John Emms

beating

EVERYMAN CHESS
Gloucester Publishers pic www.everymanchess.com
First publi shed in 2010 by Gloucester Publi shers plc (formerly Everym an
Publishers plc ) , Northburgh House, 10 Northburgh Street, London EC1V OAT

Copyright © 2010 John Emms

The right of John Emms to be identified as the author of thi s work has been as­
serted in accordan ce with the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of thi s publication m ay be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system or tran smitted in any form or by any m eans, electronic,
electrostatic, m agnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior
permission of the publi sher.

British Libra ry Cata loguing-in-Publ ication Data

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

I S B N : 978 1 8 5 744 617 3

Di stributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, P.O Box 480,
246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480.

All other sales enquiries should be directed to Everym an Chess, Northburgh House,
10 Northburgh Street, London E C 1V OAT
tel : 020 7 2 5 3 7887 fax: 020 7490 3 708
email : info@everymanchess.com ; website: www.everymanchess.com

Everyman is the registered trade m ark of Random House Inc. and is used in thi s
work under licence from Random House Inc.

Everyma n Chess Series

Chief advisor: Byron J acobs
Commissioning editor: John Emms
Assi stant editor: Rich ard Palliser

Typeset and edited by First Rank Publishing, Brighton .

Cover design by Horatio Monteverde.
Printed and bound in the US by Versa Press.
Co n t e n t s

Bibliography 4

Introduction 5

1 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I) 9

2 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part II) 49

3 Italian Game: Classical Main Line 80

4 Italian Game: Two Knights Defence 124

5 Italian Game: Other Lines 162

6 Bishop's Opening 175

Index of Variations 219

Index of Games 222

 B ibl i og ra phy

Books
Attacking with 1 e4, John Emms (Everyman Chess 2001)
Beating the Open Ga mes, Mikh ail Marin (Quality Chess 2007)
Italia n Ga me a nd Evans Ga mbit, J an Pin ski (Everyman Chess 2005)
Nun n 's Chess Openings (Everyman Ch ess/Gambit 1999)
Play the Open Ga mes as Black, John Emms (Gambit 2000)
Sta rting Out: Open Games, Glenn Flear (Everyman Chess 2010)
The Giuoco Pia no, Eduard Gufeld and Oleg Stetsko (Batsford 1996)
The Two Kn ights Defence, J an Pin ski (Everyman Chess 2004)
Understa nding the Open Ga mes, Andy Solti s, Edm ar Mednis, J ack Peters and Wil­
liam H artston ( R H M 1980)

Electronic sou rces, DVDs and databases

Chess Informants 1- 103
Chess Today
Mega Database 2010 (Chess Base), with Peter Lukacs as the m ain contributor in the
Italian Game section
The Italia n Ga me, Stefan Kindermann (Topschach .de 2009)
The Week in Chess

4
 I n t r o d uct i o n

Returning to the Italian Game aim s to provide a repertoire for White

The Italian Game (1 e4 e S 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 in the Open Games. The backbone of
i.C4) occupies a very speci al place in the repertoire is based on what is now
the order of chess openings. Not only is con sidered to be the m ain line of the
it one of the oldest recorded openings Italian Game:
in chess history - its exi stence has been 1 e4 e 5 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 i.c4 i.C5 4 c3 lLlf6
recognized for hundreds of years; it's and now 5 d3 (rather th an S d4, which
al so th e first opening that m any pl ay­ releases the ten sion an d usually leads
ers learn, especi ally those who begin to more simplified position s).
chess at an early age. (For th e record, I
don 't count Scholar's Mate as an open­
ing!)
A s w e progress and m ature, we
tend to move on to more sophisticated
openings. I say 'more sophisticated'
only because young players will natu­
rally play the Italian Game in an un so­
phi sticated way. As we now know,
there are plenty of ways of playing the
Italian G ame which are anything but
un sophisticated. Thi s wasn't always the case though.
This book examines the Italian Only 30 years ago (not a long time
Game and th e Bishop's Opening and when you con sider the long history of

5
Beating 1 e4 eS
thi s opening) the view on 5 d3 was
generally quite dismi ssive. For exam­
ple, in Understanding the Open Ga mes,
a book I grew up with and greatly ad­
mired, this is what American grand­
m aster Edmar Mednis wrote:
"[5 d4 i s] the only logical follow-up
to 4 c3. Of course, the solid 5 d3 is play­
able, but what then is the point of
White's fourth move.
"Often there is more th an one good
pl an in a given opening position. Yet
once a particul ar pl an has been chosen,
one must be con sistent in executing it.
Skipping to and fro between various
courses will only lead to indigestion ! "
I remember being surpri sed by 5 d 3
when playing a fellow junior Nick
Thomas (he was obviously ahead of his
tim e in comparison to other juniors ! ) . I
h ad only ever faced 5 d4 previously,
and like Mednis I was left wondering
about the logic of such a follow-up.
More to the point, I al so remember I
wasn't able to find an easy solution for
Black.
Even though 5 d3 is an old m ove, it
was only during the 1980s that grand­
masters really began to appreci ate that
the 'quiet Italian ' was a viable option
for White, one which could easily be
compared to various d3 lines in the Ruy
Lopez. Practitioners during thi s period
included players such as John Nunn,
Lev Psakhis, Sergey Dolmatov and Ser­
gey Kudrin, while even An atoly Karpov
pl ayed it very occasion ally, most nota­
bly in his 1981 world championship
6
m atch again st Viktor Korchnoi.
In the 1990s there were some new
discoveries, adding an extra string to
White's bow. A group of players dem­
on strated that White could play the
Italian Game m ore aggressively. Delay­
ing king side castling provided m ore
options, including l aunching a sus­
tained attack again st the bl ack king
usin g a combin ation of pieces and
pawn s. In thi s book I 've decided to
cover both approaches (the Classical
Main Line and the Modern Variation) to
give the reader a choice, depending on
his style and m ood. In any case, even if
you wish to add just one line to your
repertoire, some knowledge of the
other i s useful in order to recognize
and appreciate overl apping pl an s and
tactical ideas, as well as the numerous
tran sposition al possibilities.
Can you count on a theoretical ad­
vantage using the Italian G ame? I don't
think you can . I could say "Where can
you? Good luck tryin g to prove an edge
again st the Marshall G ambit! ", but I
better stop myself at thi s point. Basi­
cally, there are m any lines in th e Italian
Game which do lead to an advantage
for White, but there are al so m any
which 'only' lead to interesting posi­
tion s, with level chances. I don't think
thi s m atters. After all, when all i s said
and done, it's worth remembering th at
understanding the position better than
your opponent is much more impor­
tant th an any theoretical edge the po­
sition m ay offer. In thi s book my aim i s

to h elp you to really understand the
Italian Game and Bishop's Opening.
In recent years there h ave been a
number of players whose creative ef­
forts over the board h ave enrich ed the
theory and ideas of the Italian G ame.
They h ave m ade the task of studyin g ,
playin g and writin g about the Italian
Gam e a lot easier than it might h ave
been, and for thi s they deserve a huge
amount of credit and gratitude. The list
of Italian G am e h eroes includes players
such as Sergei Tiviakov, Viktor Bologan,
Sergei Movsesian, Alexander Aresh­
chenko, Zah ar Efimenko, Michael Ad­
ams, Boris Gelfand, Evgeny Alekseev
and Vladimir Kramnik. I could on, but
however long the list was, it would al­
ways miss out someone who deserved
to be there. Throughout thi s book there
are m any g ames and g am e snippets
involving these players, but you don 't
need to stop there. You coul d do much
worse than check out players such as
Tiviakov and Bologan on an online da­
tabase, and play through all of their
games in the Italian G ame, as I'm sure
this would h elp you to get a good feel
for the opening.
As for my own experiences in thi s
opening, I returned to the Italian Game
in 2000 so that I would h ave another
weapon to go with the Ruy Lopez. Since
then I h ave avidly studied and played
the Italian G ame - fortunately with
good results. I'm finding that even now
I'm learning new things. For example,
just a few days ago I pl ayed a game and
Introduction
my opponent surprised me with a
completely new idea. H aving said that,
after 10 years of studying the opening
it's probably gettin g to the stage where
I 'm learning fewer things, so thi s seem s
like a good time to share my thoughts.
Arriving via the Bishop's Opening
While considering a 1 e4 e S repertoire
for White for thi s book, one deci sion I
h ad to m ake was how to reach the Ital ­
ian G ame. I didn't h ave much h esita­
tion about choosing a route via the
Bishop's Opening. Using the move or­
der 1 e4 eS 2 tLlf3 tLlc3 3 -tC4 would
require coverage of the Petroff Defence,
which I decided again st for two rea­
son s. Firstly, the Petroff leads to com ­
pletely different positions to those in
the Italian G ame, whereas the Bishop's
Opening and Italian Game are closely
linked as White uses very similar de­
velopment pattern s. Combining the
Italian Game and the Bish op's Opening
provides a 'system ' type of repertoire,
and thi s seemed like a logical step to
take. The second problem is a practical
one. The Petroff i s a unique opening, in
that the theory it has generated vastly
outweigh s its popularity at anything
under 2 600 level - it's almost inversely
proportion al to it. I wasn't attracted by
the idea of a con siderable percentage
of the book being taken up by an open­
ing which readers would face only oc­
casion ally.
By including the Bishop's Opening, I
hope th at the repertoire option s will be
7
Beating 1 e4 e5
useful in more than one way. Firstly,
and most obviously, there's the option
of always choosing the Bishop's Open­
ing move order in your games. Sec­
ondly, those of you who are always pre­
pared to face the Petroff might wish to
use only the Italian G ame part of the
repertoire. Finally, some players like to
keep their opponents guessing by us­
ing a combination of 2 tZ'lf3 and 2 Ji.c4,
choosing one or the other for specific
occasions, depending on factors such
as the opponent's repertoire.
Chapters at a Glance
Throughout the book I 've generally
presented the m aterial using the tradi­
tional m ove orders. For example, I refer
to the Italian G ame as 1 e4 e5 2 tZ'lf3
tZ'lc6 3 Ji.c4, rather than 1 e4 e5 2 Ji.c4
tZ'lc6 3 tZ'lf3 . I 've sometimes tweaked
move orders within games, normally in
order to cover early alternatives in a
convenient way.
Before plunging in, I think it's worth
laying down a brief summ ary of the
chapters, on thi s occasion using the
Bi shop's Opening move order:
1 e4 e5 2 Ji. C4
2 tZ'lf3 tZ'lc6 3 Ji.C4 is the Italian Game
(Chapters 1-5).
If Black an swers 2 tZ'lf3 with 2 ... d6,
White can pl ay 3 Ji.C4, which i s covered
8
in Chapter 6 (Gam e 46).
White cannot play an Italian G ame
set-up with Ji.C4 and d3 if Bl ack
chooses 2 ... tZ'lf6, 2 ... d5 or 2 .. .f5 - basi­
cally m oves which attack the e4-pawn .
2 tZ'lf6
...
If 2 ... tZ'lc6, White replies 3 tZ'lf3 with a
direct tran sposition to the Italian G ame
(Chapters 1-5). Second move altern a­
tives are con sidered in Ch apter 6.
3 d3
Now:
a) 3 ...tZ'lc6 (the most common
choice) 4 tZ'lf3 tran sposes to the Italian
Game: 4 ... Ji.C5 5 c3 i s covered in Chap­
ters 1-3, while other m oves (4 ... Ji.e7,
4 ... h6, 4 ... d5 etc) belong in Ch apter 4.
b) 3 ... c6 is the m ain alternative for
Black (see Chapter 6).
c) Other m oves, like 3 ... Ji.c5 and
3 ... Ji.e7, are al so covered in Chapter 6.
Now, without further ado, it's time
to plunge in ! It just remain s for me to.
wish you every success with the Italian
Game and Bishop's Opening.
PS Please look out in the future for
free updates on thi s book at
www.everymanchess.com .
John Emms
Hildenborough
May 2010
 Cha pte r O n e

Italian Game:
Modern Variation (Part I)

Before the early 1990s, the autom atic World Ch ampion Wilhelm Steinitz h ad
way to play this li pe as White involved been doing something similar more
early castling, usually on move 6. th an a hundred years earlier, but th at
Around this time, h owever, a few play­ was in the Ruy Lopez rather th an the
ers began experimenting with the plan Italian Game.
of del aying castling. Over the years this
idea h as really caught on, so much so Let's begin by playing through a few
th at nowadays some would argue th at early moves:
it's the m ain line of the Italian G ame. 1 e4 e S 2 tLlf3 tLlc6 3 ..Itc4 ..Itcs 4 c3 tLlf6
One key advantage of delaying cas­ S d3 a6
tling i s that White can carry out the
typical tLlbd2-fl-g 3 m anoeuvre more
efficiently, simply because of the trivial
reason th at there's no obstacle of a
rook on fl. Sometimes thi s tempo­
saving i s the height of White's ambi­
tion s, and once the knight lands on g 3
White i s h appy t o castle. However, an ­
other option - one th at is more ambi­
tious - is to delay castling further, or
even di spen se with the idea com ­
pletely, in favour of l aunching an at­ Thi s little pawn move h as been
tack on the king side. Of course the Bl ack's most popul ar choice in recent

9
Beating 1 e4 e5
years. It pre-empts any possible b2-b4
advance by giving the bishop a useful
hideaway on a7. On a7 the bishop i s
completely out o f h arm 's way, whereas
on b6 Black h as to be wary of tiJbd2-C4
ideas.
6 i. b3
White normally plays this move
sooner or later, regardless of whether
he wants to delay castling or not.
Though it's not a threat at thi s precise
moment, at some point White needs to
takes measures against ... tiJas, which
can now be answered by iLc2. If White
carelessly allows thi s exch ange of
knight for bishop, h e h as no chance of
g aining any advantage.
6 ... iL a 7
Again thi s i s the m odem choice.
Black m aintains m aximum flexibility
over where to place his d-pawn and
al so doesn't commit his king yet.
7 h3
Continuing the theme o f m aximum
flexibility! White not only delays cas­
tling but also the tiJbd2-f1 plan . The
reason : to keep the option of i.g s open
10
for one further move in case Black cas­
tles. The immediate 7 tiJbd2 i s of course
pl ayable, and thi s move is covered in
Chapter Two.
A key possibility for Bl ack is to ad­
vance in the centre with ... dS, and thi s
m ove can be played in numerous posi­
tion s. Paradoxically, in the m ain line
Black pl ays ... d6, only to play ... dS just a
couple of moves l ater! Confused? Don 't
worry. Everything will h opefully be­
come clearer once you've pl ayed
through a few of the g ames.
If Bl ack does pl ay ... dS in the near
future, White must choose between
two pl ans. These will be covered in
depth within the g ames, but in a nut­
shell they are:
Plan A: White h olds the centre,
keeps thing s as blocked as possible and
slowly builds up an attack on the king ­
side.
Plan B: White exch anges pawn s on
dS, castles kin g side, pressures Bl ack's
centre and searches for dynamic piece
play.
White can al so execute Plan A if
Bl ack settles for ... d6.
Returning to the position in the dia­
gram, 7 h 3 is a multi -functional m ove
reg ardless of which plan White
chooses. Let's list a few things it does:
1. It prevents ... tiJg4, something
White usually needs to do before play­
ing tiJbd2-fl.
2. It facilitates action on the kin g ­
side when White chooses Plan A: either
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
the ttJh 2-g4 m anoeuvre or the aggres­
sive g 2-g4Iunge.
3 . It prevents ...�g4. As we'll see
throughout thi s book, White doesn't
usually need to fear the pin on the f3-
knight. However ... �g4 is a useful op­
tion for Black in lines where White
chooses Plan B.
I could go on, but I think the sim­
plest solution i s to go straight into the
illustrative g ames. Let's begin with
some games where White successfully
carries out Pl an A.
Game l
D.Howell-A.Ashton
British Ra pidplay
C h a m pion s h i p, Ha l ifax 2008
1 e4 e S 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 �C4 ttJf6 4 d3 �CS
5 c3 a6 6 �b3 �a7 7 h3
The m ain advantage of the 7 h 3
move order i s that, i n contrast to 7
ttJbd2, White m aintains the option of
meeting 7 ... 0-0 with 8 �g S ! (see Tivia­
kov-El Taher, G am e 10).
7 d6
•••
7 ... dS i s covered in Roy Chowdhury­
Skjoldborg (Game g).
8 ttJbd2
White begins the knight m anoeuvre
round to g 3 . Castling would tran spose
to lines con sidered in Chapter Three.
8 0-0
...
8 ... ttJe7 is covered in Games 7-8.
9 ttJf1
9 •.. dS
g. . . dS h a s been the popular choice
in practice and it i s certainly Black's
most ch allenging respon se to White's
ttJd2-fl pl an . It can 't be denied th at
Black has lost a tempo by pl aying ... d6
and then ... dS in quick succession, but
there's a cast-iron logic for doing so.
Once White's knight m oves from d2 to
fl, White i s in a much less favourable
position to an swer ... dS with exds, 0-0,
:el, ttJc4 etc, to attack the centre and
the es-pawn in particular. Bl ack often
follows the rule of thumb to play ... dS
only after White's knight is committed
to fl.
g ... �e6 i s covered in Yemelin-Klimov
(Game 6).
10 'iVe2 !
In respon se, White usually m eets
thi s advance by protecting th e strong ­
point o n e 4 rather than exch anging on
dS. That is, he chooses Plan A in stead of
Plan B.
10 exds ttJxdS 11 ttJg 3 i s too slow
and gives Black enough time to get or­
ganized. For example, 11 ... �e6 12 0-0
11
Beating 1 e4 e5
f6 ! 13 l:[el (m aybe White should play
13 �e3 ! ?, an approach con sidered in
Emms-Greet, Game 11) 13 ...'iVd7 14 d4
exd4 15 cxd4 �f7 16 �C2 l:.ae8 and
White had less than nothing in
S.Movsesian-V.Akopian, Carl sbad 2007.
Returning to 10 'ii'e 2, Black must
decide whether to cl arify the situation
in the centre immediately or keep the
ten sion for at least one more move.
lo ... dxe4
The option of keeping the ten sion
with moves such as 10 ... �e6 or 10 ... l:!.e8
is discussed in G ames 4- 5 .
11 dxe4 'iVe7
11 ... liJh 5 i s covered in Gonzalez
Vidal-Gomez, (Game 3)
12 liJ g3 h 6 ?
The natural follow-up to 11 .. :ii'e 7
must be 12 ... �e6 (see Tiviakov­
Sargi ssian, Game 2), and I can see no
reason to delay thi s move.
Is Black's choice of 12 ... h6 the first
sign th at he is un aware of the danger
in thi s position ? True, it's desirable to
eliminate the possibility of .1i.g 5 or
liJg 5, but the drawback i s that Black's
12
king side h a s been weakened. I s thi s
weakness significant?
1 3 liJh41
Yes it i s ! And it's immediately ap­
parent why. N ot only does White
threaten 14 liJg 6, but when a knight
reaches the juicy f5 outpost it's going
to be mightily difficult for Black to di s­
lodge it, even more so now th at ... g6
would leave the h6-pawn hanging.
Black's defence from thi s position
coul d probably be improved upon, but
it's already clear th at he is experienc­
ing much discomfort.
13 ... <iii' h 7
If 1 3 ...� e 6 both knight m oves t o f5
look enticing, but 14 liJgf5 has the ad­
vantage of vacatin g g 3 for the queen .
For example, 14 ... 'ilVd7 1 5 'iVf3 and the
threats of 16 �xh 6 and 16 liJxh 6+ are
not easy to m eet.
14 liJhf5 'iVe8?
It's not good in any case, but Black
has to play 14 ... 'iVd8.
1 5 'ii'f3 liJg8
Thi s defends against the liJxh 6
threat, but...
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
16 liJxg71
... H owell h ad another idea up his
sleeve !
16 ... �xg7 17 liJ h S + 1-0
White forces m ate after 17 ... �g 6 18
'l'g 3+! �xh 5 19 i.. d l+!, or 17 ... �h 8 18
'l'g 3 followed by 'iVg 7.
A crushing win for White. Perhaps
the quiet Italian is not so quiet after all !
One question you might ask is, does
White's attack offer chances for success
ag ain st a 2600+ grandm aster? Let's
see ...
Game 2
S. Tivia kov-Ci.Sa rgissia n
FIDE World Cha m pion s h i p,
Tri pol i 2004
1 e4 eS 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 i.. C 4 i.. c s 4 c3 liJf6
5 d3 d6 6 i.. b3 a6 7 h 3 i.. a 7 8 liJbd2 0-0
9 liJf1 dS 10 Ve2 dxe4 11 dxe4 Ve7 12
liJg3 i.. e 6
Thi s i s much stronger than 12 ... h 6 ?
Black's bishop move already brings
about a key moment, with White fac­
ing a question which ari ses tim e and
time again in the Italian Game. Should
he allow the exchange of the light­
squared bishops or avoid it? In general
thi s question i s very difficult to an swer,
and in m any situati on s the correct
choice m ay ultim ately depend on a
player's style.
Let's see wh at Tiviakov does:
1 3 i.. c 2 1 ?
Tiviakov chooses to keep th e bi sh ­
ops o n t h e board.
Thi s i..b 3-C2 retreat can be difficult
to comprehend at first. I admit it's cer­
tainly not the sort of move I would
have con sidered playing when I was
younger. On the surface White seem s
to be spending a tempo moving his
bishop to a more passive position, and
leaving Bl ack's e6-bishop in possession
of the a2-g8 diagon al . If all of this i s
true (and i t i s ! ), why are grandmasters
and Italian Game experts like Tiviakov
happy to play this way? Why do they
view i.. c 2 as White's most ambitious
option ?
13
Beating 1 e4 e5
Well, maybe this retreat could be
compared to some extent with White's
automatic .i.b3-C2 when faced with
... ttJas in the Ruy Lopez. The bishop be­
comes temporarily passive, but White i s
counting o n its long-term potential.
Furthermore, despite the symmetrical
pawn structure it does seem as though
Black enjoys slightly less manoeuvring
space for his pieces, and so in general he
would welcome an exchange of minor
pieces. Of course, in the Lopez scenario
there's an extra incentive - to leave
Black with a less than ideal knight on as.
This is why there .i.c2 is an 'automatic'
choice, whereas here the decision re­
quires some agonizing.
Let's see how Black should defend if
White allows the exchange and con­
tinues action on the king side: 1 3 ttJh4
(planning ttJfs) 13 ... .i.xb3 14 axb3 'i¥e6 !
(with the bishops off the board, the
queen sits very comfortably on thi s
square - it's now her j o b to patrol the
light squares) 1 5 b4 ttJe8 (thi s knight
will go to d6 to battle for control of fs)
16 0-0 ttJd6 17 ttJhfs
14
(or 17 'iith 2 ttJe7 18 f4 exf4 19 .i.xf4
ttJg 6 with a roughly equal position,
G .Ardelean -I.Chirila, Eforie Nord 2009).
In thi s position Black should avoid
17 ... ttJxfs ? ! 18 exfs ! which gives White
a great square on e4 for his knight and
the possibility to break up Black's kin g ­
side with f6. 17 ...ttJ e 7 is a wiser choice,
and here 18 ttJxd6 'iVxd6 19 l:td1 'iVc6
leaves Black close to equality.
Let's return to the position after 1 3
.i. c 2 . White's immediate plan i s ttJh4
followed by ttJfs and possibly 'i¥f3 . H ow
should Black react?
13 ... :tfe8
If Black wants to activate a rook,
isn't 13 ... :ad8 more desirable? Yes it is,
especially since after 14 ttJh4 the rook
on d8 helps with the tactical shot
14 ... ttJb4 ! .
Thi s seem s t o solve Black's prob­
lems. For example, 15 .i.b1 (White
should avoid 15 cxb4 'ikxb4+ 16 .i.d2
l:txd2 ! 17 'i¥xd2 .i.xf2+ 18 'iit d 1 'iVxd2+
19 'iit x d2 .i.xg 3, while 1 5 ttJhfs ttJXC2+
16 'iVxc2 .i.xf5 1 7 ttJxf5 'iVe6 18 0-0
reaches an equal position) l s ... 'iVd6 ! 16
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
liJhfs liJd3+ 1 7 .i.xd3 'iVxd3 18 .i.g 5
liJxe4! ? 19 'ti'xe4 'ti'xe4+ 20 liJxe4 f6 !
etc. White might be better off playing
14 0-0 in stead.
Another idea for Black is to prevent
liJh4 with 13 ... liJe8, when again the
knight i s ready to hop into d6. 14 0-0
liJd6 15 .l:tel f6 16 ltJh 2 :ad8 17 liJg4
'iff7 18 .i.bl �h 8 19 ltJe3 :d7 20 b3
iUd8, as pl ayed in V.Nevednichy­
L.Fressinet, Khanty Man siysk 2007, pro­
vides a good demon stration of a suc­
cessful Bl ack strategy - White's king ­
side pl ay h as come t o nothing and
Black i s slowly improving his position.
White needs m ore dynami sm here,
and his play in D.Howell - P.5vidler,
Dresden Olympiad 2008, provides m ore
of a challenge: 14 ltJg s .i.d7 l s ltJfs 'iff6
(ls ... .i.xfs 16 exfs reveal s the point be­
hind m oving the knight to g s, as the
e4-square i s now beckoning) 16 h4 (16
liJf3 intending .i.g s followed by 0-0-0 i s
al so possible) 16 . . .ltJd6.
In thi s position my feeling is that 17
g4! ?, as suggested in Chess Today, looks
more ambitious th an Howell's 17 ltJe3 .
A m ove earlier, i f Black pl ays 16 . . .h 6
(in stead of 16 . . .ltJd6) White coul d ig­
nore the attack on the knight, since 17
.i.d2 hxg s ? 18 hxg s 'ti'g 6 19 0-0-0 looks
to me like a very strong attack down
the h -file.
14 ltJh41
Now there i s absolutely nothing to
dissuade White from carrying out thi s
desirable idea. It's surprising just how
quickly Black's position worsens from
here on .
14 'iff8
...
14 ... g 6 prevents an entry into fs for
the m om ent, but the pin with 1 5 .i.g s
i s obviously going to hurt Black.
14 ... 'i!Vcs offers Black more possibili­
ties, such as ... 'ifC4, ... 'ifbs or ... .i.c4.
Here Lukacs feel s that 15 .i.g s ! , intend­
ing l s ... .i.c4 16 'iff3 :e6 17 liJhfs, is
White's best option and I agree with
him. White is threatening 18 ltJxg 7 !
�xg 7 19 .i.xf6+ �xf6 20 liJh s+.
1s liJhfs ltJe71
Black has to ch allenge thi s power­
fully placed knight as quickly as possi­
ble.
15
Beating 1 e4 e5

16 .i.gs .i.xfS?
Black really needed to keep thi s
bi shop in order t o oppose i t s counter­
part, whose scope is about to be in­
creased with the change of pawn struc­
ture. H aving said that, 16 ... ttJxfS isn't a
bed of roses for Bl ack either: 17 exfs !
(17 ttJxfS ttJd7 ! followed by .. .f6 mini-
mizes Black's disadvantage) 1 7 ... .i.ds
18 O-O-O ! ? intending to meet 18 ... .i.xa2
with 19 .i.xf6 gxf6 20 ttJe4.
17 exfs ttJed s 18 O-O-O!
Excellent play! Tiviakov exploits to
the full his earlier deci sion to delay cas­
tling. Indeed, 0-0-0 i s now the natural
choice, with White's active pieces,
powerful bishops and pawn spearhead
on fS providing ample ammunition for
a king side attack. White enjoys a sig­
nificant advantage in thi s position .
18 ... h6 19 .i.h4 Vc S 20 ttJe4 'ii'c 6 2 1
.i.b3 ttJf4!? 2 2 ttJxf6+ 'ii'xf6 2 3 'ii'g 4 'ii'c 6
24 f6 1 'i!Vxg2?
24 ... g 6 i s more resilient, even
though White is in compl ete control
after 2S :d7 ttJe6 26 :hdl.
25 .i.g3 ! gs
2 6 Vd 7 ?
26 .i.xf4! was much stronger. White
win s after 26 ..... xg4 27 hxg4 exf4 28
:xh 6 .i.xf2 29 :g 6+! 'iitf8 30 :g7, as
indicated by Lukacs.
26 .. JU8?
Missing a big chance to get back
into the g am e with 26 ... ttJe6 ! .
2 7 .i.xf4!
Tiviakov rarely wastes a second op­
portunity!
27 .•• exf4 28 'ii'f S ! l:.fd 8 29 'iVg6+ 1-0
The n ext g am e demon strates just
how much flexibility White's position
contains. Early on it looks like White i s
aiming for a typical pawn storm o n the
kingside, but somewhat surpri singly he
ends up castling th at side.
Game 3
V.Gonza lez Vidal-F.Gomez
C u ba n C h a m pion s h i p,
Holg u i n City 2002
1 e4 eS 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 .i.C4 ttJf6 4 d3 .i.cS

16
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
5 c3 a6 6 �b3 �a7 7 lDbd2 d6 8 h 3 0-0
9 lDf1 dS 10 'iie 2 dxe4 11 dxe4 lD h s ! ?
Thi s knight move i s an important
idea - both here and in similar posi­
tion s - because it more or less prevents
12 lDg 3, which h as becom e undesirable
in view of 1 2 ... lDf4 or 12 ... lDxg 3 . So
White h as to amend his original plan .
Whenever Black pl ays ... lDh S , both
sides need to be wary of tactics involv­
ing lDxes uncovering an attack on the
knight by the white queen . On thi s oc­
casion 12 lDxe s ? ? is a blunder. White
win s a pawn after 12 ... lDxes 13 'iix h S,
but then Bl ack win s the game with
13 ... lDd3+ !
1 2 g3!
Preventing any ... lDf4 ideas. While
it's certainly true that White's king side
structure h as become compromi sed to
some extent, White can usually get
away with accepting thi s because king­
side castling only rarely features in his
plans.
White can allow .... lDf4 in some po­
sitions, but he doesn't want to force
the knight there: 12 g47 ! lDf4 13 �xf4
exf4 and White h as weakened his posi­
tion for no compen sating factors.
What's m ore, that knight on f1 is no
longer such a h appy piece !
If White wants to allow ... lDf4, a bet­
ter way to do so would be 12 �g s "iVd6
13 lDe3, as played in K. Landa­
V.Akopian, Sochi 2006. I 'm sure th at
White plan s to meet 1 3 ... lDf4 with 14
�xf4 exf4 l s lDdS; or 1 3 ... h6 with 14 g4
lDf4 (14 ... h xg S ! 7) 1 5 �xf4 exf4 16 lDdS,
when in comparison to 1 2 g47! White
has found an excellent square for the
knight. In the g ame, Akopi an chose
1 3 ... �xe3 and Landa m an aged to g ain
a small advantage after 14 �xe3 lDf4
1 5 �xf4 exf4 16 e S 'iVh 6 17 'ili'e4 �e6
18 �xe6 'i!Vxe6 19 0-0 :ae8 20 l:tfel f6
2 1 'i!Vxf4 fxe s 2 2 'i!Ve3 in view of the i so­
lated e-pawn, although Bl ack's play
was perhaps a bit too simplistic.
12 ... lDf6 !
The knight has done its job - lDg 3 is
no longer possible. Now it return s to
hit the e4-pawn so that White cannot
plan lDe3 either.
1 3 g4! ?
17
Beating 1 e4 e5
White has oth er options but clearly
thi s is the most ambitious. The good
thing about delaying castling i s that
White can consider aggressive ideas
such as lunging forward with pawns
on th e king side.
1 3 i.. g s h 6 14 .l:!.dl "ile7 reveal s a
problem with having a pawn on g 3 .
White would like t o play 1 5 i..h 4 but
then he would always have to worry
about ... g s trapping the bishop. Even if
an immediate lS ... g S is con siderably
risky in view of 16 lDxg s hxg s 17 i.. x g s,
the fact that Black has thi s possibility in
reserve, say after l s ... i.. e 6, i s somewhat
annoying for White (although not an­
noying enough to prevent some bold
players choosing to play like thi s - see
the H owell-Mchedlishvili reference in
Game 10).
After 1 3 g4 Black needs to come up
with an effective plan, which is easier
said than done ...
13 lDd7
...
Sen sibly removing the knight out of
the firing line of White's king side ad­
vance, and eyeing the possibility of ex-
18
ploiting the hole o n f4 via . . .lDcs-e6.
1 3 ..."ile7 intending ... .te6 is, as al­
ways, a key defen sive idea. Again st this,
White coul d play 14 lDg 3 and m eet
14 ... i.. e 6 with l s lDfS.
The immediate 1 3 ... i.. e 6 ! ? i s al so in­
teresting, and White faces one of those
typical dilemmas regarding the light­
squared bishops. 14 .txe6 fxe6 leaves
the e-pawn s doubled and isol ated, but
it could be argued with some justifica­
tion that Black's g ain in control of dS
and fS, plus the use of the open f-file,
more th an compen sates him for this. I
would be much more tempted to con­
tinue with 14 lDg 3 .
14 lDe3 lDes 1S .te2
Preventing the exch ange and al so
... lDd3+.
1S ••• aS
Black's idea i s . . .b6 followed by
... i.. a 6, but White can easily negate thi s
threat after which Black i s left awk­
wardly pl aced.
Motwani suggests ls ... lDe6, plan­
ning to m eet 16 lDdS with 16 .. .f6 ! ? "fol­
lowed by ... lDe7 to challenge White's
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
ds-knight, which i s a key guardian of
the f4-square". Thi s does look like a
wise defence to me, although I still pre­
fer White's position after 17 i.. e 3 i.. x e3
18 �xe3 ttJe7 19 0-0-0. Another entic­
ing option i s 16 ttJfS, intending to an ­
swer 16 ... g 6 with 17 ttJh 6+ followed by
M, again with some initiative.
16 0-0!
It's sometimes easy to forget th at
White can still castle this side ! Black i s
hardly in a position t o exploit any
weaknesses, especially as most of his
pieces are l abourin g on the queenside.
16 ... b6 17 l:td1 i.. a 6 18 'iVe1 'iWf6 19 'itg2
It has become abundantly clear that
Black's plan involving ... as, ... b6 and
... i.. a 6 was a misguided one. He should
have at least con sulted his poor bishop
on a7 !
19 ttJe7
..•
Bl ack h ad to do something about
the obvious idea of ttJdS or ttJfS.
20 g S ! ?
Thi s advance i s quite committal, but
White's initiative becomes very strong .
2 0... 'ii'e 6 2 1 b 4 axb4 2 2 cxb4 ttJb7?
Black misses his chance. After
22 ... ttJg 6 ! 23 ttJg4 ( 2 3 bxcS ttJf4+ 24
'ith 1 'iWxh 3 + 2S ttJh 2 is very unclear, as
i s 23 ttJdS .1l.c8 ! 24 ttJg 1 ttJa6) 23 ... ttJd7
24 i.. b 3 'iWe7 2S h4, White is better but
Black is still alive.
23 ttJd S ! .l:!.ac8 24 i.. b 3
24 ... ttJxd S 2 S b S ! 1-0
White win s a piece after 2S ... i.. x bs
2 6 .1l.xds and 2 7 .1l.xb7.
The next g am e highlights a problem
th at Black often encounters in thi s line:
how does he create m eaningful coun­
terplay? My opponent plays quite
imaginatively on the queenside, but he
still finds it very difficult to do anything
con structive. In contrast, White's
moves on the king side didn 't seem to
require too much thought.
Game 4
J.Emms-D.Ledger
Britis h League (4NCL) 2006
1 e4 eS 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.. C4 i.. c s 4 c3 ttJf6
19
Beating 1 e4 e5
5 d 3 a6 6 .Jtb3 d6 7 liJbd2 0-0 8 h 3 .Jta7
g liJf1 dS 10 'iVe2 'iWd6
Black adds support to eS in prepara­
tion for his next move.
11 liJg3
11 ... liJas
11.. . .Jte6 is certainly possible, but
perhaps it m akes more sen se to play it
a m ove earlier without the queen com­
mitted to d6 (see the next game). Now:
a) 12 liJh4 dxe4 1 3 dxe4 .Jtxb3 14
axb3 'ii'e 6 tran sposes to the note to
White's 1 3th move in Game 2 .
b ) 12 liJg S ! ? liJ e 7 1 3 0-0 liJg6
( 1 3 ... .Jtd7 ! ?) 14 liJh s liJd7 1 5 liJxe6 fxe6
16 .Jte3 liJf6 17 liJxf6+ �xf6 18 .Jtxa7
l:[xa7 19 g3 c6 20 d4 looked a touch
better for White in B.Macieja-P.Acs,
Budapest 1996.
c) 12 0-0 h 6 1 3 liJh4 dxe4 14 dxe4
liJe7 ! (14 ... .Jtxb3 15 liJgfS ! ? is interest­
ing, planning to an swer ls ... 'ii'e 6 16
axb3 'ili'xb 3 ? by 17 'ji'f3 with threats on
h6) 15 'ji'f3 'iith 7 16 liJhfs liJxfs 17 liJxfS
.JtxfS 18 'ii'xfS+ g6 19 'i!Vf3 'iit g 7 and
Black has equalized, I . Brandis-S.Vajda,
20
Sovata 1998.
11...d4 i s another reason able idea
for Black, although not m any pl ayers
have been willing to alter the ten sion
in this way.
One of Bl ack's ideas is to play ... dxC3
in combination with ... b S -b4 to g ain
control of d4, but thi s pl an i s not easy
to carry out if White plays with pur­
pose: 12 0-0 .Jte6 13 liJh4 (again thi s
idea suggests itself as the most dan­
gerous) 13 ... liJe7 14 .Jtg s liJe8 15 cxd4 ! ?
.Jtxd4 16 .Jtxe 7 ! 'ji'xe7 17 liJhfs 'ii'd 7 18
.Jtxe6 fxe6 (or 18 ... 'ii'x e6 19 liJxd4 exd4
20 liJfS) 19 liJxd4 'ji'xd4 20 'ifc2 and
White enjoyed a slight edge in
B.Macieja- I .Sokolov, Elista Olympiad
1998 - Black's pawn weaknesses are
m ore serious th an White's.
12 .JtC2 dxe4
Golubev suggests 12 ... d4! ? here, and
thi s is certainly a worthwhile idea. Af­
ter 1 3 0-0 White's plan i s similar to the
one employed after 11...d4.
1 3 dxe4 .Jtd7 1
Thi s i s the point of Black's previous
play. With the knight vacating c6, Black
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
gains the possibility of doing some
damage with ... �bS .
Should White pl ay b3, t o m eet
... �bS with c4? Thi s is what Rybka
wants to do ...
14 liJh41
No!
14 �b5 15 'iff3
...
Computers, at least initially, assess
that Black i s well placed here. Perhaps
they are taking into con sideration the
fact th at White i s unable to castle ei­
ther side at thi s moment. My feeling,
though, i s th at White's king stuck in
the centre m ay well be safer th an
Black's king tucked behind those three
kingside pawn s, at least in hum an vs.
human battl es!
1 5 l:tfeS?
...
Perhaps the m ain problem for Black
is not the assessm ent of the position,
but rather the fact th at it's m ore diffi­
cult for him to handle. After just one
seemingly n atural move by Black, the
computers begin to acknowledge
White's attacking potenti al .
ls .. :iVe6 ! pre-empts liJfS ideas and,
although I prefer White, there's every­
thing still to pl ay for.
16 liJ hf5 'ili'fS
The problem with 16 .. :ife6 here i s
that 17 �g S ! threaten s 18 liJxg 7 ..t>xg 7
19 �xf6+ 'ii'xf6 20 liJh S+, and al so ex­
ploits a down side to 17 ... l:.fe8 - the f6-
knight no longer h as e8 available.
Again st 1 7 ... liJd7 ? I h ad pl anned 18
liJh S ! , which exploits another drawback
to Black's rook move !
17 h4!
Thi s m ove creates a m ajor threat,
and it al so introduces h S-h 6 ideas.
I had analysed the immediate 17
liJxg 7 'ili'xg 7 18 liJfs but couldn 't find a
follow up after 18 ... 'iIi'g 6. With a pawn
on h4 in stead of h 3 , though, White
could win here by playing h S .
17 J:te6?
..
Initially thi s move seem s to discour­
age liJxg 7 because it appears to give
Black a second option of capturing on
g 7, with the king . However, thi s proves
to be worse than capturing with the
queen !
17 ... ..t>h 8 ! was the only decent way
21
Beating 1 e4 e5
to meet White's threat. The point be­
hind the king m ove i s th at 18 ttJxg 7
'iWxg 7 19 ttJfS 'iWg 6 20 h S 'iWg4 no longer
works for White because it's not check
on h 6 . In stead I h ad planned to keep up
the pressure with 18 h S .
1 8 ttJxg7 ! 'it>xg7
18 ... 'iWxg 7 is more resilient but still
winning for White: 19 ttJfS 'iVg 6
(19 . :ili'f8 i s met by 20 i.h 6; or 19 ... 'Wh 8
. Wei n strasse 2009
20 i.h 6 with the point that 20 ... ttJe8 2 1
'iWg 3 + :g6 allows 2 2 ttJe7 m ate) 2 0 h S .
Here 2 0 . :ii'g4 2 1 ttJh 6+ win s the queen,
. 5 c3 a6 6 i.b3 i.a7 7 h3 d6 8 ttJbd2 0-0
while 20 .. ttJxh S 21 llxh S i s hopeless for
. 9 ttJf1 dS 10 'iWe2 i.e6
Black in the long run .
19 i.h6+!
David Ledger looked a bit shocked
when I played thi s move, which either
win s the queen or forces m ate. Perhaps
he had been expecting 19 ttJfS+? 'it>h 8.
Sportingly, he allowed me to execute
the m ate.
19 ... 'it>xh6 20 ttJfS+ 'it>g6 2 1 'ii'g 3+ 'it> h s
2 2 'iWgs mate (1-0)
Sergei Tiviakov is one of the Italian
G ame's greatest advocates. He's always
22
coming up with n e w and interesting
ideas, and it's no coincidence th at his
g ames are featured more than anyone
el se's in thi s book.
Game S
S. Tiviakov-R. Buhmann
Neustadt an der
1 e4 eS 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.C4 ttJf6 4 d3 i.cS
Thi s is a good m ove. Black increases
the ten sion by introducing the possibil­
ity of a bishop exch ange after a trade
on e4. White can react either solidly or
aggressively.
If 10 ... h 6, White can continue with
11 ttJg 3 but 11 g4! ? is an attractive al­
ternative, especially now that Bl ack h as
given White's attack a 'hook' with ... h6.
The g am e V. Komliakov-I .Yagupov, Rus­
sia 1995, demon strates some of
White's attacking possibilities:
1 1 ... dxe4 12 dxe4 ttJd7 (the typical reac-
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
tion to g 2-g4 - Bl ack's knight heads for
e6) 13 lLlg 3 (I quite like 1 3 lLle3 ! ? lLlcs
14 ..tC2, when the knight can al so go to
dS - compare G on zalez-Gomez, G am e
3) 13 ...lLl c s 1 4 i. c 2 lLl e 6 1 5 lLlfS l:t e 8 16
h4 lLlf4 1 7 ..txf4 exf4 18 l:r.dl 'ii'f6 19 gs
hxg s 20 hxg s 'ii'g 6 2 1 lLlSh4 'ii'h s 2 2
'ii' d2 ..t c S 2 3 g 6 ..td6
24 gxf7+ ! ? (Rybka prefers the para­
doxical 24 'ii'd S ! , because even after an
exch ang e of queens White keeps an
initiative: 24 ... 'ii'x ds 2 5 ':'xdS ..te6 2 6
.l:.h S etc) 24 .. .'�xf7 2 5 l:tg l i. g 4 2 6
i.b3+ �6 2 7 l:[xg4! ? 'ii'x g4 2 8 'iVds
ttJes 29 lLlxes ':xe s ? ? (after 29 ... i.xe s
there's nothing obvious for White; now
the attack i s decisive) 30 'ii'f7+ 'iii> g s 3 1
cJtd2 ! �h 6 3 2 .:1h l 'ii'h s 3 3 lLlfS+ ':'xfS
34 exfs and Black resigned.
10 ... lie8 is m ore solid. Black doesn't
fear 11 ..tg s because he plan s to m eet
it with 11 ... dxe4 12 dxe4 ..te6, followed
typically by an exch ange of bishops on
b3 and the queen working her way to
e6. For example, 13 l:Idl (I h aven 't
found any g ames with 13 ..ta ! ?, but
this looks like the sort of m ove Tiviakov
might choose) 13 ... 'ii'e 7 14 lLle3 ..txe3
1 5 'ii'x e3 ..txb3 16 axb3 'ii'e 6 17 ..txf6
'ii'xf6 18 0-0 'ii'e 6 19 :dS f6 with a level
position, V.lordachescu-Z.Gyimesi, Ro­
mania 2004.
If 10 ... l:te8 is m et by 11 lLlg 3, Black
can play 11 ... h6 safe in the knowledge
that White no longer h as aggressive
g 2-g4 ideas at his disposa1 . Even so,
there are some interesting possibilities
here:
a) 1 2 0-0 ..te6 1 3 l:tdl (otherwise
Black might pl ay ... lLlas, ...dxe4 and
... ..tc4) 1 3 ... 'iVe7 14 lLlh4 dxe4 1 5 lLlhfS
'ii'f8 16 dxe4 ..txb3 17 axb3 lLle7 18 'ii'f3
(threatening lLlxh 6+) 18 ... lLlxfS 19 lLlxfS
':'e6 (K. Landa-M.Adam s, En schede
2006) and here 20 b4 introduces the
possibility of b S at some point. White's
position i s the more comfortable, even
if Bl ack might be able to equalize with
accurate pl ay.
b) White can al so begin king side ac­
tion with 12 lLlh 2 ! ?
Thi s move offers m ore chances for
both sides to unbalance the position.
For example, 12 ... ..te6 1 3 lLlg4 dxe4 14
23
 Beating 1 e4 e5
dxe4 .i.xb3 15 axb3 l:te6 ! ? (ls ...l2Jd7 ?
allows 16 .i.xh 6 ! gxh6 17 l2Jxh 6+ �f8
18 'ii'g 4 - Kobalija - which i s very good
for White) 16 .i.d2 l2Je7 17 O-O-O! ? "We8
(M. Kobalija-M.5orokin, Russian Cham­
pionship 2005) and here Kobalija gives
18 l2JfS ! ? lId8 19 .i.e3 .i.xe3+ 20 'ilVxe3
with an unclear and roughly level posi­
tion.
c) After 12 l2Jh4 White has to watch out
for ...l2Jxe4 tricks. For example, 12 ...l2Jas
13 ii.c2 l2Jxe4 ! ? 14 dxe4 'ii'x h4 15 exds
l2JC4.
Let's return to 10 ... ii.e6. Wh at
should White play?
ll .i.c2 1 ?
Here's th at 'mysterious' bishop
move again !
11 l2Jg 3 h as been White's most
popul ar choice in practice. With accu­
rate play Black h as very good chances
of reaching a level position, but thi s
move might still appeal t o those who
prefer m ore simplified positions. Play
normally continues 1 1 ... dxe4 (there's
al so 11 ...l2Jas ! ? 12 .i.c2 dxe4 1 3 dxe4
.i.C4! 14 'ilVd2 'ikxd2+ 15 l2Jxd2 .i.e6 16
24
l2Jf3 l2Jd7, as in E.Vorobiov-V. Diu, Kras­
nodar 2002; thi s looks fairly level and
I'm surprised we h aven 't seen it more
often) 12 dxe4 .i.xb3 13 axb3
and now:
a) 1 3 ...'iWd7 14 0-0 'iWe6 1 5 b4 h 6 and
here the plan of 16 l2Jh4 intending l2Jfs
forces Bl ack to defend with some accu­
racy: 16 ... 'ii;Jh 7 ! 17 l2Jhfs l2Je7 18 .i.e3
(perhaps 18l2Jxe7 'ii'x e7 19l2Jfs 'ilVe6 20
'iWf3) 18 ...l2Jxe4 ! ? (18 ... .i.xe3 looks wiser,
and equal) 19 'ji'g4 g6 20 'ilVxe4l2Jxfs ? !
(better i s 20. . .g xfS ! 2 1 'ifxb7 .i.xe3 2 2
fxe 3 c 6 with g -file counterplay) 2 1
l2Jxfs 'iWxfs 2 2 'iWxb7 .i.xe3 2 3 fxe 3 'iWd3
24 'ikxc7 'ilVxe3+ 25 'ii;Jh 2 'ii;J g 8 26 .l:.f6
with some advantage for White,
L.McShane-Z.Gyimesi, G erman League
2006.
b) 1 3 ...l2Je8 ! again reroutes the
knight to d6, a more favourable square.
Thi s seems to be a reliable option for
Black:
bl) 14l2Jfsl2Jd6 15 0-0 (15 g4 is ag­
gressive, but after lS ... 'ilVf6 16 h4 'iWe6
1 7 b4 f6 ! 18 h S .l:.ad8 19 l2J3h4 .l:.d7,
V. Bologan -V.Mal akhov, Kemer 2007, it's
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part /)
not clear what White does next)
15 ... ttJe7 16 ttJxd6 'iix d6 17 litdl We6 18
"YWC4 'ifxC4 19 bXc4 :ad8 with equality,
V. Bologan -V.Georgiev, Wijk aan Zee
2007.
b2) 14 ttJd2 ! ? ttJd6 15 ttJC4 ttJxc4 16
bXc4 ttJe7 17 0-0 "iVd6 18 b 3 IUd8 19
i.a3 Wf6, again with a level position,
L.McShane-J .Werle, London 2009.
Against 11 ..tg 5 Black can employ a
similar plan to reach a level position :
11 ... dxe4 1 2 dxe4 ..txb3 1 3 axb3 'ii'd 6
14 ttJg 3 We6 15 b4 ttJe8 16 0-0 f6,
S.Movsesian-V.Topalov, Tripoli (rapid)
2004.
Finally, although in some position s
White can contemplate meeting ... ..te6
with ttJg 5, I don't think thi s i s one of
them. There are various pros and con s
to weigh up about an exchange of
knight for bishop on e6, but here the
debate might even be redundant, due
to tactical reason s : 11 ttJg 5
11 ... dxe4 ! ? (1l ... We7 12 ttJxe6 fxe6 i s
solid) 12 ..txe6 (or 12 ttJxe6 exd3 1 3
ttJxd8 dxe2) 12 . . . exd3 1 3 ttJxf7 ':xf7
(13 ... We7 14 ttJg 5+ 'ii'x e6 1 5 ttJxe6 dxe2
16 'iti>xe2 :f7 is equal) 14 ..txf7+ 'iti>xf7
with good compen sation for the ex­
ch ange.
11 ... dxe4
11 ... d4 must be a con sideration
here. There's also 11 ... b 5 ! ? with the in-
tention of pl aying .....tc4 - after ex-
changing pawn s - to force a queen ex­
change: 1 2 ttJg 3 dxe4 1 3 dxe4 ..tC4 14
'ii'd 2, as in A.Maier-A.Stoer, Aug sburg
2003. White could try 12 ttJg 5, the idea
being that after 12 .. :ile7 1 3 ttJg 3 the
queen now h as space on f3 : 1 3 ... dxe4
14 dxe4 ..tC4 1 5 ttJf5 'ii'd 7 16 Wf3 etc.
12 dxe4 ttJhS
We've already seen thi s idea in a
similar position (Game 3), and White's
respon se i s the same.
1 2 ... We7 1 3 ttJg 3 would tran spose to
Tiviakov-Sargissian (Game 2).
13 g3
13 h6
...
Thi s move certainly has its uses, but
Black must always be a bit wary about
playing it unprovoked.
In D.Howell-M.Mchedlishvili, Dres­
den Olympiad 2008, Black in stead
25
Beating 1 e4 eS
chose 13 ... liJf6. The young English
grandmaster responded with the bold
14 ..ig S ! ? h 6 1 5 ..ih4 ! ? - bold, because
it gives Bl ack the opportunity to trap
the bishop with ... g S . H aving said th at,
it's possible that the execution i s
weaker than the threat, because l S ... g S
16 liJxg s hxg s 17 ..ixg s 'iftg 7 18 f4! left
White with tremendous pl ay for the
piece. Indeed, after 18 .. :iVd6 19 fS ! ..ic8
20 liid l 'ii'c s 2 1 liJe3 l:th 8 22 liJdS liJxds
23 ':'xdS 'ii'b 6 24 ..ib3 'iftf8 25 h4 l:tg8?,
White could have reached a winning
position with 26 'ii'h S ! .
Bl ack doesn 't h ave a decent defence
to the threat again st f7 after the dS­
rook moves: for example, 2 6 ... 'ifte8 2 7
l:.d6 ! ! l:.f8 2 8 ..ixf7+! .:txf7 2 9 .l::[f6 'iff2+
30 'iftdl etc. It's very possible th at Black
should avoid ... g s at that m om ent and
in stead choose something like l s ... 'ii'e 7
(or 14 .. :ii'e7 a m ove earlier) when the
position remain s doubled edged.
14 liJe3
White must avoid 14 liJxe s ? liJxe s
1 5 'ifxh s liJd3+ 16 ..ixd3 'ifxd3.
1 4... b 5 1 5 liJh4!
26
Tiviakov carries on with the typical
attacking pl an on the kin g side.
1 5 ... liJf6 16 liJhf5 liJe7
Black can try to chan g e the ch arac­
ter of the position by playing
16 ... ..ixe 3 ! ? Exch anging the a7-bishop
for a knight on e3 i s an underrated de­
fen sive resource in m any lines. The
bishop on a7 looks impressive, but
when White goes for an all -out assault
on the king side there's a danger it
might become an uncomfortable spec­
tator. It's a fierce battle between the
bishop and knight pairs after 17 ..ixe3
..ixfs 18 exfs 'ifds 19 0-0 e4 20 f3 ! ?
Alternatively, if White i s unwilling to
alter the pawn structure, the slower 17
liJxe3 is possible, planning 'iftfl-g 2
and/or g 3-g4 followed by liJfS.
17 g4
It's still possible to castl e king side,
but Tiviakov senses blood!
17 ...liJg6 18 liJg2 !
Preventing ... liJf4 - sometimes you
have to go one step backward before
going two steps forward.
Black is afflicted by a typical m al -
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
aise. His pieces look well placed and
there seem s to be n othing much wrong
with his position . In fact, objectively
maybe there's isn't; it's just irritatin gly
difficult to come up with an effective
plan . In the g ame, Buh m ann begins to
drift. Meanwhile, Tiviakov slowly edges
forward on the king side.
18 ... tiJd 7
18 .. :it'd7 intendin g .. Jlad8 looks
stronger.
19 h4 tiJC5 20 'ilff3 l:te8 21 �d2 c6 2 2
b3!
White wants to castl e queenside be­
fore going any further, so he blocks the
attack on a2. Thi s seem s to invite ... as,
but Tiviakov h as calcul ated that his
attack will be the quicker.
22 ••• a5 23 0-0-0 a4
Thi s doesn't work, but after 23 .. :iic7
24 h S White's attack is breakin g
through very quickly: 24 ... tiJf8 2 S ttJxg 7 !
'it>xg 7 2 6 �xh 6+ 'it'xh 6 2 7 'iVf6+ 'it'h 7 2 8
h 6 and 'ilfg 7 m ate; or 2 4. . .ttJe7 2 S
ttJxh 6+! gxh6 2 6 �xh 6 �c8 2 7 'ii'f6
ttJe6, and now 2 8 �f4! i s the m ove Ry­
bka wants to win with !
24 �xh6 'iVb6 2 5 ttJxg7 axb3 26 ttJxe8
bxa 2
Or 2 6 ... .l:.xe8 2 7 'it'f6.
27 ttJf6+ 'it> h 8 28 'it>d 2 1
Thi s is much stronger th an 2 8 'it>b2 ?
b4! .
2 8 ... ttJf4
Perh aps Buhmann h ad initially
thought th at 28 'it>d2 was impossible
because of 28 ... l::t d 8+. H ere 2 9 ttJdS ! is
the only m ove, but it's a very effective
one.
2 9 ttJxf4 exf4 30 'li'xf4 �C4 3 1 'it>e1 .l:.d8
32 l:.a l 'it'a 5 33 tiJd 5 ! 1-0
A wonderful attacking displ ay by
Tiviakov, and a great advert for the
Modern Variation . There's no doubt
that thi s opening requires a certain
amount of subtlety. But if you get it
right, as Tiviakov does here, it can be
very rewarding.
Next we consider three games in
which Black chooses to del ay, or com ­
pletely dispen se with, the ... d6-dS ad­
vance. In thi s first game, White goes all
out for an attack - and succeeds !
27
Beating 1 e4 e5

plays 8 ... .i.e6 (a move earlier), White

Game 6 h as the possibility of 9 lDg s ! ? If Bl ack
V.Yemelin-S.KlimoY h as already castled thi s move m akes
St Petersbu rg 2009 little sense. But here 9 ... .i.xb3 10 ii'xb3
0-0 1 1 ii'xb7 win s a pawn, as indicated
1 e4 eS 2 lDf3 lDc6 3 .i.C4 .i.cS 4 c3 lDf6 by Ivanchuk, even though Black is not
5 d3 a6 6 .i.b3 .i.a7 7 h3 d6 8 lDbd2 0-0 completely devoid of compensation .
9 lDfl .i.e6 In stead, the imbal ances caused by
9 .. :iVd7 10 lDxe6 fxe6 are not easy to
assess. I'm still not 100% certain which
side h as been favoured more by the
exchange on e6. However, White's play
in R.5lobodjan-Z.Gyimesi, G erman
League 1997, is certainly worth noting,
especially the way he slowly shuts the
a7-bishop out of the g am e : 1 1 lDf3 0-0
12 0-0 l:[ae8 13 �h 2 lDe7 14 lDh4 h6 1 5
g 3 ! g s 16 lDg 2 lDg6

The ... d6 and ... .i.e6 idea is seen in

many lines of the Italian Game. It's a
solid option for Bl ack and i s favoured
by m any strong pl ayers. In thi s particu­
lar position, for example, both Carlsen
and Aronian have played 9 ... .i.e6.
10 .i.xe6?! fxe6 needs to be avoided,
here and in m any simil ar positions af­
ter ... .i.e6, for obvious reason s. White
shouldn 't present Black with an open f­
file and extra control of centre squares 17 f4! g xf4 18 g xf4 exf4 19 lDxf4
unless there is a good reason to do so. lDxf4 20 .i.xf4 �h 7 2 1 'ife2 'iff7 2 2 d4!
One good reason is if White can ii'h s 23 �xh s lDxh s 24 .i.e3 .l:.f6 2 5
trade his f3 -knight in stead of his light­ .l:txf6 lDxf6 26 .l:tfl l:tf8 2 7 'it>g 2 :g8+ 2 8
squared bishop. Black still gets an open �f3 d s 29 exds exds 30 .i.c2+ �g 7 3 1
file and some central control, but thi s .i.fs b6 3 2 .i.f4 c 6 3 3 .:tel .:te8 34 :g l+
tim e White gain s the bishop pair and and Bl ack resigned.
Black loses some influence over the Black sometimes prefaces ... .i.e6
light-squares. For example, if Black with 9 ...h 6, perhaps to avoid the possi-

