The Ultimate Dragon

Volume 2: Classical
and Other Variations

Eduard Gufeld,
Oleg Stetsko

B.T. Batsford Ltd, London

First published in 200 I
© Eduard Gufeld, Oleg Stetsko 200I

ISBN 0 7134 8689 9

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.

A catalogue record for this book is
available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be

reproduced, by any means, without prior permission
of the publisher.

Printed in Great Britain by

Creative Print and Design (Wales), Ebbw Vale
for the publishers,
B.T. Batsford Ltd,
9 Blenheim Court,
Brewery Road,
London N7 9NT

A member of the Ch�lis Group pic

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK

 Contents

Preface 5
Introduction 6
Classical and Other Variations 7
1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 (6 .ie2 i.g7)
Chapter 1: Classical Dragon with 7 .ie3 lDc6 7
Line 1 : 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd2 8
Line 2: 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 16
Line 3: 8 0-0 0-0 9 lDb3 18
Line 4: 8 lDb3 33
Line 5: 8 h4 38
Line 6: 8 'ii'd2 39
Chapter 2: Classical Dragon with 7 lDb3 (7 0-0 8 0-0 lDc6)
... 42
Line 7: 9 'it>h1 43
Line 8: 9 i.g5 48
Line 9: 9 lie1 65
Chapter 3: Variations with 6 i.c4 (6 ... .ig7 7 h3 0-0) 70
1 ) Continuations with the development of the bishop 8 .ie3 (8...lDc6)
Line 1 0 : 9 i.b3lDxd4 71
Line 11: 9 .ib3lDa5 72
Line 12: 9 .ib3.id7 10 0-0 l:tc8 75
Line 13: 9 .ib3 i.d7 10 0-0 'ii'a5 79
Line 14: 9 0-0 86
2) Continuations with the development of the bishop on g5
Line 1 5: 8 0-0 lDc6 9 llel .id7 1 0 .ig5 88
Line 1 6: 8 i.b3 a6 9 0-0 b5 1 0 l:te1 .ib7 1 1 i.g5 89
Chapter 4: Variations with 6 .ig5 92
Line 1 7: 7 'ii'd2 92
Line 18: 7 .ib5 93
Chapter 5: Levenfish Attack 6 f4 97
Line 19: 6 ... .ig7 97
Line 20: 6...lDc6 99
Line 21: 6... lDbd7 105
Chapter 6: Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 110
Line 22: 6...lDc6 7 lDde2 Ill
Line 23: 6...ltJc6 7 i.g2 12 1
Line 24: 6 ... i.g7 126
 Preface

hat does the that it is not possible to cover

W
modem "Dragon" everything related to such an
represent? Nearly immense subject and have restricted
half a century of the range of their monograph to the
investigation and Eurely classical treatment I e4 c5 2
application in lll f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lt::lxd4 lt::lf6 5
competitive play. The practical lt::lc3 g6, leaving the so-called
experiences of several generations "Accelerated Dragon", 2... lt::lc6 3 d4
of chess players have been cxd4 4 lt::lxd4 g6, for another time.
particularly intense in the latter part The whole range of systems
of the 20th century and have characteristic of the classical
enabled the Dragon to grow into a variation of the Dragon can be
monumental structure. As with all divided into 3 main directions:
social structures there have been
I) The Rauzer Attack---6 .te3
fluctuations in its development; on
.tg7 7 f3 followed by 8 'if'd2 with
occasion it has receded into the
the inclusion of queenside castling
shadowy background of unfashion­
and development of the bishop on
able inventions, but it has also
c4·
enjoyed starry moments when the
most eminent grandmasters have
2.) Classical variations---6 .te2
with the development of the second
lauded it to the skies. It seems that
bishop on e3;
in recent years the Dragon has been
3) Modem variations with the
passing through just such a period.
fianchetto of the light-squared
The best confirmation of this was
bishop---6 g3
seen in the Kasparov-Anand (New
In a separate group we have the
York 1995) title match where the
less frequently seen continuations 6
world champion used it to good
h3, 6 .tg5, 6 f4
effect.
As befits the richness of its ideas Without doubt in modem practice
and the ramifications of its various centre stage is taken by the Rauzer
plans, the Dragon variation is Attack, which the authors look at in
regarded as one of the most Volume I, dealing with all other
complicated openings employed in systems in this book.
modem practice. The authors realise
 Introduction

In Volume One we looked at the

theory of the Dragon variation: 1 e4
c5 2 tll f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lt:Jxd4 lt:Jf6
5 lt:Jc3 g6 examining the Rauzer
Attack (6 i.e3 i.g7 7 D). In this
volume we shall investigate all other
main directions of play.

6 i.e2-Chapters I and 2
6 i.c4-Chapter 3
i.g5 Variations-Chapter 4
6 f4-Chapter 5
6 g3-Chapter 6

Symbols used in this book

+ check
+- winning advantage for White
± large advantage for White
;!; slight advantage for White
-+ winning advantage for Black
+ large advantage for Black
+ slight advantage for Black
level position
good move
!! outstanding move
!? interesting move
?! dubious move
? bad move
?? blunder
1-0 the game ends in a win for White
0-1 the game ends in a win for Black
1h-1h the game ends in a draw
(ch) championship
(m) match
(izt) interzonal tournament
(zt) zonal tournament
(ol) olympiad
 1: Classical Dragon
with 6 �e2 �g7 7 �e3

(I e4 cS 2 ttJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Classical Dragon with 7 ..ie3

lbxd4 ltJf6 5 tbc3 g6)
(l e4 cS 2 ttJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
6 ..te2 i.g7 ltJxd4 ltJf6 5 tbc3 g6 6 ..ie2 ..tg7)

7 ..te3
Completing a solid system of de­
velopment of the minor pieces. On
this square the bishop reinforces the
centre and prepares for operations
on both flanks.
7 tbc6
.•.

Lines associated with the develop­

ment of the bishop on e2 and subse­
quent kingside castling were
practised as long ago as the 1 9th
century and therefore it is custom­
ary to group them under the name of
Classical Dragon.
8 0-0
White's main direction of play is Immediate kingside castling is the
linked to the development of his classical plan.
dark-squared bishop on e3 or g5. In The game takes an independent
the second case White moves away direction if White refrains from
his knight as it has insufficient pro­ kingside castling. Main deviations
tection on d4. are 8 lL!b3 (Line 4), 8 h4 (Line 5)
and 8 'ii'd2 (Line 6).
7 .tel-this chapter 8 g4 is not in the spirit of the posi­
7 lbb3-Chapter 2 tion and allows 8.. d5! 9 tbxc6 (no
.

better is 9 ..ib5 ..id7 10 exd5lL!b4 +

 8 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3

or 9 exd5lL!xd5 l 0lL!xd5 'ii'xd5 II 14 'ii'c l a6 15lL!d4lL!xd4 16 .i.xd4

.i.f3 'ii'c4 =i=) 9...bxc6 1 0 e5lL!d7 II lL!g4 1 7 .i.xg4 .i.xd4 18 lL!e2 .i.a7
f4 e6 1 2 0-0 0-0 and Black's posi­ with an active position for Black,
tion is preferable, Rodi-Miiller, Bad Ciocaltea-Beliavsky, Lucerne (ol)
Elster 1940. 1982.
8...0-0 2) 9 �h l d5 (also deserving atten­
tion is the counterattack with the
other pawn: 9 ...lL!xd4 1 0 .i.xd4 e5!?
II .i.e3 .i.e6 12 f4 exf4 13 .i.xf4
'ifb6 1 4 lib l llfc8 15 .i.g5!lL!d7 1 6
lL!d5 .i.xd5 1 7 'ii'xd5 llle5 18 c3
llc5 19 'ii'd2 'ii'c6 with equal
chances, Barua-Gufeld, New Delhi
1984) l 0 exd5 ( l 0 lL!xc6 is also
seen: IO ... bxc6 II e5lL!e4 1 2lL!xe4
dxe4 13 'ii'xd8 llxd8 1 4 llfd l .i.e6
15 .i.d4 f5 with approximately equal
chances, Adams-Khalifman, Las
Palmas 1993) 10 ...lL!xd5 (or
In this position White's main con­ lO...lL!b4 II 'ii'd2lL!bxd5 12lL!xd5
tinuations are: lL!xd5 13 .i.h6 .i.xh6 1 4 'ii'xh6 'ifb6
15lL!b3 a5 1 6 c4lL!f6 17 c5 'ii'c7=
9 1i'd2-Line l N.Nilsson-Inkiov, Copenhagen
9 f4--Line 2 1990) l l lL!xd5 lL!xd4 12 .i.xd4
9lL!b3-Line 3 'ii'xd5 13 .i.xg7 'ii'xdl 14 llaxdl
�xg7 with an equal endgame,
On the prophylactic continuations Femandez-Komljenovic, Olot 1992.
9 h3 or 9 �hl Black gets the chance
to attack the centre by ...d6-d5 with
good coi.mterplay. Line 1
l ) 9 h3 d5 1 0 exd5
I a) l O...lL!xd5 l l lL!xd5 'ii'xd5 (1 e4 cS 2 lL!f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
(worth considering is l l...lL!xd4 12 lL!xd4 lL!f6 S lL!c3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
.i.xd4 'ii'xd5 13 .i.xg7 'ii'xd1 1 4 .i.e3 lL!c6)
llaxdl �xg7 1 5 .i.f3 .i. f5 with an
equal ending, Levenfish-Chekhover, 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd2
USSR 1939) 12 .i.f3 'ii'a5 13lL!xc6
bxc6 14 'ii'c l (or 14 .i.xc6?! l1b8 15
'ii'd5 'ii'c7 + Ravinsky-Lisitsin,
USSR 1 944) l 4....l:.b8 15 c3 c5 (af­
ter l 5 ... 1i'c7?! 1 6 lld l lte8 17 b3 e5
18 .i.c5 and Black stands worse,
Knox-Ward, Oakham 1 994) 16 l:ld1
.i.b7 with even chances.
l b) IO...lL!b4 11 d6 (or 1 1 'ii'd2
lL!bxd5 12lL!xd5lL!xd5 13 .i.h6 e5=
Thorhallsson-Grenn, Gausdal 1991)
I l...'ii'xd6 12lL!db5 'ifb8 13 a3lL!c6
 Classical Dragon with 6 1Le2 Jig7 7 iLe3 9

A very old plan, already more 'ii'xd5 itJd6 13 'ii'h3 iJ..e6 14 itJd5
than 100 years old. White allows itJf5 15 c4 ltJxe3 16 itJf6+ 1Lxf6 17
...d6-d5, but hopes in this case for a l:xdS l:taxdS 1 S 'il'xe3 iJ..xb2 and
lead in development which should Black has sufficient compensation
tell if lines are opened. for the queen, Vasiukov-Gufeld,
USSR (ch) 1959.
Black's main continuations are: It is also easy to parry the attempt
to cramp Black's position after 10
1A: 9. . . d5 ltJxc6 bxc6 11 e5 llleS 12 f4 f6 13
18: 9 ••. ltJg4 iLD l:.bS 14 1Lxa7 l:xb2 15 ..id4
1C: 9. . .iJ..d 7 Jif5 16 l:fd I fxe5 17 fxe5 llb4 with
lD: 9 .•. ltJxd4 equality, Minev-Gufeld, Sofia 1967.
10...itJxd5
1A 10 ... itJb4? 1 1 d6! 'ii'xd6 I2 itJcb5!
leads to an obvious advantage for
(1 e4 cS 2 itJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 White.
ltJxd4 itJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 1Le2 iJ..g7 7 1 1 ltJxc6
iJ..e3 ltJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd 2) Here already I I l:fd1 allows
Black the p�wn sacrifice 1 1 ...ltJxc3!
9 d5
... I2 ltJxc6 1Vxd2 13 ltJxe7+ �hS I4
l:xd2 1Lxc3! 15 bxc3 itJf5 to obtain
good counterplay on the queen's
flank.
At first the continuation 1 1 ltJxd5
was popular, but it leads to mass ex­
changes: 1 l . ..itJxd4! 12 c4 (or 12
1Lc4 iJ..e6 13 iJ..xd4 iJ..xd5 1 4 iJ..xg7
1Lxc4 1 5 'ii'h6 iJ..x fl 16 iJ..xf8 1i'xf8
with full equality, Honfi-Gufeld,
Kecskemet 196S) 1 2 ...e5 1 3 f4 iJ..e6
1 4 fxe5 ltJxe2+ 15 'il'xe2 iJ..xd5 16
l:ad1 1Lxc4 (stronger is 16 ... 1Lxe5
17 .:.xd5 'ii'c7 1S h3 llfdS 19 l:fxd1
The most consistent move, llxd5 20 l:xd5 a6 21 'ii'd2 l:eS 22
through which Black smashes the b3 and White has the better chances
centre. in view of his pawn majority on the
10 exdS queen's flank, Berg-Thomert, Swe­
10 l:.fd1 is a trappy move with the den 1995) 17 'ii'xc4 'ii'cS 1S 'ii'xcS
idea, after IO...li)xe4? 1 1 ltJxc6 l:.axcS 19 l:.d7 1Lxe5 20 l:xb7 a5 21
1Lxc3 I2 'ii'xd5 'ii'xd5 13 ltJxe7+ b3 l:c2 with an even endgame,
�g7 1 4 ltJxd5 iJ..xb2, to upset the Panchenko-Gufeld, Daugavpils
coordination of Black's active 197S.
pieces, 15 l:ab1 iJ..e5 16 f4 JibS 17 l l .bxc6 12 .:.ad1
..

iJ..d4+ �h6 1S iJ..O f5 19 g4! and to 12 l:fd1 is also seen, then

attack the king, but this leads to 12...1i'c7 13 iJ..d4 e5 14 iJ..c5 l:r.dS 15
nothing substantial if Black first ex­ 1Lc4 iJ..g4 I6 l:e1 itJb6 I7 iJ..d3 iif5
changes knights, l O... ltJxd4 11 and Black maintains equality,
'ii'xd4. For example: 1 l...ltJxe4 12 Mariotti-Parma, Rome 19S 1 .
10 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3

1 2......c7
On 12....i.f5 13 lLlxdS ,.,xdS
(13 ... cxdS is not good because of 1 4
c3! and i n the event of 1 4...� 8 1S
.i.cS l:r.e8 16 .i.a3! .i.e6 17 .i.f3
Black suffers material losses) 1 4 c4!
White's pawn structure is better,
Smyslov-Denker, Groningen 1 946.
1 2....i.e6 is also insufficient to
equalise the game: 1 3 lLlxdS cxdS
1 4 .i.f3 'Wic7 1 S .i.xdS .i.xdS 16
,.,xdS ,.,xc2 1 7 l:r.d2 ,.,c7 18 b4 and
White retains the initiative, Szabo­ Black obtains the advantage of the
Geller, Hilversum 1 973. two bishops, but concedes space.
13 .i.d4
1 3 lLlxdS leads to simplification 10 .i.xg4 .i.xg4
after 13... cxdS 14 ,.,xdS .i.e6 1S
,.,cS ,.,xeS 1 6 .i.xcS l:r.fc8! (this is White's main continuations are:
stronger than 1 6....i.xb2 17 .i.a6
.i.xa2 18 c4 .i.f6 19 l:r.d7 l:r.fd8 20 1Ba: l l f4
l:r.c7 l:r.d2 with an even endgame, l Bb: l l lLlxc6
Kovalev-Savchenko, Simferopol 1Bc: l l lLld5
1988) 17 .i.xe7 l:r.xc2 1 8 .i.f3 l:r.b8
and Black 's chances are preferable, The restrained 11 f3 .i.d7 12
German-Pomar, Stockholm (izt) l:r.adI, with the idea of gradually
1962. preparing a knight invasion on dS,
13 ... e5 14 .i.c5 l:r.d8 15 lLle4 f5 does not create (>articular problems
In White's favour is IS. . ..i.f5 16 for Black: 12 ... l:r.c8 (or 12 ...a6 13
lLld6! or 1S ....i.e6 16,.,gS. lLldS bS 14 c3 l:r.c8 = Kholmov­
16 lLlg5 R.Byme, Moscow 197S) 13 l:r.f2
On 1 6 lLld6?! follows 16 ... .i.f8!. ,.,aS! 14 lLldS (weaker is 14 lLlb3?!
16 ... h6 17 c4 hxg5 18 cxd5 cxd5 .i.xc3 :f: Euwe-Dcnker, London
19 ,.,xg5 .i.e6 and Black keeps the 1 946) 14 . . ....xd2 IS l:r.fxd2 with an
balance, Timoshchenko-Beliavsky, equal endgame.
Leningrad 1 977.
IDa

1B (1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlcJ g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
(1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .i.e3 lLlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 ,.,d2 ltlg4 10
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.xg4 .i.xg4)
.i.e3 lLlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 ,.,d2)
l l f4
9...lLlg4
Here, Black 's possible plans are
associated with the continuations:
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 i.e3 II

27Ba1 : l l ...i.d7 Also possible is an immediate 1 3

27Ba2: l l ..ltJxd4
. f5 ltJe5 1 4 b3 (worth considering is
1 4 i.h6 ltJc4 1 5 'ii'c I , since
After I I ...'ii'a5 12 f5! Black risks 1 5... ltJxb2?! is dangerous because
falling under a dangerous attack. of 1 6 i.xg7 ltJxd I 1 7 'ii'h6 ltJxc3 1 8
For example: 1 2...gxf5 13 exf5 fxg6 whereupon, in the game
i.xd4 14 .i.xd4 f6 15 a3 �h8 1 6 h3 Unzicker-Giustolisi, Lugano 1959,
i.h5 17 liJd5 ± Foltys-Wood, Buda­ White retained the better chances
pest 1948. after 1 8 ... fxg6 19 :xf8+ 'ii'xf8 20
i.xf8 :xf8 21 'ii'e3) 14...l:te8 1 5
1Ba1 liJd5 i.c6 16 h3 i.xd5 17 exd5 'ii'd7
when, instead of 18 i.g5 as played
(1 e4 cS 2 ltJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 in the game Ellison-Lirindzakis,
ltJxd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 Balatonbereny 1992, White main­
i.e3 ltJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd 2 ltJg4 10 tains the better position by 1 8 c4.
i.xg4 i.xg4 1 1 f4) Also worthy of deeyer study is the
immediate 13 liJd5 tl!xd4 14 i.xd4
l l .. i.d7
. i.xd4+ 15 'ii'xd4, since the accep­
tance of the pawn sacrifice by
15...:xc2 gives White a dangerous
attack on the king: 16 f5 i.c6 (or
1 6 ...f6 1 7 fxg6 hxg6 1 8 e5! dxe5 1 9
'ii'd3) 1 7 ltJe3 :e2 (17...:c5 1 8 b4
l:te5 19 ltJg4! ±) 18 ltJg4 h5 1 9
tiJh6+ �h7 20 ltJxf7! with material
gains for White, Richter-Petrov,
Bad Harzburg 1938.
13 ...b6
Or 1 3...a6 14 :f2 f5?! 1 5 exf5
gxf5 1 6 tiJd5 :n 17 tiJf3 with dan­
gerous threats for White, Radulov­
Black moves his bishop out of the Bobotsov, Varna 1968. But 14...b5
danger zone, avoiding the risk of it was more logical.
being cut off by f4-f5. However this 14 fS liJeS 15 b3 i.c6 16 JigS
involves a loss of time and White i.b7 17 liJdS i.xdS 18 exdS a6 1 9
grabs space, based on the possibility a4 'ii'd7 2 0 c4 with the better game
of a knight invasion on the d5 for White, Nevednichy-Rogozenko,
square. Bucharest 1993.
12 :ad1
But not an immediate 12 liJd5 e6!
and he does not succeed in exploit­ 1Ba2
ing the weakness of the d6 pawn in
view of the counterplay on the c­ (1 e4 cS 2 tiJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
file: 13 ltJc3 ltJa5 14 b3 :c8 1 5 ltJxd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
:ael a6 16 f5 ltJc6! with an excel­ i.e3 ltJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd 2 ltJg4 10
lent game for Black, Barden-Pilnik, i.xg4 i.xg4 1 1 f4)
Helsinki (ol) 1952.
12 ...:c8 13 h3 l l .. ltJxd4
.
12 Classical Dragon with 6 .i&.e2 .i&.g 7 7 .i&.e3

.il.e3 tl:Jc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 _.d2 tl:Jg4 10

.il.xg4 .il.xg4)

1 1 tl:Jxc6
A comparatively new plan, asso­
ciated with an exchange of the
Dragon bishop. However, Black ob­
tains a half-open b-file, a compact
pawn chain and the possibility of an
attack on the centre e4 pawn.
l l ... bxc6 12 .il.h6 .il.xh6 13 •xh6

12 .il.xd4 e5 13 .il.e3 exf4 14 1lxf4

Also interesting is 14 .il.xf4!?
'il'b6+ 15 �h1 _.xb2 16 �d5 with
an initiative for the pawn, since
1 6...-.xa l ? is not good: 17 llxa1
.il.xa 1 18 c3! and the bishop on a1
has no way out.
14 ....il.e6 15 1lf2 .il.e5
Or 1 5...llc8 1 6 .il.d4 .il.e5 =

Unzicker-Sax, Wijk aan Zee 198 1.

16 .il.d4
16 .il.f4 l:lc8 17 .il.xe5 dxe5 18
_.e3 offers nothing.
16...-.e7 13 ...�6
Other possibilities: This is more active than 13...l:lb8
1) 1 6...a6 1 7 �e2 llc8 18 c3 .il.d7 14 b3 Wa5, since after the retreat 15
19 �6 _.e7 20 lle 1 .il.c6 21 �f4 We3 White retains control over the
f6! ·(2 1 ...l:lce8 22 lle3 ± Jimenez­ centre.
Larsen, Palma de Mallorca (izt) 1) 15 ... e5 16 h3 i.c6 1 7 l:lad l
1 970) 22 l:le3 l:f.f7 Larsen.
= l:lbd8 18 �h I 1"6 19 I� nnd White
2) 1 6...-.a5 1 7 .il.xe5 dxe5 18 maintains the initiative, Knmsky­
ti:Jd5 _.xd2 19 l:f.xd2 = Radulov­ Rao, Philadelphiu 199 1.
Mestel, Belgrade 1982. 2) 15...l:lf'd8 16 li)n4 ( 16 h3?!
17 a4 .il.e6 17 l:lfd l to IH l:ld 3 ._,b6 19
After 17 llad1 l:lfd8 Black �6 Wc5 "' Timmnn-Topalov,
proceeds with ...d6-d5 and fully Novgorod 1995) 16 . . . c5 ( l6 ... ..te6
equalises, Matanovic-Trifunovic, 17 f4 ;!;) 17 c4 ;t (J.Tirnmun).
Belgrade 1 952. 14 l:labl .le6
17 ... a6 18 aS l:lac8 and Black's Also worth con� idcrin g is 14 ...
chances are not worse, Hartman­ e5!? 15 �hi .lc6 16 I� f5 with
Inkiov, Saltsjobaden 1988. roughly equal chunccs, R.Perez­
Tregubov, Cappello In < irnndc 2000.
1Bb 15 l:lfdl
In the first in11tunce preven ting
(I e4 c5 2 ti:JO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .. d6-d5, which miMhl li11luw, for
.

tl:Jxd4 ti:Jf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 example, on 15 Wh4 n, Ifl <J..h I d5!
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3 1 3

when after 17 exd5 cxd5 1 8 ::tfeI l l ....i.d7

llfe8 Black's position is preferable. On l l ...:cs White could sacrifice
On 15 llfe l also best is l 5...d5 (in a pawn: 12 c4! �xd4 13 .i.xd4
the game Ljubojevic-van der Wiel, l:.xc4 14 .i.xg7 �xg7 in association
Tilburg 1 984, l 5 ...::tab8?! was with the manoeuvre 1 5 �e3. How­
played after which, as pointed out ever after 15 ...l:.xe4 16 f3 .i.xf3!
by Van der Wiel, Black could obtain (16 ... :xe3? 17 'il'xe3 .i.e6 1 8 'il'xa7
a good game by l 6...'il'a5! 17 'il'e3 ±) Black has three pawns for the
f5!? 18 e5 f4) 1 6 e5 .i.f5 17 'il'd2 piece and the situation is unclear,
lHd8 with roughly even chances. e.g. 17 ::txf3 'il'b6! 18 �h i (18
lS...fS! l:td1?! d5! +) l 8 .. .'iWd4! 19 'il'f2 f5
Increasing the sphere of activity 20 lldl 'il'e5 and Black is not worse,
of the king's rook. After 15...l:tab8 Stoica-Vera, Timisoara 1 987.
16 l:.d3 'il'c5 17 b3 ::tb4 18 :te l f6 V.Stoica also looked at 17 gxf3
19 'il'd2 a5 20 lLla4 'il'a7 21 c3 ::tb7 l:te5! 18 f4 (18 'il'd4 'iib6!) l 8...lte4
22 c4 llb4 23 l:.c3 c5 24 f4 White 19 �d5 e6 20 �c3 'il'b6+ 21 �hI
keeps the initiative, Kindermann­ l:tb4, but even here White does not
Benko, Aruba 1992. appear to have made any particular
16 ltd2 :n 17 b3 f4 18 lLle2 progress.
'il'b4 19 ::td4 'iVcS 20 ::td2 'il'eS and In Timoshchenko-Makarychev,
Black's game is preferable, Nielsen­ USSR (ch) 1979, Black shunned the
Tiviakov, Gausdal 1993. pawn sacrifice: 12....i.e6 13 b3 'ii'd7
14 l:tae 1 �xd4 15 .i.xd4 .i.xd4 1 6
lBc 'il'xd4 ::tc5 17 f4 .i.xd5 1 8 exd5 b5
and also obtained satisfactory play.
(l e4 cS 2 �0 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 12 c4 �es
�xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 After 12 ..f5 13 exf5 gxf5 14 f4
.

.i.e3 �c6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'il'd2 �g4 10 ltf7 15 l:tadl :cs 1 6 l:.fe l White's
.i.xg4 .i.xg4) position is preferable, Trepp-Haik,
Biel l 986.
l l �dS 13 b3 e6! 14 �c3 'ii'aS
Interesting, as in the game Emms­
Riemersma, Gausdal 1993, is
l 4...�g4!? when after 15 .i.g5 'il'a5
16 �de2 (16 .i.e?? 'ii'e5!) l 6...b5!
17 h3 b4 1 8 hxg4 bxc3 1 9 'il'c l
::tfe8 Black gained the advantage.
IS h3 a6 16 f4
Or 16 a4 f5 17 f4 �f7 1 8 exf5
gxf5! (I.Boleslavsky).
=

l6 ... �c6 17 �de2 l:.fd8 and

Black is ready for the break ... b7-b5,
which gives him equal chances.

lC
White intends to increase his con­
trol over the centre by c2-c4, but in ( l e4 c 5 2 � f3 d 6 3 d4 cxd4 4
this variation the absence of his �xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 .i.e2 i.g7 7
light-squared bishop is felt. .i.e3 �c6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd2)
14 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 i.e3

9 . i.d7
. . A typical method of counterplay
The favourite continuation of the in similar Sicilian formations. Black
old days. Black hurries to complete either rids himself of the weakness
his development and start action on on d6 with an exchange of pawns,
the queenside. Possible continua­ or compensates for it (if White al­
tions for White here are: lows ... e5xf4) by grabbing the e5
square and pressurising the e4
lCa: 10 f4 pawn.
lCb: 10 .:adl 13 fxeS dxeS 14 i.e3 it'xd2 IS
i.xd2 .:rd8
15...lLJd7 leads to an equal end­
l Ca game after 16 i.e3 .:fd8 17 .:fd 1
i.ffi 18 lLJd5 i.c5 = Mariotti­
(1 e4 cS 2 lLJfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Velimirovic, PortorozJLjubljana
lLJxd4 lLJf6 5 lLJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 1 975.
i.e3 lLJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 1i'd2 i.d7) 16 i.e3
Weaker is 16 .:adl ?! .:d4! 17
10 f4 i.g5 h6 1 8 i.xf6 i.xf6 19 .:xd4
exd4 20 lLJd5 i.g5 21 l:td1 .:c8! +
Illescas Cordoba-Gulko, Leon 1992.
16 ... i.f8 17 .:adl lLJd7 and the
game is even (B.Gulko).

l Cb

(1 e4 cS 2 lLJfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLJxd4 lLJf6 5 lLJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
i.e3 lLJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 it'd2 i.d7)

10 .:adl

lO...lLJxd4
The routine 10 ....:c8 allows White
to avoid an exchange of knights by
1 1lLJb3! i.g4 12 l:tad1 b5 13 e5 and
maintain the initiative, Inkiov-Sax,
Baile Herculane 1982.
1 1 i.xd4 i.c6 12 i.f3
Activity by 12 e5?! after 12...lLJe4
13 lLJxe4 (weaker is 13 1i'e3 dxe5
14 fxe5 i.h6 15 1i'd3lLJg5! 16 i.g4
i.g7! 17 :ad1 b5 +) 13...i.xe4 14
.:ad1 dxe5 15 fxe5 1i'd5 16 c4 1i'e6
hands Black the initiative IO ... .:cs 1 1 f3
(D.Velimirovic). A sturdy move reinforcing the
12 ...e5! centre. Also possible is 11 f4, since
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 i.e3 15

here, with the rook already standing 1D

on d1, 1 l ...lLlxd4 12 i.xd4 i.c6
(1 e4 c5 2 ltlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
yields nothing because of 13 i.f3!
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
and the advance ...e7-eS is not
i.e3 lLlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 "jjd2)
possible.
For a long time Black pursued a 9 ... lLlxd4
plan of attack on the queen's flank:
1 l ...a6 12 h3 (or 12 lLlxc6 i.xc6 13
i.f3 "jjc7 14 ltf2 bS 1S lLldS "jjb7
16 c3 l:tfe8 17 fS aS = Larsen­
Kavalek, Bugojno 1982) 1 2...bS
(threatening ... bS-b4, gaining an
important tempo-more passive is
12...-.c7 1 3 lLlb3 i.e6 1 4 i.f3 bS
1S lLldS i.xdS 16 exdS lLlb8 17
lLld4 ;!; M.Kovacs-Nikolic, Reggio
Emilia 1978/79) 1 3 a3 "jjc7 14lDb3
.l:.fd8 1 S i.f3 i.e8 1 6 "jjf2 l:.b8 1 7
lLldS and White has the freer game,
Unzicker-Eiiskases, Saltsjobaden The attempt to solve the problem
(izt) 19S2. Worth considering is of defence by exchanges activates
1 l ...lLlg4!?. For example, the game the white bishop which, in the cen­
Sisish-Golubev, Ko�abrsk/Alushta tre, cramps Black even more than
1997, continued: 1 2 ltJxc6 bxc6 13 the knight since it is not attacked
i.d4? eS! 14 i.xa7 ( 1 4 fxeS cS!) and needs no support. And yet with
14...-.aS 1S i.f2 lLlxf2 16 l:.xf2 accurate play Black can fight for
exf4 17 "jjxd6 i.e6 18 "jjxf4 l:.b8 19 equality.
'ii'c1 "jjb4 with advantage to Black. 10 i.xd4 i.e6
1 1. .. a6 12 a4 10...i.d7 is also seen. Now in the
It is useful to hold back the b­ event of 11 f4 i.c6 12 i.f3 there
pawn. Earlier, 12 �h1 was played arises a position examined in varia­
and Black did not experience any tion 1Ca (9 ... i.d7), where Black ob­
particular difficulties: tains a good game. Therefore more
1) 12...lLlaS 13 i.h6 lLlc4 14 promising looks 11 .l:.ad l i.c6 12 f3
i.xc4 Axc4 1S i.xg7 �xg7 16 a6 13 a4 'WaS 14 "jje3 with the more
lLlce2 bS Nimzowitsch­ pleasant position for White.
Tartakower, Bled 1931. 1 1 l:.ad1
2) 12...bS 1 3 lLlxc6 i.xc6 14 a3 Also here the move 1 1 f4, though
fic7 1S i.h6 .l:.fd8 16 i.xg7 �xg7 it looks more logical (than upon
1 7 "jje3 i.b7 18 l:[d3 "jjcS 19 "jjxcS 10...i.d7), could add to Black's
.l:.xcS= Ragozin-Korchnoi, USSR problems: 1 l ..."jjaS! ( 1 l ...a6 is a
(ch) 19S4. loss of time: 1 2 l:.ad1 l:.c8 13 i.f3
12 ...fic7 13 lLlb3 .:.res 14 "jje 1 .l:.c4 1 4 lLle2!, threatening to grab
lLlb4 15 l:td2 i.e6 16 lLld4 i.c4 17 space by b2-b3 and c2-c4,
'ii'f2 e5 18 i.xc4 "jjxc4 19 lLlde2 d5 T.Petrosian-Gutman, USSR 1 963)
and, after opening the centre, Black 1 2 l:lad1 l:[fc8 1 3 fS?! i.c4 and
obtained a fully equal game, Black is already better, Christensen­
Kristensen-I.Ivanov, Gausdal 1993. Borge, Copenhagen 1991.
1 6 Classical Dragon with 6 if..e2 if..g7 7 if..e3

1 3 if..f3 was safer. if..c4 1 4 l:tf3 tt:lxd4 1 5 Wxd4 if..a6 I6

On 1 1 l:.fe 1 possible is 1 l ...'ifa5 tt:ld5 l:r.c8 1 7 f6 llc4 I8 Wd2 exf6
I2 l:.adi l:tfc8 1 3 if..fl a6 1 4 tt:ld5 I9 'ii'h6 f5 20 l:r.h3 I-0.
'ihd2 I5 l:txd2 .txd5 I6 exd5 �:ffi On 9... il..g4, IO tt:lxc6! is strong.
1 7 c4 b5 I8 b3 bxc4 I9 .txc4 tt:le8 For examP.Ie: 1 0...if..xe2 II tt:lxe7+
20 i.xg7+ 'ittxg7 2 1 g4 and White Wxe7 I2 'ifxe2 llfe8 I3 Wd3 tt:lxe4
has only a symbolic advantage, I4 tt:ld5 Wd7 I5 f5 and, apart from
Geller-Arbakov, Tiraspol 1 994. the weak d6 pawn, Black comes
l l 'ifc8 12 l:.fe1 lld8 13 tt:ldS
... under an attack, Barua-D.Gurevich,
.txdS 14 exdS a6 15 if..n l:te8 16 New York 1 987.
a4 tt:ld7 17 il..xg7 �xg7 18 aS and The problem of the e4 pawn can
White has the more active play, be solved in two ways:
Radulov-Kristensen, Silkeborg
1 983. 28A: 10 'ii'd3
28B: 10 eS
Line 2
He cannot ignore the threat to
(1 e4 cS 2 tt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 capture the e4 pawn: 1 0 �h 1 tt:lxe4
tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 if..e2 .tg7 7 1 1 tt:lxc6 Wxc6 1 2 tt:ld5 lle8
.te3 tt:lc6 8 0-0 0-0) ( 1 2...Wd7 1 3 if..d4 with chances for
both sides, Romanishin-Sosonko,
9 f4 Tilburg I979) 1 3 if..f3 f5 and White
has no compensation for the pawn
(G.Sosonko), while on the aggres­
sive IO tt:lf5? Black could take the
b2 pawn with impunity: 1 0...Wxb2
1 1 qja4 'ifa3 I2 c3 tt:lxe4! I3 if..c 1
tt:lxc3 etc.

2A

(1 e4 cS 2 tt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
tt:ld4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 if..e2 .tg7 7
if..e3 tt:lc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 'ifb6)

An old continuation, preventing 10 'iVd3

the move 9... d5.
9 'ifb6!
...

In bringing the queen out to an

active position, Black attacks the
knight d4 (threatening ...tt:lf6xe4)
and the b2 pawn.
The thrust 9...tt:lg4?! is insuffi­
cient. It was introduced as long ago
as the last century in the game
Lasker-Golmayo, Havana 1 893,
which continued 1 0 if..xg4 if..xd4 II
if..xd4 if..xg4 12 Wd2 if..e6 13 f5
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i..e2 .i..g 7 7 .i..e3 1 7

This obvious defence of the e4 <li>xf6 20 fxe6+ or 20 'ifh6! and

pawn relinquishes his control of the White has a strong attack.
g4 square. 14.!Z:lxe3 .i.xg4 15.!Z:lxg4 l:lac8
10....!Z:lg4 Or 15...f5 16 exf5 gxf5 17 .!Z:le3
Apparently he could have also l:tac8 with approximate equality,
gone for 1 0...'ifxb2 1 1 a3 (or 1 1 Grosar-Winslow, 1993.
:b1 'ifa3 12 .!Z:lxc6 bxc6 13 .!Z:ld5 16 .!Z:le3 f6 17 :ad1 .!Z:la5 18 :a
ii'xd3 14 .!Z:lxe7+ �h8 15 cxd3 = rj;rJ with an even endgame, Grosar­
Gayson-Holmes, England 1987) Ward, Berne 1992.
1 l ....!Z:lxe4 1 2 .!Z:lxc6 (on 12 .!Z:la4
Black could sacrifice the queen: 2B
12...'ifxd4 1 3 .i.xd4 .i.xd4+ 14 �h1
(1 e4 c5 2 .!Z:lt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
.i.f5 15 _.d1 .!Z:lf2+ 16 l:1xf2 .i.xf2,
.!Z:lxd4 .!Z:lf6 5 .!Z:lc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
obtaining a sufficient equivalent,
.i.e3 .!Z:lc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 'ifb6)
Crepan-Mukhtarov, Portoroz 1994,
but even stronger is 12....!Z:lc5! 13 10 e5
.!Z:lxc6 .!Z:lxa4 14 .!Z:lxe7+ <li'h8 and
White suffers material losses)
12....!Z:lxc3 1 3 .!Z:lxe7+ 'ili>h8 14 .i.O
l:r.e8 1 5 .!Z:lxc8 :axc8 1 6 .i.xa7 d5
with a sharp game, Wach-Oley,
Poland 1973.
l l .!Z:ld5
11 .i.xg4 leads to an approxi­
mately equal endgame after
1 1 ... .i.xd4 12 .i.xd4 'ifxd4+ 13
'ifxd4 .!Z:lxd4 1 4 .i.xc8 (worth
considering is 14 .i.dI!? .i.e6 1 5
l:r.f2 with· the idea of driving away
the knight, Podlesnik-Jazbinsek, The so-called Zollner Gambit­
Ljubljana 1 994) 14...l:tfxc8 15 .l:f2 the most consistent, but hardly a
l:tc4 1 6.!Z:ld5.!Z:lc6. correct continuation.
l l ... J.. xd4! 12 .i.xg4 10 ... dxe5 1 1 fxe5 .!Z:lxe5 12 .!Z:lf5
After 1 2 .!Z:lxb6 J.. xe3+ 13 �h 1 'it'xb2!
(after 13 ii'xe3 .!Z:lxe3 14 .!Z:lxa8 A determined capture of a pawn,
.!Z:lxfl 15 .i.xfl d5 Black has the bet­ laying claim to be a refutation of the
ter endgame) 13...J..xb6 14 .i.xg4 gambit.
.i.xg4 15 f5 .!Z:le5 16 'ifg3 .i.e2 and The other possible continuation is
Black has more than sufficient com­ 12 ...'ife6 13 lbxg7 �xg7 14 'ifd2
pensation for the queen, Leiber­ 1;g8 (not good is l 4....!Z:lg8? l 5.!Z:lb5
Berend, Ostend 1992. 'ifd7 16 'ifc3 ± Kramer-Euwe, (m)
12 ... J.. xe3+ 13 'ifxe3 'ifxe3+! 1940, or l 4....!Z:leg4? 15 .i.d4 'itd7
R.Schwarz recommends 13... 1 6 .i.xg4 'ifxg4 17 :r6 ± Alekhine)
'ifxb2 14 .i.xc8 :axc8 15 l:tab1 15 :ael lbc6 (weaker is l 5...J..d7
'ifxa2 16 l:r.xb7 e6, but after 17 16 .i.d4 .i.c6 17 .i.b5 .!Z:lfd7 18
.!Z:lf6+! 1;g7 18 'ifc3! (also-interest­ .i.xc6 bxc6 19 'ife3 f6 20 .i.xa7
ing is 18 f5 1;xf6 19 'ifh6 with the with advantage to White, Grechkin­
threat 20 'ifh4!) 18....!Z:le5 19 'ifh3 lvashin, corr. 1952) 16 .i.O (in
18 Classical Dragon with 6 i&.e2 i&.g 7 7 i&.e3

Black's favour is 16 i&.d3 'ii'd7 17 After 15 lDxc8 .l:ld8 (or

h3 liJh5 18 'ii'f2 ltJg7 19 'ifh4 'ifd8 15....1:1axc8 16 i&.xe5 .l:lfd8 1 7 i&.xf6
20 ltJe4 f6 + Nezhrnetdinov­ i&.xf6! +) 16 liJb5 .l:laxc8 17 c3 'it'e7
Pogrebysky, USSR 1949) 16...1Vd7 18 lDxa7 .l:.xc3 with an extra pawn
1 7 'ii'f2 with the idea of attacking by for Black, Palda-Galia, Vienna
1Vf2-h4 (E.Geller). 1947.
Upon the transposition to an end­ 15 ...1Vxe7 16 'ifd4 liJh5
game 1 2...'it'd8 13 'ifxd8 .l:lxd8 14 16 ...ltJe8 is also possible.
lllxe7+ �f8 (14...'�h8 15 il.g5 ±) 17 i&.xg7+ ltJxg7 18 i&.d3 i&.e6
15 i&.c5 White obtains the advantage and White does not have full com­
(Alekhine). pensation for the sacrificed pawn
13 lDxe7+ ¢>h8 14 il.d4 (E. Geller).
This move sets Black the most
complicated problems, whereas af­ Line 3
ter 1 4 'it'd2 i&.e6! 15 .l:lab l 'ifa3 1 6
l:hb7 .l:.fd8 17 'ife 1 ltJe4! or 14 (1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lDxc8 'ifxc3! 1 5 i&.d4 1Vxc8 1 6 liJxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 i&.e2 i&.g7 7
i&.xe5 .l:.d8! White has no apparent i&.e3 liJc6 8 0-0 0-0)
objects of attack.
9 liJb3

14...'iib4!
Upon passive defence 14 ...ltJg8 The most radical means of pre­
15 lllb5 "iVb4 1 6 liJd5 1Va4 17 .l:.f4 venting the thrusts ... d6-d5 and
White has a dangerous attack, . ..liJf6-g4. The drawback of the
Aratovsky-Ilivitsky, corr. 1948. move is that it removes the knight
1 4 ...liJfg4 leads to interesting from the centre which allows Black
variations. For example: 15 liJed5 to obtain counterplay on the queen's
(15 ltJcd5? 'it'xd4+! or 1 5 lDxc8 flank.
lDe3!) 1 5...1Va3 16 lDb5 1Va5 17 h3
lDh6 1 8 l:tf6! lDc6 19 i&.c3 'iVd8 The main continuations for Black
with dynamic equality, Castro­ are:
Rogoff, Graz 1972. A possible fur­
ther continuation is 20 .l:ld6 1Vg5 21 3A: 9...i&.e6
i&.d2 with 'perpetual check' to the 38: 9 ...a5
queen. 38: 9 ...a6
15 i&.xe5 3D: 9... b6
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3 1 9

Worth considering is the hardly planning his game. His main

investigated 9 ... o!De5 with the idea of continuations are:
1 0 f4 o!Deg4 1 1 .i.d4 e5 12 fxe5
o!Dxe5 =. The game Lukin-Sergeev, 3Aa: 10 .-c8
...

St-Petersburg 1993, continued 10 h3 3Ab: 10 o!Da5

...

.i.e6 1 1 o!Dxd4 (after 11 .!Dd2 d5! 12 3Ac: 1 0 l:tc8

...

f4 d4! 13 fxe5 .!DeS Black takes

over the initiative) 11....!Dc4 12 .i.c1 It is useful also to get familiar
l:tcS 13 b3 o!De5 14 o!Dxe6 fxe6 15 with 10...b5, where the sacrifice is
.i.b2? _.a5 1 6 _.e1 g5! and because tactically based on the activity of
of his threat to double rooks on the the pieces: 11 .i.xb5 o!Dg4! 12 _.d2
c-file, Black has the preferable o!Dxe3 13 •xe3 o!Db4 etc. Usually
game. Stronger was 15 .i.d2 with the pawn is not taken:
complex play. 1) 11 f5 .i.xb3 (weaker is
Upon the continuation 9....i.d7 11...b4?! 12 fxe6 bxc3 13 exf7+
White exerts pressure in the centre �hS 14 bxc3 ± Spassky-Miles,
by 1 0 f3 :cs 1 1 o!Dd5. Bugojno 197S) 12 axb3 b4 with a
complicated game.
3A 2) 11 .i.f3 _.d7 12 h3 .i.c4 13 e5
.!DeS 14 l:tf2 and White's chances
(1 e4 c5 2 o!Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 are preferable, Liberzon-Miles,
o!Dxd4 .!Df6 5 o!Dc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 Baden 19SO.
i.e3 o!Dc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 o!Db3)
3Aa
9 .i.e6
...

(1 e4 c5 2 o!Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
o!Dxd4 .!Df6 5 o!Dc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
.i.e3 o!Dc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 o!Db3 .i.e6 10
f4)

10 .-c8
...

A reliable continuation. Black de­

velops his bishop on the most attrac­
tive square from where it supports a
break in the centre ...d6-d5, leaving
in reserve the possibility of a flank
attack ...a7-a5.
10 f4 The most popular continuation for
White intends the advance f4-f5, Black. The queen not only takes un­
which Black must reckon on when der control the f5 and g4 squares but
20 Classical Dragon with 6 Jie2 Jig 7 7 Jie3

also frees a place for the rook from FIDE-Wch Las Vegas 1999, was
where it will support the advance played 1 6 lLle3 lld8 17 i.h3 lLle5
...d6-d5. with an equal game, also nothing is
1 1 �hl offered by 17 'it'xd6 exf5 18 exf5
This prophylactic move, moving i.xf5 19 'it'f4 lld4 ) 16...i.xe6 17
=

the king off the weakened g1-a7 di­ i.xe6 fxe6 18 llxf8+ i.xf8 19
agonal and securing a square for the lLlf6+ �g7 20 ltJg4 h5 21 ltJf2 ;!;
dark-squared bishop, is the most Krnic-Rigo, Rome 1986)
common continuation in this varia­ 2) 11 h3 (in radically preventing
tion. But it is useful to look also at the thrust to g4, White loses an im­
other moves. portant tempo and Black can attack
1 ) 1 1 i.f3 (this move, useful in the bishop via the c4 square)
other variations, allows Black to 1 l ...lld8 12 lLld4 (after 1 2 i.t3 i.c4
drive back the bishop) 1l ...lLlg4 13 l1f2 e5! Black takes over the ini­
(upon the exchange of the light­ tiative: 14 f5 gxf5 15 exf5 d5 16
squared bishops 1 l ...il.g4 12 ltJd5! Jig5 e4 + Steinmeyer-Benko, USA
i.xf3 1 3 'it'xf3 lLlxd5 14 exd5 White (ch) 1 962/63, or 14 lld2 'it'e6 15
fixes the Dragon pawn phalanx, ltJd5 exf4! + Rolland-Larsen, Le
which complicates Black's task, for Havre 1966) 1 2...ltJxd4 13 i.xd4
example the game Hiibner-Miles, Jl.c4 1 4 f5 d5! 15 e5 lLle4 16 f6 exf6
Tilburg 1 985, continued 14...ltJb4?! 17 exf6 i.f8 18 i.xc4 'it'xc4 with
15 'ii'e4 lLla6 16 c3 'it'c7 1 7 l:.ae1 equal chances, Geller-Lipnitsky,
btae8 18 f5 and White gained the Kiev 1950.
advantage, but upon the better 3) 11 'it'e1 lLlb4! (exploiting the
1 4... lLlb8! 1 5 c3 ltJd7 16 llae1 lLlf6 weakening of the c2 square to ex­
it is not easy to breach Black's posi­ change bishops; risky is 1 l...lLlg4?!
tion, Asrian-Khalifrnan, New York because of 12 i.xg4 i.xg4 13 f5!
1 998) 12 i.e1 i.xb3 13 i.xg4 i.e6 gxf5 14 h3 f4 15 l:txf4 i.h5 16 ltJd5
1 4 f5 i.d7 (worth considering is the with a very strong attack for White,
intermediate exchange 14...i.xc3!? Ragozin-Veresov, Moscow 1945)
15 bxc3 .i.d7 16 i.h6 l:.e8 1 7 fxg6 12 ltJd4 i.c4 13 a3 i.xe2 14 'it'xe2
hxg6, not fearing 1 8 llxf7?! i.xg4 lLlc6 15 llad1 (15 lLlb3 ltJg4 16
19 btg7+ �h8 20 'ii'd2 llg8 21 :tf7 i.d2 a5! +) 15 ...lLlg4 (or 15 ...1le8
'ii'e6 22 llafl ltJe5 +) 15 ltJd5 e6 with the idea 16 ... lL!xd4 17 i.xd4
(15...bte8 is also seen-in the game e5! ) 16 ltJd5 lLlxe3 17 'it'xe3 'it'd8
=

Tal-Fedorowicz, Reykjavik 1986, 1 8 c3 e6 and the position is simpli­

White offered a pawn sacrifice by fied, while the weakening of the d6
1 6 .i.g5 and on its refusal 16... i.f8? pawn cannot be exploited.
17 a4 lLle5 18 i.h3 obtained an ob­ l l ...lld8
vious advantage, but nevertheless 11 ... i.g4 is also encountered,
after 16...i.xb2 17 l:.b1 i.e5 there when after 12 i.xg4 'it'xg4 13 'it'e1
was apparently nothing real; more b5 14 i.d2 b4 15 ltJd5 lLlxd5 16
natural is 16 c3 lLle5 17 i.h3 e6 18 exd5 lLld4 the initiative passes to
fxe6 .i.xe6 19 i.xe6 llxe6 20 i.g5 Black, Kupreichik-Stanec, Oberwart
;!; Asrian-Xu Jun, Ubeda 1998) 16 1999. Stronger, as in the main varia­
fxe6 (in Asrian-And.Rodriguez, tion, is 12 Jig l .
 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 i..e3 21

i..f2 i..xc3! 19 bxc3 'ii'f6 20 i.. e3,

though even here White's chances
were preferable) 15 .l:.ael b4 I6
�d5 with chances for both sides,
Westerinen-Gufeld, Havana 1985.
On I l...a5 simplest is 12 a4,
transposing to a position from the
variation 9... a5 10 a4, since on 12
�d4 Black could play 12...�xd4 I 3
i..xd4 i..c4 14 i..d3 b5! with not bad
counterplay on the queen's flank.
12 i..gl
I) I2...b6 I3 �d5 i..xe2 I 4 'ii'xe2 White does not have a more use­
'iVb7 I5 l:tad I ltfe8 I 6 c3 .l:.ac8 I7 ful move. Let's look at the other
i..f2 �b8 I8 'ii'f3 'ii'a6 I9 �xf6 possibilities.
i..xf6 20 e5! with advantage to I) I2 �d4 i..g4 13 f5 i..xe2 14
White, Savon-Sosonko, Ljubljana/ �dxe2 �e5 (controlling the e5
Portoroz I 977. square guarantees Black a fully
2) I 2....1:.d8 13 �d5 i..xe2 I4 equal game) 15 i..g5 'ii'c5 I 6 �f4
'ii'xe2 e6 I5 �xf6+ i..xf6 I6 c3 lte8 17 �d3 'ii'd4 18 i..xf6 i..xf6 I9
i..g7 I7 AadI l:[b8 18 i..f2 ! b5 �d5 'ii'xe4 20 �c7 gxf5 2 I �xa8
(l8...'ii'c7!?) I9 i..h4 ltd7 20 ltd3 l:lxa8 22 �xe5 i..xe5 and Black has
and, in view of the weakness of the full compensation for the exchange,
d6 pawn, Black has the preferable Bareev-Tiviakov, Belgrade GMA
game, Anand-Fedorowicz, Amster­ I989.
dam 1990. 2) 12 i.. f3 i..c4 (12...i..g4 allows
3) l 2...Ab8 13 �d4 a6 (worth an occupation of the central posi­
considering is 13 ...i..xe2 14 'ii'xe2 tion: I3 �5! i..xf3 I4 'ii'xf3 e6 15
b5!?) I4 i..xg4 'ii'xg4 15 'ii'd2 ltbc8 �xf6+ i..xf6 16 c3 d5 17 e5 i..g7
I6 Aael b5 (also interesting is 18 .:.aeI b5 19 �d4 and White ob­
l 6 ...Afd8) 17 e5 dxe5 18 fxe5 b4! tains a small but enduring positional
I 9 �xc6 .l:.xc6 20 �e2 �h5 advantage, Kupreichik-Novikov,
(20...'ii'd7 21 �d4 ±) 21 �d4 (or 21 Lvov 1988; worth considering is the
i..d4 'ii'e6 ) 21...ltc5! with equal
= consistent 12...d5!? I3 e5 �g4 14
chances, Svidler-Khalifman, Tilburg i..gI d4 15 �e4 �e3 16 i..xe3 dxe3
1994. I7 'ii'e1 i..c4 18 ltgl 'ii'f5! with a
4) I2...i..xe2 (the most consistent) complex game, Barua-Yurtaev,
1 3 'ii'xe2 'ii'g4 (possible is 13...�d7 Frunze 1983) 13 ltf2 e5! (the stan­
I4 ltf3 f5 I 5 ltdl Af7 16 exf5 gxf5 dard Sicilian method: the weakness
I7 �d5 �f8 I8 c4 e5 with of the d6 pawn is compensated by
sufficient counterplay, Kotronias­ having an outpost on e5 for his
Zaichik, Moscow I987) I4 'ii'd2 b5 knight) 14 ltd2 (on 14 g3 possible is
(in the game Kasparov-Gufeld, I4...d5! 15 exd5 e4 16 �xe4 �xd5
Baku I978, Black pursued a plan of +) I4...exf4 (this allows White to
pressurising the f4 pawn: 14...�h5 stabilise the pawn structure in the
15 ltf3 f5 16 h3 'ii'h 4 I7 exf5 gxf5?! centre, worth considering is
I 8 �d4 and landed in a difficult po­ I4...'ii'e6!? I5 fxe5 �xe5 or
sition; stronger was 17....lhf5 18 14... i..h6!? I5 Ad6 'ii'c7 16 .l:.xd8+
22 Classical Dragon with 6 iie2 .1ig 7 7 .1ie3

l:lxd8 with active counterplay) 15 cxd3 ±) 18 'Wf3 l:ac8 19 l:aeI l:c6

iixf4 lbe5 16 .1J..xe5 (it is easier for 20 iixf5 gxf5 21 l:g I �h8 22 g4
White to count on a struggle for the and the g-file is opened to White's
advantage with a stable pawn advantage, Kovalev-Matveeva,
structure; after 16 lDe2 l:a6 the Helsinki 1992. However after
weaknesses in both camps balance 14... f6! 15 lDxe6 'Wxe6 I 6 lDb5 l:d7
each other out, Matanovic-Geller, 17 exf6 exf6 18 f5 gxf5 19 l:xf5
Belgrade 1957) 16 ...dxe5 17 .1J..e2 'Wxf5 20 iJ..g4 'We5 21 .ixd7 f5!
l:.xd2 18 'ii'xd2 .1J..e6 19 l:fl 'Wd8 20 Black's centralised pieces secure
'ii'e3 and White's chances are some­ him a good game, Smirin­
what preferable, Votava-Klopfer, Tukrnakov, Rostov 1993.
Altensteig 1993.
12 ... d5 13 eS lDe4 3Aal
More passive is 13 ...lDd7, which
allows the establishment of a base (1 e4 cS 2 lDfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
on d4 for his knight: 14 lDb5 .1if5 lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 i.e2 .1J..g7 7
15 lD5d4 lDxd4 16 lDxd4 iJ..e4 17 e6 .1J..e3 lDc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lDb3 .1J..e6 10
lDf6 18 exf7+ �xf7 19 iJ..d3 e6 20 f4 'Wc8 1 1 �hl l:d8 12 i.gl dS 13
'ii'e2 and White's chances are pref­ eS lDe4)
erable, Thipsay-Stanec, Moscow
(ol) 1994. 14 iJ..d3
Now the most promising con­
tinuations for White are:

3Aa1 : 14 iJ..d3
3Aa2: 14 lDbS

Not good is 14 t:Dxe4 dxe4 15

'We1 f6 (worth considering is
15 ... b6! ?, averting the threat of
lDb3-c5, and then ...f7-f6, and also
15... g5!?) 16 lDc5 fxe5 17 fxe5
lDd4! (after 17....1J..f5?! 18 .1J..c4+
..t>h8 19 t:Dxe4 lDxe5 20 iJ..b3 'Wc6
21 l:.f4 h6 22 'We2 White has a Threatening to win a pawn.
dangerous initiative, Lobron-Sax, 14 ... f6 IS exf6 exf6 16 lDbS
Lucerne (ol) 1982) 18 t:Dxe4? lDxe2 Not dangerous for Black is 1 6 f5
19 'ii'xe2 .1J..c4 and White is left the lDxc3 (apparently also possible is
exchange down, Zagrebelny­ 16 ... .1J..xf5 17 lDxd5 �h8 18 lDe3
Asanov, USSR 1983. iJ..e6 ) 17 bxc3 .117 18 lDd4 lDe5
=

On 14 lDd4 the doubled pawns 19 lDe2 'Wc7 20 i.d4 'Wd6 21 lDf4

14...t:Dxc3 15 bxc3 t:Dxd4 16 iJ..xd4 l:e8 and the chances of the two
iif5 17 iJ..d3 only stabilise White's sides are approximately equal,
centre and allow him to go over to Kindermann-Landenbergue, Mos­
an attack on the king's flank: cow (ol) 1994.
17...'We6 (17...e6 18 g4 .1J..xd3 19 16 ...rs 17 c3
 Classical Dragon with 6 �e2 �g7 7 �e3 23

�d7 27 l:.fd1 and Black is doomed

to passive defence, Illescas­
Tukrnakov, Lyon 1 992.

