.

-------� Paul Keres Chess J-------1

Master Class
PERGAMON RUSSIAN CHESS SERIES

PAUL KERES
CHESS MASTER CLASS
PERGAMON RUSSIAN CHESS SERIES

Executive Editor: Martin J. Richardson

General Editor: Kenneth P. Neat

AVERBAKH, Y.
Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge
Comprehensive Chess Endings
Volume 1: Bishop Endings & Knight Endings

BOTVINNIK, M. M.
Achieving the Aim
Anatoly Karpov: His Road to the World Championship
Selected Games 1967-70

BRONSTEIN, D. & SMOLYAN, Y.

Chess in the Eighties

ESTRIN, Y. & PANOV, V. N.

Comprehensive Chess Openings

KARPOV, A. & GIK, Y.

Chess Kaleidoscope

KARPOV, A. & ROSHAL, A.

Anatoly Karpov: Chess is My Life

LIVSHITZ, A.
Test Your Chess IQ, Volumes 1 & 2

NEISHTADT, Y.
Catastrophe in the Opening
Paul Keres Chess Master Class

POLUGAYEVSKY, L.
Grandmaster Preparation

SMYSLOV, V.
125 Selected Games

SUETIN, A. S.
Modern Chess Opening Theory
Three Steps to Chess Mastery

TAL, M., CHEPIZHNY, V. & ROSHAL, A.

Montreal 1 979: Tournament of Stars
 PAUL KERBS
CHESS MASTER CLASS

By

Y. NEISHTADT

Translated by
KENNETH P. NEAT

PERGAMON PRESS
OXFORD · NEW YORK· TORONTO· SYDNEY· PARIS· FRANKFURT
U.K. Pergamon Press Ltd. Headington Hill Hall,
Oxford OX3 OBW, England
U. S. A. Pergamon Press Inc., Maxwell House, Fairview Park,
Elmsford, New York 10523, U.S.A.
CANADA Pergamon Press Canada Ltd, Suite 104,
150 Consumers Rd., Willowdale., Ontario M2J 1P9, Canada
AUSTRALIA Pergamon Press (Aust.) Pty. Ltd., P. 0. Box 544,
Potts Point, N.S.W. 2011, Australia
FRANCE Pergamon Press SARL, 24 rue des Ecoles,
75240 Paris, Cedex OS, France
FEDERAL REPUBLIC Pergamon Press GmbH, Hammerweg 6, 6242 Kronberg­
OF GERMANY Taunus, Federal Republic of Germany

English translation copyright © 1983 K. P. Neat

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 , mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, with­
out permission in writing from the publishers.

This edition is a translation of

Schakhmatnaja Schola Pau/ja Keresa
published in 1981 by Fizkultura i Sport

Library of Congress Catalogiug in Publication Data

Neishtadt, lA I. (IAkov Isaevich)
Paul Keres chess master class.

(Pergamon Russian chess series

Translation of: Shakhamatnaia shkola Paulia
Keresa.
Includes index.
1. Chess. 2. Keres Paul, 1916-
3, Chess-Collections_of games, I. Neat, Kenneth P.
11. Title. Ill. Series.
GV1445.N44. 1983. 794.1'5 82-13206

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Neishtadt, Y.
Paul Keres Chess master class. - (Pergamon
Russian chess series)
1. Chess
I. Title 11. Schakhmatnaja Schola Paulja
Keresa. English
794.1'2 HV1445

ISBN 0-08-023122-5
ISBN 0-08-029719-6 Pbk

Printed in Hungary by Franklin Printing House

 CONTENTS

PAUL KERES- A BRIEF INTRODUCTION vu

COMBINATIONS 1

THE CREATION OF A TACTICALLY FAVOURABLE SITUATION 25

THE CALCULATION OF VARIATIONS 31

ATTACK {preconditions for, and ways of conducting) 55

Positiona1 evaluation and planning 55
Pawn formation. Strong and weak squares 55
Connected, isolated, backward and doubled pawns. The concept of blockade 59
The position in the centre 61
The scale of relative piece values. The position of the kings 75
The king's pawn screen 79
When the king has not castled 83
The kings are castled on the same side 93
The kings are castled on opposite sides 104
The Q-side offensive. Positional pressure 113
Seizing the initiative in the opening. Development of the initiative 122
Seizing the initiative in the middlegame 145

DEFENCE AND COUNTER-ATTACK 151

Active or passive? 151
Against a flank attack - counter-play in the centre! 152
Defence by tactical means 154
Resourcefulness in a difficult position 156

THE PRACTICAL ENDGAME 159

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 177

INDEX OF OPPONENTS 181

INDEX OF OPENINGS 183

V
 Paul Keres - a brief introduction

"After the death of Alexander Alekhine in 1 946, this was the greatest loss suffered by the
chess world". This is how the death of Paul Keres was received by his lifelong rival Mikhail
Botvinnik.
"Hours pass, days run, but years-fly .. .". In complete accordance with this piece of
Eastern wisdom, there rush past in our memory the countless international events, interzonal
tournaments, candidates events, and matches for the supreme title. New stars flare up on the
chess horizon. How many of them have appeared (and then faded) since the time that Paul
Keres first forced the chess world to talk about him.
This was in 1935. Little Estonia, which had never participated in the Tournaments of Nations,
decided to send a team to the 6th Olympiad in Warsaw. The right to lead the team was granted
to the 19-year-old winner of the country's championship.
The youth, who was unknown outside Estonia, made the fifth best score on top board:
12} points out of 1 9. This is how Keres began his ascent of the chess Olympus. Only three
years later the 22-year-old player shared first place with Fine in the AVRO-Tournament-one
of the most imposing events in the history of chess. Behind them were Botvinnik, Alekhine,
Euwe, Reshevsky, Capablanca, Flohr . . .
For 40 years, without fading, his star shone among the brightest chess stars. For a quarter
of a century he was a real contender for the title of the strongest in the world.
The AVRO-Tournament with the participation of the Champion and seven contenders in
1 938. The Match-Tournament for the World Championship in 1948, and then five Candidates
Tournaments*, without missing a single one!**
Throughout the entire history of chess it is possible to name only a few masters who have
retained their playing strength for as long as Keres. The 6th Olympiad in 1 935. The 1 6th
Olympiad in 1 964. And between them a further nine Olympiads***. The 12th USSR Cham­
pionship in 1 940. The 41st Championship in 1 973, and in between, a further twelve Champion­
ships, in which he three times won the title of USSR Champion.
Victory by the 20-year-old Keres at the international tournament in Bad Nauheim (together
with Alekhine), and, almost 40 years later, victory in the imposing international tournament
in Tallinn in the Spring of 1 975-his swan song.
Regarding the competitive exploits and the creative longevity of Paul Keres, more eloquent

* Budapest (1950), Zurich (1953), Amsterdam (1956), Yugoslavia (1959), Curacao (1962).
** By a decision of FIDE, in subsequent World Championship cycles the Candidates Tournament was
replaced by Candidates Matches - Quarter-Final, Semi-Final and Final. In 1965 Keres met Spassky in a
Quarter-Final Match.
*** In four (Warsaw 1935, Munich 1936, Stockholm 1937 and Buenos Aires 1939) Keres played for Es­

tonia, and in seven (Helsinki 1952, Amsterdam 1954, Moscow 1956, Munich 1958, Leipzig 1960, Varna
1962, Tel-Aviv 1964) for the USSR.

vii
t han any words are the lists of events in which he participated, and the years of his appearances.
The greatness of his talent is told by his games, part of which are presented in this book.

* * *

"Chess is the most interesting game of all those in existence. Chess is competition, rivalry,
expression of character. Chess is art, creativity, a clash of personalities", said Paul Keres.
Tense battles at the highest chess level, the severity of competitive elimination, and the constant
nervous stresses-all this leaves its impression on the personality of famous players.Paul Keres
withstood this severe test with honour. Both on days of hope, and on days of failure, this
tireless chess fighter remained a kind and charming person. To the end of his days he main­
tained good relations with his rivals. Here are a few opinions of his colleagues, which charac­
terize the human and the professional aspects of the Estonian grandmaster:

" ... He was endowed both with enormous talent, and with a liking for hard work. Top-class
chess players are normally people of difficult character. In this respect Keres was an exception.
As a person he was very modest, restrained, and tactful .. ."
Boris Spassky

" .. .His outstanding talent was immediately apparent, and shortly after reaching the age
of 20 he was rightly called one of the main contenders for the chess throne ... In four Candid­
ates Tournaments he was each time lacking in just a little bit of luck. Keres was ready to play
in events of the most varied standard, and in each of them he would generously demonstrate
his outstanding talent, playing artistically, freshly and boldly."
Vasily Smyslov

"I must be grateful to Paul. Had it not been for him, during the period 1 938-1948 I would
have been unable to advance so far in the field of chess. In 1 938 (the AVRO-Tournament)
and in 1 940 (the USSR Championship) Paul finished ahead of me ... As a tournament (but
not a match) fighter, it is unlikely that Keres was inferior to anyone in the world .
. .. Paul came into chess as a straightforward, reserved and friendly person, immensely
devoted to his favourite occupation, and that too is how he departed, leaving to chess enthusi­
asts his games, his analytical works, and the fond memory of a fearless fighter".

Mikhail Botvinnik
* * *

Keres was one of the most erudite players in the world. He knew practically everything in
chess. The writings of the Estonian grandmaster include major works on the opening, orig­
inal research in the endgame, and classic game annotations. For the player wishing to improve,
it is difficult to overestimate the importance of his book on the 1 948 Match-Tournament
and his own collection of lOO games.
The universal nature of his style enabled the Estonian grandmaster to view the course of
a game from various aspects. Keres's annotations are notable for their detailed analysis of
variations, subtle assessments, and precise indication of the turning points of the struggle.
They are not an accompaniment to the winner, but a genuine search for chess truth, a complete
"dissection" of a game.
* * *

viii
 A rare objectivity, bordering on mercilessness, permeates the annotations to his own games.
The works created by a great chess master do not die-they continue to live. Paul Keres
was a chess classic in the true meaning of this word. Using his games and analyses, many
generations of players have learned and will continue to learn.
This book was conceived as a course in chess improvement, based on the games of one
player. The Paul Keres Chess Master Class is a text book devoted to combinations and positio­
nal play, to tactics and strategy, to positional evaluation and specific calculation, to problems
of the initiative and attack, and to defence and counter-attack in various stages of the game.
This is a text book, and at the same time a gallery of impressive works. This is your teacher
and your partner in analysis.

ix
 Combinations
Tactics and strategy. Combinational and
positional play. The reader will encounter
these concepts, virtually the most widespread
in chess, in the description of every game, in
every commentary. In our fascination for the
game, we do not bother pondering over the
origin and initial meaning of the words which
make up our special chess terminology ....
Many of our terms are borrowed from war­
fare-after all, the game of chess is an ideal­
ized model of war, in which each side (in
contrast to real wars) sticks to compulsory
rules. Strategy is a highly important part of
warfare, relating to the preparation and
conduct of military actions, and to the plan­
ning of operations. Tactics are the art of de­
ploying the forces, of conducting a battle.
Since an individual battle is part of an overall
(strategic) operation, tactics are determined
by strategy, and put its missions into effect.
In this sense chess strategy should cover
the field of planning, and indicate the goal to
which one should aim in a given position.
Tactics, on the other hand, have in mind the
concrete actions, and answer the question as
to how specifically one must act, in order to
achieve the set strategic goal (as Euwe put
it-"what to do" and "how to do it").
In short, if we follow the terminological
source, tactics are subordinate to strategy and
depend on it. But in fact, the chess concepts
which have been borrowed from warfare have
acquired a rather different sense.
*For example, 'a strategically complete game' means roughly the same as 'a positionally complete game',
while the expression'the sacrifice was strategically justified' is understood to mean that the sacrifice was justified
from the positional point of view. When it is said that a player is
excellent at finding combinations.
1
What we understand by tactics is not every
concrete operation (say, manoeuvre, re­
grouping, or exchange), but only actions of a
combinational nature, which radically change
the picture of the chess battle. Moreover, it is
of no significance whether the tactical oper­
ation is a logical development of events (i.e.
it follows from the strategic plan), or whether
it is not connected with the overall direction
of the play, and the possibility itself of a
combination suddenly appears (as a result,
for example, of a mistake by the opponent in
a superior position).
In other words, tactics in chess are not
always subordinate to strategy-they can be
an end in themselves. Individual moves and
manoeuvres, which are parts of a strategic
plan, are not regarded as tactics. In general,
the expressions 'tactics' and 'combinational
play', and 'strategy' and 'positional play', are
used almost as synonyms in chess literature*.
ln starting work on this chess book, it is
useful to bear in mind this transformation of
warfare (and also political) terminology.
The task which the author has set himself
is a strictly practical one-it is to help the
reader to understand chess better, and thus
to raise his standard of play. Therefore ar­
guments about terminology, and clarifications
and corrections of the formulations rooted
in our special literature, are outside the
bounds of the chosen theme. We will touch
on certain definitions only when they are
an excellent tactician, this means that he is
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

necessary for easier assimilation of the ma­ 39 Q X J5 + Kd8 40 Qf8 + Kd7 41 Bg4 +
terial. and 42 B X e6 mate) 3 9 BXe8 Qxe8 40
As has already been said, this book is a Qxe8+ KXe8 41 Rh8+. Mter the move
text-book, or more accurately a self-tutor, on played, an inexperienced player might decide
tactiCs and strategy, on combinational and that the black king has safely escaped from
positional play. It is a text-book, illustrated the checks. But in fact this is not so.
by the diverse talent of Paul Keres. We will
begin our exposition with the alpha and ome­ 37 Qh7+ ! K X h7
ga of chess-the combination. It is the com­ 38 Bf7 mate.
bination which has made chess into a game,
with which no other game ever devised by We saw that all Black's replies were
mankind can be compared. forced-there was nothing else that he could
have done.
Keres-Foldsepp Moves or series of moves, united by an
Correspondence, 1933 overall idea, logically linked to one another,
are called a variation. When one side compels
w the other to make strictly determined forced
moves, this is a forcing variation.
Compliance with such a forcing variation is
ensured by compulsive measures-in the given
case by checks. By 3 7 Qh7+ White sacrificed
his queen, which then enabled him to give a
deadly discovered check-3 8 Bf7 mate. Thus
White won by carrying out a forcing variation
with a sacrifice.
It is this that constitutes a combination.
For the sake of an attack White has made
big material sacrifices*. He has as though
taken upon himself the obligation to mate the
Keres-Dely
opponent without fail.
European Team Championship,
Now White will take the knight with check,
Kapfenberg, 1970
but even after this the opponent will still be
w
a rook up. Besides, in pursuing the enemy
king, White cannot allow himself the slightest
breathing space-he himself is threatened
with 3 6 ...Bfl+.
Thus the first move 36 QX g6+ is obliga­
tory, since after 3 6 B X g6 + Kf6 the checks
come to an end.
Keres's opponent replied 36 . .. Kg8.
After 36 ...Ke7 White wins by 37
QXg7+ Kd8 3 8 QXf8+ Be8 (or 38 . . . Kd7 1

* We define a sacrifice as the voluntary (constant or temporary) granting to the opponent of a material
advantage.

2
 Combinations
White is a piece down, but it is obvious
that the black king is dangerously placed.
There followed 25 Rh8+ !, and the Hun­
garian master stopped the clocks.
How would the game have ended after the
capture of the rook?
25 ...BXh8 is decisively met by 26
RXh8+! (a capture with check is a violent
measure, normally leaving the opponent the
least choice of continuations) 26 ...KXh8 27
Qh6+ and 28 Qh7 mate.
"But ", the reader will remark, "the capture
of the second rook is not obligatory: instead
of 26 ...KXh8 Black can play his king to
g7."
This is true. It means that, when sacrificing
his rook, White had to calculate another
variation, namely: 26 ...Kg7 27 Qh6+ Kf6,
and now 28 g7+. Here the calculation can
perfectly well be terminated-on any move
(28...Ke7 or 28 ...Kf7) 29 gXf8=Q+ is
sufficient to win. However, if the king moves
to f7 there is a more striking solution-29
g8=Q+, after which the capture of the new
queen leads to mate: 29 ...RXg8 30 Rh7+
Ke8 31 Bb5+ Bc6 32 Qe6+ Kf8 33 Qf7
mate.
As in the first example, throughout the
entire tactical operation Black made forced
moves-he accepted sacrifices, or moved his
king. The calculation of variations did not
cause White any difficulty, since the opponent
was denied any choice. The main problem
was to discover the sacrifice, i.e. to find the
very first, introductory move of the combi­
nation.
Things are more complicated when the
defender has a choice of several replies. Then
the active side, i.e. the side carrying out the
combination, has to calculate not one or
two, but several variations, which, in turn,
may have branches.
How does this wider choice of replies arise?
Most often, when the combination includes
so-called 'quiet' (intermediate) moves-con-
3
tinuations without a capture or a check
(but definitely containing a strong threat).
Let us refer again to the position in the
diagram, and after the introductory sacrifice
25 Rh8+ BXh8 we will not sacrifice the
second rook. Instead let us play 26 Qh6 with
the threat of mate at h8 or h7.
The queen move contains a strong one­
move threat, but it is 'quiet'-without a check
or a capture.
It is true that the only defence against
immediate mate is the queen sacrifice 26 ...
QXg5+.Mter 27 QXg5 BXh1 there again
follows the quiet move 26 Qh6, which wins:
28 ...RXf2 (the rook has to be moved, since
otherwise it is mate at h7) 29 Qh7+ Kf8 30
QXh8+ and 31 QXa8, or 28 ...Rf7 29
gXf7+ Kxf7 30 Qxhl . For the queen
Black has only a rook, and the win for White
is merely a question of time.
But even so, the absence of checks, even in
this desperate position, widened Black's
choice of defences. In the last variation after
27 QXg5 Black for an instant gained a respite,
which resulted in the right to a greater choice
of replies.
Let us take a closer look at this position.
Instead of 27 ...BXh l , more tenacious is
27 ...Bg7, for example: 28 Qh5 RXf2, or
28 Rh8+ BXh8 29 Qh6 Rf7 30 gXf7+
KXf7.
We have given these variations merely so as
to show how much simpler is the calculation
of the combination with the second rook
sacrifice, when the forcing variation consisted
almost entirely of checks, and consequently
Black's choice of replies was extremely
restricted.
Let us now look at a combination in which
the sacrifice itself, and the majority of the­
forcing moves, are without check. As has
already been said, such a combination may
have several 'side' branches, which must be
envisaged in the calculation.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Keller-Keres 23 . . . Ng3
Zurich, 1961 White resigns.
B In this example Black, when sacrificing his
rook, had to consider two important moves
by the opponent (19 Qa6+ and 22 Rf8+ ),
which represented an attempt at counter­
attack.
The student should bear in mind that if a
threat-even a very strong one-is not ac­
companied by a check or at least a capture,
one normally has to reckon with a larger
number of replies.
18 . . . R X h2! The majority of authors regard a sacrifice
as a necessary feature of a combination. In the
A typical sacrifice, by which Black transfers examples examined earlier, the sacrifice was
his heavy pieces to the h-fi1e with gain of made on the very first, introductory move,
tempo, and creates a mating net: 19 K X h2 but it can also occur in the middle of a forcing
Qh4+ 20 Kgl Rh8. variation, or even at the concluding stage.
19 Qa6+
Laurentius (Laurine) -Keres
The capture of the rook would have put
Tal/inn, 1936j37
into effect the mating mechanism. But what
does the check at a6 change? . . . B

19 ... Kb8
20 K X h2 Qh4+
21 Kg1 Rh8
22 Rf8+

The only move to save White from imme­

' diate mate. But with what should Black take
the rook?
22 RXf8!

Only with the rook! White's last hope in 18 . . . N4g5 !

his desperate position was 22 . . . B X f8?? 19 e X f4 NXf4
(apparently logical-Black maintains the 20 Re3
threat of mate at h l ). Then 23 N X c6 + ! White thought that by this attack on the
(this was the reason for the check a t a6!) queen he would gain a tempo for the defence
23 . . . B X c6 24 B X a7 + , and it is not White of his K-side. Note that the introductory
who is mated, but Black! (24 . . . Ka8 25 moves to the combination are exchanges,
Bb6+ Kb8 26 Qa7+ and 27 Qx c7 mate). creating the conditions for a decisive sacrifice.
23 Nd2
20 . . . N X e2+
23 . . . Qe l + and 24 .. . Rh8 + was threat­ 21 Q x e2 NXf3+
ened, so that White has no time to take on c6. 22 gXf3 Qg5+

4
 Combinations
The white king is forced to h l , after which
the bishop at b7 plays the leading role in the
attack.
23 Khl
B important point (the theme of diversion), by
23 RX£3!
• • •
24 RX£3 Qg4
White resigns.
A combination is an extraordinary path to
a goal. But in the given position this path is
the only correct one, or else the shortest
possible one.
A combination sharply changes the balance
of forces of the two sides. Like a stroke of
lightning it suddenly clarifies the situation,
exposes false values, and confirms true ones.
The aims of a combination can be highly
varied : mate to the opposing king, the achieve­
ment of a material advantage, a favourable
transformation of the position (say, transition
into a won ending), or, in an inferior position,
saving the game (by means of stalemate,
perpetual check, reducing play to a theoreti­
cally drawn ending, etc.), and also weakening
the opponent's pressure, or creating hin­
drances to the realization of an advantage.
In short, everything that is achievable by
normal, positional means can under certain
circumstances be achieved by an extraordina­
ry, combinational path.
There are several ways of classifying
combinations. From the practical point of
view (i.e. proceeding from the problem of
how to improve) the most important is the
5
division according to theme.
The theme of a combination is determined
by the answer to the question : by what
means is it carried out. For example, by the
diversion of an opposing piece, defending an
the pinning of an enemy piece (the theme of
pinning), and so on.
But before thinking about means of
combinational action, it must be determined
whether or not the conditions for a combina­
tion exist in the given position. Before search­
ing, it is necessary to know in which direction
to conduct the search.
What are the features of a position which
indicate to us the possibility of a combination?
Such conditions can be : the back rank is
inadequately defended, or the defence of it is
imaginary, squares in the immediate vicinity
of the king are weakened, there is a superiori­
ty of forces or greater piece mobility than the
opponent in an important sector of the board,
individual pieces are badly placed (undefend­
ed, positioned on the same file or diagonal,
lacking in co-ordination), and so on. The
motif of the combination-this is the initial
pointer (or pointers), the features of the posi­
tion which indicate the direction of search.
Thus, in every combination we will dis­
tinguish its aim, theme and motif.
We will begin with combinations on the
very common theme of diversion.
What is meant by diversion? .
This is a tactical device, forcing an enemy
piece or pawn to be diverted from the
defence of a key square (or line).
Keres-Hindre
Estonian Championship, Tartu, 1953
(See diagram next page)
Black has a difficult position-the opposing
rook has invaded the eighth rank, and the
knights at e8 and a6 are awkwardly placed.
Aiming to free himself, Black played 28 . . .
Nec7, offering the exchange of rooks. But
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
B w
there followed 29 Qd7!, when he was forced to
resign.
This sacrifice, diverting the queen from the
defence of the rook, decided the game. The
black king at h8 was not defending the rook,
and also had no escape square (if, for ex­
ample, the h-pawn had been at h6, the
sacrifice would not have worked).
Thus the motif of the combination on the
theme of diversion was the weakness (al­
though latent) of the back rank.
Keres-Trtiger
Match USSR-West Germany,
Hamburg, 1960
Keres played 29 Red2 with the threat of
30 RXd6 (after which the rook at e8 is
prise). The German master replied 29 . • •
offering the exchange of rooks, and not imagin­
ing that there was anything unpleasant in
store for Black ...
30 R X dS RXdS
31 Q£7 !
Watch out, the back rank! This tactical
stroke on the theme of diversion, overlooked
by Black, forced him to lay down his arms.
The queen cannot be taken because of mate,
on 31...Qc8 there follows 32 QXc4, while
after31...Kb8 32RXd8+ Qxd8 33 QXc4
White is a piece up.
In this combination too the motif of the
combination was the lack of defence of the
back rank. In comparison with the Keres­
Hindre game, in which the black queen had
not a single square to go to, in this example
the queen could have gone to c8. Also possi­
ble was 30...Kb8, defending the queen.
But in each case the queen, which was si­
multaneously defending rook and knight,
was obviously overloaded, which led to loss
of material.
Keres-Eiiskases
Semmering-Baden, 1937
en
Nc4,
6
 Combinations

By 32 RbS Keres created the threat of 33 Euwe-Keres

Bb4+ followed by 34 Rg5. Match-Tournament for the World
Championship, 1948
32 . .
. Re6

Black defends against the threat, by vacat­

ing e8 for his king. Now a queen check at
d8 would be fatal for Black, but how is White
to penetrate to that square?
To do this the enemy knight must be divert­
ed from f6, so the white rook sacrifices itself.

33 RX hS !

On 33 . . . NXh5 there follows 34 Qd8+

ReS 35 Bb4+ Re7 36 BXe7+ and mates
(the motif was the penetration of the queen The white queen has to defend g2, and
onto the eighth rank). cannot abandon the long diagonal, and so .. .
If Black does not take the rook, he has no
36 . . . Rc3f
defence against the numerous threats: 34 Bh6,
34 Rg5 and 34 Bb4+, and so Eliskases Diversion.
resigned.
37 Qd5 ReS!

Again diversion.
Keres-Kotov
Piimu, 1947 38 Qd2

w Now on 38 Qb7 the invasion of the second

rank, 38 . . . Rc2, is decisive. Note that if
Black had played 37 . . . Rc2 immediately
(instead of 37 . . . Rc5), White would have had
a defence-38 Bd2.

Were it not for the enemy pawn at d6,

White would be able to give mate at d8. Since
the d6 pawn cannot leave the d-file, its de­
fence of the e5 pawn is imaginary.And so .. .

20 NXe5!
A pseudo-sacrifice on the theme of diver-
sion with 'mate to the queen'.Black resigned.
It may appear that White has everything in
,
order. But in fact his queen and rook are
overloaded, and the bishop, which at first

2 7
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

sight seems securely guarded (by queen and Pfleger-Keres

rook), turns out to be undefended. Mter all, Bamberg, 1968
the queen has a more important task-that of
B
defending g2, while the rook has to prevent
the deadly check at f3. Therefore ...

38 • . . RXcl!

The theme i s diversion, and the motif is

the overloading of queen and rook. In short,
the rook cannot be taken by anything, but
this means that Black is a piece up with a
winning position.

Lyublinsky-Keres
In offering the exchange of rooks at e7
18th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1950
with his previous move, White assumed that,
in view of the threat of capturing at f7, Black
w
would have no choice, and after 45 ...RXe7
46 BXe7 White's centralized queen securely
defends the squares d l and g2. In view of the
passed c-pawn, Black would not be able to
hope for more than a draw. For example
46 ... Qh3+ 47 Ke2 Qg4+ 48 Kd2 Qf4+
(48. . .Nf3 + ? 49 Ke3) 49 Kc3 QXf2 50 BXh4
Qxh4 51 Qxf7+ .
But in the game there followed ...

The c3 pawn is attacked, but Black is not
threatening to take it, since then White gives
perpetual check at f5, c8 and d7. Therefore,
not fearing 46 . ..QXc3, Lyublinsky played
46 Qe6? (correct was 46 Kh2).
Keres replied with the diverting sacrifice
46 . . . b4!, and ... White had to resign.
The diversion of the c3 pawn from control
over d4 (after 47 cX b4) allows Black
the bishop by 47 . . . Qd4 + . But if White does
not take on b4, Black himself captures the c3
pawn (or plays . . . b3), when it is all over.
Here the motif of the diverting pawn
sacrifice was a double attack-a simultaneous
attack by the queen on the king (check) and
the bishop at f4.
45 . . . R X cS ! !
The check a t f 7 i s not so terrible! After
46 Qxf7+ Kh6 47 Qh7+ (or 47 Qg7+)
4 7 . . .Kg5 Black's king i s safe, and h e i s a
knight up. Mter 46 RXf7+ Kh6 Black is
again a knight up, since White cannot take
the rook because of mate at d l .
But why shouldn't White take the rook
to win
and remain the exchange up?
46 Q x c5
Now that, as a result of the diverting sac·
rifice, the white queen has moved from d5
(removing its guard on the squares d l , g2 and
h l ), Black's queen and knight, operating like
a well co-ordinated mechanism, win the
white rook by force.

8
 Combinations

46 . . . Qdl+ w r-������--�

47 Rel Qd3+ • ••• •

w
• • • •••
• • • •
• �.�.�.r
!!, . ��� • •
• �� • • !!,
r� •E,•
••�11
.
m. ••«--�•• �� �
�
. . �
On 41 ...Kg6 there follows 42 Rh6+ ,
driving the king into the centre: 42 ...Kf5 43
Qf2+ Ke4 (or 43 ...Kg5 44Be3+ , and mate
48 Re2 next move) 44 Qe3+ Kf5 45 RXh5+ Kg6
Forced, since after 48 Kg1 Qh3! the 46 Qh6 mate.
queen is lost (49 Qd5 Nf3+ ). Thus the motif of the rook sacrifice was a
murderous discovery with check.
48 • . . Qdl+
49 Rel Qd3+ Keres-8passky
50 Re2 Qh3+ Goteborg Interzonal, 1955
Mter repeating moves, Black successfully B
concludes his attack.

51 Kel Nf3+
White resigns, since after 52 Kd1 Qf l + he
loses his rook.
The motif of the combination, on the same
theme of diversion, was the co-ordinated
action of queen and knight, which became
possible after the diversion of the white
queen.
White's powerful bishops, excellently placed
Another fairly frequently-occurring com­
knight, and active queen and rook are attack­
binational theme is decoy (or luring). By
ing a black K-side which has been weakened
means of a sacrifice, an enemy piece is lured
by ...h6. The natural 29 ... N8d7 fails to
into an unfavourable position.
30 NXd7 QXg3 (or 30 .. QXd7 31 BXf6)
.

and now the intermediate check 31 NXf6+ .

Keres-Jansa
It was no doubt for this reason that Spassky
Budapest, 1970
decided to move his other knight to d7.
(See diagram next column) 29 . . . N6d7
41 Rh8+ ! It may seem that Black is not threatened
with anything immediate-if the knight
By luring the king to h8, White wins the
moves from e5 he exchanges queens ...
queen by a discovery with check: 41 ...KXh8
42 BXg7+ and 43 QXd5. 30 Q X g7+ !
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
Spassky overlooked this. By luring the
enemy king to g7, White gives a discovered
check. First he picks up the knight, and then,
by means of another discovered check, the
queen, as a result of which he comes out a
piece up: 30 ...KXg7 31 NXd7+ Kg8 32
Nf6+ Kf1(32 • . . Kh8 33NXe8+) 33 Nd5+.
Black therefore resigned.
On this occasion too the motif of the com­
bination was a discovered check, but in a
rather more complicated form.
Tolush-Keres
Training Tournament, Leningrad-Moscow,
1939
B
Ignoring the threat of 36 Qc7, Keres
played 35 • . . e2, on which there followed
36 Qc7.
Mate is threatened, Black has no way of
defending g7, and it appears that he does not
have a single check ...
But in fact he has a check, and, what's
more, a winning one!
36 . . • Qg3+ !
A temporary sacrifice, luring the king to g3,
after which there follows a destructive check.
37 KXg3 el Q+
=
And, without waiting for the mate in
three moves, Tolush resigned.
Here the motif of the combination was the
gaining of an important tempo, achieved by
means of a decoy sacrifice. The temporary
10
queen sacrifice enabled Black in one instant
to seize the initiative and to be the first to give
mate.
Keres-Kurajica
European Team Championship,
Kapfenberg, 1970
w
23 Q X h6+ !
The queen is sacrificed only for a brief
instant, so as to lure the king to h6. After
23 ...KXh6 there follows 24 NXf7+ Kg7
25NXd8RcXd8 26RXe7+,or25 ...BXd8
26 RXe8 NXe8 27 RXe8, in both cases
with a decisive material advantage for White.
The motif of the combination is a knight
fork (one of the forms of double attack), by
which White, as a minimum, regains his
pawn with a continuing attack.
23 . . . Kg8
24 Bh4
Here too 24 Qh8+ was possible, followed
by 25 NXf7+ and 26 NXd8, but Keres
wants to win by direct attack.
24 .. N8d7
.
On 24 ...N6d7 White wins by 25 NXf7
KXf7 26 RXe7+. If 24 ...QXd4, then
25 Rh3 with the threat of 26 Qh8+ (decoy,
followed by a deadly double check) 26 ...
KXh8 27 BXf6+ + and 28 Rh8 mate. It is
easy to see that other replies similarly fail to
save the game-White's advantage is too
great.
 Combinations

25 N X g6! A special type of combination is one in

which the aim is to 'immure' the enemy king.
Destroying the king's pawn screen. After
Completely surrounded by its own pieces, it
25 ...fXg6 26QXg6+ Kf8 27Rg3! mate is
is then mated by a knight, such a mate being
inevitable, while if 26 ...Kh8, then 27 BXf6+
known as a 'smothered mate'.
BXf6 (27 . . . NX/6 28 Rh3+) 28 RXe8+
An example of a ready-made smothered
etc.
mate construction is provided by a miniature
Black resigned.
game played in a tournament in Szczawno­
Zdroj (Poland) in 1950.
Tai-Keres
Candidates' Tournament, Yugoslavia, 1959
Keres-Arlamowski
Caro-Kann Defence
B
1 e4 c6
2 Nc3 dS
3 Nf3 d X e4
4 NXe4 Nd7
5 Qe2

Without bothering to ponder over this not

altogether usual queen move, the Polish
master continued his development by 5 • . .

Ngf6? ? , and was promptly mated-6 Nd6

mate.
Black has the possibility of a tempting
combination with a sacrifice of two pawns,
Keres-Larsen
luring the white king into a mating net:
Copenhagen, 1966f67
48 ...h5+ 49 Kxg5 (if 49 KX h5, then 49 ...
Qh3+ 50 KXg5 f6 mate!) 49 ... Qf6+ 50 w
Kxh5 Ne5.

This position did not occur in the game,

but could have occurred if Larsen had gone in
for a variation offered by Keres, in which
Mate is threatened at h6. Is this variation Black is left with an extra pawn on the e-fi1e.
correct, or does White have some way of Keres could have attempted to exploit the
saving the game? The reply to this question opposition of the white queen and black king
determined Keres's decision (cf. p.177, on the e-fi1e by 10 BXc7, and in the event of
No.1). 10 ...NxcJ?-11 Rd1! After 11 ...Bd7 (or

11
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

11 ...Nd7) Black is mated by 12 Nd6, diversion and decoy, we give an example in

exactly as in the Keres-Arlamowski game which these themes are closely interwoven
just considered. with each other.
Note that a deadly knight check at d6
Keres-Fine
(only not with mate, but with a fork) would
Match USSR-USA, Moscow, 1946
also have followed after 10 ... QXc7 (instead
of 10 . ..NX c7?) 11 BXd5 Bb7? (11 ...Ra7 w
is correct) 12 BXb7 QXb7 13 Nd6+ and
14 NXb7.
In this example too the mate is achieved
without the help of a decoy sacrifice. Only the
introductory move 10 BXc7 was a combina­
tional one, after which Black was not bound
to end up in a smothered mate.

Another modification of the smothered

mate-after K-side castling-is characterized
by a decoy queen sacrifice. With his last move Fine incautiously
moved his attacked rook from b8 to c8
B
(24 . . . Rb7 was correct, when after 25 Be5 the
threat of 26 BX/6 can be parried by 25 . . .
Qd7).
Using two ideas-diversion and decoy­
Keres struck a tactical blow.

25 NXf7!

The knight cannot b e taken by the rook

because of 26 QXc8, nor with the king, in
view of 26 Qe6 mate. In the first instance the
Here we have a typical text-book position· rook is diverted from the defence of the rook
The white king is mated as follows: at c8; in the second instance the king lured to
f7 is mated. It follows that the motifs of the
1 ... Qb6+
combination are: (1) the undefended state of
2 Khl Nf2+
the rook which rashly moved to c8 (in the
3 Kgl
event of 25 . . . RX/7), and (2) the fatal posi­
Giving up the exchange by 3 RX f2 allows
tion of the black king (after 25 . . . KX/7).
mate after 3 ...Re1+.
Thus White won a pawn, and, moreover,
3 ... Nb3++ the threat of 26 Nd6 forced Fine himself to
4 Khl Qgl+ ! offer the exchange of queens by 25 ... Qd7,
simplifying the opponent's task of realizing
This decoy queen sacrifice forces the rook
his advantage.
to 'wall up' the king's only escape.
We have seen how, by means of diversion,
5 RXgl Nf2 mate.
an enemy piece or pawn important for the
Now that the reader has made the acquain­ defence was eliminated. This same aim is
tance of combinations on the themes of pursued by combinations on the theme of

12
 Combinations

defence-elimination. But here the opposing White is a passed pawn to the good, but it
piece protecting the key square (or line) is not is blockaded. The b6 pawn, attacked by the
diverted, but is destroyed by a 'crude' knight, is defended by the bishop. But the
capture. bishop, in turn, is attacked. By sacrificing the
exchange, White eliminates the defender of
Keres-Aiekhine the b6 pawn, and ensures the advance of his
Margate, 1937 d-pawn and of his passed pawns on the Q-side.

w
Keres concluded the game by 23 Q X d7 + .
The motif of the sacrifice is already familiar
to the reader. On 23 . . . R X d7 there follows
24 Re8 + , and mates.
We will now examine combinations in
which the decisive word belongs to a passed
pawn. Such combinations occur not only in
the concluding stage of the game, when the
field of battle is already fairly cleared through
mutual elimination of the forces.
In the following example the promotion of
a pawn is achieved by defence elimination.
Keres-Barcza
Szczawno-Zdroj (Poland), 1950
w White eliminates the enemy pawns on the
37 RXd4
On 37 . . . e x d4 there follows 38 N X b6
Rei+ 38 Kh2 Qd8 40 Q X d4, after which
the forced march of the a-pawn is threatened.
For example : 40 . . . Rc2 41 a5 Ra2 42 a6
Kf8 (42 . . . Ra5 43 Qc3! Qxb6 44 Qc7+ or
43 . . . R X b5 44 Qc7+ ) 43 Na4 Qa5 44 d7,
and the game is over.
Instead of 40 Q X d4 Keres was intending to
play 40 d7, which would also have won :
40 . . . Rc7 (41 Qa8 was threatened) 41 a5 Ra 7
42 a6 Kf8 43 Q X d4 Rc7 44 Qe4 and then
45 Qe8+. In this variation the rook is helpless
against the passed pawns.
If instead Black keeps his king at g7 (or f7),
the win is achieved as follows : 42 . . . Rc7
(instead 42 . . . Kf8) 43 Q X d4 Ra7 44
of
Qd6 Kf7 (or 44 . . . Rc7 45 Qe6 Kf8 46 Qe8 +
Q X e8 47 d X eB=Q+ KX e8 48 Nd5 Ra7 49
b6 RX a6 50 b7, and the pawn queens un­
hindered) 45 Qd5 + Ke7 (or 45 . . . Kf8 46
Qe6) 46 Qe4+ Kf8 (if 46 . . . Kd6, then 47 Qe8)
47 Qe8+ Q X e8 48 d X e8=Q + K X e8 49
Nc8 Ra8 (if 49 . . . Rc7, then 50 b6 RX c8 51
b7) 50 b6 Kd8 (50 . . . RXc8 51 b7; 50 . . .
RXa6 51 b7) 51 b7 R X c8 52 b X c8=Q+
K X c8. While Black is picking up the a-pawn,
other wing : 53 Kg3 Kb8 54 Kf3 Ka 7 55
Ke4 KX a6 56 Kd5 Kb5 57 Ke6, and wins.

37 . . . ReS

Keres had also taken this reply into con­

sideration.

38 NXb6! RXdS
39 RXdS Qf5

13
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

The black queen is unable to combat the Blumenov-Keres

passed d:. and a-pawns. If 39. � .Qd8, then Tallinn, 1933
40 d7, 'fettering' the queen, followed by
B
a4-a5.
After the move in the game the d-pawn
reaches the prize square.

40 d7 Resigns

The promotion of the pawn was achieved

by defence-elimination.

If one of your pieces or pawns is blocking

a line, in freeing which you can carry out a
favourable manoeuvre or land the opponent
26 N X e3!
a tactical blow, it is worth weighing up wheth­
• • •

27 fXe3 B X g3+ !
er or not, in spite of loss of material, you can
28 K X g3
open this line.
Thus we have the theme of line-opening. If 28 Kg l , then 28 .. .Bh2+ 29 KXh2
(29 Kf2 Qh4 mate) 29 ...QeS+ 30 Kg l
Keres-Boleslavsky Qg3+. However, the same final position is
24th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1957 reached in the game.

w 28 • • • Qg5+
29 Kh2

If 29 Kf2, then 29 . Qh4+ and 30 ...

. .

Qg3+.

29 • • • Qe5+
30 Kgl Qg3+,

and mate next move.

Before we make the acquaintance of com­

Were it not for the knight at d4, White
would be able to give mate. This means that
the knight must move aside, in order to open
the d-file, and in such a way as to 'hurt' the
opponent.
30 Nb5 ! Resigns.
We will now investigate some combina­
tions, the theme of which is the destruction of
the enemy king's pawn cover.
By sacrificing two minor pieces, Black
exposes the king and easily concludes
attack.
binations on the theme of pinning, a few
words about how pinning affects the mobility
of pieces.
When pinned, a piece (or pawn), attacked
by a queen, rook or bishop, is completely or
partly paralyzed, since it screens another
piece-which is more valuable or is unde­
fended-which is positioned on the same line
(diagonal, file or rank).
If the pinned piece is screening the king, its
mobility is restricted to the maximum extent­
it can move only along the line of attack. If
his the pinned piece is not screening the king, but
some other piece, one has to reckon with the

14

possibility of a sacrifice, when 'for the sake of
a higher goal' the pinned piece leaves
prise the more valuable piece (for example, so
as to carry out a tactical blow).
An illustration of the exploitation of a
vertical pin by positional means is provided
by the finish to the following game.
R. Garcia-Keres
Buenos-Aires, 1954
B
The c-pawn cannot take, since this leaves
the rook at c2 en prise. Therefore the first
move suggests itself-the pawn
attacked.
25 • • • d5
One further detail-the c-pawn is not only
unable to leave the c-file, but also to advance,
since the c5 square is twice attacked by Black.
Now Black has four attacks on c4, while
White has only three defences, so he brings up
a fourth.
26 Rfcl
White has broken the vertical pin, and is
threatening to play 27 c5.
26 . . . dXc4
27 NXc4 Qe6!
The vertical pin has been replaced by anoth­
er pin-along the diagonal. The knight is
attacked by four pieces, and defended by
three. There is no fourth defence. True, the
knight can move, defending the queen in
Combinations
doing so, but then the rook at c2 is left un­
en defended.
Had White foreseen what was awaiting
him, he would of course have reconciled
himself to the loss of his c-pawn, although
this would not have saved the game.
28 Nd2 QXb3
29 RXc7
Forced, since after 29 NXb3 RXc2 White
is a rook down. Now he threatens mate at
c8, and on 29 ... RXc7 he regains his ma­
terial by 30 NXb3.
Nevertheless, the intermediate capture at
c7 does not achieve its aim. Black has the
possibility with one move of both defending
against the mate and removing his queen.
29 . . . Qe6!
White resigns.
As we have seen, the aim of the pin was to
win the besieged (and pinned) pawn at c4.
And now-the exploitation of a diagonal
must be
pin to create an irresistible mating threat.
Keres-Radovici
Leipzig Olympiad, 1960
w
White's centralized pieces dominate the
entire board, while the black pieces occupy
passive positions.
By 27 Qd4 Keres attacked the b6 pawn.
There is no way of defending it, and the
Rumanian master replied 27 . . . Qc7.
15
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

White can get away with taking the pawn: e-file-29 . .. Rae6, Keres would not have
28 RX b6, and now 28 . . . Rd8 29 Rc6 Qe 7 30 defended the pawn (30 e5 f6! or 30 f3 Nd3),
Qc3. But this was not at all the reason why but would have continued 30 Rc1, when after
Keres played 27 Qd4 ! 30 . . . dXe4 (or 30 . . . Rx e4 31 Rc7) 31 Rc7
White has a much more effective way of Black comes under an attack, for example :
winning. The f7 pawn is pinned and immobile, (a) 31 ... R6e7? 32 RXe7 R X e7 33 Qc8 +
which allows White to carry out a decisive Bf8 34 Bh6, and mates.
tactical manoeuvre. (b) 31 . ..Rf6 32 Qd7 Rf8 33 Bd6.
After only one more move, 28 Rg6!, Black (c) 31 ... Rf8 (relatively best) 32 R X f7
resigned in view of the inevitable mate at g7. (stronger than 32 QXa5 Nd3 33 Be3 BXb2,
when Black can still resist) 32 ...R X f7 33
In the following example a sacrifice allows
QXe6, and White must win.
the creation of two strong threats-mate and
the win of the queen. 29 ... Rf6
30 Qd7 Rfe6
Keres-Giigoric 31 Re3 d X e4
Candidates' Tournament, Yugoslavia, 1959 32 Rg3

w Now, in addition to his material difficulties,

Black has further worries : he has to defend
against 33 Bh6 ! .

32 . . . Ra8
33 Qd4 !

By means of a pin White wins a pawn.

33. . . Rg6
34 Q x e4 ReS
35 b3 Nc6
27 RXg7+ ! B X g7
The black knight wants to reach d4.
28 Qg4
36 Rd3! Re6
The bishop at g7 is pinned and attacked.
37 Qc4 Ree8
Moreover, White is threatening not only mate
38 Rg3 Re6
at g7, but also 29 Nh6 + winning the queen.
Black is unable to obtain adequate com­ w
pensation for it by 28 .. .Rg6 : 29 Nh6 +
B X h6 30 Q X d7, and he has only a rook and
minor piece for queen and pawn. There only
remains the move in the game.

28 . . . QXf5
29 Q x rs

If now 29 .. . Nd3, then 30 Re3, when both

30 ...N X f4 31 Q X f4 B X b2 32 e X d5, and
30 .. . Rf6 31 Qd7, are in White's favour.
On the attempt to exploit the pin on the 39 Bh6!

16
 Combinations

A further variation on the theme of the pin. Here is an example of ignoring a pin for
The bishop cannot be taken, in view of the sake of 'a higher goal'.
40 Qg4 with the simultaneous threats of 41
QXg7 mate and 41 QXc8+. Keres-Behrensen
After the forced reply Keres exchanges Mar del Plata, 1957
bishops, after which the black king is in­
adequately defended.

39 . . . Rg6
40 BXg7 KXg7

Of course, not 40 ...RXg3? 41 fXg3

KXg7 in view of the double attack 42 Qg4+.

41 Qc3+ Kg8

27 g4

Keres undermines the f5 pawn which

defends the knight.

27 . . . N£6

The e5 pawn is pinned. In attacking the

rook, Black decided that he would then be
able to take on g4 ...
42 h4!
28 Rd4 fXg4
Now after h4-h5 Black will also have to
reckon with mating threats.
w
42 . . . Ne7

If 42 ...h6, then 43 Rxg6+ fXg6 44 Qf6.

43 RXg6 + hXg6
44 QXa5 Rcl +
45 Kh2 Rdl

This last move was sealed (Gligoric was

defending against the threat of 46 Qd8 + ), but
the game was not resumed-Black resigned.
As has already been mentioned, under
certain conditions a move by the pinned
piece is not only theoretically possible, but
also advantageous, despite the fact that a
more valuable piece is left en prise.
29 eX£6 !
Breaking the pin. In view of the threat of
mate on the back rank (the motif of the
combination), Black cannot take the queen,
and is forced to resign.

17
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Tal-Keres 35 Rb6 B X e4+

Candidates' Tournament, Curacao, 1962 36 Ke2 Bf3+

Diversion.

37 Ke1 f4
38 Bc3 fX g3
39 R X a6 Rd4!
40 Ra7+ Kh6

After 40 B X d4 eXd4+ the g-pawn queens.

41 Rf7

And, without waiting for Keres's reply,

Tal resigned.
Tal, who is two pawns down, has just
played Rd l -d6. This move allows a tactical In practical play the pinning theme can be
blow, by which Keres wins the exchange. closely interwoven with other combinational
themes.
26 . . . Qb6+
27 Kg1
Maslov-Keres
If 27 Kg2, then of course 27 . . . Nf4 + and USSR Spartakiad, 1967
28 . . . Qx d6.
B
27 • . . Nd4!

Breaking the pin, and how !

28 R X h6 Nxf3+
29 Kf2 g X h6
30 K X f3 ReS

As a result of his combination Black has

won the exchange, and also has a positional
advantage. The next stage is to realize his
advantage. Were it not for the bishop at d5, Black
could win a piece due to the pin by . . . NXe5.
31 Rh1 Kg7
But where should the bishop be moved?
32 Bb3 Bb7
There is nothing for which it can be exchanged
Both players were in time trouble. By
and similarly it is not possible to move it,
controlling the e6 square, and thus preventing
creating a new threat. But the bishop can be
. . . Re6, White has created the threat of 33
given up for a pawn . . .
Bd2. The simplest way of parrying this was
by 32 . . . a5, vacating a6 for the other rook. 14 . . . B X g2!
But Black's advantage is too great, and the
After 15 KXg2 NXe5 Black is a pawn up
loss of the h6 pawn merely complicates
with an excellent position. Therefore, since in
matters, without affecting the result.
any case his knight is lost, White in turn, be­
33 Bd2 f5 fore taking the bishop, gives the knight up for
34 R X h6 Rad8 a pawn. An instance of a 'desperado' knight.

18
 Combinations

15 Nxf7 between two opposing pieces which are

positioned on the same line.
The knight ca n only take the f 7 pawn, since
otherwise (after 1 5 NX d7, for example) Black
Keres-Tarnowski
takes the rook at f l .
Helsinki Olympiad, 1952
15 . . . R X £7
16 K x g2 w

White has maintained material equality.

However, after the loss of his g-pawn (the
consequence of Black's tactical operation
which involved exploiting the pin) the posi­
tion of his king has been seriously weakened.
The semi-open f-file and the prospect of
establishing his knight at h4 or f4 indicates
the direction of Black's attack.

16 . . . NeS!
36 Ne7+ !
Again exploiting the pin. Now White has to
By cutting the connections between queen
parry the queen check at d5.
and rook (36 . . . B X e7 37 Q X e6+ ), White
17 £3 QdS forces the enemy king to go to f7 (decoy),
18 Qc3 Ng6! after which a discovered check is used to
19 Rael carry out the winning manoeuvre.

If 19 Be2, then 19 . . . Nf4+ 20 Kf2 Qg5, 36 . • • K£7

when 21 Rg1 fails to 21 . . . Nh3 + . 37 Nc6+ Kg8
38 Nd8!
19 . • . Nh4 +
20 Kh3 A pin (on the rook at e6) and, simul­
taneously, diversion (of the queen away from
Or 20 Kg3 Qg5+ 21 Kh3 Qg2+ 22 KXh4
the defence of the rook).
when together the queen and rook mate the
isolated white king : 22 . . . Rf4+ 23 Kh5 Qg6 38 . . . Q X d8
mate. 39 Q x e6+ Kh8
40 Q£7 Resigns.
20 • • • N X £3
In the examples considered the most
White resigned, since 21 Re3 leads to mate varied tactical devices have been employed.
after 21 . . . Qh5+ 22 Kg3 Q X h2+ 23 Kg4 In those instances where at some stage
Rf4 mate. a sacrifice (either genuine or pseudo) has
We conclude our illustrations of pinning occurred, we have agreed to regard such an
with a comparatively simple forcing man- operation as a combination. If things have
oeuvre, in which, however, several themes been managed without a sacrifice-however
are put into effect, including decoy and unexpected, paradoxical or spectacular an

1
diversion. But the introductory move is based individual move (or moves) has seemed-this
on the theme of interference. was only a forcing variation, or forcing
In interference the connections are cut manoeuvre.

19
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

One of the most common tactical devices, 33 Qa4 ! Resigns.

employed both in carrying out a combina­
Another highly effective tactical device is
tion, and independently, is the double attack­
the creation of a double threat, when one has
the simultaneous attack by one piece on two
to simultaneously defend against different
enemy objects. A highly effective form of this
threats by two pieces.
is the knight fork, but it is probably the queen
An example of a double threat in a combi­
which most often makes a double attack.
nation (after an introductory decoy sacrifice)
The ability of this, the most mobile and long­
was the conclusion of the Keres-Gligoric
range piece, to conduct 'all-round fire', is
game (p. l 6).
constantly exploited in a tactical struggle.
In the following game a double attack
The strike capability of the queen enables it,
concluded a combination on the theme of
in contrast to other pieces, to attack targets on
defence-elimination.
files, ranks, and even diagonals.
The strength of the double attack is that
Tolush-Keres
with his answering move the opponent can
Estonian Championship, Tal/inn, 1945
remove only one of his attacked pieces. It
should, however, be borne in mind that in B
certain cases both attacked pieces can be de­
fended by this one move. In addition, it may
be advantageous, in moving one of the at­
tacked pieces, to create a strong counter­
threat.
Let us see how the tactical device of the
double attack is exploited in 'pure form'-i.e.
without an introductory sacrifice of material.
Keres-Thomas
Hastings, 1937/38 White's last move was Qel-bl. By remov­
B ing his queen from the e-file and defending
his bishop at c2, he is now threatening to
take the knight. But the knight does not
retreat . . .
21 . • . N X c3!

Defence-elimination !

22 R X c3 Q X d4

A double attack. White is unable to defend

simultaneously his rook and knight. This
Black played 31 . . . Ba3, not fearing the means that Black regains his temporarily
pin . . . sacrificed piece and remains with a material
32 Ral Qf2 advantage.

The bishop cannot be taken, of course, 23 Bb4 Q X d2

because of mate. But White can simulta­ It is possible that Keres's opponent per­
neously attack the black bishop and rook. mitted the tactical operation, hoping in turn

20
 Combinations
for a discovered attack, 24 RXc4, after which
Black's queen and rook are simultaneously
attacked. But now he saw that 24 ...Qd7
parries both threats, and in addition White
loses another pawn: 25 RXc6 Qxc6, or
25 Qb3 Rec8 26 RXc6 (26Bd3BX e4!) 26 ...
Qxc6.
24 a5 B X e4
After 25 BXe4 NXe4 again 26 RXc4 does
not work, this time because of 26 ...Qe3 !
w happen that a tactical operation succeeds
White cannot take the rook because of a
forced mate: 27 RXc6 Nf2+ 28 Kg l Nd l +
29 Kh l Qe l + and 30 ...RXe l mate. But
in order to parry this threat, he has to give up
the exchange, in addition to the two pawns he
is already down.
White resigned.
And now-the creation of two threats
without the help of a combination.
Keres-Clarke
Hastings, 1957j58
w tional.
* We are not thinking here of lost positions,
1 By . 20 Nh4 White created two threats:
21 Ng6+ winning the queen, and 21 f4 win­
ning the bishop.It is impossible to parry both
threats simultaneously.
After 20 . . . Rg8 21 f4 Keres won a piece,
and a few moves later Black curtailed his
resistance.
We can remove another feature from a
combination-the fact that the variations
comprising it have to be forced. It may
(does not become possible, but succeeds!)
only thanks to a mistake by the opponent,
this mistake being provoked.
The provocation of a mistake is called a
trap. And a successful trap is when the op­
ponent gives in to the provocation.
One can argue about whether or not a trap
should definitely involve a risk for the one
who is setting it. But in both cases the pro­
vocation consists of a clever move, hoping
for ap error by the opponent. He appears
to be invited to choose a move (or variation)
which seems favourable or at any rate
natural. And this move meets with an un­
expected refutation.
Playing for traps which involve a serious
risk rarely occurs in games between top
masters. The high standard of the opponent
makes it highly probable that he will see
through the trap, and this will have unfa­
vourable consequences-material or posi­
In important events the traps employed
are normally those in which the risk is re­
latively slight, even if the opponent should
see through the clever idea*. These are little
traps which the opponent is set, without
deviating from the intended plan, "in the
general course of things ".
Often a trap tempts the opponent into
playing actively or gaining material.
where anything may be tried to save the game.
21
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Keres-Lillenthal check at c5 and the exchange on d3 Black

Stockholm Olympiad, 1937 wins the exchange by . . . Nf2+.
But Keres's opponent, after playing 13
w
. . •

Qc5+ (which is forced), did not win the

exchange. And this is why. After 14 Kh1
NXd3 15 QXd3 Nf2+ 1 6 RXf2 QXf2
White would have attacked the queen by
1 7 Rfl, and on 1 7 ...Qc5 would have pursued
it with 18 b4. The only move is 18...Qc6,
but then comes 1 9 NXe7+ .
Thus, had Black been tempted into winning
the exchange, he would have lost his queen.