28
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
bility of 9 ... �e6 10 �g s (see below).
Here 10 ltJg 3 �e6 would tran spose to
the main game, but White h as another
option in 10 g4! ? As we've already
seen, thi s aggressive lunge i s often a
promising way to respond to ... h6.
Here's a young Viktor Bologan demon­
strating White's attacking potenti al
and m aking it all look very easy:
10 ... ltJh 7 (lo ... dS 11 'ife2 tran sposes to
the note on 10 ... h6 in Tiviakov­
Buhmann, G am e 5) 11 ltJg 3 �e6 12
llg l dS 1 3 'ife2 l:te8 (13 ... dxe4 14 dxe4
i.xb3 15 axb3 'ilid7 followed by .. :�e6
or ... l:tad8 might be stronger) 14 exds ! ?
i.xds 1 5 ltJe4 �xb3 16 axb3 ( I prefer
White here) 16 .. .f6 17 h4 'itth 8 18 �e3
i.xe3 19 'ifxe 3 'ifds 20 O-O-O!
20 ... 'iWxb3 2 1 g s fS 2 2 ltJcS 1i'b6?
(22 .. :i'dS offers a better chance; now
the queen i s hopelessly out of play) 2 3
gxh 6 .l:tad8 2 4 :'xg 7 e 4 2 5 ltJg s ltJxg s
26 'iVxg s ltJes 2 7 l:th 7+! and 1-0,
V.Bologan-G. Prakash, Mamaia 1991.
Let's return to the position after
9 ... i.e6:
10 ttJg3
10 �g s i s rare in thi s position, but
part of m e i s tempted by it. Thi s m ove
is a standard way of trying to exploit
Black's l ack of ... h 6 . However, compared
to the similar position reached in
Emms-Flear (see Game 11) it might not
be so effective, since h 2-h 3 isn't such a
vital move here. Even so, I think it de­
serves attention. It certainly worked
out well for White in A. Purtov­
R.Farakhov, Alushta 2004: 10 ... 'ife7
(preparing ... �xb3 followed by 'iWe6;
10 ... h 6 1 1 �h4 gs 12 �g 3 ltJh s i s un­
clear, and I don 't trust 12 ltJxg s hxg s
1 3 �xg s, if nothing else because of
13 ... �xf2 + ! ) 11 �C2 (11 ltJe3 ! ?) 11 ... h 6
12 �h4 dS (12 ... g S ! ?) 13 'iW e 2 dxe4 14
dxe4 'iWcS ! ? 15 �xf6 gxf6 (lS ... �C4 16
'iWd2 g xf6 17 ltJe3 l:tfd8 18 'ilicl i s a
critical line - I think I prefer White
h ere) 16 ttJe3 :fd8 17 .ltb3 ltJas ? (a
blunder, although by now White's ad­
vantage cannot be di sputed) 18 �xe6
fxe6 19 ttJh4 ! .
Thi s win s a vital pawn : 19 ... 'ilie7 20
'ilig4+ 'ilig 7 2 1 'ifxe6+ 'iff7 2 2 ii'g4+
'iVg 7 ? 23 ttJhfS and Black resigned.
29
Beating 1 e4 eS
Fin ally, 10 .JiLc2 is al so possible. For
example, if 10 ... d5 11 'ife2 we h ave
tran sposed to Tiviakov-Buhmann
(Game 5).
1o h6...
The most popul ar choice. Bl ack de­
cides to prevent the possibility of .JiLg 5,
and thi s m akes it easier for him to play
... d5 if needed (see the note to Black's
1 1th move, below).
The immediate 10 ... d5 i s risky be­
cause it invites the pin with 1 1 .i.g 5 ! ?
(11 'ife2 is, of course, al so possible).
H ere 11 ... dxe4 12 tt'lxe4 .JiLxb3 1 3 axb3
appears to be precarious for Black, and
it would be without the resource
13 ... tt'lxe4! 14 .JiLxdS tt'lxf2, as played in
F.Nem eth - I . Danilov, Eforie Nord 200S.
Even so, White kept an edge in the
g am e after 15 'ifc2 :axdS 16 0-0 tt'lg4+
17 'iith l tt'le3 lS 'ife2 tt'lxfl 19 ':xfl.
There's a strong case for Black to ex­
change bishops immediately, and per­
haps significantly 10 ... .JiLxb3 i s what
both Carl sen and Aronian h ave chosen
to do when reaching thi s position :
a) After 1 1 axb3 tt'le7 1 2 tt'lh4 'iith S
1 3 0-0 d5 1 4 'iVe2 'i!i'd6 1 5 .JiLg 5 'iVe6 1 6
b 4 h 6 17 .JiLe3 .JiLxe 3 lS 'ifxe3 l:tadS 1 9
tt'lgf5 tt'lxf5 20 tt'lxf5 lId7 2 1 ':fel dxe4
22 dxe4 'iith 7 (22 .. JUdS 23 'ifg 3 tt'leS
al so looks okay) 2 3 ':'a5 b6 ! ? 24 ':'xa6
:fdS 25 'i!i'f3 g6 26 tt'le3 'iit g 7 Black had
sufficient play for the pawn to hold the
bal ance in I . N epomniachtchi-L.Aronian,
Mainz (rapid) 2009.
b) H owever, 11 'ifxb3 'ifcs
(l1...:bS ! ?) 1 2 0-0 tt'le7 13 d4 tt'lg 6 14
30
.JiLg 5 tt'ld7 1 5 tt'lf5 g ave Bl ack m ore
problems to solve in K. Kulaots­
M.Carl sen, G ausdal 2007.
Returning to the g ame, and 10 ... h 6,
how should White proceed from here?
1 1 tt'l h 2 !
Operation s o n t h e kingside begin !
Thi s knight can hop into g4, offering a
trade of minor pieces. Black h as to be
careful because an exchang e on g4
gives White the opportunity to open
the h -file for his rook.
One significant advantage White
enjoys is that, in contrast to several
position s where the queen h as to go to
e2 and only l ater f3, here she can reach
the m ore desirable attackin g post in
one jump.
Note th at thi s i s one of those posi­
tion s where 1 1 tt'lh4? i s impossible - it
simply loses a pawn to the typical tac­
tic 11...tt'lxe4! '
1 1 tt'le7
.•.
Black responds by moving another
minor piece to the kin g side, to help out
in defence. Just like White's tt'ld2-fl-g 3,
Bl ack's ... tt'lc6-e7-g 6 i s a typical ma-
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
noeuvre in the Italian Game.
Action in the centre with 11 ... d5 is
still a serious option here. White replies
with 12 'it'f3 and now:
a) 12 ... liJa5 1 3 iLc2 dxe4 14 dxe4
ltJC4 15 liJg4 liJd7 16 0-0 (16 liJf5 ! ?)
16 ... 1t'h4 17 liJf5 iLxf5 18 exf5 liJd6 19
f6 ! ltJxf6 20 liJxf6+! ? (20 liJxe 5) 20 ... g xf6
21 'itth 2 f5 2 2 g 3 'ii'f6 2 3 'iVh 5 'itt g 7 24 g4
f4? (Black shoul d pl ay 24 ... e4 2 5 iLf4,
when White h as promising compen sa­
tion for the pawn) 2 5 g 5 ! Ve6 2 6 iLxf4!
with a big advantage for White in view
of 26 ... exf4 27 :ael, A.Morozevich ­
M.Adam s, Yerevan 2008.
b) 12 ...dxe4 i s more solid: 1 3 dxe4
i.xb3 14 axb3 liJh 7 15 h4 (perhaps
White can apply more pressure with 1 5
ttJg4 liJg 5 16 Vf5) 1 5 . . .'ii'd 7 ! (Black loses
quickly after 1 5 ... 'iIi'xh4? 16 liJg4 'i'd8
17 liJf5 - a n asty accident is going to
happen on h6 or g7, or both ! ) 16 liJg4
l:!.ad8 17 0-0 'ili'd3 ! , V.Tkachiev-G . Flear,
Clichy 1995. Thi s defen sive resource
with ... 'ii'd 3, offering the exch ange of
queen s, is well worth remembering,
and Black i s very close to equality here.
I think White's best ch ance is 18 iLe3
iLxe3 19 liJxe3 when the possibilities of
liJf5 and liJd5 still give Black something
to think about.
12 liJg4
12 ... liJg6
The Brazilian grandmaster Vescovi
has played 12 ... liJh 7 here, but in a l ater
g am e he preferred the text move (see
below). I wonder whether thi s i s be­
cause of 1 3 liJh 5 ! ? (13 'i'f3 'ii'c 8 14 liJe3
iLxe 3 ! 1 5 iLxe3 iLxb3 16 axb3 f5 was
okay for Bl ack in V.lordachescu­
G .Vescovi, Bermuda 2004). For exam ­
ple, 1 3 ... 'ii'd 7 ? 14 iLxh 6 ! iLxg4 (if
14 ... gxh6, White plays 15 liJgf6+) 1 5
hxg4 g x h 6 16 'i'd2 'ii'x g4 17 "i/ixh 6 'ii'g 6
18 liJf6 + ! ; o r 1 3 . . .iLxb3 1 4 'i'xb 3 ! with
pressure (White must avoid 14 axb3
f5 !). If 14 ... 'itth 8, White could con sider
15 liJxg 7 ! ? 'itt x g 7 16 iLxh 6+ 'itth 8 and
now 17 iLxf8 or 17 O-O-O! ?
1 3 liJfs liJh7
The g ame J .Cubas-G .Vescovi, Sao
Paulo 2006, provides another example
illustrating the problems Black can face
here: 1 3 ... l:te8 14 'ii'f3 h 5 15 liJxf6+
31
Beating 1 e4 e5
'iVxf6 16 g4! (16 'iVxh s .txfs 17 'iVxfs
'it'xfs 18 exfs ttJf4 i s okay for Black)
16 ... .txb3 17 axb3 ttJh4 18 'iVg 3 ttJxfs
19 gxfs ds 20 1:[gl .tcs ? (thi s should
lose, but with .tg s on the cards Bl ack
was already under some pressure) 2 1
�g s 'iVb6 (or 2 1 . . .'iVc6 2 2 �e7 ! ) 2 2 .lte3 !
(preventing ... .tf8 ! ) 2 2 ... g 6 2 3 fxg 6 f6 24
.txcs 'fixcs 2 5 'ii'h 4 dxe4 2 6 'fixh s :e7,
and here White could have forced an
immediate win with 2 7 .l::t g 4 intending
:h4.
The ri sky attempt to win a pawn
with 13 ... .ltxfs 14 exfs ttJh4 backfires
after 15 g 3 ! ttJxfs 16 'iVf3 ttJxg4 1 7 hxg4
ttJe7 18 g s ! etc.
14 h41
White i s slowly beginning to turn
the screw. 14 .txe6 fxe6 15 ttJxg 7 i s
tempting, but l s ... �xg 7 16 .txh 6+ �h 8
17 .txf8 'iVxf8 looks unclear to m e and
lets Bl ack off the hook to some extent.
14 JWd 7
..
Against 14 ... h s I prefer 1 5 ttJh 2 to 1 5
ttJge3, s o that after l s ... ttJf6 White can
set up an annoying pin by playing 16
.tg s .
32
15 h S
White's attack seem s t o b e building
up steam, but surely it's not yet hope­
less for Black?
1 s ttJ e7?
•..
It i s now!
It looks like Black's only chance lies
with l s ... .txfs 16 exfs ttJf4! (16 ... ttJe7 is
strongly m et by 17 f6 ! ) . Perhaps Klimov
was worried about the knight being
trapped with 17 g 3 but Black can save
him self here with 17 ... 'ii'c 6 !, even
though White must still be better after
18 .:r.f1 ttJh 3 19 'iVe2 ttJ3g s 20 .txg s
ttJxg s 2 1 0-0-0. In any case, thi s i s infi­
nitely superior for Black compared to
what h appen s in the g ame.
16 ttJgxh6+1 �h8
Of course ! Somehow Black h ad
missed th at 16 ... gxh6 i s m et by the
crushing 17 'iVg4+. Unfortunately for
Black, declining the knight is no help at
all .
1 7 'ii'g 4 g 6 18 .txe6
18 ttJxf7+! l:txf7 19 hxg6 is even
m ore deci sive: 19 ... ttJxg 6 20 'iVxg 6
.txb3 2 1 axb3 : g 8 2 2 :xh 7+! ':'xh 7 2 3
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
'i'f6+ J:[gg 7 24 ..th 6 etc.
18 'i'xe6 19 ttJxe7 'i'xe7 20 hxg6 fxg6
...
2 1 f3 1-0
White is just going to play ..td2 and
0-0-0, with a good extra pawn and a
decisive advantage.
Bl ack seemed to put up very littl e
resi stance in thi s game, and you would
be forgiven for thinking this was the
work of an inexperienced player. Yet
Sergey Klimov is a grandmaster, rated
over 2 500. It just goes to show that it's
not th at easy for players, even very
strong ones, to deal with the pressure
of having to defend again st White's
obvious attacking intentions on the
kin g side.
Game l
O.Korneev-D.Ca m pora
Sevi l l e 2010
1 e4 e 5 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 ..tC4 ..tC5 4 c3 ttJf6
5 d3 a6 6 ..tb3
Note that the game's actual m ove
order was 6 0-0 ..ta7 7 ttJbd2 d6 8 ..tb3
0-0 9 h 3 ttJe7 10 .l:te1 ttJg 6 1 1 ttJf1 ..te6
12 ttJg 3 h 6 1 3 d4 'ue8, but for conven ­
ience I 've ch anged the m ove order into
the one where White delays castling.
6 . . ...ta7 7 h 3 d 6 8 ttJ bd2 ttJe7
As I m entioned in the previous
g ame, the knight m anoeuvre from c6
to g 6 i s a typical pl an for Bl ack, mirror­
ing White's own knight m anoeuvre to
g 3 . Black's knight definitely prefers the
g 6-square to c6. One merit of the c3-
pawn which i s often forgotten i s how
well it restricts Black's knight when it i s
on c6.
If 8 ...0 - 0 9 ttJf1 a n d only then
9 ... ttJe7, I think White should just
tran spose to the m ain game with 10
ttJg 3 ttJg6. I don 't think 10 ..tg 5 ttJg 6
gives White anything.
9 ttJf1 ttJ g 6 10 ttJ g 3 0-0
Thi s is an important moment.
Black's knight on g6 is very well placed
to battle again st any typical king side
action from White. 11 ttJh4 is pre­
vented; 11 ..tg 5 ? ! achieves less than
nothing after simply 11 ... h 6 ! ; and fi­
nally, 11 ttJh 2 with the plan of ttJg4 and
33
Beating 1 e4 e5
'iff3 i s well met by 11 ... dS when White
has to avoid 12 'iVf3 ?? It:Jh4 ! . He can
play 12 It:Jg4, but 12 ... dxe4 13 It:Jxf6+
'ifxf6 14 It:Jxe4 'iffS, as in 5.Yudin­
V. Belov, St Petersburg 2006, i s basically
level.
50 wh at does White do?
11 a-a!
He changes plan ! Let's call thi s one
' Pl an ('.
The position i s virtually symm etrical
now, but the advantage of the first
move still counts for something. White
is the first to be able to push in the cen­
tre, and thi s is often enough to give
him a small advantage.
11 ... h 6
Bl ack usually pl ays thi s m ove, either
here or a bit later, to prevent both i.. g s
(as a reply t o ... dS) and It:Jg s (as a reply
to ... ];te8). He usually follows up, in
some order, with ... lite8, ... i.. e 6, ... c6,
...'ifC7 etc. Meanwhile, White will build
up the pressure with :el, d4, i.. e 3 etc.
Altern atively:
a) If 11 ... dS ? ! 12 i.. g S ! and the pin on
the knight causes Black some prob-
34
lems, but after 11 ... h 6 Black i s ready to
advance in the centre.
b) 11 ... i.. e 6 12 d4 l:te8 13 litel h 6
tran sposes t o the m ain g ame.
c) l1...bS i s Black's m ain alternative
here, and thi s is covered in the next
game.
12 lite1
Thi s prevents 12 ... d S ?, which fails
tactically to 1 3 exds It:Jxds 14 It:Jxe s
It:Jxes i s ::'xe s i.. xf2+ 16 �xf2 'i!Vf6+ 1 7
'iVf3 'i!Vxe s 18 'iVxdS.
The immediate 12 d4 i s also possi­
ble, with a likely tran sposition.
12 ... i.. e 6
12 ... lt:Jh 7 ! ? i s interesting and cer­
tainly playable. Black is mirroring a
plan which White often employs -
holding the centre and advancing with
the knights on the king side. One g am e
worth seeing is S. Kindermann ­
D.Sebastian, G erman League 2006 .
Kinderm ann demon strated on his ex­
cellent DVD why White shouldn't fear
aggression from the black knights: 1 3
d 4 'if e 7 ( 1 3 ... 'iff6 i s a decent alterna­
tive) 14 i.. e 3 (14 It:Jfs is al so possible)
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
14 ... liJg S 1 5 liJh 2 ! ? liJf4?! (thi s i s very
temptin g , but Black should play some­
thing else h ere) 16 h4! liJh 7 (after
16 ... liJge6 17 liJfs 'ii'd 8 18 g 3 Black i s
driven back completely) 1 7 liJfS ! .JtxfS
18 exfs, and Black supposedly strong
knight on f4 actually turned out to be a
fatal weakness. If 18 .. :iVxh4 19 g 3 'iVg s
20 'iith l 'ii'xfs 2 1 gxf4 exf4 2 2 'il'f3 and
White win s the knight for in sufficient
compen sation . Or 18 ... 'ii'f6 19 g3 liJh 3 +
(in the g ame Bl ack chose 19 . . .'ii'xfs 20
gxf4 exf4 2 1 ..td2 but White soon won)
20 'iitg 2 'ii'xfs 2 1 'ii'g 4 'ii'x g4 2 2 liJxg4
and the knight is trapped on h3 (analy­
sis by Kindermann). Obviously I
wouldn 't rule out 12 ... liJh 7 on the basis
of thi s g ame, as there are several alter­
natives for both sides early on .
13 d4
White finally advances in the cen­
tre. We'll come across thi s structure
quite a few times throughout the book.
This central ten sion certainly favours
White, and because of thi s he should
look to m aintain it as long as possible.
He should only advance with dS or cap-
ture on eS if there is a concrete reason
for doin g so, as otherwise thi s would
only help Black. likewise, Black i s usu­
ally reluctant to exch ange on d4, as thi s
gives White a powerful, mobile pawn
centre.
13 ••. .:e8 14 ..te2 !
Once again we see thi s retreat,
avoiding the exch ange of bishops and
the easing of Bl ack's position . In thi s
in stance, with White enjoying the ini­
tiative in the centre, it's much easier to
understand its merits. The bishop on
e6, blocking the e-file, i s not particu­
l arly well placed to help Black put pres­
sure on White's centre. H aving said
th at, White probably doesn't h ave to
retreat immediately, since 14 ..te3
..txb3 1 5 'il'xb3 looks a bit better for
him.
One word of warning: although liJfs
is undoubtedly a very tempting option,
and one which should always be con ­
sidered, White h as to be careful not to
play it too early otherwise he run s the
risk of his central control being loos­
ened. For example, here 14 liJfS ? ! exd4
1 5 cxd4 d S ! leaves White in some trou­
ble. It's better to build up slowly and
check out liJfs possibilities l ater on .
14 ... e6 15 ..t e3 'ilVe7 16 "jji'd 2 l:tad 8
1 6 ... 'iith 7 might be more accurate,
since 17 liJfS looks less threatening
here: 17 ... ..txfS ! 1 8 exfs liJf8 ! 1 9 dxe s
..txe3 20 'ii'x e3 dxe s, when 2 1 liJxes
only brings about an equal position
after 2 1 ... liJ6d7 ! 22 liJxd7 l:[xe3 2 3
liJxf8+ .l:txf8 2 4 .l:txe3, a s in R. Perez G ar-
35
 Beating 1 e4 e5
cia-L. H enris, Ch arleroi 200S. The m ore
patient 17 l:tadl .l:.ad8 tran sposes to
the note to Bl ack's 17th move - see be­
low.
17 :!ad1
17 ttJfS ! looks promising for White.
Bl ack has to be very careful . For exam­
ple:
a) 17 ... .)i,xfs 18 exfs ttJf8 19 .)i,xh 6 !
g xh 6 20 'ii'xh 6, C. Lamoureux-F. Forgues,
French League 2008; or
b) 17 ... dS 18 ttJxg 7 ! �xg 7 19 .)i,xh 6+
�g 8 20 exds ..txdS 2 1 ttJxes .)i,b8 2 2
'ii'g s ttJh 7 2 3 'ili'g 3, A.Areshchenko­
E.5utovsky, Gibraltar 2007, with good
pl ay for White in both cases.
c) In A.Vol okitin -Zhou Jian ch ao,
Khanty Mansiysk 2007, Black chose
17 ... exd4 whereupon 18 cxd4 dS! 19
ttJxg 7 �xg 7 20 .)i,xh 6+ �g8 21 .)i,g s
ttJxe4 proved to be in sufficient for
White. However, 18 .)i,xh 6 ! looks much
stronger: for example, 18 ... d3 19 .)i,xg 7 ! ,
o r 18 . . ..)i,xfs 19 exfs gxh 6 20 'ii'xh 6 ! .
17 ... d S ? !
Black i s trying to solve all his prob­
lems at once with thi s advance, but it
36
looks like White can refute it with care­
ful pl ay. Therefore Black should just
accept a m an ageable disadvantage
with 17 ... �h 7. Then 18 'ii'c l vacating
the d-file looks sen sible, after which
there are still some ttJfS possibilities in
the air. For example, 18 ... b S (S.J essel ­
Wang Li, Yerevan 2006) 19 ttJfS ! .)i,xfS ?
20 exfs ttJf8 2 1 dxe s .)i,xe3 2 2 'ii'x e3
dxe s 2 3 liIxd8 'ii'x d8 24 .)i,b3 is good for
White.
18 ttJxe s ! ttJxe s 19 .)i,f4!
19 ... ttJxe4
A much earlier game had continued
19 ... ..txh 3 20 .txe s ? ':xe s 21 dxe s
'ili'xe s with excellent play for Black, who
threaten s ... 'iVxg 3, S. Kudrin -A. Kosten,
London 1988. It's possible th at White
players were discouraged by that
gam e, but 20 exd s ! appears to be a ma­
jor improvement as far as I can see. For
example, 2 o ... ttJfg 4 21 'ii'e 2 ! ; or
20 ... .)i,g4 21 l:txe s ! ; or fin ally, 20 ... ttJf3+
2 1 g xf3 'ii'd 7 2 2 .)i,es intending
2 2 ... 'ii'x ds 2 3 'ii'd 3 ! .
2 0 ..txe4 dxe4 2 1 ..txe s 'ii'e 7 2 2 ttJ h S !
Thi s i s very strong , although even
 Italian Game: Modern Variation {Part I}
the simple 2 2 ttJxe4 leaves Black with
nothing substanti al for the pawn, with
the try 22 .. .f6 losing to 23 i.. xf6 g xf6 24
'i'xh 6.
2 2 f6 2 3 i.. xf6 ! gxf6 2 4 'iix h6
...
White's attack should be winning.
The various threats of ttJxf6+, J:[e3 and
.l:.e4 cannot be m et properly. If 24 .. .f5
2 5 .l:r.e3 i..b 8, White has the nice m ove
26 f4! intending 26 ... exf3 27 l::t x e6 ! and
wins.
24 i..f 5
...
25 ttJxf6+?
I'm not sure why Korneev avoided
25 g4!, as it looks very strong : 25 ... i..h 7
26 ttJxf6+ �h 8 2 7 ]:txe4! 'i!Vf7 (perhaps
he had missed th at after 27 ... 'iix e4 28
lLlxe4 ':xe4, White can pl ay 29 'iff6+) 2 8
':del l:txe4 29 ':xe4 must b e winning
for White.
2 5 �f7 2 6 ttJxeS l:.xeS 27 �f4
...
27 g4 intending 2 7 ... i.. g 6 2 8 f4! i s
still good for White. The fin al position,
where the pl ayers agreed a draw, i s no
longer so clear.
27 JWf6 2 S g4 i.. g 6 29 'ifxf6+ �xf6 30
..
a4 ¥z-¥z
Game 8
C.Bauer-T.Nyback
French league 2009
1 e4 e5 2 i.. C4 ttJc6 3 ttJf3 i.. C 5 4 c3 ttJf6
5 d3 a6 6 i.. b 3 i.. a 7 7 ttJbd2 0-0 S h3 d 6
9 ttJf1 ttJ e 7 10 ttJ g 3 ttJ g 6 11 0 - 0 b 5
Black's light-squared bishop will go
to b7, where it can influence events in
the centre. Thi s is a very reason able
alternative to the pl an of ... h 6, ... i.. e 6
and ... .l:!.e8 seen in the previous g ame.
White certainly has chances of
keeping a slight edge in the ten sion­
filled position s after 12 d4 i..b 7 (or
12 ... c5 1 3 i.. c 2 cxd4 14 cxd4 i..b 7 15
i.. e 3 l:te8 16 :el, V. Bologan­
R. Kasimdzh anov, French League 2007)
1 3 i.. c 2 (if 13 d5, Black will break with
... c6) 13 ... :e8 14 l:[el h6 15 a4, and in­
deed thi s has been played in quite a
few games. However, it's clear th at af­
ter White plays d4 Bl ack's light-squared
bishop is more actively pl aced on b7
th an, say, e6 or d7. So if the d3 -d4 ad­
vance isn't quite so attractive against
37
Beating 1 e4 e5
... �b7, what el se can White consider
doing?
Well, if ...�b7 does h ave a weakness,
it's the fact that on thi s square the
bishop no longer control s some key
light squares on the kin g side. Thi s en­
courages White to just hold back in the
centre, restricting the bishop's influ­
ence there, and to begin action on the
king side, where its l ack of presence
might be exploited.
Let's see how Christian Bauer tries
to do thi s :
12 a4 � b 7 1 3 l:.e1 ]:te8 14 lLl h 2 1 ?
White keeps the d-pawn firmly on
d3, blunting the b7-bishop, and begins
typical action on the king side. H e can
now think about moves such as 'ii'f3,
lLlg4 and lLlfs . I'm not sure whether
objectively thi s is a better way to pl ay
th an 12 d4, but it does at least give
Black something different to think
about.
14 lLlfs ? ! would be premature here,
and after 14 ... d s ! it's not easy for White
to hold his centre. Don 't rush with thi s
move !
38
14 ... d 5
With the pressure off h i s e-pawn,
Black strikes in the centre with ... ds.
Thi s advance i s such a n atural reaction
to a m ove like lLlh 2, although that
doesn't mean alternatives don't exist.
For example, 14 ... lLld7 planning ... lLlcs
to hit the bishop and the a4-pawn . Let's
foll ow another g am e involving Bauer
h ere, C. Bauer-M.Godena, Swiss League
2004: 15 'iVf3 (normally White would be
reluctant to give up his light-squared
bishop, but after l s lLlfs ! ? lLlcs 16 axbs
axbs 1 7 lLlg4 lLlxb3 18 'iVxb3 White's
knights on the kin g side pose a threat,
and 18 ... �xf2+?? 19 'ifi>xf2 l:txal loses to
20 lLlfh 6+ g xh 6 21 lLlxh 6+ 'ifi>g 7 2 2
'ii'x f7+ 'ifi>h 8 2 3 �g s etc) l s .. JU8 16 as ! ?
(White wants t o an swer . . .lLlcs with
�a2, so he releases the ten sion; 16 lLlfs
lLlcs 17 �C2 is al so possible) 16 ... lLlcs
1 7 i.a2 lLle6 18 lLlfs lLlgf4 19 i.xf4 (19
d4! ?) 19 ... lLlxf4 20 d4 'ii'f6 2 1 li[adl with
a ten se position offering equal
chances.
1 5 'ii'f3
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)

Thi s looks enticing, but in fact the knight on f4 and to trap the queen with
knight i s going back to g 6 next m ove. l:tadl.
The g am e O.Eismont-S.Hirsch, Duis­
burg 2000, demon strates a typical bat­
tle between White's king side pl ay and
Black's advancing pawn s in the centre:
lS ... h6 (to prevent .Yl.g S) 16 tiJfs cS 17
exds (17 ..txh 6 ! ? g xh 6 18 ..txdS ..txdS -
18 ... tiJxd S ? ? loses to 19 tiJxh 6+ - 19
exds i s an interestin g piece sacrifice)
17 ... c4! (thi s thematic pawn sacrifice is
forced, since 17 ... ..txdS fails to tactics
on h6: 18 ..txdS 'ifxds 19 tiJxh 6 + ! , or 18
i.xds tiJxds 19 axbs axbs 20 ..txh 6 ! ) 18 2o ... 'iff6 2 1 tiJfs g61
dXc4 e4 19 'ife2 "ii'd 7 20 tiJd4 (20 Nyback chooses to sacrifice his f­
ttJxh 6 + ! ?) 20 ... ..txd4 21 cxd4 bXc4 22 pawn, preferring complication s over a
..txC4 tiJxds and Black h as some com­ passive position .
pen sation but I still prefer White's posi­ 2 1 ... tiJg 6?? loses to 2 2 g S I . For ex­
tion after 23 b 3 . ample, 22 .. :iWb6 leads to a king hunt
1 6 'ife2 tiJg6 and a nice m ate in the middle of the
White was threatening ..tg s, and af­ board: 2 3 .Yl.xf7+! c;t>xf7 24 tiJh 6+ c;t>e7
ter 16 ... h 6 1 7 tiJg4 tiJxg4 18 "ii'x g4 (or 18 2S "ii'f 7+ c;t>d6 2 6 tiJfS+ c;t>cS 2 7 ..te3+
hxg4) the knight i s not especially well c;t>c6 2 8 'iWds m ate. Thi s i s worth a dia­
placed on h4 after all . gram !
After 16 . . .tiJg 6 Black's argument i s
that White's 'free' "ii'd l-e2 i s not par­
ticularly useful, given that ... tiJf4 will
attack the queen ag ain.
1 7 ttJg4 tiJf4 18 "ii'f 3 tiJxg4 19 hxg4 dxe4
20 dxe4
After some to-ing and fro-ing with
the queen and knight, Black still has
problems to solve here. Firstly, White is
just threatening to win a pawn by tak­
ing on f4. Secondly, 20 ... 'ifd3 is the
move Black would like to play, but thi s 2 1 ... tiJe6, blocking the diagonal, i s a
is very well m e t b y 2 1 ..te3 1 . If 2 1 . . ...txe3 wiser choice, but White keeps an ad­
22 fxe3 ! White threaten s both the vantage here after 22 g S ! tiJxg s (or

39
Beating 1 e4 e5
22 .. :ii'd8 2 3 'ii'g 3 ) 2 3 i.xg s 'ii'x g s 24
axbs. The point i s that Bl ack cannot
recapture on bs, since 24 ... axb s ? ? loses
to 2 5 .l:r.xa7 ! (deflecting the rook from
back rank duties) 2 s ... .:txa7 26 ltJh 6+!
gxh6 2 7 'ili'xf7+ 'it>h 8 2 8 'ili'xe8+ �g 7 29
'iVg 8+ <ifi>f6 30 'ii'f7 m ate.
2 2 ltJh6+ <ifi>g7 23 ltJxf7 1:tf8 24 i.xf4
Possibly 24 axbs is more accurate.
24 ... axbs 25 i.xf4 exf4 26 e s ! would
tran spose to the note to Black's 2 5th
move, below, while after 24 .. J:txf7 2 5
i.xf7 'iVxf7 26 bxa6 i.c6 2 7 i.e3 it's still
complicated but White must be better.
24 ... exf4 2S axbs a s ?
The point behind 2 s ... as i s that
2 s ... axb s 2 6 e s ! i s very good for White:
26 ... 'iVxf7 2 7 'iVxb7 'iVxb3 28 :xa7 ':xa7
29 'i!i'xa7 'ii'x b2 30 'ili'd4! and it will be
very difficult for Black to cope with the
passed e-pawn .
However, Black should pl ay
2 s .. J�xf7 ! 26 bxa6 i.c6 2 7 i.xf7 'ii'xf7.
White has a m aterial advantage and
should be better, but it won't be easy to
overcome those two powerful bishops.
2 6 gs 'iVe7
40
2 7 ltJh6?
Here 2 7 'i!i'h 3 ! , intending 2 7 ... .l:txf7
28 i.xf7 'iVxf7 29 l:tad1 ! , would have
been very strong : 29 ... I1e8 30 l:.d7 l:.e7
31 .:ted1 ! i.cs 32 b6! cxb6 33 'iVh 6+
<ifi>g8 34 ':d8+ .:te8 35 l:!.ld7 ! :!xd8 36
.:txf7 <ifi>xf7 3 7 'ii'xh 7+ i s winning.
After 2 7 ltJh 6 Bl ack i s allowed right
back into it. The rest of the game isn't
really important for our purposes. H ere
are the rem aining moves:
2 7 . . .'iVxgs 28 ltJg4 h S 29 ltJh2 'ili'xb s 3 0
i.d S c6 3 1 i. a 2 l:t a d 8 3 2 l:t a d 1 'iVxb2 3 3
l:txd8 lbd 8 34 ': b 1 'ii'xf2+ 3 S 'ii'xf2
i.xf2+ 3 6 <ifi>xf2 .:td2+ 3 7 <ifi>e1 .l:!.xa 2 3 8
l::t x b7+ 'it>f6 3 9 ltJf3 ':'xg2 4 0 ': C 7 gs 4 1
l:txc6+ <ifi> e 7 42 <ifi>f 1 l:t g 3 43 ltJ d 4 l:t e 3 44
':c S <ifi>f6 4S ':xa s :xe4 46 :a6+ <ifi>f7 47
ltJf3 'it>g7 48 ltJxg s ':C4 49 %:ta 3 <ifi>f6 SO
ltJf3 l:!.c8 Sl <ifi>f2 <ifi>fs S2 :as+ <ifi>e4 S 3
'it>e2 1-0
In the final two games of thi s chap­
ter we con sider Black's m ain alterna­
tives to 7 ... d6. These are 7 ... ds, 7 ... 0-0
and 7 ... h 6 .
Let's begin with 7 . . . . d s :
Game 9
S.Roy Chowd h u ry-J.Skjoldborg
Prague 2008
1 e4 e S 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 i.C4 ltJf6 4 d 3 i.cs
S c3 a6 6 i.b3 i.a7 7 h 3 d S
Black's d-pawn advances straight­
away to ds. The advantage of thi s ap­
proach is that Black doesn 't spend a
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)

tempo on ... d6 before playin g ... ds. The
disadvantage i s that White hasn't
committed him self to the ltJd2-fl pl an,
and he h as other possibilities.
play his opponent here, and it's worth
giving the rest of thi s grandmaster bat­
tle to show how Conquest slowly
g ained an advantage: 18 .. .l::t a d8 19
l:tfdl ltJe7 20 'ifg4 'i!Vf7 2 1 l:!.as ! ? ltJg 6 22
g 3 1:tfe8 2 3 .l:tds

8 exd s
Thi s i s an important mom ent, with
White choosing a completely different
strategy - Plan B.
In stead of holding the centre, as
we've seen in previous games, White
chooses to open it. He will castle
quickly and then try to combin e pres­
sure on the centre (in particular th e e s ­
pawn) with dynamic piece play.
If White wants to stick to Plan A,
there's an argument here for 8 We2,
2 3 ... c6? (thi s seemingly impercepti­
ble weakening of d6 is eventually fatal ;
there's nothing wrong with Bl ack's po­
sition after 23 ... ltJe7) 24 l:td3 'i!VC7 2 5
ltJdc4 ltJxC4 26 l:txd8 l:txd8 2 7 We6+!
�h 8 2 8 ':xd8+ 'ii'x d8 29 ltJxC4 'ii'd l+ 30
�g 2 hs 31 h4 'ifd3 3 2 ltJd6 �h 7 33
Wfs ! Wxd6 34 Wxh s+ �g8 35 Wxg 6
'iVd2 3 6 h s �f8 3 7 'iffs Wd8 3 8 We6 1-0.
8 ltJxd s 9 0-0 0-0 10 ': e1
...

and if 8 ...0-0 9 .i.g s ! utilizing the fact

that White h asn 't had to play ltJd2-fl
before developing thi s bishop.
S.Conquest-J . Parker, British League
2009, continued typically with 9 ... dxe4
10 dxe4 .i.e6 11 ltJbd2 .i.xb3 12 axb3
'i'd6 1 3 ltJh4 We6 14 ltJfs ltJe8 1 5 b4 f6
16 .i.e3 .i.xe3 17 ltJxe3 ltJd6 18 0-0
when you could only describe the
chances as level . Even so, there i s still
plenty of scope for either side to out-

41
Beating 1 e4 e5
Quickly attacking the e s-pawn .
White must continue with purpose,
otherwise Black would soon reach a
comfortable position .
10 f6...
Thi s move looks like a surpri sing
way to defend the e s-pawn, but it's not
that easy for White to fully exploit the
pin on the dS-knight and the tempo­
rary weakness of the a2-g8 diagon al .
What's more, defen ding the e s-pawn
with pieces presents more problem s for
Bl ack than you might think. H ere are
some alternatives:
a) 10 .. J:te8 ? ! i s m et strongly by 11
d4! .
This i s a key tactical th eme t o re­
m ember - Black loses a piece if he cap­
tures on d4. 11 ... e4 is the obvious
choice, but 12 tiJg s leaves Bl ack in diffi­
culties. For example, 12 ... .i.fs (or 12 ... e 3
1 3 .i.xe3 ':xe3 14 �xe3 tiJxe3 1 5 'ifh s,
winning) 1 3 tiJxf7 ! �xf7 (13 ... 'it'd7 i s
m et by 1 4 'iWh s - Lukacs) 14 'ifh s+ g 6
( 1 4. . .� e 6 1 5 c 4 regains the piece) 1 5
'it'xh 7+ � e 6 (or l s . . .�6 16 'it'h4+ �e6
1 7 .i.g s 'ii'd 6 18 tiJd2) 16 g4 with a big
42
advantage for White, M. Kobalija­
V. Petkov, European Ch., Plovdiv 2008.
b) 10 ...'it'd6 rather invites 1 1 tiJbd2
intending tiJc4 or tiJe4. In thi s position
11. .. tiJf4 looks critical : 12 tiJe4 (12 tiJC4
'iVxd3 13 .i.xf4 'ii'x dl 14 :axdl exf4 1 5
tiJces - Lukacs - al so looks promising)
12 ... 'ii'x d3 (or 1 2 ... 'ii'g 6 1 3 .i.xf4 exf4 14
�fl �h 8 1 5 'ii'd 2 with an edge for
White, V.Nevednichy-R.Dabo Peranic,
Bizovac 2006 - after the exch ange on
f4, Black's a7-bishop i s in con stant
danger of being shut out by d3-d4) 1 3
.i.xf4 'ii'x dl 14 l:t.axdl exf4 1 S tiJeg s .
I think th at White's activity i s worth
m ore th an a pawn h ere. For example,
ls ... tiJas 16 .i.xf7+! �xf7 17 tiJxf7 �xf7
18 tiJe s+ �6 19 l:td8 threatening tiJg4+
followed by :ee8.
c) 10 ... .i.e6 i s a decent option for
Black:
Cl) The tactical justification i s 1 1
tiJxe s ? tiJxes 12 l:[xes .i.xf2 + ! intending
1 3 �xf2 ? 'ii'f6+. Thi s theme i s well
worth remembering because it crops
up in m any simil ar positions.
b) 1 1 tiJa3 bs! 1 2 tiJC2 'fi'f6 1 3 'ii'e 2
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part I)
h6 14 .lte3 .ltxe3 1 5 fxe 3 .l:tad8 was
equal in F.Vallejo Pon s-V.Topalov, Dos
Herm anas (rapid) 2008, but I'm not
totally convinced by 1 1 ttJa3 .
c) Lukacs's suggestion of 1 1 'ii'e 2 ! ?
looks m ore interesting. H e gives
11 ... .l:te8 (if 1 1 ... 'ii'f6 12 iYe4 and .. J:�d8
runs into .i.g s ; or 1 1 .. .f6 1 2 d4 .l:te8 13
dxes i..f7 14 iYdl ttJxe s 15 ttJxe s l:[xes
16 ':xe s fxe s 1 7 ttJd2 iYh4 18 'ii'e 2 c6
19 ttJf3) 12 ttJg s and assesses the posi­
tion as "+1=". It's worth playing a few
more m oves after 12 ... ttJf4, which looks
critical to me: 13 i.. xf4 i.. x b3 14 axb3
exf4 1 5 'ii'x e8+ 'ii'x e8 16 ':xe8+ ':xe8 1 7
'ii?fl ttJe s (otherwise White plays d 4 t o
kill the a7-bishop) 18 d 4 h 6 ! (18 ... ttJd3 ?
19 ttJa3 ! leaves Black's knight embar­
rassed, and it becomes trapped after
19 ... ttJxb2 20 .l:tbl ttJd3 2 1 l:tdl ttJb2 2 2
.l:!.d2) 19 ttJf3 ttJxf3 20 gxf3 c 6 2 1 ttJd2
i.b6 22 b4 with a l evel endg am e posi­
tion.
ll d4
11 ttJbd2 is possible but I feel th at
White's best ch ance of an edge might
well be to clarify things in the centre,
accept an i sol ated queen's pawn ( IQP)
and then try to exploit the light­
squared weaknesses in Black's camp. If
thi s is the case, the knight most cer­
tain ly belon g s on c3 rather th an d2.
11 •.. exd4
There was little choice, as White
was threatening 12 dxe s uncovering
an attack on ds.
12 ttJxd41?
1 2 cxd4 would be very promising
for White after 12 ... �h 8 1 3 ttJC3 ! , but
12 ... ttJas ! , as played in F. De la Paz­
N . 5hort, Ottawa 2007, i s a stronger
m ove. Black doesn 't mind investing a
tempo or m ore if it mean s he can swap
off White's powerful light-squared
bishop. That g am e continued 13 ttJc3
(13 i.. c 2 ! ? ttJb4 14 i.. e 4 fs forces the
exch ange, but thi s i s worthy of con sid­
eration because .. .f6-fs i s quite a con­
cession from Black) 1 3 ... ttJxb3 14 iYxb3
c6 1 5 i..f4 l:tf7 16 i.. g 3 i..fs and here
White should h ave played 17 ttJh4.
12 ..• ttJxd4 13 cxd4
The exchange of knights mean s that
it's easier for Bl ack to support his re-
43
Beating 1 e4 e5
m aining knight on d5 with ... c6. On the
other hand, it al so mean s th at White
gets to keep his powerful light-squared
bishop!
13 .. .';£th8 14 tDc3 tDxc3?!
I don't like thi s move, and neither
does Black's bishop on a7!
The solid 14 ... c6 is the most obvious
choice, although it's entirely possible
that White keeps a small edge in the
symm etrical structure arising after 1 5
tDxd5 cxd5 16 1i'f3 �xd4 17 �xd5, be­
cause of his slight lead in development
and Black's weaker king . At the very
least Black will have to displ ay some
accuracy to equalize.
14 ... tDe7 is another try, and here
White could con sider buil ding up the
pressure with 1 5 d5 intending 'iVf3,
�f4 (or �e3), .l:.adl etc.
15 bxc3 l:te8 16 l:txe8+ 'iVxe8 17 �f4 c6
18 'iVd 3 �b8
Understandably Black was keen to
swap off or improve the position of his
problem bishop, but thi s 'undevelop­
ment' leaves him l acking coordin ation
and with back rank i ssues.
44
19 �xb8?!
White begins to drift and lets Black
off the hook.
19 �d2 ! prepares l:tel and keeps up
the pressure. For example, 19 ... �d7 20
.:tel 'iWf8 21 �C2 g6 22 'i!i'f3 intending
to m eet 2 2 ... �c7 with 2 3 �h 6 ! 1i'xh 6 24
'ti'xf6+ 'ti'g 7 25 'ti'xg7+ <;£txg 7 26 :e7+.
19 .. J:txb8 20 <;£tfl
20 �c2 g 6 2 1 'iVg 3 is stronger.
20 'ilVf8 21 :tel �d7 2 2 1i'e3 l:te8 2 3
.•.
'iVf4 l:[xel+ 24 <;£txel 'iVe7+ 2 5 <;£td2 �c8
2 6 g4 g6 27 h4 <;£tg7 28 g 5 �e6?
White has no real advantage after
2 8 ... �f5 ! .
29 �xe6 'ilVxe6 30 'ilVc7+ 'iVf7 3 1 gxf6+
1-0
I wonder whether Black lost on time
here. His problem is that 31 ... <;£txf6 al-
lows 3 2 'iWe 5 m ate. So 3 1 ... <;£tg8 i s
forced, a n d then White has excellent
ch ances to convert his extra pawn after
3 2 1i'c8+ 1i'f8 3 3 f7+ <;£txf7 34 1i'xb7+.
Game 10
S.Tivia kov-R.EI Ta her
Am m a n 2006
1 e4 e5 2 tDf3 tDc6 3 �C4 �C5 4 c3 tDf6
5 d3 a6
Note th at the actual move order of
the g am e was 5 ... d6 6 �b3 a6 7 h 3 0-0
8 �g s h6 9 �h4 �e6 10 tDbd2 �a7 11
tDh 2 .
6 � b 3 � a 7 7 h 3 0-0
Black commits him self to neither
. .. d6 nor ... dS. On the other h and, as we
 ftalian Game: Modern Variation (Part f)
already know, castling itself i s commit­
tal !
As well as 7 ... d6 or 7 ... d5, there's al so
the flexible 7 ... h 6 ! ?, preventing the pin
and hoping to find out White's inten­
tion s before committing to a plan of
action . If 8 ttJbd2 0-0 9 ttJfl, 9 ... d 5 ! 10
'i'e2 gives Black an extra ... h 6 m ove in
the m ain lines (Games 1-5). Thi s should
be at least partially useful to him, al­
though I'm not 100% sure - we've seen
previously how thi s pawn advance can
give White a hook to attack.
Looking at altern atives to 9 ttJfl, 9
0-0 d6 10 .l:tel would tran spose to the
0-0 lines of Chapter Three. More ag­
gressive players might prefer 9 g 4 ! ?
Again White i s looking t o exploit
Black's early ... h 6 . The positions are
double-edged, but thi s certainly
worked well for White in the g ame
T.5tepovaia Dianchenko-I ,TuTOva, Ka­
zan 2004: 9 ... d5 10 .l:!.g l (even 10 g 5
hxg 5 11 ttJxg 5 i s interesting; the open
g-file is always going to promise White
some action) 10 ... dxe4 11 dxe4 -te6 12
'i'e2 b 5 1 3 ttJf1 ttJd7 14 -te3 ttJa5 ? !
( 1 4... ttJc5 ! ? looks better) 1 5 -txe6 fxe6
16 0-0-0 'ile7 1 7 g5 -txe3+ 18 ttJxe3
hxg 5 19 ttJxg 5 ttJf6 20 .l:!.g 3 and White's
attack looked much more dangerous
than Black's.
8 -tgSI
One of the m ain points behind
White's move order with 7 h 3 i s th at
7 ... 0-0 can be m et by this move. Thi s
typical p i n i s more annoying than
usual for Black for the following rea­
sons :
1. Bl ack h a s already castled king­
side. Therefore, breaking the pin with
... h6 and ... g 5 will compromise his
king ' s safety.
2. White h as yet to commit to king­
side castling. This might m ake it easier
for him to start an attack on the king ­
side (for example, meeting ... g 5 with
h4) without h aving to worry about his
own king's safety.
3. With Black's bishop back on a7,
there i s no possibility in the foreseeable
future to break the pin with ... -te7.
In isol ation, I don 't think any of
these factors carry such great signifi-
45
Beat ing 1 e4 e5
cance. When combined, though, they
certainly seem to give Black a few
headaches.
8 d6 g lLl bd 2 iL e6
...
The altern ative is to break the pin
immediately. I . Kulish-O.5tjazh kina,
Elista 2000, continued 9 ... h6 10 iLh4 g s
11 iLg 3 (11 lLlxg S ! ? hxg s 12 iLxg s i s a
tempting piece sacrifice; compare
Emms-Flear, G ame 11) 11 .. Jle8 (or
11 ... lLlh S - planning .... �f6 and ... lLlf4 -
12 lLlh 2 ! ? and now 12 ... lLlf4 1 3 �f3 fol-
lowed by 0-0-0 and h4, or 12 ... lLlxg 3 1�
fxg 3 and White g ains a useful open f­
file) 12 lLlfl lLle7 1 3 'ii'd 2 <ii;> g 7 14 0-0-0
lLlg6 (in view of wh at happen s, Black
should probably hold back with thi s
m ove) 1 5 h4! g4 16 h S ! lLlf8 (or 16 . . .lLlf4
1 7 lLlg l lLl6xh s 18 iLh4 f6 19 lLlg 3 ) 17
lLlh4 and White i s ready to m ake sig­
nificant progress on the king side with
f4, lLle3 etc. Black's defences are begin­
ning to creak.
10 lLl h 2 1
Threatening lLl g 4 a n d thus encour­
aging Black to advance on the kingside.
G arry Kasparov pl ayed iLg s m ore
46
than once against an early ... 0-0, but in
G . Kasparov-1Timman , Rotterdam 1999,
he failed to find the right pl an : 10
iLh4?! <ii;>h 8 1 1 g4 lLle7 ! 12 iLxf6 g xf6 1 3
lLlh4 lLlg 6 14 lLlg 2 c6 1 5 'ii'f3 dS 16 lLlfl
as 17 lLlg 3 iLcS 18 a4 iLe7 19 iLa2 .:ta6
20 lLlh S l:tb6 21 "ii'e 2 'ii'd 6 with reason­
able counterpl ay for Black. Timman
suggested 10 lLlh 2 as an improvement
for White.
10 lLlfl would tran spose to the note
to White's 10th m ove in Yemelin­
Klimov (Game 6).
10 ... h6
10 ... dS i s too slow here: 1 1 'ii'f3 ! d4
12 lLlg4 iLxg4 13 hxg4 dxc3 14 bxc3
'ii'd 6 15 lLlC4 "ile7 16 'ii'h 3 and Black's
position was already critical in
G . Hassell-S.5mith, correspondence
2000, since 16 ... h6 1 7 iLxh 6 gxh6 18
'ii'xh 6 forces m ate.
11 iL h4 g5
12 iL g 3
Timman assessed thi s position as
'unclear', but I would prefer to be
White and evidently so would Tiviakov!
12 <ii;> g 7
.•.
 Italian Game: Modern Var iation (Part I)
I deally Black would really like to
shift the queen 's knight over to g6 in
order to bol ster defences on the king ­
side, but there's n ot enough tim e t o do
so: 12 ... tDe7 ? ! is m et by 13 �xe6 fxe6
14 tDg4! tDxg4 (if 14 ... �g7, White pl ays
15 tDxf6 l:txf6 16 h4 tDg 6 17 hxg s hxg s
18 l:th S) 1 5 'iix g4, hitting e6 and an­
swering l S ... 'ili'd7 with 16 h4.
13 �xe6 fxe6 14 h4!
Direct play by Tiviakov - the idea of
h4 is obvious and good. The g s-pawn
becom es increasingly vulnerable and
the h i-rook becomes active on its
home square.
14 ... l:th8 i s tDdf3 !
Enticing the pawn forward.
lS ... � g6
Probably best, although the fact
that Black i s having to m ake m oves like
thi s i s not a good sign for him !
The 'easy' option would h ave been
lS ... g4 16 tDd2 h S, but then White
would simply break with f2-f3 and
Black's king would never be compl etely
safe.
16 'ili'e2 tDh S 17 hxgs hxgs 18 0-0-0
'iie 7 19 tDg4 .l:1af8
Or 19 ... tDf4 20 �xf4 and now either
20 ... exf4 21 d4! killing the a7-bishop, or
20 ... g xf4 21 g 3 ! probably killing the
kin g !
20 'iid 2 tDd8 2 1 d4!
The tim e is right for thi s advance.
White hopes that once the centre i s
opened, Black's king will become even
m ore exposed.
21 ...exd4 22 exd4 tDf7 23 e S �g7 24
�h2
Perhaps 24 'iii>b l i s strong er. I don 't
think White should mind if Black trades
on g 3 .
24 d S !
••.
Black's best chance i s t o keep the
position as blocked as possible.
2S 'iii> b l e S 2 6 dxes �xe s 2 7 ':'el :te8 2 8
tDd4 �b6
2 8 ...�xd4! 29 'ili'xd4 ':xcl+ 30 ':'xcl
tDd8 intending ... tDc6 would have kept
Black in the game.
29 tDe3 'iid 7 ?
30 tDefs+!
Now the bishop on h2 comes right
back to life.
47
Beating 1 e4 e5
30 ... exf5 3 1 e6 'iVa4 3 2 i.e5+!
Perhaps El Taher overlooked thi s
move. Now 3 2 . . .li:Jxe5 3 3 'iVxg 5+ m ates
quickly, so Black i s lost.
32 ... �g6 33 exf7 i.. x d4 34 i.xh 8 ! :xh8
35 b3 'iVd 7 36 'ii'x d4 l:tf8 37 'ii' b 6+ 1-0
Key Notes
1. By delaying castling White i s able
to carry out the li:Jb1-d2-f1-g 3 plan
more quickly and effectively. More to
the point, he g ains the option of attack­
ing Black on the king side using either
pawn s or pieces, or often a combina­
tion of both .
2. The m ain line, and the one theory
usually recommends for Black, is 7 ... d6
8 li:Jbd2 0-0 9 li:Jf1 d5 (Games 1-5).
White chooses Plan A and thi s leads to
ten se position s which are rich in possi­
bilities.
3. Don't be fool ed by computer as­
sessments ! In some position s where
White adopts Pl an A, computers seem
to underestim ate his chances on the
kin g side, or overestim ate Black's out­
wardly active pieces, or perhaps a bit of
both . In hum an vs. hum an encounters
(th e only ones th at really m atter to us !),
the evidence suggests that White's po­
sition is the easier to play.
4. If Black plays ... h6, look out for
possibilities to use thi s pawn as a hook
for a king side attack. Th e most obvious
48
way to exploit it is with g4-g 5, but sac­
rifices on the h 6-square al so come into
pl ay (see, for example, G ame 5). Re­
member th at a knight on f5 is usually
even m ore powerful once Bl ack h as
pl ayed ... h 6, since trying to force it back
with ... g6 becomes problem atic.
5 . Regardless of whether Bl ack plays
... d5 or ... d6, one of his m ain ideas is to
oppose bishops with ... i.. e 6. Don't un­
derestim ate the possibility of meeting
thi s with i.c2. It's certainly not the only
option, and there will be occasion s
where it's not the best option, but
overall players are beginning to fully
appreci ate the m erits of thi s m ove.
Even when pl aying the g am e in a for­
ward gear, sometimes a temporary re­
treat is required.
6. If Bl ack pl ays ... d6 followed by
... li:Je7-g6 (Games 7-8), he's ideally
pl aced to meet any early king side ag­
gression . In thi s case we should change
course and revert to short castling -
Plan C.
7. If Bl ack advances immediately in
the centre with 7 ... d5 (Game 9), it's a
good time to choose Plan B : exch ange
on d5, castle, attack the centre and aim
for active piece play.
8. If Black plays 7 ... 0-0 (Game 10),
White shoul d certainly take the oppor­
tunity to pin the knight on f6 with 8
i.g 5 . Thi s pin i s very awkward for Bl ack
to deal with .
 Cha p t e r Two
Italian Game:
Modern Variation (Part II)
In thi s ch apter we con sider early alter­
natives for both colours in the Modern
Variation . The first, after 1 e4 e5 2 tDf3
tDc6 3 �C4 �c5 4 c3 tDf6 5 d3 a6 6 �b3
J.. a 7, i s 7 tDbd2, a move with which I 've
enjoyed some success. 7 tDbd2 coul d
easily lead to a tran sposition to m ain
lines con sidered in the previous ch ap­
ter. However, there's an in dependent
option for White in 7 ... 0-0 8 tDC4 ! ? (see
games 11-12); and al so one for Bl ack
with 7 ... 0-0 8 h 3 d5 (see Oratovsky­
Gozzoli, Game 1 3) .
The rest o f t he chapter focuses on
alternatives for Black on the 5th an d
6th moves. In Bologan-Heberl a (Game
14) Black pl ays th e typical idea of 6 ... 0-0
followed up by a quick ... d5, and White
reacts by i m plementing Plan B. In Nun ­
Spesny (Game 15) Bl ack castles a m ove
earlier, again with the intention of ad­
vancing two squares with the d-pawn,
but thi s time White prevents the ad-
vance with �g 5.
Bl ack can al so play 6 ... d6, leaving his
bishop on c5. Thi s move often tran s­
poses to main lines because ... �a7 is
usually played at some point, but not
always. In Degraeve-Dorfm an (Game
16) White invites complication s by car­
ryin g out th e tDd2-fl m anoeuvre with ­
out first playing h 2-h 3, so ... tDg4 be­
comes an option for Black.
Finally, Erenburg - Kreizberg (Game
17) gives us the opportunity to con ­
sider a number of different possibilities
for Bl ack, good and bad, if he dispen ses
with the usual ... a6 move.
Garne l l
J.Em ms-Ci.Flea r
Jack Speige l Memorial,
Southend 2009
1 e4 eS 2 tDf3 tDc6 3 �C4 � CS 4 c3 tDf6
49
Beating 1 e4 e5
5 d3 a6 6 J.b3 J.a7 7 tiJbd 2
50 far we've only considered 7 h 3 .
Thi s knight m ove offers White some
new possibilities.
7 ••• 0-0
The theoretically recommended re­
spon se. Bl ack keeps open the possibility
of pl aying ... dS in one jump.
If 7 ... d6, White can of course tran s­
pose to m ain lines with 8 h3, but
there's al so 8 tiJfl ! ? inviting Black to
play 8 ... tiJg4. Now:
a) 9 tiJe3 tiJxe3 10 J.xe3 J.xe 3 ? ! 11
fxe 3 0-0 12 0-0 left White with a useful
open f-file in 5.Tiviakov-E.Van den Doel,
Dutch Champion ship 2000. H owever,
as Tiviakov notes, Black would be okay
after any reasonable move in stead of
10 ... J.xe 3 .
b) 9 d4! ? looks m ore testing from a
theoretical viewpoint. For example,
9 ... exd4 10 cxd4 tiJf6 ! (10 ... 'i!Vf6 11 h 3 !
tiJxf2 1 2 �xf2 J.xd4+ worked out well
for White after 13 J.e3 J.xe3 + 14 tiJxe3
'iVxb2+ 1 5 'iVd2 'i!Vxd2+ 16 tiJxd2 in
J . Degraeve-D.Marciano, Belfort 1997 -
White's extra piece i s worth m ore than
50
the three pawn s) 1 1 tiJg 3 J.g4 12 J.e3
dS 13 e S (13 exds tiJxdS 14 h3 J.e6 is
equal) 1 3 ... tiJe4 14 J.C2 (thi s might be
too committal ; perh aps simply 14 0-0
0-0 15 l:tcl ! is stronger) 14 .. .fS 15 exf6
( 1 5 h 3 ! ?) l S ... tiJxf6 16 h 3 J.xf3 17 'i!Vxf3
J.xd4 18 tiJfs J.xb2 19 :bl J.C3+ 20
�fl and White didn't h ave enough for
his m aterial investment in J . Degraeve­
V.Tkachiev, Corsica 1997. However,
there is certainly some scope for im­
provement here.
S tiJC4 1 ?
Thi s move i s quite rare but after
spending some time studying it, I be­
g an to appreciate that it was trickier
than it initially l ooked.
White normally chooses either 8 h 3
(see Oratovsky-Gozzoli, G ame 1 3 ) or 8
0-0, reaching the Classical Main Line.
S ••• d6
Can thi s n atural move really be
classed as a mistake? I 'm not totally
sure, but what is clear is th at Black has
to deal with some problem s which
aren't easily solved.
It seem s that Bl ack experiences
fewer difficulties after 8 ... dS (see the
next g ame).
9 J. g 5 1
The point. Black is forced t o endure
the usual pin on the knight, again in
awkward circumstances. Compare Tivi­
akov-El Taher (Game 5), and the prob­
lems Black faced there. This current
situation might be even more unfa­
vourable for Black because ... h6 followed
by ... gS is even riskier (see below).
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
9 ••• h6
Previously, Tony Miles had played
9 ... 'tJe7 again st me (Mondariz, 2000),
after which 10 O-O ? ! let Black off the
hook following 10 ... 'tJg6 1 1 'tJh4 'it>h 8 ! .
later o n 1 realized th at White would
have more chance of an advantage by
playing 10 'tJe3 ! ?, which discourages
10 ... 'tJg 6 in view of 1 1 'tJds .
10 i.. h 4 i.. e 6
Again st 10 ... gs 1 would have been
very tempted to play just like in the
game, with 1 1 'tJxg s ! ? hxg s 12 i.. x g s .
However, there's also nothing wrong
with the simple 11 i.. g 3 . let's see how
this worked out well for White in the
game V.Zhelnin-A. Kolev, Odessa 1989:
11 ... i.. g 4 (perh aps 1 1 ... i.. e 6 i s wiser) 12
ttJe3 i.. x e3 1 3 fxe3 'ike7 14 h 3 i.. d 7 1 5
ttJh 2 'it>g 7 16 'it'e2 as 17 a 4 .:tab8 18 0-0
i.e6 19 i.. c 2 'tJg8 20 l::tf2 f6 2 1 'tJf1 'ike8
22 i..h 2 i..f7 2 3 'tJg 3 'tJce7 24 d4 and
White had built up a significant advan­
tage without h avin g to do anything
spectacul ar.
10 ... 'tJe7 is al so possible a m ove
later. 11 'tJe3 no longer m akes sen se
because of 1 1 ... 'tJg6, but with the pawn
on h6 rather than h7 weakening Black's
structure, 1 1 i.. xf6 ! becomes m ore de­
sirable: 11...gxf6 12 'tJh4 (I quite like 12
'ii'd 2 ! ?) 12 ... ds 13 exds 'tJxds
14 "ii'f3 (White mustn 't get too ex­
cited: 14 'ii'h s ? ? 'tJf4! 1 5 'ikxh 6 'ii'x d3 !
and it's White's king which is the ter­
minally weak one) 14 ... 'tJf4 15 0-0-0
'ii'd s (White was threatening both 16
g3 and 16 d4) 16 "ii'x ds 'tJxds 17 'tJxe s
'tJxc3 18 bxc3 fxe s 19 :td2 'it>g 7
(19 ... :e8 ! ? m ay be stronger) 20 :tel f6
2 1 d4! (now White i s definitely better)
2 1...h s (the problem for Black is th at
2 1 ... exd4 allows m ate with 2 2 l:te7+
'it>h 8 2 3 'tJg6) 2 2 lId3 ! 'it>h 6 23 :g 3 i.. g 4
24 h3 exd4 (or 24 ... i.. d 7 2 5 ':g6+ 'it>h 7
2 6 i.. c 2 'it>h 8 2 7 .l:te3 ! etc) 2 5 hxg4 dxc3
26 'tJfs+ 'it>g s 27 gxh s+ and Black re­
signed, G .5ax-M. Brancaleoni, Bratto
2003. Black might h ave been doing
okay somewhere in that g ame, but it's
clear that he's under some pressure.
11 'tJe3 1
Still not committing the king. How­
ever, if Black were to play 11 ... i.. x e3 12
51
Beating 1 e4 e5

fxe3 then of course kingside castling

and utilizing the newly-opened f-file
suddenly becomes highly attractive.

1 3 ... ..t>g7 14 'ilf3 liJb8

To support the f6-knight with
... liJbd7.
11 ... g51 In general Black would welcome an
The pin is very annoying and it's dif­ exchange on e6, to provide cover for fS
ficult to refrain from playing thi s move, and dS, but he must still be wary of
but it's likely th at Bl ack is now in some some concrete lines. For example,
trouble. 14 ... l:th B ? 15 �xe 6 ! fxe6 16 liJg4 1:tfB 17
Glenn suggested 11.. . ..t>h 7 ! intend­ 'ifh 3 ! and White wins.
ing .. J:tgB and only then .... g s as a crea­ 1 5 liJf5+ �xf5
tive way for Black to solve some of his The knight must be taken : lS ... ..t>g6?
problems. loses to 16 �h4 (threatening 'ilg 3+)
12 liJxg 5 ! 16 ... :g B 1 7 'i/i'g 3 + ..t>h 7 lB �xf6 ! 'i/i'xf6
Again 12 .i.g3 was possible, but thi s (or lB .. J:txg 3 19 hxg3+ ..t>g 6 20 ':h 6
sacrifice was simply too difficult t o re­ m ate ! ) 19 'ilVh 3 + ..t>g6 20 'ifh 6 m ate.
sist! 16 'ii'xf5 liJbd7 1 7 h41
12 ... hxg5 1 3 �xg5
White h as fabul ous compen sation
for the piece: Black's king is un safe; the
pinned knight on f6 i s a con stant
source of concern ; and the bishop on
a7 is more or less out of the g ame. If
Bl ack ever takes on e3, White recap­
tures with the f-pawn after which l:r.fl
is going to be decisive. True, Black can
defend initially, but White's initiative
lasts for a very long time.

52
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
With two ideas: h s -h 6+ and llh 3 fol­
lowed by l:.f3 or :g 3 . White doesn't
have to castle king side to activate the
rook.
17 ... .:.g8 1 18 l:t h 3 'fie7 19 �f3 �h81
The best try.
20 �e2 !
Planning t o bring in the final piece
with :h 1-h 3 - g 3 .
There's no hurry t o take o n f6, and
indeed 20 i.xf6+?! 4:Jxf6 2 1 'ii'xf6+
'i'xf6 2 2 llxf6 l:txg 2 2 3 �e2 l:tf8 would
offer Bl ack good chances for survival .
20 ... .:g6 2 1 h S ':'xgs
What else can Black do?
2 2 'it'xg s 'it'h7 2 3 :g3 ':g8 24 'fifS+ �h8
2 S .l:r.xg8+ �xg8 2 6 h 6 �h8 2 7 llhl c6
Or 2 7 ... 4:Jf8 28 ':'h 3 4:Jg6 2 9 ':f3
liJf4+ 30 :'xf4! exf4 3 1 '1Wg s and White
win s.
28 :h3 ..tb6 2 9 :g3 i.d8
Fin ally Black's dark-squared bishop
is back in the action, but it's too late to
save him.
3 0 ':'g7 ! d S 3 1 exd s 4:Jcs
31 ... cxds can be met simply by 3 2
.txds. Glenn's one remaining chance
here was that both pl ayers were in
some tim e trouble, but I m an aged to
keep everything together.
3 2 dxc6 4:Jxb3 33 axb3 bxc6 34 g4 e4 3 S
d 4 e 3 3 6 fxe3 'fid6 3 7 g s 'fih2+ 3 8 �d 3
'fihl 39 �c2 'fie4+ 40 'ii'x e4 4:Jxe4 41
':'xf7 i.xg s 42 'iti>d3 1-0
Game 12
J.Emms-A.Cireet
Britis h C h a m pio n s h i p,
Douglas 2005
1 e4 e S 2 4:Jf3 4:Jc6 3 i.C4 i.cs 4 c3 4:Jf6
S d3 a6 6 ..tb3 ..ta7 7 4:Jbd2 0-0 8 4:JC4
dS
Black m akes the thematic . . .d s
break, ignoring the double attack on
the es-pawn . To me thi s looks like the
best way of meeting 8 4:JC4.
g exd s
I don 't think Black has much to
worry about after 9 4:Jcxe s 4:Jxe s 10
4:Jxe s dxe4. For example, 11 d4 (the
only chance for an edge i s to try to
block out the a7-bi shop, but Black im­
mediately seeks to activate it) 11 ... Cs!
12 i.e3 (M.Klinova-Qin Kanying, New
Delhi 2000) and now 12 .. .'ii' e 7 intend­
ing ... i.e6 i s Black's simplest route to a
decent position .
9 ... 4:Jxd S 10 0-0
With White's king finally tucked
away, the threat to es becomes real.
How should Black deal with it?
10 ... f6 !
Thi s is a key move, which demon-
53
Beating 1 e4 e5
strates that Black i s not afraid of the
temporary weakness on the a2-g8 di­
agonal . For example, 1 1 ltJe3 can be
met by 11.. . .i.e6 followed by ... 'iith 8 .
10 .. J:t e 8 looks seemingly more at­
tractive and is certainly playable, but I
feel White can cause Black m ore prob­
lems after thi s move: 11 %:tel .i.g4
(Black must avoid 11..:iVf6 1 2 d4! e4 13
ltJcd2 ! , attacking ds and N, P.5vidler­
H.5teingrim sson, G ausdal 1991) 12 h 3
.i.xf3 (if 12 ... .i.h s White can safely grab
the pawn with 13 g4 .i.g 6 14 ltJcxes
and follow up with d3 -d4 to shut out
the a7-bishop) 13 'iVxf3 'iVf6 14 ltJd2
'iWxf3 15 ltJxf3 ltJf6 16 .i.g s :ad8 17
l:tadl h6 18 .i.h4 with a n agging edge
for White, P.Van der Houwen-1Masek,
correspondence 2003. The pawn s on d3
and e s are both weaknesses, but
White's two bishops might become a
handful if the position open s up.
11 l:.el
Given how effectively Black deals
with this obvious move, there's an ar­
gument here for trying something else.
If I were to reach this position again, I
54
would be tempted to play 11 .i.e3 ! ? It
might seem strange to offer Black the
chance to grab the two bishops, but ac­
tually I think White should be happy to
get rid of his dark-squared bishop. It's
not easy to find a useful role for it; in­
deed, it's in danger of becoming White's
worst minor piece. I won't go as far as to
claim that this gives White an advan­
tage, but it can lead to some interesting
positions. If 11...ltJxe3 (this i s certainly
not the only move) 12 fxe3 ! 'iith 8 13 d4,
the position looks genuinely unclear.
White's aim - not for the first time
- i s to keep the a7-bishop firmly out of
play. The g am e Z.Hajnal - L.Vajda, Eger
2002, continued 1 3 ... e4 (thi s looks too
committal) 14 ltJh4 ltJe7 15 g3 g s
( l s ... .i.h 3 ! ?) 16 ltJg 2 b s 1 7 ltJd2 fs 18
'iVh s ! ltJg6 and I prefer White's position
here. As well as the g ame's 19 .i.c2,
White could consider the pawn break
g4 (now or l ater), or even 19 h4 intend­
ing to m eet 19 ... gxh4 with 20 ltJxe4!
fxe4? 21 ltJxh4! with a winning attack:
2 1...ltJxh4 2 2 %:txf8+ 'iixf8 2 3 'iWe s+ 'iWg 7
24 'iWe8+ and it's m ate next move.
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
11 �h81
•••
Other m oves are possibl e, but vacat­
ing the a2-g 8 diagonal is the simplest
solution . I think Black i s fully equal
here.
12 h 3
White n eeds to prevent . . . �g4. I
wanted to play 1 2 lLlh4 intending 'iWh 5,
but I couldn 't find a reason why Black
should avoid the straightforward
12 ... g 5 ! 13 lLlf3 b5 14 lLle3 lLlf4 when
White is in serious danger of being
worse.
12 .. .lIe8
12 ... b5 13 lLle3 lLlf4 14 d4 exd4 1 5
cxd4 lLle7 was equal
A.Tzermiadianos-H.Gretarsson,
thymnon 2003, and even 15 ... lLlxd4 ! ? i s
possible: 16 lLlxd4 'ii'x d4 1 7 'ii'f3 � e 6 18
liJc2 'iVxf2+ 19 'iVxf2 �xf2+ 20 �xf2
liJd3+ 2 1 �f3 lLlxe1+ 22 lLlxe1 is ag ain
equal .
13 �e3 1
Better l ate than never (see the note
to White's 1 1th m ove), even if the cir­
cumstances here are less favourable for
White.
1 3 d4 looks like the only other logi­
cal continuation, but after 1 3 ... exd4 14
llxe8+ 'ilixe8 1 5 cxd4 �e6, or 15 lLlxd4
lLlxd4 16 cxd4 �e6, Black i s well coor­
din ated and probably h as an edge.
1 3 ... lLlxe3 14 lLlxe 3
14 fxe3 ? ! m akes much less sense
with the TOok on el. Besides, after
14 ... b 5 ! White's knight would h ave to
retreat to the ugly a3-square to avoid
droppin g the d3 -pawn.
in
Re-
14 ... lLla s ? 1
It is desirable to kick the bishop off
the a2-g8 diagon al, but now Black's
knight i s misplaced, he loses his grip on
the centre and White can get in d3-d4.
14 ... �e6 15 �xe6 ':'xe6 16 'ilib3
looks a bit awkward for Black, but
16 ... 'ii'c 8 should be okay for him. Alter­
n atively, there's 14 ... 'ii'd 6 to prepare
... �e6. White can try 15 lLlh4 here, and
15 ... �e6 16 lLlef5 'iVd7 17 'iWh5 �xb3 18
axb3 �g8 19 .:ta4! i s the kind of thing
White should be aiming for. Unfortu­
nately, Black can spoil the fun with
something like 15 ... �xe3 first, and only
then ... �e6.
55
Beating 1 e4 e5
lS i.c2 i.e6 16 d4! exd4 17 liJxd4 i.g8
18 'iVg4 i.xd4 19 cxd4 liJc6 20 d S
Now White enjoys a small advan­
tage. His pieces are the more active,
and the isol ated d-pawn, although re­
quiring protection, does have a slight
cramping effect on Black's position.
20 ... liJe s
20 ... liJe7 2 1 �ed1 'iVd6 is equally
playable, but not 21 ... liJxd 5 ? ? 22 liJxd5
i.xd5 23 'iVh 5.
2 1 'ii h 4 'iid 6 2 2 l:ted1 'ii'f8 2 3 litac1
:ad8 2 4 i.b1 ':e7 2S 'iib 4 c6 2 6 dxc6
liJxc6 2 7 'iVb6
The c- and d-pawn s have been ex­
ch anged, leaving a symmetrical struc­
ture. White's m ore active pieces still
promise an edge, something which i s
m aintained through to t h e endg ame.
27 •.. l:.ed 7 2 8 ':xd 7 l:r.xd 7 29 i. e 4 'iVd 8
30 'iVxd8 liJxd8 3 1 a 3 g6 3 2 ':c8 'it>g7 3 3
'it>f1 i.e6 34 'it>e1 'it>f7 3 S i.f3 'it>e7 3 6
liJC4 �d 1+ 3 7 'it>xd1 i.xc8 3 8 'it>d2 i.e6
3 9 'it>C3 'it>d7 40 'it>d4 i.f7 41 'it>cS 'it>c7
During the g am e I was concerned
about the defence 41 ... liJe6+ 42 'it>b6
liJd4 43 liJa5 ? liJxf3 44 g xf3 i.e6 ! 45 h4
56
i.d5, but in fact 43 i.g4+ ! f5 44 liJe5+
'it>e7 45 liJxf7 fxg4 46 liJg 5 i s still very
good for White.
42 i.ds liJe6+
Now White is probably winning.
Passive defence with 42 ... i.e8 ! offers
Bl ack better chances of survival .
43 i.xe61 i.xe6 44 liJb6!
Intending liJd5+. The pawn endings
are winning for White because his king
i s so far advanced and Black run s out of
waitin g moves.
44 ... gS 4 S liJd S+ i.xd s 46 �xd S �d7 47
g4! �e7
Or, for example, 47 ... a5 48 b3 b6 49
b4 axb4 50 axb4 h6 51 b 5 etc.
48 'it>cS 'it>d7 49 'it>b6 �c8 S O a4 �b8 Sl
b41 �c8
If 51 ... �a8, White win s by 52 �C7
�a7 53 b 5 axb 5 (or 53 ... a5 54 f3 h6 5 5
�c8 - but not 5 5 b6+?? �a6 ! - 5 5 ... �b6
5 6 �b8, winning as in the g ame) 54
axb 5 �a8 55 b6 h6 5 6 f3 and it's m ate
in four.
S2 'it>a 7 a s l
The l ast try. 5 3 bxa 5 ? �C7 ! 54 a 6 b 6 !
5 5 'it>a8 'it>c8 ! i s only a draw, but...
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
53 b 5 ! cJ;C7 54 cJ; a 8 1-0
After s4 ... h6 55 f3 cJ;b6 56 cJ;b8
White win s the cruci al b-pawn and
with it the g ame.
Game 1 3
M.OratoYsky-Y.Gozzoli
Ta rragona 2007
1 e4 e S 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.C4 ttJf6 4 d 3 i.cs
5 c3 a6 6 ttJbd2 i.a7 7 i.b3 0-0 8 h3
8 h3 i s basically an attempt to
tran spose to the m ain lines discussed
in the previous chapter, if Black pl ays
8 ... d6. But wh at happen s if Bl ack ad­
vances one square further?
8 d5!
...
In a n ideal world, Black would like
to pl ay ... ds in one jump a nd with
White having pl ayed ttJfl, but usually
he can meet both these condition s only
if White pl ays in accurately (for exam ­
ple with the move order 8 ttJfl ? ! d s ! ) .
Even so, o n e out o f two i sn 't bad, and
this looks like a reliable option for
Black.
9 exd s ! ?
White chooses Pl an B : taking o n d s
a n d relying o n active piece play and
pressure again st Black's centre.
9 'iVe2 has been played m any times,
even by such players as Bologan , but
the problem is th at after 9 ... l:te8 10 ttJfl
White is basically a tempo down on the
m ain line, with Black having played
... ds in one go.
If White wants to keep his option s
open in the centre, then committing to
king side castling with 9 0-0 is a rea­
sonable choice, although 9 ... dxe4! 10
dxe4 "fIe7 does leave Black with an
equal share of the chances. For exam ­
ple, 11 ttJh 2 i.e6 12 i.c2 .:1ad8 1 3 'iff3
ttJd7 14 ]:tel f6 15 ttJdfl Wif7,
K.5han ava-M. Kobalija, Tbilisi 2009.
9 ttJxd S 10 ttJe4!
...
Thi s i s the only move to challenge
Black.
Note that one of the points behind
playing ... ds with the white knight on
d2 i s revealed after 10 O-O?! ttJf4!,
which i s something White definitely
needs to avoid. Compare Roy Chowd-
57
Beating 1 e4 e5
hury-Skjoldborg (Game 9), where White
doesn 't have this problem because the
knight is still on bl.
With the centre semi-open, 10
ttJfl ? ! i s far too slow. Either 10 ... ttJf4 ! ?
11 �xf4 exf4 followed by .. J!e8+, or
simply 10 ... �e6 11 ttJg 3 f6 12 0-0 �h 8,
i s m ore than okay for Black.
1o ... �f5
10 ... h 6 ? is strongly m et by 11 �xh 6 ! '
Thi s tactical shot, intending
11 ... gxh6 1 2 �xds 'ii'x ds 1 3 lLlf6+, is
well worth remembering.
H owever, Black does have two de­
cent altern atives here:
a) 10 .. .f6 ! 1 1 0-0 (11 �e3 ! ?) 1 1 ... �h 8
is extremely solid (compare my g am e
again st Greet). After 12 l:t e l � e 6 1 3
ttJg 3 1i'd7 1 4 ttJh4 :ad8 1 5 1i'h s �f7 1 6
'ii'f3 ttJde7 17 � C 2 � d s 18 'ii'h s �f7 19
1i'f3 the position was equal in Xu Yu­
hua- N . Short, Jinan 2003.
b) 10 .. .fs ! ? i s riskier but al so play­
able. For example, 11 O-O! �h 8 12 ttJeg s
h 6 1 3 ttJh4! hxg s ! ( 1 3 ... ttJce7? 14 .:tel ! i s
good for White - Quezada Perez) 1 4
'Wh s+ �g 8 1 5 �xg s 1i'd6 16 c 4 (R.Perez
58
G arcia-O. Ruiz, Vill a Clara 2007), and
here Quezada Perez assesses 16 ... lLld4!
17 cxds ttJxb3 18 axb3 as unclear.
1 1 0-0
11 ttJg 3 is al so possible. 11 ... �g 6 12
0-0 ttJf4 13 �xf4! exf4 14 ttJe4 �xe4 1S
dxe4 1i'f6 16 'ifds ! proved to be better
for White in V.Bologan-M. Krasenkow,
Spanish Team Champion ship 2006, but
I prefer 12 ... ttJf6 ! when the position
looks equal to me.
11 ...�g6 12 :e1 �h8 1 3 �a4
White lures the b-pawn forward to
create some light-squared weaknesses
on the queenside, although thi s does
con sume some time. After the m ore
typical 1 3 ttJg 3 f6 14 ttJh4 �f7 1 5 ttJhfS
'ii'd 7 16 1i'f3 :ad8 the position is simi­
l ar to Xu Yuhua-Short, above, and the
chances are level .
1 3 ... b 5 14 �b3
14 ...f5?!
Thi s i s too ambitious and too loos­
ening; it certainly does the bishop on
g 6 no favours at all . Furthermore,
White's set-up is well geared to meet
thi s advance. H avin g said that, while
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part 1 /)
lookin g through m any g ames I h ave
noticed a tendency for Black to lunge
forward with .. .f5 even when it's n ot
justified. Thi s could be caused by the
natural inclination amon g st m any
players to be always doin g something,
even when the best course of action i s
to 'do nothing'.
14.. .f6 ! i s still the best m ove here.
15 liJeg5 'ii'd 6 16 liJh41
Suddenly White's pieces come to
life, and Black h as to deal with prob­
lems both on the king side and in the
centre.
16 .:ad8 17 liJxg6+
...
17 d4! is a strong alternative, since
17 ...exd4? 18 ':e6 ! i s immediately
crushing. If Black plays 17 ... e4, the a7-
bishop i s once again shut out of the
game. Wh at's m ore, after 18 �xd5
'i'xd5 19 liJxg 6+ hxg6 20 �f4 Black
must be careful n ot to be m ated down
the h-file.
17 'iIi'xg6 18 'iWe2 h 6 19 liJf3 'iif6 20
...
lZ\xe 5 1 ?
Heading for complication s.
20 i.. d 2, possibly foll owed up by a2-
a4, leaves White with a solid edge -
Black still h as m any light-squared
weaknesses to defend.
20 J:tde8?
.•
A whole book could be written on
the subject of 'the wrong rook'.
20 .. J:t.fe8! prevents liJd7 ideas, and
the resultin g position after the long
tactical sequence 2 1 �g 5 ! ( 2 1 d4
�xd4!) 2 1 .. ..l:!.xe 5 ! ( 2 1 ... hxg 5 ?? 22 'ii'h 5+
�g8 2 3 �xd5+) 2 2 �xf6 l:txe2 2 3 �xd8
�xf2+ 24 �f1 l:txel+ 25 ':xel �xel 2 6
�xd5 liJxd8 2 7 �xel offers Black excel ­
lent drawing chances.
2 1 liJd7?
Missing an opportunity: 2 1 d4!
�xd4 and only then 2 2 liJd7 is
strong er. White keeps some advantage
after 22 ... l:txe2 23 ':xe2 'iid 6 (23 ... liJxc3
24 bxc3 'ii'd 6 25 liJxf8 �xc3 26 l:r.e8 ! !
�xal 2 7 liJg6+ �h 7 28 �f7 ! wins) 24
liJxf8 �e5 2 5 liJg 6+.
2 1 ...l:lxe2 2 2 .l:[xe2
22 ••• liJxC 3 1
An important resource, which saves
Black. The neat perpetual check which
follows i s more or less forced.
59
Beating 1 e4 e5
2 2 ... 'ii'd 6 2 3 ttJxf8 would give White
a decisive advantage.
2 3 bxc3 'ifxc3 24 �b2 'ifxd 3 2 5 ttJxf8
If 2 5 J::t e 6, not 2 s ... 'ikxd7?? 26 ':xh 6
mate(!) but in stead 2 s ... 'ii'd 2 ! (covering
h6) 2 6 ttJxf8 'ii'x b2 and again White will
take the perpetual check.
25 ... 'ifxe2 2 6 ttJg6+ �h7 27 ttJf8+ �h8
Yz-Yz
In the next two games we con sider
lines where Bl ack castl es quickly, either
on move five or six.
Game 1 4
V.Bologa n-B.Heberla
E u ropea n C h a m pion s h i p,
Plovd iv 2008
1 e4 e5 2 �C4 ttJf6 3 d 3 ttJc6 4 ttJf3 �C5
5 c3 a6 6 �b3 0-0
We've seen thi s idea of quick cas­
tling before, in Tiviakov-El Taher (Game
10). The only difference here i s that h 2 -
h 3 and ...� a 7 h aven't been pl ayed, but
thi s slight ch ange coul d be m ore sig-
60
nificant th an it initially appears to be.
6 ... ds 7 exds ttJxds 8 0-0 0-0 9 h 3 (or
9 ttJbd2) transposes to lines con sidered
below.
7 h31?
White keeps all h i s option s open,
and thi s move is useful in preventing
... �g4 l ater on . Alternatively:
a) Judging by what we've seen in
previous games, there's a great temp­
tation to pl ay 7 .tg s ! ? here. Indeed,
after 7 ... h6 8 �h4 d6 9 ttJbd2 Bl ack suf­
fers the usual pains from the pin . For
example, 9 ... ttJe7 10 .txf6 (or 10 d4! ?)
10 ... gxf6 1 1 'ii'e 2 fs 12 0-0-0 �h 8 1 3 d4
exd4 14 cxd4 �a7 1 5 es and Bl ack's
king remai n s a concern, M. Kobalija­
A. Kharlov, Internet 2004. Altern atively,
8 ... g s 9 �g 3 d6 10 ttJbd2 �g4 (I prefer
10 ... ttJh s) 11 h 3 �h s 12 'ii'e 2 �g6 13 h4
ttJh s 14 hxg s ttJxg 3 15 fxg 3 hxg s 16
0-0-0, ag ain with some advantage to
White, V.lvanchuk-M.Marin , Canada de
Cal atrava (blitz) 2007.
However, Black has a strong defen­
sive resource in 8 ... .te7 ! .
Even though thi s move breaks the
 Italian Game: Modern Var iation (Part 1 /)
pin, it might not be easy at first to un­
derstand its real strength. After all,
hasn 't Bl ack just given up a tempo with
... B(f8}-cs-e7 in an otherwi se normal
looking position ? That's a fair question,
but it's not quite as simple as th at. It
could be argued in Black's favour that
White's bishop on the h4-d8 diagonal i s
now somewhat mispl aced, since i t of­
fers Black opportunities to relieve some
pressure via exchanges.
S.Tiviakov-M.Marin, Reggio Emilia
2007, continued 9 tDbd2 d6 (9 ... tDh S 10
.1g3 tDxg 3 1 1 hxg3 d6, as indicated by
Marin, bypasses White's possibility on
the next move) 10 �g 3 ! ? (10 0-0 tDh S !
1 1 .txe7 'ii'x e7 sees Black's exchanging
plan in action) 10 ... .:e8 (Tiviakov's idea
was to m eet 10 ... tDh s with 11 tDxe s !
ttJxes 12 .txe s dxe s 1 3 "ii'xh s 'ii'x d3 14
"i'xes with some advantage, since
14 ... .tg4 can be an swered safely by 15
.1C4). Here Tiviakov's 1 1 tDfl ? ! looked
too slow and cumbersome with the
bishop on g 3 blocking its n atural route,
and with 11 ... dS ! (Marin) Black's posi­
tion already looks comfortable. I would
prefer 1 1 0-0, planning typical central
action with h 3 , .:tel, d4 etc. Black can
grab the bishop pair with 11 ... tDas (but
not 11 ... tDh S ? 12 tDxe s ! ) 12 .tc2 tDh s,
but as compen sation White can gain
space on the queen side after 1 3 b4
ttJxg 3 14 hxg 3 (14 fxg 3 ! ?) 14 ... tDc6 1 5
.1b3.
b} 7 tDbd2 ! ? intending 7 ... dS (7 ...�a7
transposes to Games 11-13) 8 exds
ttJxdS 9 0-0 i s al so possible. Now:
bl} We've seen previously that
White must be wary of ... tDf4 ideas, but
here 9 ... tDf4?! 10 tDe4! g ains a key
tempo attacking cS, and if 10 ... tDxd3 ? !
there follows 1 1 tDfg S ! .
Suddenly Black i s facin g a fierce at­
tack: for example, 11 ... h 6 ? (Black h as to
pl ay 11 ... tDXC 1 ! , although even here 12
'iWh S ! .tfS 1 3 .txf7+ �h 8 14 l:[axcl h 6
1 5 tDxcs 'ii'x g s 16 "ii'x g s hxg s 17 .t d S is
very good for White) 12 'iVh S ! 'ii'e 7 13
'ii'g 6 ! hxg s 14 tDxg s and Bl ack is forced
to give up his queen .
b2} 9 ... .tg4 i s logical and has been
pl ayed a few times: 10 h3 .th S 11 tDe4
.ta7 12 l1el (or 12 tDg 3 ! ? .tg6 13 1:.el)
12 .. .f6 1 3 .te3 ! .txe3 (if 1 3 ... �h 8, 14
.txa7 l:Ixa7 15 tDg 3 .tf7 16 d4! open s
up the centre to White's advantage) 14
fxe3 .tf7 1 5 'ii'd 2 h 6 16 d4 and White's
centre pawn s promise him a slight ad­
vantage, P.svidler-T.Ern st, G ausdal
1991 .
Let's return to the position after 7
h3:
7 ••• dS
In m any ways thi s is the con sistent
61
Beating 1 e4 e5
follow up to 6 ... 0-0, especi ally since 7
h 3 appears to do little to discourage
this advance (in comparison to, say, 7
0-0).
If 7 ... i.a7 White shouldn 't hesitate
to reply with 8 i.g s ! (see Tiviakov-El
Taher, G ame 10). Likewise, 7 ... d6 can
and probably should be m et by 8 i.g s ! .
I n either case Bl ack has lost the possi­
bility to unpin with ... i.e7.
8 exd s l
Again w e see White choosing Plan B.
If 8 'ii'e 2 h 6 9 lLlbd2 i.e6 10 lLlfl
Bl ack has gained a tempo by playing
... ds in one go, and he might even find
a better move than the usual ... i.cs-a7.
8 ... lLlxd S 9 0-0
Thi s time White must avoid 9
lLlbd2? lLlf4 ! .
9 ... lLlde7
By removing the knight from its po­
tenti ally vulnerable post on ds, Black
hopes to avoid some tactical possibili­
ties and al so expose the d3 -pawn .
What's more, Bl ack can now reinforce
the e s-pawn if need be by playing
... lLlg 6.
62
Some other moves h ave been tried
here:
a) 9 ... i.a7 tran sposes to Roy Chowd­
hury-Skjoldborg, (Game 9).
b) 9 ... lLlf6 10 .:tel 'iVd6 11 lLlbd2 !
'i!Vxd3 12 lLlxes lLlxes 1 3 l:[xes i.a7 (if
1 3 ... i.d6??, 14 i.c2 ! traps the queen in
mid board ! ) 14 'ii'f3 ! 'ii'xf3 l s lLlxf3 with
an edge for White, R.Mainka-R.5tern,
H ockendorf 2004. The 'exchange' of
pawn s in the centre often benefits
White, whose pieces tend to be a bit
m ore actively pl aced. There's pressure
ag ain st f7, and possibilities of lLlg s,
];te7 and i.f4 or i.g s .
c) 9 ... lLlb6 10 ':'el h 6 1 1 lLlbd2 ! (not
1 1 lLlxe s ? ! i.xf2+! 12 'itxf2 lLlxeS 13
];txe s ? 'ii'f6+) 11..:ii'xd3 12 lLlxes 'ii'g 3
1 3 'ii'f3 ! 'ii'xf3 14 lLldxf3, as played in
V. Kramnik-M. Krasenkow, Wijk aan Zee
2003, is similar to the previous note.
After Krasenkow's 14 ... lLle7 I think
Kramnik could have won a pawn with
15 lLlxf7 ! ':'xf7 16 l::tx e 7 ! i.xe7 17 lLle s -
I really can't see anything wrong with
this. Bl ack can improve with 14 ... lLlxes
l s lLlxes i.d6, but here 16 lLlg6 .l::t d 8 17
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
ttJe7+ Wf8 18 lDxc8 l1axc8 19 �e3, as
indicated by Lukacs, gives White the
advantage of the bishop pair in an
open position.
10 lDxe s l ?
1 0 lI e l lDg 6 11 lDg S ! ? i s another
possibility. For example, 11 ... h6 1 2
'ill S ! hxg s (or 12 . . .lDce7 1 3 lDe4 �b6
14 �xh 6 ! ) 1 3 'ii'x g 6 lDas ! ? (13 .. :i!kf6 !
keeps the m aterial balance, and after
14 'ii'xf6 gxf6 15 lDd2 �b6 16 lDe4 �g 7
17 �e3 %;Id8 18 l:[adl the position looks
equal to me) 14 'iVxg s lDxb3 15 axb3
'i'xd3 16 'ifxes �d6 17 'ife3 'ikc2 18
lLld2 �fS 19 b4, R.Mainka- H . Bastian,
Hoeckendorf 2004. White i s threaten­
ing to unravel with lDC4 or lDf3-d4, and
I don't think Bl ack h as got quite
enough compen sation for the pawn.
10 ...lDxe s 11 d4 �xd4 12 cxd4 lDsc6
We've reached an IQP position. Will
White's d-pawn be a strength or a
weakness? In the g ame Black soon
manages to capture it, but the cost of
doing so it too great.
1 3 �gS
I wonder about 1 3 dS lDas 14 lDC3
here. White wants to increase the pres­
sure with :el, �g 5 etc.
13 ... �e6
I think Black can obtain a more fa­
vourable version of the g am e by flick­
ing in 1 3 ... h6! here. If 14 �h4 (14 �xe7
'i!Vxe7 1 5 lDc3 �fS 16 dS lDe s looks
equal) 14 ... �e6, the insertion of ... h 6
a n d � h 4 seems t o help Black. For ex­
ample, 1 5 lDc3 �xb3 16 'iVxb3 'ii'x d4 ! ?
(or 16 . . .'ifd7) and because the bishop i s
attacked o n h4, White h as to settle for
the less threatening 17 �xe7 lDxe7 18
l:.adl (or 18 'ifxb7).
14 lDc3 �xb3
It's a bit l ate for 14 ... h 6 now, since
1 5 dS ! hxg s 16 dxe6 f6 i s something
Black would rather avoid.
1 s 'ii'x b3
1S •.• 'ii'x d4?
Too greedy! Now Bologan is able to
whip up a fierce initiative.
lS ... lDxd4 16 'ii'x b7 is only a bit bet­
ter for White, and there's al so nothing
wrong with l S ... 'iVd7: 16 �xe7 (16
'i!Vxb7?? l:tfb8 traps the queen, or 16 dS
lDd4 17 'ii'C 4 lDdfS and the knight
63
Beating 1 e4 e5
heads for d6) 16 ... tiJxe7 17 'ii'x b7 tiJc6
18 dS tiJd4 19 d6! 'ifxd6 20 :tadl .:tab8
21 'iVe4 cS and the position is equal .
16 l:tfe11 tiJa5 17 'iWa 3 tiJec6 18 litad1l
'iWa 7
Not a pleasant move to have to
play! With the bl ack queen and both
knights stranded on the queen side,
Bologan isn't slow to seek action on the
other side of the board, with decisive
results.
19 tiJd 5 tiJC4
20 tiJf6+1
Thi s striking sacrifice leads to a
m ating attack, although to be fair
White i s spoilt for choice here. 20 'ifc3 !
is al so strong : 2 0 ... tiJd6 2 1 tiJf6+! �h 8
(2 1...gxf6 2 2 ii.xf6 i s even quicker) 2 2
"iiVd 3 g 6 2 3 'ii'c 3 tiJbs and now the at­
tack on the queen can be ignored with
24 tiJg4+ ! ! tiJxc3 2 S ii.f6+ �g 8 26 tiJh 6
m ate.
20 ... gxf6 2 1 'ii'g 3 1 fxg5 2 2 'iWxg 5+ �h8
2 3 'iWf6+ �g8 24 .l:!.d 5 1 tiJ4e5 25 l::t d xe5
tiJxe 5 2 6 ':xe 5
Despite being a rook ahead, Black's
position i s hopeless.
64
If 2 6 ... l::tfd8, White finishes Black off
with 2 7 1:[g S+ �f8 28 :tfS :d7 29 'ilVh 8+
�e7 30 .l:te s+ �d6 31 'ii'f6 m ate.
The only way to avoid m ate is with
26 ...h 6, but 2 7 'iWxh6 Vb6 28 l:tg S+ 'ifg6
29 l:txg6+ fxg 6 30 'iVxg6+ i s an easy win.
2 6 ..JUe8 2 7 l:tg5+ �8 2 8 :f5 1-0
White m ates after 28 ... l::t e 1+ (or
28 ... l::t e 7 29 'iVh 8 m ate) 29 �h 2 �e8 30
'iWxf7+ �d8 3 1 litdS+ �c8 32 'iff8+. Plan
B can be just as dangerous as Plan A!
Game 1 5
J.Nun-J.Spesny
Czech League 1998
1 e4 e5 2 tiJf3 tiJc6 3 i.C4 ii.C5
Note: the actual m ove order of this
game was 3 ... tiJf6 4 d3 ii.cs s 0-0 d6 6
c3 0-0 7 b4 i.b6 8 a4 a6 9 i.g s 'ife7 10
tiJbd2.
4 c3 tiJf6 5 d 3 o-ol?
Black castles even more quickly
than in the previous g ame. If White
reacts slowly, Black's intention is al­
most certainly to play ... dS here.
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)

