WINNING

WITH
THE
DUTCH

ROBERT BELLIN
Winning With the
Dutch
ROBERT BELLIN

B. T. Batsford Ltd, London

First published 1990

::D Robert Bellin 1990

ISBN 0 7134 5760 0

A CIP 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 the prior permission of the publisher

Typeset by Lasertext, Manchester

and printed in Great Britain by
Dotesios (Printers) Ltd,
Trowbridge, Wilts
for the publishers,
B. T. Batsford Ltd,
4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London W 1 H OAH

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK

Adviser: R. D. Keene GM, OBE
Technical Editor: Ian Kingston
Contents

Introduction v

1 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6 1

2 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... lLlc6 13
3 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... •e8 25
4 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 33
5 Hort-Antoshin Variation 48
6 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4 57
) The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5 66
8 The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3 77
9 2 lLlf3 and Others 88
j])The Classical Variation 95
11 The Dutch Indian 105
12 Classical System: Auxiliary Variations 115
13 Alekhine's Variation: 6 ... lLle4 123
14 Ilyin-Zhenevsky System 133
15 Classical Stonewall 150
16 Stonewall with . . . .td6 177
Introduction
Welcome to the very special world
of the Dutch Defence! This most
versatile of defences to 1 d4 boasts
several positive features: it is for­
cing (White cannot prevent you
playing your defence, as is the case
with, say, the Nimzo-Indian); it
rules out radical strategic simpl­
ification (as occurs, for example,
in the Queen's Gambit Declined
when White plays the Exchange
Variation); and it does not permit
early major material simpl­
ification (which happens in stan­
dard lines of the popular King's
Indian and Gri.infeld Defences).
So how on earth is it that even
now the Dutch Defence is some­
thing of a secret? The reason has
its origin in the nineteenth century,
when the massively influential
world champion Wilhelm Steinitz
('the founder of modern chess')
dogmatically dismissed the Dutch
after a couple of crushing victories
over Zukertort in the 1872 title
match. His pedagogical pre-emi­
nence was such as to eclipse the
fact, for example, that the no less
legendary Paul Morphy had regu­
larly used the Dutch with success.
The result was that the defence
went under a cloud for gener­
ations.
v
The process of rehabilitation
began in the 1920s, spearheaded
by World Champions Alekhine
and Botvinnik, and gradually con­
tinued until the point was reached
in the 1951 World Championship
match where it was employed by
both players. Despite this zenith,
the Dutch was subsequently once
again overshadowed throughout
the sixties and seventies, this time
by exciting developments in the
other major defences. Now at long
last it seems that the Dutch's time
has come as more and more top
players have become aware of its
creative and combative potential.
The resurgence of interest during
the eighties has sown a seed which
will surely develop as we go into
the last decade of the twentieth
century.
This book summarizes the curr­
ent state of all the major variations
of the Dutch Defence and, in
addition to its purely didactic
aims, is intended to provide a
useful and reliable basis for com­
petitive preparation right across
the spectrum from club to inter­
national level. The annotated
illustrative games on which each
chapter is based, including classics
from the turn of the century as
l'i Introduction
well as modern masterpieces, have
been selected for their exceptional
instructive value regarding typical
plans, stratagems and tactics.
Those who are new to the Dutch
would be best advised first of all
to simply play through the games
without worrying too much about
the detailed opening notes. This
will enable the reader to find
quickly which variation
appeals and obtain a basic 'feel'
for it before proceeding to a more
technical examination of its theor­
etical nuances.
One of the great advantages of
playing the Dutch is that it is
really several different defences in
one: not only are there the three
major variations-the Leningrad,
Ilyin-Zhenevsky and Stonewall­
but also other interesting lines
such as the Hort-Antoshin, the
hybrid Alekhine, and the Dutch
Indian. Of these, the (mainly tact-
Acknowledgements
My thanks are due to Bob Wade
for providing the friendliest of
research facilities and to Clive
ical) Leningrad and (mainly posi­
tional) Stonewall are currently the
most popular and successful.
This book is selective in that
poor lines for Black have generally
been omitted (although, of course,
not all of them, as it is as essential
to know what is bad and does not
work as to know what is good and
does), but the assessments and
most
opinions given are intended to be
objective. In addition to present­
ing a distillation of current know­
ledge of the Dutch I have also
sprinkled a few totally new sugge­
stions here and there which the
brave reader may care to try out.
It is m y hope that those who
work through this book diligently
will acquire the information and
understanding necessary to be
able to step out successfully on the
creative and very rewarding path
of 'Winning With the Dutch'.
Cubitt for his painstaking proof­
reading.
1 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . c6

The Leningrad Variation is char­ turous player seeking challenge

acterized by the fianchetto of and excitement.
Black's KB which produces a curi­ The introductory moves are as
ous kind of Dutch/King's Indian follows:
hybrid. The fact that Black has I d4 f5
left his e-pawn unmoved makes 2 g3 lLlf6
communication between the wings 3 ..tg2 g6
more difficult, but on the other 4 lLlf3 ..tg7
hand keeps his central structure 5 o-o o-o
very sound. Since it is virtually 6 c4 d6
obligatory sooner or later to play 7 lLlc3 c6 (1)
... d6, Black always has to keep
an eye on the sensitive e6 square.
In general, White will concentrate
his attention on the centre and
the queenside whilst Black will
monitor the centre and develop
counterplay on one or both flanks.
Not surprisingly, the resulting
middlegames are often extremely
complex, both strategically and
tactically. Battle may often be con­ The basic idea of this move is
ducted on several fronts simul­ to free the square c7 for the queen
taneously and sometimes the from where it can support the
whole board can be ablaze with advance ... e7-e5. In addition, it
action. All in all, then, the Lenin­ controls d5, blunts the action of
grad is tailor-made for the adven- White's KB on the long diagonal
2 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6
. .
and creates the option of exerting
direct pressure on the queenside
by ... -.. b6 or, occasionally, ...
-..as. As there is no immediate
threat, White's range of response
is very wide, although only the
immediate advance of the d-pawn
is generally thought to offer White
chances of an opening advantage.
Before considering the main
move in detail we briefly note
some alternatives:
(a) 8 .l:el lLle4 9 -..d3 lLlxc3 10
be eS II e4 -..as 12 i.gS (thus far
Holmov-Bannik, USSR Ch. 1962)
12 ... dS! 13 cd fe 14 -..xe4 cd IS
-..c2 e4=.
(b) 8 b3 aS 9 i.b2 lLla6 10 -..c 2
-..c7 II .J:ad l eS 12 cS ( Pachman­
Gerusel, Mannheim 197S) 12 ...
e4 13 cd -..xd6 14 lLleS lLlb4 1S -..b l
i.e6 with a promising position for
Black.
(c) 8 -..c2 -..c7 (8 ... �h8 is
a useful alternative, e.g. 9 i.gS
i.e6 10 b3 lLlbd7 II .!:ad! dS 12
lLleS lLle4= Belyavsky-Yusupov,
Reykjavik 1988) 9 e4 fe 10 lLlxe4
i.fS (or 10 ... lLlxe4 -..xe4 i.fS
12 -..h4 eS 13 de de 14 i.h6
lLla6 IS .J:ad l .l:ae8 with balanced
chances; Gofstein-Bikhovsky,
USSR 1977) 11 lLlh4 lLlxe4 12
i.xe4 e6 13 i.e3 lLld7 14 lLlxfS ef
IS i.g2 lLlf6 16 .l:ab l and a draw
was agreed in Starck-Liebert, E.
German Ch. 1962.
8 d5
Experience has shown this to be
White's most effective approach.
The positive aspects comprise rul­
ing out the formation of a mobile
black e- and f-pawn duo (thanks
to the possibility of capturing en
passant), exerting pressure on c6
and particularly the weakened e6,
gaining space and providing an
efficacious post for the knight at
d4. The quid pro quo for these
gains is Black's increased control
of the dark squares, particularly
cS, and the opening of the long
diagonal for his KB.
The strategic problems con­
fronting Black have been tackled
in various ways over the years but
only two approaches have stood
the test of time and these will
be examined via the introductory
moves 8 ... i.d7 and 8 ... eS. The
best of the rest, 8 ... -..as, caused
considerable havoc amongst
White players until the discovery
of 9 lLld4 -.. cs 10 i.gS! (with the
point 10 ... -..xc4? 11 de be 12
i.xf6 i.xf6 13 lLlxc6! ± ±) fol­
lowing which the line rapidly van­
ished from international compet­
ition.
Ribli-Mestel
London 1986
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lLlf3
i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6
8 d5

8 .td7 ( 2)
2 10 a3 cd II cd l:l.c8 12 lL!d4 ttJc5
Although comparatively little
explored, the indications are that
this is a sound treatment with
potential for further development.
The main idea of the variation is
to renounce ... e7-e5 in favour
of a containment strategy in the
centre coupled with action on the
queen's wing. There are marked
similarities with the 7 ... W'e8
variation, the major difference
being that here the queen is usually
deployed directly into the action
via ... Wb6.
9 l:l.bl
Awarded an exclamation mark
by Ribli himself, this deferment of
ttJd4 has the effect of deterring ...
Wb6 (on account of .te3) and
enables White to get by without
playing e3 (see note (b) below). It
seems that the rook move does
indeed have a legitimate claim to
being the most precise.
Other tries:
(a) 9 W'c2? (9 W'b3 W'b6 10 de
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6 3
W'xb3 II ab ttJxc6 = S. Webb­
Larsen, London 1973) 9 ... ttJa6
13 l:l.dI ttJfe4 14 lL!xe4 fe! and with
... .ta4 in the air White is in dire
straits.
(b) 9 c5!? (although crude, this
tactical lunge should not be
treated lightly) 9 ... de 10 l2Je5 and
now not 10 ... .te8? II W'b3 W'b6
12 de+ W'xb3 13 cb! but 10 ...
�h8 defusing such possibilities
after which Larsen has opined that
'Black may be in good shape'.
(c) 9 lL!d4 W'b6 (simultaneously
reinforcing c6 and priming tactical
discoveries on the lL!d4 by, for
example, ... ttJe4) 10 e3 l2Ja6 II b3
(after II l:l.bI a game Palatnik­
Gulko, Kiev 1973, went II ... lDc5
12 b4 l2Jce4 13 lL!a4 W'c7 14 f3 lL!g5
15 e4 ttJf7 16 ttJe6 .txe6 17 fe
l2Je5 18 ef gf 19 W'c2;;!;;; failing an
improvement on this, II ... l2Jc7
comes into consideration, e.g. 12
de be 13 b4 e5 with complex play)
II ... lDc5 12 .tb2 a5 13 l:l.bl (the
position is now the same as the
column with the exception that
Ribli substituted W'd2 for e3; it is
noteworthy that in this game
Black plays the idea recommended
by Ribli) 13 ... W'a6! 14 a4?! (smo­
thers Black's projected counter­
play with a timely ... a4 but at the
high cost of accepting consider­
able queen's wing vulnerability) 14
... Wb6! 15 l:l.el l:l.ae8 16 l2Jce2
4 Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6
cd 17 cd .l:l.c8 (Black displays an
admirable flexibility of thinking)
18 l2Jc3 l2Jfe4! (suddenly, Black is
on top) 19 l2Jcb5 l2Ja6 20 ..tfl l2Jb4
21 ..tc4 .l:l.c5! 22 l2Je2 ..txb2 23
.l:l.xb2 .l:l.fc8+ 24 l2Jbc3 .l:l.xc4! 25
be .l:l.xc4 26 l2Ja2 •c5 27 l2Jxb4
ab 28 h4 l2Jc3?! (tempting, but it
allows White unnecessary coun­
terchances; 28 ... •a5! 29 •d3 b3!
30 .l:l.d1 .l:l.b4 with ... ..txa4 and
... l2Jc5 to follow was a surer
method of turning the screw) 29
l2Jxc3 be 30 .1:1. xb7 ..txa4 31 •d3?
(misses the opportunity to muddy
the waters by 31 •a1! with the
possibility of creating threats
against the enemy king) 31 ... c2
32 .l:l.c1 �f7 + + 33 h5 .l:l.c3 34
hg+ hg 35 'ir'd2 •a3? (the wrong
way; correct was 35 ... •c4 when
the threat of ... .l:l.d3 forces White
into the hopeless ending following
36 .1:1. b2 .1:1. d3 37 .1:1. bxc2 ..txc2 38
•xc2 •xd5) 36 .l:l.a7! •xct +?
(Black would have retained real
winning chances by 36 . . . .1:1. d3
•xc2 ..txc2 38 .l:l.xa3 .l:l.xa3 39
.1:1. xc2 .1:1. d3, but now with precise
play White escapes with a draw)
37 •xc1 .l:l.d3 38 �g2! .l:l.d1 39
•a3 c1(•) 40 •xa4 .l:l.g1+ 41
�f3 g5 42 .l:l.a8 •d1+ 43 •xd1
.l:l.xd1 44 .l:l.a5 g4+ 45 �e2 .l:l.bl
46 e4 !-! Spiridonov-Akesson,
Polanica Zdroj 1981.
9 l2Ja6
10 b3 l2Jc5
11 ..tb2 a5
12 •d2 .b6
13 l2Jd4 ( 3)
3
B
Both sides have deployed their
forces harmoniously and a rich
middlegame is in the offing. Many
more practical trials are needed
before any worthwhile assessment
can be made but there seems no a
priori reason for the resources of
Black's position not to be adequ­
ate to meet whatever demands
White makes upon them.
Our present example carried on
as follows: 13 ... .I:!. adS?! (Black's
plan of centralising the rooks fails
to accomplish anything; clearly,
this is the point to look for an
improvement-Ribli noted the
possibility of 13 ... •a6 intending
... a4) 14 .l:l.fd1 .l:l.fe8 15 e3 e5 16
. de ..txe6 (the weak a-pawn would
prove a liability after 16 ... l2Jxe6
17 l2Ja4!) 17 l2Jxe6 .1:1. xe6 18 l2Ja4!
l2Jxa4 19 ba (White has accurately
assessed the open lines and diag­
onals for his pieces to be more
 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6 5

important than the structural which 10 ... e4! leaves Black with
weakness incurred) 19 ... 'it'a6 (or a centre whose dynamic potential
19 ... 'it'c7 20 .td4) 20 .td4 �e4? at least balances its vulnerability.
(allowing a surprising and decisive (b) 9 e4 cd (9 ... c5 is also fully
liquidation; 20 ... .l:ld7 was playable) 10 cd �a6 11 ef (11
mandatory and would have .tg5? h6 12 .txf6 'itxf6 13 ef gf
enabled Black to put up a stiff left Black with all the play in
defence with good chances of Tsvetkov-Kotkov, Bulgaria­
resisting White's pressure) 21 RSFSR 1957) 11 ... gf 12 �h4
.txe4 .l:lxe4 22 .txg7 �xg7 23 gives a complicated position with
c5! (cleverly creating a deadly chances for both sides.
passed pawn) 23 ... .l:ld7 (23 ... d5 9 .txe6 ( 4)
24 .:. b6 followed by 25 'it'b2+ and
26 .l:lxb7 is also hopeless) 24 cd 4
.:. xa4 25 'it'c3+ �h6 26 'it'f6 'it'e2 w

27 'ite6 .l:lxa2 28 .l:lfl .l:lg7 29

.l:lbe1! 1-0.

Uhlmann-Vaiser
Szirak 1985

1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .tg2 g6 4 �f3

.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 �c3 c6
8 d5 A position of major importance
8 e5 in the theory of the Leningrad
Long established as the most variation.
popular choice here, this move Both pawn configurations have
constitutes Black's most con­ now been broadly established and
sequent and challenging response because of their contrasting
to White's advance of the d-pawn. characteristics they are of crucial
9 de importance in determining the
A logical capture which pro­ respective strategies to be adopted.
cures White the better pawn struc­ From the static point of view,
ture. Alternatives forfeit any real White's structure is clearly super­
prospects of obtaining an opening ior as it is compact and without
advantage: weakness whereas Black's is not
(a) 9 de be 10 b3 is an unimpress­ only generally loose but also
ive suggestion of Simagin's after suffers from a particular defect in
6 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . c6
the vulnerable d-pawn on a half­
open file. Consequently, Black
must make the most of the
dynamic potential of his position
deriving from his good central
control and kingside attacking
chances (the positive concomitant
of Black's unruly pawn structure)
plus free and active development.
The battle lines, then, are clear:
White will pressurize the d-pawn
and seek simplification in order to
highlight the intrinsic weakness of
Black's pawns, while Black will
endeavour to generate sufficient
pie �activity to offset his struc­
tural Inferiority.
10 b3
Experience has shown that only
two methods of defending the c­
pawn leave White any real pro­
spects of fighting for an advantage
from the opening-10 b3 and 10
'tt'd3-which we shall examine in
detail in the context of complete
games. It is worth noting some
alternatives for the light they shed
on how Black's pieces can co­
operate in non-critical situations:
(a) 10 tt:lg5? (a baseless offer) 10
... ..txc4 II b3 ..tl7 12 ..ta3 tt:le8
13 tt:lxl7 .:. xl7 14 .:. c1 tt:la6 15 h4
tt:lc7 16 e4 f4 and Black is well
placed with a pawn to the good;
Ribli-Sax, Hungarian Ch. 1971.
(b) 10 tt:ld2 tt:lbd7 (this rare but
effective placement of the knight
points up the inadequacy of Whi-
te's retreat) II 'tt'c2 tt:lb6 12 tt:la4
(better 12 b3 d5 although Black's
position is still promising) 12 0 0 .
tt:lxa4 13 'tt' xa4 'tt'e7 14 'tt'c2 (the
queen is misplaced) 14 0 0 . d5 15
cd tt:lxd5 16 a3 .:. ad8 17 tt:lc4 f4!
and with development completed
and a strong central position
Black advantageously begins to
attack on the king's flank; Etruk­
Holmov, TU Spartakiad 1965.
(c) 10 ..tf4 (misguided since
Black is now relieved of the major
weakness in his position) 10 0 0 .
..txc4 11 ..txd6 .:. e8 12 tt:le5 ..te6
13 'tt'd3 tt:lbd7 14 tt:lxd7 tt:lxd7 (14
... 'tt'xd7 also comes into consider­
ation) 15 .:. fd1 'tt'f6 16 f4! .:. ad8
17 ..tc7 .:. c8 18 ..td6 with an
invitation to repetition suiting the
nature of the position; Aronson­
Hasin, Moscow 1956.
10 tt:la6 (5)
Black wisely prefers develop­
ment to material grabbing by 10
... tt:le4 which gives White a choice
of advantageous continuations,
e.g. 11 tt:lxe4 ..txa1 (the irresolute
II ... fe was fittingly punished in
Kjarner-Etruk, Parnu 1967, by 12
tt:ld4 ..tl7 13 ..txe4! 'tt'e7 14 ..tg2
c5 15 tt:lc2 ..txa1 16 tt:lxa1 tt:lc6 17
tt:lc2 (a typical position in which
White's control of the vital al -h8
artery into the heart of Black's
king's position and iron grip on
the centre outweigh the slight
material deficit) 17 0 0 . h5 18 ..tb2

�h7 19 Wd2 a5 20 a4 1Db4 21
!LleI! (heading for another weak­
ened dark square in the vicinity of
the enemy king-g5) 21 ... :adS
22 �f3 d5 (at last a vestige of
counterplay, but it arrives too late)
23 1Dg5+ �gS 24 cd 1Dxd5 25
�e4 ..teS 26 l:dl ..tc6 27 Wh6
�f4 (a despairing Junge which
mercifully cuts short Black's
agony) 2S WhS+ �f7 29 Wg7+
�eS 30 l:xdS+ 1-0. On 30 ...
�xdS 31 Wxe7+ �xe7 32 gf
White exchanges into an easily
won ending, whilst 30 ... WxdS
31 We5+ leaves Black with no
satisfactory answer.) 12 Wxd6 (12
..tg5 Wc7 13 Wxd6 is also good
as is the more complicated 12
1Dfg5!? Wd7 131Dxd6 l:dS 14 ..tf4
of Plaskett-Vincent, 19S3) 12 ...
..Wxd6 131Dxd6 ..tcS (13 ... b6 14
..tg5 ..tf6 15 ..txf6 :xf6 16 iDeS
:n 17 �g5 :e7 IS 1Dxe6++
Malich) 14 ..tg5 ..tf6 15 ..txf6
:xf6 16 lDxcS1Da6 171De7+ �f8
IS1Dxc6 be 191De5 ± Syre-Pahtz,
E. German Ch. 1975.
11 ..tf4
A relatively recent attempt to
inject fresh problems into the pos­
ition, probably born of Jack of
satisfaction with the prospects
offered by the alternatives:
(a) II ..ta3? Wa5! 12 Wxd6?
:res 13 ..tb21De4 141Dxe4 ..txb2
15 1Deg5 :adS+ +; this line of
Taimanov's serves to illustrate
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6 7
5
w
that Black's set-up is more than
resilient enough to deal with crude
attempts to over-run it.
(b) II ..te3 We7 12 l:cl lDc5 13
..td4 ..td7 (13 ... a5 gives Black
a perfectly acceptable game) 14
Wd2 1De6 15 ..txf6 (thus far
Vaganian-Knezevic, Leningrad
1977) 15 .. . ..txf6! 16 :fd11Dc5
is assessed as unclear by Makary­
chev; White's plan fails to impress.
(c) 111Dg5 ..tcS! 12 l:b1 We7
(12 ...1Dg4 may be more precise;
Adorjan- Vaiser, Szirak 19S5, con­
tinued 131Da4 We7 14 b4 lDc7 15
b5 c5 16 ..tf4 and in this obscurely
balanced position the gladiators
agreed a draw) 13 Wc2 h6 (the
immediate 13 . . . lDc5? would
allow 14 b4 with b5 to follow and
advantage to White) 141Df3 lDc5
15 ..ta3 ..te6 16 l:bd1 :adS with
fully satisfactory play for Black;
Petrosian-Knezevic, Banja Luka
1979.
(d) 11 ..tb2 (certainly the most
natural follow-up) II ... We7 12
8 Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6 .

Wc2 d5 13 cd lL!b4! 14 WcllLJfxd5! eluded as follows: 15 .tel 'iie7

15 lLJa4 :adS and with his devel­ (15 0 0 0 ..tf5!) 16 lL!d4 .id7 17 a3
opment completed and pieces :f7?! (the situation is too volatile
actively placed Black can look to to permit this ideal doubling on
the future with confidence; Sche­ the f-file; the prophylactic 17 ...
eren-V. Kovacevic, Thessaloniki tL!e6 might be the best way of
01. 1984. drawing the sting from White's
11 lLlh5! intended b3-b4-b5, though 17 ...
Quite in the spirit of the Lenin­ :ae8 is a natural and good
grad, Black parries the attack on enough alternative) 18 b4 ab 19
the d-pawn with a counterattack. ab tL!e6 20 tL!f3! g5 21 g4! (it was
12 .id2 necessary to prevent 0 0 . g4) 21 0 0 .

12 .ig5 would be hazardous, tL!f6 22 h3 h5?! (precipitate: 22 ...

e.g. 12 0 0 . Wa5 13 tL!d4 W'xc3 14 :d8 preparing succour for the
tL!xe6 W'xal 15 W'xa1 .ixa1 16 perennial weakling seems more in
tL!xf8 .ih8! 17 tL!e6 :e8 18 ttJf4 tune with the needs of the position)
tL!xf4 19 .ixf4 :xe2 20 .ixd6 23 gh g4 (23 0 0 . tL!xh5 24 lLJe4 ±)
:xa2 and White is struggling (21 24 hg lLJxg4 25 tL!e4 d5 (on 25 ...
b4 :d2! or 21 :e1 ..td4!). ..te5 comes 26 Wd3 :g7 27 h6!
12 tL!c5 :g6 28 lLlxd6 lLlf8 29 c5 : x h6
13 Wc2 a5 30 tLJf5 ± according to Uhlmann)
14 :adl f4!?(6) 26 cd cd 27lLJc5! (avoiding Black's
trappy idea 27 : xd5 .ia4! 28
'iibl ..tc6 29 :a5 :xa5 30 ba
lbd4 with good counterchances)
27 0 0 . :c8 28 :xd5!? (fearlessly
ambitious!) 28 0 0 . b6 29 :fd I lLlf6
(the best try; 29 0 0 • ..te8 30 W'g6!
is good for White and 29 ... be 30
:xd7 Wxd7 31 :xd7 :xd7 32
.ih3 skewers Black's position) 30
:e5 be 31lLJg5 f3? (in time trouble,
Black fails to find the amazing
This belligerent thrust signals saving grace pointed out by
the beginning of a mutually Uhlmann: 31 0 0 . cb! 32 Wg6! lLJg4!
difficult middlegame replete with 33 lL!xf7 Wh4!! 34 lLJh6 +! lLJxh6
problems and prospects for both 35 :xe6 lLJg4 36 ..tb2 Wxf2+
sides. Our illustrative game con- 37 �hi Wh4+ with perpetual

check!) 32 ef! nfffi 33 :del cb 34
Wg6 .te8 35 Wbl .txh5 36 nxe6
Wc7 37 ne7 'ilfc2 38 Wxb4 .tg6
39 lLle6 n 17 40 nxl7 .txl7 41
t2Jxg7 �xg7 42 .tb2 (a deadly
pin) 42 ... nc4 43 Wb8 Wf5 44
ne4 �g6 45 Wd6 .td5 46 .txf6
net+ 47 �h2 nc6 48 Wg3+
1-0. Hard fighting!
Yusupov-Barbero
Mendoze 1985
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lLlf3
.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6
8 d5 e5 9 de .txe6
10 Wd3
This protection of the c-pawn
with a developing move seems the
most natural.
10 lLla6
Black does best to get on with
his development as quickly as
possible especially as it carries
with it a threat to drive away the
white queen and thereby win the
c-pawn.
11 .tf4 (7)
7
8 kov, Moscow 1958, and although
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . c6 9
A logical continuation of the
mobilization of White's forces
which immediately brings press­
ure to bear on the weak spot in
Black's camp.
We also note one poor and one
important alternative:
(a) 11 �d4?! (it throws instruc­
tive light on the idiosyncratic
nature of the Leningrad that this
natural centralization is out of
keeping with the needs of the pos­
ition) 11 . .. .tl7 12 b3 d5! 13
.ta3 ne8 14 nfdl de 15 be WaS
16 ..td6 lLlc5 17 Wc2 lLlce4 18
lLlxe4 lLlxe4 and White's disadvan­
tage is rapidly assuming decisive
proportions; Grooten-Perez­
Garcia, Wijk aan Zee II 1986.
(b) 11 lLlg5 (this hunting of the
minor exchange demands precise
handling by Black) 11 . . . ..tc8!
(the most challenging response; it
is not entirely out of the question
to allow White to implement his
strategy, e.g. 11 ... We7 12 .tf4
nad8 13 nadl lLlg4! 14 lLlxe6
Wxe6 15 e4 lLlc5 16 ef gf 17 Wc2
lLle5 18 b3 Wg6, Fridstein-Luti­
White has the two bishops and
much superior pawn structure, his
position is to some extent all
dressed up with nowhere to go,
while Black has a pair of frisky
knights champing at the bit to join
in the general plan of harassing
White's king) 12 .tf4 (on 12 ndt
10 Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6
h6! 13 tt:lf3, Black should eschew
13 ... ..te6? 14 Wxd6 Wxd6 15
:xd6 ..txc4 16 tt:le5 ..tfl
..txh6! ± lvkov-Sahovic, Zemun
1982, in favour of 13 ... tt:le4! 14
tt:lxe4 fe 15 Wxe4 ..tf5! 16 'it'h4 (or
16 We3 tt:lb4) 16 ... g5 17 Wh5 'it'f6
with excellent compensation) 12
... lLlh5! 13 :adI (it has long been
established that 13 Wxd6 lLlxf4 14
Wxf4 h6 15 tt:lf3 g5 gives Black
sufficient play for the pawn, e.g.
16 Wet ..te6 17 .:tdl; thus far
Simagin-Hasin, Moscow
1956, and now Simagin gives 17
. 1 We7! 18 b3 .:tad8 as best) 13
. is unclear according to Vukic) 15
... lLlxf4 14 gf h6 15 tt:lf3 .:tf6 16
.:td2 tt:lc5 17 Wc2 We7 18 tt:ld4
..td7 with chances for both sides
in a difficult position; Garcia­
Palermo-Ivkov, Havana 1986.
II tt:le4!?
Amongst the various options at
Black's disposal at this point, this
mettlesome attempt to seize the
initiative makes the most favour­
able impression.
As a safety net, there is always
the solid, if craven, antithesis to
the text-ll ... tt:le8. But one
senses that should such moves
ever be required it would be better
to switch variations.
12 tt:lxe4 fe
13 Wxe4 tt:lc5 ( 8)
Black augments the cohesion of
his forces with tempo gain. By
contrast, the apparently
X
w
17
forceful 13 ... ..tf5 began a sequ­
ence ending in fatal organic dislo­
Ch. cation in Vukic-Kaizauri, Skara
1980: 14 We3 ..txb2 (14 ... •b6!?
.:tadl .:te8 16 Wd2 Wf6 17 e3 ..ta3
(something is wrong when such
moves are necessary) 18 tt:ld4 ..tb4
(18 ... g5? 19 ..txd6!) 19 We2 ..td7
20 h4 lLlc7 21 Wb2! c5 22 Wb3! a5
23 tt:lc2 a4 24 Wd3 ..tc3 25 ..txd6
tt:la6 26 ..txb7 .:ta7 27 ..te5! 1-0.
The scattered black forces are
pitiful in their disarray; a drastic
reminder of the indispensable need
for harmony and coordination.
14 We3
A necessary improvement on 14
Wc2? after which 14 ... ..tf5 15
Wd2 (15 Wet intending to answer
15 ... tt:la4 by 16 b3 looks relatively
best) 15 ... tt:le4 16 We3 (16 Wet
is preferable although after 16 ...
Wb6 Black maintains strong press­
ure) 16 ... :e8 17 Wa3 Wb6 18
.tel d5 gives powerful play for
more the pawn; Nordstrom-Niklasson,
 Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6
. II

Swedish Ch. 1974. paid off after 20 ..te3!? (20 Wxc5

13 ..txc4 simplifies into a level ending after
The animated middlegame we 20 ... Wxd2 21 lt:lxe2 Wxe2 22
are about to embark upon is teem­ Wb4! Wxb2 23 Wxb2 ..txb2 24
ing with possibilities and clearly :bl) 20 ... lt:\e4? (a pity that in
offers vast scope for new discover- the labyrinth of variations such as
ies. 20 ... :xe3? 21 fe ..th6 22 lllf5!
15 .l:tadt :es Black loses his way; 20 ... ..tf8 21
Again, counterattack is the best Wxc5 ..txd6 22 Wxd6 :xe3 23
policy since 15 ... ..td5 16 lllg5! fe ..txfl 24 ..txfl Wxe3+ was
brings Black into difficulties. correct with good chances of hold­
16 Wet ..txe2 ing the position) 21 :d7 c5 (the
17 :xd6 WaS point of Black's play, exploiting
Of course not 17 ... Wb6 18 the pin on the rook but there is a
..te3 :xe3 19 Wxe3 ..txfl 20 surprising riposte ...) 22 :xg7+?
..txfl and all White's pieces are (... which White misses!; 22 :e1!
poised for a concerted assault on cd 23 :xg7+! �xg7 24 ..th6+!
the black king. �[7 25 Wf4+ lllf6 26 ..td5+!
18 ..td2 Wb5 would have sewn matters up in
19 lt:ld4 Wd3 (9) spectacular style) 22 ... �xg7 23
lllxe2 Wxe2 24 :el Wh5 25 ..txe4
(in time trouble, White plays safe
and transposes into a slightly fav­
ourable endgame in preference to
the more accurate but less clear­
cut maintenance of pressure by 25
Wc2) 25 ... :xe4 26 ..th6+ Wxh6
27 Wxh6+ �xh6 28 :xe4 :g8
29 �fl :g7 30 �e2 :d7 31 h4
�g7 32 :e5! b6 33 :e6 �f7 34
:c6 �e7 (34 ... :e7 +!) 35 h5! ±
The combatants have traded �f7?! (35 ... gh 36 :h6 �d8 was
blows with accuracy and imagin­ the simplest) 36 hg+ hg 37 f4
ation, creating a position of con­ �g7 38 �e3 �f7 39 b3 �g7 40
tinuing complexity and approxi­ �e4 �f7 41 �f3 (41 �e5! ±)
mately equal chances. In the game, 41 ... :e7 42 �g4 :d7 43 �h4
White's tactic of continually :d2 44 :c7+ �f6 45 :xa7 b5?
adding fuel to the flames finally (45 ... �f5 had to be played) 46
12 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6. .

.l:l c7 (46 .: aS was more precise) 46 49 .l:l xb5 c3 50 .l:l c5 c2 5 1 b4 g5 +

. . . c4 47 .l:l c6 + ! �f5? (47 . . . �f7 52 fg .l:l d4 + 53 �h5 .l:l xb4 54
would have obliged White to play .l:l xc2 1 -0.
more delicately) 48 .l:l c5 + �e6
2 Leningrad Main Line : 7 0 0 0 ttJ c6

1 d4 fS ation is Black's least soundly

2 g3 ttlf6 based option positionally-either
3 ..tg2 g6 the knight goes offside or the pawn
4 ttlf3 ..tg7 structure becomes compro­
s 0-0 0-0 mised-but it frequently leads to
6 c4 d6 fearsome complications and it
7 ttlc3 ttlc6 ( 1 0 ) would clearly be premature to
believe that the last word has yet
10
been said.
w
Before proceeding with our
examination of the major continu­
ation 8 d5 we will briefly look at
some alternatives:
(a) 8 Wc2 e5 9 de de 10 .:td l
..td7! II ..te3 (not II ttld5? e4!
1 2 ttlxf6 + ..txf6 1 3 ttle I ttld4 1 4
'ilt'd2 ..ta4! 1 5 b 3 ..txb3! and
This provocative knight devel­ White has lost material; Bertok­
opment simultaneously puts Ghitescu, Reggio Emilia 1 968/69)
pressure on d4 and prepares . . . 1 1 . . . e4! 1 2 ttld4 ttlg4 1 3 ttl xc6
e7-e5 and intentionally aims to (after 1 3 ttle6? ttlxe3 1 4 fe ..txe6
goad White into the space-gaining 1 5 .:t xd8 .: axd8 1 6 ttld5 ttle5! the
but committal advance d4-d5 fol­ queen proved no match for Black's
lowing which two entirely different well coordinated pieces in Peev­
types of game arise according to Nikolaevsky, Varna 1 968) 1 3 . . .
which way the knight jumps. It is ttlxe3 1 4 'ilt'cJ 'ilt'e8 1 5 'ilt' xe3 ..txc6
generally agreed that this vari- and Black may look to the future
13
14 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lLlc6
with confidence thanks to his
bishop pair and cramping e-pawn.
(b) 8 b3 li:le4 (the immediate 8
. . . e5 has to reckon with 9 de de
1 0 ..ta3) 9 ..tb2 e5 1 0 de li:lxc3
II ..t xc3 W'e8! 1 2 W' c2 de 1 3 W'b2
W'e7 14 .rHdl g5 + 1 5 .:t d5? (the
prospect of being buried under an
avalanche of black pawns panics
White into a faulty manoeuvre) 1 5
. . . ..te6 1 6 : b5? a6 1 7 : xe5 ( 1 7
.:t xb7 ..tc8 + + ) 1 7 . . . li:lxe5 1 8
li:l xe5 c6 with a decisive material
advantage; Welsh-Alexander,
Cheltenham 1 954.
8 d5
Botvinnik-Matulovic
USSR v Rest of the World
Belgrade 1 970
8 li:la5 (II)
11
w accepted) 9 . . . li:le4 (9 . . . c5 would
With this sideways swipe at the
c-pawn Black begins a plan which
bears a close affinity to the Panno
variation of the King's I ndian
Defence. The intention is to secure
the wayward knight's position by
. . . c7-c5 and then proceed with
. . . a7-a6 and . . . b7-b5 thus gener­
ating counterplay against c4 in
particular and on the queen's flank
in general. In addition, there some­
times arise possibilities of striking
in the centre with . . . e7-e5. As in
the Panno, however, there is the
perpetual problem that should
Black's initiative dissipate without
anything concrete being achieved
then the errant knight may
become a liability of decisive pro­
portions.
9 li:ld2
This manoeuvre, known from
the Panno, is probably White's
most reliable method of damping
down Black's activity. There are
several playable alternatives :
(a) 9 b3 (an interesting exchange
offer which clearly gives White
strong positional compensation if
be the sensible way to decline if
preferred) 1 0 li:lxe4 ..txa l II li:leg5
c5 1 2 W' e l ..tg7 1 3 ..td2 b6 1 4
e4 li:lb7 1 5 e f gf 1 6 W'e2 with
approximately balanced chances;
Udovcic-Gufeld, Leningrad 1 967.
(b) 9 W' a4 c5 10 de li:l xc6 ( 1 0 . . .
be II li:ld4 c5! is interesting) II
.:t d l W'a5 1 2 W'xa5 li:lxa5 1 3 li:ld5
li:lxd5 14 cd ..td7 with full equal­
ity; Vladimirov-Gastonyi, Lenin­
grad v Budapest 1 96 1 .
(c) 9 W'd3 c5 (parrying the

threatened 1 0 b4) 1 0 b3 (after 1 0
tt:lg5 a 6 II e 4 b5 1 2 c b ab 1 3 tt:lxb5
fe 14 lLl xe4 lLl xe4 1 5 ..txe4 ..ia6
16 a4 c4, Dely-Gufeld, Debrecen
1 970, or 1 0 ..id2 a6 II : ac t
l:.b8 1 2 b 3 b5!, Paldan- Pedersen,
Danish corr. Ch. 1 973-4, Black
succeeds in stirring up adequate
counterplay) 10 . . . a6 II ..i b2
l:.b8 1 2 : ae l b5 1 3 .t a l be
1 4 be : b4 (the immediate 1 4 . . .
lLlg4!? merits investigation) 1 5
lLld2 lLlg4 1 6 a 3 : b8 ( 1 6 . . . lLle5 1 7
'ilt'c2 : xc4!? is quite a reasonable
exchange sacrifice) 1 7 11t"c2 ..id7
1 8 e3 lLle5 19 lLle2 11t"e8 20 l:.b l
..ta4 2 1 11t"a2 11t"d8 22 f4! and
having beaten off Black's initiative
in instructive fashion White is on
the way to gaining the upper hand;
Nikolac-Bertok, Yugoslavia
1 969.
9 c5
10 a3!
Indirectly preventing . . . e7-e5
which against other moves is gen­
erally Black's best method of cre­
ating counterplay as the following
examples show :
(a) 10 b3? lLl xd5! II ..i xd5 + e6
1 2 lLldb l ed 1 3 11t"xd5 + �h8 1 4
..tf4 l:.e8 1 5 ..ixd6 ..ie6 and
White is in trouble, e.g. 1 6 11t"d3
'ii b6 or 16 11t"xc5? b6 1 7 11t"a3
.txc4.
(b) 10 l:.b l e5! II de ..txe6
12 b3 d5 1 3 ..ia3 (steering for
equality with 1 3 cd is the prudent
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lll c6 15
course) 1 3 . . . l:.c8 1 4 lLla4 b 6 1 5
b4 c b 1 6 ..txb4 de with excellent
compensation for the sacrificed
material; Pinter- Bjelajac, Pernik
1 978.
(c) 10 11t"c2 e5! II a3 (II de
..txe6 1 2 l:.d l 11t"e7 1 3 b3 lLlc6
leaves Black actively placed, e.g.
14 ..ib2 lLld4 1 5 11t"d3 f4! 1 6 gf
..if5 1 7 e4 ..ie6! and the coming
. . . lLlf6-h5xf4 gives a strong attack;
J. Piket- M . Gurevich, Lucerne
1 989) 1 1 . . . b6 1 2 b4 lL:lb7 1 3 ..i b2
We7 1 4 l:.ael lLld8 1 5 e3 lLlf7
and having usefully redeployed the
problem knight Black's prospects
are fully satisfactory; Vaganian­
Tal, USSR 1 970.
10 ..id7
11 11t"c2
A voiding the trap II b4? cb
1 2 ab lLlxc4! 1 3 lLlxc4 11t"c7! after
which Black regains his material
and assumes the initiative, e.g. 1 4
11t"b3 l:.fc8 1 5 lLl a 5 11t"xc3 1 6 11t"xc3
l:.xc3 1 7 lLlxb7 l:.b3 and White is
in difficulties.
11 11t"c7
Once again preventing b2-b4
by utilizing the sensitivity of c4.
12 b3 a6
The central advance 1 2 . . . e5
leaves White an indisputable pos­
itional advantage after 1 3 de
..ixe6 14 .t b2 and so Black is
forced to fall back on the alterna­
tive wing demonstration plan. It
appears, however, that here too
16 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . tt:lc6
. .

White can maintain the upper Black seeks to relieve the press­
hand. ure by means of exchanges. While
13 .tb2 bS (I 2) this may indeed be the best policy,
the defender must beware of drop­
12 ping his guard as forces are
w reduced because White's advan­
tage is of a particularly insidious
and persistent nature as the pres­
ent game well shows.
17 ..txg7 �xg7
18 W"c3 +
The queen takes over on the key
c3 square menacing both flanks
simultaneously.
14 �d1! 18 �g8
Although at first sight Black's 19 �b2! .Z:.b7
position looks active enough, this 20 �dJ .Z:.tb8
subtle retreat begins a sophi­ 21 .Z:.ab1!
sticated plan, first employed by Appreciating that as the rooks
Botvinnik in the analogous Pan no disappear so too do Black's
K ing's I ndian position in a cel­ chances of counterplay. Moreover,
ebrated game versus Geller in the exchanges accentuates the
1 952, which brilliantly highlights superior activity and coordination
the deficiencies of Black's set-up. of White's minor pieces.
In essence, the idea is to post 21 .Z:.xb1
the bishop at c3 simultaneously 22 .Z:.xb1 .Z:.xb1 +
surveying the hobbled horse in 23 �xb1 W"b6
Black's camp and clearing a path 24 �d2 �f6 ( 1 3 )
for the tour �d l -b2-d3-f4 by its
more fleet of foot white counter­
part. Once a white knight establ­
ishes itself on f4 the weakness of
e6 may become a real problem for
Black.
14 be
Can Black improve hereabouts?
15 be .Z:.ab8
16 ..tcJ lL!g4

While to the inexpert eye it may
appear that an amicable hand­
shake is j ust around the corner, in
fact the real fighting is j ust about
to begin! Space considerations do
not permit us to follow the further
vicissitudes in too great detail
(especially since White unfortun­
ately strays from the consistent
course quite soon) but hopefully
this will not prevent the reader
from drawing the unavoidable if
unpalatable conclusion that those
wishing to play 8 . . . li:l a5 must
either come armed with a big
improvement or be prepared for a
long and arduous defensive task.
Still, at the end of it there may be
a half point waiting, even against
a world champion! 25 h3! <1;>17 26
cli>h2 li:lb7 27 e4 fe 28 li:lxe4 li:ld8
29 li:lg5 + (29 li:lf4! would have set
Black greater problems; as it is, he
is freed from having to defend
the li:lf6 and this permits him to
regroup) 29 . . . cli>e8! 30 li:lf4 li:ll7
3 1 li:lfe6 li:l xg5 (with the exchange
of the problem QN Black's defens­
ive prospects improve enor­
mously) 32 li:l xg5 W'b I ! 33 i.e4
W' a2! 34 cli>g2 ..tf5 35 ..bf5 gf 36
W'd3 h6 37 li:le6 li:le4 38 W'f3 W'xc4
(38 0 0 0 li:lf6!) 39 W'h5 + <l;>d7 40
W'xf5 li:lf6 4 1 li:l xc5 + cli>e8 42
W'g6 + cli>d8 43 li:le6 + cli>d7 44
li:lf4 li:lxd5 45 W'xh6 (45 W'f5 +
cli>c6 46 W'xd5 + W'xd5 47 li:l xd5
cli>xd5 48 cli>f3 <l;>e5 should be
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . llJc6 17
drawn) 45 . . . We4 + 46 �h2 W'e l
47 li:ld3 W'c3 48 W'g6 W' xa3 49 h4
(49 g4 W'c3 50 g5 was a stronger
but riskier winning attempt) 49 . . .
W'c3 50 h5 W'f6 5 1 W'g4 + e6 52
W'a4 + �e7 53 W' xa6 W'f3? (53 . . .
W' f5 collecting the h-pawn was
correct) 54 Wa7 + �d8 55 W'h7
li:lf6 56 W' h8 + cli>d7 57 W'g7 +
<l;>c6 58 h6 li:lg4 + 59 cli>g l "it'd! +
60 cli>g2 We2 6 1 cli>h3? (61 W'c3 +
�d7 62 W'd4 li:lxh6 63 W'g7 +
�c6 64 W'xh6 W'xd3 65 W'xe6
would have preserved winning
chances) 61 . . . li:l xh6 62 W'xh6
W' xd3 63 W' xe6 W'fl + !-!.
Ribli-Barber
Lugano / 985
1 d4 f5 2 g3 li:lf6 3 ..ig2 g6 4 li:l f3
..ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d 6 7 li:lc3 li:lc6
8 d5
8 li:le5
Although current fashion in the
Leningrad has focused attention
on . . . c6 systems (and 7 . . . W'e8 in
particular) at the expense of 7 . . .
li:lc6, aficionados of uncompro­
mising play ensure that the knight
move still appears from time to
time albeit almost invariably in the
form of this centralizing variation.
The basic point at issue is whether
the assortment of tactical and
attacking chances Black acquires
after White· captures the knight
(presently considered the main
18 LeninKrad Main Line: 7 ... lLlc6
continuation) are sufficient to off­
set the positional drawbacks. The
last word on this question has yet
to be said despite the recent trend
of games going in White's favour :
any system capable of dealing
Karpov one of the most crushing
defeats of his career must have
rather a lot going for it.
9 t!Jxe5
The critical response, but there
are also two worthwhile alterna­
tives :
(a) 9 ttJd2 (of course not 9 b3?
t!Je4 and Black wins material) 9
. . . c6! 1 0 h3 (against 1 0 b3 I
recommend 1 0 . . . cd 1 1 cd t!Jh5!
intending 1 2 ..tb2 f4 with active
play on the king's wing) 10 . . . W b6
I I ttJa4 Wc7 with a promising
position for Black; Taimanov­
Vinogradov, Leningrad Ch. 1 946.
(b) 9 Wb3 is only just beginning
to be explored and deserves
respect, as witness the following
defensive fiasco : 9 . . . t!Jed7 1 0
..te3 ttJc5 I I ..txc5 (in ECO this
capture is mentioned in a note and
evaluated with a laconic·= ', quite
erroneously, as we shall see) I I . . .
de 1 2 t!Jg5! .l:l b8 1 3 Wa3 a6 1 4
Wxc5 b6 1 5 W b4 h6 1 6 t!Jf3 b5 1 7
t!Je5 1 -0 Seira wan- Pellant, 1 983.
The best antidote to this is 9 . . .
t!Jxf3 + ! 1 0 ef (or 1 0 ..txf3 ttJd7
I I ..te3 t!Jc5 and the removal of
a pair of knights makes it far less
attractive for White to capture on
c5, failing which Black's position
is fully satisfactory) I 0 . . . e5 I I de
..txe6 1 2 .l:l e l Wd7 1 3 f4 c6 1 4
..te3 Wf7 1 5 Wa3 ..txc4 ( 1 5 . . .
.:. fd8!?) with a very healthy equal­
ity for Black; Pilnik­
Tartakower, Paris 1 954/55.
9 de ( 1 4 )
14
IV
The modified pawn structure
delineates the respective spheres
of action : for White, the centre
and queenside; for Black, the cen­
tre and kingside.
10 Wb3
A multi-purpose and sensible
move which puts pressure on b7,
sets up a vis-a-vis along the
important a2-g8 diagonal, and
prepares to bring a rook to the
d-file. Apart from the centrally
consolidating I 0 e4, the other
tenth moves hardly encompass the
same breadth or depth of efficacy
although one or two of them
nevertheless pose Black some deli­
cate problems which, perhaps,
have not yet entirely been solved :

(a) 1 0 f4? e4 + 1 1 ..te3 tt:\g4 1 2
..td4 e5 1 3 ..tc5 b6! 1 4 ..txf8
•xf8 (Vinogradov) with more
than adequate compensation for
the (probably temporary) sacrifice
of material.
(b) 10 .:te l ?! e4 is fine for Black.
(c) 10 Wc2 permits untroubled
liquidation of Black's structural
weakness by I 0 . . . e6.
(d) 1 0 ..tg5?! tt:'Jd7! leaves the
bishop flailing.
(e) 10 c5!? e4 ( 1 0 . . . e6 looks
safer) I I *'b3 �h8 1 2 .:td l *'d7?!
(artificial to say the least) 1 3 ..te3
c6 14 f3 cd 1 5 tt:\xd5 tt:\xd5 1 6 fe
fe 1 7 : xd5 ± on account of the
superior pawn structure and que­
enside pressure; Cramling-G.
Flear, 1 983.
(f) 10 b3!? e4 I I ..ta3! .:tf7 ( I I
. . . tt:\g4!?) 1 2 f3! ef 1 3 ef f4 1 4 .:te l
with a clearly more harmonious
position for White; Dlugy-Gal­
lego, World Jr. Ch. Sharjah 1 985.
10 e6
Ribli assesses 1 0 . . . �h8 I I
: d I as ;;!; , but it may be worth­
while further investigating the
plan of leaving the centre pawns
untouched, e.g. 10 . . . h6 I I : d 1
�h8 1 2 c5 g5 1 3 ..td2 e4 1 4 .te l
a6 1 5 *'a3 *'e8 1 6 b4 ..td7 1 7 W b3
tt:\g4 with good kingside attacking
prospects for Black; Siekansky­
Hawelko, Polish Ch. 1 989.
II .:td l ed
If this seems too risky then the
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . l0c6 19
playable I I . . . *'e7 i s available,
e.g. 1 2 ..tg5 (;;!; R i bli) h6 1 3 ..txf6
..txf6 1 4 e4 (thus far Schmid­
Menvielle, Tel Aviv 01. 1 964) and
now ECO recommends 1 4 . . . : b8
with an evaluation of equality.
Clearly, there remains much to be
properly worked out here.
12 tt:'Jxd5 c6
13 ..tg5!?
A startling new idea. Older
analyses had only considered the
attacking attempt 1 3 c5 which fails
after 1 3 . . . cd 14 ..txd5 + tt:\xd5
15 .:txd5 We8! as White has no
useful discovered check.
13 cd
The offer cannot be declined
because after 1 3 . . . •as White
plays 14 tt:\e7 + followed by cap­
turing on c8 and then b7 with
advantage.
14 ..txd5 + �h8
15 ..txb7 ( 1 5 )
15
8
The point of White's combi­
nation is now revealed : to bring
about an approximate, heterog-
20 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . lLlc6
.