Keres-Taimanov
Here Keres played 15 e4, 'inviting' his
19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951
opponent to take the pawn. Bnt Lilienthal
declined the 'gift', and retreated his bishop w
to c6. And he was right to do so.
Why was the e4 pawn invulnerable ?
Because on 15 . . . BX e4? there would have
followed 16 Ng5 ! BXc2 (if 16 . . . BXg5,
then 17 BXe4 and f2-f4) 1 7 BXb7 and 1 8
BXaS, with a material advantage.
This trap was of course a highly transpar­
ent one. By placing his pawn en prise, White
himself appeared to urge his opponent to
search for the tactical blow he had devised.
Of course, Black is not threatening to win
The offer to take on e4 'for free' would in
the d4 pawn, in view of the exchange on d4
itself have forced Black to be wary.
and the discovered check (BXh7 + ). Keres,
however, moved his queen off the d-file, and
Keres-Gereben
played 12 Qe2.
Amsterdam Olympiad, 1954
There is no longer a discovered check with
w the bishop, and Black has the opportunity to
take the pawn. What had Keres prepared in
this case ?
12 . ..NXd4 13 NXd4 QXd4. The black
queen has been lured onto the diagonal of
the bishop at b2, and now comes a jump by
the knight : 14 Nd5 ! Black has only one reply,
14 ... Qc5, after which it may seem that all
his pieces are securely defended.

{See diagram next column)

Keres played 13 Nd5. At first sight this If Black, in weighing up the consequences
move seems to be a mistake-after the queen of the capture on d4, had cut short his

22
 Combinations

w pawn. If, say, the heavy pieces were removed

from the board, White's advantage would
become obvious. Therefore it is natural that
Keres aims for exchanges.
With his next move Alekhine appears to
fall in with his opponent's wishes.
24 . .. Bh3
At first sight it appears that, before parrying
the mating threat, White can, in full accord­
ance with his strategic task, exchange rooks
calculation at this position (having decided by 25 RXe8+ RX e8, and then by 26 Qd2
that there was nothing for White to attack), defend g2. At the same time he offers the
he would have suffered a catastrophe : exchange of queens . . .
15 . . . BX/6 White wins
1 5 B X f6 g X f6 (on It was this that Alekhine was hoping for,
immediately by 16 Qe4!) 16 N X e7+ Q x e7 in setting his little trap.
1 7 Qg4+ ! (this way, rather than 17 Qh5,
B
when Black replies 17 . . f5 and White
.

achieves nothing, whereas now he wins the

queen) 1 7 . . . Kh8 1 8 Qh4, and Black can avoid
mate only by giving up his queen (18 . . .f5).
This is why Taimanov declined the 'gift'
and played 12 . . . ReS.
As was indicated by Keres, an energetic
reply to the trappy move 12 Qe2 would
have been 12 . . . Nb4 !.

ICeres-1\Jeld[bme A rook sacrifice, diverting the queen from

AVRO-Toumament, Holland, 1938 the defence of g2-26 . . . Re 1 + ! I would have
B forced White's immediate capitulation (27
R X e1 QX d2,· 27 Qx e1 QXg2 mate, or 27
Kf2 QXg2 + 28 KXe1 Qfl mate).
Keres did not fall into the trap. He played
25 g3, and the game continued :
25 . • . Qf6
26 Re3
White seizes the e-file, forcing the exchange
of rooks.
26 • • • Bd7
White's position is better. His knight, 27 Rdel R X e3
which occupies a dominating position in the 28 R X e3,
centre, is stronger than the enemy bishop. and the World Champion had to conduct a
Black's central pawn is blockaded, while on difficult defence. In the end Alekhine never­
the Q-side White has three pawns against theless succeeded in complicating matters,
two and the prospect of creating a passed and in gaining a draw.

3 23
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Keres-Tal cannot capture the knight with either his

Piirnu, 1971 queen or his rook, in view of mate at d l .
Tal later related how h e had already written
B
down 22 ...QXe5 on his scoresheet, when he
suddenly saw the murderous 'quiet' move
which Keres had prepared.

White's last move was Qf3-e4. Black is

afforded the possibility of capturing on e5 . . .
Mter some thought Tal decided against
22 .. .NXe5. But not because of 23 f4?, when
Black has the spectacular reply 23 ...Ng4 ! !, 23 Rd2 ! !
after which mate is threatened at d l , the
A tactical stroke, which combines two
queen is attacked, and White loses. Note
ideas: diversion and the weakness of the back
that it is only 23 ...Ng4 which wins for
rank. The rook cannot be taken-by the
Black, whereas the plausible transposition of
knight because of 24 QXe5, or by the rook
moves 23 ...Rd l + ? 24 Kh2 Ng4+ ? not
in view of mate after 24 QS+ . The queen is
only fails to achieve its aim, but loses instant­
also invulnerable due to 24 RXdS mate.
ly due to the undefended state of the back
Meanwhile Black has both rook and knight
rank. After 25 hXg4 QXe4 Black is mated
en prise, and his knight cannot move, since
by 26 ReS!
then the queen will be undefended. On 23 ...
Why then did Tal not take the e5 pawn? ReS or 23 . . . Qc7 White wins by 24 QXc4
It was because Keres was not at all obliged with the same ideas-diversion and weakness
to play 23 f4. Instead of this he would have of the back rank.
invaded the seventh rank with his rook-23 Thus at the last moment Tal saw through
Rc7 !, with an excellent position. the trap and avoided the loss of a piece. He
Having rejected 22 ...NXe5, Tal began crossed out the move that he had already
considering 22 . . .QXe5, after which White written down, and played 22 . . . b5.

24
 The creation of a tactically favourable situation

The opportunity of carrying out a combi­ B

nation (or tactical device), without undertak­
ing any positive action and merely awaiting a
mistake by the opponent, rarely presents
itself. True, it may happen that, in a situation
favourable for him or 'on level ground',
your opponent will make a tactical oversight.
Without being forced to do so, he makes a
poor move, allowing you to carry out a com­
bination, or else he creates such a possibility
for you in carrying out his plan, by making a
mistake in his calculations. 14 . . . Nd4!
But much more often a combination is the
consequence of successful preparatory ac­ Mter the inevitable exchange of the f3
tion-the logical consequence of the devel­ knight, the black queen penetrates to h2.
opment of an initiative or else the seizure of The other attempt to open the diagonal for
the initiative as a result of counter-play. We the bishop at b7 and to exchange the f3
should add that in a difficult situation, when knight, 14 . . . Nce5 15 NXe5 QXe5, achieves
it is necessary to parry numerous threats, the nothing for Black after 16 f4.
probability of a mistake increases.
It can be confidently stated that the creation 15 B X d4 B X £3
of favourable preconditions for successful 16 gX£3 Q X h2 +
combinational play, the creation of positions 17 l(fl c X d4
in which the opponent has all the time to be
The white king is exposed and subject to
on the alert (which makes a mistake on his
attack.
part highly probable), is a much more difficult
task than the discovery of the combination 18 Be4
itself.
Let us see how, in the course of a tactical Mter the immediate exchange, 1 8 fXg4
struggle, a position becomes 'ripe' for a dXc3 19 QXc3, Black would have successful­
concluding combination. ly continued his offensive by 19 . . . Bc5 20
Qc2 Rd8.
Cioldenov-ICeres If White does not eliminate the knight at
15th USSR Championship, Leningrad, 1947 g4, but plays 18 Nb5, Black's attack con-
The h2 square, at which the attack is aimed, tinues as follows : 18 . . . Qh3+ 1 9 Kg1 Nh2
is defended by the knight at f3. Black's 20 Be4 (20 Be2 Rc8) 20 . . . Rc8 with the threat
problem is to remove this defence. of 21 . . . ReS, as well as 21 . . . g5 and . . . g4,

3* 25
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

or 19 Ke2 (instead of 19 Kgl) 1 9 . . . Ne5 21 • • • hS!

20 Be4, and now an immediate win results
In this way the rook at h8 joins the battle.
from 20 . . . d3 + !
22 gS

So as to avoid opening the h-:file for the

rook. Even so, 22 Qg3 was more tenacious
(22 . . • QXg3 23 [Xg3 R X b2 24 Rabl).

22 . . . B X gS
23 Radl Rh6
24 Qa5?

A desperate attempt at counter-attack,

instead of which White should have played
24 b4.
18 . . . RbS
19 fX g4 24 . . . Bh4
2S Q X a7
As was already stated in the note to White's
The other attempt to defend f2, 25 Rd2, is
1 8th move, White is bound to eliminate this 26 Q x a7
met by 25 . . . Rg6 (for example,
knight, which co-ordinates so well with the
Rg1 + 27 Ke2 Qe5 28 Kd1 RX e1 + , and
black queen. If 19 Nb5, then 19 . . . d3 ! 20
wins). But now comes a decisive combination,
B X d3 Ne5, after which White is unable to
prepared by Keres's purposeful preceding
repulse the attack (for example 21 Nc7 + Kf8 play.
or 21 Be4 Q-0).

19 . . . d X c3 B

20 Bc6+

If White takes the pawn immediately

(20 Q X c3), Black castles, threatening 21 . . .
Bf6.

20 • • • XIS
21 Q X c3

25 . . . BX£2!
26 Q x £2 Rf6
27 Bf3 Qh3+

The final blow will be struck by the rook

at b8. On 28 Ke2 (28 Qg2 RX/3+) there
follows 28 . . . R X f3 29 Q X f3 R X b2+ 30
Ke3 Rb3 + , winning the queen.
White resigned.

26
 The Creation of a Tactically Favourable Situation

Mikenas--,Keres �, i'
,
"' Outwardly a logical move, in accordance
17th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1949 with White's plan of defence (he wants to
block the dangerous diagonal by c3-c4), but
B
in fact a mistake.
Correct was 13 B X c3, when on 13 . . . Qe7
White could have played 14 h4 ! . Weaker is
14 0-0, since then White has to reckon with
14 . . . g5 and 1 5 . . . Q X e2.

13 . . . gS!
14 Nd3

White has delayed the development of his

K-side. His last move was g2-g3, with the
intention of fianchettoing his bishop. The
drawback to this manoeuvre is that it weakens
his e2 square, which is situated on the half­
open e-file.
Black's goal is clear. But how is he to
reinforce the action of his rook?

8 .. . b6
The first move of the combination is a
After driving away the queen, the bishop decoy sacrifice :
will be trained on e2.
14 . .
. R X e2+ ! !
9 Bg2 Ba6 15 K x e2
10 Qc2 Nbd7
Now the white king is on the diagonal of
More exact is the immediate 1 0 Re8,
the black bishop, and the knight at d3 is
. • •

preventing White from developing his knight.

pinned. How should this pin be exploited?
Then 1 1 Bf3 would involve a loss of time, and
The knight must be attacked, in such a way
. . . Nbd7-e5 would lead to a clear positional
that White cannot play c3-c4.
advantage for Black.
The other way of developing the g 1 knight 15 . . . Ne5!
was by 1 1 e3, but then the same manoeuvre
The knight at d3 is indefensible. The main
. . . Nbd7-e5 would have disclosed a new
thing, of course, is not that for the sacrificed
weakness in White's position at d3.
rook Black gains a knight and pawn. Situated
11 Nh3 on the open lines and unable to castle, the
white king comes under a very strong attack.
Now the knight will defend the e2 pawn
from an active post at f4. In addition, White 16 Kd1
can hope to castle K-side.
The attempt to give up the queen-16
11 • . • Re8 B X g5 B X d3 + 1 7 Q X d3 N X d3 1 8 K X d3
12 Nf4 B X c3 -obtaining a rook and minor piece for it,
13 b X c3? does not give any chance of saving the game.

27
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Mter 18 ...Qd7 (19 B X/6 Qf5+ 20 Be4 W

Q X/6) the restless position of the white king
would quickly tell.

16 . . . B X d3
17 Qa4

White attempts to prevent the enemy queen

from going to d7. On 17 Qb3 there would
have followed with great effect 17 ...Qd7,
intending ...Qf5.
But all the same the black queen goes to d7.
was hoping to play ...Bb7, defending his
17 . . . bS
knight and bringing into play his undeveloped
18 Qa6 Qd7 !
queen's rook. But Keres had been aiming for
Now the threat is not only 19 ...Qf5, but this position, and with a double attack he
also 19 ...b4. wins a pawn.

19 Kc1 b4 23 N X e6 !
20 QaS
This i s a pseudo-sacrifice. O n 23 ...fxe6
B there follows 24 B X d5, when the bishop
cannot be taken because of 25 Q X d5+ and
26 QxaS, while 24 ...Rb8 is decisively met
by 25 Qe5.

23 B X e6
24 B X d5 Rd8

An attempt to exploit the pin to create

threats on the K-side.Black could have played
24 ...Bf6, when after the retreat of his queen
20 a6 White would have been a healthy pawn to the
good.
A 'quiet' move, after which it becomes
clear that the white queen has lost its way on 25 e4 Bg4
the flank. The threat is 2
1 ...Nc4, winning 26 Rd3 Kh8
the queen (for example, 21 cXb4 Nc4), while
Black wants to play ...Bc5, but this is not
on the attempt to break out of the encircle­
possible immediately because of the discov­
ment by 21 Qb6 there follows 2
1 ...Qa4, with
ered check 27 B X f7+.
inevitable mate.
White resigns. 27 Qe5 !

Now on 27 ...Bc5 there still follows>

Keres-�vemdish
28 B X f7! Also after other replies, the basic
15th USSR Championship, Leningrad, 1947
idea of White's tactical play is to divert the
Black's last move was . . b6. The knight at
. enemy rook from the defence of the back
c5 is attacked, and on its retreat Leven:fish rank.

28
 The Creation of a Tactically Favourable Situation

• • •
B Walther-Keres
r·y�
.-.
. ._., ;··�·
'�10' Zurich, 1959

-�· - � � · ­ B

. ·�� .
E . • E •-t•
• a�t• w�
���l-
.

�L.q;,·�.·���-
··'01' %�0!��� %

• • -
•
.... ..

• e

27 . . . Bf6
On 27 ...Bd6 Keres would not have moved
his queen, but would have replied 28 Bb3!,
pinning the bishop at d6. Then 28 . ..h5 is White is a pawn up, but his king is in an
forced, and after 29 RXd6! RXd6 30 extremely dangerous position. It should be
Qe8+ Kh7 31 BXf7 Black has only a few borne in mind that it has already moved, so
'dying' checks-31 ...Rd1+ 32 Kg2_ Bf3+ that castling is not possible.
(or 32 . . . Bh3+ 33 KXh3 etc.) 33 KXf3 By moving his attacked rook, 34 • • • ReS,
Qg4+ 34 Kg2, with a quick mate. Keres created the threat of a discovered
check-35 ... Bc4+.
28 Qc7 Rd7
Of course, White cannot take on e6: 35
29 Qc6 Bh3
Nxe6 RXe6+ 36 Kf l Qe2+ , while 35 Qe3
w
• • • • fails to 35 . ..Bf7.

��
if� �� � r��. �,
• :•
�
35 Kf l looks a natural continuation (35 . . .
•
���.�- -�·
• %
. .
Bc4+ 36 Kgl), but 35 ... Nd5! leaves White

. - % 1··-- ····
in a hopeless position, since a move by the
.

� queen (say, to d2) allows 36 . ..Ne3+! (37

• •E• • QXe3 Bc4+ ; 37 Kgl NX dl) .

• ��� 11. �.l

rn�--�. ���!@ �n
35 Qd2

•
• •
• •
• �
6
Having blocked the second rank, White
decided that he could survive the discovered
30 Be6! check. Now on 35 ...Bc4+ there follows
36 Kf2, and if 36 .. . Nd3+ then 37 Kg2
The motif is the weakness of the back rank,
(37 . . . Nel + 38 Kf2!), after which all White's
and the theme-line-opening (the d-file), in­
pieces are defended. But Keres had in mind a
terference (of the h3 bishop's diagonal) and
different discovered check ...
diversion (of the rook). And in specific terms:
the rook cannot be captured because of mate 35 . . . Bh3+ !
at e8, nor the bishop because of mate after
Preventing the white king from going to g2.
31 Qc8+ Bd8 32 QXd8+.
Black resigns. 36 Kf2 Nd3+
It is curious that both the tactical cata­
Exploiting the pin.
strophes in this game should occur on the
e6 square. 37 . Kgl Rel + !

29
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

This move implements the idea of diversion 38 • • . RXhl +

(the rook at dl is tied to the defence of the 39 K X hl
queen, and therefore the white king is forced
And in conclusion-a fork.
to move).

38 Kh2 39 . . . Nf2+
For Black it is extremely important that
For those who like elegant finishes, we
the white king should be deprived of the
suggest that they find another way to win
square g2, and that the exchange of rooks at
(cf. p. 1 77 No. 2 for the answer).
h l , which is an essential part of the combina­
tion, should take place with check. Otherwise
40 Kh2 N X dl
White would be able to make the intermediate
41 Q X b2 N X b2
exchange on 1 77, enabling him to eliminate
all the threats. White resigns.

30
 The calculation of variations
Before embarking on a tactical operation,
a player calculates the consequences of each
move (his own and the opponent's) and of
the entire operation as a whole. The aim of
the calculation is to consider the most prob­
able replies and to find retorts to them.
Some of the combinations and tactical
devices examined by us have been relatively
simple : after the discovery of the idea, the
calculation did not present any difficulty, in
view of the absence in a forcing variation of
any side branches. In other instances the
finding of the idea and even the calculation
of the main variation comprised only a part
of the problem. It was necessary to weigh up
the consequences of secondary continuations,
each of which could have refuted the entire
concept, and in the end forced the combina­
tion to be rejected. It is especially difficult to
foresee so-called intermediate moves. It can
also happen that a combinational idea will
succeed thanks to a subtle intermediate move
of one's own.
Forcing variations have to be calculated to
the end, or almost to the end, i.e. the calcula­
tion must be taken to a position where not
only the material balance, but also the eval­
uation of the resulting position, is undisputed.
Such a position is called determined, and this
means that with his next few moves the oppo­
nent has no possibility of changing the eval­
uation. Thus, the aim of a combination is to
transform an undetermined position into a
determined one.
* Apart from the complicated nature of the position on the board, account must also be taken of a restriction
on time for thought.
31
If the development of events is not forced,
an exhaustive analysis is normally impossible.
In complicated positions* the 'tree of cal­
culation' has to be cut short at some point,
and the conclusion based on considerations
of a general nature. An exact calculation is
also difficult in quiet positions, when there is
a manoeuvring struggle, in short, when the
forces of the two sides are not in close contact,
so that the opponent's choice of replies is not
subject to strict reckoning. In such situations
the anticipation of the opponent's specific
moves becomes of secondary importance, and
reduces to an estimation of the two or three
most probable continuations. The leading
role here is played by an evaluation of the
position.
But in every case, at some stage or other,
the calculation of specific variations has to ,
give way to evaluation.
Variations are calculated by both players,
and both players evaluate the position. If all
these calculations and all evaluations were to
coincide, no conflicts would arise on the chess
board-every game would end in a draw. But
in fact it is by no means always that the players
operate with the same variations, and 'see'
and calculate identically. And it is not just
a matter of playing strength, although, of
course, both range and accuracy of evaluation
depend on this.
It can happen that both players will cal­
culate one and the same variation, but will
evaluate it differently-each thinks that the
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
given variation is favourable for him. Thus
in the course of a game conflicts arise and
are settled, being conditional upon correct
and incorrect calculation of variations, or
upon differences in positional evaluation.
First, an example in which the sacrifice of a
piece demands the concrete calculation of a
main variation and of all its branches.
Keres-Laurentius (Laurine)
Correspondence, 1935
This game was played by correspondence.
We, however, will regard it as one played in
a normal tournament, and will analyze the
resulting position without moving the pieces.
22 B X f6!
Black's choice is restricted to two replies :
22 . . . g x f6 and 22 . . . B X f6-others are an­
swered by a deadly discovered check, while
running away with the king 'before the very
eyes' of the white pieces does not bear con­
sideration.
Mter 22 . . . g X f6 Black is mated in four
moves : 23 Qh5 + Kg8 24 Qg4+ Kf7 25
Qg7 + Ke8 26 Nc7 mate. There remains only
the capture with the bishop.
22 . .. BXf6
23 Rd7+
This second move of the combination
demanded greater effort : Black can not only
block the check with his knight (as occurred
in the game), but can also move his king :
32
(a) 23 . . . Kg8 allows the elegant 24 Q X f6 !
(24 . . . gXf6 25 Rg7 mate).
(b) On 23 . . . Kg6, mate follows after 24
R X g7 + ! B X g7 25 Qg4 + Kf7 26 Q X g7 +
and 2 7 Nc5+ , a s well a s 24 Nf4+ Kf5 (or
24 . . . Kh6 25 Qh5 mate ; 24 . . . Kg5 25 Qh5+
KX/4 26 g3 mate) 25 g4+ Kg5 26 h4+
Kh6 (26 . . . KXh4 27 Qh3+ Kg5 28 Qh5+
KX/4 29 QJ5 mate) 27 g5 + B X g5 28 Qh5
mate.
(c) Up till now in his calculation White
has been constantly pursuing the black king.
This is the simplest case. But after 23 . . . Ke8,
after weighing up the various discovered
checks (24 Nc5+ etc.), White has to find a
different way. In the end, by the analysis of
several plausible moves (attacks and cap­
tures), or, much more quickly, by intuition, we
discover the strongest continuation of the
attack-24 R X b7, after which the knight at
c6 is attacked, the rook at d7 is no longer en
prise, and the discovered check has by no
means been removed from the agenda (for
example, if Black should defend his knight
with his queen). While if 24 . . . Ne5, then
25 N X g7+ B X g7 26 RX g7.
Thus there remains only the move played
in the game.
23 .. Ne7
.
This position, and a new sacrifice forcing
mate, had to be foreseen by White when he
embarked on the combination-after all, at
present Black is a bishop up.
 The Calculation of yariations

24 R X e7+ ! K X e7 one of the black bishops is lost (21 . . . B X b3

22 R X e7), and White comes out a pawn
Other replies by Black, involving running
ahead. Defending the black-squared bishop
away with his king, can be ignored-it is
is also unsatisfactory. It is true that the bish­
obvious that they all lose.
ops remaining would be of opposite colour,
25 Q X b7+ Kd6 but in this case White would have not one,
but two extra pawns.
After the retreat of the king to e8, White
The other intermediate move, the conse­
can, apart from anything else, pick up both
quences of which Keres had to consider, was
rooks.
20 . . . b5 (Black drives away the knight, and
26 Qc7+ KdS when it retreats he will take the rook). Then
27 Qc5 mate. comes 21 Rf7 ! Black cannot take on a4, in
view of 22 R X e7, with a completely won
A more difficult calculation (not in terms
position for White. But Black has another
of number of variations), in which it is essen­
intermediate move (or more exactly-inter­
tial to foresee intermediate moves by the
mediate attack), 21 . . . Be8.
opponent and find retorts to them, is illustrat­
ed by the conclusion to the following game.
w

Keres-Botvinoik
A/ekhine Memorial Tournament,
Moscow, 1956
w

On this Keres would have sacrificed his

knight : 22 Rg7 ! ! b X a4 23 Qb4+ .
Black cannot block the check with his
queen (24 Q X b7+ KX b7 25 R X e7+ , with
an easily won ending). It remains to consider
20 RXf6! the two king moves-to a8 and c8 :
(a) 23 . . . Ka8 24 e5 ! ! The d6 pawn is
By diverting the black bishop away from
pinned, and the threat of a bishop check at
the defence of d6, White wins the queen :
f3 concludes the game.
20 . . . B x f6 21 Q x d6 + and 22 Nb6 + . But
Black is not obliged to take the rook imme­
(b) 23 . . . Kc8 24 � X e7 ! ! (diverting the
queen from the defence ofa6) 24 . . . Q X e7 25
diately, and Keres had to weigh up the con­
B X a6 + Kd7 (or 25 . . . Kc7) 26 Qb7 mate.
sequences of several intermediate moves on
Therefore Botvinnik had to reconcile him­
the part of the opponent. Since the conclud­
self to the loss of his f6 pawn, and the game
ing blow in the above variation is landed by
continued as follows :
the knight, he had to reckon with 20 . . . B X a4.
In this way Black also defends d6. On this 20 . . . Rh7
there would have followed 21 R X e6, when 21 Rg6 b5

33
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

By this move Black activates his queen, 29 . . . R X g6

but White gains the opportunity to transfer 30 N X g6
his knight to an active position.
But now after the exchange of the bishop
22 Nc3 QcS White is threatening to take the d6 pawn.
23 Na2 ! Botvinnik prefers to part with a different one,
The knight is aiming for d3 ! his e-pawn, which does not affect matters.

23 ... Ka7 30 • . • Bb7

24 Nb4 Rf8 31 B X e6 Bd8
25 Bf3 h4 32 BdS B X dS
26 h3 Bc8 33 Q X dS Rf7
27 Nd3 Qc7 34 eS

27 . . . Qd4 is strongly met by 28 c3 Qb6 29 It is no use playing on three pawns down.

e5, when 29 . . . d5 fails to 30 B X d5. Black resigned.

28 Nf4 Rf6 A highly important, and sometimes decisive

role in a tactical operation can be played by
w one's own intermediate moves, foreseen be­
forehand in the calculation.

Keres...Stahlberg
Warsaw Olympiad, 1935

Finding himself in an extremely difficult

position. Botvinnik tries his last chance. If
White is tempted into winning a pawn by
29 R X f6 B X f6 30 Q X d6, there follows
30 . . . Q x d6 3 1 RX d6 Be5 32 Rd8 (the only
move) 32 . . . B X f4 33 RX c8 Rd7, and the
opposite-coloured bishops offer Black some White has an appreciable material advan­
hopes of saving the game. tage-a rook and two minor pieces for a
But Keres does not allow the opponent queen. The outcome of the game is beyond
any counter-chances.
doubt. With accurate play. See how exactly
29 Bg4! Keres solves the technical problem facing
him.
By means of an 'X-ray' the rook at g6
With his last move Black retreated · his
participates in the attack on the e6 pawn !
queen from h4, so as to prevent Nf3. At the
The reply is forced, since 29 . . . Rhf7 would
same time he is threatening . . . g4.
allow White to increase his material advan­
Keres, however, ignores the threat.
tage : 30 N X e6 S X e6 3 1 B X e6 R X g6 32
B X f7. 26 Nf3!

34
 The Calculation of Variations

In order to make this move, White had to B

calculate this variation : 26 . . . g4 27 Nfg5
g X h3. Now on 28 Re6+ Black takes the
knight, obtaining a minor piece ending with
an equal number of pawns. So this means
that Keres was wrong ? No ! After 28 . . . K X g5
the intermediate check 29 f4+ ! radically
changes matters : White wins the queen
without losing his rook (29 . . . Kh5 30 Be2 + ).
It is on this intermediate move, the more
difficult for being at the end of a variation,
An intermediate move, which radically
that the entire calculation depends.
changes the picture. While retaining the
The game in fact went :
queens, White gains a lead in development
26 . • . g4 after 8 . . . Qd7 9 N X f3. Now 9 . . . Na5 ? fails
27 NfgS QbS to 10 B X f7+ ! Q x f7 1 1 Qb5 + , with a
28 N X h7 + Kg7 material advantage for White, while 9 . . .
29 Nf4 Qh6 e X d4 is strongly met by 10 0-0, with the
30 NgS Qd6 threat of 1 1 Rel + .
Of course, the knight cannot be taken 8 ... NaS?
because of the fork.
This move was made by Botvinnik after
31 NbS+
lengthy reflection, but even so he overlooked
Having achieved co-ordination, the rook a tactical blow.
and three minor pieces drive the king into a
mating net. w

31 ... Kf8
32 Re6 Qb4
33 Bg6 Ne7
34 Rf6+ Kg8
35 Bh7+ ,
and without waiting for the mate in two
moves, Black resigned.

Keres-Botvinnik
22nd USSR Championship, Moscow, 1955 9 Qa4+ Qd7
(See diagram next column) 10 BXf7 +

Here Botvinnik played 6 . . Bg4.

. Utilizing the ideas of pinning (the queen is
On 7 Bc4 he intended 7 . . . B X f3, consider- immobile and cannot take the bishop) and
ing 8 Q X f3 to be forced. The exchange of diversion (the king also cannot take the
queens leads to simplification, and Black's bishop-the queen will be undefended). As a
position will be perfectly satisfactory . . . result Black comes out a pawn down.

7 Bc4 BXf3 10 . . . Kd8

8 Qb3 11 Q X d7+ K X d7

35
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

12 NXf3 e X d4 In calculating this variation, Keres's oppo­

13 N X d4 nent expected here 23 RX b8+ RX b8 24
Q X b8 + Ke7 25 Qb7+ Kf6, after which
White is a pawn up with excellent develop­
material is level, but the white bishop is
ment. Keres confidently realized his advan­
attacked, and in addition Black threatens
tage.
26 . . . Qc5 !, as well as 26 . . . B X f3 27 g X f3
Instead of 6 . . . Bg4 Black should have
Qel + . This variation is correct-things are
played 6 . . . e X d4 (not 6 . . e4 in view of an
indeed bad for White. But Keres had some­
.

unpleasant pin-7 Bc4 Qf5 8 Qe2), answering

thing quite different in mind.
7 Bc4 with 7 . . . Qf5 8 c X d4 Be6 and 9 . . .
0-0, or 7 . . . Qh5 8 0-0 Nf6. 23 Qb6 !

An intermediate move, which sharply

Keres-Raud changes the picture. The queen invades the
Piirnu, 1937 enemy position with decisive effect.
Mate is threatened at d8. What is Black to
B
do ? 23 . . . Nd7 24 Q X d6+ . Kg8 25 Q X d7
Rf8 26 Qc6 favours White. The attempt to
shelter the king after 23 . . . g6 does not work :
24 Qd8+ Kg7 25 RXf7+ ! K x f7 26 Ng5 +
Kg7 27 Ne6+ Kf7 28 Qf8 mate, or 27 . . .
Kh6 28 Qg5 mate.
If instead 23 . . . Qc8, then 24 Rc7 Qe8 25
Ng5 (this is stronger than 25 Qb7 Nd7 26
RXd7) 25 . . . Nh6 26 Q X d6+ Kg8 27 Q X e5 !
Qf8 28 Ne6 !, or 27 . . . Qd8 28 Ne6 !-win­
Black has two minor pieces for a rook, but ning in both cases.
how is he to save his knight at b8? There remains the move in the game.
Keres's opponent rejected passive defence 23 ... Nc6
by 20 . . . Qc8 because of 21 Bd3 followed by 24 Qc7 ! Nh6
Reb2, and instead conceived some interesting 25 Q X d6+ Kg8
tactical complications. 26 d X c6 Kh8
20 . . . Bb5 Mate at b8 was threatened. White has not
21 RX e7 Kf8 only regained his piece, but has also acquired
22 Rb7 B X e2 a formidable passed pawn.

w w

36
 The Calculation of Variations

27 Rb8 + R X b8 26 Qc7 (White has no other move) 26 . . .

28 Q X b8+ Ng8 Q X b2 27 Q X c8+ Kg7 28 e5 Be7 29 Qc7
(See diagram previous column) Kf8, when White has nothing better than to
29 c7! repeat moves (30 Qc8+ Kg7 31 Qc7 Kf8),
since 30 Qc2 Q X c2 3 1 B X c2 Bb4 gives
If now 29 . . . Q X c2, then 30 h4 (30 . . . Black the better chances.
Qcl + 31 Kh2 Qf4+ 32 g3 QXf3 33 QXg8+ ! Jumping ahead, we should remark that,
and 34 c8= Q mate). had Malich known what was awaiting him,
29 . . . Bb5 he would have rejected 25 . . . Qb4, and would
By blocking the b-file, Black himself probably have preferred the quiet 25 . . . Nc6.
threatens mate by 30 . . . Qal + . When White But what had he overlooked?
makes an escape square for his king, Black
will play . . . Bd7, covering the pawn's queen­ 26 Qc7 Q X b2
ing square. 27 e5!

30 Qd8 ! A strong intermediate move, which escaped

Black's attention. If the bishop abandons the
Defending against the mate at a l . But why
d8-h4 diagonal, White acquires an important
shouldn't Black take the bishop, again threat­
attacking resource-Ng5. As the reader will
ening mate on the back rank?
see, the leitmotif of Keres's tactical operation
30 . • . Q X c2 is an attack on f7.
31 Kh1 Now Black has to move his bishop from f6,
Now the c-pawn queens. In analogy with since after 27 . . . Bb7 ? (27 . . . B X e5 ? ? 28
the variation given in the note to White's NX e5) 28 e X f6 B X f3 there follows 29 Qd8+
29th move, 3 1 h4 would also have won. Kh7 30 Qf8, when 30 . . . Qcl + 31 Bfl Qh6
does not help in view of 32 Q X f7+ Kh8 33
31 f6
Qe8+ Kh7 34 f7, and White wins.
. . .

32 c8 = Q Qb1 +
If Black does not take on f3, but plays
33 Ng1 Q X a2
28 . . . Qb4, defending f8, the knight comes in­
33 Qf8 Resigns.
to play with decisive effect : 29 Ng5 ! Qf8.

Keres-Malich -l• ·1
w
Varna Olympiad, 1962
B

30 Qh2 ! with inevitable mate.

Thus the bishop at f6 has to move.
By 25 . . . Qb4 Black attacked the bishop,
having calculated the following variation : 27 . . . Be7

37
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

In the event of 27 . . . Bg7 the immediate
28 NgS fails to 28 . . . Bd7 ! !
(29 Q x d7 Qcl +
and 30 . . . QXg5; 29 Qd8+ Bf8 30 Qf6 Be8).
Correct is 28 Q X c8 + Bf8 29 B X g6 ! (on
Which bishop should White take ?
28 Q X e7 !
White 'steals up' on the f7 square !

29 Qc7 Black has 29 . . . Qa3, and if 30 Ng5 28 . . . Qcl+

then30 . . . Qe7). 29 Bfl
But uot 29 Kh2 in view of 29 . . . Qf4+ aud
B
30 . . . Bb7.
29 . .. Bb7
Why not 29 . . . Ba6?, the reader may ask.
We will give him the opportunity to answer
this question himself (cf. p. l 77 No.3).

30 Ng5 Q£4

(a) 29 . . . fx g6 30 Q x e6 + Kh8 (30 . . .

Kh7 31 Qf7+ Bg7 32 Ng5+ Kh6 33 Ne6
]Jh8 �4 Qf8+ and mates, or 33 . . . BX e5 34
Qf8+ Kh5 35 Qf3+ Kh6 36 Qh3 mate)
31 Qf6 + Bg7 32 Qd8+ Kh7 33 NgS +
Kh6 34 Ne6 ! Qc1 + (34 . . . Kh7 35 Qc7!)
35 Kh2 Kh7 (35 . . . g5 36 Qg8) 36 Qe7
Qh6 + 37 Kg3 ! Nc6 (37 . . . g5 38 NXg5+
Kg6 39 Qe6+ KXg5 40 Qg4 mate, or Black has defended f7, but only for a short
38 Kg8 39 Qf7+ Kh8 40 Qe8+ Bf8 41
. • . time. The queen cannot be maintained on the
Nf7+ ) 38 NgS + Kg8 (38 . . . Kh8 39 Qe8+ f-file.
Bf8 40 Nf7+ ) 39 Qe6+ Kh8 40 Nf7 + , and
31 g3!
White wins the queen.
{b) 29 . . . Q x a2 30 Qe8 ! fXg6 31 Q X g6 + On 3 1 . . . QfS there follows 32 Bd3, so
Bg7 (31 . . . Kh8 32 Ng5) 32 NgS Qa4 (32 . . . Black resigned.
Qe2 33 Qf7+ Kh8 34 Qe8 + ) 33 Q X e6+ and And now some further examples of 'com­
mates. petitions in depth and accuracy of calcula­
tion', and in the end-in correctness of
w evaluation.

Keres-Fine
Ostende, 1937
(See diagram next column)
24 N X h7!
The knight sacrifice is temporary : by
doubling heavy pieces on the h-file, White
restores the material imbalance.

38
 The Calculation of Variations
w w
There can be no doubt that Fine saw
24 NX h7, and was pinning his hopes on
Black's coming counter-play.
24 • • • N X h7
25 Rh3 Qcl
It was on this counter-blow, exploiting the
remoteness of the white pieces from the de­
fence of the back rank, that Fine based his cal­
culation. After 26 Q X h7+ Kf8 White cannot
continue 27 Qh8+ Ke7 28 Qh4+ in view
of 28 . . . g5 !
w 30 Qf6+
This means that White has to return his
rook from h3 to e3, but then by 27 . . . d4
Black will begin a counter-attack . . .
But now let us see what Keres had in mind.
26 Q X h7 + Kf8
27 Rhe3 d4
(See diagram next column)
28 Qh8+ Ke7
29 Q X g7!
This move had escaped Black's attention.
By playing 27 . . . d4 he has opened the diago-
4 39
nal for the enemy bishop at b3, and Keres
elegantly exploits this.
29 . . . Rf8
Black has to make this passive move, since
the rook cannot be taken because of mate,
while on 29 . . . Bd5 White wins by 30 Qf6 +
Ke8 (or 30 . . . Kd7 31 BXd5 dX e3 32 QX/7)
mate) 31 e6 ! fxe6 (or 31 . . . Bx e6 32 BX e6)
32 RX e6+ B X e6 33 Q X e6 + , and mate
next move.
Ke8
31 e6!
Black resigned, since he loses at least his
queen : 31 . . . d x e3 32 e X f7+ RX f7 (32 . . .
Kd7 33 Qe6+ and 34 R X cl + ) 33 B X f7+
Kd7 (33 . . . Kf8 34 Be6+ leads to mate) 34
Qe6+ Kc7 (34 . . . Kd8 35 Qd6 mate) 35
RX c1 + etc.
Keres-8toltz
Salzburg, 1942
B
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

By the move which suggests itself, 35 . . . 39 Kh2 N X g4+

Rc2, Black attacked f2, to which Keres replied 40 hX g4 Qe3
with a deeply-calculated tactical operation. 41 Be2 Q£4+
42 g3 Q X g4
36 B X bS Q X f2 +
43 Qd6
Note that on 36 . . . a X b5 there would have
In spite of the rather open position of
followed 37 Qa8 + Kh7 38 Qf8 ! Q X f2+
White's king, his material advantage (es­
39 Kh2, when Black cannot avoid mate.
pecially if account is taken of the passed b­
If instead 36 . . . Q X b5, then simply 37 Nd4,
pawn) is sufficient for victory. But this does
winning the exchange. But Stoltz's calculation
not mean that Stoltz had to blunder away his
was based on the capture of the f2 pawn to­
queen . . .
gether with his following move.
43 . . . h5? ?
37 Kh1 Ne3
44 Qd8+

On 44 . . Kh7 there follows 45 Ng5+ .

.

Black resigns.

Keres-Borisenko
18th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1950

It was on this position that the Swedish

master was pinning his hopes. It is true that
Black is a piece down, but how is White to
defend both his rook and the g2 square ?

38 Q x a6 !

Keres has calculated further. I t turns out
that on 38 . . . N X g4 there follows 39 Qa8+
Kh7 40 Bd3 + g6 41 B X c2, and if 41 . . . Ne3
(attackitig'the bishop and also g2) 42 B X g6+ !
fXg6 (42 . . . KXg6 43 Qg8 + , and mates)
43 Qb7+ Kg8 44 Qc8+ Kg7 45 Qd7+ and
46 Qd2 ! This is the reason for White's
'zig-zag' checks-g2 is now defended, and
his extra b-pawn must assure him of a win.
Black has to check with his rook at cl, so
as to be able to take on g4 with check. But
In order to exploit the 'overloading' of the
bishop at g7 (which simultaneously defends
the knight at h6 and the e5 pawn), White
played 10 e4.
Mter this 1 1 N X e5 is threatened. Keres's
opponent rejected the anti-positional ex­
change 1 0 . . . fxe4 1 1 Ng5 (after which
White obtains an excellent base for his minor
pieces at e4). He also did not care for 10 . . .
Ndf7 (on which 11 0-0 is the simplest reply).
He played 10 Nh£7, on which Keres
• . .

now White remains with two minor pieces for calculated a forcing tactical operation, lead­
a rook. ing to a clear endgame advantage for White.
38 . • . Rcl + 11 Nd5 Ne6

40
 The Calculation of Variations

On 1 1 . . . fxe4 Keres was intending 12 1 7 . . . Nc2+ is threatened, but Keres has

N X c7+ Kd7 13 N X a8 e X f3 14 Bh3+ prepared a surprise.
Ne6 1 5 B X e6+ K X e6 16 Nc7+ , when
w
White is the exchange up.
By the move played Black has defended c7,
but after the following exchange one of his
'hanging' pawns-at f5-becomes tactically
weak.

12 eXfS gXfS
13 Nh4 c6

Not 13 . . . Nd6 14 c5.

w
17 Ne6+ ! B X e6
18 d X e6 Nc2+

Having said 'a', Black is obliged to say 'b',

since 1 8 . . . N x e6 1 9 B X b7 is hopeless for
him.
19 Kd1 N x a1
20 e X f7 Rd8+

When embarking on the complications,

In playing 13 . . . c6, Borisenko assumed
that White had nothing better than 14 Ne3,
after which by 14 . . . Nd4 Black securely
defends f5.
Keres's opponent also examined 14 N X f5,
and convinced himself that it was impossi­
ble-White comes out the exchange down . . .
14 N X f5
Both players calculated the consequences
of this move, but their evaluations did not
coincide. Borisenko cut short his calculation
in the position depicted in the next diagram.
And Keres ? . .
14 . • . c X dS
15 c x d5 Nd4
16 N X g7+ Kf8
Borisenko came to the conclusion that
1 4 N X f5 would not work for White because
of this position, which has been reached by
force. The white knight is attacked, and
Keres assumed that instead of this the oppo­
nent would play 20 . . . K x f7. He was then
intending to continue 21 Bd2, and on 21 . . .
Rc8-22 Bc3 b5 23 B x e5, with a favourable
ending. Later, when analyzing the game, the
Estonian grandmaster found a more exact
way to win, namely 21 Bg5 ! (instead of 21
Bd2). By preventing the check on the d-file,
White threatens by 22 Kd2 to win the knight.
For example, 21 . . . h6 22 Bh4 Rac8 23 Be4
and 24 Kd2.
21 Bd2 KXf7
22 Kcl
Threatening 23 Bc3 and 24 Kb1, winning
the knight. Black succeeds in saving it, but at
too high a price.
22 . . . Rc8+
23 Bc3 bS
Otherwise the knight is lost.
24 Kb1 Nc2

4* 41
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

25 B X e5 Keres-Fuchs
Marianske Lazne, 1965
Keres's plan has proved correct : with
material roughly level (White has two pawns w
for the exchange) his powerful bishops ensure
him a decisive advantage.
25 . . . Rhe8

If 25 . . . Rhd8, then 26 Be4 winning the h7

pawn, since on 26 . . . Rd2 there follows
27 Rcl, and if 27 . . . Re8 28 Bf4, or 27 . . .
Re2 28 B X c2, with the threat of a discovered
check Bb3 + .
If White plays 36 NX d5, he has to reckon
26 Bd5+ Kf8
with the intermediate check 36 . . . Ra2+ .
27 B£4 Nd4 Retreating the king to the back rank by
The active 27 . . . Re2 fails to the pin 29 Rcl . 37 Kel is clearly unfavourable, since Black
replies 37 . . . NX d5 38 RX d5 (38 RX c4 NX
28 Bh6+ Ke7 e3) 38 . . .f6, defending against the mate and
29 Be3 Nc6 threatening both 39 . . . RX g2 and 39 . . .
30 Rd1 Kf6 NX e3.
31 h4 It follows that White has to play 37 Kg3,
but then after the exchange of knights-37 . . .
Winning a pawn by 31 B X c6 RXc6 32
N X d5 38 RXd5 (38 R X c4 ? NX e3 is bad,
B X a7 would be a fundamental mistake.
simultaneously attacking the rook and the g2
In this open position it is much more im­
pawn) White has to reckon with the tactical
portant for White to retain his two bishops.
blow 38 . . . RXg2 + , luring the white king to
31 . . . a6 g2, so as to win the e3 pawn and then the
32 Bg2 rook by means ofa fork. This leads to a knight
ending with an equal number of pawns.
The bishop clears a way for the rook into
This was roughly how Keres reasoned, as he
the enemy rear.
considered his move in the diagram position.
32 ... Ne5 How would you have played in Keres's
33 Rd6+ Kf7 place ? In other words, should White take the
34 Bd5+ Ke7 d5 pawn? (cf. p. l78, No. 4).
f1
35 R X a6 Nc4 �-
-
36 B£4 Kd7? Keres-Bronstein
26th USSR Championship, Tbilisi, 1959
This loses immediately. Mter the cunning (See diagram next column)
36 . . . Red8 White would have had to avoid a
trap : 37 Bg5+ Kf8 38 B X d8 ? Nd2+ ! and Can White win a pawn by a temporary
mates ! But after 37 Re6+ Kf7 38 Rc6 + or piece sacrifice-NX d5 and B X e4?
37 . . . Kd7 38 Rel the end would not have Let us try to calculate variations, without
been prolonged for long. moving the pieces :
38 NXd5 B X d5 39 B X e4 B X e5 (after
37 Ra7+ Resigns. 39 . . . BX e4 40 RX e4 White is a 'healthy'

42
 The Calculation of Variations

w It stands to reason that 42 ReS ? must be

pawn to the good). Now after 40 fX e5 Black
restores the material balance by 40 . . .
Q X g4+ , while 40 dXe5? fails to 40 . . . Bc4,
winning the exchange. Therefore, before
taking the bishop at e5, let us exchange on
d5-40 B X d5. After 40 . . . RXd5 41 fXe5
Q X g4+ Black regains his pawn, but 42 Rg2
puts him in a difficult position. On 42 . . . Qe6
there can follow 43 Rgf2, attacking f7 (and if
43 . . . Qg4+ , then 44 Khl).
However, this variation merely signifies
that Black, before taking the bishop at d5
(40 . . . RX d5), should attempt to give up his
bishop at e5 in some advantageous way.
Let us continue our calculation : 40 . . .
B X d4+ (40 . . . BXJ4 ? fails to the interme­
diate check 41 BXf7+) 41 Q X d4, and now
41 . . . e6, regaining the bishop by the pin.
w energetically conducted concluding attack
(which we examine in another section on
p. 99), Keres won the game.
immediately rejected, since after 42 . . . RX d5
43 RXd5 e X d5 the g4 pawn is attacked
(43 . . .f5 44 Re4). But White has at his dis­
posal a curious tactical possibility, involving
the swift advance of his f-pawn.
42 f5 ! RX d5 (the inclusion of 42 . . . gX/5
43 gX/5 does not affect matters) 43 fXe6 ! !
It is on this fine move that the evaluation of
the temporary knight sacrifice depends, and
it was this move which was the reason for the
decision taken by Keres ! On 43 . . . RX d4
there follows 44 e X f7+ and 45 fX e8 =Q,
winning a rook. Black therefore has to reject
the capture of the queen, and restrict himself
to the modest 43 . . . fxe6 (43 . . . QX e6 ? 44
RX e6 RX d4 45 R X e8). Then comes 44 Qf6
with the threat of Be5-immediately or after
the check at f7. To avoid mate, Black has to
give up the exchange. His position is hopeless.
Thus the game went 38 NX d5!, when
Bronstein rejected 38 . . . B X d5 (perfectly
sensibly, as the reader already knows) and
tacitly agreed to play on a pawn down.
38 • . •
Nd6
39 Ne3 B x g2
40 R X g2
White has an undisputed advantage. By an

�� "' Goldenov-Keres
15th USSR Championship, Leningrad, 1947
B

Anyone who stopped his calculation at

this position, having concluded that Black has
everything in order, would be making a
serious mistake. The calculation must be
continued !
What can White do ?

43
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

' With his last move (Bd3-e4) Keres's Barcza-Keres

opponent attacked a rook. After lengthy Tal/inn, 1969 ' .

reflection the grandmaster moved his rook-

B
18 . . . Rb8. (The continuation of the game has
already been analyzed in a different section
on p.26). Why did he think so long ?
Keres was weighing up the consequences
of the rook sacrifice in the following variation :
18 . . . NeS 19 B X a8 d3.
This move, denying the white king access
to e2, is the point of the sacrifice. White's
queen is attacked and mate at h1 is threatened,
so that his next two moves are forced.

20 Qa4+ Kf8 21 f4. Keres played 17 . Rfc8, occupying the

. .

The bishop which took the rook now de­ open file first and threatening to invade the

fends h1, saving the king from mate. But second rank with his rook.

Black's attacking resources are not exhausted ! The Hungarian grandmaster replied
18 Rfcl, preventing this invasion.
21 . . . BcS 22 Bg2.
On 18 . . . Rxc1 + he planned 19 R X cl,
The ubiquitous bishop has blocked the and in the event of 19 . . . RX a2-20 Qb4,
queen's access to another key square-f2. regaining his pawn in an almost symmetric
But there is also a third key square . . . position.
B In the game that is in fact what happened :

18 . . . R X cl +
19 RX cl RX a2
20 Qb4

22 . . . Nf3 !

Threatening mate at g l . The knight cannot

be taken because of mate at f2. On 22 Ne2
Keres had in mind 22 . . . Qg1 + ! 23 N X g 1 1
Nh2 mate. (We should point out that Black
does not have to sacrifice his queen, but can "Surely Black won't make the awkward
give mate immediately by 22 . . . Nd2.) move 20 . . . Ra6 ? ! Besides, after 21 Bfl I will
What is the point ? Why after lengthy be threatening 22 e4. But since Black's
thought did Keres avoid this spectacular back rank is inadequately guarded, he has no
variation? other way of keeping his b6 pawn (if, for
See if you can improve White's defence. example, 20 . . . Qd8?, then 21 Qx b6)". After
For the answer cf. p. 178, No. 5. reasoning in roughly this way, the Hungarian

44
 The Calculation of Variations

grandmaster here cut short his calculation. Barcza reluctantly goes into a rook ending
He was convinced that the game would soon a pawn down. And indeed, it is difficult to
end in a draw. endure the enemy bishop at h3, when the
Keres, however, extended the calculation. white rook is tied to the back rank. On 24 Rb 1
He extended it by only one move, but what there could have followed 24 . . . g5 !
a move !
w
20 • • • h6
21 Q X b6

If now 25 b4 (or 25 b3), then 25 . . . Bf5

26 Rei g4 27 Bg2 RXe2, and the white rook
still has to guard the back rank (28 RX c6 ?
Rel + 29 Bfl Bd3).
21 . . . Qc6 ! ! In the event of 25 e3 Black again plays
25 . . . Bf4 26 Rei g4, when the white bishop
This is what Keres had in mind. I t is not
again has no convenient retreat square : on
Black's back rank, but White's, which is
27 Bd l (as well as 27 Be2 or 27 Bg2) Black
weak ! The queen cannot be taken by the
picks up the b2 pawn (28 RX c6 ? Rbl).
rook because of 22 . . . Ra l + 23 Bf l Bh3 !,
Black's task is much more difficult after
with inevitable mate.
25 e4, when he should play 25 . . . Kf8,
After the enforced exchange of queens
waiting for White himself to determine the
White incurs a difficult ending.
fate of his e-pawn before carrying out the
22 Q x c6 b X c6 standard manoeuvre . . . Bf5 and . . . g4. There
can follow : 26 b4 (26 e5 Bf5 27 Rcl g4, or
Again White cannot take on c6 because of
26 eXd5 eXd5 27 b4 Bf5 28 Rcl g4)
mate, while 23 Bf l RXb2 24 RXc6 is very
26 . . . Ke7 27 eXd5 (27 e5 Bf5, or 27 Rcl Rb2)
strongly met by 24 . . . Rd2 ! 25 e3 Rd l , when
27 . . . eXd5 28 b5 (in this way White avoids
the pin on the back rank is White's downfall
losing material) 28 . . . cXb5 29 BXd5 Rd2.
(26 Kg2 Be4+ 27 f3 Rd2+ and 28 . . . BX/3).
Now in the event of 30 Bf3 (after 30 Bg2 Bf5
23 Bf3 Black wins the d4 pawn, while retaining his
own at b5) 30 . . . b4 3 1 d5 (31 R X b4 ? g4!)
Correct is 23 g RXb2 24 e4, for example :
3 1 . . . Rd4 the b4 pawn is more dangerous
24 . . . dXe4 25 fXe4 Bg6. Mter this the
than the one at d5. Correct for White is
pawn cannot be taken (26 R X c6 ? RXg2+ ,
30 f4 !, with drawing chances.
27 . . . BX e4+ and 28 . . . BX c6), but 26 d5 !
In the endgame we have investigated there
gives White good drawing chances.
are numerous analytical nuances, which
23 • • . Bh3 would be extremely difficult to f�resee in
24 Bg2 practical play, even for a grandmaster. And

45
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

one can understand Barcza, who decided to apparent how White can prevent the advance
get rid of the dangerous bishop at h3. of the d-pawn.

24 • • . B X g2 45 . . . e3
25 K X g2 R X b2 46 Kf3 Kd4
26 e3 Rb6 47 ReS Rf2+
48 Kg4 Kd3
It is very difficult to win a rook ending
White resigns.
with 'six against five', but Keres succeeds in
exploiting his opponent's errors, and soon
lreres-�ve�
Black's positional gains prove sufficient for
17th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1949
victory.

27 h4 h5 w
28 Kf3 f6
29 Rat eS
30 d X eS'?

A serious positional mistake, which allows

Black two strong central pawns. He should
have played 30 Ra7.

30 . . • rx es
31 g4

Here too 3 1 Ra7 was essential.

