Winning With The Dutch - Bellin PDF

WINNING
WITH
THE
DUTCH
ROBERT BELLIN
The Dutch Defence is a popular attempt by

Black to seize the initiative against 1 d4.
Once a prime weapon in the hands of such
players as the great World Champion
Alexander Alekhine, the Dutch
IS
.
agmn 1n
the theoretical spotlight, thanks to the efforts

of several young Grandmasters, among
Also in this series

Winning With the Grunfeld
Andros Adorjon and Jeno Dory
Winning With the Queen's Indian
Zolton Ribli and Gabor Kolloi
them Britain's Nigel Short.
Other Botsford opening books

This book concentrates on the main winning
plans for both sides, giving complete
coverage of the Dutch Defence. Strategic
ideas, including the most recent
developments, are all clearly explained.
Robert Bellin is an International Master and
winner of the British Championship in 1979.
He is the author of several successful books.
This series by top authors deals with

openings that have been extensively
played and analysed at Grandmaster
level. The material is based around
complete games which illustrate the
possibilities for each side.
Botsford Chess Openings 2

Gory Kosparov and Raymond Keene
The Sicilian for the Tournament Player
Eduard Gufeld
Car o-Kann Defence
Alexei Suetin
French Defence
Alexei Suetin
The C omplete Pirc
John Nunn
Najd orf for the Tournament Player
John Nunn
The Sicilian Pelikan
Evgenny Sveshnikov
For further details of these

and other Botsford chess books,
please write to:
B. T. Botsford Ltd,
4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London WlH OAH
Winning With the

Dutch
ROBERT BELLIN
B. T. Batsford Ltd, London
First published 1990

::D Robert Bellin 1990
ISBN 0 7134 5760 0
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, by any means,
without the prior permission of the publisher
Typeset by Lasertext, Manchester
and printed in Great Britain by
Dotesios (Printers) Ltd,
Trowbridge, Wilts
for the publishers,
B. T. Batsford Ltd,
4 Fitzhardinge Street,
London W 1 H OAH
A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK
Adviser: R. D. Keene GM, OBE
Technical Editor: Ian Kingston
Contents
Introduction
1
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6
v
1
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... lLlc6
13
3
4
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... e8
25
Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems
33
Hort-Antoshin Variation
48
6 Staunton Gambit: 2 e4
) The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5
8
57
66
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3
77
2 lLlf3 and Others
88
j])The Classical Variation
95
11 The Dutch Indian
105
12 Classical System: Auxiliary Variations
115
13 Alekhine's Variation: 6 ... lLle4
123
14 Ilyin-Zhenevsky System
133
15 Classical Stonewall
150
16 Stonewall with . . . .td6
177
Introduction
Welcome to the very special world
The process of rehabilitation
of the Dutch Defence! This most
began in the 1920s, spearheaded
versatile of defences to 1 d4 boasts
by World Champions Alekhine
several positive features: it is for
and Botvinnik, and gradually con
cing (White cannot prevent you
tinued until the point was reached
playing your defence, as is the case
in the 1951 World Championship
with, say, the Nimzo-Indian); it
match where it was employed by
rules out radical strategic simpl
both players. Despite this zenith,
ification (as occurs, for example,
the Dutch was subsequently once
in the Queen's Gambit Declined
again overshadowed throughout
when White plays the Exchange
the sixties and seventies, this time
Variation); and it does not permit
by exciting developments in the
early
other major defences. Now at long
major
material
simpl
ification (which happens in stan
last it seems that the Dutch's time
dard lines of the popular King's
has come as more and more top
Indian and Gri.infeld Defences).
players have become aware of its

creative and combative potential.
So how on earth is it that even

now the Dutch Defence is some
The resurgence of interest during
thing of a secret? The reason has
the eighties has sown a seed which
its origin in the nineteenth century,
will surely develop as we go into
when
the last decade of the twentieth
the
massively
influential
century.
world champion Wilhelm Steinitz

('the founder of modern chess')
This book summarizes the curr
dogmatically dismissed the Dutch
ent state of all the major variations
after a couple of crushing victories
of the
over Zukertort in the 1872 title
addition
Dutch Defence and, in
match. His pedagogical pre-emi
aims, is intended to provide a
nence was such as to eclipse the
useful and reliable basis for com
fact, for example, that the no less
petitive preparation right across
to its purely didactic
legendary Paul Morphy had regu
the spectrum from club to inter
larly used the Dutch with success.
national
The result was that the defence
illustrative games on which each
went under a cloud for gener
chapter is based, including classics
ations.
from the turn of the century as

v
level.
The
annotated
l'i
Introduction
well as modern masterpieces, have
ical) Leningrad and (mainly posi
been selected for their exceptional
tional) Stonewall are currently the
instructive value regarding typical
most popular and successful.
plans,
stratagems
and
tactics.
This book is selective in that
Those who are new to the Dutch
poor lines for Black have generally
would be best advised first of all

to simply play through the games
without worrying too much about
the detailed opening notes. This
will enable the reader to find
quickly
which
variation
most
appeals and obtain a basic 'feel'

for it before proceeding to a more
technical examination of its theor
etical nuances.
One of the great advantages of
playing the Dutch is that it is
really several different defences in
one: not only are there the three
major variations-the Leningrad,
been omitted (although, of course,

not all of them, as it is as essential
to know what is bad and does not
work as to know what is good and
does), but the assessments and
opinions given are intended to be
objective. In addition to present
ing a distillation of current know
ledge of the Dutch I have also
sprinkled a few totally new sugge
stions here and there which the
brave reader may care to try out.
It is m y hope that those who
work through this book diligently
Ilyin-Zhenevsky and Stonewall
will acquire the information and
but also other interesting lines
understanding
such as the Hort-Antoshin, the
able to step out successfully on the
necessary
to
be
hybrid Alekhine, and the Dutch
creative and very rewarding path
Indian. Of these, the (mainly tact-
of 'Winning With the Dutch'.
Acknowledgements
My thanks are due to Bob Wade
Cubitt for his painstaking proof
for providing the friendliest of
reading.
research facilities and to Clive
Leningrad Main Line: 7
c6
The Leningrad Variation is char
turous player seeking challenge
acterized
and excitement.
by
the
fianchetto
of
Black's KB which produces a curi

ous kind of Dutch/King's Indian
hybrid. The fact that Black has
left his e-pawn unmoved makes
communication between the wings
more difficult, but on the other
The introductory moves are as

follows:
2
3
4
very sound. Since it is virtually
5
6
obligatory sooner or later to play
hand keeps his central structure
d4
g3
f5
lLlf6
..tg2
lLlf3
g6
..tg7
o-o
c4
lLlc3
o-o
d6
c6 (1)
... d6, Black always has to keep

an eye on the sensitive e6 square.
In general, White will concentrate
his attention on the centre and
the queenside whilst Black will
monitor the centre and develop
counterplay on one or both flanks.
Not
surprisingly,
the
resulting
middlegames are often extremely

complex, both strategically and
tactically. Battle may often be con
The basic idea of this move is
ducted on several fronts simul
to free the square c7 for the queen
taneously
and
sometimes
the
from where it can support the
whole board can be ablaze with
advance ... e7-e5. In addition, it
action. All in all, then, the Lenin
controls d5, blunts the action of
grad is tailor-made for the adven-
White's KB on the long diagonal
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6

.
and creates the option of exerting
Experience has shown this to be
direct pressure on the queenside
White's most effective approach.
by ... -.. b6 or, occasionally, ...
The positive aspects comprise rul
-..as. As there is no immediate
ing out the formation of a mobile
threat, White's range of response
black e- and f-pawn duo (thanks
is very wide, although only the
to the possibility of capturing en
immediate advance of the d-pawn

is generally thought to offer White
chances of an opening advantage.
passant), exerting pressure on c6
and particularly the weakened e6,

gaining space and providing an
main
efficacious post for the knight at
move in detail we briefly note
d4. The quid pro quo for these
Before
considering
the
some alternatives:
gains is Black's increased control
(a) 8 .l:el lLle4 9 -..d3 lLlxc3 10
of the dark squares, particularly
be eS II e4 -..as 12 i.gS (thus far
cS, and the opening of the long
Holmov-Bannik, USSR Ch. 1962)
diagonal for his KB.
12 ... dS! 13 cd fe 14 -..xe4 cd IS

-..c2 e4=.
The
strategic
problems
con
fronting Black have been tackled
(b) 8 b3 aS 9 i.b2 lLla6 10 -..c 2
in various ways over the years but
-..c7 II .J:ad l eS 12 cS ( Pachman
only two approaches have stood
Gerusel, Mannheim 197S) 12 ...
the test of time and these will
e4 13 cd -..xd6 14 lLleS lLlb4 1S -..b l
be examined via the introductory
i.e6 with a promising position for
moves 8 ... i.d7 and 8 ... eS. The

best of the rest, 8 ... -..as, caused
Black.
(c) 8 -..c2 -..c7 (8 ... h8 is
considerable
havoc
amongst
a useful alternative, e.g. 9 i.gS
White players until the discovery
i.e6 10 b3 lLlbd7 II .!:ad! dS 12
of 9 lLld4 -.. cs 10 i.gS! (with the
lLleS lLle4= Belyavsky-Yusupov,
point 10 ... -..xc4? 11 de be 12
) fol
Reykjavik 1988) 9 e4 fe 10 lLlxe4
i.xf6 i.xf6 13 lLlxc6!
i.fS (or 10 ... lLlxe4 -..xe4 i.fS
lowing which the line rapidly van
12 -..h4 eS 13 de de 14 i.h6
ished from international compet
lLla6 IS .J:ad l .l:ae8 with balanced
ition.
chances;
Gofstein-Bikhovsky,
USSR 1977) 11 lLlh4 lLlxe4 12

i.xe4 e6 13 i.e3 lLld7 14 lLlxfS ef
IS i.g2 lLlf6 16 .l:ab l and a draw
was agreed in Starck-Liebert, E.
German Ch. 1962.
d5
Ribli-Mestel
London 1986
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lLlf3
i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6
8 d5
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6
.td7 ( 2)
W'xb3 II ab ttJxc6
S. Webb
Larsen, London 1973) 9 ... ttJa6

10 a3 cd II cd l:l.c8 12 lL!d4 ttJc5
13 l:l.dI ttJfe4 14 lL!xe4 fe! and with

... .ta4 in the air White is in dire
straits.
(b) 9 c5!? (although crude, this
tactical
lunge
should
not
be
treated lightly) 9 ... de 10 l2Je5 and

now not 10 ... .te8? II W'b3 W'b6
12 de+ W'xb3 13 cb! but 10 ...
h8 defusing such possibilities
Although comparatively little
explored, the indications are that
after which Larsen has opined that

'Black may be in good shape'.
this is a sound treatment with
(c) 9 lL!d4 W'b6 (simultaneously
potential for further development.
reinforcing c6 and priming tactical
The main idea of the variation is
discoveries on the lL!d4 by, for
to renounce ... e7-e5 in favour
example, ... ttJe4) 10 e3 l2Ja6 II b3
of a containment strategy in the
(after II l:l.bI a game Palatnik
centre coupled with action on the
Gulko, Kiev 1973, went II ... lDc5
queen's wing. There are marked
12 b4 l2Jce4 13 lL!a4 W'c7 14 f3 lL!g5
similarities with the 7 ... W'e8
15 e4 ttJf7 16 ttJe6 .txe6 17 fe
variation,
the
major
difference
l2Je5 18 ef gf 19 W'c2;;!;;; failing an
being that here the queen is usually
improvement on this, II ... l2Jc7
deployed directly into the action
comes into consideration, e.g. 12
via ... Wb6.
de be 13 b4 e5 with complex play)
l:l.bl
II ... lDc5 12 .tb2 a5 13 l:l.bl (the
Awarded an exclamation mark
position is now the same as the
by Ribli himself, this deferment of
column with the exception that
ttJd4 has the effect of deterring ...
Ribli substituted W'd2 for e3; it is
Wb6 (on account of .te3) and
noteworthy
enables White to get by without
Black plays the idea recommended
that
in
this
game
playing e3 (see note (b) below). It
by Ribli) 13 ... W'a6! 14 a4?! (smo
seems that the rook move does
thers Black's projected counter
indeed have a legitimate claim to
play with a timely ... a4 but at the
being the most precise.
high cost of accepting consider
Other tries:
able queen's wing vulnerability) 14
(a) 9 W'c2? (9 W'b3 W'b6 10 de
... Wb6! 15 l:l.el l:l.ae8 16 l2Jce2
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. . c6
cd 17 cd .l:l.c8 (Black displays an
11
..tb2
a5
admirable flexibility of thinking)
12
13
d2
.b6
18 l2Jc3 l2Jfe4! (suddenly, Black is

on top) 19 l2Jcb5 l2Ja6 20 ..tfl l2Jb4
.l:l.c5! 22 l2Je2 ..txb2 23
.l:l.xb2 .l:l.fc8+ 24 l2Jbc3 .l:l.xc4! 25
21 ..tc4
l2Jd4 ( 3)
be .l:l.xc4 26 l2Ja2 c5 27 l2Jxb4
ab 28 h4 l2Jc3?! (tempting, but it

allows White unnecessary coun
terchances; 28 ... a5! 29 d3 b3!

30 .l:l.d1 .l:l.b4 with ... ..txa4 and
... l2Jc5 to follow was a surer
method of turning the screw) 29
l2Jxc3 be 30 .1:1. xb7 ..txa4 31 d3?
(misses the opportunity to muddy
Both sides have deployed their
the waters by 31 a1! with the
forces harmoniously and a rich
possibility
threats
middlegame is in the offing. Many
against the enemy king) 31 ... c2
more practical trials are needed
of
creating
32 .l:l.c1 f7 + + 33 h5 .l:l.c3 34
before any worthwhile assessment
hg+ hg 35 'ir'd2 a3? (the wrong
can be made but there seems no
way; correct was 35 ... c4 when
priori reason for the resources of
the threat of ... .l:l.d3 forces White
Black's position not to be adequ
into the hopeless ending following
ate to meet whatever demands
36 .1:1. b2 .1:1. d3 37 .1:1. bxc2 ..txc2 38
White makes upon them.
.l:l.a7! xct +?
Our present example carried on
(Black would have retained real
as follows: 13 ... .I:!. adS?! (Black's
xc2 xd5) 36
winning chances by 36 . . . .1:1. d3
plan of centralising the rooks fails
xc2 ..txc2 38
.l:l.xa3 .l:l.xa3 39
to accomplish anything; clearly,
.1:1. xc2 .1:1. d3, but now with precise
this is the point to look for an
play White escapes with a draw)
improvement-Ribli
37 xc1 .l:l.d3 38 g2! .l:l.d1 39
possibility of 13 ... a6 intending
noted
the
a3 c1() 40 xa4 .l:l.g1+ 41
... a4) 14 .l:l.fd1 .l:l.fe8 15 e3 e5 16
f3 g5 42 .l:l.a8 d1+ 43 xd1
. de ..txe6 (the weak a-pawn would
.l:l.xd1 44 .l:l.a5 g4+ 45 e2 .l:l.bl
prove a liability after 16 ... l2Jxe6
46 e4 !-! Spiridonov-Akesson,
17 l2Ja4!) 17 l2Jxe6 .1:1. xe6 18 l2Ja4!
Polanica Zdroj 1981.
9
10
b3
l2Jxa4 19 ba (White has accurately

l2Ja6
assessed the open lines and diag
l2Jc5
onals for his pieces to be more
important
than
the
... c6
structural
which 10 ... e4! leaves Black with
weakness incurred) 19 ... 'it'a6 (or
a centre whose dynamic potential
19 ... 'it'c7 20 .td4) 20 .td4 e4?
at least balances its vulnerability.
(allowing a surprising and decisive

liquidation;
20
mandatory
and
...
.l:ld7
(b) 9 e4 cd (9 ... c5 is also fully

playable) 10 cd a6 11 ef (11
have
.tg5? h6 12 .txf6 'itxf6 13 ef gf
enabled Black to put up a stiff
left Black with all the play in
defence
of
Tsvetkov-Kotkov,
21
RSFSR 1957) 11 ... gf 12 h4
.txe4 .l:lxe4 22 .txg7 xg7 23
gives a complicated position with
c5!
chances for both sides.
resisting
with
would
was
good
White's
chances
pressure)
(cleverly creating a deadly
passed pawn) 23 ... .l:ld7 (23 ... d5
Bulgaria
.txe6 ( 4)
24 .:. b6 followed by 25 'it'b2+ and

26 .l:lxb7 is also hopeless) 24 cd
.:. xa4 25 'it'c3+ h6 26 'it'f6 'it'e2
27 'ite6
.l:lxa2 28 .l:lfl
.l:lg7 29
.l:lbe1! 1-0.
Uhlmann-Vaiser
Szirak 1985
1 d4 f5 2 g3 f6 3 .tg2 g6 4 f3
.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 c3 c6
A position of major importance
8 d5
in the theory of the Leningrad
e5
Long established as the most

popular choice here, this move
constitutes
Black's
most
con
variation.
Both pawn configurations have
now been broadly established and
sequent and challenging response
because
to White's advance of the d-pawn.
characteristics they are of crucial
de
A logical capture which pro

cures White the better pawn struc
of
importance
their
in
contrasting
determining
the
respective strategies to be adopted.

From the static point of view,
ture. Alternatives forfeit any real
White's structure is clearly super
prospects of obtaining an opening
ior as it is compact and without
advantage:
(a) 9 de be 10 b3 is an unimpress
ive suggestion of Simagin's after
weakness whereas Black's is not

only
generally
loose
but
also
suffers from a particular defect in
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .
. .
c6
the vulnerable d-pawn on a half
te's retreat) II 'tt'c2 tt:lb6 12 tt:la4
open
file. Consequently,
(better 12 b3 d5 although Black's
must
make
the
most
Black
of
the
position is still promising) 12
0 0 .
dynamic potential of his position
tt:lxa4 13 'tt' xa4 'tt'e7 14 'tt'c2 (the
deriving from his good central
queen is misplaced) 14
0 0 .
d5 15
and kingside attacking
cd tt:lxd5 16 a3 .:. ad8 17 tt:lc4 f4!
chances (the positive concomitant
and with development completed
control
of Black's unruly pawn structure)
and
plus free and active development.
Black advantageously begins to
The battle lines, then, are clear:
attack on the king's flank; Etruk
White will pressurize the d-pawn
strong
central
position
Holmov, TU Spartakiad 1965.

(c) 10
and seek simplification in order to
..tf4
(misguided since
highlight the intrinsic weakness of
Black is now relieved of the major
Black's pawns, while Black will
weakness in his position) 10
endeavour to generate sufficient
..txc4 11 ..txd6 .:. e8 12 tt:le5 ..te6
pie
13 'tt'd3 tt:lbd7 14 tt:lxd7 tt:lxd7 (14
activity
to offset his struc
tural Inferiority.
10
b3
Experience has shown that only
0 0 .
... 'tt'xd7 also comes into consider

ation) 15 .:. fd1 'tt'f6 16 f4! .:. ad8
17 ..tc7
.:. c8 18 ..td6 with an
two methods of defending the c
invitation to repetition suiting the
pawn leave White any real pro
nature of the position; Aronson
spects of fighting for an advantage
Hasin, Moscow 1956.
from the opening-10 b3 and 10
tt:la6 (5)
10
'tt'd3-which we shall examine in
Black wisely prefers develop
detail in the context of complete
ment to material grabbing by 10
games. It is worth noting some
... tt:le4 which gives White a choice
alternatives for the light they shed
of
on how Black's pieces can co
e.g. 11 tt:lxe4 ..txa1 (the irresolute
operate in non-critical situations:
II ... fe was fittingly punished in
(a) 10 tt:lg5? (a baseless offer) 10
Kjarner-Etruk, Parnu 1967, by 12
advantageous
continuations,
... ..txc4 II b3 ..tl7 12 ..ta3 tt:le8
tt:ld4 ..tl7 13 ..txe4! 'tt'e7 14 ..tg2
13 tt:lxl7 .:. xl7 14 .:. c1 tt:la6 15 h4
c5 15 tt:lc2 ..txa1 16 tt:lxa1 tt:lc6 17
tt:lc7 16 e4 f4 and Black is well
tt:lc2 (a typical position in which
placed with a pawn to the good;
White's control of the vital al -h8
Ribli-Sax, Hungarian Ch. 1971.
artery into the heart of Black's
(b) 10 tt:ld2 tt:lbd7 (this rare but
king's position and iron grip on
effective placement of the knight
the centre outweigh
points up the inadequacy of Whi-
material deficit) 17
0 0 .
the
slight
h5 18 ..tb2
Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6
h7 19 Wd2 a5 20 a4 1Db4 21
!LleI! (heading for another weak
ened dark square in the vicinity of
5
w
the enemy king-g5) 21 ... :adS

22 f3 d5 (at last a vestige of
counterplay, but it arrives too late)
23 1Dg5+ gS 24 cd 1Dxd5 25
e4 ..teS 26 l:dl ..tc6 27 Wh6
f4 (a despairing
mercifully
cuts
Junge which
short
Black's
agony) 2S WhS+ f7 29 Wg7+

eS 30 l:xdS+ 1-0. On 30 ...
that Black's set-up is more than
xdS 31
resilient enough to deal with crude
Wxe7+
xe7 32 gf
White exchanges into an easily
attempts to over-run it.
won ending, whilst 30 ... WxdS
(b) II ..te3 We7 12 l:cl lDc5 13
31 We5+ leaves Black with no
..td4 ..td7 (13 ... a5 gives Black
satisfactory answer.) 12 Wxd6 (12
a perfectly acceptable game) 14
..tg5 Wc7 13 Wxd6 is also good
Wd2 1De6
as is the more complicated 12
Vaganian-Knezevic,
1Dfg5!? Wd7 131Dxd6 l:dS 14 ..tf4
15
..txf6
(thus
far
Leningrad
1977) 15 .. . ..txf6! 16 :fd11Dc5
of Plaskett-Vincent, 19S3) 12 ...
is assessed as unclear by Makary
..Wxd6 131Dxd6 ..tcS (13 ... b6 14
chev; White's plan fails to impress.
..tg5 ..tf6 15 ..txf6 :xf6 16 iDeS
(c) 111Dg5 ..tcS! 12 l:b1 We7
:n 17 g5 :e7 IS 1Dxe6++
(12 ...1Dg4 may be more precise;
:xf6 16 lDxcS1Da6 171De7+ f8
tinued 131Da4 We7 14 b4 lDc7 15
IS1Dxc6 be 191De5 Syre-Pahtz,
b5 c5 16 ..tf4 and in this obscurely
Malich) 14 ..tg5 ..tf6 15
..txf6
E. German Ch. 1975.
11
Adorjan- Vaiser, Szirak 19S5, con
balanced position the gladiators

agreed a draw) 13 Wc2 h6 (the
..tf4
A relatively recent attempt to

inject fresh problems into the pos
immediate
13
. . . lDc5?
would
allow 14 b4 with b5 to follow and
ition, probably born of Jack of
advantage to White) 141Df3 lDc5
satisfaction
15 ..ta3 ..te6 16 l:bd1 :adS with
with
the
prospects
offered by the alternatives:

(a) II ..ta3? Wa5! 12 Wxd6?
:res 13 ..tb21De4 141Dxe4 ..txb2
15 1Deg5 :adS+ +; this line of
Taimanov's serves to
illustrate
fully satisfactory play for Black;

Petrosian-Knezevic, Banja Luka
1979.
(d) 11 ..tb2 (certainly the most
natural follow-up) II ... We7 12
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6
Wc2 d5 13 cd lL!b4! 14 WcllLJfxd5!
eluded as follows: 15 .tel 'iie7
15 lLJa4 :adS and with his devel
(15
opment
pieces
:f7?! (the situation is too volatile
actively placed Black can look to
to permit this ideal doubling on
the future with confidence; Sche
the f-file; the prophylactic 17 ...
completed
and
0 0 0
..tf5!) 16 lL!d4 .id7 17 a3
eren-V. Kovacevic, Thessaloniki
tL!e6 might be the best way of
01. 1984.
drawing the sting from White's

lLlh5!
11
Quite in the spirit of the Lenin

grad, Black parries the attack on
the d-pawn with a counterattack.
12
.id2
:ae8
is
natural
and
good
enough alternative) 18 b4 ab 19
ab tL!e6 20 tL!f3! g5 21 g4! (it was
necessary to prevent
12 .ig5 would be hazardous,

e.g. 12
intended b3-b4-b5, though 17 ...
0 0 .
g4) 21
0 0 .
tL!f6 22 h3 h5?! (precipitate: 22 ...
Wa5 13 tL!d4 W'xc3 14
:d8 preparing succour for the
tL!xe6 W'xal 15 W'xa1 .ixa1 16
perennial weakling seems more in
tL!xf8 .ih8! 17 tL!e6 :e8 18 ttJf4
tune with the needs of the position)
0 0 .
tL!xf4 19 .ixf4
:xe2 20 .ixd6
23 gh g4 (23
tL!xh5 24 lLJe4 )
0 0 .
:xa2 and White is struggling (21
24 hg lLJxg4 25 tL!e4 d5 (on 25 ...
b4 :d2! or 21 :e1 ..td4!).
..te5 comes 26 Wd3 :g7 27 h6!
12
tL!c5
:g6 28 lLlxd6 lLlf8 29 c5 :
30 tLJf5 according to Uhlmann)
13
Wc2
a5
14
:adl
f4!?(6)
h6
26 cd cd 27lLJc5! (avoiding Black's
trappy idea 27
'iibl
: xd5 .ia4! 28
..tc6 29 :a5 :xa5 30 ba
lbd4 with good counterchances)

27
0 0 .
:c8 28 :xd5!? (fearlessly
ambitious!) 28
0 0 .
(the best try; 29
b6 29 :fd I lLlf6
0 0
..te8 30 W'g6!
is good for White and 29 ... be 30

:xd7 Wxd7 31 :xd7 :xd7 32
.ih3 skewers Black's position) 30
:e5 be 31lLJg5 f3? (in time trouble,
Black fails to find the amazing
This belligerent thrust signals
the
beginning
of
mutually
difficult middlegame replete with
saving
grace
Uhlmann: 31
pointed
0 0 .
out
by
cb! 32 Wg6! lLJg4!
33 lL!xf7 Wh4!! 34 lLJh6 +! lLJxh6
problems and prospects for both
35
sides. Our illustrative game con-
37 hi
:xe6 lLJg4 36 ..tb2 Wxf2+

Wh4+ with perpetual
check!) 32 ef! nfffi 33 :del cb 34
. . .
c6
A logical continuation of the
Wg6 .te8 35 Wbl .txh5 36 nxe6
mobilization
Wc7 37 ne7 'ilfc2 38 Wxb4 .tg6
which immediately brings press
n 17 40 nxl7 .txl7 41
ure to bear on the weak spot in
pin) 42 ... nc4 43 Wb8 Wf5 44
We also note one poor and one
39 lLle6
t2Jxg7 xg7 42 .tb2 (a deadly

ne4 g6 45 Wd6 .td5 46 .txf6
net+ 47 h2 nc6 48 Wg3+
Yusupov-Barbero
Mendoze 1985
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lLlf3
.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lLlc3 c6

8 d5 e5 9 de .txe6
10
This protection of the c-pawn

with a developing move seems the
most natural.
lLla6
Black does best to get on with

his development as quickly as
possible especially as it carries
with it a threat to drive away the
white queen and thereby win the
c-pawn.
11
7
8
.tf4 (7)
forces
important alternative:
(a) 11 d4?! (it throws instruc
light
on
the
idiosyncratic
nature of the Leningrad that this

natural centralization is out of
keeping with the needs of the pos
ition) 11 . .. .tl7 12 b3 d5! 13
.ta3 ne8 14 nfdl de 15 be WaS
16 ..td6 lLlc5 17 Wc2 lLlce4 18
lLlxe4 lLlxe4 and White's disadvan
Wd3
10
White's
Black's camp.
tive
1-0. Hard fighting!
of
tage is rapidly assuming decisive

proportions;
Grooten-Perez
Garcia, Wijk aan Zee II 1986.

(b) 11 lLlg5 (this hunting of the
minor exchange demands precise
handling by Black) 11 . . . ..tc8!
(the most challenging response; it
is not entirely out of the question
to allow White to implement his
strategy, e.g. 11 ... We7 12 .tf4
nad8 13 nadl
lLlg4! 14 lLlxe6
Wxe6 15 e4 lLlc5 16 ef gf 17 Wc2

lLle5 18 b3 Wg6, Fridstein-Luti
kov, Moscow 1958, and although
White has the two bishops and
much superior pawn structure, his
position is to some extent all
dressed up with nowhere to go,
while Black has a pair of frisky
knights champing at the bit to join
in the general plan of harassing
White's king) 12 .tf4 (on 12 ndt
10
.. . c6
h6! 13 tt:lf3, Black should eschew

13 ... ..te6? 14 Wxd6 Wxd6 15
:xd6
..txc4
16
tt:le5
17
..tfl
X
w
..txh6! lvkov-Sahovic, Zemun
1982, in favour of 13 ... tt:le4! 14

tt:lxe4 fe 15 Wxe4 ..tf5! 16 'it'h4 (or
16 We3 tt:lb4) 16 ... g5 17 Wh5 'it'f6
with excellent compensation) 12
... lLlh5! 13 :adI (it has long been
established that 13 Wxd6 lLlxf4 14
Wxf4 h6 15 tt:lf3 g5 gives Black
sufficient play for the pawn, e.g.
16 Wet
..te6 17 .:tdl; thus far
forceful 13 ... ..tf5 began a sequ

ence ending in fatal organic dislo
Ch.
cation in Vukic-Kaizauri, Skara
1956, and now Simagin gives 17
1980: 14 We3 ..txb2 (14 ... b6!?
1 We7! 18 b3 .:tad8 as best) 13
is unclear according to Vukic) 15
... lLlxf4 14 gf h6 15 tt:lf3 .:tf6 16
.:tadl .:te8 16 Wd2 Wf6 17 e3 ..ta3
.:td2 tt:lc5 17 Wc2 We7 18 tt:ld4
(something is wrong when such
Simagin-Hasin,
Moscow
..td7 with chances for both sides
moves are necessary) 18 tt:ld4 ..tb4
in a difficult position; Garcia
(18 ... g5? 19 ..txd6!) 19 We2 ..td7
Palermo-Ivkov, Havana 1986.
II
20 h4 lLlc7 21 Wb2! c5 22 Wb3! a5

23 tt:lc2 a4 24 Wd3 ..tc3 25 ..txd6
tt:le4!?
Amongst the various options at
tt:la6 26 ..txb7 .:ta7 27 ..te5! 1-0.
Black's disposal at this point, this
The scattered black forces are
mettlesome attempt to seize the
pitiful in their disarray; a drastic
initiative makes the most favour
reminder of the indispensable need
able impression.
for harmony and coordination.
As a safety net, there is always
14
We3
the solid, if craven, antithesis to
A necessary improvement on 14
the text-ll ... tt:le8. But one
Wc2? after which 14 ... ..tf5 15
senses that should such moves
Wd2 (15 Wet intending to answer
ever be required it would be better
15 ... tt:la4 by 16 b3 looks relatively
to switch variations.
best) 15 ... tt:le4 16 We3 (16 Wet
12
13
tt:lxe4
Wxe4
fe
tt:lc5 ( 8)
Black augments the cohesion of
is preferable although after 16 ...

Wb6 Black maintains strong press
ure) 16 ... :e8 17 Wa3 Wb6 18
his forces with tempo gain. By
.tel d5 gives powerful play for
contrast,
the pawn; Nordstrom-Niklasson,
the
apparently
more
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .. c6

.
paid off after 20 ..te3!? (20 Wxc5
Swedish Ch. 1974.
simplifies into a level ending after
..txc4
13
II
The animated middlegame we
20 ... Wxd2 21 lt:lxe2 Wxe2 22
are about to embark upon is teem
Wb4! Wxb2 23 Wxb2 ..txb2 24
ing with possibilities and clearly
:bl) 20 ... lt:\e4? (a pity that in
offers vast scope for new discover-
the labyrinth of variations such as
ies.
20 ... :xe3? 21 fe ..th6 22 lllf5!
15
.l:tadt
Black loses his way; 20 ... ..tf8 21
:es
Again, counterattack is the best
Wxc5 ..txd6 22 Wxd6 :xe3 23
policy since 15 ... ..td5 16 lllg5!
fe
brings Black into difficulties.
correct with good chances of hold
..txfl 24
..txfl
Wxe3+ was
16
Wet
..txe2
ing the position) 21 :d7 c5 (the
17
:xd6
WaS
point of Black's play, exploiting
Of course not 17 ... Wb6 18
the pin on the rook but there is a
20
surprising riposte ...) 22 :xg7+?
..txfl and all White's pieces are
(... which White misses!; 22 :e1!
poised for a concerted assault on
cd 23 :xg7+! xg7 24 ..th6+!
..te3
:xe3
19
Wxe3
..txfl
[7 25 Wf4+ lllf6 26 ..td5+!
the black king.
18
19
..td2
lt:ld4
Wb5
Wd3 (9)
would have sewn matters up in

spectacular style) 22 ... xg7 23
lllxe2 Wxe2 24 :el Wh5 25 ..txe4
(in time trouble, White plays safe
and transposes into a slightly fav
ourable endgame in preference to
the more accurate but less clear
cut maintenance of pressure by 25
Wc2) 25 ... :xe4 26 ..th6+ Wxh6
27 Wxh6+ xh6 28 :xe4 :g8
29 fl :g7 30 e2 :d7 31 h4
g7 32 :e5! b6 33 :e6 f7 34
:c6 e7 (34 ... :e7 +!) 35 h5!
The combatants have traded
f7?! (35 ... gh 36 :h6 d8 was
blows with accuracy and imagin
the simplest) 36 hg+ hg 37 f4
ation, creating a position of con
g7 38 e3 f7 39 b3 g7 40
tinuing complexity and approxi
e4
mately equal chances. In the game,
41 ... :e7 42 g4 :d7 43 h4
White's
tactic
of
continually
adding fuel to the flames finally
f7
41
f3 (41
e5! )
:d2 44 :c7+ f6 45 :xa7 b5?

(45 ... f5
had
to be played) 46
12
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . c6

.
.l:l c7 (46 .: aS was more precise) 46

. . . c4 47 .l:l c6 + ! f5? (47 . . . f7
would have obliged White to play
more delicately) 48 .l:l c5 + e6
49 .l:l xb5 c3 50 .l:l c5 c2 5 1 b4 g5 +

52 fg .l:l d4 + 53 h5 .l:l xb4 54
.l:l xc2 1 -0.
Leningrad Main Line : 7
2
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
d4
g3
..tg2
ttlf3
0-0
c4
ttlc3
fS
ttlf6
g6
..tg7
0-0
d6
ttJ c6
ation is Black's least soundly

based option positionally-either
the knight goes offside or the pawn
structure
becomes
compro
mised-but it frequently leads to
fearsome complications and it
would clearly be premature to
believe that the last word has yet
been said.
Before proceeding with our
examination of the major continu
ation 8 d5 we will briefly look at
some alternatives:
(a) 8 Wc2 e5 9 de de 10 .:td l
..td7! II ..te3 (not II ttld5? e4!
1 2 ttlxf6 + ..txf6 1 3 ttle I ttld4 1 4
'ilt'd2 ..ta4! 1 5 b 3 ..txb3! and
White has lost material; Bertok
Ghitescu, Reggio Emilia 1 968/69)
1 1 . . . e4! 1 2 ttld4 ttlg4 1 3 ttl xc6
(after 1 3 ttle6? ttlxe3 1 4 fe ..txe6
1 5 .:t xd8 .: axd8 1 6 ttld5 ttle5! the
queen proved no match for Black's
well coordinated pieces in Peev
Nikolaevsky, Varna 1 968) 1 3 . . .
ttlxe3 1 4 'ilt'cJ 'ilt'e8 1 5 'ilt' xe3 ..txc6
and Black may look to the future
ttlc6 ( 1 0 )
10
w
This provocative knight devel

opment
simultaneously
puts
pressure on d4 and prepares . . .
e7-e5 and intentionally aims to
goad White into the space-gaining
but committal advance d4-d5 fol
lowing which two entirely different
types of game arise according to
which way the knight jumps. It is
generally agreed that this vari13
14
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lLlc6
with confidence thanks to his

bishop pair and cramping e-pawn.
(b) 8 b3 li:le4 (the immediate 8
. . . e5 has to reckon with 9 de de
1 0 ..ta3) 9 ..tb2 e5 1 0 de li:lxc3
II ..t xc3 W'e8! 1 2 W' c2 de 1 3 W'b2
W'e7 14 .rHdl g5 + 1 5 .:t d5? (the
prospect of being buried under an
avalanche of black pawns panics
White into a faulty manoeuvre) 1 5
. . . ..te6 1 6 : b5? a6 1 7 : xe5 ( 1 7
.:t xb7 ..tc8 + + ) 1 7 . . . li:lxe5 1 8
li:l xe5 c6 with a decisive material
Welsh-Alexander,
advantage;
Cheltenham 1 954.
d5
8
Botvinnik-Matulovic
USSR v Rest of the World

Belgrade 1 970
8
li:la5 (II)
11
w
With this sideways swipe at the

c-pawn Black begins a plan which
bears a close affinity to the Panno
variation of the King's I ndian
Defence. The intention is to secure
the wayward knight's position by

. . . c7-c5 and then proceed with
. . . a7-a6 and . . . b7-b5 thus gener
ating counterplay against c4 in
particular and on the queen's flank
in general. In addition, there some
times arise possibilities of striking
in the centre with . . . e7-e5. As in
the Panno, however, there is the
perpetual problem that should
Black's initiative dissipate without
anything concrete being achieved
then the errant knight may
become a liability of decisive pro
portions.
9
li:ld2
This manoeuvre, known from
the Panno, is probably White's
most reliable method of damping
down Black's activity. There are
several playable alternatives :
(a) 9 b3 (an interesting exchange
offer which clearly gives White
strong positional compensation if
accepted) 9 . . . li:le4 (9 . . . c5 would
be the sensible way to decline if
preferred) 1 0 li:lxe4 ..txa l II li:leg5
c5 1 2 W' e l ..tg7 1 3 ..td2 b6 1 4
e4 li:lb7 1 5 e f gf 1 6 W'e2 with
approximately balanced chances;
Udovcic-Gufeld, Leningrad 1 967.
(b) 9 W' a4 c5 10 de li:l xc6 ( 1 0 . . .
be II li:ld4 c5! is interesting) II
.:t d l W'a5 1 2 W'xa5 li:lxa5 1 3 li:ld5
li:lxd5 14 cd ..td7 with full equal
ity; Vladimirov-Gastonyi, Lenin
grad v Budapest 1 96 1 .
(c) 9 W'd3 c5 (parrying the
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . lll c6
threatened 1 0 b4) 1 0 b3 (after 1 0

tt:lg5 a 6 II e 4 b5 1 2 c b ab 1 3 tt:lxb5
fe 14 lLl xe4 lLl xe4 1 5 ..txe4 ..ia6
16 a4 c4, Dely-Gufeld, Debrecen
1 970, or 1 0 ..id2 a6 II : ac t
l:.b8 1 2 b 3 b5!, Paldan- Pedersen,
Danish corr. Ch. 1 973-4, Black
succeeds in stirring up adequate
counterplay) 10 . . . a6 II ..i b2
l:.b8 1 2 : ae l b5 1 3 .t a l be
1 4 be : b4 (the immediate 1 4 . . .
lLlg4!? merits investigation) 1 5
lLld2 lLlg4 1 6 a 3 : b8 ( 1 6 . . . lLle5 1 7
'ilt'c2 : xc4!? is quite a reasonable
exchange sacrifice) 1 7 11t"c2 ..id7
1 8 e3 lLle5 19 lLle2 11t"e8 20 l:.b l
..ta4 2 1 11t"a2 11t"d8 22 f4! and
having beaten off Black's initiative
in instructive fashion White is on
the way to gaining the upper hand;
Yugoslavia
Nikolac-Bertok,
1 969.
c5
9
10
a3!
Indirectly preventing . . . e7-e5
which against other moves is gen
erally Black's best method of cre
ating counterplay as the following
examples show :
(a) 10 b3? lLl xd5! II ..i xd5 + e6
1 2 lLldb l ed 1 3 11t"xd5 + h8 1 4
..tf4 l:.e8 1 5 ..ixd6 ..ie6 and
White is in trouble, e.g. 1 6 11t"d3
'ii b6 or 16 11t"xc5? b6 1 7 11t"a3
.txc4.
(b) 10 l:.b l e5! II de ..txe6
12 b3 d5 1 3 ..ia3 (steering for
equality with 1 3 cd is the prudent
15
course) 1 3 . . . l:.c8 1 4 lLla4 b 6 1 5

b4 c b 1 6 ..txb4 de with excellent
compensation for the sacrificed
material; Pinter- Bjelajac, Pernik
1 978.
(c) 10 11t"c2 e5! II a3 (II de
..txe6 1 2 l:.d l 11t"e7 1 3 b3 lLlc6
leaves Black actively placed, e.g.
14 ..ib2 lLld4 1 5 11t"d3 f4! 1 6 gf
..if5 1 7 e4 ..ie6! and the coming
. . . lLlf6-h5xf4 gives a strong attack;
J. Piket- M . Gurevich, Lucerne
1 989) 1 1 . . . b6 1 2 b4 lL:lb7 1 3 ..i b2
We7 1 4 l:.ael lLld8 1 5 e3 lLlf7
and having usefully redeployed the
problem knight Black's prospects
are fully satisfactory; Vaganian
Tal, USSR 1 970.
10
..id7
11
11t"c2
A voiding the trap II b4? cb
1 2 ab lLlxc4! 1 3 lLlxc4 11t"c7! after
which Black regains his material
and assumes the initiative, e.g. 1 4
11t"b3 l:.fc8 1 5 lLl a 5 11t"xc3 1 6 11t"xc3
l:.xc3 1 7 lLlxb7 l:.b3 and White is
in difficulties.
11
11t"c7
Once again preventing b2-b4
by utilizing the sensitivity of c4.
a6
12
b3
The central advance 1 2 . . . e5
leaves White an indisputable pos
itional advantage after 1 3 de
..ixe6 14 .t b2 and so Black is
forced to fall back on the alterna
tive wing demonstration plan. It
appears, however, that here too
16
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . tt:lc6

.
White can maintain the upper

hand.
13
.tb2
bS (I 2)
12
w
14
d1!
Although at first sight Black's
position looks active enough, this
subtle retreat begins a sophi
sticated plan, first employed by
Botvinnik in the analogous Pan no
K ing's I ndian position in a cel
ebrated game versus Geller in
1 952, which brilliantly highlights
the deficiencies of Black's set-up.
In essence, the idea is to post
the bishop at c3 simultaneously
surveying the hobbled horse in
Black's camp and clearing a path
for the tour d l -b2-d3-f4 by its
more fleet of foot white counter
part. Once a white knight establ
ishes itself on f4 the weakness of
e6 may become a real problem for
Black.
be
14
Can Black improve hereabouts?
.Z:.ab8
15
be
..tcJ
16
lL!g4
Black seeks to relieve the press

ure by means of exchanges. While
this may indeed be the best policy,
the defender must beware of drop
ping his guard as forces are
reduced because White's advan
tage is of a particularly insidious
and persistent nature as the pres
ent game well shows.
17
..txg7
xg7
18
W"c3 +
The queen takes over on the key
c3 square menacing both flanks
simultaneously.
18
g8
.Z:.b7
19
b2!
.Z:.tb8
20
dJ
21
.Z:.ab1!
Appreciating that as the rooks
disappear so too do Black's
chances of counterplay. Moreover,
the exchanges accentuates the
superior activity and coordination
of White's minor pieces.
.Z:.xb1
21
.Z:.xb1 +
22
.Z:.xb1
23
xb1
W"b6
f6 ( 1 3 )
24
d2
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . llJc6
While to the inexpert eye it may

appear that an amicable hand
shake is j ust around the corner, in
fact the real fighting is j ust about
to begin! Space considerations do
not permit us to follow the further
vicissitudes in too great detail
(especially since White unfortun
ately strays from the consistent
course quite soon) but hopefully
this will not prevent the reader
from drawing the unavoidable if
unpalatable conclusion that those
wishing to play 8 . . . li:l a5 must
either come armed with a big
improvement or be prepared for a
long and arduous defensive task.
Still, at the end of it there may be
a half point waiting, even against
a world champion! 25 h3! <1;>17 26
cli>h2 li:lb7 27 e4 fe 28 li:lxe4 li:ld8
29 li:lg5 + (29 li:lf4! would have set
Black greater problems; as it is, he
is freed from having to defend
the li:lf6 and this permits him to
regroup) 29 . . . cli>e8! 30 li:lf4 li:ll7
3 1 li:lfe6 li:l xg5 (with the exchange
of the problem QN Black's defens
ive prospects improve enor
mously) 32 li:l xg5 W'b I ! 33 i.e4
W' a2! 34 cli>g2 ..tf5 35 ..bf5 gf 36
W'd3 h6 37 li:le6 li:le4 38 W'f3 W'xc4
(38
li:lf6!) 39 W'h5 + <l;>d7 40
W'xf5 li:lf6 4 1 li:l xc5 + cli>e8 42
W'g6 + cli>d8 43 li:le6 + cli>d7 44
li:lf4 li:lxd5 45 W'xh6 (45 W'f5 +
cli>c6 46 W'xd5 + W'xd5 47 li:l xd5
cli>xd5 48 cli>f3 <l;>e5 should be
0 0 0
17
drawn) 45 . . . We4 + 46 h2 W'e l

47 li:ld3 W'c3 48 W'g6 W' xa3 49 h4
(49 g4 W'c3 50 g5 was a stronger
but riskier winning attempt) 49 . . .
W'c3 50 h5 W'f6 5 1 W'g4 + e6 52
W'a4 + e7 53 W' xa6 W'f3? (53 . . .
W' f5 collecting the h-pawn was
correct) 54 Wa7 + d8 55 W'h7
li:lf6 56 W' h8 + cli>d7 57 W'g7 +
<l;>c6 58 h6 li:lg4 + 59 cli>g l "it'd! +
60 cli>g2 We2 6 1 cli>h3? (61 W'c3 +
d7 62 W'd4 li:lxh6 63 W'g7 +
c6 64 W'xh6 W'xd3 65 W'xe6
would have preserved winning
chances) 61 . . . li:l xh6 62 W'xh6
W' xd3 63 W' xe6 W'fl + !-!.
Ribli-Barber
Lugano / 985
1 d4 f5 2 g3 li:lf6 3 ..ig2 g6 4 li:l f3
..ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d 6 7 li:lc3 li:lc6
8 d5
li:le5
8
Although current fashion in the
Leningrad has focused attention
on . . . c6 systems (and 7 . . . W'e8 in
particular) at the expense of 7 . . .
li:lc6, aficionados of uncompro
mising play ensure that the knight
move still appears from time to
time albeit almost invariably in the
form of this centralizing variation.
The basic point at issue is whether
the assortment of tactical and
attacking chances Black acquires
after White captures the knight
(presently considered the main
18
LeninKrad Main Line: 7 ...
lLlc6
continuation) are sufficient to off

set the positional drawbacks. The
last word on this question has yet
to be said despite the recent trend
of games going in White's favour :
any system capable of dealing
Karpov one of the most crushing
defeats of his career must have
rather a lot going for it.
9
t!Jxe5
The critical response, but there
are also two worthwhile alterna
tives :
(a) 9 ttJd2 (of course not 9 b3?
t!Je4 and Black wins material) 9
. . . c6! 1 0 h3 (against 1 0 b3 I
recommend 1 0 . . . cd 1 1 cd t!Jh5!
intending 1 2 ..tb2 f4 with active
play on the king's wing) 10 . . . W b6
I I ttJa4 Wc7 with a promising
position for Black; Taimanov
Vinogradov, Leningrad Ch. 1 946.
(b) 9 Wb3 is only just beginning
to be explored and deserves
respect, as witness the following
defensive fiasco : 9 . . . t!Jed7 1 0
..te3 ttJc5 I I ..txc5 (in ECO this
capture is mentioned in a note and
evaluated with a laconic= ', quite
erroneously, as we shall see) I I . . .
de 1 2 t!Jg5! .l:l b8 1 3 Wa3 a6 1 4
Wxc5 b6 1 5 W b4 h6 1 6 t!Jf3 b5 1 7
t!Je5 1 -0 Seira wan- Pellant, 1 983.
The best antidote to this is 9 . . .
t!Jxf3 + ! 1 0 ef (or 1 0 ..txf3 ttJd7
I I ..te3 t!Jc5 and the removal of
a pair of knights makes it far less
attractive for White to capture on
c5, failing which Black's position

is fully satisfactory) I 0 . . . e5 I I de
..txe6 1 2 .l:l e l Wd7 1 3 f4 c6 1 4
..te3 Wf7 1 5 Wa3 ..txc4 ( 1 5 . . .
.:. fd8!?) with a very healthy equal
for
ity
Black;
Pilnik
Tartakower, Paris 1 954/55.
9
de ( 1 4 )
14
IV
The modified pawn structure

delineates the respective spheres
of action : for White, the centre
and queenside; for Black, the cen
tre and kingside.
10
Wb3
A multi-purpose and sensible
move which puts pressure on b7,
sets up a vis-a-vis along the
important a2-g8 diagonal, and
prepares to bring a rook to the
d-file. Apart from the centrally
consolidating I 0 e4, the other
tenth moves hardly encompass the
same breadth or depth of efficacy
although one or two of them
nevertheless pose Black some deli
cate problems which, perhaps,
have not yet entirely been solved :
Leningrad Main Line: 7 . . . l0c6
(a) 1 0 f4? e4 + 1 1 ..te3 tt:\g4 1 2

..td4 e5 1 3 ..tc5 b6! 1 4 ..txf8
xf8 (Vinogradov) with more
than adequate compensation for
the (probably temporary) sacrifice
of material.
(b) 10 .:te l ?! e4 is fine for Black.
(c) 10 Wc2 permits untroubled
liquidation of Black's structural
weakness by I 0 . . . e6.
(d) 1 0 ..tg5?! tt:'Jd7! leaves the
bishop flailing.
(e) 10 c5!? e4 ( 1 0 . . . e6 looks
safer) I I *'b3 h8 1 2 .:td l *'d7?!
(artificial to say the least) 1 3 ..te3
c6 14 f3 cd 1 5 tt:\xd5 tt:\xd5 1 6 fe
fe 1 7 : xd5 on account of the
superior pawn structure and que
enside pressure; Cramling-G.
Flear, 1 983.
(f) 10 b3!? e4 I I ..ta3! .:tf7 ( I I
. . . tt:\g4!?) 1 2 f3! ef 1 3 ef f4 1 4 .:te l
with a clearly more harmonious
position for White; Dlugy-Gal
lego, World Jr. Ch. Sharjah 1 985.
e6
10
Ribli assesses 1 0 . . . h8 I I
: d I as ;;!; , but it may be worth
while further investigating the
plan of leaving the centre pawns
untouched, e.g. 10 . . . h6 I I : d 1
h8 1 2 c5 g5 1 3 ..td2 e4 1 4 .te l
a6 1 5 *'a3 *'e8 1 6 b4 ..td7 1 7 W b3
tt:\g4 with good kingside attacking
prospects for Black; Siekansky
Hawelko, Polish Ch. 1 989.
II
.:td l
ed
If this seems too risky then the
19
playable I I . . . *'e7 i s available,

e.g. 1 2 ..tg5 (;;!; R i bli) h6 1 3 ..txf6
..txf6 1 4 e4 (thus far Schmid
Menvielle, Tel Aviv 01. 1 964) and
now ECO recommends 1 4 . . . : b8
with an evaluation of equality.
Clearly, there remains much to be
properly worked out here.
12
tt:'Jxd5
c6
13
..tg5!?
A startling new idea. Older
analyses had only considered the
attacking attempt 1 3 c5 which fails
after 1 3 . . . cd 14 ..txd5 + tt:\xd5
15 .:txd5 We8! as White has no
useful discovered check.
13
cd
The offer cannot be declined
because after 1 3 . . . as White
plays 14 tt:\e7 + followed by cap
turing on c8 and then b7 with
advantage.
h8
14
..txd5 +
15
..txb7 ( 1 5 )
15
8
The point of White's combi

nation is now revealed : to bring
about an approximate, heterog-
20
Leningrad Main Line:
7 . . lLlc6
.
eneous balance of queen and

pawns versus rook and two minor
pieces. Such positions are notori
ously resistant to generalization
and necessitate concrete appraisal,
and here lies the nub of White's
discovery-that the black pieces
are lacking in coordination and a
useful plan whereas White's pawns
can be rapidly mobilized and
made into a real threat.
IS
Wxd l +
Perhaps Black can improve at
this juncture. It's true that 1 5 . . .
.td7 is unplayable on account of
16 .txa8 "it' xa8 1 7 .txf6 .txf6 1 8
.l: xd 7, but 1 5 . . . .l: b8 immediately
enables the a-pawn to be saved,
e.g. 1 6 .l: xd8 .l: xd8 1 7 .l: d l .l: g8!
(not 1 7 . . . : xd l ? 18 "it' xd 1 .txb7
1 9 .t xf6 .t xf6 20 "it'd6 ) 1 8
"it'a3 .l: xb7 with conspicuously
better chances than in the game.
16
: xd l
: b8
.txb7
17
"it'a3
1 7 . . . : xb7? 1 8 .txf6 wins for
White.
18
.txf6
.txf6
19
"it'xa7
With the capture of a third
pawn the situation has clarified
in White's favour. Although there
would still be considerable techni
cal difficulties to overcome against
the most stubborn defence, the
game illustrates well just how
difficult it is to manage the
maximum resistance in practice :
1 9 . . . .ta8 20 b3 .l: bd8 2 1 : xd8

.l: xd8 22 f3 e4 (22 . . . g8 was
mandatory) 23 "it'f7! .td4 + 24
g2 ef + 25 ef .tg7 26 "it'e7 :rs
(on 26 . . . .l: d2 + 27 fl .tc6, 28
"it'c7! wins material) 27 b4 (once
the pawns start rolling there is no
hope) 27 . . . h5 28 b5 g8 29 b6
.tf6 30 "it'e6 + g7 3 1 c5 .l: d8
32 c6 .l:d2 + 33 fl f4 34 b7
1 -0.
Karpov-Jacobsen
USSR v Scandinavia, junior

match 1 968
1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4 lt:lf3
.tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc6
8 dS lt:le5 9 lt:lxeS de
10
e4 ( 1 6 )
This central advance both fixes

