Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
To my parents.
The Slav
Caro-Kann Advance
Byron Jacobs
1 90 1 25 9 06 4
Closed Sicilian
Daniel King
Dutch Leningrad
Neil McDonald
1 90 1 25 9 0 3
1 90 1 25 9 1 0 2
French Advance
Tony Kosten
1 90 1 25 9 02 1
Scandinavian
John Emms
1 90 1 25 9 OS 0
Semi-Slav
Matthew Sadler
1 90 1 25 9 0 1 3
1 90 1 25 9 09 9
Sicilian T aimanov
James Plaskett
Trompowsky
Joe Gallagher
For further details for Chess Press titles, please write to The Chess Press
c/o Everyman Chess, Gloucester Mansions, 1 40a Shaftesbury Avenue,
London WC2H SHD.
The Slav
Matthew Sadler
ir
[1Illj
First published 1 997 by The Chess Press, an imprint of First Rank Publishing,
23 Ditchling Rise, Brighton, East Sussex, BN1 4QL, in association with
Everyman Books plc
Reprinted with corrections 1 999
Copyright 1 997 Matthew Sadler
Distributed by Everyman Chess, Gloucester Mansions,
1 40a Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H SHD.
CONTENTS
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6
Bibliography
Introduction
13
27
39
53
62
72
87
98
1 08
10
1 18
11
130
2
3
4
142
BIBllOGRAPsH Y
Books
Periodicals
In/ormator
ChessBase Magazine
New In Chess Yearbook
British Chess Magazine
Chess Monthly
INfRODUCrlON
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6
Th e S l a v
In t r o du c tio n
d4
Th e Sla v
12
CHAPTER ONE
The Old Main Line:
Black plays to prevent e3-e4
8 0-0
Gamel
Richardson-Sadler
Th e Sla v
Th e O ld M a in L in e : B l a c k pla ys to pre v e n t e 3- e 4
l:!:b8 2 3 iL d 2
iLa 5 !
1 6 . . bxc6 !
b 1 l:!:b8 3 2 h3
gxe4
Th e Sla v
Game 2
Karpov-Kramnik
5 1 b7
c4 f5+ 6 2
'it>d6 g 6 + 0 - 1
but . .
1 3 . . . e5 1 4 d 51Iad8
W e 2 tLJ e 5 36 iL e 2 xg4+ 3 7 W d 2
!!ed8+ 38 We 1 xd 1 + 3 9 iLxd 1 g 1
Riga 1995
1 d4 d 5 2 e4 e6 3 tLJf3 tLJf6 4 tLJe3
dxe4 5 a4 iLf5 6 e3 e6 7 iLxe4 iL b4
8 0-0 0-0 9 tLJh4!
9 . . . tLJbd7 ! ?
17
Th e Sla v
Game 4
Ivanchuk-Bareev
Dortmund 1 995
1 tLlf3 d 5 2 d4 tLlf6 3 c4 c6 4 tLlc3
dxc4 5 a4 jLf5 6 e3 e6 7 jLxc4 jL b4
S 0-0 tLlbd7
1 0 tLlxf5 exf5 1 1 c2 g 6 1 2 f3 b6
1 2 . J:lc8 ! ?
.
10...0-0
Th e Sla v
1 7 d6!
Belgrade 1995
10 . . . .liLh 5 1 1 g4 tLJd 5 !
26.liLc2? !
Th e Sla v
Game 6
Ivanchuk-Lautier
Linares 1994
1 d4 d 5 2 e4 e6 3 ctJf3 ctJf6 4 ctJe3
dxe4 5 a4 iif5 6 e3 e6 7 iixe4 iib4
8 0-0 ctJ b d 7 9 'iWe2 iig 6 1 0 e4 ! ?
From el, the rook protects the c3pawn and supports the c3-c4-c5 push.
1 3 . . 0-0-0
.
1 4 . . . ctJd6 ! ?
Th e O ld M a in L in e : B l a c k pla ys to pre v e n t e 3- e 4
1 7 . . . b6 1 8 c4 !
Threatening c4-cs.
1 8 . . . c 5 1 9 a 4 e 5 20 dxc5 b x c 5 2 1
e3 ge6 22 tLlg 5 .l::rf 6 23 b 2 h 6 24
tLle4 tLlxe4 25 xe4 ge6
1 6 h3
16 . . J!he8
26
ge 1
g6
27
a8+
b8
28
Game l
Ehlvest-Schwartzma n
New York
Open 1996
17 a6!
Th e S l a v
Munich 1994
1 d4 d 5 2 e4 e6 3 ttJe3 ttJf6 4 ttJf3
dxe4 5 a4 f5 6 e3 e6 7 xe4 b4
8 0-0 ttJbd7 9 'i1\Ve2 g6 1 0 e4 xe3
1 5 . . . .i:!.de8 1 6 h4 a8 1 7 'Wb2 f5
11
J::!. f e 1 ! ?
J:l:hf8 2 1 f 1 e 5 22 d x e 5 J:l:xe 5 2 3
a6
13
1 3 . . . ttJxe3
Th e O ld M a in L in e : B l a c k pla ys to pre v e n t e 3- e 4
f 4 Il:.d 5 3 3 .l:i.e4 g 5 3 4 a4 e 5 3 5
21
'i'xa5 2 1 ctJxg4 b5 2 2 c2 ? !
40 xg 5 g 6 41 h4 f6 42 h2 ctJe7
43 a4 c6 44 .l:i.g 3 ctJf5 45 gf3
g7 46 l:te4 e6 47 h5 ctJe7 48
hxg6 ctJxg6 49 h3 ctJe7 50 g3
ctJg6 51 f5 e7 5 2 g4 l:ta7 5 3
g 5 ctJh8 5 4 g 4 ctJ f 7 + 5 5 <;t> h 5 +
f 8 56 g6 e 8 5 7 h 4 1 -0
25
Th e S l a v
S u m m a ry
The alert reader will have noticed my profound mistrust of the line 8 . . . 'bbd7
9 'i'e2 g6 10 e4 xc3 1 1 bxc3 'bxe4. I honestly cannot understand the at
traction of these lines for Black. Therefore, if Black wishes to try to prevent
e3-e4, then Kramnik's 8 . . . 0-0 9 'i'e2 g6 is the line for you; Yusupov's plan of
a quick 'bh4 is the most testing response.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ttJt3 CUt6 4 ttJc3 dxc4 5 a4 .ltf5 6 e3 e6 7 .ltxc4 .ltb4
8 0-0
8 . . . 0-0
8 . . . 'bbd7 (D)
9 'bh4 g6
10 e2 - game 4
1 0 h3 - game 5
9 'i'e2 g6 (9 . . . g4 - see next chapter) 10 e4 xc3 (10 . . . g6 see next chapter) 1 1 bxc3 'bxe4 12 a3 'i'c7
13 .sfe 1 - game 8
1 3 .sfc1 0-0-0 14 as (D)
14 . . . 'bd6 game 6
14 . . . c,t>b8 - game 7
-
9 e2
9 'bh4 game 3
-
9 . .lt g 6
. .
12 . . . 'i'e7 - game 1
12 . . . 'i'aS game 2
-
B... ttJ b d7
26
14 a5
12 'iJ.d1
CHAPTER TWO
The Old Main line:
Black allows e3-e4
8 0-0
Game 9
G ofshtein-Sadler
Ischia 1996
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 l2lf3 l2lf6 4 tLlc3
dxc4 5 a4 i.f5 6 e3 e6 7 i.xc4 i.b4
8 0-0 tLlbd7 9 e2 0-0 1 0 e4 i.g6
1 1 i.d3
Th e S l a v
. . .
it h 5
. . .
