First published in 2014 by Gloucester Publishers Limited, Northburgh House,

10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V 0AT

Copyright © 2014 Kevin Goh Wei Ming

The right of Kevin Goh Wei Ming to be identified as the author of this work has been
asserted in accordance with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

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

ISBN Kindle: 978-1-78194-023-5

ISBN epub: 978-1-78194-022-8

Distributed in North America by National Book Network,

15200 NBN Way, Blue Ridge Summit, PA 17214. Ph: 717.794.3800.

Distributed in Europe by Central Books Ltd.,

99 Wallis Road, London E9 5LN. Ph 44(0)845 458 9911.

All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everyman Chess,

Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V 0AT
email: info@everymanchess.com; website: www.everymanchess.com

Everyman is the registered trade mark of Random House Inc. and is used in this work
under licence from Random House Inc.

Everyman Chess Series

Chief advisor: Byron Jacobs
Commissioning editor: John Emms
Assistant editor: Richard Palliser

Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton.

Cover design by Horatio Monteverde.
Printed by TJ International Limited, Padstow, Cornwall.
About the Author
Kevin Goh Wei Ming is an International Master and a six-time National Champion of
Singapore in classical chess. He has represented Singapore in five Olympiads and other
major team tournaments such as the Asian Nations Cup, Asian Indoor Games and South-
East Asian Games. Kevin has gained two grandmaster norms. Outside of playing, he was
a columnist on the chess theory website chesspublishing.com. Chess Developments:
Sicilian Najdorf 6 Bg5 is his first book project.
Contents
About the Author
Bibliography
Foreword by GM Thomas Luther
Introduction
Acknowledgments

1 The Trendy 6 ... Nbd7

2 The Good Old Polugaevsky, the MVLV and 7 ... Qc7
3 The Classical Variation
4 Poisoned Pawn Variation with 10 f5
5 Poisoned Pawn Variation with 10 e5
6 The Delayed Poisoned Pawn Variation

Index of Complete Games

Bibliography
Advanced Chess Tactics, Lev Psakhis (Quality Chess 2012)
Easy Guide to the Najdorf, Tony Kosten (Everyman Chess 1999)
Experts vs the Sicilian (2nd edition, Chapter 1), Thomas Luther (Quality Chess 2006)
Grandmaster Repertoire 6 – The Sicilian Defence, Lubomir Ftacnik (Quality Chess 2010)
Mastering the Najdorf, Julen Arizmendi & Javier Moreno (Gambit 2004)
My Great Predecessors (volumes 1-4), Garry Kasparov (Everyman Chess 2003-4)
The Complete Najdorf: 6 Bg5, John Nunn (Batsford 1996)
Play the Najdorf: Scheveningen Style, John Emms (Everyman Chess 2003)
Play the Najdorf Sicilian, James Rizzitano (Gambit 2010)
Starting Out: Sicilian Najdorf, Richard Palliser (Everyman Chess 2006)
The Sharpest Sicilian, Kiril Georgiev & Atanas Kolev (Chess Stars 2007)
The Sharpest Sicilian 2012, Kiril Georgiev & Atanas Kolev (Chess Stars 2012)
Winning with the Najdorf, Daniel King (Batsford 1993)
Winning with the Najdorf Sicilian, Zaven Andriasyan (New In Chess 2013)

DVDs, Periodicals and Internet Resources

Chess Evolution
ChessPublishing.com
ChessPublishing forum
Chessvibes Openings (part of periodicals)
Correspondence Database 2013, ChessBase
Hiarcs Opening Book
How to Play the Najdorf (volumes 1 & 2), Garry Kasparov (ChessBase)
Najdorf Powerbook 2013, ChessBase
Mega Database 2014, ChessBase
New In Chess Yearbooks
Powerplay 18: The Sicilian Najdorf – a Repertoire for Black, Daniel King (ChessBase)
The Week in Chess (till issue 1004)
Foreword
by GM Thomas Luther, 3-time German Champion

The Najdorf is known as the opening of the world champions. White has numerous
replies, but the most challenging move is 6 Bg5. Some of the most remarkable games in
all of chess history have featured this variation. Indeed, the 6 Bg5 line could just be
studied out of pure joy for the historical games and all the entertaining tactical ideas
which can easily occur.

One might argue that 6 Bg5 is nowadays more popular than ever. I recommend to all
my students to play this line. It combines sharp variations (good for improving one’s
calculating skills), with many general ideas. Just to tell one Najdorf story: Black always
comes fast with ... b7-b5-b4, attacking White’s knight on c3. This is a key moment of the
game, as if the knight goes back to b1 or e2, Black is fine, maybe even better, with the
dynamics of the position on his side. So White should go Nd5!, sacrificing the knight for
an attack. Go forward! In the 6 Bg5 line it is victory or glory, nothing else. If you cannot
make Nd5 happen, at least play e4-e5 or anything aggressive, but do not settle for a
compromise.
Almost every chess player has a pet line, an opening variation he or she analyses
deeply for ages because the search for the ultimate truth requires no less. The
assessment of each variation, even it is the most far flung sideline, means everything.
This dedication can lead to the most remarkable results and can be a lifetime’s
achievement. My pet line has long been 6 Bg5 against the Najdorf.
At the end of the 1980s I was a young player collecting my IM norms. Struggling
against the Sicilian with the closed systems and 2 c3, GM-norm results seemed far away.
In 1987, right after the closing ceremony of a tournament in Czechoslovakia, a GM from
Yugoslavia approached me. He congratulated me on my result, but criticised my
openings. If I really wanted to become a GM, I had to improve my openings. And he
offered the perfect solution: I should buy the Encyclopaedias of Chess Openings he had
brought to the tournament. I bought the Enzies, as they were called, started to work on
the Open Sicilian and have never regretted it since. No wonder I scored my first GM norm
as soon as 1991.
The 6 Bg5 Najdorf soon became a special line for me. Working for ChessBase, early on
I encountered the strength of chess programs and their use in sharp lines. After playing
the 6 Bg5 variation for more than a decade, Jacob Aagaard contacted me in 2004 to write
the Najdorf chapter in his book Experts vs the Sicilian. I was uneasy about publishing my
ideas, but Jacob insisted. His main argument was that playing competitive chess does not
last forever; one needs to focus on a second career. Becoming an author and a coach
would be the right choice for me. To ensure I understood, he booked a flight and came to
visit me. We finished writing the Najdorf chapter in less than a week. Since then I have
regularly published training materials and coached students.
I was pleased when Kevin asked me to write the foreword to this book, being happy
that someone remembered my games and articles. Kevin told me he was inspired by my
chapter in Experts vs the Sicilian, which was the reason why he first picked up the 6 Bg5
variation.
In this book Kevin deeply analyses 40 recent games. Theory develops quickly,
especially in sharp lines. Besides knowing the history of an opening line, I advise you,
dear reader, to be on top of the latest news. Study the new games and look for novelties!
In my view, Kevin has written a great book and will surely be Singapore’s next
grandmaster. His deep understanding and devotion to the game make it only a question
of time. To become a strong chess player many say that talent is required. However, the
most important talent needed for chess is the ability to work hard. Kevin has more than
demonstrated that skill in this book. It is a difficult task to analyse games so deeply and
publish one’s findings. All his analysis should be checked by you, but will inspire, give you
knowledge and guide you successfully in your games.

Thomas Luther,
Germany
October 2014
Introduction
It is quite a miracle that I’m writing an introduction to a Najdorf book. The fact is – I once
hated the Najdorf. It is a pesky opening where White never seems to have any real route
to obtaining clear and understandable positions, and my score against it has always been
horrendous. When I was a kid, John Nunn’s incredible work Beating the Sicilian 3 was my
bible, but although a reasonable choice, I could never quite get advantageous positions
from the opening with 6 f4. For a good number of years, I retreated into the shell of the 2
c3 Sicilian world, eager to escape from the complications that can arise from any Najdorf.

I eventually decided to explore new grounds again, this time with 6 Be3 which was all
the rage back in the early 2000s. However, the positions in the English Attack are often
extremely wild and contain seemingly illogical nuances that were impossible (to me) to
understand. I soon gave that up as well. Of course, I am happy to admit that there is
probably very little wrong with the opening and the bad results were more to do with the
player than anything else.
I never really considered studying 6 Bg5 at all as I was put off by the tremendous
amount of theory that is in place and, in any case, all the various options at Black’s
disposal seemed perfectly respectable and hard to crack. Daniel King’s quote in his 1993
classic on the Najdorf sums it up pretty well:
“White players are scared of the complexity and variety of defences (counterattacks)
at Black’s disposal, and simply do not have the time or inclination to go through books
learning masses of variations by rote. Moreover, many of these sharp lines are
theoretically good for Black anyway. I’m amazed that anyone plays 6 Bg5 at all. (The
reason they do is for the chance to sacrifice all their pieces in some glorious fashion to
force mate.)”
My first real contact with 6 Bg5 came about purely by chance and almost felt like it
was predestined. Flipping a random New In Chess Yearbook in my university dormitory, I
came across the game Nakamura-Gelfand, Biel 2005, in the Forum section where the
Israeli super-GM was demonstrating the black side of the Gelfand variation. A brief
comment at move 20 where Gelfand seemed to evaluate as fine for Black intrigued me.
Surely, the vulnerable position of the black king should count for something? I proceeded
to do something I’d never really done before – investigate an opening position really
deeply and thoroughly, complete with chess engines and all. Back then, Fritz was not
exactly Houdini, but was still pretty good and everything appeared to point in White’s
favour. Yes, Black was completely busted.
Despite the fact that I was in the middle of the Singapore National Championship, I
forced my good friend Junior Tay to hold an online joint analysis where we spent a couple
of hours going through my notes. Finally at 2am, we concluded that White was close to
winning and Gelfand should have counted himself extremely lucky to be annotating a win
instead of a loss.
As luck, or destiny, would have it, I was paired with IM Chan Peng Kong on the very
next day. I had, of course, prepared against his favourite Classical Sicilian, but was
thoroughly surprised when Peng Kong essayed 5 ... a6 instead. Without any doubt in my
head, I immediately replied with 6 Bg5!, despite the fact that I had virtually no
knowledge of any of the variations apart from the Gelfand game that I had analysed the
night before. I didn’t know what I was thinking, but despite the incredibly bad odds, we
followed my analysis and I won.

K.Goh Wei Ming-Chan Peng Kong

Singapore Championship 2006

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qf3 Qc7

9 0-0-0 b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rhe1 Qb6 12 Nd5 Qxd4 13 Bxf6 gxf6 14 Bxb5 Qc5
15 Nxf6+ Kd8 16 Nxd7 Qxb5 17 Nxf8 Rxf8 18 Qa3 Rc8
Stronger is 18 ... Ke8!, as analysed in Game 23.
19 Qxd6+ Ke8 20 Re3!
20 c3? was played in the aforementioned game H.Nakamura-B.Gelfand, Biel 2005.
20 ... Qc6
This was given an exclamation mark by Gelfand.
21 Qd2! Ke7 22 Qb4+ Kf6 23 c3! Qc5 24 e5+ Kf5 25 g4+ Kg6 26 f5+ Kg7
27 Qf4 Kh8 28 Qh6!

Here my preparation ended, but my opponent already had less than twenty minutes left.
28 ... Bg2 29 Rd7! Qc4 30 b3! Qf1+
Black no longer has a valid defence. After 30 ... Qb4 31 Kb2 Qxg4 32 Rg3 Qe2+ 33
Rd2 White wins back the piece with interest.
31 Rd1 Qb5 32 Rd2 Bf1 33 Kb2 Rg8 34 Qf6+ Rg7 35 fxe6 fxe6 36 Rf3! Qc5
37 Rd8+ Rxd8 38 Qxd8+ Rg8 39 Qf6+ Rg7 40 Rxf1 Qd5 41 Rf2 a5 42 Qf4 h5
43 Rd2 Qc6 44 Qh6+ Kg8 45 Rd8+ Kf7 46 Qf6# 1-0
After the game, I vowed to study 6 Bg5 for life and immediately fell in love with the
opening. Despite the massive complications and the mandatory memory work required,
the attacking ideas and motifs make a lot of sense, appealed to me and I had no doubt
that this would be my companion for life.

This Work
When I proposed to write this particular book to John Emms, I surely underestimated the
task that was ahead of me. This book has taken a long time to write because of the
massive amount of material available in today’s market. Tons of books on the Sicilian
have been written, but these have mainly been from Black’s perspective which means the
coverage is often restricted to one or two critical variations. Obviously, chess theory has
moved on tremendously since John Nunn’s mammoth The Complete Najdorf: 6 Bg5 was
written and it is hardly a big surprise that no one has attempted a similar project ever
since. Thomas Luther’s article in Experts vs the Sicilian is thoroughly inspirational, but is
mainly a repertoire for White which naturally means the scope is much narrower than a
complete overview.
There are simply many, many possibilities within the 6 Bg5 world and existing theory
often does not show the whole story as many players, even grandmasters, can find
themselves going wrong at a very early stage of the game. This means that contrary to
popular belief, there are still new grounds to explore in the opening as I have done.
Make no mistake about it, this book is first and foremost a theoretical manual and
most readers will find the coverage excessive or even intimidating. However, I have tried
to the best of my ability to explain the typical themes and motifs while rationalizing the
irrational. Indeed, I genuinely hope and believe that players of all levels will be able to
grasp some, if not all the positions that are discussed in this book. Despite my obvious
emotional attachment to the white pieces, my personal goal was to be completely
objective about each theoretical evaluation that I have given.

Approach
I have ambitiously hoped to make this the go-to book for all 6 Bg5 Najdorf related
matters. In my research, I have obviously referenced all the major Najdorf books that
were published recently and have also delved deeply into the correspondence chess
world. I find it quite amazing that whenever some top player plays a big theoretical
novelty in a major event, the move has more likely than not been played five to six years
before in some random correspondence game. This simply means that a good
correspondence database is often a treasure trove for researchers and anyone who wants
to write an opening book.
As for the use of chess software, I have primarily used Houdini 4 and the latest
Stockfish, plus ChessBase’s very helpful ‘Let’s Check’ function which saved me a lot of
time by pointing me in the right direction in a matter of seconds. While I am a great
believer in the prowess of the human brain, there are certain positions in chess that
simply require an engine to solve them by brute force and unfortunately these exist very
often in the Najdorf. Using this approach, I have managed to find a large number of new
ideas and ‘novelties’ to existing theory which I hope can be useful even at grandmaster
level.

Scope
This work is part of the Chess Developments series which means the focus is primarily on
cutting-edge theory. However, I have deemed it fit to include lines where I have proved
that well-established conclusions are either inaccurate or erroneous. I have also added
certain rarely played variations that I feel deserve a lot more attention than the respect
that theoreticians have given them. I believe that given the surprise value, a careful
study of these lines will be useful in a practical game. However, there are also some
necessary if unfortunate omissions – some of which I hope to cover in the future.
In a strange way, I have enjoyed the rather painful process of writing this book and I
have learnt a lot, not just in terms of the theoretical aspect, but also in terms of learning
to be better organised and more detailed in my research. I hope you will enjoy this book
as much I have enjoyed writing it, and that you will score many more points from either
side of this fascinating opening.
Acknowledgements
I must thank the following without whom this work would not have been possible:
i. My good friend, ICCF International Master Junior Tay, for reigniting my interest in chess
after a temporary hiatus, for being my grammar police over the years, for giving me
countless advice at and away from the chess board, and basically being supportive every
step of the way.

ii. National Master Olimpiu Urcan, for his infectious optimism, no holds-barred and
direct criticism, and for always reminding me that there are many other facets to life
apart from chess.
iii. International Master Erik Kislik for sharing his extremely detailed notes and
spending long nights proof-reading the final product.
iv. Grandmaster Zhao Zong Yuan for spending an entire evening with me analysing a
line in the Delayed Poisoned Pawn – a variation that he doesn’t even play.
v. Grandmaster John Emms, for entrusting me with my first book project and for being
incredibly understanding when I failed to meet deadlines along the way.
vi. Grandmaster Tony Kosten, for giving me the opportunity to write for the popular
ChessPublishing.com website.
vii. My employer KPMG Singapore, for providing me with endless support in chess-
related matters.
viii. My wife Yoke Ching, for being extremely tolerant with my bizarre and quirky
behaviour throughout the course of writing this book.

Kevin Goh Wei Ming

Singapore
October 2014
Chapter One
The Trendy 6 ... Nbd7

This variation has, without question, been the single biggest revelation in the 6 Bg5
Najdorf in the last 10 years. Previously thought to be merely a transposition or a dubious
sideline, this system has evolved into a hotly-debated opening variation and has been
contested by many top players.
The popularity of the line can be attributed to the relative freshness of the entire
approach. Black exponents no longer have to remember endless variations to force a
draw in the Poisoned Pawn, but instead have a new weapon to fight for the full point in
unknown territory. Naturally, players of all levels have hopped on to the bandwagon at
annoying speed and as a result the theory in this line has moved forward tremendously in
the last five years.
We immediately dive into the deep end of the pool in Game 1 where the wild 7 ... Qb6
8 Qd2 e5 is investigated. White sacrifices the b2-pawn in very similar manner to the
Poisoned Pawn with a terrifying-looking initiative, but Black seems to hold with engine-
like accuracy. 15 e5!? may be an improvement on Radjabov’s play and is certainly worth
a punt, but the general feeling is that even if Black objectively holds the position, there is
very little point in his navigating through the chaos just to force a draw.
We then look at the comparatively rare 7 ... Qa5!? in Game 2 which seems to be a
worthy surprise weapon. The game is a perfect illustration of the danger that White can
find himself in if he plays natural moves. I’ve analysed the novelty 8 Qd3!? which looks
like the way to go as White, even though I did not manage to prove an advantage with it.
Games 3-6 focus on arguably the main line of the variation. Here I have tried to
present a complete overview of the state of affairs in the 7 ... Qc7 variation. Black’s play
in Game 3 is solid but passive and I don’t see many who will find this approach attractive.
I have focused on the more critical lines in Games 4-5, and it is worth pointing out that
the little known 16 g3!? in Game 5 appears to be an improvement on existing literature
and looks very dangerous. Game 6 looks at black alternatives on move 8 of which 8 ... b5
looks particularly interesting and I will not be surprised if this turns out to be the way to
go in the foreseeable future.
Games 7-8 cover 7 Bc4 which in many ways is White’s most principled approach. Black
has solved most of his problems here, but he has to go 7 ... Qb6! as the alternatives
seem dubious. Then Games 9-11 see the tricky 7 Qe2 where it seems that 7 ... b5 is the
strongest retort, although Black should be aware of the numerous forced draws here.
Instead, 7 ... h6 8 Bh4 g6!? is the most popular at the GM level. Here, I like 9 f4 e5 10
Nf3, although the main move is no slouch itself and has to be treated with respect.
Finally, we end the chapter by looking at the transpositional possibilities after 7 ... e6 in
Game 12, where it seems that Black is fine.

Game 1
T.Radjabov-H.Nakamura
Medias 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7!?

The burst in popularity in recent years of this early knight jump is nothing short of
extraordinary. Once thought to be a mere sideline and dealt with rather dismissively in
John Nunn’s classic reference work on the 6 Bg5 Najdorf, this little nuance is currently
considered to be Black’s main weapon against 6 Bg5.
The reason for this sudden surge in popularity is pretty clear. The fact that this
variation was only developed in the last 4-5 years means that there remains plenty of
scope for creativity. A more important point, which I hope will be illustrated in the next
few games, is that Black has plenty of chances to play for the win as compared to
traditional lines that have been virtually analysed to a draw. A lot of credit has to be
given to GM Lubomir Ftacnik who recommended this variation in his excellent repertoire
book on the Najdorf and contributed much to the theoretical revolution of this dynamic
new line.
7 f4
This is the most common move by far. 7 Bc4 is principled in many ways and is
explored in Games 7 and 8, while the tricky 7 Qe2!? is examined in Games 9-11.
7 ... e5!?
A rather surprising move at first sight. Allowing a white knight to hop to the f5-square
is considered a cardinal sin in most Sicilians, and especially in the Najdorf. Moreover, here
Black even encourages White to do so. However, concrete analysis has shown that Black
has effective counter plans at this disposal and there is nothing to be afraid of for now.
Otherwise, 7 ... e6 transposes to normal lines, while the other big moves here are 7 ...
Qc7 and 7 ... Qa5. These will be given plenty of attention in the next few games.
I want to briefly mention too that 7 ... Qb6 8 Qd2 e5 is another way to reach the
game continuation. However, 8 ... Qxb2 is not recommended.

After 9 Rb1 Qa3 10 Bxf6 Black faces an unappealing choice:

a) 10 ... gxf6 11 Nd5 Kd8 (11 ... Rb8? loses immediately to 12 Rb3 Qxa2 – 12 ... Qa4?
loses a really important pawn after 13 Bxa6! when Black is quite lost – 13 Qb4! with the
threat of Ra3: for example, 13 ... a5 14 Qc3 e6 15 Bb5 a4 16 Qc7 exd5 17 Qxb8 Kd8 18
Bxd7 Kxd7 19 Rxb7+ 1-0, J.Van der Wiel-G.Danner, Lucerne Olympiad 1982, or here 15 ...
exd5 16 0-0! dxe4 17 Ra3 Qd5 18 Rxa5, snaring the black queen) 12 Be2 e6 (or 12 ... Nc5
13 Bf3 again with the attack) 13 Rb3 Qxa2 (if 13 ... Qc5 14 Rc3 Qa7 15 Nc7 Rb8 16
Nxa6!) 14 Qc3! exd5 15 0-0 dxe4 16 Ra1, winning material, which should be very close to
winning for White.
b) 10 ... Nxf6 11 e5 Nd7 (Black is also on the brink after 11 ... Ng4 12 Nd5 Qxa2 13
Nc7+ Kd7 14 Qb4 when the threat of Bc4 is hard to meet, while Nunn gave 11 ... dxe5 12
fxe5 Ng4 13 Nd5 Qc5 14 Nb3 Qc6 and here 15 Qa5! is strong) 12 Nd5 Rb8 13 e6 Nc5 14
exf7+ Kxf7 15 Bc4 e6 16 Qe2! leads to a winning attack.
8 Nf5
The most principled reply and by far the most popular. Others:
a) 8 Nb3 is insipid and one of the earliest games of this line continued in typical
fashion with 8 ... Be7 9 a4 h6 10 fxe5 Nxe5 11 Bf4 0-0 12 Be2 Be6 13 0-0 Rc8 when Black
was already the more comfortable in ‘Spidey’-‘OpenFormula’, Internet 2007.
b) Exchanging pawns and clarifying matters with 8 fxe5 dxe5 9 Nf5 Qb6 is relatively
unexplored. Here White’s best reply appears to be 10 Qd2 (10 a3!? h6 11 Be3 Qc7 12 Qf3
g6 13 Ng3 Bg7 14 0-0-0 b5 looks comfortable for Black) 10 ... Qxb2 11 Rb1 Qa3 12 Bc4,
transposing to the note at White’s 11th move.

8 ... Qb6!
Played with the spirit of the Poisoned Pawn. Black argues that White is now without
his two main weapons (the pawn thrusts f4-f5 and e4-e5), and that the placement of the
strong f5-knight is only temporary. The immediate 8 ... h6 can be met with the
unexpected 9 Nxd6+! when 9 ... Bxd6 10 Qxd6 hxg5 11 fxe5 gives good compensation for
the piece. In fact, Black is now obliged to return the piece with 11 ... Nxe4 when after 12
Nxe4 Qa5+ 13 c3 Qxe5 14 Qxe5+ Nxe5 15 Nxg5 f6 16 Ne4 Be6 he has completed his
development and is very active. However, a pawn is a pawn and White should have a
slight edge here.
9 Qd2
Kotronias once gambled with 9 Qf3?, but after 9 ... Qxb2 10 Rb1 Qxc2 11 Bc4 Nxe4 12
0-0 in V.Kotronias-Xiu Deshun, Moscow 2011, Black should have played 12 ... Nxc3 when
such wild attempts as 13 Nxg7+ (or 13 Nd4!? Ne2+! 14 Bxe2 Qc5) 13 ... Bxg7 14 Bxf7+
Kxf7 15 fxe5+ Nf6! 16 exf6 Bf8 17 Rxb7+ Bxb7 18 Qxb7+ Kg6 19 Qxa8 Kxg5 do not work
out very well.
9 ... Qxb2
Taking the poisoned pawn is critical. I also analysed 9 ... h6 10 fxe5! dxe5 11 Be3
Qxb2 12 Rb1 Qa3 13 Bc4 which seems promising for White. A typical line goes 13 ... Nc5
14 0-0 Be6 15 Bb5+! axb5 16 Nxb5 Qa5 17 Nfd6+ Ke7 18 Qxa5 Rxa5 19 Bxc5 when the
black king is vulnerable.
10 Rb1
A recent miniature continued 10 Rd1?! h6 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 fxe5 Nxe4! 13 Nxe4 Bxf5 14
Nxd6+ Bxd6 15 Qxd6? (15 exd6 is stronger, when it is not clear whether White’s
compensation is sufficient for equality) 15 ... Qxa2 16 Bd3?? Qa5+ 17 Kf2 Rd8 and Black
soon won in M.Langer-W.So, Calgary 2013.
10 ... Qa3

11 Be2
Commonest and the computer’s first choice. White also has a few important and
dangerous alternatives:
a) 11 Rb3?! was played in what was arguably the stem game of this line with 7 ... e5
and 8 ... Qb6. After 11 ... Qc5 12 Be2 b5 13 fxe5 dxe5 14 Nd5 Black played 14 ... Nxe4 in
‘Etaoin Shrdlu’-‘Ibermax’, Internet 2007, which ultimately proved to be good enough, but
14 ... Nxd5 15 exd5 Bb7 16 c4 g6 17 Ng3 Qd4 already secures a better position for Black.
b) 11 fxe5 dxe5 12 Bc4 is a natural continuation and the most important alternative. A
high-level clash continued 12 ... Qa5 (alternatively, the untried 12 ... Qc5!? deserves
attention, while 12 ... h6 13 Be3 transposes to a previously discussed position, but 12 ...
g6? loses immediately to 13 Nd5!) 13 0-0 Qc5+ (attacking White’s light-squared bishop
looks natural, but 13 ... Nb6 is met with a flurry of tactics: 14 Nxg7+! Bxg7 15 Bxf7+!
Kxf7 16 Bxf6 Bxf6 17 Qg5 Ke8 18 Qxf6 Qc5+ 19 Rf2 Rf8 20 Qxf8+ Qxf8 21 Rxf8+ Kxf8 22
Rxb6, with a large advantage for White) 14 Ne3. Now:
 b1) 14 ... b5 (the only move played thus far) 15 Bd5 Ra7 (or 15 ... Nxd5 16 Ncxd5 Bb7
17 Kh1 f6 18 Bh4 with good compensation for the pawn) 16 Kh1 Rc7 17 Rb3 b4 18 Ncd1
Bb7 (18 ... h6 19 Bh4 a5 is a possible improvement, but I still like White’s piece play after
20 Nb2!) 19 Rd3 Nxd5 20 Nxd5 Rc8 21 N1e3 f6 was seen in D.Swiercz-A.Korobov, Lublin
2012, and here 22 Nxf6+!! Nxf6 23 Bxf6 gxf6 24 Ng4 Be7 25 Nxf6+ Bxf6 26 Rxf6 Bxe4 27
Rdd6 would have led to a brilliant finish.
b2) I analysed 14 ... h6 15 Bxf6 Nxf6 16 Na4! Qc7 (16 ... Qa7 17 Rxf6! gxf6 18 Rb6 is
a fine positional sacrifice; an important point is that 18 ... Bc5 can be met with 19 Bxf7+
Kxf7 20 Qd5+ Kg7 21 Qxc5 Rf8 22 Nc4 with great compensation) 17 Nb6 Rb8 18 Kh1 Be6
19 Nbd5 Bxd5 20 Bxd5 Be7 21 Nf5 0-0? (21 ... g6 22 Nxe7 Qxe7 23 c4 should be a bit
better for White, but no more than that) 22 Nxh6+! gxh6 23 Qxh6 and White has a
winning attack.
b3) I also considered 14 ... Be7!? when getting out of the pin and hence preparing Nf5
with 15 Kh1 may be best. A hypothetical line goes 15 ... h6 16 Bxf6 Nxf6 17 Na4 Qd4! 18
Qxd4 exd4 19 Nd5 Nxd5 20 Bxd5 Be6 21 Rxb7 Rc8 with a drawish endgame. Most
endgames arising from these positions where White sacrifices his b2-pawn are generally
fine for Black and I have the feeling that this line may be the simplest route to equality.
c) The immediate 11 Bc4 is rarely played presumably because 11 ... Qc5! seems to be
a fine retort. Black activates his pieces nicely after 12 fxe5 Nxe5 13 Bd5 Nxd5 14 Nxd5
Nc4 when he is fine.
d) 11 Bd3 is hardly ever played, but appears to give White interesting compensation:
11 ... h6 12 Bh4 exf4 (there are certainly other options available here, such as 12 ... b5!?
or even 12 ... g6!?) 13 0-0 g6 and now in S.Stukner-J.Bernasek, Frydek Mistek 2012,
White should have continued with the thematic 14 Rxf4!, which seems to be a recurring
theme in this line. In addition, White can respond to 14 ... g5 with the enterprising 15 e5!
with the idea of 15 ... gxf4 (or 15 ... dxe5 16 Ra4 Qc5+ 17 Bf2 Qc7 18 Rc4 and with all his
pieces on optimal squares, this looks very good for White) 16 exf6 with a promising
initiative.
 11 ... h6!
For some reason, this is virtually the only playable move here. For example, 11 ...
Qc5?! 12 fxe5 dxe5 13 Rd1! (after 13 Be3 as played in D.Kanovsky-V.Dydyshko, Frydek
Mistek 2011, 13 ... Qc6! improves: for instance, 14 0-0 b5 15 Bf3 Nb6 with counterplay for
Black) 13 ... Qb6 (the threat was Bxf6) 14 Be3 Qc6 15 0-0 b6 (15 ... b5? 16 Nd5! is good
for White) 16 Qd3 followed by Nd5 looks good for White.
White also has a promising attack after 11 ... Qa5 12 fxe5 dxe5 13 0-0 h6 14 Bh4
Qc5+ 15 Kh1 b5 16 Rfd1! when it’s hard to find a useful move for Black. In particular, 16
... Bb7? loses to 17 Nxb5! axb5 18 Bxf6 Nxf6 19 Bxb5+ Bc6 20 Qe3!.
12 Bh4 exf4

We have (finally!) reached the main line of this particular variation.

13 0-0
The main move. Again there are alternatives:
a) 13 Bf2?! was played in S.Ganguly-W.Spoelman, Wijk aan Zee 2011, and here 13 ...
Qa5! (instead of 13 ... Nc5 14 0-0 Bxf5 15 exf5 Be7 16 Bd4 as played in the game, or 13
... g6 14 Rb3 Qa5 15 Nxd6+ Bxd6 16 Qxd6 Qe5 17 Qxe5+ Nxe5 18 Bd4 Nfd7 19 Nd5
which was good for White in P.Darini-M.Al Sayed, Sharjah 2011) is a clear improvement.
This move prevents White from defending the c3-knight with tempo by playing Rb3 when
he might consider Nxd6+ ideas. Play might continue 14 0-0 g6 15 Nxd6+ Bxd6 16 Qxd6
Qxc3 17 Bd4 Qxc2! 18 Bxf6 (if 18 Rbc1 Qxe2 19 Rf2 Qxe4 20 Rfc2 Qxd4+! 21 Qxd4 0-0,
while 18 Rbd1 Qc6 19 Qxf4 g5 looks fine for Black) 18 ... Nxf6 19 Qxf6 0-0 and Black is in
the driver’s seat.
b) 13 Rb3!? is playable:
b1) 13 ... Qa5 14 0-0 and now Black should play 14 ... Qe5 with an unclear position:
for example, 15 Re1 d5 16 exd5 Bc5+ 17 Kh1 Be3 18 Nxe3 fxe3 19 Qd1 0-0 20 Bg3 Qf5
21 Rb4 Re8 22 Rf1 Qg6 23 Rf3 b5 24 Bd3 Qg5 25 Rf5 e2 26 Nxe2 Qe3. Instead, in
S.Zhigalko-I.Nyzhnyk, Bad Wiessee 2011, Black blundered with 14 ... Nc5? and could have
found himself facing a lost cause after 15 Nxd6+! Bxd6 16 Qxd6 Nxb3 17 Bb5+!! axb5 18
Bxf6 gxf6 19 Nd5 Qd8 20 Nxf6+ Qxf6 21 Qxf6.
b2) Giving away a few tempi for material gain with 13 ... Qc5!? 14 Bf2 Qe5 (or 14 ...
Qc6 15 Qxf4, with unclear play) 15 Bd4 Nxe4 16 Nxe4 Qxe4 17 Bxg7 Rg8 18 Bxf8 Qxf5 19
Bxd6 Nc5 is a sharper alternative.
13 ... g6
Playing in King’s Gambit Accepted style with 13 ... g5 is suicidal. After 14 Bf2 one can
hardly hope to survive with the black pieces, such is the lag in development in his
position. However, 13 ... Qc5+ seems like a decent and simpler alternative. After 14 Bf2
Qc7 15 Bd4 Ne5 we have:

a) 16 Rxf4 (this didn’t work out too well) 16 ... Be6 17 Kh1 Rc8 18 Rbf1 Nfd7 19 Ne3
Be7 (Black has played perfectly so far and has a serious edge at this juncture) 20 Ned5
Bxd5 21 Nxd5 Qxc2! was good for Black in A.Suarez Real-J.Alonso Moyano, Don Benito
2012.
b) 16 Qxf4 Bxf5 17 Qxf5 (17 exf5 Be7 looks okay for Black) 17 ... Be7 18 Nd5 Nxd5 19
Bxe5 Nf6 20 Bd4 0-0 21 Bd3 Rfe8 22 a4 looks good for White, but Black is structurally
sound and solid after a move like 22 ... Bd8!? followed by ... Re6.
c) 16 Bb6 is an intriguing try when things become pretty random after 16 ... Qc6 17
Nd4 Nxe4 18 Nxe4 Qxe4 19 Rxf4 Qg6 20 Bd3! Nxd3 (20 ... Qg5 21 h4 Qh5 22 Qc3! looks
rather risky for Black) 21 cxd3 Be7 22 Re1 Be6 23 Nxe6 fxe6. Although Black is a couple
of pawns up, I personally would feel quite uncomfortable due to the vulnerable king.
Hence, 16 Bb6 may be White’s best shot against 13 ... Qc5+.
14 Rxf4!
White had no choice but to play as energetically as possible. His position now looks
extremely appealing from an attacker’s point and especially so since the f5-knight cannot
be captured at this moment.
14 ... g5!
This is more or less forced. As advertised, capturing with 14 ... gxf5? is erroneous
because 15 Rxf5 with the threats of Bxf6 and Rb3 is hard to meet. Black can try 15 ... b5,
but 16 Rxf6! with the idea of 16 ... Nxf6 17 Bxf6 Rg8 18 Nd5 is a convincing follow-up.

15 Rb3
I once prepared 15 e5!? which requires extreme precision from Black to survive. My
notes continue with 15 ... gxf4 16 exf6 Qc5+ 17 Nd4 Rg8! (17 ... Ne5?! 18 Na4! Qc7 19
Nb6 Rb8 20 Qxf4 is awkward for Black; White’s hyperactive pieces more than compensate
for the exchange) 18 Kh1 Ne5 19 Bf2 (threatening Ne6) 19 ... Bd7! (19 ... b5? is too
loosening as White can continue with 20 Ne6 Qc6 21 Nxf4 when it is not clear where the
black king is supposed to go) 20 Qe1! with complex play.
15 ... Qa5 16 Nxd6+ Bxd6 17 Qxd6 gxf4 18 Ra3!
The last few moves were pretty much forced and no comments are really needed. For
players who are not 2700s and booked up to hilt, this move may though come as a
surprise. Again, this computer-like move is best due to very concrete reasons. The
alternative 18 Bxf6 is more normal, but Black gets easy play after 18 ... Nxf6 19 Qxf6
Rg8. Here 20 h4!? (Rogozenko gives 20 Nd5?! Qe1+ 21 Bf1 Rxg2+! 22 Kxg2 Qxe4+ 23
Kf2 Qxd5 and Black is better; Black is also comfortable after 20 Qxf4 Qc5+ 21 Kh1 Qg5!)
20 ... Qc5+ 21 Kf1 Bh3! 22 Bf3 may be best, with very unclear play.
18 ... Qb6+!
The alternative 18 ... Qc5+ is worse as White gets the d5-square for his knight after
19 Qxc5 Nxc5 20 Bxf6 Rg8 21 Nd5.
19 Qxb6 Nxb6 20 Bxf6 Rg8 21 Rb3 Nd7 22 Nd5
 The dust has settled and, taking stock, White is currently an exchange down, but his
pieces are extremely active and he is on the verge of winning the f4-pawn.
22 ... Rg6
Both players were still in their home preparation. Instead, 22 ... b5 23 e5 (23 Bh4!?
Kf8 – or perhaps 23 ... Rb8 24 Rd3 Rg6!? 25 Bh5!?, again with some play for the material
– 24 Be7+ Kg7 25 Nxf4 Bb7 26 Rd3 looks like a possible improvement to me; play might
continue 26 ... Ne5 27 Nh5+ Kh7 28 Nf6+ Kh8 29 Rh3 Rg6 30 Bh5 Rg7 31 Rc3! Nc4 32
Nd5 Kh7 33 Bf6 Rgg8 34 h3 when White is certainly the one pressing) 23 ... Rb8 24 Rd3
Rg6 25 Bh4 Rg5! 26 Bxg5 hxg5 27 Rh3 Bb7 was equal in J.Dijon-H.Williamson,
correspondence 2011.
23 Bd4
Apparently, Nakamura had only prepared the following insane continuation: 23 Nc7+
Kf8 24 Bb2 (24 Nxa8 Nxf6 25 Bf3 Nd7, as played in A.Lanc-H.Tiemann, correspondence
2011, is fine for Black) 24 ... Ra7 (White keeps up the pressure after 24 ... Rb8!? 25 Ba3+
Kg7 26 Bd6! Rxd6 27 Ne8+ Kg6 28 Nxd6 Nc5 29 Rc3 b6 30 g3!) 25 Ba3+ Kg7 and now:
 a) The idea was 26 Ne8+ Kh7 27 Nd6 Ra8 28 Bh5 Rg7 29 Bxf7 Ne5 30 Bd5 f3 31 g3
Bh3 32 Bb2 Rf8 33 Nf5 Re7 34 Bg8+ Kh8 35 Bd5 Kh7 with an extraordinary repetition.
This may be irrelevant if 26 Nd5 turns out to be a significant improvement, but it is still
important to note the deep opening preparation that world-class players constantly
demonstrate in high-level tournaments.
b) 26 Nd5! went unmentioned, but may be a better try to bamboozle Black. The point
is that after 26 ... Rc6 27 Nxf4 Rxc2 28 Rg3+ Kf6 (or 28 ... Kh8 29 Bd1! Rxa2 30 Bb4,
which is nasty for Black to handle) 29 Rg8 Ke5 there is 30 Bd1!!, a really surprising move
and one which is extremely aesthetically pleasing. Concrete tactics are the name of the
game. After 30 ... Rxa2 31 Re8+! Kd4 (31 ... Kxf4 32 Bc1+ is a beautiful mate, while
Black is also entangled in a mating web after 31 ... Kf6 32 Bb4! Kg5 33 g3!) 32 Ne2+
Rxe2 33 Bxe2 Ra8 34 Bb2+ Kc5 35 e5 the endgame is slightly preferable for White. Of
course, these lines are certainly not forced, but it is striking to see just how powerful
White’s bishop-pair can be in wide-open positions even in the later stages of the game.
23 ... Rc6 24 c4
24 c3!? b5 25 Rb1 is probably equal as well, but at least Black has less counterplay
compared to the game.
24 ... b5
 Black has broken out of the bind and is a few moves away from getting out of all
danger. Needless to say, if Black manages to get his pieces into play, the future will
suddenly be a lot brighter than it was a few moves ago.
25 cxb5
This activates Black’s queen’s rook. I think White should start playing for a draw with
25 Nxf4 bxc4 26 Rg3 followed by Nd5, with sufficient activity for the material deficit.
25 ... axb5 26 Nc3?!
White is living dangerously. 26 Rb2!? Ba6 (or 26 ... Ra4 27 Bc3) 27 Kf2 is safer.
26 ... Ba6!
Threatening 27 ... b4!. Black is certainly pressing for the win at this point.
27 Kf2 Rd6?
Rogozenko rightly pointed out 27 ... Nc5 when it’s not obvious what White’s best
defence is. After 28 Bxc5 Rxc5 29 Nxb5 the simple 29 ... Ke7! retains decent winning
chances.
28 Rb4!
After a few slip-ups, Radjabov gets back on his feet and defends immaculately from
here on.
28 ... f6 29 Kf3 Rc8
After the natural 29 ... Ne5+ 30 Kxf4 Nc6, White can continue 31 Bc5 Rd2 32 Bh5+!
Kd7 33 Bg4+ Kc7 34 Rb1 Rxg2 35 Nd5+ Kb7 36 a4, which should be pretty comfortable
equality for him.
30 Nxb5 Bxb5 31 Bxb5 Ke7 ½-½
With a pawn and the bishop-pair for the exchange, White has no real risk of losing.
After this game, very few games in this line were played by grandmasters and the above
analysis does seem to indicate that it may be overly risky for Black. As such, Najdorf
exponents turned to other alternatives after 6 ... Nbd7 7 f4 ...

Game 2
I.Sukandar-S.Mareco
Albena 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 f4 Qa5!?

This tricky move is a speciality of Grandmasters Zhou Jianchao and Sandro Mareco,
both of whom have scored very well with it.
8 Qd2
This is probably the most natural reply, but is by no means forced:
a) The retreat 8 Nb3 is something that Najdorf and Scheveningen players generally
hope for as the knight is on a less threatening square. In fact, there are several lines in
the Sicilian where Black is happy to waste a tempo with a move like ... Bc5, provoking
Nb3, followed by ... Be7 for the same purpose. A recent model game continued 8 ... Qc7 9
Qe2!? (9 Qf3 is more natural, but Black equalizes comfortably after 9 ... b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11
0-0 e6; instead, 10 Bxf6?! Nxf6 11 e5 Bb7 12 exd6 exd6 was already clearly better for
Black in I.Semenova-M.Komjagina, Sochi 2004) 9 ... e5 10 f5 (keeping the tension with 10
0-0-0 is better, although Black is fine after 10 ... h6 11 Bh4 Be7) 10 ... b5 11 0-0-0 Be7 12
Bxf6 Nxf6 13 g4? (the restrained 13 a3 was better) 13 ... b4 14 Nd5 Nxd5 15 exd5 h5! 16
h4 a5 17 Kb1 a4 18 Nd2 a3, and Black is doing well in L.Butkiewicz-N.Grandelius,
European Team Championship, Legnica 2013.
b) 8 Qf3 is commonest. Here 8 ... h6! with the idea 9 Bh4 g5 (or 9 ... e5!? 10 Nb3 Qc7
11 fxe5 dxe5 12 0-0-0 Be7 13 g4 which was unclear in Lu Shanglei-Zhou Jianchao,
Chinese Team Championship 2011) 10 Nb3 (10 fxg5 hxg5 11 Nb3 g4! 12 Qf2 Qh5 13 g3
Bh6 is slightly better for Black) 10 ... Qb6 11 Bf2 (Erik Kislik wondered about the following
crazy continuation: 11 fxg5 Ne5 12 Qf4 Ng6 13 Qg3 Nh5 14 Qf2 Qd8 15 Be2 Nhf4 16 Bg3
hxg5 17 0-0-0 Bg7 18 Nd5 when White appears to have the easier play; however, I think
Black is fine after, say, 18 ... b5 19 Kb1 e6 20 Bxf4 gxf4 21 Nxf4 Qf6! 22 Nd3 Qxf2 23 Nxf2
Ke7 with strong compensation) 11 ... Qc7 12 g3 b5 13 Bg2 Bb7, as played in U.Rau-
O.Mueller, Germany 2003, results in a complex fighting game with equal chances.
 c) While preparing for a game against Jianchao himself, I investigated the untried 8
Qd3!?.

This is a new move according to my database, but has been played 110 times in
ChessBase’s Najdorf Powerbook 2013. I believe the move does not objectively attain an
advantage, but it is tricky and there are plenty of ways for Black to go wrong:
c1) The natural 8 ... Nc5 does not win a pawn because of 9 Qd2 when the e4-pawn
still cannot be captured. At the same time, the f6-knight is no longer defended by its
compatriot which means Black is susceptible to reaching a Rauzer-like pawn structure
with doubled f-pawns, but with his queen and knight awkwardly placed on a5 and c5
respectively. A hypothetical line goes 9 ... Bd7 10 0-0-0 b5 11 Bxf6 gxf6 12 Qe3 e6 13
Kb1 b4 14 Nce2 h5 15 Nc1 Qb6 16 Be2 Rc8 17 Nd3 with a typical edge for White.
c2) 8 ... h6 is thematic and in line with the earlier analysis, but the difference in the
placement of the queen on d3 as compared to the f3-square is extremely significant after
9 Bxf6! Nxf6 10 0-0-0:
c21) 10 ... e6 11 Kb1 Be7 12 Be2 Qc7 (12 ... 0-0? walks into an attack after 13 g4
when after 13 ... d5 14 e5 Nd7 15 h4 Bb4 16 Rh3! Bxc3 17 Qxc3 Qxc3 18 Rxc3 g5! – Black
must break up White’s stronghold in the centre – 19 hxg5 hxg5, the move 20 Rh3! with
the idea 20 ... gxf4 21 Rh5! followed by Rdh1 continues the attack with a superior
position) 13 g4 Nd7 14 h4 b5 15 a3 Rb8 16 g5 is a logical line for the game to continue.
Here I slightly prefer White due to Black’s inability to find a safe haven for his king, but
Black certainly has his fair share of counterplay on the queenside.
c22) The pawn structure after 10 ... g6 11 Be2 Bg7 12 Kb1 resembles the game
Karjakin-Nakamura, Sandes 2013 (see the notes to Game 11), and White should have a
better game by proceeding in similar fashion, i.e. going after the weakened g6-square
with f4-f5 or h4-h5.
c23) 10 ... e5 11 Nb3! (11 Nf5 is the main recommendation by all my engines, but the
arising opposite-coloured bishop middlegame seems perfectly fine for Black: for example,
11 ... Bxf5 12 exf5 Be7 13 g3 exf4 14 Bg2 – or 14 gxf4 0-0 15 Bg2 Rac8 16 Rhe1 Rc7 – 14
... 0-0 15 Rhe1 Qc7 16 gxf4 d5! 17 Rf1 d4! 18 Qxd4 Rfe8 19 Nd5 Nxd5 20 Bxd5 Rac8 21
c3 Bf6 22 Qd2 Re7 and although White is a pawn up, it is hard to see him finding any sort
of winning plan) 11 ... Qc7 12 Nd5! Nxd5 13 exd5 (now the threat is 14 fxe5 followed by
15 d6) 13 ... Bg4 (perhaps the pawn sacrifice 13 ... g6!? 14 fxe5 Bf5! 15 exd6 Bxd6, with
some compensation for the pawn, is the way to proceed, although I still prefer White) 14
Be2 (14 Re1 0-0-0 15 f5 g6 16 fxg6 fxg6 17 Qxg6 h5 18 Be2 is also possible) 14 ... Bxe2
15 Qxe2 Be7 16 Rhe1 with a pleasant edge for White.
c3) 8 ... e6 doesn’t convince as after 9 0-0-0 Be7 10 Kb1 Qc7 (it’s only a matter of
time before Black makes this retreat as the queen no longer serves any purpose on a5
once the a2-pawn is guarded) 11 Qg3! we transpose to a variant of the Browne variation
with the extra move Kb1.
c4) 8 ... b5!? is the most serious alternative to 8 ... e5 (variation ‘c5’):
c41) Black seems fine after 9 Bxf6 Nxf6 10 0-0-0 (10 e5 is tempting, but Black has the
retort 10 ... b4! 11 Ne4 Nxe4 12 Qxe4 d5 13 Nb3 – forced, or else Black just consolidates
with ... e6 and has the better game – 13 ... dxe4 14 Nxa5 f5 with equal play) 10 ... e6 (10
... b4 11 Qc4!? is a little tricky for Black) 11 e5 b4 12 Nb3 Qc7 13 exd6 Bxd6 14 Qxd6
Qxd6 15 Rxd6 bxc3 16 bxc3 Ke7 when he has definite compensation.
c42) Hence 9 Be2 looks to be the most accurate when we have arrived at another
split:

c421) White obtains his ideal attacking set-up after 9 ... Qc7?! 10 0-0-0 Bb7 11 Bf3 e6
12 Rhe1. A logical line goes 12 ... Be7 13 Bxf6! Nc5! (13 ... Bxf6 14 Ndxb5 axb5 15 Nxb5
Qb6 16 Nxd6+ Ke7 17 e5, 13 ... Nxf6 14 e5! and 13 ... gxf6 14 a3 are all promising for
White) 14 Qe3 Bxf6 15 e5 dxe5 16 Ndxb5! axb5 17 Nxb5 Qe7 18 Nd6+ Kf8 19 Qxc5 Bxf3
20 gxf3 exf4 21 Re4! and White is to be preferred.
c422) 9 ... Nc5 doesn’t win a pawn due to 10 Qe3 Nfxe4? (or 10 ... Ncxe4 11 Nb3;
perhaps 10 ... b4 11 Nd5 Ncxe4 is best, although I still like White after 12 Nxf6+ gxf6 13
Qxe4 d5 14 Qe3 fxg5 15 fxg5) 11 Nb3! Nxb3 12 Qxe4 Nxa1 13 Qxa8 Qc7 (13 ... Nxc2+ 14
Kd2) 14 Kd2 b4 15 Bxa6 bxc3+ 16 bxc3 Kd7 17 Rb1!, which is winning for White.
 c423) 9 ... b4?! 10 Nd5 is awkward for Black.
c424) 9 ... Bb7! 10 Bxf6 Nxf6 11 e5 dxe5 12 fxe5 b4! (more or less forced; after any
knight move, White can continue 13 e6! with a decisive edge) 13 exf6 bxc3 14 bxc3 gxf6
15 0-0 with complex but slightly easier play for White. His king is safer, the d4-knight is a
beast and the advantage of the bishop-pair is not too serious since White can contest the
long diagonal easily enough with Bf3.
c5) 8 ... e5!? is the engine’s recommendation based on an aesthetically pleasing
tactical resource. Attacking d6 with 9 Nf5 is a natural reply. Now Black has the startling
retort 9 ... Nxe4!.

The idea is 10 Qxe4 Nc5, when White cannot reasonably defend his knight. However,
White can maintain the tension after 11 Nxd6+ Bxd6 12 Qf3 Ne6 13 0-0-0! exf4 14 Rxd6
Qxg5 15 Bd3 0-0 16 Kb1 Qe5 17 Rd5 Qc7 18 Re1 g6 19 Rde5 followed by Nd5, with good
compensation. This is all very hypothetical I know and I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if
improvements can be found along the way.
With this, I’ll conclude my short survey on the hitherto untried 8 Qd3!?, and we return
to Sukandar’s 8 Qd2:
8 ... e6 9 0-0-0?!
This natural move is already an inaccuracy at this stage and has scored a dismal
0.5/3. Preferable are:
a) 9 Be2 b5! 10 Bf3 (or 10 Bxf6 Nxf6 11 e5 b4!) 10 ... Bb7 11 f5 e5 12 Nb3 Qc7 looks
fine for Black.
b) I believe the untried 9 f5!? is White’s best try for an edge, although Black should
equalize with best play. For example, 9 ... e5 10 Nb3 Qc7 11 Nd5 Nxd5 12 Qxd5 h6 13
Bh4 Be7! 14 Bxe7 Kxe7 15 Bc4 Rf8 16 Qd3 Nf6 followed by ... Bd7 and ... Bc6.
c) 9 g3, as suggested by Kislik seems particularly intriguing. It looks like the most
natural course of action is 9 ... b5 10 Bg2 b4 11 Nd1 Bb7 12 Nf2 with a complicated game
in prospect.
9 ... b5! 10 Nb3
 Other moves do not inspire: 10 e5 b4! 11 exf6 bxc3 12 Qe3? Nxf6 13 Bxf6 gxf6 was
clearly better for Black in M.Perunovic-I.Ivanisevic, Belgrade 2009, and 10 Qe1 Qc7 11 f5
e5 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 Bb7 14 Nc6 h6 15 Bd2 Bxc6 (15 ... Nf6!) 16 Ba5 Qb7 17 dxc6
Qxc6 was also better for Black in Wang Yue-Zhou Jianchao, Hefei 2011.
10 ... Qc7 11 Bd3 Be7 12 Rhe1 h6 13 Bh4 Bb7 14 a3 Rc8?!
14 ... Nxe4! seems to win a pawn.
15 Bf2 0-0

Black has a very pleasant position with the obvious plan of attacking on the
queenside. Moreover, White’s pieces are clumsily placed and she has no concrete plan.
16 Kb1 Rfd8 17 Qe2 e5! 18 f5?
Maintaining the tension and discouraging any potential ... d5 breaks with 18 g3 may
be preferable.
18 ... Qb8!
Threatening the thematic exchange sacrifice on c3, which White generously allowed.
19 g4
White does not have any promising alternatives and a move like 19 Qd2 only
encourages further activities down the c-file with 19 ... Rc7!.
19 ... Rxc3! 20 bxc3 d5
 Black has obtained a dream Najdorf scenario and he didn’t give his young opponent
any chances from here on.
21 Qe3 Qc8?!
This doesn’t throw away his edge, but surely 21 ... dxe4 followed by ... Nd5 was
simpler.
22 Kb2
22 g5 was White’s only chance, but 22 ... Qxc3! with the threat of ... Bxa3 keeps
White honest.
22 ... dxe4 23 Be2 Nd5 24 Rxd5 Bxd5 25 Rd1 Qc6 26 Na5 Qd6 27 c4 bxc4
28 Bxc4 Nf6 29 h3 Qc7! 30 Qc3 Rb8+ 31 Ka1 Bxc4 32 Nxc4 Rc8 0-1
It appears that 7 ... Qa5!? is a promising weapon with which to play for a win. It is not
clear how White should react, but I like the untested idea 8 Qd3!?.

Game 3
S.Sjugirov-J.Gallagher
European Championship, Plovdiv 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 f4 Qc7

 This is the most commonly played and was recommended by Lubomir Ftacnik.
8 Qf3
8 Qe2 is an important alternative as this transposes to the classical lines, but with
White deploying his queen to the e2-square instead of f3. Here 8 ... e5 is critical. After 9
Nf5 (9 Nf3?! h6 10 Bxf6 Nxf6 11 g3 Be7 12 0-0-0 0-0 did not look very convincing for
White in B.Savchenko-A.Korobov, Russian Team Championship 2013) 9 ... h6 10 Bxf6 (10
fxe5 dxe5 11 Bd2 has scored 2/2 in my database, but Black should be objectively better
after 11 ... b5 12 0-0-0 Bb7 13 Be1 Rd8!; instead, one game continued with the careless
13 ... g6?! 14 Ne3 Nb6 15 Bh4 Bg7 16 Qf3 Nfd7?? 17 Bxb5! and 1-0, P.De Paiva-
M.Alvarenga de Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro 2012) 10 ... Nxf6 we have:
a) 11 Ne3 has been played by strong players, but Black is fine after 11 ... exf4 12
Ned5 Nxd5 13 Nxd5 Qa5+ 14 c3 (Black was also comfortable after the exchange of
queens with 14 Qd2 Qxd2+ 15 Kxd2 Rb8 16 Nxf4 Be7 in T.Radjabov-V.Ivanchuk, Bazna
2009) 14 ... Be6 15 0-0-0 (15 Nxf4 Be7 16 Nxe6 fxe6 17 Qg4 Qe5 also leads to sterile
equality) 15 ... Be7 (15 ... 0-0-0! may be a clearer equalizer) 16 Kb1 Rc8 17 Qf2 Bxd5 18
Rxd5 Qa4, as in S.Maze-S.Bogner, German League 2010, although White eventually
squeezed out a win.
b) 11 0-0-0 exf4 is unclear, but probably harmless. For example, 12 Qc4 (12 Qd2 Bxf5
13 exf5 0-0-0 is also completely equal) 12 ... Qxc4 13 Bxc4 Be6 14 Bxe6 fxe6 15 Nxd6+
Bxd6 16 Rxd6 Ke7 17 e5 Nd7 18 Rhd1 Rhd8 19 Ne2 Nxe5 20 Rxd8 Rxd8 21 Rxd8 Kxd8 22
Nxf4 with mass exchanges and a likely draw.
c) 11 fxe5 is best and after 11 ... dxe5 12 0-0-0 ...
 ... a truly remarkable move is 12 ... Bb4!?, giving away a critical kingside pawn with
check to boot (Black can also try 12 ... b5, 12 ... Be6 or even 12 ... Bd7, with complex but
balanced play). Yu Yangyi-Le Quang Liem, Qinhuangdao 2011, continued 13 Nxg7+ Kf8
14 Qf3 Qc6? (instead, 14 ... Qe7! 15 Nf5 Bxf5 16 Qxf5 or 16 exf5 e4 17 Qe3 Qe5 both give
Black very interesting compensation for the pawn; continuing the former line a little
further, the computer gave a slight edge for White after 17 ... Bxc3 17 bxc3 Rg8 18 Bc4
Rxg2 19 Rdg1 Rxg1+ 20 Rxg1 Rd8, although this does not seem all that clear to me) 15
Nd5 Kxg7 16 Qg3+ Ng4 17 h3 Qg6 and now White could have seized a large edge with 18
hxg4 Qg5+ 19 Kb1 Bxg4 20 Rd3!.
8 ... h6
8 ... e6 again transposes to Chapter Three. Instead, 8 ... b5!? is comparatively rare,
but has scored decently here in my database. This will be investigated in Game 6.
9 Bxf6!
9 Bh4?! has been written off by many sources, including Grandmaster Repertoire 6
which gave some convincing analysis. I don’t see any reason to disagree with this
conclusion, although I think White has drawing chances if he defends accurately. Here we
have:
a) 9 ... e5 was the ‘old’ approach and has been pretty obsolete ever since 9 ... g5 was
discovered. Here I believe 10 fxe5 is best: 10 ... Nxe5 11 Qf2 Neg4 12 Qe2 Be7 13 0-0-0
b5 and now the game B.Adhiban-B.Savchenko, Leiden 2009, was agreed drawn at this
stage, but White has a slight edge after 14 h3 Ne5 15 Bxf6 Bxf6 16 Nd5.
b) 9 ... b5!? was explored in New in Chess Yearbook 107, but after 10 0-0-0 Bb7 11
Bxf6 Nxf6 12 f5 White establishes control over e6 and g6 and makes it hard for Black to
unravel his kingside.
c) 9 ... g5! is a new concept that has gained plenty of popularity in recent years. Black
attacks the dark-squared bishop and activates his pieces while doing so. A tabiya is
reached after 10 fxg5 hxg5 (Richard Palliser pointed out that after 10 ... Ne5 11 Qe3!
Neg4 12 Qd2 hxg5 13 Bxg5 b5 14 0-0-0 Black doesn’t quite get as much counterplay as
he can for the pawn) 11 Bxg5 Qc5:

c1) 12 Nf5?! e6 13 Bxf6 (13 Be3? Qb4 just wins a piece; White did not obtain sufficient
compensation after 14 0-0-0 exf5 15 Qxf5 Rh5! 16 Qf3 Be7 in D.Kanovsky-D.Navara,
Czech Championship, Ostrava 2010) 13 ... Nxf6 14 Nxd6+ (M.Narmontas-S.Bogner,
Antalya 2009, deviated with 14 Ne3 Nd7 15 Ng4 and here 15 ... b5! 16 e5 – there is
nothing better; Ftacnik analysed several alternatives with Black emerging on top in each
and I highly recommend readers to go through them – 16 ... Rb8 17 0-0-0 Nxe5 18 Nf6+
Ke7 is clearly better for Black, as given by Tiemann in Grandmaster Repertoire 6) 14 ...
Bxd6 15 Qxf6 Bg3+! 16 hxg3?! (Palliser suggested the ugly 16 Ke2! as a better chance to
survive this position, but 16 ... Be5 17 Qg5 Bd7 18 Rd1 Qc7 19 h4 f6 still looks very good
for Black) 16 ... Qe3+ 17 Ne2 Rxh1 18 Rd1 (18 Qf4 Qc5 19 Nc3 Bd7 20 0-0-0 Rd8! is also
very good for Black) 18 ... Bd7 19 Rd4 Rc8 was very close to winning for Black in
H.Namyslo-S.Bogner, German Championship, Bad Liebenzell 2010.
c2) After 12 Qe3 Palliser gave the following instructive lines which I can’t really
improve on: 12 ... Ng4 13 Qd2 Bg7 14 Nf5? (14 Nb3 was the lesser evil, although Black
retains the initiative with 14 ... Bxc3 15 bxc3 Qe5! 16 0-0-0 b5 17 h3 Bb7 18 Bd3 Ngf6 19
Bf4 Qe6 20 Rhe1 Ne5, with full compensation) 14 ... Bxc3 15 Qxc3? (15 bxc3 was forced,
although the position after 15 ... Ndf6 16 Bd3 Bxf5 17 exf5 Rc8 still looks very ugly for
White) 15 ... Qf2+ 16 Kd1 Rxh2! 17 Bh4 Rxh4! 18 Nxh4 Ne3+ 19 Kc1 Nxf1 was easily
winning for Black in R.Griffith-D.Eggleston, British Championship, Torquay 2009.
c3) 12 Be3 is probably White’s best defence. After 12 ... Ne5 13 Qe2 (Ftacnik also
analysed the less natural 13 Qd1?!, when after 13 ... Neg4 14 Bg1 I believe 14 ... Qa5! is
best, with the ideas 15 Be2? Nxe4! and 15 Nb3 Qg5 16 Nd4 Ne3 17 Qd2 Bh6 18 Bxe3
Qxe3+ 19 Qxe3 Bxe3 20 Rd1 Bd7 with a promising endgame) 13 ... Neg4 14 Bg1 Bh6 we
reach a further divide:
 c31) 15 a3? Qb6! is strong (15 ... Qg5!? has scored well and is also quite good). There
is no useful discovered attack with the queen on the long diagonal and defending the b2-
pawn is a strangely awkward task for White. For example, 16 Rb1 Qa5 17 g3 Bd7 18 Bg2
Rc8 with an obvious initiative.
c32) White can also try to facilitate long castling with 15 Nb3 Qg5! 16 Nd2, but after
16 ... Be6! 17 0-0-0 Qa5 Black starts going on the offensive on the queenside and the
logical continuation 18 Kb1 Bxd2! 19 Rxd2 Rc8 20 Rd3 Rxc3 21 Rxc3 Qxa2+ 22 Kc1 Qa1+
23 Kd2 Qxb2 is extremely promising for him.
c33) 15 g3! Ne5! (again there are other moves, but I believe this is best) 16 h3 Bd7
17 Nb3 Qc7 18 Bd4 (White can also re-route his bishop, but 18 Be3 Rc8 19 Bf4 – 19 0-0-
0? Nxe4! was the sneaky idea – 19 ... a5! is exceedingly awkward for White who faces
threats on every part of the board) 18 ... Rc8.

Black has clear compensation for the pawn, but if he does not do anything active with
his initiative White’s extra pawn will eventually tell. Hence it is important to continue
energetically and create problems for White to solve at every turn: 19 Bg2 (19 Rg1? Be6
20 g4 Bg5 21 Nd2 was played in J.Radulski-A.Raykhman, Cappelle la Grande 2010, and
now 21 ... b5! improves, with the idea of 22 a3 Qa5! followed by ... b4) 19 ... Rg8 20 Qf2
Be6! 21 Rd1 (21 0-0? Nh5! 22 g4 Nf4 looks like a complete disaster on the kingside;
again, notice how difficult it is for White to find a safe haven for his king) 21 ... Rg6! 22
g4 (again, 22 0-0 falls for an extraordinary trick with 22 ... Bc4 23 Rfe1? Nfg4!! 24 hxg4
Rf6 25 Bb6 Qd7 and since 26 Qd4 is impossible due to 26 ... Qxg4 with a winning attack,
White’s queen is essentially trapped) 22 ... b5 23 0-0 Nfd7 and the game goes on. Black
has clear compensation for the pawn and the compromised pawn structure on the
kingside means that White can do very little with the extra pawn for now, although he is
certainly not lost yet.
Returning to the exchange on f6:
9 ... Nxf6 10 f5
A move like 10 h3?! is insipid and Black gets an ideal Sicilian after 10 ... e5 11 Nb3
Be7 12 0-0-0 0-0 13 Bd3 b5 with ... Bb7 to come.

10 ... e5!?
This has a dismal score, but is actually one of the engine’s top choices and has been
played by a few grandmasters. Alternatives are plentiful:
a) 10 ... Qc5! is Black’s main try and is analysed in the next game.
b) 10 ... g5?! was once suggested by Richard Palliser, but appears to have been
refuted by Ftacnik’s suggestion of 11 fxg6 fxg6 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 when White’s control
of the light squares is particularly prominent. One instructive game continued 13 ... Bd7
(Ftacnik gave 13 ... Bg7 14 0-0-0 Bd7 15 Bd3 as “unpleasant for Black”) 14 Bd3 Rg8?! (14
... 0-0-0!? may be a better practical option, although White is certainly in the driver’s seat
after 15 Bxg6 Bg7 16 0-0-0 followed by Rhe1 and Qe4 as Palliser pointed out), and now in
R.Palliser-D.Eggleston, British Championship, Sheffield 2011, I like the improvement 15
Qe2!, with the point that after 15 ... 0-0-0 16 Ne6 Qa5+ 17 c3 Re8 18 0-0! White has a
distinct advantage.
c) The slower 10 ... Bd7?! has not done too well (0/3 in my database), and the
following model game demonstrates how White should exploit Black’s lack of activity: 11
0-0-0 Rc8 12 Kb1 Qc5 13 Nd5! h5!? (Black is extremely cramped after 13 ... Nxd5 14
exd5) 14 Be2 Ng4 15 h3 Ne5 16 Qb3 b5 17 Rhf1 Rh7 18 Nf4! (inducing Black’s response,
after which the h4-pawn is more of a weakness than anything) 18 ... h4 19 Nd5 Rh6 20
Nf3! a5 21 Nxe5 dxe5 22 a3 a4 23 Qd3 Rd6 24 c3 with a healthy advantage for White in
D.Swiercz-I.Nyzhnyk, Wijk aan Zee 2011.
d) Lastly, 10 ... Rg8?! does not hide the fact that Black is preparing ... g5, but 11 0-0-0
g5? (amazingly the computer’s first choice at a very high depth; 11 ... Bd7 is safer,
although White is still better after 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 g5 14 fxg6 – or maybe 14 f6!? –
14 ... Rxg6 15 Bd3 Rf6 16 Bf5!; here, a deep piece of analysis given in Chess Evolution
continued 16 ... Rc8 17 Qe4 Bxf5 18 Nxf5 Qc4 19 Rd4! Qxa2 20 Ra4 Qb3 21 Kb1 Qb5 22
g4 Rc5 23 Rb4 Qd7 24 Rf1 Kd8 with the evaluation given as ‘unclear’, which is probably
fair enough, but I would imagine most people would prefer White after a move like 25
Rf4!? with attractive compensation) 12 e5! dxe5 13 Ndb5! axb5 14 Nxb5 Qb8 15 Qc3 Bd7
16 Nc7+ Kd8 17 Nxa8 Qxa8 18 Bb5 Qc8 19 Qa5+! Qc7 20 Qa8+ Qc8 21 Qa4 Kc7 22 Rd3
was a devastating demolition job in J.Hector-E.Berg, Swedish Championship, Vasteras
2011.
11 fxe6 fxe6

12 0-0-0!
It may seem strange to append an exclamation mark to this natural move, but the
fact is that the alternative 12 g3 seems very attractive and there seems little point in
delaying it. 12 g3!? has the idea of massaging the e6-pawn with a future Bh3, so Black
might try:
a) 12 ... e5!? looks positionally suspect, but Black remained solid after 13 Nf5 Be6 14
0-0-0 0-0-0 15 h4 Kb8 16 Bh3 Qd7 17 Kb1 h5 (White has a definite edge at this juncture
due to his extra space and his stronghold over the d5-square, but it’s hard to see what his
breakthrough plan is) 18 Nd5 (perhaps 18 Rd3!? followed by doubling rooks improves;
White has to be careful about the move ... g6 though, which is not a threat yet but may
eventually become one) 18 ... Bxd5 19 exd5 Qa4 20 Rhf1 Rc8 21 Ne3 Rc5 22 Bf5 and
eventually drew in P.Kolar-I.Nataf, correspondence 2010. This may or may not have been
the French Grandmaster Igor Nataf.
b) I tried hard to make the optically attractive 12 ... d5!? work, but it seems that
White gets a slight edge by force. For instance, the rook endgames after 13 0-0-0 (13
exd5?! Qe5+ 14 Nde2 exd5 15 0-0-0 Bg4 16 Qd3 Bc5 is slightly better for Black) 13 ...
Bb4 14 exd5 Bxc3 15 Qxc3 Qxc3 16 bxc3 Nxd5 (16 ... exd5?! 17 c4! is awkward) 17 Re1
0-0 18 c4 Nc3 (all this is more or less forced and very logical so far) 19 Nxe6 Bxe6 20
Rxe6 Rf2 21 Bd3 Nxa2+ 22 Kb2 Nb4 23 Be4 Rd8 24 Kc3 Nc6 25 Bxc6 (or even 25 Bd5 Kf8
26 Rb1 with pressure) 25 ... bxc6 26 Rxc6 Rdd2 27 Rc1 all look pleasant for White and
certainly should not be what Black is aspiring to achieve.
12 ... Bd7
After the analysis in the previous note, it should be apparent that Black is kind in a
mini-zugzwang as he has difficulties finding a noncommittal move. Perhaps 12 ... Be7 is
best, although I still prefer White after 13 g3 0-0 (or 13 ... Bd7?! 14 Bh3 Qc4, as in
N.Guliyev-J.Moussard, Paris 2011, and then 15 Rhe1! with a clear edge) 14 Bh3 Nd5 15
Nxd5 exd5 16 Bf5!. Of course, 12 ... e5? is pointless here and White’s bishop can hope to
land on c4 eventually, since it is no longer committed to the h3-square.
13 g3! 0-0-0 14 h4
A slight but important improvement on previous practice. After 14 Bh3 Re8 15 Rhe1,
15 ... h5! is surprisingly strong, as in G.Filev-D.Marjanovic, Plovdiv 2012. The point is that
after 16 Rd2, Black should have continued with the logical 16 ... h4!, gaining active play
on the kingside.
14 ... Kb8 15 Bh3 Re8 16 Kb1 Bc8

White has more space and an obvious target in the e6-pawn, but how can he exert
more pressure on it?
 17 Nce2?!
A manoeuvre that is typically seen in the Rauzer. The knight is on its way to the f4-
square where it targets not just e6, but also the weakened g6-square. White’s three
minor pieces will then be working at optimal capacity. However, this move unnecessarily
allowed Black’s response which gave him active counterplay. Perhaps a waiting move like
17 a3!? would have forced Black to find something constructive to do, which is not an
easy task as he is still very passive at this point.
17 ... d5!
Black has to react and somehow get his dark-squared bishop into play. He obtains an
isolated pawn on d5 for his troubles, but at least his pieces are liberated and he can hope
to obtain some play down the e-file.
18 exd5 exd5 19 Bxc8 Rxc8 20 Nf4 Bd6 21 Rhf1 Bxf4 22 Qxf4 Qxf4 23 Rxf4

White has a very slight edge at this juncture primarily due to his superior pawn
structure, but it’s hard to see Black losing this one with accurate defence. White
eventually did go on to win, but since this is not an endgame book, the rest of the game
will be littered with light comments only.
23 ... Ne4 24 g4 Rhf8
This didn’t spoil things yet, but 24 ... g5! 25 hxg5 hxg5 26 Rf5 Rh2! 27 Rxd5 Rg2
should draw comfortably.
25 Rf5 g6 26 Rxd5 Nf2
26 ... Rf4! 27 Rg1 h5! 28 gxh5 gxh5 29 Rh1 Ng3! also draws easily.
27 Rg1 Nxg4
27 ... Rf4! should hold easily.
28 c3 h5 29 Rd6
 29 ... Rf2?
There are not many things in this world that are more natural than putting a rook on
the seventh rank, but perhaps Black should have defended passively with 29 ... Rg8 .
30 Rxg6 Rh2 31 Re1!
Suddenly White’s rooks are poised to appear on the seventh simultaneously and it’s
not so easy to find a defence to this.
31 ... Rf8
If 31 ... Rxh4 then 32 a4!! is extremely effective, creating luft and setting up the
battery on the seventh rank. Black is helpless against this simple plan.
32 a4! Rff2? 33 Rb6
White had an extraordinary tactic at his disposal with 33 Re8+! Ka7 34 a5!! Rxb2+ 35
Kc1.

Amazingly Black is helpless against the simple plan of Rgg8 and Ra8 mate. In fact,
White has an even prettier mate after 35 ... Ra2? 36 Nc6+! bxc6 37 Rg7#.
33 ... Ka7 34 a5 Rf7
Black has somehow managed to stay in the game, although the tide is definitely in
White’s favour at this point and he finished the game with technically precise chess.
35 Rd6 Nf2 36 Nb3 Rxh4 37 Re8 Re4 38 Rh8 Ng4 39 Rdd8 Re1+ 40 Ka2 b6
41 Ra8+ Kb7 42 Rhb8+ Kc6 43 Rxb6+ Kd5 44 Rd8+ 1-0
It looks like 10 ... e5 is a very solid move, but Black will have to suffer a fair bit in the
fight for equality.

Game 4
T.Gharamian-D.Navara
European Championship, Aix-les-Bains 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 f4 Qc7 8 Qf3 h6

9 Bxf6 Nxf6 10 f5 Qc5!

This is Black’s most positionally sound move. On c5 the queen controls some
important dark squares and also paves the way for Black’s next move ...
11 0-0-0 g5!
... which is a good move that is more or less forced as Black has to develop his dark-
squared bishop somehow. This may seem weakening, especially on the light squares, but
a cursory glance will be sufficient to realize that the light-squared weaknesses after 12
fxg6 will be fully compensated by 12 ... Bg4!, winning the exchange (more on this later).
To better illustrate the point, a ‘normal’ move like 11 ... Bd7? will translate to long-term
suffering for Black after 12 Nd5! Nxd5 13 exd5 0-0-0 14 Rd3!? Kb8 15 Qe4!.
 Here I don’t see how Black can ever develop his dark-squared bishop decently.
12 e5!?
This is not the most common move. Moreover, it doesn’t refute Black’s system and it
is probably not even White’s best option, but I’ve chosen it for one of the main games
primarily because it allows White to generate real attacking chances unlike his other
options. Objectively, with precise and careful play, Black should be able to hold, but the
fact that a world-class grandmaster could fall to such a blitzkrieg approach shows that
there is real practical value here. As always, we should look too at some key alternatives:
a) Calling Black’s bluff with 12 fxg6!? is the most significant option and will be
investigated in the next game.
b) 12 Nd5 is hugely favoured in the computer chess world, but has not done as well in
over-the-board play: 12 ... Nxd5 (not 12 ... Bg7?? 13 b4!) 13 exd5 Bg7 14 c3 (14 Nb3 is
passive and White met a horrid end after 14 ... Qb6 15 Bd3 Bd7 16 Rhe1 Bf6 17 Qh5? a5!
18 c3 a4 19 Nd2 a3! when he was overwhelmed by this bulldozer of an a-pawn in Yee
Soon Wei-Gao Rui, Kuala Lumpur 2011) 14 ... Bd7 15 Kb1 (or 15 Nb3 Qb6 16 Bd3 Bf6 17
Rhe1 0-0-0 18 Re4 a5! 19 Rde1 Kb8, which transposes to the stem game and was equally
fine for Black) 15 ... 0-0-0 16 Bd3 Kb8 17 Nb3 Qb6 18 Rhe1 Bf6 19 Re4 a5 with equal
chances in M.Petr-D.Raznikov, Olomouc 2010.
12 ... Qxe5
Commonest, but I am not certain that this is best. 12 ... dxe5!? was thought to be
dubious due to the surprising tactic 13 Ndb5! where Black has to find some accurate only
moves just to survive.
 Black appears to obtain equality more or less by force, but only if he finds (or knows)
the right defence:
a) 13 ... axb5? loses to 14 Bxb5+ Nd7 (or 14 ... Bd7 15 Qxb7 Qc8 16 Rxd7!) 15 Rxd7
Bxd7 16 Bxd7+, winning truckloads of material.
b) 13 ... Bd7? also does not help: 14 Na4 Qc8 (14 ... Qb4 15 Qxb7 is equally
devastating) 15 Nb6 Qb8 16 Nxd7 Nxd7 17 Rxd7! Kxd7 18 Qd5+ Ke8 19 Bc4 e6 (Black is
also helpless after 19 ... Rh7 20 Rd1 Qc8 21 Kb1! h5 22 Qxe5 Bg7 23 Nd6+ Kf8 24 Qd5)
20 fxe6 Be7 21 Rf1 f6 22 Qd7+ and 1-0 in A.Pijpers-B.Von Meijenfeldt, Haarlem 2011.
c) 13 ... g4? 14 Na4! is a typical motif and after 14 ... gxf3 15 Nxc5 axb5 16 Bxb5+
Bd7 17 Nxd7 0-0-0 18 Nxf6 exf6 19 Rxd8+ Kxd8 20 gxf3 White has an extra pawn and the
presence of opposite-coloured bishops should not be enough for Black to salvage a draw.
d) 13 ... e4! is the only move that keeps Black in the game:
d1) Forcing the win of an exchange with 14 Qg3!? is an interesting shot, but allows
Black practical chances. The following intriguing line seems more or less forced: 14 ...
axb5 15 Nxb5 e6 (if 15 ... e5, the computer-like 16 b4! looks good, and if 16 ... Qe7? 17
Qc3 Bg7 18 Nd6+ Kf8 19 Nxc8, while 16 ... Qxb4 17 Nc7+ Ke7 18 Nxa8 looks good for
White amidst the chaos) 16 Nc7+ Ke7 17 Nxa8 Bg7! and in view of his extremely active
pieces, Black should be fine despite being down an exchange.
d2) 14 Nxe4 Nxe4 15 Qxe4 Bg7 (15 ... axb5? 16 Rd5 followed by Bxb5 is curtains) 16
Rd5 (the engines initially prefer 16 Nd6+, but I see no sense in trying to squeeze
something out from the resulting opposite-coloured bishop middlegames after 16 ... Kf8
17 Nxc8 Rxc8 18 Rd5 Qc6 where Black should be comfortable after ... Bf6) Black again
has to be accurate:
 d21) After the innocuous and unfortunate 16 ... Qc6? White found the attractive tactic
17 Nd6+ Kf8 18 Nxf7! Kxf7 19 Bc4! when Black had no answer to his opponent’s
bombardment on the light squares. The game continued 19 ... Ke8 (19 ... e6 was more
resilient, but after 20 fxe6+ Bxe6 21 Rf1+ Ke7 22 Bb3! Black cannot possibly hope to
survive the coming onslaught) 20 Rhd1 Bd7 21 Qe2! Bf6 22 Bb3 h5 23 Rxd7 Qxd7 24
Bf7+! Kd8 25 Rxd7+ Kxd7 26 Bxh5 and White eventually won in O.Wieczorek-
L.Cernousek, Teplice 2013. Extremely powerful opening play from White!
d22) 16 ... Qb6! (this accurate move is essential for survival) 17 Nd6+ (17 f6? Bxf6 18
Rd6 Qc5 19 Rxf6 axb5 20 b4 Ra4! was better for Black in D.Naroditsky-M.Molner, Internet
2011) 17 ... Kf8 18 Nc4 Qc7 19 Qe3 Bd7 20 Nb6 Rd8 21 Nxd7+ (White can kiss his
winning chances goodbye after this, so he perhaps should have considered 21 Bc4!? to
keep things interesting; still, Black should be fine after the normal 21 ... Bc6 22 Rxd8+
Qxd8 23 c3 Bf6 24 Rd1 Qb8) 21 ... Rxd7 22 Rxd7 Qxd7 23 Bd3 Bf6 when Black was fine
and arguably had the better bishop in V.Bukhteeva-A.Kovalyov, St Petersburg 2012.
Indeed, the Grandmaster went on to outplay his opponent in instructive fashion.
So it seems that with 12 ... dxe5 Black obtains equality with a few key but not
extremely difficult moves. In addition to 12 ... dxe5, 12 ... g4!? is also noteworthy.
 The ‘refutation’ 13 Qg3! Qxe5 (13 ... dxe5 14 Nb3 Qb6 15 Qxe5 is better for White) 14
Bb5+! axb5 15 Qxe5 dxe5 16 Ndxb5 e6 17 Nc7+ Ke7 18 Nxa8 exf5 19 Nc7 is probably
slightly better for White, but Black certainly retains practical chances.
13 g3
This prevents ... Qf4+ and prepares Bg2, followed by bringing the h1-rook to the e1-
square, which is the whole point of sacrificing the e4-pawn in the first place.
13 ... g4 14 Qf2
14 Qd3? is bad due to 14 ... Nd5! 15 Nxd5 Qxd5 when White has nothing much to
show for the lost material.
14 ... h5!
A key move. This not only allows the bishop to develop to h6 with check, but more
importantly, there is a possibility of making real progress on the kingside with ... h4 and
... hxg3.
14 ... Bd7?! is less direct and after 15 Bg2 Qc5 16 Rhe1 0-0-0 17 Qe2 White has an
enduring initiative, while 14 ... d5? is a risky move and seems to play straight into White’s
hands. After 15 Bg2 Bg7 16 Rhe1 Qd6 17 Nb3 (17 Qe2!? is also strong) 17 ... 0-0 18 Bxd5
White was evidently better in A.Vovk-D.Eggleston, London 2012.
15 Kb1 Bh6
As advertised earlier, 15 ... h4!? deserves serious attention given that it poses White
direct questions on how he intends to resolve the ongoing conflict concerning those
kingside pawns. After 16 Rg1 (16 gxh4! may be best when 16 ... Bh6 17 Re1 Qf4 18 Qe2
Qe5! appears to force a repetition since 19 Qxe5 dxe5 20 Rxe5 Bf4 21 Re1 Rxh4 or 19
Qd1 Be3! 20 Nb3 d5! is not really a viable option) 16 ... hxg3 17 hxg3 Bd7 18 Bg2 Qc5 19
Rge1 0-0-0 Black had a solid extra pawn in O.Wieczorek-D.Raznikov, Albena 2011.
16 Re1 Qc5 17 Bg2 Bd7?
This casual move was actually a serious mistake that eventually cost the Czech
number one the game. 17 ... Bg7 and 17 ... h4 were safer and better options.
18 Qe2!
 Richard Palliser pointed out that Black was probably hoping for the naive 18 Bxb7
when he obtains good pressure on the queenside after 18 ... Rb8 19 Qe2 0-0 20 Nb3 Qxf5
21 Qxa6 Rfe8.

18 ... 0-0
18 ... Bf8 was played in P.Zvara-F.Meissner, Pardubice 2011, but here White can safely
grab some pawns with 19 Bxb7! Rb8 20 Nb3 Qb6 (20 ... Qxf5 is impossible due to 21
Qxa6 Bg7 22 Rhf1 Qg5 23 Qxd6!) 21 Bxa6 when he has emerged with an extra pawn.
19 Nb3 Qxf5?
Black anticipated the loss of his two central pawns and hurriedly grabbed one of
White’s pawns in order to make up for that. However, the opening of the f-file proved to
be a decisive factor in the game. Palliser suggested 19 ... Qc7!? 20 Qxe7 Bg7 21 Rd1
Rac8 as a better defence, although I still like White after 22 Rhf1.
20 Rhf1 Qg5 21 Qxe7 Rae8 22 Qxd6
White has a clear edge at this juncture. His queen is powerfully placed and his minor
pieces are all operating effectively. On top of that, Black’s king is extremely vulnerable
and I believe that Black’s position may already be lost.
 22 ... Rxe1+ 23 Rxe1 Re8
Giving up the b-pawn was tantamount to resignation, but there were not many
attractive options here: for example, 23 ... Bc8 24 a4! followed by Re5 looks terrible for
Black.
24 Rxe8+ Bxe8 25 Bxb7
Navara could have resigned here with a clear conscience, but played on for a few
moves through inertia.
25 ... Qe3 26 a4 Qg1+ 27 Ka2 Bg7

28 Qe7
28 Qd8! Qxh2 29 Ne4! would have won a piece.
28 ... Bd7 29 Nd5 Qf2 30 Qd8+ Kh7 31 Nxf6+ Qxf6 32 Qxf6 Bxf6 33 Nc5 1-0
Black may have lost this game, but the above analysis shows that he has more than
one way to equalize comfortably. Nevertheless, I have not found anything more than
equality in any of the above lines so the pawn sacrifice may be worth a punt now and
then, especially in games with faster time controls.

Game 5
J.Zidu-N.Pascual Perez
Correspondence 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 f4 Qc7 8 Qf3 h6

9 Bxf6 Nxf6 10 f5 Qc5 11 0-0-0 g5 12 fxg6!?
This is the critical try in this particular variation. The point of ‘blundering’ the
exchange will become clear in a few moves.
12 ... Bg4
Of course, anything else such as 12 ... fxg6? will be completely illogical and in this
case is swiftly refuted by 13 e5! dxe5 14 Nb3 Qc6 15 Bd3! Rg8 16 Qg3 with a huge
attack.
13 gxf7+ Kxf7 14 Qd3 Bxd1 15 Nxd1

White argues that the extra pawn and his compensation on the light squares will be
more than sufficient for the material deficit. Indeed, White’s pieces are primed to strike:
the d1-knight will hop to e3 and may land on the f5-square, while the white queen and
bishop may look to exert pressure on the light squares from the b3- and h3-squares
respectively.
15 ... Bg7
Commonest and again most likely best. Ftacnik’s book contained some novel analysis
on this position which has been proven to be fairly accurate by subsequent games. I will
present Tiemann’s analysis from that book with some updates, but first there are
important alternatives to look at:
a) Setting up a potential battery down the long diagonal with 15 ... Qe5!? is logical.
Here White can try 16 Be2!?, with the point that 16 ... Qxe4 can be met by 17 Qc3! when
the threat of 18 Bf3 is surprisingly tricky to meet. After 17 ... Qxg2 (if 17 ... d5 18 Bf3
Qf4+ 19 Ne3! Rc8!? 20 Qd2 Qe5 21 Nxd5! Nxd5 22 Re1 Qg5 23 Qxg5 hxg5 24 Bxd5+ and
White’s active pieces dominate the position, or here 20 ... e6? 21 Rf1! with dangerous
threats) 18 Qb3+ d5 19 Rf1 White has the immediate threat of Ne3-f5 with a strong
initiative.
b) Both 15 ... Rc8 and 15 ... h5 are very logical, but have yet to be played. In either
case, White should probably continue with a combination of Ne3, g3, Nef5 and so on.
16 g3
This is an interesting shot and was not analysed by Ftacnik and Tiemann. White plans
the immediate Bh3 which means putting a rook on the c8-square will be counterintuitive
for now. However, Black has a tactical resource in hand ...
Ftacnik pointed that after 16 Be2, 16 ... e6! makes a lot more sense now that White’s
light-squared bishop has been committed to a less dangerous diagonal. Instead, 16 Qb3+
d5 is the heavily-analysed main line in Ftacnik’s book.

I don’t really have anything fresh to add since practice has demonstrated that Black,
indeed, equalizes quite comfortably after 17 Nf5:
a) 17 ... Nxe4 18 Bd3 Nf6 19 Re1 (surprisingly, this is still untried since Grandmaster
Repertoire 6 was published; instead, 19 Rf1?! had an outing and after 19 ... b5 20 Nh4 in
R.Castellanos-A.Kovalyov, Montreal 2010, Black should have played 20 ... Rhc8! with the
slightly better position) 19 ... Rhe8 20 Nh4! (not 20 Qxb7?! Ra7! 21 Qb3 e6 when Black
takes over the initiative) 20 ... Kg8 21 Bg6 Qc7 22 Qh3!? (22 Bxe8 Rxe8 is equal) 22 ...
Qf4+ 23 Kb1 Qg4 24 Qxg4 Nxg4 25 Nf5 e6 26 Bxe8 Rxe8 with equality.
b) I also couldn’t find anything tangible after the rarely played 17 ... Rac8!?. For
instance, 18 Bd3 e6 19 e5! exf5 20 Bxf5! Rc7 21 exf6 Bxf6 22 Kb1 Rf8 23 Qg3 Ke8 24 Qf3
(or 24 Re1+ Kd8 with equal chances) 24 ... Kd8 25 g4 h5 26 h3 Rc6 when Black was fine
and even proceeded to win in A.Lanc-P.Tulfer, correspondence 2011.
c) Ftacnik also mentioned 17 ... Rhc8?!, but after 18 Bd3 (instead of 18 Nc3, as
discussed in the book) 18 ... Rc7 19 Nde3 e6 20 exd5 Nxd5 21 Bc4! Nxe3 22 Bxe6+ Kg6
23 Nxe3 Kh7 24 Nd5 White has decent practical chances.
16 ... Nxe4!
The Black king looks extremely draughty after this, but this is critical in the sense that
it passes the ball into White’s court to prove that there is ample compensation. Instead,
16 ... d5 17 e5 Ne4 18 Bh3! Bxe5 19 Ne6 Qd6 20 Qf3+ Nf6 (20 ... Kg8 21 Qh5!) 21 Nf2!
followed by Nd3 exerts unbearable pressure on Black’s position, while 16 ... e6 17 Bh3
Rae8 (17 ... Rhe8 18 Rf1 is similar) 18 Rf1! Re7 19 Ne3 Rhe8 20 Ng2! (this should be
familiar by now) is simple positional chess at its best.

The theme of having the knights on d4 and f4 to pressure the e6 point seems to be a
recurring one. With 20 ... Qe5? Black floundered as a result of White’s purposeful play: 21
Nf4! Qxe4 22 Qxe4 Nxe4 23 Bxe6+ Rxe6 24 Nfxe6+ Bf6 25 Rf4 and White has a clear
endgame plus in J.Hector-A.Volokitin, German League 2011. 20 ... b5 was a better
defence, although 21 Nf4 is still dangerous for Black. Likewise, after 21 c3 Qc4 22 Qxc4
bxc4 23 e5! dxe5 24 Nc6 Rc7 25 Nxe5+ Kg8 26 Ne3,White’s chances are clearly
preferable, although he will have to deal with a lot more resistance than in the game.
17 Qxe4 Bxd4
This may not be the most accurate. Black can also try to change queens with 17 ...
Qxd4 when the position after 18 Bc4+ Ke8 19 Qxb7 Qa7 20 Qd5 (20 Qe4!? with the idea
of 20 ... Kd8 21 Re1 Bf6!? 22 Nf2 Qxf2! 23 Qxa8+ Kc7 24 Qe4 Rb8 seems to give Black
adequate counterplay) 20 ... Kd8 21 Rf1 is deliciously unclear.
 A recent game continued 21 ... Rb8 (Kislik suggested that 21 ... Rc8!?, with the idea of
seeking active counterplay with ... h5-h4, is a possible improvement) 22 c3 a5?!
(challenging White’s remaining rook with 22 ... Rf8 looks logical, although White keeps a
little extra after 23 Rxf8+ Bxf8 24 a4; 22 ... Qb6!? is also worth a look) 23 Rf7! Be5 24 a4
Qc5 and White, presumably showing respect to his opponent’s near 2600 rating, accepted
a draw in L.Fusco-S.Mareco, Montevideo 2011. White should be better though and a move
like 25 Qe6!? looks difficult for Black to handle.
18 Bd3 Bf6
18 ... Ke8!? 19 Qxb7 Ra7 20 Qb3 Kd8! may be worthy of further investigation.
19 Re1

19 ... b5
Kislik pointed out the unlikely 19 ... Ke8!? as a possible saving move. The idea is to
get the king to d7 where it’ss a lot safer and after 20 Qxb7 Ra7 21 Qb3 a5 22 a4 Rf8 23
c3 White’s edge looks to be negligible.
20 Nc3 Qd4
This is virtually the only move in view of the threat of Nd5. Roberto Gabriel Alvarez
gave 20 ... Bxc3?? 21 Qxe7+ Kg8 22 Qe6+ Kg7 23 Qd7+ Kg8 24 bxc3 followed by Re7
and a swift execution.
21 Qg6+ Kf8

22 Ne4!!
A wonderfully creative approach that bears the hallmark of correspondence chess. I
believe not many players, including the very best grandmasters, would even consider
giving up the b2-pawn with check and compromise their king’s position in such a manner.
A deeper look will reveal the underlying point behind this unlikely pawn sacrifice: the
threats of Nxf6 followed by Rf1 and the immediate Rf1 are awkward to meet and, most
importantly, there is no perpetual check. This is the kind of move that is easy to analyse
at home with the help of computers, but hardly possible to find during an actual game.
22 ... Qxb2+
Black had zero chances to come back after this, but nothing else really makes sense:
for instance, 22 ... Rg8 23 Qxh6+ Bg7 24 Qh5! Qe5 25 Rf1+ Bf6 26 Qh4 does not give
Black much joy either.
23 Kd1 Rg8
Again this is forced. Spite checks with 23 ... Qa1+ 24 Kd2 and 23 ... Qb1+ 24 Ke2
followed by Nxf6 hardly help matters.
24 Qxh6+ Rg7 25 Nxf6 exf6 26 Re7! f5
Not an ideal move to play, but Black had little choice at this stage. White has no
qualms exchanging off his last rook if it means he can capture both of Black’s rooks
eventually. After 26 ... Kxe7 27 Qxg7+ Ke6 28 Qg4+ Kf7 29 Qd7+ Kf8 30 Qxd6+ Kg7 31
Qe7+ Kg8 32 Qh7+ Kf8 33 Qh8+ White wins the a8-rook and the game.
27 Re3!
 A fantastic switch-back. Now White can go after the f5-pawn. Black’s position is
horribly uncoordinated and he is quite lost at this juncture.
27 ... Qd4 28 Kc1! Qa1+
28 ... Qc5 29 Rf3! reveals the point of White’s 27th move. There is no reasonable way
for Black to defend the f-pawn.
29 Kd2 Kg8 30 Bxf5
Black has no defence to the devastating Be6.
30 ... Qd4+ 31 Ke2 Qc4+ 32 Ke1 Rf7 33 Be6 1-0
A possible finish would be 33 ... Qf1+ 34 Kd2 Raf8 35 Re4! Qg2+ 36 Re2 Qf3 37 Qg6+
Kh8 38 Bxf7 Qxf7 39 Qxd6, with two extra pawns and a continuing attack.