eneous balance of queen and 1 9 . . . .ta8 20 b3 .l: bd8 2 1 : xd8

pawns versus rook and two minor
pieces. Such positions are notori­
ously resistant to generalization
and necessitate concrete appraisal,
and here lies the nub of White's
discovery-that the black pieces
are lacking in coordination and a
useful plan whereas White's pawns
can be rapidly mobilized and
made into a real threat.
IS ·�Wxd l +
Perhaps Black can improve at
this juncture. It's true that 1 5 . . .
.td7 is unplayable on account of
16 .txa8 "it' xa8 1 7 .txf6 .txf6 1 8
.l: xd 7, but 1 5 . . . .l: b8 immediately
enables the a-pawn to be saved,
e.g. 1 6 .l: xd8 .l: xd8 1 7 .l: d l .l: g8!
(not 1 7 . . . : xd l ? 18 "it' xd 1 .txb7
1 9 .t xf6 .t xf6 20 "it'd6 ± ± ) 1 8
"it'a3 .l: xb7 with conspicuously
better chances than in the game.
16 : xd l : b8
17 "it'a3 .txb7
1 7 . . . : xb7? 1 8 .txf6 wins for
White.
18 .txf6 .txf6
19 "it'xa7
With the capture of a third
pawn the situation has clarified
in White's favour. Although there
would still be considerable techni­
cal difficulties to overcome against
the most stubborn defence, the
game illustrates well just how
difficult it is to manage the
maximum resistance in practice :
.l: xd8 22 f3 e4 (22 . . . �g8 was
mandatory) 23 "it'f7! .td4 + 24
�g2 ef + 25 ef .tg7 26 "it'e7 :rs
(on 26 . . . .l: d2 + 27 �fl .tc6, 28
"it'c7! wins material) 27 b4 (once
the pawns start rolling there is no
hope) 27 . . . h5 28 b5 �g8 29 b6
.tf6 30 "it'e6 + �g7 3 1 c5 .l: d8
32 c6 .l:d2 + 33 �fl f4 34 b7
1 -0.
Karpov-Jacobsen
USSR v Scandinavia, junior
match 1 968
1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lt:lf3
.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc6
8 dS lt:le5 9 lt:lxeS de
10 e4 ( 1 6 )
This central advance both fixes
Black's front e-pawn (and thereby
deadens the KB) and provides
White with a means of opening
up the position at an opportune
moment. It has long been consid­
ered the best continuation despite
its tendency to produce formi-

dable complications.
10 f4
This bold thrust nails Black's
colours to the mast and commits
him to an all out assault on the
enemy king. Although present day
interest has focused almost exclus­
ively on this uncompromising
attacking line, there does exist a
quieter alternative which certainly
deserves mentioning and that is
I 0 . . . e6. There are two main ways
for White to meet this central
challenge :
(a) 1 1 .-b3 ed (should Black
suddenly experience a change of
heart and a craving for complica­
tions, then 1 1 . . . f4 is still available
with the usual unclear conse­
quences) 1 2 cd �h8 ( 1 2 . . . ltJe8
1 3 ef gf 1 4 d6 + is promising for
White) 1 3 ..te3 f4!? (the staid 1 3
. . . ltJe8 brought Black a draw in
Tartakower-Aiexander, Hastings
1 953/54) 14 ..tcS : es 1 5 : fd 1 b6
1 6 ..ta3 ..tg4 1 7 f3 ..td7 1 8 gf
ltJ hS 1 9 ltJe2 ef when Black is not
without chances on the kingside to
offset White's undoubted central
supremacy; Uhlmann-Espig, E.
Germany 1 972.
(b) 1 1 ef ef (the untested 1 1 . . .
gf has its points) 1 2 ..te3
(Gheorghiu's bald 1 2 *'b3 ± has
yet to be confirmed in practice)
1 2 . . . e4?! (looks premature here;
ECO has suggested 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3
j_c5 : e8) 1 3 ..td4 : e8 1 4 : e l
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . lllc6
. 21
b6 15 f3 ± and the game opens
up to White's advantage; Collins­
Sherwin, New York 1 952.
11 b3
The right idea but insuffici­
ently energetically executed-the
bishop needs to be fianchettoed in
order to find worthwhile develop­
ment, but equally the q ueen
requires an active station and
therefore 1 1 b4 (reserving b3 for
the queen) has become the major
continuation. We shall examine
that move in the context of the
next game and note the other
eleventh turn possibilities here :
(a) 1 1 gf ef ( 1 1 . . . ltJh5!? 1 2 f5
ltJf4 also gives compensation for
the pawn) 1 2 ..t xf4 ( 1 2 eS leads
to strange positions tending in
Black's favour, e.g. 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3
e6 ltJeS 1 4 .-b3 f3 1 5 ..th3 b6!
with . . . ..ta6 in the air) 1 2 . . .
ltJxe4! 1 3 ..tg3 (or 1 3 ltJe2 ltJd6!
with balanced prospects) 1 3 . . .
ltJxg3 1 4 hg e6 and Black has
overcome his opening problems;
Hodakowsky-Hiibner, Aibling
1 965.
(b) 1 1 c5 gS 1 2 *'b3?! �h8 1 3
lObS?! (having blocked his b-pawn
White has difficulty forming a
plan) l 3 . . . c6 1 4 ltJc3 .-es 1 5 .- d 1
..i d 7 1 6 b 4 :d8 1 7 ..t b 2 ltJg4 +
Black has completed his develop­
ment and is ready to proceed with
the kingside attack; a perfect
example of how Black should
22 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . .
build up the position when left
undisturbed; Wells-Hansen,
World Jr. Ch. Kiljava 1 984.
(c) 1 1 f3?! (pusillanimous
prophylaxis) I I . . . c6! 1 2 de "ir'b6 +
1 3 � h I be (keeping control of the
important d5 square) 14 b3 g5 1 5
..ta3 �17! 1 6 gf gf 1 7 ti'la4 "ir'c7
1 8 "ir'e l l::t g8 and Black can be
well satisfied with his share of the
chances in a difficult position for
both sides; Hjartarson- Plaskett,
Hastings 1 985/86.
11 g5
12 f3
White is concerned at the possi­
bility of the g-pawn advancing
even further.
12 "ir'd6
13 g4 h5 ( 1 7)
17
w
A sight to gladden every Lenin­
grad player's heart! One glance
suffices to show that White's strat­
egy has failed miserably and
allowed Black to create a deadly
kingside attack. The further course
of the game is extremely instruc-
. ll:\c6
tive: 14 h3 hg 1 5 fg (acquiescing
to the opening of the h-file would
be tantamount to resignation) 1 5
. . . .id7 1 6 a4 "ir'b6 + 1 7 �h2
�f7 18 .if3 l::t h8 19 �g2 l::t h4
20 aS "ir'c5 21 ..ta3 "ir'e3 22 "ir'e 1
( 18)
22 . . . .ixg4! (having this u p
his sleeve was the reason Black
allowed the queen to be driven
into the enemy camp with its
exchange apparently inevitable­
excellent calculation!) 23 hg (23
..txg4 ti'lxg4) 23 . . . ti'lxg4 24 l::t h 1
l::t x h I 25 "ir'xe3 ti'lxe3 + 26 �xh I
g4 (despite the reduction in forces,
White is still in trouble due to the
powerful connected passed pawns)
27 .ie2 f3 28 .1c5 (not 28 .td 1 ?
f2 and . . . l::t h 8 mate will follow)
28 . . . .th6 29 l::t e 1 b6 30 .txf3
(or 30 .txe3 .1xe3 3 1 .1 xf3
l::t h8 + 32 �g2 gf+ 33 �xf3
..td2- + ) 30 . . . be 3 1 .i d 1 �g6
32 ti'lb5 .tf4 33 l::tx e3 (if 33 �g1
then 33 . . . g3 followed by . . . l::th8-
h2 etc.) 33 . . . ..txe3 34 ti'lxc7

tlh8 + 35 �g2 tlh4 36 a6 ..tf4
37 �gl g3 38 ..tf3 .l:t h2 39 ..tg2
¢;f7 40 �fl tlh6 41 �e2 tlb6
0- 1 .
C. Hansen-J. Kristiansen
Esbjerg 1 984
I d4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lL!f3
.ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lL!c3 lL!c6
8 d5 lL!e5 9 lL!xe5 de 10 e4 f4
II b4 g5
With the centre locked, both
sides pursue their respective flank
initiatives with great energy. It
would be quite wrong for Black
to meddle with the centre, e.g. I I
. . . e6 1 2 .ib2 ed 1 3 ed .if5 1 4
:le t and with the inevitable arrival
of the knight at e4, Black will find
himself at a significant positional
disadvantage.
12 :lei
A somewhat enigmatic move,
not exactly forced, which passively
vacates f1 for the bishop in the
event of a . . . g4 . . . f3 pawn storm,
and actively observes the e3 square
(see the note to White's fifteenth
in Farago-Poutiainen below).
12 a6
A necessary preparation for the
transfer of the queen to the king­
side, simply preventing lL!b5. An
u ntested alternative plan is 1 2 . . .
g4 1 3 c5 f3 1 4 ..tfl h5, though
such a'n approach lacks flexibility.
13 ..tb2 'ilt'e8 ( 1 9 )
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . ll\c6 23
/9
w
An attractive, rich position of
clearly drawn battle lines which
should have no trouble attracting
supporters for both sides. Pract­
ical experience so far is extremely
limited, and many more tests will
be required before a trustworthy
judgement can be advanced.
14 c5
Optimally priming White's pos­
ition for various breakthroughs.
An earlier game, Farago- Poutiai­
nen, Budapest 1 975, went 14 :le i
lL!g4 1 5 : c2? (looks natural
enough but lands White in dire
straits; 1 5 f3 was subsequently pro­
posed as an improvement, the idea
being 1 5 . . . lL!e3 1 6 tlxe3! fe 1 7
g4! with superb positional com­
pensation for the material deficit,
but Black can also improve with
15 . . . 'ilt' h5! with obscure play) 1 5
. . . -.. h5 1 6 h 3 f3 ! 1 7 ..txf3 (White
suddenly finds himself between
Scylla and Charybdis : 1 7 hg
..txg4 1 8 ..tfl : f6 would be fatal)
1 7 . . . -..x h3 1 8 'ilt'd3 lL!xf2! 19 tlxf2
24 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . .
( 1 9 �xf2 W'h2 + 20 �e3 : xf3 +
2 1 �xf3 g4 + 22 �e3 i.h6
mate!) 19 W' xg3 +
20 �fl i.h3 + 2 1 �e2 g4 0- l .
A very instructive miniature,
played with panache.
14 i.d7?!
With the laudable aim of devel­
oping the queen's rook, but unfor­
tunately White can throw a tacti­
cal spanner in the works by 1 5 c6!
be 1 6 de i.xc6 1 7 lt:ld5 when the
soft underbelly of Black's position
has been dangerously exposed. In
fact, in the game this opportunity
to seize the initiative was missed,
and the proceedings took an
entirely different course, albeit one
still full of points of interest and
instruction.
Presumably, 14 . . . lt:lg4 must
still come into consideration, and
Kristiansen himself has noted 1 4
. . . W' f7 as a n improvement.
15 : ct ltd8
16 a4 W'f7
lllc6
Threatening to unleash the black
forces by . . . lt:lg4.
17 gf!
An economical way of cutting
dead Black's f-file pretensions.
17 ef?
Black has spotted an amazing
idea which seduces him into this
inferior capture. After the obvious
1 7 . . . gf, there would be real pro­
spects of creating play along the
g-file, but as it is Black's dreams
of attack fade away before they
get going: 1 8 e5! lt:lxd5! 1 9 i.xd5
e6 20 i.e4! (after the natural­
looking 20 i.f3 comes 20 . . . i.c6
2 1 W'e2 lt d2!! and Black wins!) 20
. . . f3 2 1 � h 1 W'h5 22 lt e3 lt f4
23 i. xf3 : xf3? (the last chance
was 23 . . . g4) 24 lt xf3 g4 25 lt:le4!
(with this fine defensive move all
Black's tactics are foiled and
White assumes the initiative) 25
. . . gf 26 W'd4! W'h4 27 �td l J:H8
28 lt g l lt f4 29 W'xd7 lt g4 30
W'xe6 + 1 -0.
3 Leningrad Main Line : 7 . . . 'ife8

1 d4 f5 Occasionally the queen also finds

2 g3 lLlf6 useful employment on r7 putting
3 ..tg2 g6 pressure down the f-file and
4 lLlf3 ..tg7 attacking the c-pawn, and from
5 0-0 0-0 time to time we will see the queen
6 c4 d6 deployed at g6 or h5 after the
7 lL\c3 'li'e8 (20) advance . . . h6 and . . . g5.
8 d5
The familiar method of prevent­
ing . . . e5 and probably best. At
any rate the alternatives do not
look particularly threatening to
Black, e.g. :
(a) 8 e4 fe 9 lL\g5 lL\c6 1 0 ..te3
..tg4 I I 'ii' d 2 'ii' d 7 and Black's
active development assures him a
satisfactory game; Afifi-Yusupov,
It seems strange now to think Tunis 1 985.
that it wasn't really until the 1 980s (b) 8 l:tel 'li'rl (of course not 8
that this typical Classical Dutch . . . lL\e4 immediately because of 9
move was transplanted to the Len­ lLlxe4 fe I 0 lL\g5 ± ± ) 9 b3 lL\e4
ingrad and worked up into a 10 ..tb2 lL\c6 I I l:t c l h6 1 2 l:t fl (in
coherent system. From e8 the order to threaten capturing on e4; 1 2
queen supports the advance . . . d 5 lL\b4 would leave a2 tactically
e7-e5 and also helps prepare, in vulnerable) 1 2 . . . lL\xc3 1 3 ..txc3 e5
conjunction with the QB, to con­ with full equality; Gavrikov­
test the centre by . . . c7-c6. Malanyuk, USSR Ch. 1 986.
25
26 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . .
(c) 8 lt:ld5 lLlxd5 9 cd 'it'b5 1 0
lLl e I (Black has a fine game after
10 'it'b3 'it'xb3 I I ab c6 1 2 ..ig5
.:te8 1 3 .:t fc l e6 14 de ..ixe6;
Zukhovitsky- M ih. Zeitlin, USSR
1 986) 1 0 . . . lLla6 ( 1 0 . . . a5!?) I I e3
..id7 12 lt:ld3 c5 1 3 de ..ixc6 14
..ixc6 be 15 'it'b3 + lH7 16 'it'xb5
cb 1 7 ..id2 e5 = Balashov­
M alanyuk, USSR. Ch. 1 986.
(d) 8 'it'b3 lLla6 9 ..ig5 c5 1 0
..ixf6 ..ixf6 I I .:t ad ! ..ig7 and
after this prophylaxis against e2-
e4 (which would now be answered
by f5-f4) prospects are balanced
thanks to Black's possession of the
two bishops; Lerner- Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 986.
(e) 8 b3 (a useful waiting move
hoping to show that Black's
threatened advance of the e-pawn
is actually loosening and opens
the position prematurely) 8 . . .
lLla6 (this standard treatment is
the most solid; 8 . . . e5 9 de de I 0
e4! lLlc6 I I lLld5! has indeed been
shown to favour White) 9 ..ib2 (9
..ia3 c6 1 0 'it'd3 .:t b8 I I e4 fe 1 2
lLlxe4 ..if5 1 3 lLlxf6 + ..ixf6 1 4
'it'e3 b5 gives a dynamic balance;
Kishnyev- Bukhman, Budapest
1 989) 9 . . . ..id7 10 d5 c6 I I .:t e l
h 6 1 2 e 3 .:t c8 1 3 lLld4 'it'f7 with a
typically rich position for both
sides; Kasparov-Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 988.
8 lLla6
The most effective method of
"i1t' e8
developing the queenside given
that White's d-pawn advance
ceded Black control of c5.
9 lLld4
The most natural follow-up to
the previous move, but there is
also a case for trying to throw
Black's plans out of gear by pre­
paring a rapid advance of the b­
pawn, e.g. 9 .:t b I ..id7 1 0 b4 ( I 0
lLld4 would transpose to
Tukmakov - M . Gurevich below)
10 . . . e5 I I de ..ixe6 1 2 lLld4
..ixc4 1 3 . .ixb7 .:t b8 14 ..ic6 ±
since White has simultaneously
downgraded Black's pawn struc­
ture and turned the stranded a6
knight into a real liability; Ruka­
vina-Cvitan, Yugoslav Ch. 1 986.
9 . . . c6 looks a sensible attempt
at improvement.
9 ..id7 ( 2 1 )
21
w
Necessary preparation for the
advance of the c-pawn which
forms an indispensable link in
Black's counterplay.
Essentially, White must now

decide whether to concentrate
operations in the centre or on the
q ueenside, and accordingly our
illu strative games will feature the
continuations 10 e4 and 10 l: b l .
I n addition to these the follow­
ing examples are also worth not­
ing :
(a) 10 e3 c6 I I b3 (a game
Gavrilov-M. Gurevich, USSR
1982, continued interestingly with
II l: b l tiJc7 12 b4 cd 1 3 cd l: c8
1 4 a4 tiJa8 1 5 "it'b3 and Black
is uncomfortably cramped; I I . . .
l:t b8 looks more precise) I I . . .
tiJc7 1 2 .i b2 c5 1 3 tiJde2 (as
the game goes, White gets into
difficulties over the weakness of c4
and so 1 3 tiJf3 with a later re­
routing to d2 was preferable) 1 3
. . . b5 1 4 "it'c2 l: b8 ( Black has a
pleasant initiative while White has
nothing to do) 1 5 l: ac l (exacer­
bates the problems of the position;
either 15 l: ab l or 1 5 cb should
have been played) 1 5 . . . be 16 be
tiJg4! 1 7 .ia 1 tiJe5 1 8 tiJd 1 .ia4
19 "it'd2 tiJxc4! and Black has won
a sound pawn in very instructive
fashion; Belyavsky-Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 983.
(b) 10 b3 (this move has much
in common with 10 l: b l but here
White chooses to forgo b4 options
in favour of a different placement
of the rook) I 0 . . . c6 I I .ib2 tiJc7
12 l: c l ( 1 2 "it'd2 merits attention,
e.g. 12 . . . c5 1 3 tiJf3 a6 14 : ae l
Leningrad Main Line : 7 . . . "ilfe8 27
b5 1 5 "it'd3 l: b8 1 6 .ia 1 h6 1 7
tiJd2 tiJg4 1 8 e3 ± since the sting
has been taken from Black's
counterplay and White
is ready to push through in t he
centre; P. Stefanov- Marasescu,
Romanian Ch. 1 983. Perhaps
Black should prefer 1 3 . . . : b8
and possibly dispense with . . . a6
altogether.) 1 2 . . . : b8 1 3 "it'd2 c5
14 tiJf3 a6 (Kremenetsky considers
14 . . . b5 1 5 cb tiJxb5 1 6 tiJxb5
l: xb5 1 7 .ixf6 .ixf6 1 8 "it'c2
intending tiJf3-d2-c4 to be ;t, but
this is hard to credit given the
open nature of the position and
Black's bishops) 1 5 "it' c2 b5 1 6
tiJd2 e5!? 1 7 de .ixe6 1 8 .i a I ( 1 8
e4? would allow the characteristic
and instructive tactical blow 18 . . .
be 1 9 be fe 20 tiJcxe4 l: xb2!) 1 8
. . . "it'e7 1 9 1!4 f4! (a typical side­
stepping response to White's tor­
tuously prepared central advance)
20 tiJd5 (of course not 20 gf? tiJh5
when the black squares around
White's king are irreparably weak­
ened) 20 . . . tiJfxd5 2 1 cd .id7 22
.ixg7 "it'xg7 23 tiJf3 .ig4 and
with transition to a classic good
knight versus bad bishop position
imminent Black's winning chances
are good; F. Lengyel-Kremenet­
sky, Satu-Mare 1 983.
(
R. Hernandez-Chemin
Cienfuegos 1 981
·
t d4 rs 2 g3 tiJf6 3 ig2 g6 4 tiJf3
28 Leningrad Main Line: 7 . ..
..tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 ltlc3 -.es
8 dS lt:Ja6 9 ltld4 ..td7
10 e4
Such rustic applications of the
pedagogues' panacea for dealing
with the Dutch-play e4-rarely
prove really threatening as long as
they are met precisely. Generally
speaking, White does better to
promote strategical complexity
rather than clarify matters with
an early showing of his hand.
Nevertheless, any logical opening
up of the centre is always an acid
test of Black's defensive resources
and needs careful handling.
10 lt:Jxe4
Of course Black can j ust as well
capture with the pawn as long
as transposition to the column is
effected by exchanging knights as
well; failure to do so leads to grave
problems for Black, as shown by
I vkov- Bischoff, Thessaloniki
Open 1 984: 10 . . . fe 1 1 lt:Jxe4
c5? 1 2 lt:Je6 ..txe6 1 3 de lt:Jc7 1 4
lt:Jxf6 + ..t xf6 1 5 -.e2 .l:l. b8 1 6 a4
lt:Ja6 1 7 h4! and with h5 to come,
Black's fragile kingside defences
will soon be ripped apart.
II lt:Jxe4 fe
12 ..txe4 ( 22)
An important tabiya for the 7
. . . -.es variation, containing an
interesting mixture of structural
and dynamic pros and cons for
both sides. White's advanced d-
Wle8
22
8
pawn assures him a spatial advan­
tage and he is without structural
weakness, his pieces can develop
freely and the half-open e-file
beckons for major piece oper­
ations; the pride and joy of his
position at the moment is the
beautifully centralized knight
which is particularly happy to be
keeping e6 under surveillance. By
comparison, Black is cramped and
suffers from a problem e-pawn,
none too sturdy kingside and the
e6 weakness in the heart of his
position. To offset these static
deficiencies, Black has active
pieces and useful lines to operate
along in the half open f-file and
h8-a 1 diagonal as well as pro­
spects of creating play in the centre
and/or on the queenside by appro­
priate pawn pushes.
12 c6
This appears to be Black's most
reliable continuation judging from
the evidence so far. The alterna­
tives :

(a) 1 2 . . . c5?! 1 3 de? ( 1 3 lLJe6!
lo oks unpleasant for Black; cf.
Ivkov-Bischoff, note to Black's
tenth above) 1 3 . . . be 14 .l:t b 1 .l:t c8
1 5 .te3 Wf7 1 6 We2 e5 1 7 lLJb3
4Jc7 1 8 .tg2 d5 with promising
dynamic possibilities for Black in
a complex position; Schmidt-Gri­
gorov, Prague 1 985.
(b) 1 2 . . . 4Jc5 1 3 .tg2 a5 1 4
.tg5 W f7 1 5 W d2 .txd4 1 6 W xd4
e5 1 7 Wc3 with a clear positional
superiority for White thanks to
the bishop pair; Van der Sterren­
Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984.
13 .te3
Not 1 3 de? be transposing to
Schmidt-Grigorov above.
13 lLJc7
14 Wd2 c5!
Now that lLJe6 is no longer
possible Black is happy to stabilize
the centre so as to launch a flank
initiative.
15 lLie2 b5
16 cb .tf5!
Forcing White to retreat since
exchanging would irretrievably
weaken the d-pawn.
17 .tg2 W xb5 ( 23 )
Yet another demonstration of
the versatility of the e8 placement
of the black queen! It is interesting
to observe how Black has usurped
the initiative despite White having
apparently played only natural
and sensible looking moves. Note
that White has failed to develop
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . -. e8 29
23
w
any play at all against Black's
sensitive e6 and e7 points whereas
Black has both isolated White's d­
pawn and created a target of the
b-pawn by opening up the b-file.
18 lLic3 Wd3
Proceeding in instructive safety­
first style denying the opponent
any chance of attacking on the
kingside.
19 .l:tfdt W xd2
20 .l:txd2 h6
Preventing counterplay against
the e-pawn by .tg5 and rooks to
the e-file. Now White is reduced
to passive defence while Black can
gradually apply the pressure with
every chance of a positive outcome
as indeed was the case in the game :
2 1 .l:t c l .l:t ab8 22 .tfl .td7 23
.tc4 .1:t b4 24 b3 .1:t fb8 25 a3?
(precipitates the end, although
continued passivity would have
to contend with the undermining
advance of Black's a-pawn; White
ought to have . gone fishing in
muddy waters by 25 4Je4 with
30 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... WeB
sacrificial possibilities on c5) 25 . . .
J::tx b3! (a typical and instructive
exchange offer to batter down the
defensive wall) 26 i.xb3 l::tx b3 27
lt:le2 a5 28 i.d4 i.f8! 29 l::tb2 a4
30 J::t x b3 ab 3 1 J::t b l c4! 32 J::tc l
lt:lxd5 0- 1 . White i s helpless
against the black pawns, e.g. 33
lt:lc3 (33 l::txc4? i.b5) 33 . . . lt:lxc3
34 i. xc3 i. b5 followed by . . .
i.g7 and the blockade is broken.
Ryshkov-Zarubin
Leningrad I 983
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lt:lf3
i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 W'e8
8 d5 lt:la6 9 lt:ld4 i.d7
10 J::tb 1
A useful move side-stepping the
veiled attack from Black's KB and
introducing b4 options into the
position.
10 c6
The only sensible continuation
at this juncture. One final warning
against . . . c5 when it can be answ­
ered by lt:le6 : 10 . . . c5? I I lt:le6
i. xe6 1 2 de W'c8 1 3 lt:ld5 lt:lxd5
14 cd c4 1 5 i.g5 J::te8 16 e4 fe 1 7
i. xe4 W'c5 1 8 i.e3 W'b4 1 9 W'g4
lt:lc7 20 h4 (with this Black's fate
is irredeemably sealed) 20 . . . J::t f8
2 1 h5 lt:le8 22 hg h6 23 W' h4 lt:lf6
24 i.f3 lt:le8 25 i.xh6 l::t xf3 26
i.xg7 �xg7 27 W'h7 + 1 -0
Burger-Dlugy, 1983.
11 b3
The immediate double step
advance of the b-pawn appears to
have tactical objections, e.g. I I
b4?! (or similarly I I de be 1 2 b4?!
lt:lxb4 1 3 l::t xb4 c5 1 4 lt:ld5 cb 1 5
lt:lc7 W'c8 1 6 lt:lxa8 lt:le4 1 7 i.xe4
fe 1 8 i.g5 J::tf7 1 9 lt:lc2
W' xa8 20 lt:l xb4 i.h3 + Kara­
sev-Cherepkov, Leningrad 1 983/
84) I I . . . lt:lxb4 1 2 l::t xb4 (perhaps
1 2 a3 is worth consideration) 1 2
. . . c5 1 3 J::tx b7 cd 1 4 lt:lb5 W'c8 1 5
J::tc7 (or 1 5 l::tx a7 W' xc4 1 6 l::tx a8
l::txa8 17 lt:ld4 l::txa2 18 e3 lt:le4 ± )
1 5 . . . W' b8 1 6 J::tc6 lt:le4! 1 7 i.xe4
i.xc6! 1 8 de fe and Black's
material advantage should be
decisive; M ilut-Armas, Romanian
Ch.
11 lt:lc7 ( 24 )
I I . . . l::tb8 merits careful con­
sideration here as it could quite
easily turn out to be the most
precise move. Cebalo-Jacimovic,
Pula 1 985, continued 12 i. b2 lt:lc7
1 3 b4 (perhaps too forcing; 1 3 e3
would be normal) 1 3 . . . e5! 1 4 de

tZ:lxe6 1 5 e3 W f7 1 6 W b3 lL!xd4 1 7
ed and now instead of 1 7 . . . b5
Black could either bring about a
stable equality by 1 7 . . . ..te6 1 8
d 5 cd 1 9 cd ..td7 or try for more
by 1 7 . . f4!?
0
12 ..tb2
This looks natural enough but
it has the drawback of allowing
Black to get on with his plan
unhindered. Alternatives:
(a) 1 2 b4 (with the black knight's
retreat the tactical problems have
disappeared) 1 2 . . . e5 1 3 de (both
1 3 lLl b3 cd 14 lL!xd5 lL!cxd5 1 5
..txd5 + lL!xd5 1 6 W xd5 + ..te6
and 1 3 de ed! 14 cd W xd 7 1 5 lLla4
lL!e4 1 6 ..t b2 b5 are in Black's
favour) 1 3 . . . lL!xe6 1 4 lL!b3 (better
to support the k night by 1 4 e3) 1 4
. . . lL!g4! 1 5 ..t b2 lL!e5 (Black has
neatly highlighted the drawback
of the b4 advance-the weakening
of c4-and has achieved a per­
fectly viable position) 1 6 lL!d2 a5?!
(rather than spurring White on
with his plan he should make him
think twice by playing 16 . . . a6)
1 7 b5 lL!c5 1 8 be be 1 9 lL!a4!
and White's position is the more
purposeful; Tukmakov-M. Gure­
vich, USSR 1 982.
(b) 1 2 e3 (creating an alternative
retreat for the knight) 1 2 . . . c5 1 3
lL!de2 b5 1 4 cb lL!xb5 1 5 lL!xb5
.i.xb5 1 6 ..t b2 Wfl = 1 7 .C. e l
lL!e4 1 8 ..t xg7 W xg7 1 9 .C. c 1 a5
20 lLl f4 ..td7 21 Wc2 lL!f6 22 Wd3
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... jte8 31
.C. fb8 23 lL!e6 ..txe6 2 4 d e .C. a7 2 5
.C. c4 Wf8 26 e4 fe 27 ..txe4 We8
28 Wd2 t-t Adorjan-Grigorov,
Prague 1 985.
(c) 1 2 de be 1 3 b4 e5 14 lLlb3
We7, with chances for both sic;les
in a complicated position, is a
suggestion of Tukmakov's.
12 c5
13 lLlf3
The knight is not well placed
on c2, e.g. 1 3 lLlc2 .C. b8 ( 1 3 . . . g5
intending play on the kingside
comes into consideration) 1 4 e4
(the point of leaving the bishop's
diagonal clear) 1 4 . . . b5 1 5 e5?!
(over-optimistic) 1 5 . . . de 1 6 d6
lLle6 1 7 lLlxb5 ..txb5 1 8 de Wxe7
19 cb (thus far Szilagyi-Armas,
Tatabanya 1 985) 1 9 . . . lL!d4 20 a4
.C. fd8 and Black dominates the
centre.
13 .C. b8
14 lLld2 b5
15 cb
White has decided to leave his
e-pawn untouched for as long as
possible and therefore has to deal
with the threatened . . . b4 in more
radical fashion. Both 1 5 e3 and 1 5
e4 were alternatives worth atten­
tion with balanced chances.
15 lL!xb5
16 lL!c4 g5
With the centre stable and some
progress already made on the
queenside Black now turns his
attention to the opposite flank.
31 Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... WeB

17 lL!xb5 .i.xb5 Removing the sting from e5.

18 11fc2 24 e5 de
Erroneously egging Black on. 25 .:. ret e4! (26)
Much safer was 1 8 e3 in order to
26
be able to open the e-file in the
w
event of Black still pushing on
with . . . f4.
18 f4 ( 25 )

25
w

Black has neatly thwarted Whi­

te's counterplay and now passes
to decisive action on the kingside.
The game concluded : 26 fe .i.xc4
27 be (27 11fxc4? f3 28 d6 + �h8
Black has made considerable
29 de f2 + 30 �xf2 lL!g4 + + 3 1
progress and is clearly in the driv­
�g3-3 1 �e2 lL!e5 + costs the
ing seat.
queen-3 1 . . . 11fxh2 + ! 32 �xg4
19 1Wf5?
.::. f4 mate) 27 . . . lL!g4 28 1Wh3 11fg5!
Merely a waste of time. 29 .i.xg7 11fxg7 30 e5 l:.xb 1 3 1
19 h6 l:.xb 1 lL!xe5 3 2 � h 1 f3 3 3 .i.fl
20 gf .i.d7 .::. f6? (Black loses his way; simply
21 1Wd3 gf 33 . . . �h8 with 34 . . . l:.g8 to
22 e4 follow would quickly wrap things
White pins his hopes on coun­ up) 34 'lieS + �h7 35 .i.h3 1Wf8
tering Black's kingside attacking 36 11fxc5 l:.f4 37 l:.b7 l:.xc4 38
chances by central action but this 11fe3? (38 l:.xe7 + ! �h8 39 11fe3!
turns out to be misguided. keeps matters unclear) 38 . . . 11ff6
22 11fh5 39 .i.fl l:.h4 40 l:.xa7?? l:.xh2 +
23 f3 .i. b5 0- l .
4 Leningrad : Miscellaneous
Systems

I n this chapter we review various

White alternatives to the mainline
sequence 1 d4 f5 2 g3 t!Jf6 3 .tg2
g6 4 t!Jf3 .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6
7 t!Jc3. Working backwards, we
shall simply note our rec­
ommended responses where the
deviations are no more than modi­
fications of previously encoun­
tered plans, but those incorporat­
ing new strategic concepts will be
examined in greater detail in the
context of complete games.
Seventh move alternatives (after 6
. . . d6 (27 ) )
I n addition t o the classic knight
development 7 t!Jc3 White has also
experimented with the following
possibilities :
(a) 7 b3 This flexible move may
comfortably be met by the stand­
ard 7 . . . c6 with essentially similar
play to the main line but of greater
i nterest are the following continu-
33
27
w
ations, attempting, in the first case,
to exploit the lack of control of e4,
and in the second the weakening of
the a 1 -h8 diagonal: (i) 7 . . . t!Je4
8 .t b2 t!Jd7 9 "it"c2 and now
instead of 9 . . . t!Jdf6 10 t!Jbd2 e6
1 1 t!Je 1 t!Jxd2 1 2 "it"xd2 "it"e7 1 3
t!Jd3 ;t (Petrosian- Kaiszauri, Vil­
nius 1 978) Black should prefer the
immediate 9 . . . e6, e.g. to t!Jbd2
t!Jxd2 1 1 "it"xd2 "it"e7 and he is
poised to play the liberating . . .
e6-e5 when appropriate; (ii) 7 . . .
e5!? 8 de de 9 "it"c2 (evidently, the
prospect of being pinned precludes
34 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
the capture on e5) 9 . . . e4! I 0 : d I
"fle7 I I lL!d4 c5 1 2 lL!b5 and now
not 12 . . . lL!c6? 1 3 .tf4 ± (Ban­
giev-Lutikov, USSR Navy Ch.
1 970) but 1 2 . . . a6! with fine pro­
spects for Black.
(b) 7 b4 e5! 8 de de 9 .tb2 e4
10 lL!d4 "fle7 I I "flb3 �h8 with
chances for both sides.
(c) 7 d5 By advancing in the
centre immediately White cuts out
Black's main line option of 7 . . .
lL!c6. The simplest response is 7 . . .
lL!a6 8 lL!d4 .td7 9 lLlc3 "fle8
transposing to Chapter 3. Botvin­
nik has claimed that 10 lL!b3 leaves
the position slightly in White's
favour, but this contentious assess­
ment has yet to be upheld in
practice. One additional example
of play : 10 : e l lL!c5 I I "flc2 c6 1 2
lL! b3 lL!ce4! 1 3 lL!xe4 fe 1 4 ..be4
"flf7! (the veiled threat against f2
enables Black to regain his pawn
with advantage) 1 5 .te3 cd 1 6 cd
: fc8 1 7 "fld3 lL!xe4 1 8 "fixe4 .tf5
1 9 -.h4 .txb2 + Prakhov -Bert­
holdt, Bad Salzungen 1 960.
Early b3 fianchetto
White may opt for a quick queen­
side fianchetto at almost any stage.
All Black's standard responses
remain valid but the most distinc­
tive counter features an intriguing
Leningrad/Stonewall hybrid.
Portisch-Smyslov
Portoroz 197 1
I d 4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 .tg2 g 6 4 lL! f3
.tg7 5 b3 0-0 6 .tb2 d 5 ( 28 )
28
w
This bold advance signals a rad­
ical departure from the standard
Leningrad strategies. In place of
the usual quicksilver centre and
fleet-footed piece play, we have a
locked pawn front which slows
the mid-board battle considerably
and sees both sides jockeying for
optimum positioning behind their
own lines before engaging in hand
to hand combat. Comparison with
the standard Stonewall shows that
it is easier for Black to develop his
pieces in the Leningrad version
since in general there is less central
congestion and in particular
Black's Q B, usually the problem
piece, finds useful deployment at
e6. One suspects that the Lenin­
grad Stonewall could well prove
to be a major growth area in the
future development of the Dutch
 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 35

Defence. :!9
7 e4 e6 8
8 0-0 ..te6
With this immediate develop­
ment Black declares himself
unconcerned at the possible
k night sally which White chooses
to implement. The preparatory 8
. . . 'it>h8, enabling the bishop to
drop back to g8 if attacked, is
an alternative and equally valid
approach. with considerable effect. Thus
9 li:lg5 ..tf7 hindsight indicates that White
10 li:leJ 'ili'e8! should have played 14 cd li:lxd5!
A key move in Black's plans; (not 14 . . . cd 15 e4 ± ) 15 li:l xd5
from f7 the queen will not only 1 hd5 with balanced chances
protect d5 but also maintain the according to Portisch.
pressure against c4 as will be seen. 14 de!
11 'ili'dJ h6 15 be li:lb6
12 li:lxf7 'ili'xf7 Now all becomes clear; the
13 f3 weakness of the white c-pawn, and
A direct and natural-looking subsequently the c4 square,
continuation which aims to open enables Black to seize the initiative
up the centre as rapidly as poss­ and generate long-term pressure
i ble. Black's resources are also on the q ueenside.
fully adequate to meet immediate 16 e5
play on the queen's wing, e.g. 1 3 1 6 d5 would be no better for
cd cd 1 4 'ili'b5 e6 1 5 li:la4 li:lc6 1 6 then the other knight would swing
tL:lc5 li:le4! with excellent central into action on the e5 and c5
counterplay. squares after 1 6 . . . li:lfd7.
13 li:lbd7 16 li:le4
14 e4 ( 29 ) 17 .tel .l:tad8
It appears that Black is in immi­ 18 .l:t b l li:ld7!
nent danger of being rolled up Sim ultaneously increasing the
in the centre, to his permanent pressure on the white centre and
spatial disadvantage, but there is parrying the threat of 19 .l:t xb7 on
a hidden weak spot in White's account of 1 9 . .. . li:lxc5.
position which Black uncovers 19 d5 b5!
36 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
The knight has no intention of
vacating its powerful outpost. If
now 20 cb then the white d-pawn
would come under attack after 20
. . . lLJdxb6.
20 de lLJxc5
21 Wc2 a6 ( 30)
30
w
White's proud-looking centre of
the previous diagram has been
shattered and it is merely a matter
of time before the remnant
straggler at c6 is ripe for the pluck­
ing. Rather than exit prosaically
White attempts to muddy the
waters with a pawn offer which
at least allows him to dream of
counterplay down the long diag­
onal. Black's play, however, is las­
er-accurate to the last, and it is
the white king which becomes
exposed : 22 f4 ..bc3! 23 Wxc3
lLJ xe4 24 ..txe4 fe 25 a4 Wd5 26
ab ab 27 ..tb2 .I:H6 28 ..ta I Wc5 +
29 �h i Wxc6 30 : bd l e3 + 3 1
� g l : d2 3 2 : xd2 ed 3 3 W b3
: d6 34 Wc3 e5! 35 : d l (the
attempt to keep the diagonal open
would meet with an elegant refu­
tation : 35 fe d l W 35 ed Wh I + ! 37
�xh 1 Wxfl mate) 35 . . . Wc5 +
36 �h i We3 37 fe : d 3 0- 1 .
A s an addendum t o this fine
game let us also note a more recent
variation of the same theme which
provides much interesting food for
thought. Yusupov-Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 98 7 : I d4 f5 2 g3 lLJf6
3 ..ig2 g6 4 b3 ..tg7 5 ..t b2 0-0
6 lLJf3 d6 7 0-0 c6 8 lLJ bd2 � h8 9
c4 d5!? (electing for the Stonewall
formation even at the cost of a
tempo!) 1 0 lLJe5 ..te6 I I lLJd3
lLJ bd7 12 : c l ( Malanyuk gives 1 2
f3 W b6 1 3 e 3 c5!? as unclear) 1 2
. . . lLJe4 1 3 lLlf4 ..t f7 1 4 cd cd 1 5
f3 lLJd6 1 6 e3 ( 1 6 e4? W b6!) 1 6 . . .
Wa5 1 7 lLJd3 ( 1 7 ..ic3 W b6 leaves
the bishop misplaced) 1 7 . . . : ac8
(Black has completed his develop­
ment harmoniously and has no
problems) 1 8 We2 Wa6 19 : fe 1
: xc l 20 : xc 1 : c8 2 1 : xeS lLJxc8
22 a4 and now instead of 22 . . .
lLJd6 23 ..ifl Wc6 24 Wd I �g8
25 �f2 Wc7 26 W c 1 W xc l 27
lLJxcl which left White a tiny edge
which he worked hard to exploit
before agreeing to a draw on move
sixty, Malanyuk proposes 22 . . .
e5 23 de lLJ xe5 24 ..tfl lLJxd3 25
..ixg7 + �xg7 26 Wxd3 Wxd3 27
..txd3 lLJe7 28 ..ib5 a6 29 ..td7
�f6 as Black's surest path to the
draw. That one of the foremost
modern connoisseurs of the Lenin-

grad should be ready to adopt
�he Stonewall formation a tempo
down, yet nevertheless equalise
without difficulty against a player
of Yusupov's calibre, bodes well
indeed for the future of the Lenin­
grad Stonewall.
Sixth move alternatives
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4
liJO .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 ( 3 1 )
31
w e4 can be met either simply by 8
Some succinct suggestions for
meeting the various offbeat alter­
natives to the natural 6 c4 :
(a) 6 d5 is met most simply either
by 6 . . . c6 7 c4 d6 transposing to
chapter 1 or 6 . . . lt:la6 7 c4 d6 as
in 7 d5 above.
(b) 6 c3 d6 (6 . . . d5 is feasible)
7 1fb3 + e6 8 lt:l bd2 (Black is
certainly happy to oblige with a
Stonewall after 8 lt:lg5 d5 since
White will lose time) 8 . . a5 9 a4
lt:la6 10 l:te 1 lt:le4 with pleasant
prospects for Black; Kavalek­
Ciocaltea, Caracas 1 970.
(c) 6 lt:lc3 is best answered by 6
. . . d5 with a favourable Stonewall
Leningrad : Miscellaneous Systems 37
because the standard 6 . . . d6 can
leave Black facing tricky problems
in the centre after either 7 l:te 1 or
7 1fd3.
(d) 6 b3 - see Portisch-Smys­
lov above.
(e) 6 lt:lbd2 d6 (apart from 6 . . .
d5 other experimental byways also
beckon for those of an adventur­
ous disposition, e.g. 6 . . . c6 7 b3
a5 8 a4 lt:la6 or even 6 . . . lt:la6
immediately) 7 c3 (7 l:te I lt:lc6 8
. . . fe 9 lt:lxe4 lt:lxe4 1 0 l:t xe4 .tf5!
or more enterprisingly with 8 . . .
f4!? with complex play) 7 . . . lt:lc6
8 l:t e 1 (other moves are no better,
e.g. 8 W b3 + �h8 9 d5? lt:la5! 1 0
Wa3 c 5 with a favourable main
line position, or 8 b4 a6 9 Wb3 +
e6 1 0 .t b2 �h8 I I c4 e5! with
balanced prospects) 8 . . . e5 9 de
lt:lxe5!? (Black posits that the
removal of this pair of k nights will
promote his attacking prospects;
9 . . . de I 0 e4 f4!? with unclear play
also comes into consideration) 1 0
lt:lxe5 d e 1 1 e4 f4!? This typical
pawn sacrifice gives Black plenty
of chances. The game Kaplun-M.
Gurevich, USSR 1 983, illustrates
the potential dangers to the white
king : 12 lt:lc4 (on 1 2 gf follows 1 2
. . . lt:lh5! and the weakness of the
f4 square coupled with the
vulnerability of the h2 and 12
points plus easy access of the black
forces to the kingside all add up
38 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
to an onerous defensive task for
White) 1 2 . . . fg 1 3 hg 'W/e7 1 4 b3
l:te8 1 5 ..ta3 'W/f7 1 6 'W/c2 aS
(a good move which sets up the
possibility of a timely . . . a4 initiat­
ive stealer) 1 7 lLle3 ..te6 1 8 l:[ ed 1
(the natural 1 8 l:[ ad I would land
White in trouble after 1 8 . . . a4)
1 8 . . . ..tf8! (shrewdly trades the
passive K B for its active counter­
part and simultaneously gains the
rooks access to the f-file) 1 9 ..txf8
l:[ xf8 20 l:td2 h5 (whereas piece
play alone would be unable to
breach the defences the humble
footsoldier can perform wonders,
as we shall see) 2 1 c4 (attempting
to pressurize the one weakspot in
the black camp - the e-pawn) 2 1
. . . lLlg4 2 2 lLlxg4 ..txg4 2 3 l:t d 5
'W/ e 7 24 'W/ b2 l:[ ae8 (inviting the
rook to wander offside in search
of booty) 25 l:[ fl c6! 26 l:[ xa5 h4
27 b4 (hoping to get the rook back
into play via a3) 27 . . . l:[ f7 28 f4?
(28 f3 was mandatory when the
struggle is still in progress whereas
now Black clearly gains the upper
hand) 28 . . . h3! 29 ..th 1 (29 : xeS?
hg + + or 29 ..tf3 'W/d7! + ) 29 . . .
ef 30 gf l:[ ef8 3 1 'W!d2 ..te6 32 l:[ f3
'W!h4 33 l:[g5 ..tg4! 34 'Wif2 h2 + !
(glorious and decisive self-immo­
lation!; if now 35 �fl then 35 . . .
'W/xg5 36 fg l:[ xf3 wins) 35 'W/ xh2
'W/xh2 + 36 �xh2 ..txf3 37 ..txf3
l:t xf4 38 ..tg2 �g7 39 a4 l:[ f2 40
l:t c5 l:[ c2 41 �g3 l:t c3 + 0- 1 .
Fifth move alternatives
l . d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4
lLlf3 ..tg7
There are no specially indiv­
idualistic fifth moves available to
White which will not transpose
elsewhere, but it is worth noting
the following instructive example:
5 lbc3 0-0 6 h4?! c5 7 d5 d6 8
0-0 (stamps White's flank gesture
as a sham) 8 . . . lLlh5! (eyeing
the weakened g3 and clearing the
bishop's path) 9 e3 lLld7 1 0 'Wie2
lbe5 1 1 ..td2 l:[ b8 1 2 a4 a6 with
the advantage over the entire
board; note how White's only
positive plan, playing e4, is ruled
out on account of the extra
strength lent the reply . . . f4 by
White's thoughtless sixth;
Bobekov- Lutikov, Bulgaria v
RSFSR 1 958.
Karlsbad Variation: I d4 f5 2 g3
lbf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lbh3
First played back in the 1 923
Karlsbad tournament, this vari­
ation still commands respect
today. The rationale behind the
knight's lateral development stems
from the light square sensitivity in
Black's formation, especially the
almost invariable weakness of e6.
By manoeuvring the KN to f4
White pressurizes this Achilles'
heel in particular and the white
squares in general, since the K B
remains unblocked. Not infre-

q uently, White augments his strat­
egy by developing the queen to
b3, simultaneously eyeing b7 and
l ooking down the a2-g8 diagonal
at e6. Black's counter strategy may
well seek to utilize White's dimin­
ished control of e5 as well as
a tempo-enhanced pawn advance
on the kingside ( . . . g5).
Sikhov-Korchnoi
USSR Student Team Ch.
Liningrad 1 950
I d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .i.g2 g6 4 lZlh3
4 .i.g7 ( 32)
5 c4
There are some interesting alter­
natives to this standard approach:
(a) 5 d5!? attempting to restrict
Black's options is an idea which
has yet to be properly explored.
One example: 5 . . . d6!? 6 �f4 c5!?
7 h4 0-0 8 h5 "ife8 9 hg hg 10 lZld2
lZla6 I I �f3 lZle4 with chances for
both sides in a sharp position,
Solmundarsson - Padevsky,
Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 39
Siegen 01. 1 9 70.
(b) 5 c3 c6! (anticipating the
queen's development to b3, block­
ing the attack on b7 and preparing
to oppose queens) 6 �d2 (in Toth­
Knezevic, Italy 1 973, a balanced
and very difficult position arose
after 6 a4 d6 7 "it"b3 e5 - 7 . . .
"it"b6 would be ineffective here on
account of 8 "if a2 - 8 de de 9
�a3 lZla6 I 0 .i.e3 "ife7 I I �c4
�d5) 6 . . . d6 7 �f3 "ifc7 8 "it"b3
"it"b6 9 �f4 "ifxb3 10 ab �e4 I I
�d3 .i.e6 = Geller-Gufeld, Kis­
lovodsk 1 968.
(c) 5 0-0 0-0 6 lZlf4 e6!? (this
method of circumventing White's
usual strategy certainly deserves
further investigation) 7 c4 d6 8
"it"b3 lZla6 9 lZlc3 c6 1 0 %1 d l "ifc7
(with a harmonious development
behind his flexible pawn structure
Black can be satisfied with his
position) I I e4?! (mis-timing the
key central advance as Black
shows in an instructive sequence)
I I . . . fe 1 2 lZl xe4 lZl xe4 1 3 .i. xe4
e5! 1 4 de �c5 1 5 "ife3 �xe4 1 6
"if xe4 .i.xe5 + . Bereft of the pro­
tective KB White's king is prey to
the black bishops on an open
board; we have been following the
exemplary miniature. P. Nikolic­
Bjelajac, Novi Sad 1 982, which
concluded thus : 1 7 "ife2 .i.f5 1 8
�d3 .i.d4! 1 9 .i.f4 : ae8 20 "it"d2
c5 21 �b4 .i.e4 22 �c2 .i.xb2 23
.i.xd6 "iff7 24 :e I .i.c3! neatly
40 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
refuting White's desperate
attempts to distract the black
pieces; White resigns.
5 0-0
6 lt::l c3 d6
Black proceeds in keeping with
the main line strategy already out­
lined in Chapter 1 . Once again
6 . . . e6!? comes seriously into
consideration (see P. Nikolic­
Bjelajac above). Two further
examples: 7 0-0 (7 lt::l f4 followed
by h4 is a sharp alternative) 7
. . . d6 (7 . . . •e7 lands Black in
difficulties after the positional
pawn sacrifice 8 d5 e5 9 d6! • xd6
10 •xd6 cd I I lt::l b 5 and Black's
mobilization is severely hampered,
Taimanov- Liebert, Rostov 1 96 1 )
8 b 3 c6 9 •c2 ( 9 .i.a3 can also be
answered by 9 . . . a5 but not 9 . . .
•a5?! 1 0 • c 1 .C. d 8 II b4 when
Black is cramped; Ree-Hi.ibner,
Wijk aan Zee 1 975) 9 . . . a5 1 0
.i.a3 lt::l a6 1 1 .C. ad 1 •c7 1 2 lt::l f4
lt::l b4 1 3 • b 1 e5 and with the
liberating . . . e5 thrust Black
secures equality; A verbakh­
Gulko, USSR 1 976.
Another logical response to
White's system which has hardly
been played at all yet is 6 . . . lt::l c6!?,
e.g. 7 d5 lt::l e 5 8 b3 lt::l f7 9 .i.b2 e5
10 de de 1 1 •xd8 .C. xd8 and Black
has no difficulties; Osnos- Legky,
Lvov 1 984.
7 lt::l f4
Alternatively:
(a) 7 0-0 is considered inexact
because Black may reply 7 . . . e5
8 de de 9 • xd8 .C. xd8 10 lt::l d 5
.C. d7! (necessary on account of the
twin threat of capturing on c7
immediately and on b7 after II
lt::l e 7 + and 1 2 lt::l x c8) with good
prospects of containing White's
initiative according to theoretical
works. Personally, I find Black's
position here unappealing and
would prefer 7 . . . e6 or 7 . . . c6.
(b) 7 d5 is generally held to be
the most precise continuation as
it prevents . . . lt::l c6 and enables . . .
e6/e5 to be captured (en passant).
More importantly, it means that
after 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 e5 9 de Black
cannot try 9 . . . lt::l a6 because of 1 0
.i.f4 and i s thus compelled t o play
9 . . . .i.xe6 after which White has
10 •b3! •e7 I I lt::l g 5 .i.f7 (II . . .
.i.c8 1 2 e4! ± ) 1 2 lt::l x f7 .C. xf7 1 3
.i.f4 lt::l a6 1 4 .C. ad 1 lt::l e8 1 5 • a3
when Black is under fierce press­
ure; Ree-Rakic, Maribor 1 980.
In the search for better defensive
methods the following come
strongly into consideration:
(b 1) 7 . . . lt::l g 4!? is an interesting
suggestion of Dolmatov which has
yet to be tested in practice.
(b2) 7 . . . lt::l a 6!? 8 0-0 .i.d7 with
similar play to Chapter 1, e.g. 9
.C. e l c6 1 0 e4 fe I t lt::l xe4 lt::l xe4 1 2
.C. xe4 lt::l c 5 with plenty of possi­
bilities for Black in a roughly equal
position.

(b3) 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 ..td7!? 9 W'b3
( Dolmatov notes the very unclear
variation 9 c5!? de 1 0 W'b3 W'b6
I I de + W'xb3 1 2 cb W' b6 1 3 ba(W')
�c6 1 4 lt:la4 W' b4) 9 . . . W' b6 10
.te3 W' xb3 1 1 ab c5 1 2 lt:lf4 lt:la6
13 lt:le6 : fc8 1 4 lt:l xg7 �xg7 1 5
lt:la2? (it would have been better
to play to open up the centre by
15 ..td2 intending e4) 1 5 . . . b5! 1 6
cb ..txb5 1 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc7 + White's
doubled isolated b-pawns are a
lasting liability; Zaichik-Dol­
matov, H arkov 1 985.
7 c6
8 d5 e5
9 de lt:la6!?
At the very least this is a super­
ior move-order to the commonly
played 9 . . . W'e7 after which White
may choose to obtain the prefer­
able position by the simple means
of 10 : b1 !? ..txe6 (now 10 . . .
lt:la6 would be met by 1 1 b4 threat­
ening 1 2 b5) 1 1 lt:lxe6 W' xe6 1 2 0-
0 lt:la6 1 3 b3 with the bishop
pair and sounder pawn structure;
Legky-Machulsky, Tallin 1 985.
10 ..te3?!
This simplistic move, hoping to
prevent . . . lt:lc5, meets with a vig­
orous rebuff. After the more natu­
ral 10 0-0 lt:lc5 H arding notes 1 1
: e 1 ( 1 1 b4 lt:lce4) 1 1 . . . g5 1 2
lt:lh3!? ( 1 2 lt:ld3 lt:lce4) 1 2 . . . h6 1 3
e4 ..txe6 as adequate for Black
(which it certainly is) and 1 3 . . .
lt:lcxe4 as worth checking (which
Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 41
i t m a y be).
10 W'e7
11 0-0 g5!
12 lt:ld3 lt:lg4!
13 ..td2 ..t xe6
14 b3 lt:lc5 ( 33)
33
w
Black has energetically pushed
back the white pieces and wrested
the initiative. As the game pro­
ceeds we see Black convert his
superior dynamism into a tangible
queenside pawn majority whilst
White's attempts to counter in
the centre are contained by the
bulwark knight on e5. A final
effort to undermine the knight
by removing its KB protection is
crisply refuted by an exchange
sacrifice. 1 5 h3 lt:le5 1 6 lt:l xc5 de
1 7 W'c2 : ad8 1 8 : ad 1 f4! 1 9 lt:le4
h6 20 ..tc3 : xd 1 2 1 W'xd 1 b5! 22
cb cb 23 W' a 1 ..tf7 24 : d 1 b4 25
..t b2 c4 26 be ..txc4 27 :d2 �h8
28 lt:ld6 ..tg8 29 ..te4?! fg 30 fg
W'e6! 3 1 �g2 ..th7 32 ..txh7
�xh7 3 3 W'bl + �h8 34 e4? g4!
35 lt:lf5 : xf5! 36 ef W' c6 + 37 �g l
42 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
(37 �f2 'jj' f3 + 38 �gl 'jj' e 3 + 39
n f2 ll'ld3 would result in a lost
king and pawn ending) 37 . . .
ll'lf3 + 38 �f2 ll'lxd2 39 .txg7 +
�xg7 40 'jj' xb4 'jj' b6 + 4 1 'jj' xb6
ab 42 hg ll'le4 + 43 �e3 ll'lc3 44
�f4 �f6 0- 1 .
Fourth move alternatives
1 d4 f5 2 g3 ll'lf6 3 .tg2 g6 ( 34)
Other fourth moves pose no
danger to Black :
(a) 4 ll'ld2 ll'lc6!? (reacting to
the fact that the d-pawn is now
undefended; 4 . . . d5 is also emin­
ently playable) 5 d5 (on 5 c3 Black
may either revert to the trusty 5
. . . d5 or experiment with 5 . . . e5!?
with the idea 6 .txc6 be 7 de ll'lg4
8 ll'ldf3 'jj' e 7 9 .tf4 .tg7 I 0 'jj' d4
c5 I I Wd5 n b8 when the threat
of 1 2 . . . .tb7 puts White in a
quandary) 5 . . . ll'lb4!? (an interest­
ing departure from the usual . . .
ll'le5) 6 c4 (the original course
taken by Szabo-Gheorghiu,
Budapest 1 970, clarified in Black's
favour after 6 ll'lc4 c6! 7 d6 b5! 8
.td2 be 9 .txb4 ed 1 0 .txd6
.txd6 II 'jj' xd6 'jj' e 7) 6 . . . a5 7 a3
ll'la6 8 b4 .tg7 9 n b l 0-0 1 o ll'lgf3
ab I I ab c5! = Gheorghiu.
(b) 4 ll'lc3 d5! 5 .tg5 c6 and in
comparison with similar vari­
ations arising from 2 .tg5 White's
KB is passively placed.
(c) 4 h4 is less outre than it
appears at first sight, but not
surprisingly fails to challenge
Black's equanimity, e.g. 4 . . . .tg7
5 ll'lh3 d6 6 d5 (6 c3 c6 is fine for
Black, cf. 5 c3 in the Karlsbad
Variation) 6 . . . c6 7 c4 e5 8 de
.txe6 9 ll'ld2 'jj' b6 10 0-0 0-0 I I
ll'lg5 n e8 and in this balanced
position White's h4 advance
begins to look superfluous; Olafs­
son-Alexander, Amsterdam 01.
1 9 54.
Systems with c4 and .tg5
Systems where White combines
.tg5 with c4 are best implemented
via the move order I d4 f5 2 c4
without fianchettoing then KB.
That Black has an easy time of it
when White plays .tg5 in the
context of a main line fianchetto
is well illustrated by the game
Usachi-Stein, Ukraine Ch. 1 957,
which went I d4 f5 2 c4 ll'lf6 3 ll'lc3
g6 4 g3 .tg7 5 .tg2 0-0 6 .tg5
c6 7 'jj' d 2 d6 8 n d l 'jj' c 7 9 ll'lf3
ll'lbd7 1 0 0-0 ( 1 0 d 5 meets with
tactical problems after 10 . . . ll'lb6
I I b3 cd 1 2 cd ll'le4! 1 3 ll'lxe4 fe

1 4 tt:ld4 tt:lxd5 1 5 ..t xe4 tt:lc3 etc.)
t O . . . e5 I I de de 1 2 ..ih6 ..t xh6
J 3 'ii x h6 e4 1 4 tt:ld4 tt:le5 and
Bl ack's advanced pawn chain and
well posted knights give him the
better position thanks to his king­
si de attacking chances.
Smyslov-Belyavsky
Sochi 1 986
I d4 f5 2 c4 tt:lf6 3 tt:lc3 g6
4 ..ig5 ( 35 )
When White has ..ig5 in mind
he must play it straight away and
not preface it by tt:lf3 : 4 tt:lf3 ..ig7
5 i.g5 0-0 6 'ii d 2'?! (this is the real
culp rit although other moves also
leave Black free to carry out his
basic plan unhindered, e.g. 6 'ilfc2
d 6 7 e3 c6 8 ..te2 'ii a 5 9
0-0 e5 and White certainly cannot
lay claim to any advantage; Baum­
b ach- Babrikowsky, E. German
Ch . 1 976) 6 . . . tt:le4! 7 tt:lxe4 fe 8
li:lg I b5! 9 e3 (9 cb a6 gives Black
co n t rol of the centre and open
Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 43
lines while W hite's development
remains difficult to complete)
9 . . . : f5! 10 ..th4 be I I ..t xc4 +
d5 with a positional advantage
to Black; Kelecevic-Rajkovic,
Yugoslavia 1 973.
4 ..ig7
5 'ii d2
Nor are other moves to be
feared :
(a) 5 ..txf6 ..t xf6 6 e4 fe 7 tt:lxe4
0-0 8 ltJf3 d6 9 ..te2 i.f5 1 0
ltJ xf6 + ef I I 0-0 c6 = Sokolov­
Shahovic, Yugoslavia 1 973.
(b) 5 e3 c5 6 ..td3 d6 7 ltJf3
0-0 8 0-0 ltJc6 9 d5 ltJ b4 10 a3
ltJ xd3 I I 'ii x d3 ltJd7 1 2 i.f4 h6
1 3 h3 a6 (with the more purposeful
piece coordination plus the latent
power of the bishop pair Black
has the superior prospects) 14 a4
b6 1 5 .ig3 g5 1 6 : a b l 'ilfe8 1 7
b4 'ii h5 1 8 ltJe2 (Black now carries
out an imaginative manoeuvre
designed to stifle any queenside
counterplay in order to be able to
concentrate on the king's wing
undistracted) 1 8 . . . a5! 1 9 be be
20 ltJd2 ltJb8 2 1 f4 ltJa6 22 ltJf3
ltJb4 and Black is firmly in control;
Lerner- Belyavsky, USSR, Ch.
1 984.
5 c5!
This central challenge also has
the virtue of freeing the queen for
action. While Black should avoid
5 . . . h6 6 ..ixf6 ..hf6 7 e4 which
leaves him with a rickety kingside
44 Leningrad : Miscellaneous Systems

in the face of a strong central rectly reckoning that his king will
preponderance, there may be a be safer in the centre than on the
valid alternative in S . . . lZ:Jc6, e.g. kingside.
6 h4 (6 l:t d 1 h6 7 ..ixf6 .i.xf6 8 lLlf3 8 'ihh6 lZ:Jxc5
d6 9 e4 eS is equally satisfactory for 9 lZ:Jh3
Black) 6 . . . h6 (not exactly forced) 9 f3 -.as 10 0-0-0 bS 1 1 cb a6 1 2
7 ..txf6 .i.xf6 8 e4!? (8 lZ:Jf3 d6 9 e4 ( Belyavsky and Mikhalchishin)
e4 eS 1 0 de de 1 1 'it'xd8 + ..ixd8 would produce mutually difficult
could easily find White rueing the complications.
disappearance of his QB; 9 -.as
Koblencs-Lutikov, Lativa v 10 0-0-0 ( 36)
RSFSR 1 9SS) 8 . . . lZ:Jxd4 9 ef lZ:l xfS
36
1 0 ..id3 with attacking chances in
8
return for the pawn.
6 de
6 dS is a serious alternative
which awaits testing in practice
but 6 lZ:Jf3?, erroneously noted as
good for White by Belyavsky and
Mikhalchishin, is in fact a dreadful
mistake on account of 6 . . . lZ:Je4!
6 lZ:la6
6 . . . -.as? 7 ..t xf6 .i.xf6 8 lZ:JdS 10 b5!
puts Black in trouble. In such positions material is of
7 .i.h6 little consequence in the race to
Proceeding with one of the cen­ get to the king first.
tral ideas of this system - the 11 lZ:Jg5?
exchange of Black's potentially Too optimistic; consolidation
powerful KB. Another approach by 1 1 cb a6 1 2 b6! -.xb6 1 3 f3
would be to develop and keep : b8 1 4 -.d2 0-0 1 S e3 was in
Black out of the key central order.
squares : 7 lZ:Jh3 lZ:JcS 8 f3 0-0 9 e3 11 .i.b7!
d6 10 .i.e2, with a rich position Bringing dS under control and
which Belyavsky and Mikhalch­ thus avoiding variations such as
ishin contentiously assess as 1 1 . . . b4? 1 2 -.g7 : f8 1 3 lZ:JdS
slightly in White's favour. lZ:JxdS 14 lZ:Jxh7 lZ:Je6 l S -. xg6 +
7 .i.xh6 and wins.
Black dismisses 7 . . . 0-0 cor- 12 -.g7
 Leningrad• Miscellaneous Systems 45

There is no time to take the too limited to have hammered out

pawn, e.g. 1 2 cb lt'Jce4 13 lt'Jcxe4 any definitive paths.
_txe4 14 lt'Jxe4 lt'Jxe4 + Belyavsky (a) 3 g3 g6 4 ..tg2 ..ig7 5
a n d M ikhalchishin. tt'lc3 0-0 (naturally, this opening
12 : rs sequence is flexible) 6 e3 d6 7 d5
13 lt'J xh7 (7 lt'Jge2 e5 equalizes immediately)
Consistent but quite hopeless 7 . . . e5 (of course, other methods
alth ough the white position was familiar from the main lines are
beyond salvation anyway. also applicable here) 8 de c6 9
13 lt'Jxh7 lt'Jge2 ..txe6 1 0 b3 -.c7 I I ..i.b2
14 -.xh7 b4 a5 12 -.c2 lt'Ja6 and Black has an
15 lt'Jd5 easy game; Vidmar jr.- Fuderer,
Trying to gain time by the mate Yugoslav Ch. 1 95 1 .
threat to organize his defences; 1 5 (b) 3 lt'Jf3 g6 4 e 3 J.. g7 5 ..i.e2
'i' xg6 + �d8 1 6 lt'Jd5 -.xa2 wins d6 6 0-0 lt'Je4!? (utilizing White's
easily for Black. Jack of control of e4 to uncover
15 ..txd5 the K B and support the vital . . .
16 :l. xd5 d6 e5 advance that way) 7 -.c2 0-0 8
17 �b1 b3! lt'Jbd2 lt'Jxd2 9 ..txd2 e5 I 0 de
A decisive thrust j ust as White de again with complete equality;
had seemed to have wriggled out. Trifunovic-Grob, Zurich 1 954.
18 ab : b8 3 tt'lc3 g6 ( 3 7 )
With the entry of the rook the
37
attack becomes irresistible.
w
19 -. xg6 + �d7
20 : x£5 -.el +
21 �a2 lt'Jxb3
0-1
An impressive miniature against
a former World Champion.

