-,-

WIW Chess
University-
Ii
~

WWW.CHESSM.COM

D~®D~~~~~
~1~ ffil11 ~o/J~~~~
(ill ill}] ~ 0rn~Q~ ~
Alexander Beliausky
Adrian Mikhalchishin
aOlel Stetsko
Russian CHESS House
MOSCOW
2012
Russian Chess House
107076, P.Box 6, Moscow, Russia

Isolani Strategy. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Isolated Queen's Pawn

Copyright 2012 © Russian Chess House
Text Copyright © Alexander Beliavsky, Adrian Mikhalchishin, Oleg Stetsko

The moral right of the author has been asserted

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

in retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recodering or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the copyright owner.

English translation: Ken Neat

Typeset by Andrey Elkov

e-mail: murad@chess-m.comorandy-el@mail.ru

ISBN 978-5-946-93227-1

This book can be ordered directly from the publisher at the website:
www.chessm.com
Or try your local bookshop
 Introduction
Anyone who fears an isolated pawn should not
Aaron Nimzowitsch, one of the
outstanding chess researchers, con-
sidered that the problem of the iso-
lated pawn was one of the cardinal
problems of positional play. We are
talking about a central d4-pawn for
White or a d5-pawn for Black, the
isolation of which is characterised
by the absence of the pawns of this
colour on the e- and c-files.
From the dialectical point of
view, the specific nature of the iso-
lated pawn is the assessment of its
inherent contradictions - strengths
and weaknesses, or in other words,
dynamics and statics. In the open-
ing stage of the game this is an as-
sessment of the advantage of the
first move, although for the mod-
em state of theory the creation of
dynamically balanced positions is
more typical.
From the dynamic point of view,
the advantage of the isolated pawn,
let's say a pawn on d4, is that it is an
outpost, controlling the central c5-
play chess
Siegberl Tarrasch
and e5-squares, on which a knight
can be established, supporting an at-
tack on the king, and the presence
of the open e- and c-files assists the
rapid activation of the rooks. From
the static point of view, the defects
of the isolated pawn are that it needs
defending, especially when it is not
supported by the bishop, and above
all that it can be blockaded by a
piece, usually a knight, occupying
an important outpost (in our case
this is d5), which is not easy to elim-
inate. The benefits of controlling this
outpost become especially apparent
when the material is reduced, since
the weakness of the squares e4 and
c4 is felt.
The first to begin studying the
topic of the isolated pawn was the
first world champion Wilhelm Stei-
nitz, who encountered this prob-
lem in his match for the world title
with Johann Zukertort. Here is this
historic 9th game of their match, in
which the method of playing against
4 Introduction
the isolated d4-pawn was convinc-
ingly demonstrated.
ZUKERTORT - STEINITZ
New Orleans 1886
Queen's Gambit Accepted D26
l.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.LZ'lc3 LZ'lf6
4/1'\ f3 dxc4 S.e3 cS 6.i. xc4 cxd4
7.exd4 i.e7 S.O-O 0-0.
A typical position with an iso-
lated d4-pawn, characteristic of the
Queen's Gambit Accepted.
9:~e2 LZ'lbd7 10.i.b3 LZ'lb6
1I •.ltf4. Nowadays the development
ofthe bishop at g5 is preferred.
1I ... LZ'lbdS 12 ..ltg3 ~aS 13.
~acl .ltd7 14.LZ'leS l:tfdS! lS:~f3
.lteS! Note the manoeuvre l:1f8-d8
followed by playing the bishop to
e8 - this is an important positional
idea, which is still practised today.
Such a regrouping of the pieces is
useful both for attack, and for de-
fence.
16.l:tfel %lacS 17..lth4.
17 ••• LZ'lxc3! Today the positional
ideas of fighting against the isolated
d4-pawn are known to many play-
ers, but when they were employed
by Steinitz they were a revelation.
After Black has securely defended
his kingside, he switches to an at-
tack in the centre and creates a so-
called isolated pawn pair d4-c3. The
d4-pawn is defended, but there is
now a new weakness - the c3-pawn,
which needs defending.
lS.bxc3 'WIc7. One of the ele-
ments of modem technique is the
fixing of the isolated pawn pair,
which in the given position could
have been achieved by l8 ... b5!?,
but Steinitz carries a different plan
against the weaknesses. He aims to
simplify the position, reckoning that
the hanging pawns (if White plays
c3-c4) will remain a target.
19JIVd3 LZ'ldS! (nowadays a
typical exchanging manoeuvre)
20.i.xe7 ~xe7 21.i.xdS. White
falls in with Black's plans, and com-
mits a serious positional mistake.
Introduction
21 .. &.g3 would have retained rough-
ly equal chances.
21. •. ~xd5 22.c4. White plays
too actively - the advance of the
c-pawn merely weakens his pawn
centre.
22 •• J:Idd8 23.I:te3. This attack
on the securely defended king is not
realistic. White should have sup-
ported his d4-pawn with 23 .I:ted I ,
intending ~ d3-b3 with the idea of
c4-c5 and lile5-c4-d6, or, in some
cases, d4-d5.
23 ... ~d6 24.:tdl. 24.t!h3
~xd4 25:~xh7+ WfS is not dan-
gerous for Black.
24 ••• f6 25.I1h3 h6 26.tLlg4
~f4! Black has repelled White's
attack and he now launches a coun-
terattack, which gains in strength
because the rook at h3 coordinates
poorly with the remaining pieces.
27.11Je3 .ta4! The need to de-
fend the d4-pawn forces the white
rook to abandon the first rank.
28.1113 ~d6 29.l:Id2 .li.c6
30.l:tg3. Nothing is given by
30.l:txf6 gxf6 31.~g6+ c;t>fS
32.~xf6+ \t>e8 33.0Jf5 exf5, but
30.d5 ~e5 31.I1g3 exd5 32.~g6
came into consideration, although
even here after 32 ... ~c7 Black has
the advantage.
30 ••• fS 31JIg6 .te4 32.~b3
..tJh7 33.c5 l::txc5 34Jhe6 :c1+
3S.t1ldl ~f4 36JiUb21Ibl 37.~c3
Ilc8 38.l:he4 ~ xe4. White re-
lIigned.
5
A convincing win, wouldn't you
agree? Johann Zukertort clearly
failed to cope with the problem of
the isolated d4-pawn, which he de-
liberately (we must emphasise this)
went in for in the opening, hoping
to benefit from his advantage in
space, which was greatly valued in
the romantic 19th century. It was no
accident that one of the faithful fol-
lowers of Steinitz's teachings, Sieg-
bert Tarrasch, vigorously stood up
for the isolated pawn: 'I think that
the player whose queen's pawn is
isolated has a clear advantage. The
point is that this pawn may serve as
the starting-point for a very strong
attack.' Tarrasch's belief in the vir-
tues of the isolated pawn was so
great, that he was also prepared to
have one with Black, by playing in
the Queen's Gambit l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6
3.CiJc3 c5! (Tarrasch's evaluation),
thereby agreeing to the isolation
of his d5-pawn after 4.cxd5 exd5
5.CiJf3 followed by the exchange on
d4. Nowadays the Tarrasch Defence
to the Queen's Gambit is regarded
as a sound opening, where Black
achieves a position of dynamic bal-
ance.
In modem practice the appear-
ance of an isolated pawn is the re-
sult of an opening variation being
chosen, in which the possessor of
the pawn hopes in return to exploit
his advantage in time or space. It is
well known that the advantage of
6 Introduction

the first move affects the possibil-
ity of exploiting the dynamic and
static features of an isolated pawn
when there are still a large number
of pieces on the board. Therefore we
think it is logical to consider sepa-
rately positions from the opening
obtained with isolated d4- and d5-
pawns. In isolated pawn positions
with reduced material and stable in
character, the strategy of the play, ir-
respective of the colour, has its gen-
eral rules, both in the middlegame,
and in the endgame.
 PART!
THE ISOLATED D4-PAWN

The study of modern chess takes Queen's Gambit, Orthodox

Rccount of the interconnection of the Defence
opening with the middlegame, since I.d4 dS 2.c4e6 3.ctJc3 ctJf64.i.gS
the pawn structure arising after the i.e7 S.ctJf3 0-0 6.e3 ctJbd7 7.i.d3
opening largely determines the dxc4 8.i.xc4 cS 9.0-0 cxd4 lO.exd4.
further development of the game.
As regards our theme, Tarrasch re-
marked: 'If for an isolated pawn one
can obtain an advantage in time or
position, such an operation is advan-
tageous and becomes an important
Icature for the creation of an attack.
But if the opponent has a lead in de-
velopment, the isolating of the pawn
iii unfavourable.'
Modern opening theory includes
II quite extensive range of openings,
where White goes in for an isolated Queen's Gambit, Capablanca
d4-pawn, with the hope of exploit- Variation
ing its dynamic features. Here are a I.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.ctJc3 lfJf6
number of typical positions, arising 4.i.gS i.e7 S.ctJf3 0-0 6.e3 ctJbd7
in the popular openings. 7.l:tcl c6 8.i.d3 dxc4 9.i.xc4
ll'ldS 1O.i.xe7 'ilxe7 11.0-0 ctJxc3
12.l:txc3 eS 13.~c2 exd4 14.exd4.
8 Part I
Queen's Gambit, Tarrasch De-
fence Deferred
I.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.cik3 0'Jf6
4.LL\f3 c5 5.cxd5 liJxd5 6.e3 Ciic6
7 ..liL.d3 cxd4 8.exd4.
Queen's Gambit Accepted
I.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.Ciif3 lilf6
4.e3 e6 5 ..~xc4 c5 6.0-001c6 7.W!ie2
cxd4 8.I!dl .1i.e7 9.exd4.
Queen's Gambit Accepted
l.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.01c3 e5 4.e3
exd4 5.exd4liJf6 6 .. I1l.xc4.
Nimzo-Indian Defence
I.d4 Cilf6 2.c4 e6 3.01c3 .~.b4
4.e3 0-0 5 .. I1I.d3 d5 6.01f3 c5 7.
0-0 01c6 8.a3 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4
10 .. I1l.xc4.fl.e7.
The isolated d4-pawn
Caro-Kann Defence, Panov At-
tack
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4
c6 5.0lc3 0,)f6 6.0lf3 'b..e7 7.cxd5
0)xd5.
Caro-Kann Defence, Panov At-
tack
l.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5
4.c4 0lf6 5.0lc3 0lc6 6.Ciif3 5U.g4
7.cxd5 0lxd5 8.~b3 .'b..xf3 9.gxf3
0ib6 1O .. ~.e3 e6.
9
Sicilian Defence, Alapin Vari-
ation
l.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 ~xd5
4.d4 e6 5.0lf3 0lf6 6 ..~d3 ii.e7
7.0-0 0-0 8.~e2 cxd4 9.exd4.
Petroff Defence
l.e4 e5 2.01f3 0lf6 3.0lxe5 d6
4.0Jf3 Lilxe4 5.d4 d5 6 .. 'b..d3'b..e7
7.0-0 0lc6 8.Mel 0..g4 9.c4 Ciif6
1O.0lc30-0 II.cxd5 0lxd5.
10
Giuoco Piano
l.e4 e5 2.tt::lf3 liJc6 3.it.c4 it.c5
4.c3 liJf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 it.b4+
7.it.d2 i.xd2+ 8.liJbxd2 d5 9.exd5
liJxd5.
Part I
By agreeing, on emerging from
the opening, to a position with an
isolated pawn, White hopes to ex-
ploit its dynamic features. What do
they comprise?
I) The d4-pawn ensures control
of the e5- and c5-points. Of partic-
ular importance is the e5-outpost,
from which a knight, supported
by active bishops (in particular
the light-square bishop) assists the
mounting of a kingside attack.
2) A dynamic feature of the d4-
pawn is the potential energy of
its advance, comprising the d4-d5
breakthrough, which leads to the
opening of the position and is es-
pecially apparent when White has a
lead in development.
3) If Black is behind in devel-
opment, an attack on the piece
blockading the d4-pawn may lead
to a favourable change in the pawn
structure by means of exchanges
ond5.
 Chapter 1

Attack on the kingside

1.1. Attack with the f-pawn 12 ... tiJfd5, aiming for simplifica-
tion) 13.L1leS .1l.c6 14.1:tadl tLl b4
The feature of this attack is mak- 15.~h3 .1l.d5 16.tilxdS tLlbxdS?
ing use of the rook on fl. From here A mistake, allowing White to begin
it supports the fl-f4-f5 advance, the pawn attack f2-f4-fS. 16 ... tLlfxd5
and after the exchange on f5 coor- was correct, when after 17.~cl l:tcs
dination is established between the White has only a slight advantage.
knight on e5, the light-square bishop
on the a2-gS diagonal, and the rook
on fl. After this the f7-pawn will
need constant defence.
The first player to carry out this
theme most effectively was the fifth
world champion Mikhail Botvinnik.

BOTVINNIK - VIDMAR
Nottingham 1936
Queen's Gambit D60

1.c4 e6 2.Ci) t3 dS 3.d4 0J f6 4•. ~ gS 17.f4! I.Ic8 .

.U.e7 S.tilc3 0-0 6.e3 tilbd7 7.s1l.d3
cS 8.0-0 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4 10•.lii.xc4
tilb6 11.~b3 ~d7 12.~d3.
A typical switching of the queen
to the kingside, which we will also
encounter in later examples.
12 ... tLlbdS (nowadays Black
would almost automatically prefer
Black is unable to prevent the
opening of the f-file. If 17 ... g6, then
IS.~h6 1:teS 19 ..Ji£.a4, winning the
exchange. If 17 .. .tlJe4 there fol-
lows IS.tLlxf7! Wxf7 (lS .. Jlxf7
19. Wxe6) 19 .I1de I ! with a decisive
attack.
18.fS exfS?
12 Part I . The isolated d4-pawn

Apparently the decisive mistake. Nimzowitsch recommended that the

18 ... ~d6 was more tenacious, al-
though after 19.fxe6 fxe6 20.Q)c4
~c6 21.k'tfel here too White has a
great advantage.
19J:hfS ~d6.
If 19 .. J:tc7, then 20.l:dfl LLlb6
21.~h4 LLlbd5 22.LLlxf7 k'txf7 23 .
.1i.xd5 Cilxd5 24.l'hf7 ~xg5 25.
~xg5 with a mating attack.
d4-pawn should first be defended,
reckoning that the attack on the king
would follow of its own accord.
10 ..• 0-0 11.~e2 CZlb4 12.CZleS
b6?!
12 ... LLlbd5 was more logical.

13.f4! LLlfdS 14.Itad1 .1l.f6.

14 ... g6, preventing the advance of
the pawn to 5, came into consideration.
1S.t1J e4 .1l. b716.fS exfS17.lhfS
20.tt\xt7! ~xt7 2l.1i.xf6 ..Iii..xf6
0'\xe3.
(2 I. .. tfJ xf6 22.Ihf6 .1l. xf6 9.
~xc8+) 22.l:IxdS ~c6 23.l:d6
~e8 24.r.::td7.
Black resigned.

SPASSKY - NIKOLAEVSKY
Kharkov 1963
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27

l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3it) t3 CiJ f6

4.e3 e6 S•.1l. xc4 cS 6.0-0 a6 7.a4 cxd4
8.exd4 LLlc6 9.LLlc3 .1i.e7 10..1l.e3.
The experts have different opin-
ions about this modest development
of the bishop. Thus Tarrasch and
18.CiJ xf6+!
Black had only reckoned on
18.~xe3 .1l.xe5 19.Ihe5 .1l.d5.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kings ide
18••. gxf6 19J#Yxe3 fxeS 20.
~xeS h6 2tJIf6 '>t'h7.
He also loses after both 21 ...
Cild5 22.~g3+ Wh7 23Jii,d3+ and
21. .. i!..d5 22.Mxh6 f6 23.~g3+
Wf7 24.l:.Ih7+.
22.I'tdfl JU.dS 23Ji'fS+ ~g8
24.~g4+ Wh7 2S.MXh6+.
Black resigned.
LERNER - KHARITONOV
51 st USSR Championship,
Lvov 1984
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.CilO a6 4.e3
0Jf6 SJLxc4 e6 6.a4 cS 7.0-0 cxdS 8.
exdSCiJc69.lf)c3iLe710~e30-0 11.
~e2 b612~adl tilb4 13.tileS St..b7.
14.f4! In contrast to the simi-
lar situation in the previous game,
Black has completed his develop-
ment and he has secure control of
the d5-square, but here too the at-
tack with the f-pawn gives White
the better chances.
13
14 •.. CiJbdS IS.fS ~d6.
Since 15 ... exf5 is unfavourable
for Black, he tries to maintain his e6-
point.
16•.1lgS! ctJxc3.
White steps up the pressure on
Black's position, and Black tries to
weaken it by exchanging. However, it
is not easy for him to find a satisfacto-
ry plan of defence, since in some vari-
ations the weakness of the a6-pawn is
felt. If 16 ... Mfe8 White could have
continued 17.Md3, when 17 ... ctJb4
is not dangerous in view of 18.I:tg3
I/W xd4+ 19. \t> hI with a strong attack.
17.bxc3 Cile4 18..ltxe7 ~xe7
19J~~g4! liJf6.
White's pressure increases (19 ...
Cilxc3? 20.f6) and Black is forced to
make positional concessions.
20.~h3 exfS 2t~xfS .1le-'.
It is not possible to neutralise
White's pressure on the kings ide by
21...iL.d5?, since this loses a piece:
22 ..ltxd5 tDxd5 23.tDc6 ~d6
24.~xd5 ~xd5 25.l1le7+.
22.~gS .1lg6.
14
13.l:tf3! A typical inclusion of
the rook in the attack on the king.
Nothing is given by 23.l1'\xg6 hxg6
24.*xg6 .e3+ 2S.Whl ~xc3
26.Ilxt~ ~xc4 with equality.
23 .. .'~c7 24.l:h3l:fe8 2S.ii.b3
(intending 26.tLlxg6) 2S •. J:txeS
26.~xeS ~d7 27.l':te3 IiIe8 28.~f4
~c8 29.~del bS30.axbSaxbS31.h3
~c6 32:~t3 ~b6 33lte5 b4 34.~e3
h6 3S.c4 'it> h7 36.0 ~ c6. Black re-
signed.
NEVEROV - MAKSIMENKO
Kherson 1989
Nimzo-Indian Defence E41
l.d4 tLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.tLlc3 j(b4
4.e3 cS S.j( d3 cxd4 6.exd4 dS
7.tLlt3 dxc4 8.j(xc4 tLlbd7 9.0-0
tLlb6 10.j(b3 j(d7 1l.j(gS j(e7
12.tLleS j(c6.
13.f4! 0-0 14.15 exf5?! 14 ...
ii.dS! was necessary, covering
White's important attacking diago-
nal a2-g8.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
IsJhrs tLlfdS. IS ... j(d7!?
with the idea of j(e6 was more te-
nacious.
16.ii.xe7 ~xe7 17.~d3
17 ••• I:tad8?
A routine move, allowing White
to develop an irresistible attack.
17 ... g6!? with the idea of 18.~g3
tLlxc3 19.bxc3 ii.dS was necessary.
18.~an f6 19.tIhS gS. No
better is 19 ... g6 20.tLlxg6! hxg6
21.~xg6+ ~g7 22.~e4 with a de-
cisive pin on dS.
20.tLlg4 I:Id7 2I.h4 gxh4 22.tLle3
l:ifd8 23.UffS. Black resigned.
1.2. Piece attack on the kingside
This attack involves coordinat-
ing the heavy pieces, and switching
them to the kingside with the aim of
provoking a weakening of the king's
pawn screen. One of the standard
procedures is moving a rook along
the 3rd rank to h3 or g3.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside
FURMAN - KERES
22nd USSR Championship,
Moscow 19S5
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 dS 2.e4 dxe4 3.ltJO ltJf6
4.e3 eS S•.lihe4 e6 6.0-0 a6 7"~ e2
ltJbd7 8.a4 exd4 9.exd4 ltJb6
10•.tb3 .te7 1l.lhe3 0-0 12.I.'tdl
Q:)bdS 13.0:JeS .lid7 14..1i.gS .te6.
IS.l:Id3! Although Black has
completed his development and is
controlling the dS blockading square,
White retains attacking resources and
he switches his rook to the kingside.
IS....~d6. If IS ... ltJb4 there
would have followed 16.IIg3!, when
16 ... ~xd4 is dangerous because of
17.ltJxf7! <JJxf7 (17 ... IIxf7 18.~xe6
LLldSI9.11dl) 18.~xe6+\t'e819.l':Idl
with a strong attack for White, for exam-
ple: 19 ... ~b6 20..te3 ~c7 21.l::txg7.
16.l':Iadl I:tfd8 I 7.l:t h3 g6.
If 17 ... .te8, then 18.ltJxdS
exdS (18 ... LLl xdS 19 ..1L. xdS exdS
20.ltJc4) 19 ..tc2 h6 20 ..txf6 .txf6
IS
21.~d3 g6 22.ltJg4 hS 23.l!IxhS
gxhS 24.~h7+ \t;f8 2S.ltJh6 ~e6
26.Wfl with the idea ofI:Iel.
18•.tel. The bishop returns to
its initial position, in order to vacate
the diagonal for the queen, but this
manoeuvre loses White two tempi
compared with 18.~d3!? followed
by ~g3 and ~h4.
18 .. JIae8 19"~'d2 liJhS. Black
should have included his bishop in
the defence: 19 ... .tf8 20.~gS i..g7
(if 20 .. .'~'b4, then 2l.i..xdS ltJxdS
22.ltJxf7! Wxf7 23.IIxh7+ .tg7 24.
~eS lIg8 2S ..th6) 21.~h4 ltJe7
(weaker is 21. JiJhS 22.ltJe4 VJlie7
23.ltJgS! f6 24.ltJxc6J:txc6 2S.ltJe4
with advantage to White) 2l.g4
\t;f8 22 ..tgSltJeg8 with chances of
a defence.
20.~xhS gxhS 2i.ltJe4 Vjjb4
22.~d3 h4 (preventing 23.~g3)
23.ltJgS .1L.xgS 24 ..1L.xgS f6
2S•.liLxdS ,lll.xdS. If 2S ... l:txdS?,
then 26 ..txf6 .txa4 27.Vjjh3! l:xeS
28 ..~xe5 .txdl 29.~xe6+ Wf8
30 ..1L.d6+, winning.
26 ..t xf6 l:t f8.
16
The game would appear to be
decided. After 27.ttJg4! White's
attack should have brought him a
material advantage, since Black has
nothing better than to return the ex-
change: 27 .. Jhf6 28.ttJxf6+ rtJg7
29.CZlxd5 exd5 30:~f5, transposing
into an endgame which is hopeless
for Black. However, White relaxed
and after 27.~xh4? ~xb2 28.ttJd7
Ue3 29.~n Ufe8 Black seized the
initiative.
POLUGAEVSKY - LUTIKOV
Sverdlovsk 1958
Queen's Gambit D40
I.d4 ttJf6 2.e4 e6 3.0:\(3 eS
4.e3 iL.e7 S.ttJe3 0-0 6.~d3 dS 7.
0-0 dxe4 8.~xe4 ttJbd7 9.~e2 a6
10.84 exd4 1l.exd4 ttJb6 12.~b3
.td7 13.ttJeS ~e8?! (13 ... ~c6 or
the immediate 13 ... €I bd5 was more
active) 14.I:Idl ttJbdS.
IS.l:td3! The bishop on e8 dis-
rupts the coordination of the black
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
pieces, and this facilitates the
switching of the white rook to the
kingside.
IS •• J:le8 (after 15 ... ttJb4 all the
same there follows 16.l:tg3, since
16 ... ~xd4 is not possible because
of 17.iL.h6) 16.l:Ig3 rtJh8 17.<~gS
ttJb4 18.IIdl IIe7. Preparing 19 ...
Cf)fd5, which was impossible im-
mediately on account of 19.ttJxd5
ttJxd5 20.~xd5 ~xg5 21.~xb7.
After 18 ... ttJg8 19.~xe7 'VJiJxe7
20.d5! exd5 21.~xd5 White has a
strong attack.
19.1':th3 (preventing 19 ... ttJfd5
in view of 20.~h5) 19 ... g6? But
such a weakening of the position
should be made only if absolutely
necessary. It was more logical to
play 19 ... iL.c6 20:~e3 (20.iL.xe6
fxe6 21.ttJg6+ rtJg8 22:iYxe6+
l:f7 is inadequate) 20 ... ttJg8
21.~f4, although White's attack is
still strong.
20:~f3 J:tg8. After weaken-
ing his kings ide, Black essentially
has no defence. If 20 .. .tiJfd5 there
follows 2l.ttJxg6+ fxg6 22.~xf8+
~xf8 23.iL.xd8, while after 20 ...
€I h5 White has the decisive 21.~ h6
Ug822.'ihf7!
21.ttJe4 ttJhS. The capture 21...
ttJxe4 leads to mate - 22.l::txh7+
rtJxh7 23.'iVh3+ rtJg7 24.~h6#.
(See diagram)
22.~Jhti! The decisive stroke,
since after 22 ... ~xf7 23.ttJxf7+
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside 17

14.IIe3 g6. 14 ... Cilg4 15 ..,axe7

liJxe3 does not work because of
16.ii.xh7+!
15.l::tg3 :C:c8. It was essential
to play 15 ... liJc6! 16.J2.h6 ~xd4
17:~xd4 liJxd4 18.ii.xfS \t'xfS,
hindering White's attack at the cost
of a slight loss of material.
16.JL.h611e8 17.a3 C!Jc6.

Wg7 24.Cilxd8 Mxd8 25.g4! Cilf6

26.,~h6+ <Jih8 27.Cilg5 Black loses
material.
22 ... J2.c6 23.~xe6 ug7 24.d5
,ild7 25.,i1.xe7 kIxe7 26Jl~'d6 ~e8
27/])f6 Cilxf6 28.~xf6+ Ilg7
29.d6. Black resigned.

KEENE - MILES
Hastings 1975176
Queen's Gambit D42
18.Cilxg6! hxg6 19.J2.xg6 fxg6.
Black loses after both 19 ....1l.d6
l.CilfJ liJf6 2.c4 c5 3.lilc3 CiJc6
20 ..1lxf7+ 'tt>xf7 21.IIg7+ WfS
4.e3 e6 5.d4 d5 6.cxd5 t;J xd5
22.~f3, and 19 ....1lfS 20.ii.c2+
7.,\.ild3 cxd4 8.exd4 ,\.ile7 9.0-0 0-0
~h8 2L~xfS l'lxfS 22.~d2 liJg8
10.~el Cilf6 1l.,l:l,g5 Cilb4 12.,~,bl
23.IIh3+ Wg7 24.1Jh7+! Wf6 25.d5.
b6 13.t;\e5 ,Ub7.
20.~bl liJe5 21.dxe5 liJe4
22.liJxe4 Wh7 23.liJf6+ ii.xf6
24.~xg6+ Wh8 25.ii.g7+ ii.xg7
26.~xg7#.

We will consider some examples

of attack with the pawn structure
where an isolated d4-pawn is imped-
ed by a pawn on c6. A characteristic
feature is the active use by White of
the open e-file for his rook. If Black
18
delays his development, White can
also begin a direct piece attack.
FARAGO - VELIKOV
Albena 1983
Queen's Gambit D68
I.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.liJc3 liJf6
4.CilO e6 s..lilgS .'ii.e7 6.e3 li'lbd7
7.:act 0-0 8•.'ii.d3 dxc4 9..~.xc4
CildS 10.Sbe7 ~xe7 11.0-0 L1Jxc3
12.Mxc3 eS 13J~'c2 exd4 14.exd4
~d6.
White's pieces are well mobi-
lised, and the rook at c3 is already
on its way to the kingside. Black
is behind in development, but the
main defect of his position is that his
knight is unable to block the a2-g8
diagonal of the bishop. Exploiting
the fact that the king is inadequately
defended, White builds up an irre-
sistible attack.
IS.ttJgS! (attacking the h7- and
f7-pawns) 15 ••• liJf6. 15 ... g6?
leads to disaster on the f7-square:
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
16.Cilxf7! ktxf717.I;!f3t;]f618.~b3
V/lie7 19 ..fl.xf7+ ~xf7 20.Mxf6.
After 15 ... ~g6 16.~xg6 hxg6
17.lJel the invasion of the rook at
e7 is decisive.
16.I;!O g617.~b3 CildS. If 17 ...
VJlie7 White wins by 18.liJxf7! l:'Ixf7
19 ..~xf7+ ~xf7 20.I;!xf6.
18.li'le4 ~d8 19.Jlt..xdS cxdS.
20.CLlf6+! Wg7 21.~e3! (the de-
cisive queen invasion) 21. .. hS
22.~eS Wh6 23.CiJxhS il..g4 24.
~g7+ WgS (24 ... Wxh5 25.~h7+
Wg5 26.h4#) 2S.l:Ig3. Black re-
signed.
LPUTIAN - BALASHOV
Yerevan 1986
Queen's Gambit D68
I.d4 liJf6 2.c4 e6 3.liJO dS
4.tiJc3 Jlt..e7 S.Jlt..gS 0-0 6.e3 ttlbd7
7.I'Ict c6 8..'ii.d3 dxc4 9.Jlt..xc4
CLldS 10.Jlt..xe7 ~xe7 11.0-0 lfJxc3
12J:Ixc3 eS 13"~c2 exd4 14.exd4
liJf6 IS.tIel ~d8.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside
The pawn structure of both sides
is identical to the previous example,
but here Bhick succeeds in blocking
the bishop's diagonal. However, an
important virtue of White's position
is his control of the e-file, and he ex-
ploits the outpost at e5 to switch his
rook to the kingside.
16.h3! White prevents the de-
velopment of the bishop at g4 and
threatens after l7.k'tce3 to invade
with his rook at e7, placing Black
in a critical position. His reply is
forced.
16 .. .tZ'ldS 17•.lixdS! ~xdS
(17 ... exd5 18.!'tc7) 18.BeS.
19
With the exchange of his knight,
Black's king has been left without
protection and it comes under attack
by the heavy pieces.
18 .. J~~d6(18 ... ~xa2?? 19.IIa3
and the queen is lost} 19.'11gS g6
(if 19 ... ~g6, then 20.~b3 is pos-
sible) 20.lJO f6. 20 .. "~xd4?! is
dangerous because of 21.l::te4 ~ d5
22.'11xf7 !=lxf7 23.l:e8+ ~g7
24.~c3+ ~h6 25.~e3+ ~g7
26.!hf7+ ~xf7 27."fJ.e7, winning
the queen, while if 20 ... ..trs there
follows 21.nxf5 gxf5 22.l::tg3 ~h8
23.~xf5 W'g6 24.~f4 f5 25.liJxh7.
21.~b3+ Wg7 22.l:e8! as. Af-
ter 22 ... :axe8 the king succumbs
to a mating attack: 23.~f7+ Wh6
24:~xh7+ Wxg5 2S.h4+ ~g4
26:~xg6+ <;t>xh4 27.g3+.
23.Hxc8. Black resigned.
KARPOV - YUSUPOV
Candidates match, 8th Game,
London 1989
Queen's Gambit D56
1.d4 liJf6 2.c4 e6 3.liJO dS
4.QJc3 ..te7 S•.¥l.gS 0-0 6.e3 h6
7.,~h4 Cile4 8.,liL.xe7 'fixe7 9.IiIcl
c6 10.lL.d3 cnxc3 llJlxc3 dxc3
12.,¥l.xc4 liJd7 13.0-0 eS 14...tb3
exd4 lS.exd4 I1:lf6 16.gel ~d6.
(See diagram)
The pawn structure in the dia-
gram is similar to the previous ex-
amples, but here the e5 outpost is
20
accessible to the knight. Therefore
White's move seems obvious.
17.tLleS! tLldS?! Black's reply
seems equally obvious, since the
knight occupies the strategically
important d5-point and blocks the
important diagonal of the bishop at
b3. But the knight moves away from
the castled position, which White
immediately exploits. Black should
have aimed for the exchange of
bishops: 17 ... .liL.e6 18.li.xc6 fxe6,
although after 19.1::tg3! he would
still have had to work hard to defend
his position.
18.Iig3 .liL.fS. 18 ... .liL.e6 19.~d2
'it'h8 was more cautious, but not
19 ... .liL.f5 20 ..liL.xd5! exd5 21.~f4
.te4 22.0 .liL.h7 23.~g4 g5 24.f4 f6
25.fxg5 hxg5 26.h4 with an attack.
19JWhS .liL.h7 20.~g4! (White's
attack develops rapidly) 20 ••• gS
(20 ... g6 21.h4) 21.h4 f6 22.hxgS
hxgS 23.f4 tIaeS? This move leads to
loss of material. 23 ... ~h8 was better,
at least maintaining material equality
in an inferior rook endgame: 24.fxg5
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
fxe5 25.g6 ~xg6 26.~xg6 .liL.xg6
27.IIxg6 exd4 28.l:te4 IIf7 29 ..liL.xd5
exd5 30.gh4+ kth7 31.Iixd4 bId8.
24.fxgS! fxeS. If 24 .... ~ f5, then
25.gxf5+! .liL.xg4 26.l:hg4+ Wh8
27.11'1f7+ l:Ixf7 28.l::txe8+ Iif8 29.f7
I1lf6 30.Uxf8 ~xf8 31.I:Ig8+.
2S.g6 .liL. xg6 26.dxeS ~ e6 27.
.liL.xdS! cxdS 28.~xg6+ ~xg6 29.
Mxg6+ ~h7 30.tId6, and White
won the double rook endgame.
In the last two examples White's
spatial advantage was determined by
his control of the e-file. Now we will
consider one more example with the
use of the e5 outpost by a rook .
VAGANIAN - HUBNER
Tilburg 1983
Queen's Gambit Accepted D20
1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.tLlc3 eS
4.e3 exd4 S.exd4 tLlf6 6 •.liL.xc4 .liL.e7
7.tLlO 0-0 8.0-0 tLlbd7 9.ktelli'1b6
10•.liL.b3 c6 1l •.liL.gS .tg4.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kings ide
12.'Wtd3! White is much more ac-
tive, mainly due to his pressure on the
e-file. By removing his queen from
the pin by the bishop, he provokes its
exchange by the threat of0'lf3-e5.
12 .... s:.:.xfJ 13..~xfJ CilfdS 14.
\:Lxe7. Not l4.Mxe7 0'lxe7 l5.k'tel
0'lbc8 16.~e2 lIe8 17 .. txt7+
~xt7 18.%lte6+ 'fi.7f8 19.1"Ie3 CiJd6
20.kIf3+ 0'lef5!, and White is weak
on the back rank.
14 . ..tiixe7.
IS.l1eS! The rook joins the at-
tack, combining control of the e-file
with control of the d5-point.
21
IS ••• CiJg6 16.I:Ie4 L'ild7 17.l::dl
~aS ISJ:te3! (vacating a square for
the knight) IS •. J:tadSI9.LLJe4 VJlic7
20.h4! h6. 20 ... 0'lxh4 is not pos-
sible on account of 21.~h5 Cllg6
22.kIh3 h6 23.~xg6.
21. ~ g4 WhS 22.hS 0'1 f4 23.~ g3
gS 24.hxg6 fxg6 2S.I::rel UdeS
26.t1ge3. Combining an attack on
the king with pressure on the e-file.
26 ... Cllb6 27li)cS ~cS? An
oversight in a difficult position;
27 ... Mxe3 was necessary.
2S"~'xf4. Black resigned.
In an attack on the kingside, be-
gun with the switching of the queen,
its enhanced mobility expands
White's possibilities. The most usu-
al route for the queen to the kingside
is via d3-h3.
BRONSTEIN - BERGER
Amsterdam 1964
Queen's Gambit D60
l.c4 e6 2.LLJ c3 dS 3.d4Cll f6 4..it. g5
~.e7 S.e3 0'lbd7 6.CllfJ 0-0 7..it.d3
dxc4 S.,1l.xc4 cS 9.0-0 cxd4 10.exd4
C;i)b6 1l.3lb3 1Ld7 12.Cllesl::tcS.
(See diagram)
13.~d3. White is intending to
switch his queen to the kingside.
13 ... LLJ bdS? This move once again
indicates the lack of understanding in
those years of how to play dynamical-
ly against an isolated pawn. Modem-
22 Part I . The isolated d4-pawn

17 ... ~d6. There is no defence.

If 17 ... h6 there follows 18 ..ilxh6!
gxh619.~xh6withadecisiveattack.
In the event of 17 ... b4 18.tilxdS!
.U.xdS 19.'~d3 g6 20 ..)1Lh6 ne8
2 LliLa4 Black would have lost the
exchange.
lS.tLlxc6 l:txc6 19.,~xf6 Cilxf6
20.tile4! Black resigned.

KAVALEK - PRITCHETT
day defensive technique is based on Olympiad, Haifa 1976
striving for exchanges, and therefore Queen's Gambit D42
correct was 13 ... tLlfdS! 14.~xe7 (14 .
.~c2 g6 IS.~h6 0lb4=) 14 .. .'~xe7 l.CilfJ c5 2.c4 Cilf6 3.Cilc3 e6
(14 .. .tbxe7 IS.~c2 g6) IS.CiJxdS 4.e3 Cilc6 5.d4 d5 6.cd tilxd5
exdS 16.:6!ael ~d6 17.f4, although 7.. ~.d3 cxd5 S.exd5 .l:l.e7 9.0-0 0-0
even here White's initiative is quite 1O.bl: e 1 t;') cM ll.~ b 1 l{) f6 12.a3
serious. Cilbd5 13.CiJe5 ~d7.
14.I:tfel ~c6 15J~h3 a6. Black
is unable to relieve the pressure on
the kingside. If IS ... h6 there fol-
lows 16.~xh6! gxh6 17.W'xh6
Cilh7 18.~c2 tLlgS 19.h4, while af-
ter IS ... g6 White has the decisive
16.~h6! t'te8 17.tLlxf7.
16.IIadl b5 17.1i.c2.

14.~d3! White switches his

queen to h3 for an attack on the h7-
pawn with the active support of his
bishops.
14 ... ~c615J!Hh3!~d616.iL.g5!
(threatening 17.CiJxdS and 18.~xf6)
16... g6 (16 ... h6? 17.~xh6!).
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside 23

the faulty idea of playing the knight

to c4. 14 ... %Yd6 15.~d3 IXfd8
should have been considered.

17.. ~.a2! The bishop takes con-

trol of the important d5-point, al-
lowing the queen's rook to come
into play.
15.Clie5! The logical reaction to
17 ... HfdS IsJ1adl .:&.eS 19.
the decentralisation of the knight,
itd3! White is threatening to double
preparing the switching of the queen
heavy pieces on the h-file after W#h4
to the kingside.
and t~h3.
15 ... gcS 16J~'b'd3! 'Wic7.
19•.. Clixc3 20.bxc3 Clid5 (20 ...
~xa3? 2L~.xe6! fXe6 22.'~xe6+
Wg7 23.Clic4, regaining the piece) 21.
!1.xd5 .!1.xg5 (21. .. exd5 22.LfIxf7!
I::t..xfl 23.!.l.1xe7) 22•. I::t..xb7 nabS 23.
~f3 ~c7 24.:&.c6 f6 25.. ~xeS fxe5
26Jt~g4 ~c4 (26 ... Hxe8 was more
tenacious) 27.!.i.xg6 hxg6 2S.L'tg3
~.f4 29JIUxg6+. Black resigned.

DLUGY-OLL
Moscow 1989
Caro-Kann Dejence B14 17.. lig5. By playing 17 ..ltf4!
White could have placed Black
I.c4 c6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4in a critical position (the threat
CiJf6 5/iJc3 Clic6 6.cxd5 Clixd5is 18.tDg4). If 17 ... ~d8, then
7.Clif3 e6 S•.l1i.d3 .~b4 9.lU.d2 0-018 ..ltg5 gains in strength: 18 ... g6
10.0-0 Cilf6 11.a3 .1J.e7 12.21.e3 b619 ..lth6 ge8 20.~h3! (with the un-
13.hte1 .ab7 14.JiL.c2 LtJa5?! Withpleasant threat of 2I.CZJxt7!) 20 ...
24 Part I . The isolated d4-pawn

~d6 21..~a4 li:)c6 22.li:)b5 ~d5 4.c4 CiJf6 S.tiJc3 e6 6.QJO 1t.e7 7.
23.li:)xf7! Wxf7 24 ..lit.b3 with a de- cxdS li:)xdS 8.1t.d3 li:)c6 9.0-0 0-0
cisive attack. 10.I.!el ~d611.~c2 g6.
17 ... g6 18.~h3! li:)dS 19..1i.h6
QJxc3 20 ..1i.xfB .1i.xfB 21.bxc3
W'xc322 •.1i.d3.

12.li:)e4. The black king's posi-

tion has been compromised by the
move g6, creating the grounds for
an attack.
22 ....~xd4. It was better to
12 .•• W'c7 13.a3! It is important
capture this pawn with the knight
to take control of the b4-square, re-
- 22 ... li:)b3!? 23.~adl li:)xd4,
stricting the mobility of the black
for example: 24 ..1i.xg6 hxg6!? (or
knights.
24 ... ~xh3 25 ..1i.xf7+ Wg7 26.gxh3
13 ... .1i.d7.
1t.c5) 25.~xc3 ~xc3 26.~xd4 .1i.d5
with compensation for the exchange.
22 ... ~c7!?, defending the f7-pawn,
also came into consideration.
23.li:)xt7! Wxt7 24.kIadl ~f6
2S.~xh7+ .1i.g7 26•.lit.xg6+ We7
27 •.1i.f5 IIc6 28.~e3 ~h6 29.~g8
~fB 30..1i.e4 ~c4 3 l •.lit.g6. Black
resigned.

VELIMIROVIC - RUKAVINA
Novi Sad 1975
Caro-Kann Defence B14
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exdS cxdS
14.~d2! A brilliant solution!
The queen heads for h6, from where
with the support of the minor pieces
Chapter 1. Attack on the kings ide
it will exert strong pressure on the
king.
14... Mfe8 IS.~h6 ~f8 16.~h4
Cilee7. If 16 ... :il.g7 there follows
17.~c4!CDce718.CDe5,~xe519.dxe5
~xe5 20.SLxd5 CDxd5 21.~g5, at-
tacking the weak dark squares.
17.tDegS h6 18.CDh3 Wh7. If
18 ... h5 there follows 19 .g4! hxg4
20.tilhg5iLg7 21.C!'\e5, winning the
f7-pawn with a continuing attack.
19.tileS tilfS? (20 ... f6 would
have enabled the position to be
held) 20.~xfS exfS 21.LtJgS+ Wg8
22.tilgxt;, and White won.
LOBRON - DJURIC
Adelaide 1986
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 0'\f6 2.til13 dS 3.e4 dxe4
4.e3 e6 S.~ xe4 eS 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
Cbe6 8.~e2 exd4 9.I:tdl iLe7
10.exd4 0-0 lIllle3 tildS 12..Jlld3
Cbeb4 13 ..Jllbl ~e7. It is sounder
to develop the bishop at d7 or fian-
chetto it after 13 ... b6 (with the idea
of 14.'iVe4 f5).
25
14.CfJeS! Black's kingside is in-
adequately defended, and this al-
lows White to begin an attack on
the king, since the acceptance of the
pawn sacrifice 14 ... CDxc3? 15.bxc3
~ xc3 allows the rook to be included
with decisive effect - 16.Ma3! VJ!ic7
17.,~xh7+ ~xh7 18.~h5+ ~g8
19.Mh3.
14 ... f6. After 14 ... .Jlld7 15.IiIa3!
Cilf6 16.tile4 CDbd5 17.lIh3 White
also succeeds in switching his rook
to the kingside with a dangerous at-
tack.
IS.~hS fS. White's activity on
the kingside has borne fruit - Black
has weakened his pawn structure.
Now White exploits the delay in
the development of the c8-bishop
and attacks the blockading knight,
with the intention of seizing the c-
file.
16.CDxdS CDxdS.
17.i.a2! Black's posItIon is
held together by the strong knight
on d5, and therefore it is impor-
26
tant for White to take it under con-
trol, by threatening in the event of
17 ... .1ld7?! to transfonn the posi-
tion by the exchange 18.Ji.. xd5!
exd5 19 ..1lf4 .1ld6 20.l::tacl ~d8
21.~f3, with a serious positional
advantage.
17 ... ~c2 ISJtH3 ~xa4 19.
,il. xd5! ~ xa 1 20.1i. b3 a5. 20 ... ~ a5
was more tenacious, after which
White would have carried out a fa-
vourable breakthrough in the centre:
21.d5! ~b6 (21...ktd8 22.dxe6!
~xdl+ 23.~xdl ~xe5 24.~d8+!)
22.Ji..f4 .1lf6 23,ctJc4 ~b5 24.lild6
~b6 25.dxe6, obtaining a great ad-
vantage.
21.Ji..f4 ~xb2 22.L!lc4 ~xb3
23Jlhb3, and White soon won.
In the preceding examples we
have seen that Black most often op-
posed White's attack with the (usu-
ally forced) barrier g7-g6, which is
not easy to breach. It is more diffi-
cult to defend after the position has
been weakened by h7-h6, which
makes the bishop sacrifice a possi-
ble motif.
DREEV - DOLMATOV
New York 1989
Keres Defence EOO
I.d4 e6 2.c4 i.b4+ 3.liJd2 d5
4.e3liJf6 S.liJt3 0-0 6.i.d3 c5 7.a3
i.xd2+ S.i.xd2 cxd4 9.exd4 dxc4
10•.txc4 h6. In preventing the pin
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
on his knight, Black weakens his
king's defences. 10 ... liJd5 11.0-0
0Jc6 came into consideration.
11.0-0 liJc6 l2.ktcl L!le7.
13'ci)eS!? This centralisation of
the knight is tactically based. It is
risky for Black to accept the sacrifice
of the d4-pawn in view of his lag in
development: 13 ... ~xd4?! 14 ..1lb4
~xe5 15"il.xe7 l::te8 I 6.I:te I ~f5
(l6 .. .'~g5 17.h4! ~xh4 18.sii.b5
leads to the loss of the exchange)
17 ..1ld3! (after 17.~d6?! b5 18 ..1ld3
~ d5 White has no compensation
for the pawn) 17 .. .'~h5 18"il.xf6
~xdl 19.1:Iexdl gxf6 20.l:Ic7 with
a pennanent advantage for White in
the endgame.
13 ... L!ledS 14.~b3! White
switches his queen to the kingside.
14 ... b6 ISJ::Ifel .1lb7 16J~Yg3
(with the threat of .1lxh6) 16 ...
liJhS 17;@'O liJhf6 IS;~'g3 WhS
19.~h3 I:tcS.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside 27

cally unjustified. The position should

have been strengthened by 28.h5,
since Black cannot play 28 ... l!ld7?be-
cause of 29.ii.xd5! .~xd5 30.Cilxd7
~xd7 31.IIc7, while 28 ... f4 loses a
pawn after 29.~h4 and Cilg6.
28 ... Jlxc6 29.Mxc6 f4, and
Black managed to defend.

RADJABOV - SVIDLER
Linares 2006
20 .. 0..d3. White rejects the Slav Defence D16
tempting 20.~.xh6 gxh6 21.~xh6+
0J h7 (not 21. .. <;t> g8? because of I.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.LLJc3 LLJf6
22.1~Wg5+ 'it>h8 23 .. ~.xd5! l!lxd5 4.t1Tt3 dxc4 5.a4 e6 6.e3 c5 7.~xc4
24J'hc8 ~xc8 25.h3! followed by l!lc6 8.0-0 cxd4 9.exd4 i.e7
kIe4) 22 .. ~.d3 f5 23.Cilg6+ '.tig8 10•. ~g5 0-0 11.k'!el.
24.01xf8 l!lxf8, and Black parries
the attack, since his knight at d5 oc-
cupies a dominating position.
20 .. Jhcl 21.BXcl l!lh7. 21. ..
Wg8 was better. The decentralisa-
tion of the knight allows White to
intensify the pressure.
22.~h5 ~e8 23J/HM 5?! It
was better to defend without weak-
ening the pawn structure, for exam-
ple, 23 ... Wg8.
24.1liYg3 Yf6 25.M LLJf8 26•. ~e2.
White is completely dominant, and 11 ... h6. The white pieces are
Black has a problem finding useful actively developed and therefore it
moves. looks quite logical to put the ques-
26 ••• Wg8 27.i.t3. By playing tion to the bishop on g5. However,
27.~b3 followed by 28 ..J2.f3, White the appearance of the pawn at h6
would have placed Black in a criti- creates motifs for an attack.
cal position. 12.i.f4. If 12.~h4 Black ex-
27 ... ~d8 28.lnc6?! This ex- changes the dark-square bishops -
change of the strong knight is strategi- 12 ... LLJh5 13.~xe7 Ci'lxe7 14.~d2
2S
CZJ f6, when he succeeds in establish-
ing a blockade at dS.
12 ... CZJb4. Now the threat of an
attack on the h6-pawn becomes very
real. Apparently Black should have
continued harassing the dark-square
bishop: 12 ... CZJdS!? 13.Jii.xdS (13.
CD xdS exdS 14.Jii. d3 Jii. d6=) 13 ...
exdS 14.~b3 Jii.b4 IS.l:te3 .~e6,
obtaining a solid enough position.
13.~d2!
13 ••• Jii.d7.1t is already not easy to
defend. If 13 ... 11J bdS White can also
sacrifice his bishop with 14.Jii.xh6!?
gxh6 lS:~xh6, creating dangerous
threats to the king. Is ... lLlg4 can be
met by either 16.~hS lLlgf6 (16 ...
CZJdf6 17:~gS+ WhS IS.h3 :gS
19:~d2) 17:~'gS+ WhS Is.lLlxdS
exdS 19:~h4+ Wg7 20.l:IeS, or
16:~h3lLlgf6 (16 ... lLldf6 17.~g3
WhS IS:~h4+ Wg719:~gS+ leads
to a position from the previous vari-
ation) 17.l:teslLlf4 18.I:IgS+ lLlg6
19..Jtd3 and then 20 ..i.xg6.
14..i.xh6! Uc8 ISSLb3 gxh6
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
16.~xh6 lLlh7. 16 ... lLlg4 17.~hS
lLlf6 18.~gS+ Wh8 19.~h6+ lLlh7,
was more tenacious, when if 20.MeS
Black defends with 20 ... ttgS. But
White can open up the position by
19.dS!?, for example: 19 ... CZJh7 (or
19 ... ~g8 20.~h6+ lLlh7 21.t'ileS
~f8 22.~xf8lLlxf8 23.lLlxd7 t'ilxd7
24.dxe6) 20.~hS ctJxdS 21.0JxdS
exdS 22,.,txdS, with a continuing attack.
17.J:e5 f5 IsJhe6 .\U.xe6 19.
.1i. xe6+ W hS.
20.Jii. xeS. 20.lLl eS !1:1 f6 21. t'il g6+
llxg6 22:~'xg6 was stronger, also
picking up the fS-pawn.
2o •• .l:If6 21.~h5 ~xeS 22.kte1
~f8 23.lLle5 'tttgS 24.~dl lLlg5.
24 ... aS was more tenacious: 2S.~b3+
'lith8 26.h4, and then as in the game.
25.~b3+. 2S:~cl! ~h6 26.f4
lLlh7 27.lLldS! was stronger.
25 ••. Wg7 26.h4 lLlf7 27.lLle2
lLlxe5 2S.dxe5 l:Ie6 29.lLlf4 Jii.e7
30.~g3+ c;t;h7 31.~f3 ~eS 32.g3
~f7 33.e6 ~f6 34.~h5+ WgS
35.~eS+ ~f8 36.~g6+ ~g7
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside
37J~'xf5 btc5 38.~e4 CiJc6 39.l;jd5
~xb2 40.~f5 ~c1 41.tZJxe7+.
Black resigned.
NAVARA - SVIDLER
Olympiad, Turin 2006
Slav Defence D16
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.til c3 0J f6 4.t;) t3
dxc4 5.a4 e6 6.e3 c5 7•. 1l. xc4 t;) c6
8.0-0 cxd4 9.exd4 .'fLe7 10.kg5 0-0
lI.nel .~.d7. In contrast to the pre-
vious game, Black does not hurry to
drive away the bishop from gS, and
he completes his development, in-
tending to play his light-square bish-
op to c6. If he attempts to fianchetto
it - II ... b6 he has to reckon with the
opening of the position: 12 .. liLxf6!?
.l?L.xf6 13.dS exdS 14 ..'fLxdS .~b7
IS.tile4 .i:J..e7 (lS .... s.ixb2? is dan-
gerous because of 16.CilfgS with the
threat of 17.Cilxf7 !lxf7 18.Cild6)
16J1c I nc8 17.l:!e3 with a serious
initiative for White.
12.~ e2. Making way for the rook,
the queen defends the bishop on c4.
29
12 .•. h6. Black puts the question
to the bishop in more favourable
circumstances, since he succeeds in
securing control of the dS-point.
13..~f4. If 13 ..1i.h4 Black sim-
plifies the position by 13 .. .lilhS!?
14 .. liLxe7 Cilxe7 IS.tileS tilf6, re-
taining control of dS.
13 •.• Cil b4 14.Cile5 kc6
15.!!adl.IS.tilxf7?! hlxf716.kxe6
tZJbdS 17 ..'fLeS CL\xc3 18.bxc3 kd5
19 .. ~.xf7+ 1l.xf7 is not dangerous
for Black, since in the middlegame
the two minor pieces may prove
more mobile than the rook.
15 .•. Cilbd5 16•.~c1. It stands to
reason that White did not play tZJeS
in order to exchange 16. tZJ xc6 bxc6,
when Black stands no worse .
16 •.• il.b4 17.l::td3 tZJe7. A pro-
phylactic knight retreat, with the
aim of preventing 18.IIg3 in view
of 18 ... CbfS.
18SL.d2 gc8?! Black could have
maintained the balance by 18 ... as, sup-
porting his bishop, which makes the
breakthrough in the centre ineffective.
30
19.d5! The breakthrough in the
centre is one of the main dynamic
resources with an isolated pawn (it is
examined in more detail in Chapter
2). By opening the position, White
exploits the fact that the bishop at b4
is unprotected.
19 ... exd5 20.tiJxd5 ii.xd5?
Black begins with the wrong piece,
which leads to the forced break-up
of the pawns covering his king. Cor-
rect was 20 ... tilexd5 21.ii.xb4 l:te8!
(weaker is 21...ttJf4 22.ii.xf7+ \t7h7
23.~e3! with advantage to White
- Svidler) 22.~d2 ~c7 23.ii.xd5!
l:txe5 24.:Ixe5 "iVxe5 25.~c3 ~f5
26..txc6l:Ixc6 27.0 with a positional
advantage for White, since his bishop
is stronger than the knight (Navara).
21 •.txb4 l'le8 22Jjd2 ~b6.
In the event of 22 .. .'iYc7 23.ii.xd5
It'Iexd5 24.lIxd5 tilxd5 25.~xd5
l'!cd8 26.~e4! f6 White forces
the transition into an endgame:
27.~c4+ ~xc4 28.ttJxc4 Uxel+
29.ii.xe I l:td4 30.b3 I:d3 31.tild2,
where his minor pieces are stronger
than the rook.
23.~xe7 ~xc4 24.l:Id6? 24.
bide3! ~xe7 25.tilxc4 would have
decided the game more quickly.
24 ... ~c7 25.ii.xf6 gxf6 26.Il:d7
l'lcd8? 26 ... ~b8 27.ttJg4 Ihel+
28.'~xel ~f4 29.ttJe3 ii.e6 was
stronger, when Black consolidates
his forces.
27.l:tdl l:txd7 28.ttJxd7 ~g7
29•• c3. White could have won a
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
pawn - 29.t!lxf6 Wxf6 30.~xh6+
We7 31.~h4+ Wf8 32.~cl, but this
would have meant going into a queen
endgame: 32 ... lI:!Va5 33.lI:!Vxc4l':el+
34.l':txel ~xel+ 35.~fl ~b4.
29 ... ~f4? This leads to the loss
of the f6-pawn, which could have
been defended by 29 ... ~ c6, al-
though even here after 30.h3 it is not
easy to defend against the threat of
~ g3+ and tId6.
30.g3 ~g4 3l.'~·xf6+ \!lg8 32.
~d6l':te6 33:~f8+ 'lith7 34.lI:!Vxt7+
'lith8 35:~f8+ 'lith7 36J:tcl ~d4
37.~c5 IIe4 38:~'fS+ ~g7 39.t!lf6
ge2 40~xc4. Black resigned.
BRUZON - DOMINGUEZ
Cuba 2005
Queen's Gambit D47
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ttJc3 liJf6
4.e3 e6 5.tilIJ t!lbd7 6.i.d3 dxc4
7.ii.xc4 b5 8.ii.d3 .td6 9.0-0 0-0
10.ttJg5 86 1l.it.d2 ii.b7 12.ttJce4
ttJxe4 13.ttJxe4 ii.e7 14.b4 e5
15.~ c2 exd4 16.exd4.
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside
White's spatial advantage on the
queenside is obvious, but it is not easy
to convert it into a win. In the given
situation he must widen the attacking
front, in other words, follow Nirnzo-
witsch's rule about the need to create
new weaknesses. Clearly, White will
try to do this on the kingside.
16 ... h6?! Without particular
need, Black weakens his castled po-
sition, creating a target for White to
attack - the h6-pawn. At the same
time, there was nothing wrong with
developing the rook by 16 ... tte8,
for example: 17.a3 tilf8 18.Lflcs
\1L,xcs 19.dxcS %Yh4 (or 19 ... tilg6
20.Madl ~h4) 20.IIadl gad8, not
weakening the king's defences.
17.a3 (17 .the I was also good)
17 ... tilb6 lS.!Iadl ltJdS 19.Ufel
~e7 20.%Yel. Threatening the bish-
op sacrifice on h6. White would not
have achieved anything significant
by 20.C!lcS, for example: 20 ... l:Ife8
21.Mcl ,~,xcS 22.~xcS l'!xel+
23.Dxel Ild8 24.,i2e4, although
here too he retains the advantage.
31
20 •• JIfeS 21.tl.bl ,afS 22.~e2
IJadS.
23.h4! A far-sighted move. In
view of the threats along the bl-h7
diagonal, Black cannot get by with-
out the g7-g6 barrier, and White pre-
pares to undermine it. For example,
if 23 ... as there can follow 24.liJd6!
Bxel+ 2sJhel g6 (2s ... Cilf6
26.tile8!) 26.tilxb7 ~xb7 27.hS.
23 .. Jde6 24.CLJg3 ~xel+ (24 ...
tilf6 2S.tilhS) 2sJhel g6 26.hS.
Now the appearance of a weak pawn
at g6 is unavoidable.
26 •. J'Id6 27.hxg6 fxg6 2S.CLJe4
lle6 29.CileS idxel+ 30.i.xel
,1l xeS. The g6-pawn cannot be
saved: 30 ... tile7 31.~b3+ l'ildS
(31...Wh8 32.~f7) 32.,\txg6.
31.~xg6+ ~g7 32.~xg7+
Wxg7 33.dxeS, and White convert-
ed his extra pawn in the endgame.
In a number of positions with
an isolated d4-pawn one possibility
that has to be reckoned with is an
32
attack on an inadequately defended
king along the a2-gS diagonal.
KRAMNIK - KASPAROV
World Championship Match,
10th Game, London 2000
Nimzo-Indian Defence E54
I.d4 CiJ f6 2.c4 e6 3 CiJ c3 ,~b4
4.e3 0-0 5.iLd3 d5 6.CiJf3 c5 7. 0-0
cxd4 8.exd4 dxc4 9.iL xc4 b6. This
same position can be reached in the
Caro-Kann Defence under index
B14.
10.i.g5 iLb7 1l.Uel CiJbd7
12.l:Ictl:tc8 13.~b3 iLe7 14.iLxf6
CiJxf6. This allows the bishop sac-
rifice on e6, which could have been
avoided by 14 ... iLxf6.
15.iLxe6 fxe6? The accept-
ance of the bishop sacrifice places
Black on the verge of defeat. After
15 ... l:c7! 16.i.c4!? (in the event of
16.CiJg5 ~xd4! 17.tijxfl iLc5 the
initiative may pass to Black) 16 ...
i.xf3 17.gxf3 l:td7 in such a sharp
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
middlegame an extra doubled pawn
does not have any serious signifi-
cance (variations by Kramnik).
16.~xe6+ 'it'h8 17.~xe7 iLxf3
18.gxf3. After the transition into an
endgame-IS.~xdSl:cxdSI9.gxf3
l::txd4 Black's chances of saving the
game are improved.
18 .• J~hd4 19.CiJb5.
19 ....~!hb2? Apparently both
players were familiar with the game
Hazai - Danielsen, Valby 1994,
which continued 19 ... ~ f4 20.kl:xcS
l:xcs 21.CiJd6 ~xf3? 22.CiJxcS
~g4+ 23.Wf1 ~h3+ 24.We2
~xcS 25.Wd2, and White won.
Instead of 21...~xf3?, which led
to a hopeless ending, in Kramnik's
opinion the only defence was 21 ...
traS, but here too after 22.CiJt7+
22 ... \t>gS 23.CiJdS ~g5+ 24.\t>hl
~h5 25Y~Ye6+ WhS 26.CiJfl+ \t>gS
27.CiJe5+ WhS 2S.f4 White has the
advantage.
In capturing the pawn, Kasparov
overestimates Black's defensive
Chapter 1. Attack on the kingside
resources, whereas, as shown by
Kramnik and backed up by com-
puter analysis, Black would have
done better to play his queen to
d3 or d2. Here are the main vari-
ations:
a) 19 ... ~d3!? 20.l:hc8 (or
20.CiJd6 :eta8 21.CiJf7+ '.iig8 22.CiJe5
~f5 23.Uc7!? C!Jh5! 24.~h4!?
Cilf4 25.~g4 ~f6, with the tactical
basis 26.CiJd7 ~d6 27.CiJxf8 ~xc7
28.CiJe6 ~e8!) 20 .. Jhc8 21.CiJd6
]:ta8 22.~e6 h6 23.Wg2;
b) 19 .. .'~'d2!? 20.gxc8 l:Ixc8
2l.CiJd6 I:tb8! 22.CiJe8 lIb7! 23.
~f8+ (23:~e5 CiJg8) 23 ... CiJg8 24.
l:Ie4l:ld7 25.l:Ig4 ~xb2.
20.Uxc8 Ihc8 21.l1Jd6 l:b8?
Black sets a clever trap - 22.~xa7?
l'tf8 23.~e7 l:a8 and the absence of
the a7-pawn enables him to hold the
position after 24.CiJ f7+ \t>g8 25.~e6
~xa2! But 21..J:Ia8 also fails to
save him 22.CiJf7+ \t>g8 23.~e6
h6 (or 23 ... h5 24.CiJg5+ \t>h8
25.~f5 ~xa2 26.~g6) 24.CiJxh6+
cJth7 25.Cilf7! l:Ie8 26.~f5+! g6
27.~h3+ \t>g8 28.l:txe8+ CiJxe8
29.ib'e6 CiJg7 30.~d5 (Kramnik).
30.~xg6! is also possible, since
after 30 ... ~xa2 the advance of the
h-pawn is decisive: 31.CiJh6+ \t>h8
32.CiJg4 \t>g8 33.h4 ~e6 34.~g5
\t>f8 35.h5.
22.CiJf7+ \t>g8 23.~e6! nIB.
Opening an escape square for the
king by 23 ... h5 also does not save
Black, since White sets up on attack
33
on the g7-pawn by coordinating his
queen and rook: 24.CiJg5+ Wh8
25.~f5 ~c3 (25 ... ~xa2 26.l:te6
\t>g8 27.~g6) 26.Ue6 ~c7 (26 ...
Wg8 27.IJ:e7) 27.~g6l:tf8 28.l:Ixf6
gxf6 29.'~h6+ \t>g8 30.v.wxf8+. If
23 ... h6 a similar mechanism goes
into operation: 24.CiJxh6+ \t>h7
25.~f5+! Wh8 26.CiJf7+ \t>g8
27.l1Jg5 ~xa2 28.Ue7 (threatening
~g6) 28 ... I!e8 29.l:xe8+ CiJxe8
30.\t>g2 with the irresistible threat
of ~d7 (30:~d7 iVbl+ 3l.Wg2
~g6).
24.ctJd8+ \t>h8 2SJ!Ve7. Black
resigned.
SARGISSIAN - NAJER
Kallithea 2008
Slav Defence D16
I.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 3.CiJf3 CiJf6
4.CiJc3 dxc4 S.a4 e6 6.e3 cS 7.iLxc4
cxd4 8.exd4 CiJc6 9.0-0 iLe7
10JIel 0-0 1l.iLgS iLd7 12:.d2
CiJ b4. Black is aiming to set up a
blockade on d5, but White's ini-
tiative proves more real. 12 ... nc8
13.l:Iadl CiJb4 14.CiJe5 CiJbd5
15.iLxf6 CiJxf6 16.d5 iLb4 17.dxe6
iLxe6 18:~'c2 ~b6 19.iLxe6 fxe6
looks sounder, with an inferior, but
defensible position, Shirov - Svi-
dler, Foros 2008.
13.CiJeS iLc6?! Creating the mo-
tif for an attack. 13 .. J:tc8 was more
circumspect.
34
14.01xt7! This combination is
based on the coordination of the
knight at e5 and the bishop on the a2-
g8 diagonal, supported by the rook.
14 ••• :r:txt7. If 14 ... Wxf7? 15.
l::Ixe6 tLlbd5 White decides matters
with 16J:he7+! Wxe7 17"~e2+
Wf7 18.iL.xf6!
15Slxe6 LtJbd5 16.l'.!e5 LtJc7?!
Black forces the exchange of the
bishop, after which his king remains
under attack. He should have con-
sidered 16 ... ttJxc3!? 17.bxc3 .lie8
(17 ... iL.d5? 18.iL.xf6!) 18.I:tael .td6
19.IIf5 Wh8, evacuating the king.
17.iL.xt7+ Wxt7.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
18.d5!? The alternative was 18.
ktae I!? ~d6 19.IU5, building up
the threats.
18 .•. 0Jcxd5 19.01xd5 Cilxd5
20.kIdl Cilf6 21.%Yc2 ~g8. 21...
~c7 22,l'Idel .~d8 was more tena-
cious.
22.b4 h6 23.b5 hxg5 24.bxc6
bxc6 25.gdel IIe8 26.~xc6 WfB
27J~1'b7 ~t7 28.~xa7. The game is
decided. Black is powerless against
the advance of the a-pawn.
28 ••• g4 29.a5 LtJg8 30.a6 ~b3
31.~c7 ~b8 32.ihb8 I1xb8 33.a7
~a8 34.1:Ia5 iL.d8 35.l'Ibl .~c7
36.bIb7. Black resigned.
 Chapter 2