Black has left his a-pawn undefended, but
31 . • . Rb4 to take it would be a mistake. On 18 Q X a6
32 gXh5 R X h4 Black replies 18 . . . Ne6 !, when the d4 pawn is
33 Ra8+ Kf7 indefensible. On 19 Qd3 there follows
34 ReS Rc4 1 9 . . . N X d4 (20 QXd4 ? ? Bc5), while also
35 Rh8 Rc2 unfavourable for White is 1 9 Nf3 B X f3 and
36 h6 g X h6 20 . . . N X d4, when the knight dominates in
37 R X h6 Ke7 the centre and causes White considerable
38 Rh7+ trouble.
It should be mentioned the routine 18 Rei
Even without this check the ending can no
is also met by 1 8 . . . Ne6 with the same threat
longer be saved.
of 1 9 . . . N X d4.
38 . • . Kd6 Therefore Keres played 18 Rf2!
39 Rh6+ KcS After this White is now threatening to take
40 e4 Kd4! the pawn (19 Qxa6 Ne6 20 Qd3 NX d4
41 e X dS c x dS 21 QXd4, and the bishop at g4 is attacked),
42 Rd6 e4+ and thus he gains time. At the same time he
43 Kg3 Ra2 vacates f1 for his knight for the manoeuvre
44 Rd8 Kc4 Nf l -g3-f5, also assisting the development of
45 f4 his Q-side pieces.

The two connected passed pawns prove to 18 . . . Rc6

be stronger than one, but otherwise it is not 19 Nfl Bh5

46
 The Calculation of Variations
An imperceptible but significant positional
mistake. 1 9 . . . Ne4 was unfavourable because
of 20 Rc2, but 19 . . . Be6 followed by . . . Ne4
was the strongest continuation from the
practical viewpoint. There could have fol­
lowed 20 Ng3 Qc8 2 1 Bf4 Ne4 22 Rf3, or
20 . . . Ne4 21 Rc2, and in each case White's
chances are merely slightly preferable.
The drawback to transferring the bishop to
g6 is that later Black has to defend his d5
pawn, whereas at e6 the bishop controls f5
and simultaneously defends d5.
20 Ng3 Bg6
21 Nf5
Threatening 22 B X d5 (22 . QXd5 23
. .
NX e7 + Kh8 24 BXg5). Black should
have exchanged on f5 without delay, to
eliminate the dangerous knight : 2 1 . . . B X f5
22 RXf5 Ne6. After 23 Be3 the advantage is
with White (he has two bishops, one of
which is directed at d5), but this was relatively
the best decision.
21 • • • Kh8
22 Be3
It is easy to see that now 23 B X d5? does
not work because of 23 . . . BX f5 24 QXf5
RX c1 + ! and 25 . . . QX d5, when Black
comes out with two minor pieces for a rook.
22 • • • Ne6
23 Qd2 Bg5?
47
w
Black not only misses the last chance of
exchanging the knight, but even allows it to
occupy a dominating position at d6 !
"How could grandmaster Levenfish make
such a bad move-bad on the most general
positional grounds ?", the reader will no
doubt ask.
Levenfish was hoping that his opponent
would be tempted by the win of a pawn :
24 B X g5 N X g5 25 QXb4. Then he intended
25 . . . Rb6 26 Qa3 BXf5 ! 27 RXf5 Ne6
followed by . . . a5 and . . . Rb4, when for the
sacrificed pawn Black obtains strong pressure.
But a gain of material does not attract
Keres.
24 Nd6!
Black had not taken this into account.
He now has to lose time on the defence of his
d-pawn, but then by a4-a5 White isolates the
pawn at b4, and it becomes the Achilles heel
in Black's position.
24 • • • B X e3
25 Q X e3 Nc7
Taking account of the previous note, the
sacrifice of the exchange offered Black
practical chances-25 . . . RX d6 26 e x d6
Q X d6. However, after 27 Bc2 White should
gradually realize his advantage.
26 aS!
Threatening 27 Ba4, winning the exchange.
26 . . . Qe7
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

27 Qd2 w
· Of course, not 27 Ba4 ? ? RX d6.
27 . . . Rb8

This was Black's last chance to give up the

exchange for a pawn.
28 Ba4 Rc4

28 . . . Nb5 29 B X b5 a X b5 30 Q x b4 and
28 . . . RX d6 29 e X d6 Q X d6 30 Rcl are
equally hopeless. 35 Q X b4!

29 N X c4 d X c4 The queen cannot be taken because of

36 Rc8+ ! Ng8 (36 . . NX cB 37 Re8 mate)
By giving up the exchange in this way,
.

37 RX g8+ K X g8 38 Re8 mate, while

Black cherishes the hope of establishing his
if 35 . . . Re8, then 36 Qx e7.
knight at d5.
Black resigns.
30 Rcl Qe6
Spassky-Keres
w
29th USSR Championship, Baku, 1961
w

31 d5!

A typical device. White exchanges the

White's extra pawn is twice attacked, and
d- and c-pawns, opening up the game so the a6 square is controlled by the black rook.
that the d5 square will no longer be impreg­ In a word, there seems no way of defending
nable. the pawn. Spassky finds a clever way of
31 . .. N X d5 exploiting the open position of the black
king.

I
3 1 . . . Q X d5 32 Q X d5 N X d5 33 R X c4 is
64 h4+ K X h4
equally cheerless for Black.
On 64 . . . Kg4 there would have .-1011owed
32 RX c4 Ne7 65 Qg8.
33 Bb3! Q X e5
34 Re2
65 Qd8+ Kg4
Of course, not 65 . . . Qg5 66 Rd4+ win­
Watch out for the back rank !
ning the queen, while 65 . . . Kg3 fails to 66
34 . . . Q£6 Qd3 + and 67 Qc4+ winning the rook.

48
 The Calculation of Variations

w r-������--�
B
• • · ·
• • • � •
• • • J: .
� •
R
.• �
-@ •
.•J:
• • •••
• • • •
•• • • E .
. · � · ••
66 Qg8! Both 70 Qg3 mate and 70 g3 mate are threat­
A simultaneous attack on the rook and the ened. Nothing is changed by 69 . . . Qe5 +
g6 pawn ! If now 66 . . . Qe2, then 67 Q X g6 + 70 g3 + and mate next move.
Kf4 (67 . . . Kh4 68 Rd4+ ) 68 Rd4+ Ke5 "It's all over", said someone loudly in the
(68 . . . Ke3 69 Re4 + ) 69 Qd6 + Kf5 70 Rf4+ stalls . 0 0 . At that point Keres played 69 . . 0

Kg5 71 Qf6 mate. Qhl + ! ! and the players shook hands-it

A much more logical continuation is is a draw by stalemate.
66 . . . Re2, securely defending the rook,
threatening 67 . . . Rel + , and maintaining Stein-Keres
control of the central squares (and h2!). Tal/inn, 1969
For example, 67 Q X g6 + (67 Qc4+ Re4)
B
67 . . . Kh4 ! (but not 67 . . . Kf4 68 Rfl + Ke3,
and now, if White does not want to calculate
the variations with the pursuit of the king-
69 Rf3+ Kd4 70 Rd3+ Kc4 71 Qa6+ Kc5
72 Qb6+ Kc4 73 Qb3+ Kc5 74 Rc3+
Kd6 75 Qb8+ Kd7 76 Rd3 + , which is suffi­
cient to win even after the exchange of
queens : 76 . . . Ke7 77 Q X e5 R X e5 78 RaJ­
he can chose the positional continuation 69 a6,
which should also lead to a win).
After 67 . . . Kh4 ! Black is threatening to
25 . . . c X d4
force a draw by 68 . . . Re l + (on 68 Rfl he
plays 68 . . . Rei, exchanging rooks). In playing this, Black had to reckon with
But Keres chose the most accurate con­ the white bishop subsequently moving, with
tinuation-he immediately exchanged rooks. a discovered attack on d7.

66 . . . Ral ! 26 B X d4 Qb5
27 RXc8+
This appears to lose, and that is what was
thought by the majority of the spectators Of course, for the moment 27 B X g7 is
who were following this interesting clash. not possible, since the rook at cl is left
undefended.
67 Q X g6+ Kh4
68 RX al Q X al 27 . . . B X c8
69 Kh2 28 Qc2 Bb7

49
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
w the mate, and by 32 . . . d4 Black would have
Here the spectators (and Stein also !)
decided that Keres had overlooked an obvious
tactical blow . . .
29 B X g7 K x g7
30 R X d7
B relevance to our theme, and we give the
Stein judged this position to be safe for
White. He is a pawn up, and it appears that
the opponent is unable to do anything
unpleasant: on 30 . . . Rb1 + there follows
3 1 Rd1, and if 30 . . . Q X d7 then 3 1 Q X b3.
But like a bolt from the blue there came . . .
30 • . • BdS!
A move based on the ideas of interference
and weakness of the back rank. The bishop
cannot be taken by the pawn because of a
deadly check at bl. Meanwhile the bishop
has defended the rook, and Black threatens
both 3 1 . . . Rb1 + and 3 1 . . . Q x d7.
White is forced to give up the exchange.
31 h4
Mter 3 1 R X d5 e X d5 White would have
had to waste a move on defending against
50
won without difficulty.
31 ... Q X d7
32 e X dS Rb8
33 Qc3+ f6
34 d X e6 Rbl +
35 Kh2 Q X e6
White has escaped with a slight fright.
He has a pawn for the exchange, his king is
securely defended, and all the pawns are on
one wing, while Black has to reckon with the
open position of his king. A further 23 moves
were made, after which the players agreed a
draw.
The further course of the game has no
finish in brief: 36 Qc7+ Qf7 37 Qf4 Rel
38 Qg4+ Qg6 39 Qd7+ Qf7 (Keres would
like to exchange queens, but Stein declines
the offer-after all, the black king is exposed)
40 Qg4+ Kh8 41 Qc8+ ReS 42 QfS ReS
43 Qf4 Qg6 44 Qd2 Kg7 45 Qd7 + Qf7
46 Qg4+ Kh7 47 Qf4 Qg6 48 Qd4 Kg7
49 Bf3 Rel SO Kg2 Rcl 51 Qa7 + Qf7
52 Qe3 Rc7 53 Qd4 Qe6 54 Qb4 QeS
SS Qg4+ Kf7 56 Be4 Kf8 57 Bf3 Kf7
58 Be4. Drawn.
Keres-Petrosian
17th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1949
w
Black has just played . . . Nd7-b6, attacking
the c4 pawn. Keres has reckoned with this
 The Calculation of Variations
attack, and meets it with a deeply-calculated
tactical manoeuvre.
19 Qg3
An X-ray beam penetrates to d6-the
vulnerable link in Black's position. He is
obliged to take the c4 pawn, otherwise after
b2-b3 White's advantage will become obvious.
Besides, this last move contains the combina­
tional threat of 20 c5 ! d X cS 21 Nf6 + B X f6
22 g X f6, when, since 22 . . . Qe8 23 QgS leads
to mate, Black after 22 . . . QXf6 23 B X eS
comes out a piece down.
19 • . • NeX c4
19 . . . Nb X c4 20 b3 Nb6 leads merely to a
transposition of moves.
20 b3!
This way, rather than 20 N X d6, when
Black has 20 . . . Nx b2.
20 • • • Nce5
All is now ready for a combinational
blow.
w move his queen.
21 N X d6 !
The theme is a discovered attack with use
of a pin.
The knight sacrifice is a temporary one,
but in making this move Keres was bound
to calculate a number of complicated varia­
tions. After White regains his 'piece, his
knight is stranded in the enemy position.
21 . . . Q X d6
51
Black also had 21 . . . Nd5, on which Keres
was intending 22 NX c8 and then 23 Bel,
when, with two bishops at his disposal,
White exerts positional pressure in the centre.
Even so, compared with what happened in
the game, this was the lesser evil for Black :
his bishop at g7 would have 'remained alive',
and his K-side would not have been so weak­
ened.
22 Nf5
B
Since it is unfavourable for Black to give
up his queen for rook and knight (22 . . .
QXdl 23 RXdl B X/5 24 BX e5), he must
But where to ?
If 22 . . . Qc7, then 23 NX g7, and after the
forced 23 . . . Nbd7 White wins two pieces
for a rook by 24 RXd7! and 25 B X eS.
Keres thought that 22 . . . Qc5 would set
White the most problems. On this he was
intending 23 N X g7 Nbd7 24 Be3 Qe7
25 f4 KXg7 26 fXeS with a clear advantage,
since Black cannot take the e5 pawn because
of a fatal pin (26 . . . Nx e5 27 Bd4 Re8
28 Rf3 Kg8 29 Re3), while on 26 . . . Nc5
there follows 27 e6 !, giving free range to the
bishop which now has no opponent. Thus on
27 . . . NX e6, for example, there follows
28 QeS + Kg8 29 Bd4.
Let us again make the moves 22 . . . QcS
23 NX g7, and investigate the attempt by
Black to divert the white queen-23 . . . h4,
so as to answer 24 QXh4+ with 24 . . . KXg7.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

w 25 ... NXf8
26 Ne8 Be6
27 Nf6+ Kh8
28 Qf4 Nh7

The knight at f6 cannot be tolerated.

29 Qd4 NXf6
30 Q X f6+ Kh7

w
Here Keres had prepared 25 Qh6+
Kg8 and now 26 Rd5 ! . By taking away the e5
knight's defence, White successfully concludes
his attack. In this variation, as in others,
White's attack proves successful due to the
weakening of the black squares on the
K-side, which, in turn, is a consequence of
the exchange of the g7 bishop.
But now let us return to the game, and see
what happened after the other queen move. 31 e4
22 Qa3
While Black is picking up the Q-side
• . .

After this Black loses the exchange. pawns and including his rook in the defence,
White will play f2-f4-f5, when it will all be
23 N X g7 Ned7
over.
24 Bd6 Qa5
31 Q X a2
Possibly Petrosian had been intending to . . .

32 f4 B X b3
take the a-pawn, but it turns out that the
33 Rd6 Rg8
pawn is immune. After 24 . . . Q x a2 25 B X f8
34 f5 Rg7
N X f8 26 Ne8 White threatens 27 Qc3 or
27 Qe5 (to say nothing of 27 Nc7). This
Other moves (for example, 34 . . . a5) are
means that the black queen is obliged to
answered by 35 Rd8, and after 35 . . . RX d8
control the c3 and e5 squares, which is what
by a deadly intermediate check-36 fX g6+
Petrosian does.
fX g6 37 Qe7+ .
25 B X £8 But now White is able to double heavy
pieces on the 8th rank.
Good enough to win, but from the thematic
point of view 25 b4! should have been con­ 35 Rd8 Qa5
sidered (depriving the queen of one of the 36 Qd6 f6
squares-c3 or e5), and on 25 . . . Qb5- 37 Q£8 gXf5
26 B X f8 N X f8 27 Ne8. Now 28 Qc3 is 38 Qh8+ Kg6
threatened, and on the capture of the b4 39 Qh6+ ,
pawn there follows 28 Qe5. There is also a
more prosaic threat-28 Nc7. and mate next move.

52
 The Calculation of Variations
Keres-8tahlberg
Telegraph Match, 1960
w 23 RX e6, when 23 . . . d X c3 ? fails to 24
21 N X d5 looks tempting, and if 21 . . .
e X d5 then 22 RX d5 ! (22 . . . Q x d5 23
Qxd5; 22 . . . Qc7 23 RXd8 Qxd8 24
RX e8+ ). However, Stahlberg would not
have taken the knight, but would have pinned
it by 21 . . . Bc6, and after the forcing 22
N X f6 B X f3 23 RX d6 RX d6 24 Nh7+
RX h7 25 B X h7 B X h5 White has merely
an insignificant positional advantage in the
ending (his pawn formation is more compact).
The alternative for White after 21 N X d5
Bc6 is 22 Nf4, and then 22 . . . B X f3 23
N X e6+ Q X e6 (23 . . . Kg8 24 RXd6 R X d6
25 gX/3 does not work, since the rook at h8
is completely shut out of the game) 24
RXd8+ Ke7 25 RX e6 + K X d8 26 g X f3.
In the resulting ending with opposite­
coloured bishops Black can put up a stub­
born resistance (26 . . . B X b2 27 Ra6 Rf8
etc.).
Keres rejected the tempting 21 NX d5, and
chose a much stronger continuation.
21 Qe3!
Threatening not only 22 Q X e6, but also
22 Ne4 ! Black has no satisfactory defence.
If, for example, he exchanges off the danger­
ous knight by 21 . . . B X c3, then after 22
Q X c3 his defence is extremely difficult
(the active bishop at f6 was significant
compensation for the terrible position of the
53
rook at h8 ; it defended the king against an
attack on the f-:file).
If instead 21 . . . d4, then 22 Q X e6 ! Q X e6
RX d8 and 25 RX e8 mate. The preparatory
exchange of bishops, 23 . . . B X g6 24 hX g6
dX c3, leads by force to a hopeless pawn
ending : 25 RX f6+ ! g X f6 26 RX d8+ Kg7
27 RX h8 K X h8 28 b3 !, picking up the c3
pawn with the king.
It remains to investigate 23 . . . Bd7, by
which Black simultaneously attacks the rook
and knight. But White replies 24 Re2,
remaining a pawn up, since on 24 . . . d X c3
there follows 25 RX d7 ! (25 . . . RXd7 26 Re8
mate).
21 . . . Bf7
Stahlberg decides to part with his c-pawn,
hoping to obtain a powerful pawn centre.
22 Ne4 Qb6
23 Nxc5 e5
24 Qa3!
Threatening a double check 25 Nd7+ + .
On 24 . . . Be7 Keres had prepared 25 RX e5.
B
Black can take the knight immediately, or
can first capture on g6, but in each case
White wins :
(a) 25 . . . B X c5 26 Qf3 ! (a decisive pin)
26 . . . Qc7 27 RdXd5, with an irresistible
attack, for example : 27 . . . RX d5 28 RX d5,
with the threat of 29 Rd8 + .
(b) 25 . . . Q x c5 26 Rf5 Q x a3 27 RXf7+
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

and 28 b X a3, with an easily won position.
(c) 25 . . . B X g6 26 RX e7 ! KXe7 27 h X g6,
with the threat of 28 Qe3+ and a won po-
sition. 27 . . . Rd6 is strongly met either by
28 Qc3 (28 . . . d4 29 RX d4), or 28 Re i + Kf6
(28 . . Kd8 29 Nb7 + ) 29 Nd7+ R X d7
.
sacrificed rook-28 . . . Qc6 29 Rdl, after
which further resistance is pointless. For
example, 29 . . . Rh6 30 QxdS+ Qxds 31
RXdS RXg6 32 Rd7.
Black resigns.

30 Qf3+ KX g6 31 Qg4+ Kh7 32 QX d7. Keres-Eiiskases

Semmering-Baden, 1937
24 • • • Kg8
25 b4 B X g6 w
26 hX g6 h5

The rook, which has spent the entire game

in captivity, intends at last to join the battle
via h6, but it is too late.

In the Sicilian Defence Keres chose the

gambit variation 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 b4, and
after 3 cxb4 4 d4 Nf6 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nbd2
. • .

dX e4 7 NX e4 Nbd7 8 Neg5 Qc7 the diagram

position was reached.
Keres continued 9 c4, offering his opponent
27 R X d5 RX d5
a second pawn.
28 Qb3
Can Black play 9 . . . b X c3 ? For the answer,
By this pin White regains his temporarily cf. p. 1 78, No. 6.

54
Attack (preconditions for, and ways of conducting)
Positional evaluation and planning
In the positions examined by us in the
preceding chapters the outcome was decided
by combinational means. Completely disre­
garding the preceding play, we began with
positions in which everything was ready for
a combinational blow-it only remained to
find a decisive continuation. Then, stepping
back several steps, we showed how a fa­
vourable tactical situation is exploited, and
how in the course of tactical play a position
becomes 'ripe' for a concluding combination.
In this chapter, adhering to this same
retrospective method, we have to proceed
even further back-to that stage from which
the offensive begins.
Depending on the character of the position,
an offensive can be conducted by either posi­
tional or combinational means. Often an
offensive conducted by positional means is
concluded by a combination, the logical
consequence of the development of the attack.
But in by no means all positions is an attack
possible. It is as in warfare : before attacking
a plan should be made, but the first question
to be answered is what are its chances of
success, how promising is it. The answer is
given by an evaluation of the position.
In the chapter 'The Calculation of Varia­
tions' we spoke about the difference between
forcing and non-forcing continuations, and
gave examples where to calculate tactical
complications to the end was not possible. In
such instances (and there is an overwhelming
majority of them) calculation plays a sup­
porting role, the leading one being played by
5 55
positional evaluation. It serves as a guide,
enabling the correct direction of play to be
chosen.
Thus, before determining a plan, including
a plan of attack, one must make an objective
evaluation of the position.
To evaluate means to comprehend and to
weigh up critically. The evaluation of a posi­
tion is composed of partial evaluations, on
which we will now dwell in more detail.
Pawn formation. Strong and weak squares
Every position is characterized by certain
features, among which a special role is played
by the pawn formation. A badly-placed piece
can be transferred to another square, or, if
necessary, to its former post. But pawns move
only in one direction-forwards. As a result
of such an advance (which is not always vol­
untary) squares which were securely covered
are left undefended.
Depending on the number of pawns, as
well as their mutual arrangement, positions
can be divided into open, semi-open and
closed.
If the pawn skeleton is not precisely depict­
ed (the pawns are not blocking one another),
and if in the centre there are one or two files
free of pawns, such a position is regarded as
open.
In open positions the time factor becomes
of primary importance-the mobilization of
the forces, and also their co-ordination in the
zone of attack (or defence). Therefore, before
making a pawn break, or opening up the
game in some other way, it is necessary to
 Paul :K.eres Chess Master Class

answer the question : whose pieces will be

more actively placed. A general rule can be
formulated as follows : the opening of lines
favours the side which is better developed.
The prospects in an open battle, and also
the nature of the battle itself, depend to a
large extent on how safe the kings are. The
fact that one side is deprived of the right to
castle, or is late in castling, the remoteness of
defending pieces from the K-side, and the
weakening of the king's pawn screen-these
factors can often indicate the direction of the And now, with the pawns and heavy pieces
attack. in the same positions, let us add two different
Things are rather different in closed posi­ minor pieces : a white bishop at d3 and a black
tions. knight at d4.

The pawn skeleton is clearly enough defined
and only the e-file is free. The mutual arrange­
ment of the pawns determines the strong and
weak squares* in the positions of the two
sides. Thus one only needs to place a white
knight at e6 and a black bishop at e7, and to
add several heavy pieces (and, of course, the
kings), and even an inexperienced player will
realize that, thanks to his powerful knight at
e6, White enjoys a significant positional ad­
vantage, enabling him to attack the K-side.
The pos1t1on now favours Black, whose
knight is comfortably placed at d4. But in
this case the strong square is not so deep in
the opponent's position, and Black's advan­
tage is not as significant as White's was in the
previous diagram (with the knight at e6).
Thus the pawn formation discloses the
weak and strong squares in the two sides'
positions, but whether or not they can be
exploited depends on the arrangement of the
pieces.

* We will regard a square as strong (and, correspondingly, weak for the other side), if a piece on that square
exerts strong pressure on the opposing position, or else plays a significant role in defence. By virtue of the pawn
formation, this piece cannot be driven from its position.
The possession of a strong square relates to other advantages, since it influences the entire course of the
subsequent battle.

56
 Attack

With this arrangement of minor pieces

In this position too the e-file is open, and
the f-file is half open. The f6 square is weak,
but this weakness manifests itself only with
certain piece arrangements. If we successively
add the kings-at g l and g8, then the queens
-at d2 and d7, and finally rooks-at a l and
fl, a8 and f8, we see that in each case the
weakness of the f6 square does not give White
any advantage.
(white knight at c3, and black knight at e5)
White can direct his knight towards the
weakened f6 square ; he can then attempt to
create threats against the enemy king. There
can follow, for example, 1 Ne4 Qd8 2
Nf6 + Kg7 3 Qd4.
The black knight also occupies a strong
position, but the e5 square is in Black's own
half of the board, which makes it less valu­
able.
Now let us place two different minor pieces
on the board-a white bishop at b2 and a
black knight at c5.

Here the decisive role is played not by the

weakness of the f6 square, but by the cata­
strophic weakness of the long diagonal, which
is 'raked' by the white bishop. The weakness
of the f6 square prevents Black from erecting
a barrier (for . . . Qd8 and . . . Nd7 - e5 he

For what disposition of forces then will does not have time).

the f6 square play a significant role in the Keres-Guti

evaluation of the position ? Tel-Aviv Olympiad, 1964
w

5* 57
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Black has a whole complex of weak squares

-d6, f6 and g7, this weakness being aggra­
vated by the absence of his black-squared
bishop. As a result, White's queen and bishop,
having no opponents, penetrate on the a3-f8
and h4-d8 diagonals.

15 Bd2!

First the queen is driven off the key diago­

nal : 1 5 . . . Qa3 16 Bb4. Then, after 16 . . .
Qa4 (or 16 . . Qa6) 1 7 Qf6 the simultaneous
advantage on the K-side does not give him
.

attack on e7 (threatening 1 8 Qe7 mate) and

anything real.
h8 wins the rook.
It is a quite different matter if some minor
Black resigned.
pieces are also added.

Here Black has to keep a careful watch on

In this closed position White controls
greater space-his e-pawn has crossed the
demarcation line. Just as in warfare the terri­
tory occupied must be controlled by troops
(otherwise in the course of the battle the oppo­
nent may cut the communications between
the rear and the front), so the space occupied
by pawns must be safeguarded. The support­
ing of advanced pawns by pieces and the
control of space enable a favourable regroup­
ing of the forces to be carried out in the re­
quired direction.
Let us 'enliven' our diagram by adding
some heavy pieces-white king at g l , queen
at dl and rooks at a l and f1 ; black king at
g8, queen at e7 and rooks at _a8 and f8.
By playing . . . c5 Black will gain counter­
play on the Q-Side, whereas with only heavy
pieces on the board White's spatial
the activity of the white pieces on the K-side.
White's spatial advantage (protected outpost
at e5) gives him the initiative. In reply to
1 . . . c5 there can follow 2 d X cS N X cS 3
Nd4, occupying d4, and after 3 . . . N X d3 4
Q X d3 the white knight is significantly
stronger than the enemy bishop.
Thus, the active or passive placing of a
piece depends to a large extent on the pawn
formation.
It is difficult to give a clear-cut differen­
tiation between open, semi-open and closed
positions. In the course of play (and also
during the mental calculation of variations)
the character of the pawn formation, the
number of open lines, and also the pieces
which can utilize these open lines, change as a
result of pawn advances, exchanges (of pieces

58
 Attack

and pawns), and combinational operations. This also applies to an attack on the pawns
Thus closed positions become open, and a from the rear, which is typical of the con­
positional manoeuvring struggle can trans­ cluding stage of the game-the endgame.
form into a close-range fight. And, on the
contrary, after exhausting their opportunities
to advance, pawns run up against one another
or as a result of exchanges open files are
blocked, and so on. In making a plan, we
weigh up these possible changes in position,
taking account of our own actions and those
of the opponent. The character of the result­
ing position determines our strategy. Open
positions are subject to one set of laws, and
closed positions to another.
Isolated pawns are defenceless against
Connected, isolated, backward aild doubled attack from the front and from the rear-:they
pawns. The concept of blockade have to be supported by pieces. At the same
The pawn skeleton indicates to us the strong
time the square in front of an isolated pawn
and weak squares in the enemy position and (the so-called blockading square) is an excel­
in our own. But pawns can be strong or weak lent base for an opposing minor piece (or
in themselves, depending on the position of sometimes even a heavy piece).
adjacent pawns.

• • • •
••• • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • • • .j_. •
• • • ·= ·
� �� -� �
• • ·
�
• %

�-.. �. � � n
.... %.•
�.•
�
•••

• • • •
• • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
• • • •
• • • •
When pawns are arranged in a phalanx
• • • •
(the name given to connected pawns which
are on the same rank), both in the event of a
• • • •
frontal attack, and of an attack from the rear, • •i• •
they are able to defend themselves. Mter . � . .
c4-c5 the c-pawn is securely defended. It is • • • •
true that the rook can attack one of the adja­ • • • •
cent pawns ( . . . Rd8 or . . . Rb8). But this
• • • •
tempo can sometimes prove costly, even too
costly (for example, in the case of far-ad­ Note that the weakness of an isolated pawn
vanced pawns,which areheadingfor thequeen­ becomes more appreciable as the number of
ing square and are prepared for self-sacrifice). fighting units is reduced. But in the middle-

59
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
game, when there is a large number of pieces,
the side with an isolated d-pawn-and we
are talking in particular about this pawn­
also has a number of advantages, in the form
of free piece play and possession of the semi­
open e-ille. In the section on the centre we
will touch on this question in somewhat more
detail.
Isolated pawns on other illes are usually a
weakness, and not only in the endgame, with
a small number of pieces, but also in the
middlegame. A general method for exploiting
the weakness of an isolated pawn is to simplify
the position by exchanges.
Highly advantageous (and, correspond­
ingly, unpleasant for the opposing side) can
be pressure by the heavy pieces on an isolated
or so-called backward pawn.
In the first diagram the isolated c-pawn is
being besieged by Black's heavy pieces, who,
however, must take care that White does not
play c3-c4. The rule is that the besieged object
must be fixed-deprived of its mobility. This
60
is achieved by the concentration of a large
number of attacks on the critical square. (In
the given case c3-c4 is not possible, since the
pawn will be supported by three white pieces,
but attacked by four).
In the second diagram the backward
d-pawn is being besieged. The fact that it is
fixed on its initial square seriously hinders
Black's play, since he is deprived of scope for
manoeuvring (connections between his Q-side
and K-side are hindered).
Doubled isolated pawns are on obvious
weakness, especially if they are on an open
ille.
Doubled pawns arranged in a compact
mass, i.e. adjacent to another pawn (or pawns)
are not a weakness. But with an extra pawn
which is doubled, the creation of a passed
pawn can present serious difficulties. Most
often such a task will be impossible.
With material equal, White has essentially
an extra pawn on the Q-side-Black is unable
to obtain a passed pawn on the K-side.
 Attack
The position in the centre
The central squares are e4, d4, d5 and e5.
But, when talking about the centre, we often
have in mind the so-called extended centre­
squares contained in the square c3-c6-f6-f3.
Right from the opening we strive to gain
control of the central part of the board, just
as troops in a battle aim to seize the heights
which dominate the locality. The ideal is to
occupy the centre with pawns, so that under
cover of them the remaining pieces-minor
and heavy-can be developed comfortably. If
the opponent does not create any barriers in
the path of our pawns, by advancing they
cramp his forces and destroy his manoeuvring
freedom. A pawn wedge, driven into the
enemy position, cuts it as though in two-it
destroys the co-ordination between the flanks.
As for example in the following variation of
the Giuoco Piano :
1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5
d4 e X d4 6 c X d4 Bb6?
Correct is 6 . . . Bb4+ , gaining time for
counter-action.
7 dS Ne7 8 e5 Ng4 9 d6! c X d6 10 eX d6
Nc6.
A quick defeat results from 10 . . . N x f2 ?
1 1 Qb3 N X h l 12 B X f7+ Kf8 13 Bg5. If
1 0 . . . B X f2+ ?, then 1 1 Ke2 Nc6 12 h3 or
1 1 . . . Nf5 12 Qd5, and Black loses material.
11 BgS Nf6 12 0-0, with a clear advantage
to White.
The advance of the central pawns proved
successful (and after 10 . . . NX/2 ? or 10 . . .
B X/2 + ?, decisive) thanks to the effective
support of the �ther pieces.
And now an example of a catastrophe,
caused by conceding the centre, from a practi­
cal game.
"t"'; i'
Keres-Terpugov
'\ .,......
19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951
Chigorin Defence
1 d4 dS
2 c4 Nc6
61
An opening which used to be employed by
Chigorin. Black concedes the centre, in order
to create pressure on it later. The straightfor­
ward 3 c X d5 Q X d5 4 e3 allows Black to
develop his forces easily-4 . . . e5 5 Nc3 Bb4.
A game between Chigorin and Pillsbury
(White) played in 1 896 is regarded as a classic
example, illustrating the advantages of the
Chigorin Defence. It went 3 Nf3 Bg4 4
c X d5 B X f3 5 d X c6 B X c6 6 Nc3 e6 7 e4
Bb4 8 f3 f5 9 e5 Ne7, and Chigorin's excel­
lent piece play gave him the advantage. More
than half a century passed, and it was discov­
ered that Pillsbury had missed an excellent
tactical possibility. Instead of 9 e5 he could
have played 9 Bc4 !, and if 9 . . . fX e4 (or
9 . . . Qe7), then 10 0-0 !, for example : 10 . . .
e X f3 1 1 B X e6 Qf6 12 d5, with a formidable
position for White.
3 Nc3 Nf6
3 . . . dX c4 is well met by 4 Nf3, for ex­
ample : 4 . . . Nf6 5 e4 Bg4 6 Be3, or 4 . . .
Bg4 5 d5 B X f3 6 e X f3 Ne5 7 Bf4 Nd3 + 8
B X d3 c X d3 9 Qb3, in both cases with an
advantage for White.
The move in the game is very rarely played.
In his preparations for this USSR Cham­
pionship, Terpugov, who was playing for the
first time in such an important event, had
analyzed this continuation a great deal.
Coming up against famous grandmasters
with an excellent mastery of contemporary
opening variations, he was hoping to exploit
the element of surprise. The first game, in
which he was able to employ his home pre­
parations, was the one with Keres.
And so, 'with the clock ticking away' Keres
had to try and refute Black's set-up. His
positional feeling told him that Black's set-up
had some significant positional defects . . .
Let us see how the grandmaster solved the
problem facing him.
4 Nf3
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Black's plan is justified after 4 c X d5 9 ... c6

N X d5 5 e4 N X c3 6 b X c3 e5 ! 10 Qb3 !

4 . • • Bg4 One of the rules of chess strategy runs :

S c X dS a spatial advantage acquires decisive signifi­

cance when allied to a lead in development.
Keres decides against the outwardly tempt­ How is Black to complete the mobilization
ing 5 Ne5 (for which Terpugov was very of his forces ? 1 0 . . . cX d5 is bad in view of
mu�h hoping !), and rightly so. After 5 . . . the extremely unpleasant bishop check at b5
N x e5 6 d X e5 Terpugov would have replied (11 Bb5+ N8d7 12 Rd1 !), while 1 0 . . . g6 also
7 Nb5
6 . . . d4 ! , for example : 7 e x f6 (after does not work, if only because of 1 1 Be5.
c6 8 eXf6 c x b5 or 8 NX d4 Qa5+ 9 Bd2 Meanwhile White threatens to intensify the
Q x e5 Black has a good game) 7 . . . d X c3 8 pressure by playing 1 1 Rdl .
Q X d8 + RX d8 9 fX e7 B X e7 1 0 b X c3 Bf6,
10 . . . N8d7
and for the pawn Black has more than suffi­
11 Rd1 Qc8
cient compensation (e.g. 11 Bd2 0-0 12 f3
Be6 13 e4 Rd6). The threat was 12 d X c6 b X c6 13 Ba6 !,
seriously 'disturbing' the rook at a8. But now,
S ... N X dS
too, White finds an excellent way of employ­
6 e4 B X f3
ing his white-squared bishop.
It was relatively best to retreat the knight If 1 1 . . . c X d5, then 12 Bb5, as in the note
to b6, without exchanging on f3. to White's lOth move.

7 gXf3 Nb6 12 Bh3

This terrible pin decides the game. To win,

After 7 . . . N X c3 8 b X c3 White has the
it remains for White to open the d-file and to
two bishops and a reinforced centre, and
remove (by exchanging or driving away) the
8 . . . e5 is rather unpleasantly met by 9 d5
knight at b6. Against this threat Black has to
Nb8 10 Qb3.
resort to extreme measures, by erecting a
8 dS Nb8 pawn barrier on the diagonal of the h3 bishop.
9 Bf4 But this completely compromises his position.

B 12 . . . g6
13 Na4 f5

If 13 . . . N X a4, then of course 14 d X c6.

The opinion was expressed that Black might
have put up a much more st!jbborn resistance
by 13 . . . c5 ; after all, his task is to keep the
position closed if possible. But here even
this would not have helped, since by 14 d6 !
White obtains a won position, for example :
14 . . c4 (15 dX e7 was threatened, and 14 . . .
.

Here Black was no doubt beginning to

e6 is met by 15 BX e6) 1 5 N X b6 a X b6 (if
regret what he had embarked upon. He is
15 . . . cXb3, then 16 NX c8, 17 dX e7 and
threatened with 9 Nb5 (as well as 9 Rcl), 18 B X d7 + ) 16 Qc3 !
which forces his next move. 14 N X b6 ax b6

62
 Attack

But why not 14 . . . N X b6 ? Because this is arises which allows the two sides to contain
decisively met by 15 Be5 Rg8 16 d X c6, with each other.
an unexpected 'mate to the rook'.
The character of the pawn formation
15 e x fS Nc5 depends to a great extent on the opening
16 Q X b6 e5 chosen, or, more exactly, on the opening
On this move Black was pinning his last variation. We will give several typical po­
hopes-after 1 7 B X e5 (or 17 dX e6) 17 . . . sitions with determined and undetermined
Ra6 to force the opponent to play his queen situations in the centre, with mobile and
to c7 (18 Qb4? ? Nd3+ ) and then to exchange immobile centres.
queens.
Mobile centre
17 d X e6 Ra6
Pawns at e4 and d4 against a pawn at d6
w
Smyslov-Keres
Match-Tournament for the Title of Absolute
USSR Champion, 1941
B

Black has achieved his aim, but . . . Keres

has no intention of exchanging queens !

18 f6! ! N X e6
To his regret, Black realizes that he cannot
The previous moves-1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3
take the queen because of mate in two moves
Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 S 0-0 d6 6 Re1 Bd7 7 c3
(19 f7+ and 20 Bg5 mate).
Be7 8 d4 0-0 9 Nbd2 e X d4 10 cX d4.
19 Qb3
Pawns at e4 and d4 against a pawn at e6
Matters are decided by diagonal pins.

19 . . . Kf7 Keres-Fine
20 0-0 c5 Ostende, 1937
21 Rfe1 c4 B
22 QbS Resigns.
White's occupation of the centre and the
advance of his d-pawn across the demarcation
line quickly led to a decisive advantage,
because of Black's serious lack of develop­
ment. Crushing defeats of this type rarely
occur in master games. Usually, as a result
of the mechanical blocking of the pawns or
exchanges, a pawn (or piece-pawn) formation

63
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

The previous moves-1 Nf3 d5 2 d4 Nf6 3 and the advance e3-e4 proved to be un­
c4 e6 4 Nc3 c5 5 cX dS NX d5 6 e4 N X c3 realizable.
7 b X c3 cX d4 8 cX d4.
In both cases White has two pawns in the Pawn tension in the centre
centre against one, and Black has to reckon
both with e4-e5, and with d4-d5. Note that Keres-Botvinnik
d4-d5 in the first example, and e4-e5 in the 22nd USSR Championship, Moscow, 1955
second, weaken the e5 and d5 squares
respectively. However, crossing the demarca­ w
tion line with a pawn increases White's
spatial advantage, and assists the regrouping
of his pieces and the mounting of an attack.
The following game shows a classic example
of play against a mobile pawn centre.

Gligoric-Keres
Candidates' Tournament, Yugoslavia, 1959

B
The previous moves-1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2
Nc6 4 c3 e5.

GeUer-Keres
19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951

The previous moves-1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6

3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e3 c5 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nf3 0-0
7 0-0 b6 8 cX d5 e X dS 9 Bd2 Bg4 10 a3
BX c3 11 B X c3 c4 12 Be2 Nc6 13 Ne5
B X e2 14 Q X e2 Qd6 15 f3.
White has an extra pawn in the centre,
and Black-on the Q-side. The typical plan
for White is to prepare e3-e4. But Black is on
the alert-he will meet this with . . . d X e4,
after which the d4 pawn will be insufficiently
defended. In the event of the preparatory
exchange on c6 Black will have more attacks
on another central square-e4 (in addition he
also has in reserve the doubling of rooks on
the e-file). Therefore in the game Black played
1 5 . . . b5 ! (on the Q-side he is stronger !),
The previous moves-1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3
Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Rel b5 7 Bb3
d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 Na5 10 Bc2 c5 11 d4 Qc7
12 Nbd2 c X d4 13 cX d4 Bb7 14 Nfl Rac8
15 Bb1 d5.
These last two diagrams illustrate the maxi­
mum possible tension-in the very centre four
pawns oppose one another. Such a direct
clash normally leads to a rapid change in the
situation.

64
 Attack

And now a position in which the close­
range fight spreads over to the extended
centre.
Bondarevsky-Keres
Training Tournament, Leningrad-Moscow,
centre has taken shape. White's spatial ad­
vantage (outpost at e5) dictates a plan of
activity on the K-side. Black will reply by
undermining the pawn chain. First, its base,
and then its outpost : 8 . . c5 9 Nf3 Nc6 1 0
.

0-0-0 f6.
1939
We call a centre fixed when one of the
w
pawns (d- or e-) runs up against the enemy
pawn, and the adjacent file is free of pawns.

Capablanca-Keres
AVRO-Tournament, Holland, 1938
w

The previous moves-1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3

Nc3 d5 4 e3 Bg7 S Qb3 c6 6 Nf3 0-0 7 Bd2
e6 8 Bd3 b6 9 0-0 Bb7 10 e4 c5.
Pawn tension (perhaps not in such pro­
nounced form) occurs in the majority of
opening set-ups. As a result of subsequent ac­
tion (exchanges, pawn breaks, piece sacrifices) The previous moves-1 d4 e6 2 c4 Bb4+
some of the lines blocked by pawns are 3 Nc3 c5 4 e3 Nf6 S Ne2 c X d4 6 e X d4 0-0
7 a3 Be7 8 Nf4 d5 9 c X d5 N X dS 10 NfX dS
opened.
e X dS 11 Qb3 Nc6 12 Be3 Bf6 13 Rd1 Bg4
Pawn chains. The fixed centre. 14 Be2 B X e2 15 N X e2 ReS.

Stahlberg-Keres An isolated pawn in the centre

Kemeri, 1937
Perhaps the most common type of position
B with a central isolated pawn is the following :

Furman-Keres
24th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1957
w

The previous moves-1 d4 e6 2 e4 d5

3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Bg5 Be7 5 e5 Nfd7 6 B X e7
Q X e7 7 f4 0-0 8 Qd2.
The pawn formation in the immediate

65
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

The previous moves-1 d4 dS 2 c4 d X c4 has frequently been demonstrated by Bot­

3 Nf3 Nf6 4 e3 c5 5 B X c4 e6 6 0-0 a6 7 Qe2 vinnik, perhaps the most striking example
bS 8 Bd3 c X d4 9 eX d4 Bb7. being his game with Vidmar at Nottingham,
The opening in this game was a variation 1 936* .
. of the Queen's Gambit Accepted. However,
Let us now make the acquaintance of some
similar set-ups can also arise in the Nimzo­
positions in which it is not the white, but
Indian Defence (for example, 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6
the black d-pawn which is isolated.
3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e3 0-0 5 Bd3 d5 6 Nf3 c5 7 0-0
Nc6 8 a3 dX c4 9 B X c4 c X d4 10 eXd4 Be7
Keres-Bogoljubov
11 Qd3 etc.) and the Caro-Kann Defence
Zandvoort, 1936
(1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 ex d5 c X d5 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3
Nc6 6 Bg5 e6 7 Nf3 Be7 8 Bd3 dX c4 9 BX c4 w
0-0 10 0-0).
One general (and highly important) detail
is that the black pawn is at e6, and White has
secure control of e5. As a result, Black's
queen's bishop is not able to support his
K-side (it is usually developed at b7 or d7).
In such positions a clear-cut plan of play
against the 'isolani' at d4 was first employed
by Steinitz in his match with Zukertort
(1886). By using the blockading square d5 and
In comparison with the previous example,
thus preventing the advance and exchange of
the side playing against the 'isolani' has an
the isolated pawn, Black aims to simplify the
extra tempo for development. White's king's
position, in order to begin a siege of the pawn.
bishop has been fianchettoed, and 'observes'
At the same time measures are taken against
from afar the d5 pawn.
White's threats on the K-side.
This position is from a variation of the
An isolated d-pawn is a convenient target
Tarrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit,
for attack. This is what Steinitz thought, and
1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5, in which Black
he succeeded in demonstrating this in practice.
voluntarily goes in for the isolation of his
But then Tarrasch (1 862-1934) asserted that
central pawn.
for the isolation of his pawn White has more
than sufficient compensation. The weakness
Keres-Capablanca
at d4 can be exploited by Black deep into the
AVRO-Toumament, Holland, 1938
endgame. But in the middlegame White's
open e-file, and the possibility of active piece This set-up resulted from a French De­
play (in certain cases-switching his rooks to fence, the previous moves being 1 e4 e6 2 d4
the K-side) give him favourable preconditions dS 3 Nd2 cS 4 e X dS e X dS 5 Nf3 Nc6 6 BbS
for an attack. Qe7+ 7 Be2 c X d4 8 0-0 Qc7 9 Nb3 Bd6
In our time the art of developing the 10 NbX d4 a6.
initiative in positions with an isolated d-pawn In comparison with the first example, the

* 1 c4 e6 2 Nf3 d5 3 d4 Nf6 4 Nc3 Be7 5 Bg5 0-0 6 e3 Nbd7 7 Bd3 c5 8 0-0 c xd4 9 e x d4 d X c4 10
10 B Xc4 Nb6 11 Bb3 Bd7 12 Qd3 Nbd5 1 3 Ne5 Bc6 14 Rad1 Nb4 1 5 Qh3 Bd5 1 6 N X d5 Nb Xd5 (16 . . .
NfXd5 w.as essential) 1 7 f4! ReS 18 f5 e X f5 19 R X f5 Qd6 (19 . . . Rc7 is more tenacious) 20 N Xf7 ! R X f 7 21
B X f6 B Xf6 22 R X d5 Qc6 23 Rd6 Qe8 24 Rd7 Resigns.

66
 Attack
easy development of his queen's bishop
(the cl-h6 diagonal is open) and the extra
tempo give the side playing against the iso­
lated pawn a certain advantage.
Hanging pawns
ICeres-�vemdish
12th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1940
The previous moves-1 d4 N£6 2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 d5 4 BgS Be7 5 e3 h6 6 Bh4 0-0
7 Qc2 b6 8 c X dS N X d5 9 B X e7 Q X e7
10 N X dS e X dS 11 N£3 c5 12 Be2 Ba6
13 B x a6 N x a6 14 dX c5 b X cS 15 0-0 Q£6
16 Rad1 Rab8.
Smyslov-ICeres
17th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1949
The previous moves-1 d4 N£6 2 c4 e6
3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e3 d5 5 a3 Be7 6 N£3 0-0
7 Bd3 b6 8 0-0 c5 9 c X d5 e x d5 10 d X c5
bX c5.
67
'Hanging' pawns is the name given to pawns
at d5 and c5 (or at d4 and c4 for White).
Unsupported by other pawns, they as though
hang in chess space and require piece sur­
veillance. The difficulty over defending hang­
ing pawns is that they are positioned on
semi-open (i.e. open for the opponent) files.
As a rule, a reduction in the forces favours
the side playing against hanging pawns. It
should be borne in mind that (a) the exchange
of one of the hanging pawns leads to the
isolation of the other, and (b) the advance of
one of the hanging pawns entails the weaken­
ing of the square adjacent to it (after . . c4- .
the square d4, and after . . . d4-the square c4)
It may be asked : why then should Black
(in the first example-Levenfish, and in the
second-Keres) voluntarily go in for such
positions ?
The point is that, as compensation for his
hanging pawns, Black in turn has the half­
open b-and e-files, plus free play for his
pieces.
In certain situations the strategically weak
hanging pawns can acquire dynamic strength.
The advance of one of the hanging pawns,
although it weakens the square alongside it,
can have favourable tactical consequences.
For example, after . . . d4 (in combination
with pressure on the e-file) the square e3 is
undermined, while . . . c4 (together with
. . . Rab8) assists a siege of the b2 pawn.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
The centre is free of pawns
Hjort-Keres
Lidkoping, 1944
The previous moves-1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Qe2 b5
7 Bb3 0-0 8 c3 d5 9 e X d5 Bg4 10 b3 BXf3
11 Q X £3 e4 12 Qe2 Na5 13 Bc2 Q X d5
14 d3 e X d3 15 B X d3 Rfe8.
Keres-Petrov
12th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1940
The previous moves-1 e4 e5 2 f4 d5
3 e X d5 e4 4 d3 N£6 5 Nd2 e X d3 6 B X d3
Q X d5 7 Ngf3 Bc5 8 Qe2+ Qe6 9 Ne5 0-0.
Ekenberg-Keres
Lidkoping, 1944
The previous moves-1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 d5 5 e X d5 Na5 6 Bb5+
c6 7 d X c6 b X c6 8 Be2 h6 9 N£3 e4 10 Ne5
Bd6 11 d4 e X d3 12 N X d3 Qc7 13 h3 0-0
14 Nc3 Rb8 15 0-0.
68
B
In all three positions the central files are
open, and the decisive word belongs to the
pieces. In such situations a lead in develop­
ment and the seizure of the initiative are of
primary importance.
The piece-pawn centre
Keres-Becker
Zandvoort, 1936
The previous moves-1 Nf3 Nf6 2 c4 g6
3 d4 Bg7 4 g3 0-0 5 Bg2 d6 6 0-0 Nbd7
7 Nc3 e5 8 b3 Qe7 9 e4 eX d4 10 NX d4 Nc5.
Keres-Capablanca
Semmering-Baden, 1937
The previous moves-1 e4 c5 2 Ne2 d6
3 d4 c X d4 4 N X d4 Nf6 5 f3 Nc6 6 c4 g6
7 Nc3 Bg7 8 Be3 0-0 9 Qd2.
A piece positioned in the centre possesses
two important advantages : {I) it attacks the
maximum number of squares, and (2) with
the minimum loss of time it can be transferred
to either wing. Hence the rule : direct the
 Attack

B This position was reached after the opening

moves 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 d6
5 c4 Bd7 6 Nc3 Nf6 7 d4 N X d4 8 B X d7+
Q X d7 9 N X d4 e X d4 10 Q X d4.
The centralized white queen cannot be
driven away by pieces ; this can only be done
by 10 . . . c5. However, such an advance would
be a serious positional mistake, since on a file
which is open for White's heavy pieces, a
backward pawn at d6-an eternal weakness
for Black-is formed. The square in front of
development ofyour pieces towards the centre.
it (d5) is firmly controlled by White.
On the central squares it is the minor pieces
Therefore Thomas had to reconcile himself
which feel the most comfortable, whereas a
to the active position of the queen at d4.
queen or rook can be subject to attack not
There followed 10 . . . Be7 11 0-0 0-0 12 b3
only by the pawns, but also the minor pieces
Rfe8 13 Bb2 Bf8 14 Rfel. White's position is
of the opponent, when time has to be wasted
much freer, and he has the initiative.
in retreat.
The best position for the rooks is not in the
For the same reasons, in the Centre Game
centre, but on the central files, namely on the
after 1 e4 e5 2 d4 e X d4 3 Q X d4 the move
squares d l , e l , as well as c l and f1 (for
3 . . . c5 is bad : the queen retreats, when the
Black-d8, e8, as well as c8 and f8).
d-pawn and the d5 square will become weak*.
With a strong pawn centre, a typical plan is
An attack on the queen by a minor piece-3
the placing of the rooks on the central files
. . . Nc6, is quite a different matter. Black not
followed by the opening of these files, which
only drives away the queen, but simultane­
allows the rooks to play an effective part.
ously gains a tempo for development, which
Speaking about the inconveniences experi­
assists the preparation of the counter-blow
enced by the heavy pieces on the central
. . . d5. A game Feilitzsch-Keres, played by
squares, it should be borne in mind that not
correspondence in 1 932/33, continued : 4 Qe3
every attack which forces their retreat is
Nf6 5 Nc3 Bb4 6 Bd2 0-0 7 0-0-0 ReS
advantageous.
8 Bc4 d6 9 f3 Na5 10 Bd3 d5t
Keres-Thomas The white queen feels uncomfortable.

Hastings, 1937/38 1 1 . . . d4 is threatened.

11 QgS ( 1 1 Nce2 is strongly met by 1 1 � . .
B
Qe7) 11 . . . h6 12 Qb4 d4 13 Nce2 B X d2+
14 R X d2 c5.
By worrying the queen, Black has taken the
initiative and now goes onto the offensive.

15 c4 Be6 16 b3 bS!

The opening of the b-file enables Black's

heavy pieces to invade the white king's
position.

* Such weaknesses can also arise after attacks by pawns on other pieces.

69
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
w B
17 N£4.
If 17 c X b5, then 17 . . . B X b3 ! 1 8 a X b3
N X b3 + 19 Kc2 N X d2, and White cannot
take the knight in view of 20 . . . N X e4+ ;
meanwhile 20 . . . c4 is threatened.
17 . . . b X c4 18 N X e6 R X e6 19 b X c4 Rb8
20 Ne2 Qb6 21 Kd1 Qb4 22 Qg3 Nd7!
23 Rc2 Qa3 24 £4 Rg6 25 Q£3 RX g2!, and
Black won easily.
Another example of exploiting the insecure
position of a queen in the centre is provided
by the game Keres-Eiiskases, Noordwijk,
1938. After 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 c5 4 eX d5
Black, not wishing to go in for a position
with an isolated central pawn (for example,
in the variation 4 . . . ex d5
5 Nf3Nf6 6 Bb5+
Bd7 7 BXd7+ NbX d7 8 0-0 Be7 9 dX c5),
replied 4 . . . Q x d5, and the game continued
S Ngf3 c X d4 6 Bc4 Qd8 7 0-0 Nc6 8 Nb3
N£6 9 Qe2.
Keres is in no hurry to regain his pawn, and
aims to occupy the d-file.
9 Be7 10 Rd1 0-0 11 NbX d4 Qc7 12
. • .
N X c6 b X c6.
White's position is also markedly better
after 12 . . . Q X c6 13 Ne5. The time lost by
Black on moving his queen begins to tell.
13 Bg5.
(See diagram next column)
White has a clear positional advantage.
13 . . . Nd5 ? leads to the loss of a pawn after
14 B X d5 c X d5 1 5 B X e7 Q X e7 16 R X d5,
while 13 . . . c5 is strongly met by 14 Ne5.
13 . . . Bb7 was played in the game, when
70
White could have intensified the pressure by
13 Ne5 !, since 14 . . . Nd5 ? again does not
work, in view of 15 B X e7 Q X e7 (15 . . .
NX e7? 16 Rd7) 16 N X c6 ! (by exploiting the
pin on the e-file, White wins a pawn) 16 . . .
B X c6 1 7 B X d5.
Instead of 14 Ne5 Keres preferred to go into
a promising ending : 14 Qe5 Q X e5 15 N X e5
Rfd8 16 Nd7 c5 (capturing on d7 would have
given White the advantage of the two bishops)
17 N X £6+ B X £6 18 BX£6 gX£6 19 f3.
Thus the position of a heavy piece in the
centre can lead to a loss of time or have some
other negative effect. It can, but it does not
always happen this way. If this and other
similar · conclusions were of an absolute
nature, playing chess would be extremely
simple-but uninteresting.
It can happen that, with the board full of
pieces, a queen in the centre plays a decisive
positive role. And not necessarily in strategi­
cally quiet situations, as was the case in the
Keres-Thomas game, but even when in the
central sector of the board a tactical struggle
develops.
In a game Keres-Laurentius (Laurine)
played by correspondence in 1 934, after
1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 e x d5 cx d5 4 c4 Nf6
5 Nc3 Nc6 6 BgS d X c4 (6 . . . e6 is safer)
7 d5 NeS 8 Qd4 the position of the queen in
the centre had a decisive influence on the
further course of the game. The continuation
was 8 . . . Nd3+ 9 B X d3 cX d3 10 Nf3 e6
11 0-0-0.