'Vj'e7 ! ?
Absolutely necessary.
13
. . .
this move?
Answer: The first place to look for
Th e O ld M a in L in e : B la c k a lia ws e 3 - e 4
1 7 . . . Jixd 3 1 8 xd 3 .l:!.e4 !
g e 8 2 5 b 3 ge7 26 .l:!. e 2
ne4? !
Th e S l a v
.t-urich 1994
1 2 . . . lLld 5 1 3 lLlxd5
1S
dealt
1 3 . . . cxd 5
Th e O ld M a in L in e : Bla c k a I/a ws e 3- e 4
Protecting g4.
Excellent judgement. In the result
ing position, White's bishop com-
55 . . . 'i'xb2
56
3i.e 5 'i'c2
57
'i'e7
'i'e4+ 58 g3 'i'd3+ 1 -0
31
Th e S l a v
Game 1 1
Xu Jun-Akopian
13 . . . cS is unpleasantly met by 14
ltgS! 'i'aS 15 ltbS! Once Black moves
the knight on d7, he will lose the cs
pawn, and he cannot protect it with a
rook due to the bishop on gS. If he
protects the knight with l S . . . 'i'c7,
then 16 Mac1 is unpleasant. The text
prevents ltgS and prepares . . . c6-cS .
1 4 CLlg3
dxc4 5 a4 f5 6 e 3 e 6 7 xc4 b4
8 0-0 CLlbd7 9 e2 g6 1 0 e4 0-0
1 1 d 3 h5 1 2 e 5 CLld 5 1 3 CLle4 ! ?
14 as?
Many white players d o not enjoy
the positions that we have seen in the
first two games of this chapter. With
the centre closed, and the prospect of
exchanges on the c-file, they feel un
easy about their winning prospects; so
recently the plan with 13 tbe4 has
come to prominence. Of course,
Black keeps his knight outpost on ds
and his pawn-break against the centre
with . . . c6-cS. However, White's space
advantage remains and he retains e4 to
transfer first his knight, then his
32
Th e O ld M a in L in e : B l a c k a //o ws e 3 - e 4
14 . . JLg 6
.
1 5 JLxg6 hxg6
1 7 tZJc3
33
Th e S l a v
1 5 l:Iac 1 !
1 5 . . . b6
lh - lh
Game 12
Sadler-M iles
1 1 d 3 h6
1 6 b 1 !
Th e O l d M a in L in e : B l a c k a ll o w s e 3 - e 4
17 . . :i'd8 ?
1 8 ClJc4!
N ow
Black is suffering.
Novgorod 1994
Game 13
Khalifman-Kir Georgiev
.
Elenite 1994
1 d4 d5 2 ttJf3 ttJf6 3 c4 dxc4 4
itJc3 c6 5 a4 Jl. f5 6 e3 e6 7 i.xc4
ib4 8 0-0 ttJ b d 7 9 e2 i.g4 ! ?
A rather unusual
bore White to tears
into a dull ending.
10 J::i. d 1 'i'a 5 !
11
1 2 h3
Th e S l a v
1 5 b3 xc3
1 6 bxc3
USA
1992
Th e O l d M a in L in e : Bla c k a ll o w s e 3 - e 4
1 2 ....txa5
1 3 "lixe6+ '>t>dS
1 4 e5
9 :tlVb6 1 0 e4
..
brilliant
discovery
of
David
10 . . . .tg6
opening
more
central
'llIVx g7
Si.d5
1S
e6!
.txe6
19
"lig5+!
37
Th e S l a v
S u m mary
8 . . . LtJbd7 (D)
9 "iVe2 g4
10 dl - game 13
10 h3 - game 14
9 "iVb3 - game 1 5
9 e2 CL'l b d 7 1 0 e 4 iL g 6 1 1 iL d 3 iLh 5 (D)
12 f4 - game 9
1 2 . . . CL'l d 5 (D)
13 LtJxds - game 1 0
1 3 LtJe4 - game 1 1
38
. . .
CL'lbd 7
11
. . .
iLh 5
12
. . .
CL'ld5
balance?
A nswer: Black has four pawns for a
Game 16
Lal i c-Sadler
draw
by repetition after 10 . . . 'i'xd4 1 1
'fxf7+ d8 1 2 g5+! ttJxg5 1 3 'i'xg7
.ixc3+ 14 bxc3 'i'xc3+ 15 e2 'i'c2+
16 el 'i'c3+, etc.
10
. . .
iLxd 2 + 1 3 xd 2 d 5 +
Hastings
1995/96
11
iZJxe4
xe4+
12
e2
Th e Sla v
1 4 . . . 0-0 ! 1 5 e3
Th e N e w M a in L in e : Bla c k fig h ts fo r c o n t r o l o f e 4
Th e Sla v
1 7 1le2
Game 1 7
Sadler-Ferguson
11
lZlxe4
xe4+
12
e2
A novelty. Kramnik-Kir.Georgiev,
Moscow Olympiad 1994, had contin
ued 18 . . .f6 19 Mhd1 'i'g2 20 Mxd8
Mxd8 2 1 'i'xe6 with a clear advantage
for White.
Th e N e w M a in L in e : Bla c k fig h ts fo r c o n t r o l o f e 4
Game 18
!:!'xd 5 !
K ra m n i k -Lautier
Linares 1994
1 tLJf3 d 5 2 d4 tLJf6 3 c4 c6 4 tLJc3
dxc4 5 a4 f5 6 tLJe5 e6 7 f3 b4
8 e4 xe4 9 fxe4 tLJxe4 1 0 .i1Ld2
xd4
11
tLJxe4
xe4+
12
e2
It>c2 c7 3 5 n d 7 + b6 36 xb5
1 -0
1 6 e5 f6 1 7 xd 5
31
. . .
b8
43
Th e Sla v
lS
dis
1 7 . . . exd 5
26 . . . g 6 27 h e 1 e5 28 a5 tZ:la2 ! 29
xe5 bxe5 30 a 1
tZ:lb4 3 1
tZ:le2
Just in time!
39 g4 tZ:lxh6 40 gxf5 gxf5 4 1 We3
e5
Preventing lLlbs+.
24 h4 !;lhf8 2 5 h 5 f5 26 h6
44
Th e N e w M a in L in e : B la c k fig h ts fo r c o n tro l o f e 4
Game 19
Karpov-Hjartarson
Tilburg
1988
11
t2Jxe4
xe4+
12
e2
1 5 tLlxc4 0-0-0 1 6 e 5 f6 1 7 e3 ! ?
23 . . . xb3+
24
x b3
t2Jxb3
25
1 7 . c5 ! ?
.
.l:!.cf 1
l:!.f7+
'kt>d6 42 'kt>e3 a6 1 -0
Th e Sla v
21 b3 ctJd5 22 f3 f4 23 1;;!; f 1
Game 20
d4 24 f2 xf2 25 llxf2 c8 !
S h i rov- Ba reev
Biel 1991
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 ctJf6 3 ctJc3 c6 4 ctJf3
dxc4 5 a4 lLf5 6 ctJe5 e 6 7 f3 lL b4
8 e4 lLxe4 9 fxe4 ctJxe4 1 0 lLd2
xd4
11
ctJxe4
xe4+
12
e2
llxh7 lld 5 !