Can Black play ... dS even sooner? tling becomes less desirable, so White
The answer i s no. S d3 actually sets a usually ends up castling short.
little trap, which h as caught out a fair
number of players. The immediate
S ... dS? is a serious error which can be
punished by 6 exds tLlxds 7 'iYh 3 ! .

If 6 i.g s Black should play 6 ... h6 7

i.h4 i.e7 ! . Compare the note on 7 i.g s
in the previous g ame.
6 tLlbd2 i s a decent alternative,
The threat t o capture o n dS i s a sur­ pl anning to m eet 6 ... dS with 7 exds
prisingly awkward one for Black to tLlxds 8 tLle4 (or 8 0-0 i.g4 9 tLle4)
meet, given that 7 ... tLlas ? run s into 8 8 ... ii.b6 9 0-0 - compare Oratovsky­
'i'bS+. If Black plays 7 ... i.e6, White can Gozzoli (Game 13 ) .
safely grab the pawn with 8 'ii'xb7. The most common choice for White
Black still has problems with his cS­ here is actually 6 0-0, indicating a de­
bishop (8 ... tLlce7 and 8 ... tLlas both lose sire to play the Classical Main Line seen
to 9 'iYh S +), and if 8 . . tLlde7 there fol­
. in Chapter Three (for example, after
lows 9 'iVbs i.xC4 10 �xc4 and White i s 6 ... d6 7 i.b3 a6). But what happen s if
simply a pawn u p for nothing. Bl ack insists upon 6 ... dS here?
6 b4! ? (see following diagram)
This move isn't an attempt to win a
pawn with b S . In stead the idea i s to
force Black's bishop to m ake a decision
and to g ain some space on the queen­
side. The b2-b4 advance nearly always
makes more sense if Black hasn't yet
played ... a6 allowing the bishop to drop
back to a7 in one go. One thing White
has to bear in mind when advancing
with b4 and a4 is th at queen side cas-

65
Beating 1 e4 eS
You would assume that it would be
somewhat risky, given th at White
hasn't spent any time on .i.b3 or h 2-h 3,
but that doesn't seem to be the case
and it's noticeable th at some very
strong players have tried thi s recently.
It's early days, but I think a critical line
is 7 exds liJxds 8 l1el (8 b4 .i.e7 trans­
poses to 6 ... i.e7 in the next note, while
if 8 ... i.b6 ? White can pl ay 9 i.xds
'ifxds 10 c4 and 11 cS trapping the
bishop) 8 ... i.g4 9 h 3 i.h s 10 liJbd2 (10
g4 i.g6 1 1 liJxe s liJxes 12 l:txe s c6 is
playable, but it does give Black con sid­
erable compen sation for the pawn)
10 ... liJb6 ! (10 ... liJf4?! 11 liJe4! .i.e7 12
liJg 3 i s good for White) 1 1 b4! ? (11 i.bs
i.d6 h as proved to be acceptable for
Black: for example, 1 2 liJe4 fS 1 3 liJg 3
i.xf3 14 ..wxf3 ..wd7, Ni Hua­
P.Harikrishn a, Reggio Emilia 2007)
11.. . .i.d6 (11 ...liJxc4? 1 2 liJxC4 leaves e S ­
hanging) 12 i.b3 �h 8 1 3 liJe4 f6 14 a4
and White is slightly the m ore active,
D.Vocaturo-M.Godena, Sarre 2009.
It will be interesting to see how thi s
rel atively fresh l i n e progresses. If White
wants to prevent or discourage ... dS
and is h appy to play the Classical Main
Line with 0-0, he could try the m ove
order 4 d3 liJf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 ]:tel; or 6 h 3
intending 6 ... d S 7 exds liJxdS 8 1:el
tran sposing to Emms-Wittman (Game
34); or fin ally 6 i.b3 ! ? as suggested by
Kinderm ann .
6 ... i. b6
This i s the most n atural retreat, and
al so by far the most popul ar, but
66
6 ... i.e7 ! ? i sn 't silly. White should avoid
the greedy 7 b S ? ! liJas 8 liJxe s, as
8 ... liJxC4! 9 liJxC4 dS 10 liJcd2 (or 10
exds 'iWxds hittin g g 2 and b S ) 10 ... dxe4
ll liJxe4 a6 12 bxa6 .l:txa6, as played in
S.Vysochin-M.Godena, Internet 2008,
gives Bl ack excellent compen sation .
After the wiser 7 0-0 dS ! ? 8 exds
liJxdS, the idea is that White's weak­
nesses on the queen side created by the
b-pawn 's advance compen sate Bl ack
for the problems he experiences de­
fendin g e s . The critical line seem s to be
9 b s liJas
10 i.xdS ! (rather than 10 liJxe s i.f6,
again with good compensation for
Bl ack) 10 .. :ii'xds 1 1 c4. For example,
11..:iVd8 12 i.d2 ! (12 i.b2 e4! ) 12 ... b6
1 3 liJxe s i.f6 14 i.xas bxas 15 d4 i.xes
16 dxe s i.e6 17 liJa3 and White was
better in W.spoelman - I . Kurnosov,
Budva 2009; or 11...'iWe6 12 %:tel f6 13
i.d2 b6 14 i.xas bxas 1 5 liJd4 ! ? 'ilVd7
16 liJc6 a6 with an unclear position,
S.Tiviakov-L. Babujian, Mashhad 2010.
Thi s line could certainly do with further
tests.
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
7 a4 a 6
If 7 ... as, White can safely grab the
es-pawn : 8 b S t'iJe7 9 t'iJxe s ! dS 10 exds
t'iJg6 1 1 t'iJxg 6 lle8+ 12 'itJlfl hxg6 13
i.g s 'ifd6 14 .Jtxf6 'ifxf6 15 d4 11e4 16
t'iJd2 :f4 17 f3 with some advantage
for White, A.G alliam ova-E.Vasiukov,
Moscow 1989. True, White's king isn't
ideally placed, but Bl ack's dark-squared
bishop is shut out and two extra pawn s
have to be worth something.
8 i. g5
Now that Black can no longer unpin
with ... .Jte7, thi s m ove becomes much
more desirable.
A typical continuation after 8 0-0 is
8 d6 (or 8 ... dS 9 exds t'iJxds 10 'ifb3
...
lLlf6 1 1 t'iJg s 'iWe8, B.Gelfand-A.Shirov,
Munich 1993, and here Gelfand sug­
gests 12 .Jte3 with an edge for White) 9
lLlbd2 t'iJe7 10 .Jtb3 (intending t'iJC4 to
hit the b6-bishop) 10 ... t'iJg 6 11 t'iJc4 .Jta7
12 .i.e3 .i.e6 13 .i.xa7 ]:txa7 14 ]::t e l lIa8
with a roughly level position .
8 d6 9 t'iJbd2 'ife7
...
Planning to deal with the pin by
playing ... t'iJd8-e6. Black does some-
thing similar in a m ain line of the Four
Knights G ame. There it even h as a
n ame, 'the Metger unpin'.
If 9 ... h 6 10 .i.h4 gs then 1 1 .i.g3 i s of
course okay, but 11 t'iJxg S ! ? hxg s 1 2
.i.xg s would be hugely tempting (com­
pare Emms-Flear, G am e 11).
10 0-0!
White is wise to castl e kingside
here, especially with the queenside
pawn s well advanced. Moreover, if
White doesn 't pl ay 10 t'iJfl, there's no
ch ance of falling for a very nice trick. I
was considering the variation 10 ... h 6
1 1 .i.h4 g s (11 . . ..Jte6, planning a n ex­
change of bishops followed by ... 'ife6,
looks fine for Bl ack) 12 t'iJxg S ? hxg s 1 3
.i.xg s which a t first seemed fairly
promising for White. It would be, but
for 13 ... t'iJxe4! ! 14 .i.xe7 .i.xf2+ 1 5 'itJle2
.Jtg4, which i s m ate for Bl ack!
Please watch out for this one !
10 t'iJd8
•••
10 ... h6 11 i.h4 and only now
11...t'iJd8 avoids t'iJh4 and forces White
to find another plan. On the other hand,
...t'iJe6 no longer comes with tempo. In
67
Beating 1 e4 e5
L.Yudasin-R.Hess, New York 2004, White
sensibly chose to start action in the cen­
tre: 12 as i.. a 7 13 d4 (now ... lDe6 would
drop the e-pawn) 13 ... exd4 14 lDxd4 (14
cxd4 is also interesting, intending
14...lDc6 15 e S dxes 16 dxes lDxes 17
lIel lDxf3+ 18 'ii'xf3 with play for the
pawn) 14 ... lDc6 15 lDfS ! ? (I prefer
White's position after 15 lDxc6 bxc6 16
'ili'f3 - a6 is a constant worry for Black)
lS ... i.. xfS 16 exfs lite8 17 'iVc2 l:iad8 18
b S ! ? dS? (I'm not sure why Black avoided
the straightforward 18 ... lDes ! ) 19 bxc6
dXc4 20 cxb7 'iVe2 21 .l:.a2 'ii'd 3 22 lDf3
and White had a clear plus.
l1 lDh4!
The right idea, interferin g with
Black's unpinning plan . Flicking in 11
as i.. a 7 before pl aying 12 lDh4 i s al so
good.
Any quiet move, like 11 l:tel, allows
11 ... lDe6 and after 12 i..h 4 Bl ack could
even just pl ay 12 ... h 6 followed by
... lDf4-g 6 to fin ally break the pin . 1 1 d4
lDe6 would al so be fine for Bl ack.
11 ••• lDe6 12 lDfS 'iWd 8 1 3 i.. h 4 lDf4
Moving thi s knight to g 6 i s the right
68
plan, but Bl ack could con sider 13 ... aS
14 bS and only then 14 ... lDf4. Judging
by what happen s l ater, thi s in sertion of
pawn s moves which gives Bl ack more
control of cS might be a good idea.
14 lDe3 !
H eading for d S .
1 4... lDg6 1 5 i.. g s h 6 1 6 i.. xf6 'iVxf6 17
lDd S 'iVd8 18 lDxb6 cxb6 19 g 3 !
Restricting the knight on g 6 .
19 ... i.. h 3 20 .l:.e1
Initially I h ad no idea why White in­
duced ... h6 in stead of just pl aying 15
i.. xf6, but m aybe it's because Bl ack
now h as to watch out for 'ii'h s ideas
attacking g6 and h 3 .
20 i.. e 6 2 1 'iVb3 i.. x C4 2 2 lDxC4 d S 2 3
.•.
lDe3 dxe4 24 dxe4
I didn 't like Black's plan of exchang­
ing bishops (20 ... 'ii'g s looked less ac­
commodating) and White enjoys a sig­
nificant advantage now. His structure
is healthier and his knight, eyeing out­
posts on fS and dS, is clearly stronger
than its counterpart.
24 ... ':c8 2 5 l:.adl 'iVe7 2 6 ':d 3 l:.fd8 2 7
l:ted1 l:txd 3 2 8 l:txd 3 : d 8 29 lDd S 'iVe6
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
30 �d1 Wh8 3 1 b5 axb5 3 2 axb5 :d6
33 c4 ttlf8? 34 'iVa 1 ! ttld7
3 5 IIa 3 ?
Missing a big chance: 3 S ifa8+ ! Wh 7
36 'iVd8 ! threaten s a devastating 3 7
0,e7. Black i s forced t o pl ay 3 6 . . .ttlcS
but then 37 ttlf6+ 'iVxf6 3 8 .l:!.xd6 win s
the exch ange.
3 5 . . .ttl C 5 3 6 f 3 W h 7 3 7 :a8 f5 !
Now Black i s right back in the g ame.
3 8 exf5 'iVxf5 3 9 :a3 'iV c 2 40 ': C 3 'iVe2
41 'iVf1 �d2 42 �C1 �XC1+ 43 .l:!.xc1 e4
44 fxe4 Yz-Yz
In the final two g ames we con sider
lines where Black dispen ses with the
modern treatment and del ays or avoids
... 1i.a7, or even ... a6. These lines coul d
be con sidered as 'older' but they are
still very popul ar at all level s.
Game 1 6
J.M.Degraeve-J.Dorfma n
French League 2007
1 e4 e 5 2 ttlf3 ttlc6 3 1i.C4 1i.C5 4 c3 ttlf6
5 d 3 a6
The move order S ... d6 6 i.b3 a6 is
just as likely.
6 JLb3 d6
Black forgoes the possibility of ... dS
in one move, but commits neither his
king nor his dark-squared bishop. There
are m any possibilities for tran sposi­
tion s into lines we've already covered,
since Black often plays ... iJ.. a 7 at some
point. Here I'll focus m ainly on lines
where Bl ack del ays or avoids thi s move.
7 ttlbd2
N aturally White can play 7 h3 (or 7
0-0 of course), with a likely tran sposi ­
tion to m ain lines, but here he decides
to pl ay the ttld2-fl-g 3 m anoeuvre as
quickly as possible.
7 . 0-0
..
7 ... iJ.. a 7 tran sposes to the note to
Bl ack's 7th move in Emms-Flear (Game
11).
8 ttlf1 ! ?
A bold move, invitin g Black to play
... ttlg4. If he doesn't, White will just
carry on with ttlg 3 and there may be
some advantages to delaying h 2-h 3 .
69
Beating 1 e4 e5
S ••. dS
A s we've seen before o n more than
one occasion, thi s is the n atural re­
spon se to ttJf1. Alternatively:
a) The critical continuation i s
8 ... ttJg4 ! ? 9 d4! ? (9 ttJ e 3 ttJxe3 10 �xe3
is just equal) 9 ... exd4 10 cxd4 and now:
al) 10 ... ttJxd4 ! ? i s dangerous and
unclear, but White h as good chances to
emerge un scathed and with some ad­
vantage: 11 ttJxd4 'tWh4 (or 11 ... :e8 1 2
ttJ e 3 :xe4 1 3 ttJf3 �xe3 1 4 fxe 3 ttJxe3
15 �xe3 l:txe3 + 16 'iiif 2) 12 ttJg 3 'iVf6 13
�e3 ttJxe3 14 fxe3 �b4+ 1 5 'iii e 2 �g4+
16 ttJf3 'iVxb2+ 1 7 'iVc2 etc.
a2) 10 ...�b4+ 1 1 �d2 .:te8 (or
1 1 .. :ii'e 7 1 2 ttJg 3 ttJf6 1 3 �xb4 ttJxb4 14
0-0 �g4 15 h3 �xf3 16 'iVxf3 with a
clear plus for White, G .5ax-F. Berkes,
Hun g arian League 2003) 12 ttJg 3
�xd2+ 1 3 ii'xd2 ttJf6 (or 1 3 ... dS 14 e S f6
1 5 h 3 ttJh 6 16 O-O-O ! ?) 14 O-O! (9 d4
would be totally unplayable without
thi s resource) 14 ... ttJxe4 (otherwi se
White's centre gives him an edge) 1 5
ttJxe4 l:1xe4 16 �xf7+! 'iiih 8 1 7 l:tfel (17
d S ! intending 1 7 ... ttJes 18 ttJg s :g4 19
70
f4 looks even more promising)
1 7 ... :xe1+ 18 l:txel �d7 19 dS with an
obvious advantage for White, G.Zentai­
K.Valko, Hungarian League 2003.
8 ...ttJg4 9 d4 has h ad little practical
testing so far, so it's difficult to m ake a
definitive assessment. The signs are
looking quite promising for White,
though. And as a back up, there's al­
ways 7 h 3 !
b ) 8 ... �e6 9 ttJg 3 ( 9 �g S ! ?) 9 ... h 6 and
now:
bl) 10 h3 dS 11 'iWe2 :e8 12 ttJh 2 ! ?
ii'd7 13 ii'f3 is similar t o positions we've
seen before, but here Black can utilize
the fact that his dark-squared bishop
isn't committed to a7 - it might instead
drop back to defend on the kingside. For
example, 13 .. J:tad8 (13 ... as ! ?) 14 �C2 bS
15 0-0 �e7! ? 16 %tel ttJh 7 and Black was
solidly placed in M. Kobalija-E. Inarkiev,
Ramenskoe 2006.
b2) 10 0-0 �a7 11 h3 (11 �C2 ! ?)
1 1 ... dS 12 'iVe2 dxe4 (12 .. J:te8 tran s­
poses to the note on 10 ... .:te8 in Tivia­
kov-Buhmann, Game 5) 13 dxe4 �xb3
14 axb3 'iVd6 15 ttJfS 'iVe6,
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part 1 /)
and h ere 16 .i.xh 6 ! ? i s interesti n g :
1 6 ... g xh 6 17 lDxh 6+ <&th 8 18 lDg 5 'ife8
19 'iff3 lDh 7 20 'ifh 5 f6 2 1 lDhf7+ l:txf7
22 lDxf7+ c;t;>g 7 2 3 1i'h 6+ c;t;>xf7 24
"i'xh 7+ c;t;>e6 2 5 'ii'x c7 and White was on
top in L.Ruan-Y.Shen, Beijing 2009.
Black might h ave better ways to de­
fend here, but it seem s wise not to al­
low thi s sacrifice. 14 ... 'iVd7 1 5 lDf5 'iiJlh 7,
as in I . N epomniachtchi-Z.Al m asi, Dres­
den 2007, looks safer, and Black was
just about holding his own after 16
.!:tdl 'ife6 17 .i.g 5 ! l:tad8 18 b4 .i.b6 ! .
9 exd 5 ! ?
Chess i s not a n easy g am e ! I freely
admit that previously I 've questioned
the strategy of combining the lDd2-fl­
g 3 m an oeuvre with exd5. Maybe I 'll try
to justify thi s as the exception which
proves the rule. Or m aybe White's case
is helped by the fact th at, with the
omission of h 2-h 3 , his development i s a
bit quicker th an usual .
9 'ife2 .i.e6 i s similar to note 'bl'
above.
9 lDxd 5 10 lDg3
•••
10 lDf6
•••
There are some decent altern atives
for Bl ack here:
a) 10 .. .f6 followed by ... .i.e6 and
... c;t;>h 8 i s wh at I 've suggested for Black
in similar position s. In thi s particular
situation, though, White has just
enough time after 11 0-0 .i.e6 (if
11 ... c;t;>h 8, White should play 12 l:Iel
discouraging ... .i.e6 in view of d3-d4) to
get in the desirable 12 .i.e3 ! .
Thi s m akes at least some difference:
1 2 ... .i.e7 ! ? (12 ... .i.a7 ? ! 1 3 .i.xa7 ! l:!.xa7
14 d4 exd4 1 5 lDxd4 is the kind of posi­
tion that Black must avoid; or 12 ... .i.xe3
1 3 fxe3 'iiJlh 8 14 'iVd2 and White will
push with d4) 1 3 d4! c;t;>h 8 14 dxe 5
lDxe3 1 5 fxe 3 'ifxdl 16 l:!.axdl .i.xb3 1 7
axb3 .i.C5 18 c;t;>f2 ltae8 (18 . . .lDxe5 19
lDxe 5 fxe5+ 20 <&te2 i s better for White;
his king i s well placed and the knight
will come to e4) 19 b4 iLb6 20 :d5 lDe7
(or 20 ... lDxe5 21 lDxe5 l:[xe 5 2 2 l:[xe5
fxe5+ 23 c;t;>e2 l:txfl 24 lDxfl followed by
c;t;>d3-e4) 2 1 l:d7 lDg6 2 2 c4 fxe5
(V.Mal akhov-V.Georgiev, Solin 2006)
and now 23 c;t;>e2 e4 24 lDg 5 ':'xfl 2 5
lDxfl would h ave kept an advantage.
71
Beating 1 e4 e5
b) 10 ... h6 11 0-0 l::t e S (ll ... liJf6 trans­
poses to the main game) 12 liJe4 ! ?
ii.e7 ! (if 12 . . . .i.fS o r 12 ... .i.a7 you have
to remember the standard trick 1 3
ii.xh 6 ! ) 1 3 .:r e l .i. e 6 1 4 liJg 3 ii. c s was
equal in S. Kudrin-M. Khachiyan, Las Ve­
gas 2006. White could con sider 14 h 3 ! ?
in stead of 14 liJg 3, and i f 1 4.. :i!t'd7 then
15 liJg 3 .i.d6 16 liJh S ! ? and possibly d3-
d4.
c) 10 ...liJf4 11 ii.xf4 exf4 12 liJe4
.i.e7 (after 12 ... .i.b6 13 0-0 the bishop i s
once again in danger o f being blocked
out by d4) 13 0-0 ii.g4 14 d4 planning
"iVd3 . White's strong centre promises
him an edge here.
11 0-0 h 6
Preparing ...l:.eS, which at the mo­
ment would be strongly met by 12
liJg s ! .
12 .i.e3 1
Ag ain we see thi s move, and it's the
only one here which allows White to
fight for an advantage. Bl ack must
m ake some kind of concession . Either
he must spend time safeguarding his
bishop or, as chosen in the g ame, ex-
72
change on e3 thereby strengthening
White's pawn structure and opening
the f-file.
12 .•. ii.xe 3
If 12 ... .i.d6, 1 3 liJh4 ! ? aim s for f2-f4
- White doesn't always have to play
l:[el ! Thi s plan worked to perfection in
T.Gharamian- D.Marholev, La Fere 200S:
1 3 ... ii.g4 (13 .. .l::t e S ! ?) 14 'ilVd2 ! (lining up
.i.xh 6 possibilities) 14 ... liJe4?! (14 ... liJas
15 ii.c2 .:reS 16 liJhfs .i.fS 1 7 b4, with
an edge for White) 15 liJxe4 'iVxh4 16
f4! liJe7? 17 liJxd6 cxd6 lS fxe s dxe s 19
.i.cs l:.aeS 20 l:tael 'tWh s 2 1 d4, when
Black was tied up in knots and saw no
reason to continue the struggle. Admit­
tedly thi s was poor defence by Black,
but even so White's pl an looks promis­
ing.
1 3 fxe3 l:[ e 8 14 liJh41
I prefer White here. At th e very least
his position is the easier to play.
14 ... .i.e6 l s liJhfs ii.xb3 16 Vxb3 l::t e 61
16 .. :ikxd3 1 7 liJxh 6+ i s good for
White.
There's not enough time for
16 .. J�bS?, which i s m et by 1 7 liJxg 7 !
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
'iii' x g 7 18 l::t xf6 ! 'iit xf6 (or 18 .. .'ii' xf6 19
ttJh 5+) 19 l::tf l+ 'iit g 7 20 'i!Vxf7+ 'iith 8 21
.uf6, winning.
17 'iVxb 7 ! ?
Bold pl ay by Degraeve, and he i s in­
stantly rewarded.
17 ... l:ta7?
Thi s looks like a critical mistake.
True, Black reg ains his pawn, but only
at a cost of losing coordination .
If 17 .. J:tb8 18 'i¥xa6 and Black
doesn't h ave an effective discovered
attack again st the queen. Or 17 ... g6 18
lLlxh 6+ 'iit g 7 19 ltJxf7 ! 'iit xf7 20 ltJe4, and
White threatens ltJg 5+. However, after
17 ... 'iith 7 ! preparing ... g6 the position i s
still very unclear.
18 'iVb3 'iWxd 3 19 l::t a dl 'ifbs 20 'iVc2 !
White certainly isn't about t o ease
Black's position by exchanging queen s.
20 ...l:.b7?
.
Black h ad to play 20 ... 'iWC4 prevent­
ing White's next move.
2 1 ltJe4!
Threatening 22 ltJxh 6+.
2 1 ...ltJe8
If 21 ... ltJxe4 22 'iWxe4 and l::t d 7 i s
coming. Black's can 't pl ay 2 2 ... 'i!Vxb2
because of 2 3 l:tbl.
2 2 'iVf2 !
Again the threat i s 2 3 ltJxh 6+. Black
tries to prevent it with ...
2 2 . . .'it>h7
2 3 ltJxh6! 1-0
... but it happen s anyway! Dorfman
resigned in view of the following lines:
2 3 ... 'iit xh 6 24 'i¥h4+ 'iit g 6 2 5 g4 (threat­
ening m ate on h 5) 25 ... ltJf6 26 J:[f5
ltJxe4 27 'iWh 5 mate; 23 ... gxh6 24 'i¥xf7+
ltJg 7 2 5 l::t d 7 l::t g 6 26 ltJf6+; or finally,
23 ... :txh 6 24 ltJg 5+ 'iith 8 25 'i!Vxf7 with
m ate to follow.
Game 1 7
S.E renbu rg-M.Kreizberg
Tel Aviv 2002
1 e4 e S 2 ttJf3 ltJc6 3 .i.C4 .i.cs 4 c3 ltJf6
S d3 d6
5 ... d6 i s still a very popul ar move or­
der for Black, especially at club level .
Again transposition s are frequent,
since Black typically pl ays ... a6 at some
73
Beating 1 e4 e5
point. In this game I 'll focus on lines
where he doesn't.
6 �b3 h6
Black has quite a few alternatives:
a) What should White play ag ain st
6 ... 0-0? Hopefully 7 �g S ! should be an
automatic reaction by now! Play i s
similar to Tiviakov- El Taher (Game 10)
and in fact a tran sposition is possible
after 7 ... �e6 8 ttJbd2 a6 9 h3 �a7 10
ttJh 2 h 6 11 �h4.
b) 6 ... �e6 can be m et by 7 0-0, 7
ttJbd2, 7 �C2 or even 7 �a4! ?, exploit­
ing the fact that there is no ... bS avail­
able for Bl ack. There's al so the possibil­
ity of 7 ttJg S ! ?,
74
which works because 7 ... �xb3 8
�xb3 win s a pawn. True, Bl ack gets
some compen sation, but it's not totally
convincing : after 8 ... 0-0 9 �xb7 'it'd7 10
0-0 iLb6 11 �a6 ttJe7 12 ttJd2 h6 13
ttJgf3 ttJg 6 14 ttJC4 'iVe6 15 'iVa4 ttJh S 16
'fWdl, as played in S.Tiviakov-S.sul ski s,
I stanbul 2003, White must be a bit bet­
ter.
Black can avoid the pawn loss with
7 ... dS 8 ttJxe6 fxe6 9 ttJd2 0-0 10 0-0, as
indicated by Lukacs, when we reach a
position of dynamic imbal ance. Bl ack's
light-squared control and pawn struc­
ture h as been compromi sed, and White
h as the bishop pair. But Black enjoys
some central control and can seek ac­
tion down the open f-file. If pushed, I
think I prefer White because there's
more scope for improvement in his po­
sition, and if Black releases the ten sion
in the centre it i s likely to expose his
structural weaknesses. One possible
continuation from here would be
10 ... Vie7 11 "iYe2 Wh 8 12 ttJf3 l:tad8 13
.lta4 .ltd6 14 .l:!.el.
c) 6 ... iLg4? ! , either here or in m any
other similar positions, is a m ove you
are likely to m eet quite often when fac­
ing less experienced players.
One of the key advantages for
White i s that while iLg s i s nearly al­
ways a concern for Black, ... iLg4 gener­
ally causes White no problem s at all ; in
fact he positively welcomes the m ove !
Why i s thi s so?
1. With the c3 -pawn covering d4,
Bl ack is n ever in a position to increase
 Italian Game : Modern Variation (Part / I)

the pressure on the pin with ... ttJd4. h4! h 5 (or 1 5 ... h 6 16 h 5 �h 7 17 g 5 1) 16
2. ttJbd2 reinforces the defence of ttJg 5 !
the f3-knight, but more importantly
White h as the basic plan (after h 2-h 3
and ... �h 5) of ttJfl-g 3 . Thi s forces Black
to either spend tim e safeguarding his
light-squared bishop or agree to an
undesirable exch ange. In effect, White
can use Black's bishop as a hook to g ain
momentum on the kin gside.
I noticed a number of Kasparov
games from simultaneous displays
with his opponents choosing 6 ... �g4.
They were all wins, with the longest 16 .. .'ilVe7 (16 ... hxg4 1 7 h 5 �h 7 1 8 h 6
game l asting just 34 moves ! i s very strong) 1 7 g xh 5 �h 7 1 8 1:[g l
..ti>h 8 19 ttJxh 7 ..ti>xh 7 20 'ii'g 4 'ii'f6 2 1
':'g 2 g 6 2 2 �xf7 ! and 1-0, A. Kofidis­
S.Beshukov, Greece 199 5 . It's not easy
defendin g again st thi s type of attack,
whether you are an am ateur facing the
mighty Kasparov, or a grandmaster
with a rating of 2 500!
d) Finally, there's the solid option of
6 ... �b6.

Let's see how White shoul d proceed:

7 h3 �h 5 8 ttJbd2 0-0 9 'iVe2 d5 (passive
play i s likely to get crushed: 9 .. .'iIi'd7 10
g4! �g6 11 ttJf1 l:[fe8 12 ttJg 3 ttJe7 13
.1g 5 h6 14 �xf6 g xf6 15 0-0-0 l':ted8 16
ttJh4 �h 7 17 ttJh 5 'iVc6 18 ttJxf6+ �8
19 ttJxh 7+ 'iit g 7 20 g 5 'iit xh 7 2 1 'iVh 5
ttJg 8 2 2 'ii'xf7+ 'iith 8 2 3 ttJg6 m ate,
G.Kasparov-B.Guillot, Besancon 1999)
10 ttJfl dxe4 1 1 dxe4 �g6 (if 1 1 ... h 6, 12 Thi s is typical prophyl axis against
ttJg 3 �g6 1 3 ttJh4 gains m ore time) 1 2 d3-d4 and i s usually combined with the
ttJ g 3 ttJh 5 1 3 ttJxh 5 �xh 5 14 g4 �g6 1 5 m anoeuvre ... ttJe7-g 6. Compared to the

75
Beating 1 e4 e5
... a6 and ... i.. a 7 plan, Bl ack is saving a
tempo. What's more, if White castl es,
pl ays i.. e 3 and exchanges bishops,
Black i s happier to recapture with the
a-pawn rather than having to play
... .l:.xa7.
The 'only' problem for Black i s that
on b6, the bishop cannot escape cap­
ture if White pl ays liJd2-C4. It therefore
makes sen se for White to choose thi s
plan, and this gives h i m good chances
of gaining an edge. For example, 7
liJbd2 ! liJe7 (7 ... 0-0 i s al so met by 8
liJc4) 8 liJc4 liJg6 9 0-0 0-0 10 h 3 h 6 1 1
l:t e l i.. e 6 12 d 4 i.. x c4 (12 .. .l::t e 8 1 3 ds ! ?
i.. d 7 1 4 a4 - Kramnik - i s a line which
demon strates why White isn't always
in a rush to trade on b6) 13 i.. x c4 exd4
14 cxd4 liJxe4 (or 14 ... ds 1 5 exds liJxds
16 i.. d 2 c6 17 'iVb3 "ifd7 18 a4 with an
edge - Kramnik) 15 i.. d s liJf6 16 i.. x b7
l:tb8 17 i.. c 6 and again White is slightly
better, D.Bojkov- K.Haznedaroglu, Is­
tanbul 2001.
7 liJbd 2
Now th at Bl ack h as pl ayed ... h 6 to
rule out i.. g s, there's no real need to
76
hold back with thi s any longer, espe­
cially if White is pl anning on delaying
castling in favour of liJfl-g 3 etc.
On the other hand, it's worth re­
membering that in nearly all cases
White can revert back to the Cl assical
Main Line by castling at any stage. If,
for example, White plays 7 0-0 here or
on the next move, Black might be
'tricked' into a line where he i s commit­
ted to ... h6; a perfectly respectable line,
but not necessarily one he would have
chosen h ad White castled earlier. For
example, here 7 ... 0-0 8 liJbd2 a6 9 ':'el
i.. a 7 10 h3 would tran spose to G ames
18 and 21. Moreover, the m ove order
chosen here mean s that White even
h as the option of playing 10 liJfl and
delaying h 3 - 10 ... liJg4 achieves noth­
ing after 11 d4! . See al so Bron stein­
Ivkov (G am e 28), where Bl ack delays
... i.. a 7.
7 ... 0-0 8 h 3 liJ h S I ?
Aiming for ... liJf4 and ... "iff6, which
i s one of Bl ack's m ain plan s in the Cl as­
sical Main Line (see Game 18).
8 ... i.. e 6 is, as usual, a solid option
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
for Black. If White wants to avoid cas­
tling, transposing to the Classical Main
line, he can try one of the followin g :
a } I f 9 li'lfl ds 1 0 'iie 2 Black can try
to utilize the tempi g ained avoidin g
... a6 and ... i.a7: 10 ... li'las ! ? (or 10 ... as ! ?)
11 i.xds ! (White h as to improvise,
since the autopilot respon se 1 1 i.C2 ?
allows 1 1 ... dxe4 1 2 dxe4 i.C4! which i s
embarrassing) 1 1 ... i.xds 1 2 exds li'lxds
13 li'lg 3 li'lf4 ! ? 14 i.xf4 exf4 1 5 li'le4 l:te8
16 b4 i.b6 1 7 bxas i.xas 18 0-0 fs 19
'ii'c 2 fxe4 20 dxe4 i.b6 2 1 Iladl "fiIe7 22
es J:[ad8 2 3 "ife4 J:[xdl 24 l:.xdl 'iVcs 25
'ii'g 6 iVxf2+?? 2 6 'iith l and Black re­
signed in I . N epomniachtchi-E.5utovsky
Netanya (rapid) 2009, in view of
26 ... .l:tf8 2 7 .l:td7 'iif l+ 2 8 c;;t>h 2 with
mate on g 7 . A win for White, but over­
all thi s line looks quite unclear.
b} 9 i.c2 ds 10 "ife2 and now:
bl} 10 ... d4 1 1 li'lfl as 12 g4 a4 13
tiJg 3 with complex play.
b2} 10 .. Jle8 11 li'lf1 "ifd7 12 tiJg 3
b s ! ? and White should play 1 3 0-0 dxe4
14 tiJxe4 tiJxe4 15 "fiIxe4 with a roughly
equal position , since the typical 13
tiJh4?! allows a tactical trick with
13 ... dxe4 14 dxe4 i.C4 15 "iff3 li'lb4! .
9 d41?
White exploits tactics involving the
unprotected knight on h s (9 ... exd4 10
cxd4 li'lxd4 11 li'lxd4 i.xd4 12 'iVxh s)
but thi s advance in the centre i s quite
committal .
Another option worth con sidering
was 9 li'lfl iVf6 10 g 3 ! ?, preventing
...tiJf4 and leaving the knight poorly
placed, albeit at a cost of weakening
the king side. White can play i.e3, swap
off bishops and then aim for li'le3-
ds/g4 or li'lh4.
9 •.. i.b6 10 li'lC4
Eren burg suggests 10 0-0 here. If
Bl ack plays 10 .. :iVf6, 11 li'lC4! would
transpose to the g ame. I think 10 ... li'lf6 !
i s stronger, and the position looks
equal to me.
10 "fiIf6
•••
Black can, and probably should, play
10 ... exd4 11 tiJxb6 axb6 12 tiJxd4 (12
cxd4 li'lf6 leaves White struggling to
defend e4 properly) 12 ... li'lf6 1 3 f3, as
indicated by Erenburg . Here 13 ... ds
should equalize.
11 li'lxb6 axb6 12 0-0 tiJf4 1 3 'iit h 2
Superficially it looks like Bl ack is do­
ing pretty well. It seem s that with the
knight on f4 and the queen on f6 he
enjoys some pressure on the king side.
Black's position certainly isn't bad, but
perh aps a key point is that there are
more opportunities for improvement
in White's (for example, i.e3, tiJg l, g 2 -
g 3 and eventually f2-f4) and there's the
77
 Beating 1 e4 e5

long-term advantage of the bishop 'iVg 6+ 19 'it'f2 �xh 3 20 tiJxh 3 .l:i.xh 3 21

pair. Perhaps realizing this, Kreizberg 'it'e2 etc.
chooses to go for an adventurous at­
tack on White's king, but it proves to be
over-ambitious. Erenburg's preci se play
demonstrates both the resilience and
potential in White's position.

17 �xf4!
I can only think that Black forgot
thi s m ove was possible because White
h ad avoided it for so lon g .
17 .. JiVxf4+ 18 g3 "iVg4
1 3 ... .l:i.a S ! ? 14 �e3 exd4 The only other m ove to protect the
Committal, but con sistent with rook was 18 ... 'iig 5, but 19 f4 'iig 6 20 f5
Black's previous move. iVg 5 2 1 'Yi"f3 intending .i.dl is crushing.
1S cxd4 .l:i.hS 19 "iVxg4 �xg4 20 f4! �c8 2 1 fS !
There was still time to change tack
with 15 ... .l:i.e8 (Erenburg), but Black
wasn't going to back down .
16 tiJg1!
Bl ack was threatening the deadly
16 ... �xh 3 . Now 'Yi"f3 becomes an im­
portant resource for White in some
lines.
16 ...tiJe7?
Thi s m eets with a rather simple
refutation .
Rybka wants to play 16 ... .l:i.h4 in­ I bet by now the rook was wishing it
tending to an swer 1 7 g3 with 17 ... �g4. was back on the sleepy a8-square !
However, Bl ack's attack h as a desperate 2 1 ... d S 2 2 �d1 1-0
look to it after 17 f3 : for example, If 22 ... :g 5 , 23 h4 puts the rook out
17 ... .l:i.h 5 18 iVd2, or 17 ... tiJxg 2 18 'it'xg 2 of its misery.

78
 Italian Game: Modern Variation (Part / I)
Key Notes
1. 7 ltJbd2 0-0 8 ltJC4 i s a tricky al­
ternative to the m ain line, especially
since Bl ack seems to get into diffi cul­
ties after 8 ... d6 (Gam e 11), which i s his
most n atural reaction . 8 ... dS (Game 12)
looks like a wi ser choice.
2. The i.. g s pin can be a very power­
ful weapon when the circum stances
are favourable, for example in Games
11 and is. The pin i s not quite so effec­
tive if Black still h as the option of
... i..c s-e7. The notes to Game 14 show
that Bl ack should be willing to break
the pin in thi s way, even though it's at
a cost of a tempo.
3 . If Black aim s for a very quick ... dS,
usually White should exchan g e pawn s
and execute Pl an B (see Game 14 and
some notes in G am e i s ) . Remember
that S ... dS? is too early and is an swered
by 6 exds ltJxdS 7 'iVh 3 ! .
4 . Executing th e ltJbd2-fl-g 3 ma­
noeuvre without a preparatory h 2-h 3
carries some risk, as Black always has
the possibility of meeting ltJfl with
... ltJg4 attackin g the f2-pawn. However,
as the notes to Games 11 and 16 dem­
on strate, White can sometimes an swer
... ltJg4 by playing d3-d4. lf you think the
resulting complication s favour White,
it might be worth tempting Black with
thi s option .
s . If Bl ack di spen ses with the
... a6/ ... i.. a 7 plan and in stead chooses
... i..b 6, the most natural reaction by
White i s to force a knight-for-bishop
exchange with ltJbd2-C4 (see Game 17,
note on 6 ... i..b 6).
6. Less experienced players are often
attracted by an early ... i.. g 4 pin . This
move causes White no problem s at all
and he should be happy to face it (see
Game 17, note on 6 ... i.. g 4).
79
 C h a pt e r T h r e e

Italian Game:
Classical Main Line

In thi s ch apter we'll con sider lines 1 e 4 e 5 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 .i.C4 .i. C 5 4 c3 ttJf6
where White castles early and develops 5 d 3 a6 6 0-0 d6 7 .i.b3 .i.a7
in a more tradition al styl e. I was
tempted to call it 'the old m ain line'
because thi s i s how White played when
th e Italian Game with c3 and d3 first
cam e to prominence back in the 1980s.
But despite a growing threat from the
modern lines di scussed in the previous
two ch apters, it rem ain s sufficiently
popul ar today not to be labelled with
'old'.
Simply put, White's prim ary pl an
after castling is to play l:.e1, h 3 , ttJbd2- Of course there are various oth er
f1-g 3 and th en, after all the necessary move orders here. For, example 6 .i.b3
preparation, advan ce with d3-d4. Of .i.a7 7 0-0 d6, or 6 0-0 .i.a7 7 .i.b3 d6.
course there are lines where Bl ack cuts Basically, White pl ays i.b3 fairly early
across thi s idea and White has to on for the usual reason- to avoid the
change course, but generally speaking possibility of ... ttJas forcing its ex­
thi s i s what he wants to do. ch ange.
S .l:te1
Let's take a brief look at the opening 8 ttJbd2 h as actually been White's
moves : most popular choice in practice, but I

80

prefer 8 l:tel. In m any cases the two
moves reach the same position, but 8
.l:r.el offers White more possibilities in
some of the key lines and al so cuts out
one or two option s for Bl ack. More to
the point, it's useful for White to main­
tain the possibility of ii.g s for as long
as possible.
8 0-0 9 h3
...
Thi s i s a key m ove. If White pl ays 9
tLlbd2 ? ! Bl ack can seize the initiative
with 9 ... tLlg4! 10 �e2 �h 8 ! and there's
no stopping .. .f5. Practice h as shown
that after 11 h3 lDh 6 12 lDfl f5 ! 1 3
i.xh 6 g x h 6 Black's activity and open
lines more than compen sate for the
structural damage to his kin g side, and
this i s a variation White needs to avoid
at all costs.
The position after 9 h3 i s a tabiya
for the Classical Main Line. It has pro­
vided the battleground for hundreds of
grandmaster g ames. As m entioned
above, next on the agenda for White is
ttJbd2-fl-g 3, and only then will he be­
gin to think about pushing with d3 -d4.
I n most circum stances it's a mi stake to
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
advance with d3 -d4 before the knight
m anoeuvre. Black would continue to
put pressure on the centre with m oves
like ... l:te8, and it would be difficult for
White to develop his queen side pieces
and protect both e4 and d4 at the same
time. Furthermore, releasing the ten­
sion in the centre with dxe 5 or d5 nor­
m ally only eases Black's position .
The resulting position s after 9 h 3
are covered i n the first five games of
the chapter. Th ere are three m ain op­
tion s for Bl ack here:
1. H e can execute the plan of ... lDh 5,
... 'iVf6 and ... lDf4. Thi s i s covered in
Frois-Korneev (Game 18).
2 . He can play ... �e6, with or with­
out ... h 6 first. This approach i s covered
in Games 19-21.
3 . H e can play 9 ... lDe7 followed by
... lDg6 (see Felg aer- Hector, G ame 2 2 ) .
The final s i x g ames o f this chapter
deal with earlier options for both play­
ers and al so some move-order issues.
Warakom ski-Bartel (Game 23), for ex­
ample, shows how White can come
un stuck if he doesn't pay enough at­
tention to these intricacies.
White's chief alternative to the
m ain line i s to choose a plan involving
�e3 (seejollowing diagram).
Thi s approach has been a favourite
of Tiviakov's. Objectively Black should
be okay but it's not particul arly easy to
meet for the un suspecting. It even
caused Anand problems when he faced
it (see G ames 24-25).
81
 Beating 1 e4 e 5
If Bl ack plays 7 ... 0-0 in stead of
7 ... i.. a 7, White has the interesting if
doubl e-edged possibility of 8 i.. g 5 ,
which i s covered i n Tiviakov-Pavasovic
(Game 26). After that we con sider
7 ... i.. g 4 in Kinderm ann-Dietmayer
Kraeut1er (Gam e 27), and fin ally lines
without ... a6 in Bron stein-Ivkov (Game
28). Note that 5 ... 0-0 6 0-0 has already
been covered in the notes to Nun ­
Spesny (Game 15).
Without further ado, let's move on
to the g ames:
Game 1 8
A.Frois-O.Korneev
Ma laga 2005
1 e4 e s 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 i.. C 4 i.. c S 4 c3 lLlf6
S d3 a6 6 0-0 d6 7 i.. b 3 i.. a 7 8 :e1 0-0 9
h3 h6
Black plan s aggressive action on the
king side with ... lLlh 5, .. :ikf6 and ... lLlf4.
Thi s i s an appealing option and it's no
surpri se th at it h as been Black's most
popular choice over the years.
82
9 ... h 6 i s a necessary precursor t o the
pl an, because the immediate 9 ... lLlh 5 is
met convincingly by 10 i.. g 5 ! forcing an
awkward queen move. After 10 .. :i¥e8, if
nothing el se there's 11 d4 (11 lLlh 2 ! ?)
11...h6 12 i.. e 3 and White coul d end up
a tempo ahead of the m ain lines:
12 ... 'i¥e7 1 3 lLlbd2 'iVf6 14 lLlfl lLlf4 15
lLlg 3 etc.
Thi s demonstrates one of the ad­
vantages of playing 8 .l:tel in stead of 8
lLlbd2 - the immediate 9 lLlh 5 i s a m a­
...
jor possibility for Black after 8 lLlbd2
0-0 9 h 3 .
1 0 lLlbd2 lLl h S 1 1 lLlf1
Note th at 11 lLlxe 5 ? ? is a blunder
because of 11...lLlxe 5 12 1Wxh 5 lLlxd3 or,
even worse, 11...'ifh4 ! .
11 .. :ikf6 12 i.. e 3 !
12 lLle3 i s al so possible, but the feel ­
ing i s that White's best chance of find­
ing an advantage lies with thi s offer to
trade the dark-squared bishops. How­
ever, it should be pointed out that
White's isn't always going to force the
exchange of these bishops. Indeed, if
Black avoids exchanging on e3, which

he tends to do in practice, White will
often play d3-d4. In thi s case, as we've
seen before, a significant part of
White's strategy is to block the a7-
bishop out of the action . What's m ore,
all the tim e White has the option to
exch ange bishops with dxe s followed
by �xa7, whereas Black doesn't. Thi s
tension i n the centre undoubtedly fa­
vours White.
1 2 .t'hf4
••
Occupying f4 straight away looks
attractive, and thi s is Black's most
popul ar choice here. However, worthy
alternatives do exist:
a) 12 ... il.xe3 i s committal but it does
at least cl arify the position to some
extent. If Black wants to exch ange on
e3, now i s probably the time to do so;
after ... tiJf4, any exch ange on e 3 only
encourages fxe 3 to force the knight to
retreat. White can recapture in either
way:
al) 13 tiJxe3 tiJf4 14 'it?h 2 (14 tiJds
lLlxds 1 5 exds tiJe7 16 d4 tiJg6 i s equal)
14 ... tiJe7 1 5 a4 il.e6 16 �xe6 fxe6 ? ! (af­
ter 16 ... tiJxe 6 ! - Karpov - the position i s
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
equal) 17 tiJg l ! . Thi s knight retreat i s
o n e point o f 1 4 'it>h 2; indeed it's a typi­
cal plan for White. The idea i s to kick
the knight back with g3 and slowly
m ake progress on the king side:
17 ...�ad8 18 g3 tiJfg 6 (now thi s knight
i s a poor piece, restricted by the pawn
on g 3 ) 19 l:tfl ds 20 'iWe2 tiJc6 21 tiJg 2
lif7 2 2 h4 �df8 2 3 �adl tiJge7
(A. Karpov-A.Yusupov, Bugojno 1986)
and here 24 f4! (Karpov) would h ave
m aintained an edge for White.
a2) 13 fxe 3 ! ? is perhaps more ch al ­
lenging.
Black can no longer carry out his
... tiJf4 plan and needs to regroup, while
White will begin action on the kin g ­
side: 1 3 ... 'i¥e7 (to give the knight a
square) 14 g4 tiJf6 1 5 tiJg 3 il.e6 16 d4
(I'd be tempted to hold the centre and
continue with 16 .:ttl ! ?, intending
16 ... ds 17 exds tiJxds 18 'iVe2) 16 ... il.d7 !
1 7 'iVe2 tiJh 7 18 'iVg 2 'it>h 8 19 �tl with
an unclear position, O.5vetushkin­
CMarcelin, Yerevan 1999. White i s the
more active but Black's position i s solid
enough.
83
Beating 1 e4 e5
b) 12 ... ltJe7 (providing reinforce­
ments for the king side) 13 d4 (13 �xa7
J:txa7 14 ltJe3 ltJf4 15 'it>h 2 :taS trans­
poses to note 'al', above) 1 3 ... ltJf4
(13 ... ltJg 6? fail s to the tactic 14 ltJxe s !
dxes 1 5 'iixh s, since l s . . . exd4 16 cxd4
�xd4? loses to 17 �xd4 'ifxd4 lS
'ii'x g6) 14 ltJg 3 ltJeg 6 15 �C2 ! .
The deci sion t o retreat the bishop
looks strange at first sight (how m any
times h ave I said that?), but it's actually
a strong move. Th e key idea for White
(see note 'b2') is to interfere with
Bl ack's king side action by playing ltJfs :
bl) l s ... ltJh4 16 ltJxh4 'ii'x h4 17 'iif3
g6 lS l:tadl �g 7 19 �b3 'iff6 20 �h 2
l:teS 2 1 l:td2 �e6 2 2 �xe6 (finally the
tim e i s right to release the ten sion)
2 2 .. J::t x e6 2 3 dxe s dxes 24 l:td7 �b6 2 5
Itedl and White's control of the d-file
g ave him the edge in L.Dominguez
Perez-V. Quezada Perez, H avana 200S.
b2) ls ... c6 16 ltJfs J:eS 17 ltJh 2 ! ? h s
l S �h l (planning g 3 ; returning with
lS ltJf3 ! ? now that g s has been weak­
ened m ay be stronger, and thi s posi­
tion looks a bit better for White)
84
lS ... dS ! 19 dxe s 'ii'g s (Rybka wants to
play 19 .. .llxes ! 20 �xa7 l:[xa7 2 1 'ifd4
b6 22 ii'xb6 l:tb7 2 3 Vxa6 llbS 24 ii'a4
l:txb2 with counterplay) 20 ltJg 3 ! h4? 21
ltJf3 "iWh 6 2 2 ltJfs (White i s already win­
ning here, but according to the data­
base there now came ... ) 2 2 ... 'ii'g S ? ? 23
ltJxg s and 1-0, Hou Vifan-W.spoelman,
Wijk aan Zee 2007.
c) 12 ... �e6 1 3 �c2 coul d easily
reach position s similar to those in note
'b' where White voluntarily plays �c2.
For example, 13 ... ltJf4 14 d4 ltJe7 15
ltJg 3 g s ! ? (lS ... ltJeg 6 is met by 16 ltJfS,
and l s ... g 6 by 16 ltJh 2 h s 17 Vd2) 16
ltJh 2 ! :fdS (A.Ol sson - K.On g , Gothen­
burg 2005) and here 17 ltJfS ! i s a good
m ove, because 17 ... ltJxfs i s m et by the
strong zwischenzug lS ltJg4 ! . Earlier, 13
�xa7 .l:!.xa7 14 ltJe3 ltJf4 15 ltJds and 13
d4 �xb3 14 axb3 are al so possible.
13 ltJg3
13 d4 is a good altern ative. Bl ack
usually m eets it with 1 3 ... ltJe7 which
tran sposes to 1 2 ... ltJe7, above.
After 1 3 ltJg 3, initially there appears
to be no danger at all for Bl ack, but

watch out for some hidden traps lurk­
ing in thi s position !
13 ... g6
Not the first idea you would think
of, but thi s pawn m ove i s almost a ne­
cessity!
The first thing to note i s that an in­
nocent move such as 1 3 ... ..ie6 can be
m et by 14 ..ixf4! (14 d4 i s also good),
when 14 ... 'iWxf4?? 15 lLlh s, trapping the
queen in mid-board, i s easy to miss.
(This expl ain s the reasoning behind
13 ... g 6.)
14 ... exf4? i s al so a mi stake, losing a
pawn after 1 5 lLlh s 'iVe7 (or l s ... 'ilVg 6 16
lDxf4 ..ixb3 17 'tWd2 ! 'iVg 3 18 d4) 16
lDxf4. The well -known Spanish grand­
master Vallejo Pon s once fell for this,
albeit in a blindfold game.
Actually, Black can escape real h arm
with 14 ... ..ixb 3 ! 15 axb3 exf4 intending
16 lLlh s 'iVg 6 17 lLlxf4 'ilVg 3 18 'ilVd2
i.xf2+ 19 'ilixf2 'ili'xf4. But 16 lLlfl ! fol­
lowed by d3-d4 allows White to achieve
his positional goal of blocking out the
a7-bishop, with some advantage.
13 ... lLle7 i s met by a similar re-
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
spon se: 14 ..ixf4! exf4 15 lLlh s 'ii'g 6 16
lLlxf4 'tWg 3 17 'tWd2 ..ixf2+ 18 'iWxf2
'iWxf4. Black h as regained his pawn, but
after 19 e s ! White stands better.
Perhaps the most important alter­
n ative for Black is 13 ... g s ! ?, further sup­
porting the strong knight and thus
eliminating any tricks. Bl ack will hope
to organize some action on the king­
side, but 1 3 ... g s does saddle him with
light-squared weaknesses which White
can justifiably expect to exploit after
the logical respon se 14 lLlh 2 ! .
White's long-term goal s are t o oc­
cupy the 'real outpost' on fs and to
force the f4-knight from its 'pseudo
outpost' with a timely g2-g3 advance.
For example, 14 ... 'iWg 6 1 5 d4 <bh 8 16
..ic2 lLle7 (or 16 .. .f6 17 lLlfs ! ..txfs 18
exfs 'ilVh s 19 lLlg4! �g 7 20 ..ib3 lLlas?
2 1 dxe s ! fxes, D.5vetushkin-K.Pilgaard,
Ubeda 1999, and here 22 ..ic2 intend­
ing ..ixf4, 'iWd3 and f6+ looks precarious
for Black) 17 'ilVf3 f6 18 �h l ..id7 19
.:tadl ..ic6 20 l:.d2 'ilVh 7 (Black is in no
position to pl ay 20 .. .fs ? - after 2 1 dxes
dxes 2 2 ..ixa7 ':xa7 2 3 'ilie3 ! J:.aa8 24
85
Beating 1 e4 e5
ttJf3 it's difficult for him to hold his po­
sition together) 21 b4 ttJeg 6 22 ttJf5
ttJe7 2 3 ttJxe7 'it'xe7 24 ttJfl ! (one knight
replaces the other) 24 ... �d7 25 ttJg 3
'iVh 7 2 6 ttJf5 :g8 (V.5ikul a- B.Marzolf,
Metz 2007) and here 2 7 �b3 l:[g6 2 8 g 3
ttJxh 3 29 'iig 4 is complicated but might
simply be good for White: 29 ... ttJf4 30
dxe 5 ! hS 3 1 'iid l iLxe3 3 2 fxe3 ! ttJh 3 33
exd6 h4 34 g4! etc.
14 d41
This move, blocking out the a7-
bishop, seem s to give Black the most
problems, certainly at least in practice.
14 ttJh 2 pl anning 'ii'f3 and/or ttJg4 is
a decent alternative, but White should
certainly avoid 14 iLxa7 ? ! l:txa7 when
there is no way to dislodge the f4-
knight for the foreseeable future. As a
rule of thumb, if White quickly ex­
chan g es on a7, the knight should go to
e3 rather than g 3 .
By pl aying 1 4 d4, White introduces
another positional threat which isn't
immediately apparent. Can you spot
what it is?
14 ... ttJas?1
86
An innocent-looking move like
14 ... �d7? allows White to carry out his
threat: 15 �xf4! 'ili'xf4 (if 15 ... exf4, 16
e 5 ! followed by ttJe4 is strong - thi s is a
reoccurring theme) 16 ttJf5 ! ! .
A bolt from the blue. Black was
probably feeling very comfortable, but
now his queen i s trapped in mid-board!
16 ... �xf5 (16 ... g xf5 is m et in the same
way) 17 g 3 ! 'iix e4 18 :xe4 �xe4 19
'iie 2 with a clear advantage for White,
G.Todorovic-M. Pavlovic, Belgrade 2009.
The g am e ended 19 ... �xf3 20 'iixf3
exd4 2 1 'iff6 �h 7 2 2 :el :g 8 2 3 �g2
dXc3 24 bxc3 ttJe 5 25 f4 ttJd7 2 6 'ife7
ttJC5 27 f5 and 1-0.
14 ... l:te8? m eets the same fate: 15
�xf4! 'it'xf4 (or 1 5 ... exf4 16 e 5 ! ) 16 ttJf5 !
�xf5 17 g 3 'ifxe4 18 l:[xe4 �xe4 19
ttJd2 �f5 20 g4! �d7 21 'it'f3 (Lukacs)
and again White is clearly better. N ote
that the trap only works once White
h as played d4; without thi s Black could
take the pawn on g 3 exploiting the pin
on the f-pawn .
There are a couple of moves Black
can play to avoid the trick, and these