Game 6
B.Ochsner-P.H.Nielsen
Horsens 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 f4 Qc7 8 Qf3

b5!?
This line is gradually gaining in popularity and has been scoring incredibly well. Apart
from developing his queenside quickly by omitting ... e6 altogether, Black plans to put his
bishop on the g7-square, which is more dynamic and hence gives him the chance to
obtain greater fighting chances. It is notable that a number of 2600s have used this line
primarily against lower-rated opposition, often blowing them away.
 8 ... g6 is rarely played but has notably been played by Anton Korobov. Play continues
9 0-0-0 Bg7 10 Kb1 (10 Bh4!? followed by 11 g4 is a peculiar yet strangely logical idea)
10 ... 0-0?! (10 ... h6! is a clear improvement, although White can pose some light-
squared questions with 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 f5) 11 h4 h5 (11 ... e5 12 Nb3 h6 13 f5! b5 14 g4
b4 15 Bxf6 Nxf6 16 Nd5 Nxd5 17 exd5 a5 18 Bd3 a4 19 Nd2 is also a huge pile of mess
that appears to favour White) and now in J.Stachanczyk-M.Manik, Prague 2014, 12 f5! is
pretty strong. White can increase the pressure by manoeuvring the c3-knight to f4 and
placing his queen on the g3-square.
9 0-0-0
Best:
a) 9 e5?! Bb7 10 exd6 Qb6! 11 Qe3 e6 12 f5 e5 13 Nb3 Qxe3+ 14 Bxe3 Bxd6 15 Na5
(15 a4? b4 16 Na5 bxc3 17 Nxb7 cxb2 18 Nxd6+ Ke7 is slightly better for Black who has
the better structure and quicker development) 15 ... 0-0-0 16 Nxb7 Kxb7 17 g3 Bc5 is
comfortable equality.
b) 9 a3 has also been played. I initially thought that this is just a general loss of
tempo, but Kislik pointed out that this temporarily halts Black’s attack on the queenside
which may turn out to be a useful nuance. After 9 ... Bb7 10 0-0-0 (if 10 g4, 10 ... h5!? is
possible: for example, 11 gxh5 Rc8 12 Bh3 e6 13 0-0-0 Qa5 with a complete mess) 10 ...
Rc8 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 g4 Qa5!? with ... Rxc3 ideas in the pipeline, Black seems to be doing
fine.
9 ... Bb7 10 Bd3 g6!?
Black has scored extremely well with this independent approach. This particular
position reminds me of a Dragadorf with some concrete differences. White has not placed
his pieces according to the standard Yugoslav set-up and hence his typical attacking plans
in the Dragon are not available here. Meanwhile Black has already developed his queen
on the c7-square, which is relatively uncommon in the Dragon and makes a move like
Nd5 particularly attractive. A complex and challenging game is in prospect and the
various engines seem to agree with me as the evaluation ‘0.00’ was amazingly given by
all of them.

Instead, 10 ... e6 would still be normal of course, while the extravagant 10 ... Qb6!?
looks a little risky after 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 g6 14 Rhe1 with some
pressure for White. Here the natural 14 ... Bg7 may lead to concrete discomfort after 15
Nc6 Bxc6 16 dxc6 e6 17 f5! gxf5 18 Qxf5, although Black may objectively be able to hold
this with best play.
11 Nd5
11 Rhe1 normally transposes after 11 ... Bg7 12 Nd5. Instead, 12 Nb3 is lame and
Black quickly went on the offensive with 12 ... 0-0 13 h4 b4 14 Ne2 a5 15 h5 a4 with a
typical Sicilian smash in A.Liang-J.Sarkar, Ledyard 2014.
11 ... Nxd5 12 exd5 Bg7
Consistent and correct. Instead, 12 ... Nb6?! 13 Rhe1! 0-0-0? (13 ... Bxd5? doesn’t
work due to 14 Nxb5! Qc5 15 Be4; 13 ... h6 was best, but White is still better after 14 Bf6
Rg8 15 Be4 with a strong attack) 14 Nc6! Bxc6 15 dxc6 was much better for White in
I.Gazik-J.Tompa, German League 1995.
 13 Nc6!?
White’s key alternative is the natural 13 Rhe1. Black has scored an incredible 90%(!)
after this move, but players on the white side have been grossly outrated and the
position is objectively playable for both colours:
a) 13 ... Bxd4?? loses after 14 Rxe7+ Kf8 (or 14 ... Kd8 15 Rxf7+ Kc8 16 Be4! Bc5 17
Qh3 and Black is all tied up in knots) 15 Qe4 Bg7 16 Rxf7+!, with mate arriving swiftly.
b) 13 ... Bf6!? is though perfectly playable and now:
b1) The aggressive 14 h4 Rc8 15 Kb1 0-0 16 Nf5!? is interesting (16 c3!? is also
possible). Here the calm 16 ... e6! was best and after 17 Nh6+ Kh8 18 h5!? (18 Qf2!?
Bxb2! 19 Kxb2 Qc3+ 20 Kb1 Bxd5 is incredibly complex: for example, 21 Be7 Kg7!! 22
Bxf8+ Rxf8 23 Ng4 Nc5 24 Bf1 Qb4+ 25 Kc1 Qa3+ 26 Kd2 Qb4+ forces a draw, as 24
Qd2? Qa3 25 c3 Nxd3 is close to winning for Black) 18 ... Bxd5, White should have tried
19 Bxf6+! (instead of the inferior 19 Qh3?! of D.Kanovsky-I.Nyzhnyk, Legnica 2013) 19 ...
Nxf6 20 Qf2 Nxh5 21 g4 Ng7 22 f5!, which would have been a better way to muddle the
situation on the kingside.
b2) 14 Nc6 is comparatively less exciting and after 14 ... Bxg5 15 fxg5 Bxc6 16 dxc6
Ne5 17 Rxe5! dxe5 18 Bxg6! fxg6 (or 18 ... hxg6 19 Rd7 Qa5 with a draw in K.Rodriguez-
H.Van den Bos, correspondence 2012, presumably because of 20 Rxe7+ Kxe7 21 Qf6+
Ke8 22 Qxh8+ Ke7 23 Qf6+ with a perpetual) 19 Rd7 Qa5 (19 ... Qxd7? 20 cxd7+ Kxd7
21 Qd5+ Kc7 22 Qxe5+ Kd7 23 Qd5+ Kc7 24 Qe6 gives White good winning chances) 20
Rxe7+ Kxe7 21 Qf6+ Ke8 22 Qxe5+ Kf7 23 Qf6+ Kg8 24 Qe6+ Kg7 25 Qe7+ White
forces a draw. It is always important to remember such ‘forced draw’ variations,
especially in critical tournament situations.
b3) 14 Qe3 Bxg5 15 fxg5 Nb6 16 Be4 (White’s pieces are menacingly placed in the
centre, but even though Black’s king looks draughty, his position contains sufficient
defensive resources) 16 ... 0-0 (16 ... Bxd5? is risky: 17 Bxd5 Nxd5 18 Qf3 Nb6?? – 18 ...
Qc4 was Black’s only move, although I still like White’s chances after 19 b3 Qc5 20 Re2
Ra7 21 Nf5! – 19 Nc6 e6 20 Qf6 Qxc6 21 Qxh8+ Kd7 22 Qg7 with a completely winning
position for White in A.Pijpers-R.Edouard, Deizisau 2012, although he somehow contrived
to even lose the game eventually) 17 Qf3 Rae8 18 Nf5 Bc8 19 Nh6+ Kg7 20 h4 Qc5 21
a3?! (21 Qf4!?) 21 ... f5! when Black had equalized and might even have had a small
edge in R.Labonte-A.Rawlings, correspondence 2011.
c) 13 ... Nf6 and now an untried move is best, although there are some logical
alternatives that are worth looking at too. Note also that White has lost all three games
from this position:

c1) 14 f5 Bxd5 15 Nxb5!? (15 Qe2 is more conservative, but 15 ... Rb8! 16 Kb1 Rb7 is
a fine retort: for example, 17 h4 0-0 18 fxg6 hxg6 is better for Black) 15 ... axb5? (the
surprising 15 ... Qd8! followed by ... axb5 was best) 16 Bxb5+ Kf8 17 Rxd5 Rxa2 and now
in T.Babaev-S.Zhigalko, Nakhchivan 2013, 18 Rd4! would have been strong, with the idea
18 ... Qa5 19 c3! Qxb5 20 Rb4 Qe8 21 Rxe7! Kxe7 22 Re4+ Kd7 23 Rxe8 Nxe8 24 f6 with
unclear play.
c2) 14 Be4 0-0 15 f5 looks like a natural follow-up, but Black’s position is resilient and
he went on the counterattack with 15 ... Qc4 16 Qb3 Qc5 17 Nf3? (17 Bf3 Nxd5 18 Nxb5
Qxb5 19 Bxd5 should be equal) 17 ... Rfc8 with an extremely promising position in
T.Meurs-T.Burg, Vlissingen 2011.
c3) 14 Qe2 was played in I.Videnova-S.Guramishvili, Belgrade 2013, and here the
Georgian IM could have simply taken on d5 with 14 ... Nxd5, as she could have met 15
Be4 with 15 ... 0-0 16 Bxd5 (16 f5 Rae8 is also good for Black) 16 ... Bxd5 17 Qxe7 Qxe7!
18 Bxe7 Rfe8 19 Nf3 Bxa2 20 Bxd6 Rxe1 21 Rxe1 Bd5 with the better endgame.
c4) 14 Nc6! is the untried improvement. Now 14 ... e6! is forced when 15 f5! throws
more wood on to the fire. Black has to react accurately after 15 ... 0-0 16 fxe6:
 c41) The natural 16 ... Nxd5? falls to an unlikely series of tactical shots: 17 e7! Rfe8
(Black has insufficient compensation for the exchange after 17 ... Bxc6 18 exf8Q+ Rxf8 19
Be4) 18 Bxg6! hxg6 19 Nd8!! (a beautiful shot) 19 ... Nf6 20 Qxb7 Qxb7 21 Nxb7 Ra7 22
Rxd6! Rxb7 23 Bxf6 Bxf6 24 Rxf6 with possibly a winning endgame.
c42) 16 ... fxe6! 17 Rxe6 Nxd5 18 Qxd5 Qxc6 19 Qxc6 Bxc6 20 Rxd6 Bxg2 with
equality.
Finally, we can return to the immediate 13 Nc6:

13 ... Bf6
This has been played in the three games I could find in my database. For the
adventurous soul 13 ... e6!? may be interesting, although White does obtain scary-looking
compensation after 14 dxe6 (Kislik pointed out that the engines favour Black after 14
Rhe1 Bxc6 15 dxc6 Nc5 16 f5! 0-0 17 f6 Bh8 and that things are hardly clear at all after
18 g4!? Rfc8 19 Kb1 Qxc6 20 Qf2 with compensation for the material; both of us agree
that we would much prefer the dark-squared bishop to be a little more active than it is in
this particular position) 14 ... Nc5 15 exf7+ Kf8 16 f5 Bxc6 17 Qe3 Nxd3+ 18 Qxd3 gxf5
19 Qxf5 (the endgame after 19 Bf4 Rd8 20 Bxd6+ Qxd6 21 Qxd6+ Rxd6 22 Rxd6 Be4
should be better for Black, although White does has his chances) 19 ... Qxf7 20 Qh3 Bd7
21 Qa3 b4! 22 Qxb4 Kg8.

White has two pawns for the piece and Black’s king is exposed, although he does
seem to have weathered the storm and can look forward to consolidating his position.
The engines like Black here, but I have only taken a cursory glance which does not do
justice to such a sharp position. A possible line is 23 Rxd6 Re8 24 Rhd1 a5! with the idea
of 25 Qxa5 Bg4 when White has some problems on the back rank.
14 h4!?
14 Bh6!? also deserves some attention. Black’s dark-squared bishop is running out of
squares after 14 ... Rc8 (14 ... Nc5!?) 15 g4! and he may have to resort to the ugly 15 ...
Rg8!? to save his bishop (15 ... Bxc6 16 dxc6 Qxc6 17 Qxc6 Rxc6 18 Be4 Rc4 19 Bd5! Rc5
20 g5 e6 21 gxf6 exd5 22 Rhe1+ Kd8 23 Re7 is clearly better for White, while 15 ... Nb6
16 Be4 e6 17 Rhe1 also looks very good for White; instead, 15 ... e6!? 16 g5 Be7 17 Nxe7
Kxe7 18 Rhe1 Kd8! 19 Qh3! Bxd5 20 Bg7 Re8 21 Kb1 is another plausible line where
things get very messy indeed). Despite the engine’s approval for Black’s position, I
believe he has long-term problems with his king and I still prefer White after 16 g5 Bh8
17 Be4 Nc5 18 Rhe1. It’s all getting very messy, but White’s position is slightly the easier
to play.
14 ... Rc8!
This was new at the time of play and I believe is a significant improvement.
Previously, 14 ... h6 15 Bxf6 Nxf6 was played in a couple of high-level encounters:
 a) White has very promising compensation for the pawn after 16 f5 gxf5 17 Bxf5 Nxd5
18 Qxd5 Bxc6 19 Qd4:
a1) 19 ... Rf8? 20 Rhe1! Bd7 (20 ... e6 21 Bxe6! fxe6 22 Rxe6+ Kd8 23 Qe5 Kc8 24
Rdxd6 also looks terrifyingly strong) 21 Rxe7+! Kxe7 22 Re1+ Be6 (22 ... Kd8 23 Qg7!
wins back the rook and with it the game) 23 Qg7! Qc4 24 Rxe6+ Qxe6 25 Bxe6 Kxe6 26
Qxh6+ f6 27 Qe3+ Kf7 28 Qd3 Ke6 29 Qe4+ Kf7. White has played the game flawlessly
and now in T.Gharamian-W.So, French team Championship 2012, he could have tried 30
Qd5+ Ke7 31 h5 Rh8 32 a4! bxa4 33 g4 with terrific winning chances.
a2) 19 ... e5? 20 Qxd6 Qxd6 21 Rxd6 Bxg2 22 Re1 Ke7 23 Rd2 Rhg8 (23 ... Bf3! may
be best, but White is still pressing after 24 Rd3 Bc6 25 Rxe5+ Kf6 26 Rc5 Rad8 27 b4!
when Black’s queenside pawns are vulnerable) 24 Rxe5+ Kf6 25 Rc5 Rg3 26 b3 (26 Rf2!)
26 ... Bh3 27 Rd6+ was better for White in S.Azarov-V.Gashimov, Khanty-Mansiysk 2011.
a3) The untried 19 ... Rg8! may well be best as Black seems to hold after 20 Rhe1 Bd7
(20 ... Rd8 21 Qf6 e5 22 g4 looks bad for Black) 21 Bh7!? Rc8 22 c3 Rf8 23 Qe4 e6,
although White should have at least enough for the pawn.
b) I analysed 16 h5!? which seems promising. For example, 16 ... Nxd5 (16 ... Nxh5?
17 f5! leads to a winning attack; instead, the unlikely 16 ... gxh5!? may be best, although
White’s compensation is very apparent after 17 Rde1 Nxd5 18 Qxd5 Bxc6 19 Qxh5 Bxg2
20 Rhg1) 17 Qxd5 Bxc6 18 Qd4 0-0-0 19 hxg6 fxg6 20 Bxg6 Bxg2 21 Rhe1 and Black has
a lot to think about regarding his loose position.
15 h5
I had previously prepared 15 Be4!?, with the idea 15 ... h6 (if 15 ... Nc5? 16 Bxf6 exf6
17 h5 with an attack for White) 16 Bxf6 Nxf6 17 Rhe1 0-0 18 f5 Nxe4 19 Qxe4 Bxc6 20
dxc6 Qxc6 21 Qxc6 Rxc6 22 Rxe7, although Black should be fine here in any case.
15 ... Rf8 16 hxg6 hxg6
 17 Bxf6
It is not easy hunting for improvements here as both players have played
exceptionally well. Again 17 Be4!?, with the idea of 17 ... Bxg5 18 fxg5 Nc5 19 Rhe1 Nxe4
20 Qxe4 can be considered, although White admittedly has very little for the pawn after
20 ... Bxc6 21 dxc6 e6!.
17 ... Nxf6 18 f5 Bxc6
The game petered out to a peaceful draw after this. The audacious 18 ... g5!? was the
last try to inject some excitement, but is probably unnecessarily flashy. Objectively the
position is about equal after 19 Rde1 Nxd5 20 Qxd5 Bxc6 21 Qd4 f6 22 Re2 Kd8 23 Rhe1
Re8 when Black’s extra pawn doesn’t count for much.
19 dxc6 Qxc6 20 fxg6 Qxf3 21 gxf7+ Kxf7 22 gxf3 Rg8 23 Rdg1
23 a4 looks like a simple way to further liquidate.
23 ... Rxg1+ 24 Rxg1
 Even though Black is objectively on the sunny side of the draw, there should be too
little material left on the board for him to obtain concrete winning chances. For the sake
of completeness, I present the rest of the game with very brief notes.
24 ... Nd7 25 Be4 Nc5 26 a3 Rh8 27 Bg6+?
White is drifting. Something like 27 b4!? would have been much better.
27 ... Kf6 28 b4 Rg8! 29 bxc5 dxc5 30 Rd1 Rxg6 31 Rd5

31 ... Rg5
31 ... c4! 32 Rc5 Ke6 33 Rc7 Rf6 with decent winning chances.
32 Rd7 Rf5 33 Ra7 Rxf3 34 Rxa6+ Ke5 35 Kb2 Kd5
35 ... Rf8!? 36 Rb6 Kd4 37 Rxb5 e5 may be Black’s best chance for a win.
36 Rb6 e5! 37 Rxb5 e4 38 Rb8 Rf7 39 Re8?!
39 Kc3 Rf3+ 40 Kd2 Rxa3 41 Rd8+ is a straightforward draw.
39 ... Kd4 40 Rd8+ Ke3 41 Re8 Kf3 42 Kc3 Ra7
42 ... e3!? is a better winning attempt, but White draws by the skin of his teeth after
43 Kc4 Rf4+ 44 Kxc5 Re4 45 Rf8+ Kg3 46 Rg8+ Kf2 47 Rf8+ Ke1 48 c4 e2 49 Rh8 Kd2 50
Rh1.
43 Kc4 Ra5 44 a4 Rxa4+ 45 Kxc5 e3 46 c4 e2 47 Kd5 Ra3 48 Rxe2 Kxe2 49
c5 Rd3+ 50 Ke6 Rc3 51 Kd6 Kd3 52 c6 Kc4 53 c7 Kb5 54 Kd7 Rxc7+ 55 Kxc7
½-½
8 ... b5!? looks like a very attractive alternative to the heavily-analysed main lines and
I predict that the popularity of this variation will grow exponentially in due time.

Game 7
N.Huschenbeth-Le Quang Liem
Lubbock 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Bc4

 This is a key alternative to the main lines arising after the more common 7 f4. In
many ways, it is the most principled approach as the temporary omission of 6 ... e6
seems to be crying out for such a response. Also, the Sozin-style attack involving long-
castling and potential sacrifices on both d5 and e6 is optically very attractive.
7 ... Qa5!?
Again we see such a development of the queen. There’s also:
a) 7 ... Qb6 is the main alternative and will be covered in the next game.
b) 7 ... g6?! has been tried a few times, but White’s score after 8 Qe2! has been huge
and after 8 ... Bg7 9 0-0-0 0-0 10 f4! Qc7 11 Bb3 b5 12 Rhe1 e5 13 Nf3 Bb7 (R.Mamedov-
A.Korobov, Dubai 2004), White has 14 Qd2!, with the point that after 14 ... b4 15 Qxd6
Qxd6 16 Rxd6 bxc3 17 fxe5 cxb2+ 18 Kb1 Nxe4 19 Rxd7 he emerges with an extra pawn.
c) 7 ... e6 transposes into a hybrid of 6 Bg5 and the Sozin Attack. This position occurs
very rarely from the Sozin move order, which helps to explain why this position has not
been thoroughly investigated as yet.
 White has a few options:
a) 8 Qe2!? is generally in line with Sozin-related ideas, involving long castling and
potential sacrifices on d5 and e6. I think inserting 8 ... h6 9 Bh4 before playing 9 ... b5 is
important. White’s pieces may be developed, but they are not well co-ordinated as yet
and the sacrifice 10 Bxe6!? (10 Bb3 Bb7 11 f4 Be7! – a deep and intriguing pawn sacrifice
– 12 Bxe6 0-0 13 Bxd7 Qxd7 and now 14 0-0-0 Nxe4 15 Bxe7 Qxe7 16 Nf5 Qf6 17 Nxe4
Qxf5 18 Nxd6 Qxf4+ 19 Kb1 Bc6 saw Black attain comfortable equality in L.Neagu-
M.Tochacek, correspondence 2010, while 14 Bxf6 Bxf6 15 0-0-0 b4 16 Nd5 Bxd5 17 exd5
Rfe8 supplies decent compensation) 10 ... fxe6 11 Nxe6 Qa5 12 0-0-0 (K.Bulski-
A.Kovchan, Copenhagen 2010) 12 ... b4! 13 Nd5 Kf7 14 Nec7 Ra7 15 Qc4 Kg6 (15 ... Ne5
16 Qb3 Nxd5 17 Nxd5 Kg6 18 f4 Nc6 19 g4! looks like a menacing attack) 16 Ne6 Nxd5 17
exd5 Kh7 results in unclear complications.
b) 8 Bb3?! Nc5! 9 f4 Be7 10 Qf3 Qc7 11 0-0 0-0 12 f5 Nxb3 13 axb3 Bd7 14 Kh1 b5 15
Qd3 was fine for Black and agreed drawn at this point in R.Dzenis-V.Lebedev,
correspondence 2009.
c) 8 0-0 is the main move. Now 8 ... Qa5!? is the most common (8 ... b5? simply loses
to 9 Bxe6! fxe6 10 Nxe6 Qb6 11 Nd5 Nxd5 12 Qxd5 when the threat of Nxg7 followed by
Qe6 is decisive, as is 11 ... Qc6 12 Re1! followed by Re3-c3), and after 9 Qd2 I suspect
that Black should provoke White into sacrificing on d5, although he doesn’t have to:
c1) 9 ... b5 10 Bd5!? (10 Bd3 Bb7 is too tame to cause any trouble for Black) 10 ...
exd5 11 exd5 (11 Nc6!? Qb6 12 exd5 Ne5 13 Rfe1 Bb7 14 Nxe5 dxe5 15 Rxe5+ Kd7, with
unclear prospects, is another possible way to go) 11 ... Ne5 12 f4 Ng6 13 Qe3+ Be7 14
Bxf6 gxf6 15 Ne4 f5 16 Nxd6+ Kf8 17 N6xf5 Bxf5 18 Nxf5 Qc7.
 Here I prefer Black’s piece to the extra pawns.
c2) The simple 9 ... h6 is also possible: for example, 10 Be3 (10 Bh4 b5! 11 Bd5 exd5
12 exd5 Ne5 13 f4 Ng6 14 Rae1+ Be7 15 Bxf6 gxf6 16 Rf2 Qb6! 17 Ne4 f5 18 Ng3 Kf8 19
Ngxf5 Bxf5 20 Nxf5 Bf6 again looks preferable for Black) 10 ... Ne5 11 Bb3 Neg4 12 f4
Be7 13 Kh1 Nxe3 14 Qxe3 and in Li Chao-Zhou Jianchao, Hefei 2010, Black should have
simply played 14 ... 0-0 (instead of 14 ... g5?! when White is better after 15 f5 e5 16
Nde2 Qc5 17 Qd3!) 15 Rad1 Qc5 (15 ... Qc7 16 g4! looks good for White) 16 Rfe1 Rd8
with equal chances.
Returning to 7 ... Qa5:
8 Qd2 e6 9 0-0-0

9 ... b5
This is the most commonly played by a clear mile. After 9 ... h6 there is the untried 10
Bh4!? with the idea of 10 ... g5 11 Bg3 b5 12 Bb3! b4 13 Nd5!, with promising play.
Likewise, here 12 Nxe6!? fxe6 (12 ... bxc4 13 Nxf8 Kxf8 14 Bxd6+ Kg7 15 h4 looks very
good for White) 13 Bxe6 Ne5 14 Bb3 seems to give White very promising compensation:
for instance, 14 ... Bd7 (14 ... b4 15 Nd5 Nxd5 16 Bxd5 Rb8 17 Kb1 also gives White long-
term compensation for the piece) 15 Qd4 Qc7 16 h4 g4 17 f4 gxf3 18 gxf3 0-0-0 19 f4
Neg4 20 Rhe1, which looks very interesting for both sides.
10 Bb3
The late Vugar Gashimov won brilliantly after 10 Bd5?! b4! 11 Bxa8 bxc3 12 bxc3
Qxa2 with great compensation in A.Giri-V.Gashimov, Wijk aan Zee 2012.
10 ... Bb7 11 Rhe1
White’s play has been very logical. His pieces have all been deployed optimally and he
seems poised to strike in the centre while Black has not even completed development
yet. Indeed, this position seems fundamentally unsound in principle for Black.

11 ... Be7
This is actually quite risky, but in truth Black has serious difficulties finding a decent
reply. For example:
a) 11 ... Rc8 12 e5! dxe5 (12 ... Nxe5 13 Nxe6! fxe6 14 Rxe5! dxe5 15 Bxf6 Qc7 16
Bxe5 Qf7 17 f4 is also highly unpleasant for Black) 13 Nxe6! (even 13 Bxf6 Nxf6 14 Rxe5
looks good for White) 13 ... fxe6 14 Bxe6 Qc7 15 f4! with promising compensation.
b) 11 ... 0-0-0 is the commonest choice, but I don’t really see the point of Black’s
entire set-up. Here 12 f3 is simplest, with a comfortable edge.
12 Nf5!
White blows open the centre with a perfectly-timed piece sacrifice. Such sacrifices are
extremely common in the Najdorf.
12 ... exf5 13 exf5 Ne5
 14 Bxf6?
This is a serious inaccuracy that gives Black a lifeline. 14 f4! is stronger and more fluid
since Black probably has to give away the e5-knight anyway. For instance, 14 ... 0-0-0 15
fxe5 dxe5 16 Qe2 b4 17 Ne4! with a large advantage for White.
14 ... gxf6 15 f4 0-0-0 16 fxe5?!
This releases the tension prematurely after which White’s edge dissipated into thin
air. Instead, 16 Bd5! retains an edge: for instance, 16 ... Rhe8 (16 ... b4? 17 Bxb7+ Kxb7
18 Qd5+! Qxd5 19 Nxd5 Rd7 20 Nxe7 Rxe7 21 fxe5 dxe5 22 Rd6 wins a big pawn in the
rook ending) 17 a3!? Nc6 18 Bxf7 Rf8 19 Bd5 Rfe8 20 Qe3 with very good compensation.
Black may have an extra piece, but his dark-squared bishop is currently hemmed in by his
own pawns while White’s pieces are occupy ideal squares.
16 ... dxe5 17 Qe3 Bb4!
Black is completely fine at this point and now proceeds to outplay his opponent.
18 Bxf7 Kb8 19 Be6 Bxg2 20 Rxd8+ Rxd8 21 Rg1 Bb7 22 Rg7 Bxc3 23
Qxc3 Qxc3 24 bxc3
 24 ... Bf3 25 Bd7?!
This puts White clearly on the defensive. 25 c4! h5 26 c5 would have forced a draw.
25 ... h5 26 h4 e4 27 Re7 Bg4 28 Bc6 Rd1+ 29 Kb2 Bxf5 30 Bxe4 Re1 31
Rb7+ Kc8 32 Bc6 Re6 33 Bh1 Re2 34 Rg7?
This may well have been a time-trouble error. 34 Rb6! looks drawish to me.
34 ... Rxc2+ 35 Kb3 Kd8 36 Bb7 a5 37 Bc6?
37 a4 bxa4+ 38 Kxa4 Rxc3 39 Kxa5 looks like White’s best chance for a draw in view
of the lack of material remaining on the board.
37 ... b4 38 Rg3 Ke7 39 Re3+ Kd6 40 Be8 Rh2 41 cxb4 axb4 42 Bxh5?
Be6+! 43 Ka4 b3! 44 Rd3+ Ke7 0-1

Game 8
A.R.Salem-Zhou Jianchao
Tagaytay City 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Bc4 Qb6

 This is Black’s most principled response, playing in the style of the Poisoned Pawn.
8 Bb3
Sacrificing the b2-pawn à la the Poisoned Pawn has also been played, but here Black
is slightly more solid given that 6 ... Nbd7 is a slightly more useful move than 6 ... e6.
The d7-knight adds control over the e5-square and without the pawn on e6, White does
not have f4-f5 ideas like he has in the standard Poisoned Pawn lines. Still, the variations
after 8 Qd2!? Qxb2 9 Rb1 (both 9 Nb3!? and 9 0-0!? are less explored and potential
avenues for improvement) 9 ... Qa3 10 0-0 e6 are highly complex and deserve a look:

a) 11 Bxe6!? has scored very well and looks extremely scary, but Black is objectively
fine after 11 ... fxe6 12 Nxe6 Qa5 (12 ... Kf7!? was covered on ChessPublishing.com, but
13 Nd8+ Ke8 14 Nxb7 Bxb7 15 Rxb7 Rb8 16 Rxb8+ Nxb8 17 Bxf6 gxf6 18 Nd5 Nd7 19 c3
gives White very attractive compensation) 13 f4 Kf7 (flicking in 13 ... h6!? is interesting).
Here White has two main choices:
 a1) 14 f5 is the more restrained approach, but after 14 ... b5! 15 Qd3 (Black’s extra
piece should count in the long run after 15 a4 Bb7 16 axb5 Rc8 17 bxa6 Bxa6 18 Rf3
Bc4!) 15 ... Bb7 16 Nd5?! (16 Nxb5!? axb5 17 Rxb5 Qa7+ 18 Be3 Bxe4 19 Ng5+ Kg8 20
Nxe4 Qa3 remains better for Black, but White retains some practical chances; perhaps
here Black should try the computer-like 18 ... Qa6! 19 Qb3 Qxa2! 20 Rxb7 Qxb3 21 cxb3
h6 when he successfully forces the exchange of queens and hence stands better in the
endgame) 16 ... Rc8 (16 ... Bxd5! 17 exd5 Ne5 18 Qg3 Rc8 seems to be a more direct
win) 17 Bxf6? (17 Bd2 Qxa2 18 Nc3 Qc4 19 Qxc4 Rxc4 20 Nd8+ Ke7 21 Nxb7 Rc7 22 Na5
Kf7 23 Rf3 Be7 followed by ... Rc8 gives Black a large endgame edge, but at least White
has re-established material parity) 17 ... Nxf6 18 Ng5+ Kg8 19 Nxf6+ gxf6 20 Ne6 Kf7
Black won in a few more moves in J.Ikeda-G.Gopal, Ho Chi Minh City 2012.
a2) I quite like 14 e5!?, which has scored 3/3 so far, but I think Black is objectively
fine after 14 ... Kxe6 15 Kh1!? (15 f5+? Kf7 16 e6+ Kg8 17 Qd3 Ne5 18 Qg3 occurred in
Wang Yiye-B.Ochsner, Kocaeli 2013, and here 18 ... Neg4 19 h3 Qc5+ 20 Kh1 h5! wins
handily for Black) 15 ... Kf7 (Richard Palliser also analysed 15 ... dxe5 16 fxe5 Ne4! 17
Qf4 Nxg5 18 Qf5+ 18 ... Ke7 19 Qxg5+ Ke8 when White’s well has dried up; here Erik
Kislik pointed out the crazy-looking 18 Ne4! which may be White’s best chance, but after
18 ... Nxe4 19 Qf7+ Kxe5 20 Qf5+ Kd6 21 Qxa5 Nec5! Black’s four minor pieces should
eventually carry the day) 16 Rbe1 h6! (White had a tremendous initiative after 16 ...
Nb6? 17 exf6 gxf6 18 Bxf6 Rg8 19 Bd4 in I.Cheparinov-D.Kadric, Aix-les-Bains 2011) 17
Bh4.

Now in Wang Yue-Zhou Jianchao, Danzhou 2011, Black really should have refuted
White’s innovative but ultimately dubious play with 17 ... dxe5!: for example, 18 fxe5 (or
18 Bxf6 gxf6 19 fxe5 Nxe5 20 Rxf6+!? Kg7! 21 Qf4 Qxc3 22 Rf1 Qc7! 23 Rf7+ Nxf7 24
Qxc7 Be6) 18 ... Nxe5 19 Rxf6+!? gxf6 20 Bxf6 Nf3! 21 gxf3 Rg8 and Black wins in all
variations, as analysed by Richard Palliser.
b) 11 Kh1 is the alternative and after 11 ... Be7 12 f4, I think the natural yet untried
12 ... 0-0 is best (12 ... b5?! is a tad over-provocative and 13 Bxe6!? fxe6 14 Nxe6 Kf7 15
Bxf6 gxf6 16 Nd5! is extremely good for White): for instance, 13 f5 e5 14 Nde2 Qc5 15
Bb3 Bd8!? does not look like anything much for White.
8 ... e6

9 Qd2
Preparing long castling is certainly the most natural way to proceed, although White
has a few other plans at his disposal:
a) The position after 9 0-0 Be7 may not look like anything special, but it is actually
pretty topical with many grandmasters believing in the potency of White’s resources.
Here too there are a few approaches:
a1) Firstly, White can keep his bishop on e3 before charging his f-pawn with 10 Be3
Nc5 11 f4 Qc7 12 f5, which has been tested in quite a few games (12 Qf3?! b5! 13 e5 Bb7
14 Qg3 dxe5 15 fxe5 Nh5 16 Qf2 0-0 is also comfortable for Black, especially as 17 g4
does not win a piece due to 17 ... b4 18 Nce2 Ne4 19 Qe1 Ng5!; White does in fact win a
piece after the inferior 18 Nd1 Ne4 19 Qe1 Qxe5! 20 gxh5 Qxh5 21 Qe2, but after 21 ...
Qg6+ 22 Qg2 Nf2! he faces the choice between losing his queen and getting checkmated
aesthetically with 23 Qxg6? Nh3#). Here, I like 12 ... b5!, with the idea 13 fxe6 fxe6 14
a3 Nxb3 15 cxb3 0-0 16 b4 Qd7! when Black will soon be able to unravel and has the
more comfortable game.
a2) 10 Kh1 prepares f2-f4 immediately while keeping the dark-squared bishop on g5.
After 10 ... Nc5, White has two key ideas:
a21) 11 Qe2 is the more common but both 11 ... Nxb3 12 Nxb3 Bd7, with the idea of
13 Rad1 Bb5! 14 Nxb5 Qxb5 15 Qxb5+ axb5 16 Bxf6 Bxf6 17 Rxd6 Bxb2 18 Rb6 0-0 19
Rxb7 Rfc8, and 11 ... h6!? 12 Bh4 (12 Be3 Qc7 13 f4 0-0 also looks fine for Black) 12 ...
Nxb3 13 Nxb3 g5 14 Bg3 e5 15 f3 Be6, as played in C.Le Page-D.Rotaru, correspondence
2011, look like straightforward equality for Black.
a22) The rare 11 f4!? can lead to some wild lines after 11 ... h6 12 Bh4 g5!? (White
has good compensation for the pawn after 12 ... Ncxe4 13 Nxe4 Nxe4 14 Bxe7 Kxe7 15
Qd3 Nf6 16 Rfe1, although this may well be Black’s best route) 13 Bf2! gxf4 14 Qf3 Qd8
15 Qxf4! e5 16 Qd2 exd4 17 Bxd4, again with strong compensation for the piece.
Continuing the line a bit further, 17 ... Be6 18 Qf4 Ncd7 19 Nd5 Bxd5 20 exd5 Kf8 21 Rae1
looks very promising for White.
a3) Jamming the queenside with 10 a4!? Nc5 11 a5 has been mainly contested in
correspondence games. Black is generally doing okay here after 11 ... Qc7 12 f3 (12 Ba2
h6 13 Be3!? Ncxe4 14 Nxe4 Nxe4 15 Qg4 Nf6! 16 Qxg7 Rg8 17 Qxh6 Bd7 18 f3 0-0-0 gave
Black active play for the pawn in N.Huschenbeth-E.Berg, Sarajevo 2010) 12 ... 0-0 13 Ba2
b5 14 axb6 Qxb6, which saw him equalize comfortably in M.Sadowski-R.Scherer,
correspondence 2010.
b) 9 Bxf6 looks unnatural to me and after 9 ... Nxf6 10 f4 Be7 (10 ... d5 has been
tested in correspondence chess; Black should be okay after 11 e5 Nd7 12 Qd2 Bb4 when
we have obtained a French type of structure, but with White’s bishop placed on the less
attractive b3-square) 11 Qd2 0-0 12 0-0-0 Nd7!? 13 g4 Nc5 14 g5 in G.Ginsburg-A.Givon,
Jerusalem 2013, I think Black should have played 14 ... Bd7 with complications.
Returning to 9 Qd2:
9 ... Be7 10 0-0-0 Nc5
In the excellent book Advanced Chess Tactics , famed Sicilian expert Lev Psakhis
commented on a similar position that the c-file is like the Nile, Ganges and Volga of the
Sicilian Defence and hence a move like ... Nc5 is not desirable as it would have to move
away in the future to give Black counterplay down the c-file. This is of course true in
many Sicilian lines but here is where the complexity of the Najdorf is telling. In this
particular variation, the queen was already committed to the b6-square and hence the
usual development with ... Bb7 and ... Rc8 are much more time consuming. Concrete
analysis shows that Black should therefore strive for counterplay down the b-file instead.

11 f3
Recent tests have shown that after 11 Rhe1, Black should bravely castle into it with 11
... 0-0!? (Kislik also pointed out 11 ... h6!?, which side-steps all the annoying h4 ideas; a
possible line could go 12 Bh4 Qc7 13 Bg3 0-0 14 e5 dxe5 15 Bxe5 Nxb3+ 16 Nxb3 Qc6
with equal chances). For instance, 12 f4 h6 13 h4!? (13 Bxf6 Bxf6 is very comfortable for
Black) 13 ... Qa5 when we have a parting of the ways:
a) 14 Qe2 e5! 15 Nf5 Nxb3+ 16 cxb3 Bxf5 17 exf5 Rac8 18 Kb1 exf4 19 Qd3 hxg5 20
hxg5 Ng4 21 b4 Rxc3 was agreed drawn in V.Perevertkin-D.Povchanic, correspondence
2010, presumably because of the following forcing continuation: 22 bxc3 Qc7 23 f6 Nf2 24
Qf5 Bd8 25 Rh1! g6 26 Qxf4 Nxh1 27 Rxh1 Qxc3 28 Qh4 Qd3+ 29 Ka1 Qc3+ with
perpetual check.
b) 14 Kb1! is the engine’s first choice, with the standard Nd5 tactic in line for an
appearance, and here it’s not so clear how Black should react. Perhaps the extremely
sharp line 14 ... Nfxe4 15 Nxe4 Qxd2 16 Nxd2 hxg5 17 hxg5 d5 18 Rh1 g6 19 Rh6 Kg7 20
Rdh1 Rg8 21 Rh7+ Kf8 is his best reply. White’s play down the h-file looks threatening,
but I have not seen an effective follow-up and after 22 N2f3 Bd6 23 Ne5 Bxe5 24 fxe5
Bd7, a move like 25 Rf1 does not lead to anything due to 25 ... Rg7.
c) 14 Bxf6 Bxf6 15 g4? (15 Kb1 is better, although Black stands well after 15 ... b5
followed by ... Bb7) 15 ... e5!.

A strong central break. After 16 fxe5?! (16 Nf5 may be best, but Black is still better
after 16 ... exf4 17 g5 Be5 18 gxh6 g6!) in M.Molner-M.Paragua, Los Angeles 2011, Black
should have played 16 ... Bxh4! 17 exd6 Bg5! with a large edge.
11 ... Qc7
11 ... h6 12 Be3 h5?! is a typical idea in the Rauzer, but here White should keep an
edge after 13 a3 Qc7 14 Ba2.
12 Kb1
This is probably best. White makes an innocuous waiting move and waits to see if
Black commits to castling kingside before launching a pawn storm. The immediate 12 g4
is too rushed and hence lacks punch. After 12 ... b5! 13 Be3 (or 13 a3 Bd7 14 Kb1 Qb7 15
Be3 and in S.Ter Sahakyan-E.Miroshnichenko, Dubai 2011, Black could have continued
with the simple 15 ... a5!, leaving his attack on the queenside in full flow) 13 ... Bd7!? (I
quite like 13 ... Nfd7!?, followed by ... Bb7, ... Ne5 and ... Rc8, reaching an ideal set-up)
14 g5 Nh5 15 Kb1 in V.Sanal-J.Duda, Al-Ain 2013, I like 15 ... Qb7! followed by a gradual
queenside advancement.

12 ... 0-0
This gives White a clear and purposeful plan to advance on the kingside. Perhaps
waiting with 12 ... Bd7!? followed by ... b5 and ... a5 may be a better idea.
13 g4 b5 14 a3 Rb8 15 h4 Bd7
At first glance, 15 ... b4!? appears to lose material after 16 axb4 Rxb4 17 Bxf6 Bxf6 18
Nd5, but after 18 ... exd5 19 Qxb4 dxe4 20 g5 Be5 21 fxe4 Bg4 22 Bd5!? (White has to
return the material, as 22 Rde1? a5! 23 Qd2 Rb8 is very awkward for him) 22 ... Rb8 23
Qa3 Bxd1 24 Rxd1 Qd7 the position looks roughly equal. My thanks to Erik Kislik once
again for sharing his home preparation here.
16 Bxf6?!
Not the most accurate way to proceed with the attack. 16 h5! is White’s best attempt
to formulate a breakthrough, although Black appears to be holding his own here:
 a) 16 ... h6? is just inviting trouble and Black is completely lost after 17 Bxh6! gxh6 18
Qxh6 Nh7 19 Nf5! exf5 20 gxf5 Kh8 21 Rhg1 Rg8 22 Bxf7!.
b) 16 ... a5? occurred in R.Van Kampen-M.Tseitlin, Gibraltar 2014, and here 17 h6! g6
18 Nf5! is virtually winning: for example, 18 ... exf5 (18 ... gxf5 19 Bh4! is a recurring
motif, as we shall soon see, and here 19 ... Kh8 20 Qg5 Rg8 21 Qxf6+! Bxf6 22 Bxf6+
Rg7 23 hxg7+ Kg8 24 Rxh7! is a fine photo finish by White) 19 Nd5 Nxd5 20 Bxe7 Nxb3
21 Qxd5 Rbc8 22 cxb3 Be6 23 Qd4 f6 when it is important to continue with 24 gxf5! (not
24 Bxf8?? Qc2+ 25 Ka1 Qxb3) 24 ... Qxe7 25 fxe6 Qxe6 26 Qxd6 Qxb3 27 Rc1! Rcd8 28
Qc7 Qd3+ 29 Ka1 Rd7 30 Qxa5 Qxf3 31 Qxb5, with a big plus.
c) 16 ... Rfc8! seems to be Black’s best bet, but he has to find several precise moves
in order to survive the attack. Here White has two choices:
c1) 17 Bxf6 Bxf6 (17 ... gxf6? occurred in B.Guven-B.Dastan, Antalya 2013, and would
have been ideal were it not for 18 Nf5!) 18 g5 and now:
 c11) After 18 ... Nxb3 19 cxb3 Be7 20 b4 a5 21 h6 g6 22 bxa5 Kf8 23 a6 Qb6 24 Nc2
Qxa6 25 Qd4 e5 26 Qe3 Be6 27 Nb4 Qb6 28 Qxb6 Rxb6 29 Ncd5 Bxd5 30 Nxd5 Rbb8 31
Rhg1 Ke8 Black’s activity made up for White’s control over the d5-square and the game
soon ended in a draw, N.Moura-P.Soares, correspondence 2011.
c12) 18 ... Be7?! 19 Nf5! Bf8 (19 ... exf5 20 Bxf7+! Kxf7 21 g6+ Kg8 22 Nd5 is pretty
strong for White) 20 Nxd6 Bxd6 21 Qxd6 was good for White in J.Potrata-C.Teichmann,
correspondence 2011.
c13) 18 ... Bd8!? could be an improvement. For example, 19 g6 Bf6 20 gxf7+ Kxf7 21
h6 g6 22 f4 Nxb3 23 Nxb3 Bxc3 24 Qxd6 Bc6 25 bxc3 Bxe4 26 Rh3 Qxd6 27 Rxd6 with an
equal endgame.
c2) 17 h6! g6 18 Nf5! is direct and dangerous.

However, after 18 ... exf5! (18 ... gxf5? 19 Bh4 fxe4 20 Qg5+ Kf8 21 Qg7+ Ke8 22
Qh8+ Bf8 23 Bxf6 was winning for White in V.Minchev-G.Hechl, correspondence 2011) 19
Qd4 Black can just about survive with 19 ... Nxb3 20 cxb3 Qc5 21 Nd5 Qxd4 22 Nxe7+ Kf8
23 Rxd4 Kxe7 24 exf5 Rc5! 25 Re1+ Re5 26 Rxe5+ dxe5 27 Bxf6+ Kxf6 28 Rxd7 Rb6,
reaching an equal rook ending, as analysed by Richard Palliser.
Returning to 16 Bxf6:
16 ... Bxf6 17 g5
 17 ... Be7
This is the first choice of various engines, but it is not clear that it is an improvement
over existing theory. 17 ... Bd8 was played in the first game that arrived at this position.
A fantastic battle arose after 18 h5 (18 g6?! hxg6 19 h5 g5 20 h6 g6 does not lead to
anything concrete) 18 ... a5 19 g6 Nxb3?! (many commentators have criticised this move;
19 ... h6!? is a likely improvement when I don’t see how White can make progress before
Black blasts his way through the queenside) 20 Nxb3 fxg6 21 hxg6 h6 in A.Shirov-
L.Dominguez Perez, Wijk aan Zee 2010, which was a truly fascinating game.
18 h5 a5 19 g6 Bf6?
This may not be a decisive error, but Black’s path to survival was so narrow that he
was always going to fail in a practical game. Again, I like the ‘holding’ 19 ... h6! when I
don’t see a good follow-up. For example, 20 gxf7+ (or 20 Nf5 exf5 21 Nd5 Qd8 22 Nxe7+
Qxe7 23 Bxf7+ Kh8 24 Qxd6 Qxd6 25 Rxd6 Be8! 26 Bxe8 Rbxe8 27 exf5 Rxf5 28 Rhd1
Ref8 when Black is clearly the one pushing for a win) 20 ... Rxf7 21 Nf5 b4 22 axb4 axb4
23 Nxe7+ Rxe7 24 Na2 Nxb3 25 cxb3 d5! and Black is clearly for choice.
20 h6! hxg6 21 Qh2 Rfe8
Instead, 21 ... Rfc8 walks into 22 Nf5!.
 After 22 ... exf5 23 Nd5! Qd8 24 hxg7 Kxg7?? (this loses immediately; the kamikaze
24 ... Bh4 does not help due to 25 Rdg1! Kxg7 – 25 ... Nxb3 26 Qf4!! wins – 26 Qf4! Ne6
27 Qxd6! a4 28 Ba2 when Black is helpless against the terrible threat of Qe5, and 24 ...
Bxg7 25 Qxd6 looks completely winning for White until one sees that after 25 ... Be6!! 26
Ne7+ Qxe7 27 Qxe7 Nxb3 28 cxb3 Bxb3 29 exf5 Bc2+ 30 Ka1 Bxf5 Black has great
practical chances) 25 Nxf6 Qxf6 26 Rxd6 Be6 27 e5 Qg5 28 Qh7+ Kf8 29 Bxe6 Black
resigned in S.Solomon-R.Griffiths, Istanbul Olympiad 2012.
22 Nf5!
The young Grandmaster from the UAE has conducted his attack with great verve and
energy.
22 ... exf5 23 hxg7 Bxg7 24 Qh7+ Kf8

25 Bxf7!
Another fantastic sacrifice on the remains of Black’s kingside. White was really in his
element in this game.
25 ... Kxf7 26 Rdg1 Be6!
The Chinese Grandmaster defends resolutely. 26 ... Re6 27 exf5 Rf6 28 Rxg6 is just
winning for White.
27 Rxg6 Kf8?
After a series of precise defensive moves, Black finally falters. 27 ... Rg8! was his only
chance and appears to force a draw: 28 Rhg1 Kf8 29 exf5 Qf7! 30 f6! Bxf6 31 Rxg8+
Qxg8 32 Rxg8+ Bxg8 33 Qc7 Rd8 34 Nxb5 a4 35 Nxd6 Nb3!! 36 cxb3 Bxb3. White is
caught in something like zugzwang and is forced to give perpetual check after 37 Qc5 Be7
38 Qf5+ Kg8 39 Qg4+ Kf8.
28 Rhg1 Rb7 29 exf5 Na4
This makes things easier for White, but Black was lost in any case. 29 ... Qf7 puts up
more resistance, but after 30 fxe6 Nxe6 31 Ne4 Rd8 32 Ng5! Nxg5 33 R6xg5 Qg8 34 Qh4
White’s firepower versus Black’s uncoordinated defence is a complete mismatch.
30 f6 Nxc3+ 31 bxc3 Bg8 32 Qh4! Qxc3 33 fxg7+ Rxg7 34 Qf4+ Bf7 35
Qxd6+ Re7 36 Rxg7
White has finally broken through and it’s game over.
36 ... Qc4 37 Kc1 b4 38 Rh7 1-0

Game 9
K.Goh Wei Ming-H.Mas
Kuala Lumpur 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Qe2!?

This little nuance is the latest fashion to combat the Black Diamond. Delaying f2-f4
provides White with additional options such a rapid long castling. In certain scenarios,
White can also start his kingside attack with g4 immediately, saving a critical tempo.
7 ... Qa5?!
 This is a rare but tempting queen sortie that looks very natural. However, we shall
soon see in subsequent games that there are more reliable moves.
8 h4!
This has scored remarkably well with 3.5/4 in my database. Unfortunately, yours truly
was the one who contributed to the only draw in these four games. Here practice has
also seen:
a) At first sight, 8 f4 appears to be a more natural way to defend the bishop:
a1) The immediate 8 ... e5 9 Nb3 Qc7 10 g4 (White should focus on the centre, i.e. 10
0-0-0 b5 11 Nd5 Nxd5 12 exd5 with complex play) 10 ... b5 turned out well for the
Ukrainian wunderkind in E.Miroshnichenko-I.Nyzhnyk, Reykjavik 2011. After 11 Bg2? (11
a3, preventing ... b4, is best), the improvement 11 ... b4! 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 f6 14 Bh4
Be7 15 fxe5 Nxe5 looks promising for Black.
a2) After 8 ... h6 9 Bh4 e5 White has to make a decision over his f4-pawn (9 ... g5!? is
thematic, but after 10 Nb3 Qc7 11 fxg5 hxg5 12 Bxg5 Bg7 13 0-0-0 Nb6 14 Be3! Be6 – if
14 ... Bg4 15 Qf2! – 15 Bd4 Nbd7 16 Nd5 Qc6 17 Qc4 Qxc4 18 Bxc4 Rc8 19 Nxf6+ Bxf6 20
Bxe6 fxe6 21 Bxf6 Nxf6 White retains a small advantage in the endgame): 10 Nb3 Qc7 11
g3 Be7 12 0-0-0 (in another game between two grandmasters, White changed his mind
as to where to put his king with 12 a4?! and after 12 ... b6 13 Bg2 Bb7 14 0-0 0-0 15 f5
Rfe8 Black had an extremely pleasant version of the g3 Najdorf in S.Kapnisis-A.Kovalyov,
Leros 2010) 12 ... b5 13 Qd2?! (there is no immediate need for White to move his queen
yet given that his light-squared bishop is on the way to g2 or h3; perhaps 13 a3, taking a
pause in the action on the queenside, is best but after 13 ... Rb8! Black gets standard
queenside play anyway) 13 ... Bb7 14 Bh3 Nb6 (both 14 ... b4! 15 Nd5 Nxd5 16 exd5 f6
17 fxe5 Nxe5 18 Qxb4 g5 and the more direct 14 ... g5! 15 fxg5 Nxe4 look good for Black)
15 Na5 Rd8 (15 ... g5!? again seems like an improvement: for example, 16 fxg5 Nxe4 17
Nxe4 Bxe4 18 gxh6 Bf8! 19 Bg5 f6!, again with equal chances and complex play) 16 Bxf6
Bxf6 17 Nxb7 Qxb7 18 Nd5 Nxd5 19 Qxd5 Qxd5 20 Rxd5 exf4 21 gxf4 g5 and the game
petered out to a draw in Hou Yifan-Bu Xiangzhi, Xinghua 2013.
b) 8 Bd2!? has only been played in one game, but may be an interesting option. The
point is that after 8 ... Qb6 (8 ... g6 9 g4!?) 9 Nb3 e6 10 g4! White’s attack is well
underway.
8 ... h6 9 Bd2 Qb6
9 ... Qc7 seems a tad more natural, but White gets a comfortable game anyway after
10 g4! Nb6 11 Nf5 Be6 12 0-0-0.
10 Nb3
 10 ... Ne5
A high-profile game continued with the natural 10 ... e6 11 g4! (Ftacnik suggested the
interesting and very original rook manoeuvre 11 Rh3 h5 12 0-0-0 Be7 13 Rg3, but Black
can neutralize any initiative with 13 ... Ng4! 14 f3 Qf2!, forcing the exchange of queens)
11 ... Ne5 12 f4!? (enterprising and logical play; 12 Rg1 was a way to obtain a smaller but
stable edge, and after 12 ... h5 13 g5 Nfg4 14 Rg3 White will be able to gain several
tempo by playing f3 and f4 in quick succession) 12 ... Nexg4 13 e5 (this is logical, but
Black has sufficient resources to hold; the surprising and somewhat difficult 13 h5!, with
the idea of trapping the g4-knight, would have given White a large plus: for example,
after 13 ... e5 14 f5 Black has severe difficulties in extracting his offside knight) 13 ...
dxe5 14 fxe5.

An awareness of tactical resources is always crucial in the Najdorf and here Black
would be lost without his next move: 14 ... Qc7! 15 exf6 Qg3+ 16 Kd1 Nf2+ 17 Kc1 Nxh1
18 Ne4 Qxh4 (White has sacrificed the exchange for the initiative) 19 Qc4 g5? (this loses
in practical terms as Black has to find only moves from here on whereas White’s attack
plays itself; bringing the queen back into play with 19 ... Qh2 was essential) 20 Nbc5
Ng3? (20 ... b5 21 Qd4 Qh2 was Black’s last chance) 21 Qa4+ b5 22 Bxb5+ axb5 23
Qxb5+ Kd8 24 Ba5+ Rxa5 25 Qxa5+ Ke8 26 Qb5+ Kd8 27 Qb6+ Ke8 28 Nd6+ 1-0,
F.Vallejo Pons-I.Papaioannou, Aix-les-Bains 2011.
Instead, 10 ... g6 11 0-0-0 Bg7 12 f4 (12 h5!? with the idea of 12 ... Nxh5 13 g4 Nhf6
14 f4 is interesting, while 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 was played in M.Yilmaz-Zhou Jianchao,
Shenzhen 2011, and here 13 ... Nf6 14 Ba5 Qa7 15 Bc3 0-0 is probably equal) 12 ... Qc7
13 g4 again looks promising for White.
11 Nd5!

Releasing the c3-square for the bishop and opening up the e-file. Ideas of Ba5 also
come into play.
11 ... Nxd5 12 exd5 Qc7
12 ... Bf5 13 Ba5! Qa7 14 0-0-0 is also slightly better for White.
13 Bc3
White has played simple and logical moves to obtain a promising position. The bishop
on c3 exerts tremendous pressure down the long diagonal and because of this, it is not
easy for Black to develop his dark-squared bishop. My opponent, however, found a
resourceful way to untangle his kingside.
13 ... h5 14 0-0-0
This is a perfectly normal move, but the immediate 14 f4! Bg4 15 Qe4 Nd7 16 Be2
looks even better for White than what transpired in the game.
14 ... g6!? 15 Kb1
After 15 f4 Bh6 16 Qd2 0-0 17 Kb1 Ng4 the worst is over for Black, although White is
still slightly better.
15 ... Bh6 16 Qe4 Bf5 17 Qa4+!
 Diverting Black’s light-squared bishop to a less active square.
17 ... Bd7?
This walks into White’s devious plan. Instead, 17 ... Kf8! seems to restrict White’s
edge to a minimum: for example, 18 Nd4 (or 18 f4 Ng4 19 Be2) 18 ... Bd7 19 Bb5 Rc8 20
Bxd7 Qxd7 21 Qb3.
18 Qd4 Rg8 19 f4 Ng4 20 Qd2
This move, with the intention of putting a knight on d4 in the future, wasn’t bad at all,
but I subsequently noticed that in these sort of positions, the queen is normally pretty
well placed on the b4-square. For instance, 20 Ba5 Qc8 21 Bb6 Bg7 22 Qb4! followed by
Bd3, Rhe1 and g3 would have been endless suffering for Black.
20 ... Bf5
This sort of vindicates my previous move as a future Nd4 will be played with tempo.
On the other hand, it is hard to suggest a useful move for Black.
21 Re1
Naturally, not 21 Nd4? due to 21 ... Be4!.
21 ... Rc8 22 Nd4 Qc5?
Black underestimated the danger. 22 ... Bg7 23 Rh3 Bxd4 24 Qxd4 Kf8 was safer.
White has an indisputable edge here, but it isn’t so easy to find a way to turn that into
something tangible.
23 Bb4!?
Setting a nasty little trap. However, it seems this was best time for 23 Rh3! with the
idea of 23 ... Kf8 (23 ... Qxd5 24 Nxf5 Qxd2 25 Rxe7+ is a better version of the game) 24
Nxf5 gxf5 25 Bd4 Qc7 26 Rb3! with a winning advantage.
23 ... Qxd5?
Walking into a maelstrom of tactics. 23 ... Qc7 24 Nxf5 gxf5 25 Bd3 was forced,
although of course White has a clear edge here.
 24 Rxe7+!
The right idea, but played with the wrong follow-up in mind. I had seen that after 24
Nxf5 Qxd2 25 Rxe7+! (25 Nxd6+ Qxd6 26 Bxd6 e6 is fine for Black) 25 ... Kf8 26 Bxd2
gxf5 27 Rxb7 Black can trap my rook with 27 ... Nf2 28 Rh2 and I was not entirely happy
with this. However, a closer look shows that this is but temporary and that Black has no
way to attack the rook at all. Indeed, White is winning, but has to exhibit some care: 28
... Re8 29 Bc4 Rg7 30 g3 Ne4 31 a4 Re7 32 Rb8+ Re8 33 Rxe8+ Kxe8 34 Be1! Nxg3 35
Bxa6 Bxf4 36 a5 and White should win.
24 ... Kxe7
24 ... Kf8 25 Nxf5 Qxd2 26 Bxd2 would transpose to the previous note.
25 Nxf5+ Ke6

I had played 24 Rxe7 with the intention of entering this position which I felt had to be
winning for White. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the pretty idea at my disposal. Can you
see how White can win?
26 Qxd5+??
I gave up searching for the win after 20 long and agonizing minutes. The solution is
the unexpected 26 Bd3!! with the ideas of 26 ... Ne5 27 Re1, 26 ... Kd7 27 Bb5+ Ke6 28
Bd7+!, and 26 ... gxf5 27 Bxf5+! Qxf5 28 Qxd6#. Unfortunately, this lovely finish didn’t
materialize over the board.
26 ... Kxd5 27 Ne7+ Ke6 28 Nxc8
It was not too late for me to blunder with 28 Nxg8? Bxf4! when Black emerges with an
extra pawn.
28 ... Rxc8 29 g3 Kd7
29 ... Nf2 30 Rg1 Ne4 31 Bd3 f5 is more accurate, but the game was destined to end
peacefully anyway.
30 Bh3 f5 31 Rd1 Bf8 32 Bxg4 ½-½

Game 10
A.Volokitin-M.Al Sayed
Istanbul Olympiad 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Qe2 b5!?

This is comparatively rare, but appears to be the main move here if Black wants to
avoid the mainstream theory that can arise after 7 ... e6.
8 Nd5!
This direct approach seeks to exploit the temporary weakness on c6 which was a
result of Black’s last move. The threat is now the obvious 9 Nc6 and hence Black’s reply is
more or less forced. Other plans are:
a) White has also tried to incite a further weakening of the light squares on the
queenside with 8 a4 before pushing a knight to the d5-square, but this is
counterproductive here since it also compromises the safety of White’s king which is most
likely to nestle on the queenside. Things have not been too clear here, but Black seems
to get a fine game with accurate but simple play, with 8 ... b4 9 Nd5 Bb7. Now:
a1) 10 Bxf6 was scrutinised by Kislik as part of his home preparation: 10 ... Nxf6 11
Nxf6+ (or 11 Qc4 Nxd5 12 exd5 g6 – even 12 ... Qc8!? 13 Qxb4 Bxd5 14 Bb5+ Kd8! looks
fine for Black – 13 Nc6 Qd7 when 14 Qd4!? is the only way to create some form of
discomfort, but after 14 ... e5 15 Qb6 Bg7 16 Bc4 0-0 17 0-0 Rfc8 Black should be fine) 11
... gxf6 (or even 11 ... exf6!? 12 Qe3 g6 13 Bc4 Bg7 14 Bd5 Qd7 15 0-0 0-0 16 Qd3 Bxd5
17 exd5 f5 and the strength of Black’s bishop again compensates for his inferior pawn
structure; here 12 g3 g6 13 Bg2 Bg7 14 Nf5 0-0 15 Nxg7 Kxg7 16 0-0 Qe7 is also fine for
Black as he can easily create pressure against the queenside or the e4-pawn to
compensate for the d6 weakness) 12 Qe3 Qa5 13 Bd3 Rg8 14 0-0 Qg5! 15 Qxg5 Rxg5 16
g3 e6 17 Rfe1 h5 is pretty comfortable for Black.
a2) 10 Qc4 Rc8! 11 Qxb4 Rb8! is a fine sacrificial idea which was doubtless the
product of some fine home preparation.

Black generates sufficient counterplay here and in fact gets back his pawn with 12
Nxf6+ gxf6 13 Be3 Bxe4, which led to balanced play in Wang Hao-Le Quang Liem, Beijing
2012.
b) 8 0-0-0 is a normal move in related positions, but I think White should avoid the
typical plans that are normally executed when ... e6 has been played. The reason is
simple: if White does not try to exploit the omission of this move, say, by attacking d5 or
f5, Black is simply an important tempo up in the most important variations. That is not to
say that ... e6 is not a good move, it normally is, but delaying the move with the purpose
of accelerating the attack on the queenside can be a very effective strategy if White isn’t
careful. Here 8 ... Bb7 leads to a further split:
 b1) After 9 Bxf6, 9 ... Nxf6! seems to be best (the Chinese Grandmaster Wang Hao
has tried 9 ... gxf6, but didn’t obtain a particularly pleasant position from the opening; in
any case, I quite like the extravagant looking 10 h4!? with the idea of 10 ... Nc5 11 a3 e6
12 Kb1 Rc8 13 f4 h5 14 Rh3! followed by Re3 or 13 ... Qa5 14 Qh5! b4 15 axb4 Qxb4 16
Rh3! followed by Re3 and f5 in the near future), whereupon 10 e5!? (there is little point
in taking on f6 voluntarily if White does not push e4-e5 immediately) 10 ... dxe5 11
Ndxb5 (after 11 Qxe5 Qd6!? 12 Qxd6 exd6 13 f3 g6 Black’s raking bishops make up for
the weak d6-pawn; unfortunately, the fireworks after 12 Bxb5+ axb5 13 Qxb5+ Qd7 14
Ne6 Bc6 don’t really work for White, although it looks like a forced draw occurs after 15
Qb6 Qxe6 16 Nb5 Bxb5 17 Qxb5+ Nd7 18 Rhe1 Rb8! 19 Qa4 Qh6+ 20 Kb1 Rd8 21 Rxd7
Rxd7 22 Qa8+ Rd8 23 Qa4+) 11 ... Nd7 12 Na3 e6 13 Nc4 Qc7 14 Qd2 Bc5 15 Nd6+ Bxd6
16 Qxd6 Qxd6 17 Rxd6 Ke7 saw Black equalizing comfortably in B.Grabarczyk-
T.Heinemann, German League 2013.
b2) 9 Nd5? Nxd5 10 exd5 was played in S.Melia-M.Parligras, Aix-les-Bains 2011, and
here 10 ... Qc7! (10 ... Bxd5 was played in the game, but then 11 Nf5! with the idea of 11
... Nb6 12 Rxd5! Nxd5 13 Qe4 f6 14 Qxd5 fxg5 15 Be2 seems very promising for White)
11 Nf5 Nb6 12 Bf4 Rd8 13 Ne3 g6! would have been ideal for Black.
b3) 9 f4 threatening an early e4-e5 must be critical:
 b31) 9 ... b4 was played in a top-level game and after 10 Nd5 Nxd5 11 exd5 Nb6 (11
... Qc7!? looks better, when 12 g4! is also not clear) 12 Nc6! Bxc6? (12 ... Qc7 13 Nxb4
Qc5 14 Qe4 was better for White, but clearly a better alternative compared to the game)
13 dxc6 Qc7 14 g4! the position was clearly good for White in A.Grischuk-Le Quang Liem,
Beijing (blitz) 2013.
b32) 9 ... e5 10 Nf5 Qb6 11 g4! (11 g3 Rc8 12 Bg2 was interesting in G.Kuzmin-
N.Vitiugov, Sochi 2007, when 12 ... b4! is best, with the idea of 13 Nd5 Nxd5 14 exd5
Qb5! 15 Qxb5 axb5 16 fxe5 dxe5, with good chances for equality) 11 ... g6 12 fxe5 dxe5
13 Ne3 h6 14 Bxf6 Nxf6 15 Kb1 Bg7 16 Ned5 Nxd5 17 Nxd5 Bxd5 18 exd5 0-0 19 h4
seems very unpleasant for Black.
b33) 9 ... Rc8 may well be best: for example, 10 e5 dxe5 11 fxe5 Rxc3! 12 exf6 (12
bxc3? Ne4 13 e6 fxe6 14 Bd2 Qb6 is very comfortable for Black) 12 ... Rc5 13 fxe7 Bxe7
14 Qxe7+ Qxe7 15 Bxe7 Kxe7 with equality.
c) 8 f4 h6! seems to be the most effective way for Black to unravel and after 9 Bxf6 (9
Bh4 g5! 10 fxg5 hxg5 11 Bxg5 Bb7 is a much improved version of related lines) 9 ... Nxf6
10 0-0-0, as played in L.Milov-D.Forcen Esteban, Deizisau 2013, 10 ... Bg4! is an
important improvement, with the idea of 11 Nf3 b4 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 g6 14 h3 Bd7
15 Nd4 Bg7 16 g4 Qb6 17 Nc6 0-0! 18 Nxe7+ (if 18 Bg2 a5) 18 ... Kh7 19 Nc6 a5 with
balanced chances.
d) Lastly, I don’t believe in 8 g4?! h6 9 Bd2 which may have finished in a blitzkrieg
victory for White in J.Fluvia Poyatos-A.Alonso Rosell, Barcelona 2011, but 9 ... Bb7 10 Bg2
Rc8 already looks distinctly awkward for White.
8 ... Bb7 9 Bxf6 Nxf6 10 Nxf6+ exf6!
 10 ... gxf6 is less solid and Black’s king will always feel draughty whichever side of the
board it decides to go: 11 0-0-0 Qc7 (11 ... h5!?) 12 Kb1 0-0-0 13 g3 Kb8 14 Bg2 e6 15
Bf3!? (15 f4 seems more natural, but White probably did not want to weaken g3 in
anticipation of ... h5-h4) 15 ... Rg8 16 h4 Rc8 17 Rd3 Qb6 18 Rhd1 and White was slightly
better in D.Alsina Leal-A.Alonso Rosell, Sabadell 2011.
11 a4
Obviously, White must strike fast or else Black simply develops with ... g6, ... Bg7 and
... 0-0, with a fine game.
11 ... bxa4!
This has so far scored 0/2 but there was very little wrong with Black’s position.
12 Rxa4
12 Qc4 a3! was played in the other GM clash that I could find. After 13 Rxa3 d5 14
Qa4+ Qd7 15 Qxd7+ Kxd7 16 Rb3 Kc7 (16 ... Ra7!? may be an interesting way to play
on: for example, 17 exd5 Bxd5 18 Rd3 Kc7 19 c3 Bc5) 17 Rc3+ Kb6 18 Rb3+ and here
the Chinese no.1 blundered spectacularly with 18 ... Ka7?? (18 ... Kc7 would have
repeated moves).
 After 19 Bxa6!! he was forced to resign immediately in A.Motylev-Wang Hao, Beijing
2012.
12 ... Be7?!
This move is hard to understand, given that the scope of bishop is so much less here
compared to how it would be on g7. Indeed, 12 ... g6 is thematic. A typical continuation
could be 13 g3 Bg7 14 Bg2 0-0 15 0-0 Qd7 16 Rfa1 (or 16 b3 Rfc8 followed by ... Rc5) 16
... d5! 17 exd5 Bxd5 18 Bxd5 Qxd5 19 c3 f5 20 Qc4 Qxc4 21 Rxc4 Bxd4 22 Rxd4 Rfc8 and
Black should draw this rook ending quite comfortably.
13 Qg4! g6?
After this Black never gets out of the bind that White eventually converted with fine
mastery. 13 ... 0-0 is best when White’s edge after 14 Bc4 d5 15 exd5 Qe8! 16 b3 Bb4+
17 Kd1 a5 looks fairly manageable. White’s vulnerable king and Black’s bishop-pair should
enable the second player to drum up a fair amount of counterplay.
14 Bc4
White has obtained his ideal configuration and is comfortably better. Black will take a
long while to activate the dark-squared bishop. The rest of the game is presented with
light notes:
14 ... d5 15 exd5 Bxd5 16 0-0 0-0 17 Rd1
In view of Black’s alternative in the next note, perhaps 17 Nf5! is more accurate, with
the idea of 17 ... h5 18 Nxe7+ Qxe7 19 Qe2.
17 ... Bxc4
The computer highly recommends 17 ... h5!? when after 18 Qe2 Re8 19 Qd3 White
seems to be slightly better, but with 19 ... Bxc4 20 Rxc4 Qb6! Black appears to equalize.
18 Nc6
18 Nf5! is a useful intermediate move.
18 ... Qc7 19 Rxc4 Bd6 20 g3 Rfe8 21 b3 f5 22 Qf3 Bf8 23 Kg2 Rac8
 24 Rd5
24 Qd5! Kg7 25 Rd3 also looks strong for White.
24 ... Qb6?!
Allowing access to the seventh rank cannot be good. 24 ... Qb7! is better, although
White retains an edge after 25 Na5 Qa7 26 Rxc8 Rxc8 27 Nc4.
25 Rd7 Bc5 26 Qd5
26 Ne7+! Bxe7 27 Rxe7 looks more promising than the game continuation.
26 ... Qxc6 27 Rxc5 Qxd5+ 28 Rdxd5 Kg7
28 ... a5! looks like a better drawing attempt, although White of course retains all the
chances.
29 Rxc8 Rxc8 30 c4 Rb8 31 Rd3

White has liquidated the position into a winning endgame. Not surprisingly, the
computer was not able to calculate deep enough to realize that the Black king is
hopelessly cut off from the queenside and White simply has to slowly shuffle his king
towards the a-pawn to secure the win.
31 ... Kf6 32 Kf3 Ke5
32 ... Re8 33 Rd6+ Re6 34 Rxe6+ fxe6 35 b4 e5 36 h4! should be winning for White.
33 Ke3 a5 34 f4+ Ke6 35 Kd2 Ra8 36 Kc3 h5 37 h4 a4
Making it easy for White but the position was already lost.
38 bxa4 Rxa4 39 Kb3 1-0

Game 11
I.Kurnosov-R.Wojtaszek
Jurmala (rapid) 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Qe2 h6

This is the latest fashion in the ongoing 6 ... Nbd7 dispute.
A top-level clash has seen the immediate 7 ... g6 8 0-0-0 Bg7 9 f4 Qa5, which Ftacnik
has described as unpleasant for White. However, White soon obtained a large edge after
10 g3 (this turned out well, but I actually prefer the wait-and-see approach with 10 Kb1,
with the idea of 10 ... 0-0 11 g4 when White has got his attack underway) 10 ... h6 11
Bxf6 (11 Bh4! with the idea of 11 ... Nc5 12 Bxf6! Bxf6 13 Kb1 followed by Bg2, h4 and h5
seems even stronger) 11 ... Nxf6 12 Bg2 Bg4 13 Bf3 Bxf3 14 Qxf3 0-0 15 Rhe1 Nd7 16
Nb3 Qc7 (having to allow White’s next move with tempo is unfortunate, but 16 ... Qd8?
17 e5! would have brought even harsher repercussions) 17 Nd5 Qd8 18 h4 when White’s
position is very pleasant and easy to play, S.Karjakin-H.Nakamura, Stavanger 2013.
8 Bh4

8 ... g6
Black’s most combative set-up. There are plenty of alternatives:
a) The flexible 8 ... b5 is rarely seen, but seems playable. Now:
a1) 9 0-0-0 Bb7 10 Bxf6 (10 f4!? g5 11 fxg5 hxg5 12 Bxg5 transposes to the next note,
while 10 Nd5 Nxd5 11 exd5 was N.Ziaziulkina-K.Kulon, Athens 2012; here 11 ... Bxd5? 12
Nf5! Nb6 13 Rxd5! Nxd5 14 Qe4 sees White win material, but 11 ... Qc7! 12 f4 Nb6 picks
off the d5-pawn for very little in return) 10 ... Nxf6 11 e5 dxe5 12 Qxe5 Qd6! looks fine
for Black. However, after the inferior 12 ... Nd7 White gains a healthy initiative with 13
Qe3! Qb6 14 Be2 e6 15 Bh5!.
a2) 9 f4!? has only been seen in games between engines, but may well be White’s
best option here: 9 ... e5 (perhaps the pawn sacrifice 9 ... g5!? should be considered,
although it is unclear whether the compensation after 10 fxg5 hxg5 11 Bxg5 Bb7 12 0-0-0
e6 13 Qe1! is sufficient for equality) 10 fxe5 dxe5 11 0-0-0!.

As we shall see, leaving the d4-knight en prise is extremely typical in this line. Taking
the knight should not be considered under any circumstances:
a21) 11 ... exd4? 12 e5 Be7 13 exf6 Nxf6 14 Bxf6 gxf6 15 Qe4 Be6 16 Rxd4 is
inconceivable.
a22) 11 ... g5 12 Bg3 exd4? (12 ... Bb7 13 Nf5 is clearly better for White) 13 e5 Ng8
14 e6!, with the idea of 14 ... fxe6 15 Qh5+! Ke7 16 Nd5+ exd5 17 Re1+ Kf6 18 Bd3 is
extremely powerful.
a23) 11 ... Bb7 12 Nf5 Qb6 13 g4 followed by Bg2 is promising.
a3) 9 Nd5 is a common response to the move ... b5, threatening the obvious Nc6
which embarrasses the black queen and opens up the e-file if Black captures on d5.
However, Black can make use of his lack of development to immediately focus on the d5-
pawn: 9 ... Nxd5 10 exd5 Nb6 (in view of the subsequent analysis, perhaps declining the
offer of the pawn with 10 ... Qc7 11 0-0-0 Bb7 12 f4 Rc8 is a better option; the play
remains very intriguing after 13 f5!? with similar play to the analysis below) 11 0-0-0 Qc7
12 Bg3? (this was a critical inaccuracy; 12 f4! Bb7 13 f5 Nxd5 14 Qd2! followed by Bd3
and Rhe1 gives White very interesting compensation for the pawn – he has the easier
play and it is not easy to see a way for Black to develop his kingside safely) 12 ... Bb7 13
Nf5 Rd8! 14 Ne3 g6 15 f4 Bg7. This was played in D.Alsina Leal-I.Cheparinov, Leon 2012,
where the Bulgarian eventually won a model attacking game.
 b) 8 ... g5?! is overly committal and after 9 Bg3 e5 10 Nf5 Nc5 11 0-0-0 Bxf5 12 exf5
Qc7 13 h4 White obtained a very attractive position in C.Balogh-S.Savchenko, Dubai
2010.
c) 8 ... Qc7 9 0-0-0 e6 will likely transpose to the 6 ... e6 lines which are covered in
Chapter Three. Instead, the ambitious 9 ... g5 worked out well for Black in a high-level
encounter, although I am constantly doubtful of these ... g5 moves in general. 10 Bg3 e6
11 h4 Rg8 12 hxg5 hxg5 was L.Milov-V.Gashimov, Mainz (rapid) 2010, and here 13 Kb1!?
is an improvement, with the idea of 13 ... b5? 14 e5! Nxe5 15 Bxe5 dxe5 16 Ndxb5!! axb5
17 Qf3! Nd5 18 Rxd5 exd5 (18 ... Bb7 19 Bxb5+ Ke7 20 Ne4! wins in fine style) 19 Nxd5
Qa5 20 Bxb5+! Bd7 21 Nf6+ (21 Bxd7+ Kxd7 22 Qxf7+ Kc6 23 Ne3 is extremely wild, but
winning for White as well) 21 ... Kd8 22 Qd5 Qxa2+ 23 Qxa2 Rxa2 24 Kxa2 Be6+ 25 c4,
with good winning chances for White.
Returning to 8 ... g6:

9 f4
The natural 9 0-0-0 is well dealt with by 9 ... e5 10 Nb3 Be7! (10 ... Qc7?! 11 Qc4! is
awkward; White was slightly better after 11 ... Qb8 12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 Qxd5 in K.Goh Wei
Ming-Le Quang Liem, Incheon 2013, and the queenless middlegames arising after 11 ...
Qxc4 12 Bxc4 b5 13 Bd5 are always a little better for White: he has the simple plan of
doubling on the d-file and bringing the dark-squared bishop into play with f3 and Bf2,
while the weakened queenside means that Na5 may potentially be a threat as well) 11 f3
(Black again arrives comfortably in a standard Najdorf position after 11 Qe1 b5 12 a3 Bb7
13 f3 Qc7 14 Kb1 Rc8 15 Bd3 Nb6, with level chances in J.Radulski-I.Cheparinov, Plovdiv
2012) 11 ... b5 12 Kb1 b4 (12 ... Kf8!? followed by ... Kg7 also looks very reasonable) 13
Na4 Nb6?! (13 ... Bb7, with the idea of 14 Qc4 d5! 15 exd5 Rc8 16 Qe2 Nxd5 17 Bxe7
Qxe7, seems more to be in the spirit of this variation) 14 Nxb6 Qxb6 15 Bf2 Qc7 16 Qc4
Qxc4 17 Bxc4 was slightly better for White. After 17 ... a5 18 Bb5+ Bd7 19 Bxd7+ Kxd7
20 Nc5+! Kc6 21 Na4 Rab8, as played in A.Danin-D.Khismatullin, Olginka 2011, White can
try 22 c4!? bxc3 23 Nxc3 with a risk-free edge.
 9 ... e5

This position has scored tremendously well for Black in the last couple of years.
10 fxe5
10 Nf3!? leads to extremely sharp positions and seems to be a good way to force a
draw. Moreover, Black even has to defend carefully according to my analysis: 10 ... Qc7
(10 ... exf4? 11 e5 dxe5 12 Nxe5 Be7 13 Nxd7 Nxd7 14 Nd5! g5 15 0-0-0! gxh4 16 Re1
Nf6 17 Nxe7 Be6 18 Ng6! is devastating) 11 0-0-0. Now:
a) White’s pieces are the more active after 11 ... Bg7 12 fxe5 (the immediate 12 Qc4!?
also looks good for White) 12 ... dxe5 (12 ... Nxe5 13 Qd2! wins the d6-pawn by force) 13
Qc4 Qxc4 14 Bxc4.
b) 11 ... b5 12 Nd5! Nxd5 13 exd5 Bg7 14 fxe5 forces Black to choose carefully:

b1) 14 ... Nxe5 15 Nxe5 Bxe5 16 Bg3! is quite dangerous for Black (and not 16 Bf6
Bg4! 17 Qxg4 Bxf6 with a large advantage for Black due to his much better bishop),
although he should be fine with a few accurate moves. Here is a sample line: 16 ... 0-0
17 Bxe5 dxe5 18 d6 (18 g4!?) 18 ... Qa5 19 Qxe5 Qxa2 20 Bd3 Qa1+ 21 Kd2 Qa5+ 22
Kc1 is a draw by perpetual.
b2) 14 ... dxe5 15 d6 (or maybe the cheeky 15 Be7!?) 15 ... Qa5 16 Kb1 (my engine
claims equality here, although I believe most Najdorf exponents will find the d6 passed
pawn a tad uncomfortable to deal with) 16 ... 0-0 (perhaps 16 ... Bb7 improves: 17 Be7
Rc8 and Black is fine) 17 Be7 Re8 18 g3 Nb6 19 Nd2 Nc4?! (19 ... Be6! seems to be
Black’s last equalizing attempt) and in Z.Almasi-P.Harikrishna, Havana 2013, the
straightforward 20 Nxc4 bxc4 21 Qd2 Qxd2 22 Rxd2 would have led to an edge for White.
10 ... dxe5
10 ... Nxe5 11 0-0-0! is a clear improvement on existing practice. White has the
simple plan of sitting on that chronically weak d6-pawn.
11 0-0-0
This was introduced by Hou Yifan against Anand last year. By now, readers should be
familiar with this theme. Instead, 11 Nf3? Bb4 was already better for Black in T.Antal-
M.Perunovic, Plovdiv 2012.

11 ... Qc7
The reigning world champion tried 11 ... Be7, but could have come under some
pressure by the Chinese wondergirl had she played 12 Nb3!. Instead, the game continued
12 Nf3 Qc7 13 Qc4 Qb8 14 Nd5 b5 15 Qc6 Nxd5 16 Rxd5 Qb7! 17 Qc3 f6 with equality in
Hou Yifan-V.Anand, Wijk aan Zee 2013. After 12 Nb3, the game may continue 12 ... 0-0
(12 ... Qc7? 13 Qf3 0-0? 14 Rxd7! is a sneaky idea) 13 Bxf6 Bxf6 14 Kb1 b5 15 g3!
followed by Bh3 when White has the more comfortable play.
Richard Palliser rightly pointed out 11 ... g5 12 Bf2 exd4 13 Bxd4 is clearly better for
White. There is no way to prevent the irresistible 14 e5 after which White’s attack will be
in full swing.
12 Nb3
12 Nd5 Nxd5 13 exd5 Bd6 is fine for Black. The dark-squared bishop is well placed on
d6, anchoring the e5-pawn and firmly blockading d5: 14 Nb3 b5 (or 14 ... 0-0 15 g4 b5 16
Nd2 Nc5 17 Kb1 f5 with counterplay) 15 Qd2 Kf8! 16 Kb1 Kg7 17 Na5 Re8 18 g4 (18 Nc6
Nc5 19 Be2 f5 is also pleasant for Black) 18 ... e4 19 Be2 e3 (19 ... Ne5!) 20 Qd4+ Be5
21 Qb4 Bd6 22 Qd4+ Be5 23 Qb4 Bd6 24 Qd4+ and a draw was agreed in T.Kosintseva-
A.Ushenina, Geneva (rapid) 2013.
12 ... b5 13 Qf3
13 g4 was played in the only other game in my database: 13 ... Be7 14 Bg2 b4?!
(delaying castling is risky and 14 ... 0-0 is safer: for example, 15 Kb1 Nb6 16 Bxf6 Bxf6 17
Nd5 Nxd5 18 exd5 Qc4!) 15 Bxf6 Nxf6 16 Nd5 Nxd5 17 exd5 Bd6 18 h4 (redirecting the
knight with 18 Nd2 a5 19 Ne4 0-0 20 Rhe1 seems more to the point) 18 ... a5 19 Nd4
Ba6? (19 ... 0-0) 20 Qe4 a4 and here in G.Guseinov-J.Gallagher, Legnica 2013, instead of
21 Kb1, White retains some initiative after 21 h5! Qe7 22 Rhe1.
13 ... Bg7

14 Bd3
Fortifying the e4 pawn, but since White eventually plays Nd5, it may make more sense
to develop the bishop on e2 instead. With this thought in mind, perhaps 14 a3 0-0 15
Be2!? Rb8 16 Kb1 with ideas to double the rooks on the d-file deserves attention.
14 ... 0-0 15 Kb1 Bb7 16 a3
Both players have continued in logical fashion and, for a rapid game, have conducted
the opening phase very impressively.
16 ... Bc6
This reinforces the b5-pawn, intending a future ... Rb8 and ... a5, which is a very
natural plan. If Black continues with the ‘automatic’ 16 ... Rac8, White can try 17 g4!?
Qb6 18 Be1!, holding up ... b4 and preparing h2-h4 himself. Play remains incredibly
complex, although I slightly prefer White.
17 g4!
Kurnosov was a fine theoretician and it is no surprise to see him playing in the most
principled way. Increasing the pressure on the f-file with 17 Rhf1 can be met by 17 ...
Rab8 when it would take a brave man to take the a-pawn after 18 Be1 b4! 19 axb4 Rxb4
20 Bxa6!? Ra8 21 Bd3 Qb7, with terrific counterplay on the queenside.
17 ... Rab8 18 Nd5 Bxd5 19 exd5

19 ... e4!
A typical pawn sacrifice to open up the long diagonal. In addition, the d7-knight is
freed to manoeuvre to the enticing c4-square via e5. 19 ... Rb6!? with the clever idea of
20 Be1 Rc8! 21 Ba5 e4! 22 Bxe4 Qe5 is also very typical.
20 Bxe4 Qe5
A strong practical move, especially in rapid chess, although regaining the pawn with
20 ... Ne5 21 Qg2 Nexg4 is objectively better.
21 Rd4 Qd6?
No doubt both players were in time trouble around this juncture as they start making
several mistakes from here on. 21 ... Rbe8 would have maintained the tension in the
position.
22 Qd1 Ne5 23 Bg3
White has consolidated nicely and with an extra pawn in the bag, should realistically
hope for a win. I present the rest of the game with light notes.
23 ... Nfd7 24 h4 Nb6 25 Na5
The simple 25 h5 Nbc4 26 c3 is much better for White.
25 ... Nbc4 26 Nc6 Rbe8 27 c3?
After 27 Nxe5 Bxe5 28 Bxe5 Rxe5 29 h5 g5 30 Qf3 White has the more menacing
attack.
27 ... Qc5?
27 ... Nxb2! 28 Kxb2 (Black emerges with an extra pawn after 28 Bxe5 Nxd1 29 Bxd6
Nxc3+ 30 Kc2 Nxe4 31 Bxf8 Bxd4) 28 ... Nc4+!! 29 Rxc4 Qxg3 sees Black win material by
force. An extraordinary tactic indeed.
28 Nxe5 Nxe5 29 h5
This didn’t completely throw away White’s advantage, but 29 d6! Nd7 30 Rd5 Qc4 31
Bc2 Re3 32 Rd3! would have been curtains for Black.
29 ... Nc4 30 hxg6 Nxb2!

31 Kxb2 Rxe4 32 Bd6!

White continues to find resources.
32 ... Qxd6?
Black could have tried 32 ... Qxd4! 33 cxd4 Rxd4, although White still stands better
after 34 Kb3 Rxd1 35 Rxd1 Rc8 36 Bb4! due to the powerful passed d-pawn.
33 Rxe4 fxg6 34 Rf1?
White had to defend the weak c3-pawn with 34 Rh3! and after 34 ... Rf2+ 35 Re2
Rxe2+ 36 Qxe2 Qxd5 37 Rd3 he retains slight winning chances.
34 ... Rc8
34 ... Bxc3+! 35 Kxc3 Qxa3+ would have forced a perpetual, but Black may have been
trying for more.
35 Rf3 Rd8 36 Qd3 Bf8 37 c4 Bg7+ 38 Ka2 bxc4 39 Qxc4 Rb8 40 Rb3
The computer says 40 Re2! is much stronger, although I suspect this is purely
academic.
40 ... Rf8 41 Rbe3 Kh7 42 Qb3??
42 Re6 Qb8 43 Qc2 keeps White edge.
 42 ... Qf6?
42 ... Rb8! would have forced instant resignation.
43 Re5??
White’s risk-taking gambles finally backfire on him.
43 ... Re8! 44 g5 Qf2+ 45 Re2 Qd4 46 gxh6 Rxe5 0-1

Game 12
Gao Rui-M.Molner
Santa Clara 2014

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 Nbd7 7 Qe2 e6 8 f4

We can also reach this position via the move order 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qe2. I had a
word with Thomas Luther about this position. He mentioned it was simply an attempt to
avoid mainstream theory and obtain a playable position. Unfortunately for him and many
others, theory has evolved quite a lot here in recent years.
Obviously there are many possible transpositions from this position, but the key choice
for Black is to decide whether to play ... Be7 and go for a classical set-up with short
castling, or to delay it and opt for early queenside play.
8 ... Qc7!
Tons of games have continued 8 ... Be7 9 0-0-0 Qc7 and here it looks like 10 g3! is
best. For example:
a) 10 ... b5 11 Bg2 b4 (both the 11 ... Bb7 12 e5 dxe5 13 fxe5 Nd5 14 Bxe7 Nxc3 15
bxc3 Bxg2 16 Qxg2 Kxe7 17 Nc6+ Kf8 18 Rhf1 Nb6 19 Qf3! Re8 20 Nd8! of J.Smeets-
L.Van Wely, Wijk aan Zee 2010, and 11 ... Rb8 12 e5 dxe5 13 Nc6 b4 14 Nxb8 bxc3 15
Nxd7 cxb2+ 16 Kb1 Nxd7 17 Bxe7 Kxe7 18 Qg4 are bad for Black) 12 e5!? (again, this is
principled or else White’s set-up does not make any sense) 12 ... bxc3 13 Bxa8 dxe5 14
fxe5 Nd5 15 Bxe7 cxb2+ 16 Kxb2 Nxe7 17 Be4 Nxe5. The moves so far have been pretty
logical and here it seems White has two reasonable ways to attain a tangible edge: 18
Nb3 (or 18 Rhe1 f6 19 Nb3 Kf7 20 Qf2 Bd7 21 Qc5 Bc6 22 Bd3 Nd5 23 Nd4 Rb8+ 24 Ka1
Ba8 25 Qxc7+ Nxc7 26 c4 and White is slightly better – Kislik) 18 ... 0-0 19 Rhe1 f5? (19
... f6 is certainly more solid, but White is better after 20 Qf2 Bd7 21 Qc5) 20 Bg2 N7g6 21
Rd4! and White went on to win convincingly in U.Hassim-H.Krueger, correspondence
2008.
b) Inserting 10 ... h6 may be more accurate as after 11 Bh4 b5 12 Bg2 Rb8 13 e5 dxe5
14 Nc6 b4 15 Nxb8 15 (Ne4!?) 15 ... Qxb8 16 Ne4, 16 ... exf4 forces White to part with his
dark-squared bishop: 17 Nxf6+ Nxf6 18 Bxf6 Bxf6 19 Bc6+ Kf8 and Black has reasonable
compensation.
9 0-0-0 b5

10 a3
Holding up ... b4, but this is by no means forced:
a) Massaging the e6-square with 10 f5 is clearly the most direct and, in many ways,
the most principled approach:
a1) 10 ... b4?! was played in a clash between two super-GMs and it has been
established that White retains an enduring initiative: 11 fxe6 bxc3 12 exd7+ Nxd7 13
Qc4! cxb2+ 14 Kb1 Nc5 (at first sight, exchanging queens seems logical for Black since he
has the better structure, but White’s activity after 14 ... Qxc4 15 Bxc4 Ne5 16 Bb3 Be7 17
Bf4 0-0 18 Nf5 is hard to control and the bishop-pair should give White some advantage
in the resulting complex endgames: 18 ... Bxf5 19 exf5 Rac8 20 Rhe1 Rc6 21 Bxe5!? dxe5
22 Rd7 and White is better) was A.Volokitin-S.Mamedyarov, Eilat 2012.

