Critical Moments Check out these

bestselling titles from

Part Two USCFSales.com:

The critical positions we have been examining up to now have been

resolved mainly on positional considerations. But, of course, far more
frequently the solution to the position turns out to be purely tactical, or to
be partly tactical and partly strategic, in varying proportions. The
character of our annotations to all of the examples that follow must
change accordingly, becoming more detailed and concrete.

Yet is it worthwhile to tack on a detailed, variant-filled analysis to the

The games under examination, when it will exhaust many of our readers?
The ChessCafe
Puzzle Book (CD)
Would it not be better to settle for a general explanation of the important
Instructor ideas? Here, of course, it’s important to decide whom these notes are for.
by Karsten Müller

I generally write for higher-rated players, for whom the reading, and even
more so, the attempts to solve the exercises presented, lead inescapably to
Mark Dvoretsky the appearance of their own thoughts, ideas and suggestions. I try to
inspire them, and prepare to answer at least some of their questions.

Polgar – Polugaevsky
Aruba 1991
1st Match Game
A Practical Guide
to Rook Endgames (CD)
W? by Nikolay Minev

Black is going to free himself by means Read an excerpt here.

of the central advance 29…d5. If White
does not want to hand over the initiative
to her opponent, she must create counter-
threats.

Play through and download 29 Bc3-e1!?

the games from
ChessCafe.com in the White intends to open lines on the
DGT Game Viewer. kingside by 30 Bh4 and 31 f6. In Chess Informant, Judit Polgar assessed
this position as winning for White – evidently influenced by the actual
course of the game.
The Complete
DGT Product Line Victor Bologan:
29…d5?
Selected Games
1985-2004
Lev Polugaevsky follows his intended plan, but allows his king to fall
by Victor Bologan
under a deadly attack.
Read an excerpt here.
30 Bh4 Qd6 31 f6 Re6 (31…gf 32 g7!) 32 f7+ Kh8 33 Qg3!

White’s bishop has engineered a breach

in the opponent’s defenses; now it
becomes a “desperado,” or kamikaze
piece, prepared to go crashing off
somewhere, to open the far-right file for
the rook sacrifice on h6. For example,
33…Rb8 34 Be7! (but not 34 Bd8?, in
view of 34…Rxb2+! 35 Kxb2 Qb4+,
with perpetual check), as indicated by
Tibor Karolyi.
33…Ba4 34 Bf6!

34 Be7! would be equally strong.

34…Rxc1+ 35 Rxc1 Rxf6

If 35…gf, then 36 g7+ Bxg7 37 Rxh6+!.

36 Rcg1!

Once again threatening the rook sacrifice on h6. Black is defenseless.

36…Rf1+ 37 Rxf1 dxe4 38 Rfg1 Qxd3+ 39 Qxd3 ed 40 Re1 Bc2+ 41

Kc1 1-0

As in the preceding example, Black lost only because he failed to take

timely action against the strategic danger threatening him. He had to
forestall White’s f5-f6.

29…Bf8-e7! 30 Be1-h4 Qf6-f8

Now the pawn sacrifice 31 f6?! Bxf6 32

Rf1 Re6 gives White nothing. And after
31 Bxe7 Rxe7 32 Rf1 Qf6! (stopping 33
f6) 33 Ne2 d5 34 Ng3, a double-edged
position arises, in which both sides have
roughly equal chances.

And so, the obvious bishop transfer to

h4 gives no advantage – it only sets the
opponent a problem (not a very complex
one), which he failed to solve.

White could also have tried to prevent the planned advance d6-d5 by
another means. The sortie 29 Qa7!? deserved serious consideration, in
order to threaten 30…Rxh6!

B?

For example, 29…d5? 30 Rxh6! Bc5

(30…gh 31 Qh7#) 31 Rh5(h7)! Bxa7 32
Rgh1 Kf8 33 Bb4+, and mates.