Black's front e-pawn (and thereby
deadens the KB) and provides
White with a means of opening
up the position at an opportune
moment. It has long been consid
ered the best continuation despite
its tendency to produce formi-
dable complications.
10
f4
This bold thrust nails Black's
colours to the mast and commits
him to an all out assault on the
enemy king. Although present day
interest has focused almost exclus
ively on this uncompromising
attacking line, there does exist a
quieter alternative which certainly
deserves mentioning and that is
I 0 . . . e6. There are two main ways
for White to meet this central
challenge :
(a) 1 1 .-b3 ed (should Black
suddenly experience a change of
heart and a craving for complica
tions, then 1 1 . . . f4 is still available
with the usual unclear conse
quences) 1 2 cd h8 ( 1 2 . . . ltJe8
1 3 ef gf 1 4 d6 + is promising for
White) 1 3 ..te3 f4!? (the staid 1 3
. . . ltJe8 brought Black a draw in
Tartakower-Aiexander, Hastings
1 953/54) 14 ..tcS : es 1 5 : fd 1 b6
1 6 ..ta3 ..tg4 1 7 f3 ..td7 1 8 gf
ltJ hS 1 9 ltJe2 ef when Black is not
without chances on the kingside to
offset White's undoubted central
supremacy; Uhlmann-Espig, E.
Germany 1 972.
(b) 1 1 ef ef (the untested 1 1 . . .
gf has its points) 1 2 ..te3
(Gheorghiu's bald 1 2 *'b3 has
yet to be confirmed in practice)
1 2 . . . e4?! (looks premature here;
ECO has suggested 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3
j_c5 : e8) 1 3 ..td4 : e8 1 4 : e l
7 . . lllc6
.
21
b6 15 f3 and the game opens

up to White's advantage; Collins
Sherwin, New York 1 952.
11
b3
The right idea but insuffici
ently energetically executed-the
bishop needs to be fianchettoed in
order to find worthwhile develop
ment, but equally the q ueen
requires an active station and
therefore 1 1 b4 (reserving b3 for
the queen) has become the major
continuation. We shall examine
that move in the context of the
next game and note the other
eleventh turn possibilities here :
(a) 1 1 gf ef ( 1 1 . . . ltJh5!? 1 2 f5
ltJf4 also gives compensation for
the pawn) 1 2 ..t xf4 ( 1 2 eS leads
to strange positions tending in
Black's favour, e.g. 1 2 . . . ltJg4 1 3
e6 ltJeS 1 4 .-b3 f3 1 5 ..th3 b6!
with . . . ..ta6 in the air) 1 2 . . .
ltJxe4! 1 3 ..tg3 (or 1 3 ltJe2 ltJd6!
with balanced prospects) 1 3 . . .
ltJxg3 1 4 hg e6 and Black has
overcome his opening problems;
Hodakowsky-Hiibner,
Aibling
1 965.
(b) 1 1 c5 gS 1 2 *'b3?! h8 1 3
lObS?! (having blocked his b-pawn
White has difficulty forming a
plan) l 3 . . . c6 1 4 ltJc3 .-es 1 5 .- d 1
..i d 7 1 6 b 4 :d8 1 7 ..t b 2 ltJg4 +
Black has completed his develop
ment and is ready to proceed with
the kingside attack; a perfect
example of how Black should
22
. .
. ll:\c6
build up the position when left

undisturbed;
Wells-Hansen,
World Jr. Ch. Kiljava 1 984.
(c)
1 1 f3?! (pusillanimous
prophylaxis) I I . . . c6! 1 2 de "ir'b6 +
1 3 h I be (keeping control of the
important d5 square) 14 b3 g5 1 5
..ta3 17! 1 6 gf gf 1 7 ti'la4 "ir'c7
1 8 "ir'e l l::t g8 and Black can be
well satisfied with his share of the
chances in a difficult position for
both sides; Hjartarson- Plaskett,
Hastings 1 985/86.
11
g5
12
f3
White is concerned at the possi
bility of the g-pawn advancing
even further.
12
"ir'd6
13
g4
h5 ( 1 7)
17
w
A sight to gladden every Lenin

grad player's heart! One glance
suffices to show that White's strat
egy has failed miserably and
allowed Black to create a deadly
kingside attack. The further course
of the game is extremely instruc-
tive: 14 h3 hg 1 5 fg (acquiescing
to the opening of the h-file would
be tantamount to resignation) 1 5
. . . .id7 1 6 a4 "ir'b6 + 1 7 h2
f7 18 .if3 l::t h8 19 g2 l::t h4
20 aS "ir'c5 21 ..ta3 "ir'e3 22 "ir'e 1
( 18)
22 . . . .ixg4! (having this u p

his sleeve was the reason Black
allowed the queen to be driven
into the enemy camp with its
exchange apparently inevitable
excellent calculation!) 23 hg (23
..txg4 ti'lxg4) 23 . . . ti'lxg4 24 l::t h 1
l::t x h I 25 "ir'xe3 ti'lxe3 + 26 xh I
g4 (despite the reduction in forces,
White is still in trouble due to the
powerful connected passed pawns)
27 .ie2 f3 28 .1c5 (not 28 .td 1 ?
f2 and . . . l::t h 8 mate will follow)
28 . . . .th6 29 l::t e 1 b6 30 .txf3
(or 30 .txe3 .1xe3 3 1 .1 xf3
l::t h8 + 32 g2 gf+ 33 xf3
..td2- + ) 30 . . . be 3 1 .i d 1 g6
32 ti'lb5 .tf4 33 l::tx e3 (if 33 g1
then 33 . . . g3 followed by . . . l::th8h2 etc.) 33 . . . ..txe3 34 ti'lxc7
tlh8 + 35 g2 tlh4 36 a6 ..tf4

37 gl g3 38 ..tf3 .l:t h2 39 ..tg2
;f7 40 fl tlh6 41 e2 tlb6
0- 1 .
7 . . . ll\c6
23
/9
w
C. Hansen-J. Kristiansen
Esbjerg 1 984
I d4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lL!f3
.ig7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lL!c3 lL!c6
8 d5 lL!e5 9 lL!xe5 de 10 e4 f4
II
b4
g5
With the centre locked, both
sides pursue their respective flank
initiatives with great energy. It
would be quite wrong for Black
to meddle with the centre, e.g. I I
. . . e6 1 2 .ib2 ed 1 3 ed .if5 1 4
:le t and with the inevitable arrival
of the knight at e4, Black will find
himself at a significant positional
disadvantage.
12
:lei
A somewhat enigmatic move,
not exactly forced, which passively
vacates f1 for the bishop in the
event of a . . . g4 . . . f3 pawn storm,
and actively observes the e3 square
(see the note to White's fifteenth
in Farago-Poutiainen below).
12
a6
A necessary preparation for the
transfer of the queen to the king
side, simply preventing lL!b5. An
u ntested alternative plan is 1 2 . . .
g4 1 3 c5 f3 1 4 ..tfl h5, though
such a'n approach lacks flexibility.
13
..tb2
'ilt'e8 ( 1 9 )
An attractive, rich position of

clearly drawn battle lines which
should have no trouble attracting
supporters for both sides. Pract
ical experience so far is extremely
limited, and many more tests will
be required before a trustworthy
judgement can be advanced.
14
c5
Optimally priming White's pos
ition for various breakthroughs.
An earlier game, Farago- Poutiai
nen, Budapest 1 975, went 14 :le i
lL!g4 1 5 : c2? (looks natural
enough but lands White in dire
straits; 1 5 f3 was subsequently pro
posed as an improvement, the idea
being 1 5 . . . lL!e3 1 6 tlxe3! fe 1 7
g4! with superb positional com
pensation for the material deficit,
but Black can also improve with
15 . . . 'ilt' h5! with obscure play) 1 5
. . . -.. h5 1 6 h 3 f3 ! 1 7 ..txf3 (White
suddenly finds himself between
Scylla and Charybdis : 1 7 hg
..txg4 1 8 ..tfl : f6 would be fatal)
1 7 . . . -..x h3 1 8 'ilt'd3 lL!xf2! 19 tlxf2
24
. .
lllc6
( 1 9 xf2 W'h2 + 20 e3 : xf3 +

2 1 xf3 g4 + 22 e3 i.h6
19
W' xg3 +
mate!)
20 fl i.h3 + 2 1 e2 g4 0- l .
A very instructive miniature,
played with panache.
i.d7?!
14
With the laudable aim of devel
oping the queen's rook, but unfor
tunately White can throw a tacti
cal spanner in the works by 1 5 c6!
be 1 6 de i.xc6 1 7 lt:ld5 when the
soft underbelly of Black's position
has been dangerously exposed. In
fact, in the game this opportunity
to seize the initiative was missed,
and the proceedings took an
entirely different course, albeit one
still full of points of interest and
instruction.
Presumably, 14 . . . lt:lg4 must
still come into consideration, and
Kristiansen himself has noted 1 4
. . . W' f7 as a n improvement.
15
: ct
ltd8
16
a4
W'f7
Threatening to unleash the black

forces by . . . lt:lg4.
17
gf!
An economical way of cutting
dead Black's f-file pretensions.
ef?
17
Black has spotted an amazing
idea which seduces him into this
inferior capture. After the obvious
1 7 . . . gf, there would be real pro
spects of creating play along the
g-file, but as it is Black's dreams
of attack fade away before they
get going: 1 8 e5! lt:lxd5! 1 9 i.xd5
e6 20 i.e4! (after the natural
looking 20 i.f3 comes 20 . . . i.c6
2 1 W'e2 lt d2!! and Black wins!) 20
. . . f3 2 1 h 1 W'h5 22 lt e3 lt f4
23 i. xf3 : xf3? (the last chance
was 23 . . . g4) 24 lt xf3 g4 25 lt:le4!
(with this fine defensive move all
Black's tactics are foiled and
White assumes the initiative) 25
. . . gf 26 W'd4! W'h4 27 td l J:H8
28 lt g l lt f4 29 W'xd7 lt g4 30
W'xe6 + 1 -0.
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
d4
g3
..tg2
lLlf3
0-0
c4
lL\c3
f5
lLlf6
g6
..tg7
0-0
d6
'li'e8 (20)
'ife8
Occasionally the queen also finds

useful employment on r7 putting
pressure down the f-file and
attacking the c-pawn, and from
time to time we will see the queen
deployed at g6 or h5 after the
advance . . . h6 and . . . g5.
8
d5
The familiar method of prevent
ing . . . e5 and probably best. At
any rate the alternatives do not
look particularly threatening to
Black, e.g. :
(a) 8 e4 fe 9 lL\g5 lL\c6 1 0 ..te3
..tg4 I I 'ii' d 2 'ii' d 7 and Black's
active development assures him a
satisfactory game; Afifi-Yusupov,
Tunis 1 985.
(b) 8 l:tel 'li'rl (of course not 8
. . . lL\e4 immediately because of 9
lLlxe4 fe I 0 lL\g5 ) 9 b3 lL\e4
10 ..tb2 lL\c6 I I l:t c l h6 1 2 l:t fl (in
order to threaten capturing on e4; 1 2
d 5 lL\b4 would leave a2 tactically
vulnerable) 1 2 . . . lL\xc3 1 3 ..txc3 e5
with full equality; Gavrikov
Malanyuk, USSR Ch. 1 986.
It seems strange now to think

that it wasn't really until the 1 980s
that this typical Classical Dutch
move was transplanted to the Len
ingrad and worked up into a
coherent system. From e8 the
queen supports the advance . . .
e7-e5 and also helps prepare, in
conjunction with the QB, to con
test the centre by . . . c7-c6.
25
26
Leningrad Main Line: 7 .

.
"i1t' e8
(c) 8 lt:ld5 lLlxd5 9 cd 'it'b5 1 0

lLl e I (Black has a fine game after
10 'it'b3 'it'xb3 I I ab c6 1 2 ..ig5
.:te8 1 3 .:t fc l e6 14 de ..ixe6;
Zukhovitsky- M ih. Zeitlin, USSR
1 986) 1 0 . . . lLla6 ( 1 0 . . . a5!?) I I e3
..id7 12 lt:ld3 c5 1 3 de ..ixc6 14
..ixc6 be 15 'it'b3 + lH7 16 'it'xb5
cb 1 7 ..id2 e5
Balashov
M alanyuk, USSR. Ch. 1 986.
(d) 8 'it'b3 lLla6 9 ..ig5 c5 1 0
..ixf6 ..ixf6 I I .:t ad ! ..ig7 and
after this prophylaxis against e2e4 (which would now be answered
by f5-f4) prospects are balanced
thanks to Black's possession of the
two bishops; Lerner- Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 986.
(e) 8 b3 (a useful waiting move
hoping to show that Black's
threatened advance of the e-pawn
is actually loosening and opens
the position prematurely) 8 . . .
lLla6 (this standard treatment is
the most solid; 8 . . . e5 9 de de I 0
e4! lLlc6 I I lLld5! has indeed been
shown to favour White) 9 ..ib2 (9
..ia3 c6 1 0 'it'd3 .:t b8 I I e4 fe 1 2
lLlxe4 ..if5 1 3 lLlxf6 + ..ixf6 1 4
'it'e3 b5 gives a dynamic balance;
Kishnyev- Bukhman,
Budapest
1 989) 9 . . . ..id7 10 d5 c6 I I .:t e l
h 6 1 2 e 3 .:t c8 1 3 lLld4 'it'f7 with a
typically rich position for both
Kasparov-Malanyuk,
sides;
USSR Ch. 1 988.
8
lLla6
The most effective method of
=
developing the queenside given

that White's d-pawn advance
ceded Black control of c5.
9
lLld4
The most natural follow-up to
the previous move, but there is
also a case for trying to throw
Black's plans out of gear by pre
paring a rapid advance of the b
pawn, e.g. 9 .:t b I ..id7 1 0 b4 ( I 0
lLld4
would
transpose
to
Tukmakov - M . Gurevich below)
10 . . . e5 I I de ..ixe6 1 2 lLld4
..ixc4 1 3 . .ixb7 .:t b8 14 ..ic6
since White has simultaneously
downgraded Black's pawn struc
ture and turned the stranded a6
knight into a real liability; Ruka
vina-Cvitan, Yugoslav Ch. 1 986.
9 . . . c6 looks a sensible attempt
at improvement.
9
..id7 ( 2 1 )
21
w
Necessary preparation for the

advance of the c-pawn which
forms an indispensable link in
Black's counterplay.
Essentially, White must now
decide whether to concentrate

operations in the centre or on the
q ueenside, and accordingly our
illu strative games will feature the
continuations 10 e4 and 10 l: b l .
I n addition to these the follow
ing examples are also worth not
ing :
(a) 10 e3 c6 I I b3 (a game
Gavrilov-M. Gurevich, USSR
1982, continued interestingly with
II l: b l tiJc7 12 b4 cd 1 3 cd l: c8
1 4 a4 tiJa8 1 5 "it'b3 and Black
is uncomfortably cramped; I I . . .
l:t b8 looks more precise) I I . . .
tiJc7 1 2 .i b2 c5 1 3 tiJde2 (as
the game goes, White gets into
difficulties over the weakness of c4
and so 1 3 tiJf3 with a later re
routing to d2 was preferable) 1 3
. . . b5 1 4 "it'c2 l: b8 ( Black has a
pleasant initiative while White has
nothing to do) 1 5 l: ac l (exacer
bates the problems of the position;
either 15 l: ab l or 1 5 cb should
have been played) 1 5 . . . be 16 be
tiJg4! 1 7 .ia 1 tiJe5 1 8 tiJd 1 .ia4
19 "it'd2 tiJxc4! and Black has won
a sound pawn in very instructive
Belyavsky-Malanyuk,
fashion;
USSR Ch. 1 983.
(b) 10 b3 (this move has much
in common with 10 l: b l but here
White chooses to forgo b4 options
in favour of a different placement
of the rook) I 0 . . . c6 I I .ib2 tiJc7
12 l: c l ( 1 2 "it'd2 merits attention,
e.g. 12 . . . c5 1 3 tiJf3 a6 14 : ae l
. . . "ilfe8
27
b5 1 5 "it'd3 l: b8 1 6 .ia 1 h6 1 7
tiJd2 tiJg4 1 8 e3 since the sting
has been taken from Black's
and
White
counterplay
is ready to push through in t he
centre; P. Stefanov- Marasescu,
Romanian Ch. 1 983. Perhaps
Black should prefer 1 3 . . . : b8
and possibly dispense with . . . a6
altogether.) 1 2 . . . : b8 1 3 "it'd2 c5
14 tiJf3 a6 (Kremenetsky considers
14 . . . b5 1 5 cb tiJxb5 1 6 tiJxb5
l: xb5 1 7 .ixf6 .ixf6 1 8 "it'c2
intending tiJf3-d2-c4 to be ;t, but
this is hard to credit given the
open nature of the position and
Black's bishops) 1 5 "it' c2 b5 1 6
tiJd2 e5!? 1 7 de .ixe6 1 8 .i a I ( 1 8
e4? would allow the characteristic
and instructive tactical blow 18 . . .
be 1 9 be fe 20 tiJcxe4 l: xb2!) 1 8
. . . "it'e7 1 9 1!4 f4! (a typical side
stepping response to White's tor
tuously prepared central advance)
20 tiJd5 (of course not 20 gf? tiJh5
when the black squares around
White's king are irreparably weak
ened) 20 . . . tiJfxd5 2 1 cd .id7 22
.ixg7 "it'xg7 23 tiJf3 .ig4 and
with transition to a classic good
knight versus bad bishop position
imminent Black's winning chances
are good; F. Lengyel-Kremenet
sky, Satu-Mare 1 983.
R. Hernandez-Chemin
Cienfuegos 1 981
d4 rs 2 g3 tiJf6 3 ig2 g6 4 tiJf3
28
..
Wle8
..tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 ltlc3 -.es

8 dS lt:Ja6 9 ltld4 ..td7
10
e4
Such rustic applications of the
pedagogues' panacea for dealing
with the Dutch-play e4-rarely
prove really threatening as long as
they are met precisely. Generally
speaking, White does better to
promote strategical complexity
rather than clarify matters with
an early showing of his hand.
Nevertheless, any logical opening
up of the centre is always an acid
test of Black's defensive resources
and needs careful handling.
lt:Jxe4
10
Of course Black can j ust as well
capture with the pawn as long
as transposition to the column is
effected by exchanging knights as
well; failure to do so leads to grave
problems for Black, as shown by
Thessaloniki
I vkov- Bischoff,
Open 1 984: 10 . . . fe 1 1 lt:Jxe4
c5? 1 2 lt:Je6 ..txe6 1 3 de lt:Jc7 1 4
lt:Jxf6 + ..t xf6 1 5 -.e2 .l:l. b8 1 6 a4
lt:Ja6 1 7 h4! and with h5 to come,
Black's fragile kingside defences
will soon be ripped apart.
fe
II
lt:Jxe4
( 22)
12
..txe4
An important tabiya for the 7
. . . -.es variation, containing an
interesting mixture of structural
and dynamic pros and cons for
both sides. White's advanced d-
22
8
pawn assures him a spatial advan

tage and he is without structural
weakness, his pieces can develop
freely and the half-open e-file
beckons for major piece oper
ations; the pride and joy of his
position at the moment is the
beautifully centralized knight
which is particularly happy to be
keeping e6 under surveillance. By
comparison, Black is cramped and
suffers from a problem e-pawn,
none too sturdy kingside and the
e6 weakness in the heart of his
position. To offset these static
deficiencies, Black has active
pieces and useful lines to operate
along in the half open f-file and
h8-a 1 diagonal as well as pro
spects of creating play in the centre
and/or on the queenside by appro
priate pawn pushes.
c6
12
This appears to be Black's most
reliable continuation judging from
the evidence so far. The alterna
tives :
(a) 1 2 . . . c5?! 1 3 de? ( 1 3 lLJe6!

lo oks unpleasant for Black; cf.
Ivkov-Bischoff, note to Black's
tenth above) 1 3 . . . be 14 .l:t b 1 .l:t c8
1 5 .te3 Wf7 1 6 We2 e5 1 7 lLJb3
4Jc7 1 8 .tg2 d5 with promising
dynamic possibilities for Black in
a complex position; Schmidt-Gri
gorov, Prague 1 985.
(b) 1 2 . . . 4Jc5 1 3 .tg2 a5 1 4
.tg5 W f7 1 5 W d2 .txd4 1 6 W xd4
e5 1 7 Wc3 with a clear positional
superiority for White thanks to
the bishop pair; Van der Sterren
Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984.
13
.te3
Not 1 3 de? be transposing to
Schmidt-Grigorov above.
lLJc7
13
c5!
14
Wd2
Now that lLJe6 is no longer
possible Black is happy to stabilize
the centre so as to launch a flank
initiative.
b5
15
lLie2
.tf5!
16
cb
Forcing White to retreat since
exchanging would irretrievably
weaken the d-pawn.
17
.tg2
W xb5 ( 23 )
Yet another demonstration of
the versatility of the e8 placement
of the black queen! It is interesting
to observe how Black has usurped
the initiative despite White having
apparently played only natural
and sensible looking moves. Note
that White has failed to develop
. . .
-. e8
29
23
w
any play at all against Black's

sensitive e6 and e7 points whereas
Black has both isolated White's d
pawn and created a target of the
b-pawn by opening up the b-file.
18
lLic3
Wd3
Proceeding in instructive safety
first style denying the opponent
any chance of attacking on the
kingside.
W xd2
19
.l:tfdt
h6
20
.l:txd2
Preventing counterplay against
the e-pawn by .tg5 and rooks to
the e-file. Now White is reduced
to passive defence while Black can
gradually apply the pressure with
every chance of a positive outcome
as indeed was the case in the game :
2 1 .l:t c l .l:t ab8 22 .tfl .td7 23
.tc4 .1:t b4 24 b3 .1:t fb8 25 a3?
(precipitates the end, although
continued passivity would have
to contend with the undermining
advance of Black's a-pawn; White
ought to have . gone fishing in
muddy waters by 25 4Je4 with
30
...
WeB
sacrificial possibilities on c5) 25 . . .

J::tx b3! (a typical and instructive
exchange offer to batter down the
defensive wall) 26 i.xb3 l::tx b3 27
lt:le2 a5 28 i.d4 i.f8! 29 l::tb2 a4
30 J::t x b3 ab 3 1 J::t b l c4! 32 J::tc l
lt:lxd5 0- 1 . White i s helpless
against the black pawns, e.g. 33
lt:lc3 (33 l::txc4? i.b5) 33 . . . lt:lxc3
34 i. xc3 i. b5 followed by . . .
i.g7 and the blockade is broken.
Ryshkov-Zarubin
Leningrad I 983
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 i.g2 g6 4 lt:lf3
i.g7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 W'e8
8 d5 lt:la6 9 lt:ld4 i.d7
10
J::tb 1
A useful move side-stepping the
veiled attack from Black's KB and
introducing b4 options into the
position.
10
c6
The only sensible continuation
at this juncture. One final warning
against . . . c5 when it can be answ
ered by lt:le6 : 10 . . . c5? I I lt:le6
i. xe6 1 2 de W'c8 1 3 lt:ld5 lt:lxd5
14 cd c4 1 5 i.g5 J::te8 16 e4 fe 1 7
i. xe4 W'c5 1 8 i.e3 W'b4 1 9 W'g4
lt:lc7 20 h4 (with this Black's fate
is irredeemably sealed) 20 . . . J::t f8
2 1 h5 lt:le8 22 hg h6 23 W' h4 lt:lf6
24 i.f3 lt:le8 25 i.xh6 l::t xf3 26
i.xg7 xg7 27 W'h7 + 1 -0
Burger-Dlugy, 1983.
b3
11
The immediate double step

advance of the b-pawn appears to
have tactical objections, e.g. I I
b4?! (or similarly I I de be 1 2 b4?!
lt:lxb4 1 3 l::t xb4 c5 1 4 lt:ld5 cb 1 5
lt:lc7 W'c8 1 6 lt:lxa8 lt:le4 1 7 i.xe4
fe
1 8 i.g5
J::tf7
1 9 lt:lc2
W' xa8 20 lt:l xb4 i.h3 + Kara
sev-Cherepkov, Leningrad 1 983/
84) I I . . . lt:lxb4 1 2 l::t xb4 (perhaps
1 2 a3 is worth consideration) 1 2
. . . c5 1 3 J::tx b7 cd 1 4 lt:lb5 W'c8 1 5
J::tc7 (or 1 5 l::tx a7 W' xc4 1 6 l::tx a8
l::txa8 17 lt:ld4 l::txa2 18 e3 lt:le4 )
1 5 . . . W' b8 1 6 J::tc6 lt:le4! 1 7 i.xe4
i.xc6! 1 8 de fe and Black's
material advantage should be
decisive; M ilut-Armas, Romanian
Ch.
11
lt:lc7 ( 24 )
I I . . . l::tb8 merits careful con

sideration here as it could quite
easily turn out to be the most
precise move. Cebalo-Jacimovic,
Pula 1 985, continued 12 i. b2 lt:lc7
1 3 b4 (perhaps too forcing; 1 3 e3
would be normal) 1 3 . . . e5! 1 4 de
tZ:lxe6 1 5 e3 W f7 1 6 W b3 lL!xd4 1 7
ed and now instead of 1 7 . . . b5
Black could either bring about a
stable equality by 1 7 . . . ..te6 1 8
d 5 cd 1 9 cd ..td7 or try for more
by 1 7 . . f4!?
12
..tb2
This looks natural enough but
it has the drawback of allowing
Black to get on with his plan
unhindered. Alternatives:
(a) 1 2 b4 (with the black knight's
retreat the tactical problems have
disappeared) 1 2 . . . e5 1 3 de (both
1 3 lLl b3 cd 14 lL!xd5 lL!cxd5 1 5
..txd5 + lL!xd5 1 6 W xd5 + ..te6
and 1 3 de ed! 14 cd W xd 7 1 5 lLla4
lL!e4 1 6 ..t b2 b5 are in Black's
favour) 1 3 . . . lL!xe6 1 4 lL!b3 (better
to support the k night by 1 4 e3) 1 4
. . . lL!g4! 1 5 ..t b2 lL!e5 (Black has
neatly highlighted the drawback
of the b4 advance-the weakening
of c4-and has achieved a per
fectly viable position) 1 6 lL!d2 a5?!
(rather than spurring White on
with his plan he should make him
think twice by playing 16 . . . a6)
1 7 b5 lL!c5 1 8 be be 1 9 lL!a4!
and White's position is the more
purposeful; Tukmakov-M. Gure
vich, USSR 1 982.
(b) 1 2 e3 (creating an alternative
retreat for the knight) 1 2 . . . c5 1 3
lL!de2 b5 1 4 cb lL!xb5 1 5 lL!xb5
.i.xb5 1 6 ..t b2 Wfl = 1 7 .C. e l
lL!e4 1 8 ..t xg7 W xg7 1 9 .C. c 1 a5
20 lLl f4 ..td7 21 Wc2 lL!f6 22 Wd3
0
...
jte8
31
.C. fb8 23 lL!e6 ..txe6 2 4 d e .C. a7 2 5

.C. c4 Wf8 26 e4 fe 27 ..txe4 We8
28 Wd2 t-t Adorjan-Grigorov,
Prague 1 985.
(c) 1 2 de be 1 3 b4 e5 14 lLlb3
We7, with chances for both sic;les
in a complicated position, is a
suggestion of Tukmakov's.
c5
12
13
lLlf3
The knight is not well placed
on c2, e.g. 1 3 lLlc2 .C. b8 ( 1 3 . . . g5
intending play on the kingside
comes into consideration) 1 4 e4
(the point of leaving the bishop's
diagonal clear) 1 4 . . . b5 1 5 e5?!
(over-optimistic) 1 5 . . . de 1 6 d6
lLle6 1 7 lLlxb5 ..txb5 1 8 de Wxe7
19 cb (thus far Szilagyi-Armas,
Tatabanya 1 985) 1 9 . . . lL!d4 20 a4
.C. fd8 and Black dominates the
centre.
13
.C. b8
14
lLld2
b5
15
cb
White has decided to leave his
e-pawn untouched for as long as
possible and therefore has to deal
with the threatened . . . b4 in more
radical fashion. Both 1 5 e3 and 1 5
e4 were alternatives worth atten
tion with balanced chances.
15
lL!xb5
16
lL!c4
g5
With the centre stable and some
progress already made on the
queenside Black now turns his
attention to the opposite flank.
31
...
WeB
.i.xb5
17
lL!xb5
18
11fc2
Erroneously egging Black on.
Much safer was 1 8 e3 in order to
be able to open the e-file in the
event of Black still pushing on
with . . . f4.
f4 ( 25 )
18
Removing the sting from e5.

de
24
e5
25
.:. ret
e4! (26)
26
w
25
w
Black has made considerable

progress and is clearly in the driv
ing seat.
19
1Wf5?
Merely a waste of time.
h6
19
20
gf
.i.d7
gf
21
1Wd3
22
e4
White pins his hopes on coun
tering Black's kingside attacking
chances by central action but this
turns out to be misguided.
11fh5
22
23
f3
.i. b5
Black has neatly thwarted Whi

te's counterplay and now passes
to decisive action on the kingside.
The game concluded : 26 fe .i.xc4
27 be (27 11fxc4? f3 28 d6 + h8
29 de f2 + 30 xf2 lL!g4 + + 3 1
g3-3 1 e2 lL!e5 + costs the
queen-3 1 . . . 11fxh2 + ! 32 xg4
.::. f4 mate) 27 . . . lL!g4 28 1Wh3 11fg5!
29 .i.xg7 11fxg7 30 e5 l:.xb 1 3 1
l:.xb 1 lL!xe5 3 2 h 1 f3 3 3 .i.fl
.::. f6? (Black loses his way; simply
33 . . . h8 with 34 . . . l:.g8 to
follow would quickly wrap things
up) 34 'lieS + h7 35 .i.h3 1Wf8
36 11fxc5 l:.f4 37 l:.b7 l:.xc4 38
11fe3? (38 l:.xe7 + ! h8 39 11fe3!
keeps matters unclear) 38 . . . 11ff6
39 .i.fl l:.h4 40 l:.xa7?? l:.xh2 +
0- l .
Leningrad : Miscellaneous
Systems
I n this chapter we review various

White alternatives to the mainline
sequence 1 d4 f5 2 g3 t!Jf6 3 .tg2
g6 4 t!Jf3 .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6
7 t!Jc3. Working backwards, we
shall simply note our rec
ommended responses where the
deviations are no more than modi
fications of previously encoun
tered plans, but those incorporat
ing new strategic concepts will be
examined in greater detail in the
context of complete games.
27
w
ations, attempting, in the first case,

to exploit the lack of control of e4,
and in the second the weakening of
the a 1 -h8 diagonal: (i) 7 . . . t!Je4
8 .t b2 t!Jd7 9 "it"c2 and now
instead of 9 . . . t!Jdf6 10 t!Jbd2 e6
1 1 t!Je 1 t!Jxd2 1 2 "it"xd2 "it"e7 1 3
t!Jd3 ;t (Petrosian- Kaiszauri, Vil
nius 1 978) Black should prefer the
immediate 9 . . . e6, e.g. to t!Jbd2
t!Jxd2 1 1 "it"xd2 "it"e7 and he is
poised to play the liberating . . .
e6-e5 when appropriate; (ii) 7 . . .
e5!? 8 de de 9 "it"c2 (evidently, the
prospect of being pinned precludes
Seventh move alternatives (after 6

. . . d6 (27 ) )
I n addition t o the classic knight
development 7 t!Jc3 White has also
experimented with the following
possibilities :
(a) 7 b3 This flexible move may
comfortably be met by the stand
ard 7 . . . c6 with essentially similar
play to the main line but of greater
i nterest are the following continu33
34
the capture on e5) 9 . . . e4! I 0 : d I

"fle7 I I lL!d4 c5 1 2 lL!b5 and now
not 12 . . . lL!c6? 1 3 .tf4 (Ban
giev-Lutikov, USSR Navy Ch.
1 970) but 1 2 . . . a6! with fine pro
spects for Black.
(b) 7 b4 e5! 8 de de 9 .tb2 e4
10 lL!d4 "fle7 I I "flb3 h8 with
chances for both sides.
(c) 7 d5 By advancing in the
centre immediately White cuts out
Black's main line option of 7 . . .
lL!c6. The simplest response is 7 . . .
lL!a6 8 lL!d4 .td7 9 lLlc3 "fle8
transposing to Chapter 3. Botvin
nik has claimed that 10 lL!b3 leaves
the position slightly in White's
favour, but this contentious assess
ment has yet to be upheld in
practice. One additional example
of play : 10 : e l lL!c5 I I "flc2 c6 1 2
lL! b3 lL!ce4! 1 3 lL!xe4 fe 1 4 ..be4
"flf7! (the veiled threat against f2
enables Black to regain his pawn
with advantage) 1 5 .te3 cd 1 6 cd
: fc8 1 7 "fld3 lL!xe4 1 8 "fixe4 .tf5
1 9 -.h4 .txb2 + Prakhov -Bert
holdt, Bad Salzungen 1 960.
Early b3 fianchetto
White may opt for a quick queen
side fianchetto at almost any stage.
All Black's standard responses
remain valid but the most distinc
tive counter features an intriguing
Leningrad/Stonewall hybrid.
Portisch-Smyslov
Portoroz 197 1
I d 4 f5 2 g3 lL!f6 3 .tg2 g 6 4 lL! f3
.tg7 5 b3 0-0 6 .tb2 d 5 ( 28 )
28
w
This bold advance signals a rad

ical departure from the standard
Leningrad strategies. In place of
the usual quicksilver centre and
fleet-footed piece play, we have a
locked pawn front which slows
the mid-board battle considerably
and sees both sides jockeying for
optimum positioning behind their
own lines before engaging in hand
to hand combat. Comparison with
the standard Stonewall shows that
it is easier for Black to develop his
pieces in the Leningrad version
since in general there is less central
congestion and in particular
Black's Q B, usually the problem
piece, finds useful deployment at
e6. One suspects that the Lenin
grad Stonewall could well prove
to be a major growth area in the
future development of the Dutch
Defence.
e4
7
e6
8
..te6
0-0
With this immediate develop
ment Black declares himself
unconcerned at the possible
k night sally which White chooses
to implement. The preparatory 8
. . . 'it>h8, enabling the bishop to
drop back to g8 if attacked, is
an alternative and equally valid
approach.
9
li:lg5
..tf7
10
li:leJ
'ili'e8!
A key move in Black's plans;
from f7 the queen will not only
protect d5 but also maintain the
pressure against c4 as will be seen.
h6
11
'ili'dJ
12
li:lxf7
'ili'xf7
13
f3
A direct and natural-looking
continuation which aims to open
up the centre as rapidly as poss
i ble. Black's resources are also
fully adequate to meet immediate
play on the queen's wing, e.g. 1 3
cd cd 1 4 'ili'b5 e6 1 5 li:la4 li:lc6 1 6
tL:lc5 li:le4! with excellent central
counterplay.
li:lbd7
13
14
e4 ( 29 )
It appears that Black is in immi
nent danger of being rolled up
in the centre, to his permanent
spatial disadvantage, but there is
a hidden weak spot in White's
position which Black uncovers
35
:!9
8
with considerable effect. Thus

hindsight indicates that White
should have played 14 cd li:lxd5!
(not 14 . . . cd 15 e4 ) 15 li:l xd5
1 hd5 with balanced chances
according to Portisch.
14
de!
li:lb6
15
be
Now all becomes clear; the
weakness of the white c-pawn, and
subsequently the c4 square,
enables Black to seize the initiative
and generate long-term pressure
on the q ueenside.
16
e5
1 6 d5 would be no better for
then the other knight would swing
into action on the e5 and c5
squares after 1 6 . . . li:lfd7.
16
li:le4
.l:tad8
17
.tel
18
.l:t b l
li:ld7!
Sim ultaneously increasing the
pressure on the white centre and
parrying the threat of 19 .l:t xb7 on
account of 1 9 . .. . li:lxc5.
b5!
19
d5
36
The knight has no intention of

vacating its powerful outpost. If
now 20 cb then the white d-pawn
would come under attack after 20
. . . lLJdxb6.
lLJxc5
20
de
21
a6 ( 30)
Wc2
30
w
White's proud-looking centre of

the previous diagram has been
shattered and it is merely a matter
of time before the remnant
straggler at c6 is ripe for the pluck
ing. Rather than exit prosaically
White attempts to muddy the
waters with a pawn offer which
at least allows him to dream of
counterplay down the long diag
onal. Black's play, however, is las
er-accurate to the last, and it is
the white king which becomes
exposed : 22 f4 ..bc3! 23 Wxc3
lLJ xe4 24 ..txe4 fe 25 a4 Wd5 26
ab ab 27 ..tb2 .I:H6 28 ..ta I Wc5 +
29 h i Wxc6 30 : bd l e3 + 3 1
g l : d2 3 2 : xd2 ed 3 3 W b3
: d6 34 Wc3 e5! 35 : d l (the
attempt to keep the diagonal open
would meet with an elegant refu

tation : 35 fe d l W 35 ed Wh I + ! 37
xh 1 Wxfl mate) 35 . . . Wc5 +
36 h i We3 37 fe : d 3 0- 1 .
A s an addendum t o this fine
game let us also note a more recent
variation of the same theme which
provides much interesting food for
thought.
Yusupov-Malanyuk,
USSR Ch. 1 98 7 : I d4 f5 2 g3 lLJf6
3 ..ig2 g6 4 b3 ..tg7 5 ..t b2 0-0
6 lLJf3 d6 7 0-0 c6 8 lLJ bd2 h8 9
c4 d5!? (electing for the Stonewall
formation even at the cost of a
tempo!) 1 0 lLJe5 ..te6 I I lLJd3
lLJ bd7 12 : c l ( Malanyuk gives 1 2
f3 W b6 1 3 e 3 c5!? as unclear) 1 2
. . . lLJe4 1 3 lLlf4 ..t f7 1 4 cd cd 1 5
f3 lLJd6 1 6 e3 ( 1 6 e4? W b6!) 1 6 . . .
Wa5 1 7 lLJd3 ( 1 7 ..ic3 W b6 leaves
the bishop misplaced) 1 7 . . . : ac8
(Black has completed his develop
ment harmoniously and has no
problems) 1 8 We2 Wa6 19 : fe 1
: xc l 20 : xc 1 : c8 2 1 : xeS lLJxc8
22 a4 and now instead of 22 . . .
lLJd6 23 ..ifl Wc6 24 Wd I g8
25 f2 Wc7 26 W c 1 W xc l 27
lLJxcl which left White a tiny edge
which he worked hard to exploit
before agreeing to a draw on move
sixty, Malanyuk proposes 22 . . .
e5 23 de lLJ xe5 24 ..tfl lLJxd3 25
..ixg7 + xg7 26 Wxd3 Wxd3 27
..txd3 lLJe7 28 ..ib5 a6 29 ..td7
f6 as Black's surest path to the
draw. That one of the foremost
modern connoisseurs of the Lenin-
Leningrad : Miscellaneous Systems
grad should be ready to adopt

Stonewall formation a tempo
down, yet nevertheless equalise
without difficulty against a player
of Yusupov's calibre, bodes well
indeed for the future of the Lenin
grad Stonewall.
he
Sixth move alternatives

1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2 g6 4
liJO .tg7 5 0-0 0-0 ( 3 1 )
31
w
Some succinct suggestions for

meeting the various offbeat alter
natives to the natural 6 c4 :
(a) 6 d5 is met most simply either
by 6 . . . c6 7 c4 d6 transposing to
chapter 1 or 6 . . . lt:la6 7 c4 d6 as
in 7 d5 above.
(b) 6 c3 d6 (6 . . . d5 is feasible)
7 1fb3 + e6 8 lt:l bd2 (Black is
certainly happy to oblige with a
Stonewall after 8 lt:lg5 d5 since
White will lose time) 8 . . a5 9 a4
lt:la6 10 l:te 1 lt:le4 with pleasant
prospects for Black; Kavalek
Ciocaltea, Caracas 1 970.
(c) 6 lt:lc3 is best answered by 6
. . . d5 with a favourable Stonewall
37
because the standard 6 . . . d6 can

leave Black facing tricky problems
in the centre after either 7 l:te 1 or
7 1fd3.
(d) 6 b3 - see Portisch-Smys
lov above.
(e) 6 lt:lbd2 d6 (apart from 6 . . .
d5 other experimental byways also
beckon for those of an adventur
ous disposition, e.g. 6 . . . c6 7 b3
a5 8 a4 lt:la6 or even 6 . . . lt:la6
immediately) 7 c3 (7 l:te I lt:lc6 8
e4 can be met either simply by 8
. . . fe 9 lt:lxe4 lt:lxe4 1 0 l:t xe4 .tf5!
or more enterprisingly with 8 . . .
f4!? with complex play) 7 . . . lt:lc6
8 l:t e 1 (other moves are no better,
e.g. 8 W b3 + h8 9 d5? lt:la5! 1 0
Wa3 c 5 with a favourable main
line position, or 8 b4 a6 9 Wb3 +
e6 1 0 .t b2 h8 I I c4 e5! with
balanced prospects) 8 . . . e5 9 de
lt:lxe5!? (Black posits that the
removal of this pair of k nights will
promote his attacking prospects;
9 . . . de I 0 e4 f4!? with unclear play
also comes into consideration) 1 0
lt:lxe5 d e 1 1 e4 f4!? This typical
pawn sacrifice gives Black plenty
of chances. The game Kaplun-M.
Gurevich, USSR 1 983, illustrates
the potential dangers to the white
king : 12 lt:lc4 (on 1 2 gf follows 1 2
. . . lt:lh5! and the weakness of the
f4 square coupled with the
vulnerability of the h2 and 12
points plus easy access of the black
forces to the kingside all add up
38
to an onerous defensive task for

White) 1 2 . . . fg 1 3 hg 'W/e7 1 4 b3
l:te8 1 5 ..ta3 'W/f7 1 6 'W/c2 aS
(a good move which sets up the
possibility of a timely . . . a4 initiat
ive stealer) 1 7 lLle3 ..te6 1 8 l:[ ed 1
(the natural 1 8 l:[ ad I would land
White in trouble after 1 8 . . . a4)
1 8 . . . ..tf8! (shrewdly trades the
passive K B for its active counter
part and simultaneously gains the
rooks access to the f-file) 1 9 ..txf8
l:[ xf8 20 l:td2 h5 (whereas piece
play alone would be unable to
breach the defences the humble
footsoldier can perform wonders,
as we shall see) 2 1 c4 (attempting
to pressurize the one weakspot in
the black camp - the e-pawn) 2 1
. . . lLlg4 2 2 lLlxg4 ..txg4 2 3 l:t d 5
'W/ e 7 24 'W/ b2 l:[ ae8 (inviting the
rook to wander offside in search
of booty) 25 l:[ fl c6! 26 l:[ xa5 h4
27 b4 (hoping to get the rook back
into play via a3) 27 . . . l:[ f7 28 f4?
(28 f3 was mandatory when the
struggle is still in progress whereas
now Black clearly gains the upper
hand) 28 . . . h3! 29 ..th 1 (29 : xeS?
hg + + or 29 ..tf3 'W/d7! + ) 29 . . .
ef 30 gf l:[ ef8 3 1 'W!d2 ..te6 32 l:[ f3
'W!h4 33 l:[g5 ..tg4! 34 'Wif2 h2 + !
(glorious and decisive self-immo
lation!; if now 35 fl then 35 . . .
'W/xg5 36 fg l:[ xf3 wins) 35 'W/ xh2
'W/xh2 + 36 xh2 ..txf3 37 ..txf3
l:t xf4 38 ..tg2 g7 39 a4 l:[ f2 40
l:t c5 l:[ c2 41 g3 l:t c3 + 0- 1 .
Fifth move alternatives

l . d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4
lLlf3 ..tg7
There are no specially indiv
idualistic fifth moves available to
White which will not transpose
elsewhere, but it is worth noting
the following instructive example:
5 lbc3 0-0 6 h4?! c5 7 d5 d6 8
0-0 (stamps White's flank gesture
as a sham) 8 . . . lLlh5! (eyeing
the weakened g3 and clearing the
bishop's path) 9 e3 lLld7 1 0 'Wie2
lbe5 1 1 ..td2 l:[ b8 1 2 a4 a6 with
the advantage over the entire
board; note how White's only
positive plan, playing e4, is ruled
out on account of the extra
strength lent the reply . . . f4 by
White's
sixth;
thoughtless
Bobekov- Lutikov, Bulgaria v
RSFSR 1 958.
Karlsbad Variation: I d4 f5 2 g3
lbf6 3 ..tg2 g6 4 lbh3
First played back in the 1 923
Karlsbad tournament, this vari
ation still commands respect
today. The rationale behind the
knight's lateral development stems
from the light square sensitivity in
Black's formation, especially the
almost invariable weakness of e6.
By manoeuvring the KN to f4
White pressurizes this Achilles'
heel in particular and the white
squares in general, since the K B
remains unblocked. Not infre-
q uently, White augments his strat

egy by developing the queen to
b3, simultaneously eyeing b7 and
l ooking down the a2-g8 diagonal
at e6. Black's counter strategy may
well seek to utilize White's dimin
ished control of e5 as well as
a tempo-enhanced pawn advance
on the kingside ( . . . g5).
Sikhov-Korchnoi
USSR Student Team Ch.

Liningrad 1 950
I d4 f5 2 g3 f6 3 .i.g2 g6 4 lZlh3
.i.g7 ( 32)
4
c4
There are some interesting alter

natives to this standard approach:
(a) 5 d5!? attempting to restrict
Black's options is an idea which
has yet to be properly explored.
One example: 5 . . . d6!? 6 f4 c5!?
7 h4 0-0 8 h5 "ife8 9 hg hg 10 lZld2
lZla6 I I f3 lZle4 with chances for
both sides in a sharp position,
Solmundarsson - Padevsky,
39
Siegen 01. 1 9 70.

(b) 5 c3 c6! (anticipating the
queen's development to b3, block
ing the attack on b7 and preparing
to oppose queens) 6 d2 (in Toth
Knezevic, Italy 1 973, a balanced
and very difficult position arose
after 6 a4 d6 7 "it"b3 e5 - 7 . . .
"it"b6 would be ineffective here on
account of 8 "if a2 - 8 de de 9
a3 lZla6 I 0 .i.e3 "ife7 I I c4
d5) 6 . . . d6 7 f3 "ifc7 8 "it"b3
"it"b6 9 f4 "ifxb3 10 ab e4 I I
d3 .i.e6
Geller-Gufeld, Kis
lovodsk 1 968.
(c) 5 0-0 0-0 6 lZlf4 e6!? (this
method of circumventing White's
usual strategy certainly deserves
further investigation) 7 c4 d6 8
"it"b3 lZla6 9 lZlc3 c6 1 0 %1 d l "ifc7
(with a harmonious development
behind his flexible pawn structure
Black can be satisfied with his
position) I I e4?! (mis-timing the
key central advance as Black
shows in an instructive sequence)
I I . . . fe 1 2 lZl xe4 lZl xe4 1 3 .i. xe4
e5! 1 4 de c5 1 5 "ife3 xe4 1 6
"if xe4 .i.xe5 + . Bereft of the pro
tective KB White's king is prey to
the black bishops on an open
board; we have been following the
exemplary miniature. P. Nikolic
Bjelajac, Novi Sad 1 982, which
concluded thus : 1 7 "ife2 .i.f5 1 8
d3 .i.d4! 1 9 .i.f4 : ae8 20 "it"d2
c5 21 b4 .i.e4 22 c2 .i.xb2 23
.i.xd6 "iff7 24 :e I .i.c3! neatly
=
40
desperate
White's
refuting
attempts to distract the black
pieces; White resigns.
5
0-0
d6
lt::l c3
6
Black proceeds in keeping with
the main line strategy already out
lined in Chapter 1 . Once again
6 . . . e6!? comes seriously into
consideration (see P. Nikolic
Bjelajac above). Two further
examples: 7 0-0 (7 lt::l f4 followed
by h4 is a sharp alternative) 7
. . . d6 (7 . . . e7 lands Black in
difficulties after the positional
pawn sacrifice 8 d5 e5 9 d6! xd6
10 xd6 cd I I lt::l b 5 and Black's
mobilization is severely hampered,
Taimanov- Liebert, Rostov 1 96 1 )
8 b 3 c6 9 c2 ( 9 .i.a3 can also be
answered by 9 . . . a5 but not 9 . . .
a5?! 1 0 c 1 .C. d 8 II b4 when
Black is cramped; Ree-Hi.ibner,
Wijk aan Zee 1 975) 9 . . . a5 1 0
.i.a3 lt::l a6 1 1 .C. ad 1 c7 1 2 lt::l f4
lt::l b4 1 3 b 1 e5 and with the
liberating . . . e5 thrust Black
secures
equality;
A verbakh
Gulko, USSR 1 976.
Another logical response to
White's system which has hardly
been played at all yet is 6 . . . lt::l c6!?,
e.g. 7 d5 lt::l e 5 8 b3 lt::l f7 9 .i.b2 e5
10 de de 1 1 xd8 .C. xd8 and Black
has no difficulties; Osnos- Legky,
Lvov 1 984.
7
lt::l f4
Alternatively:
(a) 7 0-0 is considered inexact

because Black may reply 7 . . . e5
8 de de 9 xd8 .C. xd8 10 lt::l d 5
.C. d7! (necessary on account of the
twin threat of capturing on c7
immediately and on b7 after II
lt::l e 7 + and 1 2 lt::l x c8) with good
prospects of containing White's
initiative according to theoretical
works. Personally, I find Black's
position here unappealing and
would prefer 7 . . . e6 or 7 . . . c6.
(b) 7 d5 is generally held to be
the most precise continuation as
it prevents . . . lt::l c6 and enables . . .
e6/e5 to be captured (en passant).
More importantly, it means that
after 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 e5 9 de Black
cannot try 9 . . . lt::l a6 because of 1 0
.i.f4 and i s thus compelled t o play
9 . . . .i.xe6 after which White has
10 b3! e7 I I lt::l g 5 .i.f7 (II . . .
.i.c8 1 2 e4! ) 1 2 lt::l x f7 .C. xf7 1 3
.i.f4 lt::l a6 1 4 .C. ad 1 lt::l e8 1 5 a3
when Black is under fierce press
ure; Ree-Rakic, Maribor 1 980.
In the search for better defensive
methods the following come
strongly into consideration:
(b 1) 7 . . . lt::l g 4!? is an interesting
suggestion of Dolmatov which has
yet to be tested in practice.
(b2) 7 . . . lt::l a 6!? 8 0-0 .i.d7 with
similar play to Chapter 1, e.g. 9
.C. e l c6 1 0 e4 fe I t lt::l xe4 lt::l xe4 1 2
.C. xe4 lt::l c 5 with plenty of possi
bilities for Black in a roughly equal
position.
(b3) 7 . . . c6 8 0-0 ..td7!? 9 W'b3

( Dolmatov notes the very unclear
variation 9 c5!? de 1 0 W'b3 W'b6
I I de + W'xb3 1 2 cb W' b6 1 3 ba(W')
c6 1 4 lt:la4 W' b4) 9 . . . W' b6 10
.te3 W' xb3 1 1 ab c5 1 2 lt:lf4 lt:la6
13 lt:le6 : fc8 1 4 lt:l xg7 xg7 1 5
lt:la2? (it would have been better
to play to open up the centre by
15 ..td2 intending e4) 1 5 . . . b5! 1 6
cb ..txb5 1 7 lt:lc3 lt:lc7 + White's
doubled isolated b-pawns are a
lasting liability; Zaichik-Dol
matov, H arkov 1 985.
7
c6
d5
8
e5
9
de
lt:la6!?
At the very least this is a super
ior move-order to the commonly
played 9 . . . W'e7 after which White
may choose to obtain the prefer
able position by the simple means
of 10 : b1 !? ..txe6 (now 10 . . .
lt:la6 would be met by 1 1 b4 threat
ening 1 2 b5) 1 1 lt:lxe6 W' xe6 1 2 00 lt:la6 1 3 b3 with the bishop
pair and sounder pawn structure;
Legky-Machulsky, Tallin 1 985.
10
..te3?!
This simplistic move, hoping to
prevent . . . lt:lc5, meets with a vig
orous rebuff. After the more natu
ral 10 0-0 lt:lc5 H arding notes 1 1
: e 1 ( 1 1 b4 lt:lce4) 1 1 . . . g5 1 2
lt:lh3!? ( 1 2 lt:ld3 lt:lce4) 1 2 . . . h6 1 3
e4 ..txe6 as adequate for Black
(which it certainly is) and 1 3 . . .
lt:lcxe4 as worth checking (which
i t m a y be).
10
11
0-0
12
lt:ld3
13
..td2
14
b3
41
W'e7
g5!
lt:lg4!
..t xe6
lt:lc5 ( 33)
33
w
Black has energetically pushed

back the white pieces and wrested
the initiative. As the game pro
ceeds we see Black convert his
superior dynamism into a tangible
queenside pawn majority whilst
White's attempts to counter in
the centre are contained by the
bulwark knight on e5. A final
effort to undermine the knight
by removing its KB protection is
crisply refuted by an exchange
sacrifice. 1 5 h3 lt:le5 1 6 lt:l xc5 de
1 7 W'c2 : ad8 1 8 : ad 1 f4! 1 9 lt:le4
h6 20 ..tc3 : xd 1 2 1 W'xd 1 b5! 22
cb cb 23 W' a 1 ..tf7 24 : d 1 b4 25
..t b2 c4 26 be ..txc4 27 :d2 h8
28 lt:ld6 ..tg8 29 ..te4?! fg 30 fg
W'e6! 3 1 g2 ..th7 32 ..txh7
xh7 3 3 W'bl + h8 34 e4? g4!
35 lt:lf5 : xf5! 36 ef W' c6 + 37 g l
42
(37 f2 'jj' f3 + 38 gl 'jj' e 3 + 39

n f2 ll'ld3 would result in a lost
king and pawn ending) 37 . . .
ll'lf3 + 38 f2 ll'lxd2 39 .txg7 +
xg7 40 'jj' xb4 'jj' b6 + 4 1 'jj' xb6
ab 42 hg ll'le4 + 43 e3 ll'lc3 44
f4 f6 0- 1 .
Fourth move alternatives

1 d4 f5 2 g3 ll'lf6 3 .tg2 g6 ( 34)
Other fourth moves pose no

danger to Black :
(a) 4 ll'ld2 ll'lc6!? (reacting to
the fact that the d-pawn is now
undefended; 4 . . . d5 is also emin
ently playable) 5 d5 (on 5 c3 Black
may either revert to the trusty 5
. . . d5 or experiment with 5 . . . e5!?
with the idea 6 .txc6 be 7 de ll'lg4
8 ll'ldf3 'jj' e 7 9 .tf4 .tg7 I 0 'jj' d4
c5 I I Wd5 n b8 when the threat
of 1 2 . . . .tb7 puts White in a
quandary) 5 . . . ll'lb4!? (an interest
ing departure from the usual . . .
ll'le5) 6 c4 (the original course
taken
by
Szabo-Gheorghiu,
Budapest 1 970, clarified in Black's
favour after 6 ll'lc4 c6! 7 d6 b5! 8
.td2 be 9 .txb4 ed 1 0 .txd6

.txd6 II 'jj' xd6 'jj' e 7) 6 . . . a5 7 a3
ll'la6 8 b4 .tg7 9 n b l 0-0 1 o ll'lgf3
ab I I ab c5!
Gheorghiu.
(b) 4 ll'lc3 d5! 5 .tg5 c6 and in
comparison with similar vari
ations arising from 2 .tg5 White's
KB is passively placed.
(c) 4 h4 is less outre than it
appears at first sight, but not
surprisingly fails to challenge
Black's equanimity, e.g. 4 . . . .tg7
5 ll'lh3 d6 6 d5 (6 c3 c6 is fine for
Black, cf. 5 c3 in the Karlsbad
Variation) 6 . . . c6 7 c4 e5 8 de
.txe6 9 ll'ld2 'jj' b6 10 0-0 0-0 I I
ll'lg5 n e8 and in this balanced
position White's h4 advance
begins to look superfluous; Olafs
son-Alexander, Amsterdam 01.
1 9 54.
=
Systems with c4 and .tg5

Systems where White combines
.tg5 with c4 are best implemented
via the move order I d4 f5 2 c4
without fianchettoing then KB.
That Black has an easy time of it
when White plays .tg5 in the
context of a main line fianchetto
is well illustrated by the game
Usachi-Stein, Ukraine Ch. 1 957,
which went I d4 f5 2 c4 ll'lf6 3 ll'lc3
g6 4 g3 .tg7 5 .tg2 0-0 6 .tg5
c6 7 'jj' d 2 d6 8 n d l 'jj' c 7 9 ll'lf3
ll'lbd7 1 0 0-0 ( 1 0 d 5 meets with
tactical problems after 10 . . . ll'lb6
I I b3 cd 1 2 cd ll'le4! 1 3 ll'lxe4 fe
1 4 tt:ld4 tt:lxd5 1 5 ..t xe4 tt:lc3 etc.)