The d4-d5 breakthrough

The dynamic strength of the iso-

lated pawn is founded on its 'lust to
expand', as remarked on by Aaron
Nimzowitsch. Indeed, the advance
of the d4-pawn across the d5 block-
ading point is one of the methods
often used by White to gain an ad-
vantage. The basic idea of the d4-
d5 breakthrough is to seize space
in the centre after the exchange of
a number of pieces. An important
accompanying factor in the open- In this position the blockade at
ing of the position is a lead in de- d5 of the isolated pawn is ineffec-
velopment, which shows itself to tive, since the blockading piece is
particular effect if Black has not yet not supported by a pawn. This fac-
castled. The first to demonstrate this tor, and Black's delay in castling, al-
was again Wilhelm Steinitz. low White to break the blockade.
lUixd5! ~.xd5 12.LZJxd5
STEINITZ - BARDELEBEN ~xd5 13.Sl.xe7 CiJxe7 14.l:Ie1! The
Hastings 1895 concluding move of the exchanging
Giuoco Piano C54 operation - the king is forced to re-
main in the centre.
l.e4 e5 2.tDfJ LZJc6 3..ltc4 ~c5 14 ... f6 15.~e2 ~d7 16.ttac1
4.c3 C!l f6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 .1l. b4+ c6. Later analysis established that
7.C!lc3 d5 8.exd5 CiJxd5 9.0-0 Black could have defended with
.ti.e6 10•. ~g5 §Le7. It looks safer to 16 ... Wf7!
play 1O ... ~d7!? II..1l.xd5 1l.xd5
12.lJeJ+ Wf8! (Kasparov).
36
17.dS! The decisive break-
through! By sacrificing a pawn,
White includes his knight in the at-
tack.
17 ••• cxdS Is.ti'ld4 (with the
threat ofl9.ttJf5) IS ••• Wti 19.ttJe6!
J:thcS. Black has to defend against
the invasion of the rook. He loses
quickly after 19 ... ttJc6 20.ttJc5
~c8 21.~h5+.
20JWg4! g6 21.ttJgS+! WeS.
22.J:txe7+!! The culmination of
White's attack, based on geomet-
ric motifs: 22 ... ~xe7 (22 ....~xe7
23.Ihc8+) 23.l:el+ ~d6 24.~b4+
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
Wc7 (24 ... :t1c5 25.l':l:e6+) 25.Cile6
<;t>b8 26.~f41Ic7 27.ttJxc7.
22 •.• Wf8 23.lIti+! The same
geometric motif.
23 •.. WgS 24JIg7+! WhS (24 ...
WfS 25.ttJxh7+) 2SJ'Ixh7+! and
here, according to contemporary re-
ports, Karl Bardeleben left the tour-
nament hall, tacitly admitting his de-
feat. It was left to Steinitz to demon-
strate to the delighted spectators the
following mating finish: 25.!!xh7+!
Wg8 26.Ug7+ <;th8 27.~h4+
~xg7 28.~h7+ WfS 29.~h8+
cJJe7 30.~g7+ We8 31.~g8+
We7 32.~t7+ \!id8 33.~fS+ ~e8
34.ttJt7+ '.tid7 35.~d6#.
SPASSKY - AVTONOMOV
Leningrad 1949
Queen's Gambit Accepted D28
l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.ttJO ttJf6 4.
e3 cS S.iL.xc4 e6 S. 6.0-0 a6 7.~e2
bS S.iL.b3 ttJc6 9.ttJc3 cxd410J:tdl
iL.b7 1l.exd4 ttJb4.
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
White has a big lead in develop-
ment, and in addition the black king
has not castled, which creates the
motifs for exploiting the opposition
of queen and king.
12.dS! Exploiting the fact that
the d4-pawn is not blockaded, White
opens the position with this break-
through in the centre.
12 ... tnbxdS 13.,l1.LgS! The bish-
op pin is an important motif, which
we will encounter on numerous oc-
casions.
13 ••• ,!.le7 14.,~xf6 gxf6 IS.
0ixdS~,xdS 16.,~,xdS exdS 17.
0id4. As a result of the opening of
the centre, White has transformed
his lead in development into a strong
attack. Black is unable to cover his
numerous weaknesses.
17 ..• WfB (or 17 ... ~d7 18.I1el
r;~a7 19J1acl Wf8 20.~h5 with the
threat ofCiJf5) lS.CilfS hS 19.1hdS!
~xdS 20.\~he7+ WgS 21.~xf6.
Black resigned.
37
EINGORN - GELFAND
Tallinn 1989
Queen's Gambit D24
l.d4 li'lf6 2.c4 e6 3.liJt3 dS
4.tnc3 dxc4 S•..IiLgS a6 6.a4 tnc6
7.e3 t1JaS S.tl\eS cS 9•..IiLxc4 ..IiLe7
10.0-0 cxd4 1l.exd4 LtJ xc412.LtJ xc4
as.
Not only has Black not castled,
but his queenside is also weak. And
since White's pieces are excellently
mobilised, the best way of convert-
ing his lead in development is by
opening the position.
l3.dS! exdS. In the event of
13 ... liIxd5 14.1i,xe7 Wxe7 15.W"g4
White has a strong initiative for the
pawn.
14.,1i.xf6 SLxf6 IS.CiJxdS ~e6.
Afier the natural 15 ... 0-0 there
could have followed 16.CiJcb6 ~a6
17.LtJxc8 ~xc8 18.~b3. The cen-
tralised knight and the vulnerable
pawns on a5 and b7 give White the
advantage.
38
16.liJxf6+ ~xf6 17.tiJd6+ Wf8.
lS.tZ:lxb7?! The capture of this
pawn allows Black to exchange the
queens, whereas 18.~d2! h5 (18 ...
:!:Id8 19.I:ta3) 19.f4! would have
continued White's attack.
IS ... ~e7! 19.~d6 ~xd6 20.
tZ:lxd6 We7 21.tZ:lbS IIhdS 22.tZ:lc7.
The situation is not changed by
22.l:fdl :tab8 23.tZ:ld4 'itif6
24.tZ:lxe6 1::Ixdl+ 25.Ihdl ~xe6
with equal chances.
22 ••• I:1:abS 23/tJxe6 fxe6 24.
I.1abl I:1:d2 2S.b3 kld3 26.t!fel
:bxb3 27.MXb3l:txb3 2S.f4 I:1:b4.
Draw.
In the following example Black
castled, but he underestimated
White's lead in development.
BOLESLAVSKY - KOTOV
Candidates Tournament, Zurich 1953
Queen's Gambit Accepted D28
I.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.tZ:lf3 tZ:lf6
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
4.e3 e6 S.i.xc4 cS 6.0-0 a6 7.V/!ie2
cxd4 S.exd4 i.e7 9.tZ:lc3 bSIO.i. b3
i.b7 1l.i.gS 0-0 12.IUel lilc6
13.l':tadl CiJaS.
White has a clear lead in devel-
opment, and his rooks (in contrast to
Black's) are mobilised on the cen-
tral files. This creates the motif for
exploiting the opposition of queen
and rook in the event of the position
being opened, which is aggravated
by the fact that the bishop at e7 is
inadequately defended. Therefore
on the last move 13 ... tZ:ld5, block-
ing the d4-pawn, would have been
more circumspect.
14.dS! A decisive breakthrough.
Since 14 ... tZ:lxd5 l5.i.xd5 i.xd5
16.I:1:xd5! exd5 17.i.xe7Ieads to the
loss of a piece, Black has to agree to
the loss of a pawn.
14 ••• tZ:lxb3 IS.dxe6 ~b6
16.axb3 fxe6 17.tZ:ld4! (it IS Im-
portant for White to strengthen his
control of the e6-square) 17 ••. i. d6.
In the event of 18 ... i.c5 19.~xe6+
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
Wh8 20.~xb6 .ltxb6 21.l:te7 the
rook would have invaded.
18.l@'xe6+.
As a result of the breakthrough
in the centre White is a pawn up and
his pieces are completely dominant.
18 ... 'l!ih8 19.Ci\f3 (19.1u4 .ltc5
20"~xb6 .ltxb6 21.J:l:e7 was more
consistent) 19 ... l:tad8 20•.~ f4!
.~.xf3 21.gxd6 ~xd6 22Jixd6
Wxd6 23.il..xd6 l':e8 24Jhe8+
Cilxe8 25.it.e5! An instructive ma-
noeuvre, with which White restricts
the black knight - after its exchange
the endgame with knight against
bishop and an extra pawn is easily
won. Avoiding the exchange of the
knight also does not save Black.
25 ••• it. c6 26.b4!, and after fixing
the pawns on light squares, White
won the a6-pawn and the game.
A delay in the development of
the pieces may become the theme of
an opening conception, based on the
d4-d5 breakthrough.
39
BOTVINNIK - PETROSIAN
World Championship Match,
10th Game, Moscow 1963
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3/b f3 Q'\ f6
4.e3 e6 5.it.xc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
Q'\c6 8J~Ve2 cxd4 9.ndl it.e7
10.exd4 0-0 1l.Q'\c3 l1Jb4 12.it.g5
.~d7. In Reshevsky - Petrosian,
Olympiad, Siegen 1970, Black pre-
ferred 12 ... Q'\fd5,andafter 13.Q'\xd5
Cilxd5 I4.1L. xe7 C!Jxe7 15.'~'e4Q'\d5
16.ifJe5 Q'\f6 17.~f4 Q'\d5 18.~e4
Cilf6 19.1@'f4 t1Jd5 peace was con-
cluded. 13 ..ltxe7 Cilxe7 14.Q'\e5
leads to sharper play.
13.d5. In his comments on the
game Botvinnik remarks that this
move and the subsequent continua-
tion were prepared for the game, and
yet he hesitated before going in for it,
since he foresaw that it would be very
difficult to convert the extra pawn.
13 ••• exd5 14.Q'\xd5 Q'\bxd5.
Black simplifies the position as
40
much as possible. Weaker was 14 ...
lilfxd5 15.i:t.xe7 CiJxe7 16.CiJe5
with a spatial advantage for White.
15.i:t.xd5 CiJxd5 16.l:Ixd5
i:t.xg5 17.CiJxg5 h6 ISJWd2 hxg5
19.:xd7 ~f6 (19 ... ~b6 would
not have saved the pawn in view of
20.a5 ~b3 21J~a3) 20.l:.1xb71IadS
21.~a5 gd6 22.~b4 kIfdS.
Botvinnik's doubts were con-
firmed - the active placing of Black 's
pieces fully compensates for the lost
pawn.
23.l:.1n gd4 (23 ... l:Idl 24.Il:b8)
24.~b3l:Id3 25.~c2 IId2 26.~c7
~f4. Petrosian is not looking for
adventures in the ending with
queen against two rooks (26 .. J:hf2
27.'~xd8+ ~xd8 28.l:.1xf2) and he
prefers to take play into a double
rook endgame.
27 Ji xf4 gxf4 2S.h4 ttcs 29.I:l: b4
O! With a temporary pawn sacrifice
Black breaks up White's pawns.
30.gxf4 J:tcc2 31.b3 Ilb2 32.
~g2 (32.IIb6 a5=) 32 ••• Md3
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
33.:bS+ Wh7 34.:b7 f6 35.Me1
:ctdxb3 36.J:'hb3 Mxb3 37.l:'te6 :ctb4
3S.:ctxa6 t'Ixh4 39.'it'g3 g5 40.'it'g2
\t>g6 41.l':IaS :ctf4 42.a5 ga4 43.a6
Wf5. Draw.
Although further games con-
firmed Botvinnik's doubts about
the early 13.d5 breakthrough, few
players were happy to play for a
draw a pawn down. In his notes
to the game, Botvinnik himself
thought it was sounder to blockade
the d4-pawn by CiJf6-d5. However,
removing the knight from the king-
side allows White to transfer his
queen there, which creates definite
problems with the defence of the
king.
PETROSIAN - SPASSKY
Moscow 1971
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.QJO Cilf6
4.e3 e6 5.i:t.xc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
CiJc6 S.~e2 cxd4 9.l::tdl c'fi.e7
10.exd4 0-0 I1.CiJc3 Cild5. A pass-
ing of the baton by world champi-
ons: the ninth champion invites the
tenth to demonstrate the virtues of
the blockade, adopted by him in the
16th game of his match with Botvin-
nik.
12.~e4. Apparently Botvinnik's
attacking procedure 12.i:t.d3 CiJb4
13.i:t.bl i:t.d7 14.~e4 did not seem
convincing to Petros ian.
12 •.• CiJcb4 13.CiJe5.
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
13 ... Aa7. Black prepares the fi-
anchetto of his bishop, since if 13 ...
b6 White exchanges the blockading
knight with 14.0lxdS! exdS (14 ...
CilxdS? IS.0lc6) IS.~f3, when
Black's queenside is substantially
weakened. This topic is examined in
Chapter 3.
14..~.b3 CiJf6 15.~h4 b6
16.~g3.
16 ... ~b7?! The white pieces
are very actively placed and the d4-
dS breakthrough is in the air. But
Black underestimates the threat of
17 .. ~h6. which forces him to weak-
41
en his control of the key dS-point.
16 ... Wh8!? was more circumspect,
when 17.dS?! does not now work in
view of 17 ... exdS 18.CiJxdSlilfxdS
19.~xdS CiJxdS!, since 20.CiJc6? is
parried by 20 ... 0:Jc3!, after which it
is White who has to seek a way to
save the game.
17•. ~h6 0le8 18.gael 'lith8.
19.d5! Now is the time! The
knight retreat to eR has disrupted
the coordination of the black pieces,
and the breakthrough in the centre
converts the opposition of the dl-
rook and the d8-queen into a spatial
advantage.
19 ... exd5. If 19 ... gxh6 the
simplest is 20.dxe6 0ld6 2I.exf7,
since nothing is given by 20.CiJxf7+
Uxf7 21.de gg7 22.hIxd8 hlxg3
23Jhe8+ b{g8 24.Yxe7 Jtxg2!,
when White has to reconcile
himself to a draw by 2S.hlxa7
i.h3+. 19 ... CiJxdS 20.l1JxdS exdS
21.i.e3! tta8 22.0lc6 is also bad
for Black.
42
20.~e3! 1:a8. Not 20 ... as in
view of 21.CiJxdS! CiJxdS 22.3L.xdS
~xdS 23.CiJc6. If 20 ... ~cS, then
2 LaS liJ f6 22.1n a4 is strong.
21.CiJc4! CiJd6 (21...~cS?!
22.CiJaS!) 22.~xb6. 22.CiJxb6 is
less good because of 22 ... CiJ fS!
23.~h3 CiJxe3 24.~xe3 ~gS 2S.f4
1:e8!
22 .• JWb8. Weakeris22 ... ~d7?!
23.CiJe3! ~e6 24.~cS as 2S.~xb4
axb4 26.CiJcxdS.
23.CiJa5. 23.CiJe3! was stronger.
23 .•• CiJf5 (23 ... I:Ic8!? 24.~f4)
24.~xb8 l::taxb8 25.liJxb7 Uxb7
26.a5 ~g5 27.t'Ibl d4 28.CiJd5
CiJc6 29.l(a4 IIc8 30.f4 CiJce7
31.I:tbc1 l:Icb8 32.fxg5 CiJxd5
33.~c6 IIxb6 34.axb6 CiJde3
35.b7 CiJxdl 36.Ihdl g6 37.g4
CiJg7 38.I:txd4 CiJe6 39.I:Id7. Black
resigned.
We will now consider a more
modem example of the blockade of
the central pawn.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
MILOV - GULIYEV
Corsica 200S
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
I.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.00 Cilf6
4.e3 e6 5.~ xc4 c5 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
ttJc6 8.~e2 ~e7 9.IIdl cxd4
10.exd40-0 1l.CiJc3 CiJb4 12.0e5
CDfd5. Black blockades the isolated
d4-pawn, which allows White to
switch his queen to the kingside.
13.l( b3. A prophylactic bishop
retreat. The attempt to attack on the
queenside with 13.1:a3 is parried
by 13 ... f6 14.CiJf3 .~d7 IS.~d2
l!Ic8 16.aS ~h8 17.l:Ib3 tte8 with
a sound position for Black (he is
threatening both 18 .. .'ihaS, and
l8 .. .'~c7), Milov - Xu Jun, Olym-
piad, Istanbul 2000.
13 ••• ~d7 14.~g4!? After
l4.~f3 both l4 ... ~c6 and 14 ...
,ii..e8 IS.'~h3l:Ic8 are good.
14 ... CiJ f6. Black has to reckon with
the threat of ~h6. For example, in the
event of the placid 14 ... ~c6 IS.~h6
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
li.f6 16.CLle4 ktc8 White takes play
into a favourable endgame: 17.cd') xf6+
Wxf6 18.~g5 ~t:5 19.~xt:5 ext:5
20.~d2, obtaining not only effective-
ly an extra passed d4-pawn, but also
the better position, which is not easy
for Black to defend. For example:
20 ... l'.Ice8 21.I!acl tIe7 22.11c4 a5
23.)lc5 I'Ia8 24.1Lxb4 l'ilxb4 25.f4,
or 20 ... a5 21..~xb4 axb4 22.cilxC6
bxc623.a5.
lS"~g3 WhS?! This radical
way of parrying the threatened .t h6
does not prevent d4-d5. 15 ... l::l:e8!?
160<lll.h6 .~.f8 was possible, when the
breakthrough 17.d5 exd5 18.CLlxd5
CiJ bxd5 19 j~> xd5 is parried by 19 ...
l'lxe5!
16.dS! By opening the position,
White exploits the fact that the f7-
pawn is inadequately defended.
16 ... exdS 17.t/')xdS tt'lfxdS. Or
17 ... tt'lbxd5 18.~xd5 lLc6 (18 ...
.lll.f5 19.~b3 ~e8 20 ..lll.e3) 19 ..lll.b3
~e8 20 ..lll.e3 with a positional ad-
vantage for White.
43
lS•.lll.xdS .lll.c6? Black overlooks
the queen and rook 'X-ray'. Correct
was 18 ... .lll.f5 19 ..~b3 ~e8 20.~f4
~e6 (after 20 ... ~c2 21..lll.xf7! a
pawn is lost) 21 ..lll.xe6 fxe6 22.~e4,
when although he has an isolated e6-
pawn, his position is defensible.
19•.lll.h6! gxh6 20..lll.xc6 ~bS 21.
.lll.xb7 ~xb7 22.gd7 ~b6 23.~xe7
~f6 24.CiJxti+. The simplest, al-
though the diagonal' X -ray' 24. ~ c3!
tlld5 25.lilxf7+! is also good.
24 ... 1.'Ixti 2sJhti YJlixti
26"~c3+ ~g7 27"~xb4 as 2S.~b6
~eS 29.~dl I!bS 30"~hh6 ~xb2
31.~e3 ~b3 32.l'ldS+ Wg7
33.~eS+. Black resigned.
GAVRIKOV - HULAK
Moscow 1990
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
1.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.e3 CiJf6
4.1t.xc4 e6 S.CiJf3 cS 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
CiJc6 SJ1Ve2 cxd4 9.l:Idl 1t.e7
10.exd40-0 1l.CiJc3 CiJb4 12.tiJeS.
44
12 ... b6?! This move allows
White to switch his queen to the
kings ide with gain of tempo. Here
Botvinnik considers the soundest
continuation to be 12 ....1l,d7, when
the l3.dS breakthrough proves un-
successful in view of the simplifying
.eil
manoeuvre 13 .. fxdS 14. t;J xdS
LtJxdS IS.i..xdS exdS 16.IhdS
iLg4! (after 12.i..gS i..d7 this ma-
noeuvre does not work) 17.~c4
~xdS 18.~xdS l::Iad8. In the event
of 13.]t.gSl:Ic8 Black completes his
queenside development. For exam-
ple, the game Bareev - Ivanchuk,
Linares 1994, continued 14.kIe I
]t.e8 (after 14 ... kc6 I 4.tilxc6 bxc6
IS.aS! it is more difficult to defend)
ISJ!adl fi)fdS 16.tilxdS tilxdS
17.i..xdS i..xgS 18.il.xb7 kxa4
19.i..xc8 i..xdl 20.iha6 'ilHxc8!
21. ~ xc8 l:Ixc8 22.l:Ixd I Ub8
23.l:Ibl, and here the balance would
have been maintained by 23 .. .II b4!
24.LtJf3 iLf6 2S.~fl gS! 26.h3 hS
27.g4 hxg4 28.hxg4 ~f8 29.We2
iLxd4 (Bareev).
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
13.~f3 kta7 14J!Yg3 ~c7?!
Since the opposition of queen and
rook creates the threat of .1l, h6, it
is usually parried by prophylaxis
- 14 ... Wh8.
15.i..h6 tile8. White also gains
the advantage after IS .. .eil hS
16.~g4f617.i..xe6+Wh818 ..1lxc8
fxe6 19.~xhS ~xc8 20.i..e3 (if
20.dS, then 20 .. ..1l.cS! is good)
20 ... QJI 12 21LlldS.
16.d5! The retreat of Black's
knight has weakened his control of
dS, which White immediately ex-
ploits.
16 .• Jhc4. Consideration should
have been given to 16 ....~h417.dxe6
WNxdl+ (17 ... .1l.xe6 18.IIxd8 .~xg3
19.hxg3 iiLxc4 20 .. l!t.e3 leads to
an advantage for White) 18.Ihd I
~xg3 19.exf7+ Wh8 (l9 .. JUxf7
20.hxg3 favours White) 20.kId8
(20.hxg3 gxh6 2 tJ'ld8 Ue7=) 20 ...
siLxf2+ 21.Whl l'Ie7, when Black
holds the position.
17.ti'lxc4 .~h4 18.~b8 gxh6
19.LtJxb6.
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough 45

odically occurs even in grandmaster

games. It is essential to restrict the
~d3 + .iLc2 battery with 14 ... g6.

19 ....~c7 (\9 ... ~d6 leads to a

similar variation) 20.~xc7 Cilxc7
21.IId4 <1Jc2 22.I!g4+ Slg5 23.IIc1
f5. White is also better after 23 ...
15.d5! exd5 16.. siL.g5! This stand-
0ld4 24.d6 Cild5 25.Cilcxd5 Cile2+
ard attacking mechanism, based on
26.WfI Cilxcl 27.Cile7+ WhS
the d4-d5 breakthrough, is worth re-
2s.01bxcS.
membering. 17 ...siL.xf6 is threatened,
24.Uxg5+ hxg5 25.!1xc2 ~b7
and Black cannot play 16 ... g6 be-
26.d6, and White converted his ex-
cause of 17Jhe7! Wlxe7 IS.ciJxd5.
tra pawn.
16 ... Cile4 17.tiJxe4 dxe4
ls.%'he4 g6 19.~h4 VJlic7. The
But more often the d4-d5 break-
game Portisch - Karpov, Milan 1975,
through is carried out in a situation
continued 19 .. .l:Ic7 2o.iL b3! h5, and
where, in parryi'1g a piece attack on
here with 20 ..iLb3! White could have
his king, Black disrupts the harmony
placed Black in a critical position.
among his pieces.
20•..siL.b3!
PETROSIAN - BALASHOV
Moscow 1974
Nimzo-Indian Defence E57

I.c4 l1Jf6 2.l1Jc3 e6 3.d4 ~b4

4.e3 c5 5.~ d3 d5 6.tiJ f3 0-0 7.0-
o dxc4 S.~xc4 lZlc6 9.ilLd3 cxd4
10.exd4 iLe7 H.Mel b6 12.a3
SLb7 13.~c2 MCS 14.~d3 UeS?
It is surprising that this move peri-
46
Black has no defence. 21 ..txt7+
is threatened. If20 ... .ii..f8 there fol-
lows 21..tf4! and then 22.CDg5,
while after 20 ... .td6 there is the
unpleasant 21 ..t f6.
20 ••• hS 21.~e4 <J;;g7 22 •.txti!
W xti 23 ..t h6! ~ d6. The game
S.Garcia - Pomar, Salamanca 1975,
went 23 ... .td6 24.tiJg5+ \t>f6
25.QJh7+!, and Black resigned.
24.~c4+ Wf6 2S.ttadl CDd4
26:~xd4+ ~xd4 27.I:txd4. Black
resigned.
KAMSKY - KARPOV
FIDE World Championship Match,
2nd Game, Elista 1996
Caro-Kann Defence B14
l.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.c4
liJf6 S.CDc3 e6 6.CDf3 .tb4 7.cxdS
CDxdS 8..td2 CDc6 9..td3 .te7
10.0-0 0-0 11.~e2 CDf6. The win
of a pawn by II...QJdb4 12 ..te4
CDxd4 13.liJxd4 ~xd4 14.l::tfd 1
would have allowed White too seri-
ous an initiative.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
12/iJe4. White prevents the
standard development of the light-
square bishop on the long diago-
nal (l2 ... b6? 13 li'lxf6+ .ii..xf6 14
~e4) by tactical means, since the
win of the d4-pawn is risky: 12 ...
CDxd4?! 13.CDxd4 ~xd4 14 ..tc3
~d8 (l4 ... ~b6? is not possible be-
cause of 15.'1lxf6+ i.xf6 16"~e4)
15.LDxf6+ iJ..xf6 16.Mfdl iJ..d7
17 ..liI..xf6 ~xf6 18.iJ..xh7+ \t>xh7
19.1hd7 with advantage to White.
12 ... ~d7. Black's striving to
complete his development as quick-
ly as possible leads to difficulties. In
the 4th game of the match Karpov
played the stronger 12 ... ~b6.
13.l"tadl 1':I:c8 14.Mfel. The
alternative is 14.lL'lxf6+!? .txf6
15.~e4g616 ..th6J::te817.CDe5.
14 ... QJdS Is.CDc3! A deep pen-
etration into the position. White
aims to exchange the blockading
knight on d5, exploiting the lack of
harmony created by the bishop de-
velopment at d7.
Is •..lLif6. Black should have be-
gun with the useful move 15 ... CD cb4
16 ..tbl, and only then 16 ... tzlf6,
strengthening his control of the d5-
square.
16.a3 ~c7 (16 ....iYb6 is more
active) 17..tgS ~aS? This move,
removing the defence of the bishop
on d7, allows White to carry out a
breakthrough in the centre, which
could have been prevented by 17 ...
!Ife8.
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
IS.dS! exdS. Weaker is 18 ...
til xd5? 19.<1J xd5 ,~xg5 (19 ... exd5
20 .. Ifi,xe7 IIfe8 2L~b4! leads to
the loss of a piece) 20 .. ~xh7+!
Wxh7 21.t.ilxg5+ Wh6, and now by
22.~e4!, with the threat ofa mating
attack after 23.~h7+, White wins
the queen: 22 ... Wxg5 23.~f4+
Wg6 24.~g4+ Wh7 25.~h5+ '\!1g8
26.t.ile7+ Cj'jxe7 27.~xa5.
19.,slxf6 .~xf6 20.,~xh7+!
Wxh7 21.lIxdS ,1lxc3. Understand-
ably, Black is not satisfied with
21...%Vc7 22.~d3+ Wg8 23J:hd7,
where he has no cpmpensation for
the pawn, and he decides to give
up queen for rook and bishop in the
hope of creating a fortress.
22Jhas .~ xaS 23.M! This im-
portant intermediate move, defend-
ing the rook (keeping 24.~d3+ in
reserve) ensures White a material
advantage.
23 ..• WgS 24.ba kg4? Black
misses an opportunity to exchange
a pair of rooks- 24 .. J:tfe8 25.~d3
,~g4 26.h3 ..txf3 27.Mxe8+ lhe8
47
28.~xf3 Cilxa5, which would
have given chances of setting up
a fortress along the 6th rank after
the coordinating of the remaining
pieces.
2S.a6! (depriving the knight
of its support) 2S ••• bxa6 26.~e4
.~xf3 27"~xf3 lUeS 2S.J:tal! It is
important to retain the rook, since
with the queen alone it is far more
difficult (if at all possible) to breach
Black's defences.
2S •• J'Ie6 29.h3 kIdS 30:~c3
ildd6 31.hlbl gd7 32:~c4 as
33.ktbS 1ddl+ 34.Wh21::td2 3S.l:IfS
kId4 36.~c3 l::tdd6 (36 ... g6
37.llxa5) 37.1lcS rJf6 3S.l:tc4l:tfe6
39.HCS ktf6 40"~e3 l:tfe6 4L~g3
kIg6 42"~b3 bIgf6 43"~b7 ~fe6
44"~ c7 l:t f6.
4S.f4! After the preceding ma-
noeuvres, which had the aim of
reaching the adjournment, Kamsky
shows his hand: he plans a pawn at-
tack on the king (45 .. J:tfe6 46.f5
1:f6 47.g4 g5 48.h4).
48
4S ..• g6 46.fS gxfS 47JhfS
ilde6 4s.IIhS I:th6 49J~'g3+ '>!ifS
(49 .. J:thg6 50:~c3 I;!h6 51.~f5)
SO.~dS !lhg6 Sl.~f2 IIgf6
S2.~b2 ~e7 s3.IIhS IIh6 S4J:tbS
IIhf6 SS.~c3 WfS s6.IIhS ~h6
s7.IIfS ~hg6. White has managed
to disrupt the coordination of the
rook pair.
SS.~f3! IIg7 (58 .. J:te7 59.~f4
\8te8 60.h4) S9.~f4 WgS 60.~c7
WfS 61.~cS+ We7 62.IIdS 'ittf6
63JihSl:te4 64.l:thS CfJe7 6S.l'!th7.
Black resigned.
Often the d4-d5 breakthrough is
an effective measure during an at-
tack on the king.
KAVALEK - LARSEN
6th Match Game, Solingen 1970
Caro-Kann Defence B14
1.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.c4
ttJf6 S.ttJc3 e6 6.ttJf3 iL.e7 7.cxdS
ttJ xdS S.iL. d3 0-0 9.0-0 ttJ c6 10.: e 1
ttJf6 1l.iL.gS b6 12.a3 .~b7.
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
White has good chances of an
attack on the king: the presence of
the pawn at a3 prevents the standard
knight manoeuvre to b4, making it
difficult for Black to control the d5-
square.
13 ..i1.c2 tIeS. Black does not
have time for 13 ... ttJd5 in view of
14:~d3 g6 15.iL.h6.
14.~d3 g61S.h4! l':cs 16.k:'!adl
a6. The blockading 16 ... CZld5? does
not succeed: 17.CfJxd5 ~xd5 (or
17 ... exd5 18JiL,a4! iL.xg5 19.hxg5
IIxel+ 20.Ihel ttJe7 21.ttJe5 with
the unpleasant threat of 22.~f3!)
18.,1i,b3! ~a5, as after 19.d5! exd5
(19 ... t'tcd8 dxe6! l':txd3 20.exf7+)
20.iL.xd5 ttcd8 21 :~b3 the f7-pawn
cannot be defended.
17.iL. b3 ttJ as. By countering the
threat of d4-d5, Black weakens his
control of the e5-square.
1S.iL. a2 bS 19.ttJeS ttJdS
20.iL. xdS. An advantageous trans-
formation of one type of advantage
into another.
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
20 .... llxdS 21.Jilxe7 Mxe7
(or 21...'~xe7?! 22.l:tJxg6 hxg6
23.01xd5 ~xh4 24.11Jc3, renew-
ing the threat of d4-d5) 22.<1JxdS
iYxdS. 22 ... exd5 23.h5 CDc4 was
safer, with chances of neutralising
White's initiative.
23.iilg4! ~d8? If 23 ... ~d6
there would also have followed
24.d5, but the most tenacious was
23 ... ~g7 24.~d2 ~h5 25.~f4
~f5 26.~h6+ Wh8!
24.dS! exdS 2S.~d4 k:xet+
26.!lxel ~f8 27.CDf6+ Wh8
28.1'1e8 k':xe8 29.<1Jxe8+ f630.<1Jxf6
01 b3 31. ~ eS d4 32.g4 d3 33.gS
d2 34.~dS ~c8 3S:~xb3 ~c1+
(35 .. .'~c4 36.~f3) 36.Wg2 ~c6+
37.tiIdS Wg8 38.0. Black resigned.
KASPAROV - PSAKHIS
6th Match Game, Murcia 1990
Nimzo-Indian Defence E42
1.d4 t;l')f6 2.c4 e6 3.tiIc3 Jilb4
4.e3 cS S.CDe2 dS 6.a3 Jilxc3+
49
7.Cilxc3 cxd4 8.exd4 dxc4 9..sixc4
CD c6 1O•.il e3 0-0 11.0-0 b6 12. ~ 0
.ii.b7 13.Jild3 l"Ic8 14.h'l:adl :kIc7
lS.~h3 CiJe7 16..ii.gS! tilg6
17.~g3l::Id7.
The first impression is that Black
is securely blocking the isolated d4-
pawn, but the pin on the f6-knight
allows White to carry out a break-
through in the centre and realise the
potential of his bishop pair.
18.dS! exdS. If 18 ... JLxd5, then
19 ..ii.b5! l:c7 (I9 .. J'Id6 20 ..ii.xf6
gxf6 21.CDe4! leads to the loss of the
exchange) 20.tiIxd5 exd5 21..ii.xf6
gxf6 22.~b3 <1Je7 23.IId4, attack-
ing the broken kingside.
19.Jilf5 ~e7 20.h4! (with the
threat of 2 L~xf6 gxf6 22.h5) 20•..
WI c7 (in the hope of weakening the
pressure of the white pieces by ex-
changing queens) 21.~xc7 ~xc7
22.~fel! The white rooks dominate
on the important central files.
22 •• Jle7. The desire to exchange
the active rook is natural. In the event
so
of22 ... h6 23 ..ltxf6 gxf6 24.hS QJf4
(24 .. .ciJe7? 2S.liJbS) 2S.g3 CiJxhS
26.ciJxdS ..ItxdS 27.l:txdS the white
rooks are still dominant.
23.tilbS! By attacking the queen-
side weaknesses, White does not al-
low Black the slightest respite. If
23 ... a6 there follows 24.CiJd6 iLc6
2S.CiJc8.
23 .. JUeS 24.Mxe7 CiJxe7
2S.i.h3 i.cs 26 •.ltxcS Ihcs.
More tenacious was 26 ... C?lxc8
27 ..ltxf6 gxf6 28J:hdS, although
here too White's position is techni-
cally won.
27.CiJxa7I:tc22S.b4Wf829.i.e3
C?lf5 30.i.xb6 CiJg4 31..tcS+
WeS 32.CiJbS l:Ia2 33.l1lc3 Un3
34.tL'lxdS f6 3S.bS l:Ib3 36.b6.
Black resigned.
However, despite its obvious vir-
tues, the d4-dS breakthrough does
not always achieve its goal. We will
consider a few examples.
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
KARPOV - BELIAVSKY
Linares 1995
Caro-Kann Defence B14
1.c4 c6 2.e4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.d4
tflf6 S.lJlc3 e6 6.tflf3 /b..e7 7.cxdS
lJlxdS S•. lit.d3 0-0 9.0-0 lJlc610.11e1
CiJf6 1l ..ltgS (this position may also
be reached via the Tarrasch Defence
Deferred to the Queen's Gambit un-
der index 042) 11...h6. The main
reply is considered to be 11 ... lJl b4,
aiming for the maximum control of
dS. The move in the game is aimed
at 12.i. h4 liJ hS with the exchange
of bishops.
12.,liL.e3. Now Black has to reck-
on with the threat of the bishop sac-
rifice on h6.
12 .. .ttJb4 13.i.bl b6? Care-
less. 13 ... kIe8, preparing .It f8, was
essential.
14.~d2.
14 ... l':teS. Forced. If 14 ... .il.b7
White can sacrifice his bishop:
IS.i.xh6 i.xf3 16.i.xg7 CiJg4
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
(Black loses after 16 ... Wxg7?
17.~g5+ Wh8 18.~h6+ '.itg8
19.kIe5) 17.gxf3 2l..g5 18.~e2
,~f4 19.fxg4 ~h4 20:~f3 ~xh2+
21.'l!lfl '.itxg7 22,,1i.e4 etc.
15.a3! Cilc6. The only move.
If 15 . ..tilbd5? White changes the
pawn structure by the exchange
16.tDxd5 e! Id5 (16 .. !1lxd5 los-
es to 17,,~ xh6 gxh6 18:~ xh6 f5
19:~g6+ 'rt'h8 20 ..1l.xf5! exf5
21.0lg5), after which there can
follow 17 ..il. xh6 gxh6 18. ~ xh6
tiJe4 (or 18 ... SL.g4 19.1:te5 ttJe4
20.2l..xe4 dxe4 21.tDg5) 19.Mxe4
dxe4 20"iiLxe4, gaining a big mate-
rial advantage.
16. ~ d3. White continues to
build up the threats. For the moment
the 16.d5 breakthrough is premature
and it proves effective only after the
capture with the pawn: 16 ... eUd5?
17.2l.. xh6 gxh6 18:~ xh6 1t. f8
19.MXl18 'iVx 18 2~xf6 or 16 ...
CZlxd5 17.ttJxd5 ~xd5 18:~c2
]( f6 19:~'h7+ c;t;f8 20.2l..e4 ~d7
51
21.ktedl! VJIrIc7 22.Macl .tb7
23.ttJd4 etc. (Karpov). But after
16 ... ttJa5, with the threat of0:lc4,
nothing significant is apparent. The
bishop sacrifice 17.11.. xh6 is parried
by 17 ... tD b3 18:~' g5 .~ f8 19.I'Ia2
e i Jd5, while in the event of 17iL.a2
Black simplifies the position - 17 ...
exd5 18. 0l xd5 ttl xd5 19 ..it. xd5
.ltb7 etc.
16 ••• 2l.. b717.tiJe4 Wf8! 18.i.d2.
After 18.lilxf6 2l..xf6 19:~h7 Black
can capture the d4-pawn. But now it
is indirectly defended, since in the
event of 18 ... Ci)xe4 19.~xe4 2l..f6
20:~'h7 t;Jxd4? 21..!&,b4+ White
wins.
18 •.. a5 19.2l..f4 ttJd5 20.2l..g3
2l..a6 2t.~d2 l::tc8 22.2l..a2 Wg8
23.l'Iac1 ttJf6 24.ttJc3 2l..f8.
25.d5. This pawn breakthrough
leads to simplification, after which
the worst is over for Black. 25.2l.. h4!?
looks more promising, since Black
is practically forced to weaken his
kingside: 25 ... g5 26.2l..g3, and now
52
in the event of 26 ....ag7 27.k:tcdl
White is still threatening d4-d5. But
Black can decide on a pawn sacrifice
- 26 ... g4 27.ttJe5 ~ [,d4 28~c2
tLlxe5 (not 28 .. .'~c5? 29.tLle4, or
28 ....ag7 29.QJe2! ,axe2 3o.lhxc6)
29.Ji.xe5 ~d8 30.lJcdl WJe7, in-
tending Ji. g7.
2S ... exdS 26.l::Ixe8 ~xe8
27.tZlxdS CiJxdS 28 ..1i.xdS CfJe7!
29 ..1i.a2 l:'txc1+ 30"~xc1 Ji.b7!
31.tLleS .1i.dS 32.Ji.b1 tLlc6 33"~d2
~e6 34.tLld3 ~fS 3SJ~Yd1 CfJd4
36.tLlf4 Ji.b3! 37.,txfS Ji.xd1, and
on the 70th move the game ended in
a draw.
KASPAROV - KARPOV
World Championship Match,
II th Game, Moscow 1985
Nimzo-Indian Defence E21
l.d4 tLlf6 2.c4 e6 3.0'lc3 .1i.b4
4.lJJO 0-0 S•.1i.gS cS 6.e3 cxd4
7.exd4 h6 8.Ji.h4 dS 9.Mc1 dxc4
10.Ji.xc4 QJc6 11.0-0 Ji.e7 12.I.!e1
b6.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
The white pieces are mobilised
for the breakthrough in the centre,
but if 13.d5 Black can defuse the
situation: 13 .. .tilxd5 14.tl.xd5 exd5
15.~xd5 ~xd5 16.tLlxd5 .i1.xh4
17.<1:lxh4, and here 17 ....Ub7 is pos-
sible, not fearing 18..l~hc6 in view
of 18 ... l:Ife8. Therefore Kasparov
decided to defer d4-d5 until a more
propitious moment.
13.a3 ~b7 14.Jii.g3. A note-
worthy moment: exchanges usually
make it easier to defend against an
attack. Therefore White has to reck-
on with the possible 14 ... lilh5! with
the exchange of the dark-square
bishops. But now if 14 . .Ji)h5 there
follows 15.d5!
14 .. Jlc8 1S.Jii.a2 .td6!
16.dS.1t is hard to resist the temp-
tation to make this breakthrough.
But, as the further development of
events shows, here too this move
leads to a simplification of the posi-
tion with possibilities of a defence.
As an alternative Kasparov considers
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough
setting up an attack: 16 ..lth4!? .lte7
17.~d3 Chh5 18 ..iii.bl g6 19 ..ltg3
0\xg3 20.hxg3 ~d7, when it is now
good to play 21.d5! exd5 22.lilxd5
with a dangerous initiative for
White. Therefore more detennined
defensive measures are demanded of
Black, for which Kasparov suggests
16 ... g5! 17.il.g3 .Uxg3 18.hxg3
with the possible continuation 18 ...
g4 19.Che5 ~xd4! 2o.Chxf7 ~xdl
21.l'.Icxdl 'ltixf7 22 ..iii.xe6+ Wg6
23 ..iii.xc8 .ii.xc8, although here too
after 24.!Id6 White retains a serious
initiative (24 ... Cila5 25.01d5 ~b7
26.Cilf4+ Wf7 27.MCI). 16 ..lte5!?
.t1.xe5 17.dxe5 CLld7 18 ..abl also
comes into consideration, retaining
chances of an attack.
16 .•. CilxdS 17.LlJxdS .itxg3
lS.hxg3 exdS 19.'uxdS ~f6
20.~a4 IIfdS 21JJcdl I:!d7?! As
a result of the exchanges, Black has
successfully completed his develop-
ment. Here 21.. .l:Ic7! (Kasparov)
would have retained equality.
22.~g4!
53
22 ... MCdS?? An oversight which
loses, but it was not easy to find the
correct solution. For example, 22 ...
Ye7? was bad because of 23.Ihe7
Vllixe7 24.~xf7+! ~xf7 25.I:l:d7,
while if 22 .. J'Idc7 or 22 .. J~dd8
there follows 23.b4! with pressure.
The strongest move was 22 .. Jld6!,
neutral ising White's ImtIatIve:
23.ge4 kIf8! 24.l:If4 ~d8 25.~h5
CLle5! (Kasparov).
23.~xd7! Mxd7 24.UeS+ Wh7
2S ..lte4+. Black resigned.
KASPAROV - ANAND
Wijk aan Zee 1999
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.Cilf3 dS 2.d4 e6 3.c4 dxc4 4.e3
cS S..It xc4 a6 6.0-0 Ch f6 7.il.. b3
Cilc6 S.01c3 cxd4 9.exd4 .lte7
10.l:Iel 0-0 (this position can also
be reached from the Panov Attack
in the Caro-Kann Defence) 1l •.ltf4
CilaS (if II. .. b5, then 12.d5! exd5
13.QJxd5 is good).
12..1L. c2 bS.
S4
13.dS!? exdS 14.~d3 CLlc6. This
move allows White to make use of
tactical motifs to set up the queen +
bishop battery on the b l-h7 diago-
nal. In Illescas - Anand, Leon 1997,
Black radically solved this problem
with 14 ... g6 and succeeded in par-
rying White's attack: IS.the7!?
~xe7 16.il.gS ~d6 17.~d4 ltJhS
18.ttlxdS CLlc6 19.~d2 f620.il.b3
~h8 21.il.e3 il.g4 22.liJb6?! ~xd2
23.liJxd2 I:tad8, with the clearly bet-
ter endgame. But also in the middle-
game after 22.CLld4!? CLleS Black's
chances are preferable. However,
White could have avoided these
problems by playing IS.liJd4.
lS.il.c7! ~d7 (not 16 ... ~xc7?
I 7.CLlxd5!).
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
16.Cf'\eS! l1'lxeS 17•.~xeS. If
17.J:he5, then 17 ... 1i.b7! is good,
with excellent play after 18.~ b6,
for example: 18 .. J.Ife8 19.il.d4
liJe4!? (19 ... g6!?) 20.n J::Iad8
(weaker is 20 ... il. f6?! 21.ktxe8+
~xe8 22.il.eS, threatening to cap-
ture the knight) 21.l:Id I liJ f6, or
18 ... b4 19.ctJe4 ctJxe4 20Jdxe4 f5
21.I:Ieel l::tae8. But weaker is 18 ...
il.d6 19.il.d4, when Black is forced
to weaken his king's position by
19 ... g6, since after 19 . ..li'Je4 White
gains an advantage by 20.1.:txd5!
il.xd5 21.liJxd5 f5 22,ciJb6.
17 •.. g6 18.il.xf6. In Ponomari-
ov - Galkin, Moscow 200S, White
played 18:~n, which Black parried
by 18 ... ~g4! 19.1iJxd5 (19:~xg4
.~xg4 20.il.xf6 il.xf6 21.tZlxdS
il. xb2 leads to a better endgame for
Black) 19 ... CLlxd5 20.~xd5 il.e6
(if 20 ... il.f5, then 21.il.113! with
the threat of 22:~'eS is possible)
21.~e4 ~xe4 22.il.xe4 kIa7 with
an equal position.
18 ••• il.xf6 19.1iJxdS il.g7 20.a4
bxa4 21.il.xa4 ~d8 22.il.c6.
Draw.
 Chapter 3
Attack on the queenside
In a certain type of position an
isolated d4-pawn may provide the
basis for an attack on the queen-
side. Against modern defensive
technique it is not always possi-
ble to attack the king, especially
if Black succeeds in setting up
a blockade on dS. In order not to
lose the initiative, the piece activ-
ity, which accompanies the isolated
pawn, should be used to attack the
blockade point, in order to unblock
the d4-pawn or stabilise the pawn
structure by exchanging on dS. A
precondition for such strategy is
the presence of pawn weaknesses
on Black's queenside.
3.1. Exchange on dS
An effective method in the or-
ganisation of an attack on the queen-
side, if it is inadequately defended,
may be an exchanging operation on
the dS blockading square. In this
case Black often has to agree to the
stabilisation of the pawn structure (a
knight on dS is replaced by a pawn)
or to a less effective blockade of the
pawn (a knight is replaced by anoth-
er piece), allowing White to develop
his initiative.
The importance of an energetic
attack on the blockade point was ob-
served several times by Capablanca.
We will examine some examples
from his games.
CAPABLANCA-LASKER
World Championship Match,
II th Game, Havana 1921
Queen's Gambit D64
1.d4 dS 2.CiJO e6 3.c4 tZJf6
4.it.gS 0lbd7 S.e3 §J..e7 6.tZJc3 0-0
7.Mel !'l:e8 8"~c2 c6 9.ll.d3 dxc4
10.iL.xc4 CLldS 1l ..1.l..xe7 ttxe7 12.
0-0 Cilf8 13.l:tfd1 <~d7 14.e4 tZJb6
ls.iLn Mc8 16.b4 it.e8 17.~b3
IIec7 18.a4 tiJg6 19.aS ltJd7 20.e5
b6 21.l1Je4 ~b8 22.~c3 0lf4
23.tZJd6 lildS 24"~a3 f62S.CiJxe8
~xe8 26.exf6 gxf6 27.bS IIbc8
28.bxc6 Mxc6 29.Mxc6 ~xc6
30.axb6 axb6 31.Mel ~c8 32.tZJd2
tZJf8 33.tZJe4 ~d8 34.h4l:Ic7.
56
In this position the knight at d5 is
the keystone of Black 's defence, pre-
venting his pawn weaknesses at b6,
e6 and f6 from being approached.
From this it follows that the knight
has to be exchanged.
35.~b3! White begins an attack
on the d5-knight, exploiting the 'X-
ray' of the queen and king on the a2-
g8 diagonal.
35 .. JIg7. Black tries to provoke
the move g3, to prevent White from
switching his queen to the kings ide
along the 3rd rank.
36.g3l:!a7 37•.ltc4 J::ta5 3S.ClJc3!
After the exchange of the knight,
Black's defences collapse.
3S••. ClJxc339.~xc3~ti40.~e3
~d6 41.~e4 Ua4 42.~b7+ Wg6.
(See diagram)
43.~cS?! As was shown by
Kasparov, there was a practically
forced win by 43.h5+! ~h6 44.~f7
~d8 45 ..td3! IIxd4 46.l:he6l:Ixd3
47.IIxf6+ Wg5 48 .• g7+ ClJg6
49.IIxg6+.
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
43 ... ~b4? By playing 43 ...
l:Ia7! 44.~xe6 l'tlxe6 45J:he6
~xd4 Black would have gained
real saving chances. Indeed, White
can win the b6-pawn, by divert-
ing its defenders with an attack on
the king: 46.~g8+! I:tg7 47.~e8+
'rtih6 48.~f8 Wg6 49.gd6! ~e5!
50J!xb6 ~el+ 51.~g2 ~e4+
52.~h2 ~f3, but with heavy pieces
on the board and the pawns on one
wing there is no direct win.
44.I:tct 'VJIie7 45 ..ltd3+ 'it'h6
46J:tc7 lla1+ 47.\t>g2 ~d6
4S.~xf8+. Black resigned.
CAPABLANCA-ALEKHINE
St. Petersburg 1913
Queen's Gambit D30
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3 ClJf6 4.ClJt3
e6 5.ClJbd2 ClJbd7 6•.ltd3 .lte7
7.0-0 0-0 S.~c2 dxc4 9.ClJxc4
c5 10.ClJce5 cxd4 ll.exd4 ClJb6
12.ClJg5 g6 13.ClJgt3 \t>g7 14•.ltg5
lilbd5 15Jlact .ltd7 16.~d2 t1JgS
17•.txe7 ~xe7.
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
1S..sU.e4! Capablanca: 'This move
I've been considering for a very long
time. It looks very simple and inof-
fensive, yet it is the foundation of
the whole attack against Black's
position. The fact is that the bishop
is doing very little, while the black
knight at d5 is the key to Black's
defence, hence the necessity of ex-
changing the almost useless bishop
for a most valuable knight. '
lS .•• it.b5?! This move leads to a
difficult position. Black should have
tried to retain piece control of d5,
which could have been achieved by
18 .. .ti'lgf6, and if 19 .. tL.xd5 Ci\xd5
20.Ci\g4, then 2o .. JIfc8 21.~h6+
W g8, and White has merely a slight
advantage.
19.1!tfel.
(See diagram)
19••. ~d6. With the appearance
of the rook on e I, Black has to reckon
with its opposition with the queen, and
19 ... tiJgf6?! 20.it.xd5 tiJxd5 is now
inadequate because of 21.IIc5 with
57
the threat of 22.Uxd5! exd5 23.tiJg4
~d6 24.~h6+ Wg8 25.tiJg5. Also
inadequate is 19 ... tiJdf6 20.it.c2 (in
the event of20:~a5 CLlxe4 21.1he4
CiJ f6 Black maintains his d5-point:
22.11c7 b6! 23.Ihe7 bxa5 and 24 ...
CiJd5, or 22.Meel ~e8 23.gc7 b6
24:~a3 0'Jd5) 20 ... tiJd5 21..1l..b3
liJgf622.l::tc5.
20.it.xd5! exd5 21.~a5! Ex-
ploiting the fact that the bishop
is undefended, White invades the
queenside along the c-file and de-
cides the game.
21. .. a6 22.~c7 ~xc7 23.Ihc7
h6 24.lIxb7 MacS 25.b3l:c2 26.a4
it.e2 27.tDh4 h5 2S.lt'lhxg6 IIeS
29.Ihti+ Wh6 30.f4 as 31.ttJh4
Mxe5 32.fxe5 ~g5 33.g3 Wg4
34.Iig7+ Wh3 35.tiJg2. Black re-
signed.
An exchanging operation on the
blockading d5-square may also be
effective when Black is behind with
his queens ide development.
58
BOTVINNIK - ALEKHINE
AVRO Tournament,
Netherlands 1938
Queen's Gambit D41
I.QJD d5 2.d4 etJf6 3.c4 e6
4.etJc3 c5 5.cxd5 etJxd5 6.e3 ttlc6
7..i£.c4 cxd4 S.exd4 .i£.e7 9.0-0 0-0
10.1::tel b6? The fianchetto of the
bishop should have been prepared
by exchanging knights first - 10 ...
tZJxc3 II.bxc3 and now II.. .b6.
1l.etJxd5! With his last move
Black weakened the light squares on
his queens ide, and by exchanging
the knight White changes the pawn
structure (after which the fianchetto
of the bishop loses its point) and at-
tacks the weaknesses on the queen-
side, by seizing the important c-file.
1l ••• exd5 12.it.b5 it.d7?! This
leads to the exchange of the Iight-
square bishops, after which the
weakness of the c6-square is ag-
gravated. But also after 12 ... .i£.b7
l3.~a4 l:tc8 14 ..tf4 a6 15 ..i£.xc6
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
l"!xc6 16.lile5 J::rc8 17.~d7! .~,a8
18.l:!ac I, as occurred in Neikirkh
- Sliwa, Sofia 1957, Black would
have had to concede the c-file.
13"~a4 etJbS. After l3 ... IIc8
14 ..i£. f4 with the threat of 15.thc I
White has a big advantage.
14Slf4 ilxb5 15"~xb5 a6 16.
~a4(with thethreatofl7.ilxb8l'Ixb8
18.~xa6) 16....i£.d6 (trying by ex-
changes to ease his position) 17~1ixd6
~xd6 lSl!acl lIa7 19. ~c2! The
c-file is more important than the e-file,
since the e7-square can be defended by
the king, whereas the c7-square re-
mains vulnerable (Botvinnik).
19 •• J:l:e7. If 19 ... f6, then 20.'~f5
with the threat of exchanging queens
on e6.
20.Uxe7 ~xe7.
21.~c7! 'VJHxc7 22Jhc7. Con-
trol of the c-file and Black's pawn
weaknesses guarantee White a big
advantage.
22 ... f6! 23.<;t>n (not 23.l!tb7?!
tIc8! 24.Wfl b5. when Black has
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
improved his position) 23 .. Jln
24.11eS+ Uts 2S.:cte3! Because of
the difference in the placing of the
pieces, Black is on the verge of
zugzwang (Botvinnik). White won
on the 51 st move.
RASHKOVSKY - KUPREICHIK
Minsk 1985
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
1.d4 dS 2.<110 e6 3.e4 dxe4 4.e3
0lf6 S.,lU.xe4 86 6.84 eS 7.0-0 <11e6
S.%Ye2 exd4 9.l'ldl Jz..e7 10.exd4
0-0 11.L1Je3 Li1b4 12.tiJeS CilfdS
13J~Ye4 b6.
In contrast to the. Petros ian
- Spas sky game, Moscow 1971,
which was examined in Chapter 2,
with his last move Black has left his
rook at a8 unprotected, which allows
White to make a favourable change
to the pawn structure.
14.<1JxdS! By changing the pawn
structure in the centre, White hopes
to exploit the weakness of the d5-
59
pawn, which will need defending,
as well as the weakening of Black's
queens ide, where the a6- and b6-
pawns are potential targets.
14 ... exdS (14 ... Cilxd5? 15.<1Jc6)
lS"~O i..e6 16.<~b3 lIeS 17.i..d2
f6. Black does not want to give up
the c-file - 17 ... <1Jc6 18.<1Jxc6
ktxc6 19.9c 1 - and he goes in for a
weakening of the e6-square.
lS.liJd3 (18.liJg4!? with the idea
ofLi1e3 also came into consideration)
lS ... tne6?! 18 ... l1Jxd3 19.~xd3
a5 20.IIe 1 !ll f7 was stronger, but by
playing 21.~b5! White switches to
an attack on the queenside.
19.Ci\f4. Also good is 19.i..c3
~d6 20.<1Jf41:tfd8 21.liJxe6 ~xe6,
and here there is a choice between
22.Mel and 22.i..c2.
19 ••• <1Jxd4 20"~e3 Li1xb3
21.ttlxe6 ~d6.
22.<1Jxg7! This is stronger than
22.CiJxf8?! CiJxal 23.i..b4! <1Jc2!
24 .... xe7 ~xe7 25.i..xe7 d4! But
now, since 22 ... <1Jxal? 23.<1Jf5 can-
60
not satisfy Black, he is forced to ac-
cept the break-up of his pawns.
22 ... '<t>xg7 23Jl'hb3 He4
24. .2e3 ~b4 25.~d3 d4? 26.\t:,d2
%We5 27.b3 Me3 28.Jii.xe3 dxe3
29.gacl !;Ie8 30Jlha6 Me7
31.~d3 f5 32.b4 ~e4 33.~xf5
~xb4 34Jl'#e5+ Wg8 35.!!d4 '@'e5
36.~g4+. Black resigned.
PINTER - KORCHNOI
Beer Sheva 1988
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
1.d4 d5 2.0113 Cilf6 3.e4 dxe4
4.e3 e6 5.~ xe4 e5 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
exd4 8.exd4 .fie7 9.C!Je3 0-0
10:~e2 Lbe6 1l.Mdl 01b4 12.01e5
b6 13:~ 13 Lb fd5.
14.tZJxd5! Compared with the
previous game White has developed
his queen at fl, and after the ex-
change on d5 he effectively has an
extra tempo.
14 ••. exd5 15.Jil. b3. The weak-
ness of the d5-pawn and the vulner-
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
ability of the a6- and b6-pawns give
White a stable advantage.
15 ....l1i.e6 16..S:Ld2 f6 17.01g4.
White transfers his knight to e3. The
alternative was 17.Cild3.
17••• 01e6 18.. ~e3 ~d7 19.h3
}lad8 20:~'e2 a5 21JIel'b.f7
22Jj'f3 \t'h8 23.0:le3 !1fe8 24.. !l.e2
(switching the bishop to a more active
position) 24 ....iifS 25.. ~.d3 ~d6.
26.h4! A typical way of increas-
ing the advantage: White seizes
space on the kingside.
26.JZJb4 27.ttJf5 ViIIe7 28 •. t1.b5
0le6 29.l'he8 .It xe8 30J''tcl 01 b4
31..tld2 Wlif7. In the event of 31...
ViIIb7? 32.~ g3! White breaks through
on the c-file: 32 .. o<axb5 33.k!c7
WlibR 34.axb5 l"'tc8 35.Ihg7! ~xg3
36 ..l:Ixg311c2 37 .. s1I.h6!, winning.
32 .. ~xb4 axb4 33.0:le3 Wg8
34.b3 ~xb5 35.axb5 ~e6 36•.l:Ie6
'tIWe4 37.~xe4 dxe4 38.Uxb6 (the
passed b-pawn decides the outcome)
38 •. J:txd4 39.Mb8 'ftJf7 40.b6 Md7
41.Me8 ~d6 42.I{Je4 We6 43.Wn
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
~.e5 44.\!te2 .\ld4 4SJ!tbS <;t>f5
46.b7. Black resigned.
ROZENfALIS-MIKHALCHISHJN
Tmava 1988
Sicilian Defence B22
l.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 ~ xd5
4.d4 liIf6 5.liIfJ liIc6 6 ..tl.e3 cxd4
7.cxd4 e6 S.C;I)c3 ~d6 9.a3! .'fi..e7
10.. I1.d3 b6 11.0-0 .ilb712,l~~e2 0-0
13.!!adl )"'tacS 14.!1fe1.
15 ... liId5? A premature attempt
to set up a blockade. Black should
have played 15 ... Hfd8, increasing
his control of the centre.
15.0Jxd5! exdS. In the event of
15 ... ~ xd5 White drives away the
queen and carries out a breakthrough
in the centre: 16..i1.c4 ~h5 17.d5!
1iIa5 18..~.a2 .Uxd5 19.. ~xd5 exd5
20. ~.xb6 axb6 21.~xe7, winning a
pawn. But now the bishop on b7 is run-
ning up against the d5-pawn, whereas
White's pieces are excellently mobi-
lised, which gives him the advantage.
61
16'ci\e5! 0Jxe5 17..~f4 ~d7.
IS.dxe5! White transforms the
position and sets his sights on the
kingside; the f-pawn may be includ-
ed in the attack.
IS ... ~e6 19.~fJl'lfes 20.~g3
d4 21.h4! h5 22 •. Ug5 ~xg5. If
22 ... IIc5 there follows 23.f4!
23. W# xg5 ~ g4. Weakening the
position by 23 ... g6 would be suicid-
al. But after the exchange of queens
White wins a pawn, retaining an ex-
cellent position.
24.%Yxg4 hxg4 25 .. ~f5! l:c5
26JJxd4 g6 27.. &xg4 l:exeS
2S.!1xe5 nxe5 29.Md7~.d5 30.f4!
Black resigned.
IVANCHUK - KARPOV
Linares 1991
Nimzo-Indian Defence E54
I.d4 liIf6 2.c4 e6 3.liIc3 .~b4
4.e3 0-0 5 •.s1L.d3 d5 6.liIfJ c5 7.
0-0 cxd4 S.exd4 dxc4 9 •.~xc4 b6
10.~gS .s!i..b7 ll.l"l:cl liIc6 12.a3
~e7 13.~d31i1d5.
62
14•.it..xdS! exdS?! This restricts
the light-square bishop. Better was
14 ... i.xg5 15.liJxg5 ~xg5 16.id3
~fdS 17.~e3! ~xe3 lS.fxe3 with
a slight advantage for White (Ivan-
chuk). Here 16.f4 ~g6 17 ..1l.e4 f5
lS ..ltD l:tadS 19.QJb5 also comes
into consideration.
IS•.1l.xe7 CiJxe7 16.ktfel. As a
result of the exchanging operation
White has gained a small but endur-
ing advantage, based on the defects
of the d5-pawn, which is restricting
Black's minor pieces.
16 •. J:tc8.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
17.h4! White seizes space on the
kingside.
17 ... h6 (preventing IS.l1lg5)
18.hS l:tc7 19.CiJbS. It would have
been useful to first include 19 .~e3
~cS 20.k:tcel ~f5, and here
21.l1lb5!? is good.
19 ••• :ctxc1 2o.thc1 i.a6. Al-
though the black bishop is inactive,
it is fulfilling an important defen-
sive function. 20 ... CiJc6, preventing
tile5, was better.
21.a4 Jit..xbS? After the exchange
of this bishop Black has problems
defending the light squares on the
queenside. Stronger was 21 ... ~bS!
22.tZle5l:tcS 23.l!el .ltxb5 24.axb5
~d6 25:~D ~f6! 26:~xf6 gxf6
27.ttJg4 Cilf5 2S.CiJxf6+ ~g7
29.CiJxd5liJxd4, obtaining an equal
endgame (Ivanchuk). Instead of
27.CiJg4, also possible is 27.tild7
tilf5 2S.Bal!, retaining the better
chances.
22.~xbS tZlrs 23.g3 tile7
24.tl\eS ~d6 2SJiHa6. 25stlg2!
was stronger, not allowing the
counterplay which was now possi-
ble with 25 .. :~b4!? 26.~d3! lIcs
27.Hxcs+ tZlxcs 2S.~t3 ~el+
29.Wg2 ~e4, exchanging queens,
although in the knight endgame af-
ter 30.~xe4 dxe4 31.g4 Black still
has problems.
2S ••• CiJrs 26J~Vd3 CiJe7 27J~If3
as 28.'~tg2 (2S.b3! Anand) 28 ... f6
29.CiJd3 l'::tc8 30.I!ell!tc4.
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside 63

White is better developed, since

Black has delayed the development
of his bishop.
16.tilxd5! The aim of the ex-
changing operation on dS is to make
a favourable change to the pawn
structure in order to exploit the c-
file.
16 ... 111xd5 17.~xd5! ~xd5.
After the pawn capture 17 ... exdS
Black's position becomes passive
In this position White could have
and the move IS ... b6 loses its point.
exploited his pressure on the e-file
However, the price of retaining
by 31.~e3! <$in 32.b3 !Ic7 33.tilf4,
piece control over dS is to allow the
increasing his advantage. The game
dangerous invasion of the rook.
went 31.111f4? !!xd4, which led to
18.l'lc7! .~b7 19.~g4!
equal chances.