There are several ways to parry this

threat, not all of them equivalent: in
many variations, White does succeed in
getting to the black king. Some of the
attacking ideas are so subtle that they
cannot be properly evaluated over the board – making such a judgment
without a computer would be very difficult, making it difficult to decide
on such play (transferring the bishop to h4 was more natural and
understandable). But if White succeeds, then his opponent would have a
much harder task to solve than he did in the game.

29…Re7?! 30 Qxa6 is dubious. Black has lost a pawn, and his pieces do
not coordinate well.

29…Qe7?! would be met, not by 30 Qxa6 d5, with counterplay, but by 30

Qf2! On 30…Qf6, White wins with 31 Bd2! (with the deadly threat of 32
Bg5!), when 31…Be7 no longer works, in view of 32 Bxh6! And after
30…d5, the same maneuver, 31 Bd2! is very strong; but there is also
another, more spectacular solution: 31 Rxh6! gh 32 f6 Qe6 33 f7+ Kh8
(33…Kg7 would be no better) 34 Bd2!+–, followed by 35 Qh2.

29…Be7?! looks enticing, considering the variation 30 Qxa6?! d5 31 ed

Bxd5 32 Qxf6 Bxf6, with excellent compensation for the sacrificed pawn.
White continues her attack with the technique we have already seen: 30
Bd2! d5 (30…Ba4 31 Bg5! Qf8 32 Bxh6! gh 33 Qe3! Bg5 34 Rxg5! hg
35 Qxg5 is a pretty line: despite the extra rook, Black is defenseless) 31
Bg5! Qd6

W?

The 32 f6 break is good here only for a

draw: 32…gf! 33 Qf2 (33 Rxh6 fg 34
Qf2 Qf6 35 Rh8+! Kg7! 36 Rh7+ Kg8!
= ) 33…Ba4!? 34 Rxh6 Rc2 35 Rh8+!
Kg7! =.

The bishop sacrifice 32 Bxh6! gh 33

Qe3! (but not 33 Rxh6 Rc7!, preparing
34…Bf6) would be much stronger: 33…
Rb8 (33…Qf6 34 Rxh6+–) 34 Rh2!? (White could also try the
straightforward 34 Rxh6 Rxb2+ 35 Kxb2 Qb4+ 36 Nb3 Qa3+ 37 Kc2 Qa2
+ 38 Kd1 Qxb3+ 39 Ke2, and the king escapes the checks) 34…Bf6 35
g7! Bg5 36 Rxg5+–. Note that the apparently equivalent 34 Rg2?! would
leave the b2-square unguarded at the end of this variation, allowing Black
to seize the initiative by 36…Rxb2+! 37 Kxb2 Rb8+.

These variations give some idea of the dangers facing Black. It seems that
the only safe way out of his problems lay in the move 29…Ra8! If Black
plays this, he needs to be sure that 30 Rxh6?! Rxa7 31 Rh7 will not work,
in view of 31…Re6! 32 Rgh1 Qxg6 33 fg Rxg6. And 30 Qb6 Rec8 leads
to a complex position, where both sides have chances.

Bilek – Alster
Prague 1955

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 a6 5 g3 Nf6 6 Bg2 Qc7 7 0-0 Be7 8 b3

Nc6 9 Bb2 Nxd4 10 Qxd4 0-0 11 c4 d6 12 Nc3 Bd7 13 Rac1 Rac8 14
Rfd1 Qa5 15 Qd2 Qb4

W?

The first thing that strikes one is that

White could get a favorable endgame by
16 Nd5 Nxd5 17 ed Qxd2 18 Rxd2;
however, after 18…e5, White’s
advantage is not great.

Istvan Bilek found another, tactical way,

which looks more promising.

16 c4-c5!! Rc8xc5

Black cannot avoid the main line of the combination:

16…Qxc5? 17 Nd5+–.

16…dc? 17 e5 Nd5 17 Bxd5!+–.

16…Ne8? 17 Nd5+–.

