Playing the Trompowsky

By

Richard Pert

Quality Chess
www.qualitych ess.co. uk
 First edition 20 1 3 by Quality Chess UK Ltd

Copyright 20 1 3 Richard Pert

Playing the Trompowsky

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior
permission of the publisher.

Paperback ISBN 978- 1 -907982-75-0

Hardcover ISBN 978- 1 -907982-76-7

All sales or enquiries should be directed to Quality Chess UK Ltd,

20 Balvie Road, Milngavie, Glasgow G62 ?TA, United Kingdom
Phone +44 1 4 1 333 9 5 8 8
e-mail: info@qualitychess.co.uk
website: www. qualitychess.co. uk

Distributed in North America by Globe Pequot Press,

P.O. Box 480, 246 Goose Lane, Guilford, CT 06437-0480, US
www.globepequot.com

Distributed in Rest of the World by Quality Chess UK Ltd through

Sunrise Handicrafts, ul. Skromna 3, 20-704 Lublin, Poland

Typeset by Jacob Aagaard

Proofreading by Andrew Greet & John Shaw
Edited by Colin McNab
Cover design by Barry Adamson
Cover photo by capture36 5 . com
Printed in Estonia by Tallinna Raamatutri.ikikoja LLC
 Contents
Key to Symbols used & Bibliography 4
Preface 5
Introduction 7

1 2...e6 3.e4 11
2 2...e6 3.tlld2!? 47
3 2...c5 3.tllc3!? 61
4 2...c5 3.d5 79
5 2... tlle4 3.if4 c5 4.d5 93
6 2...tlle4 3.if4 c5 4.f3 107
7 2...d5 3.ixf6 141
8 2...d5 3.e3 157
9 2...tlle4 3.if4 d5 4.e3 171
10 Rare 3rd Moves 193
11 Rare 2nd Moves 201
12 2.ig5 against the Dutch 211
13 l .d4 d5 2.ig5 233

Variation Index 263

 Key to Symbols used
;!; White is slightly better a weak move
+ Black is slightly better ?? a blunder
White is better a good move
+ Black is better !! an excellent move
+- White has a decisive advantage !? a move worth considering
-+ Black has a decisive advantage ?! a move of doubtful value
equality # mate
with compensation with an attack
t
00 -+

with counterplay with an initiative

00 unclear N new move

Bibliography
Alburc, Dzindzichashvili & Perelshceyn: Chess Openingsfor Black Explained (2nd Edition), CIRC 2009 .
Alterman: The Alterman Gambit Guide - Black Gambits 2, Quality Chess 20 1 2 .
Avrukh: Grandmaster Repertoire 11 Beating l . d4 Sidelines, Quality Chess 20 1 2 .
-

Cox: Dealing with d4 Deviations, Everyman Chess 200 5 .

Davies: Th e Trompowsky (2nd Edition) , Everyman Chess 200 5 .
D e l a Villa: El Ataque Trompowsky, Evajedrez 200 1 .
Dembo: Fighting the Anti-King's Indians, Everyman Chess 2008.
Gallagher: Th e Trompowsky, The Chess Press 1 99 8 .
Hodgson: Secrets o fthe Trompowsky, Hodgson Enterprises 1 997.
Lakdawala: A Ferocious Opening Repertoire, Everyman Chess 20 1 0 .
Palliser: Starting Out: The Trompowsky Attack, Everyman Chess 2009.
Schandorff: Playing l.d4 - The Indian Defences, Quality Chess 20 1 2 .
Wells: Winning with the Trompowsky, Batsford 2003.
Williams: Play the Classical Dutch, Gambit 2003.

Periodicals
New In Chess Yearbooks
ChessBase Magazine

Electronic/Internet resources
ChessPublishing.com
Martin: The Trompowsky: The Easy Wtzy, ChessBase 2006.
Williams: Killer Dutch, Ginger GM 20 1 0 .
 Preface
As this is my first book, I really want to cake chis opportunity to thank the people who have
supported and helped me in chess, both on and off the board.

Firscly I would like co start by thanking the Quality Chess team, particularly Andrew Greet who
has made it so easy for me to write chis book.

Lee me now tell you a quick story. When I was five years old I went on a family skiing holiday to
Sweden . As it turned out there was no snow that year, so my dad took the opportunity to teach
my twin brother and me how to play chess. The pair of us were hooked, and my brother, GM
Nick Pert, has proved a worthy (sometimes too worthy) opponent for me ever since. My parents
contributed significancly to my chess career by giving up much of their free time driving Nick
and me to many chess events when we were youngsters . I know my dad would much rather have
spent that time sailing! One other person I want to mention from my childhood is FM Kevin
O'Connell, who lived on the same road as us. He gave up a lot of his time to coach both Nick and
me, and it is unquestionable in my mind chat without his support we would never have reached
the standard that we did. Kevin is still very active in FIDE, although recencly he has relocated to
France.

My wife definitely deserves praise, as she has had to put up with my chess bug which I can't seem
to shift (I'm sure some of you will know what I 'm talking about) . She actually didn't know I
played chess when we first started dating, but despite this she has been very patient with me over
the years when on occasion I have left her to handle the kids whilst I have gone off to play. My
kids, Nina (aged five) and Max (aged three) are fantastic and they are my biggest supporters. I 'd
also like to mention Brian Smith, who has supported me through his Wood Green team for many
years now. I 've lost count of how many London League, 4NCL and National Club tides we have
now picked up, but no doubt Brian will be able to tell you!

Away from the chess board, another person that I want to mention is IM Ali Mortazavi, who
despite his arrogant and cavalier appearance had enough heart to take me from working in a
burger bar and sit me down at a city trading desk! He still reminds me of that from time to time!
It still surprises me even today how many people from the chess circuit are willing to go out
of their way to use their time and contacts to try to help me out in my career path away from
the chess board. Without naming them all, a few examples from j ust this year alone are Paul
Littlewood, Ian Reynolds and Dilys Tan.

I 've made many other friends through chess and it is impossible to mention chem all, ranging
from the guys who used to support myself and Nick when we started out playing in Ipswich as
kids, through to the Essex contingent nowadays. I do however want to quickly mention a couple
of ocher guys, firstly GM Danny Gormally who along with his parents gave me a place to stay
when I first came to London looking for work as a 2 1 -year-old lad. Actually the plan was chat
6 Richard Pert - Playing the Tro m powsky

I was going to get a flat share with Danny, but he dropped all his money on a tennis bet and so
we ended up staying at his parents' house for a while instead! I also want to mention GM Simon
Williams - along with my brother I have probably been to more tournaments with him than
anybody else. We've had some good times and near scrapes over the years, including a manic trip
to Budapest, several visits to the South of France, a fun holiday/tournament in Norway (with
Mark Hebden and Adam Hunt) , and a dodgy week in Sheffield amongst many other trips. Simon
is a real enthusiast for the game and it rubs off. One final guy I want to mention away from the
chess board is my mate Dan Gray, who has always looked out for me over the last fifteen years,
and now looks out for my kids as well. Dan j ust got engaged to his girlfriend Rhiann in March
this year, and I want to wish them all the best in the future.

That's enough of me boring you with my life story - now you'd better go and learn how to play
this opening!

Richard Pert
Billericay, June 20 1 3
 Introduction
If like most players you have a limited amount of time that you can spend studying chess openings,
but still want to push for an advantage with White, then the Trompowsky is a great choice. Despite
the opening not being as well investigated as a lot of the main lines, it is still a very attacking
opening that is tricky for Black to face. I have no doubt that when I made this opening my main
choice some fifteen years ago, it significantly improved my performance with White.

In this opening White stamps his mark on the position from the second move with 2.ig5 . I have
focused on providing an in-depth White repertoire in the Trompowsky, l .d4 lll f6 2.ig5 , with a
couple of choices for White against several of Black's key options. On top of that I have also taken
the time to give a repertoire versus the Dutch Defence, l .d4 f5 2.ig5 , which seems to me to be very
strong, and had a look at the Pseudo-Tromp, l . d4 d5 2.ig5 , which leads to interesting positions.

This is my first book and I really haven't held anything back in my quest to make it as good
as possible. The book is packed with novelties and new ideas, whilst also taking into account
previous work. I am confident that this book will contribute significantly to the future theory of
the Trompowsky. It's my belief that this book is suitable for players ranging from club players all
the way up co top grandmasters. With firsthand experience of playing this opening against several
of the world's top players, and having studied it over such a long period, I believe that puts me in a
strong position to know which paths White should choose.

The Trompowsky really took off in England in the 1 990s, during which time GM Julian Hodgson
used it as his main weapon and GM Mickey Adams added it to his repertoire. I remember watching
Hodgson win British Championship after British Championship using this opening. It got to the
point where everyone knew what was coming, but no one knew what to do about it. This popularity
continued into the early 2000s with excellent books on the opening from GMs Joe Gallagher and
Pete Wells. By chis stage I would say that the majority of leading English players had at least taken
the opening out for a test run at some point. The popularity may have dwindled slightly over the
last decade, but I very much hope this book will help return it to the forefront again.

I have been fortunate enough to get the chance to play this opening against four of the five leading
English GMs in FIDE-rated games in recent years, Mickey Adams, Luke McShane, David Howell
and Gawain Jones. Despite English players being the leading experts on the Trompowsky, it is
interesting to note that all four of them chose relatively quiet lines against me, even though they
must have expected the opening. That certainly gives backing to my belief that White is doing
quite well in the main lines. Incidentally, I would just mention that this opening can be particularly
effective against players from outside Britain, many of whom have not studied this opening in
much depth.