SMYSLOV - RIBLI
Candidates Match, 7th Game,
London 1983
Queen's Gambit D42

l.d4111f6 2.lilt3 e6 3.c4 d5 4.111c3

c5 5.cxd5 lilxd5 6.e3 t;jc6 7S2.d3
(, e7 8.0-0 0-0 9.83 cxd4 I O.exd4 .~. f6
Il.Ue4 lllce7 12.111e5 g6 13.~h6
'~.g7 14.~.xg7 Wxg7 15.Yet b6.

19 .. Jlad8. The white pieces

coordinate excellently in the attack
on the king, whereas Black's ~b7
+ ~ dS battery is merely decora-
tive. The attempt to evict the rook
by 19 ... Itac8 leads to the loss of a
pawn: 20.l::rd7 ~e4 21.~xe4 ..Iit.xe4
22.0 ~dS 23Jha7 Itc2 24.h4.
2o.IIdl a5 21.h4! I:tc8 (21 ... hS?
22.~xg6+) 22.tl:d7 ~e4 23.~g5
64
,1l.e6 24.0! ~fS. In the event of
24 .. .'~e2 25.CZJg4! the weakness
of the dark squares proves decisive:
25 ... ~xdI+ 26.Wh2 Wg8 27.'~h6
followed by LZJf6+.
25.ga7 ..ta4 26.l::tel ge2 27.b4
,~b3 28.bxa5 bxa5 29.ge4 h6
30.'l~Ye3 Mb2 31.gg4!, and in view
of the threatened capture on g6
Black loses material. White won on
the 43rd move.
KASPAROV - KARPOV
World Championship Match,
23rd Game, Moscow 1985
Queen's Gambit D55
l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.0le3 ,fl,e7
4.C[)O CZJf6 5•..tg5 h6 6.1Lxf65l.xf6
7.e3 0-0 8.gcl e6 9.,~d3 tiJd7
10.0-0 dxe4 11 ...t xe4 e5 12.h3 exd4
13.exd4.
This position with an isolated d4-
pawn was the result of home prepa-
ration. In his choice of opening vari-
ation Kasparov was hoping to gain
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
a slight advantage and to retain the
initiative, thus retaining possibilities
of playing for a win. If successful,
such strategy could have decided
the match ahead of schedule.
13 ••• <1'lb6. A logical reply -
Black takes control of the d5-point.
If 13 .. .l::te8, then 14.~b3 is un-
pleasant.
14.,~b3 Ue8 IS.gel ,\1i,fS
16Jhe8+ ~xe8 17.~d2 ~d7
18.~ell:Id8 19.'1~·f4.
19 ... 0ld5. White has achieved
his aim: he firmly holds the initia-
tive, and this is essentially admitted
by Karpov, an expert on this type
of position, by allowing the conse-
quences of the exchange on d5.
20.0lxd5! exd5 21.<1'le5 llxe5.
A forced exchange: 21 ... ~ c8
22.McI or 21...'~e6 22.LiId3 fa-
vours White.
22J'he5 ,ae6. As a result of the
exchanging operation White has a
stable advantage thanks to his better
bishop.
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
23J~'e3 Wf8 24J~'d3 f6?! Af-
ter this weakening move White's
advantage increases. 24 ... iVc7 was
sounder, intending 2SJ!Icl iVf4.
25.IIel 1Ln 26.iVc3 ~d6
27.~cl ~eS 2S.il..dl a6 29.il..f3
g6 30.h4 h5 31.g3. Kasparov com-
ments that 31.VJ!jc7 VJHxc7 32.Ihc7
il..c6 33.Ji..e2 as 34 ..1i.d3 was also
not bad, with the better endgame,
but he prefers to complete his pawn
squeeze on the queenside.
31 ... ~n 32.a4 I:Id7 33.a5 <J;;g7
34.VJHb3 ~e6 35.~b4 ~eS. Parry-
ing the threat of 36.MC8, since the
exchange of queens after 3S ... iVe7
favours White.
In his commentary on this posi-
tion, Kasparov writes: 'Here I decid-
ed on a plan with l:Ic l-cS, ~b4-c3,
gcS-c8 and VJHc3-cS, forcing a tran-
sition into a won ending. However,
unfortunately, I stopped keeping a
careful watch on Black's actions'.
36.'i!lg2?! (36.il..g2 was more
logical) 36 ... ~dS 37.l:tc5 iVe7
6S
3S.~c3?! White should have played
38.iVd2, and after 38 ... gS 39.WgI
gxh4 40.gxh4 the opening of the
game is in his favour.
3S ... g5! 39.iVe3 g4 40.il..dl
iVe4+ 41.Wgl. Draw.
3.2. Attack on queenside
weaknesses
Queenside weaknesses are usu-
ally characterised by the weakening
of the dark squares after a7-a6, or
the light squares after b7-b6, which
may provide the motiffor a piece at-
tack.
KARPOV - GELLER
Moscow 1981
Queen's Gambit D58
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Lt'lc3 ~e7
4.tl'l f3 CD f6 5.k g5 h6 6.k h4 0-0
7.e3 b6 SJ::tcl il..b7 9.il..d3 CDbd7
10.0-0 c5 11.~e2 l::tcs 12.il..g3
cxd4 13.exd4 dxc4 14.il..xc4 kxf3
15.gxf3 CiJh5.
66
A serious defect of Black's posi-
tion is the weakening of his queen-
side, which is aggravated by the ab-
sence of his light-square bishop.
16..1i.a6! White immediately
exploits the weakness of the light
squares. To avoid losing the ex-
change, Black is forced to exchange
the bishop on g3, repairing White's
kingside pawn structure.
16 ..• tt'lxg3 17.hxg3 IIc7. If
17 ... l':taS IS.Itfdl t1lf6, then 19.dS!
ClJ xdS 20. tt'l xdS exdS 21..1i. b7 is
strong.
IS.I:tfdl! There was no point in
playing IS.l1JbS?! ktxcl 19.9xcl
liJbS! 20.tt'lxa7 ~xd4 with an equal
game.
IS •. .tiJf6. If IS ... ti\b8 there fol-
lows 19 ..1i.c4 with the unpleasant
threat of d4-dS.
I 9.liJ bS! ~xcl 20Jhcl CiJdS.
After 20 ... ~dS 21.a3 Black is con-
demned to passive defence.
21.tt'lxa7! Although the white
pieces are stuck for time on the
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
queenside, Black is unable to ex-
ploit this factor.
21. •• l1Jb4 22.a3! ~aS (22 ...
tilxa6 23.~xa6 ~xd4 24.liIc6
was bad for Black) 23.11c7! QJdS
24.gb7 .1i.f6 2S.tt'lc6 kics 26.t;)eS!
.1i.xeS 27.dxeS gci+ 2S.Wg2 ~dS
29.~d3 :aal 30.~e4 g6 3l.IIxti!
Wxti 32.~xg6+ ~f8 33.~xh6+.
Black resigned.
An attack on the queenside,
based on an isolated pawn, may be
carried out by obtaining a spatial
advantage. Usually this is combined
with threats to the king.
KORCHNOI - LJUBOJEVIC
Tilburg 1987
Nimzo-Indian Defence E56
I.d4 tt'lf6 2.c4 e6 3.tt'lc3 .~.b4
4.e3 0-0 S•.1i.d3 dS 6.0:\0 cS 7.0-0
tilc6S.a3.1i.aS9.h3!?dxc410.. ~xc4
.ifld7 1I •.1i.d3 ~e7 12.tt'le4 tilxe4
13..~xe4 cxd4 14.exd4 h6.
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
15.b4! Exploiting the poor position
of the bishop at as, White seizes space
on the queenside and drives back the
black pieces to passive positions.
15 .... tl.b6 16.b5 CiJa5 17.a4
IUd8 18•.1L.a3 ~f6 19.,1i.b4 (threat-
ening the b7-pawn) 19 ....~f4. The
alternative was 19 .. J:lab8 20.IIe I
.1i.e8 21.dS! exdS 22.,~c2 !!dc8
23.na2 ~f4! (weaker is 23 ... d4?!
24.~d2 GtJc4 2S.~d3 g6 26.aS
.f2.c7 27.rhe8+ l=!xe8 28.~xc4, ob-
taining two minor pieces for rook
and pawn) 24J:t..e7 with the better
chances for White. But he can also
simply strengthen his position -
20.~d3 ~f4 2l.g3 ~f6 22.l'Iacl.
20.. ~.bl a6 (in order to safeguard
the knight at as) 21.~d3 g6 22 •.1i.d2
~f5 23.~e3! ~h5 24.CiJe5! Threat-
ening 2S .. ~.xg6 fxg6 26.lilxd7 k!xd7
27.~xe6+ l'If7 28.~xb6.
24 ... axb5. 24 ... ~e8!? is also
insufficient: 2S.Cilg4 .liLxd4 (the pro-
phylactic move 2S ... Wh8!? does not
help because of26.~a3!) 26 ..liLxaS!
67
Possibly the best was 2S ... Wg7
26.\~hh6+ ~xh6 27 ..1L.xh6+ Wh7
28Jii.gS with the initiative for White
in the endgame.
25.~xa5! .~xa5 (2S .. .I:IxaS
26 ..1i.xg6!) 26J~'f4 .1i.e8 27.GtJg4
\ttfB. 27 ... \ttg7 does not bring any
relief - 28.~f6+ Wh7 29.axbS
~gS 30.~xg6+ ~xg6 (30 ... fxg6
31.~f8) 3 U';haS!
28.0J f6 g5 29. ~ e5 ~h4 30.ttJg4
.f2.b6 31.~h8+ <tIe7 32.~f6+ WfB
33.i!tdl .1i.e7 34.:a3 (bringing up
the last reserves into the attack)
34 ... h5 35.g3 ~xh3 36.QJh6 h4
37.. lfLfS ~e5 38.~xe5 exfS 39.l::te3.
Black resigned.
SASIKIRAN - MALAKHOV
Moscow 2006
Slav Defence D15
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.lilo lilf6 4.lilc3
a6 5.g3 g6 6~g2 ,~g7 7.0-0 0-0
8.exd5 exd5 9.lile5 e6 10Sl.gS h6
USle3tZJfd712.f4tZJc613Sl.attJe7
14.Itct 0JfS 15.e4 dxe4 16Sl.xe4
lilf6 17J1L.g2 lile7 18.~b3 ttJed5.
68
White's control of the c-file
gives him the advantage. He ex-
ploits it by combining threats
against the seemingly securely de-
fended kingside.
19J1fel! bS?! This creates com-
binative motifs in view of the rook
at a8 being undefended. 19 .. Jle8!?
20.a4 l::te7 was more circumspect,
defending the f7- and e6-pawns.
20.tLlxdS! tLlxdS.
21.l:teS. White prefers the domi-
nation of his pieces to the forced win
of a pawn: 21.tLlc6 "'d6 22.il.xd5
exd5 23.tLle7+ Wh7 24.IIc6!?
(after the direct 24.~xd5 "'xd5
25.tLlxd5 il.b7 Black has compen-
sation in the form of his active Iight-
square bishop) 24 ... ~d8 25:~xd5
il.b7 (or 25 ....~xd5 26.tLlxd5 l::td8
27.tLlb6 l::tb8 28.d5 il.b7 29.l::tc7
Jt..xd5 30.tLlxd5 Ihd5 31.l:txf7
Wg8 32.IIa7 Jt..xb2 33.IIxa6 Wf7
34.l::ta7+) 26 .... xd8 l::taxd8 27.~c7
Jt..f3 28.f5! IIfe8 29.fxg6+ fxg6
30.d5 with the·threat of3l.tLlc6.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
21...~d6? After 21...Jt..b7?!
Black suffers a catastrophe on the
a2-g8 diagonal: 22.QJxg6! fxg6
23.l:he6 ~f5 24.l::Ie5! Jt..xe5
25.ilxd5+ <:JJg7 26.dxe5 with an
obvious advantage to White. The
only way of breaking White's at-
tack was by exchanging his knight
- 21 ... Jt..xe5 22.dxe5, but even here
after 22 ... Jt.. b7 23.a4 b4 24.l'lec I a5
25.~dl lIc8 26.~fl White invades
the weakened queenside.
22.liJxg6. 22.CiJxf7! llxf7
23.l:txd5 exd5 24.Jt..xd5 Wh7
25.il.xf7 was even stronger
(Sasikiran). Then 25 ... Jt..xd4? is
not possible because of 26.ilxg6+!
Wxg6 27.'~g8+ Jt..g7 28.'~e8+
Wh729 .... e4+.
22 ... fxg6 23.I:txdS exdS 24.
~ xdS+ ~ xdS 2S.il. xdS+, and
White gained a decisive material
advantage.
Delay in castling may also pro-
vide the motif for a piece attack on
the queenside. Usually such possi-
bilities are the result of the opening.
PONOMARIOV - VAN WELY
World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 2005
Sicilian Defence B40
1.e4 eS 2.tLlO e6 3.e3 lDf6
4.eS tLl dS S.il. e4 CiJ b6 6.Jt.. b3 d6
7.exd6 il.xd6 8.0-0 tLle6 9.d4 cxd4
10.cxd4 tLldS (l0 ... tLle7!? is more
flexible).
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
1l .. ~.g5!? Black has blockaded
the d4-pawn, but his delay in cas-
tling provides the motiffor White to
gain positional pluses by exchanges
in the centre. II.t1lc3 looks more
natural.
1l •••. te7. The alternative was
II...f6 12 .. ~.xdS (12Jl.d2 Cilce7
13.t1lc3 0-0) 12 ... fxgS 13.~xc6+
(13 ..l1.b3 g4) 13 ... bxc6 14.tiJbd2 0-0
IS.Cile4, where White's knights attack
the numerous pawn weaknesses.
12•.I2.xd5 ~xd5? Now Black is
unable to castle. Correct was 12 ...
$l.xgS!? 13.~xc6+ (I3.iL.e4 ~f6
leads to the loss of the d4-pawn)
13 ... bxc6 14:~a4 0-0 IS.CilxgS
(after IS:~xc6 Ilb8 Black has good
counterplay) IS ... ~xgS 16.Cilc3
IIb8 17.b3 as with counterplay,
as the weakness of the c6- and d4-
pawns balances out.
13.Cilc3 ~f5. With the king
needing to be defended, 13 ... ~d8
looks more circumspect.
14.il..xe7 CiJxe7 15.~a4+ ~d7
16.~a3.
69
16 ••• lild5. Black has been pre-
vented from castling and it is al-
ready hard to offer him any good ad-
vice. If 16 ... ~c6 there also follows
17.CiJeS, building up the pressure,
for example: 17 .. .'~f6 (17 ... ~f4
18.~adl) 18.ttlxc6 bxc6 19.':1'\e4!?
~xd4 20.Cild6+ Wf8 21.!Ifdl. In
the event of 16 ... CiJ g6 17.I:t fe I
.iilc6 there is the strong reply 18.dS!
~xdS 19.1ilbS.
17.CiJe5 CiJxc3 18.bxc3
~g5 19.1::tabl ~c8 (19 ... i..c6
20.Chxc6 bxc6 21.l:tb7 was also
bad) 20.l:tfel ~e7 21.~a4+ ~f8
22.d5 h5 23.lIbdl. The immediate
23.d6 was also possible: 23 ... ~d8
(23 .. .'tWxd6? 24:~f4! with the
threats of 2S:~f7# and 2S.CiJg6+)
24.d7.
23 ••• exd5 (23 ... l:th6 24.d6)
24.C1Jg6+ fxg6 25.l:he7 Wxe7
26.~d4 ~n 27.~xd5+ ~f6
28.*d4+ wn 29.~c4+ ~e6
30Jld7+. Black resigned.
70
AKOPIAN - KARJAKIN
Olympiad, Turin 2006
Sicilian Defence B50
l.e4 e5 2/i'lfJ d6 3.e3 li'lf6
4.Jl.e2 JL.g4 5.0-0 e6 6.I'Iel Ji..e7
7.d4 exd4 S.exd4 d5 9.exd5li'lxd5.
Black has blockaded the d4-
pawn, but his king has not yet cas-
tled and the b7-pawn is undefended,
which allows White to develop an
unpleasant initiative on the queen-
side.
10.~b3! ~b6. The pawn sac-
rifice 10 ... li'lc6 11.~xb7 li'ldb4
looks dubious in view of 12.Ji.. f4 a6
13.Ji..c7, when Black is forced to ex-
change queens.
1l.Ji..b5+li'le612.li'le5Ji..f5. The
knight retreat 12 ... li'lf6!? leads after
13.li'lc3 0-0 (13 ... Ji..fS 14.dS exdS
IS.Ji..e3 ~c7 16.iU4 also favours
White) 14.i.xc6 bxc6 IS.~xb6
axb6 16.i.gS i.f5 17.li'lxc6 to the
loss of a pawn, in a worse version
than the game.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
B.ttle3 l:IdS. 13 ... tiJc7 was
weaker: 14.Jl.xc6+ (Black also
has to reckon with 14.ttlc4 ~xd4
IS.i.e3 ~d8 16.ttadl) 14 ... bxc6
Is:ihb6 axb6 16.li'lxc6.
14.Ji..xe6+ bxe6 15J!hb6 axb6
16.li'lxe6 gd6 17.ttJxe7 <t;xe7
IS.i.d2.
The game has gone into an end-
game with an extra pawn for White.
However, as the course of the game
shows, it is extremely difficult to
convert this advantage, but an anal-
ysis of this endgame does not come
within our objective. What is impor-
tant is the method of converting the
opening advantage.
IS ••• Wd7 19.a4 I'IaS 20.l:Iecl
li'lxe3! (with the exchange of
knights, the role of the opposite-
colour bishops increases) 21.i.xe3
(if21.bxc3, then 21...l:1dS! with the
threat of :adaS is good) 21. •• i.e4
22.b4 l:te6 23.a5 gaeS 24.i.d2
l:xcl+ 25.i.xcl b5. 2s .. J!Ic4
26.i.d2 :tc2 (26 ... l:Ixd4 is also
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside
possible) 27.~f4 !tc4 also came
into consideration.
26.f3 .ltd5 27 ..ltf4. 27.a6 would
have set more problems to Black,
but after 27 ... ~a8!? with the idea
ofl"Ic8-c4 no clear plan for convert-
ing the extra pawn is apparent. It
71
should be mentioned that 27 ... Wc6
is weaker: 28.1H4 f6 29.a7 Wb7
30.~d6 ~a8 31 ..ltcS.
27 •• Jlc4 28.ktcl l:1xcl+ 29.
.ltxcl f6, and Black held the ending
with opposite-colour bishops, gain-
ing a draw.
 Chapter 4
Defence based
on the blockade at d5
'The main weakness created by
an isolated pawn is not the pawn it-
self, but the square in front of it',
wrote Richard Reti. Indeed, an iso-
lated d4-pawn may be blockaded
on d5 by a piece, the activity of
which extends to the neighbour-
ing squares. From our study of the
attacking potential of an isolated
pawn in the previous chapters it
can be concluded that White's ini-
tiative was greatly aided by insuf-
ficiently effective use by Black of
the blockading d5-square. The im-
portance of exchanging pieces was
also underestimated, although it is
obvious that the static weakness of
the isolated pawn increases as the
material is reduced. At the same
time, a study of positions from the
standpoint of opposing the dynam-
ics of the isolated pawn is impor-
tant, since it aids the development
of the positional skills, needed by
every strong player.
This chapter examines plans for
implementing the most expedient
arrangement of the forces and spe-
cific positional methods of weaken-
ing White's attack. These, in par-
ticular, are control of the blockading
d5-square, the knight manoeuvres
t;] f6-d5 and t;) f6-h5 to exchange the
dark-square bishops, the bishop ma-
noeuvres il.e7-g5 and .~.d6-f4 (with
the white bishop on the c l-h6 diago-
nal) with the same aim, and also the
knight exchange lfJd5xc3 to create
an isolated pawn pair. As for the ex-
change of the light-square bishops,
if the blockade of the isolated d4-
pawn is maintained this is advan-
tageous to Black, since it weakens
White's control of the neighbouring
e4- and c4-squares.
4.1. Reducing attacking potential
by exchanging pieces
This important defensive method
against the isolated d4-pawn was
employed in the first famous game
on this theme, Zukertort - Steinitz,
with which we began our mono-
graph. At the basis of Steinitz's de-
fensive plan there was the leitmotif
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
of reducing the attacking material. It
was echoed by Capablanca.
LASKER-CAPABLANCA
World Championship Match,
10th Game, Havana 1921
Queen's Gambit D61
l.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.li'Ic3 l1lf6
4.~.gS .'1Le7 S.e3 0-06.0'113 Cilbd7
7.vJlic2 cS 8.t'tdl ~aS 9 ..1l.d3
h6 10.JlLh4 cxd4 1l.exd4 dxc4
12 ..1l.xc411lb6 13.. ~.b3 .l.2.d7 14.0-0
!lac8 IS.t!JeS.
This was Capablanca's comment
on the position: 'Black has obtained
an excellent development. He must
now find the way either to exchange
the white bishop at h4 for his bishop
at e7, or to post a piece at d5 so as to
bring about some exchanges that will
simplify the position to some extent.
All this must be done while keeping
immobile the white pawn at d4.'
IS ..• Jii.bS?! 15 ... Jii.c6 was in the
spirit of the position.
73
16.gfell1lbdS.
17.il.xdS? Lasker repeats Zuk-
ertort's mistake. In those times the
magic of the blockading knight was
so great, that even the strongest
players in the world were prepared
to give up for it their light-square
bishop - one of the key pieces of
White's attack. Such an exchange in-
dicates a lack of experience in play-
ing positions with an isolated pawn.
Anyone who has studied White's
potential in the preceding chapters
would have no difficulty in finding
the exchanging operation 17.i.xf6
ilxf6 (not 17 ... Cilxf6? on account
of 18.ttJg6! fxg6 19J::txe6, regain-
ing the piece with interest) 18.Jii.xd5
exd5 19:~f5, and Black's position
is not easy to defend.
17 •.• ttJxdS 18.i.xe7 ttJxe7
19.~b3 Jii.c6 20.ttJxc6 bxc6! With
the exchange of three pairs of minor
pieces, the weakness of the d4-pawn
has become perceptible, and this
gives Black the advantage. As for
74
Black's weak c6-pawn, it cannot be
attacked.
21.l:IeS ~b6 22JtHc2 l'IfdS
23.ttJe2. Stronger was 23.ttJa4!?
~b8 24.MC5, when after 24 ... QJf5
25.Ihc6 Ihc6 26.~xc6 Cilxd4 the
ill-starred pawn is exchanged, al-
though Black's position still remains
preferable.
23 ...l:IdS! By exchanging rooks,
Black transforms one form of advan-
tage into another. By agreeing to the
elimination of the isolated pawn, Black
gains control of the open c-file while
retaining pressure on the d4-pawn.
24ltxdS. It is risky to sit back
behind the d4-pawn: 24.11e3 c5!?
(24 ... QJf5 25.11b3 ~d8 26.Mb4
~d7 is also possible) 25.l:Ic3 (25.
dxc5 ~xb2!) 25 ... l:Icd8 26.11b3
~c6 27.1'1cl ~d6, and Black wins
a pawn.
24 ... cxdS 2S.~d2 ttJrs 26.b3
hS 27.h3? This move allows Black
to paralyse the kingside pawns. It
was essential to exchange knights
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
- 27.tiJg3 QJxg3 28.hxg3, although
even here after 28 .. .'~c7, by com-
bining the threat of an invasion
on the c-file with an attack on the
queenside pawns, Black would have
retained real winning chances.
27 •.• h4! 2S.~d3l:tc629.Wfl g6
30.~bl ~b4 31.Wgl as 32.~b2
a4 33.~d2 ~xd2 34.l!xd2 axb3
3S.axb3.
3s •• JIb6! 36.l:Id3 (if 36.I:tb2,
then 36 .. Jlb4, winning a pawn)
36 .. .l'la6! 37.g4 (37.L!m3?l'lal+)
37 ... hxg3 3S.fxg3 Ma2 39.lJJc3
kIc2 40.Lf)dl Cile7 41.lilc3 IIc1+
42.Wfl t1Jc6 43.liJdl lIbl!
44.We2. The pawn is also not saved
by 44.Wel QJa5 45.Wd2 llxb3
46.Ihb3 ttJxb3+, although the
chances of a draw in the knight end-
game are somewhat better.
44 ..• ttxb3! 4S.'lt>e3 IIb4!, and
Black won on the 68th move.
In our time one of the great ex-
perts in the fight against an isolated
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
pawn has been Anatoly Karpov. The
following example on the theme of
exchanging operations is one of his
masterpieces.
KORCHNOI - KARPOV
World Championship Match,
9th Game, Merano 1981
Queen's Gambit D53
l.c4 e6 2.tZ'lc3 d5 3.d4 .0..e7
4.t1l0 t1lf6 5.. ~g5 h6 6.. ~.h4 0-0
7Jlcl dxc4 8.e3 c5 9 .. s:t.xc4 cxd4
10.exd4 tZ:lc6 11.0-0.
1l ... t1lh5!? A standard idea,
forcing the exchange of the dark-
square bishops, which significantly
reduces White's attacking potential.
At the same time Black does not
forget about his main objective - to
retain control of the d5-square.
12.iL.xe7 fi'lxe7 13.iL.b3?!
White has not extracted anything
from the opening, and it would have
been better to get rid of the isolated
pawn: l3.d5 exd5 14.tZ:lxd5 tZ:lxd5
75
15.iL.xd5 Ci\ f4 16.iL.e4 ~xd 1
17.1::l:exdl .s&.e6 with a probable
draw.
13 .. .tilf6 14.tile5 iL.d7 15J~~'e2
tIc8 16.tZ:le4. The exchange of mi-
nor pieces is advantageous to Black.
16.kt fe I was more logical, prevent-
ing 16 ... Slc6? because of 17.tZ:lxf7.
Therefore Black should play 16 ...
'fJ..c7.
16 •• .lZ'lxe417Jthe4.
17 ••• iL. c6! An important sub-
tlety. Black is not afraid that after a
double exchange on c6 he will also
have an isolated pawn. In this case
his knight is capable both of secure-
ly defending his pawn, and attack-
ing the enemy d4-pawn, whereas
the functions of the white bishop are
restricted (Karpov).
18.tZ:lxc6 ~xc6! 19.1'Ic3. Re-
garding White's avoidance of the
exchange 19.Ihc6 bxc6, it can be
remarked that the modem classics
have learned the lessons from the
games of their predecessors.
76
19 ....~~¥ d6 20.g3. White shouldn't
have been in a hurry to make this
move. He could have used the g3-
square for the participation of his
heavy pieces in an attack on the
black king, and therefore 20.h4
came into consideration.
20 ..• l'Id8 21.IIdl IIb6! (prepar-
ing 22 ... ~d7) 22.~el ~d7 (22 ...
Ub4 23.l:Ic4) 23.t\cd3. 23.l::tc5 did
not work: 23 .. JId6 24.l:Idcl Q')c6
25.~a4 0Jxd4! 26 ..~xd7 tilf3+
27.Wfl CLlxel with an extra pawn
for Black.
23 ... l:'.td6 24.~e4 ~c6! 2S.~f4
lfJdS 26.~d2 ~b6! (with the threat
of27 ... CLlb4).
27.~xdS? Even in this situa-
tion White should have refrained
from the exchange of the bishop and
preferred 27.a3. In the heavy piece
endgame it is extremely difficult to
defend the isolated pawn. The at-
tacking mechanism is the tripling of
heavy pieces on the d-file with the
threat of e6-e5. which forces f2-f4.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
seriously weakening the king's de-
fences.
2S ..• J:IxdS 28.kIb3 ~c6 29JIi¥c3
~d7 30.f4 b6! 31.k!b4 bS! (pre-
venting llc4) 32.a4 bxa4 33. ~ a3
as 34.Iha4 ~bS! 3s.Ild2.
3S .•• eS! The decisive thrust, re-
vealing the exposed position of the
white king.
36.fxeS UxeS 37.~al ~e8!
38.dxeS ':xd2 39Jhas ~c6
40.~a8+ Wh7 41.~bl+ g6 42.~n
~cS+ 43.Whl ~dS+. White re-
signed.
It was easy for Karpov to play
this game, since he already had
experience of conducting a frontal
attack against an isolated pawn in
a game with Spassky at the Mont-
real Tournament of 1979. But there
is also another, dynamic way of
handling the position arising after
White's 11th move.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
Damljanovic - Beliavsky
Belgrade 1993
Queen's Gambit D53
1.Ci)f3 d5 2.c4 e6 3.d4 tilf6
4.tilc3 .'il..e7 5•.'il..g5 h6 6•.'il..h4 0-0
7.kId dxc4 S.e3 c5 9 •.'il..xc4 cxd4
10.exd4 Nc6 11.0-0.
11 ... ~b6!? Exploiting the fact
that the b2-pawn is temporarily un-
defended, Black sets up pressure on
the d4-pawn without forgetting about
control of the d5 blockading square.
12Jij'd2 IldS 13.tLJa4?! This al-
lows Black to exchange the queens,
which practically neutralises the dy-
namic potential of the isolated pawn.
Of course, 13.l:tfdl was in the spirit
of the position. For example, the
game Yusupov - Beliavsky, Bel-
grade 1991, continued 12.~d2 kIdS
13.gfdl .lit..d7 14"~e2 Cilh5!? (af-
tcr 14 ... .1leS 15.d5 exd5 16 ..1i.xd5
'It> f8 17 ..'il.. b3 White has a spatial
advantage) 15.d5 QJf4 16"~'el
exd5 17 ..'il..xe7 QJxe7 IS.~xe7
77
CLlg6! 19.QJxd5 QJxe7 20.tilxb6
axb6 2l.QJe5 J!t..eS 22 ..1i. b3 QJc6!
23.CLlxc6 (23.Cilc4 Chd4=) 23 ...
bxc6 24.f4. Draw.
13 ... ~b4! 14.~xb4 QJxb4
15.tiJc3 .'il..d7 16J'Udl l::tacS
17..1Lb3.'il..c61S.QJe5.
After the exchange of queens
Black has regrouped his forces
around the d5-point and obtained a
favourable endgame. But what to do
next? After the exchange QJxc6 and
then d4-d5 White may be able to
neutralise the position. The problems
are also not solved by IS ... il.d5, af-
ter which White can exchange mi-
nor pieces: 19 ..'il..xf6 il.xf6 20.il.xd5
tilxd5 2l.Chxd5 exd5 22.f4.
lS ... g5! 19...tg3 iLe4! This
move is linked with the previous
one - Black plays his bishop to the
kingside and prepares an attack on
White's position in the centre after
QJc6.
20.h4. The exchanges 20.QJxe4
QJxe4 21.I:IxcSl:txcs favour Black.
78
20 ... .l1HS 2t.hxgS hxgS 22.a3
CiJbdS 23.lZ'lxdS CiJxdS 24.J1lxdS.
Sooner or later White had to capture
on d5, to prevent the attack on his
d4-pawn after CD f6. But although
the pawn structure in the centre is
now stabilised, Black retains the
better chances thanks to his bishop
paIr.
24 •.. exdS 2S.0 f6 26.l1lg4
,it xg4! An old joke states that the
advantage of the two bishops can al-
ways be transfonned into the advan-
tage of one. Now White has prob-
lems with his d4-pawn.
27.fxg4 ~f7 2S.$.c7 (parrying
the threat of We6 and IIc4) 2S •..
l::teS. This is more accurate than
28 .. J'ld7 29.$.g3 ktc4 30.Wf2,
which allows the king to be brought
towards the centre.
29.Wfl We6 30.<;£70 (30.We3?
...td7 31.$.g3 i.xa3+) 30 ..• Wd7
31.$.g3.
31. •. bS! Preparing to occupy the
most important square in the posi-
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
tion-c4. For example: 32.~hl Uc4
33.t!xc4 bxc4 34.t!h7 l:!c8 35.Ji,e 1
We6 and White has problems with
his b2-pawn.
32.a4 bxa4 33J2:hl t!xcl
34.k'!xcl MCS! 3sJhcs. If 35.!!al
there follows 35 ... a3 36.bxa3 Mc3+,
but the bishop endgame with an ex-
tra pawn is also won easily.
3S •.. WxcS 36.We3 a3 37.bxa3
,sU.xa3 3S.'it>d3 as 39.](,el a4
40.$.c3 'it>d7 4t.'it>e2 '.i7c6 42std3
'it> bS. White resigned.
In modem chess the voluntary
exchange of material occurs com-
paratively rarely, and the besieging
of an isolated pawn often takes place
in a complicated middlegame. How-
ever, the conversion of an advantage
nevertheless usually takes place via
exchanging operations.
BRUZON - ANAND
Wijk aan Zee 2005
English Opening A13
1.CiJO CiJf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 dS
4.$.g2 dxc4 S"~a4+ c6 6"~xc4
bS 7.VJlic2 ii.b7 S.d4 <1:Jbd7 9.a4 cS
10.0-0 b4 ll.$. gS UcS 12.lZ'i bd2
$.e7 13JUcl 0-0 14J~d3 h6
lS.$.xf6 ,liLxf6 16.e3 kIc7 17.We2
WcS lS.WbS a6 19..~n as 20.b3
l:idS 2t.WbS $.c6 22"~e2 Wb7
23.lLlc4 WaS 24.kla2 cxd4 2S.exd4
$.dS 26.I:1:ac2.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
The advantage is with Black,
whose bishops are trained on the
pawn weaknesses at d4 and b3 on
White's queens ide. To intensify his
attack Black provokes advantageous
exchanges.
26 .• J"rdeS 27J~'dl ~a6! Inten-
sifying the pressure on the knight
at c4. In the event of 27 .....It xc4
28.thc4 ~xc4 29.bxc4 "Viiia7 30.c5
White has counterplay.
2S.l'Llfe5. If 28.~d3 matters are
decided by the pin 28 ... C1Jb6 29.i.fl
Lflxc4 30.bxc4 ..IiL.xf3! 31."Viiixf3
.~xd4, and Black wins the d4-pawn.
79
2S ••• ..IiL.xe5 29•..IiL.xd5 ..IiL.xg3! A
bird in the hand is worth more than
two in the bush after 29 ... ..IiL. f4
30.gxf4 exd5 31.0Je3 'iY g6+ 32.
\t;fl (variation by Anand).
30.hxg3 exd5 31.QJe3 l'he2
32.khe2 l1J f6 33.IIe5l::t xe5 34.dxe5
~ e6 35J~~ d4.
35 •.. g6. As a result of the ex-
changing operation the game has
gone into an endgame with an extra
pawn for Black, although, in view
of the possible activity of the white
queen, it is not easy for him to win.
For the moment Black forestalls the
threat of 36.Ci'\f5.
36.~e5 l1Jd7 37JWd6? A time-
trouble oversight. White transposes
into a lost knight endgame, whereas
he could have gone into a queen
endgame: 37.~e8+ <tJg7 38.ctJg4
g5 (or 38 ... d4 39.ctJe5 ctJxe5
40:~xe5+ ~f6 41.~d5!) 39.ctJe5
ctJxe5 40:~xe5+ Wg6 41:~d4,
where Black's passed d-pawn bal-
ances White's passed c-pawn.
80
37 .• JlHxd6 38.cxd6 WfS 39.
ttJxdS ttJcS 40.Wn We8 41.ttJb6
lilxb3 42.We2 ttJcS 43.13 hS! It
transpires that White cannot cope
with the passed pawns on opposite
wings.
44.We3 b3. White resigned.
4.2. Counterplay based on control
of the blockading dS-point
In the preceding examples White
underestimated the role of reduced
material and he aided Black's ex-
changing strategy. However, modem
technique usually does not allow the
strategy of simplifying the position
to be carried out so easily.
We will begin with a structure
from the Queen's Gambit Accepted,
which was examined in the preced-
ing chapters.
GLIGORIC - SUETIN
Titovo Uzice 1966
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 3.ttJt3 Cilf6
4.e3 e6 S.i. xc4 cS 6.0-0 a6 7.a4
0Jc6 8.~e2 cxd4 9.ndl i.e7
10.exd4 0-0 l1.tDc3 tDdS 12.i.d3
tDcb413.i.bl i.d7. In recent times
Black preferred to fianchetto his
bishop by 13 ... b6, with the inten-
tion of parrying 14"~e4 by 14 ... f5.
14.tDeS (the 16th game of the
Botvinnik - Petrosian match contin-
ued 14"~e4) 14 ••• i.c6.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
A dynamically balanced posi-
tion has arisen. Black is securely
controlling the d5 blockading point,
but his king is inadequately defend-
ed. He also has to reckon with the
weakening of his b6-point, which
may be emphasised by a4-a5, when
White has chances of an attack on
the queens ide.
IS.na3! tDf6. If 15 .. J!Ic8?!
White builds up his threats to the
king by 16.tDe4! with the threat of
17"~h5.
16.i.gS g6. Here 16 .. J;Ic8
was now possible, since the attack
on the h7-pawn - 17.i.xf6 i.xf6
18.tDa2 is parried by the mate
threat 18 ... ~d5 (l8 ... tDxa2?
19.i.xh7+), but Black prefers a
radical way of defending the b 1-
h7 diagonal.
17.aS (fixing the weakness of the
b6-point).
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
17 .•• McS. In Gligoric - Ivkov,
Novi Sad 1976, Black preferred
the routine blockading move
17 ... l!l bdS?!, underestimating
White's possible initiative on the
queens ide. After 18.lLJxc6! bxc6
19.~a4! ~c7 20.~d3 ~b7 21.Itc4
~tb8 2V1'\a4 lfJd7 23.~d2 ~f6
24.~dcl Itc8 2S.~e4 White
gained a strategically winning po-
sition in view of the pawn weak-
nesses at a6 and c6.
IS/i'la4?! This pawn sacrifice is
unjustified. The idea looks more log-
ical after 18.l:tb3!? ~xaS 19.~e4,
but here too after 19 ... til bdS (19 ...
CiJxe4?! 20.~xe7 tiJxc3 21.bxc3
favours White) 20.lt'Jxc6 bxc6
21.~xdS 0\xdS 22.~xe7 Cf"lxe7
23.IIa3 White does not achieve any-
thing significant. 18.CL\xc6 QJxc6
would have led to an equal game.
IS .. ."V~ha5 19/t'\c5 'iVb5
203~·e1. After 20"~xbS ~xbS
21.ctJxb7 <1'lbdS Black's advantage
in the endgame is obvious.
20 •.• llfeS. 20 ... b6 21.ClJxc6
81
~xc6 was simpler, with advantage
to Black.
21.ClJxt7? White has insufficient
force for an attack on the king. 21.: b3
as 22.~d3 ~b6 23.~c4 was in the
spirit of the position, with the idea of
23 ... ~dS 24.~xf6 ~xf6 2S.ClJed7
~d8 26.~xdS ClJxdS 27.:txb7.
21. .. Wxt7 22.~xe6+ Wg7
23.l:th3 ~d5 24.~e3 ClJg4 25.~d2
,~d6 26.~f4 ~xf4 27.~xf4 iVe2
2S.I:tn ~c4 29/lJd3 Ci\xd3. White
resigned.
MIKHALCHISHIN - PSAKHIS
49th USSR Championship,
Frunze 1981
Nimzo-Indian Defence E48
l.d4 ClJf6 2.c4 e6 3.ClJc3 ~b4
4.e3 c5 5.~d3 ClJc6 6.ClJge2 cxd4
7.exd4 d5 S.O-O dxc4 9.~xc4 0-0
1O.~ g5 h6 11.~ e3 b6 123~' d3
~d6 13.a3 ~b7 14.I:tadl ~bS
15.ClJg3 a6 16.~a2 CiJe7 17•.tbl
ClJg61S.l:tfel I:teS 19.ClJn.
82
19 ... 0Jd5. Black finnly block-
ades the dS-square, and also con-
trols the important b8-h2 diagonal,
which enables him to exchange the
dark-square bishops.
20•.1i.cl Wic721.lile4.
21. ••.1i.f4! The exchange of the
dark-square bishops is an important
procedure in the battle against an
isolated pawn.
22.g3 ii.xcl 23Jhcl ~e7
24.lile3 CiJxe3 25J!lhe3 l:tad8.
Black's plan includes playing his
queen to d8 (after kId7) and his
knight to dS (CiJg6-e7-dS) fol-
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
lowed by f7-fS. This requires time,
which allows White to forestall this
plan. Therefore 2S .. J!ed8!? was
more accurate, retaining the op-
tion of fighting for the c-file with
the second rook, which could be
exchanged.
26.J:Iedl Ild7 27.CiJd2! White
exploits the weakness of the b6-
pawn and, by playing his knight to
c4, seizes the initiative.
27 •.• liJf8 28.EilC4 b5 29.Ei')e5
kId6 30.tZJd3?! White should have
played 30JIcs with the idea of ex-
ploiting the c-file after ~c3. Even
so, with accurate play Black can
hold the position: 30 ... f6 3l.liJg6
(nothing is given by 31.t1ld3l'i:ed8
32.CiJb4 as 33.ll'lc2 IIdS) 31...
VJlif7 32.liJxfS WxfS 33 .. I.2.a2 Wid7
(33 ....1i.dS is premature: 34 ..liLxdS
exdS 3s.Wif4, and White's chanc-
es are preferable) 34.~c3 Bc8
3S.l::e I and now 3S ... l'lxcs or
3S ... k1:cc6.
30 .• Jled8 3 l.CiJ c5 .lia8 32.i.l..e4
W&a7 33J~f3 .id5 34.. ~xd5 ~xd5
35.CiJb3 lilh7 36.l:Ic6?! More te-
nacious was 36.h4 CiJf6 37.IIcs
as 38.k1:xdS BxdS 39.!!cl kId8
(39 ... a4 40Jic8+ \th7 41.~d3+
g6 42.CiJcS) 40:~c6 a4 4I.CiJcS,
complicating Black's task (41...
~b8 42.li\a6 ~d6 43.VJlixd6 ktxd6
44.CiJc7).
36 ••• CiJg5 37J~'c3 e5 38.MC7
~a8 39.1'1el exd4 40JirVd3 kt5d7
41.I:txd7 Mxd7. White resigned.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
Now we will examine some
modern examples of defence based
on control of the d5-point.
KAMSKY - KARPOV
FIDE World Championship Match,
4th Game, Elista 1996
Caro-Kann Defence B14
l.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.c4
t;lf6 S.t;\c3 e6 6.t;\O iL.b4 7.cxdS
t;\xdS S.. ad2 t;\c6 9 ..iiL.d3 .'!i.e7
10.0-0 0-0 11.~e2 Lilf6 12.Ci\e4
~b6!
An improvement compared with
12 ... ~d7, as occurred in the 2nd
game of the same match. The at-
tack by the queen on the d4- and
b2-pawns resembles to some extent
the game Damljanovic - Beliavsky,
Belgrade 1993, which was exam-
ined earlier.
13.a3 (indirectly defending the
b2-pawn - 13 ... W'xb2? 14.l:Itbl)
13 ... iL.d7 14JUdl UadS!? A pro-
phylactic defensive procedure typi-
83
cal of Karpov. He uses his queen's
rook to control the d5-square and
keeps his king's rook for the de-
fence of his king. 14 .. .lilxd4
15.lil xd4 ~ xd4 does not work be-
cause of 16.iL.c3! ~a4 17.b3! ~c6
18.tilxf6+ iL.xf6 19.iL.xf6 gxf6
20 .. l.iLxh7+, and White wins.
Is.tihf6+. The exchange ofmi-
nor pieces plays into Black's hands,
since it allows him to besiege the d-
pawn. 15.b4!? followed by l:tac I is
more in the spirit of the position.
IS ••• ,1t.xf6 16J~~'e4 g6 17.3Le3
(with the threat of 18.~f4 and
19.d5) 17 •.• t;\e7! (parrying this
threat - 18. W~H4 t;\d5) IS.lileS.
IS ...t;\f5!? A concrete decision.
Black begins an attack on the d4-
pawn, leaving the control of the dS-
square to his bishop, since its exchange
will merely aggravate the problem of
defending the pawn. Of course, 18 ...
lildS was by no means worse.
19.1ilc4. It is not possible to ex-
change the d4-pawn - 19.d5? lilxe3
84
20.t1:Jxd7 l:txd7 21.~xe3 ~xe3
22.fxe3 IIfd8 leads to its loss.
19 ....~a6! (with the idea of20 ...
JtbS) 20.a4 il.c6 21"~f4 il.dS. Black
has solved his main strategic objective
- the blockade of the d4-pawn, and he
stands better. Diverting from the gen-
eral course by 21.. ..1lxd4? hands the
initiative to White: 22.il.xfS iL.xe3
23.tLlxe3 exfS 24.ctJxfS!
22.tLleS ~b6 23 •.1l..xfS exfS
24.~d2 il.g7 2S.h4 ~feS 26"~g3
UcS. Karpov thinks that it would
have been more accurate first to re-
strict White's possibilities with 26 ...
h6, forestalling the threat of27.hS in
view of27 ... gS.
27.CfJd7. White makes the knight
manoeuvre tLleS-d7-cS-d3-f4 rather
than give up his d4-pawn after the
'short' 27.tLld3.
27 ... ~c6 2S.tLlcS b6 29.tLld3
Vj'd7 30.aS (30.tLleS ~e6 3l.aS
was more accurate).
30 ... IIe4! With the threat of
Ug4.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
3 l.liJ f4 bS 32.Mddl .liLc4
33.Uacl. Objectively speaking,
defending the isolated pawn from
the rear is an unpromising busi-
ness. Therefore White aims to ac-
tivate his rook on the c-file, with
the intention of defending the pawn
from the side. However, he misses
a chance to gain counterplay by
33.hS!?, which Black immediately
nips in the bud.
33 ... h6 34.I:Ic3 b4 3S.:rlc2
~c6! (preparing the conditions for
the exchange of rooks) 36.11dcl
.lU.bS 37.Wh2 ~h7 3S.llxc6 .~xc6
39.llc4. The only saving chance
was 39.dS! (Karpov).
39 ... Slf8! A typical Karpov
move! By playing his bishop to d6,
Black aims to exploit the overload-
ing on the b8-h2 diagonal. The pawn
capture 39 ... il.xd4 40.il.xd4 IIxd4
41.~b3 ~xc4 42.~xc4 would have
left White with some hopes.
40.liJd3 ~e6 (40 .. .'~dS! was
stronger, with the threats ~ xe4,
Mg4 and .1l..d6) 41.dS (too late!)
41 ... .1l..xdS 42.Ihe4 (42.Ci1f4 .iLd6)
42 ... .1l..xe4 43 ..lixa7. White can
simplify the position - 43.ctJcS
~dS 44.liJxe4 fxe4 4S.~h3 ~xaS
46.~d7, but the endgame cannot be
saved: 46 .. .'~a2! 47.~xa7 ~xa7
48.il.xa7 b3.
43 ... .1l..d6 44.liJf4 (if44.f4 Black
wins by 44 ... ~d7! with the threat
of 4S ... il.xd3) 44 ... ~eS 4s.li'lh3
~e7. White resigned.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
SVESHNIKOV - RIAZANTSEV
Moscow 2002
Caro-Kann Defence B14
l.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxdS 4.c4
0if6 S.Cilc3 e6 6.£1\13 .l1Lb4 7.cxdS
CilxdS 8.~c2 CiJc6 9 •.ile2 0-0 10.
0-0 fl.e7 ll.l'ldl Jl.f6.
12JWe4. White begins an attack
on the king, forcing the weakening
move g7-g6. If 12.tbe4 Black can
complete his development: 12 ...
li.d7 (intending lIc8), for example:
13.0Jxf6+ ~xf6! (not 13 .. .'8xf6?
14 .. \lg5) 14.1l.g5 ~g6 15.1l.d3 ~h5
16.~b3b617.1l.e4f618.JiLh4!;'Iac8
with an equal game (Riazantsev).
12 ••• Cilce7 13.h4 .lil.d7 14•.~d3
g61S.hS.1ii.c616.~g4CiJf517.11ie4
fJ..g7 18.hxg6 hxg6 19.~h3 kte8
20.CilegS CiJf6 2 l.CiJ eS Ue7 22.1l.c4.
22 .. ~.e2? can be met by 22 ... C1Jxd4
23.JiLc4 and the pin is broken by
23 ... 0Jf3+!
22 •.•..tdS. Black vigilantly
maintains the blockade - the knight
85
is replaced by the bishop, and now if
23 ..~e2?! there follows 23 ... ~b6!
23.b3t'tc7 24.1l.e2l::tac8 2S.1l. f4
Cild6.
26.CiJc4. This knight retreat sig-
nifies an abandonment of the attack,
a logical conclusion to which could
have been 26.CtJxg6!? fxg6 27.CtJxe6
VJ!ie7 (or 27 .....txe6 28 ..~xe6+
f1\fl 29.1l.xc7 hxc7 30.I:tacl I:te7
31.~h3 Cild6 32 ..ild3) 28.CiJxc7
kIxc7 29 ..1i.d3 !;'Ic3 (29 ... i.e4?
30.Uel) 30.k:tacl Uxcl 31.l:hcl
with the initiative for White (31 ...
tDh5 32.~e3, 31... Wfl 32.i.e5).
Now, however, Black seizes the ini-
tiative.
26 •.• 1l.xc4! 27.bxc4 J::Id7 28.dS.
This activity is essentially forced,
since 28.~acl ttlf5 leads to the
loss of a pawn, and 28.i.e5 CiJde4!
to the exchange of the minor piec-
cs: 29.CiJxe4 CiJxe4 30"~e3 CiJd6
31.i. xg7 rt; xg7, after which White
has problems with the defence of his
hanging pawns on d4 and c4.
86
28 ••. exdS 29.cxdS liJde4.
30ltac1. The alternative was
30.t1Jxe4ttlxe4 31..~b5 Ii:e7 32.l'!abl
l:Ic2! with counterplay for Black. 32 ...
CiJc3? does not work because of 33.d6
tIe6 34.1:tel! with dangerous threats
for White: 34 ... <1Jxbl? 35.~xe6
Uc3 36.I:te8+, 34 ... CiJe4 35.d7 IIc3
36.I:tbcl, or 34 ... ~f6 35.d7.
30 ••• 1:txc1 31Jhc1? An inexpli-
cable blunder of a pawn. 31..~xcl
l:Ixd5 32.IIxd5 ~xd5 33.~c8+
,il..f8 34.ii.a3 CiJc5 35.ii.xc5 ~xc5
36.~xc5 ii.xc5 37.ii.c4 was cor-
rect, regaining the pawn in a some-
what inferior endgame.
31. •• CiJxdS 32.~h7+ 'i!tfS, and
Black won a pawn, and then also the
game.
VALLEJO PONS - KASPAROV
Linares 2005
Queen's Gambit Accepted D21
l.ttJo dS 2.d4 e6 3.c4 dxc4 4.e4
bS S.a4 c6 6.axbS cxbS 7.b3 ii.b7
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
8.bxc4 i.xe4 9.cxbS t1Jf6 10.,iLe2
,'iLe7 11.0-0-0 12.l11c3 ,~b7.
This position with an isolated
pawn can be considered dynami-
cally balanced. White's spatial ad-
vantage is compensated by Black's
firm control of the d5-point. Black's
main objective is to eliminate the
cramping pawn on b5.
13.ii. f4. Kasparov would have
parried 13.CiJe5 with 13 ... ~c7!
14.ii.f3 I!i'xc3 15.,iixb7 ~xal
16.i.xa8 ttJbd7, when Black sim-
plifies the position.
13 ••. ii.b4! (intending the ex-
change of the knight) 14.l1Ja4. In
the event ofl4.'iVb3 ii.xc3 15.ihc3
ttJd5 16.'iVd2 t1Jxf4 17.~xf4 a6
18.bxa6 tZlxa6 Black gets rid of the
b5-pawn while leaving White with
the problem of defending his iso-
lated d4-pawn.
14 ••• CiJbd7 lS.'iVb3 CiJdS
16.i.gS ii.e7. As we know, the ex-
change of the dark-square bishops is
advantageous to Black.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
17.,~d2 a6! 18.b6. Understand-
ably, White avoids the exchange of
the queenside pawns, but now his
b6-pawn will need to be defended.
18 ••• ~c6!
19.0'\e5?! This move leads to mass
exchanges and allows Black to seize
the initiative. Stronger was 19.Mtbl!?
~.xa4 20.llxa4 ~xb6 21.~a2 ~d6
with roughly equal chances.
19 ••• 0lxe5 20.dxe5 0'\xb6 21.
CjJ xb6. The alternative was 21.
~xb6 ~xd2 22:~xc6 ~xe2
23.CiJb6l':Iad8=.
21..JWxd2 22.l1Jxa8 ~xe2 23.
I1'lc7 iYxe5 24.~g3 ~fS! 25.kIxa6.
87
25 .•. ~e4. Although nominal-
ly he has a slight material deficit,
Black has two well-coordinated
bishops and the best continuation
for him was 25 ... ~e4! 26.0 (26.
Ucl kld8 27.h3 ~h4) 26 .. :~d4+
27.'~hl.tb7 28.!laal.1l.d629.LtJb5
~ xa I, gaining a material advan-
tage (Kasparov). Possibly, instead
of 28.llaa I White should decide
on 28.l'lxe6!? fxe6 29.ttJxe6 ~f6
30.'1Jxf8 .1i.xf8, simplifying the po-
sition as much as possible.
26.l'Ia7 ~c5?! Stronger was
26 ... ~c5!? 27.hlaal ~d6 28.~h4
~b7 29.l::tfcl ~e5 30.l:tcl (30.l:tel
~f5) 30 ... .Jixg2 31.Wxg2 ~xc7
with more than sufficient compen-
sation for the exchange, since now
White could have consolidated his
forces by 27.I:ta4! Ud8 28.lLlb5 (if
28 ... ~c6 or 28 ... ~ b3 there follows
29.ttJd4). But there followed ...
27.l::ta5? ,~xf2+ 28.~xf2 ~xa5
29.0lxe6 Slxg2! White resigned.
TOPALOV - KRAMNIK
World Championship Match,
7th Game, Elista 2006
Queen's Gambit Accepted D27
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.ttJt3 ttJf6 4.e3
e6 5.~d3 dxc4 6.1l.xc4 c5 7.0-0 a6
8.1l.b3 cxd4 9.exd4 ti'lc6 10.tiJc3
ii..e7 1l.IIet 0-0 12.a4. This attempt
to prevent b7-b5 leads to a weaken-
ing of the b4-point, making it easier
for Black to control d5.
88
12 ..• i.d7. 12 ... b6 is also pos-
sible, not fearing 13.dS exdS
14,ciJxdS CiJxdS IS.i.xdS i.b7,
but in the event of 13.dS Black
has reserved another post for his
bishop: 13 ... exdS 14.CiJxdS CiJxdS
IS.i.xdS i.fS, achieving an equal
game.
13.CiJeS i.eS. A Steinitz-style
bishop retreat, but with a significant
difference - in his game with Zuker-
tort (1886) the f8-rook had moved to
d8. But Black's idea in attacking the
d4-pawn is to force White to block
the e-file for his rook on e I.
14.i.e3 J::tcS. After the exchange
14 ... CiJxeS IS.dxeS ~xdl 16.i.xdl
'1Jd7 17.i.f3! as 18.i.d4 White has
a spatial advantage.
IS.kIcl CiJb4 16.~f3. White
switches his queen to the kingside.
16 ... i.c6 17.~h3. The ex-
change is rather to Black's advan-
tage, since White is deprived of his
attacking knight, and the weakness
at c6 is defended.
17 ••• i.dS lS.CiJxdS CiJbxdS.
Part I. The isolated d4-pawn
19.~cdl! Black has carried out
his plan of establishing a blockade
at dS, and in search of an active ar-
rangement of his forces White frees
his bishop from the defence of the
d4-pawn.
19 •. Jlc7. Not so much to seize
the c-file, as to defend the f7-pawn.
20.i.gS ~cS 21 Jj'f3. It was
not easy to assess the outcome of
the exchanging operation 21.i.xf6
CiJxf6 22.tt:Jxf7!? IiIxf7 23 ..iL.xe6
~d8 24J:~cl l'Id7 (24 .. J:hcl? is
bad: 2S.l:.txcl i.f8 26.i.xf7+ Wxf7
27.~b3+ ~dS 28.l:Ic7+) 2S.~b3
,iL. f8, and Black coordinates his
pieces.
2t..JIdS 22.h4 h6 23 ..ltcl.
23.i.d2 came into consideration,
and if 23 ... i.b4, aiming for the ex-
change of bishops, then White can
provoke a crisis on the f7 - and e6-
squares: 24.i.xb4 tt:Jxb4 2S.QJxf7!
Wxf7 26.i.xe6+ ~xe6 27.:txe6
Wxe6 28.g4! However, after 28 ...
gS 29.~f5+ Wf7 30.hS tt:JbdS
31.~g6+ Wf8 32.'~'xh6+ Ug7 the
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
position remains unclear, since the
white queen finds itself trapped:
cJif8-n, kId8-g8 and klg7-h7 IS
threatened.
23 .... lfl.b4 24.k.Ifl ~d6.
25.g3. White sticks to waiting
tactics. Of course, the critical de-
cision could have been the attack
with 25.g4!?, but here too after
25 ... Sl.xe5 26.dxe5 CLJd7 Black
has adequate defensive resources,
for example: 27.g5 hxg5 28 ..~xg5
tDxe5 29.~g3 f6 30.~xf6 ttJf3+!
(weaker is 30 .. .ctJxf6 31.Ihd8+
~xd8 32.~xe5, when White has the
advantage) 31.'iYxf3 Un 32.Uxd5
exd5 33 ..stl.xd5 l::txd5 34.~xd5
~g4+ 35.~g2 'iYxg2+ 36.~xg2
l:Ixf6, and in the rook endgame
Black has real saving chances (On-
ischuk). The preparatory 27.~g3
can be met by 27 ... CLJc3! 28.Udel
ttJe2+ 29.l'1xe2 lhcl 30.g5 hxg5
31.hxg5 ttJ f8, and White's attack
comes to a standstill.
25 ... b6 26.~e2 CLJe7. Played in
89
Karpov style - Black combines con-
trol of the d5-point with a threat to
attack the d4-pawn from f5.
27.IJ:fel ~xe5. Black decides to
change the pawn structure, having
no doubts about its solidity. How-
ever, 27 ... CLJ fd5 was also sound.
28.dxe5 (28.~xe5? CLJc6 would
have led to the loss of the d4-pawn)
28 .. Jhdl 29.~xdl CLJfd5 30.i.d2
l'tc5 31.~g4 CLJrs 32.~e4 b5 33.b5
(otherwise Black himself can play
h6-h5) 33 ... bxa4 34.~xa4 l:Ib5
35.IIct ~b7.
Black has managed not only to
simplify the position, but also to at-
tack the b2-pawn, whereas White
can only pin his hopes on the illu-
sory strength of his bishops.
36.~c2. If 36.i.xd5 ~xd5
37.~c3 White has to reckon with
37 ....~f3.
36 ... ttJb6! 37.~g4 Uxb2
38.i.e4?! He should have regained
the pawn: 38.~c3 Ub5 39.i.xfS
exfS 40.~xf5.
90 Part I . The isolated d4-pawn

38 ... ~d7 39.kel tDd5 40.,Ud3

Ci'lb4 41.,Un ltJd3 42.~d1. After
42.,l2.xd3 ~xd3 the prospects of the
passed a-pawn would be improved.
42 ... ltJxe5 43.~xd7 Ci'lxd7 44.
kIc8+ Wh7 45.~c7 l2:bl 46.b'l:xd7
kIxel 47Jhn 35. White's counter-
play involves exploiting the b l-d3
diagonal.
48.<,t>g2 Wg8 49.M37 kIe5 50.g4
ltJd6 51.kd3 ~f8 52.,~g6 l'!d5
53.0 e5 54.Wf2 kId2+ 55.Wel
I:d5 56.We2 I:Ib5 57.1:td7 ldd5
58.M37 IIb5 59.,~d3 ~d5 60.,Zlg6.
Draw.
To conclude this topic we would
like to draw attention to another de-
fensive idea. It is common knowl-
edge that the usual way of parrying
an attack along the bl-h7 diagonal
by the queen + bishop battery is the
move g7-g6. But f7-f5, a rarer way
of defending, also occurs. It can be
employed in a specific situation,
when Black does not have to fear
the weakening of the e6-pawn.
14 ... f5! A concrete approach to
the position. There is a certain lack
of hannony in the arrangement of
White's forces: the rook at c4 and
the bishop at b2 are badly placed,
and Black exploits this. He nips in
the bud White's activity on the bl-
h7 diagonal and consolidates his
queen's central position. The weak-
ening of the e6-pawn is insignificant
- there is no way of attacking it.
15.0-0 .ad7! 16.I'!dl?! 16.~e3
k'Ic8 17.MC3 C!:la5 18.tile5 was
stronger, not conceding the c-file,
since 18 ... Hxc3 19.bxc3 leads to an
unclear position.