16…Rc6? 17 e5 (17 Na4 Qxd2 18 Rxd2 is not bad either) 17…de 18 Nd5
Nxd5 19 Qxb4 Nxb4 20 Rxd7+–.

From here, up to a certain point, the game proceeded almost by force.

17 Nc3-d5! Nf6xd5 18 Qd2xb4 Nd5xb4 19 Rc1xc5

Taking the rook obviously leads to an

inferior endgame for Black. Sometimes,
 it makes sense to jump out of the
game track laid down by one’s
opponent, even if it costs some
material. Just so here: Black could have
tried the exchange sacrifice 19…Bc6 20
Rc4 d5, when he would have knight and
pawn for the rook, with his pieces
decently placed.

But in any case, would this have been the lesser or the greater evil? I
think, greater: after 21 Rcd4! de 22 Ba3 Nd5 23 Bxe7 Nxe7 24 Bxe4,
White retains good winning chances. It is not yet time for such desperate
measures.

19…d6xc5 20 Rd1xd7 Be7-f6 21 e4-e5 Rf8-d8! 22 Rd7xb7

Sensing the onset of a critical moment

sometimes comes down merely to
seeing that one has a choice. In this
game, Black comes up more than once
against a subtle choice – this is why his
defense proved so difficult.

22…Rd8-d1+ 23 Bg2-f1 Bf6-d8

Besides the obvious check, followed by

23…Bd8, Black also had to examine
22…Nd3?! 23 ef (not only the bishop, but also the e5-pawn was under
attack) 23…Nxb2.

Black has equality after 24 fg Rd1+ 25 Bf1 Ra1. It is harder to assess the
consequences of 24 Bf1 gf 25 Bxa6 Rd1+ 26 Kg2 Rd2 and 24 Ra7 gf 25
Rxa6 Rd1+ 26 Bf1, but it is clear that Black would have to fight for the
draw.

24 Rc7!? gf 25 Rxc5 Rd2

After something like 26 Ra5 Nd3 27

Rxa6 Nxf2, Black retains counterplay.
The question is only how realistic it is –
whether his kingside threats will prove
enough to distract his opponent from the
advance of his passed pawns. In any
case, taking on these variations would
have meant that Black would have been
playing va banque. Sometimes, that
decision has to be taken – though
apparently, not here.

22…Rd8-d1+ 23 Bg2-f1 Bf6-d8 24 a2-a3

24 Ba3 a5 is evidently weaker.

24…Nb4-c6!

Still another far from obvious move. 24…Nc2?! 25 Rb8! Kf8 26 Rc8 is
hardly better, but he should have considered 24…Na2?!, taking away a
square from the dark-squared bishop before attacking it with the rook –
although it would seem that Black could not solve his problems that way,
either. White would retain the advantage even after the simple 25 a4 g6
26 Ba3 Nb4 27 Kg2 a5 28 Bc4; still more accurate would be 25 Kg2 Rd2
26 Rb8 g6 (26…Kf8 27 a4 Rxb2 28 Rxd8+ Ke7 29 Rc8+/–) 27 a4 Kg7
28 Ba3+/–.

25 Kg1-g2
White would get nothing special out of 25 Bc3!? Kf8 26 Kg2 Rc1 27 Bd2
Rc2 28 Bf4 (28 Be3 Nxe5) 28…g5 29 Be3 Be7 (29…Nxe5? 30 Rb8) 30
Bxa6 Nxe5 31 h3 c4 32 a4 cb 33 Rxb3 Ra2 34 Rb8+ Kg7 35 Bb5 g4!?+/=.

B?

Here was the critical moment for Black,

in my opinion. Up to this point, he had
played the best moves, but here Ladislav
Alster finally broke under the strain.

25…Rd1-d2?

A natural, but mistaken move, allowing

White to make a significant
improvement in the position of his dark-squared bishop by getting it to e3.