Now 15 Be2! is an important improvement on the game, which saw 15 e5 Rb8 16

exd6 Bxd6 17 Re1+ Kf8 18 Bd3 and here there is the amazing 18 ... Rb4!, with the idea
of 19 Qc3 h6 20 Bd8 Qxd8 21 Nc6 Na4! 22 Qxb4 Bxb4 23 Nxd8 Bxe1 24 Rxe1 g5! 25 Bc4
Rh7 when Black should unravel pretty soon. After 15 Be2!, the game might continue 15 ...
h6 16 Bh4 Be7 17 Bxe7 Kxe7 18 Rhf1 Be6 19 Nf5+ Bxf5 20 exf5 Rhc8 21 Bh5 Kf8 22
Rxd6! and White is clearly better.
a2) 10 ... e5! is a typical Najdorf response and is positionally sound. After 11 Nd5
Nxd5 12 exd5 there are several moves, but 12 ... Nb6! seems the most straightforward:
 a21) 13 g4 was tried in O.Zambrana-S.Mareco, Campinas 2011, and after 13 ... Bb7
the following line seems to force a draw: 14 Bg2 Nxd5 (Black can try 14 ... Rc8!? if he
wants to prolong the fight) 15 Bxd5 Bxd5 16 Nxb5 axb5 17 Rxd5 Qc4! 18 Rxe5+! dxe5 19
Qxe5+ Kd7 20 Rd1+ Kc6 21 Rd4 Qf1+ 22 Rd1 Qc4 with a draw by repetition.
a22) 13 Qh5 Be7 (this is the safer option; 13 ... g6!? may objectively be fine, but
Black’s position looks loose after 14 fxg6 fxg6 15 Qh4 Bg7 16 Bd3, while here 15 ... Be7?!
16 Bd3 Rg8? 17 Rhf1 was close to winning for White in B.Adhiban-R.Padmini, Chennai
2012) 14 Bxe7 (Black defends solidly after 14 Bd3 Bxg5+! 15 Qxg5 f6 16 Qh5+ Qf7 17
Qe2 Nxd5 18 Ne6 Bxe6 19 fxe6 Qxe6 20 Qf3 Nc7 21 Bf5 Qe7 22 Qc6+ Kf7 23 Rxd6 Rhd8
when White may be very slightly better, but nothing more – Kislik) 14 ... Qxe7 15 Nc6 Qf6
16 Bd3 Bd7 17 Be4.

Computers hate destroying their structures voluntarily, but I think 17 ... Qh6+!! is a
brilliant strategical decision. Black’s kingside pawn structure may be compromised, but in
exchange he swapped the queens, opened the g-file and White will find it hard to defend
against the attacks on the d5- and f5-pawns. After 18 Qxh6 gxh6 19 Na5 f6 20 Rd3 Rg8
21 Rh3 Rg4 Black was better and went on to win a fine game in J.Fluvia Poyatos-
S.Sjugirov, Barcelona 2012.
b) 10 g3?! is much less effective and after 10 ... b4 11 Nd5 exd5 12 exd5+ Be7 13 Nf5
Nb6! 14 Nxg7+ Kd8 15 Re1 Nfxd5! Black has managed to unravel and stands better,
although White certainly retains a some degree of compensation.
c) Similarly, 10 g4?! b4 11 Nd5 (the computer suggests 11 Na4?!, but that looks pretty
pointless to me) 11 ... exd5 12 exd5+ Be7 13 Nc6 Nb8 14 Bxf6 gxf6 15 Bg2 and now in
B.Jobava-S.Karjakin, Sochi 2007, 15 ... f5! 16 gxf5 Nxc6 17 dxc6 Bxf5 looks scary for
Black, but White has no concrete ideas to make further progress.
Returning to 10 a3:
10 ... Bb7
This is commonest and very natural, but Black has a second plan that involves
opening up the b-file quickly. A model game in this line went 10 ... Be7 11 g4 Rb8! 12
Bg2 h6 13 Bh4 b4 14 axb4 Rxb4.

We’ve reached something of a tabiya:

a) Play continued 15 Bf2 g5! 16 fxg5 (16 h4!? gxf4 17 g5 is interesting, although
Black’s fortress remains hard to crack after 17 ... Ng8 18 Qf3 Ne5 19 Qxf4 Qa5) 16 ...
Nxg4!? (this was an attractive move, but the simple 16 ... hxg5 is better, with a very
slight edge for Black) 17 Qxg4 Bxg5+ 18 Kb1 Qxc3 19 Nb3 Qc7 20 Be1 Rc4. Black has
obtained comfortable equality after his mini-combination and went on to outplay his
opponent in Yu Yangyi-P.Negi, Ho Chi Minh City 2012.
b) 15 Rhe1 g5! 16 e5 (A.Pavlidis-N.Galopoulos, Eretria 2011), 16 ... dxe5 17 fxe5 Qxe5
(Kislik pointed out the possible improvement 17 ... gxh4!?, with the idea of 18 exf6 Qf4+
19 Kb1 Qxf6 20 Qd3 Nc5 21 Qd2 Bd7! 22 Nd5 Rxb2+! 23 Kxb2 exd5 24 Bxd5 0-0 with
counterplay against the loose white king) 18 Qxe5 Nxe5 19 Bg3 Ng6 is balanced. The
following hypothetical line seems rather forcing and illustrates Black’s chances: 20 Nc6
Nf4! 21 Nxb4 Nxg2 22 Re2 Nf4 23 Bxf4 gxf4 24 Nc6 Bb7 25 Nxe7 Kxe7 and I think Black
has equal chances. His pieces are very active and it is easy to imagine the passed e- and
f-pawns soon rolling down the board. Not surprisingly the computers slightly prefer White,
but I find this position very attractive from Black’s point of view.
c) 15 Be1!? with the idea of 15 ... Qb6 16 Bf2! is worthy of further investigation.
11 g4

11 ... Rc8
I feel that 11 ... Be7?! does not go well with ... Bb7 in general. Many games have
been played here, but I like the extremely rare 12 f5, with the thematic idea to control
the d5-square after 12 ... e5 13 Bxf6 Nxf6 14 Nb3 h6 15 h4. It seems that White simply
gets a small but comfortable edge. For example, 15 ... 0-0-0 (15 ... Nd7 16 Rh3 Rc8
occurred in C.Balogh-A.Gabrielian, Plovdiv 2012, and here 17 Kb1, with the idea of 17 ...
Nb6 18 g5 hxg5 19 hxg5 Rxh3 20 Bxh3 Bxg5 21 f6, looks slightly better for White) 16 Bg2
Kb8 17 Kb1 Rc8 18 g5 (18 Rd3 followed by Rhd1 should also be slightly better for White)
18 ... hxg5 19 hxg5 Nh7 20 g6 fxg6 21 fxg6 Nf6 22 Bh3 Rcf8 23 Be6 (again, the engine
gives an equal assessment, but White certainly has the more pleasant position) 23 ... Bd8
24 Qd3 Qe7 25 Bf7 Rxh1 26 Rxh1 Bb6 27 Nd5 Nxd5 28 Bxd5 Qf6 29 Bf7 Ka7 30 Nc1! Bc8
31 Na2 Ba5 32 Nb4 Bxb4 33 axb4 Bb7 34 Qe3+ Kb8 35 Rh3. White has obtained a large
advantage and went on to win in F.Schubert-S.Bubir, correspondence 2009.
12 Bxf6 gxf6
More or less forced. 12 ... Nxf6?! 13 g5 Nd7 14 h4 would have been asking for trouble.
13 h4
 We have reached a strategically complex position. White’s typical plan is again to
probe on the light squares with an eventual f4-f5, provoking ... e5, after which he would
try to dominate the d5-square by doubling rooks on the d-file. Black’s plan normally
focuses around getting a knight to c4 and opening up the queenside with ... Qb6 and ...
b5-b4. The problem with Black’s position is that his king is much more vulnerable than his
counterpart and he will even find it hard to find any decent moves if White is able to snuff
out his initiative on the queenside.
13 ... Nb6
Alternatively:
a) 13 ... h6 was played in a game between two super-GMs and White quickly got an
edge with 14 Rh3 Rg8 15 Kb1 Qb6 16 f5! e5 17 Nb3 in A.Grischuk-Wang Hao, Beijing
(Basque) 2013. After 17 ... Nc5, White should have continued with 18 Nxc5! Rxc5 19 Rhd3
with a big positional advantage. Black’s g8-rook looks rather ridiculous and White
completely dominates the critical d5-square.
b) Preparing an exchange sacrifice with 13 ... Qb6 is also an interesting plan: 14 Rh3
(calling Black’s bluff with 14 f5 allows 14 ... e5 15 Nb3 Rxc3! 16 bxc3 Qc7 with obvious
compensation for the exchange) 14 ... Nc5? (the knight is very often badly placed on the
c5-square; 14 ... h5! with the idea of 15 g5 fxg5 16 hxg5 Bg7 would have ensured full
counterplay for Black) 15 f5 e5 16 Nd5! and White was much better in I.Ortiz Suarez-
J.Becerra, Silvania 2011.
c) Richard Palliser once analysed 13 ... d5 14 exd5 Qxf4+ 15 Kb1 Rxc3!? 16 bxc3 Bxd5
17 Bg2 Bc4 with good play for the exchange. This may be true in a practical game, but
objectively White should have a clear edge with precise play after 18 Qe1 Be7 (18 ...
Ne5? 19 Nc6! wins) 19 Bc6! 0-0!? 20 Nxe6 fxe6 21 Rxd7 Rf7 22 g5!.
14 Kb1
 14 ... h6?!
This presumably stops g4-g5, but I would have thought that is exactly what Black
should be hoping for since opening the a1-h8 diagonal would have given his dark-squared
bishop a new lease of life. 14 ... Nc4 15 Rh3 is the logical follow-up. Here play may
continue 15 ... Qb6 16 f5 e5 17 Nd5 Qd8 18 Nb3 Rg8 with a tense game in prospect.
15 Rh3 Rg8 16 g5?
White felt the need to land an immediate blow, but Black’s position contains sufficient
resources. 16 Rg3 Nc4 17 Qe1! would have retained control over the position.
16 ... hxg5 17 hxg5 fxg5 18 Rh7?
White was not able to handle the chaos that have appeared on the board and with
this move, handed the initiative over to Black. 18 Rg3! would still have asked some
questions.
18 ... gxf4! 19 Nxe6 Qe7
 White’s mini-operation has not turned out well as Black is the one who has benefited
from the opening of the position. Black now threatens ... Rxc3 followed by ... Na4, which
is not an easy threat to deal with. In fact, White immediately blundered at this point.
20 Bh3??
A critical loss of a tempo. Black has fine compensation after 20 Nxf8! Rxc3! 21 bxc3
Na4 22 Qd2 Kxf8 with ideas of ... Rg3 and ... Qe5, but it would still have been a game.
Evidently, the Chinese player underestimated the following blow.
20 ... Rxc3!
It would have been rude to decline such an invitation.
21 bxc3 Na4 22 Rd3?
This makes it easy for Black, although the position was lost anyway: 22 Qd2 Rg3! 23
Re1 Rxh3! 24 Nxf8 Re3! 25 Rxe3 fxe3 26 Qxe3 Qf6! and with this last accurate move,
Black should be very close to winning.
22 ... Rg1+ 23 Ka2 d5! 24 c4
24 Nxf8 also loses to 24 ... Ra1+ 25 Kxa1 Qxa3+.
24 ... bxc4 25 Nxf8 Qe5!
Ignoring all of White’s en prise pieces. Black is intent on creating a masterpiece.
26 c3 cxd3 27 Qxd3 Kxf8 0-1
It seems that the classical set-ups with 7 ... e6 are still standing strong. Moreover, Black
should be able to obtain exciting positions which enable him to play actively and for a
win.

Conclusion
Black is doing very decently in the 6 ... Nbd7 variation in virtually all variations, but he
does have to have a fair bit of knowledge. After 7 f4 I recommend the relatively rare 7 ...
Qa5!? and 7 ... Qc7 8 Qf3 b5!, which I predict will prove to be the future of this variation.
White exponents need not be dismayed though – I have pointed out several
improvements in the notes which I believe will be extremely dangerous against
unprepared opponents.
Chapter Two
The Good Old Polugaevsky, the MVLV and 7 ...
Qc7
The Polugaevsky variation has long been known to lead to sharp but slightly dubious and
risky positions. I remember trying to find an outright refutation in the past thanks to a
team-mate (yes Jason, I’m talking about you!) who plays it exclusively and with great
results. To my surprise, Black’s concept of zipping around with his queen instead of
focusing on developing his pieces has proved to be highly resilient and has withstood the
test of time.

In this chapter, we focus on 10 exf6 Qe5+ 11 Be2 Qxg5 12 0-0 which is a line that has
been established as the acid test of the variation.

In Games 13 and 14, we look at 12 ... Qe5 and alternatives where White has good
chances of obtaining an opening advantage. Readers are particular urged to investigate
the rarely played 13 Kh1!? which seems to be a refutation of 12 ... Qe5.
In Game 15, we analyse the critical 12 ... Ra7 where White has decent chances of
obtaining an edge, but Black should be fine as long as he remembers his stuff well.
The surprising 7 ... Nc6 has been played since a long time ago, but has only recently
gained popularity thanks to the efforts of the French Grandmaster Maxime Vachier-
Lagrave who has a superb score with it. White’s key responses are 8 Nxc6 (Game 16) and
8 e5 (Games 17 and 18). In the latter, 9 ... g5 looks like a reliable equalizer, especially
with the rarely seen 10 fxg5 Nd5 11 Nxd5 exd5 12 exd6 hxg5!? which seems to force a
draw immediately.
The solid 7 ... Qc7 has been recommended in a number of books given that the
number of forcing variations is drastically less than its sister variations.

I’ve presented a refreshing new idea that has not been covered before. After 8 Qf3 b5
9 0-0-0 b4 10 e5 Bb7 11 Qh3 dxe5 the novelty 12 Bb5+!? leads to very exciting positions,
although with concrete defence Black should just about hold the draw. This is
investigated in Game 19.
In Game 20, our attention shifts to the more positional line with 7 ... Qc7 8 Qf3 b5 9
Bxf6 gxf6 10 a3!?, a line which has not been seen as often as it should have been. White
should emerge from the opening with a small but safe edge, although Black certainly has
concrete counterplay.

Game 13
S.Bieszk-P.Zinoviev
Correspondence 2009

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 b5

 The good, old Polugaevsky variation is rarely seen these days as it is now known to be
a tad too risky and unnecessarily complicated even for Najdorf players. However, the fact
that Nakamura has used this variation in top-level competition shouldn’t be overlooked
and a well-prepared player can still expect to surprise a few opponents with it.
8 e5
This is critical, to exploit Black’s imprudent pawn move. Other moves such as 8 Bd3
and 8 Qf3 are also playable, but these moves are too tame to threaten the existence of
the line.
8 ... dxe5
This is forced as 8 ... h6? 9 Bh4 g5 10 fxg5 Nh7 11 Qh5 hxg5 12 Bg3 Bg7 13 0-0-0
leads to a dream attacking position for White.
9 fxe5 Qc7!

This is the key tactical point behind Black’s impish pawn push on the 7th move. Black
threatens to snare the two bishops early in the game in return for his lack of
development. In such an open position Black can hope to seize the initiative with his
bishop-pair, particularly down the a8-h1 and a7-g1 diagonals, but only if he is able to
consolidate. As such, play tends to be extremely concrete.
10 exf6
This has become established as White’s main attempt to refute the Polugaevsky
outright. There have not been many developments with 10 Qe2 of late and Black is
known to be fine theoretically here.
The interesting 10 Nf3!? is rarely played. It seems to pack a certain punch, although
after 10 ... b4 (the equally sharp 10 ... h6 11 Bh4 g5! 12 Bg3 Nh5 13 Ne4 Nxg3 14 hxg3
Nd7 also appears to lead to equality) 11 Nb5! axb5 12 exf6 Rg8! (this untried move leads
to dynamic play which is what Polugaevsky players are looking for; I also like 12 ... Nd7
13 Bxb5 Ra5 14 Qd3 Qb7 15 Bxd7+ Bxd7 with active play for the pawn deficit) 13 Bxb5+
Bd7 14 Qe2 gxf6 15 Bxf6 Bxb5 16 Qxb5+ Nd7 17 Rd1 (17 0-0-0? b3! is a nice trick,
winning material on the spot) 17 ... Bd6 18 0-0 Qxc2 19 Rd2 Qc5+ 20 Qxc5 Bxc5+ 21 Bd4
Rxa2 22 Bxc5 Nxc5 23 Rc2 Ra5 24 Rfc1 Nb3! we reach an equalish endgame.
10 ... Qe5+ 11 Be2
Virtually the only move here. White has significant less play after 11 Qe2 Qxg5 12 Ne4
(12 g3!? gxf6 13 Bg2 Ra7 14 Ne4 Qe5 15 0-0-0 is also possible, with interesting
compensation) 12 ... Qe5 13 0-0-0. Now:
a) After the natural 13 ... Bb7 White has the extremely strong 14 Qd2! (instead of the
weaker 14 Nc3, as played in E.Sandberg-D.Pruess, Berkeley 2011), with the idea of 14 ...
Bxe4 (14 ... Qxe4 15 Nxb5 Bd5 16 fxg7 Bxg7 17 Nd6+ is even more devastating) 15 Nxb5
Bd5 16 Re1! and Black cannot cope with the multiple threats without losing material.
Here 14 ... Bd5 is probably best, but White still has strong play after 15 Re1 Nc6 (15 ...
Bxe4 16 Bd3 is again dangerous for the second player) 16 Nxb5! axb5 17 Nc3 Qd4 18
Qxd4 Nxd4 19 Nxd5 0-0-0 (the forcing continuation after 19 ... Rxa2 20 Kb1 Ra5 21 b4!
Ra7 22 Rd1 Rd7 23 Rxd4 Rxd5 24 Rxd5 exd5 25 Bxb5+ Kd8 26 c3 gxf6 27 Rd1 leads to a
winning position for White) 20 fxg7 Bxg7 21 Nf4. White has a small plus here, although
converting it will hardly be easy.
b) 13 ... Ra7! 14 Nf3 (or 14 Qf3 Rd7 15 c3 Bb7 16 Bd3, as in F.Bindrich-E.Vorobiov,
Cappelle la Grande 2010, and now 16 ... b4! gives Black fine counter-chances) 14 ... Qf4+
15 Nfd2 Rd7! 16 g3 was O.Rodriguez Vargas-E.Jimenez Zerquera, Cienfuegos 1972, and
now rather than the game’s 16 ... Qe5, I prefer 16 ... Qh6 17 fxg7 Bxg7 18 Bg2 Nc6 with
typical Polugaevsky counterplay and approximate equality.
11 ... Qxg5 12 0-0
 This is the first key position for the line with 10 exf6. At first glance, it appears that
Black has a terrible position. He has only developed his queen, made a series of pawn
moves and is nowhere close to getting his king to safety, while White is way ahead in
development, has already castled and didn’t even need to sacrifice material for this.
A closer look at the position will, however, show that matters are far from so
straightforward. As mentioned earlier, Black only needs a couple of moves to get his
bishop-pair into play (such as ... Bb7 and ... Bc5), and will seize the initiative if he is able
to do so without having to make any concessions. Play is typically bloodthirsty, with
White trying to put Black away early in the middlegame and Black normally hanging on
by a thread, often with the help of tactics.
I’ll also briefly mention 12 Qd3!? with very interesting play after 12 ... Qxf6 13 Rf1!
Qe5 14 0-0-0 (or 14 Rd1 Ra7 15 Ndxb5 Rd7 16 Qc4 Bb7 17 Rxd7 axb5 18 Qc7 Nxd7 19
Qxb7) 14 ... Ra7 15 Ndxb5!?.
12 ... Qe5
The modern 12 ... Ra7! is analysed in the high-profile game between Wang Hao and
Nakamura, while 12 ... Bb7? 13 Bf3 just helps White accelerate his attack:
 a) Of course, the co-operative 13 ... Bxf3 14 Qxf3 is just good for White: 14 ... Ra7
(trying to alleviate the pressure by sacrificing the exchange with 14 ... Bc5 doesn’t work
as White can simply decline with 15 Rad1! when Black still has plenty of problems to
solve) 15 Ne4 Qe5 16 Rad1 Rd7 (all the tactics work in White’s favour; 16 ... g6 17 Qc3
Rc7 18 Nxe6!! is one of my favourites) 17 Qc3! Qxe4 18 Qc8+ Rd8 19 Qc7 and thanks to
the threat of Nxe6, Black will not last long.
b) The typical 13 ... Ra7 loses to 14 Nxe6! fxe6 (14 ... Qe3+ 15 Kh1 fxe6 16 fxg7! also
wins for White) 15 f7+ Ke7 16 Qd4! Kxf7 17 Bxb7+ Ke8 18 Ne4!.
c) 13 ... Qe3+ 14 Kh1 Bxf3 15 Rxf3 Qe5 16 Qd2! Bd6 17 g4! (defending against mate
and controlling h5 which is a key square for the black queen; White is already winning
here) 17 ... b4 18 fxg7 (18 Nf5! is also strong, but there are many ways to skin a cat) 18
... Rg8 19 Nf5! bxc3 20 Nxd6+ Kd7 21 Rxf7+ Kc6 22 Qg2+ Qd5 23 Ne4 with a winning
attack. Likewise, 12 ... gxf6? 13 Ne4! Qe3+ 14 Kh1 is extremely dangerous for Black: 14
... Be7 (14 ... Qxe4 15 Bf3 Qh4 16 Bxa8 Bc5 17 c3 is just better for White with his extra
material, while 14 ... f5?? 15 Nf6+ Ke7 16 Nxf5+ is a nice tactic that was played in
J.Asturiano Molino-P.Garre Murcia, San Javier 1995) 15 Nxf6+ Bxf6 16 Rxf6 was good for
White in D.Jakovenko-J.Smeets, Wijk aan Zee 2007, given that he has eliminated the
dark-squared bishop which is normally Black’s best defensive and offensive piece.
13 Nf3
Standard, but by no means forced:
a) Tony Kosten analysed 13 Bf3!? on ChessPublishing.com and concluded that 13 ...
Ra7 14 Re1 Qxf6 15 Nd5 Qg5 16 a4 Bd6 17 axb5 0-0 should be fine for Black.
b) While analysing this game, I noticed that the uncommon 13 Kh1! has scored
extremely well in tournament practice. After the more or less forced 13 ... Ra7 14 Nf3
Qxf6, the even rarer 15 Ne4! Qd8 (15 ... Qg6 16 Nd6+ Bxd6 17 Qxd6 Nd7 18 a4! looks
very dodgy for Black indeed) 16 Qe1!, preventing 16 ... Be7 due to 17 Qg3, looks very
strong for White indeed. If this line forces an edge for White, the theoretical relevance of
the much more popular 13 Nf3 may be reduced to shreds.
 13 ... Bc5+
This used to be the main move before White more or less found a way to obtain an
advantage with forceful play. 13 ... Qe3+ is analysed next in Da Costa-Claridge, while 13
... Qxf6? is simply asking for it: 14 Ne4 Qxb2 15 Nfg5! f5 16 Nd6+ Bxd6 17 Qxd6 Qf6 18
Bf3, winning the exchange and potentially more than that.
14 Kh1 Qxf6 15 Ne4 Qe7 16 Ne5!

This can lead to some pretty wild tactics.

16 ... 0-0
16 ... f5 is the other main move here. After 17 Bh5+! (this move, preparing a
temporary sacrifice, is the most promising) 17 ... g6 18 Nxg6 hxg6 19 Bxg6+ Kf8 20 Nxc5
we arrive at a strange position, with White having an extra pawn but both his minor
pieces are vulnerable. At the same time, Black has a trump card in the form of his passed
e-pawn and if he gets to consolidate and develop his queenside, particularly with ... Bb7
and a future ... Rah8, he may gain dangerous counterplay. Now:
a) 20 ... Kg7 loses in a straightforward manner: 21 Nxe6+! Bxe6 (21 ... Kxg6 22 Nf4+
Kg7 – 22 ... Kh6 23 Qh5+ Kg7 24 Qg6+ Kf8 25 Rae1 is a massacre – 23 Rf3! with a
devastating attack: for example, 23 ... Qe5 24 Rg3+ Kf6 25 Nh5+ Kf7 26 Rg7+ Ke6 27
Qd2 followed by Re1) 22 Bxf5 and with three pawns for the piece plus an unstoppable
attack, White was winning in D.Langner-D.Kirton, Manitoba 1996.
b) 20 ... Qxc5 loses to 21 Qd8+ Kg7 22 Qg5! when Black has no defence to White’s
numerous threats. For example, 22 ... Rxh2+ 23 Kxh2 Qe5+ 24 Kg1 Qf6 25 Qg3 Qxg6 26
Qc3+, winning material.
c) 20 ... Rh6 21 Bh5! (again, this is the most promising; Black is okay after the
tempting 21 Nxe6+ Bxe6 22 Bxf5 Bf7, as occurred in J.Diaz-R.Vera Gonzalez Quevedo,
Havana 1986) and now:
 c1) The crazy 21 ... Qxc5? loses easily to 22 Qd8+ Kg7 23 Rf3! Rxh5 (23 ... f4 24 Rxf4
Rxh5 25 Qf6+ mates in a few more moves) 24 Rg3+ Kf7 25 Qg8+ Ke7 26 Rg7+ Kf6 27
Rf7+ Ke5 28 Qg3+ Kd5 29 Rd1+.
c2) White also has a nagging edge after 21 ... Ra7 22 Ne4! (22 Nd3 can now be met
by 22 ... Qg5! which is unclear) 22 ... Rd7 23 Qe2 Kg8 24 Ng3 Nc6 25 a4 with pressure all
over the board.
c3) White successfully regroups and consolidates after 21 ... Nd7 22 Bf3! Ra7 23 Qd2
Rh7 24 Nd3 with a fantastic position.
c4) Even after 21 ... Nc6! Black’s position looks loose and precarious, but White has to
play some exact moves to obtain a plus: 22 b4! (this secures the c5-knight, which is an
annoying thorn in Black’s side) 22 ... Nxb4 (22 ... a5 23 Qf3! is awkward to meet, as 23 ...
e5 24 Bg4 Qh4 25 Bh3 axb4 26 Rad1 is extremely dangerous for Black; the natural and
aggressive-looking 26 ... Ra3 is met with 27 Ne6+! Bxe6 28 Qxc6 when Black’s
compensation after 28 ... Rxh3 29 gxh3 should be insufficient: for example, the natural
continuation 29 ... Kf7 30 Qc7+ Qe7 31 Qxe5 Qb7+ 32 Kg1 Rg6+ 33 Kf2 Qg2+ 34 Ke3
Qxh3+ 35 Rf3 Qg2 36 Rg3 Rxg3+ 37 hxg3 ends in White’s favour, although admittedly
White has had to play some good moves to get here) 23 Bf3.
 Once again, Black has several options:
c41) 23 ... Rb8 24 Qd2 Rh4 25 g4! is extremely strong. Black can hardly move without
losing material.
c42) 23 ... Qc7 was given by Thomas Luther in Experts vs the Sicilian along with some
impressive analysis: 24 h3 Nc6 25 a4! (softening up the queenside as advertised) 25 ...
bxa4 (closing the queenside with 25 ... b4 does not really limit the damage as after 26
Qd2 Kg7 27 Rae1 the attack rages on, while 26 ... Rg6? 27 Bh5! followed by Rae1 is
crushing) 26 Qd2 and White has a winning attack. The rest of the game is an illustration
of White’s ruthless attacking potential: 26 ... Kg7 27 Rxa4 e5 (27 ... Ra7 28 Rh4! Rxh4 29
Qg5+ Kf7 30 Qxh4 wins) 28 Rh4! Rg6 (similarly, 28 ... Rxh4 29 Qg5+ Kf8 30 Qf6+ Qf7 31
Qxh4 is winning) 29 Bh5 1-0, A.Wosch-N.Nordin, correspondence 2001.
c43) The typical Polugaevsky move 23 ... Ra7 is met by 24 Qd2 when after 24 ... Rh4
(24 ... Rxh2+ 25 Kxh2 Qc7+ 26 Kh1 Qxc5 27 Qh6+ Kg8 28 Rad1 is completely winning for
White) 25 Rae1! Kf7 26 g3 Rc4 27 Nxe6! Bxe6 28 Qh6 White has a relentless attack.
c44) 23 ... Nc6! has only been played once, but appears to be strongest according to
my analysis: 24 Qd2 Kg7 25 Bxc6 Qc7! is the main tactical point behind Black’s idea. After
26 Qg5+ Rg6 27 Qe3 (the queen versus two rooks ending after 27 Qxg6+ Kxg6 28 Bxa8
Qxc5 favours Black in view of his strong central pawn mass) 27 ... Qxc6 28 Rf3 Qd6 29
Qc3+ e5 30 Rd3 Qf6 White’s pieces are the more active and the black king is slightly the
more vulnerable, but after the creative 31 Rf1 b4! 32 Qxb4 Qc6 33 Ne4! (with an eye on
the e7-square) 33 ... Ra7 34 Ng3 f4 35 Qb2 Kh7 36 Qxe5 Bh3! 37 Rd2 Bxg2+ 38 Rxg2
fxg3 39 hxg3 Rh6+ 40 Kg1 Qb6+ 41 Rgf2 Rg7 Black managed to hold this inferior
endgame with tenacious defence in M.Tritt-M.Mathias, correspondence 2008. Still, this is
surely not the sort of attractive position that one should be looking for with the Najdorf.
d) 20 ... Nc6!? is unplayed according to my database, but appears to be a promising
alternative.
 Now:
d1) Trying to transpose to the line 20 ... Rh6 21 Bh5 Nc6 22 b4 with 21 b4 can be met
by 21 ... a5!, based on the point 22 Qf3 (a fascinating alternative is 22 Qd2!? Kg7 23
Rae1! Kxg6 24 g4!?, with an attack for White) 22 ... Ne5!! 23 Qxa8 Rxh2+ 24 Kxh2 (24
Kg1 Rh1+! is the same) 24 ... Qh4+ 25 Kg1 Qd4+ with a perpetual.
d2) After 21 Nd3 Rh6 we reach a final divide:
d21) 22 Bh5 Kg7! (preparing to complete development with ... Bb7 and ... Rah8, as
mentioned in an earlier note; my first thought for Black was 22 ... Qh7, which seemed
very strong until the computer pointed out the line 23 Qf3 Bb7 24 Nf4 Nd4 25 Qe3! Qg7
26 Rf2 e5 27 Ng6+ Kg8 28 Nxe5 Rxh5 29 Qxd4 with a clear plus for White) 23 Bf3 Bb7 24
Qe1 Rah8 25 Qg3+! (25 h3 e5 26 Nxe5 also leads to a safe edge) 25 ... Rg6 26 Qf2 e5 27
Rae1 e4 28 Nf4 Rgh6 29 h3 with a messy position. Black certainly has counterplay,
although I doubt it’s sufficient for equality.
d22) 22 Nf4 e5 23 Qd5! exf4 24 Rae1 Rxg6 25 Rxe7 Kxe7 is wonderfully unclear. The
computer likes White, but I actually prefer Black’s chances and think his two pieces and
rook will outweigh White’s queen in the long run.
Thus 20 ... Nc6!? may be the way to go if Black wishes to revive the entire 13 ... Bc5+
variation.
At long last we can now return to 16 ... 0-0:
17 Nxf7!
 17 ... Rxf7
The untried 17 ... Nc6 leads to a similar advantage for White as the main line after 18
Bd3 (18 Bh5 g6 19 Nxc5 Qxc5 20 Nh6+ Kg7 21 Rxf8 Qxf8 22 Bf3 Qc5 is less clear) 18 ...
Rxf7 19 Rxf7 Kxf7 20 Qh5+ g6 21 Qxc5.
Instead 17 ... Bb7 gives White a few options:
a) 18 Nxc5 Qxc5 19 Qd6 Qxd6 20 Nxd6 was slightly better for White in H.Brasch-
M.Stangl, German League 1989, although it won’t be easy to convert such an advantage.
b) 18 Bd3 Rxf7 19 Rxf7 Kxf7 (19 ... Qxf7 20 Ng5! wins for White) 20 Qh5+ g6 21 Rf1+
Kg8 22 Qxc5 Qxc5 23 Nxc5 Bd5 is similar to 18 Nxc5, again with a slight plus for White.
c) 18 Neg5!? is a crazy computer-inspired line and now 18 ... Be3 (18 ... h6 19 Bd3!
hxg5 20 Bh7+! Kxh7 21 Qh5+ Kg8 22 Qh8# is another nice tactic) 19 Bd3 (the crazy 19
Nxe6!? is Houdini’s first choice, but I’m not even going to try to dissect this) 19 ... Bxg5
20 Qh5 Bh6 21 Nxh6+ gxh6 22 Rxf8+ Kxf8 23 Rf1+ Kg7 24 Qe5+ Kg8 25 Rf4 Bxg2+ 26
Kxg2 Qg7+ 27 Qxg7+ Kxg7 28 a4 is a sample variation.
18 Rxf7 Kxf7 19 Bh5+ Kg8
19 ... g6 was the computer’s first choice, but after 20 Nxc5 Ra7 21 Ne4 Kg7 22 Bf3 e5
23 c3 Bf5 24 Qg1! (an exquisite move) 24 ... Bxe4 25 Bxe4 Rd7 26 Qe3 White retains a
slight advantage.
20 Nxc5 Ra7!
Again, the typical Polugaevsky move, preparing ... Rd7 and anticipating White’s Bf3.
Instead, 20 ... Nc6 21 Bf3 Qxc5 22 Bxc6 Ra7 23 Qd8+ Qf8 24 Be8! Re7 25 Qxc8 Rxe8
26 Qxa6 Qf5 27 c4 leads to a promising endgame for White, 20 ... Nd7 21 Bf3! (21 Nxe6
Bb7 22 Nd4 Rd8 23 c3 Nc5 is less clear as Black gets active play in exchange for the
pawn) 21 ... Rb8 22 Nxe6 Nf6 23 Nd4 results in a clear extra pawn for White, and 20 ...
Qxc5 loses in straightforward fashion to 21 Qd8+ Qf8 22 Bf7+!.
21 Nd3!
White has a slight but comfortable edge in view of Black’s inferior pawn structure.
White’s plan is fairly typical in this line: re-route the bishop to the e4-square, pile up on
the e6-pawn by doubling on the e-file, and play a2-a4 at some stage to weaken Black’s
pawns on the queenside.

21 ... Nc6
21 ... Nd7 22 Bf3 Rc7 23 c3 Bb7 24 a4 Qd6 25 axb5 axb5 26 Bxb7 Rxb7 27 Qe2 was
similar in L.Kubala-J.Cacko, correspondence 2006.
22 Bf3 Nd4
22 ... Bb7? is met by the aesthetic 23 Qg1!, threatening 24 Qb6. White is clearly
better after 23 ... Ra8 24 Nc5.
23 Be4
White’s minor pieces are now optimally placed and he has the simple plan of doubling
on the e-file. His advantage is as much as he can hope for and it is clear that he is
playing for two results.
23 ... Bb7 24 Bxb7 Rxb7 25 c3 Nf5 26 Qe2 Rd7 1-0
 My database shows Black resigning or forfeiting here. In any case, after 27 Re1 Black
will have a hard time for the rest of the game.

Game 14
L.Da Costa-J.Claridge
Correspondence 2006

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 b5 8 e5 dxe5 9

fxe5 Qc7! 10 exf6 Qe5+ 11 Be2 Qxg5 12 0-0 Qe5 13 Nf3 Qe3+!?

This has been fairly topical in the 10 ... Qe5+ variation ever since the problems with
13 ... Bc5+ were found and never really solved.
14 Kh1 Nd7
Commonest and best:
a) 14 ... Bb7 15 Nd4! is strong, threatening the devastating 16 Ncxb5 and to exchange
Black’s only active piece with Bf3 (15 Re1 Qf4 16 Nxb5 was D.Kokarev-A.Smirnov, Samara
2012, and now Black should have played 16 ... gxf6! when it’s not clear what White’s
follow-up is). After 15 ... Nd7 16 Bf3 Bxf3 17 Rxf3 Qe5 I like 18 a4 b4 19 Nc6 Qc7 20 fxg7
Bxg7 21 Nxb4 when Black doesn’t have sufficient compensation for the pawn deficit.
b) 14 ... Ra7 can be met strongly by 15 Re1, with a strong initiative. In the only game
played to date, White obtained a winning position easily against his 2500+ opponent
after 15 ... Qf4 16 Nd5! Qd6 (16 ... exd5 17 Bxb5+ Kd8 18 Re8+ Kc7 19 Qxd5 axb5 20
Qd8+ Kb7 21 Qxc8+ Ka8 22 Rd1 is an ugly way for the black king to die) 17 Qd4, winning
material in O.Badmatsyrenov-V.Nevostrujev, Tomsk 2009.
c) The greedy (and insane) 14 ... gxf6? loses to 15 Nd5! when 15 ... exd5 16 Qxd5
Ra7 17 Rae1 is game over.
15 Re1
This is the only move played so far. There is though a case for the untried 15 Nd4 to
be made. This prepares Bf3, as well as the sacrifices on the b5- and e6-pawns in some
lines. For example, 15 ... Nxf6 16 Bxb5+! axb5 (the sacrifice must be accepted since 16
... Bd7 loses to the typical 17 Bxd7+ Nxd7 18 Nd5! Qe5 19 Qf3!) 17 Ncxb5 Nd5 18 c4 Bc5
19 cxd5 0-0 20 dxe6 (20 Nc6!?) 20 ... Bxe6 21 Re1 with a slight edge, although Black is
certainly very active.

15 ... Qb6
Holding the e6-pawn and also guarding the d6-square. Given that the text allows 16
Nd5 with tempo, 15 ... Qa7! has the point of not allowing that, although it does not
contain the above merits of 15 ... Qb6. Hence, White should continue with the logical 16
fxg7 Bxg7 when we have:
a) 17 Qd6 disrupts Black’s plan to complete development, although Black’s position is
not that easy to crack. Now:
a1) 17 ... Qb6 was first played in a high-profile game between Leko and Ivanchuk.
Leko’s convincing win and subsequent analysis of it has deterred black exponents from
going down this path ever since. After 18 Qg3 0-0 19 Rad1 White had the initiative in
P.Leko-V.Ivanchuk, Monaco (blindfold) 2001.
a2) A blitz training game of mine continued 17 ... Qc5 18 Qg3 Bxc3 19 bxc3 Bb7 20
a4, which looks promising for White. However, Black obtained an enduring kingside
initiative after the unexpected 20 ... 0-0-0! 21 axb5 axb5 22 Bf1 Rhg8 23 Qf4 h5! followed
by ... Rg4, with active kingside play.
a3) That said, 17 ... Bb7! is probably the most accurate move here. In some lines,
Black can force White to worry about his own king with moves like ... Rg8 and ... 0-0-0.
Just a couple of sample lines: 18 Rad1 (18 a4 Rg8! is tricky for White to handle: for
example, 19 axb5 Bxc3 20 bxc3? Qf2 is immediately decisive; 18 Qg3 0-0 19 Rad1 Rad8 is
also not particularly dangerous for Black) 18 ... 0-0-0 19 Qf4 Bxc3 20 bxc3 Qf2 21 Bd3!
Bxf3 22 gxf3 and here Black has to find the incredible 22 ... Ne5!! 23 Rf1 (23 Rxe5 Rhg8
24 Re2 Rxd3! 25 cxd3 Qxe2 is the tactical point behind Black’s 22nd move) 23 ... Qc5 24
a4 with a terribly unclear position.
b) The aggressive 17 Ng5 is also worth a punt when I think Black has to put the
question to the knight with 17 ... h6! (17 ... 0-0 18 Qd3 Nf6 19 Rf1 Qc5 20 Nce4 Nxe4 21
Qxe4 Qxg5 22 Qxa8 Bxb2 23 Rad1 wins the exchange, although the battle is far from won
for White). Here I couldn’t find anything other than forced draws everywhere. For
example, a typical line goes 18 Nxf7 Kxf7 19 Bh5+ Kg8 20 Rxe6 Nf8 21 Re8 Bb7 22 Re7
Bxg2+! 23 Kxg2 Qxe7 24 Qd5+ Kh7 25 Qd3+ with perpetual check.
Before we return to 15 ... Qb6, 15 ... Qf4 was played in another training game of
mine. Here play should transpose to the main game after 16 Nd5! Qd6 (16 ... exd5? 17
Qxd5 Ra7 18 Ne5 would be completely crushing).
16 Nd5!

Thematic, and again very strong.

16 ... Qd6
16 ... Qc5 is met by 17 Nd4!, a lovely tactical nuance, similar to the main game:
a) 17 ... Nxf6 leads to a pleasant endgame advantage after 18 Nxf6+ gxf6 19 Bf3 Ra7
20 Nc6 Rd7 21 Rxe6+! Be7 (not 21 ... fxe6 22 Bh5+ of course) 22 Rxe7+ Qxe7 23 Nxe7
Rxd1+ 24 Rxd1 Kxe7.
b) 17 ... Bb7 18 Bf3 Bxd5 19 Bxd5 Qxd5 20 fxg7 Bxg7 21 Nxe6! Qxd1 22 Nxg7+ Kf8 23
Raxd1 Kxg7 24 Rxd7 also leads to a nice endgame edge.
c) 17 ... exd5 18 b4! (deflecting the queen from its important role of defending the d-
pawn) 18 ... Qb6 19 Bf3+ Kd8 20 Bxd5 Bb7 21 Qf3 Qxf6 22 Bxb7 Qxf3 23 Bxf3 and
White’s exemplary attacking play led to a big plus in O.Badmatsyrenov-A.Shomoev, Ulan
Ude 2010.
17 Nd4!
 Readers should be familiar with this beautiful shot by now. All lines lead to a clear
edge for White.
17 ... Nxf6
There’s little better:
a) 17 ... exd5 18 fxg7 Bxg7 19 Nf5 Qf6 20 Bxb5+ Kd8 (20 ... Kf8 21 Qxd5 is also
crushing) 21 Qxd5 Ra7 (21 ... axb5 22 Qxa8 Qxf5 23 Qa5+! wins aesthetically) 22 Ba4
Kc7 and now the unlikely 23 Ne7!, threatening to take on c8, wins cleanly.
b) Trying to plug the e-file with 17 ... Bb7 18 Bf3 Ne5 (18 ... Bxd5 19 Nf5 Qb6 20 fxg7
Bxg7 21 Nxg7+ Kf8 22 Nxe6+! fxe6 23 Bxd5 exd5 24 Qxd5 is also pretty hopeless) fails
to 19 Nf5! exf5 20 Qd4 0-0-0 21 Rxe5 with a winning position. White will soon open the
queenside with a2-a4 and Black’s king can’t hope to survive with such little cover.
18 Nxf6+ gxf6 19 Bh5! Be7
19 ... Ra7 is met by 20 Qg4!, but not 20 Nxe6 Bxe6 21 Qxd6 Bxd6 22 Rxe6+ Be7.
20 Qf3
20 Nxe6 is similar to a line that was analysed above. White was probably afraid of
Black’s drawing chances due to the presence of opposite-coloured bishops in the resulting
endgame.
20 ... Ra7 21 Rad1
 All of White’s pieces are working at full capacity and I am surprised that he isn’t just
winning here. As this was a correspondence game, it is possible that Black might be able
to hold the position somehow, but White’s practical chances are certainly very high. From
a theoretical perspective, this should be sufficient and I now present the rest of the game
with some light notes.
21 ... Qb6 22 Qh3 Kf8 23 Qe3 Ke8 24 Qh6
24 Nxe6 Qxe3 25 Rxe3 Bxe6 26 Rxe6 is again slightly better for White.
24 ... Rc7 25 Re4?!
25 b4! prevents ... Rc5, which is a critical defensive manoeuvre. It is important that 25
... Rc4 can be met by 26 c3! when 26 ... Rxc3 27 Bg4 Rc4 28 Qg7 Rf8 29 Nxe6 Rxg4? (29
... Bxe6 30 Rxe6 Qxe6 31 Bxe6 fxe6 32 Qxh7 is also winning for White) 30 Qxf8+! Bxf8 31
Ng7# is a nice finish.
25 ... Rf8 26 c3 Rc5! 27 Rde1 Re5 28 Rxe5 fxe5 29 Rxe5 Qd6
 Black is a lot safer now that he has exchanged a pair of rooks and drew the game
easily.
30 Qe3 Bf6 31 Rf5 Bxd4 32 cxd4 Bb7 33 Rf2 Bd5 34 a3 b4 35 axb4 Qxb4 36
Kg1 Kd7 37 Bxf7 Qe7 38 Qf4 Kc6 39 Qf6 Qxf6 40 Rxf6 ½-½
It appears that 15 ... Qb6 doesn’t quite equalize and that Black’s best bet is the
sequence 15 ... Qa7 16 fxg7 Bxg7 17 Qd6 and then 17 ... Bb7 or 17 ... Qc5.

Game 15
Wang Hao-H.Nakamura
Biel 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 b5 8 e5 dxe5 9

fxe5 Qc7 10 exf6 Qe5+ 11 Be2 Qxg5 12 0-0 Ra7!

With all the problems surrounding 12 ... Qe5, as illustrated in the previous two games,
it is now established that the text is the Polugaevsky’s best chance of obtaining equality
in the 10 exf6 variation. Black does not waste any time with his queen or dark-squared
bishop and instead brings his queen’s rook quickly to the d7-square which will be followed
by developing the light-squared bishop.
13 Qd3
Pretty much the main move here. It controls the e3-square and hence prepares Ne4
and/or Rad1.
Before writing this book, I wasn’t aware of the move 13 Ne4 which was hardly played
and looks bad, but is actually pretty decent. For example, 13 ... Qe3+ 14 Nf2 Rd7 15 c3
Bb7 (15 ... Nc6 16 Qc2! is strong) 16 Qe1 (16 Bh5 gxf6 17 Re1 Qg5 18 g3 Be7 19 Rxe6 0-
0 20 Re1 Bc5 looks completely random, but Black should have his fair share of play in
view of the weakened h1-a8 diagonal) 16 ... Nc6 17 Nxe6!? Qxe6 18 Bg4 Qxe1 19
Raxe1+ Kd8 is the main line in correspondence chess where both sides have equal
chances.
 13 ... Rd7
13 ... Qe5 14 Ne4 Rd7 transposes.
14 Ne4 Qe5
14 ... Qd5 is risky. Here I like the untried 15 Rad1 (15 c3 was played by a 6 Bg5
Najdorf expert and is also good: 15 ... Nc6 16 Nxc6 Qxc6 was S.Sulskis-J.Stocek, Port Erin
2002, and here 17 fxg7! Bxg7 18 Qg3 exerts considerable pressure on Black’s position) 15
... g6 (15 ... Nc6 16 Nxc6 Qxc6 17 Qg3! is awkward to meet) 16 Qc3 Bb7 17 Kh1 Qxe4 18
Bf3 Qe5 19 Bxb7 Qc5 20 Qe3 with a continuing attack. Note that 20 ... Rxb7? is not
possible due to 21 Nxe6! fxe6 22 Qxe6+ Be7 23 Rd5, winning instantly.
Instead, the odd 14 ... Qg6!? is rare for a good reason. After 15 Qe3 Bb7 16 Bd3 Black
has to play the undesirable 16 ... Qh6 (White was threatening Qg3, attacking g7 and the
knight on b8) and here 17 Rf4 looks promising for White.

15 Nf3
We have reached the first major cross-roads. 15 c3 is the other big main move here
and after 15 ... Bb7 16 Bf3 Black has:
a) Exchanging the light-squared bishop on e4 is not ideal, but Black cannot afford to
allow the dangerous e4-knight to hang around much longer. For example, 16 ... Nc6 17
Rad1 looks dangerous for Black. Richard Palliser gave the following analysis on
ChessPublishing.com as an illustration: 17 ... Qc7? (17 ... g6 is safer, but White retains
the initiative with a move like 18 a4!?, with the idea of 18 ... bxa4? 19 Nxc6 Bxc6 20
Qxa6) 18 Nxe6! fxe6 19 fxg7 Bxg7 (I’ll add 19 ... Rxg7 20 Bh5+ Ke7 21 Qf3 Qe5 22 Qf7+!
Rxf7 23 Rxf7+ Ke8 24 Rxb7+ Qxh5 25 Nf6#, which is a pretty mate) 20 Qxd7+ Qxd7 21
Bh5+ Kd8 22 Rxd7+ Kxd7 23 Rf7+, winning material.
b) After 16 ... Bxe4! 17 Bxe4 gxf6 White is ahead of development, but he is a pawn
down and has to act fast before Black consolidates (17 ... Bc5 should transpose after 18
Rad1 gxf6 19 Rfe1, while after 17 ... Bd6 White has the interesting 18 Qh3!? gxf6 19
Rae1, with decent compensation or here 18 ... Qxe4?! 19 fxg7 Rg8 20 Rae1 Qg6 21 Nxe6
fxe6 22 Rxe6+ Kd8 23 Rxg6 hxg6 24 Rf6, which looks promising):
 b1) Black’s next move is ... Bc5 so it is a no-brainer to put the white rooks on d1 and
e1. Hence, 18 Rae1?! doesn’t make much sense and Black gets a comfortable position
after 18 ... Bc5, A.Kogan-I.Smirin, Maalot-Tarshiha 2008.
b2) There is also no need for a move like 18 Kh1 when Black again gains comfortable
play after 18 ... Bd6! (softening the white kingside a little) 19 g3 Bc5 20 Rad1 h5!? (20 ...
Kf8 is a safe alternative) 21 Rfe1 Qg5 with ... h4 to follow.
b3) 18 Rfe1 Bd6! 19 g3 Bc5 (Chess Evolution gave 19 ... Qh5!? 20 Bf3 Qg6 21 Be4 Qh6
22 a4 bxa4 23 Rxa4 0-0 with the assessment that ‘Black has the upper hand’, although I
think White has sufficient compensation for equality after a move like 24 Kg2, with the
idea of 24 ... Rfd8 25 Bd5! exd5?? 26 Nf5 Qg6 27 Rg4!) 20 Rad1 Qg5 21 Kg2 when
White’s nicely centralized pieces and better structure should promise him sufficient
compensation for the pawn, but no more than that.
15 ... Qc7!?
This rarely played move must have been a small surprise to Wang Hao. While theory
does not view this retreat favourably, we can expect Nakamura to know what he is doing
given that he is extremely well prepared in the Najdorf.
15 ... Qxb2 is, of course, the big main move and the key to Black’s survival in the
entire Polugaevsky complex. After 16 Qe3 Bb7 (more or less the only move; an innocuous
one such as 16 ... Nc6 loses immediately to 17 Rfb1 Qxc2 18 a4! with the combined
threats of Rc1 and Ne1) White has:

a) 17 a4 is the second most popular choice in my database when Black has:

a1) In the famous game, P.Leko-E.Ghaem Maghami, Yerevan 2001, 17 ... b4 was
played and even though 18 Rab1 led to a convincing victory for the Hungarian no.1, I
believe 18 Qb6!, with the idea of taking on g7 and Nd6+ is even more convincing. For
example, 18 ... Bxe4 loses to 19 Qxb8+ Rd8 20 Bb5+! axb5 21 Qxb5+ Rd7 22 Rad1 Bd5
23 Rxd5! exd5 24 Re1+.
a2) 17 ... Qb4! is an effective retort. After 18 c4 (nothing else makes sense as White
has to attack; 18 Nfg5 Bxe4 19 Nxe4 Qd4 would force the exchange of queens) 18 ...
Bxe4 19 Qxe4 Black has a further choice:
a21) 19 ... gxf6!? has only been played once, but appears reasonable. It was omitted
from Experts vs the Sicilian, but the author of the relevant part of that monograph had to
face it soon enough: 20 axb5 and now in T.Luther-S.Bromberger, Austrian League 2006, I
like the untried 20 ... Qc5+ 21 Kh1 Bg7!, which seems to give Black good play. Instead,
20 Qf4 is complicated: for example, 20 ... Qd6 21 Qxf6 Rg8 22 Rad1 Qc5+ 23 Kh1 Qe3!
24 Rde1 b4 25 Bd1 Qh6 (the only square to hold the e6-pawn) 26 Qxh6 Bxh6 27 Ne5 Re7
28 Bh5 Rg5 when Black is a little better, but probably not enough to have realistic
winning chances. This certainly suggests that there is no need to venture into the
complications after 19 ... Qc5.
a22) 19 ... Qc5+ 20 Kh1 b4! 21 Qf4 reaches an important tabiya. Black has managed
to close up the queenside and has some control over some nice dark squares, but White
has some concrete tactical chances that cannot be underestimated:

a221) 21 ... Nc6 22 Rad1 Qf5 23 Qg3! gives White very good play. The exchange of
Black’s d7-rook will allow White to infiltrate on the queenside at some point.
a222) 21 ... Bd6 22 fxg7 Rg8 23 Qh6 was played in A.Rodriguez Cespedes-M.Stangl,
Biel 1988. Here Richard Palliser pointed out the logical novelty 23 ... Qf5, “covering h7
and preparing ... Bf4 and ... Qg6”. White can still press a little though: for example, 24
c5! Bf4 (24 ... Bxc5? loses to 25 Rac1 Be7 26 Rc8+ Rd8 27 Rxd8+ Bxd8 28 Nd4 Qg5 29
Qxg5 Bxg5 30 Bh5) 25 Qh4 Rxg7 26 Rab1 Qc2 27 Rfe1 Qf5 28 Rxb4 Bc7 29 Qc4 Nc6 30
Rbb1 Nd4 31 c6 Rd8 32 Rb7 Qa5 33 Rf1! and White will press all the way.
a223) 21 ... Qa7 22 Ne5 Rd4 23 Qf3 also looks very good for White.
a224) Palliser mentioned that 21 ... Qc7! is “maybe the only move that stands up to
scrutiny”. I see no reason to disagree with his assessment as the alternatives are clearly
inferior, as we’ve seen. After 22 Ne5 g6 23 Qe4! (White has to continue attacking; the
greedy 23 Nxd7 Qxf4 24 Rxf4 Kxd7 25 c5 a5 26 Bb5+ Kc7 gives Black good compensation
for the exchange – White has a couple of weak pawns that are prime for plucking and the
passed b-pawn will be a force to reckon with as the game goes on) 23 ... Rd8 (beefing up
the e6-pawn with 23 ... Rd6 and the crazy-looking 23 ... Bc5!? are possible alternatives
and might be worth a look)
24 Bg4 Black must be careful:

a2241) A then promising junior essayed 24 ... Bc5? in K.Maslak-N.Grandelius,

Pardubice 2008, where White missed 25 Bxe6! 0-0 (25 ... fxe6? 26 f7+ Kf8 27 Qf4 is
crushing) 26 Nxg6 fxe6 27 Nxf8 Bxf8 28 f7+ Kh8 29 Rad1 Rxd1 30 Rxd1 Nc6 31 Qxe6 with
a big plus. Black has to watch out for all these tactics pertaining to the light-squared
pawns surrounding his king.
a2242) Palliser pointed 24 ... Nd7 25 Nxd7 Rxd7 26 Rad1 Bd6 27 c5! Bxc5 28 Qa8+
Qd8 29 Qc6 Qc7 30 Bf3 which wins by force.
a2243) 24 ... Bd6! is the only move that isn’t immediately losing. After 25 Nxf7! Kxf7
(25 ... Qxf7 loses to 26 Bxe6 Qc7 27 Rae1 Kf8 28 Bd5!, threatening Qh4 followed by Re7
at some stage) 26 Bxe6+ Kf8 27 Rae1 Nd7! (Black has to play really accurately as there
are pitfalls waiting at every juncture: for example, the line-clearing sacrifice 27 ... Nc6 28
c5! Bxc5 29 Ba2! is extremely strong) 28 Bxd7 (28 Qe3 should be met with 28 ... h6! 29
Bxd7 Qxd7 30 c5 Qa7! when it seems like White has nothing, rather than 28 ... h5 29
Bxd7 Qxd7 30 c5 and then 30 ... Qa7 31 Qg5! or 30 ... Bc7 31 Qe7+) 28 ... Qxd7 29 Rd1
Qc7 30 Qd4! Rb8! (30 ... Kf7? 31 Qd5+ Kf8 32 c5 is another sneaky trick) 31 Qxd6+ Qxd6
32 Rxd6 Kf7 33 Rxa6 Ra8 34 Rd6 Rhd8 Black has finally reached a drawish rook endgame.
 Personally I don’t see the point of suffering at length and navigating through all these
land-mines just to obtain a draw at best. For this reason, I recommend readers to take a
closer look at 19 ... gxf6 which seems like a simpler way to equalize, while obtaining
some chances to play for a win. The options available at Black’s 23rd move also deserve
attention.
b) After spending considerable time on this variation, I believe 17 Rab1! is best:

b1) 17 ... Qxc2 was recently played in a handful of games, but Black seems to be
more at risk here than after capturing the other pawn: 18 Nfg5 Qc7 (the only move; both
18 ... h6? 19 Rbc1 Qxa2 20 Nxf7! Rxf7 21 Bh5, M.Van Delft-R.Rietveld, Dieren 2010, and
18 ... g6? 19 Rbc1 Qa4 20 Nxe6 fxe6 21 f7+ Kd8 22 Qg5+ Re7 23 Qe5, P.Negi-
E.Hermansson, Malmo 2007, led to quick wins for White) 19 a4! (19 fxg7 Bxg7 20 Nf6+
Bxf6 21 Rxf6 Bd5 22 Bh5 looks dangerous for Black, but the leading Dutch GM extricated
himself with an accurate sequence of moves: 22 ... Qa7 23 Qxa7 Rxa7 24 Bxf7+ Ke7 25
Rbf1 Nd7 26 Rh6 Nc5 27 Bxe6 Bxe6 28 Nxe6 Nxe6 29 Re1 Kf7 30 Rexe6 Kg7 with an
equal endgame in D.Solak-L.Van Wely, Porto Carras 2011) 19 ... b4 (19 ... Qe5 was
played in J.Zawadzka-N.Grandelius, Olomouc 2007, and for some reason White didn’t play
20 axb5, which just seems to be winning: 20 ... a5 21 Rbc1 g6 22 Nf3 Qxe4 23 Rc8+ Rd8
24 Rxd8+ Kxd8 25 Qb6+ Ke8 26 Qc7!; meanwhile Chess Evolution gave the following
convincing line: 19 ... g6 20 axb5 a5 21 Nxe6! fxe6 22 Rbc1! Qe5 23 f7+ Ke7 24 Qa3+
Kd8 25 Qxa5+ Ke7 26 Nf6! and wins) 20 Rxb4! is a typical tactic in this line. The
possibility of fxg7 at every turn prevents Black from recapturing on b4. My preparation
continued 20 ... Nc6 21 Rb6! Nd4 22 a5, with a big advantage.
b2) 17 ... Qxa2 18 c4 (the only move in the database, but I wonder about the
objective merits of 18 Ne5!? when it’s not clear if the exchange sacrifice after 18 ... Qd5
19 Nxd7 Nxd7 20 Bf3 Qe5 is just enough for Black to hold the position) 18 ... Bxe4 19
fxg7 Bxg7 20 Qxe4 reaches another critical tabiya:

b21) One of the brightest Chinese prospects tested 20 ... h6, simply preventing any
Ng5 ideas. The game probably followed preparation after 21 Ne5 Bxe5 22 Qxe5 0-0 23
Rb2 Qa3 24 Rf3 Qa1+ 25 Rf1 Qa3 26 Rf3 Qa1+ 27 Bf1! Kh7. Now 28 Rf6 was played and
after 28 ... Rg8 29 Qf4 Rg6 30 Rxf7+ Rxf7 31 Qxf7+ Rg7 32 Qf2 Nc6 Black drew
comfortably enough in Gao Rui-Ma Qun, Ningbo 2011. 28 Rg3 is a possible improvement:
for instance, 28 ... f6 29 Qe4+ Kh8 30 Rf2! with a continuing attack.
b22) The solid move 20 ... Rd6 defends e6 and prepares ... Nd7, after castling of
course. After 21 Ng5 Rd4 White has:
b221) 22 Qb7? (the Indian prodigy loses his way in the chaos) 22 ... 0-0 23 Bd3? (the
decisive mistake; 23 Bh5 would have forced Black to find 23 ... Rf4! 24 Qc7 Rxf1+ 25 Rxf1
Qxc4 26 Bxf7+ Kh8 27 Qxc4 bxc4 28 Nxe6 Rc8, with good winning chances) 23 ... Qd2! 24
Rxf7 Qxg5 and Black won quickly in P.Negi-A.Shomoev, Moscow 2012.
b222) 22 Qe3!, as played in several correspondence games, is an obvious
improvement. Now 22 ... Qd2 (22 ... 0-0? 23 Nxf7! Rxf7 24 Qxe6 Bf6 25 Bh5 wins
material) 23 Qxd2 Rxd2 24 Bh5 Bd4+ 25 Kh1 Rf2 26 Nxe6 Bb6 27 cxb5 Rxf1+ 28 Rxf1
Kd7! 29 Ng5 axb5 30 Rxf7+ Kc6 31 Bf3+ Kc5 reduces Black’s disadvantage to the
minimum, but it is clear that White is the one playing for a win.
Before we return to 15 ... Qc7, I should briefly point out that the alternatives are
simply bad: 15 ... Rxd3? 16 Nxe5 Rd4 17 fxg7! Bxg7 18 Nxf7 0-0 19 Nfg5 Rxf1+ 20 Kxf1!
h6 21 c3 with an extra pawn for nothing, while 15 ... Qf4? 16 Qc3! is a devastating double
attack. White gains a serious advantage after 16 ... Qxe4 17 fxg7 Bxg7 18 Qxg7 Rf8 19
Bd3 Qe3+ 20 Kh1 f6 21 Qg4 Re7 22 a4!, M.Stanford-R.North, Vancouver 2001.

16 Qe3 Bb7
16 ... g6 has also been played. After 17 c4 b4 I like 18 Bd1!, which is a nice transfer to
a much better diagonal. White quickly gained an clear edge after 18 ... Bb7 19 Ba4 Bc6
20 Bxc6 Nxc6 21 Rad1 in T.Tenev-M.Scacco, correspondence 2004.
17 Nfg5
New, but harmless. I suspect Wang Hao had forgotten his theory. The alternatives:
a) 17 c4 is the main move and has been known to be the most challenging for some
time:
a1) As seen many times in the analysis above, Black often gets rid of the e4-knight
before it can do more damage, but here after 17 ... Bxe4 White gets a lot of play with 18
Qxe4 gxf6 19 cxb5 Qb6+ (19 ... axb5 20 Rac1 Qb7 21 Qxb7 Rxb7 22 Nd4 is also better for
White) 20 Kh1 axb5 21 a4!, with a nagging initiative in R.Vasquez-E.Arancibia Guzman,
Maipu 2003.
a2) 17 ... bxc4! (the most precise) 18 Rac1 (Palliser suggested 18 Nfg5!?, but I’m not
sure how White is supposed to proceed after 18 ... h6 as the logical follow-up 19 Nxf7
Rxf7 20 fxg7 Rxg7 21 Nf6+ Ke7 22 Bg4 Rxg4 23 Nxg4 Nd7 appears to work in Black’s
favour) 18 ... Bxe4 19 fxg7 (19 Qxe4 gxf6 20 Rxc4 Qb6+ 21 Kh1 Bg7 22 Rc8+ Ke7 23
Rxh8 Bxh8 24 Qxh7 Qxb2 25 Bc4 f5 was okay for Black in N.Kosintseva-V.Duschek, Biel
2010) 19 ... Bxg7 20 Qxe4 Qb7! 21 Qxc4 0-0 and Black seems absolutely fine here.
b) Looking through some correspondence games, I get the impression that White’s
best try at this juncture is the quiet 17 c3!?, which has not been played over the board as
yet.

White wants to open the queenside via the a2-a4 lever which would simultaneously
activate his queen’s rook: 17 ... Bxe4 (17 ... g6 18 a4 Qc6 19 Nfd2 followed by 20 Bf3 is
good for White) 18 fxg7 Bxg7 19 Qxe4 h6 (19 ... 0-0 20 Bd3 Qb6+ 21 Kh1 f5 22 Qe2
amounts to roughly the same thing) 20 a4 bxa4? (Black should quickly attempt to swap
queens with 20 ... Qb7 when White should continue 21 Qg4 0-0 22 Nd4, setting up 22 ...
b4 23 Nxe6 fxe6? 24 Rxf8+ Kxf8 25 Qxe6 when Black has no defence) 21 Rxa4 Qb6+ 22
Kh1 0-0 23 Bd3 f5 24 Qe2 and White converted his advantage smoothly in N.Kuosa-
T.Teimer, correspondence 2008.
c) 17 a4!? has never been played, but seems like another possible try. For example,
17 ... Bxe4 18 Qxe4 gxf6 19 axb5 Qb6+ 20 Kh1 axb5 21 Qh4 Be7 22 Qh6! with the
initiative.
17 ... h6 18 Qh3!
The knight sacrifices with 18 Nxe6? fxe6 19 Bh5+ Kd8 and 18 Nxf7? Rxf7 19 Bh5 g6!
20 Bxg6 Rg8 21 Bxf7+ Kxf7 22 Qf3 Rg6 23 Rae1 Nd7 are insufficient, as indicated by
Palliser.
18 ... g6 19 Bd3 Nc6
 20 Kh1
An ambitious attempt. White could have tried to force matters with 20 Nxf7 Kxf7 21
Ng5+ hxg5 22 Qxh8, but Black’s position is very solid after 22 ... Ne5! 23 Rae1 Bd5. This
position is probably dynamically balanced.
20 ... Ne5
I prefer 20 ... Nd4 21 Rad1 Nf5!, jamming up the kingside and making sure that there
won’t be any sacrifices on e6, f7 and g6 for the time being. It is also important that White
can hardly hope to dislodge the knight with g2-g4 in view of Black’s light-squared bishop.
White’s pieces look more offside than threatening and I prefer Black’s chances.
21 Rae1
21 Rad1 is safer.
21 ... Bb4!
Black is slowly taking over the initiative.
22 Re3
Palliser analysed the improbable 22 Nxf7!? Nxf7 23 c3 Ba5 24 Qxe6+ Kd8 25 Bc2 Bd5!
26 Qxa6 Qb6! with insufficient compensation for the piece.
22 ... Bd5 23 Be2 Nc4
 The American no.1 has successfully regrouped and achieved a promising position. If
White doesn’t have a killing blow in the centre or on the kingside, Black will simply pluck
all his queenside pawns.
24 Rd3 Qe5 25 a3 Ba5 26 Bg4!
Wang Hao has found the best way to complicate and it immediately pays dividends.
26 ... Nd6??
Nakamura, rather untypically, falls for a tactic after which there is no way back. The
time to cash in with 26 ... Nxb2! had arrived and despite White’s aggressive-looking
pieces, there is no way to prove sufficient compensation. For example, 27 Re3 Nc4 28
Re2 and now Palliser pointed out 28 ... Kd8! followed by ... Kc7 as the safest way to
untangle.
27 Rxd5! Qxd5 28 Bxe6!
A superb series of blows. White has just sacrificed the exchange and all three of his
remaining minor pieces are under attack, and yet it is Black who is going to lose material.
28 ... fxe6 29 f7+ Kd8?
29 ... Ke7! was Black’s only hope when 30 Qxh6! Rdd8 31 f8Q+ Rdxf8 32 Qg7+ Kd8
33 Rxf8+ Rxf8 34 Qxf8+ Kc7 would have given him some chances to hold the resulting
pawn-down ending.
30 Nxe6+ Kc8 31 f8Q+ Rxf8 32 Rxf8+ Bd8 33 Nxd6+ Kb8
33 ... Qxd6 is well met by 34 Rf1!.
34 Rf1 Rxd6 35 Nxd8 Qc4 36 Rg1 Rxd8 37 Qg3+ Kb7 38 Qxg6
 The dust has settled and White emerged with two extra pawns. At the very top level,
this simply means ‘1-0’.
38 ... Rd2 39 Qxh6 Rxc2 40 Qg7+ Kb6 41 b4 Qd3 42 Re1 Qe3 43 Qf6+ Kc7
44 Qf1 Rf2 45 Qg1 Qf4 46 h3 Qg3?! 47 Qh2 1-0
I apologise for the exhaustive (and exhausting) analysis, but it is clear to me that the
Polugaevsky is here to stay and will not be refuted for the time being. However, Black
has to remember some important moves, otherwise he may fall victim to some quick-fire
attack. In conclusion, the old line with 15 ... Qxb2 is probably best, after which 16 Qe3
Bb7 17 Rab1! gives the best chance for an advantage. Instead, after 15 ... Qc7 16 Qe3
Bb7 I prefer the hitherto untested 17 c3!? which I predict will become the main line in the
foreseeable future.

Game 16
M.Yilmaz-F.Keler
Turkish Team Championship 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nc6!?

 This surprising move burst into fashion when the French GM Maxime Vachier-Lagrave
scored an astonishing 3 out of 4 with it in 2009. The variation was subsequently coined
‘Maxime’s line’ in a couple of New in Chess Yearbook articles where the entire line was
placed under extreme scrutiny. It is attractive to some Najdorf exponents given that the
variations can be quite forcing and that the resulting positions may appear to be pretty
random where the better-prepared player can gain a serious advantage in practical play.
There are also a couple of tricks at Black’s disposal, as we shall soon see.
8 Nxc6
This is one of two critical moves in the ‘Maxime variation’, or MVL variation in short.
The immediate 8 e5 is the only serious alternative and is covered in Games 17 and 18.
Others:
a) The most important trick, as many have fallen into, can be seen after the natural 8
Qd2?!. This can be swiftly met with 8 ... h6! accompanied by a huge grin on your face.
The point is that White is forced to give up the bishop-pair by capturing on f6 in view of
the nasty tactic 9 Bh4? Nxe4!. I am embarrassed to say that I once fell for the same trick
in a similar position and I remember feeling completely stupid. Here harmless is 9 Bxf6
Qxf6, which I’ve always viewed as being quite a comfortable Rauzer for Black in view of
his bishop-pair. Following 10 Nf3 Bd7 (Black is normally advised to slowly and patiently
unravel in this line, but a very interesting alternative is 10 ... g5!? 11 g3 gxf4 12 gxf4
Ne5! 13 fxe5 Qxf3 14 Bg2 Qh5 15 exd6 Rg8, which was a much more ambitious handling
of the position in J.Todorovic-B.Tadic, Vrsac 2007) 11 0-0-0 Qd8 12 Bd3 Qc7 13 Rhf1 0-0-
0 14 g4 Be7 15 Kb1 Kb8 16 h4 Na5 Black was quite comfortable and very solid in
S.Barrientos-A.Abreu Delgado, Havana 2007.
b) 8 Qd3!? is an intriguing move, with plans to castle queenside quickly or, in some
lines, to swing the queen over to the kingside. Black can gain sufficient play with 8 ... h6
(or 8 ... Qb6, with the idea of 9 Bxf6 gxf6 10 Nb3 with a Rauzer-like position where its not
clear whether the queen’s position on d3 is an improvement) 9 Bh4 g5!? (9 ... Be7 10 0-0-
0 Nxd4 11 Qxd4 0-0 is also a perfectly viable option) 10 fxg5 Ng4 11 0-0-0 (this looks
natural and is most commonly played, but 11 Nxc6 bxc6 12 0-0-0 may be best; the
pressure on the d-pawn is rather oppressive and may induce Black to prematurely
advance it to the d5-square when White can make use of the open files to create some
damage in the centre) 11 ... Bd7 12 Nxc6 Bxc6 13 Qf3 (the idea of transferring the queen
to f6 appears to be a waste of time; 13 Be2 hxg5 14 Bg3 Ne5 15 Qd4 Qc7 looks best
when White may be very slightly better, but Black is not without chances and a typical
plan for him is to proceed with ... b5 and ... Rb8) 13 ... Ne5 14 Qf6 Ng6 15 Bg3 hxg5 16
Qd4 Qa5. Black was perfectly fine here and went on to win in A.Naiditsch-M.Vachier-
Lagrave, French Team Championship 2009.
8 ... bxc6 9 e5
This forces the next three to four moves. The typical 6 Bg5 Najdorf move 9 Qf3 does
not work so well here due to 9 ... Be7 10 0-0-0 d5 11 Qg3 0-0 when Black obtains a fair
amount of counterplay down the b-file.
9 ... h6
Not 9 ... dxe5? 10 Qxd8+ Kxd8 11 fxe5 h6 12 0-0-0+ Kc7 13 Bh4 g5 14 Bg3 Nd5 15
Ne4 with a substantial edge for White.
10 Bh4 g5

11 fxg5
Commonest. There is something to be said about the rare 11 Bf2!?, which can be
quite tricky, but Black appears to have solved his problems after a series of concrete
moves, beginning with 11 ... Nd5 12 Ne4 gxf4. Now:
a) 13 Nxd6+?! Bxd6 14 exd6 Qxd6 was just an extra pawn for Black in S.Reutsky-
V.Aveskulov, Kharkov 2005.
b) 13 exd6 Bg7! (13 ... Bxd6 14 Qh5! is still tricky for Black) 14 Bd4 e5 15 Bc5 0-0
seems very promising for Black despite the engine’s evaluation of ‘0.00’.
c) 13 Qh5! Qa5+ 14 c3 and then:
 c1) 14 ... Ne3? 15 Bh4! is extremely dangerous for Black. He continued 15 ... Nf5? in
V.Gashimov-L.Dominguez Perez, Havana 2007, which finished eventually in a draw, but
16 Nf6+ Kd8 17 exd6 Bxd6 18 Ne4+ Kc7 19 Nxd6 Qe5+ 20 Be2 Qxd6 21 Rd1 would have
yielded a healthy advantage for White; Black’s exposed king and the wide open centre
are the bishop-pair’s dreams. Instead, 15 ... Ra7! looks best, although White gains a
small material advantage after 16 exd6 Qxh5 17 Nf6+ Kd8 18 Nxh5+ Kd7 19 Bf6! Rg8 20
Bd4 Nc2+ 21 Kf2 Nxd4 22 Nf6+ Kxd6 23 Nxg8 when Black’s compensation is surely
insufficient for equality.
c2) 14 ... Rb8! (accurate stuff; quite often the best form of defence is to attack) 15
exd6 Bg7! 16 Bd3 0-0 17 0-0 f5! 18 Nd2 Rxb2! 19 Nc4 Qxc3 20 Nxb2 Qxb2 when Black’s
pawn mass on the e- and f-files clearly compensates for the very slight material deficit.
11 ... Nd5 12 Ne4
This is the overwhelming main move, but Richard Palliser pointed out on
ChessPublishing.com that Black has to react carefully after 12 Nxd5 exd5! (it seems
natural to capture towards the centre with 12 ... cxd5, but 13 Qh5! Qb6 14 Bd3! looks
very attractive for White) 13 Qh5 (Palliser also analysed 13 exd6 hxg5 14 Bg3 Bxd6 15
Qf3 Qe7+ 16 Be2, claiming a small edge for White in M.Hebden-D.Gormally, Port Erin
2001, but the black king is surprisingly safe after 16 ... g4! 17 Qd3 Bxg3+ 18 Qxg3 0-0
when the uncomfortable pin down the e-file most likely means that White has to force a
draw with 19 Qf4 Re8 20 0-0-0 Qxe2 21 Qg5+ Kf8 22 Qh6+ Kg8 23 Qg5+ and so on) 13
... Qb6 14 Be2 Bf5! when the point of recapturing with the e-pawn is evident.
12 ... Qb6
 This position is the main starting point of the theoretical discussion and a huge
battleground for theoreticians and players alike. Instead, 12 ... dxe5?! is solid but passive
and White gets a small but stable edge with the simple 13 Nf6+ Nxf6 14 Qxd8+ Kxd8 15
gxf6 due to his superior pawn structure.
13 c3!
This has become established as White’s main try for an advantage. 13 Bd3 used to be
the main move, but Black has found some concrete equalizers after 13 ... hxg5:
a) Palliser correctly pointed out that after 14 Bg3, 14 ... Nf4! 15 Bxf4 (15 Nxd6+?! is
inaccurate due to 15 ... Bxd6 16 Bxf4 Bb4+! 17 c3 gxf4 18 cxb4 Qxb4+ 19 Qd2 Rb8 when
Black is slightly for choice) 15 ... gxf4, as played in U.Atakisi-A.Kovchan, Kharkiv 2006, is
a fine rejoinder. In fact, after 16 Nxd6+ Bxd6 17 exd6 e5! 18 Qf3 Rb8! Black had seized
the initiative and quickly won after White blundered with 19 Bc4? (Palliser suggested 19
Rd1!?, although after 19 ... Qxb2 20 Qxc6+ Bd7 21 Qe4 Qc3+ 22 Kf1 Kf8! Black retains a
pleasant position) 19 ... Qxb2.
b) 14 Bxg5 Qxb2 15 c4 (15 Nf6+ leads to a curious draw after 15 ... Nxf6 16 Bxf6
Qc3+! – an important check to prevent castling – 17 Kf1 Rh6 18 Rb1 dxe5 19 Bg5 Rh8 20
Bf6 Rh6 with a repetition in P.Marczell-R.Hiltunen, correspondence 2003; here 19 Qf3 is a
move, although Black should still be okay after 19 ... Qc5! 20 Re1 Qd5, more or less
forcing the exchange of queens, or even 19 ... e4!? 20 Bxc3 exf3 21 gxf3 a5) 15 ... Be7!
(an unexpected resource that forces a draw immediately) 16 Bxe7 Ne3 17 Qc1 Nxg2+ 18
Kd1 Ne3+.
 Now 19 Ke1 Ng2+ 20 Kd1 Ne3+ 21 Ke1 was agreed drawn in Y.Quesada Perez-
L.Dominguez Perez, Havana 2012. White could opt for some additional fireworks with 19
Qxe3 Qxa1+ 20 Kd2 Qxh1, although this should still lead to a draw after precise play: 21
Bxd6 Rxh2+ 22 Be2 Qb1! 23 Nf6+ Kd8 24 Qd4 c5! 25 Bxc5+ Kc7 26 Qd6+ Kb7 27 Qe7+
and Black cannot escape the checks.
13 ... Qe3+!?
This is the latest fashion, although there are certainly important alternatives to
investigate at this juncture:
a) I should state that 13 ... dxe5? is now considered to be more or less refuted due to
the concrete 14 g6! with White scoring an astonishing 97% in games played between
engines:

a1) Exchanging the queens with 14 ... Qe3+ now is less desirable due to 15 Qe2 fxg6
(Bekker and Goudriaan gave 15 ... Qxe2+ 16 Bxe2 fxg6 17 0-0-0! Be7 18 Bxe7 Kxe7 19
Bf3 as better for White in New in Chess Yearbooks 98 and 99, a conclusion that I see no
reason to dispute in view of the fact that White will restore material parity shortly by
going after the e5-pawn, after which he has the much better structure; it is worth noting
that keeping the knights on certainly gives White more resources as he can target the
weaknesses in Black’s camp more easily) 16 Nf6+ Kf7 17 Ng4! Qxe2+ 18 Bxe2 (these
endgames are always a little better for White, again due to the superior pawn structure)
18 ... Bg7 19 0-0+ Kg8 (or 19 ... Nf4 20 g3 g5 21 gxf4 exf4? 22 Bf2 e5 23 Bc5 e4 24 Rad1
Be6 25 Nf2 Rhb8 26 Rd6 and White eventually won smoothly in S.Azarov-M.Yilmaz, Rijeka
2010; Black’s 21st was a piece sacrifice likely borne out of desperation and the
alternative 21 ... gxh4 22 Nxe5+ Bxe5 23 fxe5+ Ke7 24 Rf6 doesn’t inspire confidence
either), and here instead of 20 Bd3, which was played in H.Ziska-M.Burrows, Reykjavik
2011, 20 Bf6!? with the idea of 20 ... Bxf6 21 Nxf6+ Kg7 22 Ng4 e4 23 c4 Nb4 24 Ne5 Ra7
25 Rf4 Rf8 26 Rxe4 again assures White of a comfortable edge.
a2) 14 ... fxg6 and now the novelty 15 Bf2! is the big move here.

The point is that after 15 ... Qxb2 (if 15 ... c5 16 Qc2 Bb7 17 b4! or the safer 17 0-0-0,
which are both pleasant for White) 16 Rb1 Qxa2 (16 ... Qa3 17 Qg4! Rg8 18 Bc4 followed
by castling gives White a terrific initiative; my analysis continues with 18 ... Be7 19 0-0 h5
20 Qg3 Qa4? 21 Qxe5!! Qxc4 22 Nd6+ Bxd6 23 Qxd6 Rf8 24 Bc5 Rf5 25 Rbd1! and Black
has no defence, or here 20 ... Nf4 21 Bd4!) 17 Bd3 White’s position is a much improved
version of the traditional Poisoned Pawn lines with 10 f5, as he is better developed and
has clearer attacking plans. After 17 ... Be7 18 0-0 Black might try:
a21) 18 ... 0-0 19 Ra1! (it’s important to push the queen to a less active square; after
19 Qg4 Nf4! the queen has an escape square on d5) 19 ... Qb2 20 Qg4 Nf4 21 Rfb1 wins
material.
a22) Retreating the queen to a safer square with 18 ... Qa5 allows a beautiful tactical
resource: 19 Qg4 Rg8 (19 ... Nf4 20 Bb6! followed by sacrificing on f4 doesn’t help
matters) 20 Rb7!! Bxb7 (if Black doesn’t take the rook and plays a non-move such as 20
... Qa3?, White eliminates the dark-squared bishop with devastating effect: 21 Rxe7+!!
Qxe7 22 Bc5 and White’s attack is just too strong) 21 Qxe6 Kd8 22 Qxg8+ Kd7 23 Qg7
and White has a winning attack.
a23) 18 ... h5 (this is ugly, but Black has to prevent Qg4) 19 c4 Nf4 20 g3 when White
wins a piece by force as the f4-knight has nowhere to go and 20 ... Nxd3 21 Qxd3 Qa3 22
Nd6+! Qxd6 23 Qxg6+ Kd7 24 Rfd1 is game over.
b) For the same reason, 13 ... Qxb2? 14 Rb1 Qxa2 15 g6! fxg6 16 Bf2! is virtually a
refutation (there is also nothing wrong with Kuzmin’s refutation starting with 16 Bd3 Nf4
17 Nf6+ Kf7 18 Bxg6+!! Kxg6 19 Qg4+ Kf7 20 0-0 Qxg2+ 21 Qxg2 Nxg2 22 Kxg2 when
Black is more or less busted), as 16 ... dxe5 (more or less forced, as moves like 16 ... Qa5
are again met by the natural 17 Qg4 Rg8 18 Bd3) 17 Bd3 will transpose to ‘a’. There is
more than one route to Rome here.
c) 13 ... Rb8!? is a rare but interesting option and was notably the choice of Bekker,
who was one of the key contributors to this variation in the aforementioned New in Chess
Yearbook articles.

Here I propose 14 Qd3!? (Black obtained the upper hand easily after 14 Qd2? Qxb2 15
Rd1 Qxd2+ 16 Rxd2 dxe5 in T.Burg-S.Bekker, Utrecht 2012) 14 ... dxe5 (or 14 ... Qxb2 15
Rd1 Be7 16 Bg3!) 15 g6! fxg6 16 Bf6 Nxf6 17 Nxf6+ Ke7 18 Ne4 with a strong initiative.
d) I should also add that White obtains a significant edge after 13 ... hxg5? 14 Bxg5
Rg8 15 Qh5 Qxb2 16 Rd1 dxe5 17 Rxd5! Qb1+ 18 Rd1 Qxe4+ 19 Be2 Be7 20 Rf1 Rf8 21
Bh6! gaining material.
14 Qe2 Qxe2+ 15 Bxe2 dxe5
Not 15 ... hxg5? 16 Bxg5 dxe5 17 Nf6+ Nxf6 18 Bxf6 Rg8 19 Bxe5 when White was
just a pawn up as ... Rxg2 was not really an option here in L.Videnova-S.Avagianos,
Rethymnon 2011.
 16 Nf6+
This proves to be good enough for a slight endgame edge, although Black, despite
being outrated by over 300 rating points, eventually managed to hold.
Instead, 16 0-0?! hxg5 17 Bxg5 f5! was already good for Black in V.Jacko-
M.Janczarski, Frydek Mistek 2011. However, 16 g6! is a key improvement: 16 ... fxg6
(Black is living precariously after 16 ... f5? 17 Nf6+ Nxf6 18 Bxf6 Rg8 19 0-0-0) 17 0-0-0
Be7 18 Bxe7 Kxe7 19 Bf3, which transposes to ‘a1’ in the notes to Black’s 13th move.
16 ... Nxf6 17 gxf6 Bb7 18 Bf3
18 Rd1!? Rg8 19 0-0 with the remarkable computer-assisted idea of 19 ... c5 20 Rf3!!
Bxf3? 21 Bxf3 Rc8 22 Bb7 Rc7 23 Bxa6 may be another important improvement.
18 ... 0-0-0 19 Bg3 c5 20 Bxb7+ Kxb7 21 Bxe5
I’ll end the game at this stage as the rest of it is not too relevant for our theoretical
discussion. White is a pawn up, but Black is a lot more active than he was and drew
comfortably. For now, 13 c3 appears to be the acid test of the MVL variation and black
exponents have to find some critical improvements to revive the entire variation.