32 ctJg6 ctJxg6 3 3
lL x g 6 lld 7 !
Th e N e w M a in L in e : B la c k fig h ts fo r c o n t r o l o f e 4
Came 21
K ra m n i k -Ivanchuk
Linares 1994
1 CLlf3 d 5 2 d4 l2lf6 3 c4 c6 4 l2lc3
dxc4 5 a4 iLf5 6 l2le5 e6 7 f3 iLb4
11
l2lxe4
xe4+
12
e2
1 5 4:Jxc4 0-0-0 1 6 e5 f6 1 7 e3
29 l2le3 c5 30 l2lc4 b6 3 1 b 1
Wb8! 1 8 iLe2 e 5 !
Y:, - Y:,
Came 22
K ramni k-Shirov
1 9 93 e6 20 b3 .nd 5 21 b2 Rhd8
22 :gad 1 l2l b4 23 c3 e7 24 l2le3
Dortmund 1996
11
tLlxe4
xe4+
12
e2
Th e S l a v
1 7 e2 xg2 1 8 ghg 1
xh2 1 9 I:Ixg7 !
ilxcl3 .
1 9 . . . I:Id4? ! ?
I:Ih2+ 34 b3
gg5 44 gb7
gh5
45
ge6
':cI3+
23
Th e N e w M a in L in e : Bla c k fig h t s fo r c o n t r o l o f e 4
20 'iVg 3
e4
21
ctJe3 ctJ d 5+
22
1 8 Wb1
% -%
tLlxd 5 cxd 5
Game 23
Adianto - K ramnik
8 Si.g5
'i'xd4 % - %
49
Th e Sla v
New York Open 1994. 1 5 .. .'Jd7! intends . . . tLJxc5, highlighting the weakness on b3, and . . .f7-f5 activating the
light-squared bishop on h7. After 16
d3 xc5! 17 xc5 tLJxc5 18 c2 f5!
1 9 exf5 tLJd4! Black stood clearly bet
ter.
1 2 lLlxc6
bxc6
1 3 e4
itxc 5 !
\tf6 41
lh - lh
1 4 xc4 g6
1 5 a6 xa6
16
SLxa6 !:!. b 8 !
Game 24
I .Sokolov-Bareev
Leon 1 995
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 lLlc3 lLlf6 4 lLlf3
dxc4 5 a4 SLf5 6 tLle5 e6 7 g 3
Th e N e w M a in L in e : Bla c k fig h ts fo r c o n t ro l o f e 4
9 f3 -lig6 1 0 0-0
10 e4 c5 11 e3 cxd4 12 xd4
'iVxd4 13 xd4 ctJc6 14 ctJxc6 bxc6 1 5
0-0-0 0-0-0 i s the theoretical recom
mendation, but 16 f1 is more pleas
ant for White due to his superior
structure and Black's inactive bishop
on g6. 13 . . . ctJfd7!?, instead of
13 ... ctJc6, was my first idea in order to
reactivate the bishop on g6 with .. .f7f6 and . . . f7. However, 14 ctJxc4 f6
15 0-0-0 ctJc6 16 f2 (intending
... ttJc6) 16 . . . e7 17 ctJa2! wins the
bishop pair, giving White a small ad
vantage, as 17 . . . c5 loses to 1 8
lhd7+! xd7 1 9 xc5, winning two
pieces for a rook. In fact, 1 1 .. .c7! is
stronger: 12 ctJxc4 cxd4 (attacking the
knight on c4) 1 3 xd4 ctJc6 is fine for
Black and 1 2 0-0 cxd4 13 xd4 (13
39
l::!. d 8 l::!. x a5 40
A tough endgame.
51
Th e Sla v
S u m m a ry
The sidelines do not seem to cause Black any problems, but undoubtedly the
most crucial line at the moment is Kramnik's 14 Wc2 ctJa6 15 ctJxc4 0-0-0 16
'iVe3 . In general, such positions are easier to play for White than for Black.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c 6 3 lLlf3 lLlf6 4 lLlc3 dxc4 5 a4 f5 6 lLle5
6 . . . e6 7 f3 (0)
7 g3 game 24
-
7 . . . b4 8 e4
8 g5 - game 23
8 . . . xe4 9 fxe4 lLlxe4 1 0 d2 xd4 1 1 lLlxe4 xe4 1 2 e2 xd2+
1 3 'It>xd 2 d5+ 1 4 'It>c2
14 Wc3 game 1 6
-
16 'iVe3
16 . . . Wb8 game 1 7
1 6 . . . ctJc5 game 22
-
1 6 . . . f6 1 7 e3
17 'iVxd5 - game 18
1 7 . . . 'It>b8
17 . . . c5 game 1 9
-
1 8 e2 (0)
1 8 . . . 'iVxg2 - game 20
18 . . . e5 - game 21
7 f3
52
1 6 e5
18 e2
. .
Game 25
Piket-Gelfa n d
. . .
1 1 'ixd4 a 6 !
Th e Sla v
1 5 e 2 .liL b 4 1 6
%-%
White obviously has more crucial
possibilities. Who better to test the
black position than Garry Kasparov?
Game 26
Kasparov-Shi rov
. . .
.liL b4 ! ?
Th e Ne w M a in L in e : Bla c k c o u n t e ra t t a c k s
. . .
Game 27
Gelfand-Shirov
Dortmund 1996
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJc3 ctJf6 4 ctJf3
dxc4 5 a4 ..tf5 6 ctJe5 e6 7 f3 c5 8
e4 cxd4 9 exf5 ..tb4 1 0 ..txc4 d6
Th e Sla v
1 1 5l b 5+ tLlc6 1 2 5lf4 !
25 .i:!xg6+ hxg6 26 xg 6+ h8 27
.l::!. h 1 !
5lxc3+ 1 5 bxc3 g 5 1 6 f4 xg 2 1 7
Came 28
l I Iescas-Gelfand
56
11
fxe6 fxe6
12
Th e N e w M a in L in e : B la c k c o u n t e ra t t a c k s
Game 29
Van der Sterren-Petu rsson
1 992
. . .
fxe6 fxe6
1 2 lLxc4 dxc3
13
bxc3
gabS
19
Th e Sla v
1 7 . . : xa4 1 8 .l:!.d 1 + xd 1 + 1 9 xd 1
e 5 20 f7 ge8 2 1 xg 7 ctJd 7 22
iLf7 .l:!.f8 23 iLe6 ctJf6 24 b7 .l:!.e8
25 xa8+ e 7 26 iLf4+ 1 -0
Came 30
Topalov-G elfand
1 9 :l:!hd 1 :l:!ab8 20 g3
25
d3 ge 1 + 26 f2 f7 27 e5 :l:!a 1
28 e4+ e8 29 d3 f7 30 xa 7
.l:!.a2+ 3 1 f 1 :l:!a 1 + 32 g2 ga2+
33 h3
e4+ e8 3 7 b4 Be 1 3 8 xe 1
xe6+
:l:!xe 1 39 a5 Ba 1 40 a6 e7 4 1 gd2
15
xe6
exb2
16
iL b4+ 1 7 e2 e7 1 8 e4
58
iLxb2
1 -0
Th e N e w M a in L in e : Bla c k c o u n t e ra t t a c k s
Both 6 . . . e 6 7 f3 b4 and 6 . . . e 6 7 f3
are popular counterattacking sys
tems at all levels of play. However,
Black can also play more slowly, aim
ing to break out from a cramped posi
tIOn.
c5
Game 3 1
Kramni k-Short
Novgorod 1 994
tiJf3 d 5 2 d4 tlJf6 3 c4 dxc4 4
tZJc3 c6 5 a4 .iLf5 6 tlJe5 tlJbd7 7
tilxc4 tlJb6 8 tlJe5 a 5
9 g3!?
