the two Knights defence by Jan Pinsky A EO al ass Gloucester Publishers ple www.everymanchess.corFirst published in 2004 by Gloucester Publishers ple (formerly Everyman Publishers ple), Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT Copyright © 2004 Jan Pinski The right of Jan Pinski to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Alll rights reserved, No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data ‘A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 85744 283 0 Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480. All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess, Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT tel: 020 7253 7887 fax: 020 7490 3708 email: info@everymanchess.com website: www.everymanchess.com Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work under license from Random House Inc. EVERYMAN CHESS SERIES (formerly Cadogan Chess) Chief advisor: Garry Kasparov Commissioning editor: Byron Jacobs ‘Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton. Cover design by Horatio Monteverde. Production by Navigator Guides. Printed and bound in Great Britain by Biddles Ltd.CONTENTS Bibliography 4 Introduction > 1 04 e5 2 AF3 Ac6 3 Bc4 ATE 4295 1 Introduction and 4...d5 5 exd5 bS!? 7 2. Pritz Variation 4...d5 5 exd5 Dd4 19 3 4..d5 5 exd5 Ba5 — Introduction 30 4 4..d5 5 exd5 @a5 — Main Line 42 5 Traxler Gambit 4.251? 60 ada 6 4..exd4: Introduction 86 7 4..exd4 55 d5 100 8 4..exd4 50-0 123 4 Others 9 443 138 Index of Complete Games 159BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Enoyclopaedia of Chess Openings Volume C (Sahowski Informator 2000) The Two Knights’ Defence and Traxler Counter Gambit, Jozsef Palkévi (Caissa 2001) The Two Knights Defence, Yakov Estrin (Batsford 1983) ‘The Tao Knights Defence, A.Beliavsky & A.Mikhalchishin (Batsford 2000) Dreispringerspiel bis Koniogeambit, Paul Keres (Sportverlag Berlin 1974) Play the Open Games as Black, John Exmms (Gambit 2000) Periodicals Chess Informant #1-#87 Nem in Chess Yearbook #1-#68 Software ChessBase 8.0 Fritz 8INTRODUCTION “You should speculate in two cases. When you have reasons to do so, or when you don’t; said Mark Twain. It is similar with the Two Knights Defence. You can play it when you have a reason for doing so, and when you don’t. Why? Well, if nothing else, it leads to inter- esting play. For a club player it is a good weapon even against very strong players and also against weaker players. Black is just obliged to know what he is doing as soon as he has played (1 e4 5 2 D3 De 3 £c4) 3..D#6. Finally, but not lastly, the Two Knights Defence 1s a kind of intellectual relic in chess. Every chess player should know something about this opening — otherwise he has no chess culture. 3..f6 was already played in 15th century, which makes the Two Knights Defence for chess what Rome is for the Western civilization! A few notes about the opening 4 d3 looks very innocent, but is still played by many top grandmasters; for example, World Champion Vladimir Kramnik, the 2002 European Champion Bartlomie} Macieja, Grand- master Leonid Yudasin, and so on, ‘The most important thing to remember is the following plan in the main line (4...2e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 Bet d6 7 c3): ...@h8, ... Ag8, and ...f7-£5, even if it means sacrificing pawns. Another unforcing line is 4 d4 exd4 5 €5. This variation has, in my opinion, the greatest future of all those in this book. Here Black has two less well-known continuations (5...\g4 and 5...e4), which he should try out. Secondly, White has some sidelines which gives a good basis for independent investigations. The move 4 g5 rose from the dead in the 1990's, woken to life by Grandmasters Alexander Morozevich and Nigel Short. It is quite an interesting variation, If you are a hard- working chess player you can seriously hope to get your work returned by good results here for White. Almost all those who play this position as Black are not so well acquainted with the actual theory. Many variations give White the chance to win the game from home through dedicated preparation. And then there is 4 g5 &c5!2. Now what is this? Leaving £7 unguarded like a beginner falling for the fool’s mate? Not really. These days nobody normal plays Traxler’s attack regu- 5Two Knights Defence larly with Black, Still it is 2 tricky line that cannot be completely dismissed just on account of opening theory I hope the Two Knights Defence