Other variations with c4 (I d4 f5

2 c4 lt'l f6 )
No ne of these lines has any theor­
etical bite and are therefore rarely
seen. Consequently, the examples
presented here should be taken as
just that since experience is as yet
4 tt'lf3
There have also been experim­
ents with Jess natural continu­
ations :
(a) 4 f3 (employed once by
46 Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
Korchnoi, so not to be taken
lightly) 4 . . . ..tg7 5 e4 d6 (5 . . . fe
immediately looks preferable) 6
..td3 (6 e5!? requires a better
response than 6 . . . de 7 de "it'xd 1 +
8 �xd 1 lt:lh5 9 f4 ..te6 I 0 lt:lf3 ±
Korchnoi-Lombardy, Lone Pine
1 979) 6 . . . fe 7 fe?! (7 lt:lxe4 appears
necessary, but what comment is
that on 4 f3?) 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 lt:lf3 ..tg4
9 ..te3 0-0 10 0-0 e5 t I d5 lt:ld4
with a beautifully flowing pos­
itional advantage; Boros-Kus­
minich, USSR t 957.
(b) 4 e3 ..tg7 5 ..te2 0-0 6 h4?!
d6 7 h5 gh (an interesting decision,
certainly not forced) 8 ..txh5 e5
9 ..te2 (thus far Hodos-Savon,
USSR Ch. 1 962) 9 . . . c5! with
chances and problems for both
sides.
(c) 4 "it'c2 ..tg7 5 e4 fe 6 lt:lxe4
0-0 shows clearly that brute imple­
mentation of the supposedly
advantageous e4 advance can eas­
ily backfire and merely put White's
development out of kilter.
4 ..tg7
Now there are a number of
contrasting plans available :
(a) 5 "it'c2 0-0 6 e4 fe 7 lt:lxe4
lt:lxe4 8 "it'xe4 d6 9 ..te2 lt:lc6 t O
0-0 ..tf5 I I "it'h4 e 5 t 2 ..tg5 "it'd7
with full equality; Nemet- Matulo­
vic, Yugoslav Ch. t 972.
(b) 5 e3 0-0 6 b4!? (routine
development cannot bring White
any advantage, e.g. 6 ..te2 d6 7
0-0 and now Black may choose
according to taste between 7 . . . c6
8 "it'c2 lt:la6 9 l:l d l "it'e8 tO b3 e5 =
Larsen, or 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 9
lt:ld4 c5 = ; similarly, 6 ..td3 d6
7 0-0 lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 also gives
balanced play) 6 . . . b6 7 "it'b3 c5
8 a3 e6 9 ..te2 "it'e7 10 0-0 d6 I I
..tb2 lLl bd7 1 2 l:l ad l lt:le8 and
Black's flexible pawn structure
and lack of weak points offset
White's slight spatial edge in a
mutually difficult position; Quint­
eras-Sax, Wijk aan Zee t 973.
(c) 5 ..tf4 d6 6 h4 (6 "it'b3 c6 or
6 . . . e6 should both be perfectly
adequate for Black) 6 . . . lt:lh5
(the most consequent riposte to
White's provocative strategy) 7 e3
lt:ld7 (after the natural 7 . . . 0-0
White can bring tactical succour
to his set-up by 8 c5!) 8 d5 lt:lxf4
9 ef e5 1 0 de lt:lc5 and this analysis
by Vukovic leaves Black with
excellent prospects.
The tacit prophylaxis of 2 . . . lLlf6
There is a simple reason for prefer­
ring 2 . . . lt:lf6 to 2 . . . g6 : to a vert
the blitzkrieg attacks launched by
3 h4. These are dangerous for
Black in all forms : I d4 f5 2 c4 g6
3 h4, or 2 lLlf3 g6 3 h4, or even 2
g3 g6 3 h4. Theory considers that
White has at least sufficient com­
pensation for the exchange offer
which generally occurs on h5 (after
a . . . lt:lf6, h5 lt:lxh5, l:l xh5 gh

sequence) and in practice the
defensive problems are extremely
taxi ng.
Here is one warning example : 1
d4 f5 2 c4 g6 3 h4 ti:lf6 4 h5 ti:lxh5
5 Jl xh5 gh 6 e4 d6 (6 . . . i.g7 7
..W xh5 + �f8 8 1 hf5 + �g8 9
8f3 1t'f8 1 0 1t'h5 1t'f7 I I 'it' h4 i.f6
1 2 i.g5 ± Polovdin) 7 'it'xh5 +
;t>d7 8 1t' xf5 + e6 9 1t'h5 c6 (9 . . .
jt"f6 1 0 ti:lf3 ± ) 1 0 ti:lc3 'it'e8 1 1
..W h2! ± �c7 1 2 i.f4 ti:ld7 1 3 ti:lf3
b6 1 4 0-0-0 �b7 ( 1 4 . . . i.b7 1 5
Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems 47
�bl ! enables the rook to go to
c I should i t be required, and
points up the long-term passivity
of Black's position and his
inability to undertake anything
positive) 1 5 i.xd6 ti:lf6 16 i.xf8
1t'xf8 17 ti:le5 i.d7 18 d5 cd 19 ed
ed 20 ti:lxd7 ti:l xd7 2 1 ti:lb5 ti:lc5 22
1t'c7 + �a6 23 cd �a5 24 b4 +
�xb4 25 ..W g3! ti:l a4 26 Jl d 4 +
�a5 27 ..W b3 Jl c8 + 28 �d 1
1 -0 Polovdin-Kovalev, USSR
1 982.
5 Hort--Antoshin Variation

The Hort-Antoshin variation is a

38
close relative of the Leningrad and
w
transposition during the first few
moves frequently occurs. Here,
though, everything is subordi­
nated to forcing through the . . .
e5 advance, natural development
included, and consequently
Black's strategy demands sophi­
sticated positional insight and a
well-developed sense of danger in
lenged, Black's intention is to fol­
order not to backfire.
low up with . . . •c7 thus support­
We shall examine three games
ing the . . . e7-e5 advance.
covering the main replies at White's
5 •c2
disposal: first, where White avoids
Proposing to cross Black's
the kingside fianchetto, and then
plans by advancing his own e­
in turn the fianchetto both with
pawn first. Other possibilities:
and without c2-c4.
(a) 5 e3 •c7 6 d5 (White cannot
Antoshin-Hort afford to be casual: 6 ..td3 e5 7
Moscow 1 960 e4 f4 concedes Black a significant
spatial advantage on the kingside
I d4 rs Etruk-Antoshin, USSR 1 962) 6 . . .
2 c4 lt:lf6 e5 7 de ..txe6 8 lt:ld4 ..td7 9 ..td3
3 lt:lc3 d6 g6 I 0 b3 lt:la6 I I ..t b2 ..tg7 1 2
4 lt:lf3 c6 ( 38 ) 0-0 0-0 with a balanced position;
This last is the characteristic Khouk-Hort, Leipzig 01. 1 960.
move of the variation; unchal- (b) 5 ..tg5 lt:l bd7 6 e3 is best
48

met by 6 . . . g6 and not 6 . . . e5?!
wh ich facilitates an opening up of
the position before Black is able
to cope, e.g. 7 de de 8 W' c2 e4 9
.':J d4 li:le5 1 0 0-0-0 W'e7 1 1 f3 ef 1 2
gf "W f7 1 3 f4! ± instructive play;
K otov-A. Zaitsev, Sochi 1 967.
(c) 5 g3 will transpose to Gavri­
k o v - Psakhis below.
5 li:la6
6 a3
White would not be able to
operate comfortably with threats
o f . . . li:l b4 constantly in the air.
6 g6
Simultaneously promoting the
development of both bishops.
7 e4 fe
8 li:lxe4 li:lxe4
9 W' xe4 .US
10 W' h4
Hoping to exploit Black's weak­
ened kingside. In Robatsch-Anto­
shin, Sochi 1 974, White kept his
q ueen centralized and a mutually
difficult struggle developed after
1 0 'llt' e 3 ..tg7 1 1 ..td2 0-0 1 2 ..tc3
CiJc7 1 3 ..te2 b5 14 b3 aS 1 5 a4
b4 1 6 ..tb2 W'd7.
10 ..tg7
II ..te2 ( 39) ..tf6
An ambitious move which con­
si derably increases the tension.
F ourteen years later Antoshin pre­
fer red to pursue equality through
s irn plification : 1 1 . . . e5!? 1 2
'tit xd8 + l:txd8 1 3 ..te3 ed 1 4
.h d 4 ..t f7 1 5 ..txg7 ..txg7 1 6
Hort-A ntoshin Variation 49
_19
B
li:ld4 tt:lc5 1 7 0-0 d5 18 b4 tt:\e6 =
Smyslov-Antoshin, Sochi 1 974.
12 W'h6 c5
13 ..tg5 W'a5 +
14 �n ..txg5
15 li:lxg5 cd
Thus Black, temporarily at
least, has an extra pawn but the
position remains totally unclear
and capable of going either way. It
seems likely that White's following
queen manoeuvre is not the best:
1 6 W'g7 W'e5 17 W' f7 + ..td7 1 8
li:lf3 W' f4! ( 1 8 . . . W'e4 1 9 .:t d 1 .:t af8
20 W'g7 gives Black problems) 1 9
W' d 5 (since now 1 9 .:t d 1 would fail
against 1 9 . . . d3!) 1 9 . . . d3! 20
..txd3 (not 20 W'xb7 + ? tt:lc7 2 1
..t d 1 .:1. hb8 2 2 ..ta4 + �d8 2 3
W'c6 .:1. b 6 snaring the queen) 20 . . .
..txd3 + 2 1 W' xd 3 .:t hf8 22 .:t e l
.:l. ac8 (Black i s clearly o n top) 23
b3 li:lc5 24 W'e3 e5 25 li:ld2 li:ld3
26 W' xf4 .:t xf4 27 .:t e2 .:l. af8 28 f3
li:lc1 29 .:t e4? (collapses immedi­
ately; 29 .:t e3 would have hung on
longer) 29 . . . li:lxb3! 0- 1 .
50 Hort-A ntoshin Variation
Gavrikov-Psakhis
USSR Ch. 1 985
1 d4 f5
2 g3 tt:lf6
3 .i.g2 d6
4 c4
The usual range ofless orthodox
methods is available :
(a) 4 tt:lh3 c6 5 c4 Wc7 (simply
5 . . . e5 is also playable) 6 tt:lc3 e5
7 0-0 .i.e7 and as White does not
have the c4-c5 possibility as in
the analogous main line Black
is able to complete his kingside
development satisfactorily.
(b) 4 tt:lc3 lLl bd7 5 tt:lh3 (5 e4 fe
6 tt:lxe4 tt:lxe4 7 ..be4 tt:lf6 8 .i.g2
c6 and Black has no worries) 5 . . .
e5 6 0-0 ed 7 W xd4 J... e 7 8 b3
c6 9 J... b 2 d5 10 e3 0-0 with
approximately equal chances in a
rich posJtton; R. Byrne­
Gheorghiu, Varna 01. 1 962.
(c) 4 d5 e5!? 5 de tt:lc6 6 tt:lh3
J... x e6 7 tt:lg5 J... g8 8 0-0 and in
this entirely satisfactory position
for Black several continuations
deserve trying, e.g. 8 . . . Wd7 or 8
. . . d5, but 8 . . . h6? is mistaken
since 9 lL\0 Wd7 10 tt:ld4 har­
monizes the white forces and
leaves Black at some disadvan­
tage; Kottnauer-- Davie, Dundee
1 967.
4 c6
4 . . . e5 is not unthinkable but
as yet there are no practical
examples.
5 tt:lf3
Somewhat more precise than
developing the queen's knight first,
since 5 tt:lc3 gives Black the
additional possibility of playing 5
. . . e5!? immediately, when White's
chances of gaining an advantage
are minimal, e.g. 6 de (or 6 e4 Wc7
7 ef J... xf5 8 lL\0 .i.e7 and Black
is quite OK, M ikenas-Cherepkov,
TU Ch. USSR 1 97 1 ) 6 . . . de 7
W xd8 + �xd8 8 lL\0 e4 9 tt:lg5
�e8 10 f3 h6 I I tt:lh3 ef 1 2 .i.xf3
tt:l bd7 1 3 tt:lf4 tt:lc5 1 4 b3 �17 =
Bannik-Antoshin, USSR Ch.
1 957.
5 Wc7 ( 40 )
40
w
6 tt:lc3
Alternatively :
(a) 6 0-0 e5 7 de de 8 Wc2
(Romanishin-Antoshin, Cien­
fuegos 1 977) 8 . . . e4! is given as
unclear by Botvinnik.
(b) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 J... b2 tt:lbd7
9 Wc2 g6 1 0 tt:lbd2 .i. h6!? 1 1
Wc3 e4 with a mutually difficult

position; Krause-Sydor, Dort­
m und 1 976.
(c) 6 d5!? is a surprising gambit
which gains time and opens up
the position at the cost of an
important central pawn. Practice
indicates it deserves respect: 6 . . .
cd 7 cd tt:lxd5 8 0-0 tt:lf6 9 tt:lc3
!iJc6 (one suspects Black could
profitably seek an improvement
here) 10 ..tg5 e6 I I .C. c l (better
than 1 1 ..txf6 gf 1 2 tt:lb5 "fle7 1 3
n e t d 5 1 4 tt:lfd4 a 6 1 5 tt:lxc6 be
1 6 lLld4 c5 1 7 tt:lxf5 "fld7! when
the black infantry dominate the
centre; Spassov-Jankov, Primor­
sko 1 972) 1 1 . . . i..e 7 1 2 tt:lb5 "fld7
1 3 ..txf6 gf 14 tt:lfd4 d5 15 tt:lxe6!
and Black is lost; Baranov-A.
Zaitsev, !-final TU Ch. USSR
1 965.
6 e5
7 0-0
Other continuations promise
lit tle :
(a) 7 c5?! clarifies the centre to
Black's advantage, e.g. 7 . . . e4 8
cd ..txd6 9 tt:lg5 (or 9 lLld2 ..te6
10 e3 h5 I I tt:le2 h4 1 2 "flc2 tt:la6
13 a3 "flf7 with Black clearly in
con trol; Opocensky-Antoshin,
Lei pzig 1 965) 9 . . . h6 10 lLl h3 tt:la6
I I a3 "flf7 12 f3 ef 1 3 i.. xf3 ..te6
1 4 ..tf4 .C. d8 1 5 0-0 tt:lc5! and
again Black is clearly on top;
Gol ovko-Antoshin, USSR 1 970.
( b) 7 e4 prematurely picks a
t a ctical fight where Black's
Hort-A ntoshin Variation 51
resources are more than adequate :
7 . . . fe 8 tt:lg5 ..tg4 9 "Wi b3 ed 1 0
tt:lcxe4 tt:lbd7 1 1 h3 lLl xe4 1 2 i.. xe4
tt:lc5! 13 "flc2 "fle7! 14
0-0 ..td7 1 5 ..txh7 0-0-0 and
Black soon broke through on the
kingside; Hofmann-Nevole, corr.
1 969/70.
(c) 7 de permits Black's KB to
take an active part in the proceed­
ings and thereby enhance his pro­
spects of equalizing, e.g. 7 . . . de 8
e4 (better than 8 0-0 ..t b4! 9 "flc2
0-0 10 a3 ..te7 I I e4 f4!? 1 2 gf ef
1 3 e5 tt:lg4 with a typical sharp
Dutch position where White's
king is likely to be in the greater
danger; l gnatiev-Chechelnitsky,
Moscow 1 964) 8 . . . i.. b4! 9 ef (9
"Wi b3 tt:la6 10 0-0 fe I I tt:lg5 ..txc3
1 2 "WI xc3 ..tf5 is fine for Black;
Karasev-Cherepkov, Leningrad
Ch. 1 974) 9 . . . ..txf5 10 "flb3 lLla6
I I 0-0 and now instead of I I . . .
0-0-0?! which was shown to be
good for White in Farago- Bokor,
Hungarian Ch. 1 967, after 1 2 ..te3
..tc5 1 3 ..t xc5 lLl xc5 14 "fla3 tt:la6
1 5 tt:l b5!, Black should prefer short
castling, I I . . . 0-0, when the activ­
ity of his pieces goes a long way
to offsetting the isolated pawn.
7 e4!
Experience has shown that this
is Black's best try. It is instructive
to note the drawbacks of the alter­
natives :
(a) 7 . . . ..te7 8 c5! (White could
52 Hort-Antoshin Variation
also get the better of it with 8 de
de 9 e4 obtaining an improved
version of note c above) 8 . . . e4 9
cd .txd6 1 0 lt:leS! .te6 ( 1 0 . . .
.txeS 1 1 de ..- xeS 1 2 .tf4 gives
White a strong initiative in return
for the pawn) 1 1 f3 .txeS 1 2 de
..- xeS 1 3 fe fe 14 .tf4 ..-cs + 1 S
� h 1 lt:lbd7 1 6 : c 1 ..-hs 1 7 ..-d6
and Black is in dire straits;
Udovcic- Lombardy, Zagreb
1 969.
(b) 7 . . . .te6 8 dS! .td7 9 e4
fe l O lt:lgS .te7 1 1 lt:lgxe4 lt:la6 ( 1 1
. . . 0-0? 1 2 cS! is dreadful for
Black; Kozma-Marsalek, Czecho­
slovakia 1 962) 1 2 .te3 and with
a spatial advantage, more active
pieces, and firm control of the
central blockading square, e4,
White's positional superiority is
indisputable.
Let us note that it is only here
that we join our game properly as
it actually arose via the move
order 1 lt:lf3 fS 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2
d6 4 d4 c6 S 0-0 ..-c7 6 c4 eS 7
lt:lc3 e4. Such transpositions are a
common occurrence.
8 lt:lg5
This has supplanted 8 lt:le I in
contemporary praxis although the
inadequacies of the retreat have
yet to be shown over the board.
The following is known : 8 lt:le l
.te7 9 f3 ef (attempting to hold
the e4 point gets Black into trouble
after 9 . . . dS 10 cd cd 1 1 .tf4) 1 0
ef (Korchnoi preferred t o capture
with the bishop: 1 0 .txf3 0-0 1 1
lt:lg2 lt:l bd7 1 2 .tf4 : f7 1 3 b4 lt:lf8
14 bS lt:lg6 1 S be be but could claim
no advantage in a complicated
pos1t10n; Korchnoi-Antoshin,
Moscow 1 9 6 1 ; Antoshin analysed
l 3 cS lt:lf8 1 4 dS - Black must
always be alert to this sudden
pawn rush - 14 . . . lt:lg6 1 S cd
.txd6 1 6 .txp6 ..- xd6 1 7 de
..-cs + 1 8 � h 1 1 be = as the weak­
nesses cancel out) 10 . . . 0-0 1 1
lt:ld3 .te6?! (simply 1 1 . . . : e8
intending . . . lt:lbd7-f8 looks a
better try) 1 2 b3 lt:l a6 1 3 : e 1 .tf7
14 .th3 g6 1S lt:lf4 ..-d7 16 dS
lt:lc7 17 .t b2 and White's position
is a picture of positional superior­
ity thanks to his spatial advantage,
and pressure on the a 1 -h8 diag­
onal and down the e-file, particu­
larly of course e6; Udovcic-Anto­
shin, Yugoslavia v USSR 1 964.
8 h6
This preludes an aggressive
solution to Black's problems. It
may be that a purely defensive
approach will suffice to hold the
balance : 8 . . . .te7 9 f3 ef 10 ef
(Botvinnik has suggested 10 lt:lxf3;
it is interesting to mull this over
with the note on 8 lt:le1 in mind)
10 . . . o�o 1 1 : e 1 lt:la6 1 2 a3 : e8
1 3 b4 h6 1 4 lt:lh3 .td7 I S ..-d3
.tf8 with equality according to
Botvinnik, although Black would
be wise to maintain his vigilance;

Qanov-Knezevic, Skopje 1 967.
9 l!Jh3 jkf7
This collected an exclamation
ma rk from Gulko and although it
co uld well be Black's best the
alternative may also be playable:
9 . . . i.e6 10 d5 i.f7 1 1 f3 cd
( White obtained a clear advantage
in Yusupov-Yermolinsky, Tallinn
1977, after the unsuccessful pawn
offe r 1 1 . . . l!J bd7 1 2 fe fe 1 3 l!Jxe4
cd 1 4 cd l!J xe4 1 5 i.xe4 1Wc5 +
1 6 �h l ) 1 2 cd 1Wc5 + 1 3 �h 1 ef
1 4 ef l!Jxd5 1 5 : e 1 + i.e7 1 6
tL:la4!? 1Wc7 1 7 l!Jf4 l!J xf4 1 8 i.xf4
0-0 1 9 : xe7 1Wxe7 20 i.xd6 1Wd8
2 1 i.xf8 1W xf8 and Black holds
the balance; Razuvayev- Mama­
tov, Frunze 1 979.
10 d5 ( 4 1 ) g5!?
41
B
In the game where 9 . . . 1Wf7 was
i n troduced Black continued with
a les s radical strategy : lO . . . cd 1 1
cd li:l a6 (also ! from Gulko) 1 2 f3
ef 1 3 i. xf3 ( ;t Gulko) g5! 1 4 i.g2
'i' h 5 15 l!Jf2 i.e7 16 i.e3 0-0 1 7
.t d 4 (Gulko eschews the win of
Hort-Antoshin Variation 53
a pawn by 1 7 l!Jb5 i.d7 1 8 l!J xa7
: ae8 1 9 i.d4 even though he
evaluates it as ;t ) 1 7 . . . i.d7 1 8
e4 11t'xd 1 1 9 : axd 1 l!J b4! 20 :d2
fe 2 1 l!Jfxe4 l!Jxe4 22 i. xe4 : xfl +
23 �xfl : f8 + 24 �g2 b6 and
the ending should be tenable;
Gulko-Antoshin, Moscow Ch.
1 98 1 .
One important aspect of the text
move is that it prevents White
capturing on f3 with a piece
because of the . . . g4 fork.
11 f3 ef
12 ef c5
Black's play is consistently bold;
Black locks the centre in prep­
aration for the k;ng taking up
residence there. On rerlection, this
is not so surprising since a return
to 'normal' chess by 1 2 . . . i.e?
1 3 : e 1 0-0 1 4 b3 would leave
White all the trump cards of space,
development and coordination as
well as making Black's advanced
kingside pawns look as much a
self-inflicted weakness as a van­
guard of aggression.
13 : et + �d8
14 b4!?
Correctly seeking to open up
the position since then the lack of
communication between the black
rooks could prove serious.
14 l!Ja6!
The right response; on 1 4 . . . cb
there might follow 1 5 ltJ b5 l!Ja6
(not 1 5 . . . l!J bd7? 1 6 i. xg5!) 1 6
54 Hort-A ntoshin Variation
.i.b2 lbc5 1 7 'W'd4 .i.e7 1 8 .:. xe7!
and it all falls apart.
15 be lb xc5
16 lLl f2 ..td7
17 .:t b1 .i.g7
Black has marshalled his
defences carefully and is optimally
poised to counter any offensive
and further reduce White's advan­
tage. In the game White failed to
find a really testing plan and a
draw was shortly agreed : 1 8 lbd3
b6 19 lbb5 ( 1 9 lbxc5 de! 20 a4
lbe8 21 lbb5 ..txb5 22 ab lbd6 is
unclear, White's domination of the
e-file being offset by Black's mag­
nificent knight) 19 . . . ..txb5 20
.:t xb5 lLlfd7 2 1 f4 g4 22 ..te3 lLlxd3
23 'W' xd3 .:t e8 24 .:t bb 1 .:t c8 t-t .
Probably, White was nagged by a
feeling that he could have done
better and was happy to call a
halt. After, say, 25 a4 lbc5 26 'W'a3
'W'c7 White would still have no
clear method of break ing through.
Gheorghiu-Tal
Moscow 1 971
1 d4 r5 2 gJ lL!f6 3 ..tg2 d6 4 lL!f3
c6 5 0-0 'W'c7 ( 42 )
6 lbbd2
White aims to threaten to
advance his e-pawn as quickly as
possible and thus for the time
being at least postpones c4. Other
systems dispensing with c4 have
also been played :
42
w
j
(a) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 ..t b2 e4
(8 . . . lb bd 7 invites the dangerou�
pawn offer 9 e4!? lbxe4 lO lbbdZ
lbxd2 1 1 'W' xd2 e4 1 2 lb h4 lLlf6 1 3
.:t ad 1 threatening 1 4 'W' g5 wit
powerful pressure - Fuchs) 9 lbd4
..te7 10 lbd2 a6! (threatening . .
c5) 1 1 e3 0-0 1 2 f3 c5 1 3 lbe2
ef 14 .i.xf3 lbc6 and Black has
equalized at least; Gligoric-Kava­
lek, The Hague 1 966. If White is
attracted by the idea of the queen's
fianchetto then it is probably best
effected on move five in order t o1
hinder . . . e5. The attempt by Black
to throw a spanner in the works
by 5 b3 'W'a5 + does not quite
come off, e.g. 6 lLl bd2 e5 7 de de
8 0-0 e4 9 lbc4 'W'd5 10 lbd4 g6 1 1
..tb2 .i.e7 1 2 f4 0-0 1 3 lbe3 'W'f7 1 4
c4 ;t Vukic- Knezevic, Yugoslav
Ch. 1 967.
(b) 6 lL!C3 !? is another prom1smg
method of initiating direct action
in the centre. A major incon­
venience for Black is that trans­
positions to a Stonewall leave the

queen poorly placed and vulner­
a ble to attack. Normal reactions
can backfire badly: 6 . . . e5 7 de
d e 8 e4 ..i b4 (by analogy to note
c to White's seventh but here Whi­
te ' s development is better and he
ca n strike faster in the centre; 8 . . .
fe 9 tt:lg5 ..ig4 is relatively best) 9
ef 0-0 (or 9 . . . ..i xf5 1 0 tt:lxe5!
..t xc3 1 1 be 'iWxe5 12 l:te I tt:le4 1 3
.he4 ..ixe4 1 4 'iWd4! ± ) 1 0 tt:lh4
!Lla6 1 1 g4 'ilt"e7 12 g5 ..ixc3 1 3 be
!Lle8 (thus far Krogius-Otstavo­
kov, USSR 1 965) 14 'ilt"g4! and
Black has problems, e.g. 14 . . . g6
1 5 f6! ..txg4 16 fe l:t f7 1 7 ..ia3 or
14 . . . tt:ld6 15 ..ta3 c5 16 ..id5 +
� h 8 1 7 tt:lg6 + ! etc. Thus it seems
that Black does best to opt for 6
. . . g6 with Leningrad-type lines in
mind.
6 g6
The hidden sting concealed in
the apparently innocuous devel­
opment of the QN becomes clear
if Black innocently proceeds with
his plan : 6 . . . e5? 7 de de 8 lll c4!
and there is no satisfactory reply,
e.g. 8 . . e4 9 ..if4 or 8 . . . tt:lbd7
. slumbers. On top of that, the
9 !Ufxe5! tt:lxe5 10 ..tf4 ± .
7 l:t e l d5
As usual, the Stonewall for­
mation proves the best way of
keeping the lid on things.
8 c4
8 !Ue5 immediately should be
ans wered as in the game and not
by 8 0 0 0 lll b d7?! 9 lll df3 ..ig7 1 0
Hort-AIItoshin Variation 55
c4 ± since 10 . . . tt:lxe5? 1 1 de tt:lg4
1 2 cd cd 1 3 'iWxd5 loses a pawn
for nothing, Bilek-A. Zaitsev,
Debrecen t 970, and Taimanov's
recommendation of 10 . . . de is
also unappetizing.
8 ..ig7
9 tt:le5 0-0
10 llld f3 tt:le4
II ..if4 ( 43)
43
B
Clearly, thi �
s a Stonewall
which has gone very wrong for
Black. White has an iron grip on
e5 and has almost completed his
development whereas Black's que­
enside has yet to wake from its
unhappily placed black queen
must move again in view of the
threatened discovered attack.
That Black manages not to lose
this position is a tribute to the
resilience of the Stonewall for­
mation -- but it helps also to be a
former world champion.
The game concluded as follows :
56 Hort-Antoshin Variation
l l . . . "it" b6 1 2 "it"c2 a5 (necessary
restraint of the avalanche which
would occur after, say, 1 2 . . . ..te6
1 3 c5 "it"d8 14 b4) 1 3 c5 "it"d8 1 4
h 4 ttld7 1 5 b 3 l"Lldf6 1 6 a 3 ..td7
1 7 "it"cl (lucky for Black that White
did not think of this earlier) 1 7 . . .
ttlg4 (Black's first active move of
the game . . .) 18 % Hl ( . . . and it is
enough to cow White into curbmg
his ambitions; 1 8 ttlxg4 fg 19 ttle5
would still leave White all the
chances) 1 8 . . . ttlef6! -!--! . For the
first time Black has the semblance
of an acceptable position and one
can well understand both parties
being pleased to terminate the
proceedings.
6 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4

The Staunton Gambit clearly con­

stitutes one of the most radical
and critical challenges to the fun­
damental soundness of the Dutch
Defence. White posits that the
gambitting of his important cen­
tral pawn will best enable him to
highlight the negative aspects of
Black's first move - that it does
not contribute to development,
and exposes the king - by getting
an advantage in development and
mounting a k ingside attack. H ap­
pily, the Dutch passes this crucial
test with flying colours, and the
Staunton Gambit is consequently
rarely encountered in contempor­
ary praxis.
t d4 rs
2 e4 fe ( 44)
As Steinitz wisely observed, the
o nly way to refute a gambit is to
acce pt it, and that is especially
tr ue where an important central
pawn is on offer.
3 lL!c3
Obviously W hite's most natural
continuation. The artificial alter­
natives can easily bring White into
difficulties :
(a) 3 lL!d2 lL!f6 4 g4 d5! 5 g5
lL!fd7 6 f3 e5! 7 fe .te7! (stronger
than 7 . . . "W' xg5 8 lL!gf3 "W' h 5 as
played in Bisguier-Bronstein,
Goteborg 1 955, when 9 ..tg2!
would have brought White some
play) and White is paying the
penalty for flouting the elementary
principles of opening play, e.g. 8
h4 0-0 9 lL!gf3 ed 1 0 ed lL! b6 + .
(b) 3 f3 e5! 4 de lL!c6 (4 . . .
d5!? certainly deserves attention) 5
"W'd5 "W'e7 (Black could also con­
sider turning the tables with the

57
58 Staunton Gambit: 1 e4
gambit 5 . . . ..tb4 + 6 c3 liJge7 7
-.. xe4 d5) 6 f4 d6 7 ed cd 8 ..t b5
..td7 9 liJc3 liJf6 and Black's active
position and strong e-pawn guar­
antee a promising middle game.
3 liJf6
Now White must choose
between the two major continu­
ations 4 f3 and 4 ..tg5, which
we shall examine in detail in the
following illustrative games. In
addition, there is the unjustifiably
wild 4 g4?! which is rarely risked
nowadays: 4 . . . h6! and by main­
taining his knight on f6 Black
assures himself of an advantage
no matter how White continues :
(a) 5 h4 d5 6 ..th3 liJc6 7 ..tf4
g5! 8 ..te5 (8 hg hg 9 ..txg5 courts
disaster, riz. 9 . . . ..txg4 10 f3
l:t xh3! I I l:t xh3 ..txh3 1 2 liJxh3
-.. d 7 13 liJf2 0-0-0; Yermolinsky­
Safarov, Leningrad 1 977) 8 . . .
..te6 9 f3 -.. d 7 1 0 -.. d2 o-o-o +
Byrne and Mednis.
(b) 5 f3 d5 6 g5 (or 6 ..tg2 e5!
7 de liJxg4! + Kuzminikh, while 6
..tf4 e6 7 -.. d 2 ..td6 8 0-0-0 ef 9
..txd6 cd 10 liJxf3 0-0 leaves Black
with an extra pawn and good
prospects; Menchik-Sultan Khan,
Cambridge 1 932) 6 . . . hg 7 ..txg5
..tf5 8 ..tg2 (after 8 -.. e 2 liJc6 9
0-0-0 -.. d7 1 0 ..txf6?! ef I I fe
de 1 2 liJxe4 0-0-0 + White has
restored material parity at the cost
of positional inferiority; Gasz­
tonyi -Szilagyi, Hungarian Ch.
1 953) 8 . . . e3! 9 liJge2 liJc6 1 0 a3
e6 I I ..txe3 ..td6 and once again
we observe White regaining his
pawn but remaining with a con­
siderable positional disadvantage;
Tyroler-Araiza, 1 928.
(c) 5 g5 hg 6 ..t xg5 d5 7 -.. d 2
(7 f3 transposes to note (b)) 7 . . .
..tf5 8 0-0-0 c6 9 f3 liJbd7 1 0 ..tg2
-.. as and White has nothing to
show for his pawn deficit; Radu­
gin-Kubbel, Leningrad 1 934.
(d) 5 f4?! d5 6 ..te2 (6 g5 hg 7
fg liJh5 8 ..te2 g6 =t ) 6 . . . g6! 7
..te3 h5! 8 g5 liJg8 9 -.. d 2 e6 1 0
f5 (allowing Black t o blockade
with his knight would be hopeless)
10 . . . ef I I liJh3 c6 1 2 liJf4 -.. d 6
and despite White's nice blockade,
two healthy extra pawns should
be good enough to win; Szabo­
Aiexander, Amsterdam 01. 1 954.
(e) 5 d5?! e6 6 g5 (6 de d5 + ) 6
. . . hg 7 ..txg5 ..te7 8 ..txf6 ..txf6
9 liJge2 d6 I 0 ..tg2 c6! I I de d5
1 2 cb ..txb7 White's attempt to
gain space in the centre has com­
pletely backfired leaving Black
with a huge strategical advantage
in the form of the bishop pair and
central pawn mass; Benediktsson­
Kristjansson, Reykjavik 1 968.
Gulko-M. Gurevich
USSR Ch. 1 985
1 d4 rs 2 e4 fe 3 liJc3 liJf6
4 f3 ( 45 )

The purest form of the gambit.
Experience has shown that captur­
ing this pawn gives White at least
sufficient compensation in devel­
opment and attacking chances,
and therefore we shall concentrate
on the most critical method of
declining.
4 d5
By securing the advanced e­
pawn Black hopes to obtain a
free and easy development while
placing some constraints on
White's.
5 fe
White gains nothing from delay­
ing this capture, and indeed
atte mpting to get by without it
can easily lead him astray, e.g.
5 ..tg5 ..tf5 6 -.. d 2?! (6 fe de
tra nsposing to the game is correct)
6 . . . tt:lc6 7 .i.b5 e6 8 fe de 9 d5?
(a mistaken conception; 9 tt:lge2
was better although it is true that
Blac k would be very comfortably
placed after simply 9 . . . .i.e7) 9
· · . ed 1 0 .i.xf6 -.. xf6 1 1 tt:lxd5
Staunton Gambit: 2 e4 59
-.. x b2 12 tt:lxc7 + �f7 13 .i.c4 +
�g6 and White is on the brink of
defeat; Krause-Tartakower,
Luxembourg 1 936.
5 de
6 .i.g5
Serves to discourage various . . .
e5 thrusts. After 6 .i.c4, for exam­
ple, Black has the pleasant choice
between 6 . . . e5!? 7 de (7 tt:lge2?
ed 8 tt:lxd4 .i.g4! is just bad for
White, but 7 .i.g5 ed 8 tt:lxe4 -.. e 7
would produce obscure complica­
tions) 7 . . . -.. x d 1 + 8 tt:lxd 1 tt:lg4
with easy equality, and 6 . . . tt:lc6 7
tt:lge2 e5!? (or Black could equalize
by 7 . . . .i.f5 8 0-0 -.. d 7) 8 .i.g5
(8 d5 tt:la5 ) 8 . . . ed! 9 tt:lxe4
=
.i.b4 + 10 c3 de 1 1 ttJ4xc3
-.. xd 1 + 1 2 .C. xd 1 tt:le4 and Black
remains a pawn to the good with
the endgame fast approaching
(analysis by Kovacevic).
6 .i.f5 ( 46)
46
w
7 tt:lge2
In order to solve the problem
of the development of the king's
60 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4
knight and pressurize the
advanced e-pawn as quickly as
possible. Whether it it is White's
best continuation, however,
remains to be established. The
alternatives are as follows:
(a) 7 "ife2?! lZlc6 (7 . . . -.xd4? 8
-. b5 + ) 8 .bf6 (8 0-0-0?? .tg4)
8 . . . ef 9 0-0-0 .td6 1 0 lZlxe4
0-0 1 1 lZlxd6?! (meets with a
surprising rejoinder, but in any
case Black has a very comfortable
game) 1 1 . . . cd! 1 2 -.f2 -.as 1 3
.tc4 + �h8 1 4 lZle2 lZlb4 1 5
.tb3 .:t ac8 + Black's queenside
attack is becoming very dang­
erous; Ed. Lasker-Alekhine,
match, Paris 1 9 1 3.
(b) 7 -.d2 ?! e6 8 h3 .td6 9 0-
0-0 h6 1 0 .txf6 -.xf6 1 1 .tc4 lZlc6
1 2 lZlge2 0-0-0 1 3 : hfl lZla5 1 4
.t b5 -. g5 1 5 lZlf4 a6 + a useful
example of how Black can proceed
when White does nothing in par­
ticular; Arbakov-Gieizerov,
Saratov 1 9 84.
(c) 7 .tc4!? lZlbd7!? (7 . . . lZlc6
is generally featured as Black's
best continuation with the main
line running 8 lZlge2 -.d7 9 0-0 e6
10 -.el 0-0-0 I I .:t d l lZla5 1 2 .tb5
c6 13 .ta4 lZlc4 - Taimanov
suggests 1 3 . . . .td6 14 d5 -.e7 -
with an unclear, roughly balanced
position : a game Schultz-Wille,
E. Germany 1 957, went 1 4 d5?!
.tc5 + 1 5 � h i .te3 1 6 de -.c7
with wild complications, while
Minev has recommended 14 .t b3
with lZlg3 to follow, again with
approximate equality in a mutu­
ally difficult position) 8 lZlge2 lZlb6
9 .tb3 -.d7 10 0-0 e6 1 1 -. e 1 0-
0-0 1 2 .:t d 1 c6 1 3 lZlg3 .tb4 1 4
.txf6 g f 1 5 lZlgxe4 with chances
for both sides in a sharp position;
Danner--Strobel, Austria 1 969.
7 e6
8 lZlg3 .te7
Black also obtained an advan­
tage in the game Martinez-Byrne,
Nice 01. 1 974, after 8 . . . .t b4 9
.tc4?! lZlc6 1 0 0-0 -. xd4 + 1 1
-. xd4 lZlxd4 1 2 .txf6 gf 1 3 lZlcxe4
.txe4 1 4 lZlxe4 f5 1 5 lZlg5 lZlxc2!,
but White could improve at move
nine with, say, 9 -.d2.
9 -.d2 h6!
10 .te3
There is no joy for White in 1 0
.txf6 .txf6 1 1 lZlcxe4 -. xd4 1 2
lZlxf6 + -.xf6 1 3 0-0-0 0-0 + .
10 lZlbd7
11 .te2
Chernin and M. Gurevich
analyse 1 1 lZlxf5 ef 1 2 .tc4 .td6!
1 3 .te6 g6 as clearly in Black's
favour, 14 .t xh6 being well met
by 14 . . . -.e7 with . . . 0-0-0 to
follow.
ll lZlb6
12 0-0 -.d7
Simply 1 2 . . . .tg6 would have
avoided the sequence which fol­
lows and left Black clearly in
control.
 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4 61

13 �hS l: g8 47
Understandably fearing the sac­ w
rifices which could follow 1 3 . . . 0-0
b ut unnecessarily so according to
Chernin and M. Gurevich who
a nalyse 14 �xg7?! � xg7 1 5
.txh6 + �h7 1 6 W'g5 ( 1 6 .ixf8
.:t xf8 + ) 1 6 . . . l: g8 1 7 W'h4 l:t g6
and there is no good continuation
of the attack.
14 �xf6 + .ixf6
IS .ihS + ! g6 mttJattve grinds to a halt and
16 .ie2 Black slowly takes control of the
By forcing Black to weaken his whole board.
kingside pawns White has set up 21 .ie3 a6
the double threat of g2-g4 and 22 �c3 l: g7
�xe4. 23 : f2 : h7
16 W' g7! 24 g3 W'e8
A clever tactical counter, utiliz­ 25 .ifl W'c6
ing the latent heavy piece power With his q ueen optimally re­
on the g-file. grouped Black is poised for the
17 .ixh6?! decisive assault.
Gives Black an easy time of 26 W'e2 �d7!
it. For better or worse, it was Naturally, Black denies his
practically mandatory to brave the adversary the glimmer of hope
perils of 1 7 g4 0-0-0! 1 8 : ad l (not which would follow from the dou­
1 8 gl'? gf + 1 9 �f2 .ih4 mate) 1 8 ble capture on c3. Instead, the
. . . h5! knight is sent over to claim control
17 .ixd4 + of g4.
18 �ht W' h8! 27 �dl �f6
19 .if4 28 c3 .ig4!
On 1 9 g4, Black could reply 1 9 29 : xr6?
. . . 0-0-0 20 gf e f and White would Abject capitulation; 29 W' e l
be hard pressed to cope with the .if3 + 3 0 �gl .ib6 3 1 .ixb6
th reat of . . . .ie5 and . . . g5. W'xb6 32 �e3 g5 with . . . g4 to
19 �0 follow would doubtless end in the
20 �b5 eS ( 4 7 ) same result, but at least it would
With this, White's temporary require more effort from Black to
62 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4
secure it.
29 .i.xe2
30 : xc6 .i.f3 +
White's fate is sealed; the end
came quickly : 3 1 �g 1 .i.xe3 +
3 2 lLl xe3 be 33 .i.xa6 + �b8 34
: n : d2 35 : f2 : xf2 36 �xf2
: xh2 + 0- 1 .
Shchumitshev-Shaposnikov
7th USSR corr. Ch. 1 967-9
1 d4 f5 2 e4 fe 3 lLlc3 lLlf6
4 .i.g5 ( 48)
48
8
This is the classical continu­
ation used by Staunton himself. In
essence, White hopes to recover
the pawn whilst maintaining a
central superiority rather than
make a real gambit of it.
4 lLlc6
Inaugurating lively piece play
in the centre of the board, making
use of the fact that should the
knight be chased to n (via e5) it
will attack the bishop.
An alternative defence which is
becoming increasingly popular is
4 . . . e6 which we have covered in
Chapter 8, page 78. Note, how­
ever, that Black is unable to hang
on to the pawn as in the 4 n
variation because of the following
refutation : 4 . . . d5? 5 .i.xf6 ef 6
"ifh5 + g6 7 "if xd5 pocketing one
pawn immediately with a second
soon to follow.
5 d5
All the alternatives are very
pleasant for Black :
(a) 5 .i.xf6?! ef 6 d5 (6 .i.c4?!
f5 7 lLlge2 lLla5 8 .i.b3 lLlxb3 9 ab
.i.e7 is hopeless for White) 6 . . .
lLle5 7 lLl xe4 f5 with a fine game
for Black.
(b) 5 lLl h3?! g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7
0-0 d5 8 .i.xf6 ef 9 .i.xd5 .i.xh3
10 gh f5 + Taimanov.
(c) 5 .i.b5 a6 (5 . . . g6 comes
into consideration) 6 .i.xc6 be 7
"ife2 e6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 9 .i.xf6
.i.xf6 1 0 tt:Jn 0-0 and now whether
White opts for the aggressive 1 1
0-0-0 or the prudent 1 1 0-0, Black's
bishops and central pawn mass
provide satisfactory middlegame
prospects.
(d) 5 n e5! (given that it is too
risky to accept the pawn, the text
move is the most logical way of
declining: Black stakes a claim in
the centre and entrenches on the
dark squares) 6 d5 (White achieves
nothing by 6 de lLl xe5, e.g. 7 Wd4
d6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 or 7 fe d6 8 tt:Jf3
.i.g4) 6 . . . lLld4 7 lLl xe4 (the dark

squ are weakness would be more
e vi dent after 7 fe j_e7 8 j.c4 d6
9 t2Jge2 tt:lg4!; Barda-Rossolimo,
Hastings 1 949/50) 7 . . . j.e7 8
�xf6 j_xf6 9 Wd2 (or 9 c3 tt:lf5
t O Wd2 d6 1 1 j. b5 + j_d7 1 2
� xd7 + 'it' xd7 1 3 tt:lh3 0-0-0 =
Wexler-Adler, Mar del Plata
1 952) 9 . . . 0-0 10 0-0-0 d6 1 1
c3 t2Jf5 with balanced chances;
H orberg-Larsen, Stockholm
1 966/67.
5 tt:le5
6 Wd4
Alternatives are not as good :
(a) 6 f4?! tt:lf7 7 W d4 g6 8 tt:lxe4
�g7 is fine for Black.
(b) 6 f3 tt:lf7 7 j_xf6 (relatively
best; 7 j_e3 ef 8 tt:lxf3 g6 9 j_e2
� g7 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 tt:ld4 c6! as in
van Seters-Rossolimo, Beverwijk
1950, and 7 j_f4 ef 8 tt:lxf3 c6 9
.tc4 cd 1 0 j_ xd5 e6 1 1 j_b3
.tb4 as in van Seters-Donner,
Beverwijk 1 95 1 , both leave White
with nothing to show for the pawn)
7 . . . ef 8 tt:lxe4 f5 9 tt:lg3 g6 gives
Black an active and promising
position.
(c) 6 j_xf6 ef 7 tt:l xe4 f5 8 tt:lg3
g6 9 We2 We7 10 0-0-0 tt:lg4! hands
B lack the initiative in short order;
Alzate-Nilsson, Havana 01. 1 966.
6 tt:lf7 ( 49)
7 j_xf6
E xperience with the alternatives
st ro ngly suggests that White is
Well advised to cede the bishop
Staunton Gambit: 2 e4 63
49
w
pair rather than lose time:
(a) 7 h4 c6 8 0-0-0 (8 j_ xf6 gf 9
'it' xe4 cd 1 0 tt:lxd5 e6 1 1 0-0-0
j_g7 =t ) 8 . . . W b6! 9 j_xf6 gf 1 0
'it' xe4 W xf2 1 1 tt:l f3 j_h6 + 1 2
� b 1 'it'e3 1 3 'it'a4 W f4 1 4 W b3 a5
and in an interestingly unbalanced
position Black's bishop pair,
potentially powerful central
pawns, and dark square play give
him the better of it; Yudintsev­
M artinov, !-final USSR corr. Ch.
1 964/65.
(b) 7 j_ h4 g5! (stemming from
Simagin, the time and activity
gained from this bold thrust far
outweigh the weakening of the
kingside) 8 j_g3 j_g7 9 0-0-0 c6!
(again we see this important little
move which not only challenges
White's last central pawn but also
lets the queen into play) 10 tt:lxe4
(White is left with a similarly bleak
ending after 10 d6 W b6! 1 1 tt:lxe4
'it' xd4 1 2 .l:txd4 tt:lh5 1 3 ll d l tt:lxg3
14 hg ed 1 5 c4!? b5! 16 cb d5;
Matsukevich-Cherepkov, Lenin-
64 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4

grad 1 963) 10 . . . • b6! (exchanging but Black emerged on top after 1 1

queens is the correct strategy; . . . 0-0 1 2 ..tc4 J.g7 1 3 •d3
Black thereby diminishes White's J.xb2 1 4 l:t b 1 •f6 15 � 1 e2 ..te5
attacking prospects while enhanc­ 1 6 de ..t xc7.
ing his own positional advantages) 10 J.h6 +
I I �xf6 + ..txf6 1 2 • xb6 ab 1 3 11 f4
�b1 d6 1 4 a 3 l:t a5 and Black has Attempting to gain some dark
taken charge; Potter--Jezek, corr. square control; 1 1 � b 1 0-0 leaves
01. Final 1 959/60. Black with at least equal pro-
7 ef spects.
8 �xe4 11 0-0
If White does not capture the 12 �f3 ..tg7
pawn immediately then Black 13 .. d2 b5!
holds it temporarily in order to 14 �d4 �d6 (50)
return it for positional gains : 8
0-0-0?! f5! 9 f3 ..td6! 1 0 fe ( 1 0 50
w
• xg7?? J.e5) 1 0 . . . J.e5 1 1 •d3
f4 12 �f3 0-0 with a firm blockade
on e5, + ; Kenez-Borisenko, corr.
1 958.
8 f5!
The most forceful continuation
and probably best.
9 �g3
Black would meet 9 �c3 in the
same way. Variously evaluated as 'equal'
9 g6 or 'unclear', it nevertheless seems
M aking maximum use of the fairly evident that Black's pro­
marvellously placed knight on f7. spects are the more promising in
10 0-0-0 this unusual and difficult position.
The ultra-sharp 1 0 h4 ..th6 1 1 The major handicap of White's
h5 looks more threatening than it setup is that he has no equivalent,
actually is on account of 1 1 . . . either literally or figuratively, to
•e7 + ! breaking the flow of White's the powerful black-squared
attack (but not 1 1 . . . 0-0? 1 2 hg bishop on g7 which gives energy
hg 1 3 d6!). A game Gudmunsson­ and purpose to the black position.
Donner, Amsterdam 1 950, saw 15 c3
White try I I d6 (after I 0 h4 ..th6) Obviously White dare not cap-
 Staunron Gambit: 2 e4 65

t u re the pawn immediately ( 1 5 With the white monarch's pawn

axb5? l0xb5 1 6 R.xb5 : b8 with cover shattered beyond repair and
. . . a6 and breakthrough on b2 to the black KB rampaging unop­
follow) so he primes the threat by posed down the long diagonal,
blunting the bishop's action along White's queenside is ripe for the
the a l -h8 diagonal. plucking and his fate practically
IS 1:1 b8 sealed. Despite desperate defensive
16 tO b3?! aS! efforts, in the end White could find
In trying to slow Black's attack no answer to the concerted action
White has inadvertently acceler­ of the black forces : 20 • b2 • as
ated it! The rook pawn thrust 2 1 • b4 ..txd5 22 R.xb5 l0 xb5!
ina ugurates a forceful and instruc­ (22 . . . : b8 23 a4!) 23 •xb5 c6 24
tive sequence which wrests a •c5 : b8 25 : xd5 (25 c4 • b7 is
lasting initiative and positional crushing) 25 . . . cd! (not falling for
dominance. 25 . . . 1:1 b5? 26 • xb5 cb 27 1:1 hd l
17 l0xa5 : as with good chances of holding on)
18 b4 1:1 xa5! 26 1:1 d l d4! 27 tOe2 •e4 28 •c4 +
19 ba ..tb7 (51 ) �h8 29 •d3 • b7! 30 1:1 d2 de 3 1
l0xc3 'i/c7 32 1:1 c2 •xf4 + 33 � d l
•xh2 3 4 • e 3 d 5 35 'i/12 d4 36
lObS d3 37 l::t c7 • xc7! 38 l0xc7
1:1 b l + 39 �d2 1:1 b2 + 40 �e3
.td4 + 41 �xd4 1:1 xf2 42 �xd3
: xa2 43 a6 f4 44 �e4 g5 45 �f3
�g7 46 �e4 �g6 0- l .
7 The Queen Bishop Attack :
2 .tg5