3Aa2

(1 e4 c5 2 lt:\t3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lt:\xd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:\c3 g6 6 �e2 �g7 7
�e3 lt:\c6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lt:lb3 �e6 10
f4 -.c8 1 1 �h1 .l:[d8 12 �g1 d5 13
e5lt:\e4)

It is possible to assess the present 14 lt:\b5

position as preferable for White, not
only because of the blockaded
isolated black d5 pawn but also the
definite weaknesses around it which
might show themselves after an ex­
change of the dark-squared bishops.
White's next plan is to gain space
on the queen's flank which pro­
vokes a further weakening of the
dark squares.
17...�h8
The game swings around to a
similar scenario also on 17...�f7 18
a4 a6 (or 18 ... h5 19 a5 h4 20 .:.n White intends to consolidate the
g5!? 21 fxg5 �h5 when, according d4 square for the knight, which
to an analysis by D.Barua of the forces Black into resolute action.
game Barua-Tiviakov, Tilburg 14...g5!
1 992, White retains the advantage A decisive break in the centre.
by 22 'ii'c2 �xf3 23 gxf3 lt:\e5 24 But also possible is 1 4 ... f6 15 exf6
fxe4lt:\xd3 25 'ii'xd3 dxe4 26 'ii'h3) exf6 16 lt:\5d4 f5 = Balashov­
19 lt:\5d4 l:r.e8 20 a5 l:r.e7 2 1 l:.a4 Mitenkov, Moscow 1999.
�e8 22lt:\xc6 �xc6 23 l:r.b4 and the 15 fxg5
rook invades on the queen's flank, After 15 g3 �h3 White has to part
Lau-Tukrnakov, Antwerp 1 993; with the exchange: 16lt:\5d4!? �xf l
stronger seems 2 l ...'ii'd7!? ;!;, 17 �g4 e6 1 8 'ifxfl , obtaining defi­
18 a4 �g8 19 a5 a6 20 lt:\5d4 nite compensation for it since after
l:.e8 2 1 lt:\xc6 'ifxc6 22 �d4! 1 6 .:.n gxf4 1 7 gxf4 �h8 1 8 :d3
It is important to exchange the (or 18 lt:\5d4 l:r.g8 19 'ii'd3 �g4 20
cemented bishop; after 22lt:\d4 'ii'c7 :m �h6! and Black's threats are
23 lt:\c2lt:\c5! 24 �d4 lt:lb3 25 �b6 too dangerous, Morovic-Tringov,
'ii'd6 26 l:r.a3 lt:\c5 Black does a Lucerne (ol) 1 982) 18...�h6 19 �f3
successful "twirl", Anand-Gelfand, the initiative passes to Black.
Linares 1992). 15 ...lt:\xe5
22...l:r.e7 23 �xg7+ �xg7 24 Taking with the bishop 15...�xe5
lt:\d4 'ii'c5 25 �c2 �e6 26 'ii't3 16 �d3 �f5 17 'ii'e2 �g6 18 l:.ad1
24 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3

tLlxg5 1 9 tLlxa7! leads to an advan­ manoeuvre ...l:.a8-c8xc3 and

tage for White, Timman-Tarjan, ...tLlf6xe4.
Banja Luka 1974. 1 1 f5
16 tLlxa7 The most consistent, otherwise
On 16 tLl3d4 good is 16 ....i.d7 Black will be able to carry out a
and for the time being White must freeing advance of pawns in the
look at consolidating his position by centre:
17 c3, since quite bad is 17 tLlc3? 1) 1 1 tLlxa5 'ii'xa5 12 .i.f3 .i.c4 13
tLlxc3 18 bxc3 'ii'xc3 1 9 l:.b1 'ii'c7 l:.e1 (after 1 3 :t2 l:fd8 14 'ii'd2
and White has no compensation at 'ii'c7 1 5 b3 .i.a6 16 :ad 1 l:.ac8
all for the pawn, Qin Kaiying­ Black 's position is preferable,
Matveeva, Subotica (izt) 1 99 1 . Treybai-Foltys, 1940) 1 3....1:.fd8 1 4
16...'ii'd7 'ii'd2 'ii'c7 1 5 l::ta c 1 e5 1 6 fxe5
After 16 ...'ii'xc2 he has to reckon (weak is 1 6 b3? d5! 1 7 exd5 e4 and
on 1 7 .i.d4 with the threat of 18 Black has the advantage, Rauzer­
:ct. Botvinnik, USSR (ch) 1 933)
17 tLlb5 tLlc4 18 tLl5d4 tLlxb2 19 16...dxe5 1 7 'ii'd2 b6 1 8 g4 h6 with
'ii'c 1 tLla4 20 'ii'f4 and White's equal chances (E.Geller).
chances are better, Daniliuk­ 2) 11 .i.d4 .i.c4 (also worth con­
Maximenko, St.Petersburg 1993. sidering is 1 1...l:lc8!? 12 .i.xa7
l:lxc3 13 bxc3 tLlxe4 14 .i.d4 tLlxc3
3Ab with compensation for the ex­
change) 12 tLlxa5 (or 12 .id3 l:lc8
(1 e4 c5 2 tLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 3 Wf3 e5 1 4 tLlde2 d5! = )
tLlxd4 tLlf6 5 tLlc3 g6 6 .J..e2 .i.g7 7 1 2... .i.xe2 13 'ii'xe2 'ii'xa5 14 l:ad1
.J..e3 tLlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 tLlb3 .i.e6 10 (14 e5 tLld5 15 tLlxd5 'ii'xd5 ) =

f4) 14...l:lfd8 15 �h1 e6 and, by

preparing ...d6-d5, Black does not
stand worse, Yanofsky-Kaptsan,
Canada (zt) 1986.
3) 1 1 �h1 .i.c4 1 2 e5 .ixe2 13
'ii'xe2 dxe5 14 fxe5 tLld5 1 5 J:lad1?
tLlxc3 16 l:r.xd8 tLlxe2 1 7 lha8 .l:.xa8
1 8 tLlxa5 .ixe5 with an extra pawn
for Black, Timman-Hjartarson,
Reykjavik 1988.
l l ....ic4
Here the main continuations for
White are:

10 tLla5
.•. 3Ab1: 12 .id3
With this continuation, first 3Ab2: 12 tLlxa5
played in the game Marco-Maroczy,
Monte Carlo 1 903, Black, in The attempt to exploit the hanging
allowing the advance f4-f5, endeav­ position of the black pieces by tacti­
ours to ease his defence by the ex­ cal means does not work: 1 2 e5
change of two minor pieces, .i.xe2! 1 3 'ii'xe2 dxe5 14 l:tad1 'ii'c7
incidentally having in mind the 15 tLlb5 'ii'c4! with an extra pawn
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 i.e3 25

for Black, or 12 fxg6 hxg6 13 cxd3

(12... fxg6? 13 .:xf6!) 13 e5 i.xe2 On 13 1i'xd3 good is 13...tlJg4 ! .
14 1Wxe2 dxe5 15 �5 tiJb3! 16 13 ...d5
axb3 b6 with the better game for A timely opening of the position.
Black, Panov-Chistiakov, Moscow Including an exchange of knights by
1936. l 3... tLlxb3 14 1i'xb3 activates the
queen, while counterplay by
3Ab1 l 4...tlJg4 15 i.g5 1i'a5 16 �h1 1i'c5
17 i.h4 i.e5 IS h3 tiJf6 leads into a
(1 e4 c5 2 tiJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 blind alley after 19 .:.n .:.acS 20
tL!xd4 tiJf6 5 tLlc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 :an and White takes over the ini­
i.e3 tiJc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 tiJb3 i.e6 10 tiative, Mortensen-Amason, Esbjerg
f4 tlJa5 1 1 f5 i.c4) l 9S4. But also possible is 14 axb3
when l 4...d5 is not so effective: 15
12 i.d3 i.d4 dxe4 16 dxe4 a6 (or l 6...'ifc7
17 e5 :adS IS exf6 i.xf6 19 .:.a4!
b5 20 tLlxb5 1i'd7 21 1i'e2 a6 22
i.xf6 axb5 23 i.xe7 with an extra
pawn for White, R.Spielmann; but
eossible is l 6...e6) 17 e5 tL!eS IS b4
0.c7 19 f6 exf6 20 exf6 i.h6 21
i.b6 and White's chances are pref­
erable, Spielmann-Landau, Amster­
dam l 93S.
The retreat of the knight 13...tL!c6
14 d4 e6 (14...b5!?) 15 fxe6 fxe6 16
�h l 'ife7 17 i.g5 leaves White
with the initiative, Zapata­
Despite the fact that an antidote R.Hemandez, Merida 1992.
has been found to this continuation, 14 tL!xa5
popular in the old days, it is periodi­ Not good is 14 e5? tLlxb3! 15 exf6
cally met even today. i.xf6 16 1i'xb3 d4 17 i.h6 dxc3! IS
12 ...i.xd3 i.xf8 cxb2 19 .:.abl 1i'd4+! and for
The main reply, but worth consid­ the exchange Black has a passed b2
ering is 12...d5 13 e5 tLle4 14 tL!xa5 pawn and the initiative.
1i'xa5!? (in the game Sieiro 14 ...1i'xa5 15 e5 d4! 16 i.xd4
Gonzalez-A.Hemandez, Havana Risky is 16 exf6 i.xf6 17 fxg6
l 9S6, was played l 4 ... tL!xc3 15 dxc3 I S gxh7+ �hS.
bxc3 1i'xa5 16 f6 exf6 17 exf6 16...tiJd7 17 f6 exf6 18 exf6 i.xf6
:reS! I S 'ifd2 i.f8 19 i.h6 'ifc5+ 18...tL!xf6? loses a piece: 19 i.xf6
20 'it>h l .:.e6 and Black maintains �6+ 20 �hl i.xf6 21 tiJd5.
the balance, but if White had played 19 .:.xr6
16 i.d4!, preparing e5-e6, then 19 i.xf6 �6+ 20 �hl (after 20
Black's problems would be more .:.f2 tL!xf6 21 'iff3 �g7 22 l:el
complicated) 15 tL!xe4 (or 15 i.d4 :adS 23 .:.e7 l:d7 White has no
'ifc7) l 5... i.xd3 16 cxd3 'dxe4 17 compensation for his weakened
d4 �6! with a double-edged game pawn structure) 20... tL!xf6 21 'iff3
(Andres).
26 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 i.e3

1;g7 22 l:tae 1 l:tad8 23 lle7 th-th 12 c!DxaS

Upton-Holmes, England (ch) 1987.
19....!Dxf6 20 'ii'f3 .!DhS
The game Rantanen-Helmers,
Oslo 1978, continued 20...c!Dd7? 21
'ii'xb7 l:tad8 22 .!Dd5 llfe8 23 b4
'ii'a3?! (23...'ii'a4) 24 i.c3 with a
great advantage to White, since he
has no opposition on the long a l -h8
diagonal.
21 tiJdS fS

12 i.xe2 13 'ii'xe2
•.•

Mass exchanges by 13 c!Dxb7

i.xdI 14 c!Dxd8 i.xc2 15 c!Dc6 l:tfe8
lead to an equal endgame, Lasker­
Riumin, Moscow 1 936.
13 ...'ii'xa5 14 g4
If White is striving for the initia­
tive then he must take such sharp
measur�s to fight for the d5 square.
The quieter method 1 4 i.d4 leads
The bishop, in complete control to simplification and equality after
of the long diagonal, is no weaker 14 ... c!Dd7 15 i.xg7 c:l;xg7 16 c!Dd5
than a rook. However Black's rear is c!Df6!. But if Black does not strive
quite reliably defended by heavy for simplification-14...llac8, then
pieces. For example, the attempt to he risks ending up in the worse po­
win a pawn by 22 c!De7+ c:l;f7 23 sition: 15 llad 1 a6 (or 15 ...llfe8 16
'ii'xb7 llab8! leads to an exchange r:i;hl b5 17 c!Dxb5 'ii'xa2 18 c!Dxa7 ±
of queens-24 c!Dc6+ llxb7 25 Glek-Lobron, Tilburg 1994) 16 a3
c!Dxa5 lld7 and the recovery of ma­ b5 17 c!Dd5 c!Dxd5 18 exd5 llc7 19
terial (J.Silman). c3 'ii'a4 20 i.xg7 c:l;xg7 21 lldeI ;!;
The game Kindermann-Bjazevic, Thipsay-Peptan, Biel 1999.
Mendoza 1986, continued 22 b4 14...llac8
'ii'd8 23 i.e5 :cs 24 d4 :c2? 25 A counterattack with the threat to
'ii'b3 and White won. However, af­ sacrifice the exchange is the best
ter 24 ...l:tf7 or 24...'ii'd7 the game way to counter the advance g4-g5.
assumes an unclear character. Other moves are insufficient to
maintain equality. Thus 14...'ii'b4?
is not good: 15 g5 c!Dh5 (15...c!Dxe4?
3Ab2 loses because of 16 .!Dd5) 16 a3
'ii'xb2 17 c!Dd5 llae8 18 'iVf2 and
(1 e4 cS 2 c!Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 White develops a dangerous attack
c!Dxd4 c!Df6 5 c!Dc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 (the threat is f5-f6), Estrin­
.ie3 c!Dc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 c!Db3 i.e6 10 Fridshtein, USSR 1945, while on
f4 c!Das 1 1 fS i.c4) the prophylactic 14...llae8 15 g5
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3 27

lt:Jd7 16 li'ld5 gxf5 17 lhf5 there A natural developing move, creat­

follows a frontal attack on the f-file. ing the threat of an exchange sacri­
15 g5 fice on c3.
On 15 i.d4 Black defends himself 1 1 �hi
by l5...'ili'b4 16 .l:adl 'ji'c4!, cover­ This waiting move, useful in a
ing the d5 square by the "X-ray" number of cases, moves the king off
pressure on the c2 pawn. the weakened a7-gl diagonal.
I.Boleslavsky _presents this varia­ Another idea, II i.f3, intending
tion: 17 l.td3 tLld7 18 i.xg7 'iti>xg7 to plant the knight on d5, allows the
19 'ji'd2lt:Jf6 20 .l:lh3 g5! 21 'ji'xg5+ thrust 1I...i.c4 (on 1l...b5 White
'ifi>h8 22 'ji'h6 .l:g8 23 g5 l:.xg5+ 24 does not deviate from the general
'ji'xg5 .l:.g8 and the black queen is line: 12lt:Jd5lt:Jd7 13 c3 a5 14 a3 a4
not weaker than the rooks. 15 li'ld4 .i.xd5 16 exd5 li'lxd4 17
15 ....l:lxc3 16 gxf6 i.xd4 i.xd4+ 18 'ji'xd4 'ji'b6 19
It is understandable that White .l:ad1 .l:c4 20 'ji'xb6 lt:Jxb6 21 g3
does not settle for 16 bxc3li'lxe4. and obtains the better endgame,
16 l:txe3 17 'ji'xe3 i.xf6 18 c3
.•. Mortensen-P.H.Nielsen, Denmark
l:tc8 19 Whl 1991) 12 .l:e1 (or 12 .l:f2 b5 13 .l:d2
Or 19 a3 .l:lc4 20 .J:ael b5 21 :n b4 14 lt:Je2 'ji'c7 ) 12...b5 (after
=

'ji'c7 with equal chances, 12... e5 13 'ji'd2 exf4 14 i.xf4 li'le5

Filipowicz-Hollis, Marianske Lazne 15 .J:ad1 b5 16 'ji'xd6 'ji'xd6 17
1962. .l:xd6 lt:Jxf3+ 18 gxf3 b4 19 lt:JdI
19 .....a6 20 h4 .l:lc4 21 h5 d5! tLlh5 20 .i.e3 and Black does not
with excellent counterplay for have enough compensation for the
Black, Lukin-Kr.Georgiev, pawn, Gubematorov-Minasian,
Naleczow 1981. Podolsk 1990) 13 'ji'd2 a5 14 lt:Jd5
li'ld7 15 .J:ad1 b4 with an active
3Ac game for Black. In the game Gross­
Oiesen, New York 1993, White sac­
(I e4 c5 2 lt:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 rificed a pawn, 16 e5 dxe5 17
lt:Jxd4 lt'lf6 5 lt:Jc3 g6 6 .i.e2 i.g7 7 li'lxe7+ 'ji'xe7 18 'ji'xd7 'ji'xd7 19
i.e3 lt:Jc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lt:Jb3 i.e6 10 .l:xd7 lt:Jb8 20 .l:a7 exf4, but did not
f4) obtain compensation.
Black's plans are only promoted
10...l:tc8 by 11 f5 .i.d7 12 g4 lt:Je5! and the
threat to sacrifice the exchange be­
comes real.
1) 13 i.d4 .l:xc3 14 bxc3 li'lxe4
15 lDd2 lt:Jxd2 16 'ji'xd2 i.c6 and,
for the exchange, Black has a pawn
and a positional advantage,
Ravinsky-Simagin, Moscow 1957.
2) 13 lt:Jd2 .l:xc3 (also not bad is
13 ... i.c6 14 g5lt:Jfd7 15 'ji'e1 a6 16
'ji'h4 b5 17 a3 a5 + Akopian­
Fonseca, Los Angeles 1991) 14
bxc3 i.c6 15 i.f3 lt:Jxf3+ (also
good is an immediate 15...d5) 16
28 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 il.g 7 7 il.e3

_.xf3 d5 I7 il.d4 dxe4 18 _.h3 Khalifman, FIDE-Wch Las Vegas,

ll:ixg4 19 il.xg7 �xg7 20 ll:ixe4 1999) 13.....ixg4 (on 13 ... ..ic4 pos­
1Vb6+ 21 ll:if2 gxf5 0-1 Daniliuk­ sible is 14 llf2 with the threat of
Malakhov, Russian (ch) 1995. e4-e5) 14 _.xg4 ll:ib6 15 _.e2 ;t;
On 11 g4 possible is I 1...ll:Ja5 and Kupreichik-Larsen, Esbjerg 1988.
now on 12 g5 it is necessary to take Also dubious is 12... lLla5?! 13 e5!
into account the exchange sacrifice (on 13 ll:id4 ..id7 I4 ..ig1 e5!? 15
12...Axc3 I3 bxc3 ll:ixe4 14 il.d3 ll:ide2 1i'e7 16 a4 l:lfe8 17 _.eI exf4
ll:ixc3 15 1i'e1 ll:ic6 and Black has 18 ll:ixf4 ll:ic4 Black equalises the
an obvious advantage, Yu Shaoteng game, Zapata-Petursson, St Martin
-Wang Ziti, Beijing 1997. Therefore 1992) 13...ll:ie8 14 ll:ixa5 _.xa5 15
it is better to start with I2 f5 and af­ ..ig4 ..ix_g4 16 _.xg4 l:ld8 17 e6
ter 12.....ic4 13 g5 (13 ll:ixa5 ..ixe2 •rs 18 'ifxf5 gxf5 19 il.b6 l:la8 20
leads to a position from the varia­ l:laeI with advantage to White,
tion 10...ll:Ja5) 13 ...ll:id7 arises a Kovalev-Ca.Hansen, Gausdal 1990
double-edged game. On 12 ... b5 possible is 1 3 ll:id5
l l ... a6 (there was weaker play in the game
Worth considering is II. ..ll:ia5, Zapata-Armas, Matanzas 1994-13
planning, on 12 f5, to exploit the c4 _.ei ?!, which allowed Black to start
square: an attack on the queen's flank:
1) I 2.....ic4 13 ..id3 a6 (dubious 13...a5! 14 l:ld1 b4 15 ll:id5 ll:id7 16
is 13...d5?! 14 ll:ixa5 _.xa5 15 e5 e5 a4 17 ll:Jc 1 dxe5 18 fxe5 ..ixd5
ll:Je4 16 ll:Jxe4 dxe4 I 7 ..ixc4 l:bc4 19 ..ixd5 ll:icxe5 20 _.xb4 e6 21
18 f6 ± Thipsay-Beaumont, Tor­ ..if3 l:lc4 22 1Vb5 _.b8 23 _.xb8
quay 1998) 14 _.e1 (I4 'W'd2!?) l:lxb8 and obtained an advantage in
14.....ixd3 15 cxd3 ll:ixb3 16 axb3 the endgame) 13....txd5 14 exd5
d5! 17 ..ig5 d4 with equal chances, ll:ia5 15 _.e2 ll:ic4 16 .td4 and
Kindermann-Cebalo, Munich I 989. White's chances are preferable,
2) 12...ll:Jc4 13 ..id4 ..id7 14 Cela-Angelopoulos, Athens 1993.
..ixc4! .l:.xc4 I5 _.d3 llc8 16 ..ixa7 13 .l:.fl e5 14 l:ldl ll:ie8 15 ..ig4
b6 17 _.a6 b5! with compensation After I5 f5 �h8 16 g4 .tf6 17
for the pawn, Thipsay-Watson, l:lg2 ..ig5 18 .txg5 _.xg5 Black
Kuala Lumpur I992. It seems that controls the important dark squares
16 AadI ;t; gives Black more and has the preferable game, Glek­
difficulties. Tolnai, Cattolica 1993.
1 2 ..if3 15 ...f5 16 exf5 gxf5 17 .tel ..in
__

Sometimes 12 ..id3 ll:Ja5 is seen. 18 _.e1 �h8 19 'iffl iL:x.b3 lO a:x.b3

For example, the game Vink­ ll:id4 2 1 ..id3 ll:if6 ll h3 _.e8 with
Neessen, Holland (ch) I999, contin­ approximately equal chances,
ued 13 ll:id4 ..id7 I4 _.e2 'flc7 15 Nijboer-Szalanczy, Vienna 1990.
l:lae1 ll:ic4 16 ..ic1 with rather the
better chances for White. 13.....ic4 38
is worth considering.
1l.....ic4 (1 e4 c5 l ll:if3 d6 3 d4 c:x.d4 4
Too slow is 1 2 ... ll:Jd7 13 ..ig4 (or ll:i:x.d4 ll:if6 5 ll:ic3 g6 6 .tel .tg7 7
13 f5 ..ic4 14 ..ie2 ll:ice5 I5 fxg6 ..ie3 ll:ic6 8 0-0 0-0 9 ll:ib3)
hxg6 16 ..ig5 ll:if6 17 ll:id5 ll:ixd5 18
exd5 Wc7 19 c3 llfe8 = Asrian- 9 a5
...
 Classical Dragon with 6 �e2 �g 7 7 �e3 29

sides are equal, Ermenkov-Nijboer,

Dieren 1988. A.Aiekhine's con­
tinuation I1... d5 is justified only in
the case I2 exd5?! .i.xd5 13 .!Dxd5
.!Dxd5 14 .!bxc6 bxc6 15 .i.d4 e5 16
.i.c5 l:le8 17 .i.c4 'ii'c7 I8 c3 l:lad8
I9 'ii'c 2 e4! with initiative for Black,
Spielmann-Aiekhine, Margate I938.
But with a preliminary exchange of
the bishop, I2 .!Dxe6 fxe6 13 exd5
exd5 (I3 ... .!Dxd5 I4 .i.d2! ;!;) I4
.!bb5 e5 I5 c3 ltf7 (anticipating I6
A continuation introduced into 'ii'h3) I6 f4 'ii'e7 17 fxe5 .!bxe5 18
practice by A.Aiekhine. With the .i.d4, White obtains a promising po­
threat ...a5-a4-a3 Black practically sition in view of the weakness of
forces the reply a2-a4, gaining the Black's pawn structure (E.Geller).
b4 square. However upon this the
b5 square also becomes vulnerable.
10 a4
He does not succeed in exploiting
the weakening of the b6 square: IO
lDd5 .!bxe4 II �b6 'ii'd7 I2 .!bc7
l:tb8 I3 .!bxa5 �xb2! with material
advantage for Black.
I O .i.e6
...

Other ways of developing this

bishoy have also been tried:
I0 .. .ti�b4 II f4 .i.d7 (in the game
Gufeld-Zaremba, USA 1998, Black
dared to play II....i.g4?! I2 .i.xg4 l l .i.xb3
...

.!bxg4 13 'ii'xg4 .!bxc2 14 'ii'e2 A radical means of exploiting the

.!DxaI I5 lhaI, which turned out in weakening of the b4 square so as to
White's favour) I2 .i.f3 .i.c6. The organise a counterattack in the cen­
game Lukin-Zarudny, USSR I986, tre. After 1 l ...d5 12 e5 (also inter­
continued I3 .!bd5 b5 14 .i.b6 'ii'd7 esting is 12 f5!?) I2....!De4 13 .!Dxe4
I5 .i.xa5 and here, instead of the ex­ dxe4 I4 'ii'xd8 l:lfxd8 I5 .!bc5,
change I5 ....i.xd5 16 exd5 after White has the better endgame,
which White's chances were prefer­ Hennigan-Porubszki, Budapest
able, A.Lukin recommended I990.
I5 ... bxa4! I6 .i.xb4 axb3 I7 l:Xa8 There is an interesting continua­
.i.xa8 =. tion associated with the exploitation
11 f4 of the c4 square:
On I1 .!bd4 simplest is II....!Dxd4 I) 1I....!bd7 12 ltb1! (White de­
I 2 .i.xd4 l:tc8 with piece play fends the b2 pawn, threatening the
around the weakened squares. For advance .!bc3-d5; the continuation
example: 13 ltei .!bd7 I4 .i.xg7 I2 f5 plays into Black 's hands:
�xg7 I5 .!bb5 'ii'b6 I6 b3 .!be5 I7 I2 ... �xb3 13 cxb3 .!bc5 14 .i.c4
c4 .i.d7 and the chances of the two .!be5, with the game A.Fedorov-
30 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 i..e3

M.Makarov, Russia 2000, continu· ltld7 1 5 ltldb5! ltlxd3 16 cxd3

ing 1 5 i..d 5?! l:te8! 1 6 ltlb5 e6 with i..xb5 I7 axb5 b6 1 8 f5 ! and Black
a good game for Black, M.Makarov has to maintain a passive defence)
recommended 15 'ii'e2!? ;!;) 1 2...ltlb4 1 3 i.. f3 llJg4 1 4 i.. g 1 h5
1 2...ltlb6 1 3 .!t)d4 i..c4 1 4 ltldb5 I5 .!t)d4 i..c4 I6 l:leI e5 1 7 llldb5
:tc8 1 5 b3 i..e2 1 6 ltle2 ltld7 1 7 l:ld8 (also possible is 17 ...exf4 at
ltlg3 ltlb4 1 8 l:lf2 ltla2 1 9 e5! ±, once or after the exchange on b5) 1 8
Gavrikov-Yrjola, Tallinn 1 985. h3 ltlf6 I9 .!t)xd6 l:lxd6 20 'ii'xd6
2) 1 l ....!t)b4 1 2 ltld4 (or 1 2 i.. f3 lllxc2 2 1 fxe5 ltle8 22 'ii'd2 lllxa 1
ltld7 13 ltld4 i..c4 1 4 l:lf2 e5! 1 5 23 l:.xa 1 i..xe5 with an equal game,
ltldb5 exf4 1 6 i..xf4 i..xb5 1 7 axb5 Asrian-And.Rodriguez, FIDE-Wch
i..e5 1 8 i..xe5 ltlxe5 with equal Las Vegas (rapid) 1 999.
chances, Bronstein-Korchnoi, USSR 12 cxb3 e6
1 959) 1 2...'iWc8 1 3 �h 1 i.. c4 1 4 White's advantage on the queen's
i..d3 i..xd3 1 5 cxd3 'ii'd7 1 6 'ii'e2 flank is devalued by the doubled
ltlg4 17 i..g 1 e5 18 ltldb5 exf4 1 9 pawns which might tell in the end­
l:lxf4 ltle5 20 d4 ltlec6 21 l:.afl with game. Therefore Black strives for
the more active game, Yakovich­ exchanges, above all of the e4 pawn
Makarov, St.Petersburg 1 995. which leads to an opening of the
3) 1 1 ...l:lc8 12 i..f3 (after 1 2 f5!? position. On routine manoeuvres
i..xb3 1 3 cxb3 .!t)b4 14 i..c 4! ltld7 "square by square" of the type
1 5 'ii'e2 ltle5 1 6 i..b5 ltla6 1 7 ltld5 I2...lllb4 1 3 l:lc l llld7 1 4 i..c4 l:lc8
the weakness of the light squares in 1 5 'ii'g4 ltlc5 16 f5! White's space
Black's camp is obvious, Liberzon­ advantage, consolidated by the ac­
Pavlenko, USSR 1 968, but by play­ tive pair of bishops, mokes Black 's
ing at once 1 3...ltld7 1 4 i..c4 ltlc5 defence difficult. For example:
followed by ...ltlc6-e5, Black posts I6....!t)cd3 1 7 fxg6 hxg6 18 1Vxg6!
his knight actively, creating l:lxc4 1 9 'ii'g 3! and Alack falls under
counter-chances) 1 2...lllb4 1 3 ltld4 a dangerous attack.
i..c4 1 4 l:lf2 ltld7 1 5 l:ld2! (or 1 5 13 .i.f3 ltlb4 14 'ii'e2
i..g4 e6 1 6 ltldb5 i..xb5 I 7 ltlxb5 Now after 14 l:lc l d5! 1 5 exd5
ltlf6 1 8 i..f3 d5 19 e5 ltle4 20 i..xe4 lllfxd5 Black cqunliscs, Serper­
dxe4 21 ltld6 l:.c6 22 :td2 ltld5 23 Khalifman, Vilnius 1 9 8 8 .
'ii'e2 l:lxd6 24 exd6 i..xb2 25 l:lf l This blow in foct is olso good on
i..c3 with sufficient compensation 1 4 l:lf2, but ollcr corresponding
for the exchange, D.Schneider­ preparation: 14 ... 'ii'c7 (upon the im­
Perelshteyn, USA 1 999) 1 5...i..a6 mediate 1 4 .. dS I S cxdS li�fxd5 1 6
.

(!.Rogers considers the preliminary i..xd5 .!t)xd5 1 7 o!i)xdS Bl uck comes

1 5...ltlb6 best, but this is also insuf­ up against problems with his iso­
ficient for equality) I6 ltlcb5! e5 I7 lated d5 pawn: 17 ... 'ii'xdS? I X 'ii'xd5
ltlb3! ( I7 ltle2? exf4 I8 i..xf4 i..xb2 exd5 1 9 l:ld l ± or 17 . cxd5 1 8 i.. d4
. .

+ Hennigan-Rogers, London 1 989) l:le8 1 9 ..txg7 � x � 7 20 rs ;!;

1 7... exf4 I8 i..xf4 i.. xb2 I9 l:.xd6! S.Garcia Mortincz· Pinul, ( 'uhu (ch)
i.. xaI 20 ltlxa 1 ! and the active 1 984) 15 l:ld2 dS I ll cxd� lilfxd5 17
white pieces more than compensates ltlxd5 exd5 18 ..t l'2 l:lhlli 19 i.b6?
for the sacrificed exchange. d4! and Rinck tukcN over the
4) 1 l...'ii'c8 1 2 �h i (also possible initiative, Scmcnyuk- K hnl i I'man,
is 1 2 h3 ltlb4 13 ltld4 i.c4 14 i..d3! Riga 1 988.
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 i.e3 3 1

1 4 ...d5 similar plan to the previous

On 14...'ii'e7 there also follows 15 variation.
l:tad l with the idea 'ii'e2-b5 and
i.e3-b6.
I5 l:tadl 'ii'e7 I6 'ii'b5! l:r.fc8 I7
exd5 lDfxd5 I8 lDxd5 lbxd5
On 18...exd5, 19 i.b6 1s
unpleasant.
I9 i.fl!
After 19 i.xd5 exd5 20 i.b6 d4!
and Black has enough counterplay.
The game Yakovich-Khalifman,
Kuibyshev 1986, went on 19 ... .l:.c2
20 i.xd5 exd5 21 'ii'xd5 l:r.xb2 22
i.c5 ! and White achieved the ad­
vantage. As pointed out by
Y.Yakovich, worthy of attention is I O...i.e6
19 ... i.xb2! ? 20 i.xd5 exd5 2I After I O ... lba5 11 e5 lbe8 12
l:.xd5, though even here White's lbxa5 'ii'xa5 13 lbd5 i.e6 14 exd6
chances are preferable. exd6 15 lbb6 White's position is
preferable.
3C 1 1 f4
11 .l:.a3 looks rather artificial:
(I e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ll...d5 12 exd5 lbxd5 13 lbxd5
lbxd4 lDf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 'ii'xd5 and the game is even,
i.e3 lbc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lbb3) Ljubojevic-Larsen, Riga (izt) 1979.
l l ...llc8
9... a6 Already here l l ...lba5 is more
With this typical Sicilian move, real, since 12 f5 is harmless (or 12
Black strives for a flank attack, e5 lbe8 and Black is ready for the
avoiding positional concessions incursion ...i.e6-c4) 12... i.c4 13
(characteristic for the move 9... a5). fxg6 hxg6 14 e5 i.xe2 15 'ii'xe2
The main continuations for White dxe5 16 llad l 'ii'c7 17 g4 lbxb3 18
are: cxb3 e6 19 g4 and now in the game
Matulovic-Nicevski, Stip 1979,
3Ca: IO a4 Black should have continued
3Cb: IO f4 19...lbd5 with a double-edged
game.
3Ca 12 �hi
Also encountered is 12 f5 i.d7
(I e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 (12 ...i.xb3 13 cxb3 lbb4 14 i.c4
lbxd4 liJf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 lbxe4?! 15 fxg6 hxg6 16 lbxe4 d5
i.e3 lbc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lbb3 a6) 17 'ii'g4 gives White the better
chances, Tseshkovsky-Azmaipar­
IO a4 ashvili, Minsk 1985, but 14...lbd7 is
Radically preventing the advance possible) 13 a5 lbe5 14 i.b6 'ii'e8
... b7-b5, but also weakening the b4 15 lbd2 gxf5 16 exf5 i.c6 17 i.d4
square. Now Black can pursue a 'iii>h8 with chances for both sides,
32 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g 7 7 .i.e3

Kovalev-Ovseyevitsch, Alushta 10 f4
1 999.
1 2....i.xb3
Possible is 1 2... tt::ld7 1 3 tt::ld2
(mass exchanges by 1 3 tt::ld 4?!
tt::lxd4 14 .i.xd4 .i.xd4 l S "ii'xd4
"ii'b6! 1 6 'ii'xb6 tt::lxb6 are in Black's
favour in view of the weakness of
the c4 square) 13 ... tt::laS 1 4 fS .i.c4
1 S .i.d3 tt::leS (accepting the pawn
sacrifice, 1 S ....i.xd3 1 6 cxd3 .i.xc3
17 bxc3 .l:txc3 1 8 .i.h6 .l:te8 1 9 tt::lf3
g !ves White chances for attack) 1 6
'iVe2 dS! (weaker is 1 6 ... bS?! 1 7
axbS axbS 1 8 tt::lf3 ! ;!; Kindermann­
Yrjolii, Dubai (ol) 1 986) 1 7 exdS White carries out a standard plan
tt::lxd3 1 8 cxd3 .i.xdS 1 9 tt::lde4 with linked to the advance (depending on
a complicated game. the situation) of the e- or f-pawns.
13 cxb3 "ii'a5 14 g4 tt::ld 7 15 e5! 10...b5
tt::lb6 Also seen is 1 0 ....i.e6 1 1 fS .i.xb3
1 S ....l:tfd8 1 6 exd6 tt::lf6 is not bad. (possible is 1 1 ....i.d7 with the idea,
16 exd6 llfd8 17 tt::le4! exd6 18 after ...tt::lc6-eS, of transferring the
.i.d2 bishop to c6; when the opportunity
presents itself Black can open the
g-file) 1 2 axb3 l:.c8 1 3 <ifi>h 1 tt::leS 1 4
lla4 .l:tc6! lS g4 (also interesting is
l S tt::ldS bS 16 l:.d4 in conjunction
with an exchange sacrifice,
1 6...tt::led7 1 7 'ii'd2 tt::ldS 1 8 exdS!
.i.xd4 19 .i.xd4 in order to attack by
'ii'd2-h6, L.Psakhis) l S ...bS 1 6 llxd4
llxc3! 1 7 bxc3 'ii'a8 1 8 .i.f3 'fic6 1 9
g S tt::lxf3 20 'ii'xf3 tt::ld7 2 1 l:.d2
.i.xc3 22 l:.g2 aS with counterplay
for Black, Psakhis-Lechtynsky,
Tmava 1 988.
The game Tukrnakov- Worth considering is the more re­
D.Gurevich, Geneva 1 99S, arrived strained 1 1 .i.f3 with the idea of
at this position, where after tt::lc3-dS.
1 8...'ii'dS? 19 .i.f3 White obtained 11 .i.O .i.b7
the advantage. V.Tukrnakov sug­ A natural reply, but deserving at­
gested 18 ... tt::lb4! 19 'ii'e 1 tt::l6d5 tention is the plan of a flank attack
with complex play. after 1 l....i.d7 1 2 'fid2 .l:tb8, carried
3Cb out in the game Glek-Robovic, Os­
tend 1 993, which continued 1 3 tt::ldS
(1 e4 c5 2 tt::lt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 b4 1 4 l:.fe 1 aS 1 S a4 tt::le8 1 6 "ii'f2 e6
tt::l xd4 tt::lf6 5 tt::lc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 1 7 tt::lb6 .i.xb2 1 8 .l:tab 1 .i.c3 1 9
.i.e3 tt::lc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 tt::lb3 a6) .l:ted1 with double-edged play.
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.. e2 .i.. g 7 7 .i..e3 33

After 1 l ...e5 12 f5 l:tb8 l 3 g4 b4 Black introduces the bishop into

1 4 lLld5 lLlxd5 1 5 exd5 lLle7 16 i.e4 play and brings the knight over to
f6 1 7 'ii'd3 Black lands in a cramped the queen' s flank. Throwing in the
position, Cabrilo-Larsen, New York routine 1 1 ...l:tc8 represents a loss of
1 988. time: 1 2 'ii'e2 lLld7 1 3 a3! (in the
Premature is 1 l...b4 1 2 lLld5 lLld7 game Liberzon-Stein, Tallinn 1 969,
l 3 e5! ( 1 3 lLld4? i.xd4 1 4 i.xd4 e6 was played l 3 l:tad 1 ? lLlb4! 1 4 'ii'd2
+) 1 3...l:tb8 1 4 exd6 exd6 1 5 'ii'd2 i.xc3! 1 5 bxc3 ltlxa2 and Black ob­
i.xb2 16 l:tad 1 i.g7 1 7 lLld4 i.b7 tained the advantage) 13 ...ltlc5 1 4
18 ltlxc6 i.xc6 1 9 ltlxb4 i.xf3 20 llad 1 and White's chances are
l:txf3 'ii'a5 2 1 c3 and after the trans­ preferable.
fer of the bishop to d4, White in­ 12 'ii'd 2 lLla5
creases his initiative with an Dubious is 12 ...b5?! 13 ltlxb5
advance of the f-pawn. i.xb2 1 4 l:.adl and White gains the
12 e5 advantage, Sax-Kagan, Rio de Ja­
After 1 2 'ii'd2 lLld7 13 'ii'f2 ltla5 neiro (izt) 1 979.
14 ltlxa5 'ii'xa5 the game is equal, 13 ltJ xa5 bxa5 14 llad1 lLlb6 15
Morrison-Wojtkiewicz, Atlantic b3 a4
Open 1 999. Or 1 5 ...llc8 1 6 ltle2 a4 1 7 'ii'a5
12 ...dxe5 13 ltlc5 exf4 14 ltlxb7 1ic7 1 8 c4 axb3 19 axb3 �
'ii'c7 15 i.xf4 'ii'xb7 16 'ii'e 1 l:tad8 Benjamin-Abramovic, Palma de
and Black equalises the game, Mallorca GMA 1 989.
Yakovich-Savchenko, Rostov 1 993. 16 i.d4 i.xd4+ 17 'ii'xd4 l:tc8
and Black equalises the game, Drei­
3D Cvitan, Ticino 1 994.

(1 e4 c5 2 ltlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Line 4

ltlxd4 lLlf6 5 ltlc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
(1 e4 c5 2 ltlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
i.e3 ltlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 lLlb3)
ltlxd4 ltlf6 5 ltlc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
i.e3 ltlc6)
9 b6
...

8 lLlb3

This continuation looks rather

passive but, having few weaknesses, This continuation has been widely
Black can counter White's initiative. seen in the practice of world cham­
10 f4 i.b7 1 1 i.f3 lLld7 pions. By holding back castling
34 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 i.e3

White prepares a pawn attack on the l 2...lt:\e5 13 �h l h6 14 lt:\d4 a6

king's flank. This idea was advo­ with equal chances, Stavich­
cated by Alexander Alekhine. Golubev, USSR 1988
8...0-0 9 f4 2) 9...a6 10 g4 b5 11 g5 llld7 12
The continuation 9 g4 stands by Wd2 lllb6 13 o-o-o l:tb8 14 lt:\d4
itself, on this Black can react as in Wc7 15 lt:\xc6 1Wxc6 16 llld5 lt:\xd5
the main variation by carrying out 1 7 exd5 "ikc7 with a double-edged
the programmed ...d6-d5: 9... d5 10 game, Totsky-Mukhametov, Ore)
exd5 lt:lb4 1 1 i.f3 lt:\xg4 12 i.c5 1994
lt:\a6 13 i.d4 lt:\f6 with a compli­ 10 g4
cated game, Filipowicz-Trapl, Not only countering the threat of
Warsaw 1 969. ... d6-d5, but threatening an assault
9. .i.e6
. on the king' s flank.
By developing the bishop Black Black 's most consistent replies
not only prepares the break ... d6-d5, are:
but also takes under control the im­
portant c4 square. 4Aa: 10 ...d5
Deserving more attentive study is 4Ab: 10 ... lt:\a5
the position with the inclusion of 4Ac: 10...l:.c8
9...a5 10 a4 i.e6. Now on the move
11 g4 (the main continuation on Also worth considering is 1 0 ...a5
9... i.e6) the blow in the centre 1 1 f5 i.c8 12 g5 llld7 13 lt:\d4 lt:lb6
11...d5! becomes more effective 1 4 0-0 �e5 15 b3 d5! with a com­
compared to variation 4Aa: 1 2 f5 plex game, Gulko-Lukin, USSR
i.c8 13 exd5 lt:lb4 14 fxg6 (practi­ 1979.
cally forced, since on 14 i.f3 strong
is 14...gxf5! and, distinct from 4Aa
variation 4Aa, White does not have
the intermediate move a2-a3) (1 e4 c5 2 lt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
14...hxg6 15 i.f3 i.xg4! 1 6 i.xg4 lt:\xd4 lllf6 5 lt:\c3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
lt:\xg4 17 'ifxg4 lt:\xc2+ 18 'ittd2 i.e3 lt:\c6 8 lt:lb3 0-0 9 f4 i.e6 10
lDxe3 19 'ifi>xe3 'ifb6+ 20 llld4 f5! g4)
with an obvious advantage for
Black, Bokuchava-Soos, Tbilisi 10...d5
1 965. 11 lt:\d4? is not good because
of 1 l ...'ifb6! 1 2 lt:\xe6 Wxe3 13
lt:\xffi lt:\g4 with a strong attack for
Black (M.Euwe). It seems that
White has to return to 11 0-0, which
leads to a position examined in
variation 3B.
It is also useful to familiarise one­
self with the rarer continuations:
1) 9 ... e5 l 0 0-0 exf4 II i.xf4 l:te8
12 i.f3 (weaker is 1 2 Wxd6 Wb6+
13 1Wc5 lt:\xe4 1 4 1Wxb6 axb6 1 5
lt:\xe4 ltxe4 16 i.d3 l:tea4 +
Kolpakov-Tukmakov, USSR 1 979)
 Classical Dragon with 6 j.,e2 j.,g7 7 j.,e3 35

By sacrificing a pawn, Black 'ifxf3, then Black obtains counter­

meets the flank attack by opening chances by transferring the bishop
lines in the centre. This plan was in­ to the strong g6 square, 16.. _j.,g4 17
troduced into practice in 1936 by 'iVg2 j.,h5=0

the 6th world champion 1 5 ... tiJa6 16 'ifd3

M.Botvinnik. Also interesting is 16 'ii'd2 j.,f5 17
1 1 rs h3 g3 18 0-0-0 l:.c8 19 l:.hg1 j.,g6
The defect of the move 11 e5?! 20 j.,f3 b5 21 j.,h6 j.,xh6 22 'ifxh6
was clear as long ago as the game 'iVd6 23 li)d4 l:.xc3 24 bxc3 'iVxa3+
Levenfish·Botvinnik, Moscow 25 �d2 tlJc5 with sharp play,
1936, which continued 1 l...d4! 12 Hausner-Lutz, Germany 1992.
li)xd4 (12 exf6 j.,xf6! +) 12...li)xd4
13 j.,xd4 li)g4 +.
l l . j.,cS 12 exd5 li)b4 13 j.,f3
. .

Upon the preliminary exchange

13 fxg6?! hxg6 14 j.,f3 Black has
the choice between 14...tiJxg4 15
j.,xg4 j.,xg4 16 'ii'xg4 tlJxc2+ 17
..t>t2 tlJxa1 and the recommended
continuation of the 5th world cham­
pion M.Euwe: 14...e6!? 15 j.,c5
ll:)fxd5 16 tDxd5 tDxd5 17 0-0 l:le8
18 c4 tiJf4! in both cases with good
chances for Black.
On 13 d6 the famous game 16.. tiJc7
.

Alekhine-Botvinnik, Nottingham Other continuations have been

1936, continued 13...'ifxd6 14 j.,c5 considered to be clearly in White's
'iff4 15 l:.fl 'ifxh2 16 j.,xb4 tlJxg4 favour, but such assessments have
17 j.,xg4 'ii'g3+ 18 l:.t2 'ii'g1+ and recently been challenged:
Black forced a draw, but also possi­ 1) 16...e6 17 0-0-0 tiJxd5
ble was l 3...exd6, not fearing 14 g5 (17...exd5 18 h3 g3 19 j.,d4 ±) 18
in view of 14...j.,xf5! 15 gxf6 h3 g3 19 .l:.hg1 'itd6 20 j.,xd5 exd5
tlJxc2+ 16 ..t>t2 'ifxf6 with an attack Fischer-Reshevsky, New York
for Black. 1961, after which White can obtain
13...gxf5 14 a3! the advantage by the move 21 j.,d4!
White achieves nothing after 14 (R.Fischer).
g5 tlJg4 15 j.,c5 tiJa6 16 h3 tlJe5 17 2) 16...tiJd7 17 0-0-0 (on 17
j.,d4 and the game is equal j.,d4?! very strong is 17...e5! 18
(P.Keres). dxe6 j.,xd4 19 tiJxd4 tiJdc5! 20 'ii'e3
14 ... fxg4 'iVh4+ with advantage to Black)
Worse is 14 ... tlJxg4 15 j.,xg4 17 ...tlJe5 18 'ife2 'ii'c7 19 j.,d4?!
Jlxc3+ 16 bxc3 tiJxd5 17 j.,h6 e5 (stronger is 19 h3!? with chances of
18 h4 with an attack for Black, attack on the king) 19...tiJg6! 20
Spassky-Listengarten, USSR 1953. j.,xg7 after which in the game
15 j.,g2 Yakovich-Lemer, Kuibyshev 1986,
White sacrifices a pawn. If he instead of 20...'iff4+?, Black could
tries to attack without material have defended himself successfully
expenditure-15 axb4 gxf3 16 by means of 20.....t>xg7 21 d6 exd6
36 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 i..e3

22 'Dd5 (22 'Db5 'ike7 ) 22 .. .'ifdS

= In anticipation of the opponent's
23 'ike3 h6 with the idea of long castling Black commences ac­
...'ikdS-g5 (Yakovich). tive operations on the queen's flank.
3) 1 6...'ikd6 17 0-0-0 'Dh5 (upon 1 1 g5
the routine 1 S ... i..d7 l S l:thfl :lacS An immediate attack of the bishop
19 i..d4 White has the advantage, allows Black to obtain good coun­
Nei-Pitksaar, USSR 1 95 1 ) l S h3 terplay after 11 f5 i..c4!
'Df4 19 'ike4 'Dxg2 20 hxg4 'ikg6 21 1 ) 12 0-0 a6 13 g5 lt:Jd7 14 lt:Jxa5
'ikxg2 i..xg4 22 l:tdg 1 h5 seems rea­ i..xe2 1 5 'ikxe2 i..xc3 16 lt:Jxb7 'ikc7
sonable for Black, Yakovich-Sadler, 17 lt:Jxd6 i..xb2 1 S l:tab 1 i..e5 19
K.oge 1997. lt:Jc4 i..xh2+ with advantage to
17 0-0-0 iDeeS 18 h3 g3 Black, Persitz-Partos, Ascona 1976.
After this pawn "break" the king 2) 12 e5 i..xe2 (also possible is
is left in a safer posiiton. In White's 12...lt:JeS 13 e6 fxe6 14 fxg6 hxg6
favour is 1S...'Dd6 1 9 hxg4 i..xg4 15 i..d3 'ikc7 16 h4 d5! +
20 l:.dfl h5 21 i..h3 i..xh3 22 l:txh3 Bohmfeld-Miles, Dortmund 1 979)
'ikd7 23 i..d4 ± Petrienko-Tolnai, 1 3 'ikxe2 'Dd7! (not 13 ...dxe5? be­
Voronezh 19S7. cause of 14 .l:ld 1 'ikc7 15 g5! and 16
19 'Del 'Dd6 20 'Dxg3 i..d 7 21 lt:Jd5 winning a piece) 1 4 f6 exf6 15
i..d4 l:tc8 22 �b1 i.. a4 23 i.. O �h8 exd6 .l:leS I6 0-0-0 lt:Jc4 with a good
24 .l:lhg1 .l:lg8 25 .l:lg2 'ikc7 26 'Dc5 game for Black.
Lembit Oil considers 26 lle1! 3) 12 i..d3 d5? 13 e5 'DeS 14
best. lt:Jxa5 'ikxa5 I5 i..d4 lt:Jc7 I6 0-0
26 ... i..b5 27 'ikd2 b6 28 'Dce4 with a greater space advantage for
'Dfxe4 and now in the game White, Olsson-Thorhallsson, Co­
Oll-Pigusov, Beijing 1997, instead penhagen I990. I2 ...lt:Jd7 was
of 29 l£lxe4?! 29 i.. xe4 would retain necessary.
the better game. Worth considering is a prelimi­
nary II i..d4 i.. c4 and now I2 g5
4Ab i..xe2 (weak is 1 2 .... e5? I3 gxf6
exd4 1 4 lt:Jxa5 i..xe2 I5 �xe2 'ifxf6
(1 e4 c5 2 lt:JO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
I6 'Dd5 'ike6 17 'ikd3 with
lt:Jxd4 lt:Jf6 5 lt:Jc3 g6 6 i..e2 i.g7 7
advantage to White, Yakovich­
i..e3 lt:Jc6 8 lt:Jb3 0-0 9 f4 i..e6 10
Riemersma, Belgrade GMA I9SS)
g4)
13 'ikxe2 lt:Jh5 I4 i..xg7 lt:Jxg7 I5 f5
10...lt:Ja5 .l:lcS 16 0-0-0 and White's chances
are preferable, Isupov-V.Kozlov,
Vladivostok 1990
l l ...lt:Jd7
Or 1I...lt:JeS I2 i..d4! i..c4
(12 ....l:lcS 13 h4 lt:Jc4 I4 i..xc4 .l:lxc4
15 'ikd3 .l:lcS 16 0-0-0 is in White's
favour, Foltys-Eiiskases, Podebrady
I936) I3 i..xg7 i..xe2 14 'ikxe2
�xg7 and now, in the game
Louma-Prucha, Bmo I944, White
should have played I5 0-0-0, retain­
ing rather the better chances.
 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 i..e3 37

1 l ...tt::lxe4 12 tt::lxe4 i..xb2 does A very sharp position has arisen

not work because of 1 3 i..d 4! ± which I.Boleslavsky assessed as fa­
Vroombout-Sa1a, Weekender 1999. vourable for Black, considering that
12 i..d4 f6! on 17 hxg5 or 17 h5, 1 7...tt::le5 was
1 2... tt::lxb3 1 3 axb3 i..xd4 14 good. However one must exercise
'ii'xd4 or 12...i..xb3 13 axb3 i..xd4 caution. For example, in the game
14 'ii'xd4 are to White's advantage. Thiel-Schmitz, Germany 1993,
13 h4 Black played 17 ...tt::lc6? and after 18
After the exchange 13 gxf6 tt::lxf6 llJxc6 bxc6 19 'ii'd2 came under
it is easier for Black to defend him­ attack.
self: 14 'ii'd2 (the essence of the po­
sition is not changed by 14 l:tg1 iifl 4Ac
15 'ii'd2 ltc8 16 f5 'ii'c 7! 17 h4 tt::lc4
and the initiative passes to Black, (1 e4 c5 2 tt::lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Osterman-Nesis, corr. 1980) 14 tt::lxd4 tt::lf6 5 tt::lcJ g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7
'ii'd2 ltc8 15 f5 i..fl 16 i..d3 •12-th i..e3 tt::lc6 8 tt::lb3 0-0 9 f4 i..e6 10
Shabalov-Finegold, USA (ch) 1 994. g4)
White achieves nothing after 13
tt::ld5 tt::lxb3 14 axb3 fxg5 15 i..xg7 10 . l:.c8
. .

�xg7 16 'ii'd4+ �g8 17 i..c4 i.. fl

18 fxg5 e6 and the game is even,
Jongsma-Lutz, Tilburg 1993.
13 ... fxg5
Otherwise after h4-h5 White com­
mences an attack. For example:
1 3... tt::lc6 (13 ... ltc8 14 h5 tt::lc4 15
tt::ld5 ±) 14 h5 fxg5 1 5 i..xg7 �xg7
16 tL!d4 i..fl 17 hxg6 hxg6 18
tt::lxc6 bxc6 19 'ii'd4+ e5 20 'ii'xd6
gxf4 21 0-0-0 and White's attack is
the more dangerous, Markun­
Stavanja, Bled 1992.
14 i.. xg7 �xg7 15 tt::ld4 i.. g8 16 1 1 r5
f5 'ii'b6 Another direction of play comes
from 11 g5 tt::ld7 12 'ii'd2 tt::lb6 (after
12...a6 13 0-0-0 tt::lb4 14 �b1 b5 15
i..d4 f6 16 h4 tt::lc6 17 i..e3 b4 18
llJa4 fxg5 19 hxg5 White is more
active) 13 0-0-0 (or 13 0-0 tt::lc4 14
tt::ld3 d5 and Black is already better,
Mertin-Ciaussen, Germany 1993)
13 ...tt::lc4 (or 1 3... tt::lb4 14 q;>b1 tt::lc4
15 i..xc4 l:.xc4 16 i..d4 i..g4 17 ltc 1
= Estrin-Veresov, USSR 1962) 14
Jtxc4 i..xc4 15 �b1 a5 16 h4 b5
with a double-edged game.
Willemze-Anka, Holland (ch) 1998.
l l ...i..xb3
38 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g l 7 i.e3

This exchange is interchangable V.Smyslov employed this move

with the following blow in the cen­ in his I958 world championship
tre. But also possible is II. . .i.d7 I2 match against M.Botvinnik.
'ifd2 (I2 g5 lile8 I3 0-0 i.xc3 I4 8 0-0
...

bxc3 lilg7 IS lild4 tileS favours In the last, 9th, game on this
Black) I2...lile5 1 3 g5 .r:r.xc3!? (or theme from the Smyslov-Botvinnik
1 3 ...lile8 I4 lild4 lilc4 IS i.xc4 match, Moscow I958, Black pre­
.r:r.xc4 1 6 0-0-0 ;!;) 1 4 gxf6 llxe3 1 5 vented the advance of the h-pawn:
'it'xe3 i.f6 with a double-edged 8 ... h5 9 0 0-0 1 0 1i'd2 d5 II t:Dxc6!
game, Haist-Honfi, Baden-Baden bxc6 I2 e5 lile8 1 3 f4 (on 1 3 i.h6
I985. Botvinnik intended 1 3 ... i.xe5! 1 4
12 axb3 dS i.xffl 'itxffl) 1 3 ...f6 (after 1 3 ...f5
On 12 ... e6 possible is 13 g5 lilxe4 Black is deprived of counterplay,
1 4 lilxe4 exf5 1 5 lilc3 .l:[e8 1 6 i.f2 whereas White retains the advantage
and Black does not have full com­ on the queenside due to the weak­
pensation for the piece, Savon­ ness of the c5 square.) I4 0-0-0 fxe5
Gufeld, USSR (ch) 1 972. But worth IS fxe5 i.xe5 1 6 g4 i.xg4 I7 i.xg4
considering is 1 2 ...lile5 1 3 g5 :txc3 hxg4 1 8 h5 g5! 1 9 i.xg5 1i'd6 and
with sufficient compensation for the Black's chances proved to be
exchange. preferable.
13 lilxd5 Later M.Botvinnik recommended
On 13 exd5 lilb4 14 i.O possible 1 4 g4 fxe5 (in the game
is 1 4 ...lilfxd5! 1 5 lilxd5 lilxc2+ 1 6 Omelchenko-Heemsoth, corr. I982,
'itf2 lilxa 1 1 7 'ii'xaI l:tc2+ 1 8 'itg3 Black accepted the pawn sacrifice
i.e5+ 19 <Ji>h3 e6 with an attack on 1 4 ... hxg4?! and lost after IS 0-0-0
the king, Dikariev-Kupreichik, fxe5 I6 fxe5 1i'a5 1 7 h5 i.xe5 1 8
Kharkov 1 966. hxg6 i.xc3 1 9 :th8+!) 1 5 fxe5
13 ...lilxe4 14 i.f3 with an unex­ i.xe5 with unclear complications.
plored game. 9 hS dS 10 hxg6 hxg6
In the game Smyslov-Botvinnik,
Line S
Moscow (m/7) 1 958, 1 0 ... fxg6 1 1
(1 e4 cS 2 lilf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 exd5 lilxd5 was played when, as
lilxd4 lilf6 5 lilc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 shown later by M.Botvinnik, White
i.e3 lilc6) could have obtained an undoubted
advantage after 1 2 i.c4! e6 1 3
8 h4 lilxd5 exd5 I4 i.b3 lilxd4 1 5 i.xd4
1i'e7+ 1 6 'itf l .
1 l lilxc6!
Exchanges by 1 1 exd5 lilxd5 1 2
lilxc6 bxc6 1 3 lilxd5 1i'xd5 1 4
1i'xd5 cxd5 leave the game even,
Smyslov-Botvinnik, Moscow (m/5)
1 958.
l l ... bxc6 12 eS lile4 13 lilxe4
dxe4 14 i.d4 i.e6
Or 1 4 ... 1i'a5+ 15 i.c3 1i'd5 1 6
'ii'c l ;!; (M.Botvinnik).
15 1i'd2 cS
 Classical Dragon with 6 il..e2 il..g7 7 il..e3 39

Weaker is 15...'ii'c7 1 6 'ii'f4 l:tfd8 il.. xg4 il..xg4 10 tbd5 l:c8 11 c4

I7 il..c3 il..d5 18 'ii'h 4 �f8 19 0-0-0 'ii'a5 12 tbc3 a6 13 l:c1 0-0 14 b3
and the opening of the h-file makes il..d7 15 0-0 l:tfd8 16 l:.fd1 with
it easier for White to organise an positional pressure, Bogatyrchuk­
attack, Boyarinov-Pribilov, USSR IIyin-Genevsky, USSR (ch) 1934.
1 963. But also worth considering is 9
16 il..c3 'ii'xd2+ 17 'it>xd2 l:f.ad8+ tbxc6 bxc6 10 il..xg4 ..txg4. For
Also possible is an immediate example: 11 il..h6 il..xh6 (11...0-0 is
17...f5 and on 1 8 �e3-18...l:.ad8 safer) 1 2 'ii'xh6 e5 13 0-0 'ii'e7 14
(weaker is 18...�f7?! 19 g4 ;!;;) 19 f4 b3 AdS 15 f4 and White's chances
exf3 20 il..xf3 g5 with an equal are preferable, Simon-Adam,
game. Hungary 1 993.
18 �e3 f5 19 exf6 exf6 20 l:.ad1 9 0-0-0
f5 21 il.. xg7 �xg7 22 g3 �f6 with Here already on 9 l:d 1 possible is
approximately equal chances in the 9 ...tbg4 10 il..xg4 il..xg4. For exam­
endgame, De Ia Villa-Almeida, An­ ele: 11 f3 il..d7 1 2 0-0 l:.c8 13 l:f2
dorra (zt) 1987. llle5 1 4 b3 f5 15 exf5 gxf5 1 6 t'Lld5
t'Llf7 1 7 tbe2 e6 18 tiJdf4 b5 with
Line 6 double-edged play, Larsen-Miles,
Reykjavik 1986.
(1 e4 c5 2 tiJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 On 9 h4 (or 9 h3) 9...d5 is good:
tiJd4 tiJf6 5 tbc3 g6 6 il..e2 il.. g7 7 10 exd5 (the game van den Bosch­
il..e3 tbc6) Euwe, Amsterdam 1936, continued
1 0 t'Llxc6 bxc6 11 lld1 'ii'c7 12 h5?!
8 'ii'd2 tbxe4 1 3 tbxe4 dxe4 14 hxg6 hxg6
15 il..d4 l:d8 16 'it'c3 l:xd4 17 l:xd4
'ii'b6 0-1) 1O ...tiJxd5 1 1 tbxd5
tbxd4! 12 tbxe7+ 'ii'xe7 13 il..xd4
il..xd4 14 'ii'xd4 l:te8 with equal
chances, but also possible is
9...t'Llxd4 1 0 il..xd4 'ii'a5 1 1 0-0-0
il.. e6. For example the game Zelcic­
Mantovani, Velden 1994, continued
12 'ii'g5 'ii'xg5+ 13 hxg5 tiJd7 14 f4
llac8 15 g3 f6 16 gxf6 il..xf6 17
il..f3 with some initiative for White.
On 9 f3, 9...d5 is also good: 10
0-0-0 (weaker is 10 exd5 lllxd5 11
For the time being, White does tbxd5 'ii'xd5 12 c3 tbxd4 13 il..xd4
not make a decision where to place il..xd4 14 'ii'xd4 'ii'xd4 15 cxd4 il.. e6
his king, intending to sort this out with rather the better endgame in
according to the future development view of the presence of the isolated
of events while exploiting the fact pawn, Camus-Collas, Cappelle Ia
that Black cannot now play 8 ... d5 in Grande 1993) 10 ....tbxd4 (weaker is
view of 9 il.. b5. l 0... 1i'a5 11 tiJb3 'ii'c7 12 lLlb5 'ii'd8
8...0-0 13 exd5 tbe5 14 d6 exd6 15 'ii'xd6
8...tbg4 is also seen sometimes. A 'ii'xd6 16 l:xd6 with an extra pawn
possible continuation for White is 9 for White, H.Nielsen-Sylvan,
40 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 .i.e3

Roskilde 1998) 11 .i.xd4 dxe4 12 with an initiative for the sacrificed

fxe4 .i.e6 with equal chances. Also pawn.
possible is 9...�xd4 10 .i.xd4 .i.e6 1 1 �bl
11 0-0-0 'ii'a5 12 �b1 Afc8 13 a3 Or 11 f3 l:tc8 12 g4 'ii'a5 13 a3
l:.ab8 1 4 g4 b5 with chances for .i.c4 14 g5 �h5 15 .i.xg7 �xg7 16
both sides. .i.xc4 l:txc4 17 �d5 'ii'xd2+ 18
9 ...�xd4 l:.xd2 .!:[e8 with an equal endgame,
After 9... d5 10 exd5 �xd5 11 Sermier-Murey, France 1993.
�xc6 bxc6 12 �xd5 cxd5 13 'ii'xd5 Also 1 1 h4 is interesting, meeting
arises a position similar to that ex­ 11...'ii'a5 with 12 'ii'g5, e.g. Shirov­
amined in the Rauzer Attack, the Topalov, Madrid 1996, continued
only difference being that instead of 12... b5!? 13 'ii'xb5 'ii'c7 14 e5 �e8
f2-f3 he has made the useful devel­ 15 exd6 �xd6 16 'ii'c5 1Wxc5 1 7
oping move .i.fl -e2, which allows .i.xc5 .i.xc3 18 bxc3 l:.fc8 =.