will bring you pleasure, be you Black or White. Jan Pinski, Warsaw, December 2003.CHAPTER ONE Introduction and 4 4g5 d5 5 exd5 b5 1 04 05 2 Df3 Dc6 3 Bcd DE 4 Ags All chess books teach us that we should not moves the same piece twice in opening, and in most cases this is good advice. How- ever, 4 Dp5 is definitely a correct move. Why? There is one important reason: the £7- pawn (like the f2-pawn) is Black’s biggest weakness in the first few moves of the open game (1 e4 €5). So White breaks the rule about moving the same piece, but in so doing attacks Black’s biggest weakness. That is the secret! In this chapter we consider the position after 4..d5 5 exd5 b5, which is a minor alter- native to the main line 5...Da5, but still inter- esting. An important point is that 5..b5 6 REI! Da4 leads to Chapter 2. Game 1 Bahram-Hector Stockholm 1998 1 ef &5 2 O13 Ac6 3 oa O46 The living legend, grandmaster David Bronstein, thinks that this opening should be called Chigorin’s Counter-Attack rather than the Two Knights Defence! Bronstein be- lieves firmly in the strength of Black’s last move 4Dg5 d5 ‘The most natural move. There is only one alternative: 4...0c5!2 — the ‘Traxler Gambit (see Chapter 5), 4..A\xe4? has never been played by anyone good. Black hopes for 5 @xfi2 (5 Dxed d5) 5... Wh4 6 0-0 Dxf2 7 Exf2 &c5 with a strong initiative. But 5 Sixf7+ is the strongest move and after 5..<8e7 6 d4t h6 7 Dxe4 Sxt7 8 dS White is much better. 5 exd5 Here Black has three good options: 5..@a5 (Chapters 3 and 4), and wo very similar moves, 5...b5 (see below) and its twin brother 5..“Ad4 (the Fritz Variation) which have a common main line covered in Chap- ter 2 Weak is 5..2xd5? and now:Two Knights Defence a) 6 Dxf7!? gives White has a very strong attack after 6..82xf7 7 WA3+ de6 8 Ae Db4 (8..De7A 9 dd c6 10 By5 h6 11 Ke? Sxe7 12 0-0-0 BB 13 Wed Qp5+ 14 Sb1 Hes 15 Wred+ B47 16 Axd5 exdd 17 Vxds+ Hf8 18 Rb3 HS 19 Wet g6 20 h4 and White has a completely won position accord- ing to old maestros Mieses and Bardeleben) 9 Wed c6 10 a3 Dab 11 d4 Dac? 12 Rts BET 13 Bxe5 and the white attack is very strong according to grandmaster Reuben Fine. 13 0-0-09? is also interesting, But the piece sacrifice is not necessary for White to obtain the advantag b) 6 da! exd4 (or 6... WS+ BHe6 9 DAc3 Abs 10 Wed c6 11 a3 Dab 12 Wxed+ WT 13 Dsdd exdd 14 Sixd5+ $18 15 0-0 with a huge advantage for White) 7 0-0 26 (if 7..2e7 8 Axt? Sxt7 9 We3+ dee6 10 Ac3! dxc3 11 Belt De5 12 Kft REG 13 Bxe5 Vxe5 14 Bxedt+ Gxed 15 Bett Bd4 16 Bxd5 Bes 17 Wa3+ dees 18 b4+ dexb4 19 Wd4+ and White won in Mor- phy-NN, New Orleans 1858) 8 Het Wa7 9 Dsf7 ext? 10 WHI+ Sy8 11 Exes Bas 12 Ags Wre6 13 Qxd8 Welt 14 Ret Wes 15 Sh4 and White is much better according to This very interesting idea is copyrighted by the American master Olav Ulvestad, who wrote an article about this move in ‘Chess Review’ in 1941/1. To this Yakov Estrin commented: ‘If someone can come up with such a new sound plan in a position which has been known for 500 years, it seems that chess is truly immortal!” 6 dxc6?! After this move White is actually fighting to say alive, The paradoxical 6 SFL is the main move here and will be explained in Game 4. 6 &xb5?! has also been played, but it is weaker, as can be seen in Games 2 & 3. 6...bxe4 Now White has the following possibilities: 7Dc3 Best, but insufficient for equality The alternative is 7 We2#! h6l? (also possi- ble is 7..Wd5 8 £4 h6 9 Wred+ Wae5+ 10 fxe5 hxgS 11 exf6 gxf6 12 Dc3 Ld6 and Black is slightly better) 8 Wxe5+ 2e7 9 DES 0-0 10 0-0 Sg4 11 Wet &d6 with a better position for Black whose attack is very dan- gerous. This was shown in the game Berger- Zaweiberg, corr. 1963-64, which continued 12 Wred 2x63 13 gxf3 Bb8 14.03 ae. ce a. a ae is 14..Ab5I!? (perhaps this is not the best plan, but it is definitely the most impressive) 15 Wxb5 Ads! 16 Wed (after 16 Wxd5 xh2+ 17 @xh2 Wrxd5 Black has a strong attack with at least perpetual check. White is of course some material up, but it is sitting idly on the queenside) 16..Df4 17 Bh1 Hes, 18 Eigl? (it is more difficult to defend than to attack; here White underestimates the strength of Black's attack or else misses some 8Introduction and 4 g5 d5 5 exd5 b& detail) 18...Wh4 19 WEL GF 19 Wd4 g6! 20 d3, Wh3! and Black wins) 19..Ad3 20 £4 Dxf2+ 21 tyg2 Bc5 and White resigned. 18 d3 was the best move and if now 18...ih4? 