Let me briefly tell you about the layout of the book. It is a White repertoire book, yet despite this
I have tried to give the reader a choice of lines against many of Black's main continuations in the
8 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

Trompowsky. For example, in the main line which continues l .d4 lll f6 2.ig5 lll e4 3.if4 c5, I have
actually given the reader three choices - sacrificing two pawns for a massive attack, sacrificing one
pawn for some initiative, or sacrificing no pawns but instead looking to obtain a small but solid
edge. Often I think it is useful to have a second choice in your back pocket for surprise value.

I haven't offered as much choice against l . . . f5 and l . . .d5, focusing more on providing one good
repertoire. I'm particularly pleased with my work against the Dutch and it looks to me that after
l .d4 f5 2.ig5 Black is struggling to hold the balance. I've also given a repertoire against l .. . d5, and
whilst I think that White may not be able to prove an advantage here against accurate play from
Black, the positions look interesting and fully playable.

Book Structure

Personally I read a lot of chess books on the train, as I have commuted on virtually a daily basis over
the past ten years. As a result I have a good knowledge of the books I find easy to read, and the ones
I struggle to find my way around.
I have tried in this book to lay everything out as logically as possible. I have taken time at the
start of each chapter to give an overview of Black's possibilities, showing clearly all his options and
highlighting any transpositions, and also showing where a second option is offered for White. One
further thing I've done is to make it clear which move I think should be played in each position.
I have seen several previous authors take the approach of putting a collection of model games
together, but have then found that I ended up not knowing what the right move was in each
position.
To help you find your way around the material, let me tell you some more about the chapters.

Chapter 1 : 1 .d4 f6 2.igS e6 3.e4

2 . . . e6 is one of Black's most solid choices and has risen in popularity in recent years to the point
that it is now Black's second most popular response to the Trompowsky. Black's idea is to prevent
his pawns being doubled by taking the time to protect the f6-knight with his queen . That said, the
move is slightly passive and gives us the chance to grab the initiative.
Here I have given two choices for White. The main move which I focus on in this chapter is
3 . e4, grabbing space in the middle of the board. My idea is to follow 3 . . . h6 4.ixf6 Wxf6 with the
modern 5 . c3 , where I have extensive personal experience. Although Black is quite solid, I believe
that White has good chances of an advantage.
The chapter also features new ideas against 3 . . . c5 , where I have a very powerful idea in the main
line.

Chapter 2: 1 .d4 f6 2.igS e6 3.d2

The second option against 2 . . . e6 that I cover is the flexible 3 .tll d2! ? . This approach has become
popular amongst the world's elite in recent years, particularly in blitz and rapid games.

Chapter 3: 1 .d4 f6 2.igS cS 3.c3

With 2 . . . c5 Black indicates he is ready to do battle! This uncompromising move was suggested by
Dembo in her highly-rated book, Fighting the Anti-King's Indians, which came out in 2008 .
In this chapter I take a look at a repertoire involving the quirky 3 .tll c3 !? which I have played on a
 Introductio n 9

number of occasions myself. I have found a major improvement in the main line which makes this
whole variation playable, where previously it was considered doubtful. Black must walk a tightrope
to make it out of the opening, and even if he does then White's chances look reasonable.

Chapter 4: 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS c5 3.d5

My main recommendation against 2 . . . c5 is to play 3.d5, taking control of the centre of the board.
In this chapter I have a couple of seriously good novelties, particularly in the Vaganian Gambit
which arises after 3 . . . '\Wb6 4. lll c3 . I think these improvements will send shivers up Black's spine!
Note that it is important when reading this chapter to check out the introduction, as transpositions
to variations elsewhere in the book are rife.

Chapter 5: 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS c!ll e4 3.if4 c5 4.dS

2 . . . lll e4 3 .if4 c5 is the main line and is considered by many as the best way to handle the
Trompowsky. I give three distinct ways of tackling this opening. In this chapter I look at 4.d5. Then
after 4 . . . %%6 White may sacrifice the b2-pawn in return for the initiative with 5 .lll d2! ? .
It i s also possible to defend the pawn with 5 .ic l , and this variation i s closely related t o one of
lines examined in Chapter 6 (with 7.ic l ) .

Chapter 6 : 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS c!ll e4 3.if4 c5 4.f3

White may also meet 2 . . . lll e4 3 .if4 c5 with 4.f3, and after 4 . . . Wa5 t 5 . c3 lll f6 6.d5 Wb6 I offer
another choice.
Firstly, 7.ic l seems quite solid for White and gives a reasonable chance of sneaking an advantage.
Finally I've extensively analysed the fascinating double pawn sacrifice which occurs after 7.e4
Wfxb2 8 .lll d2 '1Wxc3 9 .ic7!?. My analysis on this line is much deeper than has previously been
published, and I think it looks really interesting for White.

Chapter 7: 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS d5 3.ixf6

2 . . . d5 is another solid option for Black. It is his third most popular move against the Trompowsky
and it was the choice of both Michael Adams and David Howell against me in 20 1 0 . I offer White
two full repertoires against this line, covering 3 .ixf6 in this chapter.
After 3 . . . gxf6!? I have some exciting unplayed analysis which looks good for White.
Against the rock-solid 3 . . . exf6 I suggest a repertoire that involves playing g2-g3 and building
queenside pressure.

Chapter 8: 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS d5 3.e3

The second option which I cover against 2 . . . d5 is the flexible move 3 .e3 . This was a regular choice
ofTrompowsky expert Hodgson (in fact he played it against me once!) .
Transpositions are possible to a Veresov o r to lines elsewhere i n the book (for example, 3 . . . lll e4
4.if4 transposes directly to Chapter 9), so the introduction to the chapter should be read closely
if this is to be your main choice.

Chapter 9: 1 .d4 c!ll f6 2.igS c!ll e4 3.if4 d5

This variation combining . . . lll e4 with . . . d5 is becoming increasingly popular. This set-up is not
as aggressive as those involving . . . c5, and not as solid as those with 2 . . e6 or 2 . . . d5 - it is somewhere
in the middle. Unlike the other main variations where I have given White a second choice, here I
10 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

have chosen to look deeply at just one line involving 3 . e3 followed by a plan of id3 and ixe4, as I
feel happy about White's chances of gaining an advantage in these positions and it seems to me to
be the best line. Actually it was a game in this variation which was probably my main inspiration
for taking up the Trompowsky when I witnessed Mickey Adams wipe out Xie Jun in the 1 996
Hastings Premier.

Chapter 10: Rare 3rd Moves

Black has tried many other moves after 2 . . . llie4 3 .if4, from the provocative 3 . . . g5 through to
the ridiculously new 3 . . . e5. Generally in these lines White's chances look preferable, nevertheless
it is worth looking at the sidelines in this chapter - even strong players will sometimes resort to
them, for example Luke McShane tried 3 . . . d6 against me in an important last round clash in a
tournament in Denmark.

Chapter 1 1 : Rare 2nd Moves

We finish up our round-up of Trompowsky odds and ends by looking at various 2nd move
options, the old-fashioned 2 . . . g6 being the most common of these.

Chapter 12: 2.igS against the Dutch

2.ig5 against the Dutch Defence has gone from once being a sideline to now being one of the
most dangerous moves for Black to face. I think White's prospects in this line are excellent and I
have used this move on a number of occasions myself with great results. I feel confident offering
just one repertoire against this variation as it seems to me that Black is really struggling to hold the
balance. So much so that a good friend of mine, Simon Williams, who is well known for his Dutch
exploits, now regularly plays I . . . e6, looking to transpose into the classical Dutch via a different
move order specifically aimed at avoiding this line.

Chapter 13: 1 .d4 dS 2.igS

In our final chapter we look at 2.ig5 against I. .. d5 - known as the Pseudo-Tromp. I don't
believe that 2.ig5 is as accurate here as it is against I . . . lli f6 or I .. .f5 , and with correct play I think
that Black can reach a balanced position. That said, it can be a good practical choice as it is low in
theory and the positions are interesting and imbalanced. This line was particularly popular with
top English GMs Mickey Adams, Julian Hodgson and Tony Miles during the 1 990s. I do not offer
White as many choices in this line as I do in the Trompowsky, but instead focus on picking out my
favourite variations for White.
After studying this variation in detail I have come to the conclusion that 2 . . . h6 and 2 .. .f6! are the
two choices for Black which are most difficult to prove an advantage against. I feel quite happy with
White's prospects of gaining an advantage against Black's numerous other second moves.
After the main move 2 . . . h6 I suggest a variation which was a firm favourite of Hodgson's. White
sacrifices a pawn in the centre of the board but gets a huge amount of play for it, and from a
practical viewpoint I really like it for White.
I have come round to the view that the rarely played 2 .. .f6! (only the fifth most popular choice)
may actually be Black's best. Because it seems the critical move, I have spent quite a lot of time on it.
I look at the three responses 3 .ih4, 3 .if4 and 3.id2, all of which are playable for White, though
being honest I would have to say that in each line the chances look balanced.
Chapter 1

