Clles � ·s

eva n
Technical Editor: IM Sergei Soloviov

Translation by: GM Evgeny Ermenkov

Cover design by: Kalojan Nachev

Copyright ©Alexei Kornev 2013

Printed in Bulgaria by "Chess Stars" Ltd. - Sofia

ISBN13 : 978 954 8782 95-1
 Alexei Kornev

A Practical White Repertoire

with l.d4 and 2.c4

Volume 2: The King's Fianchetto Defences

Chess Stars
 Bibliography

Books

The Safest Grunfeld A Complete Repertoire for black by Delchev and

Agrest, Chess Stars 2011
The Modern Philidor Defence by Barsky, Chess Stars 2010
The King's Indian A Complete Black Repertoire by Bologan, Chess
Stars 2009
Opening for White According to Anand l.e4, val. 4 by Khalifman, Chess
Stars 2005
Playing l.d4. The Indian Defences by Schandorff, Quality Chess 2012
A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White by Watson, Gambit 2012
The Grunfeld Defense volume two by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2011
l.d4 volume 2 by Avrukh, Quality Chess 2011
Revolution in the 70's by Kasparov, Everyman Chess 2007
King's Indian Defense: Averbakh variation by Petursson, Cadogan 1996
King's Indian Defence by Geller, Moscow 1980

Electronic/Periodicals

64-Chess Review (Moscow)

Chess Informant
New in chess Yearbook
Correspondence Database 2013
Mega Database 2013

4
Contents

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Part 1. The Gruenfeld Defence

l.d4 tt:lf6 2 .c4 g6 3.tt:lc3 dS 4.cd tt:Jxd5 5.e4 tt:Jxc3 6.bc .ig7 7.tt:lf3

1 7 . . . 0-0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 7... c5 8 ..ie3 tt:lc6; 8 ... 0-0; 8 ...�g4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3 7 . . . c5 8 . .ie3 �a5 9.�d2 w/o 9 . . . 0-0 . 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 7 . . . c5 8.�e3 �aS 9.�d2 0-0 . 53 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part 2. The King's Indian Defence

l.d4 tt:lf6 2.c4 g6 3.tt:lc3 .ig7 4.e4

5 4 . . . 0-0 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6 4 . . . d6 5 . .ie2 tt:Jc6; 5 . . . c5; 5 . . . e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

7 4 . . . d6 5 . .ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 tt:lc6; 6 . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
8 4 . . . d6 5 . .ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 tt:Jbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
9 4 . . . d6 5 . .ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 tt:la6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
10 4 ... d6 5 ..ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 3
11 4 ... d6 5 ..ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 cS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Part 3. The Modern Defence

l.d4 g6 2 .c4

12 2 ... d6; 2 ....ig7 3.e4 w/o 3 ... d6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

13 2 ... .ig7 3.e4 d6 4.tt:lc3 eS; 4 ... tt:Jc6; 4 ... tt:ld7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

Part 4. The Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

l.d4 d6 2.e4 tt:Jf6 3.tt:lc3 g6 4 . .ie3

14 4 . . . a6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15 4 . . . .ig7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 206. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .

16 4 ... c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

5
 Part 5. Black avoids the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence
l.d4 d6 2 .e4 l2Jf6 3.l2Jc3

17 The Modem Philidor. 3 ... e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243

18 The Lion Defence. 3 . . . l2Jbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
19 The Czech Defence. 3 . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

Index of Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284

6
PREFACE

The first volume has been published not so long ago and I would like
to present to the readers the second volume of out three-volume work,
devoted to the building of a practical repertoire for White after the
move l.d2-d4.

In the first volume, we have analysed the openings for White af­
ter Black's classical response - l.. .d7-d5. In the second volume, we
deal with systems for Black connected with fianchettoing of his dark­
squared bishop. These openings are very complicated and as a rule,
there arises after them a complex multi-pieces middle game in which
White must know thoroughly numerous typical resources.

In this book, we pay most attention to the Gruenfeld Defence (part

1) and to the King's Indian Defence (part 2). In the process of choosing
systems against these opening, the author has emphasized on the prin­
ciple of reliability. Against the Gruenfeld Defence, we analyse the Mod­
ern Exchange variation with i.e3 and �d2 , in which there often arises
a transfer into an endgame, slightly preferable for White. Against the
King's Indian Defence, our main opening weapon is the Averbakh sys­
tem, which has been thoroughly analysed. Black can hardly begin there
any active actions on the kingside.

It is also worth mentioning that is reply to the move l . . .d6 (parts

3 and 4 of the book), we analyse 2 .e4, therefore this book will be use­
ful also to the readers who like beginning their games with the move
l.e2-e4.

In our third and last volume, which will be published at the begin­
ning of the year 2014, we will analyse thoroughly the Budapest Gambit,
the Benko Gambit, the Benoni Defence, the Dutch Defence and some
rarely played lines for Black on moves 1 and 2 as well as one of the most
popular defences for him against White's move one with his queen's
pawn - the Nimzowitsch Defence.

The author wishes to express his deepest gratitude to Margarita

Schepetkova and Ekaterina Smirnova for their invaluable help in the
creation of this book.

Alexei Kornev

7
 Part l

The Gruenfeld Defence

l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5

initiative altogether.
The Gruenfeld Defence was in­
cluded in the repertoire of many
world champions. M.M.Botvinnik
contributed greatly to the devel­
opment of its theory and he not
only played it in the most impor­
tant games, including the match­
es for the world championship,
but in 1979 he, together with Y.
Estrin, wrote a book devoted to
After this move there arises this opening.
the Gruenfeld Defence. It was in­ We must also mention
troduced to the tournament prac­ that the Gruenfeld Defence was
tice by the Austrian grandmaster played by R.Fischer and G.Kaspa­
E.Gruenfeld back in the year rov. The contribution of Kasparov
192 2 . should be particularly empha­
I t was a revolutionary opening sized, because he played it for
at the time. Instead of occupying many years and not only in tour­
the centre with his pawns, Black nament games, but also in his nu­
presents it completely to his op­ merous match-games against A.
ponent. Still, after a while, it Karpov.
turned out that White's task was Presently, during the comput­
not simple at all. Yes, he can oc­ er era in chess, the Gruenfeld De­
cupy the centre with his pawns fence has become a part of the
without any problem, but then opening repertoire of many play­
Black's pieces exert powerful ers and this is not surprising at
pressure against it (ig7, cS, lt:Jc6 all. The centre is usually opened
and eventually !g4). A single im­ and the game is almost forced, so
precision by White may lead not all this can be analysed extensive­
only to the loss of the opening ad­ ly and very precisely by comput­
vantage, but Black may seize the ers.

8
 Among the contemporary which after the exchange on dS,
grandmasters we should mention White at first occupies the centre
P.Svidler who was champion of with e2-e4 and then fortifies his
Russia many times and used this d4-pawn with the moves lt:\f3 and
opening during his entire chess ie3 .
career as well as M.Carlsen. It is In the first and second chap­
also worth noting that in the last ters, we will analyse variations,
world championship match be­ which are not so popular in the
tween V.Anand and B.Gelfand, contemporary tournament prac­
the last one chose the Gruenfeld tice.
Defence as his main opening The third chapter will be de­
weapon against l.d4 and Anand voted to the variation with 8 . . .

was so unsuccessful in this 1M/aS, which is considered to be the

opening with White that at the best for Black by the modern the­
end of the match he began to play ory. In this chapter we will see all
l.e4. the responses for him with the ex­
As a main opening weapon for ception of 9 . . . 0-0. This move will
White, we will analyse a line in be analysed in Chapter 4.

9
Chapter 1 l.d4 lL!f6 2.c4 g6 3.lL!c3 d5 4.cxd5

E:xa3 12.'?t/c1 E:aS 13.E:d1 c6 14 . .ih6

.ixh6 15.\WxhM and in the game
T.Petrosian - Smyslov, Gagra
1953, White maintained a slight
edge due to his powerful pawn­
centre. After the trade of the dark­
squared bishops, he will have
chances of attacking on the king­
side. The potential weakness of
the a2-pawn cannot be sufficient
compensation for Black.) 9 . .ie2
This is the most logical move .ie6. Black is preparing the ex­
for White. He exchanges on dS change of the light-squared bish­
and forces the enemy knight to ops. 10.0-0 .ic4 ll.E:cl tt:l8d7
occupy this square in order to at­ 12.a4 aS 13.b3 he2 14.\Wxe2 e6
tack it with the move e2-e4, occu­ 15.E:fd1 E:c8 16.-igS 1We8 17.e5±
pying the centre with his pawns. and in the game A.Petrosian -
4 ••• c!Llxd5 5.e4 c!Llxc3 Taimanov, Tallinn 1980, White
Naturally, it is better for Black obtained a great advantage. Black
to exchange the knight; other­ is practically helpless against the
wise, he will lose a tempo to re­ manoeuvre tt:lc3-e4-d6. These two
treat is away from the centre. . examples are quite sufficient to
understand the main defect of the
Still, sometimes h e plays 5 . . . move 5 . . . tt:lb6, since after it Black
tt:lb6? ! too. The best for White is incapable of exerting pressure
would be to play immediately against his opponent's pawns on
6.h3 ! This move prepares tt:lf3 and d4 and e4. White completes ef­
prevents .ig4. 6 . . . .ig7 7.tt:lf3 0-0 fortlessly his development and
8 . .ie3 c6 (It is not preferable for maintains an advantage in the
Black to advance his flank pawns: middle game thanks to his power­
8 ... a5 9 ..ie2 a4 10.0-0 a3 ll.bxa3 ful pawn-centre.

10
 2.c4 g6 3. lD c3 d5 4.cd ltJxd5 5.e4 ltJxc3 6.bc i.g7 7. ltJ.f3 0 - 0 B. i.e2

6.bxc3 .ig7 7.0,£3 must exert pressure against

This natural move (What can White's pawn on d4 as quickly as
be more natural than developing possible. 8 . .ib5 + . This resource is
the knight to f3 in the opening . . . ?) well familiar from some other
did not become so popular imme­ openings. White forces the move
diately. It remained in the shadow c7-c6, so that Black's bishop on b7
of the plan with .ic4, ltJe2, be­ does not exert pressure against
cause it was considered that it was the e4-pawn. 8 . . . c6 9 . .ic4 0-0
not good for White to allow the 10.0-0 .ia6 ll.ha6 ltJxa6 12 .'1Wa4
pin of his knight after .ig4. Later '1Wc8 13 . .ig5 ;1;. White has a slight
however, it became clear that the edge thanks to his pawn-domi­
pin was not so dangerous for nance in the centre. In addition,
White after all and the move 7. Black's pieces are a bit cramped.
ltJf3 began to be played more and He obviously lacks space. Later,
more often in tournaments and in the game Kasparov - Pribyl,
became popular. Skara 1980, White obtained a
very promising position with a
pawn-sacrifice. 13 . . . '1Wb7 14J''!:fe1
e6 15.E:ab1 cS 16.d5 ! hc3 17. l"i:e d1
exd5 18.exd5 ig7 19.d6 !� Despite
the missing pawn, White had very
powerful initiative. G.Kasparov
demonstrated in this game one of
the main ideas in this variation.
White should ignore the possible
material sacrifices and advance
his d-pawn as quickly as possible
in order to squeeze the enemy
7 ... 0-0?! pieces.
This natural move is definitely
imprecise, because it enables 8 . .ie 2 !
White to obtain an advantage ef­
fortlessly.

The strongest move for Black

- 7... c5! will be analysed in Chap­
ters 2-4.
It is also worth mentioning the
possibility 7 . . . b6? ! White should
not be afraid of it, because it is not
in the spirit of the main idea of
the Gruenfeld Defence. Black

11
Chapter 1

This is the point. White ex­ As a rule, there do not arise

ploits Black's imprecision and original positions following 8 . . . b6
completes immediately the devel­ 9.0-0 ib7 (9 . . . liJc6 10.ie3 - see
opment of his kingside. 8 . . . liJc6; 9 . . . c5 lO .i.gS - see varia­
tion B) 10.Wfd3
Later, the readers will see that
in response to 7 . . . c5, we will ana­
lyse 8.�e3. Now, after 7 . . . 0-0,
White does not need this move at
the moment.

8 . . . c5
Black's main idea is to create
pressure against his opponent's
centre.
About 10 . . . c5 ll.i.gS - see var­
He plays only seldom 8 .. .lt:lc6 iation B.
9.0-0 b6 (following 9 . . . e5 10.d5 10 . . .Wfd7 1l.�g5 liJc6 12.Wfe3 -
liJe7 ll.ia3±, White has more see 10 . . . liJc6.
space and his bishop exerts pow­ Following 10 ... liJd7 ll.i.gS
erful pressure on the a3-f8 diago­ :Be8, Bravo - Le Quang, Istanbul
nal, Leon Oquendo - Calzadilla 2012, White can maintain a slight
de Ia Cruz, Camaguey 2010) 10. edge after the typical pawn-ad­
�e3 eS. Undermining the centre vance for similar positions - 12.
with the e-pawn is not so effective eS! ?t. Now, Black's bishop on g7
for Black as the same with the c­ and his knight on d7 are severely
pawn. ll.:Bc1 Wfe7 12.Wfa4 �b7 restricted in their movements. It
13.:Bfd1 h6 (He cannot win a is worth mentioning this resource
pawn, because after 13 . . . exd4 14. works only when Black's knight
cxd4 Wfxe4?, White has the re­ has been developed to d7; other­
source 15. liJg5 Wfe7 16.:Bxc6± and wise, with a knight on b8, Black
in the middle game his two will play liJc6-a5 and the weaken­
minor pieces are stronger than ing of the light squares may be
Black's rook and pawn.) 14.d5 unpleasant for White.
liJd8 15. Wfb4 Wff6 16.a4 �c8, J. 10 . . . liJc6 ll.igS Wfd7 12 .Wfe3
Graf - Marinkovic, Germany :Bfe8, Kreiman - Ehlvest, New
1991, 17.c4t - There has arisen a York 2003. Here, White obtains a
position of the King's Indian type slight but stable advantage after
and it is more favourable for 13.:Bad1 liJa5 14.h4t - he is domi­
White, since he has a clear-cut nant in the centre and can devel­
plan for queenside actions: a4-a5 op his initiative on the kingside
or c4-c5. with i.h6 and hS.

12
 2.c4 g6 3. lt:J c3 dS 4.cd lt:JxdS 5.e4 lt:Jxc3 6.bc i.g7 7. lt:Jj3 0 - 0 8. i.e2

9.0-0 \WaS 14.4Je5±, Black has won a

pawn indeed, but his position is
very difficult because his bishop is
misplaced on b4 and he lags in
development.) 12 .\Wc2 b6 13.gac1
4Jf6, Timman - Roos, Amsterdam
1978, 14.h3 ! ?;!; White has the ad­
vantage thanks to his dominance
in the centre.

A) 9 ••• cxd4
This move leads to a difficult
position for Black. He continues
Black has two main replies in with the standard plan for the
this position: A) 9 cxd4 and B)
••• Gruenfeld Defence - pressure
9 b6.
.•• against the d4-pawn. Here, it does
not work well however. The point
About 9 ... 4Jc6 10.i.e3, or 9 . . . is that after White has castled
.ig4 10 . .ie3 - see Chapter 2 , vari­ kingside, he can sacrifice the ex­
ation B. change on a1 in many variations
with the move d4-d5 and regains
9 . . . \WaS. This move seems it easily, while Black's knight on
much stronger before White has c6 will be forced to occupy a very
castled. Here, he can simply con­ bad position at the edge of the
tinue with lO.i.gS ! ? , for example: board.
10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 i.g4, Sorm - 10.cxd4 lbc6
Nepomniachtchi, Biel 2007 and About 10 . . .ig4 ll.i.e3 4Jc6
now, he can simply capture a 12 .d5 - see 10 . . . 4Jc6
pawn: 12 .he7!? ges 13.i.h4 gxe4 10 . . . b6 ll.igS .ib7 12 .\Wd3 -
14.\Wb1 ges 15.\Wxb7 4Jd7 16.\Wbs;�; see variation B.
- The activity of Black's pieces ll.ie3 i.g4 12.d5 !
does not compensate adequately
his material deficit.

His position is solid but very

passive after 9 . . . \Wc7 - Black has
no weaknesses, but he does not
exert pressure against his oppo­
nent's centre and cannot equalise.
10 .i.e3 gds ll.dS ! ? 4Jd7 (It would
be extremely risky for him to opt
for ll . . . .bc3 12.gc1 i.b4 13.\Wb3

13
Chapter 1

This is the main idea in this

variation for White. Now, Black
has a choice: Al) 12 hf3 or•••

A2) 12 ••• ltle5.

12 ... tt:la5. The retreat of the

knight to the edge of the board
leads to a difficult position for
Black. 13.:1k1 b6. This move weak­
ens the c6-square and White's
knight is immediately headed
there. 14.tt:ld4 !xe2 15.\l;lfxe2 \l;lfd7 13 ••• ltla5
16.\l;l!bS l:!fd8 17.tt:lc6 tt:lxc6 18. After this, Black will have great
dxc6± His prospects are clearly difficulties, because his knight is
preferable thank to the powerful terribly misplaced on aS.
passed c6-pawn, Van Wely - Ari­
el, New York 1994. It is not preferable for him to
opt for 13 . . . tt:le5. The point is that
The move 12 ... ixa1, as a rule, Black will fail to preserve his
transposes to variation Al, since knight in the centre. 14 . .ie2 l:!c8
later Black captures hf3 anyway. (It would be too risky for him to
Otherwise, if White's knight re­ choose 14 .. .f5 - White has the
mains on the board, Black may two-bishop advantage and open­
have great difficulties, for exam­ ing of the position would be in his
ple: 13.\l;lfxa1 tt:laS 14 . .ih6 f6 15. favour. 15.f4 tt:lg4 16.!xg4 ixa1
M8 \l;lfxf8 16.tt:ld4 ! ? This is the 17.exf5 ! Black's position begins to
point. White's knight will go to crumble. 17 . . . gxf5 18.MS l:!xfS
the weakened e6-square, very 19.\l;lfg4+ .ig7 2 0 .\l;lfxfS± - He has
close to the enemy monarch. 16 . . . no compensation for the pawn
!xe2 17.tt:lxe2 l:!c8, D e Boer - Den and his king is vulnerable. Xu Jun
Boer, Dieren 1989, 18.tt:ld4!±, fol­ - Razmyslov, Seville 2003.) 15.
lowed by tt:le6 and White's attack­ \l;lfa4 b6 16.l:!acl± White maintains
ing tandem {queen and knight) an overwhelming advantage,
seems very threatening. since he has an excellent centre
and two bishops, while Black's
knight will be ousted from the
Al) 12 •••hf3 centre at any moment with the
This is a natural move, but is move f2-f4, Malaniuk - Bednar­
not the best for Black, because he ska, Poznan 2012.
will have problems with his knight
on c6. It is evidently bad for Black to
13.hf3 try 13 . . . ixa1 in view of 14.\l;lfxa1

14
 2.c4 g6 3. lt:J c3 d5 4.cd lt:Jxd5 5.e4 lt:Jxc3 6.bc :llg7 7. lt:Jf.3 0 - 0 B.:ll e2

lt:JaS 1S . .ih6 f6 16.ig4 ! This is the

best for White. He is not in a hur­
ry to regain the exchange and re­
lies on the power of his bishops.
16 . . . '?;l/d6 (It is not preferable for
Black to choose 16 . . . lt:Jc4 17 . .ie6+
i>hS 18.l:!bl± White's pieces are
tremendously active and Black's
defence is very difficult. Later, in
the game Khalifman - Roos, Vil­
nius 199S, Black failed to cope
with the intricacies of the defence 14 b6 15.�a4 '?;lid6 16.g3±
•••

and made immediately a decisive It is also good for White to play

blunder. 18 . . . '?;l/c7? 19 . .hf8 l:!xf8 16 . .ig4 ! ?±, taking control over the
20.'?;l/c3+- and the pin on the c­ c8-square and maintaining a
file is decisive.) 17.:lle 6+ i>hS 18. great advantage, since he not only
f4 ! Once again White does not dominates in the centre and has
capture on f8, considering quite two powerful bishops, but Black's
deservedly that his bishop on h6 knight on aS is terribly misplaced.
is not weaker than Black's rook in
this position. White's main task is
to advance f4 and eS as quickly as
possible, trying to checkmate the
enemy king on the a1-h8 diago­
nal. 18 . . . l:!fc8 19.eS '?;lieS+ 20.i>h1
'?;l/c3 21.'?;l/xc3 l:!xc3 22 .d6. Black
has traded the queens indeed, but
this is small consolation for him,
because White's central pawns,
with the support of his bishops,
will promote irrevocably. 22 . . .
lt:Jc6 23.dxe7 l:!e3 24.-ifS fxeS 2S. In this position, which is very
fS ! gxfS 26 . .bfS+-, he has a win­ difficult for Black, he made a mis­
ning position, because Black will take in the game Yermolinsky -
have to give up his knight for the Kreiman, Philadelphia 1996 16 •••

enemy e7-pawn, Kolanek - Buj­ e6? and this enabled White to

dak, Internet 2011. sacrifice exquisitely a pawn with
17.e5 ! and to obtain a decisive
14.l:!cl advantage following 17 '?;l/xe5 •• •
.

This move deserves great at­ 18.dxe6 l:!ad8 19.ext7+ l:!xt7

tention. White deprives the ene­ 20.l:!fdl l:!xdl+ 21.'?;l/xdl l:!f8
my knight of the c4-square. 22.i>g2 i>h8 23.'?;l/d7+- The

1S
Chapter 1

material is equal indeed, but Meanwhile, it is also possible

Black's position is hopeless, be­ for him to play 1S.!'i:acl ! ?;!;, or even
cause White's powerful bishops 1S.!'i:ab1 ! ?;!; and he preserves an
control the entire board, while edge in both cases.
Black's pawns on a7 and b6 are
very weak and his king and the
knight on aS do not take part in
the fight at all (White's rook on c1
deprives Black's knight of the c4-
square).

A2) 12 .•• li)e5

15 . . . ti'a5
This is an active move. Black's
queen attacks the enemy pawn on
a2 and eventually (after ti'a4) will
exert pressure against the e4-pawn.

He has tried many other pos­

sibilities in this position, but they
This move is no doubt more do not promise him equality.
reliable, since Black succeeds in
trading advantageously the 1S . . . ig7 16.id4 hd4 17.E:xd4
knights. White still preserves a ti'b6 18.!'i:d3 E:fd8 19.!'i:b3 ti'c7 20.
slight edge thanks to his domi­ ti'e3 e6 21.dxe6 fxe6 22 .h4--+
nance in the centre, but must White has an edge in the arising
work very hard in order to obtain endgame with major pieces, since
a real advantage, since there are Black's king is obviously weaker,
just a few pieces left on the board R.Bagirov - Najer, Cappelle la
as a result of the numerous ex­ Grande 2000.
changes.
13.li)xe5 .ixe2 14.ti'xe2 Following 1S . . . ti'd7, White ad­
.ixeS ts.gadl vances with tempo f4 and eS and
With this move White not only obtains an advantage. 16.f4 (It is
protects his dS-pawn in case of also interesting for him to try
the pawn-advance e4-eS, but also 16.ih6 ! ? !g7 17.hg7 <;!{xg7 18.
prepares the inclusion of his rook eSt and his advantage is doubt­
into the attack (!'i:d1-d3-h3). less thanks to his mobile pawn-

16
 2.c4 g6 3.liJc3 d5 4.cd liJxdS 5.e4 liJxc3 6.bc �g7 7. liJ.f3 0 - 0 8. �e2

centre.) 16 . . . .ig7 17.e5t Yermolin­ This development of the bish­

sky - Nestorovic, San Benedetto op is more active than on e3, be­
1989. cause the bishop on gS will exert
pressure against the e7-square
16 .ig5 �a3 17.g3 gac8 18.
• and White's queen might need the
gel gfd8 19.�g2 f6 20 .ih6 • e3-square.
�a4 21.h4 Y:Yd7 22.gfdl gxcl
23 .ixcl gcs 24.h5t White still
• 10 ••• .ib7
maintains a slight edge, because it
will be difficult for Black to neu­ About 10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 i.b7
tralise his opponent's pressure on 12.Y:Yd3 -see 10 . . . i.b7.
the kingside, Bjuhr - Lohmann,
Email 2008. 10 ...h6 11.�4 cxd4 12.cxd4 �b7
13.W/d3 �d7 14.:aad1 - see 10 ....ib7.
B) 9 b6 •••

ll.�d3

This move is very typical for

numerous variations of the Gru­ u . . . cxd4
enfeld Defence. Black's main idea
is to attack the e4-pawn and to Besides this move, Black has
force White to protect it with W/d3. also tried in practice ll . . . h6. Still,
After this, Black will play .ia6 and this move has the defect that it
exchange the light-squared bish­ weakens his king's shelter and
ops. This trade is in his favour, that was proved in the game Ata­
because he has less space and kisi - Anilkumar, Email 2001:
must strive for exchanges. Still, 12 . .ih4 W/d7 13.:aad1 e6 14.W/b1
this would not equalise for him, W/a4 1S.:afe1 :ac8 16 ..ib5 W/a5 17.d5
because his pieces do not exert W/xc3 18.dxe6 fxe6 19.e5± Black
sufficient pressure against can hardly parry the attack of
White's centre. White's forces against the g6-
lO .igS
• square, because his queenside

17
Chapter 1

pieces have not been developed yet. strong centre and possibilities for
active actions on the kingside,
He cannot equalise with 11 . . . Sakhabeev - Mik, Email 2006.
Wd7 either. Following 12.'?9e3
cxd4 13.cxd4 lt:Jc6 14J�ad1 E:fc8 Following 12 . . . ia6 13.We3
15.ihM, White obtains a slight ixe2 14.'?9xe2 E:e8 (14 . . . lt:Jc6 15.
but stable advantage, S.lvanov - E:ad1 W/d7 16.d5 lt:Ja5 17.e5 e6
Nepomniachtchi, Moscow 2005. 18.d6±, White obtains a great ad­
He has a powerful pawn-centre vantage, since his powerful d6-
and despite the fact that Black has pawn, supported by the pawn on
no pawn-weaknesses in his camp, e5, cramps considerably Black's
he is faced with a long passive de­ position, Komev - Vastrukhin, Vo­
fence without chances of creating ronezh 2012) 15.E:ac1 (It is also
counterplay. good for White to try here 15.
E:ad1! ?;!; and Black cannot play 15 ...
11 . . . ia6. He wishes to facili­ lt:Jc6? ! , since after 16.d5±, White's
tate his defence by trading the advantage would increase.) 15 . . .
bishops. 12 .'?9e3 .be2 13.'?9xe2 lt:Jd7, Browne - Van Riemsdijk,
Wc7 (13 . . . cxd4 14.cxd4 - see 11 . . . Santiago de Chile 1981. Here, the
cxd4 12.cxd4 ia6) 14.'?9e3 e 6 15. simplest decision for White would
ihM and under the cover of his be 16.E:c4;!; and this move not only
pawn-centre, White plans to be­ prepares the doubling of the rooks,
gin an attack against the enemy but also protects the d4-pawn.
monarch, Gonzalez Garcia - Jerez After 12 . . . lt:Jc6 13.E:ad1 Wfd7
Perez, Sabadell 2010. 14.d5 lt:Je5 15.lt:Jxe5 .be5 16.f4;!;,
White will advance e4-e5 without
12.cxd4 h6 any problems, ending up with a
slight edge, Gladyszev - Szabo,
Black fails to equalise with Gyongyos 1995.
12 . . . '?9d7 13.E:ad1 e6 14.'?9e3 lt:Jc6
(14 . . . '?9a4 15.E:d2;!;) 15.ih6 We7 13 . .ih4 Wfd7 14.:gadU
16.h4;!; White has protected relia­
bly his centre and will begin ac­
tive actions on the kingside, V.
Ivanov - Baikov, Moscow 1992.

It is also possible for Black to

choose here 12 . . . '?9d6 13.We3 lt:Jc6
14.E:fd1 lt:Jb4 15.E:ac1 E:ac8 16.if4
Wd7 17.ic4 e6 18 .ih6 f6 19 . .bg7
\!;>xg7 20 .h4;t. We see here the
usual situation fEWhite has a

18
 2.c4 g6 3. lt:J c3 dS 4.cd lt:Jxd.S 5.e4 lt:Jxc3 6.bc :fig7 7. lt:Jf.3 0 - 0 8. i.e2

In this variation, White's

queen rook often goes to d1, not
only to prepare d4-d5, but also
running away from the strike of
the enemy bishop on g7. In gen­
eral, one of the main ideas for
White in this variation is to re­
move as quickly as possible his
pieces and pawns away from the
a1-h8 diagonal, so that Black's ac­
tive bishop on g7 "shoots" in vac­
uum.

14 ... e6 15.�e3 This move is obviously strong­

We are already familiar with er than 17.id1? ! , as it was played
this placement of White's queen. in the game Gelfand - Tseshko­
vsky, Ulcinj 1997. White does not
15 ... �a4 need to attack the enemy queen
This is an active move for on a4, since it is misplaced there.
Black. He is trying to organise
counterplay against White's weak 17 . . . a6 18.i.e7
pawn on a2 . He transfers his knight to the
b4-square and there it will be
Black cannot equalise with much more active than on h4.
15 . . . lt:Jc6 16.ib5;!;, because he can
get rid of the pin of his knight only 18 . . . gfe8 19.i.b4i
by playing a6 and bS, but this White has a slight advantage,
would lead to the weakening of because he has a powerful pawn­
the cS-square, Vercammen - centre and after the transfer of his
Rivest, Email 2002. bishop from h4 to b4, the place­
ment of Black's queen on a4 may
become precarious.

Conclusion
We have just analysed the variation with 7 . . . 0-0 in the Gruenfeld
Defence. As a rule, White obtains an advantage effortlessly. It looks
like the most dangerous plan for Black is to play b7-b6 and to develop
his bishop on b7. White counters this with �d3, i.gS, gad1, combining
active actions in the centre and on the queenside.

19
Chapter 2 l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5
�xd5 5.e4 �xc3 6.bxc3 .ig7 7.�f3 c5

move 8.ie2? ! is not so good here,

since after 8 . . . tLlc6 9.ie3 ig4?,
Black obtains a very good game
creating pressure against the d4-
square.
White plays often 8.:Bbl ! ? , but
this move has two essential draw­
backs :
- in many variations he will
have to sacrifice his a2-pawn,
- the theory of numerous vari­
We have already mentioned ations goes deep into the middle
this is Black's most precise move. game.
8 .ie3
• We will devote to the analysis
This is one of the most popular of Black's main line 8 \!faS our
•••

moves for White in this position. next two chapters. Now, we will
He fortifies the key d4-pawn for deal with some other not so popu­
the Gruenfeld Defence and pre­ lar moves for him: A) 8 �c6, ••.

pares to evacuate his rook away B) 8 0-0 and C) 8 .ig4.

••• •••

from the al-h8 diagonal. This

move became popular after Kar­ About 8 . . . cxd4 9.cxd4 �aS+
pov's game against Kasparov in 10.�d2 - see Chapter 3, variation
their match for the world champi­ A.
onship in the year 1990, as well
as after Kramnik's win against
Kasparov in their match for the A) 8 ••• �c6? !
world championship in London in This move is considered to be
the year 2000 ro.zzy . V.Kramnik somewhat premature, because af­
plays this variation quite success­ ter
fully until today. 9.gcl!
Black is incapable of counter­
We have to mention that the ing the move d4-d5.

20
 2.c4 g6 3. lt:Jc3 d5 4.cd tt:Jxd5 5.e4 lt:Jxc3 6.bc i.g7 7. lt:Jf3 c5 B. i.e3

�e2:t White's pawn-centre is very

powerful and Black will have to
defend long and hard despite the
fact that he has no weaknesses in
his camp, Grischuk - Ganguly,
Dresden 2008.

10.cxd4

9 ... cxd4

He cannot equalise with 9 . . .

�aS, since following 10 .d5, Black
is forced to continue with 10 . . .
lt:JeS (It i s bad for him to opt for
10 . . . .bc3+? ll.l:!xc3 �xc3+ 12.
id2 �f6 13.dxc6 �xc6 14.�c2±
and in the arising position White's
two minor pieces are obviously 10 . . . 0-0
stronger than Black's rook and
two pawns. The point is that in It would be too dangerous for
the middle game he can hardly Black to opt for 10 . . . �a5+? ! , be­
promote his pawns, while the cause after ll.i.d2! �xa2 12 .d5,
danger of being checkmated on White has very powerful initiative
the weakened dark squares is for the sacrificed pawn. For exam­
quite real.) ll.lt:JxeS heS 12 .�d2 ple: 12 . . . lt:Je5 13.lt:Jxe5 heS 14.
0-0 13.f4 ig7 14.c4 �xd2 + . This .ibS+ .id7 15.�g4! e6. Black is
is the best for Black - to transfer forced to weaken his position in
the game into a slightly inferior this way and comply with the fact
endgame. (It is worse for him to that his king will remain stranded
choose 14 . . . �a3, because Black's in the centre for long (He will be
queen is misplaced there. 15.e5 checkmated following 15 . . . hbS??
�f5 16.l:!c3 �a5 17.l:!b3 �c7 18.i.d3 16.l:!c8+ l:!xc8 17.�xc8#; 15 . . .
hd3 19.l:!xd3 l:!fd8 2 0 . 0-0± Ko­ l:!d8?? 16.�xd7! ) 16.hd7+ 'i!?xd7
tanjian - Tutisani, Tbilisi 2010. 17.�g5 f6 18.�h6 l:!he8 19.0-0
White has completed his develop­ l:!ac8 20 .�xh7+ l:!e7 21.�xg6+­
ment and is ready to advance his Black's position is hopeles�. He is
pawn-mass in the centre at any not only a pawn down, but his
moment. Black's defence will be king is very weak. He cannot save
very difficult.) 15.'i!?xd2 b6 16. the day with 21.. .�xd2, since after

21
Chapter 2

22.dxe6+ , Black either loses his

rook on c8, or his queen due to
the pin.

ll.d5 �e5
This is a logical move, because
Black's knight is better placed in
the centre than at the edge of the
board.

Following ll . . . tt:laS? ! 12 .i.e2 e6

13.d6 ! , White maintains a great gains time to organise counter­
advantage (It is also good for him play on the queenside by attack­
to choose 13. 0-0 ! ? exdS 14.exdS ing the enemy bishop with his
i.fS 1S.�d2± and the powerful pawns.
pawn on dS and the misplaced
black knight on aS provide White It may be interesting for White
with a considerable advantage, to try 13.f4 ! ? , forcing his oppo­
Hort - Safarli, Hoogeveen 2008.) nent to clarify the situation with
13 . . . eS. Later in the game Miles - his bishop. After every possible
Rodriguez, Riga 1979, White ob­ retreat of the bishop, White main­
tained a great advantage with an tains a slight edge.
energetic play. 14J'k7 i.e6 1S.
tt:lgS± Now, Black has nothing
better than to allow the exchange
on e6 after which his pawn-struc­
ture will be hopelessly compro­
mised. 1S . . . 1"k8 16.tt:lxe6 fxe6 17.
Ei:xc8 �xeS 18.0-0 tt:lc6 19.d7 �c7
20.i.g4+- Black will fail to hold
his e6-pawn, so his position is
hopeless. White will have not only
an extra pawn, but a powerful 13 . . . .id6 ! ? 14.i.e2!;t; It is best
passed pawn on d7. for him to go immediately with
the bishop to e2, because the in­
12.�xe5 he5 clusion of the moves i.c4 and bS is
(diagram) much rather in favour of Black, as
13 .ic4
• it was demonstrated in the game
With this move White pre­ Cerniauskas - Roberts, Email
vents his opponent's pawn-ad­ 2012: 14 . .ic4 bS? 1S.i.e2 �aS+
vance e7-e6. Still, this bishop­ 16.'it>f2 i.d7 17.�d2 �xd2 18 ..ixd2
move has the drawback that Black f6 19.i.e3 Ei:ac8 20 .'it>f3 a6 21.i.d3

22
 2.c4 g6 3. ltJ c3 dS 4.cd ltJxdS 5.e4 ltJxc3 6.bc ig7 7. ltJ.f3 c5 B . .ie3

e6 - White's passed pawn has 13 b5 14 .ib3 a5 15.0-0

••• •

been reliably blocked by Black's a4 16 .ic2

•

bishop, so White does not have Black has advanced his queen­
any advantage in this endgame. side pawns by attacking White's
After 13 . . ..ic7, Black's bishop bishop, Presently, it is rather un­
prevents the appearance of his clear whether this is good or bad
queen on the aS-square. There­ for him. Now, Black must play
fore, White can develop his bish­ very energetically.
op to c4, without being afraid of
14 . . . bS. 14 . .ic4 .ib6 (Black cannot
equalise with 14 . . . bS 1S.i.xbS i.xf4
16.i.xf4 W/aS+ 17.�f2 W/xbS 18.
W/d4t and in this position with
bishops of opposite colours White
has powerful initiative, because
the dark squares in the vicinity of
Black's king are vulnerable.) 1S.
'!Mfb3 i.xe3 16.W/xe3t White has a
slight advantage thanks to the
dominance of his pawns in the
centre. 16 • . • e6 17.f4 ic7
13 . . . .ig7. This is the most natu­
ral retreat of Black's bishop, but It is evidently worse for Black
even then White obtains an edge to choose 17 . . . .ig7? ! , since follow­
effortlessly. 14 . .ic4 (Here, it ing 18.-icS �e8 19.d6 eS 20.fS .id7
seems anti-positional for Black to 21.'1MfdS �f8 22 .id3±, White's
advance bS, because this would powerful passed d6-pawn and the
lead to the weakening of the cS­ vulnerability of Black's bS-pawn
square.) 14 . . . bS (14 . . . b6 1S.O-Ot provide White with an edge, Miles
Sambuev - Zhang, Montreal - Gligoric, Bled 1979.
2010; 14 . . . .id7 1S.O-O a6 16.W/b3
bS 17 . .id3 �c8 18.W/a3 �xc1 19. 18 .ic5 .ib6 19.�9'd4 .ixc5!
•

�xcl aS 20 .W/cS± Khenkin - Fer­

nandez Fernandez, Tromsoe This is stronger than 19 . . .
2009) 1S . .ie2 a6 16.0-0 .ib7 17. �a6? ! , because after 20 ..id3± Kor­
if3;!; Black has problems creating chnoi - Miles, Vienna 1979,
counterplay, since his bishop on Black's rook on a6 is misplaced.
b7 is restricted by his own pawn
on dS and its colleague will share 20.'fbc5 exd5 21.ex�5 .ib7
the same destiny after White ad­ 22.d6 t The powerful passed
vances eS. The pawn on eS will pawn on d6 provides White with a
restrict its mobility considerably. slight edge. Still, we have to admit

23
Chapter 2

this advantage is not so great and after 10.0-0 'ffc7 ll.'ffd 2 lDf6 12.
the move 8 . . . lDc6 is obviously .id3 �d8 13.h3;!;, Black can hardly
stronger than its reputation. create any pressure against his
opponent's centre, Walker -
B) 8 ••• 0-0 Grams, Detroit 1994.
This move, just like castling
for Black on move seven, is con­ Following 9 ... ig4 10.0-0 'ffc7
sidered by theory as not so pre­ (about 10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 lDc6 12.
cise, because his slowing down dS - see Chapter 1. variation A),
the pressure against the key d4- the simplest way for White to ob­
square enables White to complete tain an advantage is the line: 11.
without any problems the devel­ h3 ixf3 12 . .ixf3 �d8 13.'1Wa4 lDc6
opment of his kingside pieces. 14.d5 lLJeS 15 ..ie2;!;. He has occu­
pied the centre and has two pow­
9 .ie2
. erful bishops and will oust the en­
emy knight from its active posi­
tion with the move f2-f4, Lautier
- Van Wely, Dordrecht 2001.

Besides this, Black has tried in

practice 9 ... lDc6. This is not a good
move however, because he fails to
exert pressure against his oppo­
nent's centre and his knight will be
attacked by White with d4-d5.
10.0-0

9 b6
•••

After this move there arise po­

sitions similar to the variation
with 7 . . . 0-0, except that White's
bishop has already been devel­
oped on e3. This is, no doubt, in
favour of Black, since the bishop
would have been more active on
the gS-square. Despite this, Black
cannot equalise, because he does About 10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 .ig4
not exert sufficient pressure 12 .d5 - see variation A, Chapter
against White's centre. 1.
10 . . . 'ffc7 ll.�c1 �d8 12 .d5 b6
It seems a bit passive for Black 13.lDd2 lDa5 14.c4;!; White has bet­
to continue with 9 . . . lDd7, because ter prospects in the middle game,

24
 2.c4 g6 3Jijc3 d5 4.cd 0.xd5 5.e4 0.xc3 6.bc .ig7 7. 0.j3 c5 8 . .ie3

since he has more space, A.Graf Now, White has a pleasant

- Braun, Deizisau 2001. choice. He can maintain an edge
10 . . . .ig4 ll.dS hf3 (ll ... liJaS. in two different ways.
This retreat of the knight to the He can interpose against the
edge of the board cannot be good check with his bishop. ll . .id2 ! ?
for Black at all. 12 .hcS .ixc3 �a3 (Naturally, Black cannot
13.l':k1 .ig7 14.'1Wd2 b6 1S . .ia3± equalise by retreating his queen
White is dominant in the centre to its initial position. ll . . . �d8 12.
and Black's knight is horribly �cl .ig4 13.dS e6 14 . .ib4 �e8 1S.
misplaced. It is also bad for him 0-0 exdS 16.exdS aS 17 ..ia3 0.a6
to opt for ll . . . liJeS 12 .hcS 0.xf3+ 18.h3;1; White has a slight edge. He
13 . .ixf3 .ixf3 14.�xf3 �c8 1S. has a powerful passed pawn on dS
.ixa7± and Black's compensation and more active pieces, while
for the pawn is insufficient, Do­ Black's knight on a6 is obviously
britsa - Chester, IECG 2002.) misplaced, R.Sherbakov - Vakhi­
12 . .ixf3 0.eS (but not 12 . . . 0.aS 13 . dov, Raipur 2002) 12.0-0 .ig4
.ixcS .ixc3 14 .�cl± and again (Following 12 . . .b6, Eljanov -
Black's knight is not placed well at Zubov, Dnipropetrovsk 2000, the
the edge of the board and White simplest reaction for White would
has the two-bishop advantage, be 13.�b1 .ia6 14 . .ibS .ixbS 1S.
Nielsen - Jessen, Copenhagen �xbS;!; and Black can hardly cre­
2002) 13 . .ie2 0.d7 14.�b1 b6 1S. ate any pressure against White's
�c2 �c7 16.f4 .ih6 17.�bdl± He centre, because his knight cannot
has two powerful bishops and ex­ go to the c6-square.) 13.�bl.
tra space, while Black's pieces are White will have to play this move,
cramped, M.Carlsen - Hammer, since he wishes to advance d4-dS.
Oslo 2009. Now, there will be an exchange of
the a2-pawn for Black's b7-pawn.
It may be interesting for him 13 . . . �xa2 14.dS 0.d7 1S.�xb7 �fc8
but still insufficient for equality to 16 . .ie3;1; Cramling - Caruana, Vil­
try here: 9 . . . cxd4 10.cxd4 �aS+ lafranca 2010. White maintains a
(10 . . . 0.c6 11.0-0 .ig4 12 .dS - see slight advantage, since Black's
Chapter 1, variation A) pawn on a7 is much rather a lia­
bility than strength, despite its
being a passed pawn. Meanwhile,
White's rook on b7 is very active
and Black may have problems
with the protection of his e7-pawn
in numerous variations.
White can interpose with his
knight too - 11.0.d2 ! ? , but this
move is played seldom in practice

2S
Chapter 2

in comparison to 11 . .id2 . He has 10 ... W!xc3. If Black has to suf­

an edge after it as well. White's fer, then he wishes to be subjected
main idea is to win a tempo, after to this at least for a pawn. 11.Ei:cl
castling, by attacking the enemy Wfa3 12.Ei:xc5 W!xa2 (It is obviously
queen with his knight - lLlc4. 11 . . . weaker for him to choose 12 . . .
Ei:d8 12.0-0 e 6 13.Ei:cU I n this po­ lLla6? ! , which after 13.Ei:c2 lLlb4
sition, White has a slight edge. 14 . .ic1 WfaS 1S . .id2 Wfb6 16.Ei:b2,
13 . . . lLlc6 14.lLlc4 Wfc7 15.e5. This led to the loss of a knight in the
move is forced. Now, you can see game Jussupow - Sax, Vrbas
the drawback of lLld2 : the control 1980.) 13 . .ic4. White has very
over the d4-square is diminished. powerful initiative for the sacri­
On the other hand, White's ficed pawn and Black must be
knight, with the support of the very careful not to lose his queen,
pawn on eS is headed for the d6- which is seriously endangered in­
outpost. 15 . . . Wfe7 16.lLld6 Ei:xd6. side White's camp. 13 .. .'�a3. This
This is an interesting exchange­ is the only move. (It is obviously
sacrifice, but still insufficient for weaker for Black to play 13 . . .
equality. 17.exd6 W!xd6 18.Wfa4 Wfb2?, i n view of 14.lLlg5 ! and on
lLlxd4 19.Wfe8+ Wff8 2 0 .Wfxf8+ top of all the problems for him, he
'tt>xf8 2l..ig4 fS 22 . .id1 hS 23.f4 must worry about the protection
Ei:b8 24.Ei:f2 eS 2S.Ei:d2 .ie6 26.fxe5 of his t7-pawn. 14 . . . e6 15.lLlxt7
lLlc6 27 . .if4 a6 28.Ei:bl± Galanov ­ 'tt>xt7 16.Ei:xc8 Ei:xc8 17 . .ixe6 'tt> xe6
Craciunescu, Email 2011. In this 18.Wfg4+ 'tt> t7 19.Wfxc8+-; 14 . . .
position Black has a pawn for the lLla6 15.Ei:b5 Wfc3 16.Wfe2 Wfa3 17.
exchange and White's eS-pawn is .ic1 ! ? Wfd6 18.Wfa2 e6 19.d5 lLlc7
weak. Still, the position should be 20 . .ia3 WfeS 21.lLlxt7! ; 17.Wff3 e6
evaluated in his favour, because 18.e5 Wfe7 19.Wfh3 h6 20.lLle4±
his rooks will remain very active Black has succeeded in the evacu­
in this open position. ation his queen from the enemy
camp and has protected reliably
It seems very risky for Black to his e7-pawn, having preserved his
try to win a pawn with 9 . . . Wfa5 extra pawn, but his kingside is
10.0-0 terribly weakened. It is quite un­
clear what he must do with his
h6-pawn, because the move h6-
h5 will compromise hopelessly
the dark squares and White's at­
tack will become decisive after
.igS and lLlf6.) 14 . .icl. White be­
gins a chase after the enemy
queen. 14 . . . Wfb4 1S . .id2 Wfa3 (It is
obviously worse for Black to

26
 2.c4 g6 3. 4Jc3 d5 4.cd 4Jxd5 5.e4 4Jxc3 6.bc i.g7 7. 4Jj3 c5 B. i.e3

choose here 15 . . . 1M/b6?, since fol­ he loses his queen.) 18.E1d5 hf3
lowing 16.i.a5, his queen will not (18 . . . i.g7 19. �xb7±) 19.E1xd4. The
go back to d8 and will need to go arising complications end up in
to the f6-square under the attack favour of White, for example: 19 . . .
of White's pieces and pawns. 16 . . . �c5 20. �d3 i.g4 21.E1d5 �c7
�f6 17.e5 �f5 18.e6+-) 16.E1e1 22 . .ih6. This is the point. Now,
i.g4 Black must give up the exchange.
22 . . . 4Jc6 23.�c3 e5 24 . .ixf8 E1xf8
25 . .ib5 i.e6 26.E1c5± - He has for
the moment two pawns for the ex­
change, but his position is very
difficult. Black will lose one of his
pawns and will have only miracu­
lous chances for a draw.

This position is in favour of

White but he must play accurate­
ly. He is only slightly better
following 17.E1e3 �b2 18.E1d3 (Or
18 . .ic3 1M/b6 19.E1b5 �d8 20.E1xb7
4Jc6;!; and although he has re­
gained the sacrificed pawn, Black
has solved the problem with
his queen on a2 and his pieces Meanwhile, Black's situation
exert rather unpleasant pressure will not be any easier even if he
against the d4-pawn.) 18 . . . �b6 refrains from capturing the c3-
19.E1b3 1M/d6 20.E1xb7 4Jc6 21.E1d5 pawn:
�e6 2 2 .e5 �f5;t White has re­ 10 . . . 4Jc6 11.�b3 ! ? This is the
gained the sacrificed pawn, but simplest for White. Now, his
Black's queen has surprisingly pawn on c3 is reliably protected.
found a very good square on f5. ll . . . cxd4 12.cxd4 .ig4 13.E1ad1
White maintains a slight edge but �b4 14.h3 i.xf3 15 . .ixf3 E1fc8 16.
the position remains very compli­ �xb4 4Jxb4 17.e5;!;. White is clear­
cated. ly better in this endgame thanks
17.�b1! This not so obvious to his two powerful bishops, Kar­
move is evidently stronger than pov - Ljubojevic, Montreal 1979 ;
E1e3. It enables White to obtain a 10 . . . E1d8 11.�b3 cxd4 12.cxd4±
great advantage. 17 . . . hd4 (It is - He has protected . reliably his
bad for Black to try 17. . . 4Ja6?, be­ pawn on d4 and his advantage is
cause of 18.E1e3 �a4 19 . .ib5± and doubtless due to his dominance in

27
Chapter 2

the centre, E.Atalik - Fritzsche, ltlc6 (Or 13 . . . �d6, Hort - Hueb­

Ottawa 2007; ner, Hamburg 1979, 14.ltld2 ! ?
It seems rather passive for ltlc6 15.e5 �e7 16.ltlc4;!;, followed
Black to opt for 10 . . . ltld7 11.�b3 by ltld6 and White's prospects are
e6 12 .a4 �c7 13.a5±. White has a preferable thanks to the powerful
wonderful centre and initiative on placement of his knight.) 14 . .ig5.
the queenside, Shimanov - Rakh­ He has lost a tempo indeed, but
manov, Irkutsk 2010. White realises the best set-up of
his pieces in this variation: i.g5,
10.0-0 �e3, 1!ad1, followed either by d4-
d5, or by h2-h4-h5. 14 . . . �d6 15.
�e3 1!fe8 16.h4 1!ac8 17.h5;!;.
White won later quite convinc­
ingly this position in the game,
Gligoric - Popovic, Yugoslavia
1979.

12.cxd4

10 ••• .tb7

10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 e6 (ll . . . i.b7

12 .�d3 - see 10 . . . ib7) 12 .!g5
�d6 13.�d2 .ib7 14.�e3 1!c8 15 .
.ih6 .ih8 16.1!adU White has ac­
complished the standard set-up
for similar positions and has
seized completely the initiative, 12 . • • ltlc6
Fedorowicz - Henley, New York
1981. About 12 . . . e6 13.1!ad1 - see
ll . . . e6.
ll.�d3 cxd4
It is possible for Black to
Following ll . . . e6, White's best choose here 12 . . . �d7 13.1!ac1 e6
reaction would be 12 .1!ad1 ! (It is (after 13 . . . i.a6 14.�d2 he2 15.
also possible for him to try 12. �xe2 e6, Arencibia Rodriguez -
1!fd1 ltld7 13.a4;!; San Segundo Matamoros Franco, Bayamo
Carrillo - Ponomariov, San Se- 1989, White can maintain a slight
bastian 2009.) 12 . . . cxd4 13.cxd4 but stable edge by simply dou-

28
 2.c4 g6 3. 4J c3 d5 4.cd ltJxdS 5.e4 4Jxc3 6.bc ig7 7. ltJfJ cS 8. ie3

bling his rooks on the c-file: 16. nent's temporary activity with
l'!c4 4Jc6 17.l'!fcU) 14.l'!fd1 4Jc6 15. precise play, maintaining a slight
�bS l'!fd8 16.ig5 f6. He preserves edge. For example : 15.�bl .!bc2
his advantage after the energetic 16 .tf4 �d7 17.gcl .!bd4 18.
•

move 17.if4 ! (It is not so clear af­ .!bxd4 .ixd4 19.�b4 gxcl 20.
ter 17.ie3, because following the gxcl ic5 21.�b3;!; White has
variation 17 . . . 4Ja5 18.�d3 l'!ac8 parried his opponent's activity
19.h4 l'!xcl 2 0.l'!xcl l'!c8 21.l'!xc8, and can look optimistically in the
the opponents agreed to a draw in future. He has a stable advantage
the game Babula - Ftacnik, Czech thanks to his more active minor
Republic 2011. It is true that pieces (Black's bishop on b7 is re­
White can hardly seize the initia­ stricted by White's pawn on dS.).
tive after the exchange of the
rooks. In addition, Black can cre­ C) 8 ••• .tg4
ate a passed pawn on the queen­
side in the endgame.) 17 . . . tt'la5
18.�xd7 l'!xd7 19.d5 exdS 2 0.ib5
l'!f7 21.exd5;!; White maintains the
initiative in this endgame, be­
cause his dS-pawn is very power­
ful being supported by his bish­
ops.

13.gadl gcs
13 . . . e6 14.ig5 - see ll . . . e6.
14.d5 4Jb4
This is an active move. Black
does not lose time for castling and
exerts immediate pressure against
White's centre. Now however,
contrary to the variation with 8 . . .
4Jc6, Black i s not i n a hurry t o de­
velop his knight to c6 ; otherwise,
it will come under attack after d4-
d5. We must also mention that we
will analyse later other variations
with the development of Black's
bishop on g4, but with the inclu­
This is an active move. Black sion of the moves �aS and �d2 .
wishes to penetrate with his Here, we will analyse only varia­
knight to the c2-square. Still, tions which lead to original posi­
White can neutralise his oppo- tions.

29
Chapter 2

9J�cl cated. White should be better, at

White cannot continue the least because of his material ad­
game without this move. His plan vantage.) 11.lLlxd4. Black has
includes the move d4-d5, so he problems with the protection of
must protect his c3-pawn. his queenside pawns. He can pro­
tect the pawn on b7, but his a7-
pawn may become a cause for
worries. 11 . . . �c7 (11 . . . .ic8 12.
�bS+ �xbS 13.tt:lxb5 tt:la6 14.
tt:lxa7± The vulnerability of the
pawns on a2 and c3 is not suffi­
cient to compensate Black's lost
pawn, Khalifman - A.Evdokimov,
Taganrog 2011.) 12.tt:lb5 �d8 13.
i.c4 0-0 14.tt:lxa7 �c7 15. 0-0±
His compensation for the pawn is
not good enough, Khairullin -
Now, Black has a choice. He Svidler, Dagomys 2010.
may capture on d4 - Cl) 9 .••

cxd4, or include beforehand the Cl) 9 • • • cxd4

trade on f3 - C2) 9 .bf3.
••• The idea of this exchange is to
open the game a bit more.
About 9 . . . 0-0 10 .d5 �aS 11. 10.cxd4 0-0
�d2 - see variation C in Chapter
4. About lO ... .ix£3 11.gxf3 - see
variation C2.
Following 9 . . . �a5, White has a
very powerful argument at his ll . .ie2
disposal - 10.�b3 ! (this is strong­
er than the routine move 10.�d2).
10 . . . cxd4 (It may be interesting
for Black to try, but still insuffi­
cient for equality 10 . . . .b:f3 11.
�xb7 0-0 12 .�xa8, for example:
12 . . . cxd4 13.�d5 �xdS 14.exd5
hdS 15.hd4± and Black does
not have sufficient compensation
for the exchange in this endgame,
or 12 .. J:!d8 13.�b7 cxd4 14.�b4
�xb4 15.cxb4 .ixe4 16 . .ig5t and
despite the fact that it is an end­ Now, Black has a choice be­
game, the position is very compli- tween three possibilities: Cla)

30
 2.c4 g6 3. lbc3 dS 4.cd ltJxdS 5.e4 lbxc3 6.bc ig7 7. lbj3 cS B. i.e3

ll ... ltJc6, Clb) ll ... e6 and Clc)

ll .. :tva5.

Cla) ll . . . ltJ c6
We have already analysed a
similar position (see variation A
in Chapter 1), but with the differ­
ence that here, instead of 0-0
White has played �cl. This is in
favour of Black indeed, but is not
sufficient for equality. This is the point. Now, White
12.d5 h:f3 is practically forced to accept the
knight-sacrifice if he wishes to
fight for the opening advantage.
16.f4! Vxe4 (16 . . . ltJd7 17.�c4±)
17.fxe5 Vxg2 18J�gU In the
ansmg complicated position,
White maintains a slight advan­
tage, because his bishop is strong­
er than Black's pawns. Naturally,
he must play very carefully, since
with his king in the centre a single
imprecision might have very
grave consequences for him.
13.h:f3
After this move, he has an in­
teresting possibility to complicate Clb) ll ... e6
the fight with a piece-sacrifice.

If White wishes to avoid tacti­

cal complications, he can choose
13.gxf3 ! ? ltJeS 14.f4 ltJd7 1S.�b3
�c8 16.0-0;!; and despite the fact
that his castling position has been
weakened a bit, White has an
edge, since he has two bishops
and a powerful pawn-centre, Hra­
cek - Uaneza Vega, Warsaw 2009.

13 ltJe5 14.i.e2 �aS+ 15.

••• Before playing ltJc6, Black is
�d2 ti'a4 preparing to exchange the pawns.

31
Chapter 2

12.0-0 lilc6 13.d5 exdS 14. 15.d6

exdS If White is afraid for the future
of his d-pawn, he can play simply
15.h3 ! ? .bf3 16.hf3;t;, preserving
a slight but stable edge thanks to his
bishop-pair and his passed d-pawn.
15 lilc6 16.h3 .id7 17.'ti'b3
•••

gbs 18.gfdU White's d6-pawn,

supported by his pieces, is very
powerful. Black will have great
problems neutralising his oppo­
nent's pressure, Knaak - Heinig,
Plauen 1980.

14 .•. lile7 C1c) ll ti'a5+

•••

He attacks immediately the

enemy dS-pawn.

14 . . . .bf3. This move looks

very dubious, because it presents
White with the two-bishop advan­
tage. The game Petursson -
Shamkovich, Lone Pine 1980 is a
very instructive example of the
dangers that Black might face:
15 ..bf3 lLleS 16 . .ie2 b6 17.d6 '!Wh4
18.1Mfd5 :!! adS 19.:!!c7+-, White's
position is already winning, be­ After this move there arises an
cause Black can hardly protect his endgame.
queenside pawns. 12.'ti'd2 'exd2 + 13.lilxd2
.ixe2 14.<i!?xe2
14 ... lLle5. One of the doubtless
pluses of this move is that Black
succeeds in exchanging two cou­
ples of minor pieces and this fa­
cilitates his defence. Still, after
15.lLlxe5 .be2 16.'1Wxe2 .beS 17.
'!Wb5;t;, White preserves a slight
edge, because his pieces are more
active and his passed dS-pawn is
very powerful, despite the numer­
ous exchanges of pieces.

32
 2.c4 g6 3. lt:J c3 d5 4.cd lt:Jxd5 5.e4 lt:J xc3 6.bc ig7 7. lt:Jj3 c5 8. ie3

14 .lila6
•• game mostly due to the misplaced
black knight on a6, Khenkin -
It is bad for Black to opt for Macieja, Lubniewice 1998.
14 ... e6, since it lets the enemy
rook to penetrate to the penulti- C2) 9 ••• .txf3
mate rank, 15.!!:c7;!; Plachetka -
Sax, Skara 1980.

Black cannot equalise with

14 .. .f5, because after 15.f3 e6
16.E:c7 lt:Jc6, Andrianov - Gulko,
Moscow 1981, White could have
created great problems for his op­
ponent with the line: 17.E:b1!
lt:Jxd4+ 18 . .hd4 .hd4 19.E:bxb7;!;
and thanks to his absolute domi­
nance of the penultimate rank,
the evaluation of the position in With this trade Black weakens
favour of White is doubtless. a bit White's kingside pawn­
structure.
It is possible for Black to choose 10.gxf3 cxd4
here 14 . . . lt:Jc6 15.d5 lt:Jb4. He pre­ About 10 . . . 0-0 ll.ds �aS 12.
vents the penetration of the ene­ �d2 - see Chapter 4, variation C.
my rook to the penultimate rank ll.cxd4 0-0 12.d5 !
(15 ... lt:Ja5, Hebden - Dunworth, Bir­ This i s a very strong move.
mingham 2001, 16.E:c7± - The aris­ White realises one of the main
ing endgame is tremendously dif­ ideas of this variation - removes
ficult for Black.). 16.a3 lt:Ja6 17.E:c4;J; his last pawn from the a1-h8 di­
agonal. Now, Black's bishop is at­
ts.gc4 tacking nothing.
12 .l!�d7 13 .ih3 �h8
• • •

15.lt:Jb3 ! ? E:ac8 16.a3 e6 17.lt:Ja5

b6 18.ltJcM - White has a stable ad­
vantage in this endgame, because
Black's knight on a6 is misplaced
and White's knight has occupied
the weakened c6-square, P.Niel­
sen - Karjakin, Panormo 2002.

15 gfc8 16.ga4;!; - Despite

•••

the numerous exchanges, White

preserves a slight edge in the end-

33
Chapter 2

14.0-0 ! ?

This move i s more reliable

than 14.f4 fS lS.eS gS� Later in
the game Caruana - Areshchen­
ko, Olginka 2011, White managed
to score a full point, but he had to
sacrifice the exchange on g7, which
might not be to everybody's liking.

with weakening the castling posi­

Or 15 . . . lt:Jf6 16.11Nc2;!;, preserv­ tion of White's king. Therefore, it
ing a slight edge. With his last is advantageous for him to trade
move, White has not only protect­ the queens even if he loses two­
ed his e4-pawn, but has prepared bishop advantage in the process
the penetration of his queen to of doing this.
the c7-square as well. 19 11Nxcl 20.hg7+ Wxg7
•••

21.:Sxcl;!; and in the arising end­

16.:Sxc8 11Nxc8 17 .id4 :Sg8 • game White maintains a slight
18 .ig2 11Nc7
• edge, despite the fact that Black
(diagram) has some counterplay on the dark
19.11Nc1! squares. The point is that the pen­
This is an important move. etration of White's rook to the c7-
Black's counterplay is connected square is unavoidable.

Conclusion
We have just analysed some rarely played variations of the Gruen­
feld Defence. As a rule, White obtains an advantage effortlessly. His
main task is to remove as quickly as possible his pieces away from the
al-h8 diagonal, after which Black's bishop on g7 becomes harmless. In
addition, he has problems with the development of his knight on b8,
since after lt:Jc6, White can attack it advantageously with the move d4-
d5.

34
Chapter 3 l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 d5 4.cxd5
�xd5 5.e4 �xc3 6.bxc3 .ig7 7.�£3 c5
8 . .ie3 VaS

a tempo, may not be to every­

body's liking.
Following 9 .'1Wd2 , besides
9 . . . 0-0, a move which will be ana­
lysed in our next chapter, Black
has a choice: to enter an endgame
after A) 9 cxd4, or to conceal
• • .

for the moment his further plans

with the move B) 9 .lbc6.
••

He plays sometimes 9 . . .b6

This is Black's main response lO .l'kl .ia6. Black wishes to trade
in this position. As a rule, there the bishops and to facilitate with
arise endgames after it with a this his defence. This plan has a
slight advantage for White mostly definite drawback however. White
thanks to his pawn-centre. This completes effortlessly his devel­
move has been played by G.Kas­ opment and after this Black can
parov and nowadays it is used al­ hardly exert pressure against
most by the entire chess elite: White's centre. ll..ixa6 tt:lxa6 12.
L.Aronian, A.Morozevich, A.Gri­ 0-0 0-0, Weissenbeck - Dvoirys,
schuk, P.Svidler, P.Leko, F.Caru­ Oberwart 2003 and after the sim­
ana and many others. ple move 13.d5;!;, he would have
9J9d2 maintained the advantage, be­
This is White's most natural cause his pawns dominate in the
move. He is not afraid of the pos­ centre, while Black's knight on a6
sible exchange of queens. is misplaced.
Still, sometimes he plays 9 .
.id2 ! ? After this White avoids the V.Korchnoi has tried a very
early trade of the queens, but it is original plan in this positi<;m. Af­
understandable that playing 8 . ter 9 . . . tt:ld7, Black transfers his
.ie3 and then, retreating immedi­ knight on the route d7-b6-a4 with
ately with the bishop to d2, losing the idea to exert pressure against

35
Chapter 3

the vulnerable enemy pawn on c3. most resilient defence. (He ob­
Still, following 10.id3 0-0 11. tained a very bad position in the
0-0 tt:lb6 12.E:ab1 tt:la4 13.E:fcU, game Kramnik - Kasparov:
White would have preserved 13 . . . 0-0 14.0-0 cxd4 15.cxd4
better prospects. He has protect­ ixd4 16.id5 ic3 17.'\Wcl tt:ld4 18.
ed reliably the weakness on c3 ixd4 ixd4 19.E:xe7± Black has no
and now, the deployment of compensation for the pawn. His
Black's knight on a4 is not advan­ situation would not be any easier
tageous at all, because it is placed after an exchange of the queens :
at the edge of the board after all, 16 . . . '\Wxd2 17.i.xd2 E:fc8, Yermo­
Rivas Pastor - Korchnoi, Linares linsky - Azmaiparashvili, Hyder­
1985. abad 2002, White could have ob­
tained an advantage with the line:
It seems rather dubious for 18.'it>g2 e6 19.ib3�) 14.cxd4
him to choose 9 . . . i.g4? ! , as it was '\Wxd2+ 15.'it>xd2 tt:lxd4 16.i.xd4
showed in the famous game ixd4 17.'it>e2� He has an obvious
Kramnik - Kasparov, London edge in this endgame, because
(m/2) 2000. 10.E:b1 ! Black is practically helpless
against the penetration of White's
rooks to the penultimate rank and
the pressure of White's bishop
against the f7-square. 17 . . . e6 18.
E:d1 i.e5 19.E:dd7 0-0 2 0.f4 ! This
is an important tactical resource.
Now, White advances f5 and
Black will fail to hold the f7-
square. 20 . . . ih8 (It is not prefer­
able for him to defend with 20 . . .
White emphasizes the defects i.xf4, i n view of 2l.i.xe6± and
of Black's early bishop-sortie - White's bishop is untouchable
White is threatening to capture due to the checkmate.) 2l.f5 ! gxf5
on b7 and to follow this with E:b5 2 2 .exf5 E:ac8 23.ib3± He main­
winning the enemy c5-pawn. 10 . . . tains a great advantage, Slugin -
a 6 (The endgame i s very difficult Danin, Lipetsk 2006.
for Black after 10 . . . .ixf3 11.gxf3 Black tried to rehabilitate this
cxd4 12.cxd4 '\Wxd2+ 13.'it>xd2 tt:lc6 variation with the move 10 . . . tt:ld7
14.d5± White's two bishops are in the game Giri - Nijboer, Eind­
very powerful force, Rivas Pastor hoven 2010. Here, White has to
- K.Georgiev, Plovdiv 1984.) 11. capture the pawn - 11.E:xb7!?, for
E:xb7 ixf3 (11 ... tt:lc6 12 .ic4 .ix£3 example: 11 . . . E:b8 12.E:xb8+ tt:lxb8
13.gxf3 - see 1l.. . .bf3) 12.gxf3 13.ic4 ix£3 14.gxf3 0-0 15. 0-0
tt:lc6 13.ic4 cxd4. This is Black's cxd4 16.cxd4 '\Wxd2 17.i.xd2 i.xd4

36
 4.cd l:iJxdS 5.e4 l:iJxc3 6.bc ig7 7. l:iJ.f3 c5 B. ie3 'f!a5 9. 'f!d2 cd 1 0 .cd

18.ib5;!; and despite the fact that Secondly, he can organise pres­
Black has succeeded in regaining sure against White's pawn on d4
his pawn, the game has entered and his bishop on g7 will play an
an endgame which is in White's important role in this process.
favour, because his bishops are 10.cxd4 ti'xd2+ ll.�xd2
evidently more powerful than As a rule, White captures on
Black's minor pieces. In order to d2 with his king, since in the end­
understand this, it would be suf­ game, contrary to the other stages
ficient to compare the bishop on of the chess game, the king feels
bS with Black's knight on b8. quite comfortable in the centre of
the board. Naturally, White must
be very careful about the possibil­
A) 9 ••• cxd4 ity of Black exploiting the juxta­
position of his rook and White's
king on the d-file.
11 ••• 0-0
About ll ... l:iJc6 12.gb1 - see
variation 83.
12.gbl

After this move there arises

immediately on the board a quite
typical endgame for this opening
variation. As in the majority of the
endgames of the similar type,
White has a slight edge, because
thanks to his pawn-centre his This is an important move.
pieces can occupy more active po­ White takes under control the b4-
sitions than Black's pieces. In ad­ square, so that after Black's knight
dition, White's rooks can exert comes to c6 and White's pawn on
rather unpleasant pressure on the dS ousts it from there, Black's
c-file. In this variation Black must knight is deprived of the b4-
be constantly on the alert about square.
the possible penetration of t2 ••• gds
White's rook to the c7-square.
Black has his pluses as well. At About 12 . . . 1:iJc6 13.id3 - see
first, he has no pawn-weaknesses. variation 83.

37
Chapter 3

Black has also tried in practice

the move 12 . . . b6 with the idea to
trade the light-squared bishops
and thus to facilitate his defence.
This cannot equalise for him how­
ever, since it takes too much time.
For example: 13 . .id3 .ia6 (The
move 13 . . ..tb7 has been tested in
the game Rashkovsky - Certek,
Pila 1992 . Following 14J!hc1 lLlc6
15.d5 lLlaS 16.l'!c7±, Black failed to
defend against the penetration of 15.e5
the enemy rook to the penulti­ With this move White solves
mate rank.) 14.l'!hc1 .b:d3 15. 'ihd3 radically the problem with the
lLla6 16.l'!c4;!; White has a slight protection of his d4-pawn and
edge in this endgame. This is not prepares .te4. Naturally, he must
only due to his pawn-centre, but consider the weakening of the dS­
also thanks to the fact that his square as well.
king is very active, while Black's
knight on a6 is horribly mis­ He can fight for the advantage
placed. In addition, he can hardly in another way too - 15.l'!c4 ! ? ,
neutralise the pressure of White's protecting the d4-pawn and pre­
rooks on the c-file. Later, in the paring doubling of his rooks on
game Gruenberg - Trettin, Ger­ the c-file. 15 . . . .id7 (or 15 . . . lLla5
many 1991, there followed: 16 . . . 16.l'!cn Epishin - Santos, Oviedo
l'!fd8 17.'it>e2 l'!d7 18.l'!bc1 ifS?? This 1991) 16.We2;!; and Black will have
is a terrible blunder. As it often to fight long and hard for a draw
happens, Black fails to cope with without any chances of organising
the difficulties of defending an in­ counterplay.
ferior position and makes a deci­
sive mistake. 19.l'!a4 lLlb8 20 .l'!c8.
This penetration of the rook wins
for White. 20 ... 'it>g7 21.l'!ac4 bS 22.
!!4c5 and Black cannot get rid of
this pin without material losses.

13 . .id3 e6

About 13 . . . lLlc6 14.d5 - see

variation B3.

15 . . h6!
.

38
 4.cd liJxd5 5.e4 liJxc3 6.bc :ig7 7. liJ.f3 c5 8 . :i e3 Wfa5 9. Wfd2 cd J O .cd

This is the best for Black since 16.a4

he must take the gS-square under
control. White failed to obtain an ad­
vantage in the game Gelfand - Ivan­
After 15 .. .f6, White can obtain chuk, Astrakhan 2010: 16.'it>e1
powerful initiative with a pawn­ i.f8 17.i.e4 liJb4 18 ..id2 liJd5 19.a4
sacrifice - 16.'it>e2 ! ? fxeS 17.dxe5 b6 2 0.a5 .ib7 21.axb6 axb6 22 .
liJxeS 18.liJxe5 .b:eS 19.:ie4. Black .b:dS .b:dS 23.:Bxb6 .ixf3 24.gxf3
has an extra pawn indeed, but he :Bxd4 25.f4 :Bdd8 26 . .ie3 :Bab8.
must fight laboriously for a draw, The game ended in a draw after
because his e6-pawn is weak and the almost complete annihilation
his queenside pieces are not de­ of the material on the board.
veloped. 19 . . . :Bb8 20.:Bc5 i.d6 21. 16 .lbe7 17.:ie4 tbd5 18.a5
••

:BaS a6 22 .i.b6 :Bd7 23 .h4 :ic7 24.

'it>e3 .b:b6+ 25.:Bxb6� Kozul - Po­
lajzer, Ptuj 1989. The activity of
White's pieces compensate with
an interest his minimal material
deficit. Black's defence is very dif­
ficult. His only chance is to give
back the extra pawn at some mo­
ment in order to develop his bish­
op on c8 and after that to defend
in the endgame having an inferior
pawn-structure.
White's only chance of obtain­
Black cannot equalise with ing an advantage in this variation
15 . . .fS, because after 16.h4 h6 is to impede Black's pawn-ad­
17.'it>e2 i.f8 18.g3 liJb4 19.i.c4 b6, vance b7-b6.
White's knight on d3 is restricted 18 .if8 19.:ixd5 l!!xd5 20.
•••

in its movements by his own l!! c7 b6

pawns, but he can transfer it ad­ This pawn-sacrifice is forced.
vantageously to the d3-square. 21.axb6 axb6 22.l!!xb6;!;
20.liJe1! liJdS 21.liJd3 i.b7 22.a4;!; White has an extra pawn in the
- He has solved the problem with endgame and despite the fact that
his knight and despite the fact Black has two powerful bishops
that Black's knight is also perfect­ (His light-squared bishop is par­
ly placed on dS, White's position ticularly strong, since it has no
is preferable due to the chronic opponent.), White can torment
weakness of Black's e6-pawn, his opponent for long .in this end­
Damljanovic - Kozul, Belgrade game, Perikov - Nenciulescu,
1989. Email 2010.

39
Chapter 3

B) 9 .lbc6
•• games played after this, but White
failed to create problems for his
opponent in the opening. In fact,
in some games Black even tried to
complicate the game trying for
more than just a draw in the end­
game.

After to.gbl Black has a

choice between the following pos-
sibilities: Bl) 10 . . . b6, 82)
10 ... 0-0, 83) 10 . . . cxd4 and
84) 10 ... a6.
to.gbt!
This is the only move with
which White preserves hopes of Bl) 10 . . . b6
obtaining an edge. The point is This move is seldom played
that after the exchange on d4, it is but is very interesting. Black de­
essential for White to control the fends his cS-pawn and prepares
b4-square in the endgame. the development of his light­
squared bishop to b7, or to a6.
After 10.E1cl, Black equalises ll . .ib5
as it was showed in the game White exploits the defect of
Kramnik - Kasparov, Astana the move b6 - some weakening of
2001. 10 . . . cxd4 ll.cxd4 \Wxd2+ the a4-e8 diagonal.
12.<;!{xd2 0-0 13.d5 E1d8 14.'i!lel.
This is the point! If White's rook
had remained on bl, he could
have played here id3, without be­
ing afraid of the move lt:lb4. Now,
due to the threat e7-e6, he must
waste a tempo to retreat his king
and thus loses his opening advan­
tage. There followed later 14 . . .
lt:laS 15.ig5 id7 16.id3 E1dc8
17.'i!le2 e6 18.E1xc8+ E1xc8 19.E1cl
E1xcl 20 . .bcl exdS 2l.exd5 bS 2 2 .
if4 lt:lc4 23 . .bc4 bxc4 24.ie5 if8 ll . . . .ib7! ?
25.ltld2 ibS 26.ltle4 fS 27.lt:\c3 This i s a n active move.
id7 28.'i!fe3 ic5+ 29.id4 ib4
30.ie5 and the opponents agreed It is also possible for Black to
to a draw. There were many other choose here ll . . . id7. Now, his

40
4.cd ttJxd5 5.e4 ttJxc3 6.bc i.g7 7. ttJ.f3 c5 B. ie3 Vff a5 9. Vff d2 ttJ c6 1 0 . 'l!bl

bishop will go neither to b7, nor to out to be very powerful, while

a6. On the other hand he covers Black's king is vulnerable, Khen­
reliably the a4-e8 diagonal. 12 .d5 kin - Mikhalevski, lsrael 2009.

12.0-0

Naturally, White would lose

the game after 12 .d5??, due to
12 . . . .bc3 13.dxc6 ia6 ! - +

12 . . . 0-0

After 12 . . . cxd4, White has the

This seems to be a bad move at resource 13.tiJxd4 ! ? and Black has
first sight, because Black can cap­ problems, since his queen on aS is
ture on c3, but after a thorough misplaced. 13 . . . 'l!c8 14.'l!b4 ixd4
analysis it becomes clear that 15.Vffxd4! ± It is very difficult for
White should not be afraid of this. him to maintain the material bal­
12 . . . ttJe5 (Following 12 . . . .bc3, ance, because after the straight­
there arises a position with a non­ forward move 15 . . . 0-0, White
standard material ratio. 13.dxc6 will follow with 16 . .bc6 and Black
0-0 14.cxd7 .bd2 + 15 . .bd2 Vffx a2 will be forced to give up the ex­
16.0-0;!; White's three minor change, since it would be bad for
pieces are stronger than Black's him to play 16 . . . .bc6, due to 17.
queen and two pawns, because ih6 eS 18.Vffd 6+- with an una­
White's passed d7-pawn is very voidable checkmate.
powerful, Schmitzer - Farmer,
Email 2003.) 13 . .bd7+ ttJxd7 14.
'l!cl 0-0 15.0-0 'l!ad8 16.i.g5.
This bishop-manoeuvre is typical
for this variation. White attacks
the e7-pawn and creates prob­
lems for his opponent. 16 . . . 'l!fe8
(The move 16 . . .f6 has the draw­
back that it weakens Black's cas­
tling position and restricts the
bishop on g7. 17.i.f4 'l!fe8 18.'l!fdU
White's position is preferable,
Khenkin - Nijboer, Haarlem 13.Vffb 2!
·
2000.) 17.'l!fd1 ttJf6 18.'l!e1 ttJd7 This is a very strong move.
19.e5 f6 2 0 .exf6 exf6 21.if4;t - White avoids the trade of queens,
The passed pawn on dS may turn since the placement of Black's

41
Chapter 3

queen on aS may turn out to be would be: 14 . .if4 ! ? '?9c8 15 . .id3 eS

unfavourable. 16.tt:lxe5 tt:lxeS 17.E:xe5 .ixeS 18.
13 ••• a6 14 .ie2 bS 15.lUcU
• he5;!; and his bishop and two
White's position is preferable, central pawns are stronger than
since Black can hardly counter Black's rook.
White's powerful pawn-centre. 12.lha5 dxe3 13. ti'xe3
tDxaS 14.tDd4 .id7 15.e5
White has centralised his
82) 10 ••• 0-0 knight with his last move and has
After this move, Black is prac­ restricted the scope of action of
tically forced to give up his queen. Black's bishop on g7.
In the pre-computer era, this sac­
rifice was considered to lead to a
complicated double edged fight.
Nowadays, White manages to cre­
ate great problems for his oppo­
nent, forcing him to fight labori­
ously for a draw.