Botvinnik, who a year earlier had tried this
variation in his match games with Flohr*,
expressed the opinion that 1 1 B X f6 Q X f6
12 Q x d3 would have ensured White a clear
advantage. But also after White's Q-side
castling Black experiences great difficulties.
11 . . . Be7 12 Rhe1 0-0 13 RX d3
B counter-blow. Its aim is to break up the pawn
13 . . . QaS.
On 13 . . . eX d5 Black would have had to
reckon with 14 RX e7 ! Q X e7 15 N X d5, but
now the d-pawn will have something to say.
14 d6 Bd8 15 Ne5 Bd7 16 Rh3 Nd5.
The threat was 1 7 B X f6 and 18 Qd3, with
attacks on h7 and d7.
17 Be7 N X c3 18 bX c3 Bb5 19 Kb2 B X e7
20 d X e7 Rfe8 21 Ng4 Rx e7.
Black has at last got rid of the menacing
pawn, but now his K-side, lacking in support
by pieces, comes under a crushing attack.
22 Nf6+ ! gXf6 23 Q X f6 Rd7 24 Qg5+
Kf8 25 RX h7 Resigns.
• Instead of 10 . . . e6 Flohr chose 10 .
6 71
Attack
Counter-play in the centre
When talking about the struggle for the
centre and the advantage of occupying it with
pawns, we gave an example on p.61 showing
the strength of a pawn phalanx advancing
unhindered. An effective measure against
such strategy is the timely preparation of a
phalanx, and to transform advantageously
the position in the centre.
In the position already familiar to us in the
Giuoco Piano after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4
BcS 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 eX d4 6 eX d4, instead of
6 . . . Bb6 ?, allowing the pawns to cross the
demarcation line with gain of tempo, we will
hold up their advance by 6 . . . Bb4+ . Mter
7 Bd2 B X d2+ 8 NbX d2 White retains his
central phalanx. But only for an instant.
The counter-blow 8 . . . d5 breaks up the
chain-after 9 e X d5 N X d5 instead of a pawn
pair White has an isolated d-pawn. True, as
compensation he has rather freer piece play
(instead of an overwhelming advantage in the
example with the retreat of the bishop to b6).
There can follow 10 Qb3 Nce7 11 0-0 0-0
12 Rel c6, when the chances are roughly
equal.
The advance of pawns beyond the de­
marcation line widens the manoeuvring
possibilities of your pieces, and also creates
strong points in the enemy position. On the
. . g6, but after 1 1 B Xf6 e X f6 12 0-0 he incurred a lost position.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
other hand, as we have already emphasized,
the seizure of space is advantageous only
when this space is secured, i.e. it is controlled
by pieces. Otherwise the advanced pawns,
remote from their main forces, can be liquidat­
ed (usually as a result of a forced exchange),
and the time spent on advancing the pawns
can be used by the opponent for development,
favourable regrouping, and the preparation
of a counter-blow. In addition, an enemy
piece can penetrate into the uncontrolled
space. In a word, the occupation of the centre
does not signify the seizure of the initiative ;
a pawn centre can be not only a strength,
capable of smashing the opponent, but also
a convenient target for attack. At any rate, an
arithmetic count of the number of pawns in
the centre is insufficient for a correct evalua­
tion of the position.
The idea of counter-play against a pawn
centre, exploiting the space unsecured by the
opponent, is the basis of an approach to the
opening which is fundamentally different to
the classical. In openings such as Alekhine's
Defence, the King's Indian Defence, the
Griinfeld Defence and the Pirc-Ufimtsev
Defence, Black not only does not prevent the
occupation of the centre by pawns, but him­
self provokes their advance.
Take one of the sharpest variations of
Alekhine's Defence :
1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 c4 Nb6 4 d4 d6 5 f4
B on 6 d5 (6 d X c5 Qa5 ! 7 cX d6 ? N x e4 !)
White's centre appears formidable, but
Black has counter-play, consisting of constant
72
pressure (mainly on d4) and the undermining
of the central pawns.
5 . . . d X e5 6 f X e5 Nc6 7 Be3.
On 7 Nf3 Black can immediately pin the
knight by 7 . . . Bg4, intensifying the pressure
on d4.
7 . . . Bf5 8 Nc3 e6 9 Nf3 Nb4.
The idea of this manoeuvre is to prepare
the undermining . . . c5. The alternative is
9 . . . Bg4, pinning the knight, although losing
a tempo.
10 Rc1 c5 !
A complicated battle with chances for
both sides is in prospect.
In this opening White more often chooses
a more restrained system of development,
namely : 1 e4 Nf6 2 e5 Nd5 3 d4 d6 4 Nf3
Bg4 5 Be2 c6. This occurred, for example,
in a game Tiim-Keres (Estonian Champion­
ship, Tallinn, 1945). Black's idea is to ex­
change on f3 and e5, and then to pressurize
the e-pawn by . . . Nd7, . . . Ne7-g6 and
. . . Qc7.
6 0-0 (6 Ng5 is rather more promising)
6 . . . B X f3 7 B X f3 d X e5 8 d X e5 e6 9 Qe2
Nd7 10 c4 Ne7 11 Bf4 Ng6 12 Bg3 Qc7
13 Re1 Bb4 14 Nc3 B X c3 15 b X c3 0-0-0.
In the King's Indian Defence Black allows
the opponent to set up a phalanx of four
pawns : 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 Bg7 4 e4 d6
5 f4. The undermining 5 c5, with the idea
• • •
of continuing . . . e6 and . . . e X d5 gives
Black counter-play on the e-file, and, in the
event of White answering c X d5, also on the
Q-side.
Black's strategy in the Pirc-Ufimtsev
Defence is similar : 1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6
4 f4 Bg7 5 Nf3 c5, and if 6 dX c5 then 6 . . .
Qa5.
It should be mentioned that the plan of
provoking pawn advances and then undermin·
ing them was employed in certain games by
 Attack
the masters of the second half of the 1 9th
century. Thus the game Weiss-L. Paulsen
from the 1 883 Nuremberg tournament went
1 e4 d6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Nc3 g6 4 f4 Bg7 S Nf3
0-0 6 Bd3 Nbd7 7 e5 Ne8 8 0-0 cS! As a
result of this undermining and subsequent
exchanges, White's apparently powerful pawn
centre was destroyed.
Black also voluntarily concedes the centre in
the Griinfeld Defence, for example, in the
main variation : 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3
d5 4 c X dS N X dS 5 e4 N X c3 6 b X c3 Bg7.
Black's idea is to continue . . . c5 followed
by . . . c X d4 and . . . Nc6, with pressure on d4.
7 Bc4 cS
w Opening, illustrating this plan.
8 Ne2! (stronger than the routine 8 Nf3,
for example, 8 . . . Nc6 9 0-0 c X d4 10
c X d4 0-0 11 Be3 Bg4 12 e5 e6, and the
chances are with Black) 8 . . . cX d4 9 c X d4
Nc6.
Hypermodem strategy. 'Observation of the
centre'. The role of fianchettoed bishops
In all the set-ups examined in the King's
Indian, Alekhine's, Griinfeld and Pirc­
Ufimtsev Defences, the centre was conceded
by Black. Conceded, so as to exploit the
negative aspects of the pawn advances :
the time lost, the remoteness of the pawns
from the remaining forces, and the weaken­
ing of certain squares. But the representatives
of hypermodernism-an original stream of
thought which arose in the first two decades
6*
of this century-Breyer, Nimzowitsch and
Reti, proposed that one should avoid oc­
cupying the centre with pawns when playing
White, and having the initiative thanks to the
right of the first move.
They replaced direct occupation of the
centre with so-called 'observation of the
centre'. The leading roles in this strategy
belong to fianchettoed bishops, the c-pawn,
and the king's knight. A central set-up is
deferred until the opponent declares his
intentions. Only after this do the d- and
e-pawns join the battle, and by their advance
frequently decide the outcome of the opening
clash.
We will give several variations of Reti's
1 Nf3 d5 2 g3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Bg2 Be7
5 0-0 0-0 6 b3 c5 7 Bb2 Nc6 8 e3 b6 9 Qe2
Bb7 10 Rd1 Qc7 11 Nc3 Rad8 12 Racl.
B
On 12 e5, by continuing 13 c X d5
• • .
N X d5 14 NXd5 R X d5 15 d4 (only now
does the d-pawn advance !), White assumes ,
the initiative.
1 Nf3 dS 2 g3 Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 Bg2 d4
(instead of4 . . . Be7) 5 b4! cS.
5 . . . B X b4 ? fails to 6 Qa4+ Nc6 7 Ne5.
6 Bb2 Nc6 7 b5 Ne7 8 e3.
By undermining and exchanging the d4
pawn, White gains a positional advantage,
thanks to the excellent placing of his pieces.
Here now is the opening of the game
Keres-L. Steiner, played in the Munich
Olympiad (1936). 1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 c6 3 b3 Nf6
73
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
4 Bb2 g6 5 g3 B£5 6 Bg2 Bg7 7 0-0 Qc8
8 Nc3 0-0 9 Rc1 d X c4 10 b X c4 Bh3.
w
11 d4 (only now !) 11 . . . Rd8 12 Qb3 B X g2
13 KX g2 Nbd7 14 Ba3 c5 15 Nd5. White has
an ideal position.
In the game Keres-Euwe (Noordwijk,
1 938) Black advanced his central pawn at
the first opportunity : 1 N£3 d5 2 c4 d4
(for 2 . . . d X c4, see the next example) 3 e3
(by exchanging the advanced enemy pawn,
White drives away the queen by d2-d3 and
Be3, and then advances d3-d4) 3 . . . Nc6.
On 3 . . . c5 there is an interesting gambit
continuation, aimed at destroying Black's
advanced pawn : 4 b4 !, and if 4 . . . d X e3
5 fX e3 c X b4, then 6 d4.
4 e X d4 N X d4 5 N X d4 Q X d4 6 Nc3 Bg4
(the alternative is 6 . . . e5, when there again
follows d2-d3 and then Be3) 7 Qa4+ c6
8 d3 Nf6 9 Be3 Qd7 10 d4.
B
On looking at this position, it is difficult
to imagine that initially White conceded the
centre to his opponent !
74
Keres-Euwe (12th match game, 1 939/40) :
1 Nf3 d5 2 c4 dX c4 3 e3.
3 Qa4+ or 3 Na3 is also possible, for
example : 3 Na3 c5 4 N x c4 Nc6 5 b3 f6
6 Bb2 e5 7 g3 Nge7 8 Bg2 Nd5 9 0-0 Be?
1 0 Nh4 !
3 . . . c5 4 B X c4 N£6 5 0-0 a6 6 b3 b5
7 Be2 Bb7 8 Bb2.
'Observation of the centre' : the bishop is
aimed along an open diagonal, and the e5
square is controlled by the minor pieces.
8 . . . Nbd7 9 a4 Qb6 10 a x bS a x b5 11
Rx a8+ B x a8 12 Na3 Bc6.
w
Only here did Keres play 13 d4 ! Mter
13 . . . e6 14 d X c5 B X c5 15 Nd4 his position
was preferable.
We should add that, if the position is of a
closed nature, White can delay castling, so as
to then position his king depending on the
actions of the opponent.
In certain cases control of the black
squares on the long diagonal (in particular e5)
is carried out by the queen's bishop supported
by . the king's knight, and sometimes by the
f-pawn (without the participation of the c4
pawn). The king's bishop is not fianchettoed,
but developed at b5, d3 or e2. White's
attack is aimed at the K-side, and his central
pawns are assigned a secondary role. This is
the idea of certain lines of Nimzowitsch's
Opening, which is similar in structure to the
old Bird's Opening.
1 N£3 d5 2 b3 c5 3 e3 N£6 4 Bb2 Nc6
5 Bb5 (the point of this move and the subse-
 Attack

quent exchange will soon become clear) what stronger than a rook and pawn, but
5 . . . Bd7 6 0-0 e6 7 d3 Be7 8 B X c6. weaker than a rook and two pawns), a rook is
In this way White strengthens his control equal to a minor piece and one and a half
of the key e5 square. pawns, and a queen is equal to two rooks, or
8 . . B X c6 9 NeS. By following up with
. three minor pieces, or a rook, minor piece
f2-f4 and possibly Rf3, White prepares an and one and a half pawns.
attack on the K-side. These computations are of course arbi­
1 Nf3 d5 2 b3 c5 3 e3 Nf6 4 Bb2 Bc6 trary-everything depends on the concrete
5 BbS Qb6 (instead of 5 . . . Bd7) 6 Qe2 a6 situation. There are, however, general signs,
7 B X c6+ Q X c6 8 Ne5 Qc7 9 d3 g6 10 indicating how in certain situations the
Nd2 Bg7 11 f4 0-0 12 0-0, with good strength of individual pieces manifests itself.
prospects for White. For example, in the opening and middlegame
a minor piece is preferable to three pawns.
The scale of relative piece values. The position However, account must be taken of the sort
of the kings of pawns which are obtained for the piece :
whether they are connected or isolated,
Why have we devoted so much attention to central or wing pawns, whether they are far
the problem of the centre? Because to a great advanced or have not yet crossed the de­
extent it is on the situation in the centre that marcation line, whether they are free to
the subsequent course of the game depends. advance (passed) or have in front of them a
Out of the numerous possible plans, the barrier-an enemy pawn (or pawns) or
character of the position, including the blockading enemy pieces, and whether they
situation in the centre, dictates to us a certain co-ordinate with the remaining forces or are
plan. lacking their support.
But, of course, what is most important is Since in the opening stage and the middle­
the relative balance of the forces in combat, game the piece is normally valued more
and the position of the kings-their degree highly than the pawns, the exchange of a
of security*. The remaining components of a bishop or knight for three pawns is custo­
position we as though add to this initial marily called a positional sacrifice. Positional,
information, obtained from the position on because its consequences do not become
the board, or from a position mentally apparent immediately. Compensation may
conceived in the calculation of variations. be provided by the exposed position of the
The formal balance of the forces is deter­ enemy king, which as a result of the sacrifice
mined by a scale of values of the pieces. (or exchange) is deprived of its pawn screen,
According to this scale, the bishop and knight and is subjected to attack. Such a sacrifice
are roughly equal. The value of a minor (exchange) can be carried out either to
piece is defined as three to three and a half break up the pawn fortress defending the
pawns (this means that a minor piece is castled position, or to eliminate the pawn
slightly stronger than three pawns, but weaker screen of a king which has not yet castled.
than four). Two minor pieces are roughly In the latter case an extra stimulus may be
equal to a rook plus one and a half pawns provided by depriving the opponent of the
(in other words, two minor pieces are some- right to castle.

* Here we are talking about the middlegame and the opening. In the endgame the king does not have to be
guarded-it becomes a strong piece, and the question is not of the security, but of the degree of activit¥ of the
king.

75
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

It may also happen that the sacrifice B X f5 I3 N X g7 + Kd8 I4 N X f5. A typical

(exchange) of a minor piece for three pawns position after such a sacrifice has been
has the aim not of an attack, but of exploiting reached. Black's king has been prevented
a mobile pawn mass, either in the middlegame from castling, and the co-ordination of his
or the endgame. When there is a small amount forces destroyed. White's advantage is un­
of material left on the board, passed pawns disputed.
often prove superior to a minor piece.
7 Nf6
8 h4
Keres-Oiafsson
Bled, 1961 In the 2nd game of the Tal-Botvinnik
Caro-Kann Defence return match (1961) White played 8 Nf4.
After 8 . . . Bd6 9 0-0 by 9 . . . Nd5 Botvinnik
l e4 c6
prevented the possibility of a sacrifice at e6,
2 d4 d5
and gained a perfectly satisfactory position.
3 Nc3 d X e4
In an earlier game against Golombek
4 N X e4 Bf5
(Alekhine Memorial Tournament, Moscow,
In contrast to the French Defence (1 e4 e6 1 956) Keres played 8 0-0, and answered
·

2 d4 d5), in the Caro-Kann Defence Black's 8 . . . Bd6 with 9 f4 Qc7 10 f5.

queen's bishop is not locked in by . . . e6.
8 ... h6
A defect of the opening is the slight delay in
developing the K-side, and the fact that 8 . . . h5 ? would be a bad blunder, since
. . . c5, which in a number of variations is an after 9 Nf4 Black would have to part with
important move for undermining the centre, his h-pawn, as the exchange on g6 would
is carried out with loss of time ( . . . c6 and leave his e6 and g6 squares hopelessly weak.
then . . . c5).
9 Nf4 Bh7
The alternatives for Black are 4 . . . Nf6
5 NX f6+ e X f6 (or the double-edged
10 Qe2
5 . . . gX.f6) and 4 . . . Nd7 followed by 5 . . . The 9th game of the Tal-Botvinnik match
Ngf6.
(1960) went 1 0 0-0 Bd6, when Tal sacrificed
5 Ng3 Bg6 a knight for two pawns : 1 1 N X e6 ! ? fX e6
6 Bc4 e6 12 B X e6, preventing his opponent from
7 Nle2 castling, after which the game continued
12 . . . Qc7 13 Re i Nbd7! Instead of I3 Rei,
White intends to play his knight to f4,
better possibilities were offered by I3 Nh5 !
where it will be actively placed. In particular,
(recommended by the Soviet master Kondra­
Black will have to reckon with possible
tiev).
sacrifices on e6. This plan became popular
By developing his queen at e2, Keres
after the first match for the World Champion­
creates a further attack on e6.
ship between Botvinnik and Tal (1 960).
A game Simagin-Goldberg (Moscow, 1961) 10 . . . Bd6
played soon after the match, went 7 . . . Nd7
It is extremely dangerous to take the
8 0-0 Qc7 9 Nf4 Bd6, when White gave up a
d-pawn-the sacrifice on e6 gains greatly in
minor piece for three pawns-10 B x e6 !
strength.
fXe6 (10 . . . B X.f4 fails to 11 B X d7+
Kx d'i 12 Qg4+ ) 1 1 N x e6 Qc8 1 2 Nf5 ! 11 c3

76
 Attack
Here 1 1 B X e6 is premature because of the
clever reply 1 1 . . . 0-0 !, with strong threats on
the e-file.
In the 5th game of his 1960 match with
Botvinnik, Tal said goodbye in this position
to any ideas of a sacrifice on e6, and by 1 1
Be3 blocked the e-file and then attempted
to attack on the K-side. After 1 1 . . . Nbd7
12 Ngh5 N X h5 13 N X h5 Rg8 ! 14 g4 Qc7
Botvinnik prepared Q-side castling, and
successfully solved his opening problems.
11 . . . Nbd7
The Icelandic grandmaster does not fear
the sacrifice on e6. Serious consideration
should have been given to 1 1 . . . Qc7, and
then, according to circumstances, . . . 0-0 or
. . . 0-0-0.
1 1 . . . 0-0 is also good. After c2-c3 has
been played, Q-side castling entails a serious
risk for White-the bishop at h7 is controlling
an important diagonal. K-side castling also
has its dangers, since White has played
h2-h4. But now a typical positional sacrifice
at e6 gives White fair prospects.
w position. If after 17 . . . Bf8 Black should
12 B X e6 fX e6
13 N X e6 Qe7
14 Nf5
This exchange of knight for bishop is very
important from the positional point of view.
The operation undertaken by Keres has the
aim not of creating an attack, but of obtain­
ing a promising ending.
14 . . . BXfS
77
15 NXg7+ Kf7
16 N x rs Q X e2+
17 K X e2
B
This position has been reached by force.
White has three pawns for a knight, and his
knight occupies a favourable position at f5.
Now the black bishop and the h6 pawn are
attacked. 17 . . . Bc7 18 N x h6 + Kg6 fails
to 1 9 g4 !, and if 1 9 . . . RX h6, then 20
B X h6 KX h6 21 g5+ .
The h6 pawn can be defended only by the
'ugly' 17 . . . Bf8. Nevertheless it should have
been chosen. Let us get away from concrete
variations and cast a general glance over the
succeed in playing . . . h5, his position will
perfectly playable. But if White himself
plays h4-h5, fixing the enemy pawn on a
black square, it will become a chronic weak­
ness, and the advantage then will be with
White.
Thus after 17 . . . Bf8, if White wants to
gain an advantage he is obliged to continue
18 h5. And now let us calculate a concrete
variation : 18 . . . Ke6 19 Nh4 (after 19 Ne3
Bd6 the black pieces are activated) 1 9 . . . Rg8
(not, of course, 19 . Nx h5 20 Ng6 Rg8
. .
21 NXf8+ and 22 RX h5) 20 Ng6 Bd6 !
(now not only the h6 pawn, but also the h5
pawn, is attacked !) 21 B X h6 NX h5 22
RX h5 RX g6. The resulting position is not
easy to assess. One would think that Black
should be able to cope with the passed f- and
g-pawns.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

17 . . . Ke6 30 g4 RdS
31 b4 Ncd7
Played on the grounds that White will not
32 Re1
take the h-pawn (18 NXh6 ? Bf8). However,
despite the fact that the knight at f5 is very The point of exchanging rooks is to
strong, Black should have retained his bishop. attempt to take the king across to the Q-side.
However, things do not get as far as that.
18 N x d6 K X d6
In severe time trouble Olafsson blunders,
19 Bf4+ Ke6
which soon puts an end to Black's resistance.
20 h5!
32 . . . Rx e1
Fixing the pawn at h6, and tying down
the black pieces to its defence. 32 . . . b5 is more tenacious.

20 . . . c5 33 K X e1 Ke6
34 Ke2 NeS?
A natural move, but by no means the
best, since now the black knights will not Black's position is difficult, but he could
have any strong points in the centre. Correct still have continued the struggle by 34 . . . b5
was 20 . . . Ne4 followed by . . . Ng5, taking (35 B X a7 Rd6) or 34 . . . Rg5 and then
the pressure off the h6 pawn. Another plan . . . Rg8.
was to attempt to take control of the white
squares by 20 . . . b5, so as to establish a
knight at d5.

21 d X c5 Nxc5
22 Rad1 Nd5

This activity is purely apparent. Due to the

fact that the h6 pawn is attacked, 22 . . . Rad8
is not possible.

23 Bel

The position of the black knights in the

centre is insecure. 35RX f6+

23 . . . Rae8 Forcing a transition into an easily won

24 Rh4 b6 ending.
25 £3
35 . . • K X £6
White's subsequent plan is to prepare an 36 f4 Ke6
advance of his K-side pawns.
The only alternative was a hopeless pawn
25 . .
• N£6 ending : 36 . . . RX d4 37 fX e5 + K X e5 38
26 K£2 K£7 c X d4+ .
27 Be3 ReS
37 B X e5 Rd8
28 Bd4 Re6
38 Bd4
28 . . . Rd5 fails to 29 B X f6.
The K-side pawns, supported by bishop
29 Rf4 Rd8 and king, cannot be stopped.

78
 Attack

38 . . . b5 j The king's pawn screen

I
39 Kf3 a6
The position where the pawns screening
40 Ke4 Kf7
the king are on their initial squares is regarded
41 g5 Resigns.
as the most convenient for defence.

Let us continue our discussion about the

relative values of the pieces in positions of a • • •••
certain type. •.-.
• ·�.
i �:l.
� i .. . %

In a battle against enemy pawns, a bishop

is normally stronger than a knight. A bishop
• • • •
co-ordinates better with its own pawns than
does a knight, and against a rook it also shows
• • • •
to better effect than a knight. In open positions • • • •
bishops are normally more active than knights • • • •
(especially two bishops against two knights). • • • •
And the knight? We have been talking
above about positions with open or relatively The pawns defend all the outer approaches
open diagonals, providing the bishops with to the king ; they are attacking four adjacent
operational scope. In blocked positions the squares-h6, g6, f6 and e6, of which the g6
freedom of the bishops is restricted by the square is attacked twice. With such an ar­
pawn chains, and therefore it is more advan­ rangement, it is the most difficult for the op­
tageous to have knights. ponent to exchange pawns and to open lines.
Against two rooks, a queen is usually most The drawback to having the pawns in a row
effective when the enemy king is exposed, is a tactical one-one has to reckon with
but proves weaker if the opposing king is mating threats on the back rank.
screened against checks.
· • •.•
The security of the king's position is deter­ -
� •
·
• � ·� i ��J
mined, firstly, by where it is situated. In the
� -
·
• � •
• �• %��.��%
• • • •
opening, and especially in the middlegame,
a king which is late in castling (or is forcibly
deprived of the right to castle) is subjected to • • • •
much greater danger than after it has castled, • • • •
when it is situated on the flank behind a • • • •
pawn screen. We are assuming, of course,
that this screen has not been deformed, and
• • • •
that the squares in the immediate vicinity Here mate on the back rank no longer
of the king are defended (or can be defended, has to be feared (provided, of course, that
if they are attacked). In order to detain the the h7 square is not attacked). However, the
king in the centre and then attack it, by escape square made for the king ( . . . h6)
exploiting the opening of lines, material obliges one to keep an eye on the advanced
sacrifices can be made. This is covered in pawn (for example, one may have to reckon
more detail in the section 'Seizing the initia­ with a piece sacrifice on h6, as a result of
tive in the opening. Development of the which the g- and h-pawns are removed and
initiative'. the king exposed). In addition, in the event

79
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

of an attack along the bl-h7 diagonal the

barrier . . . g6 will be less secure than with the • • •••
pawn at h7. • • •�·. 1
.
� .
� '""'% .
�
• . . .
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •

Such a pawn formation is characteristic of

positions with a fianchettoed king's bishop.

• • •••
•
. •,. �1R
·
. �1
• • •1•
• • • • diagonals. The obvious deficiency of this
• • • • pawn formation will be emphasized by the
exchange of the white-squared bishop.
• • • • Let us now take a look at doubled pawns.
• • • •
• • • • • • •••
, The squares deprived of pawn protection • • · 1 �1
are guarded by the bishop. The attacking • • •1.
side will of course try to exchange it, so as to • • • •
weaken the complex of black squares h6, g7 • • • •
and f6. • • • •
However, the move . . . g6 is not bound to
be associated with the development of the
• • • •
bishop. It may be forced by a diagonal attack • • • •
on h7, or by a vertical attack on g7.
It is much more rarely that the f-pawn is • • • ••
advanced. • • • •1
The advance . . . f6 (whether it is made • • •1.
voluntarily or forced) weakens the a2-g8 . . . ·
diagonal and the square e6 (assuming that • • • •�
the d-pawn has moved).
In this situation a whole complex of white
• • • •
squares has been weakened. Especially dan­ • • • •
gerous are attacks along the a2-g8 and bl-h7 • • • •
80
 Attack

In both cases the barrier screening the king 9 . . . 0-0 ! White cannot keep his knight, since
is fairly solid. In the first diagram there is a if it moves there follows 10 . . . Qf6 !, with a
possibility of danger for Black on the open simultaneous attack on the rook and on f2.
h-file. In the second diagram the security of 8 0-0 0-0?
the defensive formation depends on how The knight should have been retreated
dangerous the opponent's threats are on the immediately to f6.
f-file (the invasion points are f7 and f8) and 9 d3 Nf6.
the a2-g8 diagonal. After 9 . . . Nd6 White wins simply by 10
The following two positions are obviously Bg5 Qe8 11 a5.
unfavourable for defence. 10 Bg5 d6 11 Nd2!
Threatening 12 Ne4. The pin on the knight
• • ••• leads to a fatal deformation in the king's pawn
• • •i.i screen .
• • • • 11 . . . Bf5 12 Ne4 B X e4 13 d X e4 Nd4 14
Ra3!
• • • • As soon as the black king is exposed (this
• • • • now depends on White), this rook will join
• • • • the attack along the third rank.
• • • • 14 . . . Ne6
•

• • • •
• • •••
• • •i.i
• • • •

-;·;·;·;
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
Such a deformed pawn formation arises as
a result of an unfavourable exchange on f6
(first diagram) or h6 (second diagram).
Let us examine the following variation of
the Evans Gambit.
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 b4.
By sacrificing a pawn, White gains a tempo
for the seizure of the centre : 4 . . . B X b4 5 c3
and then d2-d4.
4 . . . Bb6 (Black declines the gambit) 5 a4
a6 6 Nc3 Nf6 7 Nd5 ! Nx e4?
After taking this pawn Black comes under
a very strong attack. He should have played
7 . . . N X d5 8 e X d5 e4, and if 9 d X c6 then
15 B X f6 gXf6 16 Qh5 c6.
The threat was 17 Qh6 and N X f6+ .
Black's bishop at b6 is a long way from his
K-side, and he is not able to defend f6. If he
attempts at least to protect h7, by 16 . . . Kh8
17 Qh6 Rg8 18 N X f6 Rg7, White gains a
decisive attack after 19 Rh3 Nf8 20 Rd1 and
Rd 1-d3-g3.
By . . . c6 Black drives away the menacing
knight, but even this does not save him.
17 N X b6 Q X b6 18 Rg3 + Kh8 19 Qh6.
On 19 . . . Qd8 (otherwise f6 cannot be
defended) White eliminates the defender of
the g7 square by 20 B X e6-the game is over.
* * *

81
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
'

Conclusions : to waste a tempo on a king move ( . . . Kb8 for

(1) Unnecessary advances of the pawns Black, Kb1 for White), and sometimes also
screening the king create weaknesses, and a rook move ( . . . Rc8 for Black, Rcl for
assist the opponent in building up an attack. White).
(2) The weakening of a complex of squares In order to make Q-side castling possible,
of a certain colour, caused by pawn moves the queen is often developed at c7, b6 or a5
( . . . g6, or . . . h6 and . . .f6-when Black has (or for White at c2, b3 or a4), and first . . . c6
castled K-side), becomes more appreciable if or . . . c5 (for White c2-c3 or c2-c4) is played.
the bishop defending these squares is ex­
changed off.
We have restricted our examination of
pawn screens to castling only on one side­
the K-side. The defence of the Q-side castled
position is complicated by the fact that the
rook's pawn is not automatically supported
by the king, and that the rook, which goes to
d8 (or d1) does not defend the c-pawn
(whereas with K-side castling the h-pawn is
immediately covered by the king; and the
f-pawn by both king and rook).
In comparison with the previous diagram,
the king's position has been weakened to a
certain extent : the b8-h2 diagonal is open.
In addition, it is easier for the opponent to
open the b-file.
* * *

The manner in which attack (and defence)

of the castled position is connected with
the position in the centre, the manner
in which an advantage in force is achieved
in the attacking sector (and, correspond­
ingly, the switching of forces for defence
• • • •• is carried out), and how the king's pawn
• • · 1 �1 1 screen can be weakened (and, correspondingly,
a defensive position is strengthened), will be
• • • • described using concrete examples .
• • • • Thus, the elements, out of which a posi­
• • • • tional evaluation is composed, are :
• • • • (1) Material balance (initially purely for­
• • • • mal).
• • • • (2) Position of the kings (in the centre or
on the wing, castling on the same side or on
With Q-side castling the defensive front is opposite sides, the solidity of the screen of
therefore somewhat extended, and to con­ pieces and pawns, weaknesses and 'holes' in
solidate the position it often proves necessary the immediate vicinity of the king).

82
 Attack
(3) Pawn formation (the nature of the
centre, strong and weak squares resulting
from the pawn formation).
(4) Positioning of the pieces (their mobility
and co-ordination, control over open lines,
their role in attack and defence).
We should distinguish a preliminary evalua­
tion, a so to speak general glance at the posi­
tion without the checking of concrete varia­
tions, and a final one, based on an anticipa­
tion of the most probable immediate actions
-your own and the opponent's.
There are a large number of positions in
which the direction of the play-the typical
plans and the methods of carrying them out­
are known from previous experience. A know­
ledge of typical positions and typical devices
enables a situation to be evaluated more
correctly, and the plan and individual move
corresponding to this situation to be chosen.
But at the same time almost every position is
an individual one-it contains features which
are peculiar to it alone. This individuality can
be the result of the most insignificant change
in the placing of the pieces and pawns, in
comparison with one seen earlier. The result
may be that a feature which in a similar posi­
tion was the most important is now of se­
condary importance-the position demands a
different solution. Thus experience and know­
ledge, although a considerable help in guiding
a player, by no means reduce chess to a re­
petition of what has occurred before in
practice.
How is a position evaluated?
To divide a position into its component
elements and weigh up each factor in isola­
tion is not such a difficult task. However,
evaluation is perhaps the most difficult aspect
of chess. It all depends on the ratios in which
the individual elements are present. What, in
the given case, should be considered of pri­
mary importance and what of secondary im­
portance ? Should a certain rule (which is
83
correct in the majority of similar situations)
be followed, or is this one of the exceptions
to the rule ? The number of such exceptions
in chess is endless. Also, in a practical game,
following one rule often means breaking
another-to carry out both simultaneously is
simply impossible. Which rule in this case
should be given preference ? For instance,
when doubling pawns during a recapture it is
expedient to take towards the centre. But,
according to another rule, it is advantageous
to open files for one's rooks. What should
be done if in doing so a pawn has to take not
towards the centre, but in the opposite
direction ?
A single solution on the basis of a rule is
possible only in very simple situations. But
the majority of positions which are encoun­
tered in practical play are complicated.
The basis of combinational play is cal­
culation, but the basis of strategy is planning.
"Tactics", wrote Euwe, "require a penetrat­
ing glance, strategy requires reflection". In
the chapter on combinations the positions
which interested us were ones in which a
penetrating glance and concrete calculation
were required. Now what is required is
reflection, with the aim of answering the
question "what to do?".
We will investigate a number of positions
which are favourable for attack. We will make
a plan of action, and see how this plan is
carried out in practice. Firstly, we will ex­
amine some positions in which an uncastled
(or forcibly prevented from castling) king is
subjected to attack, and then we will turn to
attacks when the two sides have castled either
on the same wing, or on opposite wings.
When the king has not castled
A basic rule of warfare (and chess) strategy '
runs : the success of an attack is ensured by
a superiority in force in the decisive area of
the battlefield.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Keres-Laurentius (Laurine) The knight cannot be taken because of a

Correspondence, 1935 deadly discovered check : 21 B X f6+ (of
course 21 Bc7 + is also sufficient, but in this
w way the game concludes more quickly) 21 . . .
Kd7 22 B X e7 N X e7 23 RXd4+ .
21 B X d4

The outcome of the combinational attack

is that White is now a pawn up with a won
position. He threatens 22 Qb3. If 21 . . .
N X d4 22 N X d4 Q X a2 ?, then 23 Q X b7
Rhe8 (23 . . . Rae8 24 Nf5) 24 RX e7+ R X e7
25 Q X a8, winning a piece.
But why shouldn't Black take the a-pawn
Black has occupied the centre, his e5 pawn immediately?
seems securely defended, and in addition he
is a pawn up. After playing . Bf8--e7 on
. .
21 . . . Q X a2
his last move, Keres's opponent assumed Against this move Keres had prepared a
that the bishop at f4 was bound to retreat. brilliant sacrifice.
However, if we turn our attention away
w
from the centre, we are struck by Black's lack
of development. His rooks are still on their
initial squares, and his king has not castled.
At the same time White's pieces are ready for
action. On the central files-the decisive part
of the battlefield-his advantage is obvious.
Exploiting his threats against d5 and the
favourable position of his knight, Keres
destroys the enemy centre.
16 Bc4! d4
This pos1t1on was analyzed in detail on
The bishop at f4 cannot be taken because p.32. The game concluded within a few
of 1 7 RX d5, while 16 . . . Nd4 also fails to moves : 22 B X f6! B X f6 23 Rd7+ Ne7 24
1 7 RXd4 e X d4 18 Nc7+ Kf8 19 Bb5. R x e7+ K X e7 25 Q x b7+ Kd6 26 Qc7+
Kd5 27 Qc5 mate.
17 Be6!
In the initial position the determining
The bishop is also immune because of the factor was White's lead in development. The
check at c7. white rooks took an active part in the offen­
sive, whereas, because Black was late in
17 . . . Qd8
castling, his rooks were merely spectators.
18 B x e5! B X e6

1 8 . . . N X e5 is of course answered by 19 Karu-Keres ; if

Rx e5. Correspondence, 1931-32
19 Nc7+ Kf7 White is a pawn up, but he has delayed the
20 N x e6 Qa5 development of his K-side.

84
 Attack
B Correct, instead of 12 . . . Nb3, is 12 . . .
7 Bb4
• . .
In playing this, Keres had first of all to
weigh up the consequences of the reply 8 a3.
Should then Black exchange on c3 ? No ! By
playing 8 . . . b5 !, and if 9 c X b5 ? Nd4 !, Keres
would have won. In fact, the bishop cannot
be taken by the queen because of 10 . . . Nc2
mate, nor by the pawn because of 10 . . . Bb3,
winning the queen. Things are not changed
by 10 b X a6 + c6, when against 1 1 . . . Bb3
White can do nothing.
Instead of 9 eX b5 ? White would have had
to retreat his queen-9 Qdl , after which
9 . . . Q X d l + 10 K X d l 0-0-0+ 1 1 Bd2
B X c3 12 b X c3 B X c4 gives Black a position­
a! advantage with material level.
The natural continuation for White was
8 e3, defending his c4 pawn, controlling d4,
and planning to develop his K-side.
8 Bd2? B X c4
9 a3 b5
10 Qc2
If 10 Qdl , then 10 . . . Nd4 (11 aX b4 Bb3).
10 . . . Nd4
11 Qe4+ Be7
12 Nf3
White evidently rejected 12 e3 because of
12 . . . Nb3 13 Rdl B X fl . But he does not
lose a piece ! Keres would not have gone in
for this variation, because of the subtle 14
Bel ! (14 . . . Qc8 15 Qc6+ Kf8 16 KX/1),
when White has everything in order.
85
B X fl 13 e x d4 (now 13 KX/1 fails to 13 . . .
Nb3) 13 . . . Bc4 14 Qc6+ Kf8. Despite his
loss of castling, the odds are with Black, who
has two active bishops. In addition the d4
pawn is weak.
12 . . . c5
13 Rcl
13 N X d4 c X d4 14 Qc6 + Kf8 has little
benefit for White : his knight has to retreat
from the battlefield, since 15 Ne4 fails to
15 . . . Bd5, and after 15 Ndl (15 Nb1, 15 Na2)
15 . . . Nf6 Black has an obvious advantage.
It was very tempting to clarify the situation
by 13 e3, but after 13 . . . Nf6 14 Qbl B X fl 15
RX f1 Nb3 White would have had to make
the awkward move 16 Ra2, and without this
rook Black's pressure in the centre would
have been unbearable. He would have pro-
bably continued 16 . . . Qd6 and then . . . 0-0.
In anticipation of . . . Nf6 White develops
his rook, so that after the retreat of his queen
it should not be isolated.
13 . Nf6
. •
14 Qb1 Qd6
Played with the aim of developing, of
course, but also so as to prevent White's
intended e2-e3. Now 15 e3 loses, to 15 . . .
N X f3+ 16 g X f3 Rd8 1 7 Rdl Bb3.
15 N X d4 c X d4
16 Ne4 NX e4
17 Q X e4
Possibly White thought that the worst was
over-K-side castling can be answered by
1 8 Bb4 . . .
17 0-0!
On 18 Bb4 Keres was intending to play
1 8 . . . Q X b4+ 1 9 a X b4 B X b4+ 20 Kdl
Bb3 + 21 Rc2 (21 Qc2 is more tenacious)
21 . . . Rac8. Later he pointed out a less
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

spectacular, but more effective continuation- B

1 8 . . . Qh6 ! (instead of 18 . . . Q x b4 + ), and
on 19 Bd2-19 . . . Bg5, after which White
cannot parry the threats on the e-file.

18 Bf4 Qd8
19 Rd1 Bf6
20 Qf3

20 e3 is still not possible, because of the

check at aS.
25 . . . R X e4 + !
It has to be said that an experienced player
would require only a glance at the position, On 26 Qx e4 there follows a problem-like
in order to conclude : a catastrophe on the mate : 26 . . . Qcl + 27 Rdl d2 mate.
e-file is inevitable ! White resigned.

20 . . . ReS Keres-Wilkins
21 b3 Correspondence, 1933
Vienna Game
B 1 e4 e5
2 Nc3 Nc6

The main vanat1on of this opening is

2 . . . Nf6 3 f4 d5 4 fx e5 Nx e4.
3 f4
A position from the King's Gambit has
been reached with the inclusion of the moves
Nc3 and . . . Nc6. But while . . . Nc6 is nor­
mally a useful move for Black in the King's
Gambit, in certain variations the move Nc3
21 • • . d3 ! deprives its own pawn of the square c3, which
prevents White from giving good support to
Mter sacrificing his bishop-22 b X c4
his d4 pawn.
b X c4 ! , Black uses the pin on the e-file to
advance his c-pawn. He threatens 23 . . . 3 ... eX f4
Bc3 + 24 Bd2 B X d2+ 25 RX d2 c3 ! 26 4 Nf3 g5
R X d3 (if 26 Ra2, then 26 . . . c2 27 Qf4 5 d4 g4
Qa5+ 28 Qd2 cl = Q mate) 26 . . . c2 ! 27 6 Bc4 g X f3
RX d8 Ra X d8, and White must resign. This 7 0-0
variation also works after 23 e4. As in the sharp variations of the King's
White is forced to decline the sacrifice. Gambit, White has sacrificed a knight, and
is to ready to assail the f7 square with superior
22 e4 Bc3+ forces. Thus after 7 . . . Bh6 the second sacri­
23 Bd2 Qd4! fice 8 B X f7+ K X f7 9 Q x f3 is dangerous for
24 B X c3 Q X c3 + Black. Mter 7 . . . fX g2 this same sacrifice
25 Rd2 gives White an irresistible attack, since his

86
1 940. V. Petrov (left) and Keres arrive in Moscow for the 12th USSR Championship.

Keres and Szab6 before a game o f tennis.

The Moscow part of the 1948 Match-Tournament for the World Championship. One of the
games between Euwe and Keres.
 Keres and Botvinnik surrounded by fans.

Keres and Tal at play in the 29th USSR Championship (Baku, 1 96 1 ) .

 " We seem to have found a win . . . " Keres with his trainer, international master Iivo Nei.

In the tournament lobby. From left to righ t : Rokhlin, Flohr, Keres and Filip, with Baturinsky in the back­
ground.
Keres and Petrosian. On this occasion the conversation is not about chess.
 •

Bas-relief on the Paul Keres Chess Club, Tallinn.

At the traditional Keres Memorial Tournament in Tallinn.
 Attack

queen is now free to go to h5 : 8 B X f7 + 12 . . . Bf6

K X f7 9 Qh5+ Kg7 10 Qg4+ and then 13 eS Be7
1 1 R X f4 + . 14 Rg3+ Kf8
Let us now analyze 7 . . . N X d4, so as to
w
answer 8 Q X d4 with 8 . . . Qg5 and a double
threat : mate at g2 and 9 . . . Bc5. On 9 Qd2
not only 9 . . . Qc5 + is possible, but also
9 . . . Bc5 + ! 10 Khl (10 Rf2 QXg2 mate)
10 . . . Be3. But White is by no means bound
to take the knight. Instead of 8 Q X d4? he
should play 8 B X f4 ! , when a possible con­
tinuation is 8 . . . Qf6 9 Nd5 Qg7 10 N X c7 +
Kd8 1 1 g3 !, with a sharp position, not un­
favourable for White.
15 R X g8+ !
7 ... Bg7
8 B X f4 B X d4+ Black resigns (15 . . . RXg8 16 Bh6+ ).
9 Kh1 B X c3
Let us return to the opening stage. As was
The intermediate check 9 . . . fXg2+ 10 stated earlier, the inclusion of the moves
K X g2 favours White, since it opens the Nc3 and . . . Nc6 favours Black, yet in the
f-file for him. For example, on 10 . . . B X c3 he majority of the variations in the game he
begins a decisive attack : 1 1 B X f7 + KX f7 12 came under a strong attack.
Qh5+ Ke7 13 b X c3, and Black i s defence­ What is his best defence in this variation ?
less (13 . . . Nf6 14 Bg5 Rf8 15 RX/6 etc.). B
10 B X f7+ K x f7
11 QdS+ Kg7'?

This loses by force. Much more tenacious

is 1 1 . . . Ke8, and if 12 Qh5+ Ke7. Black is
still in danger, but how is White to conclude
his offensive ? After 13 b X c3 (Keres also
suggested the sharp 13 e5 as a possibility)
1 3 . . . Nf6 14 Bg5 Ne5 White has two ways
of continuing his attack. The first-15
B x f6 + K x f6 16 Qf5+ Kg7 1 7 Q x e5 +
Qf6 1 8 Qg3 + Qg6-does not give him any
more than a draw by perpetual check. On the
other hand, the second-the exchange sacrifice
1 5 R X f3 N X f3 1 6 QX f3-enables him to
develop a very strong attack.
12 RXf3
Black is three minor pieces ahead, but
around his open king White has a decisive
superiority in force.
When you are a piece up, you should not
be greedy. The counter-sacrifice of a pawn
is highly promising -7 . . . d5 !, enabling Black
to bring his queen's bishop into play : 8 e X d5
(if 8 NX d5, then 8 . . . Bg4 9 gXf3 Bh3 10
B X/4 Rc8) 8 . . . Bg4. If now 9 Re1 + , then
9 . . . Nge7 10 Ne4 (10 gXf3 Bh3) 10 . . . Bg7
1 1 g X f3 Na5 12 Bfl Bh5, and Black beats
off the attack, retaining a material advantage.
In the game just examined the introduction
to the direct attack was the bishop sacrifice

7 87
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
at f7. With the king uncastled, this square is
the most vulnerable defensive link. In open
games-particularly in the King's Gambit,
Two Knights' Defence, Vienna and Italian
Games, and the Evans, Danish and Scotch
Gambits-the majority of the attacks are
directed against it.
Keres-Bilek
Leipzig Olympiad, 1960
Sicilian Defence
1 e4 c5
2 N£3 d6
3 d4 c X d4
4 N X d4 N£6
5 Nc3 e6
This set-up for Black is known by theory
as the Scheveningen Variation. By placing
his pawns at d6 and e6, Black keeps the
central squares under control. His plans
include activity on the Q-side, in particular
along the c-file.
White's chances are on the K-side and in
the centre. He must act energetically, other­
wise Black will complete his development and
then take the initiative.
6 Be3
The classical variation is 6 Be2 Nc6 7 0-0
Be7 8 Be3 a6 9 f4 Qc7 10 Qe1 0-0. In the
present game White delays for the moment
the development of his K-side. By the advance
of his g-pawn Keres aims to drive the knight
from f6, and then begin a central offensive.
6 • • . a6
7 £4 Qc7
8 g4
How should Black play now ?
8 . . . h6 can be met by the quiet 9 Bg2 (as
Keres was intending to play), when 9 . . . b5
fails to 1 0 e5. Great complications result from
9 g5 (instead of 9 Bg2) 9 . . . h X g5 1 0 fX g5
Nfd7 1 1 g6 Ne5 12 g X f7+ Q x f7. Black's
88
possession of e5 gives him counter-chances,
although White's attacking possibilities
should not be underestimated.
8 . . . e5 is unfavourable in view of 9 Nf5,
and if 9 . . . g6, then 10 g5 g X f5 (10 . . . NX e4
11 NX e4 B Xf5 12 Nf6 + favours White) 1 1
g X f6.
8 . . . h5 9 g5 Ng4 cannot be recommended.
After 10 Bg 1 White is threatening to win the
errant knight by 1 1 h3.
The correct reaction to White's flank diver­
sion was to continue playing actively on the
opposite wing-8 . . . b5, when White does
not have 9 e5 because of 9 . . b4 ! Correct
.
therefore is 9 a3 Bb7 10 Bg2, renewing the
threat of g4-g5.
It is well known that the best reaction to a
flank attack is energetic action in the centre.
But this general rule, like all chess rules, does
not apply in every case, by any means. The
difficulty of chess is that in each concrete
position one has to decide whether the gener­
al rules of theory apply to it, or whether the
tactical features of the position dictate a
different decision.
Bilek thought that his counter-play in the
centre was both justified and timely.
8 ... d5
The tactical basis of this move is that 9
e X d5 is answered by 9 . . . Bb4 !
9 e5 Nfd7
9 . . Ne4 10 N X e4 d X e4 1 1 Bg2 leads to
.
the loss of a pawn.
10 a3
White's chances are associated with the
preparation of f4-f5, but he also has to reckon
with the weakness of his e5 pawn. This means
that he must first complete his development.
He will of course castle on the Q-side. Now
10 Qf3 deserved consideration. Keres rejected
this because of 10 . . . Bb4, but after the game,
in analysis, he came to the conclusion that
 Attack

1 1 Ne2 followed by 0-0-0 would have given 12 . . . Nc6

White excellent prospects. 13 0-0-0 Be7
14 Bg2 Bd7
10 . . . g5? !
w
Black boldly goes in for complications, try­
ing to eliminate the e5 pawn. A safer plan was
to develop his Q-side by 10 . . . Nc6 followed
by . . . Nc5, . . . Bd7 and . . . 0-0-0.
w

It only remains for Black to castle . . .

15 BX d5 ! !

This bishop sacrifice destroys Black's de­

fensive screen.
11 f5 !
15 . . . ex d5
Keres sacrifices his central pawn, hoping to
break up the enemy king's pawn screen. Also Had Black declined the sacrifice by 1 5 . . .
possible was 1 1 fXg5 N X e5 12 Qe2, or e X f5, Keres would still have continued his
1 1 . . . Q x e5 12 Qd2. offensive by 16 B x c6 B x c6 1 7 N X c6 b X c6
1 8 Bd4 f6 1 9 g X f5. White's position is of
11 N x e5?
course better, but for Black this was the lesser
• . .

An incorrect decision. Correct was 1 1 . . . evil.

Q X e5, and if 12 Qd2, then 12 . . . Bc5 13 16 NX d5 Qd6
0-0-0 Nc6. If White consolidates his hold on
d4 by 14 Nce2, then by 14 . . . Nf6 ! Black 16 . . . Qa5 loses to 1 7 N X c6 and 1 8 Bb6.
gains excellent counter-play. It is true that 17 N x c6 B X c6
White has a much stronger reply, namely
14 h4 ! . Although he permits a general ex­ There is nothing else. On 1 7 . . . Q X c6
change on d4, he nevertheless gains quite White wins by 1 8 NXe7 K X e7 1 9 B X g5 + ,
sufficient compensation for the pawn in the while 1 7 . . . N X c6 or 1 7 . . . b X c6 is met by 1 8
form of the open h-file. In addition, Black's Nb6.
pieces would be passively placed. 18 BcS !
12 Qe2 ! 18 Nb6 could now have been met by
White pays no attention to the g5 pawn. 1 8 . . . Bf3.
His aim is not to re-establish material equa­ By diverting the queen from the defence of
lity, but to develop as quickly as possible. If e5, White lands a crushing blow along the
Black should succeed in making three moves : e-file.
. . . Nc6, . . . Bd7 and . . . 0-0-0, he will be 18 . . . Q x c5
able to face the future with confidence. 19 Q X e5

7* 89
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

The rook at h8 is attacked, and 20 f6 is also and . . . Nc6), the set-up with . . . e6 and . . .
threatened. If 19 . . . B X d5, then 20 Q X h8+ Nbd7, the . . . e5 system, as well as develop­
Bf8 21 Qe5 + , and wins. ment in the spirit of the Dragon Variation
( g6).
19 £6
. • .
• . .

20 N x £6+ K£7 6 Be2

Or 20 . . . Kf8 21 Nd7+ B X d7 22 Q X h8 + . Nowadays 6 Bg5 or 6 Bc4 is more often

played.
21 Qe6+ K£8
6 . . • Qc7
Mter 21 . . . Kg7 the simplest is 22 Nh5 +
Black intends to delay the development of
Kf8 23 f6.
his king's bishop. The classical continuation
22 Rhel ! mentioned above, 6 . . . e6 followed by . . . Be7
and . . . Nc6, and the Boleslavsky Variation
White is still a piece down, but Black's
6 . . . e5, have been thoroughly studied.
position is hopeless. 23 b4! is threatened,
with an immediate win, as well as 23 Nd7+ 7 Bg5 Nbd7
B X d7 24 RXd7 Re8 25 f6. If 22 . . . B X f6 8 (H) e6
23 QXf6+ Kg8, then of course 24 Re7.
Only now does Black intend to develop his
22 • . Rd8 bishop, but by an original attack Keres
23 RX d8+ B X d8 prevents this.
24 Nd7+ Resigns.
9 Bb5
Mter 24 . . . B X d7 25 Q x d7 Be7 White An opening preparation, specially intended
wins by 26 f6 ! for Kotov, who previously had successfully
It stands to reason that, when conducting employed this particular move order in the
an attack on the king, you do not take upon Sicilian Defence.
yourself the obligation to mate the opponent The threat is 10 N X e6. What should Black
without fail. It can also happen that, in play ?
saving his king, the defender loses material
9 ... Qc4
or is forced to make significant positional
concessions, which in the end decide the The queen defends e6. It is interesting that,
outcome of the game. in his preparations for the game, Keres did
not consider this possibility. Even so, the
Keres-Kotov surprise nature of 9 Bh5 had its effect : the
Candidates' Tournament, Budapest, 1950 defence chosen by Kotov is unsuccessful.
Sicilian Defence In his preparations Keres analyzed 9 . . . Ne5,
on which he was intending 10 B X f6 gXf6
1 e4 c5
1 1 Kh1 (the king has to be removed from
2 Nf3 d6
the a7-gl diagonal) followed by f2-f4. An
3 d4 cX d4
alternative, which Keres also considered, is
4 N X d4 N£6
9 . . . NXh5 10 QXh5 g6. Then 1 1 Qh4, and
5 Nc3 a6
if 1 1 . . . Bg6-simply 12 Radl . (Note that,
With this move order Black retains the apart from 11 Qh4, to be considered is 11 Qh3
possibility of transposing into the classical with the threat of 12 NX e6). In both cases
Scheveningen Variation (after . . . e6, . . . Be7 White's position is more promising.

90
 Attack

It is true that Black can play . . . g6 imme­
diately, without first exchanging on h5-9 . . .
g6 !, and if 1 0 Be2 Bg7. The weakness of the
d6 pawn is only apparent, and after the
possible 1 1 Qd2 b5 12 a3 0-0 1 3 Rad1 Nc5
14 f3 Bb7 Black has a good game.
w
A tactical blow o n the theme of diversion­
I t . . . Q X d5 12 Nc7 mate ! After the forced
1 1 . . . Nb6 12 Q X c4 N X c4 1 3 Nc7+ White
comes out the exchange ahead.
11 NdS!
Black is again faced with a choice : he can
parry the check at c7 either by taking the
knight (and opening the e-ffie for the oppo­
nent), or by giving up the right to castle. After
1 1 . . . N X d5 12 e X d5 Keres had in mind the
forcing variation 12 . . . Qf5 (the only move)
13 Qe l + Ne5 (or 13 . . . Qe5 14/4) 14 f4.

After the move made by Kotov, Keres

sank into thought-his prepared analysis had
come to an end. The result of his thought was
a grandiose sacrifice.

10 NXe6!
A bold decision, which demanded both a
tactical and a positional basis. The first
question is : why shouldn't Black now ex­
The threat is 15 fXe5 Q X g5 16 e X d6 +
change on h5 and then take the knight? And
(16 . . . Kd8 17 Qa5+ ) , and Black i s not saved
the second question : why not take the knight by 14 . . . Be7, or 14 . . . h6, or 14 . . . g6.
immediately ?
11 . . Kd8
10 . . . Q x e6
.

12 Bg4
Kotov invites Keres to answer the second
White has an enormous lead in develop­
question. In answer to the first question,
ment, the black king is stuck in the centre,
Keres was intending to meet 1 0 . . . N x h5
and the c7 and f6 squares are tactically
not with 1 1 Q X h5, but 1 1 Qd5 ! !
weak. In short, there must be a decisive con­
B tinuation !