t O . . . e5 I I de de 1 2 ..ih6 ..t xh6
J 3 'ii x h6 e4 1 4 tt:ld4 tt:le5 and
Bl ack's advanced pawn chain and
well posted knights give him the
better position thanks to his king
si de attacking chances.
Smyslov-Belyavsky
Sochi 1 986
I d4 f5 2 c4 tt:lf6 3 tt:lc3 g6
4
..ig5 ( 35 )
lines while W hite's development

remains difficult to complete)
9 . . . : f5! 10 ..th4 be I I ..t xc4 +
d5 with a positional advantage
to Black; Kelecevic-Rajkovic,
Yugoslavia 1 973.
..ig7
4
'ii d2
5
Nor are other moves to be
feared :
(a) 5 ..txf6 ..t xf6 6 e4 fe 7 tt:lxe4
0-0 8 ltJf3 d6 9 ..te2 i.f5 1 0
ltJ xf6 + ef I I 0-0 c6
Sokolov
Shahovic, Yugoslavia 1 973.
(b) 5 e3 c5 6 ..td3 d6 7 ltJf3
0-0 8 0-0 ltJc6 9 d5 ltJ b4 10 a3
ltJ xd3 I I 'ii x d3 ltJd7 1 2 i.f4 h6
1 3 h3 a6 (with the more purposeful
piece coordination plus the latent
power of the bishop pair Black
has the superior prospects) 14 a4
b6 1 5 .ig3 g5 1 6 : a b l 'ilfe8 1 7
b4 'ii h5 1 8 ltJe2 (Black now carries
out an imaginative manoeuvre
designed to stifle any queenside
counterplay in order to be able to
concentrate on the king's wing
undistracted) 1 8 . . . a5! 1 9 be be
20 ltJd2 ltJb8 2 1 f4 ltJa6 22 ltJf3
ltJb4 and Black is firmly in control;
Lerner- Belyavsky, USSR, Ch.
1 984.
5
c5!
This central challenge also has
the virtue of freeing the queen for
action. While Black should avoid
5 . . . h6 6 ..ixf6 ..hf6 7 e4 which
leaves him with a rickety kingside
=
When White has ..ig5 in mind

he must play it straight away and
not preface it by tt:lf3 : 4 tt:lf3 ..ig7
5 i.g5 0-0 6 'ii d 2'?! (this is the real
culp rit although other moves also
leave Black free to carry out his
basic plan unhindered, e.g. 6 'ilfc2
d 6 7 e3 c6 8 ..te2 'ii a 5 9
0-0 e5 and White certainly cannot
lay claim to any advantage; Baum
b ach- Babrikowsky, E. German
Ch . 1 976) 6 . . . tt:le4! 7 tt:lxe4 fe 8
li:lg I b5! 9 e3 (9 cb a6 gives Black
co n t rol of the centre and open
43
44
Leningrad : Miscellaneous Systems
in the face of a strong central

preponderance, there may be a
valid alternative in S . . . lZ:Jc6, e.g.
6 h4 (6 l:t d 1 h6 7 ..ixf6 .i.xf6 8 lLlf3
d6 9 e4 eS is equally satisfactory for
Black) 6 . . . h6 (not exactly forced)
7 ..txf6 .i.xf6 8 e4!? (8 lZ:Jf3 d6 9
e4 eS 1 0 de de 1 1 'it'xd8 + ..ixd8
could easily find White rueing the
disappearance
of
his
QB;
Koblencs-Lutikov,
Lativa
v
RSFSR 1 9SS) 8 . . . lZ:Jxd4 9 ef lZ:l xfS
1 0 ..id3 with attacking chances in
return for the pawn.
de
6
6 dS is a serious alternative
which awaits testing in practice
but 6 lZ:Jf3?, erroneously noted as
good for White by Belyavsky and
Mikhalchishin, is in fact a dreadful
mistake on account of 6 . . . lZ:Je4!
6
lZ:la6
6 . . . -.as? 7 ..t xf6 .i.xf6 8 lZ:JdS
puts Black in trouble.
7
.i.h6
Proceeding with one of the cen
tral ideas of this system - the
exchange of Black's potentially
powerful KB. Another approach
would be to develop and keep
Black out of the key central
squares : 7 lZ:Jh3 lZ:JcS 8 f3 0-0 9 e3
d6 10 .i.e2, with a rich position
which Belyavsky and Mikhalch
ishin contentiously assess as
slightly in White's favour.
7
.i.xh6
Black dismisses 7 . . . 0-0 cor-
rectly reckoning that his king will

be safer in the centre than on the
kingside.
lZ:Jxc5
8
'ihh6
lZ:Jh3
9
9 f3 -.as 10 0-0-0 bS 1 1 cb a6 1 2
e4 ( Belyavsky and Mikhalchishin)
would produce mutually difficult
complications.
-.as
9
10 0-0-0 ( 36)
36
8
b5!
10
In such positions material is of
little consequence in the race to
get to the king first.
11
lZ:Jg5?
Too optimistic; consolidation
by 1 1 cb a6 1 2 b6! -.xb6 1 3 f3
: b8 1 4 -.d2 0-0 1 S e3 was in
order.
11
.i.b7!
Bringing dS under control and
thus avoiding variations such as
1 1 . . . b4? 1 2 -.g7 : f8 1 3 lZ:JdS
lZ:JxdS 14 lZ:Jxh7 lZ:Je6 l S -. xg6 +
and wins.
12
-.g7
Leningrad Miscellaneous Systems
There is no time to take the

pawn, e.g. 1 2 cb lt'Jce4 13 lt'Jcxe4
_txe4 14 lt'Jxe4 lt'Jxe4 + Belyavsky
a n d M ikhalchishin.
: rs
12
13
lt'J xh7
Consistent but quite hopeless
alth ough the white position was
beyond salvation anyway.
lt'Jxh7
13
b4
14
-.xh7
15
lt'Jd5
Trying to gain time by the mate
threat to organize his defences; 1 5
'i' xg6 + d8 1 6 lt'Jd5 -.xa2 wins
easily for Black.
..txd5
15
:l. xd5
d6
16
b3!
17
b1
A decisive thrust j ust as White
had seemed to have wriggled out.
: b8
18
ab
With the entry of the rook the
attack becomes irresistible.
19
-. xg6 +
d7
-.el +
20
: x5
lt'Jxb3
21
a2
0-1
An impressive miniature against
a former World Champion.
45
too limited to have hammered out

any definitive paths.
(a) 3 g3 g6 4 ..tg2 ..ig7 5
tt'lc3 0-0 (naturally, this opening
sequence is flexible) 6 e3 d6 7 d5
(7 lt'Jge2 e5 equalizes immediately)
7 . . . e5 (of course, other methods
familiar from the main lines are
also applicable here) 8 de c6 9
lt'Jge2 ..txe6 1 0 b3 -.c7 I I ..i.b2
a5 12 -.c2 lt'Ja6 and Black has an
easy game; Vidmar jr.- Fuderer,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 95 1 .
(b) 3 lt'Jf3 g6 4 e 3 J.. g7 5 ..i.e2
d6 6 0-0 lt'Je4!? (utilizing White's
Jack of control of e4 to uncover
the K B and support the vital . . .
e5 advance that way) 7 -.c2 0-0 8
lt'Jbd2 lt'Jxd2 9 ..txd2 e5 I 0 de
de again with complete equality;
Trifunovic-Grob, Zurich 1 954.
3
tt'lc3
g6 ( 3 7 )
37
w
Other variations with c4 (I d4 f5

2 c4 lt'l f6 )
No ne of these lines has any theor
etical bite and are therefore rarely
seen. Consequently, the examples
presented here should be taken as
just that since experience is as yet
4
tt'lf3
There have also been experim
ents with Jess natural continu
ations :
(a) 4 f3 (employed once by
46
Korchnoi, so not to be taken

lightly) 4 . . . ..tg7 5 e4 d6 (5 . . . fe
immediately looks preferable) 6
..td3 (6 e5!? requires a better
response than 6 . . . de 7 de "it'xd 1 +
8 xd 1 lt:lh5 9 f4 ..te6 I 0 lt:lf3
Korchnoi-Lombardy, Lone Pine
1 979) 6 . . . fe 7 fe?! (7 lt:lxe4 appears
necessary, but what comment is
that on 4 f3?) 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 lt:lf3 ..tg4
9 ..te3 0-0 10 0-0 e5 t I d5 lt:ld4
with a beautifully flowing pos
itional advantage; Boros-Kus
minich, USSR t 957.
(b) 4 e3 ..tg7 5 ..te2 0-0 6 h4?!
d6 7 h5 gh (an interesting decision,
certainly not forced) 8 ..txh5 e5
9 ..te2 (thus far Hodos-Savon,
USSR Ch. 1 962) 9 . . . c5! with
chances and problems for both
sides.
(c) 4 "it'c2 ..tg7 5 e4 fe 6 lt:lxe4
0-0 shows clearly that brute imple
mentation of the supposedly
advantageous e4 advance can eas
ily backfire and merely put White's
development out of kilter.
4
..tg7
Now there are a number of
contrasting plans available :
(a) 5 "it'c2 0-0 6 e4 fe 7 lt:lxe4
lt:lxe4 8 "it'xe4 d6 9 ..te2 lt:lc6 t O
0-0 ..tf5 I I "it'h4 e 5 t 2 ..tg5 "it'd7
with full equality; Nemet- Matulo
vic, Yugoslav Ch. t 972.
(b) 5 e3 0-0 6 b4!? (routine
development cannot bring White
any advantage, e.g. 6 ..te2 d6 7
0-0 and now Black may choose

according to taste between 7 . . . c6
8 "it'c2 lt:la6 9 l:l d l "it'e8 tO b3 e5 =
Larsen, or 7 . . . lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 9
lt:ld4 c5 = ; similarly, 6 ..td3 d6
7 0-0 lt:lc6 8 d5 lt:le5 also gives
balanced play) 6 . . . b6 7 "it'b3 c5
8 a3 e6 9 ..te2 "it'e7 10 0-0 d6 I I
..tb2 lLl bd7 1 2 l:l ad l lt:le8 and
Black's flexible pawn structure
and lack of weak points offset
White's slight spatial edge in a
mutually difficult position; Quint
eras-Sax, Wijk aan Zee t 973.
(c) 5 ..tf4 d6 6 h4 (6 "it'b3 c6 or
6 . . . e6 should both be perfectly
adequate for Black) 6 . . . lt:lh5
(the most consequent riposte to
White's provocative strategy) 7 e3
lt:ld7 (after the natural 7 . . . 0-0
White can bring tactical succour
to his set-up by 8 c5!) 8 d5 lt:lxf4
9 ef e5 1 0 de lt:lc5 and this analysis
by Vukovic leaves Black with
excellent prospects.
The tacit prophylaxis of 2 . . . lLlf6

There is a simple reason for prefer
ring 2 . . . lt:lf6 to 2 . . . g6 : to a vert
the blitzkrieg attacks launched by
3 h4. These are dangerous for
Black in all forms : I d4 f5 2 c4 g6
3 h4, or 2 lLlf3 g6 3 h4, or even 2
g3 g6 3 h4. Theory considers that
White has at least sufficient com
pensation for the exchange offer
which generally occurs on h5 (after
a . . . lt:lf6, h5 lt:lxh5, l:l xh5 gh
sequence) and in practice the

defensive problems are extremely
taxi ng.
Here is one warning example : 1
d4 f5 2 c4 g6 3 h4 ti:lf6 4 h5 ti:lxh5
5 Jl xh5 gh 6 e4 d6 (6 . . . i.g7 7
..W xh5 + f8 8 1 hf5 + g8 9
8f3 1t'f8 1 0 1t'h5 1t'f7 I I 'it' h4 i.f6
1 2 i.g5 Polovdin) 7 'it'xh5 +
;t>d7 8 1t' xf5 + e6 9 1t'h5 c6 (9 . . .
jt"f6 1 0 ti:lf3 ) 1 0 ti:lc3 'it'e8 1 1
..W h2! c7 1 2 i.f4 ti:ld7 1 3 ti:lf3
b6 1 4 0-0-0 b7 ( 1 4 . . . i.b7 1 5
47
bl ! enables the rook to go to

c I should i t be required, and
points up the long-term passivity
of Black's position and his
inability to undertake anything
positive) 1 5 i.xd6 ti:lf6 16 i.xf8
1t'xf8 17 ti:le5 i.d7 18 d5 cd 19 ed
ed 20 ti:lxd7 ti:l xd7 2 1 ti:lb5 ti:lc5 22
1t'c7 + a6 23 cd a5 24 b4 +
xb4 25 ..W g3! ti:l a4 26 Jl d 4 +
a5 27 ..W b3 Jl c8 + 28 d 1
1 -0 Polovdin-Kovalev, USSR
1 982.
Hort--Antoshin Variation
The Hort-Antoshin variation is a

close relative of the Leningrad and
transposition during the first few
moves frequently occurs. Here,
though, everything is subordi
nated to forcing through the . . .
e5 advance, natural development
included,
and
consequently
Black's strategy demands sophi
sticated positional insight and a
well-developed sense of danger in
order not to backfire.
We shall examine three games
covering the main replies at White's
disposal: first, where White avoids
the kingside fianchetto, and then
in turn the fianchetto both with
and without c2-c4.
38
w
lenged, Black's intention is to fol

low up with . . . c7 thus support
ing the . . . e7-e5 advance.
c2
5
Proposing to cross Black's
plans by advancing his own e
pawn first. Other possibilities:
(a) 5 e3 c7 6 d5 (White cannot
afford to be casual: 6 ..td3 e5 7
e4 f4 concedes Black a significant
spatial advantage on the kingside
Etruk-Antoshin, USSR 1 962) 6 . . .
e5 7 de ..txe6 8 lt:ld4 ..td7 9 ..td3
g6 I 0 b3 lt:la6 I I ..t b2 ..tg7 1 2
0-0 0-0 with a balanced position;
Khouk-Hort, Leipzig 01. 1 960.
(b) 5 ..tg5 lt:l bd7 6 e3 is best
Antoshin-Hort
Moscow 1 960
I
2
3
4
d4
c4
lt:lc3
lt:lf3
rs
lt:lf6
d6
c6 ( 38 )
This last is the characteristic

move of the variation; unchal48
Hort-A ntoshin Variation
met by 6 . . . g6 and not 6 . . . e5?!

wh ich facilitates an opening up of
the position before Black is able
to cope, e.g. 7 de de 8 W' c2 e4 9
.':J d4 li:le5 1 0 0-0-0 W'e7 1 1 f3 ef 1 2
gf "W f7 1 3 f4! instructive play;
K otov-A. Zaitsev, Sochi 1 967.
(c) 5 g3 will transpose to Gavri
k o v - Psakhis below.
li:la6
5
a3
6
White would not be able to
operate comfortably with threats
o f . . . li:l b4 constantly in the air.
g6
6
Simultaneously promoting the
development of both bishops.
fe
7 e4
li:lxe4
8
li:lxe4
9
W' xe4
.US
10
W' h4
Hoping to exploit Black's weak
ened kingside. In Robatsch-Anto
shin, Sochi 1 974, White kept his
q ueen centralized and a mutually
difficult struggle developed after
1 0 'llt' e 3 ..tg7 1 1 ..td2 0-0 1 2 ..tc3
CiJc7 1 3 ..te2 b5 14 b3 aS 1 5 a4
b4 1 6 ..tb2 W'd7.
..tg7
10
II
..te2 ( 39) ..tf6
An ambitious move which con
si derably increases the tension.
F ourteen years later Antoshin pre
fer red to pursue equality through
s irn plification : 1 1 . . . e5!? 1 2
'tit xd8 + l:txd8 1 3 ..te3 ed 1 4
.h d 4 ..t f7 1 5 ..txg7 ..txg7 1 6
49
_19
B
li:ld4 tt:lc5 1 7 0-0 d5 18 b4 tt:\e6 =

Smyslov-Antoshin, Sochi 1 974.
c5
12
W'h6
W'a5 +
13
..tg5
14
n
..txg5
cd
15
li:lxg5
Thus Black, temporarily at
least, has an extra pawn but the
position remains totally unclear
and capable of going either way. It
seems likely that White's following
queen manoeuvre is not the best:
1 6 W'g7 W'e5 17 W' f7 + ..td7 1 8
li:lf3 W' f4! ( 1 8 . . . W'e4 1 9 .:t d 1 .:t af8
20 W'g7 gives Black problems) 1 9
W' d 5 (since now 1 9 .:t d 1 would fail
against 1 9 . . . d3!) 1 9 . . . d3! 20
..txd3 (not 20 W'xb7 + ? tt:lc7 2 1
..t d 1 .:1. hb8 2 2 ..ta4 + d8 2 3
W'c6 .:1. b 6 snaring the queen) 20 . . .
..txd3 + 2 1 W' xd 3 .:t hf8 22 .:t e l
.:l. ac8 (Black i s clearly o n top) 23
b3 li:lc5 24 W'e3 e5 25 li:ld2 li:ld3
26 W' xf4 .:t xf4 27 .:t e2 .:l. af8 28 f3
li:lc1 29 .:t e4? (collapses immedi
ately; 29 .:t e3 would have hung on
longer) 29 . . . li:lxb3! 0- 1 .
50
Gavrikov-Psakhis
USSR Ch. 1 985

1
2
3
4
d4
g3
.i.g2
c4
f5
tt:lf6
d6
The usual range ofless orthodox

methods is available :
(a) 4 tt:lh3 c6 5 c4 Wc7 (simply
5 . . . e5 is also playable) 6 tt:lc3 e5
7 0-0 .i.e7 and as White does not
have the c4-c5 possibility as in
the analogous main line Black
is able to complete his kingside
development satisfactorily.
(b) 4 tt:lc3 lLl bd7 5 tt:lh3 (5 e4 fe
6 tt:lxe4 tt:lxe4 7 ..be4 tt:lf6 8 .i.g2
c6 and Black has no worries) 5 . . .
e5 6 0-0 ed 7 W xd4 J... e 7 8 b3
c6 9 J... b 2 d5 10 e3 0-0 with
approximately equal chances in a
rich
posJtton;
R.
Byrne
Gheorghiu, Varna 01. 1 962.
(c) 4 d5 e5!? 5 de tt:lc6 6 tt:lh3
J... x e6 7 tt:lg5 J... g8 8 0-0 and in
this entirely satisfactory position
for Black several continuations
deserve trying, e.g. 8 . . . Wd7 or 8
. . . d5, but 8 . . . h6? is mistaken
since 9 lL\0 Wd7 10 tt:ld4 har
monizes the white forces and
leaves Black at some disadvan
tage; Kottnauer-- Davie, Dundee
1 967.
4
c6
4 . . . e5 is not unthinkable but
as yet there are no practical
examples.
5
tt:lf3
Somewhat more precise than
developing the queen's knight first,
since 5 tt:lc3 gives Black the
additional possibility of playing 5
. . . e5!? immediately, when White's
chances of gaining an advantage
are minimal, e.g. 6 de (or 6 e4 Wc7
7 ef J... xf5 8 lL\0 .i.e7 and Black
is quite OK, M ikenas-Cherepkov,
TU Ch. USSR 1 97 1 ) 6 . . . de 7
W xd8 + xd8 8 lL\0 e4 9 tt:lg5
e8 10 f3 h6 I I tt:lh3 ef 1 2 .i.xf3
tt:l bd7 1 3 tt:lf4 tt:lc5 1 4 b3 17 =
Bannik-Antoshin, USSR Ch.
1 957.
Wc7 ( 40 )
5
40
w
6
tt:lc3
Alternatively :
(a) 6 0-0 e5 7 de de 8 Wc2
Cien
(Romanishin-Antoshin,
fuegos 1 977) 8 . . . e4! is given as
unclear by Botvinnik.
(b) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 J... b2 tt:lbd7
9 Wc2 g6 1 0 tt:lbd2 .i. h6!? 1 1
Wc3 e4 with a mutually difficult
position; Krause-Sydor, Dort

m und 1 976.
(c) 6 d5!? is a surprising gambit
which gains time and opens up
the position at the cost of an
important central pawn. Practice
indicates it deserves respect: 6 . . .
cd 7 cd tt:lxd5 8 0-0 tt:lf6 9 tt:lc3
!iJc6 (one suspects Black could
profitably seek an improvement
here) 10 ..tg5 e6 I I .C. c l (better
than 1 1 ..txf6 gf 1 2 tt:lb5 "fle7 1 3
n e t d 5 1 4 tt:lfd4 a 6 1 5 tt:lxc6 be
1 6 lLld4 c5 1 7 tt:lxf5 "fld7! when
the black infantry dominate the
centre; Spassov-Jankov, Primor
sko 1 972) 1 1 . . . i..e 7 1 2 tt:lb5 "fld7
1 3 ..txf6 gf 14 tt:lfd4 d5 15 tt:lxe6!
and Black is lost; Baranov-A.
Zaitsev, !-final TU Ch. USSR
1 965.
e5
6
0-0
7
Other continuations promise
lit tle :
(a) 7 c5?! clarifies the centre to
Black's advantage, e.g. 7 . . . e4 8
cd ..txd6 9 tt:lg5 (or 9 lLld2 ..te6
10 e3 h5 I I tt:le2 h4 1 2 "flc2 tt:la6
13 a3 "flf7 with Black clearly in
con trol;
Opocensky-Antoshin,
Lei pzig 1 965) 9 . . . h6 10 lLl h3 tt:la6
I I a3 "flf7 12 f3 ef 1 3 i.. xf3 ..te6
1 4 ..tf4 .C. d8 1 5 0-0 tt:lc5! and
again Black is clearly on top;
Gol ovko-Antoshin, USSR 1 970.
( b) 7 e4 prematurely picks a
t a ctical fight where Black's
51
resources are more than adequate :

7 . . . fe 8 tt:lg5 ..tg4 9 "Wi b3 ed 1 0
tt:lcxe4 tt:lbd7 1 1 h3 lLl xe4 1 2 i.. xe4
13
"flc2
"fle7!
14
tt:lc5!
0-0 ..td7 1 5 ..txh7 0-0-0 and
Black soon broke through on the
kingside; Hofmann-Nevole, corr.
1 969/70.
(c) 7 de permits Black's KB to
take an active part in the proceed
ings and thereby enhance his pro
spects of equalizing, e.g. 7 . . . de 8
e4 (better than 8 0-0 ..t b4! 9 "flc2
0-0 10 a3 ..te7 I I e4 f4!? 1 2 gf ef
1 3 e5 tt:lg4 with a typical sharp
Dutch position where White's
king is likely to be in the greater
danger; l gnatiev-Chechelnitsky,
Moscow 1 964) 8 . . . i.. b4! 9 ef (9
"Wi b3 tt:la6 10 0-0 fe I I tt:lg5 ..txc3
1 2 "WI xc3 ..tf5 is fine for Black;
Karasev-Cherepkov, Leningrad
Ch. 1 974) 9 . . . ..txf5 10 "flb3 lLla6
I I 0-0 and now instead of I I . .
0-0-0?! which was shown to be
good for White in Farago- Bokor,
Hungarian Ch. 1 967, after 1 2 ..te3
..tc5 1 3 ..t xc5 lLl xc5 14 "fla3 tt:la6
1 5 tt:l b5!, Black should prefer short
castling, I I . . . 0-0, when the activ
ity of his pieces goes a long way
to offsetting the isolated pawn.
7
e4!
Experience has shown that this
is Black's best try. It is instructive
to note the drawbacks of the alter
natives :
(a) 7 . . . ..te7 8 c5! (White could
.
52
also get the better of it with 8 de

de 9 e4 obtaining an improved
version of note c above) 8 . . . e4 9
cd .txd6 1 0 lt:leS! .te6 ( 1 0 . . .
.txeS 1 1 de ..- xeS 1 2 .tf4 gives
White a strong initiative in return
for the pawn) 1 1 f3 .txeS 1 2 de
..- xeS 1 3 fe fe 14 .tf4 ..-cs + 1 S
h 1 lt:lbd7 1 6 : c 1 ..-hs 1 7 ..-d6
and Black is in dire straits;
Udovcic- Lombardy,
Zagreb
1 969.
(b) 7 . . . .te6 8 dS! .td7 9 e4
fe l O lt:lgS .te7 1 1 lt:lgxe4 lt:la6 ( 1 1
. . . 0-0? 1 2 cS! is dreadful for
Black; Kozma-Marsalek, Czecho
slovakia 1 962) 1 2 .te3 and with
a spatial advantage, more active
pieces, and firm control of the
central blockading square, e4,
White's positional superiority is
indisputable.
Let us note that it is only here
that we join our game properly as
it actually arose via the move
order 1 lt:lf3 fS 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .tg2
d6 4 d4 c6 S 0-0 ..-c7 6 c4 eS 7
lt:lc3 e4. Such transpositions are a
common occurrence.
8
lt:lg5
This has supplanted 8 lt:le I in
contemporary praxis although the
inadequacies of the retreat have
yet to be shown over the board.
The following is known : 8 lt:le l
.te7 9 f3 ef (attempting to hold
the e4 point gets Black into trouble
after 9 . . . dS 10 cd cd 1 1 .tf4) 1 0
ef (Korchnoi preferred t o capture

with the bishop: 1 0 .txf3 0-0 1 1
lt:lg2 lt:l bd7 1 2 .tf4 : f7 1 3 b4 lt:lf8
14 bS lt:lg6 1 S be be but could claim
no advantage in a complicated
Korchnoi-Antoshin,
pos1t10n;
Moscow 1 9 6 1 ; Antoshin analysed
l 3 cS lt:lf8 1 4 dS - Black must
always be alert to this sudden
pawn rush - 14 . . . lt:lg6 1 S cd
.txd6 1 6 .txp6 ..- xd6 1 7 de
..-cs + 1 8 h 1 1 be = as the weak
nesses cancel out) 10 . . . 0-0 1 1
lt:ld3 .te6?! (simply 1 1 . . . : e8
intending . . . lt:lbd7-f8 looks a
better try) 1 2 b3 lt:l a6 1 3 : e 1 .tf7
14 .th3 g6 1S lt:lf4 ..-d7 16 dS
lt:lc7 17 .t b2 and White's position
is a picture of positional superior
ity thanks to his spatial advantage,
and pressure on the a 1 -h8 diag
onal and down the e-file, particu
larly of course e6; Udovcic-Anto
shin, Yugoslavia v USSR 1 964.
8
h6
This preludes an aggressive
solution to Black's problems. It
may be that a purely defensive
approach will suffice to hold the
balance : 8 . . . .te7 9 f3 ef 10 ef
(Botvinnik has suggested 10 lt:lxf3;
it is interesting to mull this over
with the note on 8 lt:le1 in mind)
10 . . . oo 1 1 : e 1 lt:la6 1 2 a3 : e8
1 3 b4 h6 1 4 lt:lh3 .td7 I S ..-d3
.tf8 with equality according to
Botvinnik, although Black would
be wise to maintain his vigilance;
Qanov-Knezevic, Skopje 1 967.

l!Jh3
9
jkf7
This collected an exclamation
ma rk from Gulko and although it
co uld well be Black's best the
alternative may also be playable:
9 . . . i.e6 10 d5 i.f7 1 1 f3 cd
( White obtained a clear advantage
in Yusupov-Yermolinsky, Tallinn
1977, after the unsuccessful pawn
offe r 1 1 . . . l!J bd7 1 2 fe fe 1 3 l!Jxe4
cd 1 4 cd l!J xe4 1 5 i.xe4 1Wc5 +
1 6 h l ) 1 2 cd 1Wc5 + 1 3 h 1 ef
1 4 ef l!Jxd5 1 5 : e 1 + i.e7 1 6
tL:la4!? 1Wc7 1 7 l!Jf4 l!J xf4 1 8 i.xf4
0-0 1 9 : xe7 1Wxe7 20 i.xd6 1Wd8
2 1 i.xf8 1W xf8 and Black holds
the balance; Razuvayev- Mama
tov, Frunze 1 979.
g5!?
10
d5 ( 4 1 )
41
B
In the game where 9 . . . 1Wf7 was

i n troduced Black continued with
a les s radical strategy : lO . . . cd 1 1
cd li:l a6 (also ! from Gulko) 1 2 f3
ef 1 3 i. xf3 ( ;t Gulko) g5! 1 4 i.g2
'i' h 5 15 l!Jf2 i.e7 16 i.e3 0-0 1 7
.t d 4 (Gulko eschews the win of
53
a pawn by 1 7 l!Jb5 i.d7 1 8 l!J xa7

: ae8 1 9 i.d4 even though he
evaluates it as ;t ) 1 7 . . . i.d7 1 8
e4 11t'xd 1 1 9 : axd 1 l!J b4! 20 :d2
fe 2 1 l!Jfxe4 l!Jxe4 22 i. xe4 : xfl +
23 xfl : f8 + 24 g2 b6 and
the ending should be tenable;
Gulko-Antoshin, Moscow Ch.
1 98 1 .
One important aspect of the text
move is that it prevents White
capturing on f3 with a piece
because of the . . . g4 fork.
ef
11
f3
12
ef
c5
Black's play is consistently bold;
Black locks the centre in prep
aration for the k;ng taking up
residence there. On rerlection, this
is not so surprising since a return
to 'normal' chess by 1 2 . . . i.e?
1 3 : e 1 0-0 1 4 b3 would leave
White all the trump cards of space,
development and coordination as
well as making Black's advanced
kingside pawns look as much a
self-inflicted weakness as a van
guard of aggression.
d8
13
: et +
14
b4!?
Correctly seeking to open up
the position since then the lack of
communication between the black
rooks could prove serious.
14
l!Ja6!
The right response; on 1 4 . . . cb
there might follow 1 5 ltJ b5 l!Ja6
(not 1 5 . . . l!J bd7? 1 6 i. xg5!) 1 6
54
.i.b2 lbc5 1 7 'W'd4 .i.e7 1 8 .:. xe7!

and it all falls apart.
lb xc5
15
be
lLl
f2
16
..td7
.:t b1
.i.g7
17
Black has marshalled his
defences carefully and is optimally
poised to counter any offensive
and further reduce White's advan
tage. In the game White failed to
find a really testing plan and a
draw was shortly agreed : 1 8 lbd3
b6 19 lbb5 ( 1 9 lbxc5 de! 20 a4
lbe8 21 lbb5 ..txb5 22 ab lbd6 is
unclear, White's domination of the
e-file being offset by Black's mag
nificent knight) 19 . . . ..txb5 20
.:t xb5 lLlfd7 2 1 f4 g4 22 ..te3 lLlxd3
23 'W' xd3 .:t e8 24 .:t bb 1 .:t c8 t-t .
Probably, White was nagged by a
feeling that he could have done
better and was happy to call a
halt. After, say, 25 a4 lbc5 26 'W'a3
'W'c7 White would still have no
clear method of break ing through.
Gheorghiu-Tal
Moscow 1 971
1 d4 r5 2 gJ lL!f6 3 ..tg2 d6 4 lL!f3
c6 5 0-0 'W'c7 ( 42 )
6
lbbd2
White aims to threaten to
advance his e-pawn as quickly as
possible and thus for the time
being at least postpones c4. Other
systems dispensing with c4 have
also been played :
42
w
(a) 6 b3 e5 7 de de 8 ..t b2 e4
(8 . . . lb bd 7 invites the dangerou
pawn offer 9 e4!? lbxe4 lO lbbdZ
lbxd2 1 1 'W' xd2 e4 1 2 lb h4 lLlf6 1 3
.:t ad 1 threatening 1 4 'W' g5 wit
powerful pressure - Fuchs) 9 lbd4
..te7 10 lbd2 a6! (threatening . .
c5) 1 1 e3 0-0 1 2 f3 c5 1 3 lbe2
ef 14 .i.xf3 lbc6 and Black has
equalized at least; Gligoric-Kava
lek, The Hague 1 966. If White is
attracted by the idea of the queen's
fianchetto then it is probably best
effected on move five in order t o1
hinder . . . e5. The attempt by Black
to throw a spanner in the works
by 5 b3 'W'a5 + does not quite
come off, e.g. 6 lLl bd2 e5 7 de de
8 0-0 e4 9 lbc4 'W'd5 10 lbd4 g6 1 1
..tb2 .i.e7 1 2 f4 0-0 1 3 lbe3 'W'f7 1 4
c4 ;t Vukic- Knezevic, Yugoslav
Ch. 1 967.
(b) 6 lL!C3 !? is another prom1smg
method of initiating direct action
in the centre. A major incon
venience for Black is that trans
positions to a Stonewall leave the
Hort-AIItoshin Variation
queen poorly placed and vulner

a ble to attack. Normal reactions
can backfire badly: 6 . . . e5 7 de
d e 8 e4 ..i b4 (by analogy to note
c to White's seventh but here Whi
te ' s development is better and he
ca n strike faster in the centre; 8 . . .
fe 9 tt:lg5 ..ig4 is relatively best) 9
ef 0-0 (or 9 . . . ..i xf5 1 0 tt:lxe5!
..t xc3 1 1 be 'iWxe5 12 l:te I tt:le4 1 3
.he4 ..ixe4 1 4 'iWd4! ) 1 0 tt:lh4
!Lla6 1 1 g4 'ilt"e7 12 g5 ..ixc3 1 3 be
!Lle8 (thus far Krogius-Otstavo
kov, USSR 1 965) 14 'ilt"g4! and
Black has problems, e.g. 14 . . . g6
1 5 f6! ..txg4 16 fe l:t f7 1 7 ..ia3 or
14 . . . tt:ld6 15 ..ta3 c5 16 ..id5 +
h 8 1 7 tt:lg6 + ! etc. Thus it seems
that Black does best to opt for 6
. . . g6 with Leningrad-type lines in
mind.
6
g6
The hidden sting concealed in
the apparently innocuous devel
opment of the QN becomes clear
if Black innocently proceeds with
his plan : 6 . . . e5? 7 de de 8 lll c4!
and there is no satisfactory reply,
e.g. 8 . . e4 9 ..if4 or 8 . . . tt:lbd7
9 !Ufxe5! tt:lxe5 10 ..tf4 .
d5
7
l:t e l
As usual, the Stonewall for
mation proves the best way of
keeping the lid on things.
8
c4
8 !Ue5 immediately should be
ans wered as in the game and not
by 8
lll b d7?! 9 lll df3 ..ig7 1 0
.
0 0 0
55
c4 since 10 . . . tt:lxe5? 1 1 de tt:lg4

1 2 cd cd 1 3 'iWxd5 loses a pawn
for nothing, Bilek-A. Zaitsev,
Debrecen t 970, and Taimanov's
recommendation of 10 . . . de is
also unappetizing.
..ig7
8
0-0
tt:le5
9
tt:le4
llld f3
10
II
..if4 ( 43)
43
B
Clearly, thi
s a Stonewall
which has gone very wrong for
Black. White has an iron grip on
e5 and has almost completed his
development whereas Black's que
enside has yet to wake from its
slumbers. On top of that, the
unhappily placed black queen
must move again in view of the
threatened discovered attack.
That Black manages not to lose
this position is a tribute to the
resilience of the Stonewall for
mation -- but it helps also to be a
former world champion.
The game concluded as follows :
56
l l . . . "it" b6 1 2 "it"c2 a5 (necessary

restraint of the avalanche which
would occur after, say, 1 2 . . . ..te6
1 3 c5 "it"d8 14 b4) 1 3 c5 "it"d8 1 4
h 4 ttld7 1 5 b 3 l"Lldf6 1 6 a 3 ..td7
1 7 "it"cl (lucky for Black that White
did not think of this earlier) 1 7 . . .
ttlg4 (Black's first active move of
the game . . .) 18 % Hl ( . . . and it is
enough to cow White into curbmg

his ambitions; 1 8 ttlxg4 fg 19 ttle5
would still leave White all the
chances) 1 8 . . . ttlef6! -!--! . For the
first time Black has the semblance
of an acceptable position and one
can well understand both parties
being pleased to terminate the
proceedings.
Staunton Gambit: 2 e4
The Staunton Gambit clearly con

stitutes one of the most radical
and critical challenges to the fun
damental soundness of the Dutch
Defence. White posits that the
gambitting of his important cen
tral pawn will best enable him to
highlight the negative aspects of
Black's first move - that it does
not contribute to development,
and exposes the king - by getting
an advantage in development and
mounting a k ingside attack. H ap
pily, the Dutch passes this crucial
test with flying colours, and the
Staunton Gambit is consequently
rarely encountered in contempor
ary praxis.
rs
t
d4
fe ( 44)
2
e4
As Steinitz wisely observed, the
o nly way to refute a gambit is to
acce pt it, and that is especially
tr ue where an important central
pawn is on offer.
lL!c3
3
Obviously W hite's most natural
continuation. The artificial alter

natives can easily bring White into
difficulties :
(a) 3 lL!d2 lL!f6 4 g4 d5! 5 g5
lL!fd7 6 f3 e5! 7 fe .te7! (stronger
than 7 . . . "W' xg5 8 lL!gf3 "W' h 5 as
played in Bisguier-Bronstein,
Goteborg 1 955, when 9 ..tg2!
would have brought White some
play) and White is paying the
penalty for flouting the elementary
principles of opening play, e.g. 8
h4 0-0 9 lL!gf3 ed 1 0 ed lL! b6 + .
(b) 3 f3 e5! 4 de lL!c6 (4 . . .
d5!? certainly deserves attention) 5
"W'd5 "W'e7 (Black could also con
sider turning the tables with the
57
58
gambit 5 . . . ..tb4 + 6 c3 liJge7 7

-.. xe4 d5) 6 f4 d6 7 ed cd 8 ..t b5
..td7 9 liJc3 liJf6 and Black's active
position and strong e-pawn guar
antee a promising middle game.
liJf6
3
Now White must choose
between the two major continu
ations 4 f3 and 4 ..tg5, which
we shall examine in detail in the
following illustrative games. In
addition, there is the unjustifiably
wild 4 g4?! which is rarely risked
nowadays: 4 . . . h6! and by main
taining his knight on f6 Black
assures himself of an advantage
no matter how White continues :
(a) 5 h4 d5 6 ..th3 liJc6 7 ..tf4
g5! 8 ..te5 (8 hg hg 9 ..txg5 courts
disaster, riz. 9 . . . ..txg4 10 f3
l:t xh3! I I l:t xh3 ..txh3 1 2 liJxh3
-.. d 7 13 liJf2 0-0-0; Yermolinsky
Safarov, Leningrad 1 977) 8 . . .
..te6 9 f3 -.. d 7 1 0 -.. d2 o-o-o +
Byrne and Mednis.
(b) 5 f3 d5 6 g5 (or 6 ..tg2 e5!
7 de liJxg4! + Kuzminikh, while 6
..tf4 e6 7 -.. d 2 ..td6 8 0-0-0 ef 9
..txd6 cd 10 liJxf3 0-0 leaves Black
with an extra pawn and good
prospects; Menchik-Sultan Khan,
Cambridge 1 932) 6 . . . hg 7 ..txg5
..tf5 8 ..tg2 (after 8 -.. e 2 liJc6 9
0-0-0 -.. d7 1 0 ..txf6?! ef I I fe
de 1 2 liJxe4 0-0-0 + White has
restored material parity at the cost
of positional inferiority; Gasz
tonyi -Szilagyi, Hungarian Ch.
1 953) 8 . . . e3! 9 liJge2 liJc6 1 0 a3

e6 I I ..txe3 ..td6 and once again
we observe White regaining his
pawn but remaining with a con
siderable positional disadvantage;
Tyroler-Araiza, 1 928.
(c) 5 g5 hg 6 ..t xg5 d5 7 -.. d 2
(7 f3 transposes to note (b)) 7 . . .
..tf5 8 0-0-0 c6 9 f3 liJbd7 1 0 ..tg2
-.. as and White has nothing to
show for his pawn deficit; Radu
gin-Kubbel, Leningrad 1 934.
(d) 5 f4?! d5 6 ..te2 (6 g5 hg 7
fg liJh5 8 ..te2 g6 =t ) 6 . . . g6! 7
..te3 h5! 8 g5 liJg8 9 -.. d 2 e6 1 0
f5 (allowing Black t o blockade
with his knight would be hopeless)
10 . . . ef I I liJh3 c6 1 2 liJf4 -.. d 6
and despite White's nice blockade,
two healthy extra pawns should
be good enough to win; Szabo
Aiexander, Amsterdam 01. 1 954.
(e) 5 d5?! e6 6 g5 (6 de d5 + ) 6
. . . hg 7 ..txg5 ..te7 8 ..txf6 ..txf6
9 liJge2 d6 I 0 ..tg2 c6! I I de d5
1 2 cb ..txb7 White's attempt to
gain space in the centre has com
pletely backfired leaving Black
with a huge strategical advantage
in the form of the bishop pair and
central pawn mass; Benediktsson
Kristjansson, Reykjavik 1 968.
Gulko-M. Gurevich
USSR Ch. 1 985

1 d4 rs 2 e4 fe 3 liJc3 liJf6
4
f3 ( 45 )
The purest form of the gambit.

Experience has shown that captur
ing this pawn gives White at least
sufficient compensation in devel
opment and attacking chances,
and therefore we shall concentrate
on the most critical method of
declining.
4
d5
By securing the advanced e
pawn Black hopes to obtain a
free and easy development while
placing some constraints on
White's.
5
fe
White gains nothing from delay
ing this capture, and indeed
atte mpting to get by without it
can easily lead him astray, e.g.
5 ..tg5 ..tf5 6 -.. d 2?! (6 fe de
tra nsposing to the game is correct)
6 . . . tt:lc6 7 .i.b5 e6 8 fe de 9 d5?
(a mistaken conception; 9 tt:lge2
was better although it is true that
Blac k would be very comfortably
placed after simply 9 . . . .i.e7) 9
ed 1 0 .i.xf6 -.. xf6 1 1 tt:lxd5
.
59
-.. x b2 12 tt:lxc7 + f7 13 .i.c4 +

g6 and White is on the brink of
Krause-Tartakower,
defeat;
Luxembourg 1 936.
5
de
.i.g5
6
Serves to discourage various . . .
e5 thrusts. After 6 .i.c4, for exam
ple, Black has the pleasant choice
between 6 . . . e5!? 7 de (7 tt:lge2?
ed 8 tt:lxd4 .i.g4! is just bad for
White, but 7 .i.g5 ed 8 tt:lxe4 -.. e 7
would produce obscure complica
tions) 7 . . . -.. x d 1 + 8 tt:lxd 1 tt:lg4
with easy equality, and 6 . . . tt:lc6 7
tt:lge2 e5!? (or Black could equalize
by 7 . . . .i.f5 8 0-0 -.. d 7) 8 .i.g5
(8 d5 tt:la5 ) 8 . . . ed! 9 tt:lxe4
.i.b4 + 10 c3 de 1 1 ttJ4xc3
-.. xd 1 + 1 2 .C. xd 1 tt:le4 and Black
remains a pawn to the good with
the endgame fast approaching
(analysis by Kovacevic).
.i.f5 ( 46)
6
=
46
w
7
tt:lge2
In order to solve the problem
of the development of the king's
60
knight
and
pressurize
the
advanced e-pawn as quickly as
possible. Whether it it is White's
best
continuation,
however,
remains to be established. The
alternatives are as follows:
(a) 7 "ife2?! lZlc6 (7 . . . -.xd4? 8
-. b5 + ) 8 .bf6 (8 0-0-0?? .tg4)
8 . . . ef 9 0-0-0 .td6 1 0 lZlxe4
0-0 1 1 lZlxd6?! (meets with a
surprising rejoinder, but in any
case Black has a very comfortable
game) 1 1 . . . cd! 1 2 -.f2 -.as 1 3
.tc4 + h8 1 4 lZle2 lZlb4 1 5
.tb3 .:t ac8 + Black's queenside
attack is becoming very dang
erous;
Ed.
Lasker-Alekhine,
match, Paris 1 9 1 3.
(b) 7 -.d2 ?! e6 8 h3 .td6 9 00-0 h6 1 0 .txf6 -.xf6 1 1 .tc4 lZlc6
1 2 lZlge2 0-0-0 1 3 : hfl lZla5 1 4
.t b5 -. g5 1 5 lZlf4 a6 + a useful
example of how Black can proceed
when White does nothing in par
Arbakov-Gieizerov,
ticular;
Saratov 1 9 84.
(c) 7 .tc4!? lZlbd7!? (7 . . . lZlc6
is generally featured as Black's
best continuation with the main
line running 8 lZlge2 -.d7 9 0-0 e6
10 -.el 0-0-0 I I .:t d l lZla5 1 2 .tb5
c6 13 .ta4 lZlc4 - Taimanov
suggests 1 3 . . . .td6 14 d5 -.e7 with an unclear, roughly balanced
position : a game Schultz-Wille,
E. Germany 1 957, went 1 4 d5?!
.tc5 + 1 5 h i .te3 1 6 de -.c7
with wild complications, while
Minev has recommended 14 .t b3

with lZlg3 to follow, again with
approximate equality in a mutu
ally difficult position) 8 lZlge2 lZlb6
9 .tb3 -.d7 10 0-0 e6 1 1 -. e 1 00-0 1 2 .:t d 1 c6 1 3 lZlg3 .tb4 1 4
.txf6 g f 1 5 lZlgxe4 with chances
for both sides in a sharp position;
Danner--Strobel, Austria 1 969.
7
e6
.te7
8
lZlg3
Black also obtained an advan
tage in the game Martinez-Byrne,
Nice 01. 1 974, after 8 . . . .t b4 9
.tc4?! lZlc6 1 0 0-0 -. xd4 + 1 1
-. xd4 lZlxd4 1 2 .txf6 gf 1 3 lZlcxe4
.txe4 1 4 lZlxe4 f5 1 5 lZlg5 lZlxc2!,
but White could improve at move
nine with, say, 9 -.d2.
h6!
9
-.d2
10
.te3
There is no joy for White in 1 0
.txf6 .txf6 1 1 lZlcxe4 -. xd4 1 2
lZlxf6 + -.xf6 1 3 0-0-0 0-0 + .
10
lZlbd7
11
.te2
Chernin and M. Gurevich
analyse 1 1 lZlxf5 ef 1 2 .tc4 .td6!
1 3 .te6 g6 as clearly in Black's
favour, 14 .t xh6 being well met
by 14 . . . -.e7 with . . . 0-0-0 to
follow.
lZlb6
ll
-.d7
12
0-0
Simply 1 2 . . . .tg6 would have
avoided the sequence which fol
lows and left Black clearly in
control.
l: g8
13
hS
Understandably fearing the sac
rifices which could follow 1 3 . . . 0-0
b ut unnecessarily so according to
Chernin and M. Gurevich who
a nalyse 14 xg7?! xg7 1 5
.txh6 + h7 1 6 W'g5 ( 1 6 .ixf8
.:t xf8 + ) 1 6 . . . l: g8 1 7 W'h4 l:t g6
and there is no good continuation
of the attack.
.ixf6
14
xf6 +
IS
.ihS + !
g6
16
.ie2
By forcing Black to weaken his
kingside pawns White has set up
the double threat of g2-g4 and
xe4.
16
W' g7!
A clever tactical counter, utiliz
ing the latent heavy piece power
on the g-file.
17
.ixh6?!
Gives Black an easy time of
it. For better or worse, it was
practically mandatory to brave the
perils of 1 7 g4 0-0-0! 1 8 : ad l (not
1 8 gl'? gf + 1 9 f2 .ih4 mate) 1 8
. . . h5!
.ixd4 +
17
W' h8!
18
ht
19
.if4
On 1 9 g4, Black could reply 1 9
. . . 0-0-0 20 gf e f and White would
be hard pressed to cope with the
th reat of . . . .ie5 and . . . g5.
0
19
eS ( 4 7 )
20
b5
With this, White's temporary
61
47
w
mttJattve grinds to a halt and

Black slowly takes control of the
whole board.
21
.ie3
a6
l: g7
22
c3
23
: f2
: h7
W'e8
24
g3
W'c6
25
.ifl
With his q ueen optimally re
grouped Black is poised for the
decisive assault.
d7!
26
W'e2
Naturally, Black denies his
adversary the glimmer of hope
which would follow from the dou
ble capture on c3. Instead, the
knight is sent over to claim control
of g4.
27
dl
f6
28
c3
.ig4!
: xr6?
29
Abject capitulation; 29 W' e l
.if3 + 3 0 gl .ib6 3 1 .ixb6
W'xb6 32 e3 g5 with . . . g4 to
follow would doubtless end in the
same result, but at least it would
require more effort from Black to
62
secure it.
.i.xe2
29
.i.f3 +
: xc6
30
White's fate is sealed; the end
came quickly : 3 1 g 1 .i.xe3 +
3 2 lLl xe3 be 33 .i.xa6 + b8 34
: n : d2 35 : f2 : xf2 36 xf2
: xh2 + 0- 1 .
Shchumitshev-Shaposnikov
7th USSR corr. Ch. 1 967-9

1 d4 f5 2 e4 fe 3 lLlc3 lLlf6
4
.i.g5 ( 48)
48
8
This is the classical continu

ation used by Staunton himself. In
essence, White hopes to recover
the pawn whilst maintaining a
central superiority rather than
make a real gambit of it.
4
lLlc6
Inaugurating lively piece play
in the centre of the board, making
use of the fact that should the
knight be chased to n (via e5) it
will attack the bishop.
An alternative defence which is
becoming increasingly popular is
4 . . . e6 which we have covered in

Chapter 8, page 78. Note, how
ever, that Black is unable to hang
on to the pawn as in the 4 n
variation because of the following
refutation : 4 . . . d5? 5 .i.xf6 ef 6
"ifh5 + g6 7 "if xd5 pocketing one
pawn immediately with a second
soon to follow.
5
d5
All the alternatives are very
pleasant for Black :
(a) 5 .i.xf6?! ef 6 d5 (6 .i.c4?!
f5 7 lLlge2 lLla5 8 .i.b3 lLlxb3 9 ab
.i.e7 is hopeless for White) 6 . . .
lLle5 7 lLl xe4 f5 with a fine game
for Black.
(b) 5 lLl h3?! g6 6 .i.c4 .i.g7 7
0-0 d5 8 .i.xf6 ef 9 .i.xd5 .i.xh3
10 gh f5 + Taimanov.
(c) 5 .i.b5 a6 (5 . . . g6 comes
into consideration) 6 .i.xc6 be 7
"ife2 e6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 9 .i.xf6
.i.xf6 1 0 tt:Jn 0-0 and now whether
White opts for the aggressive 1 1
0-0-0 or the prudent 1 1 0-0, Black's
bishops and central pawn mass
provide satisfactory middlegame
prospects.
(d) 5 n e5! (given that it is too
risky to accept the pawn, the text
move is the most logical way of
declining: Black stakes a claim in
the centre and entrenches on the
dark squares) 6 d5 (White achieves
nothing by 6 de lLl xe5, e.g. 7 Wd4
d6 8 lLlxe4 .i.e7 or 7 fe d6 8 tt:Jf3
.i.g4) 6 . . . lLld4 7 lLl xe4 (the dark
squ are weakness would be more

e vi dent after 7 fe j_e7 8 j.c4 d6
9 t2Jge2 tt:lg4!; Barda-Rossolimo,
Hastings 1 949/50) 7 . . . j.e7 8
xf6 j_xf6 9 Wd2 (or 9 c3 tt:lf5
t O Wd2 d6 1 1 j. b5 + j_d7 1 2
xd7 + 'it' xd7 1 3 tt:lh3 0-0-0
Wexler-Adler, Mar del Plata
1 952) 9 . . . 0-0 10 0-0-0 d6 1 1
c3 t2Jf5 with balanced chances;
Stockholm
H orberg-Larsen,
1 966/67.
5
tt:le5
6
Wd4
Alternatives are not as good :
(a) 6 f4?! tt:lf7 7 W d4 g6 8 tt:lxe4
g7 is fine for Black.
(b) 6 f3 tt:lf7 7 j_xf6 (relatively
best; 7 j_e3 ef 8 tt:lxf3 g6 9 j_e2
g7 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 tt:ld4 c6! as in
van Seters-Rossolimo, Beverwijk
1950, and 7 j_f4 ef 8 tt:lxf3 c6 9
.tc4 cd 1 0 j_ xd5 e6 1 1 j_b3
.tb4 as in van Seters-Donner,
Beverwijk 1 95 1 , both leave White
with nothing to show for the pawn)
7 . . . ef 8 tt:lxe4 f5 9 tt:lg3 g6 gives
Black an active and promising
position.
(c) 6 j_xf6 ef 7 tt:l xe4 f5 8 tt:lg3
g6 9 We2 We7 10 0-0-0 tt:lg4! hands
B lack the initiative in short order;
Alzate-Nilsson, Havana 01. 1 966.
6
tt:lf7 ( 49)
7
j_xf6
E xperience with the alternatives
st ro ngly suggests that White is
Well advised to cede the bishop
63
49
w
pair rather than lose time:

(a) 7 h4 c6 8 0-0-0 (8 j_ xf6 gf 9
'it' xe4 cd 1 0 tt:lxd5 e6 1 1 0-0-0
j_g7 =t ) 8 . . . W b6! 9 j_xf6 gf 1 0
'it' xe4 W xf2 1 1 tt:l f3 j_h6 + 1 2
b 1 'it'e3 1 3 'it'a4 W f4 1 4 W b3 a5
and in an interestingly unbalanced
position Black's bishop pair,
potentially
powerful
central
pawns, and dark square play give
him the better of it; Yudintsev
M artinov, !-final USSR corr. Ch.
1 964/65.
(b) 7 j_ h4 g5! (stemming from
Simagin, the time and activity
gained from this bold thrust far
outweigh the weakening of the
kingside) 8 j_g3 j_g7 9 0-0-0 c6!
(again we see this important little
move which not only challenges
White's last central pawn but also
lets the queen into play) 10 tt:lxe4
(White is left with a similarly bleak
ending after 10 d6 W b6! 1 1 tt:lxe4
'it' xd4 1 2 .l:txd4 tt:lh5 1 3 ll d l tt:lxg3
14 hg ed 1 5 c4!? b5! 16 cb d5;
Matsukevich-Cherepkov, Lenin-
64
grad 1 963) 10 . . . b6! (exchanging

queens is the correct strategy;
Black thereby diminishes White's
attacking prospects while enhanc
ing his own positional advantages)
I I xf6 + ..txf6 1 2 xb6 ab 1 3
b1 d6 1 4 a 3 l:t a5 and Black has
taken charge; Potter--Jezek, corr.
01. Final 1 959/60.
ef
7
xe4
8
If White does not capture the
pawn immediately then Black
holds it temporarily in order to
return it for positional gains : 8
0-0-0?! f5! 9 f3 ..td6! 1 0 fe ( 1 0
xg7?? J.e5) 1 0 . . . J.e5 1 1 d3
f4 12 f3 0-0 with a firm blockade
on e5, + ; Kenez-Borisenko, corr.
1 958.
f5!
8
The most forceful continuation
and probably best.
9
g3
Black would meet 9 c3 in the
same way.
g6
9
M aking maximum use of the
marvellously placed knight on f7.
10
0-0-0
The ultra-sharp 1 0 h4 ..th6 1 1
h5 looks more threatening than it
actually is on account of 1 1 . . .
e7 + ! breaking the flow of White's
attack (but not 1 1 . . . 0-0? 1 2 hg
hg 1 3 d6!). A game Gudmunsson
Donner, Amsterdam 1 950, saw
White try I I d6 (after I 0 h4 ..th6)
but Black emerged on top after 1 1

. . . 0-0 1 2 ..tc4 J.g7 1 3 d3
J.xb2 1 4 l:t b 1 f6 15 1 e2 ..te5
1 6 de ..t xc7.
10
J.h6 +
f4
11
Attempting to gain some dark
square control; 1 1 b 1 0-0 leaves
Black with at least equal prospects.
11
0-0
12
f3
..tg7
13
.. d2
b5!
14
d4
d6 (50)
50
w
Variously evaluated as 'equal'

or 'unclear', it nevertheless seems
fairly evident that Black's pro
spects are the more promising in
this unusual and difficult position.
The major handicap of White's
setup is that he has no equivalent,
either literally or figuratively, to
the
powerful
black-squared
bishop on g7 which gives energy
and purpose to the black position.
15
c3
Obviously White dare not cap-
Staunron Gambit: 2 e4
t u re the pawn immediately ( 1 5

axb5? l0xb5 1 6 R.xb5 : b8 with
. . . a6 and breakthrough on b2 to
follow) so he primes the threat by
blunting the bishop's action along
the a l -h8 diagonal.
IS
1:1 b8
16
tO b3?!
aS!
In trying to slow Black's attack
White has inadvertently acceler
ated it! The rook pawn thrust
ina ugurates a forceful and instruc
tive sequence which wrests a
lasting initiative and positional
dominance.
: as
17
l0xa5
18
b4
1:1 xa5!
..tb7 (51 )
19
ba
65
With the white monarch's pawn

cover shattered beyond repair and
the black KB rampaging unop
posed down the long diagonal,
White's queenside is ripe for the
plucking and his fate practically
sealed. Despite desperate defensive
efforts, in the end White could find
no answer to the concerted action
of the black forces : 20 b2 as
2 1 b4 ..txd5 22 R.xb5 l0 xb5!
(22 . . . : b8 23 a4!) 23 xb5 c6 24
c5 : b8 25 : xd5 (25 c4 b7 is
crushing) 25 . . . cd! (not falling for
25 . . . 1:1 b5? 26 xb5 cb 27 1:1 hd l
with good chances of holding on)
26 1:1 d l d4! 27 tOe2 e4 28 c4 +
h8 29 d3 b7! 30 1:1 d2 de 3 1
l0xc3 'i/c7 32 1:1 c2 xf4 + 33 d l
xh2 3 4 e 3 d 5 35 'i/12 d4 36
lObS d3 37 l::t c7 xc7! 38 l0xc7
1:1 b l + 39 d2 1:1 b2 + 40 e3
.td4 + 41 xd4 1:1 xf2 42 xd3
: xa2 43 a6 f4 44 e4 g5 45 f3
g7 46 e4 g6 0- l .
The Queen Bishop Attack :

2 .tg5
The bishop sortie aims t o disrupt

the normal development of Black's
kingside : 2 . . . e6 is prevented, and
2 . . . lLlf6 permits 3 ..txf6, down
grading the black pawn structure
in a relatively closed position
where the two bishops at best
offer problematic compensation.
Consequently, the two recom
mended variations we shall
examine avoid the structure
damaging exchange by postpon
ing the development of the knigh t :
t h e restrained 2 . . . g 6 and the
ambitious whiplash 2 . . . h6 3 ..th4
g5.
52
w
. . . lLlf6, ..txf6 exchange, whilst

also observing the eternally
important e5 square directly as
well as x-raying the long diagonal
in general and the weakened b2
spot in particular.
Note that there is no inconsist
ency here in recommending 2 . . .
g6 while counselling its avoidance
in favour of 2 . . . lLlf6 in the Lenin
grad (see p. 46) since the bishop's
presence on g5 gives Black the
important additional resource of
being able to answer an h-pawn
thrust of h4-h5 with . . . h6, ..i
Kouatly- VI. Kovacevic
Thessaloniki 0/. 1 984