White to retain somewhat the better

chances after the continuation
1 3...'ii'c7 14 'ii'xa8 .i.f5 15 'ii'xffi+
�xffi 16 .l:.d2 ;!; Wade-Wotkovsky,
Heidelberg 1 949.
On the fashionable manoeuvre
9 ... .i.d7 10 �b 1 Ac8 possible is the
more active 11 f4. For example the
"speed" game lvanchuk-Anand,
Monaco (rapid) 1997, continued:
1 l ...a6 12 l:.he1 b5 13 .i.f3 'ii'c7 14
�b3 b4 15 �a4 l:.b8 16 e5 dxe5 17
�ac5 .i.c8 18 .i.xc6 'ii'xc6 1 9 fxe5
�g4 20 .i.f4 and White gained the
advantage. l l .. .'ii'a5
Worth considering is 9 ... �g4!? 10 White also retains the initiative on
i.xg4 .i.xg4 11 f3 .i.e6 12 �xc6 other continuutionN.
bxc6 13 .i.h6 'ii'a5 (after 1) l l . . .l:.cH 1 2 u3 (with the idea of
13... .i.xh6?! 1 4 'ii'xh6 'ii'a5 15 f4! capturing on o7; nller 1 2 h4 .i.c4 13
White has a dangerous attack linked .i.f3 l:.e8 1 4 hS 'ii'n 5 1 5 n3 'ii'a6 16
to l:.d1-d3 and f4-f5) 14 .i.xg7 hxg6 hxg6 1 7 /i)dS c5 ond Black
�xg7 1 5 a3 l:tab8 16 �e2! 'ii'e5 17 does not 11tnnd wnrHc, Smyslov­
'ii'd4 f6 18 l:.d2 l:.b7 19 'ii'xe5 fxe5 KonstantinopniNky, Mnscow 1945)
20 �c3! with an equal game in 12 . . .'ii'o S J J .t " n' .t " n' 1 4 �d5
Glek-Smirin, Pula 1997. 'ii'xd2 I S li)x n, I -J/jJ.7 1 6 �h5+
10 .i.xd4 .i.e6 gxhS 1 7 l:.xd2 with the better end­
Also not bad is 10...'ii'a5 and game lhr White.
nothing is offered by 1 1 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 2) l l . . .'irc7 12 .tn! (playing in
12 �d5 'ii'xd2+ 13 Axd2 �g7, the style uf the� lhul.t"l' Allack by 12
while on 11 .i.c4 possible is h4 hS 1 .\ n J:li�H 1 4 J:ldg l 'ii'a5 15
1 l ...b5!. It seems that better here is o3 bS I t1 :,1 1 h-1 li1vnurs Black,
11 �b1 on which 1 l .. .e5 is also Riet�n-l(ubnl•l h, MuNcow (ol) 1994)
interesting (1 l ....i.e6 is looked at 1 2 . . . J:llcH 1 .1 :,le d i;)d7 ( t 3 ...a6 14
below) 12 .i.e3 .i.e6 13 'ii'xd6 l:.fc8! eS t ) 1 4 i. 11 11'1 ·J.o"l.f/ 1 5 li1d5! with
 Classical Dragon with 6 J..e2 J..g 7 7 J..e3 41

a positional advantage to White, 15 b3 'iVxe4 16 J.. f3 and after 17

Fuchs-Liebert, East Germany 1961. 'iVxd6 White has in effect an extra
3) l l ...a6 12 h4 b5 13 h5 b4 14 pawn on the queen's flank). But
J..xf6 J..xf6 15 hxg6 (15 lD<i5 J..g7 stronger is 12...exf6 with counter­
with chances for both sides, Honfi­ play after ...f6-f5.
Jean, Monte Carlo 1967) 15...hxg6 On 12 lDd5 'iVxd2 13 lDxe7+ �h8
( 1 5...bxc3? 16 'iVh6) 16 lDd5 ;!;;, in­ 14 l:txd2 lDxe4 15 J..xg7+ �xg7 16
tending an attack after 16 ... J..xd5 1 7 l:td4 lDf6 17 J..f3 l:tfe8 18 lDd5
exd5 a5 18 'ir'h6 l:te8 19 J.. g4. lDxd5 19 J..xd5 J..xd5 20 l:txd5 l:te2
4) l l ...b5 1 2 J..xb5 l:tb8 1 3 l:the 1 21 l:tf l l:tac8 22 c3 .l:.c6 Black has a
'iVa5 14 J..a4 l:tb4 15 J.. b3 lhd4 1 6 good endgame in view of the threat
'iVxd4 lDd5 17 exd5! J..xd4 18 l:txd4 of 23 ... l:tb6! (analysis).
J..f5 19 l:txe7 and White's chances 12 ...l:tfc8 13 J.. xf6 J..xf6 14 lDd5
are still preferable, Kupreichik­ 'ii'xd2 15 lDxf6+ �g7 16 lDh5+
Watson, Frunze 1985. gxh5 17 .l:.xd2 with rather the better
12 a3 endgame for White, though Black
The obvious 12 J..xf6 also spoils has sufficient defensive resources,
the pawn structure after 12 ... J..xf6 Glek-Khalifman, Russia (ch) 1995.
1 3 liJd5 ( 1 3 ...'iVa4 14 lDxf6+ exf6
 2 : Classical Dragon 7 ctJb3

(1 e4 c5 2 tt::l f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
tt::lxd4 tt::l f6 5 tt::lc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7)

7 tt::lb3

For ;xample: 9 f4 b5! 10 .i.f3

Wib6+ 11 �h1 e5 12 a4 b4 13 tt::ld5
tt::lxd5 14 'iVxd5 .i.b7 15 Wib5 .i.a6
(15 ...l:tac8!?) 16 'iVxb6 tt::lxb6 17
This retreat of the knight keeps .l:r.d1 exf4 18 .i.xf4 .i.xb2 with a
open the possibility of developing good game for Black, Mortensen­
the queen's bishop not only to e3, Mestel, Hastings 1993, or 9 .i.g5 a6
but also to the more active position 10 a4 b6 11 f4 .i.b7 12 .i.f3 b5 13
on g5. In the latter case it is clear axb5 axb5 14 .l:r.xa8 .i.xa8 with
that the knight on d4, which has chances for both sides, Gavrilakis­
thereby lost its support, must move Meste1, Thessaloniki (ol) 1988; also
away and there is no better square not bad is 14...'ii'a8!?.
for it (on f3 it hampers the advance White usually prevents this coun­
of the f-pawn). In addition, the terplay by means of 9 a4 b6 10 a5
knight retreat increases White's .i.b7 11 f3 a6 12 axb6 'iVxb6+ 13
control over the d5 square and he �h1 a5 (or 13 ... ltfc8 14 tt::la5 .i.c6
can carry out the plan of a f2-f4 15 tt::ld5 .i.xd5 16 exd5 ltc5 17 .i.e3
pawn attack with his dark-squared tt::lxd5 18 .i.xc5 'ii'xc5 19 tt::lb3 !
bishop remaining for the time being B.Horvath-Dueball, Rotterdam
on its original square. 1988) 14 .i.g5 .l:r.fc8 15 'iVd2 (after
7 0-0 8 0-0 tt::lc6
... 15 lta2 d5! 16 tt::lxd5 tt::lxd5 17 exd5
Also seen is the development a4 18 tt::lc1 .i.xb2 19 c4 a3! Black
8...tt::lbd7 with the idea of saving a equalises the game, Wahls-Golubev,
tempo for a pawn advance on the Berlin 1993) l 5 ...tt::le5 16 .l:r.a2 and
queen's flank thanks to the attack on White's chances are preferable
the e4 pawn. (M.Golubev).
 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 li::Jb 3 43

After 8 ...li::Jc6 the basic plans,

each assuming an independent char­
acter, are associated with the
continuations:

9 �h 1-Line 7
9 i..g5-Line 8
9 Ae1-Line 9

After 9 f4 b5! Black exploits in a

tactical way the momentary weak­
ening of the g1-a7 diagonal: I 0
i..xb5 is not favourable for White, A natural reaction to the knight
since then follows IO... li::Jxe4! 11 move which has more foundation
li::lxe4 'iib6+, winning back the here than after the developing move
piece. True, White can occupy the i..c l -e3.
d5 square by 10 i..f3 b4 II li::Jd5, 10 a4 i.. e6 1 1 f4 'ii'h6
but after 1 I ...li::lxd5 12 exd5 li::Ja5 In good time seizing control of
Black has compensation for the the important diagonal, otherwise it
weakening of the e7 pawn and ob­ will be taken by White:
tains counterplay on the queen's 1) 1 l ...'Wc8 12 i..e3 li::lb 4! (on
flank, since the c2 pawn is also 12...i..g4 possible is 13 i..g l l:.d8 14
backward. li::Jd5 i..xe2 15 'Wxe2 and White
dominates the centre, Alekhine­
Golombek, Montevideo 1939) 13
Line 7 li::Jd4 (or 13 i..f3 l:.d8 14 li::Jd4 i..c4
15 l:.f2 e5 16 li::Jdb5 d5! and Black
(1 e4 c5 2 li::JO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 takes over the initiative, N.Rogers­
li::J xd4 li::Jf6 5 li::Jc3 g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7 Soltis, Murphy 1994) 13...i.c4 14
li::Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li::lc6) i..d3 (or 14 l:.cl i..xe2 15 'Wxe2
li::Jg4 16 i..g l e5 17 fxe5 li::lxe5 18
9 �h1 li::Jcb5 ;!; Matanovic-Deze, Yugosla­
A prophylactic king move, pre­ via 1977) 14 ...e5 15 li::Jdb5 l:.a6 16
paring the advance f2-f4. Black's 'We2! with rather the better chances
main continuations are: for White, Morovic-Rantanen,
Lucerne (ol) 1982.
7A: 9 ... a5 2) l l ...Ac8 12 i..e3 li::Jb4 13 li::Jd4
7B: 9 ... i..e6 i..c4 14 li::Jdb5 i..xe2 15 'Wxe2 Ac6
7C: 9... a6 16 l:.adl 'Wb8 17 .l:td2 b6 18 li::Jd5
'Wb7 19 i..d4 li::Jbxd5 20 exd5 and
White gains a space advantage,
7A Mencinger-Baric, Pula 1990.
12 li::Jd 5!
(1 e4 c5 2 li::JO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 After 12 f5 Black prevents the
li::Jxd4 li::Jf6 5 li::Jc3 g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7 transfer of the knight on b3 to b5
li::Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li::Jc6 9 �h1) and obtains counterplay along the
dark squares: 12...i..xb3! 13 cxb3
9 ... a5 'ii'b4 (13...'Wd4 is also interesting)
44 Classical Dragon with 6 i&.e2 i&.g7 7 liJb3

1 4 il.e3 liJd7 (but not 14...liJxe4? in A natural developing move. Black

view of 15 liJd5! trapping the for the time being avoids weak­
queen) 1 5 il.c4 liJb6 1 6 �a2 liJxc4 nesses on the queen's flank.
17 liJxb4 liJxe3 1 8 'ife2 liJxfl 1 9 10 f4
liJxc6 liJg3+ with sufficient com­ As in the variation with the devel­
pensation for the queen, Van den opment of the bishop on e3 the main
Berg-Larsen, Beverwijk 1959. continuations for Black are:
12 ... il.xd5 13 exd5 liJb4 14 il.f3
li'a6!? 7Ba: I O ...'iVc8
The continuation 14 ....Z::.ac8 15 c3 7Bb: I O...l:.c8
liJd3 16 li'xd3 'iVxb3 17 lie1 liJd7
18 li'e2 leaves White with a definite Distinct from the variations where
initiative, Kurajica-Velimirovic, the bishop is standing on e3, the
Osijek 1978. manoeuvre 10...liJa5 1 1 f5 il.c4 is
But worth considering is 14...e6 less attractive, since White has
1 5 dxe6 fxe6 16 liJd4 d5 1 7 l:a3 several ways to fight for the
l:lfe8 1 8 Ae3 .!:.adS 1 9 c3 liJa6 20 advantage:
.l:te2 liJc5 and a "French" type of 1) 1 2 e5 il.xe2 (or 1 2...liJe8 1 3 e6
position arises in which Black ob­ liJf6 14 liJd4 il.xe2 15 'iVxe2 liJc6
tains sufficient counterplay thanks 1 6 exf7+ l:.xt7 1 7 liJe6 'iVd7 18
to the possibility of his controlling fxg6 hxg6 19 il.f4 with gaping
the e4 square, Messa-Martin, Roma weaknesses for Black, Zapata-Oltra
1 983. Caurin, Salamanca 199 1 ) 13 liJxe2
15 il.e2 'ifb6 and Black maintains liJe8 (13...liJg4! ?) 14 fxg6 hxg6 15
the balance, Nijboer-Riemersma, e6! liJc6 16 �f4 liJe5 17 liJd4 liJc7
Nederland (ch) 1 993. 18 exf7+ (18 il.d2 'iVc8 19 exf7
l:xt7 20 c3 'iVd7 + Psakhis-Lemer,
78 Moscow 1986) 18... .Z::.xt7 1 9 liJfe6
liJxe6 20 liJxe6 .Z::.xfl 2 1 'iVxfl +
(1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'ir'd7 and here, in the game Torre­
liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 il.e2 il.g7 7 Sosonko, Wijk aan Zee 1981, White
liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 �hi) retained the better chances with the
move 22 il.d2.
9 .. il.e6
. 2) 12 il.d3 d5?! 13 liJxa5 1Wxa5
1 4 e5 liJe4 15 liJxe4 il.xd3 16 cxd3
dxe4 17 f6 with advantage to White,
Sl!lrensen-Muse, Berlin 1992.
3) 1 2 liJxa5 il.xe2 13 'ir'xe2 1Wxa5
14 g4 and now the exchange
sacrifice 14...l:ac8 15 g5 ltxc3 is no
good because of 16 gxf6 (if the
bishop was on e3 Black would take
it with tempo), nor 1 4 ... 'ifb4 15 g5
liJd7 16 a3 and he has to retreat
since the b2 pawn is defended.
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.. e2 i..g 7 7 l"iJb3 45

7Ba to secure himself against the thrust

l"iJc3-d5 by exchanging pieces.
(1 e4 c5 2 l"iJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 After l l...i..c4 12 J:lf2 l:td8 13
l"iJxd4 l"iJf6 5 l"iJc3 g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7 l"iJd5 e6 (also interesting is 13 ... e5
l"iJb3 0-0 8 0-0 l"iJc6 9 �h1 i..e6 10 1 4 l"iJxf6+ i..xf6 15 i..g4 'ifc7 1 6 f5
f4) i..g7 1 7 'iff3 and now, in the game
Rantanen-Binham, Helsinki 1983,
10..JWc8 Black could have played 17 ... d5
with chances for both sides) 14
l"iJxf6+ i..xf6 15 c3 'ifc7 16 i..e3 e5
17 l"iJd2 and White's chances are
preferable (since on 17...i.. e6 possi­
ble is 18 f5), Sigurjonsson-Miles,
Hastings 1975176.
Also after l l....l:r.d8 12 l"iJd5 i..xd5
1 3 exd5 l"iJb4 1 4 c3 l"iJa6 15 i..e3
l"iJc5 16 .l:r.e1 'ifc7 1 7 l"iJd4 White
consolidates his pieces in the centre
and has the preferable position,
Kindermann-Habibi, Dortmund
1 987.
12 l"iJd5 i.. xf3 13 'ifxf3 l"iJxd5
A multi-purpose move, Simplifying the position with ex­
establishing control over the f5, g4 changes, but also possible is the
and c4 squares. plan to counterattack on the queen­
1 1 i..f3 side: 13 ...b5 14 c3 b4 1 5 i..d2 'ifb7
White prepares the thrust l"iJc3-d5. 16 l:.ae1 a5 17 l"iJxf6+ exf6 1 8 l"iJci
Sometimes the move 1 1 i..d3 is J:lfe8 19 l"iJd3 'ifb5 20 f5 g5 2 1 h4
employed, with the idea of f4-f5, 112-112 Kavalek-Sosonko, Waddinx­
but on this he loses control over the veen 1 979.
d5 square and Black can counterat­ 14 exd5 l"iJd4 15 l"iJxd4 i.. xd4 16
tack in the centre: l l .. .d5 (in the 'ifd3 i..f6 with equal chances,
game Smirin-Khalifman, USSR (ch) Kindermann-Chiburdanidze, Biel
1988, Black carried out this move 1988.
after some preEaration: 1 1 ...l"iJb4 12
l"iJd4 i..g4 13 'Wei l"iJh5! 14 l"iJb3 a5
15 i..d2 a4 16 l"iJci d5! and also ob­ 7Bb
tained a good game) 12 f5 dxe4 1 3
fxe6 exd3 14 exf7+ J:lxf7 1 5 'ifxd3 (1 e4 c5 2 l"iJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
l"iJb4 16 'ife2 'ifg4 17 l:tf3 e5 with l"iJxd4 l"iJf6 5 l"iJc3 g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7
an excellent game for Black, l"iJb3 0-0 8 0-0 l"iJc6 9 �h1 i..e6 10
So.Polgar-Ashley, New York 1992. f4)
The continuation 1 1 i..e3 leads to
variations with the early develop­ 10...J:lc8
ment of the bishop on e3. Black continues his development,
l l . i..g4
. . ignoring the threat of f4-f5, and in
Exploiting the absence of the this way counting on exploiting the
bishop from e3, Black endeavours e5 square.
46 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 tiJb3

16....i.g5 17 g3 e6 18 tiJf4 'iWe7

when Black even has the better
chances, Lengyel-Borge, Budapest
1991.
13 ... tiJc4 14 .i.xc4 ltxc4 15 'iWd3
llc8 16 llad1 .i.c6 17 tiJd5 .i.xd5
18 exd5

1 1 f5
Rej ecting this move in favour of
11 .i.f3 allows Black to solve his
opening problems with the help of
the standard ... e7-e5 thrust:
1I....i.c4 12 l:.f2 (or 12 lle1 e5! 13
tiJd5 tiJxd5 14 exd5 tiJb4 15 'ii'd2
.i.xb3 16 'ihb4 .i.xc2 17 'iWxb7 e4
18 .i.e2 .i.d4 and the black bishops The posttlon is characteristic of
dominate the position, Chechlov- such plans of play but with the
Hoffmann, Biel 1994) 12 ...e5 13 important difference that White is
.i.e3 .i.h6!? (also good is 13 ...b5 14 ready to open the f-file. In the game
fxe5 tDxe5 15 a3 "ile7 16 tiJd4 l:.fd8 Leko-Turzo, Szeged 1994, Black
17 .i.g5 h6 18 .i.xf6 'iWxf6, main­ hurried to exploit his trump card­
taining the balance, Cabrilo­ the e5 square-and came under at­
Chatalbashev, Cacak 1991) 14 'iWd2 tack: 18...CiJg4 19 c3 tiJe5 20 'iWh3
exf4 15 .i.xf4 .i.xf4 16 'iWxf4 tiJe5 lle8 21 ttJd4 llc5? (2I...'iWa5!?) 22
!!nd with his control of the e5 square fxg6 hxg6 23 tiJe6. Worth consider­
Black secures equal chances, ing is 18 ... 'iWc7 19 c3 'ii'c4, striving
Cabrilo-Velimirovic, Bukovicke to compensate for the weaknesses of
Banje 1993. both the e7 and d5 pawns.
l l ... .i.d7 12 .i.g5
Also interesting is the plan to put 7C
eressure on the king's flank: 12 g4
(1 e4 c5 2 tiJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
tiJe5 13 g5 tiJe8 14 tiJd4 .i.c6?!
tiJxd4 tiJf6 5 tiJc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
(more active was 14...CiJc4 15 .i.c1
tiJb3 0-0 8 0-0 tiJc6 9 �h1)
'ikb6) 15 .i.e3 tiJc7 16 tDxc6 tDxc6
17 .i.c4 a6 18 .i.b6 'iWd7 19 f6 and 9 a6
.••

White gains the advantage, Since the knight on c6 is not at­

Kashasvili-Theocharides, Halle tacked, Black endeavours to organ­
1995. ise an offensive with the b-pawn.
12 ... tiJe5 13 .i.d3
After 13 tiJd4 .i.c6 14 tiJxc6 llxc6 White's main continuations are:
threats of sacrificing the exchange
appear for Black, since 15 .i.xf6 7Ca: 10 f4
�xf6 16 tiJd5 is harmless after 7Cb: 10 a4
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g l J {jjbJ 47

7Ca 13 ... ljjxdS 14 exdS {jjas I S .i.d4

ljjxb3 1 6 axb3 aS 1 7 .i.xg7 �xg7
(1 e4 c5 2 {jjf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 8 'fkd4+ and White has some space
ljjxd4 {jjf6 5 ljjc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 advantage, Cabrilo-Pavlov, Tmava
ljjb3 0-0 8 0-0 ljjc6 9 ..t>h1 a6) 1 98 1 , but worth considering is
1 2 ...l:tc8 1 3 l:tf2 b4 J 4 {jja4 l:tb8 1 S
10 f4 a3 {jjas ! with approximately equal
chances, Nunn-Kudrin, Wijk aan
Zee 1 98S
13 a3
Black also has sufficient counter­
Qlay after 1 3 a4 bxa4 (or 1 3 . b4 1 4
..

lLJdS ljje 8! followed by ... e7-e6) 1 4

l:1xa4 aS.
13 a5 14 a4 bxa4 15 ljj xa4 'it'c8
.•.

16 ljjb6 'i'c7 17 ljjxd7 ljj xd7 18 c3

l:1fc8 with equal chances, Zontakh­
Khasin, Budapest 1 99 1 .

7Cb
White ignores the plan to advance
on the queen's flank, hoping to con­ (1 e4 c5 2 {jjf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
quer the position in the centre. ljjxd4 {jjf6 5 ljjc3 g6 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7
10 ... b5 1 1 .i.f3 .i.d7 ljjb3 0-0 8 0-0 ljjc6 9 �h1 a6)
Leaving the b-file open for the
rook. After I I ....i.b7 White can pro­ 10 a4
ceed with the standard knight thrust
1 2 a4 b4 1 3 ljjd S, also with the idea
of exerting pressure by a4-aS. The
pawn break in the centre 1 2 eS is
linked to a pawn sacrifice: 1 2 ...dxeS
13 ljjcS 'iVb6 (weaker is 1 3 ...'i'xd1
14 l:txd1 e4! 1 S ljj3xe4 ljjxe4 1 6
.i.xe4 l:1ad8 1 7 .i.e3 ;!;) 1 4 ljjxb7
'i'xb7 1 S fxeS ljjd7 1 6 e6 fxe6 1 7
ljje4 ltad8 1 8 'ii'e 1 ljjdeS 1 9 {jjgS
'i'c8! for which there is apparently
not sufficient compensation,
Chemiaev-Serper, St.Petersburg
1994. Radically preventing Black's
12 .i.e3 l:tb8 plan, but now the b4 square is
1 2 ...b4 is rather premature. Then weakened.
1 3 ljjdS (on 1 3 lLJa4 possible is 10....i.e6
1 3 ...l:1b8 14 a3 aS I S l:1f2 'fkc7 1 6 Also interesting is the plan with
l:td2 and here, i n the game Short­ the fianchetto of this bisho_p: I O ... b6
Chiburdanidze, Banja Luka 1 98S, I I f4 .i.b7 12 .i.f3 lLJd7! (or
Black could have maintained the 12 ...l:1c8 13 .i.e3 eS with an unclear
balance with the move 1 6 . . .l:tfd8) game) 13 .i.e3 l:tc8 14 ltf2
48 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 li:Jb3

(A.Mikhalchishin recommended 1 4
l:.b 1 with li:Jc3-d5 t o follow)
14 ...lt:Ja5 ! 1 5 lt:Jxa5 bxa5 1 6 i.d4
( 1 6 l:.a3?! .l:.c4 1 7 l:tb3 "it'c8 1 8 "iid3
l:tb4 19 l:.fl lt:Jc5 20 i.xc5 "it'xc5 +
Smirin-Kramnik, Bugojno 1999)
16 ... e5 1 7 fxe5 lt:Jxe5 with chances
for both sides.
1 1 f4 li:Ja5
Black could obtain a pawn major­
ity on the right flank: 1 I ...i.xb3 1 2
cxb3, but this reduces his resources
for counterplay. It is a long way to As pointed out by I.Smirin, this is
the endgame and White needs to confirmed by the variation:
reckon on the advantage of the two 19 ...Wb6 20 aS 1Wd4! (20 ...ilxb2?
bishops: 1 2 ...e6 1 3 i. f3 l:tc8 1 4 2 1 lta2 "ilib4 22 li:Je4 ±) 21 ilt3
i.e3 l:.e8 1 5 i.g1 ilc7 1 6 .l:.c 1 "ilib8 "iig4! 22 fxg6 hxg6 23 "ifxb7 l:tb8
1 7 .l:.c2 and though here, in the and the position is even. However,
game Smirin-Kir.Georgiev, Elenite in the game, Smirin-Mark Tseitlin,
1 993, a draw was agreed, White's Israel 1 99 1 , followed 19 ...gxf5? 20
chances appear to be preferable. lt:Je4 and White gained the
12 li:Jxa5 advantage.
On 1 2 f5 best is 1 2 ... i.c4 13 e5
i.xe2 1 4 li:Jxe2 li:Je8 with a complex Line 8
game, but weaker is 1 2 ... i.xb3 1 3
cxb3 "ilib6 1 4 l:ta3 .l:.ac8 1 5 i.d3 e6 (1 e4 cS 2 li:Jt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
1 6 i.g5 with some advantage for li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 5 li:Jc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
White, Sznapik-Pavlov, Baile Her­ li:Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li:Jc6)
culane 1 982.
12 ...1Wxa5 13 i.d3 l:.ac8 9 i.gS
Also worth considering is
1 3 ...b5!? 1 4 f5 i.d7 1 5 i.d2 bxa4
1 6 lt:Jxa4 'ikc7 1 7 li:Jc3 .l:.tb8 1 8 l:.a2
with a complicated game (I.Smirin).
14 f5 i.c4 15 'We2 i.xd3
On 1 5 ..ilb4 follows 1 6 a5.
.

16 cxd3 e6! 17 i.d2

Or 1 7 i.g5 l:tce8 1 8 'ikf3 li:Jd7
with equal chances.
17 ...exf5 18 exfS :res 19 'ikd1 !
On 1 9 ikf3, Black equalises by
1 9 ...'Wf5.
From its starting square the queen
can be transferred to b3, while for The active development of the
the time being White plans i.d2-g5. bishop (respective to the restrained
But all the same this position objec­ i.e 1 -e3) is one of the ideas of the
tively can be assessed as dynami­ retreat of the knight to b3. The aim
cally equal. of it is not only to prevent the
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 l:i:Jb3 49

advance ...d6-d5, because of the 1 8 l:i:Jxa5 i.a8 1 9 i.d6 b4 20 i.xb8

possibility of a capture on f6, but bxc3 2 1 i.d6 l:i:Je3 with sufficient
also the "X-Ray" effect on the e7 compensation for the exchange,
pawn. The drawback of the move is Szell-Liptay, Magyarorszag I 986)
the weakening of the g 1 -a7 diagonal 13 ...bxa4 I4 .l:r.xa4 l:i:Jb4 15 .l:r.a3
which is felt after f2-f4. i.e6 1 6 l:i:Jxa5 .l:r.a8 I7 l:i:Jb3 .l:r.xa3 I S
Black's main continuations are: bxa3 1Vc7 with good counterplay,
Soltis-Jovicic, Belgrade GMA 1988.
SA: 9 a5...

SB: 9 i.e6
••• SA
SC: 9 a6
...

(1 e4 c5 2 l:i:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Also seen sometimes is piece sup­ l:i:Jxd4 l:i:Jf6 5 l:i:Jc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
port for the advance of the b-pawn. l:i:Jb3 0-0 S 0-0 l:i:Jc6 9 i.g5)
1 ) 9 .. Jlb8 10 a4 (the most radical;
also possible is 1 0 .l:r.e 1, preventing 9 a5
•••

1 0 ...b5 by defending the e4 pawn:

10 ... a6 I I f4 b5 12 i.f3 h6 1 3 i.h4
e5 14 f5 g5 1 5 i.f2 l:i:Je7 16 g4 .l:r.e8
1 7 1Vd2 b4 I 8 l:i:Je2 i.b7 1 9 l:i:Jg3
d5 ! 20 l:i:Jc5 i.a8 2 I .l:r.ad l 1Va5 with
sharp play, Zapata-R.Hemandez,
Bayamo 1990) 1 0...i.e6 I I f4 l:i:Ja5
I 2 �h l l:tc8 1 3 l:i:Jxa5 1Vxa5 14
i.d3 i.c4 1 5 1Ve2 (also good is I S
1Vf3, but premature i s 1 5 f5 d5! 1 6
i.xc4 Axc4 I 7 i.xf6 i.xf6 1 8
l:i:Jxd5 .l:r.xe4 I 9 l:i:Jxf6+ exf6 and
Black maintains the balance, while
after 16 e5 l:i:Je4 1 7 l:i:Jxe4 dxe4 1 8 As in other variations, the natural
i.xc4 l:txc4 I 9 i.xe7 .l:r.fc8 he even reaction to the placing of the knight
has the preferable game, A.Sokolov) on b3. The drawback of the move is
1 5 ...1Vb4 16 .l:r.ab l e6 1 7 f5 with the the weakening of the b5 square.
rather better chances for White, 10 a4 i.e6
A.Sokolov-Ljubojevic, Tilburg After the immediate 10 ...l:i:Jb4
1987. White can advantageously return to
2) 9 ... i.d7 IO �hl .l:r.b8 I I f4 (he d4 with his knight: I I i.f3 ! (the
does not succeed in slowing down move I I .l:r.e I is examined within
the b-pawn even by 1 1 a4 in view of the variation 9 .l:r.e !-chapter 9)
1 l .. .a6 1 2 f4 b5 1 3 axb5 axb5 1 4 1 1 ...1Vc7 1 2 l:i:Jd4! i.d7 1 3 1Vd2
i. f3 h6 1 5 i.h4 b4 I 6 l:i:Jd5 l:i:Jh7 !? .l:r.ac8 1 4 .l:r.ad 1 1Vb8 1 5 .l:r.fe 1 .l:r.fe8
1 7 .l:r.a2 g5 I 8 i.g3 gxf4 1 9 i.xf4 16 h3 i.c6 17 l:i:Jcb5! and, after oc­
l:i:Je5 and the centralised knight cupying the main key squares on the
guarantees Black good counterplay, board, White has the advantage,
Vogt-Thorsteinsson, Saltsjobaden Balashov-Spiridonov, Halle 1 976.
1 988) l l .. .b5 1 2 i.f3 aS f3 a4 (or 1 1 �h1
1 3 e5 dxe5 1 4 i.xc6 i.xc6 1 5 1Vxd8 This prophylactic move is made
.l:r.fxd8 16 fxe5 l:i:Jg4 I 7 i.xe7 .l:r.e8 practically automatically in
50 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.e2 .i.g7 7 lbb3

conjunction with f2-f4. Thus 1 I f4 The plan of transferring the

l:r.c8 1 2 'iti>h I leads to a transposition second knight to the queen's flank is
of moves. However we should men­ passive: I I ...lbd7 I2 f4
tion that on I 2 .i.f3 possible is I) I 2 ...lbb6 1 3 f5 .i.c4 I4 .i.xc4
12 ...lbd7 I3 'it>h i lbb6 intending to lbxc4 I 5 'ife2 lbb6 I6 'iVb5 and
place the knight on c4. White has very strong pressure,
l l ...:cs Karpov-Sosonko, Bad Lauterberg
Subsequently preparing a transfer I 977.
of the bishop to c4. In this context 2) I2 ....i.xb3 13 cxb3 lbc5 I4
also worth considering is 1 l . ..'iVc8 .i.c4 .i.xc3 I5 bxc3 lbxe4 I 6 .i.h6
1 2 f4 ( I 2 lbd5? does not work be­ lbf6 (a practically forced exchange
cause of 1 2 ... lbxe4 1 3 lbb6 'iVd8 1 4 sacrifice, since on I6 ... l:te8 follows
lbxa8 lbxg5 I 5 'ifd2 lbe4 1 6 'ife3 I 7 f5 !) I7 .i.xf8 �xf8 I 8 "ilf3 1i'd7
lbc5 and the knight has no way out (or I 8 ...'iVb6 I9 l:tae i ± Matanovic­
from a8) 1 2 ... l:r.d8 (or 1 2 ...lbb4 1 3 Velimirovic, Skopje I976) I9 l:.ad i
lbd4 .i.c4 14 lbdb5 l:r.d8 1 5 .i.d3 1i'f5 20 h3 llc8 2 I 1l'e3 l:tc7 22
'ifc5 16 'ife2 llac8 1 7 l:tad 1 lbxd3 .i.d3 'iVc8 23 .i.e2 ;!; Savanovic­
1 8 cxd3 .i.xb5 1 9 axb5 a4 20 l:.a 1 Velimirovic, Vrnjacka Banja I 998 .
.l:r.a8 2 1 lla3 lldc8 = Yurtaev­ 12 f4
Ledder, Lyngby 1 990) 1 3 .i.f3?! In the game Renet-Petursson,
lbb4 1 4 lbd4 (not much better is 14 Marseilles I988, was seen I2 l:te I
l:.f2 or 14 l:r.e 1 +) 14 ....i.c4 15 l:.f2 lbb4 I 3 lbd4 .i.d7 14 lbdb5 .i.xb5
h6 1 6 .i.h4 e5 Black obtains the I 5 .i.xb'5 'iVb6 I6 'iVe2 'ifc5 I7 .i.e3
better game, Cherniaev-Gallagher, 'iVh5 1 8 .i.b6 'ifxe2 I9 l:txe2 with
Hastings 1 994. A.Cherniaev recom­ the transfer to a rather better end­
mended 1 3 'ife 1 lbb4 1 4 llc 1 with game for White.
complex play. 12 ...lbb4
On the thrust 1 l ...lbb4 White, just Now the concession of the d4
like a move earlier, makes a favour­ square is not so important since
able return with the knight: 1 2 lbd4 Black is preparing a place on c4 for
'iic 8 (after 1 2 ...llc8 1 3 lbxe6 fxe6 his bishop.
1 4 .i.d3 'iVd7 1 5 f4 White is ready to 13 lbd4
advance the e-pawn; the possible White transfers his knight to a
character of the struggle is illus­ more active position.
trated by the game, Fliickiger­ Premature is 1 3 f5?! .i.xb3 I4
Danner, Bern 1 990, which contin­ cxb3 llxc3! 15 bxc3 ( 15 .i.xf6 l:tc5 !
ued 1 5 ...l:r.c5 16 .i.b5 "fie? 1 7 e5! =F Bangiev-Kupreichik, USSR I 975)
dxe5 1 8 fxe5 lld8 19 exf6 .i.xf6 20 1 5 . . . o!Dxe4 1 6 cxb4 .i.xa i I7 'iVxa i
.i.d2 llh5 21 h3 .i.g5 22 'ifxh5 gxh5 lbxgS with active play for Black.
23 .i.xg5 and White had more than However it is necessary to take
enough material compensation for into account Black's tactical re­
the queen) 1 3 f3 .i.c4 14 lbcb5 lle8 sources. For example, in the game
1 5 .i.xc4 'ifxc4 16 c3 lba6 1 7 'ife 1 Moroz-Chernikov, Pardubice I 997,
h6 1 8 .i.e3 l:tad8 1 9 b3 'iVc8 20 c4 on 1 3 i.h4'!! followed I3 ... lbxe4 !
b6 2 1 l:tb I and White has a space 14 �xe4 lilxc2 1 5 lbbc5 .i.f5 I 6
advantage, Ivanovic-Basagic, 'ifxc2 llc5 1 7 'iVdJ d 5 +.
Yugoslavia (ch) I99I 13 ... .tc4 1 4 l.ildb5
 Classical Dragon with 6 1Le2 1l.g 7 7 li:Jb3 51

Here the continuations are: 19 ... llxfl+ 20 llxfl 'ii'd8 21 l:td1

exd6 22 l:txd6 'ii'e7 23 'ii'xe7 1Lxe7
8Aa: 14...dS 24 l:td7 1Lf6
8Ab: 14 ... 1LxbS Also after 24 ... 1Ld8 25 ltxb7
SAc: 14 ...1Wb6 li:Jxc2 26 li:Je4 f5 27 li:Jed6 White's
chances are preferable, Van der
Wiei-Piket, Holland (ch) 1 988, but
8Aa 26 li:Jd5 seems stronger.
2S li:Je4! 1Lxb2 26 c3 li:Jc6 27
(1 e4 cS 2 li:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .!:lxb7 ltd8 28 g3 with the better
li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 S li:Jc3 g6 6 1Le2 1Lg7 7 endgame for White, Balashov­
li:Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li:Jc6 9 iLgS aS 10 a4 Geller, Lvov 1 978.
1Le6 1 1 'it>hl .!:lc8 12 f4 li:Jb4 13
li:Jd4 1Lc4 14 li:JdbS) 8Ab

14... dS (1 e4 cS 2 li:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 S li:Jc3 g6 6 1Le2 1Lg7 7
li:Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li:Jc6 9 1l.gS aS 10 a4
1Le6 1 1 �h1 ltc8 12 f4 li:Jb4 13
li:Jd4 1Lc4 14 li:JdbS)

14...1LxbS

This radical attempt to break up

the centre involves a pawn sacrifice.
1S 1Lxc4
Nothing is offered by 1 5 e5 li:Je8
1 6 li:Jd4 1Lxe2 1 7 li:Jcxe2 'jj'd7 when
Black's chances are not worse, 1S .i.xbS li:Je8
Reyes-Portela, Madrid 1 992. The first experience of this varia­
1S....!:lxc4 16 1Lxf6 1Lxf6 17 exdS tion involved a pawn sacrifice
1Wb8 1 5 ...h6 I 6 1Lh4 li:Jh7 1 7 'ii'd2 g5 1 8
Weaker is 1 7 ...1Lxc3 1 8 li:Jxc3 fxg5 li:Jxg5 1 9 1Lxg5 hxg5 20
l:tc5 19 'i'd4 'ifb6 20 l:ad I li:Jxc2 2 1 'ii'xg5, but nevertheless Black's
'jj'e4 with a dangerous initiative for counterplay, 20... e6 21 'jj'g3 ltc5 22
White, Zapata-Estevez, Bayamo ltadl (22 l:tf4 llg5 23 'jj'f2 ;t Vogt­
1984. Barczay, Tallinn 1 98 1 ) 22 ... ltg5 23
18 'ife2! .!:lxf4 19 d6! 'ii'f2 'ii'c7 24 'ii'f4, did not fully
With a timely return of the pawn, compensate for the pawn,
White maintains an enduring Romanishin-Tseshkovsky, Riga (izt)
initiative. 1 979.
52 Classical Dragon with 6 i. e2 i.g7 7 tiJb3

His problems are not solved by 1 7 i.f2 'ifh5 1 8 i.b6 'iVxd 1 1 9

1 5 ...d5 1 6 exd5 tiJfxd5 1 7 tiJxd5 l:.fxd 1 ll f8 2 0 lt::la7 and Black has a
tiJxd5 1 8 c3 and White's position is difficult endgame, Karpov­
preferable, Franzoni-Korchnoi, Hemandez, Las Palmas 1 977.
Berne 1 992. 1 b) 1 5 ... i.xe2 16 'iVxe2 'ii'c5 1 7
16 e5 d5 17 .l:.fl f6 18 exf6 i.xf6 l:lad 1 (worth considering is 1 7 b5
19 i.xf6 tiJxf6 and Black equalises, with the idea of .l:.a 1 -d 1 -d2 and
Makarychev-Tseshkovsky, Sochi i.h4-f2, which forces Black into
1 983. passive defence) 1 7 .. .'ii'c4 1 8 l:.fe 1
llfe8 19 'ii'xc4 .l:.xc4 2 0 lt::la3 l:.cc8
8Ac 2 1 e5 dxe5 22 fxe5 lt:Jg4 23 i.g3
and an equal endgame arises,
(1 e4 c5 2 tiJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Gaprindashvili-Beliavsky, USSR
tiJxd4 tiJf6 5 tiJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 1 977.
tiJb3 0-0 8 0-0 lt::lc6 9 i.g5 a5 10 a4 2) 15 i.xc4 .l:.xc4 16 'ili'e2 llfc8
i.e6 1 1 �h1 llc8 1 2 f4 lt::lb4 13 17 .l:.ad 1 'ii'c5 1 8 f5 ! (in the game
lt:Jd4 i.c4 14 lLldb5) King-Wilder, Dortmund 1988, was
played 1 8 e5 dxe5 19 fxe5 lt::lg4 20
14. ."ifb6
. b3 l:xc3 2 1 tiJxc3 h5 ! 22 lt::le4 and
Occupying the active diagonal White likewise develops an unpleas­
and preventing 1 5 e5?- 1 5 ...dxe5 ant initiative) 1 8 ... lt::lc6 1 9 i.xf6! (or
16 fxe5 l:.fd8. 19 i.e3 'iib4 20 tiJa2 'ii'xa4 2 1
lt::lbc3 l:lxc3 2 2 tiJxc3 'iVb4 with
good counterplay for Black)
1 9 ...i.xf6 20 fxg6 hxg6 2 1 lt::lxd6!
and White wins a pawn.
3) 1 5 i.d3 l:.fe8 (or 13 ...i.xd3 1 6
cxd3 d 5 1 7 e 5 d4 1 8 exf6 exf6 1 9
i.h4 dxc3 2 0 bxc3 tiJd5 2 1 c4 lt::le3
22 i.f2 'ii'e6 23 i.xe3 'iVxe3 24 f5 !
llfd8 25 :n 'ii'e5 26 d4 and White
has effectively an extra pawn in the
centre, Haik-Dancevski, Cannes
1 997) 16 'ii'e2 i.xd3 1 7 cxd3 lt::ld7
18 f5 lt::lc5 19 i.e3 'iVc7 20 d4 lt::ld7
This sharp position has still not 2 1 l:lad1 and White's game is pref­
been sufficiently investigated. Up to erable, Kundin-Le Roux, Tallinn
now White has attempted to develop 1 997.
in the following directions:
1) 1 5 i.h4 (with the aim of 8B
driving the queen from the active
diagonal) (1 e4 c5 2 lt:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
l a) 1 5 ...'ifc5 1 6 i.d3 l:lfd8 (it is lt:Jxd4 lt::lf6 5 lt::lc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
also not easy on 16 .. .l:lfe8 1 7 f5 lt::lb3 0-0 8 0-0 tiJc6 9 i.g5)
lt::lxd3 1 8 cxd3 i.xb5 1 9 axb5 b6 20
.l:.a4 'ifc7 21 "ifb3 'ifd8 22 l:ld4 with 9...i.e6
strong pressure in the centre, A natural developing move
Fishbein-Fossan, Stavanger 1 990) through which White for the time
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.. e2 il..g 7 7 l?Jb3 53

being avoids the weakening of his This move allows a flank advance
queen's flank, characteristic of by Black.
9 ... a5.

10...b5!
White's plan entails the advance The pawn is thrown into the
of the f-pawn and therefore this is queenside attack, exploiting its
his main continuation. immunity from capture ( I I il..xb5?
"ifb6+ +).
8Ba 10 f4 Also worth considering is
8Bb 1 0 'itth 1 10 ...'ii'c8 with the idea of exchang­
ing the light-squared bishop after I I
If White plays for the exchange of il.. f3 il..g4. In the game Roskutov­
the Dragon bishop, Black succeeds Mukhametov, St.Petersburg I 996,
in generating activity on the queen's White carelessly played 12 l?Jd5?
flank: 10 "ifd2 :cs 1 1 l:lad1 (for the and after I 2 ... il..xf3 I3 g_xf3 ( 1 3
present, premature is 1 1 il.. h6 il..xh6 "ifxf3 l?Jxd5 I 4 exd5 liJd4 +)
12 ifxh6 aS ! I3 ife3 a4 I4 l?Jxa4 1 3 ...l?Jxd5 14 exd5 h6 I S il.. h4 ifh3
l?Jb4 15 il..d I l?Jxc2 16 il..xc2 l:lxc2 landed in a difficult position.
1 7 l?Jd4 l:k4 ! and Black has the ini­ 11 il.. f3
tJatlve, Malaniuk-Giek, Sibenik White reinforces his position in
1990, on 1 7 l?Jc3 would have fol­ the centre, counting on an occupa­
lowed I 7 ...il..c4! ) I I . ..l?Je5 I 2 il..h6 tion of the d5 square. Worth consid­
il..c4 1 3 il..xg7 'ittxg7 I4 :re i i..xe2 ering is also I I f5 il..c4 I 2 �h I with
15 l:.xe2 l?Jc4 I6 Wfci l?Jd7 I 7 l?Jd5 a practically unexplored game. Thus
l?Jde5 I S l?Jd4 l?Jc6 with equal not good is I 2 ... b4?! 1 3 il..xc4 bxc3
chances, Liicke-Leko, Nettetal 14 fxg6 hxg6 I S bxc3 l?Jxe4 I 6
1 992. l:lxf7! and the black king is in
danger.
Here the main directions of play
8Ba are linked to the continuations:

(1 e4 c5 2 l?Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 8Ba1 : l l ...b4

l?Jd4 l?Jf6 5 l?Jc3 g6 6 il.. e2 il..g7 7 8Ba2: l l ... il..c4
l?Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 l?Jc6 9 il..gS il.. e6)
Also possible is I I . . .l:.c8 I 2 'iPh i
10 f4 "ifb6. For example: 13 l?Jd5 il..xd5
54 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 li)b3

14 exd5 li)a5 1 5 li)xa5 'ifxa5 1 6 a3 play in A.Sokolov-Khalifman,

h6 1 7 i.h4 'ifc7 1 8 c3 a5 with USSR 1 986: 1 7 ... h6?! 1 8 i.h4 bxa3
roughly equal chances, Savanovic­ 1 9 l:lxa3 'ifb4 20 c3 'ifxf4 2 1 i.g3
Annanda, Bled 1 999. 'ifc4 22 'ifxc4 llxc4 23 l::Ixa7 and
Black was left a pawn down.
8Ba1 18 axb4 1Vxb4 19 c3 1Vc5 20
'ifd2 llb8 1/z-1/z
(1 e4 c5 2 li)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 King-Krlihenbiihl, Lucerne 1 989.
li)xd4 li)f6 5 li)c3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 Black compensates for the attack on
tiJb3 0-0 8 0-0 ltJc6 9 i.g5 i.e6 10 his a7 pawn with play against
f4 b5 1 1 i.f3) White's weaknesses on b2, d5, f4.
As a possible continuation we might
l l . .b4
. suggest 21 l:la2 'ifc4 22 l:tfa1 li)e4
23 i.xe4 1Vxe4 and Black's position
looks preferable.

8Ba2

(1 e4 c5 2 li)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lL'lxd4 tiJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
tiJb3 0-0 8 0-0 ltJc6 9 i.g5 i.e6 10
f4 b5 1 1 i.f3)

1 1 ...i.c4

Grabbing space on the queen's

flank.
12 tiJd5 i.xd5
Worth considering is 1 2 ... a5 13 a4
(it is necessary to block this pawn,
since after 13 ltJxf6+ exf6 14 i.h4
a4 1 5 ltJc l a3 16 b3 g5 1 7 i.f2 f5
Black is in full possession of the
initiative, Silva-Almeida, Almada
1988) 1 3 ... bxa3 14 l:.xa3 a4 1 5
i.xf6 i.xf6 1 6 ltJxf6+ exf6 1 7 ltJd4
'ifb6 with a double-edged game, Ye A logical move which, besides the
Jiangchuan-Ljubojevic, Moscow occupation of an important square,
(ol) 1 994. opens the way for a type of plan
13 exd5 ltJa5 14 'ife2 .l:r.c8 15 which blockades the bishop f3 .
�h1 'ifb6 12 .l:r.e1 e5
Preventing the manoeuvre Worth considering is a prelimi­
tiJb3-d4-c6. nary 12 ... h6 1 3 i.h4 and, after driv­
16 ltJxa5 'ifxa5 17 a3 llc7! ing back the active bishop, Black
Before continuing the pressure on can go over to play in the centre:
the queen's flank, it is useful to de­ 1 3 ...e5 1 4 �h l Ac8 1 5 f5 g5 1 6
fend the a7 pawn. There was weaker i.g3 b4 1 7 ltJd5 i.xd5 1 8 exd5 lL'le7
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 liJb3 55

with excellent prospects, Barua­ White's possibilities of exploiting

Boissonet, Gausdal 1986. the weak d5 square. A possible con­
13 f5 tinuation was 19 i.xf6 i.xf6 20
After 1 3 fxe5 liJxe5 14 �h i h6 1 5 liJd5 liJxd5 2 1 'iVxd5 and, in order
i.e3 b4 1 6 liJd5 liJxd5 1 7 exd5 :e8 not to find himself reduced to a po­
18 liJd4 liJxf3 19 'iVxf3 'iVh4 Black sition where he is doomed to a de­
has the more active position, pressing defence of the weak d6
Moroz-Jurtaev, Podolsk 1 990. pawn, Black should go for the pawn
13 ...'ii'b6+ sacrifice: 2 l .. .gxf5 ! 22 exf5 e4! 23
Also good is 1 3 ... b4 14 liJd5 i.xe4 (or 23 :xe4 'iVc5 ;!;) 23 ...l:tfe8
i.xd5 1 5 exd5 liJe7 16 fxg6 hxg6 24 i.d3, though even here White's
1 7 a3 a5 1 8 axb4 (on 1 8 �h 1 'iVc7 chances are preferable.
Black intends elay on the queen's In the game Moutousis-Aiterman,
flank after ... �e7-f5 and a5-a4) Santiago 1 990, White played 1 9
18 ...a4 19 liJd2 'iVb6+ 20 �h1 'iVc 1 and here Black could develop
._,xb4 with an equal game. Klicnar­ counterplay on the king's flank by
Neumeier, Budapest 1999. 1 9 ...gxf5! 20 exf5 (or 20 liJxf5
14 �h1 liJxf5 2 1 exf5 �h8) 20 ... h5 ! 2 1
After 14 i.e3?! 'iVc7 15 a3 gxf5 ! i.xf6 i.xf6 2 2 i.xh5 Wg7 with
16 liJd2 f4 1 7 liJxc4 bxc4 1 8 i.f2 ...:f8-h8 to follow (B.Aiterman).
l:tab8 19 l:tb 1 liJe7 Black equalises
the chances, King-Mestel, England
(ch) 1 989. 8Bb
14...b4 15 liJd2! bxc3 16 liJxc4
'ii'b4 (1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
This is apparently more accurate liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
than 1 6 ...'iVc5 1 7 b3 liJd4, since it liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 i.g5 i.e6)
creates a threat to the e4 pawn.
1 7 b3 :adS 10 �h1
After 17 ...liJd4 1 8 liJe3 liJxf3 1 9
gxf3 ! White can establish an
"eternal" knight on d5.
18 liJe3 liJe7!

A useful prophylactic retreat of

the king.

A complicated position has arisen, Here Black's original plans were

an evaluation of which depends on linked to the continuations:
56 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 tiJb3

8Bb1: 1 0...h6 1 1 i.h4 gS 12 i.g3 d5 13 tiJc5

8Bb2: 1 0 tiJaS
•.. The exchanges 1 3 exd5 tt::lxd5 14
8Bb3 : 10 .....c8 tiJxd5 'ii'xd5 hand over the initiative
to Black, Gluzman-Dumitrache,
Also logical is 1 0...l':tc8 1 1 f4 a6 Moscow (ol) 1 994.
( 1 l . . .tiJa5 leads to the variation 13 ... d4
10 ... tiJa5) 1 2 i.f3 b5 ( 1 2 .....c7 1 3 Black is practically forced to play
l:.e 1 l:.fe8 1 4 tiJd5 i.xd5 1 5 exd5 a game for tempi. Taking the e4
tlJa5 16 c3 ;!; Kovalev-Tennstedt, pawn leads to the creation of many
Berlin 1 993) 1 3 tiJd5 i.xd5 (after pawn weaknesses in his camp.
1 3 ...tiJd7 14 c3 tiJb6 1 5 'ii'e2 tiJc4 I) 1 3 . . .tlJxe4 14 l'LI3xe4 dxe4 1 5
1 6 l:.ad 1 and White has a small but l'Lixe6 fxe6 1 6 c3 'ii'd5 1 7 'ii'a4 _.f5
enduring advantage, Karpov-Martin, 1 8 h3 �h8 1 9 l:tae 1 l:.ad8 20 i.g4
Las Palmas 1977) 14 exd5 tiJa5 1 5 'ii'g6 2 1 'ii'xe4 and White's light­
'ii'e2 tlJc4 1 6 tiJd4 (the alternative is squared bishop faces no opposition,
16 c3) 16 . . .tiJxb2 (also possible is Ljubojevic-Korchnoi, Brussels
16 ...tiJxd5 ! ?) 17 tlJxc6 l':txc6 1 8 1 988.
dxc6 and here in the game Feigin­ 2) 13 ... dxe4 1 4 l'Lixe6 fxe6 1 5
Willemze, Heme 1 998, Black ob­ i.c4 'ii'c8 1 6 l'Lib5 l'Lia5 1 7 i.b3
tained sufficient compensation for tt::lxb3 1 8 axb3 l'Lid5 1 9 c4 l'Lif4 20
the exchange after 1 8 ... d5 ! . 'ii'c2 and, after winning back the e4
pawn, White organises pressure on
8Bb1 the e6 pawn, Hebden-lvkov, France
1 989.
(1 e4 cS 2 tiJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 After 1 3 ... d4 it is unfavourable for
tiJxd4 tiJf6 5 tiJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 White to take the pawn (14 l'Lixe6
tt::lb3 0-0 8 0-0 tiJc6 9 i.g5 i.e6 10 fxe6 1 5 l'Lib5 e5).
�h1) 14 l'Lib5 i.c8 15 i.c7
White endeavours to gain a tempo
10 ... h6 for the advance of his e-pawn.
After 1 5 l'Lic7 llb8 16 tt::ld5 e5 1 7
l'Lixf6+ 'ii'xf6 Black is no worse,
Lan�-Basin, Tmava 1 989.
Not dangerous is 15 e5 l'Lid5 1 6
l'Lid3 a6 1 7 l'Lia3 i.f5 1 8 i. f3 e 6 =
Zel�ic-Damaso, Pula 1997.
1S...'ii'e8 16 i.g3 _.d8 17 eS l'LidS
18 tiJxd4 l'Lixe5 19 c3 l'Lif4 20 i.xf4
gxf4 21 'ii'c 2 'ii'c7 with approxi­
mately equal chances, Kholmov­
Smirin, Klaipeda 1988.

8Bb2
A consistent plan, driving back
the bishop, after which Black can (1 e4 c5 2 l'Lif3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
strive for a counterattack in the cen­ l'Lixd4 l'Lif6 5 tt::lc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
tre, exploiting the loss of tempo due l'Lib3 0-0 8 0-0 l'Lic6 9 i.g5 i.e6 10
to the king move. �h1 )
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g 7 7 li:Jb3 5 7

1 0...li:JaS Black threatens an exchange sacri­

fice followed by the capture of the
e4 pawn.

The most popular plan of play

which is linked to an occupation of
the c4 square. 12 fS
11 f4 Tempting is 1 2 e5 li:Jxb3 1 3 axb3
After I I li:Jd5 i.xd5 I 2 exd5 llc8 dxe5 I4 fxe5 li:Jd5 I S l:lxa7 winning
1 3 c3 li:Jc4 I4 i.ci 'iVd7 I S f4 b5 1 6 a pawn, but after 1 5 ...li:Jxc3 !
i. f3 a S I 7 li:Jd4 li:Jb6 Black comes ( I 5 ... h6?! I6 i.d2 'ifb6 I 7 l:a4 li:Je3
first with his counterplay on the I 8 i.xe3 'ifxe3 1 9 l:r.e4 ±
queen's flank, Romanishin-Lemer, Slobodjan-Szalanczy, Dortmund
Tashkent 1 980. I 992) 1 6 bxc3 'ifxd l (if he declines
Here Black's main continuations the exchange of queens by I 6...'ifc7
are: I 7 i.f3 i.xe5 I 8 l:lxb7 'ifxc3 I 9
i.xe7, White gains the advantage,
8Bb2a: l l ...llc8 Van der Wiei-Haik, Montpellier
8Bb2b: l l .. li:Jc4
. I 985) 1 7 llxd 1 i.xe5 18 i.xe7 l.tfe8
1 9 i.b3 i.xc3 Black equalises.
Weaker is l l . ..i.c4?! I 2 e5 i.xe2 12 ...i.c4
( 1 2 ...li:Je8 1 3 li:Jxa5 leads to the loss Or 1 2 ... i.d7 13 li:Jxa5 'ifxa5 1 4
of the e7 pawn) I3 'ifxe2 dxe5? i.xf6! exf6 1 5 'ifxd6 i.c6 1 6 'iff4
( 1 3 ...li:Jxb3 14 axb3 ±) 14 llad i and Black hardly has compensation
'ifc7 1 5 fxe5 li:Jxb3 I6 exf6 exf6 I 7 for the pawn, Petschar-Szalanczy,
i.f4 1 -0 Kengis-Belaz, Berne I 995. Oberwart 1 99 1 .
1 3 i.d3 bS
8Bb2a A natural reaction, but worth at­
tention is 13 ... a6! ? and if White
(1 e4 cS 2 li:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 considers I4 'ife i , then Black sim­
li:Jxd4 li:Jf6 S li:Jc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 plifies the position: I4 ...i.d3 1 5
li:Jb3 0-0 8 0-0 li:Jc6 9 i.gS i.e6 10 cxd3 li:Jxb3 1 6 axb3 (now the aim of
'iii'h 1 li:JaS 1 1 f4) the move 1 3 ...a6 becomes clear­
the a-pawn is defended) I 6... 'ifb6
l l ..llc8
. and by attacking the b3 pawn Black
Forcing White to decide on his maintains the balance. But stronger
future plan since, despite his here is I 4 'ifd2.
apparent control over the e4 square, 14 'ife1
58 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 liJb3

After 14 'i'd2 Black carries out 8Bb2b

the favourable advance ...d6-d5 :
14 . . . b4 1 5 liJe2 (weak is 1 5 liJd 1 ? (1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
liJxe4 with advantage t o Black) liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 i..e2 i..g7 7
1 5 ...d5 ! 1 6 e5 (after 1 6 liJxa5 'i'xa5 liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 i..g5 i..e6 1 0
1 7 e5 liJe4 1 8 i..xe4 dxe4 1 9 i..xe7 'it>hl liJa5 1 1 f4)
llfe8 20 i..xb4 e3 ! the advantage
passes to Black) 1 6...liJe4 1 7 'ii'e3 l l ...liJc4
ttJxg5 1 8 'ii'xg5 liJc6 1 9 e6 liJe5
with complex play, Mainka-Ristic,
Dortmund 1989.
But possible is 14 liJxa5 'ii'xa5 1 5
'ii'd2 b4 1 6 liJe2 d5 1 7 e5 liJe4 1 8
'i'e3 ! (weaker is 1 8 i..xe4 dxe4 1 9
i..xe7 llfe8 2 0 f6 'i'xe5 +)
1 8 . . . liJxg5 (weaker is 1 8 ... i..xe5 1 9
i..xe4 dxe4 2 0 i..xe7 l:tfe8 2 1 f6
with an obvious advantage to White,
Bangiev-Teslia, USSR 1 986) 1 9
'i'xg5 i..xd3 20 cxd3 f6 2 1 exf6
i..x f6 22 'i'd2 and White's chances
are preferable, A.Bangiev. A continuation which has lately
14... b4 15 liJdl come into fashion.
After 1 5 liJe2 i..xd3 16 cxd3 liJc6 12 f5
1 7 liJf4 a5 1 8 l:td 1 l:te8 1 9 'ii'h4 d5 Beginning forcing play, but also
20 l:lf3 dxe4 2 1 l:[h3 'i'd6 Black has possible is 1 2 i..xc4 i..xc4 13 l:r.f2
the preferable position, Riemersma­ b5 with a double-edged game. In
Sosonko, Holland (ch) 1 993. Kristensen-Madsen, Vejle 1 994,
15...d5 16 e5 lle8 Black played 13 ...'i'b6 and after 1 4
So as in the future to be able to 'ii'f3 l:r.ac8 1 5 l:[d2 i..e6 1 6 h3 l:[fe8
move away the knight, while retain­ 1 7 l:r.ad1 'ii'a6 1 8 liJd4 White's
ing the e7 pawn (after an exchange chances were preferable.
on a5). 12 ...liJxb2 13 'ii'c l
17 liJxa5 Also seen is 1 3 'ii'e 1 i..d7 1 4
Or 1 7 exf6 exf6 1 8 i..e3 d4 with 'ii'h4, but Black succeeds i n repuls­
equal chances. ing the assault: 14 ... l:tc8 (possible is
17 ... i.. xd3 18 cxd3 'ifxa5 19 .id2 the preliminary attack 14 . . . liJa4 1 5
Less clear is 19 fxg6 fxg6 20 liJe3 liJxa4 i..xa4 when, in the game
'ii'b5 2 1 'ii'h4 'i'xd3 22 :tad 1 , as oc­ G.Kuzmin-Khalifman, USSR (ch)
curred in the game Kurajica-Honfi, 1 990, after 16 liJd4 l:r.c8 1 7 i..d3
Stip 1978, after which the chances i..d7 ! 1 8 l:lab 1 'ii'c7 1 9 :n 'i'c5 20
were equalised by the move liJe2 'ii'a5 2 1 l:r.h3 h5 Black has the
22 ...'ii'e4! . better chances) 1 5 .!:tf3 (or 1 5 liJd5
19...liJg4 20 d4 and White has the liJxd5 16 exd5 f6! 1 7 i.e 1 lhc2 1 8
more active position, Makarychev­ liJd4 l:r.xe2 1 9 liJxe2 liJd3 20 liJd4
Taborov, Daugavpils 1978 liJe5 with chances for both sides,
 Classical Dragon with 6 il.e2 il.g7 7 t'iJb3 59

Kruszynski) I 5 ...l:.e8 I6 :an 8Bb3

l:txc3 ! I 7 l:.xc3 l'£Jxe4 I 8 'ifxe4 ( I 8
fxg6?! is insufficient: I 8 . . .hxg6 I 9 (1 e4 c5 2 l'£Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
l:.cf3 l'£Jxg5 20 _.xg5 il.e6 with a l'£Jxd4 l'£Jf6 5 l'£Jc3 g6 6 il.e2 il.g7 7
reliable position for Black, t'iJb3 0-0 8 OPO l'£Jc6 9 il.g5 il.e6 1 0
Kruszynski-Inkiov, Copenhagen �h l)
I988; W.Kruszynski looked at I 8
l:.h3 l'£Jxg5 I9 'iVxgS h6 2 0 'iVc I to -.c8
...

il.xf5 ! 2 I l:txf5 ! gxf5 22 l:.g3 �h7

23 l:.xg7+! �xg7 24 _.xb2+ e5 and
Black likewise defends himself)
I8 ... il.xc3 I9 l'£Jd4! d5 ( I 9 ...�6!?)
20 'iff3 ! il.xd4 2I fxg6 il.f6
(2 1 ... fxg6 22 'ii'xd5+ ±) 22 gxf7+
�xf7 23 il.c l ! 1;g7 24 il.xb2 l:tf8!
(24 ... il.xb2 25 'iVf7+ �h8 26 il.d3)
25 il.ci �h8 26 'ifxd5 il.c6 27 'ii'h 5
'iVdS and Black maintains the bal­
ance, Kotronias-Khalifman, Bled
1 99 I .
1 3...il.c4 1 4 'iVxb2
Also worthy of further study is I 4
e 5 il.xe2 I S l'£Jxe2 l'£Je4 I 6 f6 exf6 A rather passive arrangement of
I7 ex f6 l:te8 (after I 7 ... l'£Jxg5 I 8 the heavy pieces. However Black's
1Wxg5 l:te8 White's chances are position is sufficiently fire-proof
preferable) I 8 l'£Jc3 ! (the game and resembles a spring, ready to
Khalifman-Savchenko, USSR I984, uncoil at an appropriate moment,
continued I 8 l'£Jg3 l'£Jxg5 1 9 _.xb2 and White needs to make quite an
il.h8 20 l:.t2 h6 2 I l:.afl lte6 22 c4 effort in order to maintain the
l'£Jh7 and Black surrounds and wins initiative,
the f6 pawn) I 8 ... l'£Jxg5 I 9 _.xg5 1 1 f4 :d8 12 il.f3 il.c4 13 :n h6
l:tc8 20 t'iJdS l:.e5 2 1 Wd2 l'£Jc4 22 By driving back the bishop Black
'iVd4 and White gains the advantage, prepares play in the centre. Less
Kupreichik-Watson, Germany I 993. successful is 13 ... e6 14 lld2 'iVc7 1 5
14...il.xe2 15 l'£Jxe2 l'£Jxe4 16 f6 _.e 1 h6 1 6 il.h4 l:td7 1 7 :ad 1 with
l'£Jxf6 17 t'iJbd4 'iWd7 18 c4 l'£Je4 strong pressure on the backward d6
Also possible is 1 8 ...l:ac8 I9 pawn, Karpov-Miles, Bad Lauter­
l:tac I l:txc5 20 il.e3 l:.fc8 21 �3 d5 berg 1 977.
22 cxd5 l'£Jxd5?! 23 l:txc5 ! :xeS 24 Upon flank play 13 ... a5, 1 4 l'£Jd5!
..igi l:.c8 25 lld i ± Gipslis-Borge, is unpleasant: 1 4 ...1:ta6 15 .txf6
Aalborg I 993; stronger was exf6 16 .tg4 f5 1 7 exf5 gxf5 1 8
22 ...'iVxd5 or 22 ...llxc l . .te2 .txe2 1 9 llxe2 and the
1 9 il.e3 d 5 20 cxd5 'iVxd5 2 1 shattering of Black's pawn structure
l:tab1 t'iJd6! with a double-edged determines White's advantage,
game, Gipslis-Nadyrhanov, Alushta Yurtaev-Kapengut, Pula 1 990.
1 994. 14 il.h4 e5 15 il.xf6
60 Classical Dragon with 6 J..e2 J..g 7 7 liJb3

To realise his plan White is

obliged to part with his bishop,
since on an immediate 1 5 f5?!
follows 15 ... g5 16 J..g3 and, after
neutralising the bishop, Black sets
about attacking on the queen's
flank: 1 6 ...b5 17 a3 aS 18 liJd2 liJd4
19 liJxc4 'ii'xc4 20 J..e2 'ii'c 5,
keeping the initiative, Tischbierek­
Parker, Hastings 1 99 1 .
1 5...J..xf6 1 6 f5! d 5 1 7 liJxd5
J..xd5 18 exd5 gxf5 19 J.. e4!
Now Black is forced to weaken White plans play in the centre to
the light squares by 19 ... f4 and after counter Black's sudden attack on
20 'ii'h 5 or 20 g3 White's chances the flank.
are preferable. There was weaker 10 ... b5 1 1 .i.f3
play in the game G.Kuzmin­ If he wants, White can slow down
Nadyrhanov, Alushta 1 994,- the b-pawn with the move 1 1 a3, but
1 9 ... liJe7?! 20 d6! , after which in this case Black has time to de­
White had the advantage. velop his light-squared bishop:
1) I I . ...i.b7 12 ..th l ( 1 2 .i.£3 re­
duces his control over the b5 pawn
8C and Black can continue with a flank
attack: 12 ...a5 13 �h i b4 14 axb4
(1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 axb4 1 5 l:txa8 .i.xa8 1 6 lbd5 e6 1 7
liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 J..e2 J..g7 7 lbxf6+ .i.xf6 1 8 .i.xf6 'ii'xf6 1 9
liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 J..g5) 'it'xd6 'ii'xb2 and achieves the better
position, Bistric-Admjan, Sarajevo
9 ... a6 1 982) 1 2 ...lbd7 13 f5 lbce5 ! (after
Exploiting the retreat of the 1 3 ...lbc5?! 14 lbxc5 dxc5 1 5 lbd5
knight from d4 to rush forward by and White has a strong initiative,
... b7-b5-b4, which gains in strength Smirin-Aiterman, Israel 1 994) 1 4
with the absence of the bishop from 'ii'e 1 l:tc8 1 5 'ii'h4 lle8 with a com­
the g l -a7 diagonal. plex, unexplored game.
2) I I . . .J..e6 1 2 �h 1 l:c8 (it seems
White's main continuations are: that 1 2 ... .i.c4 13 .i.xc4 bxc4 is pre­
mature because of 14 lbd2! and on
8Ca: 10 f4 14 ... d5 there is a possible exchange
8Cb: 10 a4 sacrifice: 1 5 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 6 lbxd5 !
.i.xb2 1 7 lbxc4 .i.xa 1 1 8 'ii'xa 1 with
more than sufficient compensation
8Ca for White, Yurtaev-Diaz, Frunze
1 989) 1 3 J..d3 lba5 (also worth con­
(1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 sidering_ is 13 ... .i.xb3 14 cxb3 lbd7
lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 .i.e2 J..g7 7 1 5 b4 liJb6 with complicated play;
lbb3 0-0 8 0-0 lbc6 9 .i.g5 a6) in Ljubojevic-Aiterman, Groningen
1 993, Black played the weaker
10 f4 1 3 ...lbd7?! and after 14 lbd2! lbb6
 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 Cf)b3 61

I 5 f5 i.d7 I6 'ii'e I Cf)e5 I7 'ii'h4 exchange of knights-I 2 Cf)d5

White had the better game) I4 Cf)xd5 I 3 exd5 leaves Black the
Cf)xa5 'ii'xa5 I5 f5 i.c4 I 6 'ii'f3 b4 better chances after I 3 . . .Cf)a5,
with roughly equal chances thanks to the active positions of his
(B.Alterman). pieces:
After I I i.f3 the main continua­ I) I4 Cf)xa5 'ii'xa5 I5 'iWe i i.f5
tions are: and Black takes over the initiative,
Gonzales-Chiburdanidze, Barcelona
8Ca1 : l l ... b4 I 979.
8Ca2: l l . .i.b7
. 2) I4 l:lb i Cf)c4 I5 'ii'e2 'iWc7 I 6
'it> h I i.f5 ! and the black pieces hang
Also seen is I I . ..i.d7 I 2 l:le I h6 menacingly over White's position,
I3 i.h4 Cf)h7 I4 i.f2?! b4 I 5 Cf)a4 Zapata-Miles, Thessaloniki (ol)
l:tb8 I 6 a3 Cf)e5! I 7 axb4 Cf)c4 I 8 I 984.
'iWe2 Cf)xb2 ! and Black achieves the 3) I4 'ii'e2 i.xb2 ( I 4 ... Cf)xb3? I 5
better game, Ye Jiangchuan­ cxb3 'ii'h6+ I 6 'it>h I lte8 I 7 l:tfe I ;!;
D.Gurevich, Biel (izt) I 993, but, as Ljubojevic-Sosonko, Tilburg I 984)
pointed out by Ye Jiangchuan, by I 5 i.xe7 'ii'b6+ I6 'ii'f2 'ii'xf2+ I 7
playing I4 l:tb I ! g5 I 5 i.g3 gxf4 'it>xf2 i.xa I 1 8 l:lxa I Cf)c4 ! I 9 i.xf8
(after I 5 . . .b4 1 6 Cf)d5 e6 I 7 llle3 the �xf8 20 c3 a5 with equal chances
d6 pawn is weak) I 6 i.xf4 Cf)e5 I 7 (L.Ljubojevic).
�h i White retains the slightly better 4) I4 l:.e i �c4 I 5 'iWe2 'iWb6+ I 6
chances. 'ii'f2 'ii'x f2+ I 7 'it>xf2 a 5 I 8 i.e2
i.a6 and Black's chances are
8Ca1 preferable, Ciric-Petursson, San
Bernardino I99 I .
(1 e4 c5 2 Cf)o d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 12 ...'ifc7
Cf)xd4 Cf)f6 5 Cf)cJ g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 Black defends the knight (in case
Cf)bJ 0-0 8 0-0 Cf)c6 9 i.g5 a6 10 f4 of e4-e5) and exerts pressure on the
b5 1 1 i.O) c2 pawn, without for the present de­
ciding where to place the bishop.
l l ..b4
. Also played is I2 ... i.d7 1 3 a3
(after I3 e5 possible are both
1 3 ...Cf)e8, and 1 3 ...dxe5 1 4 fxe5
Cf)xe5 I 5 i.xa8 'ifxa8 I6 Cf)ac5 i.c6
when Black has sufficient compen­
sation for the exchange, Zapata­
D.Gurevich, New York I 984)
1 3 ...l:.b8 (or I3 ...l:lc8 I4 .:.f2 Cf)a5
I 5 lLlxa5 'ifxa5 I6 axb4 'iVxb4 I 7 c3
'ii'b8 I 8 e5 dxe5 I 9 fxe5 i.xa4 20
'ifxa4 _.e5 2 I i.f4 ;!; Mensinger­
Petursson, Ljubljana I98 I ) I4 axb4
ltxb4 (weaker is I4 ...lLlxb4 I 5 e5
Cf)e8 I6 c3 Cf)d3 I 7 'ifxd3 l:lxb3 I 8
12 Cf)a4 l:.f2 ± Wilder-Lindemann, Naestved
The attempt to cramp Black in the I 988) I 5 'it>hi 'ifc7 I 6 Cf)c3 i.e6 I 7
centre and get to the e7 pawn by an Cf)a5 l:lfd8 and Black has the
62 Classical Dragon with 6 Ji.e2 Ji.g7 7 (i)bJ

preferable game, Gofstein-Gufeld, (i)b3 0-0 8 0-0 (i)c6 9 Ji.gS a6 10 f4

USSR 1978. bS 1 1 Ji.f3)
13 c4
The most active. When the oppor­ l l .. Ji.b7
.

tunity arises White will threaten to

play c4-c5. Other continuations are
also encountered:
I ) 1 3 l:lf2 l:tb8 I4 c3 (i)a5 I 5 cxb4
(i)xb3 I 6 'ii'xb3 Ji.e6 I 7 'ii'c3 'ii'a7
I 8 'ii'e I Ji.d7 I 9 (i)c3 llxb4 with
equal chances, Zapata-Kudrin,
Titograd I 984.
2) 1 3 ltc 1 a5 ! I4 l:le i Ji.a6 I 5 c4
bxc3 1 6 (i)xc3 'ii'a7+ (weaker is
I 6 . . .(i)b4?! I 7 e5 (i)d3 1 8 f5 (i)xei
I9 'ii'xe I dxe5 20 (i)d5 with an
equal game, Bashkov-Rechlis,
Ostrava l 99 I ) I 7 ..th I (i)b4 I 8 Ji.e2 Black is no hurry to force events
l:tfc8! with initiative to Black (at an and completes his development.
appropriate time he will threaten 12 �h1
. . .ltc8xc3). A prophylactic move, characteris­
3) 13 c3 l:tb8 I 4 .l:tc i Ji.d7 I 5 tic for the structure with the pawn
..th 1 a5 I 6 e5 dxe5 I 7 Ji.xf6 exf6 on f4.
I 8 cxb4 axb4 I 9 (i)ac5 Ji.c8 20 fxe5 Also seen is the natural 1 2 (i)d5
fxe5 2 I Ji.d5 and the activity of the (i)d7 I 3 c3 l:le8 (worth considering
white pieces compensates for the is 1 3 ... f6! ? 14 Ji.h4 e6 I 5 (i)e3 g5
sacrificed pawn but no more than I6 Ji.g3 gxf4 17 Ji.xf4 (i)de5 =

this, Zapata-Martin, Salamanca Roskutov-Kotsur, Russia I 997) I4

I 99 1 . 'ii'e i (or I 4 �h i a5 when in the
13 ...(i)d7 game Xie Jun-Serper, Jakarta I 994,
In the game Hiibner-Romero Hol­ instead of I 5 'ii'd 2?! a4 I6 (i)c i a3
mes, Wijk aan Zee 1992, Black sac­ =i=, necessary was I 5 a3) 14 ...(i)b6 I 5
rificed a pawn by 1 3 ... h6?! I4 Ji.h4 l:ld i (i)xd5 I 6 exd5 (i)a5 with an
g5 I 5 fxg5 hxg5 I 6 Ji.xg5 (i)e5, but equal game. Van der Wiei­
after I 7 (i)d4 'ifxc4 I 8 l:lc l 'ii'd3 I 9 Konguvel, Koszalin I 998.
(i)c6 he did not obtain sufficient 1 2...(i)d7
compensation. Also possible is 1 2 ...lte8 13 (i)d5
14 �h1 aS (i)xd5 I4 exd5 (i)a5 I 5 (i)xa5 'il'xa5
14 ...(i)b6 is not good because of 1 6 c3 h6 1 7 Ji.h4 b4 Savanovic­
=

I5 (i)xb6 'ii'xb6 I6 e5. Vuckovic, Ikaros 1 999.