Th e Sla v
9 . . . a 5 1 0 e4
2 5 ttJe 1 b 6 26 d 6 e4 2 7 d 5 f6 28
J:!ad 1 e3 29 fxe3 xe3 3 0 ttJd3 c3
J:! d 5
1 3 0-0 ttJfd 7
1 4 ttJxg 6 !
<Ji h 7 % - %
1Lg 1 fd8 1 7 b3
hxg6
1 5 <Jih 1
e7
16
Game 32
Ruzele-Thorsteins
Cup) 1994
18
ttJ a 2 !
cxd4
19
ttJxb4
60
Th e Ne w M a in L in e : Bla c k c o u n t e ra t t a c k s
S u m m a ry
. . .
e6
9 xc4 game 25
-
. . .
ctJc6
12 'iVe2 game 30
-
12
. . .
dxc3
13 'iVe2 game 28
13 bxc3 game 29
-
8 ctJe5
9 exf5
l '
. .
. fxe 6
61
62
Game 33
Ivanchuk -Smyslov
Th e S m y s / o v Va ria tio n
. . .
8 i!.. e 3 tiJb4 9 a 5
. . .
i!.. e 7
Game 34
N ovikov-Greta rsson
Th e Sla v
this move?
A nswer: The main idea is that Black
1 2 b3 c7 1 3 Rfc 1 b7 1 4 g 5
d 5 25 ttJc3 d4 26 f3 e 5
R f d 8 1 5 .i1Lxf6 gxf6
27 g3 b 4 2 8 Rd 1 xd 1 + 2 9 ttJxd 1
d4 30 d 3 g7 3 1 b3 h6 32 a6
%-%
This game is a model illustration of
Black's middlegame strategy in this
vanatlOn.
c5 33 f 1 f6
Game 35
Benz-Gretarsson
Th e S m y s l o v Va ria tio n
iLlb4 1 0 e2 !
1 7 1Lf4
14 d 5 ! ?
1 7 . . . J:::!. e 8 1 8 f 1 a6
stage
65
Th e Sla v
To prevent LLlb5 .
1 9 .a.d2? !
24 .a.e 1
1 9 . . . '>&d 7
20 g 2?
'>&c6
21
ctJb5
h6 25 iL b 5 iLe4 26 .a.xe4
1 7 iLe3 h 6 !
Game 36
K ra m n i k-Ivanchu k
Th e S m y s l o v Va ria tio n
. . .
cxb5
25 iLxh6 c 5
26 d7
Game 37
Kramni k-Short
28
. . .
tLl d 5 ! ! 29 xc5
29
. . .
xe4 3 2 iLf6 b4 3 3 c8 e 1 + 34
f4 f2+ 35 g 5 d2+ 36 h4
h6+ 37 g3 e3+ Yz - Yz
Th e Sla v
1 4 . . . ctJxe5 1 5 dxe5 a5 1 6 f4 h 6
1 7 g2 J::r a d8 1 8 .1Le3 .1L h 7 1 9 J::r x d8
J::r x d8 20 t1.d 1 a 6 !
2 1 .1L b 3 h8 !
23 axb5 cxb5 24 f5
ctJc6!
Th e S m y s / o v Va ria tio n
Game 38
Bacrot-S myslov
Th e Sla v
a4 gd 5
29 gxd 5 exd 5
30 gd3
37
f2
CiJxc7
38
gb3
CiJe6
39
CiJc7 31 b4 CiJ d b 5 3 2 c 5 f5 3 3
b6 gd6 34 e4 !
70
Th e Sm y s / o v Va ria tio n
S u m m a ry
Theoretically, S . . . ctJa6 is doing well for Black and if a system has been played
by Smyslov, Ivanchuk and Short then it must have some merit! If you don't
mind playing slightly cramped positions, then it could be the system for you.
6 e3 is the most critical test.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJf3 ctJf6 4 ctJc3 dxc4 5 a4 ctJa6
6 e4 (D)
. . .
7 iLxf3 - game 33
7 . . . e6 game 34
. . .
6 e4
1 3 e4
7 ilLxc4
71
Game 39
Kram nik-Damljanovic
. .
72
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
10
SLd2 Wife7
11
SLxb4
8 ttJxc4 e 5 !
9 ttJe4
1 3 xd 2 exd4 1 4 iLled6+ e 7
21 .iLe2 e 7
22 J::i. x a 1 iLl d 7 23 b4 !
Th e Sla v
23 . . . f6 2 4 gd 1 iLl b 6
IS
2 5 iLl a 5 !
f7+ 28 c3
1 -0
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
Game 40
Schandorff-Hellsten
Copenhagen 1996
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJf3 ctJf6 4 ctJc3
dxc4 5 a4 g4 6 ctJe5 h 5 7 f3
IiJfd 7 8 ctJxc4 e 5 9 ctJe4 b4+ 1 0
d2 e7 1 1 x b4 x b4+ 1 2 d 2
xd2+ 1 3 '.t>xd2 exd4
1 4 ctJed6+
d8 ! ?
1 9 '.t>c3 he8 ! 20 ctJac4 .!;l;ab8 2 1
d 3 ? ctJxd3 2 2 '.t>xd3 ctJc5+ 2 3 '.t>e2
f5! 24 '.t>f 1 f4 2 5 ctJd 1 ctJb3 0 - 1
Game 41
Epishin-Pomes
Manresa 1995
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJf3 ctJf6 4 ctJc3
dxc4 5 a4 g4 6 ctJe5 h 5 7 f3
ctJfd 7 8 ctJxc4 e 5 9 g 3
1 5 ctJxb7+
1 5 . . '.t> c 7
9 . . . b4
16
ctJba5
ctJa6
17
e4
Th e Sla v
b3 ilLf8 22 b2
Game 42
Parker-Hellsten
Copenhagen 1996
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 LiJf3 LiJf6 4 LiJc3
1 6 . . . d 7 ? !
76
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
1 7 . . . Ile8
0-0 c5+
19
<;t>g2 xc3
20
axb6 1 7 h4
b5 26 c4 bxc4 27
gxb7 I!xa 5 28 Il b4 R d 5 29 R c 1
3 2 e4 ga2+ 3 3 <;t>h3 f5 34 gxc6
fxe4 3 5 fxe4 Ilxe4 36 1::!. x g6 <;t>h7 37
gg 5 P.e7 38 Id.h 5+ '/z - '/z
Game 43
Dautov-Ni kolic
Preventing . . . g7-g5 .
Th e Sla v
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
a5 25 h4 b6 26 c2? !
1 7 ctJxh8
JLxe4 ! 1 8 g 5
Game 45
Nesterov-Imanaliev
1 9 0-0-0 e7
20 xe7
ri;xe7 21 f 1 g 6
Th e Sla v
Game 46
1 1 xd4 3L c 5 1 2 lZJd6+! f8
I . Sokolov- Hellsten
Malmo 1 995
1 3 xg 7+ ! !
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 lZJc3 lZJf6 4 lZJf3
dxc4 5 a4 3Lg4 6 lZJe5 3L h 5 7 f3
lZJfd 7 8 lZJxc4 e5 9 3Le3 3Lg6
1 0 h4!