12 . .. Qe5

If 12 . . . Qe8, then simply 13 Qd2 ! with

two threats : 14 B X d7, as well as 14 Qc3 or
14 Qa5 + .

13 £4 Q X e4

Hopeless, as however is 13 . . . Q X b2 14
Rbl Qa3 1 5 B X d7. If Black captures with the

91
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

bishop there follows 16 N X f6, while if with 24 Bb6 + Kc8 25 Rc7+ Kb8 26 RX c6
the king, then 16 B X f6 and 1 7 Nb6 + . b X c6 27 Re8+ Kb7 28 Re7+ , and Black
loses after :
14 B X d7 B X d7
(a) 28 . . . Kc8 (28 . . . Kb8 29 Bc7+ and
If 14 . . . KX d7, then, as already stated, 30 QX/4) 29 Q X f4 RX b6 30 Qd4 (this
1 5 B X f6, when after 15 . . . Kc6 (15 . . . gXf6 double threat-31 Q X b6 and 31 Qh8-which
16 NXf6 + ) White wins by 16 c4 g X f6 1 7 had to be seen beforehand, is the point of
Qa4+ b 5 1 8 eX b5+ KX d5 1 9 Rad1 + . the entire plan) 30 . . . Kd8 31 Ra7, or
(b) 28 . . . Ka8 29 Bd4 ! (threatening not
15 N X £6 g X £6
only 30 QX/4, but also 30 Qe2!), and if
If 15 . . . Qc6, then 16 Nd5+ Kc8 (16 . . .f6 29 . . . Qh6, then 30 g3 Be5 31 Re8+ and
17 NXf6) 17 Rf3 Kb8 18 Rc3, and Black is 32 Q X f7 mate.
unable to parry the attack.
24 Bb6+ Kc8
On 15 . . . Qg6 there could have followed
25 ReS+ B x es
16 Nd5 + f6 1 7 Qd4 ! fX g5 1 8 Qb6+ Ke8
26 R X e8+ Kd7
19 Rae 1 + Kf7 20 Q X b7 Rd8 21 Qc7, when
27 RX£8 Resigns.
White wins.
By giving up the exchange, Black hopes to A grandiose game !
obtain counter-play.
Keres-Mikenas
16 B X £6+ Kc7
USSR Team Championship, 1969
17 B X h8 Bc6
18 Qd2 Bh6
19 Rae1 Qg6
20 Re7+ Kd8
21 Rfe1 aS

Otherwise 22 Qa5 + .
22 Bd4 Ra6

And now a check at b6 was threatened.

23 Q£2 B£8

On 23 . . . B X f4 Keres had calculated the

following variation : Whereas White has nearly all his pieces
developed, Black has only his queen in play.
w However, it should be remembered that a
lead in development is of a temporary nature,
and that in order to exploit it, determined
action is required. White's first task is to
open lines and to eliminate the main pawn
barrier-at e5.
14 £4!

On 14 . . . e X f4 there follows 15 Qh5 +

with a very strong attack, since 15 . . . Qf7 fails

92
 Attack

to 16 Rbe 1 + Be7 1 7 RXe7+ ! ! K X e7 1 19 . . . Bd6

1 8 Bb4 + , winning the queen ! 20 Q x e6+ Kd8
21 Q X g8+ Kc7
14 . . . Be6

Mikenas hoped that this move would en­

able him to develop. On 15 fX e5 he intended
1 5 . . . Nd7, with three attacks on the e5 pawn,
which he thought would be unable to move,
since the knight at g3 is undefended.

15 fX e5 Nd7

Mate is threatened at h2, and the white

queen is en prise . . .

22 R X b7+ !

By sacrificing his 'extra' rook, Keres

vacates the f1 square for his king.
22 . . . K X b7
16 e X f6! ! 23 Rb1 + Nb6
The start of a deeply calculated combina­ If 23 . . . Kc7 (23 . . . Ka6 24 c5+ ), then
tion. 24 Ba5 + Nb6 25 Qf7 + .
16 . . . Q X g3
24 Qf7+ Bc7
17 fX g7 BcS +
25 Kg1 Rd8
Why not 17 . . . B X g7 ? 26 c5
Because then comes the subtle 18 Qe1 ! !
The counter-attack has been parried, and
The exchange of queens-18 . . . Q X e 1 19
Black loses material. The conclusion was :
Rb X e1-is forced, and after 19 . . . B X c3
20 R X e6+ Kd8 21 d X c3 the ending is won 26 ... RX d3
for White. 27 c X d3 Qh2+
28 Kf2 Qg3+
18 Khl Rg8
29 Ke2
19 Qel!
The white king heads for c2. Black resigns.
After the exchange of queens White re­
gains his piece by the pin, remaining with a
decisive material advantage. The kings are castled on the same side
Mikenas makes a desperate attempt to
create threats along the b8-h2 diagonal. One of the ways of 'getting at' the enemy
Note that 19 Qe2 does not work in view of king is to exploit a weakening of its pawn
1 9 . 0--0-0, and if 20 Q x e6 Bd6 !
. . screen.

93
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Stahlberg-Keres 26 Ke1 Rfe8+

Stockholm; 1967 White resigns.
B
Keres-Donner
Bled, 1961
w

It only requires the e2 pawn to be dislodged,

and White's f3 square will become weak.
20 • • . d3!
21 e x d3 Black's K-side has been weakened by the
If 21 Qc3, then 21 . . . f6, and 22 e X d3 fails advance of his pawns, while White controls
to 22 . Nf3+ 23 B X f3 B X f3 with the
. .
the a2-g8 diagonal, and his bishops are very
threat of 24 . . . Qh3-White loses at least a active. How can he exploit these advantages ?
bishop. 21 Bc4!
In taking the pawn, Stahlberg had in mind
2 1 . . . Nf3 + 22 B X f3 B X f3 23 Q X c4. In By taking control of the a2-g8 diagonal,
comparison with the variation given in the Keres frees his queen from this duty, and
previous note, the bishop at g5 is not attacked, prepares a combination with a rook sacrifice :
and the threat of 23 . . . Qh3 is parried by 22 Bg5 Rff8 23 RX h7+ ! K X h7 24 Qh3 +
24 Qh4+ . . . Kg7 25 Qh6 mate.
But Black has another, much more effective 21 . . . £4
way of exploiting the weakening of the f3
The h3 square is now attacked by the bish­
square.
op, and the above combination does not
21 • . . Bf3 ! work. But White has another possibility of
Now White's queen cannot reach h4. But creating a mating threat.
in this case how is he to defend against 22 Bg5 Rff8?
22 . . . Qh3 ?
22 . . . Be7 ! was essential.
22 B X f3
23 Bf7!
To avoid mate he has to give up a piece.
Threatening 24 Bf6 mate. Black resigns.
22 . . . NXf3+
'1 1l
23 Kg2 N X gS Keres-Geller } J :r
24 £4 8th Match Game, Moscow, 1962
Here White could well have resigned. Here the black king's pawn screen has not
24 • . . Qc6+ been weakened, but it is deprived of piece
25 Kf2 Qf3+ support, all three minor pieces having strayed

94
 Attack
w (a) 18 B X c3 R X c3 19 Rfe1, with a marked
to the opposite wing. White only needs to
open the diagonals, when his bishops will
be aimed at g7 and h7. Then a double attack
on one of these squares will force Black to
advance one of the pawns screening his
king . . .
16 d5! e X d5
If Black attempts to exchange bishops by
16 . . . Bc3 (which from the strategic point of
view would be advantageous to him), he
loses the exchange after 17 Ba3 Re8 18 BbS,
while 16 . . . Qe7 is very strongly met by 1 7
Nd4 (17 . . . Bc3 1 8 d6! Q x d6 19 BX c3
R X c3 20 Nb5; 17 . . . eXd5 ? 18 N/5).
17 eX d5
White's aim is achieved-the diagonals are
open. The d"pawn is immune : 1 7 . . . B X dS
(17 . . . Q x d5 ? ? 18 BX h7+ ) 1 8 QeS (but not
18 Be4 Bc4 19 B X h7+ KXh7 20 Qe4+ f5)
1 8 . . . f6 (or 18 . . . Qf6 19 Qh5 g6 20 BX/6
gX h5 21 Ng5 with a material advantage)
19 QhS g6 20 B X g6 h X g6 21 Q X g6 + Kh8
22 QhS + and 23 RX dS, winning.
Meanwhile a double attack is threatened­
I S Qe4.
17 . . . Qe7
The other possibilities were 1 7 . . . Re8
(when, as in the game, 18 Ne5 is strong, with
the threat of 19 B X h7+ l(X h7 20 Qh5+
Kg8 21 QX/7+ and 22 Rd3), and 1 7 . . . Bc3,
after which White has two alternatives :
95
positional advantage for White (19 . . . B X d5
still does not work, this time because o f a
pin-20 Be4 ReS 21 Qd3, or 20 . . . Bc4 21
R X d8 B X e2 22 R X/8+ KX/8 23 RX e2,
winning a piece).
(b) 1 8 BfS ! (even stronger) 18 . . . Rc7 (or
18 . . . Rc4 19 Ne5 with a clear advantage)
1 9 Ba3 Re8 20 Qd3 g6 21 d6 !, and, after the
rook moves, 22 d7.
18 Ne5! £6
White wins brilliantly after 18 . . . Bd6
19 QhS g6.
w
20 Ng4 ! ! f6 (20 . . . gXh5 21 Nh6 mate)
21 Qh4 gS 22 Q X gS + ! fX gS 23 Nh6 mate.
Or 19 . . . h6 (instead of 19 . .g6) 20 QfS
.
g6 21 N X g6.
These and other variations show just how
dangerous are the rampant bishops on the
open diagonals.
19 Qh5
This is much stronger than the unclear
bishop sacrifice : 19 B X h7+ K X h7 20 Qh5+
Kg8 21 Ng6 Qd7.
19 . . . g6
If 19 . . . fx eS ?, then of course 20 B X h7+
Kh8 21 Bg6+ and 22 Qh7 mate.
(See diagram next page)
20 N X g6
By sacrificing a piece, White destroys the
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

w Keres-Laurentius (Laurine)
Estonian Championship, Tal/inn, 1935
B

enemy king's pawn screen, and then includes

his rook in the attack.
The position in the centre is fixed. The
20 . . . h X g6
reinforced outpost at e5 isolates Black's
21 B X g6 Qg7
main forces from the defence of his K-side,
The attempt to deny the rook the d3 square and gives White a spatial advantage (which,
by 21 . . . Ba6 loses after 22 d6 Qg7 (if 22 . . . in turn, provides manoeuvring freedom).
B X d6, then 23 Rfe1 Be5 24 BX e5 /X e5 Fearing an attack, Black decided to exchange
25 RX e5, with a winning attack) 23 d7 Rcd8 the opponent's important white-squared bish­
(23 . . . Rc5 24 Bf5) 24 Rd4 ! op by 14 . . . Ba6, when there followed :
21 . . . Rc7 also fails to the same 22 d6 !
15 BX a6
B X d6 23 Rfel Be5 (or 23 . . . Qd8 24 Rd4,
with decisive threats) 24 RXe5 ! fX e5 25 Keres thought that at a6 the black rook
B x e5 Rf6 26 Qg5 ! would be out of play (and could also become
the target for a double attack by the queen
22 Rd3 Bd6
after Ng5 and Qd3), and that Black would be
Otherwise 23 Rg3. unable to organize a defence of his K-side,
even after getting rid of the dangerous bishop.
23 f4
However, Black has defensive resources at his
Renewing the threat of 24 Rg3. disposal.
Seriously to be considered was the retention
23 . . . Qh8
of the bishop by 15 Ba4, when after 1 5 . . . b5
24 Qg4 Bc5 +
16 Bc2 a typical sacrifice at h7 is threatened
25 Kh1 Rc7
(17 BXh7+ KX h7 18 Ng5+ etc.).
There is no longer any defence.
15 . . . R x a6
26 Bh7+ + Kf7 16 Ng5
27 Qe6+ Kg7
Threatening the double attack 1 7 Qd3,
28 Rg3+ ,
which also would follow after 16 . . . h6.
and mate next move.
16 . . . Ng6
This was the last, decisive game for the
17 Qb5 b6
right to participate in the Candidates' event
18 Nf3
for the World Championship. By winning it,
Keres won the match 41/2-31/2 . The win of a pawn-1 8 N X e6 fXe6 1 9

96
 Attack

Q X g6-does not tempt Keres. After 1 9 . . . The knight heads for f5, but the right time
Qf7 ! 20 Q X f7 + R X f7 White is left with a has been missed.
bad bishop (impeded by its own pawns)
22 Racl Qd7
against an active black knight. 21 Be3 is
23 RXc8
strongly met by 21 . . . a4 followed by the
transfer of the knight via a5 to c4. 23 B X e7 RX c1 24 R X c l QXe7 25 Rc8
does not achieve anything after 25 . . . Qd7 !
18 • . . Rc8
23 . . . N x cs
w
•• 24 Re3!
.
•/- The knight has had to retreat to c8, and
J! Keres hastens to switch his rook to the h-file.

24 • . . Ra7

If 24 . . . Ne7, then of course 25 B X e7

Q X e7 26 Ng5 with the threat of Rh3. On
26 . . . f6 White wins by 27 e X f6 g X f6 (or
27 . . . Q X g6 28 Rf3!) 28 Rg3 !
19 g4 25 Nh4 Ne7
A fresh attacking resource-White intends
Too late !
to open the h-file. A general rule is that the
advance of the pawns in front of one's own 26 Rh3
castled position is justified when the centre is
closed, and one has a spatial advantage, B
ensuring the switching of the heavy pieces to
the K-side. In open and semi-open positions
one has to reckon with counter-play by the
opponent in the centre, the best way of expos­
ing a weakening of the K-side.
In the given case the position in the centre is
closed, and the second condition (spatial
advantage) also applies. But it should be
borne in mind that the white-squared bishops
are no longer on the board, and that after
The threat is 27 Qh8 + ! K X h8 28 Ng6+ +
g4-g5 control of the f5 square will pass to
and 29 Rh8 mate.
Black. In anticipation of this, it was essential
to play 1 9 . . . Nce7!, so as to answer 20 g5 26 . . . Neg6
with 20 . . . hXg5 21 N X g5 Nf5 !. It is instruc­
No better is 26 . . . Nfg6 27 B X e 7 ! Q X e 7
tive to follow how Black loses, after missing
(27 . . . NX e7 28 Qh8+ ) 28 N X g6 fXg6 29
this opportunity to occupy the key f5 square
Qh8 + Kf7 30 Rf3 + , and wins.
with his knight.
27 N X g6 fX g6
19 • . . Nf8?
20 g5 h X g5 After 27 . . . N X g6 Black is mated on the
21 B X g5 Ne7 back rank : 28 Qh7+ Kf8 29 Qh8+ .

97
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
28 Qh8+ Kf7
29 Rf3+ ,
and mate next move.
And now another example of an attack in
which, with the two sides castled on the same
side, the pawns take an active part.
Keres-SzabO
Hastings, 1954j55
w
After the exchange of his :fianchettoed
king's bishop, the black king's pawn screen
has been weakened. The centre is not com­
pletely blocked, but it is securely controlled by
White, who has a definite spatial advantage.
At the same time-and this is a very
important detail !-Black's knight is stuck
over on the Q-side, so that on the K-side
White has an advantage in force. Such are
the preconditions for the storm by the h-pawn,
which Keres now begins.
14 h4!
By the advance of this pawn White threat­
ens to open the h-:file and after Kg2 and
Rh1 to create threats to the black king.
14 . . . b5
In order to divert White from his plan,
Black begins a demonstration on the opposite
wing. On the attempt to halt the further
advance of the h-pawn by 14 . . . h5 White
would have prepared g3-g4 (it does not
98
work immediately : 15 g4 e5! 16 dX e6
QXh4 17 eXf7+ RX/7) by 1 5 Qd2 !
15 c X b5 Qb6
Black regains his pawn, but at the same
time his queen is diverted to the Q-side . . .
However, after 1 5 . . . Rb8 16 a4 a6 White
has the very strong reply 1 7 b4 !
16 a4 a6
17 h5 a x b5
Black is unable to block the position on
the K-side by 1 7 . . . g5, since White replies
1 8 b4, retaining his extra pawn (18 . . . Nc4
fails to 19 Qcl !). It should be added that,
even if White had not had this tactical
possibility, he would still not have allowed
his opponent to block the K-side : he can
also answer 1 7 . . . g5 with 1 8 h6 f6 19 Be4
followed by Qc2, Bf5-e6 and f2-f4.
18 h X g6 h X g6
lf l8 . . . fXg6, then 19 Bg4.
19 Kg2
The advance of the h-pawn and its ex­
'
change have enabled White• to create an ad­
vantage!in force in the attacking sector : he
threatens Rhl.
19 . . . f6
Black wishes to play . . . Kg7 and then
• . Rh8 .
.
20 Rh1 Kg7
Black does not have time to take the a­
pawn : 20 . . . b X a4 21 Qc2 ! Kg7 22 Qe4
Rae8 (or 22 . . . Qc7 23 RX a4, when after
23 . . . NX b3 24 R X a8 R X a8 25 Qh4 White
has irresistible mating threats) 23 Qe3 !, and
Black cannot parry the attack, for example :
23 . . . Rh8 24 RX h8 K X h8 25 Qh6+ Kg8
26 Q X g6+ Kf8 27 Bh5.
21 aXb5 Q X b5
 Attack
If 21 . . . Rh8, then 22 R X h8 RX h8 23
Qc3 ! Nb7 24 Qe3 ! with an extra pawn and
the better position. 22 . . . K X h8 (instead of
22 . . . RX h8) loses to 23 Qd2 !, with a decisive
switching of the rook to the h-file.
22 Qd2!
The queen is aimed not only at a5, but also
h6. Therefore Black again cannot play
22 . . . Rh8, on which, when playing 19 . . . f6,
he was pinning his hopes (after 23 R X h8 he
has to take with the king, but then 24 Qh6+
and 25 QXg6+ ). Note how, by simultaneous
threats, Keres exploits the unfortunate posi­
tion of the black knight.
22 g5
• • .
An enforced weakening, after which the
white bishop becomes master of the highly
important h3-c8 and bl-h7 diagonals.
23 Qe3 Qd7
w
24 Bg4!
Keres also saw another way to win-24
Qd3 Rh8 25 R X h8 R X h8 (25 . . . KX h8
26 Rhl + ) 26 R X a5 Qh3 + 27 Kgl , when
White is a piece up with his king safe, but he
considered it too crude.
24 . . . Qc7
The bishop is immune, in view of a forced
rnate (24 . . . QXg4 25 Q X e7+ Rf7 26 Rh7+ !
KX h7 27 QX/7+ Kh8 28 Rhl + ).
25 B£5 K£7
99
And now 25 . . . Rh8 is met by 26 Rx h8
RX h8 (or 26 . . . KXh8 27 Rhl + Kg7 28
Rh7+ Kg8 29 Qe6+ ) 27 RX a5 !, when
27 . . . Q x a5 allows 28 Q X e7+ and mate.
26 Rh7+ Ke8
27 Rahl
The terrible bishop prevents the black
king from escaping to the Q-side. Against
the threat of 28 Rh8 there is no defence.
27 . . . Qb7
28 Rh8 Resigns.
On 28 . . . Q x d5 + there follows 29 Be4.
Keres-Bronstein
I rq
26th USSR Championship, Tbi/isi, 1959 u
w
In the preceding play Keres won a pawn,
and now, exploiting (1) his concentration of
forces on the K-side, and (2) the advantage
in space gained in this sector, with (3) a se­
cure position in the centre, he begins a decisive
offensive.
42 £5!
The exchange on f5 (24 . . . NX/5 34 NX/5
gXf5 44 QX/5) weakens catastrophically
Black's f7. Meanwhile White is threatening
not so much the exchange on g6, but rather
43 f6 !
With his introductory move White has
brought into play his 'sleeping' bishop at h2.
All this forces Black (who is a pawn down)
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

to offer the exchange of queens, so as to This tactical resource was taken into
weaken the onslaught. account by Keres.

42 • . . Qe4 48 N3g4 !
43 Q X e4 N x e4
Against the check at h6 there is no defence.
White will then give a discovered check
(by moving his knight from h6) after first
retreating his rook to h3. For example,
48 . . . Nd7 49 Nh6 + Kh7 50 Rh3 N X f6 (if
50 . . . Nx e5, then 51 NX/7+ Kg8 52 Nx e5,
and wins) 5 1 Nhg4+ Kg8 (or 51 . . . Nh5
52 RX/7+ Bg7 53 Nf6 + , and wins) 52
RX f6 !, and White wins.
After Bronstein's reply, White's task is
even simpler.
44 Rg4! 48 . . . g5
White's attack develops even without the 49 Rh5 R x e5
queens. By attacking the knight and forcing A futile attempt to divert the knight . . .
the opponent to take the c3 pawn, White
advances f5-f6, after which Black's bishop 50 Nh6+ ! Kh7
is shut out of play, and his king, which is 51 Nf5+ Kg8
restricted by his own pieces, comes under a If 5 1 . . . Kg6, then 52 Rh6 mate.
crushing attack along the h-fil e.
It should be mentioned that, in playing w
.�-
�.�• -
�%•� �
�W�·'· ;; :
- -- - �.
'tal � -
44 Rg4, Keres was obliged to take account
of the temporary piece sacrifice 44 . . . N X g5
;!L./. - ••
� �-� •" •·�
·· ·
45 R X g5 f6. To this he would have replied
��:0'Mi.
lWMi
•
%!'. ..�
M
-
� � ·i&�d�i0'� f
� �"ZJ�
;' J ..� �
:1L
46 RX g6 ! fX e5 (after 46 . . . NXg6 47 NXg6
White has two minor pieces and a pawn for a .j!!��"•'u�..�.•
;;;�;;; �•
; .•�
rook) 47 Rg4 !, when the threat of 48 B X e5 �• • �
(47 . . . Nd7 is very strongly met by 48 dx e5)
�
-� -�••• •• .. .....
. . �.
�u ,;
: :

-� • ·
renders Black's position hopeless.
•-5�
44 . . . Nxc3
52 Ne7+ !
45 f6! Bh8
Of course, the simple 52 B X e5 is also
After 45 . . . e x f6 46 g X f6 Bh6 White wins sufficient. But now the reader has the chance
immediately by 47 Nf5 ! But now the black of meeting a typical combination, in which a
king perishes in a cage formed out of his own pawn, on reaching the seventh rank, attacks
pieces. an undefended knight . . .
46 Rh4!
52 . . . RX e7
Threatening 47 N3g4 and then Nh6 + . 53 R X h8+ ! Resigns.

46 . . . e X f6 After 53 . . . K X h8 54 fX e7 the appearance

47 gXf6 R X d4 of a new queen cannot be prevented.

100
 Attack
Keres-Unzicker
2nd Match Game, Hamburg, 1956
w to move his attacked rook.
In an attempt to weaken White's pressure,
with his last move 22 . . . Re7-f7 Unzicker
offered the exchange of rooks.
How does White exploit his advantage in
force on the K-side ?
23 N X g7!
The prelude to an attack. By exposing the
enemy king, White achieves success. The
general precondition for the sacrifice is
the remoteness of Black's rook, bishop and
knight from the main scene of events.
23 • • • R X g7
The knight can be taken only by the rook,
since after 23 . . . K X g7 White wins immedi­
ately by 24 Qg4+ Kf8 25 Bh6+ .
Keres was intending to meet 23 . . . Raf8
with the spectacular 24 Ne6 ! : 24 . . . R X f5
25 Qg4+ Kh8 26 N X f8 followed by Bd4+ ,
or 24 . . . Q x e6 25 Qg4+ Kh8 (or 25 . . . Qg6
26 Rg5, and wins) 26 Bd4+ Rf6 27 RXf6
QX g4 28 RX f8 mate.
24 Bh6!
The rook cannot move to g6 (or e7)
because of mate at f8, nor to f7, in view of
25 Rg5+ Kh8 26 Qc3+ . Therefore 24 . . . Re8
appears to be the only move, but then comes
25 h4 ! with the threat of 26 B X g7 f}_ X g7
(26 . . . KXg7 27 Rg5+ Kh8 28 Qf6 + ) 27
Rg5.
101
24 . . . Qe7
Having defended f8, Black is threatening
25 B X g7 Q X g7
Or 25 . . . KXg7 26 Qc3 + , and now :
(a) 26 . . . Kg6 27 Rf3 Qe5 28 Qd3+ Kg7
29 Re3, and Black is lost.
(b) 26 . . . Kg8 27 Rf3 Qe5 28 Qc4+ Qd5
(if 28 . . . Kh8, then 29 Qf7!, or 28 . . . d5,
when 29 Qa6, with a simultaneous attack on
knight and bishop, is good enough to win)
29 Qf4 Qe6 (30 Rg3+ and 31 Qf6 mate was
threatened) 30 Re3 (driving away the queen,
so as to then occupy the e-file with his other
rook) 30 . . . Qf7 3 1 Rg3+ Kf8 32 Qh6+ Ke8
33 Re 1 + , and White successfully concludes
his attack.
In all variations the exposed black king is
unable to defend itself against the numerous
threats. Note the sorry placing of Black's
bishop and knight.
26 h4
As in the variation analyzed in the note to
White's 24th move, this is an important
attacking resource. The threat is 27 Rg5.
26 . . . h6
26 . . . Rf8 also did not help, when Keres had
a pleasant choice between 27 Rei R X f5
28 Q X f5, and an attack in which he exploits
the unfortunate placing of Black's bishop
and knight : 27 RXf8 Q X f8 28 Qg4+ , and
now :
(a) 28 . . . Kf7 29 Rc3 Qe7 (29 . . . Ke7 30
Qe2+ Kd7 32 Qa6!-a double attack) 30
Rf3 + Ke8 3 1 Re3.
(b) 28 . . . Kh8 (or 28 . . . Qg7 29 Qc8 + }
2 9 Qd4+ Qg7 (if 29 . . . Kg8, then 30 Rc3)
30 Qx a7, and wins.
27 Rc4!
The second rook comes decisively into
play. Black resigns.
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Euwe-Keres 17 . . . Bd3
Match-Tournament for the World 18 Rel R X e1 +
Championship, 1948 19 Q X e1

w B

Having sacrificed a pawn, Black has gained Keres's next move best answers the ques­
a marked lead in development. All his pieces tion as to why he did not make any attempt
are in play, whereas White's Q-side pieces to control the open file, but exchanged rooks.
are still on their initial squares. The white Black will attack by exploiting another
queen looks awkwardly placed on the e-file. file-the f-file, where he will have a clear
Black, on the other hand, has two active advantage in force. But first he must remove
bishops and prospects of occupying the e-file. a barrier-the f4 pawn.
A significant defect in White's position is the
19 . . . B X f4 !
fact that his pawn is at f4, which, firstly,
makes his queen's bishop 'bad', and, second­ A bishop sacrifice which destroys White's
ly, weakens his white squares. However, it K-side defences. But why the bishop, and
should not be forgotten that Black is a not the knight ? Was Keres right to reject
pawn down. This obliges him to act energeti­ 1 9 . . . N X f4 ? (cf. p. 1 78, No. 7).
cally. Now the best chance for White was
20 g X f4
1 5 Nf3, when by 1 5 . . . B X b 1 16 R X b l Qg6
Keres would have regained his pawn with a What if White declines the sacrifice and
sligptly better position, thanks to his control by 20 Qe6+ exchanges queens ? (cf. p. 1 79,
of the white squares. No. 8).
Euwe made the plausible move 15 Nd2,
20 . . . N X f4
which within just a few moves allowed his
21 Ndf3
opponent to create dangerous threats on the
K-side. At last the white bishop comes into play.
But it is too late : the white king is exposed
15 . . . Ng6
and can no longer be saved.
Not only vacating the e-file, but also If 2 1 Qe5, then 21 . . . Ne2+ 22 Kh1 Qf2 !
provoking g2-g3, accentuating the weakness On 21 Ngf3 Black wins by 21 . . . Qg6 + 22
of the white squares. Kf2 Nh3 + 23 Ke3 Bc2 ! 24 Qe2 Qh6 + ,
or 24 Qfl Qe6 + . If 21 h4 , then simply
, 16 g3 Rae8
21 . . . h6 (22 . . Ngf3 Qg6+ ).
17 Q£2
.

21 Qh4 also loses quickly after 21 . . . Ne2+

1 7 Qf3 allows 1 7 . . . h6, winning the knight. 22 Kg2 Be4+ ! 23 Kh3 Ng1 + 24 Kg4 (or

102
 Attack

24 Kg3 Qf2 + 25 Kg4 Qf4+ and 26 . . . Bg6 22 Q X d4 b6

mate) 24 . . . Qf4+ 25 KhS Bg6 mate.
After this the complex of white squares, a6,
21 • . • Ne2+ b7 and c6, becomes weak. But on 22 . . . Kb8
22 Kg2 h6 there would have followed 23 NbS, when all
the same Black has to play 23 . . . b6, and
The simplest. Black regains his piece with
after 24 Qa4 aS 25 b4 White's attack cannot
an unceasing attack.
be parried.
23 Qd2 QfS 23 NdS!
24 Qe3 hX gS
25 Bd2 Be4 In this way White prevents the development
of the enemy knight, and gains time for a
White resigns. decisive regrouping of his forces (Qa4 and
Earlier it was mentioned that with Q-side Nb4).
castling the defensive front is extended some­ 22 . . . . Qf7
what in comparison with K-side castling. 24 Qa4 Kb7
Let us see how in such positions a weakening 2S Rf3 Nh6
of the king's pawn screen is provoked, and 25 . . . c6 is decisively met by 26 Ra3.
then exploited.
26 Nb4!
Keres-Mikenas The white queen and knight invade the
Tbi/isi, 1946 enemy king position along the weakened
white squares. The threat is 27 Qc6+ Kb8
w
28 Na6 and mates, or 'from the other side',
27 Qa6 + Ka8 28 Nc6. Black has to make a
further weakening.
26 .. . aS
27 Qc6+ Kb8

27 . . . Ka7 is met by 28 Ra3 !, with the

irresistible threat of a rook sacrifice-29
RXaS+ b X aS 30 Qa6+ Kb8 31 Nc6 mate.

28 Na6+ Ka7
The K-side is blocked, but on the Q-side,
w
where the kings are situated, White has a
significant advantage in force. Via the third
or fourth rank his rook can be switched
across to the a- or b-:file. Also apparent is the
weakness of the e6 and dS squares.
With his first move Keres exchanges the
enemy piece which is playing an important
role in defence.
21 Nd4! N X d4

Otherwise the white knight penetrates to e6. 29 NcS!

8 100
 Paul I{eres Chess Master Class

The concluding tactical stroke. Mate is B

threatened, the rook is attacked, and on
29 . . b X c5 there follows 30 Ra3 and mates.
.

Black resigns.

The kings are castled on opposite sides

If the kings are on different sides of the

board, the choice of attacking means is
considerably expanded. An active role in the
attack now belongs not only to the pieces,
but also to the pawns which stand opposite defences to collapse like a house of cards.
the enemy castled position. Their advance
will not affect the safety of their own king, 23 . • • g5 !
since it is on the opposite flank. It is the 24 Bel
pawn storm which is considered a typical Black wins after 24 hX g5 h4 !
attacking plan after castling on opposite
sides. The idea of it is to eliminate the pawns 24 . . . g X h4
screening the enemy king, and to open lines 25 g X h4 NXh4,
for the long-range pieces. In this case the and White's position became hopeless.
pawns, like infantrymen storming a fortress,
are ready to sacrifice themselves. In the following games we will follow the
The opening of lines is facilitated if the development of the attack, beginning from
pawns defending the opposing king have the opening stage.
already been advanced.
Note that the participation of several Keres-Petrov
pawns in the attack is justified when the 12th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1940
position in the centre is blocked, or at any King's Gambit
rate fairly stable. The general strategic rule,
1 e4 e5
according to which the success of a flank
2 f4
attack is assisted by a secure position in
the centre, also operates with opposite-sided From time to time, especially in his younger
castling. When there is a tense position in years, Keres used to employ the King's
the centre, the storm is usually carried out Gambit-that opening of chess romantics. In
by one or two pawns, which pave a way for one of the topical lines, the so-called Falkbeer
the pieces into the opposing position. Counter-Gambit, he worked out his own
We will begin our illustrations with an system, which was successfully tried in a
example of the destruction of a king's pawn number of games.
screen by a bayonet thrust.
2 ... d5

Etruk-Keres Black declines the sacrifice, and prevents

Tal/inn, 1969 one of the basic ideas of the King's Gambit­
the elimination of the e5 pawn (after . eXf4)
It may seem that the white king is securely
. .

and the seizure by White of the centre.

covered by its pawn screen. In fact it only
required one move by Black for White's 3 e X d5 e4

104
 Attack
An idea of the Viennese master Ernst
Falkbeer, who lived in the middle of the last
century. Black in turn sacrifices a pawn with
the aim of hindering the development of the
white pieces.
4 d3 Nf6
5 Nd2
Keres's move, before which 5 Nc3, 5 Qe2
or 5 d X e4 used to be played.
A classic example of a black attack in the
Falkbeer Counter-Gambit is the ancient
game Schulten-Morphy, played in 1857 in
New York : 4 Nc3 Nf6 5 d3 Bb4 6 Bd2 e3
(a second pawn sacrifice with the aim of
opening the e-file) 7 B X e3 0-0 8 Bd2
B X c3 9 b X c3 Re8+ 10 Be2 Bg4 1 1 c4 ?
(IJ Kf2 is correct, not clinging to his material
advantage) 1 1 . . . c6 ! 12 dX c6 N x c6 1 3
Kfl RX e2 ! 14 N X e2 Nd4 1 5 Qb1 B X e2+
16 Kf2 Ng4+ 1 7 Kg1 Nf3 + ! 18 g X f3
Qd4+ 19 Kg2 Qf2+ 20 Kh3 Q x f3 + 21
Kh4 Ne3 22 Rg1 Nf5+ 23 Kg5 Qh5 mate.
According to modern theory, instead of
the sharp 6 . . . e3 (which was successful only
because Morphy's opponent tried to hang
on to his extra pawns at all costs), more
expedient was 6 . . . 0-0, and if 7 NX e4 Re8 8
B X b4 N X e4 9 d X e4 RX e4+ 10 Be2
RX b4 1 1 Nf3 R X f4, as in the game Spassky­
Bronstein (Moscow, 1971).
Keres's move 5 Nd2, like 5 Nc3, has the
aim of dislodging the e4 pawn, which cramps
White's development. But, in contrast to
5 Nc3, by 5 Nd2 White avoids the pin
. . . Bb4.
5 e X d3
The sharpest situation arises after 5 . . . Bf5
6 d X e4 N X e4. After a long debate regarding
the complications arising after 7 Qe2 Bb4 8
c3 0-0 ? ! or 7 Ngf3 Bb4 8 c3 Qe7, modern
theory has taken the side of White. The first
variation can continue 9 N x e4 Re8 10
8*
cx b4 RX e4 1 1 Be3 Qe7 12 Kf2 Nd7 13
Qd2 Re8 14 Bd4 Nf6 15 Nf3, when White,
having parried the immediate threats, retains
his material advantage. In the second varia­
tion after 9 Ne4 the game would again appear
to develop in White's favour.
The move chosen by Petrov is logical. Black
restores the material balance with an almost
symmetric pawn formation.
6 B X d3 Q X d5
When this game was played, the capture
with the queen was regarded as the source of
all Black's subsequent difficulties. 6 . . . NX d5
is of course better, when, according to the
latest theory, by answering 7 Qe2+ with
7 . . . Qe 7 (7 . . . Be7 leads to a roughly equal
position) Black obtains good chances. How­
ever, as the reader will see, the move made by
Petrov cannot be regarded as a mistake.
7 Ngf3 Bc5
The restrained 7 . . . Bg4 is considered
better, and if 9 h3 (9 0-0 Bc5+ and then
.. . 0-0), then 9 . . . B X f3 10 Q X f3 Nc6,
when White's position is only slightly more
promising thanks to his two bishops.
8 Qe2+ Qe6
Of course, not 8 . . . Be6? 9 d5.
9 Ne5 0-0
10 Ne4 NX e4
If 10 . . . Bb6, then 1 1 Ng5 Qe7 (or 11 . . .
Qd6) 12 Bd2 followed by Q-side castling and
a lead in development for White.
11 Q X e4 g6
This weakens the black squares, but after
1 1 . . . f5 12 Qe2 (with the threat of 13 Bc4)
White's advantage would have been still
greater.
105
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

w 15 . • • hS

In this way Petrov tries to avert the pawn

storm, but White finds a way of opening
another file. Black should have played 1 5 . . .
N x e5 16 fXe5 Bg7, and if 1 7 h5, then 1 7 . . .

Qg4 !

12 b4 !

A bold move. Black does not succeed in

exploiting this weakening of the Q-side, but
White gains an important tempo for creating
threats along the al-h8 diagonal.

12 . . . Be7
13 Bb2 Bf6
16 g4!
A barrier on the vital diagonal. On 1 3 . . .
Nc6 Keres would no doubt have continued This move, which involves the sacrifice of
14 0-0-0, and if 14 . . . N X b4-15 Bc4 Qf5 16 three pawns, is the prelude to a decisive
Ng4 !(16 . . . Q x e4 17 Nh6 mate ; 16 . . . attack. The threat of breaking up his king's
Qxg4 17 Qe5!). pawn screen forces Black to exchange his
black-squared bishop, after which the bishop
14 0-0-0!
at b2 acquires enormous strength.
Another bold (and correct) decision.
16 . . B X eS
White's lead in development and the weaken­
.

ing of the black king's pawn screen allow If 16 . . . h X g4, then 17 h5, or 16 . . . N X e5 ?
Keres to carry out a pawn storm. It is true 1 7 fXe5 and, of course 1 8 g X h5.
that White's Q-side castled position has also
been weakened by the move b2-b4, which 17 rx e5 Q X g4
obliges him to act extremely energetically. 18 Qe3

14 . . . Nc6 A 'quiet' move, inviting the opponent to

take another pawn-the b-pawn. Black has
Capturing the pawn, 14 . . . QX a2, loses
no choice, since on 18 . . . Be6 there follows
Black time. White can continue his offensive
19 Rdg1 and 20 Qh6. If 1 8 . . . Qe6, then
by 1 5 h4, aiming to open the h-file : 1 5 . . . Qe6
again 1 9 Qh6, and if 19 . . . N X e5-20 Rde1
(15 . . . h5? 16 Bc4! and 17 QXg6 + ) 16 h5.
(or 20 Rhg1). Black is helpless.
Also possible is the preparatory 15 Bc4
(instead of 15 h4) 1 5 . . . Qa4 16 Bb3, and 18 . . . N X b4
only on 1 6 . . . Qe8-17 h4.
Taking with the queen i s totally bad
15 h4 because of 1 9 Qh6.

Threatening to open lines by h4-h5 X g6. 19 e6!

106
 Attack

w 23 Qe8 + Resigns.

The participation of the pawns in the

attack can also be more modest, as we see
in the following two examples. In the Keres­
Szab6 game the advance of the h-pawn
enables White to include his rook in the attack,
leading to a decisive advantage in force. In
the Keres-Petrov game the advance of the
g-pawn, apart from bringing the rook into
action, allows a piece defending the king to
19 e6! be driven away, and an advantageous tactical
A third pawn is sacrificed, so as to prevent manoeuvre to be carried out.
the blockading move . . . Be6. Now the power
of the b2 bishop is revealed to its fullest Keres-SzabO
extent ! Match USSR-Hungary, Budapest, 1955
19 . . . Nd5 Sicilian Defence

The main variation which Keres had in

1 e4 cS
mind was 19 . . . N X d3 + 20 cX d3 fXe6
2 Nf3 d6
(20 . . . Qx e6 21 Qh6) 21 Rdf1 1 Rf5 (the c X d4
3 d4
exchange of rooks leads to an immediate
4 N X d4 Nf6
catastrophe on the black squares) 22 Rhg1
S Nc3 Nc6
Kf7 23 RXg4 RXfl + 24 Kc2 hXg4 25
6 BgS
Qe5 1, and the occupation of the long diagonal
brings White victory. This move is the introduction to a well­
We should add that 19 . . . B x e6 loses to studied system which bears the name of the
20 Qh6 N X d3 + 21 cX d3 f6 22 Rhgl . Soviet master and theorist Rauzer. His plan
involves Q-side castling and active play in
20 eXf7+ R X £7
the centre and on the K-side. At the same
In the event of 20 . . . Kh7 Keres would time, White prevents the Dragon Variation :
have played 21 B X g6 + I QXg6 22 RX dS, 6 . . . g6 allows the exchange on f6, leading
and after 22 . . . Bg4 23 Rg5 Q X f7 24 Rg7+ to the isolation of the d-pawn.
White is bound to win.
6 ... e6
21 Bc4! 7 Qd2 Be7
A simple concluding combination. It is 8 0-0-0 0-0
easy to see that Black can take neither the 9 f4 a6
queen (because of 22 Rd8+ and 23 Rh8
An innovation, and the cause of all Black's
mate), nor the bishop (in view of 22 Qe8+
subsequent difficulties. Nowadays the ex­
Rf8 23 QXg6 mate).
change on d4 is considered relatively best
21 . . . c6 (immediately or after the preparatory 9 . . .

22 R X dS! Q X c4 h6), followed by . . . Qa5.

Or 22 . . . c x ds 23 Qe8+ Rf8 24 B X d5 + , 10 eS! d X eS
while after 22 . . . Be6 23 Rd4 White wins. 11 N X c6 · b x c6

107
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
Mter the exchange of queens, 1 1 . . .
Q X d2+ 12 R X d2 b X c6 1 3 fX e5 Nd5 14
B X e7 N X e7 1 5 Bd3 !, Black's position is
clearly inferior.
12 fX eS
The attempt to win a pawn by the pin-
12 Q X d8 R X d8 1 3 R X d8 + B X d8 14
fX e5-is parried by 14 . . . h6 1 5 Bh4 g5.
12 . . . Nd7
12 . . . Nd5 is strongly met by 1 3 B X e7
Q X e7 14 Ne4.
Knowing the final result of the game, one
could advise Black to exchange queens, with
an inferior ending.
w
13 h4 !
The prelude to an attack on the K-side.
The king's rook is to be transferred to g3.
The e5 pawn is of course immune.
13 . . . Rb8
14 Qe3 Re8
15 Rh3 Qa5
An attempt to obtain counter-play on the
Q-side. Had Black been afraid of the attack,
he could have forced the exchange of queens
by 15 . . . Qb6, but even then the chances
would have been with White. For example,
15 Q X b6 R X b6 (15 . . . NX b6 ? 16 BX e7)
1 6 B X e7 R Xe7 1 7 Rhd3 (or 17 Na4), and
Black experiences serious difficulties. Even
so, this was better than being mated, as
occurred in the game.
108
16 B X e7 R X e7
17 Rg3
The e5 pawn is still indirectly defended.
1 8 Qg5 is threatened, and it is too late for
Black to exchange queens (17 . . . Qb6 18
Qg5).
In the event of 1 7 . . . Kf8 or 1 7 . . . g6 (so as
to threaten the e5 pawn), the quiet 18 Re1
retains for White all the advantages of his
position. Thus after 1 7 . . . Kf8 18 Re1 he
again threatens 19 Qg5, and if 1 8 . . . h6, then
1 9 Qe4 !, when 1 9 . . . Qb4 allows 20 Qh7 !
Q X b2+ 21 Kd2, with very strong threats.
After 1 7 . . . g6 18 Rei White threatens
h4-h5. But his position is so strong that Keres
did not want to waste time on defending his
e-pawn. He was intending to play 1 8 h5
immediately. Mter 18 . . . Q x e5 19 Q X e5
N X e5 20 Rd8+ Kg7 Keres was not tempted
by the creation of a mating net (21 h6+ ?
KX h6 22 Rg8 f5!), but intended 21 Ne4 !,
threatening not only 22 h6+ (22 . . . KX h6 23
Rg8, when . . .f5 does not save Black from
mate), but also 22 B X a6, as well as 22 Nd6.
17 0 0 0 Re8
Now the back rank is safeguarded, and
White has to think about defending his
e-pawn . . .
w
18 R X d7!
By eliminating the only defender of the
K-side (as well as the threat to his e-pawn),
White, firstly, gains time for his offensive,
 Attack

and, secondly, creates a decisive advantage Or 22 . . . Kg8 23 Q X h6 (with the threat of

in force in the critical sector of the battlefield. 24 Bh7+ Kh8 25 Bg6+ , 26 Qh7+ and
27 QX/7 mate) 23 . . . f5 24 e x f6.
18 . . . B X d7
19 Bd3 23 Bg6

It remains to play 20 Qg5, and if 20 . . . g6 On 23 . . . Re7 there follows 24 Qh8 mate.

21 h5, when Black's entire K-side will col­ Black resigns.
lapse. This game is a classic example of the re­
futation of an opening innovation. And not
19 h6
in analysis, but at the board, in a practical
• • •

1 9 . . . Qb4 would still have been answered playing situation.

by 20 Qg5, and after 20 . . . Q X b2+ 21 Kd2 Innovations have various fates. This one
g6 22 h5 Black has no way of defending his was unlucky. The convincing destruction of
king. Black's position carried out by Keres led to
By the move played Black parries the threat 9 . . . a6 being given in opening books with
of 20 Qg5 (it goes without saying that he a single reference to the Keres-Szab6 game.
would be perfectly happy with the variation Knowing it, no one has ventured to play it
20 Qxh6 Q X e5 21 Qh7+ Kf8 22 Qh8+ again . . . .
Ke7).
Keres-Petrov
20 Qf4
Match Estonia-Latvia, Riga, 1939
20 Qe4 would also have won (20 . . . g6 21 French Defence
RXg6+ /), but the move played is very
1 e4 e6
good.
2 d4 d5
20 . . . Kf8 3 Nd2

The threat was 21 Qf6. The point of this move, defending the e4
pawn, is to avoid the pin 3 . . . Bb4 which is
w possible after 3 Nc3. Also, after 3 . . . Nf6 4 e5
Nfd7 the knight is more favourably placed
at d2 than at c3-it does not block the c-pawn,
and in the event of . . . c5 White can attempt
to maintain his centre by c2-c3, Ne2 and
Nf3.
The drawback to 3 Nd2 is that in certain
variations the knight, which blocks the bishop,
is more passively placed than at c3. In par­
ticular, it does not control d5. After 3 Nc3
the reply 3 . . . c5 is a mistake, whereas after
21 RX g7 ! 3 Nd2 this move is perfectly possible and
comprises one of the main lines.
The second rook sacrifice in this game leads
to mate. 3 ... d X e4

21 • . . KX g7 Mter this, Rubinstein's continuation, there

22 Qf6+ Kf8 is no difference between 3 Nd2 and 3 Nc3.

1 09
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Black relieves the tension, conceding White 12 0� 0-0

more space in the centre. Practice has shown
The players have castled on opposite sides.
that White gains good attacking chances on
Now White has to demonstrate that his lead
the K-side. Black has difficulties over the
in development (Black still has to bring his
·

development of his queen's bishop, while in

queen's bishop into play) will enable him
addition the planned counter in the centre,
more quickly to create threats against the
. . . c5, leads after d X c5 to a position in which
enemy king.
it is easier for White to exploit his pawn
majority on the Q-side (three pawns against 13 NeS b6
two) than for Black to exploit his on the w
K-�ide, where he has four pawns against
three.
The advantage of the early exchange on e4
is that it avoids complicated variations and
obtains Black a sound, if cramped, position.
We should mention that the advantages of
· White's position can be revealed only by very
exact play on his part. The slightest inaccu­
racy will allow Black to solve all his opening
problems.
14 g4!
4 N X e4 Nd7
Firstly, the black knight must be driven
Black prepares 5 . . . Ngf6. The immediate
away from the defence of the K-side. Sec­
4 . . . Nf6 5 N X f6 + g X f6 (5 . . . Q X/6 6 Nf3 ondly, the rook can be included in the attack
gives White a lead in development) leads to
along the g-:file. Thirdly, with the pawn at g5
a double-edged position, in which Black
and a rook at g1, after Ng4 Black has to
hopes to exploit the open g-:file. However,
reckon with the tactical threat of Nf6+ .
White's chances are clearly preferable, for
example : 6 Nf3 b6 7 Bf4 Bb7 8 c3 Bd6 9 14 . . . Bb7
Bg3 Nd7 10 Qa4 a6 (otherwise 11 Ba6l) 1 1 15 gS! NdS
Bd3, or 1 1 0-0-0, with an excellent game.
Taking the rook is forbidden : 15 . . . B X h1
S Nf3 Be7 16 gXf6, and now :
6 Bd3 Ngf6 B
7 Qe2 N X e4
8 B X e4 Nf6
9 Bd3
Black automatically played 8 . . . Nf6, and
White equally automatically retreated his
bishop. After 9 B X b7 B X b7 10 Qb5 +
Black would have lost a pawn for no corn-
pensation.

9 ... cS
10 d X cS QaS+ (a) 16 . . . B X f6 1 7 Nd7 Qc6 (Black has to
11 Bd2 Q X cS defend his bishop, otherwise there follows

1 10
 Attack

18 NX/6+ and 19 R X hl, with two bishops 18 . . • Bd6

for a rook and pawn) 1 8 N X f6+ 19 Qg4+ 19 Ng4 Rfc8
Kh8 20 Qh4 f5 21 Qf6 + Kg8 22 Rg1 +
It is readily apparent that Black's counter­
Bg2 23 Bh6, and mates.
play is too late . . .
(b) 16 . . . g X f6 17 Qg4+ Kh8 18 Rgl .
20 Kb1
16 Rhgl !
This move is useful in the event of a pos­
Black was probably hoping for 16 Nd7,
sible check at f4.
when 16 . . . Qc7 1 8 N X f8 Nf4 ! gives him an
excellent game. But now he has to waste a 20 . . . b5
tempo on defending against the threat of 21 Rg1 Be7
17 Nd7, and in the meantime the white rook
The threat was 22 Nf6+ N x f6 23 g X f6
comes into play.
and then 24 R X h7 ! (24 . . . KX h7 25 Qh5+
16 . . . Qc7 etc.), but the move played by Black loses
17 Rg4 immediately. The most tenacious was 2 1 . . .
Qe7, when Keres would probably have con­
The typical sacrifice 'on h7-17 B X h7+
tinued his offensive by 22 Rh6 followed by
K X h7 1 8 Qh5+ Kg8, would have been
Be4 with the threat of B X d5 and Nf6+ .
premature. On 19 Rg3 there would have
followed 19 Q x e5, and if 20 Rh3 then
. . • 22 Nh6+ Kf8
20 . . . f6. 23 NXf7!
Mter the rook manoeuvre Black is now
Conclusive. 23 . . . K X f7 is decisively met
threatened with 1 8 B X h7+ K X h7 1 9 Rh4+
by 24 RX h7+ and 25 Q x e6.
Kg8 20 Qh5, mating. To defend against this,
he is forced to weaken his f6 and h6 squares. 23 .
.. Bc5
24 R X h7 Bd4
17 . . . g6
25 Q X e6,

and White won easily.

Keres-i\le�der
Hastings, 1954j55
w

18 Rh4!

Keres gives his opponent no respite. Black

again has to defend against a mating attack-
1 9 RX h7 K X h7 20 Qh5 + Kg8 2 1 N X g6.
In the meantime White will move his knight
12 Qa4
to g4, where it will be directed at the weakened
f6 and h6 squares. By b2-b4-b5 White intends to drive away

11 1
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
the knight, which defends the a7 pawn and
controls the important e5 square.
12 . . . h6
Black in turn begins an offensive, but in
advancing his pawns he has to reckon with
the formation of 'holes'.
13 Bh4 g5
w
14 Bg3
Here White had the possibility of an ad­
vantageous sacrifice, which went unnoticed
by both commentators and players. Instead of
the bishop retreat, very strong was 1 4 Bb5 !,
and if 14 . . . g X h4 (14 . . . a6 loses to 15 Ne5),
then 1 5 Ne5 Qd6 16 N X c6 b X c6 1 7 Qa6 +
Kd7 (if 17 . . . Kb8 18 B X c6 Bc8, then 19
Qb5+) 1 8 B X c6+ ! Q x c6 19 RXe7+ !
Kd6 20 Qa3 + , and mate next move.
14 . . . B X f3
On 14 . . . Bd6 White had a choice of two
continuations : 1 5 Bb5 (after which 15 . . . a6
fails to 16 Ne5! BX e5 17 BX e5, when things
are bad for Black), and 15 b4.
The exchange of this bishop (Black wants
to clear the way for his pawns) is the first
indication of a significant weakening of the f5
square.
15 NXf3 g4?
15 . . . Bd6 is more tenacious.
Black's last move is bad, if only because it
allows 16 Nh4. The threat of 1 7 Bf5 is ex-
1 12
tremely unpleasant for Black, and the pawn
sacrifice 16 . . . Ne4 1 7 B X e4 dX e4 18 RX e4,
while it prevents the occupation of f5, does
not give him any compensation. But Keres
finds an even more convincing move, involv­
ing a tactical exploitation of the weakening of
the f5 square.
w
16 Ne5 !
Alexander considered this move impossible,
since, after all, Black can take the knight, and
after 1 6 . . . N X e5 White loses a piece : 17
Q x d7+ Nex d7, or 1 7 Q X a7 Nc6 1 8 Qa8 +
Nb8. But there is a third continuation, which
Black had failed to take into account.
16 . . . N x e5
17 Bf5!! Q X f5
18 R X e5
Black has won a piece, but his queen and
bishop are attacked. When contemplating the
combination on his 16th move, Keres had
to calculate the consequences of the queen
move to d7 (all others lead to loss of material
or to a positional advantage for White).
Thus, 18 . . . Qd7 1 9 QX a7. Now Black has
two replies :
(a) 19 . . . Qe8 20 Rael Ne4 (or 20 . . Ng8)
.
21 Qa8+ Kd7 22 QX b7, and Black is
helpless.
(b) 19 . . . Qd6 20 Re3, and Black has no
good square for his queen. Mter 20 . . . Qa6
21 Q x a6 b X a6 22 RX e7 White is a healthy
pawn to the good in the endgame.
 Attack

Perhaps it was for this reason that Alexan­ 25 Rd3 Rf1

der decided not to defend the bishop.
25 .
. . Nf5 would, of course, have been met
18 . . . Qd3 by 26 e6, but now the attack on the black
squares is decisive.
The result is not affected by 18 . . . Qg6 19
RX e7 Nd7 20 Q x a7 26 RXfl NX fl
Rd7 27 Qd4!
19 R X e7
20 Re3! Qa6 Threatening 28 e6 (or 28 eXd6). On 27 . . .
21 Q x a6 b X a6 Be6 White wins by 28 e X d6 e X d6 29 Qf6 !
22 Be5! Black resigns.
This pin is fatal for Black-a further con­ In this example the attack on the g7 square
sequence of the advance of his g-pawn. After was assisted by the pin on the d-file, which
22 . . . Rd6 23 B X d6 c X d6 24 Re7 further diverted Black's forces from the defence of
resistance is pointless. Black resigns. the K-side.