15 'ii'd2 (i)b6 16 (i)xb6 'ii'xb6 13 ltb1
with chances for both sides, Gipslis­ In the game Tai-Gufeld, USSR
Shirov, Daugavpils I 990. 1 977, was played 13 'ii'e l a5 14
(i)xb5 a4 I 5 (i)d2 h6 I6 Ji.h4 (i)c5
8Ca2 with a double-edged game.
13 ...l:le8 14 (i)dS f6!
(1 e4 cS 2 {f)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 A recommendation of Kramnik;
(i)xd4 {f)f6 5 (i)c3 g6 6 Ji.e2 Ji.g7 7 Black drives back White's active
 Classical Dragon with 6 J.e2 J.g7 7 lDb3 63

pieces. Weaker is I 4 . . .'iVb8?! I 5 c3 1 3 l:te i l:tc8 I4 'ii'd2 lDa5 ! I 5 lDxa5

a5 I 6 a3 a4 I 7 lDc l e6 I 8 lDe3 lDf6 bxa5 I6 �h i l:te8 I 7 .!:lad1 lDb6
1 9 lDd3 lDe7 20 lDf2 ;!;; Xie Jun­ Black maintains the balance without
Tisdall, San Francisco 1 995. difficulty, Upton-Piket, Elista (ol)
15 J.h4 e6 16 lDe3 g5! 17 fxg5 I 998) 1 3 ...lDa5 (after 1 3 ... lDc5, I 4
In the game Apicella-Svidler, l:d2 reveals the point o f the rook
Erevan (ol) I 996, was played 1 7 manoeuvre: I4 ...lDxb3 I 5 cxb3
J.g3 gxf4 1 8 J.xf4 lDde5 1 9 J.h5 lDb4 I6 e5 ± Z.Sturua) 14 lDd4
litE 20 c3 "ii'e7 2 I "ii'e2 lDg6! and l:tc8?! 15 lDd5 ± Sturua­
Black obtains the preferable game. Lobzhanidze, Panormo (zt) 1 998.
17 ... fxg5 18 J.g3 lDde5 Z.Sturua recommends the exchange
Also not bad is 1 8 ...J.e5 I9 lDg4 of the dark-squared bishop by
i.xg3 20 hxg3 lDde5. 1 4 ... h6 1 5 J.h4 J.xd4 16 'ifxd4 e5!
19 J.h5 l:tf8 20 'ii'e2 'ii'e7 21 c3 I7 'ifxd6 'ifxh4 18 1kxd7 'ii'x f4 I 9
with chances for both sides l:e i ;!;;.
(P. Svidler). 1 1 �hl
The main move in this variation.
8Cb Also seen is I 1 f4 b5 ! (Black's
most energetic reply, also not bad is
(1 e4 c5 2 tDo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 I l ...lDa5 I 2 �h i l:c8 I3 lDxa5
lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 J.e2 J.g7 7 'ifxa5 I4 J.d3 .!:lfe8 I 5 'iff3 J.d7 I 6
lDb3 0-0 8 0-0 lDc6 9 J.g5 a6) l:tab I 'Wc5 ! I 7 J.xf6 exf6 1 8 lDd5
f5 1 9 exf5 J.c6 20 c4 J.xd5 2 1
10 a4 'ifxd5 1kxd5 22 cxd5 l:te3 =

Fishbein-Alterman, New York

I 997) 1 2 axb5 (or 1 2 J.f3 b4 1 3
lDd5 J.xd5 I 4 exd5 lDa5 I 5 lDd4
'ifb6 1 6 'it>h 1 l:tac8 I 7 f5 l:tc4 with
an excellent game for Black,
Moutousis-Shirov, Santiago 1 990)
I 2 ... 'Wb6+ 1 3 ¢>h 1 axb5 I4 l:xa8
l:txa8 I 5 lDd5 J.xd5 I6 exd5 lDa5
1 7 lDxa5 l:txa5 with equal chances,
Kunas-Odendahl, Germany I 993.
ll . .llc8 1 2 f4 lDa5
.

Weaker is 12 ...lDb4 13 J.h4

lDxe4 I4 lDxe4 lDxc2 1 5 lDbc5
White radically prevents Black's lDxa1 1 6 lLlxe6 fxe6 I 7 "ii'xa i l:tc2
intended advance, but in this case he 1 8 J.g4 .!:lxb2 19 J.xe6+ �h8 20
weakens the b4 square, without 'ife I Wb6 2 1 f5 gxf5 22 J.xe7 and
obtaining in return (as on ... a7-a5) White gains the advantage, Short­
the b5 square. Martin, Biel (izt) 1 985.
I O .J.e6
.. 13 lDxa5
A standard plan to pressurise the On I3 f5 White must reckon on
c4 square. Recently this bishop has the exchange sacrifice, 1 3 ... J.xb3
tended to be fianchettoed: 10 ...b6 I I 14 cxb3 l:xc3! 1 5 bxc3 lDxe4. The
f4 J.b7 1 2 J.f3 lDd7 1 3 l:tf2 ! (the game Dolmatov-Gufeld, USSR
rook transfers to d2; in the event of 1 978, continued 16 f6! exf6 17 J.f4
64 Classical Dragon with 6 i.. e2 i..g 7 7 (i)b3

(i)xc3 1 8 ,.d3 f5 with a double­ since after 2 0. . .i..xd3 2 1 cxd3 l:r.c2

edged game. Black invades with his rook) 1 7 ... bS
13 ... 'iha5 14 i..d3 1 8 axbS axbS 19 fS -.cs 20 b4 'ikb6
After 14 i..f3 White organises with equal chances, Wedberg-Emst,
pressure on the c-file by 14 ....r:tcS 1 S Malmo 1 988.
ltb 1 'ikc7 1 6 i.. h4 ltc8 1 7 l:te 1 l:r.c4 4) 14 ... l:r.fe8 1 S -.e2 'ikb4
1 8 i..f2 'ikaS and has the preferable 4a) 1 6 aS?! i..g 4! ( 1 6 . . . i..c4?
game, Ramirez-R.Hemandez, Mex­ leads to the loss of a piece: 1 7 l:r.a4
ico 1 984. -.xb2 1 8 l:r.xc4 llxc4 1 9 (i)d 1 'ikd4
20 i..xc4 'ikxe4 2 1 i..x f6 'ikxe2 22
i.. xe2 i..x f6 23 (i)e3 :c8 24 ltldS
'iti>g7 2S c4 when Black's position is
blockaded and he does not have
sufficient compensation for the
piece, Zelcic-Bagaturov, Elista (ol)
1998) 1 7 'ikd2 i..d7 and White's
chances are preferable, Anand­
Topalov, Linares 1994; nor are mat­
ters changed by 1 7 ,.e 1 i..d7 1 8
i..xf6 i..x f6 1 9 lDdS 'fixe 1 20
lDxf6+ exf6 21 l:r.fxe 1 l:r.e7 +
followed by ... i..d7-c6, ...l:r.c8-e8.
14 ...i..c4 4b) 16 fS i..c4 17 i..d2 with a
This looks the most consistent. complicated game (V.Topalov).
But other continuations are also 15 'ikf3
seen: On 1 S f5 also good is 1 S ...'ikb4 !
1 ) 14 ... l:r.cS?! 1S fS gxfS 16 i..d 2! 1 6 l:r.b 1 bS 1 7 axbS axbS 1 8 'ikf3
'ikc7 17 exfS i.. c4 18 i.. e3 l:r.c6 19 'ikcS 1 9 (i)d1 ?! dS and Black has the
ltf3 'ifi>h8 20 -.e2 i..d3 21 cxd3 with mtttatJVe, Serensen-Alterman,
advantage to White, A.Sokolov-Sax, Santiago 1 990; stronger is 1 9 l:r.be 1
Biel (izt) 198S. b4 20 Lbd 1 b3 with roughly equal
2) 14 ...l:r.xc3 1S bxc3 'ikxc3 1 6 chances.
l:r.b1 'ikc7 1 7 'ikd2 i..d7 ! 1 8 'ikb4 1S. .'ikb4
.

i..c6 1 9 aS l:r.e8 and Black has Also seen 1 S ...i..xd3 16 cxd3 e6

sufficient compensation for the 1 7 fS 'ikb6 1 8 l:r.ab 1 l:r.ce8 1 9 'ikh3
exchange, Mamyslo-Barczay, Bad 'ikd4 with sufficient counterplay for
Worishofen 1 988. Black, Landa-Alterman, Yurmala
3) 1 4 ... 'ikb4 1S llb 1 l:r.fe8 1 989.
( 1 S ...i..c4 16 'ikf3 e6 is looked at 16 .Z::.a b1 bS
below) 1 6 'ike 1 i..c 4! 1 7 'ikh4 (in The most energetic. On 16 ...e6
case of 1 7 fS i..xd3 1 8 cxd3 'ikd4 1 9 White attacks by 17 fS eS 1 8 i..x f6
l:td 1 e6! Black forces a pawn ex­ i.. xf6 19 fxg6 fxg6 20 'ikg4 and
change, 20 fxg6 fxg6 2 1 'ifh4 l:r.f8, gains the advantage, Fishbein­
and has the preferable game, Piza­ I.lvanov, Saint John 1 988.
Vershinin, Pardubice 1 994; he can­ 17 axbS axbS 18 i..xc4 'ikxc4 and
not derive benefit from the standard Black has the more promising
manoeuvre 1 7 i..xf6 i..xf6 1 8 lD<IS position, Thorhallsson-Petursson,
'ikxe 1 1 9 t'i)xf6+ exf6 20 ltfxe 1 , Reykjavik 1 994.
 Classical Dragon with 6 .i.. e2 .i..g 7 7 liJb3 65

Line 9 9A

(1 e4 c5 2 liJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 (1 e4 c5 2 liJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJcJ g6 6 .i.. e2 .i..g7 7 liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 .i..e2 .i..g7 7
liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6) liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 l:.e1)

9 l:te1 9... a5

A positional plan. This arrange­ As in other similar variations the

ment of forces is a child of the 90s. drawback of this active move lies in
White supports the e4 pawn with the the weakening of the b5 square, but
rook, intending to place the bishops here, after White's practically
on fl and g5 and carry out the thrust forced reply, Black also obtains his
liJc3-d5. After the exchange of own plus in the b4 square.
knights the rook on e I exerts 10 a4 .i..e6
pressure on the e7 pawn. However, Possible is an immediate occupa­
the realisation of this plan requires tion of the d4 square: I O... liJb4 I I
time and Black hurries to commence .i..g5 h6 (in White's favour is
active counterplay. I I ....i..e6?! I 2 liJd4! l:.c8 I3 liJxe6
fxe6 I4 l:la3 ..t>h8 I 5 h4 _.e8 I6 e5
Black's main continuations are: dxe5 I 7 .i..f3 and, in view of the ob­
vious defects of Black's pawn struc­
9A: 9 a5
•.. ture, the advantage lies with White,
9B: 9 ....i..e6 Vasiukov-Gufeld, Leningrad I 975;
9C: 9...a6 better was I 2 .i..h4 .i..d7 1 3 .i.. fl l:lc8
I4 _.d2 g5 I 5 .,t.g3 liJh5 I 6 liJc i
Passive is 9 ....i..d7 IO .i..g5 l:tc8 I I liJxg3 I 7 hxg3 -.c7 and White's
_.d2 liJe5 I 2 l:tadi a6 I 3 liJd5 ! chances are preferable, Kuczynski­
liJxd5 ( 1 3 ...liJxe4? I4 liJxe7+ ..t>h8 Grabarczyk, Lubniewice I 993;
I 5 liJxc8 loses the exchange) I 4 more logical was I4 liJd4 with a
exd5 l:te8 I 5 c 3 with a positional transfer of the knight to b5.
advantage for White, Tseshkovsky- 11 .i..n
Larsen, Moscow I 999.
·

I I .i..g5 llc8 I 2 .i.. fl leads to posi­

tions examined below.
66 Classical Dragon with 6 iL.e2 iL.g7 7 0.b3

l l ....l:tc8 continuation was I 8 i.xg6 ! fxg6 I 9

Worth considering is the break in Wxd4 lDxc2 2 0 Wc3 ltJxe i 2 I i.h6
the centre I l . ..d5 . For example, the lDf3+ 22 gxf3 l:tf7 23 l:te I threaten­
game Schmaltz-Stisis, Gstaad I 993, ing .l:te i -e6 and h4-h5 (Y.Schwartz).
continued: I2 lDc5 i.g4! I3 f3 d4 16 ltJb5
I4 lDb5 i.c8 I 5 b3 (or I 5 c3 dxc3 Here, on I6 i.g5, possible is
I 6 lDxc3 b6 I 7 lDb3 i.e6 +; I 7 I6 ...i.xd4 I 7 'ii'xd4 ltJxc2 I 8 'ii'c3
lDd3 i.e6 =F) I 5. . .lDd7 I 6 ltJd3 lDxei I 9 i.h6 f6 20 i.xf8 �xf8 +
lDdb8 I 7 i.a3 lDa6 I 8 Wd2 lDc7 I 9 (Z.Vukovic).
lDxc7 'ii'xc7 and Black obtains the Now, in the game Z.Vukovic­
more promising position. It seems Kosanovic, Yugoslavia I 999, Black
that White needs to confine himself played poorly: I6 ...'ii'd 7?! I 7 .l:ta3 !
to I2 exd5 0.xd5 1 3 0.xd5 i.xd5 I4 and White retained the initiative.
c4 with approximately equal Stronger was 16 ... e5! 17 dxe6
chances. fxe6 18 l:ta3 ( I 8 lDxd6?! is to
12 0.d5 Black's advantage after I 8 ...l:c6 I9
After I2 i.g5, Black exchanges 0.b5 ltJbd3 !) 18...d5! with counter­
the light-squared bishops and ob­ play for Black (Z.Vukovic).
tains a fully equal game: I 2 ... lDb4
I 3 lDd4 i.c4 I 4 lDdb5 (less accu­
rate is I4 i.xc4 .l:txc4 I 5 lDdb5, 9B
which allows Black more effec­
tively to exploit the c-file. I 5 . . .'ii'c8 (I e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
I6 'it'd2 h6 I 7 i.f4 g5 1 8 i.g3 lDh5 lDd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
I9 .l:tad I ltJxg3 20 hxg3 'it'c5 2 I lDb3 0-0 8 0-0 lDc6 9 l:tel)
l:.e3 l:.c8 + Kristensen-S.Hansen,
Aars I 995) I4 ...i.xfl I 5 .l:txfl h6 9 ...i.e6
I6 i.h4 'ii'b6 I7 'it'e2 .l:tfe8 I 8 .l:tad I
lDd7 I 9 �h i lDe5 20 lDd5 lDxd5 2 I
exd5 'ii'c5 Gipslis-Ovseevich, Al­
=

ushta I994.
12 ...i.xd5 13 exd5 lDb4 14 c4
ltJd7 15 ltJd4
Also met is I 5 i.g5 lle8 I6 'ii'd2
ltJe5 I 7 l:lec I b6 I 8 h3 lDd7. Here,
in the game Ermenkov-Chandler,
Novi Sad (ol) I 990, White forced a
draw by I9 .l:te i lDe5 20 .l:teci 0.d7,
but nevertheless White could have
shown his initiative by 2 I i.e3.
15 ...lDc5! A natural developing move.
Though White has a space advan­ IO i.fl
tage, Black has compensation in the White's main reply.
shape of his active minor pieces. The preliminary I 0 i.g5 gains in
However, weaker is I 5 ... ltJe5 I6 b3 strength only after I O... a5, since
lDed3 I 7 i.xd3 i.xd4 when in the White can post his light-squared
game Schwartz-Kaliksteyn, New bishop more actively: I I i.b5 lDd7
York I 995, the strongest I 2 lDd5 l:le8 I 3 c3 a4 I4 lDd2 0.b6
 Classical Dragon with 6 R.e2 R.g7 7 liJb3 67

1 5 liJf3 and retain the more Germany I 994) I 3 exd5 l:.e8 14 c3

prom1smg pos1t1on, Kupreichik­ _.c7 I 5 l:.b 1 liJc4 I 6 liJd2 liJxd2 1 7
Velimirovic, Cetinje 1 993. 'ii'xd2 a 6 1 8 c4 l:.b8 I 9 l:.bc I and
However, this does not prevent White, establishing control over the
Black's counterplay by ... d6-d5: centre, has the preferable chances,
1) 10 ... h6 1 1 R.h4 g5 1 2 R.g3 d5 Moldovan-Varga, Gyor I 99 1 .
13 liJc5 d4 14 liJb5 R.c8 1 5 e5 liJd7 1 1 R.b5
with a complicated game, Romero­ Distinct from the note to the move
Leko, Leon 1993. I 0 R.fl , White loses a tempo.
2) I O ... d5 !? I I R.xf6 R.xf6 1 2 l l . 'ii'c7 12 a4
. .

liJxd5 (Black has no fear of losing a Worth considering is an immedi­

pawn by I2 exd5, after 1 2 . . .R.xc3). ate 1 2 R.g5 l:.fd8 13 liJd5 (prevent­
12 ...R.xb2 13 l::tb 1 R.a3 I4 _.d2 ing ... d6-d5) 1 3 ... R.xd5 ( 1 3 . . . a4 I4
R.d6 1 5 c4 b6 16 l:.ed1 l:.c8 I 7 f4 ;!; R.xf6 axb3 1 5 R.xg7 ;!;) I4 exd5
Gild.Garcia-Vescovi, Elista (ol) liJe5 I 5 a4 with the idea of I 5 . . .liJc4
1 998. I6 'ii'e2 liJxb2 1 7 c4 trapping the
knight.
12 ...liJb4 13 R.g5 d5 14 exd5
l:.ad8 15 d6 l::txd6 16 'ii'c l R.xb3 17
cxb3 liJd3 18 R.xd3 l:.xd3 and
Black controls the d-file, Mainka­
Polster, Germany I 994.

9C

(1 e4 c5 2 liJt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 R.e2 R.g7 7
liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 l:.e1)

10 ...a5 9 a6
.•.

On 10 ... d5, apart from the consis­ Black prepares the advance of the
tent 1 1 liJc5 R.g4 ! I 2 f3 d4 I 3 liJb5! b-pawn. Here possible continuations
R.c8 I4 c3 dxc3 I 5 liJxc3 maintain­ are:
ing control over the centre, White
could transpose to the endgame by 9Ca: 10 R.g5
I I exd5 liJxd5 I 2 liJxd5 ..i.xd5 I 3 9Cb: 10 R.n
c4 R.e6 I4 liJc5 'ii'xd i I 5 l:.xd 1
R.g4 I 6 f3 l:.ad8 I 7 R.e3 R.c8 I 8 9Ca
liJa4 R.f5 19 l:.xd8 l:.xd8 2 0 l:.c 1 ,
when his chances are somewhat (1 e4 c5 2 liJt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
preferable, Ermenkov-Los, Gronin­ liJxd4 liJf6 5 liJc3 g6 6 R.e2 R.g7 7
gen I 990. liJb3 0-0 8 0-0 liJc6 9 l:.el a6)
In the event of 10 ... l:.c8 I I R.g5
White carries out his plan to reduce 10 R.g5
Black's counterplay: I I ...liJe5 I 2 A useful move. With an indirect
liJd5 R.xd5 (weaker i s 1 2 . . . liJc4?! attack on the e7 pawn White in­
13 R.xc4 l::txc4 14 'ii'd3 b5 1 5 R.xf6 creases his control over the d5
exf6 I6 liJe3 ± Heissler-Sievers, square.
68 Classical Dragon with 6 i..e2 i..g 7 7 liJb3

IO b5 11 i.. fl
... l:e8 16 c4 ;t, Kramnik) 14 �dS and
then a4-aS with the better game. In­
stead of 1 2 ... �b6? ! worth consider­
ing is 1 2 ...l:b8 with the idea, on 1 3
�dS, of playing 1 3 ...aS.
3) I l ...i..d7 12 �dS l!JxdS 1 3
exdS �eS 1 4 c3 l:e8 I S �d4 l:c8
1 6 a4 bxa4 17 i..xa6 l:b8 1 8 i..e2
'ii'c7 1 9 i.e I �c4 and Black
maintains the balance, Tischbierek­
Petursson, Gausdal 1990
4) l l ...i..b7 1 2 liJdS (1 1 a4!?)
12 ... l!JxdS (or 12 ... �d7 13 'ii'c l l:e8
14 a4 b4 l S aS ;t Egorov-G.Sorokin,
l
A feature of the present position is Ekaterinbur l 997) 13 exdS liJeS 14
the pawn formation a6-bS, the a4 'ii'b6 l S xe7 l:tfc8 16 i..gS �c4
·

Achilles Heel of which is the threat 1 7 axbS axbS 1 8 l:xa8 l:txa8 1 9 l:e7
to undermine it by a2-a4 when, if l:f8 and Black holds the position.
... bS-b4, White fixes the a-pawn Hjartarson-Petursson, Reykjavik
with the move a4-aS, taking under 1 999.
control the b6 square. Black must S) l l ...h6 (it is useful to drive
take into account this circumstance away the bishop to the king's flank)
when planning his game. Let's look 1 2 .i.h4
at the possible continuations: Sa) 1 2 ...i..b7 1 3 a4 b4 14 �dS
I} l l .. .l:te8 1 2 a4 ! (the undermin­ �d7 I S l:b l l!Jb6 16 aS ! l!Ja4 1 7
ing idea; after 1 2 liJdS l!Jd7 1 3 c3 'ii'd2 gS 1 8 i..g3 �xb2 1 9 l!Jxb4
l:tb8 Black prepares the advance of l!JxaS 20 �xaS 'ii'xaS 2 1 c3 l!Ja4 22
the bS pawn and the theme 14 a4 b4 eS! and White generates an
is not so effective, for example, the initiative, Nielsen-Ward, London
game Pliester-Sax, Aruba 1 992, 1 990.
continued IS l!Jd4 l!JdeS 16 f4 Sb) 12 ... �g4 13 h3 �geS 14 a4
�xd4 1 7 cxd4 �c6 1 8 e5 dxeS 19 �c4 I S axbS l!Jxb2 1 6 'ifcl i.. xc3
dxeS i..e6 with complex play) 1 7 bxc6 'ii'c7 1 8 l:e3 'ii'xc6 1 9
1 2 ...b4 1 3 liJdS �xdS 14 exdS l!JeS i..xe7 l:e8 2 0 i..xd6 l:xe4 2 1 l:xe4
l S aS ! �d7 ( I S ... i..b 7?! 16 i..e3 'ii'xe4 and the position has ex­
�d7 1 7 i..d4 ±} 16 i..c l �cS 1 7 ploded, Chandler-Shirov, Hastings
�d2 i..d7 1 8 �c4 ± . The knight 1 992.
controls the weak b6 square, Sc) 12 ...�d7 13 l:tb l �b6 1 4
Tischbierek-Vatter, Germany 1 994. �dS l:tc8 (also interesting i s 1 4 ...gS
2) l l . . .�d7 12 'ii'c l (or 1 2 l:b l l S i..g3 �c4) l S f4 ! i..b7 16 c3 l:c8
�b6 1 3 �dS l:e8 14 i..e3 �xdS I S = Vukovic-Rogozenko, Bucharest
exdS l!JeS 1 6 i..d4 i..b7 Vukovic­ 1 999.
=

Rogozenko, Bucharest 1 998) Sd) 12 ...e6! ? (preparing ... d6-dS)

12 ... �b6?! and here, in the game 1 3 'ii'd2 'ii'c7 14 l:.ad l l:.d8 l S f4
Kramnik-Serper, USSR 1 989, White i..b7 1 6 a3 l:.ac8 and Black's
should have played 1 3 a4! b4 chances are already preferable,
( 13 . . .i..xc3 1 4 bxc3 �xa4 I S i..h6 Adams-Miles, Tilburg 1 993.
 Classical Dragon with 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 l'Db3 69

9Cb 1 0...b5 1 1 t'Dd5

Also worth considering is I I a4
(1 e4 c5 2 t'Df3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 b4 I2 t'Dd5 e6 I3 t'Dxf6+ i.xf6 I4
l'Dxd4 l'Df6 5 l'Dc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 aS ! i.b7 I S l:.a2 'We7 I6 i.e3 and
l'Db3 0-0 8 0-0 l'Dc6 9 .:tel a6) White has the better chances
because of Black's weaknesses on
10 i.n b6 and a6, Ermenkov-V.Georgiev,
Sofia I 993.
ll l'Dd7
•.•

Weaker is I I . ..l'Dxd5 12 exd5

t'De5 1 3 c3 with the better game for
White.
12 c3 e6 13 l'De3 l'Db6 14 f4 .i.b7
15 l'Dg4 l'Dc4
After I 5 ...t'De7 I 6 t'Da5 i.c8 1 7 f5
exf5 1 8 l'Dh6+ �h8 19 exf5 l'Dxf5
20 t'Dxf5 i.xf5 2 I t'Db7 ikc7 22
l'Dxd6 White develops an initiative,
Ruban-Cvetkovic, Cetinje I 993
16 l'Dd2 'Wb6+ 17 'ith1 l'Dxd2 18
Deploying his forces in accor­ i.xd2 f5 with chances for both
dance with the requirements of the sides, Zagrebelny-Serper, Tashkent
plan with 9 l:.e I . I 992.
 3 : Variations with 6 .il.c4

(1 e4 c5 2 lt::lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 h3 h4! +) 13 . . .gxh4 1 4 l:txh4 lt::lc6

lt::ld4 lt::lf6 5 lt::lc3 g6) 1 5 'ii'd2 lt::ld4! 1 6 ..ixd4 'ii'xd4 and
Black has equal chances.
6 ..ic4 6 ... ..tg7 7 h3
If White intends to develop the
bishop on g5, then this prophylaxis
is not obligatory: 7 0-0 0-0 8 l:te 1
lt::lc6 9 ..ib3 a6 1 0 lt::lxc6 bxc6 1 1
..ig5 h6 1 2 ..th4 lt::lh5 13 f3 'iPh7 1 4
'ii'd2 ..ie5 1 5 ..t f2 'ii'a5 1 6 l:ad1
l:b8 1 7 ..id4 f6 and Black
establishes a solid defence, Short­
lvanchuk, Novgorod 1 994.
N.Short considers 1 7 ..ie3 ! g5 1 8
g3 to be stronger, driving away the
dark-squared bishop with an active
position.
White develops the bishop to an 7 . 0-0 8 ..ie3
..

active diagonal. But now, in order to The plan with the development of
develop his other bishop to e3, he is this bishop to g5 is looked at in
obliged to secure its position against Lines 1 5 and 1 6.
the thrust ...lt::lf6-g4 by playing In the game Benjamin-Gufeld,
h2-h3. Quite frequently he com­ New York 1989, White tried 8 lt::lf3 ,
mences this play with an immediate on which followed 8 ... lt::lbd7 !? 9 0-0
6 h3, which after 6. . ...ig7 7 ..ie3 0-0 a6 l O a4 b6 1 1 'ii'e2 ..ib7 1 2 ..if4
8 ..ic4 leads to a simple transposi­ 'ii'c7 1 3 l:fe 1 e6 14 .rlad 1 lt::le5 1 5
tion of moves. ..ib3 lt::lfd7 1 6 lt::ld2 lt::lc5 after which
This prophylactic move is often Black obtained a completely equal
made also after 6 ..ie3 ..ig7 (for the position.
time being the thrust 6... lt::lg4? is not 8. lt::lc6
..

possible because of 7 ..ib5+) 7 h3, Before completing his develop­

since on 7 ..ic4 good is 7 ...lt::lg4 and ment 8 ...c!Dxe4 9 lt::lxe4 d5 1 0 lt::lb5
8 ..ib5+ �ffi. Furthermore the game looks risky for Black; though in the
Ljubojevic-Sosonko, Buenos Aires game Shrentzei-Afek, Ramat Ha­
(ol) 1 978, continued: 9 ..ig5 h6 1 0 sharon 1 984, after 10 ... a6 1 1 ..ixd5
..ih4 g5 1 1 ..ig3 "ii'b6 1 2 lt::lde2 (du­ axb5 1 2 c3 b4 1 3 cxb4 lt::lc6 1 4 "ii'b3
bious is 1 2 tll f5 ?! ..ixf5 13 exf5 lt::lxb4 1 5 ..ixf7+ l:txf7 16 'ii'xb4
..ixc3+ 14 bxc3 'ii'xb5 1 5 'ii'xg4 White won a pawn, Black had in
lt::ld7 + Sosonko) 1 2 ... h5 1 3 h4 ( 1 3 return sufficient piece activity.
 Variations with 6 .ic4 71

9 .ib3 13 'it'd2?! l:r.c8 14 0-0 l:r.c4 1 5 l:r.fe l

A prophylactic retreat of the 'ifd7 1 6 �b5 l:r.fc8 1 7 'it'xa5 e5 1 8
bishop to counter the threat of .ib6 l:r.xc2 ; Mestel-Larsen, Hast­
...�f6xe4. The alternative 9 0-0 is ings 1 986) 1 3 ...l:r.c8 14 l:r.e I (insuffi­
examined in Line 14. cient is 14 e5 �d5 15 �xd5 exd5 ) =

Black's main continuations are: 14 ...�d7 1 5 �b5 .ixd4 1 6 �xd4

'it'b6 1 7 'ifd2 l:r.f6 1 8 b3 �e5 1 9
9...�xd4-Line 1 0 .l:.e2?! (stronger i s 1 9 l:r.e3 l:r.cffi 20
9...�a5-Line I I l:.fl with roughly equal chances)
9....id7-Lines 1 2 and 1 3 1 9 ... g5 ! and Black seizes the initia­
tive, Tal-Larsen, Brussels 1 987.
Line 1 0 1 0 .ixd4 b5
Here IO ....ie6 already does not
( 1 e4 c 5 2 � 0 d 6 3 d 4 cxd4 4 force an exchange on e6: I I 0-0
�xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 .ic4 .ig7 7 .ixb3 (the manoeuvre l l ...'it'a5 is
h3 0-0 8 .ie3 �c6 9 .ib3) poor: 1 2 .l:.e l 'it'h5 13 �d5 .ixd5 1 4
exd5 'it'xd l 1 5 :axd l and Black's
9... �xd4 position is cramped, S.B.Hansen­
N.Nilsson, Copenhagen 1995) 1 2
axb3 a6 1 3 'ife2 :c8 1 4 l:[fd l �d7
1 5 .ixg7 ri;xg7 16 �d5 l:r.e8 I 7
�e3 and White has a small but en­
during positional advantage,
Ljubojevic-Rajkovic, Titovo Uzice
1 978.

An exchange of knights linked to

a plan of developing the bishop on
the flank to pressurise e4, as well as
the tactical possibility ... b7-b5 or the
exchange of the light-squared bish­
ops by ....ic8-e6.
Regarding the latter, also worth
considering is the inclusion of the
move 9 ... a5 1 0 a4 which weakens 11 a3
the position of the bishop b3- After I I �xb5 �xe4 (also
I O... iDxd4 I I .ixd4 .ie6 1 2 .ixe6 worthy of attention is I I ...'it'a5+ 1 2
(a consequence of the move 9 ...a5- �c3 �xe4, not fearing 1 3 .ixg7
opening the f-file makes it easier for ri;xgJ 14 'it'd5 in view of 14 ...�c5
Black to obtain counterplay, there­ 1 5 'ifxa8 .ib7 1 6 'iVxfE+ �xffi with
fore interesting is 1 2 .idS !?, which chances for both sides) 1 2 .ixg7
so far has not undergone serious �xg7 1 3 'it'd4+ �f6 14 0-0-0 .ib7
practical trials) 1 2 . . . fxe6 1 3 0-0 (or 1 5 .l:.hg l 'it'a5 16 �c3 l:r.ac8 Black
72 Variations with 6 i..c4

obtains an equal game, Tai-Gufeld,

USSR I 973.
But not bad is the simple I I 0-0
i.b7 ( I l . . .a6?! is passive: I 2 l:e i
i.b7 I 3 llld5 i.xd5 I4 exd5 ±
Mitkov-Neessen, Weekender I999)
I 2 'ii'd3 (on I 2 l:e i possible is
I2 . . . e5 1 3 i.e3 lllxe4 I4 lllxb5 d5
I 5 f3 lllg3 I6 i.c5 lllf5 I 7 lllc3 d4
I S i.xf8 i.xf8 I 9 llle4 i.h6 with
excellent play for the sacrificed ex­
change, Sznapik-Skrobek, Poland
(ch) I977) 1 2 . b4 1 3 llld5 e6 14
..

lllxf6+ i.xf6 I5 l:ad i and White's

position is preferable, Matanovic­ Black strives to exchange the ac­
Dueball, Bad Pyrmont 1970. tive bishop, but this move involves
l l a5
... a loss of time and White can count
Just in time, since after l l . . .i.b7 on holding on to the initiative.
12 'ii'd3 this move entails a pawn 10 0-0
sacrifice: I 2 ... a5?! I 3 'ii'xb5 and not The thrust I 0 f4 weakens the
good is 1 3 . . . i.xe4? I 4 i.xf6 exf6 I 5 h i -aS diagonal: I O...lllxb3 (also
lDxe4 'ile7 I 6 'ii'e2 l:fe8 I 7 i.a4 f5 good is 1 0...b6, since I I e5 lllh 5 I 2
1 8 i.xe8 l:xe8 I 9 0-0 and Black i.d5 weakens the position riskily:
does not have sufficient compensa­ I2 ...dxe5 ! 13 fxe5 when in the game
tion for the exchange, De Firmian­ Sigurjonsson-Diaz, Cienfuegos
Oiesen, Gausdal 1995. I975, in place of 13 ...i.a6? 1 4 'tff3
12 0-0 i.b7 13 f3 l:c8 15 0-0-0, which turned out in
Worth considering 1 3 'ii'd3 i.a6 White's favour, the simpler
14 lllxb5 lllxe4 1 5 i.xg7 'iirxg7 1 6 I 3 ...l:b8 would have given Black
'iVxe4 i.xb5 1 7 l:fe I e 6 I S c4 i.a6 excellent play, since I4 e6 fxe6! is
19 l:tad I 'ifb6 20 l:.e3 l:ac8 2 I l:c3 not dangerous) I I axb3 b6 I 2 g4
and, thanks to the pawn majority on i.b7 I3 'ii'f3 a6 I4 g5 lllh5 1 5 f5
the queen's flank, White's chances l:c8 16 0-0 i.e5 with counterplay
are preferable, Hector-Borge, Esper­ for Black, Mitrovic-Markovic,
gaerde I 992. Vmjacka Banja 1 996.
13...i.c6 14 l:e1 l:b8 15 llld5 On I 0 'ii'd2 Black can deliver a
i.xd5 16 i.xd5 lllxd5 17 exd5 blow in the centre, characteristic for
i.xd4+ 18 'Wxd4 .l:te8 19 c3 'ii'b6 a situation where White is late with
and though Black's position is castling: I O...lllxb3 I I axb3 d5 ! ? I 2
cramped, he has no weaknesses, e5 llle4 1 3 lllxe4 dxe4 I 4 i.f4
Short-Khalifman, Wijk aan Zee 'ifb6! I 5 'ii'e3 f6! I 6 'ii'xe4 fxe5 I 7
I 995. i.xe5 i.f5 I S 'ii'd5+ ( I 8 lllxf5 l:xf5
+) I 8 ...e6 I 9 _.a5 i.xe5 20 'ii'xe5
Line 1 1 i.xc2! and White has to defend,
Oil-Alterman, Beijing I 997. But
( 1 e4 c5 2 lllf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 also possible is IO ...i.d7, since
lLlxd4 lllf6 5 lllc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7 harmless is I I i.h6 l:c8 I 2 i.xg7
h3 0-0 8 i.e3 lllc6 9 i.b3) 'iirxg7 1 3 _.d3 a6 I4 f4 e5! I 5 lllde2
 Variations with 6 .ic4 73

'iib6 16 0-0-0 .ibS ! 1 7 'ii'f3 .ixe2 l:.ad 1 .ixd4 1 7 'ii'xd4 e5 1 8 'it'd5!

18 'ii'xe2 lLlxb3+ 1 9 axb3 exf4 and and White achieves the advantage,
Black stands a little better. Short­ Ciric-Neulinger, Neustadt 1 99 1 ;
Kramnik, Novgorod 1 997. 1 5 ...l:.e8 was more prudent, fol­
Here Black's main continuations lowed by ...l:.a8-c8, . . .'ii'd8-c7,
are: ...lLlf6-d7, though even here White's
chances are superior.
l lA: I O b6
•.• 2) 1 1 .idS .ia6 1 2 l:.e 1 l:.c8 1 3
liB I O...a6 .igS 'ii'd7 1 4 a4 .ic4 1 5 .ixc4
l:.xc4 with chances for both sides,
l lA Inkiov-Ermenkov, Plovdiv 1982
3) 1 1 .igS .ia6! 12 l:te 1 l:.c8 and
(l e4 c5 2 lLJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 because of the threat to sacrifice the
lLJxd4 iLJf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 .ic4 .ig7 7 exchange by ... l:tc8xc3 Black has
h3 0-0 8 .ie3 lLlc6 9 .ib3 lLla5 10 quite good counterplay.
0-0)
l lAa: l l ....ib7
IO ...b6 l lAb: l l ...lLlxb3

l lAa

(l e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 .ic4 .ig7 7
h3 0-0 8 .ie3 lLlc6 9 .ib3 lLla5 10
0-0 b6 11 ...d3)

l l ....tb7

Black carries out a plan with piece

activity in the centre:
l l 'ii'd3
Let's also look at other
possibilities:
1) 1 1 l:.el ! ? .ib7 12 .tgs h6 1 3
.ih4 lLlxb3 (on 1 3 . . .l:.c8, 14 'ii'd3
looks promising; after 14 lLldS pos­
sible is 14 . . .g5 1 5 lLlxf6+ .ixf6 1 6
.ig3 lLlxb3 1 7 axb3 .ixd4 1 8 'ii'xd4 This position remains insufficient­
lhc2 1 9 l:.xa7 'ii'c7 with equal ly investigated. White maintains the
chances, De Firmian-K.aliksteyn, pressure in the centre, but the black
Philadelphia 1 995) 14 axb3 a6 1 5 pieces control the situation.
'ii'd3 (or 1 5 lLldS e6 1 6 .ixf6 .ixf6 The attempt at a pawn attack does
1 7 lLlxf6+ 'ii'xf6 1 8 c3 l:.ad8 with not give Black problems.
equal chances, Morovic-Brunner, 1 ) 1 2 f4 l:.c8 (or 1 2 ...lLlxb3 1 3
Buenos Aires 1 992) 1 5 ...lLJh5?! 1 6 axb3 lLld7 1 4 .id2 lLlcS 1 5 ._,e3 e5
74 Variations with 6 i.c4

= Fedorowicz-Christiansen, USA with an attacking posttlon for

(ch) 1 977) 1 3 l:ae l J:.xc3 14 'ii'xc3 White, Klovans-Cicak, Germany
l2Jxe4 1 5 'ifd3 l2Jxb3 16 axb3 e5 1 7 1 998.
l2Je2 'ifa8 1 8 b4 l2Jf6 and Black has
excellent piece play for the ex­
change, Mortensen-Kudrin, Copen­ l l Ab
hagen 1983.
The attempt to exploit the d5 (1 e4 c5 2 l2Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
square is apparently refuted by l2Jxd4 l2Jf6 5 l2Jc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7
Black: h3 0-0 8 i.e3 l2Jc6 9 i.b3 l2Ja5 10
2) 12 i.d5 (weaker is 1 2 l2Jd5? 0-0 b6 1 1 'itd3)
l2Jxb3 13 l2Jxf6+ i.xf6 14 axb3 d5
and Black is better) 12 ...'ii'd7 1 3 l l ...l2Jxb3 12 axb3 i.b7
llad l (Black's task i s simpler on 1 3
i.xb7 'ifxb7 1 4 J:.ad l llac8 1 5 l:fe l
when in the game Moldovan-Marin,
Bucharest 1 994, instead of the hur­
ried 1 5 ...l2Jc4 16 i.e I b5 1 7 b3 ;!;, as
pointed out by Marin, Black should
have prepared to occupy the outpost
on c4 by 1 5 ... a6! 1 6 l2J f3 b 5 1 7 a3
l2Jc4 1 8 i.c l l:c7, obtaining excel­
lent play) 1 3 ... 1lac8 14 l:fe1 a6 1 5
a4! l:fe8 1 6 i.a2! (otherwise Black
exchanges this bishop: 16 l2Jf3
l2Jxd5 17 exd5 l2Jc4 18 i.eI b5 or
16 l2Jde2 i.d5 I 7 exd5 l2Jc4 18 i.e 1 13 l:[fd1
b5 19 axb5 l2Je5 ! 20 'itg3 axb5, After the exchange on b3 the
obtaining good counterplay­ pawn structure on the opponent's
M.Marin) 1 6...'ifc7 1 7 l2Jf3 lLld7 1 8 queen's flank is determined and
i.d4 l2Jc4 and the game is even, White can count on pressure along
Mitkov-Marin, Sitges 1 997. the a-file.
A concentration of pressure in the In case of 13 llad 1 llc8 14 l:fe 1
centre looks more promising: a6 1 5 i.g5 lle8 16 'ife3 llc5 1 7 b4
3) 1 2 i.g5 l2Jxb3 1 3 axb3 a6 14 l:xc3 1 8 'ii'xc3 l2Jxe4 1 9 'iie3 l2Jxg5
llfe 1 h6 1 5 i.d2 b5 1 6 f4 e6 with 20 'ifxg5 i.f6 Black obtains an
unclear play, J.Polgar-Topalov, active game for the exchange,
Novgorod 1996. Gavrikov-Schneider, Debrecen
4) 12 l:fd 1 llc8 1 3 l2Jde2 l2Jd7 1 4 1 988.
i.d4 l2Je5 1 5 'ii'g3 i.a6 1 6 f4 l2Jec4 13...a6 14 l2Jde2 b5
1 7 i.xg7 'it>xg7 1 8 J:.ab 1 and, after Worth considering is 1 4 ... l2Jd7
reinforcing the queen's flank, White with the idea of ... llf'd-e8.
has the preferable game. Sieiro­ 15 lla2 l:lc8 16 l2Jd5 e6 17 l2Jxf6+
Diaz, Cuba (ch) 1988. 'ifxf6 18 c4 d5 19 exd5 exd5 20
5) 12 l:ad1 'ifc8 13 l:fe 1 i.a6 14 cxb5 axb5 21 i.d4 with advantage
'ii'd2 l:e8 15 i.h6 i.h8 16 i.a4 lld8 to White, Ljubojevic-Admjan,
1 7 l2Jf5 'ife6 1 8 'ifg5 llac8 19 g4 Amsterdam 1 978.
 Variations with 6 i.c4 75

l lB Line 12

(1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 (1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

ltJxd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7 ltJxd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7
h3 0-0 8 i.e3 ltJc6 9 i.b3 ltJa5 10 h3 0-0 8 i.e3 ltJc6 9 i.b3)
0-0)
9 ...i.d7
10 ... a6

A popular plan to organise piece

1 1 f4 pressure on the c-file, analogous to
After I I i.g5 h6 1 2 i.h4, 1 2 ...b5 play against the Rauzer.
seems to be the simplest (in the 10 0-0 :c8
game Morovic-Romero Holmes, The second main direction of play
Leon 1993, 12 ... e6 13 f4 ltJxb3 14 for Black, IO . . .'iVa5, is examined in
axb3 e5 15 fxe5 dxe5 1 6 ltJf3 was Line 1 3 .
played and Black started to have There are other more rarely met
worries about the e5 pawn) 1 3 i.d5 continuations, having ideas in
i.b7 with chances for both sides. common with the above-mentioned
1 1 ...ltJxb3 variations though with special
On I I ...'ii'c7 possible is 1 2 ltJf3 features of their own:
and if 1 2 . . . ltJc4?, then 1 3 i.xc4 1) IO ...ltJxd4 I I i.xd4 i.c6 (the
'iVxc4 14 e5 dxe5 1 5 fxe5 ltJh5 1 6 plan to put pressure on e4 is in the
'iid5 with a perceptible advantage spirit of the 9 ...ltJxd4 variation, but
for White, Kurajica-Miles, Wijk aan also possible is l l . ..b5 1 2 l:te l e5 1 3
Zee 1 977. Stronger is 1 2 . . . e6. i.e3 b4 1 4 ltJd5 ltJxe4 1 5 ltJxb4 aS
12 axb3 i.d7 13 'i6'f3 l:lc8 14 g4 16 ltJd5 ;!; Amason-Spacek, Prague
e5 15 ltJde2 i.c6 16 f5 1 978/79) 1 2 'iid3 (defending the
Or 1 6 g5 ltJd7 1 7 f5 f6 1 8 fxg6 pawn and connecting rooks, where­
hxg6 19 gxf6 liJxf6 and White's at­ as 1 2 :e I ? e5 1 3 i.e3 ltJxe4 loses
tacking pawns disappear without the pawn without compensation)
having achieved anything in I a) 1 2 ...b5 1 3 l:lfe l 'iid7 14 ltJd5
particular. i.xd5 (or 14 ...ltJxd5 1 5 exd5 i.b7
16 ... d5 17 g5 ltJxe4 18 ltJxe4 16 i.xg7 �xg7 1 7 l:le3 with strong
dxe4 19 'iVfl gxf5 20 'iixf5 'iid7 pressure along the e-file,
with equal chances, Da Costa Sigurjonsson-Miles, Hastings 1 974)
Junior-Pinto Neto, Brasil 1 993. 1 5 exd5 'iib7 1 6 ._,f3 l:tfe8 1 7 :ad I
76 Variations with 6 il..c4

:ac8 18 a4! with advantage to 1 9 'WaS, and finding Black's weak­

White, Christiansen-Szmetan, Tor­ nesses, White has the preferable
remolinos 1976. position, Hebden-Watson, London,
l b) l 2 ... lUd7 (the exchange of the 1 989) 1 3 exdS iUeS 14 'ii'e2 'Wc7 I S
centralised bishop seems the most c3 il.. f6 1 6 l:lad l l:lfc8 1 7 iUf3 aS
expedient method of defence in this with equal chances, Wedberg­
cramped position) 1 3 il..xg7 �xg7 Lindemann, Naestved 1 988.
14 l:tfe l (or 14 l:tad l aS I S f4 a4 1 6 After IO ...l:lc8 White's main con­
il..dS 'ii'b6+ 1 7 'ii'd4+ 'ii'xd4+ 1 8 tinuations are:
:xd4 a3 + A.Kogan-Jirovsky,
Lazne Bohdanec 1 996; R.Byme and l2A: 1 1 l:le1
E.Mednis recommend 1 4 'it'd4+ f6 12B: 1 1 f4
I S �h2 'ii'b6 1 6 'ii'd2 ;t) l 4 ... a6 1 S
iUdS l:lc8 1 6 l:lad l lUeS 1 7 'ii'e3 The move I I ii'd3 hands Black an
lUxb3 18 'ii'xb3 il.. xdS 19 exdS with important tempo, l l . . .iUeS, and af­
a space advantage for White, but ter 1 2 'ii'e2 the exchange sacrifice
Black's position has no weaknesses, l 2 ...l:lxc3 1 3 bxc3 lUxe4. is
Emms-Jonasson, Nopavogur 1 994. possible.
2) l O ... lUaS (intending to ex­
change the bishop b3 in the spirit of l2A
the variation 9 . . . lllaS)
2a) I I 'ii'd2 l:lc8 ( I I ... bS ! is more (1 e4 cS 2 iUf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
energetic) 1 2 l:tad l a6 1 3 life l bS lUxd4 iUf6 5 lUc3 g6 6 il..c4 il..g7 7
14 il..gS lUc4 I S il..xc4 l:lxc4 1 6 eS h3 0-0 8 il..e3 lUc6 9 il..b3 il..d7 10
dxeS 1 7 iUf3 and White's chances 0-0 l:lc8)
are preferable, Radulov-Forintos,
Kecskemet 1 972. 1 1 .:.et
2b) I I 'ii'd3 a6 (or l l ...lUxb3?! 1 2
axb3 a6 1 3 iUdS ;t and now
l 3 . . . e6?! 14 lUxf6+ 'ii'x f6 I S lUe2
.tc6 1 6 .id4 eS 1 7 il..e3 leads to an
advantage for White in view of the
weakness of the backward d6 pawn,
Landa-Foldi, Matra 1 993) 1 2 l:tfe l
:c8 ( l 2 ...bS !?) 1 3 iUdS-see
1 0... l:tc8 1 1 :e l .
2c) I I l:.e l .l:tc8 1 2 1i'd3 leads to
variation l A, looked at below.
3) I O ... a6!? (leaving in reserve the
manoeuvre ...lUc6-eS, Black pre­
vents the development of the queen A useful developing move. White
on d3) l l l:te l bS ( l l ...llc8, see not only defends the e4 pawn
1 0... l:.c8) 1 2 iUdS lUxdS (repulsing against the attack ...b7-bS-b4, but
the threat of lUd4xc6 and il..e3-b6, also intends the thrust lUc3-dS
but Black achieves the same aim by which, after an exchange of knights,
l 2 . . .lUaS or l 2 ...l:te8- 1 3 a4 bxa4 broadens the sphere of activity of
14 il..xa4 lUxdS I S exdS lUeS 1 6 b3 the rook. White's main plans are
fie? 17 'ii'd2 'ii'b7 1 8 il..xd7 lUxd7 linked to the moves:
 Variations with 6 .i.c4 77

41Aa: I I ltJe5 ... .i.xd4+ I9 'ii'xd4 e6 20 l:.xe6? (20

41Ab: I I a6 ... .:e3 lLlb5 2 1 'ii'd3 'ii'b6 +) 20... lLlb5 !
2 1 'ii'e3 fxe6 22 'ii'xe6+ 'St>h8 23
More passive is I I ...l:[e8 I 2 'ii'd2 l:[d 1 'ii'b6+ 0- I Mitkov-Tiviakov,
'ii'a5 I 3 liJf3 a6 ( 1 3 ...b5 at once is Mamaia I 99 I .
more energetic) I4 .:adi b5 I 5 .i.h6 1 2 ltJc4 1 3 .ixc4 l:.xc4 1 4 'ii'd3
•..

.i.h8 (or I 5 ...liJd8 I6 liJd4 llc5 I 7 llc8!

a3 .i.xh6 I S 'ii'xh6 llh5 I 9 'ii'f4 with After 14 ...'ii'c8? 15 e5 dxe5 (on
somewhat better chances for White, I 5 ...ltJh5 I 6 liJd5 l:.e8 17 exd6 exd6
Tal-C.Hansen, Reykjavik I 986) I 6 I S .i.f2 �f8 I 9 l:.xe8+ .i.xe8 20
ltJg5 lLle5 1 7 f4 lLlc4 1 8 e 5 ! allows .:e I White has an obvious advan­
White to develop an initiative, tage, Ljubojevic-S.Garcia Martinez,
Jansa-Watson, Gausdal I 988. Portoroz!Ljubljana 1 975) 1 6 fxe5
lLlh5 I 7 ltJd5 .:es I S l:.ad I .i.xe5 I 9
l2Aa b3 .:c5 2 0 liJf3 and Black suffers
material losses, Mitkov-Leenhouts,
{l e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Weekender I 999.
ltJxd4 lLlf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7 15 lladl
h3 0-0 8 .i.e3 ltJc6 9 .i.b3 .i.d7 10 On 1 5 e5 best is 15 . . . ltJe8
=.

0-0 l:tc8 II l:tel) 15... a6 with approximately equal

chances (S.Tiviakov).
l l . ..liJe5
12Ab

(I e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
ltJxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 �c4 .i.g7 7
h3 0-0 8 .i.e3 ltJc6 9 .i.b3 .id7 10
0-0 l:lc8 II l:lel)

l l...a6
After completing his develop­
ment, Black commences a flank at­
tack with the objective of
weakening the defence of the e4
pawn. Here White's main continua­
Black transfers his knight to the tions are:
c4 square.
12 f4 12Ab l : 12 lLld5
On 12 'ii'e2?!, preventing 12Ab2: 12 'ii'd2
... ltJe5-c4, he has to reckon on the
exchange sacrifice I 2 ...llxc3 ! 1 3 l2Abl
bxc3 ltJxe4. For example: I 4 f4 (or
14 .i.d2 lLlxd2 I 5 'ii'xd2 e6! I 6 a4 (1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
'ii'a 5! I 7 lLlb5 d5 1 8 'ii'e3 a6 1 9 lLld4 ltJxd4 lLlf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7
l:.c8 20 lLle2 lLlc4 2 I .i.xc4 llxc4 + h3 0-0 8 .i.e3 ltJc6 9 .i.b3 .i.d7 1 0
Aleksic-Tiviakov, Amantea I 99 1 ) 0-0 llc8 I I l:.el a6)
I4. . . .lLlxc3 I 5 'ii'fl lLlc6 1 6 'ii'd3
'ii'a5 I 7 lLlxc6 .i.xc6 I S .i.d4 12 lLld5
78 Variations with 6 il.. c4

White threatens to exploit the With the intention, when the op­
weak b6 square. portunity arises, of exchanging the
12 ...lt:la5 dark-squared bishops.
1 2 .... lt:lxe4?! loses the exchange: 12 ... b5
1 3 lt:lxc6 bxc6 14 ..tb6 'ii'e8 1 5 lt:lc7 Or 1 2 ...l:.e8 1 3 l:.ad1 lt:lxd4 14
l:.xc7 16 ..txc7 d5 1 7 f3 lt:lc5 1 8 c3 ..txd4 ..tc6 15 lt:ld5 ! i.xd5 1 6 exd5
and Black does not have sufficient lt:ld7 1 7 i.xg7 �xg7 1 8 l:te3 b5 1 9
compensation, Tolnai-Malakhov, l:r.de 1 with unpleasant pressure on
Balatonbereny 1995. the e7 pawn, Watson-Tolnai, Buda­
Worth considering is 12 ...lt:lxd5 pest 1989.
1 3 exd5 lt:le5 14 'ii'e2 'ii'c7 1 5 l:.ad1 13 l:.adl
l:.fe8 16 c3 b5 with equal chances, Here the exchange of the dark­
Bielczyk-Bobras, Suwalki 1 999. squared bishops by 13 lt:lxc6 i.xc6
l3 'ii'd3 lt:lxd5 14 ..th6 ..txh6 1 5 'ii'xh6 involves
13 ...lt:lxb3 14 axb3 ..tc6?! is simplification. The game Sznapik­
insufficient to equalise (More Jansa, Prague (zt) 1985, continued
prudent would be 14 ... e6 ;;!;;) due to 1 5 ...e6 16 a3 a5 1 7 'ii'f4 e5 1 8 'ii'd2
1 5 lt:lxc6! l:.xc6 1 6 c3 lt:ld7 1 7 ..tg5 b4 1 9 axb4 axb4 20 lt:ld5 ..txd5 2 1
l:r.e8 1 8 'ii'e3 and White obtains the exd5 'ii'b6 and Black has a fully
advantage, Popovic-Sinanovic, equal game.
Yugoslavia (ch) 1 99 1 . 13 ...b4 14 lt:\d5 lt:lxd5
1 4 exd5 l:.e8 1 5 c3 'ii'c7 1 6 ..tg5 On 14 ...lt:lxe4 possible is 1 5 'ii'e2
lt:lxb3 with the threat of lt:ld4xc6.
On 16 .. .'�f8 strong is 1 7 lle4 ! . 15 exd5 lt:lxd4 16 ..txd4 ..txd4 1 7
17 axb3 'ii'c 5! 18 lt:l tJ e5 and 'ii'xd4 and White has a space advan­
Black has equal chances, Watson­ tage as well as pressure on the e7
Larsen, Esbjerg 1 988. pawn, Watson-Findlay, England
(ch) 1 990.
12Ab2

(1 e4 c5 2 lt:ltJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 12B

lt:lxd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:lc3 g6 6 ..tc4 il.. g7 7
h3 0-0 8 ..te3 lt:lc6 9 ..tb3 ..td7 10 (1 e4 c5 2 lt:ltJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
0-0 l:.c8 1 1 l:.e1 a6) lt:lxd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:lc3 g6 6 ..tc4 i.g7 7
h3 0-0 8 i.e3 lt:lc6 9 i.b3 i.d7 10
12 'ifd2 0-0 l:.c8)
 Variations with 6 �c4 79

1 1 f4 exd5 a4 20 �a2 .!Dh5 (20 ...l%fe8 !?)