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
Game 47
K rasen kov-Sapis
Polish
Championship 1995
17
Uc 1
lLld5
18
XLg2
81
Th e Sla v
bxc4 2 1
Game 48
Gelfand - N i kolic
this?
A nswer: If Black were to play nor-
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
1 8 e4 d8 1 9 f4 e7 20 e3 0-0
21 e2 c 5 22 dxc5 xc 5 23 d 2
1 2 a5
2 3 . . . CLl d 5 2 4 h 1 d 7 25 l::i. a c 1 a4
26 f3 c3 27 bxc3 xa 5 28 f5 c4
29 fxe6 ! liJe7 30 xh7+ xh 7 3 1
e4+ liJg6 3 2 xc4 fxe6 3 3 g4
l::i. x f 1 + 34 .ti.xf 1 iVb5 35 c4 c6+ 36
g 1 g8 37 f3 d 7 3 8 l::i. f 2 a 5 3 9
xd 7 1 6 tLlb6 d8 1 7 tLlxa8
see
1 7 . . . xa 8 ?
Th e Sla v
Came 49
Klarenbeek-Rogers
9 . . . tZlb4 1 0 ]Lxe4 e6
14
e2
tZlxb4? !
xd 7
]Lxb4
15
tZla2
e4
17
]Ld2
0-0
16
18
]Lxb4? !
Came 50
Leitao-Beliavsky
Th e B r o n s t e in Va ria tio n
dxe4 5 a4 g4 6 tLle5 h 5 7 g 3
Attacking c3 .
1 0 'i'b3 0-0 1 1 d2
1 3 tLlxb6
2 7 g2 h8 28 tLle3 .l:!. f d 8 29 gd 1
f6 30 ged 2 f7 3 1 .!:!.d3 h 5 32 'i'b5
1 3 . . . 'i'x b6 1 4 e3 e 5 ! 1 5 d5 tLl d 7
itJd4
d6 '!:!' x b 2 39 d 7 .l:!.d8 40 h 1 h 5 4 1
85
Th e Sla v
S u m m a ry
I cannot really recommend the 5 . . . itg4 line for Black, not because it is a par
ticularly bad line, but simply because unless you have loads of time for de
tailed analysis, you won't be able to feel comfortable playing it. There are
many theoretical problems to solve: 7 f3 ttJfd7 8 ttJxc4 e5 9 ttJe4 gives White a
safe endgame edge, while 9 g3 is also dangerous. Even the crazy 9 e4 and 9
ite3 pose difficult problems! By contrast 7 h3 gives Black too many counter
chances, while 7 g3 is a little tame.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJf3 ctJf6 4 ctJc3 dxc4 5 a4 g4 6 ctJe5 h 5 7 f3
7 h3 ttJa6 8 g4 g6 (D)
9 itg2 - game 48
9 e3 game 49
7 g3 - game 50
-
9 g3
9 . . . b4 10 dxe5 0-0 1 1 ith3 Wlic7
12 f4 game 41
12 itf4 - game 42
9 .. .f6 game 43
9 e4 Wlih4 +
10 g3 - game 44
10 e2 game 45
9 ite3
9 . . . itg6 game 46
9 job4 - game 47
-
..
14 . . . e7 - game 39
14 . . . d8 game 40
-
8
86
. . .
g6
. . .
e5
14 ctJed6+
a6 Slav :
White plays 5 e3
Game 5 1
O i l -Anand
5 . . . b5
Th e Sla v
. . .
e6
6 b3
. . .
:iL.g4 7 h 3
. . .
:iL.xf3 !
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : Wh i t e p la y s 5 e 3
17
a4 ad8
18
e1
tDd4!
19
xb4?
Or 20 h l :d3 !
20 . . :xa 1 2 1 tDc3 c 1 22 a5 f4
23 xa6 l:l:a8 24 d6 xc4 0 - 1
Game 52
Van der Sterren-Shi rov
1 5 c2
Freeing the
knight.
d4-square
for the
Th e Sla v
5 liJf3 b 5 6 b3 g4 7 e2
8 . . . liJ b d 7 !
Threatening . . . c7-eS .
9 f4 bxc4 1 0 bxc4 dxc4!
1 5 '!:!c 1
ac8
1 6 Re2
Wlid3 liJ d 5
1 8 fc l .!:!a5
1 9 J:!ab 1
d 6 Y:z - Y:z
see
Game 53
Wells-Flear
Oakham+1994
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 liJc3 liJf6 4 e3 a6
90
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : Wh i t e p la y s 5 e 3
Wf8 3 1 g d 2 e7 32 h6+ g8 3 3
White back.
l:!: c 3
1 7 . . . b7 1 8 e2 ga 7 ! !
h8
34
gg3
gg8
35
gd7
xe5+ 3 6 h 2 1 -0
Game 54
K rasenkov-Epishin
Bmo 1 994
dxe4
a6 5 e3 b 5 6 b3 JiLg4 7 JiLe2 e6 8 h3
Jih5 9 0-0 LZl bd 7 ! 1 0 LZle5 JiLxe2 1 1
CLJxe2 LZlxe5 1 2 dxe5 LZld7
b4 29
Th e Sla v
e2 e5 33 h3 e4 V2 - V2
Game 55
Karpov-Short
Dortmund 1 995
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 tZJc3 tZJf6 4 e3 a6
5 tZJf3 b5 6 cxd 5 cxd 5 7 tZJe5
Game 56
Sadler-Hodgson
Hastings 1 995/96
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 tZJc3
b8 22 x b8 gxb8 23 ga5
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : Wh i t e p la y s 5 e 3
. . .
e6 6 iDf3 e 5 !
Th e Sla v
20 iLc3+ c6
21
ga2
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : Wh i t e p la y s 5 e 3
7 . . . d 7 S ttJf3 e 6 9 ttJe5 cS 1 0 f3
Since 47 . . . h6 48 f4 d4 49 b2
e4 50 b3 xf4 51 xb4 g4 52
cj;c3 xh5 53 d2 g4 54 e1 f3
55 f1 draws Gust) for White.
Gam? 57
Atali k-Miles
Hastings 1995/96
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ttJc3 ttJf6 4 e3 a6
5 a4
Th e Sla v
%-%
After 5 a4 Black can simply play
5 . . . e6, aiming to put a bishop on the
hole on b4, but this leads more to a
Semi-Slav type of position, so for Slav
devotees, I offer a few other ideas:
a) 5 . . . g6 is interesting, leading to a
sort of Schlecter Slav (see Chapter 1 1) .
ClJe7+ h8 52 ClJg6+
96
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : Wh i t e p la y s 5 e 3
S u m m ary
In general Black is doing fine in these lines, but since the 4 . . . a6 Slav is such a
recent development, there is still scope for improvements for both colours. 4
Qjf3 a6 5 e3 bS 6 b3 oltg4 7 h3 xf3 8 'i'xf3 e6 9 d3 b4 10 d2, as in
Sadler-Levitt, is worth further tests, and the game Sadler-Hodgson is certainly
crazy enough to be worth analysing!
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 tUf3 tUf6 4 tUc3
4 e3 a6 (D)
5 'i'c2 game 56
5 a4 game 57
-
4 . . . a6 5 e3 b 5 6 b3
6 cxdS game 55
-
6 . . . iLg4 (D) 7 h3
7 e2 e6
8 0-0 - game 53
8 h3 game 54
-
7 . . . iLxf3 (D)
'i'xf3 game 5 1
8 gxf3 game 52
. . .
a6
. . .
iLg4
. . .
iLxf3
97
The 4
a6 Slav:
Vienna 1 996
1 lLlf3 d 5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 lLlf6 4 lLlc3
a6 5 c 5 .iLf5 6 b3 .l:!.a7 !