1 d4 rs 2 ..tgs
2
g6 (52)
Fianchettoing
the
bishop
enables Black to capture on f6
with a piece in the event of a future
66
The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5
retreats g5, thus keeping the king

side sealed.
h4
3
I ncreasing dark square control
and introducing a possible rook
pawn rupture form an important
part of White's strategic pro
gramme despite the extra defens
ive counters deriving from the
exposed bishop.
There are valid alternative
treatments :
(a) 3 ll:lc3 g7 (3 . . . d5 trans
poses to Chapter 8) 4 e4 (delaying
this advance brings nothing, e.g. 4
lLif3 lLif6 5 xf6 xf6 6 e4 fe 7
lLi xe4 d5! ) 4 . . . fe 5 lLixe4 d5! 6
ll:lc5 (nor does retreating promise
White any advantage, e.g. 6 lLig3
liJc6 7 c3 ll:lh6!? 8 Wd2 ll:lf7 with
balanced chances in a complex
position, or 6 lLic3 ll:lc6 7 b5
4J h6!? 8 xh6 xh6 9 Wf3 e6
again with mutual chances and
problems; M. Simic-Knezevic,
Smederevska Palanka 1 977) 6 . . .
b6 7 4Jb3 lLi f6 8 lLif3 0-0 9 e2
d6 10 0-0 4Jbd7 with active
possibilities for Black; Mik. Zeit
lin-Ivanenko, Central Chess Club
Ch. 1 984.
(b) 3 ll:ld2 g7 4 c3 (a game
Bergrasser- Larsen, Monte Carlo
1 967, went 4 e3 li'lf6 5 ll:lgf3 d6 6
.tc4 ll:lc6 7 c3 a6 8 h4 4Je4 ) 4
. . . h6 5 .tf4 d6 6 e3 e5 7 de de 8
.tg3 We7 9 f3 .te6 and Black
has a space advantage and the
67
more positive position; Kuttner

Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969.
(c) 3 e4 fe 4 ll:lc3 lLif6 5 f3 ef 6
ti:lxf3 J.. g 7 brings about a vari
ation of the Staunton Gambit con
sidered to offer balanced pro
spects.
3
J.. g7 (53)
53
w
4
e3
Other paths:
(a) 4 ll:lc3 c6 (again the trans
position to Chapter 8 by 4 . . . d5
is available; ECO suggests an
immediate 4 . . . h6) 5 Wd3 d5 6
0-0-0 lLif6 (6 . . . WaS is an active
alternative worth attention) 7
.t xf6!? J.. x f6 8 f4 b5 9 ll:lf3 with
an interesting middlegame in
prospect : White holds the knights
in a blocked position but Black
has attacking chances on the
queenside; Rajkovic- Kovacevic,
Yugoslavia 1 975 .
(b) 4 h5 h6 5 .tel (anywhere
else the bishop would just be a
nuisance) 5 . . . g5 (this instructive
sequence sees Black thwart
68
The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 i.g5
White's ambitions on the h-file

and turn the tables in the battle
for the initiative on the kingside)
6 'it'd3 e6 7 e4 d6 8 ti:lf3 f4!? 9 e5
ti:le7 10 ed cd 1 1 ti:lbd2 0-0 12 c3
ti:lf5 and Black can look to the
middle game with confidence;
Gipslis- Reize, Leningrad 1 960.
h6
4
With the bishop's line of retreat
blocked, Black seeks to use it as a
target to aid expansion in the
centre.
5
d6
..tf4
ti:lc6
6
..tc4
Naturally Black avoids 6 . . . e5?
which would leave him with a
displaced king and problems with
developing after 7 de de 8 ..tf7 +
e7 9 'it'xd8 + xd8 10 ..tg3
ti:le7 1 1 ti:lc3.
e5
c3
7
With other factors being equal,
this advance always solves Black's
opening problems and often gives
him the more promising position.
8
..tg3
'it'e7
The vis-a-vis with White's king
means that . . . f4 is threatened.
9
ti:le2
ti:lf6
10
f3
I n order to be able to preserve
both QB and h-pawn in the event
of . . . ti:lh5.
..td7 (54 )
10
Black has the more harmonious
development and the strategic
initiative thanks to his mobile
kingside pawns.
a4
11
Hoping for a compensatory
initiative on the other flank .
11
0-0-0
Possibly premature as it permits
White to force Black's QN away
from the centre and provoke a
slight weakening of the queenside
pawns. Of course, such a rich
position contains several feasible
plans, for example immediate
kingside expansion with 1 1 . . . g5,
or possibly opening the e-file by
1 1 . . . ed and only then castling
(so that e5 would be available to
the knight in case of d5) followed
by vigorous action on the king's
flank.
12
d5
ti:lb8
13
ti:la3
a6
'it'e8!
14
..tf2
Subtle prophylaxis designed to
hamper a charge by the b-pawn.
15
..tb3
g5
e4
16
..tc2
'it'e7
17
ti:lg3
The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .t.g5
Correctly avoiding the tempting

1 7 . . 'W'e5? which would hand the
init iative to White after 1 8 ll:Jc4
wxd5 1 9 'W' xd5 ll:J xd5 20 fe fe 2 1
lL:lh5!
: df8
18
'W'd2
This somewhat mysterious rook
move brings the piece into play
while reserving e8 for the queen.
19
0-0-0
That it is high time to remove
the king from its increasingly peril
ous position in the centre is well
illustrated by the combinative
refutation of 1 9 b4?: 19 . . . ll:Jxd5!
20 'W'xd5 .ixc3 + 21 e2 gh 22
lLlh5 .ixa 1 23 : xa 1 .ic6 24
Wc4 'W' g5 25 ll:Jf4 ef 26 gf .ixf3 + !
with a decisive advantage (V.
Kovacevic).
19
gh
At first sight this self-splitting
of his pawns seems strange, but
further inspection reveals that
without this capture it is difficult
for Black to open lines and make
progress on the kingside.
20
ll:Je2
Taking with the rook would
allow Black to move his knight
wit h a discovered attack.
20
'W'e8
21
ef
ll:Jf4
ll:Jh 7 (55 )
22
gf
Having created a weakness on
f3 Black manoeuvres his knight to
bri ng it under pressure.
lLlg5
23
.ixh4
69
24
'W'f2
Given White's next, the immedi
ate 24 'W'e2 may have been prefer
able.
a5!
24
In order to bring the inactive
knight back into play.
25
'W'e2
ll:la6
ll:Jc5
26
ll:Jb5
Consequent, but 26 . . . : hg8
first was probably more accurate.
27
b4?!
Typical time-trouble lashing
out; 27 .if2 was more circumspect
with a lot of hard fighting still to
come.
27
ab
28
cb
.ixb5
Simultaneously trading White's
most threatening piece and shat
tering his queenside pawns.
29 ab
'W'e5!?
30
: d4
Not 30 be? which would allow
Black to run amok on the black
squares: 30 . 'W' b2 + 3 1 d2
'W' b4 + 32 c l .ib2 + 33 b 1
.
70
The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 1Lg5
..tc3 + .
lll d7
30
31
lll h5
White is understandably con
cerned to remove Black's pressure
on the long diagonal, but he was
probably wrong to forego the
obvious 3 1 lll g6, e.g. 3 1 . . . 'it'e8 32
lll xf8 when Black would do best
simply to recapture by 32 . . . ll xf8
with plenty of tactical chances,
rather than allow 32 . . . ..txd4 3 3
lll x d7 etc. when t h e fact that f5 i s
unprotected makes things awk
ward.
31
f4!
Undermining the d4 blockade
which is preventing infiltration
down the diagonal.
32
lll xg7
Even in time-trouble White
does not fall for 32 lll x f4? ll xf4!
33 ll xf4 'it'b2 + 34 d l 'it' a l +
35 d2 i.c3 + 36 d3 llle 5
mate! Now at least White is
unlikely to fall prey to a mating
attack . . . immediately, anyway!
32
'it' xg7
33
ll hd1
Again, 33 ll xf4 'it' a l + 34 i. b l
'it' a 3 + 35 d I ll xf4 3 6 e f lll xf3
would be asking for trouble.
33
ll e8!?
Black is relentless in his deter
mination to get amongst White's
dark square weaknesses.
34
ll xf4
'it'c3!
ll d3
35
Not 35 e4? llle 5 when the rook

is out of play and the black cavalry
become dangerous.
35
'it' a l +
36
i.b1
36 d2 would allow a deadly
switch to the opposite flank by 36
. . . 'it'h I ! with 37 . . . lll e5 to follow.
36
llle5
37
ll b3
ll hg8
38
..tf2?!
Sorely pressed by the clock,
White fails to spot 38 i.e 1 intend
ing to transfer the bishop to c3
and drive out the menacing queen.
In this case, 38 . . . 'it'a4 keeps up
a multitude of tactical tricks.
38
lll h3
39
ll h4
lll g 1
40
'it'd1
It would be fatal to invite the
enemy's heavy guns to occupy the
home base back rank by capturing
the frisky horse : 40 ..txg l ?
ll xg l + 4 1 c2 ll eg8 4 2 ll h2
'it'a4 and White is hopelessly tied
up.
40
lll gxf3
41
ll xh6
ll g2
42
'it'c2
ll eg8 ( 5 6 )
With this, Black's domination
is complete and the outcome no
longer in any doubt despite tough
resistance : 43 ll h l (of course not
b8 44
43 ll h7?? ll g l + ) 43
'it' b2 'it'a4 45 ll a3 'it'xb5 46 'it' a l
'it'c4 + 47 ..tc2 llld 3 + ! (gaining
a vital tempo to break White's
0 0 0
The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .tg5

56
w
counterattack) 48 l::txd 3 J::txf2 49

..Wc3 b5! 50 .ib3 (it would be
worse to give Black a passed pawn
and leave the b-pawn exposed to
a frontal assault by the black king
after 50 'ifxc4 be 5 1 l:l. c3 ll::l e 5 with
the king march to follow) 50 . .
'if xc3 + 5 1 l:l. xc3 ll::le 5 52 .ic2
l:l. g3 53 l:l. e 1 b7 54 .id3 b6
55 .ie2 l:l. h2 56 d 1 l:l. h4 57
l:l. b3 l:l. g8 58 d2 l:l. h2 59 c1
.::t gg2 60 d1 l:l. h4 6 1 c1 .::t gh2
62 d 1 .::t h8 63 l:l. a3 .::t 2h4 64
c2 (saving the pawn would leave
White open to attack from both
flanks: 64 l:l. b3 .::t a8 65 c2
.::t a2 + 66 c3 l:l. h2 with fierce
pressure) 64 . . . .::t xb4 65 c3
l:l. hh4! (dashing White's last hope :
65 . . . J:l. e4?! 66 .txb5! xb5??
67 J:l. b l + c5 68 l:l. a5 mate) 66
.::t a8 l:l. he4! (Black sets his own
trap : if now 67 J:l. ea l there comes
67 . . . l:l. xe3 + 68 xb4 c5 + 69
de ll::l xc6 mate) 67 J:l. b8 + c5 68
J:l. c 1 ll::l c4 69 .id3 l:l. xe3 70 J:l. b7
l2le5 7 1 d2 + (White would lose
71
both rooks after 7 1 J:l. xc7 + b6

72 xb4 lt::l xd3 + followed by 73
. . . ll::l x cl + etc.) 7 1 . . . d4 White
resigns, as he must acquiesce in
simplification to a technically lost
ending after 72 .tfl J:l. b2 + 73
J:l. c2 (73 d 1 l:l. e 1 + ! and mate
in two) 73 . . . ll::l c4 + 74 .txc4
J:l. xc2 + 75 xc2 be. This sub
stantial game, packed with incid
ent, is a good example of the rich
middlegames which typically arise
in this variation.
Magerramov-A vshalumov
USSR 1 987
I d4 f5 2 .ig5
2
3
.th4
h6
g5 ( 5 7 )
57
w
Played not i n the naive expect

ation of trapping the bishop but in
order to develop the K N without it
being captured, thereby saddling
Black with doubled f-pawns. The
danger for Black is that the rapid
advance of his kingside pawns may
72
The Queen Bishop Attack: 2 .i.g5
leave him weak on the black

squares after a typical h4 thrust
and . . . g4 response. It then
becomes of paramount import
ance whether Black can achieve
the advance of his e-pawn to e5
so as to prevent White obtaining
control over the key f4 square.
4
.tg3
Not forced; the simple transpos
ition 4 e3 tl:\f6 5 .tg3 is equally
playable. Violent attempts at
refutation come unstuck : 4 e4?
.tg7 5 Wh5 + f8 6 .tc4 d5 7
ed tl:\f6 8 Wf3 gh with a winning
material
advantage;
Barnes
Krause, Omaha 1 959. It is quite
shocking that as recently as 1 983
Taimanov could be giving 3 . . . g5
a question mark and saying that
4 e4 is good for White through
being ignorant of the existence of
4 . . . .tg7 (he considers only 4 . . .
tl:\f6? and 4 . . . d5?).
4
tl:\f6
This is certainly the most natu
ral move here although it has
yet to be definitively established
whether it is also the most accur
ate. Examples of the alternatives :
(a) 4 . . . .tg7 5 e3 d6 (5 . . . tl:\f6
would return to the column) 6 h4
(checking on h 5 would involve
White in an unwarranted loss of
time) 6 . . . g4 (the variation 6 . . .
tl:\f6?! 7 hg hg 8 l:t xh8 + .txh8
9 tl:\h3! g4 1 0 tl:\f4 is a good
illustration of what Black should
avoid) 7 tl:\c3 e5?! 8 de de 9 W xd8 +

xd8 1 0 0-0-0 + .td7 1 1 .tc4
and White's easy, active develop
ment contrasts starkly with
Black's sluggish mobilisation and
difficulties along the d-file; Lpu
tian- Mik. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985.
(b) 4 . . . d6 5 e3 tl:\f6 6 h4 l:t g8!?
(this bold attempt to avoid . . . g4
deserves further investigation) 7
hg hg 8 .tc4 (this rather simplistic
approach tends to leave White
with insufficient pawn presence in
the centre to be able to affect
matters there; Bareev has noted 8
c4 intending to attack f5 by .td3,
Wc2, and d5, as a more challenging
plan) 8 . . . e6 9 tl:\c3 a6 (prepares
his next by preventing tl:\b5) 1 0
a4?! (mis-reads Black's intentions)
10 . . . d5 1 1 .te2 .td6 1 2 .te5
tl:\c6 1 3 f4 g4 14 .td3 f7 with
a very comfortable position for
Black; D. Ilic-Bareev, Vrnjacka
Banja 1 987.
5
e3
Persisting with the original
intention of exchanging QB for
KN by playing 5 .ie5 looks rather
artificial and should not cause
Black any trouble, e.g. 5 . . . .tg7
(5 . . . e6!? with the idea of answer
ing tl:\c3 by . . . i.b4 is an interest
ing alternative) 6 h4 g4 7 e3 d6 8
i.xf6 i.xf6 9 .ic4 and now
Black should open the queen's
path to the flank by 9 . . . c6, with
a complex and quite promising
The Queen Bishop Arrack : 2 i.g5
middle game in view, rather than

p erm it White to diminish the posi
tio n's dynamism by exchanging
queens after 9 . . . e5 1 0 tt:Jc3 c6 1 1
de de 1 2 W xd8 + xd8 1 3
0-0-0 + e7 1 4 f3 when Black's
l agging development is again
cause for concern (cf. note (a) to
Black's fourth above); Sideif
Zade--Avshalumov, USSR 1 987.
.i.g7 (58)
5
58
8
6
tt:Jd2
Nor have the alternative treat
ments so far explored given Black
any difficulties :
(a) 6 lLJc3 d6 7 .i.d3 tt:Jc6 8 tt:Jf3
c6 9 'We2 (9 .i.b5 enabled Black
to build up a crushing queenside
attack quickly in Arkhipov-Mik.
Zeitlin, Protvino 1 985, after 9 . . .
d7 1 0 We2 a6 I I .i.a4 We7 1 2
0-0-0 b5 1 3 .i.b3 b4 1 4 lL:l b 1 tt:Ja5
1 5 h4 g4 16 lL:lfd2 .i.b5 1 7 Wei
c5) 9 . . . We7 1 0 .i.b5 (in view of
th e threatened . . . e5 White has
little choice; Black's position is
already better) 10 . . . .i.d7 I I h3
73
a6 1 2 .1a4 b5 1 3 .i.b3 lLJa5 1 4

a 3 lL:lxb3 1 5 cb .i.c6 (this transfer
ence to the long diagonal high
lights Black's white square domin
ation of the whole board; in the
further course of the game White
is unable to find any counterplay
while the enemy forces mass for
the final assault) 1 6 : c 1 0-0 1 7
o-o .i.b7 1 8 b4 wn 1 9 tt:Jd2 Wg6 20
Wd3 .:. f7 2 1 f3 h5 22 lLle2 .i.h6
23 .:. f2 h4 24 .i.h2 .:. af8 25 lL:lc3
Wg7 26 : eft g4 27 fg fg 28 hg
tt:Jxg4 29 : xn : xf7 30 e4 ..te3 +
0- 1 . Smooth, very smooth! Tis
dall-Kristiansen, Denmark 1 983.
(b) 6 ..td3 e6 (a game Wheatley
Bellin, England 1 98 1 , went 6 . . .
d6 7 tt:Jd2 tt:Jc6 8 c3 e5 9 h4 f4!? I 0
hg hg I I : xh8 + ..txh8 1 2 ef ef
1 3 ..th2 We7 + 1 4 We2 lLlg4 with
a small but distinct advantage for
Black; 9 . . . g4 would avoid
simplification and leave Black
with fine prospects) 7 lL:le2 d6 8 f3
We7 9 c4 e5 1 0 lL:lbc3 0-0 1 1 de
( I I 'Wc2 ed 1 2 ed tt:Jc6 would be
in Black's favour) I I . . . de 1 2 e4
(after the more fluid 1 2 Wc2 play
might go 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 lLJc6 1 4
a 3 fe 1 5 .i.xe3 lL:ld4!? with chances
for both sides) 1 2 . . . f4 1 3 ..tf2 c6
14 c5 ..te6 1 5 'Wa4 wn with
entirely satisfactory play for Black;
Damljanovic- M. Gurevich, Baku
1 986.
6
d6
Preparing the e-pawn's advance.
74
The Queen Bishop A ttack : 2 i.g5
7
h4
White must challenge the black
pawns in this manner as otherwise
he simply concedes that Black has
gained space at no cost.
g4
7
A necessary reaction as White
is threatening to exchange pawns
and rooks and then play ttJh3
advantageously weakening the
black pawn structure in the same
way as already noted in the 4 . . .
g7 line.
h5
8
Otherwise the black knight
could occupy this square to useful
effect.
8
ltJc6
Development aimed at enforc
ing . . . e5.
9
b5
Development aimed at retard
ing . . . e5.
9
d7
10
ltJe2
a6
This is dubious as it gives White
the chance to get his knight to f4
from where it can exert a powerful
influence on Black's position. The
immediate I 0 . e5 would lead to
a complex game with balanced
chances after for example I I de de
1 2 ltJc4 ( 1 2 xc6 xc6 1 3 xe5
could be answered simply by 1 3
. . . xg2 1 4 n h2 c6 or more
ambitiously by 1 3 . . . tle7, but in
both cases White's light square
debility presents obvious play for
. .
Black) 1 2 . . . 0-0!
11
a4
White goes along with his
opponent's assessment instead of
challenging it by I I xc6 xc6
1 2 ttJf4 tid7 1 3 c4 e6 1 4 ltJb3 after
which Avshalumov evaluates the
position as slightly m White's
favour.
11
e5
12
c3
Capturing on e5 would lead to
lines similar to those in the note
to Black's tenth.
tle1 (59)
12
59
w
Black's forces are generally

more harmoniously coordinated
for effective central action, and the
black queen is functionally posted
in a way difficult for her white
counterpart to emulate, while the
advanced g-, f- and e-pawns infuse
the black position with dynamic
potential.
13
tibl?!
0-0!
Correctly perceiving that the
threat to double the c-pawns is
The Queen Bishop A ttack: 2 J.g5
ill usory since after 1 4 .txc6 be 1 5

de de Black's prospects o n the
li gh t squares more than outweigh
the damaged pawns.
14
.tb3 + ?!
Even so, this inconsistent play
is misguided, as Black now gets to
ut ilize all the positive aspects of his
position without any drawbacks
at all.
h8
14
15
.th4
W'e8
Underlining the fact that the
aggressive h-pawn can also
become vulnerable.
de
16
de
17
lLlg3
e4!
Now that White's K N has been
removed from its observation of
f4 to fulfil defensive duties, the time
is ripe to cramp White's position
fu rther and prepare to swing the
QN to eS when the weakness
of d3 will cause the white
monarch considerable embarrass
ment. Blackis now clearly in
control.
18
ft
18 .txf6 would save the h-pawn
b ut leave White's position lifeless
and inevitably doomed.
18
lLlxh5
19
g1
Thus White has managed to
re move his king to relative safety
an d activate his K R at no greater
ex pense than a pawn.
lLlxg3
19
75
20
.txg3
.te6?
A miscalculation. Simply 20 . . .
lUeS was indicated, leaving White
in dire straits.
21
.txc7
.txb3
After 2 1 . . . W'd7 22 .tf4! (pre
venting any breakthroughs on the
black squares) Black cannot
capture on d2 without leaving the
QB en prise while on 22 . . .
.txb3 White recaptures with the
knight.
.te5!
22
lLlxb3
Black adjusts well to the
changed circumstances and tries
to use his better coordination to
whip up attacking chances.
23
.txe5
lLlxe5
24
lLld4
Taking the h-pawn would be a
fatal error opening the way to the
white king.
24
g7
25
g3
g6
26
W'c2
W' f7
h5
27
g2
With this the writing is on the
wall and even with time-trouble
looming Black is unlikely to go
wrong. The end came as follows :
28 .:. ad I (28 W' b3 was the maso
chistic way to prolong the inevi
table) 28 . . . .l:t ad8 29 a4 .:t h8 30
b3 g5 3 1 c4 lLlf3 32 fl .:t d 7
33 W' c 3 .:. hd8 3 4 g2 W'f6 35
W' b4 h4 36 gh lLl xh4 + 37 .:t xh4
xh4 38 .:. h i + g5 39 lLle2
.:t h8 40 .:t xh8 W'xh8 41 lLlf4 g3!
76
The Queen Bishop
Attack: 2 .i.g5
Freeing g4 for the k ing enables

Black to proceed with . . . n d l
without being harassed by the
knight check on e6; with his

swindle chance gone White
resigned.
The Queen Knight Attack :

2 ttJc3
queenside play evolving from

advancing the c-pawn in favour
of central and kingside activity
coupled with rapid piece deploy
ment. As in the Queen Bishop
Attack, White hopes to damage
Black's pawn structure by captur
ing the KN on f6 with his bishop
when it cannot be recaptured by
a piece. Experience has shown that
the doubled f-pawns thus inflicted
on the black position are a con
siderable liability obliging Black
to play extremely precisely in
order to obtain a satisfactory pos
ition. Clearly, therefore, it makes
sense to prevent White carrying
out this strategy if at all possible
and that, indeed, is the common
factor in our two recommended
defences.
This i s the sister variation o f the

Queen Bishop Attack and indeed
could reasonably be called the
Queen Bishop Attack Deferred as
the k night development is almost
invariably followed by 3 ..tg5.
Black has only two replies which
counter the threatened 3 e4 : 2 . .
ttl f6 and 2 . . . d5. We shall examine
a promising recent offshoot of the
first of these, and the latter in its
entirety.
1
d4
f5
2
lbc3 (60)
.
riO
B
Kouatly-Tseshkovsky
Wijk aan Zee I I 1 988
1 d4 rs 2 lLlcJ
T his logical move renounces

77
78
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lll c3
tt:lf6
2
3
e6
i.g5
Known for more than a century,
until recent years this move had
always been considered weak since
it allows White to play e4. Many
of these earlier games saw Black
quickly castling kingside and
being crushed by direct attack as
a result, whereas the modern
strategy looks to effect the much
safer long castling.
The reader may care to note
that the response previously con
sidered standard here, 3 . . . d5,
allows White to implement his
primary aims mentioned in our
introductory comments by 4
.txf6.
4
e4
The g-pawn thrust makes more
sense here than in other positions;
indeed the only example com
monly cited from practice, Hort
Holacek, Havirov 1 97 1 , produced
a preferable position for White
after 4 g4 .te7 5 gf ef 6 .tg2 tt:le4
7 .txe7 Wxe7 8 Wd3 tt:lxc3 9 Wxc3
d6 I 0 tt:lh3. Naturally, this is far
from being the last word on the
variation, and the search for alter
native defensive methods might
well profitably begin by examining
4 . . . .tb4.
fe
4
5
tt:\xe4
The most natural continuation,
but two other moves come into
consideration:
(a) 5 f3 offers a gambit in the
Staunton mould which certainly
brings
White
compensatory
attacking chances after 5 . . . ef 6
tt:lxf3 .te7 7 .td3 0-0 8 h4!?
setting up threats of taking on f6
and then h7, but 5 . . . e3!? 6
.txe3 .t b4! looks a good way of
declining.
(b) 5 .txf6 Wxf6 6 tt:lxe4 W h6!
(Black is in charge of the dark
squares) 7 .i.d3 (7 g3 is a sensible
attempt to obtain some grip on
the black squares which Black
could answer either by the
straightforward 7 . . . .i.e7 or the
interesting 7 . . . ..t b4 + !? 8 c3
.i.e7 when White would be unable
to retreat his knight to c3 in the
event of a subsequent . . . d5; 7 tt:lf3
was played in a drastic miniature
Laird-Finlayson, 1 982, which
went 7 . . . d5 8 tt:leg5?! tt:\c6 9 W d2
i.d6 10 .td3?! tt:l b4! I I .tb5 +
c6 1 2 .te2 Wg6! 1 3 0-0-0??
.tf4 0- 1 ) 7 . . . d5 8 tt:lg3 .td6 9
tt:lf3 0-0 1 0 0-0 tt:\c6 I I .l: e l a6 1 2
c3 .td7 1 3 b4 .1: ae8 and Black's
possession of a black-squared
bishop more than offsets his
inferior pawn structure; M ileika
Liebert, Riga 1 96 1 .
5
.te7
6
.txf6
Capturing this way is the most
forceful as it permits White to keep
up the momentum. Time, Black's
The Queen Knight Allack: 2 lLlc3

best response to the alternative
h as yet to be established. After 6
8 xf6 + ..txf6 7 h4! capturing on
g 5 would bring Black an inferior
ending following 7 . . . ..t xg5 8
-w h5 + g6 9 -. xg5 -.xg5 10 hg,
t hus Black must seek other ways.
A game Veresov- Pohla, Vilnius
1 972, went 7 . . . 0-0 8 ..td3 -.e7
9 "We2 c6 10 c3 d5 I I f4 ..td7
1 2 0-0-0 with clearly better
chances for White. There is clearly
no need for Black to declare his
hand in castling so quickly, how
ever, and amongst various poss
ible improvements 7 . . . -.e7!
springs immediately to mind.
..t xf6 ( 6 1 )
6
-. h5 +
7
Introduced by Knaak, this
aggressive continuation has super
seded the older, straightforward
d eve lopment of 7 f3. That this
q u iete r variation is not without
venom is powerfully and instruc
tively illustrated by the famous
brilliancy Ed. Lasker-Thomas,
79
London 1 9 1 2 : 7 . . . b6 8 ..td3
..tb7 9 e5 0-0 10 -.hs -.e7?
I I -.xh7 + !! xh7 1 2 xf6 + +
h6 1 3 eg4 + g5 1 4 h4 +
( 1 4 f4 + !) 1 4 . . . f4 1 5 g3 + f3
1 6 ..te2 + ( 1 6 fl !) 1 6 . . . g2
1 7 .a h2 + g 1 1 8 d2 mate!
Persuasive evidence that Black's
safest way of meeting 7 f3 is to
remove the king to the queenside :
7 . . . -.e7 8 ..td3 c6 9 c3 b6 1 0
-.e2 ..t b7 I I 0-0-0 (if White castles
kingside then Black should follow
suit since the white forces are
better placed to launch flank
attacks, whereas homogeneous
castling enhances the importance
of Black's centralization) 1 1 . . .
0-0-0 1 2 : he ! b8 and Black's
harmonious and weakness-free
position is entirely satisfactory;
Menchik-Flohr, Hastings 1 933/34.
g6
7
-.e7!?
-. h6
8
Whether this latest try is the
most accurate remains to be
established, but it does appear to
be more logical to threaten to
preserve the KB before being com
mitted to a particular queenside
development (see Fedorowicz
Leow below). Other experience so
far :
(a) 8 . . . c6 (acceptance o f the
pawn gives White too strong an
initiative after 8 . . . ..txd4? 9 0-0-0
..tf6 I 0 h4 etc.) 9 0-0-0!? (the
seminal game Knaak- Ftacnik,
80
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3
Trna va 1 980, went 9 et:lf3 et:lxd4?

1 0 et:lxd4 ..txd4 l l 0-0-0 ..tf6 1 2
h4 'We7 l 3 et:lxf6 + 'Wxf6 1 4 h5
.l:t g8 15 ..td3 and Black was i n
bad shape; Knaak gives 9 . . . 'We7
l 0 lZl xf6 + 'W xf6 l l 0-0-0 b6 as
slightly in White's favour, while it
should be noted that l l . . . d6 in
this line would transpose to the
column game) 9 . . . b6?! (while
Black can hardly afford to fall
further behind in development by
grabbing the d-pawn, the immedi
ate 9 . . . 'We7 would probably
transpose to the column) 1 0 et:le2
'We7 l l 'We3 (threatening 1 2 d5)
l l . . . ..tg7 12 lt:l 2c3 ..tb7 (the
positionally appalling 12 . . . d5
was mandatory) 1 3 d5 and Black
is in trouble; Fedorowicz-Leow,
Philadelphia 1 986.
(b) 8 . . . b6 9 et:lf3 ..tb7 1 0 ..td3
'We7 l l 0-0-0 lt:la6 ( l l . . . et:lc6?
1 2 'Wf4) 1 2 c3 ..tg7 l 3 'We3 0-0-0
1 4 b 1 et:lb8 1 5 .l:t he l et:lc6 with
approximately equal chances (cf.
Menchik- Fiohr above); Ash
Yusupov, Winnipeg 1 986.
Thus we can conclude that if
Black succeeds in setting up the
Ash - Yusupov I Menchik - Flohr
type position then his chances are
satisfactory, but he must be alert
against White's tactical trumps
particularly the d5 breakthrough.
'W xf6
9
et:lxf6 +
et:lc6
10
0-0-0
11
et:lf3
d6 ( 62)
Thus Black keeps the white

pieces at bay with his small pawn
centre while preparing to complete
his development by 1 2 . . . ..td7
and 1 3 . . . 0-0-0. After, say, 1 2
..tc4 ..td7 1 3 .l:t he l 0-0-0, Black
has no real problems as the e
pawn is easily defended by . . .
: deS, and he can then think in
terms of ejecting the white q ueen
either by et:lc6-e7-f5 or et:lc6-d8f7 followed by mobilizing his king
side minority and increasing the
pressure along the half open f-file.
Most of the positions arising from
this variation are in fact a kind
of mirror image Sicilian where
White's attacking chances have
been diminished by the loss of
an important bishop. Food for
thought!
Doubtless with some such con
siderations in mind, White decided
to give up a pawn in order to keep
the black monarch in the centre,
but his initiative comes to nothing
and in regaining the pawn White
The Queen Knight Arrack: 2 l!Jc3
permits a decisive counterattack.

ed
12
d5?!
13
.tb5
.td7
.l:!. hel +
14
1 4 .txc6 be! 1 5 .l:!. he l + d8
would leave' Black's king quite safe
beh ind the solid mass of pawns.
ti:Je7
14
xd7
15
.txd7 +
.l:!. ae8
16
ti:Jd4
17
.. h3 +
The apparently powerful rook
incursion 1 7 .1:!. e6 would only help
Black after the simple retreat 1 7
. . . n threatening 1 7 . . . c5 and
1 7 . . . ttJfS.
ti:Jf5
17
18
.I:!. xeS
.I:!. xeS
.l:!.e7
xh7 +
19
20
.. h3
White has counted on this pin
to hold the balance but failed to
spot Black's knockout counter
punch coming.
20
.. g5 +
21
bl
d2!
22
.. o
There is nothing better; 22 '*'d3
w ould lose a piece after 22 . . .
W' xd3.
22
.l:!. el
Speedily concluding the assault
on the opponent's back rank:
W hite resigns.
Halifman-Legky
USSR 1 987
d4
f5
ti:Jc3
81
d5
Putting the Stonewall stopper

on White's e2 -e4 is especially valid
when the c-pawn is blocked from
joining in the central struggle.
Note that 2 . . . g6? would expose
Black to the most virulent form of
the h-pawn blitzkrieg after 3 h4!
(cf. Chapter 4, p. 47).
3
logS ( 63 J
63
B
M uch the most popular choice

in contemporary practice, but
Black must also know how to
handle the tricky alternatives :
(a) 3 g4 ti:Jf6! 4 gS?! (4 h3 looks
relatively best) 4 . . . ti:Je4 5 ti:Jxe4 fe
6 f3 .US and White's unorthodox
aggression has clearly backfired;
Spielmann - M ieses, Berlin 1 920.
(b) 3 e4 de 4 f3 (4 .tgS g6 5
.tc4 J.. g7 6 tLlge2 tLlc6 + Visier
Castro, Costa Bra va 1 977) 4 . . .
eS!? is a typical central counter
which suffices to bring Black at
least equal chances, e.g. 5 de
'ilt" xd I + 6 xd I (L)d7 7 tLld5 d8
8 fe fe 9 .tf4 lLlc5! 10 tLle2 tLle7
82
The Queen Knight A ttack : 2 liJc3
I I lLidc3 lLig6 with the initiative;

Beyen-Zwaig, Nice 01. I 974.
(c) 3 ..tf4 is a routine developing
move which poses no threat, e.g. 3
. . . lLif6 4 e3 e6 5 lLib5?! (mistakenly
attempting to utilize the one
special point of his third move) 5
. . . lLia6 6 a4 (artificial, but 6 c4
..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLie4 is also fine for
Black) 6 . . . ..te7 7 c3 0-0 8 ..id3
c6 9 lLia3 lLib8! 1 0 lLif3 lLie4 I I
0-0 lLid7 and Black can enter the
middlegame with confidence; V.
Raicevic- Psakhis, Troon 1 984.
(d) 3 f3 attempts straightforward
occupation of the centre but Black
can counter with a lightning infan
try charge which effectively turns
the tables : 3 . . . c5! 4 e4 e5! 5 de
(alternatives are even less palat
able, e.g. 5 lLi xd5 cd and White
has problems with e4; 5 ..tb5 +
..id7 6 ..txd7 + lLi xd7 7 lLixd5 cd
8 lLie2 fe 9 fe lLifg6 + again due to
the weak e-pawn, Pomar-Larsen,
Spain I 975) 5 . . . d4 6 ..ic4!? (other
moves leave Black in control
without a fight) 6 . . . lLic6!?
(according to Taimanov, 6 . . . as
7 lLie2 de 8 lLixc3 gives White a
strong attack, but this certainly
needs confirmation in practice) 7
lLid5 lLixe5 8 e2 lLixc4 9 xc4
..id6 1 0 ..if4 lLie7 with a fully
satisfactory position for Black;
Rossolimo- Pelikan,
Argentina
I 959.
3
g6
The usual response, but there

are alternatives, hitherto barely
explored, which are of potentialJy
crucial significance :
(a) 3 . . . c6 4 e3 g6 will in
all likelihood transpose to lines
similar to the column, while other
tries have been shown to lose too
much time with the queen in one
case : 4 . . . d6?! 5 ..id3 e5?! 6 de
xe5 7 lLif3 c7 8 lLid4 n
9 D Ghinda-Stanciu, Roman
ian Ch. I 978, and too much time
with the knight in another : 4 . . .
lLid7 5 ..td3 lLidf6 6 lLige2 e6 7 f3
h6 8 ..tf4 g5 9 ..te5 ..ig7 I 0 e4
lLie7 I I .d2 ..id7 I 2 0-0-0
Polugayevsky- Liebert,
Rostov
I 96 1 . The logical follow-up to 3
. . . c6 is 4 . . . b6!? with the point
that gambitting the b-pawn would
be dubious in a closed position,
while direct methods of deahng
with the threat would make queen
side castling either less attractive
or impossible. That would leave 5
a3, after which at the very least
Black would have acquired the
additional option of answering 5
. . . lLid7 6 ..id3 with 6 . . . e6. There
is clearly much here that remains
to be investigated.
(b) 3 . . . h6!? is an obvious and
critical move which has been
almost totally ignored. Since 4.
..ih4 would appear to involve
White in unacceptable material
loss after 4 . . . g5 5 e4 ..ig7 (cf.
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lL!c3
Ch apter 7, p. 72), the whole

ra ison d'etre of White's system
seems to be called into question.
In the only top class example of it
so far, White replied 4 ..tf4 and
after 4 . . . lZ:lf6 5 e4!? (acknowledg
ing that normal methods give
White nothing) 5 . . . fe 6 f3 ..tf5 7
fe de 8 ..tc4 e6 Black had obtained
a slightly improved version of a
Gambit
vanatton
Staunton
already considered completely sat
isfactory for Black; Ligterink
Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984.
h4
4
This advance of the h-pawn is
the keystone of White's strategy :
strategically, it reinforces the play
on the dark squares, while tact
ically it readies the h4-h5 rupture.
..tg7
4
e3
(64)
5
The usual move, opening the

qu een's path along the d l -h5
di ago nal. Alternatively, White
rna y opt for immediately intensify
i n g his dark square play and pre-
83
paring long castling by 5 Wd2.

This continuation contains hidden
venom and Black must tread
warily to avoid the many pitfalls
as the following vanatiOns
demonstrate: 5 . . . c6 6 lZ:lf3 lZ:ld7?!
(natural but inaccurate; 6 . . . h6
is necessary, with fair chances of
maintaining the balance, although
it is clear that Black's task is the
more onerous, e.g. 7 ..tf4 lZ:ld7 8
0-0-0 lll gf6 9 lZ:le5 lZ:le4! I 0 lZ:l xe4
lZ:lxe5! and by precise play White
is prevented from building any
advantage) 7 h5 h6 (were White
now to retreat the bishop then all
would be fine in the black camp
after 8 . . . g5, but instead White
sacrifices a piece for a dangerous
attack) 8 hg! hg 9 : h7! .=. xh7
(forced, after 9 . . . ..tf6 or 9 . . .
f8. simply 1 0 lZ:lxg5 is crushing)
10 gh lZ:lgf6 I I W xg5 f7 ( I I
. . . f8 puts up stiffer resistance
although Black clearly remains
under immense pressure after, for
example, 1 2 W h4! f7 1 3 e3) 1 2
Wxf5 lZ:lb6 1 3 lZ:le5 + f8 1 4 Wf4
and Black's defensive task is hope
less; Vaganian-Knezevic, Dubna
1 973.
White has also occasionally
experimented with 5 lZ:lh3 but this
should not cause Black undue
problems after simply 5 . . . lZ:lf6
threatening an early . . . lZ:le4.
5
..te6
This initially strange-looking
84
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 tt'Jd
move is aimed at shoring up the

kingside defences, a useful task for
the otherwise torpid QB. A good
example of the type of attack
White can whip up if this prophy
lactic manoeuvre is omitted is pro
vided by the game Bareev-Dreev,
Soviet U20 Ch. 1 98 3 : 5 . . . c6 6
..td3 (6 h5 would be premature
because after 6 . . . h6 the sacrificial
continuation 7 hg hg 8 .:1. xh8
..txh8 9 'it'h5 ..tg7 would be
insufficient) 6 . . . f6 (the equally
unwary 6 . . . d7 would run up
against 7 f3 gf6 8 h5 xh5
9 ..txf5 with powerful kingside
pressure, but it is still not too late
for 6 . . . ..te6, e.g. 7 f3 d7 8 h5!?
gf6 - to provoke the sacrifice
here would bring disaster after 8
. . . h6? 9 hg! hg 1 0 .:1. xh8 ..txh8
1 1 xg5 f8 12 g7! ..txg7 l 3
'it'h5 + d7 1 4 xe6-9 h6 Black need not fear the simplify
ing 9 hg hg 1 0 .:t xh8 + ..txh8 1 1
e2 ..tl7 1 2 f4 e4 - 9 . . . ..tf8
1 0 e2 ..tl7 with an interesting
position where White has cashed
in his initiative for a spatial advan
tage on the king's wing, the
advanced outpost of which (the h
pawn) could one day turn into a
liability; chances are approxi
mately equal; Palatnik-Legky,
Tallinn 1 985) 7 h5!? xh5 8 .:1. xh5
gh 9 'it'xh5 + f8 1 0 f3 'it'e8 1 1
'it'h2 e6 1 2 0-0-0 (for the exchange,
White has lasting pressure due to
the superior coordination of his

forces and the vulnerability of t he
black king) 1 2 . . . d7 l 3 g4! fg
1 4 h4 f6 1 5 f3 'it'h5?! 1 6 'it'f4
'it'l7 1 7 'it'd6 + 'it'e7 1 8 'it'g3 e8
1 9 fg .:t g8?? (cracking under the
pressure, but in any case it is
difficult to imagine Black surviv
ing in the long run) 20 ..txh7 .:1. h8
21 g6 'it'd7 22 e5! 'it'c7 23
..tg6 + e7 24 .:t fl .:tf8 25 'it' h4
b5 26 ..td3 1 -0.
This exchange sacrifice attack
plays such an important role in
this variation that it is worth quot
ing one further example, this time
arising from 5 . . . f6 : 6 h5!? xh5
7 .:t xh5 gh 8 'it'xh5 + f8 9 f3
..te6 1 0 ..th6 d7 1 1 ..txg7 +
xg7 1 2 'it'g5 + 17 1 3 'it'h5 +
g7 1 4 'it' g5 + 17 1 5 'it' h6!
(having demonstrated who is in
charge White turns the screw) 1 5
. . . .:t g8 (there is no other way of
meeting the threatened 1 6 g5 + )
thus far we have followed Vaiser
M. Knezevic, Havana 1 985, where
White decided to restore material
parity by 16 g5 + .:1. xg5 1 7 'it' xg5
thus giving Black much needed
time to develop and coordinate
his pieces, something which would
not have been at all easy to achieve
after the more ambitious 1 6
'it'xh7 + ! e8 1 7 'it' h 5 + ..t l7 1 8
'it' xf5 .
6
3
The most natural continuation,
The Queen Knight Attack: 2 l0c3
a lt h ough alternatives such as 6

8 h 3 and 6 'ii' f3 will doubtless be
ex p lored in the future.
c6
6
It is difficult for Black to get by
wit hout this reinforcement of the
d- pa wn, e.g. 6 . . . l2ld7 7 h5 h6 8
hg! hg 9 : xh8 .txh8 1 0 l2lxg5
8f8 1 1 'ii' h5 .i.g7 1 2 l2lxe6 l2lxe6
13 xf5 'ii' d 6 14 l2lxd5 and the
horde of white infantry has every
chance of marching to victory;
Palatnik- Fadeyev, Ukraine Ch.
1 984.
.tf4 (65)
7
1'>5
B
By vacating g5 for the k night,

White indirectly prepares the h
pawn thrust. The straightforward
7 .td3 occurred in VI. Kovacevic
K ristiansen, Plovdiv 1 98 3, which
provides us with a good example
of how Black should respond in
the event of an exchange of rooks
a lo ng the h-file : 7 . . . l2ld7 8 h5
ll:l gf6 (as is so often the case, Black
da re not allow the passive bishop
sacrifice 8 . . . h6? 9 hg! hg I 0 .1:1 xh8
85
.txh8 1 t l2l xg5 l2lf8 1 2 g7! .i.xg7

1 3 'ii' h5 + d7 14 l2lxe6 with a
crushing advantage) 9 hg hg 1 0
: xh8 .txh8 1 1 l2le2 (not I I 'ii' e 2
l2le4! + or 1 1 e2 'ii' b6 with . . .
c5 in the air) 1 1 . . . .tf7 1 2 l2lf4
l2le4 1 3 e2 and now instead of
1 3 . . . l2lf8?! 14 'ii' h 1 .tf6 1 5 .i.h6
l2le6 1 6 g4! as happened in the
game, VI. Kovacevic gives 1 3 . . .
.tf6 1 4 .txf6 ef 1 5 'ii' h 1 'ii' e 7
16 'ii' h6 l2lf8 1 7 c3 producing an
unclear position with chances for
both sides.
7
l2lf6
8
h5!
l2l bd7!
Acceptance of the offer would
lead Black into the usual defensive
morass : 8 . . . l2lxh5 9 .l: xh5! gh 1 0
l2lg5 .i.g8 1 1 'ii' xh5 + f8 1 2
.i.d3 e6 l 3 g4 h 6 1 4 l2lf3 ..t f7 1 5
'ii' h3 with lasting pressure; Halif
man-Lerner, Kubishev 1 986.
9
h6
The sacrifice being declined,
there is really very little else for
White to do apart from pushing
back the bishop and gaining space.
We have already seen from the
note to White's seventh that
exchanging along the h-file brings
nothing.
.tf8
9
10
'ii' d 2
.tf7
11
e6 (66)
l2le5
This is an appropriate moment
to take stock of the situation. Whi
te's advanced h- pawn means that
86
The Queen Knight A ttack: l lt)d
17
18
19
..txd6
0-0-0
g5
W xd6
e5
d7?! (67)
67
w
Black is somewhat cramped on the

kingside, but equally the blocked
position ensures a fair degree of
safety for his king. Black's central
grip is satisfactory and there are
prospects for creating counterplay
on the queen's wing. All in all,
chances are nicely balanced.
12
f3
Naturally, White seeks to open
up new fronts either by g4 or e4.
12
..te7
13
g4?!
This impetuosity should have
backfired; completing develop
ment by 1 3 0-0-0 was correct.
13
xe5
14
..txe5
fg
15
fg
0-0
16
.tel
..td6?!
Black misses his opportunity.
Halifman points out that 16 . . .
d7! 1 7 ..tg3 ..tg5 would have
given Black a slight advantage,
while 1 7 ..tg7 .l:l e8 1 8 0-0-0 ..tg5
would also leave White poorly
placed to create active play.
The knight is exposed to attack

here and would better have been
tucked away by 1 9 . . . e8 with
good defensive chances.
20 e4!
Energetically opening up the
centre the better to expose the
inadequacies of Black's setup.
20
b5
To chase the knight away from
c3.
21
ed
b4
22
e4
W xd5
23
..tg4!
Astutely breaking Black's coun
terplay by fingering the weak spot
in his position.
W xe4
23
There is no real choice; 23 . . .
..te6 24 ..txe6 W xe6 25 d5 is
crushing, while 23 . . . W xa2 24
Wxb4 .l:l ab8 25 Wa3 W xa3 26 ba
..td5 27 .l:l he l also leaves Black
in a bad way.
The Queen Knight Attack: :Z tLlcJ
24
.i.xd7
ll ad8
Black's prospects in the ending
a ris ing after 24 . . . -.xd4 25 -.xd4
e d 26 .II xd4 would be grim.
-. xeS
25
de
: hel
-. as
26
27
b3!
cS
Of course, 27 . . . -. xa2?? would
Jose instantly to 28 -.d4, and 27
. . . .i.d5 28 Jl e7 would also be
dreadful.
28
bl
A voiding the trap 2S -.d6
.:. xd7! 29 -.e5 (29 -. xd7 c4 would
give Black dangerous chances) 29
. . . -.a3 + 30 b I .i.xb3! 3 1 ab
.:. df7 when Black is still fighting.
87
28
-.c7
29
c4!
With this the white queen finally
gains access to the long diagonal
thus compelling Black to shed a
pawn and enter into a hopeless
end game. The technical part con
cluded as follows : 29 . . . -.g3 30
-. b2 -.c3 3 1 -.xc3 be 32 c2
h8 (pathetically underlining
Black's plight) 33 : f1 .i.gS 34
l:. xf8 Jl xf8 35 xc3 li dS 36 .i.g4
: e8 37 lld7 a5 3S lla7 : e5 39
: xa5 Jl xg5 40 .i.d7 Jl g3 + 4 1
d2 ll g2 + 42 e3 : g5 4 3 : as
.:. e5 + 44 d2 g5 45 .i.c6 1 -0.
2 ttJf3 and Others
This chapter provides selected

recommendations against the less
important second moves at
White's disposal after the intro
ductory 1 d4 f5. Only 2 l2Jf3 has
any real importance, although
some of the others can be dang
erous if not met precisely.
A
pinning the knight by .i.g5, are

ruled out.
H owever, if Black wishes to play
a Leningrad Variation then 2 . . .
lt:lf6 is necessary since 2 . . . g6 3
h4 is too risky (see p. 47). After 2
. . . lt:lf6 3 .i.g5 (other moves permit
Black to carry on in normal Lenin
grad fashion) Black has the inter
esting possibility 3 . . . lt:le4, after
which White has tried the follow
ing :
(a) 4 .i.f4 c5 (naturally, 4 . . . e6
is also satisfactory) 5 c3 "ii b6 6
"ii b3 "ilf xb3 7 ab d6 8 e3 .i.e6 9
..tc4 .i.xc4 1 0 be lt:lc6 and Black
has no difficulty holding the bal
ance; Radev- Knezevic, Leningrad
1 960.
(b) 4 h4 c6 5 c3 "ii b6 6 "ilfc2 d5
7 .i.f4 e6 8 lt:lbd2 .i.e? 9 lt:lxe4 fe
1 0 lt:le5 0-0 1 1 e3 c5 with an equal
position where White's advanced
h-pawn looks out of place;
Pietzsch- Larsen, Dortmund 1 96 1 .
(c) 4 .i.h4 g6 5 lt:l bd2 lt:l xd2 (5
. . . .i.g7 comes into consideration)
2 l2Jf3
2
lLlf3
e6 (68)
68
w
If Black intends playing a Class

ical System, then there is much to
be said for preferring 2 . . . e6 over
2 . . . lt:lf6. By this means White's
most promising lines, based on
88
2 lOfJ and Others
6 iWxd2 .tg7 7 c3 d6 8 e3 lLld7

a nd Black's game is entirely satis
facto ry; Eising-Besser, Aibling
! 96 5.
3
.tf4
Nor do other moves bring
White any advantage :
(a) 3 .tg5 .te7 4 .txe7 'fi xe?
5 :Ll bd2 (or 5 e3 lLlf6 = , but not 5
. . . 'fl b4 + 6 lt:lc3 'fl x b2 7 lLl b5
Wb4 + 8 c3 'fla5 9 lLle5 with strong
threats as shown in Vellner
Duckstein, Vienna 1 959; 5 lt:lc3
G f6 6 e3 d6 7 .tc4 c6 8 a4 a5 9
0-0 0-0 and Black has nothing to
fear, Haygarth - Bellin, British Ch.
1 978) 5 . . . lLlf6 6 e3 b6 7 .td3 (or
7 .te2 .tb7 8 0-0 0-0 9 c4 d6 10
b4 lt:lbd7 = Lasker-Barry, Cam
bridge Springs 1 904) 7 . . . .t b7 8
c3 c5 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 .ll e 1 d5 1 1 lt:le5
lt'J bd7 12 lLl xd7 lLlxd7 1 3 f4 g5 and
Black's kingside initiative fully
compensates for his slightly
inferior bishop; Robatsch-Duck
stein, Graz 1 96 1 .
(b) 3 c3 .te7!? (playing a waiting
game in order to prevent White's
QB attaining its most active devel
opment on g5) 4 'fl c2 d5 5 ..tf4
12lf6 6 e3 0-0 7 :Lle5 lt:lbd7 8 lLld2
12l xe5 9 .txe5 .td6 10 lLlf3 .td7
I I ..td3 'fle8 with totally satisfac
t ory prospects; Chen De- Bellin,
Sh anghai 1 98 1 .
(c) 3 d 5 ..td6!? (Black secured
ro ughly equal chances by 3 . . . ed
4 W xd5 d6 5 c4 lt:lf6 6 'fld l .te7
89
7 lt:lc3 c6 8 g3 0-0 9 .tg2 lt:le4 in

Silva Rocha-Bolbochan, Rio de
Janeiro 1 938) 4 de de 5 lLl bd2 .tc5
6 b3 lLlf6 7 e3 0-0 8 .tc4 lt:lc6 9
0-0 h8 1 0 .t b2 'fle7 ( 1 0 . . . a6!?)
1 1 'fle2 e5 1 2 .tb5 e4 1 3 .t xc6 be
1 4 lt:le5 .td6 and Black's kingside
threats put White on the defensive;
Karoly-Karlsson, Gausdal 1 987.
(d) 3 g4? fg 4 lLle5 'fl h4 5 e4
g3 + White's gambit has back
Bogolj ubow- Hasenfuss,
fired;
Kemeri 1 939.
lt:lf6
3
4
b6
e3
Of course, either 4 . . . .te7 or
4 . . . d5 may also be played.
5
lLlbd2
..tb7
6
.td3
6 h3 was answered challengingly
by 6 . . . .td6!? in Baumbach
Mohring, E. German Ch. 1 969,
giving Black a fine game after 7
.txd6 cd 8 .td3 0-0 9 'fle2 lLle4.
.te7
6
h3
7
Black's last move contained the
positional threat of . . . lLlh5 gain
ing the bishop pair.
7
0-0
8
c3
The double-step brings nothing,
e.g. 8 c4 lLle4 9 0-0 d6 1 0 'flc2
lLlxd2 I I lLl xd2 'fle8 with excellent
kingside play in the offing.
8
c5 (69)
White's bulwark centre is con
tested by a pincer formed by
90
2 fi:JjJ and Others

69
2 d5
2
3
d5
de
e5!?
d5
This direct attempt to exploit

the d-pawn's advance should
suffice to equalize. 2 . . . lLlf6 is also
good, of course.
C
Black's bishop pawns. Both armies
are harmoniously stationed and
the stage is set for a complex
strategical battle. Given the dearth
of practical experience with this
position, one can merely observe
that after the natural 9 0-0 Black
probably does best to immediately
occupy his advanced outpost by 9
. . . lLle4, after which t o -.c2 lLlxd2
I I lLlxd2 -.e8 would be a simpli
fication enhancing the positive
aspects of Black's positiOn,
namely, the raking QB and king
side attacking prospects. The
attempt to bring e4 under control
by 9 -.c2 runs into trouble
through a vis-a-vis with Black's
QR on the c-file : 9 . . . lLlc6 1 0
..th2 J:[ c8 I I a3 (parrying the
threat of . . . cd and . . . lLl b4) I I . . .
lLla5! (threatening to establish a
massive white-square bind by 1 2
. . . c4) 1 2 de (White must close the
c-file) 1 2 . . . be 1 3 c4 lLlc6 1 4
0-0 "it"e8 with a clear positional
superiority for Black; Alterman
Bellin, Biel 1 987.
Dr Krejcik's Gambit: 2 g4
2
3
g4
..tf4
fg
Probably White's best try. The

alternatives:
(a) 3 h 3 g3! and by returning
the pawn Black deprives White of
the open h-file and leaves him with
a statically weak kingside. This
is why White first develops his
bishop.
(b) 3 e4 invites sharp counters
such as 3 . . . e5!? and 3 . . . d5!?
both of which could well be good
for Black. An example of the latter
went 4 e5 ..tf5 5 lLlc3 c5 6 ..t b5 +
lLlc6 7 ..txc6 + be 8 lLlge2 e6 +
(Callinan-Saidy, USA 1 968). In
addition, 3 . . . d6, as in the column,
is also eminently playable.
(c) 3 ..tg5 has little point and
could be met by 3 . . . lLlf6 4 ll:Jc3
d5 5 -.d3 c6! 6 0-0-0 g6 7 e4 lLl xe4!
8 lLlxe4 de 9 -. xe4 -.d5 + .
3
d6
4
e4
c6
5
-.d2
On 5 lLlc3, Black can support
l liJj3 and Others
the advance of his e-pawn by 5 . . .