2 1 �xg7 �xg7 22 'ii'd2 .!Df6 23 c3
and White's chances are preferable,
Van Riemsdijk-Egger, Sao Paulo
(zt) 1 993. .
13 ... .!Da5 14 .l:r.adl .!Dc4
On 14 ... .!Dxb3?! good is 1 5 cxb3 !
( 1 5 .!Dxb3 allows Black to make a
favourable sacrifice of the ex­
change: 1 5 .. Jhc3 16 bxc3 �c6 1 7
.!Dd2 'ifa8 + Westerinen-Dueball,
Berlin 1 97 1 ) 1 5 ...'ifc7 16 g4 'ifb7
1 7 e5 with advantage to White
(Dueball).
White prepares the advance e4-e5, 15 �cl 'ifc7 16 �hi e5 17 .!Dde2
while indirectly attacking the a7 �c6 and Black's chances are not
pawn. worse, since the activity of his
ll ... a6 12 'ift3 pieces compensates for the draw­
Also seen is 1 2 'ii'd3 'ifa5 (not bad back of the backward pawn, Hector­
is 1 2 ...'ifc7 13 l:lad l .!Da5 14 f5 .!Dc4 Tiviakov, Haninge 1992.
1 5 �xc4 'ifxc4 with roughly even
chances, Janosevic-Mohr, Bled Line 13
1989) 13 l:tae l 'ifh5 14 �f2 1:fd8
1 5 'ii'g3 e6 1 6 .!Dxc6 �xc6 17 f5 (1 e4 c5 2 .!DO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
gxf5 1 8 exf5 exf5 1 9 l%e7 d5 with a .!Dxd4 .!Df6 5 .!Dc3 g6 6 �c4 �g7 7
sharp game, Zelie-Jovanovic, Pula h3 0-0 8 �e3 .!Dc6 9 �b3 �d7 1 0
1 999. 0-0)
1 2 e5 dxe5 13 .!Dxc6 l%xc6 1 4
fxe5 .!Dh5 looks risky. I n the game 10...'ii'a5
Komeev-Tiviakov, Paris 1 99 1 ,
White exchanged the e 5 pawn for
the one on e7, but at the cost of a
pinned queen: 1 5 'iff3 �xeS 1 6
�xf7+ �g7 1 7 g4 ( 1 7 'ii'd5 'ifc7
with the threat 1 8 ... .!Df6) 1 7 ...l%f6 1 8
'ifd5 �xc3 1 9 bxc3 1:8xf7 20 �d4
'i!tf8 2 1 �xf6 .!Dxf6 22 'ifd4 'ifc7
and Black gained a material advan­
tage. Of course the consistent move
was 1 5 g4, but this entails a great
weakening of White's rear. For ex­
ample 1 5 ....!Dg3 1 6 l%f3 l%xc3 1 7
bxc3 .!De4 1 8 �d4 �c6 and Black Analogous to the Rauzer Attack
has compensation for the exchange. Black develops his queen on an ac­
12 ... b5 13 a3 tive square. This position is often
Also possible is 1 3 l%ad I .!Dxd4 reached by another order of moves
14 �xd4 �c6 1 5 l1fe l 'ifc7 1 6 a3 in the so-called "Accelerated
a5 1 7 'ii'e2 'ifb7 1 8 .!Dd5 �xd5 1 9 Dragon" 1 e4 c5 2 .!Df3 .!Dc6 3 d4
80 Variations with 6 Jic4

cxd4 4 lLlxd4 g6 5 lLlc3 Jig? 6 Jie3 dangerous threats for White, Short­
lLlf6 7 Jic4 -.as 8 0-0 0-0 9 Jib3 d6 Wagman, Lugano 1986.
1 0 h3 Jid7. Placing the bishop on Sometimes l l ...l:lad8 is played
b3 instead of e2 makes it distinct with the idea, after 1 2 ,..d3 or 1 2
from the classical scheme. On the -.n, of relieving his game by
one hand the bishop is more active 1 2 ...lLlxd4 1 3 Jixd4 Jic6. But after
along this diagonal: it not only pre­ 1 2 lLl£3 ! b5 1 3 a3 a6 14 Wei -.c7
vents the advance ... d6-d5, but also 1 5 �4 the rook on d8 does not pull
makes possible the attack with f2-f4 its weight, whereas White gets his
followed by f4-f5 or e4-e5. On the attack going on the king's flank,
other hand here it takes away a Kurajica-Hiibner, Barcelona 1 965.
square from the knight, and more­
over from b3 the bishop cannot
reinforce the e4 pawn (by means of 13Aa
f2-f4 and Jie2-f3). This circum­
stance forces White to solve the (1 e4 cS 2 tLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
problem of the e4 pawn without lLlxd4 lLlf6 S lLlc3 g6 6 Jl..c4 Jig7 7
delay. h3 0-0 8 Jie3 lLlc6 9 Jib3 Jid7 10
Entering into White's plan is pres­ 0-0 -.as 1 1 f4)
sure on the king's flank and the cen­
tre, while Black intends to carry out 1 1 ...lLlxd4 12 Jixd4
counterplay against the e4 pawn and
on the queen's flank. White's main
continuations are:

13A: 1 1 f4
138: 1 1 l:te1

13A

(1 e4 cS 2 tLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 lLlf6 S lLlc3 g6 6 Jl..c4 Jig7 7
h3 0-0 8 Jie3 lLlc6 9 Jib3 Jid7 10
0-0 ,.aS)
12 ... Jic6
1 1 f4 With the help of a typical freeing
Taking under control the central manoeuvre Black has activated his
squares, White prepares the advance queen's bishop and created such an
e4-e5. Black's main continuations important defensive resource as the
are: break ... e7-e5. If played at once, this
operation is unfavourable: 1 2 ...e5?!
13Aa: 1 1. ..lLlxd4 13 Jie3 Jic6 14 f5! Jl..xe4 15 lLlxe4
13Ab: 1 1 l:lac8
••. lLlxe4 16 fxg6 hxg6 1 7 lhf7 with
13Ac: 1 1 -.hS
••. dangerous threats for White,
Pedzich-Urban, Poland (ch) 1 992.
l l ...e5?! is risky because of 1 2 13 ...d3
lLlxc6 Jl..xc6 1 3 f5 ! Jixe4 1 4 lLlxe4 The most appropriate place for the
lLlxe4 1 5 fxg6 hxg6 1 6 l:r.xf7! with queen in the present structure.
 Variations with 6 1ic4 81

On 1 3 'ii'f3 unpleasant is 2) 1 4 f5 lDd7 15 .i.xg7 (or 1 5

13 ...'ii'b 4! 14 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 1 5 l:tfe 1 lDd5 .i.xd5 1 6 .i.xg7 �xg7 1 7
'ii'c5+ 16 �h 1 .i.xc3+ 1 7 'ii'xc3 .i.xd5 lDf6 ) 1 5 . . .�xg7 1 6 1i'g3
=

'ii'xc3 1 8 bxc3 l:tac8 with the better 'ii'e5 1 7 'iib4 lDf6 and, in associa­
endgame for Black, Ciocaltea­ tion with a subsequent ...b7-b5,
Furman, Harrachov 1 966. This same Black has a fully balanced game,
manoeuvre is good on 1 3 'ii'e2- Tukmakov-Ka_pengut, Rostov 1966.
1 3 ...'ii'b4 ! 14 l:tad 1 tDxe4! 1 5 .i.xg7 3) 14 lDd5 'i:Jxd5 1 5 exd5 .i.xd4+
�xg7 1 6 lDd5 'ii'c5+ 1 7 �h2 lDf6! 1 6 'ii'xd4 .i.d7 1 7 llae 1 l:tfe8 1 8
1 8 'i:Jc7 .i.xg2 ! 1 9 'ii'xe7 .i.xh3! 20 �h1 'ii'c5 with equal chances,
�xh3 'ii'h 5+ with perpetual check. K.Jovans-Kapengut, Riga 1 965.
On 13 lDd5 good is 1 3 ...l:tae8! 14...lDd7
( 1 3 ... l:tfe8 14 f5!) 14 'ii'd3 lDxd5 1 5 Here already 14 ... e5 is bad since
exd5 .i.b5 1 6 c4 .i.xd4+ 1 7 'ii'xd4 after 15 .i.e3 exf4 16 l:txf4 Black is
.i.d7 1 8 �h2 'ii'c5 1 9 'ii'd2 e6! left with a weakness on d6. On
equalising. 14 ...b5 good is 1 5 lDd5 (in the game
13 ...l:tad8 Short-Hellers, Wijk aan Zee 1986,
In going for an opening of the after 1 5 a3?! b4 16 axb4 'ii'xb4
game around the e5 square, Black Black equalised) 1 5 ... .i.xd5 1 6 exd5
not only prevents the advance of the with a small but enduring space ad­
e-pawn, but also, when the opportu­ vantage for White.
nity arises, threatens e5. Sometimes 14 ... lDd7 15 .i.xg7 �xg7 16 �h1
an immediate 1 3 . . . lDd7 14 .i.xg7 Or 1 6 lDd5 e6 1 7 'ii'd4+ e5! 18
�xg7 is played: fxe5 dxe5 1 9 'ii'd3 lDc5 with equal
1) 1 5 �h1 f6 (weaker is 15 ...lDc5 chances, Matanovic-Tal, Palma de
1 6 'ii'd4 f6+ 1 7 l:tae 1 lDxb3 1 8 axb3 Mallorca 1 966.
'ii'c5 19 'ii'd2 e6 20 l:tf3 .J:.fe8 2 1 16...lDc5 ·
l:td3 ± Matanovic-Simagin, USSR­ On 1 6...'ii'c5 possible is 1 7 lDd5
Yugoslavia 1 963) 1 6 .i.d5 ( 1 6 'ii'd4 e6 1 8 c4 ! .
'ii'c 5) 1 6... lDc5 1 7 'ii'e3 'ii'b6 1 8 b3 17 'ii'd4+ e 5 18 fxeS
e6 1 9 .i.xc6 Ih-Ih Ciric-Honfi, After 1 8 'ii'e3 lDxb3 1 9 axb3 exf4
Liechtenstein 1 992. 20 l:txf4 'ii'e5 Black occupies the e5
2) 15 l:tae1 l:tac8 1 6 'ii'd4+ �g8 square, retaining equal chances,
1 7 lDd5 and White's chances are Ciric-Gheorghiu, Wijk aan Zee
preferable. 1 968.
14 l:tad1 18...lDxb3 19 axb3 dxeS 20 'ii'f2
Other continuations do not create fS! 21 b4! Wxb4 22 l:bd8 l:hd8 23
particular problems for Black. exfS g5 24 f6+ �fl and a double­
1) 14 l:tae 1 e5! (after 14 ...lDd7 1 5 edged position has arisen, Martin­
.i.xg7 �xg7 16 'ii'd4+ lDf6 1 7 f5 Bellon, Olot 1 974.
'ii'b6 1 8 'ii'xb6 axb6 1 9 g4 and
White's chances are somewhat pref­ 13Ab
erable in view of his better pawn
structure, Short-Korchnoi, Garmisch (1 e4 cS 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
1 994) 1 5 .i.e3 exf4 1 6 .i.xf4 d5 ! 1 7 lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDcJ g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7
e 5 lDe4 with even chances, Ekblom­ h3 0-0 8 .i.e3 lDc6 9 .i.b3 .i.d7 10
Pytel, COIT. 1 969. 0-0 Was 1 1 f4)
82 Variations with 6 ii..c4

1 1 .. .l:bc8 2) 12 .. .l:�cd8 13 'il'e1 ii..c8 14 .:.d 1

Black completes his development. e6 1 5 'ii'h4 'ii'h5 ( 1 5 . . .ltJe8? 16 f5
Here White's main plan is linked to exf5 1 7 l:td5 and White has an obvi­
the following continuations: ous advantage, Kuraj ica-Kuijpers,
Wijk aan Zee 1970) 1 6 g4 'ifxh4 1 7
13Ab1: 1 2 ltJO ltJxh4 and White's chances are pref­
13Ab2: 12 'ii'O erable in view of his space
advantage.
Less logical is 1 2 1Vd3 ltJb4 1 3 13 'il'el
'il'e2 ltJa6 14 'ii'f3 ltJc5 1 5 l:r.ad1 1 3 'ii'd3 does not prevent 13 ... b5,
ltJxb3 16 ltJxb3 and the game is since 14 'ii'xb5 'ii'xb5 15 ltJxb5
equal, Parma-Stein, Yugoslavia­ ltJxe4 is not in his interests. How­
=

USSR 1965. ever in the game De Firmian­

Vescovi, Bermuda 1995, Black pre­
13Ab1 ferred 1 3 ...'ii'a 5?! and after 14 a3
lDh5 1 5 g4 ltJf6 16 �g2 followed
(1 e4 c5 2 ltJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 by b2-b4 White obtained a great
ltJxd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 ii..c4 ii..g7 7 space advantage.
h3 0-0 8 ii..e3 ltJc6 9 ii.. b3 ii..d7 10 13 ... b5 14 a3 aS 15 l:td1 a4
0-0 'ifa5 1 1 f4 l:tac8) After 1 5 ...b4 16 axb4 axb4 1 7
liJd5 the e4 pawn is immune
12 ltJO ( 1 7 ...ltJxe4? 1 8 ti:)b6 1:.c7 1 9 ltJxd7
l:txd7 20 ii..d5), and White's advan­
tage is obvious.
16 ii..a2 b4 17 ltJd5 bxa3 18
ltJxf6+ ii..xf6 19 l:td5 e5 20 l:txd6
exf4 21 l:txf6!
In the game Klundt-Kapengut,
Ybbs 1 968, 2 1 ii..x f4? was played
and after 2 l . ..'ifc5+ 22 ..t>h 1 ii..e6
Black obtained the advantage.
21 ... fxe3 22 'il'xe3 axb2 23 ltJg5
ltJb4 24 ii..xti+
Or 24 ii..b 1 a3 ! .
24...'iPg7 25 'ii'd4 'it>h6 with a
White carries out a plan of attack complicated position (I.Boleslavsky,
on the king's flank: V.Korchnoi).
12 ...'ii'h5
Upon less active continuations it 13Ab2
is easier for White to develop an
attack: (1 e4 c5 2 ltJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
1) 1 2 .. J�fd8?! 1 3 'ii'e 1 ii.. e6 14 f5 ! ltJxd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 ii..c4 ii..g7 7
b5 1 5 fxg6 hxg6 1 6 'ii'h4 ltJe5 1 7 h3 0-0 8 ii..e3 ltJc6 9 ii..b3 ii..d7 10
ltJg5 ltJc4 1 8 ti:)d5 with dangerous 0-0 'ii'a5 1 1 f4 1:ac8)
threats, I.Zaitsev-Dietze, Polanica
Zdroj 1979. 12 'il'O
 Variations with 6 .i.c4 83

reached, Reverby-Ansel, New York

1 993.
14....a5 15 l:.ad 1 ! b5 16 g5 tt:ld7
17 f5! .i.xc3?!
Stronger was 17 ... gxf5 ! 18 �5
.i.xc3 ! 1 9 g6! tt:lf6 20 �6 .i.xe4 2 1
bxc3 •xc3 22 �h2 f4 with a com­
plex game.
18 bxc3 tt:les 19 •r4 tt:lc4 20
.i.d4 and White's position is prefer­
able, Kamsky-Anand, Sanghi Nagar
(m/6) 1 994.
This development of the queen is
characteristic for the f2-f4 scheme:
from this square it is best able to or­ 13Ac
ganise an attack on the king's flank.
The drawback of developing the (1 e4 c5 2 tt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
queen on f3 is the possibility of its tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7
being shadowed by a bishop on c6. h3 0-0 8 .i.e3 tt:lc6 9 .i.b3 .i.d7 10
12 .....h5 o-o •as 1 1 f4)
Here 1 2 ... tt:lxd4 1 3 .i.xd4 .i.c6 is
not so effective. For example: 1 4 l l ...•h5
l:tad l b 5 1 5 •e3 b4 1 6 e 5 (or 1 6
tt:ld5 .i.xd5 1 7 exd5 Janosevic­
Kagan, Netanya 1971) 16 ...tt:le8 1 7
tt:le4 .i.xe4 1 8 •xe4 e 6 1 9 c 3 dxe5
20 fxe5 with a positional advantage
for White, Hector-Wilder, Cannes
1 989.
13 tt:lxc6
The best way of driving away the
queen. On 1 3 _.f2, with an indirect
attack on the a7 pawn, Black coun­
terattacks by 1 3 ...b5! 14 a3 (or 1 4
tt:ldxb5 tt:lxe4 1 5 tt:lxe4 •xb5 1 6
tt:lg3 a S 1 7 a4 �4 with a double­ By offering a queen exchange,
edged game, Byrne-Stein, Saraievo Black wants to solve his opening
1 967) 1 4 ... a5 1 5 tt:lde2 a4 1 6 �g3 problems at once ( 1 2 •xh5 tt:lxh5
•h4 1 7 .i.a2 b4 and Black has = ) while on any refusal he will
,

counterplay on the queen's flank, quickly get his a- and b-pawns mov­
Tseshkovsky-Kapengut, Odessa ing. However on h5 the queen is
1968. quite vulnerable.
13 ....i.xc6! 14 g4 12 tt:lf3!
After 14 .i.xa7 •xf3 1 5 gxf3 Apparently the best. On 1 2 •d3
tt:lh5 16 .i.e3 .i.xc3 1 7 bxc3 .i.b5 1 8 there is the interesting pawn sacri­
life I l:.xc3 an equal endgame is fice 1 2 ...b5 ! .
84 Variations with 6 J..c4

12 ...b5! 13 aJ a5 14 _.dJ
Also seen is the preliminary I 4
.!L!d s J..e6 ( 1 4 . . ..!Llxe4? leads to ma­
terial loss: I S .!Llb6 .l:ad8 I 6 .!L!xd7
ltxd7 I 7 J..dS) I S _.d3 a4 I 6
.!Llxf6+ J..x f6 I 7 J..xe6 fxe6 I 8 c3
ltab8 I9 'iti>h2 and the threat of
g2-g4 forces Black to make posi­
tional concessions: I9 . . .dS 20 eS
J..h8 2 I g4 ..h6 22 .!LlgS .!Lld8 23
'iVd4, which obviously favours
White, Vujadinovic-Todorovic,
Accepting the sacrifice leads to an Kladovo I 992.
unpleasant situation for White: I 3 14...a4
lDdxbS lDb4 I 4 _.c4 a S and ...l:.ac8, I 4 ...b4 also leads to an interesting
or 13 lDcxbS lDb4 I4 _.c4 aS I S game. Let's look at the possible
lDc7 ltac8 I 6 c3 d S with material variations.
gain for Black. But also after the re­ I ) I S .!Lle2 bxa3 I6 .!Llg3 axb2
jection of the sacrifice Black does (weak is I 6 ....!Llb4? I 7 .!LlxhS .!Llxd3
not have an easy game. I 8 .!Llxf6+ J..xf6 I 9 cxd3 axb2 20
I ) I 3 a4 b4 (possible is I 3 ...lDb4 lta3 ±) I 7 .!LlxhS bxa I 'if I 8 .l:xa I
=

I4 'ii'd2 bxa4 I S J..xa4 J..xa4 I 6 lDxhS I 9 c3 with a complex game

ltxa4 a S ) I 4 lDdS lDxdS I S J..xdS
= (Bonsch) .
.l:.ac8 and Black's piece activity 2) I S axb4 axb4 I6 ltxa8 .l:r.xa8 I 7
increases sharply, Grabzewski­ .!L!dS with some initiative for White.
T.Georgadze, Lublin I 974. 15 J..d 5!
2) 13 a3 a6 I 4 lDf3 ltac8 I S ltadi After IS J..a2 b4 the game is
.!L!aS I6 eS dxeS I 7 fxeS J..fS I 8 even.
_.d4 .!Lld7 and White's position 15 ....!L!xd5
assumes an unstable character, De This exchange leads to a type of
Firmian-Whitehead, San Francisco structure where Black is cramped
I977. and for all practical purposes con­
3) I3 .l:aei aS I4 a3 (also here it fined to passivity. In this line Black
is unfavourable to take the pawn: I 4 would have a more dynamic posi­
.!LldxbS .!Llb4 I S _.e2 'ii'xe2 I 6 l:.xe2 tion after I S . . . e6! ? I6 J..xc6 �xc6
.!Llxe4 +) I4 ...b4 I S .!Llxc6 J..xc6 I 6 I 7 .!Lld4 (or I 7 J..d4 ;t) I 7 ...J..b7 I 8
axb4 axb4 I 7 .!L!dS .!LlxdS I 8 exdS fS though even here White is in pos­
J..d7 I9 J..d4! (it is necessary to ex­ session of the initiative, Gi.Garcia­
change the threatening bishop, in Zamora, New York I 994.
the game Short-Kamsky, Linares 16 exd5
(m/2) I 994, White played I 9 J..f2 ?! After I 6 .!LlxdS .l:ab8 (weaker is
and after I9 ... .l:r.fe8 20 ltb i WfS he I6 ...J..xb2? I 7 l:lab I J..g7 I 8 .!Llb6
begins to experience serious diffi­ lta7 I9 ltbS ±) I 7 .!Lld4 l:.fe8 I 8
culties) I9 ...�bS ! 20 _.xbS (or 20 lDxc6 J..xc6 I 9 .!Llxe7+ l:.xe7 20
J..c4 J..xc4 2 I _.xc4 ltfc8 22 _.xb4 'iVxd6 l:.be8 2I _.xc6 l:.xe4 the ac­
ltab8 23 Wa4 J..xd4+ 24 _.xd4 tivity of the black pieces fully com­
ltxc2 +) 20 ...J..xd4+ 2 I �h I Wh4 pensates for the sacrificed pawn
with rather better chances for Black. (Bonsch).
 Variations with 6 il.c4 85

16 ...ltJa5 17 i.d4 example, there is no particular point

in the exchange I I ...lllxd4 I 2 Jl..xd4
after which I 2 ... e5?! is not good be­
cause of I 3 i.e3 i.c6 I4 1i'xd6!
ltJxe4 15 ltJxe4 i.xe4 16 i.d2 1i'd8
I 7 1i'xd8 l:.fxd8 1 8 i.g5 ! with a dif­
ficult endgame for Black, while on
1 2 ... i.c6 possible is 1 3 ltJd5 since
the e4 pawn is defended and after
1 3 ...i.xd5 I4 exd5 l:tfe8 I 5 c3
White's position is preferable.
It is necessary to mention that the
thrust ltJc3-d5 represents the
leitmotiv of the variation, since if
The game J.Polgar-Kamsky, Bue­ the knight is exchanged the rook e I
nos Aires 1994, reached this sharp becomes active.
position where after I 7 . . .'ith6?! I 8 l l l:.ac8
.•.

.:ae I l:tfe8 I 9 ltJxb5 Black did not I l ... l:.fe8 is a radical way to com­
obtain compensation for the sacri­ bat the manoeuvre ltJc3-d5. Then on
ficed pawn. More logical was I 2 1i'e2, Black has a good reseonse
17 ... ltJc4 18 i.xg7 �xg7 19 l:tfel in I 2 ...1i'h5 ! 1 3 ltJf3 llle5 I4 lllxe5
l:tfe8 and it is not easy to expose the 1i'xe5 with roughly equal chances,
defects in Black's position. Ree-Sosonko, Wijk aan Zee 1 976
But worth considering is I2 'ii'd3
with the idea I 2 ...ltJe5 1 3 1i'e2 and
13B f2-f4 is threatened, while after
1 2 ...ltJxd4 1 3 i.xd4 i.c6 I4 llad i
(1 e4 c5 2 ltJfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l:tad8 1 5 1i'e3 b6 16 ltJd5 ltJxd5 1 7
ltJxd4 liJf6 5 ltJcJ g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7 exd5 White has the advantage, Tal­
h3 0-0 8 i.eJ ltJc6 9 i.b3 i.d7 10 Seibold, Germany 199 1 .
0-0 WaS) Also possible is an immediate 1 2
f4 with the threat to advance the e­
11 llel pawn, while after 1 2 . . . ltJxd4 1 3
i.xd4 e 5 1 4 fxe5 dxe5 1 5 i.e3 i.e6
1 6 1i'f3 a6 1 7 :n 'ifc7 1 8 l:.f2 b5
19 i.g5 ltJh5 20 liJd5 Black starts to
have problems in the centre,
Grunfeld-N.Nikolic, Belgrade GMA
1 988.
Also 1 1 ...1i'h5 has its own prob­
lems: 1 2 1i'xh5 ltJxh5 1 3 l'lad 1
ltJxd4 14 i.xd4 and, in connection
with the threat ltJc3-d5, he has to
lose a tempo on the retreat 1 4...ltJf6,
since 14 ... ltJf4? 15 i.xg7 'l;xg7 1 6
e 5 i.c6 1 7 exd6 exd6 1 8 f3 creates
In the first instance a prophylactic trouble for the d6 pawn, Dobos­
move, preventing Black's plan. For Diamant, Hungary 1992.
86 Variations with 6 Jl.c4

1 2 'Wd2 unpleasant and after the poor

Threatening the manoeuvre 1 8 ... lZ:\h5? 1 9 'iff2! he developed a
lZ:ld4xc6 and lZ:lc3-d5. Playing an dangerous attack. V.Jansa recom­
immediate 12 lZ:ld5 l:lfe8 (or mends 18 ... b4 19 lZ:lce4 lZ:lxe4 20
l 2 ...'Wd8 1 3 lZ:lb5 lZ:lxd5 14 exd5 .l:lxe4 Jl.e6! 21 Jl.xc4 Jl.xc4 22 b3,
lZ:\a5 1 5 lZ:ld4 b5 1 6 c3 lieS I 7 lZ:lc2 but even here White's chances are
'Wc7 1 8 Jl.d4 with some initiative preferable.
for White, Henning_�-Kapengut,
Lublin 1 973) 1 3 Ji.d2 'it'c5 14 ll:lf3
lZ:lxd5 1 5 exd5 lZ:la5 16 Jl.e3 gives Line 14
White the rather better prospects,
L.Bronstein-Kagan, Rio de Janeiro (1 e4 c5 2 lZ:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
(izt) 1979. lZ:lxd4 lZ:lf6 5 lZ:lc3 g6 6 Jl.c4 Jl.g7 7
Also possible is 12 'Wd3, on h3 0-0 8 Jl.e3 lZ:\c6)
which 12 ... lZ:\e5?! is not good be­
cause of 1 3 'We2 b5? 14 a4! b4 1 5 9 0-0
lZ:ld5 .l:lfe8 1 6 lZ:lb5 lZ:lc6 1 7 .l:lad 1 !
with advantage to White, Ljubo­
jevic-Sosonko, Wijk aan Zee 1976,
but also on the better 12 ...lZ:lxd4 1 3
Jl.xd4 Jl.c6 with the idea ...lZ:lf6-d7,
White's chances are preferable.
12 .....l:lfe8 13 lZ:lf3 a6
Worth considering is the immedi­
ate l 3 ... b5!?.
14 .l:ladl b5 15 Ji.h6 Ji.h8
Or 1 5 ... lZ:ld8 16 lZ:ld4 l:c5 1 7 a3
Jl.xh6 1 8 'ii'xh6 .l:lh5 1 9 'iff4 lZ:\e6
20 Jl.xe6 Jl.xe6 2 1 g4 with an at­
tacking position for White, Tal­ 9 ...lZ:lxe4
Cu.Hansen, Reykjavik 1 986. A consistent reply, liquidating
16 lZ:lg5 lZ:\e5 17 f4 lZ:lc4 18 e5! White's centre. After 9 . . . a6 White,
if he does not want to lead the game
into variations looked at above after
1 0 Ji.b3, could leave the bishop on
the king's flank-1 0 lle 1 lZ:\a5 1 1
Jl.fl , though, as before, Black can
exploit the c4 square. For example:
1 l ...Ji.d7 12 lZ:ld5 :lc8 13 c3 ll:lc4
1 4 Jl.xc4 .l:lxc4 1 5 Jl.g5 lZ:lxd5 1 6
exd5 Jl.xd4 1 7 cxd4 f6 1 8 Jl.h6 .l:le8
1 9 'Wd3 llb4 with equal chances,
Todorovic-Markovic, Yugoslavia
1989.
10 Jl.xti+
The game Jansa-Watson, Gausdal 10 lZ:lxe4 d5 does not create par­
1988, reached this sharp position. ticular problems for Black. For
White's initiative looks quite example: 1 1 lZ:lxc6 bxc6 12 Ji.d3
 Variations with 6 .i.c4 87

dxe4 1 3 .txe4 'i'c7 14 c3 l:lb8 1 5 Bucharest 1 983) 13 .tc5 d5 14

'iVe2 .te6 1 6 l:lfd 1 l:lb5 1 7 l:ld2 tt:lxd6 .te6 15 tllxf7 .txf7 1 6 c3 b6
.!:tfb8 18 .i.d3 l:ld5 with an even 1 7 .te3 d4 1 8 cxd4 exd4 1 9 .i.f4 d3
game, Eismont-Seres, Eger 1 993. 20 'i'd2 'i'd4 and Black's active
Now Black can take the bishop in piece play compensates for the sac­
two ways: rificed exchange.
12 c3
14A: 10 .. Jhti Or 1 2 'iVd2 �h7 1 3 llad l 'ir'a5 14
14B: 10 ...�xti tt:lc3 .td7 15 a3 .!:taf8 16 'i'e2 .i.xd4
1 7 .txd4 tt:lxd4 1 8 .!:txd4 .tc6 and
Black has an equal position,
14A Watson-Ward, England (ch) 1989.
1 2...�h7
(1 e4 c5 2 tt:lt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Actually the black king is not
tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 .tc4 .tg7 7 threatened at the moment and so he
h3 0-0 8 .te3 tt:lc6 9 0-0 tt:lxe4 10 could complete his development:
.txti+) 1 2 ....td7 1 3 .l:r.e l 'ifa5 14 'ifb3 "it'a6
1 5 a4 tt:la5 16 'ifa2 tt:lc4 1 7 tlld2
10 ... l:lxti 1 1 tt:lxe4 llc8 1 8 tt:lxc4 'ii'xc4 19 'ifxc4 l:txc4
20 a5 a6 2 1 tllc2 l:ta4 with a com­
plicated endgame where Black's
chances are not worse, ]ansa­
Watson, Oslo 1 99 1 .
1 3 'i'b3 d 5 1 4 .l:r.ad1 ? !
H e does not succeed in exploiting
the shadowing of the queen by the
rook. Therefore more logical is 14
tt:lc5 with a complex game.
14 ... tt:la5 15 'ifb4 b6 16 tt:lb3
.ta6 17 l:tfe1 tt:lc4 18 .tel e6 19
tt:lbd2 tt:le5 with the superior game
for Black, whose advantage of the
1 1 ...h6 two bishops reinforces his pawn
This move was introduced into centre, Kupreichik-Pigusov, Mos­
practice by E.Pigusov. Black pre­ cow (GMA) 1 989.
pares a refuge for his king.
Also worth considering is the plan
to form a pawn centre: 14B
1 ) 1 l ....i.xd4 1 2 .txd4 d5 1 3 tt:lg3
e5 14 .te3 .te6 1 5 'i'd2 'i'c7 1 6 (1 e4 c5 2 tt:lt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
l:tfe 1 .J:r.e8 1 7 c 3 a6 1 8 .tg5 l:lef8 1 9 tt:lxd4 tllf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 .tc4 .tg7 7
l:te2 e4 2 0 c4 tt:le5 2 1 cxd5 .txh3 h3 0-0 8 .te3 tt:lc6 9 0-0 tt:lxe4 10
with a double-edged game, Barlov­ .txti+)
Strikovic, Yugoslavia (ch) 1 989.
2) 1 1 . . .tllxd4 1 2 .i.xd4 e5 (after 10. .'1ti>xti
.

1 2 ... .tf5 1 3 tt:lg5 l:lf8 14 c4! h6 1 5 This move was suggested by

.txg7 �xg7 1 6 tt:le4 White retains A.Wojtkiewicz. Black forms a pawn
the initiative, Stoica-Makropoulos, centre.
88 Variations with 6 �c4

1 9 ... �xh6 20 'ii'xh6 'it'f6 2 1 'it'xf6

llxf6 22 f4 he will have problems
with the isolated d5 pawn.
20 �g5
On 20 �xg7 'it'xg7 2 1 f4 there is
2 l . . .h3 ! 22 g3 (22 l:.f2 l:.f6!)
22 ... h2+! 23 <t>xh2 d4! 24 cxd4
�d5, not giving the white king any
peace (A.Shirov).
20.. .'i'g6 21 �xh4 l:.f5!
Black's active piece play fully
compensates for the sacrificed pawn
1 1 ltJxe4 ltJxd4 12 �xd4 e5 13 (the threat is ...l:.f5-h5), Adams­
�e3 d5 14 ltJg3 Shirov, Biel 1 99 l .
Nothing is offered by 14 �g5
'it'd? 1 5 lt:)c3 h6 16 �h4 d4 1 7 ltJe4 Line 15
�g8 (or 1 7 ...'it'c6 1 8 l:.e1 �f5 1 9 f3
.!:tac8 20 c3 �g8 + Jansa-Hellers, (1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Heming 199 1 ) 1 8 lle 1 b6 1 9 'it'd3 ltJxd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 �c4 �g7 7
�b7 20 c4 llac8 2 1 �g3 'ii'c6 22 b3 h3 0-0)
g5 and Black develops a dangerous
attack, Gi.Garcia-Van de Mortel,
Wijk aan Zee 1 996.
14 ... �g8
14 ... d4 leads to a rather forcing
game: 1 5 �d2 �g8 16 ltJe4 'it'b6 1 7
b3 � f5 1 8 lle l llac8 1 9 llc l ! with
chances for both sides.
15 c3 �e6 16 ltJe2!
Threatening to smash the pawn
centre with the break f2-f4. Upon
the passive 1 6 'it'e2 'it'h4 White's
chances are preferable, Petersen­
S.B.Hansen, Copenhagen 1 995. 8 0-0
16...g5! 17 'ii'd 2 The drawback of the development
There is no particular benefit to be of the bishop to c4 (as in the previ­
derived from the h5 square: 1 7 ltJg3 ous variation from Line 14) is its
h6 1 8 ltJh5 �h8 and if 1 9 h4, then unstable position (when the oppor­
1 9 ...'it'd7 ! with the better chances tunity arises there is the threat of
for Black. ...ltJf6xe4) Therefore this plan is
17... h6 18 h4! gxh4 19 �xh6 usually adopted in conjunction with
Worth considering is 19 �g5 !? kingside castling and the move
�xf6 20 .txf6 'ii'xf6 2 1 f4, saddling llfl -e 1 or moving away the bishop
Black with an isolated d5 pawn. 8 �b3, which is looked at in Line
19 ...'it'f6! 1 6B.
Black endeavours to counter the After 8 ltJf3, besides the develop­
threat of the break ...f2-f4 in a more ment 8 ...ltJc6, Black could choose
favourable situation. After 7 ...ltJbd7. For example, the game
 Variations with 6 .Jtc4 89

Benjamin-Gufeld, New York 1 9S9, position where Black has sufficient

continued: 9 0-0 a6 10 a4 b6 1 1 counterplay, Zelcic-Habibi, Geneva
'iWe2 .i.b7 1 2 .i.f4 'iWc7 1 3 :re i e6 I 993.
14 llad 1 �e5 1 5 .i.b3 �fd7 and l l a6
...

Black's position is already On I I . ..'i1Va5 good is I 2 �d5 !

preferable. �xd5 ( 1 2 ...�xd4 1 3 .Jtxf6 ±) I 3
8...�c6 �xc6 bxc6 1 4 exd5 cxd5 I 5 .Jtxe7
Also seen is S ... �xe4 9 �xe4 d5 :res I6 .Jtxd5! ( I 6 c3 .Jte5 I 7 .Jtg5
10 �b5 dxc4 (possible is 10 ... a6 1 1 ± Kveinys-Szalanczy, Budapest
1Wxd5 1Wxd5 1 2 .Jtxd5 axb5 with ac­ I 992) I 6 ... .Jtxb2 I 7 1Wf3 .Jte6 I S
ceptable play, Winge-Emst, Sweden :xe6 .Jtxa i 1 9 :e5 ! l:txe7 20 :xe7
19S9) 1 1 'iWxdS :xdS 1 2 �c7 .Jtf5 with a clear advantage to White
1 3 f3 �a6 14 �xaS l:lxaS 1 5 :e 1 (A.Kveinys).
�b4 and Black has active play for 12 �f3 :es 13 lle2 h6 14 .Jte3
the exchange, Kveinis-Kupreichik, bS
Poland 1 99 1 . However the lack of
practical trials so far does not allow
us to give a more accurate evalua­
tion of the capture S ... �xe4. This is
because White also has the reply 9
.Jtxf7!?. Therefore perhaps Black
should prefer to avoid risks and
continue his development.
9 :e1
The continuation 9 .Jte3 leads to a
position examined in Line 14.
9....Jtd7 10 .JtgS
After 10 .Jtb3 Black develops ac­
tive play on the q�een's flank: In this double-edged position
l O. . lDxd4 I I Wxd4 .Jtc6 I 2 'ii'd3
. Black has sufficient resources. For
�d7 I 3 'i1Vg3 a5 I4 a4 �c5 1 5 .Jtd5 example, the game, Zelcic-Tolnai,
1Wb6 I 6 :a2 :acS 1 7 .i.g5 :res 1 S Velden I 994, continued: I 5 a3 :m
'ii'f3 e6 I 9 .Jtxc6 bxc6 20 .Jtf6 e5 16 'ii'd3 �a5 I 7 .Jtd4 �xb3 I S cxb3
with equal chances, Kotronias­ e5 1 9 .Jte3 .Jte6 20 l:ld2 :xc3 2 I
Hoffmann, Munich I 992. bxc3 'ii'a S and Black has good com­
10...l:tc8 pensation for the exchange.
Worth considering is 10 ...�xd4
I I 1Wxd4 �g4 1 2 'ii'd2 �e5 I 3 .Jtb3
:cs I 4 �d5 :es 1 5 c3 .Jtb5 1 6 16
.l:.ad I a5 1 7 .Jtc2 �c4 I S 'ii'c I �b6
and Black holds the balance, (1 e4 cS 2 �f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Gallagher-Komljenovic, Candas �xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 .Jtc4 .Jtg7 7
1992. h3 0-0)
11 .Jtb3
After I I �xc6 .Jtxc6 I 2 .Jtb3 h6 8 .Jtb3
I3 .Jth4 e6 I4 f4 'ii'c7 I 5 a4 d5 I 6 A prophylactic retreat of the
e5 �d7 I 7 �e2 �c5 I S a 5 �e4 I 9 bishop, avoiding the threat of
�g3 f5 arises a complicated ...�f6xe4.
90 Variations with 6 ii.c4

.:.ad 1 bxc3 1 8 bxc3 .:.ac8 and Black

has the advantage in view of the
weakness of the c3-pawn, Jansa­
Kir.Georgiev, Malmo 1 987.
After 10 a4 b4 1 1 lt:Jd5 e6?!
( 1 1 ...ii.b7 would be more careful)
1 2 lt:Jxf6+ ii.xf6 I 3 ii.h6 l:.e8 and
Black has problems defending the
d6 pawn. The game Short-Mestel,
London 1986, continued I4 'ii'd2
'ii'h6 1 5 l:.ad 1 ii.b7 16 lt:Jxe6! and
Black landed in a critical position.
8 a6
... However he could have played
Black prepares an "accelerated 10 ... ii.b7, which after I I l:le 1 leads
fianchetto" of the second bishop. to a position looked at below. But
The alternative 8 ...b6 9 0-0 ii.b7 1 0 worth considering is 1 I axb5 ! ?
l:le 1 li:Jbd7 1 1 il.g5 h 6 (or 1 l . ..l:.c8 lt:Jxe4 1 2 lt:Jxe4 ii.xe4 13 l:le 1 .
12 lt:Jd5 .l:tc5 13 c3 l:.e8 14 lt:Jf3 'ii'a8 l O iL.b7
...

I5 ii.e3 lt:Jxd5 I6 exd5 ii.xd5 I 7

ii.xc5 ii.xf3 1 8 gxf3 lt:Jxc5 i s a very
healthy exchange sacrifice for
Black, De Firmian-Hodgson, Ber­
muda 1 997) 1 2 ii.h4 li:)c5! (also
good is 1 2 ....:.cs 1 3 li)d5 a5 14 c3
e6 1 5 lt:Jxf6+ lt:Jxf6 16 'ii'd3 .l:tc7 1 7
.:.ad 1 'ii'a 8 1 8 ii.c2 lt:Jd7 1 9 f4 lt:Jc5
= Vertici-Geller, Moscow GMA
1 989) 1 3 ii.d5 (here already on 1 3
lt:Jd5 possible i s 1 3 ... g5 1 4 li:)xf6+
ii.xf6 1 5 ii.g3 lt:Jxe4; in the game
Socko-Macieja, Zagan I 997, White
limited himself to 13 f3 a6 1 4 'i'd2, l l iL.gS
but after 14 . . . e5! 1 5 ii.xf6 ii.xf6 1 6 Also seen is the undermining 1 1
lt:Jde2 il.g5 17 'ii'd 1 lt:Jxb3 1 8 axb3 a4.
'ii'c7 19 li:)d5 i.xd5 20 exd5 b5 the 1) 1 l . ..li:Jbd7 12 axb5 axb5 l 3
mitlative passed to Black) llxa8 'ii'xa8 1 4 lt:Jdxb5 lt:Jxe4 1 5
1 3 . . .lt:Jxd5 14 exd5 l:te8 1 5 'ii'd2 lt:Jd5 ! (or 1 5 lt:Jxe4 ii.xe4 1 6 lt:Jc7
'i'd7 16 a4 ( I 6 .:.e3 li:)a4 ! +) 'ii'b7 1 7 ii.d5 ii.xd5 1 8 lt:Jxd5 ;!;
16 ...l:tac8 1 7 l:te3 with an unex­ Stoica-Martin Gonzalez, Dubai (ol)
plored position (B.Macieja). 1 986) 1 5 ...lt:Jdf6 1 6 lt:Jxe7+ �h8 1 7
9 0-0 bS 10 .:.et lt:Jc7 'ii'a5 1 8 lt:Jcd5 with an extra
Defending the pawn. Activity by pawn for White, Elseth-Jeger,
I O lt:Jd5 is premature: I O ... ii.b7 1 1 Norway 1 990.
li:)xf6+ ii.xf6 1 2 ii.h6 .:.e8 l 3 .:.e 1 2) l l . ..bxa4 I2 ii.xa4 'ii'c7 l 3
lt:Jd7 (or 1 3 ...'ii'c8 1 4 c3 lt:Jc6 1 5 il.g5 lt:Jbd7 1 4 lt:Jd5 (or 1 4 ii.xd7
lt:Jxc6 ii.xc6 1 6 'ii'f3 a5 = Jansa­ 'ii'xd7 1 5 li:Jb3 .:.ac8 = Pekarek­
Pekarek, Namestovo 1 987) 14 c3 Emst, Dortmund 1 992) 1 4 ... lt:Jxd5
lt:Jc5 1 5 ii.d5 'ii'd7 16 'ii'f3 b4 1 7 1 5 exd5 lt:Je5 1 6 lt:Jc6 ii.xc6 I 7 dxc6
 Variations with 6 i.c4 91

e6 1 8 i.f4 l:f.fd8 1 9 i.xe5 i.xe5 lt:'lf6 1 8 i.e3? (necessary was 1 8

with equal chances, Jo.Horvath­ i.xf6 i.xf6 1 9 h4 with the idea of
Sehner, Budapest 1987 lt:'lf3-g5) 1 8 ...l:.xd5 ! 1 9 i.xd5 i.xd5
3) 1 l ...lt:'lc6 12 lt:'lxc6 i.xc6 1 3 20 lt:'lh4 i.xa2 and Black's light­
axb5 axb5 14 l:f.xa8 'ii'xa8 1 5 lt:'ld5 squared bishop has no opposition.
i.xd5 16 exd5 'ii'b7 1 7 c3 l:.e8 1 8 l4 l:.e8 15 lt:'lf3 'ii'a8 16 l:.ad1
...

i.e3 lt:'ld7 1 9 i.d4 lt:'le5 and Black

holds the balance, Jansa-Khalifrnan,
Germany 1 99 1 .
l l ...lt:'lbd7 1 2 lt:'ld5 .l:tc8
After 1 2 ...l:.e8 1 3 c3 lt:'lxd5 1 4
exd5 ! ? Black gets into a cramped
position, whereas 1 4 i.xd5 'ii'c7 1 5
a4 bxa4 1 6 l:.xa4 lt:'lc5 allows him to
display activity on the queen's
flank, Klundt-Watson, Kecskemet
1 988.
l3 c3 l:.c5
Also possible is 13 ...l:.e8 14 f3
lt:'lxd5 1 5 i.xd5 'ii'b6 16 i.xb7
'ii'xb7 1 7 lt:'lc2 lt:'lb6 1 8 lt:'le3 lt:'lc4, l6...a5
with an equal game, Kholmov­ After 16 ... lt:'lxd5 17 exd5 lt:'lf6 he
Watson, Sochi 1 988. can continue 18 i.xf6 i.xf6 19 lt:'lg5
14 'ii'd 2 i.xg5 20 1Wxg5 e5 !? and Black rids
This is more accurate than 14 himself of the backward pawn (2 1
'it"d3 l:.e8 15 lt:'lf3 1Wa8 and by a 'ii'f6 'ii'd8).
transposition of moves there arises a 17 a3 i.xd5 18 exd5 lt:'lb6 1 9
position from the game Hector­ i.e3 lt:'lc4 2 0 i.xc4 l:.xc4 with equal
Tiviakov, Stockholm 1 990, which chances, Piper-Tiviakov, Oakham
continued: 16 l:f.ad 1 lt:'lxd5 17 exd5 1 990.
 4 : Variations with 6 i.. g5

(1 e4 c5 2 ltJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Line 1 7

lt:lxd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:lc3 g6)
( 1 e4 c 5 2 ltJO d 6 3 d 4 cxd4 4
lt:lxd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:lc3 g6 6 .tg5 .tg7)
6 .tg5 .tg7
7 'ii'd 2

In 1 936, when still in the proto­ White prepares queenside cas­

type stage of developing a plan of tling. This allows Black to exploit
att3:ck against the Sicilian Dragon, the insufficiently defended knight
Vsevolod Rauzer placed the dark­ on d4.
squared bishop on the more active 7 ... lt:lc6 8 0-0-0
g5 square. However, when it be­ Sometimes he moves the knight
came clear that then the knight on beforehand with 8 lt:lb3 0-0 and
d4 was insufficiently defended, only then plays 9 0-0-0. Incidentally
Rauzer changed to developing the we should mention that after an ex­
bishop on e3 . change of the dark-squared bishops,
Modem masters more often link 9 .th6 .txh6 1 0 1Wxh6, the queen is
the move 6 .ig5 to a development deflected and Black can organise
of the queen on e2 in order to pre­ active play on the queen's flank:
pare a break in the centre with f2-f4 1 0... a5 1 1 a4 .ie6 1 2 .tb5 'ii'b6 1 3
and e4-e5. Upon this White does 0-0 lt:lb4 1 4 'iVd2 ltac8 1 5 lt:ld4 .tc4
without the move f2-f3, characteris­ and the chances of the two sides are
tic for the Rauzer Attack formation. equal, G.Kuzmin-Matveeva, Frunze
Let's look at both directions of play: 1 987.
8...0-0
7 'ii'd 2 Line 1 7
- In the game Rauzer-Ragozin,
7 .ib5+-Line 1 8 Leningrad 1936, Black played
 Variations with 6 ..ig5 93

8 ...lt:)xe4 and after 9 lt:)xe4 lt:)xd4? _.c7 I 9 lleh4 aS 20 hxg6 fxg6 with
IO lt:)f6+! exf6 I I _.xd4 0-0 I 2 ..if4 chances for both sides; the position
fS I 3 _.xd6 ..ie6 I4 _.xd8 1:.fxd8 of the knight on b3 allows Black to
I S 1:.xd8 1:.xd8 I 6 a3 ! White had an play more consistently: I I ...lt:)d7 !?
obviously better endgame. But I 2 h4 aS ! ) I O f3 llc8 when Black
nevertheless it is not simple. completes the mobilisation of his
Stronger was 9 ... ..txd4 1 0 ..tbS ..tg7 pieces and prepares for a counter­
I I ..ixc6+ (or I I _.e3 0-0 I 2 ..ixc6 attack on the queen's flank.
bxc6 1 3 lt:)xd6 .-as with good I) I I �b i lle8! I 2 g4 lt:)eS I3
counterplay for Black) I l . ..bxc6 I 2 ..ie2 lt:)fd7 I4 ..ih6 ..ih8 I S h4 lt:)b6
lt:)xd6+!? •xd6 I3 .-as ..txb2+ ! I 6 hS lt:)ec4 1 7 ..ixc4 lt:)xc4 I 8 _.h2
(this is more energetic than gS! and after devaluing White's
1 3 ....ixd4 I4 1:.xd4 _.xd4 I S l:.d i attack Black already threatened
'Wb6 I6 .-es f6 I 7 ..txf6 0-0) I4 I9 ... lt:)xb2, Panov-Kan, USSR (ch)
..ti>xb2 'Wb8+ IS �a I ..ie6 and Black I937.
repulses the threats. 2) I I lt:)dS ..ixdS I 2 exdS lt:)xdS!
(also good is I2 ...lt:)eS) I3 _.xdS
lt:)b4 I 4 _.e4 llxc2+ I S _.xc2 lt:)xc2
I 6 �xc2 _.c8+!. He already has
queen and two pawns for ·rook,
knight and bishop, and the white
king must take a walk, since 1 7
�b I ? drops a piece to I 7. . ..-fS+. It
seems that the knight thrust is more
purposeful after an exchange of
bishops by I I ..th6.
9 ... bxc6 10 eS lt:)e8
The pawn sacrifice I O...lt:)dS I I
lt:)xdS cxdS I 2 exd6 _.xd6 1 3 WxdS
9 lt:)xc6 'ii'b6 can boomerang against Black.
Also here after 9 ..th6 ..txh6 I 0 For example, the game Geiser­
_.xh6 Black goes over to a counter­ Gerber, Geneva I 993, continued: I 4
attack: IO ...lt:)xd4 I I 1:.xd4 eS !? I 2 'ii'b3 Wxf2 I S ..ic4 ..ifS I 6 llhfl
l:td i ..ie6 I3 _.d2 .-as ! I 4 _.xd6 Wxg2 I 7 ..ixe7 l:tfb8 I 8 ..ixf7+
l:tfd8 I S _.a3 'ii'b 6! and now I 6 f3? �h8 I9 .idS lhb3 20 ..ixg2
is not good because of I 6....-e3+ I7 ..ixb2+ 2 1 �d2 ..ic3+ 22 �e3 llb6
�bi l:.xd i+ I 8 lt:)xd i _.e i I 9 _.d3 23 l:txfS I -0.
..ic4 ! . 1 1 exd6 lt:)xd6 12 ..ixe7 'ihe7 13
Therefore the fate of the knight d4 Wxd6 'ii'g5+ 14 'ii'd2 'ii'a5 and the
must now be decided. White deals activity of the black pieces compen­
with this in a radical way. The alter­ sated for the sacrificed pawn,
native is 9 lt:)b3 ..ie6 (after 9 ... a6 I O Rauzer-Kan, USSR 1 936.
f3 lle8! arises the Rauzer Attack
formation; the game G.Kuzmin­
Nadyrhanov, Krasnodar I 998, con­ Line 18
tinued: I I lt:)dS lt:)xdS I 2 exdS lt:)eS
I3 ..th6 ..th8 I4 h4 _.c7 I S hS lt:)c4 (I e4 c5 2 lt:)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
I6 ..ixc4 _.xc4 I 7 llde I eS I 8 l:te4 lt:)xd4 lt:)f6 5 lt:)c3 g6 6 .igS ..ig7)
94 Variations with 6 i.g5

7 i.bS+ 18A

(1 e4 c5 2 lt:)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
li:)xd4 li:)f6 5 li:)c3 g6 6 i.g5 i.g7 7
i.b5 i.d7 8 'ii'e2)

8...a6

White completes his development

with tempo.
7...i.d7
Hardly seen in practice, but appar­
ently possible, is 7 ...li:)bd7 8 'ii'd2 a6
9 i.e2 'ii'c7 with chances for both
sides. Gaining a tempo for development,
8 'ii'e2 but this hands over the initiative to
The future play depends on White.
Black's decision as to which piece 9 i.xd7+ li:)bxd7 10 h4!
he will force White to exchange his After IO 0-0-0 l:r.c8! (this is
light-squared bishop for. Therefore stronger than 10 ... 0-0 I I f4 l:c8 1 2
his main continuations are: li:)b3 l:txc3 ! ? I 3 bxc3 1Wc7 I 4 lld3
e6 I 5 f5 li:)e5 I6 l:[h3 and White is
ISBa: 8... a6 on the attack, Vitolins-Alterman,
18Bb: 8...0-0 USSR I 988) I I f4 l:r.xc3! I 2 bxc3
18Bc: 8 ... li:)c6 1i'c7 1 3 l:[hei h6 I4 i.h4 0-0 I 5
1We3 l:.c8 I 6 h3 'ii'c5 Black takes
After the direct exchange over the tmttattve, Masserey­
8 ... i.xb5 9 li:)dxb5 a6 I O li:)d4 Hoffman, Biel I 994.
White maintains the better chances: I O .:cs
•.•

I) I O...li:)c6 I I 0-0-0 li:)d7 ! I 2 Also worthy of consideration is

i.e3 l:r.c8 I 3 li:)xc6 lhc6 I 4 i.d4 I O... h6, clearing up the position of
i.xd4 I 5 .:txd4 e5 I6 l:td3 (in the the bishop. For example, in the
game Shamkovich-Lisitsin, USSR game Giaccio-Hoffman, Buenos
(ch) I 954, was played I 6 l:td2? li:)b6 Aires I993, after 1 1 i.xf6 li:)xf6 I 2
+) I 6...li:)c5 1 7 l:td2 li:)e6 I 8 li:)d5 0-0-0 1Wa5 1 3 f4 l:tc8 I 4 e5?! ( I 4
li:)d4 I 9 1We3 followed by q.,c l-b I li:)b3 is safer) I 4. . .dxe5 I 5 fxe5
and c2-c3 ;!;. ll)d5 I6 1Wg4 .:xc3 ! Black devel­
2) I 0...1i'a5 I I f4 li:)bd7 I 2 0-0-0 oped a strong attack. But it is more
h6 1 3 li:)b3 1i'c7 I4 i.xf6 li:)xf6 1 5 logical to retain the bishop by I I
e 5 ! and White achieved the advan­ i.e3.
tage, Vitolins-Sher, USSR I 976. 1 1 l:[h3!
 Variations with 6 .i.g5 95

Preventing the exchange sacrifice Qreliminary I 0. . . a6, since 11

on c3 . lllxd6?! does not work because of
ll h5 12 0-0-0 0-0 13 <li>b1 e6
... I l .. .exd6 I2 e5 lieS ! +.
14 lt:)b3 llc6 15 f4 '6'c7 16 l::t hd3 In Zhukhov-Nadyrhanov, Novo­
b5?! rossiysk I 996, White took with the
A blank shot. 1 6 . . .1lc8 !? ;!; is more queen, 1 0 'ifxb5, when after
solid. I O... lt:)c6! 1 1 lt:)b3 (on 1 1 '6'xb7
17 a3 l:.c8 18 l:.ld2! with the Black counterattacks by 1 I ...lt:)xd4
threat of piling up the heavy pieces I 2 11xd4 llb8! 1 3 '6'xa7 l:r.a8! I 4
on the d-file, after which the weak­ '6'b7 '6'a5 !-Nadyrhanov) more ac­
ness of the d6 pawn is greatly felt, curate than 1 1 ...'ii'c8 1 2 .i.xf6 .i.xf6
A.Frolov-Palkovi, Hungary 1 990. I 3 �5 �g7 I4 f4 ;!; maintaining
the initiative, is I I ...llc8 ! ?.
10 �b1
18B On the more natural IO f4,
preparing e4-e5, Black commences
(1 e4 c5 2 lt:)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 energetic counterplay.
tt'lxd4 lt:)f6 5 lt:)c3 g6 6 .i.g5 .i.g7 7 I ) I O ... a6 I I .i.xd7 lt:)bxd7 I 2
.i.b5+ .i.d7 8 'ife2) .l:[he 1 11ac8 I 3 lt:)b3 '6'b4 14 e5?
(necessary was I4 a3 !) I4 ... 11xc3 !
8 . 0-0
. . I 5 bxc3 '6'a3+ I 6 �b i lt:)b6 with a
dangerous attack for Black,
Grigorov-A.Kovacevic, Belgrade
I989.
2) I O....i.g4!? (an attempt to take
over the initiative) I I lt:)f3 lt:)c6 I 2
'itb I lt:)h5 1 3 lt:)d5 e6 I 4 .i.xc6 bxc6
I 5 '6'd2 ( I 5 lt:)e7+? 'ith8 I6 lt:)xc6
loses after 16 ...'iVb6 I 7 lt:)cd4 .i.xf3)
I5 ... '6'xd2 16 lt:)e7+ �h8 I7 11xd2
h6 1 8 .i.h4 lt:)xf4 and Black
achieves a material advantage,
Yurtaev-Petrakov, Kstovo I 994.
10 ...a6 1 1 .i.xd7 'ii'xg5 12 h4
9 0-0-0 '6'a5 '6'a5
This manoeuvre is sometimes em­ Risky is I 2 ...'6'e5 13 .i.h3 lt:)c6?
ployed after the exchange of a pair after which the queen is in danger:
of pieces, 9 ... .i.xb5 1 0 lt:)dxb5 I4 lt:)b3 b5 I 5 g3 b4 I 6 f4 '6'h5 I 7
-I0 ...'6'a5 1 I f4 lt:)c6 I 2 <t>b i a6 g4! '6'xh4 1 8 llla4 and the queen
( 1 2 . . . l::tfc8 allows White to carry out cannot get out without great
a breakthrough in the centre: I 3 e5 material loss, Schula-Fiedler, Czech
dxe5 I4 fxe5 lt:)eS 1 5 lt:)d5 a6 I 6 Republic 1 993.
lt:)a3 b 5 I 7 e6 ± Ennenkov-Glienke, 13 .i.h3 lt:)c6 14 lt:)b3 '6'c7 15 f4
Berlin 1987) 1 3 lt:)d4 lt:)xd4 14 b5 16 lt:)d5 lt:)xd5 17 exd5 lt:)a5 and
.!:.xd4 h6 with the idea of I5 .i.h4 Black is not worse, Blodstein­
lt:)h5. Also worth considering is the A.Fedorov, Voskresensk I993.
96 Variations with 6 i..g5

18C 1 1 e5 ! i.. xb5 1 2 'iVxb5+ 'iVxb5 1 3

lLlxb5 dxe5 1 4 lLlc7+ �f8 1 5 l:lb4
(1 e4 c5 2 .!LJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l:lc8 (defending the pawn by
.!LJxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 i..g5 i.. g7 7 1 5 ... l:lb8 fails to 1 6 lLla6 lLid5 1 7
i..b5+ i..d7 8 'iVe2) l:lb5 l:lc8 1 8 l:lxb7 ± Hartmann­
Hauer, Germany 1985) 16 l::txb7 a5
8...lLlc6 1 7 %:td1 lLle4 1 8 i..e3 .!LJd6 19 ::ta7
lLlc4 20 i..c5 and the activity of the
white pieces does not allow Black to
complete his development without
material loss, Vitolins-Yurtaev,
Frunze 1979.
10 i..xc6 bxc6 11 e5 dxe5
1 l .. .'ii'a 5? loses a piece to 1 2 lLlb3
1 -0 Lakos-Lipp, Balatonbereny
1 995.
1 2 lLlxc6 'iVe8 13 lLlxe5 i..e6 14
l:the1 l:lc8
Worthy of attention is 14 ...'iVc8 !?
followed by ...l:la8-b8.
This move allows White, after an 15 'iVa6 %:tc5
exchange of knights, to carry out the White remains with the initiative
break e4-e5. after 1 5 ....:tc7 16 lL!b5 .:tc5 1 7 lLld4
9 0-0-0 0-0 i..d5 1 8 lLlb3 i..xb3 19 axb3 'iVb8
Or 9 ...l:lc8 1 0 i..xc6 bxc6 1 1 f4 20 i..x f6 i..xf6 2 1 lLld7 ! 'iVxb3 22
0-0 1 2 e5 dxe5 1 3 fxe5 lLld5 14 lLlxf6+ exf6 23 .:te2 l:tfc8 24 'iVxc8+
lLlxd5 cxd5 and here in the game l:lxc8 25 .:td8+ l:lxd8 26 cxb3 with a
Ghinda-Sax, Malta (ol) 1 980, in­ rather better endgame for White,
stead of the solid 1 5 l:lhfl , White Vitolins-Mortensen, Riga 1 98 1 .
provoked an attack upon himself: 1 5 16 f4 'iVa8 1 7 .:td2 :res 18 l::te d1
e6? fxe6 1 6 lLlxe6 'iVb6 1 7 lLlxg7 h6 19 i.. h4 lLle4 20 lLlxe4 'iVxe4
l:lf2! +. with chances for both sides,
9 ...lLlxd4 10 l:lxd4 'iVa5 is Hamdouchi-Garcia Lopez, Alicante
insufficient to maintain parity after 1 992.
 5 : Levenfish Attack: 6 f4

(l e4 c5 2 ltJt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
ltJd4 lLif6 5 ltJc3 g6)

6 f4

7 e5
Other continuations are not so
consistent and allow Black to obtain
a satisfactory game:
I ) 7 i.b5+ t2Jfd7!? (in White's fa­
Initially this system was worked vour is 7 ...i.d7 8 e5 dxe5 9 fxe5
out by grandmaster Grigory Leven­ ltJg4 IO e6 i.xb5 1 1 exf7+ �xf7 I 2
fish. White endeavours to take the Wf3+ lLif6 1 3 ltJdxb5 ±) 8 i.e3 0-0
initiative with e4-e5. What does 9 0-0 (or 9 i.e2 ltJc6 1 0 0-0 ltJb6 )
=

Black do against this? The main 9 ... a6 IO i.e2 ltJc6 I I �hi ltJc5
continuations are: (striving for an attack on the e4
pawn; less convincing is I I ...ltJxd4
6 i.g7-Line I 9
.•. I 2 i.xd4 i.xd4 I 3 'it'xd4 b5 I4 a4
6 . ltJc6---Line 20
. . bxa4 I 5 .l:txa4 i.b7 I 6 l:.fa i and
6...ltJbd7-Line 2 I White has some initiative on the
queen's flank, Hiibner-Vatter,
Germany I985) I 2 'ii'd2 i.d7 and
Line 1 9 after ... b7-b5 Black has sufficient
counterplay.
(l e4 c 5 2 ltJ O d 6 3 d4 cxd4 4 2) 7 i.e2 0-0 8 0-0 'Wb6! 9 i.e3
ltJxd4 lLif6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 f4) Wxb2? I 0 'ii'd3 'Wb4 I I e5 ! dxe5 I 2
fxe5 ltJg4 1 3 i.xg4 i.xg4 I 4 l:.f4 !
6...i.g7 - with a strong attack for White,
Black allows the advance of the Beliavsky-Kupreichik, USSR I 975.
e-pawn. Necessary was 9 ...ltJc6, transposing
98 Levenfish Attack 6/4

play to the variation 6 .ie2 .ig7 7

.ie3 lLlc6 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 'iib6 (Line
28).
7 iL!hS
...

The possibility of this move is

based on tactics: 8 g4? lL!xf4. Black
leaves White with worries over the
pawn tension since he cannot main­
tain the pawn on e5.
The other retreat of the knight is
weaker: 7 ... lLlg4 8 .ib5+! �f8 9 h3
lLlh6 I O .ie3 lLlc6 I I exd6! lLlxd4
I 2 .ixd4 'ifxd6 I3 .ixg7+ �xg7 I4 9 e6
'ifxd6 exd6 I5 0-0-0 and White has The most consistent. Upon other
an obvious advantage because of the continuations Black does not experi­
weakness of the d6 pawn, ence particular problems:
Levenfish-Rabinovich, USSR (ch) I) 9 'iff3?! dxe5 10 fxe5 .ixe5 1 1
1939, or 7 ...iL!fd7 8 e6! iLlf6 9 exf7+ .ie3 .ixb5 1 2 lLlcxb5 'ii'a 5+! 1 3 c3
�xf7 10 .ic4+ d5 I I .ib3 l:.f8 I 2 a6 14 'ifd5 .ixd4 ! 1 5 lLld6+ exd6 1 6
'iff3 e6 I 3 .ie3 �g8 I 4 0-0-0 with 'ii'xa5 .ixe3 and the three pieces
an attacking position for White. prove stronger than the queen,
But the inclusion of the premature B.Vladimirov-Mestel, France 1 974.
exchange 7 ... dxe5 8 fxe5 changes 2) 9 .ixd7+ 'Wxd7 I 0 exd6 0-0 I I
matters: 8 ...lLlfd7 (also here iL!de2 lLlc6 1 2 0-0 .l:ad8 1 3 f5 'ifxd6
8 ...lLlg4? is no good because of 9 1 4 'ifxd6 :txd6 with equal chances,
.ib5+: now 9 .. .'it>f8? loses at once to Beckmeyer-N.Ristic, Dortmund
1 0 lLle6+, with the well-known I 988.
'mechanism' 9 ...lLlc6 IO lLlxc6 3) 9 'ife2 .ixb5 (on 9 ... a6 good is
'ifxd I + I I lL!xd I a6 I 2 .ia4 .id7 I O .ic4 ! lLlc6 I I lLlxc6 .ixc6 I 2
not allowing Black to avoid material l:.fl ! ± G.Mittelman) I O iLldxb5!
loss after 1 3 h3 iLlh6 I4 lLlxe7) 9 e6 (nothing is offered by IO 'ifxb5+
lLle5! I O .ib5+ lLlbc6 (also possible 'ii'd7 I I lLlf3 lLlc6, with the game
is IO ...lLlec6 I I exfl+ �f8 I 2 lLlxc6 Lederman-Mestel, Beersheva I 988,
'Wxd I 1 3 lLlxd I lL!xc6 I4 c3 .ie6 I 5 continuing I 2 0-0? a6 I 3 'ii'e2 dxe5
0-0 .if6 I 6 iL!f2 �fl with an equal I4 fxe5 ll:Jxe5 ! and White loses a
endgame, Dzhafarov-Guseinov, pawn; stronger was I 2 exd6 'ifxd6
corr. 1 975) I I exfl+ �xfl 1 2 0-0+ 1 3 'ifxb7 0-0 I4 0-0 l::tab8, when
.if6 1 3 lLlxc6 (or 1 3 .ixc6 lLlxc6 1 4 Black regains the pawn with a fa­
lLlxc6 'ii'xd 1 1 5 lLlxdi bxc6 I 6 .ig5 vourable position) I O ... a6 I I lLla3
.ia6 with a defensible position) dxe5 1 2 fxe5 'i'd4 (weaker is
1 3 ...bxc6 14 'ifxd8 l:.xd8 1 5 .ia4 I 2 ... e6 I3 0-0 'ii'd4+ I4 .ie3 'ifxe5
.ia6 16 l:te l c5! and, though I 5 lLlc4 ±) 1 3 g4 lLlxf4 I4 .ixf4
White's pawn structure is better, his 'ii'xf4 I 5 iL!d5 'ii'xe5 I6 'ii'xe5 .ixe5
advantage is minimal since the I 7 lLlc4 ;!;= Lederman-Mittelman,
black pieces are better coordinated. Beer-Sheva I 997.
8 .ibS+ .id7 9 fxe6 10 lLlxe6 .ixc3+ 11 bxc3
...

'ii'c8
 Levenfish Attack 6f4 99

On l l ...'ifa5 Y.Kotkov suggests 20A

1 2 i..d2 ! i..xb5 l 3 c4.
12 i..xd7+ (1 e4 cS 2 lilf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Black has an easy game after 1 2 lilxd4 lilf6 S lilc3 g6 6 f4 lilc6)
'W'd3 lilc6 l 3 lilg5 i..f5 1 4 'ifd5 h6
1 5 lile4 'W'e6 16 'ifxe6 i..xe6 trans­ 7 lilxc6
posing to an even endgame, Peters­
Mestel, Hastings 1980/8 1 .
1 2...�xd7 1 3 lilgS 'W'xc3+ 14
i..d2 'ifc4 15 l:.b1 b6 16 l:tb4 'W'dS
17 0-0 and the active white pieces,
together with the insecure black
king, give White full compensation
for the sacrificed pawn, Conquest­
Watson, London 1 989.

Line 20

(1 e4 cS 2 lilf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lilxd4 lilf6 S lilc3 g6 6 f4) 7 ... bxc6 8 eS
Here Black has the choice be­
6...lilc6 tween maintaining the pawn tension
and transferring to the endgame.

20Aa: 8...lild7
20Ab: 8...dxeS

Risky is 8 ...lilg4 9 i..e2 (also in­

teresting is 9 h3 ll:lh6 10 g4 !) 9 ... h5
l 0 h3 ll:lh6 I I i..f 3 'W'b6 1 2 exd6
exd6 l 3 'W'e2+ i..e7 1 4 i..e3 'ifxb2
1 5 �d2 i..f5 1 6 i..xc6+ �f8 1 7
l:thc l with decisive threats for
White, Perelshteyn-Torres, Philadel­
phia 1999.
A more logical continuation Also in White's favour is
which forces White, if he wants to 8 ...i..g4?! 9 i.. e2 i..xe2 10 'W'xe2
play e4-e5, to exchange his central­ dxe5 I I fxe5 lild5 12 e6 f5 (or
ised knight. l 2 ...f6 13 lilxd5 'W'xd5 14 i..f4 i..g7
The main continuations here are: 1 5 0-0 ± Durao-Piatonov, Cappelle­
la-Grande, 1 995) l 3 lilxd5 'ifxd5 1 4
20A: 7 lilxc6 i..g5 and, by creating an outpost on
208: 7 lilf3 d7, White prepares a rook invasion
208: 7 i.. bS (M.Euwe).
100 Levenfish A ttack 6 f4

20Aa Sadovoj-Nesis, corr. 1 982) I l ...l:lb8

1 2 i.e3 ! a6 1 3 i.a4 dxe5 14 0-0-0
(1 e4 c5 2 lt::lt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'ii'a 5! 1 5 i.b3 (after 1 5 l:txd7?!
lt::l xd4 lt::lf6 5 lt::lc3 g6 6 f4 lt::l c6 7 i.xd7 16 'ii'xd7 l:tfd8 Black starts
lt::lxc6 bxc6 8 e5) up an attack) 1 5 ... exf4 16 i.xf4
l:txb3 1 7 axb3 'ii'a I + 18 �d2 'ii'xb2
8 lt::ld7
... 1 9 l:.b I lt::lb 8! 20 'ii'xc8 l:txc8 2 1
l:txb2 i.xc3+ with an endgame
advantage to Black, Bronstein­
Vasiukov, USSR (ch) 1 959.
9 exd6
...

9 exd6
White saddles Black with hanging
pawns, at the same time preventing
the fianchetto of the bishop. An at­
tack on the c6 pawn looks prema­ 10 i.e3
ture: 9 'ii'f3 i.g7 (counterattack is After 1 0 'ii'd4 lt::lf6 White does not
the best defence, although the thrust succeed in carrying out his plans
9 ...'ii'b6 is not recommended by because of the exposed position of
theory, being referred to in an old his queen:
analysis by Levenfish: I 0 exd6 exd6 I ) I I b3 i.g7 1 2 i.b2 0-0 l 3
I I ..te3 'ii'xb2 12 i.d4 'ii'xa l + 1 3 0-0-0 i.g4 ! 14 i.e2?! lt::ld5 1 5
�d2 l:.g8 14 'ii'xc6 etc; however in 'ii'xg7+ �xg7 16 lt::lxd5+ f6 1 7
the game Snepvangers-Solleveld, i.xg4 cxd5 and White has no com­
Holland 1 998, Black played pensation for the queen, Timman­
1 3 ...lt::le5 ! 1 4 fxe5 i.h6+ 1 5 �e2 Langeweg, Amsterdam 1974.
0-0 1 6 �f2 c5 ! and went over to a 2) I I i.e3 i.e7 12 i.e2 0-0 1 3
decisive counterattack) 1 0 i.b5 0-0 i. f3 (or 1 3 0-0 c 5 1 4 'ii'd2 d 5 and
(also seen is IO ...dxe5 I I i.xc6 l:tb8 Black's pieces will create havoc,
1 2 i.e3 llxb2 13 0-0-0 e4! 14 'ii'xe4 Szabo-Reshevsky, Helsinki (ol)
i.xc3 ! 1 5 i.xd7+ i.xd7 16 l:txd7 1 952) I 3 ...d5 I 4 'ii'd2 'ii'a5 I 5 0-0
'ii'xd7 1 7 'ii'a8+ l:.b8! and Black i.c5 I 6 �h i 1h- 1h Kasparov­
maintains the balance, Gragger­ Balashov, Moscow I 98 1 .
Honfi, Vienna 196 1 ) I I 'ii'xc6 (also 3 ) I I i.d3 i._g7 1 2 'ii'e3+ �d7 I 3
possible is I I i.xc6 l:tb8 1 2 exd6 0-0 'ii'b6 I 4 'iVxb6 axb6 1 5 i.e3
exd6 1 3 0-0 lt::lf6 and Black's pieces �c7 with an even endgame, Campa­
develop great activity: 14 lt::le4 Marin, Sevilla I 994
i.g4 ! 1 5 lt::lx f6+ i.xf6 1 6 'ii'xg4 After I O i.e3 Black's main con­
'itb6+ 1 7 lith I 'ii'xc6 1 8 f5 i.xb2 = tinuations are considered to be:
 Levenfish Attack 6f4 101

37Aa1 : 10 lbf6
.•. 18 .ixa7 lbc5 and in return for the
37Aa2: 10....te7 sacrificed pawn Black dominates
the dark squares, Milijanovic­
He does not manage to derive any Damjanovic, Belgrade 1 993.
benefit from the pinned bishop: ll ..tg7 12 o-o-o d5 13 .ic5
..