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : A g g r e s s i v e o p t io n s fo r Wh i t e
7 .ltf4 lLl b d 7 8 h 3 h6 9 e3 g 5 !
Th e Sla v
3 1 . . . 1:!.xc5
Game 59
I . S okolov-Shirov
7 3Lf4 ctJ b d 7 S h 3 ! ?
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : A g g r e s s i v e o p tio n s fo r Wh i t e
b 5 e2+ 60 c3 f4 61 gd8 f3
6 2 .l:!.d2+ e 1 0 - 1
a 5 31 d 1 b6 3 2 cxb6 gxb6 33
jLc2 .!:!.d8 34 d7 .!:!.b5 3 5 .!:!.gd 1 '!:!'xh 5
Pushkov-Epishin
36 c4 g7 37 b2 f8 3 8 .ita4
Game 60
a6 5 a4 e6
.ite6 5 1
\ii d 3
ne8 g c 5 5 7 a4 f3 58 a6 f2 59
6 g5
51 . . . f6
52 .!:!.xh6+ g 5
53 gh8
101
Th e Sla v
52 h 5 gxh 5 53
a 1
0-0 0-0 9 b3 a5 1 0 gd 1 b6
c6 2 2 iLf3 b6 2 3 iLxb7
xb 7 24 c 1 d6 2 5 h 3 gad8 26
gcc4 e 5 !
b 3 xb3 3 3 g x b 3 gd 1 + 34 h 2
g f 6 3 5 f3 g d 2 3 6 h4 g 6 3 7 ga4
exd 5 1 4 iLf4 e7
27 gab4 e4 28 d5 xd 5 29 a3
1 02
1 5 e4 d4!
16
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : A g g r e s s i v e o p tio n s fo r Wh i t e
swift attack.
Game 62
Ward-Levitt
6 a4
0-1
6 . . . h 6 7 J. h 4 lZJd5 8 e 4 lZJ x e 3 9
bxc3 b 5
Th e Sla v
1 9 f4 e8
tiJxd 7 tiJxd7
1 2 3l.e3 3l.e 7
13
20
21 h 3 e7 22 Bd 1 tiJxc3 23 3l.xc3
d6
Game 63
c5!
29 d4 e 5+ 30 c3 c5 31 3l.c4 f6
Beliavsky-Shirov
1 04
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : A g g r e s s i v e o p tio n s fo r Wh i t e
32 h4 c6 3 3 g8 h 6 3 4 c 4 d 7
3 5 h 5 f5 3 6 e x f 5 x f 5 3 7 d3 e6
38 e4 f7 3 9 g4 c4 40 b7
b 5 41 a8 c4 42 e4 d5 43
xd 5 xd 5 44 b3 e4 45 f4 e3 46
d3 e 2 4 7 xe2 e4 48 g5 xf4
49 gxh6 gxh6 50 d 3 g4 5 1 c4
xh 5 5 2 b5 g4 5 3 xa 5 h5 54
b4 h4 55 b5 h3 56 b6 h2 57 b7
h 1 58 b8 a 1 + 59 b6 b 1 +
60 rtJc7 x b8+ 6 1 xb8 V2 - V2
6 1Lg 5 ? !
Game 64
Lautier-Ba reev
Linares 1994
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 LiJf3 LiJf6 4 LiJc3
a6 5 b3 e6
fxe6
Th e Sla v
g4xfS-f6-f7-f8-g8 ! !
40 . . . 1Lb4 4 1
g4 h 6 33 f4 ge3 34 1L d 5 f5+ 3 5
40 g8 ! !
h 5 12 - 12
1 06
A brilliant game!
Th e 4
a 6 Sla v : A g g r e s s i v e o p t io n s fo r Wh i t e
S u m m a ry
If you had asked me a few months ago, I would have told you that Black had
a few problems in the 4 . . . a6 Slav, but now I am not so sure! 5 cS should be
avoided for the time being, while 5 a4, 5 ctJeS and 5 'iYb3 don't really seem to
promise a great deal, though 5 a4 and 5 'iYb3 can be good weapons if you
know that your opponent does not like to play systems with . . . e7-e6. 5 gS is
aggressive and deserves further tests.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 CLJf3 CLJf6 4 CLJc3 a6
5 c 5 (D)
5 a4 e6 (D)
6 gS - game 60
6 g3 game 61
-
5 gS game 62
5 ctJeS game 63
5 'iYb3 game 64
-
. . .
jLf5 6 b3 (D)
6 . . . .l:"!.a7 game 58
6 . . . 'iYc8 game 59
-
5 c5
. . .
e6
6 b 3
107
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd 5 cxd 5
A nswer:
Game 65
M i l ov-Sadler
Th e Ex c h a n g e Va ria tio n
7 ]L b 5 e6 8 tZJf3
8 . . . tZJd7
Th e Sla v
!!xd4
this position?
A nswer: 6 . . . a6 is a constructive
waiting move: Black keeps the white
pieces from occupying the b5 square,
which means he no longer has to
worry about .tb5, pinning his knight
on c6.
Question 5: What if White just
plays 7 e3?
A nswer: Then Black plays 7 . . . g4 8
h3 .txf3 9 iVxf3 e6. This is another
example of Black giving up his light
squared bishop for White's king's
knight in the Slav. In this case, since
White has played cxd5 so early, Black
has been able to play his knight to c6,
its most natural and best square. The
manoeuvre . . . .tg4xf3 also removes
the attacking idea ttJe5 .
Question 6: So what does White do?
A nswer: The only way that White
can go for advantage is to avoid play
ing e2-e3 too early and thus sidestep
. . . .txf3 .
21 . . . c7
22
d 1
4:Jc5
23
3 5 4:Je5 :!:!.xa4 36
4:Jxc6 bxc6 3 7 b3 c7 38 f3 c 5 39
f2 c6 40 94 c4 41 b8 a 5 42
e3 c7 43 b5 c6 44 :!:!.b8 Wc7
45 .l:!a8 I!.a2 46 95 b7 47 96! c3
48 9 7 c 2
Game 66
H odgson-Sadler
Ischia 1 996
1 c4 c6 2 4:Jf3 d5 3 cxd 5 cxd 5 4 d4
4:Jf6 5 4:Jc3 4:Jc6 6 iL.f4 a6
7 4:Je 5 ! ? e6
Th e Ex c h a n g e Va ria tio n
. . . c6-cS .
8 e3 CLlxe5 9 iLxe5 iLd7 !
7 . . . iLf5
Game 68
Y:z - Y:z
Yusupov-Sh i rov
Zurich 19941%
Game 67
Andersson-Epishin
Th e Sla v
7 f3 Si. d 7 8 Si. d 3 e6
1 12
9 Si.g3
. . .
Th e Ex c h a n g e Va ria tio n
20 . . . b6 21 lLld2 0-0 2 2 g5 h5 23
8 .itd3 e 6 9 g4
e3 a 5 24 a 3 2Lb7 2 5 .l:!.b1 a6 26
ge7 2Le6 27 .l:!.e1
lhe7 28 .itxe7
Th e Sla v
Game 70
Portisch-Kra m n i k
Th e Ex c h a n g e Va ria tio n
1 5 ds bs 16 b3 leads to a slight
advantage for White according to
Kramnik.