-was.
5
lt:ld7
lt:lc3
6
e5 ( 70)
70
w
An obscure position, sorely in

need of practical trials. It is obvi
ous that much remains to be expl
ored in this crazy gambit.
D
2 h3
2
h3
This apparently timid move

conceals aggressive intentions. As
in the preceding variation, White
plans to gambit the g-pawn but
here the opening of the h-file will
be automatic since Black has no
opportunity to decline as in note
(a) above.
Given its successful introduc
tion by no less a figure than
K orchnoi, it is surprising that this
quirky continuation has so far
sin gularly failed to attract any
fo llowers. Moreover, it is clear that
Black's best response has yet to
91
be worked out.
2
lt:lf6
As well as this natural move
Black could also consider 2 . . . d6
and 2 . . . d5.
3
g4
3 lt:lf3 would bring about H aik
M. Zeitlin, Sochi 1 985, (which
actually arose via the move order
2 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 3 h3) where Black failed
to find a good defence: 3 . . . d6 (3
. . . d5 4 c4 e6 5 lt:lc3 c6 comes into
consideration) 4 g4 g6 (after 4 . . .
fg 5 hg .txg4 White could play 6
lt:lg5 or 6 'W'd3 with compensation
for the pawn in an unclear pos
ition) 5 lt:lc3 .tg7 6 'W'd3 lt:lc6? (6
. . . c6 is much better) 7 d5 lt:le5 8
lt:lxe5 de 9 gf and Black is in dire
straits due to 9 . . . gf failing to l 0
-. g3.
3
fg
Although acceptance of the
gambit is clearly the acid test,
there is much to be said for declin
ing, e.g. 3 . . . d6 4 g5 lt:le4 5 ..tf4
c6! 6 f3 -.as + 7 c3 e5 with a wild
game which could easily go in
Black's favour.
4
hg
lt:lxg4
e4
5
d6 ( 7 I )
White has obvious compens
ation for the pawn in his control
of the centre, free development
and open h-file. The demands on
the defender are considerable and
allow no margin of error. The
inaugural game for this variation,
92
2 ttJj) and Others
Korchnoi- Kaenel, Biel 1 979, car

ried on: 6 .ig5! g6 (6 . . . c6) 7 f3
f6 8 c3 c6 9 1t'd2 .ie6 1 0
0-0-0 bd7 I I <i< b l .ig7 1 2 h3
h5 13 f4 xf4 14 1t' xf4 1t'b6
1 5 1t'd2 1t'c7 ( 1 5 . . . .if6 looks
more sensible) 16 1t'e3 b6 1 7 d5
.i.f7 18 a4 a6 19 e5! .ixe5 20 f4
.ig7 2 1 de be 22 .ig2 c8 23
e4 <i<f8 24 .ih6 and Black's
defences are at breaking point.
One would imagine this to be
sufficient to persuade most players
that accepting the gambit is too
risky.
E
2 1t'd3
2
1t'd3
An outre move which flouts the

principles of good opening play
but is redeemed by its strategic
grounding. White simultaneously
threatens the f-pawn and prepares
e2-e4 thus compelling Black to
adopt a Stonewall formation.
Happily for the Dutch Defence
this is no bad thing, and the clumsy

placing of White's queen assures
Black of a very playable game.
d5
2
A classic illustration of what
Black must not allow is provided
by Fairhurst-Dreyer, Dublin
1 957, which went 2 . . . g6 3 e4 fe
4 1t' xe4 f6 5 1t' h4 (the queen is
powerfully posted here) 5 . . . .ig7
6 f3 b6 7 c3 c5 8 .ih6 0-0 9
.ixg7 xg7 1 0 0-0-0 and Black
will experience great difficulty in
subduing the active white pieces.
3
g3
Best. More rustic schemes of
development leave White pass
ively placed, e.g. 3 .i.f4 e6? (3
. . . f6 is correct) 4 f3 (Black's
unsuspecting third move could
have been exploited by the consist
ent 4 1t'g3! a6 5 e3 c6 6 .ixa6!?
1t'a5 + 7 c3 1t'xa6 8 .id6 or 8 .ie5 - with total positional
control) 4 . . . f6 5 e3 .id6 6 .te2
(pusillanimous in the extreme; 6
c4 was necessary) 6 . . . 0-0 7 e5
c5! 8 c3 c6 9 d2 1t'c7 10 df3
fd7! I I xd7 .ixd7 1 2 .ixd6
1t'xd6 1 3 0-0 c4! 14 1t'd2 b5 1 5
el g5! 1 6 f4 g4 and the black
infantry have enveloped the board;
Semmering
Kmoch-Alekhine,
1 926.
f6
3
e6
4
.ig2
5
c4
.i.d6
Simply 5 . . . .ie7 with a later
2 &uf3 and Ochers
. . . tt:lc6 would also have its points.

6
.!Llf3
0-0
7
0-0
c6
.td7!
8
bJ
9
.taJ
.te8
10
.txd6
W' xd6
11
eJ
.!Llbd7
.th5 ( 72)
12
.!Llc3
available) 23
h8 24 l:[ f3 1: g8
25 h2 .td7 (the versatile bishop
reverts to a more familiar role
as mainstay of the queenside) 26
.th3 l:[ g6 27 h l (unhappy with
the constant possibility of
.!Llg4 + hanging over him, the
white k ing withdraws only to run
foul of the advanced cavalry) 27
. . . : bg8 28 l:[ g2 l:[ xg3! 29 l:[ gxg3
1: xg3 30 t! xg3 .!Llf2 + 3 1 g2
.!Llxd3 (a degrading demise for her
majesty who moved not once since
her optimistic emergence at the
beginning of the game) 32 l:[ xd 3
tt:le4 0- l o
0 0 0
0 0 0
F
Black has a very comfortable
position; his putatively bad bishop
is more effective than its theoret
ically good counterpart, and since
the centre is solid and White has
yet to generate play on the queen's
wing, he can think in terms of
developing his initiative on the
k ingside. The game Gavrikov
Psakhis, Tallinn 1 983, continued
1 3 tt:ld2 tt:le4 1 4 f4 l:[ ac8 1 5 c5 W'e7
1 6 b4 g5 I 7 a4 gf 1 8 ef tt:ldf6
( Black's minor pieces are much the
m ore active) 1 9 l:[ ac l b6 (prophy
lax is to nip White's play in the
b ud) 20 tt:lb3 l:[ b8 2 1 .!Lla2 .te8
22 : c2 h5 23 h4 (creates lasting
weaknesses, but otherwise Black
will constantly have . . . h5-h4
93
2 e3
2
e3
Such self-limitation instantly

forfeits any prospects of obtaining
an opening advantage. Black may
respond more or less according to
taste; the line given is analogous
to that against 2 .!Llf3.
2
.!Llf6
e6
3
.td3
Tolush-Alexander,
Hastings
1 953/4, went 3
d6 4 tt:le2?! (a
spiritless deployment which bears
no comparison with the natural 4
tt:lf3) 4 . . . e5 5 de ( Black also
had an easy time of it in Colle
Nimzowitsch, Baden-Baden 1 925,
after 5 c4 c5 6 0-0 .!Llc6 7 ttJ bc3 g5
8 de de 9 tt:lg3 e4 I 0 .te2 .td6
I I tt:l b5 ..te5 12 W'xd8 + xd8
0 0 0
2 li:Jj3 and Others
94
1 3 .l:l d l + e7) 5 . . . de 6 0-0

..tc5 7 lLlg3 g6 8 ..tc4 "ile7 and
Black's chances are already super
ior thanks to his space advantage
on the kingside and concomitant
attacking prospects.
4
lLld2
Of course, White would be
better advised to play a quick lLlf3
coupled with c2-c4.
4
c5
4 . . . d5 is also possible but the
text move is more elastic.
lLlgf3
lLlc6
5
0-0
b6
6
..ie7 ( 73 )
c3
7
73
w
Black may look to the future

with confidence. In Stahlberg-
Keres, M unich 01. 1 936, White

inconsistently continued with the
sharp 8 e4?! and paid the penalty
after 8 . . . cd 9 cd lLlb4 10 ..i b 1
..i a 6 1 1 .l:l e 1 lLl d 3 1 2 ..ixd3
..txd3 1 3 ef ..txf5 14 lLlc4 .l:l c8 1 5
lLlce5 0-0 when he has merely
managed to lose the bishop pair
and obtain an isolated d-pawn.
G The remainder
Of the 28 moves available to White
on his second move only one
(2 ..ih6??) is absolutely unplay
able, although it would not be easy
to survive after 2 d2? either.
Those moves apart (and perhaps
also 2 "ii d 2 which merely gets in
the way and presents a target), the
advantage of playing first allows
White the luxury of being able to
make a dubious move and get
away with it. When faced with
unorthodox opening play, Black
generally does best to stick as
much as possible to his preferred
development scheme in the know
ledge that natural moves are usu
ally the best.
10
The Classical Variation
This chapter covers those vari

ations which arise when White
(temporarily at least) avoids the
kingside fianchetto and instead
follows up his opening move with
the direct, classical development
of 2 c4 and 3 tt:lc3. That this
approach is rarely seen in contem
porary master praxis is testimony
enough to the adequacy of Black's
defences.
t
rs
d4
c4
2
e6
Of course, Black may equally
well play 2 . . . tt:lf6. The text move
order has been chosen in order to
take into account the possibility
t hat Black might transpose into
the Dutch via the sequence I d4
e6 2 c4 f5.
3
tt:lc3
The usual assortment of offbeat
alternatives do not cause Black
any trouble :
(a) 3 g4? fg 4 e4 (4 h3 g3! 5 fg
c 5 ! 6 d5 ..td6 + ) 4 . . . e5! 5 d5 (5
de tt:lc6 +) 5 . . . ..tb4 + (simply 5
. . . tt:lf6 is also good) 6 tt:lc3

.txc3 + 7 be d6 + ECO.
(b) 3 e4? fe 4 tt:lc3 tt:lf6 5 f3 .t b4!
(rapid development is even better
than allowing White the slight
compensation he would obtain in
return for the pawn) 6 .tg5 c5 7
de (7 d5 ed 8 cd 0-0 is also good
for Black) 7 . 0-0 8 .ri e l 'flc7 9
.txf6 .rl xf6 1 0 fe 'fl f4 I I tt:lf3
'fl xe4 + and White is in dire
straits; Freiman-Model, USSR
Ch. 1 927.
(c) 3 e3 tt:lf6 4 ..td3 (after 4 f4
b6! 5 tt:lf3 .tb7 6 ..td3 g6! 7 0-0
.tg7 8 tt:lc3 0-0 9 'fle2 c5 Black
has fully equal prospects; analysis
by Pachman) 4 . . . d6 5 'flc2 (it is
inadvisable to ignore the threat
ened advance : 5 tt:le2?! e5 6 tt:l bc3
tt:lc6 7 d5 tt:le7 8 e4 W t Dubinin
Riumin, USSR Ch. 1 934/35) 5 . . .
g6 6 tt:lf3 tt:lc6 7 0-0 e5 8 de de 9
.te2 e4 I 0 .rl d I 'fle7 l l tt:ld4 tt:le5
with excellent prospects for Black;
Pachman.
.
(d) 3 tt:lf3 is evidently replete
. .
95
96
with transpositional possibilities;

here we shall merely note some of
the more individualistic pathways :
3 . . . lLl f6 4 e3 (4 d5 .tb4 + 5 .td2
-.e7 6 ll:lc3 c6! 7 de de 8 a3
.td6 9 e4 e5 is good for Black,
Vasyukhin-Kolobov,
Moscow
Ch. 1 965) 4 . . . b6 5 .td3 J.. b 7 6
0-0 .te7 7 ll:l bd2 (or 7 -.e2 0-0 8
b3 -.e8 9 .tb2 d6 l O lLlc3 -.g6 1 1
lLle1 ll:lbd7 with complete equality;
Pfeiffer-Matulovic, Oberhausen
1 96 1 ) 7 . . . 0-0 8 -.c2 d5 (a note
worthy method of parrying the e4
threat) 9 cd (on 9 lLle5 Black will
continue with 9 . . . c5 and . . . ll:lc6)
9 . . . lLlxd5 10 a3 c5 t t de .txc5
and Black's active centralized
pieces balance the chances; H.
Frydmann-Tartakower,
Lodz
1 927.
lLlf6 ( 74 )
3
model games we shall summarize

these alternatives as follows :
(a) 4 e4? fe transposes to note
'b' to White's third move.
(b) 4 -.c2 .te7 (a game from
the world championship match,
Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1 9 5 1 , dem
onstrated that 4 . . . .t b4 is not
entirely satisfactory for Black after
5 e3 0-0 6 .td3 d6 7 lLle2 c5 8 a3
.t xc3 + 9 lLl xc3 ll:lc6 tO de de I I
b3 .td7 1 2 .t b2 ll:le5 and now
instead of preserving the bishop
with 1 3 .te2?! as was played in
the game, Botvinnik has pointed
out that 1 3 0-0-0! lLlxd3 + 14
.l::txd 3 leaves White the better
chances) 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 e4 (White
should be content with either 6 e3
or 6 g3) 6 . . . fe 7 lLl xe4 ll:lc6 8
lLlxf6 + (not 8 .td3 lLl b4 9 lLlxf6 +
h8!) 8 . . . .txf6 9 .te3 e5 = l O
d e lLl xe5 1 1 lLlxe5 .t xe5 t 2 .td3
-. h4 t3 g3?! -.h5 1 4 o-o d6 t 5 f4
.tf6 t 6 .l::tfe 1 .th3 with some
advantage for Black; Pachman
Larsen, Havana 01. 1 966.
(c) 4 .tg5 .te7 (4 . . . .tb4 also
comes into consideration) 5 e3
(White achieves nothing by 5
.txf6 .txf6 6 e4, e.g. 6 . . . fe 7
lLlxe4 0-0 8 lLlf3 d6 9 .td3 lLlc6 )
5 . . . 0-0 6 .td3 (long castling
produces double-edged positions,
e.g. 6 -.c2 -.e8 7 ll:lf3 d6 8 0-0-0
lLlc6 9 d5 lLlb4 t O W'b3 lLla6 1 1 de
lLlc5 1 2 -.c2 lLlxe6 t 3 .th4 lLlc5
t4 lLld4 W'h5 t 5 .tg3 a5; Polu=
This i s the main tabiya of the

Classical Variation and just about
every possible fourth move has
been tried at one time or another.
Before proceeding with our two
gayevsky-Guimard, Buenos Aires

6 . . . b6 7 lL!f3 (Harrwitz
Morphy, Paris 1 858, went 7 lL!ge2
_i. b7 8 0-0 lL!h5! 9 .txe7 W xe7
1 0 lL!g3 lL! xg3 1 1 hg d6 = ) 7 . . .
.i.b7 8 0-0 We8! 9 We2 lL!e4
( Botvinnik has suggested 9 . . .
..Wh5 1 0 e4 lL!c6! producing a
rich and unclear position) 1 0
.i.xe7 lL!xc3 (this important zwis
chenzug was made possible by
Black's eighth) 1 1 be W xe7 1 2 a4
.i.xf3!? (this bold and interesting
capture has been universally critic
ized in favour of 1 2 . . . lL!c6 1 3
.l:tfb l :t abS with a consensus
evaluation of = ) 1 3 W xf3 lL!c6 1 4
: fb 1 : ae8?! (but this i s where I
would point the finger; by playing
14 . . . g6! instead Black could not
be prevented from achieving the
vital . . . e5 advance) 1 5 Wh3 :t f6
(and here Alek hine's recommen
dation of 1 5 . . . g5 is more to the
point) 16 f4 Black's e-pawn has
been prevented from advancing
while the white counterpart will
shortly do so to considerable
effect; Capablanca-Tartakower,
New York, 1 924.
(d) 4 e3 b6! 5 .td3 (Najdorrs 5
e2 .tb7 6 .tf3 is most simply
answered by 6 . . . .txf3 7 W xf3
l2lc6 with approximately even
cha nces, while Fraser-Steinitz,
Dundee 1 867, demonstrated that
unambitious opening play by
White enables Black to adopt a
t 962)
97
typically flexible setup guarantee

ing pleasant middlegame pro
spects : 5 lL!f3 .tb7 6 .te2 We7 7
.td2 lL!c6 8 :t e l g6 9 Wc2 .tg7 = )
5 . . . .t b7 6 lL!f3 (6 f3 is an
important alternative, best met by
6 . . . g6, when Dus-Hotimirsky
Maroczy, Carlsbad 1 907, saw
Black equalize after 7 lL!ge2 .tg7
8 Wc2?! lL!c6 9 a 3 e5; ECO gives
7 lL!h3 .tg7 8 0-0 0-0 9 e4 ;t , but 8
. . . c5!, exploiting the decentralized
white knight, is more logical) 6 . . .
.tb4! (Black increases his control
of e4) 7 .td2 (nor has Black any
problems after 7 0-0 .txc3 8 be 00 9 a4 lL!c6 10 lL!d2 d6; Rubinstein
Maroczy, Teplitz-Schonau 1 922)
7 . . . 0-0 8 Wc2 (Black has an
extremely comfortable game after
8 0-0 d6 9 a3 .txc3 1 0 .txc3
lL!e4) 8 . . . a5 9 a3 .txc3 10 .txc3
lL!e4 1 1 0-0-0 d5 (utilizing the fact
that White dare not countenance
a further weakening of the king's
pawn cover by b2-b3 to obtain a
second central light square base
for his pieces) 1 2 lL!e5 lL!d7 1 3
lL!xd7 W xd7 1 4 .te l de 1 5 .txc4
.td5 with fine chances for Black;
Flohr- Bondarevsky, USSR Ch.
1 95 1 .
(e) 4 lL!f3 b6 5 e3 .t b7 6 .td3
..t b4 transposes to note (d).
(f) 4 f3 .t b4 5 .td2 0-0 (not 5
. . . c5 6 a3) 6 a3 .te7 7 e3 c5 8
.td3 lL!c6 9 lL!ge2 d6 1 0 Wc2 .td7
1 1 0-0-0 a6 12 g4 b5, with a typical
98
opposite wing castling maelstrom

of a middlegame to come, was
the course of Volovich-A. Zaitsev,
match, Moscow 1 962. Clearly
there remains much to be discov
ered here.
It should be noted that Black
may, of course, transpose to a
Stonewall in many of these
variations should he so prefer.
Maroczy-Tartakower
Teplitz-Schonau 1 922
1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 tt:lc3 tt:lf6
4
a3 ( 75 )
75
B
..te7
4
0-0
5
e3
d5
6
..td3
c6
7
tt:lf3
Sidestepping an instructive
error easily made by inexperienced
Stonewallers : 7 . . tt:le4? 8 cd ed 9
W'b3 and the double attack on d5
and e4 makes the proud black
knight untenable.
8
tt:le4
0-0
W'c2
9
White unsuspectingly continues
with
natural-looking
routine
moves which surprisingly rapidly
lead him into a passive and vulner
able position. 9 tt:le5 followed by
I 0 f4 would stabilize White's
kingside and produce an equal
position.
9
..td6
10
b3
tt:ld7
11
: f6 ( 76 )
..tb2
.
76
w
This modest looking move is

logical enough given that the
major theme of the Dutch is con
trol of e4 and that the move . . .
..tb4 often plays a vital role in
Black's efforts toward this end.
By switching to the Stonewall,
however,
Black
can
simul
taneously maintain control of e4
and highlight the lack of bite
behind the a-pawn advance.
Tally-ho! Black has sighted his

quarry and is after it without
further ado. It was this game which
established the rook manoeuvre
as the most effective method of

pursuing the attack in such opti
mum conditions. An alternative
idea, noted by Tartakower, would
be . . . li f6 followed by . . . g7-g5g4.
.ll fel
12
Preparing to shore up the
defences.
12
.ll h6
Threatening the bishop sacrifice
on h2 followed by . . . li h4.
13
g3
li f6
14
..UI
White would dearly like to
reposition his knight at f1 by 14
d2, but this would allow the
devastating sacrifice 14 . . . xf2!
15 ..t>xf2 .ll xh2 + 16 ..t>g 1 (or 1 6
..t> f3 e5) 1 6 . . . ..txg3 and 1 7 . . .
li h4.
14
g5
15
.ll ad1
At first sight it seems incredible
that there can be anything seri
ously wrong with White's position
given that all of his pieces are
developed and occupy sensible
looking squares while most of
Black's queenside is still asleep.
Two key factors supply the
answer : king safety and purpose.
That the white monarch is in grave
danger is clear enough, but even
that might not be decisive if only
his forces were actually doing
something - which they mani
festly are not. And therein lies the
99
overriding
problem :
whilst
White's army is optically plaus
ible, functionally it is impotent.
15
g4
16
xe4
Forced, since once again 1 6 d2
would allow the decisive knight
offer 1 6 . . . xf2 1 7 ..t>xf2 .1:1. xh2 +
1 8 .tg2 ..txg3 + !
16
fe
17
d2 ( 7 7 )
17
.ll xh2!!
A glorious conception, which
Reti, writing in 1 933, described as
'. . . a type of combination without
precedent . in the literature of
chess'. The astonishing and distin
guishing feature is that Black does
not follow up his heavy sacrifice
with a forcing sequence, but
calmly completes his development,
thus leaving his opponent all the
time and choice in the world with
which to organize his defences!
li xf2 +
18
..t>xh2
19
..t> h 1 !
The best defence. After the
0
100
obvious 1 9 .tg2, Black plays

neither 19 . . . 'it' xg3 + nor 1 9 . . .
.txg3 + 20 h i 'it' f6! 2 1 J:l. e2
.tf2! 22 J:l. xf2 'it' xf2 etc., but rather
brings up extra firepower by 1 9 . . .
lt:lf6! after which White is helpless,
e.g. 20 'it'c3 'it' xg3 + 2 1 g l
'it'h2 + 22 fl lt:lh5 23 lt:lxe4
(otherwise there follows 23 . . .
.td7 and . . . J:l.f8 + ) 23 . . . de 24
d5 e5 25 de lt:lg3 + 26 f2 .te6
and wins (analysis by Tartakower).
19
lt:lf6!
Naturally, Black does not relin
quish the pin on the knight which
is a key factor in the successful
prosecution of his attack; after 1 9
. . . 'it' xg3 2 0 lt:l b l the white queen
would be able to transfer to the
kingside immediately.
'it' xg3
20
J:l. e2
lt:lb1
21
lt:lh5
.td7!
22
'it'd2
With remarkable sangfroid
Black goes about completing his
development.
J:l. f2
23
Against the natural 23 'it' e l Tar
takower gives 23 . . . 'it'f3 + 24 J:l. g2
'it'h3 + 25 g I J:l. f8 26 lt:ld2 .tg3
27 J:l. xg3 'it' xg3 + 28 'it'xg3 lt:lxg3
29 .tc3 lt:lf5 30 J:l. e l h5, and the
pawn mass advances threaten
ingly.
'it'h4 +
23
.tg3
24
g1
The Soviet Grandmaster Rago
zin suggested 24 . . . g3 as possibly
an even stronger continuation of

the attack, e.g. 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 and
Black threatens either 26 . . . J:l. f6
and . . . J:l. h6 or 26 . . . J:l. f3 followed
by . . . lt:lf6 and . . . lt:lg4.
25
.tc3
White is obliged to give back
some material in an effort to break
the attack, for, as Tartakower
pointed out, after 25 J:l. g2 J:l. f8 26
'it'e2 J:l. f3 27 .tc3 .td6 28 .t e l
g3 2 9 lt:l d 2 'it'g4, an incredible
position arises where White,
despite his great material superior
ity, is powerless to prevent Black
carrying out the decisive knight
regrouping . . . lt:lh5-g7-f5.
It would, however, have been
better to give back the exchange
by 25 J:l. h2 .txh2 + 26 'it'xh2 'it'g5
27 .te l g3 28 'it' h l ! when the final
outcome would remain a moot
point.
25
.txf2 +
26
'it'xf2
g3
27
'it'g2
J:l. f8
Black finally completes his
development and at the same time
threatens 28 . . . J:l. f2 29 'it'h l J:l. h2
trapping the queen.
28
.tel ( 78 )
J:l. xfl + !
28
Tartakower crowns his attack
with another beautiful sacrifice!
29
xfl
e5
30
g1
.tg4
31
.txg3
On 3 1 J:l. d2, Black liquidates

79
78
into an easily won ending: 3 1 . . .

ed 32 ed ..tf3 3 3 .txg3 li:Jxg3 34
"iW h2 "ihh2 + 35 : xh2 li:Je2 + and
36 . . . li:J xd4.
31
li:J xg3
32
.C. e 1
li:JfS
33
"it" f2
WgS
34
de
After taking such a buffeting i t is
hardly surprising that Maroczy's
resistance finally snaps. Not that
the better 34 fl would have
altered the result; Tartakower
gives 34 . . . Wh5 35 "it"gl ! W h4 36
li:Jc3 li:Jg3 + 37 g2! li:Jh 1 ! 38
fl "iW f6 + with mate in two.
34
i.3 +
lLlg3 +
35
n
0-1
One of the greatest attacking
games of all time!
..
101
K. Grigorian-Balashov
USSR Ch. 1 974
d4 fS 2 c4 e6 3 li:Jc3 li:Jf6
4
The
g3 ( 79 )
fianchetto
updates
the
Classical Variation into the

modern approach, inviting vari
ous transpositions. Although play
able, it is hard to commend this
move order by White as it permits
Black to enter one of the most
reliable versions of the Dutch
Indian.
..tb4
4
Of course, Black may also
choose 4 . . . i.e7, or 4 . . . d5.
.id2
5
It is natural to prevent the
doubled pawns but not obligatory;
for 5 ..tg2 see Chapter 1 1 , p. 1 06.
0-0
s
The normal continuation and
probably best, although it is worth
noting the course of the game
Vark-Keres, Parnu 1 9 7 1 , where
Black successfully provoked novel
strategical complications: 5 . . .
li:Jc6 6 a3 ..te7 (6 . . . .txc3 7
.t xc3 li:Je4 leads to equality) 7
d5!? li:Je5 8 Wb3 ..tc5 9 .ig2 We7
lO li:Jh3 i. b6 1 1 li:Ja4 li:Je4 1 2
.tb4 d6 1 3 li:Jxb6 ab 1 4 li:Jf4 0-0
1 01
and Black had no reason to be

dissatisfied with his prospects.
d6
.1g2
6
.1xc3
tt:lf'3
7
tt:le4
.1xc3
8
Black has implemented the
standard procedure in such pos
itions : remove White's protection
of e4 by the exchange . . . .1xc3
and then occupy the outpost with
the knight.
..-c2
9
This time White must attend to
the threatened capture since hand
in hand with the appearance of
doubled pawns would go the dis
appearance of the compensatory
bishop pair.
tt:ld7
9
The correct way to develop the
queen's knight; from d7 the knight
can either support the advance . . .
e6-e5 or reinforce the outpost by
. . . tt:ld7-f6. Note that here 9 . . .
tt:lc6 would be mistaken as it
would allow White to open up the
centre, downgrade Black's pawn
structure and disrupt the flow of
his development after I 0 d5! The
consequences of this response
must always be weighed very care
fully whenever Black is contem
plating playing . . . tt:lc6.
10
0-0
tt:ldf6 ( 80)
10 . . . -.e7 is also eminently
playable after which a game
Flohr-- Botvinnik, match 1 933,
meandered to a correct draw via
80
w
I I lHd 1 tt:lxc3 (now that White's

KR has been developed the retreat
.te l preserving the two bishops
is a real threat) 1 2 -.xc3 tt:lf6 1 3
tt:le l e5 1 4 de de 1 5 :d2 e4! 1 6
tt:lc2 .1e6 1 7 : ad I : adS 1 8 tt:le3
: xd2 19 : xd2 g6 20 .1ft : d8 2 1
: xd8 -.xd8 2 2 tt:lc2
1-! .
.tel
11
An ambitious and controversial
idea : can the bishops really be
worth the disruption visited on the
white position by this retrograde
manoeuvre? The answer to that is
evidently closely bound up with
matters of taste and personal pre
ference, but I for one would be
very happy as Black to see such a
move appear on the board.
.1d7
11
In contrast to White's sophistic
ation Black continues his develop
ment with rustic simplicity.
:dt
12
I t i s interesting to note that after
this ECO evaluates the position as
;t , an assessment with which it is
not at all easy to agree. The rook

move is explained through dissat
isfaction with the immediate 1 2
ad2 ..tc6 and therefore White
prepares to advance his d-pawn.
-.e8
12
The queen is much more effec
tive here than on e7; now she is
poised for activity on the king's
flank whilst also glancing prophyl
actically to the queenside ( 1 3 b4??
..ta4).
e5
13
d5
Invariably the right response in
such situations : the position is
kept closed thus mimmizmg
White's bishop pair, the knight on
f3 is denied access to d4, and Black
creates a healthy, mobile pawn
duo on f5 and e5.
ttJc5
14
ttJd2
It stands to reason that Black
will not readily acquiesce in
exchanges which would only serve
to relieve the congestion in White's
camp.
15
0?!
While this gives luft to the con
fined cleric and prepares the
additional central pawn advance
e2-e4, it also weakens the king's
defences. The most logical conti
nuation is 1 5 b4 ..ta4 16 ttJ b3,
although after 16 . . . ttJxb3 1 7
a b ..td7 White's impaired pawn
structure is a considerable hindr
ance to his normal queenside play.
a5
15
16
17
..tf2
b3 (81 )
1 03
b6
81
B
f4!
17
Having secured his position on
the queenside Black now signals
the attack on the opposite flank.
18
e4
This advance is dictated by the
necessity of preventing Black from
decisively deflecting the f-pawn
from guarding g4, e.g. 1 8 e3 fg 1 9
h g e4 20 ttJxe4 ttJcxe4 2 1 fe -.h5
and 22 . . . ttJg4.
-.g6
18
Immediately utilising the cover
inadvertently provided by the
e-pawn.
19
1He 1
In order t o provide further
protection for g3.
19
rg
20
hg
h5!
A multi-purpose move which
fixes White's pawns, prepares a
breakthrough by . . . h4, and frees
h7 so that the KN can be optimally
re-positioned. In the meantime
/ 04
White's passive forces can do no

more than await the storm.
lLl rt
21
lLlh7
lLlg5
22
i.e3
23
i. xg5
An inglorious end for the prelate
of once grand pretensions.
"it'xg5
23
24
Wd2
Wf6
25
lLle3
Since Black can always prepare
. . . h4 at his leisure White does not
bother to postpone matters by 25
"iff2.
25
h4
26
g4
The position must be kept
closed at all costs.
26
g6
27
.:t b1
A forlorn gesture at queenside
expansion.
27
.:t f7
.:t e2
28
28 a3 a4 29 b4 lLl b3 and 30 . . .
lLld4 would only add to White's
troubles.
28
29
i.h1
.:t af8
"it'g5 ( 82)
82
w
A more perfect outcome for

Black's strategy is hard to imagine!
The outcome is no longer in doubt,
and it is something of a blessing
in disguise that White makes a
blunder in time-trouble which puts
a mercifully swift end to the
proceedings.
lLlxe4!
30
lLld1??
31
fe
"it'xg4 +
32
.:t g2
.:t rt +
33
h2
Wh3 mate
11
The Dutch Indian

This continuation often pro
duces positions which have much
in common with the Nimzo
lndian and Queen's Indian hence the designation Dutch
Indian. After the check Black must
choose between two radically
different courses: either to seek
enhanced prospects of equaliz
ation through simplification (the
early exchange of a pair of minor
pieces), or to interpret the check
as essentially a spoiler operation
designed to prevent the best
deployment of White's pieces,
albeit at the cost of a tempo. Both
approaches appear to be viable,
but the latter has come increas
ingly into favour in recent years.
Before going on to consider
White's two main replies, 5 tt:ld2
and 5 ..td2, we note how Black
should meet 5 tt:lc3. This move
allows Black to bring about a
kind of Samisch Variation of the
Nimzo-Indian . defence where
White has tamely tucked away his
After the introductory

d4
J
fS
2
c4
e6
White may choose to revert
to the fianchetto variations by
playing
3
tt:lf6
g3
..tg2
4
. . . in which case Black may either
lead into the major variations with
4 . d5 or 4 . ..te7 (for which
see Chapters 1 2- 1 6), or take
advantage of the weakness created
on the a5-e 1 diagonal by White's
second move and deliver check
with the bishop :
4
..tb4 + r 83 )
.
. .
IU
w
1 05
106
The Dutch Indian
KB on g2 instead of developing it
aggressively on d3 as is normally
the case. Thus the logical response
is 5 . . . ..txc3 + 6 be 0-0 7 lt:lf3 d6
S 0-0 lt:lc6 (probably the surest
route to equality; Meulders
Short, Brussels 1 9S7, went S . . .
'fle7 9 ..ta3 ltJ bd 7 1 0 lt:ld2! c5 1 1
e4 fe 1 2 lt:l xe4 lt:lxe4 1 3 ..txe4 and
now the precise 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 would
leave White with only slightly the
better of it) 9 'll c2 (or 9 ..ta3 .l:l. eS
1 0 'flc2 e5 1 1 de de 1 2 .l:l. fd l ..td7
1 3 lt:l h4 'lieS with level chances;
de Winter-Spassky, Lugano 01.
1 96S) 9 . . . e5 I 0 de lt:lxe5 I I lt:lxe5
de 12 ..ta3 .l:l.f7 13 .l:l. ad 1 'lieS =
White's active pieces and bishop
pair offset the weak pawns;
Colon-Spassky, San J uan 1 969.
Botvinnik-Larsen
Leiden 1 970
1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lt:lf6 4 ..tg2
..t b4 +
5
lt:ld2 ( 84 )
114
B
By parrying the check
this
fashion White hopes either to

obtain the bishop pair 'for free'
(i.e. without suffering doubled
pawns as in 5 lt:lc3), or to oblige
Black to lose time withdrawing
the bishop to the safety of its own
lines. However, Black can utilize
the indirect disadvantage of the
knight's placement at d2 - the
diminished control of d5 as a result
of the queen being blocked - to
develop the QB actively in fianch
etto without having to face a
timely d4-d5. These factors tend
to balance out, producing rich
middlegames of considerable stra
tegic complexity.
5
0-0
This natural move has been
accepted as the norm for many
years, but nevertheless may well
not be the most precise. The
reason for this assertion is to be
found in the note to White's ninth
move where a recent game has
cast serious doubt on the validity
of Black's setup. It may well be
that by playing 5 . . . a5!? (always
a useful move), with the intention
of fianchettoing before castling,
Black can circumvent the prob
lems posed by this latest White
improvement. For example, after
6 lt:lf3 b6 7 lt:le5 .l:l. a7 S 0-0, in
addition to S . . . ..tb7 Black may
also play S . . . ..txd2!? 9 'fl xd2
(a standard recapture, hoping to
develop the bishop at b2 on
The Dutch lndian
the long diagonal; 9 ..txd2 is

no better) 9 . . . d6!? with
many promising possibilities. This
certainly deserves testing in
p ractice.
6
l!Jf3
Expending a tempo on 6 a3
all ows Black instant equality after
6
..txd2 + 7 ..txd2 d6 8 l!Jf3
fke7 9 ..tc3 l!Je4. Nor does 6 l!Jh3
seem appropriate, e.g. 6 . . . d6 7
0-0 e5 8 Wb3 ..txd2 9 ..txd2 l!Jc6
1 0 de de I I ..tb4 l!Jxb4 1 2 W'xb4
tt:le4! 1 3 ll ad l fkf6 1 4 f4 ..te6! +
thanks to his better coordinated
forces; Opocensky-Keres, Prague
1 937.
aS
6
It is instructive to note the way
straightforward play backfires on
Black after 6 . . . d6 7 0-0 ..t xd2 8
.- xd2! W"e7 9 b4 e5 10 de de I I
.t b2 e4 1 2 l!Jd4 (White's control
of the dark squares is evident) 1 2
. . . l!Ja6 1 3 b5 l!Jc5 1 4 ..ta3 and
Black is suffering; Furman-Anto
shin, Voroshilograd 1 955.
By contrast, the immediate 6 . . .
b6 is a very playable alternative :
(a) 7 0-0 ..tb7 8 a3 (8 W'c2 a5 9
tt:le I ..txg2 I 0 l!Jxg2 l!Jc6 I I l!Jf3
.e7 1 2 a3 W"e8 1 3 d5 l!Jd8 1 4
n d I a4 1 5 ..te3 l!Je4 produced an
unclear and difficult position for l
both sides in Bertok- Larsen, Vin
..txd2 9 W'xd2
k ovci 1 970) 8
tt:lc6 10 b4 l!Je7 I I ..tb2 (in
Popov- Makarychev, Amsterdam
. . .
0 0
107
1 1 1974, Black cleverly exploited
the light square weaknesses in his

opponent's camp which arose via
I I a4 a6 1 2 l!Je I ..txg2 13 l!J xg2
b5! 14 cb ab 1 5 a5 l!:led5 16 f3
l!:lb6! + ) I I
W'e8 1 2 a4 W"h5 1 3
a5 ..te4 and with a firm grip
on e4 Black has no problems;
Sokolov-Cvetkovic,
Yugoslav
Ch. 1 962.
(b) 7 l!:le5!? (clearly more chal
lenging than castling) 7 . . . c6 8
0-0 ..tb7 9 l!:lb3 ..te7 1 0 a4 l!Ja6
I I a5 W"c7 1 2 ..t g5 d6 1 3 l!Jd3 c5
and Black's elastic disposition of
his forces should prevent White's
slight spatial superiority and
initiative from growing; Stein
Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 .
The text move not only restrains
queenside expansion by White but
also provides a flight-square for
the rook so that after a subsequent
. . . b6, l!Je5 sequence Black will
not be obliged to play . . . c7-c6 as
in the example above.
0-0
b6
7
8
tOeS
ll a7 ( 85 )
The point!
l!Jd3
9
Perhaps it is not too surprising
that White has recently discovered
a big improvement on this volun
tary retreat, but it is surprising
that the improvement is yet
another voluntary retreat! The
astonishing 9 lOb I ! provides a
prime example of reculer pour
0 0 .
J OB
The Dutch Indian
Dutch dream of such positions!)

12
fe 1 3 lLlxe4 li:la6 14 ie3!
W'e8 ( 1 4
li:lc5 1 5 lLlxc5 i.xc5
ixc5
be
1 7 li:ld3 ) 1 5 d 6!
16
(even better than the 1 5 lLlc3 ed
1 6 lLlxd5 i.xd5 1 7 i. xd5 + h8
1 8 lt e 1 i. b4 1 9 i.d2 of Shab
alov-Naumkin, Norilsk 1 987) 1 5
li:lxe4 ( 1 5
cd 1 6 li:lxd6 i.xd6
1 7 W' xd6 i.xg2 18 xg2 )
1 6 de W'xe7 1 7 W'xd7 W'f6 1 8
li:lc6 li:lec5 1 9 W'd2 i.xc6 20 ixc6
e5 21 i.g2 and with two bishops
on an open board plus the
better pawn structure, not to
mention Black's queenside exiles,
White's positional superiority is
massive.
After that it is a relief to note 9
li:ldf3 which brought White no
advantage in J. Watson-Gins
burg, US Ch. 1 982 : 9
ie7
(again, there is a threat to trap the
bishop by to c5) to lLld3 (a game
Portisch-K ristiansen, Luzern 01.
1 982, went 10 b3 li:le4 1 1 a3 ib7
1 2 i b2 i.f6 1 3 li:ld3 and no wJ
with 1 3 . . . c5 Black could have
transposed to the column game)
10 . . . ib7 1 1 lLlf4 lLle4 12 h4 W'e8
1 3 ie3 if6 14 .:. c t li:lc6 with
balanced chances.
9
ib7
This position is evaluated as
equal by Larsen.
10
lLlf3
1 0 li:lxb4 ixg2 I I xg2 ab
would give
Black excellent
0 0
0 0 .
0 0 .
sauter : redeploying the

knight to c3 transforms White's
strategy at a stroke as it instantly
puts the crucial advance d4-d5
back on the agenda. Not only
that, but from c3 the k night also
observes b5 thus giving Black
some cause for concern over his
eccentric rook. The following con
vincing example strongly suggests
that a satisfactory answer to this
imaginative innovation by the
Soviet player Shabalov is likely
only to be found by reconsidering
the introductory sequence (see
note to Black's fifth). After 9 lLlb I !,
Gelfand - K naak, Halle 1 987, went
9
i.e7 (with nothing left to
capture, the bishop is menaced by
to c5 and I I a3) 1 0 li:lc3 i. b7 I I
d5 W' c8 (Black's plight is made
manifest by the way the natural
1 1 . . . d6 1 2 li:lf3 e5 falls foul of 1 3
li:lg5 ic8 1 4 li:le6 i.xe6 1 5 de c6
1 6 e4 stirring up play in the centre
which he is ill prepared to meet)
1 2 e4 (those who play against the
mieux
0 0 .
0 0 .
0 0 .
The Dutch Indian
counterplay along the a-file and

l on g diagonal especially after the
arrival of the queen on a8.
tO
J.. e7
ll:le4
b3
tt
J.. f6
J.. b2
12
c5!
a3
13
There is no point in playing for
. . . e5 with so many white pieces
t rained on it, so Black contests the
centre with the aid of his c-pawn.
ll:lc6
e3
14
lLlfe5 ( 86 )
15
1 09
and the useful c5 square securely

in Black's hands.
18
tic7
tic2
19
J.. c6
f3?!
20
The beginning of a faulty plan
which exacerbates White's prob
lems; simply 20 l:l ad l was in order.
20
ll:lc5
..tg5
lLlf4?!
21
..te3 +
ll:le2?
22
f4! (87)
ht
23
87
w
15
cd!
very
a
instigates
Black
important and instructive alter
ation of pawn structure which
brings his pieces to life.
lLlxe5
ed
16
de
17
J..e7
a4
18
White is concerned that his c
p awn migh t be undermined at
so me future time by . . . a5-a4, but
the cure is more debilitating than
the disease as it leaves his queen
side pawns permanently crippled
This advance nearly always

spells trouble for White. No mat
ter how he reacts his king is bound
to become less secure.
24
ll:ld4
This is criticized by Larsen,
albeit without attempting to
suggest an improvement. It takes
a skilful trading of advantages to
show the deficiency of the text
move.
24
fg
lLlxc6
25
Not 25 hg? ti xe5! and the threat
of 26 . . . tih5 + prevents White
1 10
The Dutch Indian
doing damage with a discovered

attack by the knight.
de
25
1kf7
26
hg
27
.th3
The queen check must be pre
vented.
l:t d8!
27
This clever switch exploits the
bishop's desertion of the f-pawn
and enables Black to dominate the
d-file since the attempt to contest
it by 28 l:t ad l l:t xd l 29 1k xd l
would be unacceptable after 29 . . .
l:t d7.
28
.tc3
l:t ad7
An extremely satisfying conclu
sion to the manoeuvre begun
twenty moves ago with 8 . . . l:t a7!
29
l:t a2
There is nothing active for
White to undertake.
29
l:t d3
Larsen points out that 29
l:t d l 30 1ke2 l:t l d 3 3 1 l:t c2 ll'lxb3
also came into consideration.
30
b4
ab
31
.txb4
1kh5
32
1kh2
1kxe5
With the fall of this pawn and
the continuing central dominance
of the black pieces White's fate is
sealed. The game concluded as
follows : 33 f4 1ke4 + 34 1kg2 1k xc4
35 .txc5 .txc5 36 1k xc6 (White
is fighting hard, his temporary
sacrifices
having
prod uced
opposite coloured bishops) 36 . . .
l:t e3 37 l:t af2 h8 (37 . . . h6!) 3 8

1kg2? (the last chance lay in 38
l:t f3! l:t e2 39 l:t 3f2 l:t e4 40 l:t d2)
38 . . . h6 39 .tg4 1k xa4 40 l:t e2
e5 4 1 l:t a2 1kc4 42 l:t c2 1k b4 43
.tf5 ef 44 gf l:t e l 45 l:t e2 l:t xfl +
46 1k xfl l:t f8 47 .te4 1kd4 48 g2
1if6 49 f5 1kg5 + 50 h l 1k h4 +
5 1 g2 l:t d8 52 .tc2 l:t d4 0- l .
M. Gurevich-Dolmatov
USSR Ch. 1 987

1 d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 ll'lf6 4 .tg2
.tb4 +
5
.td2 (88)
88
8
This natural move has long been

White's most popular choice.
Theoretically
speaking,
the
exchange of dark squared bishops
should work to White's advantage
unless Black can rapidly achieve
the vital . . . e6-e5 advance.
5
.te7
The idea behind this paradox
ical retreat is that the incon
venience caused White by luring
The Dutch Indian
the bishop to d2 will adequately

off-set the tempo loss incurred. At
the same time, Black ensures that
a more complicated struggle will
ensue than would be the case after
the disappearance of the bishops.
If Black prefers the simple life,
then 5 . . . 'ike7 is a reliable alterna
tive which promises good chances
of equality as the following vari
ations show :
(a) 6 l2lh3 0-0 7 0-0 ..txd2
followed by . . . d6 with full equal
ity.
(b) 6 ..tc3 0-0 7 a3 ..t xc3 + 8
8xc3 d6 again with an easy game
for Black.
(c) 6 l2lc3 0-0 7 l2lf3 d6 8 0-0
,hc3 9 ..t xc3 l2le4 1 0 'ii c 2 l2ld7
brings about Flohr- Botvinnik,
match 1 933, given in Chapter 1 0,
p. I 03, note to Black's tenth.
(d) 6 'ii b3 ..txd2 + 7 l2l xd2
0-0 8 l2lgf3 d6 9 0-0 e5 I 0 c5 +
h8 I I cd cd 1 2 de (after 1 2 e4
fe 1 3 de de 1 4 l2lg5 l2lc6 1 5 l2lgxe4
8d4 Black's pieces are very active;
Peterson-Uusi, Parnu 1 960; Heb
ert has suggested that 1 2 'ii a3
gives White the advantage, but
t his seems unlikely, e.g. 12 . . . e4
1 3 l2le5 'ii d 8!? 1 4 l2lec4 l2lc6 and
Black should be OK) 1 2 . . . de 1 3
tLlc4 ( Heberg-Spraggett, Toronto
Open 1 985, went 1 3 e4?! l2lxe4 1 4
tUxe4 fe 1 5 l2l d 2 l2lc6 1 6 ..txe4
h3 :t ) 1 3 . . . l2lc6 14 'ii c 3 e4 1 5
tUfe5 l2lxe5 1 6 'ikxe5 'ikxe5 1 7 l2lxe5
=
Ill
..te6 with Black for choice; White

ley-Bellin, England 1 976.
(e) 6 l2lf3 ..t xd2 + ! 7 W xd2 d6
8 l2lc3 e5 9 dxe5 (9 0-0 e4 ) 9
. . . dxe5 1 0 e4 (Gulko-Speelman,
Amsterdam 1 989) and now Black's
most natural move is I 0 . . . l2lc6
( 10 . . . fxe4 I I l2lg5 l2lc6 is also
possible) when Black's free devel
opment offsets the vulnerability of
his e-pawn.
l2lc3
6
White can also fight for an
advantage with other moves :
(a) 6 ..tc3?! 0-0 7 l2ld2 d5! (the
Stonewall is the best formation for
exploiting White's substitution of
bishop for knight on c3) 8 l2lh3 c6
9 0-0 b5 10 b3 a5 1 1 'ii c 2 a4
and Black's position is already
preferable; Sliwa-Sebestyen, Sopot
1 95 1 .
(b) 6 l2lf3 0-0 (6 . . . d6 is more
precise, avoiding the possibility of
7 d5!) 7 0-0 d6 8 l2lc3 We8 9 Wc2
(it is interesting to note that with
the bishop on d2 White is unable
to adopt the normal procedure
against the Ilyin-Zhenevsky since
now after 9 l:t e l Wg6 10 e4 fe 1 1
l2lxe4 l2l xe4 1 2 l:t xe4 Wxe4 1 3 l2lh4
the d-pawn would be en prise) 9
. . . Wh5 10 e4 e5 I I de de 1 2 l2ld5
( 1 2 l2l xe5? fe is good for Black) 1 2
. . . l2lxd5 1 3 ed (the inferior 1 3 cd
gives Black active play after 1 3 . . .
..td6 1 4 l:t fe l l2la6 1 5 ef ..txf5 1 6
'ikc3 ..th3!; Shelotshilin-,Shesto=
1 12
The Dutch Indian
porov, corr. 1 955) l 3 . . . ..tf6 1 4

..tc3 ll:Jd7 and W hite has a mar
ginal positional edge; Szabo
Bronstein, Budapest 1 950.
(c) 6 Wb3 c6 (6 . . . 0-0 comes
strongly into consideration as 7
ll:Jc3 would transpose to the col
umn game, whilst 7 ..txb7 ..txb7
8 W xb7 ll:Jc6 9 ..tc3 l:l. b8 10 W a6
ll:Je4 clearly offers compensation
for the pawn) 7 d5 cd!? 8 cd e5
(both 8 . . . ed? 9 ll:Jc3 and 8 . . .
ll:Jxd5 9 ..t xd5 ed l O ll:Jc3 leave
White clearly better) 9 ll:Jc3 d6 1 0
ll:Jf3 ll:Jbd7 (of course not l O . . .
0-0? 1 1 ll:Jxe5!) 1 1 0-0 0-0 1 2 ll:Jg5
ll:Jc5 1 3 Wc4 h6 14 b4 ( 1 4 ll:Je6
ll:Jxe6 1 5 de e4 is in Black's favour)
14 . . . ll:Jcd7! 1 5 ll:Je6 ll:Jb6 16 Wb3
..txe6 1 7 de d5 with complicated
play perhaps somewhat favouring
White; Sosonko-Abramovic, New
York Open 1 986.
6
0-0 (89)
89
w
(a) 7 ll:Jh3 d6 8 0-0 e5 9 d5 h 6

1 0 f4 e4 produced a difficult game
for both sides in Kmoch-Judovtc,
Leningrad 1 934.
(b) 7 e3 d6 8 ll:Jge2 c6 9 0-0 h8
10 b4 e5 1 1 d5 cd 1 2 cd ll:Jbd7 1 3
l:l. c 1 ll:Jb6 1 4 Wb3 ..td7 and Black
has almost imperceptibly taken
control of the game in instructive
fashion; White suffers from inac
tive minor pieces, a sensitive d
pawn and incipient light square
weaknesses; Cobo-Larsen, H av
ana 1 967.
(c) 7 ll:Jf3 ll:Je4 (7 . . . d6 would
transpose to note (b) to Whtte's
sixth; adopting a Stonewall for
mation would allow White to take
advantage of the position of the
bishop on d2 by 7 . . . d5 8 0-0 c6
9 .-c2 We8 10 a3! Wh5 1 1 ll:Ja2
ll:Jbd7 1 2 ..t b4 bringing about the
strategically favourable exchange
of dark squared bishops; Flohr
Szabo, Moscow-Budapest 1 949)
8 0-0 ..tf6 9 Wc2 (9 ll:Jxe4 brings
no advantage, e.g. 9 . . . fe 10 ll:Je5
d6 1 1 ll:Jg4 ..txd4 1 2 ..txe4 e5
1 3 ll:Je3 ll:Jd7 Nogueiras- Murey,
Luzern OJ. 1 982) 9 . . . ll:Jxd2 1 0
W xd2 d 6 ( 1 0 . . . d 5 might contain
White's advantage more success
fully) 1 1 e4 fe 1 2 ll:J xe4 ll:Jc6 1 3
l:l. a d 1 with a clear positional
superiority for White; Griinfeld
Spielmann, Vienna 1 935.
c6
7
This dynamic continuation con=
W b3
7
This queen sortie is more
forcing than the alternatives :
The Dutch Indian
cedes White some structural

ad vantage in return for active
piece play in the style of the Lenin
rra d Variation.
8
dS!
d6
Black must beware of the hid
den dangers along the a2-g8 diag
onal; thus 8 . . . e5?? loses to 9 d6!
,i xd6 10 c5 + .
9
de
tt:la6
10
tt:lh3
This mode of development
leaves the KB unhampered and
thus permits White's minor pieces
to work at maximum efficiency.
10
tt:lcS
11
..-c2
tt:lg4
The best way of meeting the
threat to the f-pawn as 1 1 . . . .i. xe6
1 2 b4 would be awkward.
12
0-0
aS
Securing the c5 square and
generally
restrammg
White's
q ueenside pawns.
.i.xe6
13
b3
14
tt:lf4
.i.d7 ( 90)
With the opening almost over,
113
i t i s time t o take stock. White's

pawn structure is somewhat
sounder but the black infantry
secure a share of the centre and
provide the foundation for king
side action whilst restraining
enemy ambitions on the opposite
wing. Piece coordination in
general is roughly balanced.
Although the white prelates cur
rently enjoy slightly greater scope
than their counterparts, the suc
cess of Black's diversionary check
in deflecting White's QB from its
natural long diagonal is quite not
able. Black's major problem is to
find a suitable deployment for the
queen.
IS
tt:ld3
tt:le6
..-c7?!
16
e3
The course of the game shows
that Black should have sent his
queen to the king's flank by 16 . . .
..-es intending to cover the weak
b6 square with the KB, viz. 1 7
tt:la4 .i.d8 .
l:l. a d 1
.i.e8
17
Heading for the h7-b 1 diag
onal, this redeployment is consist
ent with his sixteenth.
18
tt:le2
gS
Depriving the white k nights of
the use of f4 as well as building
long-term attacking chances.
19
li:ld4!
A classical central counter to
Black's wing demonstration.
19
li:lxd4
1 14
The Dutch Indian
20
ed
h6
With the action of White's QB
opened up, the g-pawn needs sup
port so that the knight may retreat
to f6 if attacked.
21
: del
..tg6
22
f4
This g1ves Black
tactical
chances due to the weakening of
the g l -a7 diagonal. Dolmatov
indicates 22 :t e6 as a safer way
for White to keep in control.
22
..tf6
23
d5
: ae8
24
hl
..td4
be
25
de
26
'W' c l ! ( 9 1 )
By keeping e3 under control

and thus introducing h3 as a threat
White's advantage becomes clear.
Even so, Black's position contams

many tactical resources and the
game provides a perfect example
of how to muddy the waters when
things go wrong: 26 . . . :t e4! 27 fg
(27 h3 lLl f6 28 fg lLlh5 would be
awkward to meet) 27 . . . hg 28
..txg5! (28 ..txe4? fe would give
Black a dangerous attack) 28 . . .
'W'h7 29 h4 : feB 30 ..tf3! (gives
the king air and thereby prepares
the decisive consolidation lLlf4) 30
. . . lLle3 3 1 ..txe3? (a mistake in
time pressure; this was the correct
moment to simplify by 3 1 ..txe4!
lLlxfl 32 ..txc6 lLlxg3 + 33 g2
lLle4 when White would clearly be
on top) 3 1 . . . ..txe3 32 'W'b2 f4! +
(with the undermining of his h
pawn White's king becomes
extremely vulnerable) 33 lLlxf4?
(the decisive error; 33 gf :t 4e7 was
relatively best) 33 . . . ..txf4! 34
: xe4 (34 ..txe4 ..txe4 + is crush
ing) 34 . . . ..txe4 35 gf 'W'xh4 + 36
g l (36 g2 fails to the neat 36
. . . 'W'g4 + 37 h2 ..txf3 38 :t g l
:t e2 + ) 3 6 . . . ..txf3 3 7 :t xf3
:t e l + 38 : fl : xfl + 39 xfl
'W' h I + and the queen is lost, so
White resigns.
12
Classical System : Auxiliary

Variations
This chapter deals with various

rare deviations by White from the
main introductory sequence to
the Classical systems. Accurate
defence by Black generally results
in interesting middlegames with
balanced chances.
I
d4
f5
2
g3
liJf6
3
e6
..ig2
Blackburne's variation, named

after the British grandmaster who
introduced it over a century ago.
Developing the knight this way
avoids blocking in the KB and
prepares liJh3-f4 putting pressure
on dS and e6. Furthermore, White
is ready almost immediately to
carry out the important advance
e2-e4, supported by f2-f3 if neces
sary. On the debit side, the dimin
ished control of eS makes it easier
for Black to advance his own e
pawn, possibly with gain of tempo
(should the knight be on f4) or
positional advantage (should the
knight remain offside on h3).
Other fourth moves are rela
tively innocuous :
(a) 4 e3 ..te7 5 liJe2 0-0 6 0-0
d6 7 b3 eS 8 de de = Euwe- R.
Byrne, New York 1 95 1 .
(b) 4 ..ig5 ..te7 (as usual, 4 . . .
dS is a safe alternative) 5 ..txf6
..txf6 6 e4 0-0 7 f4 fe 8 ..txe4 d5
and Black's KB provides the basis
Reshevsky- Botvinnik
The Hague 1 948
4
tiJh3 ( 92 )
115
1 16
Classical System: A uxiliary Variations
for strong counterplay on the dark

squares; Coho-Pritchett, Siegen
01. 1 970.
(c) 4 lt:lc3 d5 (invariably the best
response when White develops the
QN in front of his c-pawn) 5 lt:lf3
c5!? (an aggressive approach; the
usual Stonewall formation might
in fact be more suitable) 6 0-0 lt:lc6
7 de (a game Mestrovic-Sines,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 968, produced a
mutually difficult position after 7
..tf4 a6 8 lt:la4 c4) 7 . . . ..t xc5 8
a3 0-0 9 b4 ..te7 lO ..tb2 W' b6
with satisfactory play for Black;
Tartakower-Treybal, Hamburg
01. 1 930.
(d) 4 lt:ld2 d5 ( Black probably
does best not to allow White to
play e2-e4; 4 . . . c5!?, while usually
not good, may be feasible here; 4
. . . lt:lc6 5 c3 d5 6 lt:ldf3 ..te7 7 lt:lh3
lt:le4 8 lt:lf4 0-0 is a strategically rich
alternative; Ftacnik-Bellin, H as
tings 1 980/8 1 ) 5 lt:ldf3 ..td6 6 lt:lh3
0-0 7 lt:lf4 lt:le4 8 lt:ld3 W'f6 9 e3
lt:ld7 1 0 0-0 g5 with fine play for
Black; Forintos-Szabolsci, Hung
arian Ch. 1 972.
4
..te7
5
0-0
0-0
c4
6
d6
M uch more logical than a 6
. . . d5 Stonewall formation which
gives White improved chances of
obtaining an advantage, e.g. 7 lt:lc3
c6 8 W'b3 lt:la6 (8 . . . W'e8 9 lt:lf4
h8 1 0 lt:ld3 lt:le4 1 1 f3 lt:lxc3 1 2
txc3 lt:ld7 1 3 b3 is assessed as

only ;;!;; by Petrosian, but it seems
to me that Black's prospects are
extremely bleak) 9 lt:lf4 h8 1 0
lt:ld3 lt:lc7 1 1 ..tf4 lt:lce8 1 2 c5
and White is clearly in charge;
Capablanca-Botvinnik, Hastings
1 934/35.
lt:lc3
7
This natural developing move
must be best. Less forceful conti
nuations allow Black an easy time
of it:
(a) 7 lt:lf4 c6 (blunting the bish
op's diagonal and taking control
of d5) 8 lt:lc3 e5 9 de de lO lt:ld3
W'c7 and Black has an excellent
Hort-Antoshin type of position;
Nemet-Djurasevic,
Yugoslavia
1 950.
(b) 7 W'b3 c6 8 lt:ld2 a5 (8 . . .
e5!? is an interesting and good
alternative, e.g. 9 c5 + d5 lO e3
W'c7, or lO de lt:lg4) 9 lt:lf4 a4 1 0
W'c3 W'c7 1 1 e4 e 5 1 2 d e d e 1 3
lt:ld3 fe 1 4 lt:lxe4 ..tf5 with active
piece play; Forintos--Farago,
H ungarian Ch. 1 965.
(c) 7 b3 W'e8 8 ..t b2 ..td8 9 lt:lf4
e5 1 0 de de 1 1 lt:ld5 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:l bc3
c6 1 3 lt:lxf6 + lt:lxf6 14 W'd6 lt:ld7
1 5 lt:la4 .:. f6 and Black has a solid
position plus kingside attacking
chances;
U dovcic-Alexander,
Belgrade 1 952.
These examples clearly demon
strate that a soundly executed . . .
e6-e5 advance invariably brings
Classical System: Auxiliary Variations
Black full equality.