KERES-TAL
24th USSR Championship,
Moscow 1957
Queen's Gambit D30

l.d4 <1\f6 2.c4 e6 3.<1\0 c5 4.e3

d5 5.a3 cxd4 6.exd4 ,ae7 7.lLlc3 0-
o 8.kf4 ltJc6 9.l:Ict ltJe4 10.kd3
lilxc3 1l.l:'Ixc3 dxc4 12.gxc4
~a5+ 13.kd2 ~d514Jj·c2.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
16 ..• l'i:ac8. In the event of 16 ...
1.l.eS 17.IIc3 .J!Lh5 White attacks
the weak e6-pawn - IS.,llc4 ~e4
19.~b3. It is risky to play 16 ... b5
17.11c3 lZ'lxd4 IS.CiJxd4 ~xd4
19.5L.e3, when White has a danger-
ous initiative for the pawn.
17.. lU.e3 Clla5 18.11xc8. By con-
ceding the c-file, White avoids being
saddled with an isolated pawn pair:
IS.Ltc3 l'txc3 19.bxc3 !1cs (19 ...
.~~.xa3? 20J!al) 20.Clle5 ,fLc6 21.f3
b5 (21. .. l2xa3?! 22.c4!), although
after 22.Ilbl ,\!(,f6 23.a4 he has defi-
nite counterplay (23...bxa4 24 .. J:l.a6
r:dS 25.tilxc6 ~xc6 26.~b5).
18 .. Jlxc8 19J~.ye2 .Ud6.
20.tile5.ln the event of20.l'1c I?!
l1xcl 2l.Slxci tilb3 22.it.e3 b5!
23.lZ'le5 ,~.xe5 24.dxe5 Slc6 Black
has an appreciable advantage (Tal).
20 ... .1l.a4 21.Ue1 i..xe5 22.dxe5
l'1d8 23.b4?! This leads by force to
a difficult endgame. White should
have retreated with 23.~bl, and
if 23.. .'~xe5, then 24.f4 ~b5
91
25 ..~a2!, keeping the e6- and a7-
pawns under fire.
23 .•. .1i.c6 24.f3 ~xd3 25.~xd3
Mxd3 26.bxa5 Iha3 27.1Lxa7
llxa5 28.,fLd4 ~a2 29.gb1 iJd2
wn.
30.,1i.c3 IIc2 31 •.,td4
32.h4. Black's advantage con-
sists not only in his extra pawn, but
also his better bishop, which coordi-
nates excellently with his rook, as is
confirmed, for example, by the fol-
lowing variation: 32.h3 f4 33.I:tb2
i1cl+ 34.Wh2 g5 35 ..1l.a7 'ltg6
36 .. llbS \t>f5 37.i..d6 h5 3S.i..bS
.\ld5 39 ..iI..d6 g4 40.hxg4 hxg4
4l.fxg4 Wxg4 42 ..1l.bS b5 43.i..d6
!Iel 44 ..fLbS b4 45.it.d6 b3 46.Ud2
f3 47.l::l:d4 ~e4 4SJ:he4+ i..xe4,
and Black wins (analysis by Euwc).
32 ... Wg6 33.gb4 h6 34.:C:b2.
At the cost of the h4-pawn White
pins his hopes on the opposite-col-
our bishops, but in vain. 34.Sle3
was more tenacious.
34 .• JIxb2 35.i.. xb2 'it> h5 36.
i..a3 'ltxh4 37•.1l.f8 Wg3 38.i..xg7
92
h5 39.i.h6 i.xO! In conclusion an
elegant bishop sacrifice follows, af-
ter which White can no longer stop
the passed pawns.
40.gxO WxO 41. Wn b5
42.i.d2 h4 43.i.b4 h3 44.'.itgl
We2. White resigned.
BRAGA - PORTISCH
Mar del Plata 1982
Sicilian Defence B22
l.e4 cS 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 ~xd5
4.d4 e6 5.lDo lDf6 6.i.d3 i.e7
7.0-0 0-0 8.~e2 cxd4 9.cxd4 tilc6
10.UdllDb4 1l.lDc3 ~d8 12.jt.c4
b6 13.lDe5 i.b7 14.a3 LiJbd5.
15.ti'le4?! Black has completed
his development and he is securely
controlling the d5-point. The at-
tempt to build up an attack by
switching the rook to the kings ide
15.l:td3 is parried by 15 ... Cbxc3!
16.bxc3 i.d5 17.i.b5 a6! 18.i.a4
(bad is 18.lDc6? ~c7! 19.CZlxe7+
~xe7 20 ..ta4 i.c4 with advantage
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
to Black) 18 ... b5 19.,1Lc2 ~e4.
The move in the game leads to an
exchange of minor pieces, which is
advantageous to Black. Therefore
15.i.g5 was more natural.
15 •.. LJixe4 16J~~'xe4 Mc8. Black
must prevent the switching of the
white rook via d3 to the kingside.
17.i.d3. If 17.~d3 there follows
17 ... f6 and in the event of 18.~h3
fxe5 19.~xh7+ Wfl 20.~h5+ g6
the king escapes via d7.
17 ••• f5! A radical and concrete
solution to the problem of safeguard-
ing the king. In view of the activity
of the black pieces, it is difficult for
White to exploit the weakness of the
e6-pawn.
18.~el. If 18.~e2 the strong-
est is 18 .. o<ii.g5!, since 18 .. Jhcl
19.1:taxcl tiJf4 20:~c2 tZ'lxg2
21.~c7! leads to an unclear game.
18 ••• Wh8 19.1i..d2 Cbf6 20.i.b4
ltld5 21.i.d2 i.g5! An important
defensive procedure - the exchange
of the dark-square bishops.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
22 ..~xgS? 22.lilo was bet-
ter, not allowing the black queen
across to the kingside, where it
will exert strong pressure on the
white king.
22 ....~xgS 23.CiJO ~h6 24.
l'Iac1 l:!xc1 2sJhc1 t;')f4 26•.1(n
.~xO 27.gxO ~gS+ 2S.Whl h6.
White has a difficult position in view
of the weakness of his kingside and
the d4-pawn.
29J!~'b4 IIdS (29 ... l'If6?
30.l"Ic8+ \t>h7 31.VJHe7) 30.~d2 eS!
31.dS ~xdS 32.IIcs+ Wh7 33.~c2
bS 34.l:tfB rId3 3S.~cS ~g2+!
White resigned.
4.3. Creation
of an isolated pawn pair
A quite popular procedure in the
battle against an isolated pawn is the
exchange of the knight on c3, lead-
ing to the creation of hanging pawns.
We encountered it in our study of
the Zukertort - Steinitz game, given
in the introduction. However, this
procedure should be adopted with
caution, since hanging pawns on
c4 and d4 may become the source
of a different type of initiative. The
exchange on c3 makes sense if it is
possible to blockade the c3-pawn,
i.e. prevent c3-c4. In this case a
new target for Black's counterplay
arises - an isolated pawn pair c3-
d4, which may be attacked (in cer-
tain situations) by the b- or e-pawn,
93
again transfonning the position into
one with an isolated pawn, but in
an inferior version compared with
that planned by the chosen opening
system. We will begin with a classic
example.
SPASSKY - PETROSIAN
World Championship Match,
3rd Game, Moscow 1966
Caro-Kann Defence B14
l.e4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.exdS cxd5
4.c4 C1lf6 S.CiJc3 e6 6.tbo il..e7
7.cxdS C1lxdS S•. ~c4 ttlf6 9.0-0 0-0
10.~e2lLlc6 11.il..e3lLlas 12.il..d3
b6 13 ..~gS il..b7 14.l:Iadl ~cS
lS.I;'Uel h6 16..~c1 $l.b4! 17..~d2.
17 ••• il..xc3! Black creates an iso-
lated pawn pair, since he is able to
secure control of d5 and c4.
lS.bxc3. Not 18.il..xc3? ~d5!,
when the bishop on c3 is playing the
role of a pawn.
lS •.. Vi'dS! 19.~n! In order to
activate his c3-pawn, White is ready
94
to sacrifice his a2-pawn. If 19 .,~ b I
there would have followed 19 ...
0lc4.
19 .• J~ha2. Here too 19 ... 0lc4
was good, but there appears to be
no reason to decline the pawn sac-
rifice.
20.tZJe5 CDb3 21.l:le2. In the
event of 21..~xh6, if Black is
concerned about the attack after
21 ... gxh6 22.l':te3, he can parry it
with the counterattack 21 ... Mxc3!
22.Ile3l:Ifc8 23.blg3 CDh5! 24.1'1g5
:tcl.
21. .. C!Jxd2 (21. . .'~a3! 22.i£,el
0lcl! was stronger) 22.11exd2 ~d5
23.c4 'iY d6. Although White has ob-
tained hanging pawns, he does not
have full compensation for the sac-
rificed pawn.
24.~e2 l:ifd8 25.h3 liJd7
26.C!Jg4 h5! (26 .. .'~f4! was also
strong) 27.lLJe3 g6 28.:a2 I:ta8
29JWc2 rJiJg7. Black has retained
his extra pawn and the better posi-
tion.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
TAIMANOV - KARPOV
Moscow 1973
Nimzo-Indian Defence E55
l.d4 C!Jf6 2.c4 e6 3.tJJc3 J£,b4
4.e3 c5 5.,~ d3 0-0 6.liJ f3 d5 7.0-
o dxc4 8.,lilxc4 cxd4 9.exd4 b6
10J~e2~b711JJdl tZJbd712 ..sLd2
!'Ic8 13.~a6 ,ltxa6 14.~xa6.
14 .... ~xc3! Black gives White
hanging pawns. Now it is very im-
portant for him to keep control of
the c4-square, thus blocking the
pawns and transforming them into
an isolated pawn pair.
15.bxc3 (after 15 ..1Lxc3 the bish-
op on c3 has no future) 15 .. Jlc7
16.Hac1. Preparingc3-c4, which for
the moment does not work - 16.c4?
~c8! and White loses a pawn.
15 .• J~·c8 17.'tWa4.
(See diagram)
17 •• J~c4! The blockade of the
isolated pawn pair is worth a pawn:
apart from the c4-square, Black also
obtains the d5-square for his knight,
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
from where it will attack the c3-
pawn.
IS.iha7 ~c6 19.W#a3 !;1cs
20.h3 h6 21.k'l: b 1. White has to
reckon with the pawn advance b6-
b5-b4, and after the exchange of
his c3-pawn he will again have an
isolated d4-pawn, but in a worse
version than that resulting from the
opening.
21 .. .1'1a4 22Jl~b3 CildS 23.Mdc1
llc4 24.l'1:b2 f6 2SJ'\el wn
26.~dl LilfS 27Jlb3 Lilg6 2S.~bl
gaS 29.Me4 Mca4 30.Ub2 LilfS
31.~d3 Hc4 32.Bel I1a3 33.~bl
tZJg6 34.Mc1? White cracks under
the pressure and makes a tactical
oversight. He should have kept the
b6-pawn under attack by sticking
to waiting tactics - 34.'l!ih2, and
only after 34 ... l:Ica4 - 35.l::tcl ~c4
36.k'!cc2.
34 .•. CLlxc3 3S.~d3 tZle2+
36.'#he2 nxcl+ 37.il.xc1 ~xc1+
3S.Wh2 Mxf3! 39.gxf3 Cilh4. White
lost on time. The best he could have
done was to go into a queen end-
95
game a pawn down: 40.ki:b3 ~g5
41.~fl ~f4+ 42.Wgl CLlxf3+
43.~g2 Cild2.
M.GUREVICH - YUDASIN
53rd USSR Championship,
Kiev 1986
Queen's Indian Defence E14
I.d4 tilf6 2.tilf3 e6 3.e3 cS
4.c4 cxd4 S.exd4 b6 6~~d3 .~b7 7.
0-0 .fLe7 S.0Jc3 dS 9.cxdS CLlxdS
lo..fLbS+ .1i.c6 11 .. ~c4 0-0 12.~e2.
12 •.. LiIxc3! An important deci-
sion. Black transforms the pawn
structure, giving White hanging
pawns in the hope of blockad-
ing them. Otherwise it is not easy
to develop the queenside. For in-
stance, Balashov - Yudasin, Minsk
1985, continued 12 ... 1L.b7 l3.nel
a6 (after 13 ... LiIc6 14.il.xd5! exd5
15.ilL. f4 White has a slight but en-
during advantage due to the differ-
ence in the activity of the bishops)
14:~e4 il.f6 15 ..1i.b3, and Black
has a problem finding useful moves,
96
e.g. 15 ... b5 16 ..tf4 L1lxf4 17.~xb7
tiJd7 18.l::tadl CiJb6 19.1i'le5 with
advantage to White.
13.bxc3 ~dS! Since it is advan-
tageous for Black to exchange the
light-square bishops (the weak d5-
and c4-squares are exposed), with
gain of tempo he vacates the c6-
square for the development of his
knight, from where it presses on the
centre more actively.
14 •.td3 LtJc6! (preventing c3-
c4) 1S.it. b2 (15.it. e3 is better, with
an equal game) IS •• J~tc8! With a
series of accurate moves Black has
solved his opening problems and
he now threatens 16 ... LtJa5 with
a blockade of the isolated pawn
pair.
16.tiJd2 it.f6 (forestalling c3-
c4).
17J:Ifdl. White should nev-
ertheless have decided on 17.c4,
which leads almost by force to a
position with somewhat the bet-
ter chances for Black: 17 ... lLl xd4
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
18"lt xd4 it. xd4 19.cxd5 Sl.. xa I
20.~e4 g6 21.l:lxal ~xd5
22.~xd5 exd5.
17 .• J!e8 (intending e6-e5)
18.~n tiJaS 19.,.\la6 (if 19.c4,
then 19 ... it.c6 20.CLlb3 .ta4 is un-
pleasant) 19 .•• I:tc7 20.c4. Black
has done his utmost to hinder the
advance of the c3-pawn, and White
makes use of his last chance to
prevent the creation of an isolated
pawn pair. But now the d4-pawn is
in danger.
20 ••• JU.c6 21.tiJb3 tiJxb3 22.
axb3 ~d7.
23.dS. Forced. If 23.~d3 Black
attacks with 23 ... ~a8! 24.~g3
Iied8 25.~g4 h5!
23 ... exdS 24.it.xf6 ~xf6 2S.
it.bS it.xbS 26.cxbS d4 27J:Iacl g6
28.h3 ~fS 29.~c4 d3 30.Md2 tte4
31.~c6 IIe2 32Jhe2 dxe2 33.::tel
tte7, and Black achieved a winning
position.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
MAKARICHEV -
MIKHALCHISHIN
46th USSR Championship,
Tbilisi 1978
Queen's Gambit D42
l.e4 e6 2.ttlO ttlf6 3.d4 dS 4.e3
eS S/ile3 Cile6 6.a3 exd4 7.exd4
.'ILe7 8.exdS <11xdS 9•. \U.d3 0-0 10.
0-0.llf611.I:!:el.
1l ... <11xe3!? Black creates a
form of isolated pawn pair, since
his control of the d4-pawn prevents
White from playing c3-c4. However,
he has to reckon with an attack on
his inadequately defended kingside.
In the event of 11 ... ttJxd4 12.ttJxd4
.JlLxd4 13.~xh7+ 'i!ixh7 14:~xd4
01xc3! 15:~·xc3 White has a slight
but enduring advantage.
12.bxe3 b613j~e2i.b714.~e4
g6 IS.~h6 I:Ie8 16.~f4 l:!e8. After
16 ... ~g7 17.i.xg7 ~xg7 Black
has to reckon with 18.ttJg5.
17.l:'Ie3. If 17.i.g5!?, with the
idea after 17 ... i.xg5? 18.ttJxg5
1'lc7 of attacking with 19.~h4 h5
97
20.g4!, the simplest is 17 ....1Le7!,
parrying the threat of 18. ~h4 by
18 ... f6 19.~d2 ~d7.
17 ••. ~ g7! Nothing is given by
17 ... ttJa5 18.ttJg5, when 18 ...
l'lxc3? fails to 19.~xg6!
18.ttJgS. In the event of 18.~xg7
Wxg7 19.tiJg5 ~f6! 20.~xf6+
Wxf6 21.0Jxh7+ Wg7 22.ttlg5
C!:le7! in return for the pawn Black
has strong pressure on the c3-d4 iso-
lated pawn pair (Makarichev).
18 .. 3!H6.
19.Cile4! By allowing the ex-
change of queens, White neutralises
the threats to his isolated pawn pair,
which would arise after 19:~h4
~xh6 20.~xh6 ~g7 21.l:th3 ~xh6
22Jhh601a5.
19 ••• ~xf4 20.~xf4 1::te7 21.
0ld6 l:ld8 22.ttJxb7 IiIxb7 23.~e4
!ie8 24.dS exdS 2S.~xdS Me7!
26.IiIae1 ..tf6! Black has parried
White's slight initiative, and on
the 36th move the game ended in a
draw.
98
An important motifin the besieg-
ing of an isolated pawn pair may be
an attack on the leading pawn at d4
by e6-e5, which usually again leads
to the creation of an isolated pawn
for White, but in a worse version
than that planned in the opening.
MARIN - GAVRIKOV
Tallinn 1989
Nimzo-Indian Defence E48
l.d4 Cilf6 2.c4 e6 3.l1lc3 .stb4
4.e3 0-0 S.<~d3 cS 6.lLle2 dS 7.cxdS
cxd4 8.exd4 lLlxdS 9.a3 .ie7
10..stc2lLlc6 11.~d3 g6 12.h4.
White is planning an assault on
the black king's position. It is well
known that the best measure against
a flank attack is counterplay in the
centre. But the immediate 12 ... e5
13.dxe5 leads to complications fa-
vourable for White. For example,
the game Knaak - Christiansen,
Olympiad, Thessaloniki 1988, con-
tinued 13 ... lLlxc3 14.~xc3 .stg4
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
15.0 Mc8 16.fxg4 tiJxe5! 17.~b3
.liL.xh4+ 18.g3 ~xc2 19.~xc2lild3+
20.Wfl ~d5 21.l1lgl! 1le8 22 .. ~h6
.~xg3 23.Mdl ~xhl 24.~xd3, and
White parried the attack while re-
taining a material advantage. There-
fore Black first creates a hanging
pawn paIr.
12 ... Cilxc3! 13.bxc3.
13 ... eS! Now, in contrast to the
above game, 14.dxe5 leads to the
exchange of queens. At the same
time 14 ....~f5 is threatened.
14.~g3 exd4 IS.hS (White has
no choice, other than an attack on
the king) Is ••• il.d6! (an exchange
of pieces eases the defence) 16.<~ f4
ii.xf4 17.lilxf4 gS!? (preventing the
opening of the h-file) 18.0-0?! 18.
0-0-0 was stronger, although here
too after 18 ... ~f6 Black should be
able to repel the attack.
18 ... Wh8 19.h6? White's last
chance was 19/ile2 dxc3 20:~xc3+
f6 2 1. J:I ad 1 VJlie7 22.lLlg3, trying to
complicate the play (Gavrikov).
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
19 ....~f6 20/t\d5 ~xh6 21.f4
IJjj d6! 22.CLl f6? A pointless sacrifice.
Objectively stronger was 22"~xg5
f5 with advantage to Black.
22 ... Wxf6 23.fxg5 ~e5 24.~h4
d3! 25.IIael %\Vc5+ 26.Whl ~f5.
White resigned.
MOISEENKO - VOLOKITIN
Dagomys 2005
Queen's Gambit D40
l.d4 C1lf6 2.c4 e6 3.C1lf3 c5 4.e3
cxd4 5.exd4 d5 6/bc3 ,~Lb4 7.cxd5
0\xd5 8.~d2 0-0 9.Sld3 C1lc6 (the
alternative is 9 ... C1lf6) 10.0-0 ,'ii.,e7
11.a3 ,~f6 12"~c2 h6.
Black has successfully regrouped
his forces, and the d4-pawn now
needs defending.
13.~e3. The game IIIescas - Dorf-
man,France 1991,continued 13.Mad1
CLlxc3 (after 13 ... ltJxd4 14.CLlxd4
,\U.xd4 15.C1lxdS Yi'xdS 16.~c3 Black
is behind in development and White's
initiative may become dangerous,
99
for example: 16 ... e5 17 ..ae4 Wd7
18 ..1lxd4 exd4 19.Md3 IIe8 20.LIe1)
14Jlxc3 (I4.bxc3 e5!) 14 .. .tDe7
15"~e2 iLd7 16.~e4 g6 17/ile5
,~a4 18.l:tde 1 ,~c6 with equal
chances. Dorfinan also considers the
direct attack: 18.d5! ~xd1 19.dxe6
,~b3 20.CLlxf7 6txf7 2I.exf7+ Wxf7
22 ..1txf6 Wxf6 23.k:te1, but after
23 ....ad5! 24.~e5+ Wf7 25.~f4+
Wg7! 26"~e5+ White has nothing
better than to force a draw.
13 .. 'cilxc3 14.bxc3.
14 ... e5! A blow at the leading
pawn of the pair.
15.M ad 1 exd4 16.cxd4 ~ g4.
White again has an isolated d4-
pawn, which needs defending.
17.iiLe4 :!:Ic8 18.~bl C1la5. The
game Khairullin - Krivoborodov,
Oagomys 2004, continued 18 ... ~b6
19.h3 ~xf3?! (19 ... ~xbl! 20.~xb1
,i/.xf3) 20 ..1lxf3?! (20:~xb6! axb6
21.i.xf3) with equal chances, but
19.dS! deserved serious consideration,
for example: 19 .. .'~xb1 20.l:hbl
100
<1:JaS 2LSi.xa7 llfeS 22.tIfel Cilc4
23.h3 .Si.xf3 24.gxf3!? (24 ..Si.xf3
l:Ixel+ 25.!'Ixel l1Jxa3=) 24 ... Cild6
25.~e3 with an extra pawn for
White.
19.h3 .Si.xf3 20.~xf3 b6 2l.d5
~d6 22.~f5 C!Jc4 23 •.Si.c1 .Si.b2
24 ...IlL.xb2l1Jxb2 25.Jlcl. Draw.
Another way of attacking an iso-
lated pawn pair is by undennining
its base, the c3-pawn, by b5-b4.
IVANCHUK - BRUZON
Havana 2005
Queen's Gambit D36
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.lilc3 iJ..e7
4.l1Jf3l1Jf6 5•.Si.g5 0-0 6.~c2 0\bd7
7.cxd5 exd5 8.e3 Ue8 9.~d3 0\18
10.0-0 c6 II.Uabl as 12.a3 .lii.d6
13.l:tfel i.g4 14.l1Jd2 i.h5 15..~h4
.iig616.l1Jf3 i.xd3 17.~xd3l1J8d7
18.e4 dxe419.ct'lxe4 .Si.e7 20.tiJxf6+
.Si.xf6 21.l:he8+ ~xe8 22.lIel ~d8
23 •.Si. xf6 l1J xf6 24.g3 g6 25.h4 Wg7
26.l:'Ie5 h5 27J~Ve2 l1Jd5 28.l!Jg5
~d7 29.LtJe4 b630.cLlc3.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
In this position Black could have
attacked the isolated d4-pawn - 30 ...
LtJf6 31.!'l:e7 (weaker is 31.~c4
gd8 32.!Iel b5 33.~c5 ~xd4
34.~xc6 CiJg4 35.~f3 b4 with a
dangerous initiative for Black) 31 ...
~xd4 32:~e6 ttf8 33.~xc6 0\g4
34.~f3 ~c5, retaining roughly
equal chances, but he preferred to
attack an isolated pawn pair.
30 .•• l1Jxc3 31.bxc3 b5 32.W#e4
1{d833.Wg2.
33 •.. b4. One of the effective
procedures in attacking an isolated
pawn pair. By undennining the c3-
pawn Black removes the support of
the d4-pawn.
34Jha5. Nothing is given by
34.axb4 axb4 35.~e7 (35.cxb4
~xd4 36.~xd4 l:'Ixd4 37.b5 Wf6
3s.11c5 cxb5 39.lhb5 is too tedi-
ous) 35 ... ~d5! 36.cxb4 ~xe4+
37Jhe4 UbS 3S.Wf3 llxb4 with a
simple draw.
34 ••• bxc3 35.IIc5. If 35.~e5+
Black does not play 35 ... f6 36.~e3
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
c2 37J!c5 ~xd4 38.~e7+, which
creates some problems for him, but
retreats 35 ... Wg8, and after 36.l"l:c5
I/i#xd4 37.W#xd4 llxd4 38.l:!xc3 the
resulting position differs from the
game only in the position of the king
at g8, which does not change its as-
sessment.
35 ... ~xd4 36.%Vxd4+ )Jxd4
37.!hc3 lla4 38."*'0 c5 39.We2
~f6 40.He3 \!if5 41.Wd2 f6 (41 ...
c4 is also possible) 42.l10+ '.!te5
43J:e3+ WfS 44.!l0+. Draw.
4.4. Creation
of a central pawn pair
With the white bishop on e3,
one of the defensive ideas available
to Black is the exchange ttJd5xe3,
creating a central pawn pair d4-e3,
the leading edge of which can be
attacked by e6-e5. But this should
have the necessary positional basis
and piece support, otherwise it may
boomerang.
101
MIKHALCHISHIN - LALIC
Sarajevo 1985
Queen's Gambit D41
l.d4 tilf6 2.<1'\0 e6 3.c4 c5
4/iic3 d5 5.cxd5 ttJxd5 6.g3 Ciic6
7..Ug2 .§i.e7 8.0-0 Ciif6 9.e3 0-0
10.a3 cxd4 1l.exd4 ~b6 12.~d3
rtd8 13..liLe3.
13 ... Ciig4?! A dubious idea.
Black is aiming to exchange the
bishop, but the opening of the f-file
allows White to attack the inad-
equately defended kingside. 13 ...
01d5 was more natural.
14.b4 a615.Uadl 0lxe3 16.fxe3
VJ#a7 17.\&>hl h6. This leads to a
weakening of the king's position.
17 .... \U.d7 was sounder, but here too
White has attacking chances, for
example: 18.0Je4!? .ile8 (l8 ... h6
19.94 leads to a position from the
game) 19.ttJfg5!? h6 20.ttJf6+ .liLxf6
21.~h7+ Wf8 22.l'!xf6 gxf6 (or
22 ... hxg5 23.~h8+ We7 24.~xg7
'it>d7 25.IIxf7+ etc.) 23.~xh6+
102
We7 24.11Jh7 Wd7 25.tZJxf6+ \£lcS
26.d5 ~bS (26 ... tZJe5? 27.~cl+;
26 ... exd5? 27.it.h3+) 27.ttJxeS
~e5 2S.d6etc. IS.d5!? it.eS 19:~c2
exd5 20.tZJxd5 is also possible.
18.tZJe4 it.d7.
19.94! White attacks a target
- the h6-pawn. Doubling rooks on
the f-file does not give anything in
view of i.d7-eS.
19,..eS. Played in accordance
with classical recommendations:
a counter in the centre is the best
reaction to a flank attack. How-
ever, it is insufficiently well-sup-
ported. If 19 ... it.eS there would
have followed 20.g5 h5 2l.tZJg3
g6 22.tZJe4, aiming at the weak f6-
square.
20.gS exd4. If 20 ... i.f5, then
21.d5 is unpleasant.
21.exd4. 2l.gxh6 gxh6 22.exd4
is also good, since Black cannot
play 21 ... iU5? because of22.tZJf6+
i.xf6 23.~xf5 CiJe7 (23 ... dxe3
24.tZJg5!) 24.• e4 dxe3 25.tZJe5!
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
21,..it.fS. If21...hxg5 there fol-
lows a mating attack: 22.11Jexg5 g6
23.ttJxf7! Wxf7 24.tfJg5+ etc.
22.gxh6 Ud5 (22 ... g6 23.d5)
23:~e3 it.g6.
24.tt'lc5! 24.QJc3?! l::th5 25.hxg7
Wxg7, allowing the doubling of
rooks on the h-file, resembles help-
play.
24,..llad8 25.hxg7 ~b8. If
25 ... W xg7 there can follow 26. tZJ d3
with the threat of 27.tZJf4, since
Black loses a piece after 26 ... lfJxd4
27YJlixe7 tZJxf3 2sJ:hf3 gxd3
29.1Jdxd3 Uxd3 30.~f6+ <3;gS
31.l::txd3 it.xd3 32.~dS+.
26.tZJd3 it.d6 27.tZJh4! l:th5
28.tZJxg6 i.xh2 (or 2S .. Jhh2+
29.Wgl fxg6 30:~e6+ Wh7
31..~e4) 29.~tJ! Wxg7 30.~xh5
fxg6 31.~xh2 ~h8 32.it.h3 'iVd8
33.ctJf4. Black resigned.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
VYZHMANAVIN - KAIDANOV
Norilsk 1987
Queen's Gambit Accepted D21
l.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.80 e5 4.e3
exd4 5.. iiLxe4 YJ/ie7 6.VJ/ib3 e6 7.exd4
l1le6 S.0le3 a6 9.~dl lilf6 10.0-0
'fl.e7 lU1lg5 0-0 12.~e2.
12 •.• 0lg4!? By the threat of di-
verting the defender of the h-pawn
- 13 ... CiJxd4 Black forces the re-
treat of the bishop to e3.
.ae3
13. b5 14.. ~b3 2l.b7. Black
plans the exchange on e3, but he does
this carelessly. After the preparatory
14 ... liJaS! IS.Mfcl tZIxb3 16.axb3
and now 16 ... j(b7! he would have
carried it out in a much better situ-
ation. For example: 17.ttJdS VJ/id6
18.ttJxe7+ VJ/ixe7 19.ttJeS (after
19 ..1l f4 Uac8 20.ttJeS ttJxeS 21.dxeS
VJ/ib4 the weakness of the white
pawns becomes apparent, the oppo-
site-colour bishops being favourable
for Black) 19 ... ttJxe3 20.fxe3 (20.
~xe3 VJ/id6) 20 ... f6 21.ttJd3 eS.
103
15JUel.
15 ... 0lxe3. Black exchanges the
bishop, but concedes the initiative
to White, who exploits the opposi-
tion of rook and queen to occupy
the weakened cS-point. After the re-
treat of the knight - Is ... lil f6 Black
would have had to reckon with
16.dS.
16.fxe3 ~b6 17.tZIe4 C)')a5?!
Black should not have wasted time
on the exchange of the bishop. By
countering the appearance of the
knight at cS by 17 ... IIac8! 18.ttJcS
0'lb8!, he would have retained
equality.
IS.clie5 lIfeS 19.ttJe5! ttJxb3
20.axb3 j(xe5. 20 ... as, prevent-
ing b3-b4, came into consideration.
Then nothing is given by 21. ~hS
g6 22.VJ/ih6 j(xcS 23.ttJd7 VJ/id8
24.ttJxcS 'iVdS, while if White plays
as in the game - 21. ttJ ed7 VJ/i d6
22.ttJxb7 ~xd7 23.ttJcS, then after
23 ... ~c6 Black gradually prepares
e6-eS.
104
21.tt'ld7 ~d6 22.ltJxeS JLdS
23.b4.
White has finnly established
his knight at cS, but Black has his
trumps: a strong bishop and the pos-
sibility of opening the central files,
whereas in the middlegame the
weakness of the a6-pawn is not so
significant.
23 ... eS! 24.gdl l::l:eS 2S.YJiig4.
Kaidanov considers the best to be
2S.~d2 ~g626.dxeSl:txeS 27.ttJd3
with the threat of ttJ f4, but Black
parries it by 27 ... l:txe3! 28.ttJf4
YJiib6 29.YJiifl (29.~hl iLb3 30.Mel
lIae8) 29 ... iLb3 30.l:Id3 ~ae8, re-
taining his extra pawn.
2S .. Jj'h6! 26.e4 iLe4. Stronger
is 26 ... ~e3+ 27.Wh I iLc4 with ac-
tive counterplay (28 ... iLe2 is threat-
ened), for example: 28.Ma3 YJiifl
29.:g3 g6 30.ttJd7 iLe2 31.~h4
~f4. Now, however, White finnly
seizes the initiative.
27.~O (27.dS? ~e3+ 28.Whl
iLe2 29.llel ~xcS!) 27 ... exd4
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
2S.b3 iLe6 29.MXd4 ~gS. 29 ...
IIad8 3o.l'hd8 iclxd8 31.h3 iLc8
32.IIdl ~f6 is more active, al-
though the endgame is advantageous
to White.
30.Y~·g3! ~f631.eS ~g6? Black
should not have agreed to an obvi-
ously inferior endgame. 31... ~ e7
32.11Je4 YJiia7 33.ktedl l::ted8 was
more logical.
32.YJiixg6 hxg6 33.'lt>f2 iLeS
34.I:tdS! l:Ia7 3S.We3 f6 36.~d4
l:ae7 37.IIet iLb7 3S.ttJxb7 I:txb7
39.I:td6 'tin 40.WdS! ~xeS+
41 JheS fxeS 42.Iha6, and White
won the rook endgame.
When the number of minor piec-
es is reduced, the creation of a cen-
tral pawn pair followed by an attack
on it with e6-eS is more justified.
BRAGA - KARPOV
Mar del Plata 1982
Sicilian Defence B22
l.e4 eS 2.e3 dS 3.exd5 YJiixd5
4.d4 e6 S.ttJO ttJf6 6.,lil.d3 JLe7
7.0-0 0-0 S.YJiie2 exd4 9.exd4 ttJe6
10.ttdl ttJb411.liJe3 ~dS12.iLbl
b6 13.tileS iLb7 14.a3 tilbdS
IS.ttJe4 ttJeS 16.YJiie2 g6 17.iLh6
ttJg7 IS.ttJe6 iLxe6 19.YJiixe6 YJiieS
20.~bS IIdS 21.ttJg3 YJiib7 22.YJiie2
iLh4 23.iLe4 VJHe7 24.iLxg7 Wxg7
2S.ttJn iLgs.
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5
The posItIOn is roughly equal
and, by playing 26.g3 with the idea
of h2-h4 and the manoeuvre of his
knight to f3, White would have
maintained equality. But he pre-
ferred to attack the knight.
26.Cile3?! lilxe3! After this ex-
change the resulting pawn on e3 is
a target for the bishop to attack. It
should be noted that the opposite-
colour bishops favour Black, who
has the more active bishop, support-
ed by the major pieces.
27.fxe3 llac8 28.,ili,d3 (not
28.!hcl in view of 28 .. Jlxcl
29.Ihcl ~xd4) 28 •. J!c7 29.,\!LbS.
105
29 ... eS! This attack is the justifi-
cation for the exchange on e3.
30.dxeS. White is forced to ac-
cept a weak pawn on e3, since 30.d5?
~ c5 leads to the loss of a pawn.
30 ... Mxdl+ 3tJ~xdl Ilcs 32.e4
IheS 33.JiLd3 hS. The advance of
the h-pawn enables the pressure
on the kingside to be intensified.
Black's plan includes creating a
second weakness, since the single
weakness on e4 is insufficient for
him to convert his positional advan-
tage.
34J~'f3 h4 3S.1'1fl ~f6 36.b3.
36 ... bS! Taking away the c4-
square from the light-square bishop.
If immediately 36 ... hlc5?!, then
37.~c4 and the bishop goes to d5,
after which the position is almost
equal.
37.Whl MCS 38.~e2 IIeS
39J~Vf3 as 40.a4 bxa4 41.bxa411cs
42.JiLbSl:lc3 43J!~'f4 h3. Black has
carried out his plan - a second weak-
ness on h2 has been created.
106
44.U f3 hxg2+ 45. ~ xg2.1i e5 46.
W'g411c2+ 47..t'Ifll:Ixfl+ 48.'it>xfl
$..xh2 49.Wg2 .1ie5. After winning
a pawn Black launches an attack on
the king.
Part I . The isolated d4-pawn
50•.1ic6 ~c5 51..1i.b5 .~.d4 52.
~f4 ~c2+ 53.Wh3 .1lf6 54.'it>g3
~b255.'iitf3 ~d4 56.~g3 ~d257.
Wg4 ~dl+ 58"~f3 ~gl+ 59"~g3
~hl 60"~f3 ~h2 61.~dl. White
resigned.
 PART II
THE ISOLATED D5-PAWN
All the features relating to the
isolated d4-pawn for White also
extend to the isolated d5-pawn
for Black, only on a somewhat re-
duced scale. Since the advantage
of the first move is of importance,
a topic such as an attack by Black
on the kingside rarely occurs - it is
more real to talk about the initiative.
Therefore in his choice of strategy
with the d5-pawn Black hopes to ex-
ploit its dynamic properties to create
active piece play, using its control
of the e4- and c4-points, as well as
its desire to make the d5-d4 break-
through. As for White's strategy,
it is aimed at exploiting the static
weakness of the isolated d5-pawn,
which is expressed in a striving for
the endgame, where its weakness is
especially perceptible.
In view of the more restricted
opportunities for exploiting the dy-
namic features of the isolated d5-
pawn, modern theory also contains
a restricted field of opening varia-
tions, where Black goes in for such
a pawn. The main openings where
positions with an isolated d5-pawn
arise are associated with the name of
Siegbert Tarrasch, who asserted that
the central pawn was good for an at-
tack. In his opinion, 'The purpose-
ful use of space, i.e. the purposeful
arrangement of your forces - is the
most important thing throughout
the game', and he implemented it
in opening such as l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6
3.tLlc3 c5 or l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tLld2
i 15, leading to the creation of an iso-
lated d5-pawn.
Here are a number of typical
positions, arising in these popular
openings.
108 Part II

Queen's Gambit, Tarrasch De- Queen's Gambit

fence Deferred l.d4 d5 2. 3.c4 e6 3.Cilc3 <1'lf6
I.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.01c3 c5 4.e3 4 ..ltg5fi.e7 5.e3 0-0 6.010 h6
Cilc6 5.010 01f6 6.cxd5 exd5 7 .. ~1..e2 7.il.xf6 .~.xf6 8.~d2 c5 9.cxd5
.rJi.e7 8.dxc5 .0..xc5. cxd4 1O.01xd4 exd5.

Queen's Gambit, Tarrasch De- Queen's Gambit

fence I.d4 d5 2. 3.c4 e6 3.C!lc3 01f6
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.010 c5 4.cxd5 4.C!10b...e7 5.b...f4 0-0 6.e3 <1\bd7
exd5 5.g3 01f6 6Jii.g2 iLe7 7.0-00-0 7.a3 c5 8.cxd5 Cilxd5 9.C!lxd5 exd5
8.Cilc3 01c6 9.il.g5 cxd4 1O.01xd4. 10.dxc5.
The isolated d5-pawn 109

Nimzo-Indian Defence French Defence, Tarrasch Var-

I.d4 liIf6 2.c4 e6 3.CZlc3 JlI..b4
4.$'Yc2 dS S.a3 .~.xc3+ 6.~xc3 Che4
7Yfojc2 cS 8.dxcS liIc6 9.cxdS exdS.
iation
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.0\d2 cS
4.exdS exdS S.liIg0 liIf6 6 ..UbS+
.~d7 7.. ~.xd7+ liIbxd7 8.0-0 .~,e7
9.dxcS.

French Defence, Tarrasch Var-

iation
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.0\d2 cS 4.exdS
exdS S.liIg0 liIc6 6.~bS .~.d6
7.dxcS .~.xcS.
 Chapter 5
Attack on the
isolated d5-pawn
From White's point of view the
isolated d5-pawn is regarded as a
target. Therefore we consider it ad-
visable to continue the study of this
topic, which was examined in Part I
with regard to the d4-pawn.
In this chapter we examine plans
for carrying out the most expedient
arrangement of the forces and the
specific positional procedures for
an attack by White on the isolated
d5-pawn. These are firm control of
the d4 blockading square, and ex-
changes of minor pieces, in particu-
lar of Black's dark-square bishop, to
weaken his control of the adjacent
e5- and c5-squares. Also in White's
arsenal is the exchange of his d4-
knight on c6 to create an isolated
pawn pair, or on e6 to create a cen-
tral pawn pair.
S.1. The strategy of exchanging
pieces
Since Black's basic plan is to
exploit the dynamic qualities of
the isolated d5-pawn, is expressed
in a striving for the initiative in the
centre and on the kingside, White's
basic objective is to exchange the
pieces supporting this pawn, which
will transform it into a target. In
carrying out this strategy, control
of the d4 blockading square is im-
portant. In order to assess more
deeply the consequences of ex-
changing pieces, we will examine
a classical example on the theme
of exploiting the weakening of the
dark-square periphery around the
d5-pawn.
RUBINSTEIN - TEICHMANN
Teplitz-Schonau 1922
Nimzo-Indian Defence E22
I.d4 Lilf6 2.c4 e6 3.Lilc3 ,~,b4
4.~b3 cS S.dxcS ,~xcS 6.Lilf3 0-0
7.e3 dS 8.cxdS exdS 9.,1.(,e2 ,1:Lb6
10.0-0 ,112,e6 nJldl '@ie7 12.Wa4
CiJc6 13.b3 Mfd8 14.,~a3 ~e8
ISJ~~'h4 ,rfl,c7 16.ldacl a6 17.:~.d3
h6.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn III

18.LiJa4! A knight manoeuvre 28.~xc7! ~xc7 29.tlJcxe6

typical for the structure with an ~xc3. Black is forced to return the
isolated pawn, which was intro- queen, since he loses after 29 ... iVb6
duced by Akiba Rubinstein. Apart 3o.Cilxd8 ~xd8 31.Mc8.
from 19.Ci)c5, Black also has to 30Jhc3 fxe6 31.C[)xe6 gd7
reckon with 19 ..~ b2 with the threat 32.f3 wn 33.t;:)d4 g6 34.'itifl. As
of breaking up his kingside pawns. a result of the exchanging operation
This forces him to exchange the White has won a pawn. The tech-
dark-square bishops. nique for converting it is highly in-
18 ••.. ~d6 19.. ~xd6 i'lxd6 structive: first White improves the
20.Ci)c5 Wtie7 21.Ci)d4! After the ex- placing of his pieces, and then he
change of the dark-square bishops exploits his pawn majority on the
White occupies the important dark kingside.
squares c5 and d4 with his knights, 34 ... ~e7 35.I.'Ic8 t;Je8 36:~e2
whereas it is difficult for Black to do wn 37.Wd3 <1:Jd6 38.l:tc5 tlJe8
anything active. 39.84 We7 40.h4 h5.
21. •. Ci)e5 22.~f4! It is advanta-
geous for White to exchange minor
pieces, with the prospect of reach-
ing an endgame with a knight on d4
against a passive bishop on e6.
22 ..• t;:)xd3 23.tIxd3 1:tc8
24.:ttdc3 k'Idd8 25.~e5 tlJg4
26.~f4 tlJf6 27.h3! l!c7? A mis-
take, but it was difficult for Black to
parry the threat of 28.tildxe6 fxe6
29.~e5.
112 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

41.liJe2! The knight is trans- of the dark-square bishops, signifi-

ferred to f4, from where it will be cantly reducing the dynamic poten-
able to attack the dS- and g6-pawns. tial of the isolated dS-pawn.
41. .. Cilc7 42.CZ,)f4 ~d6 43.Mcl 10 ••• 2U6 11 ..~d2 Cilc6 12.c~.e2
Mg7 44.g4 hxg4 4S.fxg4 as. If ~e6 13.0-0 .!2.xb2 14.~xb2 ~aS
4S .. .gS there would have followed IS.I:tfdl lJadS 16.ild2 gd7
46.hxgS MxgS 47.l:hc7! Wxc7 17.l'ladllJfdS IS.h3 h6.
48.lZJe6+ and 49.lZJxc7.
46.l'lhl gS 47.hxgS !!xgS 4S.
l'lh6+ \tieS 49.Ci'lg6+ Wf6 SO.Ci'lf8+
Wf7 Sl.l'Ih7+ ~g7 S2.nxg7+
Wxg7 s3.Cild7 Ci'la6 S4.<;t>d4 Ci'lb4
SS.tI')cS b6 S6.Ci'ld7 Ci'lc2+ S7.\t>d3
CiJb4+ SS.Wc3 Wg6 S9.lZJxb6 WgS
60.Wd4 ll'lc2+ 61.WxdS Ci'lxe3+
62.'JicS Ci'lxg4 63.Ci'lc4. Black re-
signed.

BOTVINNIK - ZAGORYANSKY
I 9.Ci'l eS! After the exchange of
Sverdlovsk 1943
knights White gains complete con-
English Opening A13
trol of the d4-square, his queen's
sphere of activity is expanded, and
l.lZJf3 dS 2.c4 e6 3.b3 CiJf6
his bishop obtains an excellent post
4.~b2 ~e7 S.e3 0-0 6.Ci'lc3 cS
at f3 for an attack on the dS-pawn.
7.cxdS lZJxdS. In the given specific
19 ..• CilxeS 20. ~xeS ~ cS 21 .. \U. f3
situation 7 ... e' IdS was more f'hi-
(threatening 22.e4) 21. .. b6 22"~'b2
ble, retaining the option of obtaining
r!cS 23.~eSl"!cdS 24.Md4! as.
more dynamic hanging pawns on dS
and cS. It is also useful to retain the
knight when transposing into a posi-
tion with an isolated dS-pawn.
S.lZJxdS exdS 9.d4. A typical
procedure, forcing Black to make a
choice between an isolated d-pawn
and hanging pawns at cS and dS.
9 ... cxd4 10"~xd4! An impor-
tant moment. From a position of
strength White forces the exchange
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
2S.g4! White has completely tied
the black pieces to the defence of the
d5-pawn and, exploiting the fact that
the king is inadequately defended,
he begins an attack on the kingside,
since it will be difficult for Black to
defend simultaneously his king and
the d5-pawn. A typical positional
procedure, by the creation of a sec-
ond weakness to facilitate the attack
on the first one!
2S ....~e6 26.gS hxgS 27.~xgS
f6 (parrying the threat of 11h4 and
~h5) 2S.~g6 .~n 29.11!~g3 fS?!
This weakening of the king's de-
fences was not directly necessary,
although it would not have been
easy for Black to parry the attack on
the g-file after the switching of the
dl-rook to gl.
30.~gS ~e6 3uiihl ~eS
32.tIgl 11rs 33.~h6 UbS. If 33 ...
g6, then 34.h4 followed by h4-h5-
h6 is decisive.
34.M h4 Wrs 3S. ~ hS+ Sl gS
36.I:U4 gbb7 37.1dgS !In 3SJ4YhS
tM#al+ 39.Wg2 g6 40"~xg6 .~h7
41."iYd6+ llfe7 42.iYdS+. Black re-
signed.
Examples of the mechanism of
exchanging minor pieces are to be
found in the play of Anatoly Kar-
pov, an expert at attacking the iso-
lated pawn. The following game on
the theme of exchanging operations
resembles his famous 9th game
with Korchnoi from the World
113
Championship Match ID Merano
1981 (Part I).
KARPOV - SPASSKY
Montreal 1979
Queen's Gambit D37
I.d4 CiJf6 2.e4 e6 3.CiJO dS
4.CiJe3 .'fi..e7 S.JlI..f4 0-0 6.e3 eS
7.dxeS L1Je6 S."~e2 ~aS 9.a3 .txeS
10J~dl Sle7 Il.ctJd2 .td7 12•.te2
BfeS 13.0-0 ~dS 14.exdS exdS
IS.CiJO h6.
A superficial impression of this
position suggests that it is dynami-
cally balanced, since after 16 ... .te6
Black consolidates his forces, al-
though it is not easy for him to ex-
ploit the dynamic potential of his
isolated d5-pawn. Nevertheless,
Black has problems. In this respect
the assessment of the position given
by Karpov is instructive: 'White's
plans include the exchange of at
least one pair of knights. In this case
it is much easier to keep control of
114
d4. In addition, the vacated post at
f3 can immediately be occupied by
the bishop, which will exert strong
pressure on the dS-pawn. In prin-
ciple, this is a typical procedure in
this type of position. The only dis-
tinguishing feature is that these ex-
changing operations are usually car-
ried out via the d4-point. '
16.CDeS! .ii.e6. If 16 ... ~e8 there
could have followed l7.tZJxd7!
iYxd7l8 ..ii.f3.
17.0'\xc6! IIxc6 (17 ... bxc6?
l8 ..ii.a6 leads to the loss of the ex-
change) 18•.ii.f3 ~b6 19.tLeS!
Here Karpov makes another valu-
able comment: 'White's advantage
is, of course, considerable, but it is
not at all easy to increase it. For the
moment he provokes the exchange
of the last pair of knights. After all,
it is for the long-range bishops and
heavy pieces that an isolated pawn
is the most convenient target. '
19 ..• 0'\e4 20"~e2! The block-
ading attempt 20Jld4 leads after
20 ....1t.cS 21..tLxcS gxcS 22 ..)Ji.xe4
dxe4 to the elimination of the iso-
lated pawn, since 23:~xe4 ~xb2
24.0'\a4 lIeS 2S:~f4 ~bS is not
dangerous for Black (variation by
Karpov).
20 •.• 0'\xc3 21..~xc3 lld8 (21.. .
.~xa3 22 ..~xg7!) 22.t'td3! Mcd6
23.l'Ifdl I!6d7 24.t'tld2. White
carries out a frontal attack on the dS-
pawn, arranging his heavy pieces as
recommended in such positions by
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
Alekhine - the queen behind the
rooks.
24 ... ~ bS 2S. ~ d 1.
The first part of the plan has been
carried out. White has tied Black
down to the defence of the dS-pawn
and next he wants to prepare an at-
tack on it with e3-e4. However, for
the moment this is not possible,
since the black pieces are well co-
ordinated. To disrupt their coordi-
nation White plans an advance of
his kingside pawns, but first he im-
proves the placing of his forces.
2S ••• b6 26.g3 $t.f8 27.jLg2 .'1J..e7
28J~'hS! (threatening 29.e4) 28 •••
a6 29.h3 ~c6 30.~h2 ~bS 31.f4!
f6. 31...fS was bad: 32.~g6 .~f8
33 ..lteS with the threat of g3-g4.
32. iY d 1 ~ c6. Karpov thinks
that 32 ... ktd6 was more tenacious,
after which 33.e4 is possible.
33.g4 gS.34 ....~d6 3S.Whl
.ii.c7 was essential, preventing the
advance of the white pawns.
34.Whl as 3S.fS §Ln.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
36.e4! After the defender of the
rook on d7 has been removed, White
lands this crowning blow, winning a
pawn.
36 ... ~g7 37.exd5 Wic7 38.t\e2
b5 39.rhe7 Dxe7 40.d6 ~c4 41.b3.
Black resigned.
The technique of besieging the
isolated pawn, demonstrated by Kar-
pov, is impressive. As a product of
the Soviet chess school, he was un-
doubtedly helped by his knowledge
of the classical heritage. We will now
examine a modem example.
RUSTEMOV - V. FILIPPOV
Minsk 1996
Queen's Gambit D45
l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e3lLlf6 4.lLlc3
e6 5.t;)fJ t;)bd7 6.'iYc2 .td6
7.b3 0-0 8•.i1Le2 e5 9.cxd5 t;Jxd5
10.Cf)xd5 cxd5 1l.dxe5 lLlxe5
12 .. ~b2 t;)xfJ+ 13 ..JixfJ .Jib4+
14.Wn! The exchange of the dark-
square bishops, which is usually
115
useful against an isolated d5-pawn,
is premature for the moment, since it
allows Black to get rid of this pawn:
14.ii.c3 'iYf6! 15.k'!cl .1U5 16.W'd2
.~xc3 17.Mxc3 .lU.e4 18o<&xe4 dxe4.
If 14.<,t>e2, then 14 ... b6 15.~d3 a5
is possible, but now if 14 ... b6 there
follows 15.~d3 a5 16.~d4!
14 ....liLe6 15.'1!¥d3 .1J..e7.
16.'it'e2! The position has sta-
bilised and, by making way for his
rook, White prepares a frontal attack
on the d5-pawn.
16 ... ~ d7. Black has no real coun-
terplay. The active 16 .... ~.f6 17 ..1l.d4
.s:L. xd4 18. ~ xd4 leads to simplifica-
tion advantageous to White.
17.kIhdl ktfd8 18.Wn l::tac8
19.\t>gl. White is in no hurry - hav-
ing nothing to fear, he has castled
artificially.
19... b6 20.;Gd2 f6 21.'~¥e2 .~b4
22.I.Id4 SLd6 23.tIadl .~e5. This
voluntary exchange ofthe dark-square
bishops plays into White's hands.
23 ... ~ f7 came into consideration,
116
with the idea of24.~d2 ,~eS 2S.Md3
k'Id7 (2S .. .MCS!? 26 ..td4 Mc7) 26.h3
l':'tcdS. Unclear play results from
24.e4 k(eS (24 ... dxe4? 2S.Mxd6)
2S.~d3!? (2S.exdS ,~f5 26:~f1
!':tc2) 2S ... .1LeS 26.exdS ,iU.d7 27.kIh4
.txb2 2S.~xh7+ \t>f8 29.~bl .aeS
30..thS ~gS 3 LiU.xeS I:IxeS.
241I4d2 .itxb2 25Jhb2 W!!Jc7
26.!:tbd2 ~e5 27:~a6 l'!c7 2S.h3 15.
Black excludes one of the potential
motifs of a frontal attack - e3-e4.
29.!:td4 !:tcd7 30.W!!Jd3 g631.g3
'tig7 32.\tig2 \tif6 33.I:Id2 Wg7.
34.b4. Black has defended his
dS-pawn and to convert his advan-
tage White needs to create a sec-
ond weakness in Black's position.
Therefore he launches an attack on
the queenside.
34 •.• Wf6 35:~'b3 Wg7 36JWdl
Wf6 37.k!2d3 Wg7 3S.W!!Jd2 Wf6
39.r.;i;h2 Wg7 40.Jl.g2 wn 41.a4
'\tf6 42.b5 wn 43.2dc3 ~bS
44:~' c1 ~ e5 45..t f3 'ti g7 46. <,i) g2
wn 47•.tdl! After lengthy ma-
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
noeuvring White switches his bish-
op onto the a2-gS diagonal, from
where it puts the black king under
an 'X-ray' attack.
47 ••• ~bS 4S.Jl.b3 We7 49.nc6
Bd6 50.MC7+ bt6d7 51.I'Ic3 ~n
52.';;t;gl ~e5 53:~d2 'iYbS 54.V:c6
Bd6 55.tIc3 IJ:6d7 56.Wh2 %¥b7
57.ktcd3 Md6.
5S.f3! White includes the final re-
source of the frontal attack - e3-e4.
5S ... ~e7. After SS .. .1X6d7
S9.e4 the pin on the bishop proves
decisive.
59.e4 Wlc7 60.Uc3 ~b7 61.e5
k!6d7 62.kIc6 ,~gS 63:~g5+ WeS
64.~f611n 65.Me6+ Ue7 66J~cYhS
~f8 67.Ilc6 rIg7 6S.!!xd5 nxd5
69.,\1.xd5 ~d7 70.Mf6+. Black re-
signed.
When carrying out a plan com-
bining a frontal attack by heavy
pieces on the dS-pawn with threats
to the king, control of the long a 1-
hS diagonal also enables strategic
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
objectives involving exchanging
operations to be implemented. In
this case White should normally aim
for the exchange of the dark-square
bishop controlling the squares adja-
cent to the dS-pawn, which, above
all, enables him to establish control
of the d4 blockading point.
PINTER - PODZIELNY
Bad Worishofen 1986
Queen's Gambit D32
1.C)lf3 cS 2.c4 Cilf6 3.tilc3 e6
4.e3 dS S.d4 a6 6.cxdS exdS 7..fl.e2
0:'\c6 8.0-0 j,.d6 9.dxcS .,txcS 10.b3
0-0 1l .. t2.b2 lie8 12.iJc1 .'1La7.
13.ktc2! The routine I3.tila4
L'ile4 leads to unclear play, and so
White carries out the plan of a fron-
tal attack along the d-file combined
with threats to the king along the a 1-
h8 diagonal.
13 •••.1i.e6 14.I:Id2 V/ile7 ISJjbl!
The queen takes control of the im-
portant squares e4 and fS, vacating
117
the d I-square for the second rook.
IS .. Jlad8 16.I!fdl h6 17.~a1.
White vacates the b2-square for
his queen, in order for the queen +
bishop battery to set up an 'X-ray'
attack on the g7-square (the threat of
tilc3xdS).
17 ..•.~cS (preventing 18Jib2 by
the threat of 18 ... Jl.a3) 18.h3 l:Id7
19/1')a4 .fl.b4? Black persists in try-
ing to counter the threats along the
a l-h8 diagonal, which allows White
to carry out advantageous piece ex-
changes. He should have retreated
his bishop, without lifting its control
of the d4-point - 19 ....~a7, when
20.~b2 can be parried by 20 ... d4
21.exd4 .idS! 22.'1:)cS, and ifhe did
not like 22 ... .ixcs 23.dxcS ~xcS
24.Lf:lh4 with the idea of <t'lh4-fS-
e3, then he could consider 22 .. Jlc7
23.b4 CilhS 24.Cild3 ~e4 with ac-
tive counterplay for the pawn.
20.tilb6! .flxd2. After 20 ...
k1dd8 21.Slxf6 V/ilxf6 22.11JxdS a
pawn is lost.
21.tilxd7 ilxd7 22.I'Ixd2.
118
As a result of his knight manoeu-
vre White has exchanged it for the
dark-square bishop, which has de-
prived the isolated pawn of any dy-
namic potential.
22 •.. d4? Black is not satisfied
with the passive defence 22 ... ke6,
but in sacrificing the pawn he did
not take into account an intennedi-
ate move by White.
23.ttJxd4 ttJe4 24.ttJxc6 kxc6
2SJj'b2! (an important interposi-
tion!) 2S ... fS? Missing an opportu-
nity for counterplay by 25 ... ~ g5!
25.h4 ~g6.
26.Ud4 £1jgS 27..ltc4+ Wh8
28..Sl,dS f4 29..ltxc6 fxe3 30..~.xe8!
e2 31.:C:e4! Black resigned. If 31...
0lxe4 a familiar technique proves
decisive: 32.~xe2 iVxe8 33.f3 0lf6
34:~xe8+ lilxe8 35.iLe5! The bish-
op restricts the knight's mobility and
the endgame is hopeless for Black.
IVANCHUK - RIAZANTSEV
Moscow 2005
Queen's Gambit D45
vi') f3 dS 2.c4 c6 3.e3 ttJ f6
4/i'lc3 e6 S.d4 a6 6.b3 .i1.b4 7.iLd2
Li'lbd7 8.iLd3 0-0 9.0-0 W1e7
1O:~c2 eS lI.dxeS ttJxeS 12.lhxeS
~xeS 13.cxdS cxdS.
(See diagram)
14.Li'le2! White aims for the ex-
change of the dark-square bishops,
without losing control of d4.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
14 .••.ltd6 IS/fig3 Wie7. 15 ...
~g5!? looks more active, intending
to answer 16.kc3 with 16 ... l1Jg4!
17"s:Lxh7+ Wh8 18.lLd3 (l8 .. tL.f5?
lilxh2!) 18 ... ~h4 19.h3 lilxe3
20.fxe3 ~xg3 21.~e2 ~h2+
22.Wf2 ~g3+, forcing a draw by
perpetual check.
16.iLc3 h6. The defence of the
h7-pawn by 16 .. "s:Le5 17j~.xe5
~xe5 is tantamount to acknowledg-
ing the triumph of White's strategy.
After 18.lIac I the invasion 'tW c7 is
threatened.
17.~b2! ne8. If Black tries to
maintain his pawn structure by re-
treating his knight - 17 ... 0le8 he has
to reckon with threats along the long
diagonal. Forexample: 18.l':Iadl St..g4
19.tiJf5 iLxf5 20.kxf5 Bd8 21.iLd4
iLa3 22:~'al etc. The counterattack-
ing attempt 19 ... ~ g5 also involves
a definite risk: 20.f4 iVh5 21.liixd6!
kxdl (or 21 ... ttJxd6 22.Ud2 f6
23.h3) 22.ttJf5 iLg4 23.ttJxg7!
18.iLxf6 iVxf6 19.W1xf6 gxf6
20.l:'Iacl.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn 119

26.I:tcl JiLe6 27.<t>fl) 25.gdcl

~adS 26.gc7 d4 27.e4 BCS 2S.Wfl
b529.f4.