1 5 . . . ttJa5 1 6 Ji.d3 Ji.xd3 1 7 xd3
d 7 1 8 .l::!. c 3 b 5 1 9 Rfc 1 ttJc4
Cien/uegos 1 996
1 d4 c5 2 c3 cxd4 3 cxd4 d 5 4 ttJf3
ttJc6 5 ttJc3 ttJf6 6 Ji.f4 ttJe4
Or 28 'iVxb4 ctJxa2!
28 . . . a5 29 b3 xb3 30 axb3 g 5
3 1 Ji. g 3 a4
see
32 ttJd2 a3 33 l;l c 1 e5 34 d 5 a2 3 5
'f1.a 1 e 4 3 6 d 6 'f1. a 8 3 7 ttJc4 ttJb5 3 8
.Jt e 5 ttJxd6 39 l:!xa2 .l::!. x a2 4 0 Ji.xd6
gxf2 41
0-1
Th e Sla v
e8 22 VJlib3 b8 23 VJlia2 h8 24
.!:!:fd 1 VJlia8 25 h4 h 5 26 '!:!: d e 1 exd4
27 exd4 .!:!:e4 28 e2 h 7 29 J::t d 1
a7 3 0 iLe7 .!:!:a6 3 1 a 5 .!:!:xd4
1 1 . . . SL d 7 1 2 iLa6 ! e5 1 3 a3 exd4
1 4 exd4 0-0 1 5 0-0 iLe8
3 2 SLb6
a8 3 5 xd 5 VJlixd 5 36 xd 5 f5 37
1 9 SL g 3 a 8 20 VJlie5 a5 2 1 VJlie3
d8 .!:!:a6 38 d7 g8 39 a7 1 -0
1 16
Th e Ex c h a n g e Va ria tio n
S u m m ary
All three major continuations of the Exchange variation seem to be doing fine
for Black. Personally I would recommend either 6 . . . a6 or 6 . . . .iiJ5 , as 6 . . .liJe4
leads to positions that are more typical of the Griinfeld than the Slav.
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 cxd 5 cxd 5
4 11. f4 CLlc6 5 e3
6 . . . f5 game 65
-
7 f3 lL d 7 8 lL d 3 e6 (D)
9 g3 game 68
9 g4 game 69
-
6. . . a 6
. . .
g6
. . .
e6
1 17
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6
Game 72
K rasen kov-I . S o kolov
Malmo
1 995
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 e3 jLf5 !
Ivan
Sokolov
suggests
that
13 . . . MadS, aiming for . . . e6-e5, was
most accurate.
M o v e - O r d e rs a n d Tr a n sp o s i tio n s
g4 iL e 4
22 .l:!. x c 7 ?
xc7
23
h 1 + 0-1
Game 73
N ogueiras-I . Sokolov
2 5 iL d 3 ?
Th e Sla v
4 e4
Game 74
LautieH .So kolov
Groningen 1995
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 ctJc3 dxc4!
7 . . . e 5 8 iLxc4?
1 20
M o v e - O r d e rs a n d Tra n sp o s i t io n s
Reykjavik 1 996
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 liJc3 dxc4 4 e4
b5 5 a4 b4 6 liJa2 liJf6 7 f3 e5 8
dxe 5 ! xd 1 + 9 xd 1 liJfd 7 1 0 e6 ! ?
8 . . .'Vxd4 9 c2
c5!
1 1 . . . ita6
20 d 5 cxb4 2 1 xe 5 f6 0 - 1
1 4 . . 0-0-0?
.
Th e Sla v
4 1 e5 c6 42 f2 e4 43 ne2 ng4
44 e6 1 -0
Game 76
Miles-Hodgson
Hastings 1 995/96
1 ctJf3 d 5 2 d4 c6 3 c4 dxc4
4 e3 b 5 5 a4!
31
ctJxe5 3 3 ctJxe5 ne 1 + 34 f2 gh 1
3 5 g2 nc 1 36 f4 ctJe6 37 f5 ctJg5
38 f6 c7 3 9 f7 ctJ h 7 40 ctJg6 .!;i.e 1
1 22
see
The
and 3
vance
tempo
White
them.
M o v e - O r d e rs a n d Tra n sp o s i tio n s
5 . . . e6 6 axb5 cx b 5 7 b3 iL b4+ 8
iLd2 iLxd 2+ 9 CLlbxd 2 a5 1 0 bxc4 b4
1 1 CLle 5 !
R b 8 2 5 g 2 !
Th e Sla v
b3 0-0 1 2 e4?
27 nxa 5 ! xa 5 28 tLlxa5 xa 5 29
xc3 bxc3 3 0 xb8+ \t>h7 3 1 b7
f5 3 2 xe 7 c 2 3 3 xe6 c 1 34
xf5+ g 6 35 f7+ \t>h8 3 6 f8+
\t>h7 37 .li d 5 !
Game 77
Kozu l - l il escas
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 tLlf3 tLlf6 4 e3
:ad8 1 8 ne1
.lif 5 !
d3 23 .l:!.cd 1 .l:i:df3 24 e2 h 5 ! 25
h3 g 5 !
5 .lid 3
M o v e - O rd e rs a n d Tra n sp o s i tio n s
3 5 xg 1 tZ:lg4 36 tZ:lc8
f8 0 - 1
Game 78
Akopian-Shirov
1 0 . . . tZ:le4 1 1 e2
1 5 .itb2 tZ:l b6 ! ?
1 25
Th e Sla v
1 8 jfLa 1
.l::i. f d8 1 9 ltJd2
jfLc6 20 ltJ b 3 b 6 21 d5
5 f4 g7
21 . . . jfLxa 1
2 2 dxc6 jfLf6
23 jfLg2
%-%
I am a little surprised that White
accepted the draw here. Although his
opponent has good counterplay,
126
M o v e - O r d e rs a n d Tra n sp o s i tio n s
Game 80
Alburt-S habalov
USA
Championship 1996
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 tLlf3 tLlf6 4 c2
g 6 5 ilLf4 tLla6 ! ? 6 e3 ilLf5 7 b3
tLlb4 ! !
S tLlg 5
11
xf 6 !
Th e Sla v
wmmng.
1 6 . . . 'ii' a 5 1 7 c4 g4 1 8 0-0 xd2
1 6 cxd 5
1 28
A fascinating game.
M o v e - O rd e rs a n d Tra n sp o s i tio n s
S u m mary
3 e3 JLfs equalises for Black; 3 CDc3 dxc4 is a very interesting line and only
Hjartarson-Gulko (Game 7S) is a possible attempt to play with White; 3 CDf3
dxc4 is very unbalanced but seems to be good for White; 3 CDf3 CDf6 4 e3 JLfs
is nothing for White; while 3 CDf3 CDf6 4 'iVc2 and 4 'iVb3 are also nothing spe
cial. Hence 3 CDf3 CDf6 4 CDc3 dxc4 is the most accurate order for both sides.
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6
3 e3
6 CDc3 game 72
6 JLbS + game 73
-
. . .
e5
5 f4
5 . . . cxd5
1 29
1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6
Game 81
. Kasparov-N ikolic
7 . . . \'l;Vd 6
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c 6 3 ltJc3 e 5 4 dxe5
d4 5 ltJe4 \'l;Va5+ 6 d 2 !
0-0
O d ds a n d En ds
1 1 e3
1 4 SLd3 tLlbd7 1 5
SLf5 !