Game 17
J.P.Le Roux-M.Vachier Lagrave
French Championship, Nimes 2009

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nc6 8 e5

This is the key alternative to 8 Nxc6 and was recommended in Experts vs the Sicilian.
 8 ... h6
Forcing the dark-squared bishop to a less active square is important. The bishop can
move to a more active square after the inaccurate 8 ... dxe5?! 9 Nxc6 Qxd1+ 10 Rxd1
bxc6 11 fxe5 Nd5 12 Ne4 h6 13 Bd2! when the bishop will go to c3 in the near future.
9 Bh4 dxe5
This is known to lead to a staid endgame with little winning prospects for Black,
although surprisingly Vachier-Lagrave chose this variation against a much lower-rated
player. Possibly he may have felt that the position is not so simple and contains sufficient
resources to play for a win.
Instead, 9 ... g5!? is examined in the next game, while Tony Kosten once
recommended 9 ... Nxd4 in his Easy Guide to the Najdorf, but it has been long established
that Black still has some serious work ahead to equalize after 10 Qxd4 dxe5 11 Qxd8+
Kxd8 12 0-0-0+ Kc7 13 fxe5 g5 14 Bg3 Nh5 15 Bf2, with a simple edge for White.
10 Nxc6 Qxd1+ 11 Rxd1 bxc6 12 fxe5
 12 ... Nd7!?
This is the latest fashion set by Mr. MVL himself, although the surprise is wearing off
quick and fast and White is finding different ways to fight for an advantage here. I think
the reason why strong players are willing to enter this endgame as Black is that although
White has a theoretical edge, the unbalanced nature of this position allows sufficient
scope for the stronger player to outplay his opponent. Particularly, White may easily lose
his e5-pawn if he is not careful and Black can often generate quick counterplay with
moves like ... c5, ... Bb7 and ... Rb8. Certainly, a degree of precision is required from
White’s perspective or he can easily end up worse, as we shall soon see.
12 ... Nd5 has been established as leading to a relatively solid but prospectless
endgame for Black, which is why this is very seldom seen in grandmaster praxis. After 13
Ne4 (practically the only move that has been played, but there is some sense in the
untried 13 Na4!?, with the idea of 13 ... Rb8 14 c4! – the point of 13 Na4; the d5-knight
has nowhere useful to go – 14 ... Bb4+ 15 Ke2! Nf4+ 16 Ke3 g5 17 Bg3 Ng6 18 Bd3
followed by Be4 which looks good for White; likewise, 13 ... Be7 14 Bf2 Rb8 15 Bc4 Bg5
16 g3! is slightly better for White) Black has:
 a) After 13 ... Be7 White should follow a game between two top players, who at the
point of this game were at different stages in their career: 14 Bf2!? Rb8 15 Bd4 Nb4 (15
... c5!? improves, although White is still slightly for choice after 16 Nxc5 Bxc5 17 Bxc5
Rxb2 18 Bd3 Rxa2 19 0-0 with good compensation for the pawn) 16 Rd2 Nxa2 17 c3 Nc1
18 Bc4 (18 Ba7! is a typical machine suggestion and one which is perfectly justified since
18 ... Ra8 19 Be3 Nb3 20 Nd6+ Bxd6 21 Rxd6 is basically a dream position for the bishop-
pair despite the pawn deficit) 18 ... Nb3 19 Bxb3 Rxb3 20 Bc5 with good compensation for
the pawn, but probably not enough to claim an edge in L.Ljubojevic-V.Ivanchuk, Tilburg
1989.
b) 13 ... Bd7 was played in M.Seps-V.Papadopoulou, Dresden 2004, and here White
can gain a substantial edge with the direct 14 c4! Nf4 15 Nd6+ Bxd6 16 Rxd6 Ng6 17 Bg3
h5 (17 ... f6 18 exf6 gxf6 19 Be2 is also good for White) 18 h4.
c) 13 ... Rb8 leads to further divide:
c1) 14 Bc4? is not the most logical move, at least to me, given that White often tries
to dislodge the d5-knight with c2-c4. More importantly, it is amazingly hard to trap the
impish black rook if it simply captures with 14 ... Rxb2!. For example, 15 Bb3 Bb4+ 16
Ke2 0-0 17 Bf2 f5! 18 exf6 e5! (opening up the position to great effect) 19 Kf3 Kh7 20 g4
Nxf6 21 Nxf6+ Rxf6+ 22 Kg3 c5 and Black eventually won in P.Zvara-D.Navara, Czech
League 2010.
c2) The immediate 14 c4?! can be met with a surprisingly effective piece sacrifice: 14
... Rxb2! 15 cxd5 (Black emerged two pawns up after 15 Nd6+? Bxd6 16 exd6 Ne3 17 Rd2
Rxd2 18 Kxd2 Nf5 in G.Mittermayr-S.Janovsky, Werfen 1994) 15 ... Bb4+ 16 Nd2 exd5, as
played in E.Rodrigues-T.Asanov, Grenoble 2006. Black has two pawns for the piece, is on
the verge of winning a third and has a rampant pair of bishops working in his favour.
c3) 14 b3 is the strongest and also the most natural move. Incidentally, this was also
played in the most high-profile game in this variation:
 c31) 14 ... Bb4+ is tricky and here 15 c3! is best. Instead, after 15 Kf2 0-0 16 Be2, as
in M.Kreuzholz-F.Lipinsky, German League 2003, Black can play 16 ... f6 with fine
counterplay. After 15 c3, play can continue 15 ... g5 (not 15 ... Nxc3?? 16 Rd8# of course)
16 Bxg5 Bxc3+ 17 Nxc3 hxg5 18 Ne4 g4 19 h4 gxh3 20 Rxh3 Rxh3 21 gxh3 when White is
certainly slightly better, but it will be hard to break Black down as he is extremely solid
and the d5-knight can no longer be dislodged. Still, the passed h-pawn should provide
White with some winning chances.
c32) White scores well after 14 ... g5?! 15 Bg3 Bb4+ 16 Kf2 h5 (or 16 ... 0-0?, as in
R.Castellanos-S.Salas Romero, Ciudad Real 2004, and then 17 h4! f5 18 exf6 Nxf6 19
Nxf6+ Rxf6+ 20 Ke3 Bc5+ 21 Ke4! Rb4+ 22 Bc4 with a big edge) 17 h4 g4 18 Bc4 Ke7 19
Rd3! and by now he was clearly better in K.Spraggett-J.Montell Lorenzo, Tarragona 2006.
c33) 14 ... Be7 has been the most common defence:
c331) 15 Nd6+?! Bxd6 16 exd6 Ne3! 17 Rd2 Nxf1 18 Rxf1 f6 followed by ... e5 and ...
Be6 should be easily defensible for Black.
c332) The stem game of the variation continued 15 Bg3 0-0 16 Be2 (16 c4 Bb4+ 17
Ke2 Ne7 18 Kf2 c5 19 Be2 Bb7 20 Bf3 Rfd8 was similarly fine for Black in E.Janosi-
M.Mueller Alves, correspondence 2008) 16 ... a5 17 c4 Nb4 (17 ... Ne3 18 Rd3 Nc2+! 19
Kf2 a4 20 Rd2 axb3 21 axb3 Nb4 22 Ra1 Na6 and 17 ... Bb4+ 18 Kf2 Ne7 19 Rd3 a4 both
look fine for Black) 18 Rd2 Rd8 19 Rf1! Rxd2 20 Kxd2 Na6? (Black fell into considerable
difficulties after this careless slip; 20 ... c5 improves when the sharp tactical line 21 Nd6
Nxa2 22 Rxf7 Bxd6 23 exd6 Kxf7 24 d7 Bxd7 25 Bxb8 Bc6 26 g3 Nb4 27 Ba7 Na6 28 Bb6
Ke7 29 Bxa5 Kd6 may be defensible for Black) 21 Bh5! g6 22 Bf3 Bb7 23 Kc3 Rd8 24 Nd6
Ba8 25 a3 f5 26 b4 g5 and now in M.Adams-V.Anand, Linares 1997, 27 Bf2! with the idea
of 27 ... Bxd6 28 exd6 Rxd6 29 b5 Nb8 30 b6 would have been winning for White.
c333) I believe White’s best chance of obtaining an edge is 15 Bxe7 Kxe7 and in this
relatively unexplored position, I propose 16 Nc5!? with the following analysis: 16 ... a5 (or
16 ... f6 17 c4 Nb4 18 a3! Nc2+ 19 Kd2 Nd4 20 Kc3 fxe5 21 Re1 Kd6 22 b4 a5 23 Nd3
axb4+ 24 axb4 c5 25 Nxe5) 17 Rd2 Rd8 18 Be2 f6 19 0-0 Nc3 20 Rxd8 Kxd8 21 Bc4 Ke7
22 exf6+ gxf6 23 Rf3 Nxa2 24 Nxe6!. In both lines White should have decent winning
chances particularly due to his superior pawn structure, although the lack of pawns
certainly improves Black’s drawing chances.
We now return to Vachier-Lagrave’s 12 ... Nd7:

13 Ne4
Palliser pointed out that 13 Bg3?! is already an inaccuracy and Black gets fine
counterplay after 13 ... Rb8 14 b3 Bb4 (E.Alekseev-M.Vachier Lagrave, Biel 2009) 15 Rd3
c5 16 Re3 Bb7 followed by ... c4, ... 0-0 and ... Rfc8.
13 ... Bb7
A game of mine continued 13 ... g5?!, which weakens the dark squares far too much.
Black’s main idea was to surround the e5-pawn,, but the pawn is untouchable and after
14 Bg3 Bg7 15 Nd6+ Ke7 16 Nc4 a5 (16 ... c5? is too slow and allows White to
consolidate relatively quickly with 17 Be2 Bb7 18 0-0, with a big plus in K.Goh Wei Ming-
Ly Hong Nguyen, Queenstown 2008) 17 h4! Ba6 (or 17 ... a4 18 hxg5 hxg5 19 Rxh8 Bxh8
20 Be2 with a slight edge for White) 18 Nxa5 Rhc8 (18 ... Bb5 allows a forcing
continuation: 19 Bxb5 Rxa5 20 Bxc6 Nxe5 21 b4! Rxa2 22 Bxe5 Bxe5 23 Rd7+ Kf8 24 0-0
f5 25 c4 when Black will be hard pressed to defend against the connected passed pawns
and rampant rook on the seventh) 19 Bxa6 Rxa6 20 Nc4 Rxa2 21 hxg5 hxg5 22 Rh5!, as
given in Experts vs the Sicilian, White wins the pawn on g5 with a big plus.
14 Bg3
This is most often played, but White has generally not done too well as Black has very
easy play after it. I believe the computer gives an edge for White mainly due to the
presence of White’s bishop-pair, but a few moves down the road will show just how easy
Black’s play is. For that reason, I believe that the rarely played 14 Nd6+!? Bxd6 15 exd6
may be White’s best chance for an edge. After 15 ... c5 16 Bf2 Black can try:
 a) 16 ... Rc8 17 h4! (this idea of preparing a future rook lift was suggested by my
good friend Junior Tay during a joint analysis session) 17 ... Nf6 (or 17 ... c4 18 Rh3 Bd5
19 Rg3 Rg8 20 Ra3 Nb8 21 Bb6 Kd7 22 Bc7 and White is pressing) 18 Rh3 Kd7 19 Rg3
Rhg8 20 Rb3 Bc6 21 Bxa6 Ra8 22 Bb7 Rab8 23 Bxc6+ Kxc6 24 Rxb8 Rxb8 25 b3 Rd8 26
a4 occurred in J.De Oliveira-R.Jankowicz, correspondence 2010. Objectively White has
good winning chances in the endgame and, indeed, he went on to convert his edge.
b) 16 ... h5!? preparing ... Rh6 and ... Rg6 to pressure the g2 pawn is logical. After 17
Rg1 Rh6 (or 17 ... h4 18 Be2 Rc8 19 Rd3) 18 Be3 Rg6 19 Kd2! Rg4 20 Kc1 White should
be better, although Black is certainly very active.
14 ... c5 15 Nd6+ Bxd6 16 Rxd6 Ke7
As explained earlier, White has obtained the bishop-pair, but his dark-squared bishop
is somewhat hemmed in by the weak e5-pawn. Added to the fact that White still has
some problems in developing his kingside, it should be clear that Black has sufficient play.
17 Kf2 Be4!
 A fine activation of Black’s light-squared bishop. Black has scored an astonishing ‘+3’
from this position, with no losses according to my database. I’ve analysed this position in
some detail here to illustrate the various plans.
18 Rd2
Practice has also seen:
a) 18 c4 Rhb8 19 Rd2 (a natural improvement; instead, 19 Ke3? Bb1! won a critical
pawn in F.Corrales Jimenez-Y.Quesada Perez, Ciego de Avila 2010, although the rating
favourite eventually scraped a draw) 19 ... Rb4! 20 Be2 a5 21 Re1 a4 22 a3 Rb3 23 Kg1
Rxg3! 24 hxg3 Nxe5 with fine compensation is a hypothetical variation that exemplifies
what Black should be playing for.
b) 18 Be2 Rhb8! 19 b3 Bxc2 20 Bf3 Ra7 21 Rc1 Bf5 22 Kg1 Rc8 23 h3 a5 24 Rc4 was
equal and agreed drawn in V.Yamaliev-A.Pavlov, correspondence 2009.
c) Initiating the exchange of the light-squared bishops with 18 Bd3 is positionally
illogical and Black is completely fine after 18 ... Bxd3 19 Rxd3 c4. For example, 20 Rd6 (or
20 Rd4 Rhc8 21 Rhd1 Nb6 22 b3 cxb3 23 cxb3 Rc2+ 24 R1d2 Rac8 and Black was slightly
better in M.Oleksienko-A.Kovchan, Poltava 2008) 20 ... Rhc8 21 Rhd1 Rc7 22 Kg1 a5! 23
h4 a4 24 h5 Rb8 25 Bh4+ f6 26 exf6+ gxf6 and Black had won a pawn in G.Oparin-
A.Kovchan, Dagomys 2009.
18 ... Rhd8 19 Be2 Nb6 20 Rhd1
 20 ... Na4!
Massaging the weak spots in White’s queenside. Defending the b- pawn is a
surprisingly awkward task.
21 Rxd8
Palliser gave the following variation as White’s best course of action: 21 c4 Rxd2 22
Rxd2 Rd8 23 Rxd8 Kxd8 24 b3 Nc3 25 a3 Bc2 26 b4 Bb3 27 bxc5 Nxe2 28 Kxe2 Bxc4+
with a likely draw, although this certainly doesn’t inspire confidence in White’s cause in
this line in general.
21 ... Rxd8 22 Rxd8 Kxd8
Black is slightly more comfortable in this endgame, although I suspect the result
should objectively be a draw. I give the rest of the game with some light comments and
Palliser’s excellent notes from ChessPublishing.com.
23 Ke1
Palliser suggested 23 b3!? Nc3 24 Ke3 Bxc2 25 Kd2 Nxe2 26 Kxe2 with good drawing
chances.
23 ... Kc7 24 Kd2 Nxb2 25 Bf2 Kc6!
Black’s knight is awkwardly placed after the routine 25 ... Kb6 26 Kc3 Na4+ 27 Kb3
Bc6 28 Bf3 when it is not easy to see how he can make progress.
 26 Kc3 Na4+ 27 Kb3 Nb6 28 Bxa6 Nd7 29 Bg3 Bxg2 30 a4 Kb6 31 Bd3 Nb8
32 Bb5 Nc6?!
This may be Houdini’s first choice, but allowing White to enter an opposite-coloured
bishop endgame is still pretty counterintuitive by any standards. Surely, 32 ... Bc6 ought
to be played.
33 Kc3?
Slightly baffling. 33 Bxc6! Kxc6 34 c4, as pointed out by Palliser, seems to be a
comfortable draw to me.
33 ... Nd4
Black is back in control and proceeded to win in fine style.
34 Bd3 Bc6 35 Bf2 Bxa4 36 Bxd4 cxd4+ 37 Kxd4 f5 38 exf6 gxf6 39 Bc4
Bd7 40 Be2 Kc6 41 Bh5 Kd6 0-1
Vachier-Lagrave’s 12 ... Nd7 appears to be holding up well and it looks like 14 Nd6+
may well be White’s best shot in this particular line.

Game 18
A.Shabalov-M.Paragua
Jakarta 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nc6 8 e5 h6 9

Bh4 g5!?
 This is the traditional main line and also the most dynamic option.
10 fxg5
Commonest by a mile:
a) 10 Bf2!? has only been played twice, but is a decent option to escape mainstream
theory. That said, Black should be fine here: for instance, after 10 ... dxe5 (10 ... Nd5!?
may be an easier equalizer: for example, 11 Nxd5 exd5 12 Bd3 gxf4 13 exd6 Bxd6 14 0-0
Rg8! 15 Nf5 Be5 16 Nxh6 Rg7 17 Nf5 Rg5 18 Nh4 Rg8 and Black has a satisfactory
position) 11 Nxc6 Qxd1+ 12 Rxd1 bxc6 13 fxe5 Ng4 14 Ne4! Nxf2 15 Kxf2 Bg7, as in
G.Guseinov-S.Soylu, Antalya 2004, both 16 Nf6+ Ke7 17 h4 Bxf6 18 exf6+ Kxf6 19 Rd6
Rb8 and 16 Nd6+ Ke7 17 Nc4 a5 18 a4 Ba6 19 Nb6 Rab8 are fine for Black.
b) The computer likes 10 Bg3!?, although this has not caught the eye of any
grandmasters recently. I found one game of a former world champion that continued 10
... dxe5 (10 ... Nd5 is the computer’s first choice, but after 11 Nxd5 exd5 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13
Qe2! dxe5 14 Qxe5+ Qe7 15 Qxe7+ Bxe7, as played in A.Slizhevsky-A.Kovchan, Sochi
2006, 16 Bd3 seems to secure a small but risk-free endgame advantage) 11 Nxc6 Qxd1+
12 Rxd1 bxc6 13 fxe5 Nd5 14 Ne4, which bears some resemblance to the positions that
arise after 9 ... dxe5. White had a comfortable edge here in V.Anand-V.Bologan, Geneva
(rapid) 1996.
10 ... Nd5 11 Nxd5 exd5
 12 exd6
Again this is the most natural and most common move, but 12 e6!? is an interesting
attempt to mix things up and I doubt many MVLV exponents will have studied this in
detail. Having said that, Black should be completely fine with a little bit of accuracy: 12 ...
Bxe6 (this is virtually forced: 12 ... Qe7 13 Nxc6! bxc6 14 Qd4 hxg5 15 Qxh8 gxh4 16 0-0-
0 and 12 ... fxe6 13 Nxc6 bxc6 14 Qh5+ Kd7 15 g6! are both good for White) 13 Nxc6
bxc6 14 Qd4 and here 14 ... Qa5+! seems best. For example, 15 b4 Qa3! (if 15 ... Qa4?
16 g6! c5 17 g7 Bxg7 18 Qxg7 Qxb4+ 19 Kd1 and Black has insufficient play for the
material) 16 Bd3 (16 g6! c5! 17 bxc5 dxc5 18 Qf6 Kd7! 19 Be2 Rg8! 20 gxf7 Rxg2 21 Rb1
was agreed drawn in A.Oleksak-E.Garus, correspondence 2012, in view of 21 ... Rb8!! 22
Rxb8 Qc1+ 23 Bd1 Qd2+ 24 Kf1 Rf2+!! 25 Qxf2 Bh3+ 26 Kg1 Qxd1+ 27 Qe1 Qd4+ 28
Bf2 Qg4+ 29 Bg3 Qd4+ with a picturesque perpetual check) 16 ... c5?! (this may not be
the most accurate and 16 ... hxg5!? 17 Qxh8 Qxb4+ 18 c3 Qxh4+ is an interesting
attempt to play for the win; certainly the endgame after 19 Qxh4 gxh4 is not worse for
Black) 17 bxc5 dxc5 18 Qxh8 Qb4+ 19 Kf1 (perhaps 19 Kd1 Qxh4 20 Rf1 is a better
attempt for White to play for an advantage) 19 ... Qxh4 20 Qe5 Bg7! 21 Qxg7 Qf4+ 22
Kg1 and the game was agreed drawn in J.Nunn-D.Gormally, Bunratty 1998.
12 ... Bxd6
12 ... hxg5!? has been very rarely seen as it appears that after 13 Qe2+ Kd7 14 Bf2
Black is taking unnecessary risks. Still, matters are not so clear here and after 14 ... Qa5+
15 c3 Bxd6 16 Nb3 (16 Qf3!?) 16 ... Qa4! 17 0-0-0 Kc7! 18 Rxd5 Bg4 19 Qd3 Rad8 20 Kb1
Be5! 21 Nc5 Qf4 22 Bg3 Qf5 23 Rxe5! Nxe5 24 Qxf5 Bxf5+ 25 Bd3! Rxd3! 26 Bxe5+ Kc6
27 Nxd3 Bxd3+ 28 Kc1 Rh6 the opposite-coloured bishop endgame should be quite
tenable for Black. If this is indeed the case, perhaps 12 ... hxg5 forces an immediate draw
given that I could not really find any significant improvements along the way.
13 Qe2+
13 Nxc6 bxc6 14 Qd4 is the other popular approach, but Black has established a clear
route to equality (14 Qd2!? is an attempt to keep things fresh): 14 ... Qe7+ 15 Be2 Be5
16 Qa4 Rb8! (16 ... Qd6?! 17 Bg3! Bd7 18 0-0-0 is very risky for Black) 17 g6 (not 17
Qxc6+? Bd7 18 Qxd5 hxg5 19 Bf2 Rh6! with magnificent counterplay) 17 ... Qb4+! 18
Qxb4 Rxb4 19 gxf7+ Kxf7 20 0-0+ Kg7 21 Bf2 Rf8! (this, a recommendation of Tony
Kosten’s, is a significant improvement that ensures equality; previously, 21 ... Rxb2 was
played when the position after 22 Bd3 is slightly better for White according to Thomas
Luther) 22 Bd3 Bxb2! 23 Rae1 Rbf4! 24 Bc5 Rxf1+ 25 Bxf1 Rf4 with a drawish position in
H.Packroff-E.Garus, correspondence 2009.
13 ... Kd7?!
The young Filipino Grandmaster is extremely well prepared in general, but this just
looks like a dubious innovation. Perhaps he simply mixed up his preparation. 13 ... Kf8! is
the main line in which Black’s position has proved to be extremely resilient.

After 14 0-0-0 (14 Nxc6 bxc6 15 0-0-0 hxg5 16 Bf2 Rb8 followed by ... Rh6-e6 is fine
for Black) we have:
a) 14 ... Nxd4 15 Rxd4 hxg5 16 Be1! Bf5 (Black’s king looks draughty after the greedy
16 ... Rxh2 17 Rxh2 Bxh2 18 g3 Bg1 19 Bb4+ Kg8 20 Be7 Qd7 21 Rd1 Qe6 22 Bxg5, while
16 ... Qc7 17 Bc3 Be6 18 Qe3 Qe7 19 g3 followed by an eventual Bg2 could be a little
something for White; perhaps, though, 16 ... Rh6!? is playable) 17 Qf2 Be5 18 Bc3! Be6
19 Bd3 Rc8 20 Re1 Qf6 21 Qe3 Rxc3 22 Qxe5 Qxe5 23 Rxe5 Rc6 24 h3 gives White a
nibble, although I suspect Black should hold this with best play.
b) 14 ... hxg5! is a reliable equalizer. After 15 Bf2 Qf6 16 Kb1 Be5 many moves have
been played:
b1) 17 c3 Bxd4 18 Bxd4 Nxd4 19 Rxd4 Bf5+ 20 Ka1 Re8 21 Qd1 Be4 22 Rd2 was very
comfortable for Black and was in fact agreed drawn here in D.Kokarev-M.Makarov,
Dagomys 2009.
b2) 17 Qd2 led to mass exchanges after 17 ... Nxd4 18 Bxd4 Bxd4 19 Qxd4 Qxd4 20
Rxd4 Be6 in S.Korosec-P.Kariz, correspondence 2000, where White had next to nothing.
c) 17 Qf3 Bxd4 18 Bxd4 Qxf3 19 gxf3 Nxd4 20 Rxd4 Be6 was a tiny bit better for Black
in D.Baramidze-L.Dominguez Perez, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007.
 d) Perhaps the untried 17 Nf3!? is White’s best chance for an edge. Here 17 ... Bg4
(17 ... Bxb2 18 Bc5+ Kg7 19 Rxd5 Bf5 20 Rd6 Qc3 21 Bd4+! Nxd4 22 Nxd4 is White’s key
idea, although Black remains very solid after 22 ... Qxd4! 23 Rxd4 Bxd4 24 Qf3 Be6) 18
h4! (18 Rxd5 Re8 is very unclear, although my instinct tells me that Black has sufficient
play for the pawn) 18 ... gxh4 19 Rxd5 gives White some chances for an edge.
14 0-0-0 hxg5

15 Bg3?
Giving Black a ticket out of hell. 15 Bf2 would have given him a bit of a headache: for
example, 15 ... Qf6 16 Kb1 Re8 17 Qd2 Qf4 18 Qxf4 Bxf4 19 h4! and Black still has
problems to solve.
15 ... Qf6 16 Nb3 Kc7 17 Bxd6+ Qxd6 18 g3 Be6
Black has comfortably developed and has fully equalized.
19 Bg2 Rad8 20 Kb1 Kb8 21 Ka1 g4 22 Nd4 Nxd4 23 Rxd4 Rh5 24 c4 Rdh8
25 Bxd5 Bxd5 26 cxd5 Rxd5 27 Rxd5 Qxd5 28 Rf1 f5 29 a3 Ka8 30 Qf2 ½-½
9 ... g5 looks reliable for Black in the main lines and perhaps the interesting 10 Bg3
may be the way to go.

The following game was played in a double-round-robin GM tournament where your

author was one of the participants. I prepared extensively with Erik Kislik, who is a close
friend of mine, both before and during the event, and we studied the key theoretical idea
which will be shown in this game. To my knowledge, the game was published on a
Hungarian chess site, but for some reason was not sent to The Week in Chess. As such,
you may not be able to find this game in your databases.

Game 19
E.Kislik-T.Antal
Kecskemet 2011
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qc7

This has been recommended by several books and is a sound alternative to the more
well-known lines in the 6 Bg5 complex. Incidentally, both Antal and his trainer, the well-
known Hungarian GM Attila Groszpeter (who was one of the GMs in the all-play-all), play
this line almost exclusively.
8 Qf3
The most aggressive option and the move most in the spirit of the 6 Bg5 Najdorf.
The positional 8 Bxf6 is a perfectly sensible option despite its lack of recent theoretical
development. After 8 ... gxf6 9 Qd2, 9 ... b5!? (instead of the traditional 9 ... Nc6)
appears to be gaining in popularity. A recent top-level game continued 10 a3 (Ivanchuk
once opted to castle short with 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 0-0 and scored an important win, although
this is probably more to the fact that the position was in the capable hands of the
mercurial Ukrainian; here, I like 11 ... Nd7 with the idea of ... Qb6, ... Rc8 and ... Nc5) 10
... Bb7 11 Be2 h5 12 0-0-0 Nd7 13 Kb1 Nb6?! (this seems unnecessarily risky; despite the
loosened queenside, I believe 13 ... 0-0-0, with the idea of 14 Rhf1 Kb8 15 Rf3 Nc5!, is
the way to go) 14 f5! e5 15 Nb3 Rc8 16 Nd5?! (16 Na5! Ba8 17 Rhe1 is pleasant for
White) 16 ... Bxd5 17 exd5 Bh6 18 Qd3 Nc4 19 Bf3 and here in S.Karjakin-V.Topalov,
Sandnes 2013, Black was perfectly fine and should have played the uncompromising 19 ...
a5!.
8 ... b5
 9 0-0-0
Both 9 Bxf6 gxf6 10 a3 and 9 f5 are analysed in our next game, which was played
three rounds before the current one.
9 ... b4
The first really independent approach. This disrupts White’s development as the c3-
knight does not have a good square to go to. Instead, 9 ... Bb7? is dubious as it leaves
the e6-pawn unmanned and White gains useful play with 10 Bxf6 gxf6 11 Qh5! when it’s
not easy for Black to react, but 9 ... Nbd7 transposes to the Gelfand variation which is
examined in Chapter Three.
10 e5!?
This move was not new, but the follow-up certainly was. There have been no recent
developments regarding the piece sacrifice 10 Nd5!?, which has been more or less
established as interesting but unsound: 10 ... exd5 11 Bxf6 gxf6 12 exd5 Qc5 (this is the
recommended antidote) 13 Qe4+ (13 Bd3 Kd8! is similar) 13 ... Kd8 14 Nb3 Qb6 15 Re1
Bd7 16 Bc4 Ra7 and Black held off the attack relatively easily in G.Euler-H.Degenhardt,
Giessen 1991.
10 ... Bb7
In an earlier game from the same tournament, Black, clearly surprised in the opening,
replied 10 ... dxe5??, which is just losing. Rather tragically, the owner of the white pieces
failed to find 11 Ndb5!, which would have been winning immediately: 11 ... Qb7 (11 ...
axb5 12 Qxa8 bxc3 13 Bxf6 gxf6 14 Bxb5+ is complete annihilation) 12 fxe5! axb5 13
exf6 (now the threat is 14 Rd8+!) 13 ... Qxf3 14 gxf3 g6 15 Nxb5 (White may be just a
pawn up, but Black cannot hope to survive against the onslaught, as shown by the
following sample continuation) 15 ... Na6 16 Bf4 Bd7 17 Bc4 Rc8? 18 Rxd7! Kxd7 19 Rd1+
Ke8 20 Nd6+ Bxd6 21 Bb5+ Kf8 22 Bxd6+ Kg8 23 Bxa6 is a rather vivid illustration of
what can happen.
Instead, 11 Qxa8?? was played and after 11 ... exd4 12 Rxd4? (12 Nb5 axb5 13 Bxf6
gxf6 14 Bxb5+ Ke7 15 Rxd4 is still complicated) 12 ... bxc3 13 Rc4 cxb2+ 14 Kb1 Bc5
Black was clearly better and went on to win quite easily in K.Goh Wei Ming-A.Groszpeter,
Kecskemet 2011. This was a really painful defeat and I virtually lost all hopes of a GM
norm after it.
11 Qh3!?
Attacking the e6-pawn with this move is a typical motif in the entire 6 Bg5 Najdorf
complex. Already Black has certain practical problems to solve as the position is very
sharp and non-standard, which is normally not what he is looking for with 7 ... Qc7.
The enterprising 11 Ncb5!? was the old main line and was once used successfully
against none other than Kasparov himself.

It had been established by various analysts that the piece sacrifice is virtually refuted,
but subsequent games seem to indicate otherwise. From my analysis, it appears that the
worst White can do is a draw though, of course, anything can happen in the utter chaos
that is about to appear on the board: 11 ... axb5 12 Bxb5+ (12 Nxb5 Qc8! 13 Qe2 Nd5
amounts to nothing) 12 ... Nbd7! (12 ... Nfd7? falls into a dangerous attack after 13 Nxe6!
fxe6 14 Qh3 Kf7 15 f5, as in Kr.Georgiev-G.Kasparov, La Valetta Olympiad 1980) 13 Qh3
(13 Nxe6? doesn’t work: 13 ... fxe6 14 Qh3 Kf7 15 exf6 Be4! defends quite comfortably)
13 ... b3!. This has been established as best for some time (13 ... Be7? loses to an
audacious queen sacrifice: 14 Bxf6! b3 15 Qxb3 Bd5 16 Bxe7! Bxb3 17 Bxd6 and despite
having only two pieces for the queen, White dominates the whole board).
 This disruptive pawn move is extremely typical in these Najdorf positions with
opposite castling. The possibility of mate on c2 forces White to take notice and take a
pause in his attacking intentions: 14 Qxb3 (after 14 exf6 bxa2 15 Kd2, the untried 15 ...
0-0-0!, sacrificing the exchange in return for plenty of activity, appears to be pretty
strong: for example, 16 fxg7 Bxg7 17 Bxd8 Qc5! 18 Qc3 Bxd4 19 Bxd7+ Kxd7 20 Qxc5
dxc5 21 c3 Bxg2 22 Rhe1 Rxd8 23 cxd4 cxd4 with an obvious edge for Black) 14 ... Bd5
(reinforcing the e6-pawn with tempo is the key idea behind the pawn sacrifice) 15 c4 Ne4
(15 ... dxe5 is also playable and leads to total chaos after 16 fxe5 Ne4 17 Bxd7+ Kxd7 18
Nb5 Qxe5 19 h4! when White is winning his piece back, but it is unclear whose king is the
more vulnerable and anything might happen here) 16 Rhe1 (Emms only gave 16 Qc2?!
when he correctly gave the position after 16 ... Bb7! as better for Black) 16 ... Nxg5 (16
... Bb7? was played in M.Yeo-I.Teran Alvarez, Campillos 2004, when Black won quickly
after managing to consolidate, but the ferocious 17 f5!! would have resulted in a brilliant
victory: for example, 17 ... Nxg5 18 fxe6 Nxe6 19 Nxe6 fxe6 20 exd6 and the two rooks
run riot down the central files) 17 fxg5.
 We’ve reached an important modern tabiya:
a) A couple of high-level correspondence games continued 17 ... 0-0-0 18 Nxe6! (18
Ba6+ Bb7 19 Nb5 Nc5 as played in S.Docx-L.Shytaj, Novi Sad 2009, is also terribly messy
but probably easier for Black to handle than the text; I propose 20 Qe3!? as a possible
avenue for further investigation) 18 ... fxe6 19 Rxd5! when the threat of Ba6 again forces
Black to play accurately:
a1) 19 ... Nc5? (this allows the persistent kamikaze rook to sacrifice itself again) 20
Rxc5! dxc5 21 Ba6+ Kd7 22 Qf3!.

This amazing quiet move was the point of White’s repeated attempts to sacrifice his
rook. Despite the extra material, Black’s pieces are not coordinated enough to hold off
White’s mounting initiative: 22 ... Ke7 (there is nothing else) 23 Rf1 Rd4 24 Bb5 Kd8 (24
... Qxe5? 25 Qf7+ Kd8 26 Qe8+ Kc7 27 Rf7+ forces mate in a few more moves) 25 Qa8+
Qc8 26 Qa5+ Qc7 27 Qa8+ Qc8 28 Qa3! (continuing to play for compensation in the form
of the much more active pieces; as Black cannot prevent perpetual at any point in time,
there is no real risk in adopting this approach) 28 ... Be7 29 Rf7 Bxg5+ 30 Kc2 Be7
(giving back a piece in the hope of alleviating the pressure, but there will be no respite)
31 Rxg7 (31 Qa5+ Qc7 32 Qxc7+ Kxc7 33 Rxe7+ Kc8 34 b4!? also looks like a decent
way to play for the win) 31 ... Rf8 32 Qa5+ Qc7 33 Qa8+ Qc8 34 Qa5+ Qc7 35 Qxc7+
Kxc7 36 Rxe7+ Kd8 37 Rxe6 Rf2+ 38 Kb3 Rxg2 39 Ka4! (White is three pawns to the
good, but decides to give up a couple of these to go after the critical c5-pawn) 39 ... Rxb2
40 Ka5 Kc7 (impressively 40 ... Rxa2+ 41 Kb6 threatens mate; White wins after 41 ... Kc8
42 Kxc5 Rd1 43 Kb6 Rxh2 44 c5) 41 a4 Rxh2 42 Ka6 and White won in a few more moves
in U.Stephan-Y.Dothan, correspondence 2001. A truly beautiful game.
a2) 19 ... Qa7!, guarding a6, seems to be the most accurate defence: 20 Rdd1 Nc5 21
Qe3 Qxa2?! (this is risky as White will always have the possibility of launching an attack
down the a-file; 21 ... d5!? with the idea of 22 b4 d4 23 Qf3 Qxa2 24 bxc5 Bxc5 25 Qc6+
Kb8 26 Qxc5 Qa1+ and forcing a draw is more sensible) 22 Kc2 Na4 (Black’s moves look
very unnatural) 23 Qd4 Nc5 24 Re3! Qa8 25 Qg4! with strong pressure on Black’s
position. White won quickly by playing Ra3 and b4 when Black could hardly hope to cope
with the onslaught in J.Claridge-W.Kund, correspondence 2006.
b) Returning the piece immediately with 17 ... Bxc4! is probably best: 18 exd6 Bxb3+
(18 ... Bxd6 forces a draw in a more straightforward manner: 19 Bxc4 Rc8 20 Kb1 Qxc4
21 Rc1 Qa6 22 Rxc8+ Qxc8 23 Rxe6+! fxe6 24 Qxe6+ Kf8 25 Qxd6+ Kg8 and Black could
not escape the perpetual in L.Hyldkrog-B.Bredenhof, correspondence 2007) 19 dxc7 Bxd1
20 Rxd1. Taking stock, White has only two pawns for the rook, but the powerful passer on
c7 coupled with his more active pieces is sufficient to ensure a rough equilibrium.
Typically Black will sacrifice a piece to get out of the bind and it is easier for White to go
wrong as he has to constantly make sure that Black doesn’t get his pieces into play.

A high-level encounter continued 20 ... Bd6 21 Nxe6 Ke7 22 Nd4! Bf4+ 23 Kb1 Nb6 24
Nc6+! Ke6 25 Nd8+! Ke7 (this was forced; 25 ... Kf5 loses material to 26 Rf1!, with the
obvious threat of g3) 26 Nc6+ Ke6 27 Nd8+ ½-½, K.Miton-M.Vachier Lagrave, Dresden
Olympiad 2008. Instead, 22 Nxg7?! runs the risk of losing control as can be seen in the
following encounter: 22 ... Bf4+ 23 Kb1 Nb6 24 Nf5+ Ke6 25 Nd4+ Kd6! (25 ... Ke5 loses
in a study-like manner: 26 g3! Bxg5 27 Nf3+ Kf5 28 Rd6 Be3 29 Bd3+ Kg4 30 Ne5+ Kh3
31 Bf5+ Kg2 32 Be4+ Kh3 33 Bxa8 Rxa8 34 Nc4! Nc8 35 Rd8 and White should win) 26
g3! (exploiting the awkward placement of Black’s dark-squared bishop; it is quite amazing
how White can keep on conjuring up play even though he is a rook down) 26 ... Bxg5 (the
endgame after 26 ... Be5?! 27 Nc6+! Kc5 28 a4! Nxa4 29 Bxa4 Bxc7 is probably easier for
White to play) 27 Nf3+ Kc5 28 a4 f6 29 Rd4?! (29 Nd4!) 29 ... Nc8 30 Rc4+ Kb6 31 Rc6+
Kb7 32 Nd4 Be3 33 Ne6 Na7 whereupon Black eventually extricated himself and won in
P.Darini-Zhao, Mashhad 2011.
Miton-Vachier Lagrave appears to be the last word in the 11 Ncb5 line, but I won’t be
surprised if more games, especially correspondence ones, surface in due time. With
apologies for the huge digression, we now return to our discussion of 11 Qh3.

11 ... dxe5
Forced and best:
a) 11 ... bxc3 seems tempting, but the following concrete and forcing variation
demonstrates a pleasant edge for White: 12 exf6 cxb2+ 13 Kxb2 Be4! (attacking c2 and
hence indirectly defending e6 since the powerful knight on d4 cannot go anywhere
without losing the pawn; 13 ... Qb6+ 14 Ka1 leads to nothing for Black and he will still
have to solve the problem of the weak e6-pawn) 14 Ka1! (getting out of harm’s way and
preparing to unleash the h1-rook by means of Bd3) 14 ... Qc8 15 f5 e5 16 Bd3 and with
the remaining White rook about to join the party, Black is in big trouble.
b) 11 ... Nd5? loses due to 12 Nxe6!, destroying Black’s defences in one go.
12 Bb5+!?
 This is the new idea which Erik and I had analysed deeply. I was first introduced to it
after reading a letter entitled ‘Improving 50 Years’ Theory’ from a Mr. B.Shankarasubbu in
the Forum section of NIC Yearbook 97. A further look indicated that it is definitely worth
playing as Black has to play extremely accurately merely to survive into a drawn ending.
It is also a little strange that none of the theoretical works that I have read contain
analysis of this dangerous looking move. Moreover, I am a little puzzled why this move
wasn’t played in the past given that my engines all indicate it as their clear first choice. It
just goes to show that with modern chess engines, one can easily find a dangerous new
idea simply by checking and rechecking old lines where mistakes are waiting to be found.
12 ... axb5 13 Ncxb5 Qb6!
Virtually the only move:
a) 13 ... Qc8?! defends the e6-pawn, but White’s next move makes a mockery of this
intention: 14 Nxe6! (nothing else makes sense) 14 ... fxe6 15 Bxf6 Kf7! (the queen
sacrifice with 15 ... Rxa2?! is not nearly enough as indicated by the following sample
variation: 16 Rd8+ Qxd8 17 Bxd8 Ra1+ 18 Kd2 Rxh1 19 Qxe6+ Kxd8 20 Qb6+; Black has
two rooks, two bishops and a knight against the white queen and knight, but the white
pieces are much the better coordinated and after 20 ... Ke7 21 Qxb7+ Nd7 22 fxe5 Black
cannot stave off the attack) 16 Rd8.
 The rook invades and Black is in trouble:
a1) 16 ... Qc6 loses to 17 Qh5+ g6 18 Rxf8+! Rxf8 (if the queen was on c5, Black
would be able to play 18 ... Qxf8) 19 Qxh7+ Kxf6 20 fxe5+ Kg5 (20 ... Kxe5 21 Qg7+ is
also devastating) 21 h4+ Kf4 22 Qh6+ Kxe5 23 Qg7+ Kf4 24 Qxf8+ Kg4 and now the
quiet 25 Qf1!! wins, with the idea of 25 ... Qe4 26 Qd1+ Kg3 27 Rh3+ Kxg2 28 Qh1+ Kf2
29 Rh2+.
a2) 16 ... Qc4 is a bit tricky to refute, but White wins after 17 Qh5+ g6 (17 ... Kg8
loses prettily to 18 Rxf8+! Kxf8 19 Bxg7+! Kxg7 – 19 ... Ke7 20 Bf6+!! Kd7 21 Qf7+ Kc6
22 Qc7+ Kxb5 23 Qxb7+ wins the house – 20 Qxe5+ Kg8 21 Qg5+ Kf8 22 Qf6+ Kg8 23
Nd6 Qc7 24 Qxe6+ Kf8 25 Re1! Bc6 26 Qf6+ Kg8 27 Re7, which is an excellent
calculation exercise) 18 Qxe5, threatening Rxf8+ followed by a check on d6. There is no
defence: for example, 18 ... Nc6 19 Rd7+ Kg8 20 Qc7! and Black is destroyed on the
seventh rank.
a3) 16 ... Qc5! is the only square for the queen to continue the fight as it now covers
some critical dark squares. Still, 17 Qh5+ g6 18 Qxe5 liquidates to a favourable
endgame: 18 ... Qxe5 19 Bxe5 Rg8 20 Rxb8 Rxb8 21 Bxb8 Bxg2 22 Rd1 with obvious
winning chances for White.
b) 13 ... Qc4 is an aggressive response, but White pretty much follows up in the same
vein as in the previous variations after 14 b3:
 b1) The sacrifice 14 ... Qxd4 is misguided: 15 Rxd4 exd4 16 Nc7+ Ke7 17 Re1!
(threatening another sacrifice, this time on e6) 17 ... Kd6 18 Nxa8 Bxa8 19 Rd1 Nc6 20
Bxf6 gxf6 21 Qh5 Ke7. Taking stock, Black has three pieces for the queen, which is
generally an acceptable trade-off. Moreover, White’s rook is blocked by the powerful d-
pawn and Black only needs two more moves to consolidate ( ... f5 and ... Bg7). However,
White’s next move destroys Black’s defences: 22 Rxd4!! Nxd4 (White is winning too after
22 ... f5 23 Qd1! Bh6 24 Rd7+ Kf6 25 g3! when the white queen dominates Black’s minor
pieces) 23 Qc5+ Kd7 24 Qa7+! Kd6 25 Qxd4+ Bd5 26 Qxf6 Rg8 27 Qxf7 e5 28 Qf6+ Kd7
29 Qxe5 and White should be winning.
b2) 14 ... Qc8 15 Nxe6! (again, we see this tactical blow) 15 ... fxe6 16 Bxf6 Rxa2!
(Black responses with a mating threat of his own and forces White to win the queen;
White has an extra pawn and keeps the initiative after 16 ... Kf7 17 Rd8 Qc5 18 Qh5+ g6
19 Qxe5 Qxe5 20 Bxe5 Rg8 21 Rhd1!, while 16 ... gxf6? loses immediately to 17 Qh5+
Ke7 18 Nd6) 17 Rd8+ Qxd8 18 Bxd8 Kxd8 (18 ... Ra1+ loses to the familiar sequence 19
Kd2! Rxh1 20 Qxe6+ Kxd8 21 Qb6+!, which we have already seen in the analysis to 13 ...
Qc8) 19 Qxe6 Nd7 20 Kb1 and despite the slight material disadvantage, White has a
continuing initiative.
 I could have stopped here, but thought I might as well give a sample line where both
sides make more or less forced moves: 20 ... Ra6 21 Qc4 Rc6 (Black must defend against
the threat of Qc7; 21 ... Bd6? is dangerous for him after 22 Rd1 Bb8 23 Qf7 Bc6 24 Nd6
Bxd6 25 Rxd6 Re8 26 Qc4! Bb5 27 Rxd7+! Kxd7 28 Qxb5+, with excellent winning
chances for White) 22 Qd3 Rc5 23 c4! bxc3 24 Nxc3 and with Rd1 in the pipeline and the
c3-knight ready to join the action, White has some pressure on the vulnerable black king.
We now return to the more precise 13 ... Qb6!:
14 Nxe6!
Once more we see that this blow is the whole idea behind White’s concept of
sacrificing the light-squared bishop in the first place.
14 ... fxe6 15 Nd6+

15 ... Qxd6!
Again this queen sacrifice is the only move even though my computer took several
seconds to figure out why. 15 ... Bxd6 16 Qxe6+ Kf8 looks good initially as 17 Rxd6 can
be met by 17 ... Bd5!! which wins for Black. However, the surprising 17 Bxf6! secures a
winning advantage in all lines:
a) After 17 ... gxf6 18 Qxf6+ Kg8 19 Rxd6 Qxd6 20 Qxd6 White’s queen is simply too
active to live with.
b) 17 ... b3 18 Rxd6 Qe3+ 19 Kb1 bxc2+ 20 Kxc2 Be4+ (stirring up some last minute
counterplay, but it is not quite enough) 21 Kd1 Bf3+ 22 gxf3 Qxf3+ 23 Kc2 Qg2+ 24 Kc3
Qf3+ 25 Rd3! Qc6+ 26 Qxc6 Nxc6 27 Bxe5 with a clear endgame plus for White.
c) 17 ... Ra6 allows White a brilliant finish: 18 fxe5 Bc5 (the desperate mating attempt
18 ... Qe3+ 19 Kb1 b3 20 axb3 Qa7 is unceremoniously met by 21 Be7+! Bxe7 22 Rhf1+
when White is the one who mates first) 19 Rd6!! (a beautiful interference) 19 ... Bxd6 20
Rf1 and White is one devastating discovered check away from winning.
16 Rxd6 Bxd6 17 fxe5
17 Qxe6+? would have been too hasty due to 17 ... Be7 18 fxe5 Nd5!.

17 ... Be7?
This natural move loses by force. Both Erik and I have focused our energies on 17 ...
Bd5!, which is clearly Black’s best defence. After 18 Bxf6 gxf6 19 exd6 Black is a lot more
solid with the bishop on d5 shoring up the defence and it appears that White has no more
than a draw despite the slightly loose black king. Here are a few sample lines: 19 ... Kd7
(19 ... Rxa2 20 Kb1 Ra6! should also be fine for Black; White will probably have to force a
draw with 21 Qh5+ Kd7 22 Qf7+ Kxd6 23 Qxf6 Rc8 24 Qf4+ Kc5 25 Qe3+ Kb5 26 Qd3+
when Black’s exposed king should see play result in a perpetual) 20 Rd1 Kxd6 21 Qg3+
Kc6 22 c4 bxc3 23 Qxc3+ Kd7 24 Qxf6 Nc6. Black has finally managed to fully develop his
pieces and this endgame should be finely balanced.
18 exf6 gxf6
 19 Qh5+?
White was confused by the complexities of the position and missed a chance to win in
great style: 19 Rd1! is extremely strong, with the idea of 19 ... Nd7 (after 19 ... Rf8 the
concrete 20 Bh6 Rf7 21 Qxe6 f5 22 Kb1! Ra6 23 Qe5 Nd7 24 Qb5 wins material by force)
20 Qxe6 Nc5 21 Qe2! with multiple threats.
19 ... Kd7?
Returning the favour. Erik pointed out 19 ... Kd8 20 Rd1+ Nd7 as a more natural
defence.
20 Rd1+?!
Missing another fascinating tactical nuance. After the game Erik found 20 Bxf6!, which
gives White good winning chances after 20 ... Bxf6 21 Qf7+ Be7 (Black has a difficult
defence after 21 ... Kd6 22 Qxf6 Nd7 23 Qf4+ Kc5 24 Rd1 Bc6 25 Qe3+ Kb5 26 Rd6! with
the idea of Qd3+, or here 22 ... Nc6 23 Rd1+ Kc7 24 Qf7+ Kb6 25 Rd7, which gives White
a continuing attack along with three pawns and the queen for Black’s rook and two
pieces) 22 Rd1+ Bd5 23 Rxd5+! exd5 24 Qxd5+ Kc8 25 Qxa8 Rd8 26 Qf3. White can
slowly advance his pawns on both wings and it is clear he is the one pressing and with no
chance of losing.
20 ... Bd5 21 Bxf6 Bxf6 22 Rxd5+ exd5
 23 Qf7+?
A careless slip. White’s queen would be less active compared to after 20 Bxf6, but
there would still be some slight winning chances after 23 Qxd5+ Kc7 24 Qxa8 Nc6 25 Qa6
Rf8 26 a3.
23 ... Kc8! 24 Qxf6 Rd8
The material situation clearly favours Black and he starts playing for the win since
there is no perpetual check.
25 Qf5+ Rd7 26 Qf8+ Kc7 27 Kb1
27 Qxb4 Rxa2 28 Qf4+ Kc8 29 Qf8+ Kb7 30 Qb4+ Ka8 dodges the queen quite easily.
27 ... Rd6 28 Qe7+ Nd7 29 Qxh7 Re8 30 b3 Re2

Black has managed to take over completely and I give the rest of the game without
further comment:
31 Qh4 Rc6 32 Qxb4 Rcxc2 33 Qd4 Rcd2 34 Qc3+ Kd6 35 Kc1 Rxa2 36
Qb4+ Ke5 37 Qc3+ d4 38 Qc7+ Ke4 39 Qc6+ Ke5 40 Qc7+ Ke4 41 Qc6+ Kd3
42 Qb5+ Ke3 43 Qg5+ Kf2 44 Qf4+ Kxg2 45 Kd1 Rf2 46 Qe4+ Kg1 47 Qxd4
Ra1+! 0-1
An absolutely tragic end to the game, but White’s novelty on move 12 deserves a lot
of attention and I hope to see more games with 12 Bb5+ in the future.

Game 20
K.Goh Wei Ming-T.Antal
Kecskemet 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qc7!? 8 Qf3 b5

9 Bxf6
I will briefly mention the relatively rare 9 f5!?, which is logical since it prevents the
immediate development of the light-squared bishop to b7.

Black has:
a) 9 ... Nc6 is a reasonable option: 10 Nxc6 Qxc6 11 fxe6 (holding back the capture on
e6 with 11 Bxf6 gxf6 12 0-0-0 is a possible improvement, although play remains complex)
11 ... fxe6 12 Bxf6 (Black has decent compensation after the natural continuation 12 Be2
Ra7 13 Bxf6 Rf7 14 e5! Qxf3 15 Bxf3 gxf6 16 Bh5 dxe5 due to his strong central pawn
formation and bishop-pair) 12 ... gxf6 13 Qxf6 Rg8 14 Be2 Be7 15 Qd4 and now in
L.Yudasin-J.Ehlvest, Pamplona 1991, 15 ... Rxg2 would have equalized as the endgame
arising after 16 0-0-0 Qc5! 17 Qxc5 dxc5 18 Bh5+ Kf8 19 e5 Rg5 20 Rdf1+ Rf5 21 Bg4
Rxf1+ 22 Rxf1+ Kg7 23 Ne4 Bd7 does not seem to be anything for White.
b) 9 ... b4! is the most dynamic and fully in the spirit of the variation: 10 Ncb5 (this
piece sacrifice has been more or less worked out to yet another forced draw; 10 Nd1?! is
the engine’s first choice, but Black gets typical Sicilian play after 10 ... Be7 11 Bd3 e5! 12
Ne2 Nbd7 13 Ne3 Bb7, as in O.Koesebay-D.Krivic, correspondence 2009, or here 11 fxe6?!
fxe6 12 e5 dxe5! 13 Bxf6 gxf6 14 Nxe6 Bxe6 15 Qxa8 0-0, which again gives Black strong
practical compensation for the exchange) 10 ... axb5 11 Bxb5+ Bd7 12 fxe6 Bxb5 13
Nxb5 Qc5 14 Bxf6 fxe6.

Now:
a) 15 Nd4!? forces Black to find some accurate but not too difficult moves: 15 ... gxf6
16 Nxe6 Qc4! 17 Qxf6 Nd7 18 Qxh8 (18 Nc7+?! Qxc7 19 Qxh8 Qc5! is pretty strong, as
pointed out by John Emms) 18 ... Qxe4+ 19 Kf2 Qf5+ 20 Kg3 Qg6+ with a perpetual.
b) 15 e5? is dubious due to 15 ... gxf6 16 Qxf6 Nd7 17 Qxh8 Qxb5 when Black is
clearly on top.
c) 15 Qh3 gxf6 16 Qxe6+ Be7 17 0-0-0 Qxb5 18 Qc8+ Bd8!? (18 ... Kf7 19 Qxh8 Rxa2
20 Qxh7+ Kf8 21 Qh8+ is drawn) 19 Rxd6 Kf7 was recommended in Emms’s book as a
serious winning try:

c1) 20 Rxd8? simply loses to 20 ... Rxd8 21 Qxd8 Rxa2 22 Kb1 Qa5, forcing the
exchange of queens.
 c2) 20 Rhd1!? was given by Emms and in Arizmendi & Moreno’s book: 20 ... b3 (20 ...
Re8!?) 21 Qe6+ Kg6 22 e5 Qe2! 23 Qxb3 Qxe5 24 Rxd8 Rxd8 25 Rxd8 Qf4+ 26 Rd2 Nc6
and I prefer the piece to White’s three pawns, although there’s still a fight ahead.
c3) 20 Qe6+ Kg7 21 Rxd8 Rxd8 22 Qe7+ Kg6 23 Qxd8 Ra7 24 Rd1 Nd7 25 Qg8+ Kh6
26 h4! (restricting the black king and hence keeping Black busy with threats at all times)
26 ... Qe2 (26 ... Qb8!, with the idea of 27 Qg4 Ne5 28 Qf4+ Kg7, seems quite sensible
and appears to give Black decent chances to play for the win) 27 g4 Qxe4 28 g5+ Kh5
and the game ended here in a draw in J.Feco-H.Claridge, correspondence 2008. I suppose
both players had worked out the following continuation: 29 Qf7+ Kg4 30 Rg1+ Kxh4 31
Qb3! Ne5 32 Qg3+ Kh5 33 Qh3+ Kg6 34 Qh6+ Kf7 35 Qxf6+ Ke8 36 Qh8+ Ke7 37 Qf6+
with a perpetual.
Returning to my decision to exchange on f6:
9 ... gxf6

10 a3!?
This line may seem similar to the positional line with 8 Bxf6, but there are some
subtle differences. White’s queen is on f3 here, rather than d2, and the moves ... b5 and
a3 have been inserted. This does affect the play, as will become clear from the
subsequent analysis.
There have been several recent high-level games after 10 0-0-0 b4 11 Nce2 (11 Nd5
exd5 12 exd5 transposes to the line 8 Qf3 b5 9 0-0-0 b4 10 Nd5!? – see the note to
White’s 10th move in the previous game) 11 ... h5! (preventing White from planting his
queen on the h5-square; 11 ... Bb7? 12 Qh5! is awkward for Black) 12 Ng3 h4 13 Nh5
Nd7.
 Now:
a) 14 Qg4 feigns a sacrifice on e6 which shouldn’t work. For instance, 14 ... Bb7 15
Nxe6?! (15 Ng7+? Bxg7 16 Qxg7 Ke7 17 Qg4 Bxe4 18 f5 Nc5 19 fxe6 Rag8 20 Qf4 fxe6
was clearly better for Black in P.Bobras-W.Moranda, Lublin 2008) 15 ... fxe6 16 Qxe6+
Be7 17 e5 fxe5 18 fxe5 0-0-0! 19 exd6 Bg5+ 20 Kb1 Qc5 and White had insufficient
compensation for the pieces in A.Volokitin-I.Papaioannou, Plovdiv 2008.
b) 14 g4 is commonest and logical. After 14 ... Bb7 (opening up the h-file with 14 ...
hxg3 15 hxg3 is also played, but White seems a little better after 15 ... Rh6 16 g4 Bb7 17
Bg2 0-0-0 18 Qe2 Nb6, as in A.Tukhaev-N.Efanov, Moscow 2012, and now 19 f5! e5 20
Nb3 with ideas such as Kb1, Rh3 and c3, opening up the queenside, or the greedy Nxf6
Rxf6; g5 are reasons why Black should refrain from exchanging on g3; here there’s also
the untried 16 Bg2!, with the tricky idea of 16 ... Bb7? 17 f5! e5 18 Ne6! with a large
edge for White) we reach a further divide:
b1) 15 Bh3? was once played by Shirov, but Black seizes the initiative with 15 ... Rc8!
16 Qe2 Qc4!, forcing the exchange of queens and leaving White’s pieces awkwardly
placed.
b2) 15 Qe2 was Shirov’s improvement, although after 15 ... 0-0-0 16 h3 Kb8 (both 16
... d5!? 17 exd5 Nb6 18 Bg2 Nxd5 and the enterprising 16 ... f5!? seem perfectly fine for
Black; in both cases, it is not easy for the offside h5-knight to return to the action) 17 Kb1
Rc8 18 Rh2! Be7 19 Qe1, as in A.Shirov-I.Papaioannou, Novi Sad 2009, Black seems to be
fine after the thematic 19 ... Nb6, with ideas such as ... d5 or ... Nc4 in the offing.
b3) 15 Kb1 0-0-0 16 Bg2 Kb8 17 Rhe1 is a natural plan, given that the focus will all be
in the centre. After 17 ... Be7 White has tried:
 b31) 18 Qh3 (going after the h4-pawn) 18 ... Nc5 19 f5 e5 20 Nb3 a5! (gaining
counterplay on the queenside is the priority; 20 ... Rc8 is similar and also very playable:
21 Nxc5?! and now in M.Kanarek-D.Swiercz, Chotowa 2009, Black should have played 21
... dxc5!, with the idea of 22 Qxh4 c4 followed by ... c3 with terrific counterplay, but 21
Rd2 is another improvement) 21 Qxh4 a4 22 Nc1 a3 23 b3 Nxe4? (this is a nice tactical
resource, but White is able to hold his own after it; instead, 23 ... d5! is extremely strong,
with the remarkable idea of 24 exd5 Na4!! 25 c4 bxc3 26 Re2 Nb2 when Black is on the
verge of breaking through on the queenside) 24 Rxe4 (24 Bxe4 loses to 24 ... Qc3 25 Nd3
d5!) 24 ... Bxe4 25 Bxe4 Qc3 26 Nd3 d5 27 Qf2! (an important move which saves the
game just in time) 27 ... dxe4 28 Qb6+ Ka8 29 Qa6+ Kb8 30 Qb6+ Ka8 31 Qa6+ ½-½
was D.Stellwagen-T.Hillarp Persson, Malmo 2008.
b32) Inducing some weaknesses with 18 Qb3 is also possible. After 18 ... a5 19 f5 Nc5
20 Qe3 Rhg8 21 h3 White has an obvious space advantage, but Black is very solid and it
is not obvious what White is supposed to do next. Probably White should somehow try to
make Nf4 work.
Returning to 10 a3:
10 ... Bb7
Probably best. However, it is notable that Vachier-Lagrave has preferred 10 ... Nc6!?,
scoring 1.5/2. After 11 Nxc6 Qxc6 we have arrived at a unique and difficult position where
it is not clear what White’s best plan is.
 I’ve taken the liberty to analyse a few different options here:
a) An early 12 f5 is certainly sensible. A high-profile game continued 12 ... Qc5 13 0-0-
0 Bb7 (continuing in the same vein as the subsequent notes with 13 ... Rb8 is also very
sensible) 14 Be2 h5 15 Kb1 Ke7? (this is unnecessary; the logical 15 ... Qe5 16 Rhf1 Be7
followed by ... Rc8 is more natural and safer) 16 Rhf1 Qe5 and here in R.Robson-
M.Vachier Lagrave, Puerto Madryn 2009, White would have made life extremely
uncomfortable for Black had he played the very strong 17 Qf2!, preparing to invade on
the queenside in conjunction with doubling rooks on the d-file.
b) Developing the bishop with 12 Bd3 blocks the d-file. In general, the light-squared
bishop prefers to be on e2 where it can hope to reach the g4- or h5-squares one day.
Here the French Grandmaster continued 12 ... f5?! in V.Kotronias-M.Vachier Lagrave,
Dresden Olympiad 2008, which was a bit risky (I prefer the normal 12 ... Rb8, or 12 ...
Be7, simply awaiting developments), and White can improve with 13 Qe3!, seizing the
initiative after 13 ... Bg7 14 exf5 Bxc3+ 15 bxc3 Qxc3+ 16 Kf2.
c) An exciting correspondence game went 12 Be2 Rb8! (again, actively going for quick
queenside counterplay is the correct strategy) 13 f5 Be7 14 0-0-0 (this may seem risky,
but after 14 0-0 Black gets sufficient play with 14 ... Qc5+ 15 Kh1 h5) 14 ... Qc5 15 Rd3
b4!? (I initially thought this was a tad hasty, but I suppose Black knew what he was doing
given that this was a correspondence game; 15 ... Qe5 followed by ... a5 also looks
decent for Black) 16 axb4 Qxb4 (16 ... Rxb4!?) 17 b3 Qa3+!? (17 ... a5!? was better) 18
Kb1 a5 19 Qe3 Ba6 (exchanging light-squared bishops is counterintuitive; I prefer 19 ...
Qc5 20 Qg3 Bd7) 20 Rd2 Bxe2 21 Rxe2 Rb7 22 e5!?.
 This seems very strong and I imagine Black would normally be overrun in a practical
game. However, 22 ... 0-0!! (calm and composed defence; Black had worked out that
there was no attack and that he was even ready to continue his own queenside initiative
by bringing his king’s rook over to the action) 23 exd6 Bxd6 24 fxe6 a4 25 exf7+ Kg7 26
Qf3 was agreed drawn in M.Sadowski-Y.Dothan, correspondence 2009. The game would
probably continue 26 ... Rfb8 27 Rf1 Rxb3+ 28 cxb3 Rxb3+ 29 Kc2 Qb2+ 30 Kd1 Qa1+ 31
Kc2 Qb2+ with a draw by perpetual.
d) 12 0-0-0 Rb8 (12 ... Bb7 13 f5 leads to similar lines as the text) 13 Be2 b4 14 axb4
Rxb4 (as readers should be aware by now, Black should be fine once he has managed to
open up the queenside as his counterplay will keep White busy) 15 Rhf1 Bb7 16 b3 f5!
(thematic and strong) 17 exf5 Qc5 18 Qh3 Bg7! (Black’s two raking bishops mean that
White is the one who has to be careful here) 19 Na2 Be4! 20 Nxb4 Qxb4 21 Qe3 Bxf5 22
Rf3 0-0 23 Rg3 Bg6 24 Bd3 ½-½, Z.Farkas-M.Canovas Pardomingo, correspondence 2009.
White came to the correct conclusion that Black had more than ample play for the
material deficit. I actually think Black has excellent practical chances here and would
have chosen to play on.
From the above analysis, it does appear that 10 ... Nc6 is a perfectly viable alternative
to 10 ... Bb7.
 11 Be2!
I believe this is the most flexible option:
a) The hasty 11 Qh5? is met by 11 ... Qc5! when Black seizes the initiative.
b) After 11 0-0-0 Nd7 12 f5 e5 13 Nb3 Rc8 14 Bd3 Qb6 15 Be2, as played in
D.Stellwagen-M.Vachier Lagrave, Paks 2008, I believe 15 ... Rxc3! 16 Qxc3 Bxe4 would
give Black more than sufficient play for the exchange. For example, 17 Bf3 Bxf5 18 Kb1
Be6 19 Bd5 (or 19 Na5 Nc5 20 Bc6+ Ke7 21 Qd2 Qc7, again with interesting
compensation) 19 ... f5 followed by ... Ke7 and ... Nf6 at some stage.
11 ... Nc6
This was a new move according to my database, but as it was also the first choice of
Houdini, I had spent a bit of time on this position during my preparation. Alternatives are:
a) 11 ... f5? loses to 12 Qh5 Bg7 13 0-0-0, with an irresistible attack.
b) 11 ... Nd7? is bad due to 12 f5 e5 (or 12 ... Ne5 13 Qh3!) 13 Ne6! fxe6 14 fxe6 0-0-
0 15 exd7+ Qxd7 16 a4 when Black will be murdered on the light squares.
c) 11 ... h5 was the favoured move and has been played by Ivanchuk no less. Now:
c1) White threatened to sacrifice a piece on e6 with 12 Qh3!? in F.Bracker-M.Parligras,
Hamburg 2008, where he scored a huge upset by outplaying his higher-rated opponent.
Here I believe 12 ... Nd7!?, sacrificing the h5-pawn and quickly castling queenside, is the
most accurate. For example, 13 Bxh5 (after 13 0-0-0 0-0-0 14 f5 e5 15 Ne6! fxe6 16 fxe6
Kb8 17 exd7 Qxd7 18 Qd3 Black has the unlikely resource 18 ... d5!!; the idea is 19 Nxd5
f5! 20 Rhf1 fxe4 21 Qxe4 Qe6 22 c4 Bc5 23 Rf5 Qh6+ 24 Kb1 Bd4 with complex play for
the pawn) 13 ... 0-0-0 14 f5 (14 Qf3?? loses to 14 ... Qc5) 14 ... e5 15 Nb3 (15 Ne6
doesn’t work this time due to 15 ... Rxh5 16 Qxh5 fxe6 17 fxe6 Nb6) 15 ... Bh6! with
fantastic play for Black.
c2) 12 0-0-0 Nd7 (Mihail Marin correctly pointed out that the variations 12 ... Nc6 13 f5
Nxd4 14 Rxd4 Qc5 15 Rhd1 Qe5 16 Kb1 0-0-0 17 a4 and 12 ... f5 13 Qh3 fxe4 14 Bxh5 are
clearly better for White) 13 f5 e5 14 Nb3 Rc8 15 Kb1 Nb6 (Black has obtained standard
Sicilian counterplay with very natural moves) 16 Rd3 with a final divide:
 c21) After 16 ... Na4 the surprising 17 Nxa4! is strong: 17 ... Qxc2+ 18 Ka2 bxa4 19
Na5 Qc7 20 Nxb7 Qxb7 21 Rc3! Rxc3 22 Qxc3 Bh6 23 Qc2! and Black will have a lot of
difficulty fending off White’s play on the light squares.
c22) The pseudo-active 16 ... Nc4 doesn’t really threaten anything and White can
continue his plan with 17 Rhd1 h4 18 Nd2 Qb6 19 Bf1. Black’s position remains rather
passive and devoid of promising ideas: for example, 19 ... a5? is met by the unusual 20
Rd5! Bxd5 21 Nxd5 Qc5 22 Nxc4 bxc4 23 Nxf6+ Kd8 24 Nd5 with a dominant position.
c23) With 16 ... Bh6!? Black wants to co-ordinate his forces and doesn’t mind
sacrificing a pawn if that means he can put his pieces on the most principled squares.
Such dynamic play is typical of the Ukrainian numero uno. After 17 Qxh5 Ke7 18 Qf3 Nc4
(18 ... Na4!?) 19 Rhd1 (keeping an eye on the a7-square with 19 Qf2! looks like a
significant improvement) 19 ... Bg5 20 h3 Rh4 Marin commented that Black had obtained
a lot of play in exchange for the pawn. While it is hard to gauge whether the
compensation is objectively sufficient, Black certainly has enough practical chances.
 Indeed, it didn’t take White, a 2650-rated GM, very long to go wrong: 21 Qf2 Qb8 22
Bg4 a5! (Black’s attack is extremely potent) 23 Qe2? (this seems insipid, but then again
there are very few good moves for White in this position and 23 g3 Rhh8 24 h4 b4 looks
promising for Black: for instance, 25 hxg5 bxc3 26 gxf6+ Kxf6! 27 Nxa5 Nxa3+ 28 bxa3
Bxe4+ 29 Nb3 d5 with good chances) 23 ... Rhh8 24 Qe1 Rhd8?! (24 ... b4! would have
been pretty strong; I am not very sure what Ivanchuk missed here as the variations are
straight forward: for example, 25 axb4 axb4 26 Nd5+ Bxd5 27 Rxd5 Ne3 28 Rxd6 Nxd1 29
Rxd1 Qb5! or 25 Nb5 Bxe4 26 Qxe4 Qxb5, with good play) 25 Nd5+ Bxd5 26 Rxd5 Qc7 27
Qe2? (this covers c2 and seems natural, but is the decisive mistake; 27 R1d3! should hold
the position as the sacrifices on both a3 and b2 don’t work, while after 27 ... b4 28 a4
Nb6 29 Bd1! Nxd5 30 Rxd5 I don’t see how Black can break through) 27 ... a4! 28 Na1?
(probably the worst possible square for the knight; the other retreats were better, of
course, although Black would still have had a raging attack) 28 ... b4! 29 axb4 a3 30 Nb3
Nxb2 31 Ra5 Ra8 (31 ... Qc3! would have won on the spot) 32 Ka2 Nxd1 33 Qxd1 Qc3 34
Qa1 Qxc2+ 35 Kxa3 Rxa5+ 36 bxa5 Rb8 0-1, J.Smeets-V.Ivanchuk, Wijk aan Zee 2010.
Returning to 11 ... Nc6:
 12 Nxc6 Bxc6
I also analysed 12 ... Qxc6 during my preparation, looking after 13 f5 Be7 14 0-0-0
Qc5 (14 ... 0-0-0 15 Qh3 is unpleasant for Black) at two lines:
a) 15 Qh3 Qe5 16 Qh5 is logical as it prevents Black from plugging the centre with ...
e5: 16 ... Bc8 17 Rhf1 Rb8 18 Rd3 b4 (18 ... a5 19 fxe6 Bxe6 20 Nd5! is again good for
White) 19 axb4 Rxb4 20 b3 a5 (20 ... Rg8? 21 Qxh7 Rxg2 22 Bh5 is also extremely
undesirable for Black) 21 Rg3! a4 22 Nxa4 (the computer points to a large advantage for
White after 22 bxa4, but this looks risky to me) 22 ... Rxe4 23 Nc3 Re3 24 Rxe3 Qxe3+ 25
Kb2 with a small but comfortable plus for White in view of the better mobility of his
forces.
b) 15 Qh5 can be met by 15 ... e5, but White still has the better of it after 16 Rd3 b4
(again, 16 ... a5 is met by 17 Nd5!) 17 axb4 Qxb4 18 Rhd1! (White would really like Black
to capture the e4-pawn as that would allow the light-squared bishop to dominate the
long diagonal) 18 ... Rb8 19 b3 Bxe4 20 Nxe4 Qxe4 21 Bf3 Qf4+ 22 Kb1 e4 23 g3 Qg5 24
Qxg5 fxg5 25 Bxe4 0-0. Black has successfully forced the exchanged of queens and
brought his king to safety, which is no mean feat, but after 26 Rf1! Kg7 27 f6+ Bxf6 28
Rxd6 White continues to be the one doing all the talking.
13 f5
 13 ... Bg7!
Developing the bishop on a diagonal that appears to be completely blocked seems
weird, but Black has worked out a pawn sacrifice which will open some lines for his
pieces.
13 ... 0-0-0 is a bit too automatic. The problem is that Black is a lot more passive
compared to similar lines in the Rauzer. A sample line I analysed goes 14 0-0-0 Kb8 15
Kb1 Rc8 (15 ... Rg8 16 Qh3 is similar) 16 Rhf1 Be7 17 Qh3! e5 (more or less forced; 17 ...
Bd7 18 Bh5! with the idea of 18 ... Rhf8 19 Bxf7 Rxf7 20 fxe6 is hard to meet) 18 Rd2
d5!? (unsound, but allowing White to pile up on the d5-square would be positional
suicide) 19 Nxd5 Bxd5 20 exd5 Bc5 21 d6! (not allowing Black any respite) 21 ... Bxd6 22
Qb3 Rhd8 23 Rfd1 when White is close to winning.
14 Qg4
14 Qh3 0-0! leads to the same pawn sacrifice.
14 ... 0-0 15 fxe6
15 0-0-0! looks like White’s best chance: 15 ... Kh8 (initially, I thought that Black
obtained good counterplay after 15 ... Rab8 until Eric pointed out that 16 Rd3! Kh8 17
Rh3! is virtually winning for White) 16 fxe6 Rac8 17 Rhf1 a5 18 e7! Qxe7 19 Nd5 with an
edge for White.
15 ... Rae8
During my preparation, I concluded that Black’s best defence is the stunning two-
pawn sacrifice 15 ... fxe6 16 Qxe6+ Kh8 17 0-0 f5!! 18 Rxf5 Rxf5 19 Qxf5 b4! 20 axb4
Qb6+ 21 Kh1 Qxb4 with sufficient play for Black. Here the computer again points to a
large advantage for White with 17 0-0-0, but it seems to me that Black gets good
practical chances after 17 ... Qb7 (17 ... f5 18 Qxd6 Qxd6 19 Rxd6 Bxe4 20 Nxe4 fxe4 is
slightly better and risk-free for White) 18 Rxd6 Rae8 19 Qh3 f5 20 Bh5 Rc8 21 Re1 Be5 22
Re6 Qg7!. White does have a narrow path to an endgame edge with 23 Bg6 Bxc3 24 bxc3
Bxe4 25 Re3 Rc6 26 Rxc6 Bxc6 27 Bxf5 Bxg2 28 Qh5! Qf7 29 Qxf7 Rxf7 30 Bd3, although
this line is by no means easy to find and in any case it seems that Black has chances to
hold this position.
16 exf7+ Rxf7

17 0-0?
I was determined not to castle long, but for once I believe White has a small but safe
edge with the simple 17 0-0-0 Bxe4 (17 ... Kh8 18 Nd5 Qb7 19 Bf3 restricts Black’s
queenside play considerably) 18 Nxe4 f5 19 Qg3 Rxe4 20 Bf3.
17 ... Re5 18 Bd3 Bd7 19 Qf4 Be6 20 Kh1
This wasn’t a bad move in itself, but I was kind of running out of ideas. The natural 20
a4 b4 21 Nd5 was possibly a better option. In general, I was trying to avoid any opposite-
coloured bishop scenarios as these positions can be a bit random, but this kind of thinking
is rigid and I should have been a lot more concrete in my evaluations. For example, it is
clear that White stands to gain significantly if Black ever exchanges on d5 as his light-
squared bishop would be activated immediately. More importantly, White would be the
one doing the attacking which is vital in opposite-coloured bishop positions.
20 ... Qc5 21 Rae1
I was contemplating 21 a4, but didn’t like the look of 21 ... b4 22 Nd5 f5. However,
the unexpected 23 Qh4! with the ideas of Qd8 or Ne7+ puts Black in an awkward
position.
21 ... Qd4 22 Rd1 f5 23 Qg3
23 Qh4! was stronger.
23 ... fxe4 24 Rxf7 Bxf7
 25 Qf4?
I remember feeling that the game was slipping away from me with every move. I
initially planned the obvious 25 Bxe4, but was suddenly worried by 25 ... Rxe4!? 26 Rxd4
Rxd4. Perhaps I am wrong, but this seems to be yet another position where the
judgement of the engine comes into question as I honestly think Black is the one with all
the chances.
25 ... Bg6
25 ... d5! would have given Black a dominating presence in the centre.
26 Bxb5 Qc5 27 Bxa6 h6
Again, 27 ... d5! was indicated.
28 Bb7 e3 29 Bf3 Kh7 30 h4 Bxc2 31 Rc1 Bg6 32 Ne2 Qb6 33 b4 d5 34 Nd4
I have managed to make some progress over the last few moves, but with a little over
three minutes until move 40 for both players, play started becoming a little chaotic.
34 ... Qd6?
A critical and potentially decisive error. It was important to disturb the d4-knight with
a move like 34 ... Re8.
35 Rc6 Qe7
 36 Ne2?
This was a pretty lame and meaningless move. The following continuation would
make for a nice calculation exercise: 36 Rxg6! Kxg6 37 Nc6 Qe8 38 Nxe5+ Qxe5 39 h5+
Kh7 40 Qxe5 Bxe5 41 Kg1 Bb2 (if 41 ... d4 42 Kf1) 42 a4 Bc3 43 b5 Ba5 (or 43 ... d4 44
b6 d3 45 Kf1) 44 Kf1 d4 45 Ke2 Kg7 46 Kd3 Bb6 47 Ke4 Kf6 48 Be2 Ke6 49 g4 when
Black’s connected passed pawns are stymied and the distant passed pawns will be too
much for him to handle.
36 ... Bd3!
Suddenly Black is the one with all the play.
37 Rc3 Rf5 38 Rc7 Qf6
I was worried about 38 ... Rxf4 39 Rxe7 Rxf3 40 gxf3 Bxe2, but White has enough play
after 41 Rxe3 Bb5 42 Re6 d4 43 Rd6.
39 Qg3?
This was very risky. As I needed a win to have any realistic chance of scoring a norm,
I decided to avoid the forced draw after 39 Qxe3 Qxh4+ 40 Kg1.
39 ... Rxf3 40 Rxg7+ Qxg7 41 Qxf3 Be4 42 Qh3 ½-½
Here I played my best move in the entire tournament by far – I offered a draw. My
opponent accepted after a long think. After the game we spent a long time analysing the
ramifications of 42 ... d4 43 Nf4 e2! (my opponent had missed this) 44 Nxe2 d3 45 Kg1!
dxe2 46 Kf2 Qe7 (46 ... Qxg2+ 47 Qxg2 Bxg2 48 Kxe2 also appears to be drawn) 47 Ke1!
and came to the conclusion that White probably just saves the position with best play.
Unfortunately, this fascinating endgame really falls outside the scope of this book.

Conclusion
The three variations explored in this chapter invariably lead to extremely interesting and
complex positions. There is still a lot of room in terms of theoretical development, but all
three have stood up to scrutiny and are worth studying if one wants a theoretically less
intense repertoire as Black.
Chapter Three
The Classical Variation
Before the Poisoned Pawn variation burst on to the chess scene during the heyday of
Bobby Fischer, Najdorf exponents had always been essaying the solid set-ups involving
the moves ... e6, ... Nbd7, ... Qc7, with or without ... Be7. As such, I have included all
these lines within the boundaries of this chapter.

In Game 21, we look at the position arising after 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qf3 Qc7 9 0-0-
0 b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rhe1 Be7 12 Qg3.

This was thought to be clearly advantageous for White and has hardly been seen at
top level in recent years. However, it seems that with precise play Black appears to
survive into an equal endgame and in fact could even have pushed for more in the actual
game.
The Gelfand Variation is one where Black omits the move ... Be7 in favour of an early
... Qb6, attacking the loose d4-knight. In Game 22, Black daringly accepted the piece
sacrifice with 11 ... Qb6 12 Nd5 exd5, after which it had been thought since 1980 that 13
Nc6! was just a direct refutation. However, the young Swedish Grandmaster Nils
Grandelius has reinvigorated this line with 13 ... dxe4! followed by a series of precise
moves. I believe the accurate 22 ... h5 leads to a draw by force, although this is purely
scientific as I really doubt that anyone can replicate these moves over the board.
In Game 23 the critical 12 ... Qxd4 followed by a long sequence leading to an
unbalanced piece for three pawns middlegame is analysed. Here 18 ... Kc8! is an
important move, after which 19 Qxd6 Qc6! leads to very little for White and, hence, all
the attention has shifted to 15 b4!?, which we cover in Game 24.
 In return for his queen and a pawn, Black will obtain three pieces and tons of tricky
queenside play. White should have good chances to obtain an edge, although Black has
consistently scored well in practice.
In the final three games of the chapter, we analyse what is arguably the real Classical
variation where Black essays the set-up with ... Be7, ... Qc7 and ... Nbd7. In Game 25 we
look at 10 Qg3, one of my favourite lines in the entire 6 Bg5 Najdorf complex. This has
been thought to be harmless, but I’ve shown that there is more than a drop of poison in
this variation and so far I have not found a clear route to equality in my analysis.
In Game 26, the vintage 10 g4 is given due coverage. After the well-known sequence
10 ... b5 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 g5 Nd7 13 f5, 13 ... 0-0! is the recent star move that has been
popularized by the Chinese Grandmaster Ju Wenjun.

This move is well on the way to receiving main line status especially as the older 13
... Bxg5+ and 13 ... Nc5 have their fair share of problems to solve.
 In Game 27 we analyse the ancient Browne variation, which is probably the most well-
known example of the ... g5 motif. Recent praxis has not changed the theoretical
evaluation of this line as a solid and reliable option for Black. Here I’ve also covered the
infamous Gothenburg variation where I believe the less popular 11 Qh5 is White’s only
route to an advantage.

Game 21
Wang Hao-L.Dominguez Perez
Russian Team Championship 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7

This is a flexible move, retaining the option of essaying either the Browne or the
Gelfand variation. The game actually went 7 ... Be7 8 Qf3 Nbd7 9 0-0-0 Qc7 10 Bd3 b5 11
Rhe1, which is a direct transposition. For now I would just like to point out that here 11 ...
b4? is a serious inaccuracy due to the typical 12 Nd5 exd5 13 Nf5 with a decisive initiative
for White.
8 Qf3 Qc7 9 0-0-0 b5

10 Bd3
This is the main move by a clear mile. There are other flamboyant moves that mostly
include a sacrifice or two, but these have been largely worked out to a draw. More
importantly, these have all been given in earlier theoretical manuals and I don’t really
have anything fresh to add.
Among those lines, 10 e5 is certainly the most critical and here 10 ... Bb7 11 Qh3 dxe5
12 Nxe6 fxe6 13 Qxe6+ Be7 14 Bxb5 (or 14 Nxb5 axb5 15 Bxb5 Be4 16 c3 0-0-0 17 Rhe1
Ba3! 18 Qa6+ Bb7 19 Qxa3 e4, which was dynamically balanced in J.Smeets-
L.Dominguez Perez, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010) 14 ... axb5 15 Nxb5 Qc6 16 Nd6+
Kd8 17 fxe5 Kc7 18 Qxe7 Rxa2 (James Rizzitano pointed out 18 ... Nd5! as a worthy
winning attempt and after 19 Rxd5 Qxd5 20 Rd1 Qxe5 21 Nxb7 Qxe7 22 Bxe7 Rxa2 23
Nd6 Ra1+ 24 Kd2 Rxd1+ 25 Kxd1 Kc6 Black is certainly for choice, although I find it hard
to imagine that Black can win this with best play) 19 exf6 (or 19 Bxf6 gxf6 20 Nxb7 Ra1+
21 Kd2 Qxg2+ which leads to another perpetual check) 19 ... Ra1+ 20 Kd2 Qd5+ 21 Kc3
Qa5+ 22 Kd3 Qd5+ 23 Kc3 Qa5+ 24 Kd3 resulted in a draw in M.Yilmazyerli-B.Esen,
Antalya 2013, and many other earlier games.
10 ... Bb7
Again, Black has to be careful before playing the careless 10 ... b4? as 11 Nd5 exd5 12
Rhe1 would spell trouble for him. Here, the engine pointed out the mystifying 12 ... Qb7
(12 ... Be7 13 Nf5! transposes to an earlier note), where 13 e5 dxe5 14 fxe5 Ng8 15 e6
Ndf6 16 Bc4!! dxc4 17 exf7+ Kxf7 18 Nc6! Be7 19 Bxf6 gxf6 20 Rd8! wins for White. An
amazing variation.
11 Rhe1

11 ... Be7
This line is seldom played these days and was a first for the Cuban number one.
Alternatively:
a) 11 ... Qb6 is dubbed the Gelfand variation and is analysed in detail from Games 22
to 24.
b) Again, 11 ... b4? is premature due to 12 Nd5!, although it is not initially easy to see
why: 12 ... exd5 13 exd5+ Kd8 14 Nc6+ Bxc6 15 dxc6 Nb6 (controlling the critical d5-
square; it wasn’t clear at first sight how White was supposed to proceed after 15 ... Nc5,
but the excellent 16 Qd5! Rb8 17 Bc4 Ne6 18 Bxf6+ gxf6 19 f5 keeps Black all tied up) 16
Bxf6+ gxf6. Now the engine recommends the crazy 17 Qh5!? when Black is near
zugzwang, although I much prefer the rational 17 Bf5 when White is clearly in the driver’s
seat after 17 ... d5 18 Be4 Kc8 19 Bxd5 Kb8 20 Be4 Bd6 21 g3. Specifically, it is going to
take Black a lot of effort to get rid of that thorn on the c6-square.
12 Qg3
Threatening e5 and/or Bxf6 followed by a sacrifice on b5. Black’s response has been
thought to be forced.
 12 ... b4
The suspicious looking 12 ... h6 has been written off due to the sequence 13 Bxf6 Bxf6
14 Bxb5!, which is a typical sacrifice to nab three pawns for the piece and has an
excellent score on my database. Objectively, it’s not so straightforward though and the
position after 14 ... axb5 15 Ndxb5 Qb6 16 Rxd6 (16 Nxd6+ Kf8 17 e5 Be7 18 f5 Bd5! is
also unclear) 16 ... Bc6 17 e5 Be7 18 Qxg7 Rf8 19 f5! Bxd6 20 Nxd6+ Ke7 is dynamically
balanced.

White has four pawns for the rook and a vulnerable black king to work on, but Black
would certainly be the one with the winning chances if he can manage to ride the storm
out. This seems to be an interesting option to investigate if one wishes to avoid the main
lines with 12 ... b4.
13 Nd5 exd5 14 exd5 Kd8

By far the only move and a good one. The black king must step away from the e-file.
Black would be annihilated after a move like 14 ... Kf8?? due to 15 Nf5 Re8 16 Bh6!.
15 Nc6+
This has been established for some time as White’s main attempt to force a win, but
there are a couple of other tries that are worthy of attention:
a) I once went 15 Qe3?! not knowing the theory of this line. My opponent, who was a
promising and annoyingly unrated junior, continued 15 ... Nb6! (15 ... Re8 16 Nf5 Nxd5 17
Qe2 N7b6 18 Nxg7 is less clear: for example, 18 ... Rg8 19 Qg4 Bc8 20 Bxe7+ Qxe7 21
Ne6+ Bxe6 22 Qxg8+ Kc7 23 Qg7 Qf6 24 Qxf6 Nxf6) 16 Nf5 Nbxd5 17 Qd4. During the
game, I felt that White had sufficient play for the piece, but there was always a risk that I
would not have sufficient resources to continue the attack. Needless to say, Black will just
be winning if he is allowed to consolidate:
a1) The game continued 17 ... Kc8 18 Bc4! (White may be a piece down, but the ones
on the board are harmoniously and optimally placed; I also considered the enterprising
18 Rxe7!? Nxe7 19 Nxg7, but this is probably over extravagant) 18 ... Bf8 19 Nxg7! (the
point; White wins back the piece by force) 19 ... Bxg7 20 Bxd5 Bxd5 (there is nothing
better; 20 ... Ne8 loses to 21 Qe4!) 21 Bxf6 Be6? (this loses in a straightforward manner;
I was worried about the ramifications of 21 ... b3!, although the computer instantly
churned out the following line: 22 axb3 Bxb3 23 Re2 Bxf6 24 Qxf6 Rd8 25 Rd3 when Black
is about to be caught in a jam down the c-file: for example, 25 ... Bc4 26 Rc3 Ra7! 27 Rd2
d5 28 b3 Qa5 29 Rdd3! with complications that slightly favour White) 22 Bxg7 Rg8 23
Qe4 and I eventually prevailed in K.Goh Wei Ming-K.Sandy, Asean Universities Games
2006.
a2) 17 ... Bf8! is probably the most accurate. A battle between a couple of 2600s
continued 18 Be4, which looks extremely strong and hard to meet (18 Ne3!? actually
improves, although I prefer Black’s extra material after 18 ... Qb6!), but now I think 18 ...
Kc8!, bringing the king further from the firing squad, will present Black with excellent
winning chances. Instead, 18 ... Rc8?? in E.Alekseev-E.Najer, Sochi 2004, should have lost
to a sequence like 19 Rd2 Qc5 20 Bxd5!, winning back the piece.
b) 15 Bh4? forces Black to make a useful defensive move: 15 ... g6. Now 16 Bf5!? is
an interesting attempt to muddy the waters and in M.Paragua-P.Negi, Mashhad 2011,
Black went wrong immediately with 16 ... Nxd5? (there’s nothing really wrong with 16 ...
gxf5, which should just be winning, as Black defends resolutely after 17 Rxe7 Kxe7 18
Nxf5+ Kd8 19 Bxf6+ Nxf6 20 Qg7 Ne8! 21 Qxh8 Rc8) 17 Bxe7+ Nxe7 18 Qh4 gxf5 19
Qxe7+ Kc8 20 Nxf5 Kb8 21 Nxd6 when White certainly had more than enough for the
piece, although he eventually contrived to lose.
c) The spectacular 15 Rxe7!? has been tried frequently in correspondence chess, but it
now appears that White does not have anything concrete after 15 ... Kxe7 16 Nf5+ Kd8
17 Bh4 Rg8 18 Nh6! (the point of the combination) 18 ... Ke7 19 Nxg8+ Rxg8 20 Bxh7 Kf8
21 Bxg8 Kxg8. If anything, I prefer Black’s minor pieces to White’s rook and extra pawns.
15 ... Bxc6 16 dxc6
 16 ... Nc5
This is the ultimate main line of the 11 ... Be7 variation, but again we should first rule
out the alternatives:
a) 16 ... Nb6?! (the knight is less actively placed here) 17 Bh4! (White targets the g7-
pawn which is so often Black’s Achilles’ heel in this line) and now:
a1) After 17 ... Rg8, the calm 18 Rd2!, with the simple idea of doubling rooks on the
e-file, was pointed out by Thomas Luther as an effective response. Sometimes, the
simplest ideas are indeed the best:
a11) 18 ... Qxc6 runs into 19 Bxh7 when 19 ... Re8 20 Qxg7 Nxh7 21 Qxf7! leaves
White two pieces down, but with a virulent initiative.
a12) 18 ... Ra7 19 Bxh7 Rh8 20 Qxg7 Rxh7 21 Qxf6 and now 21 ... Rxh4 (or 21 ... Nc8
22 Rxe7 Qxe7 23 Rxd6+! Ke8 24 Rd8+! Kxd8 25 Qd4+ Ke8 26 Bxe7 Rxe7 27 f5! when
Black’s uncoordinated pieces mean that he is obliged to give up another pawn with 27 ...
f6) 22 Rde2! with murderous intentions down the e-file should suffice.
a13) 18 ... d5 19 Bxh7 Rh8 20 Rde2! again shows what a fine move 18 Rd2 is. After 20
... Ne4 21 Bxe7+ Kxe7 22 Bxe4 dxe4 23 Qxg7 White has a truckload of pawns for the
piece.
a14) 18 ... Nbd5 19 Bxf6 Nxf6 (19 ... Bxf6 20 Bxh7 Qxc6! with the idea of 21 Bxg8
Bxb2+ is a clever try by Black, although White should still be better after 22 Kb1 Bc3 23
Qg5+ Nf6 24 Qa5+ Kd7 25 Bxf7! Qb5 26 Qxb5+ axb5 27 Rde2, with an extra pawn) 20
Rde2 Re8 21 Qxg7 Qxc6 22 Rxe7! (22 Qxf7, as suggested by Luther, is also strong) 22 ...
Rxe7 23 Qxf6 Raa7 24 Bxh7 with a significant material advantage.
a2) 17 ... Bf8 is more resilient, but notably has not been covered in any of the sources
I consulted. Following 18 Bxf6+ gxf6 19 Qh4 Bg7 (19 ... Be7? loses nicely to a
geometrical motif: 20 Rxe7 Qxe7 21 Re1! Qf8 22 Qxf6+ Kc7 23 Re7+ Kxc6 24 Be4+ and
it will be mate in a few moves) 20 Qg4! (guarding the escape square on c8 with tempo;
there is no need to rush the attack) 20 ... Bf8 21 Be4 and despite the material deficit,
White continues to call the shots.
 b) 16 ... Qxc6 is pretty hard to refute. White should hurriedly grab some pawns with
17 Bxf6!, leading to:
b1) 17 ... Nxf6 18 Qxg7 Re8 (18 ... Rg8 19 Qxf7 Qc7 20 Bf5 is difficult for Black;
generally, capturing the f7-pawn is an important success in this line and this is no
exception) 19 Qxf7 Ra7 20 Rxe7 Raxe7 21 Qxf6 leads to a risk-free edge for White.
b2) 17 ... Bxf6! looks impossible at first glance, but Black has a specific tactical idea in
mind: 18 Be4 Qa4 19 Bxa8 Qxa2.

Here 20 Rxd6! (20 Qb3 is probably safer, but the winning chances are less after 20 ...
Qa1+ 21 Kd2 Qxb2 22 Ke3! Re8+ 23 Kf3 Rxe1 24 Rxe1 Qxb3+ 25 cxb3 Nc5 26 Bd5 Bc3
when Black has decent chances of establishing a fortress) 20 ... Qxb2+ (20 ... Bxb2+ 21
Kd1 Bc3 22 Qg5+ Kc8 23 Re3 wins relatively easily) 21 Kd1 Qb1+ 22 Ke2 Qxc2+ 23 Kf3
(23 Kf1 Qc4+ 24 Rd3 Re8 25 Red1 Kc7 26 Bd5 Qb5 27 Kg1 was given as slightly better for
White in Experts vs the Sicilian, but 27 ... Nc5 28 Rc1 Kb8 29 Rdd1 Ne4! 30 Bxe4 Rxe4 is
hardly clear) 23 ... Re8 24 Rxe8+ (Black is very active after 24 Be4 Qc5!) 24 ... Kxe8 was
T.Luther-S.Dvoirys, Austrian League 2003, and now 25 Qe1+!? may be a small
improvement: 25 ... Be7 26 Bc6 Qb3+ 27 Kf2 Qc2+ 28 Kg3 Qb3+ 29 Bf3 and the game
goes on.
We can now return to 17 ... Nc5:
17 Bh4
 Targeting the g7-pawn which Black will find awkward to defend.
17 ... Rg8!
The best and most critical response:
a) 17 ... Bf8 is just too passive and White dominates after 18 Bc4 Ra7 (18 ... Qxc6 19
Bxf6+ gxf6 20 Bd5 Qc8 21 Qh4 Nd7 22 Bxa8 Qxa8 23 Qh5! continues the onslaught) 19
Bd5 a5 20 Re3 and Black could hardly move in V.Kotronias-A.Lesiege, Montreal 2002.
b) 17 ... g6 18 Rxe7! is yet another aesthetically pleasing exchange sacrifice: 18 ...
Qxe7 19 Re1 Ne6 20 f5! gxf5 21 Qh3 (21 Bxf6 Qxf6 22 Qxd6+ was played in the past and
is also good) 21 ... Rg8 22 Qxf5 Rg6 (Black is hanging on for dear life, but there is to be
no respite) 23 Qf2! Kc7 (Black has to guard the b6-square, but now White wins back all
his material) 24 Bxg6 hxg6 25 Bxf6, with a hefty interest charge.
18 Bxh7
This was given a double exclamation mark in Experts vs the Sicilian and while it was
indeed once a stunning discovery, the engines have now worked out a defence for Black.
After deliberating over this position for a long time, it appears that 18 Bf5! is now
considered more promising, although things are hardly clear, but then again, are they
ever going to be?
 Now defending the b4-pawn is of paramount importance, which only becomes clear
after going through the alternatives:
a) 18 ... Ra7?! is thematic and looks useful, but doesn’t work out due to concrete
reasons, beginning with 19 Re5!:
a1) The variation after 19 ... Ke8 shows exactly why the defence of the b4-pawn is
crucial: 20 Bxf6 dxe5 21 Bd7+ Nxd7 (21 ... Kf8 22 Bxe7+ Kxe7 23 Qe3 Ne6 24 f5 Nf8 25
Qc5+ Kd8 26 Qxb4! a5 27 Qh4+ f6 28 Be6+ was another sinister demonstration in
B.Pekand-A.Milher, correspondence 2008) 22 cxd7+ Kd8 23 Bxe7+ Kxe7 24 Qh4+ f6 25
fxe5 Rd8 26 Qxb4+! Kf7 27 e6+! Kxe6 28 Re1+ Kxd7 (there is nothing better; 28 ... Kd5
29 Re3! Rxd7 30 Qe4+ Kc5 31 Rc3+ Kd6 32 Rxc7 Rdxc7 33 Qxh7 is similar) 29 Re7+ Kc6
30 Qe4+ Kb6 31 Rxc7 Rxc7 32 Qxh7 should be winning for White, as a few
correspondence games have shown.
a2) 19 ... Na4 20 Qe3 h6 21 Qb3! Qxc6 22 Qxf7 Rf8 23 Qxg7 Rg8 24 Qxh6 and White
had completely destroyed Black’s position in N.Ziaziulkina-A.Bodnaruk, Athens 2012.
a3) 19 ... Qxc6 20 Rxe7!! (the final sting in the tail; White regains all the material) 20
... Kxe7 21 Bxf6+ Kf8 22 Bxh7 Ne4 23 Qe3 gxf6 24 Qxa7 Rh8 25 Bxe4 Qxe4 26 h3 Qxf4+
27 Kb1 with a big endgame plus for White.
b) 18 ... g6? is another natural move, but after the logical sequence 19 Qe3 gxf5 20
Qxc5 Rg6 the crazy 21 g4!! is winning immediately. For example, 21 ... b3 (White also
overruns Black’s defences after 21 ... fxg4 22 f5 Rh6 23 Bg5) 22 axb3 fxg4 23 Qc4 Rh6 24
Bg5, as played in O.Lorentzen-G.Gunnlaugsson, correspondence 2002.
c) The principled 18 ... Qxc6 may suffice for equality, but only after Black plays a
series of accurate moves. Following 19 Bxh7! (ironically, taking this pawn only after Black
has seemingly made a useful capture is more accurate than capturing immediately) 19 ...
Re8! (19 ... g5?! was played in Gao Rui-Chen Fan, Taizhou 2012, and now 20 fxg5!
improves, when White has a lot of targets to aim at after 20 ... Nxh7 21 g6 Rxg6 22
Bxe7+ Kc7 23 Qf4; note that 23 ... Rxg2 must be met by 24 Bxd6+!, instead of the tragic
24 Rxd6?? which loses immediately) 20 Rxe7! we reach yet another rook-down, highly
unbalanced position.