Not much would have been changed by 25…Rb1? 26 Bc3 Rc1 (26…a5
27 Bd3 Rc1 28 Bb2 Rd1 29 Be4+–) 27 Bd2 and 28 Be3+–.

He had to play 25…Ba5!!, without fearing 26 b4 cb 27 ab Bxb4 28 Rb6,

in view of 28…Rd2! 29 Rxb4 Nxb4 30 Bc3 Ra2!? (30…Rd5 does not
lose, either: 31 Bxb4 Rxe5 32 Bxa6+/=) 31 Bxb4 a5, with counterplay.
You will see this same opposition of forces – rook and distant passed
pawn vs. two minor pieces – in the next example as well.

White would probably have selected 26 Bxa6 Rb1 27 Rb5! Rxb2 28

Rxc5 Rxb3 29 Rxc6. But the opposite-color bishops ending a pawn down
is most likely drawn. After 29…g5 30 a4, Black could play either 30…
Rb4 31 Bb5 Re4+/=, or 30…Rc3 31 Bc4 Ra3 32 Bb5 Ra2+/=.

26 Bb2-c1 Rc1-c2 27 Bc1-e3

Two powerful bishops, plus his opponent’s pawn weaknesses, assure

White an easy victory.

27…Kf8 28 Bd3 Rc3 29 Bc4 Na5 30 Bxc5+ Ke8 31 Bb4 Nxb7 32 Bxc3
Nc5 33 b4 Na4 34 Bd4 Kd7 35 Bxa6 Kc6 36 Bd3 Kd5 37 Ba1 1-0

Portisch – Gheorghiu
Siegen Olympiad 1970

1 c4 c5 2 Nf3 g6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 Nc6 5 e4 Nf6 6 Nc3 Nxd4 7 Qxd4 d6 8

Be3 Bg7 9 f3 0-0 10 Qd2 Qa5 11 Rc1 a6 (11…Be6) 12 b3 Bd7 13 Bd3
Rfc8 14 0-0 b5 15 Rc2! Be6 16 cb ab 17 Rfc1 Bd7

W?

Florin Gheorghiu probably rejected 17…

b4 because of 18 Nb5 Rxc2 19 Rxc2
Bd7 20 Nd4+/=. Now, however, he is
ready to advance the pawn to b4. Quiet
continuations could hardly allow White
to try for any advantage. The question is
how to assess the consequences of the
tactical transformation of the position
undertaken by Lajos Portisch.

18 Nc3xb5!! Rc8xc2 19 Rc1xc2 Bd7xb5

 20 Rc2-c8+!?

Portisch awards the text move two

exclamation marks, while assessing the
position after 20 Qxa5! Rxa5 21 Bd2
Rxa2! as won for Black – but he’s
wrong! Let’s extend the variations: 22
Rxa2 Bxd3 23 Ra8+ Bf8 24 Bh6 Nd7
25 Re8!

On 25…e5 or 25…e6, White plays 26

Rd8. If 25…f5, then 26 Bxf8 (26 ef?
Kf7) 26…Nxf8 27 Rxe7 fe 28 fe, and
Black has to struggle to draw – rook
and distant passed pawn in such
situations usually outweigh the two
minor pieces.

White could try gaining a tempo in the

above variation by playing 21 b4?!
(instead of 21 Bd2), the idea being 21…
Rxa2 22 Rxa2 Bxd3 23 Ra8+ etc. But after the reply 21…Ra3! 22 Bxb5
Rxe3 23 Rc8+ Bf8 24 Bc6 Re1+! 25 Kf2 Rb1 26 b5 Kg7 27 a4 e6 28 a5
d5, Black is at least not worse.

20…Ra8xc8

Black must give up the queen. He gets into a hopeless position after 20…
Bf8 21 Rxa8 Qxd2 22 Bxd2 Bxd3 23 Bh6 Nd7 24 a4! (compared to the
variations examined previously, White keeps not one, but two queenside
pawns). 20…Be8 is also joyless: 21 Qxa5 Rxa5 22 a4! threatens both 23
Bb5 Kf8 24 b4 and 24 Bb6 Rg5 25 a5.