The bishop sortie aims t o disrupt 52

the normal development of Black's w
kingside : 2 . . . e6 is prevented, and
2 . . . lLlf6 permits 3 ..txf6, down­
grading the black pawn structure
in a relatively closed position
where the two bishops at best
offer problematic compensation.
Consequently, the two recom­
mended variations we shall
examine avoid the structure­
damaging exchange by postpon­ . . . lLlf6, ..txf6 exchange, whilst
ing the development of the knigh t : also observing the eternally
t h e restrained 2 . . . g 6 and the important e5 square directly as
ambitious whiplash 2 . . . h6 3 ..th4 well as x-raying the long diagonal
g5. in general and the weakened b2
spot in particular.
Note that there is no inconsist­
Kouatly- VI. Kovacevic ency here in recommending 2 . . .
Thessaloniki 0/. 1 984 g6 while counselling its avoidance
1 d4 rs 2 ..tgs in favour of 2 . . . lLlf6 in the Lenin­
grad (see p. 46) since the bishop's
2 g6 (52)
presence on g5 gives Black the
Fianchettoing the bishop important additional resource of
enables Black to capture on f6 being able to answer an h-pawn
with a piece in the event of a future thrust of h4-h5 with . . . h6, ..i
66

retreats g5, thus keeping the king­
side sealed.
3 h4
I ncreasing dark square control
and introducing a possible rook
pawn rupture form an important
part of White's strategic pro­
gramme despite the extra defens­
ive counters deriving from the
exposed bishop.
There are valid alternative
treatments :
(a) 3 ll:lc3 �g7 (3 . . . d5 trans­
poses to Chapter 8) 4 e4 (delaying
this advance brings nothing, e.g. 4
lLif3 lLif6 5 �xf6 �xf6 6 e4 fe 7
lLi xe4 d5! ) 4 . . . fe 5 lLixe4 d5! 6
=
ll:lc5 (nor does retreating promise
White any advantage, e.g. 6 lLig3
liJc6 7 c3 ll:lh6!? 8 Wd2 ll:lf7 with
balanced chances in a complex
position, or 6 lLic3 ll:lc6 7 �b5
4J h6!? 8 �xh6 �xh6 9 Wf3 �e6
again with mutual chances and
problems; M. Simic-Knezevic,
Smederevska Palanka 1 977) 6 . . .
b6 7 4Jb3 lLi f6 8 lLif3 0-0 9 �e2
•d6 10 0-0 4Jbd7 with active
possibilities for Black; Mik. Zeit­
lin-Ivanenko, Central Chess Club
Ch. 1 984.
(b) 3 ll:ld2 �g7 4 c3 (a game
Bergrasser- Larsen, Monte Carlo
1 967, went 4 e3 li'lf6 5 ll:lgf3 d6 6
.tc4 ll:lc6 7 c3 a6 8 h4 4Je4 ) 4 =
. . . h6 5 .tf4 d6 6 e3 e5 7 de de 8
.tg3 We7 9 f3 .te6 and Black
has a space advantage and the
The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5 67
more positive position; Kuttner­
Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969.
(c) 3 e4 fe 4 ll:lc3 lLif6 5 f3 ef 6
ti:lxf3 J.. g 7 brings about a vari­
ation of the Staunton Gambit con­
sidered to offer balanced pro­
spects.
3 J.. g7 (53)
53
w
4 e3
Other paths:
(a) 4 ll:lc3 c6 (again the trans­
position to Chapter 8 by 4 . . . d5
is available; ECO suggests an
immediate 4 . . . h6) 5 Wd3 d5 6
0-0-0 lLif6 (6 . . . WaS is an active
alternative worth attention) 7
.t xf6!? J.. x f6 8 f4 b5 9 ll:lf3 with
an interesting middlegame in
prospect : White holds the knights
in a blocked position but Black
has attacking chances on the
queenside; Rajkovic- Kovacevic,
Yugoslavia 1 975 .
(b) 4 h5 h6 5 .tel (anywhere
else the bishop would just be a
nuisance) 5 . . . g5 (this instructive
sequence sees Black thwart
68 The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 i.g5

White's ambitions on the h-file

and turn the tables in the battle
for the initiative on the kingside)
6 'it'd3 e6 7 e4 d6 8 ti:lf3 f4!? 9 e5
ti:le7 10 ed cd 1 1 ti:lbd2 0-0 12 c3
ti:lf5 and Black can look to the
middle game with confidence;
Gipslis- Reize, Leningrad 1 960.
4 h6
With the bishop's line of retreat
blocked, Black seeks to use it as a
target to aid expansion in the kingside pawns.
centre. 11 a4
5 ..tf4 d6 Hoping for a compensatory
6 ..tc4 ti:lc6 initiative on the other flank .
Naturally Black avoids 6 . . . e5? 11 0-0-0
which would leave him with a Possibly premature as it permits
displaced king and problems with White to force Black's QN away
developing after 7 de de 8 ..tf7 + from the centre and provoke a
�e7 9 'it'xd8 + �xd8 10 ..tg3 slight weakening of the queenside
ti:le7 1 1 ti:lc3. pawns. Of course, such a rich
7 c3 e5 position contains several feasible
With other factors being equal, plans, for example immediate
this advance always solves Black's kingside expansion with 1 1 . . . g5,
opening problems and often gives or possibly opening the e-file by
him the more promising position. 1 1 . . . ed and only then castling
8 ..tg3 'it'e7 (so that e5 would be available to
The vis-a-vis with White's king the knight in case of d5) followed
means that . . . f4 is threatened. by vigorous action on the king's
9 ti:le2 ti:lf6 flank.
10 f3 12 d5 ti:lb8
I n order to be able to preserve 13 ti:la3 a6
both QB and h-pawn in the event 14 ..tf2 'it'e8!
of . . . ti:lh5. Subtle prophylaxis designed to
10 ..td7 (54 ) hamper a charge by the b-pawn.
Black has the more harmonious 15 ..tb3 g5
development and the strategic 16 ..tc2 e4
initiative thanks to his mobile 17 ti:lg3 'it'e7
 The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .t.g5 69

Correctly avoiding the tempting

1 7 . . 'W'e5? which would hand the
.

init iative to White after 1 8 ll:Jc4

wxd5 1 9 'W' xd5 ll:J xd5 20 fe fe 2 1
lL:lh5!
18 'W'd2 : df8
This somewhat mysterious rook
move brings the piece into play
while reserving e8 for the queen.
19 0-0-0
That it is high time to remove
the king from its increasingly peril­ 24 'W'f2
ous position in the centre is well Given White's next, the immedi­
illustrated by the combinative ate 24 'W'e2 may have been prefer­
refutation of 1 9 b4?: 19 . . . ll:Jxd5! able.
20 'W'xd5 .ixc3 + 21 �e2 gh 22 24 a5!
lLlh5 .ixa 1 23 : xa 1 .ic6 24 In order to bring the inactive
Wc4 'W' g5 25 ll:Jf4 ef 26 gf .ixf3 + ! knight back into play.
with a decisive advantage (V. 25 'W'e2 ll:la6
Kovacevic). 26 ll:Jb5 ll:Jc5
19 gh Consequent, but 26 . . . : hg8
At first sight this self-splitting first was probably more accurate.
of his pawns seems strange, but 27 b4?!
further inspection reveals that Typical time-trouble lashing
without this capture it is difficult out; 27 .if2 was more circumspect
for Black to open lines and make with a lot of hard fighting still to
progress on the kingside. come.
20 ll:Je2 27 ab
Taking with the rook would 28 cb .ixb5
allow Black to move his knight Simultaneously trading White's
wit h a discovered attack. most threatening piece and shat­
20 'W'e8 tering his queenside pawns.
21 ll:Jf4 ef 29 ab 'W'e5!?
22 gf ll:Jh 7 (55 ) 30 : d4
Having created a weakness on Not 30 be? which would allow
f3 Black manoeuvres his knight to Black to run amok on the black
bri ng it under pressure. squares: 30 . 'W' b2 + 3 1 �d2
. .·

23 .ixh4 lLlg5 'W' b4 + 32 �c l .ib2 + 33 � b 1

70 The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 1Lg5

..tc3 + . Not 35 e4? llle 5 when the rook

30 lll d7 is out of play and the black cavalry
31 lll h5 become dangerous.
White is understandably con­ 35 'it' a l +
cerned to remove Black's pressure 36 i.b1
on the long diagonal, but he was 36 �d2 would allow a deadly
probably wrong to forego the switch to the opposite flank by 36
obvious 3 1 lll g6, e.g. 3 1 . . . 'it'e8 32 . . . 'it'h I ! with 37 . . . lll e5 to follow.
lll xf8 when Black would do best 36 llle5
simply to recapture by 32 . . . ll xf8 37 ll b3 ll hg8
with plenty of tactical chances, 38 ..tf2?!
rather than allow 32 . . . ..txd4 3 3 Sorely pressed by the clock,
lll x d7 etc. when t h e fact that f5 i s White fails to spot 38 i.e 1 intend­
unprotected makes things awk­ ing to transfer the bishop to c3
ward. and drive out the menacing queen.
31 f4! In this case, 38 . . . 'it'a4 keeps up
Undermining the d4 blockade a multitude of tactical tricks.
which is preventing infiltration 38 lll h3
down the diagonal. 39 ll h4 lll g 1
32 lll xg7 40 'it'd1
Even in time-trouble White It would be fatal to invite the
does not fall for 32 lll x f4? ll xf4! enemy's heavy guns to occupy the
33 ll xf4 'it'b2 + 34 �d l 'it' a l + home base back rank by capturing
35 �d2 i.c3 + 36 �d3 llle 5 the frisky horse : 40 ..txg l ?
mate! Now at least White is ll xg l + 4 1 �c2 ll eg8 4 2 ll h2
unlikely to fall prey to a mating 'it'a4 and White is hopelessly tied
attack . . . immediately, anyway! up.
32 'it' xg7 40 lll gxf3
33 ll hd1 41 ll xh6 ll g2
Again, 33 ll xf4 'it' a l + 34 i. b l 42 'it'c2 ll eg8 ( 5 6 )
'it' a 3 + 35 � d I ll xf4 3 6 e f lll xf3 With this, Black's domination
would be asking for trouble. is complete and the outcome no
33 ll e8!? longer in any doubt despite tough
Black is relentless in his deter­ resistance : 43 ll h l (of course not
mination to get amongst White's 43 ll h7?? ll g l + ) 43 0 0 0 �b8 44
dark square weaknesses. 'it' b2 'it'a4 45 ll a3 'it'xb5 46 'it' a l
34 ll xf4 'it'c3! 'it'c4 + 47 ..tc2 llld 3 + ! (gaining
35 ll d3 a vital tempo to break White's

56
w 72 � xb4 lt::l xd3 + followed by 73
counterattack) 48 l::txd 3 J::txf2 49
..Wc3 b5! 50 .ib3 (it would be
worse to give Black a passed pawn
and leave the b-pawn exposed to
a frontal assault by the black king
after 50 'ifxc4 be 5 1 l:l. c3 ll::l e 5 with
the king march to follow) 50 . . .
'if xc3 + 5 1 l:l. xc3 ll::le 5 52 .ic2
l:l. g3 53 l:l. e 1 � b7 54 .id3 �b6
55 .ie2 l:l. h2 56 � d 1 l:l. h4 57
l:l. b3 l:l. g8 58 �d2 l:l. h2 59 �c1
.::t gg2 60 �d1 l:l. h4 6 1 �c1 .::t gh2
62 �d 1 .::t h8 63 l:l. a3 .::t 2h4 64
�c2 (saving the pawn would leave
White open to attack from both
flanks: 64 l:l. b3 .::t a8 65 �c2
.::t a2 + 66 �c3 l:l. h2 with fierce
pressure) 64 . . . .::t xb4 65 �c3
l:l. hh4! (dashing White's last hope :
65 . . . J:l. e4?! 66 .txb5! � xb5??
67 J:l. b l + �c5 68 l:l. a5 mate) 66
.::t a8 l:l. he4! (Black sets his own
trap : if now 67 J:l. ea l there comes
67 . . . l:l. xe3 + 68 �xb4 c5 + 69
de ll::l xc6 mate) 67 J:l. b8 + �c5 68
J:l. c 1 ll::l c4 69 .id3 l:l. xe3 70 J:l. b7
l2le5 7 1 �d2 + (White would lose
The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5 71
both rooks after 7 1 J:l. xc7 + � b6
. . . ll::l x cl + etc.) 7 1 . . . �d4 White
resigns, as he must acquiesce in
simplification to a technically lost
ending after 72 .tfl J:l. b2 + 73
J:l. c2 (73 � d 1 l:l. e 1 + ! and mate
in two) 73 . . . ll::l c4 + 74 .txc4
J:l. xc2 + 75 �xc2 be. This sub­
stantial game, packed with incid­
ent, is a good example of the rich
middlegames which typically arise
in this variation.
Magerramov-A vshalumov
USSR 1 987
I d4 f5 2 .ig5
2 h6
3 .th4 g5 ( 5 7 )
57
w
Played not i n the naive expect­
ation of trapping the bishop but in
order to develop the K N without it
being captured, thereby saddling
Black with doubled f-pawns. The
danger for Black is that the rapid
advance of his kingside pawns may
72 The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .i.g5
leave him weak on the black
squares after a typical h4 thrust
and . . . g4 response. It then
becomes of paramount import­
ance whether Black can achieve
the advance of his e-pawn to e5
so as to prevent White obtaining
control over the key f4 square.
4 .tg3
Not forced; the simple transpos­
ition 4 e3 tl:\f6 5 .tg3 is equally
playable. Violent attempts at
refutation come unstuck : 4 e4?
.tg7 5 Wh5 + �f8 6 .tc4 d5 7
ed tl:\f6 8 Wf3 gh with a winning
material advantage; Barnes­
Krause, Omaha 1 959. It is quite
shocking that as recently as 1 983
Taimanov could be giving 3 . . . g5
a question mark and saying that
4 e4 is good for White through
being ignorant of the existence of
4 . . . .tg7 (he considers only 4 . . .
tl:\f6? and 4 . . . d5?).
4 tl:\f6
This is certainly the most natu­
ral move here although it has
yet to be definitively established
whether it is also the most accur­
ate. Examples of the alternatives :
(a) 4 . . . .tg7 5 e3 d6 (5 . . . tl:\f6
would return to the column) 6 h4
(checking on h 5 would involve
White in an unwarranted loss of
time) 6 . . . g4 (the variation 6 . . .
tl:\f6?! 7 hg hg 8 l:t xh8 + .txh8
9 tl:\h3! g4 1 0 tl:\f4 ± is a good
illustration of what Black should
avoid) 7 tl:\c3 e5?! 8 de de 9 W xd8 +
�xd8 1 0 0-0-0 + .td7 1 1 .tc4
and White's easy, active develop­
ment contrasts starkly with
Black's sluggish mobilisation and
difficulties along the d-file; Lpu­
tian- Mik. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985.
(b) 4 . . . d6 5 e3 tl:\f6 6 h4 l:t g8!?
(this bold attempt to avoid . . . g4
deserves further investigation) 7
hg hg 8 .tc4 (this rather simplistic
approach tends to leave White
with insufficient pawn presence in
the centre to be able to affect
matters there; Bareev has noted 8
c4 intending to attack f5 by .td3,
Wc2, and d5, as a more challenging
plan) 8 . . . e6 9 tl:\c3 a6 (prepares
his next by preventing tl:\b5) 1 0
a4?! (mis-reads Black's intentions)
10 . . . d5 1 1 .te2 .td6 1 2 .te5
tl:\c6 1 3 f4 g4 14 .td3 �f7 with
a very comfortable position for
Black; D. Ilic-Bareev, Vrnjacka
Banja 1 987.
5 e3
Persisting with the original
intention of exchanging QB for
KN by playing 5 .ie5 looks rather
artificial and should not cause
Black any trouble, e.g. 5 . . . .tg7
(5 . . . e6!? with the idea of answer­
ing tl:\c3 by . . . i.b4 is an interest­
ing alternative) 6 h4 g4 7 e3 d6 8
i.xf6 i.xf6 9 .ic4 and now
Black should open the queen's
path to the flank by 9 . . . c6, with
a complex and quite promising

middle game in view, rather than
p erm it White to diminish the posi­
tio n's dynamism by exchanging
queens after 9 . . . e5 1 0 tt:Jc3 c6 1 1
de de 1 2 W xd8 + � xd8 1 3
0-0-0 + �e7 1 4 f3 when Black's
l agging development is again
cause for concern (cf. note (a) to
Black's fourth above); Sideif­
Zade--Avshalumov, USSR 1 987.
5 .i.g7 (58)
58
8
6 tt:Jd2
Nor have the alternative treat­
ments so far explored given Black
any difficulties :
(a) 6 lLJc3 d6 7 .i.d3 tt:Jc6 8 tt:Jf3
c6 9 'We2 (9 .i.b5 enabled Black
to build up a crushing queenside
attack quickly in Arkhipov-Mik.
Zeitlin, Protvino 1 985, after 9 . . .
�d7 1 0 We2 a6 I I .i.a4 We7 1 2
0-0-0 b5 1 3 .i.b3 b4 1 4 lL:l b 1 tt:Ja5
1 5 h4 g4 16 lL:lfd2 .i.b5 1 7 Wei
c5) 9 . . . We7 1 0 .i.b5 (in view of
th e threatened . . . e5 White has
little choice; Black's position is
already better) 10 . . . .i.d7 I I h3
The Queen Bishop Arrack : 2 i.g5 73
a6 1 2 .1a4 b5 1 3 .i.b3 lLJa5 1 4
a 3 lL:lxb3 1 5 cb .i.c6 (this transfer­
ence to the long diagonal high­
lights Black's white square domin­
ation of the whole board; in the
further course of the game White
is unable to find any counterplay
while the enemy forces mass for
the final assault) 1 6 : c 1 0-0 1 7
o-o .i.b7 1 8 b4 wn 1 9 tt:Jd2 Wg6 20
Wd3 .:. f7 2 1 f3 h5 22 lLle2 .i.h6
23 .:. f2 h4 24 .i.h2 .:. af8 25 lL:lc3
Wg7 26 : eft g4 27 fg fg 28 hg
tt:Jxg4 29 : xn : xf7 30 e4 ..te3 +
0- 1 . Smooth, very smooth! Tis­
dall-Kristiansen, Denmark 1 983.
(b) 6 ..td3 e6 (a game Wheatley­
Bellin, England 1 98 1 , went 6 . . .
d6 7 tt:Jd2 tt:Jc6 8 c3 e5 9 h4 f4!? I 0
hg hg I I : xh8 + ..txh8 1 2 ef ef
1 3 ..th2 We7 + 1 4 We2 lLlg4 with
a small but distinct advantage for
Black; 9 . . . g4 would avoid
simplification and leave Black
with fine prospects) 7 lL:le2 d6 8 f3
We7 9 c4 e5 1 0 lL:lbc3 0-0 1 1 de
( I I 'Wc2 ed 1 2 ed tt:Jc6 would be
in Black's favour) I I . . . de 1 2 e4
(after the more fluid 1 2 Wc2 play
might go 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 lLJc6 1 4
a 3 fe 1 5 .i.xe3 lL:ld4!? with chances
for both sides) 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 c6
14 c5 ..te6 1 5 'Wa4 wn with
entirely satisfactory play for Black;
Damljanovic- M. Gurevich, Baku
1 986.
6 d6
Preparing the e-pawn's advance.
74 The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5
7 h4
White must challenge the black
pawns in this manner as otherwise
he simply concedes that Black has
gained space at no cost.
7 g4
A necessary reaction as White
is threatening to exchange pawns
and rooks and then play ttJh3
advantageously weakening the
black pawn structure in the same
way as already noted in the 4 . . .
�g7 line.
8 h5
Otherwise the black knight
could occupy this square to useful
effect.
8 ltJc6
Development aimed at enforc­
ing . . . e5.
9 �b5
Development aimed at retard­
ing . . . e5.
9 �d7
10 ltJe2 a6
This is dubious as it gives White
the chance to get his knight to f4
from where it can exert a powerful
influence on Black's position. The
immediate I 0 . e5 would lead to
. .
a complex game with balanced
chances after for example I I de de
1 2 ltJc4 ( 1 2 �xc6 � xc6 1 3 �xe5
could be answered simply by 1 3
. . . � xg2 1 4 n h2 �c6 or more
ambitiously by 1 3 . . . tle7, but in
both cases White's light square
debility presents obvious play for
Black) 1 2 . . . 0-0!
11 �a4
White goes along with his
opponent's assessment instead of
challenging it by I I � xc6 �xc6
1 2 ttJf4 tid7 1 3 c4 e6 1 4 ltJb3 after
which Avshalumov evaluates the
position as slightly m White's
favour.
11 e5
12 c3
Capturing on e5 would lead to
lines similar to those in the note
to Black's tenth.
12 tle1 (59)
59
w
Black's forces are generally
more harmoniously coordinated
for effective central action, and the
black queen is functionally posted
in a way difficult for her white
counterpart to emulate, while the
advanced g-, f- and e-pawns infuse
the black position with dynamic
potential.
13 tibl?! 0-0!
Correctly perceiving that the
threat to double the c-pawns is
 The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 J.g5 75

ill usory since after 1 4 .txc6 be 1 5 20 .txg3 .te6?

de de Black's prospects o n the A miscalculation. Simply 20 . . .
li gh t squares more than outweigh lUeS was indicated, leaving White
the damaged pawns. in dire straits.
14 .tb3 + ?! 21 .txc7 .txb3
Even so, this inconsistent play After 2 1 . . . W'd7 22 .tf4! (pre­
is misguided, as Black now gets to venting any breakthroughs on the
ut ilize all the positive aspects of his black squares) Black cannot
position without any drawbacks capture on d2 without leaving the
at all. QB en prise while on 22 . . .
14 �h8 .txb3 White recaptures with the
15 .th4 W'e8 knight.
Underlining the fact that the 22 lLlxb3 .te5!
aggressive h-pawn can also Black adjusts well to the
become vulnerable. changed circumstances and tries
16 de de to use his better coordination to
17 lLlg3 e4! whip up attacking chances.
Now that White's K N has been 23 .txe5 lLlxe5
removed from its observation of 24 lLld4
f4 to fulfil defensive duties, the time Taking the h-pawn would be a
is ripe to cramp White's position fatal error opening the way to the
fu rther and prepare to swing the white king.
QN to eS when the weakness 24 �g7
of d3 will cause the white 25 g3 �g6
monarch considerable embarrass­ 26 W'c2 W' f7
ment. Blackis now clearly in 27 �g2 h5
control. With this the writing is on the
18 �ft wall and even with time-trouble
18 .txf6 would save the h-pawn looming Black is unlikely to go
b ut leave White's position lifeless wrong. The end came as follows :
and inevitably doomed. 28 .:. ad I (28 W' b3 was the maso­
18 lLlxh5 chistic way to prolong the inevi­
19 �g1 table) 28 . . . .l:t ad8 29 a4 .:t h8 30
Thus White has managed to b3 �g5 3 1 c4 lLlf3 32 �fl .:t d 7
re move his king to relative safety 33 W' c 3 .:. hd8 3 4 �g2 W'f6 35
an d activate his K R at no greater W' b4 h4 36 gh lLl xh4 + 37 .:t xh4
ex pense than a pawn. �xh4 38 .:. h i + �g5 39 lLle2
19 lLlxg3 .:t h8 40 .:t xh8 W'xh8 41 lLlf4 g3!
76 The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .i.g5

Freeing g4 for the k ing enables knight check on e6; with his
Black to proceed with . . . n d l swindle chance gone White
without being harassed by the resigned.
8 The Queen Knight Attack :
2 ttJc3
This i s the sister variation o f the
Queen Bishop Attack and indeed
could reasonably be called the
Queen Bishop Attack Deferred as
the k night development is almost
invariably followed by 3 ..tg5.
Black has only two replies which
counter the threatened 3 e4 : 2 . . .
ttl f6 and 2 . . . d5. We shall examine
a promising recent offshoot of the
first of these, and the latter in its
entirety.
1 d4 f5
2 lbc3 (60)
riO
B
T his logical move renounces
77
queenside play evolving from
advancing the c-pawn in favour
of central and kingside activity
coupled with rapid piece deploy­
ment. As in the Queen Bishop
Attack, White hopes to damage
Black's pawn structure by captur­
ing the KN on f6 with his bishop
when it cannot be recaptured by
a piece. Experience has shown that
the doubled f-pawns thus inflicted
on the black position are a con­
siderable liability obliging Black
to play extremely precisely in
order to obtain a satisfactory pos­
ition. Clearly, therefore, it makes
sense to prevent White carrying
out this strategy if at all possible
and that, indeed, is the common
factor in our two recommended
defences.
Kouatly-Tseshkovsky
Wijk aan Zee I I 1 988
1 d4 rs 2 lLlcJ
78 The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lll c3
2 tt:lf6
3 i.g5 e6
Known for more than a century,
until recent years this move had
always been considered weak since
it allows White to play e4. Many
of these earlier games saw Black
quickly castling kingside and
being crushed by direct attack as
a result, whereas the modern
strategy looks to effect the much
safer long castling.
The reader may care to note
that the response previously con­
sidered standard here, 3 . . . d5,
allows White to implement his
primary aims mentioned in our
introductory comments by 4
.txf6.
4 e4
The g-pawn thrust makes more
sense here than in other positions;
indeed the only example com­
monly cited from practice, Hort­
Holacek, Havirov 1 97 1 , produced
a preferable position for White
after 4 g4 .te7 5 gf ef 6 .tg2 tt:le4
7 .txe7 Wxe7 8 Wd3 tt:lxc3 9 Wxc3
d6 I 0 tt:lh3. Naturally, this is far
from being the last word on the
variation, and the search for alter­
native defensive methods might
well profitably begin by examining
4 . . . .tb4.
4 fe
5 tt:\xe4
The most natural continuation,
but two other moves come into
consideration:
(a) 5 f3 offers a gambit in the
Staunton mould which certainly
brings White compensatory
attacking chances after 5 . . . ef 6
tt:lxf3 .te7 7 .td3 0-0 8 h4!?
setting up threats of taking on f6
and then h7, but 5 . . . e3!? 6
.txe3 .t b4! looks a good way of
declining.
(b) 5 .txf6 Wxf6 6 tt:lxe4 W h6!
(Black is in charge of the dark
squares) 7 .i.d3 (7 g3 is a sensible
attempt to obtain some grip on
the black squares which Black
could answer either by the
straightforward 7 . . . .i.e7 or the
interesting 7 . . . ..t b4 + !? 8 c3
.i.e7 when White would be unable
to retreat his knight to c3 in the
event of a subsequent . . . d5; 7 tt:lf3
was played in a drastic miniature
Laird-Finlayson, 1 982, which
went 7 . . . d5 8 tt:leg5?! tt:\c6 9 W d2
i.d6 10 .td3?! tt:l b4! I I .tb5 +
c6 1 2 .te2 Wg6! 1 3 0-0-0??
.tf4 0- 1 ) 7 . . . d5 8 tt:lg3 .td6 9
tt:lf3 0-0 1 0 0-0 tt:\c6 I I .l: e l a6 1 2
c3 .td7 1 3 b4 .1: ae8 and Black's
possession of a black-squared
bishop more than offsets his
inferior pawn structure; M ileika­
Liebert, Riga 1 96 1 .
5 .te7
6 .txf6
Capturing this way is the most
forceful as it permits White to keep
up the momentum. Time, Black's

best response to the alternative
h as yet to be established. After 6
8 xf6 + ..txf6 7 h4! capturing on
g 5 would bring Black an inferior
ending following 7 . . . ..t xg5 8
-w h5 + g6 9 -. xg5 -.xg5 10 hg,
t hus Black must seek other ways.
A game Veresov- Pohla, Vilnius
1 972, went 7 . . . 0-0 8 ..td3 -.e7
9 "We2 �c6 10 c3 d5 I I f4 ..td7
1 2 0-0-0 with clearly better
chances for White. There is clearly
no need for Black to declare his
hand in castling so quickly, how­
ever, and amongst various poss­
ible improvements 7 . . . -.e7!
springs immediately to mind.
6 ..t xf6 ( 6 1 )
7 -. h5 +
Introduced by Knaak, this
aggressive continuation has super­
seded the older, straightforward
d eve lopment of 7 �f3. That this
q u iete r variation is not without
venom is powerfully and instruc­
tively illustrated by the famous
brilliancy Ed. Lasker-Thomas,
The Queen Knight Allack: 2 lLlc3 79
London 1 9 1 2 : 7 . . . b6 8 ..td3
..tb7 9 �e5 0-0 10 -.hs -.e7?
I I -.xh7 + !! �xh7 1 2 � xf6 + +
�h6 1 3 �eg4 + �g5 1 4 h4 +
( 1 4 f4 + !) 1 4 . . . �f4 1 5 g3 + �f3
1 6 ..te2 + ( 1 6 �fl !) 1 6 . . . �g2
1 7 .a h2 + � g 1 1 8 �d2 mate!
Persuasive evidence that Black's
safest way of meeting 7 �f3 is to
remove the king to the queenside :
7 . . . -.e7 8 ..td3 �c6 9 c3 b6 1 0
-.e2 ..t b7 I I 0-0-0 (if White castles
kingside then Black should follow
suit since the white forces are
better placed to launch flank
attacks, whereas homogeneous
castling enhances the importance
of Black's centralization) 1 1 . . .
0-0-0 1 2 : he ! �b8 and Black's
harmonious and weakness-free
position is entirely satisfactory;
Menchik-Flohr, Hastings 1 933/34.
7 g6
8 -. h6 -.e7!?
Whether this latest try is the
most accurate remains to be
established, but it does appear to
be more logical to threaten to
preserve the KB before being com­
mitted to a particular queenside
development (see Fedorowicz­
Leow below). Other experience so
far :
(a) 8 . . . �c6 (acceptance o f the
pawn gives White too strong an
initiative after 8 . . . ..txd4? 9 0-0-0
..tf6 I 0 h4 etc.) 9 0-0-0!? (the
·
seminal game Knaak- Ftacnik,
80 The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3
Trna va 1 980, went 9 et:lf3 et:lxd4?
1 0 et:lxd4 ..txd4 l l 0-0-0 ..tf6 1 2
h4 'We7 l 3 et:lxf6 + 'Wxf6 1 4 h5
.l:t g8 15 ..td3 and Black was i n
bad shape; Knaak gives 9 . . . 'We7
l 0 lZl xf6 + 'W xf6 l l 0-0-0 b6 as
slightly in White's favour, while it
should be noted that l l . . . d6 in
this line would transpose to the
column game) 9 . . . b6?! (while
Black can hardly afford to fall
further behind in development by
grabbing the d-pawn, the immedi­
ate 9 . . . 'We7 would probably
transpose to the column) 1 0 et:le2
'We7 l l 'We3 (threatening 1 2 d5)
l l . . . ..tg7 12 lt:l 2c3 ..tb7 (the
positionally appalling 12 . . . d5
was mandatory) 1 3 d5 and Black
is in trouble; Fedorowicz-Leow,
Philadelphia 1 986.
(b) 8 . . . b6 9 et:lf3 ..tb7 1 0 ..td3
'We7 l l 0-0-0 lt:la6 ( l l . . . et:lc6?
1 2 'Wf4) 1 2 c3 ..tg7 l 3 'We3 0-0-0
1 4 � b 1 et:lb8 1 5 .l:t he l et:lc6 with
approximately equal chances (cf.
Menchik- Fiohr above); Ash­
Yusupov, Winnipeg 1 986.
Thus we can conclude that if
Black succeeds in setting up the
Ash - Yusupov I Menchik - Flohr
type position then his chances are
satisfactory, but he must be alert
against White's tactical trumps
particularly the d5 breakthrough.
9 et:lxf6 + 'W xf6
10 0-0-0 et:lc6
11 et:lf3 d6 ( 62)
Thus Black keeps the white
pieces at bay with his small pawn
centre while preparing to complete
his development by 1 2 . . . ..td7
and 1 3 . . . 0-0-0. After, say, 1 2
..tc4 ..td7 1 3 .l:t he l 0-0-0, Black
has no real problems as the e­
pawn is easily defended by . . .
: deS, and he can then think in
terms of ejecting the white q ueen
either by et:lc6-e7-f5 or et:lc6-d8-
f7 followed by mobilizing his king­
side minority and increasing the
pressure along the half open f-file.
Most of the positions arising from
this variation are in fact a kind
of mirror image Sicilian where
White's attacking chances have
been diminished by the loss of
an important bishop. Food for
thought!
Doubtless with some such con·
siderations in mind, White decided
to give up a pawn in order to keep
the black monarch in the centre,
but his initiative comes to nothing
and in regaining the pawn White
 The Queen Knight Arrack: 2 l!Jc3 81

permits a decisive counterattack. 2 ti:Jc3 d5

12 d5?! ed
Putting the Stonewall stopper
13 .tb5 .td7
on White's e2 -e4 is especially valid
14 .l:!. hel +
when the c-pawn is blocked from
1 4 .txc6 be! 1 5 .l:!. he l + �d8
joining in the central struggle.
would leave' Black's king quite safe
Note that 2 . . . g6? would expose
beh ind the solid mass of pawns.
Black to the most virulent form of
14 ti:Je7
the h-pawn blitzkrieg after 3 h4!
15 .txd7 + �xd7
(cf. Chapter 4, p. 47).
16 ti:Jd4 .l:!. ae8
3 logS ( 63 J
17 .. h3 +
The apparently powerful rook 63
incursion 1 7 .1:!. e6 would only help B

Black after the simple retreat 1 7

. . . • n threatening 1 7 . . . c5 and
1 7 . . . ttJfS.
17 ti:Jf5
18 .I:!. xeS .I:!. xeS
19 • xh7 + .l:!.e7
20 .. h3
White has counted on this pin
to hold the balance but failed to M uch the most popular choice
spot Black's knockout counter­ in contemporary practice, but
punch coming. Black must also know how to
20 .. g5 + handle the tricky alternatives :
21 �bl •d2! (a) 3 g4 ti:Jf6! 4 gS?! (4 h3 looks
22 .. o relatively best) 4 . . . ti:Je4 5 ti:Jxe4 fe
There is nothing better; 22 '*'d3 6 f3 .US and White's unorthodox
w ould lose a piece after 22 . . . aggression has clearly backfired;
W' xd3. Spielmann - M ieses, Berlin 1 920.
22 .l:!. el (b) 3 e4 de 4 f3 (4 .tgS g6 5
Speedily concluding the assault .tc4 J.. g7 6 tLlge2 tLlc6 + Visier­
on the opponent's back rank: Castro, Costa Bra va 1 977) 4 . . .
W hite resigns. eS!? is a typical central counter
which suffices to bring Black at
Halifman-Legky
least equal chances, e.g. 5 de
USSR 1 987
'ilt" xd I + 6 �xd I (L)d7 7 tLld5 �d8
d4 f5 8 fe fe 9 .tf4 lLlc5! 10 tLle2 tLle7
82 The Queen Knight A ttack : 2 liJc3
I I lLidc3 lLig6 with the initiative;
Beyen-Zwaig, Nice 01. I 974.
(c) 3 ..tf4 is a routine developing
move which poses no threat, e.g. 3
. . . lLif6 4 e3 e6 5 lLib5?! (mistakenly
attempting to utilize the one
special point of his third move) 5
. . . lLia6 6 a4 (artificial, but 6 c4
..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLie4 is also fine for
Black) 6 . . . ..te7 7 c3 0-0 8 ..id3
c6 9 lLia3 lLib8! 1 0 lLif3 lLie4 I I
0-0 lLid7 and Black can enter the
middlegame with confidence; V.
Raicevic- Psakhis, Troon 1 984.
(d) 3 f3 attempts straightforward
occupation of the centre but Black
can counter with a lightning infan­
try charge which effectively turns
the tables : 3 . . . c5! 4 e4 e5! 5 de
(alternatives are even less palat­
able, e.g. 5 lLi xd5 cd and White
has problems with e4; 5 ..tb5 +
..id7 6 ..txd7 + lLi xd7 7 lLixd5 cd
8 lLie2 fe 9 fe lLifg6 + again due to
the weak e-pawn, Pomar-Larsen,
Spain I 975) 5 . . . d4 6 ..ic4!? (other
moves leave Black in control
without a fight) 6 . . . lLic6!?
(according to Taimanov, 6 . . . •as
7 lLie2 de 8 lLixc3 gives White a
strong attack, but this certainly
needs confirmation in practice) 7
lLid5 lLixe5 8 •e2 lLixc4 9 • xc4
..id6 1 0 ..if4 lLie7 with a fully
satisfactory position for Black;
Rossolimo- Pelikan, Argentina
I 959.
3 g6
The usual response, but there
are alternatives, hitherto barely
explored, which are of potentialJy
crucial significance :
(a) 3 . . . c6 4 e3 g6 will in
all likelihood transpose to lines
similar to the column, while other
tries have been shown to lose too
much time with the queen in one
case : 4 . . . •d6?! 5 ..id3 e5?! 6 de
•xe5 7 lLif3 •c7 8 lLid4 •n
9 •D ± Ghinda-Stanciu, Roman­
ian Ch. I 978, and too much time
with the knight in another : 4 . . .
lLid7 5 ..td3 lLidf6 6 lLige2 e6 7 f3
h6 8 ..tf4 g5 9 ..te5 ..ig7 I 0 e4
lLie7 I I .d2 ..id7 I 2 0-0-0 ±
Polugayevsky- Liebert, Rostov
I 96 1 . The logical follow-up to 3
. . . c6 is 4 . . . • b6!? with the point
that gambitting the b-pawn would
be dubious in a closed position,
while direct methods of deahng
with the threat would make queen­
side castling either less attractive
or impossible. That would leave 5
a3, after which at the very least
Black would have acquired the
additional option of answering 5
. . . lLid7 6 ..id3 with 6 . . . e6. There
is clearly much here that remains
to be investigated.
(b) 3 . . . h6!? is an obvious and
critical move which has been
almost totally ignored. Since 4.
..ih4 would appear to involve
White in unacceptable material
loss after 4 . . . g5 5 e4 ..ig7 (cf.

Ch apter 7, p. 72), the whole
ra ison d'etre of White's system
seems to be called into question.
In the only top class example of it
so far, White replied 4 ..tf4 and
after 4 . . . lZ:lf6 5 e4!? (acknowledg­
ing that normal methods give
White nothing) 5 . . . fe 6 f3 ..tf5 7
fe de 8 ..tc4 e6 Black had obtained
a slightly improved version of a
Staunton Gambit vanatton
already considered completely sat­
isfactory for Black; Ligterink­
Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984.
4 h4
This advance of the h-pawn is
the keystone of White's strategy :
strategically, it reinforces the play
on the dark squares, while tact­
ically it readies the h4-h5 rupture.
4 ..tg7
5 e3 (64)
The usual move, opening the
qu een's path along the d l -h5
di ago nal. Alternatively, White
rna y opt for immediately intensify­
i n g his dark square play and pre-
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lL!c3 83
paring long castling by 5 Wd2.
This continuation contains hidden
venom and Black must tread
warily to avoid the many pitfalls
as the following vanatiOns
demonstrate: 5 . . . c6 6 lZ:lf3 lZ:ld7?!
(natural but inaccurate; 6 . . . h6
is necessary, with fair chances of
maintaining the balance, although
it is clear that Black's task is the
more onerous, e.g. 7 ..tf4 lZ:ld7 8
0-0-0 lll gf6 9 lZ:le5 lZ:le4! I 0 lZ:l xe4
lZ:lxe5! and by precise play White
is prevented from building any
advantage) 7 h5 h6 (were White
now to retreat the bishop then all
would be fine in the black camp
after 8 . . . g5, but instead White
sacrifices a piece for a dangerous
attack) 8 hg! hg 9 : h7! .=. xh7
(forced, after 9 . . . ..tf6 or 9 . . .
�f8. simply 1 0 lZ:lxg5 is crushing)
10 gh lZ:lgf6 I I W xg5 �f7 ( I I
. . . �f8 puts up stiffer resistance
although Black clearly remains
under immense pressure after, for
example, 1 2 W h4! �f7 1 3 e3) 1 2
Wxf5 lZ:lb6 1 3 lZ:le5 + � f8 1 4 Wf4
and Black's defensive task is hope­
less; Vaganian-Knezevic, Dubna
1 973.
White has also occasionally
experimented with 5 lZ:lh3 but this
should not cause Black undue
problems after simply 5 . . . lZ:lf6
threatening an early . . . lZ:le4.
5 ..te6
·
This initially strange-looking
84 The Queen Knight Attack: 2 tt'Jd
move is aimed at shoring up the
kingside defences, a useful task for
the otherwise torpid QB. A good
example of the type of attack
White can whip up if this prophy­
lactic manoeuvre is omitted is pro­
vided by the game Bareev-Dreev,
Soviet U20 Ch. 1 98 3 : 5 . . . c6 6
..td3 (6 h5 would be premature
because after 6 . . . h6 the sacrificial
continuation 7 hg hg 8 .:1. xh8
..txh8 9 'it'h5 ..tg7 would be
insufficient) 6 . . . �f6 (the equally
unwary 6 . . . �d7 would run up
against 7 �f3 � gf6 8 h5 �xh5
9 ..txf5 with powerful kingside
pressure, but it is still not too late
for 6 . . . ..te6, e.g. 7 �f3 �d7 8 h5!?
�gf6 - to provoke the sacrifice
here would bring disaster after 8
. . . h6? 9 hg! hg 1 0 .:1. xh8 ..txh8
1 1 � xg5 �f8 12 g7! ..txg7 l 3
'it'h5 + �d7 1 4 �xe6-9 h6 -
Black need not fear the simplify­
ing 9 hg hg 1 0 .:t xh8 + ..txh8 1 1
�e2 ..tl7 1 2 �f4 �e4 - 9 . . . ..tf8
1 0 �e2 ..tl7 with an interesting
position where White has cashed
in his initiative for a spatial advan­
tage on the king's wing, the
advanced outpost of which (the h­
pawn) could one day turn into a
liability; chances are approxi­
mately equal; Palatnik-Legky,
Tallinn 1 985) 7 h5!? � xh5 8 .:1. xh5
gh 9 'it'xh5 + �f8 1 0 �f3 'it'e8 1 1
'it'h2 e6 1 2 0-0-0 (for the exchange,
White has lasting pressure due to
the superior coordination of his
forces and the vulnerability of t he
black king) 1 2 . . . �d7 l 3 g4! fg
1 4 � h4 �f6 1 5 f3 'it'h5?! 1 6 'it'f4
'it'l7 1 7 'it'd6 + 'it'e7 1 8 'it'g3 �e8
1 9 fg .:t g8?? (cracking under the
pressure, but in any case it is
difficult to imagine Black surviv­
ing in the long run) 20 ..txh7 .:1. h8
21 �g6 'it'd7 22 �e5! 'it'c7 23
..tg6 + �e7 24 .:t fl .:tf8 25 'it' h4
b5 26 ..td3 1 -0.
This exchange sacrifice attack
plays such an important role in
this variation that it is worth quot­
ing one further example, this time
arising from 5 . . . �f6 : 6 h5!? � xh5
7 .:t xh5 gh 8 'it'xh5 + �f8 9 �f3
..te6 1 0 ..th6 �d7 1 1 ..txg7 +
�xg7 1 2 'it'g5 + �17 1 3 'it'h5 +
�g7 1 4 'it' g5 + �17 1 5 'it' h6!
(having demonstrated who is in
charge White turns the screw) 1 5
. . . .:t g8 (there is no other way of
meeting the threatened 1 6 �g5 + )
thus far we have followed Vaiser­
M. Knezevic, Havana 1 985, where
White decided to restore material
parity by 16 �g5 + .:1. xg5 1 7 'it' xg5
thus giving Black much needed
time to develop and coordinate
his pieces, something which would
not have been at all easy to achieve
after the more ambitious 1 6
'it'xh7 + ! �e8 1 7 'it' h 5 + ..t l7 1 8
'it' xf5 ± .
6 �£3
The most natural continuation,

a lt h ough alternatives such as 6
8 h 3 and 6 'ii' f3 will doubtless be
ex p lored in the future.
6 c6
It is difficult for Black to get by
wit hout this reinforcement of the
d- pa wn, e.g. 6 . . . l2ld7 7 h5 h6 8
hg! hg 9 : xh8 .txh8 1 0 l2lxg5
8f8 1 1 'ii' h5 .i.g7 1 2 l2lxe6 l2lxe6
13 •xf5 'ii' d 6 14 l2lxd5 and the
horde of white infantry has every
chance of marching to victory;
Palatnik- Fadeyev, Ukraine Ch.
1 984.
7 .tf4 (65)
1'>5
B
By vacating g5 for the k night,
White indirectly prepares the h­
pawn thrust. The straightforward
7 .td3 occurred in VI. Kovacevic­
K ristiansen, Plovdiv 1 98 3, which
provides us with a good example
of how Black should respond in
the event of an exchange of rooks
a lo ng the h-file : 7 . . . l2ld7 8 h5
ll:l gf6 (as is so often the case, Black
da re not allow the passive bishop
sacrifice 8 . . . h6? 9 hg! hg I 0 .1:1 xh8
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 l0c3 85
.txh8 1 t l2l xg5 l2lf8 1 2 g7! .i.xg7
1 3 'ii' h5 + �d7 14 l2lxe6 with a
crushing advantage) 9 hg hg 1 0
: xh8 .txh8 1 1 l2le2 (not I I 'ii' e 2
l2le4! + or 1 1 �e2 'ii' b6 with . . .
c5 in the air) 1 1 . . . .tf7 1 2 l2lf4
l2le4 1 3 �e2 and now instead of
1 3 . . . l2lf8?! 14 'ii' h 1 .tf6 1 5 .i.h6
l2le6 1 6 g4! ± as happened in the
game, VI. Kovacevic gives 1 3 . . .
.tf6 1 4 .txf6 ef 1 5 'ii' h 1 'ii' e 7
16 'ii' h6 l2lf8 1 7 c3 producing an
unclear position with chances for
both sides.
7 l2lf6
8 h5! l2l bd7!
Acceptance of the offer would
lead Black into the usual defensive
morass : 8 . . . l2lxh5 9 .l: xh5! gh 1 0
l2lg5 .i.g8 1 1 'ii' xh5 + � f8 1 2
.i.d3 e6 l 3 g4 h 6 1 4 l2lf3 ..t f7 1 5
'ii' h3 with lasting pressure; Halif­
man-Lerner, Kubishev 1 986.
9 h6
The sacrifice being declined,
there is really very little else for
White to do apart from pushing
back the bishop and gaining space.
We have already seen from the
note to White's seventh that
exchanging along the h-file brings
nothing.
9 .tf8
10 'ii' d 2 .tf7
11 l2le5 e6 (66)
This is an appropriate moment
to take stock of the situation. Whi­
te's advanced h- pawn means that
86 The Queen Knight A ttack: l lt)d

17 ..txd6 W xd6
18 0-0-0 e5
19 g5 �d7?! (67)

67
w

Black is somewhat cramped on the

kingside, but equally the blocked
position ensures a fair degree of
safety for his king. Black's central The knight is exposed to attack
grip is satisfactory and there are here and would better have been
prospects for creating counterplay tucked away by 1 9 . . . �e8 with
on the queen's wing. All in all, good defensive chances.
chances are nicely balanced. 20 e4!
12 f3 Energetically opening up the
Naturally, White seeks to open centre the better to expose the
up new fronts either by g4 or e4. inadequacies of Black's setup.
12 ..te7 20 b5
13 g4?! To chase the knight away from
This impetuosity should have c3.
backfired; completing develop­ 21 ed b4
ment by 1 3 0-0-0 was correct. 22 �e4 W xd5
13 �xe5 23 ..tg4!
14 ..txe5 fg Astutely breaking Black's coun­
15 fg 0-0 terplay by fingering the weak spot
16 .tel ..td6?! in his position.
Black misses his opportunity. 23 W xe4
Halifman points out that 16 . . . There is no real choice; 23 . . .
�d7! 1 7 ..tg3 ..tg5 would have ..te6 24 ..txe6 W xe6 25 d5 is
given Black a slight advantage, crushing, while 23 . . . W xa2 24
while 1 7 ..tg7 .l:l e8 1 8 0-0-0 ..tg5 Wxb4 .l:l ab8 25 Wa3 W xa3 26 ba
would also leave White poorly ..td5 27 .l:l he l also leaves Black
placed to create active play. in a bad way.
 The Queen Knight Attack: :Z tLlcJ 87

24 .i.xd7 ll ad8 28 -.c7

Black's prospects in the ending 29 c4!
a ris ing after 24 . . . -.xd4 25 -.xd4 With this the white queen finally
e d 26 .II xd4 would be grim. gains access to the long diagonal
25 de -. xeS thus compelling Black to shed a
26 : hel -. as pawn and enter into a hopeless
27 b3! cS end game. The technical part con­
Of course, 27 . . . -. xa2?? would cluded as follows : 29 . . . -.g3 30
Jose instantly to 28 -.d4, and 27 -. b2 -.c3 3 1 -.xc3 be 32 �c2
. . . .i.d5 28 Jl e7 would also be � h8 (pathetically underlining
dreadful. Black's plight) 33 : f1 .i.gS 34
28 �bl l:. xf8 Jl xf8 35 �xc3 li dS 36 .i.g4
A voiding the trap 2S -.d6 : e8 37 lld7 a5 3S lla7 : e5 39
.:. xd7! 29 -.e5 (29 -. xd7 c4 would
: xa5 Jl xg5 40 .i.d7 Jl g3 + 4 1
give Black dangerous chances) 29
�d2 ll g2 + 42 �e3 : g5 4 3 : as
. . . -.a3 + 30 �b I .i.xb3! 3 1 ab
.:. e5 + 44 �d2 g5 45 .i.c6 1 -0.
.:. df7 when Black is still fighting.
9 2 ttJf3 and Others
This chapter provides selected
recommendations against the less
important second moves at
White's disposal after the intro­
ductory 1 d4 f5. Only 2 l2Jf3 has
any real importance, although
some of the others can be dang­
erous if not met precisely.
A 2 l2Jf3
2 lLlf3 e6 (68)
68
w is also satisfactory) 5 c3 "ii b6 6
If Black intends playing a Class­
ical System, then there is much to
be said for preferring 2 . . . e6 over
2 . . . lt:lf6. By this means White's
most promising lines, based on
88
pinning the knight by .i.g5, are
ruled out.
H owever, if Black wishes to play
a Leningrad Variation then 2 . . .
lt:lf6 is necessary since 2 . . . g6 3
h4 is too risky (see p. 47). After 2
. . . lt:lf6 3 .i.g5 (other moves permit
Black to carry on in normal Lenin­
grad fashion) Black has the inter­
esting possibility 3 . . . lt:le4, after
which White has tried the follow­
ing :
(a) 4 .i.f4 c5 (naturally, 4 . . . e6
"ii b3 "ilf xb3 7 ab d6 8 e3 .i.e6 9
..tc4 .i.xc4 1 0 be lt:lc6 and Black
has no difficulty holding the bal­
ance; Radev- Knezevic, Leningrad
1 960.
(b) 4 h4 c6 5 c3 "ii b6 6 "ilfc2 d5
7 .i.f4 e6 8 lt:lbd2 .i.e? 9 lt:lxe4 fe
1 0 lt:le5 0-0 1 1 e3 c5 with an equal
position where White's advanced
h-pawn looks out of place;
Pietzsch- Larsen, Dortmund 1 96 1 .
(c) 4 .i.h4 g6 5 lt:l bd2 lt:l xd2 (5
. . . .i.g7 comes into consideration)

6 iWxd2 .tg7 7 c3 d6 8 e3 lLld7
a nd Black's game is entirely satis­
facto ry; Eising-Besser, Aibling
! 96 5.
3 .tf4
Nor do other moves bring
White any advantage :
(a) 3 .tg5 .te7 4 .txe7 'fi xe?
5 :Ll bd2 (or 5 e3 lLlf6 = , but not 5
. . . 'fl b4 + 6 lt:lc3 'fl x b2 7 lLl b5
Wb4 + 8 c3 'fla5 9 lLle5 with strong
threats as shown in Vellner­
Duckstein, Vienna 1 959; 5 lt:lc3
G f6 6 e3 d6 7 .tc4 c6 8 a4 a5 9
0-0 0-0 and Black has nothing to
fear, Haygarth - Bellin, British Ch.
1 978) 5 . . . lLlf6 6 e3 b6 7 .td3 (or
7 .te2 .tb7 8 0-0 0-0 9 c4 d6 10
b4 lt:lbd7 = Lasker-Barry, Cam­
bridge Springs 1 904) 7 . . . .t b7 8
c3 c5 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 .ll e 1 d5 1 1 lt:le5
lt'J bd7 12 lLl xd7 lLlxd7 1 3 f4 g5 and
Black's kingside initiative fully
compensates for his slightly
inferior bishop; Robatsch-Duck­
stein, Graz 1 96 1 .
(b) 3 c3 .te7!? (playing a waiting
game in order to prevent White's
QB attaining its most active devel­
opment on g5) 4 'fl c2 d5 5 ..tf4
12lf6 6 e3 0-0 7 :Lle5 lt:lbd7 8 lLld2
12l xe5 9 .txe5 .td6 10 lLlf3 .td7
I I ..td3 'fle8 with totally satisfac­
t ory prospects; Chen De- Bellin,
Sh anghai 1 98 1 .
(c) 3 d 5 ..td6!? (Black secured
ro ughly equal chances by 3 . . . ed
4 W xd5 d6 5 c4 lt:lf6 6 'fld l .te7
2 lOfJ and Others 89
7 lt:lc3 c6 8 g3 0-0 9 .tg2 lt:le4 in
Silva Rocha-Bolbochan, Rio de
Janeiro 1 938) 4 de de 5 lLl bd2 .tc5
6 b3 lLlf6 7 e3 0-0 8 .tc4 lt:lc6 9
0-0 �h8 1 0 .t b2 'fle7 ( 1 0 . . . a6!?)
1 1 'fle2 e5 1 2 .tb5 e4 1 3 .t xc6 be
1 4 lt:le5 .td6 and Black's kingside
threats put White on the defensive;
Karoly-Karlsson, Gausdal 1 987.
(d) 3 g4? fg 4 lLle5 'fl h4 5 e4
g3 + White's gambit has back­
fired; Bogolj ubow- Hasenfuss,
Kemeri 1 939.
3 lt:lf6
4 e3 b6
Of course, either 4 . . . .te7 or
4 . . . d5 may also be played.
5 lLlbd2 ..tb7
6 .td3
6 h3 was answered challengingly
by 6 . . . .td6!? in Baumbach­
Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969,
giving Black a fine game after 7
.txd6 cd 8 .td3 0-0 9 'fle2 lLle4.
6 .te7
7 h3
Black's last move contained the
positional threat of . . . lLlh5 gain­
ing the bishop pair.
7 0-0
8 c3
The double-step brings nothing,
e.g. 8 c4 lLle4 9 0-0 d6 1 0 'flc2
lLlxd2 I I lLl xd2 'fle8 with excellent
kingside play in the offing.
8 c5 (69)
White's bulwark centre is con­
tested by a pincer formed by
90 2 fi:JjJ and Others
69
w 2
Black's bishop pawns. Both armies
are harmoniously stationed and
the stage is set for a complex
strategical battle. Given the dearth
of practical experience with this
position, one can merely observe
that after the natural 9 0-0 Black
probably does best to immediately
occupy his advanced outpost by 9
. . . lLle4, after which t o -.c2 lLlxd2
I I lLlxd2 -.e8 would be a simpli­
fication enhancing the positive
aspects of Black's positiOn,
namely, the raking QB and king­
side attacking prospects. The
attempt to bring e4 under control
by 9 -.c2 runs into trouble
through a vis-a-vis with Black's
QR on the c-file : 9 . . . lLlc6 1 0
..th2 J:[ c8 I I a3 (parrying the
threat of . . . cd and . . . lLl b4) I I . . .
lLla5! (threatening to establish a
massive white-square bind by 1 2
. . . c4) 1 2 de (White must close the
c-file) 1 2 . . . be 1 3 c4 lLlc6 1 4
0-0 "it"e8 with a clear positional
superiority for Black; Alterman­
Bellin, Biel 1 987.
8 2 d5
d5 e5!?
3 de d5
This direct attempt to exploit
the d-pawn's advance should
suffice to equalize. 2 . . . lLlf6 is also
good, of course.
C Dr Krejcik's Gambit: 2 g4
2 g4 fg
3 ..tf4
Probably White's best try. The
alternatives:
(a) 3 h 3 g3! and by returning
the pawn Black deprives White of
the open h-file and leaves him with
a statically weak kingside. This
is why White first develops his
bishop.
(b) 3 e4 invites sharp counters
such as 3 . . . e5!? and 3 . . . d5!?
both of which could well be good
for Black. An example of the latter
went 4 e5 ..tf5 5 lLlc3 c5 6 ..t b5 +
lLlc6 7 ..txc6 + be 8 lLlge2 e6 +
(Callinan-Saidy, USA 1 968). In
addition, 3 . . . d6, as in the column,
is also eminently playable.
(c) 3 ..tg5 has little point and
could be met by 3 . . . lLlf6 4 ll:Jc3
d5 5 -.d3 c6! 6 0-0-0 g6 7 e4 lLl xe4!
8 lLlxe4 de 9 -. xe4 -.d5 + .
3 d6 �
4 e4 c6
5 -.d2
On 5 lLlc3, Black can support

the advance of his e-pawn by 5 . . .
-was.
5 lt:ld7
6 lt:lc3 e5 ( 70)
70
w
An obscure position, sorely in
need of practical trials. It is obvi­
ous that much remains to be expl­
ored in this crazy gambit.
D 2 h3
2 h3
This apparently timid move
conceals aggressive intentions. As
in the preceding variation, White
plans to gambit the g-pawn but
here the opening of the h-file will
be automatic since Black has no
opportunity to decline as in note
(a) above.
Given its successful introduc­
tion by no less a figure than
K orchnoi, it is surprising that this
quirky continuation has so far
sin gularly failed to attract any
fo llowers. Moreover, it is clear that
Black's best response has yet to
l liJj3 and Others 91
be worked out.
2 lt:lf6
As well as this natural move
Black could also consider 2 . . . d6
and 2 . . . d5.
3 g4
3 lt:lf3 would bring about H aik­
M. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985, (which
actually arose via the move order
2 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 3 h3) where Black failed
to find a good defence: 3 . . . d6 (3
. . . d5 4 c4 e6 5 lt:lc3 c6 comes into
consideration) 4 g4 g6 (after 4 . . .
fg 5 hg .txg4 White could play 6
lt:lg5 or 6 'W'd3 with compensation
for the pawn in an unclear pos­
ition) 5 lt:lc3 .tg7 6 'W'd3 lt:lc6? (6
. . . c6 is much better) 7 d5 lt:le5 8
lt:lxe5 de 9 gf and Black is in dire
straits due to 9 . . . gf failing to l 0
-. g3.
3 fg
Although acceptance of the
gambit is clearly the acid test,
there is much to be said for declin­
ing, e.g. 3 . . . d6 4 g5 lt:le4 5 ..tf4
c6! 6 f3 -.as + 7 c3 e5 with a wild
game which could easily go in
Black's favour.
4 hg lt:lxg4
5 e4 d6 ( 7 I )
White has obvious compens­
ation for the pawn in his control
of the centre, free development
and open h-file. The demands on
the defender are considerable and
allow no margin of error. The
·
inaugural game for this variation,
92 2 ttJj) and Others
Korchnoi- Kaenel, Biel 1 979, car­
ried on: 6 .ig5! g6 (6 . . . c6) 7 f3
�f6 8 �c3 c6 9 1t'd2 .ie6 1 0
0-0-0 �bd7 I I <i< b l .ig7 1 2 �h3
�h5 13 �f4 � xf4 14 1t' xf4 1t'b6
1 5 1t'd2 1t'c7 ( 1 5 . . . .if6 looks
more sensible) 16 1t'e3 �b6 1 7 d5
.i.f7 18 a4 a6 19 e5! .ixe5 20 f4
.ig7 2 1 de be 22 .ig2 �c8 23
�e4 <i<f8 24 .ih6 and Black's
defences are at breaking point.
One would imagine this to be
sufficient to persuade most players
that accepting the gambit is too
risky.
E 2 1t'd3
2 1t'd3
An outre move which flouts the
principles of good opening play
but is redeemed by its strategic
grounding. White simultaneously
threatens the f-pawn and prepares
e2-e4 thus compelling Black to
adopt a Stonewall formation.
Happily for the Dutch Defence
this is no bad thing, and the clumsy
placing of White's queen assures
Black of a very playable game.
2 d5
A classic illustration of what
Black must not allow is provided
by Fairhurst-Dreyer, Dublin
1 957, which went 2 . . . g6 3 e4 fe
4 1t' xe4 �f6 5 1t' h4 (the queen is
powerfully posted here) 5 . . . .ig7
6 �f3 b6 7 �c3 c5 8 .ih6 0-0 9
.ixg7 �xg7 1 0 0-0-0 and Black
will experience great difficulty in
subduing the active white pieces.
3 g3
Best. More rustic schemes of
development leave White pass­
ively placed, e.g. 3 .i.f4 e6? (3
. . . �f6 is correct) 4 �f3 (Black's
unsuspecting third move could
have been exploited by the consist­
ent 4 1t'g3! �a6 5 e3 c6 6 .ixa6!?
1t'a5 + 7 �c3 1t'xa6 8 .id6 -
or 8 .ie5 - with total positional
control) 4 . . . �f6 5 e3 .id6 6 .te2
(pusillanimous in the extreme; 6
c4 was necessary) 6 . . . 0-0 7 �e5
c5! 8 c3 �c6 9 �d2 1t'c7 10 �df3
�fd7! I I �xd7 .ixd7 1 2 .ixd6
1t'xd6 1 3 0-0 c4! 14 1t'd2 b5 1 5
�el g5! 1 6 f4 g4 and the black
infantry have enveloped the board;
Kmoch-Alekhine, Semmering
1 926.
3 �f6
4 .ig2 e6
5 c4 .i.d6
Simply 5 . . . .ie7 with a later