20 ... Wf8?! The existence of

doubled pawns creates problems
for Black in endings with various
combinations of pieces, requiring
22 .. ~.e2 .~.e6 23 •.1t..O gac8
him to play with particular accu-
24.0Je2 .t£,a3? The exchange of a
racy. The d5-pawn could have been
pair of rooks was in Black's interests
defended by 20 .... l.2.xg3 21.hxg3
-24 .. .llxcl 25.Uxcl Sle5! 26.Mdl
.~e6 22.Ilc7 b5 23.IIfcl klecS, or
hIcs. This 'nudging' of White leads
by relying on the drawing tenden-
to the loss of a pawn.
cies of opposite-colour bishops:
25J~c3! Jilb4 26Jhc8 ktxc8
20 .... ~.e6 21.l!Jf5 JiLxf5 22.Jlxf5
27.Q.Jf4. White has carried out his
21e5 23 .. ~g4 (or 23.IIcs+ IIxcs
plan. The d5-pawn cannot be de-
24 .. ~xcS Me7 25.Mdl llc7) 23 ...
fended .
.iJdS 24 .. ~.f3. However, in both
cases White would retain a serious
advantage.
21.IIfdl Jilg4? A loss of time.
This move merely assists White's
plan of attacking the d5-pawn by
playing his bishop to f3 (the ex-
change of the light-square bishops
is unfavourable for Black) and his
knight to f4. 21.. .i.xg3 22.hxg3
.lte6 23.l:tc7 ~e7 was more logical,
although here too White retains prac-
tical chances. For example: 24.MC3 27 .. J~c2 28.JiLxd5 Ag4 29.0
l"IeeS (24 ... ~cS 25.~xcS+ .ltxcS i.c5 30.l::Iel Ac8 31.';t>n i.a3
120
32.I:'l:e2 l::tc1+ 33.~f2 b6 34..ue4
.l.1.d7 3S.l':td2 fS 36.r!xd7 fxe4
37.btd2 SLb4 38.I'te2 exf3 39.gxf3
bS? A time-trouble oversight. After
39 ... SLd6 White would still have
had to work hard to convert his ex-
tra pawn.
40.lt'ld3. Black resigned.
MATULOVIC - BALASHOV
Teslic 1979
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS3.CiJd2 cS 4.l1Jgf3
tn c6 S.exdS exdS 6.sl bS .lit. d6
7. 0-0 C1lge7 8.dxcS 2t.xcS 9.111b3
.lit.d6 10.tnbd4 0-0 1l •.ue3 Wlc7
l2.h3 a6 13.2t.d3 tng6 14.l'tel ide8
IS.c3 SLd7 16J~Yc2 0JaS 17.~adl
ttJc4 18.2t.cl .\.1.cS.
19•.lit.fS! The exchange of the
light-square bishops is advanta-
geous to White, since the d5-pawn
becomes more vulnerable.
19 •• Jhe1+ 20.l'hel l:te8
21.l':tdl! An important moment.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
White avoids the seemingly advanta-
geous simplification of the position.
However, for a frontal attack on the
d5-pawn to be effective there have
to be at least two heavy pieces.
21. •.. ~xd4. The voluntary ex-
change of the dark-square bishop
may be considered a strategic mis-
take. 21...2t.xf5 22.l1Jxf5 tilce5!
was more logical, although after the
bishop goes to e3 it is not easy to
defend the d5-pawn. For example:
23.C[)xe5 ~xe5 24.2t.e3 JiLf8 (of
course, 24 ... 2t.xe3 25.ttJxe3 favours
White) 25.a4 l1Jf4 26.ttJg3 with the
threat of i..xf4, or 22 ... ~d7 23.b3
ttJce5 24.ttJxe5 Ihe5 25.ll.e3 SLf8
26.Cilg3 followed by ~d3.
22.CiJxd4 2t.xfS 23.t1lxfS CiJf4
24.b3 ttJb6 2S.i..e3! The abso-
lute control of the dark squares
makes it impossible to defend
the d5-pawn: both I£Wd2 and g3
are threatened. Black's attempt to
complicate the play merely has-
tens his defeat.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
2S ....~hc3 26.~xc3 ttJe2+
27.Wh2 Cilxc3 2s.IId3 d4 29.iL.xd4
CilcdS 30.Cilxg7 ge2 31.ttJfS hS
32.~.xb6! Cilxb6 33.I:i:d6, and
White won.
5.2. Exchange of the dark-square
bishop in French Defence
positions
In the French Defence l.e4 e6
2.d4 d5 with 3.Cild2 one has to be
prepared for play against an iso-
lated d5-pawn, if Black chooses the
Tarrasch variation 3 ... c5. In the re-
sulting positions a significant role
is played by Black's dark-square
bishop, which supports his initiative
on the kingside and in some cases
the d5-d4 advance. Therefore, in or-
der to neutralise the dynamic poten-
tial of the isolated d5-pawn, White
should aim for the exchange of this
bishop. We will examine some typi-
cal methods.
KARPOV - G.KUZMIN
Interzonal Tournament,
Leningrad 1973
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.£L)d2 cS
4.exdS exdS siiJ gf3 til c6 6 •.il bS
iL. d6 7.dxcS iL. xcS S.O-O ttJ ge7
9.ttJb3 ,ild6 10.iL.gS 0-0 1l.,ilh4
Wilc7.
121
12 •.~g3! A typical way of ex-
changing the dark-square bishops,
which weakens the c5- and e5-
squares adjacent to the d5-pawn and
strengthens White's control of the
d4 blockading point.
12 ••• iL. xg3. Black shouldn't
have hurried with this exchange;
12 ... iL.g4!? was better.
13.hxg3 2L.g4 14.1'1el MadS
IS.c3 ~b6 16..1L.d3 (threatening
17J!t.xh7+ Wxh7 18.ttJg5+) 16 •••
Cilg6 17:~c2 iL.xf3. The exchange
of this bishop is forced, as othelWise
White will gain firm possession of
the d4-point.
IS.gxf3 !Id6. Black's counter-
play is associated with d5-d4. How-
ever, the immediate 18 ... d4 did not
satisfy him because of 19.f4!, after
which the knight at g6 is restricted
by the f4- and g3-pawns and is un-
able to exert any serious influence
on events. All he can console him-
self with is 19 ... dxc3 20.bxc3, after
which the manoeuvrability of the
second knight is also restricted by
122
the c3-pawn. But perhaps Black no
longer had any other choice? Now
White denies him the last chance of
activity in the centre.
19.f4 !UdS 20.a3! h5 (if 20 ...
d4 there follows 21.c4) 2l.\!i g2.
White's plan includes playing his
knight to f3 and doubling rooks on
the e-fiJe.
21. .. h4 22.ge2 C1ifS 23.C1id2
Dh6 24.C1if3 hxg3. The opening of
the game favours White, since he
holds the initiative, but after 24 ...
h3+ 25.Wh2 the pawn would be cut
off from the remaining black forces
and would become easy booty.
25.fxg3 C1id7 26JIael WfS.
27.g4! White launches a decisive
offensive on the kingside, exploiting
the lack of harmony in the placing
of the black pieces.
27 ..• Wlic7 2S.g5 !:thS 29.'~g3!
The king supports the advance of its
own pawns!
29 .•. CDc5 30•.siL.f5 g6 31.b4
CDe4+. Both 31 ... gxf5 32.bxc5 Wlid7
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
33.l:th2 Wg7 34.tilh4 and 31 ... C1id7
32 ..siL.xg6 fxg6 33.~xg6 are bad for
Black.
32 •.iL xe4 dxe4 33. ~ xe4 Wg7
34.b5CDa535.W#e7! ~xe7 36.Yxe7
ktd3 37.M.c7 C1ib3 3S.'lt>g4 f(fS
39.lJee7. Black resigned.
BALASHOV - LPUTIAN
52nd USSR Championship,
Riga 1985
French Defence COg
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.C1id2 c5
4.01gf3 0lc6 5.exd5 exd5 6.<~<b5
.~d6 7.dxc5 .~xc5 S.O-O 0le7
9.01b3 .l2,d6 10JJel 0-0 lU~.g5
.f.i,g4 12 •. I:l.h4 h6.
13Jl1.g3! An exchanging ma-
noeuvre typical of the given posi-
tion.
13 .••.txg3 14.hxg3 CilfS
15.~d3 (with the threat of 16Jl.xc6
bxc6 17.lile5) 15 ... <~xf3 16J~hf3
(l6.gxf3, intending f3-f4, is also
interesting) 16 •• .eiJ fd4 17.eiJ xd4
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
0\xd4 18.~d3 ~b6. Black avoids
the heavy piece endgame after the
exchange of the knight, although
this was probably the lesser evil.
19.,~a4 :aad8 20.Uadl QJc6
(20 ... 0\e6 came into consideration)
21.,Jii.b3 d4. Black has not man-
aged to withstand the pressure on
the d5-pawn, but after moving to d4
it remains a target. In addition, the
bishop at b3 is activated.
22.Be4! Ild7 23.c3! 01a5? Af-
ter the loss of the pawn, Black's
game is doomed. The last chance
was 23 ... k'l:fd8 24.1ddel g6, and al-
though White's attack looks danger-
ous, there are still chances of a de-
fence. For example: 25.~d2 Wg7
26.11h4 g5 (after 26 ... h5 27J:hh5!
the attack is irresistible) 27.l'lhe4
~c5, 25.Me8+ Wh7 26.~f3 l:Ixe8
27Jhe8 ~g7 28.~g4, or 25.l:Ig4
<li f8 26. %H3 rt; g7.
24.l'=txd4 Ci'lxb3 25.lIxd7 0Jc5
26.l:'Id6 ~xb2 27.~c4, and White
won.
123
BOTVINNIK - BOLESLAVSKY
Match-Tournament for the Title of
Absolute USSR Champion,
Leningrad/Moscow 1941
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.li'ld2 c5 4.exd5
exd5 5.~b5+ QJc6 6.QJgf3 ~d6
7.0-0 t1\ge7 8.dxc5 ,1i.xc5 9.<1'lb3
,tl.b6.
In positions with an isolated d5-
pawn, Botvinnik thought it was im-
portant for Black to secure control of
the d4-point. This is the point of the
bishop retreat to b6, from where it
not only attacks a blockading piece
on d4, but also has the possibility of
supporting the d5-d4 advance.
10.iL.e3!? Nowadays this move
is made with the inclusion of I OJ::te I
0-0 and now 11.J(e3, not spoiling
the pawn structure.
10 ... ~xe3 1I.i.xc6+ bxc6.
After II.. .QJxc6 there would have
followed 12.l::Iel and if 12 ... d4
- 13.lDfxd4. But now Black ends
124
up with an isolated pawn pair (this
topic is covered in detail later).
12.fxe3 0-0 ( 12 ... Ji. g4 was
stronger) 13.~d2 ~b6 14.W#c3
ttbS lS.I:!abl I.'IeS.
16.1dfel. 'This Nimzowitsch-
style move - overprotection of the
e3-pawn - throws away a good 50%
of White's advantage. The obvious
16.lLlc5 I1Jf5 17.ktfel was the logi-
cal continuation. ' (Botvinnik)
16 ... CiJg6! Black plays his knight
to the better post e5.
17.ti'Jcs ~g4 lS.tLJd4 l'beS
19.b4l:tbdS 20.e4. 20.L!lde6 ~xe6
21.~xe5 came into consideration,
consolidating his grip on the dark
squares.
20 •.. dxe4 21.1'1xe4 as 22.a3.
After 22.~g3 f6 23.ldxg4 lLlxg4
24.~xg4 Black could have inter-
posed 24 ... h5!
22 ••• axb4 23.axb4 f6 24.Ubel
~ hS. Black should have exploited
the latent pin on the white king to
switch his bishop to fl- 24 ... ~h5!?
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
2S.Whl .~d7. Even now it was
not too late for 25 ... ~. h5!? 26. L!l de6
.itg6! (not 26 ... J:b8? because of
27.1'1xe5 fxe5 28.~xe5) with a de-
fensible position. Now, however,
Black loses a pawn.
26.l'bxd7 gxd7 27.~xc6 W'dS
2S.Cj)t3;gc729.L!lxeSfxeS30.~xeS+
~xeS 31J6xeS '@gS 32.BeS Bxc2
33.~xgS+ WxgS 34.kIbl, and White
obtained a won rook endgame.
KARPOV - VAGANIAN
Skopje 1976
French Defence COB
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.l1Jd2 cS 4.
exdS exdS S.L!lgf3 a6 6.dxcS ,\lxcS
7.C7Jb3 .~b6 S•. JiLd3 L!le7 9.0-0
li\bc6 10JJe1 1lg4 H.c3 h6 12.h3
.~.hS.
13.~e3! In the struggle for con-
trol of d4 it is important to exchange
the dark-square bishop.
13 ••• 0-0. The retreat 12 ... ~c7?
leads to serious positional conces-
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
sions after l3.g4! JiL.g6 14.JiL.xg6
fxg6 15.LtJc5.
14.. ~xb6 ~xb6 15jj'e2. The
queen makes way for the rook.
Black cannot exploit the queen's po-
sition by 15 ... I'!eS, since this rook is
inadequately defended.
15 ... IUd8 16.~ad1.
16 ••. a5. A standard way of
gaining counterplay on the queen-
side: Black aims not only to drive
away the knight, but also to weak-
en White's pawns. For example, if
17.~e3 there follows 17.. "~xe3
ISJ'he3 .S:;:,xf3 19.1:xf3 a420.0ld4
(20.t;'\d2 a3 2l.b3 d4) 20 ... t;'\xd4
21.cxd4 with an equal endgame.
17.. tLbl! White intends a re-
grouping of his pieces with the aim
of attacking the king, not forgetting
about control of the d4-point.
17 ••. ~xf3. 17 ... a4 was prema-
ture: IS.t;'\bd4 t;'\xd4 19.~xd4 LtJc6
20.kth4 ..IlI,xf3 21.~xf3, and Black's
kingside is inadequately defended
(21. .. Wxb2? 22.~f5 g6 23.~f6).
125
18"~xf3 a4 19.LtJd4 ~xb2
20.L1'lxc6 LtJxc6 21"~f5 g6 22Jif6
lId7. An attempt to cover the un-
protected king, since if 22 .. J::teS?!
there would have followed 23.~ xg6
fxg6 24.~xg6+ WfS 25"~xh6+
WgS 26.kIe6 with an irresistible at-
tack.
23 ..~ f5! An intuitive bishop
sacrifice, which Black decides not
to accept. Indeed, after 23 ... gxfS
24.nd3 f4 25"~xf4 White's attack
looks very dangerous, although Kar-
pov suggests the possibility of a de-
fence with 25 ... f6. Modem compu-
ter analysis shows that Black could
have held the position after 26Y~xf6
l:g7.
23 •.• Ue7 24.Mxe7 CJJxe7 25.
il.d3 LtJfS. If 25 ... WfS White wins
by 26.Mbl W'xa2 27.Mxb7 MeS
2S.JiL. xg6.
26.JiL.xfS gxfS 27.lcle1! ~xa2
28"~xh6. 2S.l:te3? is a false trail -
2S ... f4 29.~xf4 ~bl+ 30.'l!th2 a3!
31.l::tg3 ~g6!, and Black escapes.
126 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

28 .•• a3 29.'iYgS+ WfS 30.'!~#f6

Wg8 31.~xfS ~d2 32.11e7 rtfS
33.~g4+\t;h734.~eS~h63S.BhS
!la8 36.~fS+ <tJg7 37.11xh6 Wxh6
38.~f6+ Wh7 39.~xf7+ <#lh8
40.~xb7. Black resigned.

S.3. Piece attack

on the isolated pawn

On one occasion, after unsuc- In this position the problems of

cessfully attacking an isolated pawn,
.~.ent Larsen heatedly exclaimed:
'The blockade of an isolated pawn
is old-fashioned; it should be won,
not blockaded!' Of course, this is an
exaggeration, but in specific situa-
tions the strategy of a direct attack
has chances of success. Earlier we
examined methods of conducting a
frontal attack on the d5-pawn with
the heavy pieces in Karpov's games
with Korchnoi (Meran 1981) and
Spassky (Montreal 1979). We will
now consider the attack on the iso-
lated d5-pawn with the participation
of minor pieces.
defending the isolated d5-pawn are
aggravated by White's pressure on
the a-file. The absence of Black's
dark-square bishop makes his de-
fence an unpleasant task.
13.r!a4! It is important to take
control of the key d4-point.
13 .... \:J.e6 14.g4! This flank at-
tack has the aim of weakening
Black's defence of the d5-pawn.
14 •.. lild6 IS.f4 Ciide4 16.fS
Ciixc3 17.bxc3 ,~.d7 18.Bd4 hS. If
18 ... h6, then 19.c4! dxc4 20 .. &xc4
W#c7 21.~b3 with the threat of.~,a3.
19.9xhS Ciie4 20.~.d3 TIe8
21.~g4 ~b6.

BELIAVSKY -INKIOV
Olympiad, Thessaloniki 1988
Nimzo-Indian Defence E42

l.d4 Ciif6 2.c4 e6 3.Ciic3 .1.!,b4

4.e3 cS S.ciJe2 0-0 6.a3 cxd4
7.axb4 dxc3 8.11lxc3 dS 9.cxdS
exdS 10.Jl.e2 lLlc6 1l.bS Ciie7 12.
0-0 lilfS.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
22.c4! A decisive undermining
move, leading to the win of the d5-
pawn. If 22 . .. LiIf6 there follows an
attack on the king: 23.%Wg2 dxc4
24.h6 Lilh5 25 ..~.e2.
22 .•. B8C8 23JWg2 ~h6
24JlxdS Lilf6 2S.e4 ~xhS 26..ii.b2.
Black resigned.
BELIAVSKY - BAREEV
Munich 1994
French Defence COB
1.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.LiId2 cS 4.exdS
exdS S.. \!/' bS+ .tl. d7 6. ~ e2+ V!!i e7
7.\~.xd7+ Lilxd7 8.dxcS ~xe2+
9.LiIxe2l.1.xcS 10.LiIb3lU.b611.liLf4
0igf6 12.00-0 13.0-0-0 J"l:8c8.
A typical position with an isolat-
ed pawn has arisen. However, after
a routine approach with the block-
ade of the d4-point - l4.CiJbd4 g6
followed by I'tffl-e8 and CLJd7-e5 it
is not easy for White to get at the
d5-pawn. But it can be attacked im-
mediately.
127
14.Qlc3! l'!c4 IS.,l.1,g3 :tfc8 16.
Wbl!
16 ... d4. This advance is practi-
cally forced, but at d4 the pawn is
equally weak, which allows White to
attack it in combination with threats
to the rooks. It should be mentioned
that also after the passive 16 ... CLJ ffl
17.k!hel Lile6 (17 ... a6? 18 .. ~.e5
loses a pawn) 18 .. ~e5 Black cannot
avoid 18 ... d4, but here too White
begins chasing the rooks: 19.t;) b5!
Xhc2 20.LiId6 U8c6 21.CLJf5!
H6c4 22.ciid2 gc5 23.,Ud6 IIxb2+
(things are not changed by 23 ...
Hxd2 24.LiIe7+ Wh8 25.gxd2 Sl.a5
26 .. ~.xc5 ,tl..xd2 27.I!dl) 24.Wxb2
nf5 251!e5 Bxe5 26.1Lxe5, and
White again wins the d4-pawn.
17.ctJbS !'(xc2 18.CL\d6 ki:8c6
19.11Jf5! White is again 'in the saddle' !
Black is unable to defend against the
forks on e7 and d4. Thus if 19 ... I!6c4
there follows 20.LiId2 Mc5 21.CLJxd4,
while the move in the game leads to
the loss of the exchange.
128
19 ... Cild5 20.0Jbxd4 I:(xg2 21.
0Jxc6 bxc6 22.l:the1 CZJ7f6 23.tiJh4.
Black resigned. The only way to
avoid the loss of a second exchange
is by 23 ... gf2 24 ..1i.xf2 ,\lxf2, but
after 25.Cilf5 1i.xel 26.khel Wf8
27.k:Icl the c6-pawn is lost.
TOPALOV - LEKO
MoreliaiLinares 2006
Nimzo-Indian Defence E32
I.d4 Cilf6 2.c4 e6 3.Cilc3 ,1U,b4
4. ~ c2 0-0 5.a3 .~ xc3+ 6"~hc3 b6
7 ..'k g5 ,lil b7 S.li! f3 d6 9.Cild2 Cil bd7
10.f3 d5 1l.cxd5 exd5 12.e3 kteS
13•.~.e2l::rcSI4.0-0 ~e715 ..~b5 c6
16.j(a4 h6 17.j(xf6 Cilxf6 ISJUe1
b5 19•.1i.c2 c5 20..il.f5 kIc7 21.dxc5
l:Ixc5 22.'i:Vd4 a6.
White is finnly blocking the iso-
lated d5-pawn, but it is not easily at-
tacked, since Black has active coun-
terplay on the c- and e-files.
23.a4! White carries out the plan
of creating a second weakness: by
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
undennining the b5-pawn, he opens
the a-file for his rook.
23 ... bxa4 24.I:txa4 ktc6 25.b4
~e5. Black is forced to reckon with
the existence of a weak pawn at a6
and to ease the defence he exchang-
es the white queen, which is domi-
nating the position. The exchange of
knights would also not have eased
his problems: 25 ... %Wc7 26 .. ~,d3
0ld7 27.Cilb3 Cile5 28.Cilc5 0lxd3
29.~xd3 Itb6 30.~d4.
26.'~xe5 llxe5 27.,I1,d3 Ilb6.
Compensating for the pressure on
the a6-pawn with an attack on the
b4-pawn, but 27 ... rJ..e7!? 28.Wf2
Cild7 with the idea of Cile5 looks
more active.
2S.Wfl l1.cS 29.IIbl .~,f5. It
is useful for Black to exchange his
'bad' bishop.
30•. l.U.xf5 t!xf5.
31.ha5! White not only attacks
the d5-pawn, but also pins the rook
on f5, which will not be easy to bring
into play. 31 ... ne5? 32.CZJc4 will
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
not do, while after 31 ... l:thS 32.h3
~h4 33.f4 d4 (33 ... gS? 34.liJf3
bthS 3S.g4 l::txh3 36.Wg2) 34.exd4
kIxf4+ 3S.We3 gS 36.g3 l::te6+
37.Wd3l:If2 38.I:tfl ~xfl 39.lZJxfl
llb6 40.lZJe3 l':Ixb4 41.lZJfS Black
has to reckon with the d-pawn.
31. .. g6 32.We2 hS (preventing
g4) 33.g3 ~g7 34.h3 llld7 3S.g4
hxg4 36.hxg4 UeS 37.Wt2. The at-
tempt to win the dS-pawn - 37.f4
~ee6 38JhdS liJf6 39.l'.lgS lZJe4
40.lLlxe4 IIxe4 would have led to
a rook endgame with the pawns on
one wing, where Black's drawing
chances are obviously improved.
37 ••.11c6 38.IIb3 I:Ib6. 38 ...
ktc2 39.We2 CiJb6 40.Wd3 IIxd2+
41.Wxd2 Cflc4+ 42.Wd3 tDxaS
43.bxaS d4 44.exd4 l::txaS 4S.~c4
would have led to a favourable rook
endgame for White, since his d-pawn
is far more mobile than the a-pawn.
39.f4 IIee6.
40.gS! Now the dS-pawn IS
doomed.
129
40 •• Jled6 41.e4! gbS (41...
dxe4? 42,11Jc4) 42.l:txbS 8xbS
43.l:Id3 tDb6 44.lLlbl! White plays
his knight to c3, from where it will
attack two pawns, but in a critical
position Black finds counterplay.
44 •• J::tc6! 4S.exdS. The entry of
the rook could have been prevented by
playing 4S.~c3, but after 4S ... l::txc3
46.QJxc3 the knight endgame cannot
bewon46 ... dxe447.We3548.gxffi+
(48.'.i7d4 ~fl49.01xbS We7=) 48 ...
'.i7xf6 49.~xe4 gS SO.fxgS+ WxgS
Sl.QJxbS Wf6, and Black succeeds in
neutralising the b-pawn.
4s •• Jlc4 46.WtJ l'.lxb4 47.tiJd2
f6 48.CtJe4! The best way of support-
ing the d-pawn. After 48.gxf6+ W xf6
49.CtJe4+ WfS SO.QJg3+ Wf6 SI.d6
gS S2.fxgS+ WxgS S3.d7 tDxd7
White's resources are exhausted.
48 ••• fxgS49.tiJxgSWf6S0.Wg4
CtJc4 Sl.QJe4+ ~e7 S2.d6+ Wd8
S3. ~ gS lLl b2 S4.ge3.
S4 .• JId4?? Black cracks under
the prolonged stress, at a moment
130
when salvation was at hand - 54 ...
Wd7! 55.Wxg6 CiJc4 56.11d3 (56.
Yo Cilxd6 57.Cilxd6 Wxd6=) 56 ...
0Jxd6! 57.gxd6+ </I;;e7 58.gb6
iJxe4 59 ..lJb7+ Wd6.
55.Cilf6! l"Ixd6 56.ge8+ We7
57.ge2 Mdl 58.gxb2, and White
won with his extra knight.
5.4. Creation
of an isolated pawn pair
Another positional method in the
struggle against an isolated d5-pawn
is the transformation of one type of
advantage into another. One of the
most common methods is the ex-
change of the blockading d4-knight
on c6. In this case the d5-pawn is
no longer isolated, but if the result-
ing d5-c6 pawn pair can be block-
aded, this leads to the creation of a
so-called isolated pawn pair, which
is also weak and requires constant
defence. Along with the game Zuk-
ertort - Steinitz (1886), where this
method was employed against a
d4-pawn, it is useful to make the
acquaintance of a classic game from
the heritage of Akiba Rubinstein.
RUBINSTEIN - SALWE
Lodz 1908
Queen's Gambit D33
l.d4 d5 2.0.J0 e5 3.e4 e6 4.exd5
exd5 5.CiJe3 CiJf6 6.g3 t/')e6 7.~g2
exd4 8.CiJxd4 ~b6.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
Black has set up pressure on the
d4-point, but he is behind in devel-
opment, and also the position of the
queen at b6 gives White an addition-
al tempo for the occupation of the
c5-square.
9.CfJxe6! White creates an iso-
lated pawn pair d5-c6, since he suc-
ceeds in taking control of the c5-
square.
9 ... bxe6 10.0-0 .'f.J..e7. If 10 ...
.~e6, then II.e4! is strong, breaking
up the black centre after 11 ... Cilxe4
12.Cilxe4 dxe4 13 ..12.xe4.
1l.0Ja4 ~b5 12 ..12.e3 0-0
13.kIc1 .~g4 14.0! .§l.e6 15.. ~.e5
!"(fe8 16.I:tf2! White prepares to
switch the rook along the second
rank to the c-file.
16 ..• 0.Jd7 17..I1he7 l"rxe7
18.~d4! (not forgetting about
control of c5) 18 ••• I'l:ee8 19..i2.0
gee8 20.e3! ~b7 21.CJle5! Li'lxe5
22.Uxe5.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
The triumph of White's strategy,
begun with the exchange 9.0lxc6
- his pieces are blockading the dark
squares.
22 ... MC7. It was essential to pre-
vent the complete blockade of the
wing by playing 22 ... a5, since oth-
erwise Black is condemned to per-
ish by suffocation.
23.!!fc2 ~b6? It was not yet too
late for 23 ... a5, preventing b2-b4.
24.b4! a6 25.k!a5. 25.!!xd5 was
also possible, but White does not
hurry, since Black's queenside is
doomed.
25 ... 11bS 26.a3 IIa7 27J'Ixc6!
~xc6 2S.~xa7 MaS 29.~c5 ~b7
30.Wfl h5 31 ..1le2 g6 32.~d6 ~cS
33.k'!c5 "iYb7 34.h4 a5 35.b'Ic7 ~bS
36.b5 a4 37.b6 kta5 3S.b7. Black
resigned.
Boris Spas sky also found things
difficult when he decided to go in for
the creation of an isolated pawn pair
in a game with Tigran Petrosian.
131
PETROSIAN - SPASSKY
World Championship Match,
16th Game, Moscow 1969
Queen's Gambit D34
l.c4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tLlfJ c5
4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 CiJc6 6.ll.g2
0lf6 7.0-0 ,1i..e7 S.tLlc3 0-0 9.ll.g5
cxd4 10. Cf\xd4 h6 1l.ll.e3 .1i..g4
12.~a4! White activates his
queen and vacates the d I-square
for a rook.
The assessment of the position
depends on whether the activity of
the black pieces compensates for the
weakness of the d5-pawn.
12 .•• CiJa5 13.J:Iadl tilc4
14.ll.c1 ~cS! 15.~c2. It is unfa-
vourable for White to accept the
pawn sacrifice: 15.tLlxd5 tLlxd5
16.ll.xd5 tLlb6 17.~b3 t;)xd5
18:~ xd5 ll. f6 with strong pressure
(Bondarevsky).
15 .•• l:tdS 16.b3 0le5 17•.1i.. b2
~d7.
132 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

square bishop will be unable to take

part in the defence of the c6-pawn.
22 •• .cIle8. With the idea after f7-
f6 of bringing the h5-bishop into play.
Bad is 22 ... c5 23 .. lixf6 gxf6 24.g4
.~g6 25.f4, shutting in the bishop.
23.l::tct! ~c7 24..lieS! .~d6.
The exchange of the important dark-
square bishop is forced, since 24 ...
lild6 is bad in view of 25.g4 .~g6
26.f4! with the threat of27 .. l1.xd5.
18.f3! White is almmg to re- 2S.itxd6 tilxd6 26.!lfdl t;\bS.
strict the activity of the black pieces
(if 18 ... .Jii.e6? there follows 19.f4)
or force the transition into an end-
game.
18 ••• .Jii.hS (or 18 ... ith3
19.Ji.xh3 'iVxh3 20:~f5!) 19.'iVfS!
CiJc6. The exchange of queens can-
not be avoided (19 ... ~c7 20.CiJcb5
~b8 2 I. CiJe6!).
20Ji'xd7l:Ixd7.

In this position Petros ian could

have gained a decisive positional ad-
vantage by 27.g4 Ji.g6 28.f4, since
28 ... f6? fails to 29,khc6! Black also
loses after 28 ... .1i.e4 29.tL.xe4 dxe4
30.CiJc5, besieging the e4-pawn.
27.\t>f2?! f6 (bringing the bishop
into play) 28.e3 Ji.f7 29 ..1i.n CiJd6
30.l::tc3. 30.ii.a6! ~f8 31.1::tc5 We7
32.l::tc I was stronger.
21.CiJxc6! bxc6 22.CiJa4. After 30•••Wf8? Black should have
the blockade of the isolated pawn played 30 ... g5!, depriving the white
pair, White's advantage is obvious: knight ofthe f4-square, to which it could
in the near future Black's light- have been moved later in the game.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
31.C1Jc5 a5 (31... We7 32.t?\a6)
32.l'1dc1 Me7 33 ..ilh3 (with the
threat of 34.lild7+ followed by
3S.lilb6) 33 ..• Maa7 (33 ... it.e8
34.lile6+ 'ikif7 3S.liJd4) 34.a4? At
the decisive moment Petrosian daI-
lies and throws away the win, to
which he was close: after 34.ttJd3
~.e8 3s.tZlf4 Wf7 36Jhc6! .~.xc6
37.!"hc6 lilbS 38 ..fi.e6+.
34 ... g5! 35.IIdl Wg7 36.lild3
~.eS 37.lilcl f5 3S.lile2 g4! 39 ..fLg2
gxf3 40.. ilxf3 C1Je4+ 41.it.xe4 fxe4
42.C1Jd4 ttO+ 43.Wg2 I'If6 44.L1:n
l~xn 45.Wxn h5 46.Wg2 .~d7
47J'!c2 l':!a6 4S.g4 hxg4 49.~g3.
Draw.
PETROSIAN - BELIAVSKY
41 st USSR Championship,
Moscow 1973
English Opening A 13
l.c4 c5 2.b3 lil c6 3.. ~. b2 C1J f6
4.e3 e6 5.lilf3 d5 6.cxd5 exd5
7j"J.e2 a6 S.d4 cxd4 9.lilxd4 llb4+
10.~.c3 .iI.d6 1l.lild2 0-0 12.0-0
.:J..c7.
133
It is difficult for White to set up
pressure on the dS-pawn, whereas
the black pieces have great free-
dom of movement and, in particular,
13 ... ~ d6 is threatened. Therefore
White changes the character of the
position.
13.tiJxc6! bxc6 14.~c2! An im-
portant factor for the assessment of
the position is whether White can
control the cS-square or Black will
advance c6-cS, obtaining 'hanging
pawns', which are undoubtedly bet-
ter than an isolated pawn pair.
14 •. J~eS. In the event of 14 ...
~d6 IS.g3 cS 16.. ~xf6 gxf6 Black's
kings ide pawns are broken.
15...id4! White gains control of
the cS-square, after which his ad-
vantage is undisputed. The attack on
the white king is easily repulsed.
15 ... ~d6 16.g3 .~g4?! Passive
tactics with 16 ... kd7 should have
been preferred.
17.. liLxg4lilxg4IS.tiJf3! Black's
activity has come to a standstill, but
the weakness on c6 is very real.
IS ••• ~h6?!
134
19.~fS! Forcing the exchange
of queens, since 19 ... W h3? fails to
20.~xf7+ Wxf7 9.Cilg5+.
19 .. JWe6 20J:!he6 Ihe6. The
d5-c6 pawn pair is blockaded, and
Black's position is strategically
lost.
21.11acl. Beginning a siege of
the weaknesses.
21...f6 22.l'lc2 CileS 23.,\U,xeS!
In the given position the knight is a
more valuable piece than the bish-
op, since now it is hard for Black to
do anything to oppose the manoeu-
vre of the knight to c5.
23 ... ,~ xeS 24JIfc1 MCS
2s.ilcs (with the threat of
26.Mxd5) 2S .• J!d6 26.Mlc2
~n 27.Wfl We6 2S.Cilel d4
29.f4 d3 30.IId2 JU.b2 31.Mxd3
l:taS 32.l'Ixd6+ \t>xd6 33.Cild3
as 34.11c4 1l.a3 3S.lJa4 ,\i£.cs
36.0'ixcS WxcS 37.b4+ <;t>c4
3S.I:haS ~bS 39.a3 Wd3 40.Wfl
blb7 41.l'IcS l:a7 42Jhc6 ~xa3
43.Wf3. Black resigned.
AGZAMOV - GELLER
Sochi 1984
Queen's Gambit D55
l.d4 CiJf6 2.CiJf3 dS 3.c4 e6
4.Cilc3 ,\i£.e7 S..1LgS 0-0 6.e3 h6
7.1l.xf6 .1i.xf6 SJiYd2 cS 9.cxdS
cxd4 10.CiJxd4 exdS 1l ..1i.bS ~d6
12.0-0 lldS 13.11ac1lDc6.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
14.,~,xc6! bxc6 lS.Cila4! A typi-
cal manoeuvre.
lS ••. .Qd7 16liJcs rIdcS 17.b4!
With the blockade of the c5- and d4-
points, White's advantage is obvi-
ous.
17 ..• lL.eS lS.)"lc2 llcbS 19.htfc1
,'l1.I,dS 20.Cila6! (preventing 20 ... a5)
20 .• JJb6 21.We2 ~g6. 21. .. ~d7
22.a4 ,~c8 23.1Ixc6 .1Lxa6 24.b5
was no better for Black.
22.a3 .Qd7 23JWn ~f6 24.Cilcs
,UfS 2s.CilxfS ~xfS 26.0Jb3 lidS
27lZlaS d4 2s.Cilxc6 d3 29.Ild2
Md7 30.CilaS IIbd6 31.li~b3.
White's position is strategically
won.
31. •• gdS 32.Cilcs as 33.Cilb7
axb4 34.li:lxd6 ~xd6 3S.axb4
,~eS 36.IAcdl brg6 37.l:Ixd3 ~h7
3S.f4 ,iLc7 39.~f3 IIe6 40.g3 ,iLb6
41.'.t7hl. Black resigned.
In conclusion we will draw at-
tention to another way of attacking
the d5-c6 pawn pair.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn 135

NUNN - VAGANIAN
Baden 1980
French Defence COB

l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.0:'ld2 c5

4/ilgO a6 5.exd5 exd5 6.SLe2
cxd4 7.0-0 .~d6 S.kIe1l1Je7 9.Ciib3
0-0 10/iJbxd4 tilbc6 11.J:t"e3 Vliic7
12.h3 .tl.d7 13J~¥d2 Ciig6.

20 ... f6? This attempt to restrict

the dark-square bishop leads to an
irreparable weakening of the e6-
square. Black should have played
20 ... ~.e4! 2l.tilg5 .~ f5, inviting
White to reveal his further plans.
21..~c3! .0.,e4?! (21. .. :&.f8
22.Ciid4 .ild7 was more tena-
cious) 22/iJd4 axb4 23.axb4 Ciie5
24.1:has tInS 25.0 .l:t..g6 26.f4
14.Cilxc6! bxc6 15.c4! This un-
Ciic4 27:~e2! .i1.e4 2S.~g4! .~.f8
dennining move prevents the crea-
29.hhe4! Black resigned.
tion of hanging pawns at c5 and d5,
and with a subsequent c4-c5 it has
5.5. Creation
the aim of gaining space.
of a central pawn pair
15 ••• a5 16.a3 ii.e6 17.c5! The
outcome of the operation begun
Apart from the exchange of the
with 14.QJxc6 - White's dark-
blockading d4-knight on c6, in a
square bishop will now dominate
number of positions the exchange
on the long diagonal. In the event
of the knight for the bishop on e6
of 17 .cxd5 .2l xd5! the activity of
is also of strategic interest. In the
the bishop at d5 compensates for the
examples given below, the point of
weakness of the c6-pawn.
such an exchange is not to gain the
17 ....,\lLe7 IS.b4 IItbS 19.i..d4
advantage of the two bishops, but
0.,(520.S2.n.
mainly to weaken the light squares
on the kingside. The resulting cen-
tral pawn pair d5-e6 is practically
136
immobile and in the future it can
be put under attack by e2( e3 )-e4 or
in some cases by f4-fS, which may
again lead to the creation of an iso-
lated pawn. However, in contrast to
the isolated pawn pair dS-c6, with
accurate defence the central pawns
dS and e6 are more dynamic.
KARPOV - KASPAROV
World Championship Match,
4th Game, Moscow 1985
Queen's Gambit D55
l.d4 dS 2.e4 e6 3.Cile3 JL.e7
4.tilO Cilf6 S.jLgS h6 6.,1i.xf6
,~xf6 7.e3 0-0 S"~e2 LlJa6 9.l'ldl
eS 1O.dxeS ~ as 1l.exdS L1l xeS
12"~d2 ~dS13.t;Jd4 exdS 14..iie2
~b6 IS.0-0 ctJe4 16.~e2 ctJxe3
17.~xe3 jL,e6 IS.~e2 ~aeS
19"~bl :!:Ie7 20.l::td2l::tdeS.
In this position the blockading
strategy 21.g fd I does not work be-
cause of 21...JL.xd4 22.!hd4 gc2
23.1J4d2 ius. Therefore Karpov
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
transforms the position, creating
a central pawn pair, which gives
Black definite problems.
21.0lxe6! fxe6. The pawn on dS
is reinforced, but the weakness of
the light squares in Black's position
gives White a slight but stable ad-
vantage. It should be mentioned that
things are also not easy for Black if
he remains with an isolated pawn
- 21 ... ~xe6 22.l::tfdl.
22.JL.g4ge423.h3 ~e624"~d3
WhS. A loss of time. The immedi-
ate 24 ... as was simpler, when 2S.f4
flcs is not dangerous for Black.
2S.l'lfdl as 26.b3! (preventing
as-a4) 26 ...!Ic3 27"~e2 IIf8! It did
not make sense to exchange the ac-
tive rook: 27 ... l'lc I 28.~xc I ~xc 1+
29.\!i'h2 ~c6 30.g3 with a slight but
enduring advantage for White.
2S.,1i.hS! Switching the bishop to
an attacking diagonal.
2S ... bS. Black aims to reinforce
his outpost at c3. 28 ... ,f(d8 29.,1i.g6
jL,c7 30.,~.d3 ~d6 31.g3 ~eS
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
32. ~ g4 ~ f6 was also not bad, with
chances for both sides.
29•. !!i.g6 .!!I..dS 30.~d3 b4
31.~g4 ~eS.
32.e4! A thematic opening up of
the play in this type of position.
32 .... ~.gS. 32 ... J1L.b6!?, attack-
ing the f2-pawn, also came into con-
sideration.
33.l"tc2 ~lxc2? A positional
mistake. It was in Black's interests
for the exchange of rooks to take
place on c3 with the creation of a
passed pawn. Kasparov considers
the best to be 33 ... ~c8! 34.exd5
exd5 35:~xc8 IIfxc8 36.Me2 llcl
37.!!xcl ~xcl+ 38.Wh2 IIc8
39 .. ~g6 .'11.. f6 with a sound enough
position for Black.
34•.1i.xc2 ~c6 3S.~e2 ~cS
36.:kIf1 ~c3 37.exdS exdS 3S.~b1!
White plans to set up the queen +
bishop battery on the b l-h 7 diago-
nal.
3S ... ~d2 39,'~eS k'!dS? The
decisive mistake. 39 .... ~. f6! 40.%!H5
137
Wg8 41.~d3 ktd8 would have al-
lowed Black to put up a tough de-
fence (Kasparov).
40J-:~'fS WgS 41.~e6+ WhS 42.
~g6 WgS 43,'~e6+ WhS 44 •. iilfS!
~c3 4S.~g6 WgS 46.~e6+ WhS
47.,iilfS \t>gS 4S.g3 WfB 49.Wg2
~f6 SO.~h7 ~ti SI.h4 ~d2 S2.
Bdl. The inclusion of the rook in
the attack decides the outcome in
White's favour.
S2 ....fL,c3 s3.ldd3 lld6S4.l::tfJ!
We7 SSJWhS! d4 S6.~cS l:If6
S7.~cS+ 'lteS SS.I:If4 ~b7+ S9.
1le4+ Wti 60,'~c4+ WfB 61.~h7!
Uti 62.~e6 ~d7 63.~eS. Black
resigned.
SMYSLOV - KASPAROV
Final Candidates Match, 2nd Game,
Vilnius 1984
Queen's Gambit D34
l.d4 dS 2,CilfJ cS 3.c4 e6 4.cxdS
exdS S.g3 Cilf6 6..sfi.g2 iLe7 7.0-0
0-0 S.'1Jc3 Lilc6 9.iLgS cxd4 10.
<11xd4 h6 ll ..sie3 hIeS 12.83 i.e6
13.Whl ~d7.
138
14.tilxe6! fxe6 lS.f4! White's
plan is to play his dark-square bish-
op to g I and then open up the posi-
tion with e2-e4 or f4-f5, exploiting
his two bishops.
lS •. JledS! Black prepares to
meet the thematic move e2-e4. 15 ...
d4? 16.CLJe4 would have irreparably
weakened the light squares.
16•.agl kIaeS 17Jia4 WhS
lSJ'Iadl 'WIeS 19.e4!
19 ... d4! Black defends resource-
fully: 20 ...itxd4? fails to 20 ... b5.
20.CLJe2. After 20.e5 dxc3
21.exf6 ..itxf6 22.bxc3 'WIe7! Black
has sufficient counterplay.
20 ••• ..iteS 21."iVbS! After the
rash 21.b4?! d3! 22.0Jcl ..itxgl
23.'~ixgl d2 24.CiJb3 tZ\g4! 25.b5?
(25.l:I f3) 25 ... "iVh5 26.h3 t;J e3
Black wins the exchange.
21. .• .ab6 22.h3. If 22.e5?!
White has to reckon with Black's
counterplay after 22 ... CLJg4 23 ...itf3
CLJe3 24 ...itxe3 dxe3 25.l::td6 Itxd6
26.exd6 nd8 27 .nd I e5! etc. There-
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
fore White prevents this knight
thrust.
22 .•• eS.
23.fxeS?! An unfortunate ex-
change, ruining the fruits of White's
strategy. After 23 ..ti.h2! followed by
g3-g4 he would have retained the
better chances.
23 ... 0JxeS 24.~xeS+. Also
in the event of 24.tilxd4 ~xb5
25.CiJxb5 Iixdl 26.nxdl I'tc2 Black
has sufficient counterplay thanks to
the activity of his pieces.
24 ... MxeS 2S.CLJxd4 CLJe4 26.eS!
I:!xeS 27..axb7. 27.I;rcl 0le4!
28.'~h2 CLJed2 29.Ufdl lId8 leads
to unclear play.
27 ... Ite7 2s.Iic1! 01 xb2 29.
h\xe7 .axe7 30.li\e6 IIe2! 31.lild4
(31.0lxa7 0lh5!; 31.I:tf2 0le4!)
31..J~eS 32.0lf5! ..itb6! 33.0lxh6
:aaS 34•..itxb6 axb6 3S.li)fS MXaJ
36.Wh2 CLJe4 37.g4 Ua7 3S.ii..hl
liJeS 39.gS liJhS 40.Mel gaS
41.CLJd6. Draw.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
HJARTARSON -
ILLESCAS CORDOBA
Linares 1988
Queen's Gambit D34
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.CiJO c5
4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 til f6 6.,~ g2 lil. e7
7.0-00-0 S.tiIc3 I1'lc6 9.,~g5 cxd4
10.tiIxd4 h6 IU!i..e3 kteS 12.Bcl
~,g4 lJ.h3 ,t.l,e6 14.W!Vc2 ~d7.
15.tiJxe6 fxe6 16.!Ifdl. White
prepares the plan of f4, ,ilL. f2 followed
by e4 or f5 with the aim of opening
up the position, when his two bish-
ops will be especially strong.
16 ... lil.f8. Black prepares to meet
the e2-e4 attack on his central pawn
pair by supporting the e-pawn with
his rook. 16 .. J!ac8 17.f4 Jid6?
(l7 ... <~b4) 18.ii.f2~e719.e4,and
White gained an obvious advantage,
Marin - Petursson, Romania 1987.
17.f4 ~f7! Removing the queen
from the 'X-ray' attack of the rook
on dl.
lS.ii. f2 ttadS 19.e4.
139
19 ... d4! Black prevents the
opening up of the position.
20.Lilb5 e5! 21.fxe5 d3! Tactics
at the service of strategy - 22.I:Ixd3?
tilb4.
22.~c3 0Jxe5. After 22 .. l':Ixe5
23.tiIxa7 lhxe4 24.il.xe4 l:Ixe4
25.b'Ixd3 Black does not have suffi-
cient compensation for the lost pawn.
23.ii.d4 ~h5 24.ti~c7 l::1:e7
25.ii.xe5l:Ixe5. 25 .. .'~xe5 26.<1\d5
~xg3! was stronger, when Black
has excellent counterplay for the
sacrificed exchange.
26.MXd3 .1i..c5+ 27.\t'hl l:txd3
2S.~xd3 <1\xe4 29.\!th2 tlJf6
30.~c4+ Wh7 31.tiJd5 tlJxd5
32Ji· d3+! WhS 33.l::1:xc5 tlJe7 (33 ...
01e3 34.l'.!c8+ 1'Ie8 35.~d7 was also
insufficient) 34.!'Ic7 ~e2 35:~O
~xO 36.ii.xO tlJrs 37.l:lxb7 with
an extra pawn for White.
5.6. Transition into an endgame
To develop the theme of ex-
changing when playing against an
140
isolated pawn, it is useful to include
the method of exchanging queens
and transposing into a complicated
endgame. In this case the isolated
d5-pawn loses its dynamic strength
and may become a target, while the
absence of the queens allows other
pieces to exploit the weakness of
squares adjacent to it.
In the study of positions with an
isolated pawn, the transition into the
endgame is sometimes planned right
from the opening.
FLOHR - CAPABLANCA
Moscow 1935
Queen's Gambit D62
l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3.CZJe3 tilf6
4.CZJO CZJbd7 5.jLg5 jLe7 6.e3 0-0
7,'~e2 e5! The most effective way
of countering Rubinstein's set-up
with ~c2 and l::tdl in the Ortho-
dox Defence. However, it allows
White to transpose into an end-
game where Black has an isolated
d5-pawn.
S.exd5 tilxd5 9.jLxe7 ~xe7
I O.CZJxd5 exd5 1l.jLd3 exd4
12.CZJxd4 ~b4+ 13JWd2 tile5
14•.iii.b5 ~xd2+ 15.Wxd2 a6
16.JfL.d3 JfL.e6 17.gacl gfeS
ISJ:te2 ti'lxd3. Essentially a forced
exchange, since 19.!Ihcl followed
by b2-b4 was threatened.
19.cJJxd3 ttxe2 20.'It>xe2
WfB 21.~d2 l:teS 22.TJcl TJxcl
23.Wxcl.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
On the basis of a number of
games by Akiba Rubinstein, in the
1930s such an endgame with an
isolated d5-pawn and a knight at
d4 against a light-square bishop
was considered won for White. His
advantage comprises not only the
superiority of the knight over the
bishop, but also the fact that his
king can replace the knight on d4,
from where it will threaten both
wings.
Capablanca had to demonstrate.
virtuoso defensive technique (at
times finding the only moves) in or-
der to save the game.
23 ... We7 24.\t>d2 'It>d6 25.We3
b6! Black displays a subtle under-
standing of the endgame: he ar-
ranges his pawns on dark squares,
preventing the invasion of the king,
while the b5-square is controlled by
the bishop.
26.f4 .l&.d7 27.lilo f6! 2S.Wd4
a5! 29.t1ld2 .~eS 30.t1lbl .:&.e6
31.0'le3 \t?e6 32.a3 h6 33.g3.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
33 •.. hS!? Black gives up the f6-
g7-h6 pawn triangle in favour of the
f6-g6-h5 triangle, denying White
the prospect of playing his knight to
h4 with the threat of a bind by f4-
f5 (after which the knight would be
switched to f4 with the threat of an
invasion at e6).
34.b4! axb4. White was threatening
35.b5+ Wd6 36.5 1l.f7 37.11Je2 with
the switching of his knight to f4, and
therefore it is important to exchange a
pair of pawns, in order to have the pos-
sibility of attacking the b5-pawn.
3S.axb4 Wd6 36.bS g6 (fore-
stalling the threat of 37.f5) 37.Cila4
r:tJc7 38.ctJc3 Wd6.
141
39.fS! With this pawn sacrifice
White breaks up Black's defences.
39 ••• gxfS. Bad is 39 ... 1l.xf5
40.CZJxd5 1l.d7 41.l/:Jxf6 1l.xb5
42.lLld5, and White wins the b6-
pawn.
40.CZJe21l.d7.40 ... 1l.g8! 41.lLlf4
1l.f7 42.h3 1l.e8 was more accurate,
gaining tempo in anticipation of the
pawn endgame.
4t.CZJf4 1l.e8! Of course, not
41. .. 1l.xb5? 42.Lilxh5, when White
obtains a dangerous passed h-pawn.
42.CZJxdS 1l.xbS 43.CZJxb6. After
43.Cilxf6? 1l.e2 it is White who has
to fight for a draw.
43 .••.~c6 44.CZJc4+ 'lJe6
4s.li'lb21l.bS 46.lLldl1l.e2 47.l1Jf2
.an! 48.lZ'ld31l.xd3 49.'lJxd3.
49 ... WeS! The only move. Black
would have lost after 49 ... W d5
50.Wd2! We5 5l.Wel! We4 52.We2
Wd5 53.Wf3 We5 54.h3 Wd5
55.Wf4 We6 56.h4 (Grigoriev).
SO.We2. After 50.Wd2 Black
saves himself with the only move
142
SO ... h4! SI.gxh4 f4 S2.hS fxe3+
S3.\!txe3 We6 (Capablanca).
50 ... We4! 51.h3 (SI.Wfl h4
S2.gxh4 f4) 51. .. \t>d5 52.WO
We5. Draw.
LARSEN - PENROSE
Palma de Mallorca 1969
Nimzovich-Larsen Attack AOl
l.b3 c5 2..ab2 I1Jc6 3.c4 e6
4.0'\0 0'\f6 5.g3 iI...e7 6.ll.g2 0-0
7.0'\c3 d5 S.cxd5 exd5 9.ktc1 .5.iLe6
10.d4 ttcs 11.0-0 lleS 12.dxc5
.l!.Lxc5 13.tlla4 iL.e7 14.0'\c5 0'\d7
15.0'\xd7 ~xd7 16.~d2 ~dS
17.I.Ifdl .af6 IS.e3 Wlie7 19.h3
h6 20 ..~xf6 ~xf6 21.!!c3 .~.f5
22.l:Idc1 l:IcdS.
23.ltJd4! White carries out an
exchanging operation, based on the
threat of an invasion by his heavy
pieces on the queens ide.
23 •.. 0Jxd4 24.\'jxd4 ~xd4.
The exchange of queens is forced,
since after 24 .. .'~e6 2S.Wh2 Black
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
has no way of opposing the rook in-
vasion at c7.
25.exd4. The game has gone into
an endgame, where White's advan-
tage is determined by his control of
the c-file plus the weakness of the
dS-pawn.
25 ... "!de7 26.g4! By seizing space
on the kingside, White restricts the
range of the bishop.
26 .... ~.e6. Weaker was 26 ...
~.e4?! 27.f3 .1Lg6 28.llc7 I!ed7
29.t'txd7 Ilxd7 3o.IIc8+ Wh7
31.Wfl with advantage to White .
27.f4 f6 2S.Wfl .~ti 29.SLO
WfS.
30.a4! With a pawn attack on the
queens ide White aims to give Black
an additional pawn weakness, which
will help him to convert his advan-
tage.
30 ••. l:IdeS 31.a5 btd7 32.b4
Id:edS 33.iL.e2! The bishop is
switched to a more active position.
33 •.• il..eS 34.iL.d3 l':te7 35.l:IcS
UxcS 36.thcs ~ti 37.b5! White
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
has carried out his plan - 38.IIa8 is
threatened.
37 ... b6 3S.axb6 axb6 39.MbS
ne6 40.,~,g6+ 'it'fB 41.h4.
Zugzwang! Black has no useful
moves.
41. .• ge7 42.hS lle6 43.WfJ
He7 44.gS. Black resigned.
KASPAROV - KHARITONOV
55th USSR Championship,
Moscow 1988
French Defence COB
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.t;ld2 cS
4.t;\gfJ t;\f6 S.exdS exdS 6..gbS+
";':,d7 7.,)ixd7+ t;\bxd7 S.O-O ,'lLe7
9.dxcS t;\xcS 10.t;\d4 't!Yd7 11.~fJ
0-0 12.t;\2b3 t;\ce4.
13.~fS. White offers the ex-
change of queens, planning a piece
attack on the isolated dS-pawn.
13 •. J'tfcS. In Rublevsky -
Bareev, St. Petersburg 1998, Black
avoided the exchange by 13 ...
~d8!? 14.,lZLf4 g6 15.~h3 IIe8
143
I 6.I.!ad I ,~d6, but a battle did not
ensue - here a draw was agreed.
14.Uel 2LfB. In the spirit of the
. . was 14 .. .,'il,
posltton t d8 l•• . h the
? WIt
switching of the bishop to b6, from
where it puts pressure on d4.
IS.c3 ~xfS. 15 ... t;\d6! was
stronger, transferring the knight to
c4.
16.t;\xfS g6 17.t;\e3. White
begins a combined attack on the
dS-pawn, in a situation where the
black pieces are insufficiently well
coordinated to organise counter-
play.
17 •.. IIeS lS.l'ldl Ci'\cS?! The
d5-pawn should have been support-
ed by 18 .. J:tad8, although even
here after 19.t;\c2 tnc5 20.kgS!
t;\ce4 2 L!.le3 White has the ad-
vantage.
19.94! A typical idea. By the ad-
vance of the wing pawn White ex-
poses the weakness of the dS-pawn,
by threatening to drive back its de-
fender.
144
19 ... h6 20.h4! In the event of
20.liJxdS ttJxdS 21.IIxdS IIel+
22.Wg2 ttJxb3 23.axb3 as Black has
active counterplay for the pawn.
20 •.. liJxb3?! Black goes along
with White's exchanging strategy.
He should have aimed for activity:
20 ... l::te4! 21.gS (21.0 :ae6) 21...
ttlhS! 22.CiJxdSl:1:xh4 23.gxh4 t/le6
(Kasparov).
21.axb3 JicS. Here 21 ... l:Ie4 is
parried by 22.!Ia4.
22.gS hxgS 23.hxgS l'f)e4
24.ttJg4! White strengthens his
position and intends to drive back
Black's only active piece - his knight
on e4. He does not hurry to capture
the pawn, as after 24.l:1:xdS?! MadS
2S.l:IxdS lIxdS Black has good
compensation.
24 ••• Jib6 2S.Wg2 Wg7 26.Jif4
lIadS 27.0 ttJcS 2S.b4! After the
impulsive 2S.JieS+ lIxeS!? 29.
<1lxeS ttJxb3 Black could still have
put up some resistance, but now he
comes under a total bind.
2S ••• QJb3 29.l::ta3 ~e2+
30.\tlg3 thb2 31.c4! !:teS 32.cS
.1t.dS 33Jha7 :ctee2 34.l:IxdS Jie7
3S.:ctxb7. Black resigned.
POLUGAEVSKY - A.ZAITSEV
Vladimir 1969
Queen's Gambit D34
1.c4 e6 2.g3 tiJf6 3.i.g2 dS
4.L1J0 Jie7 S.O-O cS 6.cxdS exdS
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
7.d4 ttJc6 S.dxcS .1.i.I..xcS 9...agS i.e7
10.lhc3 0-0 1I.nel .~.e6 12.t/ld4
CiJxd4 13"~xd4 h6 14.. ~e3 ~aS
1S.l:1: fd 1 IUdS.
A routine approach to the posi-
tion suggests 16.~d3 followed by
.~.d4, retaining a small positional
advantage. However, the particular
features of the position, in which
White's pieces are trained on the
queenside, allow him to provoke an
advantageous exchange of queens,
after which the dS-pawn loses its
dynamic strength and becomes a
weakness.
16"~a4! 'iYxa4 17.l1Jxa4 b6
(preventing IS.ttJcS) lS.ttJc3 lId7
19.tiJbS! By playing his knight to
the d4 blockading position White
denies Black any counterplay.
19 •. JladS 20.b3 ttJeS 21.ttJd4
Jif6 22.h3. White restricts the mo-
bility of Black's light-square bish-
op.
22 •• .liJd6 23.g4 iLxd4 24.
iLxd4.
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn 145

lay allows the knight to come into

play.
33 ••. b5! 34.'it'fl t1edS 35.I:td4
bxa4 36.bxa4. 36.Iha4!? d4
37.gxd4 Mxd4 38.exd4 CtJb5
39.I:1:c6 I1lxd4 40.~xh6 I1lxb3
41.siL.e5 was more energetic.
36 ... 8c4 37.We2 siL.e6 3S.siL.g3
Ub7?? 39J'Idxc4. Black resigned.

BACROT-BOLOGAN
White's advantage is undisputed: Poikovsky 2005
Black has no useful moves, whereas Queen's Gambit D37
White can strengthen his position by
advancing his pawns. 1.d4 l1Jf6 2.c4 e6 3.813 d5
24 •.. f5. This attempt to destabi- 4.l1lc3 §i.e7 5"~c2 0-0 6.cxd5 exd5
lise the position merely widens the 7.. ~g5 c5 S.dxc5 iYa5 9.e3 CtJc6
scope of the dark-square bishop, 10.,lU.b5 Cilb4. Black avoids the cre-
which should have been restricted ation of an isolated pawn pair after
by 24 ... f6, intending ,'1Lfl. 10 ... a6 I L~xc6 bxc6 12.0-0 iYxc5
25.13 0lb5 26.e3 (if 26 ..lilb2, 13.l"Iacl.
then 26 ... d4) 26 ••• ~fl. The lesser
evil was 26 .. ,tZJxd4 27.I:txd4, de-
priving White of the advantage of
the two bishops.
27.iLb2 fxg4. In the event of
27 ... d4 28.gxf5 ..IiLxf5 29.e4 .liLe6
30 .. ~ fI the power of the bishops is
felt.
2S.fxg4 WgS 29.,~e5! A strik-
ing manoeuvre, which is worth re-
membering. The bishop restricts the
scope of the knight.
29 ..• siu7 30.a4 geS 31.siL.f4 1l.iYa4! White forces the ex-
g5 32 .. ~.h2 l1Ja3 33J!c3?! White change of queens, after which the
had two ways of implementing his game goes from the opening into an
strategy: 33.l::rd3 with the idea of endgame, where the d5-pawn be-
b3-b4. and 33.e4 d4 34.e5. The de- comes a weakness.
146
11 ••• ~ xa4 12.si. xa4 til d3+
13.We2tilxcS 14.,~c2 ,~e61S.tild4
;gac8 16.l:Iacl g6. Black takes con-
trol of the f5-point, the weakness of
which is felt in the event of 16 ... h6
17 .,~ h4 g5 18 ..it. g3 t;l fe4 I 9.tilxe4
tilxe4 20j~,e5 ,~d7 21.0 tild6
22.Slxd6 Jlxd6 23 ..ltf5.
17.Hhdl t'!fd8.
18.JU.bl! The d5-pawn is secure-
ly blockaded, and White includes his
bishop in the attack on it, by switch-
ing it to a2.
18 .•• a6 19.a3 Wg7 20.Jla2 h6
21.JU.h4 gS 22.~g3 Cflce4 23.tilxe4
tilxe4 24.JU.c7! Nothing significant
is promised by the creation of a cen-
tral pawn pair - 24.tilxe6+ fxe6,
since after 25.,~e5+~, f6 Black ex-
changes a pair of bishops, simplify-
ing the position.
24 •• J'Ie8 2S.gc2 ~f6. It
was bad to play either 25 ... jLd6
26.~dcl '.tf6 27.13 hlxc7 28.11xc7
,rJi..xc7 29.1hc7 QJd6 30.tilxe6 fxe6
31.tId7, when Black loses a pawn, or
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
25 ... ~c5 26.tilxe6+ fxe6 27.\i,e5+
'.tlg628.11dcl.
26.Cilxe6+. Now, when the dark-
square bishop can be retained, it is
logical to create a central pawn pair,
which can be put under attack.
26 ... fxe6 27.!1:dcl g4 (f2-13 was
threatened) 28.13 gxf3+ 29.gxf3
tilgS.
30.f4?! White weakens the e4-
square, which, however, Black fails
to exploit. In the spirit of the posi-
tion was 30.,ad6 l'Jxc2+ 31 Jhc2
:ad8 32.Qg3 Cilf7 33.b4 Ild7 and
now the undennining move 34.e4!,
by which White emphasises the
strength of his two bishops. For
example: 34 ... h5 35.exd5 exd5
36.lIc7 lIxc7 37.§L.xc7 d4 38.~.d5
or 34 ... dxe4 35.fxe4 e5 36 ..ae6
ile7 37.~.d5 tiJg5 38.BC8, and in
both variations White's advantage is
obvious.
30 ... l1ln?! 30 ... Lfle4 suggests
itself, but in the variation 31.f5 Wf7
32.fxe6+ Wxe6 33.1'tdl Black ap-
Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn
parently overlooked the possibility
of33 ... l:'!ed8!
31.f5 exf5?! More tenacious
was 31...Ci1d8 32.i.xd8 l::l:cxd8
33.MC7+ WfS (33 ... ~e7 34.fxe6)
34.fxe6 kIxe6 35.~fl (the immedi-
ate 35.Ihb7 is also possible) 35 ...
<J;,>e8 36.!:txb7, when Black at least
obtains opposite-colour bishops in
return for the pawn.
32.. llxdS J!LgS 33 •.ftb6 I:txc2+
34Jhc2 Cild6 3S.WfJ .~f6. Things
are also difficult after 35 .. .';t>g6
36 .. ~d4! liJb5 37 ..llc5 liJd6 38.b4
!1e5.
147
36.~ cS lil e4 37•.1J. b4 Qj gS+
38.Wfl b6? Now Black comes un-
der a mortal rook pin. His last chance
was the activation of his forces by
38 ... liJh3+ 39.'ltifl Uxe3 40.2lxb7
liJg5, for example: 4Ucig2 kth3
42.i.xa6 i.e5 43.i.c4, and the pair
of outside passed pawns should de-
cide the game (Bologan).
39.MC7+ <;t>g6 40.h4 liJe6.
40 ... liJe4+ 41.Wf3 ~d8 (41 .. J:te5
42.~f7+) 42.ktc6+ lflf6 43.i.c3
also fails to save Black.
41.gc6 as 42.i.c3 i.xh4+ 43.
\!tfJ 'tJf7 44.e4! Black resigned.
 Chapter 6

Dynamic potential
of the d5-pawn

In the mid-20th century the preva- active positions, combining threats

lent opinion was that you could allow
yourself an isolated pawn, only if you
had a lead in development. This cau-
tion was removed by the Petrosian -
Spassky 1969 World Championship
Match, in which the challenger em-
ployed the Tarrasch Defence to the
Queen's Gambit with Black in five
games and achieved a positive result
(--0 =4 + I ). After this match the number
of supporters of the isolated pawn in
Black's position increased considerably.
In the examples examined in Chap-
ter I, Black went along with White by
not objecting to reduction in the mate-
rial. However, the strategy of playing
with an isolated pawn envisages not a
passive striving for a draw, but above
all the exploitation of its dynamic po-
tential to create active piece play and,
if possible, the d5-d4 breakthrough.
on the kingside with the possibil-
ity of counterplay on the queens ide.
Pressure on the d4 blockading point
is important, tying White down by
the threat of the d5-d4 breakthrough.
PETROSIAN - SPASSKY
World Championship Match,
4th Game, Moscow 1969
Queen's Gambit D34
I.c4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.t1lc3 cS
4.cxdS exdS S.0if3 0ic6 6.g3 0if6
7.. ~.g2 .~.e7 8.0-0 0-0 9 .. ~.gS cxd4
10.t1lxd4 h6 11..lke3 .11:.g4 (in re-
cent times 12 .. .!~e8 was preferred)
12.0\b3 .~.e6 13.nc1 !:e8.