2 ... e6 3.e4

1 .d4 f6 2.i.g5 e6 3.e4

A) 3 ... c5!? 4.d5 13

Al) 4 ... d6 14
A2) 4 ... h6 16
B) 3 ... h6 4.i.xffi xf6 5.c3!? 20
Bl) 5 ... c6 21
B2) 5 ... c5 23
B3) 5 ... d5 6.d2 c5 7. gf3 24
B3 1) 7 ... cxd4 8.ll:)xd4 i.c5 9,ll:)2b3!? 25
B3 1 1) 9 ... i.xd4 26
B3 12) 9 ... i.b6 27
B32) 7 ...ll:)c6 8.i.b5 cxd4 9,ll:)xd4 i.d7 1 0.0-0!? 28
B32 1) 1 0 ...i.e7 30
B322) 1 0 ...d8 31
B4) 5 ... d6 6.i.d3 32
B41) 6 ... e5 34
B42) 6...g6 7,ll:)e2 i.g7 8.0-0 e5 9.f4 36
B42 1) 9 ... exd4 37
B422) 9 ... e7 40
B422 1) lO.ll:)d2 41
B4222) 1 0.fS! 44
12 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
1.d4 tll f6 2.i.g5 e6
This rock-solid positional choice is one
of Black's most popular responses. It seems
strange for Black to self-pin his f6-knight, but
his motivation is to prevent White doubling
his pawns, as he will be able to meet a future
ixf6 with . . . \Wxf6. It is no surprise to notice
that this move has been the first choice of
Karpov, who is renowned for never allowing
pawn weaknesses if he can help it. That said
though, Black does hand us the short-term
initiative with this approach, allowing us to
gain a lead in development and more space - it
is up to us to try to take maximum advantage
of that.
3.e4
This direct and logical move is the main line
and is my personal preference. I am going to
focus on it in this chapter. In choosing this
approach we allow Black to take the bishop
pair away from us, but in return we get quick
and easy development and that should be
enough for us to claim a small advantage.
3 .lll d2! ? is another option for White, which I
shall look at in the next chapter. This flexible
move looks to take advantage of Black's passive
response to the Trompowsky, eyeing up a
future e2-e4 without yielding the bishop pair. I
have noticed this line is becoming increasingly
popular amongst the world's elite in blitz and
rapid games, and perhaps it will become a line
for the future.
3 ... h6
This is Black's main move, looking to win
the bishop pair. John Cox also gives this as his
recommendation in his 2005 book, Dealing
with d4 Deviations. Rather complimentary
to me in his introduction, John says his
inspiration for writing the book was "being
utterly slaughtered by Richard Pert in a
London League match" . Well John picked a
solid system for Black, but nevertheless we will
try to put it under pressure.
The interesting sideline 3 . . . c5 ! ? is growing in
popularity, having been recommended by De
Dovitiis in his articles in New in Chess Yearbooks
92 and 93. It has also been recommended in
the Alterman Gambit Guide - Black Gambits 1.
However I have a seriously strong idea in the
main variation which may force Black to have
a rethink here.
4.Lf6
4.ih4? is not possible as Black simply wins a
pawn with 4 . . . g5 5 .ig3 lLi xe4 .
4 ...xf6
The main position of this variation.
 Chapter I - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 13

5.c3!? 1 .d4 tlif6 2 ..igS e6 3.e4

I plan to base our repertoire on this pawn
move. It is not as common as 5 .tll c3 or 5 .tll f3 ,
but it is my favourite. White sets about a
simple plan of playing id3 , tll e2, 0-0 and f2-
f4 , grabbing space on the kingside. Black often
finds his queen misplaced in these variations as
it is a target for White's advancing pawns, and
so he has to rake yet more rime out to move the
queen back to d8, giving us an even bigger lead
in development.
I was amazed to find that I have played this
position in excess of 1 5 0 times (including blitz
and rapid games) . In fact my games alone
make up one sixth of the total number of
games featuring this position in my database.
Hopefully this experience should mean that I
am well placed to discuss the position, and at
points I go into quite a bit of detail (perhaps I would like to j ust briefly mention 3 . . . ie7.
even more than is needed) about how I feel Although quite often played, it looks way too
White should play this position. I have laid it passive to me. White has a pleasant choice:
all out very logically so that everything is easy
to reference, and there are plenty of new ideas a) 4.tll d2! ? transposes into a favourable version
in there which should leave you well equipped of the 3 . tll d2-variation, which is covered on
to play this position. page 48 of the next chapter.

b) The alternative is to take on the challenge

with 4.e5 ! ? immediately: 4 . . . tll d5 5 .ixe7
Wfxe7 6.c4 tll b6 7.tll c3 d6 8 . tll f3 tll c6 9 . exd6
(or 9 .id3 !?) 9 . . . cxd6 1 0 .id3N;!; With 0-0
followed by l:!e l coming soon, this looks to
favour White.

A) 3 ... cS!?

This is an ambitious attempt to attack the

centre. It has gained in popularity over the
last decade as Black looks to soften up White's
dark squares before going about netting his
dark-squared bishop. However, I have a new
idea in the main line which should send Black
back to the drawing board.

4.dS
14 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

'a' A :\tit
s z,!a'(

1 l .ixe4 d6 1 2 .l'!e l ie6 1 3 .tlJ g5 tlJ c6
.a. r.iJS M
7 %lfi" ,,7, -.--.
1 4 .id5 ixd5 1 5 .l'!xe7t ixe7 1 6.ic3 ic4

" '!af'a
,,,,,;m.-
1 7.Wg4 b5 1 8 .l'!e l tlJ e 5 1 9 .ixe5 dxe5
6
5 -0
20.'1We4 0-0 2 1 .'1Wxh7# Gonzalez de la Nava

8m
- Hens bergen, Lisbon 200 1 .

W
3 , ,,,x c ,;,,,Y,
7 . f4 d6

4
. .
Play has transposed into line A 1 2 of
Chapter 4 (see page 82) .

2
'
WM -
or@o- 0 -
[j[j[!j
flt) 1mJl
4 . . . exd 5 ? ! 5 . e 5 !

1
5 . exd5 '1W b 6 6 . tlJ c3 '1Wxb2 7 . tlJ ge2 i s also
possible, with good compensation for the
a b c d e f g h pawn.
It's probably j ust a matter of taste, but
personally I really like this move as White
keeps control of the important d5-square. 4.e5
is the major alternative, but it looks a bit ugly
to me.

We shall now examine Al) 4 d6 and A2)

...
4 h6, after a quick look at a couple of other
..
options.

4 . . . \Wb6
This is liable to reach a line of the Vaganian
5 . . . We7
Gambit that is favourable to White.
5 . . . h6? doesn't work here: 6.exf6 hxg5
5 . tlJ c3 Wxb2 6.id2
7.We2t+-
6.'1We2 h6 7.if4
Here we see one of the Trompowsky's leading
experts at the wheel.
7.ixf6 is given by Alej o de Dovitiis in New
in Chess Yearbook 93 as another way to gain
the advantage. His analysis runs: 7 . . . gxf6
8 . tlJ c3 fxe5 9 . tlJ xd5 Wd6 1 0 .0-0-0t
7 . . . tlJ e4 8 . f3 tlJg5 9 . tlJc3 d4 1 O.tlJd5 Wd8
1 1 .e6
Direct chess from Hodgson.
a b c d e f g h 1 1 . . .d6 1 2.ixg5 hxg5 1 3.exf7t 'i!lxf7 14. 0-0-0t
White's safer king position gave him an edge
6 . . . \Wb6
in Hodgson - Belkhodja, France 1 999.

..
6 . . . ttJ xe4? is possible as Black will regain
the piece, but he is left so far behind in
development that it is not advisable: 7.tlJxe4
Al) 4 d6
'1We5 8 .id3 exd5 9 . tlJ f3 '1We7 1 0 . 0-0 dxe4
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 15

8.e5!
White blasts open the position at the expense
of a pawn.

8 . a4 has also been played, but I do not find

it convincing: 8 . . . 0-0 9 . lll f3 ixb5 1 0 .axb5"
Miladinovic - Aleksic, Cutro 200 I.

8 ... dxe5 9.Lf6 Lf6

9 . . . gxf6? looks somewhat shaky: 1 0 .Wfh 5 t
'i!lf8 1 1 .0-0-0

5.tll c3 i.e7!
5 . . . e5 looks a little slow to me as Black
has spent two tempos advancing his e-pawn.
6.ib 5 t id7 7.a4 ie7 8 .lll B 0-0 9 .h3 ic8
I O.ie3 White had a clear lead in development a b c d e f g h
1 I. . . Wfe8 1 2 .Wfh6t @f7 ( 1 2 . . . 'i!lg8 ? 1 3 .d3 +
and stood better in R. Pert - S. Berry, Liverpool
2008.
and here come the troops) 1 3 .ie2;!; White
keeps ongoing pressure.
6.i.b5t i.d7
6 . . . lll bd7? is not advisable: 7. dxe6 fxe6
8 .ixf6 gxf6 (8 . . . ixf6 9 .Wfxd6) 9 .Wfh5t
White forces the black king to move, and is
ahead in development as well.

7.dxe6 fxe6

a b c d e f g h
16 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom powsky

1 O.ixd7t has been tried before but White's 1 5 .tll f3!N

advantage is minimal: 1 0 . . . Wxd7 ( l O . . . tlJ xd7
1 1 .Wh5t g6 1 2 .Wg4 We7 1 3 . lLi f3) 1 1 .tlJ e4
0-0 1 2.Wxd7 tLi xd7 1 3 . 0-0-0 ad8 1 4 . tlJ f3
White has a tiny advantage, though a draw
looks the most likely result with accurate play.
1 5 . h400 was played in Aronian/Gaerths/
Zeitz - Nisipeanu/Figura/Mattick, Berlin
2009, and White went on to lose the game.
1 5 a6 1 6 .ia4 ghf8
.

1 6 . . . ih6t 1 7.@b l hf8 1 8 .Wh3

1 0 ... g6 1 1 .Wlg4 tlJ c6 12.0-0-0
1 2.ixc6? does not work out: 1 2 . . . ixc6 17.WlgS Wlxg5t 18.tll fxgS h6
1 3 .Wxe6t We?+

l 2 . tlJ e4
This is playable immediately and is likely
to transpose, but it does give Black an
additional option.
1 2 . . . 0-0
1 2 . . . Wa5 t ? is not a good idea: 1 3 . b4! Wxb4?
1 3 .c3+-
1 2 . . . We7 1 3 .0-0-0 transposes to the main
game.
1 3 . 0-0-0 tLi d4 ! ? 1 4.ixd7 Wxd7 1 5 . c3 Wd5
1 6 . cxd4 cxd4 1 7.@b l ig7
The threat of . . . f4 offers Black some
compensation for the piece, though probably
not quite enough.