I0 ...1i'e7?! I I Wid4 .ig7! ( I l .. .lbf6 .ie6 14 a3

I 2 0-0-0 .ig7 I 3 1i'xd6! 1i'xe3+ I 4 After 14 1i'd4?! the queen be­
�b i i s in White's favour) I 2 1i'xg7 comes a convenient target in the or­
1i'xe3+ I 3 .ie2 l:r.:ffi I4 l:r.fl .ta6 I 5 ganisation of counterplay on the
l:r.f3 1i'g I + I 6 .tfl .ixfl I 7 0-0-0 queen's flank: I4 .. .'ii'a5 I5 .ib4
1i'xg2 I 8 l:[dfl 0-0-0 I 9 Wfd4 ! ( I 9 'ilc7 I 6 g3 l:r.b8 I 7 .ia3 l:[g8 1 8
lbe4 lbc5 = Unzicker-Kottnauer, 1i'a4 Wfb6 I 9 .ig2 lbd7 and Black
Leysin I967) I 9 ...lbb6 20 h3 ! goes over to the attack, Nunn-Miles,
threatening to trap the queen after London 1 982.
1i'd4-d3. 14...lbd7
On 14 ...'ii'a5 White hurries to ex­
20Aa1 ploit the pin on the e-file: 1 5 .ib4
'ilc7 I6 l:.e i lbd7 1 7 lbxd5!? cxd5
(1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 I 8 'ii'xd5, maintaining a dangerous
lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbcJ g6 6 f4 lbc6 7 initiative.
lbxc6 bxc6 8 e5 lbd7 9 exd6 exd6 15 .id4 .ixd4 16 'ihd4 'ii'f6 17
10 .ie3) 1i'xf6 lbxf6 with an equal ending
(E. Geller).
10 ...lbf6

20Aa2

(1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 f4 lbc6 7
lbxc6 bxc6 8 e5 lbd7 9 exd6 exd6
10 .ie3)

10....te7

A logical continuation, through

which Black endeavours to
fianchetto his dark-squared bishop.
1 1 Wid2
White prepares queenside cas­
tling, keeping the d-pawn under
control. After I I 1i'f3 d5 I 2 .ie2
.ie7! he does not succeed in taking
under control the weakened g i -a7
diagonal: l 3 0-0 0-0 1 4 1i'f2 l:.b8 1 5 Despite the weakening of the long
b3 'ii'a5 1 6 .id4 l:r.b4 I 7 'ili>h 1 lbd7 diagonal, Black makes the decision
 102 Levenfish A ttack 6/4

to defend the d6 pawn, so as not to double-edged game, Larsen-Lein,

lose control of the important g l -a7 Lone Pine 1 979.
diagonal after ...d6-d5 .
11 'ii'd 2 20Ab
On I I -.o good is l l ...d5 and
White does not manage to exploit (1 e4 cS 2 l2Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
the weakened dark squares: 1 2 l2Jd4 l2Jf6 S l2Jc3 g6 6 f4 l2Jc6 7
0-0-0 .tf6 1 3 .td4 0-0 14 h4 l:tb8 l2Jxc6 bxc6 8 eS)
1 5 _.f2 l:tb4 16 .txf6 l2Jxf6 1 7 a3
and here, in the game Tai-Lisitsin, 8...dxeS
USSR (ch) 1 956, instead of This exchange leads to the worse
I 7 ...�6 I 8 -.xb6 l:txb6 1 9 l2Ja4, endgame for Black. A characteristic
which allowed White to obtain a drawback looked at in the position
definite advantage, Black maintains below is the presence of numerous
the balance with the move l 7 ...llb7. pawn islands.
This same method is also good on 9 -.xd8+ 'iPxd8 10 fxeS
I I .te2-I l ...O-O I 2 0-0 d5 ! I 3
l2Ja4 (on 1 3 f5 good i s I 3 . . ..tc5 I 4
.tc5 l2Jc5 I 5 f6 d4 I 6 b4 dxc3 I 7
bxc5 .tf5 + Skytte-Guid, Patras
I 999) 1 3 ...l:te8 14 _.d2 l2Jf6 I 5 _.c3
l2Je4 I 6 -.xc6 .td7 I 7 _.a6 'ii'c8 ! ,
equalising, Nunn-Sax, Teesside
1974.
1 1 0-0
.•.

Also possible is I l ...l2Jf6 I 2 0-0-0

(not in the spirit of the position is
the attack 12 h3 0-0 I 3 g4 d5 1 4
.tg2 .ta6 I 5 a 3 l2Je8 I 6 'iPf2 l2Jd6
. and the advantage is already with
Black, Ghinda-Kunsztowicz, Bo­ l O...ltJdS
chum I 98 l ) I 2 . . . . 0-0 I 3 h3 d5 14 On 10 . . .l2Jg4 White defends the e5
g4 _.a5 with a complicated game, pawn by I I .tf4! and threatens the
Perelshteyn-Shahade, USA I 999. advance e5-e6. I.Boleslavsky ana­
12 0-0-0 l2Jb6 lysed the following continuations:
Weaker is I 2 ...l2Jf6?! 1 3 h3 .te6 I ) I I . ...tg7 1 2 0-0-0+ 'iPc7 (or
14 g4 '6'a5 I 5 .tg2 l:tab8 16 b3 d5 1 2 ....td7 1 3 e6! fxe6 I4 l2Je4 e5 1 5
17 f5 .td7 I 8 'iPb I .tb4 19 .td4 .te2 h5 1 6 .td2 i.f5 1 7 .th6+ 'iPe8
with advantage to White, Fuderer­ 1 8 .txg7 l:tg8 19 .to llxg7 20 h3 !
Trifunovic, Yugoslavia 1 952. l2Je3 2 1 l:tde l l2Jd5 22 l2Jg3 ±) 1 3
13 .te2 e6+ .te5 1 4 .txe5+ l2Jxe5 1 5 exf7 ±
The flank attack 1 3 h3 .te6 14 g4 2) 1 I ....td7 I 2 l:td I ! .tg7 1 3 e6
a5 I 5 f5 l2Jc4 I 6 .txc4 .txc4 is re­ .txc3+ I 4 bxc3 fxe6 1 5 .te2 l:tf8
pulsed by Black without particular I 6 0-0 l2Jf6 I 7 .te5 ±.
difficulty, Guzzardo-Copie, corr. 3) I I .. ..te6 I2 l2Je4 .tg7 13 l2Jc5
1 987. .txe5 I4 0-0-0+ <i;c7 I 5 .txe5+
13 ...dS 14 h4 hS IS g4 .txg4 16 l2Jxe5 I 6 l2Jxe6+ fxe6 I 7 lie I 'iPd6
.txg4 l2Jc4 17 _.d3 'ifb8 with a 1 8 g3 l2Jg4 I 9 .tc4! e5 20 l:te2! !.
 Levenfish Attack 6f4 1 03

l l ltJxd5
Another way is I I .td2 .tg7 1 2
0-0-0 .txe5 1 3 ltJxd5 cxd5 14
.ta5+ 'it>e8 1 5 lhd5 .tf4+ 1 6 .td2
.te6 1 7 :d3 with some advantage
to White, Glass-Steiner, Austria
1962.
ll ...cxd5 12 .tg5
Or 1 2 .tf4 h6 13 c4 e6 14 :di
..tb4+ 1 5 .i.d2 .txd2+ 1 6 :xd2
.tb7 1 7 cxd5 ..txd5 with equality,
Durao-Copeland, Dublin 1 99 1 .
12 ... h6 I ) 9 ...ltJb4 10 h3?! (stronger is 1 0
1 2 ... .te6 1 3 0-0-0 'it>c7 14 .tb5 .te3 or 1 0 'We2) I O . . tDxd3 I I cxd3
.

with advantage to White, Penrose­ b5! 1 2 .te3 b4 13 lDe2 a5 14 g4 h5

Green, England 1969 1 5 g5 ltJe8 and Black obtains the
13 .th4 g5 14 .tf2 ..tg7 15 0-0-0 more promising position; Spasov­
and in view of the disrupted black Boissonet, Tunja 1 989.
king, White has the preferable 2) 9 . . ..tg4 10 'We i .txf3 I I :xn
chances, Donner-Spanjaard, Hol­ e6 1 2 �hi :c8 1 3 :n (or 13 .te3
land 1953. a6 14 :d i 'We7 with a complicated
game, Mrva-Rogozenko, Pardubice
20B I 997) 1 3 ...:e8 14 'Wf2 a6 1 5 f5 and
White had kingside pressure,
(1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 J.Polgar-Topalov, Leon 1 996.
ltJd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 f4 ltJc6) 3) 9 ... b5 !? (a pawn sacrifice for
the initiative) 10 ltJxb5 'Wb6+ 1 1
7 ltJf3 'it>hl ltJxe4 1 2 ltJxa7 :xa7 1 3 .i.xe4
ltJb4 1 4 a3 d5 1 5 .txd5 .tf5
( 1 5 ... :d8 1 6 .te3 ! ±) 1 6 .tb3 :c8
17 ltJg5 ltJxc2 1 8 .txf7+ �ffi (per­
haps it was worth limiting himself
to 1 8 .. .'ifi>h8 19 :a2 h6) I9 'ti'd5 e6
20 .txe6 :d8 2 1 1Va2 ltJxa I 22
.txf5 gxf5 23 ltJe6+ 'it>e8 24 ltJxd8
and White maintains his material
advantage, Ady-Shahade, Manhat­
tan 1 999.
9 'ti'e2 0-0 10 ltJd1
On the exchange of queens 1 0
'ii'e3 'ii'xe3+ I I .txe3 ltJb4 I 2 h 3 b6
This retreat of the knight and the 1 3 a3 ltJxd3+ 14 cxd3 .tb7 White
rejection of the pawn advance e4-e5 cannot count on an advantage,
has become quite popular recently. Hiibner-Sosonko, Wijk aan Zee
7 ... .tg7 8 .td3 Wb6 I 986
An active move, preventing 10...e5 11 .te3 ltJd4 12 'ii'd2 ltJg4
castling. 13 .txd4 exd4 14 0-0 .td7 15 :e1
Also possible is 8 ... 0-0 9 0-0. :res 16 h3 lDf6 with chances for
104 Levenfish Attack 6 f4

both sides, Minasian-Komljenovic, I 6 ... i.c6? I 7 l:txe7+! �f8 I 8 lLle6+

Oviedo 1 993. White wins the queen, Penrose­
Harden, Hastings I 957/58) I 7 ltJe6+
20C fxe6 1 8 l:tfl 'ii'xfl + I9 lhfl + i.fS
20 g4 i.f6 2 1 gxfS exfS and the two
(1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 rooks are stronger than the queen
lLld4 lLlf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 f4 ltJc6) (E.Geller). But also after the better
I 3 i.f4 0-0 14 c3 "ilfb6 Black has a
7 i.b5 fully equal game.
An attempt to reduce Black's con­ 9 e5 dxe5
trol over the eS square for which he Also interesting is 9 . . .ltJdS I O
willingly gives Black the advantage exd6 ( I 0 ltJxdS exdS I I exd6 e6 +)
of the two bishops but does not I 0 ... ltJxc3 I I bxc3 cS! 1 2 ltJf3
cause him any particular problems. (weaker is 1 2 dxe7? ifxe7+ 1 3 lLle2
.l:[d8 14 'ii'd3 i.c6 I S 'ii'g3 i.g7 +
Johansson-Nilsson, Stockholm
I 960/6 I ) 1 2 . . . i.g7 I 3 ltJeS i.bS I 4
c4 exd6 I 5 cxbS dxeS with equal
chances.
10 fxe5 ltJg4
In White's favour is I O ... ltJdS 1 1
ltJxdS cxdS I 2 'ii'f3 .
l l e6
An interesting attempt to exploit
the theme of overloaded bishop. Af­
ter the quiet 1 1 i.f4 i.g7 1 2 'ii'e2
ifaS ! 1 3 ltJf3 'ii'M ! Black has good
counterplay (M.Euwe).
7. .. i.d7 8 i.xc6 ll ... .i.xe6 12 'ii'f3
Upon· the retreat 8 ltJf3 i.g7 9 There is nothing in 1 2 lLlxe6
ife2 0-0 harmless is IO eS?! dxeS ifxd l + 1 3 ltJxdi fxe6 14 lLle3 lLlf6
I 1 fxeS ltJg4 I 2 i.f4 a6 1 3 i.c4 I S lL!c4 lLldS, with an equal game,
i.e6 and Black's chances are prefer­ Geller-Pogrebysky, USSR (ch)
able, Sax-Ivanovic, Vrbas 1 980. I O 1949.
0-0 is safer. 12 ...'ii'd7 13 i.f4 i.g7 14 0-0-0
8.. . bxc6 i.d5
Also possible is 8 ... i.xc6 9 eS (or Otherwise after I4 . . .0-0 I S ltJfS
9 ltJxc6 bxc6 I 0 0-0 i.g7 I I 'it>h I 'ii'b7 I6 ltJxg7 'iti>xg7 I7 h3 lLlf6 1 7
0-0 I 2 i.e3 dS ) 9 ...dxeS I 0 fxeS
= i.eS White has a tangible
ltJe4! ( I O. . .ltJdS I I e6 fS I 2 0-0 ;!;) advantage.
I I lLlxe4 ( I I lLlxc6 'ii'xd I+ I 2 15 'ii'e2
ltJxd I bxc6 1 3 0-0 i.g7 I 4 l:te I Threatening, after I 5 ... 0-0?, the
lLlcS I 5 i.d2 0-0! = G.Levenfish) blow 1 6 lLlxc6! .
1 1 . ..i.xe4 I 2 0-0 i.g7. Now on the 15 ...ltJf6 16 i.e5 0-0 17 i.xf6
natural 1 3 l:te I ? ! could follow the exf6!?
energetic 1 3 ...ifd5 ( 1 3 ... i.d5 I4 c4 This looks more promising than
i.c6! ) I4 c3 ifxeS, not fearing I S
= I 7 ... i.xf6 I S ltJxc6 'ii'xc6 I 9 lLlxd5
i.f4 ifxf4 I 6 'ii'a4+ 'it> f8 (after i.gS+ 20 'iti>b 1 e6 2 I h4 i.d8.
 Levenfish A ttack 6 f4 105

18 ttJxc6 W'xc6 19 tlJxd5 llfe8 20 a6 1 0 a4 'ilc7 I I J.e2 b6 I 2 ..tn e5

'flo :ac8 21 c3 f5 22 llhe1 �f8 13 tLlde2 J.b7 with a good game for
with roughly equal chances Black, Rossetto-Najdorf, Mar del
(M.Euwe). Plata 1 968.

Line 2 1 21A

(1 e4 c 5 2 tlJ t3 d 6 3 d 4 cxd4 4 (1 e4 c5 2 lbt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

tlJd4 tlJf6 5 tLlcJ g6 6 f4) tlJxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 f4 lbbd7)

6...tLlbd7 7 ..te2

This move radically stops the In this situation the transfer of the
threat of e4-e5, however the knight bishop to f3 is facilitated since the
is more passively placed on d7 and b5 square is under extra control
does not have such an effective in­ from the knight d4 and Black does
fluence on the centre. not have the standard counterplay
So now that he is not experiencing associated with ...b7-b5.
pressure on the knight d4, White is 7 .....tg7 8 0-0 0-0 9 'it>h1 !
more free to create havoc with his White creates the threat of
forces, with the d5 square in his invasion on d5, abstaining for the
sights. time being from the development of
The game often leads to a position the bishop to e3, so that the knight
arising from an analogous structure does not come to c4 with tempo. For
in the Najdorf Variation ( 1 e4 c5 2 example, after 9 J.e3 a6 10 ..tn
ttJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tLlxd4 tLlf6 5 possible is IO ...W'c7 I I W'e2 tLlb6
tLlc3 a6), where upon the continua­ 1 2 l:tad 1 tLlc4 1 3 J.c 1 e5 14 fxe5
tion 6 f4 tLlbd7 Black then plays dxe5 1 5 tLlb3 J.e6 with a good
7 ...g6 game for Black, An.Bykhovsky­
The main continuations here are: A.Nikitin, Moscow 1964, or in more
contemporary style I O ... e5 1 1 tLlb3
21A: 7 J.e2 exf4 I 2 J.xf4 lbe5 and the occupa­
21B: 7 tLlt3 tion of the e5 square compensates
for the weakness of the d6 pawn,
Hardly investigated is 7 J.c4 ..ig7 V.Ristic-N.Ristic, Cetinje 1 990.
8 tLlf3 (see 2 1 B) or 8 J.e3 0-0 9 h3 9 ...a6
106 Levenfish A ttack 6 f4

lDe5 I 3 J.g5 and White exploits the

weakening of the d5 square).
However possible I O ... l:e8 I I
J.f3 e5 I 2 lbb3 (or I 2 fxe5 dxe5 !
I 3 lbb3 b6 and I4 . . . J.b7 = )
I 2 ... exf4 (after I 2 ...'ifc7 possible is
I3 f5 ! with advantage for White
both on 13 ...b6 I4 b4, and also after
1 3 ...d5 1 4 exd5 e4 I 5 J.e2) I 3
J.xf4 lDe5 I 4 J.e2 J.e6 I 5 J.g5 h6
I 6 J.h4 l:r.c8 I 7 lbd4 lbc4 with a
complicated game, Leko-Lautier,
10 a4 Investabank, Belgrade I 995.
The usual reaction to ...a7-a6. 11 J.f3
White not only prevents . . . b7-b5, White prevents the fianchettoing
but also, when the opportunity of the bishop c8 because of the
arises, threatens to exploit the weak­ threat e4-e5. The other popular con­
ened b6 square by a4-a5. tinuation is I I J.e3, although the
Upon the continuation I 0 J.f3 appearance of the bishop on this
Black carries out a standard plan square stimulates the manoeuvre of
with the blockading move ... e7-e5 the knight to c4. Let's look at some
and a subsequent exchange of possibilities:
pawns, after which the knight is es­ I) 1 l ...e5 1 2 lbb3 b6 I3 f5 ..i.b7
tablished on e5. Here the weakness I4 1i'd3 l:r.ad8 I5 fxg6 hxg6 I6 J.g5
of the d6 pawn is not felt so much. and White's chances are preferable,
I) I O...'ii'c7 I I g4 e5 I 2 lbde2 Glek-Neverov, Frunze I 988.
exf4 1 3 g5 lbe8 I4 lDxf4 lbe5 I 5 2) 1 I ...lbb6 I2 'ifd3 J.g4 I3 l:laei
lDfd5 'ifd8 I 6 J.g2 J.e6 I 7 a4 lieS e5 I 4 lbb3 J.xe2 I5 lhe2 lbc4 I 6
18 l:r.a3 lbc4 19 l:r.b3 lba5 20 l:lb4 .i.e I exf4 I 7 l:.xf4 lDe5 1 8 'ifh3
l:r.c4 2 I l:r.xc4 lbxc4 with roughly 'ifd7 I 9 'ifh4 lDh5 20 l:lfl 'ii'g4 and
equal chances, Lau-Bonsch, Graz the game is even, Dolmatov­
(zt) I 993. Kuczynski, Polanica Zdroj I 987.
2) 10 ...e5 I I lbb3 (or I I lbde2 On I I a5 possible is I l .. .b5 ! I 2
'ifc7 I 2 a4 b6 I 3 J.e3 J.b7 and axb6 lbxb6 and Black is ready to
though White has the freer game, occupy the c4 square.
Black could fight for equality) l l ...l:r.e8
I I ...exf4 I 2 J.xf4 lbe5 1 3 ..i.e2 b5 In recent times Black has ab­
I4 J.g5 h6 I 5 J.xf6 J.xf6 I6 lbd5 stained from weakening his position
.i.g7 I 7 a4 with a more promising by I l ...e5, with the idea of blocking
position for White, in view of the the bishop, though this plan is quite
weakness of the d5 square, reliable: I 2 lDde2 (also interesting is
Khalifman-Kupreichik, Kuibyshev I 2 lDb3 exf4! 1 3 J.xf4 lDe5 I4 J.g5
I 986. J.e6 I 5 J.e2) 1 2 ... exf4 ! (weaker is
10...'ifc7 I 2 ...b6?!, on which possible is I 3 f5
Black takes under control the c4 J.b7 I4 lbg3 l:.ac8 1 5 J.g5 h6 I 6
square and prepares ...e7-e5, which J.e3 with the better game for White,
for the present is premature in view of the weakness of the d5
( I O ... e5?! I I lbb3 exf4 I 2 J.xf4 square, Hazai-Martinovic, Vmjacka
 Levenjish Attack 6 f4 I 07

Banja 1 984) 1 3 lLlxf4 lLle5 1 4 lLlfd5 Also seen is l2 ...l:.b8 l3 aS e6 14

lLlxd5 1 5 lLlxd5 _.d8 1 6 i.e2 i.e6 i.e3 bS 15 axb6 lLlxb6 with
1 7 i.e3 l:tc8 1 8 c3 lLlc4 with equal approximately equal chances,
chances; Hazai-Inkiov, Plovdiv Z.Almasi-Bonsch, Altensteig 1 993.
1984.

21B

(1 e4 cS 2 lLlt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 f4 lLlbd7)

7 lLlt3

12 lLlb3
After 1 2 i.e3 lLlb6 1 3 _.d3 Black
realises the main idea of his de­
fence: 13 ...lLlc4 14 .te l e5 I 5 lLlde2
exf4 16 lLlxf4 lLle5 and obtains an
excellent g_ame. Stronger is 13 e5!
dxe5 14 li)dxb5! axb5 1 5 lLlxb5
_.d7 1 6 i.xb6 l:lxa4 ! 17 _.xd7 7...i.g7
i.xd7 1 8 lLlc7 l:lc8 1 9 fxe5 lLle8, Considered a reliable continua­
though as before Black has a fire­ tion, since for the present 8 e5?!
proof position, Glek-Kupreichik, dxe5 9 fxe5 is unfavourable for
Blagoveshensk 1988. White as the complications arising
After 12 a5 e5 13 lLlde2 b5 ! 1 4 after 9 ...lLlg4 I 0 e6 fxe6 I I lLlg5
axb6 lLlxb6 Black likewise has i.xc3+ 1 2 bxc3 _.a5 1 3 _.xg4
equal chances. _.xc3+ 14 'iii>d 1 -.xa l 1 5 _.xe6
However after 1 2 lLlb3 Black has _.d4+ end in Black's favour, as in
a fully equal game. the game Fernandez Garcia­
For example, the game Anand­ Barczay, Budapest 1 978.
lvanchuk, Linares (m/6) 1 992, con­ But more often Black eiJlploys
tinued 1 2 ...lLlb6 1 3 _.e l lLlc4 14 another order of moves: 7 . . .'iic7 8
i.e2 (on 1 4 _.h4 possible is i.d3 a6 9 0-0 i.g7.
14 ...i.d7 1 5 g4 i.c6) 14 ...b6 1 5 8 i.d3
i.d3 i.b7 1 6 _.e2 l:lec8 1 7 lLld2 Hardly investigated is 8 i.c4,
lLlxd2 1 8 i.xd2 lLld7 and Black has leading, for example, after 8 ...lLlb6
the preferable position. V.lvanchuk 9 i.b3 0-0 10 i.e3 i.d7 I I ..d3
recommends 1 3 g4 e6 with a com­ i.c6 12 0-0-0 to a double-edged po­
plicated game, whereas weaker is sition, Hecht-Whiteley, Nice (ol)
13 ... i.e6?! 14 a5 lLlc4 1 5 f5 and 1 974.
White obtains the advantage. 8 ...-.c7
/08 Levenfish Attack 6f4

Here already it is necessary to exam_ple: IO 'ife2 0-0 (dangerous is

take under control the e5 square, IO ... lllc 5?! I I e5 dxe5 I2 fxe5
since, for example, on 8 ...a6?! pos­ lLlfd7 13 lLJd5 'ifc6 I4 ..tc4 lLJe6 I 5
sible is 9 e5 dxe5 I 0 fxe5 ltlg4 I I a4 lLlb6 I 6 lLlxb6 'ifxb6+ I 7 l:.t2
e6 fxe6 I 2 'ife2 'ifb6 1 3 .i.c4 ltlge5 0-0 I8 a5 and White has the advan­
I4 lLlxe5 lLlxe5 I 5 .i.b3 lLlc6 I 6 tage, A.Sokolov-Sadler, France
.i.e3 lLJd4 and here in the game I 993) I I 'iPh i (for the present pre­
Mikh.Tseitlin-Kuczynski, Polanica mature is I I e5 dxe5 I 2 dxe5 lllg4
Zdroj I989, with the move I 7 ..ta4 1 3 e6 lLlc5) I l . ..e5 ! I 2 a4 lLlc5 I 3
White forces the knight to go back, .i.c4 .i.e6 I 4 .i.xe6 lLlxe6 I 5 f5 lLlf4
obtaining the advantage. I6 .i.xf4 exf4 I 7 'ifd2 'ifb6 and
9 0-0 a6 Black holds the balance, Sax-Vera,
Rome I985.
10...0-0 11 �h1
A prophylactic retreat from the
weakened diagonal.
Sometimes I I 'ife i is played at
once, I O...b6 I 2 'ifb4 e6 (directed
against f4-f5, which, however, is not
so dangerous since it weakens the
e5 square: I 2 ... ..tb7 I 3 f5 l:.fe8 I 4
.i.h6 .i.h8 I 5 'iPh I e6 I 6 fxg6 fxg6
I 7 l:.f2 'ifc5 I 8 lLJg5 'ife5 with an
active game for Black, Kaminski­
Jaracz, Poland I 992) I3 .i.e3 .i.b7
I4 l:laei l:.ae8 I 5 .i.d4 e5 I6 fxe5
10 a4 dxe5 I 7 .i.e3 lLlh5 I 8 lLld2 lLlc5
White radically prevents the thrust with an equal game, Svidler-Lautier,
. . .b7-b5. But he need not rush with Groningen I 995
this and can prepare a break in the l l . b6 12 'ife1 .i.b7 13 'ifh4
. .

centre by I O �hi 0-0 1 1 'ife i ,

which has an effect on the flank
advance I l ...b5?! -I2 e5 ! dxe5 I 3
fxe5 lLJg4 I4 lLJd5 ! (in Black's
favour is I4 e6?! lLlc5 ! I5 'ifh4
lLlxd3 16 cxd3 .i.xe6 + Andersson­
R.Garcia, Skopje (ol) I 972)
I4 ...'ifc5 (passive is I4 ...'ifd8?! I 5
.i.g5 f6 I 6 exf6 exf6 I 7 lLle7 'iPf7?
18 .i.xf6! ..txf6 I9 lLlg5+ and White
wins, Mrva-Jirovski, Budapest (zt)
I 995) I5 .i.e4 lLldxe5 I 6 lLlxe7+
'ifxe7 I 7 .i.xa8 .i.e6 I 8 .i.e4 and
though Black has active play for the
exchange, his material deficit will 13 e5
...

still make itself felt (R.Garcia). The A standard method for this sort of
counter I I .. .e5 prevents the break in position, but worthy of study is the
the centre by radical means. For rarer I3 ... e6, not fearing I4 f5 l:.ae8
 Levenfish Attack 6 f4 1 09

1 5 .ig5. Seen here is 1 5 ...'ii'c5 1 6 In principle, matters are not

l:ab l ! (on 1 6 l:.ad1 follows changed by 1 5 .ig5 �h5 16 .ie7
16 . . .'ifb4 , since the attempt to trap .if6 1 7 .ixf6 �hxf6 1 8 'ii'h6 �g4
the queen by 1 7 .id2 'ii'xb2 1 8 e5 1 9 'ii'g5 �gf6 20 'ii'h6 �g4 2 1 'ii'g5
.ixf3 ! 19 l:a 1 �xeS 20 l:.fb 1 'ii'xa 1 �gf6 22 'ifh6 I,h-Ih Ciocaltea­
2 1 .l:ha1 .ib7 requires significant Shamkovich, Tbilisi 1 969.
material concessions, Bangiev­ 16 .ixg7 �xg7 17 �g5 �df6 18
Rashkovsky, USSR 1 975) 1 6 . . .gxf5 l:lfJ h6
1 7 exf5 e5 and Black equalises the It is useful to drive back the active
game, Anand-J.Polgar, Buenos knight at once, since after 1 8 ...'ii'e7
Aires 1 994. But V.Anand considers 19 l:.afl White threatens 20 �xh7
that 1 5 .ig5 allows 1 5 ... gxf5 !? 1 6 �xh7 2 1 l:.xf6 �g7 22 l:.xg6+ ! . The
exf5 ( 1 6 �d2 �xe4 1 7 �dxe4 fxe4 game Prasad-Tal, Subotica (izt)
1 8 �xe4 f5 ! +) 1 6 ... e5 ! , after which 1 987, continued 1 9 ... h6 20 �h3
Black has the initiative. Therefore .ic8 2 1 .ie2! and White maintained
he should possibly exchange a dangerous initiative.
beforehand by 1 5 fxg6 hxg6 1 6 M.Tal recommended 1 8 ...l:.ad8
.ig5. followed by l:d8-d4 with counter­
14 fxe5 play a_gainst the a4 and e4 pawns.
Or 14 .id2 �c5 1 5 l:.ae1 l:.ae8 1 6 19 lll h3 l:ad8
fxe5 dxe5 1 7 �g5 �cd7 1 8 l:. f3 h6 Also possible is 19 ...'ii'd6 20 l:.afl
19 �h3 ./tJh5 20 g4 �f4 2 1 �xf4 l:.ac8 2 1 g4 l:xc3 22 gxh5 l:.xd3 ! 23
exf4 22 .ixf4 �e5 and Black's pos­ cxd3 �xh5 with sufficient compen­
session of the 'eternal' blockading sation for the exchange,
square on e5, together with active V.Lepeshkin.
pieces, compensates for the sacri­ 20 :an ./tJh7 21 l:l3f2 l:ld6 22
ficed pawn, Ljubojevic-Miles, Skara �d1 l:f6 and Black repels the im­
1 980. mediate threats, Zamicki-Quinteros,
14...dxe5 15 .ih6 �h5 Argentina 1 995.
 6 : Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

(1 e4 c5 2 liJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Less effective is the attempt to

liJd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6) counter White's intentions by
6 .....tg4, since 7 f3 ..td7 8 .i.e3 lLlc6
6 g3 9 'ii'd2 .i.g7 narrows down Black's
possibilities.

White meets the fianchetto of the

f8-bishop in the same vein but with I) White could go over to a fa­
a somewhat different idea. The main vourable variation of the Rauzer I 0
thing coming out of the classical 0-0-0 0-0, looked at in detail in
variations is that White, by prevent­ book I, with the main continuation
ing the advance ... d6-d5, himself I I g4. Let's also tum our attention
strives to occupy the d5 square with to some additional possibilities after
the knight, helped by the manoeuvre I I h4:
..tfl -e2-f3. The counter-fianchetto I a) l l ...h5 1 2 .i.h6 .i.xh6 1 3
of the bishop fl enables him to 'ii'xh6 'ii'b6 1 4 lLlxc6 Wxc6 1 5 .i.b5
solve both problems. 'ii'c5 16 liJd5 �xd5 1 7 l:txd5 'ii'c7
Black, in his tum, strives to ex­ 1 8 .i.xd7 'ii'xd7 1 9 g4 and White
ploit the fl-a6 diagonal, in particu­ undermines the opponent's defence,
lar the c4 square. Likewise, when Cuijpers-Ballmann, Zug 1 987.
the opportunity arises, he utilises the l b) I I . .Jlc8 12 g4 ..txg4!? (this
move g2-g3 to carry out the ad­ sacrifice of a piece for three pawns
vance ... h7-h5-h4. is one of the defensive resources of
the Dragon; 1 2 ...lLle5 and 1 2 ... h5
Black's main continuations are: are looked at in the analysis of the
Rauzer Attack) 1 3 fxg4 ( 1 3 lLlxc6
6 lLlc6-Lines 22 and 23
... eases Black's game: 1 3 .. Jhc6 1 4
6 ..tg7-Line 24
... fxg4 lLlxg4 1 5 .i.e2?! lLlxe3 1 6
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 I l l

'ii'xe3 .i.xc3 1 7 bxc3 'ii'a5 and Black 7 lDde2

develops an initiative, obtaining suf­ The continuation 7 .i.g2 is exam­
ficient material equivalent for the ined in Line 23.
piece, Schlosser-Rigo, Dortmund The main directions of play for
1987; stronger was 1 5 lDd5) Black are linked to the moves:
13 ...lDxg4 14 lDde2 ! lDce5 1 5 b3
and White's chances are superior. 22A: 7 ....i.g7
2) The game turns out positively 22B: 7....i.d7
for White also after 10 g4: 22B: 7...b6
2a) 10 ... h5 I I g5 lDh7 1 2 f4 and
White has a space advantage, also Rarer continuations are:
presenting interest is 1 2 .i.c4 lDxg5 I ) 7 ...b5?! 8 .i.g2 b4 9 lDd5 lDxd5
1 3 0-0-0 lDxd4 14 .i.xd4 .i.xd4 1 5 1 0 exd5 lDe5 I I f4 lDd7 1 2 'ii'd4
'ii'xd4 l:.ffl 1 6 f4 with decisive com­ lDf6 1 3 'ii'b4 with an extra pawn for
pensation for the pawn, Cocozza­ White, Zsu.Polgar-Chiarelli, USA
Rigo, Rome 1984. 1 998.
2b) 10 ... 0-0 1 1 h4 h5 1 2 gxh5 2) 7 ... .l:tb8 8 .i.g2 (8 a4!?) 8 ... b5 9
lDxh5 13 0-0-0 1i'a5 14 .l:tg l with a 0-0 .i.g7 1 0 lDd5 lDd7 I I c3 a5 1 2
promising position for White, lDd4 li:)xd4 1 3 cxd4 e6 1 4 lDf4 b4
Svidler-Solozhenkin, Leningrad (also worth considering is 14 ... 0-0
1 990. followed by ... .i.c8-b7 and
. .. 1i'd8-b6) 1 5 .i.e3 .i.a6 1 6 :e 1 0-0
Line 22 1 7 'ii'd2 li:)b6 1 8 b3 li:)c8 and Black,
intending the manoeuvre
(1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ...lDa7-b5-c3, stands no worse,
lDxd4 lDf6 5 lDcJ g6 6 gJ) Lutz-Topalov, Cap d'Agde 1 994.
3) 7 ....i.g4 8 .i.g2 1i'c8 9 h3 .i.d7
6...lDc6 leads to the structure in 22B, but
with an extra tempo for White.

22A
(1 e4 c5 2 ll:)f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lDxd4 li:)f6 5 lt:)cJ g6 6 gJ li:)c6 7
lDde2)
7....i.g7

Played with the intention of driv­

ing away as quickly as possible the
knight from d4 or exchanging it, in
order to lure the white queen to the
centre and thereby gain time for de­
velopment. White cannot reply 7
.i.e3 because of 7 ... lDg4.
1 12 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

8 .ig2 0-0 I 0 tt:lf4 (insufficient is 1 0 tt:ld5

On 8 ... l:b8 White can choose a because of 10 . . . .ixd5 I I exd5 tt:le5
plan with queenside castling: 9 b3 !? 1 2 h3 'ifc7 followed by ...tt:le5-c4)
(9 a4 a6 is looked at below) 9 . . .b5 10 ....ic4 I I l:.e i e5 1 2 tt:lfd5 tt:lxd5
10 .ib2 0-0 1 1 'ifd2 t:Lle5 12 f4 I 3 tt:lxd5 f5 I4 b3 .ia6 1 5 .ia3 f4
tt::led7 1 3 0-0-0 .ib7 14 t:Lld5 aS 1 5 1 6 c3 'ifd7 1 7 tt:lb4 tt:lxb4 I S .ixb4
l:.he 1 t:Llxd5 1 6 exd5 .ixb2+ 1 7 .:.adS 1 9 'ifd5+ �h8 20 c4 with a
�xb2 b4 1 8 llld4 with a space ad­ positional advantage for White,
vantage for White, whereas Black's Svidler-Borge, Copenhagen I 99 1 .
counterattacking resources are cur­
tailed, Topalov-Shirov, Las Palmas 22Aa
1 994.
9 0-0 (1 e4 cS 2 tt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
After 9 h3, with the idea on tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 g6 6 g3 tt:lc6 7
9 ....id7 IO 0-0 'ifc8 to have the pos­ tt:lde2 .ig7 8 .ig2 0-0 9 0-0)
sibility 1 1 �h2, Black can go over
to the thrust ... b7-b5: 9 ...l:b8 1 0 a4 9 J:tb8
..

a6 I I .ie3 (more accurate is 1 1

tt:ld5, retaining after l l . ..b5 1 2 axb5
axb5 the choice between 1 3 .ie3
and 1 3 .ig? , when on 1 3 . . . tt:ld7
good is 1 4 'tfc l ! ;!;) l l ...b5 12 axb5
axb5 1 3 tt:ld5 b4 (or 1 3 . . .tt:ld7 1 4
tt::ld4 tt:lxd4 1 5 .ixd4 .ixd4 16
'ifxd4 .ib7 1 7 tt:lb4! �6 18 'ifxb6
tt:lxb6 1 9 0-0 ;!; Matulovic-Relange,
Sabac 1998) 14 tt:ld4 tt:lxd4 1 5
.ixd4 tt:lxd5 1 6 exd5 .ixd4 1 7
'ifxd4 .if5 and Black maintains the
balance, Matulovic-Zontakh, Sabac
1 998. Black removes his rook from the
Black's future plans are linked to X-Ray of the bishop on g2 and pre­
the continuations: pares the advance of his b-pawn.
10 a4
22Aa: 9 l:.b8
... In preventing Black's intended
22Ab: 9 .id7
... plan, White prepares the opening of
the a-file, after which his queen's
9 ...'ifa5 does not prevent White's rook will be 'developed' without
elanned manoeuvre: 1 0 h3 'ifb5 I I moving from its starting position.
lL!d5 tt:lxd5 1 2 exd5 tt:la5 I 3 tt:ld4! ? On other continuations Black car­
.ixh3 1 4 'ifxh5 gxh5 1 5 .ixh3 ries out ...b7-b5 without difficulty
.ixd4 I6 l:e 1 and the activity of and maintains the balance.
White's pair of bishops compen­ I) 1 0 b3 b5 I I l:b 1 b4 1 2 tt:ld5
sates for the sacrificed pawn, .ia6! I 3 .ib2 t:Lld7 I4 .ixg7 �g7
Balashov-Dvoiris, Smolensk 1 99 I . 1 5 c4 bxc3 1 6 l:e I tt:lc5 I 7 tt:lexc3
After 9. . ..ie6 White likewise suc­ tt:ld3 and Black is in firm possession
cessfully struggles for the occupa­ of the initiative, Condie­
tion of the d5 square: Kir.Georgiev, Dubai (ol) I 986.
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 1 1 3

2) 10 h3 b5 1 1 lLld5 iDd7 1 2 c3 e6 cxd4 lLlc6 1 7 e 5 e6 1 8 lLlf6+ .ixf6

1 3 liJb4 lLlxb4 14 cxb4 lLlb6 1 5 lLlc3 1 9 exf6 leads to unclear play,
d5 16 exd5 lLlxd5 17 'ifb3 lLlxc3 1 8 Modiahki-Sulaiti, Dubai 1 996, but
bxc3 .ib7 = V.Salov-Serper, New perhaps 1 8 lLle3 is more promising)
York 1 996. 1 5 ...lLlc6 1 6 'ii'e2 b4 1 7 .id2 bxc3
10... a6 1 8 .ixc3 .ixc3 1 9 bxc3 .ie6 20 c4
Passive is 1 0 ... b6?! 1 1 l:.e 1 .ib7 .ixd5 2 1 cxd5 lLld4 with an even
1 2 h3 lLlb4?! (really it is better to game, Milu-Marin, Bucharest 1 996.
return to the plan of preparing 12 axb5 axb5
...b6-b5 by 1 2 . . .a6 1 3 .ie3 lLla7) 1 3
lLld5 lLlbxd5 14 exd5 ikc7 1 5 l:.a3 !
ltfe8 16 lte3 with unpleasant pres­
sure on the e7 pawn, Kir.Georgiev­
Shirov, Pardubice 1994.
The main directions are play are:

22Aa1 : 1 1 iDdS
22Aa2: 1 1 h3

22Aa1

(1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 ltJf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 g3 lLlc6 7 13 .igS
lLlde2 .ig7 8 .ig2 0-0 9 0-0 l:.b8 10 This looks the most active. Let's
a4 a6) also examine other continuations:
1 ) 1 3 .ie3 b4 14 l:.a2 ( 1 4 lLld4
1 1 lLld5 leads to mass exchanges: 14 ...lLlxd4
1 5 .ixd4 lLlxd5 1 6 exd5 .ixd4 1 7
'ii'xd4 .if5 1 8 .ie4 .ixe4 1 9 'ii'xe4
'ii'd7 and Black maintains the bal­
ance, Atlas-Zontakh, Europa Cup,
Eupen 1 999) 14 ...lLlg4 1 5 .ig5 h6
16 .ic l e6 1 7 lLle3 b3 1 8 cxb3
lLlge5 19 .id2 'ifb6 and Black's ini­
tiative fully compensates for the
sacrificed pawn, lvanchuk-Kramnik,
Horgen 1 995.
2) 13 c3 b4 (V.Mikhalevski ana­
lysed 1 3 ...lLld7 14 lLld4 with the
possible branches: 14 ...lLlde5 1 5
l l ...b5 ttJxc6 lLlxc6 1 6 'ii'e2 e6 1 7 lLlb4
Sometimes the knight makes a lLlxb4 1 8 cxb4 .ib7 1 9 l:.d l 'ii'c7 20
preliminary retreat: 1 1 ...lLld7 1 2 c3 .if4 ltfd8 2 1 l:.ac l 'ii'e7 = and
(also worth considering is 1 2 ltb 1 14 ...lLlxd4 1 5 cxd4 .ib7 1 6 lLlb4
b5 1 3 axb5 axb5 1 4 b3 with the idea lta8 1 7 .ie3 ltxa l 1 8 'ii'x al 'ifb6 1 9
of exchanging the darK-squared 'ii'd 1 'ii'a5 2 0 ikd2 ltc8 ) 14 lLlxf6+
=

bishoes) 1 2 ...b5 1 3 axb5 axb5 1 4 (upon the exchange of the cavalry

lLld4 ttJde5 1 5 lLlc6 ( 1 5 f4 ltJxd4 1 6 14 lLld4 lLlxd4 1 5 ltJxf6+ Black
1 1 4 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

eliminates the e4 pawn-1 5 . . . exf6! while Black has counterplay on the

1 6 cxd4 f5 ! :j: Kopylov-Nesis, corr. queen's flank.
1 992) 14 ... ..txf6 1 5 lt::lxd4 lt::le 5 1 6 In the game A.Ivanov-Emst,
f4 ..tg4 1 7 1Wc 2 lt::lc4 1 8 f5 'iVb6 Gausdal 1 99 1 , after 1 5 .l:f.d 1 lt::lc5 16
with double-edged play, Shevelev­ ..th6 ..th8 White made an unsuc­
Mikhalevski, Israel (ch) 1 999. cessful exchange sacrifice: 1 7 b4?!
3) 13 h3 b4 14 ..te3 lt::ld7 15 1ic1 ..txa1 1 8 1ixa1 lt::le6 1 9 lt::ldf4 lt::le 5!
(in Black's favour is 15 lt::ld4? and landed in a difficult position .
..txd4 ! 1 6 ..txd4 e6 1 7 lt::le3 e5 +) White chose a more flexible
1 5 ... e6! 1 6 lt::ldf4 ike? 1 7 .:a2 lt::lf6 startegy in the game Gi.Hemandez­
(on 1 7 . . . lt::lde5 1 8 lt::ld3 lt::lc4 possible Serper, Chicago 1 997: 15 h3 ..tb7
is 1 9 ..th6) 1 8 lt::ld3 .:d8 19 c4! ..tb7 16 .l:f.d1 1ic8 17 ..th6 ..th8 18 ..te3
20 b3 lt::ld7 (more active is ..ta8 19 c3! and White's chances
20... lt::la5 !) 2 1 .:d 1 ;!; Malakhov­ looked preferable.
Svidler, Russia (ch) 1 997.
13 ...lt::ld7 22Aa2
Also worth considering is
13 ...lt::lg4 14 c3 h6 1 5 ..td2 lt::lge5 1 6 (1 e4 c5 2 lt::\0 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lt::ld4 lt::lxd4 1 7 cxd4 lt::lc6 1 8 ..te3 e5 lt::lxd4 lt::lf6 5 lt::lc3 g6 6 g3 lt::lc6 7
19 dxe5 dxe5 20 ..tc5 .:e8 and lt::lde2 ..tg7 8 ..tg2 0-0 9 0-0 .l:tb8 10
though White' s chances look prefer­ a4 a6)
able, it is not easy to breach Black's
position which does not have any l l h3 b5 1 2 axb5 axb5
weaknesses, Marinkovic-Djuric,
Vmjacka Banja 1 996.
14 1Wcl
In the game Gi.Hemandez-Serper,
Chicago 1 997, was played 1 4 .:a2
h6 1 5 ..td2 ..tb7 1 6 ..tc3 lt::lde5 1 7
b3 e6 1 8 lt::lb4 'iVb6 1 9 1id2 .:fd8
with an equal game for Black.
14...:e8

l3 ..te3
A logical consequence of the
move 1 1 h3-White places his
pieces harmoniously in the centre.
In this same structure White can
also play first 1 3 ..tg5 h6 14 ..te3.
The thrust 13 lt::ld5 in this situa­
tion is less logical since White
spends time on the modest move 1 1
A position of dynamic equality h3. A possible development of
has arisen: White is in possession of events is 13 ...lt::ld7 14 .l:ta2 (on 14 c3
the a-file and controls the centre, good is 1 4 ... b4; there was weaker
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 1 15

play in the game Gufeld-Shahade, 22Ab

I998: I4 ... lLlb6?! I S ll::lxb6 _.xb6
and White obtained an important (1 e4 c5 2 lLlfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
tempo for development: I 6 �e3 ll::lxd4 lLlf6 5 ll::lc3 g6 6 g3 lLlc6 7
_.d8 I 7 lLld4 ;!;) I 4 ...ll::lc 5 (also pos­ ll::lde2 �g7 8 �g2 0-0 9 0-0)
sible is I4 ... e6 I S lbdf4 _.c7 1 6
�d2 lLlcS I 7 ll::lc I �b7 1 8 ll::lcd3 9.. �d7
.

l:ta8 T.Horvath-Kir.Georgiev,
Lvov I 984) I S �g5 h6 I6 �d2 b4
I 7 b3 �a6 I 8 l:.e 1 e6 I9 lLldf4 _.c7
20 �e3 l:tfd8 with an even game,
Goetz-Jirovsky, Germany I999.
13 ... b4
In the game Van der Wiel­
Reinderman, Holland (ch) 1 999,
Black played an immediate
I3 ...ll::ld7 and after I4 lLld4 �xd4 I S
�xd4 b4 I 6 ll::le2 ll::lxd4 I 7 lbxd4
'ii'b6 I 8 _.d2 lLleS I 9 l:fd 1 �d7 20
b3 l:.fc8 obtained full equality.
14 lLld5 lLld7 Without glVlng up the plan of
As in variation 22Aa I Black has counterattack on the queen's flank,
an effective influence on the Black continues his development
queen's flank. Let's look at the pos­ since White is practically forced to
sible continuations. prevent the threat to exchange the
I ) 1 5 lLld4 �xd4 I6 �xd4 e6 1 7 light-squared bishops after
ll::le3 e5 with an active game for .....d8-c8.
Black, Stojanov-V.Georgiev, Bul­ 10 h3
garia (ch) I999. After I 0 lDdS lLlxdS 1 I exd5 lLleS
2) I S l:ta2 e6 I 6 lLldf4 b3 ! (thanks I 2 lLld4 'ii'b6 1 3 c3· l:ac8 I4 'We2
to the pawn sacrifice Black brings l:fe8 I S l:d 1 aS ! , thanks to the
his pieces to active positions: 1 7 threat of ...lbe5-c4 Black's chances
cxb3 ll::lb4 I 8 l:la I �xb2 I 9 l:b I are preferable, Tai-Gufeld, USSR
�e5 20 lLld3 ll::lxd3 2 I _.xd3 lLlcS I 974.
22 'ii'c2 �a6 and Black has more Here Black's plans are linked to
than sufficient compensation, the continuations:
Marinkovic-Kovacevic, Yugoslavia
I 997. 22Ab 1 : 10 ... l:c8
3) 15 'ii'c i lLldeS I 6 �h6 (after I6 22Ab2: 10 ... a6
b3?! e6 I7 lLldf4 his concentration
of forces on the c I-h6 diagonal is 22Ab1
reduced and after I7 ... �b7 1 8 l:d i
_.c7 Black's chances are preferable, (1 e4 c5 2 lLlfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Payen-Rigo, Paris 1 995) I 6... �xh6 ll::lxd4 lLlf6 5 ll::lc3 g6 6 g3 ll::lc6 7
I7 'Wxh6 when Black could play ll::lde2 �g7 8 �g2 0-0 9 0-0 �d7
I7 ... b3 or I 7 ...ll::lc4 I 8 b3 lLl4e5 I 9 10 h3}
f4 (not I 9 _.d2? because o f I 9 ...
�xh3 ! ) with unclear consequences. 10...ltc8
1 1 6 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

b2-b3 and c2-c4, which makes pos­

sible 1 3 ...'ilb6 14 l:ta2! e6 (or
14 ...'ilc5 1 5 b3 �f5 1 6 c4 �d3 1 7
�e3 'ii'c7 1 8 f4 �xe2 1 9 'ilxe2
tLld7 20 a5 ± Ostojic-Los, Belgrade
GMA 1 988) 1 5 �e3 'ilc7 16 b3
exd5 1 7 ttlf4 and White occupies
the weak d5 square, obtaining the
advantage, Marinkovic-Mednis,
Amsterdam 1987. On 13 . . .ttlc4 also
good is 14 l:la2! with the threat of
b2-b3 and c2-c4.
A traditional plan to exert 14 ttld4
pressure on the c-file with a drift to­ After 14 c3 b5 15 f4 ttlc4 16 axb5
wards occupation of the c4 square. �xb5 1 7 'i&;lh2 'ilb6 and Black has
1 1 tLldS the Imhahve, Speelman-Peters,
A typical raid for the present type Hastings 1 980/8 1 .
of position: after the exchange of Furthermore, in the game Jansa­
knights White fixes the Dragon De Firmian, Vmjacka Banja 1 983,
pawn chain. But we should look followed 1 4 ... 'ii'c5 15 c3 a6 16 :te l
also at the development of the sec­ l:lfe8 and here White could retain
ond bishop: the rather better chances with the
1) 1 1 �e3 ttla5 12 b3 b5 13 l:lc l move 1 7 l:le2.
'ilc7 14 'ii'd2 l:tfd8 1 5 ttld5 ttlxd5
16 exd5 e5 1 7 dxe6 fxe6 with
chances for both sides, Rotstein­ 22Ab2
Kachur, Lvov 1 995.
2) 1 1 �g5 ttle5 12 a4 h6 13 �e3 (1 e4 cS 2 ttlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
ttlc4 14 �cl a6 1 5 b3 ttla5 1 6 �e3 ttlxd4 ttlf6 5 ttlc3 g6 6 g3 ttlc6 7
b5 17 axb5 axb5 1 8 lla2 ttlc6 1 9 ttlde2 �g7 8 �g2 0-0 9 0-0 �d7
'ild2 ttlb4 2 0 l:laa 1 ;t Cioara­ 10 h3)
Contempi, Italy 1 999.
1 1 . ..ttlxd5 10...a6
The influence of the centralised
knight is too great to delay this
exchange. In the event of l l ...ttle5
12 a4 (after 1 2 ttlef4 ttlxd5 1 3 exd5
'ilb6 14 c3 l:lfe8 1 5 l:le l 'ila6 it is
easier to defend, Boleslavsky­
Polugaevsky, USSR (ch) 1 956)
1 2 ... lDe8 1 3 l:la2 e6 14 ttle3 ttlc6 1 5
�d2 f5 1 6 exf5 gxf5 1 7 c4 and by
restricting Black's "small centre",
White has the preferable game,
Mestel-Silva, Malta (ol) 1 980.
12 exdS tLleS 13 a4 'ilc7
By attacking the c2 pawn, Black Black pursues a plan of a pawn
prevents the clamp on the centre by counterattack on the queen's flank
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 1 1 7

along the lines of variation 22Aa. 'il'xc2 2 I l:txe7 .i.f6 2 2 l:te3 .i.xb2
Together with this the developing with a good game for Black.
move ... .i.c8-d7 cannot be consid­ 14...b4
ered a loss of time. On I 4 ... tLle8 good is I 5 tLld4 e6
1 1 a4 (here the advance I 5 . . .b4 only cre­
Also seen is 1 1 tLld5 tLlxd5 1 2 ates problems for Black: I 6 'iVd2 b3
exd5 tLle5 l 3 c3 'il'c8 1 4 'ifi>h2 .i.b5 I 7 c3 tLlc7 I 8 tLlxc6 .i.xc6 19 l:ta7
1 5 a4 .i.c4 1 6 .i.e3 with rather bet­ tLlxd5 20 exd5 .i.b5 2 I l:.e I l:te8 22
ter prospects for White, Pripis­ .i.g5, riveting him to the defence of
Beliavsky, USSR 1 978. the weak pawns on e7 and b3,
ll ..J:tb8 12 tLld5 Marinkovic-Vuruna, Belgrade GMA
The continuation 1 2 .i.e3 b5 1 3 1 988) I6 tLlxc6 .i.xc6 I 7 tLlb4 .i.b7
axb5 axb5 14 tLld5 usually leads to I 8 c3 and White, controlling the
a simple transposition of moves. weak squares on the queen's flank,
1 2...b5 has the preferable position, Jansa­
The drawback of an early defining Jakobsen, Esbjerg I98 I .
of the position of the knight by The exchanging operation
1 2 ...tLla5 was revealed in the game 14 ... e6?! 1 5 tLlxf6+ .i.xf6 16 'il'xd6
Geller-Parma, Malta (ol) 1 980, .i.xb2 I 7 l:tad1 l:tb7 I 8 c3! places
which continued 13 l:ta2 ! lL!xd5 1 4 the dark-squared bishop in a danger­
exd5 'iVc7 1 5 b 3 b 5 1 6 axb5 axb5 ous position, Atlas-Fieish, Roslavl
17 i.e3 l:ta8 1 8 .i.d4 tLlb7 19 J:xa8 I 989.
l:txa8 20 .i.xg7 'it>xg7 when there is 15 .l:ta2 tLle8 16 .i.g5 h6 17 .i.d2
the fine manoeuvre 2 1 'il'd4+! 'it>g8 e6 18 tLle3 tLlc7 with roughly equal
22 'iVd2 and White can get the better chances, Smirin-Pigusov, Podolsk
game. I 990.
13 axb5 axb5 14 .i.e3
White takes under control the
periphery of Black's queen's flank, 22B
since the exchange 14 ...tLlxd5?! 1 5
exd5 creates additional problems (1 e4 c5 2 tLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
associated with the emergence of a tLlxd4 tLlf6 5 lL!c3 g6 6 g3 tLlc6 7
weak c6 square. On the other hand, tLlde2)
upon other continuations this ex­
change is possible: 7....i.d7
1) I4 .i.g5 tLlxd5 I 5 exd5 tLle5
and now after I6 tLld4 h6 I7 .i.e I
'iVb6 I 8 c3 b4 Black takes over the
initiative, Soltis-Donaldson, Lone
Pine 1 98 1 .
2) I 4 l:te 1 tLlxd5 I 5 exd5 tLle5
and Black has a promising position.
For example, in the game Rivera­
Campos Moreno, Madrid I 993, af­
ter I 6 J:a7 a favourable exchanging
operation becomes possible:
I6 ...'iVc8 17 ..tih2 .i.xh3 I 8 .i.xh3
tL!f3+ I9 'it>g2 ltJxe I+ 20 'iVxe I
1 18 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

Black does not hurry with castling are preferable, Waitzkin-Moskow,

and, by threatening an exchange of New York 1993.
light-squared bishops, counts on 9 .i.g7
...

preventing the white king castling Here the most often employed
kingside. continuations by White are:
8 .i.g2 _.c8 9 h3
The same problem, as it were, is 22Ba: 10 a4
solved also by 9 lLlf4, but after 22Bb: 10 .i.eJ
9 . . . .i.g7 1 0 0-0 0-0 it is not easy for 22Bc: 10 b3
White to make a choice: after 1 1
lLlcd5 lLlxd5 1 2 exd5 lLle5 there is Also seen is the manoeuvre 1 0 g4
the threat of ... .i.d7-g4, on 1 1 l:r.e 1 0-0 1 1 lLlg3 llb8 1 2 a4 lLlb4 1 3 .i.e3
l:r.e8 1 2 a4 likewise bad is 1 2 . . .lLle5, b6 14 0-0 l:r.d8 1 5 f4 .i.xg4! ? 1 6
while on 1 1 .i.e3 follows 1 1 ...lLlg4. hxg4 lLlxg4 1 7 .i.f2 lLlxf2 1 8 llxf2
In the game Ostojic-Rechlis, Berlin .i.xc3 19 bxc3 _.xc3 and Black's
1 987, was played 1 1 .i.d2 l:r.e8 1 2 three pawns fully compensate for
a4 lLld4?! (worth considering i s 1 2 the sacrificed piece, Zecevic­
a4 .i.g4 1 3 f3 .i.e6 14 .i.e3 lLle5) 1 3 Jovicic, Yugoslavia 1 986 .
.i.e3 llJe6 14 lLlfd5 lLlxd5 1 5 exd5
lLlc5 16 .i.d4 and White retains
some initiative. 22Ba
However, is the manoeuvre
... .i.d7-h3 so unpleasant? Thus (1 e4 c5 2 lLlt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
M.Matulovic quite successfully lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlcJ g6 6 gJ lLlc6 7
advocated the continuation 9 b3, lLlde2 .i.d7 8 .i.g2 _.c8 9 h3 .i.g7)
ignoring the threat of . . . .i.d7-h3
because then he can exploit an 10 a4
exchange of bishops on h3 to gain a
tempo in the struggle for the d5
square by lLle2-f4, while White
solves the problem of the weaken­
ing of his king's flank by castling
queenside: 9 ....i.g7 1 0 .i.b2 0-0 1 1
'Wd2 .i.h3 1 2 .i.xh3 _.xh3 1 3 0-0-0
l::tfd8 (or 1 3 ...l:r.fc8 14 �b 1 b5 1 5
lLlf4 _.d7 1 6 lLlfd5 _.e6 1 7 f3 l:r.ab8
1 8 lLle2 and White's chances are
preferable, Matulovic-Velimirovic,
Vmjacka Banja 1 99 1 , M.Matulovic
recommended 14 . ....g2 1 5 lLlf4
•n 16 l:r.he 1 .i.h6 with complex White prevents the thrust . . .b7-b5.
t�lay) 14 lLlf4 _.c8 (or 14 .....d7 1 5 1 o 0-0 1 1 .i.e3
...

llJfd5 l:tac8 16 lLlxf6+ .i.xf6 1 7 lLld5 Also deserving attention is 1 1

.i.xb2+ 18 �xb2 _.e8 19 g4 _.ffl 20 lLld5 !?.
g5 with advantage to White, l l l:r.d8
...

Matulovic-A.Kovacevic, Bukovicke Black prepares the advance

Banja 1 993) 1 5 �b1 e6 16 h4 b5 1 7 ...d6-d5.
_.e2 a6 1 8 h5 and White's chances 12 _.d2 lLlb4 13 l::t c 1 .i.c6
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 1 1 9

Also seen is 1 3 ... a5 14 lL!d4 e6 1 5 On 1 1 'iid2 likewise possible is

b3 l:ta6 1 6 g4 i.c6 1 7 0-0 e5 with 1 l ...b5 12 l:tc 1 'iia6 13 b3 b4 1 4
approximately equal chances, Short­ lL!d5 'Wxa2 1 5 lL!xb4 lL!xb4 1 6
Mestel, Hastings 1 982. 'Wxb4 'iia6 1 7 'Wd2 'Wc8 1 8 c4 i.c6
Not good is 13 ... h5 14 b3 e5 1 5 1 9 f3 a5 20 0-0 lL!d7 with approxi­
lL!b5 ( 1 5 'Wxd6? i.xh3) 1 5 . . .lL!c6 1 6 mately equal chances, Kagan­
c4 and White underlines the weak­ Velimirovic, Rio de Janeiro (izt)
ness of the d6 pawn, Short-Watson, 1 979
Brighton 1982. 1 1 ...l:td8
14 0-0 d5 15 e5 d4 16 i.xd4 Also seen is 1 l .. .b5 12 b3 l:tb8 1 3
i.xg2 17 'itxg2 lL!c6 and here in the 'Wd2 a 5 (worth considering is
game Rechlis-Rachels, Manila (izt) 13 ...'Wa6! ? with the threat of b5-b4)
1990, White obtained the advantage 14 lL!d5 lL!xd5 1 5 exd5 lL!b4 1 6 c3
with the move 1 8 f4 ! . lL!a6 1 7 h4 h5 1 8 0-0 lL!c5 19 lL!d4
and White, by controlling the cen­
22Bb tre, has the preferable position,
Abramovic-Petursson, New York
(1 e4 c5 2 lL!f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 986.
lL!xd4 lL!f6 5 lL!c3 _g6 6 g3 lL!c6 7 12 b3
lL!de2 i.d7 8 i.g2 'ifc8 9 h3 i.g7) Worth considering is 1 2 'Wd2 !?.
12 ...d5!
10 i.e3 A decisive counterblow, based on
the shadowing of the queen by the
rook. This move is also played after
preparation: 1 2 ...e6 1 3 0-0 d5 !? 1 4
exd5 exd5 1 5 'it>h2 i.e6 1 6 lL!d4
'iic7 1 7 lL!ce2 lL!e4 with sufficient
counterplay for Black, Marinkovic­
Velimirovic, Vmjacka Banja 1 99 1 .
1 3 exd5
After 1 3 lL!xd5 lL!xd5 14 exd5
lL!b4 (upon 1 2 'Wd2!? this move
would not be possible) 1 5 c3 lL!xd5
16 i.xd5 i.c6 1 7 c4 e6 Black wins
back the piece with a good game.
This looks the most harmonious 13 ... lL!b4 14 i.d2
development but it allows the thrust No help is 14 i.g5 i.e6 1 5 i.xf6
...b7-b5, tactically based on the un­ i.xf6 16 'Wd2 i.xd5 ! and Black
defended b2 pawn. wins back the pawn. On 14 i.d4
10 ...0-0 follows 14 ...lL!bxd5.
Worth considering is 1 0...b5. For 14 e6 1 5 0-0 lL!bxd5 16 lL!xd5
•..

example: 1 1 l:tc 1 b4 1 2 lL!d5 lL!xd5 exd5

13 exd5 lL!e5 14 b3 i.b5 1 5 0-0 Also good is 16 ...lL!xd5 1 7 c4
'iia6 16 l:le 1 i.xe2 1 7 'Wxe2 'Wxe2 lL!f6.
1 8 l:txe2 a5 transferring to an equal 17 lL!f4 i.c6 18 i.a5 b6 19 i.b4
ending, Marinkovic-Jovicic, Bel­ lL!e4 and Black equalises the game,
grade 199 1 . Marinkovic-Golubev, Belgrade
1 1 l:lcl 1 99 1 .
120 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

22Bc Markovic, Belgrade 1996, Black

should have played 1 8 ...b4 ! .
(1 e4 cS 2 lbt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 1 �b2 aS
lbxd4 ltJf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 g3 lbc6 7 Also seen is 1 l . ..lbe8 1 2 'ii'd2 ( 1 2
ltJde2 �d7 8 �g2 'ii'c8 9 h3 �g7) 'ii'c 1 lbc7 1 3 a3 e6 1 4 f4 :es 1 5
'ii'd2 d5 1 6 e5 b5 = Lepelletier­
10 b3 Koch, Narbonne 1 997) 1 2 ...b5 1 3
0-0-0 'ii'a6 1 4 �b 1 e6 1 5 f4 l:td8
with roughly equal chances, Palac­
Koch, Cannes 1 995.
1 2 a3
He does not succeed in exploiting
the weakening of the b6 square: 1 2
lba4, apart from 1 2. . .l:ta6 13 c4
lba7 1 4 lbac3 b5 with counterplay,
Black could try to exploit White's
delay in castling-12 ...lbb4 ! ? with
the idea of 1 3 lbb6 'ii'xc2 14 �xf6
�xf6 1 5 lbxd7 �xc3+! 16 lbxc3
ltJd3+ and Black wins the queen
Black carries out a plan with the (V.Salov).
fianchettoing of the second bishop. 12 ...l:ta6 13 :b1 lba7 14 ltJf4
10...0-0 :e8! 15 ltJcdS ltJxdS 16 ltJxdS
An interesting idea of Matulovic �xb2 17 :xb2 a4! 18 bxa4 ( 1 8 b4
is 10 ... h5 (it should be mentioned 'ii'c4 ) 18 ... lbc6! and Black main­
=

that M.Matulovic employed this tains the balance, Salov-lvanchuk,

thrust in reply to 7 ltJge2-7...h5, Buenos Aires 1 994.
practically forcing 8 h3, which after
8 ...�d7 9 �g2 'ii'c8 10 b3 leads to a
22B
transposition of moves) 1 1 �b2 0-0
1 2 'ii'd2 aS 1 3 0-0-0 b5 (in the game
(1 e4 cS 2 lbt3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Matulovic-Velimirovic, Yugoslavia
lbxd4 ltJf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 g3 lbc6 7
(ch) 1 988, Black offered a sacrifice
ltJde2)
of the exchange- 1 3 ...a4 and on the
refusal l 4 ltJd5? axb3 1 5 axb3 l:ta2!
7...b6
took over the initiative but, as
pointed out by Matulovic himself, it
is still worth accepting the sacrifice
14 ltJa4 :xa4 1 5 bxa4 'ii'a8 1 6 ltJc3
lba5 1 7 �fl :c8 1 8 �b1 ;!;) 1 4
lbd5 a4 1 5 lbb6 (in the case o f 1 5
lbxf6+ �xf6 1 6 �xf6 exf6 1 7
'ii'xd6 Black has sufficient counter­
etay: 1 7 ... axb3 1 8 axb3 �e6 1 9
lDc3 :d8 20 'ii'c5 lbd4 2 1 'ifxc8
:axeS = I.Markovic) 1 5 ...'ii'a6 1 6
lbxa8 :xa8 1 7 lbc3 axb3 1 8 cxb3
and here in the game Matulovic-
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 121

Black intends to exploit the fl-a6 At one time this move was not in
diagonal. theory's good books since it allows
8 i..g2 i.. a6 9 0-0 i..g7 10 h3 0-0 the deflection of the queen to the
On I 0 . . .lieS possible is I I i..g5 exposed d4 square, which enables
lLld7 I 2 l:r.e i h6 ( I 2 ... 0-0 leads to a Black to gain tempi for the develop­
eosition looked at below) I 3 i..e3 ment of his pieces. However in re­
lDa5 I4 i..d4 ;t (A.Yermolinsky). cent years White has found ways to
II i..gS l:lc8 place his pieces actively.
Also seen is I l . ..h6 I 2 i.. e3 lLld7 7...lL!xd4
I3 lle i lieS I4 'ii'd2 (or I4 l:r.b i The consistent reply, but also pos­
�h7 I 5 a4 with unclear play, sible is 7 ...i..d7 S h3 i..g7 9 i.. e3
Kudrin-Thorsteinsson, Reykjavik 0-0 I 0 'ifd2 l:r.cS I I 0-0 lL!xd4 I 2
I9S6) I 4 ...�h7 I 5 l:r.adi lL!c5 I 6 b3 i..xd4 l:r.c4 ! ?, striving to attack the
i..b7 I 7 g4 e5 I S f4! ;t as played in c2 pawn and preventing the knight
Yermolinsky-Smirin, Erevan (ol) jump to d5 with good prospects in
I 996. the forthcoming struggle. For
12 l:r.e1 lL!d7 13 l:r.b1 lLlde5 14 b3 example, in the game Salov-Anand,
fS l 5 lLlf4 Buenos Aires I 994, White became
G.Kaidanov recommends I 5 exf5 "violent" by I 3 'ifd3 'ifcS (on
l:lxf5 I6 f4 lLlf7 I 7 g4 i..xe2 I S 1 3 ...i..e6 possible is I4 lLle2 !) I 4
lLlxe2 l:r.c5 I 9 i..h4 d5 2 0 f5 with i..x f6?! i..x f6 I 5 lL!d5 llxc2 I 6
sharp play. lLlxf6+ exf6 I 7 'ifxd6 llc6!
15 ...'ifd7 16 exf5 Wxf5 17 h4 ( I 7 ....i.e6 I S 'ifd4 =) I S 'ifd4 i..xh3
'it>h8 18 i..e4 'ii'd7 19 h5 l:r.f5! 20 I9 i..xh3 'ifxh3 20 'ii'xa7 l:r.eS and
i..xf5 'ifxf5 21 h6 i..f8 22 lLle4 i..b7 landed in a difficult position. More
23 f3 lLlb4 with sharp play, reliable was the knight retreat 1 3
Kaidanov-Shabalov, Philadelphia lL!e2, intending b2-b3 and c2-c4. An
I 997. alternative worth considering is I 3
e5 !? with the idea of I 3 ...lDeS I 4
Line 23 'ifd3 .
8 'ifxd4 i..g7
(1 e4 cS 2 lL!f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lL!xd4 lLlf6 5 lL!c3 g6 6 g3 lL!c6)

7 i..g2

9 0-0
It is useful to become acquainted
with other continuations:
122 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

I ) 9 .i.g5 0-0 I O 'ji'd2 .i.e6 I I 0-0 23A: 10 h3

I a) I I . . .'ifb6 I 2 a4 .l:.ac8 1 3 lL!b5 23B: 10 -..,4
a6 I4 .i.e3 'ji'd8 I 5 lL!d4 � Bakic­ 23C: IO 'ii'd3
Ataiik, Vmjacka Banja I 992.
I b) 1 I . . .l:c8 I2 lL!d5 (on 1 2 .l:.fe 1 23A
possible is 1 2 ...l:te8 1 3 lL!d5 lL!g4 ) =

12 ... lL!xd5 1 3 exd5 .i.f5 I4 c3 .l:.c7 (1 e4 c5 2 lL!f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

1 5 h3 b5 16 a3 a5 1 7 l:ac I 'ifh8 I 8 lL!xd4 lLlf6 5 lL!c3 g6 6 g3 lL!c6 7
l::tfe 1 'fib7 1 9 l:e2 and, thanks to the .i.g2 lL!xd4 8 "6'xd4 .i.g7 9 0-0 0-0)
pressure on the e7 pawn, White's
chances are preferable, Baiashov­ 10 h3
Brodsky, Smolensk I 99 1 .
1 c) I I ...l:b8 ! I 2 lL!d5 .i.xd5 I 3
exd5 'ji'd7 1 4 .l:.fe i l:fc8 1 5 c3 b5
I6 l:.e2 .i.b7 1 7 .l:.ae i a5 ! with
initiative to Black, Rajthajm­
Szuharek, Palic 1 999.
2) 9 .i.e3 0-0 10 'ji'd2 lL!g4 1 1
.i.f4 lL!e5 1 2 lL!d5 .i.g4 1 3 0-0 e6 I4
lL!e3 lL!f3+ 1 5 .i.xf3 .i.xf3 I 6 .i.xd6
b5 1 7 'ii'd3 .i.xe4 1 8 "6'xe4 "6'xd6 1 9
l:Hd 1 'ii'c5 with excellent play for
Black, Ivanchuk-Kasparov, Moscow
(ol) 1 994.
3) 9 a4 0-0 IO a5 (White grabs A useful prophylactic move, an­
space on the queen's flank) ticipating the thrust of one of the
IO ... i.e6 (or 1 0....i.d7 1 1 0-0 .i.c6 pieces (most frequently the knight)
1 2 'ifb4 "6'c8 13 h3 .l:.d8 I4 .l:.d l to g4.
l:.d7 1 5 �h2 .l:.c7 I 6 .i.e3 with 10 .i.e6
...