19 @c3! ‘Wh3 20 x4 Wxt3+ 21 Sgl Axf4 22 Was and White wins. Instead after 18..We5 19 Qxt4 Qxf4 20 Byt Wh4 21 Hy3 Hel+ 22 by2 Bxg3 23 Wxh4 &xh4 Black has com- pensation for the pawns. It is actually likely that he is better here as White has no way to mobilise his pieces. 7..:h6 8 Dge4 White has no easy choices here, Also pos- sible is 8 D3 Rdo 9 We2 0-0 10 0-0 and according to ECO Black has compensation for the material. This is definitely the case. After something like 10..He8 White has a difficult game in front of him, e.g. 11 Wxed? 04 12 Det Bxh2H 13 Sxh2 Dgs+ 14 bg3 5! 15 Wh4 h4+ 16 $h3 a5 17 Wa3 De3+ 18 Bh2 Dsfl+ 19 Sel Dxd2 and Black wins. 9 0-0 might be an improvement, but still Black has a very dangerous attack. B...2xe4 9 Dxe4 Wd5 10 WI3 26 11 0-0 0-0-0! After the feeble 11..&e7 White would have time to complete his mobilisation in peace. 12 Ze1?! This basically just loses a tempo. Better was 12 b3 Wxc6 13 bxc4 £5 14 Dgs Wxf3 15 Dxf3 Bxc4 16 d3 e4 17 dxc4 exf3 and Black is slightly better, 12...Wxc6 13 b3 f5 14 Ac3?! ‘The uncomfortable 14 Dg e4 15 Wh3 was necessary, when Black can try 15...hxg5l? (or 15..Rb4 16 Bxe6 Wxe6 when the game is unclear) 16 Wxh8 S25 with strong com- pensation, 14...04 15 Wh?! White is surfing around with the queen as if it was the Internet. Better was 15 We2 &.d6 with an attack, 15...¢5 16 bxcd g6! 17 We2? 17 Wh4 was better, but the position is very uncomfortable. The white pieces are not playing at all. 17...2xc4! Now Black wins, 18.43 1618 Wxe4 Sxf2t 18...exd3 19 cxd3 Hxd3 20 We2 2a6 21 d1 &b7 22 De3 4, WX WirZ “ Moy i en 22...21xe3! 0-1 If 23 fxe3 then 23...&xe3+ and the queen hangs. Game 2 Grau Ribas-De Groot Email 1997 1 e4 e5 2 D3 Acé 3 ed DE 4 Ags d5 5 exd5 b5!? 6 Sixb5?! ‘This move loses the two bishops which can be crucial in such a sharp position. 6...Wxd5Two Knights Defence 7 &xc6+ White also has: a) 7 We2 has been played a few times by weak players. Their games cannot really be seen as solid indicators for the way play should proceed, so I have tried to find my own path: 7...Wxg2 8 Wxe5+ Se7 9 EEl 0-0 10 We3 (10 S&xc6 Wec6 and Black is much better) 10...Wd5!? (10...Wxp3 11 fxg3 Ad4 12 Ba4 2d7 and Black also has excellent play) 11 Bc3 We5 12 Wace? Dd4 13 Wxcd Bxe5 14 Sa4 h6 15 Dged Axed 16 Axed B6 with terrific compensation. b) 7 Be2 Bb7 8 d3 Dds 9 DES! (best) 9..2)xe2 10 Wxe2 Bd6 11 Dc3 Web 12 0-0 0-0 13 &g5 Da7 with compensation, Mestrovie-Smejkal, Ybbs 1968, 6) 7 Dc3 We? 8 WE Wxf3 9 Axf3 2d7 10 0-0 (10 43 2d6 with equality, or 10..Ad4 11 Bxd7+ Gxd7 12 Axd4 exd4 13 De2 Bcd and Black is probably a little better) 10...8d6 (10..Ab4? 11 Axed Dxc2 12 xd? Dxd7 13 Hb1 0-0-0 with an unclear game ahead) 11 Bxc6 Rxc6 12 Axe5 Bxe5 13 Hel 0-0-0 14 Fxe5 Hhe8 15 dé Bxd4 16 Bxe8+ Axe8 17 &c3 with an even endgame. 7... Wixc6 8 WE3? ‘This move is simply a waste of time. There is no chance in hell that Black will exchange the queens, even though it is not bad at all. Instead, 8 0-0 can be seen in Game 3. 8...e4! Black of course goes for the initiative. Nevertheless, possible was 8...Wxf3 9 Dxf3 4 10 De5 Ka 11 b3 Dds 12 Ba3 Dds with some compensation for the pawn. 9 Wb3 2c5! Black does not want to waste his time pro- tecting pawns. It is more important that his rook will come quickly to the f-file. 10 Wxt7+ a8 4 110-0 White is in trouble. Alternatives were: a) 11 @c3 Est 12 Weg? Hes 13 Who Bxf2+ 14 BE Lar 15 Ae? Bd4 16 el Bxe2 17 dxe2 3 and White has problems. b) 11 Wh3 Bes 12 0.0 Ags 13 d4 Bxdd 14 Wo4 (if 14 Bal Wado! 15 Axes Wxh2+ 16 Bl RaGt 17 c4 c5 and Black is much bet- ter, Essegern-Brauer, corr. 1981) 14..Sc5 15 Balt e816 Wxedt Wxed 17 Axes Drs? 18 Dxf2 Hxf2 19 Bel+ B47 20 Be3 Bxe3 21 Bxe3 Exc? and Black is better in the end- game; White must lose b2 or g2 now (22 b3 Qb7 or 22 Bb3? Bel+ 23 WA2 265). 11...h6? This move gives away the h-pawn for no reason, It might seem that the game is not about pawns, which is true, but still they can have their function in the mating attack, Black had a win by force here: 11...f8! 12 Wag? (for 12 Wb3 Dg4 see 11 Wb3 above) 12...Bg8 13 Wh6 &b7 14 Sh1 Bg6! (besides the tempo, we now see why the pawn should be on h7}) 15 Wih4 Wa5 16 Ah3 (if 16 bd e3! 10Introduction and 4 ®g5 d5 5 exd5 bd 17 3 €2 18 Bet Bxg5 19 bxcd Wxf3! and Black wins, or 16 f4 e3 17 Wh3 Ded 18 Dsr+ SeB 19 Dc3 De2+ 20 Wxf2 ext2) 16..e3 17 Dts Wxp2+ 18 Axe? Bxp2+ 19 Sel Rb7+ 20 Wy3 exf2+ 21 Bxf2 Ruf 22 xf2 Ded+ and Black wins. 12 Wxg7 Hg8 13 Wxh6 2b7 White is under a lot of pressure. This looks almost like a beginnet’s game, where White has been running around with his queen taking every pawn possible. Of course these strong analysts are not beginners, but sometimes you have a bad year in email chess, just as you can have a bad day in nor- mal chess. 