represent his best option s :
a ) 14 ...tD e 7 ( s o that Black can m eet
15 .i.xf4 'ii'xf4 16 tDf5 with 16 ... tDxf5 ! ,
but with ... tDeg 6 no longer a n option,
it's not clear whether e7 i s such a good
square for thi s knight) 15 tDh 2 ( 1 5
'it>h l ! ?) 1 5 ... h 5 and now:
al) 16 ft'f3 �g 7 1 7 l:.adl l:th 8
(17 ... tDc6 ! ?) 18 tDe2 ! g 5 ! (if 18 ... tDxe2+
19 �xe2 followed by tDf3, when the g 5 -
square i s inviting) 19 dxe 5 dxe 5 was
D.Howell-Uoh annessen, Oslo 2008,
and here 20 tDxf4 g xf4 21 .i.xa7 l:txa7
22 'ii'd 3 tDg 6 23 tDf3 tDh4 24 l:.d2 looks
unclear.
a2) 16 'ii'd 2 ! ? is a promising altern a­
tive to 16 'iVf3 . If Bl ack carries on with
16 ... �g7, White can play 17 tDf3 ! in­
creasing the pressure on e 5 and f4.
The point is that 17 ... tDxh 3+? fails
here, to 18 g xh 3 ft'xf3 19 .i.dl ! 'ii'f6 20
.ig 5 ! 'ii'e 6 2 1 .ib3 �xh 3 2 2 .i.h 6+ �g 8
23 'ii'g 5 ! .
b ) 1 4...h 5 ! i s perhaps Black's best
move, and in all likelihood thi s limits
White to a small edge: 15 a4 (planning
to gain space on the queenside with as;
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
note th at 15 ..txf4 �xf4 16 tDf5 g xf5 17
g 3 no longer works - Black has sneakily
vacated the h6-square ! ) 15 ... a5
( 1 5 ... �g7 can be m et by 16 �d2 ! and
again 16 ... tDxh 3+? fails to 1 7 gxh 3 �xf3
18 .i.h 6+ Wg 8 19 �g 5 ! ) 16 .i.C4 tDe7 1 7
tDh 2 .i. e 6 18 .i.xe6 (thi s looks m ore
challenging to me th an 18 .i.a2 .i.xa2
19 .l:[xa2 c5, which l eft White's a2-rook
slightly misplaced in A. Delchev­
Z.Alm asi, Sibenik 2006) 18 ... tDxe6 (or
18 .. .fxe6 19 dxe 5 dxe 5 20 .i.xa7 ':'xa7
21 tDe2 ! tDc6 22 tDxf4 intending
2 2 ... exf4 2 3 e5 tDxe5 24 �d4 tDc6 25
'iYC4 .l:1e8 2 6 l:.e4) 19 tDf3 and the ten­
sion in the centre still favours White.
If 19 ... tDf4 20 'ii'd 2 ! tDxh 3 + 21 g xh 3
'iYxf3 2 2 .i.g 5 f6 2 3 .l:r.e3 ! and Black's
queen i s trapped.
15 .i.e2 !?
Even here White can pl ay 1 5 .i.xf4!,
although in thi s in stance the trick
doesn 't lead to quite such an over­
whelmingly favourable outcome:
1 5 ... �xf4 (15 ... exf4 i s once again m et
by 16 e 5 ! ) 16 tDf5 ! gxf5 17 g 3 'ii'x e4 18
l:txe4 fxe4 19 tDd2 with some advan -
87
Beating 1 e4 e5
tage for White, as indicated by Lukacs.
Frois decides th at the threat is
stronger th an the execution, and the
evidence from thi s g ame suggests he's
right!
1 5 ...ltJe4 16 i.e1
True, White h as been forced back­
wards temporarily, but Black's knight
on c4 i s on a poor circuit - it l acks pro­
tection and will soon be forced to re­
treat.
16 ... e 5 ? !
It becomes clear after thi s move
that Korneev was compl etely oblivious
to White's idea. That m akes it at the
minimum two experienced grandm as­
ters that h ave fallen for White's cleverly
concealed trick.
16 ... h S ! gives the queen the h6-
square ( compare 14 ... h S ) and keeps
Bl ack in the g ame. White m aintains
some advantage with 1 7 a4.
1 7 b3 ltJa 5 18 i.. xf4! 'it'xf4?
G ood or bad ( and it is probably bad) ,
Black h ad to allow 18 ... exf4 19 e s ! .
19 ltJf5 !
Thi s version of the trap i s simply
88
winning for White, who g ains the
queen in return for only two minor
pieces. Korneev battles on g amely but
the result was never seriously in doubt
from thi s moment.
19 ...i.xf5 20 g3 'it'xf3 21 'iVxf3 i.d7 22
dxe5 dxe 5 23 litad1 i.e6 24 .:td6 .:tae8
25 .:ted 1 i.b8 26 :6d2 ltJe6 27 c;tg2
c;tg7 2 8 i.d3 b 5 29 i.e2 b4 30 'iWe3 ':'e8
31 exb4 exb4 32 i.. d 3 i.n 33 'it'e1 ltJd4
34 i.xa 6 :e3 3 5 l:td 3 :e2 36 ':ld2 ':'e7
37 l:.b2 l:.b8 38 .:td1 ':'e3 39 %:te1 ltJf3 40
'it'd 1 ltJg5 41 h4 ltJxe4 42 i.e4 .l:.e8 43
':'xe3 bxe3 44 .:te2 i.xe4 45 bxe4 ltJd2
46 J:ixe 5 ':xe4 47 'iVe2 i.d4 48 :d 5 i.f6
49 I1d7 l:.b4 50 'ii'd 3 ltJe4 5 1 ':e7 ltJb6
52 'ii'd 6 l:tb5 53 'iWe6 1-0
It would be an understatement to
say th at the following encounter i sn 't a
g ood advert for the Italian G ame, but
the reason for its inclusion is to provide
a stark warning. Even though there's a
'system' feel to thi s opening, White
certainly cannot get away with pl aying
on auto-pilot. A pl an which works well
in a certain type of position might

backfire in those which contain seem­
ingly insignificant differences. In thi s
game, it b ackfires quite spectacul arly!
Game 19
D.Svetushkin-S.Haslinger
Pa l m a de Ma l lorca 2008
1 e4 e 5 2 lDf3 lDe6 3 ..te4 ..te5 4 e 3 lDf6
5 d3 a6 6 0-0 ..ta7 7 lIel 0-0 8 h 3 d6 9
.ib3 ..te6
Thi s bishop move needs no intro­
duction, as we've already seen it m any
times in similar positions. Korchnoi
chose ... ..te6 again st Karpov back in
1981 (with lDbd2 pl ayed in stead of
J:!.el), and more recently it h as been
favoured by grandm asters such as
Levon Aroni an and Vishy An and. Suf­
fice to say, it's reg arded as a reli able
choice for Bl ack.
Now White must m ake th at typical
deci sion again : does he allow an ex­
ch ange on b3 if Black wants it, or re­
treat the bishop to c2? Remember that
White needs to avoid 10 ..txe6? ! fxe6,
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
as thi s just gives Black an open f-file
and m ore control of the centre.
10 ..te2
Thi s i s definitely the m ost challen g ­
ing m ove.
Players who enjoy quiet positions
m ay want to choose 10 lDbd2, but ac­
curate play by Black in practice has
shown thi s to be fairly h armless. Let's
follow the g am e E.Bacrot-L.Aroni an,
Mainz (rapid) 2007: 10 ... ..txb3 1 1 'ii'xb3
lir.b8 (the immediate 1 1 ... 'iVd7 i s al so
good, since 12 'ii'x b7 ? ? loses to the
queen to 12 ... .:fb8) 12 lDfl 'ii'd 7 ! 1 3
lDg 3 lUe8 1 4 ..t d 2 (White can reroute
the queen to avoid an exch ange with
14 lDh 2 'iVe6 lS 'ii'd l, but lS ... dS 16 'iff3
dxe4 1 7 dxe4 lDe7 1 8 ..tg s lDd7 19
':adl f6 20 ..tCl lDf8 2 1 b3 ':bd8 2 2
lD g 4 <iith 8, a s pl ayed in Z.Andriasian­
B.5ocko, Kallithea 2008, is objectively
equal) 14 ... h6 lS .l:tadl 'ti'e6 ! and Bl ack
h as equalized.
As usual , bringing the queen to e6
to contest the light squares is an excel ­
lent idea after the exchange of bishops.
There's al so 11 axb3 to con sider.
89
 Beating 1 e4 e5
Once again 11 ... dS i s the most logical
equalizing try, although Black can al so
choose 11...ltJd7 aiming for .. .fS. For
example, 12 ltJfl (or 12 ltJC4 fS 13 exfs
':'xfS 14 .i.e3) 12 .. .fS 13 exfs ':xfS 14
ltJg 3 .l:tf8 15 :a4 ltJf6 16 ltJe4 'iVd7 1 7
ltJxf6+ ':xf6 18 : g 4 l:taf8 19 ..t e 3 .i.xe3
20 .l:r.xe3 with a roughly equal position,
Z.Efimenko-A Bezgodov, Sochi 2006.
Returning to 11 axb3 dS, I wonder
what the likes of Efimenko would have
planned against this. One possibility is
12 ltJh 2 preparing 'iVf3 and ltJdfl-g 3,
but then 12 ... dxe4 13 dxe4 'ili'd3 ! is an­
noying. Perhaps it's simply 12 'iVe2,
which did give White a tiny bit of pres­
sure after 12 ... dxe4 (12 ... 'iVd7 ! ?) 13 dxe4
ltJh s 14 ltJC4 'iVf6 15 ..te3 .i.xe3 16 'iVxe3
ltJf4 (16 ....l:r.fd8 ! ?) 17 g 3 ! ltJe6 (17 ...ltJxh 3+
18 �g 2 traps the knight) 18 ltJas in
M.Klinova-M.Ferguson, Port Erin 2007.
To sum up, 10 ltJbd2 isn't a m ove to
really ch allenge Bl ack theoretically, but
it might appeal to those who are confi­
dent of outpl aying opponents in quiet
positions.
lo ... d S
90
There's no need for Bl ack t o hold
back. If he does, White shoul d most
certainly push with d3-d4. For example,
10 ... ltJe7 11 d4 ltJg6 12 .i.e3 h 6 13
ltJbd2 with an edge. Note th at if Black
plays 1 3 ... ltJh S ? here, White can win a
pawn with 14 d S ! .i.xe3 1 5 l:[xe3 .i.d7
16 ltJxe s ! .
1 0. . .h 6 11 ltJbd2 tran sposes to
Areshchenko-Aleksandrov (Gam e 2 1),
but 11 d4 threatening dS might be
more promlsmg. Kaidanov gives
11...exd4 12 cxd4 ltJb4 13 dS ltJxc2 14
'ili'xC2 .i.d7 15 ltJC3 ltJh s 16 .i.e3 ..txe3
17 J:[xe3 'iVf6 with a slight advantage
for White, and I agree with his assess­
m ent.
l1 ltJbd 2 ? !
In m any respects the m ost n atural­
looking m ove, but thi s i s a mistake !
White should play 1 1 exd s ! , which
i s covered in the next g ame.
11 •.. dxe4I l2 dxe4 ltJ h s !
Thi s i s t h e point. Black return s to
the obvious and enticing plan of ... 'iVf6
and ... ltJf4, as seen in the previous
g ame. But thi s version is so much m ore

favourable for Black because he i s bet­
ter developed and, just as importantly,
White no longer h as the option of shut­
ting out the dark-squared bishop with
the d3-d4 advance. Compare al so Gon­
zalez Vidal -Gomez (Game 3), where
White was in a much stronger position
to meet ... ttJh S . H ere g 2-g 3 just isn't on !
13 ttJh2?!
White wants to pl ay all the usual
moves: 'iVf3, ttJg4, N (d2)-f1 etc. The
trouble is, Black h as some moves too,
and they are pretty good ones !
Karpov chose 1 3 ttJf1 against
Korchnoi in their 1981 world champi­
on ship m atch, and for some reason
Korchn oi dispen sed with the possibility
of 13 .. J1Vf6 ! in favour of exch anging
queen s. White can aim to occupy dS
with 14 ttJe3, but after 14 .. Jlad8 (or
even just 14 ... i.xe3 15 i.xe3 ttJf4) 1 5
liJds 'iVg 6 (threatening ... i.xh 3 ) 16 'it>fl
fS (Keene, cited by Marin) Black is very
active and it's impossible to recom­
mend thi s for White. Even so, it's better
than 13 ttJh 2 !
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
There's no need to settle for the f6-
square when h4 i s available. Black al­
ready h as the advantage.
14 'ili'f3 g6!
Pl anning to seize the initiative with
.. .fS, which would be Black's an swer to
most of White's m oves here ...
i s ttJg4??
... except thi s one ! Thi s was clearly
not a good day at the office for
Svetushkin.
l S ... i.xg4! 16 hxg4 ttJg3 ! 0-1
Black i s m ating on h i. The a7-
bishop reigns supreme. To be fair,
given how much grief it's been caused
by White's play in previous g ames, it is
difficult to begrudge it one moment of
glory.
Game 20
B.Predojevic-Ci.Jones
E u ropea n C h a m pion s h i p,
Plovd iv 2008
1 e4 e s 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.C4 i.cS 4 c3 ttJf6
S d 3 a6 6 i.b3 i.a7 7 0-0 d6 8 lIel
91
Beating 1 e4 e5
Note th at with the move order 8
liJbd2 0-0 9 h 3 .ie6, 10 .ic2 dS 11 exds
is less effective since it can be met sim­
ply by 11 ... .ixds - another reason for
choosing 8 .:tel over 8 liJbd2.
8 ... 0-0 9 h 3 .i e6 10 .ie2 d S 11 exd s l
Thi s move i s much stronger th an 1 1
liJbd2 ? ! .
11 . .'ii'xd s
.
The queen recapture h as been
Black's usual choice, and it's the only
way to defend eS directly.
The ideal way to recapture on dS
would be with the bishop, but thi s
leaves the es-pawn e n pri se and White
shoul d certainly accept the Marshall
G ambit style offer: l1.. . .ixdS 12 liJxes
liJxe s 13 l:txe s �d6 14 d4 (watch out
for 14 :el?? Vg 3 ! ) 14 ... cS was
A.Delchev-A.Stefan ova, Benidorm 200 5 .
In t h e g ame 1 5 .ie3 Vc6 16 l:tfS g 6 1 7
:g s :ad8 left Black with good com­
pensation, especially in view of White's
awkwardly placed TOok. 15 .ig S ! looks
stron ger to me, and I think Black i s
strugg l i n g to prove equality after
ls ... :ad8 (or lS ... cxd4 16 .ixf6) 16 Vd3
92
g 6 17 liJd2 cxd4 18 cxd4.
I can find only one g ame with
l1...liJxdS, but thi s m ove can 't be ruled
out. For example, 12 liJbd2 (if 12
liJxe s ? ! liJxe s 13 ':xe s, Black once again
has the trick 13 ... .ixf2+!) 12 ... liJf4 (if
12 .. .f6, White plays 13 d4! intending
either dxes or c4 followed by dS) 13
liJfl (or 1 3 liJe4 ! ? liJg 6 14 liJfg s .ids 15
1i'h s h 6 16 liJf3) 1 3 ... liJg 6 14 liJg s .id7
(14 ... .idS ! ?) 15 d4! Vf6 (ls ... exd4 is met
by 16 Vh s h 6 17 liJxf7) 16 liJe4 Ve7 17
dS liJd8 (A.5hlakich-V. Frolochkin, St
Petersburg 2007) and now 18 .ie3 with
some advantage for White.
12 .igSI
Thi s is a key move. Black probably
doesn 't want to give White the oppor­
tunity to pl ay .ixf6, and ... liJd7 is the
n atural retreat. But thi s leaves the
queen on dS somewh at awkwardly
pl aced, and to h ave any chance of g ain­
ing an advantage White must try to
exploit this to the m aximum .
1 2 ... liJ d 7
12 ... 'iVcS ! ? looks strange, and 13
�e2 (13 .ih4 ! ? i s an interesting alter-

native) 1 3 ... ttJd7 seem s to invite 14
ttJbd2 followed by ttJe4 g aining m ore
time. H owever, Bl ack h as the resource
14 ... ttJd4! 15 cxd4 Vxc2, as pl ayed in
A.Brkic-M. Pap, Bosnjaci 2009. Thi s isn't
entirely clear, but White should proba­
bly choose either 16 dxe 5 ttJC5 1 7 l:tacl
'i'xd3 18 .i.e3, or 16 .i.e7 ! ? lUe8 17 .i.a3
exd4 18 l:tacl Va4 19 l:txc7.
13 ttJbd2 .l:.fe8
Could thi s logical m ove actually be a
mistake? Let's explore altern atives :
a ) 1 3 ... l:tae8 helps Black in some
lines if White pl ays 14 ttJe4, because
with the other rook on f8 Black is better
placed for .. .f5. However, in A.Delchev­
M. Kazhg aleyev, G onfreville 2006, White
began h arassing the black queen to
good effect: 14 c4! 'iVC5 (or 14 ... 'ifa5 1 5
a3 intending b4) 1 5 ttJe4 'ifb6 16 .i.a4
lLld4 17 ttJxd4 exd4, and here 18 C 5 !
obliged Black t o give up the exch ange
with 18 ... ttJxC5 since 18 ... 'ifxb2 19 l:te2 !
'i'b4 20 a3 'iVa5 2 1 .i.d2 traps the black
queen .
b) The tempting 13 .. .f6 i s an swered
convincing ly by 14 d4! .
Italian Game: Cla s s i cal Ma in L ine
White has every chance of g aining
an advantage here. For example,
14 ... .i.f7 (or 14 .. .fxg 5 15 .i.b3 'iVd6 16
ttJe4 'ife7 1 7 d5) 15 .i.e3 exd4 16 cxd4
lIad8 1 7 .i.e4 'iVd6 18 'iVa ! ttJxd4 19
.i.xd4 .i.xd4 20 .i.xh 7+ 'it>h 8 21 l:te4!
was played in T. L. Petrosian­
H.Melkumyan, Yerevan 2010. H ere
Black felt obliged to give up a piece for
insufficient compen sation after
21 ... .i.xf2+ 22 'it>xf2 'ii'b 6+ 23 l:te3 l:tfe8
24 .l:[ael. If Black plays 21 ... c5 in stead,
22 :h4 gives White a promising attack.
He is already threatening m ate with 2 3
.i.g8+ �xg 8 24 'ifh 7.
c) 1 3 ... h 6 h as been played by Nigel
Short. It's a m ove Bl ack woul d like to
pl ay and it might even be his best op­
tion . Where should White retreat his
bishop?
Cl) If 14 .i.h4, Black can claim he h as
g ained something because the bishop
can no longer come back down the cl­
h6 diagonal to annoy the black queen
in certain lines.
a) 14 .i.e3 i s a decent respon se, and
14 ... .i.xe3 1 5 fxe 3 ! ? Vd6 16 d4 f5 17
93
Beating 1 e4 e5
.ltb3 �h 8 was roughly equal in
Z. Efimenko-N.5hort, Kemer 2007.
After studying thi s position for
quite some time, I realized that there
was a third option : White doesn 't have
to move the bishop at all :
c 3 ) 1 4 ttJe4! ? i s a very interesting
possibility for White here. If Black takes
the bishop it looks to me like White
gets a fierce attack in return . Here's
just a sample of the m any possible
lines: 14 ... hxg s 1 5 .ltb3 'iWbs 16 ttJfxg s
16 ... .ltxb3 (or 16 ... .ltfs 17 .ltC4 'ii'x b2
18 'iVh s ttJd8 19 :abl 'iVc2 20 ttJxf7) 17
'i!Vh S ! l:.fe8 18 axb3 ttJd8 (18 ... 'iVxb3 ? i s
m et by 19 l:ta3 ! 'iVds 20 c4) 19 'iVh 7+
�f8 20 ttJg 3 ttJf6 2 1 'iVh 8+ �e7 22
1i'xg 7 and the attack i s still burning
strongly.
It's still early days in the develop­
m ent of this line. With accurate play
Bl ack might well be okay, but it does
seem easy to go wrong . Initially Short's
12 ... h 6 looked like the most reliable
m ove to me, but I can no longer say thi s
with any certainty in view o f 1 4 ttJe4 ! ?
1 4 ttJe4!
94
Black definitely h as some problems
to solve here, the m ain one being to
find a stable square for his under pres­
sure queen .
Bl ack h as fewer concerns after 14
.lte3 .ltxe3 1 5 :xe3 h 6, as played in
Z.Almasi- L.Aronian, European Team
Ch., Heraklion 2007. It's al so worth not­
ing that 14 c4 is less effective here,
since Black h as 14 .. :iVd6 intending 15
ttJe4 'iVf8 ! .
14 ttJC5
•..
Desperately trying to ease conges­
tion by exchanging a pair of knights,
but White is having none of it.
Predojevic's an alysis in Chess Infor­
m a nt 102, given below, suggests that
there i s no easy way out for Black, but
he can minimize White's advantage:
a) 14 .. .fS ? ! 1 5 .ltb3 'iWbs 16 .ltxe6+
1:Ixe6 17 a4 1i'ds (or 17 ... 1i'xb2 18 ':'e2
1i'b6 19 .lte3 ttJd4 20 cxd4 fxe4 21 dxe4
exd4 22 .ltxd4) 18 c4 'iVas 19 .ltd2 'iWb6
20 as "ii'x b2 2 1 .ltC3 .ltxf2+ 2 2 'ifi>f1
'iVxal 2 3 .ltxal .ltxel 24 ttJeg s l:[e7 2 5
ttJxel ttJxas 2 6 ttJ C 2 with a clear advan ­
tage for White.

b) 14 ... ltJf8 ! 1 5 'ii'e 2 h 6 16 ..te3 ltJg 6
17 ..txa7 ':'xa7 18 'ife3 b6 19 ..tb3 'ifd7
20 ..ta4! J:taa8 21 l:tadl with an edge
for White. If 2 1...fS ?, 22 d4! i s a strong
reply: for example, 2 2 ... b S 2 3 ltJcs 'iff7
24 ltJxe6 bxa4 2 5 dS etc.
l S ltJg3 !
No trades! White i s planning d4, or
even b4 to force the knight back to d7.
lS ... h6 16 ..te3 ltJd 7
16 ... l:tad8 looks more n atural, but
even here 17 d4 exd4 18 cxd4 ltJb4 19
.ibl! (19 dxcS 'ifc4) 19 ...ltJd7 20 a3 ltJc6
(Predojevic) 21 ..ta2 followed by dS
looks very strong .
1 7 ..txa 7 ':xa 7 1 8 d4! exd4 19 exd4
Ita lian Game: Classi ca l Main Line
Thi s is an extremely favourable I QP
position for White: Black's rooks are
momentarily di sconnected and his mi­
nor pieces could be in better positions.
The immediate threat i s 20 ..tb3 fol­
lowed by 2 1 dS, and in fact thi s isn't
easy to m eet.
19 ...ltJf6
Covering the ds-square (and h 7 af­
ter 'ifd3), but is it enough?
20 ..tb3 'ifa s 2 1 ..txe6?
Missing a huge opportunity.
White can still play 21 dS ! , and in­
deed Predojevic's analysi s suggests
that it leads to a deci sive advantage:
2 1...l:td8 (or 2 1...ltJxds 2 2 ..txdS lId8 2 3
.l:!.xe6 ! ) 2 2 dxe 6 ! l:txdl 2 3 exf7+ 'i?r>f8 2 4
:axdl :la8 2 s ltJh4 'iVg s 2 6 ltJgfS .
It's difficult for Black to meet
White's m any ideas, including l:.d3-g 3 .
2 1 ....:.xe6 2 2 .l:!.xe6 fxe6 2 3 a 3 'iVd s 2 4
':e1 .l:!.a8
White still has a small edge here,
but Black is certainly over the worst
and the game soon ends in a draw.
2S ltJe2 :idS 2 6 'ii'e 2 'i!Ve4 27 'ife4 'ifd s
2S Ve2 Ve4 29 'iVe4 'iWd s 30 'ii'e 3 'ii'd 6
95
Beating 1 e4 e5
31 'ir'b3 ttJa5 3 2 'ii'c 2 ttJc6 3 3 'ii' b 3 ttJa5
34 'ii'c 2 ttJc6 3 5 ttJC3 'ii'f4 3 6 ttJe2 Yz-Yz
Game 21
A.Areshchen ko-A.Aleksa ndrov
Aeroflot Open, Moscow 2007
1 e4 e5 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 .i.C4 .i.C5 4 c3 ttJf6
5 d3 a6 6 Ji.b3 .i.a7 7 0-0 d6 8 ':'e1
The game's actual move order was 8
ttJbd2 0-0 9 h 3 .i.e6 10 l:[el l:.e8 1 1 ttJfl
h6 12 ttJg 3 'iVd7 13 .i.c2 ds 14 'ii'e 2.
8 ... 0-0 9 h 3 h 6
As we have seen previously, thi s
pawn move i s often a precursor to
... ttJh s. However, it's al so a useful wait­
ing m ove if Black wants to play ... .i.e6.
10 ttJbd2 Ji.e6
We are faced with th at perennial
choice again: do we allow an exchange
of bishops or avoid it with Ji.c2?
11 .i.c2
In compari son to the position after
9 ... .i.e6, it seem s to me that there's
slightly m ore appeal to allowing an
exchange here. White i s one move fur-
96
ther down the road with his kingside
pl an s, whereas Black's extra ... h 6 may
only prove to be semi-useful, or even a
hindrance if White is lucky. In truth,
the difference i s fairly insignificant and
Black's position i s solid. Even so, this
rem ain s an option for the those prefer·
ring quieter position s : 11 ttJfl l:te8 (or
11 ... Ji.xb3 12 axb3 lle8, if Black doesn't
want to allow White to change his
mind and pl ay 12 Ji.C2 ! ) 12 ttJ3h2 (so
th at White can an swer ... ds with 'ii'f 3;
both 12 ttJg 3 and 12 Ji.e3 are al so pos­
sible) 12 ... Ji.xb3 1 3 axb3 'ii'd 7 14 'ii'f3
'ii'e 6 1 5 ttJg 3
l s ... ttJe7 ! (avoiding l s ... 'ii'xb3 ? ! 16
ttJfs ! when White threatens both 17
ttJxh 6+ and 17 Ji.xh 6) 16 b4 c6 17 ttJg4
ttJxg4 18 hxg4 ds 19 ttJfs ':'ad8 20 g3 f6
2 1 'iii> g 2 dxe4 2 2 dxe4 ttJxfs 2 3 gxfS 'iVC4
24 Ji.e3 .i.xe3 and V2-%, P. Leko­
V. Kramnik, World Championship, Mex­
ico City 2007.
This was model defence by Kramnik,
and objectively Black must be okay in
this line. However, perhaps it's not as
easy as Kramnik makes it look. Indeed,

when Leko decided to switch sides he
wasn't able to display the same accu­
racy: 14 4:Jg 3 (instead of 14 'iff3)
14 ... 4:Je7 15 b4 c6 16 4:Jg4 'ilfe6 17 .ie3 ! ?
(17 'ii'f3 would transpose t o Leko-
Kramnik) 17 ... .ixe3 18 4:Jxe3 dS 19 exds
4:JexdS (19 ... cxdS looks stronger) 20
4:JC4! 4:Jd7 2 1 4:Je4 4:Jf4 2 2 'ilff3 b S 23
tLlas (23 4:Jcd6 ! ?) 2 3 ...fS 24 4:JcS 4:JxcS 2 5
bxcS 4:JdS 26 4:Jb7 ! e 4 2 7 dxe4 fxe4 2 8
'iVg 3 4:Jf6 29 4:Jd6 :e7 30 b4 with a clear
advantage, V.lvanchuk-P.Leko, Nice
(rapid) 2009. As I've stressed previously,
Black should be okay but there is cer­
tainly enough scope in these positions
to outplay your opponents.
11 ... :e8
Thi s m ove, in conjunction with ... dS,
i s Black's m ost con sistent follow-up.
If Black plays 11 ... 4:Je7 it's White
who advances in the centre. H ere 12
tLlfl 4:Jg 6 1 3 4:Jg 3 :le8 14 d4 reaches
Korneev-Campora (Gam e 7). Thi s i s an
example of how the Modern Variation
can tran spose to the Classical Main
Line, and vice-versa.
1 2 4:Jf1 d S
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
Another typical decision to m ake:
capture or keep the ten sion ?
13 'ife2
13 exds ! ? looks like a totally in­
nocuous version of the pawn capture,
but even here there is a drop of poison
in the position : 1 3 ... .ixds (the two
other recaptures are al so possible, but
thi s looks the most n atural) 14 4:Jg 3
"ii'd 7 1 5 .ie3 .ixe3 16 l:[xe3 l:te7 ? ! 17
4:Jh4! .ie6 18 4:Jh S ! 4:Jxh S 19 'ii'xh s 'iVd6
20 :g 3 ! 'it>f8 21 :el and suddenly
White h as drummed up a fierce attack
from seemin gly nowhere.
H . H amdouchi-P.Van Hoolandt, Nice
2002, concluded 2 1 ... .id7 2 2 :ee3 e4
2 3 dxe4 'ii'd 2 24 .ib3 'iVxb2 2 5 l:tef3
4:Jes 26 4:Jg6+ 4:Jxg 6 27 Wxg6 1-0.
Bl ack showed much greater accu­
racy in J . Degraeve-J .Votava, Erfurt
2009 : 16 ... l:.ad8 ! (in stead of 16 ... l:te7 ? ! )
17 'iVe2 .ixf3 18 'iVxf3 4:JdS 19 l:teel
J::t e 6 20 .l:.adl, with a roughly level posi­
tion .
13 . 'iVd 7
..
Black must also decide when or if he
should release the tension . In
97
Beat ing 1 e4 e5
E.Alekseev-F.Caruan a, Kh anty-Man siysk
2009, Black did so straight away:
13 ... dxe4 14 dxe4 b S (14 ... liJh S ? can be
safely an swered by 1 5 liJxe s here) 15
liJ3h2 (15 liJg 3 would allow Black the
option of forcing a queen exchange
with l S ... i.C4) l s ...liJe7 16 %:tdl 'iic 8 17
'iff3 liJh 7 18 liJg4 liJg 6 19 liJfe3 l:td8 20
liJfs :xdl+ 2 1 'iix dl 'iid 8 2 2 'iie l hS 23
liJh 2 liJf4 24 i.xf4 exf4 25 l:tdl 'ii'e 8 26
'iid 2 i.xfs 2 7 exfs and White was bet­
ter. There might well be some possible
improvements here, but to me 1 3 ... 'ilfd7
followed by ... l:tad8 looks m ore flexible.
1 4 liJg3 :tad8
1 5 'it h 2 1 ?
The idea behind thi s move i s to pre­
pare liJh4 - the immediate 15 liJh4 al­
lows l S ... i.xh 3 ! 16 g xh 3 'ifxh 3 1 7 liJhfs
liJg4 18 i.e3 � 2 + 19 'ittl 'i¥h 3 + 20
'itg l with perpetual check, N .5edl ak­
B. Predojevic, Zlatibor 2007. H owever,
Bl ack h as nothing to fear providin g he
finds the right respon se, and it i s pos­
sible th at 15 'ith 2 isn't the best m ove
objectively, even though it works very
well in thi s game.
98
Blitz games aren 't always helpful
pointers but when they involve the
World's elite, they do at least reveal the
first m ove which goes through a super­
grandm aster's mind. H ere are a couple
of recent examples from thi s position :
a) 1 5 i.d2 i.cs (a typical m ove - if
White begins action on the king side,
thi s bishop m ay want to return to f8 to
provide cover ... ) 16 iladl d4! ?
( ... especially if White plays an eventual
c4, when the bishop would look silly on
a7) 17 i.bl bS 18 ':cl! dXc3 (thi s is
committal - perh aps Black didn't want
to be left with a pawn on d4 after
18 ... i.f8 19 cxd4; 18 ... i.b6 ! ? is an alter­
n ative) 19 bXc3 i.f8 20 i.e3 and
White's plan now is d3-d4, B.Gelfand­
V. Kramnik, Moscow (blitz) 2008.
b) 1 5 liJh 2 b S 16 lVf3 (threatening
i.xh 6) 16 ... liJh 7 1 7 liJg4 d4 18 liJfs
i.xfs 19 exfs, as played in L.Dominguez
Perez-S.Mamedyarov, World Blitz Ch.,
Alm aty 2008, i s the kind of promising
king side action White i s looking for.
ls ... liJe7 ! , intending to m eet 16 'ii'f3
with 16 ... liJg6, looks like a stronger de­
fence to me.
1 5 . . .'it h 8
I s it possible that Aleksandrov was
unaware of the significance of 15 'ith 2,
and thought it was just a waiting
move?
l s ... 'ife7 ! , as pl ayed in A.Minasian ­
S.Gal dunts, Yerevan 1 9 8 2 , cuts across
White's plan (16 liJh4?? i s rudely m et
by 16 ... liJg4+ ! ) and forces him to re­
think.

16 ttJh41
Now thing s begin to run like clock­
work on the kin g side. White gradually
strengthens his position and Bl ack
drifts into passive defence.
16 ... ttJg8?1
Perh aps Aleksandrov was worried
about 16 ... ttJe7 1 7 'iVf3, but thi s still
looks tenable for Bl ack after 17 ... dxe4
18 dxe4 ttJg 6.
1 7 'iVf3 ii. e s 18 ttJgfs ii.f8 19 g 4 1 g6
Bl ack's previous play ( ... ttJg 8 and
... ii.cS-f8) clearly showed that he was
basing his hopes on kicking the knight
away from fS . But...
20 l:tgll
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
A star move. Areshchenko is in no
m ood to retreat !
It's difficult for Black to do an ything
apart from accept the piece sacrifice,
but then he run s into a fierce and ulti­
m ately decisive attack, perfectly exe­
cuted by the Ukrainian grandm aster.
20 ... dxe4 21 dxe4 gxfS 22 gxfs ii.e4 2 3
f6 1 lte6 24 :xg8+1 �xg8 2 5 .i. e 3 ttJe7
White was threatening simply 2 6
.l:tg 1+ �h 8 2 7 'ii'g 4 and m ate o n either
g8 or g 7 .
2 6 fxe7 .i.xe7 2 7 .l:.gl+ .i. g s 2 8 'iV h s .l:tf6
29 b 3 1 ii.bs 30 a41 ii.e6 31 :xg s+ hxgs
32 'ifxgs+ lig6 33 ttJxg6 fxg6 34 b41
The light-squared bishop joins the
party and there's simply no defence for
Black.
34 l:te8 35 ii.b3+ �h8 3 6 'iVh4+ 'ii' h 7
•..
3 7 .i. h 6 1 l:tf8 3 8 'iVgS I l:txf2+ 3 9 �g3
l:tf7 40 'iVxes+ :g7 41 'iVgs ii.e8 42
.i.xg7+ 'ii'x g7 43 'ifh4+ 'ii' h 7 44 iYf6+
iYg7 45 es gs 46 a s 'iixf6 47 exf6 ii.d7
48 .i.ds .te8 49 ii.f3 b6 50 ii.g4 ii.b7 51
ii.fs 1-0
Game 22
R.Felgaer-J.Hedor
Pol itiken C u p,
Cope n hagen 2002
1 e4 e s 2 ttJf3 ttJe6 3 .i.e4 ttJf6 4 d 3 .tes
5 e3 a6 6 0-0 .ta7 7 i.b3 d6 8 .:tel 0-0 9
h 3 ttJe7
Again we see the typical ... ttJe7-g 6
m anoeuvre by Bl ack.
One other idea worth m entioning i s
99
Beating 1 e4 e5
9 ... �h S ! ?, breaking the pin on the f-
pawn and planning ... tUg S (or ... tUh S)
an d .. .fS.
White can certainly continue with
10 tUbd2, but again st such a non­
developing move 10 d4! ? seems justi ­
fied. With action h appening in the cen­
tre, Black is di stracted from his pl an,
and a bonus for White i s th at ... lIeS
isn't possible with the f-pawn hanging.
10 .. :iVe7 11 J.. e 3 h 6 (11 ... tUxe4? 12 dS !
win s m aterial) 12 tUbd2 J.. d 7 1 3 tUfl
(13 J.. C 2 ! ? pre-empting ... tUas looks
sen sible) 13 ... tUas 14 J.. C 2 bS 15 tUg 3
( 1 5 a4! ?) l S ... cS 16 dxes dxes 17 tUh4
tUC4 is .1i.cl tUd6 19 'ii'f3 c4 20 a4 was
solid for Black in V. Nevednichy­
V.Tkachiev, Manila 1992, but White
m ay have stronger option s and even
here he might still h ave a slight edge.
10 tUbd2 tUg6 11 tUf1
Now if Bl ack chooses a m ove such as
1 1 ... J.. e 6, 1 1 ... .:.eS or 1 1 ... h6, White re­
plies with 12 tUg 3 and we tran spose to
position s seen in Korneev-Campora
(Gam e 7). With thi s move order,
though, Bl ack h as a serious altern ative:
100
11 ... tU h 5 1 ?
There are certainly some similarities
here to the lines di scussed in Frois­
Korneev (Gam e is). Bl ack's basic plan is
once more ... tUhf4 and ... 'ii'f6. He might
even be able save a tempo by avoiding
... h6. Or m aybe not...
12 d4
Thi s i s again White's most effective
plan . The d4 advance creates central
ten sion and blocks out the a7-bishop.
12 J.. g s m ore or less forces 12 ... 'ii'e S.
It looks tempting but in reality White
doesn't gain a great deal from this in­
sertion of moves, as the bishop is vul­
nerable to ... h 6 possibilities. Al so, 13
tUxe s tUxes 14 d4 tUf6 1 5 J.. xf6 g xf6 16
dxes fxe s 1 7 tUg 3 �h S i s okay for Black,
A.Grosar-S.Polg ar, Bled 1994.
12 ... tUhf4
Of course Bl ack h as to avoid
1 2 ... 'iVf6 ?? 1 3 J.. g S ! .
1 2 ... 'iVeS has been played a few
times, and even by Shirov, but it does
look a bit strange to move the queen

here without being forced to by i.g s.
True, White is discouraged from playing
ttJg 3, but 13 ttJe3 ! planning ttJds or ttJfs
does the job just as well. 13 ... ttJhf4
(13 ... exd4 14 ttJds ! ) 14 ttJfs exd4 15
ttJ3xd4 (15 cxd4 also looks promising)
ls ...'ifd8 16 'iff3 ttJe6 was Z.Efimenko­
A.5hirov, German League 2006, and here
White looks pretty active after 17 i.e3 .
1 3 ttJ g 3 'ili'f6?
Thi s is certainly Black's most n atural
follow-up to his previous play. What's
more, it's worth noting th at, according
to databases, 1 3 ... 'iff6 has been Black's
most popular choice here. Everything
seems to be l ooking rosy: the e s-point
is securely defended, the knights seem
well placed and the queen enjoys being
on the f6-square. But...
14 ttJhS!
A shocking m ove for Black to face.
Since 14 ... ttJxh s allows 1 5 i.g s ! win­
ning the queen, Black i s forced to re­
treat and must allow a damaging ex­
change of pieces on f4. 1 3 ... 'iIi'f6 i s sim­
ply a blunder, and evidently White's
two-move trap i s sophisticated enough
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
to h ave snared a number of highly­
rated victi m s !
Let's return for a moment t o Bl ack's
1 3th m ove to con sider better option s.
In view of this trap, it's clear now th at
... 'iYf6 requires some preparation .
1 3 ...h 6 ! i s a logical move, preventing
the i.g s idea. It's worth comparing thi s
t o the 1 2 ...ttJ e 7 variation in Frois­
Korneev (Game 18), and indeed it leads
to a direct transposition after 14 i.e3 !
'ilff6 1 5 i.c2. Thi s might b e White's best
option, since 14 i.xf4 ttJxf4! 15 dxe s
dxes 16 'iYxd8 (16 ttJxe s ? 'ili'g s ! )
16 . . .l:txd8 17 ttJxe s l:td2 18 i.xf7+ �f8
(Marin) i s unclear, while the immediate
14 ttJfs can be met by 14 ... exd4 intend­
ing 15 cxd4 ds.
Another possibility is 1 3 ... i.d7 ? ! but
after 14 i.e3 Black is no nearer to play­
ing 14 ... 'iff6 as it still run s into 15 ttJh s ! .
I n the g ame V.lvannikov-E.Gafner, St
Petersburg 2000, Bl ack decided he
couldn 't do without 14 ... h 6 anyway,
but thi s admission really questions the
value of 13 ... i.d7. After 15 'iYd2 Bl ack
still has problem s to solve:
10 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
After the game's 1 5 ... 'iIt'c8 ! ? White
coul d have even gained an advantage
with the simple 16 �xf4 exf4 17 ltlh 5
�xh 3 18 ltlxf4 ltlxf4 19 'ilt'xf4. Note al so
that 15 .. :ii'f6 ? 16 dxe 5 ! highlights an­
other problem with Black's 1 3th m ove.
Finally, one of the earliest g ames
reaching thi s position featured a very
young Vladimir Kramnik di splaying his
understanding of the intricacies in thi s
l i n e . V. Kramnik-D.Campora, Moscow
1989, went 13 ... 'iIt'e7 ? ! 14 �e3 ]:Id8 1 5
�c2 ! h 6 16 ltlf5 'it'f6 with a clear plus
for White - Black h as basically wasted a
tempo with his queen . H ere 1 7 g 3 !
forced the knight t o retreat, since
1 7 ... ltlxh 3+? 18 �g 2 ltlg 5 19 ltlxg 5 hxg 5
20 'it'h 5 would h ave been virtually win ­
n i n g for White.
Incidentally, the earliest g am e I
could find reaching 1 3 ltlg 3 featured a
similarly young G ata Kam sky. His op­
ponent pl ayed 13 ... 'it'f6?, but Kamsky
didn't punish him with 14 ltlh 5 ! .
N ow let's return t o the position af­
ter 14 ltlh 5 :
14 :ii'e 7
•.
102
1 5 �xf41
Black's e 5-pawn will end up on f4,
and thi s will leave him with no pres­
sure on the d4-pawn and a miserable
bishop on a7. It's payback time for
what happened in Svetushkin­
H aslinger!
1S ... ltlxf4
Black even loses the f-pawn after
1 5 ... exf4 16 'it'd2.
16 ltlxf4 exf4 17 'ii'd 2 'ii'f6
Or 17 ... g 5 18 e S h 6 19 exd6 'ii'x d6 20
h4 �g4 2 1 'it'd3 �xf3 2 2 'it'xf3,
V.Belikov-M.Novik, Sochi 1990. In all of
these lines White i s enjoying a power
play with one black piece 'sittin g on the
bench'.
18 e S dxe s 19 l:txe s
19 ltlxe s i s al so pretty good, but this
move looks even stronger.
19 ••. c6
A desperate defen sive try based on
... �b8 ideas. It's hardly a surprise th at
there's a refutation, and there's proba­
bly m ore than one.
19 ... �d7 20 l:[ael c5, as played in
P.Ti shin-J.Geller, Sam ara 2002, al so

tries to reawaken the dark-squared
bishop before it's too late. But 2 1 1he4!
(instead of the g ame's 21 dS? ':adS 2 2
..tC2 .1i.bS) 2 1 . . ..1i.bS 2 2 :xf4, i f not quite
as destructive as the m ain g ame,
should still give White a near deci sive
advantage.
20 l:ael h6 2 1 !tle41 .1i.b8
If 2 1...g S 22 h4 and Black's position
collapses: for example, 22 ....1i.fs 2 3
hxg s hxg s 2 4 liJxg S ! .
2 2 l:r.xf4
White i s happy to self-skewer (is
that the right term ?). Even if Black were
able to win the exch ange, White's pres­
sure on f7 would more than compen­
sate. As it is, White gets to play a deci­
sive combination on th at square.
22 ...'i¥g6 23 l:.xf7 ! l:txf7 24 l:te7 'ii' b l+
2 5 liJel .1i.f4 2 6 'ii'e 2 1
Not falling for 26 'it'xf4?, when the
amazing defensive resource of
26 . .1i.e6 ! , intending 2 7 .1i.xe6?? 'i¥xel+
. .
28 'iith 2 'i¥xe 6 ! , allows Black to fight on .
26 ... .1i.f5 2 7 ':'xf7 'iit h 8 28 g4 .1i.d3 29
'i'xd 3 'iVxel+ 30 'iit g 2 1-0
If Black saves the bishop by pl aying
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
30 ... .1i.g s, 31 .1i.c2 m ates quickly. Don't
be fooled by these apparently quiet
lines. There are m any traps lurking .
The previous five g ames covered the
'main line' with lIel and h 3 . In the n ext
few g ames we con sider altern ative op­
tion s for both colours, beginning with
some king side aggression from Black:
Game 2 3
T. Warakomski-M.Bartel
Pol i s h League,
Ka rpacz 2008
1 e4 e 5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 .1i.C4 .1i.C5 4 d 3 liJf6
5 c3 a6 6 .1i.b3 d6 7 0-0 .1i.a7 8 h 3
Thi s could, and often does, lead to
the m ain line after S ... o-o 9 iiel. But
get ready for something a bit differ­
ent...
8 ... h 6 ! ?
Fair enough. Bl ack often plays this
move.
9 l:iel?! g 5 !
But not thi s !
103
 Beating 1 e4 e5
Suddenly it becomes clear th at
Black doesn't have to castle king side
after all, and White's early h 3 has pro­
vided enough encouragement for this
aggressive pawn lunge. The roles have
been reversed: Black is trying to do to
White what White often did to him in
Chapter One !
10 .ie3
10 ttJh 2 tries to prevent ... g4, but
fails. Thi s move hasn 't fared well in
practice: 10 ... .l:tg8 (Black can also play
10 ... g4 immediately: 11 hxg4 :g 8 12
'iVf3 'iVe7 1 3 .ie3 .ixe3 14 fxe3 .ixg4
1 5 ttJxg4 ttJxg4 with at least equality
for Black, M.Adam s-A.5hirov, Elista
2007) 11 .ie3 g4 12 J.. x a7 g xh 3 ! was
played in Hou Yifan-P.H. Nielsen, Am ­
sterdam 2009.
In the game the young Chinese
grandmaster accepted a clear disad­
vantage after 13 g3 ttJxa7 14 ttJd2 h S
1 5 <iith 1 "iIIe 7. Let's see wh at might hap­
pen if White's tries to hold on to the
extra piece: 1 3 .ie3 ':xg 2+ 14 'iti>h 1
ttJg4! 1 5 ttJxg4 (15 ttJf3 is met by
1 S ... l:txf2 ! followed by ... "illf6) 1 S ... .ixg4
104
16 'ilVc1 (16 f3 'i!Vh4! is crushing)
16 ... 'iVf6 17 ttJd2 0-0-0 18 .id1 :g8 19
.ixg4+ l:t8xg4. With ... h2, ... 'Wh4 and
... :g1+ on the horizon, it's difficult to
see how White can escape unharmed.
10 J.. x e3 11 l:[xe3 g4!
••.
Simple, direct and very strong .
12 hxg4 ttJxg4 1 3 :e2 'iVf6 1 4 ttJbd2
J.. d 7 1 S .i d S
Getting out of the way of the b­
pawn and thus enabling the plan of b4,
a4 and b S .
lS ... 0-0-0
Let's take stock of the position . The
players h ave castl ed on opposite sides,
and as usual the key factor is how
quickly each side can org anize his at­
tack. Black enjoys a clear advantage
simply because the open g -file gives
him a significant head start.
16 b4 ttJe7 ! 17 ttJe1
A sad retreat. White would rather
avoid an exchange on dS, but after 17
.ib3 ttJg6 (threatening ... ttJf4) 18 g3 hS
followed by ... h4 thing s are going to
turn ugly.
17 ... ttJxd S 18 exd s h S

Planning ... h4 and ... 1i'f4, and al so
the following piece sacrifice:
19 f3 'iff4! 20 liJf1
If White accepts the knight, the at­
tack down the newly opened h -file
proves to be too strong . For example,
20 fxg4 hxg4 21 J:te4 'ifh 2+ 22 �f2 f5
23 1k4 f4 24 liJf1 g 3 + etc.
20 liJf6 21 'ili'b3 l:tdg8 22 a4 h4
...
Now it's full steam ahead for Black.
In contrast, White's demon stration on
the queen side looks a bit lame.
23 bS h 3 24 bxa6 bxa 6 2 S 1i'C4
Or 2 5 .:tbl �d8 and White's 'attack'
reaches a dead end.
2S hxg2 2 6 :xg2
...
If 26 'ifxf4, 26 ... :h l+! 27 �f2 g l'if
mate i s a good zwischenzug !
26 .l:.xg2+ 2 7 liJxg2 'ili'xf3 28 l:b1 liJg4
...
29 �c1 0-1
Not waiting for the inevitable
29 ... 'iff2 m ate.
Clearly thi s is a line we need to
avoid, at least if we are playing White !
But how should we do this? As far as I
can see, the safest way - assuming our
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
aim is to reach the m ain lines - is to
play 8 J:tel in stead of 8 h 3 . If Black pl ays
8 ... h 6 we can reply with 9 liJbd2 ! . It's
true th at Black can still insist on king­
side aggression by playing 9 ... g 5, but
the key difference here is that White
has avoided presenting Black with a
'hook' (h 2-h 3 ) and thi s mean s Bl ack h as
to work that much h arder to engineer
activity on the kin g side.
Here's an example: 10 liJfl g4 11
liJ3d2 (if 11 liJh4, Black h as 11 ... liJxe4)
11 ... h 5 12 liJC4 h4 13 .i.e3 .i.xe3 14
liJcxe3 .i.d7 15 a4 ':'g8 (if 15 ... h 3 , White
blocks things up with the simple 16 g 3 )
16 .i. a 2 liJ e 7 17 d 4 h 3 (17 . . .liJxe4 1 8
dxe 5 dxe5 19 liJ d 5 open s the centre up,
which can only be in White's favour) 18
dxe 5 (the safer 18 g3 still looks good)
18 ... hxg2 19 liJg 3 ! dxe 5 20 1\¥b3 :g7 2 1
'ili'xb7 iLc6 2 2 'iib 4 lIb8 2 3 'ifC4 and
White was clearly on top in the game
A.Min asian-A.Aleksandrov, Podol sk
1990.
After 8 .:tel, there's another cave­
man-style approach to con sider:
8 ... liJg4 ! ?
105
Beating 1 e4 e5
I must confess that until a couple of
days ago I didn 't think much of thi s
move at all . I realized that White
needed to avoid 9 d4 exd4 10 cxd4, on
account of the typical trick 10 ... liJxd4!
11 liJxd4 "Wh4, when White i s in some
trouble. H owever, after 9 l:.e2, surely
Black's knight is mi splaced on g4 and
he will lose time in the long run, won't
he?
Judging by a severe l ack of g ames
with 9 ...liJg4, m any players must have
agreed with me on thi s point, and
when Sam Collins played it against me
(Briti sh League, 2010) I was genuinely
surprised. More to th e point, as far as I
can see, he h as found a way to m ake
thi s playable for Bl ack !
The game went 9 l:.e2 'iff6 ! (if
9 ... 0-0, White pl ays 10 .i.g 5 ! intending
10 .. :iVe8 1 1 h3) 10 liJbd2 (Mickey Ad­
am s suggested 10 liJa3 to prevent
Black's next move) 10 ... g 5 1 . Thi s is a key
idea, without which White would just
play liJd2-fl and then h 2-h 3 only when
the time is right. The point is that Black
is now simply threatening to win m a-
106
terial with 11 ... liJxf2 ! 12 .l:r.xf2 �xf2+ 13
�xf2 g4, and thi s forced me to take
action in centre earlier than I might
have wanted to. The gam e continued
11 d4! .i.d7 (11 ... exd4 12 e 5 ! dxe 5 13
liJe4 is very promising for White) 12
liJfl :g8. At thi s moment I was
tempted by the idea of gettin g a knight
to d5, but 1 3 liJe3 ? ! 0-0-0 14 liJd5 ? 'i!Vh6
took too much time. The knight was
achieving little on d5 and Black was
developing some n asty threats on the
kin g side. I should h ave kept the knight
on f1 and chosen 13 .i.e3 ! , when White
can m eet 13 ... liJxe3 with 14 fxe3 !
strengthening d4, blocking the a7-
bishop and preparing to use the f-file.
There are alternatives for both sides
earlier on, but judging from thi s evi­
dence 9 ... liJg4 cannot be di smissed as a
bad m ove.
Let's con sider yet another option.
This tim e it's for White, if he h as played
8 h3:
Game 24
T.Radjabov-V.Anand
Ba ku (ra pid) 2009
1 e4 eS 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 .i.C4 .i.cs 4 c3 liJf6
5 d 3 a 6 6 .i. b 3 d 6 7 0-0 .i.a7 8 h 3 h 6 9
�e 3 1
If Bl ack i s going t o pl ay . . .g 5, then
.i.e3 is a much better m ove than ::tel.
It was Tiviakov m ore than anybody
who showed th at the plan with .i.e3 is

not a h armless one, although he usu­
ally plays it a m ove earlier (see the next
game).
g �xe3
•••
Thi s is certainly not a mistake, at
least from an objective viewpoint.
However, it does appear th at the
resulting position s with the semi-open
f-file are easier for White to play than
Black, something which is demon­
strated to some extent in thi s g ame.
The aggressive 9 ... g 5 ! ? remai n s a
decent option, but White h as less to
fear here th an with 9 :el ? ! g 5 . For ex­
ample, 10 �xa7 tDxa7 (Bl ack wants to
keep the option of ... O-O-O! ) 11 d4 fie7
12 tDbd2 g4 1 3 hxg4 tDxg4 (or
13 ... �xg4 14 dxe5 dxe5 15 tDC4 tDc6 16
tDe3 :g 8 17 .:tel l:td8 18 tDd5 tDxd5 19
exd5 e4 20 �f1 ! with some advantage
for White, D. Pavasovic-L. Fressinet,
European (h., Plovdiv 2008) 14 �a4+ ! ?
( I prefer thi s t o 1 4 dxe 5 dxe 5 1 5 g 3 , as
played in I . Kh amrakulov-F.Vallejo Pon s,
Pamplona 2007) 14 ... b 5 (if 14 ... �d7,
White replies 1 5 �xd7+ 'i1i'xd7 16 dxe 5
dxe5 1 7 tDC4 and tDh4-f5 is the plan ; or
Italian Game: Classical Main Line
14 ... c6 15 dxe 5 dxe5 16 tDc4!) 15 �b3
and White, having induced ... b5, will
follow up with a4.
The safest option is 9 ... 0-0 which
transposes after 10 tDbd2 to Game 2 5,
note 'c' to Black's 9th move.
10 fxe 3 0-0 11 tDbd2
11 ... �e6
The immediate 11 ... tDe7 is m et by
12 tDh4! after which not only i s
12 ... tDg 6 impossible, but Black al so has
to be wary of exchange sacrifices on f6.
11 ... d5 also doesn't completely solve
Black's problems, as typically this ad­
vance leaves White with a strong centre.
For example, 12 exd5 tDxd5 13 'i¥el! tDf6
14 d4 .l::!. e 8 15 'i¥g 3 �e6 (15 ... exd4 16
exd4 �e6 is better) 16 tDxe5 tDxe5 17
dxe5 tDd7 18 tDe4 �8 19 l:[adl �xb3 20
axb3 'i¥e7 21 e6 'i¥xe6 22 'iVxC7 with a
clear advantage for White, W.5chill­
R.Rasmussen, Budapest 2004.
12 �C2 tDe7
12 ... d5 looks more appealing here,
and yet I still think White has a small
edge after 1 3 exd5 tDxd5 14 'i1i'el l:te8
15 fif2 planning d4.
107
Beating 1 e4 e5
13 tiJh4!
Thi s i s a key move and almost an
automatic respon se to ... tiJe7.
13 ...tiJe8
Anand begins to drift. In fact thi s
and his following two moves m ake a
very strange impression . Perhaps he
was initially planning on the super­
solid ... g6 and ... tiJg 7 but then decided
again st it.
13 ... tiJg6 looks more n atural,
again st which White replies with 14
tiJfS. What i s clear i s that Bl ack has no
easy solution in his search for equality.
14 d4 ..td7?!
Thi s definitely feel s wrong .
If 1 4... g 6 there follows 1 5 tiJdf3 f6 16
..tb3 (or 16 tiJh 2 ! ?) 16 ... tiJg7 17 ..txe6+
tiJxe6 18 'iVb3 and Black i s still under
some pressure. Perhaps he should try
to create some action in the centre
with 14 ... CS ! ?
1 5 ..t b 3 !
Why not?
1 5 ... tiJf6
Thi s allows a promising exch ange
sacrifice, but it's too l ate to go back
108
with lS ... ..te6? because of 16 ..txe6 fxe6
17 ':xf8+ �xf8 18 'iVb3 Wc8 19 dxes
dxe s 20 tiJC4.
16 :xf6 !
I wouldn't h ave thought Radjabov
spent too long on thi s move. It looks,
and is, a very dangerous sacrifice.
16 ... gxf6 17 'ii' h 5 �g7 18 ':f1
18 ... .ie6
If 18 ... tiJg6 there follows 19 tiJfS+
..txfS 20 exfs tiJe7 2 1 tiJe4! tiJg8 (or
2 1...dS 2 2 tiJxf6 ! ) 2 2 .l::tf3 dS 2 3 :1g3+
�h 7 24 'iVg4 and m ate with Wg 7.
19 .l:tf3 ! (5
Black needs to keep his bishop on e6
to provide at least some protection for
his shaky light squares. After 19 ... ..txb3
20 .l:tg 3 + ! (20 axb3 .:r.h 8 ! ) 20 ... �h 7 21
axb3 it's extremely difficult for Black to
defend: 2 1...'ii' d 7 22 tiJdf3 ! planning
tiJh 2-g4, or 2 1 . ..exd4 2 2 .l:tg4! dxe 3 23
tiJfs tiJxfs 24 'ii'xfS+ �h 8 25 'ii'h s �h 7
26 .l:th4 and White m ates.
20 :g3+
White could have kept some advan­
tage with 20 ..txe6 fxe6 2 1 'iVg4+. Black
has to allow 2 1...�h 7 2 2 Wxe6, since

21 ... Wf7 ? 2 2 dS ! exds 2 3 exds intend­
ing lLle4 i s very strong .
20 ... Wh7
21 .txe6?
Missing a great ch ance. Although 2 1
.txe6 i s undoubtedly tempting, i t only
leads to perpetual check.
Radjabov could have pl ayed 2 1 lLlfS !
ttJxfS 2 2 exfs .txb3 2 3 axb3, which
would h ave given him a very danger­
ous attack, and probably a winning
one. For example, 2 3 ... exd4 (or 2 3 ... 'i!Ve7
24 1:.g4 :g8 2 S l::th 4 'fif8 2 6 lLle4) 24
ttJe4! dxe3 2 S .l:!.g4! e2 2 6 Wf2 ! ,
and there is no good defence to the
threat of :h4.
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
21 ..• fxe6 22 :g6 lLlxg6 23 'i!Vxg6+ Wh8
2 4 'iVxh6+ Wg8 25 'iVg6+
The winning try for White is 2 s lLlg 6
threatening 2 6 'i!Vh 8+ Wf7 2 7 'iVh 7+
We8 28 'iVg 7 ! . The only defence for
Black is 2 s .. :iVd7 ! but it's good enough.
A key point i s th at after 26 'iVh 8+ 'iti>f7
2 7 'iVh 7+ We8 2 8 lLlxf8 'iVxh 7 2 9 lLlxh 7
We7, as indicated by Malcolm Pein in
CHESS, White's knight on h 7 i s trapped.
25 .•. Wh8 2 6 'iVh6+ 1/z-1/z
It seem s only right to include a Tivi­
akov g ame with .te3, since he was the
one player who really put thi s move on
the m ap .
Game 25
S.Tivia kov-D.De Vreugt
Die re n 2003
1 e4 e 5 2 .tc4 lLlf6 3 d 3 .tC5 4 lLlf3 lLlc6
5 c3 d6 6 .tb3 a6 7 0-0 .ta7 8 .te3
With this move order, if White
wants to play .te3 there's no reason to
hesitate. As we see in this game and in
10 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
some sub-variations, White might not
have to play h 3 at all .
However, it's al so worth mentioning
the move order s ... a6 6 0-0 iJ.. a 7 7 iJ.. b 3
0-0 where Bl ack holds back with his d­
pawn and can con sider meeting 8 iJ.. e 3
with 8 ... dS ! ? For example, 9 exds liJxds
10 iJ.. x a7 l:txa7 11 Itel liJf4 12 d4 exd4
13 cxd4 iJ.. g 4, as played in S.Zagrebelny­
A.Aleksandrov, Moscow 2004. If White
wishes to avoid this possibility, he can
play 8 h3 intending 9 iJ.. e 3 only after
8 ... d6.
8 0-0 9 liJbd2 liJe7
.•.
Thi s typical knight move has been
Black's most popular choice, but it does
allow White to carry out his intended
plan . In particul ar, White can now play
liJh4 without worryin g about ... liJxe4
tactics.
Let's look at some alternatives in
thi s position :
a) 9 ... iJ.. x e3 10 fxe3 reaches a struc­
ture simil ar to the previous g ame, with
White h avin g an open-file for his rook.
As I mentioned there, these position s
are usually easier for White to play,
because his pl an s - usually involving
action on the kingside - are m ore obvi­
ous. An example: 10 ... liJas 11 iJ.. c 2 cs 12
'ii'e l liJh s 1 3 a3 ! ? g 6 14 b4 liJc6 1 5 iJ.. b 3
liJg 7 16 iJ.. d s (16 d4! ?) 16 ... cxb4 1 7 axb4
iJ.. e 6 18 liJC4 with a bit of pressure,
F.Vallejo Pon s-A.5hirov, Dos H ermanas
2008.
b) 9 ... iJ.. e 6 i s solid, but 10 iJ.. x e6 fxe6
11 iJ.. x a7 l:i.xa7 12 'iWb3 'ike7 1 3 d4 still
offers White chances of an advantage.
1 10
The structure is reversed from the
previous note; thi s tim e Black pos­
sesses the open f-file. However, White
has been able to advance in the centre
and activate his queen, and further­
more Black's rook on a7 is mi splaced -
all of thi s m akes a difference.
S.Tiviakov-H .Jonkman, Santo Domingo
2002, continued 1 3 ... liJd7 14 a4 as 15
'iYbs 'iff6 16 ds with an edge for White.
c) Black's best m ove might well be
9 ... h 6 ! . Thi s prepares ... .l:.e8 and, if
White does nothing, ... dS. The problem
for White is that 10 liJh4? is met simply
by 10 ... liJxe4 ! . Typical play from here is
10 h3 lte8 and now:
Cl) If 1 1 liJh4 ! ? liJxe4? White h as 12
'ifh s ! . H owever, Black can play
1 1 ... liJas ! intending 1 2 iJ.. c 2? (12 'ii'f3 ! is
best) 12 ... liJxe4! .
(2) Tiviakov h as pl ayed 1 1 l:tel
iJ.. x e3 ! 12 fxe 3 ! ?, but of course the rook
is not ideally placed on el here.
c3) 11 iJ.. x a7 ':xa7 12 li!el liJe7 1 3 d4
liJg 6 14 liJC4 iJ.. e 6 1 5 dxes iJ.. x c4 16
iJ.. x c4 liJxe s 17 liJxe s dxe s 18 'iYb3 'ife7
19 a4 c6 20 as :taa8 with an equal po-

sition, R. Felg aer-A.Onischuk, Buenos
Aires 200 5 .
In summ ary, 9 ... h 6 ! i s a very solid
option which seem s to promise Bl ack a
position with level chances.
10 ttJh41
So simpl e ! White plan s St.xa7 fol ­
lowed by f2-f4, after which the position
will resemble a King's G ambit Declined
- and a good version for White - rather
than an Italian Game.
Tiviakov h as noted th at the m ove
order 10 St.xa7 .l:i.xa7 11 ttJh4 allows
Black the possibility of 11 ... gS prevent­
ing f4. Still, even thi s position looks
quite promi sing for White after 12
"i'f3 ! ttJd7 (Bl ack must avoid 12 ... g xh4
13 'iVxf6 ttJg 6 ? ! 14 St.xf7+! ) 1 3 ttJfS (and
White should probably avoid 1 3 'iWe3
gxh4! 14 'ilYxa7 ttJb6 ! ) 1 3 ...ttJxfS 14 exfs .
10 (61!
...
This looks a bit slow and it does
nothing to challenge White's basic
plan . Let's con sider altern atives:
a) 10 ... ttJg6 1 1 ttJxg 6 hxg6 12 St.xa7
':'xa7 1 3 f4 c6 transposes to the m ain
game, and thi s was actually the move
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
order adopted in both games in the
n ote to White's 14th m ove.
b) With f4 coming, 10 ... St.e6 in order
to relieve some of the pressure ag ain st
f7 looks sen sible. Even so, White still
keeps an edge with 11 St.xa7 ':'xa7 12
f4, and he gradually built up some
pressure on the king side after 12 ... exf4
1 3 l:txf4 dS 14 d4 cS 1 5 eS ttJd7 16 St.C2
in Z. Efimenko-B.Avrukh, Saint Vincent
200 5 .
c ) 10 ... St.g4 ! ? 1 1 'i!Vel ! i s not even a
minor inconvenience, unless Black con­
tinues with 1 1 ... ttJh S ! to prevent f4.
B.Michiels- P.Vandevoort, Pays de
Charleroi 2003, continued 12 h 3 St.e6
13 'iVdl (perh aps 13 St.xe6 fxe6 14
St.xa7 l:[xa7 15 g3 l:ta8 16 'iWe2 ttJf6 17
'i£i>h 2 and slowly building for f4, a la
Karpov-Yusupov) 13 ... ttJf4 (Black is close
to equality after 13 ... ttJg 6 ! 14 ttJxg 6
St.xb3 1 5 'ii'x b3 hxg6 16 d4 l:tb8) 14
St.xf4! exf4 1 5 'iif3 St.xb3 16 axb3 ttJg6
1 7 ttJxg 6 fxg 6 18 'ilYg4 'iVf6 19 ttJf3 ':ae8
20 lUel c6 21 b4 .:te7 22 l:te2 l:tfe8 2 3
l:tael with a n edge - d4 and eS will
eventually arrive.
111
Beating 1 e4 eS
d) There's still time to pl ay 10 ... �xe3
here: 11 fxe3 �h S (or 11 ... lDg6 12 lDfs
c6 13 d4 ds 14 'iff3 �e6 1 5 l:1ae1 with a
small advantage for White, D.Barua­
K.Sasikiran, Nagpur 2002) 12 h3 lDeg S
1 3 'ii'e 1 g 6 14 g4! ? "ike7 1 5 'ifg 3 lDeS 16
.:tf2 lDg7 17 l:taf1 �e6 lS d4 l:!.aeS 19
lDhf3 f6, as played in I . Khamrakulov­
A.Rizouk, Lorca 2005, demon strates
good defence by Black. White enjoys
more freedom, but Black's position is
difficult to break down.
11 �xa 7 ! l:[xa 7 12 f4!
Of course! I definitely prefer White's
ch ances here.
12 ... lDg6 1 3 lDxg6 hxg6
112
14 fxe 5
It's possible that 14 "ikf3 might be
even stronger. What i s certainly true is
that it has led to three easy win s fOT
White. Strangely (and promisingly
from our perspective !), in all three
g ames Bl ack fell for the same trap:
14 ... 'iVb6+ (thi s plan is flawed; Simon
Williams' suggestion of 14 ... b s offering
protection to f7 would h ave been
wiser) 15 �h 1 �g4 16 'ifg 3 ! �e2 ? (in­
tending ... lDh s after rook moves, but...)
17 fxe s ! �xf1 (or 1 7 ... dxes lS l:txf6 !
gxf6 19 'ifxg6+ �h S 20 'ifxf6+ �gS 21
l:te1 'ilfe3 2 2 lDC4 'jffx d3 23 lDxes and
1-0, V.5ikula-M. Hrenic, Latschach 2006)
lS exf6 �xg 2+ ( Bl ack chose to suffer
less in W.Hendriks-D.Ledger, H astings
200S/09, with lS ... �e2 19 'ifxg 6 'ii'x b3
20 'ii'x g 7 m ate) 19 �xg 2 ds 20 fxg7
l:teS 2 1 l:ttl and White soon won in
D.5advakasov-H .Melkumyan, Dubai
2007.
14 ... dxe5 1 5 lDf3 �g4!
If ls .. :ii'e7, 16 lDg s planning 'ife1-
h4 looks promising for White.
16 'ii'e l lDd 7 ?