15 ••• gfc8
It is understandable that
Black's hopes of creating counter­
play are mostly connected with an
attack against White's weak pawn
on c3.

11.l�� b5 cxd4 Following 15 . . . tt:lc6 16.f4 tt:lxd4

17.cxd4, White has got rid of his
This move is forced; other­ liability on c3 and now must only
wise, Black simply ends up a pawn complete his development in or­
down. For example: 11 . . . '?9c7 12. der to begin the realisation of his
!!:xeS b6 13.E:g5. White has a solid material advantage. 17 . . .E:fc8 18 .
extra pawn indeed, but must play .te2 E:c2 19 . .td1 E:c7 20.0-0 e6
very accurately, since he lags in 21..if3 .if8 22 .E:bl± Black has no
development and his rook on gS compensation for his material
may be endangered. After 13 . . . deficit and his only chance of sur­
.tb7, Schaefer - Gnassisch, Glad­ vival is connected with building a
bach 1992, the best line for him fortress. This is not very likely,

42
4.cd 4Jxd5 5.e4 4Jxc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. 4Jj3 c5 B. ie3 '?!! aS 9. "fid2 4J c6 1 0 . '8 bl

however . . . , A.Volkov - Gataullin, ell, Wijk aan Zee 2010.

Email 2008.

16.f4
White fortifies his key eS­
pawn and frees the f2-square for
his king.
16 ••• e6

It is interesting but hardly cor­

rect for Black to try 16 . . . '8c5 17.
4Je6 '8xe5 18.fxe5 .ixe6 19.i.e2
4Jc6 2 0 .i.f3 4Jxe5 21..ixb7±.
White lags a bit in development 17.h4!
and his pawns on a2 and c3 are This resource, together with
weak, but unfortunately for Black, the already analysed trade of the
his two minor pieces and a pawn bishops after i.bS, must be re­
are not sufficient to compensate membered very well by the play­
the missing queen, J.Nielsen - ers who use this variation with
Borge, Denmark 1998. White. He begins an attack on the
h-file. Naturally, this will hardly
16 . . .'8c7. This is a natural lead to a checkmate, but the ac­
move. Black prepares the dou­ tive play on the h-file will be very
bling of his rooks on the c-file in helpful for him in order to break
order to attack the weak enemy Black's defence. In addition,
pawn on c3. 17 . .ib5 ! With this White's rook may protect the c3-
move White succeeds in exchang­ pawn from the h3-square.
ing advantageously the bishops. 17 J:�c7 18.h5 '8ac8 19.'8h3
••

17. . . 4Jc6 18 . .ixc6 .ixc6 19.4Jxc6 4Jc4

'8xc6 2 0.�e2 . The position has Or 19 . . .if8 20.�f2±
been simplified and it has become 20.hc4 '8xc4 21.ti'f3 '88c7
evident that Black's initiative has 22.ti'g3
evaporated after the trade of two White is preparing to transfer
pairs of minor pieces. 20 . . . b6 his queen to the h4-square.
(The evaluation of the position re­ 22 b5 23.Wh4 ie8 24.a3
• • .

mains the same after 20 .. .f6, due '8c8 25.g4

to 21.'8d1 fxeS 22.'8d7± Atalik - His g-pawn joins into the at­
Howell, Ottawa 2007.) 21.'8d1 tack. Later in the game Matush­
'8ac8 22.'8d3± Now, White's pawn kina - Bocheva, Email . 2010,
in c3 is reliably protected and White managed gradually to
Black is doomed to a long and la­ break Black's defence and scored
borious defence, Akobian - How- a full point.

43
Chapter 3

2S .id7 26.ti'e7 g4c7 27.

••• the placement of White's bishop
<.!?e2 aS 28.hxg6 hxg6 29.<.!?d2 on a6, which deprives Black of the
.if8 30.ti'h4 .ig7 31.ti'h7+ <.!?f8 possibility l:!c8, so White is com­
32.gd3 ges 33. �h2 gc4 34. pletely dominant on the c-file,
c!bf3 .ic6 3S.c!bgS .idS 36.c!bh7+ Ibragimov - Isoev, Azov 1991.)
<.!?e7 37.f5 <.!?d7 38.fxe6+ fxe6 14.<.!?e2;t and he maintains a slight
39.c!bf6+ .ixf6 40.exf6 1-0 edge although Black's counter­
play, connected with exerting
B3) 10 ••• cxd4 pressure against White's centre,
After this move, there arises should not be underestimated.
an endgame on the board. Here, it
is essential for both opponents to 12.<.!?xd2 0-0 13 .id3 ! ?
•

know its theory, but it is even This i s White's most precise

more important for them to be ex­ move.
perts of playing endgames in gen­
eral. He does not need to present
ll.cxd4 his opponent with the additional
possibility, arising following 13.
dS lt:\ aSoo Khenkin - Sutovsky,
Kaskady 2002. In this complicat­
ed and double-edged position,
White's advantage, if it really ex­
ists, is unlikely to be proved.

t3 • • • gds
Black increases his pressure
against White's centre.

About 13 . . . e6 14.l:!hc1 l:!d8 15.

ll �xd2 +
••• eS - see variation A.
This is Black's most natural
and often played move. 13 .. .fS. This way of undermin­
ing White's centre is encountered
It is very interesting for him to once in a while in this variation of
try 11 . . . 0-0 ! ? After this, White's the Gruenfeld Defence and we
simplest line would be : 12 .\1;lfxa5 will see it many more times in the
lt:\xaS 13.i.d3, for example 13 . . . future. 14.exf5 gxfS 15.d5 .!DeS 16.
i.g4 ! ? This i s a n active move. (It is lt:\xeS .beS 17.l:!heU White's posi­
weaker for Black to opt for 13 . . . b6 tion is preferable thanks to his su­
14.<.!?e2 i.d7 15J:!hcl l�Uc8 16.i.a6 perior pawn-structure and better
l:!xcl 17.l:!xc1 <.!?f8 18.d5± and in developed pieces, Spoelman -
this position it is worth noticing Goormachtigh, Netherlands 2010.

44
4.cd l:i:Jxd5 5.e4 1:i:Jxc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. 1:i:Jj3 c5 8. i.e3 vtia5 9. vtid2 1:i:J c6 1 0 . '£bl

14.d5 15.'k!?e2
This move is forced but is not His king avoids the unpleasant
bad at all. x-ray with the enemy rook on the
d-file.

14 . . . �a5
It is a bit unusual to place vol­ 15 . . . b6
untarily the knight at the edge of
the board, but here, this is a good There arises an interesting
move for Black. tactical fight after lS .. .fS. White's
prospects are preferable in all the
Following 14 . . . 1:i:JeS, White ob­ variations, because his pieces are
tains an advantage effortlessly. better mobilised. 16.'£hcl b6 (Or
lS.I:i:JxeS i.xeS 16.f4 i.g7 17.i.c5 (or 16 . . . fxe4? ! 17 ..ixe4 i.fS 18.i.xfS
17.'£hcl ! ?t - preparing the pene­ gxfS 19.'£bS b6 2 0 .'£c7± and
tration of the rook to c7, Avrukh Black's pawns on e7 and fS are
- Ben Artzi, Eilat 2012) 17 . . . 'k!?f8 very weak, while White's rook has
18.'£hcl fS 19.'k!?e3. This is one of penetrated to the penultimate
the typical features of this end­ rank and Black's knight on aS is
game. White's king is much more horribly misplaced, Nitsche -
active here than its counterpart Groth, corr. 2002.). 17.1:i:JgS fxe4
and can take part in the actions at 18 . .ixe4 i.a6+ 19.'k!?el '£ac8 20.
any moment. 19 . . . b6 20.ia3 fxe4 l:i:Je6 '£d7 21.'£xc8+ .ixc8, Vidit -
21.i.xe4 i.fS 22J:'k7 i.f6 23.d6. Af­ Bernard, Paris 2010. Now, White
ter this energetic breakthrough can maintain a slight edge follow­
his advantage increases. 23 . . . exd6 ing 22.'£cl .ib7 23 . .if3t and
24 . .bf5 gxfS 2S.'£bS '£ac8 26. Black's knight is not placed well
i.xd6+ 'k!?g8 27.'£xfS± and White on aS and capturing for him on dS
has excellent prospects to realise is impossible, because White will
his extra pawn in the endgame, counter 23 . . . .ixdS? with 24.fi.g4±
Khenkin - Wuerdinger, Bad Wi­
essee 2002. 16.�d4

4S
Chapter 3

His knight takes the weak c6- It is also possible for him to
square under control. continue with 17.tt:Jc6 tt:lxc6 18.
dxc6. Now, there arise varia­
tions with the already familiar
exchange-sacrifice on the d3-
square : 18 . . . �xd3 19.\t>xd3 ia6+
20.\t>c2 �c8 21.�bc1 ibS 22.\t>b3
fxe4 23.c7 ieS 24.�hd1 id3
25.g3;!; and despite the activity of
Black's bishops, White has excel­
lent chances of realising his mate­
rial advantage, Sutkalenko - Lah­
denmaeki, Lechenicher Schach­
Server 2010.
16 ••• f5
17 fxe4 18.fxe4 .ig4+ 19.
•••

After 16 . . . e6 17.tt:Jc6 tt:Jxc6 18. 1!/£2 gf8+ 20.\t>g3 .id7 21.lLlf3

dxc6 �xd3 19.\t>xd3, Black's com­ e6 22.d6 .ic6 23 .ig5 lLlb7•

pensation for the exchange is in­ 24.ghel lLlcS 25 .ic2 gf7 26.
•

sufficient. 19 . . . .!a6+ 20.\t>c2 �c8 gbdU White has a powerful

and here, White's best line would passed pawn on d6, moreover
be: 21.�bcl ! (It is weaker for him that Black's e6-pawn is very weak,
to opt for 21.�hc1 i.c4 2 2 . \t>d2 so in the game Hudak - Reeky,
�xc6 23.\t>e1 bS 24 . .!xa7 f5 25.�c2 Email 2010, White scored a con­
�a6? and thanks to his two pow­ vincing victory.
erful bishops Black created coun­
terplay in the game Sakaev - B4) 10 ••• a6
Hoffmann, Groningen 1991.) 21... Black parries radically the
i.c4 22.�hdl± White maintains a threat �bS, but weakens the b6-
great advantage, because Black square.
cannot capture the pawn on a2, n.gcl
since White's pieces will become After having provoked the
tremendously active in that case. weakening of the b6-square,
For example: 22 . . . .ba2 23.�d7 White's rook protects the pawn
�xc6+ 24.\t>d3 �xc1 25.�d8+ i.f8 on c3. Now, Black must be con­
26 . .bc1 \t>g7 27.ib2+ f6 28. stantly on the alert about the po­
h£6+- and the endgame is com­ sitional threat d4-d5.
pletely hopeless for Black. (diagram)
17.f3 In this position he has the
This is a reliable move. White's choice between the following pos-
first priority is to take care about sibilities: B4a) ll . . . f5, B4b)
the safety of his pawn-centre. ll ... .ig4 and B4c) ll . . . cxd4.

46
4.cd liJxdS 5.e4 liJxc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. liJj3 c5 8. ie3 Y!! aS 9. 1lff d2 liJ c6 1 0 J�!.bl

11 . . . 0-0 12 .d5 E:d8 13.i.e2 e6 12 ••• f4

14.0-0 exdS 1S.exd5 liJe7 16.c4 Black sacrifices a pawn for ini­
1Jffxd2 17.liJxd2;!; Karpov - Galli, tiative.
Bastia 1998. The majority of the
endgames of this type, as a rule, It is possible for him to opt for
are close to equality, but in this 12 . . . b5, occupying space on the
situation White has an edge. The queenside, 13.ie2 ib7 (after
point is that Black's pawn is 13 . . . 0-0 14.0-0 E:d8 15.a4 i.e6
not on a7, but on a6. The moment 16.axb5 axb5 17.'1Wb2;!;, White suc­
he plays b7-b6, White will man­ ceeds in keeping the enemy bish­
age to exert pressure against that op on g7 inside the cage of pawns
pawn. on eS, d4 and c3, Fridman - Kra­
senkow, Jurmala 2012) 14.0-0
cxd4 1S.liJxd4 liJxd4 (following
B4a) ll •.. f5 15 . . . liJxe5 16.liJe6 if6 17.1i.d4�,
Having undermined White's thanks to the powerful position of
centre with the move c7-c5, Black the knight on e6, which prevents
inflicts a strike against it from the Black from castling, White has
other side of the board. more than sufficient compensa­
12.e5 tion for the sacrificed pawn) 16.
This move is seemingly illogi­ ixd4 0-0 17.id1 idS 18.ib3
cal (White presents his opponent ixb3 19.axb3;!; White's bishop on
with the control over the dS­ d4, supported by the pawn on c3,
square.), but is one of the typical is obviously more active than its
resources for him in this varia­ counterpart on g7, so the position
tion. Its idea is to restrict maxi­ is clearly in favour of White, Ry­
mally Black's bishop on g7. This chagov - Nikolenko, Moscow
"good" bishop will be restricted 2010.
by White's pawn on eS and will
have problems entering the ac­ 13 .ixf4 ig4 14.ie2 gds
•

tions. 15.liJg5

47
Chapter 3

White does not insist on keep­ 13.gxf3 0-0-0 14.i.d3 (After the
ing the extra material and tries to careless move 14.f4, Black can un­
deploy his knight on the weak­ dermine White's centre with the
ened e6-square. 15 .ixe2 16.
••• move 14 . . . e6? and organise coun­
1rxe2 �US 17 .td2 cxd4 18.tt:le6
• terplay, Bosman - Ni Hua, Plov­
d3 19.�e3;!; - Now, despite Black's div 2010.) 14 . . . tt:le5 15.i.e2 f5 16.f4
powerful passed pawn on d3, tt:lg4 17.i.xg4 fxg4 18.c4 �c7 19.h3
White wins the exchange, since gxh3 2 0J'!xh3;!; White's pawn­
three of Black's pieces are under mass in the centre looks very im­
the attack of White's knight and pressive and Black is incapable of
cannot run away simultaneously, exploiting the placement of White's
Salem - Daulyte, Dubai 2011. king in the centre, Mengual Bolo
- Perez Marco, Email 2009.
B4b) u . . . .tg4
This seemingly active move 13 .te2 0-0 14.0-0 .txf3
•

(Black increases his pressure

against White's centre.) has a def­ Black can also try to under­
inite drawback. With his previous mine immediately his opponent's
move White has protected his centre without the preliminary
pawn on c3, so he can occupy ad­ exchange. 14 . . . e6 15.!g5. White's
ditional space in the centre. is attacking the enemy rook on d8
12.d5 and frees the way of his queen to
the f4-square. 15 .. J'!d7 (following
15 . . .£6 16.i.f4;!;, White preserves
an edge, because after Black has
played f7-f6, his bishop on g7 has
turned immediately from active
into very passive, Standaer -
Nogga, Email 2009) 16.�f4 ! Now,
there arise tactical complications,
which turn out to be in favour of
White. 16 . . . .txf3 17.dxc6 .ixe2 18.
cxd7 f6 19.�d6 fxgS 20 .�xe6+ gf7
21.e5. This is the key idea of this
12 ... �M8 variation. White's e-pawn is com­
Black intends to undermine ing to the assistance of his d7-
White's centre with the move e6. pawn. Black can hardly hold this
position. 21.. .i.b5 (His situation is
Black can also compromise his horrible after 21.. . .txf1 2 2 .�d5
opponent's pawn-structure, but �dB 23.e6 ge7 24.�xf1 i.f6 25.c4
must part with his powerful bish­ �g7 26.gb1+-. He has kept his
op in order to do that. 12 . . . .ixf3 extra piece and has blocked tern-

48
4.cd !iJxd5 5.e4 !iJxc3 6.bc ig7 7. 0,j3 c5 8. i.e3 VIi aS 9. Vfid2 !iJ c6 1 0 . 'gbJ

porarily White's central passed

pawns, but Black is incapable of
countering the penetration of his
opponent's rook inside his camp.)
22 .Vfid5 hd7 23.e6 .be6 24.Vfixe6
.bc3 25.f4 i.d4+ 26.'tt>h 1 Vfid8
27.fxg5± Black's position is diffi­
cult and White's rook is more
powerful than Black's bishop and
pawn in this open position.

15.hf3 e6 ter this strong move, Black is

faced with a rather unpleasant
choice. 19 :Se8 (but not 19 .. .f6
•••

20.i.f4±; 19 . . . 'gxd5 2 0 . .bd8 'gxd2

21..b:a5 'gxe2 2 2 .i.b6± and in the
endgame White has all the chanc­
es of realising his material advan­
tage) 20.:Selt White has seized
completely the initiative and his
bishops begin to be very active in
this open position, while Black
can hardly manage to block the
enemy dS-pawn.
16 .ie2 !
•

This i s a very accurate move. B4c) ll . . . cxd4

White removes prudently his This is Black's most popular
bishop away from the possible move. He enters an endgame hop­
strike CiJeS. ing later to equalise a slightly in­
ferior position.
After the routine response 16. 12.cxd4 ti'xd2+ 13.'tt>xd2
'gfd1, Black obtains a very good
position following 16 . . . exd5 17.
exdS CiJeS? Ding - Li, Olongapo
City 2010.

16 ••• :Sd7 17.:SfdU

(diagram)
White's position is preferable
thanks to his two powerful bish­
ops and the passed d-pawn. 17 •••

exd5 18.exd5 :Sfd8 1 9 .ig5! Af-

•

49
Chapter 3

13 ... e6 1'!d8 25.1'!b6± - He has more than

This is a precise and reliable sufficient compensation for the
move. Black is trying to build a exchange. Black's a6 and e6-
solid defensive line. pawns are very weak and what is
even more important - his king is
It is also possible for Black to seriously endangered in the cen­
play 13 . . .f5 - a counter strike tre of the board despite the fact
which we are already familiar that it is an endgame.) 17.'it>e2
with. 14.e5 !

17. . . e6 18.1'!b1 1'!f7. Here,

With this move White begins a White's best chance of obtaining
plan to restrict the enemy bishop an advantage is the move 19.
on g7. 14 . . . i.e6 (A quite typical for ttlg5 ! ? (following 19.g3 1'!d7 20.
this variation exchange-sacrifice 1'!b6 h6 21.h4 1'!c8 2 2 .ttlel 1'!cd8
was tried in the game Sakaev - 23.ttld3 tt:Jxd4+ 24.1'!xd4 1'!xd4 25.
Smikovski, Novokuznetsk 2008: hd4 1'!xd4 26.1'!xe6;J;, he again
14 . . . h6 15.i.c4 ttla5 16.id5 e6 17. maintains an edge, but there is
1'!xc8+ ! 1'!xc8 18.he6 1'!c6 19.i.d5± still plenty of material left on the
White's bishop and his two cen­ board and in actions on both
tral pawns are stronger than flanks Black's bishop may turn
Black's rook and b7-pawn.) 15. out to be stronger than White's
i.c4 hc4 16.1'!xc4 0-0 (16 . . . 1'!d8 knight, Kuljasevic - Safarli, Par­
17.'it>e2 e6 18.1'!b1 1'!d7, Prasad - dubice 2010) 19 . . . 1'!e7 20.h4;J;, fol­
Ganguly, Nagpur 2008. Here, lowed by the subsequent transfer
White has a very powerful argu­ of the knight to f4 via the h3-
ment at his disposal - 19.ttlg5 ! ?, square. White maintains unpleas­
attacking immediately Black's ant pressure.
Achilles heel - his weak e6-pawn. The evaluation of the position
19 . . . 'it>e7 20.i.cl ! White's bishop is remains more or less the same
transferred to the a3-square after 17 . . . h6 18.1'!bU. Later, in
where it will be much more active. the game Z.Schneider - Neubau­
20 . . . ttlxd4+ 21.1'!xd4 1'!xd4 2 2 . er, Oberpullendorf 2002, Black
1'!xb7+ 1'!d7 23.ia3+ lt>e8 24.1'!b8+ played carelessly - 18 . . . e6? and

50
4.cd 0.xd5 5.e4 0.xc3 6.bc :ig7 7. 0.j3 c5 B. fie3 Wia5 9. Wld2 0.c6 1 0 . 'i'J.bl

this enabled White to continue Besides this, he has also tested

with a simple winning combina­ in practice 13 . . . 0-0 14.d5
tion: 19.'i'J.xb7 0.a5 20.'i'J.xg7+ 'it>xg7
2l.'Sc7+ 'it>h8 22 .id2 +-
17 . . . 'i'J.ad8 18.'i'J.bl 'iJ.dS (Follow­
ing 18 . . . 'i'J.d7 19.g3 e6 20.'iJ.bM,
White has again a slight edge, Ol­
szewski - Kanarek, Warsaw 2011.
His pieces are active and Black
must be constantly on the alert
about the possible exchange-sac­
rifice on c6 - which is one of the
main resources for White in this Now, it is bad for him to opt
position.) 19.a4 'Sfd8 20 .g3 h6 for 14 . . . 'i'J.d8, due to lS.'it>el 0.b4
21.h4t He has the initiative in this (15 . . . 0.a5?? 16.:ib6+-) 16.id2 ! ,
endgame. 21.. .0.a5 22.'i'J.c7 'i'J.Sd7 Brunner - Marzolo, Metz 2010,
23.'i'J.c5 'iJ.dS 24.'i'J.xd5 'iJ.xdS 2S.'i'J.b6 16 . . . a5 17.a3 0.a6 18.ixa5± and
'it>t7 26.:id2 if8 27.ic3 e6 28. Black's compensation for the
0.el! ± White redeploys his knight pawn is insufficient. Still, even af­
to a more active position. 28 . . . i.e7 ter 14 . . . 0.e5, White develops ef­
29.0.c2 idS 30.ha5. Having im­ fortlessly his initiative in the end­
proved maximally the placement game. 15.0.xe5 !xeS 16.f4 ib8
of his pieces, White finally trades 17.e5 'i'J.d8 18.i.d3 if5 19.i.xf5 gxfS
his bishop for the enemy knight 20.'it>e2t - He has a better pawn­
on aS and wins the b7-pawn. structure, while Black's bishop on
Black's position crumbles. 30 . . . b8 is very passive restricted by
'fJ.xaS 31.'i'J.xb7+ 'it>e8 32.'i'J.b4 'iJ.dS White's pawn on eS, Akobian -
33.'i'J.c4 'i'J.d7 34.'i'J.c6 'it>t7 35.'i'J.xa6 Khachiyan, Wheeling 2010.
'i'J.b7 36.a5 'i'J.b2 37.'it>d3 'i'J.a2 38.
'i'J.a7+ 1-0 Giri - Sutovsky, Wijk 14.i.d3
aan Zee 2010. This is a reliable move. White
is not in a hurry to force the issue.

He has also tried in practice

the riskier line: 14.d5 exdS 15.
exdS. Still, after Black's solid re­
ply 15 . . . 0.e5 16.0.xe5 ixeS 17.g3
:ifS 18.ig2 'it>d7= , White can
hardly fight for the advantage, be­
cause his passed pawn has been
reliably blocked and the exchange
of the rooks on the c-file will elim-

51
Chapter 3

inate the conflict in this position,

Ftacnik - Jansa, Bratislava 1983.
14 ••• 0-0
About 14 ... .id7 15.!k4 0-0 -
see 14 . . . 0-0.
15.gc4 .id7
Black cannot equalise if he
tries to organise counterplay with
15 . . .f5 16.g3 .id7 17J1hc1 E:fc8 18.
dS exdS 19.exd5;!;. White's pros­
pects are preferable thanks to his
powerful passed dS-pawn, Khen­ square in order to fix the enemy
kin - Seel, Bad Wiessee 2003. h7-pawn.
The character of the fight re­ 16 gfc8 17.h5 .!lJa5 18.
•••

mains the same following 15 . . . E:d8 gxc8+ gxc8 19.h6 .ih8 20.gc1
16.h4 (16.E:b1 ! ?;!;) 16 . . . .id7 17.h5;!; gxc1 21. c.!?xcl .!lJc6 22. i>d2 .if6
Epishin - Polovodin, Podolsk 23.i>c3;!; White's king is more ac­
1992 . tive and he will play for a win lat­
(diagram) er, combining his threat to break
16.h4!? with his king towards Black's
The endgame i s slightly better queenside pawns with the pawn­
for White, but it would not be easy advance in the centre d4-d5, as
for him to break Black's defence. well as with an attack against
With his last move White plans to Black's h7-pawn, Epishin - Fer­
advance his pawn up to the h6- nandez Aguado, Logrono 1991.

Conclusion
We have just analysed variations of the Gruenfeld Defence in which
Black develops his queen to aS. In these lines, as a rule, there arises a
slightly better endgame for White, because his pieces occupy more ac­
tive positions thanks to his wonderful pawn-centre. Black will need to
work hard to neutralise his opponent's pressure on the c-file and to
prevent the penetration to the c7-square. If he tries to undermine his
opponent's centre with the move f7-f5, then White has the unpleasant
plan with the move e4-e5, after which Black's bishop on g7 becomes
severely restricted in its movements and White seizes completely the
initiative on the queenside. With a black bishop remaining on g7, White
will have an extra piece in his queenside actions.

52
Chapter 4 l.d4 ttJf6 2.c4 g6 3.ttJc3 d5 4.cxd5
ttJxd5 5.e4 ttJxc3 6.bxc3 .ig7 7.ttJf3 c5
8 .ie3 Vas 9.Vd2 0-0
•

cxd4 and finally the move which

is considered to be the best in this
variation - F) lO gds. •••

About 10 . . . lt:Jc6 ll.d5 lt:Je5 (11 . . .

gds - see lO . . . gds) 12.lt:Jxe5 .ixeS
13.f4 - see Chapter 2, 8 . . . lt:Jc6, 9 . . .
�as.

A) 10 ••• b6
This move was considered to This move is only seldom
be imprecise for many years and played in the tournament prac­
was not in the focus of the con­ tice. White obtains effortlessly an
temporary theory. In the 21st cen­ opening advantage.
tury however, new ideas were
found for Black and they led to a
very complicated and double­
edged game. Therefore, this vari­
ation became a frequent guest in
the tournament practice even at
the super top level. It was tested
in the games of L. Aronian, A.
Grischuk, P. Leko, P. Svidler, V.
Topalov and many other grand­
masters.

to.gcl n.Ah6
Black has a great choice of This is a typical reso�rce in
moves in this position: this variation. White wishes to
A) 10 b6, B) 10 c!bd7, C)
••• ••• trade the enemy bishop in order
10 Ag4, D) 10 e6, E) 10
• • • ••• ••• to weaken the shelter of the ene-

53
Chapter 4

my king. By playing like this, he is

not planning so much to attack,
but is trying to force his opponent
to exchange on d4, which would
lead to the trade of queens and a
transfer to an endgame advanta­
geous for White.

It may be interesting for him

to choose the move ll.h4 ! ? , which
has not been analysed thoroughly
yet. It has been tried by I.Sokolov. There has arisen a typical end­
Later, Black did not defend in the game for the Gruenfeld Defence
best possible way and White with a slight edge for White due
scored a quick victory following to his dominance in the centre.
ll . . . l'!e8?! 12 .h5 i.a6 13.hxg6 hxg6 Later, in the game Yermolinsky ­
14.i.h6 i.h8 1S.i.xa6 ltlxa6 16.d5 Khachiyan, Las Vegas 2004,
1Wa4 17.1Wf4 1Wc4 18.ltle5 1-0 I. So­ Black made a grave positional
kolov - Berghagen, Sweden 2001. blunder 15 .. Jic8? and after 16.
Ivan Sokolov's idea requires fur­ gxc8 hc8 17.gcl i.a6 18.gc7±
ther practical tests. White's rook penetrated to the c7-
square. In addition, Black's knight
ll . . • cxd4 on b8 has not been developed yet.
This exchange is forced. 18 . . . �f8 19.e5 hd3 2o.gc8+
�g7 21.�xd3+-, White has a de­
After 11.. .l'!d8, White can play cisive advantage in this endgame,
12 .h4! and will force his opponent because Black cannot get rid of
to trade pawns in the centre any­ the pin of his knight on b8 with­
way. Still, contrary to the majority out material losses.
of similar positions, after the
exchange, White is not obliged B) 10 ••• �d7
to enter an endgame but can play
for an attack. 12 . . . cxd4 13.i.xg7
�xg7 14.h5± with a very powerful
attack, Daly - Isaev, Moscow
1994. We have to mention the fact
that Black's rook on d8 is not pro­
tected, so he cannot exchange on
c3.

12.hg7 �xg7 13.cxd4

tfxd2+ 14.�xd2 i.b7 15.i.d3;!;

54
4.cd 11Jxd5 5.e4 11Jxc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. 11Jj3 c5 8 . fi. e3 Wfa5 9. Wf d2 0 - 0 1 0 . '£cl

Jan Nepomniachtchi liked to White preserves an edge. 12 .�6

play this move. i.d7 (or 12 . . . '£d8 13 . .ixg7 \t>xg7 14.
ll . .id3 d5;!;, followed by 0-0 and White's
This is a natural developing prospects are preferable thanks to
move for White. He not only pre­ his dominance in the centre, Ba­
pares to castle kingside, but also nikas - Rowson, Tallinn 1997)
protects prudently his central e4- 13.d5 .ib5 14 . .ixg7 \t>xg7 15.c4 (15.
pawn, because Black can attack it h4 ! ?;!;) 15 ... Wfxd2+ 16.\t>xd2 .ia6
later (11Jf6, or fi.b7 after b7-b5). 17.h4;!; White has extra space (his
pawns have occupied the centre),
while Black's minor pieces are
very passive, Bosiocic - Vorobiov,
Trieste 2012.

11 . . . 11Jf6. With this move Black

attacks the enemy e4-pawn and
prepares c5-c4. We have already
mentioned before that the pawn­
advance c5-c4 is not dangerous
for White. 12.0-0 c4 (after 12 . . . e6
13.Wie2;!;, his beautiful pawn-cen­
n ... e5 tre provides him with an advan­
This is Black's best move. tage, Bronstein - Tukmakov,
Wijk aan Zee 1992) 13.ib1 b5 14 .
It seems premature for him to .ih6 .ib7 15.'£feU and again
begin active actions on the queen­ White's pawn-centre guarantees
side with ll . . . b5 12.0-0 c4. This his edge, Rodrigues - Mundstock,
move is strategically risky. Black Brazil 1993.
occupies space on the queenside
indeed, but reduces his pressure 12.d5
against White's centre. 13.ic2 This is the only way for him to
fi.b7 14.'£b1 11Jb6 15.h4 ! This is the fight for the opening advantage.
beginning of an attack against the
enemy king. 15 . . . '£ad8 16.h5 '£fe8 Following 12 .h4 cxd4 13.cxd4
17.'£fcl fi.c6 18.fi.h6± White has Wfxd2+ 14.\t>xd2, White maintains
powerful initiative on the king­ a slight edge in the endgame, but
side and a wonderful pawn-cen­ Black can rely on equalising grad­
tre, which can hardly be attacked ually with an accurate defence, as
by Black, Santos Etxepare - it was shown in the game Aronian
Sanchez Carol, Email 2010. - Nepomniachtchi, Khanty-Man­
siysk 2010: 14 . . . exd4 15 ..ixd4 '£d8
11 ... 11Jb6. After this move 16.\t>e3 11Jf6 17 . .ixf6 .ix£6 18.i.c4

55
Chapter 4

h6 19 . .ib3 :!'!d7 2 0.g4 :!'!e7 2 1.g5 .idS :!'!b8 25.Wle7+-; 23 ... lt:Jf6? 24.
i.g7 2Vt:ld4 ixd4+ 23.r;!;>xd4 ie6 Wle7+ r;!;>h6 25.Wlf8+ r;t>gs 26.i.f7)
24 . .be6 :!'!xe6 25.gxh6 :!'!d8+ 26. 24.Wle7+ r;!;>h6 25.:!'!fe1 lt:Jf6 26.
r;!;>e3 :!! d eS 27.f3 r;!;>h7= and the op­ WlfB+ r;!;>hS 27.:!'!e3 :!'!b7 28 ..if7 :!'!xf7
ponents agreed soon to a draw. 29.Wlxf7t In this complicated po­
sition White has a rook and a
pawn for Black's two minor piec­
es. White's position is preferable,
since he has a very strong pawn
on d6, while Black's king is obvi­
ously endangered on the hS­
square.

13.0-0 c4 14 . .ic2 �a3

tSJ!bl gbs

12 . . .b5
Black is preparing active ac­
tions on the queenside.

He can also try something on

the kingside as well. 12 .. .f5 13.ig5
c4 (after 13 .. .tbf6 14 ..bf6 .bf6
15.0-0;!;, White's extra space and
his passed dS-pawn are more im­
portant than Black's two-bishop
advantage, Pavlovic - Sedlak, 16.�cl
Valjevo 2011) 14.ixc4 fxe4 15.d6+ Black's queen is perfectly
r;!;>h8 16.lt:Jh4. This move is forced. placed on a3, so White should
Now, the position becomes very better exchange it immediately.
complicated. White has a power­ 16 . . . �xc1 17.gfxcl aS
ful and far-advanced pawn on d6, The game has entered a com­
but his knight on h4 is misplaced. plicated endgame in which each
16 ... i.f6 17.Wle3 ! (threatening 18. side has its chances.
lt:Jxg6) 17 ... .bg5 18.Wlxg5 :!'!f6 19. 18.a4
0-0 WlcS 20 . .ib3 b6 21.lt:Jxg6+ ! White undermines immedi­
He solves radically the problem ately Black's queenside pawns.
with his bad knight. White organ­
izes a powerful attack for the sac­ It is possible that White's most
rificed knight. 21.. .:!'!xg6 22 .Wld8+ reliable move is 18.lt:Jd2 ! ? , for ex­
r;!;>g7 23.:!'!cd1 :!'!b8 (23 . . . :!'!f6? 24. ample: 18 . . . .ia6 19 . .idU and he is

56
4. cd ltJxd5 5.e4 ltJxc3 6.bc :ig7 7. ltJj3 c5 8. :ie3 Vff a5 9. Wid2 0 - 0 l O .'ikl

p reparing to transfer his bishop prospects are better, since his

to e2, followed by undermining dominance in the centre is a more
Black's pawn on c4 with the move important factor than his slightly
a2 -a4. compromised pawn-structure (af­
ter the possibility - .ixf3).
18 ••• b4 ll.d5
White occupies space. This is
the reason he has played :1kl, so
that his pawn on c3 is protected.

19 .ldl! ?
•

White will redeploy his bishop

to e2.
ll . . . .txf3
It would be too risky for him to This is Black's basic and most
present Black with two connected logical move. He compromises his
passed pawns. 19.cxb4 axb4 20. opponent's pawn-structure.
idl c3 21.:ie2 fS+t Pashikian -
Nepomniachtchi, Moscow 2010. About ll .. J:!d8 12.ltJg5 - see
Black has a very good position. variation F.
His queenside pawns are very
dangerous and his task is much ll . . . ltJd7. This move leads to a
easier than White's game. clearly inferior position for Black.
12 .c4 W:fb6 (After 12 . . . W:fa3 13 . .le2
19 . • • b3 20.lbd2 .la6 21 .le2;!;
• ltJf6 14.Vfic2 WiaS+ 15.:id2 W:fc7
Black has a protected passed 16. 0-0;!;, White has completed his
pawn on b3, but his c4-pawn is development and now Black will
very weak, so the position should have a hard time fighting against
be evaluated in favour of White. his opponent's centre, Davidavi­
cius - Boreika, Email 2005. Fol­
lowing 12 . . . W:la4, White can. avoid
C) 10 ••• .lg4 the doubling of his pawns with
This active move leads to a 13.ltJg5 h6 14.h3 ihS 15.g4 hxgS,
complicated fight in which White's Kotanjian - Kviriashvili, Tbilisi

57
Chapter 4

2009, 16.i.xg5;!;, he regains his 13.c4 �c7

bishop and preserves his posi­
tional advantage.) 13.ie2 �b4 14. There arises an inferior end­
h3 i.xf3 15 . .ixf3 a6 16.ie2 �xd2+ game for Black in which he has no
17.'it>xd2t In this endgame, natu­ counterplay at all after 13 . . . �xd2+
rally Black has some counterplay 14.'it>xd2 fS 15.exf5 gxfS 16.f4 lLlf6
on the dark squares, but White's 17.id3t, his pawns on fS and e7
prospects are preferable thanks to are very weak, Kuljasevic - Ashi­
his superior pawn-structure and ku, Trieste 2012.
the two-bishop advantage, Cebalo
- Tseshkovsky, Banja Luka 1981. 14.f4

It would be too risky for Black

to opt for ll . . . lLla6, since he not
only loses a tempo, but removes
his knight to the edge of the board.
The best way for White to empha­
size the drawbacks of this move is
12.h4 ! ? , beginning an attack on
the kingside. 12 . . . f5 13.exf5 ixfS
14.h5 :!':ladS, Kramnik - Svidler,
Moscow 2009, 15.ih6 ! ?± and af­
ter the trade of the dark-squared
bishops, White's kingside attack White is fighting for the key
becomes very powerful. square in this position - eS. The
subsequent play of both adversar­
12.gxf3 lLld7 ies is focused on this square.
14 ••• e5
Black cannot equalise with Black corrects his opponent's
12 . . . c4. Following 13.h4 h5 14.ih6 pawn-structure indeed, but cre­
Elc8 15.ixg7 'it>xg7 16.f4 lLld7 17. ates some counterplay.
Elg1 �b6 18.f5t, White obtained a 15.fxe5 lilxe5 16.i.e2
better position in the game Khen­ This is the key position of this
kin - Schandorff, Helsingor 2011. variation.
It is worth paying attention to (diagram)
White's previous actions. At first, 16 ••• lild7
he provoked the move hS, weak­
ening the g6-square and then be­ 16 . . . �e7. Black's position is
gan an attack against it with the difficult after this move. 17.f4 lLld7
pawn-advance f3-f4-f5. After the 18.if3 gS. This pawn-sacrifice is
exchange on g6, White's f2-pawn forced, since the control over the
may join into the attack (f4-f5). eS-square is vital for Black. 19.

58
4.cd 0.xd.S 5.e4 0.xc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. 0.j3 c5 8. ie3 V!faS 9. Wid2 0 - 0 J O . 'i'!.cl

Email 2010. White has two pow­

erful bishops and a passed dS­
pawn. Black's king shelter has
been weakened and he must be on
the alert about White's possible
attack on the g-file, or against the
h7-square.

D) 10 ... e6
This is a passive move. Black
fxgS 0.e5 20 . .ie2 fS 21.d6! After prevents d4-d5, but loses time in
this strong move there arises an the process. As a rule, in this vari­
endgame which is better for White ation, there arises an endgame
(Things are not so clear after 21. which is better for White in which
exfS 'SxfS+!. Black has counterplay Black can hardly organise any
due to the unsafe enemy monarch counterplay.
in the centre of the board, Khen­ n . .th6
kin - Romanishin, Ohrid 2001.). This is an already familiar re­
21.. .V!fe6 2 2 .V!fd5. This is the es­ source. White wishes to advance
sence of White's previous move. h2-h4, threatening an attack
After the trade of queens, Black is against the enemy king, in order
incapable of exploiting the pre­ to force Black to exchange on d4.
carious placement of White's king
in the centre of the board. 22 . . .
V!fxdS 23.exd5 'Sae8 24.\t>d2 b6
25.'Scf1 'Sd8 26.h4 'Sxd6 27.h5± ­
He has a great advantage in this
endgame with two powerful bish­
ops and a strong passed pawn on
dS, while Black's pawns on fS and
h7 are vulnerable.

17.f4 gae8 18.e5 g5. This is a

timely undermining move. 19.
0-0 White must sacrifice a pawn ll ... tlJc6
if he wishes to fight for the open­ This is his most natural move.
ing advantage. 19 gxf4 20.
•••

ix£4 ttJxe5 21 .tg4 ti'b6 22.

• The character of the fight re­
.tf5� - He has more than suffi­ mains more or less the same fol­
cient compensation for the sacri­ lowing ll . . . 'Sd8 12 .h4 cxd4 13.
ficed pawn, Romanov - Shulman, .ixg7 \t>xg7 14.cxd4 0.c6 1S,ti'xa5

59
Chapter 4

lt:lxaS 16.�d2 .id7 (after 16 . . . h5,

Grischuk - Mamedyarov, Mos­
cow 2009, 17 . .id3, White main­
tains a slight but stable edge in
the endgame) 17.id3 E:ac8 18.g4
h6 19.�e3 ia4 2 0.g5 hS 21.lt:le5
lt:lc6 22 .lt:lxc6 E:xc6 23.E:xc6 hc6
24.E:cl �f8 25.f4;!; and White pre­
serves a slight advantage in the
endgame, because Black's king­
side pawns, placed on light
squares, may turn into good tar­ 15 . . . h6 16 ..id3 E:d8 17.�e3 .id7
gets for White's bishop, Najer - 18.E:b1 lt:la5 19.lt:le5 E:ac8. Later, in
Rakhmanov, Irkutsk 2010. the game Sherbakov - S.Ivanov,
USSR 1991, White accomplished
It is not preferable for Black the standard plan for similar po­
to opt for ll . . . cxd4 12 .hg7 �xg7 sitions, by advancing his king­
13.cxd4 lt:lc6 (13 .. .'�xd2 14.�xd2 side pawns with the idea to fix
lt:lc6 15.h4 E:d8 16.�e3 - see 11 . . . the enemy pawns on light
lt:lc6) 14.E:c5 �xd2+ 15.�xd2. squares: 20 .f4 ie8 2l.E:hc1 a6 2 2 .
There has arisen again on the g4 ! b S 23.g5 ! hxgS 24.hxg5;!; - the
board an already familiar end­ endgame is very difficult for
game. Later, in the game Jako­ Black.
venko - Rakhmanov, Dagomys
2010, there followed: 15 . . . a6 16. 16.c.!le3 .id7 17.gbl
id3 .id7 17.E:hc1 (17.E:b1! ?;!;) 17 . . .
E:fd8 18.�e3 ie8 19.E:b1 E:d7 2 0 . It is also good for White to play
E:b6;!;. White's rooks have occu­ immediately 17.h5;!;, preparing
pied active positions, while Black eventual actions on the h-file,
has no counterplay and is Yermolinsky - Benjamin, Phila­
forced to adhere to a passive de­ delphia 1992.
fence.

12.h4 cxd4 13 .ixg7 �xg7

•

14.cxd4 �xd2+ Following 17 . . . b6 18.iaM,

Black will have problems fighting
About 14 ... E:d8 15.'�xa5 - see for the c-file, since the c8-square
ll . . . E:d8. is controlled by White's bishop,
Koepcke - Henao, Los Angeles
15.c.!lxd2 1991.
(diagram)
15 J!d8
• • 18.J.d3 lt:le7 19.h5;t;

60
4.cd tjj xd5 5.e4 tjj xc3 6.bc :ig7 7. tjjj3 c5 8. :ie3 Wia5 9. Wid2 0 - 0 l O . 'i!cl

rule, enters a typical "Gruenfeld

Defence' endgame.

This position was reached in

the World Championship match
in the game Karpov - Kasparov,
Lyon/New York 1990. Thanks to ll.cxd4 Wixd2+ 12.lilxd2
his pawn-centre, White can com­ Here, contrary to some other
bine threats both on the queen­ situations, White can capture on
side and on the kingside, while d2 not with his king but with his
Black must only defend passively. knight, since his d4-pawn is pro­
19 f6 20.hxg6 hxg6 21.gh2
••• tected. The idea behind this cap­
b6 22.g4 e5 23.dxe5 .ixg4 24. turing is to transfer the knight to
exf6+ �xf6 25.lild4± White's b3 in order to protect his d4-
kingside activity has brought pawn. The placement of the
some results. There has appeared knight on b3 has the plus that af­
a weak pawn on g6 in Black's ter f7-f5, White will be able to de­
camp. His position is difficult. fend his central e4-pawn with the
Kasparov exploited some impre­ move f2-f3.
cise moves by White and man­
aged to save the draw, but this
variation became a very rare guest
in the contemporary tournament
practice and quite deservedly so.
There will not be so many players
willing to obtain right after the
opening an endgame without any
active prospects and to lead a pas­
sive defence to the end of the
game.

12 •.. e6
E) 10 ••• cxd4 This move is solid but some-
After this move, the game, as a what passive.

61
Chapter 4

About 12 . . . tt:\c6 13.tt:\b3 gds It may be interesting, but still

(13 .. .fS 14.f3 - see 12 .. .fS; 13 . . . e6 insufficient for Black to equalise
14.ibS - see 12 . . . e6) 14.dS - see with 14 . . . tt:leS 1S.ie2 fS 16.£3 fxe4
12 . . . gd8. 17.fxe4 e6, Schmied - Fuhrmann,
Wuerzburg 1994, 18.igS ! ? gfs
Following 12 ... b6 13.ie2 tt:\a6 19.d6;!; - he has great problems
14.0-0 i.b7 1S.gc4;!;, Black's knight fighting against White's passed
is horribly misplaced at the edge pawn.
ofthe board, Kovacs - Apro, Hun­ 14 . . . tt:\b4. This move is seem­
gary 2003. ingly active, but after 1S.id2 ! ,
Black's knight i s suddenly endan­
12 ...f5. This undermining move gered. 1S . . . tt:\a6. He cannot equal­
is not dangerous for White's cen­ ise with this move, because he has
tre due to the possibility 13.f3, for lost too much time for manoeu­
example: 13 . . . fxe4 14.fxe4 tt:\c6 vres with his knight. (1S . . . aS 16.a3
1S.tt:lb3 id7 (Black's situation is a4 17.tt:laS ! tt:\a6 18.tt:\c4;!; Black
even worse after 1S . . .c.!<>h8 16.i.bS has solved the problems with his
aS 17.a4 tt:\a7 18.i.e2± and in the knight indeed, but his pawn on a4
endgame White has a stable ad­ is misplaced and his pawn-major­
vantage thanks to his superior ity on the queenside has been de­
pawn-structure and more harmo­ evaluated. He must fight for a
niously developed pieces, Khen­ draw in an inferior endgame. It is
kin - Hort, Bad Homburg 2007.) also good for White to choose
16.i.c4+ cJ;>hs 17.gfa here 18.gc2;!;, preventing Black's
counterplay, connected with the
12 . . . gds. The idea of this move move ib2 and maintaining a
is to exert pressure against slight edge.) 16.i.gS i.f8 17.i.bS h6
White's d4-pawn. 13.tt:\b3 tt:\c6 18.i.h4 gS 19.ig3 e6 2 0.ixa6
(13 . . . e6 14.!gS - see 12 . . . e6) 14.dS bxa6 2 l.i.c7 gd7 22.dxe6 fxe6
23.f3 ib4+ 24.cJ;>f2;!; Black's two­
bishop advantage cannot com­
pensate the numerous weakness­
es of his pawn-structure, S.Atalik
- Laciner, Marmaris 2006.

13.tt:lb3
White has accomplished the
planned transfer of his knight to
the b3-square.
This is the right move ! Now, (diagram)
Black's knight does not have a 13 ••• l!!t d8
good square to retreat to. This is a reliable move for

62
4. cd 11Jxd5 5.e4 11Jxc3 6.bc �g7 7. 11Jj3 c5 8. �e3 Wia5 9. ffd2 0 - 0 J O . 'l!cl

have remained bishops of oppo­

site colours on the board, but
Black's position is difficult, since
his c6-pawn is weak and the dark
squares on his kingside are terri­
bly weakened, Olesen - Marti­
novsky, Chicago 1993.

The endgame is slightly pref­

erable for White following 13 . . . b6
14.f3 .ia6 15 . .ie2 (15.'it>f2 ! ?;!;) 15 . . .
Black. He increases the pressure '8d8 16.'it>f2 'it>f8 17.h4 ixe2 18.
against White's d4-pawn and con­ 'it>xe2;!; Gajewski - Greenfeld, Za­
ceals for the moment his further greb 2011.
plans.
14 .ig5
•

13 . . . a5. The advance of Black's With this move White pro­

rook-pawn cannot cause any vokes the pawn-advance f7-f6, af­
trouble for White. 14.�b5 �d7 15. ter which the scope of action of
ixd7 11Jxd7 16.'8c7 11Jf6 17.f3 b5 18. the bishop on g7 is reduced. The
'it>e2;!; Anikaev - Tseshkovsky, loss of time for this bishop-ma­
Severodonetsk 1982. White's cen­ noeuvre for White is not impor­
tral pawns restrict considerably tant, since Black is incapable of
Black's minor pieces. In addition, exploiting this.
White dominates on the c-file. All 14 f6 15 .ie3
... •

this leads to the evaluation that

Black is faced with a difficult fight
for a draw in this endgame.

The natural move 13 . . . 11Jc6 has

the drawback that White can at­
tack immediately this knight with
his bishop. 14.�b5 '8d8. Black ig­
nores the possible weakening of
his pawn-structure and begins ac­
tive actions (it is just bad for him
to opt for 14 . . . �d7, in view of
15.11Jc5 ie8 16.e5;!; Schachinger ­ 15 .lbc6
• •

Andersen, Triesen 2010). 15.ixc6

bxc6 16.0-0 �a6 17.:1l:fd1 �e2 Black cannot equalise with
18.'8d2 �b5 19.11Jc5 .if8 2 0.�g5 15 . . .f5. He contributes to the ac­
ixc5 21.'8xc5 '8d7 2 2 .if6;!; - There tivity of his bishop on g7 indeed,

63
Chapter 4

but weakens his pawn-structure. .id7 22.d5 exd5 23.hd5:t

16.exf5 gxfS 17.i.g5 l'l:£8 18.i.b5:t White's pieces are much more ac­
Kobalia - Najer, Sochi 2 0 05. tive than their counterparts,
Grischuk - Kamsky, Mainz 2010.
Black obtains a solid, but a bit
passive position, if he transfers
his bishop to another diagonal. F) 10 ... l3d8
15 . . . i.f8 16.i.c4 lt:lc6 17. 0-0 i.d7 This move is considered to be
18.f4:t - His pieces can hardly at­ Black's main response at the mo­
tack White's powerful pawn-cen­ ment. After it, there arise very
tre, Galanov - Schwenck, Email complicated positions in which
2010. White must know very well the
concrete variations and for exam­
16.i.b5 �b4 ple, in the main line he will have
to sacrifice his queen.
The position is inferior for ll.d5
Black following 16 . . . i.f8, because He occupies space.
after 17.i.xc6 bxc6 18.f3, his c6-
pawn is weak and he will have to
part sooner or later with his two­
bishop advantage, because he will
have to give his bishop on f8 for
the enemy knight on cS. 18 . . . i.b7
19.'i!lf2 aS 20.lt:lc5 i.xcS 21.l'!xc5
@f7 22 .l'!b1 l'!d7 23.a4± Black's
pawns on aS and c6 are weak and
his bishop on b7 is very passive, P.
Nielsen - Ruck, Panormo 2002.

Now, we will analyse thor­

oughly the moves: Fl) ll . . . �c6
and F2) ll . . . e6.

It would be too dangerous for

Black to try here ll . . .fS, Tunik -
Ovchinnikov, Kazan 2013, be­
cause after 12 .i.c4!±, the weaken­
ing of the a2-g8 diagonal will hurt
him badly.

17.a3 a6 18 . .ic4 �c6 19. Black should better refrain

0-0 .if8 20.a4 g;,g7 21.lUdl from ll . . . b6, since this move may

64
4.cd liJxdS 5.e4 liJxc3 6.bc :!g7 7. liJ.f3 c5 8. !e3 WfaS 9. Wf d2 0 - 0 1 0 . '8cl

j ust turn out to be a loss of a tem­ 12.h4!?

po. 12 .:!h6 :!h8 13.h4 liJd7 14.h5 This i s White's most princi­
liJf6 15.hxg6 hxg6 16.id3;!; White's pled and energetic move. He does
centre is solid enough, he has not lose time and prepares an im­
op ened the h-file and can begin mediate attack against the enemy
an attack against Black's mon­ king.
arch, Orsag - Korschner, Czech
Republic 2011. He cannot obtain an edge with
12 .:!e2 e6 13.:!g5 f6 14.ie3 exdS
The endgame is worse for 15.exd5 liJe7 16.c4 Wfxd2+ 17.liJxd2
Black and he has no active coun­ b6 18.g4 fSoo Bacrot - Timofeev,
terplay after ll . . . liJd7 12 .c4 Wfxd2+ Moscow 2010. There has arisen a
13.mxd2 b6 14.!d3;!; Hillarp Pers­ complicated endgame with mutu­
son - Jensson, Reykjavik 1997. al chances. Black has good coun­
terplay on the dark squares and
White should not be afraid of must only transfer his knight on
ll. . . :!g4, because he can avoid the e7 to d6, via the c8-square.
exchange of this knight with the
move 12 .liJg5, for example: 12 . . . h6 12 ••• e6
13.h3 id7 14.liJf3;!; Khenkin -
Lutz, Recklinghausen 2001. Black Following 12 . . . h5 13.:!e2 ig4
has lost time on moves with his 14.ig5;!;, White has a slight but
bishop and now, he can hardly at­ stable advantage thanks to the
tack effectively his opponent's weakening of the gS-square, Zaja
centre. - Cvitkovic, Hum na Sutli 2012.

Fl) ll ••• liJc6 13.h5 exd5 14.hxg6

This move is played by such
great experts of the Gruenfeld De­
fence as P.Svidler and A.Timo­
feev.

14 fxg6
•••

This capture seems quite reli­

able. Now, Black is not threatened

65
Chapter 4

to be checkmated on the h-file, file and Black is helpless against

but he will lose his dS-pawn due the sacrifice on h8. His most re­
to the weakening of the a2-g8 di­ silient defence is to give up the
agonal. exchange. In the game Kozul -
Brkic, Zagreb 2012, he played
14 . . . hxg6. Capturing with the 16 . . . :!'!d6 and after 17.:!'!xh8+ �xh8
h7-pawn would lead to the open­ 18. �f4+-, White's attack was vic­
ing of the h-file and Black would torious.
have problems parrying White's Following 15 . . . :!'!e8, White ob­
attack. 15.�h6. The position is tains a great advantage with a
very complicated with mutual rather non-obvious manoeuvre
chances. White must play the with his knight to the h7-square.
strongest moves; otherwise, he 16.hg7 :!'!xe4+ 17.�e2 �xg7 18.
may not only lose his advantage, tt:JgS ! His knight goes in the vicin­
but may even lose quickly. (For ity of the enemy king. 18 . . . :!'!eS
example in the game Zakhartsov
- Kurnosov, Irkutsk 2010, it took
only two moves for him to turn
his slightly better position into a
hopeless one : 15.exd5?! ig4 16.
tt:JgS?? Now, with a series of ex­
quisite tactical strikes, Black ob­
tained a winning position. 16 . . .
:!'!xdS ! 17.'�xd5 ixc3+ 18.:!'!xc3
�xc3+ 19.�d2 :!'!d8 !-+ and his
queen is untouchable due to the 19.tt:Jh7! ! Now, Black's position
checkmate.) crumbles. 19 . . . �d8 20 .�h6+ �g8
2l.f4 :!'!e8 22.�f2 +- and White's
attack on the h-file is impossible
for Black to parry.

15.exd5 �e6 16.�c4! ?

This move i s stronger than

16.c4 ifSoo Giri - Svidler, Gu­
ingamp 2010.

15 . . . ih8 16.ig5± After this 16 ... ll:le7 17.�h6 .ixd5

move, Black's position becomes It is not preferable for Black to
nearly hopeless. White's bishop is choose 17 . . .if6 due to 18.�e2±
removed with tempo from the h- 18 . .ixd5+ :!'!xd5 19."f!re3

66
4.cd CiJxdS 5.e4 CiJxc3 6.bc :Jlg7 7. CiJ.f3 c5 8. :fle3 WiaS 9. Wid2 0 - 0 J O . 'Bcl

This is Black's basic reply. He

undermines White's centre.
12 .ig5
•

This is the only move for White

to fight for an advantage in the
opening.

Following 12.c4? ! , it is only

Black who can play for a win, as it
was shown in the game Tunik -
Timofeev, St Petersburg 2002: 12 ...
He has regained his d5-pawn W!xd2+ 13.CiJxd2 b6 14 . .ie2 CiJa6 15.
indeed, but this is small consola- 0-0 CiJb4 16.a3 CiJa2 17.'8c2 CiJc3+.
tion for Black since his king is very His knight is perfectly placed on
weak. Later, he will have great c3 (It is worth remembering the
problems to parry the threats long purposeful manoeuvre CiJb6-
against his king and to maintain a6-b4-a2-c3 . . . ) and the arising
the material equality at the same position should be evaluated
time. 19 fM8 20.ti'e6+ �h8 21.
••• much rather in favour of Black.
.bg7+ �xg7 22.c4 !td6 23.
!txh7+ �xh7 24J«f7+ �h6 25.
�e2 !te6+ 26.Wixe6 lL!c6 27.
'f«e3+ �g7 28. W!xc5;t; White has
an extra pawn. His queenside
pawns on a2 and c4 are weak, but
there is just a few material left on
the board and he has all the
chances of realising his slight ma­
terial advantage.

F2) u ... e6
12 ••• f6
This is his most popular move.
Black ousts with tempo the enemy
bishop. Still, this leads to some
weakening of Black's king shelter
and to the closing of the long di­
agonal for his dark-squared bish­
op on g7.

It deserves attention for him

to try 12 . . . '8d6 !?, as it was played

67
Chapter 4

in the game Khenkin - Grischuk, of possibilities, but neither of

Istanbul 2012. 13.if4 E:d8. Now them promises him an easy game.
White, if he wishes to avoid the Following 13 . . . b5, White can
repetition of moves after 14.ig5, play the energetic move 14.h4 be­
must continue with 14.ie2 exdS ginning an attack on the kingside.
15.exd5 bS 16.ig5 ! ? (It would not 14 . . .ib7 15.id3 tt:\d7 16.h5;!; - His
be so energetic for him to enter an kingside activity is likely to create
endgame with 16.c4, because in great problems for Black, Pashi­
the game Khenkin - Sevdimaliev, kian - Vachier Lagrave, Moscow
Baku 2012, White failed to prove 2010.
the advantages of his position.). It seems too passive for Black
Now, no matter how Black reacts, to opt for 13 . . . tt:\d7. After 14.h4 hS
White maintains a slight initia­ 15.ih6 ih8 16.ie2;!;, his position
tive, for example: 16 . . . E:e8 17. 0-0 is without good prospects. He is
tt:\d7 18.d6 ib7 19J�fe1 E:e4 20. cramped by the enemy d6-pawn
ien. He has seized completely and White's game is much easier,
the initiative. His passed d6-pawn Rombaldoni - Avrukh, Alghero
squeezes the enemy pieces, while 2011.
Black's rook is awkwardly placed 13 ... id7. Black blocks reliably
on e4. If he tries to capture the the enemy d6-pawn. 14.ih6 if6.
pawn on a2 with 20 . . . E:a4, then he He is trying to preserve his dark­
may pay dearly, since with the squared bishop, since without it
move 21.tt:\g5±, White will exert the dark-squares in his position
powerful pressure against the f7- would be defenceless. (Following
square. 14 . . . '1Mld8 15.h4±, Black's position
becomes very difficult as it hap­
12 . . . E:e8. This move has a seri­ pened in the game Anand - Leko,
ous drawback. Now, Black's rook Miskolc 2009. He will not be
is incapable of fighting against checkmated, but his dark squares
White's passed d-pawn. 13.d6. Of will be an easy prey for White.
course - this is the right move ! 15 .. .f6 16.e5 ic6 17.h5 gS 18.ixg7
c.!txg7 19.exf6+ 'IM!xf6 2 0 .h6+ c.!ih8
21.'1Mlxg5 E:f8 2 2 .'1Mlxf6+ E:xf6 23.
tt:\e5+- and White has an extra
pawn and a better position.) 15.
h4. Once again, he is preparing
the typical opening of the h-file
for this variation. White is not
afraid that his king will remain in
the centre of the board, since
Black can hardly exploit this with
Now, Black has a great choice his undeveloped queenside piec-

68
4.cd CiJxd5 5.e4 CiJxc3 6.bc �g7 7. CiJj3 c5 8. �e3 �aS 9. �d2 0 - 0 J O . 'Scl

es. 15 . . . ic6 16.h5 CiJd7 17.CiJgS c4. �xd2+ 17.CiJxd2. H e captures with
He is forced to sacrifice a pawn in his knight in order to transfer it
order to neutralise White's king­ later to the e4-square, where it
side initiative. Later, in the game would be perfectly placed in the
Palo - Ivanchuk, Skanderborg centre of the board. 17 . . . �d7 18.
2003, there followed: 18 . .bc4 CiJe4 b6 19.h4 ifS 2 0 .CiJc3 CiJb4
'Sad8 19.'Sh3 �eS 20.�e2 ixe4 21. 21.\t>d2. Despite all Black's tricks,
CiJ xe4 �xe4 22.\t>fU and White his position remains very diffi­
had two powerful bishops, while cult. He can improve somehow
Black had to parry the enemy the placement of his knight on a6,
threats in the centre (against the but the deployment of his bishops
d6-pawn) and on the h-file. is definitely unsatisfactory. 21...
CiJc6 22 .h5 \t>f7 23.g4. White ousts
13 .te3
• the enemy bishop to its initial po­
sition. 23 . . . ic8 24.hxg6+ hxg6
2S.CiJe4± White's position is clear­
ly better thanks to his powerful
dS-pawn and the superiorly
placed minor pieces in this end­
game.

He should not be afraid of the

possibility 13 . . . �a4. White main­
tains a slight but stable advantage
with quite simple moves. 14.c4
CiJa6 15.�e2 exdS 16.exd5 b6 17.
13 ... ltlc6 id1 �a3 18.'Sc3 �aS 19. 0-0;!;.
Black's minor pieces are mis­
As a rule, there arises transpo­ placed. His knight remains at the
sition of moves following 13 . . . edge of the board and the dark­
exdS 14.exd5. I n the game Kram­ squared bishop is restricted by his
nik - Howell, London 2010, Black own pawn on f6, Kosic - Gupta,
chose the rather extravagant Kavala 2 011.
move 14 . . . CiJa6? ! , placing his
knight at the edge of the board (It 14 .td3
•

was still not too late for him to opt White develops his bishop
instead for 14 . . . CiJc6 1S.�d3 c4 16. with tempo.
hc4 �e6 and there would have Now, Black's knight is hang­
arisen by transposition the varia­ ing. It is understandable that he
tion with 13 . . . CiJc6.). 1S.�e2 ie6 cannot capture twice on dS, since
16.c4. Now, an endgame advanta­ he will lose his rook because of
geous for White is reached. 16 . . . the pin.

69
Chapter 4

14 . . . exd5 If he refrains from the sacri­

fice, there arises an approximate­
Black plays sometimes 14 . . . b6 ly equal position. 17. 0-0 hdS 18.
with the idea to trade the light­ hdS+ �xdS 19.�c2 if8 20.:Bfd1
squared bishops. 15.0-0 ia6 16. �f7 2l.�a4 :Bac8 22 .h3 :Bxd1+ 23.
ie2 :Bd7 17.:Bfd1 :Be8 18.'1Wc2 exdS :Bxd1 b6 24.c4= Kornev - Sakaev,
19 . .ixa6 �xa6 20.exd5 0,e7 2l.c4 Taganrog 2011. The chances are
0,f5 2 2 .if4;!; White has a powerful balanced. Black's king is a bit
protected passed pawn in the cen­ weakened by the move f7-f6 and
tre, while Black's kingside is con­ his queenside pawns are placed
siderably weakened by the pawn­ on squares with the same colour
advance f7-f6, Dolgov - Tisch­ as his bishop. This is all compen­
bierek, Email 2011. sated by the vulnerability of
White's isolated c4-pawn.
15.exd5 c4
This is an important tactical nu­ 17... �e7 18.dxe6
ance. Black sacrifices temporarily White must sacrifice; otherwise,
a pawn with the idea to entice the he would simply lose his dS-pawn.
enemy bishop to the c4-square, so
that White cannot support his dS­
pawn with the move c3-c4.

16 ..ixc4 .ie6
Now, White must make a posi­
tional sacrifice of his queen in or­
der to fight for the opening ad­
vantage.
(diagram)

This is the last preparation for

the sacrifice.

70
4.cd liJxdS 5.e4 liJxc3 6.bc :!g7 7. liJj3 c5 8. fi.e3 �aS 9. �d2 0 - 0 l O . 'Bcl

19 Jbc3
•• He must play very carefully.
This is Black's most popular The check from another square
move. would be a mistake. 20 . . . �a1+ ? !
It may be also interesting for 2l..id1 liJfS 2 2 . 0-0 �c3 23.ib3
h im to try here 19 . . . liJfS ! ? , as it 'i!ih8 24.'8d7 E:e8 2S . .id2± and due
was played in the game Yazgeldi­ to Black's imprecise move 20,
ev - Tleptsok, Email 2012. At White has succeeded in bringing
first, Black wishes to exchange the his king to safety and seizing com­
powerful enemy bishop. 20 .'8d3 pletely the initiative, Lupulescu -
liJxe3 21.'8xe3 �c7 22 ..ib3 'i!ih8 Bukavshin, Aix-les-Bains 2011.
23.0-0 .if8 24.'8d3 '8d8. Unfortu­ Black's position is tremendously
nately White cannot avoid the difficult. All his pieces must be on
trade of a couple of rooks and this the alert about his opponent's
is, no doubt, in Black's favour. pawn on e6 and he is helpless
Still, even after this, White can against White's piece-activity.
continue to play for a win without 21.'8dl �c3+ 22.'i!ie2
any risk mostly thanks to his Unfortunately this move is
strong e6-pawn. 2S.'Bfd1 'Bxd3 26. forced. In order to play for a win,
E:xd3 .id6 27.g3 ! ? (This is strong­ White has forfeited his castling
er than what was played in the rights and left his king in the cen­
above mentioned game - 27.liJd2 tre of the board .
.icS 28.E:dS .id6 and despite all
his efforts, White has failed to
prove any advantage.). He has an
edge in the arising position. Black
is doomed to a long and laborious
defence, while White can gradu­
ally improve his position. His main
task is to eliminate the enemy
blockade of the e6-pawn. 27 . . . bS
28.liJd4. White's knight is trying
to go to the c6-square. 28 . . . a6 29 .
.idS 'i!ig7 30.liJc6 hS 3l.E:e3 .ie7 32.
liJxe7 �xe7 33.c4 bxc4 34 . .ixc4 aS 22 ••• a5
3S.h4;!; The position has been sim­ If he coordinates his pieces
plified, but remains difficult for and ensures the safety of his king,
Black. He must watch very care­ White's advantage would be
fully about the possibility of White's doubtless. Therefore, Black must
rook coming to the d7-square. organise queenside counterplay
Then, his e6-pawn will advance as quickly as possible.
·

and Black will have to resign. It is with the same purpose (to
20.ib3 �cl+ create counterplay) that he may

71
Chapter 4

try the interesting move 22 . . . �b4. 23.gd7

Now, White's only chance of fight­ In this variation, it is useful for
ing for the advantage is 23J!d4 ! White to force the opponent to
This is the move which justifies protect the knight on e7 as quickly
White's queen-sacrifice. He must as possible.
coordinate immediately his rooks 23 ••• a4
(The game Pashikian - Cornette, Black is trying to organise
Aix-les-Bains 2011 ended in a counterplay. Unfortunately, his
draw after a repetition of moves attempts are doomed to fail.
following: 23J'!d3 aS 24J�cl a4 2S. White regains his queen and
:1'k4 �bs 26.:1'kS �b4 27.:tk4 �bs maintains a clear advantage in the
28J'!cS �b4= ). There might fol­ endgame.
low 23 . . . �bS+ 24 . .ic4 �a4 2S.
ghdl ges (After 2S . . .fs 26.gd8+
.if8 27..ib3 �bS+ 28.\t>el �aS+ 29.
gsd2 �bs 3o .gcu, White man­
ages to stabilise the position and
may hope to maintain an advan­
tage in the future fight. His main
task would be to evacuate his king
away from the centre after which
his pieces may assist the pawn on
e6. Black's position will become
very difficult after that.) 26.gld3.
White's king rook has entered the
actions and Black is forced to de­
fend passively. This variation is 24 ti'b2 +
•••

very difficult to analyse even with I t i s possible that Black's most

a computer. At first it likes Black's resilient defence may be the move
situation, but the more it grabs 24 . . . �b4, although even then, af­
the intricacies of the position, the ter the almost forced line : 2S . .ic4
more it likes White's prospects. gcs 26.lt:ld2 .if8 27 . .id4 fS 2s.gb1
See an exemplary variation 26 .. .fS �xbl 29.lt:Jxbl gxc4 30.lt:Jc3 gc6
27.gds i>f8 28 . .ib3 �a6 29.g8d7 31.gxb7 gxe6+ 32.\t>fl lt:Jc6 33.
h6 30.h4 lt:Jc6 31.hS gS 32 . .icS+ .ie3t, there arises on the board an
lt:Je7 33.lt:Jd4 .ixd4 34 . .ixd4 f4 3S. endgame which is better for
.icS �c6 36.g3dS �xe6+ 37.'it>d3+­ White, because Black's a-pawn is
Black has failed to save the game weak and his king is cut off on the
by a perpetual check and White's penultimate rank.
king is perfectly placed in the cen­ 2s.gc2 ti'bl 26.c!ild2 axb3
tre of the board. The pin of the 27.c!ilxbl bxc2 28.c!ilc3 c!ilf5 29.
knight on e7 is decisive. .id2

72
4.cd ti.JxdS 5.e4 ti.Jxc3 6.bc fi.g7 7. ti.Jj3 c5 B. i e3 WiaS 9. Wid2 0 - 0 l O . 'i!.cl

It is understandable that
Black's c2-pawn is harmless. Af­
ter the exchange of the pawns on
e6 and b7, White's outside passed
pawn on a2 will turn into power­
ful force.
29 ••• ges
It is even worse for Black to
opt for 29 . . . h5, because after 30.
\!fd3 bS 3l.e7 'i!.e8 32.ti.Jd5 wt7
33.Wxc2±, White has a great ad­
vantage in this endgame having 30.gxb7
preserved his e-pawn. Black's at­ This move is obviously strong­
tempt to regain it in the game er that what was played in the
Leko - Topalov, Porto Carras game Potkin - Svidler, Moscow
2011 only speeded up his demise 2010, 30.Wd3? ! and after 30 . . . b6,
- his pieces came under a deadly Black managed to save a draw.
pin. 33 . . . 'i!.c8+ 34.ti.Jc7 ti.Jxe7 35. 30 .l!Jd4+
•• 3U�d3 ti.Jxe6
ib4 if8 36.Wb3 'i!.b8 37.ti.Jd5 we6 32.Wxc2±
38.'i!.d6+ WeS. Black managed to The tactical complications,
get rid of the pin with a heroic started with the queen-sacrifice,
march of his king to the centre of have ended up in an endgame
the board, but there was no mira­ with an extra pawn for White. De­
cle destined to happen. After the spite the possible technical diffi­
move 39.f4+, his resistance lasted culties, he has all the chances of
only a few more moves. realising it.

Conclusion
We have just completed the analysis of the variation with 9 . . . 0-0.
As a rule, if Black refrains from 10 . . .'i!.d8, he is forced to defend pas­
sively the slightly worst endgame arising after cxd4 and the trade of the
queens.
The character of the fight is entirely different following 10 ... 'i!.d8. In
this line there arise very sharp positions in which if White wishes to
fight for the opening advantage - he must enter a position with a
queen-sacrifice. He has only a rook and a bishop for the queen in this
endgame, but his powerful pawn on e6 provides him with good chances
of maintaining an advantage after a correct play. Naturally, he must
have studied thoroughly the theoretical material, because to find the
right way over the board in all the intricacies of the numerous possible
variations is tremendously difficult.

73
 Part 2

The King's Indian Defence

l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 i.g7

of the development of this open­

ing, the chess world was very
sceptical towards it, since it was
rather unusual for these times.
The critical moment, after which
the King's Indian Defence began
to be considered as a quite correct
opening, was the Candidates tour­
nament in the year 1953, about
which D.Bronstein wrote his re­
markable book. We must also
After this move, there arises mention that I.Boleslavsky and E.
on the board the King's Indian Geller contributed greatly to the
Defence (Naturally, with the ex­ development of the theory of this
ception of the cases when White opening and it was because of them
does not play e2-e4 and Black ad­ that the King's Indian Defence be­
vances d7-d5. Then, there arise came very fashionable. It was quite
variations from the Gruenfeld De­ deservedly that M.Botvinnik said
fence, which we have already ana­ once "We did not understand, the
lysed.). way we needed, the King's Indian
Now, contrary to the Gruen­ set-ups before E.Geller".
feld Defence, Black does not mind Years later, the World Cham­
White building up his centre the pions number eleven and thirteen
way he pleases. He is trying to de­ - R.Fischer and G.Kasparov con­
velop quickly his kingside pieces tributed greatly to the develop­
and to attack his enemy castling ment of this opening. Nowadays,
position with his pawns (f7-f5-f4, it is played sometimes by H .Na­
g6-g5, h7-h5 and g5-g4). This kamura, T.Radjabov and A.Gri­
plan has ended up with numerous schuk, but it has lost its populari­
crushing attacks for Black. We ty at the top level. The point is
have to mention that at the dawn that Black has no real chances of

74
equ alising in it and White can ob­ In the fifth and the sixth chap­
tain an advantage in several ways. ter, we will deal with some seldom
It is however another story in the played lines for Black in which he
tournaments of one level below - avoids the natural move for this
the Swiss system events. What is opening d7-d6 (Chapter 5) and
very specific in these tournaments later schemes in which he plays
is that the players who are striv­ d7-d6 indeed, but postpones cas­
ing to occupy a top place in the fi­ tling (Chapter 6).
nal standings must play for a win Our chapter seven will be de­
irrelevant of the colour of the piec­ voted to some not so principled
es. You can encounter the King's responses for Black among which
Indian Defence there quite often. the most dangerous for White is
We will analyse as our main the move - 6 . . . c6.
weapon against this defence the Black's plans, connected with
Averbakh system - 4.e4 d6 5 . .ie2 6 . . . tt:ibd7, will be dealt with in
0-0 6.ig5, in which White's ad­ chapter eight.
vantage may not be so great, as In chapter nine, we will ana­
for example in the Classical sys­ lyse the most popular move in the
tem, but he is relatively safe from contemporary tournament prac­
being checkmated in the middle tice - 6 . . . tt:ia6, while the moves
game. We will devote to this open­ 6 . . . h6 and 6 . . . c5 will be analysed
ing seven of our chapters - from 5 in chapters ten and eleven ac­
to 11. cordingly.

75
Chapter S l.d4 ltlf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltlc3 .ig7

ingly threatening. In fact, after 5 . . .

ll:\e8, White's achievements are
only temporary. His impressive
pawn-centre is much rather a lia­
bility and Black will undermine it
with the moves d6 and c5, forcing
his opponent to solve very diffi­
cult problems. The classical ex­
ample of a perfect play for Black
can be the game Letelier - Fis­
cher, Leipzig 1960 : 6.f4 d6 7.i.e3
4.e4 c5
This is a natural move. White
should occupy the centre with his
pawns if Black does not mind.
4 ... 0-0
As a rule, this move transposes
to the main line, if Black plays 5 . . .
d7-d6 later. Now, we will analyse
variations in which he avoids
playing this move.
About 4 . . . d6 - see Chapters
6-11. 8.dxc5 ll:\c6 9.cxd6 exd6 10.
5 .ie2
• ll:\e4 i.f5 ll.ll:\g3 i.e6 12.ll:\f3 Yfic7
With this move White allows 13.\&b1 dxe5 14.f5 e4 15.fxe6 exf3
his opponent to reconsider and 16.gxf3 f5 17.f4 ll:\f6 18.i.e2 E!:fe8
after 5 . . . d6 6 . .ig5, to transpose to 19.'>t>f2 E!:xe6 20 .E!:e1 E!:ae8 21.i.f3.
the Averbakh system, which we There follows a spectacular com­
will analyse later. bination, which has been quoted
in almost all textbooks on tactics.
The move 5.e5 is only seem- 21...E!:xe3 22.E!:xe3 E!:xe3 ! 23. 'it>xe3

76
 l.d4 {jjj6 2.c4 g 6 3. {jj c3 :1;.g7 4.e4 0 - 0 5. ie2

1;Wxf4+ ! ! Black wins, since his After Black has played c6,
queen is untouchable because of White can already occupy the cen­
the checkmate. tre, since Black's undermining
move cS will have to be played
s . . c6
. with a loss of a tempo.
We have already mentioned
that here we will analyse varia­ 6 ••• lile8 7.f4! ?
tions in which Black does not play This is an interesting move.
d7-d6. White is fortifying his centre in
anticipation of the move d7-d6
Following S ... cS 6.d5, he and wishes to protect his eS-pawn
should better transpose to the as reliably as possible.
main lines with the move 6 . . . d6
and we will analyse them in chap­
ter eight, since after 6 . . . e6? !
(about 6 . . . e5 7 . .ie3 d6 8.h4 - see
Chapter 6, variation B), White
can already occupy the centre
with 7.e5 {jj e 8 S.{jj f3 d6 9.0-0
{jj a 6 lO . .igSt Uhlmann - Keene,
Hastings 1976. He maintains a
considerable advantage, his mi­
nor pieces are very active, while
their black counterparts are terri­
bly passive. White's centre, con­ 7 d6
•••

trary to the game of Bobby Fis­ Black accomplishes the main

cher, which we have analysed at idea of the variation chosen by
the beginning of the chapter, is him.
very powerful.
Following 7 . . . d5, he abandons
the idea of undermining his oppo­
nent's centre and ends up in a
passive position. 8.cxd5 cxdS 9.
{jj f3 {jj c 6 10.0-0 {jj c7 ll. .ie3 id7
12Jk1 E:c8 13.1l;Vd2 a6 14.h3 bS
15.b3 E:e8 16.id3 eM There has
arisen a position of a French type,
except that Black's dark-squared
bishop has been fianchettoed.
This difference is in favour of
White, because he can try to ex­
6.e5! ploit the weakening of Black's

77
Chapter S

kingside. 17.lild1 ! White's knight 12 . .ie3 dxe5 13.i.c5 exf4 14.i.xf8

is transferred to the g4-square i>xf8 15.1!;!lxd8 :Bxd8 16.:BadU In
and the vulnerability of the f6 and the arising endgame Black has a
h6-squares in Black's camp may pawn for the exchange and initia­
hurt him later. 17 . . ..if8 18.lilf2 tive on the dark squares. Still,
.ib4 19.1!;!lb2 ie7 2 0 .lilg4± Black's White's prospects are preferable,
king is seriously endangered, Bars because the position is quite open.
- Barr, Email 2011. The power of his rooks should be
a telling factor.
There do not arise original po­
sitions after 7 .. .f6 8.lilf3:t, since The endgame is better for
Black will have to play d7-d6 White following 8 . . .f6 9.i.e3 dxe5
sooner or later, Yakovich - Sav­ 10.dxe5 1!;!lxd1 + 11.:Bxd1 fxe5
chenko, St Petersburg 2011. 12.lilxe5:t Korotylev - Koeller,
Passau 1995. Now, Black can ex­
change on e5, or refrain from that.
He maintains an advantage in
both cases. In the first line he will
have the two-bishop advantage,
while in the second variation, his
pawn-structure will be preferable
(Black's e7-pawn is very weak.).