6.1. Active piece play for Black

The control by the isolated d5-

pawn of the central e4- and c4-points
allows Black to develop his pieces in
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
Black has completed his develop-
ment, and although for the moment
the e-file is blocked by the bishops,
this is only a temporary phenome-
non. For example, if 14.ttJc5 there
can follow 14 .. .Shc5 15.2L.xc5
l1le4 with active play for Black.
14.I!el. A prophylactic move,
against the threat of~d7 and 2L.h3.
After 14.0lb5, which was played
in the 2nd game of the match, there
followed 14 ... ~d7 15.'1Jbd4 ~h3
16.Cilxc6 bxc6 17:~d3 il.xg2
18.\8ixg2 a5! with good play for
Black.
14 .. J/iHd7 15.. lii.e5! (the ex-
change of the dark-square bishops
is advantageous to White) 15 ...
llae8 16..llxe7 ~xe7 17.e3 I'Ied8
18.~e2.
18 ... 2L.g4! 'There was no point
in Black relieving himself of his
isolated pawn by 18 ... d4. You don't
play the Tarrasch Defence, in order
to be thinking about the weakness
of the isolated d5-pawn! Consist-
149
ent play by Black should be aimed
in the first instance at exploiting its
strength.' (Bondarevsky)
19.0 (l9.~fl l1Je4) 19••.
2l.f5 20.Medl ttJe5 21.liJd4 2l.g6
22.2l.h3.
22 ••. Ue4!? A sharp move; 22 ...
;!!tb8 would have led to quiet play.
23.g4. If 23.f4 there could
have followed 23 ... 2l.h5 24:~fl
0Jc6! 25.g4 ttJxg4 26.0lxd5 IIxd5
27.~xc4 ~h4! 28.2l.xg4 ~xg4+
29.Whl l:txd4 with a guaranteed
perpetual check.
23 •. JJb4 24.b3 ttJe6 25.~d2
'lb6 26.l1Jee2?! 26.ttJa4 Ila6
27.2l.fl ttJxd4 28.exd4 was correct.
26...il.h7 27.2l.g2 'le8 28.ttJg3
LL\xd4 29.exd4l:Ie6 30.Hxe6 ~xe6
31.Il:ct 2l.g6 32.2l.fl? 32.~t2!
would have consolidated the posi-
tion. Now Black seizes the initia-
tive.
32 ••.ttJh7 33.~f4 ttJf8 34.~e5
(34:.e5! was stronger) 34... 2l.bl!
35.84 ttJg6 36.~d2 ~f6 37.Wfl
ISO
t/lf4 3S.aS .liL.d3! 39.t/lfS ~gS!
40.t/le3 ~h4+ 41.Wgl~,xfl.
White resigned. After 42.t/lxfl Ye2
he has no defence.
KARPOV - CHANDLER
Bath 1983
Queen's Gambit D32
1.c4 e6 2.t/lc3 dS 3.d4 cS 4.e3
t/lf6 S.t/lO 0Jc6 6.cxdS exdS
7.,\ibS ,~,d6 S.dxcS ,1lxcs 9.0-0 0-0
10.b3 ,f.l,g4 1l.,\1[.b2 l'lcs 12.,~,e2
,~,d6.
A typical manoeuvre in this
structure. Black switches his bishop
to the b8-h2 diagonal, planning an
attack on the kingside.
13.tiJbS. White's strategy is
aimed at firm control of the d4-point.
After the exchange of the light-
square bishops: l3.Mcl ,liL,b8 14.h3
,i!LhS IS.lLlh4 ~d6 16.g3 ,fLxe2
17.0lxe2 gfd8 18.lLld4liJeS Black
does not experience any problems,
Zviagintsev - Lutz, Essen 2002.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
13 •.. ,\ibS 14J!cl XXeS lSJWd3.
If IS.lil bd4 there also follows
IS ... t/le4. For example, the game
Sunye Neto - Kasparov, Graz 1981,
continued 16.h3 ,~,xf3 l7.0lxf3
~d6 18.WiNd3 0lgS 19.f(fdl j;"(cd8
20.WfI CZle4 with excellent play for
Black.
lS .•••t/le4 16.t/lbd4 ~d6 17.g3
hS. A sharp move. 17 ... ~ f6 with
the threat of 18 ... ,&xf3 was in the
spirit of the position.
lS.t/lxc6. This relieves Black of
the problem of his isolated pawn.
The immediate 18.t/lh4!? was
stronger.
lS ••• bxc619.t/lh4,Jih320.Iifdl
~h6 2U~.O.
21. •• gS! Black goes onto the of-
fensive.
22.t/lg2 h4 23JkYe2 .s~I.fS 24.ii.d4
hxg3 2S.fxg3 l':e6. 2S ... .liL.d6 26.11fl
cS was also possible, but Black is
carried away by his attack on the
king.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
26.Yn ~h3 27.tilel g4.
28 ..s1Lg2? White should have re-
conciled himself to 28 .. ~.xe4 Jil.xe4
28.'</-'~f2 f5 and an inferior position,
since now Black could have con-
cluded the game with a spectacu-
lar queen sacrifice - 28 .. :~xh2+!!
29.Wxh2 .:1lxg3 30.~a6 .:1le2+ with
a mating attack. But Black commit-
ted an irreparable mistake, disrupt-
ing the logical course of the game.
28 ... tilxg3?? 29.hxg3 ~xg3 30.
ExfS ~h4 31..s1LxdS lJh6 32.~g2
}1c7 33.lDo ~h3 34.IIgs+ 'r!ifS
3S.~.g7+ '.t>e8 36..s:t.xh6. Black re-
signed.
NEUKIRCH - UHLMANN
East German Championship,
Potsdam 1974
French Defence C09
1.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.0Jd2 cS 4.exdS
exdS S.~bS+ tilc6 6.liJgf3 .td6
7.0-0 cxd4 8.tilb3 tDge7 9.liJbxd4
0-0 I 0..,Ii/. gS VJIi c7 lI.h3.
151
II. .. f6! Wolfgang Uhlmann is
one of the most devoted support-
ers of the French Defence - against
l.e4 he has invariably replied I ...
e6. Naturally, he is also a great ex-
pert on this type of position. There-
fore this not altogether typical
weakening of the e6-square should
be regarded as a strictly concrete
measure. In view of White's pawn
being at h3, he cannot exchange the
dark-square bishops by .1l.h4-g3-d6.
At the same time, the weakness of
the e6-square is insignificant, and
Black gains the opportunity to cen-
tralise his knight at e5, from where
it controls c4.
12•. ~e3 .:1leS 13.b3 (prevent-
ing tile5-c4) 13 ... a6 14.~e2 iLd7
IS:&d2 bS 16.I:!adl Wh8 17.lDel.
With the idea of driving away the
knight by 18.f4.
17 ... llJSg6! Black neutralises
White's intentions, threatening if
18.f4 to play 18 ... f5 followed by
the transfer of a knight to e4 (liJe7-
g8-f6-e4).
152
1S.CiJd3 G! The white pieces
are huddled together on the central
files and are hindering one another,
which allows Black to launch an of-
fensive.
19.iL.g5 f4 20..siLxe7 iL.xe7
21.SL g4 ~ f6 22.iL. xd7 .siL xd4
23.iL.g4 iL.c3 24Jj'e2 f3! 25.~e3
XlaeS 26:~c5 ~xc5 27.t!lxc5 fxg2
2S.Wxg2 h5 29.iL.d7 t!lf4+ 30.\t>g1
I'Ie7. White resigned.
SCHMID - PORTISCH
Olympiad, Nice 1974
French Defence C09
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.tDd2 c5
4.CiIgf3 LLlc6 5.exd5 exd5 6.SLb5
Jid6 7.dxc5 iL.xc5 s.o-o CiJge7
9.CiJb3 .~d6 10.Jig5 0-0 11 •.~h4
iL.g4 12.iL.e2 kleS 13JIe1 ~b6
14.CiJfd4 iL.xe2 15.Ihe2.
15 ..• iL.e5! Exploiting the power
of his dark-square bishop, Black
provokes a crisis on the d4 blockad-
ing point.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
16.LLlxc6. A forced exchange,
since 16.11d2 LLlxd4 17.CiJxd4
txd4 18.Bxd4 CiJf5 19.k1:f4 t!lxh4
2o.l:hh4 %Wxb2 leads to the loss of
a pawn. If 16.c3 there follows 16 ...
.txd4.
16 ••• t!lxc6 17.c3 a5! The ad-
vance of the a-pawn is an important
device in the attack on the queen-
side. If 18.~xd5? there follows
18 ... a4 19.CiJc5 ~b5 with the threat
ofga8-a5.
1s.IIb1 a4 19.t!ld2 ~b5!
20.SL g3 iL. f6 (avoiding the exchange
of the important bishop) 21JheS+
MxeS 22:~n ~c5! 23.I!e1.
23 ••• l'IdS! Black avoids ex-
changes, since his pieces are much
the more active. The rook may
be able to aid the d5-d4 break-
through.
24.a3 h6 25:~d3 ~b6 26:~c2
~b5 27.§i.c7 !Ics 2S.Jif4 CiJd4!
29:~'d1 QJe6 30.~g4 h5 31.~G
I:teS 32.t!lf3 ~xb2 and Black con-
verted his advantage into a win.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
For many years Rafael Vaganian
has been famed as an expert on the
French Defence, and his games are
especially worthy of study.
PSAKHIS - VAGANIAN
Moscow 1981
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.CiJd2 c5
4.exd5 exd5 5.CiJgt3 CiJc6 6.Si.b5
.~d6 7.dxc5 lLxc5 s.o-o tiJge7
9.t1:)b3 ,\td6 10.:el 0-0 1l.Si.g5
,~g4 12.,\te2 ideS 13.c3 h6 14•.t£.h4
Wb6.
By activating his queen, Black
not only takes control of the im-
portant d4 blockading point, but if
15.~g3 he has prepared 15 ... Si.xg3
18.hxg3 CiJ f5 with the threat of
Ciixg3.
15.~xe7. White exchanges his
bishop in the hope of further simpli-
fication after 15 ... CiJxe7 16.CiJfd4.
More logical was the immediate
15.CiJfd4 lLxe2 (l5 ... .id7 16.i.g3
153
Si.xg3 17.hxg3 l'1Jg6, intending
CiJge5, is also possible) 16.Uxe2
l'1Jg6 17.Si.g3 CZlxd4 18.CiJxd4 J:te4
with an equal game, A.Rodriguez
- Vaganian, Biel Interzonal 1985.
15.. Jhe7! 16..~'hd5 UaeS
17"~d2 a5! Black has gained a
serious initiative for the sacrificed
pawn.
IS.h3 (if 18.CZlbd4?!, then 18 ...
,~.c5! is unpleasant) IS•••Si.g3!
A picturesque position - the
culmination of Black's attack!
The capture on f2 is threatened,
and 19.5i. d I? does not defend
against this: 19 .. .l:Ixel+ 20.CiJxel
,~xf2+!
19.CiJbd4 lLxt3 20•.in! The
only move; if 20 ..ixf3?, then 20 ...
CiJxd4 2l.cxd4 ~xb2!.
20•••.ixf2+. Black relieves the
situation, now leaving White with
the problem of an isolated pawn.
But, apparently, better chances were
offered by 20 ... l:Ixe I 21.l:he I the I
22.~xel CiJxd4 23:~e8+ 'St'h7
154
24.,\lLd3+ f5 25.cxd4 ,\lLxf2+ 26.'l!tfl
,~.xd4 27.gxf3 ~c5.
21.<;$}xfl Cilxd4 22.cxd4 ,ild5
23.hlxe7 kixe7 24.b3 ~e4 25.I'Idl
~f6+ 26.Wgl b6 27.,5iLc4. With
difficulty White has managed to
maintain the balance.
27 .. J!#d6 28.~d3 g6 29.a4
~g7 30.,~xd5 ~xd5 31.~c4
~d6 32.~c3 ~d5 33.~c4 ~d6.
Draw.
A.SOKOLOV - VAGANIAN
Candidates Tournament,
Montpellier 1985
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Cild2 c5
4.exd5 exd5 5.CilgtJ tilc6 6.,1.Lb5
.lii..d6 7.0-0 cxd4 8.Cilb3 Cile7 9.
tZJ bxd4 0-0 10.c3 ,~g4 11. ~ a4
.lii..h5 12.I:l:el ~c7 13.,~fl.
White has gained control of d4,
but the active placing of Black's
pieces enables him to develop en-
ergetic counterplay, based on the
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
d5-pawn's control of the important
central squares e4 and c4.
13 ..•a6! Defending against
14.CilbS. It was risky to play 13 ...
t;Jxd4?! 14.Cilxd4 ,t.i,xh2+ IS.Whl,
when Black has to reckon with
the threat of C;jd4-bS (ls ... ,ild6?
16.tZJbS ~d7 17.~h4! .~g6
18.Cilxd6).
14.g3 <1\ a5. The knight is switched
to a more active position at c4.
15.Cilh4 Cilc4 16.%Vc2. A pair of
minor pieces should have been ex-
changed - 16.LZl fS CilxfS 17.CilxfS.
16.• Jlfe8 17.,\1L,g5 Cilc6 (attack-
ing the key blockading square d4)
18.C!\dfS ,~,f8 19.tile3 WHa5! With
the idea after 20 ..ill.,g2 of carrying
out the dS-d4 breakthrough - 20 ...
Cilxe3 21.,ilxe3 d4 22.cxd4 <1\xd4!
20.M?! Cilxe3 21..llxe3 ~d8.
It is hard for White to fight for the
d4-point, since the bishop at hS pre-
vents his rook from going to d 1, and
at the same time the knight at h4 is
out of play.
22 ..1l.g2.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
22 •..d4! The opening of the posi-
tion leads to a real advantage thanks
to the two active bishops.
23 ..!?i.xd4 (23 .. l2.xc6 d3!) 23 ...
0lxd4 24.cxd4 ~xd4 25.St.xb7
.tl.xb4 26.0lf5 ~f6 27J'heS+ I:1:xeS
2S.I!bl .1lfS 29..~e4 .~g6 30..li£.d3
IldS 31..IU.e4 ~e5 32.t!b3.
32..• h5?! This outwardly ac-
tive move allows White to consoli-
date his position. Black could have
fought for an advantage with 32 ...
Yie8 33 .. ~d3 .tl.c5.
33.JJe3! ~al+ 34.'$}g2 l'ldl
35Ji~'e2 ~gl+ 36.Wh3 .tl.c5
37/1Je7+ .axe7 3S.. ~.xg6 fxg6
39.t!xe7 Wh7 40.i1e6 ~d441.~e4
~xe4 42.btxe4. Draw.
A.SOKOLOV - VAGANIAN
Candidates Match, 6th Game,
Minsk 1986
French Defence C09
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Cild2 c5
4.exd5 exd5 5.liJgtJ Cilc6 6.i.b5
ISS
.lid6 7.dxc5 .1lxc5 s.o-o CiJe7
9.cnb3 .i(.d6 10.ttel 0-0 1l.ii..g5
.Ug4 12 ..~.h4 l'leS 13 .. Ug3 ~xg3
14.hxg3.
14... ~b6! With gain of tempo
Black brings his queen to an active
position, from where it controls the
important d4-point.
15.ii.d3 a5! The march of this
pawn, threatening to break up
White's pawns on the queens ide,
is one of the important resources
for Black in this type of position.
He ignores the threat of 16.ii..xh7+,
hoping to gain several tempi for his
queenside play.
16.i£.xh7+?! (16.a4 was more
circumspect) 16.• :~fS! (with the
threats ofg7-g6 and a5-a4) 17.ii..d3.
17:vl!!ic I? was worse in view of 17 ...
ii..xf3 18.gxf3 a4 19.Cild2 g6!, when
the bishop is trapped, since nothing
is given by 2o.Cilc4 ~d4.
17... a4 Is.Cilbd2 CiJf5! Threat-
ening to capture on g3, whereas 18 ...
~xb2?! would hand the initiative to
156 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

White: 19.1::tbl ~xa2 20:~c1 and NAUMANN - VAGANIAN

the queen is in a dangerous posi- Bundesliga 2005
tion. French Defence COB
19.t!xeS+ ItxeS 20.cZlfl ~xb2
21.llbl ~xa2. l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.l1Jd2 e5
4.exd5 exd5 5.t1lgf3 C1lf6 6.Ji£.b5+
.~d7 7 ..\lxd7+ C1lbxd7 S.O-O .\le7
9.dxe5 CiJxe5 10.l1Jd4 ~d7 11.~f3
0-0 12.'11fS rUeS. In Azarov - Dol-
matov, Greece 2003, Black followed
a plan recommended by Kasparov:
12 ....~d8 13.C1lb3 0lce4 14.Ji..e3
hIc8 15.c3 kl:e8 16 ..11.d4 a5, and ob-
tained good play.
13.llel .ilf8 14.01fl C!lee4
15.e3.

22.~el. If22.k'Ixb7 there would

have followed 22 ... d4!, not fear-
ing 23 .. ~b5 ~d5 24.~.xa4 CiJe5!
25 ...iTl..xe8, and now not 25 ... li'lxO+?
26.gxO ..iTl..xo 27.~b8 or25 .... ~xf3?
26.l::tb8, which favours White, but
the simple 25 ... ~xb7.
22 ...d4 23.0J3h2lilh6 24.lilxg4
ctJxg4 25.1:al ~d5 26.tha4 b5!
27.l::ta6 ctJge5 2S.~a3+ b4 29J~'a4
.:1Jxd3 30.exd3. Both 30.~xc6
'iYxc6 31.Uxc6 ctJcI 32.l::Ic4 Me I 15••. b5. Black carries out the plan
33.f3 d3 34.cxd3 b3 35.~b4l:Ie2 and of an attack on the queens ide, based
30.l:txc6 C1lel! 31.0 d3 32.~xb4+ on the centralisation of his pieces:
Wg8 33.l:!d6 'iYa2 were also advan- the d5-pawn supports the knight on
tageous to Black (Vaganian). e4, and the bishop at f8 supports the
30•..I:!e6 31.l:tb6 g6 32.Mb5 pawn offensive.
~d6 33.f4 gel! 34.l:Ib6 :gel, and 16.a3. The alternative was 16.
Black gained an overwhelming ad- Ji£.e3 b4 17.cxb4 .~xb4 18.I;;ecl g6
vantage. 19.ctJd4 .l1.d6.
16..• a5 17..1Le3 b41S.axb4 axb4
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
19.cxb4 tL.xb4 20.l:Iedl ~f8. 20 ...
r!xal also came into consideration:
21.k'Ixal g6 22.11Jd4 (22.01h6+
"t;g7 23.l"Idl .tLcS!) 22 ... 01g4 23.
Ddl .~d6 24.h3 liJxe3 2S.QJxe3
~b7 with counterplay.
21..1L. d4 ~ e6.
22.01 le3. Stronger was 22.Uxa8
i'txa8 23.011 e3 g6 24.01g3 l"Id8
(24 .... ~g7? 2S.01xdS!) 2S.01e2 .tg7
26.01f4 ~e8 27.b4, and White's
chances are preferable.
22 ...01d2! Black forces the ex-
change of the important dark-square
bishop, after which it will be easier
for its surviving opposite number to
control d4.
23.~f4 thai 24.l"Ixal 01b3
25.k'Idl 01xd4 26.01xd4 ~b6
27.b3 neS 2S.01ec2 g6 29.h3 01e4
30. ~ 0 .0., g7. The same strategy of
pressure on the centre.
31.01e2 ~b5 32.l11cd4 ~c5
33.~d3 MCS 34.~e3 ~b4 3S.~d3
0lc3 36.01xc3 l"Ixc3 37.~b5
VJIi xbS. Draw.
IS7
Of the modern elite grandmas-
ters, a great expert on positions with
an isolated pawn is Vasily Ivanchuk,
who successfully plays them with
both colours. His strategy of coun-
terplay with a dS-pawn is based
on active pressure on the central
squares.
DELGADO - IVANCHUK
Havana 200S
French Defence COB
l.e4 e6 2.d4 dS 3.QJd2 cS
4.01g0 0'lf6 S.exdS exdS 6.~bS+
.0.,d7 7.. iixd7+ 01bxd7 S.O-O ~e7
9.dxcS tt'lxcSlO.Uel 0-0 II.QJn.
1I .•. aS. Since White's plan of
blockading the d4-square usually
includes the move c2-c3, Black pre-
pares an attack on this pawn. How-
ever, this more often occurs with the
move order 11 ... l'i:e8 12 .. te3 as. The
plan of controlling the c4-point after
a7-a6 and b7-bS also occurs, creat-
ing for White the motif of attacking
158 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

the b-pawn by a2-a4. For example,

the game Rublevsky - Bareev, Mos-
cow 2005, continued: l2 ... b5 l3.c3
~d7 14J~.d4 IIad8 15.Cile3 Cilce4
l6.~b3 a6.

control the squares adjacent to the

d5-pawn. A dynamically balanced
position has arisen.
17.a3. Or i7.c3 b4 l8.cxb4 axb4
with an equal game.
17•.• b4 IS.axbS axbS 19..~gS
l7.01e5!? ~b7?! l8.Cild3 ~c6
Cilce4! Black's play is still based on
19.a4! Cild2 (19 ... iI..d6 20.axb5 axb5
control of the central squares.
21.0 also favours White) 20.~c2
20 ..!ixf6. If 20.lI..e3 there can
Cilc4 21.axb5 axb5 22.Cbf5 .~.f8
follow 20 ... 01g4, since 21.Cilxe4
23.b3 Ltlb6 24.Cile5 with an obvious
dxe4 22.~xe4 .~.d6 23.~f3 .~xh2+
advantage to White.
is unfavourable for White.
Black's defensive mistakes were
20•.•Cilxf6 2t.h3 t1.dS. The bish-
associated with inadequate control of
op is switched to b6 in order to con-
the squares adjacent to the d5-pawn.
trol the d4-point.
l7 .. :~c7 (instead of l7 ... ~b7?!)
22JheS+ ~xeS 23.Ciln ~eS
was more active, and now if l8.a4
24.~b3 .1Lb6 2S.~xb4 .~xd4
!ic5 19.CiJO .0.xd4, when 20.Cilxd4
26.~xd4 ~xd4 27.l1xd4 k!xc2
is bad because of 20 ... Cilxf2! White
2S.CiJe311xb2 29.CiJxdS. Draw.
would have had to restrict himself to
18.Cbd3.5Jld6.
S. SAVCHENKO - IVANCHUK
12•. ~e3 bS 13.Cild4 ~d7
Cruise Odessa-Istanbul 2006
14JWO g6 ISJ'tadl l"!feS 16.CiJg3
Queen's Gambit D34
~acS.
(See diagram) l.tiJO dS 2.d4 cS 3.c4 e6 4.cxdS
Black has developed his pieces exdS S.g3 Cil f6 6..~ g2 .1i. e7 7.0-
in active positions, from where they o 0-0 S.tiJc3 QJc6 9.,!&.gS cxd4
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
IO.Cilxd4 h6 1l •.iL.e3 I1e8 12.~b3
0185 13.~c2 .~g4 14.L2lrs IIc8
15•. ~.d4 .1L,c5.
16.e3?! This move weakens the
light squares, which allows Black to
develop an energetic initiative. The
classical continuation is 16 .. ~ xcS
Excs. For example, the 9th game of
the Karpov - Kasparov world cham-
pionship match, Moscow 19S4/SS,
continued: 17.lhe3 .\3le6 (White is
better after 17 ... d4?! IS.gadl Cilc6
19.Cilxg4 Cilxg4 20.e3, when it is
not easy for Black to escape from
the pin) IS.kIadl ~cSI9.~a4k'!dS
2o.IId3 a6 21.t!fdl Cilc4 22.Cilxc4
Hxc4 23"~aS !XcS 24"~b6 l'Id7
25.k'td4 VJHc7 26.~xc7 Udxc7, and
Black was able to repel the frontal
attack on the isolated dS-pawn. It
should be mentioned that the pawn
is defended by the rook from cS,
where it is more actively placed than
behind the pawn. We will also en-
counter this defensive procedure in
subsequent examples.
IS9
16•••Cile4! Regarding 16 ... j(xfS
17.ihfS .~.xd4 IS.exd4, it is appro-
priate to repeat Bondarevsky's as-
sertion: 'You don't play the Tarrasch
Defence in order to worry about the
isolated dS-pawn'.
17.L2lh4. 17 ..1t.xe4!? dxe4 IS.
iladl .~xdl 19.MXdl came into
consideration, with definite com-
pensation for the exchange.
17..•. ~xd4 18.exd4 b5 19.a3
W#f6. 19 ... Cilc6 was also in the spirit
of the position.
20Jlfel g5!? Vasily Ivanchuk
is true to himself - the main thing
is the initiative! 20 .. .'~ xd4 2l.h3
.:&.hS 22.~xe4 dxe4 23Jhe4i:txe4
24.'~xe4 ~xe4 2S.<1Jxe4 would
have led to a roughly equal end-
game.
21.~. xe4. A forced exchange,
since 21.h3? gxh4 22.hxg4 hxg4 is
bad for White.
21. •.dxe4 22Jhe4.
A critical point of the game.
White has parried the immedi-
160
ate threats, and Black should have
retreated his bishop - 22 ... ~e6
23.tilg2 ~ed8, when in view of the
threat of .~ f5 he retains sufficient
compensation for the sacrificed
pawn. But the game went 22 ...Ji(.h3?
23.0Jd5! ~d6 24.0lG!, and White
seized the initiative.
VAN WELY - IVANCHUK
Monaco 2006
Slav Defence DI5
l.d4 d5 2.e4 e6 3/11 f3 til f6
4.lZle3 a6 5.a4 e6 6.Ji(.g5 Lilbd7
7.Wle2 h6 8•. ~h4 .'il.e7 9.e3 0-0
10.a5 e5 1l.dxe5 tZJ xe5 12.exd5
tZJxd5 13.0Jxd5 exd5 14.. i!i..xe7
~xe7 15.Ji(.e2.
White has achieved the ex-
change of the dark-square bishops
and a blockade of the queens ide
weaknesses. But he has delayed
castling, which Black energetically
exploits.
15...Ji(.g4 16.0-0 Uae8 17.l:Ifdl
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
l:1:fd818.h3tile419.Wla4. IfI9.~b3
there can follow 19 ... ~e6 with the
idea of 20.l:Iac I llxc I 21.Ihc I d4.
19.•.Ji£.h5 20.I!ael. A routine
move. 20.l:Idc I is more accurate,
when if20 ... tilg3 there is the retreat
21..~dl.
20•..tZJg3! Black seizes the ini-
tiative.
21.Ji(.d3. Of course, 21.lIxc8
tZJxe2+ 22.<Jifl IIxc8 23.r.Jixe2
uc4 was safer, although this po-
sition cannot be considered an
achievement for White.
21..Jhc1 22.khc1 J1L. xf3
23.gxf3 d4 24.~e4 dxe3?! Black's
powerful initiative would have been
worthily crowned by the knight
retreat 24 ... tilh5! Now, however,
White succeeds in consolidating his
forces.
25.fxg3 ~ d6 26.. ~ n ~ xg3+
27.Whl ~xf3+ 28.. ~g2 iJdl+ 29.
kIxdl ~xdl+ 30.'It7h2 e2 31.~e8+
<Jih7 32.~G+ Wg8 33.~e8+ Wh7
34. ~ G+. Draw.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
GERSHON - IZORIA
Athens 2005
Queen's Gambit D32
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Ci\c3 a6 4.e3
0\f6 5.Ci\f3 c5 6.cxd5 exd5 7.,il,e2
,~,i,d6 S.O-O 0-0 9.dxc5 .siLxc5 10.b3
0\c6 1l.,~b2 fLa7 12.ktcl lieS
13.Li)a4 lile4.
14.,skd4. Black has developed his
pieces in active positions, and White
already has problems in choosing an
effective plan. The exchange of the
dark-square bishop seems dubious,
but apparently White did not like
Black's activity after 14.Ci\d4 ~d6
15 ..i!L f3 Lile5.
14 •• .liJxd4 15.CLlxd4 ~g5
16. ~ d3. The threat of .siL h3 could
have been prevented by 16.,~ f3
,J.id7 17.Lllc3 (not 17.Uc7? because
of 17 ... ,0.xa4 IS.bxa4 CLlxf2!) 17 ...
EacS IS.~d3 ~e5 19.Ufdl i.bS
20.g3, although here after 20 ... i.a7
Black also has an excellent game.
16 ... i.h317.i.f3l:'IadS1S.Lllc3
'~,b8.
161
19.1ilde2?! White underesti-
mates Black's threats. 19.Lllce2!?
was more circumspect, intending
to answer 19 ... h5 with 20.Ci\f4.
The acceptance of the pawn sacri-
fice 19.Lllxe4 dxe4 20.SLxe4 'iYe5
2L~xh7+ (21.1ZJf3 ~h5! is dan-
gerous) 21...WhS 22.f4 ~xe3+ 23.
~xe31Ixe3 24 ..slI.f5 .siLxf5 25.Lllxf5
lle2 would have led to a better end-
game for Black.
19 ••• h5! 20.Lllg3. If 20.I:tfdl
Black increases his initiative: 20 ...
,~f5 (20 ... h4 2l.lilxd5) 21.~d4
.siLe5 22.'~'b6 Lllxc3 23.Lllxc3
d4.
20 ••• h4 21.gxh3 hxg4 22.hxg3
Lllxg3! 23.fxg3 ~xg3+ 24.1i.g2
~xe3 25.~d4 ~h2+ 26.'.tf2
l::rde8 (with a threat of mate)
27.~xe3 l':txe3 2S.\t>xe3 ~xg2
29.Wd3 ~xh3+ 30.'.tc2 1i.e5
31.Llle2 ~e3 32JUei g633.IIcdl
~e4+ 34.Wcl d4 35.lZJgl 1i.f4+
36.Wb2 i.e3 37.Lile2 1i.f2. White
resigned.
162
L' AMI - SARGISSIAN
Wijk aan Zee 2007, Tournament B
Queen's Gambit D38
1.d4 tiJf6 2.c4 e6 3.tiJO dS
4.l'ilc3 ~b4 S..lit.gS I1Jbd7 6.cxdS
exdS 7.W1c2 cS 8.dxcS h6 9•.lit.d2
.It xcS 10.e3 0-0 ll ..lt d3 a6 12.0-0
bS 13.Clle2 .~b7.
This position can be considered
dynamically balanced. Here 14.h4!?
~d6 (weaker is 14 .... ~. b6 15 ..1Lc3
Clle4 16 .. ~d4) 15.Clled4 Clle4
should have been considered, when
although White firmly controls the
d4-point, Black is established at e4.
But White underestimated Black's
counterplay along the a7-g1 diago-
nal, based on the coordination of
his dark-square bishop, knight and
rook.
14li'Jg3 gc8 lS.%Wbl Ue8
16.IIct tiJe4 17..~el? Even here
it was not too late for 17.h4 i. b6
18.Mxc8 ~xc8 19.~b2 L1Jdf6
20.ucl ~d7, simplifying the posi-
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
tion, although in less favourable cir-
cumstances.
17...Cllxg318.hxg3.
18...Mxe3! 19.b4 llxo 20.bxcS
Df6 21.a4 Cllxcs 22.axbS axbS
23 •. lii.,h7+. 23 .. ~xb5? d4 was clearly
weaker.
23 ... '\&>h8 24 .. 0..fS L1Je6. 24 ...
gcc6 25.~xb5 gxf5 26J:hc5
t'!xc5 27.~xc5 would have led to
the same material balance as in the
game.
2S.Mxc8 W1xc8 26.tLxe6 l'lxe6.
White would have had more dif-
ficult problems to solve after 26 ...
fxe6! 27:~xb5 e5 28.Ma7 nf7.
27. ~ xbS d4. The outcome is that
Black has won a pawn, although in
trying to convert it he has to reckon
with the drawing tendencies of op-
posite-colour bishops.
28.i.d2 tLc6 29.~b4 ~d7
. 30J~el !"l:f6. After the rook ex-
change 30.. .l:xeJ+ 31..iU.xel ~d5
32.f3 d3 33 ..lit.d2 the passed pawn is
blockaded.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
31.0 Wh7 32.lIe7 ~d8 33.l::te5
d3 34.g4 ild6 35.~f4 f6 36.Me3
~d7 37.ttel Jilb7. If37 ... Md4 there
can follow 38.Me7! "fixe7 39"~xd4
~e2 40.~e3.
38.k!c1 .fi.d5 39•.lit.b4 Mb6?
Black did not want to exchange
rooks - 39 ... MC6 (after 39 .. J!a6
40.llc7 he has to reckon with the
activation of the white rook), but the
move in the game leads to the loss
ofa pawn.
40.ll~·d4l:b7 41.~xd3+. Draw.
6.2. The d5-d4 breakthrough
It is well known that the dynamic
potential of an isolated pawn lies in
its 'lust to expand'. But for Black,
who has a tempo less for making the
d5-d4 breakthrough, it requires more
effort to unblock the d4-square.
When playing d5-d4 one must as-
sess the consequences of opening
the position. We will begin with an
'anti-example'.
RESHEVSKY - GHITESCU
Olympiad, Tel Aviv 1964
Queen's Gambit D32
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.l{Jc3 c5 4.e3
0lc6 5.t;)0 t;)f6 6.cxd5 exd5
7.. 'b..e2 .'fl.e7 8.dxc5 .lit.xc5 9.0-0 0-0
10.b3 a6 1l •. fi.b2 .rfi..a7 12.gc1.
163
12••.d4? Black is behind in devel-
opment, and it is obvious that open-
ing the position will not be to his ad-
vantage. 12 ... ~e6 was correct.
13.exd4l{Jxd4 14.CiJxd4 ~xd4.
Black shouldn't have exchanged the
queens. After 14 ... ~xd4 15.~f3
l'lb8 16.t;)a4 ~xb2 17.t;)xb2 .1i1.e6
18.l{Jd3 ~b6 it would be easier for
him to defend. Now, however, it is
far more difficult for him to resist
White's pressure on the queenside.
15.~xd4 Si.xd4 16.Mfdl i..a7
17.h3! An important move, restrict-
ing the opponent's pieces. 17.i..f3
can be met by 17 ... ~g4 18.i..xb7
.txdl 19.~xa8 ~xb3, equalising
the position.
17 ••• fH5 18..~0 ktab8 19.94!
With the march of his g-pawn White
drives the black pieces from the cen-
tre.
19 •.. ~g6 20.g5 CiJh5 21.l{Jd5
I!fe8 22.l1c7 ~h8 23.l{Je7 l{Jf4
24.l{Jxg6+ hxg6 25.1hti l{Jxh3+
26.\tg2 CiJxfl 27.gdd7. Black re-
signed.
164
WIRTHENSOHN - TAL
Olympiad, Luzem 1982
Queen's Gambit D32
l.e4 C!\f6 2.tile3 e5 3.C!\f3 e6
4.e3 d5 5.exd5 exd5 6.d4 C!\e6
7.11..e2 iLe7 8.dxe5 ~xe5 9.0-0 0-0
10.b3 a611 ..~b2 ~d612.~cl.1:La7
13.k'l:el kte8 14.a3 J.!L.g4 15.Me2
l'Iad816.Md2.
The black pieces are developed
in active positions, whereas the
white pieces are poorly coordinated.
The time has come for decisive ac-
tion.
16 ... d4! As a result of the open-
ing of the position, the activity of the
black pieces increases significantly.
17.C!\xd4. The d4-pawn can-
not be ignored - I 7,c'tJb I 11..xf3
18.2Lxf3 dxe3 19Jhe3 (19.fxe3
IIxe3!) 19 ... l::txe3 20.l::txd6 l:Ixd6
21. ~ cl b'Ixb3 is obviously favour-
able for Black. Apparently the lesser
evil was 17.exd4 11..xf3 18.11..xf3
J::!xel+ 19:~xel 0'ixd4 20.Whl
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
tte8, but here too Black's initiative
is very dangerous.
17.••C!\xd4 18.exd4. If 18 ..!.i.xg4,
then 18.Ji'lf3+! or 18 ... 8xg4
19.~xg4 C!\f3+ is decisive.
18....~xd4 (with the threat of
19 ....lixfl) 19•.tLxg4 l:xel+. 19 ...
Cilxg4 was more accurate: 20.g3
~h6 21.Mxe8+ Uxe8 22.h4 C!\xfl
23.IIxfl ~e3 24,cDe4 .fLxb2
25.~d7 Bf8 with a winning posi-
tion.
20"~ xe 1 C!\ xg4.
21.0Je4? This loses quickly.
21.g3 ~h6 22:~e7 kIf8 23.C!\e4
..\1l.xb2 24.Ud8 g6 25.h3 was more
tenacious, although even here after
25 ... .i1lxa3! Black transposes into a
won endgame.
21. ...~hh2+ 22.Wfl ~hl+
23.We2 ~xg2 24.'t>dl ~f3+
25.~e2 ~hl+ 26"~el ~f3+
27JlIVe2 ~xb3+ 28.Wel CZle5
29.0Jg5 ii..e3. White resigned.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
TAL-AGZAMOV
Sochi 1984
Queen's Gambit D32
1.c4 c5 2.Cilf3 Cilf6 3.Cilc3 e6
4.e3 Cilc6 5.d4 d5 6.cxd5 exd5
7.2l..e2 cxd4 8.Cilxd4 <~d6 9.0-0 0-0
10.Cilf3 a611.b3 h!e812 •. ~.b2 .'h.c7
13.%\fd3 ~d6 14Jlfdl? 14.g3!?
was essential.
White has underestimated the
threats posed by the queen + bish-
op battery, and this allows Black to
open the position to his advantage.
14... d4! 15.exd4 .~.g4. This
forces a weakening of the king's po-
sition and creates the possibility in
certain variations of exploiting the
pin on the knight at D. This stand-
ard attacking mechanism, based on
the breakthrough of the d-pawn, is
examined in Part I (Chapter 2) in the
gamc Pctrosian - Balashov, Mos-
cow 1974 (p. ??).
16.g3. It is also not possible to
dcfend after 16. \t' f1 Cil b4! 17. ~ d2
165
.lfLxf3 18o<~xD ~xh2 19.93 liJg4!
20.tlle4 f5.
16••. tllb4! An important interpo-
sition. Now if 17.~d2?! the themat-
ic pinning mechanism goes into op-
eration: 17 ... Mxe2! 18:~xe2 Me8,
and White loses material.
17.. ~a3 Cilxd3 18.jLxd6 2l.xd6
19.k"txd3 .~b4! 20•.~n .ltfS
21.Cildl il,xd3 22 .. ltxd3liJd5, and
Black converted his exchange ad-
vantage.
FISH - LAUTIER
Saint Vincent 2005
Nimzo-Indian Defence E56
l.d4 0,)f6 2.c4 e6 3.Cilc3 .~b4 4.
Cilf3 d5 5.e3 0-0 6..1fLd3 c5 7.0-0 Cilc6
8.cxd5 exd5 9.dxc5 .~g4 10..~e2
~e7 1l.b3 ,~xc5 12.~b2 ktfd8.
13.liJd4. White blocks the d5-
pawn, since if 13.kIel or 13.11cl
there follows 13 ... d4, but it would
have been better to do this after
13.11Ja4 ~d6 and now 14.Cild4.
166
13•.. Jilxd4! 14..liL.xg4?! White
persists in the retention of Black's
isolated pawn and as a result he
comes under a strong initiative,
whereas after l4.exd4 Black's posi-
tion is merely slightly preferable.
14 ••• ,1i..e5 15.Jil h3. If 15 ..sli. f3
there would have followed 15 ... d4!
16.exd4 Bxd4 17:~c2 l"rad8 with a
spatial advantage for Black.
15.••ttJe4 16.gcl? 16.'~cl was
essential, since now Black makes
a breakthrough in the centre, ex-
ploiting the opposition of rook and
queen.
16••.d4! 17.exd4. White should
have reconciled himself to 17.ttJxe4
dxe4 18.'~c2 Jilxb2 19.'~xb2
W'xe4, when Black has the advan-
tage.
17•. J'lxd4 18.ttJd5 (l8.W'el
ttJd2) 18•••Jilxh2+ 19:~hl. Also
after 19.Wxh2 ~d6+ 20.<t>gl !.!xdl
21.Il:fxdl ~h6 22.Jilf5 ~h4 White
does not have compensation for the
queen.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
19...CIlxfl+ 20.!!xfl I'!xd1+
21.k!xdl ~h4 22.!!e2 .~.g3 23.I:d3
~g5 24Jle4 h5 25JIee3 Jile5
26.J&.a3 Wh8 27.UO t;)d4 28.l::txn
ViIi g6. White resigned.
BAREEV - IVANCHUK
Havana 2006
Nimzo-Indian Defence E37
l.d4 t;)f6 2.c4 e6 3.lilc~ Jilb4
4. ~ c2 d5 5.a31i. xc3+ 6. ~ xc3
t;) e4 7. W' c2 c5 8.dxc5 ttJ c6
9.cxd5 exd5 10.ttJO W'f6 H.e3
.~.g4 12.](.e2 0-0 13.0-0 lUe8
14 .. ~d2.
14... d4! The d5-d4 breakthrough
disrupts the harmony in the placing
of the white pieces.
15.Il:adl. The dynamic strength
of the breakthrough by the d-
pawn is especially effective after
15.l::Iael? - 15 ... d3! 16.Jilxd3 (16.
~xd3 Jilxf3 17.Jilxf3 nad8) 16...
iLxf3 17.gxf3 W'xf3 with an attack
for Black (lvanchuk).
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
IS ...Cilxdl (15 ... ~ad8 16.i.cl!)
16.~xdl ktad8 17YAYcl.
17... d3?! As was shown by Ivan-
chuk, this breakthrough should have
been prepared by the useful move
17 ... h5 18.h3 (if I 8.tIre I , then 18 ...
d3! is now effective since, com-
pared with the game, after the ex-
change of pieces Black could have
included his rook in the attack) 18 ...
d3 19.~xd3 l':txd3 20.hxg4 hxg4
21.21xd3 gxf3 22.g3 ~h6 23.1'1el
r:Ie6 24.~c4 ~h3 25.iHI ~h5
26.Md I Mh6 etc.
18.ktxd3 ~xd3 19.i.xd3 i.xf3
20.gxf3 ctJeS 21.i.e4 I{Jxf3+
22.kxf3 ~xf3 13.~dl ~fS 24.b4.
24.~d6 h5 25.ktdl J:Ie6 26.~d8+
<Jih7 27.~d3 Jdg6+ 28.~fl ~xc5
29.~d5! lIg5 30.~xc5 l:1:xc5
31.ktd7 leads to an equal endgame
(lvanchuk).
24 ... h6 2S.Mel as 26.e4 ~g6+
27.<;t>n axb4 28.axb4 I:txe4.
167
29.~bl? After the simple 29.
k:Ixe4~xe430.~d8+~h731.~d7!
White would not have been in any
danger (31..:~xb4 32:tIt'f5+). But
now his king comes under attack.
29.•JWa6+ 30.~g2 l'lg4+ 31.
'.ith3 llg6 32JlI~lfS? To defend the
king, the rook should have been
broughtup-32.l:l:e8+Wh733.IIe3!,
for example: 33 .. :~f6 34:~'c2 ~d4
35.)!tg3 ~xb4 36Jhg6 fxg6 37.c6
bxc6 38.~xc6, hoping for a draw in
the queen endgame.
32 ... ~c6 33.)!te4. White also
fails to save the game with 33.:te3
Ug5 34.~e4 ~d7+ 35Sii'h4 ~dl
36:iH3 ~d4+ 37.1'1e4 (37:t\Ve4
~f6) 37 .. :~d8 38.\t)h3 ~d7+
39.~h4l:1:g1 (Ivanchuk).
33 ••JIgS 34Jl'lYf3 ~d7+ 3S.\£lh4
:gl 36.~e3 ~fS 37.Ue8+ \tJh7
38.~e4 gS+. White resigned.
A motif for the d5-d4 break-
through is often provided by the fact
that the white king is still in the cen-
tre. Here is a typical example.
168
YUSUPOV - TIMMAN
Tilburg 1987
Queen's Indian Defence E12
l.d4 0\f6 2.c4 e6 3.lilf3 b6
4.a3 ,ab7 s.lilc3 dS 6.cxdS 0\xdS
7.Vi!c2 cS 8.dxcS .~.xcS 9.Ji.gS
'ilk'c8 10.MCl h6 1l .. :Jl.d2 Cilc6
12.0\xdS exdS 13.e3 0-0 14.,JiLbS
lile7 lS.b4il,d6 16.~xc8 Mfxc8
17.~e2.
White is threatening with .Uc3 or
lild4 to establish a blockade on d4,
retaining a stable advantage.
17•.. d4! A pawn sacrifice, ena-
bling Black to activate his light-
square bishop.
18.exd4 a6! It is essential to drive
the bishop away from the weakened
c6-square, which becomes apparent
in the line 18 ... 01d5?! 19.'1'\e5! f6
20.,tl.c6.
19Jhc8+ kIxc8 20.5id3 tt'ldS.
The activity of the black pieces
fully compensates for the sacrificed
pawn.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
21.gcl l'ixcl 22 .. :Jl.xcl 01f4+
23.,fi.. xf4 .ii.. xf4 24.a4 .iL d6 2S.bS
axbS 26•. ~.xbS ,~.xf3+. It is useful
to repeat an old joke: 'the advantage
of the two bishops is often expressed
in the favourable exchange of one of
them'. Black liquidates into a theo-
retically drawn position with oppo-
site-colour bishops.
27.Wxf3 WfS 28.~e4 .~a3
29.WdS .li.b2 30.. ~c4 \ife7 31.13
.t.:.c3, and Black held the endgame.
KORCHNOI - BELIAVSKY
Leon 1994
Queen's Gambit D45
l.c4 c6 2.d4 dS 3.e3 C!lf6 4.'11c3
e6 s.tilf3 lilbd7 6Jl#c2 .tl.d6 7.b3
0-0 8 •.ili.b2 eS 9.cxdS cxdS 10.dxeS
lilxeS 1l •.tLe2 Cilxf3+ 12•. 0..xf3.
12 ... d4! The motive for the pawn
sacrifice is White's delay in cas-
tling.
13.exd4? Viktor Korchnoi likes
to accept sacrificed pawns, but in
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
the given situation it was correct
not to take the pawn, but to sacrifice
one - I3.cile4 Cbxe4 14.il.xe4 dxe4
15.0-0 exf2+ 16"~ xf2, obtaining ac-
tive play. Now his king is prevented
from castling.
13•• J:teS+ 14.Wfl. A blitz
game Seirawan - Speelman (1992)
went 14.01e2 .1Lb4+ 15.'i!7fl (no
better is 15.~c3 .l.ii.f5! 16.~d2
&.xc3 17"~xc3 bCS IS.~b4 .~.d3
with an unpleasant pin) 15 .... ~e6
16.ci) f4 krcs with active play for
the pawn. In the event of 14.Sl.e2
&.g4 15.0 2Lh5 16.0-0 ~c7 17.h3
Ilg6 IS ..5Jl.d3 0\h5 Black has an
unpleasant initiative on the king-
side (Korchnoi).
14•• :~a5 15:~'dl .~b4 16.h\cl
!i.d7. 16.... ~e6!? also came into
consideration.
17.a3. A difficult decision, but
how can 17 ... :t'tacS be prevented? Of
course, not possible was 17.~xb7?
'JL xc3 IS .. 5Jl. xc3 ~b5+ with the loss
ofa piece.
17••.. :&.xc3 Is.Ihc3. In the event
of IS.~xc3 ~xa3 19.iLxb7 k'IabS
20Jlai VliJe7 21.iLf3 QJe4 22 ..~xe4
~ xe4 White may also have prob-
lems on the h I-aS diagonal.
IS•..QJd519.i.xd5. Not 19.1:Ic5?
because of 19 .....ltb5+ 20.Wgl
llel+, mating on the first rank.
19.• :~xd5 20.a4 ~acS 21.13
l'hc3 22.iiLxc3 ~e3.
169
23.iL a 1. White loses after
23"~d2? h\XO+ 24.gf ~xf3+
25.'It'gl ~c6. But in order to re-
lease his rook, he has to part with
his queens ide pawns.
23 .•.IIxb3 24.<.t> a iiLxa4 25.Mel
f6. After opening an escape square
for his king, Black threatens to win
the queen by 26 ... lIb2+.
26JWcl il.c6 27:~H4 h5 2S.h4
ga3 29.Wg3 ga2 30.iLc3 VJJin
3 U~H5. This loses immediately, but
if the king moves 3l.Wh2 the inva-
sion of the queen is decisive: 31 ...
VliJg6 32.~d2 ~d3 33.iLb4 i.xf3
with crushing threats.
31....~c7+. White resigned.
KOROTYLEV - KHAIRULLIN
Moscow 2007
Queen's Gambit D37
l.d4 QJf6 2.c4 e6 3.QJO d54.QJc3
i.e7 5.ii..f4 0-0 6.e3 QJbd7 7.a3 c5 S.
cxd5 CiJxd5 9.QJxd5 exd5 10.dxc5
etJxc5 USLe5 il.m lU,e2 iiLxe5 13.
QJxe5QJe614.QJiJ VJJitti 15.VJJid2 lidS.
170
16.~d1. The attempt to take
control of the d4-point with the king
still in the centre creates the motive
for the d5-d4 breakthrough. After
16.0-0 Black could also have played
16 ... d4, but in this case White
would have gained a spatial advan-
tage by 17.l':tadl dxe3 18.~xe3
.iiLd7 19.ttJe5.
16•••d4!? 17.ttJxd4. White ac-
cepts the pawn sacrifice. 17.0-0
dxe3 would have led to a position
from the above variation.
17••• ttJxd4 18.exd4 ti..d7
19.~d3 (19.0-0? ti..a4) 19•••ii.c6
20.0-0 I.:td6 21.gd2. In the event
of 21.ii.0 ii.xo 22.~xO ~xf3
23.gxf3l':!ad8 24.IUel \iJf8 25.l'te4
g6 in view of the threat of f7 -f5 the
d4-pawn cannot be held.
21 ••• ~g5 22.g3. If 22.0 there
can follow 22 ... Iie8 23.1::l:f2 (23.
~c3 tte3) 23 ...l::ted8 24.~c3 ~f4,
regaining the pawn with the better
position.
22 ••. ~d5 23.f3 tIe8 24.~c3 h5
25.ii.c4 ~g5 26.d5 ~d7.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
27.~d4. 27.f4 ~h6 (27 ... ~d8
28. ~ d4) 28. ~ d4 looks more criti-
cal.
27 ..• h4 28.g4 h3 29.~e2 5.
Draw. White did not want to risk
30.f4 ~d8!? (30 ... ~h4 is weak-
er: 31.~f2 \\!Hxf2+ 32.'l!7xf2 fxg4
33.l:cl with the better endgame for
White) with active play for Black:
31.VJ!jxa7 fxg4 or 31.g5 Me4 31.~c5
krg6 (32.g5? Mxg5+).
6.3. Spatial expansion
by the d5-d4 advance
In positions where White has not
established pawn control of the d4
blockading square, the dynamic po-
tential of the isolated d5-pawn is of-
ten used to gain space in the centre
of the board. However, it should be
borne in mind that it may also be-
come a target on d4.
We will begin with a classic ex-
ample.
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn 171

LASKER - TARRASCH
St. Petersburg I 914
Queen's Gambit D30

l.d4 d5 2.tilf3 c5 3.c4 e6

4.cxd5 exd5 5.g3 tilc6 6 .. '&.g2
tilf6 7.0-0 SJ..e7 8.dxc5 .~xc5 9.
tilbd2.

15.a4! This pawn raid has the

aim of destabilising the placing of
the black pieces on the queens ide.
15•.. 0'le4 16.. tel tIad8. This
natural move merely strengthens
the effect of the a-pawn's advance,
but in the event of 16.J2:fe8!?
17.a5 .~c5 18.a6 gab8 19.~c2
bxa6 20.tLlh4! Black would have
Black faces a choice - whether encountered the same problems as
to agree to the blockade of the d5- in the game.
pawn after 9 ... 0-0 IO.LDb3 .~.b6 17.a5 ..lkc5 18.a6 bxa6 19.1Iacl
II.tilbd4 tile4 or decide on a spa- (exploiting the overloading of the
tial expansion, as occurred in the queen in defending the minor piec-
game. es) 19.•.!'Ic8 20.0Jh4 jLb6 2l.QJrs
9...d4. Regarding this advance, ~e5.
Capablanca made a valuable com-
ment in his notes to the following
game.
10.tiJb3 2.Lb6 11.~d3! Empha-
sising the problems with the defence
of this pawn. As a target for attack,
it is important to blockade it! II.e3
dxc3 12.SJ..xe3 0-0 would relieve
Black of the problem.
1l ....iU.e6 12.ktdl 1£.xb3 13.
%¥xb3 VJlje7 14.JJ..d2 0-0.
172
22 .. l1lxe4. White wins the ex-
change, but 22.~f3!, exposing
the undefended state of the black
knights, was even stronger: 22 .. .
QJc5 23.b4 QJd7 24.~f4! or 22 .. .
l1Jf6 23.~f4!
22 ....~xe4 23.0:Jd6 ~xe2
24.QJxe8 Mxe8 2S"@dS ~e6
26"@fJ h6 27.~d2 l1'leS 28J:he8+
~xe8 29.l1~·e4 Cild7. 29 ... Cilg4 was
no better: 30.gcl ~ d7 31. %Y c6
~xc6 32.Bxc6 d3 33.Wg2! f5
(33 ... ~xf2? 34.IIc8+ 'i!ih7 35.Wf3)
34.Md6.
30.ttcl ~f8 31..~.xh6 CileS
32"~g4 f5 33"~Wg6 ~ti 34.~xti+
Wxti 3S.~gSCj)d3 (35 ... Cile4 36.h4
d3 was more tenacious) 36.Mbl
We6 37.b3 \t>dS 38.fJ as 39.h4
QJcs 40.hS d3 41.Wfl a442.bxa4
C!j xa4 43.ii. f6 We6 44 ...It xg7 Wti
4S.iL.eS CileS 46.l:dl. Black re-
signed.
CAPABLANCA - RUBINSTEIN
Berlin 1928
French Defence C09
1.d4 dS 2.l1'lfJ eS 3.de e6 4.e4
.~xeS S.exdS exdS 6 .. ~bS+ Cile6
7.0-0 Ci'\ge7 8.Cilbd2 0-0 9.Cilb3
.~b6 10.IIel .Ug4 11 •.~d3 QJg6
12.h3 .~xfJ 13"~xfJ C!:leeS 14"~f5
Cilxd3 lS"~xd3.
(See diagram)
It is obvious that, with a small
number of minor pieces on the board,
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
the isolated d5-pawn is weak, and if
White should succeed in exchanging
the bishops after .1lL.e3, its weakness
will increase. Black could have pre-
vented this exchange by 15 .. :~f6!,
exploiting the fact that the f2-pawn is
inadequately defended. After the best
reply 16.. ~e3 ~xb2 17.~xd5 .lU.xe3
18.llxe3 the position would have
been completely equal. But Rubin-
stein takes a different decision.
lS•.. d4. This is how Capablanca
comments on this pawn advance:
'From the point of view of the
safety of the pawn this is a natural
enough move, but it is strategically
wrong unless there is more than an
even chance of advancing it still
further. In its present position the
pawn blocks the line of action of the
strongly posted bishop at b6. There
is one advantage in having it at d4,
namely that the white c-pawn can-
not advance. But again that is an ad-
vantage provided that Black is able
either to defend the pawn at d4 or to
attack White's c-pawn.'
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
16.,lU.d2 ~f617.l:Ie4. The course
of the game shows that Black's at-
tempt to gain space has not solved
the problem of the isolated pawn
- at d4 it remains a target for White
to attack.
17 ... MadS. 17 .. JUdS was more
logical, intending by the knight ma-
noeuvre 0lg6-fS-e6 to support the
d4-pawn. The second rook could
have been developed at cS.
IS.l'!ael W&'c6. The assessment
of the position depends on whether
Black is able to gain counterplay. If
he does not succeed in this, the static
weakness of the d4-pawn will give
White a positional advantage. For
the moment Black prevents 19 ..ikaS,
on which there follows 19 ... fS!
20.ile6 ctJf4.
19.93 (preventing tiJf4) 19..•~feS
20•. 0. as! It is important to exchange
the defender of the d4-pawn, after
which it is doomed. The direct win
of the d4-pawn by 20.l'heS+ l':IxeS
21.IlxeS+ ~xeS 22.ctJxd4? LtleS
would have led to the loss of a piece.
173
20•••Ihe4. 20 ....~xaS! was
stronger: 21.01xaS Mxe4 22:~xe4
(22.ldxe4 ~dS 23.CJJb3 ClJeS
24.~e2 MeS favours Black) 22 ...
~b6 23.Ltlb3 as with good counter-
play for Black.
21.~xe4 0lfB. 21...t~Yxe4 22.
Ihe4 <~xaS 23.lLlxaS fS was bet-
ter, although even here White would
have retained a slight advantage af-
ter 24.l:Ie2, since it is not easy to de-
fend the d4-pawn.
22.~xc6 bxc6 23.l:te7 I:tdS?!
Black misses a chance to activate
his rook, which makes it difficult
to defend the queenside pawns. Af-
ter 23 ... d3 24.cxd3 l:txd3 2SJlxb6
(2S.2i,b4IIxg3+) 2S ... axb6 26.l:Ib7
I,:tdl+ 275ilg2 tiJd7! it would have
been much easier to defend.
24.~xb6 axb6 2S.h(b7 ctJd7
26.l:'Ic7Md6 27.I:IcS+ CiJfB 2S.ctJd2
cS.lf2S ... bS, then 29.ctJb3 followed
by 0laS.
29.tilC4 Me6 30.l'.Ib8 I:tel+
31.'\!7g2 gS 32.a4 Ual 33.ctJxb6
Wg7 34.I,:tc8 lile6 3S.tlJd7 l:ha4
36.tZJxcS ~b437.tild3 ~bS38.Wt3
h6 39.b4 hS 40.g4 hxg4+ 41.hxg4 f6
42J'Ic4 'iJf7 43.tilCslild8 44.tZJb3.
Black lost on time.
RUDNER - IVKOV
Gennany 197 S
Queen's Gambit D41
l.c4 ctJf6 2.ctJc3 cS 3.ClJt3 e6
4.g3 Qj c6 S.ii. g2 dS 6.cxdS Qj xdS
174
7.0-0 .Ue7 S/ilxd5 exd5 9.d4 0-0
10.dxc5 .12.xc5 ll.b3 .~f5 12.,~b2
~e4 13Jlc1 Wie7 14.~d2.
The black pieces are very active
and the position can be assessed
as dynamically balanced. A logi-
cal continuation could have been
14 ... Sl.b6 15.Yfdl P;fe8. But Black
decided to expand his spatial con-
trol, overlooking an opportunity for
White to exchange the queens.
14 •.. d4? 15.~g5! White liq-
uidates into an endgame, in which
the d4-pawn loses any chance of
advancing further and becomes a
target.
15.. .'~xg5 16.Cilxg5 J1l..xg2
17.~xg2 SLe7? With the support
of the bishop from f6, the pawn be-
comes more vulnerable. Therefore
17 ... ,~b6 18.t!fdl klfe8 19.'tt'fl
lJad8 was more logical, when if
20.Cilf3 there can follow 20 ... d3
2l.exd3 Cilb4 22.d4 Cilxa2.
lS.CZJO ,:siU6 19.hlfdl d3?! 19 ...
~ fd8 was more tenacious, although
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
after 20Jld2 and ncd I the d4-pawn
cannot be saved.
20.,~xf6 dxe2 21Jld7 gxf6
22.gxb7lJacS23.HelIlfeS24.tilgl
Cild4 25.ild7 fredS 26JhdS+
hAxdS 27.Cilo a5 2s.Cilxd4 Mxd4
29.Ihe2, and White easily won the
rook endgame.
Let us now tum to some positive
examples.
LJUBOJEVIC - KARPOV
Moscow 1977
Queen's Indian Defence E17
l.CilO Cilf6 2.g3 b6 3.,I2.g2 ,.\1Lb7
4.0-0 e6 5.c4 ,~,e7 6.0'\c3 0-0 7.kIel
d5 S.cxd5 exd5 9.d4 c5 10.~f4
0'\a6 ll.Cild2 ~d7 12.tiln ~fdS
13.h3l'1acS 14.b!c1 cd 15.~xd4.
The black pieces are excellently
mobilised, whereas it is obvious that
the queen on d4 is a poor blockader.
15•. Jlc4! 16.~dl d4. Black ex-
pands his spatial control, fixing the
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
pawn on e2. However, this move al-
lows a simplification of the position,
and Karpov thinks that it would
have been more effective after the
preparatory 16... L1J h5!? 17 ..li£. e5
- 17 ... d4! 18 ..1i.xb7 ~xb7 19.L1Jb5
)'!c5 2o.Ihc5 bxc5 21. ~ a4 f6, and
Black has a greater advantage com-
pared with the game.
t7 ..lJ.£.xb7 ~xb7 t8.CiJe4! llxel
t9.Cllxf6+~.xf6 20.~xel W'd5
21.%Ybt Cllc5 22.Cllh2 h5 23.h4
d3?! A premature exchange of the
pawn which is cramping White.
Black should have secured the post
for his knight at c5 by 23 .. a5, which
would have retained a serious ad-
vantage.
24.exd3 CLJxd3 25.Mdt ~b5
26.. l2g5.i1xg5 27.hxg5 ~f5 28.ktd2
r(d4 29.~c2.
29 ... h4! Black opens up the
king's defences.
30.gxh4 ~h3 3tJi~'c6 (parrying
the threat of 31...Cllel) 31. .. l:Ixh4
32.~g2 ~f5. It was also possible to
175
play for a win in the endgame: 32 ...
t1lf4 33.~g3 t1Je6 34Jld3 ~xg3
35.Ihg3 Yc4 (Karpov).
33.~g3 gd4 34.g6 fxg6 35.~e3
btd5 36.lZln tilf4.
37Ji#xf4? This involves an over-
sight. White should have exchanged
rooks - 37J:'txd5 lilxd5, when it is
not easy for Black to convert his ex-
tra doubled pawn.
37 ... ~xf4 38.BXd5 ~g4+!
Ljubojevic was hoping for 38 .. .'~c4
39.MC8+ 'liif7 40.b3, when White
succeeds in defending his a2-pawn.
39.CiJg3 ~c4 40Jdd8+ \t>h7
41.b3 ~c2 42.Wg2 g5 43.gd6
~xa2, and Black soon won.
ANDERSSON - MUREY
Interzonal Tournament,
Moscow 1982
Queen's Gambit D33
l.tlJo d5 2.d4 c5 3.c4 e6 4.cxd5
exd5 5.g3 tilc6 6.kg2 tlJf6 7.0-0
i.e6 8.Cllc3 h6 9..Qf4 Mc8 to.gel
176
a6 1l.dxc5 Si.xc5 12.Cile5 0-0
13.l!Jxc6 Yxc6 14.. lke5.
14 ... llJg4! Black is ready to ex-
change his dark-square bishop for the
sake of advancing his central pawn.
15.ii.d4. If IS.it. f4 there can fol-
low IS ... gS 16.jt>d2 "iYd7 with ac-
tive play.
15 ... it.xd4 16Jthd4 Mc4! 17.
~a7. The queen retreat 17.~d2 d4
18.Cile4 IIxcl 19.1hcl ~xa2leads
to the loss of a pawn.
17 ... d4 IS.lL\e4 d3! 19.exd3
IIxcl 20Jhcl "iYxd3. The dS-
pawn has successfully completed its
raid, and after the logical continua-
tion 21."iYxb7 i.dS 22."iYd7 Si.xe4
23.~xg4 .~xg2 24.Wxg2 ~dS+
and ~xa2 the position would have
become extremely simplified.
21.h3?! llJe5 22.tilc3 b5 (22 ...
"iYd2!? was more energetic) 23.Mdl
W"c2 24.~d4 ~xb2 25.I'Id2.
2S.l::tbl ~c2 26.Si.e4 Si.fS! was also
advantageous to Black. If 2S.~xeS
there follows 2S ... b4.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
25 •.. ~cl+ 26.l'tdl ~c2 27.it.e4
SlfS 2S •.i1Lxc2 Cilf3+ 29.'iin lilxd4
30 •. l1i.xf5! tilxfS 31.tild5! ttaS.
Black has won a pawn, in return for
which White merely has some activ-
ity.
HULAK - MARJANOVIC
.Yugoslavia 1984
Queen's Gambit D34
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.tilc3 c5
4.cxd5 exd5 5.Cilf3 Cilc6 6.g3 llJf6
7.1Lg2 .'ke7 S.O-O 0-0 9.dxc5 it.xc5
10.tila4 .~e7 1l ..ii.e3 l'teS 12JIcl
.1i>g4 13.~b3 W>Yd7 14•. ac5 l{Je4
15.. l1i.xe7 Mxe7 16.l"!fdl.
Black has deployed his pieces
actively, whereas a serious defect of
White's position is the knight at a4,
which is shut out of the game.
16••• d4! By the advance of this
pawn Black gains a spatial advan-
tage.
17.~a3. It is not possible to ex-
ploit the opposition of queen and
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn
rook by 17.e3. By sacrificing a pawn
- 17 ... ~f5 18.exd4 I1ae8! - Black
develops a dangerous initiative:
19.1';'J;d3 (19.tiJc5? tZ'lg5) 19 ... b5
20.Mxc6 bxa4 21.~c2 (21.~a3?!
t;Jxf2; 21.~dl? tZ'lg5) 21 ... tZ'lxf2 (if
21...'~Jg5, then 22.0Je5 is possible)
22.<.i'ixf2 ge2+ 23:~xe2 IIxe2+
24.Wxe2 ~e4+ 25.Wf2 ~xc6, and
Black has won the queen for a rook
and minor piece.
17... gaeS IS ..itn ~fS 19.1iJeS.
19... tZ'lxfl! 20.Wxfl ge3 21.
nd3. 21.tZ'ld3? allows a mating at-
tack: 21.. .~xe2+! 22 ..1i.xe2 J::txe2+
23.\t>xe2 ~xf3+ 24.Wd2 ~e2#.
21. .. b6. After the preparatory
2l..Jtxf3 22.exf3 and now 22 ... b6
(22 ... ~xf3+ 23.Wgl tiJe5 24.trb3)
Black's attack could have reached
its logical conclusion. After any
move of the white knight 23 ... tZ'le5!
is very strong.
2V1'lb7 .itxf3 23.tiJd6 (if
23.exf3, then 23 ... CiJe5! is unpleas-
ant) 23 ... ~hS 24.Wgl Ihe2 2S.h4
177
..\!LdS? With this bishop retreat Black
significantly reduces the intensity of
the attack, which could have been
continued after 25 ... liJe5! 26 ..itxe2
.itxe2.
26.tZ'lxeS MxeS 27.~d6 ~fS
2S.~f4. White has managed to con-
solidate his forces and hold the po-
sition. On the 67th move the game
ended in a draw.
KHARLOV - IVANCHUK
Moscow 2005
Queen's Pawn Game D02
l.d4 dS 2.Cilf3 eS 3.e3 as 4.dxeS
ttJ f6 S.e4 e6 6.exdS .it xeS 7. ~ e2
.itb4+ S•.itd2 exdS 9•.itxb4 axb4
10.tlibd2 0Je6 1l.tZ'lb3 .itg4 12.g3
tteS 13.~dl 0-0 14..itg2 ~b6
IS.0-0 IIfdSI6.~d2 h617.l'!tfdl.
17••• tiJe4! White has not man-
aged to control the d4 blockading
square and Black has gained a spa-
tial advantage. But before expand-
ing it by d5-d4, he drives back the
178
queen. After the immediate 17 ... d4
White has 18:~f4.
lSJi#el d4! 19.<1Jcl (l9.h'l:acl
!{a8 20.kIal is pointless) 19.••CiJe5
20.Clld3 CZJxd3 21.Uxd3 t'taS. 21...
.iU5!? 22.l'!d2 Ua8 also came into
consideration.
22.Md2 Ma5 23.~dl ii.e6 24.b3
.!3L.f5 25.h3 .fLe4 26/ilel (26.l'icl
l'tc5) 26 .... ~xg2 27.Wxg2.
27..•I:te5. 27 .. :~c5 is also pos-
sible, intending 28.~cl ~d5+
29.CZJO lIda8, but 30.hlcc2 holds
the position.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
2S.tiltJ !:te3 29.~bl! W#a5?!
White has managed to stabilise the
position and, so that the d4-pawn
should not become a target, Black
should have simplified with 29 ...
d3 30.BXd3 (weaker is 30.exd3
tild4 31.tilxd4 ~xd4) 3o.Jldxd3
3l.exd3 ~d8 32.~el Uxd3, gain-
ing control of the d-file.
30. ~ e4. After this centralisa-
tion of the queen the d4-pawn loses
its dynamic potential and becomes
weak.
30 .•. Uxb3. If30 .. :~c5 31.t'Iadl
)"Jcl 32.kIxcl ~xcl Black has to
reckon with 33.e3 dxe3 34.11xd8+
Cilxd8 35"~xe3 (after 35.~e8+
Wh7 36"~xd8 ~c2! 37.~d5
~xf2+ 38.'ttihl e2 all the same the
knight has to be given up) 35 .. :~xe3
36.fxe3, when White stands better in
the knight endgame.
31.~adl l':Ia3 32.tilxd4 ~d5
33.Wxd5l'c!xd5 34.Cilb3, and White
obtained the better endgame.
 Chapter 7