Keres-Oren The Q-side offensive. Positional pressure

Amsterdam Olympiad, 1954 Although the ultimate aim of a game of
w chess is to give mate to the opposing king, an
attack on its position is only one of the pos­
sible ways.
Steinitz taught that you must attack where
you are stronger and the opponent is weaker.
Active measures can also be directed against
targets which are a long way from the enemy
king, and have no effect on its safety.
The theme of this section is offensive meas­
ures with the aim of gaining a material
advantage. Moreover, we will be talking not
The black king's pawn screen has been about tactical operations with the winning of
weakened by . . . g6 and the exchange of his material, but about consistent pressure, aimed
black-squared bishop. White also dominates at giving the opponent constant weaknesses,
on the central files. By 21 e5 Keres created at creating strong points for the pieces,
pressure on the d6 pawn, while also threaten­ seizing open lines and invading the enemy
ing e5-e6. position. Thus we will be talking about the
21 . . . Bg4 Q-side offensive, with the kings on the other
22 Rd2 Rc6 side of the board.
23 Qd4! Pawn weaknesses (formed as a result of the
opening battle, or created in the course of the
Attacking the bishop and the a-pawn.
offensive) can become specific targets for
23 . . . Qd7 attack. A favourable attacking factor can be
24 Q x a7 Ng3 a Q-side pawn majority, assisting the creation
24 . . . Ng7 is more tenacious, although even of a passed pawn. In other instances the
then after 25 Nd5 White has an obvious development of the initiative and the success
advantage. of the offensive are assisted by half-open files

1 13
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

(open for the attacking side's heavy pieces,
and closed for those of the defender). We
should also mention the possible role of the
:fianchettoed king's bishop. Given a favoura­
in gambit style with 8 c3, sacrificing a pawn
for a lead in development. The point is that
the immediate 8 Q X d4? leads to the loss of a
piece : 8 . . c5 9 Qd5 Be6 10 Qc6+ Bd7 1 1
.

ble pawnformation in the centre, it can attack Qd5 c4. At the 1 956 Moscow Olympiad Keres
targets on the opposite wing-on the Q-side. caught the Polish master Dworzinski in this
The defender will of course oppose the transparent trap.
weakening of his pawns, prevent the invasion
of the attacking pieces, and will in turn take 5 • • • Bd7
counter-measures. An especially sharp battle An interesting branch of this variation is
develops when a Q-side offensive is opposed 5 . . . Bg4, and if 6 h3, then 6 . . . h5 ! ?
by an attack on the king.
In aiming for success in the offensive sector, 6 c4
one may have to make concessions on the Transposition of moves has led to the
defensive flank. In such situations play pro­ Duras Variation.
ceeds according to the slogan : 'Who is the
quicker' . . . . 6 • . • g6
We will now analyze an example illustrat­ 7 d4 Bg7
ing a successful Q-side offensive, an example 8 Be3 Nge7
in which the opponent's K-side counterplay
Black allows d4-d5, after which White will
is too late.
have a spatial advantage on the Q-side.
Black's chances are on the K-side, where he
Keres-Shiyanovsky
hopes to prepare a pawn storm. But White
29th USSR Championship, Baku, 1961
has almost everything ready for his offensive,
Ruy Lopez
and his prospect$ are more real. Correct
1 e4 e5 therefore is 8 . . . e X d4.
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bb5 a6 w
4 Ba4 d6

The so-called Steinitz Defence Deferred

(the first World Champion used to play
3 . . . d6 immediately). The inclusion of 3 . . . a6
and 4 Ba4 gives Black more possibilities.
5 0-0

White's alternatives are 5 c3, preparing

d2-d4, the exchange variation 5 B X c6 +
b X c6. 6 d4, the continuation of the Czech
9 d5 Nb8
grandmaster Duras, 5 c4, which has the aim
10 cS! 0-0
of controlling d5, as well as the immediate
11 Nc3 b6
5 d4. In this latter case White must bear in
mind that after 5 . . . b5 6 Bb3 NX d4 7 NX d4 Black's plan includes advancing . . . f5, but
e X d4 he cannot immediately take the d4 the immediate 1 1 . . . f5 allows 12 B X d7 and
pawn, but must play either 8 Bd5, or continue then Ng5, when the knight penetrates to e6.

114
 Attack

12 Nd2 w
So as to answer 12 . . . f5 with 13 f3. The
king's knight is required on the Q-side.

12 • . . Nc8

Covering in advance the squares b6 and d6,

weakened due to the flank development of the
black-squared bishop.

13 b4 B X a4
14 Q X a4 f5
15 f3 Nd7 20 a4!
16 Racl Now the black a-pawn is doomed.
The immediate 16 c6 ! b X c6 17 dX c6 The pattern of attack in this game and in
deserved serious consideration. many similar ones is highly distinctive : one
side attempts to establish himself in the
16 . .. f4 opponent's Q-side position, so as then to
Of course, the exchange 16 . . . fXe4? 17 extend the action of his heavy pieces along tlie
NdX e4 is unfavourable, since it leaves the seventh or eighth (or sometimes sixth) rank.
white knight extremely well posted, but Black's The side attacking the king position aims by
intended plan of attack on the K-side, involv­ the advance of his pawns to cramp the oppo­
ing the opening of the g-file ( . . . g5-g4) is too nent on that flank, and to open lines for his
slow. heavy pieces. The play proceeds as though in
16 . . . Nf6 looks more tenacious, maintain­ a clockwise direction.
ing the central tension and not allowing the
white pieces to switch completely to the siege
of the Q-side. 17 c6 could then have been
answered by 17 . . . b6.
Also to be taken into account is the fact
that after . . . f4 the bishop at g7 becomes
virtually a spectator.
17 Bf2 Kh7

Here too it would have been expedient to

take measures against c5-c6 by 17 . . . Nf6.

18 c6 But in the game under consideration Black

is far too slow with his counter-action, and
Black cannot now avoid a fatal opening of White's strategy triumphs.
lines on the Q-side.
20 bX a4
18 . . . b5
. . •

21 NX a4 N x a4
On 18 . . . b x c6 19 d X c6 Ndb6 White 2z Q X a4 Ne7
would have retreated his queen to b3, intend­ 23 Rc2
ing the advance of his a-pawn.
Preparing to triple heavy pieces on the
19 Qa5 Ndb6 a-file.

1 15
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

23 . '. . NgS
24 Ra1 Bf6
25 QaS Be7
26 Rea2 RbS

Otherwise 27 b5.
27 Ba7!

Winning the a-pawn, and with it the game.

In the event of 27 . . . Rb5 28 Qx a6 RX b4
29 Qa5 ! the rook has no retreat square !
10 Ba3 e X d4
27 . . . ReS
11 N X d4
28 Q x a6 g5
A move which indicates a subtle understand­
Too late ! ing of the position. The plausible 1 1 c X d4
29 b5 Nf6 would have allowed Black calmly to complete
30 b6 e X b6 his Q-side development after 1 1 . . . Nc6.
31 B X b6 QeS "But the capture with the knight gives
32 Qe2 White an isolated c-pawn", the reader will
point out.
Clearing the way for the invasion of the Yes, this is so. But the main point is that
rooks. the knight is included in White's active opera­
32 . . . RbS tions on the Q-side, where he now has an
33 Bc7 ReS advantage in force. The place for his queen is
34 Ra7 Rf7 at b3, while his bishops will exert strong
35 Ne4 ! pressure along the diagonals. The c-pawn
Now the d6 pawn 1s lost (35 . . . Qf8 (which is not at all weak !) also plays its part,
36 BXd6). ensuring control of central squares.
Black resigns. 11 . . . Qe7
An excellent illustration of positional 12 Qb3 Bf6
pressure on the Q-side. Whereas White,
attacking 'in a clockwise direction', edged his The isolated pawn should be blockaded.
way deep into the enemy rear, Black for his Flohr was planning . . . Nd7-b6-c4, or possi­
part was unable even to open the g-file. bly . . . Nd7-c5. In order to make the first
move of this manoeuvre, the e7 pawn has to
And now another example of positional be defended. But Black is too far behind
pressure on the Q-side, the result of which with his Q-side development.
was the gaining of a decisive material ad­
vantage. 13 Rfd1 Nd7
14 e4!
Keres-Flobr i'\ ; .{
It turns out that the blockade at c4 is
Semmering-Baden, 1937 unrealizable : 14 . . . Nb6 is favourably met
Exploiting his long-range fianchettoed bish­ by 15 c5.
op and the half-open b-fi1e, White tries to 14 . . . Ne5
seize the initiative on the Q-side. 15 Qb4 Ne6

1 16
 Attack

Apparently an excellent reply. On 1 6 Nb5 w

Black has planned 1 6 . . . Qe5, not only
attacking the e2 pawn, but also threatening
by . . . a6 to drive away the knight, which has
no retreat square . . .
Jumping ahead, we should mention that,
had Flohr known that within nine moves he
would have to resign the game, instead of
1 5 . . . Ne6 he would have made the 'ugly'
move 1 5 . . . Na6. Mter 1 6 Qb5 Rd8 1 7 e3
followed by c4-c5 with the threat of c5-c6,
19 . . . RX d5, but even then 20 N X d5 gives
things would not have been easy for Black,
White an obvious advantage. For example,
but he would have been able to avoid imme­
20 . . . Q x a2 21 N X f6+ e X f6 22 Rd1 !, pre­
diate tactical dangers.
venting Black from developing his bishop and
16 Nb5 Qe5 threatening 23 Rd8+ Kg7 24 Qf8+ N X f8
Flohr had aimed for this position. How 25 B X f8+ and mates. If 22 . . . h5 (or 22 . . .
does White defend against the two threats- g5), then 23 Bb2 with the threat of 24 Ra 1,
17 Q X e2 and 1 7 . . . a6 ?
. • . which also wins after 23 . . . Qa6.
17 Rac1 ! (b) 19 Nc3 (this is what Keres was intending
to play) 1 9 . . . B X c3 (after 19 . . . Qg4 20 h3 the
White has parried the second threat (the queen has no retreat square) 20 Q X c3, and
knight can now retreat to c3), while on the Black cannot parry all the threats (21 Bb2,
capture of the e-pawn (17 . . . QX e2) Keres 21 Rei, 21 Bf3). Thus on 20 . . . Q x a2 there
had prepared 1 8 Nc3 Qe5 1 9 Nd5 ! with a follows 21 Bb2 f6 22 RXd8+ N X d8 23 Ra1,
powerful initiative. If, for example, Black winning the queen.
defends his e-pawn by 1 9 . . . Re8, then 20
Qb5 is strong, while if 1 9 . . . Ng7, then 20 Rel . 18 . . . R X d5
If Black exchanges off the dangerous knight 19 c X d5 a6
by 1 8 . . . B X c3 (instead of 18 . . . Qe5), then If 1 9 . . . Nd4, then 20 N X d4 Q X d4 21
after 19 Q X c3 his position will be hopeless : Q X d4 B X d4 22 B X e7.
apart from 20 Bf3, winning the queen, simply Now it is readily apparent that Keres took
20 B X e7 is threatened, and in some cases Bb2. the correct decision on his 1 1th move.
In short, 1 7 . . . a6 does not work, and the White's isolated pawn has proved to be very
e-pawn cannot be taken . . . strong !
17 . . . Rd8
(See diagram next column)
18 Rd5 !
Again Black is afforded the opportunity of
taking the e-pawn. Now on 18 . . . Q X e2
White has a choice of two continuations :
(a) 1 9 Nc7, so as to answer 1 9 . . . Rb8 with
20 Re1 Q X a2 21 RX d8 + N X d8 22 R X e 7 !
B X e7 23 QX e7, with irresistible threats.
Instead of 19 . . . Rb8, more tenacious 1s

1 17
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Flohr was expecting to answer 20 Nc3 exerts pressure on the e6 pawn. Black on the
with 20 . . . Nd4 . . . other hand is cramped, and can only attempt
to use the f-file for creating tactical threats on
20 Na7!
the K-side. But it is a long time before this is
Keres called this manoeuvre one of the possible, and Keres consolidates his advan­
most original in his tournament practice. tage in the centre.
One of Black's attacked pieces (bishop or
15 c5 !
knight) is lost, since even worse is 20 . . . RX a 7
2 1 R X c8 + Nf8 22 Qb6 with 'mate to the Mter the plausible 1 5 . . . d5 1 6 R4e2 Rac8
rook' (22 . . . Qd4 23 Bc5). 1 7 b4 White's positional advantage becomes
undisputed. His spatial advantage on the Q­
20 Nd4
side, control of e5, pressure on the e-file, the
• • •

21 R X c8+ R X cS
weakness of the black e-pawn and, finally, the
22 N x cs Q x e2
'bad' bishop at d7 - all this leaves Black no
Black's faint hope-of creating threats hope of saving the game.
against the enemy king-is easily parried. On 1 5 . • . Qd5 there can follow 16 c X d6
c X d6 1 7 R4e3, and now 17 . . . Q x a2 18
23 h4 Nf5
B X d6 Rfe8 1 9 Ra3 Qc4 20 Ne5, or 1 7 . . .
24 Qe4 Resigns.
N X d4 1 8 Ne5 Qb5 1 9 Bfl Qa4 20 b3, or
In this game White's energetic play tied 17 . . . B X d4 18 N X d4 Q X d4 19 Rd3, in all
down his opponent ; all the time Black had to three variations with a positional advantage
parry positional threats, and he was deprived to White.
of counter-play. We must also consider the tactical try
1 5 . . . N X d4 ? ! , so as after 16 RX d4 B X d4
Positional pressure with the aim of giving
1 7 Q X d4 to continue 17 . . . Bc6 (the imme­
the opponent long-term weaknesses can be
diate 1 7 . . . e5 is not possible, since after the
carried out on any part of the board, includ­
capture on e5 the bishop is undefended)
ing the centre.
and then . . . e5. True, instead of 1 6 R X d4
White can play 16 NX d4, allowing . . . e5,
Keres-SimaginJ '!.. ,;- and after 16 . . . e5 17 cX d6 c x d6 18 Ne2
19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951
(on 18 Be3 Black has 18 . . . d5) 1 8 . . . e X f4

w 19 N X f4 he still has a positional advantage,

but possibly this was the least evil for Black.

15 . . . d X c5
16 d X c5 e5

In order to 'enliven' his bishop at d7 (or

White has the half-open e-file, and Black
the half-open f-file. but their values are not
equivalent. White controls more space, and
after 17 Qxd7 exf4 18 R X/4 Q x c5 to get
out of his difficulties) Black parts with his
weak pawn. He could also have played 16 . . .
Qd5, but then White has a pleasant choice
between the quiet 1 7 R4e2 and the forcing
continuation 1 7 B X c7 Q X d2 1 8 N X d2
B X b2 19 Bd6 or 19 Nc4, with the advantage
in both cases.

118
 Attack

17 NxeS NX eS
22 R X e4 Raf8
18 B X eS Bc6
23 h4!

w This is of course stronger than 23 Rg4+

and 24 BX b7. Now the black rooks are un­
able to 'untie themselves'.
23 . . . Kh8

If 23 . . . c6, then 24 Re5 Qh6 25 Rg5+

Kh8 26 Bfl (bringing the bishop into play)
and f2-f4, with an overwhelming advantage.
24 Re7 QfS
25 f4 Qg6
26 Kh2
By giving up a pawn, Black has rid himself
of his positional weaknesses in the centre, and B
now, after the rook moves, he intends to
exchange all the bishops. It will be very
difficult for White to win the resulting heavy­
piece ending.
But the rook has no intention of moving.

19 B X f6!

A transformation of advantages ! White's

positional pressure has led to Black being
forced to give up a pawn, and now, so as to
Threatening 27 Be4. If 26 . . . Rg8, then
deny the opponent chances of saving the
27 Qc3, and on 27 . . . Rg7-28 Be4 Qh6
ending, Keres exploits a favourable tactical
29 Re8+ Rg8 30 Re6 Rgf8 3 1 Re7, and
situation.
wins.
Sacrificing the exchange, he obtains two
pawns for it, and also exposes the enemy king. 26 . . . R8f7
Black has no choice, since on 1 9 . . . RX f6
Black has to return the exchange.
there follows 20 Re5, and the ending after
20 . . . Qg6 21 B X c6 RX c6 22 Qd7 is ob­ 27 ReS+ Kg7
viously in White's favour. 28 Be4 Qg4
29 BdS Qd7
19 . . . B X e4
20 B X g7+ K X g7 There is no other move (29 . . . R/8 ? 30
21 Qd4+ RXf8, or 29 . Rd7? 30 Rg8+ ).
. .

Black's king has been deprived of its pawn 30 QeS!

cover, but his main misfortune is that he ends
Regaining the exchange and remaining two
up in a pin.
(and within a few moves-three) pawns up,
21 . • • Rf6 White easily wins.

2 1 . . . Kg8 22 B X e4 is worse. 30 • . . h6

9 1 19
 Pau1 Keres Chess Master Class

31 B X f7 K X £7 not only fails to achieve anything for White,

32 Rf8+ ! K X £8 but is also a positional mistake.
33 Q X £6+ Kg8
17 d X eS d X eS
34 Qg6+ Kh8
18 Q x e7 RX e7
35 Q X h6+ Kg8
36 Qg6+ Kh8 The only open file is in White's possession,
37 Q£6+ Kg8 but how is he to exploit it ? If he invades at d6
38 b5 Qd1 with his rook, Black will drive it away by
39 Qg6+ Kh8 . . . Ne8. Whereas White's control of the cen­
40 Qe8+ tral file is a temporary factor (by regrouping,
Black can exchange or drive away the rooks,
Keres was in time trouble. Now that the
and deprive White of this advantage), the
time control had been reached, Black resigned.
weakening of the d4 square (the result of the
premature exchange on e5) is of a chronic
Reshevsky-Keres
11 nature. Potentially a black knight (via c5-e6
Semmering-Baden, 1937 '1 :J 'f'. or f8-e6) has the possibility of establishing
itself at d4, and this plays an important role
w
in the subsequent struggle.

19 Bb3 Bc8
20 b4
Instead of this, White should have been
thinking of how to deploy his forces to pre­
vent the seizure of d4 by Black. For example,
by transferring his knight from f3 to c2 (after
Re2).
20 • • • Nf8
White is splendidly developed and is now 21 B X c8 R X c8
faced with choosing a plan of how to pro­ 22 Rd6
ceed. Serious consideration should have been
A blow in thin air. White merely assists the
given to the doubling of rooks on the d-file
regrouping planned by Keres.
and, in some cases, Bh3, with pressure on the
central file. If Black were to concede the 22 ... Ne8
centre by . . . e X d4, and if N X d4 Ne5, this 23 Rd3 f6
would entail a serious weakening of his 24 Redl Kf7
d-pawn, and since his black-squared bishop 25 a4 Ke6
has already been exchanged, this entire plan 26 Rd8 Rec7
loses in strength. It should be borne in mind
Of course, not 26 . . . RX d8 ? 27 RX d8.
that Black's pieces are cramped and have
By the move played Black vacates e7 for his
little scope for manoeuvring, whereas White,
king, so that it can participate in driving
after doubling rooks, can choose the most
away the enemy rook.
favourable moment to exchange on e5 and
exploit the open file. 27 K£1 Ke7
However, such a moment has not yet 28 R8d3 Rd7
arrived, and the decision taken by Reshevsky 29 R X d7+ N X d7

120
 Attack

w Black has won the strategic battle : all his

pieces have occupied active posts, while all
White's are passive. Now it would be good
to force the white king to leave the centre
for a time.

38 Rd8!
39 Kc3

39 Ke3 is bad because of 39 . . . Nc4+

The next part of Black's plan is to exploit
the poor move b2-b4, which has weakened
the c4 pawn. The place for the black knights is
at e6 and d6.
30 Ke2
40 N X c4 b X c4 41 f3 Rd3 + 42 Kf2 Rb3,
when the ending is hopeless for White.
39 . . . £5
Once the e4 pawn is exchanged, all the
central squares will be in Black's possession.

On the Q-side White cannot undertake any 40 e X £5+

activity. The point is that he cannot gain If 40 f3, then 40 . . . fX e4, after which the
control over d5 by 30 b5, because of 30 . . . black rook invades the enemy position via
c xb5 (the c-file is in Black's hands !). the f-file.
The other active move, 30 a5, fails to
30 . . . b X a5, 31 . . . Rb8, and . . . Nc5. 40 g X £5
41 £3 ReS
30 . . . Nd6 42 Kd3
31 Nd2 N£8 !
42 Kb3 fails to 42 . . . Nd4+ 43 N X d4
The black knight is heading for d4-White's e X d4 44 Rel + Kd5, and if 45 Re7, then
control of this square has been removed ! 45 . . . Rc3+ 46 Kb2 Nc4+ 47 N X c4 b X c4,
32 Ra1 Ne6 when the rook ending with two passed pawns
33 a5 b5 is won for Black.

This appears to assist the opponent's 42 • .. Ne8 !

occupation of d5, but in fact White is unable
Having eliminated the e4 pawn, Keres
to move his knight there.
threatens to transfer his knight to d5, so as
34 c X bS Nd4+ ! to tie White's pieces to the defence of his
35 Kd3 c X b5 b-pawn.
36 Rc1
43 Nc3 N£6!
After 36 Nd5 + Ke6 the knight cannot be
It turns out to be unfavourable for White
maintained at d5. Black continues . . . f5 and
to take the b5 pawn. After 44 N X b5 Nd5 !
. . . Rc2, threatening . . . fXe4 followed by
he not only loses his b4 pawn. He also has to
. . . RXd2 + , . . . N X e4+ and . . . K X d5.
defend against the threat of 45 . . . NcX b4+
36 • • . Ke6 46 Ke2 a6 and then 46 . . . Nc3+ with a fork,
37 Ne2 Nc6! and if the rook leaves the back rank (to avoid
38 Rb1 the fork), the black rook invades at cl.

9* 121
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

44 Rb2 a6 54 h X g3 hX g3
45 g4 55 Rd3 g2
56 Ne2
This activity is forced. Had White 'stood
still', Keres would have been free to attack 56 Rg3 is again met by 56 . . . RX c3 + .
White's K-side by . . . h5-h4 and . . . Rg8 or 56 . . . R x e4
. . . Rh8. 57 Ngl Rel
The point of the pawn sacrifice offered by
Reshevsky is to establish his knight at e4, White resigns.
and thus to gain counter-chances.
Seizing the initiative in the opening. Develop­
B ment of the initiative

In order to attack successfully, appropriate

positional preconditions are required. In the
initial position there are no such precondi­
tions. A player's task in the opening-the first
stage of a chess game-is the rapid mobiliza­
tion of his forces, ensuring their harmonious
co-ordination and corresponding to the idea
of the chosen variation. White has on his side
the advantage of the first move. His opening
45 . . . e4+ program is to deploy his pieces in active
(or potentially active) positions, resolve the
The most clear-cut way to win. Black
problem of the centre, and, by gaining time,
obtains an extra pawn on the K-side, whereas
to gain a lead over the opponent in develop­
White's pawn in the centre is blockaded and
ment. Then he can dictate his will. Black's
completely worthless.
opening program is more modest-he has to
46 fX e4 Ne5+ neutralize the advantage of the first move,
47 Kcl fX g4 which his opponent has, and to gain equal
48 Kb3 Nc4 chances. This is, so to speak, his 'minimum
49 N X c4 program'. His 'maximum program' is not
only to catch up with his opponent, but also
49 Rc2 allows Black to force a won pawn
to overtake him in mobilization, and by
ending : 49 . . . NX d2 + 50 RX d2 R X c3 + !
seizing the initiative to place him in the posi­
5 1 K X c3 N X e4 + 52 Kd3 N x d2.
tion of defender.
49 • . . R X c4 "But", the reader may remark, "in contrast
50 Re2 to warfare mobilization and the movement
of troops, in chess moves are made in turn.
Because of the same combination ( . . .
How in this case can time be gained?"
RX c3 + ) the white rook cannot occupy the
In developing his forces, each side at the
open file.
same time aims to hinder the opponent's
50 • • • Ke5 development and his occupation of the centre,
51 Rel hS! tries to drive away enemy pieces which are
52 Rdl h4 already developed, prevent their favourable
53 Rd8 g3 regrouping, and so on. Chess time-tempi-

122
 Attack
is won (and lost) by attacking a more valuable
piece with a less valuable one. For example,
by attacking a piece with a pawn, as a result
of which this piece is forced to retreat to its
initial position or to a less favourable one,
or so-called 'development with gain of
tempo', when a minor piece, in developing,
attacks and drives back an enemy piece.
Time is lost in the exchange (forced or un­
forced) of a developed piece for an undevel­
oped enemy piece. Time can be gained if,
for the sake of winning material, your oppo­
nent makes moves with an already developed
piece.
We have come to one of the central
problems of opening strategy-that of gam­
bits. The word 'gambit' arose in the distant
times of the Italian School. To employ a
gambit means to sacrifice material in the
opening (one or more pawns, or more rarely
a piece) for the sake of rapid development,
the seizure of the centre, restriction of the
opponent's pieces, delaying (or prevention)
of him castling, the weakening of his pawn
formation, and other advantages.
It may be asked : why then accept the gam­
bit, why take the 'wretched' pawn, if you
lose time, fall behind in development, and
come under an attack ?
Of course, if the disadvantages of accepting
the gambit are obvious, only an ignorant
beginner will be tempted by it ; an experi­
enced player will decline it. But the evaluation
of the overwhelming majority of chess
positions is determined by many factors.
All general chess recommendations, and
even principles, are relative. That which in
one instance is the main, determining factor,
may in another instance (often after the
opponent's very next move) be of secondary
importance. In some positions the determin­
ing factor is positional (for example, a lead
in development, the occupation of an open
file), while in others, even of very similar ap­
pearance, it is material. Thus in one instance
123
we may describe the avoidance of castling
as inexcusable carelessness, and in another as
objectively the best decision, gaining an
important tempo for bringing the other pieces
into action. Specific calculation, taking ac­
count of both positional and tactical possibili­
ties, sometimes suggests that it is expedient
to accept a gambit, so as then to neutralize
the opponent's initiative and in the end,
having survived the danger, to retain a
material advantage. Or at an appropriate
moment it may be possible to return the
sacrificed material, achieving positional gains
in return. Mter the acceptance of a gambit a
tactical turn of events is also possible, sharply
changing the situation, and with it the entire
evaluation of the position.
When a master, in accepting a gambit,
breaks the principle of development-Que
of the basic principles of playing the open­
ing-this is not because he has forgotten
about it. Simply he has come to the conclu­
sion that what applies in the given instance is
not the rule, but an exception. And he goes
in for the win of a pawn (or pawns), realizing
that in doing so he is losing time and is
subjecting himself to a certain danger.
He may prove to be correct in his calculations
and evaluation, and, having parried the
onslaught, will exploit his material advantage,
or, say, will find a tactical opportunity to
refute the gambit idea. Or he may have been
mistaken in his decision, and as a result comes
under an attack . . . .
Let us see how, in the battle for the initia­
tive, gambit means are employed.
Keres-Fuderer
Goteborg Interzonal, 1955
Sicilian Defence
1 e4 c5
2 Nf3 d6
3 d4 c X d4
4 N X d4 Nf6
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

5 Nc3 a6 1 1 . . . e X f5 is answered with enormous

6 Bg5 strength by 12 e6 ! , while if 1 1 . . . d X e5,
then 12 fX e6 ! :
In this sharp variation White plans to
castle Q-side. For example, 6 . . . e6 7 f4 Be7
B
8 Qf3 Qc7 9 0-0-0, or 6 . . . Nbd7 7 Bc4 Qa5
8 Qd2 e6 9 0-0-0.

6 ... e6
7 £4 Qb6

In this way Black prevents Q-side castling.

8 Qd2

The less aggressive 8 Nb3 is also played.

Black, it is true, can then exchange queens
-8 . . . Qe3 + 9 Qe2 Q X e2 + 1 0 B X e2, al­
12 . . . e X d4 13 e X f7 + K X f7 14 Bc4+
though the chances remain with White.
Ke8 1 5 Qf4 ! ! Q X c3 + 16 Kd1 , and against
Therefore 8 Nb3 is better met by 8 . . . Nbd7.
the two threats of 1 7 Qf7 mate and 1 7 Re1 +
By sacrificing his b-pawn, White opens
Black has no defence.
the b-file, drives the enemy queen to a3, and
begins a swift offensive in the centre. 12 fX e6 fx e6
13 Be2
8 ... Q X b2
Black is seriously behind in development,
The Yugoslav master thinks that he has
and his king is stuck in the centre. Mter
sufficient defensive resources.
White's K-side castling his threats along
9 Rb1 Qa3 the f-file will become very real.
10 e5 Nfd7'?
13 . . . Nbc6
Mter this game the theorists established 14 NX c6 b X c6
that Black should first exchange on e5-10
If 14 . . . N x c6, then 1 5 0-0, with the threat
. . . d X e5 1 1 fX e5, and only then play
of 16 Qf4, for example : 1 5 . . . Qc5 + 1 6 Kh1
1 1 . . . Nfd7. After 1 2 Bc4 Bb4 a highly
Qd4 17 Qe1 , with the threats of 1 8 Rdl and
involved position is reached, in which White,
16 Rf4, when all White's pieces join the
by sacrificing material, takes it upon himself
attack. In order to defend f7, Black will
to complete his attack without fail.
again have to waste time on . . . Ne5.
But why is it so necessary to exchange
first on e 5 ? . . 15 Ne4 d5

11 £5 ! White's aim was to weaken e5, where the

black knight is well placed, playing an im­
After 10 . . . d X e5 1 1 fx e5 White would
portant role in repelling the attack. But Black
not have had this important attacking
has nothing better than 1 5 . . . d5. White was
resource !
threatening 1 6 Rb3, driving away the queen
By sacrificing a second pawn, White opens
and winning the d6 pawn, while 1 5 . . . Be7
the central files and weakens Black's e6 square.
would have lost quickly to 16 B X e7 K x e7
11 . . . N x e5 1 7 Qg5 + .

124
 Attack

w This old continuation, modernized by

Nimzowitsch, was Keres's main weapon
against the French Defence in the years of
his chess youth.

3 ". c5

Black's plan of counter-play in this varia­

tion involves undermining the pawn chain;
3 . . . f6 does not work in view of 4 Bd3 !

16 0-0!
The knight cannot be taken, of course,
because of mate at d8, while 16 . . . Be7
still does not work, this time because of
1 7 Rb3 Qa4 1 8 B X e7 Q X e4 (18 . . . KX e7
19 Qg5+ ) 19 Rf4 Qg6 20 Rg3 Qh6 21 Bg5
Qg6 22 Qb4 ! Ra7 23 Qb8, and wins.
I
The attempt to gain a tempo for develop-
ment by 16 . . . Bc5 + also does not help.
After 1 7 Kh1 Black has to reckon with the
threat of 1 8 Rb3.
16 . . . Qa4
17 BhS + ! Kd7
If 1 7 . . . Ng6, then 1 8 Qf4 or 1 8 B X g6 +
h X g6 1 9 Qf2 !, while 1 7 . . . g6 loses to
1 8 Nf6+ .
18 RXf8!
The theme of defence-elimination. On the
capture of the rook there follows 1 9 Nc5 + .
4 d X c5
In a game with Stahlberg, played a year
earlier, Keres continued here 4 Nf3, sacrificing
his d-pawn and securely reinforcing his
outpost at e5. (This plan is analyzed in detail
on p. 154, where; mention is also made of
maintaining the centre by c2-c3).
4 d X c5, which Steinitz considered the
strongest move, pursues the same aims.
Moreover, White does not sacrifice his central
pawn, but exchanges it. However, in contrast
to the 4 Nf3 c x d4 variation, he has to reckon
with the black bishop being actively placed
at c5.
4 ". Nc6
It became clear comparatively recently
that this reply is more accurate than the
immediate 4 . . . B x c5. The point is that after
5 Qg4 Ne7 White does not play 6 QXg7
(since by 6 . . Ng6 Black regains his pawn
.

Black resigns. with a good position), but first 6 b4 !, driving

back the bishop, and only on 6 . . . Bb6-7
And now another sacrifice of the b-pawn,
QXg7 with the advantage, since with his
this time in another opening, and also in the
bishop at b6 Black does not have . . . Bf8.
interests of development. The black queen
wastes time on travelling into the enemy 5 N£3 B X c5
position, and again on the return journey. 6 Bd3 Nge7

6 . . . f6 deserves serious consideration, im­

Keres-Aiexandrescu
mediately beginning a battle for the key e5
Munich Olympiad, 1936
square. After 7 Bf4 fX e5 8 N X e5 Black has
French Defence
the strong move 8 . . . Qf6 !, while if 7 Bb5,
1 e4 e6 then 7 . . . Qb6 ! 8 B X c6 + b X c6 with excel­
2 d4 dS lent prospects for Black.
3 e5 On 7 Qe2 Black has a choice between 7 . . .

125
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
fxes 8 N x es Nf6 9 Bf4 0-0 10 0-0 Ne4,
with a roughly equal game (for example,
11 NX c6 b X c6 12 Be3 B X e3 13 Q X e3 Nf6,
as in Becker-Mar6czy, Karlsbad, 1 929),
and intensifying the pressure on e5 by
7 . . . Qc7. In this latter case Black should meet
8 Bf4 with the bold 8 . . . g5 9 Bg3 g4 and
10 . . . N X e5, with an extremely sharp position
in which it is not so easy for White to show
that he has sufficient compensation for his
lost central pawn.
7 B£4
Keres invites a double attack on f2 and b2.
The game Nimzowitsch-Alekhine (St Peters­
burg, 1 914) showed that after the quiet
7 0-0 Black gains a good game by 7 . . . Ng6
8 Rei Bd7 9 c3 Bb6 followed by . . . Bc7.
7 ... Qb6
8 0-0
8 ... Q X b2
Black accepts the challenge. But did he
have to take the pawn immediately? Possible
was 8 . . . Ng6, so as only on 9 Bg3 to answer
9 . . . Q X b2. The difference is that White's
e-pawn would then be under attack. For ex­
ample, 10 Nbd2 NgX e5 1 1 N x e5 N X e5, and
it is not apparent how White can advantage­
ously drive away the enemy queen (after
12 Rb1 Qc3 13 Rb3 Qd4 White can merely
regain one of his sacrified pawns by 14 Bb5+
Nd7 15 BXd7+ BXd7 16 RX b7, with an
unclear position).
126
In the opinion of Keres, on 8 . . . Ng6
it would have been most expedient for
White to sacrifice his b-pawn by 9 Qcl ,
when after 9 . . . N X f4 10 Q X f4 Q X b2
1 1 Nbd2 the e5 pawn is securely defended,
and his lead in development and the open
b-file give White good attacking chances.
9 Nbd2 Qb6
In taking the pawn, Black has lost two
tempi and also opened for the opponent an
important file. It is instructive to follow how
Keres exploits these advantages of his posi­
tion.
Note that the retreat of the queen was
forced. Further winning of material would
have placed Black on the verge of catastrophe,
for example : 9 . . . Ng6 10 Rb l Q X a2 ? 1 1
Bg3 followed by h2-h4, with a very strong
attack.
10 c4
Played in complete accordance with the
principle that a lead in development shows
up best in an open position. Keres aims to
open lines, being convinced that a favourable
tactical possibility is bound to appear . . .
Perhaps more justified was the alternative
plan of preparing an attack, which was the
quiet move 10 Nb3 !, so as to answer 10 . . .
Ng6 with 1 1 Bg3 and then h2-h4.
10 . . . h6
Castling was not possible, in view of the
typical bishop sacrifice at h7.
11 Qcl
And now Black has no time to castle,
because of the threat of 12 Rb1 (driving
away the queen) and 13 ex d5 (when the
bishop at c5 will be undefended !).
11 . .
. Nb4
12 Be2 Bd7
13 a3 Na6
 Attack

14 Rb1 Qc6 23 Qc2 ! B X f2 + 24 Kf1 and wins, while

15 Bg3 if 22 . . . Rac8, then simply 23 Q X b7, when
the unfortunate position of his knight at a6
After retreating his bishop, White threatens
is Black's downfall.
16 c x d5, when 16 . . . N X d5 is very strongly
All this signifies that Black has to allow
met by 1 7 Ne4 !, while on 16 . . . e x d5 Keres
the check at g7, which is equivalent to
had prepared 1 7 e6.
resigning the game.
15 . N£5?
21 . . . Bb6
. .

1 5 . . . 0-0 ! was essential, retaining a sound 22 Q X g7+ Kd6

position.
w
16 c X d5 e X d5

23 Nc4 + ! d X c4
24 Rfd1 + Resigns.

17 e6! In the following game White, in trying to

increase his lead in development, sacrificed
By sacrificing itself, this pawn vacates e5
three pawns, one after another.
for the knight, after which White obtains an
irresistible attack.
Keres-Winter
17 . . . fX e6 Warsaw Olympiad, 1935
Sicilian Defence
Taking with the bishop is not possible due
1 e4 cS
to 1 8 Bb5.
2 N£3 N£6
18 Ne5 N X g3
A rather uncommon continuation-an
19 h X g3 Qc7
20 N X d7! unusual hybrid of Alekhine's Defence (1 e4
Nf6) and the Sicilian Defence. Black invites
Much stronger than 20 Bh5 + Kd8 the opponent to attack his knight, so as then
21 Nf7+ Ke7 22 N X h8 RX h8. to exploit the slight weakening of the pawn
formation.
20 . . . K X d7
21 Qb2! 3 e5 Nd5
4 Nc3
Threatening not only 22 Q X g7+ . On
2 1 . . . Rhg8 there follows 22 Rfc l ! (the After 4 c4 Nc7 Black's position is perfectly
consequence of the opening of the b- and satisfactory, for example : 5 d4 eX d4 6 Q x d4
c-files) with a deadly pin. If 22 . . . Qb6, then Nc6 7 Qe4 d5 8 e X d6 Qxd6 9 Nc3 Qg6 !

127
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

4 ... e6 0--0 10 Bd3 d6 11 eXd6 Re8 + ) 9 . . . B X f2+

1 0 Ke2 0-0, with a complicated game, rich
In the event of 4 . . . N X c3 White does
in tactical possibilities.
best to take with the d-pawn, opening a
central me and aiming for rapid development. 7 Bg5
For example, 5 d x c3 e6 6 Bf4 Nc6 7 Bc4
A move thought up by Keres at the board.
Qc7 8 0-0 b6 9 Re1 with the better chances,
Its aim is to delay the development of Black's
or 5 . . . d5 6 e x d6 Q x d6 7 Q X d6 e x d6
K-side. Before this they used to play 7 e X d6
8 Bf4, with strong positional pressure.
B X d6 8 d X c5, isolating the d5 pawn, or
The apparently logical 5 . . . b6 is instruc­
7 Bb5 + , which was considered inadequate
tively refuted :
for obtaining an appreciable advantage. We

w should mention that recently the evaluation

of 7 Bb5+ has changed, and it is now con­
sidered favourable to White. Here, for ex­
ample, is how the game Bouwmeester-Pomar
(Berne, 1 962) developed : 7 . . . Nc6 8 0-0
Be7 9 c4 Be6 10 Be3 Qb6 1 1 a4 a6 12 a5
Qc7 13 e X d6 Q X d6 1 4 d x c5 Qd8 15
B X c6 + b X c6 1 6 Ne5 Qc7 17 Qa4, and
White converted his advantage into a win.

7 ... Qa5 +

6 e6 ! d X e6 (6 . . .jX e6 is met by the terribly

Since 7 . . . Be7 fails to 8 B X e7 Q X e7 9
strong 7 Ne5!, threatening 8 Qh5+ as well as
d X c5, when White is a pawn up, 7 . . . Qb6
8 Qf3) 7 Q X d8 + K X d8 8 Ne5 Ke8 9 Bb5 +
looks logical. But then too White takes the
Bd7 (if9 . . . Nd7, then 10 Bc6 Rb8 11 Bf4, and pawn-8 d x c5 d x c5 (8 . . . Q X c5 is of course
there is no way that Black can save his rook)
completely bad) 9 Q x d5 Be6 (9 . . . h6 loses
10 N X d7 N X d7 1 1 Bf4 a6 (11 . . . 0-0-0 to 10 0--0-0! h X g5 11 Bb5+ Nc6 12 NX g5,
12 Ba6 mate !) 1 2 Bc6 Rc8 1 3 Bb7 Rd8
with irresistible threats) 10 Bb5 + Nc6 1 1
14 Bc7, and White wins the exchange.
Qb3, and Black's slight initiative does not
5 N x d5 compensate for his sacrificed pawn.
By checking at a5, Keres's opponent was
Perfectly possible is the modern continua­
hoping for 8 Bd2, so as only then to play
tion 5 Ne4, when 5 . . . Nc6 is well met by
8 . . . Qb6, when the d5 pawn would no longer
6 c4 Nb6 7 b3 ! followed by 8 Bb2.
be under attack . . .
5 ... e x d5 But Keres had something quite different
6 d4 d6 in mind.

Black's unhappy experience in this varia­ 8 c3 c X d4

tion (including the present game) led to a 9 Bd3
search by the theorists for new paths. The
Black is behind in development, and by
result was a sharp variation, in which Black
sacrificing a pawn Keres tries to gain time.
tries by sacrificing a pawn to seize the initia­
tive : 6 . . . Nc6 7 d X c5 B X c5 8 Q X d5 Qb6 9 9 ... dXc3
Bc4 (the passive 9 Qd2 favours Black-9 . . . 10 0-0

128
 Attack

B w

10 . . . cX b2?
N X e5, then 15 Bb5+ Nd7 16 Qx d5 ! !,
Played according to the principle : in for concluding the attack.
a penny, in for a pound. But Black should After the move in the game, the sacrifice at
have been concerned for his development, f7 works immediately.
and played 10 . . . Nc6, when by restricting
his gains to one pawn, he could probably w
have maintained a defensible position. For
example, 1 1 Re1 Be6 12 b X c3 d X e5 1 3
N X e5 N X e5 14 RXe5 Bd6. The point i s
that the consequences o f the exchange sacri­
fice-15 RX e6+ fXe6 16 Qh5 + , which
Keres considered highly promising, are un­
clear, on the retreat of the rook to e1 Black
simply castles, while if 1 5 Re3, then 1 5 . . . d4 !
But let us return to the Keres-Winter
game, in which Black is now three(!) pawns
13 NXf7 !
up.
11 Rb1 d X e5 Black is made to pay for his 'pawn-grab­
bing'. Having delayed castling, the black king
A further mistake. You should not open
is forced into an unequal battle.
lines if the opponent has a lead in develop­
ment. Essential was 1 1 . . . Nc6, and if 12 Re1 13 . . . KXf7
Be6, although even then after 13 RX b2 14 Qh5+ g6
White retains a dangerous attack. The follow­
If 14 . . . Kg8, then 15 Qe8+ Bf8 16 Q X c8.
ing variation, for example, is amusing : 13 . . .
On 14 . . . Ke6 White wins by 15 Bf5 + Ke5
Qc7 14 Qb1 Rb8 15 Rc1 Bd7 (16 R X c6 was
(15 . . . KX/5 16 Bd2 + ) 16 Rfe l + , while in
threatened, and if 15 . . . a6, then 16 Rb6,
the event of 14 . . . Kf8 Keres had prepared
renewing this threat). this variation : 15 Rfe1 Bd7 16 Qf3+ Kg8 1 7
(See diagram next column) Be7 !, when Black is defenceless {17 . . . B X e7
16 e6 ! fxe6 1 7 Bg6+ ! h X g6 18 Q X g6 -18 RX e7, with the irresistible threat of
mate. 19 Qf7+ ).
12 N x e5 Bd6 15 B X g6+ ! h X g6
Now 12 . . . Be6 13 RX b2 Nc6 is very 16 Q X h8 Bf5
strongly met by 14 RXb7!, and if 14 . . . 17 Rfe1 Be4

1 29
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

The threat was 1 8 Qh7+ Kf8 1 9 Bh6 4 e5 Ne4

mate.
To be considered was 4 . . . Nd5 5 Q X d4
18 R X e4! d X e4 e6, and if 6 Bc4, then 6 . . . Nc6 7 Qe4 d6.
19 Qf6+ S Q X d4 dS
Either move by the king is now answered 6 Nbd2
by mate : 19 . . . Ke8 20 Qe6+ Kf8 21 Bh6 After 6 e X d6 N X d6 Black would have
mate, or 19 . . . Kg8 20 Q X g6+ Kf8 21 successfully completed his development.
Q X d6+ Kg8 22 Qe6+ Kg7 (22 . . . Kh7 23 Nc6
6
Qf7+ ) 23 Bf6 + etc.
. . .

Black resigns.
And now-an example of gaining time by
a so-called obstructive sacrifice.
Keres-Schmid
Bamberg, 1968
Sicilian Defence
1 d4 c5
2 e4
, Keres takes play from a closed opening
into a Sicilian Defence.
2 • • • c X d4
3 Nf3
The gambit continuation 3 c3 is interesting,
when Black is by no means obliged to accept
the pawn sacrifice. After 3 . . . d X c3 4 N x c3
Nc6 5 Nf3 d6 6 Bc4 e6 7 0-0 Nf6 8 Qe2
White has compensation for it in the form
of better development. But perfectly possible
is 3 . . . d5, 3 . . . Nf6, or even 3 . . . d3.
3 . . • Nf6
Holding on to the pawn by 3 . . . e5 is
dangerous. After 4 c3 (4 NX e5? ? Qa5+ )
4 . . . d X c3 5 N X c3 White has not only a
lead in development, but also control of d5,
which gives him good prospects.
Instead of the move played, Black could
have transposed into one of the normal
variations of the Sicilian Defence by 3 . . . d6,
3 . . . e6 or 3 . . . Nc6, but instead the German
7 BbS BfS
Strangely enough, this natural move (Black
wishes to maintain his control of e4) is the
cause of his subsequent difficulties. He should
have played 7 . . . N X d2 and 8 . . . e6.
8 0-0 a6
Of course, 8 . . . N X d2 9 B X d2 B X c2 ?
would have been suicidal : 10 e6 1 fXe6 1 1
Rc1 Bf5 1 2 Ne5, with a n easy win.
In trying to get rid of the annoying bishop,
Black loses a tempo. In reply to 8 . . . e6 Keres
would probably have played 9 Qa4, with an
unpleasant pin on the knight at c6. Thus on
9 . . . Qb6 there could have followed 10 Nb3,
and if 10 . . . Nc5, then 1 1 N X c5 B X c5 12
b4 Be7 13 Be3, with advantage to White.
9 B X c6+ b X c6
10 Qa4 Qd7
One more move, . . . e6, and Black will
have solved his opening problems . . .
11 N X e4 B X e4
1 1 . . . dXe4 is strongly met by 12 Ng5
(12 . . . c5 13 Qc4; 12 . . . Qd5 13 c4 Qd7 14
c5 or 14 Rel).
(See diagram next column)
12 e6!
This sacrifice obstructs the development of
Black's K-side.
12 Q X e6
• . .

grandmaster chooses an original path. On 12 . . . fXe6 there would have followed

1 30
 Attack

18 f3

The opening of another file gives White

additional attacking resources. Also perfectly
possible was 1 8 Rd2 followed by Rfdl.
18 . . . h6

1 8 . . . e6 still does not work, this time be­

cause of 1 9 Rd6 ! B X d6 20 Q X e6 + Kd8 21
Rdl .
19 fX e4
13 Ne5 Qd6 1 4 Bf4, with a won position for 1 9 Rfe1 would have given Black fewer
White. chances, although the move made by Keres
13 NgS Qg6 in a time scramble is unpleasant enough for
Black.
Black attempts to hold on to his pawn, but
soon ends up in a lost position. Relatively 19 . . . Q X e4
best was 1 3 . . . Qd7, giving back the pawn, 20 Q x cs e6
although even in this case the advantage re­ 21 Qc7 Be7
mains with White. 22 Rd7!
This wins easily, whereas the plausible
14 NX e4 d X e4
continuation of the attack by 22 Rfe1 would
15 Bf4 f5
have allowed Black to resist after 22. . . Rd8( !),
16 Qc4 !
as intended by Schmid:
There was also another tempting manoeu­ (a) 23 RX d8 + B X d8 24 R X e4 B X c7 25
vre-16 Qb3, with the threat of 1 7 Qb7, but Rc4 (25 RX e6 + ? Kf7), and here Black has
the move made by Keres is much more subtle. the saving check 25 . . . Bb6+ followed by
White continues to obstruct the development 26 . . . Kd7.
of his opponent's K-side ( . . . e6 is not pos­ (b) 23 R X e4 RX d1 + and 24 . . . fX e4,
sible). when for the queen Black obtains two rooks,
which he is ready to unite after . . . Kf7.
16 c5
(c) 23 Q X d8 + B X d8 24 R X e4 fX e4 25
• . •

Otherwise it is not clear how Black will Rd6, with an advantage in the ending.
defend against Rad1, after which White
22 . . . Bd8
threatens not only the doubling of his rooks,
but also Bd6. w

17 Rad1

Keres is in no hurry to regain his pawn :

after 1 7 Q X c5 Qe6 Black will hide his king
at f7.

17 . . . Qc6

And now on 1 7 . . . e6 there would have

followed 1 8 Qa4+ Kf7 19 Rd7+ .

131
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

23 R x d8+ Or 42 . . . Kg6 43 g4 Rd3 + 44 Ke2 fX g4

45 RX e4.
This leads to a rook ending where White is
two pawns up. 43 g4 Rd3+
44 Ke2 Ke5
23 RX d8
45 R X fS+ Kd4
. • .

24 Q X g7 Rf8
46 g5 Re3+
Forced, since 24 . . . Qd4+ ? 25 Q X d4 47 Kfl h3
RX d4 26 Be5 leaves White a bishop up. 48 c6 R X h4

25 B X h6 Qd4+ The result is unaffected by 48 . . . e3 49 g6.

If25 . . . Rf7, then 26 Qg8+ Ke7 27 Bg5 + . 49 g6

26 Q X d4 R X d4 Black is unable to create a mating net, and

27 c3 Rd6 meanwhile the white pawns inexorably ad­
28 B X £8 K X £8 vance.
29 Rel 49 • • . e3
so g7 Rhl +
Here all roads lead to Rome, and the re­ 51 Ke2 Rh2+
mainder is not of any great interest. In time 52 Kel Resigns.
trouble White complicates his task somewhat,
without however letting slip the win. These were examples in which a sacrifice
of a pawn (or pawns) enabled White to sharp­
29 • • . K£7 ly increase the advantage stemming from
30 K£2 K£6 the right to make the first move.
31 Ke2 e5 Let us now see how, by means of a sacrifice,
32 Rdl Rb6 the initiative is seized by Black.
33 b3 KgS
34 c4 K£4 Luckis-Keres
35 Rd3 Buenos Aires, 1939
A prophylactic time-trouble move. Sim­ Two Knights Defence
plest, of course, was 35 c5. 1 e4 e5
35 ... Rh6 2 N£3 Nc6
36 Rh3 Rg6 3 Bc4 N£6
37 Rh4+ Kg5 In this opening Black allows an attack on
38 g3 aS f7, then sacrifices a pawn to gain several tempi
39 c5 e4 and seize the initiative.
40 Ke3 Rb8
4 NgS
The last move before the time control.
The alternative, by which White declines
40 . . . Rc6 would not have saved Black after
the sacrifice and himself aims for a lead in
41 Kd4 Re6 42 Rf4 e3 43 Rf1 e2 44 Re1
development, is 4 d4 e X d4 5 0-0 or 5 e5.
Kg4 45 Kd5 and 46 c6.
On the resumption there followed : 4 • • • d5
5 eX d5 Na5
41 Rf4 Rd8
42 h4+ K£6 Mter 5 . . . N X d5 ? 6 N X f7 K X f7 7 Qf3 +

132
 Attack

Ke6 8 Nc3 White develops a strong attack, Therefore White must first drive away the
but even more convincing is 6 d4, and if bishop.
6 . . . e X d4, then 7 0-0, threatening the sacri­
14 . . . BhS
fice on f7.
15 g4 Bg6
6 d3 16 d X c6 bXc6

The other branch of this well-studied open­ White still has not castled, his queen is
ing is 6 Bb5+ c6 7 d x c6 b X c6 8 Be2 h6 9 badly placed, and in addition his position
Nf3 e4 1 0 Ne5 Bd6, when again Black has has a number of weaknesses.
perfectly adequate compensation for the
17 Bd2?
pawn.
Essential was 1 7 Be3, preventing the open­
6 ... h6
ing of the e-file. Black would probably have
7 Nf3 e4
continued 1 7 . . . Nd7, with excellent compen­
8 Qe2 N X c4
sation for the sacrificed pawn.
9 d X c4 BcS
10 Nfd2 B

This is considered strongest.

10 . . . 0-0
11 Nb3 Bg4
12 Qfl Bb4+ !

All this can be found in the openings

books. The bishop check is very important :
Black wants to provoke c2-c3, weakening the
d3 square, since then his knight, by the
manoeuvre . . . Nd7-e5, can invade on this 17 . . . e3!
square. For example, 1 3 c3 Be? 14 h3 Bg5 1 5 18 fX e3
g4 Bg6 16 Be3 Nd7! 1 7 N1d2 Ne5 1 8 0-0-0 Or 18 B X e3 Ne4 (18 B X c2 is also
. . .

b5 ! 1 9 c X b5 Nd3 + 20 Kb1 Q X d5 (or possible), and now :

20 . . . a6), with a splendid attacking position
for Black. Even so, this was better for White
than that which occurred in the game.
13 Nc3?
This attempt to avoid the weakening of the
d3 square costs White too dearly.
13 . . . c6!
Black is not concerned about regaining his
pawn. His aim is to open lines for attack as
quickly as possible.
14 h3
Of course, not 14 d X c6 ? ? Qd1 mate !
(a) 19 Bd2 N X d2 20 N X d2 B X c2, with
the terrible threat of 2 1 . . . Re8+ .
(b) 19 Rd1 Qe7, with an irresistible attack.
(c) 1 9 a3-the least evil, although even
then 19 . . . B X c3 + 20 b X c3 N X c3 gives
Black an excellent attacking position.
18 . . . B X c3
19 b X c3
Or 1 9 B X c3 Ne4 20 Rg1 Re8, and things
are bad for White.
19 . . . B X c2
It is not a question of the pawn, of course,
but that in this way Black prevents castling.

133
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

20 Nd4 Ne4! example, 5 N x es Bd6 6 N x c6 b X c6 7 d3

(weak is 7 Q x c6+ Bd7 8 Qa6 dX e4 and
Threatening 21 . . . Qh4+ .
9 . . . 0-0, with excellent development for the
21 h4 sacrificed pawn) 7 . . . 0-0 8 Be2 Qe8 ! (one of
the last opening innovations by Paul Keres ;
Equivalent to capitulation, but on 21 Rgl
formerly 8 . . . Re8 used to be played here,
there could have followed 21 . . . Bd3 ! 22
when 9 Bg5 dX e4 10 dX e4 retains for White
Qg2 (22 Q X d3 Qh4+ 23 Ke2 Qf2+ and
his extra pawn) 9 Nd2 Rb8 10 0-0 c5, with
24 . . . QXg1 + , or 23 Kd1 Nf2+ ) 22 . . . Qh4+
the initiative for the pawn.
23 Kdl Rab8, and White cannot parry the
attack. 4 • • . d X e4
s N x e5 Qd5
21 . . . c5
6 Qa4 Nge7
Much more decisive than the immediate
win of the exchange by 21 . . . Ng3.
White has been slow in developing his
Q-side, which may have dangerous conse­
22 Nf3 Ng3 quences.
23 Qg2 N X h1
Be4 7 N X c6
24 Q X h1
White resigns. Now Black completes the development of
his K-side without hindrance.
Lutt-Keres Why then does White exchange on c6 ? It
Correspondence, 1934 soon becomes apparent that Keres's oppo­
Ponziani's Opening nent has decided to concern himself with the
e4 pawn . . .
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6 7 ... N x c6
3 c3 8 0--0 Bd6
9 Re1
The idea of this opening, which bears the
name of the 1 8th century Italian player B
Domenico Lurenzo Ponziani, a contemporary
of Philidor, is to prepare the occupation of
the centre by d2-d4.