7
-.e8 ( 93 )
\13
w
The immediate 7 . . . e5?! con

demns Black to a cheerless defence
in the ending arising after S de de
9 -. xdS ..txd8 (9 . . . .I:.Xd8? 1 0
tZJd5) 1 0 b 3 l2:\a6 1 1 ..ta3 ll e8 1 2
tZJb5, a s was shown i n the game. E.
Vladimirov-Psakhis, USSR 1 9S5.
7 . . . c6 may be an acceptable
alternative, e.g. 8 e4 fe 9 l2:\ xe4 e5
I 0 de de 1 1 l2:\ hg5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\xf6 +
gf 1 3 l2:\e4 -. xd 1 1 4 ll xd 1 ..ig4 1 5
f3 ..if5 with full equality; Olafs
son- Ivkov, Birmingham 1 95 1 .
e4
8
and
Consequent
active,
although some of the alternatives
can lead to even more complex
p lay :
(a) S b3 should simply be met
by the usual S . . . c6 rather than 8
. . . l2:\c6?! 9 d5 or 8 . . . e5?! 9 de de
I 0 l2:\d5 .idS 1 1 ..ia3 when White
has the initiative.
(b) 8 -.b3 c6 9 d5!? cd 10 cd e5
I I l2:\g5 l2:\a6 1 2 l2:\e6 ..ixe6 1 3 de
117
!Llc5 1 4 -.c2 e4 1 5 f3 d5 with a

complex, double-edged position;
Fesche-Schmeisser,
K uortone
1 976.
(c) 8 l2:\f4 is probably best answ
ered by Keres's recommendation
8 . . . g5 9 l2:\d3 -.g6 which has yet
to be tested in practice. After the
standard 8 . . . c6, White can use
tactical means to gain a positional
advantage : 9 d5! e5 10 de be 1 1
l2:\fd5! lll x d5 1 2 l2:\ xd5 .idS 1 3 b3
.i.b7 14 l2:\c3 and Black's pawns
are decidedly shaky; Taulbut
R umens, London 1 977.
fe
8
l2:\f4
9
Against the immediate recap
ture 9 l2:\xe4, I recommend 9 . . .
!Llxe4 l O .i.xe4 e5! 1 1 l2:\g5 .i.xg5!
(the consequences of 1 1 . . . h6 1 2
l2:\h7 are not a t all clearly in Black's
favour) 1 2 .i.xg5 !Llc6, and the
harmony of the black forces offsets
White's bishop pair.
c6
9
l2:\xe4
l2:\xe4
10
e5
II
.i.xe4
12
l2:\g2
1 2 de would isolate Black's e
pawn, but after 1 2 . . . de 1 3 l2:\d3
(otherwise Black's K B will occupy
the a7-g 1 diagonal) 1 3 . . . .i.h3
14 lle1 l2:\d7, Black's dynamic
compensation can easily become
more than sufficient.
12
l2:\d7
13
l2:\e3 ( 94 )
1 18
Classical System : A uxiliary Variations
94
8
13
eel
Introducing
a
simplifying
manoeuvre which completely
equalizes. Keres notes that t 3 . . .
llJf6 1 4 .tg2 e4 1 5 d5! c5 1 6 .td2
followed by .tc3 is in White's
favour.
14
1fxd4
llJe5
f4
15
Covering the weakness on f3.
15
llJg4
16
llJxg4
.txg4
Black may look to the future
with confidence on account of
White's weakened king's position.
The game concluded as follows :
t 7 : e t .tf6 t 8 1fd3 ( 1 8 1f xd6?
: d8 t 9 1fa3 .td4 + 20 h t 1fh5
would give Black a dangerous
attack) 1 8 . . . 1fh5 1 9 .td2 : fe8
20 : ab l ? (20 : e3!) 20 . . . : e7?
(20 . . . : e6! was better) 2 1 .tb4
: ae8 22 .txd6 : e6 (perhaps
Black had intended 22 . . . : xe4
23 : xe4 : xe4 24 1f xe4 .tf5 25
1fel .td4 + winning, and only
now noticed that 25 1fe3! turns
the tables on account of 25 . . .

.txbl 26 1fe6 + , and it is Black
who is mated) 23 : e3 : xd6! (a
temporary sacrifice to force t he
draw) 24 1f xd6 : d8 25 1fc7 1fc5
26 : e t : c8 27 1f xb7 .td4 28
f2 .txe3 + 29 : xe3 1fd4 30
1fb3 1fd2 + 3 1 gt 1f c l + 32
f2 1fd2 + 3 3 g l 1fc1 + !-! .
Botvinnik-Bronstein
World Ch. ( 1 ) 1 95 1
t d4 r5 2 g3 ttJf6 3 .tg2 e6
4
5
c4
llJc3
.te7
Some interesting nuances can

arise when White plays 5 llJf3 and
delays castling after 5 . . . 0-0, for
example :
(a) 6 llJc3 d5 (a game Bogo
ljubow-Alekhine,
World
Ch.
1 9 34, went 6 . . . d6 7 .tf4 1fe8 8
: c 1 llJc6 9 d5 llJd8 1 0 llJ b5 1fd7
I I 1f b3 a6 12 de llJxe6 1 3 llJc3
llJxf4 1 4 gf h8 = ) 7 llJe5 c6 8
.tf4
1fe8
(Selezniev-Model,
USSR Ch. 1 927, went 8 . . . llJ bd7
9 1fc2 llJ xe5 I 0 de llJe4 I t llJ xe4?
fe 1 2 .td2 .tc5 1 3 f3 1f b6 1 4 00-0
e3
and
White
was
in trouble) 9 1fb3 h8 10 0-0-0?!
( 1 0 0-0 =) 1 0 . . . llJ bd7 I t h 3 llJ xe5
12 .t xe5 llJd7 1 3 .tc7 b6 and
with . . . .ta6 to follow, Black
has the better chances; Se1ezniev
Riumin, USSR 1 927.
(b) 6 d5!? .t b4 + (ECO gives 6
Classical System : A uxiliarr Variations
. . . d6 7 de lZlc6 8 lZld4 lZlxd4 9

-w xd4 c6 and . . . .txe6 as equaliz
i ng, but I for one do not find this
co nvincing) 7 .td2 'fle7 8 0-0
.txd2 9 'flxd2 eS 1 0 d6! (a deep
p ositional pawn sacrifice) 1 0 . . .
cd? (it would be better to remove
the queens by I 0 . . . 'fi xd6 I I 'flxd6
cd 1 2 lZlc3 lZlc6 1 3 .l:tfd I lZle8 14
:t d2, as indicated by Robatsch,
b ut even so White has good com
pensation) I I lZlc3 lZla6 1 2 'figS!
dS (or 1 2 . . . g6 1 3 lZlh4 h8 1 4
'W xg6!) 1 3 lZlh4! h 8 1 4 lZlxfS 'fl f7
1 5 cd with a crushing advantage;
Buenos
Robatsch-Jamieson,
Aires 01. 1 978.
It seems to me that until a
reliable antidote is found to
Robatsch's 6 dS, Black should
refrain from castling on move five
and effect a simple transposition
according to choice.
5
0-0 ( 95 )
95
w
e3
6
It is important to be au fait with
t he alternatives :
119
(a) 6 e4 fe 7 lZlxe4 dS! (both 7

. . . lZlxe4 8 .txe4 dS 9 .td3 and
7 . . . d6 8 lZle2 'fie8 9 0-0 are good
for White) 8 lZlxf6 + .txf6 9 lZlf3
cS 10 0-0 cd I I lZlxd4 de 1 2 .te3
lZlc6 1 3 lZlxc6 be 1 4 .tcS : f7 I S
'it' xd8 + .txd8 and with pressure
to come against White's b-pawn,
Black has no problems; Boutte
ville-Duckstein, Le Havre 1 966.
(b) 6 d5 .tb4 (better than leav
ing the bishop locked behind the
pawn chain after 6 . . . eS 7 lZlf3 d6,
although that is also playable) 7
.td2 (7 'flb3 awaits testing) 7 . . .
eS 8 e3 d6 9 lZlge2 a6!? (intending
to weaken the dS pawn by attack
ing its support) 10 'fic2 'fie8 I I f3
bS! 1 2 'flb3 ( Botvinnik- Bronstein,
World Ch. 1 9S I , ninth game) and
now simply 1 2 . . . .txc3 1 3 lZlxc3
be 1 4 'fixc4 'flf7 would give Black
excellent play thanks to the dual
threats of I S . . . c6 and I S . . . aS
combined with . . . .ta6.
(c) 6 .1g5 d6 (6 . . . c6!? is
possible, with 7 .txf6 .txf6 8 e4
'fl b6 leading to unclear play and
7 lZlf3 dS bringing about a Stone
wall) 7 .txf6 (7 lZlf3 lZlbd7 8 0-0
eS is fine for Black) 7 . . . .txf6 8
e4 fe 9 lZlxe4 lZlc6 I 0 lZle2 eS with
a position assessed as unclear by
Garcia- Palermo. This whole line
awaits further practical tests.
(d) 6 'flb3 (usually known as
the Anti-Stonewall Variation, for
obvious reasons; cf. Chapter I I , p.
1 20
Classical System : Auxiliry Variations
1 1 2) 6 . . . c6 (Black's best response

has yet to be established; 6 . . .
a5!? 7 lLlf3 - 7 ..t xb7? a4 costs
material - 7 . . . d6 is natural and
sensible, while the gambit continu
ation 6 . . . c5!? 7 d5 e5 8 e4 d6!? 9
ef ..t xf5 1 0 -. xb7 lLlbd7 certainly
offers some compensation in
return for the pawn) 7 d5 d6 (7 . . .
e5?? 8 d6 will win the bishop) 8 de
lLla6 (cf. Gurevich- Dolmatov, p.
1 1 0) 9 lLlf3 lLlc5 10 -.c2 lLlfe4 I I
lLld4 lLlxc3 1 2 be .i.xe6 1 3 lLl xe6
lLlxe6 1 4 0-0, and it seems that
White's bishop pair and open lines
outweigh the weakened pawns;
Euwe-Opocensky, Venice 1 948.
Thus Black's defences currently
stand in need of reinforcement in
this variation, but, with so much
yet to be explored, this is a task
which may be approached with
optimism.
The text-move, first played in
Staunton-Horwitz, London 1 8 5 1 ,
and re-introduced i n the present
game, aims for flexible and har
monious development, but has the
big strategic drawback of allowing
Black to achieve . . . e6-e5 without
difficulty.
d6
6
A much more logical reaction
to White's restrained development
than adopting a Stonewall for
mation, although that was Botvin
nik's response when Bronstein
confronted him with the psycho-
logical ploy of usmg the same

variation.
c6
lLlge2
7
e5
0-0
8
In notes to this game, Botvinnik
himself observed, 'Black has
achieved a good game . . . White
has already lost his opening
advantage'. The immobility of the
knight on e2 is particularly not
able.
d5
9
Gaining space at least; other
moves bring nothing:
(a) 9 e4 lLl xe4! 10 lLlxe4 fe 1 1
.i.xe4 ..th3 +
(b) 9 de de 1 0 -. xd8 l hd8 1 1
e4 lLl a6 = .
-.es
9
10
e4
Bolstering the centre rather
than ceding it by 10 de be I I lLl b5?
which would get nowhere after 1 1
. . . -.d7 and 1 2 . . . ..tb7.
-. hs
10
11
ef
Hoping to use e4 for his pieces
at a future date while also defusing
dangerous attacking ideas based
on . . . f5-f4.
11
..t xf5 (96)
12
f3
Bringing e4 under control with
tempo gain due to the fork threat
g3-g4. The dangerous tactical
thrust 12 c5 (based on the fact that
1 2 . . . de? 1 3 -.b3! is very strong
for White) can be satisfactorily

9fJ
w
countered by 1 2 . . . ..th3 as Bot

vinnik's following instructive vari
ations demonstrate :
(a) 1 3 de lt:lxc6 1 4 b3 + <ithS
15 "Wxb7 l:tacS with a promising
attack in the offing.
(b) 1 3 cd ..txd6 14 de lt:lxc6 1 5
llf xd6 : adS 1 6 c5 lt:lg4 1 7 f3
. hg2 1 S fg (or 1 S c4 + <ithS
1 9 fg h3 20 :1'2 ..tf3) 1S . . .
.:. xfl + 1 9 'itxg2 n. and White
is in trouble.
(c) 1 3 f3 ..txg2 14 'itxg2 de 1 5
b3 b5 1 6 de + n 1 7 c7 lt:la6
1 8 lt:lxb5 lt:ld5 and Black maintains
the balance.
(d) 1 3 b3 lt:lg4 1 4 de + 'ithS
1 5 cb ..txg2 1 6 h4 ..tf3! 1 7 ba
lafter 1 7 lt:ld5 ..t xh4 1 8 xf3 :t xf3
1 9 ba ..tdS 20 'itg2 :t xf2 +
Black gives perpetual check) 1 7 . . .
.haS 1 S lt:ld5 lt:lh2! and again
Black has sufficiently strong
cou nterplay. Wonderful stuff!
12
... g6
lt:lbd7
13
..te3
It is interesting to observe that
121
all the black pieces are more

actively placed than their white
counterparts.
14
cd
d2
15
cd
1 5 lt:l xd5 is better, with approxi
mately even chances after 1 5 . . .
lt:lxd5 1 6 cd, but not 1 6 xd5 +
..te6 1 7 xb7? d3 winning a
piece.
..td8
15
An excellent regrouping, but it
would have been preferable to
preface it with 1 5 . . . h5 keeping
White contained on the kingside.
16
:t act
M issing the chance to play 16
g4 ..td3 17 : fd I ..ta6 IS lt:lg3
with increased activity. 16 lt:lb5
lUeS gets nowhere.
16
..ta5
17
g4
Better late than never. Bronstein
points out that 1 7 :t fd 1 runs up
against 1 7 . . . lt:l b6 1S g4 lt:lc4! 1 9
gf xf5 and 20 . . . lt:lxe3.
17
..td3
18
:t fd 1
..tc4
c2
19
White understandably seeks
salvation in the ending, but even
so Black's pressure persists.
19
xc2
lt:lb6
:t xc2
20
21
:t cd2 ( 9 7 )
21
..ta6
M issing the favourable liqui
dation 2 1 . . . ..txe2 22 : xe2 ..txc3
1 12
23 ..txb6 ab 24 be g5, with a

winning position according to
Bronstein.
22
..tf2
lL:lc4?
In time-trouble, Black not only
forgoes the above line once again
but also misses 22 . . . e4! threaten.

ing 23 . . . e3 24 ..txe3 lL:lc4, thUs
obliging White to play 23 g5 ef 24
..txf3 lL:l fd 7 when Black is still
clearly in control.
23
l: c2
..tb6
ab
24
..txb6
l:el!
25
With this, White is out of the
woods.
lL:le3
25
26
l: d2
lL:lc4
lL:le3
l: c2
27
28
l: d2
lL:lc4
White claimed a draw by three
fold repetition.
13
Alekhine's Variation :
6
lt:J e4
.
Alekhine's Variation is reached

after the moves
1
d4
rs
g3
2
lt:lf6
3
.i.g2
e6
i.e7
4
lLlf3
5
0-0
0-0
c4
lt:le4 (98 )
6
thoroughly tested by him in other

games played that same year.
Black's main idea is to preserve
his option on d-pawn placement
as long as possible: 'It is generally
in the interests of the second player
to delay as long as logically poss
ible the advance of his d-pawn in
this opening, so as to keep the
choice between the two points,
d6 and d5' - Alekhine. Another
important point is that the early
advance of the KN vacates f6
for the KB which can thus exert
pressure along the h8-a I diag
onal.
The potential dangers of delay
ing the development of the queen
side make considerable demands
on the accuracy, sophistication
and resourcefulness of the second
player, but for those able to rise to
the challenge Alekhine's variation
provides a viable and intriguing
alternative to the established
classical lines.
98
w
This provocative move was

i n troduced by the great former
World
Alexander
Champion
Alekhine in his game against
Samisch at Dresden 1 936, and
1 23
1 24
A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . lCJe4
Capablanca-Alekhine
Nottingham 1 936
7
W b3
This move has its logic: White
pressurizes b7 and makes d 1 free
for the rook. Its main drawbacks
are that the queen is somewhat
exposed to harassment by Black's
minor pieces and the QB is
deprived of development in fian
chetto.
Other uncommon lines also fail
to upset Black's equanimity :
(a) 7 e 1 d5 8 f3 f6 9 cd ed
1 0 d3 b6 1 1 i.e3 i.d6 1 2 c3
c6 1 3 l: c 1 W'e7 14 W'd2 i.a6 1 5
i.f4 bd7 1 6 i. xd6 W' xd6 with
a fully satisfactory position for
Black; Flohr-Aiekhine, Pode
brady 1 936.
(b) 7 fd2 d5 8 cd (White is
concerned to cover the weak d
pawn) 8 . . ed 9 c3 c6 1 0 W'c2
i.f6 and Black has no problems
whatever; Incutto-Emma, Buenos
Aires Ch. 1 972.
(c) 7 W'c2 i.f6 (as is frequently
the case, Black may perfectly well
produce a Stonewall by 7 . . . dS)
8 c3 (the seminal encounter
Samisch-Aiekhine, Dresden 1 936,
went 8 l: d 1 d6 9 bd2 xd2 1 0
i.xd2 c6 1 1 i.c3 W'e8 1 2 dS
.txc3 1 3 W' xc3 d8 14 de xe6
1 5 d4 c5 with equality; 8 bd2
would transpose to the second
featured game) 8 . xc3 9 be (9
0
0 0
W' xc3 c5 would leave White's d4

more sensitive) 9 . . . d6 10 e4 c6
1 1 ef ef 1 2 l: e 1 a5 1 3 W'd3 cS
with a difficult and roughly equal
game where White's greater activ
ity is tempered by his structural
weakness;
Foltys-Aiekhine,
Prague 1 9430
7
i.f6
Alekhine observes that this
bishop placing '. . . is strong both
for attack or defence'.
l: d 1
8
W'e8
8 . . . We7 is an equally good
alternative.
c6!
9
c3
10
b5
A contentious sortie, disparaged
by Alekhine but lauded by others.
Although it may not bring White
any advantage, it can equally do
no harm to force Black to retreat
his bishop. In any case, it is cer
tainly better than the superficially
attractive 10 d5 which would
invite the troublesome 10 . . . aS.
10
..td8
11
W'c2
According to Capablanca, he
should have preferred 1 1 d5 a5
1 2 W'c2 c6 1 3 de and 14 d6 with
the better chances. However, that
would only be true if Black recap
tured with 1 3 . . . de, whereas 1 3
. . . be would produce an unclear
position charged with strategic
complexity.
d6 ( 99 )
11
Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4
12
d5
Alekhine's observations on this
advance are very instructive : 'In
the majority of cases the exchange
involved by this move is in White's
favour. It gives him control of the
square d5 . . . but in this particular
position White has already lost
too much time with his queen and
knight, thus permitting Black to
complete his development and to
take advantage of the open e-file'.
lLl b4
12
This manoeuvre occurs q uite
often; by attacking the enemy
queen Black gains the time for
optimum repositioning of the
knight.
lLla6
13
'it'b3
14
de
Naturally, White cannot allow
Black to advance . . . e6-e5 which
w ould instantly deaden the white
position while giving Black a
dangerous mobile pawn d uo and
a strong initiative on the king's
wing.
1 25
14
lLlac5
15
lLlxe6
'it'c2
16
lLlfd4
Simple development by 1 6 ..te3
a6 1 7 lLl bd4 was preferable.
16
lLlxd4
17
lLlxd4
..tf6
18
lLlb5
Causing even less inconvenience
than the first time; 1 8 ..te3 was
still indicated.
'it'e7
18
a6
19
..te3
20
lLld4
..td7
: ae8
21
: ac l
22
b4
b6
23
lLlf3?!
This knight's inability to keep
still ought to have cost White
dear. After the correct 23 'it'b3 the
chances would be approximately
even.
lLlc3!
23
The direct 23 . . . g5 would also
generate strong threats, but the
text move throws the enemy camp
into even greater disorder.
24
: d3 ( 1 00 ) f4?
Beginning an hallucinatory mis
calculation. The straightforward
24 . . . ..ta4 25 'it'd2 lLle4 26 'it'el
g5 would have left Black with a
big, perhaps decisive, positional
advantage according to Alekhine.
25
gf
..tf5
..txd3
26
'it'd2
c5?
27
ed
Black persists in the delusion
Alekhine's Variation:
126
. . 0,e4
.
/00
8
that he is winning two exchanges

when in fact he is losing three
minor pieces for two rooks. After
27 . . . lt:la4 28 d4 (or 28 lt:lg5)
White's generally active position
and Black's wayward knight
would give White more than
sufficient compensation for the
exchange, but Black would not be
entirely without hope. After the
move played, the life goes out
of Black's position and against
Capablanca there is no hope.
28
.lhc3
.ixc3
11H6
29
1t'xc3
Retaining the queens would also
be hopeless.
30
'tfxf6
gf
f5
31
lt:ld2
3 1 . . . cb 32 .id5 + rJ;g7 33
lt:le4 is no improvement.
a5
b5
32
33
lt:lfl
rJ;f7
rJ;g6
34
lt:lg3
35
.if3
: e7
36
rJ;ft
rJ;f6
37
.id2
rJ;g6
38
a4
Black resigned. There is nothing
to be done about the winning plan
given by Capablanca : White plays
.ic3 followed by h2-h4-h5;
Black must respond with h7-h6
and rJ;h7; then comes .if3-g2h3 forcing . . . : e7-f7 after which
Black can only oscillate his king
between h7 and g8 while White
posts his king on f3 and
manoeuvres the knight to d5; in
this position Black must protect
the b-pawn, but whichever way he
does it the check on f6 by the
knight is decisive.
Ree-Bronstein
Budapest 1 977
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3
.ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lt:le4
7
lt:lbd2 ( J OJ )
This immediate challenge to the

advanced cavalry is evidently a
critical continuation. Its drawback
is that the QB is blocked in and the
Alekhine"s Variation : 6 . . . 0.e4
necessity of solving this problem

li mits White's flexibility. Conse
quently, the continuation 7 b3
suggests itself, with practical
experience so far indicating that
Black must react carefully : 7 . . .
..H6 8 .tb2 (a game Cebalo
Pytel, Liege 1 980, saw White
obtain an edge after 8 "if c2 c5 9
.t b2 cd 1 0 lt:l xd4 lt:lc6 1 1 lt:lxc6
be 12 lt:ld2 d 5 1 3 .txf6 .C. xf6
14 e3; one wonders if Black was
correct to eschew the natural 1 3
. . . "ifxf6) 8 . . . b6 (both 8 . . . c5 and
8 . . . d5 come into consideration,
as does 8 . . . a5 which produced
a position teeming with strategic
complexity after 9 a3 lt:lc6 10 lt:le5
lt:le7 1 1 f3 lt:ld6 1 2 "ifd3 b6 1 3
lt:ld2 .tb7 i n Andersen-Bronstein,
M unich 01. 1 958) 9 lLl bd2 .t b 7
10 lt:le5 d6 1 1 lt:ld3 "ife7 ( l l . . . c5
1 2 e3 is worth testing) 1 2 "ifc2 lt:lc6
1 3 e3 lt:lxd2 1 4 "if xd2 lt:ld8 1 5 d5!
..bb2 1 6 "if xb2 e5 1 7 f4 e4 ( 1 7 . . .
lt:lfl is rather better) 1 8 lt:l b4 a5 1 9
lt:lc2 .ta6 2 0 lt:ld4 and Black's
position is cramped and passive;
G aprindashvili-Gurieli, match,
Tbilisi 1 980.
.tf6
7
Once again, Black may adopt a
Stonewall formation : 7 . . . d5 8 b3
l2Jc6 9 .tb2 .td7 1 0 lt:le5 ( 1 0 e3
is less committal, with a mutually
difficult game) 10 . . . lt:lxe5 I I de
c6 1 2 lt:lf3 "if b6 1 3 "ifd3 .C. ad8 with
fine prospects; Rovner-Hasin,
127
!-final USSR C h . 1 956.

8
"ifc2
Natural and logical, but the
forthright capture 8 lt:lxe4 poses a
much more radical challenge to
Black's opening. After 8 . . . fe 9
lt:le5 d5, experience has shown that
the immediate attempt to open
the centre by 1 0 f3 backfires on
account of 10 . . . c5 1 1 .te3 ( I I
lt:l g4 .te7! 1 2 fe de is good for
Black) I I . . . .txe5 1 2 de d4 1 3
i.e I lt:lc6 ( 1 3 . . . e3 straightaway
has to reckon with the conse
quences of 1 4 b4 which may never
theless go in Black's favour) 14 f4
e3 1 5 b3 "ifb6 and Black's extra
ordinary pawn chain severely
hampers
the
communication
between White's Hanks; Vagan
ian-Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 97 1 .
Subsequently 1 0 lt:lg4 was success
fully employed in Didishko
Yuferov, USSR 1 9 76, bringing an
edge after I 0 . . . .te7 I I .tf4 c6
1 2 "ifc2 lt:ld7 1 3 f3 ef 1 4 .txf3 "ife8
1 5 .C. ae l . It remains to be seen
whether the possible improve
ments I I . . . c5 or 1 3 . . . lt:lf6 will
sustain the viability of Black's set
up.
8
dS
It is essential for Black to main
tain a grip on e4; meekly exchang
ing the knight by 8 . . . lt:lxd2 9
.txd2 d6 l O .tc3 "ife8 1 1 e4 gives
White an advantageous llyin
Zhenevsky-type position (see
1 28
A lekhine's Variation : 6 . . liJe4

.
Chapter 1 4).
9
b3
M uch the most natural. Black
met 9 .l:t d 1 in traditional Stonewall
manner in the game Borisenko
Korchnoi, U SSR 1 965: 9 . . . c6 (9
. . . tt:lc6 is also playable) 1 0 tt:l fl
tt:ld7 1 1 b3 g5 1 2 .i.b2 We7 1 3 tt:le 1
W g7 1 4 f3 tt:ld6 with a mutually
difficult game.
9
c5 ( 1 02 )
This rapid sharpening o f the

central conflict is characteristic of
Alekhine's Variation. Black trusts
that his pieces will become
sufficiently active to balance any
loosening of his pawn structure.
The relatively restrained 9 . . .
tt:lc6 once again provides a service
able alternative as demonstrated
in Farago- Pytel, Bagneux 1 980,
which went 1 0 .i.b2 aS (typically
restraining the white queen's wing
and providing a possible later
white-square softener in . . . a5-a4)
1 1 e3 .i.d7 1 2 a3 We7 ( 1 2 . . . g5!?)
1 3 .1:t ac I and here Pytel rec-
ommends 1 3 . . . .l:t fc8!? preparing

to answer 1 4 tt:le5 with 1 4 . . . .i.e8
and then play on the queenside.
10
.i.b2
Acquiescing in the dissolution
of his own pawn centre in the hope
of saddling Black with structural
weakness. To this end White is
successful, but it turns out that the
secure foothold in the centre and
active piece play provide more
than enough compensation. Other
tries :
(a) I 0 e3 is recommended as best
by Bronstein which he feels should
conserve White's opening edge;
this has yet to be tested in practice.
(b) 1 0 .i.a3 cd 1 1 .i.xf8 W xf8
1 2 cd ed is a somewhat exotic
variation, again emanating from
Bronstein, which he evaluates as
slightly in Black's favour; this also
remains to be confirmed in prac
tice.
(c) 10 cd ed (not 10 . . . cd 1 1
.i.b2 tt:lc3 1 2 tt:lxd4!) 1 1 .i.b2 cd
1 2 tt:lxd4 W b6 1 3 tt:l2f3 tt:lc6 1 4
.l:t a d 1 .i. d 7 1 5 e 3 .l:t ac8 \lnd
although White has an iron grip
on d4 Black's pieces are extremely
active; Bukic-Barle, Yugoslav Ch.
1 976.
10
cd
11
.i.xd4
White fared no better with the
alternative capture in Fine-Alekh
ine, A VRO 1 936: I I tt:l xd4 tll c6
1 2 tt:l xe4 fe 1 3 .l:t a d l Wb6 1 4 tt:lxc6
Alekhine's Variation : 6 .
. .
liJe4
1 29
be 1 5 i. xf6 : xf6 and the upshot
wins.
of all the exchanges has been to
17
i.f7
18
lLld4
1 8 : ac t would invite the awk
ward pin 1 8 . . . ..th5.
18
lLJeS
19
lLJ xe4
This is q ueried by Bronstein but
his proposal of 1 9 'W'fl hardly
seems any better after 19 . . . lLlg4.
fe
19
b6!
20
'W'bS
A quiet move of high class
avoiding the overimpetuous 20 . . .
lLld3? 2 1 : xd3! ed 22 'W' xd 3 with
excellent prospects of holding the
draw, or 20 . . . ..te8? 2 1 'W' xa5
'W' xf2 + 22 h l ..th5 23 : fl
'W'xe3 24 : xf8 + :xf8 25 'W'xd5 +
and White turns the tables.
: act
lLJd3!
21
: c2
22
Now 22 : xd3? would come
unstuck against 22 . . . ..te8! 23
'W'a6 'tt' x f2 + etc.
: c8
22
: c5
23
: dd2
i.e8
24
'W'a6
i.d7!
25
h3
Black naturally wants nothing
to do with the premature 25 . . .
: xc2 26 : xc2 lLlxf2 27 'W' b7! but
instead strengthens the threat by
planning 26 . . . i.c8 27 'W'a7 : xc2
28 .:. xc2 lt'Jxf2 and the h-pawn is
en prise.
26
: xeS
White feels obliged to liquidate
give Black a powerful centre and

strong pressure on f2.
11
lLJc6
'W'xf6
12
i. xf6
13
cd
ed
14
a3
aS!
Preventing the expansion on the
queen's wing which would enable
the QN to find useful work via b3.
1S
'W'd3
..te6
: ad8( 1 03)
16
e3
The right rook. Although at

present the play is all in the centre
or on the queenside, the massive
presence of the knight on e4
ensures that the kingside will one
day come to life.
17
: fd 1
Bronstein supplies t h e following
v ariation to show that White can
not afford to ignore the growing
pressure on the d-file : 1 7 : fc 1 d4
1 8 ed lLlxd4 1 9 lLlxd4 : xd4 20
lLl xe4 fe 2 1 'W'e3 : d 3 22 'W' xe4
W' xf2 + 23 h 1 ..td5 and Black
Alekhine's Variation : 6 . . . liJe4
/30
to the ending which, however,

rapidly proves untenable. The
middlegame following 26 f4 .i.c8
27 -.a7 -.d6 28 .i.fl lLie l would
scarcely be more palatable.
be
26
.ll xf6
27
-. xf6
.ll b6
28
lLic2
.i.c6
29
f3
de
30
fe
a4
31
lLial
White's quietus.
32
b4
cb
33
ab
.ll xb4
.ll b2
34
lLic2
0-1
Huerta-Nogueiras
Santa-Clara 1 980
as tantamount to a refutation of
Black's play. The present game,
however, has been instrumental in
revising that assessment, and at
the time of writing the ball remains
quite clearly in White's court.
7
..tf6
-.c2
8
Not 8 lLid4 c5! 9 lLic2 lLid6! with
the initiative (Simonovic- Kostic,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 946), or 8 lLifd2
lLixd2 9 lLixd2 e5 tamely handing
Black an easy game ( Haugli-Gau
sel, Gausdal 1 990).
8
lLia6!
( 105 )
1 05
w
I d4 f5 2 g3 lLif6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 lLif3

i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 lLie4
7
d5 ( 104 )
104
8
This advance, which simul

taneously gains space and pre
vents Black shoring up the knight
with . . . d5, was long regarded
White's queen move prevents 8

. . . e5 because of the crafty retreat
9 lLie1 winning a pawn. In the
debut game with 7 d5, Reshevsky
Suesman, US Ch. 1 938, Black tried
8 . . . a5 but was overwhelmed
after 9 lLI bd2 lLic5 (9 . . . lLixd2 is
relatively better but White still
keeps the upper hand after 1 0
i.xd2 d6 1 1 e 4 fe 1 2 -.xe4 lLia6
1 3 ..te3; 10 lLixd2 also comes into
Alekhine"s Variation : 6 .
consideration) I 0 e4 fe I I .!Dxe4
.!Dxe4 1 2 Wxe4 ed 1 3 WxdS + h8
14 .!DgS We8 I S .i.f4 and White's
massive positional superiority is
virtually decisive.
The only real alternative to the
text move is 8 . . . d6 intending to
answer 9 .!De I .!DeS I 0 .!Dc3 eS
I I e4 by I I . . . f4 stirring up
complications, while I I b4 .!Dcd7
1 2 : b I would also not be without
counterchances.
The knight move has several
plus points : it continues Black's
development, it prepares tactical
harassment of the white queen,
and it reinforces Black's growing
pressure on the dark and queen
side squares weakened by the
advance of White's d-pawn.
9
.!Del
This is unsuitable here and leads
White into difficulties. As a poss
i ble improvement, Nogueiras
mentions 9 .!Dbd2, but Taimanov
is of the opinion that Black stands
well after 9 . . . ed I 0 cd We7 and
himself suggests that White should
investigate either 9 .i.e3 or 9 .!Dc3.
It is hard to believe that these
moves will bring White much joy,
particularly the positionally inept
k night move.
.!Db4
9
Causing mischief in the best
tradition of knights developed on
a6.
10
Wd1
. .
Ci:Je4
131
I f 1 0 W b3 o r W a4 then 1 0 . . . a S
will prime a further tempo-gaining
attack by . . . .!DeS.
a5
10
11
.!DeS
f3
12
.!Dc3
d6
13
c6!
l:t bl
Cleverly using tactical means to
pursue his positional ends.
e4
14
14 a3 founders on 14 . . . ed!
1 S ab ab when Black regains his
material with advantage.
14
ed
15
ed
cd
l:t e8
16
cd
Takes the newly opened file and
prevents the QB going to e3.
17
a3
Wb6! ( 106)
106
w
18
hl
18 ab ab 19 .!De2 .!Dd3 + 20
h i .!Df2 + 2 1 l:t xf2 Wxf2 would
be fatal.
18
Wa6!
Black continues to manoeuvre
with great verve. and exploits his
initiative to the utmost.
132
A lekhine's Variation: 6 . . . 0.e4
:a
19
1 9 a b a b would certainly not
ease White's defensive task.
lt::l bd3
19
lt::l xd3
20
lt::l xd3
21
.l: e2
..td7
.l: xe2
22
..tfl
lt::l xcl
23
-. xe2
.l: xcl?
24
A grave inaccuracy j ust when it
was beginning to look as if the
worst of his troubles were behind
him. By interposing 24 -. xa6 ba
25 .l: xc l White would have kept
his disadvantage to a minimum
after 25 . . . .1: b8 26 .l: c2 .1: b6.
-. xe2 \
24
.l: c8
25
..txe2
The combined pressure from the
c-file pin and the dominating
bishop pair leave White scant
hope of saving the game. With
time-trouble approaching Black
concludes the proceedings as
elegantly as he began them: 26
.l: c2 b5 27 ..td3 .l: c5 28 g2 g6
29 f4 f8 30 ..tf2 b4! 3 1 ab ab
32 lt::l a 2 ..ta4! 33 : e2 ..td4 + 34
f3? (a time-induced blunder, but
there could be no doubt about the
final outcome even after the best
play 34 g2 ..td l ! 35 .l:d2 b3!
36 lt::l b4 ..th5) 34 . . . ..td l
0- 1 .
14
Il yin-Zhenevsk y S y stem
the centre and on the kingside.
Experience suggests, however, that
by judiciously mixing prophylaxis
against . . . e6-e5 with preparation
for e2-e4 himself, White can
manipulate the strategical battle
in his favour. Even so, Black's
resources, tactical in particular,
are considerable, and are quite
capable of yielding the one or two
improvements in key areas which
would be sufficient to challenge
the current assessment.
We shall examine the material
under the broad divisions of 7 b3
(in conjunction with lt:lbd2) and 7
lt:lc3 when Black has the choice
between 7 . . . es and 7 . . . a5.
The Ilyin-Zhenevsky System is

established by Black's sixth move
in the sequence
1
d4
rs
lt:lf6
g3
2
3
e6
..tg2
lt:lf3
4
..te7
5
0-0
0-0
d6 ( 1 07)
6
c4
/ 07
Goldberg-Ilyin-Zhenevsky
Named after the Soviet master

who developed and refined it dur
ing the 1 920s and 30s, this is
Black's most direct attempt to
force through the advance of his
e-pawn. Left unhindered, the basic
plan of . . . eS, . . . ..td8 and . . .
e5 guarantees Black lively play in
Leningrad 1 932
7
b3
Although the fianchetto devel

opment is an important weapon
in countering Black's plans, it
requires vigorous support in order
1 33
/ 34
1 /yin-Zhenevsky System
to be effective. This game shows

just how easily an optically
attractive and apparently har
monious development can turn
out to be functionally inadequate.
Of White's other seventh moves,
only 7 b4 has any independent
significance. This attempt to pep
up the fianchetto needs to be coun
tered energetically lest White
obtain too much space too
quickly : 7 . . . e5! 8 de de 9 tt:Jxe5 (9
"ii' b 3 e4 would produce a complex
balanced middlegame) 9 . . . "ii' x d 1
1 0 .lhd 1 ..txb4 1 1 ..tb2 c6 1 2
tt:Jd2 tt:Ja6 1 3 tt:Jb3 ..te6 with
reciprocal chances; Djaja-Duck
stein, Gloggnitz 1 970.
"ii' e8 ( 1 08)
7
1 08
w
8
tt:J bd2
A refinement designed to
reserve the possibility of answer
ing 8 . . . ..td8 with 9 ..ta3 which
would paralyse Black's position at
a stroke. It suffers though from
the drawback of diminishing con
trol of d5, thus permitting Black's
QN to join the central battle

immediately
without
being
exposed to the push d4-d5 which
would downgrade the black pawn
structure.
Thus White's best eighth move
is the simple 8 ..tb2 ruling out 8
. . . tt:Jc6 on account of 9 d5. After
the correct response 8 . . . a5 (a
typical all-purpose waiting move)
White can transpose to variations
considered later by 9 tt:Jc3, or carry
on with 9 tt:J bd2 satisfied at having
gained a tempo over the column
game. The game Averbakh-Boles
lavsky, Zurich 1 953, provides a
good example of likely develop
ments in this latter case : (8 ..tb2
a5 9 tt:J bd2) 9 . . . tt:Jc6 10 a3 ..td8
1 1 tt:Je 1 e5 1 2 e3 ..td7 1 3 tt:Jc2 ed
14 tt:J xd4 ( 1 4 ed f4!) 14 . . . tt:Jxd4
1 5 ..txd4 ..tc6 ( Black has a very
comfortable position) 1 6 tt:Jf3 ..te4
1 7 tt:Je l b6 1 8 a4 tt:Jd7 1 9 tt:Jd3 g5!
(denying the knight access to d5
via f4) 20 tt:Jcl tt:Je5 (20 . . . ..tf6
was a better way to strengthen
Black's position) 2 1 _be4 fe 22
..txe5 "ii' x e5 23 "ii' d 5 + "ii' xd5 24 cd
(the exchanges have helped White
considerably, but accurate play
enables the position to be held
without much difficulty) 24 . . .
tt b8 25 tt d 1 b5 26 g4 ..tf6 27
tt a2 ..te5 28 g2 :n 29 ab
tt xb5 30 tt a4 ..tb2 31 tt xe4
!-! (in view of 3 1 . . . ..txc I 32
tt xc l tt xd5).
Jlyin-Zhener:sky System
8
ll:lc6
9
..tb2
..td8
This subtle retreat uncovers the
support from the queen which is
necessary to effect the strategically
vital . . . e6-e5 advance. Black is
able to get away with such 'unde
veloping' because of the generally
closed nature of the position and
the somewhat sluggish disposition
of White's forces.
10
-.c2
Alternatively, 1 0 ll:lel e5 12 e3
would parallel A verbakh- Boles
lavsky above, while 10 J:l. e l takes
away protection from the king and
also enables Black to utilize the
possibility ofthreatening a . . . ll:ld3
fork, e.g. 1 0 . . . e5 I I e4 f4! 1 2 d5
( 12 gf lLlh5 would be extremely
risky) 1 2 . . . ll:lb4 1 3 -. b 1 (thus
far a game Shatskes-Neishtadt,
Moscow 1 963) and now by 1 3 . . .
fg 1 4 hg c5 Black could secure the
centre in preparation for pursuing
his attacking ambitions on the
kingside. Note also that 10 ..ta3
..te7 instantly renews the threat
of . . . e5.
e5
10
11
de
White hopes to distract Black
from the kingside by opening up
the centre. Closing the centre
would be a positional error freeing
Black to concentrate on building
his attack, e.g. I I d5 ll:le7 1 2 J:l. ae l
h 5 1 3 e4 ll:lg6 and already the
1 35
storm clouds are gathering over

White's
king;
Lisitsin- Ilyin
Zhenevsky, USSR Ch. 1 93 1 .
de
11
e4
(
1
09
)
12
12
fe
This simple move brings Black
open lines galore and obvious
attacking chances for no more
than acceptance of an isolated
pawn. It is a measure of the inad
equacy of White's opening that
Black also has the option of sacri
ficing a pawn for a more complex
type of attack based on establish
ing a knight on f4 : 1 2 . . . f4!? l 3
gf lLlh5 1 4 f5 (an attempt to limit
the activity of the black pieces) 1 4
. . . lLlf4 1 5 h i ..tf6 1 6 a3 g6 1 7
fg -.xg6 1 8 J:l. g l h 8 1 9 ..th3
-.h5 20 ..txc8 J:l. axc8 21 l:l. g3 lLle2
22 l:l. g2 l:l. g8 23 l:l. xg8 + l:l. xg8 24
-.dl lLlf4 25 -.n : d8 26 : d l
ll:ld3 2 7 ..tc3 ..th4 2 8 lLlxh4 -. xh4
0- 1
Budo-Ilyin-Zhenevsky,
USSR Ch. 1 93 1 .. Although White's
defence was rather feeble, the
136
llyin-Zhenevsky System
impression remains that this type

of attack must be very difficult to
withstand in practice. Thus despite
the fact that Ilyin-Zhenevsky
played 1 2 . . . fe after 1 2 . . . f4, it
would probably be mistaken to
deduce from this that he consid
ered the capture superior. Both
approaches are valid and the cho
ice is largely a matter of personal
preference.
13
lt:lxe4
Wh5
14
lt:lxf6 +
White is understandably anxi
ous to remove the potentially very
dangerous K night but in so doing
he relieves Black of the problem
of his back rank bishops and
encourages occupation of the out
post on d4.
.ixf6
14
15
lt:ld2
.ih3
lt:le4
.:t ad8
16
17
f4?
A panicky attempt to force mat
ters which backfires in spectacular
fashion. The prudent 1 7 f3 would
have been much more appropri
ate.
lt:ld4
17
18
Wfl? ( 1 1 0)
Compounding the previous
error; the uninviting 1 8 ..ixd4 was
essential.
ef!
18
.lhf6
19
lt:lxf6 +
20
..id5 +
On 20 ..ixd4 comes 20 . . . fg 2 1
1 10
B
W xg3 : g6 etc.
: xd5!
20
Shattering White's dreams of 20
. . . h8? 2 1 .ixd4 fg 22 Wxf6!
21
cd
fg
We2!
22
W xd4
0- 1
A fittingly elegant coup de grace
with which to conclude this won
derfully instructive miniature from
the Master's own hand.
Flohr-Sokolsky
Semi-final USSR Ch. 1 953
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lt:lf6 3 .ig2 e6 4 lt:lf3
.ie7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6
7
lt:lc3
It is not surprising that this

active and natural development
poses Black far more serious prob
lems than the previous variation.
7
We8
The standard and most expl
ored continuation; other possi
bilities will be examined further
on.
Jlyin-Zhenevsky System
.l:lel
8
White's most direct procedure,
aiming to open the centre with e2e4 as quickly as possible.
8
li.Je4!?( 1 1 1 )
This obstructive occupation of

e4 is probably the most promising
of Black's less explored paths in
the classical Ilyin-Zhenevsky.
That such relatively fresh ideas
need to be investigated is plain
from the well established main
lines where Black is reduced to
trying to hang on for a draw. For
example, 8 . . . 'ifg6 9 e4 fe 10 li.Jxe4
li.Jxe4 1 1 .1:1 xe4 li.Jc6 ( 1 1 . . . 'if xe4
1 2 tt.Jh4 traps the queen) 1 2 'ife2
J.f6 1 3 J.d2 e5 1 4 de li.Jxe5 (in
the famous game Aronson-Tal,
USSR Ch. 1 957, the 'magician
from Riga' typically sought com
plications by 1 4 . . . de 1 5 J.c3
.US 1 6 li.Jh4 J.xh4 1 7 .l:l xh4 .l:l ae8
1 8 'ife3 h6 19 b4 'iff6 20 b5 d8,
and although he was rewarded
with the full point some moves
after 2 1 J.d5 + ? h8 22 f4? eP.
137
23 'ii' d 2 'ii' b6 + ! 24 J.d4 'ii' g6 25

'if xf4 h7 26 'if xc7 J. b 1 !, simply
21 c5 would have underlined Whi
te's positional supremacy on the
queen's wing in complete safety)
1 5 li.Jxe5 J.xe5 16 J.c3! J.xc3
1 7 be c6 1 8 .1:1 e 1 (another line is
1 8 .l:l e7 J.g4 19 f3 i.f5 20 .l:l xb7
i.d3 2 1 'iff2 J.xc4 22 .l:l xa7 .l:l xa7
23 'ifxa7 c5 with compensation
for the pawn because of White's
uncoordinated pieces; M atulovic
Minic, Yugoslav Ch. 1 959) 1 8 . . .
i.d7 ( 1 8 . . . J.f5 1 9 .l:l e7 ..td3 20
'if b2) 19 'ife3 .l:l fe8 20 'ifd4 i. f5
2 1 .l:l xe8 + .l:l xe8 22 .l:l xe8 + 'if xe8
23 h4! 'ifb8 24 c5 de 25 'if xc5 ..te6
26 a4 ..tf7 27 a5 a6 28 'ife7 and
White went on to squeeze out
a win in Bukic-Maric, K raljevo
1 967. Even with improvements,
such barren positions would hold
little attraction for warriors of the
Dutch.
9
'ifc2
The most natural method of
disputing control of e4. Alterna
tively:
(a) 9 li.Jd2 li.Jxc3 10 be e5 1 1 c5
is Konstantinopolsky's artificial
looking suggestion.
(b) 9 'ifd3 can hardly be better
than the column move, but in
Cvetkov- Hermann, Halle 1 954,
Black incurred a slight disadvan
tage after 9 . . . 'ii' g6 lO -'.f4 li.Jc6
1 1 .l:l ad l h8 (certainly not
essential) 1 2 tt.Jb5 ..td8 1 3 d2
1 38
J lyin-Zhenevsky System
tt:l xd2 1 4 'it' xd2 a6 1 5 tt:lc3 ..tf6 1 6

d 5 tt:ld8 1 7 de tt:l xe6 1 8 tt:ld5.
(c) 9 tt:l xe4 de is sharp and
critical: 10 tt:ld2 (in Martin- Piaz
zini, Argentina 1 954, the tactics
following I 0 tt:lg5 d5 1 1 cd ed 1 2
'it'b3 c6 1 3 tt:lxe4?! 'it' f7 1 4 ..tg5
..txg5 1 5 tt:lxg5 'it'xf2 + 16 h I
'it'xd4 went i n Black's favour; 1 3
f3 is better) I 0 . . . d5 I I f3 ..tf6!?
( I I . . . ef 12 ef tt:lc6 also merits
attention) 1 2 fe ..txd4 + 1 3 e3
..t b6 1 4 cd ( Bertok-Milic, Yugos
lav Team Ch. 1 958, went instead
14 ed ed 1 5 ..txd5 + h8 1 6 tt:lb3
c6 17 ..tg2 tt:ld7 18 tt:ld4 tt:le5 1 9
b 3 ..tg4 20 'it'd2 and now 20 . . .
l:t d8 would have been the best
way to augment Black's dang
erous compensation) 1 4 . . . ed 1 5
ed tt:ld7 (Black's active pieces and
the many weaknesses in White's
camp provide fine play in return
for the pawn) 16 tt:lc4 tt:le5 1 7
tt:lxb6 ..tg4 1 8 'it'd4 ab 1 9 ..td2
c5 20 de l:t d8 21 ..tc3 l:t xd4 22
ed 'it'f7 23 l:t xeS 'it' f2 + + White's
attempt to break Black's initiative
by giving up his queen has not
been
successful;
Bilek- M ilic,
Gotha 1 957.
9
'it'g6 ( 1 1 2 )
1 0 b3
White must decide how to
develop his QB, an important
question which will determine the
shape of the middlegame. The
fianchetto declares an intention to
concentrate on the centre in stark

contrast to the important alterna
tive 10 ..te3 which renounces
central play in favour of a
space-gaining pawn storm on the
queenside. The encounter Olafs
son-Korchnoi, Hastings 1 955/56,
provides an excellent illustration
of typical play for both sides :
( I 0 ..te3) tt:lxc3 (White is threaten
ing I I tt:l xe4 and 1 2 tt:ld2 with
advantage; note that I 0 tt:lxe4 fe
I I tt:ld2 loses instantly to I I . . . e3)
I I 'it'xc3 ..tf6 1 2 b4 ( 1 2 l:t ad l tt:lc6
1 3 'it'b3 e5! is fully acceptable for
Black) 1 2 . . . tt:lc6 (this appears
somewhat more precise than 1 2
. . . l:t e8 1 3 c5 e5 1 4 cd cd 1 5 de de
1 6 l:t ac l tt:lc6 1 7 b5 tt:ld8 1 8 l:t ed l
tt:lf7 as in Furman-Boleslavsky,
semi-final U SSR Ch. 1 954) 1 3 b5
tt:ld8 14 c5 tt:lf7 (White's spatial
advantage is clear, but the knight
on f7 helps both to cover potential
entry points along the d-file and
ensure that the central counter
punch . . . e6-e5 cannot be pre-
vented) 1 5 cd cd 1 6 lLld2 e5 1 7 de
de 1 8 .idS e4 1 9 ..id4 ..ixd4 20
'!W xd4 ..ie6! 2 1 ..i xe6 (it would be
risky to take the pawn, e.g. 2 1
_i xb7 ll ad8 22 'if c3 lLlg5 with . . .
f5-f4 to follow) 2 1 . . . 'if xe6 22
tt ec l l:t ad8 23 'ifc4 l:td5 24 lLlfl
ad6 25 'ifb3 l:t e8 (25 . . . lLlxb5??
26 l:t c5) 26 a4 f4 27 l:t d l l:t xd l 28
'1W xe6 + l:t xe6 29 l:t xd l g5 30 l:t d 5
h6 -! .
10
lLl xc3
Deflecting the queen away from
its observation of e4 and on to the
sensitive a 1 -h8 diagonal.
11
'if xc3
..i f6
12
..ia3
Black would be entirely satisfied
with 1 2 ..ib2 lLlc6 1 3 'ifd2 e5 1 4
d e de.
12
lLlc6
13
..id7
l:t adl
'ifcl
a5 ( 1 1 3 )
14
1 /3
w
15
d5
Having completed his develop
ment White proceeds with the cen
tral breakthrough only to find that
139
it accomplishes very little.

tLl b4
15
..ixe6
1 6 de
17
'ifd2
Against 1 7 lLld4 the retreat 1 7
. . . ..ic8 would be surprisingly
effective in renewing the threat on
the a-pawn.
f4!
17
l:t c 1?
18
This passive prevention of 1 8 . . .
lLlc2 merely loses a tempo as he
can find nothing better than to
accept the pawn sacrifice later on
anyway. The f-pawn is immune :
1 8 'ifxf4? ..ic3 or 1 8 gf'? ..ih3 1 9
lLlg5 ..ixg2 20 xg2 h6. After 1 8
..ixb4 a b 1 9 'ifxb4 Black could
choose between 19 . . . b6 20 a4 fg
2 1 hg h5 and 1 9 . . . fg 20 hg ll xa2
21 'ifxb7 'iff7, in both cases with
active pieces, the bishop pair, and
attacking chances in compens
ation for the pawn.
18
fg
h5!
19
hg
Single-mindedly pursuing the
storming of the white monarch's
citadel.
ab
20
..ixb4
h4!
21
'if xb4
22
lLl xh4
..i xh4
'if f6
23
gh
Not 23 . . . ..ih3? 24 'ifxb7, but
Sokolsky notes that both 23 . . .
l:t f4 24 l:t c3 and 23 . . . b6 24 'ifc3
came into consideration.
l:t xa2
l:t fl
24
/ 40
Jlyin-Zhenevsky System
25
'it' xb7?
Loses quickly, but the line given
by Sokolsky as relatively best is
also unpleasant: 25 c5 d5 26 'it' xb7
: xe2 27 ..txd5 'it'xh4 28 ..txe6 +
tt xe6 29 'it'd5 tt f6.
tt xe2
25
'it'd4!
26
'it' xc7
Black bludgeons away the last
line of defence in a mercifully swift
onslaught.
27
'it' e7
27 tt cd 1 would not deter Black:
27 . . . : fxfl! with mate i n three on
acceptance of the queen.
27
tt fxf2
28
hl
..th3!
Black throws in the kitchen sink
as well, dashing White's last hope
of 28 . . . tt xg2?? 29 'it'e8 + h7
30 'it'h5 + with perpetual check.
White resigns.
Csom-Szabolcsi
Hungarian Ch. 1 972

1 d4 f5 2 g3 lll f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lll f3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lllc3 'it'e8
b3 ( 1 1 4 )
8
This elastic continuation makes
for a sophisticated positional bat
tle where White hopes to outfox
his opponent by virtue of greater
flexibility of position.
White's remaining eighth moves
are mostly minor and of a more
rustic character:
(a) 8 e4?! fe (8 . . . lll xe4 is more
ambitious) 9 lll g5 d5 10 cd ed 1 1
'it'b3 c6 1 2 lll gxe4 h8 1 3 lll c5
b6 1 4 lll d 3 ..ta6 1 5 'it'd ! lll bd7
with excellent play for Black;
Purdy-Koshnitzky, match 1 9 34.
(b) 8 b4 'it'h5 (Taimanov rec
ommends 8 . . . e5 9 de de 1 0 lll d 5
..td8 I I ..tb2 e4 ) 9 'it'b3 h8
I 0 c5 lll c6 1 1 b5 lll d 8 1 2 ..ta3 lll f7
gives
a
mutually
difficult
posttwn; Vaganian-Andersson,
Groningen 1 968/69.
(c) 8 'it'd3 'it'h5 9 e4 e5 1 0 de de
1 1 lll d 5 lll c6 1 2 lll x e7 + lll xe7
1 3 lll xe5 fe 14 'it'c3 ..th3 with
attacking prospects on
the
light squares; Steiner-Duckstein,
Vienna 1 969.
(d) 8 ..tf4 c6 9 'it'b3 lll b d7 1 0
a 4 a 5 1 1 lll g 5 e 5 1 2 ..te3 W h5
with a very tense and complicated
position; Szily-Farago, H ung
arian Ch. 1 967.
(e) 8 ..tg5 lll e4 9 ..txe7 ll\xc3
1 0 be 'it' xe7 and White's pieces
show little dynamism to offset the
doubled pawns; Rossolimo-Pach=
Ilyin-Zhenevsky System
rnan, Beverwijk 1 950.