12 Wf e7 13.e4 0-0-0 14.c3 .ig7

..
A2) 4 h6 5 .ixf6 Wlxf6 6.tll c3
..

So far we have been following what appears

to be a consultation game between teams of
three, and here I would like to suggest an
improvement.

6 a6
..

A blitz game of mine highlights the danger

if Black fails to cover the b5 -square: 6 . . . d6
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . e6 3 . e4
. 17

7.i.b 5 t ctJ d7 8 .dxe6 fXe6 9 . ctJ f3 a6 1 0 .e5 Wi'g6
( 1 0 . . . W/f4 l l .g3 Wi'f7 1 2.i.xd7t i.xd7 1 3 .exd6
i.xd6 1 4.Wi'xd6 Wi'xf3 1 5 .l:%fl and White's better
pawn structure gives him an edge) l l .i.d3
Wi'xg2 1 2 .l:%gl Wi'h3 1 3 .i.g6t c;f?ds 1 4.l:%g3 1 -0
Antidrome - CofC-SCal, Internet 2009.
By the end of this book you will be used to my
Internet Chess Club handle of''.Antidrome" , as
I have often called upon my vast number of
blitz games to fill gaps where ideas have not yet
been played in FIDE-rated games.
7.ctJf3 d6
This line has been played against me by two
Australian players, GM Ian Rogers and IM
Alex Wohl. It is obvious that they believed
it to be a reasonable way of handling this
position, but after the shock Alex received
against me in the opening, I fancy they may
turn to different ideas in the future. This line
is also the recommendation of De Dovitiis in
New in Chess Yearbook 93, but he did not pay
sufficient attention to my next move.
7 . . . e5 is a commitment Black does not want to
make yet. He would rather stay flexible with
his pawn on e6 where he can make the choice
between opening or closing the e-file at any
given moment. White can continue with 8 . a4
This new idea is seriously powerful. I
remember when this position appeared on
the board in my game against Alex Wohl in
Hastings 20 1 0, I was very excited by the
prospect of playing this move. This position
can very quickly become winning for White.
Sadly I cannot claim the move as my novelty;
I have discovered that I was only the second to
play it. But the first time it was played, White
immediately followed up incorrectly and so
its strength was not apparent - see the note to
White's 1 0th move below.
8 ... dxe5 9.e2
I believe that White should aim for a standard
plan here of playing 0-0-0, g2-g3 (preventing
. . . W/f4t) , i.h3 and l:%he l ; I will call this Plan
A. Going for an early ctJ e4 may look tempting
but is often a mistake, as White should stay
flexible and try to keep all his options open.
It's uncomfortable for Black to know that he
could be hit by ctJ e4 at any moment.
9 ... tli d7
This looks to be critical, though Black has
several other options.
9 . . . i.d6 1 0 . 0-0-0! 0-0 l l .g3 l:%d8 1 2 .i.h3 b5
1 3 .l:%he l

.1att
d6 9 .i.e2;!; with ctJ d2-c4 on the cards.

..
. . : l'
s

7
-% Y,
8.e5!!
-- . xr

:,,.,-
4
- --
..... r. ..... r.
:"'/ w; n

,: Q:J .t
2 88"/i" ld r.
3

a b c
r
1 x - x
d e f g h
White's Plan A worked well in this example,
quickly leading to a winning position: 1 3 . . . b4
1 4. llJ e4 Wi'e7 1 5 .ctJxd6 l:%xd6 1 6.ctJxe5+
Antidrome - sovaco, Internet 2009.
a b c d e f g h
18 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

9 . . . b5 10. 0-0-0 .ib7 This was the move my opponent chose the
I O . . . b4 I 1.lll e4 first time I played this line in a tournament.
As you will see I was winning shortly after
the opening, and it's absolutely criminal
that I failed to win the game - but that's
chess!
I O .'Wxe4 .id6 1 l .dxe6 'Wxe6 1 2. 0-0-0 'Wxe4
1 3 .lll xe4 .if4t 14.@b l lll d7 1 5 .g3 .ic7
1 6 . .ih3 lll e5 1 7 . .ixc8 xc8 1 8 . lll x e5 .ixe5
1 9 .d5!

6 rr1-0 a r
- - j
:::
-
0 .
"a lti -
"
I 1 . lll xb5 !
r.: n
...

Showing a benefit of n o t playing lll e4 too s

4
" -
-
early.

2 8 8- o
l l . . . e4 3

1 - -- --:
l l . . .'Wf4t?! 12.'ll d2 axb 5 1 3 .Wxb5 t 'll d7
14.dxe6 0-0-0 1 5 . exd7t xd7 16.g3 Wf5

1 7. f3
1 2 . liJ d2 axb5
1 2 . . . exd5 13 .lll c7t e7 1 4.lll xa8 .ixa8
1 5 . f3+-
12 . . . We5 13.lll xe4 .ie7 14.lll c7t Wxc7
1 5 . d6 'Wc6 16.dxe7+-
13 .Wxb 5t lll d7 1 4.dxe6 fxe6 I 5 .Wxb7 b8
16.'Wxd7t xd7 17.lll xe4t 'Wd4 18.xd4t
cxd4 1 9 . .id3;!;
White's passed pawns on the queenside are
more than enough for the exchange.
9 . . . e4
h
a b c d e f g
Black is about to lose two pawns.
19 . . . .ib8 20.lll xc5 0-0 2 1 .e l ?
Although White is still winning after this,
21. lll xb7+- is simple and strong.
21. . ..ia7 22. 'll d3 c7 23.c3 g6 24.c2
g7 2 5 .de5 h5 26.e7 fc8 27.lll f4 xe7
2 8 . xe7 .ixf2 29.'ll h3 f6 30.xb7 .ie3
31.d3 e8 32.b4 f5 3 3 . lll fL. .ih6 34. lll e4
d8t 3 5 .d4 xd4t 36.xd4 g4 37.c4 f5
3 8 .c5 fxe4 39.c6 e3 40.c7 e2 41. c8=Wt
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 19

Somehow, despite being a queen down,
Black manages to wriggle away with a draw.
That Mr. Wohl is a slippery character - I
really thought I had him in this game!
41. . .c;!/f3 42.1Wc6t c;!/f2 43.Wf6t <itig l 44.'1We6
c;!/f2 45 .Wf6t c;!/g l
Yz-Yz R. Pert - Wohl, Hastings 2010.
This was Paci - F. Berend, Nancy 2008.
White now missed a chance to gain a decisive
advantage:
14.d7t!N ixd7 1 5 . lll xe6+-
1 0 ...J.e7
Against the alternatives the standard
treatment yet again does the job:

7
8

r.
i.-.t
: .
-- - - Z r
10 . . . exd5 11. lll xd5 1Wd6 12.g3 ie7 13 .ih3
0-0 14.Elhel;!;

65 . t---%-% 8 tj;...J'

10 . . . b5 1 Lg3! ib7 12.ih3 Eld8 13.lll e4 Wg6

----%
14. lll h4 1Wh7 15.dxe6+-

4 1 1 .g3

3nm
------- -% -
White sticks with Plan A - I've included a

---efr
8 ---% (b:r,(r
;Z ----Z
couple of my blitz games as there have been
2 8 1W 8 r no tournament games in this variation to show

lf - mn how effective this line is.

a b c d e f g h 1 1 0-0
..

10.0-0-0 l 1 . . . h 5 12.ih3 0-0 13 .Elhe l b5 14.c;!/b l c4

It is inaccurate to play: 15.lll e4 Wg6 16.dxe6 fxe6
10 .lll e4?! '1We7 11.0-0-0 f5 ?!
This is too weakening.
1 l . . . b 5 ! ?N followed by . . . ib7 seems fine for
Black; the threat to the d5-pawn will divert
White from Plan A.
12.d6 Wd8 ?
12 . . . Wf7 was necessary to defend the light
squares.