!lOmewhat better chances for White, The move with the most ideas for
Radu-Calzetta, Kishinev I 995) I I the struggle for the c4 square. After
'fib4 lL!d7! ( 1 1 . .."6'c7) I 2 lL!d5 ! (it is I O. . . .i.d7 I I 'ji'd3 (more passive is
dangerous to take the pawn 1 2 I 1 'ii'd i l%c8 I 2 a4 l:.c4 ) I I .. Jlc8
=

'ii'xb7 lL!c5 1 3 'ifb4 .l:.b8 1 4 "6'a3 I2 a4 .i.e6 1 3 l:le I lL!d7 I4 lL!d5

.i.c4 or I 3 'fibs l:b8 I 4 "6'e2 .l:.b4!? .i.xd5 I 5 exd5 .i.f6 I6 l%a2 White,
with a dangerous initiative for preparing b2-b3 and c2-c4, obtains
Black) I 2 ...b5 I 3 axb6 (on 1 3 a6 a space advantage, Sanz Alonso­
possible is I 3 ...lL!c5 I 4 0-0 .i.xd5 Romero Holmes, Benidorm I 984.
1 5 exd5 "6'c8 = S.Tiviakov) But also worth considering is
1 3 ... .i.xd5 I4 exd5 'ifb6 I 5 "6'xb6 I O...lL!g4 I I "6'd 1 lL!e5 with the
axb6 1 6 .l:.xa8 .l:.xa8 1 7 �d2 b5 I 8 same ideas. On 1 2 f4 possible is
l:.e I lL!b6 1A-1h Marinkovic­ 1 2 ...'ifb6+ 1 3 �h2 lL!c4, while on
Tiviakov, Cacak I 996. I 2 'ii'e2 follows I 2 ....i.e6 1 3 lL!d5
9 0-0
... .l:.c8. In the game Saltaev-Kondou,
Komotini I 993, White played 1 2
Here White's main plans are lL!d5, but after I 2 ... b5! I3 a4 e6 14
linked to the continuations: lL!e3 b4 I 5 f4 lL!c6 I 6 e5 d5 1 7 c4
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 123

bxc3 1 8 bxc3 'iVb6 Black obtained

good counterplay.
1 1 "ifdl 'ir'c7
Other continuations are also seen:
I) 1 I ...'ir'a5 1 2 ll:ld5 ..ixd5 1 3
exd5 ll:ld7 (or 1 3 ...l:tac8 1 4 c 3 'iVb5
1 5 l:te l l:tfe8 1 6 a4 'ir'a5 1 7 ..if4
ll:ld7 1 8 h4 ;!; Makarychev-Jevtic,
Novi Sad 1 983) 14 c3 ..if6 1 5 ..ih6
l:.fe8 16 h4 b5 with chances for both
sides, Janosevic-Martinovic, Smed­
erevska Palanka 1 978
2) l l . . ...,d7 1 2 �h2 l:tac8 1 3 ll:ld5 In recent times this plan of organ­
ll:lxd5 14 exd5 ..if5 1 5 c3 h5 1 6 a4 ising pressure on the queen's flank
(worth considering is 1 6 ..ie3) has become quite popular.
16 ...llc4 ! 17 l:te l ..ie5 ! with a 10...'ii'c7
double-edged game, Laketic­ 10 ...l:tb8 1 1 a4 looks passive, and
Shcherbakov, Chelyabinsk 1 99 1 . though in the game Popovic-Sax,
3 ) I I ...'ir'c8 !? 1 2 �h2 'ii'c 4! 1 3 a4 Sarajevo 1 982, after I I ...ll:lg4 1 2
l:tac8 1 4 a5 ll:ld7 1 5 ..id2 (in the ll:ld5 ll:le5 1 3 a5 ..id7 1 4 ..ie3 ll:lc6
game Makarychev-Svidler, Russia 1 5 'ii'a3 b6 16 axb6 axb6 1 7 c3 b5
(ch) 1 995, was played 1 5 l:la3 'ir'c7 Black managed to keep the balance,
1 6 f4 ..ixc3 ! 1 7 l:txc3 'ii'xa5 1 8 f5 on the basis of insufficient pactice it
..ic4 1 9 l:tf4 ..ia6! and White does is difficult to give a real evaluation
not obtain sufficient compensation ofBiack's idea.
for the pawn) 1 5 ...'ii'c 7 1 6 f4 ..ic4 But it seems that also premature is
1 7 l:.e l e6 1 8 'ii'f3 with a complex the activity by IO ... a5 I I 'iVb3 ..ie6
game (P.Svidler). 1 2 'ii'xb7 (on 1 2 ll:ld5 good is
12 ll:ldS ll:ldS 1 2 ...a4! 1 3 'ii'xb7 ll:lxd5 14 exd5
Weaker is 1 2 ... ..ixd5?! 13 exd5 ..if5 1 5 ..ig5 'iVb8 1 6 'ii'xb8 l:lfxb8
b5 14 l:te 1 l:lfe8 1 5 c3 l:tab8 1 7 ..ixe7 l:txb2 + Adams-Kramnik,
( 1 5 ... a5!?) 1 6 ..ig5 h6 1 7 ..ie3 ll:ld7 Wijk aan Zee 1998) 12 .....ic4 1 3 e5!
1 8 'ii'd2 with a small, but enduring (weaker is 13 l:te 1 ll:ld7! 14 'ir'c6
advantage for White, Lukin­ and now, following the game Milos­
Arakelian, St.Petersburg 1 994. Gaprindashvili, Palma de Mallorca
13 exdS .irs 14 c3 bS I S 'ii'e2 (GMA) 1 989, 14 ... ll:le5 ! 1 5 'ii'a4
l:.ab8 16 ..tgs :res 17 'ii'd 2 hS 18 .l:.b8 leads to an advantage for
.l:.fel aS with approximately equal Black-Milos) 1 3 .....txfl 14 'ii'xa8
chances, Fabisovich-Savchenko, 'ii'xa8 1 5 ..ixa8 dxe5 16 �xfl l:txa8
Pula 1 990. 1 7 a4 e6 1 8 l:ta3 l:.c8 19 l:.b3 and
White's chances are preferable.
23B Nevostruyev-Sherbakov, Russia
1 998.
(1 e4 cS 2 ll:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 11 a4
ll:lxd4 ll:lf6 S ll:lc3 g6 6 g3 ll:lc6 7 White endeavours to restrict
..ig2 ll:lxd4 8 'ii'xd4 ..ig7 9 0-0 0-0) Black's pawns on the queen's flank,
but also not bad is the development
10 'iVb4 of the bishop:
124 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

1 ) 1 1 .i.gS .i.e6 1 2 liJdS .i.xdS 1 3 avoid this by means of 1 3 .i.d2 l:tfe8

exdS a S (weaker i s 1 3 . . .'ifxc2?! 1 4 14 .J:I.fc 1 ltJeS 1 S liJdS 'il'd7 16 'il'a4
'ifxb7 'iffS 1 S .i.e3 'ifd7 1 6 'ifb4 .J:I.ac8 1 7 .i.c3 .i.h3 18 ifxd7 .i.xd7
.l:r.fb8 1 7 'ifd2 l2Jg4 1 8 .i.d4 and 1 9 f4, retaining the somewhat better
White gains the advantage, chances, Kindermann-Wirthensohn,
Glek-Vaulin, USSR 1 98S) 14 �S Hamburg 1 99 1 , or 1 3 liJdS .i.xdS 1 4
( 1 4 'iib3 bS) 1 4 .. .'ii'xc2 1 S 'ifxb7 exdS .J:I.ab8 1 S .i.gS .l:r.fe8 1 6 c3
'ii'fS 1 6 .i.e3 'ii'd7 with equal lDcS, but not achieving anything in
chances. particular, Lanzendorfer-Lindeman,
2) 1 1 .i.e3 .i.e6 1 2 liJdS .i.xdS 1 3 Saltsjobaden 1 988.
exdS liJd7 1 4 .i.d4 aS 1 S ii'd2 .i.xd4 Also seen is 13 �gS llfe8 14
1 6 ifxd4 with some advantage for .J:I.fc 1 ltJeS 1S liJdS 'ild7 1 6 ifa4
White, Hartvig-Jacobsen, Lyngby .i.xdS 1 7 exdS 'iVfS and Black dis­
1 988. plays counter-activity, Milosevic­
l l ...�e6 Petursson, Lugano 1 989.
On 1 l . . .aS simplest is 1 2 'ifbs
.i.d7 1 3 'ii'e2, followed by .i.e 1 -e3.
After 12 'ii'b3 .i.e6 13 liJdS ltJxdS
14 exdS .i.fS 1 S c3 .i.d3 Black has
an easy game: 16 :e 1 .J:I.ab8 (or
16 ....i.f6 1 7 .i.e3 .i.c4 = Torres­
Koch, Tunja 1 989, but on 1 6... bS
with the idea of 1 7 axbS .J:I.fb8 +. he
should consider 1 7 .i.gS !) 1 7 .i.gS
.J:I.fe8 with equal chances, Popovic­
Velimirovic, Titograd 1 984
12 a5
In the event of 1 2 liJdS .i.xdS 1 3
exdS 'il'xc2! 1 4 ii'xb7 .J:I.fe8 1 S aS 13 ....i.xc3
l2Jg4 16 'ifb4 ltJeS White achieves Also possible is 1 3 ...ltJeS 14 liJdS
nothing, Popovic-Timman, Zagreb/ .i.xdS 1 S exdS l:[fc8 (weaker is
Rijeka 1 98S 1 S ...'ifxc2?! 1 6 ii'xb7 l:lfb8 1 7
After 12 .i.gS h6 (or 12 ... .l:r.ac8 1 3 ifxe7 .i.f8 1 8 'iVh4 llxb2 1 9 .J:I.ac 1
llfc 1 aS ! ? and Black's chances are 'il'f7 20 l:tc7 with advantage to
not worse, Spangenberg-Leko, Bue­ White, Popovic-Ivanovic, Yugosla­
nos Aires 1 994) 1 3 .i.d2 aS 1 4 ii'a3 via (ch) 198S) 1 6 c3 'ii'd7 1 7 l:tfd 1
.J:I.ac8 1 S .J:I.ac 1 l2Jg4 1 6 liJdS .i.xdS and White's chances are preferable,
1 7 exdS 'ii'b6 1 8 c3 hS arises a posi­ Kudrin-Tal, Titograd 1 984.
tion with chances for both sides, 14 bxc3 l2Je5
Gi.Hemandez-Boissonet, Tunja Weaker is 14 . . ..i.c4 1 S .l:r.fe 1 a6 1 6
1 989. f4 .l:r.ac8 1 7 e S and White obtains the
12 ...l2Jd7 13 .i.e3 better game, but also after 1 7 �d4
Striving to transfer the bishop to eS 1 8 .i.f2 .i.bS 1 9 :a3 b6 20 .l:r.d 1
the long diagonal, White does not his chances are preferable,
allow the deterioration of his pawn Kotronias-Yrjolii, Dubai (ol) 1 986.
structure, counting on the activity of 15 f4 lLlc4 16 .i.d4 f6 17 .J:I.fe1
the bishop-pair. If he wants, he can .J:I.fd8
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 125

On I 7 ....tt7 also follows I 8 eS IS l:r.ac 1 bS 1 6 b4 tile6 1 7 .ie3 aS

dxeS I 9 fxeS fxeS 20 .icS with the I 8 cS White's chances are prefer­
better chances for White. able, Charbonneau-Bourval, Mont­
18 e5! fxe5 19 fxe5 d5 real l 999.
After I9 ...dxeS 20 'ii'xb7 'ii'xb7 2 I ll tild5 tilxd5
.ixb7 l:tab8 2 2 a6 and White has the Black exchanges the active
better endgame. knight. Another inventive idea from
20 l:teb1 l:d7 21 'ii'a4 l:f8 22 the point of view of struggling for
.ixa7 liaS 23 .ib6 'ii'xe5 24 .id4 the c4 square is l l .. .l:r.c8 1 2 c3 l:r.e8
and White's chances are preferable, 1 3 .ie3 (weaker 1 3 .igS tilg4 14
Kotronias-Kir.Georgiev, Sofia l:r.ad l h6 IS .te l 'it'as I 6 a3 .id7!
I 986. 17 'ii'e2 tileS 18 l:fe 1 .ia4 and
Black gained the advantage,
23C Martinez-Mestel, Oviedo 1 993)
13 ... 'ii'aS I4 a4 .ixdS I S exdS tilg4
(1 e4 c5 2 tilfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 6 .if4 tileS 1 7 'ii'e2 ifa6 I 8 'ii'c2
tilxd4 tilf6 5 tilc3 g6 6 g3 tilc6 7 'ii'd3 I 9 'ii'b3 llc7 20 .:tad l 'ii'c4
.ig2 tilxd4 8 'ii'xd4 .ig7 9 0-0 0-0) with equal chances, F ercec­
Damjanovic, Pula 1 990.
lO 'ii'd3 12 exd5 .trs 13 'ii'e2 b5
Also worth considering is
1 3 ...'ii'd7 !?, with the queen looking
at both flanks. For example: 14 c3
l:r.fe8 I S .ie3 .ih3 16 l:fd 1 .ixg2
I 7 'it>xg2 a6 1 8 a4 bS and Black
keeps the balance, Tolnai­
Schneider, Hungary 1 994.
14 c3 l:r.b8 15 .ie3
Or IS .igS lle8 16 'ii'd2 aS I 7 a3
•A-•A Hartmann-Sosonko, Hanover
1983.
15 ...'ii'c7 16 'ii'd2 l:fc8 17 l:r.fe1
b4 18 cxb4 1i"c2 19 .:tacl 'ii'xd2
White removes the queen to a Also in White's favour is
more natural position for implemen­ 19 ... 'ii'xb2+ 20 l:xc8 .ixc8 2 1
tation of his central strategy, but 1i"xb2 .ixb2 2 2 .id2 (22 .ixa7
here the queen becomes vulnerable l:r.b7! = ) 22 ... .if6 23 l:r.c i ;!;
to the knight. (J.Benjamin).
1 0....ie6 20 .ixd2 .ixb2 21 l:r.c6
Also worth considering is He cannot leave the c-file: 2 1
I O...'ii'aS with the idea of transfer­ l:r.xc8+?! l:r.xc8 2 2 llxe7 .te l ! 23
ring the q�een to hS. For example: .ie I .igS and the rook falls under
I I .id2 'ifhS I 2 f3 .ie6 1 3 l:r.ac l the crossfire of the two bishops
l:fc8 I4 b3 tilg4 + Carstens-Polster, (J.Benjamin).
Germany 1987. More logical is I I 21 ...�fS 22 a4 .id7 23 b5 .ixc6
.ie3 'ii'hS 1 2 f3 . 24 dxc6 .id4 25 .ih3 and since the
After 1 0 ...tild7 1 1 tildS tileS I 2 threat to form a pair of passed
'ii'e2 .id7 1 3 c4 l:r.b8 1 4 .igS l:r.e8 pawns, supported by the active
126 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

bishops, constrains Black's rook, IO ...<ihd8 1 1 ..ixc6 l:tb8 1 2 ..ie3

White's position is preferable, with a more pleasant endgame for
Benjamin-Kaliksteyn, New York White. In the game Adams-Dreev,
1993. Linares 1 997, Black decided on
1 2 . . .lhb2?! and after 1 3 0-0-0+
Line 24 q;c7 14 ..ib5 l:[b4 1 5 a3 he had to
give up the exchange.
(1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
liJd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 g3) 24A

6.....ig7 (1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

ltJd4 liJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 g3 ..ig7 7
i.g2)

7...i.g4

A natural move, with which Black

does not pretend to drive away the
knight.
7 ..ig2
. White allows the thrust .....ic8-g4, This thrust is more logical than on
hoping to derive benefit from the the 6th move since the idea of trans­
unstable position of the bishop. ferring to the channels of the Rauzer
Here the continuations are: Attack by f2-f3 is less effective with
the bishop on g2. However now,
24A: 7.....ig4 distinct from 22B, White carries out
248: 7 ...0-0 kingside castling.
8 ltJde2 ltJc6
On 7 ...ltJc6 it is necessary to take By threatening to exchange bish­
into account 8 ltJxc6 (8 ltJde2 leads ops with 8 ...'ifc8, Black can prevent
to a position from Line 22) 8 ...bxc6 castling, but after 9 h3 i.d7 the
9 e5 dxe5 10 'ifxd8+ (winning the game leads into positions looked at
exchang_e by I 0 ..ixc6+ ..id7 1 1 in variation 22B, though with a loss
..ixa8 'ifxa8 is not so good, for of tempo (. . . ltJb8-c6 has not been
example the game Matulovic­ played).
Erdogan, Ankara (zt) 1 995, contin­ 9 h3
ued: 1 2 f3 e4 1 3 0-0 exf3 14 'ii'x f3 After 9 0-0 'ifc8 White is forced
..ic6 15 'ife2 0-0 16 ..if4 'ifb7 1 7 to reconcile himself to an exchange
.l:r.ab 1 ltJg4 1 8 'ifxg4 'ifb6+ 1 9 l:lf2 of light-squared bishops: 1 0 f3 (not
..ixc3 with a good game for Black) good, of course, is 1 0 .l:r.e 1 ? ltJe5)
 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 12 7

1 0 ... .th3 (after 10 . . ..td7 1 1 .te3 h5 chances are preferable. In the game
1 2 "ii'd2 lDe5 1 3 b3 White's chances Kovalev-Apicella, Ostende 199 1 ,
are preferable) 1 1 .txh3 'ii'xh3 1 2 Black tried to put pressure on the h3
.tg5 (not in the spirit of the position pawn: 14 ...lDh7 1 5 a3 lDg5 and
is 1 2 g4?! g5 ! 13 lbd5 h5! +) after 1 6 f4 ! lDxh3 1 7 'ii'd2 .tg4 1 8
1 2 ... 0-0 1 3 'ii'd2 h6 1 4 .te3 �h7 1 5 J:lae 1 h5 1 9 f5 lost the ill-fated
l:tac 1 'ii'd7 1 6 lbd5 lDxd5 1 7 exd5 knight.
tbe5 with equal chances, Spassky­
Fischer, S.Stefan!Belgrade (m/24)
1 992. 24B
9.. .td7 10 0-0
.

After carrying out the plan with (1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4

queenside castling by 1 0 b3 Wc8 1 1 lbd4 lDf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 g3 .tg7 7
.i.b2 0-0 1 2 'ii'd2 b5 1 3 0-0-0 Black .tg2)
has good counterplay: 13 ... a5 1 4
lDd5 a4 1 5 lDb6 ji'a6 1 6 lDxa8 7 ... 0-0
J:lxa8 1 7 b4 a3 1 8 .tc3 J:lc8 19 f4
.te6 20 �b l Wa4 2 1 lDc l lDa5 22
e5 lDc4 and Black's initiative is
more than sufficient compensation
for the sacrificed exchange, Prasad­
Hodgson, Linares 1 996.
10...'ii'c8 1 1 �h2 0-0 and the po­
sition reached differs from that
looked at in Line 22 only in the in­
significant change of position of the
king to h2.

Leaving the bishop thrust until he

has completed the development of
his king's flank.
8 0-0
On 8 h3, besides 8 ...lDc6 Black
could choose 8 ...lDbd7 with the
transfer of this knight, according to
circumstances, to c5 or e5: 9 0-0 a6
1 0 a4
1 ) l O ...lDc5 1 1 .te3 (worth con­
sidering is 1 1 .l:r.e 1 'iic7 1 2 .tg5
The usual continuations in this .te6 1 3 lbd5 .txd5 14 exd5 .l:r.ae8?!
scheme are 1 2 a4 and 1 2 .te3. But 1 5 'ii'd2 and, due to the threat a4-a5,
let us also tum our attention to 1 2 White obtains the advantage, Mazi­
b3, taking under control the impor­ Jazbinsek, Bled 1 995; stronger was
tant c4 square. On 1 2 ... b5 possible 1 4 ...h6, driving away the bishop)
is 13 .tg5, after which not good is 1 1 ...'iic7 1 2 'ii'd2 .td7 1 3 aS e5 1 4
1 3 ...b4?! 14 lbd5 ±, while in the lDb3 .te6 1 5 tDxc5 dxc5 1 6 ltla4
event of 13... h6 14 .te3 White's lbd7 17 flfd l and White had t he
128 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3

more prom1smg position in the I I lLld5?! lLlxd5 1 2 exd5 lLle5 the

game Velitkovic-Runic, Yugoslavia weakness of the f3 square tells: 1 3
(ch) 199 1 . f3 ? i.xf3 ! 1 4 i.xf3 lLlxf3+ 1 5 :xf3
2) 1 0.....c7 1 1 :e t lLle5 1 2 lLld5 _.g4 and Black wins back the piece,
lLlxd5 1 3 exd5 _.c4 14 i.e3 with retaining an extra pawn,
rather the better chances for White, Marinkovic-Kudrin, Belgrade GMA
Mestel-Holland, England (ch) 1 989. 1 988) l O... lLlc6 I I f3 i.h3 1 2 i.h1
On 8 b3 possible is 8 ...i.g4 9 i.e6 1 3 i.e3 i.c4 1 4 _.d2 :ds 15
_.d2 lLlc6 l 0 lLlxc6 bxc6 I I i.b2 lt:lf4 e6 1 6 i.f2 _.c7 1 7 lLld3 :ac8
_.a5 (more crucial is l l . ..d5 1 2 h3 1 8 i.g2 i.a6 19 a4 b6 1h-1h Sax­
i.e6 1 3 0-0-0! ? _.c7 1 4 _.e3 :ac8 Kudrin, New York 1987
15 e5 lLld7 16 f4 lLlb6 1 7 g4 :rd8 10 h3 i.xe2
1 8 _.f2 i.d7 19 �b 1 e6 20 h4 and Black is forced into this exchange
White is ahead in the race for attack, if he does not want to lose time on
A.lvanov-Kreiman, USA (ch) 1 994) the retreat of the bishop along the
1 2 h3 i.e6 1 3 0-0-0 :rd8 with a lines of the previous variation.
complicated game. 1 1 lLlxe2
8 ... .tg4 9 tll de2 After I I _.xe2 :c8 1 2 i.e3 lLld7!
After 9 _.d3 Black gets the knight the threat to take on c3 forces White
into action with tempo by an attack to retreat: 1 3 lLld 1 lLld4 14 i.xd4
on the c4 pawn: 9 . ....d7 1 0 lLld5 i.xd4 1 5 c3 i.g7 16 lLle3 :e8 1 7
lLlc6 I I i.e3 lLle5 1 2 �3 :res, :rd l _.c7 1 8 h4 lLle5 1 9 f4 lLlc4
with chances for both sides, and Black equalises the game,
Mortensen-Watson, Esbjerg 1 988. Mohr-Cebalo, Ljubljana 1994.
There is also good counterplay for l l . :cs
. .

Black after 9 f3 i.d7 l 0 i.e3 lLlc6 Or 1 l .. .lLld7 1 2 c3 :c8 1 3 i.e3 a6

I I _.d2 :cs 1 2 a4 a6 1 3 :f2 _.c7 14 _.d2 _.a5 15 i.h6 i.xh6 1 6
14 lLld5 lLlxd5 1 5 exd5 lLle5 16 b3 _.xh6 _.e5 1 7 :ad 1 with somewhat
_.c3 and Black's chances are not the better chances for White,
worse, Adams-Mestel, England (ch) Komeev-Vila, Linares 1 995.
1 990. 12 c3 a6 13 lLlf4 b5 14 _.e2 lLla5
9 lLlc6
.•. 15 :d1 _.c7 16 h4 e6 17 h5 :res
Also possible is 9 . ....c8 10 :e t 18 hxg6 hxg6 19 lLld3 lLlc4 with
(after l 0 i.g5 lLlc6 he cannot do chances for both sides, A.Kogan­
without the move 1 1 f3 since after Neverov, Lazne Bohdanec 1996.
 Illustrative Games

Game l for Black. Now however Black

Minev - Gufeld threatens to take the 'exhausted'
Sofia 1 967 rook. But. ..
19...lt:Jd6! 20 i.b6 1Ve8 21 exd6
1 e4 c5 2 lt:JfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .txc3 22 i.xd5+
lt:Jxd4 lt:Jf6 5 lt:Jc3 g6 6 i.e3 i.g7 7
.tel 0-0 8 0-0 lt:Jc6 9 1i'd2 d5 10
lt:Jxc6 bxc6 11 e5

A head-spinning situation: nearly

half the pieces on the board are un­
l l lt:Je8
.•. der attack! On the tempting
After l l . . .lt:Jd7 it is easy for White 22 .. .'�h8 White had prepared the
to establish a blockade on the deadly blow: 23 1Vxc3+! ! l:xc3 24
queen's flank: 1 2 f4 e6 1 3 lt:Ja4 1Ve7 l:.xe7, threatening 25 i.d4+ mating.
1 4 1Va5 ! when Black has great diffi­ 22 ... cxd5! 23 1Vxd5+ 'ikf7 24
culties. The exchange of one of the 1Vxf7+ 'itxf7 25 l:.d1
knights also favours White: Or 25 d7? i.d4+ ! .
l l ...lt:Jg4 1 2 i.xg4 i.xg4 1 3 f4 f6 25...i.f6?
1 4 i.d4 1Va5 1 5 1Ve3 .tf5 16 l:f2! Missing a chance to win by
or l l .. .lt:Je4 12 lt:Jxe4 dxe4 1 3 1Ve3 25 ...l:b4 ! .
1Vc7 1 4 .tf4! i.e6 1 5 l:ad l . 2 6 d7! l:xc2 2 7 d8=1V l:xd8 28
1 2 f4 f6 1 3 .to i.xd8 i.e4 29 l:.a7 l:bg2+ 30 'itfl
With the threat of 1 4 lt:Jd5. l:xh2 31 i.xe7!
13...l:b8! 14 i.xa7 l:xb2 15 i.d4 The final flash!
.trs 16 l:fcl fxe5 17 fxe5. l:b4 18 31. .. l:hl+ 32 �e2 i.fJ+ 33 �xfJ
l:ab1 l:c4! 19 l:b7 l:xd1 34 i.xf6+ �xf6 35 l:.xh7
The continuation 19 i.e2 l:xd4 •A-•A
20 1Vxd4 1Vc7 leads to an advantage
130 Illustrative Games

Game 2 More cunning is 29 g3, retaining

Timman - Topalov the more pleasant prospects, since
Novgorod 1 995 now Black displays some activity.
29 ... h5 30 �g2 hxg4 31 hxg4
1 e4 c5 2 tt:lc3 tt:lc6 3 tt:lf3 g6 4 d4 l:h8 32 l:te4 aS 33 l:te1 .l:.h7 34 .l:.e6
cxd4 5 tt:lxd4 i.g7 6 i.e3 d6 7 i.e2 a4 35 bxa4 l:th8 36 .l:.1e3 .l:.a8 37
tt:lf6 8 0-0 0-0 9 'ii'd 2 tt:lg4 10 i.xg4 l:h3 l:txa4 38 l:h7+ 'it>f8 39 �g3
i.xg4 1 1 tt:lxc6 bxc6 12 i.h6 i.xh6 l:txa2 40 l:txf6+ exf6 41 .l:.xb7 ltxc2
13 'ihh6 l:b8 42 l:.b8+ �e7 43 l:tb7+ �e8 44
More active is 1 3 ...'ifb6. l:tb8+ �d7 45 l:tb7+ liteS 1/z-1/z
14 b3 'ii'a5 15 'ii'e3 l:tfd8 16 h3? !
A poor move. White drives the Game 3
bishop to a better position. More Dlescas - Gulko
consistent is 1 6 tt:la4 e5 1 7 c4 with Leon 1 992
control over the centre (J.Timman).
16 ... i.e6 17 l:tfd1 f6 18 l:d3 'ii'b6 1 e4 c5 2 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 3 d4 cxd4 4
19 'ii'h6 tt:lxd4 tt:lf6 5 tt:lc3 d6 6 i.e2 g6 7
White plans an attack on the in­ 0-0 i.g7 8 i.e3 0-0 9 'ii'd 2 i.d7 10
sufficiently defended king. f4 tt:lxd4 1 1 i.xd4 i.c6 1 2 i.f3 e5!
19 'ii'c5 20 l:ad1 �h8 21 l:1d2
•.. A typical method in the Sicilian of
reacting to the bishop manoeuvre to
f3. After the exchange . . . e5xf4 the
weaknesses of the d6 and e4 pawns
balance each other out and Black
has important control over the e5
square.
13 fxe5 dxe5 14 i.e3 'ii'xd2 15
i.xd2 l:.fd8 16 l:ad1?!
This allows Black to seize the
initiative. He should take the d4
square under control-1 6 i.e3.

2l. ..l:tg8
White already threatens to attack
by 22 e5 fxe5 (22 ...'ii'xe5 23 l:e2)
23 tt:le4 'ii'b6 24 tt:lg5 i.g8 25 l:g3
so Black brings in a defender, in­
tending ...g6-g5. The queen has to
withdraw.
22 'ii'e3 Wxe3 23 l:xe3 g5 24
tt:le2 �g7 25 tt:ld4 i.d7 26 tt:lf5+
.txr5
It was also still possible to fight 16...l:.d4! 17 i.gS
on with 26 ...�f8!?. Now after 17 i.e3 l:.c4 ! the e4
27 exf5 �f7 28 l:tde2 .l:.b7 29 g4 pawn is hanging.
 Illustrative Games 131

17 ... h6 1S .ixf6 .ixf6 19 l:r.xd4 46...a5 47 .id7 .id6 4S �c2

exd4 20 lLldS .igS 21 l:.dl l:.cS! 22 .ixh2 49 .ieS a4 SO .id7 .ieS 51
l:r.xd4 .ixdS 23 llxdS l:.xc2 24 .ieS 'it>aS 52 .ic6 b4 53 �d3 b3 54
lld7! �c4 h5 0-1
A superficial look at the position
would be deceptive. Despite the ma­
terial equality, opposite-coloured Game 4
bishops with rooks on the board, Castro - Rogoff
there is no guarantee of a draw and Graz 1 972
the side having the initiative is the
one who has the advantage. 1 e4 cS 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4
Therefore White, not concerned lLld4 g6 5 .ie3 .ig7 6 .ie2 ltlf6 7
about losing a pawn, strives for lLlc3 0-0 S 0-0 d6 9 f4 'iib6 10 e5
maximum activity. After 24 llb5 b6 dxe5 1 1 fxe5 lLlxeS 12 lLlf5 'ifxb2
25 a4 .ie3+ 26 'iti>fl a6 27 l:.b3 .id4 13 lLlxe7+ �hS 14 .id4 lLlfg4
28 l:tb4 .icS 29 llb3 aS followed by Theory considers 14 . . .'ifb4 to be
30 ....id4 or 30 ...llc4, Black increas­ best.
es his advantage (B.Gulko). 15 lLledS
24...llxb2 25 eS llxa2 26 .idS! 1 5 lLlcdS? is not good because of
In the spirit of the same strategy. 1 S ...'ii'xd4+! 1 6 1i'xd4 lLlf3+ with
After the direct 26 .ib7 Black suc­ advantage to Black. Now, however,
cessfully attacks the eS pawn: he threatens to trap the queen by 1 6
26....ie3+ 27 �fl l:.f2+ 28 lt>e 1 lLlcbS.
llfS 29 .idS .if4 (B.Gulko). 15 ...1i'a3 16 lLlbs 'Was 17 h3
26....ie3+ 27 lt>n l:tf2+ 2S �el lLlh6
bS 29 g4
Preventing llf2-f5.
29...llf4 30 l:.dS+ �g7 31 l:.d7
�f8 32 lidS+ �e7 33 l:tbS .ib6 34
l:tb7+ lt>eS 35 llbS+ �d7 36 llb7+
�cS 37 l:txti l:.xti 3S .ixti gS
It has all come down to 'pure'
opposite-coloured bishops where
the extra pawn is no guarantee of
victory.
39 .ieS a6 40 e6 .idS 41 e7?
An incomprehensible decision. He
was not obliged to give up the
pawn. After 4 1 �d2 q;c7 42 �c3
�d6 43 .id7 the outcome of the 1S l:tf6!
struggle is unclear. Shutting out the defence of the
41 ... .ixe7 42 �e2 �c7 43 �d3 knight on eS. Clearly Black cannot
�d6 44 .ig6 �cs 45 .irs lt>b4 46 capture the rook, 1 8 ....ixf6? 1 9
.icS lLlxf6 lLlc6, because of 2 0 .ic3 fol­
Also after 46 �c2 aS 47 .id7 a4 lowed by a discovered check with
the game turns out in White's the knight f6.
favour. 1S ... ltJc6 19 .ic3 'iVdS 20 lLlbc7?
132 Illustrative Games

Overlooking the opponent's reply.

Necessary was 20 l:.d6 'Wg5 2 1 .i.d2
with ap_proximately equal chances.
20 ... tll e7! 2I 'ii'd2 lt::l xdS 22
lt::lxdS ..ie6 23 :txe6
He has to beat a retreat. The
deflection 23 1hh6? ..ixh6 24
l:r.xg6+ does not work because of
24 ... f6 etc.
23 ... fxe6 24 ..ixg7+ �xg7 2S
'ii'c3+ ..ti>g8 26 lt::le3 l:r.c8 27 'Wa3
'ii'd2 28 .i.c4 llc4 0-I
29......d7 30 'Wxd7 :txd7 3I c4
Game S lld4 32 lt::lgS h6 33 llc8+ I-0
Spassky - Miles
Bugojno 1978 Game 6
Kasparov - Gufeld
I e4 cS 2 lt::lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Baku 1978
lt::lxd4 lt::lf6 S lt::lc3 g6 6 ..ie2 ..ig7 7
..ie3 0-0 8 0-0 lt::lc6 9 lt::lb3 ..ie6 I O I e4 cS 2 lt::lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
f4 bS lt::lxd4 lt::l f6 S lt::lc3 g6 6 ..ie2 ..ig7 7
The strength of this move is per­ 0-0 0-0 8 ..ie3 lt::lc6 9 lt::lb3 ..ie6 I 0
haps greater than its reputation­ f4 'Wc8 I I �hi ..ig4
which to a certain extent was Nowadays the most frequently
damaged by this game. met continuation is 1 l . ..:td8.
1 1 fS b4?! I2 ..igi ..ixe2 I3 'Wxe2 'Wg4 I4
He should first exchange on b3. 'Wd2 lt::lhS IS :tf3 fS I6 h3 'Wh4 I7
I2 fxe6 bxc3 13 exti+ �h8 I4 exfS gxfS?!
bxc3 lt::leS Stronger was 17 .. Jlxf5 1 8 ..if2
After 14 ...lt::lxe4 15 ..if3 d5 (or ..ixc3 ! 19 bxc3 'ii'f6 20 ..ie3, though
1 5 . . .lt::lxc3 16 'ii'd2 d5 1 7 lt::ld4) 1 6 even here White's chances are
..ixe4 dxe4 1 7 lt::lc5 the i7 pawn is preferable.
revitalised. I8 lt::ld4 lt::lg3+
IS ..id4 lt::lxe4 I6 .in lt::lxf3+ I7 A poor manoeuvre after which
'ii'xf3 lt::lf6 I8 l:.adi! White goes over to the attack. But it
Subjecting the queen to an 'X­ was not easy to find the right way.
ray' : 1 8 ...l:r.xil 1 9 lDc5 ! . For example, on 1 8 ... e5 possible is
I 8. ..'.,c8 I 9 ..ixf6 ..ixf6 2 0 llxd6 19 ..if2! 'We7 20 fxe5 lt::lxd4 2 1
l:r.xti 2I l:tc6 'We8 22 'We4 lld8 23 'ii'xd4 dxe5 22 'Wd5+ 'Wil 2 3 lt::lxf5
g3 ..ig7 24 'We6! winning a pawn. Perhaps the best
Blocking in the black pieces. was 1 8 ...'Wf6, threatening mass ex­
24 ... l:r.xfl + 2S �xfl .i.f6 26 lt::lcS changes on d4 .
..ixc3 27 lt::le4 ..id4 28 c3 ..ib6 29 I9 �h2 lt::le4 20 lt::lxe4 fxe4 2 I
..ti>e2 llg3 'Wh6
White's arrangement of pieces Repulsing the threat of lt::ld4-e6,
makes a pretty picture. Black cannot most graphically illustrated by the
move practically anything, while the variation 2 l .. .'Wxf4? 22 'ii'x f4 l:.xf4
exchange of queens loses quickly. 23 llxg7+ ..ti>xg7 24 lt::le6+.
 Illustrative Games 133

22 i.e3 :n 23 f5 'iff6 24 c3 �h8

25 :n 'ife5 26 tllxc6 bxc6 27 i.d4

20...g5!?
Black exploits a tactical chance
which has cropped up. However
opening his castled position has its
27...'iVd5 mmuses.
On the tempting 27 ...:gs 21 fxg5 i.h5 22 'ifn ?!
Kasparov intended to continue 28 Stronger is 22 'ifc2 ..ixf3 23 gxf3
f6! ! 'ifxg3+ 29 �xg3 i.h6+ 30 �h2 tlle5 (after 23 ...tllxg5 24 i.xf5 Wb8
i.xd2 3 1 fxe7 :fg7 32 :f8 and 25 i.e3 tllil 26 :g1 White's threats
White wins. are irresistible) 24 fxe4 tllxd3 25
28 l1xg7 :xg7 29 c4 'ifxc4 30 'ifxd3 dxe4 26 'ifh3 with advantage
l1f4 c5 31 i.xgJ+ �xg7 32 f6+! to White (Barua).
exf6 33 'ifxd6 'iffi 34 :xe4 �h8 22 ...i.xf3 23 gxf3 :f8
35 :r4 l1g8 36 :xr6 'ifg7 37 :a c4 White overlooked this tactical re­
38 l:.c2 a5 39 a4 h6 40 l:.e2 'ifg5 41 source (24 fxe4 fxe4) but his posi­
'ifd4+ 'ifg7 42 'ifxc4 'ifg3+ 43 �gl tional advantage is sufficient
:d8 44 'ifc3+ 'ifxc3 45 bxc3 :c8 compensation for the exchange.
46 l:.e5 :xc3 47 :xa5 �g7 48 :h5 24 f4 a6 25 tll5d4 tlle7 26 'ifh3
1-0 tllg6 27 :n 'ifd7 28 .tel l:tae8 29
i.h5 'ifd6 30 tllxf5?!
Game ? 30 tlle2 followed by i.g 1-d4 is
Barua - Tiviakov more reliable. Now Black simplifies
Tilburg 1 992 the position.
30...tllxf4 31 tllxd6 tllxh3 32
1 e4 c5 2 tll f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 i.ti+ lbti 33 tllx fi �h7
tllxd4 tllf6 5 tllc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7 Stronger is the preliminary
0-0 tllc6 8 tllb3 0-0 9 �hl i.e6 1 0 33 ... tllg 1 .
f4 'ifc8 1 1 i.e3 :d8 12 i.gl d 5 13 34 i.b6 �g6 35 �g2 tll hxg5 36
e5 tlle4 14 i.d3 f5 15 exf6 exf6 16 tllxg5 tllxg5 37 h3 l:le2+ 38 :a
tllb5 l:.el 39 :d2 :bt 40 tllc5 tlle4 41
Not dangerous for Black is 1 6 f5 :e2 tllg3 42 l':lc2 d4 43 tllxb7 tll f5
i.xf5 1 7 tlld5 �h8. 44 �f3 :ht 45 l::.g2+ 'it>f6 46
16...f5 17 c3 i.f7 18 a4 h5 19 a5 i.xd4+ tllxd4+ 47 cxd4 l:.xh3+ 48
h4 2o :o �e4 l':lg3 49 l:lxg3 hxg3 50 �f3
�e6 51 tllc5+ �d5 IA-1/i
134 Illustrative Games

Game 8 �g8 29 'ii'h7+ �f8 the endgame is

Smyslov - Botvinnik more pleasant for Black.
Moskow (m/9) 1 958 24... a5! 25 .l:r.b6 .ixc3 26 bxc3
.r:tab8 27 l:lxb8 .l:lxb8+ 28 'iti>a1 !
1 e4 c5 2 lLJf3 lLlc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 The king i s safer here than on the
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 d6 6 .ie2 g6 7 c I square and already l:[g I is
.ie3 .ig7 8 h4 h5 9 f3 0-0 10 'ifd2 threatened.
d5 1 1 lLlxc6 bxc6 12 e5 lLle8 28 ... .r:tg8 29 'ii'e3 .l:r.g4 30 a3 .l:te4
Also 1 2 ...lLld7 is not bad. 31 'ifd3 'ii'e5 32 �b2 l:e3 33 'ii'd4
13 f4 f6 14 0-0-0 fxe5 1 5 fxe5 'ii'xd4 34 cxd4 �g7
.ixe5 16 g4 .ixg4! 3 l . ..e5 is stronger.
Stronger than 16 . . . hxg4, which 35 l:tgl+ �fi 36 h6 l:lh3 37 l:[g7+
leaves White more attacking �f6 38 l:h7 l:h4 39 'iti>c3 l:th3+ 40
chances. �b2 l:th4 1/z-1/z
17 .ixg4 hxg4 18 h5
Game 9
Kupreichik - Watson
Frunze 1 985
1 e4 c5 2 lLJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 .ie3 .ig7 7
'ii'd2 lLlc6 8 .ie2 0-0 9 0-0-0 lLlxd4
10 .ixd4 .ie6 1 1 �b1 b5
An interesting pawn sacrifice for
the initiative. The continuations
l l . ..l:c8 and l l . ..a6 lead to a more
'academic' game.
12 .ixb5 l:b8 13 .l:lhel 'ii'a5 14
.ia4
The position seems critical, but... The bishop is included in the de­
1.8...g5! fence, but White has to reckon with
The white h5 pawn has become a the consequences of the manoeuvre
shield for the black king whereas which Black now makes. After 1 4
Black's control of the centre enables .id3 l:fc8 Black's attack is the
him to take over the initiative. more dangerous.
19 .ixg5 'ifd6 20 l:h4 lLlf6 14...l:.b4 15 .ib3 l:.xd4 16 'ii'xd4
After the exchanges 20 .....tf4 2 1 lLld5
.ixf4 'ifxf4 2 2 'ii'x f4 l:xf4 2 3 lLle2
the game is equal.
21 .ixf6 'ii'xf6 22 l:xg4+ �h8 23
�b1
An immediate 23 l:g6 does not
work because of 23 ... .if4, but now
after 23 ...l:b8 it would already be
possible.
23 ...l:g8 24 l:b4!
White defends resourcefully. Af­
ter 24 l:g6?! l:xg6 25 hxg6 �g_7 26
l:h l l:h8 27 l:xh8 �xh8 28 'ifh6+
 Illustrative Games 1 35

17 exd5! The passed pawns are stronger

An effective, even if practically than a rook.
forced, queen sacrifice. After 1 7 49 l:teS �g5?
'ii'd3 tLlxc3 14 bxc3 �xc3 Black's Black wants to win in the most
attack becomes dangerous. comfortable way, but ... overlooks
17 ... �xd4 IS .l:.xd4 �f5 19 .l:.xe7 the opponent's rather obvious reply.
'ii'dS 20 l:te3 Necessary was 49 ... f2 50 l:tf8 g3 5 1
He is not tempted by the pawn, 20 l:[g8+ 'iti>f5 52 l:[g3 f1 ='ii' 53 l:r.d3 a5
lha7, which allows Black to display and White needs to think about con­
activity by 20 ...it'g5 2 1 g3 'ii'h5 22 structing a ' fortress' of the type 54
h4 'ii'O . a4 etc.
20...l:teS 2 1 tLldl so l:[f8 �h4 51 c4 g3 52 :r4 1-0
We can see the results of the
queen sacrifice: White has a formal Game 1 0
material and slight positional advan­ A.Fedorov-M.Makarov
tage, though he can never underesti­ Russia 2000
mate the queen's capabilities.
21 ...�f8 22 g3 Wg5 23 a3 'ii'h 5 1 e4 c5 2 tLlf3 tLlc6 3 tLlc3 g6 4 d4
24 h4 h6 25 �c4 cxd4 5 tLlxd4 �g7 6 tLlb3 tLlf6 7
Not 25 �a4? in view of25 ...l:te4 ! . �e2 0-0 S �e3 d6 9 f4 aS 10 a4
2 5...g5 26 �e2 'ii'g6 2 7 l:xeS+ �e6 1 1 0-0 tLld7 12 f5 �xb3 13
�xeS 2S tLle3 'ii'f6 29 l:[b4 �d7 30 cxb3 tLlc5 14 �c4 tLle5 15 �d5?!
f3 �dS 31 l:[e4 �f5 32 hxg5 hxg5 Stronger is 1 5 'ii'e2! ? i,
33 :c4 �d7 M.Makarov.
Here Black could play more ac­ ts .. :es! 16 tLlbS
.

tively by 33 ...'ii'e 5, though after 34 The game D.Schneider-Nataf,

.l:.c3 the capture 34 ...'ii'xg3? would New York 2000, continued I 6
be unfavourable because of 35 �xc5 dxc5 1 7 �xb7 'ii'x d1 1 8
tLlxf5 'ii'e 1+ 36 �a2 'ii'xe2 37 tLlxd6 :axd I :ab8 I 9 �a6 (weaker is 1 9
and White _gains a passed pawn. �d5?! e6 20 fxe6 fxe6 2 I �c4
34 :c3 WhS 35 g4 'ii'h l+ 36 �a2 tLlxc4 22 �xc4 �d4+ 23 �hI l:r.xb2
'ii'e l 37 �a6 'ii'd 2 3S �b7 q;e7 39 +) 19 ... :xb3 20 �b5 l:r.b8 and
�c6 �cS 40 tLlc4 'ii'f4 41 �b5 f5 Black has the preferable game.
42 tLle3 fxg4! 16 ... e6 17 fxe6 fxe6 IS �c4
A clever piece sacrifice, allowing tLlxe4
him to set up a pair of passed
pawns. But also possible was
42 .. .'�d8.
43 :xeS gxf3 44 :es+ 'iti>f7 45
l:e6 g4 46 �eS?
A mistake, after which White
risks losing. Stronger was 46 �d3
g3 47 �g6+ ..t>f8! 48 tLlf5 it'xf5 49
�xf5 g2 50 �e4 g 1 ='ii' 5 1 �xf3
with an equal endgame (Minic,
Sindik).
46...�g7 47 �g6 'ii'xe3! 4S .l:be3
�g6
 136 Illustrative Games

19 .ixe6+? 17 0-0-0 lbxd5

A serious mistake. After 19 .idS ! No better is 1 7 ... exd5 1 8 h3 g3 19
exd5 20 1rxd5+ �h8 2 1 1Wxe4 d5 .id4 with advantage to White.
22 1fc2 lDg4 23 .if4 l:.c8 24 1fd2 18 h3 g3
'ii'b6+ 25 �h 1 the activity of the White strives to open lines on the
white pieces is in fact compensation king's flank, while Black barricades
for Black's extra d5 pawn. But now them.
White suffers material loss. 19 .l:thgl 1fd6 20 .ixd5 exd5 2 1
19 ....1:txe6 20 1fd5 1re7 21 lDc7 lbxd5 �h8 2 2 .if4 1fg6 2 3 1fd2
No good is 2 l lDd4 lDc5 +. .ixh3! 24 l:.xg3 .ig4 25 l:lhl
21 ...1fxc7 22 1rxe6+ �h8 23 The threat was 26 lbe7 1re6 27
l:.acl lDc5 24 1fd5 1rc6 25 1rxc6 l:lxg4 ! 1rxg4 28 l:txh7+! �xh7 29
lDxc6 �+! .
It all comes down to a technical 2 5...l:lfe8 26.lbe3 1fe4?
endgame. · By playing 26 ... f5 ! Black could
26 l:.ti lDe5 27 l:.c7 lbg4 28 have successfully defended himself.
.ixc5 dxc5 29 h3 .id4+ 30 �fl For example, 27 lDxg4 fxg4 28 1fh2
l:U8+ 31 �e2 l:.e8+ 32 �d3 lbe5+ l:lac8 29 llxg4 l:le 1 + ! . Now how­
33 �d2 l:.f8 34 :tel b6 35 l:.e7 .l:tf5 ever a catastrophe befalls him.
36 l:le6 �g7 37 l:.xb6 .ixb2 38 27 1fh2 .ie6
�e3 l:lti 39 l:le2 l:le7 40 �d2 .id4
Stronger is 40. .. .ia3 ! 4 1 �c2
.ib4 with a winning position.
41 l:lb5
It's also not easy for him after 4 1
�c2 c4 42 l:lb5 cxb3+ 4 3 �xb3
�f6 +.
41 ... l:la7 42 .:.e4 �f6 43 l:lf4+
�e6 44 .:.bs l:ld7 45 lieS+ �d5 46
. l:la8 lbc6 47 l:lc8 .ie5 48 l:.f3 lbd4
49 .l:td3 .l:tb7 50 l:ld8+ .id6 0-1

Game 1 1
Fischer - Reshevsky 28 l:lxg7! �xg7 29 1rh6+ �g8
USA {m) 1 961 Or 29 ...�h8 30 .ie5 ! .
3 0 l:lgl+ 1fg6 3 1 l:.xg6+ fxg6 32
1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lDd4 l:lad8 33 .ie5 l:ld7 34 lDxe6
lDxd4 g6 5 lbc3 .ig7 6 .ie3 lLlf6 7 l:lxe6 35 lbg4 .:n 36 1fg5 l:lfl+ 37
.ie2 0-0 8 f4 d6 9 lDb3 .ie6 10 g4 �d2 h5 38 'ifd8+ 1-0
d5 1 1 f5 .ic8 12 exd5 lbb4 13 .if3
gxf5 14 a3 fxg4 15 .ig2 lba6 16 Game 1 2
'ifd3 e6 Yakovich - Lerner
Practically forcing White to sacri­ Kuibyshev 1 986
fice a second pawn which in the
final result proves to be to his 1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
advantage. At the present time lDxd4 lLlf6 5 lbc3 lbc6 6 .ie2 g6 7
1 6...lDd7 1s considered more .ie3 .ig7 8 lDb3 0-0 9 f4 .ie6 10
reliable. g4 d5 1 1 f5 .ic8 1 2 exd5 lbb4 13
 Illustrative Games 13 7

.to gxf5 14 a3 fxg4 15 .tg2 lba6 38 :tf5 'iVxd6 39 l:lxc5 l:le8 40 .l:td5
16 'iVd3 ltld7 17 0-0-0 1-0
Apparently the best. On the obvi­ Game 13
ous 1 7 .td4 possible is 1 7 ... e5! 1 8 Savon - Gufeld
dxe6 .txd4 ! 1 9 lbxd4 ( 1 9 'iVxd4 USSR (ch) 1 972
'iVh4+) 1 9 . . . lbdc5 20 'iVe3 'iVh4+
and Black's position uncoils like a 1 e4 c5 2 lbo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
spring (Y.Yakovich). lbxd4 ltlf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 .te3 .tg7 7
17 ... lbe5 18 'iVe2 'iVc7 19 .td4 .tel lbc6 8 lbb3 0-0 9 f4 i.e6 10
More logical is 1 9 h3, opening g4 :cs 1 1 f5 .txb3 1 2 axb3 e6
lines for an attack on the king. More energetic is 1 2 ...lbe5 1 3 g5
19 lbg6 20 .txg7+ 'iVf4+?
..• l:.c3 !?, but Black intends a clever
This thrust only promotes White's piece sacrifice.
attack. More solid was 20 .. .'�xg7 2 1 13 g5
d6 exd6 2 2 lbb5 'iVe7, successfully
defending himself.
21 �b1 �xg7 22 h3 h5
On 22 ... g3 follows 23 l:ld3.
23 :d4 'tVe5

l3 ...lbxe4 14 lbxe4 exf5 15 lbc3

After 15 ltlf6+ .txf6 16 gxf6
'iVxf6 the game is level.
15 ...l:le8 16 .tfl 'iVxg5 17 �fl !
d5 18 ltlxd5 f4?
24 'iVd2! gxh3 25 .txh3 .txh3 26 Black is distracted. He should
l:bh3 l:lad8 27 l:le4 'iVf5 28 'iVg2 play 1 8 ... .txb2, though even then
'iVd7 White's chances are preferable.
White's heavy pieces carry out a 19 c4 lbe5 20 l:lg1 'iVh6?
frontal attack and an attempt to 'buy The queen is out of play here.
him off' with an exchan.ge sacrifice 20...'iVf5 would be more stubborn.
fails: 28 ...l:lxd5 29 :o 'tVg5 30 l:lg3 21 h4! l:lc6 22 l:txa7 l:tce6 23
'iVf5 3 1 lbxd5 'iVxd5 32 :xg6+. lbb7 lbc6 24 .tg4 l:.e4 25 .to
29 lbd4 l:lh8 30 l:le7! l:ld4 26 .txd4 lbxd4 27 l:le7 l:tb8
The beginning of the end. 28 l:te4 lbxb3 29 lbe7+ �h8 30
30...'iVg4 31 l:lg3 'iVxd4 32 l:lxg6+ lbc6 l:r.a8 31 'iVxb3 'iVxh4 32 �e2
�f8 33 l:lxb7 lbc5 34 l:lb4 'iVe5 35 h5 33 lbe5 �h7 34 lbxti l:tb8 35
'iVfl 'iVe7 36 d6 'iVe5 37 l:lf6 l:lh7 'iVxb8 1-0
1 38 Illustrative Games

Game 1 4 .tgl , in conjunction with the threat

Nunn - Kudrin l:ta6-a8, things are bad for him.
Wijk aan Zee 1 985 18 .txg4 'it'b7 19 .to 'il'd7 30
.tg1 'il'd3 31 lla8 l:tbb8 31 l:.xb8
1 e4 c5 1 lbo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l:.xb8 33 llxe7 'ii'd8 34 l:td7 1-0
lbxd4 lbf6 5 lbc3 g6 6 .tel .tg7 7
0-0 0-0 8 'ifi>h1 lbc6 9 lbb3 a6 10 f4 Game 1 5
b5 1 1 .to .td7 1 1 .te3 l:tc8 13 Smirin - Mark Tseitlin
l:[f2 Israel 1 991
With the idea l:.f2-d2.
13 ...b4 14 lba4 1 e4 c5 1 lbo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
After 14 lbd5 lbxd5 1 5 exd5 lba5 lbxd4 lL!f6 5 lbc3 lbc6 6 .tel g6 7
the game is equal. 0-0 .tg7 8 lbb3 0-0 9 'ifi>h1 a6 10 a4
14 ... 1lb8 15 a3 lba5 16 lbxa5 .te6 1 1 f4 lba5 11 lbxa5 'ifxa5 13
'il'xa5 17 axb4 'ii'xb4 18 c3 'it'b5 .td3 llac8 14 f5 .tc4 15 'ii'el
.txd3 16 cxd3 e6!
After the closing of the d-file this
break is effective. Not dangerous is
17 .tg5 l:.ce8! and neither way of
exchanging the f-pawn is to his
advantage.
17 .tdl exf5 18 exf5
On 1 8 lbd5 Black had planned
1 8 ...1lc2.
18 ...l:.fe8 19 'il'd 1 !
The queen heads for b3 . After 1 9
'ii'f.3 'ii'x f5 Black i s not worse.
19 ...gxf5?
An unnecessary weakening of his
19 e5! dxe5 10 fxe5 'ii'xe5 1 1 position, which in addition allows a
.td4 .txa4? transfer of the knight to an attacking
A mistaken exchange which not position. Better was 19 . . .'ii'b6 20 a5
only gives White the advantage of 'ifd4 ! and the queen controls the
the two bishops but, more impor­ whole board.
tantly, a pair of connected passed 10 lbe4 'il'd5 11 lbg3 'ifxd3 11
pawns. 2 1 ...'il'b5 was necessary. lL!xf5 l:.el 13 .tc3 'ife4
11 llxa4 'il'e6 13 'ifa1 'il'c8 14
l:tel l:te8?!
Better was 24 ... e6, leaving the
rook for more active operations.
15 l:txa6 lbg4?
Pseudo-active, upsetting the coor­
dination of his pieces. More logical
wa 25 ... e6 followed by ...lL!f6-d5.
16 .ta7 l:.b5 17 'il'a4 l:.d8?!
Black is tempted by the trap, 28
'il'xb5? lld 1 + 29 .tg1 .td4 30 cxd4
'il'c l , but also after 27 .. Jig5 28
 Illustrative Games 13 9

24 'ii'x e2! Black prefers to sacrifice a pawn

An effective queen sacrifice, neu­ since after 1 3 ...b4 1 4 lt:Jd5 ..ixb2 1 5
tralising Black's rush forward. On ltd I ..ig7 1 6 e5 the initiative passes
24 l:f3 he could have continued the to White.
offensive: 24 ...lt:Jg4 25 'iffl ..ixc3 14 li:Jb5 a4 15 li:Jd2 h6 16 ..ih4
26 bxc3 'ii'e 5. lt:Jc5
24...'ii'xe2 25 l:lae1 'ii'c2 Also here, unfavourable is
Black has four ways of driving 16 ... ..ixb2 17 l:lb 1 a3 18 lt:Jxa3.
away the queen and he does not find 17 lt:Jc4 ..ia6 18 li:Jba3 li:Jd4 19
the best one. Bad is 25 . . .'ii'g4? 26 l:.fl l:tc8?!
..ixf6, and also no good is 25 . . .'ii'c4 Up to this point Black has played
26 lt:Jxd6 'ii'c6 27 lt:Jxc8 'ifxc8 28 very energetically, but now, with a
..ixf6 or 25 ... 'ii'd3 26 lt:Je7+ �f8 27 routine move, he loses precious
lt:Jxc8. The best chance lies in time. More energetic was 19 . . .lt:Jxf3
25 ...'ii'h5 ! 26 lt:Je7+ �f8 27 lt:Jxc8 20 gxf3 f5 ! 2 1 exf5 g5 22 fxg5 hxg5
lt:Jg4 28 ..ixg7+ �xg7 29 h3 'ii'h 4! 23 ..ixg5 l:lxf5 or 1 9 ... d5 20 exd5
30 l:le2 'iVd8 31 lt:Je7 lt:Jh6! and lt:Jxf3 2 1 gxf3 'ii'xd5 22 li:Jb6 'ii'h5
Black manages to defend himself with a complicated game.
(I.Smirin). 20 l:td1 lll xf3 21 gxf3 'ikc7 22 b3
26 lt:Je7+ �f8 27 lt:Jxc8 lt:Je4? f5 23 exf5 g5 24 fxg5 hxg5 25
Fatally leaving his queen unpro­ ..ixg5 llxf5 26 'ii'xe7 d5! 27 li:Jd6
tected, since it now falls victim to a
'windmill' combination. Necessary
was 27 ...lt:Je8 28 ..ixg7+ lt:Jxg7 29
lt:Jd6 f5.
28 l:lxe4! 'ii'xe4
After 28 ... ..ixc3? 29 lt:Jxd6 threat­
ens a back rank mate.
29 l:lxti+! �g8 30 l:lxg7+ �f8 3 1
l:lti+ �g8 3 2 : n 'ii'e6 3 3 li:Jb6 d5
34 a5 'ii'e2 35 l:lel 'ii'b5 36 h3 d4
37 ..ixd4 'ii'xa5 38 l:.e7 'ii'b5 39
l:lg7+ �f8 40 l:lxh7 �e8 41 l:lxb7
'ii'c6 42 l:la7 'ii'c l+ 43 ..igl 'ihb2
44 lba6 'Wb1 45 l:la4 'ifb5 46 l:lg4 27...'ii'xe7?
'ii'e2 47 li:Jd5 'ifdl 48 lt:Jc3 'iVai 49 A mistake due to not seeing
lt:Je4 <J6ti 50 li:Jd2 �f6 51 li:Jf3 �f5 White's reply on the 29th move. It
52 �h2 'ii'c l 53 ..id4 1-0 was necessary to give up_ the ex­
change by 27 ... l:txg5 28 'iWxg5 (28
Game 1 6 lt:Jxc8?! 'ii'f4 29 'ii'c5 ..ie2 !)
Tal - Gufeld 28 ...'ikxd6.
USSR 1977 28 ..ixe7 lt:Je4 29 fxe4!
After 29 lt:Jxe4 dxe4 everything is
1 e4 c5 2 lt:Jf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 in order for Black.
lt:Jxd4 li:Jf6 5 lt:Jc3 g6 6 ..ie2 ..ig7 7 29 ... l:lxf2 30 lt:Jxc8 ..ixc8 31 exd5
0-0 lt:Jc6 8 li:Jb3 0-0 9 ..ig5 a6 10 f4 axb3 32 axb3 ..ih3 33 ..ic5 l:te2 34
b5 1 1 ..if3 ..ib7 12 �hl li:Jd7! 13 l:td3?
'ii'e 1 a5!
140 Illustrative Games

White has an enormous advan­ lDde5 2 1 l£ld4 ) 1 9 .i.h5 l:.f8 20

=

tage, but Black retains some initia­ 1i'e2 1i'e7 2 1 c3 with chances for
tive and hypnotic hopes in the both sides (P.Svidler).
strength of the bishop-pair. Never­ 17 gxf4 18 .i.xf4 l£lde5
•..

theless, by giving up part of his ex­

tra material, 34 l£lc4! .l:.xc2 35 d6
.i.d7 36 .i.d4, White would consoli­
date his forces. Unfortunately Tal
could not overcome the psychologi­
cal influence of the bishop on b3 .
34..J:te 1 + 35 .i.gl .i.f5 36 l:.e3
.:at 37 l£lc4 .i.d4
Now the deadly pin demonstrates
that everything is in order for Black.
38 .l::tg3+ �h7 39 h4 l:.cl 40 l£ld2
.i.xc2 41 d6 l:.dl 42 l£lc4 .i.f2!
42 ....i.xb3? is a false trail: 43
.l::txb3 .i.xg l 44 l:.b7+ �h6 45 �g2 With the establishment of the
and White again has the advantage. knight on e5, Black's position
43 l:.g4 .i.xb3 44 lDb2 .i.d5+ 45 proves to be preferable.
�h2 .i.xgl+ 46 l:.xgl l:.d2+ 47 19 .i.h5 .:.rs 20 c3 1i'e7 21 1i'e2
�g3 l:.xb2?? l£lg6! 22 .i.g3
Incomprehensibly underestimat­ As pointed out by P.Svidler, the
ing the passed pawn. After 47 ....i.b3 lesser evil was the exchange of the
or 47 ... .i.e6 the logical outcome of bishop which has no prospects: 22
this long-suffering game would be a .i.xg6 hxg6 23 1i'g4 g5 24 .i.g3
draw. when after 24 ...l£le5 25 .i.xe5 fxe5
48 d7 l:.b8 49 l:.dl l:.g8+ 50 �f4 26 lDa5 White comes alive.
.i.e6 51 d8 =1i' l:.xd8 52 l:.xd8 1-0 Stronger is 24 ...l:.ae8 ! , retaining the
better chances.
Game l ?
22 l£lce5 23 lDd2
Apicella - Svidler
.•.