Th e Sla v
Game 82
Rogozenko-Bets
10
1 2 . . . CLla6
22 . . . CLlSd7 23 e4 cdS 24 d f 1 fS
14 a 3 !
see
1 32
O dds a n d En ds
Game 83
G u l ko-Salov
The S c h leeter S l a v :
3 CD c 3 CD f 6 4 e3 9 6
this system?
Th e Sla v
iLxe7+
CL:Jxe7
34
W'h6+
CL:Jg6
35
Game 84
D reev-Piket
Dortmund 1994
1 d4 CL:Jf6 2 e4 e6 3 CL:Jf3 d 5 4 e3 g6
5 CL:Je3 iLg7 6 iLe2
1 4 f5? !
iLb7 28 W'g4
\i"c8 29 W'f3 f8 3 0 h3 e8 3 1
CL:Jf6+
1 34
g7
32
W'xh 7+
xf6
33
O dds a n d En ds
3 4 \\!'ve8+ g 7 3 5 \\!'ve7+ h 6 3 6 h4
IWf5 3 7 tLlg3 \\!'vxf4 38 gxe6 g a 1
Th e Sla v
5 . . . b5 6 a4 b4 7 CLJb 1
Game 85
Sadler-Bareev
Hastings 1992/93
1 d4 d 5 2 c4 c6 3 CLJf3 CLJf6 4 CLJc3
dxc4 5 e3
see
O d ds a n d En ds
3 5 h 7 h 8 3 6 d 3 .i:!. d 8 3 7 h7
Game
86
Hillarp-Persson - Acs
Budapest 1996
l2Jg 5 ! ?
dxc4 5 e4 b 5 6 e 5 l2Jd 5 7 a4 e6 8
8 . . . .lte7 9 h4 ! ? h6 1 0 l2Jge4 b4
fxe 5 .itxe5+ 65
c;t>g2 b3 66 h 8
c;t>d 1
e5
YZ - YZ
D)
T h e S l a v G a m bit :
3 tL'lf3 tL'lf6 4 tL'lc3 dxc4
5 e4 b 5 6 e 5 tL'ld5 7 a4 e6
Th e Sla v
Game 87
Savchenko-N inov
29 gae 1
l:!e4 30
b6+
1h - 1h
An amazing game!
E)
O d ds a n d En ds
1 2 h 3 h5 1 3 f3 g 6 1 4 e4! CL.lxe4
3 iLf4
F)
Game 88
Psakhis-Sadler
1 d4 d 5 2 e4 e6 3 f4 dxe4!
Th e Sla v
queens!
1 1 g c 1 xb 2 1 2 e4 ttJf6 1 3 g 5 e 5
1 4 g x f 6 exf4 1 5 xf4 a 3 1 6 e3
e6+ b8 3 1
b2 1 7 .:g b 1 a2
e4+ !
ttJg3 c2 3 2 g2
1 40
35
O d ds a n d En ds
S u m m a ry
3 CDf3 CDf6
4 CDc3 dxc4 (D)
5 e3 game 85
5 e4 game 86
5 a4 itfS 6 CDh4 game 87
3 itf4 dxc4 - game 88
-
3 . . .e5
4 dxe5 d4 5 i2Je4 'iVa5 + 6 3Ld2 'iVxe 5 7 i2Jg3 i2Jf6 8 i2Jf3 'iVd6 9 'iVc2 3Le7
1 0 0-0-0 0-0 1 1 e 3 dxe3 1 2 fxe3 (D)
1 2 . . . iVc7 - game 81
1 2 . . . CDa6 - game 82
4 . . . dxc4
7 0-0
1 2 fxe 3
1 41
Adianto-Kramnik,
1 42
49
125
127
111
95
69
1 04
64
1 02
115
77
134
23
75
30
82
55
27
133
137
121
110
24
56
18
22
62
45
16
In dex o f C o mp l e t e G a m e s
Karpov-Short,
Dortmund 1995
Novgorod 1994
Kasparov-Nikolic, Manila Olympiad 1992
Kasparov-Shirov, Dos Hermanas 1996
Khalifman-Georgiev.Kir, Elenite 1994
Klarenbeek-Rogers, Dutch Team Championship 1996
Kozul-Illescas, Erevan Olympiad 1996
Kramnik-Damljanovic, Moscow Olympiad 1994
Kramnik-Ivanchuk, Linares 1994
Kramnik-Ivanchuk, Monte Carlo (blindfold) 1996
Kramnik-Lautier, Linares 1994
Kramnik-Shirov, Dortmund 1996
Kramnik-Shirov, Vienna 1996
Kramnik-Short, Moscow (Intel Grand Prix) 1996
Kramnik-Short, Novgorod 1994
Krasenkov-Epishin, Bmo 1994
Krasenkov-Sapis, Polish Championship 1995
Krasenkov-Sokolov.I, Malmo 1995
Lalic-Sadler, Hastings 1995/96
Lautier-Bareev, Linares 1994
Lautier-Sokolov.l, Groningen 1995
Leitao-Beliavsky, Erevan Olympiad 1996
Miles-Hodgson, Hastings 1995/96
Milov-Sadler, Isle ofMan 1994
Nesterov-Imanaliev, Bishkek Zonal 1993
Nogueiras-Sokolov.l, Erevan Olympiad 1996
Novikov-Gretarsson, Berlin Open 1995
Oll-Anand, Biel Interzonal 1993
Parker-Hellsten, Copenhagen 1996
Piket-Ge1fand, Wijk aan Zee 1996
Portisch-Kramnik, Biel Interzonal 1993
Psakhis-Sadler, Megeve (PCA rapidplay) 1994
Pushkov-Epishin, Russian Championship 1995
Razuvaev-Sturua, Erevan Open 1996
Richardson-Sadler, Islington Open 1995
Rogozenko-Bets, Moldovan Championship 1994
Ruze1e-Thorsteins, Lyon (European Club Cup) 1994
Sadler-Bareev, Hastings 1992/93
Sadler-Ferguson, British Championship 1996
Sadler-Hodgson, Hastings 1995/96
Sadler-Miles, British Championship 1998
Savchenko-Ninov, Cappelle la Grande Open 1994
Kasparov-Bareev,
92
35
130
54
35
84
124
72
47
66
43
47
98
67
59
91
81
118
39
105
120
84
1 22
108
79
119
63
87
76
53
1 14
139
101
1 26
13
132
60
136
42
92
34
138
1 43
Th e Sla v
Schandorff-Hellsten,
Copenhagen 1996
Biel 1 991
Shirov-Nikolic, Wijk aan Zee 1 993
Sokolov.I-Bareev, Leon 1 995
Sokolov.I-Hellsten, Malmo 1 995
Sokolov.I-Shirov, Erevan Olympiad 1996
Strauss.D-Lakdawala, USA 1992
Topalov-Gelfand, Belgrade 1 995
Topalov-Gelfand, Dos Hermanas 1996
Vaiser-Nalbandian, Erevan Open 1996
Van der Sterren-Petursson, San Bernardino Open 1992
Van der Sterren-Shirov, Biel lnterzonal 1993
Ward-Levitt, British Championship 1995
Wells-Flear, Oakham 1 994
Xu Jun-Akopian, Moscow Olympiad 1994
Yusupov-Kramnik, Riga 1 995
Yusupov-Shirov, Zurich 1 994
Shirov-Bareev,
1 44
75
46
78
50
80
1 00
36
21
58
1 13
57
89
103
90
32
17
111