After 8 ... .ig4, White should

better preserve the knight, since
contrary to his light-squared
bishop, it can protect the pawns
on d4 and e5. 9.lilg5! i.xe2 10.
8 ... dxe5 1!;!lxe2 lilc7 (Following 10 ... h6 11.
Black has some other possibil­ lilf3:t, the pawns on e5 and d4 are
ities besides this move. safe, so White has an edge thanks
to his dominance in the centre,
It seems principled for him to Vaisser - Bernardino, New York
try 8 . . . c5, despite the loss of a 1998.) 11 . .ie3 lild7 12 .:Bd1 ! :t This is
tempo. Now, White must react a very solid move, which leads to a
very precisely in order to preserve slight but stable advantage for
his pawn-centre. 9.dxc5 lilc6 10. White. Black can hardly create
0-0 .ig4, Van Wely - Heberla, any active counterplay and is
Warsaw 2005. Black has sacri­ forced to defend passively. It is
ficed a pawn but seized the initia­ also possible for White to choose
tive. Now, White's best move is the sharper line: 12.0-0- 0 ! ? lilb6
11.cxd6 ! , for example : 11 . . . exd6 13.h4-+ - he begins an attack on

78
 l.d4 tiJj6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJ c3 ll..g 7 4.e4 0 - 0 5. 11..e2

th e kingside and Black will have 10.c5 ! ?

great problems parrying it, This i s a prophylactic move.
Moskalenko - Gutman, play­ White wishes to prevent for good
chess.com 2006. Black's possibility to advance c6-
c5.
9.fxe5 i.g4
He increases the pressure Following 10.0-0 c5 11.dxc5
against White's centre. tiJc6+!, there arises a very compli­
cated position in which Black has
In the game Drozdovskij - good compensation for the sacri­
Gutman, Dresden 2007, Black tried ficed pawn thanks to the vulnera­
9 . . . c5 lO.dS ig4 ll.if4 .txf3 12. bility of White's pawns on eS and
.bf3 tiJd7 13.�e2 f6 14.e6 tiJeS 15. cS, Bock - Gutman, Kleve 1999.
0-0;!;. White's pawn-wedge c4, dS,
e6 looks very impressive and Black 10 ... b6 ll.cxb6 axb6 12.
is faced with a difficult defence. 0-0;!; Chuchelov - Gutman,
Wiesbaden 1991. In order to de­
fend against the possible under­
mining move c6-c5, White has
weakened the dS-square; never­
theless, he maintains a slight
edge. He dominates in the centre
and after Black exchanges his
bishop on f3, White's two bishops
will be obviously stronger than
any two minor pieces left for
Black.

Conclusion
We have just analysed Black's seldom played moves in the King's
Indian Defence, with which he avoids playing the natural move 4 . . . d6.
White must obtain an advantage effortlessly, by advancing e4-e5 at the
right moment, but he needs to play accurately. He should not forget the
game Letelier - Fischer, Leipzig 1960 and must have in mind that after
imprecise moves his beautiful centre may turn quickly into ruins.

79
Chapter 6 l.d4 lilf6 2.c4 g6 3.ll:lc3 J.g7 4.e4 d6

ties to do this in the Classical sys­

tem. I can provide you with nu­
merous examples in which the
players with White have failed to
parry Black's attacks and have
lost their games. I will give you
just one example, but the player,
losing with White, was the pre­
sent World Champion himself ­
V.Anand. 7 . . . tZlc6 8.d5 tZle7 9.b4
lLJeB lO.cS fS ll.tZld2 lZJf6 12.a4 gS
5 .Ae2 ! ?
• 13.lZlc4 h6 14.f3 f4 15.i.a3 lZJg6
One of the peculiarities of the 16.b5 dxcS 17 . .bc5 E1f7 18.a5 hS
Averbakh system is that White is 19.b6 g4. It is possible that the
not in a hurry to develop his king's evaluation of the position is in fa­
knight. vour of White, but Black attacks
on the kingside and this is much
It is possible that from the more dangerous than White's at­
point of view of absolute strength tack on the opposite side of the
of the move, White should prefer board. The moment he makes a
5.lLJf3, followed by 5 . . . 0-0 6.i.e2 mistake, this may set the game on
eS 7.0-0 and there arises on the the verge of disaster. Black played
board the basic position of the more precisely than his opponent
Classical system. Still, from the in the subsequent struggle and
point of view of the practical chess reached a winning position. 20.
player, the Classical system is lZlbS cxb6 2l.axb6 g3 2 2 .@hl i.f8
hardly the best choice, since the 23.d6 a6 24.lZJc7 E1b8 25.lZJa5 @h8
adherents to the King's Indian 26.ic4 E1g7 27.tZle6 he6 28 . .ixe6
Defence for Black enjoy the pos­ gxh2 29.tZlc4 '?9e8 30 .id5 h4 31.
sibility to be able to attack the en­ E1f2 h3 32.gxh3 E1c8 33.E1a5 lZJh4-+
emy king. He has many possibili- and Black's offensive became de-

80
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJc3 fi.g7 4.e4 d6 5. 1J.e2

cisive, Anand - Nakamura, Lon­ It is just bad for Black to

don 2011. choose 5 . . . !iJfd7, since he can ad­
vance c5 or e5 even without the
retreat of his knight from the f6-
square. 6.!iJf3 c5 7.0-0 (7.d5 ! ?
0 - 0 8.0-0 !iJf6 9.h3 e 6 10.dxe6
fxe6 11.e5 dxe5 12.!iJxe5;!; White's
position is preferable due to the
vulnerability of Black's pawn on
e6, Averbakh - Byrne, New York
1954) 7 . . . !iJc6 8.d5 !iJd4 9.!iJxd4
.bd4 10.fi.h6;t Yrjola - Westeri­
nen, Gjovik 1985. White main­
tains a considerable advantage.
Now, we will analyse A) 5 ••• He has more space, while Black
c!L!c6, B) 5 c 5 and C ) 5
••• ••• e5. has problems castling. White has
a very simple plan for his further
Black's most popular move actions : c;!;>h1, f2-f4, followed by
5 . . . 0-0 will be dealt with in Chap­ the preparation of the pawn­
ters 7-11. breaks e4-e5 or f4-f5.

About 5 ... a6 6.1J..g5 0-0 7.�d2

- see Chapter 7. A) 5 . . . c!Llc6 6.d5

5 . . . !iJa6 6.ig5 0-0 7.f4 - see

Chapter 9.

5 . . . c6 6.ig5 !iJbd7 (6 . . . 0-0 7.

�d2 or 6 . . . a6 7.�d2 0-0 8.�d1 -
see Chapter 7, variation B) 7.�d2
0-0 8.!iJf3 - see Chapter 8, varia­
tion B.

As a rule, there d o not arise

original positions following 5 . . .
!iJbd7 6./i.g5 (It may b e also inter..;
esting for White to try 6.f4 ! ? 0-0
7 .!iJf3;t) 6 ... 0-0 7.�d2 and after When White's knight is still on
transposition, there arise situa­ g1, it would be very bad for . Black
tions which will be analysed in to play 6 . . . !iJe5, because White
Chapter 8. can oust it immediately from the

81
Chapter 6

centre with 7.f4 ttJed7 (7 . . . ttJeg4 c5 13.h.xg4 cxd4 14.ttJxd4 �g7

8.e5 dxeS 9.h3±) 8.ltJf3 0-0 (8 . . . 15.�d2 �d7 16.l3adH Raetsky ­
ltJcS 9.e5 ttJfe4 10.ttJxe4 ttJxe4 11. Podzielny, Schwaebisch Gmuend
�d4 fS 12. 0-0;t - He dominates 2001. It may seem that Black's
in the centre and Black's knight counterplay on the dark squares
will be forced to retreat from there is good compensation for his sac­
after the move id3, Dlugolecki - rificed pawn, but this is not true
Leroy, Email 2008.) 9.0-0 ttJcS at all. White has an easy plan to
10.e5;t White's position is prefer­ improve his position. He must re­
able, because his pawns on dS and move his king from the g1-a7 di­
eS are very strong, Chernyshov - agonal and after that he can begin
Chuprov, Voronezh 2002. 10 . . . an attack on the h-file. The game
ttJe8? Black's pieces were cramped followed with 16 .. .!k8 17.g5 �b6
anyway, so he had to find a more 18.g3 ltJc5 19.'it>g2 a6 20.1!hl± and
active placement for his knight. White not only had an extra pawn
Now, White's advantage increas­ and a space advantage, but also
es. 11.ie3 ttJd7 12 .e6 fxe6 13.dxe6 excellent attacking prospects on
ttJdf6 14.ttJg5 c6 1S.id3± Black's the h-file.
position is very difficult. White's
e6-pawn impedes the coordina­ B) 5 ••• c5 6.d5
tion of Black's pieces and if White
manages to advance f4-f5, then
Black's position will become
hopeless, since he will be helpless
to counter White's offensive
against his king.
7.f4 0-0 8.ltJf3 c6 (8 . . . ttJbd7
9.0-0 - see 6 . . . ttJeS) 9.�e3 ttJa6
10.0-0

6 • . • e5
This is the only move which
leads to original positions.
About 6 . . . 0-0 7.ig5, or 6 . . .
ttJbd7 7.ig5 0 - 0 8.�d2 - see
Chapter 11.
6 ... ttJa6 7.ig5 0-0 8.f4 - see
Chapter 9.
6 . . . e6 7.ig5 0-0 8.�d2 - see
10 •.• �g4 ll.�d4 ih6 12.h3 Chapter 11, variation D.

82
 l.d4 CiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5. ie2

Following 6 . . . b5 7.cxb5 a6 CiJhf2 CiJ h 7 21.CiJd3 fS 22 .b4± Ghe­

(7 . . . 0-0 8.ig5 - see Chapter 11, orghiu - Brood, Mar del Plata
variation B), there arises a ver­ 1971. Black has finally managed to
sion of the Benko Gambit which is advance f7-f5, but has lost too
favourable for White and we will much time preparing it. After
deal with it in our volume 3. White has advanced b2-b4, his
queenside initiative has become
7.ie3 very powerful.

It is also possible for White to

play here 7.ig5 h6 8.id2 a6 9.h4.

7 ••• 0-0
We will encounter this move
still numerous time while study­ The character of the fight re­
ing the Averbakh system. Now, mains more or less the same fol­
Black is faced with a rather un­ lowing 7 . . . a6 8.:B:bl CiJbd7 9.h4 hS
pleasant choice. He may allow h4- lO.CiJh3 CiJf8, Chiburdanidze -
h5, or play h6-h5 himself. In the H.Koneru, Krasnoturinsk 2005,
first case, he will have no counter­ 11.CiJg5± White's advantage is
play on the kingside (As a rule, in doubtless. He has much more
order not to lose his h6-pawn, af­ space and a clear-cut plan, con­
ter h4-h5, Black will have to reply nected with the pawn-advance
with g6-g5 and after White ad­ b2-b4. Black's possible kingside
vances g2-g4, the move f7-f5 will counterplay is rather difficult to
become impossible.), while in the organise.
second case (as it happened in the
above mentioned game), the gS­ Following 7 . . . CiJa6 8.g4 hS 9.g5
square is seriously weakened and CiJh7 10.h4 CiJc7 11.a3 b6 12 .�d2
White's knight will head there im­ id7 13.CiJf3 0-0 14.:B:gU, Black's
mediately. 9 . . . h5 lO.CiJf3 CiJbd7 11. attempt to create counterplay on
g3 :B:b8 12.�c2 CiJf8 13.CiJg5 CiJg4 the kingside with f7-f5 leads to
14.f3 CiJh6 15.a4 b6 16.a5 f6 17.CiJh3 the weakening of the g6-pawn af­
bxaS 18.CiJdl id7 19 ..ba5 �c8 2 0 . ter capturing en passant, there-

83
Chapter 6

fore White's position is prefera­ because White's knight on bS and

ble, Gretarsson - Rashkovsky, his pawn on a4, supported by the
Reykjavik 1994. knight on c3, parry reliably Black's
counterplay on the a and b-files.
8.h4 9.g4 tt:lbd7 10.h5 gb8 11.a4±

We are already familiar with He has no counterplay at all

this plan of a pawn-offensive on and cannot advance f7-f5 and af­
the kingside. Here however, con­ ter White's last move, Black can­
trary to some other variations, not push b7-b5 either. Now,
this is not aggression but prophy­ White can improve calmly his po­
lactic. Now, you can see the ad­ sition, preparing gradually a deci­
vantages of White's postpone­ sive pawn-break on one of the
ment of the development of the flanks. Later, in the game Sakaev
knight on gl. It does not cover the - Bachin, Krasnoyarsk 2003,
diagonal of the bishop on e2, there followed: ll . . . �aS 12.f3 tt:le8
which controls the important g4 13.�d3 f6 14.h6 .ih8 15.tt:lge2 gf7
and hS-squares. 16.id2 tt:lf8 17.tt:lg3 �d8 18.a5 b6
19. axb6 �xb6 20 .ga2 gfb7 2 1.ic2
8 . . . a6 �d8 2 2 .b3 tt:lc7 23.tt:lce2 �e7 24.
'>t>f2 tt:le8 25.tt:lcl. Black's position
After 8 . . . b5, there arises a fa­ is difficult (He has no space, has a
vourable version for White of the weakness on a6 and his bishop on
Benko Gambit, since Black's bish­ h8 has no moves.). He had to ad­
op is restricted by his own eS­ here to passive tactics and could
pawn. There might follow: 9.cxb5 have resisted for long. Still, as it
a6 10.a4 �a5 1l.�d2 axb5 12 ..ixb5 often happens in similar posi­
ia6 13.tt:lge2 .ixbS 14.tt:lxb5 �b6, tions, Black failed to solve his de­
Ruckschloss - Kaniansky, Slova­ fensive problems and after 25 . . .
kia 1999, 15.tt:lec3± His compen­ fS? 26.exf5+-, his position be­
sation for the pawn is insufficient, came hopeless.

84
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJ c3 ilg7 4.e4 d6 5. 1le2

C) 5 . . . e5 Following 8 ...ie6, White main­

After this move, there arises tains a slight edge, as it happened
an endgame which is clearly bet­ in the game Polugaevsky - Stein,
ter for White. Tbilisi 1966: 9.liJf3 liJc6 10.0-0
6.dxe5 dxe5 7. 'ilrxd8+ mxd8 exf4 ll. .bf4 liJd7 12 .:1!ad1 mc8 13.
8.f4 liJd5 liJce5 14.liJd4 c6 15.liJe7+
mc7 16.liJef5 hf5 17.exf5:t He has
the two-bishop advantage and af­
ter White's pawn on e4 went to
the f5-square, Black's counterplay
on the dark squares became
harmless for White.

The main fight in similar end­

games is centred on the d4 and
e5-squares. As a rule, Black's
knight is trying to reach the d4-
square and with his last move
White attacks its base in anticipa­
tion of this.

8 ••• c!Llbd7 9 ... c6

About 8 . . . c6 9.liJf3 liJbd7 10. It seems too risky for Black to

0-0 - see 8 . . . liJbd7. choose 9 . . . exf4, because after
10.hf4, White's minor pieces are
It seems rather dubious for very active. 10 . . . c6 11.0-0 We7,
Black to try 8 . . . liJfd7. He lags in Cvetkovic - Mirkovic, Belgrade
development anyway and with his 1980. Here, he could have in­
last move he impedes the devel­ creased his advantage with 12 .e5!
opment of his bishop on c8. 9.liJf3 liJg4 13.ig5+ We8 14.e6 ! fxe6 15.
c6 10.0-0 me8 11.f5 f6 12 .ie3± liJe4± and despite the extra pawn,
Black's position is cramped and Black's position is not to be en­
he lags considerably in develop­ vied. The game is opened and the
ment, Bertok - Udovcic, Novi Sad majority of his pieces are not de­
1955. veloped and are absolutely unpre-

85
Chapter 6

pared for the fight. it White i s not afraid o f the ex­

10.0-0 me8 ll.g3 ! ? change on f4, since he will recap­
ture with the pawn and will not
give access to the e5-square for
Black's pieces. The weakening of
the light squares is not a problem,
because White's king will protect
them.
ll h6 12. mg2;!; In order to
••. -

complete the development of his

queenside pieces Black must play
lt:\d7, but before that he will have
to exchange on f4, which after
gxf4 will lead to dominance of
White in the centre, Sadler - Api­
This is a very solid move. After cella, Cappelle la Grande 1992.

Conclusion
We have just analysed some seldom played moves for Black in the
King's Indian Defence. As a rule, White obtains easily an advantage
after them and this is not surprising, because even the beginners know
how dangerous it is to ignore castling. In the majority of the variations,
analysed in this chapter, Black can castle in a period of a few moves,
after which there will arise transposition to situations analysed by us in
Chapters from 7 to 11. If he does not do that he will be faced with a dif­
ficult defence.

86
Chapter 7 l.d4 ltlf6 2.c4 g6 3.ltlc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6
5 . .ie2 0-0

A.Alexandrov and Y.Yakovich.

After 6 . .ig5, Black has a great

choice of possibilities. We will de­
vote to its main lines our next four
chapters, while in this chapter we
will deal only with the moves A)
6 ... �c6 and B) 6 . . . c6.

It does not work for Black to

play 6 . . . e5?, because of 7.dxe5
This is Black's most natural dxeS 8.'<Mfxd8 E:xd8 9.�d5 �bd7
and popular move. He completes lO.E:dl! E:f8 ll.lLlxc7 E:b8 12 .f3+­
the development of his kingside. and Black has no compensation
6.ig5 for the pawn at all.
After this move, there arises
the Averbakh system on the It is also bad for him to opt for
board. It was named after the So­ 6 . .'%lfe8, due to 7.e5 dxeS 8.dxe5
.

viet grandmaster Yury Averbakh, lLlfd7 9.lLldS .ixeS (Or 9 . . . lLlxe5,

who made considerable contribu­ Saric - R.Schmidt, Budva 2009.
tion to the development of its the­ Before winning the exchange, it
ory. It is also worth mentioning would be useful for White to oust
the endeavours of L.Polugajevsky, the enemy knight away from the
who played regularly this system centre with the move 10.f4!±, fol­
during a certain period of his lowed by .ie7 or lLlc7.) 10 . .ixe7±
chess career. I believe that this Black has no compensation for
variation has been shadowed by the exchange, Shaidullina -
the Classical system rather non­ Schepetkova, Vladimir 200�.
deservedly. Among the contem­
porary grandmasters its most ar­ The centre has not been closed
dent and regular exponents are yet, so it seems rather dubious for

87
Chapter 7

Black to choose 6 . . . a5, since after on f3. He can hardly exploit the
7.'tlld 2 tt'la6, White has at his dis­ weakening of his opponent's cas­
posal the energetic line: 8.f4 Wfe8 tling position, while White has a
9.e5 tt'ld7 10.tt'lf3± and his pawn­ clear-cut plan for active actions
centre is very powerful, while on the queenside. He must pre­
Black's minor pieces remain pas­ pare b2-b4.) 9.tt'lxd4. There has
sive, Meins - Podzielny, Bad arisen a position, which is more
Zwischenahn 2002. typical for the Maroczy system of
the Sicilian Defence. Later, in the
6 . . . a6 7.Wfd2 c5 (About 7 . . . game Grigoryan - Zherebukh,
tt'lbd7 8.tt'lf3 - see Chapter 8 ; 7 . . . Athens 2012, there followed: 9 . . .
c6 8.E!d1 - see variation B, 7 . . . tt'lc6 tt'lc6 10.tt'lc2 tt'ld7 ll.tt'le3 tt'lc5 12.
8.d5 tt'la7 9.a4± White has much tt'led5 tt'le6 13.ih4 tt'led4 14.0-0 f5
more space, while Black's knight 15.f4 fxe4 16.tt'lxe4 b5 17.E!aeU
is terribly misplaced on the a7- and in the arising complicated po­
square, Esquivias Gomez - Rial sition, Black could hardly neutral­
Rodriguez, San Sebastian 2009.) ise White's piece pressure against
the e7-square.

A) 6 ••• tt'lc6 7.d5

8.tt'lf3 ! (The move 8.d5 enables

Black to obtain good counterplay
after 8 . . . b5 ! ??) 8 . . . cxd4 (Follow-
ing 8 . . . i.g4 9.d5 b5, there arise
positions in the spirit of the Ben­
ko Gambit. 10.cxb5 axb5 ll.hb5
Wfa5 12.0-0 i.xf3 13.gxf3 tt'la6,
Olsen - Mortensen, Copenhagen
2004. Now, White had to contin­ Naturally, Black cannot equal­
ue with 14.a3 ! ? , depriving the en­ ise by retreating his knight to its
emy knight of the b4-square. 14 . . . initial position - 7 . . . tt'lb8, since
Wfd8 15.ic6 E!b8 16.E!abl± Black is after 8.tt'lf3 c6 9.0-0 ig4 10.tt'ld2
not only a pawn down, but his he2 ll.Wfxe2 cxd5 12.cxd5 tt'lfd7
light squares have been weakened 13.E!ac1 tt'la6, Kaidanov - Zlot­
due to the exchange of his bishop nikov, New York 1992, White

88
 l.d4 li:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. li:Jc3 :ig7 4.e4 d6 5. :ie2 0 - 0 6. :ig5 li:J c6 7.d5

maintains an edge with 14.:ie3;!;,

attacking the enemy a7-pawn and
impeding the move !k8 for Black.
White's plans include later a2-a3
and b2-b4, emphasizing the mis­
placement of Black's knight on a6.

The other possible retreat of

his knight seems also rather dubi­
ous 7 . . . li:Jb4 8.li:Jf3, for example:
8 ... c5 9.h3 li:Jd7 10.a3 li:Ja6 11.1M/d2;!;
8 ... h6

8 . . . li:Jxf3+ 9.:ixf3

The game Moskalenko - Hui­

dobro, Andorra 1991 continued
with 11 .. J!e8 12.0-0 1Mfb6 13J!ab1
li:JeS 14.li:Jxe5 :ixeS 1S.f4 :id4+ 9 . . . li:Jd7 10.0-0 c6 11.1Mfd2 !!e8
16.�h1 fS? ! 17.:id3± H. White 12.!'1ac1 aS 13.b3 cxdS (13 . . .1M/c7
maintains a considerable advan­ 14.!'1fd1 li:JcS 1S.:ie3;!; Alterman -
tage. He has used the time, which Nikolaidis, Karditsa 1996) 14.
Black has lost on manoeuvres li:JxdS li:JcS 15.!'1feU Black is active
with his queen's knight (li:Jc6-b4- on the dark squares, but this can­
a6), in order to organise active not compensate White's space ad­
actions in the centre and on the vantage, Kaidanov - Karklins,
kingside. Now, White begins a Chicago 1994.
direct attack against Black's mon­ 9 ... h6 10.:ie3 e6 (10 ... e5 11.
arch (his purpose is to force his 0-0 �h7 12 .c5 li:Jg8 13.!'1cl± - His
opponent to exchange on e4 queenside initiative is evidently
and to advance f4-f5), while faster than Black's counterplay on
Black's pieces and particularly his the opposite side of the board,
knight on a6 are obviously mis­ Milov - Reich, playchess.com
placed. 2004.) 11.0-0 !!e8 12 .!'1c1 exdS
13.cxd5;!; Korchnoi - Kasparov,
Madrid 1988. He will have prob-

89
Chapter ?

lems protecting his backward c7- E:c8 15.id4 gS 16.b3 a6 17.�d2t

pawn. If he advances it ( c6 or cS), Black has succeeded in keeping
then after the trade on c6, Black his knight on the eS-square, but
will have not one, but two weak­ has weakened considerably his
nesses on c6 and d6. kingside pawns.
The endgame would be worse
for him following 9 . . . c6 10.dxc6 9 ... .!Llxf3+ 10.ixf3 e5 11.
bxc6 11.e5 dxe5 12 .�xd8 E:xd8 13 . �e3
.bc6 E:b8 14.b3t White's pawn­
majority on the queenside seems
quite threatening, while Black's
pawns are almost harmless due to
the doubled pawns on the e-file,
Lputian - Ermenkov, East Berlin
1982.

ll ... h5 !
This is his only possibility to
fight for equality in the opening.
Black wishes to trade the dark­
squared bishops.
It is worse for him to opt for
the passive move ll . . . lt:Je8, in view
9.if4 of 12 .h4, for example: 12 .. .f5 13.h5
f4 14 . .td2 gxhS 1S ..txh5 �gS 16 .
White can fight for the advan­ .tf3 lt:Jf6 17.�e2 �g6 18.0-0-0 hS
tage in another way as well - 9. 19.\t>blt Christiansen - Mestel,
.te3 ! ? . This move has been tested London 1982. There has arisen a
by one of the renowned experts in position typical for the complicat­
the Averbakh system - Y.Yako­ ed King's Indian middle game.
vich. Later, in the game Yakovich White's prospects are preferable.
- Korotylev, Kazan 2005, there He can prepare an offensive on
followed: 9 . . . lt:Jfg4 10 . .td2 c6 11. the queenside with the help of b4,
lt:JxeS lt:JxeS 12. 0-0 cxdS 13.exd5 ! ? cS and subsequent pressure on
This i s a n active move. White the c-file, while Black's counter­
wishes to exert pressure on the e­ play on the kingside will be abso­
file (it is also good for him to try lutely ineffective after White cas­
here 13.cxd5t). 13 . . . .tf5 14 . .te3 tles queenside.

90
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. ie2 0 - 0 6. :/ig5 c6 7. Wfd2

12 .ig5
•

This is the only move !

After the passive reaction
12 .h3 CiJh7 13.Wid2 i.f6 14.0-0-0
igS+t Savchenko - Sakaev, St Pe­
tersburg 1992, Black realised his
plan and following the trade of
the dark-squared bishops his
prospects were not worse at all.
12 ti'e8 13.0-0 tLlh7 14
. • • •

.ie3 f5 15.exf5 i.xf5 16 .ie4 ! ;!;

•

with a6, bS.), but cannot guaran­

tee equality for him, because
White completes effortlessly his
development and preserves his
powerful pawn-centre.
7.ti'd2
White plays this move almost
always in the Averbakh system.
Its main purpose is to prevent the
move h7-h6, preserving the bish­
op on gS on its active position.

He has failed t o exchange the

dark-squared bishops. In addi­
tion, White has managed to estab­
lish complete control over the key
e4-square. Now, Black's bishop
on g7 will be restricted by his own
pawn on eS. White's chances are
preferable since his bishop on e3
is obviously more active than its
black counterpart.

7 ... a6
B) 6 . . . c6
(diagram) 7 . . . CiJa6 8.f4 - see Chapter 9.
This is not Black's main re­
sponse in this system. It is a flexi­ 7 ... CiJbd7 8.CiJf3 - see Chapter 8.
ble move (He preserves the pos­
sibility to play in the centre - e7- 7 .. .'�a5 8.CiJf3 ig4 9.0-0 CiJbd7
e5, as well as on the queenside 10 .a3 hf3 ll.ix£3;!; White has

91
Chapter ?

two powerful bishops and a space This is a solid prophylactic

advantage, Forintos - Ljubicic, move. White not only protects ad­
Split 2001. ditionally his d4-pawn, but im­
pedes Black's pawn advance e7-
As a rule, there do not arise e5.
original positions after 7 . . . e5, 8 . . .b5 9.a3
since following 8.lbf3 lba6 (8 . . . Naturally, White should not
lbbd7 9.0-0 - see 6 . . . lbbd7) 9. allow b5-b4.
0-0, Black's best would be to con­
tinue with 9 . . . exd4, transposing
to the variation 6 . . . lbbd7 (about
10.lbxd4 lbcS 1l.�f4 - see the
next chapter) .

9 ...bxc4

After 9 . . . lbbd7? ! , White ob­

It is bad for Black to play 9 . . . tains an advantage following the
�e8, since after 10.d5 lbc5 11 . .ixf6 recommendation of GM Peturs­
.ixf6 12 .b4 lba6 13.dxc6±, White son: 10.e5 lbe8 ll.exd6 lbxd6 12 .
opens advantageously the posi­ cS±
tion in the centre and Black will
have great problems with the pro­ Black cannot equalise with the
tection of his pawn on d6, Sisatto rather extravagant move 9 . . . E:a7,
- Novik, Jyvaskyla 2006. at least because of 10.lbf3;!;, fol­
He cannot equalise with the lowed by castling kingside.
line: 9 . . . ig4 10J:!ad1 �c7 ll.d5;!;
Bosboom - Nijboer, Wijk aan Zee He obtained a very bad posi­
1989. White has extra space and tion after the move 9 . . . �c7 in the
excellent prospects for actions on game Petursson - Antonsen, Co­
the queenside. Black can hardly penhagen 1996. 10.lbf3 eS ll.dS
organise any meaningful counter­ bxc4 12.dxc6± Black's queenside
play on the other side of the activity has only led to the ap­
board. pearance of new weaknesses in
his camp (the pawns on c4 and
d6).

92
 l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0, c3 fi.g7 4.e4 d6 5. 1i.e2 0 - 0 6. 1i.g5 c6 7. Wid2

10.hc4 0,xe4
Black wishes to simplify his
defence by exchanging pieces, but
ends up with a weak pawn on c6
in his camp.

10 . . . a5 11.0,f3 ig4 12.Wlf4 ixf3

13.Wixf3 0,bd7 14.Wie2 Wlc7 15.
0-0t White has managed to com­
plete his development, preserving
his two-bishop advantage and his
powerlul pawn-centre. Black is 14.c!lJf3 idS 15.hd5 cxd5
forced to only defend, Schandorff 16J�cl
- Hoi, Denmark 1989. He has got rid of the annoying
weakness on c6, but White main­
11.0,xe4 d5 12 .i.d3 dxe4
• tains a slight edge thanks to his
13.he4 dominance over the c-file. Later,
(diagram) in the game Jarmula - Fraczek,
13 ••• .i.e6 Poronin 2012, there followed
It would be interesting for him 16 ge8 17.0-0 c!lJd7 18.gc6
•••

to try 13 . . . E:a7 and after 14.0,e2 ti'b8 19 .i.f4 ti'b3. Here, with the
•

.ig4 15.f3 ie6, Luft - Voekler, move 20.gfcU, White could have
Germany 2001, the only way for established complete control over
White to fight for the opening ad­ the c-file and would have main­
vantage would be the move 16. tained a slight but stable advan­
h4 ! , for example: 16 ...id5 17.h5 tage. The vulnerability of his d4-
E:e8 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.<.!lf2t and his pawn is immaterial, since Black's
attack on the h-file may create pieces are incapable of creating
great problems for Black. active counterplay.

Conclusion
We have just finished our analysis of some seldom played lines for
Black in the King's Indian Defence. As a rule, White obtains effortless­
ly an advantage in the opening after them and this is not surprising.
The main problems for him in this chapter may arise after the move 6 . . .
c6. I n this case, h e should not forget t o play the move E:d1, i n order to
impede Black's possibility to try the pawn-break - e7-e5. After this, he
should counter Black's queenside activity (a6, bS) with the move a3
and ends up with a stable advantage. Black's counterplay, connected
with the exchange on c4 and the temporary piece-sacrifice on e4, fol­
lowed by d6-d5, cannot equalise for him, since it leads to the appear­
ance of a weak pawn on c6 in his camp.

93
Chapter S l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 .ig7 4.e4 d6
5 . .ie2 0-0 6 . .ig5 �bd7

7.ti'd2

This move is not so popular as

the main lines for Black: 6 . . . tt:la6,
6 ... h6 and 6 ... c5. The main reason We will deal in details now
is that after 6 . . . tt:lbd7, Black can with A) 7 e5 and B) 7 c6.
••• •••

hardly exert any pressure against

his opponent's centre. After he About 7 . . . c5 8.d5 - see Chap­
advances e7-e5, White will simply ter 11.
reply with f3 and Black will have
nothing better than to exchange It is not good for Black to play
at some moment on d4, after 7 .. J!e8. The point is that in the
which the pawn-structure in the Averbakh system White has abso­
centre will be favourable for lutely no intention to trade the
White (pawns c4 and e4 against a bishops (ih6 ), since his bishop
pawn on d6). Still, this move is on gS is more active than the
played frequently in the contem­ bishop on g7. 8.f3 ! ? White pro­
porary tournament practice. Even tects reliably his e4-pawn. 8 . . . c5
G.Kasparov has played like this 9.d5 a6 10.a4 tt:lf8 ll.id3. He is
several times and at the end of the freeing the e2-square for his
90ies of the past century P .Svidler knight. ll . . . e6 12.tt:lge2 Wffc7 13.
tried often that move. 0-0 eS 14.a5 id7 15.tt:la4 ixa4

94
 l.d4 0.f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0.c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. ie2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 0. bd7 7. �d2

1 6.ID:a4 l'!eb8 17.b3 0.e8 18.0.c3

0,d7 19.1'%a3 if8 20.0.a4 f6 21.i.e3
i,g7 2 2 .b4± Black has no counter­
play at all and is helpless to coun­
ter White's queenside operations,
V. Milov - Wetscherek, Oberwart
19 93.

It is interesting for Black to

try 7 . . . a6 8.0.f3 l'!b8 - he is pre­
p aring b7-bS, but tries to do that
without the move c7-c6 (Follow­
ing 8 . . . cS 9.0-0 cxd4 10.0.xd4 8.0.f3 ! ?
CiJcS ll.f3 0.e6 12 .ie3 0.xd4 13. Naturally, White does not wish
.ixd4 ie6, there arises a position to advance d4-dS, but waits for
from the Maroczy system of the his opponent to exchange on d4.
Sicilian Defence, but with an ex­ 8 ••• tye8
tra tempo for White, because
Black has lost too much time on It seems premature for Black
manoeuvres with his queen's to opt for 8 . . . exd4, since following
knight. There might follow 14.1'%fc1 9.0.xd4 CiJcS 10.f3 h6 ll.ie3 l'!e8
�as 1S.l'!ab1 l'!fc8 16.b3 0.d7 17. 12.0-0:t, White has protected re­
ie3 1'%ab8 18 .b4 �d8 19.0.dS ixdS liably his e4-pawn and thanks to
20.exdS:t White has two powerful his pawn-centre and extra space,
bishops and good prospects on his play in the middle game will
the queenside as well as on the e­ be much easier, Rajkovic - Vu­
file, Yakovich - Rocha, Dresden ckovic, Nis 1996.
2007.) 9.0-0 bS 10.1'!fe1!? This is
the simplest move. 10 . . . b4 ll.CiJdS He will counter 8 ... l'!e8 with
e6 12.0.xf6+ ixf6 13.h4 ! ? ixgS 9.dS ! ? and this move emphasizes
14.hxgS:t White has a powerful perfectly the drawbacks of 8 . . .
centre and extra space, while the l'!e8. Black's plan i s connected
dark squares are rather weak in with f7-fS, so he will have to go
Black's camp. back with his rook to f8 sooner or
later, so this will lead to the loss of
two tempi for him. 9 . . . 0.cS 10 .�c2
A) 7 e5
. • • aS 11.0.d2 h6, Bilunov - Karasev,
After this move, there often Leningrad 1971, 12 .ie3:t White's
arises transposition to the varia­ prospects seem preferable in the
tion with 7 . . . c6. There appear oncoming complicated King 's In­
original positions only if Black re­ dian middle game.
frains from c7-c6. 9.0-0!

9S
Chapter S

This interesting move is con­ born 1992.) 16.1'!ae1 .ieS 17.Wid5

nected with a pawn-sacrifice for a6 18 . .ih6 Wif6 19 . .ixf8 'it>xf8 20.
which White obtains good com­ tt:\a3;t, he has some compensation
pensation. for the exchange indeed, but it is
9 ••• exd4 lO.tiJxd4 insufficient to maintain the equal­
ity.

lO .tiJxe4
••

This is Black's most principled 14.a4

move. Black can hardly defend
against his opponent's numerous
His position is worse following threats despite his two extra
10 . . . tt:\c5 ll.f3 tt:\e6 12 .ie3 tt:\xd4 pawns.
13.hd4 c6 14J:!ad1 Wie7 15.ie3 14 ••• c6
l'!d8 16 . .ig5;t Kaidanov - Lamou­
reux, Torey 1991. There has arisen After 14 . . . tt:\c5 15.1'!fc1 Wid3 16.
a situation in which Black can Wixd3 tt:\xd3 17.1'!xcn, White re­
hardly create any counterplay. gains one of the pawns. His
White has more space, moreover threats are very dangerous de­
that later Black may have prob­ spite the trade of queens. For ex­
lems with the protection of his ample, Black cannot capture on
d6-pawn. b2 : 17. . . .ixb2? ! , because of 18.1'!d1
tt:\eS 19 ..ie7 tt:\xf3+ 20.gxf3 i.eS
ll.tt:\xe4 Wixe4 12.liJb5 Wic6 2 l..ixf8 'it>xf8 22.1'!dc1 ih3 23.
13 .if3 'ffxc4
• l'!xb7± and he does not have suffi­
cient compensation for the ex­
He can play here 13 . . . Wib6, re­ change.
fraining from capturing on c4, but 15.tt:\xd6!
after 14 . .ie3 cS 15.Wixd6 .ixb2
(Black's position is horrible fol­ This move is stronger than
lowing 15 . . . Wixd6 16.tt:\xd6 l'!b8 17. 15 . .ie2 Wib3oo Tukmakov - Mes­
l'!ad1± Kaidanov - Torman, Dear- tel, Las Palmas 1982.

96
 l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3.tiJc3 :!g7 4.e4 d6 5. 1J.e2 0 - 0 6. ig5 tiJ bd7 7. � d2

15 . . . �e6 16J�adl! 8 ••• e5

About 8 . . . �c7 9.0-0 eS 10.

l'!ad1 - see 8 . . . eS.

8 . . . �aS 9.0-0 a6 10.a3 l'!e8

ll.b4 �c7 12.l'!acU White has
gained time for his queenside
pawn-offensive by attacking the
enemy queen, Babula - Markin,
Pardubice 2009.

Besides this move, Black can

White has more than sufficient try to prepare b7-bS. 8 . . . a6 9.0-0
compensation for the sacrificed bS 10.a3 bxc4 (Or 10 ... i.b7 11.
pawn. There might follow 16 ••• l'!ad1 �b8 12 .ih6 l'!e8 13.l'!feU
l0e5 17.ie2 c 5 (17 . . .f6 18 .ih4 and in the forthcoming middle
l'!d8 19.f4 tiJf7 2 0.i.c4 l'!xd6 21. game White's play is much sim­
ixe6 l'!xd2 2 2 .ixf7+ <j{xf7 23. pler, since he dominates in the
l'!xd2 if8 24.if2;!; Black has a centre, Milov - Irzhanov, Moscow
pawn and two bishops, but this is 1994. Following lO . . . eS ll.l'!ad1
not enough to compensate the ex­ i.b7 12.l'!fe1 l'!e8 13.dxeS dxeS 14.
change.) 18J�fel J.d7 19.�c2 h6 b4;!;, he maintains a slight edge,
20 .Ah4 b6 21 .Ac4 �g4 22.ge4
• • because his pieces are better pre­
J.f5 23.l0xf5 �xf5 24.gds� - pared for the fight for the d-file,
He has an extra pawn indeed, but while Black cannot exploit the
his defence is very difficult, be­ vulnerability of the d4-square,
cause White's pieces are tremen­ since his knight can hardly go
dously active. there, Milov - M.Gurevich, Haifa
199S.) ll.ixc4 tiJb6 (After ll . . . dS,
B) 7 c6 8.l0f3
••• there arise positions which are
similar to those we have analysed
in the previous chapter in varia­
tion B. 12 .i.d3 dxe4 13.tiJxe4 �b6
14.l'!acl aS 1S.l'!feU Black's weak­
ness on c6 is more important than
White's on d4, Volzhin - Matikoz­
ian, Yerevan 1996.) 12 .ie2 ie6
13.l'!fe1 �b8 14.l'!ac1 l'!c8 . 1S.h3
l'!a7 16.i.d3 aS 17.ih6;!; White
dominates in the centre and can
begin active operations on the

97
Chapter S

kingside, Budnikov - Podzielny, White had simply to trade the

Vienna 1991. queens and following 16.Wxd6
exd6 17.:gadU, he would have re­
It is interesting for Black, but gained the sacrificed pawn, pre­
still insufficient for equality to try serving a slight edge. For exam­
8 . . . d5. After 9.exd5 cxd5 10.0-0, ple: 17 . . . h6 (17 . . . :gd8? 18.lt:ld5+-)
there arises a position, which 18 .i.e3 :ge8 19.:gxd6 .ie6 20.he6
looks like the one in the Panov at­ :gxe6 21.:gxe6 fxe6 2 2 .:gdu and
tack in the Caro-Kann Defence. the vulnerability of the e6-pawn
would be a telling factor in the
endgame.
After 10 . . . lt:le4 ll.lt:lxe4 dxe4
12.lt:le1, there arises a position in
which White's pawn-majority on
the queenside provides him with
a slight advantage. 12 . . .f6 (12 . . .
lt:lf6 13.lt:lc2 b 6 14.:gad1 ib7 15.d5
Wd6 16.lt:ld4;t - His advantage is
doubtless due to the doubled
White should not be afraid of black pawns on the e-file, Uhl­
10 . . . lt:lb6, because of ll.c5 lt:le4 12. mann - Gross, Leipzig 1982 .) 13.
Wcl lt:lxc3 13.Wxc3;t Black has no i.e3 eS 14.:gd1 exd4 15.hd4 We7
counterplay, while White's plan is 16.lt:lc2 fS 17.hg7 Wxg7 18.lt:ld4;t
quite clear - to advance his Portisch - Nunn, Linares 1988.
queenside pawns. There might follow 18 ... We5 19.
Following 10 ... a6 ll.lt:leS dxc4 lt:lbS lt:lf6 20.Wd4 Wxd4 2l.:gxd4
12 .hc4 Wc7, White can opt for an �g7 22 .c5;t and White's game is
interesting pawn-sacrifice - 13. much easier in the arising end­
ib3 ! ? (It is also good for him to game.
try 13.'\Wf4 h6 14.hh6 hh6 15. After 10 . . . dxc4 ll.hc4, we
Wxh6 lt:lxeS 16.dxe5 Wxc4 17.exf6 have on the board a typical posi­
exf6 18J:HeU Black must watch tion with an isolated pawn.
constantly for the possibility of White's piece activity compen­
White transferring his rook to the sates with an interest this mini­
h-file. Still, it would be difficult to mal positional defect. ll . . . a6 (11 . . .
say whether he can achieve any­ lt:lb6 12 .ib3 lt:lbdS 13.:gfe1 ie6 14.
thing meaningful later, since ih6 lt:lxc3 15.bxc3 idS 16.hg7
there are just a few pieces left �xg7 17.lt:le5 b5 18.:ge3 :gc8 19.
on the board.) 13 . . . lt:lxe5 14.dxe5 :gaelt White has powerful initia­
WxeS 15J'!fe1 Wd6. This position tive, Rashkovsky - Kupreichik,
was reached in the game Gelfand Vilnius 1980) 12.:gfe1 bS 13.i.b3
- Svidler, Groningen 1996. Here, ib7 14.:gad1 :gc8 (14 . . . lt:lb6 15.d5 ! ;

98
 J.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJc3 :Ag7 4.e4 d6 5. ie2 0 - 0 6. ig5 tiJ bd7 7. Wid2

he should not be afraid of 14 . . . away with his queen from the pin,
,ixf3 15.gxf3 ges 16.a4;!; White's Wright - Krstic, Brisbane 2006.
two powerful bishops compensate
fully the defects of his pawn­ After 9 . . . Wib6, White should
structure) 1S.Wie2 b4 16.tiJa4 WiaS not be in a hurry to push immedi­
1 7.tiJe5;!; and in the arising posi­ ately d4-d5. It is better for him to
tion, White has an edge thanks to wait until Black plays ges. 10.
his more active pieces, moreover gad1 ges U.ds cxdS 12.cxd5.
that Black's queenside pawn­ Now, if Black wishes his rook to
structure has been compromised, support the pawn-advance f7-f5,
N.Gaprindashvili - Watson, Brus­ it must go back to f8. All this is too
sels 1987. slow and White's queenside initi­
ative (on the c-file) develops
9.0-0 much faster. 12 . . . tiJcS 13.Wic2 id7
14.liJd2 geeS 1S.Wib1 h6 16.:Ae3
Wid8 17.gc1 tiJg4 18.ixg4 ixg4
19.liJc4 if8 20.b4 tiJa6 21.tiJaS
Wie7 22 .a3 b6 23.tiJc6± White's
achievements on the queenside
are quite evident (the knight on
c6), while Black's counterplay is
too slow, Polugaevsky - Gufeld,
Moscow 1969.

After 9 ... ges, White's best re­

action again would be - lO.gadl.
9 . . . exd4
Black cannot continue the
game without this move, so he
should better exchange immedi­
ately.

About 9 . . . Wic7 10.gad1 ges

ll.dS - see 9 . . . ges.

After 9 . . . Wie7, White's simplest

reaction would be lO.dS;!; and He can counter 10 . . . Wie7 with
Black can hardly organise coun­ the move U.dS, for example 11 . . .
terplay on the kingside, because cS. The centre has been closed
in order for him to advance f7-f5, and the fight is focused on the
he should remove his knight from flanks. 12.tiJe1 (12.h3 ! ? a6 13.tiJh2
f6 and before that he should run Wif8 14.a3 'it>h8 15.b4tWhite has

99
Chapter S

begun a queenside offensive, since his central pawns are placed

while Black's kingside counter­ on dark squares. After its ex­
play is nowhere in sight yet, Stahl­ change, the vulnerability of the
berg - Pilnik, Beverwijk 19S6.) light squares becomes quite no­
12 ... '?9f8 13.lt:Jd3 h6 14 ..ie3 lt:Jb6 ticeable. Later, Polugaevsky real­
1S.b3 lt:Jg4 16 ..b:g4 .b:g4 17J!:de1 ised his positional advantage.
a6 18.f4. White breaks through on
the kingside. We have to pay at­ 10.tijxd4
tention that he accomplished that
only when Black did not have the
possibility to exploit the weakness
of the eS-square. 18 . . . exf4 19.!'!:xf4
�d7 20.!'\ffl± A.Petrosian - Zapa­
ta, Belgrade 1984. He has no
counterplay, while White has
more space and a clear-cut plan
for actions connected with the
pawn-break e4-eS. In the game
Black did not withstand the pres­
sure of the fight and chose the
move 20 . . . �d4? weakening irrev­ 10 ••• .!Llc5
ocably his position. There fol­ This move is connected with a
lowed 21..b:d4 cxd4 22 .lt:Jd1 lt:Jc8 tactical trap.
23.lt:J lf2 '?9g7 24.'?9f4 gS 2S.'?:l/g3 aS
26.eS+-. There are too many After 10 . . . !'!:e8, Black ends up
weaknesses in Black's camp and it in a passive position. ll.!'!:ad1 lt:JcS
will be in ruins after White breaks (ll . . . '<Mfb6 12.f3 lt:JcS 13.i>h1 lt:Jfd7.
through with e4-eS. Here, in the game Uhlmann - Mar­
Following 10 . . .'?9c7, White can tinovic, Sarajevo 1981, White in­
close advantageously the position flicted a very elegant tactical strike.
in the centre. ll.dS cxdS 12.cxdS 14.lt:JdbS !± cxbS?? 1S.lt:JdS+-) 12.
lt:JcS 13.!'!:c1 aS. After this seem­ f3 aS 13.lt:Jc2 '?9b6 14.�e3 a4 1S.
ingly obvious move, the bS-square !'!:b1 '?9c7 16.!'\fdlt White has par­
is seriously weakened in Black's ried his opponent's initiative with
position. 14.'?9c2 �d7 1S.lt:JbS hbS an accurate play and now can be­
16.hbS !'!:ec8 17.lt:Jd2t Polugaevs­ gin the siege of Black's weak d6-
ky - Gligoric, Havana 1967. The pawn forcing him to defend, A.
vulnerability of the bS-square has Onischuk - Theissen, Dortmund
led to Black being forced to give 1992 .
up his light-squared bishop. This
is a very important piece for him 11.'?9f4
in the King's Indian Defence, This is the only move.

100
 l.d4 0.f6 2.c4 g6 3JiJ c3 �g7 4.e4 d6 s. �e2 0 - 0 6. �g5 0. bd7 7. V!id2

The careless reply ll.f3? can tive and ends up in a better posi­
b e countered by Black with a tac­ tion. 13 . . . a5 (13 . . . Wie5 14.V!icU) 14.
tical strike: 11 . . . 0.fxe4 ! 12.0.xe4 j:!feU White maintains a slight but
0.xe4 13.fxe4 .bd4-+ and he wins stable advantage. He must watch
a pawn without any compensa­ carefully however, for Black's
tion for White, Adamski - Geller, possible tactical tricks. 14 . . . a4 15.
Lugano 1968. h3 V!ieS 16.Vfic1 V!ie7 17.V!if4 0.cd7
18.Vfid2 V!if8 19.0.c2 h6 20.�e3;!; ­
11 1He7
••• His pawn on d6 is very weak, Pe­
About ll .. J:!e8 12.�f3 Wie7 13. tursson - Kasparov, Reykjavik
j:!ad1 - see ll ... Wie7. 1988. After Kasparov's impreci­
12.j:!adl sion 20 . . . 0.h7? ! , White could have
increased his advantage with the
move 21.�f4 ! ±

13.f3
Now, his pawn on e4 is safe.

12 ••• 1He5

Capturing the central pawn

leads to a very difficult position
for Black 12 . . . 0.cxe4? ! 13.0.xe4
V!ixe4 14.V!ixd6. Naturally, it is ad­ 13 .l!�e6
• •

vantageous for him to exchange Black wishes to facilitate the

his weak d6-pawn for his oppo­ defence of his cramped position
nent's e4-pawn, but White's piec­ by trading the knights.
es become very active. 14 . . . 0.d7
15.�f3 V!ieS 16.�f4 V!ixd6 17.hd6 White preserves an edge fol­
j:!e8 18.0.xc6± - He regains the lowing 13 . . . 0.fd7 14.V!ih4 f6, S.
pawn and preserves all the pluses Savchenko - Neverov, Zhitomir
of his position. 1986, 15.�f4 ! Wie7 16.b4 0.a6 17.
bS 0.ab8 18.�g3± Black's d6-
White should not be afraid of pawn is vulnerable and he has
12 . . . j:!e8, because after 13.�f3, he problems with his develop­
parries gradually Black's initia- ment.

101
Chapter S

After 13 . . .'\Wxf4, there arises an

endgame advantageous for White.
14.hf4 lLle8 15.ie3 aS 16.lLlb3 (it
is also good for him to opt for
16J�d2 ! ?;!;) 16 . . . lLlxb3 17.axb3 fS
18.c5 ! ;!; With his last move White
has freed the c4-square for his
bishop and has seized completely
the initiative.

14.�xe6 he6
16Jfh4!
This is White's most accurate
move.

It would be premature for him

to choose 16.!!xd6 lLld7 17.W/xe5
he5 18.!!d2 lLlb6?, and the activ­
ity of Black's pieces enabled him
to draw in the game Grischuk -
Svidler, Sochi 2005.

Still, White can try here - 16.

ts.wht Wfcl ! ?;!;
This is a prophylactic move.
Now, White is not afraid of the 16 ... �d7 17.f4
checks of Black's queen. This is the idea of his previous
move. White is not trying to win
It is also very good for White material and wishes to organise
to continue with 15.'\We3 ! ? W/a5 an attack against the enemy king.
(Maybe Black's best option here
would be to enter an inferior end­ 17 . . . ti'c5
game with 15 . . . W/c5 ! ? 16.lLla4
W/xe3+ 17.he3;!;, although even It is bad for Black to play 17 . . .
then his d6-pawn remains very WfaS, because of 18.f5 ! gxf5 19.ih6
weak.) 16J'!xd6 lLld7 17.!!b1 ! ± ixh6 20.W/xh6 f4 21.!!xf4± White
Black i s a pawn down and h e can has a strong attack in a position
hardly create any meaningful with material equality.
counterplay on the queenside.
For example, he loses after 17 . . . 18.ie7 (18.f5? ixc4) 18 . . .
lLlb6, due to 18.c5 lLla4 19.b4+- hc3 19.bxc3 hc4 20.hd6
15 . . . !!fe8 ti'bS

102
 J.d4 ilJf6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJc3 ilg7 4.e4 d6 5. 1i.e2 0 - 0 6. 1i.g5 tiJ bd7 7. Wfd2

addition, White has weaknesses

on a2 and c3. This is all an illusion
however, because following 22.
eSt White's initiative is very pow­
erful. Black can hardly cope with
his opponent's numerous threats
(f4-f5; :Bf3-h3 ; ie7-f6, Wfh6).
22 b5 (Black loses after 22 . . .
•••

Wfxa2? 23.f5 ! ttJxeS 24.f6+-, as

well as in the variation 22 . . . Wfxc3?
23.f5 ttJxeS 24.Wff6 Wfe3 25.fxg6
21 .ixc4 (It seems also good
• ilJxg6 26.Wfxf7+ 'it>h8 27.ib4+­
for him to include the move 21. and he has no defence against
a4 ! ? , since Black cannot capture :Bd7.) 23.Wfg5 (with the idea f4-
the pawn 2l.. .Wfxa4?, in view of f5) 23 Wfe2 24.ie7 h6 25. W/h4
•••

22.:Bd4 bS 23.ixc4 bxc4 24.f5+-) tiJb6 26.if6 'it>h7 27.h3 �d5

21 Wfxc4. It looks like Black is
••• 28.f5 S:ac8 29.e6± - with a very
not threatened by anything. In dangerous attack for White.

Conclusion
We have just analysed the variation with 6 . . . ttJbd7. White obtains
effortlessly an advantage in the opening exploiting the basic drawback
of Black's sixth move. His knight on d7 does not exert any pressure
against White's centre. This leads to the fact that Black will have to
exchange on d4 sooner or later and there will arise a position with a
long lasting positional advantage for White. He will dominate in the
centre and will have the possibility to exert pressure against Black's
weak d6-pawn. We will have to mention that a similar type of position
arises in the variation of the King's Indian Defence in which White fi­
anchettoes his bishop on g2 and Black plays tiJbd7. There, as a rule, he
is doomed to a passive defence after White parries all his opponent's
tactical tricks.

103
Chapter 9 l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6
5.i.e2 0-0 6.i.g5 �a6

combinational play as G.Kaspa­

rov, V.Topalov, A.Grischuk, T.
Radjabov, P.Svidler, B.Gelfand,
J.Polgar and many others.
7.f4!?
With this move White wishes
to emphasize the drawbacks of
Black's sixth move. Now, there
arise positions similar to the Four
Pawns Attack, except that Black's
knight is on a6 and White's bish­
This move is more flexible op is on gS. I believe this inclusion
than the one we have analysed in is in favour of White, since he had
our previous chapter - 6 . . . lt:lbd7. made a developing move, while
Black prepares the typical pawn­ the placement of Black's knight
advance e7-e5 for the King's Indi­ on a6 may turn out to be disad­
an Defence and also the knight on vantageous. The move 7.f4 be­
a6 will not stand in the way of the came popular after V.Potkin's win
development of his bishop on c8. against A.Grischuk in the year
If White, in answer to e7-e5, re­ 2011.
plies with d4-d5, then Black's
knight on a6 will have the possi­ After 7.V9d2, naturally Black
bility to go to the cS-outpost, ex­ advances 7 . . . e5 and as a rule,
erting pressure against the e4- there arise positions, which are
pawn. more typical for the Saemisch sys­
Following 6 . . . lt:la6, as a rule, tem. For example: 8.d5 V9e8 9.
there arise very complicated posi­ idl id7 10.lt:lge2 lt:lcS ll.ic2 aS
tions with plenty of tactical possi­ 12.f3 hSoo and both sides have
bilities, so it is not surprising that their pluses, Grischuk - Rad­
it was tested by such masters of jabov, Biel 2007.

104
 l.d4 0.f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0.c3 :ig7 4.e4 d6 5. ie2 0 - 0 6. ig5 0.a6 7:f4

from there will support the pawn­

break e4-e5.) 13.e5± - The defects
of the placement of Black's knight
on a6 have become quite obvious.
In fact, White has an extra piece
in the fight for the centre, Ser­
gienko - Cherniaev, Tula 1998.

A) 7 ti'e8
•••

With this move Black prepares

Now, Black has two main lines the pawn-advance e7-e5, after
at his disposal: A) 7 ti'e8 and
••• which White will be forced to
B) 7 c6.
.•• push dS and Black's knight, at the
edge of the board on a6, will gain
It seems rather dubious for access to the cS-square.
him to opt for 7 . . . c5? ! . Following This plan is not so good if
8.d5, there arise positions in Black includes the preliminary
which Black's knight is better move 7 . . . h6, because after 8.:ih4
placed on d7 in order to prevent WeB, White has a powerful addi­
White's possible central pawn­ tional possibility - 9.e5 ! Later, in
break e4-e5. It is understandable the game R.Bagirov - Mareck,
that from the a6-square it can go Batumi 2002, there followed 9 . . .
only to c7, from where it cannot 0.h7 10.0.f3 f6 11.0-0 c S 12.exd6
control at all the eS-square. The exd6 13.0.b5± The vulnerability of
pawn-advance b7-b5, which the the d6-pawn will be a cause of
knight on c7 can support, is abso­ permanent worries for Black.
lutely harmless for White, be­
cause he can parry it with the
move a2-a4, or eventually with
a4-a5. 8 . . . Wa5 (After 8 . . . We8 9.
0.f3 e6 10.e5 ! ?t ; 10 . .bf6 .ixf6 11.
eS dxeS 12 .fxe5 :ig7 13.d6;t;,
White's powerful d6-pawn is a
more important factor in this po­
sition than Black's bishop-pair.)
9.ti'd2 e6 10.0.f3 exdS 11.cxd5 E:e8
12. 0-0 :ig4 (The move 12 . . . c4
weakens the d4-square. 13.�h1
bS 14.0.d4± Black's position is 8.e5 ! ?
very difficult. White's knight on Now, this move i s not a s effec­
d4 will go to the c6-square and tive as after the inclusion of the

105
Chapter 9

moves h6 and i.h4, because White's Sanchez, Madrid 2005, since White
bishop on g5 may come under at­ has the energetic resource 13.
tack in some variations with the fxe5! , for example: 13 ...gf7 (Black's
move f7-f6; nevertheless, it leads situation becomes even worse
again to an advantage for White. following 13 . . . fxe5 14.c5 ! White
8 ... .!Dd7 9 . .!Df3 c5 sacrifices a pawn and brings his
Black must be in a hurry to at­ bishop into the attack. 14 . . . tt:Jdxc5
tack his opponent's centre as 15 ..bf8 \1;lfxf8 16.ic4 <;!;>hS 17.lt:Jg5
quickly as possible; otherwise, his if5 18.lt:Jb6 axb6 19.lt:Jf7+ <;!;>gS
position will be horribly cramped. 20.lt:Jxe5+ <;!;>hS 21.gxf5 gxf5 2 2 .
10.0-0 cxd4 11 . .!Dd5 dxe5 lt:Jf7+ <;!;>gS 23 .\1;l/h5+- and i n order
to save his king, Black must part
White maintains a stable ad­ with his queen.) 14.exf6 tt:Jxf6 15 .
vantage following ll .. .f6 12.exf6 .b£6 .ixf6 16.tt:Jxf6+ gxf6 17.
tt:Jxf6 13 . .bf6 ixf6 14.lt:Jxf6+ gxf6 \1;l/xd4± - he has succeeded in sav­
15.lt:Jxd4;t - he has a superior ing the exchange, but this is a
pawn-structure: two pawn-is­ small consolation for him, since
lands against three, moreover he has no compensation for the
that Black's king is vulnerable, sacrificed pawn.
Yakovich - Trygstad, Bergen
2000. 13 . .!Dxd4 .!Db6

12 . .he7

14 . .!Df6 + !

12 ... exf4 White should not go after ma­

This move has been played in terial, because after 14.ixf8 \1;lfxf8
the game Meins - Reh, Baunatal 15.gxf4 tt:Jxd5 16.cxd5oo, despite
2001 and it is the best for Black. the extra exchange, his play will
be much more difficult, since the
His position is terrible after dark squares in his camp are con­
12 .. .f6, Herraiz Hidalgo - Paredes siderably weakened.

106
 l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0, c3 !g7 4.e4 d6 S. ie2 0 - 0 6. ig5 0,a6 7/4

14 hf6 15.hf6 'ti'e3+ 16.

•.•

g{2 lDc5 17.lbc2 'ti'e8 18.gxf4;t

- He has regained the sacrificed
pawn and his advantage is doubt­
less, due to his two powerful bish­
ops. Black must be on a perma­
nent alert how not to be check­
mated on the compromised dark
squares.

B) 7 c6 ••• 8 . . . b5. This is an interesting

pawn-sacrifice, but insufficient
for equality. 9.cxb5 (But not 9.e5,
since after 9 ... b4�. there arise
complications on the board and
they are much rather in favour of
Black, since his pieces are better
mobilised, Moskalenko - Nadyr­
hanov, Alushta 1994.) 9 . . . cxb5
10.hb5 gbs 1l.ic4;t Black has
some compensation for the pawn,
but it is still insufficient to main­
tain the equality. White does not
With this patient move Black have pawn-weaknesses in his po­
prepares the evacuation of his sition and he needs just two more
knight from the a6-square. It is moves to complete his develop­
going to c7 from where it not only ment.
supports the pawn-breaks b7-b5
and d7-d5, but can also go to e6 at Black cannot equalise with 8 . . .
an opportune moment, exerting gbs, with the idea to sacrifice a
pressure against White's centre pawn in another fashion - 9.0,f3
(the d4-square) and attacking bS 10.hf6 exf6 (Or 10 . . .hf6 11.
rather unpleasantly the bishop in cxbS cxb5 12.0,xb5;t and Black has
gS. two powerful bishops, but White
is still better thanks to his extra
8.'ti'd2 pawn and domination in the cen­
(diagram) tre.) ll.cxbS cxbS 12.0,xb5;t
8 ••• lbc7
This is the main response for It may be very interesting for
Black. Black to try 8 . . . d5 ! ? Now, White is

107
Chapter 9

forced to capture the pawn and endgame is better for White

after 9.i.xf6 exf6 10.exd5 cxdS thanks to his superior pawn­
11.lt:Jxd5, there arises a very com­ structure.) 15.'i!lf2 ic6 16.E:ae1
plicated position in which he
must play very precisely.

This is the key position for the

variation with 8 . . . d5. Now, Black
He has an extra pawn indeed, has a choice. He can push 16 . . .f5
but lags in development and Black and White's best reaction against
has two very powerful bishops. this would be 17.g3;!;, preserving a
His dark-squared bishop is par­ slight edge. (Following 17.lt:Je5,
ticularly strong, since it has no Black has at his disposal a forced
opponent. ll . . . E:e8 (after ll . . . bS variation leading to a draw: 17 . . .
12.lt:Je3 bxc4 13.if3 E:b8 14.lt:Je2;!;, E:ad8 18.'i!lg1 heS 19.fxe5 VJixeS
White is close to the completion 20.lt:lc2 VJif6 21.id3 E:xe1 22.E:xe1
of his development and Black's E:xd4 ! 23.lt:Jxd4 VJixd4+ 24.'it>h1
c4-pawn is not dangerous at all) lt:JcS 25.E:d1 lt:Jxd3 26.VJixd3 VJixb2
12.lt:Jf3 ie6 13.lt:Je3 Vlie7 (He can 27.VJid8+ 'it>g7 28.Vlid4+ VJixd4 29.
also try here 13 . . . VJid6. There may E:xd4 'it>f6=)
arise the following developments: Or 16 . . . E:ad8 and later in the
14.g3 ih3 15.'i!lf2 E:ad8 16.E:he1 game V.Potkin - Grischuk, Khan­
lt:JcS 17.id3;!;. Black's pieces are ty-Mansiysk 2011, there followed:
tremendously active, but White's 17.d5 lt:JcS 18.id3 VJic7 19.g3;!;
prospects are preferable. Black There has arisen a very compli­
has doubled pawns on the f-file, cated position in which the play is
so White has in the centre and on rather difficult for both sides.
the queenside not one but two ex­ White must be very careful about
tra pawns.) 14.0-0 id7 (The his opponent's tactical possibili­
move 14 . . . .b:c4 leads to multiple ties. If he succeeds in parrying
exchanges and a transfer into a them and simplifies the position
slightly better endgame for White. by exchanging pieces, then his
15.hc4 VJixe3+ 16.VJixe3 E:xe3 17. two extra pawns on the queen­
E:fe1 E:xe1 + 18.!\xeU Black has re­ side should gradually settle the
gained his pawn indeed, but the issue.

108
 l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3. tiJc3 :ig7 4.e4 d6 S. :ie2 0 - 0 6. :ig5 tiJa6 7.f4

9.�f3 kingside, but they backfired fol­

lowing 14 . . . g5? ! , which after 15.
fxgS fxeS 16.4Jf3 exd4 17. 0-0±,
led to a position with a consider­
able advantage for White. Black's
pawn-majority in the centre is im­
material, because his pawns are
easily blocked, while the vulnera­
bility of his castling position
provides White with excellent
attacking prospects.) 1S.fxe5 .beS
16.4Jf3 :if4 17.�d3 �d6 18.0-0
.ie6 19.�aeU - His pieces are
Naturally, you cannot see of­ very harmoniously deployed and
ten the bishop here at the begin­ Black's e7-pawn is much weaker
ning of the game, since God has than White's d4-pawn.
created the f3-square for the
knight, but now, this move is Black's plan to advance the
necessary, because White must undermining move f7-f5 is not
protect very carefully his e4- dangerous for White, since it is
square. too slow and also weakens Black's
position. 9 . . . 4Jd7 10.4Jge2 fS 11.
9 ••• c!iJe6 exfS gxfS 12.0-0. There may fol­
low 12 . . . 4Jf6 13.d5 eS 14.fxe5 dxeS
Besides this move, Black has 15.4Jg3 cxdS 16.4Jxd5 :ie6, Miton
an interesting pawn-sacrifice here - B.Socko, Germany 2011. Here,
- 9 . . . d5 10.cxd5 cxdS 11.e5 4Je4 White could have increased his
12.4Jxe4 dxe4 13 . .be4. White has advantage with the move 17.�ae1!
an extra pawn, but his play is not Black will have problems with the
easy at all, since he lags in devel­ protection of his e and f-pawns.
opment. 13 .. .£6 (following 13 . . . For example: 17 . . .£4 18.4Jh5 :ixdS
4Je6, White should better give 19.cxd5 �d6 20.4Jxg7 c;!;>xg7 21.
back the pawn immediately, be­ �xeS ! After this exchange-sacri­
ing happy with a slight edge in the fice Black's position crumbles.
endgame thanks to his better 2l.. .�xe5 22 .:ixf4 �fS 23 . .bc7±
pawn-structure after 14.:ih4 �xd4 White has two pawns for the ex­
15.�xd4 4Jxd4 16.�d1 4Je6 17.4Je2 change, a couple of powerful bish­
g5 18.fxg5 .be5 19.b3 tiJcS 20.:if3 ops and a dangerous passed d­
:ifS 21. 0-0;!;) 14 . .ih4 fxeS (In the pawn, while Black's king has
game Hernandez Carmenates - practically no pawn-shelter.
Libiszewski, Montcada 2011, Black
tried some active actions on the 10.�h4

109
Chapter 9

Unfortunately for White, he thenburg 2011, there followed:

must lose a tempo for the retreat 14.lt:Jge2 a6 15.0-0 \t>h8 16.lt:Jd4
of his bishop. !!ac8. White has completed his
10 ••• c5 development and after the central
Black succeeds in creating pawn-break 17.e5± seized com­
counterplay in the centre. pletely the initiative.
ll.dxc5 �xeS 12.!3:dl
14.�ge2

There has arisen a position

similar in its pawn-structure to 14 a4
•••

the Maroczy system in the Sicilian

Defence. Now, it all depends on The obviously bad move 14 . . .
whether White will manage to �c7? ! was played i n the game
complete his development. If he Ivanchuk - Radjabov, Medias
does, then he will have a great ad­ 2011. Black not only loses a tem­
vantage in the forthcoming mid­ po, but his queen is misplaced on
dle game; otherwise, Black may the c7-square, because in many
seize the initiative. variations, after the preliminary
12 ••• �e6 exchange .ixf6, it will come under
White's c4-pawn is Black's attack with lt:Jd5. The game con­
main target for attack. tinued with 15.0-0 a4 16.f5 ! This
is a positional pawn-sacrifice with
13.b3 aS the idea to deflect Black's bishop
Now, he switches to attacking from the protection of the d5-
the b3-pawn. square. 16 . . . gxf5 17.exf5 hf5 18.
�6 exf6 (It would be a disaster
Black only loses time with the for Black to opt for 18 . . . .bf6?,
move 13 .. .'�a5, because he cannot since following 19.lt:Jd5 �c8 2 0 .
break his opponent's position lt:Jxf6+ exf6 21.b4 lt:J e 6 2 2 .lt:Jc3+-,
with piece-sorties. Later, in the he has temporarily an extra pawn
game Hammer - Bejtovic, Go- indeed, but his position is al most

110
 l.d4 l!:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. l!:Jc3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. 1i.e2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 l!:Ja6 7.f4

hopeless, because he cannot de­ edge of the board 15 . . . lf:Ja6? ! is ob­

fend all the numerous pawn­ viously weaker due to 16.a3 ! and
weaknesses in his camp.) 19.b4 Black cannot play 16 . . . hc4 in
lf:Je6 20.lf:Jb5 119b6+ 21.'it>hl± Al­ view of 17.e5± and White's bishop
most all Black's pawns are terribly on f3 becomes tremendously ac­
weak. tive.

16.1rd3 ! ?
This simple move, protecting
the pawn, seems to me to be more
promising to White in his fight for
the opening advantage than the
pawn-sacrifice after 16.c5, for ex­
ample: 16 . . . dxc5 17.bxc5 (It is also
interesting for Black to try 17.b5 ! ?
and after 1 7. . . 119c7 18.e5 l!:JxeS 19.
fxeS E:fd8 20.119g5 E:xd1+ 21.'it>xd1
h6 22 .119e3 l!:Jg4 23.ixg4 hg4
15.b4! ? 24 . .ig3, there arises a very com­
This i s an interesting move. plicated position. White has a
White weakens his c4-pawn, but knight for two pawns, but his king
deprives his opponent of the pos­ is vulnerable and Black's pieces
sible counterplay against the are rather active.) 17 . . . tt:Jxc5 18.e5
pawn on b3. lf:Jfd7 (It is weaker for him to con­
tinue with 18 . . . 119xd2 +, because of
Following 15.l!:Jd4, White can 19 J!:xd2 lf:Jfd7 20 . .ixe7 E:fe8 21.
hardly hold on to his b3-pawn. .id6i. White has regained his
For example: 15 . . . axb3 16.axb3 pawn and maintains a slight edge
119a5 17. 0-0 119b6 18.119f2 tt:Jxb3 19. thanks to his more actively de­
l!:Jxe6 119xf2 + 20Jl:xf2 fxe6 21.e5 ployed minor pieces.) 19.0-0� ­
dxeS 22 .fxe5 lf:Je8 23 . .ig3� and al­ No doubt, he has compensation
though he has the initiative in for the sacrificed pawn, since his
this endgame, which compen­ pieces are active, but it is unclear
sates fully his minimal material whether he can achieve anything
deficit, but White can hardly rely meaningful.
on anything more than a draw;
because there remains just too lit­ 16 . . . 119b6
tle material on the board, Levin -
Wiersma, Netherlands 2011. 16 . . . 119c7 17.lf:Jd5 .ixd5 18.cxd5i
White has extra space, a bishop­
15 . . . l0cd7 pair and only needs to castle in
The retreat of the knight to the order to complete his develop-

111
Chapter 9

ment. There may arise the follow­

ing variation: 18 ... E1fc8 19.E1cl '1Wb6
2 0.E1bl '1Wc7 21.0-0 '1Wc4 22 .'1Wxc4
E1xc4 23.E1fcl E1ac8 24.iel lLlb6 25.
E1xc4 lLlxc4 26.E1cl lLle8 27 . .ig4
E1c7 28.id7 ib2 29.E1xc4 E1xc4
30.ixe8 ia3 31.ixa4 ixb4 32.
ixb4 E1xb4 33 . .ib3 E1xe4 34.'it>f2;!;
- In this endgame, White's two
minor pieces are stronger than
Black's rook and pawns.
Black's position is horrible af­
17.a3 lUeS 18.lbd5 hd5 ter 2l.. .E1aa8?! 2 2 .'it>d2±
19.cxd5 \Wa6 Following 21.. .lLle8 2 2 .lLld4;!;,
he has not achieved anything real
The inclusion of the moves and will have to begin to defend
19 . . . h5 20 .h3;!; does not change passively in a few moves.
the evaluation of the position. 22.)3cl )3xcl + 23.tLlxcl;!;
White has traded a pair of rooks
20.\Wxa6 )3xa6 21 .if2
• and succeeded in decreasing his
(diagram) opponent's initiative. Now, if
White has an advantage in the Black fails to organise pressure
arising endgame, because he can against the pawns on a3 or e4,
parry easily Black's temporary ac­ White will coordinate his pieces
tivity. and Black's position will become
21 ••• )3c4 very difficult, since he has less
He wishes to create counter­ space and his queenside pawns
play against White's e4-pawn. are seriously weakened.

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of the variation with 6 . . . lLla6. It
is quite deservedly one of the most popular responses for Black in the
Averbakh system in the contemporary tournament practice. He is try­
ing to obtain a sharp and complicated position and is ready to sacrifice
pawns in his fight for the initiative. Still, after a precise play, White has
chances of obtaining an advantage after the opening. As a rule, in this
variation he acquires some long term pluses - a space advantage and a
powerful pawn-centre. His main task is to overcome the temporary lag
in development. After he completes it successfully, Black will be forced
to begin defending.

112
Chapter 10 l.d4 �f6 2.c4 g6 3.�c3 J.g7 4.e4 d6
5 .ie2 0-0 6.J.g5 h6
•

main lines, we will analyse three

moves : A) 7. . .ltlbd7, B) 7 . . . e5,
C) 7 . . c5.
.

Before that however, we will

deal with some not so popular
lines.

White should not be afraid of

the rather slow move 7 . . . a6. After
8.\Wd2 'kt>h7 9.h3 lL:\c6 lO.lLlf3 eS
This move is one of the most ll.dS lL:\e7, he can follow with the
popular responses for Black standard resource 12 .g4 ! imped­
against the Averbakh system, ing Black's kingside counterplay
chosen by White. Black ousts im­ and developing effortlessly his
mediately his opponent's bishop initiative on the other side of the
from its active position. Still, this board. Later, in the game Kovacs
move has a serious drawback - - Mesaros, Trencianske Teplice
Black's pawn on h6 is not suffi­ 2005, there followed 12 . . . lL:\fg8
ciently protected. In the majority 13.0-0-0 .id7 14.c5 lL:\c8 15.'kt>bl±.
of the variations White can win a White's initiative is very power­
tempo by attacking it with the ful. Black is incapable of counter­
move 1Wd2 . ing White's actions on the c-file
7 . .ie3 and his kingside counterplay is
This is the right decision. In obviously too slow.
the Averbakh system, contrary for
example to the Petrosian system, It seems rather dubious for
White's bishop retreats as a rule Black to try here 7 . . . b6. In g�ner­
to this square. al, in the King's Indian Defence,
Now, Black can choose be­ Black fianchettoes his light­
tween numerous possibilities. As squared bishop only very seldom,

113
Chapter 1 0

since it can hardly find a better all. 10.ll'lf3 dS ll.id3 dxe4 12.
place for actions than the c8-h3 ll'lxe4 ll'lxe4 13.he4;!; White's po­
diagonal. 8.h3 ll'lfd7 (8 . . ..tb7 9. sition is clearly preferable and his
�c2;!;) 9.�d2 'it>h7 10.g4 eS ll.ds pieces are much more active,
aS 12 .h4. This is the beginning of Averbakh - Ragozin, Leningrad
a standard plan for similar posi­ 19S6.
tions. White advances his pawn to
the hS-square, forcing his oppo­ Now, just like in the majority
nent to play g6-gS and after that of similar variations, Black can­
Black will have no counterplay not equalise with the move 7 . . .
whatsoever and will remain in the ll'lc6, because h e provokes some
role of a spectator to the rest of weakening of White's centre after
the game. White will prepare pa­ the move 8.dS indeed, but Black
tiently a breakthrough on the loses too much time on moves
queenside. You can see a very with his knight. 8 . . . ll'leS (It is not
good example on this subject - preferable for him to retreat with
the game Panno - Camara, Sao his knight to its initial position -
Paulo 1972 . 12 . . . ll'lcS 13.hS gS 14. 8 . . . ll'lb8, since after 9.�d2 'it>h7
ll'lh3 ll'lbd7 1S.f3 .tf6 16.0-0 ie7 10 .h3 aS ll.ll'lf3 eS, in the game
17.ll'lf2 ll'lb7 18J!fb1 ll'ldcS 19.b3 Polovodin - Stotika, Leningrad
id7 20.id1 !!e8 21.a3 if8 22 .b4 1983, White could have begun im­
ll'la6 23 ..ta4± After the trade of mediately active actions on the
the light-squared bishops, Black's queenside with the move: 12.cS ! ±
position became even worse due and Black would have great prob­
to the catastrophic vulnerability lems to neutralise White's activity
of his light squares. The game on the c-file.) 9.h3 c6 10.ll'lf3
continued until move 69 and end­ ll'lxf3+ ll.hf3 cxdS 12.cxdS;!; Le­
ed in a victory for White, but there rner - Gufeld, Ivano-Frankovsk
was never a real struggle. It looked 1982 . He has a slight edge thanks
like the fight between two wres­ to having extra space. After Gufeld
tlers in which one of them is on played 12 . . . bS? ! , there appeared a
top and is trying to break his op­ gaping weakness on the c6-square
ponent's neck. The only problem in his position and White's knight
is whether the neck will withstand was headed there immediately
the pressure or not. along the route c3-e2-d4-c6. 13.
0-0 id7 14.�d2 'it>h7 1S.ll'le2 �b8
Black's position is obviously 16.!'1ac1 �b7 17.ll'ld4±
inferior after 7 . . . c6 8.�d2 'it>h7
9.h3, for example : 9 . . . a6, as it was 7 . . . ll'la6. Now, contrary to the
played by V. Ragozin against the previous chapter, this move is not
author of this system. He did not so good, because White wins a
manage to reap any dividends at tempo by attacking the h6-pawn

114
 l.d4 ll:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. ll:Jc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. :ie2 0 - 0 6. :ig5 h6 7. :ie3

with the move 8.�d2 , for example A) 7 ••• ll:Jbd7

8 . . . �h7. Here, his simplest reac­
tion would be 9.f3 ! ?, after which
there arises a favourable version
for White of the Saemisch sys­
tem.