14¢h1 14 Hai? is met strongly by 14...2xf2+ 15 HE 3 16 due3+ eT 17 Wh3 Bxgs and Black wins. 14...e3 15 £3 e2 16 Hel Ded 17 D7+1? White is taking some chances here. 17 fxe42? was not possible due to 17...Wxh6 18 Df7+ Bd7 19 Dxh6 BafB and Black wins. But after 17 Wxcé 22+ 18 gt Dh3+ 19 Ph1 Black is forced to take a draw because of DeG+. This was perhaps best. 17...2c8 18 Wxc6?? A terrible blunder — a very seldom guest in correspondence games. Instead, after 18 Bxe2! D+ 19 Bxi2 xf 20 Wxc Bxcb 21 De5 He8 22 Dd3 Ad4 Black has very ood practical compensation for the material. White still needs to develop and his king is vulnerable. 18...2f2+ 19 &g1 Dh3+ 20 &h1 xc! Black is winning, There is no way that the white kingside can withstand this pressure. 21 Bxe2 21...ixf3! ‘A decisive though not terribly difficult combination. 22 da Bxe2 23 dxeS 243! 24 Sig5 2b7 25 dB AxgS 26 Axb7 &xb7 27 Ac3 Eae8 0-1 Game 3 Kan-Konstantinopolsky Moscow 1945 1 e4 e5 2 Af3 Ac6 3 cd AE 4 Dg5 d5 5 exdS b5 6 Sxb5?! Wxd5 7 &xcé+ Wxc 8 0-0 Much better than 8 W#3. 11Two Knights Defence 8...2b7 9 WES Now this is forced. White cannot live with the pressure on the long diagonal. After 9 132! 0-0-02 Black has an excelient attack; eg. 10 d3 e4 11 Des Wa5 12 d4 63 13 AB exf2+ 14 Bxf2 £6 and so on. Also possible is 9...8d6!? 10 d3 e4 11 Hel 0-0-0 12 Dh4 h6 13 4 Wa7 14 £4 Ad5 with an attack, Wolminkin-Krol, corr. 1961 9 £32 is a stupid move. After 9..&c5+ 10 Bh1 h6 11 Dh3 0-0-0 12 d3 g5 Black had a crushing attack in Best-Muir, corr, 1968-69. 9...e4 10 Wb3 0-0-0 11 Wh3+ White should not be greedy. After 11 Dsf7? e3 12 3 c2 13 Bel &c5+ 14 hi Hde8 15 d4 (or 15 Axh8 £2) 15...Sxd4 16 We3 BE 17 Bxe2 Qa6! 18 WeS+ 27 19 Baxc8 Hxe8 20 &d2 Wed Black wins. 11...8b8 “. a “O19 ee sia @aR Estrin was convinced that Black is better here, but perhaps it is not so clear. 12 De3 12 Dxf7? is still bad: after 12...Rd5! 13 @Dxh8 Bhs 14 We3 Bcd 15 ht 3 16 3 Ded! mate is coming — in a maximum of 7 moves according to Fritz 8. 12...Md7 13 Be1 &b4? The problem with this move is that the bishop on b4 is not threatening anything. Black should play for the attack! Therefore stronger was 13..Sc5! 14 Agxed Dxed 15 Exed (if 15 Axed He7 16 d3 Rb6 17 He2 She8 with compensation) 15..WA6 16 Dal? (necessary was 16 Be2 He7 17 d4! Hxe2 18 Bxe2 Mxd4 19 Dxdd Wadd 20 Le3 Wxb2 21 Hel Ha8 22 We4 with some kind of dy- namic equality) 16...axe4 17 Wxd7 Qxc2 18 Wh5+ 2b6 19 De3 Bs 20 a4 La3 21 Wh3 ‘a8 and Black was much better in Reiter- Repp, corr. 1986, 14 d3! exd3 14,,,8x¢3 15 bxc3 exd3 16 cxd3 Wrxc3 17 Qc3 Wxd3 18 DAxé7 and with the safer king White stands better. 15 cxd3 Zhd8 16 fe3 &xe3 17 bxc3 We3 If 17..Bxd3 18 @xf7? He8 19 Babi and White is better. 18 Babi? This gives up the d-pawn needlessly. Bet- ter was 18 d4!, and although it closes the white bishop's diagonal, the knight gains a strong outpost after @g5-£3-e5. White can then proceed with the attack on the b-file and is much better. 18.828 19 DB &xf3 20 Wxf3+ Dd5 does not seem to be a reliable defence for Black. 18...Wxd3 19 Wi3 Wd5 20 Wxd5 Axd5 21 244 21 Ded Axe} 22 Dc5 Hdl 23 Bxb7+ Sc8 24 Bb Hxel+ 25 Hxel Dc? and Black should win with an extra pawn in the ending. 21...n6 22 Bed Abb 23 £c3 Not 23 fixg7? S&xe4 24 Bxed £5 and Black wins. 23...Rxe4 12Introduction and 4 g5 d5 5 exd5 b& Necessary, otherwise White will install a strong knight on c5, 24 Exe4 2d1+ 25 Ze1 Axb1 26 Exb1 a a ei « My “Ot aoe ae pan — i a owas os In this kind of position the chances are equal, which means 50% odds for Black winning, and 50% odds for a draw. But of course if you are Anatoly Karpov or Ulf Andersson, you will have a 99% chance of winning the game. 26...16 27 h4 c5 28 &f1 &c7 29 he2 &e6 30 g4! The right plan, White wants to exchange all the pawns on the kingside. This follows the old rule that if you have a worse end- game, you should try to exchange pawns, and if you are better you should exchange pieces. 30...2d7 31 g5? But this is impatient. After 31 Hct Dds 32 @d2 White retains his equal chances as before — that is a 25% chance if you want to be pessimistic. 31...hxg5 32 hxg5 Ad5 33 d2 ixg5 Now the position is more or less lost, though it is still not easy to win for Black. 34 Bgl D4+ 35 bd1 De6 36 wet Bd5 37 Hel dd6 38 He3 2f5 39 Hd3+ dc6 40 23 Bd5 Better is 40...a5! 