21 Qd2xa5 Bb5xd3 22 b3-b4!

B?

In Portisch’s opinion, White has a great

advantage. The game’s further course
confirms his assessment: 22…Nd7 23
b5 d5!? (23…Bc3 24 Qa6 and 25 a4) 24
b6 (24 ed Be5 is weaker, allowing the
bishop to join the defense) 24…d4 25 b7
Rb8 26 Bf4 e5 27 Qc7 ef (27…Bb5 28
Qc8+ Bf8 29 Bxe5! Rxc8 30 bcQ Nxe5
31 Qb8+–) 28 Qxd7 Be5 29 Qd5 Re8?
1-0 Black resigned, in view of 30 Qxe5 (I have made use of Portisch’s
notes from Informant).

“Things aren’t so dark, up close!,” as Vladimir Vysotsky assured us in his

song, “The Honor of the Chess Crown – The Game.” Black had at his
disposal an effective plan of defense, indicated by Vadim Zvjaginsev.
According to the old rule, the rook should be placed behind the
furthest-advanced passed pawn. But in order to free the rook, Black
first has to make “luft” for the king.

22…h7-h5! 23 b4-b5 Rc8-c2 24 b5-b6 Rc2-b2 25 b6-b7 Rb2-b1+

25…Kh7!? 26 Qc7 Rb1+ was good, too.

26 Kg1-f2 Rb1-b2+

Now 27 Kg1 Rb1+ is a repetition of

moves, but does White have anything
 better? After 27 Ke1 Nd7 28 Qc7 Kh7
unclear, the knight is taboo: 29 Qxd7??
Bc3+. And on 27 Kg3 Bf1 (just not 27…
Kh7?, because of the double attack with
28 Qa3+–), White’s king is not
comfortable. On 28 Bf2, the simplest
reply would be 28…Kh7 unclear.

Vukic – Sibarevic
Banja Luka 1979

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dc 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Bxc4 c5 6 0-0 a6 7 a4 Nc6 8 Qe2 cd

9 Rd1 Be7 10 ed 0-0 11 Nc3 Nd5 (11…Nb4 12 Ne5 Bd7 was preferable)
12 Qe4 Ncb4 13 Ne5 b6

W?

In a game Rashkovsky – Kupreichik

(Minsk 1985), White tried the primitive
14 Nxd5 ed 15 Qf3 Be6 16 Bb3 Rc8,
and obtained almost nothing.

The following tactical shot promises

White more.

14 Ne5-c6!! Nb4xc6 15 Nc3xd5 Bc8-b7

White would have an obvious advantage after 15…ed 16 Bxd5. Matters

are more complicated after 15…Ra7.

W?

Still another critical position for White –

one that has been seen frequently in
practice.

A) 16 Nf4 Nb4 (Milov – Spangenberg,

Buenos Aires 1996) promises little.
Black’s pieces all come to good squares,
his position is solid, and White’s
intended attack, even after Vadim
Milov’s recommendation of 17 Ra3!? doesn’t look very threatening.

B) In the game Susan Polgar – Magem Badals, Pamplona 1991/92, White

continued: 16 Nxe7+ Nxe7 17 Bg5 Qd7 18 Bxe7 Qxe7 19 d5 ed 20 Bxd5
Qf6 21 b4 Re7, with approximate equality. White should not have traded
so much off: 18 Qg4!? Rc7 19 Bd3 was stronger, retaining some initiative.

I think it makes sense to induce a weakening of Black’s pawn structure by

16 Bd3! f5, and then to play 17 Nxe7+ Nxe7 18 Qe3!, intending 19 Bc4
(18 Qe2 is inferior, because of 18…Nc6, with a counterattack against the
pawn at d4). If 18…Rc7, then 19 Bd2, with advantage to White.