This move was popular at the

beginning of the 90ies of the past
century mostly thanks to the ef­
It is not so good for Black to forts of grandmasters Z.Lanka.
play 9 . . . e5, since following lO.dS, A.Shirov and V.Bologan. Black's
his counterplay can only be con­ main idea is to prepare the pawn­
nected with the pawn-advance f7- advance c7-c5 and to sacrifice a
f5, but White is already very well pawn with the move b7-b5, after
prepared to counter it with his which there arise positions which
ninth move. Later, in the game resemble the Benko Gambit.
Gurieli - Grabics, Komotini 1993, Nowadays, this move is played
there followed 10 ... ll:Jg8 ll.h4 fS only seldom, because White has
12 .h5 f4 13.hxg6+ �xg6 14.if2±. found rather convincing ways of
Black's kingside activity has back­ neutralising his opponent's initia­
fired, because his king is vulnera­ tive. He can obtain in this varia­
ble, as well as his h6-pawn. After tion a slight but stable advantage.
castling queenside, White can
combine active actions on the 8.�d2 c5
kingside (g2-g3) with queenside
activity ( c4-c5). It is better for Black to play
9 ... c5 10 .d5 ll:Jc7 ll.g4 ll:Jg8 12. this move immediately, without
h4 eS 13.0-0-0;!; Sapi - Havasi, losing time for the protection of
Hungary 1992 . He has much more his h6-pawn. The rather slow re­
space and in actions on both sides action - 8 . . . �h7 would enable
of the board, has excellent possi­ White to play the actively-pro­
bilities to transfer his pieces to the phylactic move 9.h4 ! , obtaining a
different flanks. It was Napoleon clearly better position . .
who used to say "War - this is (diagram)
communications ! " . Now, Black will have a very

115
Chapter 1 0

and his kingside counterplay is

nowhere in sight, Aleksandrov -
Bastian, Germany 1998.
It may be possible that Black's
best decision here might be 9 . . . cS,
but following 10.E:d1 ! ? '!WaS 11.hS
gS 12.tt:lf3 cxd4 13.tt:lxd4t, there
arises a position which is more
typical for the Maroczy system of
difficult position, without any the Sicilian Defence, except that
chances of creating active coun­ as a result of the pawn-advance
terplay after 9 . . . eS? ! lO .hS gS 11. g6-gS, Black has a weakness on
dS tt:lcS (11 . . . tt:le8 12 .g4 �f6 13.tt:lf3 the fS-square in his position. This
fi..e 7 14.tt:lh2 cS 1S.O-O tt:lc7 16.E:fb1 is, no doubt, in favour of White.
tt:lb8 17.a3 b6 18 .b4 tt:lba6 19.f3 f6
2 0 .tt:lf1 E:t7 21.tt:lg3 �f8 22 .�d1 9.d5
�d7 23.�a4 .ba4 24.tt:lxa4± Po­
lugaevsky - Noerby, Lugano
1968. Black has no counterplay at
all and must only wait for his de­
mise. Later, White combined
threats on the queenside with ex­
ploiting the vulnerability of the
fS-square and scored a full point
after SO moves.) 12.f3 g4 (It does
not look better for Black to adhere
only to a passive defence with the
move 12 . . . aS, because after 13.�d1
tt:lg8 14.�c2 'it>h8 1S.g4 �f6 16. 9 ••• 'it>h7
tt:lge2 �e7 17.tt:lg3 f6 18. 0-0±,
White can deprive completely his Now, Black will have to play
opponent of chances of organis­ this move; otherwise, after 9 . . .
ing any counterplay on the king­ '!WaS, White can make a surprising
side. Later, after a difficult fight, exchange of his central pawn for
he won the game by combining the enemy rook pawn and obtain
the threat of a breakthrough on good attacking prospects. The
the queenside with exploiting the analysis shows that if both sides
weakness of the fS-square, Ra­ play correctly, White's achieve­
etsky - Pletanek, Pardubice 1992.) ments are not so great, but his
13.b4 tt:la6 14.tt:lbS E:g8 1S.tt:lxa7± play is much easier in a practical
After Black has lost his a7-pawn, game. 10 . .bh6 hl6 11.'1Wxh6
his queenside position crumbles tt:lxe4 12 .E:c1 tt:ldf6 (It is bad for

116
 J.d4 lt:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. lt:Jc3 !g7 4.e4 d6 S. ie2 0 - 0 6. ig5 h6 7. i.e3

Black to play here 12 . . . e6?, be­ side (h6, g4-g5). His king has not
cause he eliminates the risk to be castled yet, but will have an excel­
checkmated indeed, but loses a lent safe haven on the fl-square.
pawn and has no compensation White's advantage is doubtless
for it. 13.dxe6 lt:Jdf6 14.exf7+ E:xf7 in this variation, but it may be
15.lt:Jf3 i.fS 16.0-0± Oral - Rasik, even stronger for him to play
Czech Republik 1995.) 13.h4 1Mfb4 the energetic move 14.h5 ! , begin­
(Black loses immediately follow­ ning an immediate offensive
ing 13 . . . lt:Jxc3? 14.bxc3 lt:Je4 15.h5 against Black's king. 14 . . . g5 15.
g5 16.f3 lt:Jxc3 17.1M/xg5+- and af­ E:c2 if5 16. lt:Jh3 lt:Jh7 17.i.d3 lt:Jg3.
ter White's queen comes back to White should not be afraid of this
d2, Black loses surprisingly his tactical strike. 18.lt:Jxg5 lt:Jf6 (18 . . .
knight on c3, Petursson - De­ i.xd3? 19.E:h3 lt:Jxg5 20.E:xg3 f6
mire}, Katerini 1993. His position 21.f4 ixc2 22 .fxg5 <;!{f7 23.gxf6
is not to envied too after 13 . . . i.f5 <;!;>e8 24.fxe7+-). Now, you can
14.h5 g5 15.f3 lt:Jxc3 16.1Mfxg5+ see a series of computer moves :
<;!;>h8 17.E:xc3± White is much bet­ 19.lt:Jge4 ! lt:Jgxe4 20.0-0 ! ! This is
ter not only because he has an ex­ very beautiful. White has sacri­
tra pawn, but also due to the ab­ ficed a piece with his previous
sence of a pawn-shelter in front of move and now, he simply castles.
Black's monarch.) 20 . . . lt:Jg3 21.1Mff4 <;!;>h8 (21...lt:Jxf1
22 .hf5+-) 2 2 .ixf5 lt:Jxf5 23.1Mfxf5
1Mfxc4 24.!'\el± Black has succeed­
ed in avoiding being checkmated
indeed, but this is just small con­
solation for him, because not only
his king is endangered, but he has
no satisfactory defence against
the threat E:xe7.

10.h3
14.if3 lt:Jxc3 (14 . . . i.f5, Horvath
- Hassan, Cairo 1997, 15.lt:Jge2
1Mfxb2 16.h5 ! g5 17. 0-0 g4 18.he4
lt:Jxe4 19.lt:Jxe4 ixe4 2 0 .lt:Jc3±)
15.bxc3 1Mfxc4 16. h5 g5 ! 17.1Mfxg5+
<;!;>h7 18.E:h4 1Mfxa2 19.lt:Je2 E:g8
20.1Mff4;!; It is easier for White to
play the arising position, since he
has a clear-cut plan for further ac­
tions. He will attack the enemy
king with his pawns on the king-

117
Chapter 1 0

White cannot continue the (You can see this idea very often
game without this move. He must in this variation.). 13 . . . lDxb6 14.
prevent the manoeuvre of the en­ Wfc2 e6 15.id2 �b8 16.b3t Black's
emy knight - llJg4-e5. queenside counter attack has
reached its dead end and he is in­
10 b5
••• capable of exploiting White's lag
in development, because the
Besides this pawn-sacrifice queen on aS is terribly misplaced.
Black has tried in practice the Later in the game A. Shirov made
passive move 10 . . . a6, but after a blunder 16 . . . exd5?? and that led
ll.a4 ! WfaS 12.�a2t, White neu­ to the loss of his queen after 17.
tralises completely Black's queen­ lDb1+-
side counterplay (The threats
against the c4-pawn are parried 12.ltlf3 �aS 13.b6 ! ?
easily: 12 . . . Wfb4 13.lDf3 lDb6 14.
Wfd3±).

It is also possible for Black to

opt for 10 . . . Wfa5 ll.lDf3 a6 (It is
understandable that following
ll . . .bS? ! , White can simply cap­
ture the pawn with his knight 12.
lDxbS± and Black will have no
compensation for it whatsoever,
Papadopoulou - Czaeczine, Chal­
kidiki 2003.) 12. 0-0 bS 13.a3 ! ?
This prophylactic i s necessary We are already familiar with
against b5-b4. 13 . . . bxc4 14 ..bc4 this pawn-sacrifice. Just like in
iDeS 15.�ab1 �b8 16.�fclt Bareev the famous variation of the Benko
- Wahls, Germany 1992. Black's Gambit (l.d4 lDf6 2.c4 cS 3.d5 bS
queenside counterplay has been 4.cxb5 a6 5.b6), its idea is to di­
parried. In addition, White plans minish Black's active possibilities
to seize the initiative there with on the queenside. He does not
the move b2-b4. need the pawn on a6 in numerous
variations, because it closes the a­
ll.cxb5 a6 file for his rook as well as the f1-a6
diagonal for his bishop.
The move ll . . . WfaS was tried in
the game Jussupow - Shirov, 13 llJxb6 14.0-0 lDa4 15.
•••

Moscow 1992. Following 12.�c1 J.d3 lL!xc3

a6, Jussupow continued with a The developments are very in­
counter sacrifice of a pawn 13.b6 ! ? teresting after 15 . . . c4 16.lDxa4

118
 l.d4 0.j6 2.c4 g6 3. 0. c3 fig7 4.e4 d6 5. 1i.e2 0 - 0 6. 1i.g5 h6 7. iJ.e3

\Wxa4 (In the endgame, arising af­ Following 19 ...e5 20J3bli, there
ter 16 . . . \Wxd2 17.0.xd2 cxd3 18. arises an endgame of a King's In­
:§:acH, White's prospects are pref­ dian type which is in favour of
erable, because Black's pawn on White since he has more space.
d3 is much rather a liability than 20.e5;!;
strength.) 17.b3 ! cxb3 18.axb3 After this pawn-break, White
\Wd7 19.:§:a4;l; White has much seizes the initiative in the centre.
more space in the middle game There may appear a weakness in
and can play not only against the Black's camp - the pawn on e7,
weak black pawn on a6, but can after the exchange on eS, or the
also try to exploit the weakness of d6-pawn, after the removal of the
the c6-square (0.f3-d4-c6) . knight from f6 and the move
21.if4.
16.bxc3 .id7

B) 7 ... e5

This move seems to me to be This move is chosen by many

more precise than what was adherents to the King's Indian
played in the game Alterman - Defence for whom it is inconceiv­
Shirov, Elista 1998 - 17.c4, after able without the pawn-advance
which the line: 17 . . . \Wxd2 18 . .b:d2 e7-e5. After White's bishop has
.ia4 19J'!ab1 :§:fb8 20.:§:xb8 :§:xb8 abandoned the h4-d8 diagonal,
21.:§:b1 :§:xb1+ 22 .1i.xb1 0.d7= , led Black should not be afraid of los­
to complete exhaustion of the po­ ing a pawn, due to the pin of his
sition and after numerous ex­ knight. The move was the favour­
changes the opponents agreed to ite of S.Gligoric and Y.Balashov.
a draw. In the variations, which we will
analyse, you will see games by
17 ,gab8 18.c4 \Wxd2 19.
•• such outstanding King's Indian
hd2 .ia4 experts like G.Kasparov, B.Gel-

119
Chapter 1 0

fand, I. Smirin and many others. offensive on the queenside, be­

Nowadays, this move can be en­ cause his attack against Black's
countered at grandmaster level king shelter is very powerful, Sis­
too, but it has lost its popularity. niega - Zapata, Havana 1980.
The point is that it is very difficult
for Black to organise active ac­ 8 ... 4:\e8 9.'1&d2 @h7 10.g4 fS
tions on the kingside (as a rule be­ 11.gxf5 gxfS 12.exf5 .ix£5 13.id3.
cause of the White's already men­ The trade of the light-squared
tioned prophylactic move h4-h5 bishops is obviously in favour of
and eventually g2-g4), while his White. 13 . . . \&d7 14.c!bge2 .ixd3
opponent's hands are free for ac­ 15.\&xd3+ 'l&fS 16.4:\e4± Smolen -
tions on the opposite side of the Nagy, Banska Stiavnica 2012.
board. White has complete control over
the e4-outpost. His knight occu­
8.d5 pies a perfect position in the cen­
White closes the centre and tre of the board, while Black's
occupies space. bishop is severely restricted by his
own eS-pawn.

The drawback of the move 8 . . .

aS, preparing the manoeuvre
4:\a6-c5, is that it does not prevent
at all White's plan, connected
with h4-h5 and g2-g4. 9.h4 hS
(9 . . . 4:\a6 10.h5 gS 11.g4 4:\cS 12.f3
4:\e8 13.4:\h3 .if6 14.4:\f2± Sunye
Neto - Toth, Fortaleza 1989.
There has arisen one of the stand­
ard positions in which Black is
8 ••• c!bbd7 doomed to a passive defence.
White's plan is quite simple. He
It seems bad for Black to will prepare active actions on the
choose 8 . . . @h7 9.h4 4:\g8 10 .h5 queenside (b3, a3, b4) and even­
gxhS 1Ul:xh5± and his kingside tually the trade of the light­
has been seriously weakened, Ba­ squared bishops with .ie2-d1-a4.)
reev - Chow, Kitchener 2006. 10.4:\h3 c6 11.4:\gS cxdS 12.cxd5;l;
Kuzmin - Efimenko, Simferopol
He should better avoid 8 ... 4Jh7 2003. White's advantage is doubt­
as well. Following 9.'1&d2 hS 10.h4 less, because his knight on gS im­
4Jd7 11.0-0-0 4:\cS 12.4:\h3 .id7 pedes considerably Black's coun­
13.f3 a6 14.g4� White does not terplay, while on the queenside
even need to prepare his standard White has a clear-cut plan for the

120
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. �g5 h6 7. �e3

improvement of his position with cause here, contrary to the Benko

E:cl and liJbS. You can see the con­ Gambit, his fianchettoed bishop
sequences of the weakening of the is restricted by his own pawn on
bS-square by Black's move 8 . . . a5. eS (following 9 . . . liJe8 10 .\Wd2 'it>h7
11.h4 liJa6 12.0-0-0;!;, Black's piec­
8 . . . liJa6. This move is more es evidently lack space, Alster -
precise than 8 . . . a5. Black's knight Hofman, Bratislava 1959). 10.
is headed for the cS-square and he cxbS a6 ll.bxa6 \Wa5
will decide later whether to play
a7-a5, or not. 9.h4 hS (about 9 . . .
liJcS 10.\Wc2 - see 8 . . . liJbd7 9.h4
liJcS 10 .'1Wc2) 10.f3 c6 (lO . . . liJh7 11.
g4 liJf6 12.liJh3 c6 13.liJf2 i.d7 14.
'!Wd2;!; After this move, preparing
castling queenside, White main­
tains an edge. The consequences
are not so clear if he chooses
14.\Wb3 liJcS 15.\Wa3t, since White's
queen is very passive on the a3- 12.f3 liJxa6 13.\Wd2 E:b8 14.h4
square, Aleksandrov - Smirin, hS 15.g5 liJd7 16.liJh3 E:b4 17.liJf2
Batumi 1999.) 11.\Wd2 cxdS 12. f6 18.gxf6 i.xf6 19.a3! (19.E:c1
cxdS �d7 13.liJh3 liJcS 14.liJf2 E:c8 \Wd8?, Black has succeeded in or­
15.E:c1 \WaS 16.0-0 liJh7 17.liJbS ganising counterplay against the
'!Wxd2 18.i.xd2 i.xbS 19.i.xb5 a6 enemy f4-pawn, Vitiugov - In­
20.i.e2;!; Bykhovsky - Dolmatov, arkiev, Moscow 2007) 19 . . . E:b8
Dortmund 1992. The arising end­ 2 0.E:a2 '!Wd8 21.liJbS E:b6 22.liJa7±
game (just like almost all the end­ White's knight has reached the
games in the King's Indian De­ a7-square and quite purposefully
fence) is in favour of White. He at that. It can go to c6 from there,
has more space, the two-bishop or capture Black's powerful light­
advantage and what is most im­ squared bishop. White's pawn on
portant, after the exchange of the h4 is untouchable. After 22 . . .
queens, Black's possible kingside i.xh4? ! , h e obtains a decisive ad­
counterplay loses its momentum vantage with the line: 23.liJxc8
considerably. i.x£2 + 24.i.xf2 \Wxc8 25.\Wh6 E:f6
26.E:g1 liJf8 27.b4+- White's two
As a rule, his position remains powerful bishops control almost
passive after 8 . . . c5 9.g4, for exam­ the entire board. Black is incapa­
ple: 9 . . . b5. This attempt to create ble of exploiting the placement of
counterplay with the help of a his opponent's king is the centre,
pawn-sacrifice cannot provide while White is not only attacking
Black with good prospects, be- on the kingside, but is threatening

121
Chapter 1 0

to advance his connected passed dangerous for White, because

pawns with b4-bS, a3-a4-aS. Black cannot attack effectively the
f3-pawn.) ll.hS gS. Now, White
It may be interesting for Black can obtain an advantage, choos­
to try the move 8 . . . c6, although it ing between lines suggested by
is insufficient for equality. This is some of the great masters of posi­
a standard position of this type tional play. 12.f3. This move was
(for example in some variations of the favourite of T.Petrosian. (It is
the Saemisch system) and Black's as least as good for White to try
attempts to organise active ac­ 12 .g4, preferred by V.Hort. Later,
tions on the queenside are not so White exploited the fact that his
effective, because White can ex­ opponent had no counterplay and
ploit the weaknesses on his oppo­ organized pressure on the c-file
nent's kingside (h7-h6) with the and transferred his knight to g3 in
move 9.h4 ! ? order to make use of the weaken­
ing of the fS-square. 12 . . . lt::J cS 13.f3
aS 14.a4 lt::J e 8 1S.ic4 �f6 16.lt::J h3
lt::J c7 17. 0-0 id7 18.�e2 l'l:fc8 19.
lt::J f2 .if8 20.:Ei fc1 ie7 2l.'it>g2 lt::J 7a6
22 .b3 idS 23.lt::J h 1 ib6 24.lt::J g3±
Black is doomed to a long and
passive defence, Hort - Vogt, Po­
lanica Zdroj 1977.) 12 . . . a6 13.g4
bS 14.a4 b4 1S.lt::J b 1 aS 16.lt::J d 2 lt::J cS
17.hc5 ! This is a non-standard
The position i s rather passive exchange and as a rule it is bad for
for Black after 9 . . . cxdS 10.cxdS. White due to the weakening of the
His is faced with an unpleasant dark squares. Here however,
choice to either allow h4-hS, or to Black cannot exploit this, because
weaken the gS-square after h6- his minor pieces are very passive.
hS. 10 . . . lt::J bd7 (It is possible that 17 . . . dxcS 18.ibS ib7 19.lt::J e 2 lt::J e 8
the least of evils for Black may be 20 . .he8 l'l:xe8 2l.lt::J c4± T.Petro­
to continue with 10 . . . hS 11.f3 lt::J a 6 sian - Schweber, Stockholm 1962.
12.lt::J h3 �d7 13.lt::J f2 'it>h7 14.g4 The position is closed and White's
�aS 1S.gS lt::J g 8 16.a3;!; A.Petrosian knights have excellent outposts
- Morozevich, Moscow 1992, but on c4 and fS, so they are more
even then White is better, because powerful than Black's bishops.
he can play with the idea to re­ It is possible that his best
strict the enemy knight on a6 with chance is the active move 9 . . . bS. It
(b2-b4), followed by exerting does not equalise either, but
pressure on the c-file. Black's promises Black active prospects.
counterplay on the f-file is not 10.cxbS cxdS (Following 10 . . .

122
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3.li:J c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. :ie2 0 - 0 6. :ig5 h6 7. :ie3

cxbS, the play becomes much The readers may have already
calmer. White still maintains an noticed this is White's basic plan
edge thanks to the vulnerability of in similar positions.
the c6-square in Black's camp. Af­
ter White completes his develop­ 9 .c!L!c5 10.ti'c2
• •

ment he can transfer his knight

there along the route c3-a2-b4-
c6, as for example that happened
in the game Meduna - Barczay,
Trnava 198 2 : ll.a3 h5 12 .liJh3 :ig4
13.liJg5 .b:e2 14.�xe2 a6 15.f3
liJbd7 16.liJa2 ! E:c8 17.liJb4 liJb8
18.0-0;!;;) ll.liJxdS ! This is the only
move with which White can fight
for the advantage (after ll.exdS,
in the game Zaichik - Zaitsev,
Moscow 1988, Black obtained
good compensation after the 10 . . . c6
move ll . . . a6�, due to his oppo­ Black is trying to organise
nent's lag in development.) 11 . . . counterplay on the queenside.
:ib7 ( l l. . . liJxe4 12.h5 ! g S 13.:if3 fS
14.:ixe4 fxe4 15.E:cl± White's Following 10 . . . a5, as a rule it
knight on dS is very powerful, all comes to transposition of
while Black's bishop on g7 is se­ moves. ll.hS gS (It is bad for Black
verely restricted by his own pawns to play ll . . . liJxhS, since after 12.
on h6, gS, eS, d6.) 12.liJxf6+ �xf6 .b:hS gxhS 13.E:xh5 �f6 14.f3 b6
13.:if3 liJd7 (following 13 . . . d5 14. 15.g4±, his position becomes very
exdS e4 15 ..b:e4 �xb2 16.E:b1 difficult in view of the vulnerabil­
�xa2 17.h5 gS 18.liJe2;!;; , there ity of his h6-pawn, Alburt - Pla­
arises a very complicated position chetka, Decin 1977.) 12.f3 c6 13.g4
in which the activity of Black's - see 10 . . . c6 ll.hS gS.
pieces (E:e8, liJd7-f6) is not suffi­
cient to compensate the sacrificed Black cannot equalise with
pawn.) 14.E:cU His compensation 10 . . . liJg4. He obtains the two­
is not good enough. Black's posi­ bishop advantage indeed, but los­
tion is inferior and if White man­ es too much time and has no
ages to play liJe2-c3, establishing chances of creating active coun­
complete control over the dS­ terplay. ll . .b:g4 .b:g4 12 .h5 gS (It
square, Black's position would be­ is too risky for Black to accept the
come nearly hopeless. pawn-sacrifice 12 . . . .b:h5 13.f3 fS
14.0-0-0 f4 15.:ixc5 dxcS 16.
9.h4 liJge2 . His bishop on hS is horri-

123
Chapter 1 0

bly isolated and his attempt to cxdS id7 1S.lLlh3 1Mfb8 16.lLlf2�.
free it with the move 16 . . . 1Mfe8, af­ This is a typical move of a great
ter 17.'it>b1 gS 18.lLlbS 1Mff7, pro­ master. Lev Polugaevsky refrains
vides White with the chance to from the routine transfer of his
follow with a very promising ex­ knight to the gS-square and wish­
change-sacrifice : 19.E!:xhS ! '<MfxhS es to deploy it on the aS-square
2 0 .lLlxc7 E!:ac8 21.lLle6� - his along the route h3-f2-d3-cl-b3-
knight on e6 is not weaker than aS ! 16 . . . bS 17.lLld3 lLlc7 18.0-0
any of Black's rooks and his bish­ 1Mfb7 19.lLlcl! E!:ac8 20.1Mfd2 lLla8 21.
op is restricted considerably by lLlb3 lLlb6 22.lLlaS 1Mfb8 23.E!:fcl±
his own pawns.) 13.f3 id7 14. Black's position is strategically
l2Jge2 ! ? This is a very interesting very difficult in view of the vul­
move. White is not afraid of the nerability of his pawn on bS and
pawn-break f7-fS, because after it the c6-square.
he will obtain the excellent e4-
square for his knight (It is also ll.h5
very good for him to choose the
quite reliable move 14.g4 ! ?�
Shishkin - Frolov, Kiev 1997.).
14 . . .fS 1S.ixcS dxcS 16.exfS ixfS
17.lLle4� Black's two-bishop ad­
vantage is absolutely immaterial,
because his bishop on g7 is com­
pletely passive. White's knights
are dominant on the e4-outpost
and this provides him with supe­
rior prospects.

It may be interesting for Black ll . . . cxd5

to try the move 10 . . . lLlhS, which is He does not determine his
still insufficient for equality. After plans yet, considering his pawn­
ll.ixhS gxhS 12.lLlge2 fS 13.ixcS structure on the kingside.
dxcS 14.0-0-0! ?�, Black's bish­
ops are not so active to compen­ It seems very risky for Black to
sate completely the defects of his opt for ll . . . gS, since at first White
pawn-structure. will neutralise his opponent's
possible kingside counterplay
White maintains a stable ad­ with the moves 12.f3 and 13.g4
vantage after 10 . . . hS. Later, in the and then will occupy the key­
game Polugaevsky - Donner, Am­ squares on the queenside. 12.f3 aS
sterdam 1970, there followed: 11. 13 .g4 id7 14.lLlh3 a4 1S.lLlf2 '<MfaS
f3 c6 12 .b4 lLla6 13.a3 cxdS 14. (Black cannot facilitate his de-

124
 l.d4 4:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. 4:J c3 fi.g7 4.e4 d6 5. fi.e2 0 - 0 6. fi.g5 h6 7. fi.e3

fence by exchanging 1S . . . cxdS 16. 12 ... ti'a5

cxdS. In addition, White has the
possibility to accomplish the ad­ There arise very passive posi­
vantageous trade of the light­ tions for Black following 12 . . . gS
squared bishops with the move 13.f3 aS. His last pawn-move
fibS. 16 . . . !i:c8 17.'<M/d2 4:Je8 18.!i:c1 leads to a serious weakening of
4:Jc7 19.0-0 4:J7a6 20.fi.bS± Ham­ the bS-square. (13 . . . g4 14.b4 0Ja6
pel - Lassen, corr. 1991) 16.'<M/d2 15.a3 fi.d7 16.id3 !i:c8 17.0Jge2;!;
!i:fc8 17.!i:c1 a3 18 .b3 cxdS 19.4:JxdS Yakovich - Chigvintsev, Tomsk
4:JxdS 20.1WxaS !i:xaS 21.exdS 1997. Black's knight on f6 is mis­
4:Jxb3. Black has lost the strategi­ placed and his counterplay on the
cal battle and is forced to enter kingside is nowhere in sight. After
tactical complications in order to the g-file is opened, White is
make life difficult for his oppo­ much more likely to exploit it.)
nent. In the game Lugovoi - Van 14.fi.b5 ! This is the right move.
Wely, Antwerp 199S, White 14 . . . fi.d7 15.fi.xc5 ! We have already
agreed to a draw, but he did not seen a similar exchange in T.Pet­
need to. Following 2 2 .!i:b1! (He rosian's games. 15 . . . dxc5 16.4:Jge2
should not capture the knight '<Mfe8 17.'<M/a4 fi.xbS 18.4:Jxb5 '<M/d7
22.axb3, because after 22 . . . a2?, 19.4:Jg3 !i:fd8 2 0 .4:Jf5 fi.f8 21.4:Jc3
Black has good counterplay '<M/xa4 2 2 .4:Jxa4± White's knight on
thanks to his powerful pawn on fS is very powerful and almost all
a2.) 22 . . . 4:Jd4 (22 . . . 4:JcS 23.fi.xcS Black's pawns are placed on the
!':axeS 24.0Je4± White's edge is same colour of squares as his
doubtless due to the dominating bishop, Bellmann - Gwozdz,
placement of his knight in the ICCF 2000.
centre.) 23.!i:xb7 ia4 24.0Je4± -
The knight on e4 provides White Besides this move, Black has
with a clear advantage. also tried in practice 12 . . . id7
13.hxg6 fxg6 14.b4. It is essential
12.cxd5 for White to oust the enemy
knight to the edge of the board as
quickly as possible. (14.fi.xh6? !
Gobbling material cannot be good
for him at all. After 14 . . . fi.xh6 15.
!i:xh6 c;!?g7iii , Black has sufficient
compensation for the pawn. He
can obtain good play on the h-file,
as well as on the c-file an.d the
dark squares have been weakened
considerably in White's camp af­
ter the trade of the dark-squared

125
Chapter 1 0

bishops.) 14 . . . ltla6 15.a3 h5 16.f3 ard plan, connected with g3 and

f4. 22 ... Wff6 23J�df1 Wg7 24.g3
E:h8 25.f4± - His kingside initia­
tive is very powerful, S.Ivanov -
A.Kuzmin, Balaguer 1997.

13.J.d2 J.d7

It seems too slow for Black to

opt for 13 . . . �b4 14.f3 Wfb6, Legky
- David, Montpellier 1997. He
16 . . . ltlc7 (The move 16 . . . ltlh7 has managed to weaken the g1-a7
enables White to play 17.ltlb5 ! and diagonal indeed, but has lost too
Black must part with his powerful much time on moves with his
light-squared bishop in order not queen. 15.b4 ! ? ltla6 16.ltla4 Wfd4
to lose one of his pawns. 17 . . . hb5 17.:t!c1 ltlxb4 18.�b1 ltld3+ 19.
18.hb5 .tf6 19.ltlh3 .th4+ 2 0 . hd3 Wfxa4 20.hxg6 fxg6 2 1.ltle2
W e 2 ltlc7 21..td3 ltl e 8 22J'!acU Wfd7 (21.. .h5?? 2 2 . .ib5+-) 22 .
Bareev - Gelfand, Biel 1993. .ixh6 .ixh6 23.:t!xh6 �g7 24.:t!h2:;l;
White's king has remained in the Black is practically incapable of
centre indeed, but Black cannot countering the threat of the pen­
exploit this circumstance, while etration of White's major pieces
White has extra space, two pow­ on the c-file. If Black transfers his
erful bishops and the possibility knight to the cS-square, then
to organise active actions on the White will simply double his
c-file. All these are serious posi­ rooks on the h-file and Black's
tional trumps.) 17.Wfd2 ltlh7 (17 . . . king will be seriously endangered.
�e8 18.a4 Wfe7 19.ltlh3 ltlh7 2 0 .
0 - 0 - 0 hh3 2U!xh3± Levin - t4.hxg6 fxg6 ts.gbt
Degraeve, Groningen 1996. White
can exploit his space advantage
preparing active operations on
the queenside. Meanwhile, Black's
prospects on the kingside are
rather questionable.) 18.0-0-0
.if6 19.ltlh3 .ixh3 20J!xh3 .tgS 21.
.ixgS ltlxgS 22.:t!hhl. He has man­
aged to exchange advantageously
the dark-squared bishops, but
this has not facilitated Black's sit­
uation. He is incapable of coun­
tering effectively White's stand- Black's pieces have become ac-

126
 l.d4 l:iJf6 2.c4 g6 3. 1:iJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 h6 7. i.e3

tive and White's imminent task is not exploit the weakening of

to neutralise this activity. White's kingside. Meanwhile, the
vulnerability of the light squares
15 .•. 'i;Yb6 16.i.e3 aS in Black's camp may become a
telling factor in the future. 19.
16 . . . 'i;Yc7, Buhmann - Watzka, gxh3±
Austria 2002, 17.f3 ! ? l:iJh5 18.i.b5 !
It is essential for White to trade 19.f3 .!bh5 20 . .!bf2 .!bg3 21.
the bishops. The seemingly dan­ gfc1 tLlxe2+ 22J!!fx e2 b6 23.
gerous penetration of Black's gc2:t
knight to the g3-square is in
fact harmless. 18 . . . 1:iJg3 (Follow­
ing 18 . . . 1:iJf4 19.hd7 l:iJxd7 20 .g3
l:iJh5 2l.@f2 l."&f7 22 .@g2±, White
will gradually oust his opponent's
active pieces and will maintain his
positional advantage. I would like
to emphasize the following detail.
Here, contrary to the standard
King's Indian positions, Black
does not have an f-pawn (you can
see the consequences of the move
h4-h5 and the trade on g6). This This position was reached in
fact is no doubt in favour of White. the game Mesquita - Benlloch
Black cannot attack in any way Guirau, Email 2009. It is closed,
White's kingside.) 19.2'!h2 .ixb5 so Black's two-bishop advantage
2 0 .1:iJxb5 '&a5+ 21.1:iJc3 '&b4 2 2 . is not important at all. It is essen­
l:iJge2;t White will oust (or ex­ tial whether White will manage to
change) Black's pieces from their develop his initiative on the
active positions and will force him queenside. The game followed
to begin defending. with: 23 h5 24.i.d2 'i;Ya5 25.
•••

'&e3 '&a6 26 .!bcd1 'i;Yb7 27.b4

•

17.1:iJh3 a4 axb3 28.axb3 ga3 29.i.cl

gaa8 30 .!bb2 b5. The game was
•

The character of the fight re­ played on the Internet and natu­
mains more or less the same after rally, the players used computer
17 . . . 2"&ac8 18.'&d2 l."&f7, Bellmann - programs. Still, White continues
Yeremenko, Email 2001, 19.f3;t now with an exchange-sacrifice
which is quite typical for T.Petro­
18.0-0 'i;Yb4 sian's treatment of similar ·p osi­
The exchange 18 . . ..ixh3 is in tions. 31.gxc5! dxc5 32.tLlbd3+±
favour of White, since Black can- After White captures on c5, he

127
Chapter 1 0

will have only a pawn for the ex­ is very popular in the contempo­
change, but his pieces are perfect­ rary tournament practice. It has
ly coordinated and Black's rooks been used by V.Ivanchuk, E.Inar­
are not active, because the posi­ kiev, A.Khalifman, V. Bologan and
tion is closed. In addition, he will some other strong grandmasters.
have problems protecting his The last one, by the way, analysed
weak pawns on b5 and e5. Later in it extensively in his book devoted
the game, White combined his to the King's Indian Defence. If
threats against his opponent's we rely on the database, the move
weak pawns and gradually im­ was played for the first time by
proved his position, so at the end young R.Fischer in his game
Black failed to hold on to his e5- against Y.Averbakh back in the
pawn. 32 ti'c7 33.lbxc5 ti'd6
••• year 1958.
34.ib2 lUeS 35.l1kl mh7 36. Now, contrary to the move 6 . . .
ti'el ic8 37J.Ve2 ti'b6 38J!c2 c5, which will b e dealt with i n our
l:!a7 39.b4 mg8 40.ti'd3 mh7 next chapter, it is not so good for
41.icl if8 42.ti'c3 ti'f6 43. White to close the centre with the
c!bcd3 ig7 44.ib2 ti'a6 45.ti'c6 move 8.d5, because his bishop on
%Yxc6 46.l:!xc6 g5 47.ixe5± Af­ e3 is not so active as on the f4-
ter the fall of Black's central pawn, square, where it usually retreats
the outcome of the game became to in the variation 6 . . . c5 7.d5 h6.
crystal clear. He was completely When Black undermines his op­
incapable of preventing the pro­ ponent's centre with e7-e6,
motion of his opponent's e and d­ White's bishop does not exert
pawns. The game ended quickly pressure against the d6-pawn.
in a victory for White. Therefore, we have chosen as the
main line for White against
C) 7 c5
••• Black's move seven -

8.dxc5

White can hardly obtain an

edge following 8.d5 e6 9.ti'd2
exd5 10.exd5 mh7 11.h3 :ge8. Now,
you can see another drawback of
the placement of his bishop on e3 :
it does not pin the enemy knight
on f6. As a rule, in the majority of
the positions with a space advan­
tage, the side which possesses it
This interesting move is con­ (White in this case . . . ) should
nected with a pawn-sacrifice and avoid exchanging pieces. There-

128
 l.d4 !iJf6 2.c4 g6 3JiJc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. �e2 0 - 0 6. �g5 h6 7. �e3

fore, he should not allow the move try the pawn-sacrifice 8 . . . dxc5,
4Je4. Still, in order to do that, he because after 9.'!Nxd8 E:xd8 10.
must make a second move with ixc5 4Jc6 ll.!iJf3 b6 12 .�a3t, his
one and the same piece, so he can compensation for it is insuffi­
hardly obtain any advantage. cient, Y.Yakovich - Blees, Ostend
12 .�d3 b5 13.4Jxb5 4Je4 14.he4 1993. You should not make a par­
E:xe4 15.E:cl a6 16.4Jc3 E:xc4= allel between this variation and
Ponomariov - Grischuk, Beijing the similar one in the Saemisch
2011. In the arising position, system, because now White has a
Black's prospects are not inferior knight on f3 and not a pawn like
at all, since he has two powerful there. This is evidently in his fa­
bishops, while White can hardly vour, because he has no problems
exploit the vulnerability of Black's with the development of his king­
d6-pawn, or to attack his oppo­ side pieces.
nent's too active rook on c4.
Black's game is much easier in 9.J.d2
this position. Now, White must retreat his
bishop in order to parry the threat
There arise interesting com­ against his e4-pawn.
plications after the move 8.e5.
There is plenty of theory amassed
in this variation and the game en­
ters practically by force an end­
game, in which White has an ex­
tra pawn. Unfortunately, he can­
not claim any advantage, because
Black's pieces remain tremen­
dously active. For example: 8 . . .
dxe5 9.dxe5 '!Nxdl+ 10.E:xd1 4Jg4
ll.hc5 4Jxe5 12.4Jd5 4Jbc6 13.f4
4Jg4 14.h3 4Jf6 15.�f3 �f5 16.g4
�c2 17.E:d2 4Je4 18.he7 4Jxd2 9 .. tbc5
.

19.mxd2 �b1 2 0 .hf8 mxf8ii5 - his After this move, there arises a
two powerful bishops are excel­ pawn-structure analogous to the
lent compensation for the mini­ Maroczy system of the Sicilian
mal material deficit, Maslak - In­ Defence.
arkiev, Moscow 2008.
The pawn-structure remains
s . . :eras symmetrical after 9 . . . dxc5, but
This is Black's only move. then White can occupy. additional
It is obviously bad for him to space with the move 10 .e5.

129
Chapter 1 0

on g7 are very passive. Therefore,

he can hardly neutralise White's
queenside activity, since he has in
fact two minor pieces less on this
side of the board.) 13.0-0 E!:ad8,
Sagalchik - Kovalev, USSR 1987.
Now, it deserves attention for
White to try 14.tt:lh4 ! ?

Now, Black must choose where

to retreat his knight.
Following 10 . . . tt:le8 ll.f4 tt:lc6
12.tt:lf3 i.fS, Tarjan - Szabo, Mari­
bor 1978, White's best response
would be 13.tt:lh4, for example:
13 ... i.e6 14.tt:la4 1!f!c7 1S.tt:lxc5;!; -
naturally, he is a bit back in devel­
opment and his knight on h4 does
not beautify his position, but he 1 4 . . . i.c8 1S.tt:ld5 'IM/a6 16.i.c3 e6
still has an extra pawn and his 17.1!f!c2;!;. Naturally, Black cannot
prospects are preferable. win a piece here, because in the
One of the defects of the other variation 17 . . . exd5 18.cxd5, both
retreat of Black's knight - 10 . . . his queen and knight will be hang­
tt:lfd7 i s the fact that it impedes ing. Therefore, White's advantage
there the development of his bish­ is doubtless, since all his minor
op on c8. Later, in the game Alter­ pieces are much more active.
man - Reinderman, Leeuwarden Black cannot equalise with
1994, there followed: ll.f4 tt:lc6 14 . . . E!:d7, because his initiative is
12.tt:lf3 f6 13.tt:lh4 �h7 14.e6 tt:ldb8 only temporary. Neither his bish­
1S.f5± White's kingside initiative op on g7, nor his knight on h7 can
is quite real and this is very dan­ support it. White can simply trade
gerous for Black, because his his opponent's active pieces main­
queenside pieces have not been taining his advantage. 1S.tt:lxf5
developed yet. gxfS 16.1!f!e1 tt:ld4 17.i.d1 1!f!d8 18.
10 . . . tt:lh7 ll.f4 tt:lc6 12.tt:lf3 i.fS E!:f2 e6 19.i.a4 E!:e7 20.E!:d1 f6 21.
(12 . . . 1!f!d8 13.0-0 tt:ld4 14.i.e3 tt:lbS fxeS 22 .fxe5 tt:lxbS 23.i.xb5
tt:lxe2+ 15.1!f!xe2 i.fS 16.E!:fd1 1!f!c8 1!ffb 8 24.i.f4;!; - Now, Black's
17.a3 b6 18.b4;!; Rashkovsky - knight can take part in the actions
Temirbaev, Kujbyshev 1986. (via the gS-square) indeed, but
Black's two-bishop advantage is White's advantage is doubtless.
absolutely immaterial, because He is completely dominant on the
his knight on h7 and the bishop d-file and has an excellent outpost

130
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJc3 �g7 4.e4 d6 5. .ie2 0 - 0 6 . .ig5 h6 7. .ie3

on d6 for his rook. It is also worth 11. ..liJd4 12.liJxd4 1!9xd4 13.1!9c2
mentioning what is very typical �e6 14. 0-0 1Mic5 15 . .ie3 1Mia5 16.
for almost all positions in the var­ !!acl� Uhlmann - Gligoric, Am­
iation with 9 . . . dxc5. White's sterdam 1971. White has succeed­
pawns are very well placed on eS ed in neutralising the temporary
and f4. They control almost all the activity of his opponent's pieces
squares for Black's bishop on g7 and thanks to his advantageous
and the knight on h7. position in the centre (pawns on
c4 and e4 against a pawn on d6)
lO.c!LJf3 maintains some edge. Black's po­
sition is solid enough but very
passive.

11.0-0

10 . . . .ig4
This is an active move. Black is
not reluctant to trade his bishop
for the enemy knight, since this
will increase his pressure on the ll . . h£3
.

dark squares. If Black plans to trade his

bishop for the enemy knight, he
Black did not play well in the should better do that immediate­
game Tukmakov - Visser, Gron­ ly.
ingen 199 0 : 10 . . . �e6 ll . .ie3 1Mla5
12.liJd2 c!LJc6 13.0-0 !!fc8 14.f4 Following ll . . . liJc6, White can
liJh7 15.liJb3 1!9d8 16.f5 �d7 17.c5± offer his relatively passive bishop
White has seized the initiative on on e2 to be exchanged instead of
both sides of the board. the knight on f3 . 12 . .ie3 1!9a5 13.
liJd2 .be2 14.1!9xe2 !!fc8 15.!!fc1
White should better counter (diagram)
10 . . . liJc6 with the prophylactic There arises a similar position
move ll.h3, preventing the devel­ (with a pawn-structur� like in the
opment of Black's bishop to the Maroczy system, except that with­
g4-square. There might follow out light squared bishops) in the

131
Chapter 1 0

12.hf3 c!bc6 13.ie2

following variation of the Sicilian

Defence l.e4 cS V Zlf3 d6 3.ibS
id7 4.ixd7 'Wxd7 S.c4. S. Rublev­
sky is considered to be a master of
playing these positions and quite 13 .. .'tire5
deservedly so. I recommend to
the readers to study thoroughly The move 13 . . . 'WaS has been
his games in this variation. tested in the game Petursson -
1S . . . 'WhS 16.f3 lL\d7 17.E:ab1 aS Markzon, Linares 1994. Here,
18.lL\a4 ieS 19.lLlf1 gS 20.E:d1 'Wg6 White's best reaction would be
21.lLlg3 e6. Now, the best for 14.lL\dS, after which there arise
White is to play 2 2 .tZlc3;!;, main­ advantageous complications for
taining a slight edge, since he has him. 14 . . . 'WcS (14 . . . 'Wd8 1S.lL\xf6+
more space and good prospects to ixf6 16.ixh6 ixb2 17.E:b1 ig7
attack the weak enemy d6-pawn. 18 . .hg7 c;t>xg7 19.E:xb7;!; - The vul­
Black has been very active on the nerability of White's pawns on a2
kingside, but has created pawn­ and c4 and Black counterplay on
weaknesses there and this may the dark squares are not sufficient
backfire. (It is obviously prema­ to compensate White's extra pawn.)
ture for White to opt for 22 .cS, be­ 1S.E:e1 lL\xe4 16.ie3 'WaS 17.if3
cause after 22 . . . dS, he is not well lLlcS (17 . . .fS 18.ixe4 fxe4 19.'Wg4;!;
prepared for opening of the game - He regains his pawn and pre­
in the centre and Black equalises, served an edge thanks to his supe­
Horvath - Vishnu, Presolana 2011). rior pawn-structure. In addition,
1S . . . lLld7 16.E:ab1 c;t>h7 17.f4 Black's king shelter is somewhat
lLlcS 18.c;t>h1 lLla4 19.lLld1 lLlb6 20. weakened.) 18.b4 lL\xb4 19 . .id2 .
a3 lL\d7 21.lLlc3 a6 22 .tZlb3 'Wd8 He has temporarily two extra
23.E:c2;!;. White has neutralised pawns, but getting rid of the pin
the activity of his opponent's piec­ of the knight for him is not easy at
es and due to his extra space his all. 19 . . . lLlcd3 20.E:xe7 'WcS (It is
prospects in the middle game bad for Black to play 20 . . . .ha1,
seem preferable, Milov - Shche­ because after 21.'Wxa1 'Wxa2 2 2 .
kachev, Amsterdam 2000. lL\f6+ c;t>hS 23.'Wxa2 c!bxa2 24.

132
 J.d4 &iJf6 2.c4 g6 3 . liJ c3 il.g7 4.e4 d6 5. 1le2 0 - 0 6. il.g5 h6 7. il.e3

.bh6±, White regains the ex­

change and maintains a great ad­
vantage thanks to the powerful
placement of his rook on the pe­
nultimate rank.) 21.il.e3 �xc4 2 2 .
Eic7 �h4 23.Eib1 &iJxdS 24.hd5
&iJcS 25.g3 �f6 26.Eib4;!;. Black has
two extra pawn indeed, but
White's position is preferable, be­
cause his rooks and bishops are
very active. He can exchange on
cS at any moment and follow that This position was reached in
with Eibb7, so Black will be inca­ the game Yakovich - Inarkiev,
pable of protecting his pawn on f7 Novokuznetsk 2008.
and White will restore the mate­ V.Bologan evaluated it in his
rial balance. book as quite acceptable for
Black.
14.£3 g5? ! This evaluations seems to me
I d o not like this move since it to be too optimistic. White has
compromises completely the light good chances of obtaining an ad­
squares in Black's camp. vantage.
The game followed with 20.g3
It is possible that his best line ggs 21.ti'g2 gaf8 22.ti'h3 f5 23.
may be: 14 . . . �c5+ 1S.'it>h1 Eifc8 16. ext'S ti'xf5 24.ti'xf5 gxf5 25 •

Eic1 &iJd7 17.f4 a6 18.a3 �d4 19. .ic2 gas 26 .ie4 lt!c5 27 .ib1
• •

Eif3;!;, although even then Black's gf8 28.b3 lt!d7. Here, the sim­
counterplay is not dangerous for plest solution for White would be
White. He will gradually oust the the move 29.lt!d5± and the hor­
enemy queen from its active posi­ rible misplacement of Black's
tion in the centre and will force rook on the aS-square makes his
Black to defend passively. position very difficult. We have
seen in this game that Black's
15 . .ie3 lt!h5 16.ti'd2 lt!f4 17. counterplay, begun with the move
.idl lt!e6 18.Eicl 'it>h8 19.'it>h1 14 . . . g5, has not led to anything
ti'a5 good for him.

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of the variation with 6 . . . h6 7.
il.e3. Black has three main possibilities and after each one of them · there
arise very original positions. Still, White maintains an advantage in all
the variations.

133
Chapter 1 0

After the plan of Z.Lanka and A.Shirov - 7. . . lL!bd7, 8 . . . c5, followed

by the pawn-sacrifice b7-b5, White should better not go after material
gains, but following cxbS a6, he should give back the extra pawn with
the move b5-b6. After this, Black can hardly create any dangerous ini­
tiative on the queenside and White will maintain a slight but stable
edge thanks to his space advantage.
Following 7 . . . e5 8.d5, White's main idea is to advance h2-h4. After
that, if Black plays h6-h5, then White transfers his knight to gS and
begins active actions on the queenside. If Black does not react to the
move h2-h4, then White plays h4-h5 himself, forcing g6-g5 and then
neutralises completely Black's counterplay on the kingside with the
moves g2-g4 and f2-f3. There arises a very unpleasant situation for
Black in which he has no counterplay at all. White can exploit his space
advantage and regroup his forces, beginning an offensive on the queen­
side: a3, b4 and eventually id3-c2-a4, forcing the favourable exchange
of the light-squared bishops. Black is faced with a long and passive de­
fence.
After 7 . . . c5, there arise, as a rule, positions in the spirit of the Ma­
roczy system of the Sicilian Defence. White's game is quite free and he
has all the chances of obtaining an advantage in the middle game. The
only thing he needs is to watch carefully and to play accurately, during
the transition from the opening into the middle game, in order to neu­
tralise the activity of Black's pieces.

134
Chapter 11 l.d4 ti)f6 2.c4 g6 3.ti)c3 ig7 4.e4 d6
5.J.e2 0-0 6.ig5 c5

positions typical for the Benoni

Defence, but with his e-pawn.
There arise positions in which
Black has no counterplay at all.
Subsequently, he began to rely on
the move 7 . . . h6, ousting in ad­
vance the enemy bishop from its
active position. We will have a
look at all this one by one.

7.d5
This is one of the oldest moves
for Black and it was played even
during the first half of the 20th
century. What can be more logical
than this move? If Black cannot
play e7-e5, then it looks like he
should inflict a strike against
White's centre on the other side of
the board. This line was played by
G.Kasparov. Nowadays, V.Topa­
lov, A.Grischuk, T.Radjabov and
many others try it in the tourna­
ment practice. After this natural move, Black
At first, Black based his hopes has a choice between numerous
on undermining his opponent's possibilities. At first, we will ana­
pawn-centre with the move e7-e6 lyse the not so popular move A)
(after d4-d5). Later however, it 7. . . a6. Later, we will deal . with
became clear that after the ex­ the pawn-sacrifice in the spirit of
change on d5, White did not cap­ the Benko Gambit B) 7 ... b5 and
ture with his c-pawn, leading to at the end we will analyse Black's

135
Chapter 11

most popular responses : C) 7 •••

h 6 and D ) 7 e6.
•••

About 7 ... 4Ja6 8.f4 - see 6 . . .

4Ja6, Chapter 1 0 .

I t seems rather passive for

Black to choose 7 . . . E!e8. In the
game Uhlmann - Kolnsberg, Bad
Wildbad 1997, there followed: 8. hS. 9.g4 4Je8 10 .h4 fS ll.hS±
4Jf3 ig4 9.0-0 4Jbd7 10 .1!Md2 a6 Black's king is vulnerable, Zai­
ll.a4 E!b8 12 .h3 .b£3 13.h:f3 ltJeS chko - Chuprov, Ufa 1999.
14.ie2 1!Mc7 15.E!aeU White has 8 ... e6 9.4Jf3 exdS 10.exd5 ig4
two powerful bishops and a space (10 . . . E!e8 11.0-0 - see 8 . . . E!e8)
advantage. In addition, his plan 11.0-0;!; - There arises a typical
for further actions is quite clear. position with a space advantage
He will advance f2-f4, followed by for White. For example in the var­
a preparation of a breakthrough iation 7 . . . a6, we analyse a similar
in the centre with e4-e5. situation, but with the inclusion
of the moves a7-a6 and a2-a4.
After 7 . . . 1!Mb6 8.1!Md2 e6 9.4Jf3 8 . . . E!e8 9.4Jf3 e6 10.0-0 exdS
exdS, White can simplify the posi­ ll.exdS
tion advantageously with the line:
10 .h:f6 ! ? h:f6 ll.ltJxdS 1!Md8 12.
4Jxf6+ 1!Mxf6 13.0-0-0 E!d8, Ka­
lashian - Voitsekhovsky, Moscow
2008, 14.e5;!; and as a result of the
pin on the d-file, Black is incapa­
ble of saving his d6-pawn.

Everybody, who plays the

Averbakh system, should remem­
ber that after 7 . . . 1!Ma5, White has We will encounter similar po­
an only good move - 8.id2 ! (fol­ sitions with a space advantage for
lowing the natural move 8.1!Md2 , White numerous more times in
Black obtains good counterplay this chapter.
with 8 . . . a6 9.a4 bS?). Retreating the queen to its ini­
(diagram) tial position does not look good
After 8 . . . e5, White can contin­ for Black at all - 11 . . . 1!Md8 after
ue with the already familiar king­ 12 .h3 4Ja6 13.id3 4Jc7, S.Atalik -
side offensive, obtaining an excel­ Velimirovic, Vrnjacka Banja 1992,
lent position: g2-g4 and h2-h4- 14.1!Mb3 b6 15.E!fe1 E!xe1+ 16.E!xe1

136
 l.d4 l:iJf6 2.c4 g6 3. 1:iJ c3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. 1lg5 c5 7.d5

'<Wd7 17.i.f4;t, his pieces have no this position. He will occupy space
space for manoeuvring. by a pawn-offensive. Black's piec­
It is possible for him to opt for es will be even more cramped.
1l.. .'<Wb6 12 .h3 a6 (It is weaker for 25 . . . '1Je8 26.id3 '1Jc7 27.'1Je4 id4
Black to try here 12 . . . '1Ja6 13.id3 28.'1Jg3 '1Je8 29.a4 i.b2 30 .h4±
id7, Sasikiran - Pavlovic, Cap­ White is preparing h4-h5, in or­
pelle Ia Grande 2006, 14.a3± and der to create a weak pawn for his
his knight on a6 is misplaced.) opponent on h7. Later, he realised
13 . .id3 '1Jbd7 14.'<Wc2 l:iJeS. Black convincingly his positional ad­
lacks space and the exchange of vantage.
pieces is in his favour (it would be
too passive for him to choose 14 . . . After 7 . . . '1Jbd7 8.Wd2 , there
'1Jf8?! 15.a4±, his knight o n f8 is arise positions similar to varia­
obviously not so mobile as White's tion A in our previous chapter,
knight on f3, Forintos - Velimi­ except that Black has ousted the
rovic, Bath 1973). 15.'1Jxe5 E:xeS enemy bishop from the gS-square
16.i.f4 E:e8 17.E:ae1;!; The trade of with the move h6.
the knights has facilitated a bit
Black's defence indeed, but he is
still too far from equality. He
lacks space and the vulnerability
of his d6-pawn may become a tell­
ing factor in the future.
The move 11.. .i.g4 was tested
in the game Petursson - Veli­
mirovic, Novi Sad 1990 and M.
Petursson demonstrated an ex­
emplary play for White in similar This circumstance is in favour
positions. 12 .h3 hf3 13.hf3 of White, because his bishop is
'1Jbd7 14.'<Wc2 a6 15.E:ae1 E:xe1 more active on gS than on the e3-
(1S . . . b5? 16.'1Jxb5) 16.E:xe1 E:e8 square.
17.E:xe8+ '1Jxe8. There will soon Now, Black cannot transpose
arise the classical endgame for to the variations with h6, because
the Averbakh system in which after 8 . . . '<Wa5 9.'1Jf3 h6, White will
White will have extra space and follow with 10 .hh6 hh6 11.
the two-bishop advantage. Black '<Wxh6 '1Jxe4, Gelfand - Schlosser,
is faced with a difficult defence Adelaide 1988 and here, he can
without any good prospects. 18.b3 obtain a great advantage with the
Wd8 19.id1 We7 2 0.'<We4 'kt>f8 21. energetic line: 12.0-0! '1Jxc3 13.
'<Wxe7+ 'kt>xe7 2 2 .g4 '1Jef6 23.'kt>g2 i.d3 ! '1Je2+ (Black should better
'1Jg8 24.ic2 '1Jgf6 25.f4;t White is part with his extra piece immedi­
following the standard plan in ately, because his attempt to keep

137
Chapter 11

it would lead to him being check­ Seefeld 2007.) 11.�b5 ia6 12.
mated after 13 . . . tt:la4? 14.tt:lg5 tt:lf6 �a6 E!:xa6 13.0-0 \Wb6, Kustar -
15.�g6 fxg6 16.\Wxg6+ �h8 17. Nevednichy, Miercurea Ciuc
E!:fe1 \Wd8 18.E!:e4+-) 14.�e2± As 1999, 14.h3 ! ? This move is not
a rule, the exchange of Black's only a leeway for the king, but
rook-pawn for the enemy central also prophylactic against tt:lf6-g4-
pawn should be advantageous for e5. 14 . . . E!:b8 15.E!:ab1 E!:aa8 16.
him, but here, we have an excep­ E!:feU, followed by e4-e5 and
tional case. The castling position Black's compensation for the sac­
of Black's king has been seriously rificed pawn is insufficient.
weakened due to the absence of
his h7-pawn. Meanwhile, White's
rooks are perfectly prepared to A) 7 a6•..

exert powerful pressure against This move prepares counter­

the e7-pawn on the semi-open e­ play on the queenside with b7-b5
file. and as a rule transposes to varia­
It seems rather passive for tion D, since Black will have to
Black to opt for 8 . . . a6 9.tt:lf3 E!:b8 play e7-e6 sooner or later and ex­
10.a4, so now, he cannot push b7- change on dS. Now, we will ana­
b5 and is forced to adhere to a lyse only variations which lead to
waiting tactics, for example: 10 . . . original positions.
b 6 ( 1 0 . . . E!:e8 11.0-0 e 6 12.E!:fe1 8.a4
exdS 13.exd5 b6 14.id3;!; and
Black's pieces evidently lack
space, Dimitrov - Janev, Plovdiv
2009.) 11.0-0 ib7 12.E!:ad1 E!:e8
13.h3 Vflc7 14.E!:feU and once again
his pieces are cramped, Golovanj
- V. Onischuk, Alushta 2007.
8 . . . b5 9.cxb5 a6. There has
arisen a favourable version for
White of the Benko Gambit. 10.
tt:lf3 axbS (Following lO . . . VflaS 11.
0-0 axbS 12 .�b5 ia6 13.�a6
E!:xa6 14.h3 E!:b8 15.E!:ab1 tt:lb6 16. This move is played automati­
E!:fcl tt:la4 17.e5 ! dxeS 18.tt:lxe5±, cally in the Averbakh system. It
White has not only parried Black's deprives Black of his standard
pressure on the queenside, but queenside counterplay.
has accomplished the thematic 8 .'efa5
••

pawn-advance e4-e5, after which

he can exert pressure against the It is interesting, but still insuf­
enemy e7-pawn, Heinig - Pregl, ficient for equality for Black to try

138
 l.d4 li:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3. li:Jc3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 S. i.e2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 c5 7.d5

the line: 8 . . . h6 9.i.e3 e6 10.liJf3 tion D.). 10.E:a3. This is impor­

exdS. Here, we have an exception. tant prophylactic. Now, White's
Contrary to the majority of the rook is protected and Black can­
positions arising in the Averbakh not advance b7-bS, since White
system, now White must capture will capture with his a-pawn. 10 . . .
with his c-pawn, if he wishes to exdS ll.exdS E:e8 12.liJf3 i.g4 13.
fight for the advantage. The point 0-0 liJbd7 14.E:b3 �c7 1S.h3 .bf3
is that Black has already ousted 16.i.xf3 E:e7 17.E:a3 �as 18.E:b3
his opponent's bishop from its ac­ �c7 19.aS E:ae8 20.E:a3i Movszi­
tive position on gS and if White szian - Sieg, Germany 1992 . The
captures with his e-pawn, Black doubling of Black's rooks on the
can simplify advantageously the e-file is not a cause of worries for
position with the moves E:e8 and White, because Black has no
liJe4. ll.cxdS i.g4 12 .liJd2 .be2 square for penetration. Mean­
13.�xe2 E:e8 14.0-0 liJbd7. There while, White's space advantage is
has arisen a favourable position an important factor in this posi­
for White of the Modern Benoni tion. Black's active moves will
in which Black will have great soon end and he will be forced to
problems to organise counter­ defend passively.
play. 1S.h3 liJhS 16.aS E:b8 17.E:a4
liJeS 18.�h2 �e7 19.g3 liJd7 20. 9.J.d2
�g2 �h7 21.�d1 �g8 22 .�c2
E:bc8 23.E:e1 �h7 24.f4 �d8 2S.
liJf3± White has protected reliably
his e4-pawn and has cramped his
opponent's position on both sides
of the board, Topalov - Radjabov,
Bilbao 2008.

As a rule, the combination of

the moves cS and eS is not so good
for Black, because he ends up in a
very passive position. Here again,
after 8 . . . eS 9.g4!i, he can create 9 . e6
..

counterplay neither on the queen­

side, nor on the kingside. The drawbacks of the move 9 . . .
eS? ! have been illustrated i n an
8 ... e6 9.�d2 �aS (Following exemplary fashion by the author
9 . . . exdS lO.exdS E:e8 11.liJf3 ig4 of the system back in the fiftjes of
12.0-0 liJbd7 13.h3 hf3 14 . .bf3, the past century - 10.g4 liJe8
there arise positions from varia- 11.h4 fS 12 .hS f4 13.gS

139
Chapter 11

on the h-file and accomplish the

decisive break in Black's camp.
Later, there followed: 1S . . . !iJd7
19.hxg6 hxg6 20.'�h1 .ie7 21.
1!hS+ 'tt>f7 2 2 .�h6 !iJfS 23.1!h1
1!bS. Here, White made a decisive
bishop-sacrifice - 24 . .ixf4 ! Black
cannot capture it in view of 24 . . .
exf4 25.1!h4, s o the game soon
This is an important move. ended in a victory for White.
White is preparing the advanta­
geous exchange in the King's In­ lO.tlJf3 exd5 ll.exd5
dian Defence of the light-squared This is the right move ! Natu­
bishops after which the light rally, White does not capture with
squares in Black's camp will be his c-pawn, because in that case
like an open wound. Black would organise counterplay
From the point of view of the against the enemy e4-pawn.
understanding of the similar posi­
tions, the game Averbakh -
Spassky, Leningrad 1956 is very
instructive. In it Black played 13 . . .
�dS . After the moves 1 4 . .ig4 !iJc7
15 . .ixcS �xeS 16.!iJf3±, White's
positional pluses (a space advan­
tage, possibilities for actions on
the h-file and the vulnerability of
the light squares in Black's camp)
are so great that the future World
Champion B.Spassky sacrificed
surprisingly a knight in order to ll • . . ig4
change radically the character of Following 11...�c7, White dem­
the fight - 16 . . . !iJc6 ! . Naturally, onstrated a perfect example of "suf­
this piece-sacrifice was absolutely focating" Black's position in the
incorrect, but its psychological ef­ game Stewart - Caamano, Email
fect was so great that later he even 2007. 12.0-0 !iJbd7 13.h3 !iJeS 14.
managed to draw the game. �cl !iJe5 15 . .ih6 .if5 16 . .ixg7 'tt>xg7
13 . . J�f7 14 ..ig4 �dS 15 . .ixcS 17.1!e1 f6 1S.b3 'tt>g S 19.!iJd2 !iJg7
�xeS 16.!iJf3 .ifS 17/.t>e2 1!g7 1S. 20.f4 !iJd3 2l..ixd3 .ixd3 22.g4±
1!h4± Averbakh - Panno, Buenos After this important prophylactic
Aires 1954. Black's position is move, Black's knight cannot go to
strategically hopeless. White only d4 via the f5-square. His position
needs to treble his major pieces is already beyond salvation, since

140
 l.d4 lDf6 2.c4 g6 3. lDc3 ig7 4.e4 d6 5. .ie2 0 - 0 6. ig5 c5 7.d5

his bishop cannot be saved and 1S ••• l"iJe8

will perish on the d3-square.
There followed 22 .. J�ae8 23.l"iJf3 15 . . . !!fe8 16.!!ael. In general,
fS 24J�xe8 !!xeS 25.�d2 ie4 26. White does not mind the trade of
lOgS hS 27.!!e1+- and White soon the rooks in this pawn-structure.
won the game, since Black loses a He wishes to enter an endgame in
pawn after the exchange on e4. which his two-bishop advantage
would be a nearly decisive factor.
12.0-0 'f!tlc7 16 . . . !!xe1 (Following 16 . . . l"iJe5, GM
About 12 . . . l"iJbd7 13.h3 ixf3 14. L.Portisch demonstrated an ex­
i.x£3 �c7 15.�c2 - see 12 . . . �c7. cellent play for White. He simply
13.h3 exchanged all the rooks, in order
This move is also quite typical to deprive his opponent of any
for the Averbakh system. White is counterplay, and began a pawn­
not afraid of the exchange on f3, offensive on the kingside. 17 . .ie2
because Black facilitates his de­ !!e7 18.f4 l"iJed7 19 ..if3 !!ae8 20.
fence a bit for a while (He has less !!xe7 !!xe7 21.!!e1 !!xe1+ 22 .ixe1
space and the exchanges should �b6 23.id2 lOeB 24.g4 h6 2S.'j,Jg2
be favourable for him.), but as a id4 26.b3 �d8 27.l"iJe2;!; Portisch
result White obtains a couple of - Skembris, Tilburg 1994.) 17.
bishops which will be obviously !!xe1 !!e8 18.!!xe8+ . White is again
stronger than Black's knights ready to trade the rooks. 18 . . .
which have no stable squares in l"iJxe8 19.ie2 �d8 20 .g3 id4 2 1 .
the oncoming fight. Naturally, the �g2 l"iJg7 2 2 .l"iJe4 �e7 23 .ic1 l"iJf6
eS-square cannot be a reliable 24.l"iJxf6+. The knights can also be
outpost for Black's knight, since exchanged. Now, White can dem­
White can oust it at any moment onstrate a "pure" case of a two­
with the move f2-f4. bishop advantage. 24 . . .�xf6 25.
id3 �e7 26.�e2 �d7 27. b3 lOeB
13 ... hf3 14.hf3 l"iJbd7 28.id2;!; Averbakh - Boleslavsky,
15.'f!tlc2 Gagra 1953. Later, he managed to
realise his positional pluses - ex­
tra space and the two-bishop
advantage. We must also mention
that not only Y.Averbakh was
an excellent theoretician, but he
was the author of a multi-vol­
ume work about the endgames.
This should be an instructive
example for the contemporary
young players who devote most of
their time only on studying open-

141
Chapter 11

ing theory, completely ignoring the After this move, there arise po­
other stages of the game of chess. sitions which are more typical for
the Benko Gambit. Its version is
16.gael .ie5 much more favourable for White,
The character of the fight re­ because he has already advanced
mains more or less the same after e2-e4, having avoided the trade of
16 . . . ltJeS, because Black's knight his light-squared bishops, which
fails to remain on this square any­ usually happens in the Benko
way. 17.ie2 fS 18.f4;!; Horvath - Gambit. The only minimal defect
Rohl Montes, Budapest 1996. of his position is the placement of
his bishop on gS. After the ap­
pearance of Black's queen on aS,
White will have to lose a tempo to
retreat his bishop to the d2-
square.
8.cxb5 a6 9.a4!
This i s White's best move in
this position. Now, after the ex­
change on bS, White can capture
axbS and Black will not have the
typical possibility in the Benko
Gambit for actions on the a and b­
17.ie2 c!Dg7 18.g4 f5 19.f4 fi.les .
.id4+ 20.'i!?g2 c!Df6 21.if3 gae8
22.g5 c!Dtb5 23.ti'b3;!; Black's 9 ... ti'a5
pieces are horribly cramped and This is Black's basic response.
the only exception is his knight on
hS ! , Kaidanov - Fang, Philadel­ It would be premature for him
phia 1998. to opt for 9 . . . axb5, since following
10.axb5 ! , there arises a position
B) 7... b5 which is quite favourable for
White. 10 . . J�xa1 11.�xa1 ltJbd7 12.
ltJf3 ib7 (Or 12 ... ltJe8 13.0-0 ltJb6
14.�a5 ltJf6 1S.ltJd2± and he not
only has an extra pawn, but his
position is more active, Beliavsky
- Petrovic, Nova Gorica 2000. It
would be also good for White to
choose 14.�a7! ?± and Black has
no compensation for the pawn.)
13.0-0 �c7 14.c!Dd2 �a8 15.�dU
Black has established control over

142
 l.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 g6 3.tiJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. :Ji.g5 c5 7.d5

the a-file indeed, but this is small

consolation for him, because he
has no square for penetration on
it. Still, despite the absence of a
pawn, he could have still offered
tough resistance. In the game
Palatnik - Gast, Boston 2001,
Black played too actively: 15 . . .
e6? ! and after 16.dxe6 fxe6 17.
i.f4!±, this led to a very difficult
position for him, since besides the
lack of a pawn, he had a weakness If Black continues simply to
on d6. develop his pieces, then he risks
to end quickly in a very bad posi­
After 9 ... h6, the simplest reac­ tion, as it happened, for example,
tion for White would be 10 .i.f4 ! ?;!; in the game Kasparov - Spassky,
(He does not need to study the Tilburg 1981: 10 . . . tiJbd7 ll.E:a3
numerous variations, arising after i.b7 12.tiJf3 axbS 13.hb5 Wc7 14.
10 .i.d2 e6, if he can avoid that.). 0-0± White has completed his
Now, following 10 . . .'�a5 ll.i.d2 ! , development and Black has no
as well a s after 1 0 . . . g5 ll.i.e3 WaS compensation for the pawn at all.
(It is bad for Black to choose 11 . . .
e 6 12.dxe6 he6 13.e5±) 12 .i.d2;!;, There arises a much more in­
there arise positions, which we teresting position following 10 . . .
will analyse later, with the excep­ axbS ll.hbS.
tion that Black has already played
either h6, or h6 and gS. This cir­
cumstance is much rather in fa­
vour of White, because later, the
weakening of Black's king shelter
might become a telling factor.

10 .td2
.

The loss of a tempo for the re­

treat of the bishop does not wors­
en White's position at all. White should not be afraid of
(diagram) ll . . . Wb4, because of 12.f3 tiJfd7
10 . . • Wb4 13.W/cU and he has protected reli­
This is Black's main reply. He ably his pawns on e2 and b2 and
is trying to organise active actions after the completion of his devel­
(his queen exerts pressure against opment (tiJge2, 0-0), he can be­
the enemy e4-pawn). gin the realisation of his material

143
Chapter 11

advantage, Gonzales - E.Ragozin, E:b8. Here, White's simplest reac­

Philadelphia 1993. tion would be - 19.hf'6 ! , because
The move ll ... .ta6 is more in­ Black cannot capture on f6 with
teresting, since it is more typical his bishop due to the loss of the
for the positions in the Benko pawn on h6 (it is also possible for
Gambit. 12.E!:a3 tt:lbd7 (12 . . . c4 13. White to play here 19.h3;!; Jus­
tt:lf3 tt:lfd7 14.0-0 tt:lc5 15.�e2 tt:ld3 supow - Vogt, Altensteig 1993).
16.E:bl± Black has no compensa­ 19 ... exf6 2 0.h3;!;. He has an extra
tion for the pawn. His active pawn, despite its being doubled.
knight on d3 can be easily ex­ After Black was forced to capture
changed after tt:le1, Portisch - Bu­ to capture on f6 with his pawn, his
kal, Reggio Emilia 1992.) 13.tt:lf3 dark-squared bishop has ceased
hbS 14.tt:lxb5 �a6 15.�c2 E:fc8 to exert pressure against White's
16. 0-0;!; A.Petrosian - Vitolinsh, queenside.
Podolsk 1990. White has entered
an advantageous version for him ll.f3
of the Benko Gambit. His knight This move is not aesthetic, but
on bS, supported by the pawn on is reliable.
a4, prevents the development of
Black's initiative on the queen­
side. Later, his plan is quite sim­
ple: i.c3, tt:ld2-c4 and eventually
e4-e5. Still, it would be better for
Black to adhere to a passive tac­
tics, because after the seemingly
active move 16 . . . c4? ! , White's
knight will be headed immediate­
ly for the weakened c6-square.
17.tt:lfd4±
Besides 1l.. .i.a6, it may be also
interesting for Black to try 11 . . . ll ... tt:lfd7
tt:la6. Even then however, White's
prospects are preferable. 12.tt:lf3 It would be too risky for Black
tt:lb4 13.0-0 .ta6 14.i.g5 h6 15.i.h4 to choose ll . . . c4? ! , because of
hbS 16.axb5 �c7 17.�d2 E:xa1 (It 12.a5 ! and Black's queen has no
is possible that Black's best squares to retreat to. 12 . . . �xb2 (It
chance here is 17 . . . g5, but after is not preferable for him to choose
18.i.g3 E!:xa1 19.E!:xa1 tt:lhS 2 0 . 12 . . . tt:lbd7 13.b6± and White's a­
tt:J e a , the temporary activity of pawn, has turned from a weak­
his pieces does not compensate ness into a powerful protected
the missing pawn, McCraw - passed pawn. Or 12 . . . axb5 13.tt:la4
Popovic, Email 1999.) 18.E!:xa1 �b3 14.�xb3 cxb3 15.ixb5± and

144
 l.d4 0,f6 2.c4 g6 3. 0,c3 il..g 7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. il..g5 c5 7.d5

White ends up with a solid extra square against the penetration of

pawn in the endgame.) 13J!b1 White's knight there), but White
\Wa3 14.b6± Black has regained his still has an extra pawn and his
pawn indeed, but White maintains chances in the endgame are pref­
a great advantage thanks to his erable.
mighty passed b6-pawn and the
vulnerability of Black's c4-pawn, 13 ••• \Wc5 14.\Wxc4 ti'xc4
Alatortsev - Savon, Yalta 1962 .
Following 14 . . . axb5, White
I t deserves attention for Black lags in development, but he still
to try the paradoxical move 11 . . . has two extra pawns, so his posi­
W/aS ! ? He has lost two tempi, but tion is better. 15.W/xb5 W/a7 16.W/b3;!;
has provoked the move f2-f3. Af­
ter 12J�a3;!;, White's chances are 15.hc4 .!Db6 16.!e2 ax:b5
preferable here as well, but still
there is a lot of fight left in this po­
sition.

12.'l:Yc2 c4

17.a5!?
This i s the simplest move for
White. He does not go after mate­
rial gains, but wishes to simplify
the position by exchanging pieces
13 .!Ddl
• and enter a very favourable end­
game with only minor pieces on
It seems very good for him to the board.
opt for 13.a5 ! ? axbS 14.0,a4 W/b3
15.W/xb3 cxb3 16.i.xb5;!; and there The consequences of the line:
has arisen a position analysed in 17.hb5 i.d'Too are not so clear,
our notes to the move ll . . . c4, with Spacek - Pilar, Czech Republic
the difference that Black's knight 2000.
is on d7 and not on the f6-square.
This is, no doubt, in favour of There may arise the following
Black (his knight covers the b6- variation: 17 c!Dc4 18.!c3 hc3+
•••

145
Chapter 11

19.�xc3 gxa5 20.gxa5 �xa5 8.J.f4

21.b4 �c4 22.hc4 bxc4 23. This is the right square !
�ge2 �a6 24.b5 �c5 25.�d2
�b3+ 26.�e3 f5 27.g3 e5 28.
dxe6 he6 29.�d4± White has
given his extra pawn back, but has
simplified the position by ex­
changing and has neutralised in
the process the pressure of Black's
pieces. In the endgame, White
maintains a great advantage, be­
cause his king is very active. If it
comes to assist the advance of the
passed pawn on bS, Black will be
in a great trouble. 8 ... e6
This is the basic move for
C) 7 h6
••• Black in this variation. He is fight­
ing for the initiative ignoring the
possible material sacrifices.

About 8 ... e5 9.dxe6 - see 8 ...

e6.

8 ... b5 9.cxb5 a6 10.a4 - see 7 ...

bS.