41 Ha3 c4 and step by step Black wins. 41 £b3 Bus OF course a move like this cannot be a mistake, but it proves that Black has no idea how he is going to win the position. One thing you should know: as this game was played about 60 years ago, there were ad- journments after 4 or 6 hours of play, and the games finished some hours or sometimes even days later. So perhaps Black was hoping to make his advantage last all the way to move 60, after which he could take it home and prepare a winning plan without the ten- sion and pressure of the tournament hall. 42 Ba3 Hd7 43 Bad B47 44 wd1 Dd4 45 Ea6+ Not 45 &xd4? &b5 46 Ba3 cxd4 and Black should win. 45...0d5 46 296? Better was 46 Sxg5 Hxf2 47 Exa7 Ep2, although Black has chances. excellent winning 10 need to give up the g5-pawn now, Better was 46..De6! and Black should win quickly. 47 Exg Eb7 48 &c1 a5? an ‘This gives White an unexpected chance. After 48..sd3 49 3d5 a5 Black appears to be better prepared for the rook endgame — his main threat now is Bb4 — but the follow- ing line shows this is not true: 50 Sxd4 exd4 51 Hxa5 Be7 52 dys Ext2 53 Bxp7 Belt 54 seb2 He2 55 a4 d3 56 Be7+ Ladi 57 a5 BH 58 kc3 d2 59 Ha7 dict 60 dct dW 61 Hxdl+ @xd1 62 &b5 dd2 63 a6 and the endgame is drawn, The correct move was 48..2d7! maintaining a clear advantage.Two Knights Defence 49 &xd4! White correctly evaluates the rook ending asa draw. 49...exd4 49...cxd4 50 Bxa5 HET is met strongly by 51 Bp Bxt2 52 Bxg7 dc3 (if 52..Exa2 53 Bg! and White makes a draw with the Phili- dor position; ie. after 53..d3 54 Bg8 the black king can no longer hide from the checks) 53 Bc7+ dd3. 54 a4 and White should draw. 5O &c2 Bf7 51 Eg4+ &d5 52 Bg5+ &e6 53 kb3 Hi3+ 64 we4 B+ 55 bb3 a4+ 56 &a3 Lbs 57 Hxg7 Bf3+ 58 Sb2 a3+ 59 bb Exf2 60 Bb7+ &c4 61 Eb8 Eh2 Black can win the a-pawn by 61..2UfI+ and 62...Hal, but this endgame is a book draw. 62 Hb7 Hg2 %-% Game 4 Howell-Volzhin Caltutta 1996 1 ef 05 2 AP3 Ac6 3 Rcd ATE 4 Ags d5 5 exd5 b5 6 2f1! a WO, A aa R This paradoxical move is the strongest here. One point is that it protects g2 so that 6..Wxd5? can be answered by 7 c3, An- other is that the bishop is not attacked, as after 6 &e2 Da. 6...h6?! This variation is now considered dubious. The usual continuation 6..@d4 7 c3 trans- poses to 5...d4 6 ¢3 bS 7 BEI covered in Chapter 2. Another alternative is 6..Dxd5 7 Sxb5 Xb7 (7...&d72! is met strongly with 8 Whs! 26.9 WES Weg5 10 Wads We 11 Ze3 and Black is a pawn down without compensa- tion) 8 d4! exd4 9 0-0 Se7 Gf 9..,WE62! 10 Belt! Dde7 11 WES and White is clearly better; less clear is 10 WE3 Dde7 11 Wat?! exf6 12 Det 0-0-0 13 Axf6 Bd6 14 Ded %g6 when Black has compensation accord- ing to Obukhov) 10 Wh5 96 11 Who Wade 12 We7 Wi6 13 Wxf6 Qxf6 14 Kel+ (this is not a good moment for reaping: after 14 Ded Be7 15 Hat?! 0-0 16 Sxc6 Kxc6 17 Exdd Bad8 Black has great compensation for the pawn) 14.928 15 De and White is slightly better. 7 Oxt7! This move is the refutation. The alterna- tives are less critical: a) 7 Dea only ks dangerous: 7...fxe6 8 dxe6 Rc5 9 dé (if 9 Bd32 0-0 10 0-0 Was with a great attack) 9..2xd4 10 &d3 0-0 11 0.0 WdS 12 We2 a6 13 c3 &b6 and Black was slightly better in Morozevich-Piket, London (eapid) 1995, b) 7 &xb5? Wxds 8 Dc3 Wry? 9 WS Ws 10 Dxf3 2d7 and Black is slightly better. ©) 7 dxc6 hxgs 8 We2 (if 8 d4 Dg4! 9 h3 14Introduction and 4 &g5 d5 5 exd5 b& exdd 10 &xb5 Wd5 11 We2+ Be6 12 2d3 46 with good compensation for the pawn) 8.826 9 d4 (or 9 Wxb5 a5 10 Wad c4 with compensation) 9..h4 10 £4 @g4 11 Wxb5 exf4 and Black had the initiative in Alberny- Schaller, corr. 1992, d) 7 DE (natural) 7..Wixd5 8 Ac3 Wes and now if 9 Sxb52! &b7 10 We2 0-0-0 with very good compensation, e.g, 11 xe6 Wxe6 12 d3 e4 13 dxet Ba6 14 We3 Bc5 15 De5 Wado 16 Dxé7 Who 17 Wes Bd7 18 Axhs Des with a strong attack in Strange-Aagaard, Aalborg 1994; while after 9 Dxb5 We7 10 d4 C411 De5 Dxe5 12 dxeS Wre5 13 Le3 Le5 14 Bd4 Qxd4 15 Wadd Wxd4 16 Axd4 0-0 and the game was equal in Bronstein-G.Flear, Hastings 1994/95. 7. BET 7.Mxd5 8 Dxh8 Le4 9 £3 Lh5 10 Dc3 We6 11 &xb5 0-0-0 would be the 19th cen- tury way to play this line for Black. It is probably just as unsound as most 19th cen- tury games, but for a blitz game... why not!? 8 dxe6 2c5 1f 8..Wd5 9 We3 We5 10 Wh3+ #e6 11 Webs Ded 12 Weed Bxcd 13 Bab Axf2+ 14 de2 and White is much better according to Palkivi. 