. . . tt:lc6 would also have its points.
6 .!Llf3 0-0
7 0-0 c6
8 bJ .td7!
9 .taJ .te8
10 .txd6 W' xd6
11 eJ .!Llbd7
12 .!Llc3 .th5 ( 72)
Black has a very comfortable
position; his putatively bad bishop
is more effective than its theoret­
ically good counterpart, and since
the centre is solid and White has
yet to generate play on the queen's
wing, he can think in terms of
developing his initiative on the
k ingside. The game Gavrikov­
Psakhis, Tallinn 1 983, continued
1 3 tt:ld2 tt:le4 1 4 f4 l:[ ac8 1 5 c5 W'e7
1 6 b4 g5 I 7 a4 gf 1 8 ef tt:ldf6
( Black's minor pieces are much the
m ore active) 1 9 l:[ ac l b6 (prophy­
lax is to nip White's play in the
b ud) 20 tt:lb3 l:[ b8 2 1 .!Lla2 .te8
22 : c2 h5 23 h4 (creates lasting
weaknesses, but otherwise Black
will constantly have . . . h5-h4
2 &uf3 and Ochers 93
available) 23 �h8 24 l:[ f3 1: g8
0 0 0
25 �h2 .td7 (the versatile bishop
reverts to a more familiar role
as mainstay of the queenside) 26
.th3 l:[ g6 27 �h l (unhappy with
the constant possibility of 0 0 0
.!Llg4 + hanging over him, the
white k ing withdraws only to run
foul of the advanced cavalry) 27
. . . : bg8 28 l:[ g2 l:[ xg3! 29 l:[ gxg3
1: xg3 30 t! xg3 .!Llf2 + 3 1 �g2
.!Llxd3 (a degrading demise for her
majesty who moved not once since
her optimistic emergence at the
beginning of the game) 32 l:[ xd 3
tt:le4 0- l o
F 2 e3
2 e3
Such self-limitation instantly
forfeits any prospects of obtaining
an opening advantage. Black may
respond more or less according to
taste; the line given is analogous
to that against 2 .!Llf3.
2 .!Llf6
3 .td3 e6
Tolush-Alexander, Hastings
1 953/4, went 3 d6 4 tt:le2?! (a
0 0 0
spiritless deployment which bears
no comparison with the natural 4
tt:lf3) 4 . . . e5 5 de ( Black also
had an easy time of it in Colle­
Nimzowitsch, Baden-Baden 1 925,
after 5 c4 c5 6 0-0 .!Llc6 7 ttJ bc3 g5
8 de de 9 tt:lg3 ·e4 I 0 .te2 .td6
I I tt:l b5 ..te5 12 W'xd8 + �xd8
94 2 li:Jj3 and Others
1 3 .l:l d l + �e7) 5 . . . de 6 0-0
..tc5 7 lLlg3 g6 8 ..tc4 "ile7 and
Black's chances are already super­
ior thanks to his space advantage
on the kingside and concomitant
attacking prospects.
4 lLld2
Of course, White would be
better advised to play a quick lLlf3
coupled with c2-c4.
4 c5
4 . . . d5 is also possible but the
text move is more elastic.
5 lLlgf3 lLlc6
6 0-0 b6
7 c3 ..ie7 ( 73 )
73
w the way and presents a target), the
Black may look to the future
with confidence. In Stahlberg-
Keres, M unich 01. 1 936, White
inconsistently continued with the
sharp 8 e4?! and paid the penalty
after 8 . . . cd 9 cd lLlb4 10 ..i b 1
..i a 6 1 1 .l:l e 1 lLl d 3 1 2 ..ixd3
..txd3 1 3 ef ..txf5 14 lLlc4 .l:l c8 1 5
lLlce5 0-0 when he has merely
managed to lose the bishop pair
and obtain an isolated d-pawn.
G The remainder
Of the 28 moves available to White
on his second move only one
(2 ..ih6??) is absolutely unplay­
able, although it would not be easy
to survive after 2 �d2? either.
Those moves apart (and perhaps
also 2 "ii d 2 which merely gets in
advantage of playing first allows
White the luxury of being able to
make a dubious move and get
away with it. When faced with
unorthodox opening play, Black
generally does best to stick as
much as possible to his preferred
development scheme in the know­
ledge that natural moves are usu­
ally the best.
10 The Classical Variation
This chapter covers those vari­
ations which arise when White
(temporarily at least) avoids the
kingside fianchetto and instead
follows up his opening move with
the direct, classical development
of 2 c4 and 3 tt:lc3. That this
approach is rarely seen in contem­
porary master praxis is testimony
enough to the adequacy of Black's
defences.
t d4 rs
2 c4 e6
Of course, Black may equally
well play 2 . . . tt:lf6. The text move­
order has been chosen in order to
take into account the possibility
t hat Black might transpose into
the Dutch via the sequence I d4
e6 2 c4 f5.
3 tt:lc3
The usual assortment of offbeat
alternatives do not cause Black
any trouble :
(a) 3 g4? fg 4 e4 (4 h3 g3! 5 fg
c 5 ! 6 d5 ..td6 + ) 4 . . . e5! 5 d5 (5
de tt:lc6 +) 5 . . . ..tb4 + (simply 5
95
. . . tt:lf6 is also good) 6 tt:lc3
.txc3 + 7 be d6 + ECO.
(b) 3 e4? fe 4 tt:lc3 tt:lf6 5 f3 .t b4!
(rapid development is even better
than allowing White the slight
compensation he would obtain in
return for the pawn) 6 .tg5 c5 7
de (7 d5 ed 8 cd 0-0 is also good
for Black) 7 . 0-0 8 .ri e l 'flc7 9
. .
.txf6 .rl xf6 1 0 fe 'fl f4 I I tt:lf3
'fl xe4 + and White is in dire
straits; Freiman-Model, USSR
Ch. 1 927.
(c) 3 e3 tt:lf6 4 ..td3 (after 4 f4
b6! 5 tt:lf3 .tb7 6 ..td3 g6! 7 0-0
.tg7 8 tt:lc3 0-0 9 'fle2 c5 Black
has fully equal prospects; analysis
by Pachman) 4 . . . d6 5 'flc2 (it is
inadvisable to ignore the threat­
ened advance : 5 tt:le2?! e5 6 tt:l bc3
tt:lc6 7 d5 tt:le7 8 e4 W t Dubinin­
Riumin, USSR Ch. 1 934/35) 5 . . .
g6 6 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 7 0-0 e5 8 de de 9
.te2 e4 I 0 .rl d I 'fle7 l l tt:ld4 tt:le5
with excellent prospects for Black;
Pachman. .
(d) 3 tt:lf3 is evidently replete
96 The Classical Variation
with transpositional possibilities;
here we shall merely note some of
the more individualistic pathways :
3 . . . lLl f6 4 e3 (4 d5 .tb4 + 5 .td2
-.e7 6 ll:lc3 c6! 7 de de 8 a3
.td6 9 e4 e5 is good for Black,
Vasyukhin-Kolobov, Moscow
Ch. 1 965) 4 . . . b6 5 .td3 J.. b 7 6
0-0 .te7 7 ll:l bd2 (or 7 -.e2 0-0 8
b3 -.e8 9 .tb2 d6 l O lLlc3 -.g6 1 1
lLle1 ll:lbd7 with complete equality;
Pfeiffer-Matulovic, Oberhausen
1 96 1 ) 7 . . . 0-0 8 -.c2 d5 (a note­
worthy method of parrying the e4
threat) 9 cd (on 9 lLle5 Black will
continue with 9 . . . c5 and . . . ll:lc6)
9 . . . lLlxd5 10 a3 c5 t t de .txc5
and Black's active centralized
pieces balance the chances; H.
Frydmann-Tartakower, Lodz
1 927.
3 lLlf6 ( 74 )
This i s the main tabiya of the
Classical Variation and just about
every possible fourth move has
been tried at one time or another.
Before proceeding with our two
model games we shall summarize
these alternatives as follows :
(a) 4 e4? fe transposes to note
'b' to White's third move.
(b) 4 -.c2 .te7 (a game from
the world championship match,
Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1 9 5 1 , dem­
onstrated that 4 . . . .t b4 is not
entirely satisfactory for Black after
5 e3 0-0 6 .td3 d6 7 lLle2 c5 8 a3
.t xc3 + 9 lLl xc3 ll:lc6 tO de de I I
b3 .td7 1 2 .t b2 ll:le5 and now
instead of preserving the bishop
with 1 3 .te2?! as was played in
the game, Botvinnik has pointed
out that 1 3 0-0-0! lLlxd3 + 14
.l::txd 3 leaves White the better
chances) 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 e4 (White
should be content with either 6 e3
or 6 g3) 6 . . . fe 7 lLl xe4 ll:lc6 8
lLlxf6 + (not 8 .td3 lLl b4 9 lLlxf6 +
�h8!) 8 . . . .txf6 9 .te3 e5 = l O
d e lLl xe5 1 1 lLlxe5 .t xe5 t 2 .td3
-. h4 t3 g3?! -.h5 1 4 o-o d6 t 5 f4
.tf6 t 6 .l::tfe 1 .th3 with some
advantage for Black; Pachman­
Larsen, Havana 01. 1 966.
(c) 4 .tg5 .te7 (4 . . . .tb4 also
comes into consideration) 5 e3
(White achieves nothing by 5
.txf6 .txf6 6 e4, e.g. 6 . . . fe 7
lLlxe4 0-0 8 lLlf3 d6 9 .td3 lLlc6 )
=
5 . . . 0-0 6 .td3 (long castling
produces double-edged positions,
e.g. 6 -.c2 -.e8 7 ll:lf3 d6 8 0-0-0
lLlc6 9 d5 lLlb4 t O W'b3 lLla6 1 1 de
lLlc5 1 2 -.c2 lLlxe6 t 3 .th4 lLlc5
t4 lLld4 W'h5 t 5 .tg3 a5; Polu-

gayevsky-Guimard, Buenos Aires
t 962) 6 . . . b6 7 lL!f3 (Harrwitz­
Morphy, Paris 1 858, went 7 lL!ge2
_i. b7 8 0-0 lL!h5! 9 .txe7 W xe7
1 0 lL!g3 lL! xg3 1 1 hg d6 = ) 7 . . .
.i.b7 8 0-0 We8! 9 We2 lL!e4
( Botvinnik has suggested 9 . . .
..Wh5 1 0 e4 lL!c6! producing a
rich and unclear position) 1 0
.i.xe7 lL!xc3 (this important zwis­
chenzug was made possible by
Black's eighth) 1 1 be W xe7 1 2 a4
.i.xf3!? (this bold and interesting
capture has been universally critic­
ized in favour of 1 2 . . . lL!c6 1 3
.l:tfb l :t abS with a consensus
evaluation of = ) 1 3 W xf3 lL!c6 1 4
: fb 1 : ae8?! (but this i s where I
would point the finger; by playing
14 . . . g6! instead Black could not
be prevented from achieving the
vital . . . e5 advance) 1 5 Wh3 :t f6
(and here Alek hine's recommen­
dation of 1 5 . . . g5 is more to the
point) 16 f4 ± Black's e-pawn has
been prevented from advancing
while the white counterpart will
shortly do so to considerable
effect; Capablanca-Tartakower,
New York, 1 924.
(d) 4 e3 b6! 5 .td3 (Najdorrs 5
�e2 .tb7 6 .tf3 is most simply
answered by 6 . . . .txf3 7 W xf3
l2lc6 with approximately even
cha nces, while Fraser-Steinitz,
Dundee 1 867, demonstrated that
unambitious opening play by
White enables Black to adopt a
The Classical Variation 97
typically flexible setup guarantee­
ing pleasant middlegame pro­
spects : 5 lL!f3 .tb7 6 .te2 We7 7
.td2 lL!c6 8 :t e l g6 9 Wc2 .tg7 = )
5 . . . .t b7 6 lL!f3 (6 f3 is an
important alternative, best met by
6 . . . g6, when Dus-Hotimirsky­
Maroczy, Carlsbad 1 907, saw
Black equalize after 7 lL!ge2 .tg7
8 Wc2?! lL!c6 9 a 3 e5; ECO gives
7 lL!h3 .tg7 8 0-0 0-0 9 e4 ;t , but 8
. . . c5!, exploiting the decentralized
white knight, is more logical) 6 . . .
.tb4! (Black increases his control
of e4) 7 .td2 (nor has Black any
problems after 7 0-0 .txc3 8 be 0-
0 9 a4 lL!c6 10 lL!d2 d6; Rubinstein­
Maroczy, Teplitz-Schonau 1 922)
7 . . . 0-0 8 Wc2 (Black has an
extremely comfortable game after
8 0-0 d6 9 a3 .txc3 1 0 .txc3
lL!e4) 8 . . . a5 9 a3 .txc3 10 .txc3
lL!e4 1 1 0-0-0 d5 (utilizing the fact
that White dare not countenance
a further weakening of the king's
pawn cover by b2-b3 to obtain a
second central light square base
for his pieces) 1 2 lL!e5 lL!d7 1 3
lL!xd7 W xd7 1 4 .te l de 1 5 .txc4
.td5 with fine chances for Black;
Flohr- Bondarevsky, USSR Ch.
1 95 1 .
(e) 4 lL!f3 b6 5 e3 .t b7 6 .td3
..t b4 transposes to note (d).
(f) 4 f3 .t b4 5 .td2 0-0 (not 5
. . . c5 6 a3) 6 a3 .te7 7 e3 c5 8
.td3 lL!c6 9 lL!ge2 d6 1 0 Wc2 .td7
1 1 0-0-0 a6 12 g4 b5, with a typical
98 The Classical Variation

opposite wing castling maelstrom 4 ..te7

of a middlegame to come, was 5 e3 0-0
the course of Volovich-A. Zaitsev, 6 ..td3 d5
match, Moscow 1 962. Clearly 7 tt:lf3 c6
there remains much to be discov­ Sidestepping an instructive
ered here. error easily made by inexperienced
It should be noted that Black Stonewallers : 7 . . tt:le4? 8 cd ed 9
.

may, of course, transpose to a W'b3 and the double attack on d5

Stonewall in many of these and e4 makes the proud black
variations should he so prefer. knight untenable.
8 0-0 tt:le4
Maroczy-Tartakower 9 W'c2
Teplitz-Schonau 1 922 White unsuspectingly continues
1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 tt:lc3 tt:lf6 with natural-looking routine
moves which surprisingly rapidly
4 a3 ( 75 )
lead him into a passive and vulner­
75
able position. 9 tt:le5 followed by
B I 0 f4 would stabilize White's
kingside and produce an equal
position.
9 ..td6
10 b3 tt:ld7
11 ..tb2 : f6 ( 76 )

76
w

This modest looking move is

logical enough given that the
major theme of the Dutch is con­
trol of e4 and that the move . . .
..tb4 often plays a vital role in
Black's efforts toward this end.
By switching to the Stonewall,
however, Black can simul­ Tally-ho! Black has sighted his
taneously maintain control of e4 quarry and is after it without
and highlight the lack of bite further ado. It was this game which
behind the a-pawn advance. established the rook manoeuvre
 The Classical Variation 99

as the most effective method of overriding problem : whilst

pursuing the attack in such opti­
mum conditions. An alternative
idea, noted by Tartakower, would
be . . . li f6 followed by . . . g7-g5-
g4.
12 .ll fel
Preparing to shore up the
defences.
12 .ll h6
Threatening the bishop sacrifice
on h2 followed by . . . li h4.
13 g3 li f6
14 ..UI
White would dearly like to
reposition his knight at f1 by 14
�d2, but this would allow the
devastating sacrifice 14 . . . �xf2!
15 ..t>xf2 .ll xh2 + 16 ..t>g 1 (or 1 6
..t> f3 e5) 1 6 . . . ..txg3 and 1 7 . . .
li h4.
14 g5
15 .ll ad1
At first sight it seems incredible
that there can be anything seri­
ously wrong with White's position
given that all of his pieces are
developed and occupy sensible
looking squares while most of
Black's queenside is still asleep.
Two key factors supply the
answer : king safety and purpose.
That the white monarch is in grave
danger is clear enough, but even
that might not be decisive if only
his forces were actually doing
something - which they mani­
White's army is optically plaus­
ible, functionally it is impotent.
15 g4
16 �xe4
Forced, since once again 1 6 �d2
would allow the decisive knight
offer 1 6 . . . �xf2 1 7 ..t>xf2 .1:1. xh2 +
1 8 .tg2 ..txg3 + !
16 fe
17 �d2 ( 7 7 )
17 .ll xh2!!
A glorious conception, which
Reti, writing in 1 933, described as
'. . . a type of combination without
precedent . in the literature of
chess'. The astonishing and distin­
guishing feature is that Black does
not follow up his heavy sacrifice
with a forcing sequence, but
calmly completes his development,
thus leaving his opponent all the
time and choice in the world with
which to organize his defences!
18 ..t>xh2 li xf2 +
19 ..t> h 1 !
0

festly are not. And therein lies the The best defence. After the
100 The Classical Variation
obvious 1 9 .tg2, Black plays
neither 19 . . . 'it' xg3 + nor 1 9 . . .
.txg3 + 20 �h i 'it' f6! 2 1 J:l. e2
.tf2! 22 J:l. xf2 'it' xf2 etc., but rather
brings up extra firepower by 1 9 . . .
lt:lf6! after which White is helpless,
e.g. 20 'it'c3 'it' xg3 + 2 1 �g l
'it'h2 + 22 �fl lt:lh5 23 lt:lxe4
(otherwise there follows 23 . . .
.td7 and . . . J:l.f8 + ) 23 . . . de 24
d5 e5 25 de lt:lg3 + 26 �f2 .te6
and wins (analysis by Tartakower).
19 lt:lf6!
Naturally, Black does not relin­
quish the pin on the knight which
is a key factor in the successful
prosecution of his attack; after 1 9
. . . 'it' xg3 2 0 lt:l b l the white queen
would be able to transfer to the
kingside immediately.
20 J:l. e2 'it' xg3
21 lt:lb1 lt:lh5
22 'it'd2 .td7!
With remarkable sangfroid
Black goes about completing his
development.
23 J:l. f2
Against the natural 23 'it' e l Tar­
takower gives 23 . . . 'it'f3 + 24 J:l. g2
'it'h3 + 25 �g I J:l. f8 26 lt:ld2 .tg3
27 J:l. xg3 'it' xg3 + 28 'it'xg3 lt:lxg3
29 .tc3 lt:lf5 30 J:l. e l h5, and the
pawn mass advances threaten­
ingly.
23 'it'h4 +
24 �g1 .tg3
The Soviet Grandmaster Rago­
zin suggested 24 . . . g3 as possibly
an even stronger continuation of
the attack, e.g. 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 and
Black threatens either 26 . . . J:l. f6
and . . . J:l. h6 or 26 . . . J:l. f3 followed
by . . . lt:lf6 and . . . lt:lg4.
25 .tc3
White is obliged to give back
some material in an effort to break
the attack, for, as Tartakower
pointed out, after 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 26
'it'e2 J:l. f3 27 .tc3 .td6 28 .t e l
g3 2 9 lt:l d 2 'it'g4, an incredible
position arises where White,
despite his great material superior­
ity, is powerless to prevent Black
carrying out the decisive knight
regrouping . . . lt:lh5-g7-f5.
It would, however, have been
better to give back the exchange
by 25 J:l. h2 .txh2 + 26 'it'xh2 'it'g5
27 .te l g3 28 'it' h l ! when the final
outcome would remain a moot
point.
25 .txf2 +
26 'it'xf2 g3
27 'it'g2 J:l. f8
Black finally completes his
development and at the same time
threatens 28 . . . J:l. f2 29 'it'h l J:l. h2
trapping the queen.
28 .tel ( 78 )
28 J:l. xfl + !
Tartakower crowns his attack
with another beautiful sacrifice!
29 �xfl e5
30 �g1 .tg4
31 .txg3
On 3 1 J:l. d2, Black liquidates
 The Classical Variation 101

78 79
8 8

into an easily won ending: 3 1 . . . Classical Variation into the

ed 32 ed ..tf3 3 3 .txg3 li:Jxg3 34 modern approach, inviting vari­
"iW h2 "ihh2 + 35 : xh2 li:Je2 + and ous transpositions. Although play­
36 . . . li:J xd4. able, it is hard to commend this
31 li:J xg3 move order by White as it permits
32 .C. e 1 li:JfS Black to enter one of the most
33 "it" f2 WgS reliable versions of the Dutch
34 de Indian.
After taking such a buffeting i t is 4 ..tb4
hardly surprising that Maroczy's Of course, Black may also
resistance finally snaps. Not that choose 4 . . . i.e7, or 4 . . . d5.
the better 34 �fl would have 5 .id2
altered the result; Tartakower It is natural to prevent the
gives 34 . . . Wh5 35 "it"gl ! W h4 36 doubled pawns but not obligatory;
li:Jc3 li:Jg3 + 37 �g2! li:Jh 1 ! 38 for 5 ..tg2 see Chapter 1 1 , p. 1 06.
�fl "iW f6 + with mate in two. s 0-0
34 i.£3 +
.. The normal continuation and
35 �n lLlg3 + probably best, although it is worth
0-1 noting the course of the game
One of the greatest attacking Vark-Keres, Parnu 1 9 7 1 , where
games of all time! Black successfully provoked novel
strategical complications: 5 . . .
K. Grigorian-Balashov
li:Jc6 6 a3 ..te7 (6 . . . .txc3 7
USSR Ch. 1 974
.t xc3 li:Je4 leads to equality) 7
I d4 fS 2 c4 e6 3 li:Jc3 li:Jf6
d5!? li:Je5 8 Wb3 ..tc5 9 .ig2 We7
4 g3 ( 79 ) lO li:Jh3 i. b6 1 1 li:Ja4 li:Je4 1 2
The fianchetto updates the .tb4 d6 1 3 li:Jxb6 ab 1 4 li:Jf4 0-0
1 01 The Classical Variation
and Black had no reason to be
dissatisfied with his prospects.
6 .1g2 d6
7 tt:lf'3 .1xc3
8 .1xc3 tt:le4
Black has implemented the
standard procedure in such pos­
itions : remove White's protection
of e4 by the exchange . . . .1xc3
and then occupy the outpost with
the knight.
9 ..-c2
This time White must attend to
the threatened capture since hand
in hand with the appearance of
doubled pawns would go the dis­
appearance of the compensatory
bishop pair.
9 tt:ld7
The correct way to develop the
queen's knight; from d7 the knight
can either support the advance . . .
e6-e5 or reinforce the outpost by
. . . tt:ld7-f6. Note that here 9 . . .
tt:lc6 would be mistaken as it
would allow White to open up the
centre, downgrade Black's pawn
structure and disrupt the flow of
his development after I 0 d5! The
consequences of this response
must always be weighed very care­
fully whenever Black is contem­
plating playing . . . tt:lc6.
10 0-0 tt:ldf6 ( 80)
10 . . . -.e7 is also eminently
playable after which a game
Flohr-- Botvinnik, match 1 933,
meandered to a correct draw via
80
w
I I lHd 1 tt:lxc3 (now that White's
KR has been developed the retreat
.te l preserving the two bishops
is a real threat) 1 2 -.xc3 tt:lf6 1 3
tt:le l e5 1 4 de de 1 5 :d2 e4! 1 6
tt:lc2 .1e6 1 7 : ad I : adS 1 8 tt:le3
: xd2 19 : xd2 g6 20 .1ft : d8 2 1
: xd8 -.xd8 2 2 tt:lc2 1-! .
11 .tel
An ambitious and controversial
idea : can the bishops really be
worth the disruption visited on the
white position by this retrograde
manoeuvre? The answer to that is
evidently closely bound up with
matters of taste and personal pre­
ference, but I for one would be
very happy as Black to see such a
move appear on the board.
11 .1d7
In contrast to White's sophistic­
ation Black continues his develop­
ment with rustic simplicity.
12 :dt
I t i s interesting to note that after
this ECO evaluates the position as
;t , an assessment with which it is
 The Classical Variation 1 03

not at all easy to agree. The rook 16 ..tf2 b6

move is explained through dissat­ 17 b3 (81 )
isfaction with the immediate 1 2
81
ad2 ..tc6 and therefore White
B
prepares to advance his d-pawn.
12 -.e8
The queen is much more effec­
tive here than on e7; now she is
poised for activity on the king's
flank whilst also glancing prophyl­
actically to the queenside ( 1 3 b4??
..ta4).
13 d5 e5
Invariably the right response in 17 f4!
such situations : the position is Having secured his position on
kept closed thus mimmizmg the queenside Black now signals
White's bishop pair, the knight on the attack on the opposite flank.
f3 is denied access to d4, and Black 18 e4
creates a healthy, mobile pawn This advance is dictated by the
duo on f5 and e5. necessity of preventing Black from
14 ttJd2 ttJc5 decisively deflecting the f-pawn
It stands to reason that Black from guarding g4, e.g. 1 8 e3 fg 1 9
will not readily acquiesce in h g e4 20 ttJxe4 ttJcxe4 2 1 fe -.h5
exchanges which would only serve and 22 . . . ttJg4.
to relieve the congestion in White's 18 -.g6
camp. Immediately utilising the cover
15 0?! inadvertently provided by the
While this gives luft to the con­ e-pawn.
fined cleric and prepares the 19 1He 1
additional central pawn advance In order t o provide further
e2-e4, it also weakens the king's protection for g3.
defences. The most logical conti­ 19 rg
nuation is 1 5 b4 ..ta4 16 ttJ b3, 20 hg h5!
although after 16 . . . ttJxb3 1 7 A multi-purpose move which
a b ..td7 White's impaired pawn fixes White's pawns, prepares a
structure is a considerable hindr­ breakthrough by . . . h4, and frees
ance to his normal queenside play. h7 so that the KN can be optimally
15 a5 re-positioned. In the meantime
/ 04 The Classical Variation

White's passive forces can do no troubles.

more than await the storm. 28 .:t af8
21 lLl rt lLlh7 29 i.h1 "it'g5 ( 82)
22 i.e3 lLlg5
82
23 i. xg5
w
An inglorious end for the prelate
of once grand pretensions.
23 "it'xg5
24 Wd2 Wf6
25 lLle3
Since Black can always prepare
. . . h4 at his leisure White does not
bother to postpone matters by 25
"iff2.
25 h4 A more perfect outcome for
26 g4 Black's strategy is hard to imagine!
The position must be kept The outcome is no longer in doubt,
closed at all costs. and it is something of a blessing
26 g6 in disguise that White makes a
27 .:t b1 blunder in time-trouble which puts
A forlorn gesture at queenside a mercifully swift end to the
expansion. proceedings.
27 .:t f7 30 lLld1?? lLlxe4!
28 .:t e2 31 fe "it'xg4 +
28 a3 a4 29 b4 lLl b3 and 30 . . . 32 .:t g2 .:t rt +
lLld4 would only add to White's 33 �h2 Wh3 mate
 \

11 The Dutch Indian

After the introductory This continuation often pro­

J d4 fS duces positions which have much
2 c4 e6 in common with the Nimzo­
White may choose to revert lndian and Queen's Indian -
to the fianchetto variations by hence the designation Dutch
playing Indian. After the check Black must
3 g3 tt:lf6 choose between two radically
4 ..tg2 different courses: either to seek
. . . in which case Black may either enhanced prospects of equaliz­
lead into the major variations with ation through simplification (the
4 . d5 or 4 . ..te7 (for which
. . . .
early exchange of a pair of minor
see Chapters 1 2- 1 6), or take pieces), or to interpret the check
advantage of the weakness created as essentially a spoiler operation
on the a5-e 1 diagonal by White's designed to prevent the best
second move and deliver check deployment of White's pieces,
with the bishop : albeit at the cost of a tempo. Both
4 ..tb4 + r 83 ) approaches appear to be viable,
but the latter has come increas­
IU
ingly into favour in recent years.
w
Before going on to consider
White's two main replies, 5 tt:ld2
and 5 ..td2, we note how Black
should meet 5 tt:lc3. This move
allows Black to bring about a
kind of Samisch Variation of the
Nimzo-Indian . defence where
White has tamely tucked away his
1 05
106 The Dutch Indian
KB on g2 instead of developing it
aggressively on d3 as is normally
the case. Thus the logical response
is 5 . . . ..txc3 + 6 be 0-0 7 lt:lf3 d6
S 0-0 lt:lc6 (probably the surest
route to equality; Meulders­
Short, Brussels 1 9S7, went S . . .
'fle7 9 ..ta3 ltJ bd 7 1 0 lt:ld2! c5 1 1
e4 fe 1 2 lt:l xe4 lt:lxe4 1 3 ..txe4 and
now the precise 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 would
leave White with only slightly the
better of it) 9 'll c2 (or 9 ..ta3 .l:l. eS
1 0 'flc2 e5 1 1 de de 1 2 .l:l. fd l ..td7
1 3 lt:l h4 'lieS with level chances;
de Winter-Spassky, Lugano 01.
1 96S) 9 . . . e5 I 0 de lt:lxe5 I I lt:lxe5
de 12 ..ta3 .l:l.f7 13 .l:l. ad 1 'lieS =
White's active pieces and bishop
pair offset the weak pawns;
Colon-Spassky, San J uan 1 969.
Botvinnik-Larsen
Leiden 1 970
1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lt:lf6 4 ..tg2
..t b4 +
lt:ld2 ( 84 )
5
114
B a useful move), with the intention
By parrying the check m this
fashion White hopes either to
obtain the bishop pair 'for free'
(i.e. without suffering doubled
pawns as in 5 lt:lc3), or to oblige
Black to lose time withdrawing
the bishop to the safety of its own
lines. However, Black can utilize
the indirect disadvantage of the
knight's placement at d2 - the
diminished control of d5 as a result
of the queen being blocked - to
develop the QB actively in fianch­
etto without having to face a
timely d4-d5. These factors tend
to balance out, producing rich
middlegames of considerable stra­
tegic complexity.
5 0-0
This natural move has been
accepted as the norm for many
years, but nevertheless may well
not be the most precise. The
reason for this assertion is to be
found in the note to White's ninth
move where a recent game has
cast serious doubt on the validity
of Black's setup. It may well be
that by playing 5 . . . a5!? (always
of fianchettoing before castling,
Black can circumvent the prob­
lems posed by this latest White
improvement. For example, after
6 lt:lf3 b6 7 lt:le5 .l:l. a7 S 0-0, in
addition to S . . . ..tb7 Black may
also play S . . . ..txd2!? 9 'fl xd2
(a standard recapture, hoping to
develop the bishop at b2 on

the long diagonal; 9 ..txd2 is
no better) 9 . . . d6!? with
many promising possibilities. This
certainly deserves testing in
p ractice.
6 l!Jf3
Expending a tempo on 6 a3
all ows Black instant equality after
6 . . . ..txd2 + 7 ..txd2 d6 8 l!Jf3
fke7 9 ..tc3 l!Je4. Nor does 6 l!Jh3
seem appropriate, e.g. 6 . . . d6 7
0-0 e5 8 Wb3 ..txd2 9 ..txd2 l!Jc6
1 0 de de I I ..tb4 l!Jxb4 1 2 W'xb4
tt:le4! 1 3 ll ad l fkf6 1 4 f4 ..te6! +
thanks to his better coordinated
forces; Opocensky-Keres, Prague
1 937.
6 aS
It is instructive to note the way
straightforward play backfires on
Black after 6 . . . d6 7 0-0 ..t xd2 8
.- xd2! W"e7 9 b4 e5 10 de de I I
.t b2 e4 1 2 l!Jd4 (White's control
of the dark squares is evident) 1 2
. . . l!Ja6 1 3 b5 l!Jc5 1 4 ..ta3 and
Black is suffering; Furman-Anto­
shin, Voroshilograd 1 955.
By contrast, the immediate 6 . . .
b6 is a very playable alternative :
(a) 7 0-0 ..tb7 8 a3 (8 W'c2 a5 9
tt:le I ..txg2 I 0 l!Jxg2 l!Jc6 I I l!Jf3
.�e7 1 2 a3 W"e8 1 3 d5 l!Jd8 1 4
n d I a4 1 5 ..te3 l!Je4 produced an
unclear and difficult position for l
both sides in Bertok- Larsen, Vin­
k ovci 1 970) 8 0 0 • ..txd2 9 W'xd2
tt:lc6 10 b4 l!Je7 I I ..tb2 (in
Popov- Makarychev, Amsterdam
The Dutch lndian 107
1 1 1974, Black cleverly exploited
the light square weaknesses in his
opponent's camp which arose via
I I a4 a6 1 2 l!Je I ..txg2 13 l!J xg2
b5! 14 cb ab 1 5 a5 l!:led5 16 f3
l!:lb6! + ) I I
0 0 . W'e8 1 2 a4 W"h5 1 3
a5 ..te4 and with a firm grip
on e4 Black has no problems;
Sokolov-Cvetkovic, Yugoslav
Ch. 1 962.
(b) 7 l!:le5!? (clearly more chal­
lenging than castling) 7 . . . c6 8
0-0 ..tb7 9 l!:lb3 ..te7 1 0 a4 l!Ja6
I I a5 W"c7 1 2 ..t g5 d6 1 3 l!Jd3 c5
and Black's elastic disposition of
his forces should prevent White's
slight spatial superiority and
initiative from growing; Stein­
Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 .
The text move not only restrains
queenside expansion by White but
also provides a flight-square for
the rook so that after a subsequent
. . . b6, l!Je5 sequence Black will
not be obliged to play . . . c7-c6 as
in the example above.
7 0-0 b6
8 tOeS ll a7 ( 85 )
The point!
9 l!Jd3
Perhaps it is not too surprising
that White has recently discovered
a big improvement on this volun­
tary retreat, but it is surprising
that the improvement is yet
another voluntary retreat! The
astonishing 9 lOb I ! provides a
prime example of reculer pour
J OB The Dutch Indian
mieux sauter : redeploying the
knight to c3 transforms White's
strategy at a stroke as it instantly
puts the crucial advance d4-d5
back on the agenda. Not only
that, but from c3 the k night also
observes b5 thus giving Black
some cause for concern over his
eccentric rook. The following con­
vincing example strongly suggests
that a satisfactory answer to this
imaginative innovation by the
Soviet player Shabalov is likely
only to be found by reconsidering
the introductory sequence (see
note to Black's fifth). After 9 lLlb I !,
Gelfand - K naak, Halle 1 987, went
9 0 0 . i.e7 (with nothing left to
capture, the bishop is menaced by
to c5 and I I a3) 1 0 li:lc3 i. b7 I I
d5 W' c8 (Black's plight is made
manifest by the way the natural
1 1 . . . d6 1 2 li:lf3 e5 falls foul of 1 3
li:lg5 ic8 1 4 li:le6 i.xe6 1 5 de c6
1 6 e4 stirring up play in the centre
which he is ill prepared to meet)
1 2 e4 (those who play against the
Dutch dream of such positions!)
12 0 0 •fe 1 3 lLlxe4 li:la6 14 ie3!
W'e8 ( 1 4 0 0 . li:lc5 1 5 lLlxc5 i.xc5
16 ixc5 be 1 7 li:ld3 ± ) 1 5 d 6!
(even better than the 1 5 lLlc3 ed
1 6 lLlxd5 i.xd5 1 7 i. xd5 + �h8
1 8 lt e 1 i. b4 1 9 i.d2 ± of Shab­
alov-Naumkin, Norilsk 1 987) 1 5
0 0 . li:lxe4 ( 1 5 cd 1 6 li:lxd6 i.xd6
0 0 .
1 7 W' xd6 i.xg2 18 �xg2 ± )
1 6 de W'xe7 1 7 W'xd7 W'f6 1 8
li:lc6 li:lec5 1 9 W'd2 i.xc6 20 ixc6
e5 21 i.g2 and with two bishops
on an open board plus the
better pawn structure, not to
mention Black's queenside exiles,
White's positional superiority is
massive.
After that it is a relief to note 9
li:ldf3 which brought White no
advantage in J. Watson-Gins­
burg, US Ch. 1 982 : 9 0 0 . ie7
(again, there is a threat to trap the
bishop by to c5) to lLld3 (a game
Portisch-K ristiansen, Luzern 01.
1 982, went 10 b3 li:le4 1 1 a3 ib7
1 2 i b2 i.f6 1 3 li:ld3 and no wJ
with 1 3 . . . c5 Black could have
transposed to the column game)
10 . . . ib7 1 1 lLlf4 lLle4 12 h4 W'e8
1 3 ie3 if6 14 .:. c t li:lc6 with
balanced chances.
9 ib7
This position is evaluated as
equal by Larsen.
10 lLlf3
1 0 li:lxb4 ixg2 I I �xg2 ab
would give Black excellent
 The Dutch Indian 1 09

counterplay along the a-file and and the useful c5 square securely
l on g diagonal especially after the in Black's hands.
arrival of the queen on a8. 18 tic7
tO J.. e7 19 tic2 J.. c6
tt b3 ll:le4 20 f3?!
12 J.. b2 J.. f6 The beginning of a faulty plan
13 a3 c5! which exacerbates White's prob­
There is no point in playing for lems; simply 20 l:l ad l was in order.
. . . e5 with so many white pieces 20 ll:lc5
t rained on it, so Black contests the 21 lLlf4?! ..tg5
centre with the aid of his c-pawn. 22 ll:le2? ..te3 +
14 e3 ll:lc6 23 �ht f4! (87)
15 lLlfe5 ( 86 )
87
w

This advance nearly always

15 cd! spells trouble for White. No mat­
Black instigates a very ter how he reacts his king is bound
important and instructive alter­ to become less secure.
ation of pawn structure which 24 ll:ld4
brings his pieces to life. This is criticized by Larsen,
16 ed lLlxe5 albeit without attempting to
17 de J..e7 suggest an improvement. It takes
18 a4 a skilful trading of advantages to
White is concerned that his c­ show the deficiency of the text
p awn migh t be undermined at move.
so me future time by . . . a5-a4, but 24 fg
the cure is more debilitating than 25 lLlxc6
the disease as it leaves his queen­ Not 25 hg? ti xe5! and the threat
side pawns permanently crippled of 26 . . . tih5 + prevents White
1 10 The Dutch Indian

doing damage with a discovered l:t e3 37 l:t af2 �h8 (37 . . . h6!) 3 8
attack by the knight. 1kg2? (the last chance lay in 38
25 de l:t f3! l:t e2 39 l:t 3f2 l:t e4 40 l:t d2)
26 hg 1kf7 38 . . . h6 39 .tg4 1k xa4 40 l:t e2
27 .th3 e5 4 1 l:t a2 1kc4 42 l:t c2 1k b4 43
The queen check must be pre­ .tf5 ef 44 gf l:t e l 45 l:t e2 l:t xfl +
vented. 46 1k xfl l:t f8 47 .te4 1kd4 48 �g2
27 l:t d8! 1if6 49 f5 1kg5 + 50 � h l 1k h4 +
This clever switch exploits the 5 1 �g2 l:t d8 52 .tc2 l:t d4 0- l .
bishop's desertion of the f-pawn
and enables Black to dominate the M. Gurevich-Dolmatov
d-file since the attempt to contest USSR Ch. 1 987
it by 28 l:t ad l l:t xd l 29 1k xd l 1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 ll'lf6 4 .tg2
would be unacceptable after 29 . . . .tb4 +
l:t d7.
5 .td2 (88)
28 .tc3 l:t ad7
An extremely satisfying conclu­ 88
sion to the manoeuvre begun 8
twenty moves ago with 8 . . . l:t a7!
29 l:t a2
There is nothing active for
White to undertake.
29 l:t d3
Larsen points out that 29
l:t d l 30 1ke2 l:t l d 3 3 1 l:t c2 ll'lxb3
also came into consideration.
30 b4 ab
31 .txb4 1kh5 This natural move has long been
32 1kh2 1kxe5 White's most popular choice.
With the fall of this pawn and Theoretically speaking, the
the continuing central dominance exchange of dark squared bishops
of the black pieces White's fate is should work to White's advantage
sealed. The game concluded as unless Black can rapidly achieve
follows : 33 f4 1ke4 + 34 1kg2 1k xc4 the vital . . . e6-e5 advance.
35 .txc5 .txc5 36 1k xc6 (White 5 .te7
is fighting hard, his temporary The idea behind this paradox­
sacrifices having prod uced ical retreat is that the incon­
opposite coloured bishops) 36 . . . venience caused White by luring

the bishop to d2 will adequately
off-set the tempo loss incurred. At
the same time, Black ensures that
a more complicated struggle will
ensue than would be the case after
the disappearance of the bishops.
If Black prefers the simple life,
then 5 . . . 'ike7 is a reliable alterna­
tive which promises good chances
of equality as the following vari­
ations show :
(a) 6 l2lh3 0-0 7 0-0 ..txd2
followed by . . . d6 with full equal­
ity.
(b) 6 ..tc3 0-0 7 a3 ..t xc3 + 8
8xc3 d6 again with an easy game
for Black.
(c) 6 l2lc3 0-0 7 l2lf3 d6 8 0-0
,hc3 9 ..t xc3 l2le4 1 0 'ii c 2 l2ld7 =
brings about Flohr- Botvinnik,
match 1 933, given in Chapter 1 0,
p. I 03, note to Black's tenth.
(d) 6 'ii b3 ..txd2 + 7 l2l xd2
0-0 8 l2lgf3 d6 9 0-0 e5 I 0 c5 +
�h8 I I cd cd 1 2 de (after 1 2 e4
fe 1 3 de de 1 4 l2lg5 l2lc6 1 5 l2lgxe4
8d4 Black's pieces are very active;
Peterson-Uusi, Parnu 1 960; Heb­
ert has suggested that 1 2 'ii a3
gives White the advantage, but
t his seems unlikely, e.g. 12 . . . e4
1 3 l2le5 'ii d 8!? 1 4 l2lec4 l2lc6 and
Black should be OK) 1 2 . . . de 1 3
tLlc4 ( Heberg-Spraggett, Toronto
Open 1 985, went 1 3 e4?! l2lxe4 1 4
tUxe4 fe 1 5 l2l d 2 l2lc6 1 6 ..txe4
� h3 :t ) 1 3 . . . l2lc6 14 'ii c 3 e4 1 5
tUfe5 l2lxe5 1 6 'ikxe5 'ikxe5 1 7 l2lxe5
The Dutch Indian Ill
..te6 with Black for choice; White­
ley-Bellin, England 1 976.
(e) 6 l2lf3 ..t xd2 + ! 7 W xd2 d6
8 l2lc3 e5 9 dxe5 (9 0-0 e4 ) 9 =
. . . dxe5 1 0 e4 (Gulko-Speelman,
Amsterdam 1 989) and now Black's
most natural move is I 0 . . . l2lc6
( 10 . . . fxe4 I I l2lg5 l2lc6 is also
possible) when Black's free devel­
opment offsets the vulnerability of
his e-pawn.
6 l2lc3
White can also fight for an
advantage with other moves :
(a) 6 ..tc3?! 0-0 7 l2ld2 d5! (the
Stonewall is the best formation for
exploiting White's substitution of
bishop for knight on c3) 8 l2lh3 c6
9 0-0 b5 10 b3 a5 1 1 'ii c 2 a4
and Black's position is already
preferable; Sliwa-Sebestyen, Sopot
1 95 1 .
(b) 6 l2lf3 0-0 (6 . . . d6 is more
precise, avoiding the possibility of
7 d5!) 7 0-0 d6 8 l2lc3 We8 9 Wc2
(it is interesting to note that with
the bishop on d2 White is unable
to adopt the normal procedure
against the Ilyin-Zhenevsky since
now after 9 l:t e l Wg6 10 e4 fe 1 1
l2lxe4 l2l xe4 1 2 l:t xe4 Wxe4 1 3 l2lh4
the d-pawn would be en prise) 9
. . . Wh5 10 e4 e5 I I de de 1 2 l2ld5
( 1 2 l2l xe5? fe is good for Black) 1 2
. . . l2lxd5 1 3 ed (the inferior 1 3 cd
gives Black active play after 1 3 . . .
..td6 1 4 l:t fe l l2la6 1 5 ef ..txf5 1 6
'ikc3 ..th3!; Shelotshilin-,Shesto-
1 12 The Dutch Indian
porov, corr. 1 955) l 3 . . . ..tf6 1 4
..tc3 ll:Jd7 and W hite has a mar­
ginal positional edge; Szabo­
Bronstein, Budapest 1 950.
(c) 6 Wb3 c6 (6 . . . 0-0 comes
strongly into consideration as 7
ll:Jc3 would transpose to the col­
umn game, whilst 7 ..txb7 ..txb7
8 W xb7 ll:Jc6 9 ..tc3 l:l. b8 10 W a6
ll:Je4 clearly offers compensation
for the pawn) 7 d5 cd!? 8 cd e5
(both 8 . . . ed? 9 ll:Jc3 and 8 . . .
ll:Jxd5 9 ..t xd5 ed l O ll:Jc3 leave
White clearly better) 9 ll:Jc3 d6 1 0
ll:Jf3 ll:Jbd7 (of course not l O . . .
0-0? 1 1 ll:Jxe5!) 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 ll:Jg5
ll:Jc5 1 3 Wc4 h6 14 b4 ( 1 4 ll:Je6
ll:Jxe6 1 5 de e4 is in Black's favour)
14 . . . ll:Jcd7! 1 5 ll:Je6 ll:Jb6 16 Wb3
..txe6 1 7 de d5 with complicated
play perhaps somewhat favouring
White; Sosonko-Abramovic, New
York Open 1 986.
6 0-0 (89)
89
w
7 W b3
This queen sortie is more
forcing than the alternatives :
(a) 7 ll:Jh3 d6 8 0-0 e5 9 d5 h 6
1 0 f4 e4 produced a difficult game
for both sides in Kmoch-Judovtc,
Leningrad 1 934.
(b) 7 e3 d6 8 ll:Jge2 c6 9 0-0 �h8
10 b4 e5 1 1 d5 cd 1 2 cd ll:Jbd7 1 3
l:l. c 1 ll:Jb6 1 4 Wb3 ..td7 and Black
has almost imperceptibly taken
control of the game in instructive
fashion; White suffers from inac­
tive minor pieces, a sensitive d­
pawn and incipient light square
weaknesses; Cobo-Larsen, H av­
ana 1 967.
(c) 7 ll:Jf3 ll:Je4 (7 . . . d6 would
transpose to note (b) to Whtte's
sixth; adopting a Stonewall for­
mation would allow White to take
advantage of the position of the
bishop on d2 by 7 . . . d5 8 0-0 c6
9 .-c2 We8 10 a3! Wh5 1 1 ll:Ja2
ll:Jbd7 1 2 ..t b4 bringing about the
strategically favourable exchange
of dark squared bishops; Flohr­
Szabo, Moscow-Budapest 1 949)
8 0-0 ..tf6 9 Wc2 (9 ll:Jxe4 brings
no advantage, e.g. 9 . . . fe 10 ll:Je5
d6 1 1 ll:Jg4 ..txd4 1 2 ..txe4 e5
1 3 ll:Je3 ll:Jd7 Nogueiras- Murey,
=
Luzern OJ. 1 982) 9 . . . ll:Jxd2 1 0
W xd2 d 6 ( 1 0 . . . d 5 might contain
White's advantage more success­
fully) 1 1 e4 fe 1 2 ll:J xe4 ll:Jc6 1 3
l:l. a d 1 with a clear positional
superiority for White; Griinfeld­
Spielmann, Vienna 1 935.
7 c6
This dynamic continuation con-
 The Dutch Indian 113

cedes White some structural i t i s time t o take stock. White's

ad vantage in return for active pawn structure is somewhat
piece play in the style of the Lenin­ sounder but the black infantry
�rra d Variation. secure a share of the centre and
-
8 dS! d6 provide the foundation for king­
Black must beware of the hid­ side action whilst restraining
den dangers along the a2-g8 diag­ enemy ambitions on the opposite
onal; thus 8 . . . e5?? loses to 9 d6! wing. Piece coordination in
,i xd6 10 c5 + . general is roughly balanced.
9 de tt:la6 Although the white prelates cur­
10 tt:lh3 rently enjoy slightly greater scope
This mode of development than their counterparts, the suc­
leaves the KB unhampered and cess of Black's diversionary check
thus permits White's minor pieces in deflecting White's QB from its
to work at maximum efficiency. natural long diagonal is quite not­
10 tt:lcS able. Black's major problem is to
11 ..-c2 tt:lg4 find a suitable deployment for the
The best way of meeting the queen.
threat to the f-pawn as 1 1 . . . .i. xe6 IS tt:ld3 tt:le6
1 2 b4 would be awkward. 16 e3 ..-c7?!
12 0-0 aS The course of the game shows
Securing the c5 square and that Black should have sent his
generally restrammg White's queen to the king's flank by 16 . . .
q ueenside pawns. ..-es intending to cover the weak
13 b3 .i.xe6 b6 square with the KB, viz. 1 7
14 tt:lf4 .i.d7 ( 90) tt:la4 .i.d8 .
17 l:l. a d 1 .i.e8
Heading for the h7-b 1 diag­
onal, this redeployment is consist­
ent with his sixteenth.
18 tt:le2 gS
Depriving the white k nights of
the use of f4 as well as building
long-term attacking chances.
19 li:ld4!
A classical central counter to
Black's wing demonstration.
With the opening almost over, 19 li:lxd4
1 14 The Dutch Indian

20 ed h6 Even so, Black's position contams

With the action of White's QB many tactical resources and the
opened up, the g-pawn needs sup­ game provides a perfect example
port so that the knight may retreat of how to muddy the waters when
to f6 if attacked. things go wrong: 26 . . . :t e4! 27 fg
21 : del ..tg6 (27 h3 lLl f6 28 fg lLlh5 would be
22 f4 awkward to meet) 27 . . . hg 28
This g1ves Black tactical ..txg5! (28 ..txe4? fe would give
chances due to the weakening of Black a dangerous attack) 28 . . .
the g l -a7 diagonal. Dolmatov 'W'h7 29 h4 : feB 30 ..tf3! (gives
indicates 22 :t e6 as a safer way the king air and thereby prepares
for White to keep in control. the decisive consolidation lLlf4) 30
22 ..tf6 . . . lLle3 3 1 ..txe3? (a mistake in
23 d5 : ae8 time pressure; this was the correct
24 �hl ..td4 moment to simplify by 3 1 ..txe4!
25 de be lLlxfl 32 ..txc6 lLlxg3 + 33 �g2
26 'W' c l ! ( 9 1 ) lLle4 when White would clearly be
on top) 3 1 . . . ..txe3 32 'W'b2 f4! +
(with the undermining of his h­
pawn White's king becomes
extremely vulnerable) 33 lLlxf4?
(the decisive error; 33 gf :t 4e7 was
relatively best) 33 . . . ..txf4! 34
: xe4 (34 ..txe4 ..txe4 + is crush­
ing) 34 . . . ..txe4 35 gf 'W'xh4 + 36
�g l (36 �g2 fails to the neat 36
. . . 'W'g4 + 37 �h2 ..txf3 38 :t g l
:t e2 + ) 3 6 . . . ..txf3 3 7 :t xf3
By keeping e3 under control :t e l + 38 : fl : xfl + 39 �xfl
and thus introducing h3 as a threat 'W' h I + and the queen is lost, so
White's advantage becomes clear. White resigns.
12 Classical System : Auxiliary
Variations