8 . . . a6. Black is preparing b7-

b5. Still, after 9.'&d2 , White im­
proves the placement of his
This is a very energetic move. queen, making use of the circum­
Black ousts the enemy bishop stance that his opponent's pawn
from its active position on the gS­ on h6 is not protected. (It conse­
square. He is not afraid of the fact quences are very unclear if White
that after the retreat of the bishop tries the standard prophylactic in
to f4, the undermining of White's this variation - 9.a4, since follow­
centre with the move e7-e6 would ing 9 . . . e6oo, there arise position
involve the sacrifice on the pawn from the main variation, which
on d6. The move 7 . . . h6 has been we will analyse in the main line,
played by such masters of dynam­ except that with the inclusion of
ic play like Gary Kasparov, Alex­ the moves a6 and a4. This inclu­
ander Khalifman and many other sion is much rather in favour of
grandmasters. Black, because later, the weaken-

146
 l.d4 4:Jj6 2.c4 g6 3. 4:J c3 :!g7 4.e4 d6 S. i.e2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 c5 7.d5

ing of White's b4-square may dominance on the eS-square can­

tell.) 9 . . . <;!;>h7 (The pawn-sacrifice not bring anything real to Black,
in the spirit of the Benko Gambit because White can always oust
9 . . . b5 would not equalise for the enemy knight from there with
Black. lO.cxbS axbS ll.i.xbS '!WaS the move f2-f4. Later, in the game
12 .i.d3 gS 13.i.g3 i.a6 14.4:Jge2 V.Milov - Stovring, Genova 2003,
4:Jbd7 15.i.xa6 E:xa6 16.h4 '\Wb4 there followed 12.0-0 '!Wd8 13.'\Wcl
17.hxg5 hxgS 18.f3;!; White not hS 14.i.g5 4:Jde5 15.4:Jxe5 i.xeS
only has an extra pawn on the 16.h3 4:Jf6 17.i.d3;!; and White not
queenside, but also good pros­ only has a space advantage, but a
pects on the kingside. Black's clear-cut plan for further actions:
pawn on gS, as well as the fS­ f2-f4 followed by the preparation
square are very weak and White's of e4-e5, or f4-f5.) 10.4:Jf3 exdS
knight can go there later on the ll.exdS i.g4 (After ll . . .i.fS, Black
route c3-dl-e3-f5, Horvath - Pol­ fails to accomplish the favourable
zin, Austria 2006.) 10.4:Jf3 bS 11. trade of the knights (4:Je4), be­
cxbS axbS 12 .i.xb5 '?;l/b6 13.i.e2 cause of 12.4:Jh4 i.d7 13.0-0 '!Wd8
'\Wb4 14.e5 4:Jh5 15.i.e3 (It is weak­ 14.4:Jf3;t; There arises a standard
er for White to try 15.i.g3?! Uhl­ position for this variation, with a
mann - E.Geller, Palma de Mal­ slight edge for White, since he has
lorca 1970, because in that case more space.) 12 .h3 i.xf3 13.i.xf3
Black can exchange his knight, E:e8+ 14.i.e2 '!Wd8 15.0-0 4:Jbd7
placed at the edge of the board, 16.'1Wc2 4:Jh7 17.E:fel fS 18.i.fU
for White's powerful dark­ Black's pieces cannot hold the eS­
squared bishop.) lS . . . dxeS. Black square due to White's resource f2-
has regained his pawn indeed, but f4, while the weakening of the e6-
cannot equalise due to his numer­ square may tell (E:e6 !), Vilchen­
ous pawn-weaknesses. 16.a3 '!Wb7 kov - Sumkin, USSR 1979.
17. 0-0 E:d8 18.4:Jel 4:Ja6 19.4:Jd3
4:Jf6 20 .4:Jxe5 ie6 21.4:Jc6 E:xdS It seems a bit passive for Black
22.4:Jxd5 4:Jxd5 23.4:Ja5 '\Wxb2 24. to play 8 . . . 4:Jbd7. After 9.4:Jf3 a6
i.xh6 4:Jac7 25.4:Jc4 '\Wxd2 26.i.xd2 (It is again harmless for White if
hal 27.E:xaU. White has the two­ Black continues with 9 . . . 4:Jg4, be­
bishop advantage and a powerful cause the possession of the eS­
passed a-pawn. outpost cannot bring anything to
him. Later, in the game Volzhin ­
Following 8 . . . '\WaS, White Velikhanli, Abu Dhabi 2001, there
should better retreat his bishop in followed: 10.0-0 4:Jge5 11.4:Jel
the standard fashion - 9.i.d2, for 4:Jb6 12 .b3 e6 13.E:cl exd5 14.4:Jxd5
example: 9 . . . e6 (9 . . . a6 10.a4 4:Jbd7 4:Jxd5 15.'?;1/xdS '\We7 16.4:Jc2 i.e6
11.4:Jf3. Now, he should not be 17.'1Wd2 <;!;>h7 18.i.g3 fS 19.exf5
afraid of 11 . . . 4:Jg4, because the i.xfS 20.4:Je3;!; and White's knight

147
Chapter 11

was headed for the d5-square. His

prospects in the oncoming fight
are preferable. His king is safer,
because it is protected by three
pawns, while its black counter­
part is protected by only two. In
addition, White can begin an at­
tack on the kingside with f2-f4-
f5.) 10.0-0 :B:b8 ll.a4 tt:Je8 12 .:B:e1
tt:Je5 13.tt:Jxe5 dxe5 14.ie3 Vflc7
15.a5 tt:Jd6 16.Vfid2 Wh7 17.f3 f5
18.:B:ebl± Black can hardly coun­ 10J�d2
ter his opponent's queenside of­ White refrains from capturing
fensive (b2-b4 and after the ex­ on d6, because after that it would
change of the c5-pawn - c4-c5), be very difficult for him to obtain
because his kingside counterplay an advantage in the opening.
is obviously too slow, Alburt - There is plenty of theory amassed
Meyer, Philadelphia 1989. in this variation and as a rule, it
all ends in total simplification of
White should not be afraid of the position and a draw.
8 . . . :B:e8 9.Vfid2 Wh7 10.lLlf3 e6 11.
dxe6 :B:xe6 (following ll ... ixe6 10 .. :�b6
12 .i.xd6 tt:Jc6 13.0-0 ig4 14.Vflf4 This is Black's most popular
tt:Jh5 15.Vflxg4 Vflxd6 16.:B:fdU, reply. He organises counterplay
Black's compensation for the against the enemy pawn on b2
pawn is insufficient) 12 .e5. After and protects indirectly his own
this pawn-sacrifice, White seizes pawn in h6.
completely the initiative. 12 . . . lLlh5
13.ie3 i.xe5 14.tt:Jxe5 :B:xe5 15.0-0 After 10 ... Wh7, White can al­
(it may be also interesting for him ready capture on d6 - ll.ixd6,
to try 15.0-0-0 ! i) 15 . . . tt:Jg7 16. because the inclusion of the
i.xh6 tt:Jc6 17.if4± White has re­ moves Vfid2 and Wh7 is obviously
gained the sacrificed pawn and in his favour. ll . . . :B:e8 12 .e5 tt:Jfd7
his prospects in the oncoming 13.f4 f6 14.h4 fxe5 15.h5± and
fight are clearly preferable. He White's attack in the game De
has two powerful bishops and an Giorgis - Jelen, Email 1997 led to
excellent outpost on d5 for his a quick victory for him.
knight, while Black's d6-pawn is
very weak, Farago - Rigo, Buda­ Following 10 . . . Vfia5, White
pest 1978. should better continue with the
modest move ll.tt:Jf3i, because af­
9 .dxe6 .ixe6 ter ll.i.xh6 ixh6 12 .Vfixh6 tt:Jxe4

148
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. ig5 c5 7.d5

13.:Bc1 liJc6 14.h4 liJd4oo, there plicated situation in which both

arises a very complicated position sides have their positional pluses.
in which Black's prospects are not Still, White's game is much sim­
inferior at all. pler, because the vulnerability of
Black's pawn on d6 and the d5-
After 10 . . . liJc6 however, it is square is more important than his
already very good for White to counterplay on the dark squares.
play ll . .bh6, since following 11 . . .
ix:h6 12.1Wxh6 liJd4 13.:Bd1 liJxe2 12 . . . \t>h7
14.liJgxe2 .bc4 15.h4 !± his king­ This is a quiet move.
side initiative is very powerful.
It is possible that Black's best
ll.li)£3 chance here may be the active
White is trying to develop his move 12 . . . liJd4, but it still leads to
pieces as quickly as possible. a position in which White's pros­
pects are preferable. 13.liJxd4
After ll.ix:h6, he can hardly cxd4 14.liJd5 hd5 15.exd5 liJe4
obtain an edge. ll . . . hh6 12 .1Wxh6 (following 15 . . . g5 16.�g3 liJe4 17.
1Wxb2 13.:Bc1 liJc6 14.h4 liJb4oo '!Wc2 liJxg3 18.hxg3;t;, Black's king
Black's counterplay is quite real. is very weak and he must be very
It is rather unclear whether White careful not to come under attack
has anything better than the move in the middle game, Fellner -
15.1Wd2 with a transfer to an ap­ Walter, Germany 1994) 16.1Wc2. It
proximately equal endgame. may look like Black's initiative
compensates the pawn-defects in
ll ••• liJc6 his position. This is not true how­
About 11 . . . \t>h7 12. 0-0 liJc6 ever. White can oust his oppo­
13.liJd5 - see ll . . . liJc6. nent's knight from its active posi­
12.0-0 tion, while the vulnerability of the
pawns on d4 and d6 will be a per­
manent negative factor for Black
in the future. 16 . . . :Bfe8 17.�d3
liJcS 18.id2 aS 19.b3 \t>h7 (19 . . .
:Be7 20.:Bfe1 :Bae8 2l.:Bxe7 :Bxe7
22 .:Be1 :Bxe1 + 23.ix:eU Houpt -
Rubio Dobias, chessfriend.com
2004. The position has been sim­
plified considerably. White is
clearly better. After an exchange
on d3, Black's position will be
worse because his pawns on d4
There has arisen a very com- and d6 are placed on colours of

149
Chapter 11

the same square as his bishop, to his two powerful bishops and
while if he refrains from the ex­ extra space.
change, White will preserve his 14 ... lDe5
two-bishop advantage after the
retreat of Black's bishop from the After 14 . . . lDe7 15.h3 !!ae8
d3-square.) 2 0 J'!:fe1 i.f6 2l.g3 i.g7 16.!!ab1 lLlc8 17.id3 l2Jd7 18.a3
2 2 .<i>g2 �c7 23J'!ad1 b6 24.ic1 a4 lLleS 19.lLlxe5 dxeS 2 0.i.e3 �c7
25.ifU Aleksandrov - Shulman, 2l.b4 cxb4 22.axb4 fS 23.f4±,
Ohrid 2001. It is worth noticing Black has no counterplay on the
how skilfully A.Alexandrov avoid­ kingside at all. White can simply
ed the exchange of his bishops, advance his pawns - c4-c5, d5-
placing them on the c1 and f1- d6, Aleksandrov - Kotenko, Mos­
squares. In the oncoming fight, cow 2008.
White can break his opponent's
position with h2-h4 and b3-b4, Black cannot equalise with
maintaining long lasting initiative 14 . . . l2Jd4 15.l2Jxd4 cxd4 16.id3
both in the middle game and in l2Jd7 17.b4 fS 18.h4 lLlf6 19.f3
the endgame. !!ae8, Dolinski - Trusewicz, Po­
land 1991, 20 .!!ae1!t This is a pre­
13.lDd5 hd5 cise move. Now, Black's counter­
After 13 .. .'1Wd8, Muse - Hjar­ play on the e-file has been parried
tarson, Germany 1989, White and White's positional pluses
should better continue with 14. should gradually tell.
�c2t, maintaining an edge thanks
to his better pawn-structure (fol­ 15.tDxe5 dxe5 16 .ie3
•

lowing 14 . . . ixd5 - to his two­

bishop advantage).
14.exd5

There has arisen a position,

which resembles the Najdorf vari­
ation in the Sicilian Defence.
After the exchange on dS, White's positional pluses (two
White has a stable advantage due bishops and the possibility for ac-

150
 l.d4 l:jjf6 2.c4 g6 3. 1:jj c3 1lg7 4.e4 d6 5. 1le2 0 - 0 6. 1lg5 c5 7.d5

tive actions on the queenside with leslavsky, M.Tal etc. Still White
b2-b4, or in the centre with d5- soon found very good arguments
d6) are much more important against the system chosen by
than Black's kingside counter­ Black. It is not so much that White
play. obtains a great advantage, but the
16 ••• c!be4 17.%Yc2 arising positions are very un­
It is also possible for White to pleasant for Black. This discour­
choose here 17.%Yd3 ! ? l:jj d 6 18. ages the fans of the King's Indian
�abU, preparing b2-b4. Defence, because they usually
17 f5 18.gabl a5 19.a3 %Yc7
••• strive for complicated, double
20.b4!? axb4 21.axb4 b6 22. edged fight. Here, he will be
bxc5 c!bxc5 23.g3;!; His prospects forced to adhere to long and labo­
are much better. White can rious defence in the endgame
choose between exerting pressure without any counter chances.
against the enemy b6-pawn (�b5, Therefore, this variation has
�fb1), or organise a pawn-ad­ gradually lost its popularity alto­
vance in the centre - d5-d6, after gether.
�dl. Naturally, Black's kingside
counterplay should not be under­ 8.%Yd2
estimated. It is essential for White not to
allow the move h7-h6, because
the pin of the knight on f6 in this
D) 7 e6 ••• variation may be very unpleasant
for Black.

8 . . . exd5

If he postpones this exchange

with the move 8 .. .'�a5, Black can­
not expect anything positive for
him, for example: 9.1:jjf3 a6 10. 0-0
b5, Moskalenko - Grigore, Sitges
2005 and here, White can simply
capture the pawn : ll.dxe6 ! 1lxe6
12.%Yxd6± and Black does not have
This move can be considered sufficient compensation for it.
as Black's classical response
against the Averbakh system. It 9.exd5
was used often during the 50ies of Here, contrary to the Modern
the past century by such out­ Benoni, in the Averbakh system
standing King's Indian experts White captures with his e-pawn.
like M.Najdorf, S.Gligoric, I.Bo- Now, Black has no counterplay

151
Chapter 11

against the pawn on e4 and he 11.0-0 ges 12.a4 lt:Jbd7 13.h3 .ix£3
ends up in a solid but cramped 14.!xf3 - see 9 . . . ges. After the
position. move 10 . . . '1Wc7, a perfect example
of how to play this position with
White can be the game Polugaevs­
ky - Shaw, Siegen 1970 : 11.0-0
!g4 12 .h3 ix£3 13 . .ixf3 lt:Jbd7 14.
a4 b6 15 ..id1 �h8 16.ic2 lt:Jg8 17.
gael;!; He has more space and two
bishops, while Black has no coun­
terplay. Later, Polugaevsky ex­
changed all the heavy pieces and
the knights and realised easily his
advantage proving the power of
his two bishops.) 11.0-0
9 ••• ges
This is his most popular re­
sponse.

9 . . . lt:Ja6. This is not the best

idea for Black. His knight has
nothing to do on a6, or on the c7-
square, because White can easily
parry Black's queenside counter­
play. 10.lt:Jf3 lt:Jc7 (lO . . . ges 11.0-0
- see 9 ... ge8) 11.0-0 a6 (1l.. . .if5 About 11 ... !g4 12 .h3 !xf3 13.
12 .h3 '1Wc8 13.'1Wf4 lt:Jce8 14.gfe1 a6 .ixf3 lt:Jbd7 14.a4 - see 9 ... ges.
15 . .ifl± - He can hardly find good After 11 . . . lt:Jbd7 12.gfe1 lt:Je5
squares for his minor pieces, be­ 13.lt:Jxe5 gxe5 14.!d3 gxe1+ 15.
cause Black obviously lacks space, gxe1 '.Wf8 16.'1Wf4 lt:Jh5 17.'\Wh4;!;,
Gelfand - J.Polgar, Almaty 2008) White has more space, his pieces
12 .a4 gbs 13.'1Wf4 lt:Jce8 14.a5;!; Va­ are very active and Black must
ganian - Velimirovic, Budapest worry about the vulnerability of
1973. His position is cramped. In his d6-pawn, I.Grischuk - Chir­
order to neutralise White's pin on kov, Evpatoria 2006.
the h4-d8 diagonal, Black is It seems awkward for Black to
forced to place his other knight on transfer his queen to the f8-
e8 and this does not beautify his square: 11 . . . '\We7 12 .h3 '1Wf8 13.i.d3
position at all. h6 14 . .if4 g5 15.ih2 g4 16.hxg4
lt:Jxg4, Raetsky - Demeter, Kato­
Sometimes he begins with the wice 1993, 17 ..if4± - His activity
line: 9 . . . a6 10.lt:Jf3 ges (10 . . .!g4 on the kingside has only led to the

152
 l.d4 CiJj6 2.c4 g6 3. CiJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. i.e2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 c5 7.d5

appearance of additional pawn­ lowing 14 . . . i.f5 15.0.xf5 gxfS 16.

weaknesses in his camp. \Wxb2 hb2 17.E!b1 ic3+ 1B.'i!ld1
ll . . .i.fS 12.0.h4 \WeB 13.0.xf5 E!eB 19.E!xb7 0.a6 20.a3 E!abB 21.
(It is possibly even stronger for E!xbB CiJxbB 2 2 .id3 0.d7 23.'i!lc2
White to choose 13.E!ae1! 0.e4 14. i.d4 24.E!b1± White has two pow­
0.xe4 he4 1S.idl± and Black's erful bishops, while Black's fS­
bishop on e4 is obviously mis­ pawn is very weak, Carlsen - Van
placed.) 13 ... \Wx:fS 14.E!ae1 0.bd7 15. Wely, Wijk aan Zee 2013, as well
id3 \Wg4 16.h3 \Wd4, Polugaevsky as after 14 . . . h6 15.hh6 \Wxd2+
- Roos, Le Havre 1966, 17.b3 CiJeS 16.hd2 if6 17.g3 hh4 1B.gxh4
1B .ib1 E!abB 19.a4;!; Black's pieces ifS 19.if4 E!dB 20.h5. Black's po­
are seemingly very active, but he sition is very unpleasant. His d6-
cannot achieve anything real. Af­ pawn is weak, while White's dark­
ter White simplifies the position squared bishop has no opponent
by exchanging pieces, he will obtain and is very powerful. In the game
the typical endgame in this varia­ Bekker Jensen - Nordenbaek,
tion with a slight edge for him. Denmark 2000, Black decided to
capture a pawn, just to suffer for
There arise interesting tactical something real: 20 . . . gxh5? ! , but
complications after the move 9 . . . had soon to regret his decision,
\Wb6. During the BOies o f the because White's pieces became
past century L.Yurtaev found an very active. The game did not last
interesting possibility for Black, long: 21.E!g1 + 'i!lh7 22.E!g5 ig6 23.
connected with a piece-sacrifice 'i!ld2 0.a6 24.E!cg1 E!d7 2S.i.d3 E!gB
for several pawns. It would be 26.h4 0.b4 27.ib1 0.a6 2B. E!xhS+
very difficult for White to find and Black resigned, since he would
the right way over the board have to suffer huge material loss­
without concrete knowledge of es.) 1S.'i!lxd2 hdS (15 . . . -tfS 16.
the variations. 10.0.f3 ifS 11.0.h4 CiJxfS gxf5 17.E!bl b6 1B.i.d3± White
0.e4 12.0.xe4 he4 13.f3 will regain the pawn on fS and will
have a great advantage in the end­
game thanks to his two powerful
bishops and a superior pawn­
structure, Kachiani-Gersinska -
Berezina, Istanbul 2000.) 16.cxd5
E!eB. This is the essence of L.Yur­
taev's idea. Black obtains two
pawns for the piece and White's
knight on h4 is misplaced. It looks
like Black has compens�tion.' Still,
13 . . . \Wxb2 14.E!cl \Wxd2+ (The it soon became clear that White
endgame is worse for Black fol- could activate his rook 17.E!bl and

153
Chapter 11

Black's hopes to obtain compen­ 10 ... .ig4

sation were doomed to fail. 17 . . .
ttld7 1 8 . .ib5 :B:e5 1 9 . .b:d7 :B:xg5 About 10 . . . a6 ll.a4 ig4 12.
20.1'!xb7 :B:xd5+ 21.'it>c2 c4 2 2 .f4± 0-0 ttlbd7 13.h3 ixf3 14.hf3 -
White's knight enters the actions see 10 . . . ig4.
and Black has no compensation
for the piece, Lputian - Yurtaev, 10 . . .if5 11.0-0 �b6 12.1'!ae1 -
Volgograd 1985. see 10 . . . �b6.
13 ... h6. This is an interesting
move, but is not so popular. 14. 10 . . . �b6 11.0-0 if5 (1l.. .ig4
hh6 .ixh6 15.�xh6 �xb2 16.0-0 12 .h3 - see 10 . . . ig4) 12.1'!ae1
ic2 17.1'!acl :B:e8 (17. . . ia4 18.f4 ttlbd7 (Unfortunately for Black,
�g7 19.�g5;!; Black's king shelter he cannot accomplish the favour­
has been weakened due to the ab­ able trade of the knights, because
sence of his h-pawn, so White's after 12 . . . ttle4? ! 13.ttlxe4 ixe4 14.
attack may become very powerful, id3, he must comply with an ir­
Boehm - Hartung, Email 2002) revocable weakening of his pawn­
18.�d2 �f6, Dolinski - Niewiad­ structure in order to save his bish­
omski, ICCF 2007, 19.g3 ! ? This is op: 14 .. .f5 15.ixe4 fxe4 16.if4
the only way for White to fight ttld7 17.ttlg5±) 13.ttlh4
for the advantage. 19 . . . ia4 20 .f4;!;
His prospects in the middle game
will be preferable, because his
king is much safer (3 pawns
against 2 for Black's king). After
the exchange of the queens (for
example after �f6-e7-e3), White
can exploit the vulnerability of his
enemy d6-pawn, after ttlh4-f3-g5,
if3 and ttle4.
10.ltlf3 13 . . . ttle4 14. ttlxe4 ixe4 15.f3.
The knights have been exchanged
but Black has difficulties, because
of the unfavourable position of
his bishop in the centre of the
board. 15 . . . .id4+ (after 15 . . . h6
16.hh6 .ixh6 17.�xh6 .ic2 18.
�cl±, Black has no compensation
for the pawn, Spacek - Gross,
Prague 1992.) 16.\t>h1 f6, Genta ­
Izquierdo, Montevideo 1992, 17 .
.if4!± Black can choose between

154
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJ c3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. .ie2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 c5 7.d5

sacrificing his bishop for the liJc7 12 .h3 �e7 13.E!:ae1 �f8 14.
pawns on d5 and b2, or retreating i.d3:t, his pieces are terribly
it to the f5-square, which after cramped, Raetsky - Slizhevsky, So­
liJxf5 would lead to a horrible chi 2006) 12.id3 id7 13.h3 liJb4 14.
weakening of his pawn-structure. i.b1 h5 15.a3 liJa6 16.id3± White's
In both cases White's great ad­ extra space guarantees a great ad­
vantage is doubtless. vantage for him since Black has
no squares to deploy his pieces.
It is possible for Black to 11.0-0 liJbd7
choose the plan with the exchange 11 . . . a6 12.a4 liJbd7 13.h3 hf3
of the knights although it would 14.ixf3 - see 14 . . . liJbd7.
not equalise for him either. 10 . . . 11 . . . �b6 12 .h3 ix£3 13.ixf3
liJbd7 11.0-0 liJe5 (He lacks space, liJbd7 14.�c2 - see 11.. .liJbd7.
so he should not avoid the ex­
change of pieces. Following 11 . . . 12.h3 hf3 13.hf3
a 6 12.E!:fe1 b 6 13.'?;1/f4:t, White's
pieces are obviously more active,
Farago - Teufl, Austria 1999.)
12.liJxe5 E!:xe5 13.id3 E!:e8 14.E!:feU
Black's position is solid but very
passive and he can hardly organ­
ise any active actions, Nikolaidis
- Shavtvaladze, Korinthos 2002.

It seems rather dubious for

him to transfer his queen to f8
with the idea to advance his king­
side pawns. 10 .. .'!We7 11.0-0 �f8 12. There has arisen a typical po­
h3 liJa6 13.i.d3 id7 14.a3 h6 15. sition for this variation. White has
i.f4 liJh5 16.ih2 f5 17.liJb5 ixb5 extra space and two bishops and
18.cxb5 liJc7 19.E!:ae1 a6 20.b6 liJb5 Black has no counterplay. It is be­
21.E!:e6 E!:xe6 22 .dxe6 liJd4 23.liJxd4 cause of these prospectless posi­
ixd4 24.E!:e1 E!:e8, Bareev - Dy­ tions that Black ceased to be in­
achkov, Azov 1996 and after 25. terested in this variation.
g4 ! +-, Black's position crumbles.
13 . . . a6
In the game Bareev - I.Soko­
lov, Biel 1993, Black accomplished He cannot equalise with 13 . . .
an unfavourable manoeuvre with h 5 14.E!:ae1 �b6 1 5 . .id1 a6, . Tre­
his knight and it turned out to be velyan - Glek, Clichy 1995 and
just a loss of time for him. 10 . . . here, White's simplest reaction
liJa6 11.0-0 �b6 (following 11 . . . would be - 16.ib3:t and despite

155
Chapter 11

all the tricks, Black has failed to 14 . . . �e7

complicate the game and to or­
ganise counterplay. Black is clearly worse after
14 . . . W/c7 15.�c2 h5 16 . .id2 tt:lh7
13 . . . �b6 14.'�c2 a6 (After 14 . . . 17.:Bae1 i.d4 18.id1 tt:Jdf8 19.�d3
h6 15.i.d2 a 6 16.b3 :Be7 17.:Bae1 tt:Jd7 2 0.'1Wg3 l!th8 2l.b3 tt:ldf6
:Bae8 18.:Bxe7 :Bxe7 19.id1 W/d8 22 .ic2 :Bxe1 23.:Bxe1 :Be8 24.
20.a4t, Black did not manage to :Bxe8+ tt:Jxe8 25.tt:le2t - he has no
hold the position in the game counterplay and White can play
Langeweg - Najdorf, Wijk aan for a win without any risk, trying
Zee 1971. The character of the to exploit his two-bishop advan­
game remains more or less the tage and extra space, Brandberg
same following 14 . . . l!th8 15.id2 Soeder - Bennborn, ICCF 2007.
a6 16.:Baelt and later, White trad­
ed the major pieces and realised Black's activity is only tempo­
his advantage in an endgame with rary after 14 . . . tt:le5, because later,
only minor pieces, S.Atalik - Pap, White will oust the enemy knight
Vrnjacka Banja 2012.) 15.id2. In away from the centre. 15.ie2 �aS
similar position, White often re­ 16.'1Wc2 h6 17.i.d2 W/c7 18.f4 tt:Jed7
treats his bishop to d2 and from 19.:Baelt and once again he main­
there it supports the advance of tains the standard advantage for
his queenside pawns with a4-a5 this variation, Gulko - Radjabov,
and b4. 15 . . . :Be7 16.:Baelt Polu­ Wijk aan Zee 2001.
gaevsky - Gligoric, Skopje 1968.
Later, Black was reluctant to ad­ Following 14 . . . W/a5, S.Atalik
here to a passive defence and sac­ demonstrated a good example of
rificed a pawn. His compensation how to play this position with
for it was insufficient and he lost White.
the game.

14.a4

At first, he deprived his oppo­

nent of any counterplay by trad­
ing the major pieces and then, in
the endgame with minor pieces,

156
 l.d4 liJf6 2.c4 g6 3. liJc3 i.g7 4.e4 d6 5. .ie2 0 - 0 6. i.g5 c5 7.d5

he began advancing his pawns on Wfxe8 19 . .ic2 liJb6 20 .b3 liJbd7 21.
the flanks in order to acquire .if4 fffe 7 22 .WI'e2 \t>f8 23.Wfxe7+
more space. 15.Wfc2 h6 16.i.d2 \t>xe7 24.a5i,
Wfc7 17.!1ae1 !1xe1 18.!1xe1 �e8 19.
i.d1 �xe1+ 20 ..ixe1 Wfd8 21.WI'e2
\t>f8 22 .g3 Wfe7 23.Wfxe7+ \t>xe7
24.a5 liJe5 25.i.e2 liJe8 26.f4 liJd7
27.\t>g2 i.d4 28.\t>f3 f5 29.i.d3
liJg7 30.b3 h5 31.liJe2 i.f6 32 .ic2
\t>f7 33.i.d2i Atalik - Kilicaslan,
Ankara 2008. This is the end­
game White should strive for in
this variation. Black does not have
any counterplay, while White can There has arisen again a very
manoeuvre for long preparing favourable endgame for White,
breaks both on the queenside (b3- Polugaevsky - Uhlmann, Amster­
b4 ), as well as on the kingside (g3- dam 1970. Later, L.Polugaevsky
g4). Even if Black can hold this realised his advantage. This was
position, then in a practical game one of the first games which
this is a very difficult task indeed. showed the great difficulties Black
had to suffer in similar endgames.
15.S:ael Wff8 16.il.dl Our book is devoted to the
opening however, so we will not
analyse thoroughly the endgame.
The readers who would like to en­
large their knowledge and under­
stating of similar situations, I can
recommend the wonderful book
of M.Shereshevsky "Endgame
Strategy" : in which he has ana­
lysed several examples on this
subject.

17 .tf4 liJh7 18.ic2 .!DeS

•

16 h6
••• 19.b3 f5 20.ig3 Wff6 21.liJe2
.!bf8 22.f4i Black's knight on e5
It does not seem logical for has been ousted from the centre
Black to opt for 16 . . . !1xe1, because and he will have to defend for
in this variation, White is trying long a cramped and passive . Posi­
to trade the heavy pieces himself. tion, Jussupow - Zapata, Saint
Following 17.!1xe1 !1e8 18.!1xe8 John 1988.

157
Chapter 11

Conclusion
We have just completed the analysis of the variation with 6 . . . c5 in
the Averbakh system of the King's Indian Defence.
Black has many different possibilities in it, but only the ousting of
the enemy bishop from its active position with the move 7 . . . h6 provides
him with some chances of obtaining an acceptable game. Still, in this
variation White maintains an edge due to the vulnerability of the ene­
my pawn on d6. After the move 7 . . . b5, there arise variations of the Ben­
ko Gambit which are unfavourable for Black. White has already ad­
vanced e2-e4 and contrary to the variations of the Benko Gambit, he
will not lose his castling rights after i.a6-fl.
Following 7 . . . e6, there arises a standard position with a space ad­
vantage for White, who has a clear-cut plan for further actions. He
needs to exchange the major pieces and transfer the game into an end­
game with minor pieces in which he will have excellent winning chanc­
es thanks to his extra space and two powerful bishops. His plan to play
for a win is connected with occupying space with his queenside pawns
(a4-a5), followed by a preparation of breaks - either with b3-b4, or
with g2-g4.

158
 Part 3

The Modern Defence

l.d4 g6

nal for his dark-squared bishop is

opened and if White closes the
position in the centre, Black can
play f7-f5 immediately and not af­
ter the preliminary retreat of his
knight from the f6-square as it
happens in the King's Indian De­
fence.
In Chapter 13, we will analyse
the basic position of this varia­
tion, which arises after l.d4 g6
In the third part of volume 2, 2.c4 .ig7 3.e4 d6 4.tLlc3. There,
we will analyse the move l g6. It
••• we will pay most attention to
has been played even back in the Black's three main responses :
h
19 t century, but in the contem­ 4 e5, 4 lLlc6 and 4 lLld7.
•• ••• •••

porary theory it has been named In Chapter 12 we will deal

the Modern Defence and quite de­ with the different possibilities for
servedly so. The point is that at Black to avoid the main lines on
first it did not lead to original po­ moves 2 and 3.
sitions and usually transposed to I would like to mention that
the King's Indian Defence. It was White should not be in a hurry to
during the 60ies of the past cen­ develop his knight to the f3-
tury when the move l.. .g6 was square, because then Black can
played sometimes by M.Botvinnik transpose to the King's Indian
and a bit later by L.Ljuboevic and Defence, having avoided the
they began to use plans connected Averbakh system.
with pressure against White's In the contemporary tourna­
centre (the d4-square) with ig7, ment practice this move is played
tLlc6, or if White protects his d4- by numerous strong grandmas­
pawn with the move tLlf3, then ters (indeed, mostly in games
ig4. Black wishes to exploit the with a shorter time-control) : Sh.
delay of development of his knight Mamedyarov, H.Nakamura, P.
on g8, since in that case the diago- Svidler, A.Morozevich . . .

159
Chapter 12 l.d4 g6 2.c4

A) 2 ••• d6
Black wishes to advance e7-e5
as quickly as possible.

It seems bad for him to try to

transpose to the Dutch Defence
with 2 . . .f5? ! , because of 3.h4 ! --t
We will analyse this variation in
our volume 3 in the chapters de­
voted to the Dutch Defence.

Now, contrary to the move 1 . . . 3.e4

d 6 , Black i s not threatening to ad­ White continues to occupy the
vance e7-e5, so White can make centre with his pawn s .
this quite natural move for the 3 ••• e5
closed openings. This interesting move leads to
a complicated positional fight.
Now, Black has a choice. His
main line 2 .ig7 will be analysed
••• About 3 . . . ig7 4 . tLl c3 - see
in variation B), but before that we Chapter 13.
will deal with A) 2 d6.•••

3 ... ltlf6 4.ltlc3 .ig7 S . .ie2 - see

About 2 . . . ltlf6 3.tLlc3 - see Chapters 6-11.
parts 1 and 2.

2 ... c6 3.e4 dS 4.e5 ig7 S.ltlc3 (diagram)

- see variation Bl. Now, contrary to the positions
which we will analyse in the next
2 ... c5 3.d5 .ig7 (3 ... ltlf6 4.ltlc3 chapter (with the inclusion of the
.ig7 S.e4 d6 6.ie2 0-0 7 . .ig5 - moves tLlc3 and .ig7), it is not so
see Chapter 11) 4.e4 - see varia­ good for White to enter an end­
tion B2. game after the exchange on eS,

160
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 d6 3.e4 eS 4. lb c3

because Black's bishop on f8 can The routine move 6 . . . ig7? los­

go to more active positions (than es immediately after 7.e5 Ve7 (7 . . .
on g7) - to cS or b4. dxeS 8.'�xd8+ 'it>xd8 9.lbd5 lbbd7
10.0-0-0+- and Black suffers
Here, he has a choice - to open huge material losses) 8.lbd5 dxeS
the position with Al) 4 exd4, ••• 9.Vh4 lbxdS 10 .he7 lbxe7, Ste­
or to try a move, which is more fansson - C.Hansen, Moscow
typical for similar set-ups A2) 1989, ll.id3+- and Black's two
4 ••• c!Dd7. minor pieces and a pawn are obvi­
ously insufficient to compensate
About 4 . . .ig7 S.dxeS - see the missing queen.
Chapter 13, variation A. 7.f4
White has created the threat
4 .. .tbc6 S.dS lbce7 (S . . . lbd4 6. e4-e5.
ie3 ig7 7.lbge2 - see Chapter 13, 7 h6
•••

variation 82) 6.g4 ig7 7.ie3 - The inclusion of this move is

see Chapter 13, variation 81. useful.
8 .th4
•

Al) 4 ••• exd4 5.Vxd4

Black cannot exploit now his
opponent's early queen-sortie due
to the vulnerability of the a1-h8
diagonal.
s ••• .!Df6 6 .tgs
•

(diagram)
6 ••• c!Dbd7
This move is forced and Black
cannot win a tempo attacking
White's queen with the move
lbc6. 8 . . . .tg7

161
Chapter 12

It is also possible for Black to White can begin decisive actions.

try 8 . . . c5, in order to get rid of the 12 .e6 lt:Jdf6, Alburt - D.Gurevich,
unpleasant pin. At first, he weak­ Newark 1995, 13.\We5 ! This is a
ens his pawn-structure and after good example of centralization !
9.,�M3, he sacrifices a pawn in the 13 . . . \Wb6 14.lt:Jf3 0-0 15.ext7+
spirit of the Najdorf variation of Ei:xt7 16.�d3 g5 17.�g3± Black's
the Sicilian Defence. 9 . . . g5. Black castling position is horribly weak­
will soon regain the sacrificed ened and White's pieces have oc­
pawn, but the weaknesses in his cupied much more active posi­
position will remain for long. tions.
10 .fxg5 lt:Jg4 (following 10 . . . lt:Je5 9.lilf3 0-0 10.0-0-0
11.Wid2 tt:Jh7 12.lt:Jf3 tt:Jxg5, White
can simplify advantageously the
position with 13.lt:Jxe5 dxe5 14.
W!xd8+ 'tt>xd8 15.0-0-0+ 'tt> c7 16.
ig3 ig7 17.EM5± and Black loses
one of his pawns, Bente - Sulskis,
Warsaw 2005) ll.lt:Jf3 tt:Jde5 12.
Wld2 ie7 13.0-0-0 ie6 14.lt:Jb5
hxg5 15.�g3 f6 16.b3 tt:Jt7 17.�e2
Wlb6 18.h3 tt:Jge5 19.lt:Jxe5 dxe5,
Hort - Hickl, Bad Neuenahr 1991.
Now, White must exploit one of
the main drawbacks of the move 10 Yfe8 ll.e5 dxe5 12.fxe5
•••

8 . . . c5 and transfer his knight to c!Llh7 13.i.g3 c!Llg5 14.c!Llxg5 hxg5

the d5-outpost: 20 .lt:Jc3 ! W!a5 21. 15.gel ti'e7 16.h4-+ followed by
Wfe3 lt:Jd6 2 2 .�g4 !± - Here, no h4-h5.
matter whether Black exchanges White develops powerful initi­
on g4, or retreats with his bishop ative on the h-fi.le and Black will
to t7, the vulnerability of the light fail to exploit the vulnerability of
squares in his camp will be hurt­ the e5-pawn.
ing him. The point is that White's
knight can always go to d5, while A2) 4 ••• c!Lld7
Black's knight can hardly occupy This move, no doubt, leads to
the d4-square, because White's much more interesting positions
pawns on c4 and e4 are covering than 4 . . . exd4.
its way towards that key outpost. 5.d5
White is occupying space.
It would be too slow for Black (diagram)
to try 8 . . . c6? ! , because after 9.0- After the closing of the centre
0-0 ie7 10.e5 dxe5 ll.fxe5 lt:Jh7, the fight is focused on the flanks.
his forces are discoordinated and 5 ••• i.g7

162
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 d6 3.e4 eS 4. lt:l c3

About S . . . lt:lgf6 - see volume 3 f7-fS, but his knight will not be so
- l.d4 lt:lf6 2 .c4 d6 3.lt:lc3 lt:lbd7 active on e7 as on the f6-square.
4.e4 es s.ds g6.
Following 6 . . . lt:lgf6 7.f3, there
There arises an interesting arises a position which will be an­
fight, but still in favour of White, alysed in the next volume, with
after S . . . aS 6.i.d3 hS, Speelman - the move-order - l.d4 c!lJf6 2 .c4
McNab, London 1992 (6 . . . .ig7 d6 3.lt:lc3 lt:lbd7 4.e4 eS S.dS g6 6.
7 . .ie3 - see S . . . .ig7 6 . .ie3 aS) 7. i.e3 i.g7 7.f3 .
.ic2 i.h6 8.lt:lf3 �cl 9.�xc1 lt:lc5
10.0-0t, followed by b3, a3, seiz­ In this position, the principled
ing the initiative on the queen­ plans for Black include the trade
side. of his "bad" dark-squared bishop.
6 . . . hS 7.�d2 .ih6 (7 . . . aS 8.i.d3
About S . . . .ih6 6 . .ixh6 lt:lxh6 lt:lcS 9.i.c2 i.d7 10.lt:lge2 i.h6 11.
7.�d2 - see S . . .i.g7 6 . .ie3 i.h6 0-0 �e3 12 .�xe3 lt:lf6 13.f3 'it>f8
7.i.h6 lt:lh6 8.�d2 (Naturally, the 14.b3 'it>g7 1S.a3 lt:la6 16.!i:fb1 �b8
number of the moves will be with 17.b4;!; Kraidman - Suttles, Sko­
one more, because White has lost pje 1972 . There has arisen a typi­
a tempo for i.e3 and Black for cal position for this variation in
.ig7.). which White's space advantage
and the possibilities for active ac­
6 .ie3
• tions on the queenside are much
He is planning to castle queen­ more important positional factors
side, moreover that White's bish­ than the fact that he has a "bad"
op will be very useful in the prep­ light-squared bishop, moreover
aration of c4-cS. that he can always get rid of it
(diagram) with i.a4.) 8 . .ixh6 lt:lxh6 9 . 0...,. 0 -0
6 ••• c!lJe7 aS 10 .i.d3 lt:lcS 11 . .ic2 .id7 12.f3
After this move, Black pre­ 'it>f8 13.lt:lge2 'i!lg7 14.'it>bl;!; Olafs­
serves the possibility to advance son - Haik, Thessaloniki 1988.

163
Chapter 12

White's extra space guarantees change on c5 and to win the ene­

for him a slight edge. In the mid­ my a4-pawn, Sakaev - Chigvint­
dle game, he can organise active sev, Smolensk 2000.
actions on the kingside after h3
(depriving Black's knight of the Following 6 . . .a5, there arise
g4-square) and f4, while follow­ positions which are more typical
ing the trade of the queens, on the for the Saemisch system of the
queenside as well with b3, a3 and King's Indian Defence and in a
b4. very favourable version for White.
7.�d3 ltJcS 8.�c2 ltJf6 9.f3 0-0
6 . . .�h6 7.ixh6 ltJxh6 8.W/d2 10.ltJge2 �d7 11.W/d2 h5 12. 0-0-0
ltJg4 (The character of the posi­ ltJh7 13.�b1 b6 14.g3 fS 15.exf5
tion would not change much after gxfS. Now, he must prepare the
8 . . . ltJg8 9.�d3 ltJgf6 10.ltJge2:l; and pawn-break g3-g4 with 16.h3 ! ,
there arises the same position as followed by E!dg1 and g4, after
after 8 . . . ttJg4, except that instead which the position is opened and
of h3, White had played the more almost all White's pieces join in
useful move - ltJge2, Bachtiar - the attack against the enemy king
Ciocaltea, Wijk aan Zee 1974.) (He maintains an edge too follow­
9.h3 ltJgf6 10 .�d3 hS 1l.�c2 h4 ing 16.f4 ltJf6:l;, but Black has
12.0-0-0 ltJhS 13.ltJge2:l;. White some counterplay due to the vul­
not only has more space, but leads nerability of the e4 and g4-
in development too, so he must squares Spraggett - Lacroix,
strive to open the position as Montreal 1978.).
quickly as possible, for example to
play g2-g4 and after the exchange 7.g4
on g3 to double his rooks on the
f-file, Bykhovsky - Neiman, Tel
Aviv 2002.

6 . . . ltJh6. The plan with the

transfer of the knight to f7 seems
to be too slow for Black. 7.h3 f6
8.W/d2 ltJf7 9.�d3 ltJcS 10.�c2 aS
ll.ltJge2 �d7 12.0-0-0 a4. It is
possible that he had to refrain
from this important pawn-ad­
vance, but even then, White's
prospects would have been pref­ This is a standard strategical
erable. 13.�b1 W/b8 14.ltJb5 0-0 resource for White, which here is
15.ltJec3± - He only needs now to justified tactically as well.
choose the right moment to ex- 7. . . 0-0

164
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 i.g7 3.e4

It does not seem logical for

Black to choose 7 . . . lLlf6, because
then, he will be able to advance
f7-f5 only after the retreat of his
knight. 8 . .te2 0-0 (Following 8 . . .
h S 9.g5 lLlh7 lO.lLlf3 0 - 0 11.'1Wd2
.td7 12. 0-0-0±, White has obvi­
ously much more space and the
pawn-advance f7-f5 and captur­
ing en passant will lead to the
weakening of the g6-pawn for
Black, Finegold - Calton, East­ 9 ••• a5
pointe 1994.) 9.h4 lLle8, Gruen­ After 9 . . . c6 10 .h4 cxdS ll.cxdS,
berg - Uhlmann, Leipzig 1973, in the game Velimirovic - Todor­
lO.hS± White has seized com­ cevic, Bjelovar 1979, Black decid­
pletely the initiative on the king­ ed to sacrifice a pawn - 1l.. .b5.
side. White refrained in vain from the
move 12 . .txb5;!;, because in that
After the premature operation case, Black's compensation would
7 .. .f5 8.gxf5 gxfS 9.'1Wh5+, Black have been insufficient.
will have to play 9 . . . mf8 (since af­
ter 9 . . . lLlg6 10.exf5 '!Wh4 ll.'!WgS 10.h4 .!Llc5 ll.'!Wd2 .td7 12 •

.tf6 12.'1Wg3±, he will hardly man­ 0-0-0 .!Llc8 13.h5-+ followed by

age to regain his sacrificed pawn, '!Wh2 and actions on the h-file, La­
Huebner - Mohr, Germany 1990) hner - Nehybka, Brno 2004. If
10.lLlh3 ! White's knight is headed Black decides at some moment to
immediately for the gS-square play f5-f4, then White will simply
and from there it will control exchange on cS and follow that
the super-important e4 and e6- with .ih3, achieving the favoura­
squares. 10 . . . lLlf6 ll.'!We2 lLlxe4 12. ble trade of the light-squared
lLlxe4 fxe4 13.lLlg5;!; Black's extra bishops and preserving all the
pawn on e4 is absolutely immate­ pluses of his position.
rial, because White can regain it
the moment he pleases. The
placement of Black's monarch B) 2 .tg7 3.e4
•••

however, seems to be precarious, (diagram)

since there are still too many piec­ Now, Black has a great choice
es left on the board. of possibilities. His most popular
move is 3 d6 and we will. ana­
•••

8.£3 f5 9.g5 lyse it in our next chapter. Here,

This move deprives Black's we will deal with: Bl) 3 c6, B2) •••

knight of the f6-square. 3 c5 and B3) 3 .!Llc6.

.•• •••

165
Chapter 12

transfer his bishop to its initial

c8-square. ll . . . e5, Petrosian -
Spassky, Moscow 1966. Here,
White had to begin active actions
on the queenside with 12.tt:ld2 f5
13.f3 f4 14.i.f2 g5 15.b4 a5 16.a3±,
followed by c4-c5. His queenside
initiative develops much faster
than Black's counterplay on the
opposite side of the board.

About 3 . . . tt:Jf6 4.tt:lc3 - see part

2. Bl) 3 ••• c6
Black plays this move only
I t i s just bad for Black t o play very seldom. He wishes to ad­
3 . . . e5, because after 4.dxe5 .ixe5 vance d7-d5.
5.tt:lf3, he must lose a tempo for 4.c!Oc3 d5
the retreat of his bishop. 5 . . . .ig7
6.tt:lc3 tt:Je7 7.h4 ! ? h6 8.if4 d6 About 4 . . . d6 5.i.e2 - see Chap­
9.c5 ! t Yurtaev - Dzhumaev, ter 13, 4 . . . c6.
Tashkent 2007. This is an ener­
getic and strong move. Black is
faced with difficult problems,
since following 9 . . . dxc5 10.�xd8+
'it>xd8 11.0-0-0+ .id7 12.tt:lb5
tt:J a6 13.tt:le5 ixe5 14 ..ixe5 E!:e8 15 .
.if4 h5 16 . .ic4±, White has more
than sufficient compensation for
the pawn. He has two powerful
bishop and Black's pieces are dis­
coordinated. On top of this, his
king is endangered, despite the
fact that it is an endgame. 5.e5 ! ?
I t i s worse for White to play
Black would not equalise if he e4-e5 after a preliminary ex­
fianchettoes his second bishop: change on d5, because then
3 . . . b6 4.tt:lc3 .ib7 5.tt:lf3 d6 6.i.e2 Black's knight will gain access to
tt:ld7 7. 0-0 e6 8.i.e3 tt:Je7 9.�c2 the c6-square.
h6 10.E!:ad1 0-0 ll.d5 ! This is the
point! Now, Black's bishop on b7 There arises transposition to
will be restricted by White's pawn the Panov attack of the Caro­
and the best that Black can do is Kann Defence following 5.exd5

166
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 .ig7 3.e4

cxd5 6.cxd5 (It would be too risky 6.h3

for White to accept the pawn-sac­ With this move White pre­
rifice after 6.'Llxd5, since in the pares the development of his
variation 6 . . . e6 7.Vf/e2 'Llc6�, he knight on f3 preventing the pos­
will have problems to protect his sibility .ig4. Black's position is
pawn on d4 and his queen on e2 cramped and the exchanges of
would impede the development of pieces are in his favour.
his kingside pieces.) 6 . . . 'Llf6. 6 • . . 0-0 7 .!L!f3 f6
.

This move must be played im­

5 . • • .!L!h6 mediately.
Black prepares to castle and
to create counterplay against It would be too slow for Black
White's centre with the move t7- to choose 7 . . . i>h8. After 8 . .ie2
f6. dxc4 9.hc4 'Lld7 10.0-0 lt:Jb6 11.
�b3 f6 12.�f4 'Lld5 13.lt:Jxd5 cxd5
The position is difficult for 14.exf6 exf6 15.Vf/d2 lt:Jf5 16J'Uel±,
Black following 5 . . . dxc4 6 . .bc4 he will have problems with the
'Llh6 7.h3 'Llf5 8.'Llf3 b5 9 . .ib3 h5, development of his bishop on c8
Hart - Cardoso, Las Palmas 1975, and his other bishop is severely
10. 0-0± - he can hardly exploit restricted by his own pawn on f6,
the weakness of White's d4-pawn. Wojtaszek - Kuzmicz, Warsaw
The pawn-advance has only led to 2008.
the weakening of Black's c6-pawn
and the c5-square and White's 8.exf6 exf6 9.�e2
knight can go there along the
route 'Llc3-e4-c5.

Black cannot equalise with 5 . . .

.ie6. After 6.cxd5 hd5 7.'Llge2
'Llh6, the best for White is 8.'Llf4 ! ?
(although even after 8.'Llxd5 Vf/xd5
9.'Llc3 Vf/d7 10 . .ic4;t, his two bish­
ops and the more actively devel­
oped pieces compensate with an
interest the vulnerability of
White's d4-pawn, Olafsson - Car­
doso, Las Palmas 1975) 8 . . . 0-0 9 .ie6 10.�b3 �d7 11.0-0
• . •

9 ..id3 e6 10. 0-0± Black's pieces dxc4

are cramped and his knight on h6 This is the best for Black. The
is misplaced, moreover that the exchanges do not equal�se for him
dark squares are very weak in his completely, but facilitate his de­
camp. fence for sure.

167
Chapter 12

Following ll .. .lt:lf7 12 J�e1 tt:ld6 which will be analysed in our vol­

13.c5 tt:lfS 14.�f4 gS 15.�h2±, ume 3. In the majority of the cases
White has occupied space on the White can transpose to favoura­
queenside and Black's kingside ble variations of the King's Indian
activity is much rather in favour Defence, for example: 5 . . . d6 6.
of White, because the pawn-ad­ tt:lc3 tt:lf6 7.�e2 0-0 S.igS.
vances have only weakened
Black's king shelter, Short - 5.c!lJc3
Spassky, Zuerich 2001.

12 . .ixc4 .ixc4 13.ti'xc4+

'fi!f7, Pinter - Okhotnik, Hungary
1999, 14.d5 ! ?;t White's pieces are
much better prepared for the
opening of the centre and the
move f7-f6 has not only restricted
the mobility of Black's bishop on
g7, but has also weakened the
shelter of his king.

B2) 3 ... c5 s ... es

This is an attempt to keep the
position closed.
Besides this, Black has a great
choice of possibilities.

About 5 . . . tt:lf6 6.ie2 0-0 7.

igS - see the Averbakh system
(Chapter 11).

Following 5 ... tt:la6, the best for

White is to simply transpose to a
favourable variation of the King's
This move is in the spirit of Indian Defence after 6.ie2 tt:lf6
the Indian Defence. Now, White's 7.ig5 0-0 8.f4 - see Chapter 9.
main task is to transpose, if pos­
sible, to the Averbakh system of 5 . . . e6 6.�e2 . Once again White
the King's Indian Defence. is trying to transpose to the Aver­
4.d5 d6 bakh system. 6 . . . exd5 7.exd5 tt:le7.
After 4 . . . b5 S.cxbS, there arise After this move, there arise origi­
positions from the Benko Gambit nal positions (following 7 . . . tt:lf6,
(in a very good version for White), White achieves what he wants af-

168
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 i.g7 3.e4

ter 8.ig5 0-0 9.Wfd2 - see Chap­ slightly inferior, but still defensi­
ter 11, variation D) 8.tt:lf3 ig4 ble position. His attempt to con­
9.0-0 0-0 10.if4 tt:lfS ll.h3 .ixf3 tinue in an active fashion with 8 . . .
12 . .ixf3 . He has the two-bishop fS? ! Duppel - V.Georgiev, Ger­
advantage and extra space. Later, many 2001, could have led to a
in the game Iljushin - Moroze­ very difficult position for him fol­
vich, Krasnoyarsk 2003, there fol­ lowing 9.exf5 ! White has two
lowed: 12 . . . tt:Jd7 13.i.e4 tt:leS 14. bishops, so he should strive to
i.xfS gxfS 15.b3 a6 16.!k1 tt:lg6 open the game. 9 . . .gxf5 10.tt:lh3
17.id2 f4 18.Wfh5;!; and White tt:Jf6 11.0-0 h6 12 .Wfc2 . Now, Black
maintained a stable advantage is forced to play 12 . . . e4, after
thanks to his superior pawn­ which White's knight gains access
structure. to the wonderful f4-square. 13.
.ie2 tt:lbd7 14.tt:lf4 tt:le5 15.tt:lh5! Af­
It seems a bit dubious for ter this move Black's monarch
Black to try the move S . . . .ixc3+ . will not be able to castle and will
Naturally, the trade o f the bishop remain for long in the centre of
for the knight with the idea to the board. 15 . . . tt:Jxh5 16 . .ixh5+
compromise White's pawn-struc­ 'k!;>d8 17.i.f4± White's two bishops
ture is well familiar. But here, are powerful force. It is under­
contrary to the Nimzowitch De­ standable that without having
fence, the dark squares on Black's completed his development and
kingside have been weakened and with a king stranded in the centre,
this may become a telling factor in Black should not be greedy to win
the future. 6.bxc3 material. After 17 . . . tt:Jxc4? 18.Wfb3
tt:leS (18 . . . b5 19.a4+-) 19 ..ixe5
dxeS 20 .d6+-, despite the extra
pawn, Black's position seems to
be completely hopeless. He is in­
capable of parrying White's
threats Wff7, or WfdS and WfeS.
6 . . . Wfa5 7.Wfb3 tt:lf6 (It seems
too dangerous for Black to opt for
7 . . .f5? ! 8.exf5 .ixfS 9.tt:le2 tt:la6 10.
tt:lg3 i.d7 ll.id3 0-0-0 12.0-0
About 6 . . . tt:lf6 7.id3 WfaS 8. tt:Jc7 13.E:e1 Wfa6 14.E:bl± and his
Wfb3 - see 6 . . . Wfa5. e7-pawn is weak, while White's
6 . . . e5 7.i.d3 WfaS 8.Wfb3. Now, pieces are very active, Yermolin­
Black should better refrain from sky - Tate, Chicago 2008.) 8.id3
active actions and try to complete tt:Jbd7 9.tt:lf3 0-0 10.0-0;!; White
his development as quickly as has doubled pawns indeed, but
possible. He will preserve then a his two bishops (particularly the

169
Chapter 12

dark-squared bishop, which has 7.J.e2 h6

no opponent and is very power­
ful) make us evaluate the position Following 7 . . . h5, White ob­
in his favour, Zeller - Kekelidze, tains an advantage after 8.�g5
Germany 1997. 'Llbd7 9.'1Wd2 a6 10.f3 'Llf8. His
bishop on e2 and the pawn on f3
6.h4!? deprive his knight on g1 from its
usual squares for development.
Therefore, White transfers it to
f2 , via the h3-square, and from
there it can support the kingside
pawn-break (g2-g4). ll.'Llh3 'Ll8h7
12 .�e3 �d7 13.'Llf2;!; Dorfman -
Spielmann, Gonfreville 2006. The
threat g2-g4 is very unpleasant
for Black. If he decides to advance
b7-b5, White should better re­
frain from active actions on the
kingside and begin the realisation
This i s a n already familiar idea of his extra pawn.
in the King's Indian Defence.
Now, Black must either play hS, 8.h5 g5 9.g4
which would weaken the gS­
square, or allow h4-h5, but after
g6-g5 and g2-g4, he would not be
able to advance f7-f5.
6 ... tl:lf6

6 . . . h5 7.'Llf3. White's knight is

headed for the gS-square. 7 . . . 'Llf6
8.tt:lg5 'Llh7 9.'Llxh7 Ei:xh7 10.�e2;!;
Karpov - Kober, Germany (simul)
2004. Black has managed to get
rid of the enemy knight on gS, but
has lost plenty of time doing this. Now, f7-f5 has become impos­
White has extra space and after sible for Black and he will have to
castling queenside will have the defend passively to the end of the
possibility to attack on the queen­ game.
side (a2-a3, b2-b4), as well as on 9 . . . tl:la6 10.a3 tl:lc7 ll.b4 b6
the kingside (g2-g3, f2-f4). Black 12.f3 tl:lh7 13.gb1 0-0 14.J.e3
is doomed to a long and passive J.d7 15.tl:lh3 ti'c8 16.tl:lf2 ti'a6
defence. 17.gb3 gfbs 18.0-0 ti'cs 19.

170
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 .ig7 3.e4

'led2 i.f6 20.gfbl i.d8 21.'leb2

ltla6 22.ltld3 ltlf8 23.ltlb5± and
in the game S.Atalik - Schorr,
Boston 2001, White succeeded in
realising his great advantage.

B3) 3 ••• ltlc6

This is an active move. Black is
trying to create immediate coun­
terplay against the enemy d4-
pawn. This move seems more prom­
Now, White must play very ising than the retreat of the knight
precisely. to its initial position.
4.ltlf3
S . . . lt:Jb8. The pawn-advance
d4-d5 has forced Black to lose two
tempi on moves with his knight.
6.ie2 lt:Jf6 (After 6 . . . e5, the sim­
plest reaction for White would be
7.dxe6 .ixe6 8.0-0 lt:Jc6 9.lt:Jc3
lt:Jf6 10 ..if4 0-0 ll.'lec2 :Be8 12.
:Bad1 id7 13.:Bfe1 h6 14.h3t and
the extra space guarantees his ad­
vantage, Solozhenkin - Tusa,
Helsinki 2002.) 7.lt:Jc3 0-0 8.0-0

This is the rare case when in

this variation White must play
lt:Jf3 so early in the game. The rea­
son is that Black has not played
d7-d6 yet and cannot play .ig4.
We will analyse now: B3a)
4 d6 and B3b) 4 e5.
••• •••

B3a) 4 ••• d6 5.d5 Following 8 . . .e5, White main­

Otherwise, Black would have tains a stable edge with 9.dxe6 ! ?
pinned the enemy knight on his .ixe6 10.lt:Jd4, for example: . 1 0 . . .
next move with .ig4. lt:Jc6 ( 1 0 . . . .id7 1l . .ie3 . :Be8 12.f3
(diagram) lt:Jc6 13.'\Wd2 lt:JhS, Rozum - Fedo­
5 ••• ltle5 seev, St Petersburg 2010, 14.

171
Chapter 12

ltlc2 ! ?;!;, he avoids the trade of ian - Kalantarian, Yerevan 1995 .

pieces and preserves an opening White maintains a stable advan­
advantage, because Black's posi­ tage thanks to his superior pawn­
tion is cramped) ll.i.e3 ltld7, structure. He only needs to play
Gleizerov - Rossi, Padova 1999. precisely, for example: 15.i.e3 ! ?
Here, after the simple move 12. ltlbS 16.ltla4± and the pawn o n c6
f4 ! ?;!;, White would have seized will remain a cause of permanent
the initiative. worries for Black.) 10.i.e3 bS 11.
cxbS
8 . . . ltlbd7 9.i.e3 ltlcS 10 .�c2 aS
ll.!!ad1 ltlg4 12 .i.d4 f6 13.h3 ltleS
14.ltlxe5 fxeS 15.i.e3 i.d7 16.i.g4±
Black's bishop on g7 is severely
restricted by his own pawn on eS.
White has much more space and
his minor pieces are more active
than their black counterparts,
Gritsak - G.Kuzmin, Swidnica
1999.
Now, it seems rather dubious
8 ... i.g4 9.i.e3 ltlbd7 10 .h3 i.x£3 for him to opt for ll . . . axbS 12.
ll.i.xf3 c6 12.�b3 Vfic7 13J%acU dxc6 b4 (following 12 . . . ltlxc6 13.
White has a slight but stable ad­ i.xbS±, Black has no compen­
vantage thanks to his extra space sation for the sacrificed pawn,
and two powerful bishops, Jansa Mokriy - Bezgodov, Minsk 2007.)
- Nikolic, Vrnjacka Banja 1978. 13.ltld5 ltlxc6 14.i.b6 Vfid7 15.
i.bS !± He can hardly get rid of the
Following 8 . . . ltla6 9.i.e3 i.d7 pin of his knight without material
10.!!c1 !!e8 ll.a3 e6, Kiriakov - losses. In the game Moranda -
Nisipeanu, Santo Domingo 2003, Bartnicki, Gorzow Wielkopolski
White can open advantageously 2008, Black reacted rather care­
the position in the centre with the lessly 15 . . . i.b7? and this enabled
line : 12.e5 ! ? dxeS 13.ltlxe5 exdS White to inflict a tactical strike -
14.ltlxd7 d4 15.�xd4 ltlxd7 16. 16.ltle5 ! ltlxeS 17.ltlxf6+ i.xf6 18.
�d2;!; - his two bishops are pow­ i.xd7+-, Black's compensation
erful force in this open position. for the queen is obviously insuffi­
cient.
8 . . . c6 9.h3 ! It is useful to re­ It is possible that instead of
strict with this move the enemy creating counterplay, Black had
bishop on c8. 9 . . . a6 (9 . . . ltlbd7 10. to continue with the solid move
i.e3 ltle8 ll.!!c1 a6 12.dxc6 bxc6 1l. .. cxb5, but even then after 12.
13.c5 dxcS 14.i.xc5 ltlc7, Yegiazar- Vfib3;!;, White would have main-

172
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 .ig7 3.e4

tained his space advantage, the Or lO . . . eS ll . .igS h6 12 . .ie3 b6

possibility to exploit the weakness 13.1Mfd2 'it>h7 14.b4;!;, followed by
on c6 ( ltlf3-d4-c6) and to play c4-c5 and queenside initiative for
against the vulnerable enemy bS­ White, S.lvanov - A.Eliseev, St
pawn - a2-a4. Petersburg 2013.

6.�xe5 .txe5 ll . .ig5 exd5 12.cxd5

Following 6 . . . dxe5, Black's It is also good for White to

pawn-structure will be compro­ choose here 12.exd5 ! ?;!; - the pin
mised. 7.ltlc3 ltlf6 8.ie2 0-0 9. of the knight is very unpleasant
ie3 e6 10.0-0 exdS ll.cxdS. He for Black and he can get rid of it
has got rid of his doubled pawn, only by compromising his king's
but after the opening of the c-file, shelter with h6 and gS.
Black's weak c7-pawn will be at­
tacked by White. 1l.. .ltle8 12.!k1
ltld6 13.Wfd2 id7 14J��c 2 fS 15.f3;t,
followed by the doubling of the
rooks, Gause} - Kraidman, Gaus­
dal 1994. White has a clear-cut
plan for his further actions - this
is exerting pressure on the semi­
open c-file.

12 h6 13 .ie3 c6 14.dxc6
••• •

bxc6 15.Wfd2 'it>h7 16.lUdl Wfe7

17J3acU White has an easy game
against Black's weak c6 and d6-
pawns, Gelfand - Svidler, Astana
2012.

B3b) 4 ... e5
He does not lose time for the
7 .id3 .ig7 8.0-0 �f6 9.�c3
• move d6 and advances e7-e5.
0-0 10.h3 5 .ig5! ?
•

It is useful for White to take (diagram)

the g4-square under control in or­ The purpose of this move is to
der to deprive Black of the possi­ provoke f7-f6, after which Black's
bility to play ltlf6-g4-e5. pressure against the d4-pawn will
10 ••• e6 be decreased considerably.

173
Chapter 12

13.0-0t Danner - Tabernig,

Austria 2001. White has more
space (pawns on c4 and e4 against
a black pawn on d6) and has com­
pleted the development of his
pieces. In addition, due to the
placement of his pawn on h6,
Black cannot castle kingside with­
out weakening it even further (hS
or gS).

5 f6
... 6 .Ae3 d6
•

Black is trying to obtain a com­

S . . . .if6. The bishop is mis­ plicated position with his last
placed here and the best that move.
Black can do is to exchange it for It is also possible for him to
White's bishop on the d4-square. opt for 6 . . . exd4 7.ltlxd4 d6 (Slow­
6.ie3 exd4 7.ltlxd4 ltlxd4 8 . .ixd4 ing down the advance of the d­
d6 9.ltlc3t Kutzner - Lorenz, Ber­ pawn cannot be good for Black at
lin 2012. White has occupied all, for example: 7 . . . ltlge7 8.ltlc3
more space and in order to com­ 0-0 9.c5 ! ? b6 10.h4 ! This is an
plete his development Black will energetic and strong move -
need to exchange on d4, after White begins an attack. 10 . . . ltlxd4
which his position will be ll.Wxd4 bxc5 12.\Wxc5 d6 13.\Wc4+
prospectless. �h8 14.h5± - He has excellent at­
tacking prospects in a position
It is possible for him to opt for with material equality, Lesiege -
S . . . ltlge7 6.dxe5 ltlxeS 7.ltlxe5 Cazelais, Montreal 2003.) 8.ltlc3
.ixeS 8.ltlc3 h6. Unfortunately for ltlge7. Now, White can enter a
Black, he cannot continue the slightly better endgame with a
game without this move. (It is bad temporary pawn-sacrifice. 9.c5
for him to choose 8 . . . c6? ! , since dxcS 10.ltlxc6 ltlxc6 11.\Wxd8+
this weakens the d6-square and ltlxd8 12 .hc5t White has re­
White's queen is immediately gained his pawn and has the ini­
headed there. 9.f4 ig7 10.'1Wd6 h6 tiative in this endgame. He can
ll.if6 h£6 12.\Wx£6 0-0, V.Ge­ complete quickly the develop­
orgiev - Appel, Germany 2001, ment of his pieces with 0-0-0
13.\Wd6± Black's position is and .ic4. Black must still prepare
cramped and he can hardly com­ castling queenside and solve the
plete the development of his problem with his bishop on g7
queenside pieces.) 9.ie3 d6 10. which is restricted by his own
'!Wd2 ig7 ll.!!d1 ie6 12 .ie2 a6 pawn on f6.

174
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 .tg7 3.e4

7 .lL!h6
••

Black's f6-pawn has deprived

his knight of the natural square
for development, so he wishes to
transfer it to the f7-square.

About 7 . . . exd4 8.ti:Jxd4 ti:Jge7

9.c5 - see 6 . . . exd4.

It is bad for Black to opt for 7 . . .

fS, since following 8.exf5 ixfS
9.d5 ti:Jce7, White maintains a
considerable advantage by ex­
White should better not be in a changing at first the light-squared
hurry with his standard queen­ bishops and then transferring his
side play 7.d5 ti:Jce7 8.c5, because knight to the weakened e6-square.
Black will trade advantageously 10 . .td3 ti:Jf6 ll . .txfS ti:JxfS 12.ti:Jg5±
the dark-squared bishops with Anreiter - Chouraqui, Email
8 . . . .th6 ! 9.'1Wc1 he3 10.\Wxe3 fS 2009.
11.cxd6 cxd6 12 .-tbS+ , and can
avoid the favourable for White ex­ It is not good for Black to
change of the light-squared bish­ continue with 7 . . . .tg4, because af­
ops with the move 12 . . . c.!if8. The ter 8.d5 ti:Jce7 9.c5 .th6, White
position is closed and the loss of should not exchange on h6, be­
Black's castling rights is not so cause this will only help Black to
important. 13.ti:Jc3 fxe4 14.\Wxe4 develop his kingside pieces. It is
ti:Jf6 15.\We3 c.!ig7 16.!!d1 h6 17. 0-0 much stronger for White to
a6, Gligoric - Keene, Teeside choose the energetic line: 10.\Wb3 !
1972 . The opponents agreed to a he3 ll.fxe3± and Black will have
draw in this double-edged posi­ problems with the protection of
tion. his queenside pawns. White is
threatening to complete quickly
his development: .tbS, 0-0 and
depending on circumstances to
begin active actions on the c and
f-files.

It seems purposeful for Black

to try 7 . . . .th6. He exchanges fa­
vourably the bishops, . but lags
considerably in development.
8.\Wd2 he3

175
Chapter 12

on the f-file.) 13.ie2 he2 14.

lt:Jxe2 �g7, Epishin - Zaichik,
New York 1990. Now, White had
simply to double his rooks : 15.
0-0 !k8 16.E!:f2 lt:Jh6 17.h3 E!:f8
18.E!:afl±. Black has no counter­
play. He cannot exchange on f4,
because this will lead to the pene­
tration of White's knight to the
9.1Mlxe3 (It may be interesting e6-square. He can improve his
for White to opt for 9.fxe3 ! ?;!; Do­ position combining his kingside
lenc - Malakhatko, Latschach actions with the preparation of a
2012, he ends up voluntarily with breakthrough on the opposite
doubled pawns, but has good side of the board: a3, b4.
prospects on the f-file and the 11 . . . id7 12 .ie2 h5, Grigorov -
pawn on e3 covers reliably the Azmaiparashvili, Kallithea 2009
dark squares in his camp.) 9 . . . ig4 (Black loses a pawn without suffi­
10.d5 lt:Jce7 (or 10 . . . lt:Jb4, Cram­ cient compensation following
ling - Rustemov, Germany 2011 12 . . .f5 13.f4 lt:lf6 14.fxe5 dxe5 15.
and after 1UkU, Black's knight exf5 lt:Jxf5 16.1Mlxe5± Banikas - Az­
on b4 will only help White to or­ maiparashvili, Beijing 2008.) 13.
ganise his queenside offensive: 0-0 lt:Jh6 14.f4 lt:Jf7 15.fxe5. This is
a3, b4, c5 and eventually �a6) the point. 15 . . . fxe5. Black cannot
11.lt:Jd2. He is preparing f2-f4. capture on e5 with his knight
This move is possible, since after since he loses his f6-pawn. 16.c5±,
the exchange on f4, Black's knight followed by lt:Jc4 and the doubling
will hardly come to the e5-square. of the rooks on the f-file. Black's
defence will be very difficult.

8.dxe5! ?
This i s a very practical deci­
sion. White is happy with a slight
edge, depriving his opponent of
any active counterplay on the
kingside.
(diagram)
8 . . . dxe5
11 . . . c5 12.f4 �f8 (The charac­
ter of the fight remains more or 8 . . . lt:Jxe5 9.lt:Jxe5 fxe5 10.�e2
less the same after 12 . . . b6, Lerner �e6 11.c5 ! White is eyeing the
- Zilberman, Azov 1991, 13.�d3±, weakness of Black's d6-pawn. 11 . . .
followed by doubling of the rooks lt:Jf7 12 .ig4. W e have already

176
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 !g7 3.e4

side pawns with b2-b4 and c4-c5.

9.�xd8+ �xd8
The careless move 9 . . . tt'lxd8
leads to the loss of a pawn for
Black after 10.tt'ld5 tt'le6 ll . .bh6±
Friberg - Norberg, Sweden 2007.

10.0-0-0+ .id7 ll.h3

mentioned numerous times in

this book that the trade of the
light-squared bishops in positions
of the King's Indian type is almost
always in favour of White. 12 . . .
.bg4 13.�xg4 0-0, Riegler -
Mehlhorn, Saarbruecken 2009,
14.0-0t He has remained with a
"good" bishop and prospects to
attack the vulnerable enemy d6-
pawn. In addition, after the ex­ It is essential to deprive Black's
change on d6, White's knight will knight of the g4-square.
gain permanent access to the
wonderful dS-outpost. ll • . • c!LJf7

Following 8 . . . fxe5, Black will In the variation ll . . . 'it>c8 12 .c5

have problems creating counter­ �e6 13.tt'ld5 tt'lf7 14.�c4t, followed
play on the f-file. 9.h3 tt'lf7 10.�d2 by the advance of White's queen­
(It is also possible for White to try side pawns, he exerts rather un­
here 10.c5, beginning an attack pleasant pressure in this end­
against the enemy d6-pawn.) 10 . . . game. His centralised knight on
�e6 1l.�e2 �d7 12.tt'ld5t Korch­ d5 is very powerful and Black can
noi - Avrukh, Beersheba 1997. hardly connect his rooks, Dziuba
Black's knight on f7 and his bish­ - Berger, Deizisau 2009.
op on g7 are very passive. White
has much more space and his 12.c5
knight on dS is very powerful in White frees the c4-square for
the centre of the board, moreover his bishop.
that he has a clear-cut plan for
further actions: 0-0, l'!fd1, l'!ac1 12 �c8 13 .ic4 c!LJcd8 14.
••• •

followed by advancing his queen- b4 .ie6 15.c!lJd2 c6 16. �c2 .ixc4

177
Chapter 12

17.loxc4;!; - his position is much vance his a and b-pawns, or pre­

easier to play, Roiz - Hauchard, pare the penetration of his rook to
Biel 2010. Later, White can ad- d7 and the knight to d6.

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of Black's attempts to avoid
entering the Modern Defence on his moves 2 and 3. White obtains an
advantage in all the variations, but his play is not so simple at all. There
are many intricacies in these positions and there may arise transposi­
tions to numerous other openings.
In general, we have to mention that is is not advantageous for White
to develop early his knight to the f3-square, because this will enable
Black to exert pressure against the d4-square with the move ig4, or to
transpose to the King's Indian Defence, avoiding the Averbakh system.
The only exception is the move 3 . . . 'Llc6, because in this variation White
plays 4.'Llf3, but after 4 . . . d6, he must advance immediately S.dS, with­
out waiting for Black to pin his knight with the move S . . . ig4.

178
Chapter 13 l.d4 g6 2.c4 ig7 3.e4 d6

About 4 . . . c5 S.dS - see Chap­

ter 12, variation 82.

4 . . .f5. Without the move e7-e5,

played beforehand, this pawn-ad­
vance does not seem good for
Black. S.exfS i.x£5 6.tt'lf3 (This
move is more reliable than the
pawn-sacrifice 6 . .id3, although
even then, White obtains a better
game following 6 . . . .hd4 7.-hfS
In this chapter we will analyse .hc3+ 8.bxc3 gxfS 9.'\WhS+ '>!<d7
this elastic move with which Black 10.'\WxfS+ e6 11.'\WbS+ tt:Jc6 12.c5;!;.
preserves many possibilities. Black is incapable of exploiting
There arise various, some even the defects of his opponent's
rather unusual positions after it - pawn-structure, due to the unsafe
between complicated King's Indi­ placement of his king in the cen­
an middle games up to various tre of the board, Koglbauer -
endgames. Tacke, Email 2008.) 6 . . . tt:Jh6 (6 . . .
4.�c3 tt:Jf6 7 . .id3 .ig4. H e avoids the
After this natural move (White trade of the bishops, since it is in
is again not in a hurry to develop favour of White. 8 . .ie2 '1Wd7 9.0-0
his knight to f3.), we will analyse tt:Jc6 10 . .ie3 0-0 ll.h3 .hf3 12.
three basic moves for Black: A) i.x£3 eS, Birnboim - Gruenfeld,
4 . . . e5, B) 4 . . . �c6 and C) 4 . . . Tel Aviv 1988, 13 . .hc6 '1Wxc6 14.
�d7, but before that we will deal dxeS dxeS 15.'1Wb3± White's ad­
with some other possibilities for vantage is doubtless thanks to his
him. superior pawn-structure.) 7.id3
0-0 8 . .ixh6! This preliminary ex­
After 4 . . . tt'lf6 S.ie2 , there aris­ change is very important, because
es the King's Indian Defence. if White had traded the bishops

179
Chapter 13

immediately, Black's knight on fS nent with the two-bishop advan­

would have exerted rather un­ tage, or allow the enemy knight to
pleasant pressure against White's occupy the d6-outpost, Gulko -
d4-pawn. 8 . . . .hh6 9 . .hf5 E:xfS Blatny, Hawaii 1998.) 7.d5 'Lle7
10.0-0 'Lld7 1l.Ei:el± Now, you can (7 ... c5 8.0-0 .hf3 9.ixf3 'Lle7
see the results of the premature 10.a3 0-0 1l.b4 'Lld7 12.Ei:bU. In
pawn-advance f7-f5 - Black's the arising complicated King's In­
king is vulnerable, his e7-pawn is dian middle game White has good
backward and if White's knight prospects of developing initiative
comes to the e6-square, Black's on the queenside, while it would
position would turn into strategi­ be very difficult for Black to create
cally hopeless. counterplay on the opposite side
of the board, because he has al­
4 . . . c6. This is a flexible move ready exchanged his light-squared
and White's best reaction against bishop, Bojkov - Svetushkin,
it would be S.ie2 France 2005.) 8.0-0 i.xf3 9.i.xf3
0-0, Leniart - Sieciechowicz, Os­
troda 2011 lO.igS h6 11.ie3±.
White has extra space and two
powerful bishops.
s . . . �b6. Black wishes to or­
ganise counterplay against the
enemy pawn on d4 with this early
queen-sortie. 6.'Llf3 i.g4 7.'Lla4
White must place his knight at the
edge of the board in order to oust
Now, after S . . . 'Llf6 6.ig5, there the enemy queen from its active
arises the Averbakh system of the position. 7 . . . �a5+ (7 . . . �c7 8.ie3
King's Indian Defence and not - see 7 . . . �a5) 8.id2 �c7 9.ie3
under the best version for Black. 'Lld7 10.0-0 'Llgf6 (10 . . . 'Llb6 11.
After s . . . a6 6.ig5 ! ? 'Llf6 7.�d2 Ei:cl 'Llf6 12 .h3 .hf3 13.ixf3± and
0-0 8.Ei:d1, we have again the White has again extra space and a
King's Indian Defence on the strong bishop-pair, Hernandez
board. Onna - Martinez Duany, Havana
S . . . eS 6.'Llf3 ig4 (6 . . . 'Lld7 7.d5 2008.) 11.'Llc3 0-0 12.'Lld2 eS
- see S . . . 'Lld7; the endgame is (12 . . . .he2 13.�xe2 eS 14.d5± He
worse for Black following 6 . . . '2Je7 has accomplished the favourable
7.dxe5 dxeS 8.�xd8+ 'it>xd8 9.i.e3 trade of the light-squared bishops
'Lla6 10.0-0-0+ 'it>e8 11.c5 'Llc7 and has occupied more space,
12.'Lld2 i.e6 13.'Llc4± - he is faced Krizsany - Gueting, Lippstadt
with a rather unpleasant choice. 1999) 13.d5 he2 14.�xe2. After
He must either present his oppo- the exchange of the light-squared

180
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 i.g7 3.e4 d6 4. tt:\ c3

bishops Black will have problems vance f7-f5 (He will simply ex­
organising counterplay on the change twice on fS and will gain
kingside. 14 . . . 'it>h8 15J'Ud1 c5 16. control over the excellent e4-
a3 a6 17.b4 �ac8 18.�abU Graf ­ square for his knight.) and can
Manolache, Germany 2008. White patiently prepare an offensive on
has more space and his bishop is the queenside, Schlosser - Mov­
much more active than its coun­ sesian, Baden-Baden 1996.
terpart. He has the initiative on 7 ... c5 8.g4 ! ? The idea of this
the queenside and Black is forced move is to impede f7-f5 for Black.
to defend passively. 8 . . . h5 9.g5 a6 10.a3 tt:le7 11.b4 b6
12.ie3 0-0 13.�g1;!; S.Atalik -
After S . . . tt:ld7 6.tt:lf3 eS (Black N.Gaprindashvili, Tallinn 1998.
can also transpose to the King's He has no counterplay and must
Indian Defence with 6 . . .tt:Jgf6 7. wait to see what will happen with
�gS 0-0 8.�d2 .) 7.d5 ! ? White's queenside initiative.
Black's attempt to organise coun­
terplay - f7-f5, after exfS would
lead only to the weakening of the
g6-pawn and the e6-square.
White can exploit this with his
knight along the route tt:lf3-g5-e6.

A) 4 ... e5

Following 7 . . . �c7 8.�e3 tt:Jgf6

9.tt:ld2 0-0 10.0-0;!;, there arises
a favourable version for White of
the King's Indian Defence. He has
managed to play �e3 and tt:ld2 ,
while Black can reply neither with
tt:Jg4, nor with tt:lhS.
The position remains very in­
teresting and advantageous for
White after 7 . . . �e7 8.�e3, for ex­
ample: 8 . . . tt:Jgf6 9.tt:ld2 c5 10.0-0 This move has been often
0-0 11.<±>h1 ! ? . This is an interest­ played by A.Morozevich and
ing plan. White is preparing g2- Sh.Mamedyarov. Now, White's
g4, in order to neutralise Black's simplest decision would be the
possible kingside counterplay. exchange of the queens and the
ll . . . <±>h8 12 .g4 tt:lg8 13.�gU White transfer to a slightly better end­
is ready to counter the pawn-ad- game.

181
Chapter 13

S.dxeS! ? dxeS 6.fbd8+ The position remains very pas­

�xd8 sive for him after the super-relia­
In the arising endgame the ble move 8 .. .£6. Following 9.fxe5
main fight will be focused on the tt:JxeS 10.tt:lxe5 fxeS ll.igS+ if6
d4 and eS-squares. Black will de­ 12.0-0-0+ id7 13 .ie3 c6, Ro­
velop his knight along the route manishin - Dvoretzky, Leningrad
tt:lb8-c6-d4. White will try to un­ 1974, White should better contin­
dermine its base with the moves ue with 14 . .ie2 ! ? , for example :
f4 and tt:lf3. 14 . . . �c7 1S.E!hfU - his rooks have
7.f4 occupied active positions on the
He must begin this process open d and f-files. Black lags in
immediately, because after development and what is most
Black's knight comes to the d4- important - his knight on g8 will
square, White will be incapable of hardly ever come to the d4-
undermining it. square.
9 .te2
•

Now, Black has a choice be­

tween the passive tactics Al) 7 ••• 9 ••• f6
c!bd7, A2) 7 .te6, o r the more
•••

active treatment - A3) 7 c!bc6.

••• 9 . . . �e8 10.0-0

About 7 ... c6 8.tt:lf3 tt:Jd7 9 ..ie2

- see 7 . . . tt:ld7.