23 lDg4 merely provokes 23 ... f5.

Erevan (ol) 1 996
23 ...�h8 24 l:.f2 .!:.adS 25 l:r.bfl
1 e4 c5 2 l£lf3 l£lc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .i.h6
lDxd4 l£lf6 5 lDc3 d6 6 .i.e2 g6 7 With the idea of exchanging the
0-0 .i.g7 8 lDb3 0-0 9 .i.g5 a6 10 f4 dark-squared bishops after .i.g5-h4,
b5 1 1 .i.f3 .i.b7 12 �hl lDd7 13 which would consolidate the posi­
l:.bl .l:.e8 14 lDd5 f6! tion of the knight on e5.
Black drives away the bishop. The 26 l£lg4 l£lxg4 27 .i.xg4 d5!
weakening of the kingside pawn After this move Black's position
formation is compensated by the uncoils like a spring. But by now
centralised position of the knight on good advice for White is hard to
e5. come by.
15 .i.h4 e6 16 l£le3 g5! 17 .i.g3 28 .i.h5
As shown by the further develop­ Also after 28 exd5 .i.xd5 29 c4
ment of events, stronger was 1 7 (threatening 29 ... .i.d2) 29 . . . .i.a8 ! 30
fxg5 fxg5 1 8 .i.g3 lDde5 (or lDb3 f5 3 1 .i.h5 .i.e4! Black has the
18 ... .i.e5 19 l£lg4 .i.xg3 20 hxg3 advantage (P.Svidler).
 Illustrative Games 141

28 dxe4 29 tbxe4 f5 30 �xg6

.•. 26 f5 f6
On 30 tbd6 best is 30 ... �a8 ! ,
which leads to a transposition of
moves, whereas 30 ... l:xd6 3 1 �xg6
f4 32 �c2 e5 (32 ... fxg3 33 'ii'e5+
'it>g8 34 'ii'xg3+) 33 �xf4! �xf4 34
l:xf4 allows White to defend
himself.
30 ... hxg6 31 tbd6
The only safe place for the knight,
but not for long.
3l...�a8!
On 3 l . ..�d5 possible is 32 c4 ! .
3 2 �e5+
After 32 'ii'e5+ �g8 33 .l:.d 1 �g7 27 �xf6!
34 'ii'c5 e5 the queen is driven back. A decisive opening up of the
32 ...�g� 33 l:d1 l:d7 34 'ii'd3 king's position .
.l:.fd8 35 'Wg3 27 ... exf6 28 tbgxf6+ �xf6 29
On 35 .l:.fd2 would have followed tbxf6+ 'itf8 30 fxg6 hxg6 31 'ii'g4
35 ... �d5. tbf7 32 'ii'xg6 tbce5 33 tbh7+ 1-0
35...'ii'g5
After the exchange of queens the Game 1 9
knight on d6 is doomed. Karpov - Miles
36 'ii'xg5 �xg5 37 l:d3 �e4 38 Bad Lauterberg 1 977
.l:.h3 l:xd6 39 l:h8+ �f7 40 l:h7+
1 e4 c5 2 ttJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
'ite8 41 l:h8+ 'itd7 0-1
tbxd4 tbf6 5 tbc3 g6 6 �e2 ..ig7 7
0-0 0-0 8 �g5 tbc6 9 tbb3 �e6 10
Game 1 8 �h1 .,c8
Karpov - Martin An attempt to treat the position in
Las Palmas 1 977 the spirit of the variation where
White's bishop is developed on e3 .
1 e4 c5 2 ttJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 l l f4 l:d8 12 �f3 �c4 l3 l:fl e6
tbxd4 tbf6 5 tbc3 g6 6 �e2 �g7 7 14 l:d2 _.c7
0-0 0-0 8 �g5 tbc6 9 tbb3 �e6 10 It becomes clear that the differ­
'i&Jh1 a6 1 1 f4 b5 12 �0 l:c8 l3 ence in having the bishop on g5 in­
tbd5! stead of e3 is in White's favour,
In the present situation this thrust since the pin on the knight f6 pre­
is good, since Black has no counter­ vents Black from displaying any ini­
play associated with a capture on d5 tiative in the centre. Therefore he
-a consequence of the not entirely has to go over to defence.
successful combination of moves 15 'ii'e 1 h6 16 �h4 .l:td7
... �c8-e6 and ...b7-b5. It is also not easy on other con­
l3...tbd7 14 c3 tbb6 15 'ii'e2 tbc4 tinuations: 1 6... a5 1 7 a4 �6 1 8 e5
16 .l:.ad1 'ii'd7 1 7 l:fe1 Wa7 18 or 16 ... l:f8 17 l:.ad 1 tbe8 18 �e2.
�h4 l:fe8 19 tbcl ! 'ii'b8 20 tbd3 aS 17 .l:.ad1 e5?
21 tbfl �d7 22 �g4! �xg4 23 Black cannot endure the difficul­
tbxg4 a4 24 a3 'ii'b7 25 .:.n tbd8? ties of a 'god-forsaken' defence
25 ...l:f8 is more tenacious. -but this was necessary at all costs.
 142 Illustrative Games

Now, however. White wins This weakens the b4 square,

elegantly. which is exploited technically by
18 .ixf6 .ixf6 V.Toealov.
9 ... ttJc6 10 tiJb3 .ie6 1 1 �h1
l:r.c8 12 f4 lt:la5 13 lt:lxa5 'ii'xa5 14
i..d3 l:r.fe8
A move in the modem style.
Black prophylactically defends the
e7 pawn in case of lt:lc3-d5 . Another
possible continuation is 14 ....ic4,
which White now prevents.
15 'ii'e2 it'b4 16 aS?!
White fixes the black pawn-pair,
but this only increases the number
of his own weaknesses. Worthy of
consideration is 1 6 f5 .ic4 1 7 i..d2.
19 .ig4!
A masked tactical blow: the rook,
it turns out, cannot leave d7 because
of 20 i..e2 !, and the white knight
occupies d5 with decisive effect. An
immediate 19 .ie2 achieves nothing
since after 1 9....ixe2 20 ltJd5 the
queen can go back to d8.
19...exf4 20 .ixd7 'ii'xd7 2 1
:xd6 'ii'e7 22 :d7 'ii'e5 2 3 ltJd2
i..e6 24 lt:lf3 it'b8 25 l:r.7d6 i..e7 26
:6d2 i.. f6 27 ltJd5 .ig7 28 c3 g5
29 'ii'fl lt:le5 30 'ii'c5 i..g4 31 :n
-b6 32 it'hs it'b7 33 lt:ld4! 16 ...i..g4! 17 'ii'd2
After 33 lt:lxe5 .ixe5 34 lt:lxb6 On 1 7 'ii'e 1 V.Topalov intended
'ii'b 8 35 :ds axb6 36 :xeS i..e2 the 1 7 ... .id7 (after 1 7 ...1Vxb2 1 8 i..x f6
outcome of the game is unclear. i..x f6 1 9 ltJd5 and White has an un­
33 ... .id7 34 it'b3 'ii'a6 35 'ii'd 1 pleasant initiative) 1 8 .ixf6 .ixf6
.ig4 36 it'b1 lt:lc4 37 'ii'd3 b5 38 1 9 ltJd5 'ii'x e1 20 lt:lxf6+ exf6 2 1
:dfl it'b7 39 b3 ltJd6 40 lt:lrs lt:lxrs :rxe 1 :e7 with the idea of
41 exf5 l:r.d8 42 c4 �h8 43 h3 i..h 5 . . ..id7-c6 and ...:c8-e8.
44 :e1 1-0 17 ....id7 18 'ii'e 2?
A draw offer? But on 18 l:.a3 it is
possible that Anand did not like
Game 20 1 8 ....ic6 followed by 1 9 ...lt:ld7.
Anand - Topalov 18 ...'ii'xb2 19 i..xf6 .ixf6 20 ltJd5
Linares /994 i..b5
Also not bad was 20...'ii'xa 1 2 1
1 e4 c5 2 lt:lf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 :xa 1 i..x a1 .
lt:lxd4 lt:lf6 5 lt:lc3 g6 6 .ie2 .ig7 7 21 .ixb5 'ii'xb5 22 'ii'xb5 axb5 23
0-0 0-0 8 i..g5 a6 9 a4 l:labl l:tc5
 Illustrative Games 143

Summing up, Black has an extra,

albeit doubled, pawn. In view of the
fact that White's weak pawns are in
need of defence, it is not a good
idea to allow into play the second
black rook (24 lLlxf6+ exf6).
24 :rd1 �g7 25 lLlb6
On 25 g4 good is 25 ...g5 26 lLlxf6
exf6!
25....:.xc2 26 :xb5 :e2
As D.Bronstein used to joke in his
day "White's weaknesses disappear
and soon there is not a single one Black fully mobilises his forces
left!". and commences operations against
27 lLld5 lbe4 2S .:.xb7 :as 29 g4 White's king's flank.
lba5 30 g5 i.a1 ! 3 1 ltJxe7 19 i.e3 'ii'c 7 20 lLlfl
Not possible is 3 1 l:.xe7 because The exchange 20 exf5? gxf5 2 1
of 3 I .. ..:.ds. ltJt2 only plays into his opponent's
31. ..l:.xf4 32 ltJc6 l:.aS 33 l:.xd6 hands. After 2 1 ...l:U6 the rooks
:a2 34 l:[d1 :m 35 liJdS 'it>gs 36 break through to g6 for an attack on
.:.bs h5 the king.
Preventing the mate threat after 20... e5! 21 exf5 .l:.xf5 22 lLld3?
37 lLle6. Better is 22 i.d3 with the idea of
37 gxh6 i.e5 3S .l:.b7 l:.xh2+ 39 22 . . .1:.f7 23 lLlh3 and ltJg5 .
.

�g1 l:.hg2+ 40 'it>h1 .:.h2+ 41 �g1 22 ... .1:.af8 23 fxe5 ltJxe5 24 lLlxe5
l:.hg2+ 42 �h1 l:.g4 0-1 i.xe5 25 'ii'g4 'ii'e7
G.Serper considers the best
Game 2 1 continuation of the attack to be
Zagrebelny - Serper 25 ...i.c8! ? 26 'ii'e2 i.xh2 27 �xh2
Tashkent 1 992 l:h5+ 28 �g I d5 29 g3 (29 g4
i.xg4 !) 'ii'xg3+ 30 'ii'g2 .:.xfl + ! .
1 e4 c5 2 liJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 2 6 h3
ltJxd4 lLlf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 i.e2 i.g7 7
0-0 ltJc6 S lLlb3 0-0 9 l:.e1 a6 10
i.n
I0 i.g5 is more often played.
10...b5 1 1 liJd5 liJd7
Weaker is I I . ..liJxd5 1 2 exd5 lLle5
13 c3 with the better game.
12 c3
White plans i.c l -g5. Also worth
considering is 1 2 a4 with the idea of
1 2 . .b4 1 3 a5 ! , fixing the weak a6
.

pawn.
1 2 e6 13 lLle3 lLlb6
••.

Also not bad is 1 3 ...ltJc5. 26...l:.f3!

14 f4 i.b7 15 ltJg4 ltJc4 16 liJd2 From here the rook attacks not
'itb6+ 17 �h1 lLlxd2 1S i.xd2 f5 ! only the bishop fl but also the h3
144 lllustrative Games

pawn, as shown by 27 i.g5? 'ii'x g5! Or 46... axb5 47 l:r.b4 l:td i + 48

28 'ii'xg5 l:r.xh3+ 29 �gi i.h2+ 30 �c2 l:r.d5 49 �b3 followed by l:r.d4
�hi i.g3+ 3 I �g i i.f2 mate. and �b4.
27 i.h6 l:t8f5 28 �gl 'ii'f6? 47 �c2 �xe4 48 �xdl axbS 49
Hallucinating, Black continues �c2 �dS so �d3 �cs 51 b3 �dS
under the illlusion that the rook can­ 52 b4 �eS 53 c4 �d6 54 cxbS �c7
not be taken (but now the white 55 �d4 �b6 56 �c4 �c7 57 �cs
king is no longer on h i ! ) and denies �b7 58 b6 �a6 59 b7 'iti>a7 60
himself the fruits of his preparation b8='ii' I-O
for a decisive storm, the logical
development of which might be Game 22
28 . . .l:r.f2 29 l:te2 l:r.xe2 30 'ii'xe2 Benjamin - Gufeld
'ii'h4 with an invasion on g3. New York 1 989
29 gxf3 i.xf3 30 l:r.xeS! 'ii'xeS?
Confusion. Circumstances have I e4 cS 2 tiJfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
changed with the sharp increase in tLixd4 tLif6 5 tLic3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7
the role of the dark-squared bishop. h3 0-0 8 tiJfJ
Necessary was 30 ...dxe5 3 I 'ii'g3 An unjustified concession in the
g5 ! . centre. The main continuations are 8
31 'ii'h 4! gS 3 2 'ii'e l i.e4 0-0 and 8 i.b3.
Through inertia, Black plays for 8 tLibd7! ? 9 0-0 a6 10 a4 b6 I I
.•.

the attack, but in his 'groggy' state 'ii'e2 i.b7 1 2 i.f4 'ii'c7 13 l:tfel e6
it would be more logical to ex­ 14 l:r.adl tiJeS I S i.b3
change queens rather than bishops. After I 5 tLixe5?! dxe5 Black con­
33 i.g2 i.xg2 trols the d4 square.
33 ... d5 is stronger. lS ... tiJfd7 16 tiJd2 tlJcS 17 i.e3
34 �xg2 l:tf6 35 'ii'xeS dxeS 36 l:r.ad8 18 i.gS?!
i.xgS l:tg6 37 h4 h6 38 �f3 hxgS A loss of time. More consistent is
39_ l:tgl l:r.f6+ 40 �e3 �fi 41 l:r.xgS 18 f4.
18 ... l:r.d7 19 'ii'e3 dS!
Now the position opens up to
Black's advantage.
20 exdS exdS 21 'ii'g3 tLie6! 22
h4 tlJxgS 23 hxgS l:tfd8 24 ttJn

It comes down to a prosaic rook

ending where Black, due to his
pawn weaknesses, has no chance.
4l. l:r.f4 42 l:r.xeS l:r.xh4 43 �d3
•.

�f6 44 l:te4 l:thl 45 a4 �f5 46

axbS l:tdl+ 24 ...'iti>tll !
 /llustrative Games 145

The attack on the queen's flank is Not fearing 19 .ixe6 fxe6 20

crowned by his majesty who covers llxe6 .rlf8, Black prepares to break
squares of invasion along the e-file. the pin on the Ion.g diagonal.
25 ._,h4 lLlc4! 26 .i.xc4 ._,xc4 27 19 f4 ._,c5 20 1t'd3 d5 2 1 f5 exf5
._,xh7? Upon opposite-sides castling the
A dubious decision. For the sake isolated pawn is not a weakness.
of a pawn the queen becomes a sta­
tistic, but also after 27 ._,xc4 dxc4
the advantage of the two bishops is
obvious.
27......g4 28 l:ld3 ._,xg5 29 l:lh3
d4!
A decisive break in the centre,
allowing a graphic demonstration of
the geometrical influence of the
bishops.
30 tt:Je4 '6'e5 3 1 lLlfd2 d3! 32 lLJO
._,xb2 33 cxd3 llxd3 34 lLleg5 l:ld1
35 .l:.xd1 .J:txdl+ 36 �h2 ._,xf2 37
lLlf7 22 lLla4!
Also after 37 lLle6+ fxe6 38 ._,xg6 After 22 gxf5 d4! Black has the
Black has at his disposal the forcing advant�ge.
manoeuvre 38 ....i.e5+! 39 lLlxe5 22 ... Wb4 23 gxf5 ._,f4+
._,gl + 40 �g3 ._,xg2+ 4 1 �h4 After 23 ...d4! ? the 'Tarrasch
._,xh3+! 42 �xh3 llh 1 + 43 �g4 knight' (which is badly placed) is
l:lg 1 +, leading to victory. stuck on the edge of the board and
37... .ixf3! 38 .rlxf3 ._,g1+ 39 White would still have to struggle
�g3 ._,el+ 40 'iii>g4 lld4+ 41 �g5 for equality.
._,e7+ 42 �xg6 ._,e6+ 43 �g5 ._,g4 24 ..t>b 1 l:le8 25 fxg6 hxg6 26
mate! 0-1 lLlc3 lh-lh
Game 23 Game 24
Tal - Gufeld Moldovan - Marin
USSR 1973 Bucharest 1994

1 e4 c5 2 lLJO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 1 e4 c5 2 lLlc3 lLlc6 3 lLlge2 g6 4

lLlxd4 lLJf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 .i.e3 .i.g7 7 d4 cxd4 5 lLlxd4 .i.g7 6 .ie3 d6 7
.ic4 lLlc6 8 h3 0-0 9 .i.b3 lLlxd4 10 .ic4 lLlf6 8 h3 0-0 9 .ib3 lLla5 10
.ixd4 b5 11 lLlxb5 0-0 b6 11 ...d3 .i.b7 1 2 .i.d5
After this game, preference was The main continuation here is 1 2
given to 1 1 a3 . l:lfd l .
l l ... lLlxe4 12 .i.xg7 �xg7 13 1 2......d7 1 3 .ixb7 '6'xb7 14
...d4+ lLlf6 14 0-0-0 .i.b7 llad1 l:lac8 1 5 .l:.fe1 lLlc4?!
Possibly more accurate Is This thrust should be prepared by
1 4 ......a5. 1 5 ... a6! 16 lLJf3 b5. Now however
15 .rlhg1 ._,aS 16 lLlc3 llac8 17 the knight cannot be maintained on
l:lge1 e6! this outpost.
Cold-bloodedly preparing d6-d5. 16 .tel b5 17 b3
18 g4 llfd8!
146 Illustrative Games

Not good is 1 7 lDcxb5 a6 1 8 lDc3 Prophylactics in anticipation of

lDxb2 and Black has the advantage. lDc3-d5. The main continuations
17 ...b4 18 lDd5 here are l l ...a6 and l l ...ltJe5.
The exchange 1 8 bxc4? bxc3 1 9 12 'ii'd 2 'ii'a5 13 lDf3 a6
'ii'xc3 lDd7 is i n Black's favour. More energetic is an immediate
18...ltJd5 l 3 ...b5.
On 1 8 ... ltJe5? follows 1 9 'ii'b 5!, 14 l:ad1 b5 15 i.h6 i.h8 16 ltJg5
while after 1 8 ... ltJa3 White rein­ lDe5 17 f4 lDc4
forces his knight-1 9 c4.
19 exd5 lDe5
Weak is 1 9 . . . lDb6? 20 lDc6 and
not possible is 20 ... lDxd5? because
of 2 l lDa5.
20 'ii'e4 f5 21 'ii'e2

18 e5!
Exploiting the opportunity that
1 8 ... lllxd2?? is not possible because
of 1 9 i.xf7 mate!
18...lDh5?
21. ..'ii'xd5! And immediately Black makes a
Black prepares to give up the ex­ mistake. After the counter 1 8 ...b4
change if only not to allow the not possible is 1 9 ltJd5? because of
knight to get to e6: 2 l ...f4 22 ltJe6 1 9 ...lDxd2 20 lDxf6+ i.xf6, while
f3 23 'ii'e4 etc. on 1 9 lDce4 ltJxe4 20 :xe4 i.e6! 2 1
22 ltJxf5 i.xc4 i.xc4 the position is simpli­
After 22 f4 'ii'c5 23 i.e3 lDd7 24 fied and White's advantage is
lDe6 'ii'xc2 25 lDxf8 'ii'xe2 26 l:xe2 minimal.
�f8 Black has two pawns for the 19 'ii'fl ! lDg7
exchan_ge and a solid endgame. The knight heads for f5. Now al­
22 ...lllf3+ 23 'ii'xf3 'ii'xf5 24 ready 19 ... b4 does not achieve its
'ii'xf5 l:.xf5 25 l:xe7 l:xc2 1/l- lh objective: 20 lDd5 e6 2 1 'ii'a7 ! and
White maintains the initiative.
Game 25 20 g4!
Jansa - Watson Restricting the knight.
Gausdal 1 988 20 ...b4 2 1 lDd5 lDe6 22 f5!
Going for material gain.
1 e4 c5 2 lDf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 22 ...lllxg5 23 i.xg5 ltJxe5 24
lDxd4 ltJf6 5 lDc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7 lDxe7+ l:xe7 25 i.xe7 i.c6 26 .l:.e3
h3 0-0 8 0-0 lDc6 9 i.e3 i.d7 10 'ii'b6 27 i.xd6 i.f3 28 i.xe5 i.xd1
i.b3 l:.c8 1 1 :et .l:.e8 29 i.xh8 �xh8 30 .l:te8+ 1-0
 Illustrative Games 147

Game 26 after 2 l .. .iLlb7 22 i.xg7 1Wxg7 23

J.Polgar - Kamsky lL!bd4 White has a solid advantage.
Buenos Aires 1 994 22 1Wxa5 i.xh3 23 l:.fl
Black's hopes are justified upon
1 e4 c5 2 lL!fJ lL!c6 3 d4 cxd4 4 23 gxh3? 1Wxh3 24 liJd2 1i'g3+ 25
lL!xd4 g6 5 lLlc3 i.g7 6 i.e3 iLlf6 7 �h1 1i'xh3+.
i.c4 1Wa5 S 0-0 0-0 9 i.b3 d6 10 h3 23 ...axb3 24 i.xg7 �xg7 25
i.d7 1 1 f4 1i'h5 12 liJfJ b5! 13 a3 :xc2 bxc2 26 1Wc3+ �gS 27 gxh3
a5 14 1i'd3 a4 The rest is 'minus the two knights
Also possible was 14 ...b4 1 5 lLle2 defence'.
( 1 5 axb4 axb4 ) 15 ...bxa3 1 6 lLlg3
= 27...1i'xf4 2S �fl 1Wa4 29 lL!bd4
axb2 1 7 lLlxh5 bxa 1 =1W 1 8 lha 1 :as 30 :xe7 1Wa5 31 1Wxa5 1:.Xa5
lLlxh5 19 c3 with an unclear game 32 lL!xc2 .l:r.xd5 33 a4 :as 34 :e4
(Bi:insch). f5 35 :b4 �g7 36 lL!cd4 'iti>f6 37
15 i.d5 lL!xd5 lL!b3 :a7 3S a5 g5 1-0
After 1 5 ... e6 16 i.xc6 i.xc6 1 7
lL!d4 i.b7 1 8 f5 White has a strong Game 27
initiative, Gi.Garcia-Zamora, New Adams - Shirov
York 1 994. Bie/ 1 991
16 exd5
On 16 lL!xd5 possible is 16 ...:ab8 1 e4 c5 2 iLlfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
( 1 6... i.xb2? 1 7 :ab 1 i.g7 1 8 iLlb6) lL!xd4 iLlf6 5 lLlc3 g6 6 i.c4 i.g7 7
1 7 iLld4 :res with double-edged 0-0 0-0 S h3 lL!c6 9 i.e3 lL!xe4 10
play. i.xfi+ �xfi
16 ... lL!a5 17 i.d4 1i'h6 Another way is 1 0...:xf7.
An artificial decision, apparently 1 1 lL!xe4 lt:Jxd4 12 i.xd4 e5 13
based on an oversight. After i.e3 d5 14 lL!g3 �gS 15 c3 i.e6 16
1 7 ... tiJc4 Black risks nothing. lLle2!
1S l:tae1 :res 19 lL!xb5 :acS 20 Preparing f2-f4, which is not good
b3 i.f5 21 1i'd2 immediately: 1 6 f4? d4! 1 7 cxd4
exf4.
16...g5! 17 1i'd2 h6 1S h4! gxh4
19 i.xh6

2 I...:xc2?
Black is counting on an attack,
but he has insufficient resources for
this. However there is no way back: 19 ...1i'f6!
148 Illustrative Games

While preventing the break f2-f4, A pawn sacrifice for the initiative.
Black tries to exchange the bishop On 13 i.a7 follows l 3 ...lDc4 ! .
in a more favourable li_ght than after 1 3 l:tfd1
19 ... i.xh6 20 'ii'xh6 WVf6 2 1 'ii'x f6 More decisive is 1 3 lDa5, elimi­
l:r.xf6 22 f4! when Black is left with nating the possibility of the ma­
an isolated pawn on d5. Now, how­ noeuvre lDa5-c5 winning a pawn.
ever, on 20 i.xg7 'ii'xg7 2 1 f4 there 1 3 ...Wxa5 1 4 lDb5.
is the intermediate move 2 l ...h3 ! 22 13...lDc4 14 i.xc4 i.xc4 15 Wa
l:.f2 (on 22 g3 Black sacrifices two b6 16 l:td2 'ii'c7 17 l:tad1
pawns: 22 . . . h2+! 23 �xh2 d4! 24 It is not easy to exploit the
cxd4 .idS opening the white king's isolated pawn and stronger was to
posiiton) 22 ...l:r.f6 ! , forcing White to 'develop' the rook a l without
weaken his pawn cover: 23 g3 exf4 moving it from its square-1 7 a4
24 l:.xf4 (or 24 lDxf4 'ii'xg3+ 25 'ii'c6 1 8 a5.
'it>h l i.f5 26 'ii'xd5+ i.e6!) 17...lDe8! 18 'ii'h4 f5
24 . . . l:r.xf4 25 'ii'x f4 i.g4! with
chances for both sides (A.Shirov).
20 i.g5 'ii'g6 21 i.xh4 l:.f5 22 f4
Intending, on 22 . . . l:.h5?, the ma­
noeuvre 23 i.g5.
22 ...'ii'g4!
A.Shirov has a fine feeling for the
pulse of the attack.
23 i.g5?
Now, with the black queen once
again in an attacking position, this
manoeuvre is not good. A.Shirov
considers obligatory 23 i.e7 l:.e8
(or 23 ...�£7 24 i.d6 l:.g8 25 fxe5 Black has taken the initiative,
'ii'xg2+ 26 �xg2 i.xe5+ 27 �h 1 controlling the centre and the flanks.
l:th8+ ) 24 l:.f3 ! with a double­
= 19 exf5 gxf5 20 f4 Wc6 21 :a
edged game. l:tc7 22 :n i.f6 23 llg3+ l:r.g_7 24
23 ...l:r.af8! 24 :a d4! l:txg7+ lDxg7 25 'ii'h6 llSe6 26 ltJd2!
A decisive break introducing the A fine manoeuvre with the objec­
light-squared bishop into the attack. tive of eliminating the advantage of
25 cxd4 exf4 26 i.xf4 i.c4 27 the two bishops, based on an inter­
i.e3 .l:.xa 28 i.xa i.xe2 0-1 mediate move to break Black's lines
of communication-26 ... exf4 27
lDxc4 Wxc4 28 lDd5 ! .
Game 28 2 6...i.g7 2 7 'ii'h4 i.a6?!
Tal - Gufeld Retaining the two bishops but let­
Sukhumi 1972 ting go of the advantage. Stronger
was 27 ... lDd4 ! 28 lDxc4 Wxc4 29
1 e4 c5 2 lbf3 d6 3 lDc3 lDf6 4 d4 l:td2 b5.
cxd4 5 lbd4 g6 6 i.e3 i.g7 7 f3 28 lDf3 i.b7 29 fxe5 dxe5 30
lDc6 8 i.c4 0-0 9 'ii'e2 lDa5 10 i.d3 lDd5 Wxc2 3 1 lDe7+ 'it>h8 32 lDg6+
e5 1 1 lDb3 i.e6 12 0-0 l:tc8 �g8 33 lDe7+ 1/z.l/z
 Illustrative Games 149

Game 29 20 liJxf4 .txf4 21 .ie3 .txe3+ 22

Short - lvanchuk l:txe3 g5 23 g3 l:b7 24 c3 .id7 25
Novgorod 1 994 f4 .tg4
White maintains a slight initiative,
1 e4 c5 2 llJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 but no more.
llJxd4 liJf6 5 llJc3 g6 6 .tc4 .tg7 7 26 �g2 �g7 27 .tc4 a5 28 b3
0-0 0-0 8 l:e1 .th5 29 h4 f5!
Lately this plan has become fash­ Demonstrating to White that his
ionable. The usual continuation is 8 rear is also vulnerable. On the ex­
h3 . changes 29 ... .tf7 30 .txf7 l:txf7 3 1
8...llJc6 hxg5 hxg5 3 2 fxg5 fxg5 3 3 �h3
Worth considering is 8 ... a6 9 .ib3 White begins a siege of the weak g5
b5 10 .tg5 .tb7. pawn.
9 .ib3 a6 10 llJxc6 bxc6 1 1 .tg5 30 exf5 gxf4 31 gxf4 l:xf5 32
h6 12 .th4 llJh5 �g3 .tf7 33 .ta6 l:c7 34 .id3
Beginning play on the dark 1/z-1/i
squares. After 1 2 ...llJd7 it is neces­
sary to take into account the active Game 30
13 f4 llJc5 14 .if2. Short - Kramnik
13 f3 �h7 14 ii'd2 .te5 15 .tf2 Novgorod 1 997
'ii'a5 16 l:ad1 l:b8 17 .id4
N.Short considers the best to be 1 e4 c5 2 llJO llJc6 3 d4 cxd4 4
17 .ie3 ! g5 1 8 g3, threatening to llJxd4 liJf6 5 llJc3 d6 6 h3
blast the king's flank by f3-f4. The signal for the forthcoming
17 f6 18 lile2 'ii'xd2 19 l:xd2
••. development of the bishop on c4.
6 ... g6 7 .te3 .tg7 8 .tc4 0-0 9
.ib3 lila5 10 'ii'd 2
White prepares queenside cas­
tling. The main continuation is 1 0
0-0.
10 .td7 1 1 .ih6 l:tc8 12 .txg7
•..

�xg7 13 'ii'd3
Preventing an incursion of the
knight on c4, which is possible after
1 3 0-0-0.
13 a6 14 f4 e5!
.•.

Black prevents the advance e4-e5

in the most radical way. The
19...llJf4 weakening of the d6 pawn has no
Gathering the maximum ' harvest' significance since after an exchange
with play on the dark squares, on f4 the weakness of the d6 and e4
whereas on 19 ... c5 Black could with pawns is mutual, while the black
advantage step back by 20 .te3 ! , pieces have a good outpost on e5.
creating a threat against the proud 15 llJde2 'ii'b6 16 0-0-0 .tb5!
bishop on e5, since not possible is Counterbalancing the weakness
20... .txb2? because of the X-ray on on d6--an exchange on b5 would
the b-file: 2 1 l:b 1 (2 l . ...ia3 22 remove the knight's defence of the
.tg8+). e4 pawn.
150 Jllustrative Games

17 'i'f3 .txe2 18 'i'xe2 �xb3+ 19 The tactical operation thought up

axb3 exf4 20 l:thfl by Rauzer leads to a forced win of a
pawn. But it turns out that Black has
sufficient compensation for it.
.9 . bxc6 10 e5 �e8 1 1 exd6
.

�xd6 12 .txe7 'ifxe7 13 'ifxd6

'i'g5+ 14 'i'd2 'i'a5
Even stronger is 14 ...'i'xd2+ 1 5
'it'xd2 .i.h6+, driving the king to the
centre of Jhe board.
15 .tc4 l:tb8 16 .tb3 .tr5 17
�a4?
A ruinous loss of two tempi, but
also after the correct 1 7 l:the l Black,
with his two bishops, stands well.
20 ...'i'a5?
Even Caissa's strongest players
sometimes take an awful tumble to
earth: Kramnik, carried away by his
queen incursion, forgets the well­
known truth that one in the field is
not a fighting unit and bankrupts his
opening strategy.
As pointed out by N.Short, it was
necessary to defend the f4 pawn:
20 . . . �h5 2 1 'i'd2 l:tfe8! 22 'ifilb 1
(weaker is 22 'i'xd6?! 'i'xd6 23
l:r.xd6 �g3 ! , intending on 24 l:txf4
-24 ... l:txc3) 22 ...l:te6 23 l:tf3 'i'c6 17 ...l:tb4! 18 �c3 llfb8 19 l:the1
with a good game for Black. c5 20 'i'd5
21 l:txf4 'i'a1 +?! Or 20 �5 c4 2 1 �xb4 cxb3 !
Why not 2 1 . . .'i'e5 ? winning.
22 tt:\b1 �d7 20 ... 'it'c7 21 a3 .i.h6+ 22 l:.e3
Threatening ... e4-e5 and an attack Forced!
on the queen from the rear (l:tf4-a4). 22....i.e6 23 axb4
23 l:txd6 �c5 24 'i'e3 a5 25 e5 Desperation...
b5 26 l:th4 'it'g8 23....txe3+! 24 fxe3 .txd5 25
On 26 ...h5 decisive is 27 l:r.xh5 ! . �xd5 'ifd6 and Black won. 0-1
27 l:r.d5 �e6 28 'i'h6 l:txc2+ 29
'ifilxc2 l:.c8+ 30 �c3 1-0 Game 32
Shevelev - Mikhalevski
Game 3 1 Israel (ch) 1 999
Rauzer - Kan
USSR 1 936 1 e4 c5 2 �f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
�xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 g3 �c6 7
1 e4 c5 2 �f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �de2 .tg7 8 .tg2 0-0 9 0-0 l:lb8 10
�xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 .i.g5 .tg7 7 a4 a6 1 1 �d5 b5 12 axb5 axb5 13
'i'd2 �c6 8 0-0-0 0-0 9 �xc6 c3
 Illustrative Games 151

The main continuation is consid­ the consequences of the queen sacri­

ered to be 1 3 �g5. fice: 22 ...W'xb4 23 cxb4 ll:ld3 24
13 ...b4 W'e3 ll:lxc1 25 l:r.xc 1 .rl.xc 1+ 26
Also possible is 1 3 ... ll:ld7 1 4 ll:ld4 'ii'xc 1 �xd4+ 27 �fl .
ll:lxd4 1 5 cxd4 �b7 with approxi­ 23 l:.xb8 llxb8 24 'ii'e3
mately equal chances. Also here after 24 h3 there is
14 lll xf6+ 24 ...ll:ld3 25 'ii'e3 (or 25 W'd2 ll:lxc1
With the inclusion of 1 4 ll:ld4 26 l:.xc 1 �e2) 25 ...'ii'c3 26 ll:lc6
ll:lxd4-15 ll:lxf6+ Black eliminates �e2 and the bishop lives.
the e4 pawn-1 5 ... exf6! 1 6 cxd4 f5 ! 24...ll:lc4 25 W'f2 ll:le5 26 W'e3
and obtains the better game.
14 �xf6 15 ll:ld4 ll:le5
..•

Black counts on exploiting certain

weaknesses in the light-squared pe­
riphery of the opponent's position.
The alternative is 1 5 ... �b7 1 6
�e3.
16 f4 �g4
Requiring accurate calculation
since the bishop might be cut off.
Also worth considering is 1 6 ...bxc3
1 7 bxc3 ll:lc4.
17 'ii'c 2 ll:lc4 18 f5
On 1 8 b3 there is the intermediate 26 ... h6!
1 8 ...bxc3 . After having confirmation of
Ui...'ii'b6 19 'ii'f2 llfc8 20 lla4 White's intentions V.Mikhalevski
For the present the g4-bishop can­ decides to play for a win, since now
not be caetured: 20 h3 ll:lxb2 2 1 on 27 h3 it is necessary to reckon
fxg6 (2 1 'ifxb2 llxc3) 2 l . . .ll:ld3 22 with the threat of27 ... i.g5.
gxf7+ (also insufficient is 22 'ii'e3 27 ll:lc2
hxg6 23 llxf6 ll:lxc 1 14 llxc 1 exf6 White proposes an immediate ex­
25 hxg4 'ii'c 5) 22 . . .�xf7 23 'ii'a2+ change of queens since even worse
b3 (V.Mikhalevski). Therefore is the endgame after 27 ii'xh6 'ifxc3
White indirectly defends the knight 28 'ii'e3 'ifxd4! 29 'ii'xd4 ll:lf3+ or
on d4 (the threat was 20...ll:lb2). 27 fxg6 fxg6 28 'ii'xh6 'ifxc3 29
20...bxc3 21 bxc3 ll:le5 22 llb4 'ii'e3 'ifxe3+ 30 �xe3 ll:lc4 3 1 �f2
Now on 22 h3 possible is l:.b2 (V.Mikhalevski).
22 ...ll:ld3 23 'ii'e3 llxc3 (or 27...�e2
23 ...ll:lxc 1 24 llxc 1 �xd4 25 llxd4 The crowning of Black's strategy:
e5 ) 24 �d2 (24 hxg4 ll:lxcl ! )
= his bishop is free and his positional
24 ...l:.a3 (the tempting 24 ...ll:lc 1 25 achievements evident.
'ii'f2 �xd4 26 l:hd4 llle2+ 27 �h2 28 lle1 ll:ld3 29 'ii'xc5 dxc5 30
leads to a blind alley) 25 llc4 �xd4 llxe2 1:tb1 31 fxg6 fxg6 32 �n
26 .rl.xd4 �e2. l:.xcl 33 c4 �g7 34 h4
22 ...W'c5 Despite the pawn equality, White
V.Mikhalevski prefers to balance has a difficult position since the
on the edge and counter the threat of presence of opposite-coloured bish­
h2-h3 since it is not easy to assess ops favours the attacking side. For
152 Illustrative Games

exam_ple, on 34 l:td2 possible is 14 .txd4! IS .!Dd6+ exd6 16

..•

34 ... ltJe5 and 35 �g2? loses to "ii'xas .txe3

35 ... .tg5 36 l:tf2 .!Dg4 37 l:te2 l:tc2 ! . It becomes clear that the three
3 4...h S 3 S Ad2 .!Des 3 6 �fl pieces are stronger than the queen,
It's also not easy after 36 �g2 while the open position of the white
.!Dg4 37 .td3 .tc3 38 l:te2 .!De5. king does not allow any of them to
36....!Dg4+ 37 �e2 be won: 1 7 "ii'a4+ .!Dc6 1 8 "ii'e4+
After 37 �g 1 .tc3 38 l:te2 e5 ! a �d7 19 'iVxe3 l:te8.
king raid decides: 39 l:tg2 �f6 40 17 �di .!Dc6 18 "ii'c7 0-0 19 l:tfl ?
l:te2 �e7 4 1 l:tg2 �d6, as given by Why not 1 9 "ii'b7 ?
V.Mikhalevski. 19 ... l:tab8 20 �c2 .!Dd4+ 21 �bl
37 .tc3 38 l:tdl l:txc2+ 39 �d3
... .!De6 22 _.xd6 l:tbd8 23 _.e7 l:td2
:a 40 �xc3 .!De3 41 l:td7 .!Dxfl 42 24 a3 .!Dhf4 2S "ii'xb7 .!Des 26 •o
l:txe7+ �f6 43 l:tc7 .!Dxg3 44 Ac6+ .!DdS 0-1
�g7 4S eS l:te2 46 e6 l:te3+ 47 �d2
l:teS 48 e7 lbe7 49 'itd3 l:teS 0-1
Game 34
Game 33 Nunn - Miles
B.V1adimirov Meste1
- London 1 982
France 1 974
I e4 cS 2 .!DO d6 3 d4 cxd4 4
I e4 cS 2 .!Do d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 .!Dxd4 .!Df6 S .!Dc3 g6 6 f4 .!Dc6 7
.!Dxd4 .!Df6 S .!Dc3 g6 6 f4 .tg7 7 eS .!Dxc6 bxc6 8 eS .!Dd7 9 exd6 exd6
.!DhS 8 .tbS+ .td7 9 "ii'O 10 .te3 .!Df6 I I "ii'd 2 .tg7
The most consistent continuation In this variation the bishop is of­
here is 9 e6. The queen takes aim at ten developed on e7, where it pro­
the b7 pawn but never gets as far as tects the dark squares.
taking it. 12 0-0-0 dS 13 .tcs .te6 14 _.d4
9 ... dxeS 10 fxeS .txeS I I .te3 Here the queen is vulnerably
.t-xbS 12 .!DcxbS "ii'aS+! placed. Better is 14 .te2 .
Just in time. Now the troublesome 14 ..."ii'aS IS .tb4 "ii'c7 16 g3 l:tb8
knight is driven away, while 17 .ta3
ventures by White to try and win the
queen require great material
expenditure.
13 c3 a6 14 "ii'dS

17 l:tg8!
.•.

Preparing ....!Df6-e4.
 Illustrative Games 153

18 'ii'a4 'ifb6 19 .ig2 lLJd7

On 19 ...lLJg4 follows 20 l:lxd5 ! .
2 0 l:t.d3 .if5! 21 rl.e1 'itd8 2 2 rl.f3
22 lLJxd5 does not work due to
22 . . . .1Lxb2+! 23 'itb l ! cxd5 24 l:lb3
.ixc2+! 25 'itxc2 'ii'f2+ and Black
wins (Miles).
22 ... l':1e8 23 l:lxe8+ 'itxe8 24 lLld1
lLlc5 25 .l:t.e3+ 'itd8 26 .ixcS 'ii'xc5
27 c3 d4!
An astonishing position. For­
mally, the black king is the more ex­
posed, but it is its covered colleague 21 .ie2!
that perishes. Intending, on 2 l .. ..ie6, to attack
28 l:.f3 .1Le4 29 l:lf2 dxc3 30 by 22 g4 lll f4 (22 . . . .1Lxg4 23 .l:.xf6!
.ixe4 cxb2+ 31 'itd2 b1='ii' 32 .ixe2 24 rl.xg6+) 23 lLlxf4 exf4 24
.ixb1 l:lxb1 33 l:lf3 l:lb4 34 l:ld3+ g5 .
'itc7 3S 'ffa3 aS 36 lLlc3 .if8 37 2t. ..lLJdS 22 'ii'f2 lLJxc3 23 l:lxc3
'ii'c l 'ii'f2+ 38 'itd1 'figl+ 39 'ite2 .ixh3 24 .ixh5
'ii'x c1 0-1 Not 24 rl.xh3 lLlf4.
24....td7
M. Tal indicated as better:
Game 35 24 ....1Le6 25 .ie2 b5 26 axb5 axb5
Prasad - Tal 27 .ixb5 l:lab8 28 l:lc5 l:lxb5 29
Subotica (izt) 1 987 l:lxb5 .ic4 30 l:ld5 .ixfl 3 1 'ii'xfl
'ii'b4 32 l:lxe5 'ii'xb2 and Black
1 e4 cS 2 lLJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 maintains the balance.
lLJxd4 lLlf6 S lLlc3 a6 6 f4 lLlbd7 7 25 .ie2 bS 26 rl.d1 ! l:lfc8 27
a4 g6 l:lxc8 .ixc8
A metamorphosis typical of the Losing a pawn, whereas possible
modem treatment of the opening. was 27 ...l:lxc8 28 'ii'a7 l:.xc2, not
From the Najdorf variation Black stopping short of a piece sacrifice:
has transposed to the Dragon. 29 .tfl bxa4 30 'ii'xd7 'ii'xd7 3 1
8 .id3 .tg7 9 lLlf3 0-0 10 0-0 l:lxd7 llxb2 32 l:ld3 llb l 33 'itg l
'ii'c7 1 1 'ii'e l eS l:le l 34 l:la3 l:lxe4 35 .ixa6 .l:.b4
The same well-known technology. with equal chances (M.Tal).
Black is willing to trade weaknesses 28 axbS axbS 29 .ixb5 'ifb4 30
(d6 and e4) in order to control the .ic6! l:la6
e5 square. No help is 30....ib7 3 1 l:tfl .l:t.f8
12 'ith1 b6 l3 'ii'h4 .i.b7 14 fxeS 32 .ixb7 'ii'xb7 33 'ii'f6+ 'itg8 34
dxeS 1S .ih6 lLlhS 16 .ixg7 'itxg7 'ii'x e5.
17 lLlgS lLJdf6 18 l:lf3 'ii'e7 31 :tfl! r5
1 8 ...l:lad8! with the idea of An unfounded exposure of his
19 ... l:ld4 suggests itself. own king, but also after 3 l .. ..ie6 32
19 l:lafl h6 'ii'f6+ 'ith7! (32 ...'itg8 33 .id5) 33
Repulsing the threat to win a .id5 Black suffers material losses.
pawn: 20 lLlxh7 'itxh7 2 1 l:.xf6. 32 .idS! f4
20 lLlh3 .ic8 Of course not 32 ...'ffxb2? 33 'ii'c 5.
154 Illustrative Games

33 c3 'ike7 34 b4 i.e6 35 b5 lla3 16...l:.c4?

36 i.xe6 'ikxe6 37 'ii'c5 llb3 38 lla1 This natural move, attacking a
h5 39 h3 pawn, proves to be a mistake. After
Not carried away by the chase: 39 1 6 ...ltJc4 1 7 i.fl h5 Black would
l:a7+ �h6 40 'ii'f8+ �_g5 4 1 'ii'd8+ prevent the development of the
�g4 42 h3+ �g3 43 'tfg5+ 1Wg4 ! ! bishop c l and maintain the advan­
and it is White who needs to think tage. Now however a typical Tal
about saving himself (M.Tal). surprise awaits Black. _

39 ...'ikf6 17 i.e3! i.xa4?

After 39 ... f3 40 l:la7+ 'it>g8 4 1 It is as if Black is hypnotised. The
.!::ta8+ �h7 42 'ika7+ �h6 4 3 l:.h8+ lesser evil was 1 7 . . . 'it'a6 1 8 i.fl
'iti>g5 44 'ii'e3+ this pawn is lost. 'ii'a 8.
40 .!::ta6 1-0 18 b3! i.xb3 19 .!::td b1
Now it becomes clear that Black
Game 36 loses a piece. The rest is a matter of
Tal - Gufeld technique.
USSR 1 974 19 ...l:.xc3 20 ltJxb3 'ii'c7 21 ltJxa5
l:.c2 22 'ii'b5 ltc8 23 i.e4 ltJg4 24
1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 i.b6 ltJxf2 25 i.xf2 J:.xf2 26 �xf2
ltJxd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 g6 6 g3 ltJc6 7 i.xa1 27 rl.xa1 'ii'c3 28 'ii'b 1 f5 29
ltJde2 i.g7 8 i.g2 0-0 9 0-0 i.d7 i.g2 1Wd4+ 30 �n ltc2 31 'ii'e 1
10 ltJd5 'ii'd3+ 32 �g1 lte2 33 'ii'n 'ii'd4+
Nowadays this move is consid­ 34 �h1 ltf2 35 'ii'g 1 'ii'b2 36 �c4
ered premature-in great part on the 1-0
basis of this game, though Black
Game 37
also had to 'suffer'. But such is the
Makarychev - Svidler
fate of pioneers. Preference today is
Russia (ch) 1 995
given to the prophylactic 10 h3.
10...ltJxd5 11 exd5 ltJe5 1 2 ltJd4
1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 d4 cxd4 4
'W'b6
· Black has the initiative on the �xd4 �f6 5 �c3 g6 6 g3 g6 7 i.g2
�xd4 8 'ii'xd4 i.g7 9 0-0 0-0 10 h3
queen's flank. One of the key
i.e6 1 1 'ikdl 'ii'c8 12 'it>h2 'ii'c4!
threats is the march of the a-pawn.
Exerting pressure along the c-file
13 c3 l:.ac8 14 'ii'e2 l:fe8 1 5 l:.d1
restricts White's possibilities, due to
a5 16 a4
the worry over his c2 pawn.
13 a4
The thrust 1 3 �d5 ltJxe4 1 4
ltJxe7+ �h8 I s t o Black's
advantage.
13 ... rl.ac8 14 a5 ltJd7 15 lta3
It was better to continue his devel­
opment by 1 5 i.d2 'ii'c7 1 6 f4 i.c4
1 7 l:le l e6 1 8 'ii'f3 with a compli­
cated game.
15 ...'ii'c7 16 f4?!
Now it is already too late for 16
i.d2 because of 1 6 ...ltJe5 1 7 b3
'ii'c5 with the threat of ... ltJe5-c6.
 Illustrative Games 155

27...a5 2S ltg5 'ii'xc3 29 e5 'ii'xc2

30 �hl 'ii'h l+ 3 1 �h2 'ii'h2 32
�hl dxe5 33 .r:tg4 i.e6 34 l:r.h4 e4
35 'ii'f4 a4 36 'it'xe4 a3 37 'ii'xb7
'ii'c l 3S �h2 a2 0-1

Game 38
Spassky - Fischer
S.Stefan!Belgrade (m/24) 1 992

1 e4 c5 2 lLle2 lLlr6 3 lLlbc3 d6 4

16...i.xc3! 17 l:bc3 g3 g6 5 i.g2 lLlc6 6 0-0 i.g7 7 d4
After 1 7 bxc3 i.c4 1 8 .r:te 1 'ii'c5! cxd4 8 lLlxd4 i.g4 9 lL!de2 'ii'cS 10
19 �h2 i.a6 the position of the f3 i.h3 1 1 i.xh3 'ii'xh3 1 2 i.g5
rook on a3 merely hampers the de­ The attempt to trap the queen by
velopment of the bishop. 1 2 g4?! is refuted by 1 2 ... g5 ! 13
17 ...'iha5 lS r5 .i.c4 19 .r:tr4 lL!d5 h5 ! 1 4 lLlef4 gxf4 15 lLlxf4
i.a6! 'ii'x fl+! 1 6 'ii'xfl hxg4 with danger­
It is important to simplify the po­ ous threats for Black (Y.Balashov).
sition in anticipation of the attack. 12 0-0 13 'ii'd2 h6 14 i.e3 �h7
..•

20 rxg6 hxg6 15 .r:tacl 'ii'd 7 16 lL!d5 ll:Jxd5 1 7

Not 20 ... fxg6? 2 1 'ii'g4 and exd5 ll:Je5 lS b3 b 5 19 i.d4 ltacS
White's hopes are justified. 20 r4 ll:Jg4 21 i.xg7 �xg7 22 ll:Jd4
21 .r:th4 ll:lr6 23 c4 bxc4 24 bxc4 e6
It makes sense to retain the rook Black is not afraid of the forma­
by the move 2 1 .r:tcf3. tion of the hanging 'little centre',
21....r:txc3 ! the drawbacks of which are com­
The anticipated sacrifice. pensated by the exposure of the
22 i.d2 :res 23 i.xc3 .r:txc3 24 white periphery. Also worth consid­
'ii'd2 'ii'e 5! ering is an attack on the c4 pawn:
24 ... l:tc5 25 b4 'ii'c7 26 bxc5 24 . . ..r:tc5 ! ? 25 f5 g5 26 'ii'e2 l:tfc8 27
'ii'xc5 27 'ii'h6 'ii'e5 28 'ii'h7+ �f8 ll:lc6 lt8xc6 28 dxc6 ltxc6 with suf­
29 'ii'h8+ 'ii'xh8 30 .r:txh8+ �g7 3 1 ficient compensation for the ex­
l:ta8 leaves Black the exchange change (Y.Balashov).
down in a worse ending. 25 dxe6 rxe6 26 :ret :res 27
25 bxc3 ll:lb3 a6 2S 'ii'd4 .r:tc6 29 .r:tedl
After the queen exchange 25 Not dangerous is 29 c5 dxc5 30
'ii'xc3 'ii'xc3 26 bxc3 i.c4 the a­ 'ii'xd7+ ll:lxd7 3 1 .r:ted 1 .r:te7 and
pawn is unstoppable. Black defends himself.
25 ... i.c4 26 'it'h6 lL!f8 29 ... e5 30 rxe5 ltxe5 31 'ii'xe5
It has become obvious that dxe5 32 .r:txd7+ ll:Jxd7
White's attack has come to a dead In the approaching endgame the
end whereas Black threatens a swift weak c4 and e5 pawns balance each
advance of the a-pawn. other out.
27 ltg4 33 .r:tdl ll:lr6 34 c5 �f7 35 .r:tcl
Trying to complicate. On 27 'ii'e3 ll:Jd7 36 �f2 �e6 37 �e3 �d5 3S
could follow 27 ... a5 28 'ii'a7 i.a6. .r:tdl+ �e6 39 .r:tcl �d5 1/l- 1/l
 Index of Variations

1 e4 c5 2 tiJfJ d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tiJxd4 tiJf6 5 tiJc3 g6 (6 .te2 .tg7) 7

Chapter 1 Classical Dragon with 7 .te3 tiJc6 7

Line 1 : 8 0-0 0-0 9 'iWd2 8

1A 9 ...d5 9
1 B 9 . . .ltJg4 10 .txg4 .txg4 10
1 Ba 1 1 f4 10
1 Ba 1 1 I ....td7 11
1 Ba2 1 1 ...tiJxd4 11
1Bb 1 1 ltJxc6 12
1 B e 1 1 liJxd5 13
1 C 9 . . ..td7 14
1 Ca 1 0 f4 14
1 Cb 1 0 ltad 1 14
1D 9 ... tiJxd4 15
Line 2: 8 0-0 0-0 9 f4 1Wb6 16
2A 1 0 'iWd3 16
2 B 1 0 e5 17
Line 3: 8 0-0 0-0 9 tiJb3 18
3 A 9. . ..te6 1 0 f4 19
3Aa 1 0 ...1Wc8 1 1 � h 1 ltd8 1 2 .t g 1 d 5 1 3 e 5 ltJe4 19
3Aa 1 1 4 .td3 22
3Aa2 14 tiJb5 23
3Ab 1 0 ...tiJa5 1 1 f5 .tc4 24
3Ab 1 12 .td3 25
3Ab2 1 2 ltJxa5 26
3Ac 1 O. .ltc8
. 27
3B 9 ... a5 28
3C 9 ... a6 31
3Ca 1 0 a4 31
3Cb 1 0 f4 32
3D 9 ...b6 33
Line 4: 8 tiJb3 0-0 9 f4 .te6 10 g4 33
4Aa 1 0 . . .d5 34
4Ab 1 0 ...tiJa5 36
4Ac 1 0...ltc8 37
Line 5: 8 h4 38
Line 6: 8 'iWd2 39
 Index of Variations 157

Chapter 2 Classical Dragon with 7 lt:lb3 (7 0-0 8 0-0 lLlc6)

..• 42

Line 7: 9 ..t>hl 43
7A 9 . . .a5 43
7B 9 ... ..ie6 1 0 f4 44
7Ba I O...'Wc8 45
7Bb I O...l:c8 45
7C 9 ...a6 46
7Ca 10 f4 47
7Cb 10 a4 47
Line 8: 9 ..ig5 48
SA 9 ... a5 10 a4 ..ie6 I I �hl l:c8 1 2 f4 lLlb4 1 3 ltJd4 ..ic4 14 lLldb5 49
8Aa: 14 ... d5 51
8Ab: 1 4 .....ixb5 51
SAc: 1 4 ...'Wb6 52
SB 9 .....ie6 52
8Ba 10 f4 b5 1 1 .to 53
8Ba 1 1 l . ..b4 54
8Ba2 l l .....ic4 54
8Bb 10 �h l 55
8Bb 1 1 O... h6, 56
8Bb2 lO ...lLla5 1 1 f4 56
8Bb2a l l . ..l:tc8 57
8Bb2b l l ...lLlc4 58
8Bb3 1 0 . . .'iic8 59
SC 9 . . . a6 60
8Ca 10 f4 60
sea l l O ...b5 1 1 .to b4 61
8Ca2 1 o . . .b 5 1 1 .t o ..ib7 62
8Cb 1 0 a4 63
Line 9: 9 l:tel 65
9A 9 ...a5 65
9B 9 . . ...ie6 66
9C 9 ...a6 67
9Ca 10 ..ig5 67
9Cb 1 0 ..ifl 69

Chapter 3 Variations with 6 ..ic4 (6 ..ig7 7 h3 0-0)

.•• 70

1) Continuation with the development of the bishop 8 ..ie3 lt:lc6 70

Line 10: 9 ..ib3 lt:lxd4 70

Line 1 1 : 9 ..ib3 lt:la5 10 0-0 72
l l A 10 ... b6 1 1 Wd3 73
l l Aa l l .. ...ib7 73
1 1 Ab l l ...lLlxb3 74
l i B I O ... a6 75
1 58 Index of Variations

Line 12: 9 .ib3 .id7 1 0 0-0 :c8 75

1 2A 1 1 :e 1 76
1 2Aa 1 l ...�e5 77
1 2Ab 1 l . ..a6 77
1 2Ab 1 12 �d5 77
12Ab2 12 'ii'd2 78
1 2B 1 1 f4 79
Line 13: 9 .ib3 .id7 10 0-0 'ii'a5 79
13A 1 1 f4 80
1 3Aa 1 l . . .�xd4 80
1 3Ab 1 1 . ..:ac8 82
1 3Ab 1 1 2 �f3 82
1 3Ab2 12 'ii'f3 82
13Ac 1 1 ...'ii'h5 83
13B 1 1 :e 1 85
Line 14: 9 0-0 �xe4 10 .ixf7+ 86
14A I O . . :xf7
. 87
1 4B 1 0... �xf7 87

2) Continuation with the development of the bishop on g5 88

Line 15: 8 0-0 �c6 9 :e 1 .id7 10 .ig5 88

Line 16: 8 .ib3 a6 9 0-0 b5 10 :e 1 .ib7 1 1 .ig5 89
Line 17: 7 'ii'd 2 92
Line 18: 7 .ib5 .id7 8 'ii'e2 93
1 8A 8 ... a6 94
1 8B 8 ... 0-0 95
1 8C 8 ...�c6 96

Chapter 5 Levenflsh Attack 6 f4 97

Line 19: 6....ig7 97

Line 20: 6 ... �c6 99
20A 7 �xc6 bxc6 8 e5 99
20Aa 8 .. .lt�d7 9 exd6 exd6 10 .ie3 1 00
20Aal 1 0 ...�f6 101
20Aa2 1 0. . . .ie7 l0 1
20Ab 8 ...dxe5 1 02
20B 7 �f3 1 03
20C 7 .ib5 1 04
Line 2 1 : 6 ... ltJbd7 1 05
2 1 A 7 .ie2 1 05
2 1 B 7 ltJf3 1 07
 Index of Variations /59

Chapter 6 Counter Fianchetto 6 g3 111

Line 22: 6 ... c!t:\c6 7 c!t:\de2 111

22A 7 ...J..g7 8 J..g2 0-0 9 0-0 111
22Aa 9 ....:.b8 1 0 a4 a6 1 12
22Aa l 1 1 c!t:\d5 1 13
22Aa2 II h3 1 14
22Ab 9 ... J..d7 10 h3 1 15
22Ab l IO . . .l:tc8 1 15
22Ab2 1 0 ...a6 1 16
22B 7 ...J..d7 8 J..g2 1i'c8 9 h3 J..g7 1 17
22Ba 10 a4 1 18
22Bb 10 J..e3 1 19
22Bc 10 b3 1 20
22B 7 ...b6 1 20
Line 23: 6 ... c!t:\c6 7 J.. g2 c!t:\xd4 8 1i'xd4 J..g7 9 0-0 0-0 121
23A 1 0 h3 1 22
23B 10 'iVb4 1 23
23B 1 0 1i'd3 1 25
Line 24: 6...J..g7 7 J..g2 1 26
24A 7 ... J..g4 1 26
24B 7 ...0-0 1 27
 Index of Illustrative Games

page

I Minev-Gufeld, Sofia 1 967 1 29

2 Timman-Topalov, Novgorod 1995 1 30
3 Illescas-Gulko, Leon 1 992 1 30
4 Castro-Rogoff, Graz 1 972 131
5 Spassky-Miles, Bugojno 1 978 1 32
6 Kasparov-Gufeld, Baku 1978 1 32
7 Barua-Tiviakov, Tilburg I 992 I33
8 Smyslov-Botvinnik, Moscow (m/9) 1 958 I 34
9 Kupreichik-Watson, Frunze I 985 I 34
IO Fischer-Reshevsky, USA (m) I96I I 35
II Yakovich-Lemer, Kuibyshev 1 986 I 36
I2 Savon-Gufeld, USSR (ch) 1972 I 36
13 Nunn-Kudrin, Wijk aan Zee I 985 1 37
14 Smirin-Mark Tseitlin, Israel i 99 1 1 37
15 Tal-Gufeld, USSR 1 977 138
I6 Apicella-Svidler, Erevan 1 996 I 39
I7 Karpov-Martin, Las Palmas 1977 1 40
18 Karpov-Miles, Bad Lauterberg 1 977 141
19 Anand-Topalov, Linares 1 994 141
20 Zagrebelny-Serper, Tashkent 1 992 1 42
21 Benjamin-Gufeld, New York 1 989 144
22 Ta1-Gufeld, USSR 1973 144
23 Moldovan-Marin, Bucuresti 1 994 145
24 Jansa-Watson, Gausdal 1 988 145
25 J.Polgar-Kamsky, Buenos Aires 1 994 146
26 Adams-Shirov, Biel 1 99 1 1 47
27 Tal-Gufeld, Sukhumi 1972 147
28 Short-lvanchuk, Novgorod 1 994 I48
29 Short-Kramnik, Novgorod 1 997 1 49
30 Rauzer-Kan, USSR 1 936 149
3I Sheve1ev-Mikhalevski, Israel (ch) 1 999 I 50
32 Vladimirov-Mestel, France 1 974 I5I
33 Nunn-Miles, London 1982 1 52
34 Prasad-Tal, Subotica (izt) 1987 1 52
35 Tal-Gufeld, USSR 1 974 1 53
36 Makarychev-Svid1er, Russian (ch) 1 995 I 54
37 Spassky-Fischer, S.Stefan!Belgrade (m/24) 1 992 I 55
 -+ - -

V lu
- --+---
In this second part of their detailed wdrk on the Dragon Sicilian, the authors present
coverage, to date, of all lihes other than the Rauzer, which is dealt with in Volume
One. These l�nes range from an unhurtied 'Classical' development of pieces to the
early pawn r4sh f4 and e5 seen in the 'Levenfish Variation'.

I
Here, compared to the Rauzer, there is a greater concentration of play in the centre
of the board where Black is ready to fight his opponent blow for blow. On the other
hand, if need be, Black can react to any kingside offensive with a counterattack on
the other wing, making full use of the open c-file for his rook and the long h8-al
diagonal for his mighty Dragon bishop.

Whether playing the White or Black side, no competitive player- at club or tourna­
ment level - can afford to be without this book.

Eduard Gufeld, originally from the Ukraine, is a globetrotting grandmaster, current­

ly living in Los Angeles. A colourful character, well known throughout the chess
world, he has written a number of Batsford chess books, most recently The Art of
the King's Indian. Oleg Stetsko is a specialist on opening theor i and co-author of
The Classical French. !
Also available from Batsford

U LTIMATE DRAGON�
VOLUME 1
MAS TERING
S ICILIAN
THE lc-SVESHNIKOV
S ICILIAN
Eduard Ciufeld &
Danny Kopec Wei[ McDonald
Oleg 3tetsko 0 7134 8482 9 I o 7134 8581 7
0 7134 8643 0

1
I
p4.99

J
I 9