3 ... d5

This counter-blow in the centre is justified

from the positional viewpoint, since after
4 e X d5 Q x d5 the white knight cannot go
to c3, and the queen is securely placed in the
centre. However, modem theory gives pre­
9 ... 0--0 !
ference to 3 . . . Nf6, a!ld if 4 d4--4 . . . N X e4.
The e4 pawn appears to be the key to the
4 Bb5
position, since it is only because of it that
The alternative is 4 Qa4, when Black has a White cannot develop his Q-side. Neverthe­
choice between the quiet 4 . . . f6 (defending less Keres gives it up ! The whole point is that
e5) 5 Bb5 Nge7, and the gambit 4 . . . Nf6, for White will not have time to play d2-d4.

134
 Attack

10 B x c6 The introductory move of a combination.

In the years of his chess youth (Keres was
10 RX e4 is very strongly met by 10 . . . Bf5.
1 8 years of age at the time) the future grand­
10 . . . b X c6 master hardly ever missed the opportunity to
11 Q x e4 choose a spectacular continuation, even if
there was a simpler path at his disposal. Had
Here again 1 1 RX e4 is very strongly fol­
this game been played not in 1 934, but, say,
lowed by 1 1 . . . Bf5.
in 1954, Keres would of course have played
11 . . . QhS 1 3 . . . Bf5, sacrificing nothing and at the sam�
time developing a deadly attack. If, for ex­
White has not managed to develop his ample, 1 4 Q X c6, then 14 . . . Bd3 ! with two
Q-side. Now he is forced to weaken his white threats : 1 5 . . . Qg6 with a double attack on
squares, and Keres develops a crushing attack. bl and g3, as well as 1 5 . . . f6 and 16 . . . Rae8.

12 g3 In the event of 14 Qe3 f6 Black again

threatens 15 . . . Rae8. In all these variations
One does not voluntarily make such a the undeveloped state of White's Q-side is his
move, but on 12 h3 there would have fol­ downfall. The result is that his weakened
lowed 12 . . . Bf5 13 Qe2 (if 13 g4, then 13 . . . K-side is lacking in defenders.
Q X h3 14 gX/5 Bh2+ 15 Kh1 Bg3+ 16 Kg1
14 h X g3 Rae8
Qh2+ and 17 . . . QX/2 mate, or 14 QX/5
15 Q X e8 Q X £3
Qh2+ 15 Kf1 Qh1 + 16 Ke2 Rfe8+ , while
16 Qe4
if 13 Qx c6, then 13 . . . Qg6, with two threats
-14 . . . Bh2+ and l4 . . . BX b1) 1 3 . . . Qg6 14 If 16 Re2, then 16 . . . Q x g3 + 1 7 Kh1

Na3 B X h3, and White is helpless. Bg2+ 1 8 RX g2 (or 18 Kg1 Be4+ , winning
the queen) 1 8 . . . Qh3 + 19 Rh2 (otherwise
12 . . • Bh3! Black wins the queen) 19 . . . Qfl mate.
13 f3 16 ... Q X g3 +
"But why not 13 d4 ?", the reader may ask. 17 Kh1 Bg2+
Because then 13 . . . Rae8 ! 1 4 Q X e8 R X e8 1 5 18 Q x g2 Q x e1 +
R X e8 + Bf8, when both 16 . . . Qd1 + and 19 Qg1 Qe4+
16 . . . Qf3 (or 16 . . . Qd5) are threatened, and 20 Qg2
White is defenceless. Rather more tenacious is 20 Kh2 (so as to
be able to answer 20 . . . Qd3 with 21 Qe3),
B but then comes 20 . . . Re3, and the white king
is helpless against the attack by the heavy
pieces.
(See diagram next page)
White is two minor pieces up. What next?

20 . . . Qd3!!
A 'quiet' move o f exceptional strength.
By blocking the d-pawn, Black paralyzes the
opponent's entire Q-side. Now his rook comes
into play, and for it White has to give up his
13 . . . B X g3 queen.

10 135
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

B the king's pawn screen or other key points,

delay in castling in positions which permit
the opening of the central files, and so on.

Keres-Ojanen
Match Estonia-Finland, Helsinki, 1960
Sicilian Defence

1 e4 c5
2 Nf3 e6
3 d4 c X d4
21 c4 ReS 4 NX d4 a6
22 Nc3 Re6 5 Nc3 Qc7
23 b3 Rh6+ 6 Bd3 b5
24 Kg1 Rg6
A premature advance. Black should have
25 Q X g6 h X g6
completed his development, and only then
26 Na4?
taken active measures. For example, 6 . . .
A blunder, of course, but all the same Nc6 7 Be3 Nf6, when subsequently the
White's position was hopeless. The black following plan of developing the king's
g-pawn will march unhindered up to g3, bishop deserves consideration : 8 0-0 Bd6
while the white pieces will have to mark time 9 Kh1 (9 h3 b5) 9 . . . Bf4.
in order to defend one another. A possible
7 0-0 Bb7
continuation was 26 Ba3 Q X d2 27 Rcl g5,
8 Re1 !
or 26 Rbl g5 27 Bb2 g4 28 Rfl Qg3 + 29
Khl Qh3 + 30 Kgl g3, with an easy win. A very strong move, after which Black
finds himself in great difficulties. The game
26 . . . Qd4+
has only just begun, and White's initiative has

White resigns. already become menacing. 8 . . . d6 is very

strongly met by 9 Bg5 ! (with the threat of
The sacrifice of material in the opening is 10 Nd5 exd5 11 exd5+ ) :
the most energetic way, but also the most
B
risky, of battling for the initiative. The seizure
of the initiative in the early stage of a game,
and its almost forced escalation into an attack,
or a positional or material advantage, is not
bound to be associated with gambit play.
That which is achieved by means of a sacrifice
(or sacrifices) can also be achieved 'for free'
in the event of certain opening mistakes by
the opponent, such as, for example, passivity
or, by contrast, unjustified (not in accordance
with the position) activity, play without a (a) 9 . . . Nf6 10 B X f6 g X f6 1 1 Nd5 !, with
definite plan, the conceding of the centre an irresistible attack, for example, 1 1 . . . e X d5
without compensation, actions on a flank 1 2 e X d5 + Kd8 1 3 Qf3 Be7 (13 . . . Nd7 14
with the centre unsecured, the weakening of Nc6+ !) 1 4 Nf5 Re8 1 5 NXe7 RX e7 16

136

Q x f6 B X dS 1 7 BfS !
(b) 9 . . . Be7 10 B X e7 N X e7 (10 . . . Q x e7
11 Nf5) 1 1 B X b5 + a X b5 12 Nd X b5 Qb6
13 N X d6 + Kf8 (13 . . . Kd7 14 Nc4 + )
N X b7, and Black cannot take the knight
because of mate at d8.
The sacrifice on b5 is the leitmotif of com­
binations carried out in many branches of
this variation. The success of such tactical
operations is a consequence of Black's lack of
development. (Note that the piece sacrifice in
the above variation, and later in the actual
game, is made not to seize the initiative, but
for a decisive development of the initiative.)
A correspondence game Diinhaupt-Keller
( 1966) went 9 . . . h6 10 Bh4 g5 1 1 Bg3 Bg7,
when the outcome was decided by the familiar
sacrifice : 1 0 B X b5 + a X b5 1 1 Nd X b5 Qd7
12 Q X d6 ! (12 NXd6+ Ke7) 12 . . . Na6 1 3
Qb6 !, and very soon White's attack proved
decisive.
After 8 Re1 !, apart from the move made by
the Finnish master, it remains to consider
two other replies :
8 . . . Bd6, when 9 Qh5 is very strong. In a
game Nikitin-Shofman (1966) after 9 . . . Nf6
1 0 Qh4 Nc6 White gained a clear advantage
by a typical sacrifice : 1 1 Ndx b5 ! a x b5
12 N X b5 Qb8 13 NX d6 + QX d6 14 eS !
N X e5 15 Qg3 Ra5 16 Bf4. If instead 9 . . .
Qc5, then White, exploiting his appreciable
lead in development, can exchange queens by
1 0 Q X c5 B X c5, and continue 1 1 Nb3 Bb6
12 a4, when after 1 2 . . . b4 1 3 aS ! he has a
threatening initiative.
8 . . . Nc6, which is perhaps relatively best,
only on 9 NX c6 Black should not play
9 . . . Q X c6, when a game Tal-Gipslis (Riga,
1 958) continued 10 a4 b4 1 1 Nd5 ! Nf6 1 2
Bd2 N X d5 1 3 e X d5 Qc5 (13 . . . Q x d5 ?
14 Be4) 1 4 Be4 f5 1 5 Bf3 B X d 5 16 B X b4
B X f3 1 7 Q X f3 Qc8 1 8 Bc3 Kf7 1 9 Rad1
and Black lost quickly. Correct, instead of
9 . . . Q x c6, is 9 . . . d x c6, when 10 a4 gives
White merely the better prospects.
10*
Attack
8 ... Bc5
This does not get Black out of his difficul­
ties. The position of the bishop at c5 affords
14
White additional tactical possibilities .
9 Be3 Ne7
The queen's knight cannot be developed
(9 . . . Nc6 ? 10 Nx e6 and 11 BX c5), while if
9 . . . Nf6, then 10 Nd X b5 ! a X b5 1 1 N X b5
Qb6 12 B x cs Q x cs 1 3 e5 ! , and on the
retreat of the knight-1 4 Nd6 + and 1 5
N X b7 (Keres-Benko, Curacao, 1 962).
Keres thought that Black was bound to
prevent the sacrifice at b5 by 9 . . . Qb6, when
there could have followed 10 Nb3 B X e3 1 1
RX e3, with the better chances for White.
10 Qh5
1 0 B X b5 could well have been played, but
Keres decided to delay the sacrifice a little.
Firstly, because Black would not have replied
10 . . . a X b5, but 10 . . . B X d4, when after
1 1 Q x d4 a x bs 1 2 N x b5 Qc6 1 3 Nd6 +
13 Q X g7 Rg8 14 Qe5 Nf5!
(less clear is
15 Nc7+ Ke7 16 NX a8 BXa8) 1 3 . . . Kf8
White has a strong attack, but perhaps not
decisive . . .
Even so, the main reason why Keres avoided
the sacrifice was that by 10 Qh5 White
intensifies the pressure without risking any­
thing, and prepares an even more favourable
moment for the sacrifice on b5. Now 1 1
N X e6 is threatened.
10 e5
• . .
A decisive weakening of the position. In
defending against the threat (if 10 . . .g6, then
all the same 11 NX e6), Black allows the
sacrifice on b5, and in a much more favour­
able situation for the opponent than before.
The sacrifice at b5 also follows after 10 . . . b4
or 10 . . . Bd6, for example :
10 . . . b4 1 1 Ndb5 a X b5 12 N X b5 Qb6
13 B x cs.
137
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

10 . . . Bd6 11 BXb5! a x b5 12 NdXb5 18 Re3!

Qc6 13 NXd6+ Q x d6 14 Bc5 Qc6 15
Threatening Rf3-f6+, mating.
BXe7 K x e7 16 Qg5+ Ke8 17 Q x g7 Rf8
18 Nd5! In both cases Black loses. 18 • . . h5
In Keres's opinion,10 . . .Bb4 was essential,
Hoping to answer 19 Rf3 with 19 .. .Rh6.
when he was intending to continue positional­
The attempt to exchange off the menacing
ly-11 a4. The other defence against the
knight by 18 .. .Nc8 loses to 19 NXb7 QXb6
threat of 11 NXb5 was 10 Bb6, when
20 e5!, while after 18 . . .Nc7 White wins by
. . •

there could have followed another sacrifice-

19 b5.
11 B Xb5! BXd4 (Black loses quickly after
11 a x b5 12 NcX b5 Qc5 13 NXe6!!, and
. • . 19 bS QcS
if 13 . . . QXh5 14 Nd6 mate) 12 BXd4 20 c3! Nc6
aXb5 13 BXg7 Rg8 14 NXb5, with more
Despair. After the exchange of queens
than sufficient compensation for the sacrificed
(20 . . . QXd4 21 c X d4) Black's knight is
piece.
deprived of c5, and he loses one of his
11 NdXbS! a x bS attacked minor pieces.
12 N X bS Qc6
21 N X b7
13 B x cS Q X cS
The simplest.
w
21 . . . N X d4
22 N x cS N x cS
23 c X d4 Nb3
24 Rb1 N X d4

Or 24 . ..RXa2? 25 Bc4.

25 Bc4 Resigns.

Keres-Kotov
1 4 b4! Piirnu, 1947
Sicilian Defence
Now the e5 pawn falls, which means that
for his knight White gains three pawns. At 1 e4 cS
the same time Black is prevented from cas­ 2 Ne2
tling,and proves unable to unite his scattered
White indicates his intention of playing the
forces.
closed variation (without d2-d4).
14 . . . Qc6
2 . • . d6
Of course, 14 . .. QXb4 fails to 15 Nc7+
3 g3 bS
Kd8 16 Reb l .

f6
In the closed variation, when there is a
15 Q x es
quiet position in the centre (for example,
16 Nd6+ Kf8
after 3 . . .Nc6 4 Nbc3 g6 5 Bg2 Bg7), Black's
17 Qd7 Na6
plan is to prepare active play on the Q-side,
On 18 b5 Black was intending 18 ... Qc5, and by 3 . ..b5 Kotov immediately initiates
but Keres has a different idea in mind. this plan. However, White has by no means

138
 Attack

pledged to refrain from operations in the 10 R x a4

centre. Keres counters Black's flank advance
Keres could also have continued in gambit
with an immediate opening of the centre,
style : 1 0 Nc3, and if 10 . . . e6-l l Nd5 !
after which it becomes clear that the move
. . . b5 has been unfavourable for Black-he
e X d5 12 e X d5 + Kd8 (12 . . . Be7 13 N/5)
13 Bg5 Nbd7 14 Ra3, with a dangerous and
has to lose time on the defence of his b-pawn,
possibly winning attack. He saw the knight
and falls behind in development.
sacrifice, but preferred the quiet capture with
4 Bg2 Bb7 the rook, which ensures White a clear posi­
5 d4! c X d4 tional advantage.
6 N x d4 a6
7 0-0 Nf6 10 . . . Nbd7
8 Re1 11 Bd2

Threatening 9 e5, and if 9 . . . B X g2-10 Here too 1 1 Nc3 e6 12 Nd5 was a promis­
e X f6 Bh3 {10 . . . Bb7 11 N/5 with a fatal ing continuation.
check at d6 or g7) 1 1 fX e7 B X e7 12 Qh5 ! 11 .
• . NcS
Qd7 (or 12 . . .Bd7 13 Bg5) 13 Bg5, and Black U Rc4 e5
loses material due to the pin.
Kotov defends against this threat. The best decision. Black agrees to a back­
ward d6 pawn, if only to get rid of the menac­
8 ... Qc7
ing knight.
Mter this White's lead in development
becomes menacing. It would have been rela­ 13 Nf5 Qd7
tively best for Black to agree to the weakening 14 b4 was threatened.
of his d5 square, and to drive away the
centralized knight by 8 . . . e5 9 Nf5 g6
14 Bh3 Ne6
followed by . . . Be7 and . . . 0-0.
15 BaS g6
16 Ne3
9 a4!
The combination 16 Rc7 N X c7 1 7 Ng7+
This breaks up Black's Q-side, since on B X g7 18 B X d7+ K X d7 does not work :
9 . . . b4 there follows 10 c3 !, gaining a further Black gains more than enough for the queen.
tempo for development, and opening the
c-file, on which the black queen is situated. 16 . • Rc8
17 Nc3
9 ... bX a4
The attempt to exploit the pin on the knight
w by 1 7 Nd5 N X d5 1 8 R x c8 + Q x c8 1 9
e X d5 does not work because o f 1 9 . . . Qc5,
with a simultaneous attack on the bishop and
the d-pawn.
White's problem now is to exploit the
weakness ofthe opponent's central pawns.

17 • . . RX c4
18 N X c4 Qc6
19 b3

139
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Here 1 9 . . . Be7 loses a pawn after 20 B X e6 position is hopeless, in the first instance
fX e6 21 Bb4. True, one still has to calculate because of the threat of Rc7; on 24 . . . Qb5
the variation in which Black tries to exploit White wins by 25 NX d6 Q x a5 26 RXf7+
the pin-21 . . . 0--0 22 B X d6 Rd8. This, how­ Kg8 27 Nf6 mate) 22 Qb6 ! Be7 23 R X e4
ever, is refuted by 23 Nd5 !, when White re­ Q x e4 24 N x d6 + B X d6 25 Qd8 mate.
mains with a material advantage, for example : But let us return to the game. Things did
(a) 23 . . . e X d5 24 B X e7 ReS 25 e X d5 not get as far as a time scramble.
N X d5 26 Na5 (26 NX e5 ? Qc7!) 26 . . . Ne3
19 . .. Nc5
27 N X c6 N X d1 28 Na5, and White is a
pawn up. The reader will already have met this
{b) 23 . . . B X d6 24 N X f6 + , with a clear position in the section devoted to combina­
advantage. tions on the theme of diversion (p.7). M­
Relatively best was 19 . . . Nd4, when Keres, ter 20 N x e5 ! Kotov resigned-the knight
who was short of time, would have had a more cannot be taken because of mate at d8.
difficult task. Interesting complications arise Yes, playing the Sicilian Defence against
after 20 Nd5 ! NX d5 21 N x e5 ! , for example : Keres was an extremely dangerous business !
{a) 21 . . . d X e5 22 Q X d4 ! e X d4 23
eX d5 + , with a decisive material advantage, Keres-Scbmid
since 23 . . . Be7 24 d X c6 B X c6 fails to 25 Zurich, 1961
Bb4. Alekhine's Defence
(b) 21 . . . Qc5 22 Nc4. If now 22 . . . Be7, 1 e4 Nf6
then simply 23 Bg2. Mter the knight moves
This opening bears the name of the Russian
from d5, White regains his piece by 24 Bb6
World Champion, although it had been
and 25 B X d4, remaining a pawn up with an
employed earlier by the Moscow player M.
excellent position. If instead 23 . . . Nc6, then
Klyatsky. The idea of 1 . . . Nf6 is to provoke
24 e X d5 N x a5 25 Qe2 0-0 26 Q X e7
a further advance of White's central pawns,
B X d5 27 B X d5 Q X d5 28 Qx d6, with an
so as to then undermine and weaken them.
extra pawn and winning chances.
It remains for us to analyze 20 . . . N X e4 2 e5 Nd5
(instead of 20 . . . NX d5), with the idea after 3 Nc3
2 1 RX e4 of taking the knight at d5.
The most restrained continuation. The
(See diagram next column) basic idea of Alekhine's Defence is vividly
21 Q X d4 Q X d5 (after 21 . . . exd4 22 displayed in the so-called Four Pawns
RX e4+ Be7 23 RX e7 + Kf8 24 Bg2 Black's Attack : 3 c4 Nb6 4 d4 d6 5 f4.

140
 Attack

3 ... Nx c3 Of course, not 9 . . . B X b5 ? 10 Q X b5 + ,

winning the b7 pawn.
The alternative is 3 . . . e6, for example :
9 . . . f6 was possible, not fearing the weaken­
4 N X d5 e X d5 5 d4 d6 6 Nf3 Nc6 7 Be2 Be7
ing of the a2-g8 diagonal, although in this
8 Bf4 0-0 9 0-0 f6 ! 10 e X f6 B X f6, as in Sa­
case too the game develops in White's favour.
misch-Alekhine (Budapest, 1 92 1), or 4 d4 d6
Thus in a game Markland-Korchnoi (Has­
5 Nf3 Nc6 6 Bb5 N X c3 7 b X c3 Bd7 fol­
tings 1 971/72) played 10 years later, after
lowed by . . . d x e5-in both cases with
10 Qh5+ (much stronger than 10 BXd7+
roughly equal chances.
Q x d7 11 Qe3 e5) 10 . . . g6 1 1 Qe2 e5 12 Be3
4 d X c3 Bd6 13 0-0-0 (13 Bc4 Qe7) Black had to
(I3 . . . 0-0 is unpleas­
waste time on 13 . . . b6
With which pawn is it best to take on
antly met by 14 Bc4+ and 15 Bd5!, while
c3-the b-pawn (capturing towards the centre,
if 13 . . . Qe7 14 BXd7+ Qx d7, then 15 Qf3),
and then playing /2-/4 or d2-d4 with the aim
and after 14 f4 0-Q 1 5 fX e5 B X b5 16 Q X b5
of maintaining the e5 outpost), or the d-pawn
fX e5 his position was weakened.
(with the idea of rapid development and of
After the move played Black begins to
exploiting the open file) ? The theorists' de­
experience serious difficulties.
bate on this question is still going on. Each
plan has its pros and cons. 10 Bc4 Qb8
Keres gives preference to free development.
Also in White's favour is 10 . . . f6 1 1 Qe2,

4 ... d6 and if 1 1 . . . e5-12 f4.

5 Nf3 Nc6 By artificial means Black attempts to drive

away (or exchange) the enemy queen. Howev­
Black a voids the exchange on e5, not er, it will be readily apparent that, by avoiding
wishing to lose the right to castle. But, as the exchange of white-squared bishops, Black
later games showed, the variation 5 . . . d X e5 has given his opponent a marked advantage :
6 Q X d8 + K X d8 7 N x e5 Ke8 8 Bc4 e6 is the bishop at c4 is much more active than its
not dangerous for Black. White, it is true, opposite number.
has a lead in development of two extra tempi,
11 Qe4 e6
but how is he to exploit this ? At the same time
Black has his own trumps-a pawn majority
w
on the K-side (four pawns against three),
whereas on the Q-side White's pawn majority
is devalued by the doubled pawns. After the
possible 9 0-0 Bd6 1 0 Re1 Nd7 Black has a
good position.

6 Bb5 Bd7
7 Qe2

Not objecting to exchanges, Keres prepares

to castle long.
12 Bg5!
7 ... N X e5
8 N x e5 d X e5 A subtle move, by which Keres hinders
9 Q X e5 c6 Black's intended Q-side castling.

141
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

12 . . . h6 19 Rhd1 b6
13 Bh4 Bd6
Otherwise he cannot castle.
On 13 . . . g5 ? Keres would probably have
20 QhS 0-0-0
continued 1 4 Rd1 (14 . . . gXh4 15 Qd4!,
simultaneously threatening mate and the rook Black has achieved his aim, but at too high
at h8), while 1 3 . . . Be7 is strongly met by a price. White wins the f7 pawn, and even on
14 B X e7 and 15 0-0-0. the Q-side the black king does not find any
shelter. Note that 20 . . . 0-0 loses instantly to
14 0-0-0 Qc7
21 Kbl Bc8 22 Rd4.
It remains for Black to play . . . g5, when he And now consider how White should
will be able to castle long . . . continue the attack after 20 . . . Rd8. (For the
answer cf. p. 1 79, No. 9).
1S Qd4 !

A manoeuvre which hinders castling on 21 Ba6+ Kc7

either side I Both the bishop and the g-pawn 22 g3 Qf5
are attacked, so that Black's reply is forced. 23 Q X f7 e5
24 Rd6! Rh7
1S • . . BeS
16 QcS! Bf6 w

16 . . . g5 does nothing to ease Black's

position. Mter 1 7 Bg3 B X g3 1 8 h X g3 b6
1 9 Qd4 1 (but not 19 QXg5 ? h X g5 20
RXh8+ Ke7 21 R X a8 in view of 21 . . .
Bc8!) 1 9 . . 0-0-0 20 Qg7 ! White wins one of
.

the pawns.

17 B X f6 Qf4+

Mter 1 7 . . . g X f6 1 8 Rd2, and if 1 8 . . . b6

1 9 Qh5, Black still cannot castle. 2S R x c6 + !

18 Rd2 Black had no satisfactory defence against

this combinational blow. Mter 24 . . . c5,
Not only does the pin on White's rook not
25 Qd5 is immediately decisive.
lose him time, but, on the contrary, in this
way he gains an important tempo I Keres has 2S . • . Kb8
no intention of later moving his king to b l .
Very soon the black queen will be forced to Mter 25 . . . K X c6 Black is mated by 26
move, and White will double rooks with Qc4.
decisive effect.
26 Qd5 Q X f2
18 . . . gXf6 27 Qd6 + Ka8
28 Bb7+ ! K X b7
If 1 8 . . . Q x f6, then, of course, 19 Rhdl b6
29 Rc6+
20 Qd6 Rd8 (20 . . {}-()-() ? 21 Ba6
. mate)
2 1 Qc7, when things are bad for Black : Black resigns (29 . . . Ka8 30 Qd5+ , or
2 1 . . . Qe7 loses to 22 Ba6. 29 . . . Ka6 30 Qa3+ and 31 c4 mate).

142
 Attack

Keres-Reshevsky Kel ! (18 Ke2 ? Bg4+ and 1() . . . Rxd8)

AVRO-Toumament, Holland, 1938 1 8 . . . Bf2+ 19 Kf1 Bc5 + , with a draw.
Reshevsky preferred to evict the knight
from d4.

10 . . . c5

A serious, if not decisive mistake. The

white knight now transfers to f4, from where
it will exert strong pressure on d5. Black also
has to reckon with the threat of a check at
h5, and in some cases with e5-e6.

11 Ne2 c6

If 1 1 . . . Bb7, then 12 Nf4 g6 (preventing

In this opening position White, of course,
13 Qh5+ ) 13 f3 Ng5 14 e6 ! with the terrible
will not tolerate the knight at e4, but will
threat of 15 h4. However, even after the move
drive it away by f2-f3. After . . . Ng5 he will
made by Reshevsky, he is subject to roughly
either exchange his bishop for it, or will
the same degree of danger.
allow the knight to take up a blockading post
The least evil was 1 1 . . . d4, although even
at e6.
then after 12 c3 ! d X c3 (bad is 12 . . d3 ? 13
Now the most logical move was 10 . . . Bc5,
.

Nf.f) 13 NbX c3 N X c3 14 N X c3 the advan­

a possible continuation being 1 1 c3 0-0
tage remains with White.
12 f3 Ng5.
Highly interesting variations arise after 12 Nf4 g6
1 1 f3 and 1 1 Be3 : 13 c4!
(a) 1 1 f3 Qh4 12 c3 (if 12 fX e4, then
This way, rather than 13 f3 Ng5 14 e6
12 . . . BX d4+) 12 . . . Nf2 1 3 g3 (the only
(as in the variation mentioned in the previous
way, since 13 Qd2 meets with an elegant
note), when Black replies 14 . . . Bd6, and if
refutation-13 . . Nd3!) 1 3 . . . Qh5 (but not
15 h4 Qc7 !
.

13 . . . NX d1 14 gX h4, when the black knight

perishes in the enemy position) 14 K X f2 13 . . . d4
Q X h2+ 15 Ke3, with an extremely complex
Or 13 . . . d X c4 14 Qa4 !, with a clear
and unclear position. If White declines the
advantage to White.
sacri:fice-14 Qe2 (instead of 14 KX/2) Black
has a dangerous initiative after 14 . . . Nh3 + 14 Qa4 Bb7
15 Kg2 f4 !
Even worse for Black is 14 . . . Qd7 15 f3
(12 BX/4 0-0
(b) 1 1 Be3 f4 ! 12 N X c6
Ng5 16 e6 Qb7 1 7 h4 with a completely won
13 Be3 meets with a combination : 13 . . .
position for White (as occurred in a game
NX/2 ! 14 BX/2 R X/2 15 KX/2 Qh4+ 16
Ragozin-Tolush, played in the USSR in the
Ke3 BXd4+ etc.) 12 . . . fxe3 13 N X d8
same year).
e x f2+ 1 4 Kfl fX e l = Q + 1 5 K X e 1 Bf2+ 16
The other ways of defending c6 were by
Kf1 Rf8. For his sacrificed queen Black has a
1 4 . . . Qc7 and 1 4 . . . Qb6, both of which are
rook and minor piece, plus a continuing
met by 15 f3 Ng5 16 Nd5 !
attack. However, after 1 7 Q X d5 he has no
more than perpetual check : 1 7 . . . Bc5 + 1 8 15 f3 Ng5

143
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

16 h4 Nf7 B X cl 26 R X c1 , and Black loses first his

17 e6 pawn at c5, and then the one at d4. In this
game the bishop at b7, which is running up
B against its own pawns, is from beginning to
end assigned the role of an observer.

22 . . . g4
23 Nfl
The h2 square is securely defended, and
Black's attack parried.

23 ... Re4
24 Nf2 R X e1
25 Q X e1 Re8
17 . . . Q X h4 26 Qd1 Qh6
27 Nd3 Bc8
Reluctantly, Reshevsky decides to sac­ 28 Bd2 Qh4
rifice his knight. Why did he reject 1 7 . . . Nd6 ? 29 Qc2 Re2
(for the answer cf. p. 1 79, No. 10).
An instance when an invasion of the second
18 e X f7+ K X f7 rank is quite ineffective. 29 . . . Re4 would have
set White slightly more problems, but even
For the knight Black has gained two pawns
then, by transferring his bishop to g3 and
plus some hopes of an attack. See how Keres
then playing Rel and Nd2, Keres would all
neutralizes the threats and realizes his
the same have forced the exchange of rooks.
advantage.

19 Nd3 ! 30 Re1 RX e1
31 B x e1 Qe7
19 Qdl is strongly met by 1 9 . . . Bd6 ! 32 Qd2 h5
19 . . . Bd6 w
20 f4

The dangerous diagonal is blocked. Now

White has to include his queen in the defence
and complete his development.

20 . . . Rae8

The immediate 20 . . . g5 could have been

met either by 21 Qdl , or by 21 Nd2 (21 . . .

gX/4 22 Nf3).

21 Qd1 g5 33 Ne5+
22 Nd2 The most efficient. The knight cannot be
taken, so that the game is over. Winning a
Keres calmly develops his Q-side. If now
pawn by 33 . . . B x e5 34 fx e5 Q x e5 allows
22 . . . B X f4, then 23 Nf3 RX e l + (otherwise
the invasion of the white pieces after 35 Bg3 !
after BX/4 the blocked black pawns are
quickly lost) 24 Qx e l Qx e l + 25 Nfx e 1 33 . . . Kg7

144
 Attack

34 Qe2 h4 B
35 Nd2

For 'complete satisfaction' it remains for

White to transfer this knight to d3, and then
to attack the c5 pawn with bishop and queen.
Black has no way of preventing this regroup­
ing.
35 ... Bd7
36 Nb3 Be8
37 Ncl Bf7
38 b3 Bh5
Black is well prepared for the opening of the
39 Ncd3 Kh6
central files, what with his good development,
40 g3
the opponent's weakness on the g l -a 7
Now White can concern himself with the diagonal (the consequence off2-f3), and also
c5 pawn. the not altogether happy position of the white
queen on the d-file.
40 . . . h3
41 Qb2 Be8 21 c X dS c X dS
42 Qa3 Qa7 22 e5
43 Qa5 Be7,
White's desire to avoid the opening of the
and without waiting for the transfer of the d-file is understandable. On 22 e x d5 there
bishop to a3, Black resigned . would have followed 22 . . . N X d5 23 B X g7
K X g7, when the threat of 24 . . . Qc5+ and
Seizing the initiative in the middlegame the opposition of queen and rook on the
central file, are unpleasant for White.
We will be talking here about positions
of dynamic equilibrium, i.e. those in which 22 . . . Ne4! ?
the chances and counter-chances of the two
This reply was unforeseen by White. If now
sides balance each other. We will begin at
23 fX e4 d x e4 24 Qe3, then 24 . . . e x d3
the point when one of the players has the
25 RX d3 RX d3 26 Q X d3 B X a2 27 Ral
opportunity of taking the initiative by ener­
Rd8 ! 28 Qe3 (also after 28 Nd4 Bd5 29
getic means, and of giving the play a decisive
R X a7 Q X e5 30 Nc6 Qg5 or 30 Nf3 Qb8
turn.
Black is a pawn up) 28 . . . Bc4, and Black
wins a pawn, since 29 R X a 7 ? fails to
Moiseyev-Keres 29 . . . B x e2 (30 Q X e2 Qc5+ ).
19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951 Also in Black's favour is 23 B X e4 d X e4

(See diagram next column) 24 Qe3 e X f3, when his bishops are very
active.
Having chosen a restrained plan of devel­
opment, Black's strategy has been based on 23 Qc2 NX c3
the preparation of a pawn counter in the 24 NX c3'?
centre. At last he has the opportunity to
As Moiseyev indicated after the game,
make a long-planned move.
24 QX c3 was essential. The positional
20 . . . d5 threat of 25 Nd4 (a blockading knight in

145
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

front of an isolated pawn) and then f3-f4 31 Re3 Qh4+

would have forced Black to act energetical­ 32 g3
ly-he would have immediately had to give
On 32 Ke2 perfectly adequate is 32 . . .
up his central pawn (24 . . . d4 25 NX d4
B X e3.
BX a2, after which 26 f4 is all right for
White), or else play 24 . . . Qg5, and if 25 f4 d4, White resigns.
but even then after 26 Qb4 White's position 32 • . • Qb2+
is perfectly satisfactory. 33 Kel Qgl+
24 • . • Qb4!
Stahlberg-Keres
Threatening not only 25 . . . d4, but also Bad Nauheim, 1936
the transference of the queen to the K-side.
B
25 Nb5

If 25 a3, then 25 . . . Qd4+ 26 Khl

(26 Kfl Q/4) 26 . . . B x e5, and if 27 B X g6
....2....:.. 1
• • • Qf4 ! 28 Bh7+ Kh8 29 g3 Q X f3 + ,
with a clear advantage to Black.

25 . . . Bd7
26 a3 Qf4

It is well known that a side which has the

advantage of the two bishops should attempt
to free them. And on the contrary : if the
opponent has two bishops, one should aim
to keep the game closed, and to restrict their
range of action. Meanwhile, by playing
1 5 . . . d4, Keres is acting contrary to the rules.
What is the point ?
27 Nd6 Earlier it was stated that the laws of chess
strategy, formulated in general terms, are
The only chance of confusing matters,
relative. Otherwise playing chess would be
since the e5 pawn is doomed. But now, by
too easy-one would merely have to master
sacrificing the exchange, Keres builds up an
these rules.
irresistible attack.
Open diagonals ensure bishops-which
27 . . . B X e5 are long-range pieces-operational scope.
28 Nx es Q X b2 + The question is which diagonals are controlled
29 Kfl by the bishops, and how important these
diagonals are in the given, specific situation.
If29 Kf2, then 29 . . . Bd4+ .
Very soon it becomes clear that the masters
29 . . . Qhl+ in the resulting open position are not the
30 Kf2 Bd4+ bishops, but the centralized knights. This is

146
 Attack
ensured by the centralization and excellent
development of all the other black pieces.
16 e X d4
After 16 c X d4 cX d4 1 7 e4 d3 1 8 Ba4 Nd7
Black has a strong passed pawn.
16 . . . c X d4
17 RX e8+
A necessary exchange, since 1 7 c X d4 fails
to 1 7 . . . Q X d4+ ! (18 Q X d4 Rx el + 19
Kf2 NX d4).
17 . . . Q x es
18 c X d4 N X d4
At d4 the knight has taken up an ideal
position (19 Q X d4 ? Qel + ), whereas the
'proud' bishop at c2 has no decent square.
1 9 Bd3 leads to the loss of a piece after 1 9
. . . B x d3 20 Q x d3 Qe1 + 21 Qfl Q x fl +
22 K X fl (22 NXfl Ne2+ ) 22 . . . Nb3,
while 19 Be4 is strongly met by 1 9 . . . Rd8 !
with the threat of 20 . . . Ne2+ .
19 Ba4
On the edge of the board the bishop proves
to be far away from the main events.
19 . . . Qe5!
Not only centralizing the queen, but also
threatening to move the knight from d4.
20 Rb1
The threat was 20 . . . N X f3 + or 20 . . .
Ne2+ .
20 . . . Nd5!
It is already apparent that Keres's decision
was correct. His knights, supported by the
other pieces, dominate the entire board.
The threat is 2 1 . . . Nc3 with an immediate
win, and if 2 1 Ne4, then 2 1 . . . Be2 !, luring
the queen into a fork : 22 Qd2 B X f3 ! The
attempt to complicate the play by 23 Ng5
leads to a won position for Black after
147
23 . . . Be4 24 N X e4 25 Rb2 Ne2+ or 25
Ral Nc3 !
21 Bb2 Nc3
22 B X c3 RX c3
23 Kh1
B
By this king move White has indirectly
defended his a-pawn, since on 23 . . . R X a3 ? ?
there follows 24 Q X d4 !-a tactical stroke
on the theme of diversion. This means that
Black must remove the weakness of his back
rank.
23 . . . h5!
Keres not only makes an escape square for
his king, but also threatens by the further
advance of this pawn to break up the enemy
king's pawn screen. If now White moves
his knight-24 Ne4, then 24 . . . Be2 25 Qd2
(or 25 Qdl, or 25 Qgl) 25 . . . N x f3 !
24 Bd7
In defending against . . . h4-h3 (24 . . . h4
25 Ne4), Stahlberg overlooks another strong
move after 24 . . . h4 25 Ne4-25 . . . Be2, fol­
lowed by a deadly blow at f3. Keres, however,
does not notice this possibility, and attacks
f3 from the other side.
24 . . . Rd3
25 Qa4
On 25 Qe1 the simplest is 25 . . . Q X e l +
26 RX e l g6, when White cannot save the
a-pawn (27 a4? or 27 Ral ?-27 . . . Nc2).
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

25 . . . Bb7 28 . . . R X e4!
26 Ne4? 29 R X e4 d5
30 Q x a6 dXe4
This allows a crushing tactical stroke.
31 Be3
Essential was 26 Qc4, when the knight
sacrifice at f3 would not have worked. As a result of this simple operation Black
There could have followed 26 . . . Qe3 27 Nfl, has gained a passed e-pawn, which is a great­
and if 27 . . . Qe2-28 Be8 R x f3 29 Q x e2 er achievement than White's creation of a
N X e2 30 Nd2. passed a-pawn. But Black's main achievement
26 . . . B x e4 is that all his pieces (and also the e-pawn) are
27 fX e4 ready to join the attack.

B 31 . . . Qg4!

Threatening 32 . . . Nh4, not only with an

attack on g2, but also in some cases the
transfer of the knight to f5 in combination
with . . . Rd3.
The attempt to return the queen to e2-32 h3
Qg3 33 Qe2 leaves White in a desperate
position after 33 . . . Nh4. The threat of
34 . . . Nf3 + forces him either to move his
king-34 Kfl, when there follows 34 . . .
27 . . . Nf3 ! N X g2 35 Q X g2 Q x e3, with a clear advan­
tage, or to vacate f1 for his king by 34 Rf2,
White resigns. The threat of mate at h2
when there comes 34 . . . Rd3 ! (less clear is
forces him to take the knight, but then the
34 . . . Nf3+ 35 Kfl Qh2 36 RX/3 eXf3
second rank is denuded, and mate follows
37 QX/3 Qhl + 38 Bgl), and when the bishop
after 28 . . . Rd2.
moves, 35 . . . f5 sets White insoluble problems.

Euwe-Keres 32 Qc4
Match-Tournamentfor the World Is the e4 pawn attacked ?
Championship, 1948 32 • • • Rd3 !
B No, for the moment it is not attacked.
On 33 Q X e4 ? there follows 33 . . . Qe2,
winning the pinned bishop.
33 Bel
If 33 Rel , then 33 . . . f5 (34 Q x c7 Nh4,·
34g3 Nh4).
(See diagram next column)
33 . . . Nh4 !

Including the knight in the attack is more

By a temporary rook sacrifice Black important than the e4 pawn ! The co-ordina­
achieves some significant positional and tion of the three black pieces creates decisive
tactical gains. threats.

148
 Attack

B B

34 Q X e4+
Rde7 ! It turns out that White has a weak
There is no choice, since on 34 Qc2 there back rank-the queen cannot be taken be­
follows 34 . . . f5 followed by 35 . . . Rc3 or cause of mate, and therefore the bishop
35 . . . e3. has to be retreated to c4.
34 . . . f5 Even so, White should have gone in for this
35 Qb7 c6 variation. After the possible continuation
23 Bc4 Rei + 24 RX e l RX e l + 25 Bfl
By luring the enemy queen onto the c-file,
Qbl 26 Qc4 White has defended his bishop,
Keres wins a piece for two pawns.
and is in turn threatening to attack f7 by
36 Q X c6 Rd7, and 26 . . . B X b2 27 Rd7 Qf5 28 R X b7
B leads to a roughly equal position.

22 g3

After this there will be no mate at el, and

thus White renews his threat.

22 . . . Bg5 !

Keres 'invites' his opponent to play 23

Be6 . . .

We have reached a position in which Black
decided the game within a few moves
(cf. p.7).
Bobotsov-Keres
Beverwijk, 1964
(See diagram next column)
If it were White to move, he would win the
exchange by the elegant Be6. Keres parries
this threat by tactical means.
21 . . . ReS !
Now 22 Be6 does not win in view of 22 . . .
23 f4
On 23 Be6 ? Keres would have continued
23 . . . RX e6 24 R X d7 Re2 ! (note that, with
the black bishop at f6, this tactical stroke
would not have worked, since f7 would have
been undefended). In view of the threat of
mate, White loses his rook at d7, and comes
out a piece down.
Of course, the Bulgarian grandmaster
played 23 f4 very much against his will .
He rejected 23 Rd3, not wishing to allow the
enemy rook onto his second rank : 23 . . . Re2
24 Rfl Bf6 !
But now an important diagonal is denuded�

149
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

and Black's bishop acquires formidable 28 Q X d3 (mate results from 28 R X d3

strength. Rel + 29 Kg2 Rgl) 28 . . . Rel + 29 Kg2
Rgl + , winning the queen.
B White decides to sell his life as dearly as
possible.

27 Q X b6 RX d3

This is much more convincing than 27 . . .

a X b6 28 B X e2.

28 Qd8+ RXd8
29 R X d8+ Kg7
30 B X e2

For his queen White now has rook and

23 . . . Bd8 ! bishop, but his pieces are lacking in co­
ordination, as is revealed by Keres's next
On the a7-gl diagonal the black bishop
move which leads to the win of a pawn.
has no opponent. In such situations (with
opposite-coloured bishops) an attack is espe­ 30 • . . Qe6
cially dangerous. 31 Kf1 Q X a2

24 Radl Ba5 32 Rd2 Qa5

33 Kel Qc5
First the rook is driven off the second rank. 34 Bfl a5
25 Rd3 35 Ke2 b5

25 Rc2 is totally bad. Black continues the Black easily realizes his Q-side pawn
attack by 25 . . . Bb6 + 26 Kg2 Re3 ! 27 Rc3 majority.
(27 Qc4 Rc7) 27 . . . Re2+ 28 Khl (or 28 Kfl a4
36 Kdl
Rf2+ 29 Kel Re7+) 28 . . . Qh3, and mates. b4
37 Bd3
25 • .. Re2 38 Bbl Qgl +
26 Bf3 Bb6+
If 39 Kc2, then 39 . . . b3 + , but otherwise
The white king is without defence. If 27 the K-side pawns are lost.
Khl (27 Kfl Rf2 + ), then 27 . . . RX d3 White resigns.

150
 Defence and counter-attack
Active or passive?
The reader will now have looked through
a number of examples of crushing attacks and
spectacular combinations, breaking down the
opponent's defences. To attack, sacrifice and
conquer-it is so attractive and romantic.
But to frustrate the opponent's plans, parry
his threats, and patiently defend-this is
somehow tedious and dull. It is no accident
that the majority of spectators are decidedly
on the side of the attacker.
However, let us ignore spectators and fans
for the moment. What is most dear to the
observer is balancing on the edge of the chess
abyss. The ideal of the fan is attack at all
costs, without worrying about making sacri­
fices. In short, "come on, come on", as in an
adventure film, so as to take your breath
away . . .
But from the practical point of view, for
those who play, and do not watch from the
side : what in fact is more expedient-to
attack or to defend ?
In an abstract form, without taking account
of the specific situation, this question cannot
be answered. It can only be stated that
passive defence, without any prospect of
counter-play, is not to anyone's taste. It is
another matter with active defence, in which
the defender bases his plan on the preparation
of counter-action, when in the position
there are objective preconditions for this.
If by expediency one means degree of risk,
then it is of course more convenient to attack
when the opponent has not the slightest hope
of counter-play. But to obtain only those
11 151
positions which one likes is by no means
always possible. Even for World Cham­
pions.
Of course, the stronger the player, the more
developed is his sense of danger-the ability
to foresee in advance an unfavourable turn
of events. This sense of danger-a part of
chess intuition-in the majority of cases
enables him to avoid difficult positions and
by means of imperceptible prophylactic
measures to direct the game along a conveni­
ent course. Nevertheless, even with strong
players the game does not always develop
in the way that they would like. Particularly
when they meet with opponents of roughly
the same standard.
Anyone wishing to gain genuine successes
in chess must be able to do everything, or
nearly everything : to master not only the
art of attacking, but also to defend stubbornly
and to counter-attack.
Thus defence may be passive (through
necessity), or else active, at the basis of
which lies a counter-plan and tactical play.
Passive defence is restricted to restraining
the opponent, who is the master of the posi­
tion, and consists of the parrying of immediate
threats, and prophylaxis against potential
threats. One of the most frequently occurring
plans is a reduction in the attacking forces
by means of simplification (exchanges).
If you are forced to defend passively, you
should exploit any delay by your opponent
-time spent on bringing up reserves into
the attack, and on regrouping of the pieces.
A respite granted in the course of an attack
can be used by the defender to switch from
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

passive to active defence, i.e. for the prepara­ Against a flank attack-counter-play in the
tion of a counter-attack. centre!
In active defence we can distinguish : Browne-Keres
(1) Defensive measures i n the sector under Vancouver, 1975
attack, combined with counter-play on the B
other flank. For example, the preparation
and carrying out of operations on the Q-side
in answer to an offensive by the opponent
on the K-side. Or-action in the centre in
answer to a flank attack. According to the
teachings of the first World Champion,
Wilhelm Steinitz-the founder of the posi­
tional school-a secure centre and a spatial
advantage are preconditions for a successful
flank attack. Hence the defensive rule : a flank
White's pieces are somewhat more actively
attack should be met by active play in the
placed, and with his next move Keres simpli­
centre.
fies the position.
(2) Parrying of the attack and the subse­
quent seizure of the initiative on the same sec­ 12 ... Ng4
tor where the opponent is attacking. 13 B X e7 Nx e7
The choice of defensive means depends 14 N X g4 Bx bs
on the nature of the position ; the greater 15 Nh4 Bd7
the opponent's advantage (of course, we are 16 Re3
not talking of a material advantage), the B
more modest, the more restrained the defen­
sive measures. But if the attack undertaken
is positionally unfounded, the defender is
simply bound to play actively, so as not only
to parry the insufficiently prepared attack,
but also to seize the initiative, and "to punish
the opponent for his audacity". In all instan­
ces the defence should be flexible, i.e. both
positional and tactical means should be used.
In especially difficult positions, when by
Browne prepares an attack on the K-side.
normal methods the game can no longer be
In accordance with the rules of chess strategy,
saved, it is legitimate to employ tactical
Keres replies with a counter-blow in the
tricks and traps-i.e. actions involving an
centre, but first he makes a regrouping
obvious risk, and hoping for an error by the
necessary for the defence of his K-side.
opponent.
Using specific examples, we will analyze 16 . . . Kh7 !
certain methods of active defence. 17 Rg3 Ng8
18 Nf3 BX g4
Black's task is to exchange minor pieces,
and, after parrying the threats on the K-side,
leave the opponent with his rook out of play.

1 52
 Defence and Counter-attack

Browne's stubbornness in aiming for an attack 26 . • • Re6 !

allows Keres to put his plan completely into
The knight has to be defended, in view of
effect.
the threat of27 N X h6+ .
19 R X g4 Nf6
27 Rg3 g6
The h6 square is safeguarded, and the 28 Rf1
knight again occupies an active position.
B
20 Rh4 Kg8
21 Rh3

28 • . . Q£4 !

On the direct 28 . . . Q X b2 there would

have followed 29 Qe3 ! But now White's
21 • • . d5! threats are parried, and after enforced ex­
changes he loses material.
On the K-side Black has defended every­
thing, and in the centre he has an undisputed 29 Rd1
advantage, since the white rook has volun­ If29 Rel , then 29 . . . N x e4-the rook at
tarily withdrawn onto the wing.
e l cannot leave the back rank.
22 Qe2 Qd7 29 • • • Ree8
23 Nh4
The knight no longer needs defending,
Here White could have given up his attack whereas this rook will be needed on the
and held the defence by 23 Nd2, but Browne d-file.
is obstinate . . .
30 Ne7+ Kg7
23 . . . d X e4 31 Nd5
24 d X e4 Rad8
White does not succeed in blocking the
White's K-side manoeuvres have still not file.
led to anything, and in the meantime Black
is already prepared for an invasion along the 31 . . . Q x £3
d-file. 32 RX£3
If 32 g X f3, then 32 . . . Nh5 33 Rg4 c6
25 N£5 Qd2
34 Ne3 RX d l + 35 N X d l Rd8 36 Ne3
26 Q£3
Rd2, or 36 . . . Nf4, with an easy win.
Here White still had an opportunity of After the capture with his rook White
switching to defence by 26 Re3, with good loses his e-pawn, and his rook, which is stuck
drawing chances. on the K-side, comes under attack.

1 1* 153
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

32 ... c6 e-pawn (after . . . f6). It is not a question of

33 Ne3 R X d1 + the pawn, but of control over the e5 square !
39 Nx d1 Rd8 Such a plan was carried out by Keres in a
35 Ne3 N x e4 number of games at that time.

The game is over. The finish was : 4 ... Qb6

5 Bd3 cX d4
36 h3 Ng5
37 Rg3 f5 5 . . c4? would merely reinforce White's
.

38 NXf5+ gXf5 centre.

39 h4 Kg6
6 0-0 Nd7
40 h X g5 h X g5
41 Rh3 f4 6 . . . Nc6 looks more natural, as it does not
42 g3 Kf5 block the development of his queen's bishop.
43 f3 Botvinnik then used to play . . . Nge7-g6,
. . . Be? and . . . f6.
No better was 43 Rh? f3 44 RX b7 Rdl +
Stahlberg decided to attack the e5 outpost
45 Kh2 Rfl etc.
in another way : by transferring his king's
43 . . . Rd1 + knight to c6. With his knights at d7 and c6,
White resigns. he then fianchettoes his king's bishop.

This was Keres's last game. His last victory 7 Nbd2 Ne7
in his last tournament. 8 Nb3 Nc6
9 Re1 g6
Defence by tactical means 10 Bf4 B g7
11 Qd2
Keres-Stahlberg
Warsaw Olympiad, 1935 White has harmoniously deployed his for­
French Defence ces, and his e5 pawn is securely defended.
Black's extra pawn, which has no pawn sup­
1 e4 e6
port, is under constant observation.
2 d4 d5
3 e5 c5 11 . . . 0-0
4 Nf3 12 h4 Qc7

Another way of handling this variation is
to defend the pawn centre by 4 c3. Then, by
intensifying the pressure on d4 by 4 . . . Qb6,
. . . Nc6 followed by . . . Nge7 and . . . c X d4,
Black obtains a perfectly satisfactory posi­
tion.
In the opinion of Nimzowitsch, success for
White in this variation is not bound to in­
volve defending his d-pawn-it can perfectly
well be sacrificed. What is important is to
maintain the outpost at e5, for which the
support of the pieces is quite sufficient. White
also does not have to fear the exchange of his
Yet another attack, the fourth, on the e5
pawn. But White also has a fourth defence.
Therefore it would have been better to offer
the immediate exchange by 12 . . . f6. After
1 3 e X f6 N X f6 White controls the key e5
square, and the e6 pawn remains backward,
but . . . Bd7 and . . . Rae8 would have given
Black a sound position.
13 Qe2 f6
This leads to wild complications, in which
exact calculation is impossible. However,
there was no longer any positional solution.

1 54
 Defence and Counter-attack

Keres was threatening by 14 Bg3 to prevent B

. . . f6.

14 eXf6 Q x f4
15 Q X e6+ Rf7
16 fX g7

Thus, 23 . . . Qg4+ 24 Kf1, and now :

16 . . . NdeS
By this and the subsequent sacrifices,
Stahlberg hopes for an attack. His queen's
bishop comes into play, and on the K-side
Black has a serious advantage in force. Jump­
ing ahead a little, we should remark that
intuition did not deceive Keres . . .
The alternative for Black was 16 . . . Nf6,
and on 17 Qe2-17 . . . Bg4. But then White
has the strong reply 1 8 Qd2 ! , for example :
18 . . . Q X d2 19 NbX d2, with the better
chances in view of the weakness of Black's
doubled d-pawns.
(a) 24 . . . Re7 25 Qb8 ! Qh3 + 26 Kgl
Qg4+ 27 Qg3, and White is a bishop up.
(b) 24 . . . Qh3 + 25 Kel (after 25 Ke2
Qg4+ I 26 Kd2 Black plays 26 . . . Qb4+ !)
25 . . . Qhl + (if 25 . . . Re7+ , then 26 Kd2)
26 Bfl Re7 + 27 Kd2 Qe4 28 c3 Qf4+ 29
Kc2 Qf5 + 30 Kb3, and the white king escapes
from the pursuit. This means that White re­
tains his material advantage.
In such a complicated position other
continuations are also possible. In a practical
game, rather than analysis, to calculate to
the end all the consequences of the complica­
tions would be extremely difficult, if at all
possible.
But now let us see what happened in the
game.

17 Qe8+ KgX 7
18 R X eS !

Keres is not afraid of a discovered attack

by the black bishop !

18 . . . Bh3

Also of interest is the other bishop move,

1 8 . . . Bg4, and if 19 Q X a8-19 . . . N X e5
(if 19 . . . BX/3, then 20 Rg5!). But then
20 Nb X d4 ! N X f3 + 21 N X f3 B X f3 22
19 Q x a8 Nx es
g X f3 Q X f3 23 Q x a7. In calculating this
variation, both players had to answer the But why not 19 . . . B X g2 (and on 20 KXg2
question : does Black (having sacrificed a -20 . . . QX/3+ ) ?
bishop) have a perpetual check ? Because White is not obliged to take the

155
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

rook-he has the excellent tactical reply 20 attack ! Keres exploits the open position of
Rf5 ! With what should Black take the rook ? the black king to create direct threats.
(a) 20 . . . g Xf5 2 1 Nc5 ! Q X f3 (or 21 . .
24 . . g5
.

Qg4 22 Ne6+ Kf6 23 Nh2) 22 Ne6+ Kf6 23

•

25 Nd2 Qh6
Rel !, and it is no longer Black, but White,
who has the attack (the threat is 24 Qh8 + ). Played with the aim of preventing the trans­
(b) 20 . . . RX f5 2 1 B X f5 B X f3 22 Q X b7 + fer of the knight to f3. In turn, Black threat­
Kh6 2 3 Bh3 Q X h4 24 Qc8, and White ens to play . . . g4. But how terrible is this
wins. threat?
(c) Also bad for Black is 20 . . . Qg4 2 1
w
RXf7+ K X f7 22 Ng5+ .
20 Qe8 !

A highly important defensive resource.

20 . . . Nc6

On 20 . . . N X f3+ 21 g X f3 Q X f3 Keres
would have played 22 Qe5+ and 23 Qg3,
parrying the threats and remaining a knight
up.
How Keres exploited his advantage, the
w reader already knows from the chapter 'The
calculation of variations' (p.34).