(f) 8 W'b3 h8 (8 . . . c6) 9 ..tf4
0 c6 1 0 lL!b5 ( 1 0 d5 lL!d8 1 1 de
t;Jxe6 would bring the black
k ni ghts to life) 1 0 . . . .td8 1 1 d5
8e7 1 2 de ..t xe6 1 3 lL!fd4 .td7
1 4 lt:lc3 lt:lc6 with very satisfactory
play for Black; Palfi-Schneider,
Budapest 1 952.
(g) 8 e3 has little independent
significance and may be met
according to taste.
(h) 8 lL!e 1 invites 8 . . . e5 which
Black may either play or prepare
as he wishes.
(i) 8 W'c2 is a much more
important continuation than the
foregoing; after Black's most
active reply, 8 . . . W'h5 (taking
advantage of the fact that White
can no longer profit from a
manoeuvre of the type e2-e3 and
tzlf3-e1 proposing the exchange
of queens) White has three main
possibilities:
( 1 ) 9 .tg5 h6! 10 .txf6 .txf6
I I e4 lL!c6 1 2 lL!b5 wn 1 3 : ad 1
(t hus far Olafsson-Kan, Nice OJ.
19 74) and now by advancing . . .
e6-e5, either immediately or after
1 3 . . a6 1 4 lt:lc3, Black would get
an equal game.
(2) 9 e4 e5 10 de de 1 1 lt:ld5
( both 1 1 lt:l xe5? fe and 1 1 .tg5
tt:lc6 1 2 : fe t f4! are good for
Black) 1 1 . . . lt:lxd5 1 2 ed ( 1 2 cd
..t d6 1 3 ef .t xf5 1 4 W'b3 lt:ld7 1 5
..t e3 h6 leaves Black with a solid
.
141
centre and t h e initiative on the

kingside; E. Richter-Skalicka,
1 934) 1 2 . . . ..tf6 1 3 c5 e4 1 4 lL! e 1
lL! d 7 1 5 .tf4 lt:l e 5 and Black's play
is the more purposeful; Kozlov
USSR
skaya-Kakabadze,
Women's Ch. 1 97 1 .
(3) 9 b 3 (let us note i n passing
Geller-Milic, USSR v Yugoslavia
1 957, which saw the whole board
in turmoil after 9 b4 lL!c6 1 0 b5
lL!dS 1 1 a4 lLln 1 2 ..ta3 g5 1 3
: ad l f4) 9 . . . a5 (secures b4 as a
blocking outpost in the event of
White's QB moving to the a3-f8
diagonal) 10 .t b2 ( 1 0 ..ta3 lL!a6
1 1 d5 e5 12 lL!xe5? lL!b4 + demon
strates the usefulness of . . . a5, and
10 e4 merely loosens the white
position after 10 . . . fe 1 1 lL!xe4 e5
1 2 de de 1 3 ..t b2 lL!c6 14 : ae l
..tg4!) 1 0 . . . lL!a6 1 1 : ae 1 c6 1 2
a3 .td8 1 3 e4 e 5 1 4 de de 1 5 lL!xe5
lL!c5 with compensation for the
pawn; Flohr-Kotov, USSR Ch.
1 949, went 16 b4? lL!cxe4 1 7 lL!xe4
fe 18 c5? .te6 1 9 .txe4 lt:l xe4 20
: xe4 .td5 and the white-squared
bishop dominated the board.
There is a forced repetition by
16 ..tf3 W' h 3 1 7 .tg2 etc., and
Taimanov has suggested that
White may play for the win by 1 7
ef .t xf5 1 8 W'd l .
a5
8
White's basic idea would be seen
in its clearest form after 8 . . .
.idS? 9 .ta3 paralysing Black's
1 42
1/yin-Zhenevsky System
position. Similarly, the standard 8

. . . -.h5 runs up against 9 ..ta3! x
raying the now undefended bishop
and preparing a favourable alter
ation of pawn structure: 9 . . . a5
(Black's best bet might be the
consistent 9 . . . g5 10 e3 .1:1. f7 1 1 c5
..td7 1 2 ll:ld2 -.xd l 1 3 .l:l. axd l d5
1 4 ll:lf3 .l:l. g7 1 5 ll:le5 ..te8; Kozma
Bhend, M unich 01. 1 958) 10 d5!
and the centre is opened up to
White's advantage as 10 . . . e5?
loses to I I ll:lxe5.
9
.l:l.e1
Once more maximizing flex
ibility : whilst introducing the
possibility of e2-e4 White is also
waiting to see how Black plays
before committing his QB.
The simpler 9 ..t b2 ll:la6 10 e3
c6 I I -.e2 ..td7 12 e4 fe 1 3 ll:lxe4
-.h5 would bring about a standard
type of position where White has
greater freedom but Black's set-up
is very resilient and not without
counterchances on both sides of
the board.
9
-.g6
By analogy with other positions
it could be that 9 . . . ll:le4 deserves
further investigation.
10
..ta3
As in the old 8 .1:1. e I main line
White could also continue 10 e4
fe 1 1 ll:lxe4 ll:l xe4 1 2 .1:1. xe4 ll:lc6
1 3 -.e2 although the extra pawn
moves would ease Black's task
somewhat.
10
ll:la6
This typical edge-development
serves several functions : generally
restraining White's queensi de
ambitions, protecting the c7 weak
spot, and last but by no means
least, avoiding central congesti on
(. . . ll:l bd7) or offering White a
target ( . . . ll:lc6, d4-d5!).
11
e3
Flashy manoeuvring by I I lLJe5
-.e8 1 2 ll:ld3 would allow 1 2 . . .
e5, while I I d5 would also be
ineffective because of I I . . . ll:le4!
The move played secures the cen
tral dark squares and can hope to
lull the opponent into the inatten
tive I I . . ..td7? 1 2 ll:le5!
11
ll:lb4
12
..tb2 ( 1 15 )
.
1 15
B
Having accomplished a good

deal behind the scenes on the a3f8 diagonal, the bishop retires with
honour in order to eject the tres
passer on b4.
c6
12
Construction of an elastic,
1/yin-Zhenetsky System
de fen sive pawn wall is an integral

pa rt of Black's strategy in such
positi ons, but here White can util
i ze the opposition of queen rooks
to make immediate and important
spatial gains and therefore the pre
li minary 1 2 . . . ll b8 would be
p referable.
tt:la6
13
a3
ab
14
b4
..td7
15
ab
Wh5
16
W b3
17
tt:ld2
White inconsistently opts to
prepare the central advance e3-e4
before completing his queenside
action; 1 7 b5 cb 1 8 cb tt:lc7 1 9 tt:ld2
( 1 9 d5 intending 1 9 . . . tt:lcxd5 20
.{)xd5 tt:l xd5 2 1 tt:ld4 'iW f7 22 ..txd5
ed 23 ll fc l is interesting) 19 . . .
d5 20 f3 was the correct way to
preserve White's strategic initiat
Ive.
17
d5!
The delayed transitiOn to a
Stonewall
formation
is
an
important weapon in Black's pos
itional armoury. Here, there is also
the concrete point of opening up
an attack on b4.
18
b5
ft)b4! ( 1 1 6)
Astute tactical exploitation of
White's lapse on the seventeenth;
it may well be that this possibility
had escaped White's attention.
19
tt:la2
Sensibly taking immediate steps
t o eliminate the frisky intruder.
1 43
1 16
w
Simply defending d3 by 1 9 ..tfl

looks suspiciously passive, whilst
the blunt 1 9 ..ta3?! would fall foul
of 1 9
ll xa3! 20 'ilt' xa3
lbg4 2 1 h 3 tt:lxf2! with a vicious
attack.
tt:lxa2
19
20
ll xa2
ll xa2
21
'ilt'xa2
tt:le4
2 1 . . . ..t b4 would have obliged
White to meekly hold the balance
by 22 .te l tt:le4 23 be be 24 Wc2.
fe
22
tt:lxe4
..txc6
23
be
24 c5
g5
Inaugurating an extremely
brash plan which was probably
unnecessary in view of the attract
ive alternative 24 . . . .idS intend
ing to activate the bishop on the
b8-h2 diagonal.
25
..tc3
g4
26
ll f6
ll b l
..tf8
27
WaS +
28
ll h6
Wc8
29
ll xb7
Naturally, White is only too
1 44
Ilyin-Zhenevsky System
happy to make the trivial material

investment required to clear the
path for his dangerous c-pawn.
..txb7
29
'ihh2
+
30
1t"xb7
lH6
31
fl
h5?
32
..-b8
The delicate equilibrium of
opposite flank play would have
achieved a fitting finale in the
variation 32 . . . ..- h6! 3 3 gl :n
34 c6 ..-f6 35 .tel ..-e7 36 ..ta5
..-f6 etc., but Black mistakenly
plays for a win, not appreciating
that the self-incarceration of his
queen paves the way for an
imaginative and amusing finish :
33 ..-e5! ..tg7 34 c6 : xf2 +
35 xf2 ..txe5 36 de h4 37 c7 h3
(37 . . . ..- xg3 + 38 fl h3 is no
improvement : 39 c8 ... + h7 40
..-d7 + h8 4 1 ..-e8 + g7 42
..-e7 + h8 43 ..-rs + h7 44
..-n + h8 45 ..-h5 + g7 46
..- g5 h7 47 ..t h 1 ) 38 c8 ... +
g7 39 ..-d7 + g6 40 'ii'xe6 +
h5 4 1 ..- f5 + h6 42 ..- f6 +
h5 43 ..- h4 + 1 -0.
Suetin-Rashkovsky
Sochi 1 9 73
1 d4 f5 2 g3 il:lf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 il:lf3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 il:lc3
7
il:le4!?( 1 1 7)
In view of Black's theoretical

difficulties in the accepted main
lines of the Ilyin-Zhenevsky,
this neglected byway certamly

deserves deeper investigation. The
similarities with Flohr-Sokolsky
above are evident and there are
also instructive and informative
parallels to be drawn with
Notaros-Maric below.
8
..-c2
Other moves are unlikely to
worry Black, e.g. 8 ..td2 ..tf6 9
..-c2 il:lxd2! or 8 il:l xe4 fe 9 il:ld2
d5 10 f3 ..tf6 with a supeno
version of the analogous variatio
of note 'c' to White's ninth move
p. 1 38.
il:lxc3
8
9
xc3
After 9 be Black could transpos
to an acceptable Alekhine vari
ation by 9 . . . ..tf6 1 0 e4 il:lc6 iJ1
unable to find anything better.
..tf6
9
10
b3
Two other moves have been
played :
(a) 1 0 b4 il:ld7 (clearly, alterna
tives await testing, amongst them
1 45
. . . c5) I I .i.b2 c5 (thus far

vonRashkovsky, USSR 1 974)
Sa
d
now
1 2 W b3 leaves White
an
so mewhat the better of it.
(b) lO .i.e3 c6 1 1 .C. ad l We7
12 b4 d8 1 3 Wb3 f7 14 c5
and now it should not prove too
difficult to improve on the loosen
ing 1 4 . . . g5?! 1 5 e1 j; of Hasin
Simagin, USSR Ch. 1 956.
10
c6
11
.i.b2 ( 1 1 8 )
positional superiority to decisive

proportions : 1 6 . . . .i.g5 1 7 f4 .i.f6
1 8 e4 fe 1 9 .C. xe4 ( Black's sickly e
pawn is completely pinned down)
1 9 . . . .i.d7 20 e5! (an amusing
echo) 20 . . . .i.xe5 (the ignomini
ous 20 . . . .i.c8 would leave Black
doubly shamed and still struggling
after 2 1 .i.f3 and 22 Ci::J g4) 2 1 de
d5 22 .C. ee I .C. fe8 23 .i.a3 .i.c6
24 .i.xe7 .C. xe7 25 cd (the rest is
basic technique and best passed
over in silence) 25 . . . .C. ad8 26 d6
.i.xg2 27 xg2 .C. ed7 28 W b4
Wf5 29 .C.d2 a5 30 W' xb7 cd 3 1
W'c6 d5 32 W'c2 W'fl 3 3 .C. c l d4 34
W'e4 d3? 35 .C. c3 h6 36 .:t cxd3
l hd3 3 7 .C. xd3 .C. xd3 38 W' xd3
W b7 + 39 h3 W h 1 40 W'c4 f7
41 f5 Wf3 42 W'xe6 + f8 43
Wc8 + e7 44 We6 + f8 45
h4 h5 46 Wc8 + 1 -0.
Obviously, Black should now

seize the opportunity to play the
thematic 1 1 . . . e5 after which his
position would appear to be com
pletely satisfactory. Instead, in our
game there occurred 1 1 . . . .i.d7
1 2 .C. ad 1 We8 1 3 Wd2 Wh5 1 4
.C. fe I (Suet i n recommends 1 4 e 3 j;
and notes that 1 4 d5 ed 1 5 cd e5
1 6 xe5 de 1 7 d6 c6 would be
unclear) 14 . . . Ci::J e 7 1 5 Ci::J e 5!? .i.c8?
( 1 5 . . . .i.g5 16 f4 de 1 7 de .i.c6
1 8 fg f4! was the way to make a
fight of it) 1 6 Ci::J d 3 after which
White instructively increased his
Notaros-Marie
10
Novi Sad 1 974

1 d4 f5 2 g3 f6 3 .i.g2 e6 4 f3
.i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 Ci::J c3
7
a5 ( 1 1 9 )
B y taking b4 under control

Black not only impedes queenside
expansion by White but also pro
vides protection for knight forays
to that square. The critical main
line feat ures a pawn sacrifice by
Black in return for active piece
play, but with the refinement of
White's defences has come the
1 46
1 19
w
growing suspicion that the com

pensation is insufficient. Unless an
improvement can be found this
attractive variation seems doomed
to oblivion.
8
tt e1
Other continuations
make
fewer
demands
on
Black's
resources, e.g. :
(a) 8 'ilfc2 tL!c6 9 e4 (Smyslov
Filipowicz, Bath 1 973, went 9 a3
e5 10 d5 tL!b8 I I tLlg5?! c6 1 2 tt d l
and now 1 2 . . . tLl g4 would have
been more active than the 1 2 . . .
tL!e8 played) 9 . . . fe 1 0 tLlxe4 e5 I I
de de 1 2 tL!fg5 (Tomovic- Maric,
Yugoslav Ch. 1 956, saw 1 2 tt d l
'ilfe8 1 3 tL!xf6 + ..txf6 1 4 ..te3
Wh5 1 5 ..tc5 tt e8 with Black's
kingside chances at least as
important as White's central
pressure) 1 2 . . . tLlxe4 1 3 tLlxe4
tbd4 14 W d 1 ..te6 1 5 b3 ( Pytei
Bednarsky, Poland 1 97 1 ) and now
Pytel gives 1 5 . . . a4 1 6 ..t b2 ab
1 7 ab tt ax 1 + .
(b) 8 b3 tL!a6 9 ..tb2 c6 1 0 Wc2
..td7 1 1 : ae 1 ( 1 1 e4 permits the

interesting tactical counter 1 1 . . .
tL!b4 1 2 We2 fe 1 3 tLlxe4 tLl xe4 1 4
W xe4 e5! with the strong threat of
1 5 . . . ..tf5) 1 1 . . . b5 1 2 tL!d2 be
1 3 tLlxc4 tt c8 1 4 e3 ..te8 1 5 We2
and White's prospects are perhaps
slightly the more positive in this
mutually difficult middlegame;
Vilela-Rantanen, Tallinn 1 979.
This particularly rich example will
repay careful examination. It
seems likely that a search for Black
alternatives and improvements
will be rewarded.
8
tL!e4
Once again we see the knight
blockade
White's
attempted
advantageous opening of the
centre.
9
tLlxe4
This capture changes the
character of the game completely.
White's basic aim is to induce
. . . d6-d5 and then uncover the
resulting weakness by means of
f2-f3. The drawback is the danger
of the white pieces remaining
bottled up while Black's gain in
mobility.
The best move, 9 Wc2, is exam
ined in the following game.
9
fe
d5
10
tL!d2
11
f3
ef
12
tLlxf3
The d-pawn is too weak to alloW
1 2 ef ..tf6 etc.
12
c S ( 1 20)
Faced with this challenge to his

centre White has no time to settle
to quiet exploitation and occu
pation of e5.
ed
13
cd
14
.te3
c4!
This pawn has a bright future.
1S
lUeS
lt:lc6
be
16
lt:l xc6
17
b3?!
Priming
the
long-awaited
advance e2-e4 by 1 7 .tf2 was the
correct continuation; neglecting
this positional imperative, White
falls inexorably into passivity.
17
c3! ( 1 21 )
I!/
147
18
"it" c 1
Hastening t o pluck t h e irritating
thorn from his flesh, but it turns
out not to be so easy to accompl
ish. 1 8 "it"c2 .tf5 would be worse.
18
"it" b6
19
.l:t d l
.tg4
20
.tn
20 "it" xc3 .t b4 2 1 "it"d3?? .tf5
would be tragi-comic curtains, and
2 1 "it"c2 .l:t ae8 likely as not the
beginning of the final act with the
black pieces in full cry.
20
"it"b4
21
.l:t d3
c2!
22
"it"xc2
The white position has turned
septic and a radical solution must
be attempted.
22
.tfS
23
"it" xc6
.t xd3
h8
24
"it" xdS +
2S
ed
.tf6
.l:t ae8
.l:tc1
26
With this it becomes clear that
despite a temporary rallying the
case is terminal. The final throes :
27 .l:t c4 "it"e1 28 .tf2 "it"d2 29 "it"g2
.tg5 30 d5 .1:[ xf2 0- 1 .
Kavalek- Bednarsky
Skopje 0/. 1 972
1 d4 rs 2 g3 lt:lf6 4 .tg2 e6 4 lt:lf3
.te7 S 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d6 7 lt:lc3 aS
8 .l:te1 lt:le4
9
"it"c2 ( 1 22 )
Natural and clearly strongest.
148
llyin-Zhener:sky System
11
fe
e5
12
W xe4
With the strong threat of 1 3 . . .
..tf5.
13
g4!
Boldly controlling f5, albeit at
the cost of some weakening of the
kingside.
ed ( 1 23)
13
9
lLlc6
There are three other possi
bilities:
(a) 9 . . . d5 produces a rather
poor Stonewall.
(b) 9 . . . lLlxc3 10 "it' xc3 ( 1 0 be
also gives chances of advantage)
I 0 . . . lLlc6 I I e4! d5 ( I I . . fe 1 2
: xe4 ..tf6 1 3 ..tf4 is relatively
best but cedes White an unde
niable positional superiority) 1 2
ed! ..tb4 1 3 Wd3 ed 1 4 ..tg5 lLle7
1 5 c5! ..txe 1 1 6 : xe l : e8 1 7
We2 f8 1 8 lLle5 with massive
compensation for the exchange;
Shashin-Korzin,
semi-final
Moscow Ch. 1 966.
(c) 9 . . . lLla6!? will transpose to
the column in all likelihood.
10
lLlxe4
lLlb4
11
"it'b1
Consistency is essential; in
Raicevic- Maric, Bar 1 977, White
wavered with I I Wc3?! which
encouraged the energetic response
I I . . . fe 1 2 lLld2 d5 1 3 f3 c5 1 4 e3
e5! + .
.
1 4 a3
M uch stronger than the recap
ture with the knight which lets
Black drum up counterplay, e.g.
14 lLlxd4 ..t h4! 1 5 : fl (the game
Reshevsky-Larsen, Santa Monica
1 966, was drawn by repetition
after 1 5 ..te3 : e8 1 6 Wf4 : rs 1 7
We4 etc.) 1 5 . . . : e8 1 6 Wf3 : rs
1 7 Wh3 h5 1 8 lLl f5 hg 1 9 W'xh4
..txf5 20 ..tg5 Wc8 (or 20 . . . We8
2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 ..td5 + ..te6 23
"it'xg4 Havsky-Karasev, Lenin
grad Ch. 1 968) 2 1 a3 lLlc6 22 : fd 1
lLle5 with approximately even
chances; Podzielny- Bellin, Win
terthur 1 974.
lLla6
14
Larsen has mentioned the

moves 14 . . . lL!c6 1 5 lL!xd4 ..th4.
15
W xd4
1 5 lL!xd4 is inferior on account
of 1 5 . . . lL!c5 1 6 Wd5 + h8 1 7
h 3 c6 1 8 W h5 ..tf6 when 1 9 ..te3
fails to 19 . . . g6 20 Wh6 ..tg7.
15
lL!c5
16
h3
lL!b3 ( 1 24 )
Other attempts appear equally

ineffective:
(a) 1 6 . . . ..tf6 17 W d 1
(b) 1 6 . . . ..te6 1 7 W c 3 ..tf6 1 8
Wc2 a 4 1 9 ..te3 lL! b 3 2 0 .l:l. ad l
tLla5 2 1 lL!d2 and Black has very
1 49
little to show for the pawn; Kava

lek-Jamieson, Buenos Aires 01.
1 978.
17
h8
Wd5 +
.l:l. b1
18
a4
..td2
19
Stopping . . . .l:l.a5 and . . . h 5
softening up White's kingside.
..tf6
19
20
..tb4
'iWe8
21
e4
Black's temporary initiative has
ground to a halt and with normal
play White will simply consolidate
his extra pawn and win. This
explains the last desperate fling
by Black before bowing to the
inevitable: 21 . . . ..te6 22 W xb7 c5
23 e5! de 24 ..tc3 .1:1. b8 25 We4
'iWf7 26 g5 ..te7 27 'iW xe5 .1:1. b6 28
.1:1. bd I ..td8 29 .1:1. d6 ..txc4 30 g6!
hg 3 1 .1:1. xd8! .1:1. xd8 32 lL!g5 W f8
33 'iWe4 1 -0. It must be admitted
that it is very difficult to imagine
this variation being rehabilitated.
15
Classical Stonewall
Black's central spatial parity, stra
tegic initiative on the kingside,
and adequate queenside prospects
provide sufficient compensation
for ceding White permanent con
trol of e5. This is the nub of the
ongoing debate on the viability of
the Stonewall formation.
'Stonewall' is the descriptive term

for the craggy pawn configuration
. . . f5, . . . e6, . . . d5, . . . c6. This
creation of a rock-solid pawn barr
ier is essentially aimed at stabiliz
ing the centre in order to free
Black's hands for play on the
flanks. Early interpretations of the
Stonewall often saw this in its
crudest form : Black would leave
the centre and queenside to take
care of themselves and throw
everything into a va ba11que
offensive on the kingside. This
would typically be built up by
occupying the e4 outpost with the
KN, shifting the heavy pieces to
the h-file by means of . . . -.d8-e8h 5 and . . . l:H8-f6-h6 and further
mobilizing the infantry by . . . g5.
Such an attack can be very dang
erous, and constantly figures in
Black's plans, although nowadays
it is likely to be deferred, if not
abandoned, in favour of central
and queenside action. This
modern interpretation posits that
Non-fianchetto Stonewall
Practice has shown that these lines
tend to favour White, particularly
when his QB is developed outside
the pawn chain, thus Black should
probably prefer the more flexible
type of development seen in
Chapter 1 0. This variation has
produced many horror stories for
Black, but none more instructive
than the following game which is
the classic warning of the inevi
table consequences of chronic
dark-square debility.
Schlechter-John
Barmen 1 905
d4
! 50
f5
Classical Stonewall
c4
2
e6
3
lLic3
d5
As indicated above, 3 . . . lLif6 is
more promising.
4
.H4
There are also two rather dubi
ous gambit continuations :
(a) 4 g4?! fg 5 e4 de 6 'Wxg4 (or
6 lLixe4 ..t b4 + 7 lLic3 lLif6) 6
. . . lLif6 7 'W g3 lLic6 + Shainswit
Breitman, Tbilisi 1 9 6 1 .
(b) 4 cd e d 5 e 4 d e (5 . . . fe?? 6
'Wh5 + ) 6 ..tc4 lLif6 7 lLige2 ..td6
8 ..tf4 lLic6 9 0-0 and although
White has some compensation for
the pawn it should not be too
difficult for Black to improve on
M oscow
Shersher-Natapov,
1 955, which saw 9 . . . ..txf4 I 0
lLixf4 lLixd4 I I lLicd5 lLixd5 1 2
lLixd5 lLie6 1 3 'Wb3 and Black is
in danger due to his inability to
complete his development and get
his king into safety.
4
c6
5
e3
6
lLif3 ( 1 25 )
125
8
151
There is little point for White

in deviating from this promising
natural development, e.g. 6 ..td3
..te7 7 lLige2 0-0 8 h3 (White's
plan is to castle queenside and
open lines on the other wing by
g2-g4) 8 . . . lLie4 9 'Wc2 lLid7 I 0
f3 lLixc3 I I lLixc3 lLif6 1 2 0-0-0
de (a typical procedure; Black
abandons the centre in order to
gain time for a pawn storm on the
flank) 1 3 ..t xc4 b5 14 ..td3 a5
with a double-edged position;
Polugayevsky- Ufimtsev, Moscow
1 955.
6
..td6
A fundamental positional error.
In this position Black gets nothing
whatsoever in return for the
further weakening of his already
sensitive dark squares in contrast
to the fianchetto variations where
White either has to accept a weak
ening of his king's position (from
the capture sequence . . . ..txf4,
gxf4), or loss of time (the Botvinnik
..ta3 variations).
It is, however, difficult for Black
to equalize completely even after
the correct 6 . . . ..te7, e.g. 7 ..td3
0-0 8 0-0 (8 lLie5 helps Black sim
plify : 8 . . . lLibd7 9 0-0 lLixe5 t o
..txe5 lLig4! I I ..tf4 g 5 1 2 ..tg3
..td6 1 3 ..txd6 'Wxd6 14 g3 e5
and Black's opening worries are
past: Timman-P. Nikolic, Niksic
1 983) 8 . . . lLie4 . (that White can
gain an advantage by force against
/52
Classical Stonewall
this natural move is strong testi

mony to the inadequacy of this
particular Stonewall pos1t10n;
note that the equally normal 8
. . . lLl bd7 is also unplayable on
account of 9 cd forcing 9 . . . cd
because of the undefended f-pawn)
9 ..txe4! de (9 . . fe lO lZ'le5 lLld7
1 1 f3 ef 1 2 .:t xf3 ..tf6 1 3 e4 is
no improvement) lO lZ'le5 lZ'ld7
(a pawn hunt of the bishop fails
tactically: lO . . . g5 1 1 ..tg3 f4? 1 2
ef gf 1 3 Wg4 + etc. o r l O . . . h8
1 1 f3! g5 12 ..tg3 f4 1 3 fe! fg 14
Wh5! and Black cannot survive)
I I f3 lZ'lxe5 1 2 ..txe5 ef 1 3 W xf3
with complete control.
7
..td3
Wc7
8
g3!
The question of how the black
squared bishops disappear is a
vitally important one; if Black can
be forced to capture on f4 then
White will recapture with the e
pawn and enjoy pressure against
e6 and total domination of e5.
8
0-0
9
0-0
lZ'le4
10
Wb3
Threatening to take twice on e4
after I I cd ed ( I I . . . cd?? 1 2 lLl b5).
h8
10
..txf4
11
.:t acl
Understandable given the vari
ous threats generated by the vis
a-vis of rook and queen on the
c-file, but really anything is prefer
able to the self-imposed lifelong
.
structural inferiority brought on

by this move.
12
ef
Wf7
13
lZ'le5
We7
14
..txe4!
Excellent technique; White
liquidates his doubled pawns and
enhances his prospects of obtain
ing a good knight versus bad
bishop situation.
14
fe
15
f3
ef
16
.:.eel
Wc7
17
Wa3!
The dark square domination
begins; normal development by 1 7
. . . lLld7 i s ruled out because of 1 8
We7.
17
g8
lZ'la6
18
.:. xf3
19
b3
Wd8
20 c5
White has no objections to par
rying the indirect threat to his d
pawn by this space-gaining
advance.
lZ'lc7
20
21
..td7
Wb2
Wc2
We7
22
.:. en
23
.:r. ae8
24 g4
..tc8
.:t h3
25
Forcing a further, and ulti
mately fatal, weakening of the
black squares.
25
g6
26
b4
H olding the centre in a vice-like
Classical Stonewall
grip White is free to expand on

the flanks in preparation for a
breakthrough on either side
according to the disposition of
Black's defences.
26
Wi'f6
l:t e7
27
l:t hf3
a6
28
a4
29
tt:Jd1
A regrouping to cover f5 and
facilitate immediate occupation of
the weak black squares to be fixed
by g5.
29
l:t g7
30
tt:Je3
Wi'e7
31
g5
i.d7
32
tt:J3g4
.te8
Black's wretched position is
utterly passive, like some helpless
creature encoiled by a python and
gradually being squeezed to death.
33
lLl h6 +
liP h8
Wi'd8
34
Wi'e2
35
tt:J5g4
i.d7
tt:Je8
36
Wi'e5
Wi'c7
37
l:t h3
37 . . . We7 38 W b8 would be an
embarrassing way for the queen
side to drop off.
38
tt:Jf6 ( 1 26 )
The culmination o f the first part
of White's strategy, with his pieces
optimally entrenched on the weak
b lack squares.
Wi' xe5
38
Forced; 38 . . . Wi'd8 39 tt:Jxh7
wo uld win immediately.
J:re7
39
fe
153
126
B
tt:Jxf6
40
l:t hf3
Again, there is no option
because of the threat to penetrate
to the eighth with mate.
l:t xf6
l:t xf6
41
42
ef
l:t e8
43
tt:Jf7 +
g8
44
tt:Je5
Having acquired a protected
passed pawn on the sixth as a
result of his middlegame pressure,
Schlechter appropriately begins
the final phase with a thematic
re-occupation of e5.
44
l:t d8
45
g2
f8
46
h4
.te8
47
f3
i.f7
48
f4
Of course, the king is brought
up as far as possible before com
mencing the final breakthrough.
e8
48
l:t b l
49
f8
Black's helplessness is truly
pitiful.
50
b5
/54
Classical Stonewall
Black resigns. After 50 . . . ab 5 1

a b ..te8 52 be ..txc6 5 3 lt:lxc6 be
54 e5 White would finally reap
material rewards for his masterly
display of sustained strategic
domination.
Karpov-Spassky
Candidates match 1 974

d5
d4
The variations with e3 fre

quently arise via transposition.
c4
2
Although
White
generally
develops the QN on c3, as in our
featured games and variations, this
is not obligatory as the following
examples show: 2 lt:lf3 c6 3 c4 e6
4 e3 f5 and now :
(a) 5 ..te2 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3
fle7 8 ..tb2 lt:lbd7 9 lt:le5 0-0
1 0 lt:ld2 g5?! (a risky attempt to
complicate; I 0 . . lt:le4 I I f3 lt:lxd2
12 flxd2 lt:lxe5 1 3 de ..tc5 is the
solid way to equalize) I I f4 gf?!
( I I . . flg7 or I I . . . lt:le4 immedi
ately are both better) 1 2 ef lt:le4 1 3
lt:lxe4 fe?! ( 1 3 . . . de was relatively
best) 14 fld2 lt:lf6 1 5 c5 ..tc7 1 6
b4 ..t d 7 1 7 a 4 lt:le8 ( 1 7 . . . h8)
18 l h3! and White stands better
over the entire board; Speelman
Seirawan, candidates match, Saint
John 1 988.
(b) 5 ..td3 lt:lf6 6 0-0 ..td6 7 b3
fle7 8 a4 0-0 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10
lt:lxa3 lt:le4 ( I 0 . . . ..td7!? intending
.
the transfer to h5 via e8 comes

strongly into consideration) 1 1
lt:lc2 lt:ld7 1 2 fie I a5 1 3 lt:ld2 b6
1 4 f3 lt:lxd2 1 5 flxd2 lt:lf6 1 6 l:Hd t
..ta6 with just a tiny edge to
White;
Korchnoi-Yusupov,
Montpellier 1 985.
2
e6
lt:lc3
c6
3
4
f5 ( 1 27 )
e3
1 27
w
f4
5
The so-called Double Stonewall
in which White creates a fixed,
balanced pawn structure in the
centre and on the kingside in the
hope of being able to make some
thing of his more active c-pawn
placement. Practice indicates that
Black should have little difficulty
in holding the balance.
Nor do other moves hold out
much hope for White of achieving
an opening advantage, e.g. :
(a) 5 lt:lh3 lt:lf6 6 ..td2 ..td6 7
flc2 0-0 8 0-0-0 fle7 9 f3 de 10 e4
fe I I lt:l xe4?! ( I I fe is better but
also entirely satisfactory for Black
Classical Stonewall
after I I . . . e5 1 2 ..txc4 + h8)
I I . . b5 1 2 lt:lxd6 W xd6 1 3 f4 lt:la6
14 ..te2 c5 and White is in trouble;
Bronstein-Botvinnik, World Ch.
1 95 1 .
(b) 5 i.d3 lt:lf6 6 Wc2 ..te7 7
8ge2 0-0 8 f3 h8 9 i.d2 lt:la6
I 0 a3 lt:lc7 with approximately
equal chances as Black is well
placed to initiate a pawn storm on
the queenside in case White castles
there; Burger-Saidy, US Ch.
I 965/66.
(c) 5 lt:lf3 lt:lf6 (the more experim
ental 5 . . . ..td6 6 i.d3 Wf6 also
comes into consideration as
shown by Osnos-Novotelnov,
Leningrad 1 956, which went 7 b3
tt:Je7 8 ..t b2 lt:ld7 9 Wc2 0-0 1 0 h3
and now, instead of 10 . . . h8?!
as played, I 0 . . . de I I i.xc4 b5
with . . . e5 to follow would have
whipped up promising counter
play) 6 ..td3 i.d6 (more active
than 6 . . . ..te7 while 6 . . . lt:le4?!
invites the sharp retort 7 g4!) 7 b3
0-0 8 i.b2 lt:le4 9 Wc2 lt:ld7 1 0 00-0 ( 1 0 0-0 l:lf6 would be very
risky; cf. Maroczy-Tartakower, p.
99) 1 0 . . . a5 I I h3 with a sharp
battle of opposite wing attacks to
come. The game Zak-Holmov,
semi-final USSR Ch. 1 9 5 1 , showed
that White cannot save a tempo
by I I g4?! because of I I . . . tt:Jxc3!
I 2 i.xc3 fg 1 3 lt:le5 ( 1 3 ..txh7 +
h8 1 4 lt:le5 lt:lxe5 1 5 de i.a3 +
1 6 b I Wh4 and the f-pawn falls)
.
/ 55
1 3 . . . lt:lxe5 1 4 de i.a3 + 1 5 b I
W h4 with advantage.
lt:lf6
5
..te7
6
tLlf3
0-0
i.e2
7
tLle4
0-0
8
Wc2
9
9 tLle5 achieved nothing in
Tukmakov- Lerner, Cheliabinsk
1 980 : 9 . . . tLld7 10 tLlxe4 fe ( to
. . . de?! 1 1 g4 brings unpleasant
tension to Black's centre) 1 1 tLl xd7
i.xd7 1 2 ..id2 a5 1 3 l:l. c l b6
14 ..tg4 i.d6 Black's queenside
counterplay is under way.
lt:ld7
9
10
b3 ( 1 28 )
1 28
B
tLlxc3?!
10
It certainly looks misguided to
exchange the stallion on e4 for the
colt on c3. Both 10 . . . l:l. f6 1 1 a4
b6 (Botvinnik) and 10 . . . tLldf6 1 1
tLle5 ..td7 intending . . . i.e8-h5
( Kotov) are acceptable.
It
W xc3
lt:lf6
12
tLle5
..td7
13
a4
tLle4?!
156
Classical Stonewall
Seeking the exchange of light

squared bishops by 1 3 . . . ..te8 1 4
..ta3 ..th5 i s a more sensible
procedure.
..tf6?!
14
1t'd3
Yet another inaccuracy which
allows White to improve his pos
ition; 14 . . . ..te8 was still prefer
able.
.l:l. e8
15
..ta3
16
..th5!
Compelling Black to weaken his
pawns.
g6
16
..txe5
17
..tf3
Given that Black's game is
rapidly going downhill anyway,
this otherwise crazy concession of
the black squares at least has the
merit of gaining the necessary
tempo to prevent White opening
lines by g2-g4.
h5
18
de!
19
..txe4!
Correctly eliminating Black's
only good piece. Despite the
rema1mng bishops being of
opposite colour, W hite retains a
vast positional advantage due to
the superior activity of his position
in general and his bishop m
particular.
19
fe
Opening a file for the white
rooks would be suicidal.
20
1t'd2
fi
21
a5
.l:l. h8
To try and discourage line-
opening on the kingside.

.l:l. h7
22
..td6
..tc8
23
1t'b4
The
qualitative
difference
between the bishops could not be
greater.
24
.l:l. a2
g8
25
h3
a6
25 . . . h4 would enable White to
open the g-file with deadly effect.
..td7!
26
g3
This offer of a pawn in order to
bring the QR into play is Black's
best chance.
..te8
27
1t'xb7
.l:l. aa7
28
1t'b4
.l:l. ab7
29
.l:l. g2
.l:l. bfi
30
1t'c3
31
..tc5
g5
Spassky is doing his best to
complicate matters.
32
..tb6?
An inaccuracy which keeps
Black's hopes alive. This was the
right moment to play 32 cd! oblig
ing Black to recapture with the c
pawn (32 . . . ed? 33 f5! is crushing)
thus opening a route of invasion
for White's heavy pieces.
32
1t'd7
33
cd
ed
Now Black has f5 under control
and this means that White must
permit the opening of the h-file in
order to make progress.
34
g4
hg
35 hg
gf
36 ef
.l:l. h4
Classical Stonewall
37
f5
38
e6
39
'W'g3?
In mutual time-trouble Karpov
chooses the wrong method of par
rying the threatened . . . .l:t h l +
and . . . 'W'f4 + . 39 'W'e3! makes a
crucial check on g5 available,
e.g. 39 . . . .l:t h l + 40 f2 .l:t l h3
4 1 'W'g5 + .l:t g7 42 'W'd8! and
Black's resources are practically
exhausted.
.l:t h l +
39
'W'b4!
40
f2
'W'e3
41
Here the game was adjourned
and analysis established that
White should accept the repetition
41 . . . .l:t l h3 42 .l:t g 3 .l:t h2 + 43
.::!. g2 .1:t 2h3 44 .1:t g3 etc. since 42
'1ifg5 + .l:t g7 43 'W'd8 cS! gives a
counterattack at least sufficient to
draw. Thus, draw agreed.
Standard Stonewall
The standard Stonewall begins
from the following diagrammed
position :
1
d4
f5
2
lLlf6
g3
3
.i.g2
e6
4
lLlD
.i.e7
0-0
0-0
5
c4
6
d5
We shall examine White's three
major schemes of development in
t urn:
Petrosian's 7 lLlbd2
!57
Botvinnik's 7 b3
the Classical 7 lLlc3
Petrosian's 7 lLl bd2

Benko-Guimard
Buenos Aires 1 960

I d4 f5 2 c4 e6 3 g3 lLlf6 4 .i.g2
.i.e7 5 lLlf3 0-0 6 0-0 d5
7
lLlbd2 ( 1 29)
129
B
Introduced and popularized by

Petrosian, this flexible variation
generally aims to cover eS by
means of the manoeuvre lLlf3-e5d 3 and lLld2-f3. The knight on d3
is also handy for supporting a
space-gaining march by the b
pawn. Black needs to find the right
balance between disputing control
of eS (by . . . lLl b8-d7, . . . lLlf6e4-d6-f7, and . . . .i.e7-f6) and
pursuing the traditional kingside
attack.
Other seventh moves to note :
(a) 7 cd (this premature release
of the central tension improves
Black's pawn structure and
/ 58
Classical Stonewall
increases the range of his QB) 7

. . . ed 8 lt:\c3 c6 9 l:. b l 'ii' e 8 (9 . . .
a5!?) 1 0 f4 tt:l bd7 I I b4 a6 1 2
'ii' b3 o;t>h8 1 3 tt:la4 lt:\e4 1 4 tt:lc5
f6 15 'ii' c2 l:. g8 16 tt:lxd7 xd7
1 7 tt:le5 g5 18 c I tt:ld6 and Black
has successfully impeded White's
minority attack whilst preparing
a kingside attack; PanovChis
tiakov, M oscow Ch. 1 938.
(b) 7 'ii' c2 (a very flexible move
which will normally transpose to
the major lines) 7 . . . c6 (the exper
imental 7 . . . lt:\c6 failed to impress
in Lengyei Spassky, Moscow
1 97 1 , which saw 8 a3 a5 9 b3 d7
1 0 lt:\c3 e8 I I cd lt:\xd5 12 b2
h5 1 3 tt:la4 'ii' e 8 14 tt:lc5 xc5
1 5 de 'ilt'e7 and now, instead of 1 6
tt:le5? f4! + , 1 6 e4! would have
highlighted the deficiencies of
Black's position) 8 f4 'ii' e 8 (8 . . .
d7 9 tt:lbd2 e8 also comes
into consideration) 9 lt:\bd2 'ii' h5
10 l:. ae l tt:lbd7 I I tt:lg5?! (an inter
esting idea which does not quite
come off) I I . . . tt:lg4 1 2 h4 'ii' g6 1 3
D e5! with massive complications
not unfavourable to Black; Soko
lov- Berkovich, USSR 1 973.
7
c6
7 . . . b6 intending to contest the
centre by . . . c7c5 is a totally
different plan providing much
food for thought, e.g. 8 b3 c5 9
b2 (the black pawns would be
full of dynamism after 9 cd ed 1 0
d e be) 9 . . . b7 1 0 l:. c l lt:\c6!
(improving on the seminal . . . b6

game, Petrosian Tolush, USSR
Ch. 1 958, where Black went wrong
with 10 . . . lt:\a6? I I tt:le5 'ii' e 8 1 2
e3 l:. d8 1 3 'ii' e2 d6 1 4 tt:ldD tt:le4
1 5 tt:ld3 'ii' h5 1 6 l:. fe l ) I I e3
l:. c8 12 'ii' e2 tt:le4 1 3 l:. fd l 'ii' e 8 1 4
d e ( 1 4 cd e d 1 5 tt:le5 has been
recommended as a better try) 1 4
. . . b e 1 5 tt:le5 tt:lxe5 1 6 xe5 f6
1 7 lt:\0 'ilt'e7 1 8 'ii' b2 l:. fd8 with
healthy
prospects;
GrefeR.
Byrne, US Ch. 1 977.
7 . . . lt:\c6 has a better chance of
being playable here than after 7
'ii' c2 (see above), e.g. 8 e3 tt:le4 9
a3 a5! and having prevented the
opponent's queenside expansion
Black can turn to continuing his
development by . . . d7e8.
8
'ii' c2
'ii' e8 ( 1 30)
I n addition to this normal move,

and 8 . . . b6 which was played
in the next game, Black has a
noteworthy alternative in the
multi-purpose prophylactic 8 . . .
a5!?, e.g. 9 tt:le5 lt:\ bd7 1 0 tt:l d 3
Classical Stonewall
(after 1 0 lLldf3 Black exchanged

his way to equality in Malich
Mariotti, Skopje 01. 1 972, by I 0
. . . lLlxe5 I I lLlxe5 ttJd 7 1 2 .tf4
lLl xe5 1 3 .t xe5 .td6) I 0 . . . lLle4
I I lLID ttJd6 1 2 b3 lLifl! 1 3 .t b2
1ie8 1 4 e3 h8 1 5 lLlfe5 lLl fxe5 1 6
de b6 1 7 0 ttJc5 1 8 lLlf4 .ta6
with a fine game; Spassov-Bellin,
Albena 1 979.
9
lLle5
ttJbd7
It would be a grave error to
ignore the centre and stake every
thing on a kingside assault, as this
first of two instructive examples
clearly shows : 9 . . . 1ih5 (prema
ture) 10 ttJdO lLle4 1 1 ttJd3 g5 1 2
tZ:lfe5 ttJd 7 1 3 0 ttJd6 1 4 b3 .l:l.f6
1 5 h3 lLlfl 1 6 .t b2 lLldxe5 1 7 de
.tt h6 1 8 .tt ae l f4 1 9 g4 Wg6 20
Wc3 .tt h4 2 1 e3 and by opening
the centre White exposes the lack
of coordination in the black camp;
Doda -Scheparets, Prague 1 9 56.
10
ttJdJ
It is generally in the interests of
the player with more space to
a void exchanges.
h8
10
The second warning against
intemperate attack ing : 1 0 . . . g5 I I
lLIO lLle4 ( Flohr's I I . . . h6 is better)
1 2 b4! Wh5 1 3 .tt b l .tt f6 14 b5 f4
( 1 4 . . . .tt h6 1 5 h3 brings Black to
a grinding halt) 1 5 gf g4 16 lLlfe5
J: h6 1 7 h3 gh 1 8 .tO h2 + 1 9
h I Wh3 20 .te3 and again
Black's initiative has dried up leav-
/59
ing White in complete control;

Szabo-Duck stein, Bamberg 1 968.
10 . . . lLle4 is quite acceptable,
however, with a likely return to
the column after I I ttJO h8.
It
lLif3
It is nearly always mistaken for
Black to exchange his Stonewall
knight for no reason as happened
in Petrosian-Cardoso, Leipzig 01.
1 960 : I I b3 lLlxd2?! 1 2 .txd2
h8 1 3 e3 .td6 1 4 cd ed 15 .t b4
and with the exchange of black
squared bishops White's queen
side minority attack is ready to
roll with effect.
It
lLle4
ttJd6
12
.tt bt
1 2 . . . a5 first comes into con
sideration.
13
c5
lLlf7
14
.tf4
Bringing the bishop into play
clearly has its attractions but the
disadvantage is that Black can
attack it with gain of tempo. 1 4
b4 would be consistent.
14
.tf6
15
1ic3
Keeping control of e5.
15
g5
16
ii..c7 ( 1 3 1 )
A fertile and mutually difficult
middlegame awaits the players.
The present game unfolded as fol
lows : 1 6 . . . J: g8 ( 1 6 . . . We7 has
its points) 1 7 ltJ5 ttJdxe5 1 8 de
i.g7 19 Wd4? (this innocent cen-
1 60
Classical Sto11ewal/
/31
tralization turns out to be a serious

error which Black punishes with
great energy and accuracy) 19 . . .
'W'd7 20 .ta5 (20 .td6? lL!xd6
2 1 cd 'W' xd6!, exploiting White's
undefended queen, shows the tac
tical inadequacy of his nineteenth
move) 20 . . . b6! 21 cb ab 22 .txb6
.ta6! (capturing on a2 would be
premature because of : a l seizing
the file, but now that becomes an
auxiliary threat to the undermin
ing of the e-pawn) 23 lL!c5 'W'c8 24
f4 gf 25 gf .txe2 26 : f2 .th5
(the QB arrives at its traditional
outpost via an unconventional
route) 27 a4 (this passed pawn is
now White's main asset) 27 . . .
lL!d6! 28 a5 lL!e4 29 lLlxe4 fe 30 b4
.th6 3 1 f5'? (inappropriate aggres
sion based on a flawed conception;
31 'it> h I was necessary) 3 1 . . .
ef 32 e6 + .tg7 33 : xf5 .tf3!
(avoiding the messy complications
of capturing the queen in favour
of placing yet another threat over
White's head) 34 :g5 'W' xe6 35
.txf3 .tf6! 36 : xg8 + : xg8 37

..tg2 : xg2 + ! 38 'it>xg2 'W'g4 +
39 h i 'W'f3 + 40 g l 'W'g4 + 4 1
h i 'W'f3 + 4 2 g l .txd4 + 43
.txd4 + g8 (the smoke has
cleared leaving Black's queen
dominating the insecure pieces) 44
: e l 'W'd3 45 .tc5 f7 46 : a t
e 3 47 a 6 'W'g6 + ! 4 8 h i 'W'f6
0- 1 . Material loss is unavoidable,
e.g. 49 : c l e2 (threatening 50 . . .
fl + ) 50 g2 .. g5 + .
Portisch- Radulov
Budapest 1 969
1 d4 f5 2 g3 lLlf6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 lL!fJ
.te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4
6
c6 ( 132)
An important nuance of move

order which is mainly aimed at
avoiding the trade of black
squared bishops which occurs in
Botvinnik's Variation (6 . . . d5) 7
b3 etc. The deferring of structural
commitment is a generally useful
concept which arises quite regu
larly in the Dutch (cf. Alekhine's
Classical Stonewall
Variation), and this particular
application is probably the most
successful. Attempts to take
advantage of this move order have
so far been unconvincing:
(a) 7 c5 b6 8 cb ab (8 . . . "thb6
also comes into consideration) 9
tt:lc3 .tb7!? intending . . . c5 and
protecting c6 in readiness to eject
a tt:le5 by . . . d6 looks promising
for Black, and 9 . . . tt:la6 aiming to
place the QN on d5 via b4 or c7
also seems playable.
(b) 7 b3 a5! 8 .ta3 (Black is
very active on the queenside after
8 c5 b6 9 cb Wxb6) 8 . . . .txa3! 9
tt:lxa3 We7 1 0 W c l ( 1 0 c5?! b6! is
good for Black) 10 . . . d6 (the
advantage of restraining the d
pawn now becomes apparent) 1 1
W b2 tt:lbd7 1 2 tt:lc2 e5 and Black's
opening has been a complete suc
cess : Kelecevic-Bellin, Eerbeek
1 978.
(c) After 7 tt:lc3 or 7 tt:lbd2 Black
may transpose to the Stonewall
having circumvented Botvinnik's
simplification.
7
Wc2
This keeps the strategic guessing
game going.
b6
7
This is playable, but 7 . . . a5
is a more resolute continuation,
intending to answer 8 b3 by 8 . . .
tt:la6 with all sorts of intriguing
possibilities to come.
8
tt:lbd2
d5
161
Of course, e2-e4 must b e pre

vented.
9
tt:le5
.tb7
10
tt:ld3
The knight is extremely well
placed here, looking at both flanks
as well as the centre.
10
tt:lbd7
Declaring himself ready to
answer 1 1 tt:lf4 with 1 1 . . . n.
but 10 . . . .td6 may be preferable.
11
b4
Beginning an energetic pawn
advance on the queenside which
gains useful space and leads to the
opening of a file for the rooks.
11
: e8
This seems superfluous and
should be replaced by an immedi
ate 1 1 . . . .td6.
.td6
12
a4
tt:le4
13
ttl f3
be
14
c5
A voidance of this exchange
would entail living with the const
ant threat of b4-b5.
15
be
.tc7
16
.tf4
The now familiar formula of
removing Black's best bishop.
16
.txf4
17
gf!
This effectively puts the centre
under lock and key while White
furthers his queenside initiative.
Wc7
17
18
tt:lfeS
tt:lef6
Not relishing being left with a
162
Classical Stonewall
bad bishop against a good knight

as was on the cards.
19
lUb1
aS?!
It is understandable that Black
should want to activate his bishop
but this preparatory move ( 1 9 . . .
..ta6? 20 tt:Jb4) seriously weakens
b6 and also presents the a-pawn
as a target. The best chance was
19 . . . tt eb8 hoping to exchange
some pieces and hang on.
20
tt:Jxd7!
Portisch instantly sets about
removing the defenders of b6.
20
tt:Jxd7
21
tt:Jxe5
tt:Je5
22
fe
n ebS
..ta6
23
n b6
24
n ab1
n b7
25
-.d2!
Forcing
Black
into
an
unpleasant exchange.
25
n xb6
26
cb!
The introduction to a decisive
infiltration manoeuvre.
-.b7
26
27
-.xa5
..tb5
27 . . . ..txe2? would permit an
amusing conclusion : 28 -.xa8 + !
-. xa8 29 b7 -. b8 30 ..tfl ! followed
by the victorious march of the a
pawn.
28
-. b4
n xa4
28 . . . ..txa4 would lose in more
predictable fashion : 29 n a t ..ib5
30 n xa8 + -.xa8 31 -.e7! -.ai +
32 ..tfl h6 33 b7 ..txe2 34 -.xe6 +
h7 35 -.xf5 + g6 36 -.n + and

mate next move.
29
-.d6
f7 ( 1 33 )
1 33
w
30 e4!!
A stunning and very instructive
breakthrough. Despite the paucity
of pieces, Portisch mounts a fero
cious and irresistible assault on
the black king.
30
-. xb6
30 . . . fe? 3 1 ..th3 is instantly
decisive, but the most beautiful
variation would have occurred
after 30 . . . de, viz. 3 1 d5! ed 32
..th3! g6 33 -.f6 + g8 34 ..txf5!!
gf 35 hi ..te2 36 ngt + ..tg4
37 -.xf5 etc. The sweep of the
attack from the queen's flank
through the centre to the kingside
is remarkable. After the text move
everything is simple and the game
ended : 3 1 ef -.a7 (3 1 . . . ef 32 e6 +
f6 33 e7 + f7 34 -.d8 )
32 -.xe6 + ..t;>f8 33 ..t xd5 cd 34
n xb5 n xd4 35 -.c8 + 1 -0.
Classical Stonewall
Botvinnik's 7 b3
Kasparoy-T. Petrosian
Niksic / 983
1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 J.g2 lLlf6 4 lLlf3
J.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5
7
b3 ( /34 )
Given Black's general dark

square debility in the Stonewall,
the primary positional logic
behind the intention to exchange
black squared bishops by J.a3 is
clearly impeccable. Interestingly
though, it turns out that the
immediate implementation of this
strategically
desirable
goal
detracts from its strength (another
vindication of Nimzowitsch's dic
tum that the threat is stronger
than the execution). There is no
great mystery here : basically, it is
simply that the early exchange
simplifies Black's defensive task
both conceptually, by removing
st rategic complexity, and phys
ically, by giving him more space
to work in.
Nowadays. therefore, Botvin-
1 63
nik's variation is rarely seen in its

pure form, and 7 b3 tends to be
employed for its general usefulness
and concomitant flexibility, wait
ing to see Black's reaction, and
usually transposing elsewhere as
it is a common denominator in
both lL! bd2 and lL!c3 variations.
7
c6
With this standard response
Black declares himself unafraid of
the threatened exchange. Alterna
tively, two contrasting methods of
avoiding simplification and pro
moting strategic complexity are
also available :
(a) 7 . . . lL!c6 8 J. b2 (Black can
answer 8 J.a3 by either 8 . . .
J.xa3 9 lL!xa3 'fke7 or 8 . . . lL!b4!?,
but it could be that the as yet
untested 8 . . . lLle4 is even more
attractive) 8 . . . J.d7 (8 . . . lLle4 is
also worth attention, e.g. 9 lLlc3
J.f6 I 0 e3 lLle7 I I 'fke2 J.d7 1 2
lL!e5 J.xe5 1 3 de J.c6 1 4 l:l. fd I
and although White has an edge
earlier improvements for Black
could well exist; A. Mikhalch
ishin- Eingorn, USSR Ch. 1 985)
9 lL!c3 (Schmidt-Spassky, Buenos
Aires 01. 1 978, went 9 lL!e5 J.e8
10 lL!d3 J.f7 I I lL!d2 a5 with a
rich middlegame in prospect) 9 . . .
J.e8 1 0 lL!g5 J.f7 I I e3 'fkd7 1 2
lLlxf7 l:l. xf7 1 3 lL!a4 b6 1 4 l:l. c l
J.f8!?
(White
obtained
an
unpleasant central spatial super
iority after 1 4 . . . lL!d8 1 5 lL!c3 : f8
1 64
Classical Stonewall
1 6 f3 lLlf7 1 7 e4 in Polugayevsky
Spassky, Tilburg 1 983) 1 5 'it'c2
lLlb4 1 6 'it' b l lLle4 1 7 l:tfd l .l: d8
1 8 a3 lLlc6 1 9 lLlc3 lLlf6! 20 b4 lLle7
21 'it' a2 g5 22 a4 ..th6 and both
sides have their chances and prob
lems in a difficult opposite wing
attack situation; Law-Bellin,
Commonwealth Ch. 1 985.
(b) 7 . . . b6 8 ..tb2 ..tb7 9 lLl bd2
c5 (contesting the centre with
pawns rather than pieces as in the
previous example) 10 e3 lLlc6 l l
'it'e2 .l: c8 1 2 : a c t lLle4 1 3 .l: fd 1
'it'e8 (White will not find it easy
to gain an advantage from this
complex position; his pieces are
generally well placed but he lacks
a strong central outpost corres
ponding to Black's on e4) 1 4 de
be 1 5 lLle5 lLlxe5 16 ..txe5 ..tf6
1 7 lLlf3 'it'e7 1 8 'it' b2 .l: fd8 1 9 cd?!
.l: xd5 20 ..txf6 'it' xf6 2 1 'it' xf6 gf
22 : xd5 ..txd5 and Black stands
somewhat better as his pieces are
working in concert on the
important queen's flank; Grefe
Hyrne, U S Ch. 1 977 (also cited
on p. 1 58; note the transpositional
possibility).
'it'c2
8
Not surprisingly, Kasparov
rejects simplification in favour of
maintaining maximum flexibility.
It should be noted that the white
queen is usually best placed on c2
from where, amongst other things,
it keeps an eye on Black's f-pawn
in the hope of being able to induce