12.ih3 ges
12 . . . exd5 13. lll xd5 Wd6 14.Elhel;!;

1 3.ghel J.f8 1 4.dxe6 fxe6 15.tlie4 Wg6

1 6.t/Jh4 Wf7
20 Richard Perr - Playing the Trompowsky

B) 3 ... h6 4.i.xf6 Vfxf6 5.c3!?

a b c d e f g h

17.i.g4! tli f6 18.tlixf6t Vfxf6 19.i.hS gds

20.gxdS Yfxd8 2 1 .VfxeS
As is typical in these lines, White regains the
e5-pawn at his convenience and still holds all
the other advantages of the position, including
a better structure with fewer pawn islands, and
the more active pieces as Black's bishops are
hampered by his pawns.
As I mentioned in the introduction, my
preference is to support the cl-pawn with this
move, planning to continue with id3 , tLl e2,
0-0 and then f2-f4 .
Black now has several reasonable alternatives
and we shall investigate B l ) 5 ... tli c6, B2) 5 ... c5
and B3) 5 ... d5, before coming to Black's most
popular choice of B4) 5 ... d6. We first take a
quick look at a couple of rarer moves:

5 . . . b6 6 .id3 ib7 7 . lLi e2

7 . . . c5
I 've included one of my blitz games to
show what can happen if Black opts to play
slowly here: 7 . . . d6 8 . 0-0 Wi'd8 9 . tLl d2 ie7
10 . f4 tlJ d7 11. f5 exf5 12.l'!xf5 lLi f6 13 . tLl g3
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 21

White's kingside pressure gives him good 7.cxd4 ib4t 8 . ll'l c3 0-0 9.e5 Wg6 1 0.id3
prospects. 1 3 . . . Wd7 1 4 .ib5 c6 1 5 .ic4 d5 Wxg2 1 1 .i'!g l Wh3 1 2 .i'!g3 ixc3t 1 3 .bxc3
1 6.exd5 ll'l xd5 1 7 .ixd5 cxd5 1 8 . ll'l f3 0-0 Wh5 1 4.Wb3
1 9 . ll'l e5 We6 20.Wfl id6 2 1 .i'!e l i'!ae8 White clearly has great play for the sacrificed
22 .i'!e3 ib8 23.i'!ff3 ixe5 24.i'!xe5 Wd7 pawn.
2 5 . ll'l f5 i'!e6 26.i'!g3 i'!g6 27.ll'l e7t 1 -0 l 4 . . . d6? l 5 .ig6
Antidrome - GreenSkull, Internet 20 1 2. 1 -0 Argandona Riveiro - Argaya Urdaniz,
8 . 0-0 ll'l c6 9.e5 We7 1 0 . ll'l d2 d6 l l .f4 dxe5 Amorebieta 2006.
1 2. fxe5 Wd7 1 3 . ll'l f3 i'!d8 1 4.We l cxd4
1 5 . ll'l exd4 ll'l xd4 16. ll'lxd4 ic5 1 7.@h l 0-0 Bl) 5 ... c6
1 8 .i'!f4 We7 1 9 .Wg3
Yi-Yi R. Pere - Flumborc, Patras 200 1 .
Looking back, I chink setding for a draw
was premature - the position remains finely
balanced bur certainly looks easier for White
to play with ongoing kingside pressure.

5 . . . e5 6 . ll'l f3
White can also claim a slight plus with:
6.dxe5 Wxe5 7. ll'l d2 ic5 8 . ll'l gf3 We7
9.id3;!;

6.eS
This must be the right way co cry to cake
advantage of Black's previous move.

6 ...fle7
Black has also tried:
6 . . . exd4
6 . . . Wg6 7 . ll'l d2
6 . . . d6 7.ll'lbd2 g6 8 .ib5 t c6 9 .ie2 ig7
This was White's most recent choice.
1 0 .dxe5 dxe5 l 1 . ll'l c4 0-0 1 2 .Wd6 Wf4
An alternative of roughly equal value is
1 3 .0-0 Wxe4 1 4 .id3 Wd5 1 5 .Wxd5 cxd5
7 . ll'l f3 ! ? d6 and now:
1 6 . ll'l cxe5 tll c6 1 7.i'!fel;!; Duong The Anh -
a) 8 . ll'l bd2 transposes to 7 . ll'l d2 d6 8 . ll'l gf3
Eperjesi, Budapest 2008.
as considered below.
6 ... ll'l c6 7.ib5 (7.d5 ll'l e7 8 . ll'l bd2 ll'l g6
b) 8 .id3 Wxg2 9 .i'!g l Wh3 1 0 . ll'l bd2 must
9 . g3;!; preventing . . . tll f4) 7 . . . exd4 8 . cxd4
offer White some compensation.
a6 9.ia4 ib4t 10 . ll'l c3 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 ixc3
c) 8.h3!? looks strange, but there is a reason
1 2 .bxc3 was pleasant for White in Kaufeld
behind it: 8 . . . id7 9 .id3 Wxg2 ? ? 1 0 .i'!h2
Cekro, Belgium 20 1 2.
picks up the queen .
22 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

7 . . . d6 8 . f4 l 1 . tll gf3 f6 12 .b4 ie8 13 .b5 tll b8 14.Wa4 Wa3

White may also consider 8 . tll gf3 id7 9 . tll c4
ie7 10.id3 Wxg2 1 1.:B:g l , followed by
taking on g7 with the initiative.
8 . . . id7 9.Wf3 0-0-0
I 5 .Wb3 tll d7 16. tll c4 We7 I 7.a4 fxe5 l 8 . tll cxe5
tll x e5 19 .tll xe5 g5 (19 . . . Wf600 intending . . . id6
would have been stronger) 20.ic4!;!; White
seized the initiative and went on to win in
Hodgson - Rowson, Birmingham 200 I .

7 ... d6 8.ib5 .id7 9.exd6 cxd6

9 . . . Wxd6 was played against me in a blitz
game, but Black's queen finds itself awkwardly
placed in the middle of the board: 10. 0-0 ie7
1 I . tll bd2 Wd5 12.ic4N (12.c4 Wf5 13 .:B:e l
was also slightly better for White in Antidrome
- Guineo, Internet 2011) 12 . . . Wh5 13.ie2
Wf5 14.tll c4;!; and the black queen remains a

b d f g h
target.
a c e

10 .id3 f5 l 1.exf6N 1 0.0-0 a6 1 1 ..ia4 tl)a7

This looks tempting to me as now Black's

.1 --
%'
"0,,;/. ..tJiiLt.
plan of putting his bishop on c6 can be met
8
;! .,, . , , , , , , Y,
r, ..,.
- -
.t. ,,%-w.,...%
by blocking with a piece on e4.
1 I .tll e2 tll e7 12 .0-0 ic6 was unclear in 1
6
7:....%
Gogolis - Drenchev, Neos Marmaras 2012 .
11. . .Wxf6 12. 0-0-0 tll e7 13 .tll e2 ic6 14.ie4 % ,..,%

!o

White's lead in development gives him an
edge.
: r - %


3- r - ,,..% mct:Jm
2 ltwri - ftwtj
1d-''=--
a b c d e f g h
1 2.dSN
This looks the right idea, aiming to limit
Black's dark-squared bishop.
12 . tll bd2 ixa4 13.Wxa4t Wd7 14.Wb3 ie7
15.tll c4 tll c8 16. tll e3 (16.d5N may still be
the way to go: 16 . . . e5 17.a4;!;) 16 . . . 0-0 I 7.c4

a b c d e f g h
b5 18.d5 bxc4 19.Wxc4 tll b6 20.Wg4 if6
21.:B:ad l a5 22.dxe600 Rowson - Cherniaev,
7.tl)f3 London 199 9 .
Julian Hodgson went his own way here and
grabbed some space on the kingside: 7.h4!? 1 2 ...eS 13.tl) bd2 .ixa4 1 4.xa4t d7
d6 8.f4 dxe5 9.fxe5 id7 10. tll d2 0-0-0 1 5.xd7t @xd7 16.tl)c4 @c7 1 7.a4
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 23

B2) 5 ... cS a) 7 . . . exd5 8 . exd5 tll e5 9 . tll x e5 Wfxe5t

1 0 .ie2 id6 l 1 .tll a3 ! Making short work

8 .i-.i. - of Black's plan to block the position up.

" x '
7- '"S'"1"
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 .tll c4 Wff6 1 3 . 0-0 b5 1 4. tll xd6
Wfxd6 1 5 .ixb 5 :!::1b 8 1 6.Wfd3 a6 1 7 .ic4

: ,' ,!"
:!::1x b2 l 8 .:!::1a b 1 :!::1x b 1 l 9 .E1xb 1 E1e8 2 0 . g3
g6 2 1 .a4 @g7 22.h4 h 5 23.a5 Wc7 24.d6

Jo!
Wi'xa5 2 5 .Wff3 f5 26.Wf d5 :!::1f8 27.Wi'e 5 t @h6

O"
4
28 .Wff4t 1 -0 Hebden - A. Grant, Isle of Man

3 - d ---- "
- ,,,, r
2002.

JfJ Uwrf!J\Jl
!JI
2
tt:JV.i. J:. b) 7 ... tll e5 8 .ie2 tll xf3 t 9 .ixf3 exd5
1 0 .Wfxd5 We6 1 l .Wi'd3 ie7 1 2 . 0-0 0-0

1
1 3 . tll d2 b5 1 4 .:!::1 fe l :!::1 b 8 1 5 .e5 c4 1 6 .Wfd4
m Wb6 1 7.Wi'xb6 :!::1x b6 1 8 .a4 a6 19 .axb5 axb5
a b c d e f g h 20.E1a7 :!::1e 8 2 l .id5 ic5 2 2 .:!::1a 8;!; Mark came
This was tried against me at the end of 20 1 2 through with flying colours and notched up
by Arianne Caoili who at the time was playing an impressive victory in Hebden - Adams,
for an IM norm. She is the girlfriend of Lev Kilkenny 2006.
Aronian and so I am not sure if he had any
influence in her opening choice in what must 7 ...a6 8.Lc6 bxc6
have been an important game for her, Black nets the bishop pair against White's
knights, bur I still had a lead in development
6.tlia tli c6 7.J.hS!? and so looked to make that count.
White has a major alternative here in the
.i .i.-
,
more commonly played 7,d5 which is the
8
76 -
A U-AUAE

]----/,'//
first choice of English GM Mark Hebden, I
know Mark quite well and can confirm that
he knows his systems very well, so for him ,,.

,
5 ---J '.,,

to use this move on several occasions means
it has to be taken seriously. Here are a couple
,,
8
4

' !
of examples from him, including the ultimate

3 rd---- -,,,, r
r[j m
jJiill
test as he faced England's number one Mickey
Adams.
2 r
1 ;=----%-
d
m, ,
b f g h
,_ _ _ _ Y, ,., %

a c e
_ _

9.0-0 cxd4 1 0.cxd4 cS 1 1 .eS Wff5 12.tli bd2

ih7 13Jkl
Black sank into thought here as it became
obvious that untangling her position was going
to be trickier than she originally expected.