After 20 ... Rxe7 21 Qxg7 Nxh7 22 Qxf7 Raa7 23 Qxh7 Qe4 (23 ... Rac7 24 Re1 keeps
up the pressure) 24 Qxe4 (White can also choose to keep queens on with 24 Qg8+ Kc7
25 Bxe7 Qxe7 26 Qc4 a5 27 g4, which may give more practical chances) 24 ... Nxe4 25
Rd4 Kc8 26 Bxe7 Rxe7 an objectively balanced endgame arose in B.Jaederholm-M.Sferle,
correspondence 2006, but one where once again White seems to have excellent practical
chances.
d) The surprising move 18 ... a5! turns out to be best:
d1) 19 Qe3!? again forces Black to defend accurately: 19 ... Ne6 20 Bh3 (certainly not
20 Bxe6 fxe6 21 Qxe6 when White has no good follow-up after 21 ... Re8 with Black
ready to take on c6; however, 20 g4!? Re8 21 Qf3 is a fresh approach and deserves
further investigation) 20 ... Re8! 21 f5 Nf8. Here White can still set some practical
problems with 22 g4!?, but after 22 ... Qxc6 23 g5 the computer instantly pointed out the
brilliant 23 ... Kc7!!, returning the piece to get the black king to safety (a move like 23 ...
N6d7 would be hit by 24 f6 gxf6 25 gxf6 Nxf6 26 Bxf6 Bxf6 27 Rxd6+!, winning instantly).
 V.Hefka-K.Mielke, correspondence 2009, continued 24 Qd4! (Black consolidates with
an extra pawn after 24 gxf6 Bxf6 25 Qf4 Bxh4 26 Qxh4 Rxe1 27 Rxe1 Re8) 24 ... N6d7 25
Qxg7 (25 f6 is another try, but Black should equalize after 25 ... gxf6 26 gxf6 Bxf6 27 Bxf6
Rxe1 28 Rxe1 Ne6! 29 Bxe6 fxe6 30 Rxe6 Qh1+ 31 Qd1 Qxd1+ 32 Kxd1, vacuuming the
pieces off the board, although I wouldn’t be surprised if there are improvements along
the way) 25 ... a4 (showing White that he is not the only one who is capable of attacking)
26 Kb1 Ra5! (preparing either ... Ne5 or ... Re5, plugging the e-file) 27 f6 (27 Qxf7 Ne5
28 Rxe5 Rxe5 29 f6 is an enticing option, but the uncompromising 29 ... Ng6! 30 Bg3 Re2
31 Bf5 Ne5 gives Black the advantage) 27 ... b3 28 cxb3 axb3 29 Rc1 bxa2+ 30 Ka1 Rc5
31 Rxc5 Nxc5 32 Rxe7+ Rxe7 33 fxe7 with a draw, in view of 33 ... Nb3+ 34 Kxa2 Qa4+
35 Kb1 Qe4+ 36 Ka2 Qa4+.
d2) 19 Kb1 is yet another quiet move that is initially hard to comprehend. Things now
become really concrete, beginning with 19 ... Ra7! (a useful move that doesn’t give away
material; 19 ... a4 is tempting, but 20 Qe3! Ne6 21 g4 Re8 22 g5 Nh5 23 Bxe6 fxe6 24
Qxe6 is extremely dangerous for Black) and then:
 d21) 20 Re5 (this is tempting, thematic, and also slightly inaccurate) 20 ... Na4?
(Black cracks under the intense pressure; psychologically, it is very unpleasant to have
your king in the centre, facing two enemy rooks in a wide open position and having to
play ‘only’ moves for a long time) 21 Qb3! Qxc6 22 Qxf7 Re8 23 Qxg7 and White soon
won in I.Ortiz Suarez-J.Guerra Mendez, Pamplona 2012. Here 20 ... Ke8! would have
saved the game, but not without enduring more fireworks: 21 Bd7+ Ncxd7 22 cxd7+
Qxd7 (White’s powerful dark-squared bishop after 22 ... Kxd7 23 Rxe7+! Kxe7 24 Bxf6+
Kf8 25 Bd4 Rb7 26 f5 is probably sufficient for equality but no more) 23 Rxe7+! Qxe7 24
Re1 Ne4 25 Qd3! Qxh4 26 Rxe4+ Kd7 27 Qb5+ Kc8 28 Qc6+ Kb8 29 Qxd6+ and it’s
perpetual check.
d22) The calm 20 Re2! would have posed more difficult questions. For example, 20 ...
g6 (20 ... Qxc6 21 Rxe7!! Kxe7 22 Bxf6+ Kf8 23 Be5! is a spectacular continuation) 21
Bd7! (not obvious at first sight, but if you look closely enough, there is really not much of
a choice; in any case, it is always nice to put your piece on a square that is defended five
times) 21 ... Ncxd7 22 cxd7 Qxd7 23 Rde1 and here Black has to find 23 ... Qf5! 24 Qf3
Ne4! 25 Bxe7+ Rxe7 26 Rxe4 Rxe4 27 Rxe4 Re8, which is a clean equalizer.
Instead, 18 Bc4 Nfe4 19 Qg4 was analysed in depth in Experts vs the Sicilian.
 This has yet to be tested over the board, but a correspondence game continued 19 ...
Ra7 20 Bd5 Nf6 (20 ... Bxh4 was the focus in the book and after 21 Qxh4+ Nf6 22 Bf3 –
22 g4 h5! is a surprising riposte – Black can cut across White’s plan of playing g4-g5 with
22 ... h5! when he has decent chances of hanging on to his extra piece) 21 Qf3 Nxd5 22
Bf2 Nxf4 23 Bxc5 Ne6 24 Be3 Ke8 25 Bxa7 Qxa7 when Black was holding up well and
went on to win in D.Zoll-E.Cunha, correspondence 2008.
Returning to Wang Hao’s 18 Bxh7:
18 ... Rh8 19 Qxg7 Rxh7 20 Qxf6 Rxh4 21 Qxf7 Rh8 22 Re5

We have arrived at what is probably the most critical position of the entire variation.
White has four extra pawns, three of which are connected passers, and he has a
menacing attack against the vulnerable king in the centre, but Black does have two extra
pieces. Recent games have proven that Black has sufficient resources in this position to
survive the attack, but only just.
 22 ... Na4!
This is clearly Black’s strongest move at this juncture. 22 ... Rf8 is the main
alternative, which returns some of the extra material in the hope that Black will have
sufficient time to get his king to safety and his pieces into play. After 23 Qg7 he has:
a) White had the initiative after 23 ... Ra7 24 Rxc5 Qb6 (a possible improvement is 24
... Rxf4 when 25 g3 Rf8 26 Kb1 is unclear, but I prefer the three pawns to the extra
bishop) 25 Qe5! in B.Vuckovic-B.Tadic, Herceg Novi 2005.
b) 23 ... b3!? is another way to give up the knight, but White keeps some advantage
after 24 axb3 Nxb3+ 25 cxb3 Qxc6+ 26 Kb1 when Black still has some problems to solve.
A couple of sample variations will illustrate the difficulties Black faces: 26 ... Re8 (26 ...
Qe8 was played in J.Grabner-J.Hribersek, correspondence 2005, and now 27 Re4!
followed by advancing those kingside pawns look promising for White) 27 Qg6! Rb8 28
Re6 Rb6 29 f5 Qb5 30 Qf7 Rc6 31 g4 Rc5 32 h4 was appealing for White in P.Kouba-
R.Stapinski, correspondence 2007.
c) 23 ... Rxf4!? is untried, but appears to just about hold the position: 24 Rxc5 Kc8 25
Qg8+ Bf8! (White keeps up the torture after 25 ... Qd8 26 Qe6+ Kc7 27 Rh5) 26 Qe6+
Kb8 27 Rc4 Rxc4 28 Qxc4 Ka7 with a balanced endgame.
23 Re3
No surprises here as White threatens to double rooks on the e-file. Instead, 23 Re6
Nc5 simply repeats the position.
23 ... Ra7
Being able to finally put the dormant a8-rook to good use must have felt like a relief
for Black, but this is actually still established theory. There are a couple of other
reasonable tries here:
a) 23 ... Nc5 24 Rde1 is hard to meet, as 24 ... Ra7?? loses to 25 Rxe7 Qxe7 26 Rxe7
Rxe7 27 Qf6!.
b) 23 ... Re8 24 Rde1 Ra7 25 f5 transposes to the note to Black’s next move.
c) The passive 23 ... Nb6 24 Rde1 Nc8 looks ugly, but Black somehow survives. For
example, 25 Qg7 Re8 26 f5 Qxc6 27 f6 Kc7! with yet another unclear position.
24 Rde1 Qxc6
This is a novelty according to my database. 24 ... Re8 was played previously and
should also hold the balance: for example, 25 f5 Qxc6 26 f6 Nb6 27 Rxe7 Raxe7 28 Rxe7!
(keeping the last pair of rooks on the board is not a wise decision as after 28 fxe7+ Kd7
Black would soon round up the passed e-pawn and be the one pressing for the win) 28 ...
Nc8 29 Rxe8+ Qxe8 30 Qxe8+ Kxe8 31 g4 Nb6 32 g5 with a total mess. I suppose
computers may eventually be able to work out this position, but I’d rather conclude with a
useful ‘unclear’ assessment.
25 Rxe7 Rxe7 26 Rxe7
26 Qxe7+ Kc8 27 h4 Nc5 28 Rd1 d5 maintains the equilibrium.
 26 ... Nb6 27 Qf6?!
This was inaccurate and actually allowed Black some chances to play for a win. 27
h4!? may improve, but it doesn’t change the assessment that Black should be fine here.
27 ... Nd5 28 Qxh8+ Kxe7 29 Qg7+ Ke8 30 Qg8+ Ke7 31 Qg7+ Ke8 32
Qg8+ Kd7 33 Qg7+ Kd8
Acquiescing to the draw. Black could have tried for more with 33 ... Ne7! when the
queen and knight tandem would be a dangerous duo.
34 Qd4 Ke7 ½-½
This game confirms the theoretical status of this line. Black should be fine, but only if
he really knows his stuff.

Game 22
K.Maslak-N.Grandelius
Olomouc 2009

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qf3 Qc7

9 0-0-0 b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rhe1 Qb6
 12 Nd5!
This thematic sacrifice appears to be White’s most promising attempt to attain an
edge, but there are several alternatives to explore too:
a) 12 Qe3 was recently used by Luther, but I’m not too sure what to read into the
further 12 ... 0-0-0! (12 ... Be7!? is a safe alternative and was tested extensively in
correspondence chess; a typical line goes 13 e5 dxe5 14 fxe5 Ng4 with eventual equality)
13 Nf3 (13 a3!? looks more critical, although I think that Black should be okay after 13 ...
Be7) 13 ... Qxe3+ 14 Rxe3 and ½-½ in T.Luther-S.Feller, Barcelona 2007. As in most
Sicilian endgames, Black should be pretty comfortable here.
b) 12 Bxf6 Nxf6 13 f5 is a relatively rare approach, but going after the e6-pawn with
Black’s light-squared bishop on b7 is not without merit. A recent fairly high-level
encounter continued 13 ... 0-0-0 (White obtained nice light-square play after 13 ... e5 14
Nd5! Qd8 15 Nxf6+ Qxf6 16 Nb3 in D.Rook-A.Ermolaev, correspondence 2010; a possible
continuation is 16 ... Rb8 – freeing the a8-square for the bishop in case White decides to
hit it with Na5 – 17 Nd2 Be7 18 Nf1! 0-0 19 Ne3) 14 Nb3 e5? (giving up the light squares
completely; the prudent 14 ... Kb8 was safer) 15 a4! d5 16 axb5 dxe4 and now in
V.Kotronias-R.Van Kampen, Aix-les-Bains 2011, White could have recaptured on e4 with
17 Bxe4!, with a rather substantial edge after 17 ... Rxd1+ 18 Rxd1 Nxe4 19 bxa6!.
c) 12 Nb3 Rc8 13 Kb1! (not 13 Qh3? Rxc3! 14 bxc3 Qc7 15 Kb1 Be7 with thematic
compensation for the exchange) 13 ... Rxc3 14 bxc3 Qc7 15 f5 e5 and now in A.Samhouri-
J.Cabrera Trujillo, Budapest 2010, 16 g4! would be a significant improvement. For
example, 16 ... h5 17 h3 Be7 18 Bd2 (Kislik) when White is ready to press forward on the
kingside.
12 ... exd5
This much maligned capture had seemingly been established as more or less losing,
but the young Swedish Grandmaster has given it a couple of run outs. I also noticed that
there have been plenty of correspondence games with Black successfully defending,
although it certainly wasn’t a pretty sight.
 We will examine 12 ... Qxd4 in Games 23 and 24.
13 Nc6

The well-known ‘refutation’, but as we all know, things can change very quickly in this
computer age.
13 ... dxe4!
Opening up the e-file looks suicidal, but is surprisingly the only move due to very
concrete reasons:
a) 13 ... Bxc6 is bad because of 14 exd5+ Be7 15 dxc6 Nc5 16 Bxf6 gxf6 17 Bf5 and it
has been established since M.Chiburdanidze-S.Dvoirys, Tashkent 1980, that Black is in big
trouble here.
b) 13 ... d4 14 e5! dxe5 15 fxe5 Ng4 16 e6! is also extremely fun for White.
14 Bxe4 Nc5
With the idea of blocking on e6. There is no useful discovered check.
15 Bxf6
15 Bf5+ has been tested in a few important correspondence games and after 15 ...
Ne6 16 Bxe6 Black must be careful:
a) 16 ... fxe6? loses by force to 17 Rxe6+ Kd7 (17 ... Kf7 18 Qb3! Kg6 19 Bxf6 gxf6 20
Ne5+ Kg7 21 Qg3+ Kh6 22 Qg5# is an emphatic finish) 18 Ne5+! Kc8 (or 18 ... Kxe6 19
Qh3+!) 19 Qh3! Kc7 20 Qc3+ Bc6 21 Bxf6 gxf6 22 Nxc6 Qxc6 23 Qxf6!, winning the rook
on h8.
b) 16 ... Bxc6! 17 Bf5+ Kd8 (17 ... Be7 is a possible improvement: 18 Qc3 b4 19
Rxe7+! Kxe7 20 Bxf6+ gxf6 21 Re1+ Kf8 22 Qxf6 Rg8 and here White must find the
difficult 23 Bxh7!! to maintain the balance) 18 Bxf6+ gxf6 19 Qc3 Be7 20 Rxe7! Kxe7 21
Re1+ Kf8 22 Qxf6 Kg8 23 Qg5+ Kf8 24 Qe7+ Kg7 25 Re3.
 After a series of forced moves, White, with the terrible threat of 26 Rg3+, appears to
be completely winning, but it is all about depth in correspondence chess and Black, no
doubt with the help of the machine, found 25 ... Bf3!!, saving the day. White was forced
to acquiesce to the draw with 26 Qg5+ (not 26 Rxf3?? Qg1+) 26 ... Kf8 27 Qh6+ Kg8 28
Re1 Qf2 29 Qg5+ Kf8 30 Qh6+ Kg8 31 Qg5+ in E.Reina Guerra-A.Ermolaev,
correspondence 2010.
15 ... gxf6

16 Qh3
Commonest in the correspondence chess world, but there are a couple of important
alternatives.
a) 16 Bf5+? was played in the stem game where Black defended successfully and
eventually consolidated his extra piece: 16 ... Ne6 17 Qh5 Bxc6 18 Bxe6 Ra7 19 Bd7+?
Kxd7 20 Qf5+ Kc7 21 Qxf6 Qf2 22 Qxh8 Qxf4+ 23 Kb1 Qh6 with a clear advantage for
Black in E.Blomqvist-N.Grandelius, Kungsor 2009.
b) I have only found one game with the tricky 16 Bd5+!? where Black had to find
several accurate moves to survive: 16 ... Kd7 (16 ... Ne6?? 17 Rxe6+! fxe6 18 Qh5+ Kd7
19 Qf7+ leads to mate, while here 17 ... Kd7 18 Rxf6 Bxc6 19 Bxc6+ Qxc6 20 Rxf7+ wins
material) 17 Qh5 Kc7 18 Qxf7+ Nd7 19 Rd3 (the intriguing 19 Nb4!? is a suggestion of
the strong Hiarcs Openings Book; White certainly has useful compensation after 19 ...
Rd8 20 Re8 Bh6 21 Rxh8 Rxh8 22 Bxb7 Qxb7 23 g3 when Black’s pieces are all constricted
and I would imagine that White would score very highly in over-the-board play) 19 ...
Bxc6 20 Rc3 Bh6 (there is nothing better; Black has to get his pieces out somehow) 21
Bxc6 Bxf4+ 22 Kb1 Qxc6 23 Re7! Rhd8 24 Rxc6+ Kxc6 25 c4 Kc7 (25 ... Rab8 26 Qd5+
Kc7 27 Rxh7 Be5 28 c5 dxc5 29 Qxc5+ Kb7 30 h4 was slightly better for White in
B.Ivanov-A.Nekhaev, correspondence 2009) 26 cxb5! (instead of 26 Qxh7, as played in
C.Moreno Carretero-J.Aguiar Garcia, correspondence 2010) 26 ... axb5 27 Qb3 Ra7 28 g3
Be5 29 Qxb5 when the connected passed pawns on the queenside mean that White can
continue to push for the win.
16 ... Ne6 17 Bg6!

Showing the main point of White’s last move, which established an awkward pin on
the h7-pawn. Now Black had to play a series of forced moves, although these are not
particularly difficult to find.
17 ... Kd7
17 ... Qxc6? 18 Qxe6+ Kd8 19 Qxf6+ Kc7 20 Bd3 wins.
18 Bxf7 Kxc6
18 ... Qxc6? 19 Qxe6+ Kc7 20 Rd3! is another typical rook lift that is hard to defend
against.
19 Qxe6 Qd8
The threat was Rd3 followed by mate so Black had to open a route for his king to
retreat.
20 Qe3 Qd7!
 The only move. This is not immediately clear at first glance, but both players were
probably still in their opening preparation. Trying to escape with 20 ... Kc7 loses to 21
Qc3+ Kb6 22 Qd4+ Kc7 23 Rd3!, while 20 ... Bh6 is met by the straightforward 21 Bd5+
(those who don’t like the resulting opposite-coloured bishop ending can opt for 21 Qd4!?
followed by Re6 with increasing pressure) 21 ... Kc7 22 Qe7+ Qd7 23 Bxb7 Bxf4+ 24 Kb1
Rae8 25 Qxd7+ Kxd7 26 Rxe8 Rxe8 27 Bxa6 Kc6 28 g3 Be5 29 c4 with good winning
chances for White, although Black can certainly mount some resistance.
21 Qc3+
After 21 Be6 Qd8 22 Rd3 Kc7 Black escapes.
21 ... Kb6 22 Qxf6

22 ... Bxg2?
This was a tad greedy, but is an understandable move since there is no obvious
refutation.
All the evidence from the correspondence chess world seems to indicate that Black
does best with 22 ... h5!, preparing a rook lift of his own: 23 Be6 (I prefer Black’s bishop-
pair after 23 Rd3!? Bc6! 24 Rc3 Rc8 25 Qd4+ Kb7 26 Be6 Bg7 27 Qd1 Qc7 28 Bxc8+ Rxc8
29 Rce3 Bf8 30 g3, although it is obvious that matters are not at all clear) 23 ... Bg7!
(forcing a liquidation to an ending where Black will have a bishop for three pawns) 24
Bxd7 Bxf6 25 Rxd6+ Kc7 26 Rxf6 Kxd7.
 Black should be fine here as his light-squared bishop and soon-to-be-active rooks are
surely enough to handle White’s pawns. It is worthwhile examining Black’s chances in the
following game: 27 Rf7+ Kc6 28 Re6+ (28 Ree7 Rab8 is also okay for Black) 28 ... Kd5 29
Re5+ Kc6 30 Re6+ Kd5 31 Ref6! (continuing the squeeze) 31 ... Rab8 32 Rb6 Ba8 33
Rxa6 Kd4 34 Re6 (34 g3 h4! again gives Black good counter-chances) 34 ... Bd5 35 Rd7
Rbd8 36 c3+ Kd3 37 Red6 Rxd7 38 Rxd7 Ke4 39 b3 h4 when Black was very active and
eventually drew in A.Silva-G.Gerola, correspondence 2010.
23 Rg1 Bc6 24 Be6
Not a bad move, but allowing Black some flexibility. I like the restricting 24 Rde1!
when Black can hardly move. In fact, White wins material by force after 24 ... d5 25 Be6
Qc7 26 Qxh8 Qxf4+ 27 Kb1 Bb4 28 Qe5!.
24 ... Qe7 25 Qd4+ Kc7 26 Rde1 Bh6

27 Bd5?!
 Missing a nice tactic. The surprising 27 Bg8! would have snared the rook on h8.
27 ... Qd7 28 Bxc6 Kxc6 29 Qf6 Bxf4+ 30 Qxf4
White has emerged with a comfortable edge in view of his better pawn structure and
safer king. For our purposes, this should suffice, but it is still instructive to see White’s
technique.
30 ... Rae8 31 Qf3+ Kb6 32 Rd1 Rhg8 33 Rgf1 Rg6 34 Rd2 Re5 35 Qf2+
Kb7 36 Qf8 Qe8 37 Qf3+ Qc6 38 Qh3 h5 39 b3 Rge6 40 Rfd1 Qc5 41 Qf3+ Qc6
42 Qf7+ Qc7 43 Qf2 Qc5 44 Qg3 Re3 45 Qg7+ Qc7 46 Qg2+ Qc6 47 Qf2 R3e5
48 Kb1 Qc5 49 Qg3 Kb6 50 Rd3 Qb4 51 Qf2+ Kb7 52 Qf7+

52 ... Kb6?
Black has defended well, but now missed an important shot. 52 ... Re7 53 Qg6 R7e6
would have kept White’s advantage within manageable bounds, at least for the time
being.
53 Qf8!
Black cannot defend the d6-pawn without making concessions.
53 ... Re1 54 Qf2+
54 Kb2! Rxd1 55 Rxd1 would have placed Black in zugzwang.
54 ... Kc6 55 Qf3+ Qe4
55 ... Kc7 56 Qxh5 Qc5 was a better defence as the black queen would be more active
on c5 compared to e4, although White would remain in the driver’s seat.
56 Qxh5 Rxd1+ 57 Qxd1
 57 ... Qh4?
Strangely removing his queen from the action, but in his defence, Black’s position was
probably lost in any case. Still, something like 57 ... a5!? would have forced White to
work hard for the win.
58 Qf3+ Kb6 59 Rc3! Re5
59 ... Re1+ 60 Kb2 Qd4 is tricky but 61 a3 Re7 62 Qc6+ Ka7 63 Ka2! would have
freed White’s rook to good effect.
60 Qf8 Qe7 61 Qb8+ Ka5 62 a3 Qg7 63 Qd8+ 1-0
Black probably defends with 22 ... h5!, but it is a long and arduous journey to the half-
point and I don’t see too many professionals who would like to defend the position in a
practical game. Having said that, the line may well just be objectively equal.

Game 23
Rui Gao-Gu Xiaobing
Ho Chi Minh City 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qf3 Qc7

9 0-0-0 b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rhe1 Qb6 12 Nd5 Qxd4
 This is the established main line of the Gelfand variation.
13 Bxf6
I was surprised to see that the cheeky 13 Nc7+!? is actually playable. After 13 ... Kd8
14 Nxa8 Bxa8 15 Bxb5 Qb6 (15 ... Qb4 16 Bd3 Ke8 17 a3 Qb7 18 Qe2 is unclear, but I
fancy White’s chances) 16 Bxd7 Kxd7 17 Qd3 Black may be nominally ahead on material,
but he has to find a way to complete development with his king in the firing line.
13 ... gxf6 14 Bxb5 Qc5 15 Nxf6+
Beginning a forced sequence of moves which will result in another typical bishop for
three pawns position. The critical 15 b4!? is analysed in the next game.
15 ... Kd8
Not 15 ... Ke7? 16 Bxd7 Bg7 17 Nh5 Bxb2+ 18 Kxb2 Kxd7 19 Ka1! with the idea of 19
... Qxc2? 20 Rc1 Qd2 21 Red1 Qa5 22 Qd3, which is very good for White.
16 Nxd7 Qxb5 17 Nxf8 Rxf8 18 Qa3!
 Taking on d6 with the queen is important. The automatic 18 Rxd6+? allows the black
king to scramble to safety with 18 ... Kc7 19 Red1 Rac8 followed by ... Kb8.
18 ... Ke8!
Accurate. Without detailed analysis, it is hard to imagine that a move like 18 ... Rc8?
can be wrong. However, those who are familiar with the theory in this line should know
that this is a well-known inaccuracy and that White obtains a hefty edge by force. To be
honest, I am surprised to see the number of grandmasters who have played this well-
known mistake and even more surprised to see that it hasn’t been punished as often as it
should have. After 19 Qxd6+ Ke8 20 Re3! (this threatens Rc3, angling for mate on d8) 20
... Qc6 (20 ... Rg8 was played in the stem game and was swiftly punished with 21 Rc3
Bc6 22 f5! Rxg2 23 fxe6 Rf2 24 Rc5 Qa4 25 Rg1 and 1-0 in A.Kosten-Kr.Georgiev, Saint
Affrique 2005) 21 Qd2 Black has tried:

a) After 21 ... Ke7 22 Qb4+! Kf6 23 c3 White has scored 3/3 in my database, which is
quite right as he has more than a sufficient attack for the piece: 23 ... Qc5 (the untried 23
... Qc7 is best, but White remains on top after 24 e5+ Kg7 25 f5 exf5 26 Qf4 f6 27 Qxf5
Bc6 28 Rf1 Kh8 29 exf6) 24 e5+ Kf5 (forced, as moving the king to the g-file allows 25
Rg3+, after which White can capture the light-squared bishop safely) 25 g4+ Kg6 26 f5+
Kg7 27 Qf4 Kh8 28 Qh6 with a big plus in K.Goh Wei Ming-Chan Peng Kong, Singapore
Championship 2006, as given in the introduction.
b) 21 ... Qc7 is the most resilient, although after 22 Rc3 Qe7 23 Rxc8+ Bxc8 24 Qc3
Qb7 25 Rd4 Bd7 26 b3 (White has an easy advantage, but his technique is still pleasing
to watch) 26 ... f6 27 a4 Kf7 28 Qd3 Ke7 29 e5 f5 30 g4 Ke8 31 g5! (locking up the
kingside and bringing the play to the queenside where White has all the trumps) 31 ...
Rf7 32 Rd6 Qb4 33 Qd2 Qxd2+ 34 Kxd2 Bc8 35 h4 h5 36 b4 Rb7 37 c3 Ke7? 38 Rxa6
Rd7+ 39 Rd6 Rxd6+ 40 exd6+ Kxd6 41 b5 White won in a few more moves in D.Kokarev-
E.Najer, Ulan Ude 2009.
19 Qxd6 Qc6!
 The point of Black’s 18th move. He only moves his rook to c8 if he is able to threaten
mate on c2. Otherwise, it makes sense to try and exchange some pieces by preparing ...
Rd8 at an opportune moment.
19 ... Rc8? 20 Re3 would transpose to 18 ... Rc8, which, as we know by now, is not
very good.
20 Qd4
Commonest, but the other two queen moves are equally significant.
a) The eccentric looking 20 Qa3!? has scored very well and is certainly more
venomous than it looks, although Black should be objectively fine after 20 ... Rg8 21 g3:
a1) 21 ... Rd8 was played in the only GM clash that I could find. After 22 f5 Qc7 23
Qa4+ Ke7 24 Qb4+ Black should have acquiesced to a draw by retreating his king, but
instead decided to go forward: 24 ... Kf6? 25 e5+?! (this eventually did the trick, but 25
Rd6! is even more accurate: 25 ... Kg7 26 Qd4+ f6 27 e5 Kh8 28 fxe6 fxe5 29 Qxe5+ and
White is close to winning or 25 ... Rxd6 26 e5+ Kg7 27 exd6 Qd7 28 fxe6 fxe6 29 Qg4+
Kh8 30 Qxe6 Qxe6 31 Rxe6, which is clearly better for White) 25 ... Kg7 26 fxe6 fxe6 27
Qg4+ Kh8 28 Qxe6. By now White was better in Z.Hracek-A.Naumann, Dresden 2007,
and went on to win a fine game.
a2) I believe 21 ... Rc8! is objectively stronger. After 22 Rd2, the improvement 22 ...
Qc5! (22 ... Qb6 was played in D.Grobler-R.Ward, correspondence 2009, which is the only
game I could find here) 23 Qd3 Kf8 followed by ... Kg7 gives Black a comfortable position.
b) 20 Qd2 has the drawback of allowing Black future exchanges down the d-file which
is something that he generally wants: 20 ... Qc7! (20 ... Rc8? would again transpose to 18
... Rc8 after 21 Re3!) 21 f5 (21 g3 f6! was good for Black in T.Luther-K.Sasikiran, Moscow
2007) 21 ... Rd8 22 Qb4 Rg8 23 g3 Rxd1+ 24 Rxd1 Rg4! (an effective way for Black to
bring his rook into play) 25 fxe6 Rxe4 26 exf7+ Kxf7 27 Rd4 a5 28 Qb3+ Kg7 29 Qd3
Rxd4 30 Qxd4+ Kg6 31 b3 with an eventual draw in I.Georgiadis-M.Perunovic, Budva
2009.
20 ... Qc7
 20 ... Rc8 is also fine, but Black still has to be careful after it: 21 Rd2 Qc7! (21 ... f6 22
Re3 is slightly awkward for Black) 22 Re3 Rd8 23 Qa4+ Qc6? (23 ... Bc6! 24 Rxd8+ Kxd8
25 Qb4 Rg8 26 g3 Kc8 27 Rc3 Rd8 equalizes, although both sides can certainly play on)
24 Rxd8+ Kxd8 25 Rd3+ Ke8 26 Qa5! Ke7? (the decisive mistake after getting
bamboozled by White’s constant threats; 26 ... Qc8 was the only move when White can
continue the squeeze with 27 Qb6! Bxe4 28 Rc3 Qd8 29 Qxa6, although there is still a
game to be played after 29 ... Ke7) 27 Qb4+ Ke8 28 f5 Qc7 29 g3! (simply restricting
Black’s play before turning the attention back to the queenside) 29 ... Rg8 30 Rb3 Bc8 31
f6 a5 32 Qb5+ Bd7 33 Qb8+ Qd8 34 Qa7 and 1-0 being W.So-S.Arun Prasad, Gaziantep
2008. This is another demonstration of the fine line between a draw and a loss in this
variation.

21 g3?!
This tame move has been played a few times, but doesn’t pose any serious problems
for Black, so White should prefer:
a) 21 f5 has been the main move for years, but there are several reasonable ways for
Black to proceed. I will just show a couple here:
a1) 21 ... Rg8 22 g3 (after 22 fxe6!? fxe6, 23 Qf6 Qe7 24 Qf3 Rd8 holds up well, while
23 Qa4+ Bc6 24 Qc4 Rg6 25 g3 Kf7 is another logical sequence where again Black should
have no real issues since his worries over his king have been resolved) 22 ... Rc8 23 Rd2
e5 (Emmanuel Berg recommended 23 ... Rd8 when Black is also fine: for example, 24
Qa4+ Qc6 25 Qa5 – 25 Rxd8+ Kxd8 26 Qd4+ Kc8 27 Qf6 exf5 28 Qxf7 Qh6+! 29 Kb1 Rf8
30 Qc4+ Kb8 31 exf5 Rxf5 is good for Black, due to the crucial fact that after 32 Re8+
Ka7 there is no mate with 33 Qd4+ due to the resource 33 ... Qb6 – 25 ... Rxd2 26 Qxd2
and now both 26 ... e5 and 26 ... Qc7 should be okay for Black) 24 Qa4+ Kf8 (living a
little dangerously, although Black is still objectively fine at this juncture; 24 ... Qc6, with
the idea of 25 Qa5 Qb5, is safer and more logical) 25 Rd7 Qc6 26 Qb4+ Kg7 27 Qd2 Kh8
28 c3 f6 (28 ... Rc7!? is a useful move to make) 29 Rd1 Rg7 (Black could have seized the
initiative here with the idea of 29 ... Rc7! 30 Rd6 Qc4! 31 Qh6 Rf7 32 Rxf6 Bxe4!) 30 Rd6
Qa4?? (overlooking some uncommon back-rank tactics; 30 ... Qc7 would have resulted in
an equal but unclear position) 31 Rd8+ Rg8 32 Qh6! (the simultaneous threats of R1d7
and Qxf6 are impossible to meet) 32 ... Rxc3+ 33 Kb1 Bxe4+ 34 Ka1 Qxd1+ 35 Rxd1 Rc6
36 Qh5 and White converted his material advantage in E.Berg-P.Negi, Malmo 2007.
a2) The natural 21 ... Rc8 is also good: 22 Rd2 Rd8 23 Qa4+ Qc6 24 Rxd8+ (24 Qb4
Rxd2 25 Qxd2 Rg8 26 g3 Rg4 was also comfortable for Black in A.Filippov-S.Djuraev,
Tashkent 2009) 24 ... Kxd8 25 Qb4 Re8 26 Re3 Qc7 27 fxe6 Kc8! 28 e5 Kb8! 29 exf7 Qxf7
and Black eventually drew comfortably in M.Peczkowski-L.Weiss, correspondence 2010.

In this line Black is normally fine once he gets his king to safety as his active pieces
will create counterplay against the numerous white pawns.
b) 21 Re3 Rd8 22 Qa4+ Bc6 23 Rxd8+ (23 Qxa6 Rxd1+ 24 Kxd1 f6 25 Rc3 Kd7 26
Rd3+ Ke7 was also equal in S.Abu Sufian-R.Jones, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010) 23 ...
Kxd8 24 Qb4 Rg8 25 g3 Kc8 26 Rc3 Rd8, as played in M.Manduch-H.Van den Bos,
correspondence 2007, reaches a similar position to those we analysed above. Again, with
a pair of rooks exchanged and his king safely tucked away, Black is doing fairly well and
drew without too much trouble.
21 ... Rc8
This worked out well in the game, but perhaps, Black could hope for more from this
position. The untried and very thematic 21 ... f6! is probably best as it allows Black to
fight for winning chances. For example, 22 Qa4+ Ke7 23 f5 e5 24 Qb3 Rf7! 25 g4 Rc8 26
h4 Ke8! and Black is starting to gain the initiative on the queenside.
22 c3 Rd8 23 Qb4 Rg8 24 Rxd8+ Kxd8 25 Rd1+ Kc8 26 Rd4 Kb8 27 Rc4
Qd7 28 Rd4 Qc7 ½-½
Neither side could sensibly avoid the repetition. This line is more or less done and
dusted, so recent attention has rightly switched to 15 b4!? which we examine in the next
game.

Game 24
Wang Yue-Zhao Jun
Qinhuangdao 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Nbd7 8 Qf3 Qc7

9 0-0-0 b5 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rhe1 Qb6 12 Nd5 Qxd4 13 Bxf6 gxf6 14 Bxb5 Qc5
15 b4!?

This has been considered critical ever since 15 Nxf6 was worked out to be fine for
Black. Computers hugely favour White in the resulting queen versus three pieces
middlegame, but as we shall soon see, Black has plenty of practical chances. It has to be
said that most chess engines do not seem to evaluate positions where one side sacrifices
a queen as accurately as we might expect them to.
15 ... Qxb5
The automatic reply. I should point out that the improbable 15 ... Qa7 is a tricky move
to face over the board: 16 Nxf6+ Ke7 17 Bxd7 a5! (creating some counterplay on the
queenside; 17 ... Kxf6 18 Qg3 Ke7 19 Ba4! with the idea of e5 and Qg5 is devastating) 18
b5 Qc5 (18 ... Kxf6 19 e5+ Ke7 20 exd6+ Kxd7 21 Qh5! wins nicely) 19 Qg3! Bh6 (19 ...
Kxf6 20 Rd5! wins) 20 Re3 Kxf6 21 Qh4+ Bg5 22 Qxg5+ Qxg5 23 fxg5+ Ke7 24 Bc6 Bxc6
25 bxc6. This should be a winning rook endgame for White, although there are certainly
chances for him to go wrong, given the fractured nature of his pawns.
16 Nc7+ Ke7!
16 ... Kd8?! is less logical as it blocks the h8-rook from the action on the queenside
and leaves the f7-pawn undefended. White should proceed with 17 Nxb5 axb5 18 Qh5!
Rxa2 19 Qxf7! with a large edge, as in C.Giuliano-J.Fages, correspondence 2010.
17 Nxb5 axb5
 18 Qd3
Virtually the only move that has been played and the machine’s first choice by a fairly
comfortable margin. We should also, though, consider:
a) 18 Qh5?! was first played in a high-profile game between Alexander Shabalov and
Boris Gelfand back in 2004 and to my knowledge has not been repeated since. Not
without good reason though, as Black was able to create counterplay quicker than he can
after 18 Qd3. I will present a small extract of the game with some light comments: 18 ...
Rxa2 19 Qxb5 Bh6!! was a quite brilliant concept. We often hear the maxim ‘what
matters is what remains on the board and not what comes off it’ and this is a perfect
example. Despite having only two pieces for the queen, the well-coordinated black pieces
are able to generate constant threats. The risk is that Black has to be vigilant not to
allow White to return material in a favourable manner. Here:
a1) This was perhaps the time to be materialistic with 20 Qxb7 Bxf4+ 21 Kb1 Rha8
(Gelfand suggested 21 ... Raa8!?, but White can try 22 e5! when 22 ... Bxe5 23 Rxe5 fxe5
24 Qe4 is probably slightly better for him) 22 c3 Be5 23 Qc6 Ra1+! (23 ... R8a3 24 Qc4
Rxg2 25 Re2 Rxc3 was given as ‘compensation’ by Gelfand, but after 26 Qxc3 Rxe2 27
Qc4 Rxh2 28 Rg1! followed by Rg8 White will be the one pushing for the win) 24 Kc2
R1a2+ 25 Kd3 (25 Kb1 Ra1+ is a draw, unfortunately) 25 ... R8a3 when Black’s initiative
is just enough to compensate for the material deficit.
a2) 20 e5?! (true to his aggressive style, Shabalov wanted to fight fire with fire) 20 ...
fxe5?! (Mikhail Golubev rightly pointed out that 20 ... Rc8!, with the idea of 21 exd6+ Kd8
22 Qd3 Rcxc2+ 23 Qxc2 Bxf4+ 24 Kb1 Rxc2 25 Kxc2 Bxg2, would have given Black
excellent winning chances; here after 21 exf6+ Kd8! White has no reasonable way to
guard c2 as 22 c4? is met effectively by 22 ... Ba6) 21 Qxb7 Bxf4+ 22 Kb1 Rha8 23 g3
R2a7 24 Qc6 Ra6 (Gelfand analysed 24 ... Bd2 25 Rxd2 25 ... Ra1+ 26 Kb2 R1a2+ 27 Kb3
R8a3+ with a likely draw, but here 25 Qxa8! is stronger: 25 ... Rxa8 26 Rxd2 f5 27 c3
with decent chances) 25 Qc3 Bh6! (with the plan of ... d6-d5, ... Bg7 and ... Nb6-c4) 26
Re4?! (embarking on a mistaken plan to go after the h7-pawn; it was hard to find a
concrete plan in any case, but 26 Rf1!? with the idea of 26 ... d5 27 Qc7 may work) 26 ...
d5! 27 Rh4 d4! 28 Qb2 Bg5 29 Rxh7?! (29 Rg4! Be3 30 c3 was possibly White’s last
chance) 29 ... Nf6 when Black had, amongst others, the menacing threat of ... Nd5-c3 and
eventually won in A.Shabalov-B.Gelfand, Bermuda 2004.
b) Both 18 Kb1!? and 18 c3!? are untried and may be worthy of further investigation.
In the latter variation, 18 ... Bh6 (if 18 ... Rxa2 19 Qd3 Ra6 20 Qxb5 Rb6 21 Qh5) 19 g3
Ne5! 20 Qh5 Rxa2!? 21 Qxh6 Nc4 is another interesting unbalanced middlegame. Who
knows what is really going on here?
18 ... Ra6

19 Qxb5
Again, overwhelmingly the main move, but there are a few other interesting options:
a) The direct 19 e5!? would be good if White is able to open some central files: 19 ...
fxe5 20 fxe5 d5! (closing the door on the bishops is positionally undesirable, but it is even
more important to keep the black king safe; an ugly example is 20 ... Bh6+ 21 Kb1 Bd5?
22 Qg3! Nxe5 23 Qh4+ Kd7 24 Rxd5 Nc4 25 Qxh6 and White soon won in O.Simon-
J.Stephan, French League 2005) 21 Qg3 (21 Kb1!? Rc6 22 a3 Rc4 23 Qg3 is also unclear,
but it seems that Black does not get the kind of play he normally obtains in the main line)
21 ... h6 (21 ... Ke8! 22 c3 Rxa2 was better, with mutual chances) 22 Rf1 Bc6? (and here
22 ... Rh7! keeps Black in the game) 23 Rd4! Rh7 24 Qh4+?! (24 Kb1 Nb6 25 Rg4!
followed by Rg8 looks promising) 24 ... Ke8 25 Qh5 was about equal and the game
C.Claros Egea-D.James, Malaga 2010, eventually ended in a draw after further ups and
downs.
b) Shoring up the queenside with the calm 19 a3 also makes some sense, although
Black gets to defend b5 after which White is hard pressed to find a concrete plan. The
only game I could find continued in logical fashion: 19 ... Bh6 20 g3 Rb6 21 Re3 Rc8 22
Qe2 Bg7 23 Qg4 (after 23 Qh5 h6 24 Kb1 Rc4 25 Qe2 Rbc6 it’s hard for either side to
make progress) 23 ... Kf8 24 Qh5 Kg8 25 Qe2 and there was nothing much for either side
to do in I.Ruiz Bernal-S.Abramov, correspondence 2009.
 c) The untested 19 g3!? is tricky but harmless:
c1) Trying to transpose to the main line with 19 ... Bh6? fails badly to 20 Qxb5 Rb6?
(20 ... Rb8 is better, although 21 c3 Rc6 22 Kb2 Bg7 23 f5 keeps the dark-squared bishop
under lock and key, and looks very nasty) 21 Qh5! Bg7 22 a3 with a clearly superior
version of the main line for White.
c2) 19 ... Rb6! (Black should always keep the b5-pawn if he can as it maintains
important control over the c4-square) 20 Re3 (20 e5 fxe5 21 fxe5 d5 is probably a worse
version of the 19 e5 line as here Black has inserted the useful ... Rb6 compared to the
not-so-useful g2-g3) 20 ... Bg7 21 Qd2 Ra8 (21 ... Rc8? was my first instinct, but 22 Rd3!
Rcc6 23 a4! bxa4 24 b5 wins the crucial d6-pawn by force, after which Black’s position is
bound to collapse) 22 a3 Bf8 and, as we have seen, these positions should be fine for
Black since White lacks a clear plan.
19 ... Rb6 20 Qd3
The inferior 20 Qc4?! looks counterintuitive as it allows a future tempo hit with ... Rc8.
After 20 ... Bh6 21 g3 Rc8 22 Qb3 Black has:

a) 22 ... Rbc6?! (this eventually worked out well, but was in fact an inaccuracy) 23 b5
(23 Rd2! Nb6 24 b5 Rc5 25 a4 and White has got his pawns rolling) 23 ... Rc3 24 Qb4?
(24 Qb2) 24 ... Rxc2+ 25 Kb1 R2c5 26 Rc1 f5 27 exf5?? (27 Rxc5 Nxc5 28 e5 is still
unclear) 27 ... Be4+!! (a beautiful tactic, using the fact that White’s pieces are all heavily
overloaded) 28 Kb2 Bg7+ 0-1, I.Cheparinov-Kr.Georgiev, Sofia 2003.
b) 22 ... e5!? was played in H.Poetsch-S.Feller, Internet 2006. After 23 a4! (the game
continued 23 Rf1? when Black should have simply played 23 ... Nc5 followed by capturing
on e4, with a dream position) 23 ... exf4 (23 ... Nc5 24 Qa3 exf4 25 bxc5 fxg3+ 26 Rd2
Rxc5 27 hxg3 Bc6 28 Re3 Bd7 29 Rf3 Bxd2+ 30 Kxd2 Rbc6 gives Black better drawing
chances) 24 b5 there is the fascinating variation 24 ... Nc5 25 Qb4 fxg3+ 26 Kb1 Bf4! 27
a5 (27 hxg3 may be safer) 27 ... Be5!! (giving up a whole rook) 28 axb6 Ra8 29 c3 gxh2,
which leads to a position where White has an immense material advantage with rook and
queen for the three minor pieces and pawn, but he is the one struggling to draw.
 White’s passed pawns are stymied and, in contrast to White’s awkward pieces, Black’s
army oozes harmony. Of course, this last variation is hardly forced, but I felt that it was in
the spirit of the entire variation and highlights the kind of tactical possibilities that can
arise if one approach these positions with an open mind and a lot of imagination.
20 ... Bh6
Black probably forgot her theory when she played 20 ... h5?, which allowed White to
get her pawns going with 21 a4 Bh6 22 g3 in A.Kosteniuk-M.Sebag, Moscow (blitz) 2010.
21 g3

After plenty of twists and turns, we have arrived at the critical position for the entire
Gelfand variation. Black must prevent White’s main plan of pushing his passed queenside
pawns quickly.
21 ... Ra8
This is the main move, but as one can imagine, the position is full of possibilities:
 a) 21 ... Ba6!?, with the idea of holding up the queenside pawns with ... Bb5, is the
second most popular move. After 22 Qf3 (this is probably best, but White has to know
what he is doing as in most lines he will struggle to find a clear plan once his passed
pawns are stymied; the untried 22 Qd2!? is worth a try: for example, 22 ... Bb5 23 Re3
Ra8 24 a3) 22 ... Rc8! (a nasty cross pin arises after 22 ... Rxb4 23 Rxd6 Kxd6 24 Qa3!)
23 Qh5 Bf8 (this has been played in all the games, although keeping the bishop on the
long diagonal with 23 ... Bg7 24 Qxh7 Kf8 also looks interesting) 24 a3 quite an important
position is reached:

a1) 24 ... e5!? (Black should normally refrain from this advance unless it is absolutely
necessary, but it has to be said that White is also struggling for a plan here) 25 Rd2 Bb5
26 Qxh7 Rc3 27 Kb2 Rbc6 28 Rxd6? (this loses on the spot ,but even after the logical 28
Red1 Ba4 29 Rc1 Nb6 Black is the one creating the threats; maybe something radical like
28 g4!? exf4 29 g5!? is called for) 28 ... Rxc2+ 29 Kb1 Kxd6 30 Rd1+ Ke7 31 Rxd7+ Kxd7
32 Qxf7+ Kc8 33 Qxf8+ Kb7 and Black won easily in K.Pilgaard-S.Bekker Jensen, Aalborg
2006, which may be the way to go for the second player.
a2) 24 ... Ke8 (commonest, but White has a humongous score here) 25 Rd2 Rbc6 (25
... Rc3 26 Kb2 Rbc6 was played in the stem game E.Mnatsakanian-Kr.Georgiev, Yerevan
1982, and here with 27 Qa5! Bb7 28 Ree2 Rc8 29 Rd3 R3c6 30 Rb3 White can make some
progress on the queenside) 26 Re3 Nb6 27 Rg2!? (White decides to take his chances on
the kingside, knowing that his passed pawns on the queenside are very likely going to be
blocked by Black’s pieces) 27 ... h6 28 g4 Nc4 29 Reg3! (the rooks are, strangely enough,
pretty well placed here) 29 ... R6c7 30 a4! sees White playing on both sides of the board.
 The rest of the game shows how stretched Black’s defence is as it tries to cope with
the mounting threats: 30 ... Bg7 31 g5! fxg5 32 fxg5 hxg5 33 Qxg5 Bf8 34 Rc3 Kd7 35 Qf4
(35 Qf6 Be7 36 Qd4 also looks pretty strong) 35 ... Ne5 36 Rxc7+ Rxc7 37 Qe3 Be7 (37 ...
Nd3+ allows 38 Kb1 Nxb4 39 Qf4! with the idea of 39 ... Ke7 40 Rg8! when Black cannot
reasonably defend the dark-squared bishop) 38 b5 Bb7 39 a5 (White is winning here and
converted the advantage with pinpoint precision) 39 ... f5? 40 Rg7 Bxe4 41 c3 Nd3+ 42
Kd2 Ne5 43 Kd1 Bf3+ 44 Kc1 f4 45 Qd4 Ba8 46 a6 f3 47 Qh4 Ng6 48 Qf6 1-0, V.Yamaliev-
T.Tenev, correspondence 2008.
b) 21 ... e5?! allows White to advance his pawns quickly: 22 a4! exf4 23 Qd2 Rc8 (23
... Ne5 24 Qd4! followed by b5 wins) 24 a5 Rbc6 25 gxf4 Rxc2+ 26 Qxc2 Bxf4+ 27 Kb1
Rxc2 28 Kxc2 Bxh2 29 b5 when White was better and eventually triumphed with his
strong queenside pawns in G.Compagnone-P.Postupa, correspondence 2010.
c) After 21 ... Rc8 White should play the principled 22 a4, followed by putting the
queen on b3 and advancing the passed pawns as soon as possible:
c1) A.Gurmen-I.Oren, correspondence 2008, continued 22 ... Ne5 23 Qb3 Rbc6 24 b5
Rc5 25 a5 Rb8 and now White should proceed with 26 Qb4! Ba8 27 b6 Nc4 (if 27 ... Nc6
28 Qd2!) 28 Rd3 Nxa5 29 Red1 Nc6 30 Qd2 when Black’s position is about to collapse
since he is not able to defend the d6-pawn which is the cornerstone of his defence.
c2) 22 ... Ke8 23 Qa3 (23 Qd4 e5 24 Qb2 Rc4! 25 c3 exf4 26 Kb1 f3 27 a5 Rbc6 28 b5
R6c5 should give Black sufficient play) 23 ... Rbc6 (23 ... Bf8? is too slow and allows
White to advance his pawns: 24 a5 Rbc6 25 Qb2 d5? 26 exd5 Rxc2+ 27 Qxc2 Rxc2+ 28
Kxc2 Bxb4 29 a6 Bxa6 30 dxe6 Nc5 31 Re3 and White won in R.Priebe-L.Andersen,
correspondence 2006) 24 a5! (White has to sacrifice the c2-pawn; 24 Rd2 Rc4! is
annoying to face) 24 ... Rxc2+ 25 Kb1 R2c3 26 Qb2 (White plans to steamroller his way
on the queenside or reduce some of the pressure by exchanging a pair of rooks with a
future Rc1) 26 ... Bg7 (planning to reintroduce the dark-squared bishop to the game with
a timely ... f5) 27 b5 f5 28 e5 looks quite scary.
 However, after 28 ... R3c5!! (an extremely classy switch-back, the point of which is
better described with variations than words; having said that, 28 ... dxe5!? is also not
bad, with the idea of 29 a6 Bf3 30 b6 Nxb6!! 31 Qxb6 exf4 32 gxf4 Bf6! when Black
seems to be doing fine) 29 a6 (29 Rxd6 Rb8! followed by ... Bd5 would give White a big
problem with his b-pawn) 29 ... Rb8! (the point of Black’s quite brilliant 28th move; White
is not able to capture the light-squared bishop due to the awkward placement of his king
and queen, and the unbearable pressure on the b5-pawn) 30 a7! (30 axb7? Rxb7 31 Ka2
Rbxb5 32 Qd4 Nb6! 33 Qxd6 Rc8! is winning for Black) 30 ... Ra8 31 Rxd6 Bf8 (bringing
the dark-squared bishop back into play, but White has one last counter blow that saves
the day) 32 b6! Bxd6 33 exd6 Rc6 34 Qh8+ Nf8 35 Qd4 (Black has gained a lot of
material, but he is trussed up like a chicken and has no choice but to acquiesce to a
repetition) 35 ... Nd7 (35 ... Rd8 36 Rc1 Rdxd6 37 Qa4 Ke7 38 Rxc6 Rxc6 39 a8Q Bxa8 40
Qxa8 Rxb6+ is a longer path to reach the draw) 36 Qh8+ ½-½, D.Wilhelmi-M.Avotins,
correspondence 2008.
From the above evidence, it appears that both 21 ... Ba6 and 21 ... Rc8 are playable,
although Black has to tread very carefully indeed. After that lengthy discussion, we head
back to 21 ... Ra8.
 22 a3
22 e5!? has also been tried and after 22 ... Nxe5! (22 ... Rxa2? 23 exd6+! Kf8 24 Qb3
Ra8 25 b5 looks good for White, while 22 ... fxe5 23 Qxh7 is the obvious point) 23 Rxe5
fxe5 24 Qxh7 Rxa2 25 Qxh6 Be4! 26 Rd2 Rxb4 Black had just enough counterplay for
equality in I.Videnova-P.Tzouganakis, Rethymnon 2012.
22 ... Ba6!?
This is rare, but reasonable. No fewer than six(!) moves have been tried here, but
some of them will eventually transpose:
a) 22 ... e5 has been played in the majority of games.

Now:
a1) 23 Qf3 exf4! (23 ... Rba6 24 Qh5! Bf8 25 Rd3 Rxa3 26 Rxa3 Rxa3 27 Kb2 is good
for White) 24 Qh5 (Black’s three pieces work perfectly well after 24 gxf4 Ne5 25 Qg3
Rba6 26 Re3 Nc4, with sufficient counterplay) 24 ... Rxa3 (24 ... Ne5! with the idea of 25
Qxh6 Rxa3 is a more accurate move order) 25 Qxh6 (White could have tried 25 e5!?) 25
... Ne5 26 Kd2 Nf3+ 27 Ke2 Re3+ 28 Kf2 Rxe1 29 Rxe1 Nxe1 30 Kxe1 fxg3 31 hxg3 Rxb4
32 Qxh7 Rxe4+ with a fortress in Hou Qiang-M.Atnilov, Budapest 2011.
a2) 23 Qe3 Rc6 has the idea of ... Nb6 and ... Rac8, targeting the c-pawn. A tactical
feast occurred in the following spectacular game: 24 Rd2 Nb6 25 b5 Rc5 26 Rxd6!? (this
wins a pawn, but Black’s pieces become hyper active as a result) 26 ... Kxd6 27 Rd1+ Bd5
28 fxe5+ Kc7 29 Qxh6 Bxe4 30 Rd2 Nd5! 31 Qg7 Rc8 32 Qxf7+ Kb8 (White cannot defend
c2 reasonably and has to accept a draw) 33 Qe6 Rxc2+ 34 Rxc2 Rxc2+ 35 Kd1 Ne3+
forced perpetual in T.Learte Pastor-J.Jimenez Ariza, correspondence 2011.
a3) 23 Kb2 (sensibly stepping away from the long diagonal and reinforcing the
queenside pawns) 23 ... exf4 (White keeps control after 23 ... Rba6?! 24 f5!) 24 e5! (a
typical line-clearing pawn sacrifice in this line, increasing the scope for White’s rooks) 24
... fxe5 25 gxf4 Bxf4 (keeping the dark-squared bishop on the long diagonal with 25 ...
Bg7!? is also possible; play may continue 26 Qxh7 Bf6 27 fxe5 Bxe5+ 28 c3 Rba6 29 Qh6!
d5 30 Qg5+ f6 31 Rxe5+ Nxe5 32 Qg7+ Nf7 33 Re1+ Re6 34 Rxe6+ Kxe6 35 b5, with
some winning chances for White) 26 Qf5 reaches a highly disputed position in the
correspondence world.

After 26 ... Bh6 (the strange 26 ... Kd8?! has been played, but it gives up f7 tamely
and the position after 27 Qxf7 Kc7 28 c4 looks good for White) 27 Rf1 Rf8 (27 ... Bf4 28
Rde1! is awkward) 28 c4 White appears to be better, but you can never know with these
erratic positions, even though White has scored a fantastic 81% in my database from this
position:
a31) 28 ... Be3 29 Rfe1! (29 Qxh7 leads to similar positions after 29 ... Nc5 30 Rfe1
Bg5 31 Qf5 when Black is struggling all over the board) 29 ... Bh6 30 Ka2! (taking a step
to the left in order to prepare b5 without allowing ... Nxc5; Black has no answer to this
direct plan) 30 ... Rg8 31 c5 Rg2+ 32 Ka1 Ra6 33 Qh3! Bg7 34 Rxd6 Rxd6 35 cxd6+ Ke8
36 Qxh7 Rg6 37 Rd1 e4+ 38 Ka2 Be5 39 Kb3 Bxd6 (Neuer indicated a plus for White after
39 ... Rxd6 40 Rxd6 Bxd6 41 Qg8+ Ke7 42 h4) 40 Qxg6! fxg6 41 Rxd6 when the rook and
pawns obviously outweigh Black’s minor pieces and White converted efficiently in
T.Neuer-S.Karkuth, correspondence 2007.
a32) A good illustration of the potential damage those queenside pawns can dish out
is seen after 28 ... Rc6 29 Qxh7 Be3 30 Kb3 Rcc8 (30 ... Nb6 31 c5! with the idea of 31 ...
dxc5 32 Rfe1 Bf4 33 Qe4 is pretty effective) 31 Rde1 Bb6 32 Rf5 Ke8 33 Rd1 Bd4 34 Qh4
f6 35 a4 (35 Rxd4 exd4 36 Qxd4 also seems very good for White) 35 ... d5 (allowing a
third passed pawn, but Black had to try and activate his pieces somehow) 36 c5 Be3 37
Rdf1 d4 38 Rxf6! Nxf6 39 Rxf6 Bd5+ 40 Kb2 Rxf6 41 Qxf6 (Black’s rook and bishop-pair is
no match for White’s rampaging queen and pawns combination) 41 ... Bf4 42 Qh8+ Kd7
43 Qh3+ Be6 44 Qh7+ Kd8 45 a5 Rb8 46 Qh8+ Kc7 47 Qf6! and Black resigned in
P.Canizares Cuadra-J.Canamas Soler, correspondence 2010, as 47 ... Rxb4+ 48 Ka3 Rb3+
49 Ka4 Kd7 50 Qf8! Bc4 51 Qd6+ Ke8 52 c6 is curtains.
a33) The startling move 28 ... d5! may actually turn out to be best.

The point is that White manages to obtain three connected passed pawns in many
lines, but this prevents such a possibility and sets up a potential blockade in one swoop.
After 29 cxd5 Rd6! (cutting out any tricks down the d-file and setting up a blockade) 30
Qe4 (30 Qxh7 looks logical, but 30 ... Bg5! 31 Qe4 Rh8 presents some tricky problems for
White to solve) 30 ... Bg5! (not allowing White to capture the h7-pawn and attack the
bishop at the same time; this was better than 30 ... Bg7 31 a4 Rd8 32 a5 Nf8 33 b5 with
further queenside expansion on the horizon) 31 Rf2 Rc8 32 a4 h6 33 h4 Bf6 34 Rc2
(keeping the rooks on with 34 a5!? might be an improvement) 34 ... Rxc2+ 35 Kxc2 Ke8
36 a5 Bd8! (keeping the b5-pawn tied down by attacking a5) 37 h5 a draw was agreed in
E.Riccio-M.Bergmann, correspondence 2010. Despite the hefty material advantage, White
was evidently not able to find a decent plan to make further inroads.
It seems that Black has to play extremely accurately after 22 ... e5 and White’s
fantastic score in both correspondence and practical chess is a fair indication that Black
should probably start looking elsewhere. The above analysis is hardly exhaustive though
and I won’t be surprised if improvements are found in due time.
 b) Black’s other tries are rather inactive: for example, 22 ... Bg7 23 Re3! Ba6 24 Qd2
Bb5 25 Rc3 f5 26 exf5! (correctly judging the importance of Black’s dark-squared bishop)
26 ... Bxc3 27 Qxc3 Rc6? (27 ... Nf6 was required, but White retains good chances after
28 fxe6 fxe6 29 Qc7+ Nd7 30 f5! with the idea of 30 ... exf5 31 Re1+ Kf6 32 Kb1! d5 33
Rd1 when Black is overloaded and cannot adequately defend the d-pawn) 28 Qg7! e5 29
Qg5+ Nf6 30 fxe5 dxe5 31 Rd5 and White was winning in L.Ootes-D.Klein, Haarlem 2010.
We now return to 22 ... Ba6!?:

23 Qf3
The only other game I could find here continued 23 Qe3 Bb5 24 Kb1 (24 Kb2 Ne5!
reveals the main reason why the queen should not be on the e3-square) 24 ... Rba6 and
Black was fine in A.Pablo Marin-M.Panelo Munoz, Barcelona 2011.
23 ... Rc8 24 Rd2
Pawn grabbing with 24 Qh5 Bf8 25 Qxh7 Rbc6 26 Rd2 is another possible
improvement, although again Black retains fair chances of counterplay.
24 ... Bg7 25 Re3 Bb7 26 Qg4 Kf8
White has actually arranged his pieces optimally, but it is not clear at first how he can
make progress. In fact, the game ended in just a few moves:
27 Qd1 Ke7 28 Qg4 Kf8 29 Qd1 Ke7 ½-½
 A rather abrupt finish after an exciting opening. Moreover, White can try 30 Kb1 Nc5
(Black should maintain his current formation as long as possible: for example, after 30 ...
e5? 31 Ka2 Nf8 32 c3 exf4 33 gxf4 Bh6 34 Qg4 White has made tangible progress) 31 Rd4
Na4 (31 ... Nd7 32 Qd2 followed by Re1 and Rd1 is a promising looking plan) 32 c4! (32
Qd2? can now be met by 32 ... Rbc6! when White cannot prevent Black from planting his
knight on the highly desirable c3-square) 32 ... Nc5 (if 32 ... e5 33 Rd5! and again the
exchange sacrifice is a small price to pay for the amount of activity White obtains in
return; after 33 ... Bxd5 34 exd5 Ra8 35 Qg4 Kf8 36 Qd7! Nc5 37 Qc7 Rab8 38 fxe5 fxe5
39 Rf3 f6 40 Kc2 he is clearly in the driver’s seat) 33 Ka2 e5 34 Rd2 Nxe4 35 Rxe4! Bxe4
36 fxe5 fxe5 37 Qg4 Rxc4 38 Qxg7 when he has excellent winning chances.

Game 25
R.Butze-L.Namark
Correspondence 1985

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Be7 8 Qf3

 8 ... Nbd7
8 ... Qa5 was one of Daniel King’s recommendations in his classic 1993 repertoire
work. Although this is a principled approach, it has, unfortunately, not withstood the test
of time (and chess engines), and is now known to lead to a worse position after 9 0-0-0
Bd7 10 e5! dxe5 11 fxe5 Nc6 12 Nf5! exf5 13 exf6 gxf6 14 Bf4 Be6 15 Nd5! when White is
never going to be afraid of Black’s extra pawn.
9 0-0-0 Qc7
9 ... h6?! has also been played, but I believe this to be seriously inaccurate as after 10
Bh4 Qc7 11 Qg3 White appears to obtain an edge by force. I hope to convince you even
more of this once you’ve studied our main game.
10 Qg3!?

This is one of my favourite lines within the 6 Bg5 Najdorf complex. The variation itself
is not new; my database indicated that it was played by some of the best players in the
world in the 1950s. However, as Black gradually found ways to defend, its popularity
dwindled and by the 21st century, the line had been overshadowed by the much more
popular 10 g4 and 10 Bd3.
Interestingly, I only chanced upon this variation after flipping through Grandmaster
Repertoire 6 as part of my preparation against a Najdorf devotee. I realized that the
recommendations given in the book against this particular line seemed to require highly
accurate computer-style defence. Then, after analysing this line for several hours, I was
convinced that it is really dangerous.
10 ... h6
The most commonly played response, which is not surprising given that most players
who chose this particular move order normally intend to dish out the Browne variation
with 10 Bd3 h6.
10 ... b5!? is the main alternative. Whenever this move is played, White should always
keep a look out for potential piece-for-three-pawns sacrifices. After 11 Bxf6 we have:
a) 11 ... gxf6? 12 f5 Nc5 13 fxe6 fxe6 14 a3 followed by Be2 and Qh3 is pleasant for
White.
b) The rarely explored 11 ... Nxf6 is an important alternative to the more common
bishop recapture. After 12 e5 dxe5 13 fxe5 Nd7 14 Bxb5! axb5 15 Ndxb5 it looks like
White will obtain three pawns and a huge initiative for the piece, but matters are rarely
clear in such sharp lines.

Now:
b1) 15 ... Qb8 16 Qxg7 Rf8 17 Rhe1 Rxa2!? (or 17 ... Ra6 18 Kb1 followed by a4) 18
Nxa2 Qxb5 19 Nc3 should be preferable for White due to his slight material advantage
and easier play.
b2) 15 ... Qb6 isn’t too active and after 16 Qxg7 Rf8 17 Kb1 Bb7 (17 ... Qc5?! doesn’t
make much sense and White gets a plus with 18 Rhe1 Bb7 19 Rd4 Bc6 20 a4 Bxb5 21
Nxb5) 18 Rhf1 White gets to increase his pressure on the f7-pawn for free.
b3) 15 ... Qc5! keeps the queen active and also maintains an eye on the e5-pawn: 16
Qxg7 Rf8 17 Rhe1 Bb7 18 Kb1 (18 Rd4?! Rxa2! 19 Nxa2 Qxb5 20 Nc3 Qc5 21 Rdd1 Qb4
followed by ... Nb6 and ... Nc4 seems fine for Black) 18 ... 0-0-0 19 Nd6+ Bxd6 20 exd6
Kb8 21 g3 (in view of my comment on the next move, perhaps 21 a3!?, with the idea of
21 ... Qh5 22 Qd4 Rc8 23 Qa4 Rc6, or 21 g4!? Nb6 22 Ne4 Bxe4 23 Rxe4 Rc8 24 c3 Rfd8
25 Qxf7 Rxd6 26 Rxd6 Qxd6 27 Rd4, with balanced chances, are alternatives to keep the
fight going). We have been following the game A.Shabalov-D.Aldama Degurnay, Las
Vegas 2006, and now I think 21 ... Nb6! improves, with the idea of 22 Ne4 Bxe4 23 Rxe4
Nc4, surrounding the passed d-pawn. An intriguing computer-line continues 24 a3!? Nxd6
25 Rxd6! Qxd6 26 Rb4+ Ka8 27 Ra4+ Kb7 28 Rb4+ with a draw by perpetual.
c) 11 ... Bxf6 (Black generally allows the sacrifice thus) 12 Bxb5 axb5 (Black has some
compensation if he sacrifices the pawn with 12 ... 0-0 13 Bxd7 Bxd7 14 Rhe1 or 12 ... Rb8
13 Bxd7+ Bxd7 14 Rhe1 0-0 15 e5 Be7 16 Ne4 dxe5 17 fxe5 Rfd8 18 Re3, but I prefer
White’s chances) 13 Ndxb5 and now:

c1) 13 ... Qb8?! 14 Nxd6+ Kf8 15 e5 Be7 (15 ... Bd8 16 f5 exf5 17 Nxf5 g6 18 Nd6 is
winning for White, as is 16 ... Nc5 17 f6! gxf6 18 Nf5) 16 f5! exf5 (both 16 ... Nc5? 17 f6
gxf6 18 exf6 Bxf6 19 Qf3 Kg7 20 Qg4+ Kf8 21 Qh5 Qc7 22 Rhf1 Ra5 23 Qh6+ Bg7 24 Qh4
and 16 ... f6 17 exf6 Nxf6 18 Rhe1 Ra6 19 Nxc8 Qxc8 20 fxe6 Rxe6 21 Rxe6 Qxe6 22
Qb8+ Ne8 23 a4 give very good chances for White) 17 Nxf5 Qxe5 18 Qxe5 Nxe5 19 Nxe7
Kxe7 20 Nd5+ Kd6 21 Nb6+ Kc6 22 Nxa8 Be6 (or 22 ... Bb7 23 Rhe1 f6 24 b3 Rxa8 25 a4
when Houdini claims equality, but I think Black will face a difficult defensive task; in any
case, this is a reasonable position to strive for from the opening as White) 23 Rhe1 Nd7
24 b3 Rxa8 25 Kb2 and White had a clearly preferable endgame in K.Bjerring-L.Van Wely,
Munich 1993.
c2) 13 ... Qc5! is clearly the best square for the queen. After 14 Nxd6+ Kf8 15 e5 Be7
(15 ... Bd8? is counterintuitive and after 16 f5 exf5 17 Rd5! Qc6 18 Rhd1 White has a
dominating position) 16 a3! is an important move. The a-pawn is no longer en prise
which means that White is threatening 17 Nce4, which is a difficult move for Black to
meet:
 c21) 16 ... h5 17 Nce4 Qc7 18 Rd4 Nb6 19 Rhd1 occurred in L.Hallstrom-M.Fagerstrom,
correspondence 2011, which White eventually won in good style. Again, the computers
seem to think that Black is fine, but I would think most players would prefer to take
White. I have no doubts that Black could have defended better, but the general feeling I
have is that White obtains terrific practical chances and he doesn’t even have to sacrifice
material in this line.
c22) I also analysed 16 ... g6 17 Nce4 Qc7 18 Rd3 Bb7 (18 ... Kg7? 19 f5! Bxd6 20
Nxd6 Ba6 21 Rf3 wins) 19 Rc3 Qb8 20 Rb3! Ra7 (the tactics after 20 ... Bxd6 21 Nxd6 Nc5
22 Rb5 Qa7 23 Qe3 Bxg2 24 Rg1 Nd3+ 25 Kd2! Qxe3+ 26 Kxe3 Bc6 27 Rb6 Nxb2 28 Rxc6
Rxa3+ 29 Kd2 work out nicely for White) 21 Qe3 Qa8 (Black has serious difficulties in
unravelling his position: for instance, the natural 21 ... Kg7? loses to 22 f5! exf5 23 Nf6!
Nxf6 24 Nxf5+! gxf5 25 Qg5+ Kf8 26 exf6 or here 23 ... Bxf6 24 exf6+ Nxf6 25 Nxf5+ Kg8
26 Rd1) 22 Rc3! when White’s initiative is close to being decisive.
Before we return to 10 ... h6, note that a game of mine continued 10 ... g6?!, which is
a serious weakening of the light squares. After the game, my opponent told me that he
was afraid of a knight eventually landing on the f5-square, but he had probably thought
too far ahead. Following 11 Be2 h6? (a second successive mistake that weakens the g6-
pawn; here, I was about to play 12 Bh4 when I suddenly saw possibilities of sacrifices on
e6 and g6, and strong possibilities at that) 12 Bxf6 Bxf6 13 e5! dxe5 (I had calculated 13
... Be7 14 Nxe6 fxe6 15 Qxg6+ Kd8 16 exd6 Bxd6 17 f5! which wins) 14 Nxe6! fxe6 15
Qxg6+ Ke7 16 Ne4 Rf8 17 Bh5! Black could hardly hope to defend against the threat of
18 Qh7+ Kd8 19 Nxf6 Rxf6 20 Qh8+ Ke7 21 Qg7 in K.Goh Wei Ming-S.Narayanan,
Budapest 2011.
11 Bh4 g5
Continuing in typical Browne fashion. 11 ... b5!? is very rarely played, but seems to be
a perfectly viable option. After 12 f5 (12 Qxg7? Rg8 13 Qxh6? Bf8 is Black’s point) we
have:
 a) 12 ... e5 13 Qxg7 Rh7 (13 ... Rg8? 14 Nd5! Qb7 15 Nxf6+ Nxf6 16 Qxh6 Nxe4 17
Nf3 Bxh4 18 Qxh4 Bxf5 19 Bd3 is good for White; Black’s centre is loose and his king has
yet to find a safe haven) 14 Nd5 Nxd5 15 Qxh7 Ne3 16 Qh8+ Bf8 17 Rd2 exd4 18 Qxd4 is
slightly better for White.
b) 12 ... Ne5 13 Qxg7 (using ChessBase’s very useful ‘Let’s Check’ function, I
discovered that a kind soul has analysed 13 Bxb5+!? very deeply with the latest
Stockfish, which, incidentally, I believe is right up there with the likes of Houdini and
Komodo; here 13 ... axb5 14 Ndxb5 Qc5 15 Nxd6+ Bxd6 16 Qxg7 Rf8 17 Qxf6 Be7 18
Qxh6 Nc4 leads to an extremely complex position where White has five pawns for the
piece and Black has some play on the queenside which is not so easy to defuse, but I
quite like 19 Bxe7 Qxe7 20 Rd5!? followed by Rhd1) 13 ... Rg8 14 Bxb5+ axb5 15 Ndxb5
Qb8 16 Qxh6 Rxa2! (this should be thematic by now) 17 Nxa2 Qxb5 18 Nc3 Qb4 19 Bxf6
Ng4 20 Qd2 Nxf6 21 Rhe1.
 The dust has settled and taking stock, White has three pawns and a rook for the two
minor pieces, which ordinarily would be a huge material advantage for this first player.
However, the two minors happen to be the bishop-pair and the nature of the position
perfectly suits the bishops. Moreover, Black’s rook is ideally placed on the half open g-file,
while White’s rooks are not particularly operating effectively, and White’s king is
somewhat compromised due to the loss of the a2-pawn. All these factors indicate a
roughly balanced middlegame. In fact, the game ended shortly in a draw after 21 ... Bb7
22 Kb1 (perhaps 22 h3 followed by g4 is a plan, but Black would get his chances anyhow)
22 ... e5 23 Nd5 Nxd5 24 exd5 Qxd2 25 Rxd2 Rg4 26 g3 Bc8 27 Rf1 Ba6 28 Rfd1 Rg5 29
Rf2 Bd8 30 Re1 in M.Valutana-J.Kracht, correspondence 2008.
12 fxg5 Nh5
Commonest, and recommended in Grandmaster Repertoire 6. The alternative 12 ...
Rg8 is a tough nut to crack, but I believe White has good chances to obtain an advantage
after 13 Be2:

a) 13 ... hxg5 14 Bxg5 b5 15 a3 Bb7 (or 15 ... Rb8 16 h4) 16 Qh4!? (perhaps 16 h4!?
with the idea of 16 ... Nxe4 17 Nxe4 Bxe4 18 Bf3 Bxf3 19 Qxf3 Rc8 20 Bxe7 Kxe7 21 Rhf1
Ne5 22 Qf2 with a slight edge may be a better option) 16 ... Qc5! (16 ... 0-0-0?! 17 Nf3
Rg6 18 Qe1 Rdg8 19 h4 was just better for White in I.Zaitsev-A.Khruschiov, Moscow
2009) 17 Nf3 Rc8 18 Rd2 (18 Kb1? Bxe4! regained the pawn with a slightly better position
in J.Jara-B.Bartolomeo, correspondence 2009), and now 18 ... Rxg5!! is a magnificent
exchange sacrifice with the point that after 19 Nxg5 Nh7 20 Nxe6 Bxh4 21 Nxc5 Nxc5 22
Rxd6 Nf6 Black’s pieces are hyperactive and make up for the lack of pawns in his position.
The line may continue 23 e5 Nfe4 24 Nxe4 Nxe4 25 Rb6 Bd5 26 Rxa6 Bg5+ 27 Kb1 Nd2+
28 Ka1 Rxc2 29 Bxb5+ Ke7 when it’s clear that Black has more than sufficient play. As
such, White should consider the untried 16 h4!? as a potential improvement.
b) The tricky 13 ... Nc5? has been played a couple of times, but the novelty 14 gxf6!!
should put it out of business. All lines lead to a winning position for White, but there are
some difficult ones to find over the board. After 14 ... Rxg3 15 fxe7 White threatens 16
Ndb5:

b1) 15 ... Rxc3 16 Rhf1! Rxc2+ (if 16 ... Bd7 17 Bh5!) 17 Nxc2 Bd7 18 Bh5 Ba4!?
(Black’s only chance to obtain counterplay, but accurate defence wins the game) 19 b3
Bxb3 20 axb3 Nxb3+ 21 Kb2 Nc5 22 Bxf7+ Kd7 23 e8Q+ Rxe8 24 Bxe6+!! (an amazing
shot; White would like to play Rf7 with a skewer, but the bishop was getting in the way)
24 ... Kc6 25 Bd5+ Kb6 26 Rf7 Qc8 27 Bf2 Ka5 28 Bxc5 dxc5 29 Rxb7 and White wins.
b2) 15 ... Rxg2 16 Ndb5! axb5 17 Nxb5 Qxe7 18 Nxd6+ Kf8 19 Bxe7+ Kxe7 20 Rhf1 f6
21 e5! Nd7 (White obtains a dominating endgame after 21 ... Rxe2 22 Rxf6 Rxe5 23 Rf7+
Kd8 24 Nxc8+ Rd5 25 Rxd5+ exd5 26 Nb6 Rxa2 27 b4 Ne6 28 Rxb7) 22 exf6+ Nxf6 23
Rg1! Rxg1 24 Nxc8+ Rxc8 25 Rxg1 and White again obtains a winning endgame, albeit
one that demands technical accuracy.
b3) 15 ... Rg5 16 Bxg5 hxg5 17 Bh5! (amazingly enough, White’s attack continues
despite the fact that his queen has left the building) 17 ... Qxe7 (17 ... Kxe7 18 Rhf1 f6 19
Nf5+! Kf8 20 Nxd6 Qe7 21 g4 Nd7 22 e5! Nxe5 23 Nce4 wins material by force; White’s
pieces work very harmoniously in this variation) 18 Rhf1 g4 19 Bxf7+ Qxf7 20 Rxf7 Kxf7
21 Rf1+ and White has an extra pawn with a big position to boot.
c) 13 ... Nh7? loses to 14 g6! Rxg6 15 Nxe6!! Rxe6 16 Nd5 Qc5 17 Nxe7 Rxe7 18 Rd5
Qb4 19 Bxe7 Kxe7 20 Rhd1 Nhf6 21 Rxd6 and White is winning easily.
d) The careless 13 ... b5? loses to 14 gxf6! Rxg3 15 Nxe6! Qc6 16 Ng7+ Rxg7 17 fxg7
when Black cannot stop the g-pawn from promoting.
e) 13 ... Ne5 is commonest and may well be best. After 14 Nf3 hxg5 (not 14 ... Nxf3?!
15 Qxf3 hxg5 16 Bg3 g4 17 Qf2 b5 18 Rhf1 with good pressure down the f-file and against
the d6-pawn) we have:
 e1) The strange-looking 15 Nxg5!? has been played a few times with good results.
Here 15 ... b5 is best, when a correspondence game continued 16 Rhf1 Qb6 (16 ... Qa7!?
may be a better square when 17 Qe1 b4 18 Nb1 Nfg4 19 Nf3 allows 19 ... Ne3! 20 Nxe5
dxe5 21 Bf2 Nxg2! 22 Bxa7 Nxe1 leads to approximate equality) 17 Qe1 b4 18 Nb1 Nfg4
19 Nf3 Bxh4 20 Qxh4 Bb7 21 Nxe5 Nxe5 22 Nd2 Rc8 23 Qf2 Qc7 24 Kb1! Qxc2+ 25 Ka1
with a small edge for White in N.Daubenfeld-M.Avotins, correspondence 2006.
e2) 15 Bxg5 is the logical recapture when 15 ... Nh5 16 Qh3 reaches a critical position
for the 12 ... Rg8 sub-variation. Black has an important decision to make: how should he
capture on g5? He has:
e21) 16 ... Bxg5+?! 17 Nxg5 Nf4 (17 ... Rxg5 18 Bxh5 Bd7 19 Rhf1 Rg7 20 g3 is better
for White, primarily because of the pressure on d6 and f7, as well as the passed h-pawn;
at first sight, I wasn’t so convinced as Black has a magnificent knight on e5, but things
become clearer after 20 ... 0-0-0 21 Be2 Qc5 22 Qh6! Rg6 23 Qf4! when White is ready to
advance his kingside pawns, while Black has very little play) 18 Qh6! Qc5 (or 18 ... Qe7
19 h4 Nxe2+ 20 Nxe2 Bd7 21 Rhf1 Bb5 22 Rd2 0-0-0 23 Qf6 with a clear edge) 19 Nh7!
Nxe2+ 20 Nxe2 Rxg2 21 Nd4 and White had a terrific attack in G.Marcotulli-B.Hallengren,
correspondence 2002.
e22) 16 ... Rxg5! is best, although White should still emerge from the complications
with an edge after 17 Nxe5 Nf4 18 Qh8+ Bf8 19 Nd3 Nxe2+ 20 Nxe2.
 We have arrived at the next critical position for this variation. White may be a pawn
up, but Black has clear and obvious compensation in the form of his bishop-pair. At this
moment, though, Black still needs to make a few moves to complete his development:
e221) 20 ... Rxg2? fails to 21 Ndf4 Rg5 22 Nh5! Qa5 23 Nf6+ Ke7 24 Rhf1 when White
is on the verge of crashing through.
e222) 20 ... Bd7?! 21 Rhf1 Rg7 (otherwise, 21 ... Rxg2?? 22 Rxf7! Kxf7 23 Rf1+ Ke7 24
Qf6+ is curtains, while 21 ... Bc6 22 Nd4! massages the sensitive e6-pawn) 22 g3 is
clearly better for White.
e223) Giving up the d5-square with 20 ... e5! may seem counterintuitive, but this
restricts White’s knights from using the pretty d4- and f4-squares. Additionally, Black
argues that only one knight can land on the d5-square. After 21 Nb4 Be6! (attempting to
push the white knights back with 21 ... Qc4? looks tempting, but fails to 22 Nd5! Qxe2 23
Nc7+ Ke7 24 Qh4! f6 25 Nd5+ Kf7 26 Rhf1 Qh5 27 Rxf6+ Kg8 28 Qf2 Bg4 29 Rf1 Bh6 30
Kb1!, with a winning attack) 22 Nd5 Bxd5 23 Rxd5 Rxg2 24 Nc3 Qe7!? (good defence by
Black, transferring the queen to the useful e6-square) 25 Kb1 Qe6 26 Rdd1 0-0-0 27 Qh5
Bh6 28 Rhg1 Rdg8 29 Rxg2 Rxg2 30 Rxd6 Rxh2 31 Qxh2 Qxd6 32 Nd5 White had a very
slight edge in S.Khlopov-W.De Waele, correspondence 2011, but ultimately this wasn’t
enough to win.
Before we return to 12 ... Nh5, I should mention that the dubious-looking 12 ... hxg5?
is refuted by the instructive 13 Bxg5 b5 14 a3! Bb7 15 Qe1!, with a clear edge; e1 seems
like a pretty economical square for the queen, from where she defends c3 and e4, and
supports h2-h4 all at the same time.
13 Qe3 Qc5
 14 Kb1!
It is important to keep the queens on so as to exploit the sudden weaknesses created
on the kingside. For example, 14 Qd2?! is timid and allows Black to swap some pieces
with 14 ... Bxg5 15 Bxg5 Qxg5 16 Be2 Nhf6 17 Nf3 Qxd2+ 18 Rxd2 Ke7 19 Rhd1 Ne8
when he is very solid.
14 ... hxg5
For Black, exchanging dark-squared bishops too early is always a risk given how weak
the d6-pawn will be as a result and the line 14 ... Bxg5? 15 Bxg5 hxg5 (15 ... Qxg5 16
Qf2! followed by Be2-f3 is a simple plan) 16 Qh3! Qe5 (or 16 ... Rh7? 17 Nxe6! fxe6 18
Qxe6+ Kf8 19 Qg6 Nhf6 20 Be2 followed by a rook to the f-file, which is close to winning)
17 Nf3 Qg7 18 g4! Nf4 19 Qg3 is a pretty convincing illustration. Black has weaknesses all
over the board here.
15 Bf2
 15 ... Ne5
This is the most popular choice by a wide margin and was Ftacnik’s recommendation
as well. The computers all prefer 15 ... b5!? with the idea of simply proceeding with ...
Bb7 and ... 0-0-0, keeping the option of centralizing the knight for another day. Perhaps
quiet development with 16 Qd2 is best (16 a3 is, of course, very playable too; for
example, 16 ... Bb7 17 Qh3 Rh7 18 Qd3 Nhf6 19 Qd2 b4!? 20 axb4 Qxb4 with a complex
game). Yet another correspondence game continued 16 ... Qc7 17 Bd3 (17 h4!?) 17 ...
Bb7 18 Be3 g4 19 a3 Nhf6 20 Nb3 Ne5 21 Qf2 Nfd7 22 Bf4 0-0-0 23 Be2 with roughly
equal chances in J.Soberano-P.Valent, correspondence 2003. Black’s position is solid, but
he has trouble finding ways to improve it further, while White has a concrete plan of
doubling on the d-file. The position is probably equal, but I prefer White.
16 Qd2!
This avoids the sneaky ... Ng4 trick and threatens a nasty discovered attack.
16 ... Qc7
This has been established as the best square for the queen:
a) 16 ... Qa5 17 Nf3 Nxf3 18 gxf3 b5 19 a3 is good for White as the black queen isn’t
really participating in the game.
b) 16 ... Nc4? 17 Qe1! Qc7 18 Nf5! with the idea of 18 ... exf5? 19 Nd5 is extremely
strong. Here we see another reason for putting the queen on the e1-square: the
possibility of tactical tricks down the e-file.
17 Nf3

17 ... Nxf3
Black has to make an important decision at this juncture. Naturally, I have selected
Ftacnik’s suggestion as the main line for obvious reasons. The alternatives are
noteworthy if only because they seem to be refuted by force:
a) The pawn sacrifice 17 ... b5?! doesn’t work out well due to 18 Nxg5 b4 19 Na4 as
the knight is actually quite useful on the a4 square.
b) Defending the g5-pawn with 17 ... Rg8? looks natural, but leads to a disaster after
18 Nxe5 dxe5 19 h4! g4 (or 19 ... b5 20 hxg5 Bxg5 21 Bxb5+!! axb5 22 Nxb5 Qc6 23
Qb4! Be7 24 Nd6+ Bxd6 25 Rxd6 Qa4 26 Qxa4+ Rxa4 27 Rxh5 Rxe4 28 b3 with a winning
position for White) 20 Qh6 Nf6 (20 ... Nf4 leaves the knight stranded in the corner after
21 Qh7! Rf8 22 g3 Ng6 23 h5 Nh8) 21 h5 and White has obtained a menacing passed h-
pawn.
c) After 17 ... g4 18 Nxe5 dxe5 19 Be2 Nf6 one of the best players in the world at the
time showed strong positional understanding with the move 20 h3!. The point is that
after 20 ... gxh3 21 Rxh3 Rxh3 22 gxh3 the h-pawn will eventually turn out to be the
decisive factor. This may seem hard to believe as the pawn is far away from its
promotion square, but I guess seeing is believing: 22 ... Bd7 23 Qh6! 0-0-0 24 Bh4
(masterful play; exchanging more pieces reduces Black’s defensive resources and
strengthens the potential of the passed h-pawn) 24 ... Ng8 25 Qh5 and Black collapsed in
a few more moves in G.Sax-S.Tatai, Graz 1984. A model game by the Hungarian legend.
d) 17 ... Nf4? has also been tried, but the knight is not safe here and White obtains an
easy edge after 18 Nxe5 dxe5 19 g3 Ng6 20 Be3.
18 gxf3 Bd7

19 h4
This was rightly noted by Ftacnik as the most logical move at this point and was the
subject of some deep analysis in his book. Here I’d like to point out a significant
improvement on Ftacnik’s analysis that I managed to find. Just to clarify, this is not
meant as a criticism at all and I still find Ftacnik’s book to be extremely useful and
instructive in many ways. Quite simply a book on the Sicilian is always bound to contain
hidden errors here and there.
Indeed, 19 Rg1!? is an important alternative, despite being given a dubious mark by
Ftacnik. White should get a slight edge after 19 ... 0-0-0 20 Bd4 f6? (20 ... Nf4, as played
in B.Gonzalez-T.Klauner, correspondence 2011, may be best here; White should eschew
the exchange and continue 21 Qf2!? with a slight edge) 21 Qe3! Rde8 22 Bb6 Qc6 23 a4
Bd8 24 Bxd8 Kxd8 25 e5! d5 (25 ... dxe5 26 Ne4 is devastating) 26 exf6 Nxf6 27 h4! e5
28 hxg5 d4 29 Qe1 Nh5 30 Ne4 and White was close to winning in H.Williamson-
R.Hiltunen, correspondence 2010.
19 ... gxh4 20 Bxh4 Ng3!
An important tactical resource to keep Black’s position together.
21 Bxe7
White has no choice but to sacrifice the exchange to keep his attack going. Still, he
gets to keep the black king in the centre which is very good news.
21 ... Rxh1 22 Bf6

22 ... Qc5?
Ftacnik’s main recommendation, but I believe this is losing. 22 ... Nxf1 was provided
as a secondary line and may well be best. Ftacnik gave 23 Qg5 Nd2+ 24 Kc1 Rxd1+ 25
Kxd1 Bb5 26 Qg8+ Kd7 27 Qxa8 Nxf3 28 a4 Bc6 29 Qf8 Ne5 30 b4 Qb6! (30 ... b5? 31
Bxe5 dxe5 32 Qxf7+ Kd6 33 Qxc7+ Kxc7 34 a5 Kd6 35 Kd2 followed by Kd3 and Ne2-c1-
b3-c5 is winning for White) 31 Kc1 Nd3+!! 32 cxd3 Qe3+ 33 Kc2 Qf2+ 34 Kb3 Qxf6 35 b5
axb5 36 axb5 Qf3 37 bxc6+ bxc6 38 Qg7 with an edge for White in A.Shakarov-
Y.Zelinsky, correspondence 1982. Black eventually held on to the draw, but I reckon
White will score heavily from this position in practical play.
After 22 ... Qc5 I’ve made the radical call to leave Butze-Namark, which actually
concluded: 23 Qg2 Qg1 24 Qd2 Nh5 25 Bg2 Nxf6 26 Bxh1 Qc5 27 Qxd6 Qxd6 28 Rxd6 Ke7
29 Rd2 Rh8 30 Bg2 Rh2 31 Kc1 Nh5 32 Kd1 Nf4 33 Bf1 Rh1 34 Ke1 f5 35 Kf2 Bc6 36 Bg2
Rh5 37 Ke3 Ng6 38 exf5 Rxf5 39 Ne4 Ra5 40 a3 Rb5 41 b4 Rf5 42 Bf1 a5 43 c4 axb4 44
axb4 b5 45 c5 Bxe4 46 Kxe4 Rf4+ 47 Ke3 Rxb4 48 c6 Ne5 49 c7 Nc4+ 50 Kf2 Nb6 51 Rd8
Rb2+ 52 Be2 Rc2 53 Rb8 Rxc7 54 Rxb6 b4 55 Rxb4 Kf6 56 Bd3 Ra7 57 Ke3 Rc7 58 Rb6
Rc1 59 Kf4 Ke7 60 Be4 Rc4 61 Rc6 Rb4 62 Kg5 1-0. However, Ftacnik has pointed out the
improvement 24 ... Qc5, so we need our own, earlier improvement.
23 Be2!
 White’s best try.
23 ... Rh3!
Strongest and also more or less Black’s only move:
a) 23 ... Rxd1+ 24 Bxd1 Nh5 25 Bh4 f6 26 f4! Qg1 27 f5 0-0-0 28 b3 followed by Kb2
is good for White as Black has problems co-ordinating his pieces.
b) 23 ... Rc8 24 Rxh1 Nxh1 25 Bd1! (or 25 Qe1) 25 ... Bc6 26 f4 Ng3 27 Qd3! wins the
knight and secures a large plus after 27 ... Nf5 28 exf5 Qxf5 29 Qd4!.
24 e5!
This essentially refutes the entire line starting with 22 ... Qc5. The point is simple – to
cut the black queen off from the kingside and dominate the dark squares. Black has no
defence as can be seen from the following lines.
24 ... Bc6
This was the most resilient defence I could find. After 24 ... d5 25 Bd3 Nh5 26 Qg2
Nxf6 (26 ... Nf4 27 Qg4 Nxd3 28 Qxh3 Nf4 29 Qh8+ Qf8 30 Qh4 Ng6 31 Qd4 Bc6 32 Ne4
wins) 27 Qxh3 Ng8 28 Qh4! Qe7 29 Qh7! 0-0-0 30 Rg1 Qf8 31 Rg7 and with a series of
subtle moves, White has managed to force the opposition into passivity, while 24 ...
Nxe2? 25 Ne4 wins hands down.
25 Qg5 d5!
25 ... dxe5 26 Bc4! is a pretty move. For example, 26 ... Bxf3 27 Bxe6! Bxd1 28 Bxh3
Bxc2+ 29 Kxc2 Qf2+ 30 Kb1 Qg1+ 31 Qc1! Qxc1+ 32 Kxc1 Nh5 33 Bxe5 f6 34 Bh2 Ke7
35 Bg2 and White should win with careful play. Just look at those bishops!
26 Bd3!
Now the threat is 27 Qg4. Clearly, White has too much play for a mere exchange.
26 ... d4
After 26 ... Nh5 White has to find 27 Bg6!!, which is a beautiful killing blow: 27 ... fxg6
(27 ... Nxf6 28 Bxf7+ Kd7 29 Bxe6+ Kxe6 30 Qxf6+ Kd7 31 Qf5+ wins back all the
material with interest) 28 Qxg6+ Kf8 (28 ... Kd7 29 Qf7+ Kc8 30 Be7 Qe3 31 Qxe6+ Kb8
32 Bd6+ Ka7 33 Qxh3 also wins) 29 Ne2!! reminds us that chess is a hard game indeed.
After sacrificing a rook and getting ready for the final blow on the kingside, White makes
a seemingly irrelevant retreat with his knight which turns out to be completely winning.
After taking a closer look, one realizes that the point is actually pretty clear: to bring the
rook to the g1-square for the final execution. Black has two tempi with which to find a
defence, but there isn’t one: for instance, 29 ... Ba4 30 b3 Rc8 31 Nd4 Nf4 32 Qg4! Ke8
33 Qxf4 Bd7 34 Qg4 Rh6 35 Rg1 and Black can resign.
Instead, after 26 ... Qf8 27 Qg4 Qh6 28 Rg1 White will eventually win material.
27 Qg8+ Qf8 28 Qg4 Qh6 29 Qxd4 Rh1 30 Qd6! Rxd1+ 31 Nxd1 Qf8 32 Qc7
Nh5 33 Bg5 Qc5 34 Ne3!