This chapter deals with various Blackburne's variation, named

rare deviations by White from the after the British grandmaster who
main introductory sequence to introduced it over a century ago.
the Classical systems. Accurate Developing the knight this way
defence by Black generally results avoids blocking in the KB and
in interesting middlegames with prepares liJh3-f4 putting pressure
balanced chances. on dS and e6. Furthermore, White
I d4 f5 is ready almost immediately to
2 g3 liJf6 carry out the important advance
3 ..ig2 e6 e2-e4, supported by f2-f3 if neces­
sary. On the debit side, the dimin­
Reshevsky- Botvinnik ished control of eS makes it easier
The Hague 1 948 for Black to advance his own e­
pawn, possibly with gain of tempo
4 tiJh3 ( 92 )
(should the knight be on f4) or
positional advantage (should the
knight remain offside on h3).
Other fourth moves are rela­
tively innocuous :
(a) 4 e3 ..te7 5 liJe2 0-0 6 0-0
d6 7 b3 eS 8 de de = Euwe- R.
Byrne, New York 1 95 1 .
(b) 4 ..ig5 ..te7 (as usual, 4 . . .
dS is a safe alternative) 5 ..txf6
..txf6 6 e4 0-0 7 f4 fe 8 ..txe4 d5
and Black's KB provides the basis
115
1 16 Classical System: A uxiliary Variations
for strong counterplay on the dark
squares; Coho-Pritchett, Siegen
01. 1 970.
(c) 4 lt:lc3 d5 (invariably the best
response when White develops the
QN in front of his c-pawn) 5 lt:lf3
c5!? (an aggressive approach; the
usual Stonewall formation might
in fact be more suitable) 6 0-0 lt:lc6
7 de (a game Mestrovic-Sines,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 968, produced a
mutually difficult position after 7
..tf4 a6 8 lt:la4 c4) 7 . . . ..t xc5 8
a3 0-0 9 b4 ..te7 lO ..tb2 W' b6
with satisfactory play for Black;
Tartakower-Treybal, Hamburg
01. 1 930.
(d) 4 lt:ld2 d5 ( Black probably
does best not to allow White to
play e2-e4; 4 . . . c5!?, while usually
not good, may be feasible here; 4
. . . lt:lc6 5 c3 d5 6 lt:ldf3 ..te7 7 lt:lh3
lt:le4 8 lt:lf4 0-0 is a strategically rich
alternative; Ftacnik-Bellin, H as­
tings 1 980/8 1 ) 5 lt:ldf3 ..td6 6 lt:lh3
0-0 7 lt:lf4 lt:le4 8 lt:ld3 W'f6 9 e3
lt:ld7 1 0 0-0 g5 with fine play for
Black; Forintos-Szabolsci, Hung­
arian Ch. 1 972.
4 ..te7
5 0-0 0-0
6 c4 d6
M uch more logical than a 6
. . . d5 Stonewall formation which
gives White improved chances of
obtaining an advantage, e.g. 7 lt:lc3
c6 8 W'b3 lt:la6 (8 . . . W'e8 9 lt:lf4
� h8 1 0 lt:ld3 lt:le4 1 1 f3 lt:lxc3 1 2
·�txc3 lt:ld7 1 3 b3 is assessed as
only ;;!;; by Petrosian, but it seems
to me that Black's prospects are
extremely bleak) 9 lt:lf4 �h8 1 0
lt:ld3 lt:lc7 1 1 ..tf4 lt:lce8 1 2 c5
and White is clearly in charge;
Capablanca-Botvinnik, Hastings
1 934/35.
7 lt:lc3
This natural developing move
must be best. Less forceful conti­
nuations allow Black an easy time
of it:
(a) 7 lt:lf4 c6 (blunting the bish­
op's diagonal and taking control
of d5) 8 lt:lc3 e5 9 de de lO lt:ld3
W'c7 and Black has an excellent
Hort-Antoshin type of position;
Nemet-Djurasevic, Yugoslavia
1 950.
(b) 7 W'b3 c6 8 lt:ld2 a5 (8 . . .
e5!? is an interesting and good
alternative, e.g. 9 c5 + d5 lO e3
W'c7, or lO de lt:lg4) 9 lt:lf4 a4 1 0
W'c3 W'c7 1 1 e4 e 5 1 2 d e d e 1 3
lt:ld3 fe 1 4 lt:lxe4 ..tf5 with active
piece play; Forintos--Farago,
H ungarian Ch. 1 965.
(c) 7 b3 W'e8 8 ..t b2 ..td8 9 lt:lf4
e5 1 0 de de 1 1 lt:ld5 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:l bc3
c6 1 3 lt:lxf6 + lt:lxf6 14 W'd6 lt:ld7
1 5 lt:la4 .:. f6 and Black has a solid
position plus kingside attacking
chances; U dovcic-Alexander,
Belgrade 1 952.
These examples clearly demon­
strate that a soundly executed . . .
e6-e5 advance invariably brings
 Classical System: Auxiliary Variations
Black full equality.
7 -.e8 ( 93 )
\13
w
The immediate 7 . . . e5?! con­
demns Black to a cheerless defence
in the ending arising after S de de
9 -. xdS ..txd8 (9 . . . .I:.Xd8? 1 0
tZJd5) 1 0 b 3 l2:\a6 1 1 ..ta3 ll e8 1 2
tZJb5, a s was shown i n the game. E.
Vladimirov-Psakhis, USSR 1 9S5.
7 . . . c6 may be an acceptable
alternative, e.g. 8 e4 fe 9 l2:\ xe4 e5
I 0 de de 1 1 l2:\ hg5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\xf6 +
gf 1 3 l2:\e4 -. xd 1 1 4 ll xd 1 ..ig4 1 5
f3 ..if5 with full equality; Olafs­
son- Ivkov, Birmingham 1 95 1 .
8 e4
Consequent and active,
although some of the alternatives
can lead to even more complex
p lay :
(a) S b3 should simply be met
by the usual S . . . c6 rather than 8
. . . l2:\c6?! 9 d5 or 8 . . . e5?! 9 de de
I 0 l2:\d5 .idS 1 1 ..ia3 when White
has the initiative.
(b) 8 -.b3 c6 9 d5!? cd 10 cd e5
I I l2:\g5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\e6 ..ixe6 1 3 de
117
!Llc5 1 4 -.c2 e4 1 5 f3 d5 with a
complex, double-edged position;
Fesche-Schmeisser, K uortone
1 976.
(c) 8 l2:\f4 is probably best answ­
ered by Keres's recommendation
8 . . . g5 9 l2:\d3 -.g6 which has yet
to be tested in practice. After the
standard 8 . . . c6, White can use
tactical means to gain a positional
advantage : 9 d5! e5 10 de be 1 1
l2:\fd5! lll x d5 1 2 l2:\ xd5 .idS 1 3 b3
.i.b7 14 l2:\c3 and Black's pawns
are decidedly shaky; Taulbut­
R umens, London 1 977.
8 fe
9 l2:\f4
Against the immediate recap­
ture 9 l2:\xe4, I recommend 9 . . .
!Llxe4 l O .i.xe4 e5! 1 1 l2:\g5 .i.xg5!
(the consequences of 1 1 . . . h6 1 2
l2:\h7 are not a t all clearly in Black's
favour) 1 2 .i.xg5 !Llc6, and the
harmony of the black forces offsets
White's bishop pair.
9 c6
10 l2:\xe4 l2:\xe4
II .i.xe4 e5
12 l2:\g2
1 2 de would isolate Black's e­
pawn, but after 1 2 . . . de 1 3 l2:\d3
(otherwise Black's K B will occupy
the a7-g 1 diagonal) 1 3 . . . .i.h3
14 lle1 l2:\d7, Black's dynamic
compensation can easily become
more than sufficient.
12 l2:\d7
13 l2:\e3 ( 94 )
1 18 Classical System : A uxiliary Variations
94
8
13 eel
Introducing a simplifying
manoeuvre which completely
equalizes. Keres notes that t 3 . . .
llJf6 1 4 .tg2 e4 1 5 d5! c5 1 6 .td2
followed by .tc3 is in White's
favour.
14 1fxd4 llJe5
15 f4
Covering the weakness on f3.
15 llJg4
16 llJxg4 .txg4
Black may look to the future
with confidence on account of
White's weakened king's position.
The game concluded as follows :
t 7 : e t .tf6 t 8 1fd3 ( 1 8 1f xd6?
: d8 t 9 1fa3 .td4 + 20 � h t 1fh5
would give Black a dangerous
attack) 1 8 . . . 1fh5 1 9 .td2 : fe8
20 : ab l ? (20 : e3!) 20 . . . : e7?
(20 . . . : e6! was better) 2 1 .tb4
: ae8 22 .txd6 : e6 (perhaps
Black had intended 22 . . . : xe4
23 : xe4 : xe4 24 1f xe4 .tf5 25
1fel .td4 + winning, and only
now noticed that 25 1fe3! turns
the tables on account of 25 . . .
.txbl 26 1fe6 + , and it is Black
who is mated) 23 : e3 : xd6! (a
temporary sacrifice to force t he
draw) 24 1f xd6 : d8 25 1fc7 1fc5
26 : e t : c8 27 1f xb7 .td4 28
�f2 .txe3 + 29 : xe3 1fd4 30
1fb3 1fd2 + 3 1 �gt 1f c l + 32
�f2 1fd2 + 3 3 �g l 1fc1 + !-! .
Botvinnik-Bronstein
World Ch. ( 1 ) 1 95 1
t d4 r5 2 g3 ttJf6 3 .tg2 e6
4 c4 .te7
5 llJc3
Some interesting nuances can
arise when White plays 5 llJf3 and
delays castling after 5 . . . 0-0, for
example :
(a) 6 llJc3 d5 (a game Bogo­
ljubow-Alekhine, World Ch.
1 9 34, went 6 . . . d6 7 .tf4 1fe8 8
: c 1 llJc6 9 d5 llJd8 1 0 llJ b5 1fd7
I I 1f b3 a6 12 de llJxe6 1 3 llJc3
llJxf4 1 4 gf �h8 = ) 7 llJe5 c6 8
.tf4 1fe8 (Selezniev-Model,
USSR Ch. 1 927, went 8 . . . llJ bd7
9 1fc2 llJ xe5 I 0 de llJe4 I t llJ xe4?
fe 1 2 .td2 .tc5 1 3 f3 1f b6 1 4 0-
0-0 e3 and White was
in trouble) 9 1fb3 � h8 10 0-0-0?!
( 1 0 0-0 =) 1 0 . . . llJ bd7 I t h 3 llJ xe5
12 .t xe5 llJd7 1 3 .tc7 b6 and
with . . . .ta6 to follow, Black
has the better chances; Se1ezniev­
Riumin, USSR 1 927.
(b) 6 d5!? .t b4 + (ECO gives 6
 Classical System : A uxiliarr Variations
. . . d6 7 de lZlc6 8 lZld4 lZlxd4 9
-w xd4 c6 and . . . .txe6 as equaliz­
i ng, but I for one do not find this
co nvincing) 7 .td2 'fle7 8 0-0
.txd2 9 'flxd2 eS 1 0 d6! (a deep
p ositional pawn sacrifice) 1 0 . . .
cd? (it would be better to remove
the queens by I 0 . . . 'fi xd6 I I 'flxd6
cd 1 2 lZlc3 lZlc6 1 3 .l:tfd I lZle8 14
:t d2, as indicated by Robatsch,
b ut even so White has good com­
pensation) I I lZlc3 lZla6 1 2 'figS!
dS (or 1 2 . . . g6 1 3 lZlh4 �h8 1 4
'W xg6!) 1 3 lZlh4! � h 8 1 4 lZlxfS 'fl f7
1 5 cd with a crushing advantage;
Robatsch-Jamieson, Buenos
Aires 01. 1 978.
It seems to me that until a
reliable antidote is found to
Robatsch's 6 dS, Black should
refrain from castling on move five
and effect a simple transposition
according to choice.
5 0-0 ( 95 )
95
w
6 e3
It is important to be au fait with
t he alternatives :
119
(a) 6 e4 fe 7 lZlxe4 dS! (both 7
. . . lZlxe4 8 .txe4 dS 9 .td3 and
7 . . . d6 8 lZle2 'fie8 9 0-0 are good
for White) 8 lZlxf6 + .txf6 9 lZlf3
cS 10 0-0 cd I I lZlxd4 de 1 2 .te3
lZlc6 1 3 lZlxc6 be 1 4 .tcS : f7 I S
'it' xd8 + .txd8 and with pressure
to come against White's b-pawn,
Black has no problems; Boutte­
ville-Duckstein, Le Havre 1 966.
(b) 6 d5 .tb4 (better than leav­
ing the bishop locked behind the
pawn chain after 6 . . . eS 7 lZlf3 d6,
although that is also playable) 7
.td2 (7 'flb3 awaits testing) 7 . . .
eS 8 e3 d6 9 lZlge2 a6!? (intending
to weaken the dS pawn by attack­
ing its support) 10 'fic2 'fie8 I I f3
bS! 1 2 'flb3 ( Botvinnik- Bronstein,
World Ch. 1 9S I , ninth game) and
now simply 1 2 . . . .txc3 1 3 lZlxc3
be 1 4 'fixc4 'flf7 would give Black
excellent play thanks to the dual
threats of I S . . . c6 and I S . . . aS
combined with . . . .ta6.
(c) 6 .1g5 d6 (6 . . . c6!? is
possible, with 7 .txf6 .txf6 8 e4
'fl b6 leading to unclear play and
7 lZlf3 dS bringing about a Stone­
wall) 7 .txf6 (7 lZlf3 lZlbd7 8 0-0
eS is fine for Black) 7 . . . .txf6 8
e4 fe 9 lZlxe4 lZlc6 I 0 lZle2 eS with
a position assessed as unclear by
Garcia- Palermo. This whole line
awaits further practical tests.
(d) 6 'flb3 (usually known as
the Anti-Stonewall Variation, for
obvious reasons; cf. Chapter I I , p.
1 20 Classical System : Auxili�ry Variations
1 1 2) 6 . . . c6 (Black's best response
has yet to be established; 6 . . .
a5!? 7 lLlf3 - 7 ..t xb7? a4 costs
material - 7 . . . d6 is natural and
sensible, while the gambit continu­
ation 6 . . . c5!? 7 d5 e5 8 e4 d6!? 9
ef ..t xf5 1 0 -. xb7 lLlbd7 certainly
offers some compensation in
return for the pawn) 7 d5 d6 (7 . . .
e5?? 8 d6 will win the bishop) 8 de
lLla6 (cf. Gurevich- Dolmatov, p.
1 1 0) 9 lLlf3 lLlc5 10 -.c2 lLlfe4 I I
lLld4 lLlxc3 1 2 be .i.xe6 1 3 lLl xe6
lLlxe6 1 4 0-0, and it seems that
White's bishop pair and open lines
outweigh the weakened pawns;
Euwe-Opocensky, Venice 1 948.
Thus Black's defences currently
stand in need of reinforcement in
this variation, but, with so much
yet to be explored, this is a task
which may be approached with
optimism.
The text-move, first played in
Staunton-Horwitz, London 1 8 5 1 ,
and re-introduced i n the present
game, aims for flexible and har­
monious development, but has the
big strategic drawback of allowing
Black to achieve . . . e6-e5 without
difficulty.
6 d6
A much more logical reaction
to White's restrained development
than adopting a Stonewall for­
mation, although that was Botvin­
nik's response when Bronstein
confronted him with the psycho-
logical ploy of usmg the same
variation.
7 lLlge2 c6
8 0-0 e5
In notes to this game, Botvinnik
himself observed, 'Black has
achieved a good game . . . White
has already lost his opening
advantage'. The immobility of the
knight on e2 is particularly not­
able.
9 d5
Gaining space at least; other
moves bring nothing:
(a) 9 e4 lLl xe4! 10 lLlxe4 fe 1 1
.i.xe4 ..th3 +
(b) 9 de de 1 0 -. xd8 l hd8 1 1
e4 lLl a6 = .
9 -.es
10 e4
Bolstering the centre rather
than ceding it by 10 de be I I lLl b5?
which would get nowhere after 1 1
. . . -.d7 and 1 2 . . . ..tb7.
10 -. hs
11 ef
Hoping to use e4 for his pieces
at a future date while also defusing
dangerous attacking ideas based
on . . . f5-f4.
11 ..t xf5 (96)
12 f3
Bringing e4 under control with
tempo gain due to the fork threat
g3-g4. The dangerous tactical
thrust 12 c5 (based on the fact that
1 2 . . . de? 1 3 -.b3! is very strong
for White) can be satisfactorily
 Classical System : A uxiliary Variations 121

9fJ
all the black pieces are more
w actively placed than their white
counterparts.
14 •d2 cd
15 cd
1 5 lt:l xd5 is better, with approxi­
mately even chances after 1 5 . . .
lt:lxd5 1 6 cd, but not 1 6 •xd5 +
..te6 1 7 •xb7? •d3 winning a
piece.
15 ..td8
countered by 1 2 . . . ..th3 as Bot­ An excellent regrouping, but it
vinnik's following instructive vari­ would have been preferable to
ations demonstrate : preface it with 1 5 . . . h5 keeping
(a) 1 3 de lt:lxc6 1 4 •b3 + <ithS White contained on the kingside.
15 "Wxb7 l:tacS with a promising 16 :t act
attack in the offing. M issing the chance to play 16
(b) 1 3 cd ..txd6 14 de lt:lxc6 1 5 g4 ..td3 17 : fd I ..ta6 IS lt:lg3
llf xd6 : adS 1 6 •c5 lt:lg4 1 7 f3 with increased activity. 16 lt:lb5
. hg2 1 S fg (or 1 S •c4 + <ithS lUeS gets nowhere.
1 9 fg •h3 20 :1'2 ..tf3) 1S . . . 16 ..ta5
.:. xfl + 1 9 'itxg2 • n. and White 17 g4
is in trouble. Better late than never. Bronstein
(c) 1 3 f3 ..txg2 14 'itxg2 de 1 5 points out that 1 7 :t fd 1 runs up
• b3 b5 1 6 de + • n 1 7 c7 lt:la6 against 1 7 . . . lt:l b6 1S g4 lt:lc4! 1 9
1 8 lt:lxb5 lt:ld5 and Black maintains gf •xf5 and 20 . . . lt:lxe3.
the balance. 17 ..td3
(d) 1 3 •b3 lt:lg4 1 4 de + 'ithS 18 :t fd 1 ..tc4
1 5 cb ..txg2 1 6 h4 ..tf3! 1 7 ba• 19 •c2
lafter 1 7 lt:ld5 ..t xh4 1 8 •xf3 :t xf3 White understandably seeks
1 9 ba• ..tdS 20 'itg2 :t xf2 + salvation in the ending, but even
Black gives perpetual check) 1 7 . . . so Black's pressure persists.
.haS 1 S lt:ld5 lt:lh2! and again 19 • xc2
Black has sufficiently strong 20 :t xc2 lt:lb6
cou nterplay. Wonderful stuff! 21 :t cd2 ( 9 7 )
12 ... g6 21 ..ta6
13 ..te3 lt:lbd7 M issing the favourable liqui­
It is interesting to observe that dation 2 1 . . . ..txe2 22 : xe2 ..txc3
1 12 Classical System : A uxiliary Variations

but also misses 22 . . . e4! threaten.

ing 23 . . . e3 24 ..txe3 lL:lc4, thUs
obliging White to play 23 g5 ef 24
..txf3 lL:l fd 7 when Black is still
clearly in control.
23 l: c2 ..tb6
24 ..txb6 ab
25 l:el!
With this, White is out of the
woods.
23 ..txb6 ab 24 be g5, with a 25 lL:le3
winning position according to 26 l: d2 lL:lc4
Bronstein. 27 l: c2 lL:le3
22 ..tf2 lL:lc4? 28 l: d2 lL:lc4
In time-trouble, Black not only White claimed a draw by three­
forgoes the above line once again fold repetition.
13 Alekhine's Variation :
6 lt:J e4
. . .

Alekhine's Variation is reached thoroughly tested by him in other

after the moves games played that same year.
1 d4 rs Black's main idea is to preserve
2 g3 lt:lf6 his option on d-pawn placement
3 .i.g2 e6 as long as possible: 'It is generally
4 lLlf3 i.e7 in the interests of the second player
5 0-0 0-0 to delay as long as logically poss­
6 c4 lt:le4 (98 ) ible the advance of his d-pawn in
this opening, so as to keep the
choice between the two points,
98
d6 and d5' - Alekhine. Another
w
important point is that the early
advance of the KN vacates f6
for the KB which can thus exert
pressure along the h8-a I diag­
onal.
The potential dangers of delay­
ing the development of the queen­
side make considerable demands
on the accuracy, sophistication
and resourcefulness of the second
This provocative move was player, but for those able to rise to
i n troduced by the great former the challenge Alekhine's variation
World Champion Alexander provides a viable and intriguing
Alekhine in his game against alternative to the established
Samisch at Dresden 1 936, and classical lines.
1 23
1 24 A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . lCJe4
Capablanca-Alekhine
Nottingham 1 936
7 W b3
This move has its logic: White
pressurizes b7 and makes d 1 free
for the rook. Its main drawbacks
are that the queen is somewhat
exposed to harassment by Black's
minor pieces and the QB is
deprived of development in fian­
chetto.
Other uncommon lines also fail
to upset Black's equanimity :
(a) 7 �e 1 d5 8 f3 �f6 9 cd ed
1 0 �d3 b6 1 1 i.e3 i.d6 1 2 �c3
c6 1 3 l: c 1 W'e7 14 W'd2 i.a6 1 5
i.f4 � bd7 1 6 i. xd6 W' xd6 with
a fully satisfactory position for
Black; Flohr-Aiekhine, Pode­
brady 1 936.
(b) 7 �fd2 d5 8 cd (White is
concerned to cover the weak d­
pawn) 8 . . ed 9 �c3 c6 1 0 W'c2
0
i.f6 and Black has no problems
whatever; Incutto-Emma, Buenos
Aires Ch. 1 972.
(c) 7 W'c2 i.f6 (as is frequently
the case, Black may perfectly well
produce a Stonewall by 7 . . . dS)
8 �c3 (the seminal encounter
Samisch-Aiekhine, Dresden 1 936,
went 8 l: d 1 d6 9 �bd2 � xd2 1 0
i.xd2 �c6 1 1 i.c3 W'e8 1 2 dS
.txc3 1 3 W' xc3 �d8 14 de �xe6
1 5 �d4 �c5 with equality; 8 � bd2
would transpose to the second
featured game) 8 . � xc3 9 be (9
0 0
W' xc3 c5 would leave White's d4
more sensitive) 9 . . . d6 10 e4 �c6
1 1 ef ef 1 2 l: e 1 � a5 1 3 W'd3 cS
with a difficult and roughly equal
game where White's greater activ­
ity is tempered by his structural
weakness; Foltys-Aiekhine,
Prague 1 9430
7 i.f6
Alekhine observes that this
bishop placing '. . . is strong both
for attack or defence'.
8 l: d 1 W'e8
8 . . . We7 is an equally good
alternative.
9 �c3 �c6!
10 �b5
A contentious sortie, disparaged
by Alekhine but lauded by others.
Although it may not bring White
any advantage, it can equally do
no harm to force Black to retreat
his bishop. In any case, it is cer­
tainly better than the superficially
attractive 10 d5 which would
invite the troublesome 10 . . . �aS.
10 ..td8
11 W'c2
According to Capablanca, he
should have preferred 1 1 d5 �a5
1 2 W'c2 c6 1 3 de and 14 �d6 with
the better chances. However, that
would only be true if Black recap­
tured with 1 3 . . . de, whereas 1 3
. . . be would produce an unclear
position charged with strategic
complexity.
11 d6 ( 99 )
 Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4 1 25

14 lLlac5
15 'it'c2 lLlxe6
16 lLlfd4
Simple development by 1 6 ..te3
a6 1 7 lLl bd4 was preferable.
16 lLlxd4
17 lLlxd4 ..tf6
18 lLlb5
Causing even less inconvenience
than the first time; 1 8 ..te3 was
still indicated.
12 d5 18 'it'e7
Alekhine's observations on this 19 ..te3 a6
advance are very instructive : 'In 20 lLld4 ..td7
the majority of cases the exchange 21 : ac l : ae8
involved by this move is in White's 22 b4 b6
favour. It gives him control of the 23 lLlf3?!
square d5 . . . but in this particular This knight's inability to keep
position White has already lost still ought to have cost White
too much time with his queen and dear. After the correct 23 'it'b3 the
knight, thus permitting Black to chances would be approximately
complete his development and to even.
take advantage of the open e-file'. 23 lLlc3!
12 lLl b4 The direct 23 . . . g5 would also
This manoeuvre occurs q uite generate strong threats, but the
often; by attacking the enemy text move throws the enemy camp
queen Black gains the time for into even greater disorder.
optimum repositioning of the 24 : d3 ( 1 00 ) f4?
knight. Beginning an hallucinatory mis­
13 'it'b3 lLla6 calculation. The straightforward
14 de 24 . . . ..ta4 25 'it'd2 lLle4 26 'it'el
Naturally, White cannot allow g5 would have left Black with a
Black to advance . . . e6-e5 which big, perhaps decisive, positional
w ould instantly deaden the white advantage according to Alekhine.
position while giving Black a 25 gf ..tf5
dangerous mobile pawn d uo and 26 'it'd2 ..txd3
a strong initiative on the king's 27 ed c5?
wing. Black persists in the delusion
126 Alekhine's Variation: 6 . . 0,e4
.

38 a4
/00
8
Black resigned. There is nothing
to be done about the winning plan
given by Capablanca : White plays
.ic3 followed by h2-h4-h5;
Black must respond with h7-h6
and rJ;h7; then comes .if3-g2-
h3 forcing . . . : e7-f7 after which
Black can only oscillate his king
between h7 and g8 while White
posts his king on f3 and
that he is winning two exchanges manoeuvres the knight to d5; in
when in fact he is losing three this position Black must protect
minor pieces for two rooks. After the b-pawn, but whichever way he
27 . . . lt:la4 28 d4 (or 28 lt:lg5) does it the check on f6 by the
White's generally active position knight is decisive.
and Black's wayward knight
would give White more than Ree-Bronstein
sufficient compensation for the Budapest 1 977
exchange, but Black would not be 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3
entirely without hope. After the .ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lt:le4
move played, the life goes out
7 lt:lbd2 ( J OJ )
of Black's position and against
Capablanca there is no hope.
28 .lhc3 .ixc3
29 1t'xc3 11H6
Retaining the queens would also
be hopeless.
30 'tfxf6 gf
31 lt:ld2 f5
3 1 . . . cb 32 .id5 + rJ;g7 33
lt:le4 is no improvement.
32 b5 a5
33 lt:lfl rJ;f7
34 lt:lg3 rJ;g6 This immediate challenge to the
35 .if3 : e7 advanced cavalry is evidently a
36 rJ;ft rJ;f6 critical continuation. Its drawback
37 .id2 rJ;g6 is that the QB is blocked in and the

necessity of solving this problem
li mits White's flexibility. Conse­
quently, the continuation 7 b3
suggests itself, with practical
experience so far indicating that
Black must react carefully : 7 . . .
..H6 8 .tb2 (a game Cebalo­
Pytel, Liege 1 980, saw White
obtain an edge after 8 "if c2 c5 9
.t b2 cd 1 0 lt:l xd4 lt:lc6 1 1 lt:lxc6
be 12 lt:ld2 d 5 1 3 .txf6 .C. xf6
14 e3; one wonders if Black was
correct to eschew the natural 1 3
. . . "ifxf6) 8 . . . b6 (both 8 . . . c5 and
8 . . . d5 come into consideration,
as does 8 . . . a5 which produced
a position teeming with strategic
complexity after 9 a3 lt:lc6 10 lt:le5
lt:le7 1 1 f3 lt:ld6 1 2 "ifd3 b6 1 3
lt:ld2 .tb7 i n Andersen-Bronstein,
M unich 01. 1 958) 9 lLl bd2 .t b 7
10 lt:le5 d6 1 1 lt:ld3 "ife7 ( l l . . . c5
1 2 e3 is worth testing) 1 2 "ifc2 lt:lc6
1 3 e3 lt:lxd2 1 4 "if xd2 lt:ld8 1 5 d5!
..bb2 1 6 "if xb2 e5 1 7 f4 e4 ( 1 7 . . .
lt:lfl is rather better) 1 8 lt:l b4 a5 1 9
lt:lc2 .ta6 2 0 lt:ld4 and Black's
position is cramped and passive;
G aprindashvili-Gurieli, match,
Tbilisi 1 980.
7 .tf6
Once again, Black may adopt a
Stonewall formation : 7 . . . d5 8 b3
l2Jc6 9 .tb2 .td7 1 0 lt:le5 ( 1 0 e3
is less committal, with a mutually
difficult game) 10 . . . lt:lxe5 I I de
c6 1 2 lt:lf3 "if b6 1 3 "ifd3 .C. ad8 with
fine prospects; Rovner-Hasin,
Alekhine"s Variation : 6 . . . 0.e4 127
!-final USSR C h . 1 956.
8 "ifc2
Natural and logical, but the
forthright capture 8 lt:lxe4 poses a
much more radical challenge to
Black's opening. After 8 . . . fe 9
lt:le5 d5, experience has shown that
the immediate attempt to open
the centre by 1 0 f3 backfires on
account of 10 . . . c5 1 1 .te3 ( I I
lt:l g4 .te7! 1 2 fe de is good for
Black) I I . . . .txe5 1 2 de d4 1 3
i.e I lt:lc6 ( 1 3 . . . e3 straightaway
has to reckon with the conse­
quences of 1 4 b4 which may never­
theless go in Black's favour) 14 f4
e3 1 5 b3 "ifb6 and Black's extra­
ordinary pawn chain severely
hampers the communication
between White's Hanks; Vagan­
ian-Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 .
Subsequently 1 0 lt:lg4 was success­
fully employed in Didishko­
Yuferov, USSR 1 9 76, bringing an
edge after I 0 . . . .te7 I I .tf4 c6
1 2 "ifc2 lt:ld7 1 3 f3 ef 1 4 .txf3 "ife8
1 5 .C. ae l . It remains to be seen
whether the possible improve­
ments I I . . . c5 or 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 will
sustain the viability of Black's set­
up.
8 dS
It is essential for Black to main­
tain a grip on e4; meekly exchang­
ing the knight by 8 . . . lt:lxd2 9
.txd2 d6 l O .tc3 "ife8 1 1 e4 gives
White an advantageous llyin­
Zhenevsky-type position (see
1 28 A lekhine's Variation : 6 . . liJe4
.
Chapter 1 4).
9 b3
M uch the most natural. Black
met 9 .l:t d 1 in traditional Stonewall
manner in the game Borisenko­
Korchnoi, U SSR 1 965: 9 . . . c6 (9
. . . tt:lc6 is also playable) 1 0 tt:l fl
tt:ld7 1 1 b3 g5 1 2 .i.b2 We7 1 3 tt:le 1
W g7 1 4 f3 tt:ld6 with a mutually
difficult game.
9 c5 ( 1 02 )
This rapid sharpening o f the
central conflict is characteristic of
Alekhine's Variation. Black trusts
that his pieces will become
sufficiently active to balance any
loosening of his pawn structure.
The relatively restrained 9 . . .
tt:lc6 once again provides a service­
able alternative as demonstrated
in Farago- Pytel, Bagneux 1 980,
which went 1 0 .i.b2 aS (typically
restraining the white queen's wing
and providing a possible later
white-square softener in . . . a5-a4)
1 1 e3 .i.d7 1 2 a3 We7 ( 1 2 . . . g5!?)
1 3 .1:t ac I and here Pytel rec-
ommends 1 3 . . . .l:t fc8!? preparing
to answer 1 4 tt:le5 with 1 4 . . . .i.e8
and then play on the queenside.
10 .i.b2
Acquiescing in the dissolution
of his own pawn centre in the hope
of saddling Black with structural
weakness. To this end White is
successful, but it turns out that the
secure foothold in the centre and
active piece play provide more
than enough compensation. Other
tries :
(a) I 0 e3 is recommended as best
by Bronstein which he feels should
conserve White's opening edge;
this has yet to be tested in practice.
(b) 1 0 .i.a3 cd 1 1 .i.xf8 W xf8
1 2 cd ed is a somewhat exotic
variation, again emanating from
Bronstein, which he evaluates as
slightly in Black's favour; this also
remains to be confirmed in prac­
tice.
(c) 10 cd ed (not 10 . . . cd 1 1
.i.b2 tt:lc3 1 2 tt:lxd4!) 1 1 .i.b2 cd
1 2 tt:lxd4 W b6 1 3 tt:l2f3 tt:lc6 1 4
.l:t a d 1 .i. d 7 1 5 e 3 .l:t ac8 \lnd
although White has an iron grip
on d4 Black's pieces are extremely
active; Bukic-Barle, Yugoslav Ch.
1 976.
10 cd
11 .i.xd4
White fared no better with the
alternative capture in Fine-Alekh­
ine, A VRO 1 936: I I tt:l xd4 tll c6
1 2 tt:l xe4 fe 1 3 .l:t a d l Wb6 1 4 tt:lxc6
 Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4 1 29

be 1 5 i. xf6 : xf6 and the upshot wins.

of all the exchanges has been to 17 i.f7
give Black a powerful centre and 18 lLld4
strong pressure on f2. 1 8 : ac t would invite the awk­
11 lLJc6 ward pin 1 8 . . . ..th5.
12 i. xf6 'W'xf6 18 lLJeS
13 cd ed 19 lLJ xe4
14 a3 aS! This is q ueried by Bronstein but
Preventing the expansion on the his proposal of 1 9 'W'fl hardly
queen's wing which would enable seems any better after 19 . . . lLlg4.
the QN to find useful work via b3. 19 fe
1S 'W'd3 ..te6 20 'W'bS b6!
16 e3 : ad8( 1 03) A quiet move of high class
avoiding the overimpetuous 20 . . .
lLld3? 2 1 : xd3! ed 22 'W' xd 3 with
excellent prospects of holding the
draw, or 20 . . . ..te8? 2 1 'W' xa5
'W' xf2 + 22 � h l ..th5 23 : fl
'W'xe3 24 : xf8 + :xf8 25 'W'xd5 +
and White turns the tables.
21 : act lLJd3!
22 : c2
Now 22 : xd3? would come
unstuck against 22 . . . ..te8! 23
The right rook. Although at 'W'a6 'tt' x f2 + etc.
present the play is all in the centre 22 : c8
or on the queenside, the massive 23 : dd2 : c5
presence of the knight on e4 24 'W'a6 i.e8
ensures that the kingside will one 25 h3 i.d7!
day come to life. Black naturally wants nothing
17 : fd 1 to do with the premature 25 . . .
Bronstein supplies t h e following : xc2 26 : xc2 lLlxf2 27 'W' b7! but
v ariation to show that White can­ instead strengthens the threat by
not afford to ignore the growing planning 26 . . . i.c8 27 'W'a7 : xc2
pressure on the d-file : 1 7 : fc 1 d4 28 .:. xc2 lt'Jxf2 and the h-pawn is
1 8 ed lLlxd4 1 9 lLlxd4 : xd4 20 en prise.
lLl xe4 fe 2 1 'W'e3 : d 3 22 'W' xe4 26 : xeS
W' xf2 + 23 �h 1 ..td5 and Black White feels obliged to liquidate
/30 Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4

to the ending which, however, as tantamount to a refutation of

rapidly proves untenable. The Black's play. The present game,
middlegame following 26 f4 .i.c8 however, has been instrumental in
27 -.a7 -.d6 28 .i.fl lLie l would revising that assessment, and at
scarcely be more palatable. the time of writing the ball remains
26 be quite clearly in White's court.
27 -. xf6 .ll xf6 7 ..tf6
28 lLic2 .ll b6 8 -.c2
29 f3 .i.c6 Not 8 lLid4 c5! 9 lLic2 lLid6! with
30 fe de the initiative (Simonovic- Kostic,
31 lLial a4 Yugoslav Ch. 1 946), or 8 lLifd2
White's quietus. lLixd2 9 lLixd2 e5 tamely handing
32 b4 cb Black an easy game ( Haugli-Gau­
33 ab .ll xb4 sel, Gausdal 1 990).
34 lLic2 .ll b2 8 lLia6!
0-1 ( 105 )
1 05
Huerta-Nogueiras
w
Santa-Clara 1 980
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLif6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 lLif3
i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lLie4

7 d5 ( 104 )

104
8

White's queen move prevents 8

This advance, which simul­
taneously gains space and pre­
vents Black shoring up the knight
with . . . d5, was long regarded
. . . e5 because of the crafty retreat
9 lLie1 winning a pawn. In the
debut game with 7 d5, Reshevsky­
Suesman, US Ch. 1 938, Black tried
8 . . . a5 but was overwhelmed
after 9 lLI bd2 lLic5 (9 . . . lLixd2 is
relatively better but White still
keeps the upper hand after 1 0
i.xd2 d6 1 1 e 4 fe 1 2 -.xe4 lLia6
1 3 ..te3; 10 lLixd2 also comes into
 Alekhine"s Variation : 6 . . . Ci:Je4 131

consideration) I 0 e4 fe I I .!Dxe4 I f 1 0 W b3 o r W a4 then 1 0 . . . a S

.!Dxe4 1 2 Wxe4 ed 1 3 WxdS + �h8 will prime a further tempo-gaining
14 .!DgS We8 I S .i.f4 and White's attack by . . . .!DeS.
massive positional superiority is 10 a5
virtually decisive. 11 f3 .!DeS
The only real alternative to the 12 .!Dc3 d6
text move is 8 . . . d6 intending to 13 l:t bl c6!
answer 9 .!De I .!DeS I 0 .!Dc3 eS Cleverly using tactical means to
I I e4 by I I . . . f4 stirring up pursue his positional ends.
complications, while I I b4 .!Dcd7 14 e4
1 2 : b I would also not be without 14 a3 founders on 14 . . . ed!
counterchances. 1 S ab ab when Black regains his
The knight move has several material with advantage.
plus points : it continues Black's 14 ed
development, it prepares tactical 15 ed cd
harassment of the white queen, 16 cd l:t e8
and it reinforces Black's growing Takes the newly opened file and
pressure on the dark and queen­ prevents the QB going to e3.
side squares weakened by the 17 a3 Wb6! ( 106)
advance of White's d-pawn.
9 .!Del 106
w
This is unsuitable here and leads
White into difficulties. As a poss­
i ble improvement, Nogueiras
mentions 9 .!Dbd2, but Taimanov
is of the opinion that Black stands
well after 9 . . . ed I 0 cd We7 and
himself suggests that White should
investigate either 9 .i.e3 or 9 .!Dc3.
It is hard to believe that these
moves will bring White much joy, 18 �hl
particularly the positionally inept 18 ab ab 19 .!De2 .!Dd3 + 20
k night move. � h i .!Df2 + 2 1 l:t xf2 Wxf2 would
9 .!Db4 be fatal.
Causing mischief in the best 18 Wa6!
tradition of knights developed on Black continues to manoeuvre
a6. with great verve. and exploits his
10 Wd1 initiative to the utmost.
132 A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . 0.e4

19 :a 25 ..txe2 .l: c8
1 9 a b a b would certainly not The combined pressure from the
ease White's defensive task. c-file pin and the dominating
19 lt::l bd3 bishop pair leave White scant
20 lt::l xd3 lt::l xd3 hope of saving the game. With
21 .l: e2 ..td7 time-trouble approaching Black
22 ..tfl .l: xe2 concludes the proceedings as
23 -. xe2 lt::l xcl elegantly as he began them: 26
24 .l: xcl? .l: c2 b5 27 ..td3 .l: c5 28 �g2 g6
A grave inaccuracy j ust when it 29 f4 �f8 30 ..tf2 b4! 3 1 ab ab
was beginning to look as if the 32 lt::l a 2 ..ta4! 33 : e2 ..td4 + 34
worst of his troubles were behind �f3? (a time-induced blunder, but
him. By interposing 24 -. xa6 ba there could be no doubt about the
25 .l: xc l White would have kept final outcome even after the best
his disadvantage to a minimum play 34 �g2 ..td l ! 35 .l:d2 b3!
after 25 . . . .1: b8 26 .l: c2 .1: b6. 36 lt::l b4 ..th5) 34 . . . ..td l
24 -. xe2 \ 0- 1 .
14 Il yin-Zhenevsk y S y stem

The Ilyin-Zhenevsky System is the centre and on the kingside.

established by Black's sixth move Experience suggests, however, that
in the sequence by judiciously mixing prophylaxis
1 d4 rs against . . . e6-e5 with preparation
2 g3 lt:lf6 for e2-e4 himself, White can
3 ..tg2 e6 manipulate the strategical battle
4 lt:lf3 ..te7 in his favour. Even so, Black's
5 0-0 0-0 resources, tactical in particular,
6 c4 d6 ( 1 07) are considerable, and are quite
capable of yielding the one or two
/ 07
improvements in key areas which
w
would be sufficient to challenge
the current assessment.
We shall examine the material
under the broad divisions of 7 b3
(in conjunction with lt:lbd2) and 7
lt:lc3 when Black has the choice
between 7 . . . •es and 7 . . . a5.

Named after the Soviet master Goldberg-Ilyin-Zhenevsky

who developed and refined it dur­
ing the 1 920s and 30s, this is
Black's most direct attempt to
force through the advance of his
e-pawn. Left unhindered, the basic
plan of . . . •eS, . . . ..td8 and . . .
e5 guarantees Black lively play in
1 33
Leningrad 1 932
7 b3
Although the fianchetto devel­
opment is an important weapon
in countering Black's plans, it
requires vigorous support in order
/ 34 1 /yin-Zhenevsky System
to be effective. This game shows
just how easily an optically
attractive and apparently har­
monious development can turn
out to be functionally inadequate.
Of White's other seventh moves,
only 7 b4 has any independent
significance. This attempt to pep
up the fianchetto needs to be coun­
tered energetically lest White
obtain too much space too
quickly : 7 . . . e5! 8 de de 9 tt:Jxe5 (9
"ii' b 3 e4 would produce a complex
balanced middlegame) 9 . . . "ii' x d 1
1 0 .lhd 1 ..txb4 1 1 ..tb2 c6 1 2
tt:Jd2 tt:Ja6 1 3 tt:Jb3 ..te6 with
reciprocal chances; Djaja-Duck­
stein, Gloggnitz 1 970.
7 "ii' e8 ( 1 08)
1 08
w
8 tt:J bd2
A refinement designed to
reserve the possibility of answer­
ing 8 . . . ..td8 with 9 ..ta3 which
would paralyse Black's position at
a stroke. It suffers though from
the drawback of diminishing con­
trol of d5, thus permitting Black's
QN to join the central battle
immediately without being
exposed to the push d4-d5 which
would downgrade the black pawn
structure.
Thus White's best eighth move
is the simple 8 ..tb2 ruling out 8
. . . tt:Jc6 on account of 9 d5. After
the correct response 8 . . . a5 (a
typical all-purpose waiting move)
White can transpose to variations
considered later by 9 tt:Jc3, or carry
on with 9 tt:J bd2 satisfied at having
gained a tempo over the column
game. The game Averbakh-Boles­
lavsky, Zurich 1 953, provides a
good example of likely develop­
ments in this latter case : (8 ..tb2
a5 9 tt:J bd2) 9 . . . tt:Jc6 10 a3 ..td8
1 1 tt:Je 1 e5 1 2 e3 ..td7 1 3 tt:Jc2 ed
14 tt:J xd4 ( 1 4 ed f4!) 14 . . . tt:Jxd4
1 5 ..txd4 ..tc6 ( Black has a very
comfortable position) 1 6 tt:Jf3 ..te4
1 7 tt:Je l b6 1 8 a4 tt:Jd7 1 9 tt:Jd3 g5!
(denying the knight access to d5
via f4) 20 tt:Jcl tt:Je5 (20 . . . ..tf6
was a better way to strengthen
Black's position) 2 1 _be4 fe 22
..txe5 "ii' x e5 23 "ii' d 5 + "ii' xd5 24 cd
(the exchanges have helped White
considerably, but accurate play
enables the position to be held
without much difficulty) 24 . . .
tt b8 25 tt d 1 b5 26 g4 ..tf6 27
tt a2 ..te5 28 �g2 :n 29 ab
tt xb5 30 tt a4 ..tb2 31 tt xe4
!-! (in view of 3 1 . . . ..txc I 32
tt xc l tt xd5).

8 ll:lc6
9 ..tb2 ..td8
This subtle retreat uncovers the
support from the queen which is
necessary to effect the strategically
vital . . . e6-e5 advance. Black is
able to get away with such 'unde­
veloping' because of the generally
closed nature of the position and
the somewhat sluggish disposition
of White's forces.
10 -.c2
Alternatively, 1 0 ll:lel e5 12 e3
would parallel A verbakh- Boles­
lavsky above, while 10 J:l. e l takes
away protection from the king and
also enables Black to utilize the
possibility ofthreatening a . . . ll:ld3
fork, e.g. 1 0 . . . e5 I I e4 f4! 1 2 d5
( 12 gf lLlh5 would be extremely
risky) 1 2 . . . ll:lb4 1 3 -. b 1 (thus
far a game Shatskes-Neishtadt,
Moscow 1 963) and now by 1 3 . . .
fg 1 4 hg c5 Black could secure the
centre in preparation for pursuing
his attacking ambitions on the
kingside. Note also that 10 ..ta3
..te7 instantly renews the threat
of . . . e5.
10 e5
11 de
White hopes to distract Black
from the kingside by opening up
the centre. Closing the centre
would be a positional error freeing
Black to concentrate on building
his attack, e.g. I I d5 ll:le7 1 2 J:l. ae l
• h 5 1 3 e4 ll:lg6 and already the
Jlyin-Zhener:sky System 1 35
storm clouds are gathering over
White's king; Lisitsin- Ilyin­
Zhenevsky, USSR Ch. 1 93 1 .
11 de
12 e4 ( 1 09 )
12 fe
This simple move brings Black
open lines galore and obvious
attacking chances for no more
than acceptance of an isolated
pawn. It is a measure of the inad­
equacy of White's opening that
Black also has the option of sacri­
ficing a pawn for a more complex
type of attack based on establish­
ing a knight on f4 : 1 2 . . . f4!? l 3
gf lLlh5 1 4 f5 (an attempt to limit
the activity of the black pieces) 1 4
. . . lLlf4 1 5 � h i ..tf6 1 6 a3 g6 1 7
fg -.xg6 1 8 J:l. g l � h 8 1 9 ..th3
-.h5 20 ..txc8 J:l. axc8 21 l:l. g3 lLle2
22 l:l. g2 l:l. g8 23 l:l. xg8 + l:l. xg8 24
-.dl lLlf4 25 -.n : d8 26 : d l
ll:ld3 2 7 ..tc3 ..th4 2 8 lLlxh4 -. xh4
0- 1 Budo-Ilyin-Zhenevsky,
USSR Ch. 1 93 1 .. Although White's
defence was rather feeble, the
136 llyin-Zhenevsky System

impression remains that this type 1 10

of attack must be very difficult to B
withstand in practice. Thus despite
the fact that Ilyin-Zhenevsky
played 1 2 . . . fe after 1 2 . . . f4, it
would probably be mistaken to
deduce from this that he consid­
ered the capture superior. Both
approaches are valid and the cho­
ice is largely a matter of personal
preference.
13 lt:lxe4 Wh5 W xg3 : g6 etc.
14 lt:lxf6 + 20 : xd5!
White is understandably anxi­ Shattering White's dreams of 20
ous to remove the potentially very . . . � h8? 2 1 .ixd4 fg 22 Wxf6!
dangerous K night but in so doing 21 cd fg
he relieves Black of the problem 22 W xd4 We2!
of his back rank bishops and 0- 1
encourages occupation of the out­ A fittingly elegant coup de grace
post on d4. with which to conclude this won­
14 .ixf6 derfully instructive miniature from
15 lt:ld2 .ih3 the Master's own hand.
16 lt:le4 .:t ad8
17 f4? Flohr-Sokolsky
A panicky attempt to force mat­ Semi-final USSR Ch. 1 953
ters which backfires in spectacular 1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3
fashion. The prudent 1 7 f3 would .ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6
have been much more appropri­
7 lt:lc3
ate.
17 lt:ld4 It is not surprising that this
18 Wfl? ( 1 1 0) active and natural development
Compounding the previous poses Black far more serious prob­
error; the uninviting 1 8 ..ixd4 was lems than the previous variation.
essential. 7 We8
18 ef! The standard and most expl­
19 lt:lxf6 + .lhf6 ored continuation; other possi­
20 ..id5 + bilities will be examined further
On 20 ..ixd4 comes 20 . . . fg 2 1 on.

8 .l:lel
White's most direct procedure,
aiming to open the centre with e2-
e4 as quickly as possible.
8 li.Je4!?( 1 1 1 )
This obstructive occupation of
e4 is probably the most promising
of Black's less explored paths in
the classical Ilyin-Zhenevsky.
That such relatively fresh ideas
need to be investigated is plain
from the well established main
lines where Black is reduced to
trying to hang on for a draw. For
example, 8 . . . 'ifg6 9 e4 fe 10 li.Jxe4
li.Jxe4 1 1 .1:1 xe4 li.Jc6 ( 1 1 . . . 'if xe4
1 2 tt.Jh4 traps the queen) 1 2 'ife2
J.f6 1 3 J.d2 e5 1 4 de li.Jxe5 (in
the famous game Aronson-Tal,
USSR Ch. 1 957, the 'magician
from Riga' typically sought com­
plications by 1 4 . . . de 1 5 J.c3
.US 1 6 li.Jh4 J.xh4 1 7 .l:l xh4 .l:l ae8
1 8 'ife3 h6 19 b4 'iff6 20 b5 �d8,
and although he was rewarded
with the full point some moves
after 2 1 J.d5 + ? � h8 22 f4? eP.
Jlyin-Zhenevsky System 137
23 'ii' d 2 'ii' b6 + ! 24 J.d4 'ii' g6 25
'if xf4 �h7 26 'if xc7 J. b 1 !, simply
21 c5 would have underlined Whi­
te's positional supremacy on the
queen's wing in complete safety)
1 5 li.Jxe5 J.xe5 16 J.c3! J.xc3
1 7 be c6 1 8 .1:1 e 1 (another line is
1 8 .l:l e7 J.g4 19 f3 i.f5 20 .l:l xb7
i.d3 2 1 'iff2 J.xc4 22 .l:l xa7 .l:l xa7
23 'ifxa7 c5 with compensation
for the pawn because of White's
uncoordinated pieces; M atulovic­
Minic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 959) 1 8 . . .
i.d7 ( 1 8 . . . J.f5 1 9 .l:l e7 ..td3 20
'if b2) 19 'ife3 .l:l fe8 20 'ifd4 i. f5
2 1 .l:l xe8 + .l:l xe8 22 .l:l xe8 + 'if xe8
23 h4! 'ifb8 24 c5 de 25 'if xc5 ..te6
26 a4 ..tf7 27 a5 a6 28 'ife7 and
White went on to squeeze out
a win in Bukic-Maric, K raljevo
1 967. Even with improvements,
such barren positions would hold
little attraction for warriors of the
Dutch.
9 'ifc2
The most natural method of
disputing control of e4. Alterna­
tively:
(a) 9 li.Jd2 li.Jxc3 10 be e5 1 1 c5
is Konstantinopolsky's artificial­
looking suggestion.
(b) 9 'ifd3 can hardly be better
than the column move, but in
Cvetkov- Hermann, Halle 1 954,
Black incurred a slight disadvan­
tage after 9 . . . 'ii' g6 lO -'.f4 li.Jc6
1 1 .l:l ad l �h8 (certainly not
essential) 1 2 tt.Jb5 ..td8 1 3 �d2
1 38 J lyin-Zhenevsky System
tt:l xd2 1 4 'it' xd2 a6 1 5 tt:lc3 ..tf6 1 6
d 5 tt:ld8 1 7 de tt:l xe6 1 8 tt:ld5.
(c) 9 tt:l xe4 de is sharp and
critical: 10 tt:ld2 (in Martin- Piaz­
zini, Argentina 1 954, the tactics
following I 0 tt:lg5 d5 1 1 cd ed 1 2
'it'b3 c6 1 3 tt:lxe4?! 'it' f7 1 4 ..tg5
..txg5 1 5 tt:lxg5 'it'xf2 + 16 � h I
'it'xd4 went i n Black's favour; 1 3
f3 is better) I 0 . . . d5 I I f3 ..tf6!?
( I I . . . ef 12 ef tt:lc6 also merits
attention) 1 2 fe ..txd4 + 1 3 e3
..t b6 1 4 cd ( Bertok-Milic, Yugos­
lav Team Ch. 1 958, went instead
14 ed ed 1 5 ..txd5 + �h8 1 6 tt:lb3
c6 17 ..tg2 tt:ld7 18 tt:ld4 tt:le5 1 9
b 3 ..tg4 20 'it'd2 and now 20 . . .
l:t d8 would have been the best
way to augment Black's dang­
erous compensation) 1 4 . . . ed 1 5
ed tt:ld7 (Black's active pieces and
the many weaknesses in White's
camp provide fine play in return
for the pawn) 16 tt:lc4 tt:le5 1 7
tt:lxb6 ..tg4 1 8 'it'd4 ab 1 9 ..td2
c5 20 de l:t d8 21 ..tc3 l:t xd4 22
ed 'it'f7 23 l:t xeS 'it' f2 + + White's
attempt to break Black's initiative
by giving up his queen has not
been successful; Bilek- M ilic,
Gotha 1 957.
9 'it'g6 ( 1 1 2 )
1 0 b3
White must decide how to
develop his QB, an important
question which will determine the
shape of the middlegame. The
fianchetto declares an intention to
concentrate on the centre in stark
contrast to the important alterna­
tive 10 ..te3 which renounces
central play in favour of a
space-gaining pawn storm on the
queenside. The encounter Olafs­
son-Korchnoi, Hastings 1 955/56,
provides an excellent illustration
of typical play for both sides :
( I 0 ..te3) tt:lxc3 (White is threaten­
ing I I tt:l xe4 and 1 2 tt:ld2 with
advantage; note that I 0 tt:lxe4 fe
I I tt:ld2 loses instantly to I I . . . e3)
I I 'it'xc3 ..tf6 1 2 b4 ( 1 2 l:t ad l tt:lc6
1 3 'it'b3 e5! is fully acceptable for
Black) 1 2 . . . tt:lc6 (this appears
somewhat more precise than 1 2
. . . l:t e8 1 3 c5 e5 1 4 cd cd 1 5 de de
1 6 l:t ac l tt:lc6 1 7 b5 tt:ld8 1 8 l:t ed l
tt:lf7 as in Furman-Boleslavsky,
semi-final U SSR Ch. 1 954) 1 3 b5
tt:ld8 14 c5 tt:lf7 (White's spatial
advantage is clear, but the knight
on f7 helps both to cover potential
entry points along the d-file and
ensure that the central counter­
punch . . . e6-e5 cannot be pre-
 llyin-Zhenevsky System 139

vented) 1 5 cd cd 1 6 lLld2 e5 1 7 de it accomplishes very little.