The isolated pawn with a

small number of pieces

In the preceding chapters the FISCHER - FILIP

theme of the isolated pawn was Interzonal Tournament,
mainly considered as a consequence Palma de Mallorca 1970
of opening strategy. However, its English Opening A 14
appearance is often the consequence
of the middlegame. In this case, l.b3 d5 2.. I1.b2 <11f6 3.<1\13 e6
maintaining a secure blockade of 4.g3 .11.e7 5..tL.g2 0-0 6.0-0 c5 7.c4
the isolated pawn (most often the <11c6 8.cxd5 <1\xd5 9.<1\c3 .t1.f6
d5-pawn), giving the position a sta- 10.~c1 b6 1l.<1jxd5 exd5 12.d4
ble character, usually involves the ~.a6 13.ne1 Cilxd4 14•. \JLxd4 cxd4
exchange of several pieces. The re- 15.~a3 .!il.b716.!1adl .0..e717.'\~a4
sult of this is a marked lowering of ~e8 18.~xd4 nc8 19J#'f4 .~f6
the dynamic strength of this pawn, 20.<1\d4~>e5 21.~e3 g6 22.<1\b5
forcing Black to switch to passive I/>Wxb5 23.%he5 nfe8 24.'\lo'{b2 11c5.
defence, which, however, is by no
means easy to overcome. In this
chapter we will examine methods of
handling positions with an isolated
d5-pawn where there is a limited
amount of material, but the queens
are still on the board.
It should be kept in mind that,
with the queens on the board, the
position has the character of a mid-
dlegame. In certain positions, by co-
ordinating his queen with the other A particular feature of the posi-
pieces, White can develop an attack tion is the weakening of the a l-h8
on the king. diagonal, which is controlled by the
180
white queen in the absence of any
counterplay for Black.
25.h4! White creates threats on
the kingside. The usual reaction to
this pawn advance is h7-hS, but this
weakens the kingside still further.
White carries out a frontal attack on
the dS-pawn by tripling his heavy
pieces on the d-file with the threat of
e2-e4, and then the attempt to erect a
barrier by fl-fS will catastrophically
weaken the kingside.
25 ... UecS 26.Ud2 Uc3. Black
tries to block the weakened diagonal.
27.l':tedl ~c5 (with the threat
of28 .. Jhg3) 2S.b4 VJlie7 29.e3 h5.
Black resigns himself to the loss of
his dS-pawn, but hopes to exploit the
weakening of the a8-h I diagonal.
30.83 \tth7 3I.~.xd5 .1i.xd5 32.
tlxd5 ~e4.
33.~dS! The two kings are in
equally dangerous positions, but
White gets his attack in first, since
the rook at c3 is tied down by the
mate threat on h8.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
33 ....~fJ 34.Wh2 llSc4 35.
!:lId7! g5 36.lJrs Wg6 37.I!gS+
Wh7 3S.!!xg5 ncS 39.:t:dd5 Wh6
40.l"IdfS. Black resigned.
KHENKIN - RUSTEMOV
Sochi200S
Queen's Gambit D37
l.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Cilc3 .rJi..e7
4.th fJ CJJ f6 5.j£, f4 0-0 6.e3 t;J bd7
7.83 c5 S.cxd5 Cilxd5 9.Cilxd5 exd5
IO.dxc5 Cilxc5 1l .. &e5 .&..f6 I2 ..ii.l..e2
.&..xe5 I3.cLlxe5 Wd6 I4.tilfJ ~g4
15.Cild4 .axe2 I6.%he2 l'I8CS 17.
0-086 Is.lIrdl.
White has a stable advantage
thanks to his secure blockade of the
dS-pawn.
IS ... g6. This unprovoked weak-
ening of the castled position creates
motifs for an attack on the king.
Black should have stuck to central
strategy: 18 .. J~fe8 19.CilfS VJlieS
20.VJlig4 g6 21.Cild4 Cile4 22.h4
l:Ic4.
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces
19.h4! White begins an attack on
the kingside.
19".MC7?! 19 ... h5 was neces-
sary, not fearing 20.g4?! in view
of 20 ... ~e7! 21.gxh5 ~xh4. If
20.khcl there can follow 20 ... QJe4
21.QJf3 (21.~f3 ~e5 22.~h3
l:tc7!) 21...~d7 22.~d3 J:!xcl
23.k'hc I l:c8 24.l:'Idl ~c6, and the
d5-pawn is indirectly defended in
view of the threats on the first rank.
20.IIacll::trcS. Here in the event
of20 ... h5 21.g4 ~e7 22.gxh5 ~xh4
23.b4 it transpires that the rook on
c7 is badly placed, and White gains
the advantage.
21.hS ~eS. 21...QJe4 22.I.hc7
Mxc7 23.QJc2 (23.h6 ~f8) 23 ...
C1Jf6 24.QJb4 Ud7 25.~f3 ~e5
26.gd4 gc7 is also possible, ex-
ploiting the fact that the back rank is
inadequately defended.
22.~g4 <J:Jg7. In the event
of 22 ... QJe6?! 23.l:hc7 Ihc7
24.QJxe6 ~xe6 25.~f4 J:!d7 (25 ...
gc4 26.~b8+) 26.~d4 White car-
lSI
ries out a frontal attack on the d5-
pawn. 26.h6 f6 27.~d4 is also pos-
sible.
23.~h4.
23". <J:Jf8. The threat of h5-h6
has become a reality, and Black must
play with great care to resist the at-
tack on his king. 23 ... QJe6 24.h6+!
<J:Jf8 25.Ihc7l:Ixc7 26.QJxe6+ fxe6
27.~d8+ Wfl was more accurate,
not fearing 28.e4!? (2s.IIfl IIe7
29.l:Icl ~h5) 28 ... dxe4 29.l:Id7+
l:Ixd7 30.~xd7+ <J:Jf6 31.~xh7
~ d6 with the threat of perpetual
check by ~d6-dl-h5 (Rustemov).
24.h6! f6? A further weaken-
ing of the king's defences, which
allows White to develop an attack.
24 ... QJe6 was correct, leading to a
position from the previous note.
2S.QJO Yi'e6. 25 ... Yi'xb2 was
also insufficient: 26.J:!bl ~c3 (or
26 ... g5 27.IIxb2 gxh4 2S.I:txd5)
27.l:1xd5 b5 28.!:tbdl.
26:iH4 Vile7. No better is 26 ...
"fl 27.~b4 ~e6 2S.QJd4 Y&'d6
182
29.t;\e2 b6 30.t;\f4, winning the d5-
pawn.
27.BXdS. White has won a pawn
and with it the game.
GHEORGHIU - A.PETROSIAN
Bagneux 1982
Queen's Gambit D58
1.d4 dS 2.c4 e6 3.0Jc3 iLe7
4.til f3 tZl f6s..a gS h6 6.iL h4 0-0
7.e3 b6 8.<~d3 iLb7 9.0-0 Cilbd7
10J!~e2 cS ll,IUdl cxd4 12,Cilxd4
ttJeS 13.iLxf6 iLxf6 14.cxdS
CiJxd3 lS"~xd3 <~xdS 16.~e2
l::tc8 17.CildbS MCS 18.t;\xdS exdS
19.~d2 ~d7 20.ttJd411fc8.
Despite White's stable positional
advantage and his solid blockade of
the isolated pawn, it is not easy to
approach it - Black has good coun-
terplay on the c-file.
21.l::tadl ~a4?! An inaccura-
cy, which allows White to drive the
queen to a passive position. 21 ... IIc I
was better, and now if22.b3 there can
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
follow 22 .. "lixd4 23.tJ:xd4 M8c2. In
theeventof22.t;\b3 rIxdl+ 23.~xdl
the move 23 ... \'W a4 is far more effec-
tive, for example: 24.a3 ~c4 25.h3
(25.ttJd4 ~cl 26.h31lxd4) 25 ... a5
26.CiJd4 ~c5 27.b3 ~cl 28.b4
'@xdl+ 29.Mxdl axb4 30.axb4l1c4.
22.b3 ~aS 23.g3 l'lc1 24.Wg2
Bxdl 2S.k'txdl !'!cS.
26.h4! White exploits the pas-
sive placing of the black pieces to
seize space on the kingside.
26 ... ~b4. It is hard to offer
Black any good advice. 26 .. ".\1Lxd4
27.l"'rxd4 ~c3 28.W'f3 ~c2 29.b4
and 26 ... b5 27.t;\f5 with the threat
of ~ g4 were both inadequate.
27.hSl:Ic7 28.~f3 I'rcS. If28 ...
~c5, then 29.l'ld2! with the threat
of I'rc2 is possible.
29.~f5. After tying the black
pieces to the defence of the d5-pawn,
White prepares an attack on the king.
29 ... ~a3 30.~d7! White at-
tacks the f7-pawn - 30 ... ~xa2
31.~e8+ 'lith7 32.~xf7.
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces 183

30 ... <;!,>f8 31.01b5. Including the 2S.<11e2! The weakening of the

knight in the attack. The 'queen +
knight' duo does not leave the black
king any saving hopes.
31. .. W'b4 32.01d6
33J~xn+ \t>h7 34.Mxd5 Mc2? A
time-trouble blunder, but equally
after 34 .. Jhd5 35.~xd5 the game
cannot be saved.
35.~g6+ WhS 36.~xc2. Black
resigned.
DREEV - GODENA
European Championship,
Warsaw 2005
Queen's Gambit D46
a l-h8 diagonal, which is controlled
by the white queen, restricts Black's
forces. White begins an attack on
\tgS the d5-pawn.
2S .• JJc5 29.<1Jf4 ilLe6 30.~e5
I1\d7 31.~d4 I1\f6 32.a4 b6 33:~e5
I1\d7 34.~b2 I1\f6 35:iVd4 Wh7. In
the event of35 ... Wg7? 36.~e5l!c7
Black has to reckon with the threats of
37 ..1lxh5 and 37.<1Jxe6+ fxe6 38.g4.
36.l1\d3 llc6 37.l'iJe5 l:tc5
3S.l1\d3 bc6 39.l1\f4 L'tc5.

l.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.l1\c3 I1\f6

4.e3 e6 5.11\0 a6 6.b3 JU.b4 7•. ~.d2
I1\bd7 S.~d3 0-0 9.0-0 SLd6
10.llcl e5 1l.cxd5 cxd5 12.dxe5
tbxe5 13.0Jxe5 .1lxe5 14.ti'le2 ttJg4
15.h3 lL\f6 16..1lc3 ~e7 17:~c2
.iilxc3 IS:~xc3 ilLd7 19.ctJd4 llfcS
20:~ as ~ d6 21..1l e2 g6 22•.1l 0 h5
23. ~ d2 ~ a3 24.Il:c3 :etxc3 25. ~ xc3 40.g3. This solid move, the
l'tcs 26.~al as 27.gdl lJ/tIe7. last before the time control, al-
184
lows Black to activate his bishop.
The immediate 40.b4 was better:
40 ... axb4 (there are also problems
after 40 ... Mc4 41.~xb6 axb6 42.a5
Vllic7 43.gbl) 4I.Vllixb4, creating
a second weak pawn on b6, which
complicates Black's defence. For
example: 41...~c7 42.~d4 Wie7
43.~b2 ttc4 44.l:Id4 ~d8 45.e4.
40 .•• ~f5 41.b4 axb4 42.~xb4
~c7 43Ji'd4 WIle7 44.~b4 Wlc7
4S.Wg2 i.e4. 45 .. "~c6 46.liJe2
i.e4 also came into consideration.
46.i.xe4 dxe4 47.l:Ibl lclc6
4S.~f8.
4S •.. gS? After putting up a dif-
ficult defence, Godena loses his
sense of danger (he should have
maintained a defensive pose - 48 ...
Wid7 49.l:tdl ~e8) and weakens
his king's defences. He could have
been immediately punished for this
by 49.l:tb5!, when the mate threat
50.gxg5 can only be parried by
49 ... l::tc5 , after which there follows
50.Mxb6.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
49.tiJe2?! WIld7. Intending to
parry 50.gb5 with 50 ... tt'ld5.
SO.tt'ld4 MCS Sl.Wia3 CildS
S2.l:IbS h4? Unwarranted activ-
ity, allowing White to fix the weak
f5-point. Black should have stuck
to waiting tactics: 52 ... l:Id8 53.a5
bxa5 54.WIlxa5 Wg6.
S3.g4 Cilf4+? With the naive
hope after the knight exchange of
returning with the rook to c2. But
equally after 53 .. J:td8 or 53 ... .:ta8
Black is unable to withstand the
combined attack of the white piec-
es. For example: 53 ... Ma8 54.~b3
ga5 55"~c4 l::txb5 56.axb5 'it;g8
57.lLlf5 ~e5 (57 ... ~d6 58.~d4
f6 59.Wial ~d7 60.~a8) 58.~c8
Vllif6 59.~d7 ~e6 60.~d8 f6
61.~f8.
S4.exf4 ~ xd4 55. ~ e7! ~ c4
S6.gxgS gcS S7.fS gc6 SS.~f8.
Black resigned.
MOROZEVICH - GELFAND
Fiigen 2006
Petroff Defence C42
l.e4 eS 2.lLlO liJf6 3.tt'lxeS d6
4.lLlO tt'lxe4 S.d4 dS 6.Sl.d3 lLlc6
7.0-0 i.e7 S.c3 0-0 9.l:Iel ~f5
10.i.f4 MeS 11.~b3 lLlaS 12.~c2
i.d6 13.i.xd6 ~xd6 14.lLla3 ~f4
1S.lLl eS lLl c616.lLl bS lLl xeS 17.dxeS
IlxeS IS.lLlxc7 IiIdS 19.1LlbS ~g6
20.lLld4 lLlcS 21.i.xg6 hxg6 22.g3
~f6 23.l::txeS WixeS.
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces
White is finnly blockading the
isolated d5-pawn. Black's chances
lie in exploiting the e-file and the
e4-point.
24.ktdl kte8 2sJId2 ~f6
26.'~g2 l:IeS. In the event of 26 ...
~a6 27.a3 gel White liquidates
into a favourable knight endgame
- 28.J::te2 Mxe2 29.~xe2 ~xe2
30.CiJxe2.
27.CiJO CiJe4 28.ge211fS. Black
is aiming for active play, by attack-
ing the targets on the f-file, but in
so doing he loses control of the e-
file. However, also after 28 .. JIe7
29.~dl ~d6 30.CiJd4 a6 31.~el
he is forced to concede it.
29.~d3 Wh7 30JWe3 ~a6. If
30 ... a6 Black has to reckon with
31.c4 CiJd6 32.h4!? with the threat
of CiJg5+.
31.CiJd4 J:f6 32.0 CiJcs 33.a3
CiJe6 34.l:Id2 CiJxd4?! This ex-
change should have been prepared
by 34 ... ~b6, since in the event
of 35:~e5 CiJxd4 36.~xd4 ~xd4
37.gxd4 J:b6! 38.gd2 g5 39.Wf2
185
~ g6 play transposes into a more fa-
vourable rook endgame than the one
occurred in the game.
3S.~xd4 kte6 36.Wf2! An ex-
cellent move! The king prevents the
invasion of the rook, which was pos-
sible after 36.~xd5 Me2+ 37.'~h3
llxd2 38.~xd2, when in the queen
endgame Black gains counterplay:
38 ... ~fl+ 39.Wg4 ~c4+ 40.f4 f5+
41.Wh3 (41.Wf3 ~e4+ 42.Wf2
~hl=) 41...~fl+ 42.'~'g2 ~d3
(Morozevich, Kuzmin).
36 ••• ~b6 (36 .. Jld6? 37.c4)
37.~xb6 gxb6 38.\te3.
38 •• Jld6. Black is forced to
concede the e-file. In the event of
38 ... g5 the king perfonns an out-
flanking manoeuvre: 39.Wd4 lIf6
40.gf2 g4 (40 ... 11f5 41.g4 gf4+
42.\txd5) 41.f4 gf5 42.ge2 gh5
43.~c5 Wg6 44.Wd6, penetrating
into the heart of the black position
(Morozevich, Kuzmin).
39.'~d4 b6 40.ge2 gS 41.b4 f6
42.l:te7 a6 43.:a7 bS 44.'it>cS l':te6
186
4S.~xdS rie3 46.\t>d4. Black re-
signed.
MOROZEVICH - ARONIAN
MorelialLinares 2007
Queen's Gambit D38
l.d4 Cilf6 2.c4 e6 3.Cilo dS
4.Cilc3 ,~,b4 S.cxdS exdS 6.,~,gS
Cilbd7 7.e3 cS S.Jil..e2 ~aS 9.0-0 0-0
10.ctJd2.llt.xc311.bxc3 ~xc312.11c1
~a3 13.dxcS ~xa2 14.,1.I.f4 tIeS
IS.tl')O ctJe4 16.~bS a6 17.,~a4
LJJexcS ISJ::txcS ctJxcS 19.,~,xeS
ii.e6 20.Jil..eS kIxeS 2l.j(xg7 'liixg7
22.~ d4+ \t> gS 23.%'hcS ~ c4 24.
~d6 IIc8 2S.h3 ~c7 26.~b4 as 27.
~h4 ~c2 2S.0Jd4 ~e4 29.~e7 b6.
30.Wh2! The main defect of
Black's position is the weakness of
the dark squares, especially in the
vicinity of his king, against which
White prepares an attack.
30 •.. Jil..f5 31.iH6 jt,g6 32.f4!
~xe3 33.110 ~c1 34.k!:g3. The
immediate 34.f5 is also good.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
34 ....~al 3S.fS X1c1 36.11e3
gh1+ 37.Wg3 liel.
3sJlo. There was a forced mate
by 38.~d8+ ~g7 39.f6+ Wh6
40.\!?h4! ~xd4+ 41.g4 and ~f8#.
3S ..• !!n 39.fxg6? Here too
the above manoeuvre would have
led to mate: 39.~d8+ ~g7 40.f6+
<Jih6 41.<;t>h4! But now, after the
exchange of rooks, the outside
passed pawns counterbalance the
knight, which is forced to defend
its king.
39 •. .llxo+ 40J~hO ~e1+ 41.
Wf4 hxg6 42.%YxdS ~f2+ 43.LtlO.
Draw.
BU XIANGZHI - BRUZON
World Team Championship,
Beer Sheva 2005
Queen's Gambit D37
l.CilO dS 2.c4 e6 3.d4 Ltlf6
4.Cilc3 Jil..e7 S.,s:t.f4 cS 6.dxcS Cila6
7.cxdS CilxdS S.CilxdS exdS 9.e3
ctJxcS 10.,i1lbS+ ,~d7 1l..ti.xd7+
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces 187

~xd7 12.0-0 0-0 13JWe2 IlacS

14.,ae5 a6 15.il,d4 lile4 16.CiJe5
\%'fS 17Jhc1 l=txc1 IS.MXc1 MCS
19Jhcs+ ~XCS 20.l1Jd3 il,f6
2t.,i!(, xf6 Ci\ xf6 22. ~ d2 h6 23.0
~c4 24.b3 VJ!ic7 25.lJlf4 ~e5 26.h3
~al+ 27.Wfl ~bl 2S.lJle2 h5.

. 33 ... g6? This weakening of the

29.h4! White blocks the h5-
pawn, which may become a po-
tential weakness, since its defence
by g7-g6 will irreparably weaken
the dark squares. The threatened
penetration of the white knight to
f5 forces Black to concede the c-
file.
29 .. Jj'hI30.';!ig3 ~bI31.cild4
lJld7. After the return of the queen
to Black's rear by the elaborate ma-
noeuvre 31.. .~ e4!? White also
takes control of the c-file - 32:~c1
VJ!ie5+ (32 ... ~g6+ 33.<Jif2) 33.Wf2
~b8 (33 .. :~h2? 34.~c8+ Wh7
35.~f5+ 'ittg8 36.~g5) 34.~c2,
but in this case he gains control of
the f5-point.
32.'tlVc3 CLJf8 33.\!th2.
long diagonal, with the white queen
already standing on it, is contrary to
the spirit of the position and it al-
lows White to launch an attack on
the king. However, it was not easy
for Black to prevent the queen's
threatened invasion on c5. If33 ... b6
there would have followed 34.e4!
dxe4 35.lJlf5. But he could have
tried to parry the threat to the d5-
pawn by counterplay against the
h4-pawn - 33 .. :~g6!? 34:~c5
VJ!if6 35.g3 ~e5 and if 36.e4 there
is 36 ... CiJe6.
34.a4 ~ a2 35. rJ;; g3 ~ a3 36.'iY c7
WHal 37:~e7! VJ!iel+.
188
3S. Wf4! The king goes into the
attack against its opposite number!
3S ... ~d2? 'Cooperative' play!
But Black also loses after 38 ... b6
39.g3 with the idea of~e7-d8xd5.
39.'~g5! ~xg2+ 40.Wh6 ~b2
41.f4. Black resigned.
IVANCHUK - KORCHNOI
Lvov 2000
French Defence C08
l.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.CJld2 c5
4.exd5 exd5 5.QJgO a6 6.iL.e2
lZJc6 7.0-0 cxd4 S.Mel iL.e7 9.CJlb3
lZJf6 10.lZJfxd4 0-0 1l.iL.f4 <~d6
12•.txd6 ~xd6 13.c3 IteS 14.~c2
.tg4 IS.ii.xg4lZJxg4 16.QJO LtlceS
17.tiJbd4 lZJxO+ IS.LtlxO ~cS
19.h3 lZJf6 20.~b3 b6 21JJadl
Ile4 22.lZJd2 Jdxel+ 23.l:Ixel as
24.a3 h6 2S.CiJO IteS 26.MxeS+
ttJxeS 27.lZJeS lZJf6 2SJ~'a4 Wh7
29.tiJc6 g6 30.tileS ~g7.
In this position Black failed to
cope with the rotation of the white
pieces around the d5-pawn.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
31.~f4. From f4 the queen indi-
rectly attacks the f7 -pawn, creating
the threat of advancing the g-pawn.
31...g5. By removing his control
of f5, Black creates a new weak-
ness in his position. The reason for
this outwardly anti-positional move
is that other candidate moves have
their drawbacks. If 31 ... h5? there
follows 32.g4. 31.. .b5? will not do
because of 32.~xf6+!, nor 31...
~d6? because of 32.CiJxg6! After
31... ~e7 32.~d4 Black cannot
endure the pin on the long diagonal
and he is forced to return with 32 ...
~c5, after which he has to reckon
with the consequences of the knight
endgame: 33.~xc5!? bxc5 34.b4
cxb4 35.cxb4 axb4 36.axb4, where
the b-pawn advances to b6, divert-
ing the knight.
32.~d2 cne4 33J!~'e2 "i¥d6
34.tL:Jg4 ~e6 3S.~d3 hS 36.\'Wd4+
WgS 37.tije3 CiJf6 3S.0 ~f8
39.~f2 ~eS.
40.b4! This shows the result of
the weakening of the f5-point. White
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces
creates an outside passed pawn.
Black cannot prevent this: his queen
is unable to control all the invasion
squares.
40 .•. axb4 41.cxb4 Wd7 42.a4
Wc8 43.We2 h4 44.Wd2 Wb7
4S.~d3 Was 46.~c3 ~c6+
47S~ib3 ~e6 48.Wb2 Wb7
49.\t>a3 ~d6 SO.Wb3 ~e6 Sl.aS
bxaS S2.bxaS Wa6 S3. Wb4 VJH d6+
S4.~cS.
189
S4 ••• ~b8+?! Black cracks un-
der the prolonged pressure on the
d5-pawn and suddenly aims for un-
warranted activity. It was safer to
control the b6- and f5-squares with
the queen, by playing 54 ... ~e6. If
55.ltJc2, then 55 ... Wb7 is possible,
and in the event of 56.lLJd4 activity
with 56 ... ~e I + is now appropriate.
SS.\tic3 ~bl? A blunder, lead-
ing to defeat. The defence could have
been held by 55 ... ~e5+! 56.'~c2
L!ld7!? (56 ... ~e6?! is inadequate
in view of 57.'5iid2 ClJd7 58:~c8+
Wxa5 59.~d8+ \t>b4 60.~g5 d4
61.L!lc2+ Wc4 62:~xh4 with ad-
vantage to White) 57:~c6+ Wxa5
58.~xd5+ ~xd5 59.CiJxd5 <ittb5
60.<ittd3 Wc5 61.We4 Wd6 62Std4
f5, and Black is alright.
S6.lZ'lc2. Black resigned.
 Chapter 8

The isolated pawn

in the endgame

When the queens are exchanged, ILYIN-ZHENEVSKY -

the dynamic possibilities of the iso- BOTVINNIK
lated pawn are greatly reduced, and Leningrad 1932
it may become a target. Therefore French Defence COB
a decision by the side with the iso-
lated pawn to exchange the queens 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.C!ld2 c5 4.exd5
should be carefully weighed up exd5 5.,\1.l.b5+~,d7 6.W#e2+ Vllie7
and taken only if counterplay is 7.,t/.xd7+ C!lxd7 8.dxc5 C!lxc5
guaranteed. Often this problem has 9.'I'J#xe7+ ,t/.xe7. This variation oc-
to be solved as early as the open- curs rarely nowadays, since Black
ing stage. In Chapter 5, using the maintains equality without difficulty.
example of the game Flohr - Ca- IO.C!le2. White aims to blockade
pablanca (Moscow 1935), we have the d5-pawn.
already touched on the topic of
White's opening strategy employ-
ing the strategic procedure of ex-
changing queens and going into
an endgame. In modern play this
procedure occurs most often in the
Tarrasch Variation of the French
Defence, where Black does not ob-
ject to exchange queens, counting
on gaining sufficient counterplay in
a complicated endgame. For study-
ing the defensive technique in this
type of position, it is useful in the IO ••• C!le6! Black forcefully hin-
first instance to turn to the games of ders White's plan and is the first to
Mikhail Botvinnik. take control of d4.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
11.0l0 .~f6! It can be said that
this is the key move of Black's
counterplay. Already then Botvinnik
considered control of the blockading
point d4 to be an important element
in the defence.
12.. ~.e3 Cfle7. The second knight
is also included in the fight for the
d4 blockading point.
13.0-0-0 0-0 14.Uhel UfdS
IS.t1lfd4 0le6 16.f4?! A needless
weakening of the position.
16•• JXeS! Black rejects winning
ofapawnby 16 ... 0lcxd4?! l7.0lxd4
.:t.xd4 18 .. ~.xd4 0lxf4, which after
19.Me7 b6 20.t!fl 0le6 2l.Mfxf7
L!'lxd4 22.11xg7+ would have led to
a draw by perpetual check (variation
by Botvinnik) and threatens to win a
piece after exchanges on d4.
17.0lxe6l'.Ixe6. This is stronger
than 17 ... fxe6.
IS •. I1l..12 LIeS 19.a3. Of course,
19Jhd5? is not possible because of
19 ... 0lb4 20.l:J:c5 !Ice8.
19 . ..li'JaS. Threatening20 ... ttJc4
191
and therefore White cannot play
20.1.!xd5? CiJc4 21.c3 !Ice8 22.Ilc5
liJd6!
20.e3.
20 •.. 0le4?! By subtle manoeu-
vring Black has weakened White's po-
sition, and after 20 ... gce8! 21.0lg3
l'lxel 22.I!xel l:Ixel+ 23 ..siLxel
.~.h4! and 24 .. ,,1.2..xg3, with a knight
against bishop and weak light squares
in the opponent's position, he would
have gained a favourable endgame
(Botvinnik). Now, however, White
succeeds in simplifying the position
in a more favourable situation.
21.0ld4 Me4. If21 ... k.Iee8 there
follows 22.lilc2, attacking the d5-
and a7-pawns.
22J:he4 dxe4 23.0le2! as 24.
ttJe3 ttJxe3 2S.Jl.xe3 bS 26.~.d4 fl.e7
27.f'S, and White now stands better,
since the e4-pawn is obviously weak.
However, with accurate play Black
succeeded in holding the position.
, 27 ••• b4 2S.axb4 axb4 29.l:tel
bxc3 30.bxe3 I!eS 31.~e2 i.d6
192
32.h3 c~g3! (restricting the rook)
33.l:e2 f6 34.Me3 iLf2 3S.11e2 ~g3
36.l':Ie3 li.f2 37.ge2 .~,g3 38:Jidl
Wf7 39.ne3 .~f2 40.k!e2 Jl.xd4
41.cxd4 g6 42.g4 gxfS 43.gxfS e3
44.Wc2 ~e4 4S.\t>d3l:If4 46J!he3
~xfS. Draw.
FLOHR - BOTVINNIK
8th match game, Leningrad 1933
French Defence COB
l.d4 e6 2.e4 dS 3.01d2 cS 4.exdS
exdS S.Jl.bS+ iLd7 6.iYe2+ VJ/ie7
7Yliixe7+ .0.,xe7 8 ..1Lxd7+ 0lxd7
9.dxcS 0lxcs 10.01b3. Of course,
Flohr knew the previous game,
where 1O.CiJe2 was played, but he
decided to offer the exchange of
knights.
10 .. .tDa4! 0laturally, Black
avoids the exchange and with a sub-
tle manoeuvre he prevents the de-
velopment of the bishop. He subse-
quently plans to transfer this knight
to c4.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
11.01e2 .llf6! As in the previous
game, this is a key move in the con-
trol of the d4 blockading point.
12.c3. Botvinnik recommends
l2.ltjbd4, in order to free the bish-
op.
12 ... QJe7 13.0-0 0-0 14.kIdl
lJfd8 IS.lJbl. Otherwise it is dif-
ficult to develop the bishop.
IS .•. Mac8 16.Wfl.
16 ... a6! The knight at a4 has
carried out its duties and it must be
switched to the more active square
c4, but after the direct 16 ... QJb6?!
White plays his bishop to d4 -
17 .. ~e3! QJc4 18 ..Jtd4, exchanging
the important dark-square bishop.
Therefore Black makes a useful
waiting move, intending to meet
17 ..£i.e3 with 17 ... QJf5.
17.01ed4 Cilb6 18.lilas 0lc4.
Forcing the retreat or the exchange
of the knight, since 19.QJxb7? ~d7
leads to the loss of a piece.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
19.ti'lxc4 dxc4. The isolated
pawn theme is exhausted.
20 .. ~e3 tildS 21.tilf3. Draw.
2\" .tilxe3 22.fxe3 is unfavourable
for Black, since White obtains the
d4-point (Botvinnik).
And now a modem example of
play in an endgame, where with the
help of the bishop on f6 Black suc-
ceeds in controlling the d4-point.
ARONIAN - BELIAVSKY
Warsaw 2005
In this position White is not able
to establish his knight on the d4
193
blockading square, in view of the
activity of the black pieces.
23 .. J:Iac8! 24.k'l:cd2. In the
event of 24.Mxc8 Mxc8 25.1ld2 (if
25.Mxd5 both 25 .. J!c2 and 25 ...
.~xb2 are good) 25 ... a5! White
cannot prevent the exchange of his
knight - 26.e3 a4 27.ttJd4 i.xd4,
transposing into an easily tenable
rook endgame: 28.Ihd4 llc2 29.
llb4 a3 30.bxa3 ~xa2 31.l:ixb61:txa3,
which Black is not in danger oflosing
even without his d5-pawn (which he
is by no means obliged to give up).
24 .. .l'Ie4! A subtle rook manoeu-
vre with the aim of demobilising the
knight.
2S.e3 k1b4! 26.Me2l':td8 27.~n
as 28.Mdd2. 28.ttJd4 i.xd4 29.l::txd4
IIxd4 30.exd4 \t'f8 31.1le5 leads to
a drawn rook endgame.
28 ••• d4! A worthy conclusion to
Black's active play.
29.ttJxd4 i.xd4 30.exd4l':tdxd4
31.1:txd4 l':txd4. The conflict is ex-
hausted.
194
32.MeS+ Wh7 33.We2 Mb4 34.
b3 a4 35.ge3 axb3 36.axb3 k'tb5
37.MC3 g5 3S.h3 h5 39.<;,t>d3 Mrs
40.We3lJb5 41.Wd4. Draw.
These examples clearly illustrate
how important it is, in this type of
complicated endgame, to retain the
minor pieces, which can cover the
weakness of the squares adjacent to
the isolated pawn. With regard to the
d5-pawn, this relates mainly to the
dark-square bishop, the exchange of
which makes it harder for Black to
defend the dark-square periphery.
We saw this in the middlegame po-
sitions examined in Chapter I. The
same problems are also typical of the
endgame. Here is a classic example
from the heritage of Capablanca.
CAPABLANCA -TEICHMANN
Berlin 1913
Queen's Gambit D63
l.d4 d5 2.lilo lilf6 3.c4 e6 4.
.11i.g5 Ji..e7 5.tl)c3 lilbd7 6.e3 0-0
7.Mel b6 S.cxd5 exd5 9.Ji..b5 .~b7
10.0-0 a6 1l •.liL.a4 BCS 12:~e2
c5 13.dxc5 lilxc5 14J''tfdl CfJxa4
15.lilxa4 b5 16.JJxcS ~xcS
17.lilc3.
(See diagram)
The d5-pawn needs defending,
and Black offered the exchange of
queens - 17 ....~ c4, counting on
the notorious advantage of the two
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
bishops. But, as Capablanca demon-
strates, this plan is faulty, since the
bishop on b7 is passive, and Black
cannot bring it into play other than
at the cost of the d-pawn. Black
should have avoided exchanges, and
therefore 17 ... Md8 was more logi-
cal, with the possible continuation
18.a3 h6 19.JH4 LfJe4, intending
.l:2.f6.
IS.QJd4 W'xe2 19.1ilcxe2! l1cS.
Black forestalls White's intention to
occupy the c-file, and as a result he
comes under a mortal pin. However,
it was not easy for him to disentan-
gle himself: 19 ... h6 2o.lilf5 .11l.d8
2L~h4 (2L~f4· .\!Lc8 22.l'tled4
followed by l::td I-c I is also good)
21. ... ltc8 22.CfJed4 .ltl.xf5 23.lilxf5
g6 24.CDd4! (weaker is 24.lilxh6+?!
Wg7 25.~xf6+ Ji..xf6 with active
play for the pawn) and then l'tdl-
c I. The exchange of rooks also does
not solve Black's problems: 19 ...
g6 2o.k:k I k!c8 2l.kIxc8+ .liLxc8
22.lilc6 ~f8 23.liled4 Ji..b7 (23 ...
Ji..d7 24.Jl.xf6 Ji..xf6 25.lilb4 leads
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
to the loss of a pawn) 24.CfJxe7
\t]xe7 25.0 with a clearly better
endgame for White.
20.<1IfS! White exploits the pin
on the knight to exchange Black's
dark-square bishop.
20 ..• c;t>f8. In the event of 20 ...
tLd8 White wins the d5-pawn
- 2l.<1Id6 gc7 22.lLlxb7 gxb7
23.,llxf6 ,s1i,xf6 24.Mxd5 .ttc7
25.I;(d2.
21.l'llxe7 Wxe7 22.CfJd4 g6 (par-
rying the threat of 23/1')f5) 23.f3!
Emphasising Black's helplessness
- to escape from the pin, he is forced
to give up a pawn.
23 ..• h6 24.i£.xh6 tZld7 25.h4
<1Ic5 26.i£.f4 lLle6 27.ttlxe6 \t>xe6
28.tJ:d2 Uh8? A loss of time, since
White ignores the threat to his h4-
pawn. 28 ... b4 was better, with the
idea after a6-a5 of activating the
bishop. White would have contin-
ued g2-g4 and h4-h5, creating a
passed pawn.
29.l:Ic2! Forcing the exchange of
195
rooks, after which, despite the pres-
ence of opposite-colour bishops,
White achieves a won endgame.
29 .•. l:!c8 30.11xc8 i£.xc8 31.
Wfl.
31. .. d4. A forced pawn sacri-
fice, since after the transference of
the white king to d4 Black is unable
to avert the threat of it penetrating
to c5 or e5.
32.exd4 Wd5 33.We3 .lte6
34.'it' d3 Wc6 35.a3 i£. c4+ 36. \t> e3
,~.e6 37.JiL.h6 Wd5 38.,~g7. Black
resigned.
In modem practice, improved
defensive technique means that far
more effort is demanded of the at-
tacking side, and often a direct at-
tack aimed at winning the isolated
pawn prov~ insufficient. To convert
the advantage it is normally neces-
sary to create an additional weak-
ness in the opponent's position, and
it is this that determines the attack-
ing side's strategy.
196 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

We will examine some typical In view of the threat of a frontal

examples of the play in compli- attack by the white rooks, the black
cated endgames, in which rooks are rooks are tied to the defence of the
present. d5-pawn and are unable to make use
of the c-file, since the 8th rank is in-
S.I. Play with four rooks adequately defended.
on the board 19 ... MadS (l9 ... I:rc8 20.I!acl)
20.I:tac1 \t>f8 21.IIc7 116d7
It can be considered that the 22.hldc1. It is important for White
main strategy in complicated end- to consolidate his grip on the c-file,
games with rooks present is the co- since the weakness of the d5-pawn
ordination of them with the minor alone is insufficient for a win, and
pieces. Therefore the defender must he needs to create a second weak-
be careful about exchanges that ness on the queens ide.
weaken the periphery. The absence 22 ••• We7.
of his dark-square bishop may tell
when there is a frontal attack on the
isolated pawn. The attacker may al-
ternate threats to the pawn with the
invasion of the rooks on the files ad-
jacent to the pawn, which may lead
to the transformation of the position
into a more favourable endgame.
We will begin with an ending
without any minor pieces.

BAREEV - FARAGO
Rome 1990 23.~d3 l::txc7 24.lIxc7+ l::td7
25.l::tcS. The exchange of one pair
of rooks favours White, since it re-
duces Black's possibilities of coun-
terplay to the minimum.
25 ••• h5?! An inaccuracy. 25 ... a5
was stronger, when White could re-
ply 26.g4!, preventing h7-h5.
26.b4! White carries out the plan
of creating a second weakness on
the queenside.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
26 ..• We6 27. W d4 f6 2S.h4. Pre-
venting 28 ... h4 followed by g7-g5.
2S ... WfS 29.0 Wg6. If29 ... g5,
then 30.hxg5 fxg5 3I.Uf8+ Wg6
32.11e8 followed by :te5, winning
the d5-pawn.
30.a4 wn 31.a5.
31. .. <J7e6. After 31. .. bxa5 32.
bxa5 <Jie6 White would have sur-
rounded and won the d5-pawn - 33.
)'lc6+ We7 34.Wc5 Wf7 35.11d6.
32.a6. Fixing the weakness on a7.
32 ... Wd6 33.b5 We6 34.g3
g6 35.11eS+ Wd6 36.UfB We6
37.t':cS Wd6 3S.I:!c6+ We7 39.g4
wn 40.gxh5 gxh5 41.MCS. Now
that Black has acquired three weak
pawns on a7, d5 and h5, his position
is hopeless.
41 ••• We642.MeS+ '\t>d643.1!IhS
1:c7 44.UdS+ We6 45.gxd5 fS
46.e4 fxe4 47.fxe4 Mh7 4S.MdS Uc7
49.11e8+ Wf6 50.e5+ rJJn 5tJlh8
~~c5 52.~xh5 We6 53.kIh6+ cJ;;e7
54.We4 ttxb5 55.WfS. Black re-
signed.
197
Having familiarised ourselves
with the problems of defend-
ing an isolated pawn in a double
rook endgame, let us tum to more
complicated positions with minor
pieces on the board. We will begin
with a typical example of a frontal
attack.
RIBLI - PINTER
Baile Herculane 1982
White's advantage is obvious: the
black rooks are tied to the defence
of the d5-pawn, and the bishop is
stronger than the knight. However,
the standard idea of a frontal attack
with the preparation of e3-e4 does
not work here.
For the conversion of the ad-
vantage, the---one weakness at d5 is
insufficient: another target must be
created.
27.g4! This pawn offensive on
the kingside, supported by the bish-
op, should lead to the creation of a
second weakness.
198
27 ... Wfi 2S.~e2 '>tle6 29.f4
fS?! The opening of the position fa-
vours White, who has a long-range
bishop. 30 ... g6 was more cautious.
30.gxfS+ \iJxfS 31.WO We6
32.h4 l'IfB 33.Wg4 g6? Black ig-
nores the threat of e3-e4, which
could have been parried by 33 ...
01b8.
34.e4! hS+. 34 ... I:Ifd8 leads to
a lost position after 35.exd5+ Mxd5
36.IIxd5 ~xd5 37.IIxd5 'itixd5
38.f5.
3S.WgS d4 36.~xd4 LIJdS
37.~g7 CiJfi+ 3S.Wxg6 CiJhS+
39.Wh6 tilfi+ 40.~xhS. Black re-
signed.
One of the modem defensive
ideas is to protect the d5-pawn with
the rook from c5. Here the rook is
more actively placed than in the rear,
since it not only defends the pawn,
but also participates in play on the c-
file. Nevertheless, the defender has
to be on the alert.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
IVANCHUK -ARONIAN
MorelialLinares 2007
Queen's Gambit D38
l.d4 01f6 2.c4 e6 3.010 dS
4.01c3 ~.b4 S..1i.gS 01bd7 6.cxdS
exdS 7.VJHc2 cS 8.a3 sU,xc3+ 9.VJHxc3
h610.,Uxf6 ~xf611.e3 0-0 12 .. ~.e2
b6 13.0-0 Si.b7 14.hIfc1 Bac8
IS.dxcS VJHxc3 16.llxc31hcs.
17.l:Icc1! Showing a deep under-
standing of the position. White takes
measures to retain the rooks, since for
a successful frontal attack on the iso-
lated pawn he needs both of them.
17 .. .lUc8?! To ease the de-
fence Black should have exchanged
rooks - 17 .. J~txc 1+ 18.bl:xc I :gc8
19.1'hc8+ .1lxc8, reaching a minor
piece endgame of the type examined
below in Averbakh - Matanovic.
18.Udl! l:l:c2 19.il.bS! {j)fB
20.IIabl. In an unusual way White
has retained both his rooks.
20 •• J'12c7. A prophylactic re-
treat in the event of LIJf3-d4. After
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
20 ... llle6 2 LllLd7 l:tffi! (21...I.Id8?
22 .. ilxe6 fxe6 23.ttJd4) 22.l:tdcl in
order to hold the c-file Black has to
make positional concessions: 22 ...
IXc4 23.b4 followed by ttJf3-e5.
21..~a4 ttJe6 22.Jl.b3 WfS
23.h3 gc5. This side protection of
the isolated pawn against a frontal
attack is one of the safe methods of
defence.
24.Wh2! By moving his king
away, White avoids the exchange of
rooks on the back rank.
24 .•• W e7 25.IId2 II b5 26..i1l a2
!lbc5 27.li'lel as 28.I.'tbdl !:Id8
29.\t>g3 Ilb5 30.f3.
199
30 ••• MC8? A mistake, leading
to the loss of a pawn. Black should
have played 30 ... Ii:c5 with a defen-
sible position.
31.ttJd3! (threatening to trap
the rook) 31. .• d4. A forced pawn
sacrifice. It was possible to defend
against the threat of 32.b4 by 31 ...
a4, but after 32.11Jb4 ttJc7 33.e4!
dxe4 34.gd7+ We8 35J:Ixn IIg5+
36.Wf2 exf3 37.gxf3 the invasion of
the second rook is decisive.
32.<~xe6 Wxe6 33.ttJf4+ r:JJe7
34.MXd4 Itc7 35.l:I Id2 Ubc5
36.e4 Mc4 37.I'Id6 hI4c6 38.e5 Mc2
39J:hc2 k'Ixc2 40.k'Ixb6, and with
two extra pawns White won easily.
AKOPIAN - SADVAKASOV
Moscow 2007
26.l::Iedl. Apart from the frontal
attack, the plan of playing the king to
d3 and exploiting the e-file deserved
serious consideration - 26.I.'t f3!?
~g8 27.~e2 0Jc6 28.Wd3 with the
possible variations:
200
I) 28.Jbxd4 29.~xd4 Uc4+
30.'.t>d3 lle4 (after 30 ... 'It'fS 31.b3!
White drives back the rook followed
by \t>d3-d4) 31.~fe3 (31.~xe4 dxe4+
32.Wxe4 l:d2=) 31...f6 32.l:tle2,
and White forces the exchange of a
pair of rooks with the subsequent ad-
vance \t>d3-d4 and f2-f4-f5;
2) 28 ... f6!? 29.~fe3 (in the event
of 29.ctJxc6 bxc6 Black can obtain
counterplay on the b-file: 30.I:1fe3
Wfl 31.l'te6 a5 32.b3 c5 33Jh6
c4+ 34.Wd4 cxb3 35.axb3 l:Ib8
36.l'lbl l:tb5 or 30.~f4 c5 3l.IIe6
c4+ 32.Wd4 tIb7) 29 .. .tbxd4
30.Wxd41Ic4+ 31.'lt'd3 b5 32.I:1e6
lIf4 (after 32 ... Wfl 33.Mxa6 d4
34.'itc2 dxc3 35.bxc3 b4 36.Ma7+
~g6 37.l::te3 or 32 ... d4 33.l:te8+
l:txe8 34.l::txe8+ '.t>fl 35.11e4
Black has no compensation for the
lost pawn) 33.Mxa6 k'Ixf2 34.ne2
l:he2 35.'itxe2 d4 36.'itd3 dxc3+
37.'~xc3 with advantage to White.
In the rook endgame, apart from the
weakness of the b5-pawn, Black has
to reckon with the creation of an
outside passed pawn.
26 ••• ~d6 27.lIld2 :ted7
28.C1lb3 b6 29.C1ld4 bS 30.lJ)b3
Me7 31.a3 kIb6 32.Ue2 g6 33.\t>e1.
The flank attack on the d5-pawn
- 33.LtJd4 l'ld6 34.l::te5 - is parried
by 34 ... f6 35.l'le6 l'lcd7 36.Ihd6
kIxd6 37.g4 (37.LtJb3 LtJc6) 37 ...
Wfl.
33 ... l:Id6 34.l'led2 !:Ie8 3S.'itdl
ge7. Black sticks to waiting tactics,
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
retaining both rooks. This leaves
him hopes of gaining counterplay,
which is more difficult after the
exchange of a pair of rooks - 35 ...
Ue6 36.LtJd4 l'le5 37.1!!e2 IIxe2
38.'lt'xe2.
36.tiJd4.
36 ... LtJe8! Black takes the op-
portunity to activate his knight
- from b6 it will not only defend the
d5-pawn, but also have an influence
on the queens ide.
37.tZle2 LtJ b6 38.tJJe3 !:ted7
39.b3. Without the preparation of
c3-c4 the frontal attack on the d5-
pawn is pointless. But this move
weakens the c3-pawn.
39 ... I:1e7 40.~e2 I'Ide6 41.\!7b2
kreS! The flank defence of an isolat-
ed pawn by a rook is often more ef-
fective than from the rear, since the
rook is more actively placed.
42.LtJe2 as! Black defends splen-
didly. He intends by a5-a4 to deform
White's pawn structure, which will
remove c3-c4 from the agenda.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 201

43.LiJe3 l:Id7 44.I1d4 a4 GELFAND - KARPOV

45.I't2d3 axb3 46.Wxb3 We7. Vienna 1996

In contrast to standard positions with

47.t'-tf4. As a result of the
an isolated dS-pawn, a small advantage
flank counterattack the two sides
is conferred by White's doubled f4-
now have the same number of
pawn, which is controlling the centre.
pawn weaknesses. After 47.Wb4
But to convert his advantage he must
there follows 47 ... ~d6, while if
create a second weakness in Black's po-
47.CiJg4 Black can sacrifice a pawn
sition, and with this aim he begins a
- 47 .. J'Xa7!? (weaker is 47 ... h5?!
pawn offensive on the queenside.
48.~e3+ Wf8 49.Cilf6 l:d8 50.g4,
21.b4 Cile6. The active 21...
establishing the knight at f6)
Cilce4 is not good because of22.CiJa4
48.Cilxh6 Wd6, with play against
with the threat off2-0.
the weak queens ide pawns: 49.gf3
22.Cflce2 ge7 23.a4 C/Jd8 24.aS
!lcc7 50.CiJg4 (50 ... f5 was threat-
.~c6 2S.0Jc3 .ii.e8 26 •.ltn bxaS
ened) 50 ... Cilc4.
27.bxa5 gb7.
47 ... \t>e6 48.Cilc2 We5 49.I'Ib4
ua7 50.CiJd4 !.Ia5 51.l:Ie3+ Wd6
52.~e2 Cilc4 53.ga2 Cile5 54.Wc2
0\c6 55.tilxc6 IIxc6. Black has
successfully defended, and after the
transition into a double rook ending
the game soon ended in a draw.

We will consider some exam-

ples of flank strategy with the use of
rooks to attack the rear periphery.
202 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

28.t'!al! A Petrosian-style move.

The removal of this rook from its ac-
tive position has the specific preven-
tive aim of defending the a5-pawn,
in order to begin a piece attack on
the weak a6- and d5-pawns.
28 •• Ji:c7?! An aimless move,
which merely invites the knight to go
to h4, for where it is aiming. Black
should have brought up his forces to-
wards the centre - 28 ... \t>e7 or 28 ...
01e6, whereas the obvious 28 ... 01e4 39 ... 0\e6 40.!!xc7+ 01xc7
would have run into 29.0\db5! .l.1.xb5 41.Wfl r;t;e7 42.fS gS 43.r;t;e1. The
30.ctJxe4. king heads for d4.
29. ctJa2 kIb7 30.13 0\e6 43 .... Iii,bS. Black pins his last
31.I:tdbl. Now, after the seizure of hopes on the rook endgame.
the b-file, the game is decided, and 44•..liLxbS ctJxbS 4S.0'\xbS axbS
the subsequent lengthy struggle is 46.gxbSMc647JhdSktc348.Wd2
merely explained by Karpov's fine I'ta3 49.Wc2 The3 SO.Wb2 kte2+
defensive technique. S1.Wb3 gxh2 S2.a6 IIhl S3.Wb4
31. •• l'te7 32.lfib4 0\cS. After rIal 54.gaS ktb1+ SS.~cS ~b8
the passive defence of the a6-pawn S6.a7l!a8 S7.~c6, and White won.
- 32 ... ctJxd4 33.exd4 l'la7 White
liquidates into a technically won NAIDITSCH - BUNZMANN
endgame: 34.ttJxa6 Maxa6 35.~xa6 Bad Wiessee 1999
IIxa6 36.~b6 ~xb6 37.axb6 2l.c6
38.I:tcl (Gelfand).
33.~c1 IIb7 34.lJabl 0\fd7
3S.ctJbc6 I:tc7 36.ctJeS We7 37.IIc3
f6 38.CiJxd7 Wxd7.
(See diagram)
39.gb8! The attempt to trans-
form the positional advantage into
a material one by the pin 39.lJbcl
0\e6 4O.ctJxe6 ~xc3 41.0'\f8+ We7
42.ctJxg6+ hxg6 43.gxc3 allows White has an enduing positional
Black to become active with 43 ... d4. advantage in view of the weakening
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
of Black's queenside pawns, and, as
a consequence, of the dark squares,
which makes it more difficult for
him to defend the isolated d5-pawn.
20.a4! White is threatening to
win the d5-pawn after setting up a
bind with 21.a5 and invading with
his bishop on b6. Therefore Black is
forced to go in for a further weaken-
ing of his pawn structure.
20 .•• b6 21.a5! bxa5. Avoid-
ing the exchange by 21 ... b5 leads
to the loss of a pawn after 22.~b6
ttSd7 23.QJc5 QJxc5 24.Ji£.xc5 lJe6
25.iLxe7 IIexe7 26.Q'\xd5.
22.Q'\a4 Wd7 23.0xa5 ttbS
24.c4. White goes in for a forcing var-
iation, provoking d5-d4, but 24.Q'\c3
was simpler: 24 .. .ttJc7 (or 24 ... d4
25.QJc4! QJd5 26.Ji£.xd4 QJxc3
27 ..~xc3) 25.Ji£. f4 tte6 26.QJxd5
0lfxd5 27.I!xd5+ 0lxd5 2S.Ji£.xbS
with an extra pawn.
24 .•• d4 (24 ... MCS 25.Wbl) 25.
c5 ttd5 26.iLxd4 I:Ixd4 27.l:txd4+
QJxd4 2S.l:txd4+ We7 29S~Jc2
CiJd730.b4.
203
White is a pawn up with a win-
ning position.
30 ••• iH6 31.tte4 gb5? This
leads to further loss of material.
31.. .QJe5 32.QJb6 I::tdS 33.QJbc4
Q'\xc4 34.QJxc4 I::td5 was more te-
nacious.
32.QJc3 Ji£.xc3 33.Wxc3 QJxc5.
Otherwise the invasion of the rook
is decisive.
34.l:'Ic4 Wb6 35Jhc5 l:xc5+
36.bxc5+ 'it'xc5 37.QJb3+ Wd5
3S.Wd3 g5 39.lZ'ld2 g4 40.f4 Wc5
41.ttJe4+ 'it'b4 42.'i!7c2 h4 43.QJd6
Wc5 44.CLJxti g3 45.hxg3 hxg3
46.QJh6 Wd4 47.cllf5+. Black re-
signed.
DREEV - R1AZANTSEV
Sochi2005
Contrary to popular OpIniOn,
with other pieces on the board, op-
posite-colour bishops by no means
guarantee a draw. Moreover, the
side with the more active bishop has
a definite advantage. In the given
204
position White's dark-square bishop
is influencing events on both wings,
and the black king will be tied to the
defence of its pawns.
23.g5! White fixes the kingside
pawns.
23 ... Uac8 24.i..d4. It stands
to reason that play on the c-file
- 24.1:'Iacl I:Ic6 25.Ji.d4 Ufc8 gets
White nowhere.
24 ••• f6?! This natural desire to
escape from the pressure of the g5-
pawn creates a problem with the f6-
pawn. Black's best chance was to ac-
tivate his rooks as much as possible.
Riazantsev gives the following varia-
tion: 24 ... I:tc2 25.'it>h2 :Ifc8 26.\t>g3
l:::td2 27.l::thl 1:'Icc2 28.Uh2 I:txa2
29.l:::tahl \t>f8 30.l:Ih8+ ~e7 31.Mb8
l:::txg2+ 32.\t>f4 I:Iaf2 33.Uxb7+ Wd6
34.l:::tb6+ \t>d7! and, in view of the
threat of a mating attack after 35 ...
I:tg4+, White is forced to open the p0-
sition with 35.e4, which increases the
mobility of the black rooks. Here are
some possible variations: 35 ... l:Id2
(35 ... I:tg4+ 36.<;kte3 b'Igg2 37.~c I
Me2+ 38.<.tf4I:tg4+!? 39.fxg4Mxe4+
40.\t>f3 I:txd4 41.l:ha6 Ji.xg4+
42.'it>e3 I:te4+ 43.Wd2 .llt.e6 is also
possible, with sufficient compensa-
tion for the exchange) 36J1L.xg7 dxe4
37.fxe4 1::Id3 38.i..f6 I:tg4+ 39.We5
ttxb3 40.ttxa6 IIb5+ 41.Wd4
Uxe4+!, forcing a draw.
25.gxf6 gxf6 26.Wfl ~g7?!
Black should first have included
26 ... l:c2+ 27.\t>g3 and now 27 ...
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
Wg7, denying White a possibility
which occurred in the game.
27.g4! Uh8 28.~g3 g5 29.Uht
Uxht 30.Mxht. The black king is
tied to the defence of the f6-pawn,
and at the same time White can at-
tack with his f-pawn.
30 ••• Wg63t.f4 f5! After the pas-
sive 31 ... i..g8 32.f5+ ~g7 33.Iih5
<tJf7 White prepares the creation of
a second weakness on the queen-
side: 34.a4 Uc6 35.a5 MC I 36.l':Ih6
1::Ic6 37.b4 Wg7 38.:Ig6+ Wf7
39.Wf2! i..h7 40.gh6lL.g8 41.We2
Wg7 42.gg6+ Wf7 43.Wd2 <1lh7
44.gh6 i..g8 45.kthl llc4 46.Mbl
followed by b4-b5.
32.t'th5! gxf4+ 33.exf4 fxg4
34.b'I g5+ W h6. If 34 ... Wf7, then
35.f5 ,~d7 36.Ug7+ We8 37.f6 is
decisive.
35.ge5?! A loss of time. The
immediate 35.~h4! was stronger:
35 ... i..f7 36.:f5 Mc7 37.Mf6+
Wh7 38.1::Id6! Ile7 39.~xg4 Wg8
(or 39 .. J~Ie2 40.l':Id7 ~g6 41.f5+
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
Wh6 42.IId6+ Wh7 43.Wg5 with
the invasion of the king) 40.Wg5
Wf8 41. rt; f6 with a complete bind.
35 •.• Me8 36.Wh4 iLf7?! Black
misses a chance to activate his piec-
es: 36 ... g3! 37.Wxg3 iLfl, which
would enable him to hold the po-
sition. For example: 38.IU5 iLe6
39.lIf6+ Wh5 40.f5 iLg8 4l.Ub6
~g5 42.f6l:e4= (Riazantsev).
37.l';'1:f5 ~g6. There is not much
choice. 37 ... ,\&.g8 38.lIf6+ Wh7
39.Wxg4 Me6 leads to a lost bishop
ending after 40.Wg5 (40.1lf8 ~e4)
40 .. Jhf6 4l.Wxf6 Wh6 42.f5
,~,h7 43.\t>e6 iLg8+ 44.\t>e7 <;t>g5
45.'i.t>f8, while the active 37 ... ge4
38.Ilxfl IIxd4 39.Wxg4 I:d2
40.l:Ixb7 l:txa2 4l.Wf5 leads to a
difficult rook ending.
38.IIxd5 iLe4. More tenacious
was 38 ... g3 39.\t>xg3iLe440.l:Id6+
etc.
39.l':th5+ Wg6 40.fS+! Wf7.
In this position White could
have won by an attack on the
205
king: 41.~h7+ Wf8 42.\t>g5!
Wg8 (42 ... g3 43.Wf6) 43.IIg7+
Wf8 44.f6 IIc8 45.b4 g3 46.iLc5+
I1xc5+ 47.bxc5 g2 48.Wf4 with
a simple win (Riazantsev). But
there followed 41.Wxg4? iLbl!
42.'5t>g5 l'!d8! and Black held the
position: 43.I:th7+ We8 44.l:th8+
\i7d7 45.IIh2 We8! 46.i.e5 l:dl
47.l'Ih8+ Wd7 48.l::th7+ We8!
49.bIxb7ggl+50.Wf6l:ln 51.i.e3
l:xfS+! 52.rt;e6 J::tb5 53.l:te7+ Wd8
54.l'Id7+ <;t>c8 55.lId2 Ilc5 56.iLe5
IIc6+ 57.We7 iLfS 58.lld8+ Wb7
59.,1l.d6 ~c8. Draw.
I.SOKOLOV - TREGUBOV
Reykjavik 2006
White has a slight advantage
thanks to his more active bishop,
which is able to support his pawn
offensive on the kingside.
28.l:tc3. White prepares to ex-
change rooks on a defended square.
After 28.b3 l':txcl 29J:hcl iLxa3
30.l:IaliLc531.l:ha7iLxd432.exd4
206
tIc8! Black has very real chances of
saving the rook endgame.
28 ... tIxc3 29.ihc3 f6 30.f4
~f7 31.'.tif2 ilcs 32.~f3. The
sharp 32.b4 weakens the bishop's
base and in the future it may allow
the undermining of this pawn. For
example: 32 ... ile7 33.~f3 ~e6
34.fS+ ~d6 3S.Mcl (or 3S.ilel
~c6 36.tIc1+ ~b7 37.ilg3 Mc8)
3S ... MC8 36.ileS+ ~d7.
32 .. J~te8 33.tId3 bS 34.fS.
34 ... Md8. The alternative was
34 ... ii.b6!? 3s.l:hdS (in the rook
endgame after 3s.ild4 ilxd4
36.MXd4 tIeS the weaknesses equal-
ise one another: 37.Mb4 a6 38.a4
bxa4 39.l:ha4 hS 40.tIxa6 hxg4+
41.~xg4 Mxe3=) 3S ... Mxe3+
36.~f4 Me2 37.MxbS Mxg2 38.a4
with the better chances for White
(variation by Sokolov). But now
White occupies the only open file,
the c-file, with his rook.
3S.ilaS! Md7 36.MC3 ii.d6
37.MC8 ileS. A logical move, pre-
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
venting White from achieving com-
plete domination by ilaS-c3-d4.
38.il b4! This mate threat is
the point of the bishop manoeu-
vre. Black is forced to weaken his
kingside, which will be of decisive
importance in the rook endgame for
which White is aiming.
38 ... g6 39.ilc3! gxfS 40.gxfS
ilxc3 41.Mxc3. In the rook end-
game White has a clear advantage.
41...'it'e7.
42.MCS! In the event of 42.MC8
Black activates his rook by a pawn
sacrifice: 42 ... d4! 43.exd4 ttxd4
44.MC7+ 'l-t'd6 4S.Mxa7 Md2! (weak-
er is 4S ... 'I-t'eS 46.MaS MdS 47.g4
Md3+ 48.'I-t'e2 Mb3 49.a4 Mxb2+
SO.~d3 'l-t'f4 sl.lhbS Ma2 S2.Mh4+
'l-t'gS S3.'I-t'c4, when White's passed
pawn should decide the game) 46.h4
'l-t'eS 47.MaS Md3+ 48.'I-t'g4 MdS,
obtaining definite counterplay (vari-
ations by Sokolov).
42 ... a6 43.MC6 d4. Black can-
not get by without this move. If
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
43 ... gd6 there follows 44.gc7+,
and now 44 ... gd7? leads to a lost
pawn endgame: 4S.gxd7+ ~xd7
46.~g4. There only remains 44 ...
~d8 4S.gh7, when White begins
picking up pawns.
44.ge6+ ~f7 45.exd4 gxd4 46.
gxa6 1:1d3+ 47.~g4 gd2 48.1:1a7+
~e8 49.g3 l:'l:xb2 50.~h5 l:'l:h2+
(SO ... gg2 Sl.g4 gg3 was more
tenacious) 51.~g6 gg2 52.~xf6
Mxg3 53.a4 bxa4 54.gxa4 h5
55.ga8+ ~d7 56.gh8 gh3 57.~f7
h4 58.f6 gh1.
59.~g7? White is ahead in the
conversion of his passed pawn, but
in time-trouble he plays carelessly.
S9.~g8! h3 60.l:'l:h7+ ~e6 61.t7
gg1+ 62.~f8 gg3 63.We8 ga3
64.gh6+ would have won.
59 ... gg1+? Black returns
the favour. S9 ... h3! 60.t7 gg1+
61.~f8 gg3 would have led to a
draw.
60.~f8 :ctg4 61.17 ~d8 62.1:1g8.
Black resigned.
207
RUBLEVSKY - SASIKIRAN
World Cup, Khanty-Mansiysk 200S
A particular feature of the posi-
tion is that, compared with its op-
posite number, the white king can
reach the centre far more quickly,
and therefore it is to White's advan-
tage to exchange rooks, making it
easier for him to attack the isolated
pawn.
26.~d2! ge5. Doubling rooks
by 26 ... gae8 27.gS liJhS 28.gxh6
gxh6 29.~e4 leads to the loss of the
exchange.
27.gde1 lhe1. The alterna-
tive was 27 ... gae8 28.gxeS gxeS
29.gel gxel 30.~xel, and with
his dominating knight on d4 White
has clearly the better minor piece
endgame. A possible variation is
30 ... ~f8 31.~e2 ~e7 32.~e3
gS 33.hS ~d6 34.~fS ~e6 3S.f4!
gxf4+ 36.~xf4, and White creates
an outside passed h-pawn - 36 ...
~e7 37.gS hxgS+ (37 ... liJxhS+
38.'~tg4 liJg7 39.gxhS) 38.~xgS,
208 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

which is bound to decide the KAIDANOV - BRADFORD

game. USA Championship 2007
28.Ihel WfS 29.gS! After the
pushing back of the knight, the d5-
pawn becomes more vulnerable.
29 ••. hxgS. After 29 ... tLlh5
30.gxh6 gxh6 3 LliLf5 Jtxf5
32.CZJxf5 the h6-pawn is lost.
30.hxgS Ci\e8 31.We3 fjic7
32.Wf4 lile6+. No better was
32 ... Me8 33.Uhl CZJe6+ (33 ... ~g8
34.Jth7+ ~f8 35o<~(5) 34.We5
~g8 (34 .. ,ciixg5+? 35.~d6 .1l.h3
36.f4 loses a piece) 35.CZJxe6 ~.xe6
36.Wd4 with the threat of advanc- 20.ileS! It is important to retain
ing the f-pawn. the rook, in order to control the
33.CZJxe6+ ..I1lxe6 34.rJhl We7 e-file and attack the isolated d5-
3S.l::th7IIg8 36.WeS d4. A forced pawn.
pawn sacrifice. After the pas- 20 ... .tL.d7 21.SLb3 .1i.c6 22Jiae1
sive defence 36 ... g6 37.f4 Wd7 as 23.a3 h6 24.0 a4 2S.Jta2. The
White carries out a pawn break- bishop has performed its role on the
through on the kingside. For ex- a2-g8 diagonal, and now was the
ample: 38.f5 gxf5 39 ..liLxf5 it..xf5 time to switch it to the weakened
40.IIxf7+ 'it'e8 41.kl:xf5 with a g6-square after 25 .. ltc2!
won rook endgame. Also good is 2S .. J:1a6 26.Mle2 Itb6 27JUS
38.it..b5+ \tic7 39.a3 ~f8 40.IIg7 ~fS 28.IIfeS Md8 (28 .. JJf7
IIh8 41.f5! it..xf5 42.IIxf7+ Wb8 29.l:te6) 29.Wfl tId7.
43.'it'xd5, threatening an attack on
the king.
37.a3 g6 38.'it'xd4 ~d8+
39.We3 Wd6 40.Uh4 ~e841.:eId4+
<;t>cS 42.b4+ axb4 43.axb4+ ~c6
44.<;t>f4 it..a2 4S.c4, and White con-
verted his extra pawn.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
30•.ltbl. White has discovered
the Achilles' heel of Black's posi-
tion - the g6-point.
30 •• J!dS 3111e7 .ltbS 32/lJxbS
gxbS 33..ltg6 WhS 34.Wel 1Ib6
3S.h4 hS 36.It7e6 ItbS. 36 ... Itxe6
37.T.he6 d4 3S.cxd4 l:txd4 39.Itb6
tId7 40.Mb4 also fails to save Black.
37•.ad3 ttcs 3S.l':!e7 bS 39.l'.:Ib7
d4 40.llxbS MCCS 41.c4. Black re-
signed.
S.2. Play with one pair of rooks
In positions where there is one
pair of rooks remaining, an increas-
ingly important role is played by the
king, which may take an active part in
the attack on weaknesses. When con-
ducting the strategy of an attack on the
isolated pawn, still important is the
motif of creating an additional weak-
ness and transposing into a favourable
rook or minor piece ending.
HORT - VELIMIROVIC
Budapest 1973
209
The weak d5 and a4 pawns in
Black's position give White a slight
advantage. But if Black should suc-
ceed in exchanging the a4-pawn for
the pawn on b2, the weaknesses at
d5 and c3 may cancel each other
out.
24/lJd4 .ii..eS 2S.tZJa6! White
manoeuvres skilfully with his
knights, preventing a4-a3 and keep-
ing the d5-pawn under fire. For ex-
ample, in the event of 25 .. Jha6
26.IheS+ Cilf8 it is not easy for
Black to escape from the pin:
27.lLjf5 f6 28.£L)e7+ Wfl 29.£L)xd5
'l!txeS 30.Cilc7+ Wd7 3l.tZJxa6
c;;t>d6 32.tZJb4 with an extra pawn
for White.
2S ..• WfB 26.tZJb4 tZJe7?! Miss-
ing the opportunity to play 26 ... a3
27.bxa3 Jdxa3 2S.tZJdc2 (2S.g3 Ita5)
2S ... ~a5, when Black's chances of
a draw increase.
27.tZJdc2! Now the a4-pawn is
securely blockaded, and White can
embark on a siege of the d5-pawn.
210 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

27 .. Jlb8 28.k'!d3 .~.d7 29.l1Ie3 42 .•• Me2+ 43.<J7b3 llxg2 44.bS

lle6 30.0 g6 31.Wfl k(b6 32. We7. Or 44 .. .11gl 45.I'!e5 f6 46.
%>el. l:e2 with the threat ofb5-b6.
4S.b6 llgl 46.We2! Ilg2+ 47.
We3 I!gl 48.We2 !!g2+ 49.\t,>e3
rIgl SO.llbS r!el+ Sl.Wd4 !;!dl+
S2.WeS 21el+ S3.WdS :t1dl+
S4.<.t>e6 nel+ SS.YeS IlxeS+
S6.'~ixeS Wd7 S7.WdS fS S8.h4.
Black resigned.