Fitting the final piece into the jigsaw. Black is completely tied up.
34 ... Kf8 35 Bh6+ Kg8 36 Ng4
White is winning and, as such, I believe 22 ... Qc5 is fully refuted and that, as
mentioned, 22 ... Nxf1 may well be best. However, the analysis above also shows that
life is not a bed of roses there either for Black. In short, 10 Qg3 is rare, but does appear
to be extremely dangerous. Perhaps Black should take the uncommon 11 ... b5!? a lot
more seriously as the main lines simply do not inspire confidence from his perspective at
the moment.

Game 26
Li Chao-Dao Thien Hai
Manila 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Be7 8 Qf3 Qc7 9

0-0-0 Nbd7 10 g4
 The good, old main line. White launches an immediate attack on the kingside and this
approach has led to many dashing and spectacular wins in the past.
10 ... b5
10 ... h6 is not desirable here since the h6-pawn serves as a hook for White’s
attacking purposes. Indeed, the position after 11 Bxf6 Bxf6 12 h4 Qb6 (12 ... Nb6 13 g5
Bxd4 14 Rxd4 Bd7 15 Be2 0-0-0 16 Rhd1 Bc6 17 Qf2 should be a bit better for White,
although it is important to note that after 17 ... hxg5 White should recapture with 18
fxg5! when it’s not so easy for Black to use the e5-square) 13 Nde2 Nc5 (Daniel King
gave 13 ... g5? 14 e5! dxe5 15 hxg5 hxg5 16 Rxh8+ Bxh8 17 fxg5 when White is clearly
better) 14 g5 Be7 was reached in L.Nozdrachev-D.Kokarev, Yekaterinburg 2013, and here
White could have placed immediate pressure on the light squares with 15 Qh5! with the
ideas of 15 ... g6 16 Qf3 h5 17 f5! and 15 ... Bd7 16 f5! exf5 17 exf5 Bxf5 18 Nd4 Bg6 19
Qe2 when White is close to winning.
11 Bxf6 Nxf6
Standard stuff. After 11 ... Bxf6 White temporarily wins a pawn with 12 Bxb5 when
Black may be forced to enter a slightly worse rook endgame after 12 ... Rb8 (12 ... axb5?
13 Ndxb5 Qb6 14 Nxd6+ Kf8 15 e5 is out of the question; Thomas Luther commented
that Black had fine compensation after 12 ... 0-0 13 Bxd7 Bxd7, but White seemed to
have the better of it after 14 g5 Be7 15 h4 Rfc8 16 f5) 13 Bxd7+ Bxd7 14 g5! Bxd4 15
Rxd4 Qb6 16 Qd3! Qxb2+ 17 Kd2 Bb5 (the only way to create further problems and
maintain the initiative) 18 Qe3 0-0 19 Rb1 Qa3 20 Nxb5 Qa5+ 21 Qc3 Rxb5 22 Qxa5
Rxa5. Here White can push for a long time with 23 a4! as he has the more active rooks
and his king is closer to the action than Black’s. On an aside, the position after the
tempting 23 Rxd6 Rxa2 24 Rb7 h5! may well be defensible, although I still greatly prefer
White’s chances.
12 g5 Nd7 13 f5
 13 ... 0-0!
This, the modern treatment of this variation, was thrown into the limelight thanks to
the efforts of the Chinese Grandmaster Ju Wenjun who has an amazing score in this line.
In fact, Daniel King actually dubbed this the ‘Ju Wenjun’ variation on his Powerplay DVD.
Castling into the attack in such fashion would have been considered suicidal half a
century ago, but the Najdorf is such a concrete opening that anything is playable as long
as it stands up to the computer’s scrutiny. Curiously, Mikhalchishin describes this as a line
that was developed by Chinese players, but it has actually been played in correspondence
chess since 2006.
Just a brief update of the alternatives:
a) White has a tremendous score after 13 ... Ne5 14 Qg3! when he has the typical
plan of Nce2-f4, massaging the sensitive e6-pawn: 14 ... 0-0 (14 ... b4? 15 Nce2 followed
by Nf4 is a dream come true for White) 15 Kb1! Re8 (15 ... Bd8?! 16 Nce2! followed by
Nf4 is again good for White) 16 fxe6 fxe6 17 Nce2 Bd8 (preparing an unusual regrouping,
but Black has little choice; he has no counterplay after 17 ... Bf8 18 Nf4 Qf7 19 Bg2) 18
Nf4 Qe7 19 h4 Bb6 20 Bh3 Bxd4 21 Rxd4 Nc4 22 g6! h6 23 b3 and White is clearly better.
b) 13 ... Bxg5+ 14 Kb1 and then:
b1) The computer likes the rare 14 ... 0-0, which may objectively be the best defence,
but the lack of counterplay in the resulting positions is hardly an advert of its merits. Here
15 fxe6 Nb6 (controlling the d5-square is absolutely essential) 16 Nd5 Nxd5 17 exd5 fxe6
(17 ... Bf6 18 Bd3! Bxd4 19 Bxh7+! Kxh7 20 Rxd4 leads to a devastating attack) 18 Qg4
(18 Qg2!?) 18 ... Bf6 (18 ... e5 19 Qxg5 exd4 20 Bd3 g6 21 Rhf1 is highly promising for
White even though the computers seem to think Black’s position is defensible) 19 Nxe6
Be5! 20 Bg2 Qe7 21 Qe2 Rf6 may be a defensible position in view of the outstanding
bishop on e5, but it’s not at all a pleasant task to say the least. The exposed nature of
Black’s king means that the presence of the opposite-coloured bishops gives White far
greater attacking chances than Black has drawing ones.
b2) 14 ... Ne5 is the most popular move by a mile and has been the main line for a
long time. Indeed, after 15 Qh5 we reach an important tabiya:

b21) 15 ... Qe7 16 Nxe6 Bxe6 17 fxe6 g6 18 exf7+ Kxf7 19 Qh3 has been established
as good for White. A recent model game continued 19 ... Kg7 20 Nd5 Qd8 21 Qc3! Ra7
(21 ... Rc8 22 Qa3 Rc6 23 Be2 maintains the pressure) 22 Qa3! (continuing to create
threats, with the latest one being Bxb5) 22 ... Qb8 23 h4! Bh6 24 h5 a5 25 Be2 b4 26 Qg3
and White had a tremendous attack in P.Salinas Herrera-P.Ricardi, Moron 2013.
b22) 15 ... h6?! just weakens the light squares further and after 16 Nxe6 Bxe6 17 fxe6
g6 18 exf7+ Qxf7 19 Qh3 Rd8 20 Nd5 0-0 21 Qa3! (this seems to be a common motif in
this line) 21 ... Qf3 22 Bd3 Nc4! 23 Qb4! Ne5 (this is more or less forced) 24 Nc7! Black
can hardly hope to cope with the White’s multiple threats.
b23) 15 ... Bf6?! is probably the worst of the lot and White obtains a clear edge by
force: 16 Nxe6 Bxe6 17 fxe6 0-0 18 Nd5 Qd8 19 Bh3 fxe6 20 Bxe6+ Kh8 21 c3 when,
again, the opposite-coloured bishops significantly favour the attacking side and White has
the simple plan of doubling on the f-file.
b24) 15 ... Qd8 16 h4! (this has been mainly played in correspondence chess, but
appears to be best) 16 ... Bf6 (Rizzitano analysed 16 ... b4 17 hxg5 bxc3 18 Nxe6 Bxe6 19
fxe6 g6 20 Qh6 Qb6 21 b3 fxe6 22 Qg7 0-0-0 23 Rh3 as clearly better for White) 17 fxe6
0-0 18 Bh3 fxe6 (Rizzitano also gave 18 ... Kh8 19 Nd5 fxe6 20 Bxe6 Bb7 21 Rdf1 Qe8 22
Qd1! Bxd5 23 Bxd5 Rc8 24 Ne6 Rf7 25 Rf5 and White is clearly better here too) 19 Bxe6+
Kh8 20 Nd5.
 White has built up a large position with simple moves and the following examples
illustrate the enormous practical problems that Black faces: 20 ... Bb7 (20 ... Nc4?
translates into a hugely inferior endgame after 21 Nc6 Qe8 22 Qxe8 Rxe8 23 Nxf6 gxf6 24
Bxc4 bxc4 25 Rxd6, as in A.Silva-J.Asquith, correspondence 2010, and 20 ... g6 21 Qe2
followed by h5 also does not help matters) 21 Rhf1 Qe8 22 Qe2 Qd8 23 Nf4 Qb6 24 Bf5
and White eventually converted his large advantage in H.Gromotka-K.Jonsson,
correspondence 2011.
c) The most common move has been 13 ... Nc5, which is a lot more reliable than the
other alternatives to 13 ... 0-0, but White still obtains an attack with 14 f6 gxf6 15 gxf6
Bf8 16 Rg1!, which is a typical move. The rook intends to sacrifice itself in kamikaze style
with Rg7.

We have reached yet another important set of cross-roads:

c1) 16 ... Bb7 17 Bh3! b4 18 Nd5 exd5 19 exd5 looks like a winning attack in the
offing. The following is a model demonstration of White’s attacking resources: 19 ... Qa5
20 Kb1 (the immediate 20 Rg7! is even stronger) 20 ... h5 21 Rg7 b3 22 axb3 Bxg7 23
fxg7 Rg8 24 b4! Qxb4 25 c3 Qc4 26 Re1+ Ne6 27 Nxe6 Bxd5 28 Nc7+ Kd8 29 Nxd5 and
1-0 in M.Boudriga-D.Khamrakulov, Istanbul 2012.
c2) The brave 16 ... b4 induces 17 Nd5 exd5 18 exd5 which can only be fun for White,
although Black may objectively be able to hold a draw. The practical difficulties, however,
are enormous:
c21) 18 ... Bb7 19 Bh3! Nd7 20 Qh5! with the idea of 20 ... 0-0-0 (both 20 ... Nxf6 21
Rde1+ Be7 22 Qh4! Kd8 23 Rxe7! Qxe7 24 Nf5 Qe5 25 Re1 Qxe1+ 26 Qxe1 and 20 ...
Ne5 21 Ne6 Qa5 22 Rg5! Qxa2 23 Rxe5 dxe5 24 Ng7+ Kd8 25 Qxf7, with mate in sight,
are pretty convincing for White) 21 Rg7! Bxg7 22 fxg7 Rhg8 23 Qxf7 is extremely strong
for White. Black is all tied up in knots and his extra rook can hardly hope to contribute.
c22) 18 ... Nd7, with the idea of blocking the e-file with a subsequent ... Ne5, is fairly
forced. After 19 Nc6! Bb7 we have a further divide:

c221) 20 Bh3 Ne5 21 Rge1 Rg8! 22 Qh5 (in correspondence chess, White has
proceeded with 22 Qf4! Bxc6 23 dxc6 Rg6 24 Kb1 Bh6 25 Qxb4 Rxf6 26 Bd7+ Kd8 27
Rxe5!! dxe5 28 Qc5 Rb8 29 a4!, which is supposed to be a win for him, but all these
moves look extremely abstract to me) 22 ... Bxc6 23 dxc6 Rg6 24 Rxe5+! (continuing the
onslaught) 24 ... dxe5 25 Bd7+ Kd8 26 Bg4+ Ke8 (and not 26 ... Bd6?? 27 Qxe5!) 27 Rd7
Qa5!? (27 ... Qb8? appears to be losing after 28 Qf5 Bh6+ 29 Kb1 Kf8 30 c7 Qe8 31 a3!
and here my computer is screaming a win for White, although I frankly have no
inclination to analyse any further) 28 Qf5 Bh6+ 29 Kb1 Kf8 30 c7 Kg8 31 Rxf7! Qb6! 32
Rd7! Qxf6 33 Rd8+ Qxd8 34 cxd8Q+ Rxd8 35 Qxe5 and the game has petered out to a
likely draw.
c222) Houdini really likes 20 Qe4+!? Ne5 21 Kb1 with the following computer line 21
... Bxc6 22 dxc6 h5 (to unravel with ... Rh6; 22 ... Qxc6? 23 Rd5 is strong, with the idea of
23 ... 0-0-0 24 Rxe5!, while 22 ... Rc8 runs into 23 Bh3!) 23 Re1 Qa7 (23 ... Rh6 24 Bh3!
followed by Bd7 and Rg8 is strong) 24 c7 Kd7 25 Qxb4. Who knows what is really
happening here?
c3) 16 ... Bd7? 17 Rg7! Bxg7 18 fxg7 Rg8 19 e5! 0-0-0 (19 ... d5 20 Qf6 is no fun for
Black) 20 exd6 Qb7 21 Qg3 is winning for White.
c4) 16 ... h5 was the absolute old main line of the entire 10 g4 variation.

c41) 17 Rg7?! was a popular choice, particularly at club level in the 1980s and 1990s,
but has been more or less refuted with accurate defence. The following game is a key
demonstration of Black’s defensive resources: 17 ... b4 18 Nd5 exd5 19 exd5 Nd7 20 Nc6
Bb7 21 Re1+ (21 Bh3 Bxc6 22 dxc6 Ne5 23 Bd7+ Kd8 24 Qe4 Qa5 also does not lead to
anything concrete for White) 21 ... Ne5 22 Nxe5 dxe5 23 Bh3 Qd6 24 Qf5 Bc8 25 Qxe5+
Qxe5 26 Rxe5+ Kd8 27 Bxc8 Rxc8 28 Rxf7 Rc7 when Black had ridden out the storm and
had the better chances in G.Vuillemin-D.Michael, correspondence 2010.
c42) 17 Re1!? Bb7 18 Bh3 0-0-0 19 Nd5 was recommended by Luther, but I’m not sure
White has anything concrete after 19 ... Qa5 20 Ne7+ Kc7.
c43) White has generally scored extremely well with the cautious 17 a3 when it’s still
not clear which of Black’s many options is best:
c431) 17 ... Rb8 is commonest in my database, but the rarely played 18 Re1! with the
ideas of 18 ... Bd7 (or 18 ... Nd7 19 Nxe6! fxe6 20 f7+ Kd8 21 Rg8!, which is close to
winning for White, as here is 20 ... Ke7 21 Rg6!) 19 Nd5! exd5 20 exd5+ Kd8 21 Rg7!
seems extremely promising for White.
c432) 17 ... Qb6, a move which has only been played in correspondence chess, looks
best. After 18 Kb1 Rb8 from with a very small sample size, it is hard to determine what
White’s best approach is, but both 19 Bh3 and 19 Qe3 are worthy candidates for further
investigation.
c44) The little seen 17 Kb1! may well be White’s best practical choice in this position:
 c441) A routine move like 17 ... Bb7? just invites trouble after 18 Bh3! b4 19 Nd5 exd5
20 exd5 Nd7, as in E.Fernandez Romero-A.Hernandez Leon, Los Llanos de Aridane 2008,
and now White has a winning attack with 21 Nc6 Ne5 (or 21 ... Bxc6 22 Rge1+ Ne5 23
dxc6) 22 Rge1 when Black can hardly find a useful move.
c442) After 17 ... b4 (inviting the piece sacrifice is thematic) 18 Nd5 exd5 19 exd5 Bg4
20 Re1+ Kd8 21 Qf2 with fine compensation for the piece. A high-level correspondence
game continued 21 ... Kc8 22 h3 Bd7 23 Rg7! Bxg7 (Black has to accept the sacrifice
given that he has no other way to defend the f7-pawn) 24 fxg7 Rg8 25 Qxf7 Qd8 26 Bg2!,
with the ideas of Re7, Nc6 and Ne6, White had great play in J.Neumann-P.Rubinas,
correspondence 2006. That said, I would recommend you study this position in even
greater detail as, after all, White is still a rook down.
After all that excitement, we return to the equally fascinating 13 ... 0-0:

14 Qh5!?
 A dangerous attempt to refute the variation outright. Again, we have to consider
alternatives:
a) 14 f6!? is thematic, but appears to be a forced draw: 14 ... gxf6 15 gxf6 Nxf6 16 e5!
dxe5 17 Nc6 Bb7 18 Qg3+ (18 Nxe7+ Qxe7 19 Qg3+ Kh8 20 Qxe5 Rg8! retains winning
chances for Black; instead, 20 ... Bxh1 21 Rd7 Qxd7 22 Qxf6+ Kg8 23 Qg5+ forces a
perpetual) 18 ... Kh8 19 Nxe5 Bd6 (19 ... Bd8 20 Rxd8! Rfxd8 21 Ng6+ fxg6 22 Qxc7 Bxh1
is also about equal) 20 Rxd6 Bxh1 21 Rd1 Rac8! (Houdini initially suggested 21 ... Ra7 as
a potential winning attempt, but Black may be risking too much here due to the concrete
22 Qf4! Ng8 23 Rd7 Qc5 24 b4! Qxc3 25 Rxa7 when he already has to find 25 ... Be4! 26
Qxe4 Qa1+ 27 Kd2 Qxf1 just to survive into a slightly worse position) 22 Bd3 Bb7!
(White’s attack looks terrifying, but the Chinese Grandmaster defends calmly) 23 Qg5 Ng8
24 Bxh7 Qe7! 25 Qh5 Nf6 26 Qh4 Ng8 27 Qh5 Nf6 with a curious draw by repetition in
D.Solak-Ju Wenjun, Moscow 2012. Excellent home preparation by the Chinese
Grandmaster.
b) 14 h4 is a tad too slow: 14 ... b4 15 Nce2 e5?! (this allows White a thematic
square-clearing sacrifice; 15 ... Bb7! improves, when 16 fxe6 Nc5! gives Black extremely
active play for the pawn and 16 Bg2 exf5! 17 Nxf5 Rfe8 18 Ned4 Bf8 is comfortable for
him) 16 Nb3? (this is passive, but White probably expected to be able to play f6 next; the
immediate 16 f6!, opening up the f5-square, is natural and the position after 16 ... exd4
17 fxe7 Re8 18 Nxd4 Ne5 19 Qf2 Rxe7 20 h5 is surely a bit better for White as his attack
is the faster) 16 ... f6! (shutting the door on White’s attack and correctly gauging that her
own attack on the queenside will be hard to fend off) 17 g6 h6 (normally the risk of
locking up the kingside this way is the possibility of a piece sacrifice on h6; the absence
of White’s dark-squared bishop is thus an extremely important factor in this position) 18
c3 a5 19 Kb1 Nb6 20 Rc1 Qa7 21 c4 Bb7 22 Ng3 Nd7! (Black is clearly in the driver’s seat
by now and the rest of the game is a display of utter dominance) 23 Qe2 a4 24 Nd2 Bd8!
(rerouting the bishop to a healthy diagonal) 25 Nf3 Bb6 26 Bg2 Rfc8 and Black eventually
converted her advantage in B.Savchenko-Ju Wenjun, Moscow 2012.
c) 14 Rg1 is the computer’s first choice and looks very logical. Now 14 ... b4 is more or
less forced, as Black has to find counterplay fast. After 15 Nce2 e5 16 f6 (again, this is
more or less forced; the passive 16 Nb3 can be met by the no-nonsense 16 ... Kh8!
followed by a gradual queenside advance) 16 ... exd4 17 fxe7 Re8 White has tried:
 c1) 18 Nxd4 Ne5 19 Qf4 (19 Qb3 Bg4 20 Rd2 Rxe7 was also perfectly fine for Black in
B.Anderson-A.Siikaluoma, correspondence 2011) 19 ... Be6 20 Nxe6 (20 Nf5, attacking
the d6-pawn and hoping for a favourable transformation in the pawn structure after an
exchange on f5, would be ideal if not for 20 ... d5! when after 21 Kb1 dxe4 22 Qxe4 Bxf5
23 Qxf5 a5 Black is absolutely fine and has no obvious weaknesses) 20 ... fxe6 21 Rg3
Rab8 was A.Groszpeter-P.Idani, Kecskemet 2012. Black is at least equal here with the
steed on e5 cancelling any small leftover initiative for White.
c2) 18 e5!? is also an important option, but Black should have sufficient defensive
resources after 18 ... Ra7! 19 e6!? (White’s best practical chance; 19 exd6 Qxd6 20 Nxd4
Ne5 21 Nf5 Bxf5 22 Qxf5 Qc5! followed by ... Rae7 is fine for Black) 19 ... fxe6 20 g6!
hxg6 21 Nf4 Ne5 22 Qg3 Qxe7 23 Nxg6 Qf6 24 Rxd4 Nxg6 25 Qxg6 Qxg6 26 Rxg6 d5 27
Rxb4 and the game eventually ended in a draw in D.Wilhelmi-T.Riedener, correspondence
2012. This wasn’t a particularly difficult defence for Black and I would expect many
players to be able to work it out over the board.
d) The first important game that appeared in this line saw 14 fxe6 fxe6 15 Qe3 and
now in N.Kosintseva-Ju Wenjun, Nalchik 2011, I like 15 ... Nb6!, with the idea of 16 h4 e5
17 Nf5 (there is nothing better) 17 ... Bxf5 18 exf5 Rxf5 when White has very little for the
pawn.
We now return to the critical 14 Qh5:
 14 ... Ne5
This logical move was a novelty at the point of play, but may not be the most efficient
use of time as Black really should be starting concrete action on the queenside.
Grandmaster Dao is a very experienced player in the Najdorf and I suspect he wasn’t too
aware of the theory or else he would surely have chosen 14 ... b4!, a move in line with
the analysis after 14 Rg1 b4. After 15 Rd3! (a thematic rook lift with the obvious idea of
swinging to the h-file with terrible threats) 15 ... bxc3 16 Rxc3 Qb6 (more or less the only
move here; after 16 ... Qd8? 17 Rg1 Ne5 18 Nc6! Bxg5+ 19 Rxg5 Qf6 20 Ne7+ Kh8 21
Rcg3 White is crashing through on the kingside) 17 Nc6 Bf6! (an important improvement
by the young Indian IM Srinath Narayanan; in an earlier game, Ju blundered with 17 ...
Re8? and must have been surprised to find herself lost after the simple 18 fxe6 Ne5 – or
18 ... Bxg5+ 19 Qxg5 Rxe6 20 Ne7+, winning material – 19 exf7+ Nxf7 20 Bc4 when
Black had no defence in T.Kosintseva-Ju Wenjun, Ankara 2012) 18 e5! the board is well
and truly set on fire.
 This is a really extraordinary position that is fully befitting of a diagram. Following 18
... g6! (yet another only move; after 18 ... dxe5 19 Rh3 h6 20 gxh6 Qf2 White has the
computer-like 21 Kd1!, stopping the mate on e1 and continuing his own attack) 19 Qh6?
(19 Qh4! was the only move to maintain the balance, with the idea of 19 ... Bxe5 20
Ne7+ Kg7?? 21 f6+ Bxf6 22 Qh6+ Kh8 23 gxf6 and wins; instead, after 20 ... Kh8 21 fxg6
fxg6 22 Nxg6+ Kg8 – Black still has to be careful here, as 22 ... Kg7? 23 Nxe5! Nxe5 24
Rh3 Rf7 25 g6! Nxg6 26 Qxh7+ Kf8 27 Qxg6 leaves White with excellent prospects – 23
Ne7+ Kh8 both sides have to be happy with a draw) 19 ... Qf2! (this carries a devastating
mating threat on e1 and covers a few important squares; White is forced to enter the
following tactical line) 20 Kd1 Bg7 21 Ne7+ Kh8 22 Qxh7+!? (a nice try, but
unfortunately, Black has too many pieces covering the f6-square) 22 ... Kxh7 23 Rh3+
Bh6 24 Rxh6+ Kg7 25 f6+ Nxf6 26 exf6+ Qxf6 27 gxf6+ Kxh6 Black gradually won with
his extra material in P.Konguvel-S.Narayanan, Kolkata 2012. Extremely impressive home
preparation by the Indian IM.
15 Bh3
An attempt to blow Black off the board, but objectively not best. I like the calm 15 a3!
when Black’s best set-up appears to be 15 ... Re8 (Mikhalchishin gave 15 ... Rb8? 16 Rg1!
Rd8 17 Rg3! followed by Rh3, with a decisive attack) 16 Rg1 g6 17 Qh6 Bf8 18 Qh4 Qd8!
19 f6 h6, with complex play.
15 ... Qc4?!
This is really not incisive enough. 15 ... b4! 16 Nce2 Bb7 is strong, with the key point
being 17 g6 fxg6!! (17 ... hxg6 18 fxg6 Nxg6 19 Nxe6 Qc4 20 Bf5 with the idea of 20 ...
Qxa2? 21 Rhg1! is dangerous for Black) 18 fxg6 h6 19 Bxe6+ Kh8 when Black has
extinguished all of White’s attacking chances and is ready to start an attack of his own,
all at the expense of just a pawn.
16 Kb1 Bd7 17 f6! gxf6
 18 Nf5!
Such tactical opportunities do not normally escape the eyes of Li Chao, who thrives in
such dynamic and aggressive positions.
18 ... exf5 19 Nd5 fxg5 20 Nxe7+ Kh8 21 Rxd6?
A curious slip. 21 Bxf5! Bxf5 22 Qxg5 f6 23 Qxf5 is best, with a large advantage.
21 ... Qxe4 22 Rhd1

22 ... Rac8?
Black could have got out of jail with 22 ... Qh4! 23 Qxh4 gxh4, given that after 24
Rxd7 Nxd7 25 Rxd7 Rfd8 26 Rxd8+ Rxd8 27 Kc1 Re8 28 Nxf5 Re1+ 29 Kd2 Rh1 he would
even be winning.
23 Nxc8 Rxc8 24 Qxg5
Perhaps Black had overlooked that the white queen now covers the important c1-
square. The game is over.
 24 ... Rxc2 25 Ka1 Rxb2 26 Qd8+ Kg7 27 Rg1+ 1-0

Game 27
Rui Gao-Wen Yang
Ho Chi Minh City 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Be7

7 ... h6 8 Bh4 Nbd7 9 Qf3 Be7 10 0-0-0 Qc7 is another way to try to reach the Browne
variation, but this gives away Black’s intentions too early. White can play 11 Be2!?,
exploiting Black’s move order (instead, 11 Qg3 transposes to the previous game, while 11
g4 g5 12 fxg5 Ne5 13 Qg3 Nfxg4 14 gxh6 Bxh4 15 Qxh4 Qe7! is sound for Black).

Now:
a) The point of White’s previous move is clearly shown after 11 ... g5?! 12 fxg5 Ne5 13
Qe3! Nfg4 (White was a clear pawn up after 13 ... Nh7 14 Bg3! Bxg5 15 Bf4 Bd7 16 h4
Bxf4 17 Qxf4 0-0-0 18 Nf3 Nxf3 19 Bxf3 Bc6 20 Qxh6 in K.Kolesnikova-G.Kuteneva,
correspondence 2009; 13 ... hxg5 14 Bxg5 Nfg4 15 Qd2 is also clearly better for White in
view of the tactic 15 ... Nf2 16 Bxe7 Qxe7 17 Bb5+!) 14 Qd2, and due to the bishop on
e2, Black does not have the resource ... Ng6. Here Black typically plays 14 ... Qc5, but
after 15 Na4! Qc7 16 h3 hxg5 17 Bxg5 Nf2 18 Bxe7 Qxe7 19 Nb6 White retains an extra
pawn.
b) 11 ... Rb8 is a fairly popular choice, but White gets a slight edge with 12 Qg3 0-0
(12 ... Rg8 has been tried, but I find it quite bizarre to make two mysterious rook moves
in a row – just ask the black king what he thinks; specifically, Black gets into a fair bit of
trouble after 13 e5! dxe5 14 fxe5 Qxe5 15 Qe1! when White obtains his diagonals and
open files at the cost of just one pawn) 13 Rhf1! when Black’s position is very tricky. For
example, the natural 13 ... b5? gets hit by 14 e5! dxe5 15 fxe5, winning material.
c) 11 ... b5 has been the most commonly played move, but White seems to get a
useful edge after 12 Bxf6! Nxf6 (12 ... Bxf6? 13 e5 Bb7 14 Ndxb5 axb5 15 Nxb5 Qb6 16
Qxb7! simply wins material for White and here 13 ... dxe514 Ndxb5 axb5 15 Qxa8 0-0 16
Nxb5 Qc5 17 Qa3 was close to winning for White in A.Groszpeter-C.Karner, Zalakaros
2006) 13 e5 Bb7 14 Qg3 dxe5 15 fxe5 when Black has tried:

c1) 15 ... Nd7? loses to 16 Nxe6! fxe6 17 Qg6+ Kd8 18 Qxe6 Re8 (18 ... Bc6 19 Nd5!
Bxd5 20 Rxd5 is also pretty hopeless) 19 Qg6! Qc6 20 Qg3 Qxg2 21 Qd3 Qc6 22 Bg4,
winning a large amount of material by force.
c2) 15 ... Ne4?! is slightly preferable, but also fails to 16 Nxe6! Qxc3! 17 Nxg7+ Kf8 18
Ne6+ Ke8 19 Qxc3 Nxc3 (19 ... Bg5+ leads to a depressing endgame for Black after 20
Nxg5 Nxc3 21 bxc3 hxg5 22 c4!?, although he retains a small number of drawing chances
due to White’s fractured structure) 20 Nc7+ Kf8 21 bxc3 Rc8 22 Nd5 Bxd5 (22 ... Ba3+ 23
Kb1 Bxd5 24 Rxd5 Rxc3 25 Rf1 amounts to roughly the same thing) 23 Rxd5 Rg8 24 g3!
Rxc3 25 Rf1 and White retains an enduring edge.
c3) 15 ... Nd5 16 Nxe6! (no big surprises here) 16 ... fxe6 17 Qg6+ Kd7 18 Bg4 Qxe5
19 Nxd5 Qg5+! (forcing the exchange of queens increases Black’s drawing chances; 19 ...
Bxd5? 20 Rxd5+! Qxd5 21 Rd1 Bg5+ 22 Kb1 Qxd1+ 23 Bxd1 Bf6 24 Bf3 is very worrisome
for Black as the light-squared bishop is extremely effective compared to its counterpart),
with a further divide:
c31) 20 Qxg5 is most commonly played, but Black retains decent drawing chances
after 20 ... Bxg5+ 21 Kb1 Bxd5 22 Rxd5+ Kc7 23 Rc5+! (drawing the black king to an
inferior square) 23 ... Kb6 (23 ... Kd6 24 Rc3 Rac8 25 Ra3 Rc6 26 Bf3 Rb6 27 Rd1+ Ke5
28 Rad3 keeps a slight edge, although winning this is anything but easy) 24 Re5 Rhe8 25
Rhe1 Rac8 26 Bf3 Rc7. Now in R.Robson-Le Quang Liem, Lubbock 2011, White could have
tried 27 Rxe6+ Rxe6 28 Rxe6+ Ka7 29 c3 and continued the squeeze for a hundred
moves, although Black should probably hold this with best play.
c32) 20 Nf4+ has also been tried, but even though 20 ... Kc7 21 Qxe6 Qxf4+ (not 21
... Rad8? 22 Kb1 Bc8?? 23 Qxc8+! and Black resigned in B.Vuckovic-S.Marinkovic, Zlatibor
2006; a very notable trick) 22 Kb1 Kb8 23 Rd7 Bd8 24 Rxb7+! Kxb7 25 Bf3+ Ka7 26 Bxa8
Kxa8 27 Qxa6+ Kb8 28 Qxb5+ looks exceedingly dangerous for Black, his active queen is
able to conjure up enough threats to save the day.

One theoretically important correspondence game went 28 ... Ka7 29 Rf1 Qd6 30 Rf7+
Bc7 31 Qd7 Qxd7 32 Rxd7 Kb6 33 Rxg7 Bxh2 34 c3 Kc6 35 Kc2 and a draw was agreed in
M.Manduch-G.Guzy, correspondence 2006. Still, I would think White has fairly decent
chances of scoring a win from here in a practical game.
c33) Ftacnik pointed out 20 Ne3+!? as White’s main try for an edge and after 20 ...
Kc7 21 Qxe6 Bc5 (White retains a nagging pull after 21 ... Rad8 22 h4 Qf6 23 Rd7+ Rxd7
24 Qxd7+ Kb8 25 Nd5! Bxd5 26 Qxd5) 22 Rd7+ Kb8 23 Rxb7+! (23 Re1? Bc8! won
material in A.Malevinsky-Y.Anikaev, Beltsy 1979) 23 ... Kxb7 24 Re1 Kb8! (a slightly
strange looking move, but played with the logical idea of preparing ... Ra7 and ... Re7; 24
... Rad8?? 25 Bf3+ Ka7 26 Qc6 Bxe3+ 27 Kb1 Qe7 28 Rxe3 is winning for White) 25 b4!
Bxe3+ 26 Rxe3 Ra7 (Ftacnik analysed 26 ... Qf6 27 Qxf6 gxf6 28 Bf3 Ra7 29 Re6 a5, but
now 30 a4! bxa4 31 b5 retains some winning chances for White) 27 Bf3 Qd8 (27 ... Qf6
28 Qxf6 gxf6 29 Re6 a5 30 a4 transposes to the previous note) 28 Rd3 Qf6 29 Qxf6 gxf6
30 Rd6 a5 31 a4! bxa4 32 b5 White again has the better chances.
Returning to the immediate 7 ... Be7:
8 Qf3 Qc7
8 ... h6 9 Bh4 g5?! is the prelude to the infamous Gothenburg variation.
 I have included this line as a sub-section of the Browne variation simply because both
lines utilize the same motif, the radical ... g7-g5 pawn thrust to secure the e5-square for
a black knight. Needless to say, if Black can obtain that and support the knight with
another from d7, he will be doing very well. Kasparov coined this line the 'Argentinean
tragedy’ after three Argentinean players (including one particular Miguel Najdorf), quite
clearly armed with home preparation, were destroyed in three different games during the
same round of the Gothenburg Interzonal in 1955. After 10 fxg5 Nfd7 White has:
a) In the aforementioned trio of games, White had played 11 Nxe6 fxe6 12 Qh5+, but
after 12 ... Kf8 13 Bb5!? (White wants to bring his rook to f1 as quickly as possible so he
might as well put the bishop on the most useful square available, attacking the black
knight and hence indirectly adding control over the e5-square) 13 ... Rh7! (13 ... Ne5?
looks more natural, but loses to 14 Bg3 Rh7 15 Bxe5 dxe5 16 Rd1 and Black has no
defence whatsoever) 14 0-0+ Kg8 15 g6 Rg7 16 Rf7 Bxh4 17 Qxh6 Rxf7 18 gxf7+ Kxf7 19
Rf1+ Bf6 20 Qh7+ (20 e5 dxe5 21 Ne4 Qb6+ 22 Kh1 axb5 23 Nxf6 Ke7 24 Qh7+ Kd8 25
Qg8+ Kc7 26 Ne8+ is another way to reach a draw) 20 ... Ke8! (the only square, but this
suffices; 20 ... Kf8 actually loses to 21 Be2!! when the black king is not in time to escape)
21 Qg6+ Kf8 22 e5 dxe5 23 Ne4 (23 Bxd7 Nxd7 24 Ne4 Qe8! 25 Qh6+ Ke7 26 Nxf6 Nxf6
27 Qxf6+ Kd6 28 Rd1+ Kc6 29 Qxe5 also eventually leads to a draw) 23 ... Qb6+ 24 Kh1
axb5 25 Nxf6 Ke7 26 Qh7+ Kd8 27 Qg8+ Kc7 28 Ne8+ Kd8 29 Nd6+ Kc7 30 Ne8+ Kd8 31
Ng7+ Kc7 32 Ne8+ Kd8 33 Nd6+ and a draw was agreed in S.Zhigalko-E.Safarli,
Nakhchivan 2012. This seems to be the last word in this variation and clearly shows that
11 Nxe6 only leads to a draw if Black knows his stuff well.
b) The less common 11 Qh5! appears to be White’s best chance for an edge.
 A recent example went 11 ... Ne5 12 Bg3 Bxg5 13 Nf3! Qf6? (13 ... Nbd7 14 Nxg5
Qxg5 15 Qd1! was the superior course of I.Radulov-V.Inkiov, Bulgaria 1976, where Black
should have avoided 15 ... Qe7? 16 Qd4!, with an obvious edge for White, and given up
the d6-pawn with the improbable 15 ... h5!, with the idea of 16 Qxd6 h4 17 Bf2 h3! with
some counterplay, although White still stands better after 18 gxh3 Nf3+ 19 Kd1; instead,
13 ... Nxf3+ 14 Qxf3 Nc6 15 h4 Bf6 16 0-0-0 also looks very promising for White) 14 Nxg5
hxg5 15 Qd1! Ke7? (15 ... Qe7 would have put up more resistance, but White is clearly
better after 16 Qd2 Nbc6 17 0-0-0) 16 Qd2 Nbc6 17 0-0-0 Rd8 18 h4 and White won in a
few moves in S.Azarov-D.Pulvett, Cappelle la Grande 2013.
9 0-0-0 Nbd7

10 Bd3
10 Be2?! has less of an impact here. Black can switch plans with 10 ... b5! when White
is deprived of the dangerous plan involving a central attack with Rhe1 and possible Nd5
sacrifices. Another point is that after the analogous 11 e5? Bb7 12 Qg3, the white queen
is not attacking g7, unlike in our analysis to move 7.
Of course, both 10 Qg3 and 10 g4 were analysed earlier in the chapter.
10 ... h6 11 Bh4
This is the main move, but there are a couple of other moves that are worth
mentioning.
a) The aggressive 11 h4?! is attractive only if Black willingly captures on g5, but he
does not have to follow the script and it has been established that 11 ... Nc5! 12 f5 (12
Bxf6 Bxf6 13 Be2 h5! is fine for Black) 12 ... hxg5 13 hxg5 Rxh1 (13 ... Rf8? 14 gxf6 Bxf6
15 Bb5+! is awkward) 14 Rxh1 Nfd7 15 Rh8+ Bf8 16 fxe6 Nxd3+ (16 ... Ne5? 17 Nd5!
Ncxd3+ 18 Kb1 Qa5 19 Qf1! leads to an unlikely win for White) 17 Kb1! (17 cxd3? Ne5 18
Qh5 Ng6 would have kept the c3-knight pinned) 17 ... N3e5 18 g6! Nf6 19 Qxf6! Nxg6!
(19 ... gxf6?? 20 g7 Ng6 21 Nd5 wins aesthetically) 20 Nd5 gxf6 21 Nxc7+ Kd8 22 Rxf8+
Nxf8 23 e7+ Kxe7 24 Nxa8 b5 results in a probable draw (analysis by James Rizzitano).
b) 11 Qh3!? has also largely been defanged, as illustrated by a recent top-level clash:
11 ... Nb6! (“this move controls d5 and makes way for ... Bd7 followed by queenside
castling” – Rizzitano) 12 f5 e5 13 Nb3 Bd7 14 Rhe1 (14 Bd2!? 0-0-0 15 Qf3 is a possible
improvement, but 14 Be3 Na4! is an effective way for Black to fight for control over the
d5-square) 14 ... 0-0-0 15 Bxf6 (15 Be3!?) 15 ... Bxf6 16 Nd5 Nxd5 17 exd5 Kb8 18 Kb1
Qb6, which was fine for Black in A.Naiditsch-V.Bologan, Sibenik 2010.
11 ... g5

After a few twists and turns, we’ve arrived at the variation named after the American
Grandmaster Walter Browne, who played it several times in the 1970s. The theme of
sacrificing the g-pawn temporarily in order to secure the e5 outpost is known in several
lines of the Sicilian, but this was arguably the pioneer variation.
Before proceeding, I would just like to point out that 11 ... b5? loses to 12 Nxe6! fxe6
13 e5 Bb7 14 Bg6+ Kd8 (14 ... Kf8 15 exf6! Bxf3 16 fxe7+ Kg8 17 gxf3 wins a truckload
of material for the queen) 15 Qh3 dxe5 (15 ... Nf8 16 exf6 gxf6 17 Be4 is very good for
White) 16 Qxe6 and Black is defenceless.
12 fxg5 Ne5 13 Qe2
This is virtually the only played move here. 13 Qe3?! Nfg4 14 Qd2 Ng6! would have
resulted in an ideal set-up for Black.
13 ... Nfg4 14 Nf3

14 ... hxg5
This is by far Black’s most popular option. 14 ... Nxf3 may transpose to the main line,
but gives White some additional options: 15 gxf3 (15 Qxf3!? Ne5 16 Qh5 Ng6 17 gxh6! is
an untried, but very interesting attempt: for instance, 17 ... Bxh4 18 e5 Qe7 19 Ne4! d5
20 Nd6+ Kd7 21 Kb1, with the initiative for the piece) 15 ... hxg5 16 Bg3 (16 fxg4 Rxh4
17 Rhf1 Qc5, with the idea of regrouping his pieces with ... Qe5, ... Bd7-c6 and ... Rc8
looks healthy for Black) 16 ... Ne5 17 f4 (17 Qf2 b5! 18 a3 was played in J.Bartholomew-
A.Wojtkiewicz, Mashantucket 2005, and here I like the improvement 18 ... Rb8! with the
ideas of ... Qb6 and ... b4; the sacrifice 17 h4?! is also fairly popular, but I don’t see
sufficient compensation after 17 ... gxh4 18 f4 Nxd3+ 19 Rxd3 b5! 20 a3 Bb7 21 Bf2 Bf6
and Black was already for choice in P.Bobras-K.Jakubowski, Lubniewice 2005) 17 ... gxf4
18 Bxf4 Bd7 (in view of the open g-file and passed h-pawn, I am less inclined to keep the
king in the centre with 18 ... b5!?, although it is a perfectly viable option) 19 Rdf1. Now
19 ... Rh7 has been given, but I prefer 19 ... Bc6!? 20 Kb1 Bh4 21 Rhg1 0-0-0 22 Bxe5
dxe5 23 Rg7 Be8, which looks very comfortable for Black, or 19 ... Bf6 20 h4 0-0-0 21 h5
Nxd3+ 22 Qxd3 Bxc3 23 Qxc3 Qxc3 24 bxc3 Bc6 with easy equality.
15 Bg3
The pawn-grabbing 15 Bxg5?! is unnecessarily risky, although some strong players
have been willing to gamble that they would be able to ride out the storm and eventually
win the endgame with an extra pawn. After 15 ... Bxg5+ 16 Nxg5 Qc5! Black has the
threat of ... Nxd3+ followed by ... Qxg5 or ... Nf2.
 White’s reply is fairly forced: 17 Nh3 (17 Nf3 Nf2 18 Nxe5 Nxd1! 19 Nxf7 Nxc3 20 Qf3
Rf8! 21 Rf1 was analysed at length by Ftacnik; here 21 ... e5!, cutting out any line-
opening sacrifices where White plays e4-e5 himself, looks strong: 22 Bc4 d5! 23 bxc3
dxc4 24 Nd6+ Qxd6 25 Qh5+ Ke7 26 Qh7+ Kd8 27 Rd1 Qxd1+ 28 Kxd1 Bd7 29 Qg7 Re8
30 h4 Kc7 and Black is clearly better or here 24 Qf6 Qe7 25 Nd6+ Kd7 26 Qxf8 Qxf8 27
Rxf8 Kxd6, which is winning for Black as he is just in time after 28 h4 b5 29 h5 Bb7), and
now 17 ... Bd7 is the most common, but I like 17 ... b5!, with the following manoeuvre in
mind: 18 Kb1 (18 Rdf1?! was tried in S.Solomon-M.Ozanne, Dresden Olympiad 2008, but
here 18 ... Ne3!, with the idea of 19 Rf4 Nxg2! 20 Qxg2 b4 is very strong) 18 ... Bb7 19
Rde1 (R.Mamedov-A.Areshchenko, Moscow 2007) 19 ... Ke7! (a logical improvement
given that Black’s centre is extremely solid and since he has not castled long, he can hurl
his queenside pawns forward) 20 a3 Rag8 followed by ... Bc6. Black obtains perfect co-
ordination among his pieces and should stand better despite the pawn deficit.
15 ... Nxf3
Black has a couple of other options at his disposal and we will take a quick look at
each of them:
a) Preparing long castling with 15 ... Bd7 has been commonest:
 a1) 16 Rhf1 Qc5 17 Nxe5 Nxe5 18 Kb1 (A.Shirov-V.Ivanchuk, Leon (rapid) 2008) 18 ...
b5! 19 a3 Rb8 with fine counterplay for Black.
a2) 16 Rdf1 b5 17 Nxe5 Nxe5 18 Kb1 Nxd3!? (18 ... Rc8 19 Bxe5 dxe5 20 Nd1 Qc5 was
played in S.Azarov-F.Amonatov, Voronezh 2007, and here I like 21 Rf2 when the simple
plan of doubling rooks is not so easy to meet) 19 Qxd3 Rc8 followed by ... Qc4 is equal
and also perfectly fine for Black. In this line, Black can even contemplate sacrificing the
d6-pawn, as can happen after 20 Qd4 f6 21 Rd1 Qc5! 22 Bxd6 Qxd4 23 Rxd4 Bc6!
followed by ... Rh4, ... a5 and ... b4.
a3) 16 h3 is White’s most direct approach:
a31) Ftacnik’s recommendation 16 ... Nf6 may well be the best counter: 17 Nxe5 dxe5
18 Bf2 Bc6 19 Qf3!? (19 Rhf1 was played by one of the world’s best players, but Black is
fine after 19 ... Nh5 20 g3 and now in V.Ivanchuk-Z.Quan, Edmonton 2005, I like 20 ... b5,
with the idea of 21 a3 Qb7 with reasonable play; perhaps, White should simply await
matters with 19 a3!? Nh5 20 g3 0-0-0 21 Kb1, with a complex game in prospect) 19 ...
Nh5 20 h4 Nf4 21 hxg5 0-0-0! and Black will reclaim the pawn in due time with an
entirely satisfactory position.
a32) 16 ... Nxf3 has been common, but White should obtain something tangible after
17 hxg4 Rxh1 (17 ... Nh4?! runs into 18 e5! d5 19 Rh3 with Nxd5 followed by e6 ideas in
mind; here 19 ... Qa5 20 Bf2 0-0-0 21 g3 Ng6 22 Rh5 leads to a comfortable edge for
White and 19 ... Bc6 20 Bf2 followed by Bd4 and Rdh1 is also very good for him) 18 Rxh1
Nh4 (restricting the white rook’s access is virtually an automatic move; 18 ... Ne5 19 Bxe5
dxe5 20 Qf3 followed by Rh7 is too risky for Black to contemplate) 19 Rf1 (19 e5 Bc6 is
reasonable for Black).
 White has done very well from this position:
a321) In fact, Black immediately blundered with 19 ... Qc5? in I.Ortiz Suarez-J.Ruiz,
Cochabamba 2013, resulting in a virtually lost position after 20 e5! d5 21 Bf2 Qb4 (21 ...
d4 22 g3! is also extremely strong for White) 22 a3 Qf4+ 23 Kb1 Qh2 24 g3 Ng6 25 Qe1
Qh8 26 Bd4.
a322) 19 ... f6 was tried in Wang Hao-S.Ganguly, Khanty-Mansiysk 2009, and here 20
Bxh4 (instead of 20 Qf2, as played in the game) 20 ... gxh4 21 g5! fxg5 22 Qh5+ Kd8 23
Qg6! is terribly awkward for Black. He is caught in two minds as to what exactly he
should do with his king and even though White does not have an immediate threat, Black
has to be extremely careful at every turn or his position may just collapse like a house of
cards. For example, 23 ... Kc8 24 Rf7 Bd8 25 Qg7 Qc6 26 e5! d5 27 Ne2 is a vivid
illustration of Black’s difficulties. If this analysis holds, 20 Bxh4 and 21 g5 may turn out to
be a significant improvement over existing theory.
a323) 19 ... Ng6 is most commonly played, but 20 Qf3 Nh8 21 Rh1 0-0-0 22 Rh7 Bc6
23 Bf2 followed by Bd4 looks very good for White.
a324) Lastly, 19 ... Bc6 may well be Black’s most reliable choice, but even here White
gets a healthy edge after 20 Kb1 Qa5 (not the first move that comes to mind, but it is
hard for Black to find anything playable without giving something away) 21 e5 d5 22 Qf2
Kd7 23 Ne2.
b) 15 ... b5 to develop the light-squared bishop on b7 is another way to treat the
position. Black has scored well from this position, but I believe White has a small edge
after 16 h3 Nxd3+ 17 Rxd3! (White has previously taken with the queen, but this is more
to the point) 17 ... Ne5 18 Nxe5 dxe5 19 Rhd1.
After that important digression, we can return to 15 ... Nxf3:
16 Qxf3 Ne5 17 Bxe5 dxe5
 We have arrived at arguably the critical position for the Browne system. Over the
years, White has tried various means to crack Black’s fortress, but that has remained
rather resilient and solid.
18 Rhf1
18 Rdf1 is White’s other attempt to formulate a breakthrough, but the position after
the logical continuation 18 ... Rh7 19 h4 gxh4 20 Qg4 Rh8! (20 ... Rh6?? was played in
W.So-A.Adly, Dubai 2008, and here 21 Qg8+ Bf8 22 Nb5!! Qe7 23 Rxf7! would have been
winning immediately) 21 g3 Bd7 22 gxh4 0-0-0 23 Rxf7 Rdg8 24 Rg7 Rxg7 25 Qxg7 Rxh4,
as in D.Kanovsky-L.Rosko, Ostrava 2010, is completely equal.
18 ... Rh7 19 h4!
The recurring and standard motif to open up the kingside. Black is a couple of moves
away from consolidating, which means White must try to attack at all costs. Needless to
say, Black will have no problems if he can get his king to safety on the queenside.
19 ... gxh4
This has been universally played, but the untried 19 ... Bd7!? may be a simpler way to
develop. White obtains a protected passed pawn after 20 h5 0-0-0 21 g4, but I don’t
really see how he can make progress after, say, 21 ... Kb8 followed by ... Rc8 and ... Be8.
On the other hand, Black would have minimal winning chances here.
20 Qg4
 20 ... Kf8
This is literally Black’s only move. 20 ... Rh8? 21 Qg7 Rf8 was played in P.Czarnota-
K.Jakubowski, Ustron 2009, and now White should have played 22 Nb5!, with the idea of
22 ... Qc5 23 b4! Qe3+ 24 Kb2 Qb6 25 Qxe5 Kd8! (Black’s only move to defend c7) 26
Bc4+ Bd7 27 c3 Rc8 28 Nd6 Rc6 29 Nxf7+ Kc8 30 Bb3 with an extra pawn and the better
position to boot.
21 Kb1
An innocuous looking but trappy move that demands precision from Black to equalize.
21 Rf3 was played in the only other game that I could find, which ended peacefully after
21 ... Rg7 22 Qh5 Kg8 23 Rdf1 Rh7 24 Qg4+ Rg7 25 Qh5, G.Kaiser-D.Kappes,
correspondence 2009.
21 ... b5?!
Black’s first inaccuracy, but not a game-threatening one as yet. 21 ... Bd7 looks safe
enough: for example, 22 g3 hxg3 23 Rf3 Rg7 24 Qh5 Ke8! 25 Rxf7 Rxf7 26 Rf1 Qc5 27
Qxf7+ Kd8 and Black scampers to safety just in time.
22 g3
 22 ... Rg7?
This appears to be the decisive mistake. 22 ... hxg3 23 Qxg3 Rh6 24 Rg1 Bf6 25 Qe3
Rh7 26 Rdf1 Bg7 27 Qg3 Qe7 28 Be2 looks dangerous for Black, but there’s still a game to
be played here.
23 Qh5!
With the threat of 24 Rxf7, winning on the spot.
23 ... Kg8 24 gxh4 Rh7
Guarding g1 with 24 ... Bc5 is met by 25 Rf6 Be3 26 Ne2 Bb7 27 Qf3 Bc5 28 Rf1, with
a devastating attack.
25 Qg4+ Kh8 26 Rg1 Bd7 27 h5
White has obtained an extremely promising position and his plan of tripling on the g-
file is easy to execute. Black’s king is cut off on the h-file and his rook is more or less
stuck on h7 for the time being. In practice, this position is virtually winning for White.
27 ... Rd8
This doesn’t do much to defend against White’s upcoming attack, but the young
Chinese Grandmaster did not have many attractive options.
28 Rg3 Qc8 29 Rdg1 Re8 30 h6 Qd8 31 Qh5 Bf6
 32 Nd1!
Introducing the knight to the party on the kingside. Black is helpless against the
onslaught.
32 ... Qe7 33 Ne3 Bh4 34 Rg7 Bf6 35 R7g2
35 Ng4! wins immediately.
35 ... Bh4 36 Ng4 Qg5 37 Qxg5 Bxg5 38 Nxe5 f6 39 Ng6+ Kg8 40 e5 Bc6 41
Rg4 Be3 42 Ne7+ 1-0

Conclusion
This has been one of the most important chapters in this book. Each variation has its own
characteristics and demands rather varying treatments from both sides, but it does look
like Black is theoretically fine in most of the variations covered. Admittedly, white players
have to know a lot in view of the multiple options at Black’s disposal, but a careful study
of these lines will certainly improve your attacking instincts.
 Chapter Four
Poisoned Pawn Variation with 10 f5
The famous Poisoned Pawn variation is characterised by the early queen sortie 7 ... Qb6
and, if White allows it, capturing the undefended b2-pawn. This variation was popularized
by the former world champions Robert James Fischer and Garry Kasparov, both of whom
contributed greatly to the theoretical evolution of the line. As might be expected, a lot
has been written about this variation, but despite the incredible amount of attention that
it has received, I believe there is still scope for theoretical development, as I hope to
show in the this and next chapter.
An important tabiya arises after 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 e5.

We begin by investigating the extremely rare continuation 13 ... Nd5!?. This has been
written off by many experts, including Garry Kasparov himself, as simply lost for Black,
but I think that matters are far from clear-cut. If my analysis in Game 28 holds up, I
believe the important move 16 ... Ra7! saves the entire variation, although there is
definite room for further development here.
In Game 29, we jump into one of the most widely debated lines of the entire Poisoned
Pawn complex. After 13 ... dxe5 14 Bxf6 gxf6 15 Ne4, the old main line 15 ... Be7 has
been largely overtaken by 15 ... Qxa2, even though a clear refutation has not been found
yet. The move 17 Rf1, which was such a revelation when it was first played in 2003, has
been largely neutralized and it seems like the whole line is nothing more than a draw for
White. Perhaps Black can even go for more with 15 ... f5!?. This has hardly been played
or even mentioned. I have analysed this line deeply and it looks to me like it is an
extremely dangerous surprise weapon. In many lines, White is the one struggling to
obtain equality.
We then focus our attention on the modern main line of the 10 f5 Poisoned Pawn
variation that is characterized by 15 ... Qxa2.

In Game 30 we look at the dangerous 16 Rd1 Be7 17 Bd3!?, a rare move that contains
a fair bit of venom, although Black should be okay with careful play. We then look at the
critical variations arising after 17 Be2 0-0 18 0-0. Here it looks like Black again has
several ways to force equality, although there are plenty of ways for both sides to go
wrong. Game 31 features two world-class players who were not able to meet the
demands and complexities of the variation in question.
Finally, we look at the less common but equally dangerous move 13 Be2 in Game 32.
The mercurial Ukrainian superstar, Vassily Ivanchuk, has breathed some new life into this
line, although again Black has since found ways to neutralize White’s attacking ideas.

Game 28
P.Moreira Lopes-N.Luzuriaga
Correspondence 2003

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5
 A logical attempt to weaken Black’s position and to increase White’s attacking scope
by opening the f-file. 10 e5 is the other critical move and will be investigated in the next
chapter.
10 ... Nc6
This is the overwhelming main move here. Black has to do something about the
pressure on the e6-pawn:
a) The nonchalant 10 ... Be7?! 11 fxe6 fxe6 (or 11 ... Bxe6 12 Nxe6 fxe6 13 Bc4) 12
Bc4 already looks like an opening disaster in the making for Black. He has done
surprisingly well here in correspondence chess. However, this is exactly the kind of
position that engines will probably hold with best play, but which is too difficult to handle
over the board.
b) The unnatural 10 ... e5 has been played a few times, but White gets a slight but
stable edge after 11 Bxf6 gxf6 12 Nb3! (12 Nd5 exd4 13 Nc7+ Kd8 14 Nxa8 Qxa2 is less
clear as the knight will struggle to extricate itself after 15 Rd1 Nd7 16 Qxd4 Qa5+) 12 ...
Be7 13 Bc4, with typical compensation on the light squares.
c) The computer-like 10 ... b5!? has been played in a handful of games and may not
be as bad as it looks. Black is making use of his lack of development to remain flexible
and react accordingly to White’s plans. After 11 fxe6 he has:
c1) Following 11 ... Bxe6 12 Bxf6 gxf6 13 Nd5 Bxd5 14 exd5 White has more than
sufficient compensation for the pawn, in view of Black’s wrecked structure and weak light
squares. For example, 14 ... Nd7 15 Be2 followed by kingside castling or 14 ... Qxa2?! 15
Kf2! Nd7 (15 ... Qxd5 16 Bxb5+! axb5 17 Rxb5 gives White a terrifying initiative) 16 Bd3
Ne5 17 Rhe1 Rc8 18 Bf5 with very good compensation in return for the two pawns.
c2) 11 ... fxe6 once led to a typically ferocious attack by the famous Serbian
Grandmaster Dragoljub Velimirovic: 12 Rb3 (White has to play energetically; the calm 12
Be2 gives Black a comfortable game after 12 ... Be7 13 0-0 0-0 when surprisingly
Georgiev and Kolev gave 14 Bf3 and claimed that they could not find a good defence, but
14 ... Rd8!? looks particularly fine for Black) 12 ... Qc5 (12 ... Qa5! is safer, although I still
like White’s initiative after 13 Be2!? b4 14 0-0!) 13 Ncxb5! Nxe4 (13 ... axb5 14 Rc3,
winning the c8-bishop, is the obvious point) 14 Qa5!? (a beautiful geometrical motif,
defending the b5-knight indirectly and threatening Nc7; however, Black appears to have
sufficient defensive resources here and 14 Qe3!?, sticking to the principle of leaving as
many pieces en prise as possible, might be an improvement).

Now:
c21) Not surprisingly, Black went wrong very quickly over the board: 14 ... Kf7? 15
Be3! (White’s attack is already irresistible and Black can hardly move without losing
material) 15 ... Bd7 and now in D.Velimirovic-S.Marjanovic, Bjelovar 1979, White could
have crowned his model play with 16 Nxe6!.
c22) The difficult move 14 ... Be7! is probably Black’s best chance and after the more
or less forcing continuation 15 Nc7+ (15 Qc7? Nd7 16 Qxc5 Ndxc5 holds up nicely for
Black who is now poised to win material) 15 ... Kd7 16 Qxc5 Nxc5 17 Nxa8 Nxb3 18 Nb6+
Kc7 19 Nxc8 we have arrived at an extraordinary position with four hanging minor pieces.
Black should be able to hold his own here: for example, 19 ... Bxg5 20 Nxe6+ Kxc8 21
Nxg5 Nc5 with a nominal but not too serious edge for White.
Returning to the standard 10 ... Nc6:
11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6
 13 e5
13 Be2 is the other big main move and will be covered in Game 32.
13 ... Nd5
This once claimed the scalp of no less than Bobby Fischer and is extremely rare
nowadays. Before writing this book, I had the impression that the move had been
virtually refuted, but now I am not sure why as things are not as conclusive as they
appeared to be. The main move, 13 ... dxe5, will be covered in the next few games.
14 Nxd5
14 Ne4 was also tested in this position, but White did not score too significantly with
it.
14 ... cxd5
I like White’s attacking chances after 14 ... exd5 15 Bd3!? (15 e6!? is also interesting,
with the idea of 15 ... Bxe6 16 Rb7!) 15 ... dxe5 16 0-0 Bd6 17 Kh1.
15 Be2
By now, readers should be getting used to White’s attacking mechanisms. It is
imperative not to worry about pawns, but to get the pieces into play as quickly as
possible.
Developing the bishop to the natural d3-square with 15 Bd3!? looks perfectly logical. A
couple of correspondence chess games have gone 15 ... dxe5 16 0-0 Bd6 17 c4 Qc5+ 18
Kh1 e4 19 Bc2 and Black has trouble unravelling.
15 ... dxe5 16 0-0
 16 ... Ra7!
This has been established as Black’s best defence in this particular position. We shall
be seeing a lot of this ... Ra8-a7 move, which is one of Black’s key defensive manoeuvres
in this line of the Poisoned Pawn. Interestingly, Kasparov didn’t rate this move very highly
in his DVD and concluded that White has “found quite convincing ways of breaking
through Black’s defence.”
16 ... Bc5+? was the main move when this line was first played in the 1960s. In
general, Black should keep this check in reserve as it could be a useful way for his queen
to retreat with tempo after, say, White plays Rb3. After 17 Kh1 Rf8 18 c4! (continuing his
energetic play and opening up the position; Fischer as White has played flawlessly so far)
18 ... Rxf1+ 19 Rxf1 Bb7 (19 ... h6 invites the white queen to penetrate on the g6-
square: 20 Bh4! Bb7 21 Rf3 Qa4 22 Qb2! Qc6 23 Qxe5 and White has a winning attack or
here 21 ... Qb4 22 Qc2! when the threat of Qg6 is devastating) we reach a famous
position:
 a) The natural 20 Bg4? was played in Fischer-Geller, Monaco 1967, where after the
brilliant retort 20 ... dxc4! 21 Bxe6 Qd3 White was not able to make any progress and lost
quickly: 22 Qe1 Be4 23 Bg4 Rb8 24 Bd1 Kd7 25 Rf7+ Ke6 0-1.
b) 20 Qc2! was the famous improvement by Mikhail Tal which more or less banished
16 ... Bc5 to the theoretical trashbin. I suppose I could have stopped at this point, but I
think it is useful to go through the rest of the game to see the common attacking
techniques and appreciate the way Tal conducted his attack: 20 ... e4 (there’s not much
of a choice for Black; 20 ... g6 21 Bg4 looks terrible for him, while 20 ... Be7 21 Bh5+ g6
22 Bxg6+! hxg6 23 Qxg6+ Kd7 24 Bxe7 is simply devastating) 21 Bg4 Be7? (not the best,
but Black did not have any enticing options) 22 Qf2! (threatening Qf7+ and hence forcing
Black’s reply) 22 ... 0-0-0 23 Bf4! (utilizing the bishop-pair nicely; Black has hardly any
moves) 23 ... Bd6 24 Bxe6+ Kb8 25 Qb6 Bxf4 26 Qxd8+ Ka7 27 Rb1 Qd6 28 Bxd5 Bxd5
29 Qxd6 Bxd6 30 cxd5 1-0, M.Tal-R.Bogdanovic, Budva 1967.
Instead, 16 ... Qc5+ 17 Kh1 Ra7 transposes to the main line.
17 c4
Continuing in the same vein as Fischer and Tal, but clearly the rook on the a7 serves a
much more useful defensive function than the bishop on c5.
17 ... Qc5+
17 ... Rb7!?, with the idea of 18 cxd5 Rxb1 19 Rxb1 Bc5+ 20 Kh1 0-0!, may be a yet
more straightforward route to equality.
18 Kh1 d4
 Again, Black has to keep the position closed. From here on, he has to play a series of
accurate moves to keep the balance.
19 Bh5+ g6 20 Bd1!
Changing lanes to a better diagonal which might offer more scope.
20 ... Be7 21 Ba4+
21 Bxe7!? Kxe7 22 Qh6! is a potential improvement, although the engines are
generally optimistic about Black’s chances here.
21 ... Kd8

22 Rf7
The position after 22 Bxe7+ Rxe7 23 Qg5 Kc7! 24 Rfe1 appears to lead to a forced
draw after the following extremely sharp and concrete continuation: 24 ... Rf8! 25 Rxe5
Qb4! 26 Rc5+ Kd8 27 Rd1! Qxa4 28 Rxc8+ Kxc8 29 Qc5+ Kb8 30 Rb1+ Ka8 31 Qxe7 Rb8
and ½-½ in V.Grechihin-V.Popov, Cherepovets 1997, and several other correspondence
games.
22 ... h6
22 ... e4 is extremely tempting, but after 23 Rxe7 Rxe7 24 Bf6! Black’s centre is about
to collapse and the compensation he obtains after 24 ... e5 25 Bxh8 e3 26 Qd3! Bf5 27
Qb3 does not appear to be sufficient.
23 Bxh6 Rb7!?
This appears to be a small improvement. Previously 23 ... e4 had been tested
extensively, but after 24 h3! e5 25 Kg1!? the position remains extremely complex.
24 Rxb7
There is nothing better. Refraining from captures with a move like 24 Re1? loses to 24
... Qb4!, which forces the exchange of queens.
24 ... Bxb7 25 Bg5 Bxg5 26 Qxg5+ Kc8 27 Bd7+ Kb8 28 Bxe6 Qd6
It is clear that Black is doing pretty well here and the game eventually ended
peacefully:

29 Qxg6 Rf8 30 Bf5 Rd8 31 Qg7 Bc6 32 Rf6 Qc7 33 Qg6 Bb7 34 h3 Qxc4 35
Be4 Qc7 36 Bxb7 Kxb7 37 Qd3 Rd6 38 Qe4+ Ka7 39 Qxe5 Qc1+ 40 Kh2 Rxf6
41 Qe7+ Kb8 42 Qxf6 Qc7+ 43 Kg1 Qc1+ 44 Qf1 Qe3+ 45 Qf2 Qc1+ 46 Kh2
Qc7+ 47 Kh1 d3 48 Qe3 Qc2 49 Qb6+ Kc8 50 Qxa6+ Kd7 51 Qb7+ ½-½
Thus it seems that Black has sufficient resources after 13 ... Nd5 despite the line’s
risky nature.

Game 29
P.Bobras-R.Wojtaszek
German League 2009

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 e5 dxe5 14 Bxf6 gxf6
 15 Ne4
15 Be2!? has been played in a handful of games and could be an interesting surprise
weapon:
a) 15 ... Qd6!? is an attempt to exploit White’s move order, but after 16 Qe3 Qc5 17
Qg3 Be7 18 Ne4! Qxc2 19 Bd3 Qxa2 20 0-0 White’s position looks promising and is
certainly worthy of investigation.
b) Perhaps transposing to the main line with 15 ... h5 16 Ne4 Be7 is safest, but this
means that Black does not have the option of 15 ... Qxa2.
c) 15 ... Bh6 16 Qxh6 (16 Bh5+? Ke7 17 Qd3 Qc5! was winning for Black in J.Hirneise-
M.Womacka, Internet 2005, although he blundered and lost just two moves later) 16 ...
Qxc3+ 17 Kf1 Ra7! (this is forced as White is threatening Bh5+ and Black has to block on
f7 even if it is with a rook) 18 Bh5+ Rf7 19 Qg7 Qc4+ 20 Ke1 with an extremely murky
position, but one which seems to give White promising practical chances.
15 ... Be7
This is the old main line which has been seen in practice since the 1960s. This line
was previously deemed to be inferior to the 15 ... Qxa2 of Game 30, but it seems that
with the help of powerful computers, the entire variation has been resolved, with a draw
the most likely conclusion.
15 ... f5!? is a dangerous surprise weapon, as it has hardly ever been played and was
not mentioned by any of my sources:
a) The typical manoeuvre 16 Rb3 doesn’t work well here: 16 ... Qxa2 17 Qc3 fxe4 18
Be2 (18 Qxc6+ Kf7 19 Qxa8 Qxc2 20 Be2 Qc1+ 21 Bd1 Bb4+! 22 Rxb4 Qc3+ is easily
winning for Black) 18 ... Qa4 appears to lead to a good endgame for Black. After 19 Qxe5
Bb4+ 20 c3 Qxb3 21 Qxh8+ Kd7 22 cxb4 Qxb4+ 23 Kf2 Kc7 White certainly has
compensation, but probably not enough for the three-pawn deficit.
b) After 16 Be2 h5 we should explore:
 b1) 17 Qg5 is tricky to meet and Black has to play very accurately after 17 ... Qe7 18
Bxh5+ Kd8:
b11) The position remains highly complicated after 19 Qd2+ Qd7 20 Qa5+ Qc7 21
Qd2+ Bd7 22 Ng5 Kc8 23 Be2 e4!, although the worst seems to have passed for Black
and he can be quite optimistic about his chances.
b12) 19 Nf6 is also quite dangerous. Black has problems developing all his pieces, but
it seems like he has enough resources to cope with White’s compensation: 19 ... Bd7
(preparing to shift the king to the c8-square while avoiding any nasty pins on the d-file or
along the seventh rank; 19 ... Bh6 20 Qh4 followed by 0-0 and Rhd1 is unpleasant to
meet) 20 Rb7 (20 Rd1 Rxh5! 21 Qd2 Rh7! seems to work nicely in Black’s favour: for
example, 22 Nxd7 Qh4+ 23 Ke2 Bb4! 24 c3 Bxc3 25 Qxc3 Qe4+ 26 Kf2 Qf4+ 27 Ke2 Rxd7
28 Qxc6 Raa7!, which is a really crazy computer variation) 20 ... Rxh5! (again!) 21 Qd2
Kc8 22 Qxd7+ Qxd7 23 Rxd7 Rb8! and Black is clearly in the driver’s seat.
b2) 17 0-0 Bh6! followed by ... Qe3+ must be good for Black in view of the active
queen, but not the suicidal 17 ... fxe4? as 18 Qg5! looks very strong for White.
b3) 17 Bxh5+ wins the exchange, but hands the initiative to Black after 17 ... Rxh5 18
Nf6+ Kf7 19 Nxh5 Qc5! (the crazy 19 ... Qxa2? was played in the only game by titled
players that I could find with 15 ... f5; White won easily after 20 0-0 Kg6? 21 Rb3! in
Q.Hou-T.Farkas, Kecskemet 2011).
 This brings the queen to a more active square and prevents White from castling. The
move has never been played, but seems to promise Black excellent chances after 20 Rb3
(20 Qg5 Qc3+ 21 Qd2 – otherwise Black follows up with ... e4 with an excellent game –
21 ... Qxd2+ 22 Kxd2 a5! 23 Rb6 Ba6 24 Rxc6 Rd8+ 25 Ke3 Bb5 26 Rc7+ Kg6 looks
promising for Black) 20 ... a5! (Black needs to get his light-squared bishop into play as
soon as possible). For example:
b31) 21 Qg5 Qe7 22 h4 (22 Qxe7+ Bxe7 23 Rb6 Bb4+ 24 Kd1 Ba6 again looks good
for Black) 22 ... Ba6 is better for Black.
b32) 21 Qd8 is well met by 21 ... Qe7! 22 Qb6 Ba6.
b33) After 21 h4 Ba6 (21 ... a4 22 Rc3 Qb4 with the idea of 23 0-0 Ra5 also looks
interesting) 22 Qg5 Qe7 the position is extremely complex, but I would certainly prefer to
be Black.
All in all, the unexplored 15 ... f5!? seems to be a pretty worthy alternative to the
main lines.
16 Be2
 16 ... h5
16 ... 0-0 looks too dangerous for Black after 17 Rb3 Qa4 (17 ... Qxa2? just gives
White a wonderful attack after 18 0-0) 18 c4!. Indeed, White has a phenomenal score
here.
17 Rf1
This move was quite a revelation when it was discovered in 2003, but it appears that
Black has solved most of his problems here. Given how important this position is for the
theory of the 6 Bg5 Najdorf, I have presented some of the lines that went out of fashion
with some notes to explain why:
a) 17 c4 is a tricky move. White prepares castling without allowing the black queen to
reach the d4-square. After 17 ... f5 (forced; the thematic 17 ... Ra7 will be met by 18 Rb3
Rd7 19 Nxf6+! winning material, although Black can certainly put up a fair bit of
resistance, while here 18 ... Qa4 19 Rb8 0-0 20 0-0 looks extremely dangerous for Black)
18 Rb3 Qa4 White has tried:
 a1) Black is able to regroup after 19 Nd6+ Bxd6 20 Qxd6 Qa5+ 21 Kf2 when 21 ...
Ra7! followed by ... Qc7 is safe for him.
a2) 19 0-0 is unsound but also in the spirit of the opening. After 19 ... fxe4 many
moves have been tried and I’ll just look at a couple of critical ones: 20 Qc3 (thematic;
after 20 Kh1 c5 21 Qc3 Qc6 22 Qxe5 Rf8 23 Bxh5+ Kd8 24 Rd1+ Bd7, with a bit of care,
Black should eventually be able to consolidate) 20 ... Qxa2 (20 ... Bd6 21 Qg3! looks
dangerous for Black, although I couldn’t find more than a draw after 21 ... Qxa2 22 Qg6+
Kd8 23 Qg5+ Kc7 24 Rf7+ Bd7 25 Rxd7+ Kxd7 26 Qg7+ Be7 27 Rb7+ Kc8 28 Rxe7 Qa1+
29 Bf1 Qd4+ 30 Kh1 Qd8) 21 Bd1 has scored highly on my database, but the untried 21
... Rg8! is simply winning for Black, instead of 21 ... Rf8 22 Bxh5+ Kd8 23 Rd1+ Bd7 24
Qe3 Qa5 25 Rb7 Kc8 26 Rdxd7 Bc5 27 Rdc7+ Kd8 28 Rd7+, as played in L.Kavalek-
R.Fischer, Sousse Interzonal 1967.
b) 17 0-0? is a well-known error as it allows Black’s queen to eventually return to the
centre of the board via a crucial check on the d4-square. After 17 ... f5 we have:
b1) A typical continuation runs 18 Rf3 Qxa2 19 Rfb3 Qa4! (19 ... fxe4? 20 Qc3!
threatens Ra1 and Qxc6 simultaneously) 20 c4 (20 Nd6+? Bxd6 21 Qxd6 is no good here
because of 21 ... Qd4+ – the main reason why castling was a mistake) 20 ... fxe4 21 Qc3
(any other move can be met by the crippling sequence 21 ... Bc5+ followed by ... Bd4) 21
... Bd6! (21 ... Bc5+? 22 Kh1 Bd4 would now be a serious mistake because of 23 Qg3
when White has a powerful attack) 22 Ra1 Bc5+ 23 Kh1 Bd4! and Black is close to
winning.
b2) 18 Bf3 looks dangerous, but a recent outing indicated that after 18 ... Ra7! Black
has everything under control: 19 Rb8 (19 Rb3 Qa4 20 Nd6+ Bxd6 21 Qxd6 Qd4+! is,
again, the typical resource available at Black’s disposal) 19 ... Rc7 20 Qd1 (20 Kh1 could
be met by 20 ... fxe4 21 Bxe4 Qd6! 22 Qe2 Qc5!) 20 ... Kf8 (after 20 ... 0-0! 21 Rb3 Qa4
22 Nd6 h4! White has no compensation for the material) 21 Bxh5 Qe3+ 22 Nf2 Qg5 when
Black was better and went on to win in G.Stenersen-Y.Solodovnichenko, Fagernes 2011.
c) 17 Rb3 is another dangerous idea that was concocted and championed by a number
of strong players in the 1970s.

After 17 ... Qa4 (gaining a critical tempo by hitting the e4-knight; 17 ... Qxa2? 18 0-0
f5 19 Qc3! is devastating) 18 c4 (the enterprising 18 Nxf6+!? Bxf6 19 c4 was extremely
popular, but unfortunately has now been refuted by the likes of Rybka a n d Houdini;
Black’s best continuation here is 19 ... Bh4+! 20 g3 Be7, taking away the g3-square away
from the b3-rook and after 21 0-0 h4! I think he can be optimistic about his chances,
although the position remains highly complicated) 18 ... f5 19 Nd6+ Bxd6 (Black has to
give up the important dark-squared bishop; 19 ... Kf8? 20 0-0 would ask too much) 20
Qxd6 Qa5+ 21 Kf2 Ra7! followed by ... Qc7 should be okay for Black.
Returning to the critical 17 Rf1:

17 ... f5
White has scored highly after 17 ... Qxa2, although the position might objectively be
playable for Black. It is certainly practically easier for White though: for example, 18 Rd1
Qd5 (18 ... f5!? could be a possible improvement) 19 Qe3 Qa5+ 20 c3 f5 21 Qg3!
(threatening the devastating Qg7; Black’s reply is once again forced) 21 ... Kf8 (21 ... Kf7
loses to the spectacular 22 Rxf5+!! exf5 23 Bc4+ Kf8 24 Qg6 when Black is destroyed on
the light squares) 22 Qg6 (now the threat is Rxf5+ followed by Bc4, as we just saw; Black
is hanging on by a thread) 22 ... Qa4? (22 ... Ra7! is an improvement when Black is still
hanging on, although his task is hardly pleasant) 23 Rf3! (and now the threat of Rg3 is
extremely strong) 23 ... Ra7 (23 ... Bh4+ is met by 24 Rg3! Bxg3+ 25 hxg3 when the
threat of Rd8 forces Black to sacrifice his queen with 25 ... Qxd1+ when 26 Bxd1 fxe4 27
Qf6+ Kg8 28 Qd8+ Kh7 29 Qe7+ Kg8 30 Bc2 wins easily; Black’s entire army can hardly
move) 24 Rg3 Bh4 25 Ng5 Bxg3+ 26 hxg3 Qa5 27 Qf6+ Kg8 28 Rd8+ 1-0, T.Radjabov-Ye
Jiangchuan, Mallorca Olympiad 2004.
18 Rf3
18 Rb3 has also been played, but 18 ... Qa4 19 Nd6+ Bxd6 20 Qxd6 Qa5+ 21 Kf2 Qd5,
forcing the exchange of queens, is ideal for Black.
18 ... Qxa2
Probably the only move here. Instead, after 18 ... Qa4 19 Nd6+ Bxd6 (the untried 19
... Kf8 is probably better, but White retains a terrifying initiative after 20 Nc4!) 20 Qxd6
Qa5+ 21 Kf1 (White’s threat of Qxc6 is simple but effective; Black has no reasonable
riposte) 21 ... Qd5 (21 ... Ra7 22 Rb8 Kf7 23 Rxc8! is a typical sacrifice leading to the
total annihilation of Black’s centre: 23 ... Rxc8 24 Bc4 Re8 25 Bxe6+ Rxe6 26 Rxf5+ Kg7
27 Qxe6 is winning for White) 22 Qc7 Black can’t defend against the threats of Qg7 and
Rd3 and went down in flames: 22 ... Qd7 23 Qxe5 Qh7 24 Rg3 Rf8 25 Rg7 1-0, A.Danin-
S.Zilka, Prague 2011.
19 Rfb3

This is the big idea. After 19 ... fxe4 White will play 20 Qc3 with the simultaneous
threats of 21 Ra1 and 21 Qxc6, winning material.
19 ... fxe4
Trying to get the queen back to play with 19 ... Qa4 is risky, but probably just about
playable: 20 Nd6+ Bxd6 21 Qxd6 Qa5+ (21 ... Qe4? loses immediately to 22 Rb7! Qh4+
23 g3 Qd8 24 Qxe5 Rh6 25 Qg7, as played in L.Fernandez Siles-A.Gamundi Salamanca,
Albacete 2004) 22 Kf1 Ra7! (covering the seventh rank and this is probably the only move
to try and hold everything together; 22 ... Qd5? 23 Qc7! with the threat of 24 Rd1 is
devastating, while 22 ... Kf7? loses to 23 Rb7+! Kg6 24 Qe7!, as played in one of the
stem games in this variation, M.Thinius-U.Kersten, Bad Zwesten 2006) 23 Rb6!
(preventing ... Qc7; Black has to remain vigilant) 23 ... Qd5 24 Qb8 Qd7 25 Qxe5 0-0 26
R1b3 (if 26 Bxh5 Qc7, while Tony Kosten mentioned 26 Kg1 as a possible improvement,
but Black can unexpectedly gain counterplay with 26 ... a5! 27 Bxh5 a4!, ramming the a-
pawn home) 26 ... h4! 27 Qf4 Qg7 28 Qxh4 Qa1+ 29 Rb1 Qe5 with sufficient counterplay
for Black.
20 Qc3

20 ... Bd8
Throwing in an intermediate 20 ... Bh4+!? 21 g3 Bd8, creating the prospect of opening
the h-file, is interesting. White should probably carry on in the same vein as the text with
22 Qxc6+ (after 22 Ra1 Ba5 23 Qxa5 Qxa5+ 24 Rxa5 the point of Black’s 20th move is
clearer: 24 ... h4! and Black will seize the initiative) 22 ... Bd7 23 Qxe4 (but 23 Qxa8
Qxc2 is promising for Black).
21 Qxc6+ Bd7
After 21 ... Ke7?! 22 Qxa8 Qxc2 23 Qa7+ Ke8 (23 ... Bd7 24 Rb7 Qc3+ 25 Kf1 Rf8+ 26
Kg1 Qd4+ 27 Kh1 Qxa7 28 Rxa7 Ba5 29 Rbb7 Rd8 30 Rxa6 is a forcing continuation that
gives White decent winning chances) 24 Rb8 Black has an extremely unpleasant
defensive task ahead of him.
22 Qxe4
This keeps the attack going. Black seizes the initiative after 22 Qxa8 Qxc2 23 Qxa6 0-
0! (threatening 24 ... e3!) 24 Rg3+ Kh8 25 Rd1 Ba4! (another typical computer move;
Black threatens to win immediately with 26 ... Qc5 and, hence, White’s reply is forced) 26
Qa7 Qc7! 27 Qxa4 Qa5+ 28 Qxa5 Bxa5+ 29 Rd2 Rd8, winning back the exchange by
force with a drawn endgame, although Black can certainly press a little.
22 ... Ke7
This indirectly defends the a8-rook in view of the discovered check on the a5-square.
The Polish GM had probably worked everything out at home. Likewise, after 22 ... Qa5+
23 Kf1 Rf8+! (Kosten mentioned 23 ... 0-0+ in his notes, but White can try 24 Kg1! when
Black has no good reply to White’s numerous attacking threats) 24 Rf3 (24 Kg1 Qc5+ 25
Kh1 Bc6! followed by ... Kd7 allows Black to consolidate; evidently, Black’s king is safest
by far in the centre) 24 ... Rxf3+ 25 Bxf3 Ra7 26 Qg6+ Kf8 27 Qh6+ Kg8! 28 Qg6+ it’s a
draw by perpetual.
23 Rd1!

Continuing to set some tricks which an unprepared player might easily fall into.
23 ... Qa4!
Defending the light-squared bishop with tempo. After this last accurate move, White
has no choice, but to force a draw. Instead, 23 ... Rc8 24 Qg6! would have continued to
ask questions.
24 Rb4
The spectacular 24 Rxd7+!? Qxd7 25 Qxe5 is also a draw accordingly to Houdini,
although I don’t think anyone will venture into this position a rook down as White.
24 ... Ba5 25 Qh4+ Ke8 26 Bxh5+ Rxh5 27 Qxh5+ Ke7 28 Qh4+ Kf7 29
Qh7+ ½-½
It seems that the line with 15 ... Be7 has now been worked out to be a draw in
multiple ways. I recommend the reader to take a closer look at 15 ... f5!? if he is really
desperate for a win as Black.

Game 30
J.Hector-A.Areshchenko
German League 2009
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2
9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 e5 dxe5 14 Bxf6 gxf6 15
Ne4 Qxa2

For a long time, this move was considered best at this juncture. In fact, Kasparov,
who certainly knows a thing or two about the Najdorf, claimed this on his DVD. However,
if 15 ... Be7, which was examined in the previous game, stands up to scrutiny or 15 ... f5
turns out to be more than an equalizing line, this may be an inaccurate conclusion.
16 Rd1
Kasparov mentioned that the tempting 16 Nxf6+ Kf7 17 Rb3 doesn’t work due to the
thematic centralizing manoeuvre 17 ... Qa1+ 18 Ke2 Qd4! 19 Qg5 e4 when, without the
possibility of Rf3, White’s position is just lost.
16 ... Be7 17 Bd3!?
An attempt to pose some problems. Others:
a) 17 Be2 is the main move and will be seen in our next game.
b) Getting rid of Black’s dark-squared bishop with 17 Nd6+ looks natural, but after 17
... Bxd6 (this is forced, as 17 ... Kf8?? loses to 18 Bc4) 18 Qxd6 Qa5+ 19 Rd2 Ra7! 20 Bc4
Rd7! (Black had probably calculated that he would win a piece in the next few moves) 21
Qxe6+ Kd8 22 Qxf6+ Kc7 23 0-0 Qxd2 24 Qxe5+ Qd6 25 Qxh8 Qc5+! Black had grabbed
a piece in broad daylight and soon won in P.Simacek-M.Sieciechowicz, Polanica Zdroj
2011.
17 ... 0-0 18 0-0 f5 19 Rf3!?
Going for the black king. Another possibility is 19 Qh6 Rf7 (19 ... fxe4? fails to 20 Bxe4
Bc5+ 21 Kh1 Ra7 22 Rd8! and then 22 ... Qa3 23 Rxc8! or 22 ... Rxd8 23 Qg5+ Kh8 24
Qxd8+ Kg7 25 Qg5+ Kh8 26 Qxe5+ Rg7 27 Qxc5) 20 Rf3 (20 Be2 is well met by 20 ...
Qxc2 21 Ng5 Rg7 22 Nxe6 Bxe6 23 Qxe6+ Kh8 24 Qxe5 Qe4!) 20 ... Bd7 21 Bf1 Rd8 22
Rg3+ Kh8 when we have:
 a) After 23 Qh5 Be8 24 Nd6? (24 Ng5 Rxd1 25 Nxf7+ Bxf7 26 Qxd1 Qd5 was
indicated) 24 ... Rxd6 25 Rxd6 e4! 26 Rxc6 Qa1 with his massive central pawns and the
threat of ... Bc5+, Black was clearly better in T.Ernst-S.Fedder, Copenhagen 1982.
b) 23 Ng5! Bxg5 24 Qxg5 Rdf8 25 Be2 Qxc2 26 Bh5 was P.Anisimov-A.Kim, St
Petersburg 2005, where both players had played remarkably well in the complications.
Here 26 ... Qc5+! (instead of 26 ... f4?! as played in the game) 27 Kh1 Qe7! with the idea
of 28 Bxf7 Qxg5 29 Rxg5 Rxf7 30 Rg3 e4 would have preserved some winning chances for
Black.
19 ... fxe4?!
This allows White to force at least a draw. The accurate 19 ... Kh8! is the only attempt
for Black to play for a win: for example, 20 Qh6 Bd7 21 Rg3 Rf7 22 Ng5 Bxg5 23 Qxg5
Qa5! 24 Be2 Qc5+ 25 Kf1 Qe7, which is a typical manoeuvre by Black to bring his queen
back to the kingside with tempo. Black has played extremely accurately and eventually
won in ‘R.Sophistry’-‘R.PAKman’, Internet 2006.
Instead, 19 ... Rf7?! is another way route to a draw after 20 Rg3+ Rg7 21 Qh6 Rxg3
22 hxg3 Ra7 23 Nf6+ Bxf6 24 Qxf6 Rd7 25 c4 Rxd3 26 Qg5+, as played in F.Rodriguez
Pardo-R.Bury, correspondence 2006.
20 Rxf8+ Bxf8
20 ... Kxf8? loses to 21 Qh6+ Ke8 22 Qh5+ Kf8 23 Rf1+ with a quick checkmate in
sight.
21 Qg5+
 21 ... Kh8
Again, Black has to be careful as only one of his three options saves the draw:
a) 21 ... Bg7? 22 Bxe4! Bb7? (this makes things easier for White, but there were no
good options for Black; if 22 ... Qa5 23 Rd8+ Kf7 24 Qh5+ Ke7 25 Qe8+ Kf6 26 Rd1! with
a winning attack) 23 Qh5 h6 24 Qg6 and White soon won in S.Klimov-S.Virovlansky,
Moscow 2005.
b) 21 ... Kf7? 22 Be2! followed by Bh5 is also game over for Black.
22 Rf1
22 Qxe5+ also leads to a draw: 22 ... Kg8 23 Qg5+ Bg7 (I initially thought 23 ... Kh8
would just lead to a perpetual, but Houdini promptly indicated the messy 24 Rf1! Qa3 25
Qf6+ Kg8 26 Qf7+ Kh8 27 Bxe4 as a way for White to continue pressing for the win) 24
Bxe4 Bd7!! (necessary; 24 ... Bb7 25 Qh5! leads to note ‘a’ to Black’s 21st move, while 24
... Qb2 25 Qd8+ Bf8 26 Rf1 gives a continuing attack against Black’s exposed king) 25
Rxd7 Qa1+ 26 Kf2 Rf8+ 27 Kg3 Qe5+ forces the exchange of queens and should result in
a peaceful draw.
22 ... Qa3 23 Qf6+ Kg8 24 Qf7+ Kh8 25 Bxe4!?
 25 ... Qe3+?
A slip. A draw would have arisen after 25 ... Bc5+! 26 Kh1 Ra7 27 Qf6+ (if 27 Qe8+
Kg7 28 Qxc8 Rf7) 27 ... Kg8 28 Qg5+ Kh8 (28 ... Rg7 29 Qd8+ Bf8 30 Qxc8 Qd6 31 Qxa6
Rf7 is an alternative) 29 Qf6+ and it’s perpetual.
26 Kh1 Qh6 27 Bxh7! Qg7 28 Qh5 Ra7
28 ... Qh6 runs into 29 Rxf8+! Qxf8 30 Be4+ Kg7 31 Qg6+.
29 Bd3+?
Returning the favour. 29 Qe8! Kxh7 (or 29 ... Qxh7 30 Rxf8+ Kg7 31 Rf3!) 30 Rxf8
wins.
29 ... Kg8 30 Qe8 e4! 31 Bc4 Rc7 32 Qd8

32 ... Rf7 33 Qxc8 Rxf1+ 34 Bxf1 Qd4 35 Qxe6+ Kg7

The position is completely equal and the game eventually finished in a draw:
36 Qg4+ Kh8 37 Qh5+ Kg7 38 Qg4+ Kh8 39 Qh5+ Kg7 40 Qg5+ Kh8 41
Qh4+ Kg7 42 Qg3+ Kh8 43 c3 Qd1 44 Qe5+ Kg8 45 Qe6+ Kg7 46 Qe5+ Kg8
47 Kg1 Qe1 48 Qe6+ Kg7 49 Qg4+ Kh8 50 Qh5+ Kg7 51 Qg5+ Kh7 52 g3 Qxc3
53 Qf5+ Kg7 54 Qg4+ Kf6 55 Qf4+ Kg7 56 Qxe4 Qc5+ 57 Kg2 Qd5 58 Qxd5
cxd5 59 Bxa6= Bb4 60 Bb7 d4 61 Ba6 Kh6 62 Kf3 d3 63 Bxd3 Bc5 64 Bb5 Bb6
65 h4 Bc7 66 g4 Bd8 67 Kg3 Be7 68 g5+ Bxg5 69 hxg5+ Kxg5 ½-½

Game 31
A.Grischuk-V.Anand
Linares 2009

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 e5 dxe5 14 Bxf6 gxf6 15
Ne4 Qxa2 16 Rd1 Be7 17 Be2

The main move by far. This entire variation has been established as a forced draw
ever since the famous game Vallejo Pons-Kasparov back in 2004 where Kasparov
revealed some top-notch home preparation. Since then there have been some new
attempts from both sides, but nothing has appeared to change the overall conclusion.
17 ... 0-0 18 0-0 Ra7
18 ... f5!? is also played and equalizes cleanly too:
a) 19 Rf3 f4! is an untried novelty which looks fairly decent and might confuse White
(in his book, Andriasyan demonstrated the refutation of 19 ... fxe4?: 20 Rg3+ Kh8 21 Qh6
Rg8 22 Rf1!! Ra7 23 Kh1 Rb7 24 Rf7 Rb1+ 25 Bf1 Rxf1+ 26 Rxf1 Qa5 27 h3 and “no
comments!”). For example, 20 Qc3 Rb8! (preparing ... Rb7; the typical 20 ... Ra7 allows
21 Bc4 Qa4 22 Rb1 with a difficult position for Black) 21 Rg3+! fxg3 22 Qxg3+ Kh8 23
Qxe5+ Kg8 24 Qg3+ looks like the cleanest way to force a draw after 19 Rf3.
b) 19 Qh6 forces Black to tread carefully:
 b1) After the natural 19 ... Rf7?, the untried 20 Rd3! Rg7 (20 ... Kh8 21 Rg3 with the
threat of Bh5 is winning for White) 21 Nf6+ Bxf6 22 Qxf6 Bd7 23 Rfd1 is pretty dangerous
for Black.
b2) 19 ... Ra7? loses to 20 Rf3! f4 (20 ... Bb4 21 Rg3+ Kh8 may appear to hold
everything, but White has the brilliant finish 22 Qf6+!! Rxf6 23 Nxf6 when Black cannot
defend against the back-rank threats; likewise, 20 ... Rf7 21 Rg3+ Kh8 22 Nf6 Bc5+ 23
Kh1 forced resignation in A.Danin-A.Zhigalko, Minsk 2006) 21 Rh3 Bb4 22 Nf6+ Rxf6 23
Qxf6.
b3) The obvious 19 ... fxe4? loses to 20 Rxf8+ Bxf8 21 Qg5+ Kh8 22 Qf6+ Kg8 23
Bh5! when there is no defence to the threat of Rf1.
b4) After 19 ... Qxc2! we arrive at a complicated position that is critical for the
assessment of 18 ... f5.