Thi s i s a blunder. Black would still
be fighting after 16 ... i.xf3 17 ':'xf3 a s !
intending 18 'iVg 3 ? ! a4! .
1 7 'iVg3 ! i.xf3 18 l:txf3
The pressure ag ain st f7, g6 and e5 i s
too much t o handle, and Black loses a
pawn by force.
18 ltJcs 19 i. xf7+! l:1xf7 20 lixf7 'fit xf7
•..
21 'iVf2+ 1-0
Resignation is a bit premature, but
perh aps De Vreugt didn 't wish to ex­
perience Tiviakov's renowned tech­
nique. After 2 1...'fitg8 2 2 'ii'x c5 l:1a8 2 3
d4 White should win i n the long run .
So far we have concentrated on
Black's m ost popular choice, 7 ... i.. a 7,
but in the next two g ames we con sider
7 ... 0-0 and 7 ... i.. g 4.
Game 26
S.Tivia kov-D.Pavasovic
E u ropea n C h a m pions h i p,
Plovd iv 2008
1 e4 e S 2 i.C4 ltJf6 3 d 3 ltJc6 4 ltJf3 i.cs
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
S c3 d6 6 i.b3 a6 7 0-0 0-0
Perh aps one the m ain reason s
7 ... i.a7 i s played so often i s because it
really does discourage 8 i.g 5 ? ! . Given
th at Black has yet to commit his king,
and furtherm ore White h as committed
his, Bl ack shouldn 't hesitate to advance
on the king side: 8 ... h 6 ! 9 i.h4?! (it's not
too l ate for 9 i.e3 ! ) 9 ... g 5 ! 10 i.g 3 (it's
pretty obvious th at the piece sacrifice
10 ltJxg 5 ? hxg 5 11 i.xg 5 shouldn 't
work, and 11.. . .:.g 8 ! 12 h4 i.g4 is a g ood
reply) 10 .. :fie7.
Black will castle queen side, and the
time gained attacking the white bishop
with ... h6 and ... g5 will give him a vital
head start in the race of pawn storm s.
For example, 11 ltJbd2 i.d7 12 d4 0-0-0
13 d5 ltJb8 14 i.a4 lidg 8 15 i.xd7+
ltJbxd7 16 'fith l ltJf8 17 ltJg l h5 18 f3 h4
19 i.f2 i.xf2 20 l:1xf2 g4 and Black is
the only one attacking, G.Carames­
G . Flear, San Sebastian 1995. This i s cer­
tainly a line that White needs to avoid.
Incidentally, if you really want to
warn someone about the dangers of
combining i.g 5 and 0-0 wh en Black
1 13
Beating 1 e4 e5
hasn't castled, then the following, of­
ten quoted and quite beautiful line
usually does the trick: 5 0-0 d6 6 �g s ? !
h 6 7 �h4?! g s ! 8 � g 3 h s ! ? (8 . . .�g4 i s a
good alternative, with a safe edge for
Black) 9 ttJxg s h4 10 ttJxf7
10 ... hxg 3 ! ! 11 ttJxd8 �g4 12 'iVd2
ttJd4 13 ttJC3 ttJf3+ ! 14 gxf3 �xf3 and,
faced with an inevitable m ate, White
resigned in V. Knorre-M.Chigorin, st
Petersburg 1874.
Returning to the game, and the po­
sition after 7 ... 0-0:
8 �g51?
If �g s i s a good idea when only
Black h as castled, and a bad idea when
1 14
only White has castled, wh at about
when both sides h ave castled?
' Doubled-edged' i s probably an ac­
curate assessm ent. Once the bi shop is
forced back to g 3 , White must work
h ard to avoid it being shut out of the
g ame. On the other hand, Black's
weaknesses on the king side won't go
away.
If White wants to reach lines identi­
cal or similar to those we've already
covered in thi s chapter, he can simply
play 8 :e1. Black will nearly always re­
treat prophyl actically with ... iJ.. a 7 to
tran spose directly, either here or a bit
later. Occasion ally, though, Bl ack keeps
his bishop on cS, and after a subse­
quent ... ds there's the option of retreat­
ing it to f8 to cover the kin g side.
H ere are some possibilities: 8 ... h 6 9
ttJbd2 �e6 (note that if 9 ... ttJg4 10 .l::t e 2
..t>h 8, 11 h 3 ! forces the knight back to f6
and thwarts Black's .. .fs plan - thi s is
one drawback of ... h 6).
Warnin g ! White must avoid 10
iJ.. c 2? here, in view of the tactic
10 ... ttJg4! 11 :e2 �xf2+! 12 ':'xf2 ttJe3

13 'ili'e2 tDxc2 14 l:tbl ii.xa2 when i s b 3
ii.xbl 16 tDxb l tD2b4 17 cxb4 tDxb4
favours Black.
10 h3 shoul d be played. For exam ­
ple, 10 ... .:te8 1 1 tDh 2 (or 1 1 tDfl ii.xb3
12 axb3 dS 1 3 'iVe2 ii.f8 14 tDg 3 g 6 i s
b 4 'iVd7 with a n equal position,
M.Erdogdu-L.Aronian , Bursa 2010)
11 ... dS (11 ... ii.xb3 12 axb3 dS 1 3 b4 ii.f8
14 'iVf3 dxe4 i s dxe4 'iVd7 16 tDC4 l:.ad8
17 tDg4 tDxg4 18 hxg4 'iVe6 19 tDe3
tDe7 20 'iVe2 c6 21 tDC4 tDc8 22 ii.e3
tDd6 al so offers equal ch ances,
A.5hchekachev-R.Kholmov, Om sk/Perm
1998) 12 'iVf3 'iYd7 13 tDdfl 'ith 7 14
ttJg 3 l:.ad8 i s ii.c2 d4! ? 16 c4! ? and
there's a ten se battl e in prospect, with
White attacking the king side and Black
seeking action on the other win g .
D.Lobzh anidze-D.5vetushk i n , Dres­
den Olympiad 2008, continued 16 ... bS
17 cxbS tDb4 18 ii.bl axbs 19 a3 tDa6
20 tDfS tDg8 2 1 tDg4 f6 2 2 ii.a2 ! (it's
definitely worth getting rid of the Ital ­
ian bishop here ! ) 2 2 ... ii.xa2 2 3 l:.xa2
'i'e6 24 l:tal ii.f8 2S 'iVg 3 cS 2 6 a4 b4 2 7
i.d2 tD e 7 28 f4! tDxfS 29 exfs 'ilfxfs 3 0
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
fxe s h S ? (30 .. .fxes 3 1 lifl 'iVg 6 3 2
ii.xh 6 ! i s unclear) 3 1 l:tfl 'iVg 6 3 2 :xf6
( 3 2 tDxf6+! g xf6 3 3 'iVxg6+ <iit x g 6 34
l:txf6+ i s good for White) 3 2 ... g xf6 3 3
tDxf6+ <iit g 7 3 4 tDxh S+ <iith 7 3 S tDf6+
<iit g 7 3 6 tDh S+ with a draw by perpetual
check.
One further point worth m ention­
ing here i s that 8 ii.e3, although still
playable, l acks a bit of punch . Because
Bl ack h as not yet played ... ii.a7,
8 ... ii.xe3 9 fxe3 leaves him a tempo
ahead of lines con sidered in Games 24-
2 S . If White is really keen to play the
ii.e3 plan, 8 h 3 intending to m eet
8 ... ii.a7 with 9 ii.e3 is a wiser option .
S h6 9 ii. h4 g 5 1
...
At some point Black i s going to have
to take action again st the pin, and now
i s as good a time as any. One strong
reason not to del ay ... gs i s that 10
tDxg s fail s here: 10 ... hxg s 11 ii.xg s <iit g 7
12 'iVf3 ,Uh 8 intending 1 3 'iVg 3 tDh S !
(Karpov).
If Black delays ... g s there might well
be occasion s where tDxg s is a promis­
ing sacrifice. For example, 9 ... ii.e6 10
1 15
Beating 1 e4 e5
liJbd2 l:[e8 11 'it>h l ! ? (A.Cherniaev­
S.Haslinger, H astings 2006/07) l1...g S
12 liJxg S ! ? hxg s 13 .ixg s, intending f4.
Moreover, if White chooses the safe 12
.ig 3, Black's ....ie6 and ...lIe8 don 't
really fit in with the ... g s plan .
Fin ally, if 9 ... .ig4 10 h 3 .ih s 1 1 g4!
.ig6 12 liJbd2 and Bl ack has lost his
chance to pl ay ... g s altogether.
10 .ig3
10 ... .ig4
If Black coul d quickly reroute his c6-
knight to g 6 he really would be doing
well (compare thi s with the next g ame,
with colours reversed). Fortunately for
White, 10 ... liJe7 can be met strongly by
1 1 d4! when the pressure on e S brings
the g 3 -bishop right back to life.
Something that Black must al so
avoid i s 10 ... liJh S ?, as the l l liJxe s ! trick
works here: 11...liJxg 3 12 liJxc6 bxc6 1 3
h x g 3 etc.
10 ... .ia7 11 liJbd2 i.. g 4 transposes
to the note to Black's 11th move, below.
ll liJbd2
I wonder whether White should
con sider 1 1 h 3 ! ? here. After l1.. . .ih s (if
1 16
11.. . .id7 ! ?, 12 d4 .ia7 1 3 .:tel or 13
'ii'd 3) 12 liJbd2 White adopts the same
plan seen in the next note, with liJc4-
e 3 . J . Nun -J . Franzen, Trn ava 1985, con­
tinued 12 ... Vd7 13 liJC4 .ia7 14 Ve2
'it>g 7 1 5 liJe3 liJe7 16 l:Iadl liJh 7 ? 17 d4!
fS 18 liJxfS+ liJxfS 19 exfs ':'xfS and
here Rybka 's suggestion of 20 dxes
':xf3 2 1 'it>h 2 ! looks very good for
White, intending 2 1..J:txg 3 2 2 'ili'xh S.
Experience i s scarce at the moment,
but thi s looks like a line worth pursu­
ing.
1 1 liJhS!
••.
Early on there was a high-profile
game, M.Ch andler-A. Karpov, Bath
1983, which probably di scouraged
some players from using thi s line:
11...i.. a 7 12 'it>h l (intending to meet
12 ... liJh s with 1 3 h 3 ! liJxg 3 + 14 fxg 3)
12 ... .ih S ! 1 3 'ii'e l (13 liJc4!) 1 3 ... 'it>g 7 14
.idl i.. g 6 15 liJC4 ];te8 16 .ic2 'it'd7 17
Vd2 l:r.ad8 when Karpov had a rock­
solid position and went on to win.
However, I really don't see a reason
for White to delay the liJc4-e3 plan
seen in the previous note, and thi s pre-

sents Black with m ore of a ch allenge:
12 h 3 �h S (if 1 2 ...�d7 White can play
13 ttJc4 ttJh S 14 �h 2 ttJf4 1 5 ttJe3 with
an unclear position, or perhaps 13 �h 2
preventing 1 3 ... ttJh S in view of 14
ttJxes) 1 3 ttJC4! �g6 14 ttJe3
14 ... 'it>g 7 (I think Black should pl ay
14 ... ttJh S 1 5 �h 2 ttJf4 16 'ii'd 2 'it>g 7 17
�dS with unclear pl ay) 1 5 'ii'd 2 ttJe7 16
h4! g4 17 ttJh 2 'ii'c 8 18 �dl h S 19 �C2
�c6 20 Itae l ! 'it'd7 21 'it>h l 'it>g8 2 2 f4!
exf4 2 3 lIxf4 �xe3 24 'i¥xe3 'ii'e 7 2 5
�fl ttJd8 2 6 l:tf2 ]:te8 2 7 'it'd2 ttJd7 2 8
�e3 ttJb6 29 ttJfS 'ili'f8 30 eS dS 3 1 lIefl
Wh 8 32 b3 with a dominating position
for White, B.Philippeit-A. Beyer, corre­
spondence 2004 (in fact, Black resigned
here). Okay, Bl ack's defence was far
from perfect, but thi s ttJc4-e3 plan does
give him something to think about.
12 'it>h11
Releasing the pin on the f-pawn so
that White can play h 3 .
White definitely should avoid 12
tDC4 'it'f6 ! 1 3 ttJe3 il.xf3 14 'ii'xf3 'i¥xf3
15 g xf3, as played in A.Vajda-Z.Gyimesi,
Nagykanizsa 2003. It's hard to see the
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
bishop on g3 taking any further part in
the g am e !
1 2 'it'f6
..•
The m ost n atural follow-up to
11 ... ttJh S, but Bl ack has other decent
option s here:
a) 12 ... 'it>g7 1 3 h3 �d7 14 ttJh 2
ttJxg 3 + 1 5 fxg 3 fS ! (one of the points of
12 ... 'it>g7) 16 exfs �xfS 17 ttJe4 �b6 18
g4 �xe4 19 dxe4 with an equal posi­
tion, S.Tiviakov- E.Van den Doel,
Wolvega 2008.
b) 1 2 ... ttJg 7 ! ? (providing light­
squared cover on the kingside) 1 3 h 3
�h S 1 4 il.h 2 'it>h 8 1 5 ttJC4 'it'f6 16 g 4
� g 6 17 ttJe3 ttJe6 18 ttJfS �a7 19 'i¥e2
with an almost symmetrical position,
again roughly level, K.5hanava­
G.5argissian, European Ch ampion ship,
Dresden 2007.
13 h 3 il.d7
14 ttJd4
14 d4! ? is critical but Black seems to
be okay: 14 ... exd4 (14 ... �a7? 15 ttJxe s ! )
1 5 e s ! ? (15 ttJxd4 ttJf4 16 ttJxc6 �xc6 1 7
'ili'f3 was agreed drawn i n J. Nunn­
J . Pinter, Hel sinki 1983) l S ... 'ii'g 6 !
1 17
 Bea ting 1 e4 e5
(ls ... dxe s ? ! 16 ltJe4 "ile7 17 ltJfxg s
ltJxg 3+ 18 fxg 3 hxg s 19 'ii'h s win s for
White - Nunn; or l s ... ltJxg 3 + 16 fxg 3
'ii'g 6 1 7 cxd4 ltJxd4 1 8 ltJxd4 i.. xd4 19
l::tf6 ! 'iWg 7 20 'ilVh s ! ) 16 cxd4 ltJxd4 17
ltJxd4 i.. xd4 and it's not clear whether
White has enough play for his pawn
investment, although thi s could do
with a test.
14 ... ltJf4
After 14 ... exd4 1 5 'iWxh s Bl ack h as
some problem s to solve, with f4 or
e s /ltJe4 ideas in the air.
1 S ltJxc6 i.. x c6 16 ltJC4 d S !
Thi s seem s t o equalize.
17 ltJxe s ! ? 'iWxe s 18 d4 i.. x d4
18 ... "ilxe4 19 f3 "ilie7 20 l:%.el "ild6 2 1
dxcs �xcs 2 2 i.. xf4 gxf4 2 3 'iWd3 i s a
risky pawn for Black to take.
19 exd s i.. xd s 20 i.. xf4 'ii'xf4 2 1 i.. xd s
i.. e s
H ere the database gives 2 1 ... "ilfs ??
2 2 g 3 77, but 2 1 ... i.. e s i s a thousand
times more likely!
22 g3 Yz-Yz
We've seen that pinning with i.. g s
1 18
is sometimes good, sometimes bad and
occasion ally somewhere in-between -
it all depends on the specifics of the
position . The same cannot be said
about ... i.. g 4. Although it might be
stretching things to call thi s outwardly
enticing m ove an outright mistake,
White is usually more than h appy to
see it arrive on the board.
In the notes to Game 17 we saw
how White can deal effectively with an
early ... i.. g 4 if he h asn 't castled. In the
followin g g am e White h as committed
his kin g , but a similar plan should still
promise him some advantage.
Game 2 7
S.Kindermann­
M.Dietmayer Kraeutler
Austri a n League 2007
1 e4 e S 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 i.. C 4 i.. c s 4 c3 ltJf6
5 d 3 a 6 6 0-0 d6 7 i.. b3 i.. g 4
8 ltJbd 2 !
Black h as yet t o commit h i s king,
and he shouldn't b e encouraged to at-

tack on the kingside. 50 White should
avoid giving Bl ack a 'hook' with 8 h 3 ? !
i.h s 9 tLlbd2, when 9 . . .h 6 followed by
... g s would be a tempting plan.
8 0-0
...
If Black in sists on castling long,
White leaves the king side alone and
just organizes action on the other
wing . For example, 8 ... 'iWd7 9 .l:tel 0-0-0
10 i.c2 ! d5 11 b4 i.a7 12 a4! etc.
9 h3
Now it's okay to put the question to
the bishop, although there's al so noth­
ing wrong with pl aying 9 .l:.el first.
9 i. h s
...
It might be better just to accept the
loss of tim e and retreat to e6.
1 0 l:te1
There's no point del ayin g the strong
tLlfl-g 3 pl an.
10 l:te8
...
10 ... ds can be m et by 11 exd s ! tLlxds
12 tLle4. Thi s can be compared to simi­
lar position s arising in Chapter Two,
but here White's tempo g ain, caused by
... d7-d6-ds, leaves him in control :
12 ... i.a7 1 3 tLlg 3 i.g6 14 tLlxes tLlxe s 1 5
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
l:lxes left White a pawn up for nothing
in P.Lyrberg-J .Barkh agen, Budapest
1993, but giving up the bishop pair
with 1 3 ... i.xf3 14 'iVxf3 i s hardly fun for
Bl ack either.
11 tLlf1 h6
11 ... ds is again premature: 12 exds
tLlxds 13 tLlg 3 i.g 6 14 d4! win s a pawn
with a tactic we've seen before.
11 ... 'ifd7 12 i.g s ! is al so awkward
for Black: 12 ... i.g6 13 i.xf6 gxf6 14
tLlg 3 fs 15 exfs i.xfs 16 tLlg s i.g 6 17
'iWf3 'ife7 18 tLlse4 'it>h 8 19 tLlfs 'iVf8 20
tLlf6 l:ted8 21 h4 i.b6 22 i.ds :ab8 2 3
h s with a dominating position,
V.spasov-M.Mitkov, I stanbul 2001.
12 tLlg3
Thi s i s good enough, but White can
play with even more ambition : 12 g4!
i.g 6 (White i s well enough protected
after 12 ... tLlxg4 13 hxg4 i.xg4 14 'it>g 2
'iVf6 1 5 i.e3) 1 3 tLlg 3 .
The h 3 /g4 set-up is particularly ef­
fective when reinforced by a knight on
g 3 , which i s useful both in defence and
attack. White has a firm grip on the
kingside and if he isn 't careful Black
1 19
Beating 1 e4 e5
can easily get squashed, as in the fol­
lowing example: 1 3 ... 'iWd7 14 ltJh4 �h 8
1 5 �g 2 ltJe7 (ls ... ltJd8 planning ... ltJe6
looks wi ser) 16 g s ! ? (16 'iWf3 ltJh 7 17
ltJhfs i s solid and good) 16 ... ltJfg 8 17
'ii'g 4! 'ii'x g4 18 hxg4 as (or 18 ... hxg s 19
ltJxg 6+ ltJxg 6 20 �xg s and llh l+ is
coming) 19 1:[h l a4 20 �C2 �h 7 21
gxh6 gxh 6 2 2 gs and White soon won,
T. Halmeenmaeki-G. Buchh auser, corre­
spondence 2000.
12 ... �g6
12 ... .i.xf3 13 'i!Vxf3 would just be an
admission that the whole pl an with
... �g4 was misguided. ltJfs is coming
and White has a ready-m ade attack.
1 3 ltJh4!?
If White doesn 't want to sacrifice
the exch ange and enter the following
complications, 1 3 ltJh 2 intending 'ikf3
i s reasonable, or just 1 3 'ii'e 2. One nice
line, certainly not forced, i s 1 3 'ii'e 2
�h 7 (13 .. :iVd7 i s met by 14 ltJh4!) 14
ltJh 2 ds 15 ltJg4 ltJxg4 16 'iVxg4 'ii'f6 17
ltJh s ! 'ifxf2+ 18 �h 2 �g6 19 �xh 6 !
(over-protecting g l ! ) 19 ... gxh6 20 :e2
and White wins !
120
13 ... ltJxe4!
Definitely the best. After 1 3 ... .i.h 7
14 'ikf3 Black i s already under con sider­
able pressure on the king side and he
h as absolutely no counterplay.
14 l:[xe4! �xe4 1 5 'ifg4 .i.xd 3 16 ltJh5
g 5 17 'ii'f3 �h8
17 ... ds 18 'ili'xd3 gxh4 19 'ii'f3 i s good
for White.
18 'ii'xd 3 gxh4 19 'ii'f 5 :g8 20 �xh6
20 �xf7 might be stronger. Rybka 's
m ain line i s 20 ... 'ii'e 7 2 1 �xg 8 :xg 8 22
�xh 6 ltJd8 23 ltJf6 'ii'f7 24 �g s ltJe6 25
�xh4 and White i s better, although the
position remain s complicated.
20 ... 'ife7?
After 20 ... :g 6 ! White might well be
advised to accept the perpetual line 21
�g7+ l:[xg 7 2 2 ltJxg 7 �xg 7 2 3 'ifxf7+
�h 8 24 'i!Vh s+ �g 7 2 5 'ikf7+ etc.
2 1 ltJf6 !
Now White is firmly back in control.
2 1 .. .1::t g 6 2 2 'ifh 5 'ifxf6
2 2 ... �xf2+! 2 3 �h l 'iWxf6 24 �gs+
�g 7 25 .i.xf6+ :xf6 would have been a
toug her nut to crack.
23 �g5+ �g7 24 .i.xf6+ :txf6 25 'ifg5+
:g6 26 'ifxh4 :h8
And here Bl ack should h ave tried
26 .. .fs .
2 7 'ili'e4 ':xh3 2 8 'iVf5 !
N ow i t really i s over a s a contest.
28 ••• :h7 2 9 'ii'xf7+ �h6 30 'ii'f 8+ :hg7
31 'ili'h8+ l:h7 32 'iVf8+ l:.hg7 33 �d5
lig4 34 'iWf6+ :7g6 35 'ii' h 8+ �g5 36
:d1 :f4 3 7 :d2 .i.b6 3 8 g3 1:[g4 3 9 �g2
e4 40 lle2 �f5 41 �xe4+ l::t x e4 42
'i!Vh5+ 1-0

Came 28
D.Bronstein-B.lvkov
Amsterd a m 1968
1 e4 e S 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 �C4 �CS 4 c3 ttJf6
5 d3 d6 6 J.. b 3
Even if White i s planning to castl e
king side under most circum stances, I
think 6 �b3 i s a good m ove ag ain st
5 ... d6 because:
1. It forces Black to be careful with
move orders. More specifically, 6 ... 0-0
can be an swered by 7 J.. g s ! .
2. With ... d s much less likely after
... d6, White can afford to delay castling
for a m ove or two.
6 ... h6 7 0-0
7 ttJbd2, togeth er with sixth -move
altern atives for Black, was discussed in
Erenburg- Kreizburg (Game 17), where
White del ayed castling.
7 0-0 S ttJbd2
.••
Of course there's nothing wrong
with 8 Iiel, but in thi s g am e White
tries something a bit different.
S �e6
.••
Even here Black often plays 8 ... a6,
when 9 !tel would tran spose to norm al
lines.
If Black plays 8 ... �b6, 9 ttJC4 i s a
logical reply after which 9 ... �e6 tran s­
poses to the m ain g ame.
9 ttJC41?
Thi s i s an attempt to both utilize
the early ttJbd2 and exploit Black's
omission of ... a6 and ... �a7. White
avoids the exchange of bishops and
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
now Bl ack must be wary of d4-ds.
9 �b6
•••
9 ... b s ! ? i s double-edged: it forces the
exchange of light-squared bishops but
at a cost of offering White something
to attack on the queenside. 10 ttJe3
�b6 (10 .. :.d7 ! i s better) 11 �xe 6 ! fxe6
12 a4 a6 1 3 axbs axbs 14 :has 'ii'x a8
15 'ifb3, forking b s and e6, i s the type
of line th at Black has to avoid.
Strangely enough, the risky-looking
9 ... a6 i s actually pl ayable here. If 10 d4
(10 .:tel and 10 a4 are decent alterna­
tives) 10 ... exd4 11 cxd4, Black doesn't
have to play 11 ... �xC4 to avoid losing a
piece - he can play 11 ... b s ! ? Here 12
dxcs bXc4 1 3 �a4 ttJes 14 ttJxes dxe s
was roughly level in M.Maric-F.l zeta
Txabarri, Oviedo (rapid) 1993.
10 a4
10 ttJxb6 axb6 i s less ch allenging for
Bl ack because White cannot keep the
bi shop pair; for example, 11 Iiel �xb3
12 �xb3 :e8 13 'ilVC2 'ilVd7 with a level
position, K.Asrian-V. Korchnoi, Dagomys
2008.
10 ... lieS
121
Beating 1 e4 e 5

Lining up the possibility o f... ds. 1 1 : e l �cs ! ? 1 2 as ( 1 2 �a2 ! ?)

The impatient 10 ... �xc4?! i s inad­ 12 ... tDg4! 1 3 tDe3 �xe3 resulted in a
visable, and in R. Ramesh-M.Lodhi, New quick draw in S.Movsesian­
Delhi 2007, Black was soon regretting A.Morozevich, Sarajevo 2008. I wonder
his loss of control of the light squares: whether either player was aware of
11 �xc4 as 12 .:tel tDe7 1 3 tDh4! 'ifd7 thi s earlier game.
14 h3 g s (if 14 ... c6, White plays 15 �a2 11 tDd 7 ? 1
•••

and 'iff3) 1 5 tDf3 tDg 6 16 d4 c;t;>g 7 17 In his notes for Chess Informant 6,
�e3 "fie7 18 tDd2 tDf4 19 �fl tDd7 20 Ivkov prefers 11 ... �xc4 12 dXC4, al­
tDC4 f6 2 1 g3 tDe6 2 2 �e2 .l:Ih 8 2 3 c;t;>h 2 though he still evaluates thi s position
l:f.ad8 24 �h s c;t;>h 7 2 5 �g4 'iff7 2 6 �fs+ as a clear advantage for White. I 'm not
c;t;>g 7 2 7 b3 with a large advantage. convinced that Black's position is so
10 ... tDd7 1 1 tDxb 6 ?! �xb3 12 "fixb3 bad - he is after all quite solid. That
axb6 was level in Y. Kosashvili­ said, I do still prefer White, who can
Y. Kraidman, Tel Aviv 1989, but I think slowly improve his position and also
White again took on b6 too readily. 11 think about tDh4-fs ideas.
�a2 intending b4 looks stronger to me. 12 asl �XC4 1 3 axb6 �e6 14 bxc7 'ii'xC7
11 �C2 1 l S d4
Thi s is unusual, and a nice example
of Bronstein's renowned creativity.
Bl ack is invited to double White's c­
pawn s, but at a cost of ceding the light
squares and giving White a bind on ds.
Another point i s to protect e4, so that if
11 ... ds White can safely take a pawn
with 12 tDcxe s tDxes 13 tDxe s dxe4 14
dxe4 "fixdl l s .l:!.xdl etc.

Ivkov al so evaluates thi s as a clear

advantage for White. The two bishops,
central control and better structure
indicate that thi s time there's no ar­
gument from m e !
l S . . .�g4 16 d S �xf3 ? 1
16 ... tDe7 i s better, but 17 h 3 �h s 18
g4 �g6 19 tDh4 (Ivkov) i s still very
promising for White.

122

17 'i!Vxf3 l ltJd4 18 cxd4 'iVxC2 19 it.xh6 1
Winning a pawn, in view of
19 ... g xh 6 20 'iVg4+.
White has a virtually deci sive ad­
vantage here but Bron stein begins to
let it slip; and the fin al position, where
the players agreed a draw, i s genuinely
unclear.
19...ltJf6 20 'i!Vg3 ltJ h 5 21 'i!Vg4 g6
22 dxe 5 1
2 2 :acl! 'ii'x b2 2 3 ':'C7 intending
23 ... 'iVxd4 24 'it'd7 (Ivkov) should be
winning for White.
22 ...l:txe 5 23 f3 'ikxb2 24 it.e3 .l:.e7 2 5
'i'h4 ':C7 2 6 g41
And here 26 'ili'g s keeps an edge.
26 . .ltJf6 2 7 l:!.ab1 'ii'e 5 2 8 l:tfd 1 ltJh7 2 9
. included to provide a stern warning for
J:tbc1 :xc1 Yz-Yz
Key Notes
1. Remember to pl ay 9 h3 in stead of
9 ltJbd2 ? ! , which allows Black to seize
the initiative with 9 ... ltJg4!, ... �h 8 and
.. .fS .
2. White needs to prepare d3-d4
properly. A prem ature advance can
Italian Game: Clas si cal Main Line
lead to the centre coming under too
much pressure, m aking it difficult for
White to develop his queenside. Nor­
m ally it's best to wait until the queen 's
knight h as reached the king side before
thinking about thi s advance.
3 . In the m ain line with 9 ... h6,
10 ... ltJh s and 1 1 ... 'iVf6 (Game 18),
White's most promising pl an is to play
it.e3 and then d3-d4. The position looks
deceptively quiet, but there are some
cleverly concealed traps for Bl ack to
negotiate.
4. White should always be looking
for ways to shut the a7-bishop out of
the g ame. There are often tactical
mean s to achieve thi s aim (see, for ex­
ample, Game 2 2 ) .
5. Whenever Black plays . . .ltJh S, both
sides must be wary of possible tactics
involving a discovered attack with ltJxes.
6. The most ambitious way of m eet­
ing the popul ar ... i.e6 plan is with i.c2
(see Games 20-21).
7. Be careful to avoid pl aying on
auto-pilot - White's position doesn 't
pl ay by itself. G ames 19 and 23 are
those who think otherwise!
8. The it.e3 pl an is a good second
option for White (see G ames 24- 2 5 ) . If
An and can struggle again st it, then
m aybe your opponents will too!
9. An early ... it.g4 i s seemingly an
enticing option for Black, especi ally for
inexperienced pl ayers, but White
should be very happy to face thi s move
(see Game 27).
1 23
 C h a pt e r F o u r

Italian Game:
Two Knights Defence

When White plays 4 d3 again st the Two 6 ... d6 7 c3

Knights Defence, there's an invitation
for Bl ack to tran spose to the m ain lines
with 4 .... i.c5 5 c3. Indeed, thi s i s some­
thing which very often happen s. In thi s
ch apter we'll focus o n altern atives to
thi s bi shop development.
Bl ack's most popular alternative by
some di stance i s 4 ... i.e7. I suspect that
thi s m ove i s favoured by those who
norm ally pl ay the closed m ain lines
with ... i.e7 again st the Ruy Lopez, as
Bl ack's system of development is very Bl ack h as arrived at a m ajor cross­
simil ar. roads, an d there are numerous options
A key position, which has ari sen in for him:
literally thousands of games, i s reached a) The most popul ar choice in prac­
after the following moves: tice is the typical RUy Lopez plan of
1 e 4 e s 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 i.C4 liJf6 4 d 3 i.e7 g aining space in the centre and on the
5 0-0 0-0 6 i.b3 queen side, with 7 ... liJa5 8 i.c2 c5. This
White can al so play 6 �el or 6 c3, i s covered in Tiviakov-Werle (Game 29).
an d these are perfectly good options, b) Th e little pawn m ove 7 ... h 6 has
but for repertoire purposes I 've chosen more uses th an you might think. This
to focus entirely on 6 i.b3 . option is con sidered in Nevednichy-

1 24

Mitkov (Game 30), along with 7 ... ttJd7
and 7 .. .c.th B in the notes.
c) Developing the light-squared
bishop to e6 is just as much an option
here as it is in ... iLcs lines. 7 ... iLe6 is
covered in Malakhov-Carl sen (Gam e
3 1), a s well a s 7 ...iL g 4 in the notes.
The following three g ames cover
lines where Black pl ays an early ... dS.
The most significant of these i s un­
doubtedly 6 ... dS (in stead of 6 ... d6).
There are obvious similarities to the
... dS lines we've con sidered in previous
chapters; the only noteworthy differ­
ence is the placement of Bl ack's dark­
squared bishop.
White's most promising option is
Plan B: 7 exds ttJxdS.
In thi s position White must decide
between two possibilities:
a) The ch allenging B l:.e1, leading to
sharp, forcing pl ay, i s the subject of
Tiviakov-Ivani sevic (Game 3 2 ) .
b) B h 3 prevents the ...iL g 4 p i n and
can be con sidered the safer option . Thi s
i s covered in Kramnik-Kasparov, Game
33.
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defence
We also take a look at two other
lines involving an early ... dS. The para­
doxical 6 ... d6 7 c3 dS ! ? is con sidered in
the notes to Game 3 3 , while the sh arp
but theoretically dubious 4 ... dS is cov­
ered in Emms-Wittm ann (Gam e 34).
Fin ally, in Bologan-Tom ashevsky
(Game 3 S) we con sider 4 ... h 6, which i s
Bl ack's best altern ative t o th e m ain
moves, 4 ... iLcs and 4 ... iLe7.
Game 29
S.Tivia kov-J.Werle
Dutch Cha m pion s h i p,
lee uwa rde n 2005
Many of the notes in thi s g ame are
based on Tiviakov's own excellent
notes for Chess Base.
1 e4 e 5 2 iLe4 ttJf6 3 d 3 ttJe6 4 ttJf3 iLe7
5 0-0 0-0 6 iLb3 d6 7 e3 ttJa5 8 iLe2 e5
7 ... ttJas i s a popul ar move, and one
th at i s likely to be played by anyone
who uses the Chigorin Defence
(9 ... ttJas) in the mainline Ruy Lopez; or
the ... ttJas pl an again st a variety of d3
Lopez lines, for example 1 e4 eS 2 ttJf3
ttJc6 3 i.bs a6 4 iLa4 ttJf6 S 0-0 iLe7 6
.l:r.e1 b S 7 iLb3 d6 B c3 0-0 9 d3 ttJas 10
iLC2 cS. Note that thi s position can also
be reached from the m ain game, if
White chooses 6 l:.e1 (in stead of our 6
iLb3 ) and then 6 ... d6 7 c3 ttJas B iLbS !
(White saves the bishop i n a round­
about route) B ... a6 9 iLa4 bS 10 iLC2 cS.
In our line, the positions reached
are simil ar to those in the d3 Lopez,
1 25
Beating 1 e4 e5
with just a couple of slight differences.
A positive for White is that his bi shop
has reached c2 in less time (c4-b3 -C2
in stead of bs-a4-b3-c2). On the other
hand, Black isn't committed to ... a6 and
... bS and might be able to use these two
tempi more effectively el sewhere.
9 U ll
Th e pl an of a3 and b4 to g ain space
is not exactly new, but it's noticeable
th at m any of the leading Italian Game
experts are favourin g thi s approach .
It's certainly a way of tryin g to exploit
Bl ack's l ack of ... a6 and ... bS - White's
plan would be less effective in the
analogous d3 Lopez positions.
One advantage of thi s plan i s that it
can be implem ented at quite a few dif­
ferent moments. For example, White
can play 9 %:tel ltJc6 10 ltJbd2 .l:.e8 and
now, in stead of the traditional 1 1 ltJfl
intending ltJg 3, h 3 and d4 (or ltJe3, h 3 ,
ltJh 2-g4 etc), White can switch with 1 1
a3 .i.f8 12 b 4 when 12 ... a 6 reaches the
note to move 12 in the m ain game. In
S.Tiviakov- L. Bruzon Bauti sta, Calvia
Olympiad 2004, Bl ack in stead chose
1 26
12 ... g 6, but then 1 3 .i.a4! cxb4 14 axb4
.i.d7 15 ltJC4 h6 would have been fa­
vourable for White had he continued
with 16 b S ! ltJas 17 ltJe3, as indicated
by Bruzon .
9 ltJ c6 10 b4 a6
.•.
Black normally prevents the pawn
advancing to b S . If, for example,
10 ... l:e8 White could con sider 11 b S ! ?
ltJ a s 12 c4! (Lukacs) when suddenly the
bl-knight changes course and will be
very effectively developed on c3,
whereas Bl ack's knight on as will take a
while to rejoin the action .
Black i s usually reluctant to swap
pawn s on b4 unless he really h as to:
10 ... cxb4 11 axb4! increases White's
central control and activates the rook
on al.
1 1 l:[e1 l:te8
At first sight the apparently loose
l1 ... dS looks like it shouldn't work at
all, but it's actually playable because
Black can use tactics to avoid losing his
e-pawn :
a} 1 2 exds ltJxds (if 12 .. .'iVxdS 13
ltJbd2 and ltJC4-b6 becomes an idea) 13
h 3 ! ? (preventing ....i.g4; 1 3 1tJxe s ? ltJxes
14 ':'xe s .i.f6 i s Black's idea, while 13
.i.b2 .i.g4! 14 ltJbd2 cxb4 1 5 axb4 ltJf4
left Black quite active in Zhang Zhong­
L. Bruzon Bauti sta, Calvia Olympiad
2004) 13 ... .i.f6 ! ? 14 bxcS ( Dolm atov
suggests 14 ltJfd2 ! ? pl anning ltJe4)
14 ... .i.fs was V. Belikov-S.5magin, Kazan
1995, and n ow White should con sider
15 l:.a2 preparin g d4 to hold on to the
extra pawn .

b) There's something to be said for
12 lLlbd2, intending 12 ... d4 13 cxd4
cxd4 and now 14 �b3 reactivating the
bishop: 14 ... oltd6 1 5 lLlh4 lLle7 16 'ii'f3
i.g4 17 fig 3 etc, R.Picard-T.Cali stri, Gu­
ingamp 2006.
1 2 h3
White often chooses the plan of
lLlbd2 and �b2, aiming for d3-d4, but
Tiviakov tries something a bit different.
The position after 12 lLlbd2 �f8 1 3
i.b2 h a s been seen in a few games.
Some examples:
a) 1 3 ... b S 14 d4! c4 (14 ... exd4 15
cxd4 cxb4 i s met by 16 dS! and here
16 ... bxa 3 ? loses m aterial to 17 �xf6
'i'xf6 18 dxc6; or 14 ... cxd4 1 S cxd4 exd4
16 lLlxd4 lLlxd4 17 �xd4 �b7 18 'lWf3
with an edge for White, R.5chmaltz­
R.Berzin sh, German League 2002) 15 a4
i.b7 16 dS lLle7 1 7 lLlfl g6 18 �Cl �g7
19 lLlg 3 fid7 20 oltd2 l:tec8 2 1 'ii'e 2 lLle8
22 .l:!.a3 lLlC7 23 l:teal was a typically
complex Lopez-styl e battle in
Z.Efimenko-I.Saric, Kerner 2007. With
White beginning to press on the a-file,
Black hit back with 23 .. .fS ! ? and the
Italian Game: Two Kn ig hts Defen ce
unclear complication s continued after
24 exfs lLlcxdS 2 5 lLlh4 lLlf4 26 'iVg4.
b) 13 ... lLlh S 14 lLlfl (thi s time 14
d4! ? offers a g ambit, and 14 ... exd4 1 5
cxd4 cxb4 16 dS bxa3 1 7 �xa3 prom­
i ses decent compen sation) 14 ... g 6 1 5
lLle3 lLlf4?! (thi s wastes time; Hebden
prefers lS ... oltg 7 aiming for an eventual
.. .fS) 16 g 3 lLlh S 17 <itt g 2 �g7 18 �b3 !
(dS i s firmly under White's control)
18 ... �d7 19 h 3 l:.f8 20 lLldS :c8 2 1 d4
with some advantage for White,
C.Bauer-M.Hebden, Escaldes 1998.
c) 1 3 ... �e6 14 h 3 dS (otherwi se it's
White who advances in the centre:
14 ... lLld7 15 d4 cxd4 16 cxd4 exd4 17
lLlxd4 lLlxd4 18 oltxd4 with a small ad­
vantage, A.Areshchen ko-A.Abdulla,
Moscow 2008) l s lLlg S !
l S ... d4 (Black must avoid l S ... �c8?
16 exds lLlxdS 17 'iVh S) 16 l:.bl ! cxb4
(16 ... b S ! ?) 17 cxb4 as 18 bS lLla7 19
lLlxe6 fxe6 (S.Jessel-M.Hebden, Dublin
2008) and here 20 lLlC4 lLld7 21 b6 ! ?
lLlc6 2 2 olta4! l:tc8 2 3 oltCl looks better
for White. He can meet 23 ... lLlcs with
24 oltxc6 .l:!.xc6 2 5 a4 and �a3 .
1 27
Beating 1 e4 e5

12 ... .ltf8 sion so quickly, m aybe 12 �e3 really is

If Black chooses to prevent �g 5 by
playing 12 ... h 6, White can revert back
to the �b2lliJbd2/d4 pl an : 13 �b2 �f8
14 liJbd2 b5 1 5 d4 exd4 16 cxd4 cxd4
17 liJxd4 iLb7 18 liJxc6 �xc6 19 "i¥f3
with a comfortable position for White,
A.5itnikov- D.Antic, Kavala 200 5 .
13 � e 3 1 ?
an effective m ove.
Tiviakov believes th at Bl ack should
prefer 13 ... b 5 . After 14 liJbd2 White has
the possibility of increasing the pres­
sure on c5 with liJb3 .
14 axb4 b 5

1 5 liJbd2
Now White i s ready to take the ini­
Now we see why Tiviakov delayed tiative in the centre by playing d4, so
liJbd2 for so long - he wanted to put Bl ack takes steps to di scourage him
his bishop on e 3 ! Actually, e3 is nor­ from doing so.
m ally a slightly unusual square for the 1 5 ... iLb7 16 � g 5
bishop in thi s line, but here the pres­ If 16 d4, 16 ... exd4 17 liJxd4 dS
sure again st c5 provides at least some equalizes.
justification for it, and it certainly 16 ... h 6 1 7 �h4 �c8
works well in the game.
Tiviakov also mention s the more
natural-looking 13 �g 5 ! ? : "After the
exch ange on f6 the d5-square will be­
come weak and White can hope for the
advantage because of the bad bishop
on f8." Thi s m ove i s always a serious
con sideration if Bl ack pl ays ... iLf8 with ­
out first playing ... h 6 .
1 3 ... cxb4
If Black is forced to release the ten -

128

1 7 ... i.. e 7 i s an idea we've seen pre­
viously, with Black intending to relieve
some pressure with ... tDh S or ... tDd7. I
think White keeps a small plus after 18
tDfl tDd7 19 i.. g 3 , or 18 ... tDh S 19 i.. x e7
'iVxe7 (19 ... tDxe7? 20 tDxe s ! ) 20 tDe3,
intending 20 ... tDf4 2 1 tDdS ! .
1 8 tDfl
It's quite in structive witnessing how
Tiviakov eventually uses all of his mi­
nor pieces to take control of the dS­
square. H e al so con sidered 18 tDb3 ! ?,
which h as the advantage of preventing
... as for the foreseeable future.
18 •.• tDb8
Rerouting the knight to d7. The bat­
tle for the ds-square is in full swing.
19 l:ta 3 tD b d 7 20 tD e 3 'iIIC 7 2 1 i.. b3
21 ... g6
Black misses a chance to eliminate a
weakness and free his position with
2 1...as ! . White can only expect a very
slight advantage after 22 ':xas (22
bxas dS!) 2 2 ... 'iVxc3 2 3 i.. xf6 tDxf6 24
.l::. xbS i.. c 6 2 S l:.b6 tDd7 2 6 l:la6 'i¥xb4 2 7
i.. d S.
2 2 tDh2 i.. g 7
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
And here the pawn sacrifice
22 ... dS ! ? 23 tDxds tDxds 24 i.. x dS i.. x ds
2S exds a s ! 26 l::tx as 'i¥xc3 27 ':xbS
i.. x b4 2 8 tDf3 keeps White's advantage
under control .
2 3 'i!Vf3
If Black does nothing special White
will increase the pressure with tDhg4,
after which all his minor pieces are ei­
ther directly or indirectly controlling
the key ds-square ! Thi s i s brilliant
strategy from Tiviakov - he has basi­
cally won the key battl e to control dS.
However, winning a gam e of chess
again st a strong grandm aster i s rarely
easy. Werle refuses to let his position
slide into passivity. Instead he wi sely
chooses to g ain some activity and prac­
tical ch ances by sacrificing a pawn,
ironically on the very same square
White was aiming to dominate.
23 ... d S ! 24 tDxd s tDxd s 2S i.. xd S i.. xd S
26 exd s 'iVd6 2 7 :ea l tDb8 28 g4
Tiviakov di scarded 28 tDfl in view of
28 .. .fs 29 tDd2 f4 trapping the bishop,
but later he realized th at 30 tDe4 'i¥f8
3 1 'iVg4 g s 3 2 i.. x g s hxg s 3 3 tDxg s
1 29
Beating 1 e4 e5
would gives White a strong attack.
28 ... g5 29 i.. g 3 .l:r.ed8
Now Bl ack win s back the ds-pawn,
but h i s position rem ain s compromi sed.
If White brings his knight to fS it will be
very difficult for Black to save the posi­
tion .
30 'iWe2 'i!kxd 5 3 1 11d1
At first sight it looks like there h as
been a shift in mom entum : Black h as
reg ained his pawn and White h as re­
treated. But in fact Black still h as m ajor
issues to solve here. His position i s full
of weaknesses, especially the light
squares on the kingside, and White h as
a very straightforward pl an of ma-
13 0
noeuvring the knight to the very juicy
outpost on fS . To m ake m atters worse,
Werle was experiencing time trouble
problem s.
3 1 . . .1:tc6
Tiviakov believes that staying active
was Black's best ch ance: 3 1 ... e4 3 2 d4 fS
33 gxfs 'iVxfs 34 i.. x b8 l:txb8 3 S l:txa6
l:r.bc8 36 1\fe3 and "White h as an extra
pawn with advantage". With passive
defence, Black i s probably losing.
3 2 lLlf1!
H ere it comes!
3 2 ... lLld7 3 3 lLle3 'iVe6 34 lLlf5 i..f8? ! 3 5
d4!
Now Black i s unable to avoid losing
m aterial .
35 •.. exd4 3 6 'iVxe6 fxe6
After 36 ... .l:r.xe6 3 7 l::t x d4 l:r.c6 3 8 l:id3,
the pin on the d-file is fatal and White
follows up with R{a3}-al-dl.
3 7 lLlxd4 lLlf6 3 8 lida 1 !
The first pawn drops, and for the
rest of the g am e Tiviakov never loses
his grip.
3 8 l:r.cc8 3 9 lLlxe6 .l:td3 40 l:r.xa 6 l:r.dxc3
..•
41 lLlxg5 ':3c6 42 lLle6 i.. x b4 43 ':xc6

'uxc6 44 l:.a8+ c;ii> h 7 45 ':a7+ 'i?i>g8 46
lZ'ld4 ':'C5 47 lZ'lf5 h S ? 48 lZ'lh6+ c;ii> h 8 49
g5 1-0
A great performance from Tiviakov
and a hugely in structive game. It's re­
assurin g to be reminded that even
strong grandm asters can be outplayed
in these 'quiet' positions.
Game 30
V.Nevednichy-M.Mitkov
E u ropea n C h a m pio n s h i p,
O h rid 2001
1 e4 e 5 2 lZ'lf3 lZ'lc6 3 �C4 lZ'lf6 4 d 3 �e7
5 0-0 d6 6 �b3 0-0 7 c3 h6
Thi s little pawn move i s sometimes
played just to prevent lZ'lg s when Black
is planning the typical regrouping m a­
noeuvre ... ,Ue8, ... �f8 and possibly ... g 6
and ...� g 7 , so that he is better placed
to fight in the centre (the rook adds
pressure down the e-file; the bishop
influences events down the long di­
agonal ) .
In thi s particul ar line, though, 7 ... h 6
Ita lian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
is norm ally used in a different way - to
free h7 for the knight! It might not be
the first idea th at comes to mind, but
there's some solid logic behind it. Bl ack
wants to pl ay ... lZ'lh 7-g S to exch ang e at
least one pair of minor pieces, and
m aybe two, in order to ease the con ­
gestion in his position and al so to
loosen White's control of the dark
squares in the centre.
Bl ack h as al so tried other pl an s in­
volvin g m ovin g the f6-knight:
a) 7 ...lZ'ld7 frees f6 for the bishop
and al so aim s for ... lZ'lCS . With the pres­
sure off e4, 8 d4 i s a logical respon se.
Now:
al) The tempo-losing 8 ... lZ'lf6 ! ? is ac­
tually not as bad as it looks, since 9
lZ'lbd2 �g4 pressures White's centre.
Even so, I was slightly worse after 10 dS
lZ'lb8 1 1 h 3 ! �c8 (if 11 ... �h S, White
plays 12 %:tel followed by lZ'lfl-g 3, or g 2 -
g4) 12 l: e l lZ'lbd7 1 3 lZ'lfl lZ'l e 8 1 4 �C2
g6 1 5 .th 6 lZ'lg7 16 g4! lZ'lf6 17 'iVd2
c;ii>h 8 18 lZ'lg 3 lZ'lg8 19 �e3 in
A.Minasian -J . Emms, Paris 1994.
a2) 8 ... �f6 9 �e3 lZ'las (or 9 ... l:te8 10
13 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
ds l'iJe7 11 c4 l'iJg 6 12 l'iJC3 l'iJh4 1 3 �a4
with an edge for White, L.Psakhis­
E.Geller, Soviet Championship 1983) 10
.YLc2 l'iJC4 11 .YLcl and White can build
slowly here because there's not a huge
amount of pressure on his centre. The
continuation of the g am e D. Pikul a­
S.smagin, Biel 1996, is worth noti n g :
11 .. Jle8 12 a4! ? l'iJf8 1 3 b3 l'iJb6 14 a s
l'iJbd7 1 5 l'iJbd2 l'iJ g 6 16 b 4 a6 1 7 l'iJC4
exd4 18 cxd4 l'iJb8 19 l'iJe3 l'iJc6 20 z:tbl.
White has gradually seized more and
more space whereas Black seem s to
have been going round in circles.
b) 7 ... �h 8 unpin s the f-pawn in
preparation for ... l'iJg8 and .. .fs . White
must react energetically in the centre
to h ave a ch ance of g aining an advan ­
tage: 8 l'iJbd2 (development i s key; 8
h 3 ? ! l'iJg 8 ! 9 d4 fs is what Black i s hop­
ing for) 8 ... l'iJg 8 9 d4! (everything else i s
too slow and Black just breaks with
.. .fs).
H ere Black h as a choice:
bl) 9 .. .fs (con sistent, but...) 10 dxe s
dxe s 11 l'iJC4 (or even 1 1 exfs �xfs 1 2
� C 2 'it'd7 1 3 .:tel) 1 1 ... 'it'xdl 12 ':'xdl
13 2
�f6 1 3 exfs (or 1 3 l'iJe3 fxe4 14 l'iJd2)
1 3 ... �xfs 14 l'iJe3 �g6 1 5 l'iJds l:tac8 16
�e3 a6 17 h3 �h s 18 �c2 l'iJge7 19
�e4 with some advantage for White in
view of his greater activity and better
structure, D.Sermek-N. Pedersen, Gron­
ingen 1993.
b2) Bl ack can change course with
9 ... .YLf6 but then even the simple 10
dxe s is enough for some advantage,
because of Bl ack's less than optim ally
pl aced pieces: 10 ... l'iJxe s 11 l'iJxe s dxe5
12 l'iJC4 (M.Magomedov-V.Mal aniuk,
Koszalin 1999) 12 ... �e6 ! ? 13 l'iJe3 (13
�e3 ! ?) 1 3 ...'iIi'xdl 14 l:txdl l:.ad8 15
':xd8 l:r.xd8 16 �xe6 fxe6 17 �fl (Ma­
gom edov). White will org anize him self
with �e2 and �d2 etc, and the weak­
ness of Black's doubled e-pawn s i sn't
going away.
8 l'iJbd 2
8 l:tel and 8 h 3 are al so viable, and
indeed there are tran sposition al possi­
bilities if Black follows up with ...l:te8
and ... �f8. H owever, with 8 l'iJbd2
White has something el se in mind
ag ain st Bl ack's m ain plan.
8 .l:.el l'iJh 7 9 l'iJbd2 l'iJg s 10 l'iJxg 5
�xg s 1 1 l'iJc4 �e6 12 d4 .YLxC4 1 3 �xC4
�XCl 14 l:[xcl Vf6 15 �d5 l'iJe7 16 �b3
was ever so slightly better for White in
L.Psakhis-O. Romanishin, Lviv 1984.
8 l'iJh7
••.
8 ... .l:!.e8 i s Bl ack's other m ain choice
here. For example, 9 l:tel �f8 10 h3 g6
(if 10 ... l'iJa5 11 �C2 cs, White can again
con sider the a3 and b4 plan) 11 d4
(White could pl ay m ore slowly with 11

tDfl �g7 12 tDg 3) 1 1 ... �g7 1 2 a3 (to
prevent ... tDb4, which Black plays after
12 �c2 exd4 13 cxd4) 12 ... a 5 ! (gaining
counterpl ay on the queen side) 1 3 .JtC2
�d7 14 tDfl a4 (intending 1 5 �xa4
exd4 16 cxd4 tDxd4!) 15 d5 tDe7 16 C4
tDh 7 17 tDg 3 b 5 ! ? 18 cxb5 �xb5 19 �d2
c6 20 dxc6 �xc6 21 �C3 with a com­
plex and roughly level position,
S. Kudrin- K.Thorsteins, G ausdal 1982.
9 tDC4 1 ? tDg5
9 ... .Jtg4 can be m et aggressively by
10 tDe3 �h 5 1 1 g41. Thi s i s difficult for
Black to face, even though it might be
okay for him after accurate defence:
11 ... �g6 12 tDf5 �xf5 1 3 gxf5
13 ... �g 5 14 tDxg 5 hxg 5 15 �h l tDa5
16 �C2 g6 17 :g l �h 8 18 fxg 6 fxg 6 19
�e3 'iVf6 20 11g 3 tDc6 2 1 \'Vg4 \'Ve7 22
l:.h 3 �g7 23 l:txh 7+! �xh 7 24 �xg 5
1i'g 7 2 5 'iWh4+ �g8 2 6 .Jtb3+ and Black
resigned in J . Emm s-M. Pein, Southend
2005, in view of 26 .. .l::t f7 27 �f6 g5 28
�xg 5 and :g l.
1 3 ... tDg 5 looks better than 1 3 ... �g5,
and Black was close to solving his prob­
lems after 14 �h l �h 8 15 tDxg 5 (why
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
not 15 J::t g l here?) 15 ... �xg 5 16 f4 �xf4
17 �xf4 exf4 18 ':'xf4 'ili'f6 in C.Goral s­
P. H aba, Internet (freestyle) 2006.
10 tDxg5 �xg 5 1 1 f4!
Thi s is the point and the justifica­
tion behind White's previous play
(avoiding l:el and not spending a
m ove on h 3 ) . It's easy to forget that d3-
d4 isn't White's only pawn break !
11 J::t e l would tran spose to Psakhis­
Rom anishin, above.
11 ... exf4 12 �xf4 �xf4
A.Onischuk-P.Blatny, Elista Olym ­
piad 1998, in stead continued 12 ... �e6
1 3 tDe3 ! ? (13 d4 .Jtxf4 14 l:txf4 'ifg 5 15
'iff3 reaches the m ain line) 1 3 ... �xf4 14
:!.xf4 'ifg 5 (Onischuk prefers 14 ... tDe7
but still assesses 1 5 d4 tDg 6 16 :f3
'iVh4 17 .Jtc2 as a clear advantage for
White) 1 5 lif3 h 5 ? ! 16 d4 tDe7 17 'i!fd3
c6 18 �c2 and White was slowly build­
ing up the pressure in the centre and
on the king side. Thi s King's Gambit
pawn structure is certainly favourabl e
for White, which i s why it's worth keep­
ing in mind the idea of f2-f4.
13 :xf4 'ifg5 14 'iff3
133
Beating 1 e4 eS
14 ..• bS!?
Black wants to kick the knight away
so th at he can l and his own knight on
e s . White must react vigorously other­
wise he loses his advantage.
14 ... .i.e6 i s m ore solid, but White's
exch ange sacrifice in s. Roy Chowdhury­
A. Filippov, Manama 2009, looks very
promising : 1 5 d4 !De7 16 h4! ? (thi s i s
committal, and 16 'iff2 intending
16 ... !Dg6 17 l:If3 i s a decent alternative)
16 ... 'iWbs 1 7 ds .i.d7 18 .:tfl 'ii'c s+ 19
�h l f6 20 e s ! (not allowing Black to
con solidate) 20 ... !Dg 6
2 1 e 6 ! !Dxf4 2 2 'ilVxf4 .i.e8 (or
22 ... i..b s 23 'iffs ! .i.xC4 24 .i.c2 lIf7 2 5
134
'iWh 7+ 'it>f8 and now the brilliant 26
l:txf6 ! ! and White win s - Golubev) 23
!De3 .i.g6 24 !Dfs l:.ae8 25 .:tf3 .i.xfs (or
2 s ... 'it>h 7 26 h s ! i.. xh s 2 7 �h 3 .i.g6 28
':'xh 6+) 26 'ii'xfs :te7 27 .i.c2 g6 (if
27 ... g s, 28 hxg s hxg s 29 �h 3 ! 'ifb s 30
l:.h 7 'ii'e 8 31 'iVh 3 win s - G olubev) 28
'ii'x g6+ :g 7 29 'ii'xh 6 fs 30 e 7 ! .l:r.e8 31
'iWe6+ 'it>h 8 32 ':xfs and Black resigned.
15 h4!
1 5 !De3 ? ! !De s ! 16 'iWfl !Dxd3 ! , over­
loading the queen, was Black's idea.
White can save him self with 17 �xf7 !
'ii'x e3+ 18 �h l, and here 18 ... .i.e6 19
':'xf8+ ':'xf8 20 .i.xe6+ 'it>h 7 2 1 'ii'xf8
!Df2+ 2 2 'it>g l !Dg4+ 2 3 'it>h l !Df2+ is
perpetual check.
l s :iVg6 16 !De3 !Des 17 'ilVe2 'ifg3
•.
The immedi ate 17 ... .i.e6, accepting
a disadvantage, i s the safer option .
18 ':'afl .i.e6 19 d4!
White i s h appy to sacrifice the h­
pawn, as he i s fully coordinated and
ready to attack fiercely on the king side.
19 !Dg6 20 : 4f3 'ifxh4 21 !Dfs l 'ifd8
..•
After 2 1 ... .i.xfs 2 2 lir.xfs, Rybka
wants to play 2 2 ... !Dh 8 which sum s up

Black's position !
22 'ili'xb 5 .l:.b8 2 3 'ike2 1
White could h ave played 2 3 �a4,
but thi s pawn sacrifice looks even
stronger.
2 3 ... .i.xb3 24 axb3 ':xb3 25 ':'g3 1
The threats o n the king side begin to
mount. The first one Black has to pre­
vent is 26 �C4 threatening the rook
and the knight. 2S ... <bh 7 would be the
most n atural try, but then 26 liJxh 6 ! is
very strong : 26 ... gxh6 (26 ... <iii> xh 6 2 7
�g4!) 2 7 1IYh s <iii> g 7 (if 2 7 .. :iII e 7, White
plays 28 l:th 3) 2 8 l:txf7+! ':xf7 2 9 1:txg 6+
'iitf8 30 'iYg4 l:tb8 (30 ...'iYd7 loses to 3 1
l:tg8+ �e7 3 2 'iVh4+ <be6 3 3 .:tg6+) 3 1
l:txh 6 ! (White doesn't need t o rush to
win the queen) 31 ... <iii> e 8 32 l:.h 8+ <be7
(or 32 ... ltf8 3 3 lth 7 ! ) 33 ':'xd8 Ihd8 34
b4 with good winning chances.
Bl ack's choice in the gam e allows
him to defend on the king side for the
moment, but only at a cost of giving
back the pawn, and a powerful central
one at th at.
25 ... d5 26 exd 5 .l:ib6 27 c41 <bh7 28 'ili'd 3
.!:tf6 29 b4 .:te8 30 l:tgf3
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
Black can h ardly m ake a m ove here.
30 ... 'iYd7 doesn't lose immediately, but
3 1 bS keeps up the intense pressure. If
3 1 ... <bh 8, White can even play the sim­
ple 32 liJg 3 l::t xf3 33 'ikxf3 ..t>g8 34 liJfS
followed by c S .
Black's choice in the g ame fail s to
m eet White's m ain threat.
30 ...<bh8? 3 1 liJxg71
Thi s i s winning.
3 1 .. J:txf3 3 2 'ikxf3 �g8 3 3 liJf5 �g5 34
d6 cxd6 3 5 liJxd6 'iYh4 3 6 'iii'f6+ 'ikxf6 37
l:txf6 1-0
Garne 3l
V.Ma lakhov-M.Carlsen
World C u p (ra pid),
Kha nty-Ma nsiys k 2005
1 e 4 e 5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 .i.C4 liJf6 4 d 3 .i.e7
5 0-0 0-0 6 .i.b3 d 6 7 c3 .i.e6
Bl ack's other bishop move, 7 ... .i.g4,
h as m ore merit here than in similar
position s (see following diagram).
The reason is th at Black has a clear
pl an to release some pressure via ex-
135
Beating 1 e4 e5
ch anges with ... lDd7-cs (-e6) and, de­
pending on the situation, ... lDg s,
.... ..tg s, or ... ..txf3 followed by some­
thing to g S .
For example, 8 h 3 ..th S 9 llel lDd7
10 ..te3 ii.xf3 ! (if 10 ... lDcs, White's idea
i s 11 ..txcS dxcS 12 g4 ..tg 6 1 3 ..tdS fol­
lowed by ..txc6 to ruin Black's pawns,
leading to an edge) 1 1 'ii'xf3 ..tg s 12
..ta4 ..txe3 1 3 'ilVxe3 lDe7 14 d4,
S. Dolmatov-V. Kupreichik, Sverdlovsk
1984. Bl ack has succeeded in his aim of
exchanging some minor pieces, al­
though White i s still slightly more com­
fortably pl aced.
More recently, Tiviakov h as dis­
pen sed with �el to good effect: 9
..te3 ! ? lDd7 10 lDbd2 ! lDcs (it's too l ate
for 10 ... i.. xf3 11 lDxf3 ! , when ... ..tg s i s
prevented) 11 ..txcS ! ..txf3 (or l1...dxcS
12 i.. d S ! ) 12 lDxf3 dxcS 1 3 i.. d S ! 'iVd6 14
ii.xc6 bxc6, S.Tiviakov-E.Bacrot, Ajaccio
(rapid) 2008.
The only thing standing between
White and a decisive position al advan­
tage i s his d3-pawn . There might be
other ways to proceed, but even Tivia-
136
kov's radical solution - just to give it
up ! - has some promise: 1 5 'iVc2 l:tfd8
16 l:.fdl ..tf6 17 lDd2 ! ? 'ilVxd3 18 'it'xd3
.l:!.xd3 19 lDC4 �ad8 20 l:txd3 l:txd3 21
�fl �f8 2 2 �e2 :Id8 2 3 l:.dl l:.b8 24
l:td7 1:[c8 25 lDas �e8 2 6 �d2 and only
White has chances to win thi s position.
(I should add that in the g am e Tiviakov
went horribly wrong and ended up for­
tunate to draw! )
Judging by that evidence, 9 ..te3
looks like a good way to cut across the
... lDd7-CS plan . Should Black con sider
changing plan s with 9 ... dS here? If
White captures on dS, his bishop i sn't
ideally placed on e 3 . Development with
10 lDbd2 m akes more sense.
For example, 10 ... d4! ? (if 10 ... a6,
White could pl ay 11 'iVe2 and then, say,
11...'iVd7 1 2 l:1fdl h 6 1 3 lDf1 d4 14 ..td2
�ad8 1 5 lDg 3 ) 1 1 cxd4 exd4 (11 ... lDxd4
12 g4!) 12 ..tf4 ..td6 (12 ... lDd7 ! ?) 13
..txd6 'it'xd6 14 'iVa ! ..txf3 15 lDxf3, as
played in E.Torre-C. Becx, Lugano 1989.
White i s better here because of his
strong bi shop, the open c-file and pres­
sure again st d4 and C7.

Let's return to the position after
7 ... �e6. Once again White is faced with
a familiar conundrum : should he keep
the bishop on b3 or avoid the possibil­
ity of an exch ange?
8 �c2
In earlier times players tended to
keep the bishop on b3, at least for the
moment, but it's noticeable th at
grandm asters such as Mal akhov and
Tiviakov prefer to hide the bishop on
c2.
After S liJbd2 (S .:tel often tran s­
poses) here are some typical lines:
a) S ...�xb3 9 'iVxb3 ltbS 10 .:tel liJd7
11 liJC4 h6 12 d4 �f6 13 �e3 (White
has a slight edge here) 13 ... exd4?! (Lu­
kacs prefers 13 ... liJb6) 14 cxd4 liJb6
(S.Dolmatov-S.Agdestein, Tilburg 1993)
and now 1 5 dS (Lukacs) would h ave left
White in control .
b) S .. :i!i'd7 followed by centralizing
the rooks is a typical plan . 9 .:tel and
now:
bl) 9 ... .l:!.aeS intending ... �dS fol-
lowed by ... liJe7-g 6, h as been played a
few times but it looks a bit artificial : 10
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
liJfl (or 10 �a4 a6 11 d4 exd4 12 liJxd4
with a slight advantage - Yudasin)
10 ... �dS 11 liJg 3 dS (after 11 ... a6 12
�c2 'iVcs 13 d4 �g4 14 �e3 dS 15 h3
exd4 16 cxd4 dxe4 1 7 hxg4 exf3 lS �fS
the position h ad opened up nicely for
White's bishops in J . Nunn-E.Geller,
London 19S2) 12 �a4 ! .
Thi s i s a key idea, a n d a recurring
theme. I can say from experience th at
it's not so easy to remember thi s possi­
bility over the board (especially if the
bishop has previously retreated to C2).
The pin on the c6-knight can cause
Black grief, and for thi s reason he often
spends a tempo on ... a6 so as to an swer
�a4 with ... b S .
A.Cherniaev-Ma.Tseitlin, Biel 1999,
continued 12 .. :ikd6 1 3 d4! dxe4 14
liJxe s and Black could find nothing bet­
ter th an to give up material with
14 ... liJxes 15 dxe s Vi'xe s 16 �xeS :xeS.
b2) 9 ...:adS 10 �a4 ! ? (here it is
again; thi s time White's aim is to play
d4 while avoiding the exch ange of
bishops) 10 ... a6 11 d4 bS 12 �C2 �g4
1 3 h3 �h S 14 dS liJbS (Lukacs prefers
137
Beating 1 e4 e5
14 ... liJas which does look m ore natural ;
perhaps Bal ashov was concerned about
15 a4) 15 liJfl c6! (Bl ack must fight
back in the centre; pl ay i s similar to
that in the 9 d4 Lopez. except that
Bl ack's light-squared bishop i s a bit
mi splaced) 16 dxc6 liJxc6 17 liJg 3 iLg6
(A.Jakubiec-Y. Balashov. Wisl a 1992)
and here 18 liJh4 ds 19 liJxg 6 hxg6 20
exds liJxds looks good enough for a
slight advantage for White. in view of
his bishop pair.
S ••• dS
Thi s advance i s Black's m ost n atural
respon se to 8 .i.c2. and al so the most
popul ar choice.
If 8 ... liJd7 preparing .. .fs. White
strikes in the centre with 9 d4! and
Black h as to deal with the threat of ds.
L.Totsky-V.Golod. Moscow 1991. con ­
tinued 9 ... exd4 10 liJxd4 (also possible
i s 10 cxd4 ds 1 1 liJC3 dxe4 12 liJxe4)
10 ... liJxd4 11 cxd4 liJb6 12 liJc3 cs (if
12 ... ds. White advances with 13 e s ) 1 3
ds .i.c8 1 4 f4 (White can al so play m ore
positionally with 14 a4) 14 ... .i.f6 15 e s ! ?
dxes 16 fxe s iLxes 1 7 iLxh 7+ Wxh 7 1 8
138
'i!Vh s+ Wg8 19 'ili'xe s and White m ain­
tained an edge.
g liJbd2
In comparison to some of the ... .i.e6.
.i.c2 lines of previous chapters. White
could argue th at Black's dark-squared
bishop is more passively placed on e7
and it's not so straightforward for
Black to organize his forces. Thi s i s at
least partially true. although one way
for Black to try to remedy the problem
is to play ... :e8 h6 (to prevent .i.g s or
• ...
liJg s) and ... .i.f8.
Tiviakov has pl ayed 9 'ili'e2. and this
move h as the m erit of accelerating lIdl
if Black chooses to release the ten sion.
For example. 9 ... dxe4 10 dxe4 liJd7 !
(the best way to reorg anize) l 1 l:tdl (11
liJbd2 would tran spose to the m ain
g ame) 11 .. :iVc8 (11 ... 'iVe8 ! 12 liJg s iLxg s
1 3 .i.xg s f6 14 .i.e3 'ii'f7. as played in
M.Ohme-C. Billing. Kelheim 2007. effec­
tively g ains a tempo and White's ad­
vantage based on the two bishops is
small) 12 liJg s ! .i.xg s 13 iLxg s f6 14
.i.e3 'ii'e 8 1 5 liJd2 as 16 liJC4 'iVf7 17
liJa3 b6 18 :d2 lUc8 ? ! 19 .i.a4 liJa7 20

.l:ladl and White was in total control,
S.Tiviakov-M.Van der Wert, Dieren
2006.
What h appen s if Black tries to keep
the ten sion in the centre? Let's see:
9 ... l:te8 10 tLlbd2 (10 .ta4! ?) 10 ... a6
(prophylaxi s again st .ta4) 1 1 h3 h 6
12 exd5 ! ? ( 1 2 l:tdl .tf8 1 3 tLlfl 'ili'd7
14 tLlg 3 liad8 is roughly equal)
12 ... tLlxd5 (12 ... .txd5 intending 1 3 lIel
i.f8 looks like a decent alternative) 13
tLlC4 and now:
a) 1 3 ...f6 i s m et by 14 d4! .
b ) I f 1 3 . . ..td6, I wonder whether
White can grab the pawn : 14 tLlcxe 5
tLlxe 5 (or 14 ... .tf5 1 5 tLlxc6! litxe2 16
tLlxd8 litxc2 17 tLlxb7) 1 5 tLlxe5 .tf5 16
f4, intending 16 .. .f6 1 7 'ii'h 5 ! .
c ) 1 3 . . .tLlf4 1 4 .txf4! exf4 1 5 d4 .td5
16 litfel .tf6 17 'iVd3 g 6 18 ':'xe8+ 'iVxe8
19 tLlcd2, when White's strong centre
and better structure is worth m ore
than Black's bishop pair, L. Hoyos Mil-
1an -V.N asybullin, correspondence 2007.
Overall, I feel th at Black should be
okay if he i s careful but I would still
prefer to be White.
Italian Game : Two Knig hts Defen ce
9 ... dxe4
Black can al so con sider keeping the
ten sion here:
a) 9 ...'iVd7 10 %:tel .l:.ad8 1 1 .ta4!
(thi s m ove, again ! ) 1 1 ... .td6 12 h3 {I
don't see anything terribly wrong with
12 exd5 .txd5 13 tLlxe5) 12 ... a6 1 3
tLlg 5 ! ? b 5 1 4 .tb3 tLl e 7 ( 1 4... .tc5 ! ?) 1 5
d4! tLl g 6 16 tLlxe6 fxe6 17 exd5 exd5 1 8
tLle4! c6 19 tLlxd6 'ili'xd6 20 dxe5 tLlxe5
21 .tf4 tLlfd7 2 2 .tg 3 .:tde8 23 %le3 �f6
24 'ili'e2 l:te7 2 5 a4! and Black was be­
ginning to feel the pressure in
D.Serm ek-M.Ze1ic, Pula 2001.
b) 9 ... lIe8 10 :tel (10 'ili'e2 tran s­
poses to 9 'iVe2, above) 10 ... .tf8 11 h 3
h 6 ( 1 1. . .a 6 12 tLlg 5 ! ) 12 .ta4 (expanding
Philidor-sty1e with 12 b4! ? a6 1 3 .tb2
looks interesting, intending a3, exd5
and c4) 12 ... dxe4 1 3 dxe4 tLld7 ! 14 tLlfl
( I 'm tempted by 14 ite2 followed by
.txc6 and tLlc4) 14 ... tLla5 (Lukacs sug­
gests 14 ... 'iVf6 aiming for ... tLlC5 and
... lIad8) 1 5 tLle3 c6 16 .tc2 tLlC4 17 tLlg4!
h5 18 tLlgh 2 f6 19 'ii'e 2 .tf7 20 tLlh4
(White i s m arginally better, but the
gam e ends dram atically ... ) 20 ... g 6 ? ? 2 1
13 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
tiJxg 6 ! and 1-0, A. Lutikov-A.Tuzovsky,
Frunze 1973.
10 dxe4
1o ... tiJd 7 1
It might appear that Bl ack has quite
a few decent options here, but in real­
ity it's difficult to find another way to
reorganize effectively and to deal with
White's plan of 'iVe2, tiJc4, l:tdl and
possibly .i.a4.
The plan of ... .i.cs and .. :fie7 h as
some appeal, but it seem s that Black
doesn't have enough time to arrange
thi s together with the necessary pro­
phylactic moves like ... h6 and ... a6/ ... as.
For example, 10 ... .i.cs 1 1 'iVe2 "fie7 1 2
tiJC4 tiJd7 1 3 b 4 (or 1 3 tiJg s) 1 3 ... .i.d6 14
.:I.dl tiJb6 15 tiJe3 ! , or 10 ... as 11 'iVe2
.i.cs 12 tiJC4 tiJd7 1 3 tiJg s; in both cases
White can count on at least a small
advantage.
11 'fie 2 'fie8
Planning .. .f6, usefully preventing
tiJg s, followed by ... 'fif7, after which
Bl ack's pieces enjoy some coordination .
1 1 ... tiJb6 prevents tiJC4, but there's
still tiJfl-e3 (or g 3 ) . I think that White's
14 0
most ch allenging plan here involves a
pawn advance on the queenside: 12 b4
.i.d6 1 3 .l:r.dl as 14 b s tiJe7 (L.Mazi­
V.5rebrnic, Aschach 1994). Here, I was
engrossed by a long Rybka-inspired
line: 1 5 tiJg s .i.d7 16 tiJxh 7 !
16 .. .'ihh 7 17 'ilih s+ <oit g 8 18 tiJf3 g 6 !
( 1 8 .. .f6 19 ii.b3+) 19 'iVh 6 f6 20 .i.b3+
l:.f7 21 .i.g s ! ( 2 1 .i.e3 tiJbds ! 22 .i.xds
tiJxds 23 :xds lIh 7 ! 24 "fixg 6+ l:tg 7 2 5
'ilih 6 :h 7 i s a draw by repetition)
21 ... 'iVf8 ! ? 22 'iVh4! tiJed s ! 23 1:.xds a4!
24 ':'xd6 axb3 25 l:txf6 'ifg 7 26 l:!.xf7
<oitxf7 and who knows what is h appen­
i n g ? A bit of tangent, I realize, but fun
to analyse !
12 tiJC4 f6 1 3 tiJe3
Heading for ds. 1 3 :dl 'fif7 14 tiJe3
comes to the same thing.
1 3 . . .'fif7 14 lt d 1 l:tfd8 1 5 tiJd 5 nac8
Lukacs suggests that ls ... tiJb6 16
tiJxe7+ tiJxe7 restricts White's advan­
tage to a minimum, and it's h ard to
argue with this. White can pl ay 17 b3
followed by .i.e3 and hope to slowly
m ake some inroads using his bishop
pair.