1 3 ...ie7
24 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

Eventually Black decided to j ust give me a B3) 5 ... d5

pawn and accept a worse position.
This is probably Black's most critical move as
1 3 . . . cxd4 1 4.E:c7! was my intention with the he looks to stake a claim over the centre rather
idea: 1 4 . . . ic6?! ( 1 4 . . . id5 1 5 .Wa4;!;) than let White have it all his own way.

6.d2
Hodgson's regular choice was to advance in
the centre:
6.e5
I prefer to delay this move; we can always
close the centre later. But it can be
particularly useful to have the option of
opening the position, especially since we are
likely to castle first while Black's king may be
left in the middle.
6 . . . Wd8 7 . f3 c5 8 . dxc5

8 .1 .t--
7 ,,
3 . - .....
. . . 7. . , Y. ., v.
6 '- 7.'0
T ---

s i
14.dxc5 0-0 1 5 Jfol f6
4 - . .0J
--
3 -P-
2 efrg, efrg, efrg,
1 ,.:: ftl)-.lr 1tR1
a b c d e f g h
8 . . . lll d7! ?
8 . . . ixc5 9 .id3 lll c6 1 0 . 0-0 id7 l 1 . tll b d2
Wc7 1 2.We2 ie7 1 3 .E:fe l a6 1 4.E:ac l E:c8
1 5 .lll b3 Wb6 1 6 .ib l lll a5 1 7 . lll x a5 Wxa5
1 8 . lll d4 ig5 1 9 .E:cd l ia4 20. lll b 3 Wb6
2 1 .E:d4 ixb3 22.axb3 ie7 23 .ic2;!; with
a b c d e f g h
ongoing kingside pressure, Hodgson - Tan,
Scarborough 200 1 .
1 6.c6! J.xc6 17. d4 Wfd3 1 8.xc6 dxc6 9 .b4 ie7
1 9.exf6 !xf6 20.e4 Wfxdl 2 1 .xf6t E:xf6 9 . . . g6 1 0 .tll bd2 ig7 1 l .ib5 0-0 1 2 .ixd7
22.E:exdU ixd7 1 3 . 0-0 Wc7 1 4.E:e l ;l; Milov - Epishin,
In R. Pert - Caoili, London 20 1 2, Whi te Amsterdam 2000.
had achieved a comfortable advantage and I O .id3 Wc7 1 1 .We2 a5 1 2. 0-0 0-0 1 3 . lll bd2
virtually no losing chances. b600 Rogers - Epishin, Castrop Rauxel 200 1 .

6 ... c5 7.gf3
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 25

9 . . . ib4 1 0 .ib5t
1 0 .Wa4t? is well met by 10 ... tDc6+.
1 0 . . .id7 1 1 . ltJ xd7 ixd2t 1 2.Wxd2 lD xd7
1 3 .ixd7t
1 3 . 0-0?! d8 1 4. f3 Wg5 ! 1 5 .Wb4 exf3
I 6 .xf3 We7+
1 3 . . . 'it?xd7
This is the line given by Palliser. I had a quick
look at this position and think that Black can
follow up . . . hd8 and . . . c;!,ie8 against most
White plans and be absolutely fine.

7 . . . a6 looks a bit slow. White can choose

between 8 .id3 cxd4 9 . cxd4 dxe4 1 0 .ixe4!;!;
as given by Tzermiadianos, and 8 . dxc5 ixc5
9 .id3 lD c6 1 0 . 0-0 0-0 1 1 .We2 ia7 1 2.fe l
id7 1 3 .ad l ad8 1 4 . ttJ fl with an initiative
for White, Karttunen - Hellsten, Plovdiv
2003 .

B3 1 ) 7 ... cxd4 8.xd4

8 . cxd4 dxe4 9 . lD e 5 ! ?

8 . . . tDc6 9.ib5 transposes to variation B32

below.

9. 2b3!?
This is my computer's choice and was also
suggested as worthy of further investigation by
Andrew Greet.

h
9 . ltJ 4f3
b d f g
a c e
A solid alternative.
This is an interesting idea suggested by Nigel 9 . . . lD c6
Davies and supported by Tzermiadianos. Play has transposed into a game in which the
But to be honest, it's not quite good enough young Magnus Carlsen was Black. We shall
and both Cox and Palliser show support for have a quick look at the opening in which
Black's position. White managed to get an edge.
26 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

I O .id3

1 0 . . . 0-0
This was Carlsen's choice.
1 o . . . d4 is my computer's suggestion, when
White has various options:
a) 1 1 .c l is solid: 1 1 . . .dxc3 1 2.xc3 ib4
The other bishop retreat of 9 . . . id6 ?! does not
1 3 .c2 0-0 1 4. 0-0 id7 1 5 .1We2 and the
really make sense. For example: I O .ib 5 t id7
position looks balanced, although White's
1 1 . exd5 We5 t 1 2 .We2 Wxe2t 1 3 .ixe2 exd5
play may be slightly easier.
b) l 1 .e5 is playable: 1 1 . . . tll x e5 1 2 .ib5t id7
1 4.if3;!; with a clear advantage for White who
can heap pressure on the d-pawn .
1 3 .ixd7t tll xd7 1 4 .cxd4 ib6 ( 1 4 . . . ixd4?
l 5 .tll e4+-) 1 5 . 0-0 0-000
B3 1 1) 9 .ixd4
...

c) 1 l . tll c4 is my personal preference,

preparing the advance of the e-pawn:
Black may have thought that White's last move
1 1 . . . dxc3 (Black can't stop White's plans
was not possible as this reply appears to win a
with 1 l . . .e 5 ? 1 2 . b4 ie7 1 3 .b5 tll d8 1 4 . 0-0
pawn, but White can create counter-threats to
[or 1 4. tt:l cxe5 !?] 1 4 . . . dxc3 1 5 .1Wb3;!; and
win the pawn back.
Black is struggling to hold the e5-pawn)
1 2 .e5 We7 1 3 . bxc3 0-0 1 4. 0-0 White is
10.tlixd4
well placed for a kingside attack with 1We2-
1 0 .Wxd4 Wxd4 1 1 .tll xd4 dxe4 1 2. tll b5 lll a6
e4 on the cards.
1 3 . tll d6t <;tie? 1 4 . lll xe4 is playable for White,
1 1 . 0-0 ib6 1 2 .We2 Wf4 1 3 .ad l id7 1 4.ic2
but it looks very drawish.
fd8 1 5 .exd5 exd5 1 6.1Wd3 ie6 1 7.Wh7t <j;ifg
1 8 . tll b3
1 0 ... dxe4
White holds a small advantage with play
1 0 . . . 1We5 1 1 .id3 ! This clever move prepares
against the isolated queen's pawn.
to hit the queen with tll f3 which would leave
1 8 . . . Wf6 1 9 . tll bd4 lll xd4 20. tll xd4 ac8
White with better pieces and more space.
2 1 .d3 ixd4 22.xd4;!;
1 l . . . dxe4 1 2.1We2 f5 1 3 .f3 e3 1 4 . 0-0-0 0-0
In Rahman - Carlsen, Dresden (ol) 2008,
1 5 .he l f4 1 6.g3 lll c6 1 7.tll xc6;!; White is
White went on to make a draw, an excellent
going to win back his pawn and will have
result against an opponent who was soon to be
greater piece activity and a clear advantage.
the world's top-ranked player.
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 27

1 1 .tll b5 B3 1 2) 9 ...J.b6
This knight lunge looks prom1smg for
White, threatening both lll c7t and lll d6t . This tricky computer-favoured move looks to
use tactics to avoid having to clarify things in
the centre.

10.J.h5t!?
Black's clever idea comes into play if White
takes the cl-pawn:
1 0 . exd5

l I . . .ll:la6 allows White a choice of invasions

on the d6-square:
10 . . . 0-0!
a) 1 2 . lll d6t rJJ e 7 1 3 .tll xe4 We5 ! ( 1 3 . . . Wf4?
After 1 0 . . . exd5 l l .i b 5 t lli c6 1 2 .We2t;!;
1 4.Wa4 d8 1 5 .Wa3t rJJ e 8 1 6 .ib 5 t id7
White's advantage is clear, with future
l 7.lll d6t+-) 1 4.We2 f5 l 5 .lll d2 Wxe2t
pressure to come against the d5-pawn.
16.ixe2 lll c5 1 7. 0-0-0 with a balanced
l l .dxe6
endgame.
White may be able to claim a tiny edge with
b) 1 2.Wd6 ! ? We7 13 .d l id7 1 4 .Wd4!;t
l l .Wi'f3 Wi'xf3 1 2 .lll xf3 exd 5 , though Black
can achieve quite active development.
l l .ie2 allows Black to avoid being saddled
12.tll d6t <tie? 13.tll c4 Wld5 14.Wlc2
Also possible is 1 4.Wb3! ? Wc5 15.d l lll c6
with the isolated queen's pawn: 1 1 . . . eS
16.ie2 b6 l 7.Wc2i with decent compensation
1 2 .lll f3 e4 1 3 . lll fd4 Wg5 and Black regains
for the pawn.
the pawn with an edge.
l I . . .ixe6 1 2 .Wi'f3 Wi'xf3
14 ... tll c6
1 2 . . . We5t 1 3 .Wi'e2 Wi'f6 1 4. lll xe6 e8
After 1 4 . . . f5 1 5 .d l Wc5 1 6. b4 Wc7 1 7.ie2
1 5 . 0-0-0 xe6 1 6.Wi'c2 lll c6 1 7 . f3 a5 with
followed 0-0 and f2-f3, White clearly has good
unclear play.
compensation.
1 3 . gxf3 lll c6 1 4. lll xe6 fxe6
Black should be able to win his pawn back
1 5 J:dl Wlf5 1 6.Wi'a4
as the doubled f-pawns are weak; a draw
White threatens Wa3t and looks to have
seems the most likely result here.
more than enough compensation for the pawn.