Black has four(!) extra pawns, but he is severely lacking in development. White’s
attacking ideas hinge on the rook lifts Rd3 and/or Rf3, and Black has to react accordingly,
again with exact moves:
b41) Black defends easily after 20 Ng5? Bc5+ 21 Kh1 Ra7, as in V.Liberzon-
Y.Gruenfeld, Biel 1980. This is normally Black’s follow-up after White moves his e4-knight.
b42) 20 Bd3?! was played in K.Maslak-D.Kokarev, Ulan Ude 2009, and here Black can
improve with 20 ... Qa4! when 21 Ng5 Qd4+ 22 Kh1 Bxg5 23 Qxg5+ Kh8 is fine for him.
b43) 20 Rd3 Qxe2 21 Rg3+ Kf7 22 Rxf5+! is a spectacular sacrifice, but unfortunately
it only forces a draw after 22 ... exf5 23 Rg7+ Ke8 24 Qxc6+ Kd8 25 Qb6+ as in
D.Velimirovic-L.Ftacnik, Vrsac 1981, and many other games.
b44) Black also just survives after 20 Rf3 f4 21 Rh3 Rf7! (in my old notes, I initially
analysed 21 ... Qxe4 22 Bd3 as winning for White, but after 22 ... Rf6! things are hardly
clear, although White can certainly press in the endgame arising after 23 Bxe4! Rxh6 24
Rxh6) 22 Rhd3 Qxe2 (the cleanest way to force a draw) 23 Rd8+ Rf8 24 Nf6+ (24 Rxf8+
Bxf8 25 Qg5+ Kf7 26 Qf6+ Kg8 27 Qg5+ is yet another forced draw) 24 ... Kf7 25 Nh5
Bxd8 26 Qxh7+ Ke8 27 Qg6+ Ke7 28 Qg5+ Kf7 29 Qg7+ Ke8 30 Qg6+ ½-½, W.Watson-
D.King, London 1990. An impressively well-played game in the days when there was no
computer analysis to rely on.
Before we return to 18 ... Ra7, I’ll also briefly mention the rare 18 ... Qa4!?.

This is yet another viable option. Those who are turned off by the large amount of
theory that is examined in this game may prefer to uncover new ground here.
Superficially, I looked at 19 c4 Ra7 20 Qh6 (20 Nxf6+!?) 20 ... Rd7 21 Rd3 (21 Rxd7 Bxd7
22 Bh5 Qxc4 23 Bg6 is equal) 21 ... Rxd3 22 Bxd3 f5 23 Ng5 Bxg5 24 Qxg5+ Kh8 25 Qe7
Rg8 26 Qf6+ with yet another draw.
19 Rf3
19 Qh6 has been played in a handful of games. So long as Black knows his stuff, he
should have nothing to worry about as the number of tricks at White’s disposal is
considerably less than in the variations after 19 Rf3:
a) 19 ... Rd7 20 Rd3 (20 Rxd7 Bxd7 21 Bd3 f5? 22 Ng5 Bxg5 23 Qxg5+ Kh8 24 Qe7
wins a piece, but here 21 ... Rf7 22 Nxf6+ Bxf6 23 Bxh7+! Rxh7 24 Qxf6 Rg7 25 Qd8+
Kh7 26 Qh4+ is another forced draw) 20 ... Rxd3 21 Bxd3 f5 22 Ng5 Bxg5 23 Qxg5+ Kh8
24 Qe7 Rg8 25 Qf6+ led to a perpetual in the high-profile game V.Topalov-B.Gelfand,
Wijk aan Zee 1998.
b) 19 ... Qxc2 is also playable and here White has to play 20 Nxf6+! not to slip into a
worse position (the natural 20 Bd3 can be met by 20 ... Qa4! when White has no attack:
21 Nc3 Bc5+ 22 Kh1 Qd4 23 Ne4 f5 24 Ng5 e4 25 Bxa6 Qg7 and Black has good chances,
while the caveman style rook lifts don’t work: 20 Rd3 Bc5+! 21 Nxc5 Qxc5+ 22 Kh1 Qe7
or 20 Rf3 Bc5+ 21 Nxc5 Qxc5+ 22 Kh1 Qe7). However, after 20 ... Bxf6 21 Rxf6 Qc5+ 22
Kh1 Rg7 23 Qh4 Bd7! 24 Bxa6 Qe7 Black is still quite safe having forced further
exchanges.

19 ... Rd7
This was initially thought to lead to the same thing as 19 ... Kh8, but Grischuk’s
novelty on the next move shows otherwise. Unfortunately, we still do not know what
Grischuk had planned here. White has:
a) 20 Rg3 leads to a famous draw after 20 ... Rd7 21 Qh6, although even here Black
must be accurate:
a1) The right move order is 21 ... Rxd1+! 22 Bxd1 Rf7, transposing to ‘a21’ below.
Interestingly, Andriasyan gave this as the move order in his book, but all my other
references indicated that Kasparov went 21 ... Rf7?? instead.
a2) If he did play 21 ... Rf7??, Kasparov can count himself extremely lucky that he
pulled off a draw:
 a21) 22 Qh5? (missing a great opportunity) 22 ... Rxd1+ 23 Bxd1 Qa5! (threatening
mate in one and bringing his queen back with tempo) 24 Kf1! (the white king has to stay
off the a7-g1 diagonal as after a move like 24 h3? Black can bring his queen back to his
king’s aid with 24 ... Qc7, indirectly defending the f7-rook) 24 ... Qd8! 25 Qxf7 Qxd1+ 26
Kf2 Qxc2+ 27 Kf3 Qd1+ 28 Kf2 Qc2+ 29 Ke3 Bc5+ 30 Nxc5 Qxc5+ 31 Kd2 Qf2+ 32 Kc3
Qd4+ 33 Kc2 Qf2+ 34 Kc3 and White couldn’t avoid the checks in F.Vallejo Pons-
G.Kasparov, Moscow 2004. Since then, plenty of other games have followed the same
path.
a22) What a lot of commentators have failed to point out is that White could have
obtained a winning position here with 22 Rxd7! Bxd7 23 h3!, with the idea of playing Kh2
followed by Bh5. There is no real excuse for Kasparov missing this in his commentary as
it had been played in a correspondence game from 2003, which continued 23 ... Qa5 24
Kh2 Qd8 (24 ... Qe1 25 Nxf6! Qxg3+ 26 Kxg3 Bxf6 27 Kh2 is very good for White, and
here 25 ... Bxf6 26 Rb3! is a brilliant and aesthetic response; Black cannot hold the back
rank despite being a piece up) 25 Bh5 Qf8 26 Bxf7! Qxf7 27 Rb3 and Black soon resigned
in N.Ferreira-B.Jaderholm, correspondence 2003. I would love to hear from the great man
himself as to whether he had missed this little nuance.
b) 20 Qh6!? is another rare move that may confuse even someone who is booked up
to the hilt.
 b1) 20 ... Rf7? 21 Ng5! Rg7 22 Nxh7! Rxh7 23 Rd8+ can be easy to miss. Indeed, I
have won a couple of games like this in blitz.
b2) 20 ... Qxc2 21 Rxf6! Bc5+ (there’s good compensation after 21 ... Rg8 22 Ng5 Rg7
23 Rdf1 Bxf6 24 Qxf6 Qc5+ 25 Kh1 Qe7 26 Qxe5 Rd7; Stohl claims equality which may
well be the case, but it will be hard for Black to unravel in practical play despite his extra
material) 22 Nxc5 Qxc5+ 23 Kh1 Rg8 (23 ... Rg7 24 Rdf1 Rfg8 should also be okay for
Black, although White’s attack looks scary enough) 24 Bh5! (with the idea of Rf7; Black
has to overprotect h7) 24 ... Qc2 25 Rg6! (this forces Black to part with his queen for
White’s two rooks, but the attack isn’t over yet) 25 ... Qxd1+ 26 Bxd1 Rxg6 27 Qf8+ Rg8
28 Qf6+ Rgg7.

Black has three pawns and two rooks for White’s queen, but his position is stuck and
White can always choose to take a perpetual any time he likes. Here Danin played the
strong 29 Bh5!, stopping ... Raf7 and preparing to launch his h-pawn up the board. In
practical terms, this is extremely difficult for Black to handle. Indeed, after 29 ... c5 30 h4
c4 31 Qf8+ Rg8 32 Qf6+ Rag7 (32 ... Rgg7 33 Qxe5 would have continued to ask
questions) 33 Bd1 h5? (this loses in a pretty way; Black should have finally activated his
light-squared bishop with 33 ... Bb7! when after 34 h5 Bxg2+ 35 Kh2 h6 36 Qxh6+ Rh7
37 Qf6+ Rgg7 White amazingly has no breakthrough and has to acquiesce to a draw with
38 Qf8+ Rg8 39 Qf6+ Rgg7) 34 Bc2! Re8 35 Bg6 Reg8 36 g4!, in view of the onrushing h-
pawn, Black had to resign in A.Danin-S.Dvoirys, Vladimir 2009. An extremely well-played
game by the young Russian.
c) 20 Rh3!? has been played just once, but is extremely trappy:
c1) 20 ... Rd7? is so common in similar lines, but here loses immediately in brutal
fashion: 21 Qh6 Rxd1+ (21 ... Rf7 22 Qg6 Rg7 23 Rxh7+! Rxh7 24 Qe8+ Kg7 25 Rxd7
Bxd7 26 Qxe7+ is a complete whitewash) 22 Bxd1 Rf7 23 Qg6! and Black was smashed
on the kingside. The game finished 23 ... Bc5+ 24 Nxc5 Qd5 (24 ... Qa5 was Black’s only
hope, but White can simply play 25 Kf1 with an extra piece after 25 ... Qc7 26 Ne4) 25
Qxf7 Qxd1+ 26 Kf2 Qxc2+ 27 Kg3 Qc3+ 28 Kh4 Qd4+ 29 Kh5 Qd1+ 30 Rf3 1-0,
L.Figueredo Losada-A.Fernandez Hernandez, Havana 2010.
c2) Attempting to swap a pair of rooks with 20 ... Rb7 is met by the concrete 21 Qh6
Rf7 22 Rhd3 Rb1 23 Qh5! Rxd1+ 24 Bxd1 when Black is simply too exposed on the
kingside and on the back rank. He can’t move his rook without losing something, but 24
... Kg8 (24 ... Kg7 25 h3 amounts to the same thing) 25 h3! followed by Rg3 and Qg4 is
devastating.
c3) The improbable 20 ... Qa4!, deterring Qh6 for the time being, appears to be the
only saving move.

After 21 Qe3 Rd7 White has nothing better than to force a draw with 22 Rxh7+ Kxh7
23 Qh3+ Kg7 24 Qg3+ Kh7 25 Qh3+. Note that the queen on a4 not only attacks the
knight on e4, but it also threatens to swap queens with ... Qd4 and prevents White from
doing anything concrete.
After that rather lengthy but very important digression, we return to Anand’s 19 ...
Rd7:
20 Bd3!?

The novelty that Grischuk must have prepared. Previously, only 20 Qh6 Rxd1+ 21
Bxd1 Rf7 22 Rg3+ Kh8 23 Qh5 had been seen, transposing back to Vallejo Pons-
Kasparov.
20 ... f5
20 ... Rf7 21 Qh6 f5 will likely transpose, while the computer indicates 20 ... Qd5!?,
which may be a more straightforward way to hold the balance. The following computer-
generated lines look totally irrational at first glance, but the logic will become clearer
once you spend sufficient time on the position. My impression is that both sides should be
trying to find moves that do not lose immediately. After 21 Qh6 (21 Rg3+ is already
inaccurate as Black can escape with 21 ... Kf7) 21 ... Bc5+ 22 Kf1 (of course not 22 Kh1??
Qxe4, while after 22 Nxc5 Qxc5+ 23 Kh1 e4! 24 Rg3+ Kh8 25 Bf1 Qe7 Black defends
easily and is a few pawns to the good) 22 ... Kh8! White has:
 a) 23 Nxf6? is not possible due to 23 ... Qd4 when the point of ... Kh8 is revealed.
There is no check on h7 and Black is poised to strike on the kingside.
b) 23 Nxc5 Qxc5 24 Rxf6 Rdf7 (24 ... Rg7!?) 25 Ke2 Qe7 is also a successful defence.
c) 23 Be2! Qxe4 24 Rxd7 Bxd7 25 Bd3 Qxf3+ 26 gxf3 Rf7 and I prefer Black, although
the position is probably equal.
21 Qh6

21 ... Kh8?
Even the former world champion was not able to meet the demands of the Poisoned
Pawn. Both Palliser and Giri have pointed out 21 ... Rf7 as a possible improvement. This
was tested subsequently in a couple of games, but both games ending with White
victorious which is an indication of how difficult these Poisoned Pawn positions can be.
After 22 Rg3+ Kh8 23 Ng5 we have:
a) 23 ... Bxg5? 24 Qxg5 Rf8 (24 ... Rg7 25 Qf6 wasn’t much help either) 25 Bf1! Rdf7
26 Rd8 was a nice miniature in M.Kravtsiv-J.Jens, Pardubice 2009.
b) 23 ... Rg7! 24 Nxe6 Rf7 and here Giri noted that Black appears to be have
everything covered, but the position remains complicated even for engines: 25 Rg7
(Palliser analysed 25 Ng5? Bxg5 26 Qxg5 Rf8 27 Qh6 Qa3 with the onus on White to find
equality, while 25 Kf1 Bh4! is good for Black as demonstrated by Giri) 25 ... Bc5+! 26
Nxc5 Rxg7 27 Nxd7 Qd5 28 Rd2 Qxd7?! (28 ... Bxd7 is safer: 29 Bxf5 Qc5+ 30 Kh1 Qb5!
31 Rd1 Qe2 32 Rg1 Bxf5 33 Qf6 Qg4 34 Qd8+ Rg8 35 Qf6+ Qg7 36 Qxf5 with a probable
draw) 29 Bc4! Qe7 30 Qxc6 (White has the initiative, but he certainly shouldn’t have won
so easily) 30 ... Bd7?? 31 Rxd7 1-0 L.Lekic-M.Huber, Kemer 2009. I can’t help but notice
that this game was played in the World Under-12 Championship and that it is astonishing
just how much theory some kids know at such a young age.
22 Ng5 Bc5+ 23 Kh1

The threats are Nxe6 and Rh3 followed by Nxh7, both of which are tricky to meet.
23 ... Qa5
This is best under the circumstances. 23 ... Qd5 permits 24 Rh3 Rg7 25 Be2 Be7!
(Black has to keep the pressure on g2 to prevent Nxh7) 26 Rh5! Qc5 27 Nxh7 Kg8 28 Nxf8
Kxf8 29 Rh3 with a big advantage for White, while 23 ... e4? 24 Bf1! Rg7 25 Rh3 wins in
similar fashion.
24 Rh3?
This gives White an edge, but he could have ended the game immediately.
Surprisingly, 24 Nxe6 was not mentioned by either annotator, but it seems to win on the
spot. For example, 24 ... Rff7 25 Qh5! Qb4 26 Rdf1 and Black has no defence.
24 ... Qc7 25 Nxe6 Qd6 26 Nxf8 Qxf8 27 Rf1
27 Qxc6! e4 28 Be2 Rxd1+ 29 Bxd1 also seems nice for White, although there would
still be technical difficulties in converting the material advantage.
27 ... Rf7 28 Qh5 Qe7
 29 Rhf3?
Grischuk falters at the critical stage, but to be fair, the win was not the simplest to
find. 29 Bxf5! e4 30 Rb3! is a brilliant idea, planning to both attack the back rank and
bring the rook back to guard his own first rank with tempo. I suspect that Grischuk simply
missed this idea. After 30 ... Bd6 31 Rbb1 White would have been in the driver’s seat.
29 ... f4
White is still better, of course, but things are no longer that clear.
30 Be4 Rg7 31 Rb3 Ba7 32 Rd3?
The final blunder, after which the game is drawn immediately. 32 Rfb1! would have
retained the initiative.
32 ... Bg4 33 Qh6 Be2 ½-½

Game 32
V.Ivanchuk-A.Grischuk
Russian Team Championship, Dagomys 2010

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 Be2!?
 This old move was first played by Lembit Oll in 1983 and was reasonably popular in
the eighties and nineties. Since then, its popularity had dipped before Ivanchuk reignited
the line with three nice wins in 2010.
13 ... Be7 14 0-0
14 Rb3!? may catch out the unwary if they attempt to transpose to familiar territory.
Here Black has to play 14 ... Qa5 (the trap is 14 ... Qc5? 15 Be3 Qe5 16 Bd4! Qa5 17 e5!,
with promising play for White) when 15 Bh5+!? g6 (15 ... Nxh5? 16 Bxe7 d5 17 0-0! is
quite hopeless for Black) 16 0-0! is an interesting piece sacrifice. For example, 16 ...
Qc5+ (16 ... Qe5!? 17 Bf3 Ng4 is a safe alternative) 17 Kh1 Nxh5 (17 ... gxh5 18 Bxf6
Rf8! is probably safer, but Black may well be tempted to take the piece on offer since
there doesn’t seem to be a clear refutation) 18 Bxe7 Kxe7 19 Na4! Qe5 20 Qf2 Nf6 (Black
is suddenly destroyed down the f-file after 20 ... Qg7? 21 Rf3!) 21 Nb6 and here Black
bails out with 21 ... Qxh2+ 22 Kxh2 Ng4+ 23 Kg1 Nxf2 24 Nxa8 Nxe4 25 Rb8, with an
unclear endgame.
14 ... 0-0
There is little point in delaying castling. 14 ... Ra7? is a little too clever and White can
blow Black’s position apart with the typical 15 e5! dxe5 (note that ... Qc5+ is not a
plausible option because Be3 will win the rook on a7) 16 Bh5+!! (16 Bxf6 Bxf6 17 Bh5+
Ke7? 18 Qe3 g6 19 Nd5+ also wins, as in H.Huenerkopf-J.Ryan, Gausdal 1988) 16 ...
Nxh5 17 Rb8 Rc7 18 Bxe7 Qxe7 19 Ne4 Nf6 20 Nd6+ Kf8 21 Nxc8 Qc5+ 22 Kh1 when
Black is completely tied up and must lose material by force.
15 Rb3
Lembit Oll started the idea of 13 Be2!? with the move 15 Kh1, not committing the
rook to the b3-square and arguing that Black’s queen will retreat voluntarily anyway.
After 15 ... Ra7 we have:
 a) 16 Be3!? is worthy of further investigation:
a1) The only game I found continued 16 ... c5 17 Bc4 Qa5 18 Bf4 Rd8 19 Qe3 Nh5 20
Ne2 (exchanging the dark-squared bishops with 20 Bg5 is logical to control some key
squares on the kingside; I looked at 20 ... Bxg5 21 Qxg5 h6 22 Qh4 Nf6 23 e5! dxe5 24
Rxf6 gxf6 25 Ne4 when it’s unclear if White has anything conclusive, although I don’t think
he has any real risk of losing in view of the exposed black king which should allow a
perpetual if White so wishes) 20 ... Qa4 21 Qd3 Nf6 22 Nc3 Qe8 23 Rb6 Qd7 with equality
and the game was eventually drawn in N.Muzyka-A.Kazoks, correspondence 2006.
a2) The natural 16 ... Rb7 17 Rxb7 Bxb7 18 Rb1 Ba8 19 Bb6! (threatening our
favourite trick with Rb3) 19 ... d5 20 e5 Bb4 (20 ... Ne4 21 Nxe4 dxe4 22 Bc4 also looks
promising) 21 exf6 Qxc3 22 Qg5! Rxf6 23 Bd3 looks like good play for two pawns, but you
can never be entirely sure in such a chaotic position.
a3) 16 ... Rd7 17 Rb3 Qa5 18 Bc4 (the good thing about this line is that White can bail
out for a draw with 18 Bb6 Qe5 19 Bd4 Qa5 20 Bb6 any time he wants) 18 ... d5 19 Nxd5
Qxd2 20 Nxe7+ Rxe7 21 Bxd2 Nxe4 22 Rxf8+ Kxf8 23 Rb8 (the pawn sacrifice 23 Bb4!?
c5 24 Ba3 gives White some practical chances, but it’s hard to imagine that Black can be
in any trouble here) 23 ... Nxd2 24 Rxc8+ Re8 25 Rxe8+ Kxe8 26 Bxa6 looks drawish,
although I suppose White can press a little.
b) 16 Qe3 Rd7 leads to a further divide:
 b1) The pioneer himself played 17 e5, but did not generate sufficient play for the
pawn after 17 ... dxe5 18 Qxe5 Qd6 19 Qa5? (liquidating with 19 Qxd6 Rxd6 20 Ne4 Rd5
21 Nxf6+ Bxf6 22 Bxf6 gxf6 23 Bd3 was better, although White would remain worse) 19
... Bd8 20 Qa4?! Qe5! 21 Bxf6 Bxf6 22 Rf3 c5 and Black, who was a pawn up and had the
bishop-pair, eventually won in L.Oll-V.Gavrikov, USSR Championship, Tallinn 1983.
b2) 17 Rb8!? was Ivanchuk’s new move which is extremely tricky to face: 17 ... Kh8!
(this accurate move gets out of any Nd5 or Bc4 tricks) 18 e5 dxe5 19 Ne4 Qxe3 (Stohl
pointed out that 19 ... Qxa2?! is too risky due to 20 Bd3 when Black’s forces lack co-
ordination. 20 Bxe3 (one can never get tired of Ivanchuk’s creativity and industrious play;
he is two pawns down for not wholly sufficient compensation, but willingly exchanges
queens, knowing that his more harmonious pieces will work better than Black’s tangled
pieces) 20 ... Rdd8 (Stohl suggested the improvement 20 ... Rg8! when 21 Ng5 Bd6 is
slightly better for Black, although White can certainly play on with 22 Rb3 h6 23 Nxe6 Re8
24 Nc5 Bxc5 25 Bxc5) 21 Bc5 Bxc5 22 Nxc5 (White has good play for the two pawns due
to the estranged bishop on c8; the engines prefer Black, but it’s never easy to play such a
position in a practical game and it’s telling that even Carlsen couldn’t resolve the
problems at hand) 22 ... Kg8 23 Bc4 Kf7 24 Rb6.
 After 24 ... Rd4 (the position after 24 ... Ke7 25 Rxc6 Nd5 26 Rxf8 Rxf8 27 Kg1 a5 28
a3, preventing any annoying ... Nb4 moves, is roughly equal) 25 Bxe6+! (a nice tactical
shot, especially in rapid chess) 25 ... Ke7 (White has gone from two pawns down to being
one up and should be pretty satisfied after 25 ... Bxe6 26 Rb7+ Bd7 27 Nxd7 Rd8 28
Nxe5+ Kf8 29 Nxc6 Rd1 30 Kg1) 26 Rxc6 Nd7 (26 ... Bd7!? may be a more practical
solution) 27 Re1 Nxc5 28 Bxc8 Re4 29 Rc1 White had seized the initiative and managed
to win in V.Ivanchuk-M.Carlsen, Nice (rapid) 2010.
Returning to Ivanchuk’s subsequent try, 15 Rb3:

15 ... Qc5+
15 ... Qa5? allows a variant of the typical trick with 16 Nd5! when 16 ... Qd8 (16 ...
Qxd2? 17 Nxe7+ Kf7 18 Bxd2 Kxe7 19 e5! wins material) 17 Nxe7+ Qxe7 18 Rd3 is
extremely dangerous for Black. After 18 ... Qa7+ 19 Kh1 d5 20 Bxf6 Rxf6 21 Rxf6 gxf6 22
exd5 exd5 23 Rg3+ Kh8 24 Qh6! White had an irresistible attack in B.Ranalli-B.Bernal,
correspondence 2002.
16 Kh1!?
Ivanchuk springs another surprise. This rare move had hardly been played prior to this
game.
16 Be3 is the logical continuation. After 16 ... Qe5 (16 ... Qa5? again walks into 17
Nd5 Qd8 18 Nxe7+ Qxe7 and now 19 e5! dxe5 20 Qc3 is promising for White) 17 Bf4
(tons of games have continued 17 Bd4 Qa5 18 Bb6 Qe5 19 Bd4 Qa5 with a peaceful
finish) 17 ... Qc5+ (17 ... Nxe4 forces a few more exchanges, which should ease Black’s
defensive problems, but the positions after 18 Nxe4 Qxe4 19 Bxd6 Rxf1+ 20 Kxf1 Bf6 are
not so easy for Black to handle as he still has to work out how to untangle his queenside
pieces; here, 21 Bf3 seems best when after 21 ... Qc4+ 22 Qd3 ... Qxd3+ 23 Rxd3 Bd7 24
Rb3 Rd8 25 c4 it is certainly easier to play White) 18 Kh1 we reach the critical position for
the line with 13 Be2.

a) The computer thinks 18 ... d5 is best. Still, not everyone can defend like Houdini
and White has a big plus score with 19 e5 Nd7 (19 ... Ne4 20 Nxe4 dxe4 21 c4 followed
by Qc2 and Qxe4 looks promising for White) 20 Na4 Qa7 21 Qc3! Nc5 22 Nxc5 Bxc5 (22 ...
Qxc5? 23 Qh3 g6 24 Rbf3 Bd7 25 Bd3 is again dangerous for Black) 23 Qh3, as played in
A.Rodriguez-T.Ernst, Subotica Interzonal 1987. Stohl has pointed out that there have
been a number of correspondence games where Black was willing to defend this position
and his best move here is probably 23 ... a5!, with the idea of exchanging the light-
squared bishops. Instead, 23 ... Rb8 24 Rbf3 Qe7 25 Bd3 g6 26 Qg4 followed by h4
doesn’t look like fun for Black, although it is quite possible that he could objectively
defend this position with best play.
b) The most common move is 18 ... Ng4 when 19 h3! (White can regain his pawn at
the cost of losing all his chances of obtaining the initiative with 19 Bxg4?! e5 20 Bxc8
Raxc8 21 g3 exf4 22 gxf4 Bf6; Black is surely better here in view of his better minor piece
and the weakened white king) 19 ... e5 (19 ... Nf2+ 20 Kh2 d5 21 e5 Ne4 22 Nxe4 dxe4
23 Rc3! Qd5 24 Qe3 again looks like good compensation for White) 20 Na4 Qa7 arrives at
another critical juncture:

b1) Just two weeks before our main game, V.Ivanchuk-A.Grischuk, Nice (rapid) 2010,
went 21 hxg4 exf4 22 Nb6!? (preventing the ... d5 break; 22 Bc4+ Kh8 23 Nb6 d5 would
transpose to ‘b2’) 22 ... Be6 (a useful novelty by Grischuk; previously, 22 ... Rb8 23 Bc4+
Kh8 24 Rxf4 Bd7 25 Nxd7 Qxd7 26 Rf5! had placed Black under some pressure, although
here the mysterious looking 26 ... Qa7! is strong; this prevents the transfer of the b3-rook
to the kingside, in view of ... Rb1 and ... Qg1, and after 27 Rh5 Rxb3 28 axb3 Qd7 29 Rf5
h6 30 Rxf8+ Bxf8 Black managed to hold in H.Namyslo-M.Bergmann, correspondence
2007) 23 Nxa8 Bxb3 24 axb3 Qxa8 25 Ra1!? Bf6!? 26 Rxa6 Qd8 27 Rxc6 Be5 when Black
had counterplay on the dark squares for the pawn. This should be about equal, but
Ivanchuk eventually won.
b2) 21 Bc4+ Kh8 22 hxg4 exf4 23 Nb6 d5! (the cleanest equalizer, although Black can
also choose to transpose above with 23 ... Rb8) 24 exd5 cxd5 25 Bxd5 Rb8 26 Nxc8 Rbxc8
has been established as fine for Black ever since V.Ivanchuk-G.Kasparov, Linares 1990.
 That said, Black still has to be mindful of the potential threats that White can
generate on the kingside: 27 Rh3 Qb6! (to illustrate how Black can easily go wrong, here
is a high-rated correspondence encounter: 27 ... Rcd8 28 c4 Qb6 – 28 ... Rd6 29 Qc2 h6 is
a better defence – 29 Qc2 h6 30 Re1 Qc7 31 Qg6 Rf6 32 Qh5 Rdf8 33 g5 Rb6 34 Rb3 Rxb3
35 axb3 f3 36 gxf3 Bxg5 37 Re8 Qf4 38 Qg6 Qc1+ 39 Kg2 Qf4 40 Be4 Qd2+ 41 Kh3 Qd7+
42 Re6 1-0, D.Reppmann-W.Hase, correspondence 1997) 28 Re1 Bg5?! (in view of the
difficulties that Black faces after this, 28 ... Rce8 may be a better option) 29 Re6 (29 Re5
Qf6 30 Qe1 h6 31 c4 also looks more pleasant for White) 29 ... Qd8 30 Qd3 Bh4 31 c4
Rb8 (and here 31 ... Re8!? may be a more accurate defence) 32 Qe4 Qg5? (a natural but
careless move; 32 ... a5 was better, although White retains some chances) 33 Rg6 Qe7
34 Qxe7 Bxe7 35 Rxa6 with a large edge in D.Reppmann-F.Calandri, correspondence
1999.
We now return to Ivanchuk’s latest try, 16 Kh1!?:
 16 ... d5?!
This is slightly risky, although Black should be fine with accurate play. This is a difficult
position to analyse as the degree of White’s compensation (in case anyone has forgotten,
he is a pawn down) is not easy to assess. There are plenty of possibilities here so I shall
not even try to completely dissect this position. I would, however, like to highlight the
more important ones:
a) 16 ... Qe5 threatens ... Ng4. After 17 Bf4 Nxe4 (nothing else makes sense; 17 ...
Qc5 18 Be3 Qe5 19 Bd4 Qa5 20 e5! is a typical motif which we have seen before and, of
course, Black cannot take the pawn in view of Bb6) 18 Nxe4 (both the ChessVibes team
of Van Delft and Ris and Igor Stohl have pointed out that after 18 Qe3, as played in
R.Tomczak-K.Bulski, Krakow 2003, 18 ... Rxf4! is extremely strong; after 19 Qxf4 Qxf4 20
Rxf4 Nc5! 21 Rb6 d5! 22 Rxc6 Rb8! Black’s powerful bishop-pair, extra pawn and mobile
pawn centre more than compensate for the exchange) 18 ... Qxe4 19 Bxd6 Rxf1+ 20 Bxf1
White had some practical chances, although the position still seemed drawish in I.Bucsa-
W.Nitsche, correspondence 2009.
b) A few correspondence games have continued 16 ... Bd7!? 17 Be3 Qe5 (White also
has sufficient compensation in the endgame arising after 17 ... Qa5 18 Nd5 Qxd2 19
Nxe7+ Kf7 20 Bxd2 Kxe7 21 e5! Ne4 22 exd6+ Kxd6) 18 Rb7 Rf7 19 Rd1 Raf8 20 Bf3 with
a complex position. The threat of Bf4 should mean that White has enough compensation
for the pawn, although it is not clear if he can hope for more.
c) Perhaps the solid 16 ... Rf7!?, keeping Black’s position as compact as possible, is his
best option. One GM encounter continued in logical fashion: 17 Be3 Qe5 18 Bd4 Nxe4 19
Qe3 Rxf1+ 20 Bxf1 Qf5 21 Bd3 e5 22 Qxe4 Qxe4 23 Bxe4 exd4 24 Bxc6 Be6 25 Bxa8
Bxb3 26 axb3 dxc3 ½-½, D.Alsina Leal-M.Palac, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010.
17 e5 Nd7 18 Rxf8+ Kxf8!
The other captures are worse: 18 ... Bxf8? 19 Na4! Qa7 20 Qf4 followed by Rf3 is
extremely strong and 18 ... Nxf8? can be met by 19 Be3! when 19 ... d4 (not 19 ... Qa5?
20 Bb6) 20 Bxd4 Qa5 21 Ne4 Qxd2 22 Nxd2 is a pleasant endgame for White.
19 Be3 Qa5
 Black has managed to avert immediate trouble for now, but he is still lacking in
development. Hence, White has to continue energetically.
20 Bg4!
Putting more pressure on Black’s position and also reminding him that he cannot really
take on e5 in view of Bb6.
20 ... Ke8?!
Instead, 20 ... Nc5?! helps White to transfer his rook with 21 Rb1, with a strong attack
after Rf1, while Van Delft and Ris, as well as Stohl, pointed out the accurate 20 ... Qc7! as
being best. Here I like the tricky 21 Bd4!? , setting a trap:

a) The natural 21 ... c5 22 Qf2+ Ke8 appears to win a piece, but after 23 Bxe6 cxd4
24 Nxd5 Qc5 25 Qf7+ Kd8, 26 Qg8+! Nf8 (26 ... Bf8 27 Bxd7 Bxd7 28 Rf3 also wins hands
down) 27 Nxe7 Qxe7 (27 ... Kxe7 28 Bxc8 Rxc8 29 Rb7+ Kd8 30 Qxg7 wins) 28 Rf3! Ke8
29 Bf7+ Kd7 30 Bb3! White will regain his material with a continuing initiative.
 b) 21 ... Nxe5 22 Qf4+ Bf6 23 Na4! (restraining ... c5 and hence maintaining the pin;
despite being two pawns down, White is calling all the shots) 23 ... Kf7 24 Bh5+! (24 Re3
unfortunately doesn’t work due to 24 ... Rb8!) 24 ... Kg8 25 g4! (preparing g5 and
preventing back-rank mate once and for all; again, if 25 Re3? Rb8) 25 ... c5 26 Nxc5 Ra7!
27 Qf2 (27 g5 Nc6! was the idea behind Black’s 26th) 27 ... Ng6 28 Nxe6 Bxd4 29 Nxd4
and Black appears to have survived into a roughly equal position.
21 Bxe6! Nc5
Relinquishing control over the b6-square with 21 ... Nxe5? is costly due to the brilliant
22 Bf7+!!, luring the king to an unfavourable square and hence preparing the queen trap
with Bb6. For example, 22 ... Kd7 (if 22 ... Kf8 23 Bxd5, while 22 ... Nxf7? 23 Bb6 loses
the queen) 23 Bg1! (a useful move that illustrates how difficult Black’s position is; he can
hardly move) 23 ... Bb4 24 Bh5!, with a winning attack for White.
Likewise, it’s too late for 21 ... Qc7? (Van Delft and Ris), in view of 22 Nxd5! cxd5 23
Qxd5 Rb8 24 Bxd7+ Bxd7 25 Qg8+ Bf8 26 e6 and wins.
22 Bxc5 Qxc5 23 Bxc8 Rxc8 24 Qd3!

Taking stock, Black’s king remains vulnerable, although it is clear that he is no longer
in any immediate danger. White has regained his pawn and can continue to press by
either attacking Black’s loose pawns or going for some action down the f-file. It is
certainly easier to play White and Ivanchuk’s opening preparation has been rather
successful.
24 ... Qc4
24 ... Qf2? seems to be active, but White is the one to gain after 25 Rb1! when he
threatens to play Rf1 with tempo or take one of Black’s loose pawns.
25 Qf3
White naturally keeps the queens on in order to keep Black’s king busy.
25 ... Kd8?
This allows White to infiltrate. There are better defences here, but I’ll just show one
line which I think should equalize: 25 ... g6 (holding the weak light squares and waiting
for White to find something concrete) 26 Rb7 Qh4! 27 g3 Qd4 28 e6 (28 Rxe7+ Kxe7 29
Qf6+ Ke8 30 Qh8+ Ke7! holds the position) 28 ... Qf6 29 Qxf6 Bxf6 30 Na4 Be5 31 Rxh7
Rb8 and Black should have sufficient play to maintain the balance.
26 Qf7!
I’m not sure what Grischuk missed, but White’s initiative looks terrifying. The idea of
Rb7 is hard to meet and White also has ideas of Ne2-d4.
26 ... Qh4
26 ... Bb4 27 g3! with the idea of 27 ... Bxc3?? 28 Qf8+ Kd7 29 Rb7+ Ke6 30 Re7# is
strong.
27 Rb1!

As advertised, guarding the back rank and preparing to manoeuvre his knight to either
f4 or d4 with Ne2. Black has no ample resources to defend against this simple plan.
27 ... Qh6
Probably intending ... Qg6, but this allows White to land a decisive tactical blow. In
any case, it is doubtful whether Black could any longer hold off White’s attack. The
computer suggests 27 ... Bb4, but 28 Nxd5! cxd5 29 Qxd5+ Kc7 30 c3! leaves White a
couple of pawns to the good and with a winning position.
28 Nxd5!
A powerful blow that wipes out Black’s fortress in the centre. Ivanchuk has calculated
that Black has no defence against his ongoing attack.
28 ... cxd5 29 Qxd5+ Ke8 30 Rd1!
 The final sting in the tail. Black has no adequate answer to the threats of Qg8+ and
Qd7+. It is surprising how powerful the attack is even though White is only operating
with two pieces.
30 ... Rc7
30 ... Kf8 31 Rf1+ Ke8 32 Qf7+ Kd7 33 Rd1+ would have regained the piece with a
winning attack to boot. Likewise, 30 ... Rd8 31 Qg8+ Bf8 32 Rf1 is similar.
31 Qa8+ Kf7 32 Rf1+ Ke6 33 Qxa6+ Kd7
33 ... Kxe5 would have led to a good, old fashioned king hunt: 34 Qe2+ Kd4 35 Rd1+
Kc5 36 Qe5+ Kb6 37 Rb1+ Kc6 38 Qb5+ Kd6 39 Rd1+ Ke6 40 Qd5+ Kf6 41 Rf1+ Kg6 42
Qf5#.
34 Rd1+ Ke8 35 e6 Bd8 36 Qb5+ Ke7 37 Qb4+
37 Qd5 was also good, but there is more than one road to Rome.
37 ... Kxe6 38 Qd6+ Kf7 39 Rf1+ 1-0

Conclusion

We have not seen too many games with 10 f5 in the last couple of years, perhaps with
good reason as White has not exactly scored fantastically well here. Black has found
more than one way to force a draw and could even try for more with the extremely rare
15 ... f5!?, which seems to me to be an excellent way to play for a win. As for White, he
may do best to follow in Ivanchuk’s footsteps with 13 Be2!?.
Chapter Five
Poisoned Pawn Variation with 10 e5
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2
9 Rb1 Qa3 10 e5

We have arrived at one of the most, if not the most complex opening variation in all of
chess opening theory. Those who are interested only in the theory and not at all in the
history need not panic here as I will only give a very brief overview of the background of
this line. There is a ton of literature showing how this position came about and I see no
point in regurgitating this information.
Very quickly though, the Poisoned Pawn with 10 e5 was first played in 1955 in the
game Keres-Fuderer, after which there were some spectacular wins with the white
pieces. Then in the sixties, one Robert James Fischer came along and dampened White’s
spirits with three important victories with the black pieces. The line faded somewhat into
oblivion until it re-exploded on to the chess scene in 2007 when some fresh attacking
ideas were found. For the next five years, the variation became the hottest topic in
practically all the top events.
After 10 e5 dxe5 11 fxe5 Nfd7 12 Ne4 h6 (the alternatives are also covered) 13 Bh4
Qxa2 14 Rd1 Qd5 15 Qe3, 15 ... Bc5?! scored a sensational win in its first outing, but as
we will see in Game 33, White appears to have a clear refutation. In Game 34, we look at
the critical lines arising after 15 ... Qxe5! 16 Be2 Bc5 17 Bg3, a line which has been a
main battleground at all levels in the Najdorf in recent years.
 After 17 ... Bxd4 18 Rxd4 Qa5+ 19 Rd2 0-0 20 Bd6 Nc6 21 0-0 Nce5 Kolev and
Georgiev’s 22 Rdd1! appears to secure a slight edge for White. Recent practice seems to
indicate 20 ... f5 as Black’s most reliable option, although White still seems to be calling
all the shots.

Game 33
M.Freeman-T.Schmidt
Correspondence 2008

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6

The move order 7 ... h6 8 Bh4 Qb6 came into vogue in the last couple of years and
can easily transpose. We’ll investigate this in the next chapter.
8 Qd2 Qxb2 9 Rb1 Qa3 10 e5
 10 ... dxe5
An aforementioned game continued 10 ... Nfd7?! 11 f5! (opening up the f-file to great
effect) 11 ... Nxe5 (11 ... dxe5 loses to 12 fxe6 and then 12 ... f6 13 Nf5! fxg5 14 Nd5! or
12 ... exd4 13 exf7+ Kxf7 14 Bc4+ Ke8 15 0-0!) 12 fxe6 fxe6 (12 ... Bxe6 is safer, but
most people will be happy as White after 13 Rxb7, with an obvious initiative) 13 Be2
Nbc6 (Olthof suggested 13 ... Nf7, but 14 Ne4 Nxg5!? 15 Nxg5 Nc6 16 Ndxe6 Qxa2 17 Rb3
Qa1+ 18 Bd1 looks attractive for White; 13 ... d5 is slightly more tricky, but after 14 0-0
Bc5 15 Kh1 Bxd4 16 Nxd5! exd5 17 Qxd4 Qd6 18 Bh5+ g6 19 Rf6 Nbc6 20 Rxd6 White
wins in all variations) 14 Nxc6 bxc6? (14 ... Nxc6! was forced, but 15 Bh5+! g6 16 Bf6 Rg8
17 Bf3 retains the initiative) 15 Ne4! d5 16 0-0 Qa4 17 Bh5+ Kd7 18 Rxf8 1-0, P.Keres-
A.Fuderer, Gothenburg Interzonal 1955.
The immediate 10 ... Nd5? is another important inaccuracy. After 11 Nxd5 exd5 12
Rb3 Qxa2 (12 ... Qa4 13 Nb5!) 13 Qe3! Black is completely busted.
11 fxe5 Nfd7
11 ... Nd5? is again premature: 12 Nxd5 exd5 13 Rb3! Qxa2 14 Qc3 Nd7 15 e6! is
devastating.
12 Ne4
12 Bc4 is another attempt, but Fischer’s 12 ... Qa5! has withstood the test of both
time and technology as the refutation of this move.
12 ... h6!
An important insertion. After 12 ... Qxa2 13 Rd1 (13 Rb3 is the ancient line and here
13 ... h6! is critical, with the point that after 14 Bh4 Black has 14 ... Qa1+! 15 Kf2 Qa4!,
as in the famous game V.Korchnoi-A.Tolush, Riga 1958) 13 ... Qd5 (13 ... h6 can lead to a
transposition, although White can deviate here with the rare 14 Bf4, with unclear
consequences) 14 Qe3 Qxe5 15 Be2 we arrive at a position which is similar to the main
game, but with the important difference that White’s dark-squared bishop is on g5.

Indeed, after 15 ... h6 16 Bf4! Qa5+ 17 c3 the bishop is more effective on f4 than h4.
White has a 100% score in my database and a high-level example continued 17 ... Nc6
18 0-0 Nxd4 19 cxd4 Nf6 (Black has serious problems co-ordinating his pieces: for
example, 19 ... Be7 20 Qg3!) 20 Be5! Be7 21 Bxf6 gxf6 22 Nxf6+ Bxf6 23 Rxf6 and White
won quickly in A.Silva-A.Siikaluoma, correspondence 2008.
13 Bh4
I used to really like the move 13 Bb5?!, but Black can spoil the fun by playing 13 ...
axb5 14 Nxb5 hxg5! 15 Nxa3 Rxa3 when the three pieces should outweigh the queen.
13 ... Qxa2
A shocking high-profile game continued 13 ... Qa4? 14 Be2 Nc6 (leading to a swift
end, but Black was lost in any case) 15 Nxe6! g5 16 Nf6+ and 1-0 in T.Radjabov-V.Anand,
Rishon Le Zion (blitz) 2006.
14 Rd1
As already mentioned, the older 14 Rb3 is refuted by 14 ... Qa1+! 15 Kf2 Qa4!, as in
Korchnoi-Tolush.

14 ... Qd5!
This is commonest by far and clearly best:
a) 14 ... Nc6 15 Nxc6 bxc6 16 Bd3! Qd5 17 0-0 Qxe5 18 Kh1! (to prevent Black from
developing with ... Bc5 and check) 18 ... Be7 19 Bg3 Qd4 20 c3 Qb6 21 Nd6+ Bxd6 22
Bxd6 is a pretty forcing variation where White enjoys a tremendous attack in exchange
for the three pawns. Black will have a hard time unravelling and for now has to deal with
the terrible threat of Qf4.
b) 14 ... Qb2!? is trickier. Black threatens to play ... Bb4, forcing c3, when he can
exchange queens. After 15 Qe3 we have:
b1) White has scored well after 15 ... Qb6 with some amazing resources: 16 Be2 Nc6
17 Bh5! g6 18 0-0! gxh5 (18 ... Bc5 19 Kh1!! Nxd4 20 Nxc5 Qxc5 21 Rxd4 gxh5? 22 Rxd7!
is the point) 19 Kh1!!. How do you comment on a move like this when it seems
completely counterintuitive and, yet, is the only winning move in the position? The point
is that if it is White to move here, 20 Nxe6! fxe6 21 Rxf8+!! Kxf8 22 Rf1+ results in a
beautiful finish. Black has no defence.
 b2) 15 ... Bc5 16 Be2 (16 c3!? Qa3 17 Be2 is another move order), and then:

b21) 16 ... Nc6? 17 Nxe6! Qb4+ (17 ... Bxe3?? 18 Nd6# is a beautiful checkmate) 18
c3 Bxe3 19 Nc7+ Kf8 20 cxb4 Rb8 21 e6! fxe6 22 Nxe6+ Kg8 23 Bg3 with a big position
for White.
b22) 16 ... Bxd4 17 Nd6+ Kf8 was a suggestion by Tony Kosten, but 18 Rxd4 Nc6 19
Rf4 Qxe5 20 Rxf7+ Kg8 21 Qa3! as played in a subsequent correspondence game is
extremely strong. The game continued 21 ... Nd4 22 0-0 Nxe2+ 23 Kh1 (to the naked
eye, White doesn’t seem to have much for the piece and two pawns, but his
compensation lies in the fact that Black is unable to utilize his queenside pieces in the
short term) 23 ... Nd4 24 Be1! (played with the idea of Bc3; White’s somewhat indirect
but purposeful play is really instructive and Black already has no really useful moves) 24
... Kh7 (24 ... Nf5 25 Bc3! Nxd6 26 Re7! Nf5 27 Rxf5! is a beautiful finish) 25 Qd3+ Nf5 26
Bc3 (now Black has no choice but to sacrifice his queen, but White still mops up rather
efficiently) 26 ... Rg8 27 Bxe5 Nxe5 28 Qe4 Nxf7 29 Nxf7 g6 30 Rf3 Bd7 31 Rh3 h5 32 Kg1
Raf8 33 Ng5+ Kh6 34 Qf4 e5 35 Qd2 Bb5 36 Ne6+ Kh7 37 Nxf8+ Rxf8 38 c4 and White
soon won in D.Minelga-P.Osorio, correspondence 2008. One can only dream of playing a
game like that in OTB play.
b23) The critical move in correspondence chess is 16 ... Qa3 when the following
continuation has been established as the main line: 17 c3 Nc6 18 0-0 Nxd4 (18 ... Ndxe5
19 Bg3, with the idea of 19 ... Ng6 20 Bd6!, is rather risky for Black) 19 Rxd4! (a fine
sacrifice – Black’s dark-squared bishop is an important part of his defensive set-up and
this exchange is a worthwhile investment) 19 ... Bxd4 20 Qxd4 0-0 21 Nf6+! Nxf6 22 Bxf6
Re8 23 Qg4 Qf8. Black’s position looks very suspicious, but still a direct breakthrough is
lacking and the game eventually finished in a draw after more fireworks in M.Noble-
T.Gildred, correspondence 2009.
15 Qe3 Bc5
This scored well when it was first played, but I believe White has very good chances
to obtain a serious advantage here. We’ll see the superior 15 ... Qxe5 in the next game.
 16 Nxe6! Bb4+
Both 16 ... Bxe3? 17 Nc7+ Kf8 18 Rxd5 Ra7 19 e6 and 16 ... fxe6? 17 Nxc5 Qxc5 18
Qxc5 Nxc5 19 Rd8+ win for White.
17 c3 Qxe6 18 cxb4 0-0 19 Rd6
A couple of other moves have been tried here, but I believe the text wins by force. Big
words, but I’ll try to back them up with some evidence.
19 ... Qxe5
The only move that probably does not lose immediately:
a) 19 ... Qf5? 20 Bd3 Qh5 21 Bf6! Nxe5 22 Be2! Ng4 23 Bxg4 Qxg4 24 h3 Qg6 25
Bxg7! Qxg7 26 Nf6+ Kh8 27 Nh5 wins by force, as demonstrated on the
ChessPublishing.com website.
b) 19 ... Qa2 has been widely played in correspondence chess and in fact has scored
relatively well for Black after 20 Be2 Qb1+ 21 Kf2 Qxb4 (21 ... Qxh1? 22 Rxh6! Qxh2 23
Nf6+ Nxf6 24 exf6 Bh3 25 Bf1 wins by force).
 Here I believe the untried 22 Qf4!, intending Rxh6 or Nf6+, is promising. For instance,
22 ... Qa5 (Black has to move his queen out of the firing line; White obtains a terrific
initiative after 22 ... a5 23 Rhd1, while 22 ... Nc6? 23 Rxc6 just drops a piece) 23 Rxh6!
gxh6 24 Bf6 Qb6+ 25 Kg3 Nxf6 (25 ... Qb3+ 26 Kh4! Nxf6 27 Nxf6+ Kg7 28 Rd1 also
leads to mate) 26 Nxf6+ Kg7 27 Rd1 (Black may have an extra rook, but note how
beautifully coordinated White’s pieces are; the immediate threat is Rd6 and Black has no
defence) 27 ... Rh8 28 Bc4! (with the idea of Ne8) 28 ... Bf5 and now the amazing and
only winning line is 29 h4!! (threatening Qxf5) 29 ... Bg6 30 h5! and White wins.
20 Bc4

20 ... Qh5
This is most the resilient. Again, the alternatives are pretty bleak:
a) The tactics after 20 ... Nb6? do not work out well due to 21 Rxb6 Bf5 22 Nf6+ gxf6
23 Qxe5 fxe5 24 0-0, which gives White a large endgame initiative despite the two-pawn
deficit. A theoretically important game continued 24 ... Be6 25 Bxe6 fxe6 26 Rxf8+ Kxf8
27 Rxb7 Nc6 (Palliser’s suggestion 27 ... a5 is also good for White due to 28 b5 a4 29 b6
Nc6 30 Rc7 a3 31 b7 Rb8 32 Rxc6 Rxb7 33 Ra6 Rb1+ 34 Kf2 Rb2+ 35 Ke3 Rxg2 36 Bg3
a2 37 Bxe5, which should be a technical win) 28 Rc7 Nd4 29 Bf6! when Black was all tied
up in knots and White went on to win convincingly in T.Winkler-T.Schmidt,
correspondence 2008.
b) 20 ... Re8? loses to 21 Bxf7+! Kxf7 22 Qb3+ Re6 23 0-0+ Nf6 24 Nxf6 gxf6 25
Rxf6+ when Black is overwhelmed by an avalanche of major and minor pieces.
c) 20 ... Nc6? 21 0-0 Qh5 (I previously commented that Black’s only hope lies with 21
... Nb6, but even here White has a number of pleasant choices of which 22 Ba2 Bf5 23
Nf6+ Kh8 24 Qxe5 Nxe5 25 Rxf5 simply wins material by force), and now in A.Shirov-
Wang Hao, Russian Team Championship 2009, one would really have expected the
Latvian genius to have dished out 22 Bf6! when White is winning everywhere. For
example, 22 ... Nde5 23 Qg3 Bg4 24 Bd5, as mentioned by Palliser.
d) White also obtains excellent winning chances after 20 ... b5? 21 Bg3! Qa1+ 22 Rd1
Qxd1+ 23 Kxd1 bxc4 24 Rf1! followed by Nd6.
21 Bg3!
This move is pretty strong so there is little point in analysing anything else. White has
a multitude of ideas, one of which is simply castling followed by Rd5-f5, bearing down on
the f7-pawn.
21 ... Nc6 22 0-0 Nde5 23 Bxe5! Qxe5
23 ... Nxe5 24 Qg3 Kh8 (24 ... Bg4 25 Rd5 Rae8 26 h3 Re7 27 Rf4 Qg6 28 Rxe5 Rxe5
29 Rxg4 was also winning for White in L.Morokova-J.Antal, correspondence 2011) 25 Rd5
Re8 26 Nd6 wins material by force, as demonstrated in J.Fenwick-J.Bennborn,
correspondence 2011.
24 Rd5

It may not be obvious why White is winning in this position. He certainly has a lot of
open lines to work with, but Black at least has exchanged some pieces and is only one
move away from completing development. Again, concrete tactics are extremely
important and here that one tempo proved enough for White to win the game.
24 ... Qb2
Palliser gave both 24 ... Qe6 25 Rf6! Nxb4 26 Rh5! Nc2 27 Qe2 Nd4 28 Qd3 Qe7 29
Qxd4 and 24 ... Qe7 25 Nf6+ Kh8 26 Qd3, destroying the defence in both cases.
25 Nf6+! Kh8 26 Kh1!
An essential move to avoid a future ... Qd4.
26 ... Ne7!?
An intriguing piece sacrifice, but possibly Black’s only way to defend against the threat
of Rh5xh6.
27 Qxe7 Be6 28 Rh5! Qc2
And not 28 ... Bxc4? 29 Qe3!.
29 Bd5 Qd3 30 Rg1 Qg6 31 Bxe6

31 ... fxe6
Palliser also gave the following pretty line: 31 ... gxf6? 32 Bf5 Qxh5 33 Qxf6+ Kg8 34
h4 followed by g4.
32 Nd7 Qxh5 33 Nxf8 Re8 34 Qd6 Qf5 35 Nd7 e5 36 Nc5
White has won a piece and soon converted with some accurate technique.
36 ... e4 37 Qd7 Qxd7 38 Nxd7 Rd8 39 Nc5 Rd4 40 Nxb7 Rxb4 41 Nc5 a5 42
Ra1 1-0
15 ... Bc5 scored well in its first few outings, but now appears to be relegated to the
theoretical trashbin.

Game 34
S.Karjakin-D.Kokarev
Russian Team Championship 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 e5 h6
Black decides to flick in ... h6 straightaway, which is sensible and play soon
transposes.
11 Bh4
I’ve always quite liked 11 Bxf6!?, as we’ll explore in Game 36.
11 ... dxe5 12 fxe5 Nfd7 13 Ne4 Qxa2 14 Rd1 Qd5 15 Qe3 Qxe5

16 Be2
This is the most widely played move by a mile, but it’s worth pointing out that the
natural 16 Bg3? is not so good due to 16 ... Bb4+! 17 Kf2 (17 c3 Bxc3+! was the tricky
idea) 17 ... Qa5! 18 Bd6 (18 Nd6+ Bxd6 19 Bxd6 Nf6 20 Be2 Qg5! 21 Qf3 Qd5! sees Black
experiencing a bit of discomfort due to White’s d6-bishop, but managing to exchange
queens eventually; there is definite compensation, but I find it hard to believe it is
sufficient for the three-pawn deficit) 18 ... Nf6! 19 Nxf6+ gxf6 20 Bxb4 Qxb4 21 Nf5 Nc6
22 Nd6+ Kf8 and Black should be able to unravel eventually. The active black queen is a
crucial factor in dispelling any lingering hopes of an attack by White.
16 ... Bc5
Virtually the only move here. 16 ... Nc6? has been played a few times but this loses to
17 Nxc6 bxc6 18 0-0 Be7 (or 18 ... g5 19 Rxd7 Bxd7 20 Bg3! and the black queen has no
good squares: for example, 20 ... Qa5 21 Qd4!) 19 Bxe7 Kxe7 20 Qa3+ c5 21 Nd6 f5
(G.Filev-M.Vutov, Plovdiv 2009) 22 Rfe1, which is a convincing variation.
17 Bg3
 17 ... Bxd4
The main move, but 17 ... Qd5!? has also been played a fair bit:
a) 18 Bf3 0-0 19 Qc3 (19 Nf6+ Nxf6 20 Bxd5 Bb4+ 21 Kf1 exd5 gives Black three
pawns, two pieces and a solid position for the queen) 19 ... a5! 20 0-0 e5 (20 ... Bxd4+!?
21 Rxd4 Qb5 is a reasonable way to play for a win) 21 Nf6+ Nxf6 22 Bxd5 Bxd4+ 23 Rxd4
exd4 24 Qxd4 Nxd5 25 Qxd5 Nc6 is fairly comfortable for Black.
b) After 18 c4 Bxd4 19 Rxd4 Qa5+ 20 Rd2 the position bears a lot of resemblance to
the main line, but the pawn is probably better placed on c4 than c2.

In some lines, a piece on the important d6-square can be supported by c4-c5. A few
important correspondence games have continued 20 ... 0-0 (20 ... Qa1+? 21 Kf2 Qxh1 22
Qa3! leaves Black helpless against White’s many pieces) 21 Bd6 Rd8 (there are other
moves here, but this is the most critical) 22 g4! Nc6 (22 ... f5 is met by 23 g5!! when
White obtains a tremendous attack: 23 ... fxe4 24 gxh6 g6 25 Qxe4 Ne5 – 25 ... Kh7 26
Qd4! e5 27 Qf2 Rg8 28 Qf7+ Kh8 29 Rg1 Qb6 30 Rg5! wins – 26 h7+! Kxh7 27 Qh4+ Kg8
28 0-0 and Black resigned in G.Walter-J.Wharam, correspondence 2011, due to 28 ...
Rxd6 29 Qe7! Qb6+ 30 Kg2 Nbd7 31 Rxd6 Qe3 32 Bd3! Qh6 33 Qxe6+ Kh7 34 Qe7+ Kg8
35 Be4) 23 0-0 Nde5 (23 ... f6 24 c5 Qb4 25 h4! also led to a strong attack for White in
L.Ljubicic-K.Johansson, correspondence 2011) 24 h4 Rxd6 (24 ... Ng6 25 g5! continues
the attack) 25 Nxd6 b6 26 g5 Qc5 27 Qxc5 bxc5 28 Bh5 hxg5 29 hxg5 with a definite
endgame edge for White in G.Walter-A.Kain, correspondence 2012.
18 Rxd4 Qa5+ 19 Rd2 0-0 20 Bd6

After plenty of deviations, we have arrived at a position that was fairly topical from
2007-2011. Its popularity has dwindled since probably because most lines have been
analysed exhaustively and discoveries in other variations were found. To my surprise, this
position did not occur at all in 2013 according to my database. It first arose when Motylev
employed it against Anand at Wijk aan Zee 2007. White lost the game, but Anand himself
chose the same line as White in a later round and won a dashing game. As a result, its
popularity surged and many top GMs started investigating this position very thoroughly.
20 ... Nc6
Not the most common move, but Black eventually figured out that sacrificing the
exchange was a far better treatment then holding on to the material:
a) The first few games in this line continued 20 ... Re8 21 0-0 f5 (21 ... Nc6 22 Qg3 f5
transposes, while 22 ... Ne7 23 Bc7! b6 24 Rxd7! Bxd7 25 Nf6+ Kh8 26 Nxd7 was very
good for White in Wang Jue-P.Rodriguez Rueda, Kocaeli 2013) 22 Qg3! and then:
 a1) 22 ... fxe4 has been worked out to be a forced win, but White has to remember
some amazing variations. Fortunately, the lines do not seem to exceptionally difficult to
remember: 23 Qg6 Rd8 (23 ... Qxd2 24 Qxe8+ Kh7 25 Bh5! Qe3+ 26 Kh1 Qg5 27 h4!
Qxh4+ 28 Kg1 Qg5 29 Be7! wins the queen by force) 24 Rf7 Qc3 25 Bb4! Qe5 26 Bg4 Re8
27 Rdf2 Nc6 28 Rxg7+ Qxg7 29 Qxe8+ Kh7 30 Rf7 Nde5 31 Rxg7+ Kxg7 32 Bc3 and 1-0
in B.Ivanov-M.Dabija, correspondence 2008. No, this was not the famous Borislav Ivanov,
but I bet even he would be proud of such a game.
a2) 22 ... Nc6 23 Qg6 Qd8 24 Rd3! (this effective rook lift has only been played in
correspondence chess, but has scored a staggering 95%; quite simply, Black has no
defence) 24 ... Re7 25 Rg3 Nd4 (25 ... fxe4 26 Bxe7 Qxe7 27 Bh5! is very strong for
White) 26 Bd3 b5 (Black has no useful moves at his disposal; fun fact of the day:
Stockfish evaluated the position after 26 ... Nc6 27 Rxf5 as ‘+97.17’ – I’ve never seen
such a huge evaluation before) 27 Rf4! fxe4 28 Bxe7 Qxe7 29 Qxe4 Nf6 30 Qxa8 Qc5 31
Rf2 and White converted his large material advantage pretty easily in D.Grobler-I.De la
Calle, correspondence 2012. Hence, 20 ... Re8 seems to be more or less refuted.
b) 20 ... Rd8 was considered to be an important improvement, but as Georgiev and
Kolev summarized nicely, both rook moves simply waste time and the queenside remains
undeveloped while White carries on his business on the kingside.
 The first player can even choose between:
b1) 21 g4!? was investigated in the same position, but with the c-pawn on c4. It also
seems dangerous here: for example, 21 ... Nc6 (if 21 ... f6 22 h4) 22 g5 hxg5 23 Rg1 Nf6
(using the engines to a reasonably high depth, it looks like the unlikely defence 23 ... f6
24 Nxg5! Nc5! 25 c3 Rxd6! 26 Rxd6 Ne5 holds for Black) 24 Rxg5 Qa1+ 25 Rd1 Nxe4 26
Rxa1 Nxg5 27 Bc7! Rd7 28 Qxg5 Rxc7 29 Ra3! (the last few moves are pretty logical so
they didn’t really require any commentary; Black may have successfully parried the first
wave of the attack, but White’s remaining pieces continue to coordinate harmoniously
and there is no defence to the second wave) 29 ... f5 30 Rg3 b5 31 Qg6 Re7 32 Rh3 1-0,
D.Szczepankiewicz-M.Kolodziejski, correspondence 2011.
b2) 21 Qg3 forces Black to be very careful:
b21) 21 ... Qf5? has been commonest, but it seems that a route to an outright win has
been established in recent years: 22 Be5! Qg6 23 Qh4 Nc6 24 Bh5! Qf5 (24 ... Qh7? 25
Bxf7+ Kh8 26 0-0 Rf8 27 Bd6 is utterly lost for Black) 25 Bxg7! Nc5! (this puts up the
most resistance; 25 ... Kxg7 26 Rf1 Qe5 27 Rxf7+ Kh8 28 Bg6 or here 27 ... Kg8 28 Qg4+
Kh8 29 Qg6 is curtains) 26 Nxc5 Kxg7 (26 ... Rxd2 27 Rf1! is a really picturesque position;
White’s pieces are perfectly placed to prevent any sort of checks and 27 ... Qg5 28 Qxg5
hxg5 29 Rxf7 Nd8 30 Rc7! Rxc2 31 Bf6 Nc6 32 Rg7+ Kf8 33 Rh7 forces mate) 27 Rf1
Qe5+ (27 ... Qg5 28 Rxf7+ Kh8 29 Qxg5 hxg5 30 Rxd8+ Nxd8 31 Rf8+ wins easily) 28
Ne4! Qa1+ 29 Rd1 Rxd1+ 30 Bxd1 sees Black having managed to successfully exchange
some pieces, but the attack is still ongoing.
I am not sure if the Turkish GM was still regurgitating his analysis at this stage, but if
he was, that was some impressive home preparation indeed.
 After 30 ... Qe5 31 Rf6! there’s no defence:
b211) 31 ... Ne7 32 Bh5 Ng6 and now in M.Yilmaz-D.Arenas, Antalya 2009, White
could have capped his brilliant opening play with 33 Rxg6+! fxg6 34 Qe7+ Kg8 35 Bxg6
when there is no defence to mate apart from a few spite checks.
b212) 31 ... Bd7 32 Qxh6+ Kg8 33 Rf4 also wins by force: 33 ... f5 34 Rh4! Rd8
(otherwise, 34 ... fxe4 35 Rg4+ Kf7 36 Qh7+ wins, while after 34 ... Be8 35 Kf1! Rd8 36
Nf6+ Kf7 37 Bh5+ Ke7 38 Qg7+ Kd6 39 Nxe8+ Kc5 40 Bf3 White finishes with an extra
piece due to 40 ... Rxe8? 41 Qxb7) 35 Rh3!! (threatening Rg3+ while not being afraid of
giving away the e4-knight with check) 35 ... Qxe4+ 36 Kf1 Qe5 37 Rg3+ Qxg3 38 hxg3
Be8 39 Bf3 1-0 was the impressive encounter R.Hall-G.Toro Solis de Ovande,
correspondence 2008.
b22) 21 ... Qa1+ has been less common, although the refutation is hardly obvious.
Again, a browse through some recent correspondence games indicated the solution to
me: 22 Bd1! Nc6 23 0-0 f5 24 c3!.
 This is an extraordinary but beautiful attacking concept:
b221) The point is that after 24 ... fxe4 25 Bc2 Qa5 (or 25 ... Qb2 26 Rdf2! Qb6 27
Kh1 when Black is helpless against the threats of Qg6 and Bxe4) 26 Qg6 the light-square
attack is too strong: 26 ... Qb6+ (attempting to exchange queens with 26 ... Qg5 doesn’t
help due to 27 Qxe6+ Kh8 28 Qxe4 g6 29 h4! Qxd2 30 Qxg6, winning immediately) 27
Kh1 Qe3 28 Bf4! Nf8 (28 ... Qxc3 29 Qxe6+ Kh8 30 Qxe4 Nf6 31 Rxd8+ Nxd8 32 Be5!
also wins) 29 Qh5 Qxc3 30 Bxh6! Rxd2 31 Qf7+ Kh7 32 Bxe4+ Kxh6 33 Qf4+ Kh5 34 Qxf8
Rxg2 35 Qh8+ 1-0 was E.Iriarte Gomez-M.Villaescusa Navalon, correspondence 2011.
This may have been a correspondence game, but, still, what an attack!
b222) 24 ... Qb1! reduces Black’s disadvantage to a minimum: 25 Bc2 Qb6+ 26 Kh1
Rf8! (a sound defence; Black has three extra pawns which entitles him to an exchange
sacrifice when it is deemed necessary) 27 Bxf8 Nxf8 28 Nd6 (I also analysed the untried
28 Nf6+ Kf7 29 Nh5 g6 30 Nf4, which seemed the most natural to me, but the computer
whipped out 30 ... a5! and the passed a-pawn proved to be annoying to handle; still, this
position looks like an interesting one to play out over the board) 28 ... Qc5 29 Re1 and in
M.Auzins-V.Lyukmanov, correspondence 2009, White was slightly better in computer
terms, but in over-the-board practice I would imagine White would convert this position
the majority of the time.
b23) 21 ... Nc6! appears to be best, although the route to safety is a narrow one and I
can understand why the Georgiev and Kolev team focussed their attention elsewhere.
After 22 Bc7 Qa1+! (22 ... Qf5? loses by force to 23 Nd6 Qc5 24 Nxf7! Kxf7 25 Rf1+ Kg8
26 Bxd8 Nxd8 27 Qg6 Qe5 28 c3 Nc6 29 Rd3 and Black resigned in S.Salzmann-P.Loginov,
correspondence 2010; the alternative 22 ... Qb4 is slightly better, although I prefer White
after 23 Nd6 Rf8 24 c3 Qb1+ 25 Rd1 Qb2 26 Nxc8 Nf6 27 Nb6 Ne4 28 Qd3 when his extra
piece outweighs Black’s extra pawns for the time being) 23 Rd1 Qb2 we reach a critical
position.
 Black is objectively fine here, as confirmed by several correspondence games and
deep analysis, but White has several dangerous choices. To me, it doesn’t make much
sense for black exponents to study this position at such depth when there are simpler
ways to obtain an equal position. I will not attempt to analyse this position exhaustively,
but I think White has the better practical chances:
b231) 24 Bxd8 Qb4+ 25 Nd2 Nxd8 was analysed by Tony Kosten on
ChessPublishing.com and has been established as fine for Black. Still, some players may
like to take White in the unbalanced if equal position after 26 0-0 Nc6 27 Nc4 Qc5+ 28
Kh1 Ne7 29 Nd6, with some attacking chances.
b232) I would opt for 24 c3 .Rf8 (24 ... Re8 25 Rf1 f5 26 Rf2 is unclear, but I prefer
White) 25 Bd6 Rd8 26 Bf4! Ne7! (26 ... Kh7? 27 Bxh6!! gxh6 28 0-0 is a dashing finish) 27
Nf6+ Nxf6 28 Rxd8+ Kh7 29 Be5.

Black may have three pawns for the exchange, but the presence of the white rook on
d8 will cause a certain degree of discomfort in his camp. The engines seem to think that
Black is okay, but I definitely prefer White.
c) 20 ... f5 is relatively rare, but deserves attention given that it was recommended in
Kolev and Georgiev’s work on the Najdorf and has scored decently.

Still, compromising Black’s kingside pawns seems unnecessary at this stage compared
to 20 ... Nc6. Play typically continues 21 Bxf8 Nxf8 22 Nd6 Nbd7 and here I like the
relatively uncommon 23 g4!? fxg4 24 Bxg4. For example:
c1) 24 ... Qe5 25 Kf2!? (new, according to my database) 25 ... Qxe3+ (25 ... Qf6+ 26
Ke2 is unclear, but again I prefer White whenever the queens are kept on) 26 Kxe3 Ne5
27 Be2 Nfg6 28 Rb1 when White’s active pieces compensate for his slight material deficit.
c2) Kolev and Georgiev suggested 24 ... Qa1+, but I prefer White after 25 Bd1 Qe5 26
Kf2 (just as I was finishing this book, an important theoretical game between two young
Chinese Grandmasters continued 26 Qxe5!? Nxe5 27 0-0 Bd7?! – Ramirez suggested the
logical 27 ... a5 as a likely improvement – 28 Re1 Neg6 29 Nxb7 and White was playing
for two results in Yu Yangyi-Wei Yi, China 2014) 26 ... a5 (26 ... Qf6+ 27 Kg2 is very
unclear, but White’s practical chances have to be preferable) 27 Qxe5 Nxe5 28 Re1 Nf7
29 c4 Nxd6 30 Rxd6 Kf7 (not 30 ... a4? 31 Rd8!) 31 Ba4 when Black’s pieces are tied
down, although anything could happen in such a position.
Finally, we can return to the prudent 20 ... Nc6:
 21 0-0
21 Bxf8 Nxf8 22 0-0 virtually always transposes to the main line. The hyper aggressive
21 g4!? has also been played, but here Nepomniachtchi’s 21 ... Qb6! has proved to be
highly effective. The point is that after 22 Qxb6 (22 Qh3? was played in a GM clash, but
here 22 ... f5! 23 g5!? fxe4 24 Qxe6+ Kh8 was close to winning for Black in P.Smirnov-
I.Nepomniachtchi, Novokuznetsk 2008) 22 ... Nxb6 23 Bxf8 Kxf8 24 0-0 Nd7! 25 Nd6 Nce5
26 Bf3 Ke7 27 Nxc8+ Rxc8 28 Bxb7 Rc3! Black is the one pressing for the win.
21 ... Nce5
This has scored best, but not surprisingly, there is a multitude of options for Black
here:
a) The first game that occurred with this position continued 21 ... f5, which remains
Black’s most important alternative. After 22 Bxf8 Nxf8 23 Nd6 he has:

a1) 23 ... b5? was played in the stem game and after 24 Bf3 Bd7 25 Nxf5! exf5 26
Rxd7 Nxd7 27 Bxc6 White was easily winning in A.Shirov-N.Guliyev, Canada de Calatrava
(rapid) 2007.
a2) 23 ... Ne5 was played in a top-level clash, but here White can improve with 24
Rb1! (instead of 24 Bh5, which was played in E.Najer-I.Nepomniachtchi, Mainz (rapid)
2008) 24 ... Nfd7 25 Nxc8 Rxc8 26 Rxd7 Nxd7 27 Qxe6+ Kh7 28 Qxd7 Rxc2 29 Qe6 Qc5+
30 Kf1 Rc1+ 31 Rxc1 Qxc1+ 32 Kf2 Qc5+ 33 Kg3 when Black is very close to a draw, but
White is doing all the pressing.
a3) 23 ... Kh7 has been played quite frequently, but White obtains a promising attack
with 24 Nc4 Qc7 25 Nb6 Rb8 26 g4!.
a4) 23 ... Qe5 is commonest and was recommended in the first edition of The
Sharpest Sicilian. However, it seems like White gets a risk-free edge after 24 Qf2!? (24
Qxe5 Nxe5 25 Rb1 has also been played; White seems to be better here too as it is hard
to determine where Black’s minor pieces are supposed to go and White’s pieces are hyper
active) 24 ... Qc3 (Black should not give up any material voluntarily: for example, 24 ...
Bd7 25 Nxb7 Nb4? 26 Qc5! was very good for White in W.Kozlowski-V.Mamonovas,
correspondence 2008) 25 Bc4 Kh8 26 Rd3 Qf6 27 Qb6 Qe7 28 Rdd1! Ng6 29 Rfe1 when
Black’s pieces are all tangled up and White enjoys a nice initiative.
b) 21 ... Qb6!? was suggested by Golubev, but Black is surely fighting for a draw after
it: for example, 22 Qxb6 Nxb6 23 Bxf8 Kxf8 24 Nd6 f6! (24 ... Ne5? 25 Nxf7! Nxf7 26 Bh5
wins for White) 25 Rb1 Na4! (Palliser pointed out that after 25 ... Nd5 26 Nxc8 Rxc8 27
Rxb7 a5 28 Bg4! White appears to have the better chances; indeed, Black’s king is
restricted, the e6-pawn is under pressure and the d5-knight is about to be dislodged with
a timely c2-c4 push, after which the potential of White’s rooks will be maximized) 26 Bf3!
Ne5 27 Bxb7 Bxb7 28 Rxb7.

In Z.Straka-T.Schmidt, correspondence 2008, and several other email games, White

was slightly but surely better. White’s monster of a knight on d6 coupled with the
dangerous passed c-pawn are his main trumps, although Black is certainly not without
counterplay. Play typically continues 28 ... Nc3 29 Rb3 Nd5 30 c4 Ne7 31 Ra2 a5 32 Ra4
N7c6 33 c5 Rd8 34 Rb6 when White is on the sunny side of a draw.
c) Again, saving the rook with 21 ... Rd8? is ill-advised and leads to a direct win for
White after 22 Qf4! Qf5 (22 ... f5 23 Bc7 Qb4 24 Nd6! Qxf4 25 Rxf4 Rf8 26 Nxc8 Raxc8 27
Rxd7 Rf7 28 Rxf7 Kxf7 29 Bb6 is preferable for White; the bishop-pair will eventually
outweigh Black’s extra pawns) 23 Qh4 Qa5 (23 ... g5?! 24 Qxh6 Qxe4 25 Qxg5+ Qg6 26
Qh4 Qh7 27 Bh5 f5 28 Rd3 leads to a mating attack that hardly requires any comments,
W.Blank-J.Lounek, correspondence 2008) 24 Rd3!.

A thematic rook lift. Compared to the variation with 20 ... Rd8, White’s pieces are
much better placed and, in fact, this position is virtually a forced win for White. For
example, a correspondence game went 24 ... Nf8 (24 ... f5 25 Rg3 Kh8 26 Rg6 clearly
doesn’t help) 25 Bh5 f5 26 Rg3! Nh7 27 Bf4 Rd7 28 Bg6 Qb6+ 29 Be3 Qd8 30 Bxh7+ and
Black resigned in I.Pheby-E.Paleckis, correspondence 2011, due to 30 ... Kxh7 31 Bg5
followed by Nf6+.
d) Similarly, 21 ... Re8? is bad: 22 Qg3 Nce5 (22 ... f5 transposes to 20 ... Re8 which
was analysed above) 23 Bh5! Kh8 24 Rdf2! and White has an irresistible attack.
Returning to 21 ... Nce5:
22 Rdd1!
This counterintuitive move is a new idea that was proposed by Kolev and Georgiev in
the latest edition of The Sharpest Sicilian. As this game shows, the move is not without
venom, although Black should hold the draw with accurate play.
22 Bxf8 was played in the first few games of this line, but Black has found ways to
establish comfortable equality. After 22 ... Nxf8 (22 ... Kxf8?! 23 Nd6 f5 24 g4! Nf6 25
gxf5 exf5 26 Nxf5 Bxf5 27 Rxf5 Re8 28 Bf1 is better for White from a practical
perspective) 23 Nd6 (23 Rfd1 has never been played, but keeps the placement of White’s
knight flexible: for example, 23 ... Bd7 24 Nc5! Qc7 25 Nxb7 Bc6 26 Nd6 Nfd7 27 c4 with
an unclear position) we have:
 a) ‘Gewgaw’ on the ChessPublishing forum suggested 23 ... b5?! which is interesting,
but fails to the unexpected 24 Bh5! f5 (24 ... f6? loses to the amazing blow 25 Rxf6!! gxf6
26 Ne8!! Nfg6 27 Qxh6 Ra7 28 Nxf6+ Kf7 29 Ne4 and Black has no defence) 25 Rfd1 b4
26 Re2 and Black is certainly living on the ropes here.
b) In general, I am against any idea where Black gives up part of his material
voluntarily, but a top Asian player has continued 23 ... Bd7!? when 24 Nxb7 Qb4 25 Nd6
(25 Nc5 Rc8 26 Nxa6 Qa5 is awkward for White) 25 ... Bc6 26 Rd4 Qa5 was only slightly
better for White in G.Gopal-W.So, Olongapo City 2010. Black held the draw comfortably,
although it’s hard to imagine anyone looking to obtain this position from the opening.
c) 23 ... f6! is the most solid and clearly best: 24 Rb1 (24 c4 Qc7 25 Ne8 Qe7 26 Nd6
Qc7 27 Ne8 Qe7 28 Nd6 Qc7 was agreed drawn in E.Vorobiov-D.Kokarev, Ulan Ude 2009)
24 ... b5 25 c4 Bd7 26 cxb5 axb5 27 Nxb5 (27 Rdb2 Bc6 28 Nxb5 Rd8! is also comfortable
for Black) 27 ... Bc6 28 Qd4 (28 Nc3 Nfg6 29 Ra2 Qd8 30 Rxa8 Qxa8 is equal, but this
time I’d prefer to take Black as his pieces are optimally placed) 28 ... Nfg6 when Black is
very solid and stands well.
After many twists and turns, we have finally arrived after 22 Rdd1 at what I believe to
be the absolutely critical position for this particular variation.
 The point of White’s last move is not immediately clear though. By moving the d2-
rook to d1, White essentially gives up any pretence of doubling rooks on the d-file, which
is the only open file in the position. Shouldn’t he be doing so, given that it looks like the
most natural plan in the world? And also has White forgotten that he is down three
pawns? It is not easy to answer these questions. Chess is not always suitable for logical
questions and sometimes a move that looks thoroughly ridiculous may work because of
very specific or concrete details. We will see why this one works in the subsequent
analysis.
22 ... f5?!
This is not best, but it is not easy for Black to find a solution over the board:
a) The stingy 22 ... Re8? fails to 23 Bh5! Ng6 24 Qf2 Qf5 25 Qe2 Qa5 (if 25 ... Qb5 26
c4!) 26 Rxf7! Kxf7 27 Qg4 Ndf8 28 Rf1+ Kg8 29 Bxg6 and Black was busted in V.Sutkus-
J.Guevara Pijoan, correspondence 2009.
b) 22 ... f6?! is refuted by 23 Bxf8 Kxf8 (or 23 ... Nxf8 24 Nxf6+! gxf6 25 Rxf6 Ned7 26
Rxh6 Qe5 27 Qf3 with a winning position) 24 Rd6 when White is clearly better, as
analysed on ChessPublishing.com.
c) I could only find one game that continued with the natural 22 ... Ng6. Here the
untried 23 Kh1! (23 c4!? Re8 24 c5 Ne7 25 Qf4 Nf5 26 Bc7 Qa3 27 Rd3 Qb2 28 Rd2 Qb3
29 Rd3 Qb2 30 Bh5 Rf8 31 g4, as played in A.Yeremenko-J.Enricci, correspondence 2008,
also looks very good to me) 23 ... f5 24 Qg3 Kh7 25 Bh5 Nde5 26 Bxf8 Nxf8 27 Nd6 looks
good for White to me.
d) After spending several hours on this position, I think the untried 22 ... Nc6 is Black’s
best option.
 Given that Black’s previous move was 21 ... Nc6-e5, this is a really hard move to
understand, but perhaps the best explanation is that White’s rook is better placed on d2
than d1 with the knight on c6 and that Black simply has no better alternatives. Without
providing anything exhaustive, I think 23 Qg3 is best (23 Bxf8 Nxf8 24 Nd6 f6 25 Rf3 Qe5
26 Qf2!? is unclear). For example, 23 ... f5 24 Bc4 Nde5 25 Bxf8 Kxf8 26 Bb3 Nf7 27 Nd6
Qc5+ 28 Kh1 Nxd6 29 Rxd6 with aggressive intentions.
23 Bxf8
Once more there are plenty of alternatives:
a) Palliser gave the following convincing analysis on the tricky move 23 Nc5!?: 23 ...
Qb6! when “everything just about seems to hang together for Black: for example, 24 Bxf8
Kxf8 25 Rxd7!? Bxd7 26 Bc4! Nxc4 27 Nxd7+ Ke7 28 Qxb6 Nxb6 29 Nxb6 Rd8 and with
three good pawns for the piece, Black should be able to hold the ending.”
b) 23 Nd2! has been played only once, but seems to be White’s most dangerous
option.
 The immediate threats are 24 Nb3!, winning a piece, and 24 Bxf8 followed by Nc4,
which potentially transfers White’s light-squared bishop to the a2-g8 diagonal. That game
went 23 ... f4 (there is nothing better) 24 Qb3 f3 (the flashy 24 ... Rf6 25 Ne4 Rf5 26
Qxe6+ Kh8 doesn’t work due to 27 Bc7! b6 28 g4!, winning material) 25 Nxf3 Nxf3+ 26
Bxf3 Rf7 (or 26 ... Rf6 27 Kh1!, avoiding any queen swaps with ... Qb6, and after 27 ...
Qb5 28 Qa2 the position is similar to the game) and now in M.Petrolo-N.Andriuschenko,
correspondence 2008, I like 27 Qxe6 Nf6 28 Qb3, with continuing pressure.
23 ... Kxf8
23 ... Nxf8 24 Nd6 Nfg6 may be an improvement, although White still holds the long-
term chances here. For instance, 25 Bh5 Kh7 26 Kh1 Qb4 27 c3 Qh4 28 Bxg6+ Nxg6 29
Nxc8 Rxc8 30 Qxe6 Rf8 31 Rd7, as in W.Schneider-N.Andriuschenko, correspondence
2008, would be very unpleasant to face over the board.
24 Nd6 Qc5
24 ... Nf6!? looks risky, but after 25 Ra1 Black has the resource 25 ... Neg4! which
ensures he doesn’t lose a piece right away. Still, White is pressing for the win after 26
Bxg4 Nxg4 27 Qd4 Qc7 28 Ra3!? Bd7 29 Rg3.
 25 Nxf5?
This allows Black to escape into a survivable endgame. 25 Rd4!, as analysed by Lou
Cyber on the ChessPublishing forum, would have maintained the pressure. For example,
25 ... b6!? (otherwise, 25 ... Kg8 26 Bc4! Nb6 27 Nxf5! Kh7 28 Ne7! wins for White or 25
... b5 26 g4! Nf6 27 Nxf5! Ned7 28 Qxe6 Ne5 29 Qd6+ Qxd6 30 Rxd6 Nf7 31 Rc6 Bd7 32
Rc7 Rd8 33 Ra7 with a clear edge for White) 26 g4 Nf6 27 gxf5 exf5 28 Nxf5 Bxf5 29 Rxf5
Re8 30 c3! Kf7 31 Qf4 Kg8 32 Bxa6 b5 33 Bb7 with a slight plus.
25 ... Qxe3+ 26 Nxe3+ Ke7 27 Rd4 b5 28 Rb1 Ra7!
Black has defended well and it’s hard to see White engineering a breakthrough here. A
draw seems like the fairest result, although both sides eventually had their chances. The
rest of the game will be provided with light comments.
29 h4 Rc7 30 Bf3 Nxf3+ 31 gxf3 Ne5 32 Kf2 Bb7

Black is more than okay here and was even the one in the driver’s seat by this stage.
 33 Rg1 g5! 34 Rg3 Rc5! 35 hxg5 hxg5 36 Rh3
36 f4! gxf4 37 Rxf4 Kd6 38 Rg7 may be White’s best way to fight for the draw.
36 ... Bd5
36 ... Bc6! would have been stronger.
37 Rh7+ Kf6 38 f4 Kg6 39 Ra7 gxf4 40 Rxf4 Rc6 41 Ke2 Nc4 42 Nxd5 exd5
43 Kd3 Na3 44 Rg4+ Kf5 45 Rag7 Rxc2
Having eliminated White’s last pawn, Black is comfortably within the drawing zone,
although White rightly continued the fight.
46 R4g5+ Kf4 47 Rxd5 Rc8 48 Rf7+ Kg4 49 Ke2 Nc4 50 Rd1 Re8+ 51 Kf2
Kg5 52 Rg1+ Kh6 53 Rf4 Re5 54 Rf6+ Kh7 55 Rxa6
With patient technique, the Russian superstar has forced the black king to the edge of
the board. Black should still be able to hold, although it was never going to be easy.
55 ... Rf5+ 56 Ke2 Ne5?!
Perhaps 56 ... Rf7!? would have made a better defence.
57 Ke3 Nf7 58 Ke4 Rg5?
58 ... Re5+ 59 Kf4 Re7 was better, but it is already very tricky for Black.
59 Rf1?
59 Rxg5 Nxg5+ 60 Kf5 Nf3 61 Ra3! wins immediately according to the tablebases.
59 ... Nh6 60 Rff6 Ng8 61 Rfb6 Rg7 62 Rxb5 Rg6 63 Ra7+ Kh6 64 Kf4 Nf6
65 Ra1

Within reach of a comfortably drawn position, Black now unleashed an absolute

howler.
65 ... Nh5+??
65 ... Rg4+! 66 Kf3 Kg6 should eventually clinch the draw.
66 Rxh5+! 1-0
A truly heart-breaking finish for Kokarev, but both players can be proud of the overall
quality of the game.
Conclusion
Black appears to be having some concrete problems to solve in this particular variation
and, as such, attention has shifted to the Delayed Poisoned Pawn variations which will be
covered in the next chapter.
Chapter Six
The Delayed Poisoned Pawn Variation
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6 8 Bh4 Qb6

After experiencing problems in the traditional main lines of the Poisoned Pawn,
Najdorf exponents, no doubt armed with the latest engines, decided on first nudging the
h-pawn forward by one square before attacking the b-pawn with 8 ... Qb6. This seemingly
innocuous insertion gives rise to a host of possibilities.
Game 35 covers the stem top-flight game with the Delayed Poisoned Pawn or ‘DPP’
move order. After 9 Qd2 Qxb2 10 Rb1 Qa3 the positions arising after 11 f5 were new to
opening theory at the point of play. Black can equalize cleanly here and so White has
tried to bust the variation with 11 e5 instead.
After 11 ... dxe5 12 fxe5 Black can transpose to the previous chapter with 12 ... Nfd7,
but the move 12 ... Nd5!? has been extensively tested at GM level over the last three
years. These positions are tricky to handle as can be seen in Game 36 where Black
played perfectly for 23 moves before blundering the game away in one move. Game 37
covers 16 Bd3 where there are also several landmines, although Black should be okay
with accurate play. I don’t think we have seen the last of this line as yet and I foresee
further developments in due time.
Game 38 covers the improbable 12 ... g5!?, which leads to utter chaos at a very early
stage. Strangely enough, the line leads to yet another probable draw, although both sides
have to proceed carefully to reach it.
We round up the chapter and the book with two games with the independent 9 a3!?.
 This is an option that would not have been possible with the traditional Poisoned
Pawn move order. There is a lot of scope for creativity here, although at the risk of
repeating myself too many times, Black is once again fine if he knows his lines well.

Game 35
F.Vallejo Pons-A.Morozevich
Reggio Emilia 2011

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6 8 Bh4 Qb6!?