16 ..te3
Carl sen clearly believed in Black's
position to some extent, because he
was happy to repeat the line right up
to thi s point again st the sam e oppo­
nent in the same mini-match . H aving
said th at, I guess there would have
been precious little opportunity to pre­
pare thoroughly between the rapidplay
games.
16 ... ..tc S ?
Thi s i s a blunder, which loses m ate­
rial to a simple tactic.
Carl sen's improvement in the next
gam e was simply 16 ... ..tf8, but after 17
�d2 a6 ? ! 18 :tadl he was under some
pressure. If 18 ... ..tcS, 19 ..txcS liJxcs 20
b4 liJd7 21 ..tb3 keeps White on top.
Black h as problems to solve even after
17 ... liJe7 18 l:.adl, but thi s looks like a
wiser choice.
17 ..txCS liJxc S 18 'ii' b s l
If the knight moves, White just
takes on b7. Carl sen 's creative attempt
to trap the queen is met by a solid refu­
tation.
18 ... b61? 19 b4 a6 20 'ir'xc6 :d6
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
2 1 liJxf6+1
Winning.
2 1 . . .gxf6 2 2 .l:!.xd6 cxd6 2 3 Vxb6 liJd7
24 'iWxd6 ':xC3 2S ..tb3 ..txb3 2 6 axb3
.l:txb3 2 7 h 3 liJf8 28 .l:!.xa 6 liJg6 29 l:r.a8+
�g7 30 .l:!.c8 �h6 31 .:rC7 J:.d 3 3 2 "iVc6
Vf8 33 b S 1-0
In the next three g ames we con sider
lines where Black pl ays an early ... dS,
the most popul ar of which i s 6 ... dS.
Game 32
S.Tivia kov-I.lvan isevic
G reek Tea m C h a m pion s h i p,
Ka l l ithea 2009
1 e4 eS 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 ..tC4 liJf6 4 d3 ..te7
S 0-0 0-0 6 ..tb3 dS 7 exd s
Capturing is definitely the most
challenging respon se to 6 ... dS.
If 7 liJbd2, Black's most straightfor­
ward course of action is 7 ... dxe4 8 dxe4
..tcS ! 9 c3 "iVe7 reaching a position with
equal chances. I should stress th at, as
we've seen in similar positions, there's
14 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
still plenty of scope for either side to
outplay his opponent.
7 liJxd s 8 litel
..•
This is White's sharpest try, and per­
haps the most critical. The safer 8 h3 i s
con sidered in the next g ame.
8 .ig4
...
8 ... .if6 looks like the only decent al­
ternative, although even here Black
soon feel s obliged to pin the f3-knight:
9 liJbd2 (9 h3 i s al so possible, tran spos­
ing to 8 h3 .if6 9 l:tel) 9 ... .ig4 10 h 3
.ih s l l liJe4 liJf4 (if 11 .. Jile8 I like 12 c 3
�g 6 1 3 a 3 with �a2/'iVb3 ideas, while
1 1 ...liJd4 i s m et by 12 g4) 12 liJg 3 .ixf3
(12 ... .ig6 13 d4! undermines the knight
on f4) 1 3 'iVxf3 liJd4 ! ? (13 .. J:tb8 14 'iVe4
liJg6 15 c3 .ig s 16 liJfs left White with
strong light-squared control in
A.Beliavsky-G .Agzamov, Spartakiad
1981) 14 'it'xb7 l:.b8 ("intending
... :txb3" - Beliavsky) and now I think
White h as a promising queen -for­
pieces exchange: 15 'iVe4 :tb4 (or
ls ... .l:txb3 16 cxb3 liJC2 17 .ie3 liJxal 18
':xal 'iii'x d3 19 .ixf4 'ili'xe4 20 liJxe4
exf4 21 liJxf6+ g xf6 22 :Cl) 16 .id2 !
14 2
liJde2+ 1 7 .r:txe2 l:txe4 18 llxe4.
8 .. .f6 ? ! is unwise. Both 9 d4! exd4 10
liJxd4 and 9 liJc3 .ie6 10 d4! should
lead to at least some advantage for
White.
As a rule of thumb, Bl ack should
avoid .. .f6 if White can an swer immedi­
ately with d4.
9 h3
I f White wishes t o avoid the sh arp
positi on s ari sing after this m ove, he
can play 9 liJbd2 ! ? Thi s shouldn 't lead
to any significant advantage as long as
Black i s careful, but again there are
enough possibilities to keep things in­
teresting.
9 liJbd2 f6 10 h 3 .ih s 1 1 c3 (White
must prevent ... liJd4) 11 ... �h 8 12 liJe4
'ili'd7 ? (in stead Black should pl ay some­
thing like 12 ... liJas 13 �c2 CS) was
D. Pikula-Z. Petronijevic, Cetinje 1993,
and here both players overlooked the
possibility of 1 3 liJxe s ! winning a pawn
- 1 3 ... liJxes 14 'iVxh s liJxd3 loses to 15
.l:tdl.
After 9 h3 Bl ack h as to m ake a big
deci sion : should he exchange on f3 and

enter a long forcing sequence, or re­
treat and sacrifice his e-pawn to induce
a weakness on White's kin g side? Both
choices lead to very complicated posi­
tion s, albeit ones which are quite dif­
ferent in character.
9 il.xf3
...
9 ... il.h s offers a Marshall-style g am­
bit: 10 g4! (10 ttJbd2 i s likely to lead to
the 10 ttJbd2 note, after 10 .. .f6)
10 ... il.g 6 1 1 ttJxe s ttJxes 12 .l:!.xes c6.
White's king side i s compromised
because of the advanced g -pawn . On
the other h and, in contrast to the Mar­
shall G ambit in the RUy Lopez, White i s
able to develop his queenside much
more quickly. Indeed, a recurring
theme here i s how White tries to over­
come his weaknesses by striving for
piece activity. Accurate play i s required,
but objectively White coul d be doing
well h ere. For example, 1 3 'iVf3 ! il.d6 !
(13 ... il.f6 14 :e2 'itth 8 1 5 il.xds cxds 16
ttJC3 il.xC3 1 7 bxc3 .l:lc8 was seen in no
lesser g am e th an V. Kramnik­
G.Kasparov, Novgorod 1995, and here
Kramnik indicates that White can
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
m aintain an advantage with either 18
il.d2 or 18 il.e3 l:[xc3 19 il.d4 .l:!.c6 20
:ael) 14 :e2 ! and now:
a) 14 ... 'iWh4 1 5 il.xds cxds 16 ttJC3
'itth 8 (16 ... d4 1 7 ttJbs) 17 'ii'x ds ! llad8 18
il.g s 'ii'x h 3 19 'ili'g 2 'ili'xg 2+ 20 'it>xg 2
with an extra pawn and a significant
advantage for White, lNunn­
LFernandez G arcia, Lugano 1983.
b) 14 ... 'itth 8 1 5 ttJc3 ttJxc3 16 bxc3 fs
(16 ... 'iWh4 17 il.d2 fs 18 .l:!.ael fxg4 19
'ii'x g4 forces Bl ack to lose tim e retreat­
ing his queen, V. Dimitrov-M.Vucic,
Elenite 1986) 1 7 gs (Dolm atov assesses
17 'iVg 2 as a "+1=" but I prefer thi s more
active move) 17 .. .f4 18 h4. If Black now
pl ays 18 ... h6, White can go on the of­
fen sive: 19 il.b2 ! hxg s 20 c4 gxh4 2 1
'itth l .
Suddenly, with .l:!.g l and cs looming,
it's Black's king which i s being at­
tacked!
c) 14 .. .fs 1 5 ttJc3 ! (again active de­
velopment i s key) l s .. .fxg4 (or l s ... 'itth 8
16 ttJxds cxds 17 gs!) 16 'iVxg4 .l:!.fs
(16 ... il.fs 17 'iih s) 17 ttJe4! (thi s is a
strong square for the knight...) 17 ... il.es
143
Beating 1 e4 e5
18 d4! ? ( ... not so strong now, but thi s
move is tacti cally justified) 18 ... ..txd4
19 ttJg 3 ! 'iWf6 20 ttJxfS ..txfS 21 'iWg 2
�h 8 2 2 ..tg s 'iYg 6 2 3 ..txdS cxdS 24 c3
..tb6 25 ..th4 'iWc6 26 :te7 1:[g8 2 7 l:tael
..te4 28 'iig 4 ..tcS 29 ':d7 b S 30 ..te7
..tb6 31 ..td6 ..tcS 32 ..tes ..tf8 33 ':'xa7
and 1-0, M.Mathias-K.Elison, corre­
spondence 1997.
Because the positions are so com ­
plicated it would be nice to see some
more games, preferably involving
someone like Tiviakov, before m akin g a
definitive judgement. At the m om ent,
though, the signs are looking promis­
ing for White.
10 'iWxf3
10 ... ttJ d41
If Bl ack just retreats the knight from
dS, White can count on some advan­
tage due to his g ain of the bishop pair
and light-squared control .
11 'ii'xd s
Other queen m oves allow Black
comfortable equality. For example, 1 1
'iWe4 ttJxb3 12 axb3 ..tf6, o r 1 1 ... c6 ! ? 1 2
'iix es ..tf6 1 3 'iih s ttJb4 1 4 'iid l as 1 5
144
ttJa3 bS with decent compensation,
I . N epomniachtchi-A. Naiditsch, Euro­
pean Champion ship, Dresden 2007.
11 ... 1i'xd s 12 ..txd S ttJxc2 1 3 l:txe s !
It's the discovery of this move which
has breathed new life into 8 .:tel, al­
though at the time of writing I have
found only three games with it, two by
Tiviakov. Instead of trying to win the al­
bound knight straightaway, White
grabs two key pawns (es and b7). He will
be the exchange down, but the knight
on al will remain trapped and White
will still hope to capture it at a later
stage. Furthermore, it will be difficult
for Black's rooks to enter the game.
It's difficult to m ake a judgement
with any certainty because the m ate­
rial is still quite scarce, but it's reassur­
ing for us that Tiviakov h as been will­
ing to enter thi s position more than
once. Just as reassuring i s the fact that
1 3 ':xes i s Rybka 's preference !
Previously White has chosen 13
..td2, but 13 ... ttJxal 14 l:tcl l:tad8 15
ttJC3 c6 16 ..tf3 ':xd3 1 7 ..te3 ..tb4 18
..te2 (m aybe 18 ..te4 ! ?, intending

lS .. Jld7 19 idS, i s an improvement)
lS .. Jid7 19 ':'xal .i.as ! , intending
... .i.b6, probably en sures Bl ack of at
least equality, S.Dizdar-A.Mikhal chi­
shin, Zenica 19S9.
13 . . ..i. d 6
Alternatively:
a) 13 ... J:.aeS 14 .l::t e 2 ttJxal 15 .i.xb7
.td6 16 .i.e3 tran sposes to the g ame.
b) 1 3 ... l:.feS 14 .:te2 ttJxal 1 5 .i.xb7
.i.g s (! - N aiditsch ) 16 .i.e3 .l::t a dS i s as­
sessed as unclear by N aiditsch .
As far as I can see, White's best
course of action i s to play the position
'norm ally', just ignoring the trapped
knight on al for the m oment. For ex­
ample, 17 .i.a6 g6 lS .i.C4 �g7 19 ttJC3
.i.xe3 20 fxe 3 .l:.bS 21 b3 fS 22 �f2 and
now White is finally ready to win the
knight with �el-d2 and .l::t e l. It's not
clear wh at Black can do to prevent this,
and Rybka 's evaluation increases once
it begins to appreciate Black's problem .
c) 1 3 ... .i.f6 14 .l::t e 2 ttJxal 1 5 .i.xb7
llabS (if lS ... .l::t a eS, White must of
course avoid a rook exchange by play­
ing 16 .i.e4) 16 .te4 lIb6 17 ttJa3 ! l:.fbS
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
lS ttJC4 .l::t a 6 19 b3 ttJxb3 (thi s looks like
a radical solution, but it's difficult to
suggest wh at else Black should do) 20
axb3 ]::t a l 21 ]::t c 2 .l:.xb3 22 �h 2 as 23
.tf4 a4 24 .tes ];tel 25 .txf6 gxf6 26
ttJe3 a3 2 7 l:txC7 :bS 2S l:ta7 l:.e2 29
l::t x a3 l:.xf2 30 �g3 .:tfb2 31 l:.a7 hS 32
ttJfS l:tdS 33 ttJh 6+ and 1-0, G. Souleidis­
J . De Jon g , Dutch League 2007.
14 l:le2 .l:lae8
14 ... ttJxal 15 .i.xb7 l:taeS 16 .i.e3
comes to the same thing.
1 5 .i. e 3 ttJXa 1 16 .txb7
16 l::t e 5 ?
•••
Tiviakov's previous outing in thi s
l i n e went 16 .. .fS 17 .i. d S + �h S lS g 3 f4
19 g xf4 .i.xf4 20 ttJa3 l:Ie s 2 1 .tg 2 .i.xe3
2 2 fxe 3 .l::t d S 23 .l::t e l .l:.xd3 24 ttJC4! ttJc2
25 1:1cl l::t e xe3 26 IIxc2 l:.e7 and White
definitely has winning chances, al­
though Black eventually m an aged to
hold in S.Tiviakov-J . Hector, Helsingor
200S. In any case, this looks like a bet­
ter defence for Black th an the g ame
continuation.
17 ttJc3 l:r.b8 18 .i.c6 .l:.a 5 19 g3 �8 20
d4
145
Beating 1 e4 e5
This reminds me of the Souledis-De
Jong game. White slowly improves his
position, doesn 't even acknowledge the
knight's existence in the corner and
simply pretends that he has an extra
piece. Black, whose rooks are not m ak­
ing any headway at all, soon run s out
of patience, but I think he i s already in
some trouble here.
20 ... h 6 2 1 lLla4 gs 2 2 b3! lLlxb3 23 lIb2!
J:ta6 2 4 d S l-0
Game 33
V.KranBnik-G.Kasparov
peA/Intel G ra nd Prix (ra pid),
N ew York 199 5
1 e4 eS 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 �C4 lLlf6 4 d 3 �e7
5 0-0 0-0 6 �b3 d S
Another idea which i s worth men­
tioning i s Rom ani shin's 6 ... d6 7 c3 and
now 7 ... dS ! ?
Paradoxical ? Yes, but certainly not
to be underestim ated. A key point to
appreci ate i s that in some lines - those
in which White targets the e s-pawn,
146
White's extra m ove c2-C3 m ay do more
harm th an good. The d3 -pawn l acks
protection and White's queen's knight
i s denied access to C3.
For example, 8 exds lLlxdS 9 :el (9
h 3 �fS 10 l:tel .tf6 l1 lLla3 lLlb6 ! equal­
izes, S.Belkhodja-L. Fressinet, Cergy Pon­
toi se 2004; or 9 lLlbd2 ? ! lLlf4!) 9 ... i.. g 4!
10 h3 �h S 1 1 g4 i.. g 6 1 2 lLlxes lLlxes
1 3 :xes c6 and White's knight i s de­
nied use of the c3-square (compare the
note to Black's 9th m ove in the previ­
ous g ame).
Rather than exch anging on dS, in
thi s in stance it might be wiser to build
up more slowly. At least here the extra
c2-C3 is going to be useful . For exam­
ple, 8 "iVe2 dxe4 (or 8 ...d4 9 i.. a4! i.. g 4
10 lLlbd2 dXc3 11 bXc3 lLlas 12 h3 �d7
13 �c2 �d6 14 d4 with some advan ­
tage, S. Kudrin-G . Kuzmin, Kusadasi
1990) 9 dxe4 �cS (or 9 ... i.. g 4 10 h3 i..h s
1 1 lLlbd2 lLld7 12 l::t d l) 1 0 �g s h 6 1 1
�h4 "fie7 1 2 lLlbd2 (Lukacs suggests 1 2
�dS g s 1 3 �g 3 ) 12 ... a 6 1 3 lLlC4 (13
.tdS ! ? i s an interesting alternative)
13 ... i.. e 6 14 i.. c 2 gs 15 i.. g 3 i.. g 4
 Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce

off the diagon al and into a kind of no

m an's l an d.

16 b4 (if 16 h 3 Black has 16 ... liJh S ! ?,

and here 1 7 'it>h l liJf4 18 �xf4 �xf3 19
'iVxf3 exf4 20 es! i s worth investig at­ For example, 9 l:tel i s m et by 9 ... a4
ing) 16 ... bS, 5.Tiviakov-L.Fressinet, Wijk intending 10 �C4 liJb6 ! 11 �b S liJd4!
aan Zee 2004. Here Rybka likes the idea and it doesn't take long to reali i e th at
of 1 7 liJcd2 intending 1 7 ... �b6 18 a4! things are not going White's way. 50
when Black has problems with his b­ White norm ally m akes sure the bishop
pawn . In the g am e Tiviakov lost after can stay on the diagon al, either by
17 liJe3 �xe3 18 'ii'x e3 liJh s 19 �b3 playing 9 a3 or 9 a4.
Iiad8 20 �dS .l:r.d6 21 'iVcS ? ! (21 h 3 ! ) The alternative approach for Bl ack i s
2 1. . .�xf3 2 2 �xc6?? liJf4! 2 3 gxf3 'ii'e 6 ! to reinforce the defence o f his e S ­
24 .1i.xf4 g xf4 2 S 'it>h l 'iVh 3 2 6 : g 1 + pawn, either with ... �f6/ ...: e 8 o r .. .f6:
'it>h 7, with a deci sive attack for Bl ack. a) 8 ... .1i.f6 9 .:tel
7 exd s liJxd s S h 3
The solid option . Now there i s n o
annoying pin o n the knight t o worry
about, and next up White will pressure
the e s-pawn with l:tel. On the other
hand, Black does have an extra tempo
to organize his position in another way.
S .•. as
A surprising m ove, but actually thi s
h as become the m ain l i n e . It's the sort
of move that m any players would dis­
regard over the board unless they knew and now:
of its merits beforehand. al) 9 ...l:te8 10 liJbd2 .1i.fs (or 10 ... liJb6
Black's idea i s to force the bishop on b3 ll liJe4 �fS 12 liJfg s intending 12 ... �g6

147
Beating 1 e4 e5

13 h4! ?) 11 lLle4 .ixe4 (the 'careful'

11 ...h 6 turns out to be careless after 12
.ixh 6 ! ) 12 dxe4 (12 l:[xe4 is a decent
alternative) 12 ... lLlf4 (S.Vratonjic­
B.Lajthajm, Vrnjacka Banja 2006) and
now instead of taking the knight on f4,
which looks too accommodating to me,
why not 13 .ie3 intending 13 ... 'ii'e 7 14
c3 :ad8 15 'iVc2 ? I admit we're not talk­
ing about a clear edge, but White's
bishop pair must count for something.
a2) 9 ... .ie6 10 lLlbd2 lLlf4 11 .ia4 ! ? White has a dream IQP position,
lLld4 (Bologan thinks that 11 ... lLlg6 12 and a significant advantage, simply
.ixc6 bxc6 13 lLle4 .ie7 gives Black because of Black's chronic weakness
counterplay, but I still prefer White's down the a2-g8 diagonal .
position after 14 lLlfg s .ids 15 'iVhs h6 g a31
16 lLlf3) 12 lLle4 lLlg 6 13 lLlxd4 exd4 14 9 a4 lLld4! 1 0 lLlxd4 (10 lLlxes ? lLlxb3
'iVh s .ie7 15 .ig s .ids (Bologan sug­ 11 cxb3 cripples White's pawns)
gests ls .. .f6, but White can win a pawn 10 ... exd4 is proving to be very solid for
here with 16 lLlxf6+! .ixf6 17 .l:r.xe6 Black. White has been making no head­
.ixg s 18 ':xg 6 ! ) 16 .ixe7 lLlxe7 17 :e2 way here. For example, 11 'ilff3 .ie6 12
left White the more active in V.Bologan­ lLld2 lLlb4 with equality, A. Dyakov­
V.Malaniuk, Novgorod 1995. Moreover P.Leisebein, correspondence 2004.
17 lLlcs ! ? might be even stronger. Karjakin played 11 :el again st Gel­
b) 8 ... .ie6 9 l:!.el .if6 tran sposes to fand ( Khanty-Man siysk, 2009) but this
note 'a2', above. was an swered by some in spiration :
c) 8 .. /�)h 8 9 l:[el f6 10 c3 ! ? (the typi­ 1 1 ... l:!.a6 ! ! .
cal an swer to ...f6, 10 d4, i s good
enough for an edge after 10 ... exd4 1 1
lLlxd4 .ics 12 lLlxc6 bxc6 1 3 'it'h s, a s in
S.Martinovic-C.Micic, Pancevo 2003)
10 ... lLlb6? ! (Bologan gives 10 ... .ifs 1 1
d4! exd4 12 lLlh4 .ixb l 1 3 :xbl f s 1 4
lLlf3 .if6 1 5 cxd4 'ii'd 6 16 .ig s ! .l:.ad8 17
.ixf6 lLlxf6 18 lLles lLlds 19 :cl with a
small advantage for White) 11 d4 exd4
12 cxd4 lLlb4 1 3 lLlC3 c6 14 'ilfe2,
V.Bologan-G.Garcia, Wijk aan Zee 1996.

148
 Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce

The point behind thi s piece offer i s 1 0 .i.a2

that after 12 .i.xds 'iVxds 1 3 l:lxe7 :g 6
White i s in some trouble - an alysis
suggests that Black h as at least perpet­
ual check. In the g ame Karjakin chose
12 'iVh s, but after 12 ...liJb4 1 3 liJa3 :g 6
it was Black who held the initiative.
Overall, giving Black the b4-square
seem s to m ake life too easy for him.
9 ... a4
The difference here i s that 9 ... liJd4
can be m et by 10 .i.a2 ! and there is no
... liJb4 to worry about. Bl ack appears to 10 'itt h 8
..•

be active but thi s is only temporary, Preparing .. .f6.

and there rem ain lon g -term issues re­ 10 .. .fS ? too ambitious, and in fact
garding the safety of the e s-pawn . White has a nice trick which win s a
White has good ch ances of an advan ­ pawn : 1 1 liJC3 .i.e6 1 2 liJxe s ! liJxe s 1 3
tage here. For example, 10 ... liJxf3+ 1 1 lIel, a n d now 1 3 ... .i.f6 1 4 d 4 or
'iWxf3 c6 12 li e l 'iWC7 1 3 "Wg 3 .i.f6 1 4 13 ... 'iWd6 14 liJb S .
liJd2 g 6 1 5 liJf3 lI e 8 16 d4! e 4 17 'ii'x C7 11 l1e1 f6 12 d 4
liJxC7 18 liJg s .i.xg s 19 .i.xg s with the A s usual , meeting .. .f6 with d 4 i s the
bishop pair and some weak dark best ch ance to gain an edge, albeit a
squares to target, I .Almasi-R.Shabtai, slight one. 12 liJbd2 .i.cs 1 3 liJe4 .i.b6
Budapest 1994. 14 c3 .i.fs 15 liJh4 .i.e6 is typically solid
9 ... .i.e6 10 :el .i.f6 is similar to for Black, S.Martinovic-A. Kizov, Zlatibor
8 ... .i.f6, above: 11 liJbd2 h6 (I think 2007.
11...a4 ! ? 12 .i.a2 liJf4 i s a better chance 12 ...exd4 1 3 liJxd4 liJdb4
for equality) 12 liJe4 .i.e7 13 c3 .i.d6 14
.i.a4 (thi s move, again ! ) 14 ... liJde7 1 5
.i. e 3 ':b8 (or l S .. .fS 16 liJcS ! ) 16 d 4 exd4
17 liJxd4 liJxd4 18 .i.xd4 (White will
take on d6 and rely on his bishop pair
for an edge, which increases quite
quickly ... ) 18 ... liJfs 19 liJxd6 liJxd6 20
'ii'f3 1i'h4? 21 :es ! liJC4? 22 .l:.h S "fie7 2 3
.i.xg 7 ! 'itt x g 7 2 4 'ii'g 3 + 'itth 7 2 5 'iif4 and
Black resigned, Z. Efimenko-M. Kravtsiv,
Alushta 2007.

14 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
14 axb4
I wonder whether White can pose
more problems with 14 ttJxc6 here. Af­
ter 14 ... ttJxc6 l S ttJc3 Black's slight
weaknesses remain, and the knight is
more actively placed on c3. There's the
issue of wh at to do about l S ... 'ii'x d1 16
.l::[ x d1 i.fs, but I think 17 i.f4 still gives
Bl ack some work to do. If 17 ... i.xc2
there follows 18 l:ld2 (or 18 l:ld7)
18 ... i.b3 19 i.xb3 axb3 20 i.xc7 and
Bl ack still hasn't fully equalized.
14 ... 'ii'x d4 1 5 c3 'ii'xd l 16 l:txd 1 i.f5 17
ttJa 3
With slight weaknesses on a4 and
C7, Bl ack has to be careful. However,
with accurate defence, as Kasparov
displ ays here, it looks like he should be
okay.
17 ... ttJe5 18 ttJb5 c5 19 bXc 5 i.xC 5 20
ttJd4 Itfd8 21 i.e3 i.g6 22 ':'d2 i.f7 2 3
i.xf7 ttJxf7 24 l:le2 i.xd4 2 5 i.xd4 ttJd6
2 6 i.b6 Ildc8 27 .l:.e7 h 6 2 8 i.d4 b 5 29
l::f.a e 1 ttJf5 30 l:.b7 ttJxd4 3 1 cxd4 l:.cb81
32 lIee7 b4 33 l:[xg7 l:[xb7 34 l:txb7 a3
35 bxa 3 bxa 3 3 6 l:b1 a 2 37 �a1 �g7 38
�f1 �f7 3 9 �e2 �e6 40 �d3 �d 5 41
�c3 VI-VI
Game 34
J.Emms-J. Wittman
London League 2006
1 e4 e5 2 ttJf3 ttJc6 3 i.C4 ttJf6 4 d3 d 5 1 ?
Thi s move shouldn 't really work, be­
cause White hasn 't 'wasted' any time
with moves such as C2-C3 and i.b3 and,
15 0
as a consequence, he i s able to attack
the e s-pawn very quickly. In fact Black
is more or less obliged to give up the
es -pawn, and from an objective view­
point it's very likely he doesn't gain
enough compensation. On the other
han d, White has to remember a few
key tactical lines. Bearing in mind you
are unlikely to face 4 ... dS very often,
there's even an argument for pl aying it
safe and not grabbing the pawn, espe­
cially as I think White keeps and advan­
tage here too.
5 exd 5 ttJxd 5 6 0-0 i.C5 7 l:te1
7 ttJg S ! ? i s an interesting alterna­
tive, although I think Black can equalize
if he defends accurately: 7 ... 0-0 8 ttJC3 !
ttJf6 ! (if 8 ... ttJxC 3 ? White ignores the
knight: 9 "ifh S ! ttJe2+ 10 �h 1 ! - and
again ! - 10 ... h 6 1 1 ttJxf7 ':'xf7 1 2 i.xf7+
�f8 13 i.b3 "ii'f6 14 "ii'x e2 with a deci­
sive m aterial advantage) 9 ttJce4 ttJxe4
10 ttJxe4 i.e7 11 "iVh s 'ii'd 7 ! planning
... 'ii'f s or ... "ii'g 4 i s okay for Black,
V.lnkiov- B.Toth, Rome 1984.
7 ••• 0-0
Tryin g to hold on to the e s-pawn

only brings Black troubl e. For example,
7 .. .f6? 8 d4! , or 7 ... .1i.g4 8 h3 .1i.h 5 9 d4!
(9 ttJxe 5 ! .1i.xf2+ 10 'iii> xf2 'iYh4+ 1 1 g 3 i s
al so good) 9 ... .1i.xd4 10 g4.
8 h3
During the g ame I was aware th at 8
ttJxe 5 was supposed to be good for
White, but I felt a little bit uncomfort­
able with idea of plunging into any
possible preparation from my oppo­
nent - Black needs to at least know all
the tricks if he wants to risk playing
thi s line. So I took an 'easy' option . I
counted on the fact th at even after a
quiet (but useful) move White would
still hold an edge.
If you want to grab the pawn with 8
ttJxe5, you need to be prepared for
some tactical lines but the rewards are
high. H ere's a brief summ ary of what
to expect:
a) 8 ... .1i.xf2+ 9 'iii> xf2 ttJxe5 10 l:txe 5
'ii'h 4+ 11 'iii>fl ! 'ii'f6+ 1 2 'ii'f3 'ii'x e5 1 3
.1i.xd5 c6 14 .1i.b3 'ii'xh 2 1 5 .1i.e3 .1i. e 6 16
.1i.g l 'iYh4 17 ttJC3 as 18 .l:[el a4 19 .1i.f2
'ii'h 1+ 20 'iii> e 2 'i!i'h 6 2 1 .1i.xe6 lIae8 2 2
'iii> d l :xe6 2 3 ttJe4 and White h ad suc-
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
cessfully negotiated the complication s
to reach an advantage in R.Tischbierek­
I . Donev, Liechten stein 1 9 9 5 .
b ) 8 . . .'i!i'h4
9 ttJf3 (White al so g ained a clear
plus in G .Alesi-R.5imonell a, correspon ­
dence 1998, after 9 'ii'f3 ttJf6 10 ttJxc6
ttJg4 11 d4 'ii'xh 2+ 12 'iii>fl �d6 - per­
haps 12 ... bxc6 ! ? - 13 ttJe7+ .1i.xe7 14
.l:i.xe7 'iVh l+ 15 'iii> e 2 ttJf6 16 'iii> d 2 �g4
17 l:tel ! 'ii'x el+ 18 'iii> x el .1i.xf3 19 g xf3)
9 ... 'ii'xf2+ (9 ... .1i.xf2+? 10 �1) 10 �h l
(threatening both 11 .1i.xd5 and 11 .l:i.e2,
but Bl ack h as a resource ... ) 10 ... ttJf6 ! 11
:e2 ttJg4 12 c3 (forced, to prevent
... ttJd4) 12 ... �f5 (or 12 ... b5 13 .1i.d5 ! .1i.b7
14 ttJbd2 l:tae8 15 ttJe4! 'iix e2 16 'iix e2
ttJf2+ 1 7 'ii'xf2 .1i.xf2 18 ttJxf2 with a
clear advantage, A. Dyakov-M.lbar, cor­
respondence 2002) 13 h3 .l:.ae8 14 d4
.1i.e4 15 hxg4 �xf3 16 l:txf2 .1i.xdl 17
dXc5 ttJe 5 18 ttJa3 and White went on
to win in R.Gwaze-M.Lyell, British (h.,
Scarborough 2004 .
I get the impression th at those who
play thi s gambit as Black are counting
on White either chickening out - as I
15 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
did - or losing their way in the heat of
battle. I 'm sure there are some further
tricky lines to negotiate, but I'm equally
sure th at objectively White must be
able to keep an advantage, and proba­
bly a significant one.
The further good news i s th at, as far
as I can see, 'chickening out' still
probably leads to an edge for White -
and it al so spoils Black's fun !
8 ... liJ b6
If S ... .:teS White h as the intriguing 9
d4! ? (9 liJg s i s a decent alternative).
After 9 ... liJxd4 10 liJxd4 i.xd4 1 1 i.xd S !
(not 11 C 3 ? i.xf2+ 12 �xf2 'iWh4+)
11 ... 'iVxds 12 c3 White win s a piece for
two pawn s and some (but probably not
enough) compen sation, following
12 ... i.d7 1 3 cxd4 exd4 14 i.f4.
9 i.b3
9 •.. h6
Bl ack wants to play ...lIeS, but he
needs to prevent liJg s first. He can
leave the e-pawn h anging for the mo­
ment, since 10 liJxes can be an swered
by 10 ... liJxes 11 :xe s i.xf2 + ! '
9 ... 'iff6 l e d t o a quick win for White
15 2
in the game P.Jaracz-R.Forster,
Guarapuava 1991, although the move
itself isn't bad: 10 liJC3 'fi'g 6 (threaten­
ing ... i.xh 3, but...) 11 liJe4! i.e7 (if
11 ... i.xh 3 ?, 12 liJh4 win s a piece) 12
liJg 3 i.d6? (Black needs to patrol h4, so
12 ... i.f6 was required). Here White
missed the ch ance to play 1 3 liJh4! 'iff6
14 liJe4!, when 14 ... 'iVxh4 1 5 i.g s traps
the queen, and 14 ... 'iVdS 15 'Wh S ! gives
White a fierce initiative. One possibility
is ls .. .'lWeS 16 liJg 6 ! intending 16 ... hxg6
1 7 liJf6+! gxf6 is 'iWxg6+ �h S 19 %:te4!
(diagram please ! )
19 .. .fxg 6 20 :h4+ �g 7 2 1 i.h 6+
�h 7 22 i.xfS m ate.
In stead the g am e continued 13 c3?
�h S? (13 ... i.e6 ! ) 14 liJh4! (White
doesn't miss his second chance)
14 ... 'ii'f6 15 liJe4 'iWe7 ? 16 'Wh s and
Black resigned as there are too m any
threats: for example, 16 ... i.e6 17 liJg s
h 6 lS liJxe6 fxe6 19 liJg6+.
9 ... aS 10 a3 reminds m e a bit of our
previous g am e (Kramnik- Kasparov),
but a better version for White because
Bl ack has voluntarily retreated his

knight to b6. Here's one example:
10 ... ttJd4 11 ttJxd4 (11 i.a2 ! ?) 11 .. :iVxd4
(11 ... exd4 can be met by 12 'iWh s .i.d6
13 ttJd2 followed by ttJe4 or ttJf3) 1 2
.i. e 3 'iVd6 1 3 'iWh S ! .i.xe3 14 l:txe3 a 4 1 5
i.a2 ttJd7 (hardly ideal, but the e-pawn
required protection) 16 ttJd2 g6 17 'iWh 6
'iVf6 lS ttJe4 'iVg 7 19 Vh4 and Black was
struggling to untangle his position in
S.B.Han sen-M.5antos, H avana 200S.
10 ttJ c3
Moving the knight to e4 as quickly
as possible is the most obvious plan
here, and despite ... h6 I hadn 't entirely
ruled out the possibility of ttJg S ...
1 0...l:. e 8 11 ttJ e 4 i.f8?
Thi s i s clearly the most desirable re­
treat for th e bishop (on d6 it can be
captured at any moment, while on e7 it
blocks the e-file) but it loses - because
Black's king requires this square !
Again st 11 ... .i.d6 I was con sidering
the line 12 d4 exd4 1 3 ttJxd6 l:txel+ 14
"ifxel cxd6 (14 ... 'iYxd6? 1 5 'ili'eS+) 1 5
'ii'e 4 dS 16 'iVf4 g S 17 'iVg 3 with good
compen sation for the pawn, but there
may be even better option s for White.
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
If 11 ... i.e7 White could spend a
tempo on 12 a3 to safeguard his bishop
again st ... ttJas ideas, since it's unclear
how Bl ack further develops his position
(for example, ... .i.fs is met by ttJg 3). It's
true th at Black's position remain s solid,
but White m ay be able to increase the
pressure with ideas like i.d2-c3.
12 ttJfg 5 !
Sometimes ... h 6 isn 't enough to dis­
courage ttJg S !
12 ... hxg5?
Black's only real chance i s 12 ... ttJdS.
After 1 3 'ii'f3 i.e6 (not 1 3 ... hxg s ? 14
i.xds Vi'xdS ? 1 5 ttJf6+) 14 ttJxe6 fxe6 1 5
'iYg4 White h a s 'only' a virtually deci­
sive position al advantage.
1 3 ttJxg5?
1 3 "iVh S ! is more forcing (mate i s
threatened!) and more decisive. Bl ack
must protect f7, but after 13 ... i.e6
White can win with 14 ttJxg s .i.b4 (had
the bishop retreated to d6 in stead of fS
on move 11, Bl ack could have played
14 ... .i.xb3 followed by ... Vi'f6) 15 i.xe6
fxe6 16 "iff7+ 'iith S 17 :e4.
13 ... l:!.e6?
153
Beating 1 e4 e5

Black can fight on with 1 3 ... g 6 ! 14
�xf7 "iHf6. White must be winning af­
ter 1 5 .i.g 5 but this certainly isn't as
clear cut as 13 � 5 .
1 4 'ilYh 5
Now it's easy.
14 ... .i.c5 15 'iVxf7+ 'it'h8 16 'i:Vh 5+ l:!.h6
17 4:Jf7+ �h7 18 .i.xh6 g6 19 �g5+ 'iit h 8
20 'iVxg6 1-0
Game 35
V.Bologan-E.Tomashevsky
Aeroflot Open, Moscow 2006
1 e4 e5 2 �f3 �c6 3 .i.C4 �f6 4 d3 h 6
Black wants to develop with ... g6.
... .i.g7 . ... d6 etc. Although it's unusual
for Black to fianchetto in 1 e4 e 5 open­
ings. it's not difficult to appreci ate the
m erits of thi s approach. especially
when you consider th at ... lUe8 . ... B(e7)­
f8 . ... g7-g6 and ... i.g7 i s a typical re­
grouping m anoeuvre in the m ain lines.
Why not save time by playing ... g6 and
... i.g 7 straightaway?
Of course. it's not quite as straight­
forward as th at. For one thing. after 4
d3 Black first h as to deal with a serious
threat. Yes. it h asn 't been m entioned
before. but 4 d3 carries a threat !
For example. 4 ... d6? which i s not
such a rare blunder. can be punished
by 5 �g 5 ! . The best Black can do is
5 ... d5 6 exd5 when he i s a whole tempo
down on the ultra-sharp 4 �g 5 varia­
tion of the Two Knights. If 6 ... �xd5 7
0-0 and Black i s already in big trouble.
or 6 ... �a5 7 .i.b5+ (or even 7 0-0) 7 ... c6
8 dxc6 bxc6 9 .i.a4 h6 10 �e4 with zero
compen sation for the pawn . Similarly.
4 ... g 6 ? is al so met by 5 �g 5 ! . and thi s is
the reason Black spends a m ove on
... h 6 .
5 0-0 d 6
I think th at thi s i s Black's most accu­
rate m ove order.
If Black plays 5 ... g 6. White has no
need to prepare d4 with c3 because the
immedi ate 6 d4! looks even stronger.
Thi s reminds me of 4 d4 against the
Two Knights. True. White has wasted a
tempo by spending two m oves in stead
of one advancing his pawn to d4. but

154

Black h as arguably wasted two tempi
on ... g6 and ... h 6 .
H ere's o n e example: 6 ... exd4 7 lDxd4
(7 eS dS 8 i.bs lDe4 9 lDxd4 al so looks
reason able) 7 ... i.g 7 8 lDxc6 bxc6 9 e s !
lDh 7 1 0 Vd3 ! (preventing 1 0. . .0-0)
10 .. :ii'e7 was A.Tuzhik-G . Evtushenko,
Novosibirsk 2007, and in thi s position
11 lDc3 looks good. Bl ack can h ardly
contemplate pl aying 11 ... i.xe s, in view
of 12 :el g s 13 f4.
6 (3 86 7 d41
A quick d3-d4 i s the most ch alleng­
ing respon se to Black's slow develop­
ment. What's more, playing d4 h ere
and now m ore or less obliges Black to
make a further prophyl actic move
( .. :ii'e7, to go with ... h6) that he
wouldn 't h ave chosen to do in an ideal
world.
After the slower 7 .:tel i.g 7 8 d4
Black can probably dispen se with
.. :ile7, at least for the m om ent, in fa­
vour of the m ore desirable 8 ... 0-0.
7 :ile7
•.
By defending e S (and f7) Black cuts
out any tricks and i s now able to finish
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
his development in rel ative peace. Let's
take a look at other m oves:
a) Black must avoid 7 ... i.g 7 ? 8
dxe s ! .
b ) 7 . . .lDxe4?! 8 dxe s must al so be
good for White.
c) 7 ... i.g4 i s very strongly met by 8
'iVh 3 ! .
For example, 8 .. :ii'd7 9 i.xf7+! 'iVxf7
10 'ilxb7 �d7 11 dS ! lDe7 12 'iVxa8
lDxe4 13 lDbd2 and White already en ­
joys a deci sive advantage, S . Fedorchuk­
S.Bednarek, Warsaw 200 S .
I recently reached thi s position
(against G avin Wall, London League
2010) but failed to spot 11 dS in my
calcul ation s. In stead I chose 8 ii.bS ? ! ,
which i s good enough for an edge, but
nothing like 8 "iVh 3 ! . I got lucky with a
trick after 8 ... lDd7 ! ? 9 dS lDe7? (Bl ack
shoul d pl ay 9 ... ii.xf3 10 'ii'xf3 lDe7) 10
lDxe s ! .
d) The paradoxical 7 . . .exd4 isn't as
bad as it looks: 8 cxd4 i.g 7 (8 ... lDxe4? is
m et by 9 .l:tel dS 10 ii.xd S ! } 9 lDC3 0-0
10 i.bS ! ? (10 dS lDe7 11 h3 c6 12 dxc6
bxc6 was V.Genba-V.Malaniuk, Moscow
155
Beating 1 e4 e5
1995, and now 1 3 %:tel gives White an
edge; but 10 h 3 ? ! liJxe4! is something
to avoid) 10 ... .i.g4 1 1 .i.xc6 bxc6 1 2 h3
.i.d7 1 3 .te3 l:tb8 14 b3 with a small
advantage, R. Kuczyn sl<i-M.Bartel ,
Bydgoszcz 2001.
e) 7 ... liJd7 ! ? is another move which
you would think Bl ack shouldn't be
able to get away with, but again it's not
bad at all - certainly good enough to
have been used by grandmasters Alex­
ander Graf and David Howel l :
8 .t e 3 (to prevent Black from cas­
tling easily; 8 dxe5 liJdxe 5 9 liJxe 5
liJxe 5 10 .i.b3 .i.g7 1 1 f4 i s a decent
altern ative) 8 ... .i.g 7 9 'ii'c l 'ii'e 7 10 lIel
liJf6 11 .td5 ! ? liJb8 ! ? (thi s came as a
shock; I was counting on something
like 11 ... g5 1 2 .i.xc6+ bxc6 1 3 dxe 5 dxe 5
14 liJbd2) 12 liJ a 3 g 5 1 3 dxe 5 dxe 5 14
�c2 liJxd5 15 exd5 0-0 16 liJC4 f6 ! with
an unclear position, Hmms-D.Howell,
Southend 2008. Black's kingside pawn s
are not only rock-solid, they al so pos­
sess con siderable potenti al to expand.
After the g am e David suggested that
1 3 .i.b3 was a better try for White. If
156
Bl ack cannot capture on e4, White
must have a typical edge, but 13 ... liJxe4
does look risky in view of 14 'ii'c 2 f5 (or
14 ... .i.f5 15 .i.d5 ! ) 15 dxe5 dxe 5 16 .i.d5 .
8 l:te1 .tg7 g liJbd2 0-0 10 h 3
Let's try to briefly sum u p thi s posi­
tion . Black has employed a King's In­
dian/ Pirc set-up, and the natural pawn
break to g ain counterplay is .. .f5 . How­
ever, as it stands it's difficult for Black
to arrange thi s move effectively. It re­
quires at least two moves' preparation.
Wh at's more, even when the m ove be­
comes legal, Bl ack must be careful he
isn't simply opening the position in
White's favour.
The .. .f5 break becomes much more
desirable and practical if White closes
the centre with d5. Therefore, White
must try as h ard as possible to main­
tain the ten sion in the centre, and
should not be tempted by d5 unless the
rewards are significant.
10 .i. d 7
...
Bl ack has tried m any moves here,
although the plan s are all quite similar.
Here are a few possibilities:

a) 10 .. /�h 8 1 1 �fl ii.d7 12 �g 3
�h 7 1 3 ii.e3 l:.ae8 14 'iWd2 h s, as pl ayed
in V.Bologan-S.Halkias, Plovdiv 2008, i s
similar to the m ain game.
b) The plan of 10 ... �h s followed by
... 'ii'f6 and ... �f4 backfires here: 1 1 �fl
'iWf6 ? ! 12 �e3 ! (eyeing both ds and g4)
12 ... �e7 (12 ... �f4 13 �dS ! ) 1 3 �g4!
ii.xg4 (forced, but not wh at Black
would h ave wanted) 14 hxg4 �f4 15 g 3
�e6 1 6 d s �g s 1 7 �xg s hxg s 1 8 �g 2
(I 've seen better bl ack queen s ! )
18 . . . ii.h 6 19 l:[h l � g 7 20 ii. e 3 l:.h 8 2 1
'ifd2 � g 8 2 2 l:txh 6 ! �xh 6 2 3 ii.xg s and
White won, B.Heberla-I.Cheparinov,
Litohoto 1999.
c) 10 ... �h 7 intends ... �g s, an idea
we've seen previously in Nevednichy­
Mitkov (Gam e 30). Black wants to add
pressure to d4 and induce the ds ad­
vance, but White doesn 't h ave to com ­
ply: 1 1 �f1 �g s
and now:
Cl) 12 �lh 2 �xf3+ 1 3 �xf3 �h 7 14
a4 fs 1 5 dxes dxe s was M.Ghinda­
A. Beliavsky, Lviv 1981, and I think Par­
m a's suggestion of 16 ii.ds looks best.
Italian Game: Two Kn ig hts Defen ce
(2) 12 ii.xg s ! ? (an interesting deci­
sion ; by taking with the bishop on g s
rather th an the knight, White i s able to
hold d4 and at the sam e time try to
exploit the weakness of g s - something
Bl ack fails to prevent...) 12 ... hxg s 1 3
� e 3 J::[b 8 ? ! (Atlas suggests 1 3 ...� a s as
an improvement, although after 14
ii.fl it's not clear how Bl ack proceeds;
while Rybka suggests the paradoxical
1 3 .. :1Iif6 ! ? intending 14 �ds "iWd8 1 5
'ii'd 2 ? ! g4) 1 4 'ii'd 2 ! b s ? 1 5 ii.b3 � a s 16
�ds 'iWd8 1 7 dxes ii.xes 18 'ii'x g s 'ii'x g s
19 �xg s c6 20 f4 cxds 2 1 fxe s �xb3 2 2
axb3 dxes 2 3 exds and White soon
won in S.Tiviakov-D.5ermek, Beijing
1997.
11 �f1 ':ae8 12 �g3 'iWd 8
12 ... �h 8 1 3 a4 �h 7 14 dxe s ! �xes
(or, similarly, 14 ... dxe s 1 5 b 3 ! } 15 �xe s
dxe s (if l s ... 'iWxe s, White plays 16 ii.e3
intending ii.d4 or f2-f4) 16 b3! followed
by ii.a3 is annoying for Black. 16 ... .l:td8
17 ii.a3 cs 18 'iWds ! b6 19 'iWb7 'iYf6 was
J . Nunn-L.Christi an sen, London 1982,
and here 20 'iWxa7 ii.xh 3 2 1 a s ! (Nunn)
is very strong .
157
Beating 1 e4 e5
13 i.. b 3
Notice how Bologan patiently im­
proves his position . On b3 the bishop is
less prone to an attack, and in fact next
move it goes to c2 to further protect e4
and thus en able i.. e 3 .
13 d s ? ! i s exactly wh at Bl ack i s hop­
ing for, and something that should be
avoided. After 1 3 ... ltJe7 everything i s in
place for a typical King's Indian style
attack on the king side, whereas White
will take a while to get going on the
other win g .
13 ... a6
Tomashevsky waits, and al so it's
useful to have the a-pawn away from
a7 in some lines after i.. e 3 . Even so,
Bl ack should probably be tryin g to play
a bit m ore actively.
The more direct 13 ... 'Ot>h 7 14 a3 ltJg8
was played in L.Yudasin - I . Efimov, Reg­
gio Emilia 1997. It's worth seeing how
thi s g am e progresses, as it demon­
strates how difficult it i s for Black to
organize .. .fs unless White plays ds: 1 5
i.. c 2 ! (indirectly pointing at the black
king) ls ... a6 (if ls .. .fs ? ! , 16 exfs gxfs 17
158
dxe s dxes 18 ltJh4 e4 19 'iVh s ltJce7 20
i.. g s ! and some n asty sacrifice on e4 is
likely) 16 l:lbl �c8 17 b4 (White gradu­
ally expands on the queenside)
17 ... ltJd8 18 i.. e 3 ltJe6 (18 .. .fS is again
unwi se: 19 exfs gxfs 20 dxe s dxes 21
i.. c s lIf7 2 2 ltJh4 e4 2 3 'iVh s ltJe7 24
i..b 3 and Black i s getting hit from all
angles ... ) 19 'ifd2 f6 ( ... so he settles for
.. .f6) 20 l:.bdl .:te7 2 1 ltJh 2 'ii'e 8
2 2 ds (finally White advances, but
only after much preparation on the
queenside, and even here there were
m any other ways to play it) 22 ... ltJd8 2 3
c 4 'Ot>h 8 24 cs (White's attack i s quicker,
but there's still much to play for) 24 .. .f5
2 5 exfs g xfs 26 f4! (killing the d7-
bishop) 26 ... 'ii'g 6 27 i..f2 e4 28 ltJhfl
i..f6 29 ltJe3 1:[g 7 30 'Ot>h 2 ltJe7 3 1 1:[gl
lUg 8 32 a4 ltJf7 33 'ii'e 2 ltJes ! ? 34 'Ot>h l
i.. e 8 (thi s sacrifice feels a bit desperate,
but 34 ... ltJf7 is an swered strongly by 3 5
ltJh S ! ) 3 5 fxe s i.. x es 3 6 ltJgfl 'ii'g s 3 7
ltJc4 i..h s 3 8 g4 fxg4 3 9 ltJxe s g 3 40
ltJf7+ (40 'ii'x e4 should win ) 40 ... .:.xf7 41
i.. d4+ lIgg 7 42 �xe4?? (42 i.. x g7+!
'Ot>xg 7 43 ltJxg 3 ! wins) 42 ... i..f3+ (oh

dear!) 43 'iixf3 l:txf3 44 .i.. x g 7+ 'iix g 7 45
i.e4 'ili'C3 46 ':g 2 l:tf2 47 cxd6 cxd6 48
b S axbs 49 axb s liJfs and White re­
signed.
14 i.e2
Continuing the plan . Now White is
ready to increase the pressure with
.ie3, 'iid 2 and :ad1.
Whereas a premature dS should be
avoided, exchanging on eS can be con­
sidered, especially if White prefers a
position without ten sion. H ere 14 dxes
liJxe s 1 5 liJxes dxe s (or l s .. J:txe s 16
.if4 :tee8 17 'i¥d2) 16 .ie3, as sug­
gested by Lukacs, promises White a
small advantage.
14... liJ h 7 1 5 i.e3
l S ... hS
White i s quite happy to see Black
weaken the g s-square, and thi s m akes
any subsequent .. .fS less desirable.
Lukacs suggests l S ... liJg S ! ? as an
improvement. I think Bologan would
have reacted with 16 liJxg S hxg s 17 dS.
The advance i s justified here because
Bl ack is denied the possibility of ... liJe7,
and on b8 the knight i s very poorly
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
placed. Furthermore, after 17 ... liJb8 18
b4 Black still can't pl ay 18 .. .fs, as 19
exfS g xfs 20 'iVh s i s a strong reply.
Note that lS .. .fS ? 16 exfs gxfs 17
dxe s dxes 18 .i.. c S ! (or even 18 liJh S ! )
leaves Bl ack struggling.
16 'ili'd 2 "ii'f6 17 'it> h 2
Bl ack was threatening 17 ... .i.. xh 3 .
1 7. . ..i.. e 8 18 lIad1
18 a3 ! ? followed by b4 would be a
typical idea to gain space on the
queen side, but Bologan's plan proves
to be very effective indeed .
18 ..• 'it>h8 19 liJe2 ii'e7 20 liJgS !
White wants t o free up the f-pawn
and is happy to accept an exchange of
knights to do so.
20 ... liJxgs 2 1 .i.. x gs f6
Or 2 1 ... .i..f6 2 2 .i.. xf6+ 'ii'xf6 2 3 f4 (Lu­
kacs).
2 2 .i.. e 3 fS 2 3 .igs .if6 24 .i.. xf6+ llxf6
2 S f4!
At first sight it m ay look like thi s po­
sition, full of ten sion, offers equal
chances for both sides, but there are
two key factors which swing the game
almost deci sively in White's favour:
15 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
1. White's pieces are better posi­
tioned than their counterparts. For ex­
ample, Black's rook on f6 would prefer
to be on f8 defending its partner; and
his queen i s uncomfortable on the e­
file, as demon strated by 2s ... exf4? 2 6
exfs.
2. Black's king i s weaker than
White's. His decision to play ... h S has
done him no favours at all, and he ex­
periences some problems with dark­
squared weaknesses, especially after
the exchange of dark-squared bishops.
Let's see how Bologan ruthlessly ex­
ploits his advantages:
2 s .. :i!Vg7 2 6 fxe s dxe s 2 7 exfs �xfs 2 8
�xfs l:txfs
28 ... gxfs 29 dxe s l:[xe s 30 lbf4 (Lu­
kacs) is even worse.
29 lbg3 l:tff8 30 ds! lbd8 3 1 lbe4
Now White has a juicy outpost for
his knight to add to all his other advan­
tages.
3 1 .. JU4 3 2 'it'e3 l:tef8 3 3 lbc s ! e4
3 3 ... .l:.4fS h an g s on to the e s-pawn,
but 34 d6 i s a strong reply and so i s 34
lbe6 lbxe6 3S dxe6 l:te8 3 6 l:td7 'iVf8 37
16 0
l1xc7 l:lxe6 3 8 l:.xb7.
34 lbxe4 'iVe s 3 5 g3 l:t4f7
3 S ... :f3 loses to 36 'iVh 6+.
3 6 'it>g2 'it>g7 3 7 'it'd 2 c6 3 8 c4 cxd s 39
cxd s h4 40 gxh4 'ifh s 41 'ii'c 3+ 'it>g8 42
'it'g3 :f4 43 .l:.d2 1-0
Black's position is hopeless. If
43 .. .l::txh 4 there's 44 �f2 :xf2+ 4S 'iVxf2
with no decent defence to the threat of
46 lbf6+.
An exceptionally well played game
from Bologan . He didn 't seem to give
his opponent any ch ances at all .
Key Notes
1. The space-gaining plan of a3 and
b4 looks like a promi sing way for White
to play again st ... lbas and ... cs. It's
worth going through Game 29 more
than once to really appreci ate Tivia­
kov's brilliant strategical play. This is a
model g am e from White's point of
view.
2. Game 30 demon strates that
White doesn 't always h ave to play for
the d3 -d4 advance, and he sometimes
leaves the rook on f1 for a reason - to
play f2-f4!
3 . When Bl ack plays ... dS, as he does
in G am e 3 1, don 't forget about the
possibility of playing �a4, which adds
pressure to the centre by hitting the
knight on c6. Often this move comes as
a surprise. Played at the right moment,
it can be annoyingly difficult for Bl ack
to meet.
4. The best an swer to 6 ... dS is Pl an B:

exch ange on dS and then hit the e S ­
pawn . 8 l:t e l (G ame 3 2) i s the sharpest
try and an attempt at a direct refuta­
tion ; 8 h 3 (Game 3 3 ) is the safe option .
S . Black's g ambit after 4 ... dS (Game
34) i s probably un sound in the final
analysi s, but bear in mind th at your
opponent is likely to be prepared. If you
are also prepared for some forcing
lines, by all mean s take the pawn . Al­
ternatively, White h as good chances of
keeping some advantage without en­
tering the complication s.
Italian Game: Two Knig hts Defen ce
6. Again st 4 ... h6 (Game 3 S ) White
should try to play c3 and d4 as quickly
as possible. He should then try to keep
the ten sion in the centre, since thi s
m akes i t very difficult for Bl ack t o ar­
range his m ain pawn break .. .fS . White
shouldn 't be tempted to close the cen­
tre with dS unless there is a concrete
reason for doing so.
7. Be ready to punish 4 ... d6? with S
It:'Jg S . It's easy to forget that 4 d3 sets
up a threat!
16 1
 C h a pt e r F i ve
Italian Game:
Other Lines
1 e4 e 5 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 .i.C4
Now it's time to consider alterna­
tives for Black in the Italian G ame, on
his third and fourth moves. Thi s chap­
ter isn't particul arly long for a couple
of reason s. 3 ... .i.cS and 3 ... lLlf6 are the
overwhelmingly popular choices in
practice, and altern atives are quite
rare. Likewise, after 3 ... .i.cS 4 c3, only a
small percentage of g ames continue
with anything other th an 4 ... lLlf6. More
to the point, most of Black's rare op-
16 2
tion s do nothing to prevent White from
carrying on with the usual system of
development. Indeed, transpositions to
previous chapters are possible in some
places.
H aving said all th at, there are rea­
son s why m any of Bl ack's option s in
thi s ch apter rem ain rare, and I have
covered a few theoretical recommen­
dations in which White tries to punish
Black rather th an settling for a slow
build-up. In particul ar, White can often
play the d4 advance much earlier than
normal , and this puts pressure on
Black's position from an early stage. I
should stress, though, th at m any of
Black's options are playable in the
sense that White can only expect a
small advantage, and one or two have
perhaps been unfairly dismissed.
In Tanti-Sutton (Gam e 3 6) we con­
sider various option s for Bl ack on his
fourth m ove: 4 ... 'ii'e 7, 4 .. :ili'f6, 4 ... ..tb6

and 4 ... d6. Bokar-N asybullin (Game 37)
covers some third-move option s :
3 . . . .i.e7, 3 . . . d6, 3 . . . g6, 3 .. .f5 and 3 ... li::l d 4.
Game 3 6
J.Ta nti-J.Sutton
Correspondence 2003
1 e4 e S 2 li::lf3 li::l c 6 3 .i.C4 .i.cs 4 c3
4 ... 'iVe7
Thi s move isn't an attempt to pre­
vent or discourage d4 - as we shall see,
accepting the g ambit carries too much
risk. Black's idea is to offer the e 5-pawn
extra protection so th at he doesn 't
have to give up the centre after White's
advance.
Here's a brief round up of other rare
moves:
a) 4 ....i.b6 5 d4 'iVe7 i s another move
order to reach the same position (in
fact, thi s was the one chosen in the
game). White can al so choose to play
with d2-d3, probably tran sposing to
lines we've previously covered. For ex­
ample, S 0-0 li::lf6 6 d3 d6 7 li::lb d2 0-0 S
Italian Game: Ot her L ines
.i.b3 intending li::l c 4; or 5 d3 li::lf6 6 .i.b3
d6 7 li::lb d2 with the sam e idea, which i s
a logical way t o m eet a n early ... .i.b6.
b) Does 4 ... 'iWf6 prevent White's ad­
vance? 5 d4! (No it doesn't! There's
nothing wrong with 5 0-0 d6 6 d3,
though.)
Now:
bl) If 5 ... exd4, 6 e 5 ! is strong :
6 .. :ii'g 6 (6 . . .li::l x e5 i s met by 7 'iVe2) 7
cxd4 .tb4+ S li::l c 3 d6 (or S ... 'iVxg 2 9 :g l
VWh 3 10 .i.xf7+!) 9 0-0 .i.g4 10 h 3 (10
li::lb 5 ! ?) 10 ... .i.xf3 1 1 'ili'xf3 dxe 5 12 li::lb 5
0-0-0 1 3 .t d 3 'iVf6 1 4 'iVg4+ �bS 1 5
.i.g 5 'iVe6 16 .i.xdS and 1-0, V.Karavaev­
D.Metlyakhin, Moscow 1994.
b2) 5 ... .i.b6 has similar motives to
4 ... 'iIi'e7 5 d4 .i.b6, but the queen i s
more vulnerable o n the f6-square and
Black h as to lose more time: 6 0-0 h 6 (if
6 ... d6 White h as 7 .tg 5 'iVg 6 S dxe5
dxe5 9 li::l x e 5 ! and here 9 ... 'i¥xg 5 10
li::l xf7 'iVC5 11 .i.d5 li::lf6 12 li::l xh S .i.g4 1 3
'iVb3 - Bilguer - looks very good for
White) 7 a4 a6 S dxe 5 ! ? li::l x e5 9 li::l x e5
'i¥xe5 10 'iVb3, V. Egin-B.5aidov, Tash­
kent 2009.
163
Beating 1 e4 e5
Black has some problems here.
10 ... 'ilVe7 is th e natural way to defend
f7, but how does Bl ack continue after
11 e s ?
c ) 4 ... d 6 i s usually condemned on
the grounds that Bl ack is forced to give
up the centre after 5 d4, since s ... i..b 6 6
dxe s ! win s a pawn . However, I feel th at
S ... exd4 6 cxd4 i..b 6 ! isn't quite as at­
tractive for White as it first l ooks, as his
centre coul d easily come under some
pressure.
I think White still needs to play one
or two accurate moves, and thi s should
be enough to give him some advan­
tage: 7 i..b s ! (7 h 3 - to prevent ... i.. g 4 -
7 .. .'�jf6 8 ttJC3 0-0 9 0-0 ttJxe4! 10 ttJxe4
ds is the kind of thing White needs to
avoid, but 7 ttJC3 ttJf6 8 ds ttJes 9 ttJxe s
dxe s 10 i.. g s might be sufficient for an
edg e) 7 ... i.. d 7 8 0-0 ttJge7 (or 8 ... ttJf6 9
ttJC3 - or 9 e s ! ? - 9 ... 0-0 10 h 3 .l:f.e8,
J . Szabo-L. H azai, Hungarian League
1996, and now just 11 %:tel) 9 ttJC3 0-0
10 h3 and White's cl assical centre must
count for something, M. Krakops­
J . Pinter, Elista Olympiad 1998.
164
S d4
Of course White doesn 't have to
pl ay d4. He can settle for d3 and reach
positions similar to those in previous
ch apters, and indeed thi s is something
Tiviakov h as done. White can even ar­
gue that in thi s case Bl ack h as commit­
ted his queen to e7, something he
wouldn 't necessarily want to do in the
m ain lines. Thi s probably isn't a huge
issue for Black, but a tempo does count
for something, and furthermore Black
i s deprived of the typical ... ttJe7-g6 idea.
Let's take a look at an example: 5
0-0 ttJf6 6 d3 (6 d4 i..b 6 tran sposes to
the m ain g ame) 6 ... d6 7 ttJbd2 0-0 (if
7 ... a6 8 i..b 3 0-0 9 lIel i.. e 6 10 ttJfl
i.. xb3 11 axb 3 ! ?, Bl ack's queen isn't
well placed for the typical ... ds ad­
vance: l1...ds? 12 exds ttJxds 13 d4! ) 8
b4! ? i.. b 6 9 i..b 3 (intending ttJC4) 9 ... a6
10 ttJC4 i.. a 7 11 i.. g s h 6 12 i..h 4 ttJd8 13
ttJe3 ! c6 14 �h l �h 8 1 5 ttJfs ! i.. xfs 16
exfs gs (otherwise how does Bl ack get
his knight on d8 back into the g ame?)
17 fxg 6 fxg 6 18 d4! e4 19 ttJd2 g s 20
i.. g 3 and Black's position was begin-

ning to look sh aky in S.smagin-Duong
Thanh Nha, Montreal 2000. After
20 ... liJf7 21 f3 e3 22 .l:.el %:taeS 23 .l:[e2
liJh s 24 liJfl White won a pawn .
5 •.. �b61
s ... exd4 6 O-O! i s known to be prom ­
i sing for White. It's basically a Scotch
Gambit where Black's queen h as found
herself on e 7 !
a ) If 6 ... dxC3 7 liJxC3 d 6 White plays
the obvious and strong S liJdS.
b) 6 ...liJes 7 liJxes 'iWxes S f4! dXc3+ 9
�h l cxb2 10 fxes bxal'iii' 11 'iii'd s liJh6
12 �xh6 l:tfS 13 'iix cs (F.wiltenburg­
K.Woschkat, correspondence 1999),
intending 1 3 ... gxh6 14 liJa3 'iWb2 15
liJbs .
c ) 6 ... d3 7 e s ! (not allowing Bl ack to
consolidate) 7 ... d6 S �g s f6 9 exf6 liJxf6
10 liJbd2 �g4 11 b4 �b6 12 a4 as 1 3
h 3 ..txf3 1 4 'ifxf3 was V.Chekhover­
V. Panov, Tbilisi 1937. Black has no op­
tion but to castle long, but this is
hardly ideal given that it's likely to
open up there in the near future.
6 0-0
A few sources give a 'refutation '
Italian Game: Ot her Lines
based on dS followed by d6, a pawn
sacrifice to clog up Bl ack's queen side.
While I agree th at thi s i s an attractive
idea, I'm not 100% convinced it's so
great for White, or even his best option .
A centre pawn i s a centre pawn after
all !
One line i s 6 ..tg s liJf6 7 dS liJdS
(7 ... liJbS S d6 ! is a more favourable ver­
sion for White - compare below) S d6
cxd6 9 liJa3 ! ? (if 9 0-0, Black pl ays
9 ... liJe6 justifying his deci sion to choose
dS in stead of bS, and here 10 ..txf6
'iVxf6 ! 11 'iix d6 �C7 100ks okay for him)
9 ... �xf2+
10 �e2 ! �b6 11 liJh4 ds ! 12 liJfs
'iWcs 13 �e3 d4 14 liJxg 7+? (14 cxd4! i s
much stronger) 1 4... 'it>fS 1 5 ..th 6 'it> g S
16 :fl? ds ! a n d Black went o n t o win i n
D.spence-R. Parker, British League 2006.
In the final analysis, the compli cation s
in thi s line might well favour White,
but I can 't help feeling th at Black's
ch ances h ave been underestim ated.
6 ... liJf6
6 ... d6 7 h 3 liJf6 S :tel would tran s­
pose.
165
Beating 1 e4 e5
7 l:[e1 d6 8 h 3
don 't think White can dispen se
with thi s m ove, as ... �g4 would be too
annoying. It's no longer easy for Bl ack
to find an effective role for his light­
squared bi shop, especi ally since White
i s ready to m eet ... �e6 with dS.
8 ... h61?
Shades of Warakom ski-Bartel
(Game 2 3 ) . Bl ack's idea is not to pre­
vent �g s, but rather to play ... g S-g4!
Before you get too nervous, I should say
th at thi s i s under much less favourable
circum stances for Black, as the g am e
amply demon strates.
If 8 ... 0-0 White h as to solve the typi­
cal problem of how to develop his
queen side while keeping his centre
intact. Let's see how Bologan achieves
thi s : 9 liJa3 (planning liJc2 to support
d4; 9 �g s i sn 't effective here, and 9 ... h 6
1 0 Jil.h4 g s 1 1 Jil.g 3 'it>h 7 12 'i!Vd3 liJh S 1 3
�h 2 1:[g 8 14 liJbd2 'iVf6 1 5 � d S liJf4 16
�xf4 gxf4 17 'it>h l liJe7, M. Oella Valle­
M.Eckstein, correspondence 1999, pro­
vides a good reason why thi s is so)
9 ... liJd8 10 liJc2 c6 11 �d3 liJe6
166
12 a4! as 13 b 3 ! .l:ld8 14 �a3 'iWC7 15
'iVd2 liJf4 16 �fl Jil.e6 17 c4 h 6 18 ':adl
with a pleasant space advantage for
White in V.Bologan-O.5ekulic, Igalo
1994.
9 a4
Threatening to win a piece with 10
ds liJas 11 �a2 followed by b2-b4.
9 •.. a6
If 9 ... aS I think White should pl ay 10
liJa3, as in the g ame.
10 liJa 3
10 b4! ? worked tremendously well
in O.Tyomkin-I.Zugic, Montreal 2004.
After 10 ... g S ? ! 11 as �a7 12 b S ! liJd8 13
�a3 liJd7 14 dxe s liJxes 1 5 liJxe s 'iVxes
16 b 6 ! Bl ack's position was already
verging on the point of collapse.
Ag ain st 10 b4 Bl ack should probably
abandon any aggressive ideas on the
kin g side. After 10 ... 0-0! 1 1 �a3 liJd7 12
b S liJas 1 3 �a2 'iYf6, as played in
E.Torre-R. Ekstroem, Lugano 1989, it
looks like White should be a bit better,
although it's not totally clear how ef­
fective his queen side advance really is.
10 ... g5

It's possible that Bl ack was just fol ­
lowing previous g ames, perhaps un­
surprisingly if you con sider that Black
won the earliest six g ames I coul d find
reaching thi s position ! On the evidence
of thi s particul ar g ame, though, I h ave
to say I favour the idea of revertin g
back t o the solid approach with 10 ... 0-0.
After all , ... h6 can hardly be con sidered
a wasted tempo. Still, White can fight
for the advantage if he develops in a
similar way to Bologan , above: 11 liJc2
.l:!.e8 12 i.d3 iYf8 ! ? 1 3 i.e3 (I quite like
1 3 b4! ? or even 1 3 b3) 1 3 ... exd4 14 cxd4
d 5 ! (14 ... liJxe4? loses to 15 d5 ! ) 15 e5
liJe4 16 liJh 2 i.a5 17 l:te2 f6 18 i.xe4
dxe4 19 exf6 �xf6 20 b4 i.b6 21 d5
i.xe3 22 ':xe3 liJe 5 23 ':xe4 i.f5 with
compen sation for the pawn, G .5ax­
E . N agy, Balatonlelle 2003.
11 i.f11
Logical and very strong . On fl the
bishop provides rock-solid support for
the g 2 -pawn, which i s important in
view of the impending ... g4. Wh at's
more, the c4-square becomes available
and liJC4 is a move White really wants
Italian Game: Ot her Lines
to play. All of thi s overrides any "pas­
sive" barbs which could be aimed at
the bishop retreat.
l l liJxg 5 ? hxg 5 12 i.xg 5 1:.g8 13 h4
exd4, A.Reggio-S.Tarrasch, Monte Carlo
1903, i s just an un sound sacrifice.
1 1 dxe 5 ? ! dxe 5 12 liJh 2 ? ! g4! 13
hxg4 .l:!.g 8 14 g5 hxg 5 1 5 i.e3 i.xe3 16
':xe3 :th 8, K.Honfi-M.Damjanovic, Sa­
rajevo 1966, is an example of another
success for Black.
11 ... g4
There's no going back. After 11 ... 0-0
12 liJC4 i.a7 13 i.e3, Bl ack would h ave
a half decent positi on only if he were
allowed to play ... g 5 -g 7 !
12 hxg4 i.xg4 1 3 liJC4 i.a7
In V.Spasov-D. Kontic, Niksic 1991,
Black took the plunge with 1 3 ... i.xd4 ! ?
14 cxd4 liJxd4 1 5 i. e 2 liJxe2+ 16 �xe2
1:[g 8. I don 't quite believe in Black's
compensation, and neither does Rybka.
I wonder why Kontic chose to go 'all
in' like this. Did he overestim ate the
objective value of the sacrifice? Did he
consider Black's practical chances to be
reasonable? Or did he becom e aware
167
Beating 1 e4 e5
that Black is in some trouble if he just
pl ays 'normally'.
14 �e 3 1
Simple stuff, and a huge improve­
ment over 14 b4! ? exd4 15 e 5 ? ( 1 5 b 5 !
is still quite promising) 1 5 . . .lUxe5 1 6
cxd4? i.xf3 17 gxf3 1:.g 8+ 18 i.g 2
lUxf3+ ! and Black win s, N . Rossolimo­
M.Campos Lopez, Skopje 1972.
14 ... i.xf3
Taking on f3 is positional suicide,
but Black does at least win a pawn . The
problem for Black i s that his position i s
more difficult th an it looks. N atural
moves don 't seem to work for various
reason s:
a) 14 ... lUxe4? loses a piece to 1 5 d5.
b) 14 ... 0-0-0 1 5 dS ! i.xe3 16 dxc6 !
i.a7 17 lUas and Black i s facin g serious
problems on the queen side.
c) 14 ... l:tg8 1 5 dxe s (lS d5 lUb8 16
i.xa7 l:txa7 1 7 lUe3 also looks good)
ls ... lUxe s (or ls ... dxes 16 i.xa7 ':xa7
17 b4) 16 lUcxes dxe s 1 7 i.xa7 .l:[xa7 18
'iVd3 .l:.a8 19 �e3 and Bl ack i s worse,
although thi s line might represent his
best bet. The key thing to remember
168
here is th at castling is illegal !
15 'iixf3 exd4 16 (xd4 lUxd4
16 ... .txd4? is worse: 17 �xd4 lUxd4
18 'iVC3 lUc6 (or 18 ... lUe6 19 lUe3 ! and
either lUdS or lUf5) and here 19 e s ! is
very strong .
1 7 'ii'd 1
17 ••• lUe6?
17 ... lUc6 was Bl ack's best chance for
survival : 18 e s ! dxes (if 18 ... lUxe S, 19
i.xa7 .l:txa7 20 f4 win s the knight) 19
i.xa7 ':xa7 20 lUxe s ! lUxe s 21 'iVd4 cS
22 'iVxe s 'iVxe s 23 l:txe s+ ..t;>f8 24 l:txcS
and White's advantages (stronger mi­
nor piece, better structure) offer him
good winning ch ances.
18 i.xa 7 ]:txa 7 19 esl dxes 20 lUxe s
Bl ack h as no hope of surviving. The
position h as been blown open and
White is ready to unleash a series of
threats. There will be no good way of
dealing with them because Black's
pieces are totally uncoordinated.
20 (6.•.
If 20 ... 0-0, White plays 21 i.C4 in­
tending lUxf7 or lUg 6.
2 1 'iV b3

2 1 ... <iitf8
Maybe Bl ack just couldn't bring
himself to castle king side - it would
have been a final admission that his
strategy h ad been a compl ete failure.
In any case. it al so loses immediately to
2 1 ... 0-0 2 2 'iVg 3 + <iith 8 2 3 'ii'e 3 .
2 2 liJg6+1 fxg6 2 3 :xe6 'iVd8 24 l:.dl l-0
24 ... liJd5 25 'ii'f3+ <iit g 7 26 .id3 wins.
Game 3 7
J.Boka r-V.Nasybullin
Corres pondence 2006
1 e4 e5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 .iC4 .ie7
Ita lian Game: Ot her Lines
Thi s i s the Hung arian Defence. and
it's quite a rare choice for Bl ack (I ha­
ven 't yet faced it). Bl ack wants to play
... liJf6 without fear of liJg 5. and he i s
al so ready t o m eet d 4 with ... d6.
For one game I'm going to break
away from the book's central theme of
c2-C3. to examine the m ain choice in
thi s position. 4 d4. Of course there is
nothing wrong with playing 4 0-0 liJf6
5 d3. with a direct tran sposition to
Ch apter Four. However. attempts to
pl ay a quick c2-c3 and d2-d4 don 't
seem to be justified. For example. if 5
:tel 0-0 6 C 3 ? ! .
the typical fork trick 6 ... liJxe4! en­
sures Black of at least equality.
Let's look at one or two other rare
moves for Bl ack. I don't plan to cover
every option (e.g. 3 ... h 6 ? ! . 3 ... 'iVf6 ? ! .
3 ... 'iVe7 ? ! etc). I feel at some stage it
must be best to just pl ay some chess
and use common sen se at the board.
rather th an try to be booked up against
every single possibility.
a) 3 ... d6 looks similar to 3 ... .ie7. but
a key difference is that Bl ack is plan-
16 9
Beating 1 e4 e5

ning to fianchetto his king's bishop. known to be good for White.