de 1 8 .idS e4 1 9 ..id4 ..ixd4 20 15 tLl b4
'!W xd4 ..ie6! 2 1 ..i xe6 (it would be 1 6 de ..ixe6
risky to take the pawn, e.g. 2 1 17 'ifd2
_i xb7 ll ad8 22 'if c3 lLlg5 with . . . Against 1 7 lLld4 the retreat 1 7
f5-f4 to follow) 2 1 . . . 'if xe6 22 . . . ..ic8 would be surprisingly
tt ec l l:t ad8 23 'ifc4 l:td5 24 lLlfl effective in renewing the threat on
ad6 25 'ifb3 l:t e8 (25 . . . lLlxb5?? the a-pawn.
26 l:t c5) 26 a4 f4 27 l:t d l l:t xd l 28 17 f4!
'1W xe6 + l:t xe6 29 l:t xd l g5 30 l:t d 5 18 l:t c 1?
h6 �-! . This passive prevention of 1 8 . . .
10 lLl xc3 lLlc2 merely loses a tempo as he
Deflecting the queen away from can find nothing better than to
its observation of e4 and on to the accept the pawn sacrifice later on
sensitive a 1 -h8 diagonal. anyway. The f-pawn is immune :
11 'if xc3 ..i f6 1 8 'ifxf4? ..ic3 or 1 8 gf'? ..ih3 1 9
12 ..ia3 lLlg5 ..ixg2 20 �xg2 h6. After 1 8
Black would be entirely satisfied ..ixb4 a b 1 9 'ifxb4 Black could
with 1 2 ..ib2 lLlc6 1 3 'ifd2 e5 1 4 choose between 19 . . . b6 20 a4 fg
d e de. 2 1 hg h5 and 1 9 . . . fg 20 hg ll xa2
12 lLlc6 21 'ifxb7 'iff7, in both cases with
13 l:t adl ..id7 active pieces, the bishop pair, and
14 'ifcl a5 ( 1 1 3 ) attacking chances in compens­
ation for the pawn.
1 /3
18 fg
w
19 hg h5!
Single-mindedly pursuing the
storming of the white monarch's
citadel.
20 ..ixb4 ab
21 'if xb4 h4!
22 lLl xh4 ..i xh4
23 gh 'if f6
Not 23 . . . ..ih3? 24 'ifxb7, but
15 d5 Sokolsky notes that both 23 . . .
Having completed his develop­ l:t f4 24 l:t c3 and 23 . . . b6 24 'ifc3
ment White proceeds with the cen­ came into consideration.
tral breakthrough only to find that 24 l:t fl l:t xa2
/ 40 Jlyin-Zhenevsky System
25 'it' xb7?
Loses quickly, but the line given
by Sokolsky as relatively best is
also unpleasant: 25 c5 d5 26 'it' xb7
: xe2 27 ..txd5 'it'xh4 28 ..txe6 +
tt xe6 29 'it'd5 tt f6.
25 tt xe2
26 'it' xc7 'it'd4!
Black bludgeons away the last
line of defence in a mercifully swift
onslaught.
27 'it' e7
27 tt cd 1 would not deter Black:
27 . . . : fxfl! with mate i n three on
acceptance of the queen.
27 tt fxf2
28 �hl ..th3!
Black throws in the kitchen sink
as well, dashing White's last hope
of 28 . . . tt xg2?? 29 'it'e8 + �h7
30 'it'h5 + with perpetual check.
White resigns.
Csom-Szabolcsi
Hungarian Ch. 1 972
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lll f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lll f3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lllc3 'it'e8
b3 ( 1 1 4 )
8
This elastic continuation makes
for a sophisticated positional bat­
tle where White hopes to outfox
his opponent by virtue of greater
flexibility of position.
White's remaining eighth moves
are mostly minor and of a more
rustic character:
(a) 8 e4?! fe (8 . . . lll xe4 is more
ambitious) 9 lll g5 d5 10 cd ed 1 1
'it'b3 c6 1 2 lll gxe4 �h8 1 3 lll c5
b6 1 4 lll d 3 ..ta6 1 5 'it'd ! lll bd7
with excellent play for Black;
Purdy-Koshnitzky, match 1 9 34.
(b) 8 b4 'it'h5 (Taimanov rec­
ommends 8 . . . e5 9 de de 1 0 lll d 5
..td8 I I ..tb2 e4 ) 9 'it'b3 �h8
=
I 0 c5 lll c6 1 1 b5 lll d 8 1 2 ..ta3 lll f7
gives a mutually difficult
posttwn; Vaganian-Andersson,
Groningen 1 968/69.
(c) 8 'it'd3 'it'h5 9 e4 e5 1 0 de de
1 1 lll d 5 lll c6 1 2 lll x e7 + lll xe7
1 3 lll xe5 fe 14 'it'c3 ..th3 with
attacking prospects on the
light squares; Steiner-Duckstein,
Vienna 1 969.
(d) 8 ..tf4 c6 9 'it'b3 lll b d7 1 0
a 4 a 5 1 1 lll g 5 e 5 1 2 ..te3 W h5
with a very tense and complicated
position; Szily-Farago, H ung­
arian Ch. 1 967.
(e) 8 ..tg5 lll e4 9 ..txe7 ll\xc3
1 0 be 'it' xe7 and White's pieces
show little dynamism to offset the
doubled pawns; Rossolimo-Pach-

rnan, Beverwijk 1 950.
(f) 8 W'b3 �h8 (8 . . . c6) 9 ..tf4
0 c6 1 0 lL!b5 ( 1 0 d5 lL!d8 1 1 de
t;Jxe6 would bring the black
k ni ghts to life) 1 0 . . . .td8 1 1 d5
8e7 1 2 de ..t xe6 1 3 lL!fd4 .td7
1 4 lt:lc3 lt:lc6 with very satisfactory
play for Black; Palfi-Schneider,
Budapest 1 952.
(g) 8 e3 has little independent
significance and may be met
according to taste.
(h) 8 lL!e 1 invites 8 . . . e5 which
Black may either play or prepare
as he wishes.
(i) 8 W'c2 is a much more
important continuation than the
foregoing; after Black's most
active reply, 8 . . . W'h5 (taking
advantage of the fact that White
can no longer profit from a
manoeuvre of the type e2-e3 and
tzlf3-e1 proposing the exchange
of queens) White has three main
possibilities:
( 1 ) 9 .tg5 h6! 10 .txf6 .txf6
I I e4 lL!c6 1 2 lL!b5 wn 1 3 : ad 1
(t hus far Olafsson-Kan, Nice OJ.
19 74) and now by advancing . . .
e6-e5, either immediately or after
1 3 . . a6 1 4 lt:lc3, Black would get
. 16 ..tf3 W' h 3 1 7 .tg2 etc., and
an equal game.
(2) 9 e4 e5 10 de de 1 1 lt:ld5
( both 1 1 lt:l xe5? fe and 1 1 .tg5
tt:lc6 1 2 : fe t f4! are good for
Black) 1 1 . . . lt:lxd5 1 2 ed ( 1 2 cd
..t d6 1 3 ef .t xf5 1 4 W'b3 lt:ld7 1 5
..t e3 h6 leaves Black with a solid
Ilyin-Zhenevsky System 141
centre and t h e initiative on the
kingside; E. Richter-Skalicka,
1 934) 1 2 . . . ..tf6 1 3 c5 e4 1 4 lL! e 1
lL! d 7 1 5 .tf4 lt:l e 5 and Black's play
is the more purposeful; Kozlov­
skaya-Kakabadze, USSR
Women's Ch. 1 97 1 .
(3) 9 b 3 (let us note i n passing
Geller-Milic, USSR v Yugoslavia
1 957, which saw the whole board
in turmoil after 9 b4 lL!c6 1 0 b5
lL!dS 1 1 a4 lLln 1 2 ..ta3 g5 1 3
: ad l f4) 9 . . . a5 (secures b4 as a
blocking outpost in the event of
White's QB moving to the a3-f8
diagonal) 10 .t b2 ( 1 0 ..ta3 lL!a6
1 1 d5 e5 12 lL!xe5? lL!b4 + demon­
strates the usefulness of . . . a5, and
10 e4 merely loosens the white
position after 10 . . . fe 1 1 lL!xe4 e5
1 2 de de 1 3 ..t b2 lL!c6 14 : ae l
..tg4!) 1 0 . . . lL!a6 1 1 : ae 1 c6 1 2
a3 .td8 1 3 e4 e 5 1 4 de de 1 5 lL!xe5
lL!c5 with compensation for the
pawn; Flohr-Kotov, USSR Ch.
1 949, went 16 b4? lL!cxe4 1 7 lL!xe4
fe 18 c5? .te6 1 9 .txe4 lt:l xe4 20
: xe4 .td5 and the white-squared
bishop dominated the board.
There is a forced repetition by
Taimanov has suggested that
White may play for the win by 1 7
ef .t xf5 1 8 W'd l .
8 a5
White's basic idea would be seen
in its clearest form after 8 . . .
.idS? 9 .ta3 paralysing Black's
1 42 1/yin-Zhenevsky System
position. Similarly, the standard 8
. . . -.h5 runs up against 9 ..ta3! x­
raying the now undefended bishop
and preparing a favourable alter­
ation of pawn structure: 9 . . . a5
(Black's best bet might be the
consistent 9 . . . g5 10 e3 .1:1. f7 1 1 c5
..td7 1 2 ll:ld2 -.xd l 1 3 .l:l. axd l d5
1 4 ll:lf3 .l:l. g7 1 5 ll:le5 ..te8; Kozma­
Bhend, M unich 01. 1 958) 10 d5!
and the centre is opened up to
White's advantage as 10 . . . e5?
loses to I I ll:lxe5.
9 .l:l.e1
Once more maximizing flex­
ibility : whilst introducing the
possibility of e2-e4 White is also
waiting to see how Black plays
before committing his QB.
The simpler 9 ..t b2 ll:la6 10 e3
c6 I I -.e2 ..td7 12 e4 fe 1 3 ll:lxe4
-.h5 would bring about a standard
type of position where White has
greater freedom but Black's set-up
is very resilient and not without
counterchances on both sides of
the board.
9 -.g6
By analogy with other positions
it could be that 9 . . . ll:le4 deserves
further investigation.
10 ..ta3
As in the old 8 .1:1. e I main line
White could also continue 10 e4
fe 1 1 ll:lxe4 ll:l xe4 1 2 .1:1. xe4 ll:lc6
1 3 -.e2 although the extra pawn
moves would ease Black's task
somewhat.
10 ll:la6
This typical edge-development
serves several functions : generally
restraining White's queensi de
ambitions, protecting the c7 weak
spot, and last but by no means
least, avoiding central congesti on
(. . . ll:l bd7) or offering White a
target ( . . . ll:lc6, d4-d5!).
11 e3
Flashy manoeuvring by I I lLJe5
-.e8 1 2 ll:ld3 would allow 1 2 . . .
e5, while I I d5 would also be
ineffective because of I I . . . ll:le4!
The move played secures the cen­
tral dark squares and can hope to
lull the opponent into the inatten­
tive I I . . ..td7? 1 2 ll:le5!
.
11 ll:lb4
12 ..tb2 ( 1 15 )
1 15
B
Having accomplished a good
deal behind the scenes on the a3-
f8 diagonal, the bishop retires with
honour in order to eject the tres­
passer on b4.
12 c6
Construction of an elastic,
 1/yin-Zhenet•sky System 1 43

de fen sive pawn wall is an integral 1 16

pa rt of Black's strategy in such w
positi ons, but here White can util­
i ze the opposition of queen rooks
to make immediate and important
spatial gains and therefore the pre­
li minary 1 2 . . . ll b8 would be
p referable.
13 a3 tt:la6
14 b4 ab
15 ab ..td7
16 W b3 Wh5 Simply defending d3 by 1 9 ..tfl
17 tt:ld2 looks suspiciously passive, whilst
White inconsistently opts to the blunt 1 9 ..ta3?! would fall foul
prepare the central advance e3-e4 of 1 9 ll xa3! 20 'ilt' xa3
before completing his queenside lbg4 2 1 h 3 tt:lxf2! with a vicious
action; 1 7 b5 cb 1 8 cb tt:lc7 1 9 tt:ld2 attack.
( 1 9 d5 intending 1 9 . . . tt:lcxd5 20 19 tt:lxa2
.{)xd5 tt:l xd5 2 1 tt:ld4 'iW f7 22 ..txd5 20 ll xa2 ll xa2
ed 23 ll fc l is interesting) 19 . . . 21 'ilt'xa2 tt:le4
d5 20 f3 was the correct way to 2 1 . . . ..t b4 would have obliged
preserve White's strategic initiat­ White to meekly hold the balance
Ive. by 22 .te l tt:le4 23 be be 24 Wc2.
17 d5! 22 tt:lxe4 fe
The delayed transitiOn to a 23 be ..txc6
Stonewall formation is an 24 c5 g5
important weapon in Black's pos­ Inaugurating an extremely
itional armoury. Here, there is also brash plan which was probably
the concrete point of opening up unnecessary in view of the attract­
an attack on b4. ive alternative 24 . . . .idS intend­
18 b5 ft)b4! ( 1 1 6) ing to activate the bishop on the
Astute tactical exploitation of b8-h2 diagonal.
White's lapse on the seventeenth; 25 ..tc3 g4
it may well be that this possibility 26 ll b l ll f6
had escaped White's attention. 27 WaS + ..tf8
19 tt:la2 28 Wc8 ll h6
Sensibly taking immediate steps 29 ll xb7
t o eliminate the frisky intruder. Naturally, White is only too
1 44 Ilyin-Zhenevsky System
happy to make the trivial material
investment required to clear the
path for his dangerous c-pawn.
29 ..txb7
30 1t"xb7 'ihh2 +
31 �fl lH6
32 ..-b8 h5?
The delicate equilibrium of
opposite flank play would have
achieved a fitting finale in the
variation 32 . . . ..- h6! 3 3 �gl :n
34 c6 ..-f6 35 .tel ..-e7 36 ..ta5
..-f6 etc., but Black mistakenly
plays for a win, not appreciating
that the self-incarceration of his
queen paves the way for an
imaginative and amusing finish :
33 ..-e5! ± ± ..tg7 34 c6 : xf2 +
35 �xf2 ..txe5 36 de h4 37 c7 h3
(37 . . . ..- xg3 + 38 �fl h3 is no
improvement : 39 c8 ... + �h7 40
..-d7 + �h8 4 1 ..-e8 + �g7 42
..-e7 + �h8 43 ..-rs + �h7 44
..-n + �h8 45 ..-h5 + �g7 46
..- g5 �h7 47 ..t h 1 ) 38 c8 ... +
�g7 39 ..-d7 + �g6 40 'ii'xe6 +
�h5 4 1 ..- f5 + �h6 42 ..- f6 +
�h5 43 ..- h4 + 1 -0.
Suetin-Rashkovsky
Sochi 1 9 73
1 d4 f5 2 g3 il:lf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 il:lf3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 il:lc3
7 il:le4!?( 1 1 7)
In view of Black's theoretical
difficulties in the accepted main
lines of the Ilyin-Zhenevsky,
this neglected byway certamly
deserves deeper investigation. The
similarities with Flohr-Sokolsky
above are evident and there are
also instructive and informative
parallels to be drawn with
Notaros-Maric below.
8 ..-c2
Other moves are unlikely to
worry Black, e.g. 8 ..td2 ..tf6 9
..-c2 il:lxd2! or 8 il:l xe4 fe 9 il:ld2
d5 10 f3 ..tf6 with a supeno
version of the analogous variatio
of note 'c' to White's ninth move
p. 1 38.
8 il:lxc3
9 • xc3
After 9 be Black could transpos
to an acceptable Alekhine vari
ation by 9 . . . ..tf6 1 0 e4 il:lc6 iJ1
unable to find anything better.
9 ..tf6
10 b3
Two other moves have been
played :
(a) 1 0 b4 il:ld7 (clearly, alterna­
tives await testing, amongst them

10 . . . c5) I I .i.b2 c5 (thus far
Sa von- Rashkovsky, USSR 1 974)
an d now 1 2 W b3 leaves White
so mewhat the better of it.
(b) lO .i.e3 �c6 1 1 .C. ad l We7
12 b4 �d8 1 3 Wb3 �f7 14 c5
and now it should not prove too
difficult to improve on the loosen­
ing 1 4 . . . g5?! 1 5 �e1 j; of Hasin­
Simagin, USSR Ch. 1 956.
10 �c6
11 .i.b2 ( 1 1 8 )
Obviously, Black should now
seize the opportunity to play the
thematic 1 1 . . . e5 after which his
position would appear to be com­
pletely satisfactory. Instead, in our
game there occurred 1 1 . . . .i.d7
1 2 .C. ad 1 We8 1 3 Wd2 Wh5 1 4
.C. fe I (Suet i n recommends 1 4 e 3 j;
and notes that 1 4 d5 ed 1 5 cd �e5
1 6 � xe5 de 1 7 d6 c6 would be
unclear) 14 . . . Ci::J e 7 1 5 Ci::J e 5!? .i.c8?
( 1 5 . . . .i.g5 16 f4 de 1 7 de .i.c6
1 8 fg f4! was the way to make a
fight of it) 1 6 Ci::J d 3 ± after which
White instructively increased his
1/yin-Zhenevsky System 1 45
positional superiority to decisive
proportions : 1 6 . . . .i.g5 1 7 f4 .i.f6
1 8 e4 fe 1 9 .C. xe4 ( Black's sickly e­
pawn is completely pinned down)
1 9 . . . .i.d7 20 �e5! (an amusing
echo) 20 . . . .i.xe5 (the ignomini­
ous 20 . . . .i.c8 would leave Black
doubly shamed and still struggling
after 2 1 .i.f3 and 22 Ci::J g4) 2 1 de
d5 22 .C. ee I .C. fe8 23 .i.a3 .i.c6
24 .i.xe7 .C. xe7 25 cd (the rest is
basic technique and best passed
over in silence) 25 . . . .C. ad8 26 d6
.i.xg2 27 �xg2 .C. ed7 28 W b4
Wf5 29 .C.d2 a5 30 W' xb7 cd 3 1
W'c6 d5 32 W'c2 W'fl 3 3 .C. c l d4 34
W'e4 d3? 35 .C. c3 h6 36 .:t cxd3
l hd3 3 7 .C. xd3 .C. xd3 38 W' xd3
W b7 + 39 �h3 W h 1 40 W'c4 �f7
41 f5 Wf3 42 W'xe6 + �f8 43
Wc8 + �e7 44 We6 + �f8 45
� h4 h5 46 Wc8 + 1 -0.
Notaros-Marie
Novi Sad 1 974
1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 �f3
.i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 Ci::J c3
7 a5 ( 1 1 9 )
B y taking b4 under control
Black not only impedes queenside
expansion by White but also pro­
vides protection for knight forays
to that square. The critical main
line feat ures a pawn sacrifice by
Black in return for active piece
play, but with the refinement of
White's defences has come the
1 46 llyin-Zhenevsky System
1 19
w interesting tactical counter 1 1 . . .
growing suspicion that the com­
pensation is insufficient. Unless an
improvement can be found this
attractive variation seems doomed
to oblivion.
8 tt e1
Other continuations make
fewer demands on Black's
resources, e.g. :
(a) 8 'ilfc2 tL!c6 9 e4 (Smyslov­
Filipowicz, Bath 1 973, went 9 a3
e5 10 d5 tL!b8 I I tLlg5?! c6 1 2 tt d l
and now 1 2 . . . tLl g4 would have
been more active than the 1 2 . . .
tL!e8 played) 9 . . . fe 1 0 tLlxe4 e5 I I
de de 1 2 tL!fg5 (Tomovic- Maric,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 956, saw 1 2 tt d l
'ilfe8 1 3 tL!xf6 + ..txf6 1 4 ..te3
Wh5 1 5 ..tc5 tt e8 with Black's
kingside chances at least as
important as White's central
pressure) 1 2 . . . tLlxe4 1 3 tLlxe4
tbd4 14 W d 1 ..te6 1 5 b3 ( Pytei­
Bednarsky, Poland 1 97 1 ) and now
Pytel gives 1 5 . . . a4 1 6 ..t b2 ab
1 7 ab tt ax 1 + .
(b) 8 b3 tL!a6 9 ..tb2 c6 1 0 Wc2
..td7 1 1 : ae 1 ( 1 1 e4 permits the
tL!b4 1 2 We2 fe 1 3 tLlxe4 tLl xe4 1 4
W xe4 e5! with the strong threat of
1 5 . . . ..tf5) 1 1 . . . b5 1 2 tL!d2 be
1 3 tLlxc4 tt c8 1 4 e3 ..te8 1 5 We2
and White's prospects are perhaps
slightly the more positive in this
mutually difficult middlegame;
Vilela-Rantanen, Tallinn 1 979.
This particularly rich example will
repay careful examination. It
seems likely that a search for Black
alternatives and improvements
will be rewarded.
8 tL!e4
Once again we see the knight
blockade White's attempted
advantageous opening of the
centre.
9 tLlxe4
This capture changes the
character of the game completely.
White's basic aim is to induce
. . . d6-d5 and then uncover the
resulting weakness by means of
f2-f3. The drawback is the danger
of the white pieces remaining
bottled up while Black's gain in
mobility.
The best move, 9 Wc2, is exam­
ined in the following game.
9 fe
10 tL!d2 d5
11 f3 ef
12 tLlxf3
The d-pawn is too weak to alloW
1 2 ef ..tf6 etc.
 llyin-Zhenevsky System 147

12 c S ( 1 20) 18 "it" c 1
Hastening t o pluck t h e irritating
thorn from his flesh, but it turns
out not to be so easy to accompl­
ish. 1 8 "it"c2 .tf5 would be worse.
18 "it" b6
19 .l:t d l .tg4
20 .tn
20 "it" xc3 .t b4 2 1 "it"d3?? .tf5
would be tragi-comic curtains, and
2 1 "it"c2 .l:t ae8 likely as not the
beginning of the final act with the
Faced with this challenge to his
black pieces in full cry.
centre White has no time to settle
20 "it"b4
to quiet exploitation and occu­
21 .l:t d3 c2!
pation of e5.
22 "it"xc2
13 cd ed
The white position has turned
14 .te3 c4!
septic and a radical solution must
This pawn has a bright future.
be attempted.
1S lUeS lt:lc6
22 .tfS
16 lt:l xc6 be
23 "it" xc6 .t xd3
17 b3?!
24 "it" xdS + �h8
Priming the long-awaited
2S ed .tf6
advance e2-e4 by 1 7 .tf2 was the
26 .l:tc1 .l:t ae8
correct continuation; neglecting
With this it becomes clear that
this positional imperative, White
despite a temporary rallying the
falls inexorably into passivity.
case is terminal. The final throes :
17 c3! ( 1 21 )
27 .l:t c4 "it"e1 28 .tf2 "it"d2 29 "it"g2
I!/ .tg5 30 d5 .1:[ xf2 0- 1 .
w
Kavalek- Bednarsky
Skopje 0/. 1 972
1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 4 .tg2 e6 4 lt:lf3
.te7 S 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 aS
8 .l:te1 lt:le4
9 "it"c2 ( 1 22 )
Natural and clearly strongest.
148 llyin-Zhener:sky System
9 lLlc6
There are three other possi­
bilities:
(a) 9 . . . d5 produces a rather
poor Stonewall.
(b) 9 . . . lLlxc3 10 "it' xc3 ( 1 0 be
also gives chances of advantage)
I 0 . . . lLlc6 I I e4! d5 ( I I . . fe 1 2
.
: xe4 ..tf6 1 3 ..tf4 is relatively
best but cedes White an unde­
niable positional superiority) 1 2
ed! ..tb4 1 3 Wd3 ed 1 4 ..tg5 lLle7
1 5 c5! ..txe 1 1 6 : xe l : e8 1 7
We2 � f8 1 8 lLle5 with massive
compensation for the exchange;
Shashin-Korzin, semi-final
Moscow Ch. 1 966.
(c) 9 . . . lLla6!? will transpose to
the column in all likelihood.
10 lLlxe4 lLlb4
11 "it'b1
Consistency is essential; in
Raicevic- Maric, Bar 1 977, White
wavered with I I Wc3?! which
encouraged the energetic response
I I . . . fe 1 2 lLld2 d5 1 3 f3 c5 1 4 e3
e5! + .
11 fe
12 W xe4 e5
With the strong threat of 1 3 . . .
..tf5.
13 g4!
Boldly controlling f5, albeit at
the cost of some weakening of the
kingside.
13 ed ( 1 23)
1 4 a3
M uch stronger than the recap­
ture with the knight which lets
Black drum up counterplay, e.g.
14 lLlxd4 ..t h4! 1 5 : fl (the game
Reshevsky-Larsen, Santa Monica
1 966, was drawn by repetition
after 1 5 ..te3 : e8 1 6 Wf4 : rs 1 7
We4 etc.) 1 5 . . . : e8 1 6 Wf3 : rs
1 7 Wh3 h5 1 8 lLl f5 hg 1 9 W'xh4
..txf5 20 ..tg5 Wc8 (or 20 . . . We8
2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 ..td5 + ..te6 23
"it'xg4 Havsky-Karasev, Lenin­
grad Ch. 1 968) 2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 : fd 1
lLle5 with approximately even
chances; Podzielny- Bellin, Win·
terthur 1 974.
14 lLla6

Larsen has mentioned the
moves 14 . . . lL!c6 1 5 lL!xd4 ..th4.
15 W xd4
1 5 lL!xd4 is inferior on account
of 1 5 . . . lL!c5 1 6 Wd5 + �h8 1 7
h 3 c6 1 8 W h5 ..tf6 when 1 9 ..te3
fails to 19 . . . g6 20 Wh6 ..tg7.
15 lL!c5
16 h3 lL!b3 ( 1 24 )
Other attempts appear equally
ineffective:
(a) 1 6 . . . ..tf6 17 W d 1
(b) 1 6 . . . ..te6 1 7 W c 3 ..tf6 1 8
Wc2 a 4 1 9 ..te3 lL! b 3 2 0 .l:l. ad l
tLla5 2 1 lL!d2 and Black has very
1/yin-Zhenevsky System 1 49
little to show for the pawn; Kava­
lek-Jamieson, Buenos Aires 01.
1 978.
17 Wd5 + � h8
18 .l:l. b1 a4
19 ..td2
Stopping . . . .l:l.a5 and . . . h 5
softening up White's kingside.
19 ..tf6
20 ..tb4 'iWe8
21 e4
Black's temporary initiative has
ground to a halt and with normal
play White will simply consolidate
his extra pawn and win. This
explains the last desperate fling
by Black before bowing to the
inevitable: 21 . . . ..te6 22 W xb7 c5
23 e5! de 24 ..tc3 .1:1. b8 25 We4
'iWf7 26 g5 ..te7 27 'iW xe5 .1:1. b6 28
.1:1. bd I ..td8 29 .1:1. d6 ..txc4 30 g6!
hg 3 1 .1:1. xd8! .1:1. xd8 32 lL!g5 W f8
33 'iWe4 1 -0. It must be admitted
that it is very difficult to imagine
this variation being rehabilitated.
15 Classical Stonewall
'Stonewall' is the descriptive term
for the craggy pawn configuration
. . . f5, . . . e6, . . . d5, . . . c6. This
creation of a rock-solid pawn barr­
ier is essentially aimed at stabiliz­
ing the centre in order to free
Black's hands for play on the
flanks. Early interpretations of the
Stonewall often saw this in its
crudest form : Black would leave
the centre and queenside to take
care of themselves and throw
everything into a va ba11que
offensive on the kingside. This
would typically be built up by
occupying the e4 outpost with the
KN, shifting the heavy pieces to
the h-file by means of . . . -.d8-e8-
h 5 and . . . l:H8-f6-h6 and further
mobilizing the infantry by . . . g5.
Such an attack can be very dang­
erous, and constantly figures in
Black's plans, although nowadays
it is likely to be deferred, if not
abandoned, in favour of central
and queenside action. This
modern interpretation posits that
! 50
Black's central spatial parity, stra­
tegic initiative on the kingside,
and adequate queenside prospects
provide sufficient compensation
for ceding White permanent con­
trol of e5. This is the nub of the
ongoing debate on the viability of
the Stonewall formation.
Non-fianchetto Stonewall
Practice has shown that these lines
tend to favour White, particularly
when his QB is developed outside
the pawn chain, thus Black should
probably prefer the more flexible
type of development seen in
Chapter 1 0. This variation has
produced many horror stories for
Black, but none more instructive
than the following game which is
the classic warning of the inevi­
table consequences of chronic
dark-square debility.
Schlechter-John
Barmen 1 905
d4 f5

2 c4 e6
3 lLic3 d5
As indicated above, 3 . . . lLif6 is
more promising.
4 .H4
There are also two rather dubi­
ous gambit continuations :
(a) 4 g4?! fg 5 e4 de 6 'Wxg4 (or
6 lLixe4 ..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLif6) 6
. . . lLif6 7 'W g3 lLic6 + Shainswit­
Breitman, Tbilisi 1 9 6 1 .
(b) 4 cd e d 5 e 4 d e (5 . . . fe?? 6
'Wh5 + ) 6 ..tc4 lLif6 7 lLige2 ..td6
8 ..tf4 lLic6 9 0-0 and although
White has some compensation for
the pawn it should not be too
difficult for Black to improve on
Shersher-Natapov, M oscow
1 955, which saw 9 . . . ..txf4 I 0
lLixf4 lLixd4 I I lLicd5 lLixd5 1 2
lLixd5 lLie6 1 3 'Wb3 and Black is
in danger due to his inability to
complete his development and get
his king into safety.
4 the capture sequence . . . ..txf4,
5 e3 c6
6 lLif3 ( 1 25 )
125
8 the correct 6 . . . ..te7, e.g. 7 ..td3
Classical Stonewall 151
There is little point for White
in deviating from this promising
natural development, e.g. 6 ..td3
..te7 7 lLige2 0-0 8 h3 (White's
plan is to castle queenside and
open lines on the other wing by
g2-g4) 8 . . . lLie4 9 'Wc2 lLid7 I 0
f3 lLixc3 I I lLixc3 lLif6 1 2 0-0-0
de (a typical procedure; Black
abandons the centre in order to
gain time for a pawn storm on the
flank) 1 3 ..t xc4 b5 14 ..td3 a5
with a double-edged position;
Polugayevsky- Ufimtsev, Moscow
1 955.
6 ..td6
A fundamental positional error.
In this position Black gets nothing
whatsoever in return for the
further weakening of his already
sensitive dark squares in contrast
to the fianchetto variations where
White either has to accept a weak­
ening of his king's position (from
gxf4), or loss of time (the Botvinnik
..ta3 variations).
It is, however, difficult for Black
to equalize completely even after
0-0 8 0-0 (8 lLie5 helps Black sim­
plify : 8 . . . lLibd7 9 0-0 lLixe5 t o
..txe5 lLig4! I I ..tf4 g 5 1 2 ..tg3
..td6 1 3 ..txd6 'Wxd6 14 g3 e5
and Black's opening worries are
past: Timman-P. Nikolic, Niksic
1 983) 8 . . . lLie4 . (that White can
gain an advantage by force against
/52 Classical Stonewall

this natural move is strong testi­ structural inferiority brought on

mony to the inadequacy of this by this move.
particular Stonewall pos1t10n; 12 ef Wf7
note that the equally normal 8 13 lZ'le5 We7
. . . lLl bd7 is also unplayable on 14 ..txe4!
account of 9 cd forcing 9 . . . cd Excellent technique; White
because of the undefended f-pawn) liquidates his doubled pawns and
9 ..txe4! de (9 . . fe lO lZ'le5 lLld7
. enhances his prospects of obtain­
1 1 f3 ef 1 2 .:t xf3 ..tf6 1 3 e4 is ing a good knight versus bad
no improvement) lO lZ'le5 lZ'ld7 bishop situation.
(a pawn hunt of the bishop fails 14 fe
tactically: lO . . . g5 1 1 ..tg3 f4? 1 2 15 f3 ef
ef gf 1 3 Wg4 + etc. o r l O . . . �h8 16 .:.eel Wc7
1 1 f3! g5 12 ..tg3 f4 1 3 fe! fg 14 17 Wa3!
Wh5! and Black cannot survive) The dark square domination
I I f3 lZ'lxe5 1 2 ..txe5 ef 1 3 W xf3 begins; normal development by 1 7
with complete control. . . . lLld7 i s ruled out because of 1 8
7 ..td3 Wc7 We7.
8 g3! 17 �g8
The question of how the black­ 18 .:. xf3 lZ'la6
squared bishops disappear is a 19 b3 Wd8
vitally important one; if Black can 20 c5
be forced to capture on f4 then White has no objections to par­
White will recapture with the e­ rying the indirect threat to his d­
pawn and enjoy pressure against pawn by this space-gaining
e6 and total domination of e5. advance.
8 0-0 20 lZ'lc7
9 0-0 lZ'le4 21 Wb2 ..td7
10 Wb3 22 Wc2 We7
Threatening to take twice on e4 23 .:. en .:r. ae8
after I I cd ed ( I I . . . cd?? 1 2 lLl b5). 24 g4 ..tc8
10 �h8 25 .:t h3
11 .:t acl ..txf4 Forcing a further, and ulti­
Understandable given the vari­ mately fatal, weakening of the
ous threats generated by the vis­ black squares.
a-vis of rook and queen on the 25 g6
c-file, but really anything is prefer­ 26 b4
able to the self-imposed lifelong H olding the centre in a vice-like
 Classical Stonewall 153

grip White is free to expand on

126
the flanks in preparation for a B
breakthrough on either side
according to the disposition of
Black's defences.
26 Wi'f6
27 l:t hf3 l:t e7
28 a4 a6
29 tt:Jd1
A regrouping to cover f5 and
facilitate immediate occupation of
the weak black squares to be fixed 40 l:t hf3 tt:Jxf6
by g5. Again, there is no option
29 l:t g7 because of the threat to penetrate
30 tt:Je3 Wi'e7 to the eighth with mate.
31 g5 i.d7 41 l:t xf6 l:t xf6
32 tt:J3g4 .te8 42 ef l:t e8
Black's wretched position is 43 tt:Jf7 + �g8
utterly passive, like some helpless 44 tt:Je5
creature encoiled by a python and Having acquired a protected
gradually being squeezed to death. passed pawn on the sixth as a
33 lLl h6 + liP h8 result of his middlegame pressure,
34 Wi'e2 Wi'd8 Schlechter appropriately begins
35 tt:J5g4 i.d7 the final phase with a thematic
36 Wi'e5 tt:Je8 re-occupation of e5.
37 l:t h3 Wi'c7 44 l:t d8
37 . . . We7 38 W b8 would be an 45 �g2 �f8
embarrassing way for the queen­ 46 h4 .te8
side to drop off. 47 �f3 i.f7
38 tt:Jf6 ( 1 26 ) 48 �f4
The culmination o f the first part Of course, the king is brought
of White's strategy, with his pieces up as far as possible before com­
optimally entrenched on the weak mencing the final breakthrough.
b lack squares. 48 �e8
38 Wi' xe5 49 l:t b l �f8
Forced; 38 . . . Wi'd8 39 tt:Jxh7 Black's helplessness is truly
wo uld win immediately. pitiful.
39 fe J:re7 50 b5
/54 Classical Stonewall
Black resigns. After 50 . . . ab 5 1
a b ..te8 52 be ..txc6 5 3 lt:lxc6 be
54 �e5 White would finally reap
material rewards for his masterly
display of sustained strategic
domination.
Karpov-Spassky
Candidates match 1 974
d4 d5
The variations with e3 fre­
quently arise via transposition.
2 c4
Although White generally
develops the QN on c3, as in our
featured games and variations, this
is not obligatory as the following
examples show: 2 lt:lf3 c6 3 c4 e6
4 e3 f5 and now :
(a) 5 ..te2 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3
fle7 8 ..tb2 lt:lbd7 9 lt:le5 0-0
1 0 lt:ld2 g5?! (a risky attempt to
complicate; I 0 . . lt:le4 I I f3 lt:lxd2
. in which White creates a fixed,
12 flxd2 lt:lxe5 1 3 de ..tc5 is the
solid way to equalize) I I f4 gf?!
( I I . . flg7 or I I . . . lt:le4 immedi­
. hope of being able to make some­
ately are both better) 1 2 ef lt:le4 1 3
lt:lxe4 fe?! ( 1 3 . . . de was relatively
best) 14 fld2 lt:lf6 1 5 c5 ..tc7 1 6
b4 ..t d 7 1 7 a 4 lt:le8 ( 1 7 . . . �h8)
18 l h3! and White stands better
over the entire board; Speelman­
Seirawan, candidates match, Saint
John 1 988.
(b) 5 ..td3 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3
fle7 8 a4 0-0 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10
lt:lxa3 lt:le4 ( I 0 . . . ..td7!? intending
the transfer to h5 via e8 comes
strongly into consideration) 1 1
lt:lc2 lt:ld7 1 2 fie I a5 1 3 lt:ld2 b6
1 4 f3 lt:lxd2 1 5 flxd2 lt:lf6 1 6 l:Hd t
..ta6 with just a tiny edge to
White; Korchnoi-Yusupov,
Montpellier 1 985.
2 e6
3 lt:lc3 c6
4 e3 f5 ( 1 27 )
1 27
w
5 f4
The so-called Double Stonewall
balanced pawn structure in the
centre and on the kingside in the
thing of his more active c-pawn
placement. Practice indicates that
Black should have little difficulty
in holding the balance.
Nor do other moves hold out
much hope for White of achieving
an opening advantage, e.g. :
(a) 5 lt:lh3 lt:lf6 6 ..td2 ..td6 7
flc2 0-0 8 0-0-0 fle7 9 f3 de 10 e4
fe I I lt:l xe4?! ( I I fe is better but
also entirely satisfactory for Black
 Classical Stonewall / 55

after I I . . . e5 1 2 ..txc4 + �h8) 1 3 . . . lt:lxe5 1 4 de i.a3 + 1 5 � b I

I I . . b5 1 2 lt:lxd6 W xd6 1 3 f4 lt:la6
. W h4 with advantage.
14 ..te2 c5 and White is in trouble; 5 lt:lf6
Bronstein-Botvinnik, World Ch. 6 tLlf3 ..te7
1 95 1 . 7 i.e2 0-0
(b) 5 i.d3 lt:lf6 6 Wc2 ..te7 7 8 0-0 tLle4
8ge2 0-0 8 f3 �h8 9 i.d2 lt:la6 9 Wc2
I 0 a3 lt:lc7 with approximately 9 tLle5 achieved nothing in
equal chances as Black is well Tukmakov- Lerner, Cheliabinsk
placed to initiate a pawn storm on 1 980 : 9 . . . tLld7 10 tLlxe4 fe ( to
the queenside in case White castles . . . de?! 1 1 g4 brings unpleasant
there; Burger-Saidy, US Ch. tension to Black's centre) 1 1 tLl xd7
I 965/66. i.xd7 1 2 ..id2 a5 1 3 l:l. c l b6
(c) 5 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 (the more experim­ 14 ..tg4 i.d6 Black's queenside
ental 5 . . . ..td6 6 i.d3 Wf6 also counterplay is under way.
comes into consideration as 9 lt:ld7
shown by Osnos-Novotelnov, 10 b3 ( 1 28 )
Leningrad 1 956, which went 7 b3
1 28
tt:Je7 8 ..t b2 lt:ld7 9 Wc2 0-0 1 0 h3
B
and now, instead of 10 . . . �h8?!
as played, I 0 . . . de I I i.xc4 b5
with . . . e5 to follow would have
whipped up promising counter­
play) 6 ..td3 i.d6 (more active
than 6 . . . ..te7 while 6 . . . lt:le4?!
invites the sharp retort 7 g4!) 7 b3
0-0 8 i.b2 lt:le4 9 Wc2 lt:ld7 1 0 0-
0-0 ( 1 0 0-0 l:lf6 would be very
risky; cf. Maroczy-Tartakower, p. 10 tLlxc3?!
99) 1 0 . . . a5 I I h3 with a sharp It certainly looks misguided to
battle of opposite wing attacks to exchange the stallion on e4 for the
come. The game Zak-Holmov, colt on c3. Both 10 . . . l:l. f6 1 1 a4
semi-final USSR Ch. 1 9 5 1 , showed b6 (Botvinnik) and 10 . . . tLldf6 1 1
that White cannot save a tempo tLle5 ..td7 intending . . . i.e8-h5
by I I g4?! because of I I . . . tt:Jxc3! ( Kotov) are acceptable.
I 2 i.xc3 fg 1 3 lt:le5 ( 1 3 ..txh7 + It W xc3 lt:lf6
�h8 1 4 lt:le5 lt:lxe5 1 5 de i.a3 + 12 tLle5 ..td7
1 6 �b I Wh4 and the f-pawn falls) 13 a4 tLle4?!
156 Classical Stonewall

Seeking the exchange of light­ opening on the kingside.

squared bishops by 1 3 . . . ..te8 1 4 22 ..td6 .l:l. h7
..ta3 ..th5 i s a more sensible 23 1t'b4 ..tc8
procedure. The qualitative difference
14 1t'd3 ..tf6?! between the bishops could not be
Yet another inaccuracy which greater.
allows White to improve his pos­ 24 .l:l. a2 �g8
ition; 14 . . . ..te8 was still prefer­ 25 h3 a6
able. 25 . . . h4 would enable White to
15 ..ta3 .l:l. e8 open the g-file with deadly effect.
16 ..th5! 26 g3 ..td7!
Compelling Black to weaken his This offer of a pawn in order to
pawns. bring the QR into play is Black's
16 g6 best chance.
17 ..tf3 ..txe5 27 1t'xb7 ..te8
Given that Black's game is 28 1t'b4 .l:l. aa7
rapidly going downhill anyway, 29 .l:l. g2 .l:l. ab7
this otherwise crazy concession of 30 1t'c3 .l:l. bfi
the black squares at least has the 31 ..tc5 g5
merit of gaining the necessary Spassky is doing his best to
tempo to prevent White opening complicate matters.
lines by g2-g4. 32 ..tb6?
18 de! h5 An inaccuracy which keeps
19 ..txe4! Black's hopes alive. This was the
Correctly eliminating Black's right moment to play 32 cd! oblig­
only good piece. Despite the ing Black to recapture with the c­
rema1mng bishops being of pawn (32 . . . ed? 33 f5! is crushing)
opposite colour, W hite retains a thus opening a route of invasion
vast positional advantage due to for White's heavy pieces.
the superior activity of his position 32 1t'd7
in general and his bishop m 33 cd ed
particular. Now Black has f5 under control
19 fe and this means that White must
Opening a file for the white permit the opening of the h-file in
rooks would be suicidal. order to make progress.
20 1t'd2 �fi 34 g4 hg
21 a5 .l:l. h8 35 hg gf
To try and discourage line- 36 ef .l:l. h4
 Classical Stonewall !57

37 f5 Botvinnik's 7 b3
38 e6 the Classical 7 lLlc3
39 'W'g3?
In mutual time-trouble Karpov Petrosian's 7 lLl bd2
chooses the wrong method of par­ Benko-Guimard
rying the threatened . . . .l:t h l + Buenos Aires 1 960
and . . . 'W'f4 + . 39 'W'e3! makes a I d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lLlf6 4 .i.g2
crucial check on g5 available, .i.e7 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 0-0 d5
e.g. 39 . . . .l:t h l + 40 �f2 .l:t l h3
7 lLlbd2 ( 1 29)
4 1 'W'g5 + .l:t g7 42 'W'd8! and
Black's resources are practically 129
exhausted. B
39 .l:t h l +
40 �f2 'W'b4!
41 'W'e3
Here the game was adjourned
and analysis established that
White should accept the repetition
41 . . . .l:t l h3 42 .l:t g 3 .l:t h2 + 43
.::!. g2 .1:t 2h3 44 .1:t g3 etc. since 42
'1ifg5 + .l:t g7 43 'W'd8 cS! gives a
counterattack at least sufficient to Introduced and popularized by
draw. Thus, draw agreed. Petrosian, this flexible variation
generally aims to cover eS by
Standard Stonewall means of the manoeuvre lLlf3-e5-
The standard Stonewall begins d 3 and lLld2-f3. The knight on d3
from the following diagrammed is also handy for supporting a
position : space-gaining march by the b­
1 d4 f5 pawn. Black needs to find the right
2 g3 lLlf6 balance between disputing control
3 .i.g2 e6 of eS (by . . . lLl b8-d7, . . . lLlf6-
4 lLlD .i.e7 e4-d6-f7, and . . . .i.e7-f6) and
5 0-0 0-0 pursuing the traditional kingside
6 c4 d5 attack.
We shall examine White's three Other seventh moves to note :
major schemes of development in (a) 7 cd (this premature release
t urn: of the central tension improves
Petrosian's 7 lLlbd2 Black's pawn structure and
/ 58 Classical Stonewall
increases the range of his QB) 7
. . . ed 8 lt:\c3 c6 9 l:. b l 'ii' e 8 (9 . . .
a5!?) 1 0 �f4 tt:l bd7 I I b4 a6 1 2
'ii' b3 o;t>h8 1 3 tt:la4 lt:\e4 1 4 tt:lc5
�f6 15 'ii' c2 l:. g8 16 tt:lxd7 �xd7
1 7 tt:le5 g5 18 �c I tt:ld6 and Black
has successfully impeded White's
minority attack whilst preparing
a kingside attack; Panov�Chis­
tiakov, M oscow Ch. 1 938.
(b) 7 'ii' c2 (a very flexible move
which will normally transpose to
the major lines) 7 . . . c6 (the exper­
imental 7 . . . lt:\c6 failed to impress
in Lengyei� Spassky, Moscow
1 97 1 , which saw 8 a3 a5 9 b3 �d7
1 0 lt:\c3 �e8 I I cd lt:\xd5 12 �b2
�h5 1 3 tt:la4 'ii' e 8 14 tt:lc5 �xc5
1 5 de 'ilt'e7 and now, instead of 1 6
tt:le5? f4! + , 1 6 e4! ± would have
highlighted the deficiencies of
Black's position) 8 �f4 'ii' e 8 (8 . . .
�d7 9 tt:lbd2 �e8 also comes
into consideration) 9 lt:\bd2 'ii' h5
10 l:. ae l tt:lbd7 I I tt:lg5?! (an inter­
esting idea which does not quite
come off) I I . . . tt:lg4 1 2 h4 'ii' g6 1 3
D e5! with massive complications
not unfavourable to Black; Soko­
lov- Berkovich, USSR 1 973.
7 c6
7 . . . b6 intending to contest the
centre by . . . c7�c5 is a totally
different plan providing much
food for thought, e.g. 8 b3 c5 9
�b2 (the black pawns would be
full of dynamism after 9 cd ed 1 0
d e be) 9 . . . �b7 1 0 l:. c l lt:\c6!
(improving on the seminal . . . b6
game, Petrosian� Tolush, USSR
Ch. 1 958, where Black went wrong
with 10 . . . lt:\a6? I I tt:le5 'ii' e 8 1 2
e3 l:. d8 1 3 'ii' e2 �d6 1 4 tt:ldD tt:le4
1 5 tt:ld3 'ii' h5 1 6 l:. fe l ± ) I I e3
l:. c8 12 'ii' e2 tt:le4 1 3 l:. fd l 'ii' e 8 1 4
d e ( 1 4 cd e d 1 5 tt:le5 has been
recommended as a better try) 1 4
. . . b e 1 5 tt:le5 tt:lxe5 1 6 �xe5 �f6
1 7 lt:\0 'ilt'e7 1 8 'ii' b2 l:. fd8 with
healthy prospects; Grefe�R.
Byrne, US Ch. 1 977.
7 . . . lt:\c6 has a better chance of
being playable here than after 7
'ii' c2 (see above), e.g. 8 e3 tt:le4 9
a3 a5! and having prevented the
opponent's queenside expansion
Black can turn to continuing his
development by . . . �d7�e8.
8 'ii' c2 'ii' e8 ( 1 30)
I n addition to this normal move,
and 8 . . . b6 which was played
in the next game, Black has a
noteworthy alternative in the
multi-purpose prophylactic 8 . . .
a5!?, e.g. 9 tt:le5 lt:\ bd7 1 0 tt:l d 3
 Classical Stonewall /59

(after 1 0 lLldf3 Black exchanged ing White in complete control;

his way to equality in Malich­
Mariotti, Skopje 01. 1 972, by I 0
. . . lLlxe5 I I lLlxe5 ttJd 7 1 2 .tf4
lLl xe5 1 3 .t xe5 .td6) I 0 . . . lLle4
I I lLID ttJd6 1 2 b3 lLifl! 1 3 .t b2
1ie8 1 4 e3 �h8 1 5 lLlfe5 lLl fxe5 1 6
de b6 1 7 0 ttJc5 1 8 lLlf4 .ta6
with a fine game; Spassov-Bellin,
Albena 1 979.
9 lLle5 ttJbd7
It would be a grave error to
ignore the centre and stake every­
thing on a kingside assault, as this
first of two instructive examples
clearly shows : 9 . . . 1ih5 (prema­
ture) 10 ttJdO lLle4 1 1 ttJd3 g5 1 2
tZ:lfe5 ttJd 7 1 3 0 ttJd6 1 4 b3 .l:l.f6
1 5 h3 lLlfl 1 6 .t b2 lLldxe5 1 7 de
.tt h6 1 8 .tt ae l f4 1 9 g4 Wg6 20
Wc3 .tt h4 2 1 e3 and by opening
the centre White exposes the lack
of coordination in the black camp;
Doda -Scheparets, Prague 1 9 56.
10 ttJdJ
It is generally in the interests of
the player with more space to
a void exchanges.
10 �h8
The second warning against
intemperate attack ing : 1 0 . . . g5 I I
lLIO lLle4 ( Flohr's I I . . . h6 is better)
1 2 b4! Wh5 1 3 .tt b l .tt f6 14 b5 f4
( 1 4 . . . .tt h6 1 5 h3 brings Black to
a grinding halt) 1 5 gf g4 16 lLlfe5
J: h6 1 7 h3 gh 1 8 .tO h2 + 1 9
� h I Wh3 20 .te3 and again
Black's initiative has dried up leav-
Szabo-Duck stein, Bamberg 1 968.
10 . . . lLle4 is quite acceptable,
however, with a likely return to
the column after I I ttJO �h8.
It lLif3
It is nearly always mistaken for
Black to exchange his Stonewall
knight for no reason as happened
in Petrosian-Cardoso, Leipzig 01.
1 960 : I I b3 lLlxd2?! 1 2 .txd2
�h8 1 3 e3 .td6 1 4 cd ed 15 .t b4
and with the exchange of black­
squared bishops White's queen­
side minority attack is ready to
roll with effect.
It lLle4
12 .tt bt ttJd6
1 2 . . . a5 first comes into con­
sideration.
13 c5 lLlf7
14 .tf4
Bringing the bishop into play
clearly has its attractions but the
disadvantage is that Black can
attack it with gain of tempo. 1 4
b4 would be consistent.
14 .tf6
15 1ic3
Keeping control of e5.
15 g5
16 ii..c7 ( 1 3 1 )
A fertile and mutually difficult
middlegame awaits the players.
The present game unfolded as fol­
lows : 1 6 . . . J: g8 ( 1 6 . . . We7 has
its points) 1 7 ltJ�5 ttJdxe5 1 8 de
i.g7 19 Wd4? (this innocent cen-
1 60 Classical Sto11ewal/
/31
8 ..tg2 : xg2 + ! 38 'it>xg2 'W'g4 +
tralization turns out to be a serious
error which Black punishes with
great energy and accuracy) 19 . . .
'W'd7 20 .ta5 (20 .td6? lL!xd6
2 1 cd 'W' xd6!, exploiting White's
undefended queen, shows the tac­
tical inadequacy of his nineteenth
move) 20 . . . b6! 21 cb ab 22 .txb6
.ta6! (capturing on a2 would be
premature because of : a l seizing
the file, but now that becomes an
auxiliary threat to the undermin­
ing of the e-pawn) 23 lL!c5 'W'c8 24
f4 gf 25 gf .txe2 26 : f2 .th5
(the QB arrives at its traditional
outpost via an unconventional
route) 27 a4 (this passed pawn is
now White's main asset) 27 . . .
lL!d6! 28 a5 lL!e4 29 lLlxe4 fe 30 b4
.th6 3 1 f5'? (inappropriate aggres­
sion based on a flawed conception;
31 'it> h I was necessary) 3 1 . . .
ef 32 e6 + .tg7 33 : xf5 .tf3!
(avoiding the messy complications
of capturing the queen in favour
of placing yet another threat over
White's head) 34 :g5 'W' xe6 35
.txf3 .tf6! 36 : xg8 + : xg8 37
39 � h i 'W'f3 + 40 �g l 'W'g4 + 4 1
�h i 'W'f3 + 4 2 �g l .txd4 + 43
.txd4 + �g8 (the smoke has
cleared leaving Black's queen
dominating the insecure pieces) 44
: e l 'W'd3 45 .tc5 �f7 46 : a t
e 3 47 a 6 'W'g6 + ! 4 8 � h i 'W'f6
0- 1 . Material loss is unavoidable,
e.g. 49 : c l e2 (threatening 50 . . .
• fl + ) 50 � g2 .. g5 + .
Portisch- Radulov
Budapest 1 969
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lL!fJ
.te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4
6 c6 ( 132)
An important nuance of move
order which is mainly aimed at
avoiding the trade of black­
squared bishops which occurs in
Botvinnik's Variation (6 . . . d5) 7
b3 etc. The deferring of structural
commitment is a generally useful
concept which arises quite regu­
larly in the Dutch (cf. Alekhine's
 Classical Stonewall 161

Variation), and this particular Of course, e2-e4 must b e pre­

application is probably the most vented.
successful. Attempts to take 9 tt:le5 .tb7
advantage of this move order have 10 tt:ld3
so far been unconvincing: The knight is extremely well
(a) 7 c5 b6 8 cb ab (8 . . . "thb6 placed here, looking at both flanks
also comes into consideration) 9 as well as the centre.
tt:lc3 .tb7!? intending . . . c5 and 10 tt:lbd7
protecting c6 in readiness to eject Declaring himself ready to
a tt:le5 by . . . d6 looks promising answer 1 1 tt:lf4 with 1 1 . . . �n.
for Black, and 9 . . . tt:la6 aiming to but 10 . . . .td6 may be preferable.
place the QN on d5 via b4 or c7 11 b4
also seems playable. Beginning an energetic pawn
(b) 7 b3 a5! 8 .ta3 (Black is advance on the queenside which
very active on the queenside after gains useful space and leads to the
8 c5 b6 9 cb Wxb6) 8 . . . .txa3! 9 opening of a file for the rooks.
tt:lxa3 We7 1 0 W c l ( 1 0 c5?! b6! is 11 : e8
good for Black) 10 . . . d6 (the This seems superfluous and
advantage of restraining the d­ should be replaced by an immedi­
pawn now becomes apparent) 1 1 ate 1 1 . . . .td6.
W b2 tt:lbd7 1 2 tt:lc2 e5 and Black's 12 a4 .td6
opening has been a complete suc­ 13 ttl f3 tt:le4
cess : Kelecevic-Bellin, Eerbeek 14 c5 be
1 978. A voidance of this exchange
(c) After 7 tt:lc3 or 7 tt:lbd2 Black would entail living with the const­
may transpose to the Stonewall ant threat of b4-b5.
having circumvented Botvinnik's 15 be .tc7
simplification. 16 .tf4
7 Wc2 The now familiar formula of
This keeps the strategic guessing removing Black's best bishop.
game going. 16 .txf4
7 b6 17 gf!
This is playable, but 7 . . . a5 This effectively puts the centre
is a more resolute continuation, under lock and key while White
intending to answer 8 b3 by 8 . . . furthers his queenside initiative.
tt:la6 with all sorts of intriguing 17 Wc7
possibilities to come. 18 tt:lfeS tt:lef6
8 tt:lbd2 d5 Not relishing being left with a
162 Classical Stonewall

bad bishop against a good knight �h7 35 -.xf5 + g6 36 -.n + and

as was on the cards. mate next move.
19 lUb1 aS?! 29 -.d6 �f7 ( 1 33 )
It is understandable that Black
should want to activate his bishop 1 33
but this preparatory move ( 1 9 . . . w
..ta6? 20 tt:Jb4) seriously weakens
b6 and also presents the a-pawn
as a target. The best chance was
19 . . . tt eb8 hoping to exchange
some pieces and hang on.
20 tt:Jxd7!
Portisch instantly sets about
removing the defenders of b6.
20 tt:Jxd7
21 tt:Je5 tt:Jxe5
22 fe n ebS 30 e4!!
23 n b6 ..ta6 A stunning and very instructive
24 n ab1 n b7 breakthrough. Despite the paucity
25 -.d2! of pieces, Portisch mounts a fero­
Forcing Black into an cious and irresistible assault on
unpleasant exchange. the black king.
25 n xb6 30 -. xb6
26 cb! 30 . . . fe? 3 1 ..th3 is instantly
The introduction to a decisive decisive, but the most beautiful
infiltration manoeuvre. variation would have occurred
26 -.b7 after 30 . . . de, viz. 3 1 d5! ed 32
27 -.xa5 ..tb5 ..th3! g6 33 -.f6 + �g8 34 ..txf5!!
27 . . . ..txe2? would permit an gf 35 �hi ..te2 36 ngt + ..tg4
amusing conclusion : 28 -.xa8 + ! 37 -.xf5 etc. The sweep of the
-. xa8 29 b7 -. b8 30 ..tfl ! followed attack from the queen's flank
by the victorious march of the a­ through the centre to the kingside
pawn. is remarkable. After the text move
28 -. b4 n xa4 everything is simple and the game
28 . . . ..txa4 would lose in more ended : 3 1 ef -.a7 (3 1 . . . ef 32 e6 +
predictable fashion : 29 n a t ..ib5 �f6 33 e7 + �f7 34 -.d8 ± ± )
30 n xa8 + -.xa8 31 -.e7! -.ai + 32 -.xe6 + ..t;>f8 33 ..t xd5 cd 34
32 ..tfl h6 33 b7 ..txe2 34 -.xe6 + n xb5 n xd4 35 -.c8 + 1 -0.