Al) 7 c!bd7
•••

This move has a definite draw­

back. Now, Black's bishop on c8
with have problems entering the
actions.
8.c!bf3 c6 10 . . .f6 1l.g3. Now, White is not

182
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 ig7 3.e4 d6 4. l2J c3

afraid of the exchange on f4, be­ Black's knight o n the f7-square.

cause he will simply recapture ll ••• ttlxe5 12.ttlxe5 fxe5
with his g3-pawn. ll . . . l2Jh6 12.
Wg2 l2Jf7 13.ie3 if8 (13 . . . i.h6,
Rogers - Krasenkow, Birming­
ham 2006, 14J:!adU White has
slightly more space and Black
must still manage to develop his
queenside pieces.) 14.E:ad1 icS
1S.i.c1 We7 16.a3 aS 17.l2Ja4 id6
18.ie3;!; White's position is much
easier to play and Black's defence
is not easy at all, for example after
18 . . . l2Jd8?, as it was played in the
game Lund - Andreasen, Balle­ 13.ie3 �e8 14.gadl gf8
rup 2009, White could have ob­ 15.gfeU White has a superior de­
tained a decisive advantage im­ velopment, while Black's knight is
mediately with the line: 19.fxe5 still too far from the key-square in
tDxeS 20.E:xd6 Wxd6 2l.E:d1+ We7 this position - d4, Tal - Kagan,
2 2 .l2Jb6 E:b8 23 .ic5+ We6 24. Tel Aviv 1990.
id6+-
10 ... l2Je7 ll.i.d2 exf4 12.i.xf4
lDcS, Tal - Klaric, Sochi 1977, 13. A2) 7 ie6 •••

ie3 l2Je6 (It would be too risky for

Black to accept the pawn-sacrifice
- 13 . . . ixc3? ! 14.bxc3 l2Jxe4 15.
i.d3 fS 16.1"!:ael±, since after i.d4,
White regains the material and
Black's king, deprived of its cas­
tling rights, will be an easy prey
for White's rooks in the centre,
despite the fact that it is already
an endgame.) 14.E:aeU. If Black
had the possibility to castle, his
chances would not nave been
worse at all due to the vulnerabil­ This is a rather vulnerable
ity of White's e4-pawn. Now, as it placement for Black's bishop.
is the case, Black can hardly con­ 8.ttlf3 ttld7
nect his rooks.
10.0-0 ttlh6 ll.fxe5 About 8 . . . l2Jc6 9.i.e3. - see 7 . . .
It is essential to exchange l2Jc6.
there before the appearance of 9.ttlg5!?

183
Chapter 13

Naturally, after an exchange activity of White's pieces. With

on e6, White will not only obtain his last move he has prepared c4-
the two-bishop advantage, but c5, in order to develop his bishop
will attack Black's weak pawn. to an active position - c4. 17 . . . .tf8
18.c5 ctle7 19.ic4 gds 20.g4 gxd1
21.gxdl± and Black's position is
very difficult due to the unfavour­
able placement of his knight at
the edge of the board, Piket -
Azmaiparashvili, Montecatini
Terme 2000.

10.f5! ?
This i s a tactical decision for
White, but he could have played
simpler - 10.tt'lxe6+ fxe6 ll.g3;!;
9 .•• h6 C.Hansen - Seul, Germany 2001.
10 . . . hxg5 11.fxe6 fxe6
9 .. .lt:le7 10.g3 ! ? The bishop 12.hg5+ .if6
cannot run away from the e6-
square, so White does not need to
be in a hurry to exchange it. 10 . . .
h 6 11.tt'lxe6+ fxe6 12 .ih3± - He
has two powerful bishops, while
Black must worry about his weak
e6-pawn, AI Khaja - Jasim, Abu
Dhabi 2002.

Besides the move in the text,

he has tried in practice 9 . . . tt'lh6
10 .ie2 c6 11.0-0 ctle7 12 .h3 exf4
(after 12 . . .f6 13 .tt'lxe6 c!lxe6 14.f5;!;, 13.ie3
White has extra space and the Naturally, he should preserve
two-bishop advantage, while his two-bishop advantage.
Black can hardly exploit the weak­ Later, in the game Buss - Bell­
ening of the d4-square, Strating ini, Switzerland 2009 there fol­
- Hartoch, Haarlem 2005.) 13. lowed 13 . . . ih4+ 14.<!>d2 .!Lle7
hf4 tt'leS 14J'!ad1 f6 1S.ixe5 fxeS 15 .ie2 .!Llc6 16.gaf1 <!>e7 17.g3
•

16.tt'lxe6 c!lxe6 17.tt'la4. There are if6 18.h4 .!Lld4 19 . .idl gbd8
bishops of opposite colours pre­ 20.<!>cH Black's knight is power­
sent on the board, but it is very ful on d4, but White's positional
difficult for Black to neutralise the pluses - two bishops and the pos-

184
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 i.g7 3.e4 d6 4. lt:\ c3

sibility to create a passed pawn on After 8 . . . ie6 9.�e3 tt:lf6, it is

the h-file make us evaluate the essential for White to play 10 .g3.
position in his favour. Now, after an exchange on f4, he
will be able to recapture with his
pawn and will not have an isolat­
A3) 7 .•• �c6 8.�f3 ed pawn on e4. 10 . . . h6 11.0-0-0+
'it>c8 12 .h3;!; - He has covered reli­
ably the weak d4-square and his
position is preferable thanks to
his better developed pieces, An­
driuschenko - Banet, Email 2007.

Black's attempt to increase the

pressure against the d4-square
with the move 8 . . . �g4 does not
provide him with equality, be­
cause he lags in development. 9.
fxe5 tt:lxe5 (9 . . . ixf3 10.gxf3 he5,
Tarjan - Matulovic, Novi Sad
1975, 11.�e3;!; and White has the
8 . . . h6 9.�e3 exf4 10.0-0-0+ two-bishop advantage) 10 . .ie2
�d7 11.�4 g5 12 .�g3 tt:lge7 13. tt:lxf3+ ll.gxf3 ie6 12 .�g5+ i.f6
tt:ld5;!; - Despite the vulnerability 13.0-0-0+ 'it>c8 14.h4! ? (14.�e3
of the e4-pawn, White's prospects hc3 15.bxc3;!;. White's queenside
are preferable due to the powerful pawns are a bit weak indeed, but
placement of his knight in the he has two powerful bishops and
centre of the board and the unsafe maintains the advantage, moreo­
position of Black's monarch, ver that Black lags in develop­
Petursson - Ivkov, New York ment, S.Atalik - Skembris, Kar­
1988. ditsa 1996.) 14 . . . h5 15.f4 �e7 16.
tt:ld5 hd5 17.he7 tt:lxe7 18.cxd5;!;
8 . . .f6. This is a solid, but pas­ White's pawns have occupied the
sive move and we are already fa­ centre and his bishop is more pow­
miliar with it with a placement of erful than Black's knight, which is
Black's knight on the d7-square. in a very passive position.
9.�e3 �e6 10.E:d1+ 'it>c8 ll.�e2
tt:lh6 12 .fxe5 tt:lxe5 13.tt:lxe5 fxe5 9.'it>f2
14. 0-0;!;. White has a superior de­ This move is very typical for
velopment and Black is incapable this variation. Now White is not
of exploiting the vulnerability of afraid of the possible double at­
the d4-square, Vaganian - Mes­ tack by Black's knight and is wait­
tel, Skara 1980. ing for the exchange on f3.

185
Chapter 13

9 . . . c!Oxf3 10 . . . c6

9 . . . exf4 10.hf4. Black cannot The endgame is slightly pref­

exploit the vulnerability of his op­ erable for White following 10 . . .
ponent's e4-pawn, because he .ie6 ll.i.e3, for example: ll . . . tLle7
lags in development. 10 . . . tLle6 11. (Black's defence would not be
i.g3 i.d7 (following ll ... tLlh6 12. easier if he tries to compromise
.id3 .ixc3 13.bxc3 f6 14J'!heH, his opponent's pawn-structure
White has two powerful bishops, with ll . . . exf4 12 .E:d1+ 'it>c8 13.
while Black is behind in develop­ .b:f4 .b:c3 14.bxc3 tLle7 15.i.g5
ment, so all this compensates tLlc6 16 ..if6t - White's queenside
with an interest the defects of pawns are weak indeed, but his
White's pawn-structure, Peturs­ position is still preferable, be­
son - Nikolaidis, Athens 1993) 12. cause he has two powerful bish­
E:d1 'it>c8 13 . .id3 tLle7 14.tLld5 E:e8 ops, while the dark squares in
15.e5t, White's pieces are obvi­ Black's camp are very weak, Es­
ously more active than their black tremera Panos - Sutovsky, Pula
counterparts. Later in the game 1997.) 12.E:d1+ 'it>c8 13.tLld5 E:e8,
Sadler - Ehlvest, Groningen 1997, Halkias - K.Georgiev, Athens
Black failed to cope with the in­ 1998. Here, White could have ob­
tricacies of the defence and after tained a very promising position
15 . . . tLlc5? ! , White could have in­ with a pawn-sacrifice: 14.tLlxe7+
creased his advantage with a E:xe7 15.f5. There might follow:
rather simple tactical strike - 16. 15 . . . gxf5 16.E:g1 .if8 17 . .ih3 fxe4
tLlxc7! 'it>xc7 17.e6+ 'it>d8 18.exd7 18.E:g8 E:e8 19 . .ixe6+ fxe6 20.
tLlxd7 19 . .ie4± - The position fxe4t and he has more than suffi­
has been opened and White's cient compensation for his mini­
bishops have turned into power­ mal material deficit. His rook is
ful force. very active, while Black's pawns
are weak and his rook on a8 has
10.gxf3 not entered the actions yet.

U.h4!?
Black has not coordinated his
pieces and White wishes to break
his position on the kingside.

ll ... h5
After ll . . . exf4 12 . .ixf4 tLlf6
13.E:d1+ 'it>e8 14 . .id6t, Black will
have problems to complete his
development, while White has a

186
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 i.g7 3.e4 d6 4JiJc3 lb c6 S. i.e3 eS 6.d5

very simple plan to improve his

position: f4, e5 and lbe4, Bercys
- Wojtkiewicz, San Diego 2004.

12 .ie3 .ie6 13.gdl + rtlc7

•

14 .ic5 exf4 15 .id6+ rtlc8

• •

5 . . . lbh6. The transfer of this

knight to the f7-square seems to
be too slow. 6.f3 f6 7.i.d3 e5 8.
lbge2 0-0 9.d5 lbe7 10.1Wd2 lbf7
ll.g4 c5 12.lbg3 a6 13.h4 .id7
14.h5± Shipov - Beglerovic, Dos
Hermanas 2003. White's king­
This position was reached in side attack may turn out to be
the game Kiriakov - Tiller, West very powerful. If Black plays g6-
Bromwich 2005. White has a very g5, then White will begin a queen­
promising pawn-sacrifice here: side offensive and Black will have
16.lbe2 ! ? i.xb2 17.e5! He cuts no counterplay at all.
of the possible retreats of Black's
bishop. t7 c5 ts.gbl Ad4+ ••• He cannot equalise with 5 . . .
19.lbxd4 cxd4 20 .id3 .id7 21. • lbf6, because after 6.d5, Black los­
e6! i.xe6 22 .ie4± After the fall• es too much time on moves with
of his b7-pawn, Black's position his knight. 6 . . . lbe5 (Naturally, he
will be nearly hopeless. This vari­ cannot equalise even if he retreats
ation is a very instructive example his knight to its initial position.
of the power of the two bishops in Following 6 . . . lbb8 7.h3 0-0 8.lbf3
the endgame. c6 9 . .id3 e6 10.0-0 !i:e8 ll.'!Wd2t,
White has clearly better prospects
in the oncoming middle game
B) 4 • • • lbc6 thanks to his superior develop­
Black increases the pressure ment and a space advantage, Bo­
against the enemy d4-pawn. nin - Fink, Philadelphia 2006.)
5 .ie3
• 7.f4 lbed7 8.lbf3 0-0 9 ..ie2 e6
(diagram) 10.dxe6 fxe6 ll.lbg5 \We7 12.0-0
5 ••• e5 b6 13 . .if3 E:b8 14.\Wd2 i.b7 15.
This is a logical continuation E:ae1 h6 16.lbh3t. White has extra
of his opening strategy. space and Black's king shelter has

187
Chapter 13

been compromised, Tal - Chris­ i.g4 is not very sensible for Black,
tiansen, Wijk aan Zee 1982. because after 8.f3, he will have to
exchange the knights sooner or
6.d5 later. 8 . . . lLlxe2 (It is bad for Black
to opt for 8 . . . ixf3?, due to 9.Vtla4+
i>f8 10.gxf3 lLlxf3+ ll.i>dl± and
his pieces will not manage to at­
tack White's king, while in the
middle game, his extra piece is
obviously stronger than Black's
two pawns, Agrest - Sulava, Biel
1997.) 9.ixe2 id7 10.c5;!;. White's
queenside initiative develops
much faster than Black's counter­
play on the opposite side of the
board, Timoscenko - Rakhim­
Now, Black has a choice - berdiyev, Rijeka 2011.
where to retreat his knight? We
will analyse: Bl) 6 .c!L!d4 and
• • 8.i.xe2
B2) 6 ••• c!Llce7.

Bl) 6 ••• c!Lld4

The retreat of the knight to the
centre of the board cannot be
good for Black, since White forces
its exchange.
7.c!Llge2 c!Llxe2
Unfortunately for Black, he
cannot hold his knight in the cen­
tre of the board, because after 7 . . .
cS, White will follow with 8.dxc6 8 .. f5
.

c!Llxc6 9.lLlb5 and Black will have

great problems with the protec­ It seems rather slow for Black
tion of his d6-pawn. For example: to opt for 8 . . . hS, because after
9 ... i.f8 10 .Vtla4 i.e6 1U!d1 a6 12. 9.Vtfd2 ih6 10.0-0 ixe3 ll.Vtfxe3
lLlxd6+ ixd6 13.c5± and White gS 12.c5±, Black has accomplishes
will regain his bishop with his the favourable trade of the dark­
next move and Black will have to squared bishops, but lags consid­
play the rest of the game being a erably in development, Miles -
pawn down. Welling, Isle of Man 1995.
The inclusion of the move 7 . . . It is just bad for him to choose

188
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 �g7 3.e4 d6 4.tiJ c3 t:iJ c6 5. :ie3 e5 6.d.S

8 . . . CiJf6. He has waited for so long This move i s the beginning of

to develop his knight and now, he a standard plan of preventing
places it in front of his f7-pawn. Black's kingside counterplay. 9 . . .
9.c5 0-0 10.cxd6 cxd6 11.0-0 b 6 (After 9 . . .f5 10.f3 f4 11.:if2 hS
CiJe8 12 .'1Wb3 fS 12 .g5 h4 13.c5±, White has an
easy game on the c-file, while
Black's kingside counterplay is
nowhere in sight, Mellado Trivino
- Garcia Castro, Burgos 2003;
following 9 ... 0-0 10.h4 fS 11.f3
:id7, Kuthan - Todor, Austria
2011, 12 .h5 f4 13 ..if2 gS 14.c5±,
White has again succeeded in de­
priving his opponent of his coun­
terplay on the kingside, so the rest
13.exf5 gxfS 14.f4. The ex­ of the game Black will have to ad­
change on fS, followed by f4, is here to a long and laborious de­
one of the standard resources for fence without any prospects of
White in positions of the King's creating active counterplay.)
Indian type and is aimed at the re­ 10.h4 h6 11.h5 gS 12 .b4 aS 13.a3
striction of Black's kingside coun­ 0-0 14.f3 �h7 1S . .id3 CiJg8 16.
terplay. 14 . . . �h8 15.E:ad1 E:g8 16. 0-0± Black must remain very
�h1 CiJf6 17.fxe5 dxeS 18.d6± passive and only wait for his op­
White's d6-pawn is very powerful ponent to prepare c4-c5 and be­
and his pieces are perfectly coor­ gin active actions on the queen­
dinated, which cannot be said side, Bologan - Sanduleac, Ki­
about their black counterparts, shinev 2012.
Quinteros - Kotov, London 1977.
8 . . . :ih6. Black gets rid of his
8 . . . CiJe7. This attempt by Black "bad" bishop with this move, but
to advance f7-f5 under more fa­ falls behind in development even
vourable circumstances does not more. 9.'1Wd2 ixe3 10.'1Wxe3 CiJf6
work. 9.g4 ! ? 11.0-0-0 '1We7 12 .g3 id7 13.f4t
White has seized completely the
initiative. He has more space and
only needs to double his rooks on
the f-file, Petursson - Barlov,
Oviedo 1993.

9.exf5
Now, Black is faced with a
rather unpleasant choice. No

189
Chapter 13

matter how he recaptures - his White begins a pawn-offensive

position will remain worse. and Black will have great prob­
lems finding a safe haven for his
king.
10 ••• �d7 ll.h4 'We7

After ll . . . i.h6 12 .�d2 he3

13.�xe3 �f6, Nakamura - Shev­
elev, Reno 2002, 14.0-0-0±,
Black falls behind considerably in
development, while in the varia­
tion ll . . . tt:lh6 12 .h5± White seizes
the initiative completely.

9 • . • .ixf5
This move has a serious draw­
back. Black reduces his control
over the key e4-square.

9 . . . gxf5 10.£4 e4 (It would be

too risky for him to allow the
opening of the position, being so
far behind in development, for ex­
ample: 10 . . . tt:Je7 11.fxe5 dxeS 12.
i.gS �d7 13.c5 0-0 14.�b3 �h8
15.0-0-0± White's pieces are 12.c5!
much more active. Later, he ad­ After this energetic move,
vanced d5-d6 and won the game, Black's defence will be very diffi­
Korchnoi - Bohm, Leeuwarden cult, for example:
1977.) ll.ihS+ . It would be useful 12 ••• dxc5
for him to keep the enemy king in
the centre of the board. 11 . . . �f8 He loses a pawn without any
12.0-0 tt:lf6 13.c5 i.d7 14. cxd6 compensation after 12 . . . tt:lf6 13.g5
cxd6 15.ie2;!; White has a very tt:lh5 14.ixh5 gxh5 15.�xh5±
simple plan for further actions :
1Mib3, l:!c1 followed by operations 13.c!Llb5! 'Wd8 14.d6! hb5
on the c-file, while Black must 15.hb5+ c6 16.�c4 c!Llf6 17.g5
worry seriously about the safety c!Lld5 18.hd5 cxd5 19.%\'xdS
of his king, Chernin - Klinger, 'Wd7 20.0-0-0±
Austria 2008. White has regained the sacri­
ficed pawn and has a powerful
10.g4 passed pawn on d6. Black's king is

190
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 ig7 3.e4 d6 4. ttJc3 ttJc6 5. ie3 e5 6.d5

stranded in the centre of the 8.ie2 0-0 9.h4 4Je8, Gruenberg

board and is an excellent target - Uhlmann, Leipzig 1973 (9 . . . c6
for White's pieces. 10.h5 cxdS ll.cxdS \!;lfaS 12.f3 id7
13.\!;lfd2 !Uc8 14.hxg6 fxg6 15.4Jh3
a6 16.4Jg5± - his queenside coun­
B2) 6 ••• lt:Jce7 7.g4!? terplay has reached its dead end
and he is forced to defend pas­
sively, Konak - Chudy, Slovakia
2007) 10.h5 ! ± White has accom­
plished his standard plan of pre­
venting his opponent's kingside
counterplay and Black is doomed
to a long and laborious defence.

8.gxf5 gxf5 9.\!;lfhS+

White wishes to impede the

thematic pawn-advance for Black
- f7-f5.
7 f5
. • .

Unfortunately for him, there is

no other way to organise counter­
play.

After 7 . . . c5 8.id3 4Jf6 (Black

lags in development and it would 9 ••• lt:Jg6
be too risky for him to sacrifice a He sacrifices a pawn and will
pawn, because following 8 .. .f5 9. have to lose plenty of time to re­
gxfS gxfS 10.\!;lfhS+ i>f8 ll.exfS gain it in the future.
4Jf6 12.1.Wf3±, he can hardly regain
it, Joseph - Earley, Email 1996.) 9 .. .'�f8. Black cannot equalise
9.f3 0-0 10.4Jge2 4Je8 11.\!;lfd2 fS if he refrains from castling. 10.
12.gxf5 gxfS, Kormos - Tajti, ih3. This is one of the positive
Hungary 2008, 13.0-0-0 f4 14. moment concerning White's
if2 ih3 15J1hgU White has more move seven. Now, Black can
space and excellent prospects on hardly avoid the trade of the light­
the queenside (a3, b4). squared bishops. 10 . . . 4Jf6 11.'<Mlf3
f4 (It is also possible for hfm to
It would be too passive for continue with 11 . . . 4Jg6 and after
Black to play 7 . . . 4Jf6, since after 12.0-0-0 fxe4 13.\!;lfe2 a6 14 . .ixc8

191
Chapter 13

'?9xc8 15.'?9c2 b5 16.lt:Jge2 bxc4 - Rey, Amsterdam 1967, except

17.lt:Jxe4 �b8 18.lt:Jxf6 .bf6 19. that instead of the move h5, Black
'?9xc4;!;, White's bishop is obvious­ had played a6. This circumstance
ly more active than its black coun­ cannot influence the evaluation of
terpart, which is restricted by his the position at all.
own pawn on e5.) 12 .i.d2 10.exf5 f:Yh4 ll.f:Yf3 tt:l6e7

Following ll . . . tt:lf4 12 .tt:lh3

hf5 13.lt:Jxf4 exf4 14.'?9xf4 '?9xf4
15.hf4 hc3+ (or 15 . . . tt:Je7, Psa­
khis - Ranola, Balaguer 1998,
16.0-0- 0 ! ?;!; and Black's com­
pensation for the pawn is insuffi­
cient) 16.bxc3 lt:Jf6 17.f3 0-0 18.
�g1+ ig6 19.i.h6 �fe8+ 2 0 .'tt>f2±
White has an extra pawn and two
This position was tested in two powerful bishops and the weak­
games of L.Portisch. In one of ening of his queenside pawn­
them Black played 12 . . . c6, which structure can only be small conso­
after 13.tt:lge2 hh3 14.'?9xh3 '?9d7 lation for Black, Canibal - Guen­
15.'?9xd7 tt:Jxd7 16.tt:lcU, led to an ther, Email 2005.
endgame in which White had a
space advantage and a "good"
bishop against a "bad" bishop for
Black, Portisch - Minic, Ljublja­
na/Portoroz 1973 ; while in the
other game Black continued with
- 12 . . . h5, which did not change
much the character of the posi­
tion. 13.hc8 '?9xc8 14.0-0-0
ih6 15.'?9d3 �g8 16.lt:Jf3;!; White
again had a space advantage and
a more active bishop, moreover
that Black's king was seriously en­ 12Jbb5 ! ?
dangered in the middle game, I t i s always useful to deprive
L.Portisch - Rey, Amsterdam the opponent's king of its castling
1967. rights.
12 . . . a6 13.i.xc8 '?9xc8 14.'?9d3 12 . . . �d8 13.ti'g2 !
�g8 15.tt:lf3 i.h6 16.0-0-0;!; Li­ White frees the square for his
berzon - Czerniak, Netanya 1975. knight with tempo and from there
There has arisen almost the same it will go to g5 and eventually to
position as in the game Portisch the e6-square.

192
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 .tg7 3.e4 d6 4. 0. c3

13 .ih6 14.�£3 ti'f6 15.

••• After this move Black will ad­
�g5! �xf5 16.h4 �ge7 17 .id3;t; • vance e7-e5 of course, but the
Acevedo Villalba - Bjazevic, weakening f7-f6 will tell in the fu­
Email 2007. White's pieces are ture.
more active and Black's king is
stranded in the centre of the Besides this move, he has tried
board. There followed: 17 .id7 ••• in practice some other possibilities:
18.0-0-0 �c8 19. ti'£3 �b8
20.�b1 .ig7 21.�c3 ! h6 22. There arises transposition to
�ce4 �f8 23.�e6. Finally the King's Indian Defence after
White's knight has reached this 5 . . . 0.gf6 6.ie2, as well as follow­
key square. 23 �c8 24.c5 ! Af­
••• ing s . . . c6 6.0.f3 0.gf6 7 . .te2 0-0
ter this move Black's position 8.�d2 .
crumbles. 24 .ixe6 25.dxe6
•••

�xe6 26.cxd6 cxd6 27.l!!hg1 After S . . . cS 6.d5 h6, due to the

.if6 28 .if1 1-0. Black is helpless
• weakness of the h6-pawn, Black
against the threat .th3, after will have problems castling (It
which he cannot avoid the mate­ seems preferable for him to trans­
rial losses. pose to the King's Indian Defence
with 6 . . . 0.gf6 7 . .te2.). 7.id2 0.gf6
S.�cl e6 9 . .te2 exdS 10.exd5 0.b6
11.0.f3 ig4 12 .b3 ix£3 13.ixf3
C) 4 ••• �d7 �e7+ 14.�£1. It is not dangerous
Black prepares the pawn-ad­ for White to lose his castling
vance e7-e5, avoiding the possi­ rights, since he is better devel­
bility of entering an inferior end­ oped and the position is closed.
game. 14 . . . 0.bd7 15.�c2 0-0 16.E!e1 0.e5
5 .ig5! ?
• 17.id1 �c7. This position was
reached in the game Chernin -
Norwood, Marseille 1990. It re­
sembles a bit the Averbakh sys­
tem with 6 . . . c5 and 7 . . . e6, but
here, White also has the two-bish­
op advantage and extra space. The
plan for his further actions is also
identical. He should advance his
kingside pawn in order to cramp
his opponent's position even
more. 18.f4 ! 0.ed7 19.g4 ! E!ae8 2 0 .
E!xe8 E!xe8 21.h4 0.f8 2 2 .g5 . hxgS
This move impedes e7-e5. 23.hxg5 0.6h7 24.�g2± Black's
5 ••• f6 pieces are terribly cramped.

193
Chapter 13

S . . . h6 6.�e3 eS (He cannot 6 ..ie3 e5 7.c!Llf3

equalise with the original attempt With a black pawn on the f6-
6 . . . e6 7.g3 b6 8.�g2 �b7 9.ltlge2 square, White does not need to be
ltle7 10.0-0 0-0 11.\!!l/d 2 mh7 12. in a hurry to advance d4-dS.
f4;t. Black lacks space and after 7 ••• c!Llh6
the careless response 12 . . . dS? !
13.cxdS exdS 14.eS± White's ad­ Following 7 . . . ltle7, White ob­
vantage increases. He has good tains an advantage with 8.dxeS
prospects for a pawn-offensive on fxeS (Black did not play well in
the kingside and Black's bishop the game Kirillov - Saigin, Riga
on b7 has lost its mobility with the 1961: 8 . . . dxeS 9.cS ! White intends
appearance of his pawn on dS, to develop his bishop to c4. 9 . . . h6
Aleksandrov - Golovin, Voronezh 10 .�c4 fS ll.exfS ltlxfS and here,
2011.) 7.dS ltle7 (Following 7 . . . he could have won immediately
ltlgf6 8.f3 o - o 9.\!!l/d 2 mh7 10. with the line : 12.\!!l/dS ! Vffe 7 13.
0-0-0 ltlhS 11.�d3 ltlcS 12 .�c2 aS c6+-) 9.ltlgS ltlf6 lO.cS. White's
13.ltlge2;!;, there arises a typical bishop is developed again to an
King's Indian middle game in active position. 10 . . . h6 ll.cxd6
which White has extra space and cxd6 12.ltlf3 0-0 13.�c4+ mh8
Black can hardly organise any ac­ 14.0-0;!; and he has an easy play
tive actions. 13 .. .fS?! This move is against Black's weak d6-pawn.
just bad for Black. 14.exfS .ixfS
1S.ltlg3 hc2 16.\!!l/xc2 \!!l/h4 17.ltlxhS
\!!l/xhS 18.hc5 dxcS 19.ltle4± White's
knight is placed in the centre of
the board and is obviously strong­
er than Black's bishop on g7, re­
stricted by his own pawn on eS,
Petursson - Frois, Dubai 1986.
This is a good example of "a good
knight" against "a bad bishop".)
8.�d3 0-0 9.\!!l/d 2 hS 10.ltlge2 ltlcS
11.�c2 fS, Ionescu - Rakic, Berlin
1988. Here, White had to enter 8.c5!?
positions typical for the Saemisch This i s a very promising pawn­
system with the move - 12.f3 and sacrifice. White is trying to exploit
there might follow 12 .. .f4 13.�f2 the disharmony in Black's posi­
gS 14.0-0-0 ltlg6 1S.mb1 g4 16. tion and the vulnerability of the
ltlcl b6 17.ltld3 aS 18.ltlxcS bxcS a2-g8 diagonal.
19.�a4;!;, then �c6, ltlbS, :Bc1-c3- 8 . . . exd4
a3 and Black will have problems This is the best defence for
protecting his aS-pawn. Black.

194
 l.d4 g6 2.c4 :ig7 3.e4 d6 4. ttl c3

After 8 . . . dxc5 9.dxe5 c6 (Black ll .ib5+ !

•

loses immediately following 9 . . . This is an important check af­

fxeS? 10 . .ig5 ! ttlf6 11.�xd8+ �xd8 ter which Black loses his castling
1 2 .l:!d1+ �e8 13.tt:lb5+- and he rights.
suffers material losses. The end­ u . . . mn
game is very difficult for him after
9 . . . tt:lxe5 ? ! 10.ttlxe5 fxe5 11.�xd8+ It is worse for him to choose
�xd8 12.0-0-0+ id7 13 . .ic4 ll . . . c6 12 .ttlxc6 bxc6 13 . .bc6+
�c8 14J�d3 tt:lg4 15.hc5± - he .id7 14.�xd6 �e7 15.�xe7+ �xe7
has great problems with his de­ 16.ttld5+ �d6 17 . .ba8 �xa8 18.0-
fence, despite the exchange of the 0-0± White's rook and two pawns
queens, because White's pieces are stronger than his opponent's
are tremendously active.) 10.exf6 two minor pieces, since Black's
�xf6 ll.!c4 tt:leS 12.ttlxe5 �xeS forces are discoordinated and his
13.�d2 tt:lf7 14.f4± White's pawns king is endangered.
are advancing threateningly.
After 8 . . . tt:lg4 9.cxd6 tt:lxe3 Following ll . . . �f8 12 .ic4
10 .fxe3 cxd6 11.ic4±, the material tt:lxd4 13.hd4 c6 14.0-0, White's
is equal, but Black can hardly compensation is more than suffi­
manage to castle. cient for his minimal material
deficit.
9.c!Llxd4 c!Llxc5 10.b4 c!Lle6
The retreat to the edge of the 12 .ic4 ges 13. �f3 f5
•

board is worse for Black 10 . . . ttla6,

because after ll . .ibS+ �f8 12. After 13 . . . �f8 14.tt:lxe6+ �xe6
ha6 bxa6 13.ttld5 tt:lg4 14.:1kl±, (but not 14 . . . he6 15.he6 �xe6
White regains his pawn and the 16 . .ixh6 .ixh6 17.�h3+- and
endangered position of Black's Black loses a piece) 15.!xe6 he6
monarch will become the decisive 16.0-0±, Black's compensation
factor. for the exchange is insufficient.

195
Chapter 13

14.0-0 i>g8 15 .!lJxe6 .txe6

• rificed pawn and maintains better
16 .lxe6+ gxe6 17 .txh6 .txh6
• • prospects. Black's king is vulner­
18.exf5 g{6 19Jbb7 gxf5 20. able and this might be an impor­
.!lJd5;!; White has regained the sac- tant factor in the oncoming fight.

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of the variations, beginning
with the move 3 . . . d6 in the Modern Defence. In all the lines, White
maintains a certain advantage. He only needs to know well the theory
in order to find his way in the intricacies of the different variations.
This chapter should help the readers to accomplish this task.

196
 Parts 4 and 5

l.d4 d6

In the last two parts of this Here, Black has a great choice
book, we will analyse openings between different systems for
which arise much more often af­ development and after the most
ter l.e4. popular move for him in this posi­
The reason for this is that fol­ tion 3 g6, there arises the Pirc
- •••

lowing l.d4 d6, White must play Defence-Ufimtsev on the board.

2.e4 if he wishes to fight for the We devote to this possibility the
opening advantage and if Black fourth part of our book.
transfers to the King's Indian De­
fence, to be able to continue with Black's attempts to avoid the
the variations which we have ana­ Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence will be
lysed in out previous volumes. dealt with in part 5.
Otherwise, for example after This book is intended mostly
2 .c4, Black would obtain a good to suit the fans of the closed open­
game by playing 2 . . . e5, while after ings ; nevertheless, the chapters
2.lt:lf3 tt:Jf6 3.c4 g6, there arises the 12 to 17 will be very helpful as
King's Indian Defence, but with a well to the players w.ho like to
white knight on f3. begin their games with the move
2 .c!bf6 3.tLlc3
•• l.e4.

197
 Part 4

The Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3 g6

A.Ufimtsev, but the attitude to­

wards this system was neglectful.
When V.Harousek played this
opening and lost the game quick­
ly, W.Steinitz commented "If
you try such an awkward opening,
small wonder that you lose the
game.". Nowadays, it is a quite
different situation. The Pirc­
Ufimtsev Defence is used by nu­
merous strong grandmasters :
This part of the book will be V.Kramnik, V.Ivanchuk, Sh.Ma­
devoted to the Pirc-Ufimtsev De­ medyarov, A.Grischuk, A. Moro­
fence. zevich etc. As a rule, Black is not
striving to equalise right after the
This opening has been named opening, but to obtain a compli­
after the Yugoslavian grandmas­ cated and not so well analysed po­
ter V.Pirc, although the Soviet sition, even if it may be a little
master A.Ufimtsev has contribut­ worse, but with chances of seizing
ed greatly to its development as the initiative.
well. In fact, in some opening 4.i.e3
monographs you can see its name
as "The Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence".
It has long gone from the section
of the incorrect openings into one
of the most fashionable opening
systems. It has been tested even
at the top level, including in the
World Championship matches.
Naturally, the initial moves of this
opening have been tried in chess
games even before V.Pirc and

198
 This move is considered to be the players who would like to
one of the most dangerous for study this move, I would like to
Black and quite deservedly so. recommend volume 4 of the se­
White is preparing his standard ries "Opening for White Accord­
attack: 1Mfd2 , 0-0-0, f3, .ih6, h4 ing to Anand" under the edition of
etc. Meanwhile, he does not un­ A.Halifman.
cover his plans and depending on In Chapter 14 we will analyse
Black's replies, White can occupy the move 4 . . . a6, which is the fa­
the centre - f2-f4 (as a rule after vourite line of V.Kramnik. The
the preliminary move h2-h3). basic arguments for Black - 4 . . .
The move 4 ..ie3 has been tried .ig7 and 4 . . .c 6 will b e dealt with in
and still is( ! ) by numerous players Chapters 15 and 16.
and I would like to mention
among them E.Sveshnikov and It is worth mentioning that de­
M.Adams, who have contributed spite the fact that as a rule White
greatly with their games to the de­ obtains effortlessly an advantage
velopment of the theory of this in the opening, but there arise
variation for White. very complicated and not so well
It seems less flexible for him to analysed positions. Contrary to
play 4.f3, since White reveals his many other openings, Black has a
plans a bit too early. great choice of possibilities.
4.f4 ! ? This is also a very good Therefore, White should study
move - he occupies the centre. To this opening very seriously.

199
Chapter 14 l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3 g6 4.Ae3

It seems rather dubious for

Black to choose 4 . . . e5 S.dxeS l2Jg4
(It would be a disaster for him to
continue with S . . . dxeS?! 6.�xd8+
<.!lxd8 7.l2Jf3 l2Jg4 8 . .ig5+ f6 9.h3
fxgS 10.hxg4 i.e6 1l.l2Jxg5± and
Black did not have any compensa­
tion for the pawn, Bannik - Levin,
Kiev 1964.) 6 . .if4 l2Jxe5 (The end­
game is worse for Black following
6 . . . dxe5 7.�xd8+ <.!lxd8 8 . .ig3
4 ... a6 l2Jd7 9 . .ic4 f6 10.h3 l2Jh6 11.f4 .id6
V.Kramnik likes to play this 12.l2Jge2 l2Jb6 13 . .ib3;!;, White has
move and this is in a way a mark powerful initiative. He only needs
of quality. Black is preparing b7- to castle and deploy his rooks on
b5, but contrary to the move 4 . . . the d and f-files and Black will
c6, after the development to the hardly complete the development
b7-square, his bishop will not be of his pieces. His king is in the
restricted by his own pawn and centre of the board and is seri­
will exert pressure against White's ously endangered despite the
centre. trade of the queens, A.Sokolov -
Black's main replies 4 . . . .ig7 Milovanovic, Ulcinj 1998.) 7.�d2 .
and 4 . . . c6 will be analysed in the
following chapters.
There do not arise original po­
sitions after 4 . . . l2Jg4, since follow­
ing S . .igS h6 6 . .ih4 .ig7 7.�d2, a
variation is reached, which will be
analysed in the next chapter after
the move-order - 4 . . .i.g7 S.�d2
l2Jg4.

200
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 0.f6 3. !i:J c3 g6 4 . .ie3 a6 5.h3

White is preparing to castle

queenside and to exchange the
dark-squared bishops (i.e3-h6),
after which he will begin an attack
on the kingside. Black can hardly
create any counterplay, since the
advance of his queenside pawns
will not lead to an attack, but to
the appearance of new weakness-
es in his camp. 7 . . . i.g7 (He cannot 5 . . . c6 (The continuation of the
equalise with 7 . . . i.e6 8.0-0-0 roaming of Black's knight - 5 . . .
0.bd7 9.h4 h5 10.!i:Jh3;!; - White !i:Jb6 leads to very bad conse­
will transfer hos knight to the g5- quences for him after 6.0.f3 i.g7
square after which he will trade it 7 . .id3 0.g4 8 . .ig1 d5 9 .e5 f6 10.
for Black's bishop. The position is �e2 0-0 11.h3 !i:Jh6 12 .g4± Hueb­
quite open and White's two-bish­ ner - Pfleger, Germany 1986.
op advantage will become a tell­ Black lacks space and his pieces
ing factor, Kislik - Nagy, Buda­ have occupied passive positions.
pest 2011.) 8.i.h6 i.xh6 9.�xh6 In addition, he has no counter­
0.g4 10.�d2 0-0 11.0-0-0 !i:Jc6 play, since advancing c7-c5 seems
12.f3 !i:Jf6 13. g4--+ This is the be­ to be practically impossible for
ginning of the attack. Black will him. In the meantime, White can
have great problems to organise prepare patiently an offensive
counterplay and his kingside will against Black's monarch.) 6.e5
be seriously endangered. Later, in !i:Jd5 7.0.xd5 cxd5 8.0.f3 e6 9.i.d3;!;
the game Tkachiev - Gagunash­ Mas - J.Garcia, Subic Bay 2009.
vili, Saint Vincent 2005, there fol­ White has more space, better de­
lowed: 13 . . . i.e6 14.0.ge2 !i:Je5 15. veloped pieces and can exploit the
0.d4 �e7 16. g5 !i:Jh5 17.f4 0.c4 vulnerability of the dark squares
18.�f2 !i:Jb6 19.i.e2 !i:Jg7 20 .h4± in Black's camp (the consequence
Black's fianchettoed knight does of the moves g6 and e6, which as a
not beautify his position and he rule do not combine well togeth­
will hardly parry White's threats er).
- f4-f5 or h4-h5.
5.h3 ! ?
It would be too passive for This i s a "symmetrical" move.
Black to try 4 . . . 0.bd7 5.f4. It would Indeed, if Black can afford a move
be senseless for White to castle with his rook pawn, White can do
queenside, because the break­ the same, can he not? He has tak­
through in the centre e4-e5, with en under control the important
a black knight on the d7-square, g4-square with his last move.
seems simpler and more effective. Now, he can follow with a pawn-

201
Chapter 14

offensive on the kingside with the White's position is preferable, be­

help of f2-f4, as well as with g2- cause his pieces are more active,
g4. In addition, Black cannot play while Black must still think about
now b7-b5 due to some tactical the completion of the develop­
reasons. ment of his queenside pieces.)
13.lt:\xf6+ bf6 14.W!xd6 cxd6 15.
bcS dxc5 16.E:fdU White's pieces
have occupied the open d-file and
the important a2-g8 diagonal.
Black has difficulties with the de­
velopment of his bishop on c8 and
his defence will be long and hard.

After s . . . bs, White has the pos­

sibility to inflict a very unpleasant
strike for his opponent in the cen­
tre with the move - 6.e5 ! Now,
5 . . . 1g7 the h1-a8 diagonal is opened and
This is the most reliable move Black fails to develop his bishop
for him. He wishes at first to com­ on b7. 6 . . . lt:\fd7 (The retreat of the
plete the development of his piec­ knight at the edge of the board to
es and castle. the hS-square - 6 . . . lt:\h5, seems
very dubious, since after 7.W!f3
There arises a passive but solid E:a7 8.d5 E:b7, in the game Lech­
position for Black after S . . . lt:\bd7 tynsky - Schou Moldt, Teplice
6.lt:\f3 eS 7 . .ic4 .ig7 8.dxe5 dxeS 2012, White could have reached a
9.a4 0-0 10.0-0. White's posi­ winning position after 9.e6! fxe6
tion is easier to play and his mi­ 10.dxe6 lt:\f6 ll.g4+- and the
nor pieces are more active. 10 . . . threat g4-g5, would have forced
W!e7 ( 1 0 . . .b 6 ll.Wid3 ! ? i.b7 12.E:fd1 Black to part with his knight. It is
W!e7 13.lt:\d5 lt:\xdS 14 . .b:d5 .b:dS possible for him to try a line,
1S.W!xd5 lt:\f6 16.Wic6 W!b4 17. which is however insufficient to
lt:\d2 ! ;!; - He has a "good" bishop equalise: 6 . . . b4 7.W!f3 E:a7 8.lt:\a4;!;
against Black's "bad" bishop, and his queenside pawns are vul­
which is severely restricted by his nerable and the a7-square is
own eS-pawn and the pawns on hardly the best for Black's rook.)
b6 and c7, placed on dark squares, 7.W!f3. The rook on a8 will be a
may turn into targets for attack in cause of permanent worries for
the endgame.) ll.Wid3 lt:\c5 12.lt:\d5 him. 7 . . . c6 (7 . . . lt:\b6 8.a4 b4 9.
W!d6 (The evaluation of the posi­ lt:\e4±; 8 ... bxa4 9 . .id3 .ig7 10.
tion remains the same after 12 . . . lt:\xa4;!; Markovic - Bogdanovski,
lt:\xdS 13.W!xd5 lt:\ e 6 14.E:fdU - Nis 1994) 8.exd6 exd6 9 . .id3 lt:\f6

202
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ti:Jj6 3. ti:J c3 g6 4. !e3 a6 5.h3

10.i.g5 1i.e7 11.�h6;!; White is

ahead of his opponent in develop­
ment and Black's queenside
pawn-structure is very brittle.

too slow. 9.�d3 Wic7 10.ti:Jge2 i.b7

ll.h4 ! White exploits his lead
in development and begins an of­
fensive. ll . . . ti:Jb6 12 .h5 ti:J8d7 13.
hxg6 hxg6 14.�xh8+ hh8 15.e6 !±
Black's position crumbles, Hra­
cek - Konopka, Pardubice 1998.
6.f4! The position is a bit worse but
This is the best move for still defensible for him after 8 . . .
White. ti:Jb6 9.�d3 b 4 10.ti:Ja4 ti:J 8d7 ll.a3
bxa3 12.�xa3 0-0 13.ti:Je2;!;) 9.�d3
He obtains a slight edge after b4 10.ti:Je4 �b7 ll.Wif2 �a8 12.
the enlarged fianchetto of his ti:Jf3;t Goloshchapov - Murshed,
bishop with 6.g4, for example: 6 . . . Dhaka 2003. The centralisation
b S 7.e5 ti:Jfd7 8.!g2 c 6 9.exd6 of White's pieces is very impres­
exd6 10.ti:Jge2 ti:Jb6 ll.b3 0-0 12. sive, while Black lacks space.
a3 ! ? aS 13.0-0 a4 14.'1Wd2 �e8 15. Still, White's achievement are
i.gS Wic7 16.!f4;!;. In fact, Black far from being decisive. In the
should not complain, because he game, Black did not cope with
obtains what he wishes in the Pirc his defensive problems and made
Defence. His position is slightly a mistake 12 .. .f5? 13.exf6 exf6 14.
worse, but very complicated and fS±. It is understandable that he
he can try later to seize the initia­ cannot play now 14 . . . gxf5? due
tive. to 15.ti:Jg3+- and White's posi­
tional advantage becomes deci­
6 . . . 0-0 sive, because after the capture
with the knight on fS, Black's
Now, once again White can bishop on g7 becomes a "big
counter 6 . . . b5 with 7.e5 ti:Jfd7 pawn".
8.Wif3 and Black must solve the (diagram)
problem with his rook on a8.
(diagram) White develops his pieces and
8 . . . �a7 (8 . . . c6. This move is prepares e4-e5.

203
Chapter 14

The most solid move 7 ... e6

leads to a very passive position for
him. 8.id3 tt:Jc6 9.0-0 bS 10.e5
tt:ldS ll.tt:lxdS exdS 12.'?9d2;t In the
game Djingarova - T.Vasilevich,
Vrnjacka Banja 2005 Black de­
cided to get rid of the pawn on eS,
which cramped his position con­
siderably, but following 12 . . .
dxeS?! 13.fxe5 f6 14.exf6 hf6 15.
c3 ie6, White had the possibility
He maintains an advantage 16.a4 bxa4 17.l:!xa4± and sudden­
even after the not so trivial move ly, Black's pawn-weaknesses on
7.'?9f3 ! ?, preparing castling queen­ the other side of the board would
side. 7 . . . e5 (Following 7 . . . c6, become a telling factor.
Black obtains a solid but some­
what cramped position, for exam­ 7 . . . tt:lh5 This attempt by Black
ple: 8.id3 bS 9.tt:lge2 b4 10.tt:la4 to exploit the weakness of his op­
tt:Jbd7 11.0-0 ib7 12.a3 aS 13.c3;!;. ponent's g3-square cannot equal­
White is clearly better. He has ex­ ise. 8.id3 (It is also possible for
tra space, a powerful pawn-cen­ White to try the rather extrava­
tre, while Black's b4-pawn pro­ gant move 8.'it>f2 ! ?;!;, using his
vides White with a target for an king to defend the g3-square. This
offensive on the queenside.) 8. resource cannot be seen so often
0-0-0 exd4 (8 . . . exf4 9 . .txf4 tt:lhS, in practice at the beginning of the
Postny - Klenburg, Port Erin game, Zimmermann - Lubisch,
2005. Here, he had to play 10. Pinneberg 2006. I believe that
ih2 ! and after 10 . . . tt:lc6 ll.g4 tt:lf6 Stenitz would have liked that
12.tt:lge2;!;, White would have good move, since he considered the
prospects on the f-file and a pow­ king to be "a very powerful
erful pawn-centre, which could piece".) 8 . . . tt:lg3 9.l:!g1 fS 10.exf5
not be attacked easily by Black.) tt:lxfS (Now, just like in the King's
9.hd4 tt:lc6 10.i.f2 id7 11.ih4 Indian Defence, Black should not
'?9c8 12 .g4 bS 13.g5 tt:lhS 14.tt:ld5;t trade the light-squared bishops,
- It would be sufficient to evalu­ because after 10 . . . -txfS 1l..if2
ate the position correctly if we hd3 12.'?9xd3 tt:lhS 13.'?9c4±, the
compare the power of the knights vulnerability of the light squares
on dS and hS. in his camp can be noticed even
by a naked eye.) ll ..if2 e6 12 .g4
7 b5
... tt:Je7 13.'?9d2;!; White has parried
Naturally, Black has played his opponent's knight-sorties and
a7-a6 in order to advance b7-b5. now, after castling queenside, can

204
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ttJf6 3. ttJ c3 g6 4. ie3 a6 5.h3

begin a pawn-offensive against variation - Michael Adams in his

Black's castling position, or attack game against Zhukova, Caleta
the weak enemy e6-pawn with 2012.
ttJgS and l:!el. White's pieces are perfectly
mobilised and ready for the fight,
8.e5 ttJfd7 9.id3 ttJb6 10. while Black's pieces are a sorry
�e2 ttJ8d7 11.0-0-0;!; sight. They are very passive and
he obviously lacks space. There
followed: ll ... e6 12.h4! White
begins an attack on the kingside
and Black will have great prob­
lems parrying it. 12 ib7 13.h5
•••

b4 14.(jj e4± He has decided to

trade his bishop for the enemy
knight, in order to facilitate his
defence, but this cannot help
much. White's attack is develop­
ing effortlessly. 14 he4 15.
•••

he4 d5 16.id3 c5 17.hxg6

This position arose in one of hxg6 18.g4 l:!e8 19.�h2 cxd4
the games of a great expert in this 20.hd4 �c7 21.f5+-

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of the variation with 4 . . . a6 in
the Pirc Defence. It has been used once in a while even by Kramnik (but
indeed, mainly in games with a shorter time-control, or in games where
he had to win necessarily with Black). In general, White obtains rather
easily a considerable advantage. Black's main problem is that having
played a7-a6, he has great problems following this with b7-b5, because
White has the powerful tactical resource - e4-e5 with the move �f3
coming next and Black fails to develop his bishop to the b7-square. If
he is not in a hurry to play b7-b5, then White simply completes his de­
velopment and his advantage is doubtless thanks to his powerful pawn­
centre.

205
Chapter 15 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ll:)f6 3.li:)c3 g6 4.ie3 ig7

erable, since he has more space

and in many variations he can
oust the enemy knight on f6 (pro­
tecting the h7-pawn) with the
move e4-e5, organizing a crush­
ing attack against the enemy king
This is the difference between this
variation of the Pirc Defence and
the similar types of positions,
with opposite sides castling, aris­
ing in the Dragon variation of the
This move has been played nu­ Sicilian Defence. White does not
merous times and by grandmas­ have there a pawn on d4 (it has
ters like V.lvanchuk, A.Beliavsky, been exchanged there for Black's
V.Topalov, P.Nikolic, A.Khalif­ c-pawn). It is due to this reason
man and many others. It seems that many players, who like this
quite natural, does it not? It looks position for Black in the Pirc De­
like if Black has played g7-g6, he fence, postpone the development
should follow with �g7. of the bishop on g7 and prefer the
Still, things are not so simple move 4 . . . c6 - we will analyse this
at all. The point is that after variation in our next chapter. we
5.�d2 Now, Black has numerous
White has a clear-cut plan for possibilities. We will deal with:
his further actions, connected A) 5 a6, B) 5 .loc6, C) 5
••• •• ••.

with the exchange of the dark­ c!Og4, D) 5 0-0 and E) 5 c6.

••• •••

squared bishops after .ih6, fol­

lowed by castling queenside. After We will begin however, with
that, there often arise positions the analysis of some less popular
with opposite sides castling and lines for him.
pawn-offensives on the different I do not believe that the idea of
flanks. White's prospects are pref- P.Nikolic may find many follow-

206
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJc3 g6 4. ie3 ig7 5. Wd2

ers - 5 . . . d5, Van der Wiel - Ni­ cramped and White avoids pru­
kolic, Tilburg 1988. White's sim­ dently the trade of the knights.
plest reaction would be 6.e5 ! ? 10 . . . ie6 11.0-0-0 We7 12.\Wd2
liJe4 7.liJxe4 dxe4 8.0-0-0;!; and 0-0-0 13.f4 liJc4 14.Wf2 lt:Jg4 15.
the weakness on e4 will be the Wg3 liJge3 16.hc4 liJxc4 17.b3.
cause of permanent worries for White deprives the enemy pieces
Black in the future. of the important c4-square. 17 . . .
liJb6 18.Ei:heU - H e has much
The endgame is clearly worse more space and his pieces are
for him after 5 . . . e5 6.dxe5 dxeS 7. harmoniously deployed, which
Wxd8+ Wxd8 and now 8.0-0-0+ cannot be said for Black's pieces
liJbd7 9.h3 c6 10.liJf3 We7 11.a4 at all. In addition, the vulnerabil­
liJe8 12 .ic4;t; Yevseev - Astashov, ity of his d6-pawn may become a
St Petersburg 2 005. White has telling factor in the future, Yevs­
a superior development, while eev - Sarakauskas, St Petersburg
Black has problems with the de­ 2005.
velopment of his queenside piec­ 7 ... c5 8.liJf3 cxd4 9.liJxd4 WaS
es. If his knight retreats from the (9 . . . a6. This move looks too slow.
d7-square, White will have the 10 .ic4 e6 11.0-0-0 liJeS 12 .ib3±
rather unpleasant check - icS. Solodovnichenko Narancic,
Banja Luka 2007. White has a
5 . . . liJbd7 6.ih6 ixh6 7.Wxh6 clear advantage. He has a better
development and is ready to be­
gin active actions after f2-f4,
while Black's monarch is stranded
in the centre. You can see the con­
sequences of the trade on h6 -
White's queen impedes Black's
castling. We will encounter this
motif numerous more times.) 10.
0-0-0 a6 11.WbU White has a
superior development and his
About 7 . . . c6 8.0-0-0 - see play in the middle game will be
variation E, 7 . . . liJbd7. much easier, moreover that Black
7 . . . e5 8.liJf3 c6 9.dxe5 liJxeS will have problems with his cas­
(There arises transposition to var- tling, Kharchenko - Andriasian,
iation E following 9 . . . dxe5 10.ic4 St Petersburg 2012.
We7 11.liJg5 - see 5 . . . c6 6.ih6 ih6
7.Wh6 eS. Black preserves the
pawn-symmetry in the centre and A) 5 ... a6
this is his most reliable defensive He prepares the move b7-b5,
line.) 10.liJd4. His position is a bit but in anticipation of the attacks

207
Chapter 15

after the opposite sides castling, Black will have no compensation

Black had better do that with the for the numerous pawn-weak­
move c7-c6 (variation E), since nesses in his position.) 8.l!Jf3 cS
now, he will not have the possibil­ 9.0-0-0 cxd4 10.E:xd4 '!WaS 11.
ity to develop his queen to an ac­ i.c4 l!JeS 12.l!JxeS '!WxeS 13.E:hdU
tive position (after '!WaS). White's pieces are perfectly mobi­
lised, while Black's king still re­
6.i.h6 mains in the centre of the board,
Lupynin - Enescu, Email 2008.

7.0-0-0 b5 8.f3

6 ... 0-0

It is possible that Black should

have postponed his castling king­ 8 . . .b4
side. 6 . . . .bh6 7.'1Wxh6 l!Jbd7 (It is
obviously premature for him to 8 ... l!Jc6. Now, there arises a
choose 7 . . . bS, because following position, which resembles the
8.eS b4 9.l!Jce2 l!JdS 10.'1Wg7 E:f8 Saemisch system of the King's In­
ll.l!Jf3±, Black's position is evi­ dian Defence, except that White's
dently worse, due to his lag in de­ pawn is not on c4, but on c2 . This
velopment and he has problems circumstance is in his favour, be­
defending against the threat cause he has an extra tempo for
l!Jf3-gS-h7, Chandler - Jansa, the organisation of his attack (In a
Germany 1988. After 7 . . . eS 8.l!Jf3 position with attacks on the dif­
exd4 9.l!Jxd4, it is not clear why ferent sides of the board, this may
Black has lost a tempo for the turn out to be very important.). It
move a7-a6. 9 . . . l!Jc6 10.l!Jxc6 bxc6 is quite deservedly stated that
ll.i.c4 '!We7 12. 0-0-0 i.e6 13. "the chess game is a tragedy of a
.be6 fxe6 14.eS ! dxeS, Yudasin - tempo . . . ". In addition, the pawn
Benegas, Ponferrada 1992, 1S. on c2 protects the king better than
E:hel± White will regain effort­ the pawn on c4, which is much
lessly his pawn and after that rather a target for the organisa-

208
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 CiJf6 3. CiJ c3 g6 4. i.e3 ig7 5. '?!! d2

tion of Black's counterplay. 9 .h4 g4. White's attack is very power­

ful. 14 . . . i.d7 15.CiJxd4 cxd4 16.CiJe2
E:c8 17.CiJg3 '?!laS 18.'it>b1 E:c7 19.
CiJfS+ ixfS 2 0 .gxf5 W!a4 21..id3
E:g8 22.E:dg1 'it>f8 23.'?!!g5+-, his
bishop has cemented quite suc­
cessfully the queenside, while
Black's position on the kingside
will be in ruins under the pressure
of White's pieces and pawns,
Preussner - Serov, Email 2007.
In the game Badano - Kern, It is rather dubious for Black
Arco 2011 Black played passively to choose 8 . . . CiJbd7, because after
and was deservedly punished very 9 . .ixg7 'it>xg7, White has the re­
quickly: 9 . . . e6? ! 10.hg7 'it>xg7 11. source lO.eS CiJg8, followed by 11.
hS CiJxhS? He did not have to open h4� Robak - Choroszej , Kolo­
the h-file. 12 .g4 CiJf6 13.'?!!h 6+ brzeg 2007. His attack is very
'it>h8. Here, the fastest way for dangerous, for example : 11 . . . CiJb6
White to win the game was the 12 .h5 dxeS 13.'?!!e3 exd4 14.E:xd4
move - 14.e5+-. '?!feB 15.E:dh4 CiJf6 16.hxg6 fxg6 17.
Black loses valuable time with g4 'it>g8 18.i.d3 W!f7 19.E:h6 CiJbdS
the move 9 . . . CiJh5? ! , because 20 .CiJxd5 CiJxdS 21.'?!!e 1 '?!!e 6 2 2 .
White can easily parry the threat W!h4+- and Black i s incapable of
of the penetration of the enemy protecting his h7-pawn and his
knight to the g3-square. 10.CiJge2 kingside position crumbles like a
eS 11.g4± - His attack is very house built of cards.
powerful, Nijboer - Bjornsson,
Reykjavik 1998.
9 . . . e5 lO.dS CiJd4 (following
10 . . . CiJe7 11.g4±, White's attack
develops much faster) 11.CiJce2 . It
is understandable that he must
get rid of the centralised enemy
knight as quickly as possible. 11 . . .
c S ( 1 1 . . . CiJxe2+ 12.CiJxe2 E:b8 13.
hs� and after the opening of the
h-file, White's attack will become
quite threatening, while Black's
counterplay on the other side of 9.CiJce2 c5 10 .ixg7 �xg7
•
·

the board is nowhere is sight, ll.dxc5 'ti'a5

Tangatarov - Smagin, Dagomys This interesting pawn-sacri­
2009) 12 .h5 b4 13.hg7 'it>xg7 14. fice enables Black to complkate

209
Chapter 15

the fight. Now, White must react against White's centre with the
very precisely. move e7-e5 and thus to deflect
12.cxd6 l:!d8 him from the oncoming flank at­
He should not be afraid of the tack.
move 12 . . . 'Wxa2, because follow­ 6.f3
ing 13.'Wxb4±, Black has no com­ This moves is forced. White
pensation for the sacrificed mate­ must defend against the threat -
rial. 6 . . .ti:lg4.
13.e5
White exchanges a central
pawn for a flank pawn, but Black's
queen is deflected from the a2-
square in the process.
13 ••• 'Wxe5 14.Wxb4 tbc6

6 ... e5
This is Black's most logical re­
action.

As a rule, there arises transpo­

sition following 6 . . . 0-0 7.0-0-0
This position was reached in e5 8.tbge2 .
the game Salzmann - Wyder,
Email 2009. Here, White's sim­ Black can try to impede
plest decision would be to trade White's kingside pawn-offensive
the queens: 15.Wc3! ? l:!xd6 16. with the move 6 . . . h5 !?, but it has
Wxe5 l:!xd1+ 17.c;t>xd1 ttJxeS 18. not been well analysed yet. Still,
tbc3;!: and he remains with an ex­ after 7.0-0-0 a6 8.'Jibl b5 9.
tra pawn. He lags considerably in l2Jge2 0-0 10.h3;!:, White's pros­
development indeed, but Black pects are preferable, because the
can hardly exploit this, because move h7-h5 has led to a weaken­
White does not have any pawn­ ing of Black's castling position.
weaknesses in his position.
Following 6 . . . a6, there arise
B) s ... tbc6 positions similar to variation A,
This is an interesting idea. or often transposition of moves.
Black wishes to inflict a strike 7.0-0-0

210
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3. ltJ c3 g6 4. i.. e3 i..g 7 5. 'ff d2

of the drawbacks of this move is

that now, Black will have prob­
lems to castle kingside, while if he
castles queenside, the conse­
quences of its weakening with the
move b7-b5 may turn out to be
very bad for him. 9.'f!xh6 e6, Jan­
sa - Tibensky, Sumperk 1984 (Af­
ter 9 . . . e5 10.ltJge2;!;, White's piec­
About 7 . . . h5 8.lt>b1 - see 6 . . . es are better prepared for the
hS. opening of the game in the centre
7 . . . e6 8.g4 bS, Short - Kavalek, and he should not be afraid of the
Dubai 1986. Here, White could move b5-b4, since he will have the
have maintained a stable advan­ resource ltJc3-d5, Johannsen -
tage by forcing at first Black's Czech, Obertsdorf 2002.) 10.a3 ! ?
knight to occupy the hS-square This move deprives Black of the
with 9.g5 ! ? ltJhS and then forcing possibility b5-b4 just in case. 10 . . .
its exchange: 10.ltJce2 ! i.b7 11. Wie7 11.lt>b1 i.b7 12 .h4. White's
ltJg3 ttJxg3 12.hxg3;!; As a result, plan includes the move 'ffe 3, but
the h-file has been opened advan­ he does not wish to retreat his
tageously for White and having in queen yet, since it prevents
mind that he dominates in the Black's castling. 12 . . . 0-0-0 13.
centre, so it becomes evident that 'ffe 3. White must protect at first
his prospects in the oncoming his d4-pawn in order to develop
fight are clearly preferable. his bishop on d3. 13 . . . 1t>b8 14.i.d3
There arise interesting devel­ E:he8 15.ltJge2;!; - He is dominant
opments, but clearly in favour of in the centre and has more space,
White after 7 . . . 0-0 8.i.h6. There while Black's king is not so safe on
may follow: 8 . . . e5 (8 . . . b5 9.h4 - the weakened queenside.
see variation A) 9.i.xg7 lt>xg7 10.
ltJge2 b5 11.lt>b1 b4 12.ltJdS aS, Ju­
rcik - Prikryl, Olomouc 2008,
13.h4 hS 14.dxe5 ltJxeS 1S.ltJef4
i.b7 16.ltJe3 Wie7 17.ib5 c6 18.
i.a4;!; White has neutralised
Black's queenside initiative with
the help of the manoeuvre i.fl-b5-
a4 and is ready to begin active ac­
tions on the opposite side of the
board with 'f!d2-f2-g3-g5.
About 7 . . . b5 8.i.h6 0-0 9.h4
- see variation A; 8 . . . i.xh6. One 7.ltJge2

211
Chapter 15

Naturally, it is not good for 1989. Here, White's simplest re­

White to close the centre, since it action would be ll.h4± and
would be better for him to have a Black's position is very passive.
pawn on c4 in order to be able to He does not have enough space
develop his initiative on the for the manoeuvres of his pieces
queenside with the move c4-cS. and castling kingside would be
rather dubious, since White's at­
7 ••• 0-0 tack will be very powerful in this
The pawn-sacrifice 7 ... dS is case.
not quite correct, because follow­
ing 8.dxeS ltlxeS 9.ltlxdS ltlxdS 8.0-0-0
(after 9 . . . ltlc4, White has the re­
source 10.1Mfc3 !±) 10.1MfxdS±, Black's
compensation is insufficient.

After 7 . . . a6, White can block

the centre advantageously with
the move - 8.dS. There might fol­
low: 8 . . . ltle7 9.0-0-0. Black's po­
sition is very difficult, since he
can hardly parry his opponent's
threats on the kingside: g4, h4-hS
etc. His attempt to organise coun­
terplay on the queenside with 9 . . . 8 ... exd4
b S , Gazik - Irsai, Slovakia 2001,
leads only to the appearance of The breakthrough in the cen­
additional pawn-weaknesses on tre would not work for Black 8 . . .
this side of the board. 10.a3 ! ? 0-0 d S 9.dxeS ltlxeS 10.ltlf4 c 6 11.
ll.g4 E!:b8 12.'it>b1 aS 13.ltla2± exdS± - his compensation for the
Black's pawns on aS and bS are pawn is evidently insufficient,
excellent targets for White's piec­ Spasov - Benjamin, Moscow
es. 1994.

7 ... exd4 8.ltlxd4. Black can The move 8 . . .i.d7 was tested
hardly continue the game without in one of the games of Anthony
castling and his attempt to play in Miles. 9.'it>b1 1Mfb8. This is the be­
an original fashion only increases ginning of a too original plan. 10.
as a rule White's opening advan­ g4 bS ll.i.h6 i.xh6 12 .1MfxhM
tage. 8 . . . i.d7 (8 . . . 0-0 9.0-0-0, White has obtained an advantage
or 8 ... ltlxd4 9 ..bd4 0-0 10.0-0-0 with quite simple moves and after
- see 7 ... 0-0) 9.0-0-0 a6 10.g4 Black's mistake 12 . . . ltlxd4? 13.gS
1Mfe7, Mueller - Neumann, ICCF ltle8 14.ltlxd4 exd4 1S.ltldS+-, his

212
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 l!Jf6 3. l!J c3 g6 4. ie3 �g7 5. Wfd2

position became indefensible, is much slower while attacking on

since following 15 . . . ffd8, White different sides on the board. This
will play 16.h4 and Black will be is quite typical for this variation,
helpless against the opening of Batsanin - Evelev, Moscow 1996.
the h-file, Lane - Miles, Le Tou­
quet 1991. He cannot equalise following
9 . . . l!Je5 10.h4 hS 1l.ig5;!; This pin
The race in the flank attacks of the knight is very unpleasant
after 8 . . . a6 is obviously in favour for Black, for example he loses
of White, because his pawns are immediately after 11 . . . ffe8? due
much faster than their counter­ to 12.l!Jdb5 ! ffd7 13 . .ixf6 .ixf6 14.
parts. 9.g4 bS lO.dS l!Je7 11.l!Jg3 t!JdS �g7 (He cannot save his pawn
l!Je8 12 .h4± Manik - Tratar, Pula with: 14 . . . �d8 1S.t!Jbxc7 .ixc7??
2003. 16.l!Jf6+-) 1S.t!Jdxc7+- Frander
- Kormos, Hungary 2011.

The rather slow move 9 ... a6

enables White to begin an imme­
diate attack with 10.h4 t!JeS 11.
igS ! ? , threatening once again hS.
Now, it is bad for Black to choose
11 . . . b5? ! and his queenside coun­
terplay is evidently immaterial,
Coleman - Michaud, Cappelle Ia
Grande 1995 (It is preferable for
him to continue here with 11 . . . h5,
complying with the weakening of
the gS-square, but still preventing
9 .lbxd4
•• h4-h5, although even then White
The idea of this exchange is maintains better chances after
that Black prepares the develop­ 12 .�e2;!;) 12.h5 ! ± and his attack is
ment of his bishop on e6. very powerful.

About 9 ... �e6 10 .g4 t!Jxd4 11. It is interesting for Black to try
.ixd4 - see 9 ... t!Jd4. a pawn-sacrifice in the spirit of
the Dragon variation of the Sicil­
Black has tried in practice ian Defence. It is still insufficient
some other moves as well. for equality, though . . . - 9 . . . d5
lO.exdS t!JxdS 1l.�g5 ffd7, M.
It is bad for him to opt for 9 . . . Gurevich - Zaichik, Lvov l987.
�d7 10.g4 a 6 11.h4 b S 12 .h5± and Now, White should simply cap­
once again we can see that Black ture the pawn with 12.l!Jxc6 bxc6

213
Chapter 15

13.tt:lxd5 cxd5 14.'119 xd5;t;; and Black - Kallio, Leon 2001, White could
does not have sufficient compen­ have obtained a great advantage
sation for the material loss. Here, with the move 14.:1!hgl±, since
contrary to the Dragon variation, Black cannot capture the pawn
his pawn is not on e7, but on c7. 14 . . . W/xh4? in view of 15.f4 tt:lc6
This is in favour of White, since 16J�h1+- and White not only re­
Black's rooks cannot attack the gains his pawn but organises a de­
enemy king on the c-file and the cisive attack against the enemy
vulnerability of the c7-pawn king on the g and h-files.
might become a telling factor lat­ Black cannot facilitate his de­
er. fence by exchanging the knights:
10 . . . tt:lxd4 ll ..bd4 cS (following
It would be too passive for ll . . . ie6, White manages to trade
Black to choose 9 . . J!e8, since the advantageously the dark-squared
pressure of his pieces against the bishops: 12 .g5 tt:lhS 13 . .ixg7 tt:lxg7
e4-pawn is harmless for White. 14.h4 W/e7 15.f4± and then ie2
10.g4 and h2-h4-h5, M.Rodin - Meis­
ter, Podolsk 1992) 12 . .if2 ! ? Here,
the bishop is better placed than
on the e3-square, since there it
comes under a very unpleasant x­
ray with Black's rook. 12 . . .'<Mla5
13.W/xd6 tt:ld7 14.W/d3± - His com­
pensation for the pawn is insuffi­
cient.

10 .ixd4 .ie6 11.g4

•

10 . . . a6 ll.'>t>b1 tt:lxd4 12 ..bd4

ie6 13.g5 tt:lhS 14 ..bg7 tt:lxg7 15.
f4± White's attack is developing
effortlessly: ie2, h2-h4-h5 with
the decisive opening of the h-file,
Mainka - Stertenbrink, Germany
1990.
10 ... tt:le5 1l.g5 tt:lhS 12.f4 tt:lg4
13 . .igl± Black's knight is terribly
misplaced on the g4-square and
White's threat h2-h3 is very un­
pleasant, Iotov - Andersen, Email
2004. ll ... c5
Following 10 ... .id7 ll.h4 tt:leS Black opens the way of his
12 ..ie2 h5 13.gxh5 tt:lxhS, Navara queen to the aS-square.

214
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 tiJf6 3. tiJ c3 g6 4. :!i.. e3 :!i..g 7 5. Wff d2

Now, once again after the pas­ Black's fianchettoed bishop, since
sive move ll . . . a6, White exchang­ its pressure on the long diagonal
es the dark-squared bishops and may become very dangerous.
begins an attack which would
be very difficult for Black to par­
ry. 12 .g5 tiJ h5 13 . .ixg7 tiJxg7 (His
situation would be even worse af­
ter 13 . . . 1!ixg7 - Black's knight at
the edge of the board will be an
excellent target for attack by
White's pieces. 14.i.e2 f6 15.f4
fxg5 16 . .ixh5 gxh5, Boguslavsky ­
Vajda, France 2 007. Here, he had
to follow with 17J'!hg1 ! +-, begin­
ning a decisive attack.) 14.h4 Wffe 7
15.f4± Fercec - Jurkovic, Zagreb 13 ... hh6
2010.
13 . . . b5? This move loses ma­
Black's position would not be terial for Black. 14 . .ixg7 l!ixg7 15.
any better after ll . . . tiJd7 12 . .ixg7 tiJxb5 ¥5xa2 (15 ... Wffxd2 + 16.
l!ixg7 13.h4 h6 14.i.e2 f6 15.f4± �xd2+-) 16.Wffc3. This pin of
White's four attacking pawns, the knight is decisive. 16 . . . h6
supported by his pieces, seem 17.h4 �h8 18.�g1 d5 19.g5 1-0 Lu­
very threatening for Black's king, tzenberger - Epinoux, Email
Trujillo - Anic, Mesa 1992. 2001.

He cannot equalise even after Black loses immediately fol­

the more prudent approach 11 .. . lowing 13 . . . .ixa2?? 14 . .ixg7 l!ixg7
c6 12.Wb1 ! ? , for example: 12 .. . 15.tiJxa2 Wffxa2 16.Wffc3+- and he
Wff a5 (following 12 . . . b5 13.g5 tiJe8 cannot avoid the loss of a piece,
14.h4 b4 15.tiJe2± White's pawn­ because of the pin, Yurtaev - Be­
offensive develops much faster, liavsky, Frunze 1979.
Okrugin, - Korensky, Tula 2004)
13.g5 tiJh5 14 . .ixg7 l!ixg7 15.f4;t Black's position remains very
The vulnerability of Black's d6- difficult after 13 . . . �fd8 14 . .ixg7
pawn and his misplaced knight at l!ixg7 15.h4 h5 (Naturally, it would
the edge of the board guarantee be senseless for him to capture
an advantage for White, Turov - the a2-pawn 15 . . . .ixa2, Najer -
Hoi, Copenhagen 2002. Mamedyarov, Khanty-Man�iysk
2013, because after . 16.h5+-,
12 . .ie3 ¥5a5 13 . .ih6 White's attack is decisive.) 16.
White should better trade gxh5 tiJxh5 17.�gl±, followed by

215
Chapter 15

joining of White's f-pawn into the

attack against the g6-square, Yur­
taev - Gulko, Frunze 1985.

14.ti'xh6 b5
Black must be in a hurry; oth­
erwise, White will simply open
the h-file and will checkmate.
Now, Black wishes to sacrifice a
pawn and create counterplay on
the b-file.
18 .ba2
•••

It would be too irresponsible

for him to opt for 14 . . . .ixa2? ! Black cannot achieve much
15.h4, for example: 1 5 . . . �e6 16.h5 with the sacrifice - 18 . . . :1'!:xb2 19.
Wic7 (He loses immediately fol­ \t>xb2 :1'!:b8+ 20.\t>cl Wixc3, Arse­
lowing 16 . . J!:fe8 17.i.b5 :1'!:e7 18. niev - Mishuchkov, Ivanovo
WigS 1-0 Noseda - Koegler, ICCF 1982, because after 2 1.:1'!:d3 !±,
1996.) 17.lt:Jb5 Wie7 18.lt:Jxd6 lt:Jd7 White has excellent chances of re­
19.f4 hg4 20 .i.c4 \t>h8 21.lt:Jxf7+ alising his extra exchange.
:1'!:xf7 22 . .bf'7 gxh5, Hennigan -
Westerinen, Gausdal 1995, 23. 19.ti'f6 J.e6 20.ghdl Wial+
:1'!:xd7! hd7 24.Wixh5 Wixe4 25. 2t.c�d2 ti'a5
Wih6 :1'!:g8 26.Wif6+ :1'!:g7 27.:1'!:d1+-
21.. .Wixb2? 22 .:1'!:b1 Wia3 23.
15 .bb5 gabS 16. ti'f4
• :1'!:xb8 :1'!:xb8 24.:1'!:xe6+-
White concentrates his forces
on the d6-square. 22.\t>e3±
White's king has not only
16 ••• lt:Je8 abandoned the queenside, which
has been destroyed by Black's
The tactical complications af­ pieces, but is ready to take part in
ter 16 . . . d5 do not promise any­ the attack - \t>e3-f4-g5-h6 !
thing good for Black. 17.Wixf6 d4
18.a4 :1'!:b6, Schreiber - Toscano, 22 .•• c4
ICCF 1996. Here, White's sim­ Black loses immediately after
plest decision would be to enter 22 . . . :1'!:xb2? 23.:1'!:xe6+- Korneev -
an endgame with extra material Garcia Castro, Pontevedra 2003.
19.Wie5 ! dxc3 20.Wixc3 Wixc3 21.
bxc3±. 23.h4 �b2 24. \!Jf4 gb6,
Tseshkovsky - Vorotnikov, Ak­
17 .be8 gfxe8 ts.gxd6
• tjubinsk 1985, 25.h5 ! + -

216
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 t'iJf6 3. t'iJc3 g6 4. :ie3 :ig7 5. 'f!d2

C) 5 ••• l0g4 It is worse for him to play with

the same idea 6 . . .f6, since with
this move he covers the diagonal
of his bishop. 7.:ih4 eS 8.t'iJf3 ih6
(after 8 . . . 0-0 9.dxe5 t'iJxeS 10.
t'iJxeS dxeS ll.'f!xd8 E:xd8 12.t'iJd5
t'iJc6 13.t'iJxc7 E:b8 14.c3±, Black
has no compensation for the pawn
in this endgame) 9.'f!d1 exd4 10.
t'iJxd4 t'iJeS ll.:ie2 t'iJbc6, Makka -
Sklavounos, Nikea 2002. Here,
White maintains a great advan­
tage after the energetic line: 12.
This manoeuvre of the knight t'iJdS 0-0 13.t'iJb5± and his attack
(followed by h7-h6 and g6-g5), against Black's pawns on c7 and
with the idea to attack the bishop f6 is crowned with success.
on e3, is not so well justified as in
some variations of the King's In­ The endgame is worse for
dian Defence. Black following 6 . . . c5 7.dxc5 dxcS
The point is that the position is 8.f3, for example: 8 . . . 'f!xd2+ 9.
more opened and it would be eas­ ixd2 t'iJf6 lO.lt:lbS t'iJa6 11.0-0-0
ier for White to exploit the mis­ 0-0 12 .ie3 ie6 13.a3 E:fc8 14.
placement of Black's knight on g4 t'iJe2 t'iJc7 15.t'iJxc7 E:xc7 16.t'iJf4
and the vulnerability of his entire :ih6, Timoscenko - Efimov, Pula
kingside. 1997. Now, White has to get rid of
the unpleasant pin with the move
6.:ig5 17.\t>b1!? and he will be threaten­
ing t'iJxe6 and can play :ic1 at any
moment. 17 . . . E:d7 18.:ie2 ix£4
19.ixf4t - His two-bishop advan­
tage is a quite meaningful factor
in this endgame.

7.:ih4
(diagram)
7 c6
•••

Besides this move, preparing

b7-b5, Black can try numerous
other moves, but this does not
6 ... h6 mean that they are good. In· fact,
Black continue the chase after in all the variations, he remains
the enemy bishop. too far from equality.

217
Chapter 15

his prospects would be preferable

thanks to his superior pawn­
structure.