Black can al so begin with 3 ... g6, which
often tran sposes. After 3 ... d6, Black can
meet 4 d4 with 4 ... exd4 5 tiJxd4 g6 and
the bishop will be much more active on
g 7 than it would be on e7. It's basically
the Larsen Variation of the Philidor but
with an early ..tC4 and ... tiJc6.
But what about 4 c3 here, followed
by d4? Let's see:

For example, 8 ... �xf7 9 'iif3+ �e6

10 0-0 tiJa5 11 i.d3 'iff8 12 'iWe4 i.d6 13
dxe 5 ..te7 14 b4 and White won,
D.Langier-R.Acosta, Buenos Aires 1993.
Bl ack can probably defend better, but
who would want to play like thi s ?
a3) The innocent-lookin g 4 ... i.e7
might al so be a mistake:

al) 4 ... g 6 i s the most solid option for

Bl ack. 5 d4 i.g 7 (or 5 .. :i1ke7 6 0-0 i.g7) 6
0-0 'ike7 7 ];tel tiJf6 8 tiJbd2 0-0 9 h 3
should b e compared directly t o 3 . . .tiJf6
4 d3 h 6 (Bologan-Tom ashevsky, Game
3 5) and the typical ideas for White
must be very similar. The only detail
here is that Bl ack is missing the move
... h6, but I don 't think thi s should m ake
much difference.
a2) 4 ... tiJf6 ? ! looks ri sky in view of 5 5 'ii'h 3 ! ? tiJh 6 6 d4 tiJa5 7 'ifa4+ c6 8
tiJg 5 ! d5 6 exd5, when surely the extra i.d3, as played in A.Vitolinsh­
c2-c3 m akes a difference. After A.Zakh arov, Soviet Union 1963, looks
6 ... tiJxd5 (6 ... tiJa5 7 'ii'a4+!) 7 d4 i.e7 we g ood for White. In thi s case, knights on
actually tran spose to a line of the Two the rim does equal 'grim ' !
Knights (4 tiJg 5 d5 5 exd5 tiJxd5 6 d4 a4) 4. . .i.g4 must surely b e the most
i.b4+ 7 c3 i.e7) and here 8 tiJxf7 ! i s sensible option if Black isn't planning a

170

kingside fianchetto, and this is reflected
by the fact that it's the most common
choice after 4 c3. If Black follows up with
... ltJf6, and I think this is his best option,
something similar to lines seen in Chap­
ter Four is more than likely and this of
course suits our repertoire. For example,
S h3 Jth S 6 d3 and:
a41) The plausible 6 .. :i!Vf6 ?? loses to
7 g4! Jtg 6 8 Jtg s trapping the queen -
thi s i s why we inserted S h 3 ! .
a42) After 6 . . .Vid7 7 ltJbd2 White
need not be afraid of 7 ... ltJas, as the
trick 8 ltJxe S ! win s a pawn - another
good reason for S h 3 !
a43 ) 6 ... ltJf6 ! 7 ltJbd2 Jte7 8 Jtb3 0-0
9 ltJf1 (there's nothing wrong with 9
0-0 but with f1 still vacant, why not
thi s m ore aggressive approach ?) 9 ... dS
(if 9 ... ltJd7, 10 g4 Jtg6 l 1 ltJg 3 i s tempt­
ing) 10 Vie2 and then ltJg 3, or g4 fol­
lowed by ltJg 3 .
b) 3 ... ltJd4?! i s known a s the Black­
burne-Shilling G ambit, because the
English player Joseph Henry Blackburne
reputedly used it to win shillings from
amateurs.
Italian Game: Ot her Lines
It's also known in some circles, es­
peci ally in junior chess, as the "Oh my
god!" trick. For m aximum effect, after
playing the m ove you are m eant to
hold your head in your h ands and ex­
cl aim those words, all to give the im­
pression that you have just blundered
a pawn. Then you hope for 4 ltJxe s ? !
'ilVg S ! S ltJxf7 ?? 'ii'x g 2 6 l:tf1 'ii'x e4+ 7
Jte2 ltJf3 m ate. It works with some fre­
quency at junior tournaments!
The problem (for Black, not us !) i s
that after any half-decent reply, we
can't escape the fact that Bl ack has
m oved his only developed piece twice,
and it gets exchanged. After something
like 4 ltJxd4 exd4 S c3 White can al­
ready count on a significant advan ­
tage, especially since S ... JtcS ? loses to 6
Jtxf7 + ! .
c ) 3 .. .fS i s the kind o f move you
probably shouldn 't spend hours fret­
ting over, simply because the ch ances
of facing it are quite slim. The sen sible
reply, especi ally if you are surprised
over the board, i s 4 d3, which I would
have thought compares quite favoura­
bly to 4 d3 again st the Schliemann. Is
the bishop better on c4 th an on bS?
Just ask Black's kin g ! 4 ... ltJf6 S 0-0 JtcS
6 ltJc3 d6 7 Jtg s i s a King's G ambit De­
clined with reversed colours, and
7 ... ltJas 8 Jtxf6 ! 'i!Vxf6 g ltJds 'ilVd8 10 b4!
ltJxC4 11 bxcS was somewhat better for
White in D. Fryer-M.Lyell, Hastings
2003 /04.
Even so, when con sidering a move
like 3 .. .fS, it's always tempting to look
17 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
for something approaching a direct
refutation . I suspect th at 4 d4! is the
most critical move.
For example:
Cl) 4 ... exd4 5 es! ds 6 exd6 SLxd6 7
0-0 looks like a very promising g ambit
for White.
(2) 4 .. :ii'e7 5 ltJC3 ltJf6 6 ltJxe s ! ltJxes
7 dxes 'ii'x es 8 o-o! fxe4 (or 8 ... SLd6 9 g 3
fxe4 1 0 .l:tel) 9 ltJds ! ltJxds 1 0 SLxds c6
(if 10 ... SLd6 1 1 g3 c6, 12 SLxe4 0-0 13
'ii'd 3 looks good for White) 1 1 SLxe4 ds
12 SLd3 �f7 13 :tel 'ii'f6 14 l:te3 ! . White
prevents Black from coordinating his
pieces and thus keeps an advantage.
c3) 4 .. .fxe4 5 ltJxe s ds 6 SLbs "ii'd 6 7
0-0 ltJf6 8 c4! a6 9 SLxc6+ bxc6 10 ltJc3
'iVe6 1 1 'ii' a4 SLd7 12 SLg s SLe7 1 3 ltael
h 6 14 SLxf6 SLxf6 1 5 f4 and Black i s un­
der pressure, F. Fritsche-B.Blankenberg,
correspondence 200 3 . He can 't castle
because of tactics on ds and d7, and he
faces the threat of 16 fs.
In summ ary, 4 d3 i s a solid choice if
you don 't want to h ave to think too
hard; 4 d4 is the m ove if you're aiming
for a quick win .
17 2
4 d4 d6
Black's other m ain option here is
4 ... exd4, after which 5 ltJxd4 ltJf6 6 ltJC3
0-0 7 0-0 d6 8 l:tel is a kind of Scotch
G ame, but one where Black has devel­
oped passively with his bishop on e7
in stead of b4 or cs. Thi s position can
al so be reached via the Philidor De­
fence. Although Black's set-up is solid,
White's extra space and central superi­
ority promise at least a small edge. For
example, 8 ... ltJe s 9 SLfl ! (if 9 SLb3,
9 ... cs! suddenly gives Bl ack good coun­
terplay) 9 .. J:te8 10 SLg s ltJfg4 1 1 SLf4
ltJg6 12 SLg3 SLh4 1 3 'ili'd2 SLxg 3 14
hxg 3 SLd7 15 a4 ltJ6es 16 as a6 17 SLe2
ltJf6 18 f4 ltJc6 19 SLf3, M.5tolz-G. Braun,
German League 2009.
5 dxe 5 1
Even though ...SL e 7 ensures that
Black's king isn't di splaced after the
exchange of queen s on d8 (or indeed
th at Bl ack doesn't lose either the f7- or
the es-pawn !), I still think that the re­
sultin g position is quite uncomfortable
for Bl ack and I'm not sure why anyone
would be in a rush to accept it.

Note that 5 c3 i s not the most effec­
tive approach, as Bl ack gains quick
counterpl ay in the centre. For example,
5 ...liJf6 6 liJbd2 0-0 7 0-0 exd4 8 cxd4
d 5 ! 9 exd5 liJxd5.
There's no reason not to, but if
White really wants to avoid an ex­
ch ange of queen s, he should play a
King's Indian structure with 5 d5 liJb8 6
�d3 and c2-c4. Altern atively, 5 h 3 liJf6
6 liJC3 0-0 7 0-0 exd4 8 liJxd4 is similar
to 4 ... exd4.
5 .•• dxe5
Forced, since 5 ... liJxe 5 ? 6 liJxe 5 dxe5
7 'iVh 5 ! i s disastrous for Bl ack.
6 Wxd8+ �xd 8 7 liJ c3
This queenless middlegam e has al­
ways been con sidered better for White,
because of his active pieces and lead in
development. I imagine that over the
board it's quite difficult for Black to
defend. As thi s g ame demon strates, it's
no easier in correspondence chess,
where you have a lot more time to
solve your problems (or, perhaps, to
wallow in a miserable position ).
7 ... liJf6
Italian Game: Ot her Lines
7 ... �g4 8 �e3 liJf6 9 0-0-0 would
tran spose.
8 �e 3 �g4
If 8 ... 0-0 White plays 9 �C5 ! :te8 10
liJg 5 �e6 11 liJxe6 fxe6 12 �b 5 ! liJd7
1 3 �xc6 bxc6 and Bl ack's pawn s are
not a pretty sight, E .Vasiukov­
G .Gheorghiu, Manila 1974.
9 0-0-0 0-0 10 h3 � h 5
White i s not worried about
10 ... �xf3 11 gxf3, since f3-f4 is always
an option and meanwhile the bishop
pair promises good long-term ch ances.
Bearing in mind wh at happen s to
Black's bishop in the game, there's an
argument here for 10 ... �e6. But even
here White can either saddle Bl ack with
permanently weak doubl ed pawn s
with 1 1 �xe6 or choose the possibly
even stronger 11 �d5 ! ?
1 1 g4 � g6 12 liJd2 �e7 1 3 f3 !
Now Black's light-squared bishop
will struggle to get back into the game.
13 ..• liJa 5 14 �e2 l:tfd8
The first new move ! The stem game,
N . Rossolimo-S. Bern stein, US (h., New
York 19 54, had continued 14 ... c6 1 5
173
Beating 1 e4 e5
liJb3 ? liJxb3+ 16 axb3 b S and Black
m anaged to equalize.
However, there is no reason for
White to relieve Black's position by ex­
ch anging knights, especi ally such a
poor knight on the rim . 1 5 h4!, as in the
main game, would keep the pressure
firmly on Black.
l S h4! hS 16 gs liJe8 17 a 3
By pushing the knight back to e8,
White open s up possibilities of liJdS.
The problem for Black i s that ... c6 can
be met by b4 trapping th e knight on as
- a good reason for White to avoid its
exchange.
17 ... �f8 18 �f2 a6
18 ...liJd6 is strongly answered by 19
liJds intending 19 ... c6? 20 liJC7 l:tac8 21
�xa7 i:!xc7 2 2 .i.b6.
19 liJd s � d 6 20 l:thel! b S 2 1 f41
White's position is so good th at he
can win with a direct assault in the
centre, even if thi s bring the bishop on
g 6 back to life.
21 ... exf4
If 2 1 .. .f6, I like 2 2 fS .i.f7 2 3 g 6 .i.xds
24 exds .
174
2 2 e s ! �cS
22 ... iLxe s i s m et by 23 liJe7+ �8 24
liJxg 6+ fxg 6 25 b4 liJc6 2 6 iLf3, winning
m aterial . Or if 2 2 ... �f8 23 liJxf4 and
Bl ack i s getting squashed.
2 3 .i.xcs ':'xd S 24 .i.b4!
Winning an exchange.
24 ...liJ c 6 2 S iLf3 liJxb4 2 6 axb4 c6 27
�xd S cxd S 2 8 e6! ':'c8 29 exf7+ �xf7 30
C3 liJC7
30 ... d4 fails to 3 1 liJf3 dxc3 3 2 liJes+.
3 1 ':'es .:te8
Again 31 ... d4 is no good: 32 liJf3
dXc3 3 3 :d7+ �g 8 34 :CS ! etc.
32 ':xe8 �xe8 33 liJb3 �e7 34 .l:.fl �d6
3S lii xf4 liJe6 3 6 !:tf2 �e5 37 �d2 iLfS
38 �e3 g6 3 9 liJd4 liJxd4 40 cxd4+ 1-0
Key Notes
1. Again st 4 .. :We7, 4 ... �b6 or 4 ... d6
(Game 3 6), White can if he wishes just
develop as in previous chapters to
reach similar positions. H owever, an
early d2-d4 is m ore critical as it puts
Black under immediate pressure. In
contrast to position s after 4 ... liJf6,
White is much better placed to m ain­
tain his centre.
2. The critical respon se to the Hun­
g arian, 3 ...iLe7, i s the immedi ate 4 d4! .
A n early c2-c3 and d2-d4 plan i s less
effective here. Thi s i s a rare occasion in
thi s book where the d-pawn doesn 't
require protection from its partner.
3. If your opponent pl ays 3 ... liJd4
and cries out "Oh my god!", remember
to take the knight, not the pawn .
 C h a pt e r S i x
Bishop's Opening
1 e4 e5 2 .1i.c4
The only way White can guarantee
obtaining a system of development
with ..tc4, d3 and tLlf3 i s by using the
Bishop's Opening move order. If White
pl ays 2 tLlf3, the vast m ajority of the
time he will be able to force it, but if
Bl ack does choose the Petroff, 2 ... tLlf6,
he needs to be prepared for something
entirely different.
The only drawback with the
Bishop's Opening move order i s that,
because there is no immediate pres­
sure on his es-pawn, Bl ack i s not
obliged to play ... tLlc6 any time soon . In
practice there i s a con siderable ch ance
th at he will choose to do so anyway. For
example, he might pl ay 2 .. tLlc6, after
.
which 3 tLlf3 tran sposes directly to the
Italian G ame. A more likely scen ario is
2 ... tLlf6 3 d3 tLlc6 4 tLlf3, again with a
tran sposition. But Bl ack does h ave
some decent alternatives to thi s move
order, and these will be considered in
this chapter.
The most significant option is un ­
doubtedly 2 ... tLlf6 3 d3 c6 intending
... dS, and the vast majority of this ch ap­
ter is devoted to this idea. To h ave any
ch ance of obtaining an advantage,
White needs to put Black's centre un ­
der pressure as quickly as possible. The
m ain line run s 4 tLlf3 dS S ..tb3 ..td6
and now White has a choice between
two equally playable moves:
175
Beating 1 e4 e5
a) 6 ttJC3 is the traditional m ain line.
In Delch ev-Jovanic (Game 38) Bl ack
chooses to m aintain the tension with
6 ... i.e6, but his centre soon comes un­
der heavy pressure. A more reliable
solution for Black i s to release the ten­
sion with 6 ... dxe4, and thi s i s covered in
G ames 3 9-40.
b) 6 exds ! ? has been g aining in
popularity in recent times, and for
good reason . White still intends to put
pressure on the centre, but by captur­
ing on ds so quickly he eliminates
Bl ack's 'easy option' of ...dxe4. Either
recapture on ds i s possible: 6 ... cxds is
covered in Mitkov-Timoscenko (G ame
41), while 6 ... ttJxds is covered in
Nevednichy- Beliavsky (Game 42).
There are al so option s to con sider
earlier on in the 3 ... c6 line. As well as
s ... i.d6, Bl ack can pl ay s ... as or
s ... i.b4+, and these two moves are cov-
ered in Papp-Ippolito (Game 43). Bl ack
doesn't even have to pl ay ... ds; the
m ore restrained 4 ... i.e7 intending ... d6
i s seen in Sebag -Stefanova (Game 44).
The final two games of thi s chapter,
176
and of the book, deal with possibilities
on the second an d third moves: 3 ... i.cs,
3 ... i.e7 and 3 ... ds in Shaposhnikov­
Lastin (Game 45); and then 2 ... d6,
2 ... i.cs, 2 ... c6 and 2 .. .fs in Mrva­
Klemanic (Game 46).
Game 38
A.Oelchev-OJova nic
Zad a r 2004
1 e4 e S 2 i.C4 ttJf6 3 d3 c6 4 ttJf3 dS 5
i.b3 i.d6 6 ttJc3
The game's actual m ove order was 6
exds cxds 7 i.g s i.e6 8 ttJc3 Vas 9 0-0
ttJbd7. See Mitkov-Timoscenko (Game
41) for coverage of the 6 exds move
order.
6 ... i.e6
6 ... i.e6 was the original 'main line',
but more recently it h as been over­
taken by 6 ... dxe4. Black tries to keep his
centre intact, which in m any ways i s
t h e most ambitious approach . How­
ever, practice h as shown th at this i s
difficult for him t o do, a n d with accu-

rate play White can pl ace con siderable
pressure on Black's centre pawn s.
Apart from 6 ... dxe4, the other m ain
option for Bl ack here i s 6 ... d4 closing
the centre. 7 liJe2, planning liJg 3 , is
clearly the best reply, and now:
a) 7 ... liJa6 intends ... liJC5 to swap off
White's strong bishop, but 8 c3 ! i s a
good reply: 8 ... dxC3 (conceding the cen­
tre; the problem with 8 ... C5 i s th at it
m akes Bl ack's previous move look silly)
9 bxc3 0-0 10 0-0 liJC5 11 iLC2 ! iLg4 12
liJg 3 liJh 5 13 h3 liJxg 3 14 fxg 3 iLh 5 1 5
g4 iL g 6 16 h4 f6 1 7 h 5 iLf7 18 d4 liJe6
19 iLb3 'fi'a5 20 iLd2 exd4 21 cxd4 iLb4
22 iLe3 with a clear advantage for
White, J .N unn-V. Korchnoi, Joh annes­
burg 1981.
b) 7 ... C5! followed by ... liJc6 looks like
the most logical follow-up for Black. A
n atural sequence is 8 liJg 3 liJc6 9 0-0
and now:
bl) 9 ... 0-0 10 iLg 5 ! ? (White encour­
ages ... h 6, so th at later on Black will
find it more difficult to arrange ... g6;
the immediate 10 liJh4 i s a good alter­
native) 10 ... h6 11 iLd2 iLe6 12 liJh4!
Bis hop 's Opening
(Black cannot pl ay ... g6, either to pre­
vent liJf5 or to attack th e knight once it
reaches that square) 12 ... �h 7 ? ! (bat­
tling for control of f5 with 12 ... liJe7
looks like a better idea) 13 liJhf5 ':'g8
(planning ... iLf8 and ... g6) 14 liJxd6
'i!Vxd6 15 f4 iLxb 3 ? ! 16 axb3 g6 17 'fi'cl
h5 18 f5 a6 19 iLg 5 with strong pres­
sure on the king side, R.Berzin sh­
K. Kalnins, Riga 200 5 .
b2) 9 ... h 6 ! ? i s interesting. Bl ack
plans to m eet liJh4 with ... g 6 . Indeed,
he wants to pl ay thi s move anyway.
The rook stays on h8 to protect h6 and
Bl ack can castle 'by hand' with ... �f8-
g 7 . The whole idea is to keep White's
knights at an arm 's length .
1 0 h 3 g 6 11 c3 (11 a3 ! ?, intending
liJh 2 and possibly f4, might be better)
11...iLd7 12 cxd4 cxd4 13 lIel ? ! (13
iLd2 ! ) 1 3 ... 'ii'e 7 14 a3 �f8 1 5 liJfl �g7
16 liJld2 b 5 was a successful applica­
tion of Black's plan in M.5chlosser­
V.lvanchuk, Adelaide 1988, but White
has improvements to m ake life less
comfortable for Bl ack.
Moreover, 10 liJd2 worked out well
for White in W.Hendriks-F. Kroeze, En­
schede 1998, after 10 ... g 6 (I think Black
should abort the pl an here, and simply
play 10 ... 0-0) ll liJC4 iLC7 12 a4 �f8 13
f4 �g 7 14 f5, and once ag ain White
exerts pressure.
7 iLg51
White must put pressure on Black's
centre pawn s as quickly as possible.
There's an immediate threat to capture
on d5.
177
Beating 1 e4 e5
7 :ii'a 5
•.
7 ...d 4 i s again an swered by 8 liJe2,
with similar play to the previous note.
If 7 ... liJbd7? White win s a pawn with
8 exds cxdS 9 �xd S ! (remember to
avoid g liJxdS ?? �xdS 10 �xdS 'ii' a s+!).
8 0-0 liJ bd 7
Bl ack h as m an aged to keep his
pawn centre intact, but to do so he's
had to play the less-than-ideal ... 'ii'a s.
In fact, White can exploit the position
of Black's queen in a rather surprising
way:
9 exd 5 cxd 5 10 'ii'e 1!
Creating an X-ray effect on the black
queen . Because the queen is unde-
178
fended, thi s lines up tactical possibili­
ties based on liJxds and liJe4. Of course
White's queen al so attacks the e S ­
pawn. Not bad for a n awkward-looking
move !
10 ... :c8
Thi s was a critical moment, with
Black having to decide between a few
option s:
a) The problem with the straight­
forward 10 ... 0-0? is that it allows White
to win a pawn with 11 �xf6 liJxf6 12
liJxdS ! .
b ) 1 0. . .d4 l l liJe4 'ii'b 6 (if 11 . . .'ii'x el?
1 2 liJxd6+ ctt e 7, 1 3 liJfS + ! �xfS 14
lUxel win s at least a pawn) 12 �xe6
fxe6 1 3 liJxd6+ 'iVxd6 14 �h4 lk8 l S
�g 3 ! ? l:[xc2 16 liJxe s liJxe S 17 J.xes
g ave White just a slight edge in
A.Fedorov-T.Mamedjarova, Baku 2008,
but 1 3 liJfd2 ! pl anning liJC4 looks more
promising to me.
c) Moving the queen out of the X­
ray with 10 ... WcS ! might well be Black's
wisest course, but White still has good
chances of keeping some advantage
after 1 1 �xf6 ! and now:

Cl) 1 1 ... tLlxf6 12 tLlxe s 0-0 1 3 tLlf3
l:tfe8 was played in S.Taulbut­
P.Scheeren, Copenh ag en 1981. I don 't
think th at Black has enough for th e
pawn here, especially if White plays 14
'ii'd 2 intending 14 ... �g4 1 5 d4 'iVc8 16
tLle s .
(2) 11...gxf6 1 2 d4! ? exd4 1 3 tLlxds
0-0-0 14 'iVe4 �es 15 tLlf4 fS 16 tLlxe6
fxe4 17 tLlxcs exf3 18 tLld3 was a touch
better for White in S.Tiviakov­
R.5winkel s, Vli ssingen 2004. There's
al so 12 1:tdl ! ?, which might be m ore
promising . I like White's position after
either 12 ... 0-0-0 13 d4 exd4 14 tLlxd4, or
12 ... d4 13 tLle4 'i!Vb6 14 C3 ! when Black's
king won 't be safe on either side.
11 d41?
White can win a pawn with 1 1 �xf6
tLlxf6 (or 11...gxf6 12 tLlxdS 'ii'x el 1 3
tLlxel) 1 2 tLlxd S ! (Black gets some com ­
pensation after 12 tLlxe s ? ! 0-0, since
... ':c8 i s more useful th an ... 'iVcS)
12 .. .'iWxel 1 3 tLlxf6+ g xf6 14 .l::!.fxel (or
14 tLlxel) 14 ... �xb3 15 cxb 3 . Presum a­
bly Delchev thought th at Bl ack would
have drawing ch ances and preferred to
Bis hop 's Opening
keep the ten sion . Or perhaps he missed
Black's defen sive resource in the note
on 12 ... exd4.
11 ••• �b41
Of course Black would love to be
able to reply with 11...e4?, but thi s loses
to 12 tLlxe4 ! .
12 � d 2
White i s al so better after 12 tLlxes
tLle4 1 3 tLlxd7 �xd7 14 �d2 tLlxd2 15
'iVxd2. Black will regain the pawn by
capturing twice on c3, but White will
keep the queen s on and aim to exploit
Black's slightly shaky king .
12 ... �xc3?
Black panics and m akes a losing
blunder.
12 ... exd4 13 tLlxd4 o-o! keeps Black
in the g ame in view of the resource 14
tLlxe6 l:!.fe8 ! . I prefer 14 a3 �xc3 1 5
�xc3 'iVb6 16 f3, when White's strong
bi shop on c3 and control of the dark
squares must count for something. If
16 ... tLlcs White can choose between 17
'iif2 tLlxb3 18 tLlxb3 (or 18 cxb 3 ! ?) and
17 �as 'iVa6 18 �a2; in either case he
has an advantage.
179
Beating 1 e4 e5
13 iLxC3 .l::!. xc 3
If 13 ... 'ifC7 White just win s a good
pawn with 14 ttJxe s .
1 4 bxc3 e 4 1 5 ttJg5 0-0 1 6 c41
Delchev plays the rest of the game
energetically to avoid any problems.
Del aying thi s move might have allowed
Bl ack to get a grip on the c4-square
after which he would have some com ­
pen sation .
16 .. JWxe1 17 l:[axe1
Thi s is the 'right rook' - see White's
19th move.
17 ... h6
Or 17 ... dxC4 18 ttJxe6 ilc8 19 iLa4
fxe6 20 iLxd7 ttJxd7 21 ':xe4 with a
winning endgame for White.
18 ttJxe6 fxe6 19 f3 1 exf3 20 :xf3 :c8
2 1 cxd 5 exd 5 22 l:[e7 .:Id8 23 .:tg3 g5 24
l:tf3 1-0
Game 39
Z.Efimenko-V.Ciolod
Montrea l 2005
1 e4 e 5 2 iLC4 ttJf6 3 d 3 c6 4 ttJf3 d 5 5
180
iLb3 iLd6 6 ttJc3 dxe4
Ever since Kramnik demon strated
th at Black has seriously good equaliz­
ing chances with thi s m ove, it h as be­
come Black's most popular choice at
grandmaster level . Black is not worried
about giving up the centre, nor about
conceding the bishop pair a bit l ater.
Although 6 ... dxe4 is clearly unambi­
tious, if Black's goal i s to limit White's
chances as much as possible, it cer­
tainly succeeds in achieving this.
7 ttJg5
7 ttJxe4 is covered in the next g ame.
7 ...0-0 8 ttJcxe4 ttJxe4 9 ttJxe4
9 ... iLf5 1
A key move - Bl ack simply wants to
play ... iLxe4. Initially it looks like a
strange idea to trade the light-squared
bishop for th e knight, but thi s knight i s
a strong piece and practice h as shown
th at White has found it tough going
trying to prove that his bishop pair
gives him a m eaningful edge. On the
other hand, it should be said th at this
line isn't exactly much fun to pl ay as
Black.

More 'interestin g ' altern atives are
al so, almost by definition, riskier:
a) 9 ... ttJa6 10 'ii'h s ! 'ikC7 11 ttJg s ! h 6
12 ttJe4 Oining up i.xh 6 and/or "ii'g 6)
1 2 ... i.. e 7
1 3 i.xh 6 ! gxh6 14 'iWg 6+ �h 8 15
"iWxh 6+ �g 8 16 h4 with a fierce attack,
R.Tischbierek-A. Beliavsky, Novi Sad
Olympiad 1990.
b) 9 ... as 10 "ii'h s ! (again thi s move)
10 ... i.b4+ ! 11 �f1 ! (avoiding a weak­
ness on d3) 11 ... i.e7 (11 ... h 6 ? 12 i.xh 6 !
i s crushing) 12 a 4 ttJd7 (A. Fedorov­
A.shirov, European Team Ch ., Leon
2001) and here shirov assesses 13 i.. e 3
b6 14 h4 "iWe8 a s a slight plus for White.
c) 9 ... i..b 4+ 10 c3 i.e7 11 f4! ? (or 1 1
0-0 i..f s 12 'iWh s i.xe4 1 3 dxe4, which
looks like a favourabl e version - for
White - of the m ain game) 11 ... exf4 12
i.xf4 ttJd7 1 3 "ii'f3 ttJf6 14 0-0 ttJxe4 1 5
'iWxe4 and White i s the more active,
H .5tefan sson - I . Krush, Reykjavik 2004.
10 "ii'f3
10 ttJg 3 i.g 6 11 h4 h6 12 'iVg4 i s
tempting but Black's play in
V.Nevednichy-A.Raetsky, Lucerne 1994,
Bis hop 's Opening
is quite convincing . I haven't been able
to come up with a significant im­
provement over 1 2 ... �h 8 1 3 hs i.h 7 14
ttJfs "iWf6 1 5 ttJxd6 'iYxd6, when it's not
clear if White h as achieved anything
positive from his king side action .
10 0-0 ttJa6 11 ttJxd6 'iWxd6 12 'iWf3
i.e6 g ave Black comfortable equality in
V.An and-V. Kramnik, Frankfurt (rapid)
1998, but note th at 1 1 'iWf3 i.xe4 12
dxe4 would tran spose to the m ain
game.
10 i.xe4
...
10 ... i.g6 is met by 11 h4!.
If 1 1 ... i.xe4 12 dxe4 the extra move
h 2 -h4, facilitating i.. g s , helps White.
For example, 12 ... ttJd7 13 c3 ttJcs 14
i.. c 2 "ii'e 7 15 i.. g s f6 16 i.. d 2 with an
edge for White, K.Georgiev- B.Alterman,
Recklinghausen 1998. Altern atively,
11 ... h6 12 i.e3 as 13 a3 ttJa6 14 0-0-0
�h 8 15 g4! and White is ahead in the
race to attack th e kings.
11 dxe4 ttJd 7 12 0-0
White has al so played 12 c3 here, so
th at the bishop can drop back to c2
after ... ttJcs . Black's typical pl an of gain-
18 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
ing space on the queen side while
White completes his development en­
sures equality. For example, 12 ... as 13
0-0 (or 1 3 a4 tDcs 14 iLC2 �e7 1 5 0-0
'ii'e 6 ! 16 iLe3 .l:lfd8 17 'ife2 iLe7 18 g 3
g 6 1 9 b 4 axb4 2 0 cxb4 tDb3, D.Howell­
J.Smeets, Staunton Memorial, London
2009) 13 ... a4 14 iLC2 'ife7 15 l:td1 :fd8
16 h4 h6 17 g 3 bs 18 iLd2 tDf8 19 'ilkg4
'ife6 20 'i¥xe6 tDxe6, S.Movsesian - Bu
Xian g zhi, N anjing 2008.
12 tDcS
...
1 3 iL C41
The best chance. White's one advan­
tage in thi s position i s his bishop pair.
If he wants to cause Black any prob­
lems at all he mustn 't give it up.
1 3 bS 14 iLe 2 'i¥e7
...
A key point here i s th at after
14 ... 'iVh4 White can ignore the attack
on the e4-pawn : 15 iLe3 ! 'iVxe4
( l s ... tDe6 16 g3 'ife7 17 c3, as played in
S.Tiviakov-E . Rozentalis, Kallithea 2009,
i s safer, but then why give White a
tempo with g 2-g 3 ? ) 16 l:tfd1! iLe7 17
iLxcs 'ili'xf3 18 iLxf3 iLxcs 19 iLxc6 with
an edge for White, who an swers
18 2
19 ... :ab8? with 20 l:tds (Golod).
Golod's assessm ent of the ending
we reach in the m ain g am e i s in be­
tween '+1=' and '=', which seem s just
about right. At grandmaster level Black
should draw fairly comfortably as long
as he plays accurately, and thi s i s re­
flected by the high percentage of
draws.
H ere i s one of the few win s that
White h as enjoyed: 14 ... tDe6 15 c3 iLcs
16 g3 (White slowly improves his posi­
tion on the kingside) 16 ... as 1 7 �g 2
iLe7 (thi s looks a bit passive; why not
17 ... 'iVe7 here?) 18 h4 'iVc8 19 'iVfs ! ? g6
20 'iff3 (White simply wanted to induce
a weakness; 20 'ifxe s ? ? f6 would trap
the queen) 20 ... tDg 7 21 iLh 6 'iVe6 22
'ifg4 ( I like 2 2 a4 here) 2 2 .. JUd8 23
l:tfd1 a4 24 h s ! ? :xd1 2 5 'iVxe6 tDxe6 26
':xd1 l:.d8 2 7 ':'xd8+ iLxd8 2 8 f4 exf4 29
gxf4 gs 30 fxg s
30 ... tDf4+? (Black must h ave
thought that White coul dn 't m ake pro­
gress with his bishop incarcerated on
h 6, but White finds a way; 30 ... iLxg s !
h ad t o b e played, and after 3 1 iLxg s

lLlxg 5 3 2 e 5 White has some winning
ch ances) 31 'otf3 lLlxe2 3 2 'otxe2 i.. c 7 3 3
b3 axb3 3 4 axb3 ..tf4 3 5 'otf3 ..td2 3 6 c4
bXc4 37 bXc4 ..tCl 38 'otg4 ..te3 39 'otf5
..td2 40 e5 c5 41 'ote4 ..tCl 42 'otd5 ..te3
43 'otd6 (zugzwan g ! ) 43 ... ..tf4 (43 ... 'oth 8
44 g 6 ! ..txh 6 45 g xf7 ..tf8+ 46 ..t>d7 �g 7
47 'ote8 wins) 44 'otxc5 ..txe 5 45 'otd5
..tf4 46 c5 f6 47 c6 fxg 5 48 'ote6 ..tC7 49
i.. x g 5 'otg 7 50 'otd7 ..tb8 51 c7 ..txc7 5 2
'otxc7 and 1-0, E.Ghaem Maghami­
I.Datu, Kolkata 2001.
Of course at lower level s, less accu­
rate play will en sure that White (and of
course Black ! ) h as m ore winning
ch ances.
l S e3 a s l
Once m ore w e s e e Black g aining as
much space as possible on the queen­
side, his best attempt at neutralizing
White's advantage of the bishop pair.
16 i.. e 3 a4 1 7 .l:r.adl �Ud 8 18 g3
Likewise, White gains space on the
kin g side. Soon there's an almost inevi­
tabl e exchange of m ajor pieces on the
d-file.
18 lLle6 19 h4 ..tes 20 ..tel
•..
Bis hop 's Opening
Remember, White must keep the
two bishops!
20. . .l::t xd l 2 1 l::t x dl l:td8 2 2 l:txd 8+ 'ii'x d8
23 'otg2 ..tf8 24 'iYd 3 'iYxd 3 2S ..txd 3
..td6 26 h S h 6 !
Golod felt it was risky to allow
White's pawn to reach h 6 .
2 7 ..te2
Perh aps White coul d have given
Bl ack more problem s with the immedi­
ate 27 �h 3 intending 'otg4-f5 . G olod
suggests 2 7 ... lLlc5 2 8 ..tc2 lLld7 plan­
ning ... lLlf6, but here White can switch
pl an s with 29 C4! ?
2 7 ... 'otf8 !
Now Black i s in time to bring his
king to f6. There's still some pl ay left in
thi s position, and certainly scope to
outplay an opponent, but objectively
Black's solid structure and queen side
space holds the balance against
White's bishop pair. The rem aining
moves were:
2 8 'oth3 'ote7 29 'otg4 'otf6 30 f4 ..te7 3 1
i.. d 2 ..td6 3 2 e4 lLld4 3 3 ..t d l a 3 34 bxa 3
..txa 3 3 S exbs exbs 36 ..te3 'ote6 3 7 'oth3
f6 3 8 ..tas ..td6 3 9 ..tb6 �e7 40 'otg4
183
Beating 1 e4 e5
'ite6 41 i.a5 'ite7 42 i.C3 'ite6 43 'it h 3
'it e 7 4 4 ii.d2 'itf7 45 'it g 2 'it e 7 4 6 i.g4
<iSi>eS 47 i.cS 'itdS 4S i.b7 'itd7 49 i.d 5
liJe6 50 'itf3 liJd4+ 51 'ite3 liJC2+ 5 2
'it e 2 i. b 4 5 3 i. c 1 i.a3 54 i. d 2 i.b4
Yz-Yz
Game 40
F.Vallejo Pons-A.Zatonskih
G i bra lta r 2010
1 e4 e 5 2 i.C4 liJf6 3 d 3 c6 4 liJf3 d 5 5
i.b3 i.d6 6 liJC3 dxe4 7 liJxe4
Thi s shouldn 't be anything for
White, should it? With accurate play
Bl ack must surely be okay, but it's in­
teresting to note th at in practice White
has been more successful with 7 liJxe4
th an he has with the m ain move 7
liJg S . Moreover, when a 2700+ grand­
m aster plays a move like this, we have
to sit up and take some notice.
7 ...liJxe4 S dxe4
S ••• h6
Black rules out any possibility of
i.g s or liJg 5. Thi s is perhaps showing
184
too much caution, although when you
con sider option s 'a' and 'b' it suddenly
becomes easier to understand the rea­
soning behind thi s move. Unfortu­
n ately from White's point of view, op­
tion 'd' does seem to put a bit of a
dampener on thi s line, although it
would h ave been interesting to see
wh at, if anything, Vallejo had planned
again st thi s :
a ) 8 ... Ve7 ? i s a pl ausible reaction,
but surprisingly Black m ay well already
be in some trouble after thi s move: 9
liJg S ! 0-0 10 liJxh 7 ! ! (an amazing long­
term piece sacrifice)
10 ... 'itxh 7 1 1 'tWh S+ 'itg8 12 i.g s
�C7 1 3 .l:tdl with a powerful attack,
N .Mitkov-C.Gabriel, Pul a 2000. The
g ame continued 13 ... liJd7 14 ':d3 (14
'i¥g 6 i s al so strong) 14 ... liJcS 15 ':g 3
i.e7 16 i.h 6 i.f6 17 iYg 6 'iWas+ 18 c3
Vd8 19 i.xg 7 liJxb 3 ? (Black's best
chance of survival was 19 ... Vd2+ ! 20
'itxd2 liJxb3 + 2 1 axb3 fxg 6 2 2 i.xf8
'itxf8 23 ':xg 6 - Lukacs) 20 'i¥h 6 Vd2+
2 1 Vxd2 liJxd2 2 2 i.xf6+ <iSi>h 7 2 3 'itxd2
and White won .

b) 8 ... 0-0 al so seem s to invite trou­
ble: 9 �g s "fiIC7 10 "iVd2 ! (White uses
the open d-file as quickly as possible,
before Black gets coordinated) 10 ... �g4
1 1 0-0-0 �e7 12 �xe7 'ili'xe7 1 3 "fiId6 !
'iii'x d6 14 ':xd6 with some pressure,
V.Zhelnin-P.Tishin, Tula 2000.
c) 8 ... �g4! is stronger. For example,
9 h3 .lth s 10 .ltg S ! f6 (10 ... �xf3 ? 1 1
"fiIxf3 "fiIxg S ? 12 'iii'xf7+ 'itd8 1 3 'iWxb7
'ii'x g 2 14 0-0-0 i s winning for White) 1 1
.lt e 3 ttJa6 1 2 "fiIe2 "fiIe7 1 3 0-0-0 ttJ c S 14
�xc S ! �xcS 15 g4 �f7 16 �xf7+ 'iVxf7
17 Wbl 0-0 18 h4 bS 19 h S with a
roughly equal position, but one with
plenty of play, I . Rogers-V.Tseshkovsky,
Vrsac 1987.
d) 8 ... �b4+ ! i s perhaps Black's sim­
plest solution. If White enjoys pl aying
queen less middlegame positions,
there's nothing wrong with 9 c3 (9 ttJd2
avoids the exch ange, but thi s must be
level) 9 .. :tWxdl+ 10 Wxdl �d6, but with
accurate play it looks like Black should
neutralize White's slight development
edge and reach equality.
For example, 11 We2 f6 12 l:tdl c:l;e7
Bis hop 's Opening
13 ttJd2 ttJa6 14 a4 ttJcS 15 .ltC4 as,
N .5hort-H.Westerinen, Brighton 1982; or
11 ttJg s 0-0 12 We2 ttJd7 13 l:.dl �cS 14
�e3 �xe3 15 'it>xe3 ttJcS 16 �C4 (16
.l:!.d6 ! ?) 16 ... h6 17 ttJf3 .l:.e8 18 l:.acl as 19
a3 a4 20 ttJh4 Wf8 2 1 l:td6 .lte6 2 2 �xe6
l:.xe6, D.Pikula-A.Raetsky, Zurich 1998.
9 �e3
The most challenging move, pl an­
ning "fiId2 and 0-0-0. It's true that ... h 6
prevents a piece from coming t o g s,
but if Black castles king side White can
think about pushing a pawn to that
square !
9 'ii'e 7
...
Black suffers in the g ame from
some congestion with her minor
pieces. In particular, the light-squared
bishop becomes blocked in and doesn 't
see the light of day until it's too late. I
feel that Black can avoid some of the
later problems by pl aying 9 ... ttJa6 ! . The
intention is to meet 10 'iii'd 2 with
10 ..."fiIf6 and then 11 0-0-0 with
11 ... �b4! 12 c3 �e7, when Black is far
better placed th an in the game.
10 "iVd2 1 ttJd7 11 0-0-0
185
Beating 1 e4 e5
11 ... � C7
The difference here i s that after
11 ... �b4 12 c3 �as there is nothing to
prevent White from launching into
king side action with 13 g41 . It looks
crude, and it i s; but it's also quite dan-
gerous for Bl ack. For example, 1 3 ... tDf6
14 g s tDxe4 1 5 Vc2 tDxg s (or l S ... �fS
16 tDh4 g 6 17 tDxfs gxfs 18 f3 tDxg s 19
'iVxfS) 16 �xg s hxg s 17 tDxe s l .
I f 11 . . .�CS 12 �xcS 'ii'x cs (or
12 ... tDxcS 13 tDxe s ! ) White again gets
going with 1 3 g41.
12 'iYc3 � b 6 13 g4!
H ere it comes! Thi s would have also
been White's an swer to 12 ... 0-0.
1 3 ... �xe 3+ 14 fxe3 !
It's more important t o keep pres­
sure on eS than it i s to m aintain a per­
fect structure. 14 Vxe 3 would allow
Black to pl ay 14 ... tDcS followed by ... as,
with counterpl ay.
14 ... tDf6?!
It's hard to believe th at Zaton skih
overlooked White's 16th m ove. It's
more likely that she mistakenly felt her
position was already bad enough that
186
sacrificing m aterial was the best prac­
tical chance.
After 14 ... 0-0 15 :hg l ! g6 (trying to
block things up) 16 g s h S 17 tDh4! c;tr>g 7
White h as 18 tDfS + ! gxfs 19 exfs when
Black will struggle to survive. However,
Black could try to bail out to a pawn­
down ending with l S ... tDcs 16 'ii'x es
'ili'xe s 1 7 tDxes tDxb3+ 18 axb 3 .
1 5 tDxe 5 O-O?
ls ... �e6 is strongly m et by 16
tDxc6 ! , but thi s was Black's best chance
since there is still some hope for sur­
vival after 16 ... 'ii'C 7.
16 tDg6
Thi s is winning for White.
16 ... 'iVxe4 1 7 tDxfS i.xg4
1S l:thg1
Rybka likes 18 tDd7 ! , which win s for
White after 18 ... tDxd7 19 l:r.hg l tDf6 20
l1d4 'iYf3 21 ltf4 'ii'e 2 22 �xf7+! c;tr>xf7
2 3 l:tgxg4 or 18 ... �xd7 19 ':hg l c;tr>f8 20
l:r.xd7 tDxd7 2 1 Vxg 7+ c;tr>e7 2 2 Vxf7+.
Vallejo's choice, however, is ultimately
good enough.
1 S ... l:txfS
If 18 ... �xdl, White plays 19 tDd7 1 .

19 l::t d 4 'fif3 20 l::tf4 'fih3 2 1 'ij'd 2 h 5 2 2
:1 g 3 'fi h 4 2 3 a4 .:te8 24 � b 1 ttJe4 2 5
i.xf7+ � h 8 2 6 'ilt'g2 ttJxg3 2 7 i.xe8 ttJf5
28 i.. g 6 'fie1+ 29 �a 2 'iVa 5 30 'iVe4 1-0
Game 41
N .Mitkov-G.Timoscenko
Lj u b lj a n a 2003
1 e4 e 5 2 i.. C4 ttJf6 3 d 3 c6 4 ttJf3 d 5 5
i.b3 i.d6 6 exd 5 ! ? cxd 5
By capturing on ds so quickly, White
prevents Black from releasing the ten­
sion with 6 ttJc3 dxe4 (or indeed 6 ttJc3
d4). If Black i s not careful he coul d eas­
ily end up tran sposin g to De1chev­
Jovanic (Gam e 38). On the other h an d,
the early pawn exchange does give
Bl ack extra option s for development,
the m ost significant of which i s the
possibility of ... ttJc6.
6 ... ttJxds i s examined in the next
g ame.
7 i.. g 5
7 0-0 ttJc6 8 i.g s tran sposes to the
main gam e after 8 ... i.e6 9 ttJC3 . In
Bis hop 's Opening
H . H am douchi-E. Bacrot, Paris 2002,
Black in stead chose 8 ... d4 and the g ame
continued 9 l:tel 0-0 10 ttJbd2 l:[e8 1 1
i.xf6 ! gxf6 (Black would much rather
keep his pawn structure intact, but if
11 ... 'ii'xf6 White has 12 ttJe4 'iWg 6 1 3
ttJxd6 'iVxd6 14 ttJg s which looks prom­
ising) 12 ttJe4 i.e7. Here Lukacs's sug­
gestion of 1 3 ttJg 3, preventing .. .fs and
intending to follow up with ttJh4, looks
very sen sible and I prefer White's posi­
tion . I found that White could al so con­
sider sacrificing with 13 ttJh4! ? fs 14
"iWh s ! , and now either 14 .. .fxe4 15
i.xf7+ �f8 16 l'he4 or 14 ... i.. x h4 1 5
i.xf7+ �f8 16 i.xe8 'iWxe8 17 'iWxh4
fxe4 18 'fixe4.
7 ... i.e6
If 7 ... 'iWas+ 8 ttJbd2 i.e6 9 0-0 ttJc6,
White can undermine Black's centre in
a promising way by pl aying 10 C4! , as
indicated by Lukacs.
For example, 10 ... 0-0 11 i.xf6 gxf6
12 cxds i.. x ds 13 ttJe4 with strong
pressure again st Bl ack's king side weak­
nesses; or 10 ... d4 11 c s ! i.. x cs
(ll ... 'iWxCs ? loses a piece to 12 i.xe6
187
Beating 1 e4 e5
fxe6 1 3 �xf6 gxf6 14 lDe4 'ilVb4 1 5 a3)
12 �xe6 fxe6 13 'ifb3, again with some
advantage to White.
7 ... lDc6 8 0-0 �e6 9 lDc3 i s another
way to tran spose to the m ain g ame,
but in this line White has the possibil­
ity of 8 lDc3 ! ? forcing Black to m ake a
commitment in the centre with 8 ... d4,
since 8 ... �e6 9 �xf6 gxf6 10 �xds
�xds 11 lDxds 'iWas+ 12 lDC3 �b4 13
0-0 �xC3 14 bxc3 'ilxc3 1 5 lDd2 looks
good for White. V.lvanchuk-L.Domin­
guez, H avan a 2005, continued 9 lDds
�e6 10 0-0 �xds 11 �xds h6 12 �xf6
'iWxf6 13 c3 dXc3 14 bXc3 0-0 15 l:tbl
with an edge for White, m ainly be­
cause of his excellent bishop on ds.
In his notes to Chess Informant 93,
Ivanchuk gives 9 ... h 6 ! ? (in stead of the
game's 9 ... �e6) 10 �xf6 gxf6 1 1 lDd2
.l:tg 8 ! ?, and now either 12 lDe4 ':'g6 1 3
0-0 �b8 14 f4 fs, o r 12 'i!Vh s :g6 1 3 0-0
�e6 14 l:tael �xds 15 �xds �b4 16
�e4 �xd2 17 �xg 6 fxg 6 18 'iVxg6+
'iit d 7 19 J:le2 �b4 20 f4 �d6, both lead­
ing to unclear positions. My feeling,
though, i s th at generally White's posi­
tion i s the easier to pl ay.
Ivanchuk al so notes the possibility
of 9 .. :ii'a s+ ! ? 10 �d2 'ii'd 8, and here I
suggest 1 1 lDg s 0-0 12 'iWf3 .
8 0-0
8 lDc3 tran sposes to lines con sid­
ered below after 8 ... �C7 9 0-0 lDc6 or
8 .. :iVas 9 0-0 lDc6.
8 lDc61
...
As I mention ed previously, the early
exchange of pawn s on ds does allow
188
Black to develop his queen's knight to
its most active square, and the evi­
dence suggests th at thi s i s what he
should do.
8 ... lDbd7 9 lDC3 'iWas 10 'iWel would
tran spose directly into Delchev-Jovanic
(Gam e 38).
9 lDC 3
Now Black needs to protect ds, since
9 ... d4 10 lDe4 �e7 1 1 �xe6 fxe6 12
'ii'e 2 looks better for White.
9 �C7
...
Thi s i s definitely the correct bishop
retreat. 9 ... �e7 would protect ds and
al so break the pin on the f6-knight, but
White coul d then g ang up on the newly
vulnerable es-pawn .
9 ... 'iWas ! ? i s a decent altern ative for
Bl ack, though :
a) White h as replied with 10 'iVel in
a h andful of g ames, but to m e thi s
m ove looks rather toothless when
Bl ack's queen is protected, and there's
nothing wrong with 10 ... d4 here. For
example, 11 �xe6 dXc3 12 �b3 cxb2 13
%:tbl �b4 14 �d2 �xd2 15 'iWxd2 'iWcs
16 .l:!.xb2 0-0 with equality, J . Degraeve-

R.Hess, Cappelle l a Grande 2008.
b) In stead of 10 'ii'e l, I suggest a less
forcing approach . If Black castles kin g ­
side White will split his pawn s with
.i.xf6, and in that scenario it's not to­
tally clear what the queen is doing on
as. For example, 10 a3 ! ? (lining up the
possibility of .i.a2 and b4)
10 ... 0-0 (if 10 ... d4, White has 1 1
.i.xe6 intending 1 1 ... dxC3 12 b 4 ! ) 11
.i.a2 (White can al so con sider 1 1 .i.xf6
gxf6 12 'ii'c l ! ? intending to m eet
12 ... �g 7 with 13 .i.xds ! .i.xds 14 b4;
and al so just 11 .l:.el) 11 ... d4
(ll ... 'iVcs ! ?) 12 b4 'ii'd 8 13 .i.xe6 fxe6 14
ltJe4 .i.e7 15 .l:.el reaches a complex
and roughly equal position in which
White will look to exploit Bl ack's vul­
nerable centre pawn s and squares.
10 .l:.e1
In G . Kam sky- B.Gelfand, Bazn a 2009,
White threw in 10 ltJb s but I don 't
think thi s is worth doing. After 10 ... .i.b6
11 l:[el a6 12 ltJc3 Bl ack coul d just
tran spose to the m ain game by playing
12 ... .i.c7 if he wanted to. More to the
point, Gelfand's ambitious 12 .. :ii'd6 1 3
Bis hop 's Opening
.i.h4 0-0 14 .i.xf6 gxf6 1 5 'ii'd 2 �g7
leaves Black with a m ore favourable
version of the type of positions we see
l ater on in the m ain gam e .
10 a6
.•.
A very useful move, which elimi­
n ates the possibility of ltJbs and al so
.i.a4 - the l atter can now be answered
by ... b S .
1 0 ... 0-0 has al so been pl ayed, but
10 ... a6 looks more flexible. In any case,
if White plays 11 .i.h4 Black is likely to
play ... a6 sooner or l ater: for example,
11 ... .l:.e8 12 h3 a6 tran sposing to the
m ain game.
11 .i.h4
Thi s position is full of tension and it
requires subtle play from both sides.
The possibility of .i.xf6 is always hang­
ing in the air, but White has to be care­
ful with the timing of thi s move. If
played too early, Bl ack might switch to
castling queen side when it is he who
will benefit from the opened king side.
Even if Black castl es king side, a prema­
ture .i.xf6 might allow Bl ack to coordi­
nate with a quick ... �h 8 and ... .l:.g8.
18 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
11 �h4 is a useful move, as the new
possibility of �g3 hitting the es-pawn
gives Black something more to think
about.
11 ... 0-0 12 h 3
More finesse from White, who i n ­
troduces the possibility o f tDh 2-g4.
The immediate 1 2 �xf6 ? ! i s unwise,
since 12 ... gxf6 13 'ii'd 2 <Ji>h 8 followed by
... 1:[g8 100ks good for Black. However, 12
'ii'C l ! ? i s more promising, and contains
a nasty trick. 12 ...I:tc8 1 3 �xf6 (13 h 3 ! ?)
13 ... gxf6 14 'iVh 6 is, according to Lu­
kacs, "not frightening because of the
cold-blooded 14 ... tDas".
But Black's blood would indeed run
cold if White unleashes 1 5 �xds ! ,
which i s crushing: l s . . . �xds 16 tDh4
�e6 17 tDe4 etc.
It looks like Bl ack can survive,
though, with 14 ... <Ji>h 8 ! . If White does
nothing amazing, ... .:g8 will be strong ,
but after 1 5 i.. x ds i.. x ds 16 tDxds 'ili'xds
17 'ii'xf6+ <Ji>g 8 White has nothing bet­
ter than perpetual check.
Fin ally, White h as to keep in mind
the possibility of �g3, but pl ayed here
19 0
it is toothless: 12 �g 3 ? ! d4! (Bl ack ex­
ploits the fact th at the f6-knight is no
longer pinned to free his position ) 1 3
tD b l (or 1 3 �xe6?! dxc3 14 � b 3 cxb2
1 5 .l::tb l e4!, D.Howell-E.Bacrot, Antwerp
2009) 13 ... �xb3 14 axb3 tDd7 with no
problem s for Black, A.Needlem an­
G .5oppe, Ezeiza 2000.
12 ••• l::t e 8 1 3 tDh2
1 3 'ili'Cl ! ? i s again possible, and if
1 3 ...1i'd6 White must grab the bull by
the horn s and continue with 14 �xf6 !
g xf6 1 5 1i'h 6. Play i s extremely compli­
cated, and probably roughly equal, but
I would fancy White's chances more
over the board. Here are just a few pos­
sible lines: l s ... 1i'd8 (if l s ... �d8 16 tDh 2
and Black cannot prevent tDg4 with
16 .. .fs ? because of 17 tDxd s ! exploiting
the pin) 16 d4 (after 16 %:te3 <Ji>h 8 17
�xds ! ? i.. x ds 18 tDxds "ili'xds 19 "ili'xf6+
<Ji>g8 20 tDg s ! ? Bl ack can save him self
with 20 ... ..td8 ! intending 21 tDe4 1i'xe4!
22 .l:[g 3 + 'ili'g 6 23 .l:[xg 6+ hxg6) 16 ... e4
17 1:txe4! dxe4 18 tDxe4 �xb3 19
tDxf6+ 'ili'xf6 20 'ili'xf6 �xc2 21 :tCl �d8
22 'ii'd 6 ..te7 23 1i'g 3 + �g6 24 ds tDb4

2 5 d6 .i.f8 2 6 d7 :ed8 2 7 l:tC7 and it's
not easy to judge for sure, but White is
certainly on the front foot here.
13 :iWd6
••
If 1 3 ... ttJd4 14 ttJg4 .1i.xg4 15 hxg4,
Black cannot keep his strong knight on
d4 without losing the ds-pawn . After
lS ... ttJxb3 16 axb3 "iVd6 17 .i.xf6 gxf6
18 Vi'f3 Itad8 19 g 3 White can hope to
increase the pressure with 'iii> g 2 and
l:th 1.
1 3 ... .i.as, planning ... d4, i s a critical
altern ative. After looking at thi s for a
while I decided that White could sacri­
fice the exchange here: 14 ttJg4! .i.xg4
15 hxg4 d4 16 ttJe4 .1i.xel 1 7 'ilixe1 and I
like White's compen sation .
14 .1i.xf6
Finally, with White in a better posi­
tion to exploit the con sequences, it is
time for thi s capture.
14 ... gxf6 1 5 'iWh 5 ttJd4
lS ... fS ! ? is possible here, and it
might be better than Black's choice in
the g ame. After 16 'iWg S+ Black i s forced
to play 16 ... 'iii>f8, as 16 .. 5,ii'h 8 ? run s into
17 'ikf6+ 'iii> g 8 18 ttJxdS ! . In thi s position
Bis hop 's Opening
17 ttJf3 e4? 18 "iVh 6+ is very good for
White after either 18 ... 'iii> g 8 19 dxe4
dxe4 20 .l::[ x e4 ! , or 18 ... 'iii> e 7 19 dxe4 fxe4
20 l:tad1 ! ' However, 17 ... d4! is stronger
after which the position remain s very
unclear.
16 ttJg4 .i.d8
Timoscenko clearly wanted to avoid
giving up the light squares with
16 ... .i.xg4 17 hxg4 ttJxb3 18 axb 3 .
17 �e 3 ?
Mitkov errs at a critical moment,
and the con sequences are fatal . The
rook does need to get involved in the
attack, but White chooses the wrong
move order.
17 ttJh 6+! would have left Black with
all the problems :
a ) If 17 ... 'iii> g 7, 18 .l:[e3 ! gives White a
much better version of the g ame - ba­
sically he g ains a cruci al tempo. Here
18 .. JU8 loses to 19 .i.xdS ! .i.xds 20
litg 3+ 'iii>h 8 2 1 "iVg4 forcing m ate.
b) Moreover, again st 17 ... 'iii>f8 White
can still play 18 �e3 planning 1:[g 3-g8+.
Rybka i s equally keen on 18 .i.xdS !
.i.xds 19 ttJxdS 'ii'x ds 20 c3,
19 1
Beating 1 e4 e5
intending 20 ... ttJc6 2 1 c4 Wd7 2 2
ttJfS ! when Bl ack i s forced t o give u p h i s
queen t o avoid m ate.
In summ ary, 17 ttJh 6+ looks very
promising and seem s to give White a
clear advantage. After 17 l:te3?, how­
ever, the tabl es turn very quickly.
17 .. .'�h81 18 ttJh6 lU8 19 :g31
Threatening .txdS, but here it's
Black to move ...
19 ... fS !
... and thi s m akes all the difference.
White's attack is stopped in its tracks
and he finds his pieces, in particular
the rook on g 3 , in very awkward posi­
tion s.
20 llel f4 2 1 :g4 fS! 2 2 :gs .txgs 23
'i!Vxg s ttJf3+!
Winning. The rest is of no interest.
24 gxf3 l:tg8 2S ttJxg8 lbg8 2 6 'iWxg8+
'it>xg8 27 d4 e4 2 8 'it>fl 'it>f8 2 9 'it>e2 .tf7
30 ltgl .t h S 31 .ixd S .ixf3+ 32 'it>el
'ii'f6 33 ':'g8+ 'it>e7 34 .tb3 e3 3S fxe 3
'iWh4+ 3 6 'it>d2 'i!Vf2+ 3 7 'it>d3 .t e 2 + 3 8
ttJxe2 'iixe 3+ 3 9 'it>C4 'i¥xe2+ 4 0 'it> b 4 f3
41 1:[g7+ 'it>f6 42 l:txb7 f2 43 .tC4 flW 44
.:tb6+ 'it>gs 4S .txe2 'i¥xe2 46 c4 f4 47
19 2
h4+ 'it>fs 48 cJi>cS f3 49 l:tb7 f2 so .:tf7+
'it>e6 0-1
Game 42
V.Neved nichy-A.Beliavsky
E u ropea n C h a m pions h i p,
Plovd iv 2008
1 e4 e S 2 .tC4 ttJf6 3 d 3 c6 4 ttJf3 d S S
.tb3 .id6 6 exd s ttJxd S
Thi s move somehow feels inconsis­
tent - why play ... c6 before ... dS if you
are going to recapture with the knight?
- but it's actually quite a solid option
for Bl ack. The resulting position s can be
compared to simil ar ones reached in
the ... dS lines of the Italian G ame.
How do they compare? With the
knight on dS firmly protected, Bl ack's
position here h as a more solid feel, but
on th e other hand his pieces are likely
to be more passively placed. In particu­
l ar, the queen 's knight cannot use c6
and as a con sequence Black enjoys less
control of the d4-square.
7 0-0 0-0