This was the first time the Delayed Poisoned Pawn was played at top level and, not
surprisingly, it has been extremely popular ever since. Black’s move order eliminates
some of White’s options in the traditional move order at the cost of providing some fresh
ones.
9 Qd2 Qxb2 10 Rb1 Qa3
 11 f5
This is a natural attempt to exploit the weakened light squares after Black’s early ...
h6. The more dangerous and complex 11 e5!? is analysed in the next three games.
11 ... Be7
Prudent:
a) The ‘normal’ 11 ... Nc6 gives White a dangerous attack after 12 fxe6 fxe6 (or 12 ...
Bxe6 13 Nxe6 fxe6 14 Rxb7, which the engines give a ‘0.00’ score to, but White’s position
looks preferable) 13 Nxc6 bxc6 14 e5 dxe5 15 Bd3!, pointing at the g6-square.
b) 11 ... b5!? is risky: 12 fxe6 fxe6 13 Bxf6! gxf6 14 Rb3 Qa5 (this is forced, as 14 ...
Qc5 15 Ncxb5! is a disaster) 15 Be2 h5 16 0-0 and Black’s position looks very dodgy
indeed.
12 fxe6 fxe6 13 Bc4
Again, attacking e6 is the most logical and entirely in the spirit of the 6 Bg5 Najdorf.
Palliser pointed out that the timid 13 Be2?! is met effectively by 13 ... 0-0! 14 Bf2 Nc6 15
0-0 and here 15 ... Nxd4! (instead of 15 ... Ne5 16 Nf5! with the idea of 16 ... exf5 17 Rb3
Qa5 18 Bb6 Nxe4 19 Qe1 Qxc3 20 Rxc3 Nxc3 21 Qxc3 Be6, with a messy position) 16
Bxd4 b5 looks good for Black, especially when the aggressive 17 Rf3!? Qa5 18 Rg3 Kh8
does not lead to a knock-out blow as far as I can see.
13 ... Nxe4!
This is Black’s tactical justification for weakening the light squares early in the game.
13 ... d5?! would be a bit too clever and White gets the better of it after 14 exd5 Qc5 15
Bb3 exd5 16 Na4!.
14 Nxe4 Bxh4+ 15 g3
 15 ... Bg5!
This has been established as Black’s best at this juncture:
a) 15 ... 0-0?! seems to lead to a White edge by force, although he has to play
accurately: 16 Rb3! (not 16 gxh4 d5! when 17 Rg1 dxc4 18 Qxh6 Qa5+ 19 c3 Qe5 20 Qg6
Nc6 21 Nxc6 bxc6 22 Rg5 Rf5 23 Qe8+ Kh7 24 Qh5+ leads to a forced draw) 16 ... Qxa2
(White’s attack after 16 ... Qa4? 17 gxh4! Qxc4 18 Rg3 is pretty devastating) 17 Qc3!
(setting up multiple threats, such as Rxb7 for starters, while covering a1) 17 ... Bd8! 18
Nxe6 Ba5 19 Nxf8+ d5! 20 Rb4! Qxc4 21 Rxc4 Bxc3+ 22 Rxc3 Nc6 23 Nd6 Kxf8 24 Re3
Bh3 25 Kd2 and White is pushing for the win, although it will certainly not be easy to
achieve.
b) 15 ... d5 is a solid alternative:
b1) There are some nasty tricks after 16 0-0!? that are worth knowing:

b11) 16 ... dxc4? 17 gxh4 cannot be contemplated, especially when the natural 17 ...
Rf8 loses to 18 Nc6!! (18 Qe2! is also strong, but there are many ways to skin a cat) 18
... Nxc6 19 Nd6+ Ke7 20 Nxc8+ followed by Rxb7.
b12) 16 ... Bg5? 17 Nxg5 hxg5 18 Qxg5 leads to a winning attack.
b13) 16 ... Be7? 17 Nxe6! Bxe6 18 Bxd5 Bc5+ 19 Kg2 Qe3 20 Qxe3 Bxe3 21 Bxe6 and
there will be no respite from White’s relentless attack despite the queens coming off the
board.
b14) 16 ... dxe4! (the only move) 17 Nxe6 (17 Bxe6 Bg5 18 Qd1 looks dangerous, but
Black defends after 18 ... Nd7! 19 Nf5 Nf6 20 Nxg7+ Ke7 21 Bxc8 Qc5+ 22 Kh1 Raxc8 23
Rxb7+ Rc7 24 Nf5+ Kf7) 17 ... Qe7! (again, this is forced: 17 ... Bf6? simply loses to 18
Rxf6, while 17 ... Bxe6 18 Bxe6 Qc5+ 19 Kg2 Bg5 20 Bf7+ Kf8 21 Bc4+! Ke8 22 Qc3! Be7
23 Qxg7 Rf8 24 Rxf8+ Bxf8 25 Qf7+ Kd8 26 Rd1+ Bd6 27 Qxb7 Qc6 28 Rxd6+ Qxd6 29
Qxa8 is winning for White as he is likely to win a second pawn).

Here I could not find anything better than 18 Nxg7+ Qxg7 19 Bf7+ Ke7 (a higher-
rated opponent might want to play on with 19 ... Qxf7?, but would then find himself
desperately fighting for his life after 20 Rxf7 Kxf7 21 Qd5+ Kg7 22 gxh4 Nc6 23 Kh1!! and
the attack lives on; Black is essentially playing with only his knight and king’s rook, and a
convincing white win can be seen after the natural 23 ... Rf8 24 Qxe4! Rf6 25 Rg1+ Kf7
26 Qh7+ Ke6 27 Qg8+ Kd6 28 Rd1+ Kc5 29 Rd5+ Kb6 30 Qg1+! Kc7 31 Qg7+) 20 Qb4+
Kd8 21 Qa5+ Ke7 22 Qb4+ and it’s perpetual check. With hindsight, I should probably
have gone for this variation rather than ‘b2’ as Black seems to have more chances to go
wrong here.
b2) 16 Nxe6!? was first played in K.Goh Wei Ming-M.Arnold, Budapest 2011. After 16
... Bxe6 17 Bxd5 we have:
 b21) The immediate point is that after 17 ... Bxd5? 18 Qxd5 Qe3+ 19 Kd1!! (19 Kf1
Be7! 20 Qh5+ Kf8 21 Qf5+ Kg8 22 Rxb7 Nc6! is less clear) 19 ... Qf3+ 20 Kc1 Qxh1+ 21
Kb2 Qxb1+ 22 Kxb1 Nc6 23 gxh4 the coordination of the white queen and knight is
marvellous and Black can hardly hope to survive.
b22) I also considered 17 ... Bg5 during my preparation and did not find anything
better than 18 Nxg5 hxg5 (18 ... Bxd5? 19 Qxd5 hxg5 20 Kd1!! leads to a rather pleasing
finish: 20 ... Nc6 21 Re1+ Ne7 22 Rb3 Qa4 23 Rxe7+ and mate in a few moves) 19 Bxe6
Qxg3+! (not desirable but forced; otherwise, Black’s exposed and uncastled position will
be demolished quickly) 20 hxg3 Rxh1+ 21 Ke2 Rh2+ 22 Ke3 Rxd2 23 Kxd2 b5 24 Bd5 Ra7
25 a4 Nd7 26 axb5 axb5 27 Rxb5 Ke7 28 Ke3 with a drawn ending, although White can
certainly press a little here.
b23) 17 ... 0-0! was played after a very long think. I offered a draw after 18 Bxe6+,
which was eventually accepted. My preparation actually went 18 ... Kh8 19 Rf1! Re8 (19
... Nc6 20 gxh4 Rfe8 is a decent piece sacrifice, although anything might happen after 21
Bf5! Re5 22 Rb3 Qxa2 23 Qc3 Qa4 24 Kd1 Rxe4 25 Bxe4 Qxe4 with a messy position;
here 21 Rf6!? looks nice, but 21 ... Qe7 22 Rxh6+ gxh6 23 Qxh6+ Qh7 24 Qf6+ Qg7 25
Qxg7+ Kxg7 26 Rxb7+ Kh8 27 Ng5 Rxe6+! is a pretty nasty sucker punch) 20 Bd5 Bg5 21
Qd3 Qa5+ 22 Kf2 with complications. A natural continuation is 22 ... Nc6 23 Nxg5 hxg5 24
Qd1 g4! 25 Rxb7 Rad8 26 c4 Ne5 when Black has full counterplay for the pawn.
We now return to Morozevich’s 15 ... Bg5:
16 Nxg5 hxg5
 17 Nxe6?!
This gave Black easy equality, so White should look into:
a) 17 0-0 is critical and, incidentally, the computer’s first choice: 17 ... Qc5 (bringing
the queen back to the useful c5-square is an important move; the careless 17 ... Nc6? is
bad for Black after 18 Nxe6 Bxe6 19 Bxe6 Qc5+ 20 Kh1 when his king is stranded) 18 Qf2
(Van Delft and Ris analysed 18 Bxe6 Bxe6 19 Rbe1 Kd7 20 Rxe6 Nc6 21 Rf7+ Kc8 22 c3
Ne5, which is comfortable for Black) 18 ... Nc6! (the most accurate way to force equality;
White’s advantage after 18 ... e5?! 19 Nf5 Qxf2+ 20 Rxf2 Bxf5 21 Rxf5 Nc6 22 Rxg5 b5 23
Bd5 Rc8 24 Rxg7 Nd4 might not be much, but he is certainly on the sunny side of the
draw) 19 Nxe6 Qxf2+ 20 Rxf2 Bxe6 21 Bxe6 Rb8 22 Bd5 Ne5 23 Bxb7 Kd7 and Black
should draw pretty comfortably.
b) The logical 17 c3!? cuts out ... Qxg3+ tricks and prevents the exchange of queens
compared to the 17 0-0 lines. However, Black has sufficient resources here too: 17 ... Qc5
(the easiest way to equalize appears to be 17 ... Nc6 18 Nxe6 Bxe6 19 Bxe6 Qc5! 20
Rxb7 Qe5+ 21 Qe2 Qxc3+ 22 Kf1 Ne5 when White has nothing) 18 Bxe6 Qe5+ 19 Qe2
(not 19 Kf2?? when 19 ... Bxe6 20 Rbe1 0-0+! wins, as in R.Robson-L.Dominguez Perez,
Lubbock 2011) 19 ... Nc6 20 Bd5 Nxd4 21 cxd4 Qxe2+ 22 Kxe2 and, again, Black’s extra
pawn is not significant and the endgame appears to be pretty balanced.
c) Lastly, Black has scored some convincing wins after 17 Rb3?! Qc5:
 c1) White was in trouble after 18 Bxe6 Nc6! 19 Rc3 (19 Bxc8 is better, but Black
retains the better chances after 19 ... Nxd4 20 Rc3 Qe5+ 21 Kd1 0-0) 19 ... Qxd4 20 Qxd4
Nxd4 21 Bxc8 and now in I.Sukandar-A.Kovchan, Biel 2011, Palliser pointed out 21 ... Rb8
with an extra pawn for very little.
c2) 18 Re3? e5 19 Rf1 was played in M.Kanarek-W.Reza, Murzasichle 2011, and now
Black would have been on course for an upset with the stylish 19 ... Qxc4! 20 Rc3 Qxf1+
21 Kxf1 Bh3+ 22 Ke1 exd4 23 Qxd4 Nc6, with a significant material advantage.
c3) 18 Rc3 Nc6 19 Nxc6 bxc6 20 Rf1 Rb8! 21 Bb3 Qe5+ 22 Kd1 Rb4! 23 Kc1 Re4 24
Kb1 Re2 25 Qd1 Rf8 26 Rg1 Bd7 27 Rd3 d5 28 h4 g4 29 Qc1 c5 30 Rgd1 Rff2 was a pretty
powerful demonstration of Black’s chances in Lu Shanglei-Wei Yi, Beijing 2012.
17 ... Bxe6 18 Bxe6 Qxg3+!
White might have missed this familiar tactic which gives Black a comfortable game.
19 hxg3 Rxh1+ 20 Ke2 Rh2+ 21 Ke1 Rxd2 22 Kxd2 Ra7 23 Bd5
 23 ... Nd7
Black can try 23 ... Nc6, but curiously the pawn-up ending after 24 Rxb7 Rxb7 25
Bxc6+ Rd7 26 Ke3 Ke7 27 Bxd7 Kxd7, as played in M.Kanarek-W.Moranda, Warsaw 2011,
also appears to be drawn.
24 Rxb7 Rxb7 25 Bxb7 Nc5 26 Bf3 Kd7 ½-½
Black’s extra pawn does not count for much and it seems that 11 f5 has been
completely neutralized in more than one way.

Game 36
D.Solak-S.Zhigalko
European Team Championship, Warsaw 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6

The actual game continued 7 ... Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2 9 Rb1 Qa3 10 e5 h6, which is the
traditional move order. Here I have always liked 11 Bxf6!? (instead of 11 Bh4 dxe5 12
fxe5, which is a direct transposition) 11 ... gxf6 12 exd6. One of the merits of the move
order with 7 ... h6 is that it does not allow White this option. The only game I could find
with this line continued 12 ... Qxd6 (preventing White’s next move with 12 ... f5! looks
critical) 13 Ne4 Qd8 14 Qc3 Be7 15 Be2 b5? (15 ... Nd7 is safer) 16 Rd1 b4 and now in
S.Del Rio de Angelis-F.Vallejo Pons, Leon 2006, 17 Qg3! looks dangerous.
8 Bh4 Qb6 9 Qd2 Qxb2 10 Rb1 Qa3 11 e5

This is the critical main line of the Delayed Poisoned Pawn.

11 ... dxe5
Virtually the only move. 11 ... Nfd7 12 Be2! g5 13 Bf2 dxe5 14 Nxe6! fxe6 15 Bh5+
Ke7 16 Ne4! is a typical Sicilian disaster waiting to happen.
12 fxe5 Nd5!?
This is an independent approach compared to the traditional main lines of the
Poisoned Pawn and is one of the advantages of the 7 ... h6 move order. Instead, 12 ...
Nfd7 is a direct transposition to Chapter Five, while 12 ... g5!? is the other big main line
and will be analysed in Game 38.
13 Nxd5 exd5

14 e6
Again, White must try to exploit the weakened light squares:
a) The outrageous-looking 14 Bc4!? is actually playable, but 14 ... Be7! (14 ... dxc4??
15 Nb5! is the only real point of White’s last move) 15 Bxe7 Qxe7 16 Bxd5 Qxe5+ 17 Qe2
Qxe2+ is a rather straightforward way to dampen White’s spirits.
b) After 14 c4 Nc6 15 cxd5 Nxd4 16 Qxd4 Bc5 the tactic 17 Qd2?? Qa4!, as played in
C.Obregon-N.Delgado Ramirez, Asuncion 2012, is certainly worth remembering. In any
case, Black should be better from the opening stage.
14 ... Bxe6!
More or less the only move. Both 14 ... Qxa2? 15 exf7+ Kxf7 16 Rd1 and 14 ... fxe6 15
Bd3 Be7 16 Bg6+ Kd8 17 Bxe7+ Qxe7 18 0-0 are too risky for Black.
15 Nxe6
Andriasyan covered the rare 15 Rxb7!? in his book where he worked out several ways
to a draw. Since then, it has been tested in an extremely high-profile clash:
a) 15 ... Bd6!? looks risky, but the then world champion obviously knew his stuff and
had arrived at the game well prepared: 16 Nxe6 fxe6 17 Be2 0-0 18 Qd4 Rf7 19 Rxf7 Kxf7
20 0-0+ Kg8 21 Qg4 (White’s position looks very attractive here, but Anand has
everything covered) 21 ... Qe3+! 22 Bf2 (perhaps, 22 Kh1 Nd7 23 Bd3 could be tried, but
it’s hard to imagine White has anything serious after 23 ... Rf8 24 Re1 Nf6! 25 Rxe3 Nxg4
26 Rxe6 Rb8!) 22 ... Qe5 23 Bg3 Qe3+ 24 Bf2 Qe5 25 Bd4!? (ambitiously giving up a
second pawn, but again it’s hard to imagine Black losing this, especially when he can
exchange queens in short order) 25 ... Qxh2+ 26 Kf2 Qf4+ 27 Qxf4 Bxf4 28 Bg4 Nc6! 29
Bxe6+ Kh8 30 Bxd5 Rd8! 31 Bxg7+ Kxg7 32 Bxc6 Rd2+ 33 Kf3 Rxc2 and the game was
agreed drawn a few moves later in S.Karjakin-V.Anand, Moscow 2013.
b) Andriasyan analysed the extraordinary queen sacrifice 15 ... Nd7 16 Bb5!? axb5 17
Nxb5 Be7!!.

He was even able to play it in a high-level game himself: 18 Nxa3 Bxh4+ 19 g3 Bg5
20 Qb4! (20 Qc3 d4! 21 Qxd4 Rxa3 results in roughly the same type of equilibrium) 20 ...
Be7 21 Qb5 Rxa3 22 0-0 Bc5+ 23 Kh1 0-0! 24 Rxd7 Bxd7 25 Qxc5 (or 25 Qxd7 Rxa2 26 c3
Rc2 27 Rf3 Ra8!, as analysed by Andriasyan) 25 ... Rxa2 26 Qxd5 Be6 27 Qd3 Ra4 was
agreed drawn in R.Hovhannisyan-Z.Andriasian, Jermuk 2013. Magnificent home
preparation by the young Armenian.
15 ... fxe6 16 Be2

This has been played quite infrequently, whereas 16 Bd3 is the main move, as we will
investigate in the next game.
16 ... Be7
16 ... Bc5 is Houdini’s first choice, but it does look slightly more ‘loose’. White can try
the surprising 17 Rf1!?, which has been played quite often in the playchess.com engine
room: for example, 17 ... Be3 18 Bh5+ Kd7 19 Rf7+ Kc6 20 Qe2 Nd7 21 Rf3 Qc3+ (21 ...
d4? 22 Rf7! is terribly dangerous for Black) 22 Kf1 Rhf8 23 Rb3 Qa1+ 24 Be1 d4! 25 Rxf8
Rxf8+ 26 Bf3+ Kd6 27 Rd3! Qc1 28 Rd1 Qa3 29 c3! and White has a continuing attack.
17 Bh5+ Kd8 18 Bxe7+ Qxe7 19 0-0 Nd7
After the risky looking 19 ... b5?, as in P.Carlsson-Z.Andriasyan, Dubai 2011,
Andriasyan himself gave 20 c4!! as instantly winning. For instance, 20 ... bxc4 (20 ...
Qc5+ 21 Kh1 invariably transposes) 21 Rf7 Qc5+ 22 Kh1 Nd7 23 Rb7 Ne5 24 Rxg7 Nd3 25
g3! and White’s rooks will carry the day.
20 Rf7
This is possibly White’s most threatening move:
a) A famous game continued 20 Rxb7 Qc5+ 21 Kh1 Rb8!? (getting rid of the b7-rook is
positionally sound as Black will not have to worry about being mated in the near future;
Andriasyan suggested 21 ... Ra7!?, which is also fine for Black) 22 Rxb8+ Nxb8 23 Qe2
(23 Bg4 Re8 24 Rf7 Rf8! 25 Bxe6 Rxf7 26 Bxf7 d4 is comfortably equal for both sides) 23
... Qb5!.

Here Shirov may have underestimated the dangers that the resulting endgame held
for him: 24 Qxb5? (24 Qe1! is best when there is still a lot left to play for) 24 ... axb5 25
Rf7 Nc6 26 Rxg7 Rf8 27 Kg1 Nb4 28 Rb7 Nxc2 29 Rxb5 Ke7 and Black was better with her
powerful central passed pawns in A.Shirov-Hou Yifan, Gibraltar 2012, and she eventually
notched up a fantastic win.
b) 20 Qa5+ Kc8 21 Rf7 Qc5+ 22 Qxc5+ Nxc5 23 Rxg7 b5 was also harmless for Black
in S.Ould Ahmed-T.Slawinski, correspondence 2008.
20 ... Qc5+ 21 Kh1
 21 ... Rf8!
Again, the most accurate move. Trying to keep the extra material with 21 ... b6 is
risky due to 22 Qe1! Rf8 (or 22 ... Qd6 23 c4! d4 24 Rxg7 with fine compensation on the
light squares) 23 Qxe6 Rxf7 24 Qxf7 Kc7 25 Bg4 Qd6 26 c4! with the idea of 26 ... d4? 27
c5! bxc5 28 Bxd7, winning material. Alternatively, 21 ... Rc8 22 Qe1!, which is also pretty
strong and gives Black concrete problems to solve.
22 Rxg7
White is simultaneously attacking both b7 and h6, and his pieces appear to be
operating effectively. Optically, it looks like Black is living on the edge, but fortunately for
him, there is a narrow but concrete path to equality.
22 ... Rc8!
22 ... Rf6 was played in Wang Hao-E.Sutovsky, Ningbo 2011, but here White could
have seized the advantage by 23 Rg8+ Rf8 (23 ... Nf8 24 Qe1! is again very effective: for
example, 24 ... b5 25 Qe5! Qe7 26 Qd4 followed by the a4 or c4 pawn break is extremely
good for White, while 24 ... Rc8 25 Rxb7 Rc7 26 Rb1 was given by Andriasyan) 24 Rxf8+
Qxf8 25 Bg4 Qf6 26 Re1 Kc7 27 Bxe6 Re8 28 Bxd5 Rxe1+ 29 Qxe1 Qd4 30 Bf3. White
emerges from the chaos a pawn to the good, although he will require fairly good
technique to convert this position into a win.
23 Qxh6
23 h3 has also been faced by the reigning women’s world champion but Black holds
with minimal fuss: 23 ... Rc6 24 Qxh6 (Andriasyan analysed 24 Be2 Qxc2 25 Qb4 Rc7 26
Qe7+ Kc8 27 Rf1 Rxf1+ 28 Bxf1 Kb8 29 Qd8+ Ka7 30 Rxd7 Rxd7 31 Qxd7 Qf2 32 Bd3
Qe1+ 33 Kh2 Qe5+ with a virtually forced draw) 24 ... Kc8 25 Bg4 Qxc2 26 Re1 Qc3 27
Rxe6?! (maintaining the status quo with 27 Rb1 would have been equal) 27 ... Rxe6 28
Bxe6 Rf1+ 29 Kh2 Qe5+ 30 Rg3 and now in N.Kosintseva-Hou Yifan, Rostov on Don
2011, I believe Black could have started pressing for the win with 30 ... Kc7!, with the
idea of 31 Qe3 d4 32 Qxe5+ Nxe5 33 h4 d3 34 h5 d2 35 Bb3 d1Q 36 Bxd1 Rxd1 and Black
must be better.
 23 ... Qb4

Both players could still have been in their opening preparation at this juncture.
23 ... Qxc2 looks more natural and also seems perfectly fine for Black, although again
he has to find something concrete against White’s direct threats. For example, 24 Rg1 Qf2
25 Bg4 Qf6 (or 25 ... Rf6 26 Qg5 Rc6 27 Bf3 Qd4 28 Rf7 when it is terribly complicated)
26 Rg6 Qf4 27 Qxf4 Rxf4 28 Bxe6 and I like White’s chances.
24 Qc1 Qc3?
At 2600 level, one inaccuracy is normally sufficient to get yourself executed and this is
a perfect illustration of what can happen when you put one foot wrong. 24 ... Qf4! with
the idea of 25 Qxf4 Rxf4 26 g3 Rf2 27 Rxb7 Rcxc2 results in a forced draw without any
clear deviations along the way.
25 Qg5+ Kc7 26 Bf7!

Out of nowhere, Black has got into a real tangle and the co-ordination of his pieces is
not inspiring.
26 ... Qc6 27 Qe7 Kb8 28 Bxe6 Qb6! 29 Rd1 Rce8 30 Qxd7 Rxe6 31 Qxd5
White’s pressure has yielded him two extra pawns and a clearly won position. With so
many pieces left on the board, it is still very easy for both sides to go wrong and Black,
perhaps dissatisfied with how the game had gone, immediately lashed out.
31 ... Re2? 32 Rxb7+ Qxb7 33 Qd6+ Ka7 34 Qc5+ Qb6 35 Rd7+ 1-0

Game 37
A.Giri-G.Popilsky
European Club Cup, Eilat 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 Nf6 4 Nc3 cxd4 5 Nxd4 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6 8 Bh4 Qb6 9

Qd2 Qxb2 10 Rb1 Qa3 11 e5 dxe5 12 fxe5 Nd5 13 Nxd5 exd5 14 e6 Bxe6 15
Nxe6 fxe6 16 Bd3

This is White’s other main try. Both theory and statistics seem to indicate that there is
very little to choose between this and 16 Be2, and that Black is currently doing well
enough here too.
16 ... Be7 17 Bg6+
After 17 Bxe7?! Black should play the surprising 17 ... Kxe7! as the king is better
placed here than on d8 (17 ... Qxe7 18 0-0 Nd7 19 Bg6+ Kd8 transposes to our main
game). In fact, Black is better after 18 0-0 Nd7 19 Rxb7 Rab8!, with a clear extra pawn.
17 ... Kd8 18 Bxe7+ Qxe7 19 0-0
19 Rf1!? is tricky and leads to:
 a) Black can continue in similar vein to our main game with 19 ... Nd7 20 Rf7 Qc5.
Here White is not in check, so he can play 21 Rxb7, but Black should be fine after the
precise 21 ... Ne5 22 Rxg7 (22 Qf4 Qg1+! 23 Kd2 Qxg2+ 24 Kc3 Rc8+ 25 Kb2 Qxg6 26
Qxe5 Qxc2+ 27 Ka1 Qc3+ 28 Qxc3 Rxc3 is drawish) 22 ... Nxg6 23 Rxg6 Rf8 when his
counterplay matched White’s menacing rooks in E.Dibley-S.Ould Ahmed, correspondence
2008.
b) 19 ... Nc6 20 Rf7 Qd6! may be best (20 ... Qc5?! 21 Qf4! is dangerous; in fact, Black
collapsed in short order after 21 ... Qg1+ 22 Kd2 Qxg2+ 23 Kc3 Qh3+ 24 Bd3 e5 25 Qf2
Rc8? 26 Rbxb7! Na5+ 27 Kb2 Nxb7 28 Qb6+ Ke8 29 Rxb7 and White won in a few more
moves in E.Hossain-R.Nolte, Subic Bay 2009; here Ftacnik claimed equality after 25 ...
d4+ 26 Kd2 b5 27 Rxg7 Qe3+ 28 Qxe3 dxe3+ 29 Kxe3 Nd4, but White has good winning
chances after 30 Rf1!) and after 21 Rbxb7 Rb8 22 Qc3 Rxb7 23 Rxb7 Rf8 Black seems to
be doing okay.
c) The untried 19 ... Qc7!? with the idea of 20 Rf7 Nd7 21 Qb4 Re8 may be a worthy
winning attempt.
19 ... Nd7!
This is best without question:
a) 19 ... b5 is initially the first choice of my engine, but I think 20 c4! is pretty strong
and even leads to a win by force: 20 ... bxc4 (20 ... Qc5+ 21 Kh1 bxc4 22 Rf7 transposes)
21 Rf7 Qc5+ 22 Kh1 Nd7 23 Rb7 Ne5 24 Rxg7 Nxg6 25 Qe1!! is a typical correspondence
move that is both powerful and unpredictable.
 From e1, the white queen maintains a view of the entire board and threatens checks
on both h4 and a5, as well as the e6-pawn. After 25 ... Rf8 (White’s point is that 25 ... Nf8
26 Qh4+ Kc8 27 Qf4 wins immediately, while 25 ... e5 26 Rbd7+ Kc8 27 Qb1! Rb8 28
Rd8+!! Rxd8 29 Qf5+ leads to a beautiful finish) 26 Rxg6 Qc6 (26 ... Qd6 is the
alternative when making luft with 27 h3! is best: 27 ... Kc8 28 Rgg7 a5 29 Rbc7+ Qxc7 30
Qxe6+ Kb8 31 Rxc7 Kxc7 32 Qxd5 is awkward for Black, although there are certainly
some drawing chances, while here 28 ... Rg8 29 Rxg8+ Kxb7 30 Qb1+ Qb6 31 Qh7+ Qc7
32 Rg7 Rc8 33 Kg1 c3 34 Rxc7+ Rxc7 35 Qc2 should also be winning for White) 27 Rgg7
c3 (preventing Qa5+ and creating a distraction of some sort; White’s next move is pretty
extraordinary given that it is the only winning move in the position) 28 h4!! (providing an
escape route for the king, particularly via the important h3-square; to better understand
this, 28 h3 would have been inadequate because 28 ... Qd6! forces the white queen to
guard the first rank as the king cannot escape after 29 Kg1 Qc5+ 30 Kh2 Qd6+!) 28 ...
Qd6 29 Kg1!!.
 The third stunner of the sequence. White has no immediate, threats but amazingly
Black is in zugzwang: 29 ... d4 (29 ... Qc5+ 30 Kh2 Qd6+ 31 Kh3! Rc8 32 Qb1! with the
idea of Qb6 forces mate immediately) 30 Qe4 c2 (again, 30 ... Rc8 31 Qe5! is a nice
finish) 31 Qxc2 Rc8 32 Qd2 Rc6 33 Qxh6 Qc5 34 Rb8+ Rc8 35 Qxe6 Qc1+ 36 Kh2 Qf4+ 37
Kh3 1-0, L.Ljubicic-N.Kuosa, correspondence 2011. This is pretty convincing and indicates
that 19 ... b5 is more or less refuted.
b) 19 ... Qc5+ 20 Kh1 Nd7 can transpose after 21 Rf7 to our main game, but the
untried 21 Bf7!? deserves further investigation.

For example, 21 ... Qd6 22 Rfe1 Nc5 23 Qa5+ Qc7 24 Qa3 Qxf7 (liquidation with 24 ...
Ne4 25 Bxe6 Qc5 26 Qxc5 Nxc5 27 Bxd5 Re8 28 Rxe8+ Kxe8 29 Bxb7 Nxb7 30 Rxb7 Rc8
31 Rxg7 Rxc2 32 h4 Rxa2 33 Rh7 gives White some winning chances) 25 Qxc5 Qc7 26
Qd4 and White has good compensation for the material deficit, although matters are by
no means clear.
 c) Lastly, I should mention that the natural 19 ... Nc6? is bad because of 20 Qe3!,
targeting the b6-square. For example, 20 ... d4 21 Qg3 Qc7 22 Qg4 and Black cannot co-
ordinate his pieces in time.
20 Rf7
One of the key games that contributed to the popularity of this variation continued 20
Rxb7 Qc5+ 21 Kh1 Ra7 (21 ... Rf8 is also fine for Black: 22 Rxf8+ Nxf8 23 Bd3 Nd7 24
Qe1 Qc6 and I slightly prefer Black, B.Bok-L.Schut, Enschede 2009) 22 Rb3 Rf8 23 Rxf8+
Nxf8 (it is hard to argue with a move that eventually yielded victory against a fellow
world-class grandmaster in a crucial team event, but I prefer 23 ... Qxf8 when 24 h3 Rc7
25 Qa5 Qf1+ 26 Kh2 Qc4 looks very pleasant for Black) 24 Rb8+ Ke7 25 Bh5 g6.

Here Motylev might have underestimated the dangers in the resulting rook endgame:
26 Qxh6? (he could have forced a draw with 26 Qf4! Nd7 27 Rh8 gxh5 28 Rh7+ Kd8 29
Rh8+ Ke7 30 Rh7+ Ke8 31 Rh8+ Nf8 32 Qb8+ Kf7 33 Qf4+ and Black cannot escape the
checks) 26 ... Qf2! (a powerful shot that forces a promising rook endgame; the rest of the
game is pretty instructive, so I will present it with some light notes) 27 Qg7+ Kd6 28
Qxf8+ Qxf8 29 Rxf8 gxh5 30 Rc8 (another game that illustrates White’s woes in this
endgame continued 30 Rd8+ Ke5 31 Rc8 Kd4 32 Kg1 Rf7! 33 Rc6 e5 34 Rxa6 e4 and
Black was winning in T.Baron-A.Brkic, Rijeka 2010) 30 ... e5 31 h4 d4 32 Kg1 Rf7! (cutting
off the king and preparing the advance of his pride and joy, the passed e-pawn) 33 Ra8
Kd5 34 Rxa6 Rc7! 35 g4 Rxc2 36 gxh5 d3 37 Ra8 d2 38 Rd8+ Ke4 39 Kf1 Ke3 0-1,
A.Motylev-E.Sutovsky, Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad 2010. After this game, the entire
variation became highly topical.
Before we look at 20 Rf7, I have also analysed 20 c4!?, which seems to lead to
equality after 20 ... Rf8 21 cxd5 Qc5+ 22 Kh1 Rxf1+ 23 Rxf1 Qxd5. Andriasyan gave the
further 24 Qb2 Rc8 25 Qxg7 Rc5 when “Black is at least not worse”, although a tough
battle is still in prospect after 26 Qxh6.
20 ... Qc5+ 21 Kh1
 21 ... Rf8
Commonest, although I am not sure if this is the cleanest route to equality. 21 ... Rc8
has also been played and here 22 Qe1! appears best: 22 ... Qc6 23 Qh4+ Kc7 24 Qg3+
Kd8 25 Rbf1 (of course, White has the option of forcing a draw with 25 Qh4+ Kc7 26
Qg3+, as occurred in R.Mamedov-E.Safarli, Baku 2011) 25 ... Rc7 26 Rxg7 Qc3 27 Bd3
Rc6.

White has regained one pawn and has the easy plan of doubling rooks on the seventh
rank. Black’s king is relatively safe, but it has to be said that White’s activity probably
makes his position slightly the easier to handle. Here’s yet another example from the
correspondence world: 28 h4 Kc8 29 Rff7 Rd8 30 Kh2 Qe5 (this forces the exchange of
queens at the expense of the extra pawn, but White retains some pressure in the
endgame) 31 Qxe5 Nxe5 32 Rxb7 Rg8! (Black must try to get rid of one of those rooks)
33 Rh7 Nxd3 34 Ra7 Kb8 35 cxd3 Rc2 36 Rag7 Rxg7 37 Rxg7 Kc8! (impressive endgame
play as the black king rushes to the kingside to halt the soon-to-be connected passed
pawns; the immediate 37 ... Rxa2 38 Rh7 Ra4 39 Kh3 Rd4 40 Rxh6 Rxd3+ 41 Kg4 is
deliciously unclear, but I quite like White’s chances) 38 Rh7 Kd8 39 h5 Rxa2 40 Rxh6 Ke7
41 Rh8 Kf6 and Black held the draw in D.Wilhelmi-S.Marez, correspondence 2012.
Needless to say, I am sure improvements can be found, although my general feeling is
that Black is fine here.
22 Rxg7 Rf6!
Again, the best defence:
a) 22 ... Kc7 worked very well for Black in T.Kosintseva-E.Forsaa, Gibraltar 2011, but
White should have played 23 Bf7!, which admittedly is pretty difficult to find. For
example, 23 ... Qe7 24 Qc3+ Kd8! (24 ... Kb8 25 Qg3+ Ka7 26 Qe3+ Nc5 27 Bxe6! Qxg7
28 Qxc5+ Kb8 29 Qd6+ Ka7 30 Qb6+ Kb8 31 Bxd5 is excellent for White) 25 Bg8! Qd6 26
Qh3 Nc5 27 Qxh6 and White should keep some advantage.
b) 22 ... Rc8 has also been played, but White retains slightly the better chances after
23 Qxh6 Qd6 24 Bd3 Rc7 25 h4 as the connected passed pawns must surely count for
something.

23 Rg8+
This is normally the prelude to a quick draw offer, but Giri had a new idea to play for a
win in this well-known position. Practice has also seen:
a) I should point out that 23 Qxh6 can be met convincingly by 23 ... Qf8!, putting
White in a couple of awkward pins. Another forced draw arises after 24 h4 Ne5 25 Qh7
(or 25 Rbxb7 Rf1+ 26 Kh2 Ng4+ 27 Kh3 Nxh6 28 Rgd7+) 25 ... Rf1+ 26 Rxf1 Qxf1+ 27
Kh2 Qf4+ and White cannot escape the checks.
b) Strangely enough, the natural 23 Bd3!? has only been played in correspondence
games. After 23 ... Kc7 (Andriasyan gave 23 ... Qf8 24 Rh7 Rc8 25 Qa5+ Rc7 26 Rh8 Qxh8
27 Rxb7 Rf1+ 28 Bxf1 Qc3 29 Qxc7+ Qxc7 30 Rxc7 Kxc7 31 Bxa6 with the better
endgame for White) 24 c4! (this contains the sneaky threat of Qb2 and is necessary to
keep up the pressure; the careless 24 Qe1? is met by 24 ... Raf8! when Black is better) 24
... d4 25 Qe2 we have:

b1) 25 ... Rd8 is too cautious and Black eventually lost a tempo after 26 Qe4 b6 27 h3
Rdf8 28 Qh7 Rd8. It is instructive to see how White now eventually broke through Black’s
defences: 29 a4 Kd6 (keeping the white queen out with 29 ... Qe5 allows the line-clearing
30 c5! when 30 ... Qxc5 31 Rd1! Qd5 32 Bxa6 is extremely dangerous for Black) 30 Qe4!
(White’s dominance of the light squares is quite telling) 30 ... Kc7 (30 ... Rdf8 31 a5! is
awkward) 31 a5 Qxa5 32 Qxd4 e5 33 Qh4 Rc6 was very difficult for Black in V.Gerasimov-
R.Kazantsev, correspondence 2010.
b2) 25 ... Raf8! (keeping open the possibility of ... Rf7) 26 Qe4 b6 27 Qh7 (preventing
... Rf7 which would nullify White’s attack: for instance, 27 a4 R8f7 28 Rxf7 Rxf7 29 Qxe6
Rf6 30 Qe4 Qe5 is fine for Black) 27 ... Rd8 28 h3 Qe5 (28 ... Rf2 has also been played
and here 29 a4 may be an improvement, with the same line clearing-idea which we have
already seen; 29 Qxh6 was played in the only game I could find, which fizzled out to a
draw pretty quickly after 29 ... Qe5 30 a4 a5 in V.Grigoryev-E.Efendiyev, correspondence
2011) 29 a4 Kd6 30 c5+! is a sacrifice which should be pretty familiar by now.
 After 30 ... bxc5 31 Bxa6 White’s hyperactive pieces clearly supply more than sufficient
compensation for the pawn and I would imagine he would score well in a practical game.
In fact, Black failed to solve his problems in the two correspondence games I found: 31 ...
Qe3 (pretty much the only move; 31 ... Qf4 32 a5! is hard to face, and if 32 ... Rf5 33
Bd3!) 32 Bc4 (now 32 a5 can be met by 32 ... Rf5! when the white queen is kept under
lock and key, and the temporary sacrifice 33 Rxd7+ Rxd7 34 Rb6+ Ke5 35 Qxd7 fails to
35 ... Qc1+ 36 Kh2 Qf4+ with a perpetual) 32 ... Rf5 33 Re7 Rf6 34 a5 d3 35 Qg7 d2
(Black lost quickly after 35 ... Qg5 36 a6 Qxg7 37 Rxg7 Rf4 38 Bxd3 in A.Schramm-
J.Fenwick, correspondence 2011) 36 Rxd7+! Rxd7 37 Qxf6 Qe1+ 38 Qf1 Qxf1+ 39 Bxf1
Ke5 (Black might have some practical chances in an OTB game, but he cannot possibly
hope to survive this in correspondence play) 40 Be2! c4 41 a6 c3 42 Bd1 Ra7 43 Rb6 Rc7
44 Bc2 and White soon won in A.Martin Gonzalez-A.Shpakovsky, corrrespondence 2010.
23 Bd3 is definitely worth a punt here, but we now return to Giri’s 23 Rg8+:
23 ... Rf8 24 Rxf8+ Qxf8 25 c4
25 Bd3 has also been played, but Black seems to be fine after 25 ... Kc7 26 c4 Qd6.
 25 ... Qg7
Black has a couple of decent alternatives here:
a) 25 ... Qf6 26 Bd3 Rc8! 27 cxd5 exd5 28 Rxb7 Qc3! actually allows Black to seize the
initiative. Here White must find 29 Qf2! Qxd3 30 Qh4+ Ke8 31 Qh5+ Ke7 32 Qe5+ Kf8 33
Qd6+ force a draw.
b) Believe it or not, the unlikely 25 ... dxc4!? actually seems playable. A high-quality
correspondence game continued 26 Rd1 Qe7 27 Be4 Kc7 28 Qa5+ Kb8 29 a4 Ra7!? 30
Qc3 b5 (this is risky, but White has too few pieces to exploit the gaps in Black’s position)
31 Bc6 b4 32 Qg3+ (32 Qxc4 Ne5 33 Qf4 Qc5! with ... Rf7 in the pipeline is pretty
comfortable for Black) 32 ... e5 33 Qg8+ Qf8 34 Qd5 (the sharp continuation 34 Qxc4 Nb6
35 Qe6 Rc7 36 Bb5 Ka7 37 a5 Qc5! 38 axb6+ Qxb6 39 Qxb6+ Kxb6 40 Ba4 Rc3 is
unclear, but I prefer Black’s chances) 34 ... Nc5! (with the idea of ... Rf7; Black’s position
looks precarious, but everything holds up nicely) 35 Qxc4 Rf7 36 g3 Ka7 and White’s
activity made up for his material deficiency in N.Bernal Varela-J.Fages, correspondence
2009.
26 Bc2
26 Bd3 with the idea of 26 ... Qg5 27 Qe1 can be met by 27 ... Rc8 28 Qxe6 Rc6 29
Qxd5 Qxd5 30 cxd5 Rc5 when Black should hold comfortably.
26 ... Qg5!
 Bringing the queen into action with tempo. Black is evidently pretty comfortable here
and proceeded to hold his famous opponent to a draw with consummate ease.
27 Qe2 Qe5 28 Qxe5 Nxe5 29 cxd5 Rc8 30 Bb3 Nd3
Initiating a few fireworks. 30 ... exd5 31 Bxd5 Rc2 was simpler.
31 dxe6 Rc1+ 32 Rxc1 Nxc1 33 Bd5 b5 34 g3 a5 35 Kg2 Ke7 36 Kf3 b4 37
Ke3 a4 38 Kd2 Nxa2 39 Bxa2 b3 40 Bxb3 axb3 41 Kc3 Kxe6 42 g4 Ke5 43 h4
Kf4 44 g5 hxg5 45 hxg5 b2 46 Kxb2 Kxg5 ½-½
Black is currently doing pretty well in this variation, although I would recommend a
deeper look at 23 Bd3!? which seems to promise unbalanced play.

Game 38
G.Guseinov-A.Areshchenko
World Team Championship, Antalya 2013

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2

9 Rb1 Qa3 10 e5 h6 11 Bh4 dxe5
Note that the immediate 11 ... g5? is met by 12 fxg5 dxe5 13 g6!, leading to:
a1) 13 ... exd4 14 Bxf6 Rg8 15 gxf7+ Kxf7 16 Bxd4 Nc6 17 Be3 with a large advantage
for White.
b) 13 ... Be7 14 Nf3 is also good for White.
c) 13 ... Nbd7? 14 gxf7+ Kxf7 15 Nxe6! b5 (or 15 ... Bb4 16 Rb3 Bxc3 17 Rxc3 Qxa2 18
Bc4 when White wins rather easily) 16 Nd8+! Ke8 17 Be2 with an irresistible attack.
12 fxe5 g5!?
 This is a very modern idea that only became fashionable in 2009 after Nepomniachtchi
famously beat Anand in the now sadly discontinued Mainz Chess Festival. This line is
extremely fashionable for many reasons, one of which is the engines’ optimism for Black’s
chances. I know there are many who despise the excessive use of computers in analysis,
but just for the record, Houdini 4 is shows a ‘-0.20’ evaluation at a reasonably high depth.
Of course, matters are not so clear and White gets his chances as well, as we shall soon
see.
13 exf6
This is White’s best move here and the most popular one by a clear mile. The
alternatives have done badly, but are still worth a look at:
a) 13 Bf2?! doesn’t make too much sense due to 13 ... Ng4 when 14 Bg3 is obligatory
and Black obtains a tempo for free. Here 14 ... Nd7 (14 ... Bg7!?) 15 Be2 Ngxe5 16 Ne4
Bg7 looks safe enough for Black with his extra two pawns.
b) 13 Bg3!? is a lot more interesting than I initially thought. White typically ends up
sacrificing a couple of pawns for very unclear compensation. After 13 ... Nh5! 14 Ne4
Qxa2 (capturing a second pawn must be critical, although 14 ... Nd7!? is also worthy of
further investigation) 15 Rb3 (White’s compensation seems minimal after 15 Rd1 Qd5 16
Qe3 Qa5+ 17 Rd2 Nd7) 15 ... Nd7 we have:
 b1) The untried 16 Be2!? leads to complex stuff. After 16 ... Qa1+ (16 ... Nxg3 17
hxg3 Be7 occurred by transposition in C.Pedersen-M.Colpe, Helsingor 2012, and here 18
Qc3! followed by 0-0 and Ra1 wins material) 17 Bd1 Nc5 18 Nxc5 Nxg3 (18 ... Bxc5 19 Bf2
0-0 20 0-0 Nf4 21 Rg3 looks menacing) 19 hxg3 (19 Ncxe6 Bxe6 20 Nxe6 fxe6 21 hxg3
Rd8 again looks like minimal compensation for White, while Georgiev and Kolev gave 19
Rxg3 Bxc5 20 c3 Bd7 21 0-0 0-0-0, which is surely good for Black seeing how safe his king
is) 19 ... Bxc5 20 c3 we reach an interesting point where Black has two extra pawns, but
his king is draughty and it looks like White is perfectly poised to triple on the f-file within
the next five to six moves. White has interesting compensation here: for example, 20 ...
Qa5 21 0-0 Qc7 (Black cannot afford to dilly dally; indeed, a move like 21 ... b5? can be
met by 22 Kh2 followed by Bh5 with intense pressure) 22 Qe3 b5 (22 ... a5!?) 23 Bh5 Rf8
24 Kh2! followed by Rf6 and Rb2-f2.
b2) 16 Qc3!? is also of definite interest:
b21) A clash between two top young grandmasters saw 16 ... b6 17 Nd6+ Bxd6 18
exd6 Qa5 (18 ... Nxg3 19 Nxe6 Qa5 20 Nc7+ Kd8 21 Rb4 Qe5+ 22 Qxe5 Nxe5 23 hxg3
Ra7 24 Rxb6 led to a level endgame in C.Revuelta Capablanca-T.Biedermann,
correspondence 2011) 19 Rb4 e5 (19 ... Qc5 20 Rc4 Qa5! looks like an effective way to
force equality) 20 Nc6 Qc5 21 Bxe5! Nxe5 22 Qxe5+ Qxe5+ 23 Nxe5 Nf4 and now in
S.Sjugirov-I.Nepomniachtchi, St Petersburg 2009, I’m not sure why White refrained from
24 Rxb6 when 24 ... f6 25 Nd3! Nd5 26 Rb3 Kd7 27 c4 looks like a decisive endgame
advantage.
b22) 16 ... b5 has been tested in correspondence chess and here:
b221) White has tried 17 Nd6+ Bxd6 18 exd6 Nhf6 19 Nc6 Bb7 20 Ne7!, which is a
sequence that I imagine would confuse many players in a practical game. Objectively,
Black should be fine with accurate play as illustrated in the following game: 20 ... Rf8
(getting out of the pin) 21 Bd3 (giving up g2 was more or less forced, as White must act
first and cannot afford to be overly concerned about material) 21 ... Bxg2 22 Rg1 Bd5 23
Kd2 Qa4! (23 ... Bxb3 24 Ra1 wins the black queen, but matters aren’t very clear here
either) 24 Rf1 Ne4+ 25 Bxe4 Qxe4 26 Re1 Qc4 27 Qg7 (Black may have three extra
pawns, but his pieces are all tied up and it looks like White has sufficient compensation, if
no more) 27 ... b4 28 Nxd5 Qxd5+ 29 Rd3 Qa2 30 Bf2 a5 31 Rxe6+ Qxe6 32 Re3 Nc5 33
Rxe6+ Nxe6 34 Qf6 Kd7 35 Bg3 Nc5 36 Kc1 and ½-½ in M.Avotins-S.Ottesen,
correspondence 2011.
b222) In this particular position 17 Be2 fails to convince due to 17 ... Nxg3 18 hxg3
Bb7 19 Nxe6 Bxe4 20 Nc7+ Kd8 (20 ... Ke7!?) 21 Nxa8 Qxc2 22 Qa5+ Ke7 23 Rc3 Qa4!
24 Qc7 Qd4 and amidst massive complications, Black was fine in E.Janosi-O.Zacharov,
correspondence 2009.
b223) 17 Nxe6!? is a fascinating piece sacrifice.

Immense complications arise after 17 ... fxe6 18 Be2 Nxg3 (retreating the knight with
18 ... Ng7? gives White an irresistible attack after 19 0-0 Be7 20 Nd6+ Bxd6 21 exd6,
with the threats of Qxg7 and Ra1) 19 hxg3. A sample line runs 19 ... Bb7 20 Bh5+ Ke7
(Black has to play a series of only moves here to survive; 20 ... Kd8 21 Nd6! is tricky for
him) 21 0-0 Rc8 22 Rf7+ Kd8 23 Rxd7+! Kxd7 24 Nf6+ Kd8! (24 ... Ke7 25 Qd4! forces
mate) 25 Qd4+ Bd5! (again, the only move; 25 ... Kc7? 26 Rc3+ Kb8 27 Nd7+ Ka8 28
Rxc8+ Bxc8 29 Bf3+ Bb7 30 Nb6+ Ka7 31 Nc4+ wins) 26 Qb6+ Rc7 27 Qb8+ Rc8 28
Qb6+ and it’s a draw.
Returning to 13 exf6:
13 ... gxh4 14 Be2
 14 ... Nd7
14 ... h3!? has been played in a couple of correspondence games and was also briefly
mentioned in Andriasyan’s book. It seems to be a legitimate attempt to deviate from the
mind-boggling main lines, although 15 0-0 Black must be precise:
a) 15 ... Nd7 was suggested by Andriasyan, but after 16 Ne4 Nc5 17 Nc6! Bd7 (17 ...
bxc6 18 Rfd1! Bd7 19 Rb3! Qxa2 20 Nd6+ Kd8 21 Qd4 wins for White) 18 Ne5 0-0-0 19
Qf4 Bb5 20 Bxb5 axb5 21 Rxb5 Qa6 22 Rxc5+! (Andriasyan only gave 22 a4?, which is
okay for Black after 22 ... Rd4) 22 ... Bxc5+ 23 Nxc5 Qb6 24 Qf2 hxg2 25 Re1 Rd5 26
Ncd3 Qxf2+ 27 Kxf2 White is the only one that can win the position and he is very likely
to do so.
b) 15 ... Qa5! looks best and after 16 Qe3 we have:

b1) At first glance, I thought bringing the queen to shore up the defences on the
kingside with 16 ... Qg5 looked very natural, but the positions after 17 Qxh3 are very
dubious for Black, especially as after 17 ... Bc5 White has the amazing shot 18 Kh1!.
Following 18 ... Bxd4 19 Ne4 Qe3 (19 ... Qe5 20 Qa3! Nc6 21 Nd6+ Kf8 22 Nxb7+ Kg8 23
Rf3 wins) 20 Bf3! leaves Black on the ropes: 20 ... Qf4 (20 ... Nc6 21 Qg3! Be5 22 Nd6+
Kd8 23 Nxf7+ Kc7 24 Qg7 wins hands down) 21 Bh5! Qxe4 22 Qa3! Nc6 23 Bf3 Qxf3 (this
is forced due to the threat of taking on c6 followed by mate on e7) 24 Rxf3 Black may
have three pieces for the queen, but he is horribly undeveloped and White has a
continuing initiative.
b2) 16 ... Rg8!? seems like a viable option: for example, 17 g3 Rg5!? 18 Ne4 Re5 19
Bf3 Nd7 20 Rfd1 with another complex position.
b3) 16 ... Bc5 17 Bf3 Nd7 (Andriasyan only gave 17 ... hxg2 18 Rfd1 as slightly better
for White, although even this is not entirely clear) 18 Ne4 and here the majority of the
engine games played have continued 18 ... Rg8!? 19 Kh1 (19 g3 Ne5 20 Bh5 Qc7 21 Rfd1
b5 followed by ... Bb7 also seems fine for Black) 19 ... Ne5 20 gxh3 Nxf3 21 Rxf3 b6! 22
Qf4 Bb7 23 Nxe6 Qxa2 24 Nc7+ Kd8 25 Rd1+ Kc8 26 Nxa8 Bxa8 27 Qf5+ Kb8 when
Black’s powerful bishops should offset White’s extra exchange.
15 0-0 Qa5 16 Kh1
This is the main move by far. Andriasyan gave 16 Qd3 Qe5 17 Rbd1 Nc5 18 Qh3 Bd7
19 Kh1 Bd6 20 Qxh4 0-0-0, as played in H.Kolev-S.Vinchev, correspondence 2011, which
seems perfectly fine for Black.
16 ... Qg5

This is a logical move, threatening to exchange queens (which will wipe out any
initiative that White may hope to have), putting pressure on the g2-pawn and, to a lesser
extent, attacking f6.
17 Rf4!?
Inviting Black to win material, but in truth White has very limited options here:
a) Given how thoroughly the main line has been analysed, I’ve also looked at 17
Qe1!?, which is quite popular in the engine world. Here 17 ... h3 is logical and best, and
after (17 ... Bd6? 18 Ne4 Qe5 was H.Poetsch-M.Colpe, Internet 2012, when 19 Nxd6+
Qxd6 20 Bh5 would be instantaneous annihilation) 18 gxh3 (the h3-pawn is annoying
after 18 g3 Nxf6) 18 ... Qe5 19 Qf2 Rg8 20 Rfe1!? (20 Rbd1 Bb4! is unclear) 20 ... Qxf6 21
Bf3 Be7 22 Ne4 Qh4 23 Ng3! (White must keep the queens on) 23 ... Rg6 (perhaps
forcing a draw with 23 ... Rxg3 24 hxg3 Qxh3+ 25 Kg1 Bd6 26 Ne2 Bc5 27 Nd4 Bd6 is
best) 24 Rbd1 with the idea of 24 ... Qxh3 25 Ngf5! exf5? (25 ... Bc5 is better, although
White is surely the one pressing after 26 Re3 Rf6 27 Qe2 Rxf5 28 Bg4 Qxe3 29 Qxe3 Rf6
30 Qe4) 26 Qe2 White’s position looks promising.
b) The other logical-looking queen move is 17 Qd3, but Black gains an important
tempo with 17 ... Nc5 when 18 Qf3 Bd7 19 Rxb7!? Nxb7 20 Qxb7 Rc8 21 Bxa6 (21 Nxe6!?
Bxe6 22 Re1 Rxc3 23 Bxa6 Qd2 was agreed drawn in U.Staroske-P.Pasko, correspondence
2011, due to 24 Bb5+ Kd8 25 Qb8+ Rc8 26 Qb6+) 21 ... h3 22 gxh3 looked fine for Black
in M.Wurschner-E.Riccio, correspondence 2008.
17 ... e5
Danny Gormally analysed the rare 17 ... Nxf6 on ChessPublishing.com. Here 18 Ndb5!
axb5 (18 ... Be7 19 Nd6+! Bxd6 20 Qxd6 Rg8 21 Bf3 is dangerous for Black) 19 Bxb5+
Ke7 20 Rd1 Nd5 21 Nxd5+ exd5 22 Qb4+ Kd8 23 Qd4 Be6 24 Qxh8 Kc7 is a rather wild
line where Black’s activity may just about compensate for the material.
18 Nd5!

Setting the board on fire. Obviously retreat is not an option and White has no choice
but to throw more pieces at Black’s position until he hopes something cracks.
18 ... exd4
This is forced. 18 ... exf4? loses elementarily to 19 Nc7+ Kd8 20 Nde6+ fxe6 21
Nxe6+ Ke8 22 Nxg5 hxg5 23 Re1 Kd8 24 Bg4 and Black is helpless.
19 Qxd4
Alternatively:
a) 19 Nc7+?! is overly materialistic as seen in the following model game: 19 ... Kd8 20
Nxa8 d3! (an important intermezzo that forces White to temporarily block the d-file) 21
Bxd3 Bd6 22 Rbf1 (Areshchenko gave 22 Rf2 Qe5 23 g4 Qd5+ 24 Kg1 Bc5 25 Qf4 Qc6 as
clearly better for Black in his notes and I see no reason to disagree) 22 ... Bxf4 23 Rxf4
and now in S.Bromberger-A.Areshchenko, German League 2010, Kolev and Georgiev
rightly gave 23 ... Re8! 24 h3 Re6 25 Qb4 Qc5 as better for Black.
b) Clearing the e-file and safeguarding g2 with 19 Bf3 is also very logical: 19 ... Bc5
(this appears best; 19 ... Bd6 20 Qxd4 Nc5 21 Re1+ Kf8 22 g3! Ne6 23 Rfe4 Qf5 24 Qd3
looks extremely dangerous for Black and here 22 ... hxg3? 23 h4! reveals White’s point)
20 Nc7+ Kf8 21 Nxa8 Rg8 22 Rf1! Nxf6 23 Rxd4! Kg7 24 Nc7 Bxd4 25 Qxd4 Kh7 26 c4
when both sides have emerged unscathed from the mess with an equal position.
19 ... Kd8
In correspondence chess, Black has often opted to head into a murky endgame after
19 ... Bc5 20 Qe4+ (20 Qd2? Bd6 21 Re4+ Kf8 22 Qd4 was A.Pijpers-T.Beerdsen, Dieren
2012, and now 22 ... Bc5! 23 Qd3 h3 looks pretty safe for Black) 20 ... Kd8 21 Rf5 Re8 22
Qxe8+ Kxe8 23 Rxg5 hxg5 24 Nc7+ Kd8 25 Nxa8 Nxf6 26 Bf3 b5 27 Rd1+ Ke7 28 h3.
Objectively, Black should hold the position and every correspondence game from this
position has ended in a draw. Nevertheless, it does not seem very pragmatic to me for
OTB play as White has virtually zero losing chances and is certainly the one pressing for a
win.

The text reaches the critical position of the 12 ... g5 variation. It seems like White
must have a killing blow somewhere, but Black’s defences have proved to be resolute.
20 Ne7
This is White’s most important try for an edge. The immediate idea is to take on c8
followed by Rxb7 or Bg4, with terrible threats.
20 Rd1 is White’s main alternative, but has been largely defanged by 20 ... h3! 21 g3
Bd6 22 Re4 (22 Bg4 only leads to a draw after 22 ... Bxf4 23 Bxd7 Bxd7 24 Qb6+ Ke8 25
Qb4 Kd8 26 Qb6+ as played in a few correspondence games, while Andriasyan analysed
22 Nb6 Bc5! 23 Qb2 Kc7 24 Nxd7 Rd8 25 Nxc5 Rxd1+ 26 Bxd1 Qxc5 27 Bf3 Rb8 and Black
was fine), and now:
 a) Black can force a draw with 22 ... Bc5!? 23 Qc3 b6 24 Nxb6 Bxb6 25 Qc6 Rb8 26
Re7 Bd4! 27 Rxd4 Rb1+ 28 Bd1 Qg4! (a beautiful tactic) 29 Rexd7+ Bxd7 30 Qa8+ Kc7
and ½-½ in W.Schneider-C.Beecham, correspondence 2010, as perpetual check occurs
after 31 Qa7+ Kd8 32 Qa8+.
b) 22 ... Re8 gives Black chances to play for a win. After all, he has an extra piece and
it is up to White to find ways to prove that his compensation matters. Following 23 Nb6
Rxe4 24 Qxe4 Qc5 25 Nxa8 Nxf6 White goes the exchange up, but Black’s queen is very
active and can easily create threats against White’s vulnerable kingside. The computers
all give an evaluation of ‘0.00’ at this point, but I bet most players would prefer Black:
b1) After 26 Qd3?! (I doubt this move was home preparation as it doesn’t look
dangerous and doesn’t improve on existing theory) 26 ... Ke7 27 Bf3 h5 28 Qe2+ (28
Qd4! barely maintains the balance) 28 ... Be6 29 Bxb7 Ng4 30 Rf1 h4 Black was already
close to winning in L.D.Nisipeanu-R.Wojtaszek, Aix-les-Bains 2011.
b2) White should try to exchange queens with 26 Qc4! when 26 ... Ke7 27 Qxc5 (27
Nb6 Bf5! 28 Rf1 Be6 29 Qxc5 Bxc5 30 Na4 Ba7 looks okay for Black) 27 ... Bxc5 28 Re1
Kd6 29 Rd1+ Ke7 30 Re1 Kd6 31 Rd1+ was agreed drawn in M.Sadowski-L.Olivotto,
correspondence 2010.
20 ... Qe5!
This was suggested by Georgiev and Kolev, as well as Andriasyan. A lot of
correspondence games have continued 20 ... Qc5? when there doesn’t seem to be much
difference, but Black is actually lost after 21 Qb2!!.
 That sounds like an outlandish claim, but White has scored over 90% in this position
in engine games. Just a few sample lines:
a) 21 ... Qb6 22 Qxb6+ Nxb6 23 Rxb6 Bxe7 24 fxe7+ Kxe7 25 Bc4 is better for White.
b) 21 ... h3 22 Bf3 Ke8 (22 ... hxg2+ 23 Bxg2 Qb6 24 Qa1! Qc5 25 Rd4 wins for White)
23 Re1 Bxe7 24 fxe7 and Black was choked by the impudent e7-pawn in T.Wilczek-
H.Krueger, correspondence 2011, and other encounters.
c) 21 ... Qe5 22 Rd4! (a second piece sacrifice based on a beautiful tactical nuance)
22 ... Qxe2 23 Qb6+ Ke8 24 Nd5! Be7 (not 24 ... Nxb6? 25 Nc7#) 25 Nc7+ Kf8 26 fxe7+
Qxe7 27 Qa5 Ne5 28 Re1 (28 Nxa8? Nc6! was Black’s point) 28 ... b6 29 Qxe5 Qxe5 30
Rxe5 Ra7 31 Rd8+ Kg7 32 Ne8+ Rxe8 33 Rexe8 and White can be very optimistic about
his winning chances, D.Szczepankiewicz-J.Siigur, correspondence 2012.
21 Qd2 Bxe7 22 fxe7+ Qxe7 23 Bg4 f5!
The tactical sequence 23 ... Re8 24 Rc4 Rg8! (24 ... b6 25 Rd1 a5 transposes to
A.Kosteniuk-Ju Wenjun, Nalchik 2011, where both players missed 26 Bxd7 Bxd7 27 Re4,
winning on the spot) 25 Bxd7 Qg5 26 Rf4 Bxd7 27 Rd1 Qxg2+ 28 Qxg2 Rxg2 29 Kxg2 h3+
30 Kf2 ends in another endgame where White is the one playing for two results.
 24 Rxf5 Re8 25 Rd5
25 Rd1 is also possible when another intriguing sequence goes 25 ... Kc7 26 Rf7 Qxf7
27 Qd6+ Kd8 28 Qb6+ Ke7 29 Re1+ Kf8 30 Qxh6+ Kg8 31 Rxe8+ Qxe8 32 Be6+ Qxe6
33 Qxe6+ Kg7 34 Qe7+ Kg6 35 Qxh4 Nf6.

This position is probably forced and initially I liked White’s practical chances. It seems
that Black will have a hard time dealing with White’s kingside pawns and that the chance
of winning a piece in exchange for those pawns seems pretty decent. The only problem is
that Black has a strong se- up that is easy to find: 36 Qg3+ Kf7 37 Qb3+ Kg6 38 h3 (38
c4 Bf5! 39 Qxb7 Rd8 40 h4 Rd4 41 Qxa6 Rxh4+ 42 Kg1 Bd3 is also easy for Black) 38 ...
Bf5! 39 Qg3+ and a draw was agreed in V.Anikeev-A.Aksenov, correspondence 2012.
Here Black’s point was that after 39 Qxb7 Rc8 40 Qxa6 Rxc2 White cannot prevent ... Be4
when he will lose one of his kingside pawns.
25 ... b6!
 A ridiculously calm move. Faced with the prospect of a quadruple attack on the d7-
square, Black calmly pushes an irrelevant-looking pawn. Of course, Black’s main point is
to play ... Ra7, reinforcing the d-file, and also in some lines to play ... Bb7 in the future.
26 h3!
White politely meets a strange-looking pawn move with one of his own. Taking h6 is
the priority and the text eliminates any back-rank embarrassments once and for all.
26 ... Kc7 27 Qxh6
There are a couple of other interesting options here:
a) 27 Bxd7!? Bxd7 28 Qf4+ Kb7 29 Qd4 Bb5 30 a4 (30 c4 Qh7! 31 Qb2 Re2 32 Qxe2
Qxb1+ 33 Rd1 Re8 34 Qd2 Qe4 35 cxb5 axb5 36 Qxh6 was equal in I.Dolgov-G.Pezzica,
correspondence 2011) 30 ... Rad8 31 axb5 a5 32 c4 Rxd5 33 Qxd5+ Kb8! (not 33 ... Ka7?
34 c5! and Black is suddenly in trouble) 34 Qd2 with a roughly level endgame, although I
slightly prefer White’s position as he has the safer king and Black’s pawns seem the more
vulnerable.
b) 27 a4!? threatens a5, opening up the queenside, but Black can defend with 27 ...
Ne5 when 28 Re1 Bxg4 29 Rdxe5 Qxe5 30 Rxe5 Rxe5 31 hxg4, as played in
D.Szczepankiewicz-A.Shpakovsky, correspondence 2012, is very equal.
27 ... Rb8 28 Qf4+ Kb7 29 Qd4 Kc7 30 Qf4+ Kb7 31 Qd4 Kc7
 White now chose to take the draw which was probably a wise option given that this
game was played in a team event.
32 Qf4+ ½-½
32 a4!? is one way to prolong the fight, although after 32 ... Nc5 33 Bf3 (33 a5 Bxg4
34 axb6+ Kc6 35 hxg4 h3! 36 Rxc5+! Qxc5 37 Qa4+ Kd6! 38 Rd1+ Ke7 39 Qd7+ Kf8 40
Rf1+ Kg8 41 Qf7+ Kh8 42 Qf6+ is another perpetual) 33 ... Be6 34 Qf4+ Kc8 35 Rd6 Bd7!
36 a5 Qe5 (36 ... Qe3 37 Qxh4 bxa5 38 Rbd1 Rb4 39 Qf6 Qe7 40 Qg6!? is another
hypothetical line where I prefer White’s chances) 37 Qd2 Qe3 38 Qd5 Qe5 39 Qd2 Qe3
White has no real option but to accept the repetition.

Game 39
I.Nepomniachtchi-L.Dominguez Perez
Havana 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6 8 Bh4 Qb6 9

a3!?
This is an independent approach that gained rapid popularity ever since Caruana used
it to obtain a promising position against Vachier-Lagrave in a critical encounter. The
merits of the line are pretty clear – for one, it avoids plenty of forced moves that are
typical in the Poisoned Pawn variations. White’s idea is to bring his bishop back to f2,
forcing the black queen to retreat to c7, after which he normally continues with the
standard plan of queenside castling and attacking on the kingside.
 The move a2-a3 is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it delays Black’s typical
queenside counterplay associated with the pawn thrust ... b5-b4, but it also allows Black
to open the queenside if he does eventually manage to prepare that advance.
During a short trip to Sydney, I couldn’t resist looking at some chess with a friend of
mine, the Australian Grandmaster Zhao Zong Yuan, and he immediately suggested
investigating this variation. With his approval, I will share some of our joint analysis in
this and the next game.
9 ... Be7!
9 ... Nbd7 is a natural move, but this entitles White to point at e6 with 10 Bc4!.

Now:
a) 10 ... Be7 allows 11 Bf2 Qc7 (11 ... Nc5 12 Nb3! 0-0 13 Qe2 is awkward for Black)
12 Bxe6!? fxe6 13 Nxe6 Qc4 14 Nxg7+, which looks pretty dangerous for Black. For
example:
 a1) After 14 ... Kf8 15 Nf5 Nxe4 White liquidates into a slightly better endgame with
16 Nxe7 (the unlikely 16 Qd4!? Qxd4 17 Bxd4 Nef6 18 0-0-0 Rh7 19 Rhe1 gives White
compensation, but I am not sure it is more than sufficient; certainly White would
generally prefer to keep the queens on, but here he has the simple plan of doubling on
the e-file and it is not clear how Black should develop his remaining dormant pieces) 16
... Kxe7 (16 ... Nxc3 17 Ng6+ Kg7 18 Qd4+ Qxd4 19 Bxd4+ Kxg6 20 Bxh8 Ne4 21 0-0-0
should be better for White) 17 Nd5+ Kf8! (17 ... Ke6? 18 f5+! Kf7 19 b3! is extremely
strong) 18 Qd4 Qxd4 19 Bxd4 Rg8 20 Nc7 Rb8 21 Ba7 Rxg2 22 0-0-0 followed by Rhe1.
a2) 14 ... Kf7 15 Nf5 Nxe4 (there is nothing better) 16 Qg4! (16 Qh5+ Kf8 17 Qg6 Bf6
18 0-0-0 is extremely unclear) continues to hound the black king.

Indeed, after 16 ... Rh7 (or 16 ... Bf6 17 0-0-0! with the idea of 17 ... Nxf2 18 Nxd6+
Kf8 19 Qf5!, defending the f4-pawn and threatening Qg6 once the black queen leaves c4;
here 19 ... Qg8 20 Rhe1 looks to be winning for White) 17 Nxe7 Kxe7 18 Qg6 Nef6 (18 ...
Ndf6 19 Bh4! is strong) 19 Bh4 Qf7 20 Qd3 Kf8 21 0-0-0 Black will face a difficult task
fending off White’s continuing attack. White already has two pawns for the piece and is
likely to win another one on d6.
b) The aforementioned high-level game continued with the enterprising 10 ... g5!?
and after 11 Bf2 (11 fxg5 hxg5 12 Bxg5 Qc5! 13 Bxf6 Nxf6 was Black’s clever idea, with
more than sufficient compensation for the pawn) Black has:
b1) 11 ... Nc5 was played in J.Friedel-A.Zakhartsov, Dresden 2011, and here I prefer
the untried 12 Qf3! with the idea of 12 ... g4 (or 12 ... gxf4 13 b4!) 13 Qe3 Qxb2 14 0-0.
It is hard to imagine Black surviving for long here and a sample line seems to indicate
this: 14 ... Qb6 15 f5 e5 16 Nb3 Qc7 17 Nxc5 Qxc5 18 Nd5! Nxd5 19 Qb3! Qc7 20 Bxd5
Rh7 21 Bb6 Qd7 22 Rad1 when Black is completely tied up.
b2) 11 ... Qc7, with a final split:
 b21) After 12 Qe2 Nb6 (the immediate 12 ... gxf4 is clearly met by 13 Bxe6! when
Black will not have the useful c4-square for his queen after 13 ... fxe6 14 Nxe6) 13 Bb3
gxf4 14 0-0-0 Be7 15 Rhe1 (15 Rhf1!? followed by 16 Bh4 is a possible improvement) 15
... Rg8 16 g3 fxg3 17 Bxg3 e5 18 Nf5 Bxf5 19 exf5 Rg7 20 Kb1 0-0-0 21 Bf2 White clearly
had good compensation in F.Caruana-M.Vachier Lagrave, Biel 2011, and was later very
close to winning, although Black eventually survived after some tough defensive play.
b22) I am sure Caruana must have considered 12 Bxe6!, which is the whole point of
Bc4. Here I believe 12 ... fxe6 13 fxg5! hxg5 14 Nxe6 is extremely strong for White: for
example, 14 ... Qc4 (14 ... Qc6 15 Nd5! also poses difficult questions for Black) 15 Nxf8
Rxf8 16 Qxd6 when White has obtained three pawns for the piece, with an attack to
book. As far as I can see, Black’s best chance is to try and swap queens with 16 ... Qc6,
but White is still better after 17 0-0-0 Qxd6 18 Rxd6.
Before we examine 9 ... Be7, I should mentioned that White has an excellent score
after 9 ... Nc6 10 Bf2: for instance, 10 ... Qc7 (if 10 ... Nxd4?! 11 Bxd4 Qc6 12 Qd3 Be7 13
Be2) 11 Bd3 (11 Qd3!? followed by long castling also looks promising) 11 ... Be7 12 Qe2
Nxd4 (12 ... e5!? 13 Nf5 Bxf5 14 exf5 exf4 15 0-0-0 d5! doesn’t look too bad for Black) 13
Bxd4 e5 14 Be3 b5 15 0-0 0-0 16 Kh1 Be6 17 f5 Bd7 18 Nd5! (setting up a clamp on
Black’s position) 18 ... Nxd5 19 exd5 Bf6 20 Qg4 g5? (reckless; White was threatening
Be4, continuing the squeeze, so I think Black’s best chance was the typical clearance
sacrifice 20 ... e4!) 21 h4 Qd8 22 Rf3 Kg7 23 Rg3 and White went on to win in
Y.Solodovnichenko-M.Atabayev, Tashkent 2012.
10 Bf2
Richard Palliser pointed out that 10 Bc4 would now be a complete disaster due to 10
... Nxe4!, winning a pawn.
10 ... Qc7
 11 Qe2
Preparing e4-e5 is logical. Needless to say, there are other options here:
a) 11 Bg3?! moves the dark-squared bishop for the fourth time and Black was soon
better after 11 ... Nc6 12 e5? (12 Be2 0-0 13 Qd3 Nxd4 14 Qxd4 b5 15 Bf3 Bb7 was a
dream Scheveningen position for Black in V.Durarbeyli-S.Zhigalko, Warsaw (rapid) 2011)
12 ... Nd5! 13 Nxd5 exd5 14 Nf3 dxe5 15 fxe5 Qb6! in A.Istratescu-I.Dorfman, Caen 2011.
b) Zong Yuan and I focused our efforts on 11 Qf3, which is analysed in the next game.
11 ... Nc6
Alternatively:
a) 11 ... Nbd7 is untested, but allowing the d4-knight to stand its ground seems risky.
b) 11 ... e5!? is playable although Black doesn’t get many winning chances after 12
Nf5 Bxf5 13 exf5 Nc6 14 0-0-0. An exciting high-level game continued 14 ... 0-0 15 g4!?
(15 g3!?) 15 ... exf4 16 h4 f3! 17 Qxf3 Ne5 18 Qf4 Nexg4 19 Bd4 when White had obvious
compensation for the pawn. The rest of the game is worth following: 19 ... Ne5 20 Rg1
Kh8 21 Bg2 Rac8 22 Kb1 b5 23 Bd5 (transferring the bishop to the a2-g8 diagonal, but
the simple 23 Bf3 followed by doubling rooks on the g-file also looks promising). Now:
 b1) 23 ... Nxd5? 24 Nxd5 Qxc2+ 25 Ka1 with multiple threats.
b2) A perfect illustration of White’s attacking ideas can be seen after 23 ... b4 24
Rxg7!! (a lovely tactical blow; Black’s idea was to force a draw after 24 axb4 Nxd5 25
Nxd5 Qxc2+ 26 Ka1 Qa4+) 24 ... Kxg7 25 Rg1+ Kh7 26 Be3 Ng8 27 Be4 bxc3 (27 ... Bf6
28 Rxg8!! Kxg8 29 Nd5 Qd8 30 Bb6 is a picturesque finish, while 27 ... f6 28 Bd5! is a
beautiful switch-back when Black is all tied up after 28 ... Nf7 29 Qg4 Ng5 30 axb4) 28
f6+ Ng6 29 fxe7 Qxe7 30 h5 Rc4 31 hxg6+ fxg6 32 Bxg6+ Kh8 33 Qxc4 Qxe3 34 Rd1 with
Black riding out the storm somewhat, but White still retaining the initiative.
b3) 23 ... Rg8 24 Bb3 Bd8 25 Rg2 Qe7 26 Rdg1 (Black is under siege and I imagine
many players would collapse here) 26 ... Ba5 27 Nd5 (27 Ne4 Nxe4 28 Qxe4 with the idea
of 28 ... Qf6 29 Rg6 fxg6 30 Rxg6 Qf8 31 f6! Nxg6 32 Qxg6 is another possibility) 27 ...
Nxd5 28 Bxd5 Qf6 29 Rg5 (29 Qg5!? would have been a fascinating move to make, but
Black should be able to hold with the solid 29 ... Bd8!) 29 ... Kh7 30 Rh5 Rc5? (confusing
the issue somewhat; Black correctly judges that the dark-squared bishop is worth more
than his rook, but overlooks a crucial detail) 31 Be4 Re8 and now in D.Kokarev-
S.Zhigalko, Khanty-Mansiysk 2011, 32 b4! Rc4 33 Rg6! fxg6 34 fxg6+ Nxg6 35 Bxf6 Rexe4
36 Qxd6 would have been winning for White.
Returning to 11 ... Nc6:
 12 h3!?
I generally don’t trust these quiet h3 moves, especially in the 6 Bg5 Najdorf, but the
point is to play g4 without fearing exchanges on d4 followed by ... e5. Otherwise:
a) Black is fine after 12 0-0-0 Nxd4 13 Rxd4 b5 14 g4?! (adventurous but probably
unsound) 14 ... e5! 15 Rd3 exf4 16 Rg1 Be6 17 Nd5 Bxd5 18 exd5 Nd7 19 Bd4 Ne5 20 Rc3
Qd8 21 Bxe5 dxe5 22 Qxe5 0-0, as played in V.Kotronias-A.Hagen, Plovdiv 2012. Black
certainly had the better bishop here, although White eventually won after a series of
mistakes from both sides.
b) 12 Nxc6 gave Black standard queenside counterplay without a fight after 12 ... bxc6
13 Qf3 Rb8 in B.Firat-A.Kovacevic, Porto Carras 2011.
c) The untried 12 Nb3 may be worth a try, although the game is finely balanced after
12 ... b5 13 0-0-0 Rb8 14 g4 b4 15 axb4 Rxb4 16 h4 (16 Kb1 Na5 17 Nxa5 Qxa5 looks
promising for Black) 16 ... Na5 17 Nd4.
12 ... b5
Black could still continue with 12 ... Nxd4 13 Bxd4 e5 14 Be3 exf4 15 Bxf4 Be6 when
he again seems to be fine.
13 g4 Bb7 14 Bg2 Rc8
Palliser pointed out the possibility of 14 ... Na5!? 15 0-0-0 Nc4 when Black can hope to
strike on b2 or a3. I will add that White would probably continue with 16 Be1 when a
tense battle lies ahead.
15 Nxc6
15 0-0-0 Nxd4 16 Bxd4 e5 17 Be3 Qc4 is again fine for Black, as pointed out by
Palliser.
15 ... Qxc6 16 0-0-0 Qc4
 Black has comfortably equalized and White wisely decided not to push too hard for the
win, but to acquiesce to a draw with safe and solid play.
17 Rhe1 Qxe2 18 Rxe2 Nd7 19 Bg3 Nb6 20 Rd3 Nc4 21 Nd1 g5 22 f5 Ne5
23 Bxe5 dxe5 24 Ne3 Bc5 25 Red2 Bc6 26 b4 Bb6 ½-½

Game 40
A.Naiditsch-N.Guliyev
Le Port-Marly (rapid) 2012

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 d4 cxd4 5 Nxd4 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 h6 8 Bh4 Qb6 9

a3 Be7 10 Bf2 Qc7 11 Qf3

The main move.

11 ... b5!
 This appears best, although Black certainly has other options:
a) 11 ... Nc6 is a decent move, with the idea of liquidating the centre by capturing on
d4 and forcing through the ... e5 advance somehow. After 12 0-0-0 Bd7 (12 ... Nxd4 13
Bxd4 0-0 14 e5 Nd7 15 exd6 Bxd6 16 g3 followed by Bg2 is slightly better for White)
White has:
a1) 13 g4 Nxd4!? 14 Rxd4 (14 Bxd4? e5 15 fxe5 dxe5 16 Qg3 Bd6 is good for Black)
14 ... Bc6! will be followed by ... d5.
a2) 13 Be2 Rc8 14 g4 Nxd4! 15 Rxd4 was A.Naiditsch-M.Vachier Lagrave, Spanish
Team Championship 2011, and here Black has the prosaic 15 ... d5!! when White would
have to start defending like a world champion.
a3) I like 13 Nb3!, not allowing Black the liberating exchanges on d4. Now 13 ... Rb8
was seen in G.Todorovic-B.Damljanovic, Obrenovac 2011, when the quirky 14 Qe2!? is
tempting, with the idea of 14 ... b5 (14 ... 0-0 15 g4 looks promising for White) 15 e5!
dxe5 16 fxe5 Qxe5 17 Qxe5 Nxe5 18 Bg3, winning material.
b) 11 ... Nbd7 12 0-0-0 transposes into some sort of Gelfand variation where White
has gained the useful a3 and Bg5-h4-f2 moves (the immediate 12 g4? is met by the
thematic 12 ... g5!).

Black has:
b1) 12 ... b5 13 g4 g5 (again, this seems thematic, although Black might consider
making use of his previous move with 13 ... Bb7; blocking the b-file may seem
counterintuitive, but Black’s plan is to play ... Rc8, ... Nb6 and ... Nc4, although after 14
Bg2 Nb6 15 g5! hxg5 16 fxg5 Nh5 17 g6 Bg5+ 18 Kb1 Nc4 19 Qg4! White is ahead with
his attack) 14 Bg2 and then:
b11) Zong Yuan and I analysed 14 ... Bb7 in depth and concluded that Black has a few
problems to solve: 15 f5 Ne5 16 Qg3 Qd7 17 Nb3 (17 Nf3! may be even better as after
the natural 17 ... Nexg4 18 Bd4 Rc8, 19 e5! is exceedingly hard to meet) 17 ... 0-0 (not a
move that one would want to make, but the alternatives are hardly inspiring: 17 ... exf5
18 exf5 Bxg2 19 Qxg2 Rc8 20 Rhe1 Qc6 21 Qg3 Nfxg4 22 Bd4 0-0 23 Bxe5 Nxe5 24 Nd4
Qd7 25 Ne4 with a dream kingside attack in the offing, or 17 ... Nfxg4 18 Bd4 Qc7 19 fxe6
fxe6 20 Bh3!, which is obviously terrible for Black) 18 Bd4 Qc7 19 h4 Rfc8? 20 fxe6 fxe6
and here the brilliant 21 Nc5! secures a highly advantageous position.

Of course, this is all only analysis and I dare say there will be improvements along the
way if you dig deep enough, but we have seen some thematic attacking ideas which will
be useful if you want to handle the white pieces.
b12) 14 ... Rb8 15 Qh3! is another proposed improvement (15 h4 gxf4 16 g5 Ne5 17
Qxf4 Nfg4, as played in L.Ootes-B.Adhiban, Wijk aan Zee 2012, is comfortable for Black).
This appears to be a key idea when there are opposing pawns on g4 and g5. The pin on
the h6-pawn is especially annoying for Black to deal with. For example, 15 ... b4 16 axb4
Rxb4 17 Rhf1! (there are several promising moves here, but one can hardly resist making
a mysterious rook move when it is possible and advocated by the machine; instead, 17
fxg5 allows the beautiful tactic 17 ... Nxg4! when 18 Qxg4 Bxg5+ 19 Kb1 Qxc3 20 Nb3
Qc7 followed by ... Ne5 seems reasonable for Black, while 17 Rhe1 gxf4 18 g5 Ng8 19 g6
Ne5 20 gxf7+ Kxf7 21 Qh5+ Kf8 22 Qh3 is a curious draw by repetition) 17 ... h5 (the
idea behind the mysterious rook move is that after 17 ... gxf4 18 g5 Ng8 19 g6 Ne5 20
gxf7+ Kxf7, the rook is suddenly extremely well placed on f1 and 21 Be3! will cause a
severe headache for Black) 18 fxg5 Nxg4 19 g6 Nde5 (19 ... Bg5+ 20 Kb1 Nde5 21 gxf7+
Qxf7 22 Bg1 is rather murky too) 20 gxf7+ Nxf7 21 Bg1 is extremely unclear. Even though
Black’s king is a little loose, his pieces are well co-ordinated and it is not entirely clear
what White’s plan should be.
b2) 12 ... Rb8 and then:
 b21) After 13 Bd3?! (the bishop is better placed on g2 and, if anything, putting it on
d3 only disrupts White’s influence in the centre) Black was the one who seized the
initiative with 13 ... b5 14 Rhe1 b4 15 axb4 Rxb4 in A.Jerez Perez-J.Gomez Esteban,
Barbera del Valles 2009, where he went on to win after 16 Nd5? exd5 17 exd5 Nb8!.
b22) I was interested in the direct 13 g4!? when 13 ... g5 (virtually forced; a move like
13 ... b5 only invites trouble after 14 h4 h5 15 g5 Ng4 16 Bh3 when White gets all the
play) 14 Qh3! (I wanted to make 14 h4!? work, but 14 ... gxf4 15 g5 Ne5 16 Qxf4 Nfg4
looks like a typical Browne position and is fine for Black) 14 ... Nc5 (again, this appears
best; 14 ... Rh7 15 f5 Ne5 16 Be2 looks very pleasant for White indeed) 15 e5 Nfe4 16
Be1 leads to:

b221) Going pawn-grabbing with 16 ... dxe5 17 fxe5 Qxe5 18 Nxe4 Nxe4 19 Bg2 gives
White excellent compensation.
b222) Similarly, 16 ... gxf4 17 Nxe4 Nxe4 18 exd6 Nxd6 (or 18 ... Bxd6 19 Bg2) 19 Bc3
and White again has good compensation for the pawn.
b223) 16 ... d5 (Black has to plug the leaks) 17 f5! Qxe5 18 Nxe4 Nxe4 19 Bg2 and
White has excellent compensation for the pawn.
Finally, we return to the logical 11 ... b5:
12 0-0-0
The direct 12 e5 Bb7 13 Qg3 dxe5 14 fxe5 Nfd7 allows Black to force a queen
exchange, which is not a smart thing to do given the circumstances.
12 ... Bb7

13 g4
Again, I don’t really like 13 Bd3 as the bishop tends to get in the way here. After 13 ...
Nc6 (I actually prefer 13 ... Nbd7 with the standard plans of ... Rc8, ... Nb6 and ... Nc4, or
... Nc5 and ... d5) 14 Nxc6 Bxc6 15 Rhe1 Qb7 Black was pretty comfortable and scored an
upset win against a renowned 6 Bg5 expert in E.Berg-M.Arnold, Helsingor 2011.
13 ... Nbd7
Zong Yuan and I looked at 13 ... Nc6 14 Kb1 d5! (after 14 ... 0-0 15 g5 hxg5 16 fxg5
Nd7 17 h4 White’s menacing attack seems to outweigh the importance of the e5-square),
which we concluded equalizes by force: 15 exd5 Nxd4 16 Bxd4 Nxd5 17 Bxg7 Nxc3+ 18
Qxc3 Qxc3 19 Bxc3 Bxh1 20 Bxh8 Bf3 21 Rd3 Bxg4 is a fairly forcing continuation and one
which ensures safe equality.
Nobody has tried 13 ... d5!? yet, but it also seems to be a clean equalizer to me. We
came up with the following sample line: 14 e5 (14 exd5 Nxd5 15 Bg2 b4! is fine for Black)
14 ... Ne4 15 Nxe4 dxe4 16 Qe3 Nc6 17 Nxc6 Qxc6 (White’s attack is blunted and facing a
queenside attack himself, he has no choice but to force a liquidation which gives him no
winning chances at all) 18 Bg2 Rc8 19 c3 (19 Rd2? b4 puts White under intense pressure)
19 ... a5 20 Rhe1 b4 21 Bxe4 Qxe4 22 Qxe4 Bxe4 23 Rxe4 bxa3, with a likely draw.
It appears that both 13 ... Nc6 and 13 ... d5 equalize cleanly and I have no doubt that
these moves will be played sooner rather than later.
14 Bg2
 Palliser also pointed out that 14 f5? e5! 15 Nb3 Rc8 would give Black a dream
position.
14 ... g5

15 h4
Setting the kingside on fire, but in this instance 15 f5 may surprisingly be the best
option due to the weakening ... g5 move. After 15 ... Ne5 (15 ... e5 16 Nb3 Rc8 17 Qe2
followed by Kb1 and doubling rooks on the d-file looks like a clear plan for White) 16 Qe2
Black has some problems with the e6-pawn, especially as 16 ... Qd7 can be met by 17
Bg3! when he is under intense pressure in the centre.
15 ... gxf4 16 g5 Ne5 17 Qxf4 Nh5
Not the best square for the knight. 17 ... Nfg4 is more standard, but perhaps Black
was afraid of 18 g6, which looks good for White, although Black is still solid enough after
18 ... Rf8.
18 Qd2
18 Qe3 may have been a more sensible option due to the option in the note to Black’s
next move.
18 ... hxg5
This turned out to be a serious inaccuracy. 18 ... Nc4! would have given White some
problems to solve as after 19 Qe1 Nf4 20 Bf1 hxg5 21 Bxc4 Qxc4 22 Qd2 Rc8 23 hxg5
Rxh1 24 Rxh1 Ng6! Black has a powerful pair of bishops and the immediate threat of ...
e5 and ... Bxe4 is not easy to meet.
19 hxg5 0-0-0
19 ... Nc4? now loses to 20 Qe2, winning the knight on h5.
 20 Kb1?!
Preventing ... Nc4 with 20 Bf1! looks strong: for example, 20 ... Rdg8 21 Rg1 Nc4?!
(Black can also sit tight with 21 ... Qd8 22 Be3, but White would be the one calling the
shots) 22 Bxc4 Qxc4 23 Kb1 Kb8 24 Qe3 with attacking chances.
20 ... Nc4 21 Qc1 Qc5
Overlooking White’s clever reply. 21 ... Rdg8 22 Nf3 f5 looks like an interesting and
dynamic way for Black to proceed.
22 g6! Bg5 23 Nxe6 fxe6
Naiditsch had undoubtedly calculated 23 ... Qxf2 24 Nxg5 Qxg2 25 Rdg1! Qf2 26 Nxf7,
which is winning for White.
24 Bxc5 Bxc1 25 Kxc1 Nf4

The moves are becoming a bit random

here, which I suspect was due to time trouble more than anything else bearing in mind
this was a rapid game. Instead, 25 ... dxc5 26 Rxd8+ Kxd8 27 Bf3 Ke7 28 Rxh5 Rxh5 29
Bxh5 Kf6 should be sufficient to hold the draw.
26 Bxd6 Nxg2
And here 26 ... Nxd6 27 Rxh8 Rxh8 28 Rxd6 Nxg2 29 Rxe6 looks drawn.
27 Rxh8 Rxh8 28 Rf1 Kd7 29 e5? Nxd6 30 exd6 Rg8?
Did Naiditsch really sacrifice a piece for nothing and did Guliyev really let him off the
hook? It’s hard to believe these moves, but then again, it could all be down to serious
time pressure. Instead, the simple 30 ... Kxd6 looks completely winning for Black.
31 Rf7+ Kc6 32 g7 Ne3 33 d7 Kc7 34 Rf8 1-0
An important theoretical game, albeit with a rather strange finish.

Conclusion
The Delayed Poisoned Pawn has been rather topical in recent years, and with good
reason. In the solid 12 ... Nd5 line, I recommend that White gives serious consideration to
16 Bd3 and then 23 Bd3!?, but the more radical 12 ... g5 may well just be a draw. As
such, attention has turned to 9 a3, but here too the ball appears to be in White’s court.
Index of Complete Games
Bieszk.S-Zinoviev.P, Correspondence 2009
Bobras.P-Wojtaszek.R, German League 2009
Butze.R-Namark.L, Correspondence 1985
Da Costa.L-Claridge.J, Correspondence 2006
Freeman.M-Schmidt.T, Correspondence 2008
Gao Rui-Molner.M, Santa Clara 2014
Gharamian.T-Navara.D, European Championship, Aix-les-Bains 2011
Giri.A-Popilsky.G, European Club Cup, Eilat 2012
Goh Wei Ming.K-Antal.T, Kecskemet 2011
Goh Wei Ming.K-Mas.H, Kuala Lumpur 2013
Grischuk.A-Anand.V, Linares 2009
Guseinov.G-Areshchenko.A, World Team Championship, Antalya 2013
Hector.J-Areshchenko.A, German League 2009
Huschenbeth.N-Le Quang Liem, Lubbock 2013
Ivanchuk.V-Grischuk.A, Russian Team Championship, Dagomys 2010
Karjakin.S-Kokarev.D, Russian Team Championship 2012
Kislik.E-Antal.T, Kecskemet 2011
Kurnosov.I-Wojtaszek.R, Jurmala (rapid) 2013
Le Roux.J.P-Vachier Lagrave.M, French Championship, Nimes 2009
Li Chao-Dao Thien Hai, Manila 2013
Maslak.K-Grandelius.N, Olomouc 2009
Moreira Lopes.P-Luzuriaga.N, Correspondence 2003
Naiditsch.A-Guliyev.N, Le Port-Marly (rapid) 2012
Nepomniachtchi.I-Dominguez Perez.L, Havana 2012
Ochsner.B-Nielsen.P.H, Horsens 2013
Radjabov.T-Nakamura.H, Medias 2011
Rui Gao-Gu Xiaobing, Ho Chi Minh City 2012
Rui Gao-Wen Yang, Ho Chi Minh City 2012
Salem.A.R-Zhou Jianchao, Tagaytay City 2013
Shabalov.A-Paragua.M, Jakarta 2011
Sjugirov.S-Gallagher.J, European Championship, Plovdiv 2012
Solak.D-Zhigalko.S, European Team Championship, Warsaw 2013
Sukandar.I-Mareco.S, Albena 2013
Vallejo Pons.F-Morozevich.A, Reggio Emilia 2011
Volokitin.A-Al Sayed.M, Istanbul Olympiad 2012
Wang Hao-Dominguez Perez.L, Russian Team Championship 2012
Wang Hao-Nakamura.H, Biel 2012
Wang Yue-Zhao Jun, Qinhuangdao 2011
Yilmaz.M-Keler.F, Turkish Team Championship 2012
Zidu.J-Pascual Perez.N, Correspondence 2011