Resourcefulness in a difficult position

Euwe-Keres
AVRO-Tournament, Holland, 1938
B

21 Q X £7 + !

A sacrifice planned beforehand, by which

Keres halts the attack.
21 . . . KX£7

Or 2 1 . . . Q x f7 22 Ng5 and N X h3.

22 Ng5+ K£6 White's two bishops dominate the battle­

23 NX h3 Q X h4 field, and the knight at d5 is pinned. The
24 Re1 bishop at b2, controlling the long diagonal, is
Let us sum up the results of this lively intending to retreat to at , to vacate its post
skirmish. For his queen White has not only to the queen. Mter this Black will be threat­
a rook and two minor pieces, but also an ened with mate (Qh8+ followed by Qf8+ ).

1 56
 Defence and Counter-attack

In this desperate situation Keres finds an
excellent chance.
35 . . . f4!
36 exf4
Apparently, the natural reply-so as not
to allow . . . fX g3 followed by . . . Qg4 or
. . . Qh3. But it was precisely on this pawn
39 . . . Kh7 40 Kg2 Kg8 41 Kg3 Kf7 42 f5 ! !
g X f5 43 Kf4 Ke6 (or 43 . . . Kg6 44 Ke5)
44 Kg5, picking up the h-pawn, with an
easy win thanks to the passed pawns on
both wings.
But let us return to the game.
36 e3!
• • •

capture that Keres was pinning his hopes.
The correct continuation was 36 B X d5 !
R X d5 ! (otherwise 37 Qc3!) 37 RX d5 Q X d5
(37 . . . B Xd5 again fails to the same reply
38 Qc3).
w
When considering the exchange on d5,
Euwe probably saw that 38 Qc3, for which
he had been hoping, no longer achieves its
The aim of this second pawn sacrifice is to
weaken White's g3 square. On 37 fX e3 there
follows 37 . . . Qh3 38 e4 N X f4, when on the
capture of the knight, 39 g X f4, Black wins
by 39 . . . Qg4+ . What is White to do ?
His only defence is to divert the rook by
39 Bg7+ RX g7 40 g X f4. But even this does
not save him. Black continues 40 . . . Qg4 + ,
after which the white king is completely ex­
posed, and the f- and e-pawns are attacked.
The position after 38 e4 is full of tactical
possibilities. Apart from 38 . . . NX f4, Black
also has another tactical blow. What is it ?
(For the answer cf. p. 1 79, No. 1 1).
Let us also see what would have happened
after 37 Be5. Then comes 37 . . . e X f2+ 38
KX f2 Qh3 ! 39 RX d5 (39 Qf3 is decisively
met by 39 . . . Nf6!) 39 . . . Qh2+ 40 Kfl
Qh1 + 41 Kf2 B X d5, and wins.

�
aim in view of 38 . . . Qd1 + 39 Kh2 (39 Kg2
37 B X d5 !
Qf3+) 39 . . . fX g3 + , when Black gives per-
petual check. B
Carried away by ideas of an attack, the
Ex-World Champion overlooked a chance of
obtaining . . . a won ending with opposite­
coloured bishops ! From the psychological
viewpoint such a mistake is easy to under­
stand.
A win would have resulted from the prosaic
38 Q x d5 ! B X d5 39 g X f4. It is not the
question of the extra pawn, which with oppo­
site-coloured bishops does not play a signi­
ficant role. Black's downfall is the unfor­ 37 . . . e2!
tunate position of his king. Were it at e6, the
Splendid ! White cannot take the queen
ending would be drawn. But in the given
because of mate in three moves.
position White wins by the advance of his
king to g3 and the break f4-f5, for example : 38 Rel Q X dS

157
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

But not 38 . . . B X dS 39 Qc3 !, when 39 . . . Now on 41 Kf2 Black plays 41 . . . B x f3 !,

Qe4 fails to 40 Qh8 + Rh7 41 Qf8 + . after which the peaceable outcome is obvious.
Therefore the players agreed a draw.
39 Q X d5 R X dS
It could be argued that Black's position
40 f3 was extremely difficult, and that the operation
which saved the game for him succeeded only
The e-pawn is immune, in view of 40 . . .
Rd1 + and . . . Rh1 mate. thanks to his opponent's mistake. Of course !
But for his part, Keres did everything he
40 • . . Rdl could to make such a mistake possible.

158
 The practical endgame

It by no means always happens that the
game concludes in the middlegame-with a
direct attack on the king, a crushing counter­
attack, or the gaining of a material advantage
which leaves the opponent with no hope of
resistance. A stubborn struggle (this relates
especially to games between opponents of
roughly equal strength) often leads to the
outcome being decided only in the conclud­
ing stage-the endgame, when there is a
limited number of fighting units remaining
on the board.
The first fundamental difference between
the endgame and the preceding stages is that
the king, which in the opening and the middle­
game requires special consideration and a
secure shelter, normally no longer needs
defending*. It is transformed into a strong,
active piece, itself attacks opposing pieces
and pawns, and invades the enemy position.
The position of the king, its ability to take a
direct part in the play, determines to a great
extent the further course of the battle and
its final result.
The second fundamental difference of the
endgame is the sharp change in the role and
the real strength of the pawns, since the pro­
motion of a pawn (or the prevention of pro­
motion) is the alpha and omega of all end­
game plans.
The role of the remaining pieces also chan­
ges considerably. In comparison with the
middlegame (and, of course, the opening) on
the same field of battle there are fewer fight­
ing units operating, and it follows that their
duties become greater and their sphere of
action expanded-this applies in particular
to the long-range pieces, which, as a result of
pawn exchanges or the elimination of pawns
in some other way, gain the opportunity of
penetrating into the enemy position. This
allows the opposing pawns to be attacked
from the flank and from the rear.
Since the ultimate aim of a chess game is
to mate the opposing king, this is also the
aim of the endgame. But in order to obtain an
elementary ending, in which the achievement
of mate is of a purely technical nature and
does not present any difficultyt, you need a
very large material advantage. This is achieved
by the queening of a pawn.
The promotion to a queen (or in certain
tactical circumstances-for example, so as
to avoid stalemate-to another piece) is
planned or carried out in every endgame.
A passed pawn is created (not necessarily
in the endgame) by the elimination of the
opposing enemy pawns, i.e. those on the same
or adjacent files, by an exchange or a simple
capture, and sometimes by a break-through,
when a pawn barrier is overcome by means
of a sacrifice (or sacrifices). The opponent
will of course try to prevent the advance of
the passed pawn, using his pieces either to

* Exceptions are provided by a few, mainly heavy-piece endings, in which the nature of the play is closer to
the middlegame than the endgame.
t For example, when a queen (or rook), two bishops, or a bishop and knight, supported by the king, drive
the opposing king into a mating net 011 the edge of the board or in a corner.

159
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class
blockade the pawn or to attack the square in
front of it. The pawn's further advance is
ensured by the exchange of such pieces, by
driving them away, or by controlling the
square onto which the pawn must step.
If the defender is not able to blockade or
stop the passed pawn, in order to prevent the
appearance of a new queen he will have to
give up a piece for the pawn and suffer loss
of material.
In spite of the significant change in the
nature of the struggle in the endgame, many
strategic principles, as well as tactical devices,
retain their effect. For example, the principle
of centralization. Only now, in contrast to
the opening and the middlegame, an impor­
tant role is assigned to the centralization of
the king. On becoming an active piece, from
the centre it can make for either flank, accord­
ing to circumstances.
Also unchanged is the principle of activat­
ing the pieces and restricting the mobility of
the opposing forces. Specific plans take ac­
count of the fact that the action is taking place
with limited forces on a greater expanse of
space. Thus the activity of the rook shows
itself to excellent effect in attacking enemy
pawns from the side and the rear, when they
are unable to defend one another. And the
penetration into the enemy rear is facilitated
by the fact that the number of open files is
greater than in the preceding stages.
The endgame also sees the appearance of
completely new concepts, ideas, and indi­
vidual devices, which are foreign to the open­
ing and the middlegame. We can mention
certain ways of simplifying calculation (for
example, 'the rule of the square'), the concept
of zugzwang, the use of 'corresponding
squares', and so on.
The initial position of any ending is the
result of the preceding struggle, and that is
why the tasks and concrete plans of the two
sides are determined by what this result is,
and what, strictly speaking, should be aimed
160
for. Instances when an attack on the king.
begun in the middlegame with a board full of
pieces is then continued in the endgame,
occur comparatively rarely. Mating threats
can of course be put into effect in the
endgame, but this is nevertheless an excep­
tion.
The task of the stronger side in an endgame
usually consists of realizing a material or
positional advantage gained by the preceding
play, while that of the weaker side is to neu­
tralize this advantage.
In general terms the plan of realizing a
material advantage reduces to simplifying the
position until a theoretical ending is reached,
in which the method of winning has been
exactly established. Theoretical endings are
guides indicating which positions we should
aim for, and which we should avoid, which
exchanges (of pieces or pawns) we should
agree to or force, and which we should pre­
vent ; in which situations it is preferable to
remain with a bishop against a knight, and
in which, on the contrary, it is better to have
a knight against a bishop ; in which positions
it is favourable to exchange the last piece
and go into a pawn ending, and in which
everything must be done to avoid such an
exchange.
If the opponent has a material advantage,
the weaker side's task is to re-establish the
material balance or to neutralize the advan­
tage in some other way, in particular by re­
ducing play to a theoretical ending in which
the material advantage cannot be realized.
For example, with opposite-coloured bishops
an advantage of one, and often two pawns
proves insufficient for a win. It has been
established with complete accuracy in which
situations the ending 'king and pawn against
king' ends in a draw ; a king and two knights
are simply unable to mate a lone king, while
a king, bishop and rook's pawn cannot drive
a lone king out of the corner (and hence the
pawn cannot be queened) if the 'colour of the
 The Practical Endgame

bishop'* is different to that of the queening will not be the realization (or neutralization)
square. Positions have been analyzed in which of an advantage, but the gaining of one.
the advantage of the exchange (or even the In the concluding stage an enormous role
exchange and a pawn) does not win, while a is played by logic and consistency of thinking,
rook and pawn may sometimes successfully combined with specific knowledge of theory.
defend against a queen and pawn, and so on. We, however, will not be interested in theo­
If with exact play by the opponent it is retical endings (to which special multi-tome
impossible to neutralize the material advan­ researches have been devoted), but positions
tage, one should nevertheless do the maxi­ arising in practical play, and those which
mum possible to make his task more difficult, require not routine, but creative solutions.
to somehow complicate the game and to We will begin by demonstrating an original
create technical difficulties. tactical idea, which enabled Keres to obtain
In the realization of a positional advantage a passed pawn and then realize his advantage.
the stronger side tries to transform this ad­
vantage into a material one. If the opponent SkOid-Keres
is stubbornly defending a weakness (for ex­ Stockholm, 1966/67
ample, a backward pawn), you should attempt B
to provoke a further weakening of his posi­
tion, since the greater the number of weak­
nesses, the more difficult it is to defend them
simultaneomly.
Perfectly possible is the transformation of
one positional advantage into another, more
favourable one. For example, in ridding the
opponent of an isolated pawn, the active side
may instead acquire an open file which enables
his rook to invade the seventh rank (which
It would seem that Black's only chance in
may then lead to gain of material).
this ending, in which he has three pawns
Of course, the defender will try to counter
against two on the K-side, it to try to create
any plan for realizing the advantage. He will
a passed pawn. But Keres finds a forcing
defend his weak points, attempt to prevent
way to win, by exploiting a latent threat.
the creation of new weaknesses, aim to repair
defects in his pawn formation, avoid un­ 31 . .
. Ba4
favourable exchanges (in particular, the ex­ 32 Be2 a6 ! !
change of his active pieces or of pieces ful­ w
filling important defensive functions), and
prevent the invasion of the opposing pieces.
But what if the middlegame has not led to
an advantage for either side ? If its outcome
has been a position of so-called dynamic
equilibrium ? Then the weight of the entire
struggle is transferred to the concluding stage,
and the tasks of the two sides in the endgame

* What is meant i s the colour of the squares along which the bishop moves.

161
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

This wins a pawn, and with it the game. w

White cannot take on a6 because of 33 . . .
Bc6+ ! and mates. Note that this same move
(32 . . . a6) would have fo1lowed on 32 Bc6.
33 Kg2 B X bS

Black now has two extra pawns, of which

one is passed. The rest is a matter of technique.

34 .Kf3 Bh6

·Of course, not 34 . . . B X e2?, when White 29 b4! c X b4

would have taken the bishop at e3, obtaining 30 RXf5 gXfS
an ending with opposite-coloured bishops 31 d7!
and drawing chances.
Threatening 32 Bc7, but it is Black's turn
35 B X b5 a x b5 to move, and he immediately attacks the
36 Bc3 f5 pawn, which cannot be defended-after all,
the bishops are of opposite colour.
Restraining the enemy king and opening
the way for his own king. 31 . . . Bc6
37 h4 Kf7 "Why on earth has Keres given up two
38 g4 fX g4+ pawns ?", the impatient reader may ask.
39 K X g4 Bf8 This is why :
40 h5 b4
32 Rcl !
41 hX g6+ h X g6!
Luring Black into a pin !
The final subtlety. Mter 41 . . . K X g6 ?
42 B X b4 ! B X b4 the result is a draw. A s has 32 . . . B X d7
already been stated, a rook's pawn and bishop This move is obligatory : 32 . . . Bb7 loses
do not win if the pawn's queening square and
immediately to 33 Rc7.
the squares along which the bishop moves are
of the opposite colour. 33 Rd1
Mter the move made by Keres, White
Due to the threat of 34 Bc7 (and also
resigned.
34 Bg5) Black has to part with his bishop.
( .
His last hope lies in his passed pawns on the
Keres-Richter " - · <;,
Q-side. But Keres has calculated everything
Munich Olympiad, 1936 out to the end : White either stops the pawns,
or gives up his bishop for them, picking up the
White has' a passed pawn, but how is he to f5 pawn 'en route' and reducing matters to a
exploit it? Nothing is achieved by the straight­ won rook ending.
forward 29 d7 (with the threat of 30 Bc7)
33 . . . b3
because of 29 . . . Rf7, when after 30 R X c5
34 Bc7 Rc8
RfX d7 the game will end in a draw. Keres,
35 R X d7
however, had aimed for this position-he had
calculated the following forcing operation. We must once again remind the reader :

162
 The Practical Endgame

the evaluation of a position can sometimes be bl =Q+ 49 K X bl Kd3 50 Bg5.

decided by a piece which has not been (and, it Therefore he has one last hope : to sacri­
would seem, is still not) taking any part in fice his e-pawn , so as to divert the white king
events. In the given instance this piece is the and break through with his own.king to c3.
black king. Were it now standing at g8,
43 . . . e3+
Black would play 35 . . . b2, and . . . would
44 K X e3 Kc3
win ! (36 Rd1 RX cl and then . . . Rcl).
45 Kf4
But in fact the king is at h8, and on 35 . . . b2
White replies 36 Be5+ and 37 B X b2. Now the battle develops according to the
principle : 'who is the quicker', in other
36 . . . Kg8
words-whose pawn will be the first to reach
36 Be5 Rc5
the back rank.
Black's only possibility of ensuring the
45 . . . a5
further advance of his b-pawn was by 36 . . . aS
(if 36 . . . Rc2, then 37 Rb7 R X e2 38 RX b3, A position from the game is reached after

and White wins) 37 Rg7+ (as becomes clear 45 . . . b2 46 B X b2+ K X b2 47 g4 ! (by this
move White creates a passed pawn).
at the end of the variation, this check allows
White to gain an important tempo) 37 . . . Kf8 The win is more difficult if Black purs-qes

38 Ra 7 Rc2. But then comes 39 RX aS b2 40
B X b2 R X b2 41 R X f5 + (this is why the
rook check at g7 was needed !) 41 . . . Kg7
42 Kf2. Black has regained his piece, but the
rook ending is hopeless : he cannot save his
e-pawn.
37 Rg7+
the bishop with his king : 45 . . . Kc2 46 g4
fX g4 47 e4 Kb 1 (little resistance is offered
by 47 . . . b2 48 BXb2 KX b2 49 e5 a5 50 e6
a4 51 e7 a3 52 e8= Q a2 53 Qe5+ and
54 KXg4; as the reader will see, in the game
this same position is reached with an extra
tempo for Black, which all the same does not
save him) 48 e5 Ka2 49 Bel (of course, not

In this way White exchanges rooks (37 . . .

49 e6 ? KX a3 50 e7 b2 51 e8= Q b1 = Q)
Kh8 fails to 38 Bf6! Rc6 39 Rg6+ RX/6 49 . . . Kbl 50 Be3 Kc2 (if 50 . . . b2, then

40 RXf6, when the rook picks up the b- and 51 Bd4, and wins) 5 1 Bd4 Kd3 52 Bal . The
a-pawns in turn : 40 . . . a5 41 Rb6 a4 42 Rb4). bishop has 'escaped' from the king, and White
wins.
37 . . . Kf8
38 Bd6+ K X g7 w
39 B x cS Kf7

As was the case earlier (cf. the note to

White's 36th move), on 39 . . . b2 White has
40 Bd4+ .

40 Ba3 Ke6
41 Kf2 Kd5
42 Ke3 Kc4
43 Kd2
46 g4!
One more move, e2-e3, and Black will lose
without a struggle. For example, 43 . . . aS This way, rather than 46 K X f5 ?, when
44 e3 a4 45 h3 h6 46 h4 h5 47 Be7 b2 48 Kc2 after 46 . . . b2 47 B X b2 + K X b2 48 e4 a4

163
 Paul I<.eres Chess Master Class

49 e5 a3 50 e6 a2 5 1 e7 a l = Q 52 e8 = Q In the following example a material ad­

Qfl + White faces a gruelling queen ending vantage was gained thanks to the exploitation
with an extra pawn. But now Keres is the first of a pin, with the deciding role, as should
to obtain a queen, which allows him to ex­ be the case in the endgame, being played by
change queens immediately and to win the the king.
pawn ending.
Keres-Pirc f.f 1 . \' ·

46 . . . fX g4 Munich Olympiad, 1936

47 e4 a4
w
48 e5 b2
49 B x b2+ K X b2
50 e6 a3
51 e7 a2
52 e8= Q al = Q
53 Qh8+

After exchanging queens, White then picks

up both enemy pawns. The black king is too
late, and the h-pawn is free to queen.

53 ... Ka2 The f7 pawn, which is twice attacked, is

54 Q x al + K X al twice defended. But thanks to the pins on the
55 K X g4 Kb2 seventh rank and the a2-g8 diagonal, White
56 Kg5 Kc3 can bring up a third attack-his g-pawn.
57 Kh6 Kd4 Black will have no third defence-the f7
58 K X h7 Ke5 square is inaccessible to his black-squared
59 Kg6 Resigns. bishop.

Opposite-coloured bishops in the endgame 36 K£4 Kg6

are rightly considered forerunners of a draw.
Black prevents KfS and g4-g5-g6. But only
Frequently not only one, but even two extra
for a short time.
pawns prove to be insufficient for a win.
But with opposite-coloured bishops in the 37 Bd3+ Kg7
middlegame, an attack can gain significantly
Slightly more tenacious is 37 . . . Kh6, when
in strength. And not only in the middlegame,
White would have continued 38 KfS f6
but in any instance when the attack is directed
(38 . . . BgS 39 Rd6 + ) 39 Kf4 f5 (39 . . . Rh8
against a very important, key target.
40 a4, and Black is in zugzwang) 40 g X f5,
The rule of defence, according to which the
and wins.
number of defences should equal the number
of attacks, cannot always be fulfilled when 38 K£5 Kh6
there are opposite-coloured bishops. Even
If 38 . . . ReS 39 g5 Be7, then 40 Bc4 and
with equality of forces and their complete
41 Rb7.
co-ordination. The advantage of the stronger
side manifests itself in cases when the attack is
39 Bc4 Kg7
directed against points which are accessible
40 g5
to the stronger side's bishop, and inaccessible Due to the vertical and diagonal pins, 41 g6
to the enemy bishop. cannot be prevented.

164
 The Practical Endgame

40 . . • Kg8 attack. The other way was chosen by Keres in

41 g6 the game.

A third attack against two defences and a 45 Bf5

spectator bishop !
White deprives the enemy knight of the e6
Black resigns.
square, after which he threatens 46 Rg8,
And now-an example of a weakening of winning a pawn. The reply is forced.
the opponent's pawn formation and the gain­
45 . . . g5
ing of a decisive material advantage by an
46 Rh8
attack by a rook from the rear.
White either wins a pawn (after 46 . . . gXh4
Keres-Clarke 47 RX h6 and RX h4), or (after 46 . . . gXf4)
Leipzig Olympiad, 1960 creates a passed pawn.

w 46 . . . gX f4
47 R X h6 Nf7
48 Rg6 Ne5

White's position is the more active-his

rook has forced its way onto the eighth rank,
and his bishop is excellently placed. But how is
he to strengthen his position, what plan should
he adopt?
49 h5 !
All the black pawns are defended, except
one-at g7. It is against this, the vulnerable A passed pawn supported by a bishop is a
point, that White's attack should be directed. formidable force ! On 49 . . . N x g6 there
If the opponent can be forced to play . . . g5, follows 50 h X g6, when against the threat of
a new target for attack will appear-the pawn g6-g7-g8 = Q there is no defence-Black has
at h6 . . . But all this is general reasoning. to give up his rook. If 50 . . . Rd8, then 5 1 Be6 !
45 Re7 fails to achieve its aim in view of
45 � . . Re6 ! , when after 46 R x e6 N X e6 47 f5 49 ... f3
Nc5 the black knight will be deployed in the 50 Rg8 d3
best way possible. For example, 48 Bf3 (or 51 c X d3 N X d3
48 Bd3) 48 . . . Nd7 followed by . . . Kc5 and 52 Ke3 ! f2
. . . Ne5. It follows that the g-pawn must be 53 Ke2
attacked from the eighth rank. One way, the The f-pawn has been stopped, and now the
straightforward one, is 45 Rg8 Ne6 46 Bf5 h-pawn threatens to advance.
(not 46 f5 Rd8) 46 . . . N x f4 47 RX g7, after
which the h6 pawn becomes the object of 53 . . . NX b2

165
 .
Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Black has an unattainable dream-to ex­ w

ploit his passed pawn on the Q-side.

54 Kxf2 a4
ss bx a4 bX a4?
Of course, even without this oversight
Black's position was hopeless-the h-pawn
inexorably advances.

56 Rb8+ Resigns.
The episode from the following game illus­
trates a typical positional mistake in an ending,
positional mistake. Firstly, he devalues his
regarding favourable and unfavourable pawn
pawn majority on the Q-side ; secondly, he
formations with like-coloured bishops.
seriously restricts the mobility of his bishop,
f-'1 which becomes 'bad'. Correct was 34 Bb5,
Kan-Keres \ :. '" (34 . . . Rb8 fails to
for example, 34 . . . Be4
20th USSR Championship, Mos�ow; 1952
35 c4 followed by 36 Rd7+ ) 35 RX d8 KX d8
B 36 f3, when by continuing Kf2-e3, White is in
no danger of losing.

34 . . . Be4
35 R X dS K X dS
36 Bdl

The bishop is forced to occupy a passive

position--otherwise Black plays 36 . . . Bbl
37 a3 Bc2.

36 . . . Kc7
White has an extra pawn on the Q-side, 37 Kfl Kd6
and Black on the K-side. With the aim of 38 f4
weakening the enemy pawns, Keres played
Otherwise the black king advances via e5 to
30 aS, intending . . . a4.
d4(38/3 Bb1 39 a3 Ke5 40 Ke2 Kd4 41 Kd2
• • .

After exchanges on the only open file, a

Bd3 42 g3 e5 followed by . . .f5 and . . . e4,
minor piece ending is reached in which
creating a passed pawn on the e-:file).
Black's chances are merely slightly preferable.
Given exact play by the opponent, he has no 38 • • • e5
winning chances. But that is with exact play.
As a result of his postttonai mistake, White
Let us see what happened with inexact play.
has devalued his Q-side pawn majority, but
31 RX dS RX dS on the K-side Black has a pawn more.
32 Rdl Nd5
33 N X dS+ B X d5 39 g3

(See diagram next column) White cannot allow the enemy king into

34 c4? the centre, but now his pawns become isolated.

Convinced that a draw can be achieved 39 . • • Bbl

'as he pleases', White commits a decisive 40 a4 exf4

166
 The Practical Endgame

41 gXf4 Ke6 Smyslov-Keres

42 Kf2 Kf5 19th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1951
43 Ke3 h5!
B
44 Kf3

If 44 h4, then 44 . . . Be4, and White is in

zugzwang (if he moves his bishop there follows
. . . Bc2).
By controlling g4 with his h-pawn, White
intends to play his king from f3 to e3 . . .

44 • • . h4!

Conceding g4, but on the other hand fixing

the weak pawn at h3. Defending simultane­ By 33 . . . c5 ! Keres forced exchanges, allow­
ously three weaknesses-at b3, h3 and f4-is ing him to transpose into a favourable ending.
beyond White's powers.
34 Be3
45 Ke3 Ke6
On 34 Bb2 there could have followed
46 Bg4+
34 . . . Qbl .
Despair, since now White cannot avoid
34 Nx e3
the exchange of bishops. However, 46 Kf3
Bf5 47 Kg2 Kf6 would have left him in
35 Q x e3
zugzwang: his only king move, 48 Kh2, is Of course, not 35 fX e3 Qf2+ (36 Kh/
answered by 48 . . . Be4 ! with the threat of QX a2 37 Be4 Qal + and 38 . . Qe5).
49 . . . Kf5, and if 49 Bg4, then 49 . . . Bc2. And
.

35 . . . Q X e3
any move by the bishop (48 Be2 or 48 B/3)
allows 48 . . . Bc2.
36 fX e3

46 • . . Bf5 B
47 Kf3 Kf6

There is no defence against 48 . . . Bc2, so

White is forced to exchange bishops.

48 B X £5 KX£5
49 Ke3 £6

On 50 Kf3 Black wins by 50 . . . g5 5 1

fX g5 fX g5 52 Kg2 g4 5 3 h X g4 + K X g4 54
Kf2 Kf4. While the white king is watching
It was necessary to evaluate this ending
(or picking up) the h-pawn, Black eliminates
before simplifying the position. The rule in
the Q-side pawns.
endings with like-coloured bishops runs :
White resigns.
pawns should be kept on squares of opposite
And now another ending with like-coloured colour to those on which the enemy bishop
bishops, this time obtained by force from a moves. This means that the Q-side pawn for­
complicated position. mation is definitely to Black's advantage. His

12 167
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

pawns are invulnerable, whereas the white follows . . Bc2). Therefore he has to move
.

pawns can be attacked. White has to defend
them, by placing his bishop in an extremely
passive position, or else he has to part with
one of his pawns.
The e3 pawn is isolated, and as a conse­
quence White is unable to control the e5
square. On occupying it, the black king be­
comes master of the position. By playing . . . f5,
. . . g5 and then . . . f4, Black removes the e3
pawn, and via d4 (or f4) takes his king into
the enemy position to devour the pawns.
This is, so to speak, the general plan. Let
us see how Keres carries it out.
36 . . . Bb1
37 a3 aS
The first part of the plan is to fix White's
pawn weaknesses. In accordance with the
rule given above, White aims by b3-b4 to
place his pawns on black squares, and Keres
prevents this.
38 Bd1
Otherwise 38 . . . Bc2.
38 . .. Kg6
The second part of the plan is centralization
The king heads for e5.
39 Kg2 Kf5
40 Kf3 Ke5
his king or his g-pawn.
42 . . . Bf5
The natural continuation of the plan was
42 . . . f5. Keres, however, wants to provoke
g3-g4 (43 h4 allows 43 . . . Bg4+ 44 Kel
BX dl 45 KX dl, when the pawn ending is
hopeless for White ; simplest is 45 . . . gX h4 46
gXh4 Kf5 etc.).
43 g4 Bb1
44 Kf3 f5
White is in a dilemma. If he allows . . . f4,
Black will exchange on e3 and play . . . Be4,
putting his opponent in zugzwang (45 Ke2 f4
46 Kf3 /X e3 47 KX e3 Be4, and the black
king breaks through at d4 or f4, while if the
white bishop moves Black wins the b- and
a-pawns by . . . Bc2). If in reply to 45 . . . f4
White plays 46 e X f4, then after 46 . . . K x f4
47 Kf2 Be4 he again ends up in zugzwang.
White's only alternative is to himself ex­
change on f5, which is what Smyslov does.
45 gXf5 KXf5
46 Kf2 Be4
47 Kg3
B

Now is the time to carry out the third part

of the plan-advance the g- and f-pawns.

41 a4

Otherwise Black would have the favourable

opportunity of creating a passed pawn by
41 . . . Bd3 and . . . a4.
47 . . . Kg6!
41 . . . g5
42 Ke2
The fourth part of the plan is to play
It is easy to see that White is close to a . . . h5-h4 and fix a further weakness-the h3
position of zugzwang: his bishop is tied to the pawn. If this pawn advances, Black gains a
defence of his b-pawn (if it moves there passed h-pawn.

168
 The Practical Endgan1e

48 Kf2 Now an example in which a multi-piece

ending is transformed by force into a pawn
Or 48 h4 h5 49 Kh3 (49 h X g5 KX g5 loses
ending.
immediately) 49 . . . Bd3 50 Kg3 Bf5, and due
to zugzwang White is forced to take on g5.
Randviir-Keres
48 ... h5 Piirnu, 1947
49 Kg3 h4+
50 Kf2 Bf5
51 Kg2
Now that the white king is tied to the h3
pawn, and the bishop cannot leave d l , the
black king makes for the enemy rear. The
implementation of the concluding stage of the
plan still requires accuracy.

51 . . . Kf6
52 Kh2 Ke6
As becomes clear within a couple of moves, The e4 and f5 pawns appear to be securely
Black must play this, rather than 52 . . . Ke5. defended, but Keres shows that this is not so.
Here Smyslov resigned the game, without
36 . . . c5 +
making his opponent demonstrate the follow­
37 Kd3
ing forced variation : 53 Kg2 Ke5 54 Kh2 Bb 1
(this is why 52 . . . Ke6! was played, and only If 37 Kc3, then of course 37 . . . B X f5.
then 53 . . . Ke5 : White's king is now far away,
37 . . . b X c4 +
and is unable to control e4, which means that
38 bXc4
he cannot prevent the march of the black
king via e4 to d3) 55 Kg2 Ke4 56 Kf2 Kd3
57 Kf3 Kd2 58 Be2 Bf5.

38 . . . d5 ! !

A blow combining two ideas : a pin (on

59 e4 (or 59 Bfl Kc3) 59 . . . B X e4 + 60 the e-file) and a diagonal check (39 c X d5
K X e4 K X e2 (again zugzwang-this time in a Bb5 + ). Since White cannot take on d5, he
pawn ending : the white king is forced to loses a pawn.
concede the key square f3 to its opponent)
39 g4 R X e4!
6 1 Kf5 Kf3 62 K X g5 Kg3, and Black queens
his h-pawn. The start of an original and excellently

12* 169
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

calculated operation. The simple-minded B

39 . . . d X e4+ ? would have completely de-
prived Black of any chance of using the e-:file.

40 R x e4 R X e4
41 c X d5 R X g4 !
42 h X g4 BbS+
43 Ke3 B X fl

Black is a pawn up with a winning ending,

which, it is true, still has to be won . . .

44 Bd3
49 Kc3 ! with a draw (49 . . . Kd7 50 Kd3 etc.).
Obviously Keres's opponent was hoping The black king cannot move to d6 (when
to save the pawn ending, since he rightly after Kc4 White picks up the c5 pawn and
judged that, with the bishops on, White had wins), nor the white king to c4 (when after
no chance at all. After 44 d6 Kb6 45 Be4 . . . Kd6 Black wins), so the result is a draw.
Bb5 46 Bd5 Ba4 47 Bf3 (otherwise 47 . . . Bd1) Thus the task of each side is to put the
Black puts his opponent in zugzwang by opponent in zugzwang.
47 . . . a5 !
46 a4+
w
A counter-chance ! If 46 Kc3, then 46 . . . c4
47 Kd4 (otherwise 47 . . . Kc5 and 48 . . . KX d5)
47 . . . c3 ! 48 K X c3 Kc5 49 Kd3 (marching
the white king over to the a-pawn is too slow :
49 Kb3 KX d5 50 Ka4 Ke4 51 Ka5 Kf4
52 KX a6 KXg4 53 Kb6 h5, and the h-pawn
queens first, blocking the enemy a-pawn's
path to the prize square) 49 . . . Kx d5
50 Ke3 Ke5 (it is easy to calculate that after
50 . . . Kc5 51 Ke4 Kb3 52 Kd5 KX a3 53 Ke6
The white bishop cannot leave the dl-f3 Kb3 54 KXf6 a5 55 KXg5 the f-pawn
diagonal because of 48 . . . Bdl . queens before the a-pawn) 51 Kf3 (or
If 47 Be2, then 47 . . . Kc6, while after 51 Kd3 Kf4) 5 1 . . . Kd5 52 a4 a5 53 Kf2 Ke4
47 Kd3 Black wins by 47 . . . Bc6 48 Bdl 54 Kg3 Ke3 55 Kg2 Kf4 56 Kh3 Kf3,
Bb5+ and 49 . . . Kc6. winning the g4 pawn. In short, with accurate
This only leaves 47 Kd2, but then 47 . . . c4 play Black puts his opponent in zugzwang.
wins. Let us now see whether or not he was
44 . . . B X d3 able to do this in the game.
45 K X d3
46 Kb6
(See diagram next column)
• • •

47 Kc4 a5
45 . . . KbS ! 48 d6
This way, rather than 45 . . . Kb6 ?, since
There is nothing else. After 48 Kd3 Kc7
after 46 Kc4 a5 47 a4 h6 48 Kd3 Kc7 White
49 Kc3 Kd6 50 Kc4 h6 White is in zugzwang1
does not play 49 Kc4 ? (when after 49 . . . Kd6
Black picks up the d5 pawn and wins), but 48 . • . Kc6

170
 The Practical Endgame
49 d7 K X d7
so K x c5 Ke7
If White goes to win the a-pawn, the black
g-pawn will queen : 5 1 Kb5 h5 52 g X h5 g4,
and wins. This means that the white king is
obliged to remain in the centre, closer to
the K-side pawns.
51 Kd5 Kf7
Black manoeuvres with his king, so as to
play . . . h5 at the first convenient moment.
52 Ke4
The white king in turn is obliged to keep
within the square of the enemy g-pawn
(in case of . . . h5). For example, after 52 Kd6
h5 Black wins. In addition, the white king
must be ready in the event of . . . h5 and
g X h5 to defend the h-pawn-otherwise
Black will pick it up with his king, winning
easily. Thus, with the white king on the d-:file
and the black king at f7 (if, for example,
52 Ke4 had not been played), the 52 . . . h5
break wins as follows : 53 g X h5 Kg7 54 Ke4
Kh6 and 55 . . . K X h5, or 54 Ke6 g4 55 h6+
K x h6 56 K X f6 g3, and so on.
On the contrary, after 52 Ke4 the . . . h5
break does not achieve anything : 52 . . . h5
53 g X h5 Kg7 54 Kf3 Kh7 55 Kg3
White is ready to answer . . . Kh6 with Kg4.
So remember : the white king cannot step
onto the d-file.
B
52 • . • Kf8 ! !
The most difficult move in this pawn
ending. This waiting manoeuvre by the black
king puts White in a different zugzwang,
position. As has already been said, White
cannot move his king to d5 because of
. . . h5, and so . . .
53 Ke3 Ke7!
Against the threat of . . . h5 White has
defended. But now the black king penetrates
to d6, after which the game is won !
54 Ke4 Kd6
55 Kd4 h6
A further reserve move, after which the
white king cannot go to c4 because of 56 . . .
Ke5 57 Kb5 h5 58 g X h5 K X f5 and . . . g4.
It is interesting that, had the black pawn
not been at h7, but at h6, White would not
have lost ! Whereas now Keres wins, and in
study-like fashion. The key to victory is the
e5 square, which Black has to occupy with
his king. True, we should also add that
there was an alternative, simpler way (cf. the
note to Black's 57th move).
56 Ke4 Kc5!
57 Ke3 Kd5!
Captivated by his fine idea, Keres failed
to notice an elementary plan : 57 . . . Kb4
58 Kd4 KX a4 59 Kd5 Kb5 60 Ke6 a4
and 61 K X f6 a3 62 Ke7 a2 63 f6 a l = Q and
64 . . . Qe5 + etc.
But let us return to the move. It is no
accident that we have given . . . Kd5 an ex­
clamation mark. As a result of its manoeuvres,
the black king has forced back its oppo­
nent and broken through to e5. This makes
possible the familiar . . . h5 break.
58 Kd3 Ke5
59 Ke3
(See diagram next page)
59 . . . hS !
At last, Keres's long-prepared break­
through ! By exchanging his h-pawn for the
f-pawn, Black obtains a healthy passed pawn.
171
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

B 18 . . . Q X f7

1 8 . . . K X f7 is weaker. As in the game, this

would have been answered by 1 9 Bb3, and
later White would have had an important
queen check at h5 : 1 9 . . . Nc4 20 N X c4
b X c4 21 B X c4 Nd5 22 Qh5 + ! Qg6 (22 . ..
Kg8 1oses immediately to 23 ex d5) 23 Qf3 +
Bf6 (this is also forced ; after 23 . . . Kg8
24 eXd5 White is two pawns up) 24 e X d5
Q X g5 25 d6+ Kg6 (no better is 25 . . . Kf8
60 g X h5 KXf5 26 RX e8+ Kx eB 27 Qx b7) 26 Q X b7,
61 Kf3 Ke6 with an easily won position :
62 Kg4 Kf7 (a) 26 . . . Qd2 27 R X e8 R X e8 28 d X c7.
63 Kf5 Kg7 (b) 26 . . . B X c3 27 R X e 8 + R X e8 28 d7.
(c) 26 . . . RX e 1 + 27 RXel R X d6 28
White resigns. After 64 Kg4 Kh6 he loses a
Re3 !, and the bad position of the black king
second pawn due to zugzwang.
tells(28 . . . Be5 29 Qe4+ Kf6 30 f4 BX/4
31 Rf3).
Keres-Geller
Mar6czy Memorial Tournament, Budapest, 19 Bb3 Nc4
1952 20 NXc4 b X c4
21 B X c4 Nd5
22 B X e7 Q x e7

If 22 . . . Rx e7, then 23 Qd2, also regaining

the piece by the pin, and remaining with an
extra pawn and a won ending.

23 e x d5 Q X e2
24 R X e2 R X e2
25 B X e2 B X dS

"But this position is one from the early

middlegame, and by no means the endgame",
the reader will say. Moreover, we should
add, White's first move is the start of a
combination with a knight sacrifice. And
nevertheless this position bears the most
direct relation to our theme . . .

18 Nxf7!

After this, Black's queen and king end up White has not only three pawns against
in a diagonal pin. White regains his piece by two on the K-side. Also very unpleasant for
force, and . . . remains with an extra pawn in Black is the pin on the d-file. However, the
the endgame ! immediate 26 Rdl is parried by 26 . . . ReS !

1 72
 The Practical Endgame

Also not so clear is the straightforward Rb1 Bc2 3 1 Rcl R x a6 32 R X c2 R X a5

26 B X a6 in view of 26 . . . Ra8 27 c4 B X g2 Black would acquire drawing chances.
28 K X g2 R X a6. Although a pawn down, Now White wins another pawn.
in the rook ending Black can put up a stern
resistance.
29 . . . Bb3
30 Rd7+ Kf8
26 a4! 31 RXc7 ReS
A highly subtle move, after which 27 B X a6
32 Rc6 R X a5
is now threatened. If instead 26 . . . a5, then
w
27 Rd1 now works, since after 27 . . . ReS
28 RX d5 RX e2 29 g3 White wins one of
the Q-side pawns, and remains with two
extra pawns.

26 . . . Rd6
27 Rd1

It would appear that it is all over. White is

threatening to transpose into a won ending
by 28 R X d5 R X d5 29 Bc4, and 27 . . . Bb7
loses to the exchange of rooks followed by
If now 33 RX a6, then 33 . . . Rc5, winning
a4-a5 (the pawn at a6, fixed on a white
the c-pawn. With two pawns against three
square, becomes a chronic weakness, whereas
on the K-side, Black should probably be able
the a5 pawn is completely safe).
to draw . . .
However, exactly the same (but with the
rooks on, which allows Black to put up 33 Rb6 !
something of a resistance) occurs in the game.
Keres does not allow the opponent to take
27 . . . Kf7 the c-pawn ! Mter the black bishop moves,
the rook will defend this pawn from a3.
This parries the threat of a temporary
sacrifice on d5. Mter 28 RX d5 RX d5 Bc2
33 • . .

29 Bc4 Ke6 Black's king is close to the Q-side ReS

34 RX a6
pawns, and this saves him : 30 Kfl Kd6 ! 35 Ra3 Rd5
31 B X d5 K X d5 32 Ke2 Kc4 33 Kd2 Kb3. Rd1
36 f3
But against the second threat, a positional
37 Kf2 Rcl
one, Black has been unable to defend. Bg6
38 h4
28 a5! Re6 39 Bc4 Ke7
40 g4 h6
28 . . . Ke6 is well met by 29 f4 (29 . . Rc6
.
41 Bd5 Resigns.
30 Bg4+ ) .

We will conclude this chapter on the end­

29 Bfl
This is perhaps more exact than 29 RX d5
RX e2 30 g4 Ra2, although even then after
3 1 Rc5 Black is unable to save the game.
On the other hand, after 29 B X a6 Bb3 30
game with a game in which a subtle positional
move in the opening determined the direction
of the entire subsequent play, which concluded
with the transformation of one material
advantage into another.

173
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

Keres-Goldenov a X b5 1 2 Qb3 Qd7 13 fX e5 B X e5 Averbakh

20th USSR Championship, Moscow, 1952 gained an obvious advantage by 14 Nd2 !
Ruy Lopez Bg7 1 5 e5 ! {15 . . . BX e5 ? is very
Nh6
dangerous in view of 16Rei f6 17 Nf3 0-0-0
1 e4 eS
18 NX e5fX e5 19 Bg5 Re8 20 Radl) 1 6 Ne4.
2 N£3 Nc6
In the present game Goldenov makes a
3 Bb5 a6
new attempt to uphold this difficult variation.
4 Ba4 d6
5 c3 Bd7 10 . . . Ne7
6 d4 g6
w
The other plan is to play 6 . . . Nf6 and
develop the bishop at e7.

7 0-0 Bg7
Black is planning an important role for his
fianchettoed bishop. If White blocks the
centre by d4-d5 and thus restricts its scope,
Black will then prepare operations on the
K-side.

8 d x es N x es 11 fS!

Modern opening guides give preference to A subtle positional move, which discloses
8 . . . d X e5. the drawbacks to the system chosen by Black.
By forcing . . . f6, White leaves his opponent
9 N x eS d X eS
with a 'bad' bishop.
Mter 9 . . . B X e5, 10 Bb3 is unpleasant
11 ... f6
for Black. For example, 10 . . . Ne7 1 1 f4 Bg7
12 Be3 B X a4
12 f5 ! , when the pawn sacrifice cannot be
13 Q X a4+ Qd7
accepted: 12 . . . g X f5 13 e X f5 B X f5 (or
14 Q X d7 +
13 . . . Nxf5) 14 Qh5.
Also strong is the preparatory 1 1 Bg5, so Keres happily goes in for simplification
as only on 1 1 . . . 0-0 to continue 12 f4 Bg7 -in the endgame the passive position of the
13 f5 followed by 13 . . . Be5 14 Bh6, with bishop at g7 will tell.
advantage to White.
14 . . . K X d7
10 f4 15 c4 Rhd8
16 Nc3 g X fS
A strong move, employed by Fine against
Alekhine in the 1 938 AVRO-Tournament. This exchange does nothing to ease Black's
Mter 10 . . . B X a4 1 1 Q x a4+ Qd7 12 position, and gives White additional pos­
Q x d7 + K X d7 13 fx e5 Ke6 14 Bf4 White sibilities-he obtains e4 for his knight.
gained the advantage. Subsequently, instead However, after 16 . . . Ke8 1 7 g4, with the
of 10 . . . B X a4, the Soviet master Romanov­ eventual threat of h2-h4, fx g6 and h4-h5,
sky suggested 10 . . . Bb5, which Goldenov all the same Black would have had a difficult
tried against Averbakh, a few months before position. With his pawn on g4, in the event
his game with Keres. After 1 1 B X b5 + of the exchange on f5 White has the pos-

,174
 The Practical Endgame

I
sibility not only of exfS, but also gXfS with Black is forced to part with the exchange.
subsequent exploitation of the g-file.
24 . . . R X e3+
17 e x f5 Ke8 25 K X e3 Bh6+
18 g4 Rd3 26 Kf3 Nd5
27 Rfd1 Kc6
This move is only apparently active.
w
19 Kf2

Black's misfortune is his bishop. Mter

19 . . . Rad8 20 Ke2 followed by Rad l and
the exchange of rooks, White will post his
knight at e4 and become complete master of
the position. Exploiting the fact that on the
K-side Black's hands will be tied, he will then
be able to transfer play to the Q-side.

19 . . . bS'?
28 g5!
Not anticipating such an unfavourable
turn of events, Black attempts to complicate This wins by force. By blocking the diago­
matters by a pawn sacrifice. It is perfectly nal, White threatens to win the knight by
possible, however, that in his calculations he Racl + , or to obtain a won pawn ending.
overlooked a double threat by his opponent.
28 . . . e4+
Which one will become clear within a few
29 Kg3 B X g5
moves.
30 NxgS fX g5
20 c x b5 a X b5 31 Racl + Kd6
21 N X b5 Rb8 32 ReS RbS
22 N X c7+ Kd7 33 Rd8+ Ke5

22 . . Kf7 would have been met by the

.
The black king cannot cope with passed
simple23 b3 . pawns on the a- and f-files, and so Keres
forces a pawn ending.
23 Ne6 RX b2+
24 Kf3 34 R8X d5+ ! R X d5
35 R X d5+ K x dS
Black's rook has become more active, but 36 a4 hS
this is not now the main thing. How in one 37 f6 h4+
move is he to save his attacked rook (it 38 Kg4 Ke6
would seem that Goldenov overlooked the 39 a5 e3
threat of 25 Nc5+ when calcnlating the 40 Kf3 g4+
variation with 19 . . b5) and
. his bishop ? 41 K X e3 Resigns.

175
 Answers to questions

No. 1 (p.11) No. 2 (p.30)

Tai-Keres Walther-Keres
Zurich, 1959
Candidates' Tournament, Yugoslavia, 1959
B

White's immediate capitulation could have

been forced by 39 . . . Rc1 !

The variation given in the question is No. 3 (p.38)

forcing up to . . . the concluding position ! Keres-Malich
5 1 Qd6 ! ! defends against the mate, after Varna Olympiad, 1962
which it is not Black who wins, but White !
w
By luring the enemy queen into a fork-5 1 . . .
Q X d6 52 Nf5 + , White exchanges queens
and easily wins the knight ending with two
extra pawns.

It remains to add that Keres did not fall

into the clever trap set by Tal. He played
48 . . . Nf2+ (instead of 48 . . . h5+ ) , and after
a stubborn resistance Tal was nevertheless
forced to resign.

Here the idea of the temporary queen sacri­ White would have continued 30 Qd8+
fice was to exploit a knight fork-a simultane­ Kh7 (if30 . . . Kg7, then 31 Qf6+ and 32 Ng5)
ous attack on two objects. As a result White 3 1 Ng5 + Kh6 32 N X f7+ Kg7 (32 . . . Kh5
eliminated the threat of mate, and, on re­ 33 Qh8 + , 34 Qh3+ and 35 Qf3 mate) 33
gaining his queen, simplified the position to Qf6+ Kg8 34 Ng5 ! Q x fl + 35 Kh2, and
his advantage. the black king is in a mating net.

1 77
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

No. 4 (p.42) w
Keres-Fuchs
Marianske Lazne, 1965

The spectacular move 22 . . . Nf3 ! (in reply

to 22 Bg2) with inevitable mate became pos­
sible because the bishop at g2 was 'over­
loaded'.
Keres took the d-pawn, and went in for the
variation in which, after an intermediate No. 6 (p.54)
check at a2, Black carried out a tactical blow. Keres-Eiiskases
Semmering-Baden, 1937
36 N x ds Ra2+
37 Kg3 Nx ds
38 R X d5 R X g2 +

Now, as has already been stated, the cap­

ture of the rook leads to a level knight ending
after 39 . . . N X e3 + and 40 . . . N X d5, but . . .
39 Kh3 !

Keres's decision to take the d-pawn was

based on precisely this possibility ! Mate at
d8 is threatened. In order to defend against
it, Black must play 39 . . . f6 (if 39 . . . Nd6,
then 40 KXg2). But then comes 40 Rd8+
Kf7. There is no longer a fork, and White
takes the rook-41 KXg2.
Black resigns.
No. 5 (p.44)
Goldenov-Keres
15th USSR Championship, Leningrad, 1947
I
... rn ealcrilating the variations after the cap­
ture of the rook at a8, Keres found that
instead of 22 Bg2 White has 22 Ndl !. By
defending f2 (with his knight) and controlling
h l (with his bishop), White parries the threats,
and remains a rook up.
The capture of the pawn would have led to
a catastrophe.
Keres would have continued 10 Qb3 !, and
on 10 . . . e6-l l N X f7 ! K X f7 12 Ng5+
Ke8 1 3 Qx e6 + Be7 14 Qf7+ and 1 5 Ne6
mate.
In the game Black played 9 . . . h6.
No. 7 (p .l02)
Euwe-Keres
Match-Tournament for the Wor/d
Championship, 1948
Keres rejected the sacrifice 19 . . . N X f4
because of the following variation : 20 g X f4
Q x f4 (20 . . . BXf4 21 Qe6+ ) 21 Qe6+ Kh8,

178
 Answers to questions

B w

when White has 22 Ndf3 ! !, after which the said that in this variation Black would have
black queen has no good retreat. A piece created the maximum difficulties for his
down, Black himself would have had to opponent.
offer the exchange of queens . . .

No. 10 (p .l44)
No. 8 (p.102) Keres-lteshevSky
Euwe-Keres AVRO-Tournament, Holland, 1938
Match-Tournament for the World
Championship, 1948 w

Had Reshevsky gone in for this position,

20 Qe6 + loses after 20 . . . Q x e6 21 N x e6 he would have met the bayonet thrust 1 8 e7 ! ,
Be3 + 22 Kh1 Rf1 + ! ! 23 Kg2 (23 NX/1 Be4 luring Black into a fatal pin. Mter 1 8 . . .
mate) 23 . . . Rf2+ . B X e7 1 9 Nd5 (the c6 pawn is pinned)
1 9 . . . Nc8 20 N X e7 N X e7 2 1 Bg5 the e7
No. 9 (p.l42) point falls, and Black loses.
KereH3chmid
Zurich, 1961 No. 1 1 (p.157)
Euwe-Keres
White would have had the fine combination
AVRO-Tournament, Holland, 1938
2 1 B X e6 ! ! B X e6 22 g3 ! (driving the queen
(possible variation)
off the vital diagonal). The clever tactical
trick 22 . . . Rd5 ! ? would not have saved 38 . . . Nc3 !
Black, in view of 23 g X f4 R X h5 24 Rd8 + The themes of the combination are inter­
Ke7 25 R X h8 R X h2 26 Ra8, when the win ference (breaking the connection between
is . a matter of technique. Even so, it must be the white queen and g3), and also overloading

179
 Paul Keres Chess Master Class

B 39 R X d7 (39 BX c3 QXg3 + etc.) 39 . . .

Q X g3 + 40 Kfl Qf3 + 41 Ke1 Qe3 + , and
the white king cannot escape from perpetual
check.

Incorrent, however, is 38 . . . Ne3 ? because

(apart from g3, the queen also has to defend
the rook).
of 39 Bg7 + ! (diverting the rook from d7,
or luring the king into a check) 39 . . . RX g7
(39 . . . KX g7 40 R X d7+ ; if 39 . . . Kh7, then
40 Bg8+ 1) 40 Q x e3, and 40 . . . B X e4
(40 . . . Re7 41 Bd5) 41 Q X e4 Q X g3 + fails
to 42 Kfl Qh3 + 43 Qg2, when Black has no
more checks.

180
 Index of opponents

Alekhine 1 3 , 23 Guti 57
Alexander 111
Alexandrescu 125
Arlanowski 1 1 Hindre 5
Hjort 68

Barcza 13, 44
....
Becker 68 Jansa 9
Behrensen 1 7
Bilek 88
Blumenov 14 Kan 166
Bobotsov � Karu 84
Bogoljubov 66 Keller 4
Boleslavsky 14 Kotov 7, 90, 1 38
Bondarevsky 65 Kurajica 10
Borisenko 40
Botvinnik 33, 35, 64
Bronstein 42, 99
Larsen 1 1
Browne 1 52
Laurentius (Laurine) 4, 32, 70, 84, 96
Levenfish 28, 46, 67
Lilienthal 22
Capablanca 65, 66, 68
Luckis 1 32
Clarke 21 , 165
Lutt 134
Lyublinsky 8

Dely 2
Donner 94
Malich 37, 177
Maslov 1 8
Mikenas 27, 92, 103
Ekenburg 68
Moiseyev 145
Eliskases 6, 54, 70, 178
Etruk 1 04
Euwe 7, 74, 102, 148, 1 56, 1 78, 1 79
Ojanen 1 36
Olafsson 76
Feilitzsch 69 Oren 113
Fine 12, 38, 63
Flohr 1 1 6
Foldsepp 2 Petrosian 50
Fuchs 42, 178 Petrov 1 04, 109
Fuderer 123 Pfieger 8
Furman 65 Pirc 1 64

Garcia 15 Radovici 1 5
Geller 64 , 94, 1 72 Randviir 169
Gereben 22 Raud 36
Gligoric 16, 64 Reshevsky 1 20, 143, 179
Goldenov 25, 43, 1 74, 178 Richter 162

181
 Index of opponents

Schmid 1 30, 140, 179 Tamowski 19

Shiyanovsky 1 14 Terpugov 61
Simagin 1 1 8 Thomas 20, 69
Sk<>ld 161 Tolush 10, 20
Smyslov 63, 67, 167 Troger 6
Spassky 9, 48 Tiirn 72
Stahlberg 34, 53, 65, 94, 146, 154
Stein 49
Steiner 73 Unzicker 101
Stoltz 39
Szab6 98, 107
Walther 29, 177
Wilkins 86
Taimanov 22 Winter 127
Tal 1 1 , 18, 24, 177

Index of openings

Alekhine's Defence 72, 140 Nimzowitsch's Opening 74, 75

Caro-Kann Defence 1 1 , 66, 70, 76 Pirc-Ufimtsev Defence 72, 73

Centre Game 69 Ponziani's Opening 134
Chigorin Defence 61
Queen's Gambit 64, 66, 67
Evans Gambit 81 Queen's Gambit Accepted 66

French Defence 64, 65, 66, 70, 109, 125, 154 Reti Opening 73, 74
Ruy Lopez 63, 64, 68, 69, 1 14, 174
Griinfeld Defence 65, 73
Guioco Piano 61, 71 Sicilian Defence 68, 88, 90, 107, 123, 127, 130, 136,
138
King's Gambit 68, 104
King's Indian Defence 68, 72 Two Knights Defence 68, 132

Nimzo-Indian Defence 64, 65, 66, 67 Vienna Game 86

182
Paul Keres Chess
Master Class