7 . . . lLld7. Black is preparing c7-

c5. 8 . .ie2 lLlgf6 9.f4 cS 10 .d5 0-0
ll.lLlf3. White is perfectly ready to
advance e4-e5 and Black tried a
pawn-sacrifice in several games
in order to deflect his opponent
from his planned offensive in the
7 . . . lLlf6 Naturally, this retreat centre. ll . . . bS 12 ..ixb5 E:b8 13.
of the knight cannot provide Black 0-0 a6 (13 ... '\WaS 14.e5± White
with an acceptable game. 8.f4 not only has an extra pawn, but
This is White's most energetic re­ also dominates in the centre,
source to exploit Black's rather Kharlov - Kaiszauri, Stockholm
slow play. The idea is to advance 1992) 14 . .ixd7 lLlxd7 15.E:abU
e4-e5 as quickly as possible. 8 . . . Black's bishop-pair does not com­
b 6 9.0-0-0 .ib7 10 .e5 dxeS 11. pensate completely White's extra
fxeS lLldS 12.lLlf3 0-0 13 . .ic4;!; pawn, Yemelin - Lugovoi, Haf­
White's pieces have occupied ac­ narfjordur 1998.
tive positions, while Black's bish­
op on g7 is severely restricted by Following 7 ... 0-0 8.0-0-0,
his own pawn on eS, Short - Be­ Black's best response would be
liavsky, Groningen 1997. 8 . . . lLlc6 (The move 8 . . . lLla6, after
9.h3 lLlf6 10.f4 cS ll.lLlf3 cxd4 12.
7 . . . lLlc6. This is a logical idea. lLlxd4±, leads to a favourable posi­
Black exploits the absence of the tion for White, since Black's knight
bishop on e3 and increases his is misplaced on the a6-square and
pressure against the enemy d4- White is well prepared to push e4-
pawn. 8.h3 lLlf6 9.lLlf3. This move e5, T. Kosintseva - Annaberdiev,
is forced (The line: 9.f4 e5 10.dxe5 Moscow 2005.) 9.lLlf3, Adams -
can be countered by Black with Beliavsky, Tilburg 1992.
the elegant tactical strike 10 . . .
lLlxe4 ! ? and his prospects would
not be worse at all, Leventic -
Oreskovic, Osijek 2012.) 9 . . . 0-0
lO .dS lLleS ll.lLlxeS dxeS, Perez
Garcia - Herman, Seville 2000.
Here, White should have pre­
pared castling kingside and after
12 . .ie2 a6 13.0-0 '!Wd6 14J!adU,

218
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 l!Jf6 3. l!Jc3 g6 4. ie3 ig7 5. Wld2

Here, Beliavsky continued a in which he exchanged at first the

bit too actively - 9 . . .f5 (He had light-squared bishops and then
better play more prudently, for transferred his knight to the e6-
example : 9 . . . a6 ! ?t and Black's po­ outpost: 9.exf5 ! h£5 10.�d3 Wld7
sition would have been worse, but ll.l!Jge2 l!Jc6 12.f3 l!Jf6 13.d5 l!Jb4
still playable.) and after 10.exf5 14.hf5 \&xf5 15.0-0-0 c6 16.l!Jd4
h£5 ll.h3 l!Jf6 12 .d5 l!Jb4 13. Wld7 17.l!Je6± White has realised
l!Jd4±, White was clearly better, completely his plan with the
because the e6-square was horri­ transfer of his knight and Black is
bly weak in Black's camp. in a serious trouble.
8 . . . e5 9.l!Jge2 exd4 (9 . . . h5.
7 . . . g5 8.�g3 This move only leads to a further
weakening of Black's kingside.
10.h4 ih6 ll.hxg5 .bg5 12.f4 exf4
13.hf4 hf4 14.l!Jxf4± White
must castle queenside here
and develop his bishop to c4
and Black will have great prob­
lems with his undeveloped piec­
es and his king, stranded in the
centre, as well as with the protec­
tion of his pawns on h5 and f7,
It is obviously bad for Black to Cheparinov - Shirazi, Golden
choose here 8 . . . h5? ! in view of Sands 2012.) 10.l!Jxd4 l!Jc6 11.
9.h4± and his kingside will be in l!Jxc6 bxc6 12 .h4 E:b8 13.0-0-0
ruins, Gazis - Utasi, Nikea 1985. �e6 14.f3 l!Je5 15.hxg5 hxg5 16.
His attempt to exert pressure E:xh8+ hh8, Kosov - Ni, Orsha
against the d4-square backfires 2008, 17.�f2t White has a supe­
after 8 . . . l!Jc6 and 9.f3 l!Jf6 10. rior pawn-structure and his king
0-0-0 l!Jh5 ll.�f2±. White has is much safer than its counter­
not only protected reliably his d4- part. All this provides him with a
pawn, but has avoided the trade slight edge, although Black's
of the dark-squared bishops, Ar­ counterplay should not be under
delean - Csala, Hungary 2010. estimated.
Now, in order to exploit the weak­
ening of Black's kingside pawn­ 8.f4
structure, he only needs to ad­ (diagram)
vance h2-h4. 8 .. b5
.

Following 8 . . .f5, there is a

good example of an excellent play 8 . . . g5. This is an interesting
by White and it is the game Na­ pawn-sacrifice, but still insuffi­
vara - Rahman, Mallorca 2004, cient for equality. 9.fxg5 hxg5 10.

2 19
Chapter 15

9.c!LlfJ b4

9 . . . 0-0 10.id3 lt:ld7 ll.h3

lt:lgf6 12.e5 b4 13.ltle2;!; White's
position looks preferable thanks
to his dominance in the centre.
Later, in the game Vorobiov - Ko­
rotylev, Pardubice 2001, Black
decided to sacrifice rather dubi­
ously a pawn and as a result of
this his position worsened consid­
.ixgS '!Wb6 11.ltlf3 lt:ld7 12 .�c4;!; erably. 13 . . . lt:ld5 14.exd6 lt:l7f6 15.
Sariego - Sisniega, Linares 1992 . dxe7 Wlxe7 16.lt:le5± White has not
Black does not have sufficient only an extra pawn but his cen­
compensation for the pawn and tralised knight is very powerful.
cannot restore the material bal­
ance, because after 12 . . . '\Wxb2?! lO.c!Lldl Wlb6
13.E:b1 '!Wa3, White can inflict a
tactical strike - 14 . .ixe7!±, ending
up in a clearly better position,
since his bishop is untouchable:
14 . . . 'it>xe7? 15.E:b3 '!WaS 16.lt:ld5+
cxdS 17.'\WxaS dxc4 18.E:c3+-,
Black's three minor pieces are in­
sufficient to compensate the ene­
my queen, because his forces are
not well coordinated.

It would be useless for Black to

try 8 . . . '1Wb6, in view of 9.0-0-0 This position was reached in
lt:ld7 10.ltlf3± and his position re­ the game E.Sveshnikov - Beliav­
mains very difficult due to his lag sky, Minsk 1979. White could have
in development and the mis­ begun advantageous actions in
placed knight on g4, Drenchev ­ the centre even prior to the com­
Mishkovski, Sofia 2003. pletion of his development with
the move ll.e5! Black has prob­
Following 8 ... lt:lf6 9.0-0-0 lems with his knight on g4. 11 •••

0-0 10 .i.d3 bS ll.e5;!;, White's dxe5 12.fxe5 h5. White inflicts a

prospects are preferable, since his strike now on the other side of the
play in the centre develops much board. 13.a3 ! b3 14.cxb3 ti'xb3
faster than Black's queenside ts.gcl .Ae6 16 .Ad3 .Ah6 17.
•

counterplay. .Ag5± Black has a very difficult

220
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 li:Jf6 3. li:J c3 g6 4. 1i.e3 1g7 5. 'ff d2

position. His c6-pawn is weak and - Mandie, Porec 2010, 9 . .hg7

White's pieces are much better <.!txg7 10.h5-. Black's position is
developed. very difficult, because he loses im­
mediately following 10 ... li:Jxh5?,
due to ll.g4 li:Jhf6 12.'ffh 6+ <.!lg8
D) 5 ••• 0-0 13.g5 li:JhS 14.i.e2 +- and his king
This is a very risky move. will be soon checkmated.) 8 . .hg7
Black's king castles right under <.!txg7 9.f4 Vffe 7 10.li:Jf3;!; White
the attack. When I look at this dominates in the centre and can
move, I remember the words of deploy his pieces to very active
M.Servantes : "Bravery on the positions, Tarasov - Afanasiev,
verge of foolhardy is much closer Moscow 2012.
to madness than to tenacity".
Black ends up in a bad posi­
6.0-0-0 tion after 6 . . . li:Jg4 7.i.g5 cS 8.dxc5
'ff aS 9.li:Jh3 dxcS 10 . .he7 �e8
ll.'ffd 8! White simplifies the
game with a temporary queen­
sacrifice and transfers into an
endgame with an extra pawn, for
which Black does not have suffi­
cient compensation. ll . . . �xd8
(He should better give up a pawn,
since his attempt to organise
counterplay with ll . . . i.h6+ 12.
<.!tb1 �xd8 13.�xd8+ <.!lg7, leads af­
ter 14.�xc8 li:Jc6 15.�xa8 li:Jxe7 16.
6 • . • c6 �e2±, to a position in which
White's plan is quite clear. He White's two rooks and a pawn are
will attack on the kingside, so obviously stronger than Black's
Black must organise counterplay queen.) 12.�xd8+ '!Wxd8 13.hd8±
on the queenside as quickly as Yudasin - Azmaiparashvili, Kuj­
possible. byshev 1986.

About 6 . . . li:Jc6 7.f3 eS 8.li:Jge2 7. .ih6

- see variation B. (diagram)
7 b5
•••

6 . . . li:Jbd7 7.i.h6 eS (It is bad for

Black to opt for 7 . . . c6, because in 7 . . . hh6 8.'ffxh6 bS (or 8 . . .
a position with attacks on both li:Jg4 9.'1Wh4 e S 10.'1Wg3 fS n. ic4+
sides of the board, White will be <.!th8 12 .h3 WigS+ 13.<.!tb1 f4 14.
evidently faster. 8.h4 'ff a S, Novak 'fff3 li:Jf6, Spiridonov - Weggen,

221
Chapter 15

has succeeded in avoiding th e

trade of the queens and is ready to
begin his standard pawn-offen­
sive on the kingside, Zapata -
Rosch, Panama 2011.
The central pawn-break 8 ... e5
does not promise equality for
Black. 9 . .bg7 'it>xg7 10 .g4 l2:Jbd7
11.h4 hS 12 .g5 lLJe8 13.f4 exf4 14.
�xf4 bS 15.'it>b1 b4 16.lLlce2 lLlb6,
Del Pozo - Martinez Vicente, San
IECG 2000 and here White main­ Javier 1995. Now, White's most
tains an advantage following 15. precise move is 17.lLlc1 ! ?± and his
�e2± and then lLlf3, because knight protects reliably his king
Black cannot capture the pawn, and he can develop effortlessly his
since he loses his queen: 15 . . . kingside initiative.
�xg2?? 16.lLlf3 exd4 17.1!h2+-) After 8 . . . l2:Jbd7 9.h4 bS, White's
9.e5. This pawn-break leads by attack develops faster and he can
force to a better endgame for even sacrifice his a2-pawn. 10 .h5
White. 9 . . . dxe5 lO.dxeS l2:Jg4 11. b4 11.lLlb1 �xa2 12.hxg6 fxg6 13.
1!xd8 l2:Jxh6 12.1!xf8+ 'it>xf8 13.h3 .bg7 'it>xg7 14.'11;lih6+ 'it>g8 15.lLlh3±
lLJd7 14.lLlf3 lLlc5, Eckert - Sutton, - His knight is headed for the gS­
ICCF 2005, 15.lLld4 ib7 16.g4 square and despite the extra pawn
1!d8 17.lLlce2;!;, Black's pieces (the Black's position is very difficult,
knight on h6 and the bishop on Lane - Reilly, Melbourne 1999.
b7) are evidently misplaced.
8.f3
7 . . . �a5 8.f3

About 8 . . . b5 9.'it>b1 - see 7 . . .

bS. 8 . . . ti'a5
Following 8 . . .hh6 9.�xh6 About 8 . . . b4 9.lLJce2 �aS 10.
�hS 10.�d2 'it>g7 11.g4;!;, White 'it>b1 - see 8 . . . �a5.

222
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJ c3 g6 4. ie3 iJ.g7 5. �d2

Following 8 . . . aS 9.h4, White's

attack is faster, for example: 9 . . .
a 4 (after 9 . . .b 4 10.liJa4±, Black's
pawn-onslaught reaches its dead
end; it would be too slow for him
to opt for 9 . . . l:!e8 10.hg7 'it>xg7
11.hS± Reitinger - Spacek, Svetla
nad Sazavou 199S) 10 .hS b4 11.
liJb1 b3 12.axb3 axb3 13.hxg6 fxg6
(Black loses immediately after
13 . . . bxc2 14.gxh7+ 'it>h8 1S.iJ.xg7+
'it>xg7 16.h8�+ l:!xh8 17.�gS+ 1-0 the undermining of White's cen­
Spanton - Csoma, Email 2 009.) tre, because after 10 . . . liJbd7 11.h4
14.1J.c4+ dS 1S . .bb3± and White cS 12 .hS c4 13.hxg6 fxg6 14 ..bg7
not only has a powerful attack, 'it>xg7, Matikozian - Minasian,
but an extra pawn as well, Tal­ Yerevan 1999, he can obtain a de­
macsi - Amann, Email 2002. cisive advantage with 1S.�h6+
'it>g8 16.liJf4 iJ.a6 17.liJgh3 +-, fol­
It seems too risky for Black to lowed by liJgS and Black is incapa­
choose 8 . . . .bh6, since following ble of holding his h7-pawn and
9.�xh6, White's queen is placed the f7-square.
too close to Black's monarch. 9 .. . ll.liJcl.
b4 10.liJce2 �as 11.'it>b1 cS (11 . . . White's knight protects relia­
iJ.e6 12.liJc1 l:!c8 13.h4 �d8 14. bly again the a2-pawn and Black's
liJge2 �f8 1S.�d2 aS 16.liJf4± He attack has been parried.
has managed to oust White's ll ••• lL!bd7
queen, but this is just small con­ 11 . . . �b6. This is an attempt to
solation for Black, since after bring the a7-pawn into the attack,
White advances h4-hS, the cas­ but this takes too much time. 12.
tling position of Black's king will h4 aS 13.hS± and White's attack is
come under the attack of White's evidently faster, Adams - Robin­
pieces, Efimov - Sarno, Reggio son, Ebbw Vale 1998.
Emilia 1998.) 12 .h4 liJc6 13.hS± 12.h4 lL!b6
and once again, in attacks on both The character of the fight re­
sides of the board, White is much mains more or less the same fol­
ahead of his opponent, Aldama lowing 12 . . . l:!fb8 13 . .bg7 'it>xg7
Degurnay - Felecan, ICC 2010. 14.hS± Black's position is very dif­
ficult, Gelis - Skripchenko, Le
9.'it>bl b4 10.li:Jce2 Port Marly 2009.
(diagram) 13 .ixg7 <llxg7 14.h5± white's
•

10 ••• i.e6 attack is running smoothly, while

Black has no time to prepare Black's queenside counterplay is

223
Chapter 15

parried by White's knight on c1,

which not only protects the key
a2-square, but can eventually (for
example after lt:lb6-a4-c3) cover
the b-file as well (lt:lb3).

E) s . . . c6

7 ... ti'b6. Although in this vari­

ation White castles more often on
the kingside, but it seems useless
for Black to lose a tempo in order
to force the opponent to castle
queenside. 8.0-0-0 ti'aS (Open­
ing of the game in the centre with
8 . . . c5 seems very risky for Black
having in mind his lag in develop­
This is a very popular move for ment. 9 . .ib5+ .id7, Kralova -
Black. He relies, quite deservedly, Drljevic, Plovdiv 2010. Now,
that his king may be better placed White can begin a decisive attack
in the centre than on the kingside. with 10.e5! cxd4 ll.exf6 dxc3 12.

�
With his last move he prepares a
queen-sort · to the aS-square as
well as the wn-advance b7-b5.
Vfig7 !US 13.fxe7 'it>xe7 14.ltle2 ! !
cxb2+ 15.'it>b1 .bb5 16.lt:lc3+- and
despite his extra piece, Black is
6 .ih6 .ixh6
• helpless against the threats lt:ldS
This is the most logical move. and E:hel.) 9 . .ie2 .ie6 10.a3 lt:lbd7
In this variation Black's king is ll.ltlf3 0-0-0 12.ltlg5;!;, followed
better placed in the centre of the by an exchange on e6 and White
board than on the kingside where will have not only a space advan­
it may come under the attack of tage, but a superior pawn-struc­
White's pieces. ture as well.
6 . . . 0-0 7.0-0-0 - see varia­
tion D. 7 . . . lt:lbd7. This move seems to
7.ti'xh6 be too slow. 8.0-0-0 VfiaS (It may
(diagram) be interesting for Black to try 8 . . .
7 ti'a5
••• e S , but White's simplest reaction
Black is trying to exploit the is 9.f3 ! ?, protecting reliably the
defencelessness of White's e4- pawn on e4. 9 . . . 'ffe 7 10.h4 lt:lb6,
pawn. Shadrina - Podshibikhin, Kstovo

224
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 tiJj6 3. tiJ c3 g6 4. i.e3 i.g7 5. Wff d2

2011. Here, he could have ob­ It seems too precarious for

tained an advantage with the sur­ him to opt for 9 . . . b5, since White
prising inclusion of the a-pawn can counter that with 10.e5.
into the actions : ll.a4 ! ? !e6 12.a5 Opening of the centre is advanta­
exd4 - Black loses after 12 . . . geous for him, because he is bet­
t'iJbd7? 13.d5 ! - 13.E:xd4 t'iJbd7 14. ter developed and Black's king is
t'iJge2 0-0-0 15.Wffe 3 t'iJe5 16.t'iJf4;!; stranded in the centre. lO . . . dxeS
and he has less space and his d6- ll.dxeS t'iJg4, A.Muzychuk - Zhor­
pawn is very weak.) 9.t'iJf3 zholiani, Tbilisi 2009, 12.Wffg7! ?
E:f8 13.e6 ! This i s a very instruc­
tive example of an attack against
"a non-castled king". 13 . . . t'iJdf6
14.t'iJd4 i.b7 15.t'iJdxb5 fxe6 (Black
loses immediately after 15 . . . t'iJxf2?
due to 16.!c4 ! fxe6 17.E:he1 t'iJxd1
18.t'iJd6 + ! 'i!id7 19.E:xd1+-) 16.
t'iJd6+ exd6 17.Wffxb7, White's
prospects are obviously prefera­
ble. It is possible that Black's best
9 . . . t'iJb6 lO.eS dxeS ll.dxeS chance may be to trade the queens
t'iJfdS 12.t'iJxd5 t'iJxdS (It is bad for with 17 . . . Wffb 6, but this will lose
Black to opt for 12 . . . cxd5?, in view the d6-pawn for him.
of 13.Wffg 7 E:f8, Sherzer - Kaka­
geldyev, Biel 1993 and White wins After 7 . . . e5, the position re­
the exchange after 14.t'iJg5+-) 13. sembles the open games. 8.dxe5
!c4 !e6 14 . .ib3 0-0-0 15.t'iJd4 dxeS 9.t'iJf3 Wffe 7 10 .!c4
Wffc7 16.E:heU He has more space
and can compromise Black's
pawn-structure at any moment
after t'iJe6.
Following 9 ... Wffh 5, White
should better avoid the exchange
of the queens 10.Wffd 2;!; - he has a
powerful centre and a superior
development, Madl - Lorcher,
Budapest 1990.
It would be a mistake for Black 10 . . . t'iJbd7 (10 . . . b5 ll.i.b3 .ie6
to choose 9 . . . e5? ! due to 10.!c4 ! ± 12.t'iJg5 .ixb3 13.axb3 t'iJbd7 14.
and i t becomes inconceivable why 0-0 t'iJg8 15.Wffg7 Wfff6 16.Wffxf6
Black has played Wff aS in the first t'iJgxf6 17.E:a6;!; - In the endgame,
place, since with a pawn on eS, his Black has weak pawns on a7 and
queen is better placed on e7. c6, Salgado Lopez - Pancevski,

225
Chapter 15

Plovdiv 2012.) 11.lLlg5 gf8 12.tLlxh7

lLlxh7 13.W/xh7. White has man­
aged to win a pawn and Black's at­
tempt to regain it is connected
with a risky queen-sortie, while his
other pieces are not developed.
13 . . .W/g5 14.h4 W/xg2 (following
14 . . .W/f4 15.W/g7 We7 16 . .ie2 W/f6
17.W/xf6+ lLlxf6 18.Wd2±, there
arises an endgame with an extra 18.W/d4:t White has evacuated his
pawn for White, Fedorchuk - Zo­ king away from the queenside to
zulia, Tarragona 2006) 15.0-0-0 the centre of the board and Black's
bS 16 . .ib3 aS 17.h5 gxhS (Black is compensation for the sacrificed
lost after 17 ... a4? 18 . .ixf7+ ! gxf7 pawn is insufficient.) 13.gxd2 a6
19.hxg6 ! +-, White's passed pawn 14.gxd5:t - He does not have
will promote unavoidably.) 18. enough for the missing pawn.
W/xhS± Black has succeeded in re­ Naturally, White should play very
storing the material balance in­ carefully later, since he lags in de­
deed, but his position remains velopment as a result of going af­
very difficult due to his lag in de­ ter material.
velopment. His attempt to cap­
ture the enemy bishop with 18 . . . .
8 .td3
a4? loses by force: 1 9 . .ixf7+ ! gxf7
20.gxd7! hd7 21.W/xe5+-

!r
! e move 7 ... b5 leads after
8.e5 to the opening of the position
in the centre and White is much
better prepared for that. 8 . . . dxe5
(It would be too risky for Black to
continue with 8 . . . b4 9.lLlce2 tLldS
10.lLlf3 lLla6 ll.lLlg3 lLlac7 12 .W/g7
gf8 13.W/xh7± White has an extra
pawn and a good position.) 9.
dxeS tLldS 10.0-0-0 Now, contrary to the majority
(diagram) of the variations, which we have
10 . . . W/a5. This is an interesting analysed in this chapter, White
attempt to complicate the game plans to castle kingside and not
by sacrificing a pawn. ll.lLlxdS queenside.
cxdS 12 .W/d2 W/xd2+ (12 .. .'�xa2 8 ... c5
13 . .ixb5+ Wf8 14.W/xd5 W/a1+ 15. Black wishes to organise coun­
Wd2 W/a5+ 16. We2 W/b6 17.c4 Wg7 terplay on the dark squares.

226
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 !i:Jf6 3. !i:J c3 g6 4 . .ie3 .ig7 5. Wid2

8 . . . Wib6. He lags in develop­ Wih6± - his pieces are very active,

ment, so this attempt to win a while Black's rooks are not con­
pawn looks very dubious. 9.!i:Jge2 nected yet and his king, stranded
Wixb2? ! (It is possible that Black in the centre, does not beautify
had better play here 9 . . . !i:Jbd7 his position either.) ll.Wid2 !i:Jxd3
10.0-0, although even then, 12.cxd3. This is better for White
White maintains an edge.) 10. than capturing with the queen,
0-0 Wia3 (Black loses immedi­ because he fortifies his e4-pawn
ately following 10 ... b5? ll.a3+­ (against the possibility d6-d5).
and his queen is doomed to re­ 12 . . . 0-0 13.f4 Wih6 14.h3 dS (After
main on b2.) 11.f4± White has de­ 14 . . . .ie6, White obtains a slight
veloped all his pieces, while only edge by transferring his knight to
Black's queen, knight and king the e3-square. 15.!i:Jdl ! ? aS 16.
are in the centre. His extra pawn !i:Je3;J;, followed by E:f3, E:afl (or
is absolutely immaterial and he !i:Jg3 and Wif2) and the prepara­
is practically helpless against tion of the pawn-advance f4-f5.
White's central pawn-break - e4- He has a clear-cut plan for his fur­
e5. ther actions, which cannot be said
for Black at all. He cannot equal­
8 ... !i:Ja6. Black wishes to ex­ ise with 14 . . . e5, because after 15.
change the enemy bishop on d3. E:ad1 exf4 16.!i:Jxf4 Wig7 17.E:f3,
9.!i:Jge2 !i:Jb4 10.0-0 Adams - McNab, Blackpool 1990,
White maintains an advantage
thanks to his dominance in the
centre and the possibility for ac­
tive operations on the semi-open
f-file. After Black weakened care­
lessly his castling position with
the line: 17 . . . g5? ! 18.E:g3 h6 19.E:f1
'it>h8 20.e5 dxeS 21.dxe5 !i:Jh7
22 .d4±, White's advantage be­
came almost decisive.) 15.Wie3
10 . . . Wih5 (It seems too original dxe4 16.dxe4 b6, Van der Wiel -
for him to try 10 . . . !i:Jxd3 ll.cxd3 Ftacnik, Haninge 1989, 17.E:acU
.id7 12 .h3 E:g8, Santo Roman - - He has a powerful centre, while
Granda Zuniga, Las Palmas 1991. Black's c6-pawn may turn out to
White could have seized the initi­ be very weak, moreover that his
ative on the queenside with the queen is obviously misplaced on
move 13.b4 ! , for example: 13 . . . h6.
Wic7 14.f4±, o r 1 3 . . . Wixb4 14.e5
dxeS 15.dxe5 !i:JhS 16.Wixh7 E:f8 8 ... b5. This attempt to create
17.E:ab1 WiaS 18.E:xb7 WixeS 19. counterplay with the help of the

227
Chapter 15

b-pawn leads only to the appear­

ance of additional pawn-weak­
nesses in Black's camp. 9.ltlf3 b4
10.ltle2

About 9 . . .b5 10.0-0 b4 11.ltle2

- see 8 . . . b5.
9 . . . e5. Black solves radically
the problem with White's central
pawn-break e4-e5. 10.dxe5 dxe5
10 . . .b3+ 11.c3 ia6 12 . .ba6 11.0-0 �c5 12.a4, Hodgson -
lt:lxa6 13.e5 lt:ld5 14. 0-0 bxa2 15. Fyfe, Aberdeen 1996, 12 . . . a5 The
lt:lcl± Mirzoev - Movsziszian, La knight on c3 is restricted in its
Pobla de Lillet 2007. Naturally, mobility by Black's pawn on c6, so
White will capture easily the White must find a more active po­
pawn on a2 and Black will remain sition for it. He can achieve this
with weaknesses on a7 and h7 with the move 13.ltlb1 ! ;t and the
(�g7!). knight will be transferred to c4 via
10 . . .i.a6 11.ixa6 lt:lxa6 12.e5± the d2-square.
- After the retreat of the knight, After 9 . . . c5, there arise posi­
Black may have problems with tions, which are more typical for
�
the {r ction of his kingside the Sicilian Defence. 10.0-0-0
pawns (following �g7 or lt:lg5), cxd4 11.lt:lxd4;t White has already
Castro - Barata, Vila Real 2005. completed his development, while
10 ... lt:lbd7 11.0-0 e5 12.a3± - Black's king is still stranded in the
The weaknesses on Black's queen­ centre of the board. 11 . . . lt:lg4 (It
side are becoming a telling factor, would be more reliable for him to
Kupreichik - Sznapik, Zenica choose 11 . . . a6 !?, although even
1985. then White preserves an edge.)
10 ... i.g4 11.lt:lg5 ixe2 12 .ixe2 12.�h4 lt:ldf6 13.i.b5+ mf8 14.h3
lt:lbd7, Vesselovsky - Korotylev, and Black's position is very diffi­
Moscow 1994, 13.0-0± - He can cult, Ayas Fernandez - Cuijpers,
hardly find a safe haven for his Sitges 1999. For example, the re­
king. treat of the knight 14 . . . lt:le5, after
15.�h6+ 'it>g8 16.f4 lt:led7 17.
8 . . . lt:lbd7. This is a very flexible :Bhe1+-, leads to a position in
move with which Black conceals which despite the material equal­
his plans for the moment. 9.lt:lf3 ity, Black can simply resign.

228
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 tDf6 3. tDc3 g6 4. i.e3 1Lg7 5. Wff d2

Following 9 . . . Wffh 5, Black wish­ forced to comply with the dou­

es to trade the queens, but White bling of his pawns (It would be
should better avoid this, since he just bad for him to opt for 13 . . .
will have good attacking chances tDxf6? ! , because of 14.e5±, fol­
against the enemy king in the lowed by Wffh 6 with a powerful at­
middle game. 10.Wffd 2 tack.) 14.:1'i:ae1 Ei:e8 15.h3;!; White
has a superior pawn-structure
and is dominant in the centre,
Alvarez - Henriquez Garcia, Mesa
1992.

9.d5
White is occupying space.
9 . . . tDbd7 10)ijf3

10 . . . c5 11.i.e2 cxd4 12.tDxd4

Wffc5 13.f4 tDb6 14.0-0-0;!; and in
the game Arzumanian - Zakha­
revich, Tula 2002, White ad­
vanced after a while e4-e5 and
scored a full point.
10 . . . 0-0 11.tDe2. He is trans­
ferring his knight to g3 is order to
exploit the misplacement of the
enemy queen. 11 . . . e5 12.tDg3 Wffg4
13.0-0 Ei:e8 14.:1'1fe1 'it>g7 15.h3 10 . . b5
.

Wfff4, Lerner - Kantsler, Haifa It is understandable that Black

2008, 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.Wffc3;!; - wishes to create counterplay, but
The weakness on e5 will cause it is well known that "pawns can­
great problems for Black (White not go back". Later, his pawn­
can out the enemy queen away weaknesses may tell.
from the protection of the e5-
pawn at any moment with the In the main variations, he has
move tDe2.). nothing to brag about, so maybe
10 ... Wff a 5. Naturally, the retreat the least of evils for Black may
of the queen cannot equalise for be 10 . . . c4 ! ? , although even then
Black. 11.0-0 0-0 (following 11 . . . after 11.i.xc4 Wffc5 12 .i.d3 Wffxf2 +
Wffc7 12.Wffh 6±, h e cannot castle 13.'it>xf2 tDg4+ 14.'it>g3 tDxh6 15.
kingside, Nelson - McFarland, Ei:heU, White has better pr.ospects
Newcastle on Tyne 1995) 12.tDd5 in the endgame mostly thanks to
Wffd 8 13.tDxf6+ exf6. Black is the misplacement of the enemy

229
Chapter 15

knight at the edge of the board,

Van Kampen - Cuijpers, Nether­
lands 2012.

11.0-0 c4 12 .ie2 b4 13.�dl

•

ti'cS
13 . . . �xe4 14 . .ixc4± - Opening
of the e-file is obviously in favour
of White with Black's king in the
centre of the board.
14.�g5 !
White not only defends his e4- hardly hold the defence on the
pawn, but eyes Black's main queenside. This enables White to
weakness in this position - the win a pawn on the other side of
pawn on h7! the board and in order to do this,
14 ••• �e5 15.�e3 aS 16.a3 he only needs to trade the knights.
White is opening a second 24.�f3 ! �xf3+ (After 24 . . . lt:Jxe4
front. 25.lt:Jxe5+ dxeS 26.'Wg7±, the po­
16 gbs 17.axb4 gxb4 18.
••• sition is opened and the misplace­
ga2 ti'b6 19.gfal l:!xb2 20.gxa5 ment of Black's king in the centre
gbl + 21 .ifl gxal 22.gxal .ia6
• of the board becomes the decisive
23.h3 �d7 factor.) 25.gxf3 ggs 26.�g4±
(diagram) After the exchange of the knight
In the game Pert - McNab, Black loses his h7-pawn and if we
England 20110White overlooked have in mind that White's king is
the possibilitY to obtain a great much safer, Black's situation be­
advantage. Black's pieces can comes critical.

Conclusion
We have just finished the analysis of variations of the Pirc Defence
with the move 4 . . . i.g7. As a rule, White obtains effortlessly an advan­
tage exploiting the too early development of Black's dark-squared bish­
op. After 5.'Wd2, Black can castle kingside and after that there arise
complicated positions with mutual attacks on the different sides of the
board. White's prospects in that case are clearly preferable. He follows
with 0-0-0, f3, h4, i.h6, hS and organises a powerful attack on the h­
file. Meanwhile, Black's attack on the queenside often reaches its dead
end, since White can easily protect his main weakness on this side of
the board - the pawn on a2 (�bl and lt:Jcl). If Black decides to leave his
king in the centre, then after ih6 and the trade of the bishops, in many
variations the vulnerability of his h7-pawn becomes a telling factor.

230
Chapter 16 l.d4 d6 2.e4 !L!f6 3.!L!c3 g6 4 . .ie3 c6

strength you can judge by the fact

that it has been used by the World
Champions G.Kasparov and V.
Anand. The idea of this move is at
first to prevent the pawn-advance
b7-b5. White takes under control
the g4-square and prepares e4-e5.
Meanwhile, his last move will be
useful if he advances f2-f4 and g2-
g4.

With this move Black prepares

b7-b5, which may be useful if
White castles queenside. Mean­
while, he postpones the develop­
ment of his king's bishop, which
deprives White of his standard
plan, connected with '1Wd2 and
ih6, since exchanging the still
not developed bishop would seem
a bit strange.
The move 4 . . . c6 is rather pop­
ular among the fans of the Pirc Black has two main responses
Defence. It has been played by P. now: A) 5 . .�g7 and B) 5 ..
. .

Svidler, Sh.Mamedyarov, V.Ivan­ �bd7, but before that we will an­

chuk, Z.Azmaiparashvili, M.Gu­ alyse some less popular moves.
revich, A.Beliavsky and some oth­
er grandmasters. It is rather dubious for Black
5.h3 to play S . . . eS? ! , because after that
This is a very flexible system he enters a very difficult end­
of development and about its game. 6.dxe5 dxeS 7.'\Wxd8+ 'it>xd8

231
Chapter 16

8.lt:Jf3 i.d6 9.0-0-0 <tle7 10.i.c4 the weakness on d6, as well as on

ie6 ll.ixe6 fxe6 12J�d3± - His the queenside after a4-a5.) 12.
doubled e-pawns are very weak �fe1 e5 (after 12 . . . �ad8, White can
and his bishop is "bad", since it is begin immediate active actions on
restricted by his own e5-pawn, the queenside with the move 13.
Hracek - Nyback, Plovdiv 2003. a5 !:t Kamsky - Tkachiev, Moscow
2008) 13.a5 ! ?:t He has the initia­
5 . . .'�b6. The idea of this move tive and it is bad for Black to cap­
is to impede White's castling ture the pawn 13 . . . bxa5? ! , since
queenside, but he can continue White will regain it easily and
perfectly without it, while the de­ Black will end up with weak a and
fects of Black's early queen's de­ c-pawns, for example: 14.dxe5
velopment will be long-lasting. dxe5 15.�a3 �fd8 16.�ea1 if8 17.
6.a3. Now, capturing on b2 is im­ �xa5±
possible. 6 . . . ig7 7.lt:Jf3 0-0. Black
can hardly continue the game 5 . . . W!a5. This development of
without castling (7 . . . lt:Jbd7 8.id3 the queen cannot equalise for
W!c7 9.0-0 0-0 10 .a4 - see 7 . . . Black either. 6.id3 lt:Jbd7 7.lt:Jf3 e5
0-0). 8.i.d3 lt:Jbd7 9 . 0 - 0 W!c7 1 0 . 8.0-0 i.g7 9.W!d2 0-0 10 .a4
a4

10 . . . �e8 (It is also possible for

10 . . . b6. He should not allow him to choose 10 . . . exd4 ll.lt:Jxd4
the move a4-a5 (Following 10 . . . e5 �e8 12. lt:Jb3 W!c7 13.�ad1 a6, Leko
11.a5:t, White occupies space on - Kamsky, Moscow 2007. Here,
the queenside and his position is White should have continued
more pleasant, moreover that in with 14.a5 ! , without being afraid
numerous variations the vulnera­ of 14 . . . c5 due to 15.i.c4:t and the
bility of the d6-pawn will be hurt­ vulnerability of the d6-pawn and
ing Black, Kindermann - Schloss­ the d5-square is much more im­
er, Vienna 1996.) 11.Wid2 .tb7 (11 . . . portant than the weakness of
e 5 12.dxe5 lt:Jxe5 13.ie2 ib7 14. White's e4-pawn. Naturally, it
�fd1 �adS 15.i.g5:t White has would not work for Black to play
more space and can play against 15 . . . lt:Jxe4?, because of 16.i.xf7+

232
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 Ci:Jf6 3. Ci:J c3 g6 4. i.e3 c6 5.h3

'kt>xf7 17.�d5+ 'tt>f8 18.Ci:Jxe4+-) still has good chances of realising

l U�fdl exd4. After this exchange his extra pawn.
the d-file is opened and the weak­ 6 . . . Ci:Jfd7 7.exd6 exd6 (follow-
ness on d6 may become impor­ ing 7 . . . b4 8.dxe7 �xe7 9.Ci:Ja4±,
tant later (But even in the varia­ Black has no compensation for
tion ll . . . �c7 12.dxe5 dxeS 13.a5 the pawn whatsoever) 8.d5 ! a6
Ci:Jf8 14.Ci:Ja4 Ci:JhS lS.Ci:JcS Ci:Je6 16. (or 8 . . . b4 9.�d4 ! ± and he had the
�c3 Ci:Jhf4 17.i.fU, White's pros­ sad choice between playing with­
pects are preferable, since Black out a pawn, or without the ex­
can hardly fight for the only open change) 9.a4± - Now, Black can
d-file due to his weakness on a7. feel sorry for having made the
He cannot play a7-a6, because move b7-b5, which has led to the
this will lead to an irrevocable irrevocable weakening of his
weakening of the b6-square.) queenside pawn-structure, Ankit
12 .hd4 Ci:JeS 13.ie2 ie6 14.Ci:Jg5;!; - Mallick, India 2011.
White has extra space (the e4- 6 ... dxe5. The transfer into an
pawn against the d6-pawn) and endgame cannot solve the prob­
after the trade on e6 he will obtain lems for Black. 7.dxe5 �xd1+ 8.
the two-bishop advantage, Ortega :gxd1 Ci:Jfd7 (It would not work for
- Van Rijn, Arco 2003. him to play 8 . . . b4 9.exf6 bxc3, be­
cause of 10.i.d4 ! ± and Black loses
It would be premature for a pawn without any compensa­
Black to choose S . . . bS? ! in view of tion, Sveshnikov - Smyslov, Til­
6.e5! and now, Black ends up in a burg 1992.) 9.id4 e6 (He loses
very difficult position in all the immediately following 9 . . . a6? 10.
variations. e6 Ci:Jf6 ll.i.b6 Ci:JdS 12.:gxd5 ! cxdS
13.Ci:Jxd5+- and Black cannot
avoid the material losses, A.Iva­
nov - Weeramantry, Philadelphia
2003) 10.g3 aS ll.i.g2± White's
pressure on the long diagonal is
very unpleasant for his opponent,
moreover that he is threatening
the manoeuvre Ci:Jc3-e4-d6, Chai­
ka - Eremeev, Simferopol 1997.

6 . . . b4 7.exf6 bxc3 8.fxe7 �xe7

9.bxc3 i.h6 10.�e2 ia6, Goodger A) 5 i.g7 6.f4
•••

- Fegan, Sunningdale 2007, 11. The arising position on the

�f3 he3 12 .�xe3 �xe3+ 13.fxe3 board resembles very much the
ixf1 14.'kt>xfl± White's pawn­ variation with 4.f4, in which Black
structure is a bit disrupted, but he has made the not so useful move

233
Chapter 16

c7-c6. Accordingly, his further side pawns have been weakened

plans are connected not with c5, (the consequences of the move
but with advancing b5 and e5. b7-b5), but also his knight is mis­
placed at the edge of the board,
Jansa - Pfleger, Germany 1989.)
8.tt:lf3 tt:lb6 (8 ... 0-0 9.i.d3 - see
6 ... 0-0) 9.i.d3 b4 10.tt:le4;!; White's
pieces and pawns have occupied
the centre of the board, David -
Delemarre, Vlissingen 2000.

6 . . . '?tlb6. This attempt to cause

disharmony in White's camp by
attacking the b2-pawn cannot
equalise for Black either. 7.'?tfc1
6 ... 0-0
Black makes a useful move,
concealing his future plans for the
moment.

About 6 . . . tt:Jbd7 7.e5 - see 5 . . .

tt:lbd7.

6 . . . tt:lh5. This move with the

knight to the edge of the board
looks dubious, since White can 7 . . . 0-0 (It seems anti-posi­
protect easily the weak g3-square. tional for him to opt for 7 . . . tt:lh5
7.tt:lge2 (7.'?tlf3 ! ?;t;) 7 . . . e5 8.dxe5 8.tt:lge2 f5 9.e5 0-0 10J'!g1 g5
dxe5 9.'?tlxd8+ l!lxd8 10.0-0-0+ ll.g3 tt:la6 12 .i.g2 c5, Z.Hracek -
l!lc7 ll.g4± The queens have been Marin, Krynica 1998 and here,
exchanged and his lead in devel­ the simplest way for White to em­
opment provides him with a con­ phasize his edge is 13.dxc5 tt:Jxc5
siderable advantage, A.Sokolov - 14.tt:ld5 '?tld8 15.i.xc5 dxc5 16.
Chabanon, Torey 1991. '?tle3±, after which Black's knight
is a sorry sight at the edge of the
After 6 ... b5, White should re­ board. Following 7 . . . '?tla5, there
act with an immediate strike in arises a position which will be an­
the centre. 7.e5 tt:Jfd7 (The end­ alysed later, except that White's
game is very difficult for Black in queen is placed on cl. There may
the variation 7 . . . dxe5 8.dxe5 follow 8.i.d3 e5, Cornette - Sed­
'?tlxd1+ 9J�xd1 tt:Jh5 10.tt:lge2 g5 11. lak, Subotica 2005 and here,
g3± and not only Black's queen- White preserves a slight edge af-

234
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJc3 g6 4. �e3 c6 5.h3

ter 9.fxeS dxeS 10.dxeS 'WxeS 11. initiative (aS and b4). If he ad­
ltJf3 'We7 12 .'Wd2 ltJbd7 13.0-0-0:t vances bS-b4 (without a7-aS),
- the activity of his pieces com­ then after the exchange of the
pensates with an interest the pawns, he will have a weak isolat­
slight weakness of his isolated ed pawn on a7.
pawn on e4.) 8.i.d3 ltJa6 9.a3. 7 . . . ltJbd7 8.ltJf3 eS (Following
Naturally, White should not let 8 . . . cS 9.0-0 cxd4 10 . .bd4, there
the enemy knight to the b4- arises a position which is more
square. 9 . . . cS 10.ltJf3 cxd4 11 . .bd4 typical for the Sicilian Defence.
ltJcS 12 .eS ltJfd7 13.i.c4 'Wc6 (13 . . . 10 ... 0-0 ll.i.c4!? ltJb6 12.i.b3 ltJhS
'Wd8 14.'We3 ltJb6 1S.i.a2 ltJ e 6 16. 13 . .bg7 ltJxg7 14.'Wd4:t) 9.0-0
.bb6 'Wxb6 17.'Wxb6 axb6 18.ltJdS 0-0 10.a3 ltJhS 1l.dxeS dxeS 12 .fS
�e8 19.ltJxb6± Black's compensa­ bS 13.'We1 ! ? White's queen may
tion for the pawn was insufficient support eventually his attack
in the game, Arakhamia-Grant - from the h4-square. 13 . . . 'Wc7 14.
I.Marin, Eforie Nord 2009.) 14 . �dU, followed by 'Wh4. If Black
.idS 'Wa6 1S.'We3 dxeS 16.fxeS plays ltJf4, then White can easily
ltJe6, Skrobek - Nyvlt, Email exchange his opponent's active
2007, 17.0-0-0 ! ?:t White's pieces knight with the move ltJe2.
have occupied very active posi­ 7 ... eS 8.ltJf3 exd4 (8 ... ltJbd7
tions. 9.0-0 - see 7 . . . ltJbd7. It is bad for
Black to opt for 8 . . . exf4, since this
6 . . . 'WaS 7.�d3 would lead to the opening of the
f-file, advantageous for White.
Later, in the game Losev -
Gubanov, St Petersburg 1994,
there followed: 9 . .bf4 dS lO.eS
ltJhS ll . .id2 'Wb6 12 .g4 ltJg3 13.�g1
ltJe4 14 . .be4 dxe4 1S.ltJxe4 0-0
16.ic3± and Black had no com­
pensation for the sacrificed
pawn.) 9 . .ixd4 0-0 10.'Wd2 ltJbd7
11.0-0 ltJcS. Here, White can seize
It is just bad for Black to play the initiative on the kingside with
here 7 . . . bS - the combination of 12.fS ! ? ltJxd3 13.cxd3:t - his pros­
the moves 'WaS and bS seems pects are preferable, because Black
much more sensible if White had cannot capture the fS-pawn in
castled queenside. Now, after 8. view of the loss of the piece in
ltJf3 i.b7, Gjuran - Klenburg, Par­ the variation 13 . . . gxfS?! 14.exfS
dubice 2008, 9.a3 ! ± Black's .bfS?? 1S.ltJh4+-
queen on aS only impedes the
development of his queenside 7.ltJf3

23S
Chapter 16

After 7 ... tt:lbd7, White obtains

an advantage with the move 8.e5.

7 b5
• . •

It seems rather dubious for

About 7 ... \Wb6 8J�b1 tt:lbd7 9. Black to retreat his knight to the
\Wd2 \Wc7 10.id3 eS 11.0-0 - see edge of the board, since after 8 . . .
s ... tt:lbd7 6.f4 '1Wb6. tt:le8, i n the game Shaked - Beim,
Schwarzach 1997, White began a
7 . . . \WaS 8.id3 tt:la6 (8 . . . tt:lbd7 very promising attack against
- see 5 . . . tt:lbd7) 9.0-0 id7, Castro Black's monarch with 9.h4! ?±, as
Rojas - Bermudez Barrera, Bogo­ well as following 8 . . . tt:lh5 9.ttle2
ta 2006, 10.a3 !±, restricting the ih8 (after 9 ... c5? ! 10.g4± Black's
knight on a6. White has a power­ compensation for the piece was
ful pawn-centre, while Black's mi­ insufficient in the game Short -
nor pieces have occupied very M.Gurevich, Wijk aan Zee 1990)
passive positions. 10.g4 tt:lg7 ll.i.g2;t White domi­
nates in the centre, while Black's
7 ... c5? ! He ignores the loss of bishop on h8 and his knight on g7
the tempo ... 8.dxc5 \WaS 9.i.d3 dS are awkwardly placed, Jansa -
10.e5 tt:le4 ll.ixe4 dxe4 12.ttld2± Hoi, Gausdal 1991.
Black is not only a pawn down, The retreat of the knight in the
but has problems with the protec­ centre does not solve all Black's
tion of his e4-pawn, Jansa -Pein, problems either. 8 . . . tt:ld5 9.tt:lxd5
Metz 1984. cxdS 10 . .td3 \Wb6 11.\Wc1 dxeS 12.
fxeS f6 13.exf6 tt:lxf6 14.0-0 i.fS
7 . . . tt:la6 8.ixa6 bxa6 9.0-0 15.ixf5 gxfS 16.ttle5 \We6, Spivak
E:b8 10.b3;t - He has the two­ - Czerwonski, Germany 2003,
bishop advantage indeed, but his 17.i.f4;t White has a slight edge
position is worse, since his pawn­ thanks to his possession of the
structure has been compromised, important eS-outpost.
while White is dominant in the It is possible that Black's best
centre, Erenburg - Zubov, Nakh­ solution is the preliminary ex­
chivan 2003. change - 8 . . . dxe5, although even

236
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJ c3 g6 4 . .ie3 c6 5.h3

then after 9.dxe5 liJdS 10.liJxdS 9.J.d3 �b6 10.0-0 b4 11.

cxdS 11.�d2 (11.�xd5? liJxeS ! ) �e2 a5 12.a3;!; - He has much
ll . . . liJb6, Donchenko - Gavrilov, more space and a powerful pawn­
Moscow 1995, White maintains a centre, while Black's queenside
slight edge, restricting the enemy activity has led only to the weak­
knight with the move 12 .b3:t ening of his b4-pawn, Sveshnikov
- Kraschl, Finkenstein 1994.
8.e5

B) 5 ••• �bd7
He postpones the develop­
ment of the bishop on f8, trying to
advance as quickly as possible e7-
e5 or b7-b5.
6.f4

8 .tl]fd7
••

He obtains an advantage even

after the other retreats of Black's
knight, for example: 8 . . . liJe8 9.
id3 liJd7 10.0-0 ib7, Sveshnikov
- Ciglic, Ljubljana 1994, 11.�el.
White transfers his queen to the 6 b5
•••

h4-square. ll . . . liJc7 12.�h4 and Black relies on a counter at­

dangerous clouds are hanging tack on the flank.
over Black's king.
6 . . . �b6. This move is not dan­
8 . . . liJdS 9.liJxd5 cxdS 10.c3 a6 gerous for White, since he is pre­
ll . .id3 liJc6 12. 0-0:t White has paring to castle kingside and can
extra space. Later, in the game simply play 7.:gbl. There might
Lukesova - Hansen, Email 2010, follow: 7 . . . e5 8.�d2 �c7 9.liJf3
Black made a mistake by playing .ig7 10.id3 0-0 11.0-0 bS 12.a3
12 . . . e6 and White increased his a6 13.dxe5 dxeS 14.f5:t and White
advantage by transferring his begins his kingside attack. 14 . . . c5
bishop to the f6-square. 13.if2 15.fxg6 hxg6. After this exchange,
dxeS 14.fxe5 b4 1S . .ih4 �b6 16. not only the f-file is opened for
if6± White's rook, but what is even

237
Chapter 16

more unpleasant for Black - tt:lbd7. 7.e5 tt:ldS 8.tt:lxd5 cxdS 9.

White's knight will hardly be c3. The bishop on g7 is severely
ousted from the gS-square (Black restricted in its movement by
does not have the move h7-h6). White's pawn on eS. 9 . . . 0-0 (9 . . .
16.'!Wf2 c4 17 ..ie2 .ib7 18.tt:lg5 !!fe8 dxeS 10.dxe5 '!WaS ll.tt:lf3 0 - 0 12.
19.'!Wh4± White's attack is devel­ .ie2 tt:lb6, Palekha - Kornev, Ser­
oping effortlessly, Erenburg - pukhov 2003 and here, White
Zlotnikov, Parsippany 2007. could have entered a better end­
game with 13.'1Wd4 .ie6 14.'!Wc5
6 .. .'!Wa5 7.id3 cS. This ex­ '!WxcS 15.hc5;!;, he has more space
change of the c-pawn for the e­ and Black's bishop on g7 is very
pawn seems very dubious, since passive.) 10 .tt:lf3 dxeS 1Lfxe5 e6
Black falls down considerably in 12 .:li.d3 fS 13.'11;lid 2 tt:lb6 14.h4± Tu­
development in the process (7 . . . e5 rov - Tripoteau, playchess.com
8.'1Wf3 .ig7 9.tt:lge2 - see 6 . . . e5). 2005. White has a clear advan­
8.tt:lge2 c4 9.hc4 tt:lxe4 10.0-0 tage. He is threatening to organ­
tt:ldf6 (10 ... tt:lxc3 ll.tt:lxc3 tt:lf6 12. ise a dangerous attack with .ih6
'!Wf3 a6, Solodovnichenko - Movs­ and h4-h5. If Black plays h7-h5
ziszian, Milan 2008, 13.!!ae1 .ig7 himself, then his pawn-majority
14.g4 0-0 15.f5± Black is helpless on the kingside will be devalued
against his opponent's increasing and after b2-b3 and c3-c4, White
initiative on the kingside.) 11. will begin an offensive in the cen­
.ib5+ .id7 12 .hd7+ 'it>xd7 13. tre and on the queenside, where
tt:lxe4 tt:lxe4 14.c4 ! ? White wishes he will have in fact an extra pawn.
to exploit the fact that Black's
king is stranded in the centre by It may be interesting for Black
opening the position (He obtains to try 6 . . . e5 and White should
only a slight edge after the more better counter it with 7.'11;lif3 ! ? ,
prudent line: 14.'1Wd3 fS 15.c4 :li.g7 preparing castling queenside. In
16.!!fc1 !!hc8 17.tt:lc3 tt:lxc3 18. addition, his queen on f3 will sup­
!!xc3;!;, followed by White's pawn­ port effectively his pawn-on­
offensive on the queenside, slaught on the kingside with f4-f5
Sveshnikov - Beliavsky, Bled and g2-g4.
2001.) 14 . . . !!c8 15.c5t Black's king
is endangered.

The move 6 . . . :li.g7 does not

combine well together with the
previous move. If Black wished to
develop his bishop on g7, then he
had to do that immediately, with­
out losing time for the move

238
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJc3 g6 4 . .ie3 c6 5.h3

After 7 . . . ig7, White accom­ pects on the kingside and his piec­
plishes a plan which is standard es have occupied active positions,
in similar positions. He exchang­ but naturally Black's counterplay,
es on eS and follows this with fS connected with b6 and cS, should
and g4. 8.dxeS dxeS 9.fS \l;lfaS 10. not be underestimated.
g4 bS ll . .id3 b4 12.liJd1 liJcS 13.
liJe2 gxfS 14.gxfS liJxd3+ 1S.cxd3 7.a3
.ia6. The activity of Black's pieces This prophylactic is necessary.
is only temporary, while his
pawn-weaknesses are a perma­
nent factor. 16.liJc1 MB 17.liJf2 E:g8
18.liJb3 \l;lfbS 19.0-0-0 0-0-0 2 0 .
'it>bU White has a n easy game on
the e-file and Black's king is rath­
er unsafe, E.Sveshnikov - Kom­
ljenovic, Torey 1991.
After 7 ... \l;lfaS 8 ..id3 .ig7 9.
liJge2 0-0 10.0-0 exd4 (Follow­
ing 10 . . . bS ll.a3, there may arise
sharp complications on the board.
ll . . . exd4 12.liJxd4 .ib7 13.eS dxeS 7 ••• liJb6
14.liJxc6 \l;lfc7 1S.liJe7+ 'it>h8 16.
liJxbS \l;lfb8 17.liJc6 \l;lfc8 18.liJcxa7 About 7 . . . a6 8.liJf3 liJb6 9 . .id3
\l;lrb8 19.liJc6 \l;lfc8oo White has won - see 7 . . . liJb6.
a couple of pawns indeed, but his
cavalry on the queenside is iso­ Black cannot equalise with the
lated from the actions and it is un­ plan connected with advancing
clear whether he has anything rapidly aS and b4. 7 . . . .ib7 8.liJf3
more than a repetition of moves aS 9 . .id3 b4 10.liJe2 .ig7 ll.c4
After lO . . . bS, White's best reac­ bxc3 12.liJxc3 0-0 13 .0-0t White
tion is 11.dxeS. One of the advan­ has a powerful pawn-centre and
tages of this move is that Black is good attacking prospects on the
deprived of the possibility to ex­ kingside (\l;lrd1-e1-h4, fS, .ih6,
change on d4. ll . . . dxeS 12.a3t, liJgS), Cruzado Duenas - Bel­
followed by f4-fS, White's king­ legotti, Email 2006.
side attack seems more danger­
ous than Black's queenside coun­ The move 7 . . . eS was tested in
terplay.) ll.liJxd4 dS 12 .eS liJe8 13. the game Fressinet - M.Marin,
Wif2 (but not 13.e6? ! fxe6 14.liJxe6 Andorra 2004. After 8.liJf3 Wle7
liJeS ! + Sveshnikov - Rukavina, 9.fxeS dxeS 10.dS±, it t.urned out
Pula 1990) 13 . . . \l;lrdS 14.liJf3 liJc7 suddenly that White is attacking
1S.E:aeU White has good pros- on the queenside. Black has great

239
Chapter 16

problems with the protection of

his weak pawn on b5.

10 . . . .ib7

Following 10 . . . lt'lc4, White

should better retreat with his
bishop 11.ic1 and after 11 . . . a5,
8 . . . .ig7 Maze - Movsziszian, Calvia 2005,
begin active operations in the
8 . . . a6 9 . .id3 ig7 (It seems an­ centre: 12.e5 ! ? dxe5 13.fxe5 lt'ld5
ti-positional for Black to follow 14.lt'lxd5 \M/xd5 15.a4. He under­
the plan with advancing c6-c5, mines the base under the enemy
because he falls back considerably knight. 15 . . . b4 16.'?Ne2 i.e6 17.c3
in development. 9 . . . e6 10.0-0 c5 bxc3 18.bxc3 h6 19.ie4 \M/d7 20.
11.dxc5 dxc5 12 .'!M/e1 i.e7 13.\M/f2 lt'le1! After the transfer of the
\M/c7 14.f5± - His premature activ­ knight to c5, White's prospects
ity on the queenside has led only will be obviously preferable.
to difficulties with the protection
of the pawn on c5 and a lag in de­ Following 10 . . . a5, White
velopment.) 10.0-0 \M/c7 11.'?Ne1 should continue with 11.1Mfc1, pro­
lt'lfd7 12.e5± White has a powerful tecting prudently his b2-pawn
pawn-centre, while Black lags and preparing f5 and i.h6. 11 . . .
greatly in development and has a lt'lc4 ( 1 1 . . . i.d7 12 .f5 ! �) 12.i.f2 a4
problem with the safety of his 13.b3 lt'lb6 14.'?Nd2� Black's knight
king, because if he castles king­ has been ousted from the c4-
side, he will come under the at­ square and White has an advan­
tack of White's pieces, Bauer - tage thanks to his mighty pawn­
Uhoda, Metz 2005. centre.

9 . .id3 0-0 11.\Mlel a5 12.ti'h4

About 9 ... lt'lc4 10.icl 0-0
11.0-0 - see 10 ... lt'lc4. It is also interesting for him to
10.0-0 try 12.f5 ! ?�

240
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 'D/6 3. 'D c3 g6 4. !e3 c6 5.h3

12 b4 13.axb4 axb4 14.

••• It would not be so accurate for
�baS haS 15.'De2 !Oa4 16 .icl • him to opt for 17.e5, Karjakin -
c5 Ehlvest, Panormos 2002, because
after 17 . . . !xf3 ! 18J:!xf3 'DdS;!; and
the exchange of the knight on f3,
White's attack will not be so
strong.

17 gxf5 1S.!Og3 !
•••

All his pieces participate i n the

attack and there may follow:

1S .ixe4 19.!0xe4 !Oxe4

•••

20.!0g5 !Oxg5 21 .ixg5 .ixd4+

•

22.�hl f6 23 .ixf5 gf7 24 .ih6

• •

17.f5! ? .ie5 25 .ie6 ti'eS 26.gal !Ob6

•

After this move, White's rook 27.ti'h5 f5 2s.ga6 Black will ei­
and his dark-squared bishop join ther get checkmated, or lose plen­
in the attack. ty of material.

Conclusion
We have just analysed the variation with 4 . . . c6 in the Pirc Defence.
After S.h3, White obtains an advantage in the opening, because Black
cannot play S . . . bS due to 6.e5 ! and his pawn-offensive on the queenside
leads only to the appearance of weaknesses in his camp. After Black's
other possibilities, White completes effortlessly the development of his
kingside and under the cover of his powerful pawn-centre begins an
attack against the enemy king with \Wel-h4, fS, �h6 and 'DgS.

241
 Part S

Black avoids the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3

with which Black avoids entering

the Pirc Defence - (3 ... g6).
In Chapter 17 we will deal with
3 e5, with 3 �bd7 in Chapter
••• •••

18 and with 3 c6 in Chapter 19.

•••

After all these moves White

should not have problems to ob­
tain an advantage in the opening,
but he must play precisely, since
there arises often a transfer into
an endgame and a single inaccu-
In the final part of our second rate move may provide Black with
volume we will analyse the moves the possibility to equalise.

242
Chapter 17 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lt)f6 3.li} c3 e5

endgame in which he is fighting

for the opening advantage thanks
to his lead in development.

Some readers may ask them­

selves: "Is it not simpler and bet­
ter just to play 4.lt:Jf3?" and there
will arise a position resembling
the closed openings. White's
pawns have occupied the centre
and his knights are placed on c3
Surprisingly for many people, and f3, just like in the majority of
this move became very popular at the variations of the King's Indian
the beginning of the 21st century. Defence. This similarity is mis­
Numerous grandmasters have be­ leading, however. The difference
gun to use it: A.Morozevich, T. is in the placement of White's c­
Radjabov, P.Eljanov, S.Movsesian pawn. It is not on c4, like in the
etc. Even M.Carlsen played sev­ closed openings, but on its initial
eral times like this. Vladimir Bar­ square and does not participate in
sky wrote a book devoted to this the fight for the centre. His knight
variation. The main idea behind on c3 must protect the e4-pawn
the move 3 . . . e5 for Black is to try and cannot be removed easily
to enter the Philidor Defence from c3, so White's prospects to
avoiding several variations which advance c2-c4 in the middle game
are advantageous for White. are just minimal. There might fol­
4.dxe5! ? low: 4 . . . lt:Jbd7 S . .ic4 .ie7 6.0-0
I have chosen a s the main 0-0 7.a4 a6 8.a5 h6 9.!!el exd4
weapon for White against 3 . . . eS 10.lt:Jxd4 lt:JeS ll . .ifl cS 12.lt:Jb3
this move which does not seem to .ie6oo and in the game Caruana -
be so ambitious. He trades imme­ M.Carlsen, Biel 2011, there arose
diately the queens and enters an a complicated position with mu-

243
Chapter 17

tual chances in which each side tion. At first, we will deal with
had its pluses. Black's pieces are some not so popular moves A)
more active, while White has a 6 .id6 and B) 6 .ie7 and after
••• •••

better pawn-structure. Later, he this we will analyse his two most

might try to exploit the vulnera­ fashionable and strongest respons­
bility of his opponent's d6-pawn. es: C) 6 c6 and D) 6 .ie6.
••• •••

4 ••• dxe5 5.fexd8+ l!?xd8 6. There do not arise original po­

.ig5 sitions after 6 . . . h6, since follow­
ing 7.0-0-0+ �d6 S.h£6 - we
reach a position from variation A,
as well as after 6 . . . tt:\bd7, because
following 7.0-0-0 c6 (7 . . . �e7 8.
�h4 - see variation B; 7 . . . �d6
8.lt:lf3 - see variation A) 8.lt:lf3,
there arises transposition to vari­
ation C.

A) 6 .id6
•••

This is not the best move for

This is the most natural move. Black. Now, White's game is easy
White not only develops his bish­ and he obtains an edge effortless­
op to an active position, but pre­ ly. He only needs to play tt:\b5 at
pares castling queenside, winning the right moment and to exchange
a tempo for development, since on d6. White will not only obtain
his rook will give a check to the the two-bishop advantage in the
enemy king (The fact that the dB­ process, but will provoke a weak­
square is not the best for Black's ening of Black's pawn-structure.
monarch is one of the pluses of 7.0-0-0
the early trade of the queens.). This is the best.
Naturally, all this is very good for
White, but we should not forget
that there are no pawn weakness­
es in Black's camp and if he suc­
ceeds in completing his develop­
ment, White's advantage may
evaporate. Therefore, he must
play very precisely and energeti­
cally in this variation.
Black has a great choice of
possibilities in the arising posi-

244
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJj6 3. liJc3 e5 4.de de 5. 'ffxdB <tlxdB 6. ig5

7 .tL'lbd7
•• completely the initiative in this
Black wishes to eliminate as endgame and can improve pa­
quickly as possible the main de­ tiently his position (doubling the
fect of his position - his lag in de­ rooks on the d-file), while Black
velopment. must adhere only to passive strat­
egy. Meanwhile, we should not
It is obviously bad for him to forget that White has a superior
choose 7 . . . .ie6?! due to 8.f4 <tle8 pawn-structure. It also seems very
(The other possible retreat of his good for him to try the straight­
king would not change anything: forward line: 14.liJd5+ .ixd5 15.
8 . . . <tlc8 9.f5 .id7 10 ..ixf6 gxf6 11. Ei:xd5 liJc5 16 ..ig2;!; - and he has a
liJd5± and Black is incapable of slight but stable edge in the end­
saving his f6-pawn, V.Ivanov - game. Black's d6-pawn is weak as
Gorin, Moscow 1998.) 9.f5 .id7 well as his d5 and f5-squares, Col­
10 . .ixf6 gxf6 11.liJd5± S. Ivanov - lins - Trevelyan, Gothenburg 2005.
Sassi, Oulu 2004, he loses a pawn
without any compensation. In It would be too slow for him to
general, the ousting of Black's choose 7 . . . a6 - Black parries the
bishop from the e6-square, with threat liJb5 indeed, but falls back
the help of the pawn-advance f4- in development even more. 8.liJf3
f5, followed by liJd5 (naturally, liJbd7 9 . .ixf6+. Now, he must
White should exchange at first on comply with the weakening of his
f6) and the win of the f6-pawn is kingside pawn-structure in order
one of the standard ideas for him not to lose a pawn. 9 . . . gxf6 10.
in this variation and we will en­ liJd5 Ei:g8 11.liJh4 Ei:g4 12.liJf5 Ei:xe4
counter it still numerous times in 13.f3 Ei:a4 14.<tlbl± Sethuraman ­
our analysis. Neelotpal, Mumbai 2011. Black
has managed to win a pawn with a
It seems rather dubious for brave sortie of his rook, but this is
Black to play 7 . . . h6. He lags in de­ just a small consolation for him,
velopment anyway and losing an­ since his queenside pieces are not
other tempo for a flank move with developed and his rook on a4 is
his rook pawn seems unreasona­ seriously endangered. Mean­
ble. 8 . .ixf6+ gxf6 9.liJb5. White while, White's knights on d5 and
deprives his opponent of his two­ f5 have occupied dominating po­
bishop advantage and Black is sitions and all this means that
now left to worry about his pawn Black's position is tremendously
weaknesses. 9 . . . <tle7 10.liJe2 a6 11. difficult.
liJxd6 cxd6 12.liJc3 .ie6 13.g3 liJd7
14.f4 ! ;!; White creates with this 8)L'lf3 c!>e8
move the threat f4-f5 (fighting for He removes prudently his king
the d5-square ! ) . He has seized away from the pin of the enemy

245
Chapter 17

bishop and the x-ray of his rook velopment indeed, but this is not
on dl. much, since he can hardly find
About 8 ... a6 9 . .ixf6 - see 7 . . . any target for attack in Black's po­
a6. sition. In addition, we should not
forget that he has two bishops.

9 ••• @e7

Black cannot play 9 . . . tt:Jxe4? in

view of the simple tactical strike
10 .1'!xd6+-, and he loses material.

The character of the fight re­

mains more or less the same after
9 . . . a6, since in the variation 10.
tt:Jxd6+ cxd6, White's position is
9)ilb5 preferable due to his two-bishop
This is the most natural and advantage and the vulnerability of
logical move for White. Black's Black's d6-pawn. 11.lt:Jd2 h6 12.
bishop on d6 attracts White's �e3 b5 13.f3 tt:Jc5 14.tt:Jb1 @e7 15.
knight like a magnet. tt:Jc3 �e6 16.g4 tt:Jfd7 17.h4 f6 18.
1'!h2;!; A.Timofeev - L.Hansen,
It is interesting for him to try Skanderborg 2005. White has
the move 9.�b5 ! ? , but it cannot transferred successfully his knight
guarantee an advantage for from f3 to c3 and from there it can
White. Now, Black must reply go to the d5-square at any mo­
with the accurate move 9 . . . a6. ment. Now, he is preparing the
(The careless reply 9 ... @f8? might doubling of his rooks on the d-file
cost Black a pawn. After 10 . .ixd7 in order to attack decisively the
tt:Jxd7 1l.lt:Jb5 f6 12 . .ie3 @e7 13. enemy d6-pawn. Black's defence
1'!xd6 cxd6 14.tt:Jc7 b6 15.tt:Jxa8, will be difficult.
naturally, White's knight will not 10.tt:Jd2
run away from the aS-square, but This is a standard transfer of
while Black will be busy with its White's knight in this variation.
capturing, White will win a pawn, From the d2-square it can go to
for which Black will have no com­ c4, in order to attack the enemy
pensation at all. 15 . . . @d8 16.tt:Jd2 d6-pawn, as well as to follow the
.ib7 17.tt:Jc4 .ixa8 18.tt:Jxd6 @c7 route d2-b1-c3, going after the
19.lt:Jb5± Jobava - Shanava, Tbi­ d5-outpost.
lisi 2012.) 10 . .ixd7+ tt:Jxd7 11. 10 ••• h6 ll .th4 lilb6
•

�e3oo Burreh - Schulz, Bad Following ll . . . a6 12.tt:Jxd6

Sooden 2004. White leads in de- cxd6 13.f3;!;, White has a stable

246
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 0.f6 3. 0.c3 e5 4.de de 5. Wixd8 �xd8 6. �g5

advantage thanks to his bishop­ B) 6 • • • .te7

pair and the weakness of Black's This move is reliable, but
d6-pawn, Berescu - Badea, Ama­ somewhat passive. Black wishes
ra 2007. to avoid the weakening of his
12.f3 .ie6 13 .tf2 �fd7 14.
• pawn-structure.
b3 ghc8 15.�xd6 cxd6 16.�b2 7.0-0-0+
�c5 17.�bl!
White's knight is not allowed
to go to the c4-square by Black's
pieces, so it goes along another
route, which is longer, but not less
effective, and its destination is the
d5-square !
17 f5 18.exf5 .txf5 19.c4
•••

7 ... �bd7

It may be also interesting for

him to try the "super-solid" move
7 . . . �e8 and after 8.0.f3 0.bd7
(The move 8 . . . ig4 was tested in
the game Sudakova - Sharovato­
va, Rybinsk 1999. White had to
This position was reached in counter it with the active response
the game Dvoirys - Spasov, Biel 9.0.b5 ! ? and there might follow:
1993. Black must capture White's 9 . . . 0.a6 10 .ic4 0.d7 ll.ie3;!;. In
knight in order to preserve chanc­ the oncoming fight, Black will
es of resisting. 19 -txbl! (After
••• have problems to ensure the safe­
what was played in the game - ty of his king and to coordinate
19 . . . g5? ! 2 0 .0.c3±, White's posi­ his rooks. It would be worse for
tional advantage became almost him to choose instead 10 . . . 0.xe4? ! ,
decisive. Black was incapable of because the opening of files in the
protecting the numerous weak­ centre will be in favour of White,
nesses in his position.) 20.�xbU since he is better developed, so
White's two bishops are evidently Black will fail to hold on to his ex­
stronger than Black's knights and tra pawn. 11.he7 �xe7 12.!!he1 f5
he has a weakness on d6; never­ 13.0.c3 hf3 14.0.d5+ �d7 15. gxf3
theless he can still offer a tough 0.d6 16.ixa6 bxa6 17.!!xe5 !!ae8
resistance. 18.f4± White's doubled pawns on

247
Chapter 17

the f-file look much better than knight to d3, taking under control
their black counterparts on the a­ the c5-square. 14 ....ie8 15.b3 tt:l8d7
file.) 9 . .ih4 a6 10 . .ic4 .id6, Zakha­ 16.tt:ld3. Now, Black will not have
rov - Pribyl, Dresden 2008. Fol­ the possibility to trade the bish­
lowing ll.a3 ! ? b5 12 . .ia2 .ib7 13. ops on c5. 16 . . . i.a3+ 17.'it>ba, fol­
tt:ld2 'it>f8 14.f3�, Black must lose lowed by a pawn-offensive for
time in order to evacuate his king White on the kingside.
to the g7-square and to connect It seems interesting for Black
his rooks, while White is perfectly to opt for 12 . . ..ic5 ! ? - he manages
prepared to exploit his opponent's to exchange advantageously the
queenside weaknesses (the conse­ bishops. He trades White's "good"
quence of the move b7-b5) with bishop for his "bad" bishop (its
tt:ld2-b3-a5. mobility is severely restricted by
the pawn on e5). 13.i.xc5 tt:lxc5
He has also tried in practice 14.a4 aS 15.g4 h6 16.h4�
7 . . . tt:lfd7 - Black wishes to trade
the dark-squared bishops, which
should facilitate somehow his de­
fence. 8 . .ie3. Naturally, White
avoids this. 8 . . . c6 9.f4. He is try­
ing to occupy space with his
pawns on the kingside. 9 . . . 'it>c7
10.tt:lf3 f6 ll . .ic4 .id6 12.f5

White has an advantage in this

endgame, because his bishop on
c4 is very active and Black's seem­
ingly "good" bishop is cramped
considerably by the pawn on f5.
After a2-a4, White prevents the
further advance of his opponent's
queenside pawns, while Black is
White maintains a slight edge. incapable of countering White's
He has extra space and can gradu­ pawn-break (g4-g5) on the other
ally advance his kingside pawns, side of the board.
while Black must still complete
the development of his queenside (diagram)
pieces. 8.i.h4! ?
12 . . . tt:lb6 13 . .ie2 id7, Mellado White i s transferring his bish­
- Mundet, Banyoles 2002, 14. op to the g3-square in order to at­
tt:lel ! ? White is transferring his tack his opponent's pawn on e5.

248
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 0,f6 3. 0,c3 eS 4.de de 5. 'ff!xdB �xdB 6. !g5

He wishes to provoke the move ic7 13.0,e2 g6 14.0,e3 �e7 15.0,c3

!d6, after which he plans to at­ 0,b6 16 . .id3 .ie6 17.h4 0,g7 18 .
tack the bishop with the move .ih2 0,h5 19.g3 .id6 20.E:de1,
0,b5. draw, Miladinovic - Damljanovic,
Herceg Novi 2008. Black has
The careless move 8.0,f3 ena­ reached a completely equal posi­
bles Black after 8 . . . 0,g4, to force tion and White must already think
a favourable exchange of the about how not to become worse,
dark-squared bishops and since since his bishop on h2 is obvious­
the temporary activity of White's ly misplaced.
pieces will be gradually neu­ 10 ••• f6 U.0,xd6 0,xd6 12.£3
tralised, Black will have great After Black has played f7-f6,
chances of equalising. 9.he7+ his bishop has nothing to do on
�xe7 10.0,d5+ �d8 11.0,g5 0,h6 the g3-square and White trans­
12 .0,e3 �e7 13.0,d5+ �d8= Khen­ fers it to a more active position.
kin - Spiess, Germany 1999. Nat­ 12 �e7 13.0,e2 0,c5 14.
•••

urally, White's knights are de­ ttlc3 c6 15 .if2;t •

ployed very actively, but it is not It is a well known fact that the
so clear what can he really achieve. power of the two bishops is best
Black has a very simple defensive demonstrated in an open posi­
plan. He wishes to oust White's tion, but they guarantee White an
active cavalry with the moves c6, edge even now. Later, Black will
�e7 and f6, equalising complete­ be faced with the rather unpleas­
ly. ant task to defend a slightly infe­
rior endgame.
8 ••• 0,e8 9 .ig3 .id6
•

(diagram)
10.0,b5 ! ? C) 6 c6
This is one of the most popular
. . •

The move 10.0,d5 would not

bring any particular dividends for moves for Black together with 6 . . .
White. 10 . . . c6 11.0,e3 f6 12.0,f5 �e6, H e defends reliably against

249
Chapter 17

the possible sortie of White's With his last move, White has
knight to bS and plans later to oc­ prepared the doubling of his
cupy space on the queenside with rooks on the d-file after which
the move b7-b5. Black, in order to preserve his
7.0-0-0+ bishop on the d6-square, must re­
This is a very natural move. It treat with his knight to a passive
is really very difficult not to castle position on e8; otherwise, he will
with a check! lose his eS-pawn.

7 .. .'it>e8. This retreat of the

king seems more reliable, because
the t7-pawn will be reliably pro­
tected. 8.lt:Jf3 ig4 ! ? Black exploits
the fact that White's knight is
pinned and the eS-pawn is un­
touchable and develops his bish­
op to an active position (8 . . . lt:Jbd7
9.ih4 - see 7 . . . lt:Jbd7). 9.ie2
lt:Jbd7 10 .h3 .hf3 ll . .ixf3 icS 12.
ih4 ie7, Scerbo - V.Georgiev,
Cutro 2003, 13.ig3t White has a
slight edge thanks to his bishop­
7 .. .rJlc7. This retreat of the king pair, moreover that Black has
has a considerable defect - now it some problems with the protec­
cannot protect the t7-pawn. 8.lt:Jf3 tion of his eS-pawn.
id6 9.ic4 ie6. Black's pawns are
doubled after this move (It is pos­
sible that Black should better
comply with the solid defensive 8 . . . Wc7 9.ic4 ib4 10.l:!he1
move 9 . . . l:!f8, although even then hc3 ll.bxc3 l:!f8 12.a4t This is an
after 10.a3t, White, thanks to the important move. White does not
more active placement of his mi­ allow his opponent to advance b7-
nor pieces and Black's lag in de­ b5. All his pieces are in action and
velopment, maintains a stable ad­ his bishops have occupied very
vantage.). 10 . .he6 fxe6 ll.ih4 ! active positions, while Black has
We are already familiar with this not completed his development
transfer of the bishop to g3, with yet. Therefore, despite the weak­
the idea to exert pressure against ening of his queenside pawn­
the enemy eS-pawn. ll . . . lt:Jbd7 12. structure, White's position is
ig3 h6 13.l:!d2± and Black has a preferable.
very difficult position, Schandorff
- Nordqvist, Stockholm 1996. 9 . .ih4

250
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3. ltJ c3 e5 4.de de 5. V!ixd8 W xd8 6 . /igS

Once again his bishop is trans­ It seems rather dubious for

ferred to g3 in order to exert pres­ Black to choose 10 . . . ixc3, since
sure against the enemy eS-pawn. he would fail to exploit the defects
of his opponent's pawn-structure
due to his considerable lag in de­
velopment. ll.bxc3 bS 12 .fi.b3 cS,
Videnova - Bednikova, Dupnitsa
2010 (Black loses after 12 . . . ltJxe4?,
since following 13.ltJxe5+-, he
cannot capture the knight in view
of the checkmate and he is help­
less against the threats ltJf7 and
�he1) 13.c4 ! ± White gets rid of his
doubled pawns and obtains a bet­
ter position. Black's king is mis­
9 . . . .ib4 placed in the centre of the board,
despite the fact that it is an end­
9 . . . /icS 10.ic4 ib6. Black's game and the move 13 . . . b4? loses
bishop is in a hurry to occupy the immediately, since following 14.
c7-square, in order to protect reli­ ia4 ! , White's bishop enters the
ably the eS-pawn and after that actions with a decisive effect. 14 . . .
Black obtains a reliable but pas­ We7 1S.fi.c6 �b8 16.ixd7 ixd7
sive position. 11.�d2 . White plans 17.ltJxe5 ie8 18.f3+-, Black is not
to double his rooks. ll . . . fi.c7 12. only a pawn down, but has a seri­
�hd1 We7 13.a3 h6 14.b4. He oc­ ous weakness on cS which White
cupies space on the queenside. can attack effectively with the
14 . . . �e8 15.ltJe1 ! This is an impor­ moves ltJd3 and if2 .
tant manoeuvre of White's knight. ll.a3 h6
After Black has defended reliably
the eS-pawn, White's knight has It is possibly more reliable
nothing to do on f3, so it is headed for Black to try 1 1 . . .ic7, al­
for the cS-square. 15 . . . ltJb6 16.fi.b3 though even then following 12.
gS 17 . .ig3 ltJhS 18.ltJd3 f6 19.ltJcS ltJe1 ! ? We7 13.ltJd3 �e8 14.f3 ltJf8,
�d8 20.�xd8 ixd8 21.f3 aS 2 2 . Jurkovic - Jovanovic, Sibenik
if2 axb4 23.axb4;!; - The knight is 2005, 1S.if2i, White maintains a
very powerful on cS, while Black's slight edge, because his pieces
bishop on c8 is squeezed with the have occupied much more active
protection of the pawn on b7, positions.
Malakhov - Damljanovic, Kal­ (diagram)
lithea 2002. 12 .ixf6!
.
•

He exploits the fact . that the

10 .ic4 .ia5
• enemy eS-pawn is not sufficiently

251
Chapter 17

attacked by White's rook on hl.

There followed: 20 . . ,gxg3 21.
hxg3 �f8 22.li)e3. White is re­
grouping his knights. Naturally,
his knight on h4 belongs to the fS­
square. 22 . . . li)c8 23.li)hf5±-

After this move, Black is incapa­

ble of holding on too his hS-pawn
and White has excellent chances
of realising his material advan­
tage.
protected and Black cannot cap­
ture on f6 with his knight, so
White provokes a weakening of D) 6 . . . ie6
the enemy pawn-structure. This is the most logical move
12 .•• gxf6 13.li)e2 for Black. He develops his bishop
White's knights are headed for to an active position and prevents
the fS-outpost. the appearance of White's bishop
13 ... b5 14.ia2 .ic7 15.li)h4 on c4, freeing the c8-square for
li)b6 16.li)g3 ie6 17.ib3 h5 his king in the process.
tS.c!l)gf5 ggs t9.gd3 gds 20. 7.g3 ! ?
gg3

Grandmaster I.Khenkin likes

Black's position in the game to play this move. White is pre­
Khenkin - Bellini, Bratto 2004 is paring f2-f4 and wishes to be able
difficult. He is faced with the un­ to recapture on f4 with a pawn, if
pleasant choice - to either give up necessary, in order not to lose
to his opponent the g-file, or to control over the eS-square.
exchange on g3, which will lead to Black has two basic moves in
the opening of the h-file, after this position: Dl) 7. . . ib4 and
which Black's pawn on hS will be 02) 7. . . �c8 .