Botvinnik's 7 b3
Kasparoy-T. Petrosian
Niksic / 983
1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 J.g2 lLlf6 4 lLlf3
J.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5
7 b3 ( /34 )
Given Black's general dark
square debility in the Stonewall,
the primary positional logic
behind the intention to exchange
black squared bishops by J.a3 is
clearly impeccable. Interestingly
though, it turns out that the
immediate implementation of this
strategically desirable goal
detracts from its strength (another
vindication of Nimzowitsch's dic­
tum that the threat is stronger
than the execution). There is no
great mystery here : basically, it is
simply that the early exchange
simplifies Black's defensive task
both conceptually, by removing
st rategic complexity, and phys­
ically, by giving him more space
to work in.
Nowadays. therefore, Botvin-
Classical Stonewall 1 63
nik's variation is rarely seen in its
pure form, and 7 b3 tends to be
employed for its general usefulness
and concomitant flexibility, wait­
ing to see Black's reaction, and
usually transposing elsewhere as
it is a common denominator in
both lL! bd2 and lL!c3 variations.
7 c6
With this standard response
Black declares himself unafraid of
the threatened exchange. Alterna­
tively, two contrasting methods of
avoiding simplification and pro­
moting strategic complexity are
also available :
(a) 7 . . . lL!c6 8 J. b2 (Black can
answer 8 J.a3 by either 8 . . .
J.xa3 9 lL!xa3 'fke7 or 8 . . . lL!b4!?,
but it could be that the as yet
untested 8 . . . lLle4 is even more
attractive) 8 . . . J.d7 (8 . . . lLle4 is
also worth attention, e.g. 9 lLlc3
J.f6 I 0 e3 lLle7 I I 'fke2 J.d7 1 2
lL!e5 J.xe5 1 3 de J.c6 1 4 l:l. fd I
and although White has an edge
earlier improvements for Black
could well exist; A. Mikhalch­
ishin- Eingorn, USSR Ch. 1 985)
9 lL!c3 (Schmidt-Spassky, Buenos
Aires 01. 1 978, went 9 lL!e5 J.e8
10 lL!d3 J.f7 I I lL!d2 a5 with a
rich middlegame in prospect) 9 . . .
J.e8 1 0 lL!g5 J.f7 I I e3 'fkd7 1 2
lLlxf7 l:l. xf7 1 3 lL!a4 b6 1 4 l:l. c l
J.f8!? (White obtained an
unpleasant central spatial super­
iority after 1 4 . . . lL!d8 1 5 lL!c3 : f8
1 64 Classical Stonewall
1 6 f3 lLlf7 1 7 e4 in Polugayevsky­
Spassky, Tilburg 1 983) 1 5 'it'c2
lLlb4 1 6 'it' b l lLle4 1 7 l:tfd l .l: d8
1 8 a3 lLlc6 1 9 lLlc3 lLlf6! 20 b4 lLle7
21 'it' a2 g5 22 a4 ..th6 and both
sides have their chances and prob­
lems in a difficult opposite wing
attack situation; Law-Bellin,
Commonwealth Ch. 1 985.
(b) 7 . . . b6 8 ..tb2 ..tb7 9 lLl bd2
c5 (contesting the centre with
pawns rather than pieces as in the
previous example) 10 e3 lLlc6 l l
'it'e2 .l: c8 1 2 : a c t lLle4 1 3 .l: fd 1
'it'e8 (White will not find it easy
to gain an advantage from this
complex position; his pieces are
generally well placed but he lacks
a strong central outpost corres­
ponding to Black's on e4) 1 4 de
be 1 5 lLle5 lLlxe5 16 ..txe5 ..tf6
1 7 lLlf3 'it'e7 1 8 'it' b2 .l: fd8 1 9 cd?!
.l: xd5 20 ..txf6 'it' xf6 2 1 'it' xf6 gf
22 : xd5 ..txd5 and Black stands
somewhat better as his pieces are
working in concert on the
important queen's flank; Grefe­
Hyrne, U S Ch. 1 977 (also cited
on p. 1 58; note the transpositional
possibility).
8 'it'c2
Not surprisingly, Kasparov
rejects simplification in favour of
maintaining maximum flexibility.
It should be noted that the white
queen is usually best placed on c2
from where, amongst other things,
it keeps an eye on Black's f-pawn
in the hope of being able to induce
a favourable cd cd exchange.
Black has tried various methods
of reacting to 8 ..ta3 but the
following two lines are probably
the most satisfactory :
(a) 8 . . . lLlbd7 9 'it' c 1 (or 9 ..txe7
'it' xe7 10 'it'c2 lLle4 1 1 lLlc3 lLld6
1 2 lLla4 b6 1 3 cd cd 14 .l: fc l ..t a6
1 5 'it' b2 : fc8 1 6 e3 'it'd8 = ; an
example of when the opening of
the c-file does not favour White
as Black can easily contest its
control; Gligoric- Mariotti, Nice
01. 1 974) 9 . . . lLle4 10 lLlbd2 (or
10 ..txe7 'it' xe7 l l e3 b6 = ) 10 . . .
..txa3 1 1 'it'xa3 b6 1 2 .l: ac l ..tb7
1 3 .l: fd l 'it' f6 14 cd ed and Black's
strong central position and poten­
tial kingside play balance out
White's queenside pressure;
Szabo-Botvinnik, Budapest 1 952.
(b) 8 . . . ..td7 (very solid) 9 'it' c l
( 9 ..t xe7 'it' xe7 1 0 'it' d 3 J.. e 8 l l
lLl bd2 lLle4 l 2 lLle5 lLlxd2 1 3 'it'xd2
lLld7 1 4 lLld3 ..th5 1 5 'it'e3 : ae8
gave Black very sound equality in
Antunac-Smederevac, Wijk aan
Zee II 1 970; similarly, 10 lLlbd2
here would gain no advantage
after 10 . . . ..te8 l l lLle5 lLl bd7 1 2
lLldf3 .l: d8) 9 . . . J.. e 8 1 0 lLlg5 (in
Uhlmann-Guimard, Buenos
Aires 1 960, Black obtained the
advantage by tactical means,
beginning with a typical double
attack on White's d- and c-pawns,
after 10 lLlc3 lLl bd7 l l lLlg5 ..tf7

1 2 f3? ..txa3 1 3 1ha3 de! 14 be
ltJb6 1 5 -.c5 ttJfd7 1 6 ltJxf7 -.f6!;
simplification by 10 ..txe7 -.xe7
1 1 -. a3 -.xa3 1 2 ltJxa3 as in
Salov-Short, Barcelona World
Cup 1 989, gives White nothing
after 1 2 . . . ..th5 1 3 l: fe 1 ltJbd7)
10 . . . ..tn 1 1 ttJd2 ttJ bd7 1 2 ttJxf7
l: xf7 1 3 ..txe7 -. xe7 1 4 -.c3 (thus
far Reshevsky-Gligoric, match
1 952) and now 1 4 . . . l: e8! to prime
a possible advance of the e-pawn,
gives Black completely satisfac­
tory play.
It should be noted that 8 . . .
..txa3 9 ltJxa3 does not leave the
knight offside as might appear to
be the case at first sight, but in
fact helps it on the way to control­
ling e5 via ltJa3-c2-e 1 -d3.
8 ..td7 ( 1 35 )
This move, b y which the Q B
prepares to thread its way through
to an active position on the king­
side, was awarded an exclamation
mark by Kasparov in his notes to
the game.
Classical Stonewall 1 65
9 ..tb2
The consistent continuation.
Alternatives look unlikely to
unsettle Black :
(a) 9 ltJe5 ..te8 1 0 ..ta3 ..txa3
1 1 ltJxa3 ltJbd7 1 2 ltJd3 g5 with a
typically balanced position; Geru­
sel-Troger, West Germany 1 968.
(b) 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10 ltJxa3 -.e7
1 1 -. b2 ..te8 1 2 ltJe5 ( 1 2 ltJc2 ..th5
would oblige White to counter the
x-raying of e2) 1 2 . . . g5 1 3 ltJc2
(P. Nikolic notes 1 3 f3 ltJ bd7 1 4
e4 fe 1 5 ltJxd7 ..txd7 1 6 fe ltJxe4
as slightly in Black's favour) 1 3
. . . ltJbd7 1 4 cd (this i s a further
example of simplification easing
Black's defensive task) 14 . . . ed
1 5 f4 (revealing White's idea - to
solidify the centre and eventually
proceed with a minority attack
on the queenside) 1 5 . . . ltJg4!?
(preferring to maintain the tension
rather than clarify matters by a
line like 1 5 . . . gf 1 6 gf ltJe4) 1 6
-. c3 a 5 1 7 : ae I (threatening 1 8
ltJxg4 fg 1 9 e4) 1 7 . . . gf 1 8 gf ltJdf6
1 9 -.h3 �h8 20 -. h4 ltJg8 2 1 -.g3
(exchanging queens would give
Black somewhat the better ending)
21 . . . ltJ8f6 (21 . . . h5 would be
one way of playing on) 22 -. h4 (it
would be an error to weaken the
kingside : 22 h3? ltJh5 23 -.o ltJh6
and Black can follow up with . . .
l: g8 and . . . -.h4) 22 . . . ltJ g8
23 -.g3 ltJ8f6 t-!, T. Petrosian-P.
Nikolic, Plovdiv 1 983.
1 66 Classical Stonewall
9 ..te8
10 lZ:Ie5
The right moment to resposi­
tion the knight in order to better
control the dark squares and pre­
pare to threaten e4. I 0 cd cd would
be a mistake not only on account
of the exposed position of the
queen on the c-file but also
because Black would be able to
profit from the option of develop­
ing his QN on c6.
10 lZ:Ibd7
II lZ:Id3
Of course, White has no interest
in exchanging this valuable piece.
II ..th5 ( 1 36)
1 36
w
Completing the manoeuvre
begun on the eighth move.
12 lZ:Ic3
A natural enough move but
Kasparov subsequently thought
he ought to have preferred 12 lZ:If4
..tl7 1 3 lZ:Id2 intending lZ:If3, and
claimed a slight edge for White.
12 ..td6
A typical move to increase the
bishop's scope and improve the
cover of e5.
13 f3
This has the positive effect of
making e4 a constant threat but
markedly deadens the K B.
13 ..tg6!
Not only directly discouraging
e2-e4 but also lining up 1 4 l:t ae 1 ?!
f4! + .
14 e3 l:t c8
15 'We2
The queen is understandably
uncomfortable with the double x­
raying of c2.
15 l:t e8
And this opposition of rook and
queen serves to prevent 1 6 e4
which would run into problems
after 16 . . . e5! The immediate
1 5 . . . e5?! would be premature,
allowing White to settle down to
quiet exploitation of the dark
square weaknesses in Black's
camp following 16 cd ed ( 1 6 . . .
cd? 1 7 lZ:I b5) 1 7 ed cd 1 8 'Wd2.
16 'Wf2 a6
Once again activating the possi­
bility of playing . . . e5.
17 l:t acl 'We7
Having protected c3, White
could meet 1 7 . . . e5?! by 1 8 cd cd
19 de lZ:Ixe5 20 lZ:Ixe5 ..txe5 21 f4
with some advantage according to
Kasparov.
18 l:t fe1 'Wf8
As with White's fifteenth, Black
provokes and then side-steps a
 Classical Stonewall 167

queen-rook opposition. and e6.

19 .l:l cdl ( 1 3 7 ) 22 lll a4 cd
23 ed b5
137
This time the pawn is taboo
B
because of 23 . . . ll xc4? 24 lll d c5 ± .
24 cb ab
25 lll ac5!
Preferring to otTer a pawn rather
than permit Black to stifle the
game with a blockade on d5 after
25 lll c 3 b4 26 lll b 5 ll:ld5 27 ll:le5
ll:l7b6.
25 b4!?
Kasparov points o u t that the Black has it in mind to turn
opening of the position by 1 9 e4?! the tables with his own activity­
de 20 fe e5! would be slightly to gaining pawn sacrifice. Kasparov
Black's advantage. analyses 25 . . . ll:lxc5 26 de .ixc5
19 de 27 ll:lxc5 'tt' x c5 28 'ilt' xc5 ll xeS 29
After a phase of sophisticated .l:l e5! as giving at least sufficient
strategic fencing, reflecting credit compensation for the pawn.
on both antagonists, it is clear that 26 llcl 'ilt'e7
the tension could not be main­ Her majesty echoes the opening
tained much longer, and therefore manoeuvre of her QB.
Black decides to force matters with 27 .ih3 'ilt'd8!
a sequence aimed at exploiting A voiding weakening f6 by 27 . . .
White's relatively weak c-pawn. g6? which would be strongly met
20 be c5 by 28 ll:lxb4.
21 .HI 28 ll:lxb4 'ilt'a5
White must protect the pawn 29 ll:lc6
indirectly as it would be too dang­ Playing to keep the initiative at
erous to allow Black to mobilize all costs. Hanging on to the pawn
his queenside pawns by 2 1 d5?! ed by 29 ll:lxd7 tt::l x d7 30 a3 would
22 cd b5. leave Black in little danger given
21 .ifi! his well coordinated and active
Activating the threat against the pieces and White's structural
c-pawn which could not be taken weaknesses (obviously Black
immediately: 2 1 . . . cd? 22 ed ll xc4 would not allow 30 . . . ..txb4? 3 1
23 lll f4 with a double attack on c4 a b 'ilt' xb4 3 2 d5! ± ).
1 68 Classical Stonewall

29 'tt'xa 2 but a long way from the win) 45

30 �xd7 �xd7
31 d5!
Freeing the QB and preventing
the blockading and consolidating
. . . 'tfd5.
31 'tfxd5
32 : ed t .i.c5
In time trouble, Petrosian has
insufficient time to evaluate 32 . . .
.:l xc6 33 .l:l. xd5 .:l xc l + 34 .i.xc l
ed 35 ..tb2 g6! which was pro­
bably better, and instead liqui­
dates to a positionally slightly
inferior ending, albeit one which
should be tenable.
33 .:l xd5 ..t xf2 +
34 �xf2 ed
35 ..txf5 � b6
There i s n o way t o hold o n to
the exchange; 35 . . . �e5? loses
after 36 �e7 + ! .:l xe7 37 .:l xc8 +
..te8 38 ..ta3.
36 ..txc8 �xc8
The smoke has cleared leaving
an indisputable advantage to
White. Even so, it is quite astonish­
ing that Petrosian does not man­
age to hold on to the draw in the
final part of this well contested
battle: 37 ..ta3 h6 38 .:l b 1 .l:l. e6
39 �d4 .:l a6 40 ..tc5 �d6 (40 . . .
.:l aS!) 4 1 .:l b8 + �h7 42 g4 .:l a4!
43 �e3 �c4 + 44 �f4 g5 + ?
(weakening everything; 44 . . . �d6
45 : b6 .:l c4 46 .:l xd6 .:l xc5 47
.:ld7 �g8 48 h4 was much better,
leaving White in evident control
�g3 .:la2 46 .:l b7 �g6? (missing
the opportunity to counterattack
with 46 . . . �e3! 47 ..td6! �g6
although 48 h4 would preserve
White's chances) 47 �f5 .:l a6 48
h4! gh 49 �xh4 + �g7 50 � f5 +
�g6 5 1 ..td4 1 -0. 5 1 . . . �d6, the
only way to try to save the bishop,
loses to 52 � xd6 : xd6 53 f4.
The Classical 7 �c3
Botvinnik -Smyslov
World Ch. 1 958
1 d4 f5 2 g3 �f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 �f3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5
7 �c3 c6 ( 1 38 )
1 38
w
I t is not surprising that the
natural 7 �c3 is White's oldest
and most explored continuation.
Clearly, the knight is generally
more active on c3 although it takes
longer for it to be able to control
e5, a manoeuvre which is usually
accomplished via the route �c3-
e2-f4-d3 .
Whilst the broad strategic out-

lines naturally remain the same,
there are a few opening wrinkles
with which Black needs to be fam­
iliar in order to be sure of obtain­
ing a playable game.
To conclude these introductory
comments, it is interesting to note
that the actual move order of the
present game was 6 . . . c6 7 iUc3
d5 - to avoid Botvinnik's 7 b3, of
course - thus providing the high­
est possible level of endorsement
for the validity of 6 . . . c6.
8 .1g5
There is a vast array of alterna­
tives which need to be mentioned,
but the student may take comfort
in the fact that the fundamentals
underlying Black's response
remain much the same in all cases:
(a) 8 iUe5 iUbd7 9 'W'b3 (not 9
llJd3? de 1 0 iU f4 iU b6 1 1 e4 e5! 1 2
de 'W'xd1 1 3 l:txd 1 tLlg4 + ) 9 . . .
iUe4 10 cd iUxe5 1 1 iUxe4 cd 1 2
de fe 1 3 ..te3 b6 with full equality;
Filip-Szabo, Gothenburg IZ
1 955.
(b) 8 'W'd3 iUe4 9 iUe5 iUd7 1 0
iUxd7 (supporting the knight by
10 f4?! leads to trouble : 10 . . .
llJxe5 I I fe b6 1 2 e4 ..ta6 1 3 b3
llJxc3 14 'W' xc3 b5 + Black has
stolen the initiative with his typical
QB pressure along the a6-fl diag­
onal; Nielsen-H usak, corr. 1 960)
1 0 . . . ..txd7 ( 1 0 . . . 'W'xd7 intend­
ing a queenside fianchetto may
well be better) I I f3 iUxc3 with
Classical Stonewall 169
roughly even chances; Griinfeld­
Tartakower, Teplitz-Schonau
1 922.
(c) 8 ..tf4 'W'e8 (8 . . . iUe4 is
perfectly playable) 9 'W'd3 (the c­
pawn cannot constantly be left
unprotected, e.g. 9 l:t b I iU bd 7 1 0
b4? de! 1 1 'W'c2 a 6 1 2 a 4 b 5 1 3
iU g 5 iU b6 :t ) 9 . . . 'W' h 5 1 0 iUe5
iU bd7 I I f3 g5 12 iUxd7 ..txd7 1 3
.1e5 (thus far Budo-Chistiakov,
USSR 1 950) 13 . . . ..te8 and the
arrival of the bishop on g6 will
prevent White lightly advancing
in the centre, whilst the kingside
counterplay ensures a mutually
difficult game.
(d) 8 'W' b3 �h8 (a precautionary
measure, but Black could well
choose either 8 . . . iUe4 or 8 . . . b6)
9 iUe5 (9 .1f4 is best met by 9 . . .
b6) 9 . . . iU bd7 1 0 iUxd7 (or 1 0 cd
ed 1 1 iUxd7 iUxd7!) 1 0 . . . iUxd7!
1 1 l:t d 1 iUb6 1 2 cd ( 1 2 c5?! iUd7
would leave Black free to counter
with . . . e5 or . . . b6) 1 2 . . . ed
1 3 iUa4 iUc4 1 4 iUc5 (thus far
Capablanca-Botvinnik, Moscow
1 936) and now Black should forgo
the structurally weakening . . . b6
in favour of 14 . . . 'W' b6 with a fine
game.
(e) 8 l:t b I (with the clear inten­
tion of a queenside pawn storm) 8
. . . �h8 (perhaps the simplest way
of meeting White's plan is 8 . . .
iUe4 9 'W'c2 iUd6!?, with the ideas
10 c5 lt)f7 preparing the . . . e5
1 70 Classical Stonewall
counterpunch immediately, and
1 0 cd ed when the k night on d6
is excellently placed, particularly
with regard to the potential white
square weaknesses on White's
queenside) 9 cd (forfeits any hope
of an opening advantage, but nor
do the alternatives promise much :
9 c5 tt:le4 I 0 'tt c2 tt:ld7 intending
. . . i.f6 and . . . e5 = ; 9 'tt c2 tt:le4
10 b4 tt:ld7 I I c5 i.f6 = etc.) 9 . . .
cd! 1 0 i.f4 tt:lc6 I I tt:le5 (not I I
lbb5 lLlhS + ) 1 1 . . . ..td7 1 2 .l:l. c l
.l:l. c8 ( Black has a very easy game)
1 3 'tt d 3 lLih5 1 4 i.d2 i.d6 1 5
tt:lxc6 ..txc6 1 6 'tt f3 'tt e 8! and
although White's position is solid
there is little for him to undertake
whereas Black is free to operate
on either flank; Keres-Botvinnik,
Moscow 1 948.
8 lLibd7
( 1 39)
139
w
9 e3
White's intentions are clear: to
exchange first QB for knight, thus
reducing Black's attacking paten-
tial, and then central pawns (cd ed)
in order to stabilize the position
for a minority attack on the queen­
side (opening the c-file would be
asking for trouble as Black is in
no position to contest its control).
This is a fundamentally sound
plan which must be countered
with a well judged blend of defence
and aggression if Black is to obtain
a playable game.
Other examples :
(a) 9 cd ed 1 0 .l:l. b l (or 1 0 e3
when both 10 . . . h6!? and 1 0 . . .
lLie4 come into consideration) 1 0
. . . aS! and Black's game is per­
fectly satisfactory.
(b) 9 'tt c2 lLib6 (apart from the
interesting text move, Black has
the solid 9 . . . lLle4 and the chal­
lenging - risky! - 9 . . . h6!?, e.g.
10 i.xf6 lLl xf6 1 1 lL:Je5 i.d6!? 1 2
lLig6 .l:l. f7 1 3 f3?! �h7 1 4 lL:Je5
i.xe5 1 5 de lL:Jd7 1 6 f4 'tt b6 +
1 7 �h I lLic5 with an obscure
position) I 0 c5 lLibd7 I I b4 tt:le4
1 2 ..txe7 'tt xe7 1 3 e3 e5 with
approximately equal chances;
Nei- Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 963.
(c) 9 'tt d 3 lL:Je4 (9 . . . h6!?) 10
i.xe7 'tt xe7 I I 'tt e 3! (the queen is
well placed here after the exchange
of bishops) I I . . . b6 (it could be
that Black should seek an alterna­
tive here) 1 2 lLlxe4 fe 1 3 lLid2 ..ta6
14 cd cd 1 5 f3 with a slight pull
for White; Donner- Larsen,
Leiden 1 970.

9 'iWe8
Botvinnik prefers 9 . . . �e4. A
game Eingorn-Abramovic, Bor
! 986, saw yet another approach :
9 . . . h6 10 ..txf6 ..txf6 I I cd ed
1 2 �e2 a5 1 3 �f4 'it'e8 14 'it'c2 g6
1 5 l2:ld3 'it'e7 and although White
enjoys some initiative Black may
have confidence in his bishop pair
and generally solid position.
10 'iWc2 �h8
II �e2
The knight begins its journey to
control e5 from d3. Of course,
I I cd ed 1 2 'iW xf5?? lZle4 is not
possible.
II h6
12 ..txf6 ..txf6
13 cd
Not obligatory, as the opening
of the position after 1 3 � f4 de 1 4
'iW xc4 e5 1 5 de � xe5 1 6 �xe5
..txe5 17 'it' b4! �h7 18 .:t ad !
would be t o White's advantage
thanks to his active pieces.
13 ed
14 �f4 g5
15 �d3 ( 1 40 )
The knight has arrived, and the
battle lines for the coming middle­
game are clearly drawn : White
will operate in the centre and on
the queen's flank while Black will
seek attacking chances on the
king's wing. Theoretical assess­
ments of this (type of) position
tend to give White a slight edge,
Classical Stonewall 171
140
B
but even should this be true the
further course of our model game
shows that Black is always liable
to pounce at the least slip: 1 5 . . .
.t!. g8 1 6 'it'c3 ..te7 1 7 l2Jfe5 lZlf6
( Black's last two moves make one
wonder about Black's twelfth) 1 8
f3 .ie6 1 9 lLlc5 ( 1 9 b4, with a4 and
b5 in mind, seems more promising)
19 . . . ..txc5 20 'iW xc5 (permitting
a further simplification after which
most of Black's problems are
behind him and he can start to
think about his counterattack; 20
de ;t was better) 20 . . . �d7 2 1
�xd7 'iW xd7 2 2 .t!. ae l .t!. g7 2 3 .t!. f2
b6 24 'it'c3 'iWd6 2 5 .t!. c2 ..td7 26
b4 (White begins to go wrong;
there is no longer much to be
achieved on the queenside and it
would have been better to distract
Black with play in the centre by
26 e4) 26 . . . h5! (the attack finally
begins!; this is in fact an excellent
example of a late middlegame
pawn storm, typically following a
period of drawing the sting of
1 72 Classical Stonewall
White's early initiative) 27 �h 1
(again, 27 e4 was better) 27 . . . h4
28 gh (28 f4 .l:t h7!) 28 . . . gh (28 . . .
.l:t h7 29 e4 'ilt'f4 also came strongly
into consideration) 29 f4 .l:t ag8 30
.H3 .i.e8 3 1 'ii' d 2 'ii' h6 32 'ilt'e2
h3 33 .l:t cc l .l:t g2! 34 .bg2 .l:t xg2
35 'ilt'f3 (the decisive mistake; 35
'ilt' fl would probably have been
sufficient to hang on, e.g. 35 . . .
.i.h5 36 .l:t c3! .i.g4 - 3 7 e4 was
threatened - 37 e4! fe 38 .l:t ee3
.i.f3 39 .1:t xf3 ef 40 .1:t xf3 'ilt'h5 4 1
.l:t xh3 'ilt'xh3 42 'ilt' xg2 'ii' d 3 with a
very likely draw) 35 . . . 'ilt' h4! 36
b5 ..th5 37 'ilt' xg2 (37 'ilt'fl .l:t f2)
37 . . . hg + 38 �g1 c5 0- l . A
consistently executed and charac­
teristic attack on the light squares.
Flohr-Botvinnik
Match 1 933
1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 ll:lf6 4 lLlf3
.i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 ll:lc3 c6
8 b3 ( 1 41 )
141
B 1 4 ll:ld3 lLlf1 (a radically different
With the knight already devel­
oped this move has little purpose
beyond simply preparing to com­
plete development by fianchetto­
ing the QB. In his notes Botvinnik
remarked, somewhat severely per­
haps, that the move has a serious
defect in that it weakens f4. As we
shall see, however, that certainly
turns out to be the case in this
game.
8
Black commences the tra­
ditional transference of the queen
to the k ingside, a procedure which
lacks in subtlety compared to
today's positional interpretations
of the Stonewall. Nevertheless,
when White fails to find the correct
response this plan can be crushing
as the present game is intended to
show.
Nowadays, both of the follow­
ing continuations are considered
superior to the text move :
(a) 8 . . . a5 (this position fre­
quently arises through use of 6 . . .
c6) 9 ..t b2 lLle4 1 0 e3 ll:ld7 1 1 'ilt'c2
ll:ld6 1 2 lLle2 .1:t e8 1 3 lLlf4 ..tf8
approach to the old-fashioned
kingside hacking!; Black has har­
moniously protected his one
weakness and retains the flexibility
to operate over the entire board)
1 5 .1:t fd 1 b6 and with the imminent
development of his QB Black can
look forward to a rich middlegame
with balanced chances; Ungu­
reanu-Bellin, Moscow 1 977.

(b) 8 . . . lLle4 9 .i.b2 lLld7 1 0
tt'c2 ( 10 lLle l .i.f6 I I f3 lLlxc3 1 2
.txc3 de! 1 3 be e5! is excellent
for Black) 1 0 . . . .i.f6 and in the
absence of practical examples
there is a theoretical consensus
that this position offers approxi­
mately equal chances.
9 .i.b2 lLlbd7
lO Wd3
Botvinnik considers this to be
slightly less exact a placement for
the queen than c2. His suggestion
that White should aim to equalize
matters by playing I 0 lLlg5 .i.d6
I I f4, however, tends to leave
Black with rather the better of it
after I I . . lLlg4 1 2 Wd2 lLldf6
. from being able to occupy e5.
1 3 h3 lLlh6 (Biryanis-Tal, USSR
1 9 5 1 ) as his pieces are more effec­
tively placed to take action on the
kingside.
10 WhS
The queen takes up her com­
mand post from where she will
direct kingside operations. Note
also the f-pawn is protected so
that cd can be answered by . . . ed.
11 cd
White wants to move his KN
but dare not do so immediately
because of the sequence ( 1 1 lLld2
or lLle I ) . . e5! 1 2 cd e4. This
. a thematic attacking blow which
line strongly supports Botvinnik's
contention that the bishop is mis­
placed on b2, and that the queen
should be on c2.
II ed
Classical Stonewall 1 73
The exchange of pawns in the
centre has helped Black by open­
ing up the path of his QB.
12 lLld2
White's position is already
beginning to look a little un­
comfortable - he appears to be
doing nothing while Black is
gradually building up his attack.
12 lLle4
13 f3
The attempt to gum things up
by 13 f4 intending lLld2-f3-e5
would come unstuck after 1 3 . . .
lLlxd2 1 4 W' xd2 lLlf6, and whereas
the black knight is surveying e4
its white counterpart is very far
13 lLlxc3
14 .i.xc3 f4! ( 1 42 )
142
w
The 'Dutch' pawn itself delivers
instantly puts White's king's pos­
ition under severe pressure. Con­
sider White's predicament : the
pawn cannot be captured because
the arrival of a black rook on the
1 74 Classical Stonewall

h-file would be terminal, while 21 J.. e l 'it' g5

advancing the g-pawn would 22 J.. g3 J.. xg3
create grave dark square weak­ 23 lt:lxg3
nesses and invite . . . h5. There Or 23 hg lt:lh5 and White would
remains only the passive holding have to advance with 24 g4, laying
operation chosen in the game. himself open to the can-opening
15 .l:l. fe1 J.. d6 . . . h5 after the retreat of the knight,
16 lt:lfl .1:1. 17! as 24 �h2 fails against 24 . . .
This little move is of the utmost lt:lxgl
importance to the successful pro­ 23 h5!
secution of Black's attack. It is The final phase of the attack
born of the fact that the natural commences; White is hard pressed
16 . . . lt:lf6 is not good since White to meet the threatened march of
could reply with 1 7 J.. d 2! attack­ the h-pawn, winning a piece.
ing the f-pawn, and if 1 7 . . . fg 1 8 24 f4 'it'g4
hg and the bishop would cover 25 .l:l. f2
important squares on the c l -h6 This allows Black t o administer
diagonal. Now if White marks a rapid and pleasing coup de grace;
time Black has the option of bring­ 25 .l:l. fl would have held out long-
ing his knight to the kingside via er.
f8, all the time keeping control of 25 h4
f4. 26 J.. f3
17 e3 26 h3 'it'e6 (not 26 . . . 'it' xg3 27
If 1 7 e4 then 1 7 . . . de! 1 8 'it'xe4 .1:1. f3) 27 lt:lfl lt:le4 is also hopeless
( 1 8 fe?? f3) 1 8 . . . lt:lf6 is very strong. for White.
17 fg 26 hg
Now that White has weakened Gaining a decisive material
f3 and blocked the c l -h6 diagonal advantage.
this exchange is the best continu­ 27 J.. xg4 gf+
ation. 28 �g2
18 lt:lxg3 28 � xf2 lt:l xg4 + would enable
After 18 hg Black would have Black to attack and win the e-
the pleasant choice between 18 . . . pawn .
.l:l. xf3 !, 1 8 . . . 'it'g5 and 1 8 . . . lt:lf6, 28 lt:lxg4
all roads leading to Rome. 29 h3 lt:lf6
18 'it'h4 30 �xf2 lt:le4 +
19 tt:�n tt:�r6 0-1
20 .l:l. e2 J.. d7 3 1 �g2 J.. x h3 + and the
 Classical Stonewall 1 75

bishop is immune on account of M ar del Plata 1945, went 9 ..te3

the knight fork. tt:J bd7 10 tt ad 1 ..-e8 ( 1 0 . . . ..td6!?)
1 1 tt:Je5, and now, as is often the
Smejkal-Larsen case when the possibility exists,
Leningrad IZ 1 9 73 Black should have captured the
I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 tt:Jf6 4 tt:Jf3 knight on e5, with level chances.
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 tt:Jc3 c6 9 tt:Jd7
10 tt:Jxe4 fe
8 ..-c2 ( 1 43 )
In his notes, Larsen gave 1 0 . . .
1 43 tt:Jxe5 1 1 tt:Jd2 tt:Jf7 1 2 tt:Jf3 b6
B as an equality-securing variation
deserving attention.
11 ..tf4 ..tf6
This looks right, but 1 1 . . . ..tg5
might also be worth consideration.
12 tt adl
White would have done better
to play 1 2 tt:Jxd7 ..-xd7 1 3 tt a d 1 ;t
according to Larsen, rather than
A natural and elastic follow-up permit an alteration of pawn struc­
to 7 tt:Jc3, placing the queen on its ture which helps Black to equalize.
best square, from where it observes 12 ..txe5
Black's f-pawn, thus preventing 8 13 ..txe5 tt:Jxe5
. . . tt:Jbd7 because of 9 cd cd 1 0 14 de ..-e7
..tf4 with a marked advantage. 15 ..-c3 ..td7
8 tt:Je4! 16 f3 ef
8 . . . ..-e8 must reckon with 17 ef ..-c5 +
Chekhover's 9 ..tg5 after which 18 tt d4?!
Black can easily find himself in an This self-pin and the active
inferior Botvinnik-Smyslov type black queen are the source of
of position (see above) if he tries White's later troubles, and there­
to do better than the direct trans­ fore 1 8 ..-d4 was better, although
position by 9 . . .t h8 10 e3 tZJ bd7
. the ending after 1 8 . . . ..-xd4 + 1 9
etc. tt xd4 c5 20 ttd2 d4 would be fine
The text move is natural and for Black.
good. 18 aS
9 tt:Je5 19 f4 ..-a7
A game Bolbochan- Najdorf, 20 f5?!
1 76 Classical Stonewall

This assault on Black's pawn Naturally, Black has no interest

centre turns out to be much too in 27 . . . .l:l xc3? 28 fe ..txe6 29
optimistic and only succeeds in ..txd5 �f7 30 ..txb7 ..txa2 3 1
weakening White's own e-pawn. ..td5 + with a drawn ending.
20 .l:l ae8! 28 fe ..t xe6
Seeing through the incredible 29 �g1 �fi
trap 20 . . . c5 2 1 .l:l xd5!! ed 22 30 .: d3 .: b5!
..txd5 + �h8 23 e6 with f6 to 31 .l:l d2 a4
follow. 32 a3
21 cd In time trouble White is under­
If White escapes the pin by standably alarmed at the prospect
2 1 �h l , then 2 1 . . . c5 becomes of . . . a3 and . . . .: b2, but his only
playable since 22 .l:l xd5? now fails chance was to rush the king to
because of 22 . . . ed 23 ..txd5 + the centre by �f2-e3 when t here
�h8 24 e6 ..txe6! etc. would still be some slight hope of
21 cd salvation. As it is, Larsen seizes
22 �h1 .l:l c8 the opportunity to obtain a passed
23 W'd2 .l:l c2! a-pawn and makes no mistake in
How White must have regretted shepherding it home : 32 . . . .: b3
his 1 8th move! 33 ..txd5 .: xa3 34 c4 .: b3 35 �f2
24 W' xc2 W' xd4 a3 36 �e2 .: b2 37 .: xb2 ab 38
25 W'c3 W' xc3 ..te4 ..txc4 + 39 �d2 ..ta2 0- l .
26 be .l:l c8 An excellent example o f t h e pawn
The ending is very much in structures arising after captures on
Black's favour due to the both e5 and e4 and the technical
opponent's split queenside pawns. type of game following multiple
27 .l:l d 1 .l:l c5 minor piece exchanges.
16 Stonewall with
From the mid-eighties onwards
there has been an explosion of
interest in playing the Stonewall
with . . . .td6 instead of . . . .te7.
The advantages are obvious: the
bishop is more actively placed on
the b8-h2 diagonal, covering e5
and looking towards the white
king, and the queen can usefully
take up the vacated e7 square.
The disadvantages are rather less
apparent, especially since the logi­
cal attempt to profit from the
exchange of black-squared bish­
ops with .tf4 (cf. Schlechter-John
in Chapter 1 5) has been shown to
be much less dangerous for Black
than was once thought.
The starting position for the
variation arises after the following
moves :
1 d4 f5
2 g3 e6
3 .tg 2 tLlf6
4 tLlf3
With this particular move-order
White may consider deferring tLl f3
in favour o f c4 i f h e is particula rly
1 77
. . . J.. d 6
concerned to avoid the . . . .td6
variations. A recent example : 4 c4
dS (Black has the option of playing
the Dutch Indian instead) 5 tLlh3
i.e7 (persevering with 5 . . . .td6?!
would enable White to exchange
the black-squared bishops by 6
i.f4 without incurring any struc­
tural weakness) 6 0-0 c6 7 'ilt'c2 0-
0 8 tLld2 .td7 9 tLlf3 tLle4 I 0 tLleS
.tf6 I I b3 (thus far P. Nikolic­
Short, Belgrade 1 987) and now
Nikolic gives I I . . . cS! 1 2 e3 tLlc6
as best, with an unclear position.
It is because of such possibilities
that the . . . .td6 variations fre­
quently arise via transposition,
with White already having com­
mitted himself to tLlf3.
4 d5
5 c4 c6
6 0-0 .td6 ( 1 4 4 )
A s i n the standard Stonewall.
White has a large choice at this
juncture. Apart from the moves
covered in our featured games, the
following also merit noting :
1 78 Stonewall with . . . i.d6
(a) 7 tt:lc3 ttJ bd7 8 Wc2 tt:le4 9
.ll b l (thus far Dubinin-Novo­
telnov, USSR 1 948) 9 . . . a5 with
a typically rich middlegame in the
offing with chances for both sides.
(b) 7 'Wc2 tt:le4 8 tt:le l ?! (a mis­
guided attempt to take advantage
of the early advance of Black's
knight; 8 tt:lc3 tt:ld7 would trans­
pose above, and on 8 b3 Black
could try 8 . . . 'Wf6 9 ..tb2 tt:l bd7)
8 . . . tt:ld7 9 tt:ld3 (9 f3?! tt:lxg3! 10
hg ..txg3 with I I . . . 'Wh4 to follow
would give Black a very dangerous
attack --- a good illustration of the
advantages of having the bishop
on d6!) 9 . . . 'Wf6! (forcing White
to lock in his QB in order to
protect the d-pawn) 10 e3 h5!
(utilizing the fact that he has post­
poned castling; Black is now
assured of a strong attack no mat­
ter how White responds) I I f3
tt:lxg3! 1 2 hg ..txg3 1 3 tt:lf2? ( 1 3 f4
'Wh4 1 4 .ll f3 ! ..Wh2 + 1 5 .tfl h4
1 6 .ll xg3 was the best hope) 1 3 . . .
g5! with a fierce attack which
Black brought to an energetic and
beautiful conclusion in Gofstein­
K upreichik, USSR 1 979 : 1 4 e4 de
1 5 fe g4 16 ef 'W h4 1 7 .ll e l 0-0 1 8
.ll xe6 tt:lf6 1 9 .ll e2 tt:le8!! 20 f6!
.ll xf6!! 2 1 .ll xe8 + ..tf7 22 ll e2
..tf5 23 'Wd2 .ll e8! 24 .ll xe8
Wh2 + ! 25 ..tfl ..td3 + ! 0- l . An
inspired game which provides
much food for thought.
(c) 7 c5 is probably best met by
7 . . . ..te7 intending to challenge
the advanced pawn with . . . b6 and
also . . . a5 in case White supports
it with b4.
Kotov-Bondarevsky
Moscow 1 936
7 tt:lbd2 ( 1 45 )
The main idea behind this move
is to increase the control of e5 by
transferring the QN to f3 after
shifting the K N to d3 via e l .
7 0-0
Of course, it is also possible to
play 7 . . . tt:lbd7 8 'Wc2 tt:le4 before
castling.
 Stonewall with . . i.. d6
. 1 79

8 b3 17 lZlxg3
Black had no problems what­ 18 hg
ever after 8 'ilfc2 lZlbd7 9 cd cd 1 0 White appears blissfully
b3 'ilf e 7 I I ..t b 2 b 6 1 2 e 3 ..t a 6 1 3 unaware that he is walking the
.:t fc l lZle4 in Gheorghiu-Yusu­ edge of a precipice; 18 ..txg5,
pov, Luzern 1 985. keeping the approaches to the king
8 'ilfe8 closed as long as possible, was
9 lZle1 essential.
After the straightforward 9 18 'ilfh2 +
..t b2 Black should be careful 19 �f2 .:t h4
about rushing to h5 with the 20 .:tg1 .:t xd4
queen: 9 . . . lZlbd7 10 lZle5 'ilfh5 An uncommonly sprightly
(I 0 . . . lZle4!) I I e3 'ilfh6 12 'ilfe2 rook!
lZle4 13 lZlxe4 fe 14 lZlg4 'ilfg5 1 5 21 ..tb2 'ilfh4!
f3 and White succeeds in opening 22 ..txd4 lZ:le4 +
up the position before Black is 23 �e3
quite ready; Fine- Bondarevsky, After 23 �fl ..t xe5 24 ..txe5
Moscow 1 937. lZlxe5 25 fe lZlg4 White is faced
9 lZlbd7 with mate and loss of his queen.
10 lZld3 lZle4 If White was still hoping to
11 lLlf3 'ilfh5 show that the black attack had
12 lZlf4 been too extravagant he is soon
Gaining a tempo which must disabused of that illusion. There
shortly be returned. Similarly, now follows a stunningly beautiful
Black would answer 12 ..tf4 with mate in five.
1 2 . . . ..te7 and then hit the enemy 23 f4 + !
bishop with . . . g5. 24 lZlxf4 'ilf f2 +
12 •n 25 �d3 'ilr' xd4 + !!
13 'ilfc2 g5 26 �xd4 ..tc5 +
14 lZld3 'ilfh5 27 �d3 lZlxe5mate!
15 lLlfe5 .:t f6 ( 1 46)
16 f3 .:t h6! The final tableau seems the
17 h4 work of a magician.
Unhappy that he would be
obliged to return the piece after Belyavsky-Bareev
1 7 fe de White tries a remedy USSR Ch. 1 987
which turns out to be more dang­ I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 .3 ..tg2 lZlf6 4 lLlf3
erous than the disease. d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6
I 80 Stonewall with . . .i.d6
.
7 ..tf4 ( 1 4 7 )
1 47
8 as good as White's; Belyavsky­
Clearly the most direct chal­
lenge to Black's set-up.
7 0-0?!
An error, although it takes
Belyavsky's copybook play to
show exactly why.
Black's best continuation is 7 . . .
..txf4 8 gf 0-0 with good chances of
equalizing, thanks to the damage
inflicted on White's king's pos­
ition, as the following examples
show:
(a) 9 "it"c2 lL!bd7 to e3 "it"e7 I I
lL! bd2 lL!e4 1 2 a3 :t f6 1 3 :t fd l
:t h6 1 4 lL!fl lL!df6 1 5 lL!e5 ..td7
16 f3 lL!d6 17 : d2?! lL!xc4 18 liJxc4
de 1 9 "it"xc4 lL!d5 and the powerful
knight plus attacking chances
assure Black the better game;
Zamikhovsky-Panov, -!-final
USSR Ch. 1 952. This is a good
illustration of how Black can pro­
ceed if White is slow in playing
positively.
(b) 9 lL!e5 lL!bd7 10 e3 lL!xe5 1 1
fe liJg4 1 2 lL!d2 ..td7 1 3 h3 liJh6
14 f4 ..te8 1 5 �h2 �h8 1 6 "it"e2
g5 1 7 fg "it"xg5 1 8 "it"f2 ..th5 =
Black's 'bad' bishop is every bit
Salov, match, Vilnius 1 987.
(c) 9 lL! bd2 lL!bd7 (9 . . . ..td7
intending the transfer to h5 is
possible) 10 :t e l lL!e4 1 1 e3 "it"e7
( I I . . lL!df6 1 2 lL!e5 ..td7 1 3 f3
.
gave White an edge in
Groszpeter-Smagin, Zenica 1 987)
1 2 lL!xe4 de! 1 3 lL!d2 c5! 14 lL!b3
b6 15 de ( 15 f3 is a better try) 1 5
. . . lL!xc5 1 6 lL!xc5 be 1 7 "it"a4 :t b8!
1 8 b3 : b6! 19 "it"a3 e5 + Black's
QR is ready to switch to the king's
flank; Kalinichev-Giek, USSR
1 987.
8 ..txd6 "it"xd6
9 "it"c2 b6
With this, Black's idea behind
not exchanging on f4 becomes
clear: he is trying to treat the
position as a kind of Botvinnik
Variation in the standard Stone­
wall, where the queenside fianch­
etto often procures equality for
 Stonewall with . . . i.d6 181

Black after the exchange of black­ possibility o f commencing action

squared bishops. on the opposite flank, and the seed
10 lL!a3! of this tiny pawn move is destined
Priming a possible foray to b5, to grow into a flourishing attack.
an essential element in White's 11 : res
fight for an opening advantage. Interestingly, Black's best
Black would have little difficulty course lay in the reciprocal 1 7 . . .
after quieter methods, e.g. 1 0 a6 aiming to bring the knight to
lL! bd2 -'. b 7 1 1 .: ac 1 lL! bd7 1 2 d6 via b5.
.C. fd 1 .l:. acS 1 3 'if a4 'it' bS, and with 18 g4 g6
. . . c5 in the air the game is quite It is understandable that Black
level. does not want to accept the struc­
10 lL!a6 tural weakness arising from 1 8 . . .
Black sees the need to protect lL!eS 1 9 gf ef 20 .: xeS -'.xeS 2 1
c7 : 10 . . . -'.b7 1 1 cd cd 1 2 lL! b5 lL!e5 lL!f6, but that might have been
'it'd? 1 3 'ifc7! .l:. cS 14 'it'xd7 lL!bxd7 the lesser evil.
1 5 lL!d6 .l:.c7 1 6 .: fc I -'.c6 1 7 19 gf gf
.l:. c2 and Black's position i s very 20 lL!e5 lL!e8
uncomfortable indeed. 21 .l:. g3 + �h8
II .: act -'.b7 22 �h2 lL!f6
12 cd cd 23 .l:. g l .l:.c7
13 lL!b5 'ife7
14 'ifa4 Bringing extra protection to f7
Note how useful it is for White in order to be able to play his next
not to have played b3 as in Botvin­ move and chase the enemy queen
nik's variation. away. After 23 . . . a6 White would
14 lL!e8 transfer the queen to the kingside
Deciding to remove the power­ with gain of tempo : 24 'it'b3 b5 25
ful knight on b5 which is exerting 'it'e3, with a strong attack.
troublesome pressure on the que­ 24 -'. f3 -'.c6
enside, especially a7. Not 24 . . . lL!e4 25 -'.xe4 de 26
15 .l:. c3 lL! ec7 'ifxa7!
16 lL!xc7 lL!xc7 25 'if b3 .: g8
17 h3!! 26 -'.h5!
A truly profound conception. The final assault begins.
Instead of doubling rooks and 26 W f8
continuing with his play on the Forced.
queen's wing White discerns the 27 .lhg8 + lL!xg8
1 82 Stonewall with . . . i.d6

28 'ii' g3 As with Botvinnik's variation in

Her majesty arrives to lead the the standard Stonewall, this move
troops to victory. aims to exchange the dark­
28 ..tb5 squared bishops, whilst avoiding
28 . . . ..te8 would lose to the the structural weakening follow­
prosaic 29 ..txe8 'ii' xeS 30 lL!g6 + ing 7 ..tf4 ..txf4. It is currently
winning the exchange. the most popular continuation.
29 'ii' h4 lL!f6 7 'ii' e7
There is nothing to be done, e.g. The natural way of preventing
29 . . . .ll g7 30 .ll xg7 �xg7 3 1 ..ta3.
'ii' g5 + , or 29 . . . ..te8 30 ..txe8 8 ..tb2
'ii' xe8 3 1 lL!g6 + �g7 32 lL!e7 + . The best move at this juncture
30 ..tfi! has yet to be determined. There
1 -0 are many candidates:
An elegant final blow : the (a) 8 c5 ..tc7 9 ..tf4 .txf4 1 0
knight is en prise and lL!g6 + for­ g f b6 ( Polovodin suggests 1 0 . . .
king king and queen is threatened; lL!bd7 as a preliminary to playing
Black must therefore protect the for . . . g5 by . . . h6 and . . . .ll g8) 1 1
knight with a queen move, but 'ii' c2 be 1 2 'ii' x c5! 'ii' x c5 1 3 de lL!a6
after 30 . . . 'ii' e 7 comes 3 1 'ii' xf6 + ! 14 .ll c I lL!e4 1 5 lL!e5 lL!exc5 1 6
'ii' xf6 32 .ll g8 mate. lL!xc6 ..td7 1 7 lL!e5 and White
has some advantage due to his
Belyavsky-Yusupov queenside pawn majority and
USSR Ch. 1 987 potential occupation of the block­
I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 lL!f6 4 lL!f3 ading squares e5 and d4; Polo­
d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6 vodin-Giek, USSR 1 986.
(b) 8 a4 (insisting on the
7 b3 ( 1 48 )
exchange of bishops at the cost of
1 48
slightly compromising the queen­
B side pawns) 8 . . . a5! 9 ..ta3 b6 1 0
lL!e5 ..t b 7 I I ..txd6 'ii' xd6 1 2 lL!d2
0-0 13 cd cd 14 .ll c l lL!bd7 with
a completely satisfactory position
for Black; Joksic-Klinger, Zurich
1 987.
(c) 8 lL!e5 0-0 9 ..tb2 (9 lL!d3 b6
10 ..tb2 lL! bd7 I I lL!d2 a5 12 .ll c l
..tb7 = Flear-Short, Wijk aan

Zee 1 987) 9 . . . ..td7! 10 "ti'cl ..te8
I I ..ta3 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:ld3 ( 1 2 lt:lxd7
eases Black's task : 1 2 . . . W xd7 1 3
lt:ld2 ..txa3 1 4 "ti' xa3 ..th5 1 5
%He I lt:le4 1 6 W b2 .tt ad8 = F.
Portisch- Knaak, Balatonbereny
1 987) 1 2 . . . ..th5! 1 3 .::t e l .tt ae8
and Black's forces are very com­
pactly and harmoniously grouped
( ); Dizdar-Knaak, Halle 1 987.
= strikes!; now the white kingside
(d) 8 lt:l bd2 b6!? 9 lt:le5 ..tb7 1 0
..t b2 0-0 I I .::t e l a 5 ! 1 2 e3 lt:la6
with a typically complex and bal­
anced position; Petursson-Short,
Reykjavik 1 987.
(e) 8 lt:lc3 0-0 9 ..tf4 ..t xf4 1 0
g f ..td7! I I lt:le5 ..te8 1 2 Wc2
lt:lbd7 ( 1 2 . . . lt:le4 is an excellent
alternative) 1 3 cd ed 14 "ti'xf5 lt:le4
1 5 "ti'h3 lt:lxc3 1 6 "ti' xc3 .tt xf4 gives
roughly equal chances.
(f) 8 ..tf4 ..txf4 9 gf 0-0 10 lt:le5
..td7! I I lt:ld2 ..te8 1 2 .::t e l ..th5
1 3 .tt c3 lt:lbd7 1 4 ..tf3 ..txf3 1 5
lt:lxd7 "ti'xd7 1 6 lt:lxf3 ll:le4 and
here, as is frequently the case in
similar situations, Black has excel­
lent prospects since his attacking
possibilities against White's weak­
ened kingside are far more
important than White's absolute
control of e5 and queenside play;
Kouatly-Smagin, Trnava 1 987.
8 0-0
Two examples which indicate
that the queenside fianchetto is a
good alternative : 8 . . . b6 9 "ti' c l
0-0 (the alternative i s t o keep the
Stonewall with . . . i.. d6 183
king in the centre in readiness for
an ending : 9 . . . ..tb7 1 0 ..ta3
lt:l bd7 I I ..txd6 W xd6 12 "ti'a3
"ti'xa3 13 lt:l xa3 ri;e7 1 4 .tt ac l lt:le4
1 5 .tt fd I .tt fc8 1 6 lt:le I c5 = AI burt­
Short, Subotica 1 987) I 0 ..ta3
..tb7 I I ..txd6 "ti'xd6 1 2 "ti'a3 c5
1 3 de be 1 4 lt:lc3 lt:l bd7 1 5 .tt fd l ?
( l 5 e3) 1 5 . . . f4! (the 'Dutch' pawn
finds itself under restraint, await­
ing attack) 16 .tt ac l a6 1 7 ..th3?
(a poor idea which exacerbates
White's difficulties) 1 7 . . . .tt ae8 1 8
.tt c2 h6 1 9 lt:la4 lt:le4 20 cd ed 2 1
..txd7? "ti' xd7 2 2 lt:lxc5 lt:lxc5 23
.tt xc5 .tt xe2 24 lt:ld4 fg! 25 fg (25
lt:l xe2 gf + mates) 25 . . . "ti'f7 0- 1 H.
Olafsson-S. Agdestein, Reykjavik
1 987. After 26 lt:lxe2 "ti'f2 + 27
1; hI d4 + the ·bad' bishop comes
good!
9 lLlc3
Alternatively:
(a) 9 Wc2 ..td7 I 0 lt:le5 ..te8 I I
lt:ld2 lt:l bd7 1 2 f4 (as a rule, Black
is instantly OK after this) 1 2 . . .
..th5 1 3 cd?! cd 1 4 "ti'd3 .tt ac8 1 5
.tt fc I ?! ..ta3! and i t i s Black who
takes charge of the open c-file ( + );
Ree- Pie terse, Amsterdam Open
1 986.
(b) 9 lLl bd2 b6!? (9 . . . ..td7
heading for h5 is perfectly playable
here too) 10 lt:le5 ..tb7 I I e3 a5
1 2 a3?! ( 1 2 .::t e l = ) 1 2 . . . lLl bd7 1 3
a4 .tt ac8 1 4 "ilt"e2 ..ta6 1 5 .tt fc l
.tt fd8 1 6 "ti' e l (it was necessary to
1 84 Stonewall with . . . .i.d6

seek to keep the balance by play­ 16 lLlxc3!

ing 1 6 f4) 1 6 . . . ..txe5! (an instruc­ Very precise. 1 6 . . . 1t' xg5 1 7
tive capture; in the closed position lLlxe4 followed by lLlf4 would
White's bishops are more of a improve White's prospects.
handicap than an advantage) 1 7 17 1t' xc3 ..te2
de lLle4 + Renet-Yusupov, Dubai 18 J:t fel ..txd3
01. 1 986. 19 1t' xd3 1t' xg5
9 ..td7 Black's clever series of
10 lLle5 ..te8 exchanges have left him i n pos­
11 lLld3 session of the last remaining
Criticized by Yusupov who pre­ knight, a real advantage in a closed
fers 1 1 e3. position where White's bishops
11 lLlbd7 languish with nothing to do.
12 e3 g5! Black's bishop is also well posted
Yusupov is of the opinion that for supporting an attack on
Black now stands somewhat White's king and so Belyavsky
better. It is true that Black's minor decides to exchange that as well.
pieces are more purposefully pos­ 20 ..ta3 ..txa3
itioned. 21 J:[ xa3 lLlf6
13 a4 22 -. n h5!
Placing the threat of a future . . .
With ideas of exchanging bish­ h4 over White's head.
ops by 1t' c l and ..ta3. 23 1t' f4
13 ..tg6 White judges that his best
1 3 . . . ..th5 1 4 1t'c1 lLle4 would chances of salvation are to be
be a good alternative, but Yusu­ found in the endgame.
pov decides to provoke the centre­ 23 1t' xf4
deadening f4 first. 24 gf
14 f4 24 ef would make Black's e­
Naturally not 1 4 1t' c 1 ? f4. pawn backward and vulnerable
14 ..th5 but also weaken the white d-pawn
15 1t'cl lLle4 and leave Black the break with . . .
16 fg h4.
It is remarkably difficult for 24 �f7
White to find a meaningful plan 25 J:t a2 J:t g8
and he therefore decides on this 26 �h1
capture in the hope of obtaining According to Yusupov, 26 a5
f4 for the use of his knight. should have been played.
 Stonewall with . . . .i.d6 1 85

26 .1:1 g7 149
27 ..tfJ .1:1 ag8 w
28 .1:1 g2 .1:1 xg2
29 ..txg2 a5
With the fixing of White's que­
enside pawns and the fact that
e3 needs to be guarded there is
nothing left for the first player to
do but sit and wait.
30 c;t>gl
A voiding 30 ..tf3?! h4 3 1 .a g I ?
.a xg l + 3 2 lt>xgl lLlg4 winning
.a h l lt>e8 37 .1:1 g l (seizing the
the e-pawn because the ending
after 33 ..txg4 would be comple­ opportunity to activate his rook;
tely lost. if White remains passive then the
30 h4 king will go to the queen's wing
31 lt>fl lLlg4 and prepare . . . b6) 37 . . . .a xh3 38
32 h3 lLlf6 .1:1 g7 .1:1 h2 + 39 �fl (not 39 .1:1 g2
33 c;t>fl .1:1 g3 .a h l 40 .1:1 g l .a xg l 4 1 �xg l b6!
The rook gratefully takes up 42 cb �d7 followed by . . . c5
residence on the weakness created decisively creating a second passed
by the knight. Black has made real pawn) 39 . . . .a h3 40 c;t>f2 .a h 2 +
progress, but he is still a long way 4 1 lt>fl .1:1 b 2 (after a repetition
from winning. in time trouble Black once more
34 c5 picks up the thread) 42 .1:1 xb7
34 .a b I aiming for b4 at a c;t>d8! 43 �gl : e2 44 b4 ab 45
suitable moment was probably the a5 .1:1 xe3 46 a6 �c8 47 .a xb4 .1:1 a3
best chance. 48 .1:1 b6 e3! 49 : xc6 + �d7 50
34 lLle4 + ! .1:1 d6 + �e7 5 1 f5 ef 52 .1:1 xd5
35 ..txe4 fe ( 1 49) .a xa6! 53 c6 (after 53 .1:1 xf5 .1:1 g6 +
A fascinating rook ending has 54 �fl .a f6! the split pawns win
begun where Black displays great the king and pawn ending) 53 . . .
mastery in extracting the full point .1:1 xc6 54 .1:1 xf5 .a g6 + 0- 1 . Black
from his positional advantage: 36 magic!
The Dutch Defence is a popular attempt by Also in this series
Black to seize the initiative against 1 d4.
Winning With the Grunfeld
Once a prime weapon in the hands of such
Andros Adorjon and Jeno Dory
players as the great World Champion
.
Alexander Alekhine, the Dutch IS agmn 1n
Winning With the Queen's Indian
the theoretical spotlight, thanks to the efforts
Zolton Ribli and Gabor Kolloi
of several young Grandmasters, among
them Britain's Nigel Short.
Other Botsford opening books
This book concentrates on the main winning
Botsford Chess Openings 2
plans for both sides, giving complete
Gory Kosparov and Raymond Keene
coverage of the Dutch Defence. Strategic
ideas, including the most recent
The Sicilian for the Tournament Player
developments, are all clearly explained.
Eduard Gufeld

Robert Bellin is an International Master and

Car o-Kann Defence
winner of the British Championship in 1979.
Alexei Suetin
He is the author of several successful books.

French Defence
This series by top authors deals with
Alexei Suetin
openings that have been extensively
played and analysed at Grandmaster
The C omplete Pirc
level. The material is based around
John Nunn
complete games which illustrate the
possibilities for each side.
Najd orf for the Tournament Player
John Nunn

The Sicilian Pelikan

Evgenny Sveshnikov

For further details of these

and other Botsford chess books,
please write to:

B. T. Botsford Ltd,
4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London WlH OAH