a favourable cd cd exchange.
Black has tried various methods
of reacting to 8 ..ta3 but the
following two lines are probably
the most satisfactory :
(a) 8 . . . lLlbd7 9 'it' c 1 (or 9 ..txe7
'it' xe7 10 'it'c2 lLle4 1 1 lLlc3 lLld6
1 2 lLla4 b6 1 3 cd cd 14 .l: fc l ..t a6
1 5 'it' b2 : fc8 1 6 e3 'it'd8 = ; an
example of when the opening of
the c-file does not favour White
as Black can easily contest its
control; Gligoric- Mariotti, Nice
01. 1 974) 9 . . . lLle4 10 lLlbd2 (or
10 ..txe7 'it' xe7 l l e3 b6 = ) 10 . . .
..txa3 1 1 'it'xa3 b6 1 2 .l: ac l ..tb7
1 3 .l: fd l 'it' f6 14 cd ed and Black's
strong central position and poten
tial kingside play balance out
White's
queenside
pressure;
Szabo-Botvinnik, Budapest 1 952.
(b) 8 . . . ..td7 (very solid) 9 'it' c l
( 9 ..t xe7 'it' xe7 1 0 'it' d 3 J.. e 8 l l
lLl bd2 lLle4 l 2 lLle5 lLlxd2 1 3 'it'xd2
lLld7 1 4 lLld3 ..th5 1 5 'it'e3 : ae8
gave Black very sound equality in
Antunac-Smederevac, Wijk aan
Zee II 1 970; similarly, 10 lLlbd2
here would gain no advantage
after 10 . . . ..te8 l l lLle5 lLl bd7 1 2
lLldf3 .l: d8) 9 . . . J.. e 8 1 0 lLlg5 (in
Buenos
Uhlmann-Guimard,
Aires 1 960, Black obtained the
advantage by tactical means,
beginning with a typical double
attack on White's d- and c-pawns,
after 10 lLlc3 lLl bd7 l l lLlg5 ..tf7
Classical Stonewall
1 2 f3? ..txa3 1 3 1ha3 de! 14 be
ltJb6 1 5 -.c5 ttJfd7 1 6 ltJxf7 -.f6!;
simplification by 10 ..txe7 -.xe7
1 1 -. a3 -.xa3 1 2 ltJxa3 as in
Salov-Short, Barcelona World
Cup 1 989, gives White nothing
after 1 2 . . . ..th5 1 3 l: fe 1 ltJbd7)
10 . . . ..tn 1 1 ttJd2 ttJ bd7 1 2 ttJxf7
l: xf7 1 3 ..txe7 -. xe7 1 4 -.c3 (thus
far Reshevsky-Gligoric, match
1 952) and now 1 4 . . . l: e8! to prime
a possible advance of the e-pawn,
gives Black completely satisfac
tory play.
It should be noted that 8 . . .
..txa3 9 ltJxa3 does not leave the
knight offside as might appear to
be the case at first sight, but in
fact helps it on the way to control
ling e5 via ltJa3-c2-e 1 -d3.
8
..td7 ( 1 35 )
This move, b y which the Q B

prepares to thread its way through
to an active position on the king
side, was awarded an exclamation
mark by Kasparov in his notes to
the game.
1 65
9 ..tb2
The consistent continuation.
Alternatives look unlikely to
unsettle Black :
(a) 9 ltJe5 ..te8 1 0 ..ta3 ..txa3
1 1 ltJxa3 ltJbd7 1 2 ltJd3 g5 with a
typically balanced position; Geru
sel-Troger, West Germany 1 968.
(b) 9 ..ta3 ..txa3 10 ltJxa3 -.e7
1 1 -. b2 ..te8 1 2 ltJe5 ( 1 2 ltJc2 ..th5
would oblige White to counter the
x-raying of e2) 1 2 . . . g5 1 3 ltJc2
(P. Nikolic notes 1 3 f3 ltJ bd7 1 4
e4 fe 1 5 ltJxd7 ..txd7 1 6 fe ltJxe4
as slightly in Black's favour) 1 3
. . . ltJbd7 1 4 cd (this i s a further
example of simplification easing
Black's defensive task) 14 . . . ed
1 5 f4 (revealing White's idea - to
solidify the centre and eventually
proceed with a minority attack
on the queenside) 1 5 . . . ltJg4!?
(preferring to maintain the tension
rather than clarify matters by a
line like 1 5 . . . gf 1 6 gf ltJe4) 1 6
-. c3 a 5 1 7 : ae I (threatening 1 8
ltJxg4 fg 1 9 e4) 1 7 . . . gf 1 8 gf ltJdf6
1 9 -.h3 h8 20 -. h4 ltJg8 2 1 -.g3
(exchanging queens would give
Black somewhat the better ending)
21 . . . ltJ8f6 (21 . . . h5 would be
one way of playing on) 22 -. h4 (it
would be an error to weaken the
kingside : 22 h3? ltJh5 23 -.o ltJh6
and Black can follow up with . . .
l: g8 and . . . -.h4) 22 . . . ltJ g8
23 -.g3 ltJ8f6 t-!, T. Petrosian-P.
Nikolic, Plovdiv 1 983.
1 66
Classical Stonewall
..te8
9
lZ:Ie5
10
The right moment to resposi
tion the knight in order to better
control the dark squares and pre
pare to threaten e4. I 0 cd cd would
be a mistake not only on account
of the exposed position of the
queen on the c-file but also
because Black would be able to
profit from the option of develop
ing his QN on c6.
10
lZ:Ibd7
lZ:Id3
II
Of course, White has no interest
in exchanging this valuable piece.
II
..th5 ( 1 36)
1 36
w
Completing the manoeuvre

begun on the eighth move.
12
lZ:Ic3
A natural enough move but
Kasparov subsequently thought
he ought to have preferred 12 lZ:If4
..tl7 1 3 lZ:Id2 intending lZ:If3, and
claimed a slight edge for White.
12
..td6
A typical move to increase the
bishop's scope and improve the

cover of e5.
13
f3
This has the positive effect of
making e4 a constant threat but
markedly deadens the K B.
..tg6!
13
Not only directly discouraging
e2-e4 but also lining up 1 4 l:t ae 1 ?!
f4! + .
14
e3
l:t c8
15
'We2
The queen is understandably
uncomfortable with the double x
raying of c2.
l:t e8
15
And this opposition of rook and
queen serves to prevent 1 6 e4
which would run into problems
after 16 . . . e5! The immediate
1 5 . . . e5?! would be premature,
allowing White to settle down to
quiet exploitation of the dark
square weaknesses in Black's
camp following 16 cd ed ( 1 6 . . .
cd? 1 7 lZ:I b5) 1 7 ed cd 1 8 'Wd2.
a6
16
'Wf2
Once again activating the possi
bility of playing . . . e5.
17
l:t acl
'We7
Having protected c3, White
could meet 1 7 . . . e5?! by 1 8 cd cd
19 de lZ:Ixe5 20 lZ:Ixe5 ..txe5 21 f4
with some advantage according to
Kasparov.
'Wf8
l:t fe1
18
As with White's fifteenth, Black
provokes and then side-steps a
Classical Stonewall
queen-rook opposition.
19
.l:l cdl ( 1 3 7 )
137
B
Kasparov points o u t that the

opening of the position by 1 9 e4?!
de 20 fe e5! would be slightly to
Black's advantage.
19
de
After a phase of sophisticated
strategic fencing, reflecting credit
on both antagonists, it is clear that
the tension could not be main
tained much longer, and therefore
Black decides to force matters with
a sequence aimed at exploiting
White's relatively weak c-pawn.
20
be
c5
21
.HI
White must protect the pawn
indirectly as it would be too dang
erous to allow Black to mobilize
his queenside pawns by 2 1 d5?! ed
22 cd b5.
.ifi!
21
Activating the threat against the
c-pawn which could not be taken
immediately: 2 1 . . . cd? 22 ed ll xc4
23 lll f4 with a double attack on c4
167
and e6.
cd
22
lll a4
b5
23
ed
This time the pawn is taboo
because of 23 . . . ll xc4? 24 lll d c5 .
ab
24
cb
lll ac5!
25
Preferring to otTer a pawn rather
than permit Black to stifle the
game with a blockade on d5 after
25 lll c 3 b4 26 lll b 5 ll:ld5 27 ll:le5
ll:l7b6.
b4!?
25
Black has it in mind to turn
the tables with his own activity
gaining pawn sacrifice. Kasparov
analyses 25 . . . ll:lxc5 26 de .ixc5
27 ll:lxc5 'tt' x c5 28 'ilt' xc5 ll xeS 29
.l:l e5! as giving at least sufficient
compensation for the pawn.
26
llcl
'ilt'e7
Her majesty echoes the opening
manoeuvre of her QB.
27
.ih3
'ilt'd8!
A voiding weakening f6 by 27 . . .
g6? which would be strongly met
by 28 ll:lxb4.
28
ll:lxb4
'ilt'a5
29
ll:lc6
Playing to keep the initiative at
all costs. Hanging on to the pawn
by 29 ll:lxd7 tt::l x d7 30 a3 would
leave Black in little danger given
his well coordinated and active
pieces and White's structural
weaknesses (obviously
Black
would not allow 30 . . . ..txb4? 3 1
a b 'ilt' xb4 3 2 d5! ).
1 68
Classical Stonewall
'tt'xa 2
29
30
xd7
xd7
d5!
31
Freeing the QB and preventing
the blockading and consolidating
. . . 'tfd5.
31
'tfxd5
32
.i.c5
: ed t
In time trouble, Petrosian has
insufficient time to evaluate 32 . . .
.:l xc6 33 .l:l. xd5 .:l xc l + 34 .i.xc l
ed 35 ..tb2 g6! which was pro
bably better, and instead liqui
dates to a positionally slightly
inferior ending, albeit one which
should be tenable.
33
.:l xd5
..t xf2 +
ed
34
xf2
35
..txf5
b6
There i s n o way t o hold o n to
the exchange; 35 . . . e5? loses
after 36 e7 + ! .:l xe7 37 .:l xc8 +
..te8 38 ..ta3.
xc8
36
..txc8
The smoke has cleared leaving
an indisputable advantage to
White. Even so, it is quite astonish
ing that Petrosian does not man
age to hold on to the draw in the
final part of this well contested
battle: 37 ..ta3 h6 38 .:l b 1 .l:l. e6
39 d4 .:l a6 40 ..tc5 d6 (40 . . .
.:l aS!) 4 1 .:l b8 + h7 42 g4 .:l a4!
43 e3 c4 + 44 f4 g5 + ?
(weakening everything; 44 . . . d6
45 : b6 .:l c4 46 .:l xd6 .:l xc5 47
.:ld7 g8 48 h4 was much better,
leaving White in evident control
but a long way from the win) 45

g3 .:la2 46 .:l b7 g6? (missing
the opportunity to counterattack
with 46 . . . e3! 47 ..td6! g6
although 48 h4 would preserve
White's chances) 47 f5 .:l a6 48
h4! gh 49 xh4 + g7 50 f5 +
g6 5 1 ..td4 1 -0. 5 1 . . . d6, the
only way to try to save the bishop,
loses to 52 xd6 : xd6 53 f4.
The Classical 7 c3
Botvinnik -Smyslov
World Ch. 1 958

1 d4 f5 2 g3 f6 3 ..tg2 e6 4 f3
..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5
7
c3
c6 ( 1 38 )
1 38
w
I t is not surprising that the

natural 7 c3 is White's oldest
and most explored continuation.
Clearly, the knight is generally
more active on c3 although it takes
longer for it to be able to control
e5, a manoeuvre which is usually
accomplished via the route c3e2-f4-d3 .
Whilst the broad strategic out-
Classical Stonewall
lines naturally remain the same,
there are a few opening wrinkles
with which Black needs to be fam
iliar in order to be sure of obtain
ing a playable game.
To conclude these introductory
comments, it is interesting to note
that the actual move order of the
present game was 6 . . . c6 7 iUc3
d5 - to avoid Botvinnik's 7 b3, of
course - thus providing the high
est possible level of endorsement
for the validity of 6 . . . c6.
8
.1g5
There is a vast array of alterna
tives which need to be mentioned,
but the student may take comfort
in the fact that the fundamentals
underlying
Black's
response
remain much the same in all cases:
(a) 8 iUe5 iUbd7 9 'W'b3 (not 9
llJd3? de 1 0 iU f4 iU b6 1 1 e4 e5! 1 2
de 'W'xd1 1 3 l:txd 1 tLlg4 + ) 9 . . .
iUe4 10 cd iUxe5 1 1 iUxe4 cd 1 2
de fe 1 3 ..te3 b6 with full equality;
Filip-Szabo,
Gothenburg IZ
1 955.
(b) 8 'W'd3 iUe4 9 iUe5 iUd7 1 0
iUxd7 (supporting the knight by
10 f4?! leads to trouble : 10 . . .
llJxe5 I I fe b6 1 2 e4 ..ta6 1 3 b3
llJxc3 14 'W' xc3 b5 + Black has
stolen the initiative with his typical
QB pressure along the a6-fl diag
onal; Nielsen-H usak, corr. 1 960)
1 0 . . . ..txd7 ( 1 0 . . . 'W'xd7 intend
ing a queenside fianchetto may
well be better) I I f3 iUxc3 with
169
roughly even chances; Griinfeld

Teplitz-Schonau
Tartakower,
1 922.
(c) 8 ..tf4 'W'e8 (8 . . . iUe4 is
perfectly playable) 9 'W'd3 (the c
pawn cannot constantly be left
unprotected, e.g. 9 l:t b I iU bd 7 1 0
b4? de! 1 1 'W'c2 a 6 1 2 a 4 b 5 1 3
iU g 5 iU b6 :t ) 9 . . . 'W' h 5 1 0 iUe5
iU bd7 I I f3 g5 12 iUxd7 ..txd7 1 3
.1e5 (thus far Budo-Chistiakov,
USSR 1 950) 13 . . . ..te8 and the
arrival of the bishop on g6 will
prevent White lightly advancing
in the centre, whilst the kingside
counterplay ensures a mutually
difficult game.
(d) 8 'W' b3 h8 (a precautionary
measure, but Black could well
choose either 8 . . . iUe4 or 8 . . . b6)
9 iUe5 (9 .1f4 is best met by 9 . . .
b6) 9 . . . iU bd7 1 0 iUxd7 (or 1 0 cd
ed 1 1 iUxd7 iUxd7!) 1 0 . . . iUxd7!
1 1 l:t d 1 iUb6 1 2 cd ( 1 2 c5?! iUd7
would leave Black free to counter
with . . . e5 or . . . b6) 1 2 . . . ed
1 3 iUa4 iUc4 1 4 iUc5 (thus far
Capablanca-Botvinnik, Moscow
1 936) and now Black should forgo
the structurally weakening . . . b6
in favour of 14 . . . 'W' b6 with a fine
game.
(e) 8 l:t b I (with the clear inten
tion of a queenside pawn storm) 8
. . . h8 (perhaps the simplest way
of meeting White's plan is 8 . . .
iUe4 9 'W'c2 iUd6!?, with the ideas
10 c5 lt)f7 preparing the . . . e5
Classical Stonewall
1 70
counterpunch immediately, and

1 0 cd ed when the k night on d6
is excellently placed, particularly
with regard to the potential white
square weaknesses on White's
queenside) 9 cd (forfeits any hope
of an opening advantage, but nor
do the alternatives promise much :
9 c5 tt:le4 I 0 'tt c2 tt:ld7 intending
. . . i.f6 and . . . e5 = ; 9 'tt c2 tt:le4
10 b4 tt:ld7 I I c5 i.f6 = etc.) 9 . . .
cd! 1 0 i.f4 tt:lc6 I I tt:le5 (not I I
lbb5 lLlhS + ) 1 1 . . . ..td7 1 2 .l:l. c l
.l:l. c8 ( Black has a very easy game)
1 3 'tt d 3 lLih5 1 4 i.d2 i.d6 1 5
tt:lxc6 ..txc6 1 6 'tt f3 'tt e 8! and
although White's position is solid
there is little for him to undertake
whereas Black is free to operate
on either flank; Keres-Botvinnik,
Moscow 1 948.
lLibd7
8
( 1 39)
139
9
e3
White's intentions are clear: to
exchange first QB for knight, thus
reducing Black's attacking paten-
tial, and then central pawns (cd ed)

in order to stabilize the position
for a minority attack on the queen
side (opening the c-file would be
asking for trouble as Black is in
no position to contest its control).
This is a fundamentally sound
plan which must be countered
with a well judged blend of defence
and aggression if Black is to obtain
a playable game.
Other examples :
(a) 9 cd ed 1 0 .l:l. b l (or 1 0 e3
when both 10 . . . h6!? and 1 0 . . .
lLie4 come into consideration) 1 0
. . . aS! and Black's game is per
fectly satisfactory.
(b) 9 'tt c2 lLib6 (apart from the
interesting text move, Black has
the solid 9 . . . lLle4 and the chal
lenging - risky! - 9 . . . h6!?, e.g.
10 i.xf6 lLl xf6 1 1 lL:Je5 i.d6!? 1 2
lLig6 .l:l. f7 1 3 f3?! h7 1 4 lL:Je5
i.xe5 1 5 de lL:Jd7 1 6 f4 'tt b6 +
1 7 h I lLic5 with an obscure
position) I 0 c5 lLibd7 I I b4 tt:le4
1 2 ..txe7 'tt xe7 1 3 e3 e5 with
approximately equal chances;
Nei- Bronstein, USSR Ch. 1 963.
(c) 9 'tt d 3 lL:Je4 (9 . . . h6!?) 10
i.xe7 'tt xe7 I I 'tt e 3! (the queen is
well placed here after the exchange
of bishops) I I . . . b6 (it could be
that Black should seek an alterna
tive here) 1 2 lLlxe4 fe 1 3 lLid2 ..ta6
14 cd cd 1 5 f3 with a slight pull
Donner- Larsen,
White;
for
Leiden 1 970.
Classical Stonewall
9
'iWe8
Botvinnik prefers 9 . . . e4. A
game Eingorn-Abramovic, Bor
! 986, saw yet another approach :
9 . . . h6 10 ..txf6 ..txf6 I I cd ed
1 2 e2 a5 1 3 f4 'it'e8 14 'it'c2 g6
1 5 l2:ld3 'it'e7 and although White
enjoys some initiative Black may
have confidence in his bishop pair
and generally solid position.
h8
10
'iWc2
II
e2
The knight begins its journey to
control e5 from d3. Of course,
I I cd ed 1 2 'iW xf5?? lZle4 is not
possible.
II
h6
..txf6
12
..txf6
13
cd
Not obligatory, as the opening
of the position after 1 3 f4 de 1 4
'iW xc4 e5 1 5 de xe5 1 6 xe5
..txe5 17 'it' b4! h7 18 .:t ad !
would be t o White's advantage
thanks to his active pieces.
ed
13
14
f4
g5
15
d3 ( 1 40 )
The knight has arrived, and the
battle lines for the coming middle
game are clearly drawn : White
will operate in the centre and on
the queen's flank while Black will
seek attacking chances on the
king's wing. Theoretical assess
ments of this (type of) position
tend to give White a slight edge,
171
140
B
but even should this be true the

further course of our model game
shows that Black is always liable
to pounce at the least slip: 1 5 . . .
.t!. g8 1 6 'it'c3 ..te7 1 7 l2Jfe5 lZlf6
( Black's last two moves make one
wonder about Black's twelfth) 1 8
f3 .ie6 1 9 lLlc5 ( 1 9 b4, with a4 and
b5 in mind, seems more promising)
19 . . . ..txc5 20 'iW xc5 (permitting
a further simplification after which
most of Black's problems are
behind him and he can start to
think about his counterattack; 20
de ;t was better) 20 . . . d7 2 1
xd7 'iW xd7 2 2 .t!. ae l .t!. g7 2 3 .t!. f2
b6 24 'it'c3 'iWd6 2 5 .t!. c2 ..td7 26
b4 (White begins to go wrong;
there is no longer much to be
achieved on the queenside and it
would have been better to distract
Black with play in the centre by
26 e4) 26 . . . h5! (the attack finally
begins!; this is in fact an excellent
example of a late middlegame
pawn storm, typically following a
period of drawing the sting of
1 72
Classical Stonewall
White's early initiative) 27 h 1

(again, 27 e4 was better) 27 . . . h4
28 gh (28 f4 .l:t h7!) 28 . . . gh (28 . . .
.l:t h7 29 e4 'ilt'f4 also came strongly
into consideration) 29 f4 .l:t ag8 30
.H3 .i.e8 3 1 'ii' d 2 'ii' h6 32 'ilt'e2
h3 33 .l:t cc l .l:t g2! 34 .bg2 .l:t xg2
35 'ilt'f3 (the decisive mistake; 35
'ilt' fl would probably have been
sufficient to hang on, e.g. 35 . . .
.i.h5 36 .l:t c3! .i.g4 - 3 7 e4 was
threatened - 37 e4! fe 38 .l:t ee3
.i.f3 39 .1:t xf3 ef 40 .1:t xf3 'ilt'h5 4 1
.l:t xh3 'ilt'xh3 42 'ilt' xg2 'ii' d 3 with a
very likely draw) 35 . . . 'ilt' h4! 36
b5 ..th5 37 'ilt' xg2 (37 'ilt'fl .l:t f2)
37 . . . hg + 38 g1 c5 0- l . A
consistently executed and charac
teristic attack on the light squares.
Flohr-Botvinnik
Match 1 933
1 d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 ll:lf6 4 lLlf3
.i.e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 ll:lc3 c6
8
b3 ( 1 41 )
141
B
With the knight already devel

oped this move has little purpose
beyond simply preparing to com

plete development by fianchetto
ing the QB. In his notes Botvinnik
remarked, somewhat severely per
haps, that the move has a serious
defect in that it weakens f4. As we
shall see, however, that certainly
turns out to be the case in this
game.
8
Black commences the tra
ditional transference of the queen
to the k ingside, a procedure which
lacks in subtlety compared to
today's positional interpretations
of the Stonewall. Nevertheless,
when White fails to find the correct
response this plan can be crushing
as the present game is intended to
show.
Nowadays, both of the follow
ing continuations are considered
superior to the text move :
(a) 8 . . . a5 (this position fre
quently arises through use of 6 . . .
c6) 9 ..t b2 lLle4 1 0 e3 ll:ld7 1 1 'ilt'c2
ll:ld6 1 2 lLle2 .1:t e8 1 3 lLlf4 ..tf8
1 4 ll:ld3 lLlf1 (a radically different
approach to the old-fashioned
kingside hacking!; Black has har
moniously protected his one
weakness and retains the flexibility
to operate over the entire board)
1 5 .1:t fd 1 b6 and with the imminent
development of his QB Black can
look forward to a rich middlegame
with balanced chances; Ungu
reanu-Bellin, Moscow 1 977.
Classical Stonewall
(b) 8 . . . lLle4 9 .i.b2 lLld7 1 0
tt'c2 ( 10 lLle l .i.f6 I I f3 lLlxc3 1 2
.txc3 de! 1 3 be e5! is excellent
for Black) 1 0 . . . .i.f6 and in the
absence of practical examples
there is a theoretical consensus
that this position offers approxi
mately equal chances.
9
.i.b2
lLlbd7
lO
Wd3
Botvinnik considers this to be
slightly less exact a placement for
the queen than c2. His suggestion
that White should aim to equalize
matters by playing I 0 lLlg5 .i.d6
I I f4, however, tends to leave
Black with rather the better of it
after I I . . lLlg4 1 2 Wd2 lLldf6
1 3 h3 lLlh6 (Biryanis-Tal, USSR
1 9 5 1 ) as his pieces are more effec
tively placed to take action on the
kingside.
WhS
10
The queen takes up her com
mand post from where she will
direct kingside operations. Note
also the f-pawn is protected so
that cd can be answered by . . . ed.
11
cd
White wants to move his KN
but dare not do so immediately
because of the sequence ( 1 1 lLld2
or lLle I ) . . e5! 1 2 cd e4. This
line strongly supports Botvinnik's
contention that the bishop is mis
placed on b2, and that the queen
should be on c2.
ed
II
.
1 73
The exchange of pawns in the

centre has helped Black by open
ing up the path of his QB.
12
lLld2
White's position is already
beginning to look a little un
comfortable - he appears to be
doing nothing while Black is
gradually building up his attack.
lLle4
12
13
f3
The attempt to gum things up
by 13 f4 intending lLld2-f3-e5
would come unstuck after 1 3 . . .
lLlxd2 1 4 W' xd2 lLlf6, and whereas
the black knight is surveying e4
its white counterpart is very far
from being able to occupy e5.
13
lLlxc3
f4! ( 1 42 )
14
.i.xc3
142
w
The 'Dutch' pawn itself delivers

a thematic attacking blow which
instantly puts White's king's pos
ition under severe pressure. Con
sider White's predicament : the
pawn cannot be captured because
the arrival of a black rook on the
1 74
Classical Stonewall
h-file would be terminal, while

advancing the g-pawn would
create grave dark square weak
nesses and invite . . . h5. There
remains only the passive holding
operation chosen in the game.
J.. d6
15
.l:l. fe1
16
lt:lfl
.1:1. 17!
This little move is of the utmost
importance to the successful pro
secution of Black's attack. It is
born of the fact that the natural
16 . . . lt:lf6 is not good since White
could reply with 1 7 J.. d 2! attack
ing the f-pawn, and if 1 7 . . . fg 1 8
hg and the bishop would cover
important squares on the c l -h6
diagonal. Now if White marks
time Black has the option of bring
ing his knight to the kingside via
f8, all the time keeping control of
f4.
17
e3
If 1 7 e4 then 1 7 . . . de! 1 8 'it'xe4
( 1 8 fe?? f3) 1 8 . . . lt:lf6 is very strong.
17
fg
Now that White has weakened
f3 and blocked the c l -h6 diagonal
this exchange is the best continu
ation.
18
lt:lxg3
After 18 hg Black would have
the pleasant choice between 18 . . .
.l:l. xf3 !, 1 8 . . . 'it'g5 and 1 8 . . . lt:lf6,
all roads leading to Rome.
18
'it'h4
tt:n
tt:r6
19
20
.l:l. e2
J.. d7
'it' g5
J.. e l
21
J.. xg3
22
J.. g3
23
lt:lxg3
Or 23 hg lt:lh5 and White would
have to advance with 24 g4, laying
himself open to the can-opening
. . . h5 after the retreat of the knight,
as 24 h2 fails against 24 . . .
lt:lxgl
h5!
23
The final phase of the attack
commences; White is hard pressed
to meet the threatened march of
the h-pawn, winning a piece.
24
f4
'it'g4
.l:l. f2
25
This allows Black t o administer
a rapid and pleasing coup de grace;
25 .l:l. fl would have held out longer.
h4
25
26
J.. f3
26 h3 'it'e6 (not 26 . . . 'it' xg3 27
.1:1. f3) 27 lt:lfl lt:le4 is also hopeless
for White.
26
hg
Gaining a decisive material
advantage.
27
J.. xg4
gf+
28
g2
28 xf2 lt:l xg4 + would enable
Black to attack and win the epawn .
lt:lxg4
28
h3
lt:lf6
29
xf2
30
lt:le4 +
0-1
3 1 g2 J.. x h3 + and the
Classical Stonewall
bishop is immune on account of
the knight fork.
Smejkal-Larsen
Leningrad
IZ
1 9 73
I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 tt:Jf6 4 tt:Jf3

..te7 5 0-0 0-0 6 c4 d5 7 tt:Jc3 c6
8
..-c2 ( 1 43 )
1 43
B
A natural and elastic follow-up

to 7 tt:Jc3, placing the queen on its
best square, from where it observes
Black's f-pawn, thus preventing 8
. . . tt:Jbd7 because of 9 cd cd 1 0
..tf4 with a marked advantage.
tt:Je4!
8
8 . . . ..-e8 must reckon with
Chekhover's 9 ..tg5 after which
Black can easily find himself in an
inferior Botvinnik-Smyslov type
of position (see above) if he tries
to do better than the direct trans
position by 9 . . .t h8 10 e3 tZJ bd7
etc.
The text move is natural and
good.
tt:Je5
9
A game Bolbochan- Najdorf,
.
1 75
M ar del Plata 1945, went 9 ..te3

tt:J bd7 10 tt ad 1 ..-e8 ( 1 0 . . . ..td6!?)
1 1 tt:Je5, and now, as is often the
case when the possibility exists,
Black should have captured the
knight on e5, with level chances.
tt:Jd7
9
fe
10
tt:Jxe4
In his notes, Larsen gave 1 0 . . .
tt:Jxe5 1 1 tt:Jd2 tt:Jf7 1 2 tt:Jf3 b6
as an equality-securing variation
deserving attention.
11
..tf6
..tf4
This looks right, but 1 1 . . . ..tg5
might also be worth consideration.
12
tt adl
White would have done better
to play 1 2 tt:Jxd7 ..-xd7 1 3 tt a d 1 ;t
according to Larsen, rather than
permit an alteration of pawn struc
ture which helps Black to equalize.
12
..txe5
tt:Jxe5
13
..txe5
14
de
..-e7
15
..-c3
..td7
16
f3
ef
..-c5 +
17
ef
18
tt d4?!
This self-pin and the active
black queen are the source of
White's later troubles, and there
fore 1 8 ..-d4 was better, although
the ending after 1 8 . . . ..-xd4 + 1 9
tt xd4 c5 20 ttd2 d4 would be fine
for Black.
18
aS
19
f4
..-a7
20
f5?!
1 76
Classical Stonewall
This assault on Black's pawn

centre turns out to be much too
optimistic and only succeeds in
weakening White's own e-pawn.
20
.l:l ae8!
Seeing through the incredible
trap 20 . . . c5 2 1 .l:l xd5!! ed 22
..txd5 + h8 23 e6 with f6 to
follow.
21
cd
If White escapes the pin by
2 1 h l , then 2 1 . . . c5 becomes
playable since 22 .l:l xd5? now fails
because of 22 . . . ed 23 ..txd5 +
h8 24 e6 ..txe6! etc.
21
cd
22
h1
.l:l c8
23
W'd2
.l:l c2!
How White must have regretted
his 1 8th move!
24
W' xc2
W' xd4
25
W'c3
W' xc3
26
be
.l:l c8
The ending is very much in
Black's favour due to the
opponent's split queenside pawns.
.l:l c5
27
.l:l d 1
Naturally, Black has no interest

in 27 . . . .l:l xc3? 28 fe ..txe6 29
..txd5 f7 30 ..txb7 ..txa2 3 1
..td5 + with a drawn ending.
..t xe6
28
fe
29
g1
fi
30
.: d3
.: b5!
31
.l:l d2
a4
32
a3
In time trouble White is under
standably alarmed at the prospect
of . . . a3 and . . . .: b2, but his only
chance was to rush the king to
the centre by f2-e3 when t here
would still be some slight hope of
salvation. As it is, Larsen seizes
the opportunity to obtain a passed
a-pawn and makes no mistake in
shepherding it home : 32 . . . .: b3
33 ..txd5 .: xa3 34 c4 .: b3 35 f2
a3 36 e2 .: b2 37 .: xb2 ab 38
..te4 ..txc4 + 39 d2 ..ta2 0- l .
An excellent example o f t h e pawn
structures arising after captures on
both e5 and e4 and the technical
type of game following multiple
minor piece exchanges.
16
Stonewall with
From the mid-eighties onwards

there has been an explosion of
interest in playing the Stonewall
with . . . .td6 instead of . . . .te7.
The advantages are obvious: the
bishop is more actively placed on
the b8-h2 diagonal, covering e5
and looking towards the white
king, and the queen can usefully
take up the vacated e7 square.
The disadvantages are rather less
apparent, especially since the logi
cal attempt to profit from the
exchange of black-squared bish
ops with .tf4 (cf. Schlechter-John
in Chapter 1 5) has been shown to
be much less dangerous for Black
than was once thought.
The starting position for the
variation arises after the following
moves :
d4
1
f5
e6
g3
2
tLlf6
3
.tg 2
tLlf3
4
With this particular move-order
White may consider deferring tLl f3
in favour o f c4 i f h e is particula rly
. . J.. d 6
concerned to avoid the . . . .td6

variations. A recent example : 4 c4
dS (Black has the option of playing
the Dutch Indian instead) 5 tLlh3
i.e7 (persevering with 5 . . . .td6?!
would enable White to exchange
the black-squared bishops by 6
i.f4 without incurring any struc
tural weakness) 6 0-0 c6 7 'ilt'c2 00 8 tLld2 .td7 9 tLlf3 tLle4 I 0 tLleS
.tf6 I I b3 (thus far P. Nikolic
Short, Belgrade 1 987) and now
Nikolic gives I I . . . cS! 1 2 e3 tLlc6
as best, with an unclear position.
It is because of such possibilities
that the . . . .td6 variations fre
quently arise via transposition,
with White already having com
mitted himself to tLlf3.
4
d5
c4
c6
5
6
0-0
.td6 ( 1 4 4 )
A s i n the standard Stonewall.
White has a large choice at this
juncture. Apart from the moves
covered in our featured games, the
following also merit noting :
1 77
1 78
Stonewall with . . . i.d6
(a) 7 tt:lc3 ttJ bd7 8 Wc2 tt:le4 9

.ll b l (thus far Dubinin-Novo
telnov, USSR 1 948) 9 . . . a5 with
a typically rich middlegame in the
offing with chances for both sides.
(b) 7 'Wc2 tt:le4 8 tt:le l ?! (a mis
guided attempt to take advantage
of the early advance of Black's
knight; 8 tt:lc3 tt:ld7 would trans
pose above, and on 8 b3 Black
could try 8 . . . 'Wf6 9 ..tb2 tt:l bd7)
8 . . . tt:ld7 9 tt:ld3 (9 f3?! tt:lxg3! 10
hg ..txg3 with I I . . . 'Wh4 to follow
would give Black a very dangerous
attack --- a good illustration of the
advantages of having the bishop
on d6!) 9 . . . 'Wf6! (forcing White
to lock in his QB in order to
protect the d-pawn) 10 e3 h5!
(utilizing the fact that he has post
poned castling; Black is now
assured of a strong attack no mat
ter how White responds) I I f3
tt:lxg3! 1 2 hg ..txg3 1 3 tt:lf2? ( 1 3 f4
'Wh4 1 4 .ll f3 ! ..Wh2 + 1 5 .tfl h4
1 6 .ll xg3 was the best hope) 1 3 . . .
g5! with a fierce attack which
Black brought to an energetic and

beautiful conclusion in Gofstein
K upreichik, USSR 1 979 : 1 4 e4 de
1 5 fe g4 16 ef 'W h4 1 7 .ll e l 0-0 1 8
.ll xe6 tt:lf6 1 9 .ll e2 tt:le8!! 20 f6!
.ll xf6!! 2 1 .ll xe8 + ..tf7 22 ll e2
..tf5 23 'Wd2 .ll e8! 24 .ll xe8
Wh2 + ! 25 ..tfl ..td3 + ! 0- l . An
inspired game which provides
much food for thought.
(c) 7 c5 is probably best met by
7 . . . ..te7 intending to challenge
the advanced pawn with . . . b6 and
also . . . a5 in case White supports
it with b4.
Kotov-Bondarevsky
Moscow 1 936
7
tt:lbd2 ( 1 45 )
The main idea behind this move

is to increase the control of e5 by
transferring the QN to f3 after
shifting the K N to d3 via e l .
7
0-0
Of course, it is also possible to
play 7 . . . tt:lbd7 8 'Wc2 tt:le4 before
castling.
Stonewall with
8
b3
Black had no problems what
ever after 8 'ilfc2 lZlbd7 9 cd cd 1 0
b3 'ilf e 7 I I ..t b 2 b 6 1 2 e 3 ..t a 6 1 3
.:t fc l lZle4 in Gheorghiu-Yusu
pov, Luzern 1 985.
8
'ilfe8
9
lZle1
After the straightforward 9
..t b2 Black should be careful
about rushing to h5 with the
queen: 9 . . . lZlbd7 10 lZle5 'ilfh5
(I 0 . . . lZle4!) I I e3 'ilfh6 12 'ilfe2
lZle4 13 lZlxe4 fe 14 lZlg4 'ilfg5 1 5
f3 and White succeeds in opening
up the position before Black is
quite ready; Fine- Bondarevsky,
Moscow 1 937.
lZlbd7
9
lZle4
lZld3
10
'ilfh5
11
lLlf3
lZlf4
12
Gaining a tempo which must
shortly be returned. Similarly,
Black would answer 12 ..tf4 with
1 2 . . . ..te7 and then hit the enemy
bishop with . . . g5.
n
12
g5
13
'ilfc2
'ilfh5
14
lZld3
.:t f6
lLlfe5
15
.:t h6!
f3
16
h4
17
Unhappy that he would be
obliged to return the piece after
1 7 fe de White tries a remedy
which turns out to be more dang
erous than the disease.
. . i.. d6
.
1 79
lZlxg3
17
18
hg
appears
blissfully
White
unaware that he is walking the
edge of a precipice; 18 ..txg5,
keeping the approaches to the king
closed as long as possible, was
essential.
'ilfh2 +
18
.:t h4
19
f2
.:t xd4
20
.:tg1
An
uncommonly
sprightly
rook!
'ilfh4!
21
..tb2
lZ:le4 +
22
..txd4
23
e3
After 23 fl ..t xe5 24 ..txe5
lZlxe5 25 fe lZlg4 White is faced
with mate and loss of his queen.
If White was still hoping to
show that the black attack had
been too extravagant he is soon
disabused of that illusion. There
now follows a stunningly beautiful
mate in five.
f4 + !
23
lZlxf4
'ilf f2 +
24
'ilr' xd4 + !!
25
d3
..tc5 +
26
xd4
lZlxe5mate!
27
d3
( 1 46)
The final tableau seems the
work of a magician.
Belyavsky-Bareev
USSR Ch. 1 987

d4 f5 2 g3 e6 .3 ..tg2 lZlf6 4 lLlf3
d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6
I
Stonewall with . . .i.d6
I 80
..tf4 ( 1 4 7 )
1 47
8
16 f3 lL!d6 17 : d2?! lL!xc4 18 liJxc4

de 1 9 "it"xc4 lL!d5 and the powerful
knight plus attacking chances
assure Black the better game;
-!-final
Zamikhovsky-Panov,
USSR Ch. 1 952. This is a good
illustration of how Black can pro
ceed if White is slow in playing
positively.
(b) 9 lL!e5 lL!bd7 10 e3 lL!xe5 1 1
fe liJg4 1 2 lL!d2 ..td7 1 3 h3 liJh6
14 f4 ..te8 1 5 h2 h8 1 6 "it"e2
g5 1 7 fg "it"xg5 1 8 "it"f2 ..th5 =
Black's 'bad' bishop is every bit
as good as White's; Belyavsky
Salov, match, Vilnius 1 987.
(c) 9 lL! bd2 lL!bd7 (9 . . . ..td7
intending the transfer to h5 is
possible) 10 :t e l lL!e4 1 1 e3 "it"e7
( I I . . lL!df6 1 2 lL!e5 ..td7 1 3 f3
gave
White
an
edge
in
Groszpeter-Smagin, Zenica 1 987)
1 2 lL!xe4 de! 1 3 lL!d2 c5! 14 lL!b3
b6 15 de ( 15 f3 is a better try) 1 5
. . . lL!xc5 1 6 lL!xc5 be 1 7 "it"a4 :t b8!
1 8 b3 : b6! 19 "it"a3 e5 + Black's
QR is ready to switch to the king's
flank; Kalinichev-Giek, USSR
1 987.
8
..txd6
"it"xd6
9
"it"c2
b6
With this, Black's idea behind
not exchanging on f4 becomes
clear: he is trying to treat the
position as a kind of Botvinnik
Variation in the standard Stone
wall, where the queenside fianch
etto often procures equality for
.
Clearly the most direct chal

lenge to Black's set-up.
0-0?!
7
An error, although it takes
Belyavsky's copybook play to
show exactly why.
Black's best continuation is 7 . . .
..txf4 8 gf 0-0 with good chances of
equalizing, thanks to the damage
inflicted on White's king's pos
ition, as the following examples
show:
(a) 9 "it"c2 lL!bd7 to e3 "it"e7 I I
lL! bd2 lL!e4 1 2 a3 :t f6 1 3 :t fd l
:t h6 1 4 lL!fl lL!df6 1 5 lL!e5 ..td7

Black after the exchange of black
squared bishops.
10
lL!a3!
Priming a possible foray to b5,
an essential element in White's
fight for an opening advantage.
Black would have little difficulty
after quieter methods, e.g. 1 0
lL! bd2 -'. b 7 1 1 .: ac 1 lL! bd7 1 2
.C. fd 1 .l:. acS 1 3 'if a4 'it' bS, and with
. . . c5 in the air the game is quite
level.
10
lL!a6
Black sees the need to protect
c7 : 10 . . . -'.b7 1 1 cd cd 1 2 lL! b5
'it'd? 1 3 'ifc7! .l:. cS 14 'it'xd7 lL!bxd7
1 5 lL!d6 .l:.c7 1 6 .: fc I -'.c6 1 7
.l:. c2 and Black's position i s very
uncomfortable indeed.
II
.: act
-'.b7
cd
12
cd
13
lL!b5
'ife7
14
'ifa4
Note how useful it is for White
not to have played b3 as in Botvin
nik's variation.
14
lL!e8
Deciding to remove the power
ful knight on b5 which is exerting
troublesome pressure on the que
enside, especially a7.
lL! ec7
.l:. c3
15
lL!xc7
lL!xc7
16
17
h3!!
A truly profound conception.
Instead of doubling rooks and
continuing with his play on the
queen's wing White discerns the
181
possibility o f commencing action

on the opposite flank, and the seed
of this tiny pawn move is destined
to grow into a flourishing attack.
: res
11
Interestingly,
Black's
best
course lay in the reciprocal 1 7 . . .
a6 aiming to bring the knight to
d6 via b5.
18
g4
g6
It is understandable that Black
does not want to accept the struc
tural weakness arising from 1 8 . . .
lL!eS 1 9 gf ef 20 .: xeS -'.xeS 2 1
lL!e5 lL!f6, but that might have been
the lesser evil.
19
gf
gf
20
lL!e5
lL!e8
21
.l:. g3 +
h8
22
h2
lL!f6
23
.l:. g l
.l:.c7
Bringing extra protection to f7
in order to be able to play his next
move and chase the enemy queen
away. After 23 . . . a6 White would
transfer the queen to the kingside
with gain of tempo : 24 'it'b3 b5 25
'it'e3, with a strong attack.
24
-'. f3
-'.c6
Not 24 . . . lL!e4 25 -'.xe4 de 26
'ifxa7!
.: g8
'if b3
25
26
-'.h5!
The final assault begins.
26
W f8
Forced.
27
.lhg8 +
lL!xg8
1 82
28
'ii' g3
Her majesty arrives to lead the
troops to victory.
28
..tb5
28 . . . ..te8 would lose to the
prosaic 29 ..txe8 'ii' xeS 30 lL!g6 +
winning the exchange.
lL!f6
29
'ii' h4
There is nothing to be done, e.g.
29 . . . .ll g7 30 .ll xg7 xg7 3 1
'ii' g5 + , or 29 . . . ..te8 30 ..txe8
'ii' xe8 3 1 lL!g6 + g7 32 lL!e7 + .
30
..tfi!
1 -0
An elegant final blow : the
knight is en prise and lL!g6 + for
king king and queen is threatened;
Black must therefore protect the
knight with a queen move, but
after 30 . . . 'ii' e 7 comes 3 1 'ii' xf6 + !
'ii' xf6 32 .ll g8 mate.
Belyavsky-Yusupov
USSR Ch. 1 987

I d4 f5 2 g3 e6 3 ..tg2 lL!f6 4 lL!f3
d5 5 c4 c6 6 0-0 ..td6
7
1 48
B
b3 ( 1 48 )
As with Botvinnik's variation in

the standard Stonewall, this move
aims to exchange the dark
squared bishops, whilst avoiding
the structural weakening follow
ing 7 ..tf4 ..txf4. It is currently
the most popular continuation.
'ii' e7
7
The natural way of preventing
..ta3.
8
..tb2
The best move at this juncture
has yet to be determined. There
are many candidates:
(a) 8 c5 ..tc7 9 ..tf4 .txf4 1 0
g f b6 ( Polovodin suggests 1 0 . . .
lL!bd7 as a preliminary to playing
for . . . g5 by . . . h6 and . . . .ll g8) 1 1
'ii' c2 be 1 2 'ii' x c5! 'ii' x c5 1 3 de lL!a6
14 .ll c I lL!e4 1 5 lL!e5 lL!exc5 1 6
lL!xc6 ..td7 1 7 lL!e5 and White
has some advantage due to his
queenside pawn majority and
potential occupation of the block
ading squares e5 and d4; Polo
vodin-Giek, USSR 1 986.
(b) 8 a4 (insisting on the
exchange of bishops at the cost of
slightly compromising the queen
side pawns) 8 . . . a5! 9 ..ta3 b6 1 0
lL!e5 ..t b 7 I I ..txd6 'ii' xd6 1 2 lL!d2
0-0 13 cd cd 14 .ll c l lL!bd7 with
a completely satisfactory position
for Black; Joksic-Klinger, Zurich
1 987.
(c) 8 lL!e5 0-0 9 ..tb2 (9 lL!d3 b6
10 ..tb2 lL! bd7 I I lL!d2 a5 12 .ll c l
..tb7
Flear-Short, Wijk aan
=
Stonewall with . . . i.. d6

Zee 1 987) 9 . . . ..td7! 10 "ti'cl ..te8
I I ..ta3 lt:l bd7 1 2 lt:ld3 ( 1 2 lt:lxd7
eases Black's task : 1 2 . . . W xd7 1 3
lt:ld2 ..txa3 1 4 "ti' xa3 ..th5 1 5
%He I lt:le4 1 6 W b2 .tt ad8 = F.
Portisch- Knaak, Balatonbereny
1 987) 1 2 . . . ..th5! 1 3 .::t e l .tt ae8
and Black's forces are very com
pactly and harmoniously grouped
( ); Dizdar-Knaak, Halle 1 987.
(d) 8 lt:l bd2 b6!? 9 lt:le5 ..tb7 1 0
..t b2 0-0 I I .::t e l a 5 ! 1 2 e3 lt:la6
with a typically complex and bal
anced position; Petursson-Short,
Reykjavik 1 987.
(e) 8 lt:lc3 0-0 9 ..tf4 ..t xf4 1 0
g f ..td7! I I lt:le5 ..te8 1 2 Wc2
lt:lbd7 ( 1 2 . . . lt:le4 is an excellent
alternative) 1 3 cd ed 14 "ti'xf5 lt:le4
1 5 "ti'h3 lt:lxc3 1 6 "ti' xc3 .tt xf4 gives
roughly equal chances.
(f) 8 ..tf4 ..txf4 9 gf 0-0 10 lt:le5
..td7! I I lt:ld2 ..te8 1 2 .::t e l ..th5
1 3 .tt c3 lt:lbd7 1 4 ..tf3 ..txf3 1 5
lt:lxd7 "ti'xd7 1 6 lt:lxf3 ll:le4 and
here, as is frequently the case in
similar situations, Black has excel
lent prospects since his attacking
possibilities against White's weak
ened kingside are far more
important than White's absolute
control of e5 and queenside play;
Kouatly-Smagin, Trnava 1 987.
0-0
8
Two examples which indicate
that the queenside fianchetto is a
good alternative : 8 . . . b6 9 "ti' c l
0-0 (the alternative i s t o keep the
=
183
king in the centre in readiness for

an ending : 9 . . . ..tb7 1 0 ..ta3
lt:l bd7 I I ..txd6 W xd6 12 "ti'a3
"ti'xa3 13 lt:l xa3 ri;e7 1 4 .tt ac l lt:le4
1 5 .tt fd I .tt fc8 1 6 lt:le I c5 = AI burt
Short, Subotica 1 987) I 0 ..ta3
..tb7 I I ..txd6 "ti'xd6 1 2 "ti'a3 c5
1 3 de be 1 4 lt:lc3 lt:l bd7 1 5 .tt fd l ?
( l 5 e3) 1 5 . . . f4! (the 'Dutch' pawn
strikes!; now the white kingside
finds itself under restraint, await
ing attack) 16 .tt ac l a6 1 7 ..th3?
(a poor idea which exacerbates
White's difficulties) 1 7 . . . .tt ae8 1 8
.tt c2 h6 1 9 lt:la4 lt:le4 20 cd ed 2 1
..txd7? "ti' xd7 2 2 lt:lxc5 lt:lxc5 23
.tt xc5 .tt xe2 24 lt:ld4 fg! 25 fg (25
lt:l xe2 gf + mates) 25 . . . "ti'f7 0- 1 H.
Olafsson-S. Agdestein, Reykjavik
1 987. After 26 lt:lxe2 "ti'f2 + 27
1; hI d4 + the bad' bishop comes
good!
9
lLlc3
Alternatively:
(a) 9 Wc2 ..td7 I 0 lt:le5 ..te8 I I
lt:ld2 lt:l bd7 1 2 f4 (as a rule, Black
is instantly OK after this) 1 2 . . .
..th5 1 3 cd?! cd 1 4 "ti'd3 .tt ac8 1 5
.tt fc I ?! ..ta3! and i t i s Black who
takes charge of the open c-file ( + );
Ree- Pie terse, Amsterdam Open
1 986.
(b) 9 lLl bd2 b6!? (9 . . . ..td7
heading for h5 is perfectly playable
here too) 10 lt:le5 ..tb7 I I e3 a5
1 2 a3?! ( 1 2 .::t e l = ) 1 2 . . . lLl bd7 1 3
a4 .tt ac8 1 4 "ilt"e2 ..ta6 1 5 .tt fc l
.tt fd8 1 6 "ti' e l (it was necessary to
1 84
Stonewall with . . . .i.d6
seek to keep the balance by play

ing 1 6 f4) 1 6 . . . ..txe5! (an instruc
tive capture; in the closed position
White's bishops are more of a
handicap than an advantage) 1 7
de lLle4 + Renet-Yusupov, Dubai
01. 1 986.
9
..td7
..te8
10
lLle5
lLld3
11
Criticized by Yusupov who pre
fers 1 1 e3.
lLlbd7
11
12
e3
g5!
Yusupov is of the opinion that
Black now stands somewhat
better. It is true that Black's minor
pieces are more purposefully pos
itioned.
13
a4
With ideas of exchanging bish
ops by 1t' c l and ..ta3.
13
..tg6
1 3 . . . ..th5 1 4 1t'c1 lLle4 would
be a good alternative, but Yusu
pov decides to provoke the centre
deadening f4 first.
14
f4
Naturally not 1 4 1t' c 1 ? f4.
14
..th5
15
1t'cl
lLle4
16
fg
It is remarkably difficult for
White to find a meaningful plan
and he therefore decides on this
capture in the hope of obtaining
f4 for the use of his knight.
16
lLlxc3!
Very precise. 1 6 . . . 1t' xg5 1 7
lLlxe4 followed by lLlf4 would
improve White's prospects.
..te2
17
1t' xc3
..txd3
18
J:t fel
1t' xg5
19
1t' xd3
of
series
clever
Black's
exchanges have left him i n pos
session of the last remaining
knight, a real advantage in a closed
position where White's bishops
languish with nothing to do.
Black's bishop is also well posted
for supporting an attack on
White's king and so Belyavsky
decides to exchange that as well.
20
..ta3
..txa3
lLlf6
J:[ xa3
21
22
-. n
h5!
Placing the threat of a future . . .
h4 over White's head.
23
1t' f4
White judges that his best
chances of salvation are to be
found in the endgame.
23
1t' xf4
24
gf
24 ef would make Black's e
pawn backward and vulnerable
but also weaken the white d-pawn
and leave Black the break with . . .
h4.
24
f7
25
J:t a2
J:t g8
26
h1
According to Yusupov, 26 a5
should have been played.
Stonewall with . . . .i.d6
26
.1:1 g7
.1:1 ag8
27
..tfJ
28
.1:1 g2
.1:1 xg2
29
..txg2
a5
With the fixing of White's que
enside pawns and the fact that
e3 needs to be guarded there is
nothing left for the first player to
do but sit and wait.
30
c;t>gl
A voiding 30 ..tf3?! h4 3 1 .a g I ?
.a xg l + 3 2 lt>xgl lLlg4 winning
the e-pawn because the ending
after 33 ..txg4 would be comple
tely lost.
h4
30
31
lt>fl
lLlg4
32
h3
lLlf6
33
c;t>fl
.1:1 g3
The rook gratefully takes up
residence on the weakness created
by the knight. Black has made real
progress, but he is still a long way
from winning.
34
c5
34 .a b I aiming for b4 at a
suitable moment was probably the
best chance.
lLle4 + !
34
fe
( 1 49)
35
..txe4
A fascinating rook ending has
begun where Black displays great
mastery in extracting the full point
from his positional advantage: 36
1 85
149
w
.a h l lt>e8 37 .1:1 g l (seizing the

opportunity to activate his rook;
if White remains passive then the
king will go to the queen's wing
and prepare . . . b6) 37 . . . .a xh3 38
.1:1 g7 .1:1 h2 + 39 fl (not 39 .1:1 g2
.a h l 40 .1:1 g l .a xg l 4 1 xg l b6!
42 cb d7 followed by . . . c5
decisively creating a second passed
pawn) 39 . . . .a h3 40 c;t>f2 .a h 2 +
4 1 lt>fl .1:1 b 2 (after a repetition
in time trouble Black once more
picks up the thread) 42 .1:1 xb7
c;t>d8! 43 gl : e2 44 b4 ab 45
a5 .1:1 xe3 46 a6 c8 47 .a xb4 .1:1 a3
48 .1:1 b6 e3! 49 : xc6 + d7 50
.1:1 d6 + e7 5 1 f5 ef 52 .1:1 xd5
.a xa6! 53 c6 (after 53 .1:1 xf5 .1:1 g6 +
54 fl .a f6! the split pawns win
the king and pawn ending) 53 . . .
.1:1 xc6 54 .1:1 xf5 .a g6 + 0- 1 . Black
magic!

Winning With The Dutch - Bellin PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Winning With The Dutch - Bellin PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

WINNING

The Dutch Defence is a popular attempt by

the theoretical spotlight, thanks to the efforts

Also in this series

them Britain's Nigel Short.

Other Botsford opening books

This series by top authors deals with

Botsford Chess Openings 2

For further details of these

Winning With the

B. T. Batsford Ltd, London

First published 1990

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... c6

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... lLlc6

Leningrad Main Line: 7 ... e8

Leningrad: Miscellaneous Systems

The Queen Knight Attack: 2 lLlc3

2 lLlf3 and Others

j])The Classical Variation

11 The Dutch Indian

12 Classical System: Auxiliary Variations

13 Alekhine's Variation: 6 ... lLle4

16 Stonewall with . . . .td6

The process of rehabilitation

of the Dutch Defence! This most

began in the 1920s, spearheaded

versatile of defences to 1 d4 boasts

by World Champions Alekhine

several positive features: it is for

and Botvinnik, and gradually con

cing (White cannot prevent you

tinued until the point was reached

playing your defence, as is the case

in the 1951 World Championship

with, say, the Nimzo-Indian); it

match where it was employed by

rules out radical strategic simpl

both players. Despite this zenith,

ification (as occurs, for example,

the Dutch was subsequently once

in the Queen's Gambit Declined

again overshadowed throughout

when White plays the Exchange

the sixties and seventies, this time

Variation); and it does not permit

by exciting developments in the

other major defences. Now at long

ification (which happens in stan

last it seems that the Dutch's time

dard lines of the popular King's

has come as more and more top

Indian and Gri.infeld Defences).

players have become aware of its

So how on earth is it that even

The resurgence of interest during

thing of a secret? The reason has

the eighties has sown a seed which

its origin in the nineteenth century,

will surely develop as we go into

the last decade of the twentieth

world champion Wilhelm Steinitz

This book summarizes the curr