9 fea! ‘The best move. After 9 &xb5?! Dgs 10 0-0 Wh4 White is under heavy attack; eg, 11 WES+ (not 11 h3? Bxf2t 12 Bhi We8 13 WES His 14 Wa3 Biol 15 Le2 Bd4 16 Axo Dxio 17 WE Bed 18 WEL Dh5 and Black wins — Palkévi) 11.88 12 Wy3 Wxg3 13 hyg3 BR 14 &e2 Dxf2 15 b4 Lb6 16 Wh2 Dgd+ 17 Lh 1 D2 with a draw. 9.04 After 9...S2xf2+ 10 Gxf2 Dest 11 del BEB 12 43 dg8+ 13 2B et 14 We2 and White wins — Howell 100.0 10.,.2xf2+? Black is in a difficult situation here. The alternatives wer: a) 10,.Wh42! 11 Wet Beg 12 d3 DAxf27! (better 12..Du6 but Black’s compensation is gone) 13 Bxf2+ dps 14 2£3 and White wins, b) 10.8?! 11 d4 Sxd4 12 Ad2 ADxd2 13 Bxd2 Sxb2 14 Hb1 Ld4 15 Hxb5 and White is much better here. ©) 10..Wf6!? is the best try and is consid- 15Two Knights Defence ered in Game 5. 11 Sxf2+ Dxf2 12 Wt! Black had probably counted on 12 Sxf2? Wa4+ 13 SF Hew 14 c3 Sy8+ 15 23 Whe 16 Bgl (16 d3 Wxh2 17 Ad2 Leo 18 We2 might give White an advantage, but Black is allowed too much counterplay all the same) 16..c4 17 g3 WH6 18 Bp2 Red 19 Wel AB and Black has good compensation. 12.048 13 Wxf2+ 2g8 14 We3 Wh4 15 93 More accurate was 15 &xb5! 2h3 (if 15.8 16 2d3 Bb4 17 c4 BS 18 Axes xf 19 d3 and wins) 16 gxh3 HS 17 d3 Haf8 18 Dd2 Whs 19 Wel Wxh3 20 edt Shs 21 ds Bee 22 Wxt2 Bxf2 23 dxt2 Weh2+ 24 2g? Wh4+ 25 He2 and White wins — Howell. 15...WI6 16 d3 &h3 17 Dd2 Hf7 18 b3 Wxc6 If 18..a5 19 &b2 and White is much bet: ter. 19 De4 Wxe2 20 a3 a5 21 cd Le6 After 21..Wb2 22 Hel 265 (not 22,,.Nilxa2? 23 g4! Axed 24 xpd Wxb3 25 Wh3 and wins) 23 &h5 g6 24 Bd Eds 25 21 White has a virtually winning position, 22 Wd2 Wxd2 23 “xd2 a4 24 bxad Exad 25 a3 Ed7 26 c1 White is winning as the black pawns are very weak, For example, if we moved the black pawns from e5 to £6 and b5 to b7, the position would be slightly better for Black! 26...094 27 2f1! No exchanges, as they would only grant the black rooks more freedom on the board. 27...245 28 Bc3 c6 29 &b4 Hab 30 &f2 Re6 31 Ye3 AdS 32 D3 BF7 33 Le2 Axf3 34 xf3 26 35 Bc5 1-0 Black has no counterplay. He decided to call it a day. Game 5 Leisebein-Grott Correspondence 1998 1 e4 05 2 Af3 Ac6 3 cd ATE 4 Ags d5 5 exd5 b5 6 2f1! 6?! 7 A\xf7! Sxt7 8 dxc6 Lc5 9 Le2! Ded 10 0-0 WEI? If Black has enough compensation after this move then the variations with 6...h6 have a right to live. But as I see it, the compensa- 16Introduction and 4 ®g5 d5 5 exd5 b& tion is only of a practical nature, and with accurate play White should keep the advan- tage. If 15 Wd5+ Leo 16 Wre5 Hxg2! 17 £4 Bag8 and White has no defence against 18..Bxh2+ and 19...Wh4 mate. mt A Bi tito g alte ha : 11 Bh5+? This fares badly. 11 Wel Dg5 12 Dc3 Bb8 13 d3 &d4 with some practical chances, but nothing more. 11...96 12 WF After 12 £3 Dxf2 13 We2 ed! Black has a strong initiative; e.g. 14 Wxb5?! Wad4 15 Be2 We8 and Black wins because of the threat of ...Dh3+ and smothered mate, or if 16 h3 HEB 17 Gh2 RdG+ 18 g3 Bxg3+ 19 Bxg3 WdGt and White is mated 12...gxh5 13 Wxe4 Hg8 14 th1 Or 14 d3 &h3 15 g3 Bad8 with a power- ful attack, 14...215 15 WHS 15...Exg2!! Black shows no restraint. 16 wxg2?! On 16 Wxe2 Hg8 17 WES Hyd! 18 Ac3 Bet 19 Wxed Hxed 20 Axes WE3+ 21 Bgl Wxe4 wins because of the threat of ..WH followed by ..h4-h3. In such a position the pawn can become an attacking piece. Or if 17 Wd5+ eo 18 Wet 2h3 (18..Bgt 19 fF We7 20 d4 Sxd4 21 Re3 Rxe3 22 Ac3 is not so clear) 19 d4 S.xd4 20 Wd5+ 2e6 21 Wet Bot 22 £4 Bh4 23 Be3 Qxe3 24 5 Bc4 25 Wxe3 Axfl and Black is much bet- ter. 16...Hg8+ 17 &h1 e4 18 Wc3 94 19 Wxt6+ dxt6 0-1 ‘There is no defence against the mate,Two Knights Defence Summary Against 5...b5! White's only chance to fight for the advantage is with 6 Sf1!, after which Black should probably transpose to Chapter 2 with 6...d4. The alternatives 6..xd5 and 6..h6 both seem dubious and should be played at your own risk — without blaming the author of this book for the consequences, unless you are victorious of course! 