252
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3. ltJ c3 e5 4.de de 5. Wfxd8 c.!lxd8 6. :1J..g5 ie6 7.g3

Following 7 . . . i.e7 8.f4 h6 9. queenside pieces, because his

i.h4, he can sacrifice a pawn in knight must protect the d7-
the spirit of some of the variations square against the penetration of
of the Sicilian Defence, but White White's rook.) 10.0-0-0+ c.!lc8
can still maintain the advantage (Black loses a pawn after 10 . . . c.!le8
after a precise play. 9 . . . g5 10.fxg5 11.f5 ic8 12.4Jd5± Khenkin - El­
ltJh7 ll.gxh6 i.xh4 12.gxh4 ltJf6 lenbroek, Almemlo 2006.) ll.fS
13.i.h3. The trade of the bishops id7 12.ltJd5 ic6 13.ltJxf6± - His
is in favour of White, since Black's compensation for the pawn is in­
bishop is much more active. 13 . . . sufficient.
ixh3 14.ltJxh3 1'!xh6 15.ltJg5 c.!le7
16.1'!f1 (It is also good for White to After 7 . . . ltJbd7, Black's bishop
continue with 16.ltJf3 ! ? ltJbd7 17. on e6 cannot retreat anywhere
:B:gU and although his pawns on and White can exploit this with
the h-file are doubled, but one of the energetic move 8.f4. (It is
them is extra! ) 16 . . . c6 17.1'!f5 ltJbd7 worse for him to play the routine
18.ltJf3;t White's rook and knight move 8.0-0-0, because after that
squeeze Black's pieces with the Black's bishop can retreat with
protection of his e5-pawn, while tempo, attacking White's rook on
White has an extra pawn despite dl. Later, in the game V.Belov ­
its being doubled, Khenkin - Yudin, Moscow 2009, there fol­
Belkhodja, Amsterdam 2005. lowed 8 . . . c.!lc8 9.f4 ig4 10.1'!d3
and in this complicated and dou­
It does not seem logical for ble-edged position the opponents
Black to opt for 7 . . . h6. White of­ agreed to a draw.) 8 . . . h6 (8 . . . i.b4?
ten exchanges himself on f6 and 9.f5+-) 9.ixf6+ ltJxf6 10.0-0-0+
here Black loses a tempo, falling c.!lc8 ll.ltJf3 exf4 (in the game Prie
back in development, in order to - Alawieh, Fouesnant 1997, Black
force this trade. 8.ixf6+ gxf6 9.f4 chose the active reply ll . . . ib4,
ic5 (The position is difficult for but following 12.f5 i.d7 13.ltJxe5
him in the variation 9 . . . ib4 10. ixc3 14.bxc3 1'!e8 15.ltJxd7 ltJxd7,
0-0-0+ c.!le7 ll.f5 ixc3 12 .fxe6 White had the powerful tactical
id4 13.exf7 ixg1 14.1'!xg1 c.!lxf7, resource 16.f6 ! and as a result of
Chuprov - Kodinets, chessassis­ 16 . . . ltJxf6 17.i.h3+ c.!lb8 18.e5±, he
tantclub.com 2004. Here, White seized completely the initiative)
could have obtained a great ad­ 12.gxf4 g6, Santo-Roman - Cha­
vantage by transferring his rook banon, Nantes 1993, 13.ltJd4 ! ;t
to the d-file. 15.1'!g2 ! c.!le7 16. Black lags i n development and
1'!gd2± Black's defence is very dif­ fails to preserve his two-bishop
ficult, because he cannot com­ advantage without considerable
plete the development of his positional concessions. ·

253
Chapter 17

Dl) 7 .ib4 8.0-0-0+

••• 16.!!d3 ! ih6 17.c3± - The arising
Naturally, White removes his endgame is difficult for Black,
king from the pin with tempo. since he has no compensation for
his compromised pawn-struc­
ture.) 11.exd5 (It is also interest­
ing for White to play here simply
11.!!xd5 ! ? c6 12 . .ih3+ 'it>c7 13.
!!d3;!; and Black's doubled f-pawns
do not beautify his position.) 11 . . .
i.cS, Khenkin - Urban, Koszalin
1998, 12 .ih3 + ! tt::l d7 13.tt::l e 2 'it>d8
(It seems rather dubious for him
to try now 13 . . . .ixf2 ? ! , because af­
ter 14.!!hf1 i.e3+ 15.'it>b1 'it>d8 16.
tt::l c3 hS 17.i.xd7 'it>xd7 18.tt::l e 4±,
8 • . . lbbd7 White regains his pawn preserv­
ing all the pluses of his position.)
Black ends up in a very passive 14.tt::l c3 hS 15.tt::l e4;!; and in the
position in the variation 8 . . . 'it>e8 arising situation, White main­
9 . .bf6 gxf6 10.ttld5 .bdS. Unfor­ tains a stable advantage.
tunately for him he must part
with his powerful light-squared 9.f4 .ixc3
bishop; otherwise, he loses a This was the idea of Black's
pawn 1U!xd5 c6 12 .!!d1 tt::l d7 13. move 7. He has compromised
ih3 tt::l b 6 14.tt::l f3;!; Rendle - Mah, White's queenside pawn-struc­
England 2012. White's knight ture.
goes to fS and there it will be per­ 10.bxc3 'it>e8
fectly placed. The doubled f­
pawns are a permanent defect of But not 10 . . . h6? 11 . .ixf6+ gxf6
Black's position and he must de­ 12.f5 ha2 13.'it>b2 +- and Black's
fend for long a rather unpleasant bishop was trapped in the game
endgame. Zaragatski - Zeldin, playchess.
com 2008.
8 . . . 'it>c8 9.hf6. White is pre­
paring to occupy the dS-square ll.f5 .ixa2
with his knight. 9 . . . gxf6 10.tt::l d 5
hdS (Black's reluctance to ex­ It is bad for him to choose 11 . . .
change on dS leads to a worse po­ tt::l x e4, since after 12 .fxe6 fxe6 13.
sition for him. 10 . . . ic5 11.tt::l xf6 ie3 tt::l xc3 14.!!e1 tt::l x a2 + 15.'it>b2
.ixf2 12 .ih3 tt::l c6 13 . .be6+ fxe6 tt::l b4 16.tt::l f3± White's minor piec­
14.tt::l h3 ie3+ 15.'it>b1 b6, Khenkin es are evidently stronger than
- Koscielski, Bad Wiessee 2000, Black's pawns in this endgame,

254
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3Ji:Jc3 e5 4.de de 5. WixdB <ll xdB 6. ig5 .ie6 7.g3

Khenkin - V.Orlov, Almemlo

2006.

Now, White cannot obtain an

edge with 11.0-0, because of 11 . . .
.ih3 and Black has good counter­
12 .ixf6 ltJxf6 13. <llb 2 ttlxe4
• play on the weakened light
14.ttlh3 c6 15.c4 f6 16.l:!el squares in his opponent's camp.
h:c4 17.hc4 ttld6 18 .ld3;!; • It is stronger for White to play
White's bishop is more powerful 11 . .ixf6 ! ? gxf6 12. 0-0-0;!; In the
than Black's three pawns. arising position, White's superior
pawn-structure is a more impor­
tant factor than Black's two-bish­
D2) 7 ••• <ll c8 op advantage. In addition, he
must lose time in order to com­
plete his development and to
bring his queen's rook into the ac­
tions.

9 . . . h6, Kornev - Shabanov,

Moscow 2007, 10 . .ixf6 gxf6 11.
ltJf3 ltJc6 12.a3 .ixc3+ 13.bxc3;!;
The vulnerability of Black's pawns
on the f-file is a more important
factor than the weakness of
White's pawns on the opposite
He evacuates prudently his side of the board.
king away from the pin.
8.{4 .lb4 9 .ld3 • It deserves a very serious at­
(diagram) tention for Black to consider here
9 . . . ttle8 the move 9 . . ltJc6 ! ? . Later, in the
.

game Kayser - Markoja, Email

9 . . . ltJa6. His knight is headed 2011, there followed lO.fS .ixc3+
for the cS-square. lO.ltJge2 ltJcS. 11.bxc3 .id7 12.ttlf3 ltJe8 13.g4 f6

255
Chapter 17

14 . .ie3 l2Jd6 15.c4 b6 16.g5;!; and

White's extra space and the pos­
sibility for active actions on the
kingside not only compensate the
vulnerability of his queenside
pawns, but also provide him with
a slight edge.
10.fxe5
He has won a pawn, but keep­
ing it will not be an easy task for
him.
10 h6 ll . .if4 g5 12 .ie3
.•• • slight advantage after 14.0-0-0
c!LJd7 13.c!lJf3 if'S ig7 15.c!lJd5 c!LJxe5 16.c!LJe7+
(diagram) �d7 17.c!LJf5 hf5 (17 . . . l2Jxf3??
Black is transferring his bish­ 18 . .ib5+-) 18.c!LJxe5+ ixe5 19.
op to g7 in order to increase his exf5;!; and again, just like in many
pressure against the enemy eS­ variations which we have ana­
pawn, !.Popov - Khairullin, Ulan lysed in this chapter, White's two
Ude 2009. powerful bishops provide him
Now, White can maintain a with a slight edge.

Conclusion
We have just completed our analysis of the variation with 3 . . . e5 4.
dxeS. There arises after it an endgame which is slightly better for White
and he maintains the initiative thanks to his superior development.
Depending on Black's responses, White can fight for the advantage in
two different ways.
Following 6 . . . c6, he develops his bishop to c4, his knight on f3 and
castles queenside. Later, he squeezes his opponent with the protection
of the pawn on eS with the help of placing his bishop on the g3-square.
Subsequently, White doubles his rooks on the d-file and transfers his
knight along the route f3-el-d3-c5 and if Black protects his pawn on eS
with the move f7-f6, then White transfers his bishop on f2 (after f2-f3).
All this guarantees for him a slight but long lasting advantage in the
endgame.
In response to 6 . . . .ie6, White prepares the pawn-advance f2-f4 with
the move g2-g3 and forces again his opponent to adhere to a passive
defence. In general, it is much easier for White to play this endgame.

256
Chapter 18 l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3 �bd7

This move is simple and

strong! H .Pillsbury played like
this back in the year 1902.
White is preparing e4-e5 and
wishes to exploit the basic draw­
back of Black's third move - the
absence of the d7-square for the
retreat of his knight on f6.
4 .. e5
.

This is a logical move. Black

has played 3 . . . ltlbd7 in order to
It is easily understandable that advance e7-e5.
with his last move Black prepares
the pawn-advance e7-e5, avoiding His other possibilities are not
the exchange on eS with a transfer only inconsistent, but are just du­
into an endgame, which we have bious.
just analysed in our previous For example: 4 . . . g6? ! S.eS lLlhS
chapter. 6.�e2 ltlg7 7.ltlf3± Black has wast­
As a rule, the move 3 . . . ltlbd7 is ed too many tempi for the com­
usually chosen by chess players in pletely useless fianchettoing of
a fighting spirit, who strive for his knight. White has a powerful
complicated positions with many pawn-centre and a lead in devel­
pieces on the board, irrelevant of opment.
the colour of pieces they play
with. A.Morozevich, D.Khisma­ Or 4 . . . c5? ! S.eS ! cxd4 6.11tfxd4
tullin and some other grandmas­ ltlg4 (It is not preferable for Black
ters play like this. White cannot to opt for 6 . . . dxe5 7.fxe5±, be­
enter now a slightly better end­ cause now the g4-square is con­
game, but has some other promis­ trolled by White's qQeen · and
ing possibilities. Black's knight will be forced to
4.f4 retreat to its initial position.) 7.

257
Chapter 18

exd6 exd6 8 . .id2 ! White plans to 5.c!bf3

castle queenside. Now, Black will White increases his pressure
be faced with a rather unpleasant against the eS-square and forces
choice. He must either come un­ his opponent to give up the cen­
der attack in the middle game, or tre.
exchange the queens and enter an
inferior endgame due to the vul­
nerability of his d6-pawn. 8 . . .
lbgf6 9.0-0-0 .ie7 10 .g4 1M/b6
(His position will be difficult too
following 10 . . . 0-0 ll.gS lbe8 12.
lbdS±) ll.lbf3 1M/xd4 12.lbxd4
lbxg4 13.lbd5 .idS 14.:B:e1 + 'kt>f8 15.
lbbS±. White maintains a great
and possibly even decisive advan­
tage. Naturally, he will regain eas­
ily his sacrificed pawn after which
Black will hardly manage to neu­ s . . . exd4
tralise the activity of his oppo­ This is the best move for Black,
nent's pieces and complete his since after his alternatives his po­
development without material sition becomes very bad.
losses.
It seems anti-positional for
After 4 . . . c6? ! S.eS lbdS 6.lbxd5 him to continue with 5 . . . 1M/e7, be­
cxdS 7 . .id3 e6 8.lbf3 .ie7 (Follow­ cause Black's queen will hamper
ing the exchange 8 . . . dxe5, the f­ there the development of his
file is opened for White's rook kingside pieces. 6.fxe5 dxeS
and the c1-h6 diagonal for his 7.lbb5 ! ? Now, the game is opened
bishop. 9.fxe5 .ie7 10.0-0 fS 11. and this is in favour of White be­
exf6 lbxf6 12 .lbe5 0-0 13.c3 .id6 cause he is better developed. 7 . . .
14 . .ig5 Wfc7 15.1Mle2± - His pieces lbb6 B.lbxeS lbxe4 9 . .id3 lbf6 1 0 .
have occupied very active posi­ 0 - 0 c6 1l.lbc3 .ie6 12.l2le2 0-0-0
tions and can begin an attack 13.lbf4± - after the exchange on
against Black's king at any mo­ e6, White's bishop will turn into
ment, moreover that he must very powerful force. Naturally,
worry about the vulnerability of Black cannot play 13 . . . :B:xd4? due
the pawn on e6, Kasimdzhanov - to 14.lbxc6 ! + -
Schubert, Mainz 2010.) 9.0-0 g6
10.1Mfe2t White has extra space, I t i s also very bad for him to
while Black lags in development, choose 5 . . .exf4 6 ..ixf4± White has
A.Muzychuk - Akobian, Wijk aan a powerful pawn-centre, a lead in
Zee 2010. development and in the future he

258
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltlf6 3. ltl c3 ltl bd7 4/4

can organise active actions on the tive. 8 . . . fxe6 9.lt:lg5 lt:ldeS (9 . . . h5

f-fi.le after i.c4 and 0-0. 10.ie2±) 10.'1Wxd8+ i>xd8 ll.h3
lt:lf6 (The character of the position
Following 5 ... i.e7, White can remains more or less the same if
simply capture on eS. 6.dxe5 dxeS Black retreats his knight to the
7.fxe5 lt:lg4 8 . .if4± Now, the pawn edge of the board ll . . . lt:lh6, fol­
on eS is reliably protected and lowing 12.i.f4 lt:lg6 13.0-0-0+
Black must only hope that he can \t>e8 14.i.g3± - he has a weakness
create some counterplay connect­ on e6 and lags in development,
ed with the penetration of his Hoefer - Van Laar, Email 2003)
knight to the f2-square. This 12.if4 lt:lg6 13.0-0-0+ i>e8 14.
knight-sortie however, is doomed .ic7± Black is faced with a difficult
to fail in view of his lag in devel­ defence in the endgame, since he
opment. 8 . . . ic5 9.'1Wd2 lt:lf2 (9 . . . can hardly coordinate his pieces
.if2 + 10.�e2 i.b6 ll.h3 lt:lh6? 1 2 . and the weakness on e6 is hurting
igS+-) 10.E:g1 (10.-igS ! ? ; 10.e6 ! ? him, Lomonosovas - Barsciaus­
fxe6 1l.i.g5) 10 . . . lt:lg4, Malbran - kas, Panevezys 2008.
Tempone, Buenos Aires 1997
(Black's position is very bad after 6.tbd4
10 . . . c6 ll.i.e2 lt:lg4 12.E:fl±, White
not only has an extra pawn but his
development is superior.). Here,
he could have sacrificed the ex­
change beginning a decisive on­
slaught. 11.0-0-0 ! hg1 12.lt:lxgl.
There may follow: 12 . . . 0-0 13.h3
lt:lh6 14.lt:ld5 i>h8 15.hh6 gxh6
16.'1Wxh6 E:g8 17.lt:lf6 E:g7 18.
'!Wd2 +-, Black has avoided being
checkmated on h7, but he has
paid a too dear price for that.
Now, he loses his knight because This is stronger than capturing
of the pin and White ends up with with the knight. White intends to
a decisive material advantage. castle queenside and preserves
the threat e4-e5.
The other possibility for Black
to sacrifice his e5-pawn does not 6 ••• c6
promise him an easy life either. This is the main response for
5 . . . c6 6.dxe5 dxeS 7.fxe5 lt:lg4 8. Black. He takes the dS-square un­
e6! White gives back his extra der control and prepares · the
pawn just at the right moment move '!Wb6, just in case, fn order to
and seizes completely the initia- try to trade the queens and to di-

259
Chapter 18

minish his opponent's attacking tion of his d6-pawn. Later, in the

potential. He also has the active game Yakovich - Johansson,
possibility to advance d6-d5, fol­ Stockholm 1996, there followed:
lowed by �cs. 10 . . . tLlh6 11.¥tl'b4 ! aS 12 .¥tl'a3 tLle6
13.exd6+- and Black had no com­
It is bad for Black to play 6 . . . pensation for the pawn.) 8.0-0-0
g6? ! , due to 7.e5 ! dxeS 8.fxe5 �cS 0-0 9.e5 tLlfd7 (It is worse for him
9.¥tl'a4 tLlhS, Kulicov - Novitzkij , to play 9 . . . tLlg4, because after
St Petersburg 1999. Now, White 10 .�g1 �e6 ll.h3 tLlh6 12 .g4±,
can begin a decisive offensive White's pieces exert powerful
with the line: 10.g4! tLlg7 11.�g5 pressure in the centre and Black's
�e7 12 .he7 ¥tl'xe7 13.tLldS '?tfcS 14. knight on h6 is horribly mis­
0-0-0 0-0 1S.b4 ¥tl'f2 16.¥tl'b3 c6 placed, German - De Freitas, For­
17.tLle7+ 'it>h8 18.tLlxc8+- and taleza 1951.) 10.'it>b1 ! ?t White ex­
Black ends up a piece down. erts rather unpleasant pressure
against the d6-square, has extra
He should better avoid 6 . . . �e7, space and can deploy easily his
because of 7.e5 dxeS (or 7 . . . c5 8. pieces to more active positions.
¥tl'd2 dxeS 9.fxe5 tLlg4 10.¥tl'f4± and The idea of the prophylactic move
Black's knight on g4 will be a 12.'it>b1 for White is to avoid some
cause of permanent worries for tricks along the c1-h6 diagonal in
him, Zidu - Kuchta, Czech Re­ the heat of the fight.
public 2000) 8.fxe5 �cS 9.¥tl'c4
'?tfe7 10.¥tl'e2 tLlg4 ll.lLldS �f2 + 12. 7 .ie3
.

¥tl'xf2 tLlxf2 13.tLlxe7 tLlxh1 14.

tLldS+-, Black's knight will not
run away from the h1-square and
White's two minor pieces will be
obviously stronger than Black's
rook, Martin Gonzalez - Ortega
Ruiz, Linares 1998.

6 ... tLlcS. This is a possibility af­

ter which Black does not equalise
indeed, but reaches a fighting po­
sition. 7.�e3 �e7 (It is not good
for him to choose 7 . . . g6 - he is be­ 7 d5
. . .

hind in development anyway and Black wishes to develop his

cannot afford to lose time for fian­ bishop on f8 to an active position.
chettoing the bishop. 8.0-0-0
ig7 9.e5 tLlg4 lO.�gl± Black has He fails to equalise after the
great difficulties with the protec- more prudent line: 7 . . . ¥tl'b6 8.

260
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lLJf6 3. lLJ c3 lLJ bd7 4/4

0-0-0 1Wxd4 (following 8 . . . ie7 knight on h6 does not beautify

9.1Wd2 '<Mfc7 10.id3 0-0 llJ''!:h eU, Black's position, Sitnikov - Eren­
White has more space (a pawn on burg, Kolontaevo 1997) ll.fxeS
e4 against a pawn on d6) and can lLJb6 (after ll . . . lLJgxeS 12.lLJxeS if6
prepare patiently a breakthrough 13.1We4 ixeS 14.:gxd7 ixd7 lS.
in the centre - e4-eS) 9.hd4 ie7 '<MixeS :ges 16.1Wg3±, White's two
lO.eS dxeS lUxeS lLJhS 12 .lLJe4 minor pieces are stronger than
0-0 13.lLJd6;!; Meszaros - Belk­ Black's rook and pawns) 12.'<Mfe4
hodja, Agneaux 1999. He is better 1We8 13.h3 lLJh6 14.g4 fS 1S.exf6
in this endgame thanks to his ixf6 16.id3 1Wxe4 17.lLJxe4± Gro­
powerful knight on d6. Black will szpeter - Mikac, Austria 199S. He
have problems completing his de­ has succeeded in trading queens
velopment, since he cannot ex­ and now his king is not endan­
change on d6 (White will obtain a gered, but White is better in this
very powerful passed pawn if this endgame. His minor pieces have
happens.), so if he wishes to de­ occupied very active positions
velop his bishop on c8, he must and are well coordinated. On the
not only remove his knight from contrary, Black's cavalry is roam­
the d7-square, but also take care ing on different sides of the board.
about the protection of his b7- 8.e5!?
pawn. This i s a reliable move. White
is striving to obtain a slight but
It would be too precarious for stable advantage.
Black to try 7 . . . 1i.e7 8.0-0-0 0-0, He does not need to win a
because after 9.eS, his knight will pawn and enter the tactical com­
have to go to the rather unfavour­ plications in the variation S.exdS
able h6-square. 9 . . . lLJg4 (The re­ icS 9.1Wd3 1We7oo
treat to the edge of the board does
not look any better 9 . . . lLJe8 10.
�bl '<MfaS ll.id3 dS 12.fS--+ Eren­
burg - Stanley, Oak Brook 2007.
White's pawn-tandem eS and fS
seems quite threatening. He is
planning to follow with fS-f6,
opening the way of his bishop to
the h7-square and beginning a
crushing attack. It is understand­
able that Black';s undeveloped
queenside pieces are incapable of
assisting in the defence of his 8 ... �g4
king.) lO.igl dxeS (lO . . . dS ll.h3 Black's knight retreats with
lLJh 6 12.g4± and once again the tempo.

261
Chapter 18

He has also tried in practice ca 2006.) 2 0.f6;!; - Black's king is

8 . . . .ic5 9.1Mfd2 .be3 10.1Mfxe3 4Jg4 stranded in the centre and White
(It is not so good for Black to opt is beginning active actions. Black
for 10 . . . 1Mfe7, since he will fail to will need to find plenty of very ac­
preserve his knight on the f6- curate move in the oncoming
square anyway. 11.0-0-0 4:\cS, fight; otherwise, White's initiative
Saltaev - Janoszka, Germany may become decisive, Palac -
2013. Now, White must simply Mrdja, Porto San Giorgio 2002.
advance his kingside pawns:
12.h3 ! ? 0-0 13.g4± and Black's 9 .igl
•

defence is very difficult, moreover

that he has no active counterplay
at all.) 11.1Mfd2 "1Wb6 12.0-0-0 "!We3
13.h3 �xd2+ 14.Ei:xd2 4Je3 1S . .id3
4:\cS 16.l'l:el. The queens have been
traded, but White maintains the
initiative in this endgame. His
pieces are better mobilised and he
has a clear-cut plan for the occu­
pation of additional space on the
kingside with the moves g4, fS etc.
16 ... 4Jxd3+ (16 ... 4:\fS 17.g4 4Je7 18.
fS 0-0, Tiviakov - Khismatullin, 9 ••• .ic5
St Petersburg 2012. Here, White
could have played 19.b4 ! ? 4Jxd3+ The endgame is inferior for
2 0 .cxd3;!; and he would have oc­ Black following 9 . . . 1Mfb6 10.�xb6
cupied space on the kingside and axb6 ll.h3 4Jh6 12.4Je2 �b4+ 13.
preserved the possibility to or­ c3 �e7 14.g4;!; and once again it is
ganise gradually a breakthrough easy to notice that Black's knight
on the opposite side of the board on h6 is obviously misplaced.
with a2-a4, b4-b5.) 17.cxd3 4Jf5 18.
g4 4Je7 19.f5 �d7 (19 ... h5 20. 4:\gS Following 9 . . . 4Jh6 10.0-0-0
hxg4 2l.hxg4 Ei:h4 22.l'l:g2± Hav­ 4:\fS (It is also possible for Black to
ing advanced his pawns, White try 10 . . . 4:\cS 1l.�d2 ie7 12.'it>bU;
has not only occupied additional or 10 ... "\Wa5 1l.a3t and in both cas-
space on the kingside, but has re­ es White maintains a slight ad­
stricted considerably Black's bish­ vantage, since Black's knight is
op on c8. He will have problems misplaced at the edge of the
to complete the development of board.) 11.1Mfd2 �b4 12.a3 iaS,
his pieces even in the endgame Dos Santos - Felgaer, Buenos Ai­
and his defence will be very diffi­ res 2008. Now, after the simple
cult, Zaja - Kosanski, Velika Gori- move 13. 'it>b1 ! ?±, White's pros-

262
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lLJf6 3. lLJ c3 lLJ bd7 4/4

pects are evidently preferable, be­ 12 . . . .!l:\c5

cause Black's queenside counter­ There arises an already famil­
play (b7-b5-b4), is evidently not iar endgame with an advantage
so effective as White's actions for White following 12 . . . �e3 13.h3
with g4, fS etc. �xd2+ 14.'t!lxd2 lL:Jh6 15.g4t

10.Wd2 .ixgl lU�xgl Wb6 Black lags in development and

12.0-0-0 it would be too risky for him to
win a pawn with the line : 12 . . .
It is also good for him to con­ lL:Jxh2, because after 13.lL:Jd4 lL:Jg4
tinue with 12.lL:la4 ! ? We3+ 13. (Following 13 ... lL:Jxf1 14.E!dxf1:;; Pa­
�xe3 lLJxe3 14.�d3 lL:Jb6 (14 ... b5 lac - Schmidt Schaeffer, Munich
15.lL:Jc3 lL:Jb6 16.a3t Dreev - Kvei­ 1992, White's initiative compen­
nys, Vienna 1996) 15.lL:Jc5t. The sates his minimal material deficit
arising position resembles an with an interest. Black lags in de­
endgame in the French Defence, velopment, his king is stranded in
except that Black's pawn is on c6 the centre and castling kingside
and not on e6. This difference is would be very risky for him, be­
much rather in favour of White, cause in that case White will or­
because now, Black cannot organ­ ganise a powerful attack against
ise counterplay on the c-file, while the enemy king with the move f5-
White can simply advance his f6.) 14.�e2 lL:JcS 15�£3 hS, Niehaus
kingside pawns. Black's bishop on - Schmidt Schaeffer, Berlin 2006.
c8, just like in the French De­ Here, with the move 16.E!h1 !±,
fence, is not so active as his oppo­ White could have created great
nent's bishop on d3, because it is problems for his opponent. His
severely restricted by his own initiative is very powerful and
pawns on b7, c6 and dS. When Black's extra pawn is absolutely
White advances g4 and fS, Black's immaterial, moreover that he lags
bishop will have only one remain­ considerably in development.
ing d7-square. 13 . .!l:\d4 .!l:\e6 14.h3

263
Chapter 18

14 .tbxd4
•• Vienna 2012. White must play
White has a better endgame here 15.hxg4 after which his po­
after 14 . . . '?9xd4, for example: 15. sition is preferable. Now, it seems
'?9xd4 lLlxd4 16J'!xd4 lLle3 17.id3. tremendously risky for Black to
Now, he should not be afraid of try to win the exchange with the
17 . . . c5, because of 18.ib5+ <;!{f8 move 15 tbb3+ ?! (It is possibly
•••

19J!:d2 .ie6 20 . .id3 !i:d8 21.lLlb5 better for him to opt for 15 . . . ixg4
d4 2 2 .lLld6;t - his knight on d6 is 16.'?9xd4 ixd1 17.'?9xb6 axb6 18.
very powerful, while Black's <;!;>xdU, but even then, White's two
strong knight on e3 is not stable, minor pieces are stronger than
since White can undermine its Black's rook and pawn.) 16.axb3
base with the move c2-c3. '?9xgl 17.tbxd5 0-0 18.tbe7+
<;!;>h8 19.f5. White has a very
powerful attack for the exchange.
19 '?9h2 20.'?9d6 '?9f4+ 2t.<;!;>bt
.••

ges 22.ic4 '?9xg4 23.'?9d3 ! ?

Black has great problems to parry
White's threats (.if7 and f6, fol­
lowed by !i:h1). It would not be so
clear if he chooses 23.hf7, be­
cause after 23 . . . hf5 24.ixe8
!!:xeS 25.'?9d8 ig6 26.lLlxg6+ '?9xg6
27.'?9d7 <;!;>g8 28.'?9xb7 !!:xeS;!; Black
preserves some chances of saving
This position was reached in the game in an endgame with ma­
the game Kochetkova - Moser, jor pieces.

Conclusion
Black's main idea in the variation with 3 . . . lLlbd7 is to avoid the
slightly inferior endgame, arising after 3 . . . e5 4.dxe5. Following 4.f4,
White creates serious problems for Black. He must either play a worse
middle game (often with a "bad" knight on h6) or enter a very difficult
endgame in which White has a much more active bishop ( d3 against a
black bishop on c8) and a quite clear plan for active actions - advanc­
ing his kingside pawns - g4, fS. Naturally, it cannot be asserted that the
endgame is winning for White, but no doubt his game is much more
pleasant, while Black is forced to adhere for a long time only to a pas­
sive defence without any practical chances of seizing the initiative.

264
Chapter 19 l.d4 d6 2.e4 �f6 3.�c3 c6

queen to the aS-square in order

for it to support the possibility e7-
e5. In addition, he might play at
some moment b7-b5, or g7-g6.
After the last move, there may
arise a position which would be
more typical for the Pirc Defence.
4.f4
This is White's most popular
and strongest move - he is pre­
paring e4-e5. Indeed, if Black is
This move is relatively seldom reluctant to play e7-e5, then why
played in the contemporary tour­ not play with White e4-e5, occu­
nament practice. It is considered pying even more space?
that Black can hardly obtain an
acceptable position with it. In­
deed, he does not fight for the
centre so actively and his pieces
do not enter the actions so quick­
ly. On the other hand, it has been
played by strong grandmasters
like Sh.Mamedyarov, V.Bologan,
Z.Azmaiparashvili etc. At the be­
ginning of his chess career M.
Adams played often like this. All
this emphasizes that although the
move 3 . . . c6 seems somewhat Now, Black has a great choice
slow, White's task to obtain an ad­ of possibilities. We will deal with
vantage might not be so easy. five moves for Black as. his main
The main idea of Black's move replies: A) 4 . . . d5, B) 4 .. b5, C)
three is to open the way of his 4 .. Jfb6, D) 4 . g6, E) 4 . . . tfa5.
. .

265
Chapter 19

At first however, we will ana­ e4-e5. 6 ... e6 (The situation be­

lyse some not so popular possi­ comes even worse for Black fol­
bilities. lowing 6 . . . \Mfb6. He is behind in
About 4 . . . lLibd7 S.es - see development anyway, so going
Chapter 18. after the enemy pawn on d4 is
bound to end in a disaster. 7.e5
It is obviously dubious for dxeS 8.fxe5 lLidS 9.lLie4 \Mfxd4 10.
Black to choose 4 . . . e5? ! , although lLif3 \M!b4+ 1l.c3 '<Mfb6 12.c4 lLic7 13.
this move has been tested by .ie3 '<MfaS+ 14 ..id2 \Mfa6 15.lLifg5+-,
grandmasters as well. It leads to a White's attack has become crush­
difficult position for him, since ing, since Black's lag in develop­
sacrificing a pawn on eS is easy, ment is so great that he cannot
but regaining it proves to be very parry White's threats: lLid6 and
difficult. S.dxeS dxeS 6.'\M/xd8+ the simple move 0-0, after which
'it>xd8 7.fxe5 lLig4 8.lLif3 lLid7 (Fol­ his f7-pawn will be defenceless,
lowing 8 . . . .ic5 9.h3 lLie3 10 . .id3± Dabija - Gurgui, Email 2011.)
Ivanisevic - Markovic, Kraguje­ 7.lLif3 .ie7 8.e5 lLifd7, Szymaniak
vac 2012, the g2-pawn is untouch­ - Klatt, Essen 2003, 9.exd6 hd6
able, because if Black captures it, 10.f5 \Mfe7 ll.fxe6 \Mfxe6 12.\Mfxe6+
his knight will not run away from fxe6 13.lLie4± White has a clear
the g2-square: 10 . . . lLixg2 + ?? 11. advantage thanks to the vulnera­
'it>f1 lLie3+ 12.'it>e2 lLig2 13J:!h2 +­ bility of his opponent's e6-pawn.
and he loses his knight. So, Black
cannot restore the material bal­ 4 . . . \Mfc7 S.lLif3 .ig4 (Black is in
ance and White will play the rest a very bad position following 5 . . .
of the game with an extra pawn, lLibd7 6.e5 lLidS 7.lLixd5 cxdS 8.
despite its being doubled. He has .id3 e6 9.0-0 .ie7 10.c3 b6, Tka­
all the chances of realising it.) 9. chiev - Bajramovic, Neum 2000,
.if4 .icS 10 .h3 lLie3 ll.'it>d2 lLixfl+ ll.lLigS ! .ixgS 12.exd6 ! \Mfxd6 13.
12.:!!hxf1 h6 13.:!! a dl± Asauskas ­ fxgS± - He lags considerably in
Jankauskas, Vilnius 2000. White development, while White has
is ahead in development and his two powerful bishops and exerts
rooks are very well placed on the pressure against the f7-pawn.) 6.
d- and f-files. His e-pawns are iso­ h3 .ixf3 7.\Mfxf3
lated and doubled, but we should (diagram)
not forget that one of them is extra. It is bad for Black to play 7 . . .
lLibd7? ! , i n view of 8.e5± and his
Black cannot facilitate his de­ knight will be forced to retreat to
fence with the move 4 . . . .ig4, be­ its initial position, Sylvan - M.
cause after S . .ie2 .ixe2 6.\Mfxe2, Hansen, Copenhagen 1993.
due to his lag in development he It is not preferable for him to
cannot prevent the pawn-advance opt for 7... e6?! 8 ..ie3 .ie7 9.0-0-0

266
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lL\f6 3. tLlc3 c6 4f4

the loss of time is not so impor­

tant. Later, Black can organise
counterplay on the fS and g4-
squares.
5.e5
White occupies space with
tempo.

0-0 10 .�d3 tLlbd7 ll.g4±. White's

pawns are dominant in the centre
and now, he begins an offensive
on the kingside.
Following 7 . . . e5, Black can
only dream about equalising. 8.
�e3 tLlbd7 9.g4 ! ? White begins
immediately a pawn onslaught on
the kingside without delay. 9 . . . g6
10.0-0-0 �g7, D.Fridman - Ho­
kamp, Netherlands 2007, 11. 5 .lbg8
•.

dxeS ! dxeS 12 .f5. It is understand­ Black is going to build a defen­

able that Black cannot leave his sive line on the kingside which
king in the centre, but after cas­ will not be easy to break - hS, g6,
tling kingside he will be soon tLlh6, taking under control the key
checkmated. It would not be easi­ squares g4 and fS. Naturally,
er for him to defend the position White will obtain an edge (the
after 12 . . . 0-0-0 13.g5 tLle8 14. loss of two tempi in the opening
ha7+-, White has an extra pawn cannot go unpunished), but
and a better position. breaking Black's position will not
be an easy task at all.
A) 4 . . d5
.

It is amazing but this move, If Black retreats his knight to

which in fact loses two tempi for the centre of the board - 5 . . . tLle4,
Black (one to advance dS in two then after 6.tLlxe4 dxe4, he may have
moves and another to retreat the problems with the protection of his
knight after e4-e5), has been test­ pawn on e4. 7.tLle2 fS. This is the
ed in practice many times and only move; otherwise, he will lose
even a very strong grandmaster the pawn on e4. 8.c4 e6 9.tLlc3 tLla6
like M.Krasenkow has played it. It 10.�e3 tLlc7 11.'Mib3 !i.e7 12 J:!dl±
turns out that it is not so easy for Klovans - A.Ivanov, Beltsy 1977.
White to obtain an advantage, be­ White's advantage is doubtless,
cau se the position is closed and since Black can hardly parry the

267
Chapter 19

threat of the central pawn-break 9 ••• .if5 lO .ixfS c!Llxf5 ll.e6!

•

d4-d5. In addition, he has prob­ This is the only move; other­

lems with castling, because fol­ wise, Black will play e7-e6 and his
lowing 12 . . . 0-0?, White's pawn­ position will become a hard nut to
break 13.d5 ! + - will be crushing. crack.
ll ••• f6
S . . . lLlg4. Black's position be­
comes horribly cramped after this
move. 6.�d3 lLlh6 7.lLlf3 e6, San­
tos - Galego, Portugal 2003 (It
may be possible that Black's best
practical chance may be to try to
build a barricade with 7 .. .f5 8.lLlgS
e6 9.ie3 ! ? lLlf7 10.lLlxf7 �xf7 11.
�f3 cS 12.0-0-0 cxd4 13.hd4
lLlc6 14.�f2 �aS 15.�bl± There
arises a position of a French type,
but with a misplaced black king
on the f7-square. White's advan­ This position was reached in
tage is doubtless, but Black can the game Bareiss - Mueller, Ger­
offer some resistance.) 8.�e3 �e7 many 2001.
9.�e2 0-0 10.h3 lLlf5 1l.�f2±, fol­ 12.c!Llh4
lowed by g2-g4 and White's king­ White must exchange the pow­
side attack develops effortlessly. erful enemy knight on fS.
6 .id3 g6 7.lLlf3 h5 8.0-0
• 12 ••• c!Llxh4 13.ti'xh4 f5
lLlh6 He should better counter the
move 13 . . . �d6 with the energetic
response 14.f5 ! gxfS 15.l:!el. Now,
White regains his pawn with the
manoeuvre lLlc3-e2-g3-f5, for ex­
ample : 15 . . . lLla6 16.a3 �c7 17.lLle2
0-0-0 18.lLlg3 ih6 19.hh6 l:!xh6
20.lLlxf5;!; and his knight on fS oc­
cupies a dominant position and
the pawn on e6 cramps Black's
position considerably.
14.ti'g3 gb6
White's knight on c3 is doing
9.ti'el!? nothing (it is severely restricted
This is an interesting idea. by Black's pawns on dS and c6)
White wishes to put a wedge in­ and he should better transfer it to
side Black's camp with the move. the f3-square and from there it

268
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ttJf6 3. ttJ c3 c6 4.f4

can go to eS or gS. The exchange of strikes, begun

15.ltl bl!? .ig7 16.c3 ltla6 17 . with the move 6 . . . b4, leads to a
llJd2 c5 18.llJf3;!; White has more better position for White. 7.exf6
space and Black's rook is terribly bxc3 8.fxg7 .bg7 9.bxc3 eS, Rup­
misplaced on the h6-square. precht - Schunk, Germany 2008,
10.ttJf3 ! He must try to develop
B) 4 b5••• his pieces as quickly as possible.
He wishes to seize the initia­ 10 . . . e4 n.ttJd2 0-0 12 .ie2 �as
tive on the queenside. 13.ttJb3 ! White is not running af­
5.e5!? ter winning material, but wishes
The best way t o counter a flank to have active pieces and to seize
attack is a strike in the centre, this the initiative. 13 . . . �xc3+ . Other­
is well known and White is doing wise, Black would simply remain
exactly this with his last move. a pawn down. 14 . .id2 �b2 1S.ib4
E:e8 16.E:b1 �xa2. Now, he has al­
ready an extra pawn, but his
queen will not run away from the
a2-square. 17. 0-0 ie6 18.�d2 aS
19.E:a1 axb4 20.E:xa2 E:xa2 21.ttJc5
.idS 22.E:bl± Black's compensa­
tion for the queen is insufficient.
His b4-pawn is very weak and he
is likely to lose it soon and after
that White will prepare the pawn­
advance c2-c4. Black's defence
will be very difficult.
s . . . b4 6 . . . ttJd5 7.ttJf3 g6 8 . .id3 .ig7
9.0-0 0-0 (He will have great
The exchange in the centre S . . . problems after 9 . . . ttJxc3 10.bxc3
dxeS i s i n favour of White, be­ 0-0 11.�e1 ttJa6 12 .�h4� White's
cause following 6.fxeS, his bishop attack is very powerful, Barquero
on c1 will not be restricted by the Pinar - Sanchez Camino, Barce­
pawn on f4. lona 2006; ll.a4 ! ? bxa4 12 .�el±)
10.ttJxdS �xdS 11.�e1 f6 12.�h4
fxe5 13 . .ie4 �d7, Ehlvest - Kaka­
geldyev, Ivano-Frankovsk 1982.
Here, White could have forced ad­
vantageous simplifications with
14 . .ih6 ! �g4 1S.�xg4 .bg4 16 .
.bg7 @xg7 17.ttJxeS .E:xf1+ 18.
E:xfl± and in the endgame Black
will have pawn-weaknesses on c6

269
Chapter 19

and e7, which together with his 9 .'f«a5 10 .id3 dxe5

• • •

undeveloped pieces provide

White with excellent winning It seems very risky for Black to
chances. opt for 10 . . . �xc3 +, because after
ll.i.d2 �cS 12.lt:Jf3 dxeS 13.�e2
6.exf6 bxc3 7.fxg7 .hg7 8. i.e6 14.lt:JgSt, White will have
bxc3 e5 powerful initiative and Black can
hardly find a safe haven for his
Following 8 . . . lt:Jd7 9.id3 �aS monarch.
lO.i.d2±, Black has no compensa­
tion for the pawn, Esserman - ll.<!lje2 0-0 12.0-0;!; White's
Ginsburg, Mesa 2009. prospects are preferable and this
is not only because of his extra
doubled pawn, but due to the fact
that the castling position of
Black's king has been seriously
compromised (his g-pawn is
missing).

C) 4 ••• �b6

9.dxe5!
White should continue only
this way.

After 9.fxeS �h4+ ! , in order

for him to fight for the advantage,
he must sacrifice a rook. 10.g3
�e4+ ll.�e2 �xhl l2.exd6+ i.e6
13.lt:Jf3 lt:Jd7 14.'it>f2 lt:Jf6 1S.h3
lt:JdSoo. There has arisen a very
complicated position, difficult to This is not the best move for
evaluate and White is a rook down him. Developing the queen so ear­
in it, but Black's queen is strand­ ly in the opening is wrong as a
ed on the hl-square. It is quite rule. If Black wishes to make a
evident that White should better move with his queen, he should
avoid it, since he can maintain an better try the aS-square - see var­
advantage by playing much sim­ iation E.
pler. 5.e5

270
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3. ltJ c3 c6 4/4

This is White's simplest re­

sponse against Black's move
four.

Black can insist on developing

the bishop - 7 . . . g6 8.c3 if5 9.
5 • . • ltld5 hf5 gxf5, but after 10.\1;l/h5 e6 11.
ltJf3 ltJc6 12.ltJg5 ltJd8 13.g4, White
About 5 . . . ig4 6.ie2 .b:e2 7. can exploit the circumstance that
\Wxe2 - see 4 . . . ig4. the enemy king is stranded in the
centre and begin a decisive offen­
The exchange 5 . . . dxe5, just sive. 13 . . . ie7 14.gxf5 exf5 15.ltJxf7
like in many variations that we ltJxf7 16.e6± He regains his piece
have analysed, is in favour of and Black has no compensation
White, because following 6.fxe5, for the numerous pawn-weak­
he obtains the open f-file for his nesses in his position, Wells -
rook as well as the cl-h6 diagonal Rashkovsky, London 1990. It is
for his bishop on cl. 6 . . . ltJd5 7. possible that he should prefer the
ltJxd5 cxd5 8.id3 ltJc6 9.c3 g6 10. more modest approach - 8 . . . ig7,
\1;lff3 ie6 11.ltJe2 ig7 12.ltJf4 0-0, but even then after 9.\1;lff3 (I can
Prokhorov - Mischuk, Illichevsk recommend to the readers who
2008. White can begin an offen­ enjoy playing endgames to try the
sive against the enemy king under transfer to a better endgame with
the cover of his powerful pawn­ 9.\Wb3 ! ? \1;lfxb3 10.axb3;t) 9 . . . ie6
centre. 13.h4�, Black will have 10.ltJe2 ltJd7 11.f5 ! ? , White begins
problems parrying this attack, active actions, while Black's king
since he will have difficulties to still remains in the centre. 11 . . .
bring his pieces to the protection .b:f5 (but not 11 . . . gxf5, i n view
of his king due to his lack of of 12.exd6 ! \Wxd6 13.ltJg3± and
space. White regains his pawn preserv­
6.ltlxd5 cxd5 7 .id3• ing all the pluses of hi� position)
White impedes the develop­ 12 . .b:f5 gxf5 13.e6 fxe6 14.\WhS+
ment of the enemy bishop on c8 . \!;>d8 (14 . . . 1!1f8? 15.ltJf4+-) 15.\Wf7

271
Chapter 19

i.f6 16.�xe6;t. Black has an extra this pawn-sacrifice, White's at­

pawn indeed, but this should not tack is developing very rapidly
create an illusion. White will re­ and effortlessly. l8 hb4 19.a5
•••

gain it with his next move and tfc7 20.gfbl .!.e7 21.c5 c.!?a8
Black will hardly manage to main­ 22.gb3-+ gbs 23.c!bxc6 hc6
tain the material balance and 24.f5!± Now, Black will be forced
evacuate his king away from the to give up the exchange without
centre. obtaining any compensation for
it, since after 24 gbc8? 25 .!.f4
••• •

8.c3 g6 9.§'f3 �d8 26.a6+-, White's attack is

White provokes the move victorious.
9 ••. e6
Now, Black cannot castle king­ D) 4 g6
•••

side due to the vulnerability of the

dark squares on his kingside and
his monarch will have a hard time
on the other side of the board as
well.
10.ti'f2 .!.d7 ll.<!Llf3 0-0-0
12 .!.e3 c.!?b8 13.0-0 gcs 14.a4
•

c!ba5

After this move there arises a

version of the Pirc Defence which
is not so good for Black, because
in the variations of this opening in
which White advances f2-f4,
Black's main idea to create coun­
terplay is connected with under­
mining White's pawn-centre with
15.exd6! This is a very non­ c7-c5 (either immediately, or fol­
standard decision. White wishes lowing the preliminary move
to deploy his knight in the centre lLla6 ). With a black pawn on c6
of the board in order to control however, this will be done with a
the c4-square before the begin­ loss of a tempo.
ning of the pawn-offensive against
Black's king. 15 hd6 16.c!be5
••• 5.lLlf3 .!.g7
.!.e8 17.b4 c!bc6, Tazbir - Pa­ This is the most natural move
kleza, Warsaw 2011, 18.c4! After for Black.

272
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lt\f6 3. lt\ c3 c6 4.f4

After s . . . .ig4 6 . .id3 Wfb6 ( 6 . . . 6 . . 0-0

.

fi.g7 7.h3 - see s .. ..ig7), White should

play energetically: 7.e5 ! ll:JdS, Ma­ About 6 ... ll:Ja6 7.0-0 0-0 8.e5
tijevic - Skrcevski, Struga 2011. - see 6 . . . 0-0.
Now, he maintains a slight edge Following 6 . . .b5 and 7.e5 dxeS
with 8.exd6 ll:Jxc3 9.bxc3 e6 10. 8.fxe5 ll:JdS 9.ltlxd5 WfxdS 10.0-0
ia3 Wfa5 11 . .ib4 Wfd8 12.0-0 hd6 0-0 11.Wfe1, there arises transpo­
13 . .ixd6 Wfxd6 14.Wfb1 Wfc7 15.ltle5 sition to the variation with 4 . . . b5 .
.if5 16.hf5 gxf5 17.ll:Jc4 b6 18.Wfe1 It would be too passive for
ll:Jd7 19.Wfh4;!;, since Black can Black to play 6 . . . tt:Jbd7, because he
hardly find a reliable shelter for fails to advance e7-e5 anyway. 7.
his king. His pawn-structure has eS ll:JdS 8.ltlxd5 cxdS 9.0-0 0-0
been compromised both on the 10.c3 Wfb6 11.Wfel. White accom­
queenside and on the kingside. plishes the standard transfer of
his queen to the h4-square. 11 . . . e6
The active pawn-move on the 12 .�h1 :B:e8 13.Wfh4± - He is per­
queenside - S . . . bS cannot equal­ fectly prepared for an attack
ise for Black. 6.id3 b4 7.ltle2 dS against the enemy king, Kotsur -
8.e5 ltlh5 9.0-0 e6 10.a3 cS, Steel Anarkulov, Tashkent 2012.
- Adly, Maputo 2011. Here, White
had to play 11.b3 ! , ensuring his In the variation 6 . . . .ig4 7.h3
bishop against the threat c5-c4, .ixf3 8.Wfxf3 Wfb6 (8 . . . 0-0 9.0-0
for example : 11 . . . ll:Jc6 12 . .ie3;!;. In - see 6 ... 0-0), White parries eas­
the arising position of the ily his opponent's pressure
"French" type, White has more against the d4-pawn. 9.ltle2 ltlbd7
space and if the position is opened 10.0-0 0-0 11.a4 aS 12 .ie3 Wfc7
in the centre, his pieces will be 13.c3 e6 14.g4t Khenkin - Cher­
much better prepared for this nyshov, Dagomys 2009. He has
(Black's knight is horribly mis­ fortified reliably his centre and
placed at the edge of the board.). prepares a pawn-offensive on the
6.�d3 kingside. Black is faced with a dif­
ficult defence, since his pieces ob­
viously lack space.

It seems premature for Black

to try 6 . . . Wfb6, because after 7.e5
dxeS 8.fxe5 ll:JdS 9 . .id2 0-0 (9 . . .
Wfxb2? 10.ltlxd5 cxdS 11.:B:b1 Wfxa2
12.Wfc1 +-) 10.0-0 i.g4 11.ll:Ja4,
his queen fill be forced to return
ingloriously to its initial position.
11 ... Wfd8 12 .WfeU White has more

273
Chapter 19

space and good attacking pros­ the eS-square, so he will have to

pects against the enemy king: work hard to find a good place­
\Wh4, ih6, lt:JgS etc. but it looks ment of his bishop on g7.
like Black can still defend this po­
sition. Following 12 . . . b5? ! 13. After 7 . . . lt:Jbd7 8.e5;!;, Black
lt:JcS±, as it was played in the game ends up in a very passive position,
Kleiser - Kreutz, Email 2011, on because White's eS-pawn cramps
top of all Black's problems, he considerably his opponent's piec­
added a weakness on cS and es. He has a very straightforward
White's knight, which was idle at plan - to transfer the queen to h4
the edge of the board managed to and to begin an attack against
enter the actions. Black's king. There may follow:
8 . . . lt:Je8 (8 . . . lt:Jd5 9.lt:Jxd5 cxdS 10.
7.0-0 c3 - see 6 . . . lt:Jbd7; 8 . . . dxe5 9.fxe5
lt:JdS 10.lt:Jxd5 cxdS 11.1We1 1Wb6
12 .c3 f6 13.exf6 exf6, Bragin -
Mamoshin, Gagarin 2009, 14.
if4;!; - Black's bishop on g7 is
passive and the pawn-advance f6-
f5 will weaken catastrophically
the eS-square.) 9.1We1 lt:Jc7, Ku­
porosov - Mozes, Budapest 1991
and once again, White obtains a
great advantage after the transfer
of his queen to an attacking posi­
tion - 10.\Wh4±
7 .tg4
•••

His main plan in this position After 7 . . . b5 8.e5 lt:Je8 9.1We1 a6

is to exert pressure against 10 .\Wh4, he has placed his queen
White's d4-pawn. on h4 and is perfectly prepared
for a direct attack against Black's
The move 7 . . . lt:Ja6 was tested monarch.
in the game Khenkin - Zahariev,
Iraklion 1992. There followed Following 7 . . . \Wb6 8.'kt>h1 ig4,
8.e5 lt:JdS 9.lt:Jxd5 cxdS 10.c3 lt:Jc7 White should better reply with
11.1Wc2 (11.ie3 ! ?;!;) 11 . . . dxe5 12. the prophylactic move 9 .a3 ! ?, tak­
fxeS f5 13.exf6 exf6 14.if4;!; Black's ing the b4-square under control.
dS-pawn was very weak and his Now, Black cannot exchange on
bishop on g7 was restricted by his f3 and capture with his queen on
own pawn on eS. He cannot ad­ d4, because after ie3 the queen
vance f6-f5, because that would has no square to retreat to. 9 . . .
lead to a horrible weakening of lt:Jbd7 ( 9 . . . lt:Jfd7 10 .e5 c S 11.lt:Jd5

274
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lbf6 3. lb c3 c6 4/4

'!Wd8 12.exd6 exd6 13.lbe3 .b:f3 d4-pawn. White has more space,
14.'1Wxf3 lbc6 15.dxc5 dxcS 16.ic4 a powerful pawn-centre and two
�h8 17.c3;!; White has the two­ strong bishops, Pourkashiyan -
bishop advantage, Filipenko - Hemmatizadeh, Teheran 2008.
Gavrikov, Severodonetsk 1982.
You have to pay attention to his 10.lbe2 ctlfd7
last move - 17.c3, after which Black increases the pressure
Black's knight on c6 and his bish­ against the d4-pawn.
op on g7 are severely restricted in
their movements.) 10.h3 .b:f3 Besides his last move, he can
11.'?;Vxf3 eS 12.dxe5 dxeS 13.f5 '?;Vc7 attack the d4-square with his c- or
14.g4--+ A.Muzychuk - Vardi, Eilat e-pawns, for example : 10 . . . e5
2012, White has a very powerful ll.c3 lbbd7 12 .�hU and it is not
attack on the kingside and can clear how Black can increase his
play gS, followed by f6 at an op­ pressure against the centre, Janik
portune moment, sending Black's - Kaminski, Pszczyna 2007.
bishop into exile on the h8-
square. So, White will have prac­ Or 10 ... c5 ll.eS ! ? (after ll.c3
tically an extra piece. cxd4 12.cxd4 lbc6fZ Black can cre­
ate good counterplay against
8.h3 hf3 9.'?;Vxf3 White's pawn-centre, Cabrilo -
Titov, Vrnjacka Banja 1992) 11 . . .
lbfd7 12 .ie3 - see 10 . . . lbfd7.

ll.ie3

Now, he has at least the two­

bishop advantage.

9 ... ti'b6
ll ••• c5
It would be too slow for Black It is understandable that it is
to play 9 . . . lbbd7, since after lO .eS not good for Black to capture on
lOeB ll.ie3±, Black fails to organ­ b2, since following 12 J:iab1, White
ise counterplay against the enemy not only regains his pawn, but ac-

275
Chapter 19

tivates noticeably his rook. The Skulener, Moscow 1981, 14.c3 !

a2-pawn is untouchable - 12 . . . The best defence for Black is 14 . . .
�xa2? 13J''!: a 1 �e6 14.f5+- �xb2, after which there arises al­
most by force a slightly better
12.e5! endgame for White. 15.-ixcS dxcS
This is the right move ! It is es­ 16.E:fb1 �d2 17.E:d1 �b2 18.E:ab1
sential for White to neutralise the �xa2 19.E:xb7 E:ac8 20 . .ie4 �a4
pressure of Black's fianchettoed 21.E:dd7 e6 22 . .ixc6 �xc6 23.
bishop. �xc6 E:xc6 24.E:xa7 gS 25.g3;!; His
rooks have been doubled on the
12 ... ttlc6 penultimate rank, but there is just
a few material left on the board,
Following 12 . . . cxd4 13.ttlxd4 so Black has some chances for a
lDcS 14.ttlb3 ttlbd7 15.c3 �c7 16. draw.
lDxcS ttlxcS 17.exd6 �xd6 18 . .ic2
E:ac8 19.f5 �a6 20.E:f2 , White's 13 ... cxd4 14.ttlxd4!?
two bishops are powerful force in
this open position. In order to White must capture with the
parry his initiative, Black, in the knight, because in the variation
game Barnsley - Grafen, Email 14.cxd4 dxeS 15.fxe5, Black can
2008, decided to sacrifice a pawn, already capture the pawn 15 . . .
but after 20 . . . ttld3 21..ixd3 �xd3 �xb2+!. There arises a very com­
22 . .ixa7 �xf3 23.E:xf3 E:fd8 24. plicated position. He has an extra
.ie3±, White succeeded in realis­ pawn and can even sacrifice his
ing his material advantage in the knight on eS obtaining three
endgame. pawns for it and very actively de­
ployed pieces.

13.c3 ! ?
14 . . . ttlxd4
H e maintains a slight edge fol­
lowing 13.dxc5 ttlxcS, Vitolinsh - Naturally, it is bad for Black to

276
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 liJf6 3. liJ c3 c6 4.f4

opt for 14 . . .'�xb2? 15.liJb5+- and ble his opponent's pawns after the
his queen is doomed on the b2- exchange on c3 .
square.

There arise interesting com­

plications following 14 . . . dxe5 15.
liJe6 W/xb2 (15 ... liJd4 16.cxd4 e4
17 . .he4 W/xe6 18 .f5 ! \Wb6 19.E:adl
E:ab8 20.�c2 ! E:bd8 21.�b3tWhite
has managed to transfer his bish­
op to a very powerful position and
from there it exerts pressure
against the f7-square, while the
weakness of the isolated pawn on
d4 is not felt at all.) 16.liJxf8 E:xf8 Still, White can play
17.E:abU and due to the open 5.e5!?
character of the position, White's His main task i s t o seize the
rook is more powerful than initiative as quickly as possible.
Black's minor piece and his two It is also possible for White to
pawns. choose 5.id3 e5 6.liJf3;!;

15.cxd4 W/xb2 16.gfbl �c3

17 .!e4 liJb6 18.hb7 gabS 19.
•

gel

It deserves attention for White

to try 19.if2 ! ? W/xf3 20 . .hf3;!; and
thanks to his two powerful bish­
ops in the endgame his prospects
are preferable.

19 ... �b2 20 .!£2;!; - Now, his

•

two bishops are obviously strong­ 5 . . . liJe4

er than Black's bishop and knight, This is Black's most natural
moreover that White's e5-pawn and strongest move. His knight
restricts considerably Black's not only attacks on c3, but also
bishop. takes the d2-square under con­
trol, impeding the development of
E) 4 ... �a5 White's bishop.
This is Black's most popular
move in this position. Now, after The inclusion of the moves 5 . . .
5.e5 , he can play 5 . . . liJe4 and dou- dxe5 6.fxe5 i s i n favour o f White

277
Chapter 19

6 . . . tt:\e4 (6 . . . tt:\d5 7 . .id2 .if5 8 . .ic4 lowing 9 . . . Wxf4 10. 0-0� - White
\1;'/d8 9.\1;'/f3 e6 10. 0-0-0;!; Cicak ­ has completed his development,
Dinh Due Trong, Turin 2006. The while only Black's queen is in ac­
exchange of the f-pawn for the tion, so his position seems to be
central d-pawn was obviously ad­ beyond salvation.). 10.0-0 Wxc2
vantageous for White. Meanwhile 11.We1� and despite the loss of a
he is ahead of Black in develop­ pawn, White's prospects are obvi­
ment and can begin a pawn-offen­ ously preferable due to his great
sive on the kingside (g4, h4).) 7. lead in development, Goldin -
tt:\f3 .ig4 8 . .ie2 tt:\xc3 9.\1;'/d2 tt:\d7 Young, Minneapolis 2005.
10.bxc3 e6 11.0-0t Black lags in He should not be afraid of the
development and will have to ex­ double-attack - 6 . . . Wb6, since it
change sooner or later on f3, after will be suicidal for Black to cap­
which White's two-bishop advan­ ture on b2 being so much behind
tage and his active possibilities in development. 7.tt:lf3 .ig4 (7 . . .
on the semi-open f-file (eventual­ \1;lfxb2?? 8.tt:\xd5 cxd5 9.E!:b1 Wa3,
ly on the b-file as well), compen­ Izeta Txabarri - Rausis, Bordeaux
sate with an interest the compro­ 1990, 10.E!:b3 \1;lfxa2 11.Wc1+- and
mised pawn-structure on his Black's queen gets trapped) 8.
queenside. exd6 tt:\xc3 9 . .ixc3 e6 10.h3 .ixf3
11.Wxf3 .ixd6 12 .f5t White is fol­
5 . . . tt:\d5. This move does not lowing the classical principle
seem logical, because after 6 . .id2, "You should strive to open the po­
White gets rid of the pin. sition if you have the two-bishop
advantage.", Liberzon - Hodg­
son, Palma de Mallorca 1989.

6.J.d3
White must get rid of his op­
ponent's centralised knight as
soon as possible.

About 6 . . .dxe5 7.fxe5 - see 5 . . .

dxe5.
6 . . . tt:\xc3 7 . .ixc3 Wd5 8.tt:lf3
We4+ 9 . .ie2 .if5. Running after
the c-pawn seems very risky for
Black's pieces. He lags considera­
bly in development (The situation
would be even worse for Black fol-

278
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 tiJf6 3. tiJ c3 c6 4.f4

6 .tbxc3
• . White will regain his knight on
The alternatives are clearly the next move.
worse for Black.

6 .. .f5 7.exf6 4Jxf6 (following

7 . . . 4Jxc3, White has at his dispos­
al a powerful intermediate move
- 8.f7+ ! '.t>xf7 9.�d2;t - and Black
loses his castling rights) 8.id2
tiJa6 9.a3;!; The e6 and f7-squares
are terribly weak in Black's camp,
Szieberth - Francsics, Budapest
1996.

6 ... d5 7.ixe4 dxe4 8.id2 �b6 Black must make up his mind
9.4Jge2 . Now, he must defend now about his future plans and
very precisely in order to save his his main replies are El) 7. . . d5
e4-pawn. 9 . . . if5 (In the game and E2) 7 c5.
•••

Glek - Scekic, Rethymnon 2003,

Black solved radically the prob­ Following 7 . . . dxe5, White
lem with his e4-pawn - he simply maintains a slight edge after 8.
sacrificed it: 9 .. .f5 10.exf6 exf6 fxe5 cS (8 . . .g6 9.4Jf3 ifS 10.�xc3
ll.tiJxe4;t, but it was understand­ �xc3+ ll.bxc3 ixd3 12.cxd3 ig7
able that his compensation was 13.0-0 tiJa6 14.a4 b6 15. ia3;!;
insufficient.) 10.tiJg3 e6 ll.ic1 ! ? Black's bishop is restricted by the
After this paradoxical retreat of pawn on eS, while White's bishop
the bishop both White's pawns exerts powerful pressure on the
(b2 and d4) are protected. There a3-f8 diagonal.) 9.bxc3 tiJc6 10.
may follow this exemplary varia­ tiJf3 cxd4 ll.cxd4 �xd2+ 12 .ixd2
tion: ll . . . ib4 12.0-0 hc3 13. e6 13.0-0;!; - He is much better
bxc3 tiJd7 14.�e1 0-0 15.4Jxe4 c5 developed and Black will hardly
16.4Jd6 cxd4 17.cxd4 �xd4+ 18. parry the threat of the break­
ie3 �a4 19.c4 b6 20.:B:d1 ig6 21. through in the centre: c2-c4 and
�e2 and then 22 .g4t and al­ d4-d5, Ahmad - Amjad, Bagdad
though Black has preserved the 2010.
material balance, but this is just a After 7 . . .g6, White's best reac­
small consolation for him, be­ tion would be 8.4Jf3 ! (following
cause White's pawn-offensive, 8.bxc3 dxeS 9.fxe5, Black can pro­
with the support of the knight on voke complications with 9 . . . ih6
d6, seems very dangerous. 10.�xh6 �xc3+ n.'.t>e2 �xa 1 12.
tiJf3� and it is possible that White
is better even then, but playing

279
Chapter 19

this position over the board would 10.c4. This transfer into an
be too complicated, Finkel - Ora­ endgame is typical for this line
tovsky, Israel 1994) 8 . . . ig7 (8 . . . and we will encounter it numer­
ih6 9.0-0 dxeS 10.lLlxe5 lL\d7 ous times. 10 . . . Wixd2+ ll.i.xd2
ll.lLlc4 Wic7 12.Wixc3 lLlf6 13.Wie1 dxc4 12 .i.xc4 a6 13.c3 ! ? (This
lLldS 14.£5 i.g7 15.c3;!; White has move is more precise than 13.a4
succeeded in advancing the the­ cxd4 14.lL\xd4= and White has no
matic move f4-f5 and seized the chances of obtaining an advan­
initiative, so Black must defend tage in the endgame in view of the
passively in a slightly worse posi­ vulnerability of his a and c­
tion.) 9.0-0 0-0 10 .bxc3 (It is pawns., AI Sayed - Akobian, Gi­
also good for White to transfer braltar 2009.) 13 . . . lLlc6 14. 0-0 bS
into an endgame with 10.Wixc3 ! ? 1S.id3 ib7 16.a4;!; - He is better
Wixc3 11.bxc3 lLla6 12 .i.a3;!; and his developed and can exerts pres­
bishop exerts powerful pressure sure against Black's position on
against Black's position.) 10 . . . lL\a6 the queenside, as well as on the
ll.Wie1 cS 12 .id2 Wia4 13.Wih4;!; kingside with f4-f5.
Novak - Dziadykiewcz, Trinec
1998. Now, White's queen has oc­
cupied the standard attacking El) 7 d5 8.lLle2
•••

placement for this variation. He is Now, White can capture on c3

threatening f4-f5, ih6 followed with his knight is some variations.
by lLlgS with a crushing attack.
After 7 . . . e6 8.bxc3 cS (there
arises transposition of moves with
8 . . . d5 9.lLlf3 cS) 9.lLlf3, Black
should better take the e4-square
under control by playing 9 . . . d5 (in
the variation 9 . . . dxe5 10.dxe5 ! ?
lL\c6 ll.lLlgSt, White's knight is
headed for the e4-outpost and his
initiative becomes very danger­
ous).

8 ... e6

Black cannot equalise with 8 . . .

cS. One of the defects o f this move
is that White can capture on c3
with his knight, avoiding the dis­
rupting of his pawn-structure. 9.
lL\xc3 e6. The arising position re-

280
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 ltJf6 3. ltJ c3 c6 4.f4

sembles the French Defence. 10. cova - Michna, Dresden 2007.

dxc5 (10.ltJbS ! ?;t;) 10 . . . �xc5 (10 ... Here, White could have obtained
.ixcS? ! ll.ttJbS �b6 12 .b4 �e7 13. a great advantage with the line:
�b2 ttJc6 14.a3 aS 1S.lLld6+ hd6 ll.c4 ! dxc4 12.lLlc3± Black's extra
16.exd6 f6 17.b5 ttJd8 18.�d4 pawn is of no importance. White's
�xd6 19.�e3 ttJf7 2 0 . 0-0 �d7 21. knight will go via e4 to d6 or f6
�cS �c7, Ivakhinova - Petrova, and his attack will be crushing.
Taganrog 2011 and here, White
overlooked the possibility 2 2 . After 9 . . .ie7, White can try a
c4 !±, after which the position very promising pawn-sacrifice -
would have been opened in his fa­ 10.f5 ! ? (It is also possible for him
vour.) ll.a3 �d7 12 .b4 �b6 13.�b2 to choose the more prudent line:
ttJc6 14.ltJa4 �c7 15.0-0;!; Nepom­ 10.c4 �xd2+ ll . .ixd2;!;, maintain­
niachtchi - A.Ivanov, Dagomys ing a slight edge in the endgame.)
2010. Black cannot find a safe 10 . . . exf5 11.0-0 g6 12 .�h6 �f8 13.
shelter for his king, because if he �h4 �e7 14.�g5 hgS 15.�xg5� ­
castles queenside, White will After the exchange of the bishops,
open the c-file with the move c2- White has an excellent play on the
c4, while if Black castles kingside, dark squares and Black's extra
White will organise a crushing at­ pawn is absolutely immaterial.
tack after f4-f5. 10.c4
Now, there arises an endgame.
9.bxc3 10 ... �xd2+ ll . .txd2 ttJc6
The arising position is of a 12. cxd5 exd5 13.c3;!;
"French" type, except that White
has doubled pawns on the c-file.

White has a cleat-cut plan in

this endgame, connected with the
9 ••• c5 preparation of the pawn-advance
f4-f5. Later, in the game Sutovsky
9 . . . �a4. This is not the best - Altounian, ICC 2002, there fol­
move for Black. 10.0-0 g6, Nem- lowed 13 .tg4 14J'�bl 0-0-0
•••

281
Chapter 19

15 .le3. Black made a mistake

• the weak pawn on d6. 12 ... exd6
here 15 cxd4 (He had better
••• 13.tLlf3 .ie7 14.0-0 t2Ja6 (Follow­
follow with 15 . . . c4 16 . .ic2;!;, main­ ing 14 . . . 0-0 15 . .lb4 ! , Black will
taining a slightly worse but still have great problems with the pro­
defensible position.) 16.tLlxd4± tection of his d6-pawn. 15 . . . t2Ja6
and it turned out that White's 16.ixa6 bxa6 17.!Uel±) 15.:Bael;!;
pieces are much better prepared In the endgame Black will hardly
than their counterparts for the complete his development due to
opening of the position in the cen­ the pin along the e-file.
tre.
9.tLlf3 c4
He blocks the queenside, be­
E2) 7 c5 8.bxc3
••• cause it will be more difficult for
White to exploit his lead in devel­
opment in a closed position.

It seems too risky for Black to

choose 9 . . . ig4, since White can
open advantageously the position
with the line : 10.c4 ! , for example:
10 . . . �xd2 + ll.tLlxd2 dxc4 12 . .ie4
t2Jc6 13.d5 t2Jd4 (The retreat of
Black's knight to the edge of the
board is clearly worse. 13 . . . t2Ja5
14 . .ib2 bS 15.a3 0-0-0 16 . .ic3
8 ••• d5 t2Jb7 17.h3 .id7 18.:Bb1 .ie8 19.0-0
hS 20.tLlf3 aS 21.f5 b4 2 2 .axb4
8 . . . cxd4 9.cxd4 �xd2+ 10. cxb4 23 . .id4 <t/c7 24.tLlg5± This is
ixd2. In the endgame White's a very picturesque position! Black
prospects are preferable, since his has an extra pawn, but his pieces
pawns on d4 and eS cramp con­ are practically stalemated ! You
siderably Black's pieces. 10 . . . tLlc6 should pay attention to the bishop
(10 . . . dxe5 ll.fxeS tLlc6 12 .c3 f6 on f8, which does not have a sin­
13.tLlf3 ig4 14.0-0 0-0-0, Man­ gle move and all this after 23
ik - Rumpl, Austria 2003, White moves have been played since the
had to take care here of the safety beginning of the game ! ) 14.t2Jxc4;!;
of his eS-pawn with the move 15. White has a powerful pawn-cen­
.lf4 ! preserving the advantage.) tre, while Black's centralised
ll.dS tLlb8, Balogh - Beim, Aus­ knight will not remain there for
tria 2005, 12.exd6 ! He parts with long, because White will soon
his pawn-centre, but obtains good oust it from there with the move
prospects on the e-file and against c2-c3 .

282
 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lt:lf6 3. lt:l c3 c6 4.f4

It would be also interesting for

Black to try here 9 . . . tt:lc6, keeping
the possibility to develop his bish­
op on g4. 10.0-0 .ig4 (10 . . . e6 11.
a4 c4 12 ..ie2 .id7 13.'\WeU White
has a space advantage and the
possibility to organise active ac­
tions on the kingside with the
move f4-f5. All this more than
compensates his compromised
queenside pawn-structure.) 11.
E:b1 .ixf3 12.E:xf3 c4 (12 ... 0-0-0, After the routine reaction
Prusikin - Weiss, Montecatini 11.0-0 Wfa4?, he cannot find an
Terme 1997, 13.E:b5 Wfxa2 14.E:xc5 effective placement of his bishop.
e6 15.E:b5;!;; Black's position will
be terrible after 14 . . . a6? ! due to ll .if5 12.0-0 e6 13.h3 h5
•••

the cramping pawn-sacrifice 15. 14.log5 h4 15 . .ia3

e6 !±) 13.ie2 Wfxa2 14.E:xb7 Wfa6 The exchange of the dark­
15.E:b1 e6 16.f5± White has more squared bishops is in favour of
space and very actively deployed White, since almost all Black's
pieces, Orozco Lopez - Arribas pawns are on light squares.
Robaina, Guayaquil 2011. 15 .b:a3 16.:!:�xa3 .!bd7 17.
• • .

gb 1 gbs, Kanmazalp - Sirin,

10 .ie2 g6
• Konya 2011. Black's bishop is
(diagram) much more active than its coun­
ll.a4!? terpart, so White should better
R.Fischer played like this in exchange it. 18 .ig4!;!; - He has
•

similar positions in the French much more space and has an eas­
Defence. White prepares the de­ ier game on both sides of the
velopment of his bishop on a3 . board.

Conclusion
As a rule, in the variation with 3 . . . c6 White obtains effortlessly an
opening advantage. After 4.f4, Black has two main responses : 4 . . . g6
and 4 . . . '\WaS. In the first case, there arise favourable for White positions
from the Pirc Defence, since Black has played the move c7-c6, which is
not so necessary in this opening. Still, White must react very carefully
and defend reliably his d4-square.
In the second line (after 4 ... '\WaS), the position usually transfers into
an endgame which is slightly better for White, or there arise situations
of a "French" type, in which White maintains an edge thanks to his
superior development and extra space.

283
Index of Variations

Part 1. The Gruenfeld Defence

1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 d5 • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8

Chapter 1 1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 d5 4.cd .!Dxd5 5.e4 •

5 . . . .!Db6 . . . . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5 ... tt:Jxc3 6.bc ig7 7.tt:Jf3 0-0 8.ie2 tt:Jc6; 8 ... b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

A) 8.ie2 c5 9. 0-0 cd . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
B) 8.ie2 c5 9. 0-0 b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Chapter 2 1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 d5 4.cd .!Dxd5 5.e4 .!Dxc3 be •

J.g7 7 .!Df3 c5 8.J.e3

•

A) 8 . . . tt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B) 8 ... 0-0 . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C) 8 ... ig4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Chapter 3 1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 . .!Dc3 d5 4.cd .!Dxd5 5.e4 .!Dxc3 be

J.g7 7 .!Df3 c5 8.J.e3 %Ya5 9.%Yd2
•

9 . . . b6; 9 . . . tt:Jd7; 9 . . .ig4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

A) 9 . . . cd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B) 9 ... tt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Chapter 4 1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 d5 4.cd .!Dxd5 5.e4 .!Dxc3 be •

J.g7 7 .!Df3 c5 8 .ie3 %Ya5 9.%Yd2 0-0 10.gc1

• •

A) 10 . . . b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
B) 10 . . . tt:Jd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
C) 10 . . .ig4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
D) 10 ... e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
E) 10 cd . . . . . . . . . . . .
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
F) 10 ... E:d8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Part 2. The King's Indian Defence

1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 .ig7 • • • • • • . • • • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • 74

Chapter 5 1.d4 .!Df6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Dc3 J.g7 4.e4 0-0 5.i.e2 •

5 . . . c5; 5 . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

284
 Index of Variations

Chapter 6 l.d4 .!Llf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 S .ie2 • •

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
A) 5 . . . lt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
B) 5 . . . c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
C) 5 ... e5 . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 7 l.d4 .!Llf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 S.ie2 0-0 6 .ig5 • •

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
A) 6 . . . lt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
B) 6 . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Chapter 8 l.d4 lt:Jf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 S.ie2 0-0 6.ig5 •

.!L!bd7 7.lM2
various . . . . . . . . . 94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) 7 . . . e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
B) 7 ... c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Chapter 9 l.d4 .!Llf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 .ig7 4.e4 d6 S.ie2 0-0 6 .ig5 • •

.!Lla6 7.f4
7 . . . e5; 7 . . . c5 . . . . . . 104
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) 7 . . . Wfe8 . . . . . . . . . . 105
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B) 7 ... c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Chapter 10 l.d4 .!Llf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 ig7 4.e4 d6 S .ie2 0-0 6.ig5 • •

h6 7 .ie3
•

various . . . . . . . . . . 113
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) 7 . . . lt:Jbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
B) 7 ... e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
C) 7 . . . c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

Chapter 11 l.d4 .!Llf6 2.c4 g6 3 .!Llc3 ig7 4.e4 d6 S.ie2 0-0 6.1g5 •

cS 7.d5
various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .... . .
. 136 . . . . . . .

A) 7 . . . a6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
B) 7 b5 . .
... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . � . 142
C) 7 ... h6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
D) 7 . . . e6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

285
Index of Variations

Part 3. The Modern Defence

l.d4 g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

Chapter 12 1.d4 g6 2.c4

A) 2 . . . d6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
B) 2 . . ..tg7 3.e4 various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
B1) 3.e4 c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
B2) 3.e4 c5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
B3) 3.e4 lt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

Chapter 13 1.d4 g6 2.c4 1i..g7 3.e4 d6 4.lL!c3

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A) 4 . . . e5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
B) 4 . . . lL!c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
C) 4 ... lt:Jd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Part 4. The Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

l.d4 d6 2.e4 lLlf6 3.�c3 g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

Chapter 14 1.d4 d6 2.e4 lL!f6 3.lLlc3 g6 4.1i..e 3

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
4 . . . a6 S.h3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

Chapter 15 1.d4 d6 2.e4 lL!f6 3.lL!c3 g6 4.1i..e 3 1i..g7 5.Wd2

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
A) S . . . a6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
B) S . . . lt:Jc6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
c) s . lt:lg4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
. .

D) 5 . . . 0-0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
E) S . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224

Chapter 16 1.d4 d6 2.e4 lL!f6 3.lL!c3 g6 4.1i..e3 c6 5.h3

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
A) s i.g7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
...

B) s lt:lbd7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
...

286
 Index of Variations

Part 4. Black avoids the Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence

1.d4 d6 2.e4 lilf6 3.lilc3 • . . . . . . • . . . . • . . . • . • . • . . • • . . • . . . • . . . • 242

Chapter 17 1.d4 d6 2.e4 lilf6 3.ltlc3 e5 4.de de 5.'�xd8+ �xd8

6.Ag5
A) 6 . . . .id6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
B) 6 ... .ie7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
C) 6 . . . c6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
D) 6 . . . .ie6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

Chapter 18 l.d4 d6 2.e4 lilf6 3 . .!Llc3 lilbd7 4.f4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 . . . e5 5.lilf3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Chapter 19 1.d4 d6 2.e4 lilf6 3.lilc3 c6 4.f4

various . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
A) 4 . . . d5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
B) 4 . . . b5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
C) 4 . . .�b6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
D) 4 . . . g6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
E) 4 . . . �a5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

287