16 ...Wlc5? 17.b4 Wlg5 1 8.b5 tll e5 19.Wlb4t+- 1 0 ... J.d?

28 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

8 i.- - --
7 wi{t- --,wr
6
. . . -----7,w.....
L.7-w


w "%

:
--
.
/,, , ,,;

!
3" w- ---7, wv-0

2 .8JllB"
.... Ji!
-

1 -
a b c d e f g h

I definitely prefer White here. Black is facing

a long and uncomfortable task of trying to
hold his weak d5-pawn, while White has the
d4-square totally covered and can bide his
time.
1 1 ... tll xd7 1 2.exd5 We5t
1 2 . . . exd5 1 3 .We2t We5 1 4.Wxe5t lli xe5 B32) 7 ... tll c6 8.J.h5 cxd4

8 . . . a6 9 . .lxc6t bxc6 1 0 .Wa4 .ld7 l 1 . lli e5;!;

1 5 . 0-0-0;!;

Trying to avoid an isolated pawn with

8 ... J.d7 9 . 0-0 cxd4 1 0.llixd4 is j ust a
1 2 . . . e5 is dangerous here as Black can 6ncl
himself too far behind in development: l 3 . lli f3
transposition.

( 1 3 .We2 0-0 1 4. lli c2;!; also looks better for

9.tll xd4 J.d7 1 0.0-0!?
White) 1 3 . . . e4 1 4 . tli fd4 We5 1 5 .Wg4! Wxd5
1 6 . 0-0-0 Black is rather underdeveloped
and so really has to get the queens off to
avoid further problems. 1 6 . . . Wg5 t 1 7.Wxg5
hxg5 1 8 . f3!;!; Even with the queens gone,
Black's king in the middle causes him some
difficulties.

1 3.&ile2
I like this move which forces Black to accept
an isolated queen's pawn.

1 3 .We2 Wxd5 1 4. 0-0 0-0 1 5 .!!ad l llif6

1 6. lli b 5 We4 1 7.Wxe4 lli xe4 1 8 .!!d7 leads to
an unclear endgame.
13 ... exd5 14.0-0 0-0 1 5 .tll ed4 tll f6 16.el
Wf4 17.Wf3t
have considerable experience of this
position, both over the board and in internet
games. B32 1 ) 10 ... J.e7 has been the choice
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 29

of my highest-rated opponents, while B322)
10 ... YNdS is the move I faced most recently.
There are also a few other options to be
considered briefly.
1 0 . . . id6?! ( l O . . . ic5 ?! receives the same
treatment) l 1 .exd5 exd5 1 2 .l:'!:e l t ie7 ( 1 2 . . . f8
1 3 .Wb3;!; R. Pert - Eames, London 2008)
dangerous for Black as his king gets stranded
in the middle of the board whilst White's
king is safe as houses.
1 1 .ixd7t ii xd7 1 2 .cxd4 Wxd4 1 3 .exd5 Wxd5
1 3 . . . exd 5 ? 1 4.Wb3 and with a rook quickly
coming to d 1 , Black will do well to make it
out of the opening.
1 4 .Wa4t

1 3 .Wb3;!; Antidrome - AndrewMartinIM,
8

z
Internet 20 1 2.
z
7 t. , , if-JI
6 . . . . r. -
. . .. r.f
1 0 . . . a6?!
This move has now been played against me

54 1
by three grandmasters in blitz games and I

31
hold a 1 00% record, so the signs are good.
1 1 . exd5 axb5
- "
"- , .
, " '"
" -
8 Z B - i- ' Z 2 !::i f 8
7 .r.ra- - . . ' "
1 1g{ -. ,:=
h
6 .;. .. . . r.. b d f g
z,. . 7.

,,. a c e

-- " "
: -

1 4 . . . Wc6

After 1 4 . . . b5 White has a whole host of

3 - '
if/j-
options, such as l 5 .Wa6, 1 5 .Wf4 or 1 5 .Wa5 ,

2 8
ref
if
\.
, .
,, "'
if
8
all of which give promising play against the
black king. However, my preference is for
1 m r.&ii,r:: 1 5 .Wg4, eyeing g7 should Black move his
a b c d e f g h f8-bishop. For example:
a) 1 5 . . . Wf5 1 6.We2 id6 1 7. lll e4 l:l:hd8
1 2 . lll x b5 !
1 8 .l:'!:fd l e7 1 9 . lll xd6 l:l:xd6 20.l:'!:xd6 <itixd6
White already has a n advantage.
2 1 .a4 l:'!:b8 22.axb5 Wxb5 23 .Wd2t Wd5
1 2 . . . 0-0-0
24.Wf4t e5 2 5 .Wg4t with ongoing pressure.
1 2 . . . l:'!:c8 1 3 . lll e4 We5 1 4.dxc6 l:'!:xc6 1 5 .Wd3
b) 1 5 . . . id6 1 6.l:l:fd l
l:l:b6 1 6.a4 ie7 1 7.l:'!:fe l Antidrome -
c) 1 5 . . . h 5 1 6.We2 e8 1 7.l:'!:fd l Wb7
Molton, Internet 20 1 1 .
1 8 . ll:\ e4--+
1 3 . dxc6 bxc6 1 4. ll:\ e4 Wg6
d) 1 5 . . . e8 1 6.l:l:ad l Wc6?! 1 7. lll f3
1 4 . . . We5 1 5 .lll ed6t ii b8 1 6.ll:\xf7 Wxb5
1 5 .Wf4 ii e8
1 7.lll xd8 ii c7 1 8 . lll f7 l:'!:g8 1 9 .l:'!:el Wf5
1 5 . . . f6 1 6 .l:'!:ac l Wd6 1 7.Wa4t e7 1 8 .l:'!:fd l
20.lll e5 ic8 2 1 .Wa4 1 -0 Antidrome -
@ f7 1 9 .lll e4 Wf4 20 .Wd7t
shade, Internet 20 1 2.
1 6.l:'!:ac l Wd7 1 7.l:'!:fd l l:'!:d8
1 5 .lll bd6t c7 1 6.Wd4 l:'!:a8 1 7.l:'!:fd l +
A clever move from Black as he plans to meet
R. Pert - Rowson, Internet 200 1 .
l:'!:c7 with . . . id6, but nevertheless it will not
1 0 . . . ll:\ xd4 be easy for him to withstand the pressure.
This may objectively be a reasonable move, For example:
but from a practical viewpoint it looks very 1 8 .Wf3 ie7? 1 9 .lll e4 Wa4 20.l:'!:xd8 t ii xd8
30 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

2 1 .Wf4!+- 1 2 .Wi'b3
lhe white queen penetrates to c7 or b 8 . I have also played 1 2 .lll 2b3 0-0 1 3 .e l and
now:
B32 1) 1 0 ...i.e7 a) 1 3 . . . id6 1 4.Wh5 a6 1 5 .ifl lll e5 1 6.h3
fe8 1 7.ad l e7 1 8 . lll c2 Wf4 1 9 .g3 Wf6
20 .ig2;!; Antidrome - Pinkalmykia (GM) ,
Internet 2009.
b) 1 3 . . . a6 1 4.id3 id6 1 5 .ic2 fe8 1 6.Wi'd3
lll e5 1 7.Wi'h7t;!; Antidrome - Adaptation
(Caruana) , Internet 20 1 0 .
1 2 . . . 0-0
1 2 . . . Wd6 1 3 . lll 2f3t
1 3 .lll 2f3 ad8 1 4.Wxd5 ie6 1 5 .Wi'e4 id5
1 6 .Wi'f5 Wi'xf5 1 7.lll xf5;!;
R. Pert - Adair, Sheffield 20 1 1 .

1 1 ... eS
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 . lll xc6;!; bxc6 1 3 .ixc6 ixc6
1 4.Wxc6 d4 1 5 .lll f3 dxc3 1 6 .e5 '1Wg6 1 7.Wi'xc3
leaves White a pawn up.

1 l . . .c8 1 2 .ixc6 ixc6 1 3 . lll xc6 bxc6

1 1 .'1Wa4!? 1 4 .'1Wxa7 0-0 1 5 .a4 and White is a pawn up
I think this is the critical option. here too.

1 l . exd5 12.exd5 exd4

This is certainly playable and I have even
managed to get an advantage on three
occasions in this line. That said, having
looked at the position more deeply I now
slightly prefer the queen move.
1 1 . . . exd5

1 5.dxc6 bxc6
 Chapter I - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 31

1 5 . . . ixc6 1 6.ixc6 Wxc6 1 7.Wxc6 bxc6 1 1 .lLi4b3!?N

.i U. w.r

1 8 .cxd4 1:%fd8 1 9 .1:%ad l
8
----
76 - z. . .- - -
:r
I6.xd4 UdS 1 7.J.fl
.-
The smoke has cleared and White is a pawn
: f

" "' .
5-
up, Antidrome - arrowshot, Internet 20 1 1 . z....