8 .l:Ie1
8 liJbd2 i s an alternative move order
which is well worth con sidering. The
likelihood for transpositions into lines
con sidered below i s very high : for ex­
ample, 8 ... �C7 9 .:tel liJd7 (or 9 .. J:te8),
8 ... l:te8 9 l:tel, or 8 ... liJd7 9 .l:.el. More to
the point, if Bl ack plays 8 ... �g4 9 h 3
�h s White might keep the rook o n fl
for the moment and continue with 10
liJe4 (or 10 liJC4 ! ?) 10 ... �C7 ll liJg 3 �g6
1 2 �g s f6 1 3 �d2 planning liJh4.
8 liJd7
...
Thi s h as been the most popular
choice for Black, but attempts have also
been m ade to avoid blocking in the c8-
bishop:
a) The most active try i s 8 ... �g4, but
here Black must be willing to g ambit a
pawn in return for weakening White's
kin g side. Thi s i s an idea we've seen
previously, for example in the note to
Bl ack's 9th move in Tiviakov- Ivani sevic
(Game 3 2). The critical line run s 9 h 3
�h s 1 0 g4 � g 6 11 liJxe s, a s played in
E.Alekseev-A.Shirov, Germ an League
2007.
Bis hop 's Opening
Shirov cl aimed th at he "failed to
find the full compen sation for a pawn
both in the g am e and the analysi s", but
it is worth noting that since then he
h as been willing to offer the gambit
ag ain, so perhaps he h as changed his
mind. The g am e continued 11 ... �xe s
(11 ... liJd7 ! ?) 12 l:txes liJd7 1 3 lIel 'ilVh4
14 'iVf3 l:[ae8. H ere Shirov gives 1 5 �d2 !
(rather than Alekseev's 1 5 lUl)
l s ... .l:1.xel+ (or l s ... liJe s 16 'ifg 2 liJf4 17
�xf4 liJf3+ 18 'i¥xf3 l:txel+ 19 'iit g 2 'iVf6
20 'ilVg 3 ! 'ii'x b2 2 1 �d2 'ili'xal 2 2 �xel
'i¥xbl 2 3 �c3 ! and "White i s clearly
better despite being the exchange
down " - Shirov) 16 �xel l:te8 17 �C3 !
"and Bl ack seem s worse to me". (Here
17 liJc3 liJe s 18 'ii'g 3 also looks good for
White.) It will be interesting to see fur­
ther developments in this line.
If White doesn't want to grab the
pawn he can pl ay 10 liJbd2 liJd7 1 1
liJe4 �c7, but objectively thi s should be
okay for Black because he has solved
the problem of activating his light�
squared bishop. For example, 12 liJg 3
�g 6 13 a3 h 6 14 d4 exd4 1 5 'ifxd4 �b6
with level chances, S.Tiviakov-A.5hirov,
Benidorm 2008.
b) Black's other m ain option is
8 .. ..l!!. e 8 which both protects th e e s ­
pawn and keeps the c8-h 3 diagonal
open for the bishop (it does commit the
rook, but you can't have everything ! ). A
typical continuation i s 9 liJbd2 �C7 10
liJe4 (10 h 3 ! ?) 10 ... �g4 11 h3 �h s 12
liJg 3 �g6 1 3 �g s 'iWd7 (Lukacs prefers
13 .. .f6 14 �d2 �f7 when I think White
193
Beating 1 e4 eS
should still continue with 1 5 ltJh4 and
ltJhfs) 14 ltJh4 ltJa6 15 ltJxg6 hxg6 and
even though Black remain s solid,
White's bishop pair counts for some­
thing, V.Tseshkovsky-G .Agzamov, Yere­
van 19S2.
Looking at altern atives, 9 ltJg s as
played in S.5ul skis-D.5emcesen, Borup
2009, is an interesting way to try and
exploit the temporary weakening of f7:
9 ... l:te7 (if 9 ... h6, the critical try i s 10
ltJxf7 ! ? �xf7 11 c4 ltJf6 - or 11 ... .1i.b4 1 2
lie4! - 12 cs+ .1i. e 6 1 3 cxd6 'ilfxd6 1 4
.1i.e3 ltJbd7 l s ltJ(3) 10 'iVh s .1i.fs 1 1 ltJe4
(11 ltJc3 ! ?) 11 ... .1i.g 6 12 'ifh4 'ifd7 1 3
ltJbd2 (again 1 3 ltJbC3 ! ? comes into the
reckoning) 1 3 ... ltJa6 14 ltJf3 .1i.c7 1 5
.1i.g s 1:teeS ( l s .. .f6?? i s answered by 1 6
.1i.xf6 ! ) 16 l:.adl .1i.dS ( 1 6 .. .fs ! ? might be
stronger) 17 .1i.xdS .l:r.axdS lS ltJg 3 f6 19
d4 exd4 20 ':xeS+ .l:lxeS 21 'ii'x d4 bs 2 2
a4! and by now White was doing very
well.
g ltJbd2
White can al so ch ange the character
of the position entirely by playing 9
d4! ? exd4 10 .1i.xds ! cxds 1 1 'ilfxd4,
1 94
leavin g Black with an IQP.
From the evidence so far, it looks
like Black's best chance of equality is to
offer to sacrifice the pawn for some
activity: 11 ... .1i.cs ! (11 ... ltJb6 12 .1i.f4 .1i.fs
13 .1i.xd6 'ili'xd6 14 ltJa3 l eaves White
with a small but comfortable edge,
S.Tiviakov-J.Granda Zuniga, El Sauzal
200S) 12 'ili'd3 ! ? (after 12 'ifxds 'ifb6 13
.l:te2 ltJf6 14 'ilfb3 'ilfa6 1 5 ltJC3 .1i.e6 16
'ifa4 'ifb6 Bl ack's activity provided suf­
ficient compensation in S.Tiviakov­
A.5tefanova, Wijk aan Zee 2004)
12 ... 'ifb6 13 :te2 ltJf6 14 ltJc3 .1i.g4 (Mik­
h alevski prefers 14 ... .1i.d7 ! 15 .1i.e3 .1i.xe3
16 ':xe3 ltaeS, and I agree that thi s just
about equalizes) 1 5 ltJa4 'ir'c6 16 ltJxcs
'it'xcs 1 7 .1i.e3 'ilfc4 is 1:[d2 ! 'ilVxd3 19
':xd3 .1i.xf3 20 g xf3 was A.Morozevich­
B.Gelfand, Biel 2009.
Thi s i s a good position for White,
who h as a much stronger minor piece.
Let's see how Morozevich nurtured his
advantag e : 20 ... 1:tfeS 2 1 litb3 .l:te7 2 2
1:[ d l 1:[cS 2 3 .1i.xa7 ! ? ':'xc2 24 .1i.e3
(White's pawn m ajority h as great po­
tenti al, whereas Black's d-pawn can 't

get going and i s just a liability) 24 ...l:td7
25 �bs h6 26 a4 ':'C4 27 b3 .l:.h4 28 f4
.l:th s 29 �g 2 liJe4 30 l:td4 ':'d6?? (a
blunder, but Black was already strug­
gling) 3 1 .l:txe4! and Black resigned.
Overall, 9 d4 i s certainly worth con­
sidering if you enjoy playing again st
the IQP.
9 ... �c7
Black takes prophylactic action
against either liJe4 or liJC4.
The altern ative is to drop the bishop
back to f8. The g ame S.Conquest­
R.Cifuentes Parada, Olot 1994, provides
a good advert for White's chan ces:
9 ... .l:te8 10 liJe4 �f8 (10 ... �c7 tran s­
poses to the m ain g ame) 1 1 �d2 ! b6?
(Black should play 1 1 ... h 6 - Cifuentes)
12 d4! (Black i s not well placed to m eet
thi s pawn break) 12 ... �b7 13 c4 liJsf6
14 liJxf6+ 'iVxf6 1 5 dxe s ! liJxe s 16 l:txe s
':'xe s 17 �C3 �d6 18 c s ! (thi s i s very
strong) 18 ... bxcs 19 liJxe s �xes 20 "iVd7
�xc3 2 1 'i!Vxb7 and White won.
10 liJe4
10 ... .l::[ e 8
Reg ardless of whether or not Bl ack
Bis hop 's Opening
is going to play ... .l:.e8, it might be more
accurate to begin with 10 ... h6 which
eliminates the possibility of �g s (see
the next note). Al so, after 11 �d2 Bl ack
has alternatives to tran sposing to th e
m ain game:
a) 11 ... �h 8 (planning .. .fs) 12 h 3 ! ?
( 1 2 liJg 3 ? ! a s 1 3 a 3 fs i s fi n e for Black,
M. Kobalija-A.Motylev, Sochi 2007)
12 ... as 1 3 a3 fs ? ! (but thi s i s prem a­
ture)
14 liJc3 ! (explaining White's deci­
sion to keep the knight on e4; after a
knight exch ange, the bi shop will come
to c3 to pressure the es-pawn)
14 ... liJxC3 1 5 �xC3 "iVf6 16 lir.e3 b6 17
'i!i'e2 f4 18 :e4 liJcs (if 18 ...�b7, White
plays 19 d4) 19 ..txes ..txes 20 l:txe s
liJxb3 2 1 cxb3 �a6 2 2 "iVe4 cs 2 3 .l:tel
with a clear advantage for White,
V.Nevednichy-D. Fridm an, European
Ch ., Plovdiv 2008.
b) 11 ... liJ7f6 12 liJg 3 (12 liJxf6+ 1Ii'xf6
13 d4! ? is interesting, the idea being to
m eet 1 3 ... exd4?! with 14 �xds ! cxds 15
..tb4 �d6 16 ..txd6 'ifxd6 17 'ii'xd4 with
a clear positional edge) 12 ... l:te8 13 h 3
195
Beating 1 e4 e5
as 14 a3 a4 1 5 .lia2 .lid7 ! 16 liJh4?!
(White should continue with 16 c3 in­
tending 'iV(2) 16 ... e4! was Z. Efimenko­
T. Paehtz, European (h., Dresden 2007.
Black i s at least equal at thi s point,
since neither capture on e4 helps
White: 17 dxe4 .lixg 3 18 fxg 3 liJxe4, or
17 liJxe4 liJxe4 18 ':'xe4 ':'xe4 19 dxe4
Wxh4 20 exds i.. xh 3 ! .
11 h3
11 i.. g s ! ? induces 11 . . .f6 and follow­
ing 12 .lid2 �h 8 13 h3 liJf8 14 d4! exd4
1 5 liJxd4 White has a typical small ad­
vantage (better king position, slightly
more active pieces), M.Bosboom ­
A.Raetsky, H afnarfjordur 1998.
11 ... h 6 12 .lid2 liJf8
Black can still play 12 ... liJ7f6 but Be­
liavsky's choice i s al so reason able as
the knight can reroute to g6. It's only
the next move where Black starts to go
wrong .
1 3 liJ h 2 ! ?
13 . . .fS?!
Thi s advance looks tempting, and
I'm sure Beliavsky must h ave felt it was
justified after White's previous m ove
196
which temporarily took some pressure
off the centre, but N evednichy's con­
vincing respon se demon strates that it's
prem ature.
After 1 3 ... liJg6 White can continue
actively with 14 'ilVh s or 14 liJg4! ?, but
in truth there's not a great deal wrong
with Black's position .
14 'ii' h s l
Of course White isn't obliged to
m ove the knight, since 14 .. .fxe4 15
dxe4 reg ains the piece in view of the
pin . N aturally Beliavsky realized this,
but probably he underestim ated
White's piece activity after .. .fs .
14 ... liJh7?!
It's possible that Black's best bet is
in fact to take the knight. After 14 .. .fxe4
1 5 dxe4 .lie6 16 exds cxds 17 litadl
White's position is the more favour­
able, as the centre pawn s could come
under heavy pressure, but thi s is far
better for Black th an what he gets in
the g ame.
l S liJf3 !
lS .. J::tf8?
Sheer panic! Moving the rook back

to f8 looks wrong, and it is. Good or
bad, Bl ack should probably try l s ... �e6
16 lLlcS 'ili'f6.
16 lLlc3 !
Simple, and very strong . White win s
a pawn by force: for example, 16 ... lLlhf6
17 'iVg 6 'iVe8 18 'iVxe8 !Ixe8 19 lLlxdS
lLlxdS (or 19 ... cxdS 20 �c3 ! ) 20 �f4 ! .
However, the g am e provides another
twi st.
16 ...f4 17 'iVh4?
17 lLlxe s ! is completely crushing. My
only guess is that both players over­
looked that 17 .. JUS loses to 18 lLlxc6 ! :
for example, 18 . . .bxc6 19 .l:te8+ lLlf8 20
lLlxdS cxdS 2 1 .l:txd8 l:txh S 22 ':'xd S ! .
17 ... lLlg5
Even though 17 'iVh4 was a mistake,
there was a beautiful point to it. If
Black plays 17 ... 'iVxh4?, White is not
obliged to recapture the queen .
In stead 18 lLlxdS ! ! leaves Bl ack with
no good reply: 18 ... 'iVh S 19 lLlf6+, or
18 .. :i!i'd8 19 lLle7+ �h 8 20 lLlg6 m ate.
18 lLlxg5 hxg5 19 'i¥h 5 �f5 ?
All in all , thi s was not a good day at
the office for Beliavsky. While it's true
Bis hop 's Opening
th at 19 ... �e6 20 lLle4 .l:tfS isn't a great
deal of fun for Bl ack, White still has
some work to do.
20 lLlxd 5 ! cxd 5 2 1 �C3 .l:te8 2 2 'iff3
Winning a key centre pawn, after
which Black's position soon collapses.
2 2 ... �e6 2 3 �xe 5 �a5 24 c3 �f7 2 5
'i¥g4 .l:.e6 2 6 �d4 'i¥e7 2 7 !:txe6 1-0
27 ... �xe6 28 lIe1 ! is pretty convinc­
ing.
Apart from the slight slip on move
17, thi s was a very nice game from
Nevednichy. The good news - from our
perspective - is th at thi s game demon­
strates it's easy even for a world-cl ass
grandm aster to misplay Black's posi­
tion .
Game 43
G.Pa pp-D.l ppolito
Lu bbock 2009
1 e4 e5 2 �C4 lLlf6 3 d3 c6 4 lLlf3 d5 5
�b3 a 5
By threatening t o trap White's
bishop, Black succeeds in gaining some
197
Beating 1 e4 e5
space on the queen side. Although he
lost the game, thi s move became popu­
l ar for a while after it was used by Ev­
geny Bareev against G arry Kasparov.
Bl ack's other m ain alternative to
5 ... �d6 i s 5 ... �b4+.
At first sight you could easily accuse
thi s of being a beginners' m ove: patzer
sees a check, patzer plays a check. But
5 ... �b4+ actually contains a subtl e
idea. The point i s to provoke c2-c3, af­
ter which Black retreats to d6 safe in
the knowledge th at, in contrast to pre­
vious g ames in thi s ch apter, White can
no longer attack the d5-pawn with
ttJC3. The key debate is whether or not
1 98
it's worth spending a tempo to achieve
this.
White has two options:
a) 6 �d2 often leads to simplified
positions which are m arginally better
for White. Some examples: 6 ... �xd2+ 7
ttJbxd2 ttJbd7 (or 7 ... dxe4 8 ttJxe5 0-0 9
dxe4 ttJxe4 10 ttJdf3 ttJd7 1 1 0-0 ttJxe5
12 ttJxe 5 with a persistent edge be­
cause of the pressure on f7, B.Larsen­
J . Nunn, London 1986) 8 0-0 0-0 9 :el
l:te8 (after 9 ... d4 10 C3! c5 1 1 cxd4 cxd4
1 2 ttJC4 'ii'e 7 1 3 'ii'd 2 b6 14 a3 ttJC5 1 5
� C 2 ttJfd7 16 b 4 ttJb7 1 7 �a4 ttJd6 1 8
l:tacl White was better in R. Berzin sh­
Z.Gyimesi, Stockerau 1993) 10 d4! ?
exd4! ( 1 0. . .dxe4?! 1 1 ttJg 5 ! .:te7 1 2
ttJdxe4 ttJxe4 1 3 .l:txe4 leaves Black in
trouble, with f7 difficult to defend) 11
exd5 l:txel+ 12 'ilr'xel cxd5 (or 12 ... ttJxd5
13 �xd5 cxd5 14 ttJxd4 ttJf6 15 'ii'e 3
'iib 6 16 litel �d7 17 ttJ2b 3 , W.so­
E .Torre, Manila 2006) 1 3 ttJxd4 ttJC5 14
c3 �d7 15 ttJ2f3 'ii'b 6 16 'ii'd 2,
R. Kasim dzhanov-L.Chri stian sen, Yere­
van 1996. Black i s very close to equality
in these IQP positions, but I would still
rather be White.
b) 6 c3 l eads to more tension -filled
positions after 6 ... �d6, and now:
bl) Warnin g ! The idea of delaying
castling in favour of the typical 'ii'e 2
and ttJbd2-fl pl an i s flawed here, as
Tiviakov found to his cost: 7 ttJbd2 0-0 8
'iVe2 ttJbd7 9 ttJfl ? ! ttJC5 ! 10 il.c2 b 6 !
(planning ... �a6) 11 b 3 ? ! dxe4 1 2 dxe4
�a6 13 c4 ttJe6 14 ttJg 3 �b4+ ! 15 �1
b5!,

and White's position was not a
h appy one in S.Tiviakov-K. Lahno, Beni­
dorm (rapid) 2008, although Tiviakov
did turn the g am e around later.
b2) More recently, Tiviakov has cho­
sen the modest plan 7 0-0 0-0 8 l:.el
(S.Tiviakov-A.PridoTOzhni, Moscow
2009). It's likely that Black will have to
capture on e4 sooner or later, leaving a
symmetrical structure. In this case
White's gained tempo with c2-c3 must
make a difference, and he can also point
to a more active king's bishop. Let's see
a few more moves of the game: 8 ... dxe4
9 dxe4 lLla6 10 .ltg s lLlcs 11 .ltC2 h6 12
.lth4 as 13 lLlbd2 bs 14 lLlfl g s .
Bi s hop 's Opening
Tiviakov is pretty scathing about
thi s move: "I would h ave never m ade
thi s move, critically weakening the
king side. Of course, now (and in the
immedi ate future) White has no mean s
t o exploit it by organizing a direct at­
tack; but since all the pieces are still on
board, White can l ater exploit thi s
weakness which i s wh at eventually
came about in thi s g ame." The g ame
continued 1 5 .ltg 3 "ilJe7 16 lLl3d2 .lte6
17 lLle3 .:tad8 18 'ike2 .ltC7 19 lLlfs .ltxfs
20 exfs with a significant advantage
for White.
s ... lLlbd7 is less flexible than s ... .ltd6,
althoug h in practice it usually ends up
tran sposing. For example, 6 0-0 .ltd6 7
exd s ! lLlxds (if 7 ... cxds the premature
knight development is felt after 8 .ltg s ! ,
and here 8 . . .d4 9 lLlbd2 0-0 1 0 lLlC4 .ltC7
1 1 .:tel .l:.e8 12 .lta4! causes Black prob­
l ems, as indicated by Cifuentes) 8 lLlbd2
0-0 9 l:[el reaches N evednichy­
Beliavsky (Game 42).
Fin ally, S ... dxe4?! 6 lLlg s i s known to
be good for White. After 6 ... .lte6 White
has a pleasant choice between 7 lLlxe6
fxe6 8 .ltxe6 and 7 .ltxe6 fxe6 8 lLlxe4;
or if 6 ... .ltg4 White plays 7 .ltxf7+ �e7 8
1!r'd2, when 8 ... h 6 fails to 9 'iYb4+.
6 a3
Kasparov's choice was 6 lLl c 3 and
thi s remain s a critical option even
though improvements have been
found for Black. The m ain line run s
6 ... .ltb4 (6 ... d4 7 lLlxe s ! i s good for
White) 7 a3 .ltxc3+ 8 bxc3 and now we
h ave:
199
Beating 1 e4 e5
a) The stem game, G . Kasparov­
E.Bareev, Lin ares 1993, went S ... ltJbd7 9
exds ltJxds 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 1:tel ! .l:!.eS (if
11 ... ltJxC3 there follows 12 'ii'd 2 ltJbs 1 3
..t b 2 e 4 14 ltJg S with a strong initiative,
as indicated by Kasparov) 12 c4 ltJe7 1 3
ltJg s h 6 1 4 ltJe4 and the potential of
the bishop pair gave White some ad­
vantage.
b) S ... a4! (thi s i s useful as it fixes the
a3-pawn and prevents a4 and ..ta3) 9
..ta2 'ii'd 6 10 0-0 0-0 11 exds cxdS
(again st 11 ... ltJxds Tiviakov suggests 12
'ii'e l ltJd7 1 3 c4 or 1 3 11bl with an edge
for White) 12 h3 ltJc6 1 3 ]:tel (or 13
Itbl ! ? - Tiviakov) 1 3 ... lleS 14 ..tg s with
a complex and roughly equal position,
S.Tiviakov- K. Landa, Reggio Emilia 2007.
White's other option is 6 a4. The
m ain thing to remember here i s th at
Bl ack i s likely to meet exds with ... ltJxds
rather th an ... cxdS, as the latter would
leave a hole on b S . For example,
6 ... ltJbd7 (if 6 ... ..tb4+ White should pl ay
7 c3 - compare S ... ..tb4+) 7 exds ltJxds
S 0-0 ..td6 9 ltJc3 ! ? (White can of course
play more typically with 9 ltJbd2 0-0 10
200
11el, as in our m ain g ame) 9 ...ltJxC3 10
bXc3 0-0 1 1 :el "fiIC7 12 d4 b6
(M.Adam s-A.5hirov, Sarajevo 1999) and
here one possibility i s 1 3 'iVd3 intend­
ing 13 ... ..ta6 14 'ii'f S.
6 ... a4
The two m ain advantages of 6 a3
are th at White's bishop can rest peace­
fully on a2 and he no longer has to
worry about ... ..tb4. The disadvantage is
that in some lines Black finds the extra
space on the queenside useful .
If 6 ... ..td6 White goes ahead with 7
exds or 7 ltJc3, reaching either similar
position s or ones which directly tran s­
pose. I don 't see a convincing reason
for Black to delay ... a4.
7 ..ta2 ..td6
8 exd 5
White's m ain choice here has been
S ltJc3 and now:
a) S ... dxe4 9 ltJg 5 0-0 10 ltJcxe4
ltJxe4 11 ltJxe4 ..tfS ! . Black follows the
sam e formul a we saw in the m ain line
- Efimenko-Golod, G ame 39, but White
gains slightly in comparison because
his light-squared bishop is safe from

harassment by ... tiJcs : 1 2 'iVf3 �xe4 1 3
dxe4 tiJd7 1 4 0-0 � c s 1 5 ': d l with a
small edge, B.Michiels-K.Maslak, Par­
dubice 2009. Other m oves for Bl ack are
inferior: for example, 11 ... �e7? ! 12
'ilih s ! tiJd7 1 3 0-0 intends f4 and i s
good for White, G . Lane-L.Henris, Brus­
sel s 1995.
b) 8 ... d4 i s simil ar to s ....i.d6 6 tiJc3
d4. After 9 tiJe2 cs 10 tiJg 3 tiJc6 11 0-0
it's difficult to tell which side, if any,
has benefitted from the extra moves.
Black i s further advanced on the
queen side, but White's bishop i s once
again safer from harassment on a2
than on b 3 .
c ) 8 ... �e6 ! ? h a s been Black's m ain
choice. 9 �g s and now:
Cl) 9 ... d4 i s solid: 10 tiJe2 h 6 1 1 �h4
(perh aps White should stay on the cl­
h 6 diagon al with 11 �d2 ! ?) 11...tiJbd7
12 �g 3 cs 13 c3 'iib 6 14 0-0 0-0 with an
equal position, A. Borisenko-S.Mikheev,
Moscow 2008.
c2) If 9 .. :.as 10 0-0 tiJbd7 there's a
significant difference from Delchev­
Jovanic (Game 38). Because of the ad-
Bis hop 's Opening
vance of the a-pawn, Black's queen i s
protected o n as, and so there are no
tricks involving the X-ray with 11 'iVel.
In view of this, I suggest 10 �xf6 ! ? gxf6
11 0-0 in stead. White's intention is to
meet 11...tiJd7 with 12 d4! , which looks
quite promising to me.
(3) 9 ... :as ! ? i s a creative way to use
the as-square: 10 0-0 tiJbd7 and now
11 d4! causes Black a few problem s:
11...h6 {I think White h as an advan­
tage after either 11...exd4 12 'iVxd4 or
11...0-0 12 exds cxdS 13 dxe s tiJxes 14
.l:.el) 12 �xf6 (12 exds ! ?) 12 ..:iVxf6 13
'iVel ! ? (this is interesting, but 1 3 'ii'd 2 !
with similar ideas looks stronger to me)
13 ... b6 14 dxe s tiJxe s i s tiJxe s �xe s 16
exds cxdS 17 �xdS 0-0 (17 ... .i.xd S ! 18
tiJxds ':xdS 19 f4 0-0 20 fxe s 'iVxes
must be equal) 18 �xe6 fxe6 19 .l:tdl
�xh 2+?? (White i s only slightly better
after 19 ... �xc3 20 bx(3) 20 �xh 2 l:.h s+
2 1 �g l 'iVf4 2 2 'it'xe6+ �h 8 2 3 'ii'd 6 and
1-0, V.lnkiov-P.Mein sohn, Lyon 2006.
Returning to 8 exds, Black must
make the usual deci sion : whether to
recapture with the pawn or the knight.
201
Beating 1 e4 e5

8 ... ttJxd 5 probably choose o n e o f 1 0 ... ttJd7,

8 ... cxdS seem s fully pl ayable too. For 10 ... l:te8 or 10 ... i.. g 4 - compare the
example, 9 ttJc3 i.e6 10 i.g s (or 10 0-0 Nevednichy-Beliavsky g ame.
ttJc6 11 i.g s lias ! ?) 10 ... d4? ! (I'm not 11 ttJ b d 2 i.g4 12 h 3 i. h 5 1 3 ttJe4 ttJ d 7
convinced by this; Black should cer­
tainly con sider 10 ... "iVas here, or
10 ... .:!as) 11 ttJe4 i.xa2 12 i.. xf6 ! g xf6
13 l:[xa2 fS 14 ttJg 3 ! 'ilf6 1 5 c3 dxc3 16
bXc3 ttJc6 17 0-0 0-0 18 ttJd2 �h 8 19
'ile2 f4? ! 20 ttJge4 'ii'e 6 2 1 ttJC4 i.e7 22
':b2 and White was beginning to take
control in M.Sebag -S. Prudnikova, Re­
thymnon 2003.
9 0-0 0-0 1 0 :e1
10 ttJbd2 first is al so possible.
14 ttJg3 1
Thi s i s much better than 1 4 ttJxd6.
White wants to eliminate a black
bishop, but he is going after the
stronger one !
1 4 i.g6 1 5 ttJh41
. . •

If White can force thi s knight-for­

bishop exchan g e without having to
m ake any concessions, the chances are
he will come out with at least a slight
advantage.
We've now reached a position very 15 ..• .:tfe8 16 ttJxg6 hxg6 1 7 h 4 1
similar to the one seen in the previous
g ame, Nevednichy-Beliavsky. The extra
m oves on the queenside don 't change
things significantly.
10 ... 'ilC7?1
At first sight there doesn 't appear to
be anything wrong with thi s m ove at
all , but I can't escape the feeling that
Black's queen i sn 't particularly well
pl aced on c7, or at least Black shoul d
use the tempo elsewhere. H e should

202

Papp's play in thi s g am e provides an
excellent demon stration of how to ex­
ploit White's edge in thi s type of posi­
tion . The h5 push will nibble away at
Black's kingside pawn cover and fur­
ther expose some light-squared weak­
nesses.
1 7 ... liJ7f6 18 h s liJxh s 19 liJxh s gxh S 20
'ii'x h s liJf4 2 1 'ili'fs l
Even though the bishop o n c1 h as
yet to play a part in the g ame, White
wasn 't about to give up his bishop pair.
21 ... liJe6 22 :e4
The m ajor pieces are beginning to
l and on strong outposts. White is ex­
ploiting to the full Black's lack of light­
squared control .
22 .•• 'it'e7 2 3 'ii' h 3 'ii'f6 24 .l:th4 g6 2 S
l:t h 7 !
I really like Papp's focussed plan of
action on the kin g side. Some players
m ay have been tempted to take a time
out to develop the queen's bishop and
rook, but Papp appreciated that it was
more important to firstly tie Black
down to passive defence.
2 S ... .t C S ?
Bis hop 's Opening
In a difficult position to play, Ip­
polito falters. 25 ... .i.f8 ! provides much
needed support for the king and would
h ave kept Black firmly in the contest.
2 6 .te3 1
It's possible that Ippolito h ad over­
looked th at thi s move was possible, due
to the tactic 26 ... .txe3 27 fxe3 (threat­
ening lIfl) 27 ... liJg 5 28 .txf7+! liJxf7 29
.:tfl.
2 6 ...lIa s ?
As so often h appen s, one error 'logi­
cally' follows another. Even here,
26 ... .i.f8 is Black's best move.
27 nfl !
The threats are beginning to mount.
One idea is 28 g4! and then 29 .txe6
':'xe6 30 g 5 followed by m ate down the
h -file.
It's too l ate for passive defence. For
example, 27 ... .tf8 28 f4! exf4 29 ':xf4!
liJxf4 (or 29 ... l:tf5 30 .txe6 ':xe6 3 1
.td4 ! ) 30 .txf7+ 'ii'xf7 3 1 ':'h 8+ 'it>g 7 3 2
.td4+ lIae 5 3 3 .txe 5+ l:txe 5 34 'ii'h 6+
'it>f6 35 l:txf8 and White wins. Bl ack's
attempt to gain counterplay is met by a
convincing refutation :
203
Beating 1 e4 e5
27 ... e4 28 dxe4 'iix b2 29 .id2!
G ame over: White threatens both 30
.ixas and 30 .iC3.
29 .. J:tbS 30 .ie3 'iix e3 3 1 Vi'xe 3 'iitx h7
3 2 .ie41 .id4 3 3 'iVd 3 .ies 34 .ixbs
exbs 35 'iWxbs li!.e7 3 6 'iWxa4 b6 37 :d1
4:Jgs 3 8 li!.e1 fS 3 9 e S 4:Je4 40 J:[xe4 fxe4
41 'iVxe4 .ixa 3 42 'iVh4+ 'iitg 7 43 'iif6+
'iit h 6 44 f4 .ies+ 45 'iitf1 'iit h 7 46 g4 J:[g7
47 e4 1-0
Game 44
M.Sebag-A.Stefa nova
Rethym non 2003
1 e4 e S 2 .ie4 4:Jf6 3 d 3 e6 4 4:Jf3 .ie7
By pl aying this move, Black i s set­
tling for a set-up with ... d6 in stead of
... dS. In fact the immediate 4 ... d6 i s
sometimes played a n d virtually always
tran sposes (but it's always worth l ay­
ing a trap ! ) .
In contrast t o the criti cal 4 ... dS, gen­
eral ideas become more important
than move sequences. The resulting
position s are simil ar to those reached
204
in the Two Knights Defence with 4 d3
(Chapter Four). The difference, of
course, is that Bl ack has a pawn on c6
rather than a knight. To some extent
thi s mean s his position is more flexible.
The flipside is that often he exerts less
pressure on White's centre. Indeed, in
the notes to thi s g am e we see several
examples of White being able to ar­
range the d3 -d4 advance much earlier
th an in analogous positions with
... 4:Jc6.
5 0-0
Make sure you don't get caught out
by s 4:Jxe s ? ? 'iWas+!
S ••• d6
Ivan Sokolov once played S ... bS
again st me, cl aiming some space on
the queenside. Thi s idea doesn 't look
bad, but it hasn 't caught on : 6 .ib3 d6
7 c3 as ! ? 8 4:Jbd2 (8 a4! ?, preventing
Bl ack's expan sion pl an s on the queen­
side, i s a suggestion from Lukacs; he
gives 8 ... b4 9 .l:!.el 0-0 10 d4 4:Jbd7 11
4:Jbd2 with a slight advantage for
White) 8 ... a4 9 .ic2 0-0 10 d4 4:Jbd7 11
li!.e l lle8 12 4:Jfl .if8 13 4:Jg 3 'iWC7 14 h3
g 6 1 5 .ie3 .ig7 (lS ... .ib7 ! ?) 16 'iVd2
4:Jf8 17 .id3 4:Je6 18 li!.acl .id7
(J . Emms-I,Sokolov, Hastings 2000/01).
In thi s position, in stead of 19 c4? ! al ­
lowing 19 ... exd4 20 4:Jxd4 bxc4 2 1
4:Jxe6 .ixe6 2 2 .ixC4 with equality, I
could h ave kept a small plus with 19
.ibl cS 20 dS 4:Jd8.
Black has al so played S ... 'iWC7, seem­
ingly keeping the option open of either
... d6 or ... dS. There's nothing wrong

with thi s move per se, but after 6 ':el
0-0 7 .ib3 Black really has nothing bet­
ter than ... d6, in which case why com­
mit the queen so early?
6 c3
White has numerous ways to play
thi s position, but I'm going to sti ck
with the book's philosophy and choose
C2-c3 lines where suitable.
Those looking for something slightly
different could do worse th an investi­
g ate 6 !tel 0-0 7 ttJbd2 ttJbd7 S a3 ! ?
Here are two examples, from m any:
S .. :iVC7 9 .ia2 b5 10 ttJfl as 11 ttJg 3
ttJC5 12 c3 .ie6 1 3 d4 .ixa2 14 l:[xa2
ttJe6 15 b3 :feS 16 l:.d2 .ifS 17 .ib2
l:tadS with a typical edge for White,
V.An and- I .Sokolov, London (rapid)
1995; or S ... ttJC5 9 ttJfl d5 ! ? 10 exd5
cxdS l l .ia2 e4 12 dxe4 ttJcxe4 13 .ie3
a6 (J . Nunn -E . Rozentalis, Hastings
1997/9S) and here 14 .id4 followed by
ttJe3 pressures the ds-pawn .
6 ••• 0-0
Black has occasion ally delayed cas­
tling to carry out the ... ttJ(bS)-d7-fS-g 6
plan, again st which White should m a-
Bis hop 's Open ing
noeuvre his own queen 's knight to g 3 :
6 . . .ttJbd7 7 l:[el ttJfS S ttJbd2 ttJg6 9 ttJfl
0-0 10 .ib3 .
T o m e , this looks a bit like some po­
sition s from Ch apter Three, with the
difference that Black's dark-squared
bishop is less actively posted. The game
A.Fedorov-V. lordachescu, Romanian
Team Ch . 2006, continued 10 ... h 6 (or
10 ... ttJh S 11 d4 ttJhf4 12 ttJg 3 ) 11 ttJg 3
ttJh 7 (Fedorov prefers 1 1 ... l:!.eS) 12 d4
ttJg s 13 ttJfS ttJxf3+?! (and here 13 ... .if6
is better) 14 'iVxf3 .ie6 1 5 'iVh 5 .ixb3 16
axb3 l:!.eS 17 dxe s dxe s lS l:!.dl (White
is firmly in control now) ls .. :iVcs 19
.ixh 6 ! gxh 6 20 ttJxh 6+ 'it1S 2 1 ttJfS 'litg S
2 2 l:td3 with a winning attack: 2 2 ... .if6
2 3 :h 3 l:tdS 24 g4! 'iVe6 2 S g s l:!.d7 2 6
gxf6 'iYxf6 2 7 �h l l:.adS 2S :g l �fS 29
'iVh 6+ 'liteS, and here 30 'iVh S+! capped
off a very nice game for White.
7 .ib3 ttJbd7
7 ... .ig4 transposes to the note on
S ... ttJcS, below, after S h3 .ih s 9 .l:tel
ttJbd7 10 ttJbd2 ttJC5 11 .ic2. Tiviakov
has tried 9 .ie3 ! ? (in place of 9 :el),
adopting the same plan of discouraging
205
Beating 1 e4 e5
...tLlcs as the one he has chosen in a
similar position (see the note on 9 i.e3
in Malakhov-Carlsen, Game 3 1). Let's
follow the game S.Tiviakov-P.Haba,
Neustadt an den Weinstrasse 2008:
9 ... tLlbd7 10 tLlbd2 dS ! (10 ... tLlcS ? loses a
pawn to 11 i.xcs dxcS 12 g4 - the point
behind 9 i.e3) 11 'ii'e 2 dxe4 12 dxe4
'fiC7 13 l:tfel i.cs 14 i.g S ! ? h6 15 i.h4
(this looks equal, but just watch how
once again Tiviakov works his magic
and squeezes something from the posi­
tion) lS ... i.g 6 16 ..tg 3 tLlh S 17 ..th 2 tLlf4
18 i.xf4 exf4 19 eS :ae8 20 'fiC4 'fib6 2 1
l:1e2 'iVbs 2 2 'iVxbs cxbS 2 3 i.ds .l:.e7 24
e6 tLlb6 25 exf7+ i.xf7 26 ':xe7 i.xe7 27
i.xb7 tLla4 28 ..tc6 a6 29 C4 ..tf6 30 cxbS
..txb2 3 1 l:.bl i.xa2 ? 3 2 llxb 2 ! tLlxb2 3 3
bxa6 .:tf7 3 4 tLles :C7? (34... .:.e7 i s the
only chance) 3 5 i.b7 ':cl+ 3 6 �h 2 tLla4
37 a7 tLlb6 38 tLld7 ! tLla8 39 i.xa8 :C7
40 i.b7 and Black resigned.
8 l:.el l:te8
Planning the typical ... h 6, ... i.f8 and
... g 6 regrouping idea.
8 ... tLlcS 9 i.c2 i.g4 is perh aps
Black's m ost solid option here.
206
The idea, one that we've seen before
in Ch apter Four, is to relieve pressure
by exchanging two sets of minor
pieces. If Bl ack achieves his aim he is
very close to gaining full equality. As
far as I can see, B.Gelfand-A.Yusupov,
Munich 1994, remain s a key g ame, and
I'm surprised Black hasn 't chosen this
route m ore often : 10 h 3 i.h s 11 tLlbd2
tLle6 12 tLlf1 tLld7 ! 13 tLlg 3 ..txf3 14
'fixf3 g 6 ! (the immedi ate 14 ... i.g S is
met by 1 5 tLlfS and here 1 5 ...i.xCl 16
lIaxcl tLlf6 17 d4 i s slightly awkward
for Black) 15 i.e3 (or 15 i.h 6 l:te8 16
l:Xadl ..tg S) lS ... ..tg s 16 lladl i.xe3 17
'i!Vxe3 and here Yusupov suggests
17 ... 'fWb6 with an equal position.
One alternative worth con sidering
i s 11 i.e3 tLle6 1 2 tLlbd2. True, in com­
parison to Tiviakov's plan White has
'missed the boat' with i.xcS . On the
other h and, after 1 2 ... tLld7 White can
play 13 'ii'C l ! ? Thi s worked well in
W. Kruimer-G.5hell, correspondence
2001, after 13 ... i.f6 14 d4 tLlb6 15 a4 c5
16 dxcS dxcS 17 as tLld7 18 i.a4. Check­
ing thi s again, though, I'm not really
sure why Black avoided the obvious
13 ... tLlg S . Perh aps White's idea is to
pl ay 14 i.dl ! ?
Looking at other ways t o interfere
with Black's plan, it's al so worth con­
sidering 10 d4! ? For example, 10 ... tLle6
11 dxe S ! ..txf3 12 'iVxf3 dxe s 13 g3 l:.e8
14 tLld2 g6 1 5 tLlC4 'fiC7 16 a4 with a
comfortable edge for White, D. Pikula­
D.Brankovic, Nis 1995. 10 .... exd4! 11
cxd4 tLle6 i s stronger, and here I think
 Bis hop 's Opening

White's best chance of an advantage i s

with 12 dS ! (rather than 12 .1i. e 3 dS ! )
12 ... i.xf3 1 3 gxf3 lD c s 1 4 lDc3.
9 d4!

2 3 ... gxfS 24 exfs lDg7 (24 ... lDg s is

As I m ention ed in the introduction
to thi s game, White finds it easier to
carry out the d3-d4 advance if Black
chooses ... c6 and ... lDbd7 over ... lDc6.
Without a knight on c6 and with no
... i.g4 available, there i s significantly
less pressure on d4.
Note that White shouldn 't delay d4
for very long, otherwi se the risk is Bl ack
will play ... dS himself. For example, 9
lDbd2 h 6 10 lDfl (play 10 d4!) 10 ... i.f8
11 lDg 3 dS ! 1 2 h 3 dxe4 1 3 dxe4 'iIIC 7 14
m ore resilient, but 2 5 lDxg S+ hxg s 2 6
h4! i s still very good for White; actually,
the official game score gives 24 ... <iit g 7
but m oving the knight t o thi s square i s
far m ore likely t o have happened) 2 5
g S ! hxg s 2 6 lDxg s+ <iith 8 2 7 1:[ g 4 and,
faced with the prospect of 1:[h4+, Black
threw in the towel . Too much like one­
way traffic? Maybe, but it's worth
pointing out th at Bl ack was a 2 540-
rated grandm aster, and he didn 't m ake
any obvious blunders. Perhaps thi s is
not such an easy position for Black to
pl ay.
11 g6 12 lDf1 i. g7 1 3 lD g3
...

lDh4 lDcs 1 5 .1i.c2 g 6 16 i.e3 as 1 7 'i!i'cl

<iith 7 with an equal position, V.Neved­
nichy-V.lordachescu, Budva 2003.
9 h 6 1 0 lD bd2 i.f8 11 .1i.c2
...

A.Shch ekachev-N . Nikcevic, Royan

1997, is a crushing win for White: 11 h 3
g 6 12 .1i.c2 lDh S (thi s turn s out t o be
premature) 1 3 lDfl i.g7 14 i.e3 We7
1 5 'iIId 2 <iith 7 16 g4! lDhf6 17 lDg 3 lDf8
18 <iith 2 lDg 8 19 1:[g l i.f6 20 .l:!.ael b6 2 1
.l:tg 2 .1i.d7 2 2 .l:teg l lDe6 2 3 lDfS !

207
Beating 1 e4 e 5
1 3 ... ttJh7
Pl anning ... ttJg s, to exchange a pair
of knights and relieve some of Black's
congestion problems. Just like 12 ... ttJh s
in the previous note, I don 't find thi s
idea fully convincing, at least o n the
evidence of this game.
A more typical approach, and one I
feel offers Black better chances of equal ­
ity, is 13 .. :ii'c7 followed by queenside
development. For example, 14 h3 b s ! ?
(after 1 4. . .ttJf8 15 .lte3 .lte6 16 'ii'd 2 <iith 7
17 l:tadl .l:Iad8 18 'ii'C l White keeps an
edge, Hou Yifan-R.Reinaldo Castineira,
Zurich 2009) 15 .lte3 (15 a4! ?) ls ... .ltb7
16 'ii'd 2 <iith 7 17 liadl c s ! 18 ds ttJb6 19
b3 C4 20 b4 as and Black still suffers
from cramp, but opening the a-file of­
fers him just about enough counterplay
to hold the balance, D.Moldovan­
J .Lechtynsky, Stara Zag ora 1990.
14 .lte3 ttJg5 1 5 ttJxg5 hxg5 16 'ii'd 2 .ltf6
In view of what h appens, m aybe
Bl ack should play 16 ... g4! ? h ere.
17 l:tad1 <iit g 7 18 f3 1
Fixing the g s-pawn .
18 ... .:th8
208
19 ttJh11
I must confess th at I chose to in­
clude the whole of thi s g am e partially
because thi s styli sh retreat really
caught my eye. White is pl anning ttJh l­
f2-g4. Black can hardly allow the knight
to reach its ideal destination, so the
knight on d7 h as to move. Thi s in turn
mean s that Bl ack's centre comes under
more pressure.
19 ... ttJb6 20 .ltb3 'ike7
Black would like to play 20 ... g4 h ere.
It's position ally desirable but al so ap­
pears to be tactically flawed: 21 dxe s
dxe s (or 2 1 ... .ltxe s 2 2 f4! ) 2 2 'iVf2 'ike7
23 fxg4 .ltxg4 24 .ltcs ! 'ili'e8 25 lUi and
Black's position collapses.
2 1 ttJf2
Now the avenue for counterpl ay via
... g4 i s firmly closed, and White enjoys a
significant positional advantage. Black
is far too distracted with events in the
centre to ever hope to g et any action
down the h-file.
2 1 ... C5 2 2 h 3 cxd4?
Opening the position only h elps
White. Black's best chance for survival

was to sit tight with 2 2 ... i.. d 7.
2 3 cxd4 exd4 24 i.. x d4 i.. e 5 25 'iVC3 f6
2 6 liJd 3 1 i.. x d4+
Thi s couldn 't have been Black's
original intention, but White was
threatening to take on e5 in m any
lines: for example, 26 ... i.. d 7 27 liJxe5
dxe5 2 8 SLC5 "ii'd 8 29 l:td6 etc.
27 "ii'x d4 i.. e 6 2 8 liJb4 i.. x b3 29 axb3
.l:.hd8 30 liJd 5 'iWe 5 ?
Bl ack had to try to survive after
30 ... liJxd5 31 exd5 'iWf8 32 .l:.e6.
3 1 liJC71
Winning an exchange, and ulti­
mately the game.
3 1 ... "ii'x d4+ 3 2 l:txd4 �f7 3 3 liJxa 8
liJxa 8 34 .:U a6 3 5 l:.b4 :d7 36 ':c1 b 5
3 7 l:I c 6 liJ C 7 3 8 l:[ d 4 � e 7 3 9 b 4 � e 6 40
.l:1.d3 �e5 41 .l:1.dc3 liJe6 42 .l:1.xa6 liJd4 43
�f2 f5 44 l:Ia8 fxe4 4 5 l:Ie8+ liJe6 46
fxe4 :tf7+ 47 �e2 g4 48 .l:1.d 3 gxh 3 49
gxh 3 .l:.f6 50 ':'f3 g5 5 1 .l:r.xf6 �xf6 5 2
� e 3 liJf4 5 3 l:tf8+ �e7 54 l:txf4 1-0
Game 45
E.Shaposhnikov-A.Lastin
Russia n C h a m pionsh i p,
Moscow 1999
1 e 4 e 5 2 SLC4 liJf6 3 d 3 SLC5
3 ... i.. c 5 i s Black's third most popular
choice, behind 3 ... liJc6 an d 3 ... c6. Many
games after 4 liJf3 tran spose directly to
the Italian G ame when Black plays
... liJc6, either immediately or soon af­
ter. In thi s game we con sider lines
where Bl ack chooses ... c6 in stead.
Bis hop 's Opening
Alternatively:
a) 3 ... d5 features surprisingly often
here. Perh aps Black pl ayers are encour­
aged by White's quiet, non-forcing play
to 'go for it'. However, after 4 exd5
liJxd5 5 liJf3 liJc6 we have just tran s­
posed to Emms-Wittm an (Game 34), a
theoretically dubious line for Black.
b) There's nothing wrong with
3 ... SLe7, but a tran sposition to lines
previously con sidered is virtually inevi­
table. For example, 4 liJf3 d6 (4 ... liJc6 is
the Two Knights) 5 0-0 0-0 6 c3 and
here 6 ... c6 reaches Sebag-Stefanova
(Game 44) wh ereas 6 ... liJc6 7 i..b 3
tran sposes to The Two Knights (Chap­
ter Four).
4 liJf3 d6
4 ... liJc6 5 c3 does of course take us
back into the Italian Game.
4 ... 0-0 ! 7 is rare but by no mean s
bad. White shouldn 't be tempted to
grab the pawn, as 5 liJxe 5 ? ! leads to
trouble after 5 ... d5 ! . For example, 6
exd5 .l:.e8 7 d4 i.. x d4! 8 'i¥xd4 liJc6 .
White should settle instead for 5 0-0 or
5 i..b 3. Again st the latter, Bl ack could
20 9
Beating 1 e4 e5
try S ... dS ! ? 6 exds ttJxdS 7 0-0 ttJc6 lead­
ing to positions very simil ar to those
discussed in Ch apter Two (compare
Bologan-Heberla, G ame 14). Here's one
example: 8 h3 as 9 c3 .i.fs (9 ... ttJb6 and
9 ... ttJf6 are decent alternatives) 10 lIel
l:te8? (Black should pl ay 10 ... 'ii'd 6 ! ) 11
d4! (a trick we've seen before; even
players rated 2 500 keep falling for it !)
1 1 ....i.a7 12 dxes ttJb6 1 3 'ii'x d8 ':'axd8
14 .i.g s .l:.d3 15 ttJa3 .i.xh 3 16 ttJbS !
with advantage, K.5hanava-L. Babujian,
Izmir 2009.
5 c3 0-0
There are so m any different possible
move orders in this line. For example,
the game's actual move order was
S ... .tb6 6 ttJbd2 0-0 7 0-0 c6 8 .i.b3 h6 9
litel l:te8 10 ttJfl ttJbd7 1 1 ttJg 3 ttJf8 12
h 3 .i.e6 1 3 .i.c2 ttJg 6 14 d4 'ii'C 7, but in
practice Black has tended to prefer
5 ... 0-0, or s ... ttJc6 tran sposing to the
Italian G ame.
Black i s happy to commit to castling
because 6 .i.g s holds no fears for him.
The key point i s th at he can exploit the
del ayed development of his queen's
2 10
knight to negate the effect of the pin
with ... ttJbd7. Compare thi s to similar
position s we've seen with ... ttJc6, in
which Black experiences long-term dif­
ficulties with the pin .
6 0-0
6 .tb3 is a useful altern ative for
White, especially if he prefers to pl ay
lines with delayed castling in the Ital ­
ian G ame - useful because don't forget
Black can tran spose at any time with
... ttJc6. After 6 ... .i.b6 7 ttJbd2 c6 8 0-0 we
tran spose to the m ain g ame, with
White castling only once Black is com­
mitted to ... c6.
One final point: it's worth remem­
bering th at the accelerated ttJfl-g 3
plan often doesn't work well again st
... c6. For example, 8 h 3 (in pl ace of 8 0-
0) 8 ... ttJbd7 9 ttJfl ? ! dS 10 .i.c2 (if 10
'ii'e 2, Black might even play 10 ... dxe4 11
dxe4 ttJxe4 ! ? 12 'ii'x e4 ttJcS ! ) 10 ... lite8 1 1
ttJg 3 ttJf8 followed by ...ttJ g 6 and Black
is at least equal .
6 •.. .tb6 7 ttJbd2 c6 8 .i.b3 l:.e8 9 l:Iel
ttJbd7
Black has aped White's develop-

ment and we have reached a com­
pletely symm etrical position. The ques­
tion in all symm etrical position is, can
White exploit the m ove to put any
pressure on Black? I think the best
chance i s to aim for the d3-d4 advance
to set up a favourable ten sion in the
centre.
10 tDf1
Thi s has been the m ain choice, but
in view of Black's possibility in the next
note, White should con sider advancing
in the centre without del ay: 10 d4 tDf8
(or 10 ... .tc7 11 h 3 tDf8 12 .tC2 tDg6 1 3
tDfl h 6 1 4 tDg 3, a s in S. Karj akin ­
J .Smeets, Nice (rapid) 2010) 11 h 3 tD g 6
12 .t c 2 .t e 6 1 3 tDfl h 6 1 4 tDg 3 a n d we
have reached the m ain game.
10 tDf8
•..
I think Black should quit copying
and aim to push his d-pawn before
White does. In fact, after 10 ... h6 11 tDg 3
d5 ! I don't see any real problems for
him. For example, 12 h 3 .tC7 13 tDh 2
tDC5 14 .tC2 dxe4 1 5 dxe4 'i!kxdl 16
lixdl with equality, J . Degraeve­
B . Finegold, Ostend 1990; or 12 exd5
Bi s hop 's Opening
cxd 5 ! 1 3 .ta4 tDg4 14 d4? ! (14 l:te2 is
better) 14 ... e4 1 5 h 3 tDgf6, M. Bosboom­
B . Finegold, Wijk aan Zee 1991, intend­
ing 16 tDe5 ? ! tDxe 5 ! 17 .txe8 tDd3 .
11 tDg3 tDg6 12 h 3
The immediate 1 2 d 4 i s m et by
1 2 ... .tg4. Likewise, 12 ... d5 i s m et by 1 3
.tg 5 ! .
12 ... h 6 1 3 d4!
Fin ally White gets his advance in,
and now he stands slightly better.
13 'i!ke7 14 .te 2 .t e6
...
If nothing el se, it seem s like thi s
game h a s provided me with a testing
exercise in tran spositions ! The position
we h ave in front of us has al so been
reached via the Italian Game: 1 e4 e5 2
tDf3 tDc6 3 ..tC4 tDf6 4 d3 ..tC5 5 0-0 0-0
6 c3 .tb6 7 l:lel d6 8 tDbd2 tDe7 9 tDfl
tDg 6 10 tDg 3 .te6 11 .tb3 h 6 12 h 3 lie8
1 3 d4 c6 14 .tc2 'fIIC 7 (A. Beliavsky­
B.Gulko, Frunze 1981) and, perhaps
more surprisingly, the Ruy Lopez(!): 1
e4 e5 2 tDf3 tDc6 3 .tb5 tDf6 4 d3 .tC5 5
c3 0-0 6 0-0 d6 7 ]:tel .tb6 8 h 3 tDe7 9
tDbd2 c6 10 ..ta4 tDg 6 11 tDfl h 6 12
tDg 3 .:te8 1 3 d4 'ili'C7 14 .tC2 .te6. Thi s
2 11
Beating 1 e4 e5
latter move order was used in the
Dominguez-A1ekseev game, below.
1 5 �e3 l:!.ad8 16 'iiC l
16 'iVd2 followed by l:tadl is al so
possible, but after 16 'ili'cl White
doesn't have to worry about tactics
down the d-fi1e.
16 ... a6?
This move is an irrelevance. In fact it
might be worse than that because now
the b6-bishop lacks pawn protection.
Clearly Lastin didn't sense any danger
and was just marking time. Should he
have known better? Perhaps, but again
we can view this as a positive: if even a
2 s so-rated grandmaster can fail to spot
the danger, surely this position poses
Black more problems than it might ap­
pear to, especially when applied to play­
ers without stratospheric ratings.
Some players would be reluctant to
pl ay 16 ... �h 7 simply because of the x­
ray effect of White's c2-bishop. But it
does at least provide support to the h6-
pawn, preventing possible bishop sac­
rifices. The g ame L.Dominguez Perez­
E.A1ekseev, Bie1 2008, continued 17
2 12
�d3 cs 18 liJfs �xfs 19 exfs liJf8, and
here I would h ave chosen 20 dxes dxes
2 1 �C4. Alternatively, 17 b4 as 18 a3
axb4 19 cxb4 iVc8 20 'ifb2, as played in
S. Kudrin-M.Cornejo, Sao Paulo 2009,
al so looks a bit better for White.
In another super-grandmaster
cl ash, Black m an aged to equalize after
16 ... �c8 17 a3 d s ! 18 liJxes liJxes 19
dxe s liJxe4 20 liJxe4 dxe4 21 �xe4 fs !
(a key defen sive resource; 2 1 ... :txe s ?
would b e met by 2 2 �f4) 2 2 �xb6 axb6
23 �c2 .l:txes and %-V2, M.Adam s­
V. Kramnik, Dortmund 1999. But surely
17 liJfs ! ?, with similar ideas to the
m ain g ame, i s more critical ?
17 liJf5 !
Thi s i s very strong . Suddenly sacri­
fices on h 6 are looming large: for ex­
ample, 17 ... exd4 18 �xh 6 ! gxh6 19
'iVxh 6 �xfS 20 exfs etc. Lastin chooses
to get rid of the knight straightaway,
but thi s doesn't succeed in discourag­
ing White from sacrificing.
17 . . .�xf5 18 exf5 liJf8
If 18 ... e4! ? White h as a pleasant
choice between 19 liJd2 liJh4 20 �f4

l'bxf5 2 1 l'bxe4 and 19 fxg 6 exf3 20
gxf3, with some advantage in either
case. Even so, thi s was probably Black's
best bet.
19 .i.xh6!
Even without a knight on f5, thi s
sacrifice i s strong . S o strong that Bl ack
decides to decline it and battle on a
pawn down.
19 ... l'b8h7
After 19 ... gxh6 20 'ii'xh 6 White gets
a fierce attack and Bl ack's pieces are
clum sily placed for defence. For exam ­
ple, 20 ... l'bSh 7 2 1 l'bg 5 'ii'e 7 (or 2 1 ... exd4
2 2 l'bxh 7 l'bxh 7 2 3 f6) 2 2 l'bxh 7 l'bxh 7 2 3
f6 ! l'bxf6 2 4 l:te3 etc.
20 dxes dxes 2 1 .i.e3 .i.xe3 22 'iVxe3
l'bd s 23 'ii'e 4! l'bhf6 24 'ii'h 4! l'bf4 2S .l:.e3
l'b4d s 26 lIeel l'bf4 2 7 g3 l'bd3 28 lIe3 e4
If Black regains the pawn with
2S ... l'bxb2, White plays 29 l'bg 5 threat­
ening l:tb1 and al so intending .i.b3.
29 l'b g s 'ii' b 6 30 .i.b3 l:l d 7 3 1 l:!.dl l:tde7
3 2 lId2 'iVc S ?
It seem s to me th at the rest of the
game could easily have been affected
by time trouble, probably on both sides.
Bi s hop 's Opening
First White misses a win ; then he lets
Black right back into the g ame; and
finally, Black blunders on move 40.
Sound familiar?
3 3 g4?
33 l:tdxd3 ! exd3 34 .i.xf7+! win s:
34 ... lIxf7 35 lIxeS+ l'bxeS 3 6 Vh 7+ �S
3 7 l'be6+ �e7 3 S l'bxC5 d2 3 9 Vh 5 etc.
33 ...l'bf4 3 4 l'bxf7 ! ':xf7 3S .i.xf7+?
35 g 5 ! i s stronger.
3S ...�xf7 3 6 gs l'b6hs 37 :d 7+ �f8 38
'iVg4 'iVes 3 9 f6? gxf6 40 g6
40 fS??
.••
If 40 ... .:te7 ! Black is right back in the
game. Now 'order is restored' !
41 1::tf 7+ �g8 42 .:txfS 1-0
2 13
Beating 1 e4 e5
In this final g ame, we con sider sec­
ond move alternatives for Black after 2
.tC4.
Game 46
M.Mrva-E.Klema nic
Slova kia n league 1997
1 e4 e 5 2 .t C4 d6
Alternatively:
a) If 2 ... tDc6 we tran spose to the Ital­
ian G ame with 3 tDf3 ! .
b ) 2 . . ..tcS is Black's third most
popular choice again st 2 .tC4 (behind
2 ... tDf6 and 2 ... tDc6). After 3 tDf3 d6 4 c3
tDf6 S d3 we tran spose to the previous
g ame.
c) 2 ... c6 aim s for a quick counter in
the centre with ... dS. White should re­
act with the direct 3 d4! and now:
C1) 3 ... exd4?! 4 'iWxd4 exploits the
fact th at ... tDc6 i s no longer available.
The queen is well placed in the centre
here.
(2) 3 ... tDf6 4 dxe s 'iWas+ (or 4 ...tDxe4
S 'i¥e2 ! ) S tDC3 (S tDd2 'i¥xe s 6 tDgf3 al so
2 14
looks good) s ... tDxe4 6 'i¥f3 dS 7 exd6
tDxd6 8 .tb3 and I prefer White.
C3) 3 ... dS is consistent and best, but
White still keeps an edge. For example,
4 exds cxdS S .tbS+ .td7 6 .txd7+
tDxd7 7 tDc3 tDgf6 8 dxes tDxes 9 'i¥e2
'i¥e7 10 .te3 tDc6 11 0-0-0 0-0-0 12 tDf3
"fiC7 13 tDd4 'ili'as 14 tDb3 with strong
pressure ag ainst the ds-pawn,
C.Marcelin - I . Boim, H erzeliya 2000.
d) 2 .. .fS ! ? is very simil ar to 1 e4 eS 2
tDf3 tDc6 3 .tC4 fS - compare the analy­
sis in Game 3 7 . White again h as two
options. The safe 3 d3 tDf6 4 tDf3 tDc6
actually tran sposes to the line in the
Italian Game. The more ambitious 3
d4! ? exd4 4 e S i s a promising g ambit:
for example, 4 ... dS S exd6 .txd6 6 tDe2
tDc6 7 0-0 tDas 8 .txg 8 ':'xg 8 9 tDxd4
with advantage, J . Pietrasanta- K.5hirazi,
Pau 2008.
3 tDf3
Thi s position is often reached via
the Philidor Defence: 1 e4 e S 2 tDf3 d6 3
.tC4. Of course with the Bi shop's Open ­
ing m ove order there's a temptation
for White to aim for a favourable King's

G ambit with d3 followed by f4, or even
the immediate 3 f4! ?, and thi s partially
explain s why 2 ... d6 is a rare choice
again st 2 �C4. But let's stick to the
book's repertoire !
3 ... �e6
Thi s isn't Black's best option but it is
the m ost independent one, and th at's
why I 've chosen it to be the 'main line'.
There's real justification for White to
break away from our norm al system of
development again st 3 ... �e6.
Most other m oves will m ore than
likely transpose to something th at's
been covered previously:
a) 3 ... liJc6 transposes to the Italian
Game (see the notes to Game 3 7).
b) 3 ... �e7 has been Bl ack's most
popular choice. The position after 4 0-0
liJf6 5 d3 was covered in the notes to
the previous g ame.
c) 3 ... liJf6 4 d3 �e7 5 0-0 i s another
move order to reach the same position .
Actually, 3 ... liJf6 i s frowned upon by
theory because of 4 liJg s forcing Black
to gambit a pawn with 4 ... dS 5 exds.
However, I'm not 100% certain it's
Bi s hop 's Opening
that clear. To me, Black seems to get at
least a bit of compensation after S ...h 6 6
liJf3 e4! . For example, 7 'iVe2 �e7 S liJes
0-0 9 liJC3 �d6 10 d4 exd3 11 liJxd3 l:eS
12 �e3, J .Benjamin-D.John, Kona 1995,
or 7 'iWe2 �b4!? S 0-0 0-0 9 liJd4 .l:.eS,
J .Tayar-S.Fruebing, Batumi 2006.
d) 3 ... �g4 4 c3 liJf6 (4 ... liJc6 is the
Italian Game ag ain) and here White
can either pl ay 5 d3 heading for norm al
lines or try to puni sh Black for his m ove
order with 5 'iVh3 ! ?
4 �xe6 !
I wouldn 't norm ally recommend ex­
changing on e6, but on thi s occasion
there are special circum stances th at
cannot be ignored.
The 'system' way to play would be 4
d3 and then, for example, 4 ... liJf6 5
liJbd2 �e7 6 c3 0-0 7 0-0 liJc6 (compare
Malakhov-Carl sen, Game 3 1).
4. . .fxe6 5 d4!
Full steam ahead! In thi s in stance
there's neither the need, nor the time,
to prepare thi s with c2-(3. White needs
to pl ay thi s position with some urgency
to exploit his early initiative.
2 15
Beating 1 e4 e5
s ... exd4 6 lLlxd4 'iVd 7
6 ... es?! offers White's knight an in­
vitation it should certainly accept: 7
lLle6 'iVe7 8 'iVh S+! g 6 9 'iWh 3 and al­
ready White enjoys a big advantage.
After 9 ... lLla6 10 lLlc3 'i¥d7 11 f4! exf4 12
.i.xf4 lLlf6 13 0-0 Black i s in real trouble,
M.Chandler-P. Large, Hastings 1986/87.
6 ... lLlf6 ! is a wiser choice, and thi s
move seems t o limit White's advan ­
tage. For example, 7 lLlC3 (7 lLlxe6 'ii'e 7
is okay for Bl ack, but 7 'iii'd 3 ! ? i s an in­
teresting suggestion from Taylor and
H ayward - if 7 ... eS White can play 8
"iWbS+! lLlbd7 9 lLle6) 7 ... 'iVd7 8 0-0 lLlc6
9 .i.e3 .i.e7 10 'i¥e2 lLlxd4 11 .i.xd4 cS
12 .i.e3 'ilVc6 1 3 .i.g s 0-0 14 l:tad1 with
some pressure for White, S.Videki­
V.sutorikhin, Kecskemet 1991.
7 'iVh S+!
7 lLlc3 lLlf6 tran sposes to the previ­
ous note but thi s queen check, a com­
mon theme in thi s line, presents Bl ack
with greater problems. Again the idea
is to hit the e6-pawn (and the e6-
square) before Black can con solidate.
7 ••• g6
2 16
7 .. :illf7 ? 8 'iWh 3 forced Bl ack into the
really ugly 8 .. .'iti'd7 in P. H . Nielsen­
S. Pedersen, Budapest 1993.
8 'i¥h3 e S g lLle6 lLlc6 1 0 'ii' b 3 !
Who said you shouldn 't m ove your
queen too m any times in the opening ?
Thi s i s much stronger th an the auto­
pilot choice of 10 lLlC3 ? ! which allows
Black to force a swap of queen s with
10 ... lLld4 ! . By breaking the pin White
frees his knight on e6.
10 ... b6?
Thi s i s too slow and i s rightfully
punished.
Even though White win s a pawn af­
ter 10 ... lLlas 11 'iVds c6 12 lLlxf8 cxdS 1 3
lLlxd7 'iti>xd7 1 4 exds, a s in J .Van der
Wiel-R.Cifuentes Parada, Novi Sad
Olympiad 1990, it's not a straightfor­
ward task for White to convert his ad­
vantage. I h ave a feeling th at 10 ... lLlas
i s Bl ack's best choice, certainly at least
in a practical sense.
11 lLlc3 !
Threatening t o join its teammate to
form a deadly attack with lLldS. Black's
position i s critical and m ay already be

beyond salvation .
11 ... ttJd8
Unfortun ately for Bl ack, 11 ... ttJf6 is
m et very strongly by 12 �g S ! . For ex­
ample, 12 ... �e7 (or 12 ... ttJas 13 ttJxC7+!
'ii'x c7 14 'ii'e 6+) 1 3 �xf6 ! �xf6 14 ttJdS,
intending to an swer 14 ...�d8 with 1 5
ttJexc7+! overloading the bishop.
Perh aps the best bet i s 11 ... ttJas 12
iVdS c6 13 ttJxf8 �xf8 14 iVd3, but even
here Black's ch ances for survival are
slim.
12 ttJxf8 �xf8 1 3 f4!
Black m ay have succeeded in ex­
changing off White's powerful knight,
but he i s still horribly undevel oped and
there will be no surviving the second
wave of attack.
13 .•. exf4 14 �xf4 ttJe6 lS 0-0 'it>g7 16
ttJd S !
Threatening 17 'i!i'C3+.
16 ... h S 17 Iladl gs 18 iVc3+ �h7 19
�es!
Winnin g : Black has to give up his
queen .
19 ... dxes 20 ttJf6+ ttJxf6 2 1 l:txd7+
ttJxd 7 2 2 lIf7+ �g6 2 3 l:txd 7 l:tae8 24
Bis hop 's Opening
'ii'x es l:thf8 2 S h3 l:tf6 26 �h2 h4 27 a4
as 2 8 c3 I1f7 29 l:txf7 �xf7 30 b4 l:.d8
31 bxa s bxa s 32 'ii'xa s l:td3 33 'iffS+
rl;; e 7 34 e S 1-0
An impressive attacking perform­
ance from Mrva. I 've just noticed that 8
iVh 3 was the only backwards move he
played in the entire gam e !
Key Notes
1. In the m ain line with 6 ttJC3, if
Black plays 6 ... �e6 (Game 3 8) White
has excellent chances of attacking the
centre and gaining an advantage.
6 ... dxe4! (Games 3 9-40) is much more
reliable and it seem s to restrict White
to a very small edge.
2. 6 exds i s a more ambitious op­
tion for White, and G ame 41 (with
6 ... cxdS) demon strates the wealth of
possibilities for both sides. Even though
White eventually ended up losing this
game, there were some promising at­
tacking opportunities for him.
3 . 6 exds ttJxdS i s a decent alterna­
tive for Bl ack. These position s can cer­
tainly be compared to those in the Ital ­
ian G ame where White adopts Plan B.
Game 42 is well worth replaying, if
nothing el se because it's unusual for a
pl ayer of Beliavsky's calibre to get into
so much troubl e at such an early stage.
4. If Black chooses a system of de­
velopment with ... �e7, ... d6 and ... c6
(Game 44), White should look to ad­
vance quickly in the centre with d3 -d4.
Bl ack's set-up is flexible, but without a
2 17
Beating 1 e4 e5
knight on c6 he finds it h ard to exert
any pressure on d4, and White should
be aiming to exploit thi s feature.
5 . 3 ... .JTLcs can lead to a virtually
symmetrical position, as it does in
Game 45. Again White's best chance of
gaining an advantage is by trying to
force through d3-d4. Any delay m ay
2 18
give Black the initiative, as he is aiming
for the sam e with ... d6-ds.
6. After 2 ... d6 3 .JTLc4, a tran sposition
to lines previously covered is m ore than
likely. Black's choice of 3 ... .JTLe6 in G ame
46 i s convincingly met by 4 .JTLxe6 fxe6 5
d4! .
 I n d ex of Va r i a t i o n s

Ita l i a n Ga me: 8 . . . i.e6 - 2 8

Modern Va riation 8 . . .tDe7 9 tDf1 tD g 6 1 0 tDg 3 0-0
1 1 0-0
1 e4 e S 2 tDf3 tDc6 3 Si.C4 Si.cs 4 c3 tDf6 11 ... h6 - 34
5 d3 a6 11 ... b 5 - 3 7
5 . . . d6 - 7 3 9 tDf1 d S
5 . . . d5 - 6 5 9 . . .Si. e 6 - 2 8
5 . . .0-0 - 64 9 . . .h 6 - 2 8
6 i.b3 i.. a 7 1 0 'iVe2 dxe4
6 . . . d6 - 6 9 10 .. .'ii' d 6 - 20
6 . . .0 - 0 - 6 0 10 . . . i.. e 6 - 2 2
6 . . . d5 - 6 0 1 0. . . h 6 - 2 2
7 h3 10 . . ..l:!. e 8 - 2 3
7 tDbd2 0-0 ll dxe4 �e7
8 h3 d5 - 57 11 . . . tDh 5 - 1 7
8 tDC4 12 tD g 3 h 6 - 1 2
8 ... d6 - 50 1 2 . . . i.. e 6 - 1 3
8 ... d5 - 5 3
7 •.. d6 Ita lia n G a m e :
7 . . .d 5 - 40 C l a ssica l Ma i n Li ne
7 . . . 0-0 - 44
7 . . .h 6 - 4 5 1 e 4 e S 2 tDf3 tDc6 3 Si.C4 i. c s 4 c3 tDf6
8 tDbd2 0-0 5 d3 a6

2 19
Beating 1 e4 e5

5 ... d6 - 12 1 6 ... d5 7 exd5 ltJxd5

5 . . .0-0 6 0-0 d5 - 6 5 8 l:!.el - 142
6 0-o d6 8 h3 - 147
6 ... .1i.a7 7 .1i.b3 0-0 8 .1i.e3 - 1 10 7 c3 ltJa s - 1 2 5
7 i.b3 i.a7 7 ... h 6 - 13 1
7 ... 0-0 8 .1i.g 5 - 1 14 7 ... ltJd7 - 1 3 1
7 ... i.g4 - 118 7 . . .'it>h 8 - 1 3 2
8 l:.e1 7 ... i.e6 - 13 5
8 i.e3 - 109 7 ... .1i.g4 - 1 3 5
8 h 3 h6 7 ... d5 - 146
9 l:[el g5 - 103
9 i.e3 - 106
8 ltJbd2 - 80 Ita lia n Ga me:
8 i.g 5 - 1 1 3 Other Li nes
8 ... 0-0
8 ... h6 9 ltJbd2 g 5 - 105 1 e4 e S 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 i.C4 i.cS
8 ... ltJg4 - 105 3 ... .1i.e7 - 169
9 h3 3 ... d6 - 169
9 ltJbd2 - 81 3 ... ltJd4 - 1 7 1
9 ... h 6 3 .. .f5 - 17 1
9 ... 'it>h 8 - 100 4 c3 'iie 7 - 1 6 3
9 ... ltJe7 - 99 4 ... 'iif6 - 1 6 3
9 ... i.e6 4 ... .1i.b6 - 1 6 3
10 ltJbd2 - 89 4 ... d6 - 164
10 i.c2 d5
11 ltJbd2 - 90 Bishop's Open i n g
11 exd5 - 9 1
1 0 ltJbd2 ltJ h S - 82 1 e 4 e S 2 i.C4 ltJf6
10 ...i.e6 - 96 2 ... ltJc6 3 i.C4 - Chapters 1-5
2 ... d6 - 2 14
Ita l i a n G a m e : 2 ... i.C5 - 2 14
Two Kn ights Defence 2 ... c6- 2 14
2 .. .f5- 2 14
1 e4 eS 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 i.C4 ltJf6 4 d 3 i.e7 3 d 3 c6
4 ... d6 - 1 54 3 ... ltJc6 4 ltJf3 - Chapter 4
4 ... h 6 - 1 54 3 ... .1i.c5 - 209
4 ... d5 - 1 50 3 ... i.e7 - 209
5 0-0 0-0 6 i.b3 d6 3 ... d5 - 209

220
 Index of Variations

4 tLlf3 d S 6 . . . cxd5 - 1 8 7
4 . . . .i. e 7 - 204 6 ... tLlxd5 - 1 9 2
5 �b3 .i.d6 6 ... dxe4
5 ... a5 - 1 9 7 6 . . . .i. e 6 - 1 7 6
5 . . . .i.b4+ - 1 9 8 6 . . . d4 - 1 7 5
5 . . .tLlbd7 - 1 9 9 7 tLl g s - 180
6 tLlc3 7 tLlxe4 - 184
6 exd5

221
 I n d ex of G a m e s

Areshchenko.A-Aleksa ndrov.A, Aerofl ot Open, Moscow, 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Ba uer.C-Nyback.T, F rench League 2009 37
........................................................................

Boka r.J-Nasyb u l l i n .V, Correspondence 2006 169

............................................................

Bologan.V-Heberla.B, E u ropea n C h a m pionsh i p, Plovd iv 2008 60

...............................

Bologa n.V-Tomashevsky. E, Ae rofl ot Open, Moscow 2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

Bronstein.D-lvkov. B, Amsterd a m 1 9 6 8 121
......................................................................

Degraeve.J .M-Dorfma n.J, F rench League 2007 69

...........................................................

Delchev.A-Jova nic.O, Zad a r 2004 176

................................................................................

Efimenko.Z-Golod .V, Montrea l 2005 180

..........................................................................

E m m s.J-Flea r.G, Jack 5peigel Memoria l , 50uthend 2009 ..49

........................................

E m m s.J-G reet.A, B ritis h C h a m pionsh i p, Douglas 2005 53

............................................

E m ms.J-Ledger.D, British League ( 4NCL) 2006 19

............................................................

E m m s.J-Wittman.J, London League 2006 150

.................................................................

E renburg.S-Kreiz berg.M, Tel Aviv 2002 73

.........................................................................

Felgaer.R-Hedor.J, Politi ken C u p, Copen hagen 2002 99

...............................................

Frois.A-Korneev.O, M a l aga 2005 82

....................................................................................

Gonza lez Vidal.Y-Gomez.F, C u b a n C h a m pion s h i p, Holgu i n C ity 2002 16

.................

Howell. D-Ashton.A, British Rapid p l ay C h a m pion s h i p, H a l ifax 2008 11

....................

Kinderm a n n.S-Dietmayer Kraeutler.M, Austri a n League 2007 118

...........................

Korneev.O-Cam pora.D, Sevi l l e 2010 33

..............................................................................

Kra m n i k.V-Kaspa rov.G, PCA/ l nte l G ra n d Prix ( ra pid ) , New York 199 5 146
..............

222
 Index of Games

Ma lakhov.V-Ca rlsen.M, World C u p (ra pid), Kha nty-Ma n s iysk 2005 .................. 135
Mitkov.N-Timoscenko.G, Lj u b lj a n a 2003 ................................................................... 187
Mrva.M-Klemanic.E, S l ova k i a n League 1 9 9 7 ............................................................ 214
Neved nichy.V-Beliavsky.A, E u ropea n C h a m pions h i p, Plovd iv 2008 .................. 192
Neved nichy.V-Mitkov.M, E u ropea n C h a m pions h i p, O h rid 2001 . . ...................... 131
N u n .J-Spesny.J, Czech League 1 9 9 8 ............................................................................... 64
Oratovsky.M-Gozzoli.Y, Ta rragona 2007 ...................................................................... 57
Pa pp.G-lppolito.D, Lu b bock 2009 ................................................................................ 197
Predojevic.B-Jones.G, E u ropea n C h a m pion s h i p, Plovd iv, 2008 .............................. 91
Radjabov.T-Ana nd.V, B a k u (ra pid) 2009 .................................................................... 106
Roy Chowd h u ry.S-Skjold borg.J, Prague 2008 .............................................................. 40
Sebag.M-Stefa nova.A, Ret hy m n o n 2003 ................................................................... 204
Shaposhnikov. E-Lastin.A, Russia n C h a m pions h i p, Moscow 1999 ...................... 209
Svetushkin.D-Haslinger.S, Pa l m a de M a l lorca 2008 .................................................. 89
Ta nti.J-Sutton.J, Correspondence 2003 ...................................................................... 163
Tivia kov.S-B u h m a n n.R, Neustadt a n der Wei n strasse 2009 ................................... 22
Tivia kov.S-De Vreugt.D, Dieren 2003 ......................................................................... 109
Tivia kov.S-EI Ta her.R, Am m a n 2006 .............................................................................. 44
Tivia kov.S-lva nisevic.l, G reek Tea m C h a m pionsh i p, Ka l l ithea 2009 .................. 141
Tivia kov.S-Pavasovic.D, E u ropea n C h a m pions h i p, Plovd iv 2008 ........................ 113
Tivia kov.S-Sa rgissian.G, F I D E World C h a m pion s h i p, Tri pol i 2004 ......................... 13
Tivia kov.S-Werle.J, Dutch C h a m pion s h i p, Leeuwa rden 2005 .............................. 125
Va llejo Pons. F-Zatonskih.A, G i b ra lta r 2010 .............................................................. 184
Warakomski.T-Bartel.M, Pol i s h League, Ka rpacz 2008 .......................................... 103
Yemeli n.V-Kli mov.S, St Pete rs b u rg 2009 ...................................................................... 28

2 23