Black has yet another continuation at his disposal, a suggestion of

grandmaster Alexander Motylev: 15…Bd6!?.
 It might seem that White could refute
this move by 16 Nf6+!? gf 17 Bh6 f5 18
Qxc6. However, Black would take on f6
with the queen: 16…Qxf6! 17 Qxc6
Qe7. For example, 18 Qxa8 Bb7 19 Qa7

B?

The obvious 19…Qc7 allows White to

gain the upper hand by 20 d5! Ra8 (or
20…Bxh2+ 21 Kh1 Ra8 22 Qxb7 Qxb7
23 de+/–) 21 Qxb7! Qxb7 22 de Qe7 23
ef+ Kf8 24 g3 Bc5 25 b3!+/– (the f2-
square can now be protected from a2 by
the rook).

What saves Black is the standard two-

bishop sacrifice: 19…Bxh2+!! 20 Kxh2 Qh4+ 21 Kg1 Bxg2! 22 f3! (the
only way to play for a win) 22…Bxf3! 23 Rd2 Qe1+ 24 Bf1 Qg3+ 25
Rg2 Bxg2 26 Bxg2 Qe1+ 27 Bf1 Qg3+ 28 Kh1 Qh4+ 29 Kg2 Qg4+ (29…
Rc8) 30 Kf2 Qxd4+, with a likely draw.

White still maintains somewhat better prospects by declining the rook

offer in favor of 18 Bg5! Qc7 (18…Qxg5 19 Qxa8) 19 Qxc7 Bxc7 20 d5
+/=. Additionally, it would be good for him to induce the weakening of
the opposing pawn chain by 16 Bd3!? f5 first, and only then play 17 Nf6
+!. In the line 17…Qxf6 (17…gf!? 18 Qxc6+/=) 18 Qxc6 Qe7 19 Bg5!
Qc7 20 Qxc7 Bxc7 21 Rac1, White’s position is to be preferred; the
question is – by how much?

Black could have played this, and the outcome of the game would have
remained unclear. But the game continuation was also acceptable for him.

16 Nd5xe7+

16 Bd3!? g6 17 Nxe7+ Qxe7 18 d5 was also worth considering.

B?

After 18…ed 19 Qxe7 Nxe7 20 Be3,

Black has a difficult endgame.

He should have steeled himself to play

18…Nb4!, not fearing either 19 Bh6
Rfd8, or 19 d6!? Qxd6 20 Qxb7 Nxd3
21 Ra3 Rad8!? (21…Nc5 22 Rxd6 Nxb7
23 Rxb6 Rfd8 24 g3+/=) 22 Raxd3
Qxd3 23 Rxd3 Rxd3 24 g3 Rd1+ 25
Kg2 Rxc1 =.

16…Qd8xe7 17 d4-d5!

B?

This is obviously the position Milan

Vukic had in mind when he began his
tactical operation. Black is in
difficulties; however, just as in the
preceding examples, I do not believe
they were insurmountable. On the other
 hand (again, just as in the preceding
examples), Black did not, in fact,
manage to cope with the task before
him, and lost without a fight.

This is probably no accident. By finding an idea our opponent did not

expect at a critical moment, we exert pressure on him, both in the
purely chess sense and in a psychological sense, which he sometimes
will be unable to overcome, either because he lacks coolness, or
because he lacks the necessary mastery.

Black would have stood much worse after 17…Nb4 18 Qe2 Rfd8 (18…
Nxd5?? 19 Bxd5 Bxd5 20 Rxd5+–) 19 de Rxd1+ 20 Qxd1 fe 21 Bd2+/–.

He had to play for exchanges:

17…e6xd5! 18 Bc4xd5 Qe7xe4 19 Bd5xe4 Rf8-e8 20 Be4-f3 Nc6-a5

As long as White has not played Be3, it is important to trade off one of
his powerful bishops.

21 Bf3xb7 Na5xb7 22 Bc1-e3 b6-b5+/=

Compare the end-position of this variation with what actually happened in

the game.