PARMA-PUC
Ljubljana 1969

32 •..tbe6?! An unnecessary
knight exchange, leading to an end-
ing with a stable structure, where the
remaining knight is clearly stronger
than the bishop. 32 ... g5 33.Wd2 f5
came into consideration.
33.Cilxe6 r!xe6 34.Wd2 !IeS
3s.lij e2 .1L fS? In order to prevent the
knight from reaching the d4 blockad-
ing point, Black is ready to go into a
rook endgame, in which White finds White's advantage consists in the
a winning manoeuvre. Black should possibility of organising an attack on
have held his ground with 35 .. JJb5 the d5-pawn, and also the more ac-
36.Wcl We7 37.lL\d4 gb6. tive role of his king, which, in con-
36.gd4 ,~xe2 37.'.txe2 IlaS trast to its opposite number, is ready
38. W b l! The threat of the king ma- to arrive at the centre of events.
noeuvre to a3 forces Black to part 26.g4! White seizes space on the
with one of his weak pawns - d5 or kingside and prepares to switch his
a4. knight to e3 for an attack on the d5-
38 ... a3 39.b4 a2+ 40.Wal !1a3 pawn.
4tJ::txdS ktxe3 42.\txa2! With the 26 ••. 111 d7. If26 ... g6 there would
king cut off, the b-pawn is bound to follow 27.l1Ie2 with the threat of
decide the game. 28.g5, which can only be parried by
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
g6-g5, leading to a weakening of the
f5-point.
27.tLlfS tilb6 28.b3. Nothing
is given by 28.tild6?! on account
of 28 .. Jlc6! (28 ... Mc7? 29.Ite3)
29.Lf'lxb7 Lf'la4 30.MXd5 l'Ib6, and
Black regains the sacrificed pawns.
28 ••• g6 29.tLle3 MeS. If 29 ...
Hd8? there follows 30.c4 d4
31.Lf'le2, winning a pawn.
30S!te2. For the attack on the
d5-pawn the knight must be evicted
from b6, and this cannot be done
without the support of the king.
30 ••. h6?! ilealising that it is too
late to support the d5-pawn with the
king (30 ... We7 3l.a4 We6 32.b4
Yc8 33.a5, and White wins the
pawn), Black prepares to bring it
into play via f6. Strange logic - it
would have been better to spend a
tempo on 30 ... a5!?
31.Wd2 Wg7? The black king
is still unable to come to the rescue
of the d5-pawn - 31... We7 32.b4
(32.a4 is also good) 32 ... Mc8 (if
211
32 .. Jlb5? all the same there fol-
lows 33.a4! tLlxa4 34.Lilxd5+, also
winning the exchange) 33.QJxd5+
Lf'lxd5 34.MXd5, and in the rook
endgame White has an extra pawn
on the queenside with the king cut
off. But here too it was not yet too
late for 31.. .a5, not fearing 32.b4
:r'tb5!?
32J::td4! An important blockad-
ing move, which supports the pawn
offensive on the queenside. In the
event of 32.b4 l'!b5!? 33.l:td4 a5
34.a3 a4 35.c;t>d3 Wf6 the king suc-
ceeds in defending the d5-pawn, and
then after tLlb6-d7 the rook is also
released from captivity.
32 •.. as 33.a4 ~f6 34.M axM
3S.exMlle6 36.aS Ci\e8. Even worse
is 36 ... 'l!ie5? 37.Wd3, when the tac-
tics do not work: 37 ... Mc3+? 38.~xc3
Lf'la4+ 39.Wb3 Wxd4 40H)dl.
37JcixdS We6 38.f4 tLld6
39.kteS+ '.i7d7 40J:tdS We6.
41.fS+! Before breaking
through on the queens ide, it is use-
212
ful also to advance a pawn on the
kingside.
41. .. gxfS 42.gxfS+ We7 43.bS
~e8 44.a6 bxa6. 44 ... MaS 45.axb7
~bS was more tenacious.
4S.bxa6 Wd7 46.k1:aS We6
47.Wd3 Wb6 48.IIa4 I1JbS 49.a7!
~d8+. 49 ... QJxa7? is not pos-
sible because of 50.'41c4+ Wb7
5I.Cild6+.
SO.QJdS+! Wb7 (5o .. Jhd5+
51.\te4) S1.a8~+ I'ha8 S2.~b4
I'raS (52 ... ~c6 53.I:rxb5!) S3.lile3
We6 S4.ttxbS ttxbS SS.QJxbS
WxbS S6.Wd4. This is where the
foresight in playing 41. f5+ is seen.
S6 ... We6 S7.WeS Wd7 S8.~f6
We8 S9.~g7 We7 60.f6+ We6
61.h3. Black resigned.
NIKOLIC - PORTISCH
Ter Ape\ 1994
24.I!e2! An important move
- the a2- and f2-pawns are possible
targets for Black's counterplay and
therefore they must be defended.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
24 ... QJe4 2S.CileS k!b7 26.Wn
WfS 27.We2 ~e7 28.g4 QJf6 29.h3
g6 30.0 hS 31.gS tile8 32.Wd3
tile733.MeS.
33 •.. d4. An essentially forced
pawn sacrifice, since Black is
in a kind of zugzwang: the d5-
pawn is weak and 33 ... Wd6? is
not possible because of 34.HC6+
We7 (34 ... Wxe5?? 35.f4+ ~f5
36.I.':f6#) 35.IIf6. After 33 ... 1L1a6
34.Ma5 QJb4+ 35.Wc3 Wd6 36.f4
when a zugzwang position again
arises - the f7-pawn is weak. Also
dubious is 33 ... f6 34.gxf6+ Wxf6
35.lilc6 Ub2, and now, if there
is nothing better, 36.QJe7 <#Jxe7
37.Ihc7+ We6 3sJha7 winning
a pawn.
34.exd4 QJe6 3S.ttaS QJxgS 36.
tilxg6+ <;t>f6 37.lilf4 h4 38.tilhS+
Wg6 39/i)f4+ Wf6 40.k!a6+
'ltJfS 41/iJg2 lilxh3 42.UaS+
We6 43.We3 ~d6 44.tilxh4
tte7+ 4S.~d2 We6 46.tilfS kld7
47.\t>e3 Wb6 48.IteS liJgS 49.a4,
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 213

and White gradually converted his

extra pawn.

MAMEDYAROV - KVEINYS
Reykjavik 2006

26 .. J~c8. Serious considera-

tion should have been given to the
exchange 26 ... fxg4+!? 27.hxg4,
when Black sets up counterplay:
27 ... ctJgS+ 28.We2 ctJe4 29.ctJd3
as 30.l:tcl gS! For example: 31.b4
White's advantage is minimal. axb4 32.axb4 IIa8 33.IIc2 gxf4
He cannot extract anything real from (33 ... IIa3 is also good) 34.exf4 d4!
the blockade of the d4-point and 3S.'lttf3 'lttdS, and the black pieces
the c-file - 21.'lttd3 'lttd6 22.ctJd4 become very active - lIa3 is threat-
<1JcS+ 23.We2 g6 etc. Therefore his ened.
chances lie in creating a new weak- 27,CiJa2 llc5 28.ttJc3 'lttc6
ness on the kingside. 29.l:ld3I1'Jc7 30.gxfS gxfS.
21.f4 fS!? The blockade of the at-
tacking pawn allows White to create
a new target - the fS-pawn. It would
also not have been easy to breach
Black's position after the passive
21.. si,d6 22.g4 IIe8, although he
can also go in for counter-activity
- 22 ... as with the idea of 23.l:tdl
a4 24.l1Jd4 ctJxd4+ 2S.I!xd4 'lttcs,
reaching a tenable rook endgame.
22.h3 b6 23.g4 IIrs 24.l:tdl g6
25.\tJf3. 2s.IIxdS fxg4 26.hxg4
l:Ixf4 favours Black. 31.h4. White plans to invade
25 ... Wd6 26.ctJcl. with his rook along the g-file with
214
an attack on the h7-pawn, which in
the end proved successful, and first
he advances his h-pawn. However,
as the course of the game shows,
Black gains counterplay on the op-
posite wing. The invasion of the
king looks more logical: 31.Wg3
Wd6 (31...CiJbS? 32.liJxbS UxbS
is not possible on account of 33.b4
as 34.ttd4, when the black rook
is immobilised) 32.b4 (weaker is
32.Wh4 We6 33StgSliJe8 34.Wh6
liJf6 3S.liJe2 liJe4 36.liJd4+ Wf6)
32 .. J~c6 33.Wh4 We6 34.WgS as
3S.bxaS bxaS 36.h4 (36.Wh6 wn+
37.WgS ttf6 38.liJxdS is also pos-
sible, winning the dS-pawn, but not
37.Wxh7?? liJe6 and the king finds
itself in a mating net) 36 ... l::!cs
37.liJe2 (37.'~h6 wn 38.hS btc6+
39.WgS IIf6 is less effective) with
the decisive threat of 38.liJd4+.
For example: 37 ... CilbS (or 37 ...
liJe8 38.liJd4+ wn 39.liJb3 Iic6
40.'t>xfS) 38.a4! l::tc2 39.axbS btxe2
40.IIa3 l:tg2+ 41.~hS IIg3 42.b6
and the b-pawn decides the game
- 42 ... d4 (or 42 ... Wd6 43.b7 Wc7
44.thas Ilxe3 4SJ!txdS Wxb7
46.l!td7+ ~c6 47.l:Ixh7) 43.UxaS
d3 44.b7 d2 4S.~eS+ \tid7 46.l!tdS+
Wc7 47.I:txd2 etc.
31. •• 85 32.h5 liJb5 33.ctJe2 84
34.J:Id2. Defending against the inva-
sion of the rook, which was possible
after 34.l::td I. In the event of 34.b3
axb3 3S.a4 liJd6 36.liJd4+ Wc7
37.liJxb3 l::tc4 (37 ... .l:c2? 38.IhdS
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
I!h2 39.liJd4 btxhS 4o.Cil bS+ CiJxbS
41.axbS leads to a lost rook end-
game) 38.btxdS kIxa4 39.Cild411aS
Black retains the balance.
34 •.. Wd7 35.k':dl We6 36.ldgl
kIc2 37.l::tg7 d4. Black makes space
for his king, enabling him to use his
rook more actively. But the simple
37 .. Jhb238.Mxh7Q\xa339.0Jd4+
Wf6 4o.lIh6+ 'tJn 41.J:h7+ Wf8
was also possible, defending suc-
cessfully.
38.exd4. After 38Jhh7 d3 it is
White who has to fight for a draw.
38 .. .Ihb2 39.IIxh7 Irb3+
40.Wg2.
40 .• J~b2. Black intends to cap-
ture the a3-pawn with his knight, but
the coordination of his pieces would
also have been adequately con-
solidated after 40 ... l::te3!? 41.liJg3
~xa3. For example: 42.l':tb7 (42.
l::th6+ wn 43.tihfS :tb3 44.IIxb6
is parried by 44 ... liJxd4) 42 ... liJxd4
43.h6 l':tc3 44.l::txb6+ wn 4S.l':tb4
l!tc2+ 46.'I£Jh3 liJf3 47.CiJxfS Wg6
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
4S.0Je7+ \t>xh6 49.lha4 ~g7,
reducing the pawn material to the
minimum.
41.'~n Cilxa3 42.h6 t"ilc2. The
alternative 42 ... tLlc443.dS+ (nothing
is given by 43.l:tc7 Cild2+ 44.Wgl
CilfJ+4S.<ti7fl Cilh2+46.WelliJfJ+)
43 ... Wf6! (43 ... \t>xdS?! 44.l::td7+
~e6 4S.h7 l:Ibl+ 46.\t>g2 Cile3+
47.WfJ lIhl 4S.I:IdSleads to the loss
of the knight) 44.\ita liJd6 causes
Black great problems. For example,
the variation 4S.MC7 0Je4+ 46.We3
l"Ib3+ 47.'~d4 llb4+ 4S.Wd3 ktbl
49.QJc3! (49.lilcl I:l:b2 SO.h7 kth2=)
49 ... a3 SO.h7 Uhl Sl.tLlxe4+ fxe4+
S2.~xe4 a2 S3.l:Ia7 Mxh7 S4.l'Ixa2
leaves White with chances in the
rook endgame.
43.dS+!? A useful move, which
unexpectedly proves effective. In
the event of 43.l::rg7 Ubl+ 44.Wg2
Cile3+ 4S.WfJ CildS 46.Cilg3 l'Ib3+
Black neutralises the h-pawn.
43 •• .'\t;d6? This loses. 43 ...
\t>f6! would have held the position.
21S
44.lJg7 l'Ib1+ 4S.Wg2. 4S.'it)f2
a3 46.kIa7! would also have won.
4S ..• Cile3+ 46.Wh2 tLln+
47.Wh3 .llb2. 47 ... ttel 4S.t:tg6+
WxdS 49.liJc3+ Wc4 SO.h7 liJe3
Sl.Wh2 tLlfl+ S2.~hl tLlg3+
S3.'lt'g2 would also not have saved
the game.
48.Jlg2 0Je3 49.l:Ig6+. Black
resigned.
CHLOUPEK - STOHL
Prague 1992
In this position with an isolated
d4-pawn the advantage is with Black
- his blockading knight is obviously
stronger than the bishop. To convert
this advantage it is important for
him to coordinate the actions of his
knight and rook.
30 ••• Mb8! Black prepares a pawn
offensive on the queens ide. He does
not occupy the open c-file with his
rook, since after the exchange of
rooks it is not easy to win the minor
piece ending.
216
3t.l:cl Wf8 32.<>tn <>te8
33.<;!te2 Wd7 34.Wd3. White de-
cides against preventing Black's
pawn offensive on the kingside,
since after 34.h4 h5 his pawns are
on squares of the same colour as
his bishop, and after l:tb8-g8 Black
could prepare g7-g5, trying to obtain
a passed pawn or create a weakness
at h4.
34 ••• g5! The advance of the
black pawns has the aim of fixing
White's pawns on dark squares.
35.0 h5 36.l:te2 g4! 37.l:t12 f5
38.i..el.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
38 .•• b5! And now, in tum, weak-
nesses are created on the queens ide.
39.fxg4. If 39.h3 there follows
39 ... h4! 40.fxg4 hxg3 41.11f3 f4.
39 ••• hxg4 40.i..f4. White
should not have conceded the c-file
-40.l'.:tc2.
40 •. J::te8 41.i..d2. If 41.l::Ic2
there would have followed 41 ...
CiJxf4+ 42.gxf4 l'.:th8 with the inva-
sion of the rook - 43 ... l::Ih3+.
41. •• a4 42.bxa4 bxa4 43.i..b4
:i:Icl 44.l::Ib2.
44 ••• CiJf6! The knight has ful-
filled its blockading function on d5
and it now switches to e4.
45.i..e5 CiJe4 46.IiIb7+? 46.i..b4
Wc6 47.i..a5 was more tena-
cious. After the exchange of rooks
- 47.l:tc2+? Uxc2 48.Wxc2 CiJg5
49.Wd3 CiJf3 (but not 49 ... Wd5
50.We3 CiJf3? 5I.h4!) White loses
his h2-pawn.
46 ... We6 47.l'.:tb6+ We7 48.
Ihe6? This loses a piece, although
it was possible to restrict the loss to
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 217

a pawn - 48.We3 e5! 49.1:a6 1:c3+ pawns on squares of the opposite

50.<;t>e2 exd4 51.il..xd4 l:Ixa3, colour to your bishop. '
which, however, would not have
prolonged the resistance for long. FLOHR-PIRC
Also bad was 48.l1b2l:tc3+ 49.We2 Podebrady 1936
Wc6 and 50 ... Wd5 - White has no
defence.
48 ••• 1:xc5 49.dxc5 ttJxc5+ 50.
Wd4ttJxe6+51.We5Wd752.~xf5
QJd4+ 53.Wxg4 lilb5 54.Wf4
QJxa3 55.We4 tLlc4 56.Wd3 a3.
White resigned.

8.3. Minor piece endings

The most typical minor piece

endings with an isolated d5-pawn
A typical position for the struc-
are characterised by the presence
ture with an isolated d5-pawn. De-
of a blockading knight on d4. In
spite the obvious virtues of White's
them a sharply enhanced role is
position, it is not easy for him to
played by the king, which turns
convert his positional advantage
into an active fighting piece.
- with accurate defence Black can
Therefore it is important to cen-
hold the position.
tralise the king as quickly as pos-
27.Wc2. In simple endings it is
sible, so that it may join the attack
important to centralise the king as
on the isolated pawn, coordinat-
quickly as possible.
ing its actions with the knight.
27 •.• QJe4 28.f3 tLlc5 29.<il7c3.
When playing such endings, it is
also important to create additional
targets, which largely depends on
the pawn structure. In this connec-
tion it is appropriate to remind you
of Capablanca's advice regarding
the general rules for arranging the
pawns in such endings: 'If you
have a bishop, then, irrespective
of whether or not the opponent has
a bishop, you should keep your
218 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

29 ..• Wd6?! Black misses a

chance to take play into a simpler
endgame - 29 ... lilxb3! 30.Wxb3
with drawing chances, by setting
up a defence with 30 ... b6!, as dem-
onstrated in the game Flohr - Ca-
pablanca (Moscow 1935), which
was examined in section S.6.
30•.\lLe2! g6? 30 ... h6 was nec-
essary, arranging the pawns on
squares of the opposite colour their
3S.g4! White carries out the plan
own bishop.
of fixing the kingside pawns.
31.a4. 31.b4 was more accurate
3s ... lilf6 39.lileS lileS. In the
(Flohr).
event of 39 ... lile4+ 40.lilxe4 dxe4
31 ••• ..td7. The correct way of
41.gS followed by 42.Wd4 Black
defending was 31.. .as or 31.. .b6,
would have lost a pawn, but at least he
preventing White from setting up a
should have avoided the creation of a
bind on the queenside.
weakness at h7 by playing 39 ... h6.
32.aS lile6 33.b4 t7le7. After
40.gS. Now Black has as many
the knight exchange 33 .. .ctJxd4
as three weak pawns at d5, b7 and
34.Wxd4 the bishop endgame is
h7 - more than sufficient for the
clearly in White's favour, in view
conversion of White's advantage.
of the weakness of the dS- and b7-
40 .•• Cl\e7 41.kd3lileS 42.lilb3
pawns.
.~d7 43.lild4 lile7 44.J!l.e2 .~.e8
34...td3 ..teS. Black waits pas-
4S.h4 .sil.d7 46.hS lileS 47.h6 We7
sively, whereas he should have tried
4S.tJ..O .i1I..e6 49.lilb3lile7 SO.lileS
to erect a barrier against a possible
.~,eS Sl.St,e2 \!Jd6 S2.,~.d3lileS.
attack by White on the kingside
- 34 ... h6 with the idea of g6-gS.
3S.f4 .iiL.d7 36..iiL.e2 CiJeS 37.Cfl b3
IU. e6. The passive conduct of the
endgame may slowly but surely lead
to defeat. It was essential to prevent
White's next move, by playing 37 ...
h5.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 219

S3.e4! The exchange of the dS- switched to e7, where it defends the
pawn enables White to expand the kingside, and the bishop established
space he controls, after which his at d7, from where it prevents the ad-
king invades the black position. vance of the a-pawn.
S3 ... dxe4 S4.~xe4 CiJc7. IfS4 ... 29.,~d3.
Wc7, then SS.Wd4liid6 S6.WeS is
decisive.
SS.t!'lxb7+ .\1(xb7 S6 ..~.xb7 ctJe6
S7 .. ll.xa6 liixf4 S8•. ~.c4. Black re-
signed.

AVERBAKH - MATANOVIC
Belgrade 1961

29 ... g6?! In such positions the

defending side should place his
pawns on squares of the opposite
colour to his bishop. The correct de-
cision was 29 ... h6.
30.Wc3 ctJc7 31.a4 b6? Black
creates a weakness at a6. 31.. ..ltd7
was better.
32.aS bxaS 33.bxaS 'it> c5
White has a slight advantage, but
34.ctJb3+ Wd6 3S.Wb4 lDe6
by correct play Black should be able
36.g3.
to defend. White's plan is to central-
ise his king and fix the black pawns
on light squares.
2S.Wfl WfS 26.Wel (26.\tig3
gS!) 26 ... -tJe7 27.Wd2 Wd6. 27 ...
as was weaker: 28.Wc3 Wd6 29.b4
b6 30.bxaS bxaS 31.CDb3.
28.b4. White aims to fix Black's
queenside pawns on light squares.
28 ... ctJe8?! As Yuri Averbakh
showed, the knight should have been
220
36 .•. ctJd8?! The idea of exchang-
ing knights is incorrect, since the
bishop endgame is lost. Black should
have restricted himself to 36 ... h6.
37.ctJd4 I1Jc6+ 38.0Jxc6 Wxc6
39.f4! White needs to create a sec-
ond weakness on the kingside.
39••• 15. If 39 ... h6, then 40.e4!
dxe4 4Utxe4+ Wd6 42.'it'c4 Jtg4
43.Wd4 Jte2 44.Jtc2 Jtg4 45.Jtd3
.1L.c8 46.h4 Jtb7 47.g4! Jtc8 24.g5
hxg5 25.hxg5 .tb7 26 ..tc4 and wins.
40.h4 'it'd6 41.hS! (with the
threat ofh5-h6) 41. .• gxhS 42.Wc3!
Black resigned. If 42 ... Wc5 White
drives back the king by employ-
ing the 'triangulation' mechanism:
43 ..tfl! .tb7 44 ..te2 Jtc8 45.Jtd3
1w' [J6 46Wd4 'it'd6, after which for
further gain of space he again em-
ploys triangulation.
POLUGAEVSKY - MECKING
Mar del Plata 1971
In this endgame the pawn struc-
ture is identical to that in the Flohr
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
- Pirc game. Of course, for Lev
Polugaevsky, who had made a deep
study of the classical heritage, it was
easy to play this ending.
28.aS! It is important to fix
Black's queens ide pawns, giving
him a second weakness - the b7-
pawn.
28 ••• Wf8. After the more active
28 ... l1le6 29.l1le2 (29.lZ'lxe6 fxe6=)
29 ... ctJc5 30.Jtc2 '>t>f8 31.ctJf4
Black would still have had defen-
sive problems.
29.'>t>n We7 30.'l£7e2 g6. In a
similar position Capablanca arranged
his kings ide pawns on dark squares
and defended the d5-pawn with his
bishop, but Mecking is intending to
go into a bishop endgame.
31.'l£7d2 ctJe6.
32.ctJxe6. A concrete decision:
Polugaevsky goes in for the tempo-
rary liquidation of the isolated pawn,
hoping to win the bishop endgame,
but Black has a defensive resource
discovered by Timman.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
An alternative was 32.Wc3
Cllc5 33 ..1t..c2, but after 33 ... ttJe4+
34..1t..xe4 dxe4 35.ttJe2 f5 36.Wd4
W d6 it is not apparent how to loos-
en Black's position. However, Tim-
man's suggestion 33 ..1t..e2!? comes
into consideration, not fearing 33 ...
ttJe4+ 34.~b4ttJxf2 35.Wc5 ttJe4+
36.Wb6Chd6 37.Wc7 g5 (or37 ... f5
38 ..1t..f3 .1t..e6 39.ttJe2) 38 ..1t..f3 .1t..e6
39.g4 with the idea of 40.ttJf5+, and
White retains definitive chances.
32 ... fxe6. The bishop endgame
after 32 ... .1t..xe6? 33.'it>c3 is lost for
Black.
33.f4 e5! With the exchange of
this pawn Black reverts to a struc-
ture with an isolated d5-pawn. But
this cannot be avoided, since other-
wise White plays his king to d4 and
breaks through with f4-f5, winning
the d5-pawn.
34.g3.
34••• Wd6? After this natural
reply (which is what Polugaevsky
was hoping for) the bishop endgame
221
is lost for Black. The only saving
chance consisted in 34 ... .1t.. b5! But
when short of time it is not everyone
who would decide to go into a pawn
endgame - 35 ..1t..xb5 axb5, without
calculating the variations 36.fxe5
We6 37.Wd3 Wxe5 38.b4 g5 39.g4
h6 40.h3 We6 and 36.Wc3 '1t>e6
37.b4 Wf6 38.g4 h5, where Black
succeeds in maintaining the oppo-
sition. The variation pointed out by
Timman is also not easy to calculate:
35 ..1t..c2 '.itd6 36.Wc3 .1t..e2 37 ..tbl
<~fl 38.Wb4 d4! 39.exd4 exd4
40 ..1t..e4 Wc7 4l.Wc5 d3 42.Wd4 d2
43 ..~f3 b6 44.axb6+ Wxb6 45.Wc3
Wc5 46.Wxd2 Wd4, where White is
unable to convert his extra pawn.
35.Wc3 .1t..e6. Here 35 ... .1t..b5
36..1t..xb5 axb5 37.Wb4 d4 no
longer works because of 38.fxe5+!
Wxe5 39.exd4+ Wxd4 40.Wxb5
and White wins.
36.Wb4 exf4 37.gxf4 J..g4
38.Wc3 .1t..0 39.Wd4 .tg2 40.h4
~O 41.b4 .1t..hl 42 •.te2 .ta2
43 ..1t..g4.1t..e4.
222 Part II. The isolated d5-pawn

44.,lic8! A subtle manoeuvre, KARPOV - HORT

which has the aim of weakening the Budapest 1973
g6-pawn.
44 ... Wc7 45.iLe6 Wd6 46.,Ul..g8
h6 47.12,f7 h5 48.Qe8 ,~.c2 49..~.f7
,\Ji.e4.

Apart from the weakness of the

d5-pawn, Black's a6- and b5-pawns
are on squares of the colour of his
bishop and are potential weakness-
es.
50.fS! The decisive breakthrough,
32.b4! White fixes Black's
placing Black in zugzwang.
queenside pawns on squares of the
50 •.. 3LxfS. In the event of
colour of his bishop.
50 ... gxf5 5 Ll1.xh5 We6 52Jke2
32 ... g6. If 32 ... h6, then 33.,~.g6
Wf6 White decides matters with
is unpleasant.
53,,~.xa6! bxa6 54.b5! when one of
33.g4! White also strives to fix
the pawns will queen.
the kingside pawns, creating a new
51.,\Ji.xd5 ,ilc8 52.e4 We7
weakness on h7.
53.~e5 g5 54.hxg5 h4 55.g6 h3
33 ... L!ld734.f4.
56.g7 h2 57.g8~ hl~ 58.~f7+
~d8 59.~f8+. Black resigned.

In the preceding examples we

looked at endings where both sides
had a stable pawn structure, which
White could transform at his discre-
tion. We will now examine an exam-
ple with a poor pawn structure for
Black.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 223

34 ... 0If8?! Too passive, but resigned. There is no reasonable de-

also after 34 ... 0Ib6 35.CZJc6+ Wd6 fence against the threat of 46.,1i.cS.
36.0Ie5 lflc4+ 37.c;t>d4 White in-
creases his advantage, threatening RAUSIS - FARAGO
to create a passed f-pawn. For ex- Germany 1996
ample: 37 ... We7 3S.g5! (3S.Wxd5?
0Ie3+) 3S ... \t'd6 39.11Jf7+ 0.e7
40.<1lh6 0ld6 41.g4 etc. The imme-
diate 34 ... Wd6 35.g5! 0Ib6 is more
accurate, but here too White can
obtain a similar position: 36.0')£3
0Ic4+ 37.Wd4 and then 3S.L;i]e5.
3S.gS! Wd6 36.<;!;>fJ tiJe6? Go-
ing into a bishop ending, in which
all the pawns are on squares of the
same colour as the bishop, leads to a
rapid defeat. Black should have re-
In this position the conversion of
turned with his knight to d7.
the pawn majority on the kingside
37.QJxe6 Jil..xe6 38.~e3 ,l!L,g4
proves decisive.
39.,l!L,d3 ,lle6 40.Wd4 ~g4.
30.,12.f5! .it.a6 31.f4liJg8 32.hS
0If6 33.WfJ .it.b7 34•.it.g6 We7.
Black also loses after 34 .. . ,tLcs
35.g5 ,~g4+ 36.Wg3 .it.xh5 37.gxf6
,~,xg6 3S.fxg7 .it.f7 39.0\f5+.
3S.gS.

41.,:il.c2! A triangulation ma-

noeuvre to seize control of the h3-
cS diagonal, from where the weak
a6-pawn becomes accessible.
41. •• Jil..e6 42 •.llb3 iLti 43 •.it.dl 3S ..• lile4. Black is unable to
\U,e6 44.,llfJ :il,ti 4S ..llg4. Black oppose the potential passed pawn.
224
Things are not changed by 35 ...
hxg5 36.fxg5 LtJe4 37 ..Jil.xe4 dxe4+
38.We3 ~f8 39/1,]f5 .1i.d5 40.h6
gxh6 41.gxh6 .Jil.g8 42.cJJxe4 etc.
36.~ xe4! This exchange leads
to the win of a pawn.
36 ... dxe4+ 37.~e3 .Jil.dS 3S.b4
axb4 39.axb4.Jil. f7. 39 ... Wfl 40. Cil f5
hxg5 41.fxg5 .Jil.b3 (41 ... ~f8 42.h6)
42.'>iixe4 .Jil.dl 43.LtJg3 leads to the
same structure as in the game.
40.LtJrs+ '>iifS 4l.Lilg3 .1i.b3 42.
~xe4 '>iif7 43.'>iieS hxgS 44.fxgS
.Jil.c2 4S.g6+ \t(fS 46.Wf4 ii.bI
47.'>iigS .Jil.d3 4S.LtJrs '>iigS 49.l'fld4
.Jil.c4 SO.'>iirs. The immediate 50.h6
gxh6+ 51.'>iixh6 Wf8 52.Cilf5 is
also possible, followed by playing
the king to h8.
50 ... .Jil.n SI.WgS Ji.c4 S2.h6
gxh6+ S3.'>iixh6 .Jil.a2 S4.'.iigS \tfS
S5.Wf6 '>iieS S6.g7 .Jil.gS s7.CilfS
..I!l..h7 SS.CfJh6 '.tJd7 S9.cJJeS. Black
resigned.
PANNO - DONNER
Palma de Mallorca 1971
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
White's advantage lies not only
in the advantage of the two bishops
over a pair of knights which have no
strong points, but also in the possi-
bility of active manoeuvres with the
threat of transforming the position
to his advantage by exchanging one
of the bishops.
2S•.1L bS l'fle4 29.13 CilecS 30.
Wf2 LtJe6 31..iilc3 CfJc7 32•.Jil.a4
~e6 33.Ji.b4 LileS. Black's defence
is rather more flexible after 33...
tDa6 34 ..Jil.c3 CfJc7.
34.We2 tZld6 3S•.1i.b3 fS. Parry-
ing the threat of ; 13-1 4 .
36.h4! It is important to fix the
pawns, after which there is a poten-
tial threat of exchanging the dark-
square bishop at the appropriate
moment, with play against Black's
pawns on the light squares.
36 ... ttJeS 37.Ji.cS Cild7. After
37 .. .ti'ldc4 38.~a4 Cild6 39.~xd6!
~xd6 40 ..Jil.e8 ~e7 41.f4! Cilfl
42 ..Jil.xfl White would have won in
the pawn endgame.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
38.Sl.d4 ctJbS? 38 ... ctJf6 was
better, agreeing to give up the d5-
pawn.
39.Sl.b2 ctJcS 40.Sl.c2 Wd6?
Black underestimates the threat of
opening up the kingside. 40 ... ctJd7
was essential, retaining possibilities
of a defence after both 41.g4 hxg4
42.fxg4 fxg4 43.Sl.xg6 ctJe5 44.Sl.h7
I1Jd6, and 41.Sl.a4 ctJc7 42.~f2 (or
42.Sl.d4 ~d6 43.~f2 ctJe5 44.~g3
CiJe6) 42 ... ctJb6 43.Sl.c2 ctJc4. Now,
however, White exploits the poten-
tial of his light-square bishop.
41.g4! White discloses Black's
pawn weaknesses.
41 ••• hxg4?! At any event. 41. ..
~e6 42.gxh5 gxh5 was more tena-
cious, and although the weaknesses
at h5 and f5 are not easy to hold, there
would still have been some possibilities
of counterplay (43.~t2 f4!? 44.exf4
d4). Now, however, the breakthrough
of the h-pawn proves decisive.
42.fxg4 ~e6 43.hS ctJc7 44.
hxg6. Black resigned.
225
8.4. Endings with one pair
of minor pieces
Endings with a minimum
number of minor pieces and an
isolated pawn (most often this is a
d5-pawn) are usually ofa technical
nature. The most common forms
of this ending are bishop v. bishop
and knight v. bishop. When talking
about bishop endings, what is im-
plied is a conflict of light-square
bishops, in which the black bishop
is restricted to the passive defence
of the d5-pawn. The technique of
converting such an advantage was
demonstrated fully enough in the
previous section. Therefore here
we will dwell in more detail on
the endgame where the black bish-
op has to fight against a knight,
deployed on the d4 blockading
square.
In Chapter 5 [p.140] we looked
at the ending of the Flohr - Ca-
pablanca game (Moscow 1935), in
which Capablanca displayed vir-
tuoso defensive technique against
manoeuvres of the knight and king.
In order to see how difficult it is
to defend in such endings, we will
examine an endgame played two
years later. Vyacheslav Rauzer was
undoubtedly familiar with the great
Cuban's defensive methods, but he
was unable to save the game.
226
BELAVENETS-RAUZER
Moscow 1937
In this position White has
grounds for playing for a win thanks
to the superiority of his knight,
which is controlling the important
dark squares. We know that the con-
version of such a positional advan-
tage is possible only if an additional
target is created in Black's position,
apart from the d5-pawn.
2S.'~n. In minor piece endings
the king must play an active role.
2S ••• WfB 26.0. 26.We2? is pre-
mature because of26 ... d4!
26 ... '.ite7 27.'.!7e2 '.tie6 28.'~id3
WeS 29.f4+. The creation of a new
weakness is most realistic on the
kingside, where the black pawns
are badly placed from the positional
point of view. Therefore White be-
gins a pawn offensive here.
29 ... '.!7e630.Wd4.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
30 .•• Wd6?! From a comparison
of this position with that in the Flohr
- Capablanca game it can be con-
cluded that 30 ... a5 would be a use-
ful move, relieving Black of a weak
pawn on a7. The weakening of the
light squares is not dangerous, since
they are controlled by the bishop.
31.b4! Woo?! Black is too careless.
31 ... a6 was now essential, preventing
the creation ofa weak a7-pawn.
32.bS. Before starting manoeu-
vres with his knight, White must
safeguard himself against the inva-
sion of the black bishop. If Black
should succeed in forcing g2-g3 af-
ter playing his bishop to fl, he will
acquire chances involving the march
of his king to h3 (Belavenets).
32 ..• Jl.b7 33.tiJa2 'ltd6. Here
too 33 ... a6 was possible, getting rid
of the weak a7-pawn.
34.llib4 We6?! Black still re-
mains passive, whereas it was now
essential to play 34 ... f6, aiming to
hinder the creation of a weak pawn
on the kingside.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame 227

3S.g4! Threatening not only g4- 37.h3! Subtle conduct of the

gS, fixing the fl- and h7-pawns, endgame! White gains a tempo for
but above all 36.QJc6, which did the switching of his knight to g3.
not work immediately, since in the In the event of37.h4 'itie6 38.liJa2
pawn endgame after 3s.lilc6? iLxc6 Wd6 39.ltJc3 ~e6 40.ltJe2 ~c8
36.bxc6 Wd6 37.c7 Wxc7 38.WxdS 41.li.Jg3 i..d7 42.a4 i..e8 Black
fS! White is unable to win. is able to prevent h4-hS (Be-
3S ••• fS. Black is forced to block lavenets).
the f-pawn. In the event of 3S ... h6 37 ••• We6 38.ltJa2 Wd6 39.li.Jc3
36.eiJc6 iLxc6 37.bxc6 Wd6 38.c7 'It'e6 40.h4. Here is this tempo!
Wxc7 39.WxdS the pawn endgame Black is forced to take up the oppo-
is lost in view of the strong posi- sition with his king.
tion of the white king. For example: 40 •. .'\t>d64t.Ci\e2.
39 ... \t'd7 40.e4 Wc7 41.eS '.!7d7
42.5 gxfS 43.gxfS Wc7 44.e6 f6
4S.h3 hS 46.h4 a6 47.a4 as 48.Wc4
Wc6 49.e7 Wd7 SO.WbS and wins
(Belavenets ).
36.gS. White fixes the weak-
ness of the h7-pawn. His further
plan consists in advancing h2-h4-
hS-h6, after which the knight sacri-
fices at fS or h6 will be threatened,
while after the exchange on hS the
knight will go to f6, attacking the
h7-pawn. 41. .. i..c8? Black submissively
36 .•. \t'd6. goes along with White. As Be-
228
lavenets showed, the last saving
chance was 41 ... a6 (but not 41 ... aS,
since the knight goes to a4, threaten-
ing the b6-pawn) 42.l1Jc3 (42.a4 as)
42 ... axbS 43.tL'lxbS+ Wc6! 44.tL'lc3
Wd6 4S.tL'la4 Wc6 46.WeS WbS
47.tL'lb2 WcS 48.Wf6 d4 49.exd4+
Wxd4 SO.Wg7 We4 Sl.Wxh7
Wxf4 S2.Wxg6 Wg4 S3.hS f4 S4.h6
i..e4+ SS.Wf6 WhS!, and it is not
apparent how White can win.
42.tL'lg3 i..d7. 42 ... a6 is now too
late in view of 43.bxa6 i..xa6 44.hS
We6 4S.h6 with the threat oftL'lhS.
43.84. If 43 ... i..c8 there fol-
lows 44.hS gxhS 4S.tL'lxfS+ We6
46.tL'lg7+, winning the dS-pawn.
43 ••• We6 44.hS i..e8. Black
loses after 44 ... gxhS 4S.tL'lxhS i..c8
46.'~c3! (zugzwang!) 46 ... Wf7
47.'~d3 rJ:Je7 48.tL'lf6, when he los-
es a pawn (Belavenets).
4S.h6 \t> d6.
White has carried out his plan,
and Black, with three (!) weak pawns
at dS, a7 and h7, has no defence.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
46.tL'le2. Here the game was ad-
journed and White was awarded a
win. Here is the main variation given
by Belavenets: 46 ... i..d7 47.tL'lc3
i..e648.tL'la2 i.. f7 (48 ... i..c849.tL'l b4
i..b7 SO.tL'ld3 i..c8 Sl.tL'leS and
there is no defence against S2.tL'lxg6)
49.tL'lb4 i..e6 SO.tL'lc6 as SI.bxa6!
Wxc6 S2.a7 \t>b7 S3.\t>eS i..d7
S4.<;t>f6 i..xa4 SS.\t>g7 bS S6.~xh7
b4 S7.<;t>xg6 b3 S8.h7 i..e8+ S9St;7f6
b2 60.h8~ bl~ 61.a8~+ Wxa8
62:~xe8+, and the queen endgame
is easily won for White.
Despite all the problems caused
by the isolated pawn, we would like
to end this section on an optimistic
note and give an example where the
dynamic potential of this pawn was
revealed deep in the endgame.
V.KOVACEVIC - VELIKOV
Olympiad, Luzern 1982
In this position Black cannot
exploit the weakness of the iso-
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
lated d4-pawn, since the d5-square
is inaccessible to his king, but he
could have maintained the balance
by 40 ... ttJe8 (with the idea of tak-
ing control of the d5-square after
\te7-d6 and ttJe8-c7) 41.~e5 ttJc7
42.i..c4 ttJe8, sticking to waiting
tactics. But there followed ...
40 ••• Wf6?! 4l.gS+ ~e7 42.dS!
and White opened up the position,
which enabled him to activate his
king and expand the scope of his
bishop.
42 ••• ttJb7. Things have become
much more difficult for Black. In
the event of 42 ... exd5 43.'it>e5
White obtains a great spatial ad-
vantage, ensuring the superiority of
the bishop over the knight, and real
winning chances. Kovacevic gives
the following variation: 43 ... d4!
44.'it>xd4 'it>e6 45.0! (weaker is
45.i.c4+?! ttJxc4 46.'it>xc4 'it>d6
47.f4 'it>c6, when the breakthrough
48.fS does not work because of the
simple 48 ... 'it>d6! 49.fxg6 fxg6
229
50.'it>b5 Wc7, and Black maintains
the opposition; 46.bxc4 'it>d6 47.f4
'it>c6 48.~e5 'it>c5 49.f5 'it>xc4
50.f6 gxf6+ 51.'it>xf6 b5 also leads
to a draw) 45 ... ttJf5+ 46.i..xf5+
'it>xfS 47.'it>d5 'it>f4 48.'it>c6 'it>xo
49.'it>xb6 f5! 50.gxf6 gxf6 51.'it>xa5
fS 52.b4 f4 53.b5 <Jtg4 54.b6 0
55.b7 f2 56.b8~ fl. 57.~b4+!
with good winning chances in the
queen endgame.
43.dxe6 ttJcS. In the event
of 43 ... 'it>xe6?! 44 ..tc4+ ~e7
45.<Jte5 the spatial advantage also
proves decisive: 45 ... ttJd6 46.~dS
'it>d7 47.i..d3! ttJc8 48 ..tb5+ ~c7
49.f4 ttJd6 (49 ... ltJe7+ 50.~e5
ltJfS 51.h5) 50.i.d3 ~d7 51.i.fl
<Jtc7 52.We5 Wd7 53.i.h3+ 'it>c6
54.fS, and White breaks through on
the kingside.
44.i.c4.
44 ... f6? The decisive mistake.
The exchange ofpawns allows White
to make a breakthrough with his hS-
pawn. Saving chances were offered
230
by 44 ... fxe6! 45.We5 \t'd7 (if 45 ...
Qld7+ White uses the triangulation
method to reach the same position as
in the preceding variation: 46.\t>e4!
tLlc5+47.~d4Wd648.f3!)46.Wd4
\t'd6 47.f3! \t>e7 48.Wc3 Wd6
49.jLe2 (with the threat of transfer-
ring the bishop to c2) 49 ... e5 (after
49 ... \t>e5? 50S£ic4 Wf4 5l.jLdi
We3 52.jLc2 White transfers his
bishop to b5 and wins the queenside
pawns) 50.\t'c4 (50.jLc4 can be met
by 50 ... tLle6!, and in the pawn end-
game after 51.jLxe6 \t>xe6 52.~c4
~d6 53.\t>b5 \t>c7 Black maintains
the opposition) 50 ... tLle6!, and
Black succeeds in exchanging his
g6-pawn for the h4-pawn - 51.jLd3
liJf4 52.i.e4 tLlg2 53.jLxg6 tLlxh4
54..te4 tLlg2 55.\t>b5 Wc7, and in
holding the position.
4S.gxf6+ gxf6. If 45 ... \t>xf6,
then 46.e7! <3;xe7 47.~g5 is deci-
sIve.
46.\t>g4! White prepares the ad-
vance of his f-pawn.
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
46 ... tLle4. If 46 ... C1Jxe6 White
transposes into a won pawn end-
game: 47.jLxe6 Wxe6 48.f4! fol-
lowed by f4-f5.
47.13 tLld2 48.f4 tLle4. Black also
loses after48 ... t1:\xc449.bxc4 Wxe6
50.f5+ \t>f7 5l.Wf4 Wg7 52.fxg6
\t>xg6 53.\t>g4 (Kovacevic).
49.fS. Black resigned.
8.5. Pawn endings
In pawn endings with an isolated
pawn, the possibility of weakening
the opponent's position in the battle
for the opposition acquires decisive
importance. We will examine two
examples.
EHLVEST - RAUSIS
Zonal Tournament, Riga 1995
32.a4 \t>e6 33.13. The start of a
battle for the opposition, after which
the white king will penetrate to e5
orc5.
33 ••• \t>d6.
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame
The critical factor for the solution of
this position is the advance 34.a5! bxa5
3S.bxa5, and after 3S .. .Wc6 36.~eS
WcS White gains the lateral opposition
of the kings by 37.f4! A possible con-
tinuation is 37 ... Wc4 (also after 37 ...
WbS 38.WtO Wxa5 39.Wxgfj play
reduces to a queen endgame with an
extra pawn for White) 38.We6! ~bS
39. wtO and in the resulting queen end-
game White has real winning chances.
Here are the main variations:
I) 39 ... Wc4 40.~xg6 Wd3
41.Wxf.5 Wxe3 42.~g6 d4 43.f5 d3
44.f6 d2 4S.f7 dl~ 46.f8~ ~g4+
(after 46 .. "~a4 47.~f4+! ~xf4
48.gxf4 ~xf4 49.'lt>xhS White wins
the pawn endgame) 47.~h6 (with
the threat of~f4+) 47 ... 'It>e2 (47 ...
~xg3? loses after 48.~a3+ Wf4
49.~xg3+~xg3 SO.~xhS)48.~f4,
and White wins the hS-pawn, after
which the game is decided by the
pair of connected passed pawns;
2) 39 ... ~xaS 40.'~xg6 ~bS
41.~xf5 as 42.Wg6, and after the
advance of the a- and f-pawns a
231
queen endgame with practical win-
ning chances is reached.
34.Wc3 WeS 3S.Wd3. Here it
was already essential to play 3S.aS!,
since now by 3S ... aS! Black could
have restricted White's possibilities:
after 36.bxaS bxaS 37.~c3 'It>e6
38.~d4 ~d6 39.f4 ~c6 40.~eS
WcS 41.'lt>f6 ~c4! 42.~xg6 ~d3
43.'lt>xfS ~xe3 44.'~g6 d4 with
the appearance of the queens the
a4-pawn comes under attack. This
remark also applies to the next two
moves of the game.
3S ... We6 36.Wc3 (36.a5!) 36 •••
WeS (36 ... a5!) 37.Wd3 (37.a5!)
37.. .'~e6 (37 ... a5!) 38.~d4 ~d6
39.aS bxaS 4O.bxaS ~c6 41.~eS
WbS? This loses quickly. More tena-
cious was41 ... ~cS 42.f4(if42.~tO?
Black is saved by42 ... Wc4! 43.Wxg6
'It>d3 44.'~t>xhS Wxe3) 42 ... ~c4
43.~e6, reaching a position analysed
in the note to Black's 33rd move.
42.~xdS ~xaS 43.~c5. Black
resigned.
232
YURTAEV - TEMIRBAEV
Olympiad, Elista 1998
In contrast to the previous exam-
ple, here the b6-point is securely de-
Part II. The isolated d5-pawn
fended and White is unable to pen-
etrate to c5.
34 ••• h5! First of all Black elimi-
nates the threat of a pawn offensive
on the kingside, not forgetting sub-
sequently to carefully maintain the
opposition of the kings.
35.a4 ~e6 36.a5 Wd6 37.a6
We6 38.e4. White tries to exploit
the slightly better position of this
king, but this proves insufficient.
38 ••• dxe4 39.fxe4 fxe4 40.~xe4
g6 41.~f4 ~f6 42.g3 b543.g4 hxg4
44.~xg4 ~e6 45.~f4 <t>f6 46.<t>e4
<t>e6 47.<t>d4 <t>d6 48.<t>e4 <t>e6
49.<t>f4 <t>f6 50.<t>g4 <t>e6. Draw.
 INDEX OF PLAYERS
Numbers refer to pages. They are bolded if a player was White.
AGZAMOV - Geller 134; Tal 165
AKOPIAN Karjakin 70;
Sadvakasov 199
ALEKHINE - Botvinnik 58;
Capablanca 56
ANAND - Bruzon 78; Kasparov 53
ANDERSSON - Murey 175
ARONIAN - Beliavsky 193;
Ivanchuk 198; Morozevich 186
AVERBAKH - Matanovic 219
AVTONOMOV - Spassky 36
BACROT - Bologan 145
BALASHOV - Lputian 18, 122;
Matulovic 120; Petros ian T. 45
BARDELEBEN - Steinitz 35
BAREEV - Beliavsky 127; Farago
196; Ivanchuk 166
BELAVENETS - Rauzer 226
BEllA VSKY - Aronian 193;
Bareev 127; Damljanovic 77; Inkiov
126; Karpov 50; Korchnoi 168;
Petrosian T. 133
BERGER - Bronstein 21
BOLESLAVSKY - Botvinnik 123;
Kotov 38
BOLOGAN - Bacrot 145
BOTVINNIK - Alekhine 58;
Boleslavsky 123; Flohr 192; Ilyin-
Zhenevsky 190; Petrosian T. 39;
Vidmar II; Zagoryansky 112
BRADFORD - Kaidanov 208
BRAGA - Karpov 104; Portisch 92
BRONSTEIN - Berger 21
BRUZON - Anand 78; Bu Xiangzhi
186; Dominguez 30; Ivanchuk 100
BU Xiangzhi - Bruzon 186
BUNZMANN - Naiditsch 202
CAPABLANCA - Alekhine 56;
Flohr 140; Lasker 55, 73; Rubinstein
172; Teichmann 194
CHANDLER - Karpov 150
CHLOUPEK - Stohl 215
DAMLJANOVIC - Beliavsky 77
DELGADO - Ivanchuk 157
DJURIC - Lobron 25
DLUGY - 011 23
DOLMATOV - Dreev 26
DOMINGUEZ - Bruzon 30
DONNER - Panno 224
DREEV - Dolmatov 26; Godena
183; Riazantsev 203
EHLVEST - Rausis 230
EINGORN - Gelfand 37
FARAGO - Bareev 196; Rausis
223; Velikov 18
FILIP - Fischer 179
FILIPPOV V. - Rustemov 115
FISCHER - Filip 179
FISH - Lautier 165
FLOHR - Botvinnik 192; Capa-
blanca 140; Pirc 217
FURMAN - Keres 15
GAVRIKOV - Hulak 43; Marin 98
GELFAND - Eingom 37; Karpov
201; Morozevich 184
GELLER - Agzamov 134; Karpov
65
GERSHON - Izoria 161
234
GHEORGHIU - Petrosian A. 182
GHITESCU - Reshevsky 163
GLIGORIC - Suetin 80
GODENA - Dreev 183
GULIYEV - Milov 42
GUREVICH M. - Yudasin 95
HJARTARSON - IIIescas Cordoba
139
HORT - Karpov; Velimirovic 209
HOBNER - Ivkov 173; Vaganian
20
HULAK - Gavrikov 43; Marjanovic
176
ILLESCASCORDOBA-Hjartarson
139
ILYIN-ZHENEVSKY - Botvinnik
190
INKIOV - Beliavsky 126
IVANCHUK-Aronian 198; Bareev
166; Bruzon 100; Delgado 157;
Karpov 61; Kharlov 177; Korchnoi
188; Riazantsev 118; Savchenko S.
158; Van Wely 160
IVKOV - Hubner 173
IZORIA - Gershon 161
KAIDANOV - Bradford 208;
Vyzhmanavin 103
KAMSKY - Karpov 46, 83
KARJAKIN - Akopian 70
KARPOV - Beliavsky 50; Braga
104; Chandler 150; Gelfand 201;
Geller 65; Hort 222; Ivanchuk
61; Kamsky 46, 83; Kasparov 52,
64 136; Korchnoi 75; Kuzmin
G. 121; Ljubojevic 174; Spas sky
113; Taimanov 94; Vaganian 124;
Yusupov 19
KASPAROV - Anand 53; Karpov
Index of players
52, 64, 136; Kharitonov 143;
Kramnik 32; Psakhis 49; Smyslov
137; Vallejo Pons 86
KAVALEK - Larsen 48; Pritchett 22
KEENE - Miles 17
KERES - Furman 15; Tal 90
KHAIRULLIN - Korotylev 169
KHARITONOV - Kasparov 143;
Lerner 13
KHARLOV - Ivanchuk 177
KHENKIN - Rustemov 180
KORCHNOI - Beliavsky 168;
Ivanchuk 188; Karpov 75;
Ljubojevic 66; Pinter 60
KOROTYLEV - Khairullin 169
KOTOV - Boleslavsky 38
KOVACEVIC V. - Velikov 228
KRAMNIK - Kasparov 32; Topalov
87
KUPREICHIK - Rashkovsky 59
KUZMIN G. - Karpov 121
KVEINYS - Mamedyarov 213
L' AMI - Sargissian 162
LALIC - Mikhalchishin 101
LARSEN - Kavalek 48; Penrose
142
LASKER - Capablanca 55, 73;
Tarrasch 171
LAUTIER - Fish 165
LEKO - Topalov 128
LERNER - Kharitonov 13
LJUBOJEVIC - Karpov 174;
Korchnoi 66
LOB RON - Djuric 25
LPUTIAN - Balashov 18, 122
LUTIKOV - Polugaevsky 16
MAKARICHEV - Mikhalchishin 97
MAKSIMENKO - Neverov 14
Index of players
MALAKHOV - Sasikiran 67
MAMEDYAROV - Kveinys 213
MARIN - Gavrikov 98
MARJANOVIC - Hulak 176
MATANOVIC -Averbakh 219
MATULOVIC - Balashov 120
MECKING - Polugaevsky 220
MIKHALCHISHIN - Lalic 101;
Makarichev 97; Psakhis 81;
Rozentalis 61
MILES - Keene 17
MILOV - Guliyev 42
MOISEENKO - Volokitin 99
MOROZEVICH - Aronian 186;
Gelfand 184
MUREY - Andersson 175
NAIDITSCH - Bunzmann 202
NAJER - Sargissian 33
NAUMANN - Vaganian 156
NAVARA - Svidler 29
NEUKIRCH - Uhlmann 151
NEVEROV - Maksimenko 14
NIKOLAEVSKY - Spas sky 12
NIKOLIC - Portisch 212
NUNN .- Vaganian 135
OLL - Dlugy 23
PANNO - Donner 224
PARMA- Puc 210
PENROSE - Larsen 142
PETROS IAN A. - Gheorghiu 182
PETROSIAN T. - Balashov 45;
Beliavsky 133; Botvinnik 39;
Spassky 40, 93, 131, 148
PINTER - Korchnoi 60; Podzielny
11 7; Ribli 197
PIRC - Flohr 217
PODZIELNY - Pinter 117
POLUGAEVSKY - Lutikov 16;
235
Mecking 220; Zaitsev A. 144
PONOMARIOV - Van Wely 68
PORTISCH - Braga 92; Nikolic
212; Schmid 152
PRITCHETT - Kavalek 22
PSAKHIS Kasparov 49;
Mikhalchishin 81; Vaganian 153
PUC - Parma 210
RADJABOV - Svidler 27
RASHKOVSKY - Kupreichik 59
RAUSIS - Ehlvest 230; Farago 223
RAUZER - Belavenets 226
RESHEVSKY - Ghitescu 163
RIAZANTSEV - Dreev 203;
Ivanchuk 118; Sveshnikov 85
RIBLI- Pinter 197; Smyslov 63
ROZENTALIS - Mikhalchishin 61
RUBINSTEIN - Capablanca 172;
Salwe 130; Teichmann 110
RUBLEVSKY - Sasikiran 207
RUKAVINA - Velimirovic 24
RUSTEMOV - Filippov V. 115;
Khenkin 180
SADVAKASOV -Akopian 199
SALWE - Rubinstein 130
SARGISSIAN - L' Ami 162; Najer
33
SASIKIRAN - Malakhov 67;
Rublevsky 207
SAVCHENKO S. - Ivanchuk 158
SCHMID - Portisch 152
SMYSLOV - Kasparov 137; Ribli
63
SOKOLOV A. - Vaganian 154, ISS
SOKOLOV I. - Tregubov 20S
SPASSKY - Avtonomov 36; Karpov
113; Nikolaevsky 12; Petrosian T.
40.93, 131. 148
236
STEINITZ Bardeleben 35;
Zukertort 4
STOHL - Chloupek 215
SUETIN - Gligoric 80
SVESHNIKOV - Riazantsev 85
SVIDLER - Navara 29; Radjabov
27
TAIMANOV - Karpov 94
TAL - Agzamov 165; Keres 90;
Wirthensohn 164
TARRASCH - Lasker 171
TEICHMANN - Capablanca 194;
Rubinstein 110
TEMIRBAEV - Yurtaev 232
TIMMAN - Yusupov 168
TOPALOV - Kramnik 87; Leko
128
TREGUBOV - Sokolov I. 205
UHLMANN - Neukirch 151
VAGANIAN - Hubner 20; Karpov
124; Naumann 156; Nunn 135;
Psakhis 153; Sokolov A. 154, 155
VALLEJO PONS - Kasparov 86
VAN WELY - Ivanchuk 160;
Ponomariov 68
VELIKOV - Farago 18; Kovacevic
V.228
VELIMIROVIC Hort 209;
Rukavina 24
VIDMAR - Botvinnik I I
VOLOKITIN - Moiseenko 99
VYZHMANAVIN - Kaidanov 103
WIRTHENSOHN - Tal 164
YUDASIN - Gurevich M. 95
YURTAEV - Temirbaev 232
YUSUPOV - Karpov 19; Timman
168
ZAGORYANSKY - Botvinnik 112
ZAITSEV A. - Polugaevsky 144
ZUKERTORT - Steinitz 4
 INDEX OF OPENINGS
Numbers refer to pages
NIMZOVICH-LARSEN ATTACK
A01- 142
ENGLISH OPENING
A13-78, 112, 133;A14-179
CARO-KANN DEFENCE
814 - 23,24,46,48,50,83,85,93
SICILIAN DEFENCE
822 - 61, 92, 104; 840 - 68; 850
-70
FRENCH DEFENCE
C08 - 124, 127, 135, 143, 156,
157,188,190, 192;
C09- 120, 121, 122, 123, 151,
152, 153, 154, 155, 172
PETROFF DEFENCE
. C42 - 184
GIUOCO PIANO
C54- 35
QUEEN'S PAWN GAME
002 - 177
SLAV DEFENCE
015 - 67. 160; 016 - 27. 29. 33
QUEEN'S GAMBIT
020 - 20; 021- 86, 103;
024 - 37; 026 - 4; 027 - 12, 13,
15,25,39,40,42,43,53,59,60,
80, 87; 028 - 36, 38; 030 - 56, 90,
171; 032 - 117,150,161,163,164,
165; 033 -130,175; 034 - 131,
137,139,144,148,158,176;
036 - 100; 037 - 113, 145, 169,
180, 186; 038 - 162, 186, 198;
040-16,99;041-58,101,173;
042 - 17,22,63,97; 045 - 115,
168, 118; 046 - 183; 047 - 30;
053 -75, 77; 055 - 64, 134, 136;
056 - 19; 058 - 65, 182; 060 - 11,
21; 061-73; 062 - 140;
063 - 194; 064 - 55; 068 - 18
KERES DEFENCE
EOO-26
QUEEN'S INDIAN DEFENCE
E12-168; E14-95; E17-174
NIMZO-INDIAN DEFENCE
E21- 52; E22 - 110; E32 - 128;
E37 - 166; E41 - 14; E42 - 49,
126; E48 - 81, 99; E54 - 32, 61;
E55 - 94; E56 - 66, 165; E57 - 45
 CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................................................................. 3

PART I. The isolated d4-pawn .................................................................. 7

Chapter 1. Attack on the kings ide ....................................................... II
1.1. Attack with the f-pawn ............................................................. II
1.2. Piece attack on the kingside ..................................................... 14
Chapter 2. The d4-d5 breakthrough .................................................... 35
Chapter 3. Attack on the queenside ..................................................... 55
3.1. Exchange on d5 ........................................................................ 55
3.2. Attack on queenside weaknesses .............................................. 65
Chapter 4. Defence based on the blockade at d5 ................................ 72
4.1. Reducing attacking potential by exchanging pieces ................. 72
4.2. Counterplay based on control of the blockading d5-point ....... 80
4.3. Creation of an isolated pawn pair ............................................. 93
4.4. Creation of a central pawn pair .............................................. 101

PART II. The isolated d5-pawn ............................................................ 107

Chapter 5. Attack on the isolated d5-pawn ....................................... 110
5.1. The strategy of exchanging pieces ......................................... 110
5.2. Exchange of the dark-square bishop in French Defence
positions ......................................................................................... 121
5.3. Piece attack on the isolated pawn ........................................... 126
5.4. Creation of an isolated pawn pair ........................................... 130
5.5. Creation of a central pawn pair .............................................. 135
5.6. Transition into an endgame .................................................... 139
Chapter 6. Dynamic potential of the d5-pawn .................................. 148
6.1. Active piece play for Black .................................................... 148
6.2. The d5-d4 breakthrough ......................................................... 163
6.3. Spatial expansion by the d5-d4 advance ................................ 170
Chapter 7. The isolated pawn with a small number of pieces ........... 179
Chapter 8. The isolated pawn in the endgame .................................. 190
8.1. Play with four rooks on the board .......................................... 196
8.2. Play with one pair of rooks ..................................................... 209
8.3. Minor piece endings ............................................................... 217
8.4. Endings with one pair of minor pieces ................................... 225
8.5. Pawn endings .......................................................................... 230

Index of Players ....................................................................................... 233

Index of Openings .................................................................................... 237