1 ef 05 2 AF3 Ac6 3 Ac4 DEG 4 Dg d5 5 exd5 bs (D) 6 Af1 6 dxc6 bxe4 7 Dc3 — Game 1 6 Sxb5 Wxd5 7 Bxcé+ Wxe6 (D) 8 WE — Game 2 8.0-0— Game 3 6...h6 6...Ad4 7 3 —5...Ad4 (Chapter 2) 7 Dxt7 Bxf7 8B dxc6 &c5 9 Be2 Ded 10 0-0 (D) 10... S2xf2+— Game 4 10. WEG ~ Game 5 18CHAPTER TWO Fritz Variation: 4 Dg5 d5 5 exdd Ad4 1 04 05 2 D3 Ac6 3 Ac4 DIG 4 Ags d5 5 exd5 Ad4 5.Dd4 is called the Fritz Variation, named after Aleksander Fritz (1857-1932), who was a German Master. He was a player who never recorded great successes, but who could still beat anyone on a good day. His sword drew the blood of Steinitz, Paulsen and Mason among others. He wrote an arti- cle about 5..Dd4 in a 1904 issue of the Dextsche Schachgeitung, and three years later he wrote another article about 5..2d4 in the Swedish journal Tidskrift for Schack. ‘The standard position comes after 6 c3 b5 7 @£1!, which can also arise by the move order 5..b5 6 21! Ad4 7 3. The main move now is 7...Axd5, but we are getting ahead of ourselves. Game 6 G.Lee-luldachev Gent 2002 1 04 05 2 DF3 Ac6 3 Ac4 DE 4 Ags 45 5 exd5 Dd4 Besides 5...a5, this is the most setious move. 63 Other moves are worse: a) 6 0-0? bS 7 2b3 h6 8 AG Le4 9 Wel Dxf3+ 10 gxf3 Sxf3 11 Waed+ Le7 12 De3 ‘Wa7! (or 12...0-0 with compensation) 13 el (not 13 Wg3? WS! and there is no defence to Dn5) 13..2h3 14 Wxe7+ Wexe7 15 Bxe7+ Sxe7 16 Axb5 D4 and Black is much bet- ter. b) 6 d6? Wrxd6 7 Sxf7+ de7 8 Sb3 (if 8 €3 h6 9 cxd4 hxgS 10 &b3 exd4) 8..Axb3 9 axb3 h6 10 3 e4 11 Dgi VET 12 Dc3 We6 and Black was much better in Bo- golubow-Rubinstein, Stockholm 1919. ©) 6 Dc3# ho 7 DS Led 8 Le2 (B d3 Bb4 9 0-0 0-0 10 ad! [10 Bel b5 11 Sb3 He8 12 Bd2 a5 13. a4 Bxf3 14 gxf3 Dxb3 15 cxb3 bxad 16 bxad Axd5 and Black is much better] 10..Wad6 and Black is slightly better) 8..Axf3 9 2xf3 Lbs 100-0 0-0 11 Het Bes 12 a3 &xc3 13 dxc3 Dxf3+ 14 Wats Wxd5 and Black is slightly better according to Gli- gotic. 6...b5 Other moves are just weak, e.g. 6.5? 7 Wer? Dxds 8 Wxed+ Dfe7 9 Ded £6 10 Wg3 DS 11 WES and White is a pawn up with a better position. 7 af! Not 7 £43?! 25! 8 &xfS Axi 9 We Wa? and Black is slightly better according to ECO. White has also tried 7 exd4 bxc4 and: a) 8 Wad+ Wd7! (8..d7 9 £3 exd4 is 19Two Knights Defence less strong because of 10 0-0! — a new idea; after 10 Axd4 &c5 Black is better — 10...e7 11 Axd4 0-0 12 Deb Db6 13 Ard’ ADxat 14 Deb Bt6 15 Dc3 Dbo 16 a4 RAT 17 ad DxdS 18 DAxd5 Lxc6 19 Dxl+ gxf6 with equality) 9 Wxc4 (probably better is 9 Wrxd7+ Bxd7 10 dxe5 Dxd5 although Black has compensation for the pawn) 9..Wxd5 10 Wad5 @xd5 11 Ac3 Ab4 12 0-0 Dc2 13 Ads (if 13 Bb Axd4) 13..Bb8! 14 Bbt c6 and Black is much better. b) 8 dxe5 Wxd5 (attention should also be paid to 8..Axd5! 9 WE Wsg5 10 Wxd5 Hibs 11 0-0 &b7 12 Wh5+ a8 13 £3 a6 14 Wexce4 Wxe5 with compensation in Avtono- mov-Estrin, Moscow 1948, while if 9 Wa4+ ‘Wa7 10 Wse4 a5! 11 Qc3 Db4 and Black has excellent attacking chances according to Estrin) 9 exf6 (after 9 0-0 257 10 WE Wxt3 11 @xf3 Bd7 and Black is at least equal, or if 9 DB Dd7 10 0-0 27 11 De3 We6 12 Met 0-0-0 with full compensation) 9..Wxg5 10 Wes Bbs 11 We3+ (or 11 0-0 Bxfo 12 Wxfo gxf6 with a fine position) 11..Wxe3+ 12 dxe3 gaf6 and here the two bishops and the half open g- and b-files give Black sufficient compensation for the bad pawn structure, 7...Dxd5 Tuuh6? is no good; after 8 cxd4 hxgS 9 dxe5 Axd5 10 Sxb5+ Kd7 11 Lxd7+ Wxd7 12 Dc3 Af 13 d4 Axp2+ 14 SE Wh3 15 Wast a8 16 Weo Dh4+ 17 de DAtB+ 18 di He8 19 Be3 White is much better ac- cording to Estrin, 8 cxd4!? Also possible are 8 h4 and 8 Aed, as can be seen later in this chapter. With 8 exd4 White takes the money and runs 8 Dxf72! does not really work: 8..2xf7 9 cxd4 exd4 10 WE3+ Gf 10 Bxb5 We7+ 11 We2 Wre2+ 12 Bxe2 Db 13 Bct+ dys 14 0-0 £5 15 Dad Bd3 16 Rxd3+ Dxd3 17 Dc4 He8 with excellent compensation for the pawn) 10...A)f6! and now: a) 11 Wra8? &c5 12 We6 (if 12 &xbS Hest 13 Sfl Ba6 14 Weo We7 15 Wxe8+ Wre8 16 LxaG6 Wat 17 Be2 d3 18 Sh5+ Dsh5 19 Dc3 Wh4 and Black wins) 12. We7+ 13 Bd Bd7 14 Wh7 c6! 15 Wab Ded 16 Bott bed 17 Ket Wed! 18 Wxed+ Reb 19 Was (or 19 We2 Wxg2 20 3 Wxe2+ 21 dixe2 Sicd+ 22 d3 Be8+ 23 ded2 De3 24 Hel Mb4+ 25 Ac3 Ba6) 19..Wxg2 20 b4 ®De5 21 La3 d3 and Black wins. b) 11 Bxb5 &e6 and then: bl) 12 b3 &d5 (not 12..Bb8 13 We2 Rd6 14 0-0 &xh2+? — Estrin was convinced that this sacrifice wins, but.. 15 &xh2 Ag4+ 16 Get! Whs 17 Wet Sp8 18 Wh3 and White wins) 13 &c4 Bxc4 14 bxcd We8t 15 Hfl (weaker is 15 We2?! d3 16 Wre8t Bxe8t 17 Gf Bb4! and Black better) 15...Mile6 with more than adequate compen- sation, e.g. 16 Wxa8? Wxed+ 17 Bel Wxcl+ and Black wins. b2) 12 0-0 Bb8 13 Ba4 d5 (13,.Was!? also gives enough counterplay) 14 We2 £5 15 d3 BEB (or 15...c6 16 Ad2 Be8 with com- pensation ~ Pilkévi) 16 Dd2 &g8 17 &b3 Bhs 18 Bxds Wrxd5 19 AB Kbe8 20 Wat 2d6 21 Wh3 Wh and Black’s initiative was more than sufficient compensation for the pawn in V.Ivanov-Kobalia, Moscow 1996. 