17…Na5? 18 Bd3 g6 19 Bh6 Rfe8 20 Qd4 e5 21 Qxb6+– Qd8 22 Be3!?

(22 Qb4) 22…Qxb6 23 Bxb6 Nb3 24 Ra3 Bxd5 25 Bxg6 (25 f4!) 25…
hg 26 Rxd5 Nd4 27 g3 Rab8 28 a5 Re6 29 Re3! Nc6 30 Rd7 e4 31 f4!
ef 32 Rxe6 fe 33 Rd6 Ne7 34 Rxe6 Kf7 35 Re3 1-0

Gulko – Ljubojevic
Niksic 1978

B?

White is the exchange ahead, for which

his opponent can immediately pick up a
pawn as compensation. Yes, he can – but
he should not. With opposite-sided
castling, the chance to attack the
enemy king is usually worth more
than material – in such situations the
first thing to look for is a way to
develop our initiative.

33…f6-f5!

This central break is aimed at opening the h1-a8 diagonal. Had Ljubomir
Ljubojevic played thus, it would have been Boris Gulko who would have
been forced to worry about maintaining the balance. For starters, he
would have had to guess what his opponent’s idea was, and to figure out
that the natural 34 ef? allows Black to develop a killing attack by 34…
h3!!, and if 35 Nb4, then 35…a5!. The only way to safeguard the king
would have been to return the exchange.

34 Rf1-f3!

Some possible variations:

34…fe 35 Rxe4 Bc6 36 Rxe6 Bxf3 37 gf Nf6 38 Nf2!? unclear, or 38

c5!? unclear.

34…Bc6 35 ef Bxf3 36 gf Qc6 37 Rg2! (more active than 37 Ne1 Nh6 38

Rxe6 Nxf5 39 Qd5=/+) 37…Qxf3 (37…ef 38 Qe2) 38 Qe2 Qh3+ 39 Bh2
unclear.
And now, let us see what happened in the game.

33…Qxc4? 34 f5!?

The point behind this move is to gain the central square d5 for White’s
knight. It would have been more accurate, however, to play 34 Rf3!,
completely liquidating the threat of h4-h3 and getting the rook onto the
third rank for an attack on the enemy king. White would threaten 35 Ne5,
followed by 36 Rc3. On 34…Qxa4, there follows 35 Nb2, and the knight
occupies the important square c4, with decisive effect. After 34…Kb8, 35
f5!? would have become more powerful, as may be seen from the
variations 35…ef? 36 ef Ne5 37 Qe3+–, and 35…Ne5 36 Nxe5 de 37 Qe3
+/–, when the queen gets to a7 with tempo. And White’s attack would
probably have been simpler still after 35 Nb2! (instead of 35 f5).

B?

34…e5?

Positional capitulation – once again, the

strong Yugoslav grandmaster falters at
the task set before him. 34…Bc6 would
not be much better, in view of 35 Qb4!
Qxb4 36 Nxb4, with a clear advantage.
But after 34…ef! 35 Rxf5 (35 ef? h3!)
35…Bc6 36 Qb4 (36 Rf4!?+/=) 36…
Qxb4 37 Nxb4 Bxa4 38 Nd5 Bd8+/=, the outcome would still be unclear.

35 Nb4 Bf7?!

Black follows the path of least resistance. Of course, his position would
be bad after 35…Bxa4 36 Rf3 Kb8 too, but there would have been at least
some hope. In difficult situations, one should take the extra material –
it might come in handy, if your opponent finds some second-best
moves.

36 Rf3 Kb8 37 Rc3! Qxb4 38 Rc8+ Rxc8 39 Qxb4, and White later won.

[ChessCafe Home Page] [Book Review] [Columnists]

[Endgame Study] [The Skittles Room] [Archives]
[Links] [Online Bookstore] [About ChessCafe.com] [Contact Us]

© 2008 CyberCafes, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

"ChessCafe.com®" is a registered trademark of Russell Enterprises, Inc.