8...Wxg5 9 &xb5+ ‘This is the most logical move, although others have also been on the scanner: a) 9 Wh3? exd4 10 Qxb5+ @d7 11 Rxd7+ Bxd7 12 0-0 2d6 gives Black excel- lent attacking chances. is much 20Fritz Variation: 4 Ag5 d5 5 exd5 Ad4 b) 9 We2 Dbé (also interesting is 9...a6!? 10 Dc3 Ded 11 Wixe5+ WxeS+ 12 dxeS 2b7 13 d4 Dxg2t 14 Rxg2 Rxg2 15 Bgl Rb7 with even chances, or if 11 Wed Hb8 12 d3 Gb7 13 Rxft Wed 14 Wredt+ Wrest 15 dxe5 Sc5 Black has compensation on the dark squares) 10 Da3 £d6 11 dxe5 0-0 12 44 Wh4 13 Be3 c5 14 DxbS exd4 15 Lxd4 a6 16 g3 Bxb5 17 gxh4 Rxe2 18 Hxe2 Efe8 19 £4 £6 and the game was unclear in Norris-Nishimura, Jakarta 1993. 0) 9 Dc3 exd4 10 RxbS+ Bd7 11 Bxd7+ xd7 12 0-0 Des 13 Wadt Sc8 14 West &b7 15 West 06 16 d3 Wxg2t 17 Wag? Dxg? 18 Exg2 dxc3 19 bxc3 gives an equal position. ‘This is a typical ending for this line, as we shall see in the main game. 9...2d8 10 Wt3 Or 100-0 2b7 11 WB. 10...2b7 110-0 Not 11 Wxf7? D6! 12 Wes Wxe2 13 Bel a6 14 Bad West 15 We2 exd4 and Black is better. 11 @c3 exd4 12 0-0! Bb& transposes to the game, but note that 12...dxc3 is risky after 13 dxc3 WE 14 Wet Web (not 14..Wid6? 15 adi c6 16 Rad Sc? 17 c4 DLS 18 Wes We? 19 £4+ Gc8 20 WaS and White wins) 15 BgS+ Be7 16 Bxe7+ Wrxe7 17 Bfet when White has a very strong attack for the piece 11...2b8, Not 11..04? 12 Wxed &d6 13 Bel and Black does not have enough compensation for the pawns 12 De3?! Black is also slightly better after 12 Wg3?! Wrp3 13 hxg3 exd4 or 12 d3?! Woo 13 We3 exd4 14 Het 2d6 15 Wxe6 hxg6. White should play 12 dxe5, as can be seen in Game 12...exd4 Black could also try either 12..2xc3 13 dxc3 Bxf3 14 Sxg5+ £6 15 gxf3 BxbS 16 Sct exd4 17 Bd with equality, or 12... De3!? 13 Wh3 Wxg2+ 14 Wxg2 xg? 15 dxe5 Dh4 (better then 15...A4?! 16 Bel Dh3+ 17 EL as 17...$.c52! fails to 18 d4! Bxd4 19 Be3 Bxe3 20 Hadlt+ Se7 21 Bxe3 and White is much better) 16 ®e2 D+ 17 Rxf3 Qxi3 18 d4 Bb6 with good compensation for the pawn. Black's big dream here is t0 win the h-pawn and race his own to hl. 13.d3 13 Bel? is best met by 13...Ad6! when Black is just better. The alternative 13..2e7 14 Wh3 c6 seems to favour Black, but then White is forced into 15 Det Wxb5 16 We3 Ec8 17 Ado DS 18 Dxét+ ked7 19 Wes with a strong attack despite the bishop defi- cit. 13...De3 Here I think I have an improvement with 13..De7! which has not been considered before. After 14 Sxg5 (if 14 Wxb72! Bxb7 15 Sixg5 dxc3 16 a6 Exb2 17 Bfcl £6 18 sedeTwo Knights Defence Se3 Dd5 and Black is better, or 14 Wh3 WES 15 WxfS Dx 16 Ded Bxed 17 duet ExbS 18 exf5 Hxf5 and Black is a pawn up) 14..Rxf3 15 Bet dxc3 16 gxf3 exb2 17 Babl £6 18 Sct Acé 19 Bxb2 Ld6 it ap- pears that Black is slightly better. Also play- able is 13..We5 14 Ded Ato 15 Bcd Rd6 16 Dxd6 Wxd6 17 We3 with equality. 14 2c6 Now comes a long forced line. 14...Wxg2+ 15 Wxg2 Axg2 16 Sxg2 Rxg2 17 dxg2 dxe3 18 bxc3 p y \ — WY, WY a we \ 05 As noted earlier, this is a typical ending for this line and chances are about equal. How- ever, White needs to show more caution because of the weakness of his kingside. 18,..2d6 19 2e3 a6 20 Hab1 kd7 21 a7? It looks innocent, but actually this is the decisive mistake! Now White cannot avoid Bxb5 axb5, after which he has a lost end- game due to the weakness of his a- and h- pawns. 21 a4 with an even endgame was clearly better. Then White could start think- ing about 22 27. 21...8b5! Black does not give up the open file. 22 Bxb5 White has no good options here. If 22 ¢4 Hig5+ 23 3 Qxh2 and Black is clear pawn, up, or 22 &e3 Hhb8 23 BxbS axbS and Black is much better. 22...axb5 23 2d4 HaB 24 Bb1 05 25 e3 &c6 This ending is lost for White. 26 Kb2 Ha3 27 He2 15 28 h3 Le7 29 cl BaB 30 c4 b4 31 df3 216 32 ata Hd8 33 he2 g5 34 £93 94 35 hxg4?! Losing by force. White would have more chance of survival after 35 h4, though the passive position of the white pieces and the weakness of the h-pawn (after 35...n5) should be enough to secure victory for Black. 36...fxg4 36 Hcl Ma8 37 Sc2 Ba3 38 Rt4h5 39 2cl Ba8 40 2f4 Efe 41 ge3 h4 42 3d2 £03 43 He2 h3 44 &f1 Eas 45 Bcl Sxd3 46 e2 Bd7 47 Eg1 h2 48 Eh1 Sed 49 4 gxf3+ 50 dxf3 Za7 51 shea Bd6 0-1 Game 7 Sermek-Olarasu Nova Gortca 2002 1 e4 e5 2 D3 Ac6 3 Lcd DE 4 Ags d5 5 exdS Ad4 6 c3 b5 7 &F1 Dxd5 B exd4 Wxg5 9 &xb5+ &d8 10 WES 2b7 11 0-0 &b8 12 dxe5! One This is the critical position for 8 cxd4. Black has a wide range of discovered attacks. 12,..0b47! This is not the best. Also weak is 12.6421 13 We3 Wed 14 d4 Dh3+ 15 Weh3 WebS 16 Dc3 Wh6 17 SF4 and White is much better. Black should play 12..2e3! 13° Wh3 fae