-- 1
-

4 -" j.
B322) 1 0 ...dS

3 ,.,,,,R." "
z

2 8f1
-Jllx

This move was sprung on me by the talented
Chinese IM Gao Rui in a British league game
z t A t-
-----"v!=---

: : oz 0 7-0''
at the start of 20 1 3. 1
a b c d e f g h
Another way to keep the pieces on. The idea
is that if Black avoids an isolated d-pawn by
taking on e4, then White can try and land a
knight on c5.
l l ... dxe4
The immediate 1 1 . . .a6 might be more
accurate, attacking the bishop when
retreating to a4 is not an option. 1 2 .ie2
ie7 ( 1 2 . . . dxe4 1 3 .lLi xe4 We? 1 4.Wd3 ie7
1 5 .1:%ad l 1:%d8 1 6. llJ d6t ixd6 1 7.Wxd6
Wxd6 1 8 .1:%xd6 looks marginally favourable
for White) 1 3 . exd5 exd5 1 4. lLi f3 Although
my computer thinks this is equal I prefer
White, who has lasting pressure against the
isolated d-pawn.
1 2 . lLi xe4 We?
1 2 . . . Wb6 1 3 .We2 a6 1 4.ia4 ie7 ( 1 4 . . . Wc?
l 1 .Wb3
1 5 .1:%ad l b5 is well met by 1 6. lLi bc5 ixc5
Permitting the minor piece exchanges looks
1 7. lLi xc5) 1 5 .1:%ad 1 seems slightly more
to be heading pretty quickly to a dead drawn
pleasant for White.
position.
1 3 . lLi bc5 ixc5 1 4.lLixc5 1:%d8 1 5 .We2 0-0
l 1 . . .lLixd4 1 2 . cxd4 ixb 5 1 3 .Wxb 5 t Wd7
1 6.1:%ad l;l;
1 4.Wb3 ie7 1 5 .1:%ac l dxe4 1 6 .lLixe4 0-0
1 6 . . . b6 1 7.1:%fd l 0-0 1 8 .d5 exd5 1 9 .1:%xd5
l l ... dxe4 1 2.tlixe4 c7 13.d2N
and a draw looks likely.
l 7.lLi c5 ixc5
I believe this would have been stronger than
what I played, as it makes it more difficult for
1 7 . . . Wxd4 1 8 .1:%fd l Wf4 1 9 .g3 Wg4 20.1:%d7
Black to castle kingside whilst targeting the
ixc5 2 l .1:%xc5 b6 22.1:%cc7 and White will
d6-square.
regain the pawn.
1 8 .dxc5 Wc6 1 9 .1:%fd l
1 3 .We2 ie7 1 4 .1:%ad l 0-0 1 5 .1:%fe l 1:%fd8= led
Again i t looks pretty even, although White
to a draw in R. Pert - Gao Rui, Daventry 20 1 3 .
may be a smidgen better.
32 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 3 ...i.e7 1 4Jffd l 0-0-0 6 . . . g5

1 4 . . . i:!d8 1 5 .lll d6t ixd6 1 6.Wxd6 Wxd6 It is not uncommon for Black to play this
l 7.l'!xd6 rJJ e 7 1 8 .i:!ad l;!; The queenside move along with . . . e5 in order to stop
majority and slightly better coordination give White's plan of advancing his f-pawn. This
White some advantage, although it's not a lot. may seem like a sensible approach, but when
you look more deeply at the position it
1 5.e3 @bs 1 6.b4!;!; becomes obvious that the weakness on f5 is
Again this looks slightly preferable for White. a big problem for Black.
7.lll e2 lll c6 8 . 0-0 e5
B4) 5 ... d6

8 .i .i.--
7 w6i' . ;
, _ _, .
, , Y.-. ..
_
6 .
%.. % %

. . .. ,% , .. . ,% , .... %
.... .... % , .

5
-
4
.. . %8
-%" -
3 wP 'lir% ?i
. f)jl!r
.

2 w,-J%J
tt:Jif m J.. m .:
9 .ib5 !
A n important move t o remember in this type
a b c d e f g h of position. White turns his attention to the
queenside, looking to force an exchange of
So we reach Black's most popular choice in
light-squared bishops and make f5 a gaping
this variation of the Trompowsky. Often Black
hole for one of the white knights.
is looking to set up flexibly, fianchettoing his
9 . . . id7 1 0 .d5 lll e7
kingside bishop and supporting the move
1 0 . . . lll b8 is possible, so as to avoid moving
. . . e 5 . Our standard plan here is to play id3 ,
his king, but it leaves Black underdeveloped
lll e2, 0-0, f2-f4 and if Black lets us then e4-
and with no cover of the important f5-
e 5 . Usually Black will rake steps to address this
square. White replies l 1 .Wb3;!; and will then
plan by trying to play . . . e5 himself, although
explore lll g3-f5 ideas.
he will have to worry about his queen on f6
1 1 .ixd?t rJJ x d7 1 2.Wa4t rJJ d 8 1 3 . lll a3
which will be lined up with our fl -rook. I have
Black's king is misplaced and the f5-square
tried to go into quite a lot of derail in a few of
is still a problem. White's plan is to play his
Black's specific set-ups, so by the end of this
knights to e3 and g3 and then land one on
chapter you should have a good idea of how to
f5 .
handle White's position.
1 3 . . . h5 1 4.lll c4 g4
Black does everything in his power to stop
6.i.d3
the knights from landing on f5. He aims
The main moves now are B41) 6 ... e5 and
B42) 6 ... g6 , although in practice they both to hit the g3-knight with . . . h4 and the e3-
knight with . . . ih6 before they both settle.
often lead to the same position. We first take a
Unfortunately for Black he has been so
look at Black's various alternatives.
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 33

focused on countering White's plan that he
has failed to develop any pieces and has left
his king stranded in the centre.
l l .e5 0-0-0 1 2.lll c4 g5 1 3 .exd6 cxd6 1 4 . fxg5
White can safely grab a pawn.
1 4 . . . b8
14 ... hxg5 ? ? 1 5 .gxf7! wins inscancly.
1 5 .g6
R. Pere - Pokorna, Hinckley Island 2009.

6 ... lll d7 7. lll e2 g6 8 . 0-0 ig7 9 . f4 0-0 1 0 .lll d2

We7 Here we see Black once again delay . . . e5,
chis time heading kingside. Two top players
have notched up victories as White by playing
a structure with e4-e5, and I have included
both games for you to have a look.

w$!
1 5 . f4!
1s J
t ' r'S)gi '
6 ,,. , .,,, ..... ,,.,., ,, "

,, .
Blasting open the position.
7: ..Y. 7: z
5 . - ,,
1 5 . . .Wg6 1 6. fxe5 Wxe4 1 7.exd6 cxd6 1 8 . lll g3 . . ..

u. . %
4
Wxd5 1 9 .gad l Wc5 t 20.h l lll c8 2 1 .gxf7
8
.

Black's king is helpless against the coming

3 1wJ :r,,, ,,. . ,,
.

..Y.,, ...
2
attack.

: .... . . ,, ,= . . .
..

2 1 . . .Wc6 22.Wa5t e8 23.Wf5 ie7 24.Wg6
8 r ltJ 8
l
Wd8 2 5 . gxe7 Wxc4 26.gxb7
.

h
.

b d f g
1 -0 R. Pere - D. Ledger, London 2009.
a c e

6 ... lll c6 7. lll e2 g6 8 . 0-0 ig7 9 . f4 id7 1 0.lll d2
We7
When Black opts for the common plan of
playing . . . g6 and . . . ig7, he should usually
aim to play an early . . . e 5 . If he (or she, in
this case!) decides not to play ... e5, then we
should cake the opportunity to advance our
own e-pawn.
a) 1 1 .We l b6 1 2.Wg3 ib7 1 3 .e5 gad8
1 4.lll e4 b5 1 5 .gae l b4 1 6 .h4 bxc3 l 7.bxc3
Wh8 1 8 .h5 gxh5 1 9 .Wh3 h4 20.exd6 cxd6
2 l .f5 d5 22.f6 lll xf6 23.lll xf6 ixf6 24.lll f4 gd6
25 .ic2 gg8 26.lll h5 ig5 27.Wd3 f6 28. tll xf6
ixf6 29.gxf6 Wg7 30.Wf3 gc6 3 1 .gf7 gxc3
32.gxg7 gxf3 33 .gh?# Hodgson - Rowson,
Oxford 1 998.
b) 1 l .e5 b6 1 2 .ie4 gb8 1 3 .Wa4 a6 1 4 .gae l
b5 1 5 .Wc2 c5 1 6. W h l d5 1 7.if3 b4 1 8 .c4 ib7
1 9 .cxd5 ixd5 20.ixd5 exd5 2 1 .f5 gxf5 22.lll g3
cxd4 23.lll xf5 Wg5 24.lll f3 Wd8 2 5 .lll 3xd4
gb6 26.e6 fxe6 27.lll xe6 gxe6 28.gxe6 Wh8
29 .gfe l if6 30.lll h4 :ggs 3 1 .lll g6t g7
32.lll e7 lll f8 33.lll f5t hs 34.gd6 1 -0
Laznicka - Moiseenko, San Sebastian 20 1 2 .

6 . . . Wg5
This move is played every now and then.
Personally it never worries me when my
34 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom powsky

opponent wants to grant me a massive lead This is a common choice, although it is

in development in return for a pawn.
7 . tlJ f3
7.g3 has been White's most popular response,
but it really isn't in the right spirit.
7 . . .'Wxg2 8.:!'!gl Wh3 9 . tiJ bd2
likely to transpose into other variations. Let's
have a quick look to see what else may come of
this move order.
7.e2 tic6

J.. - z
7 . . . g6 is most popular, when 8 . 0-0 ig7
8
'!!I'
A -
ml.JLl51' 0:

takes us directly into line B42 below.
7 w&ri
. , . , ;< '
. , . , , ;< -,m
. , . , ;<.
6
"..- , . , ?. @i . , . , 7 . . . Wid8
Black has also tried dropping his queen back
: - , followed by . . . ie7 and castling, but White's
rd' - ?. standard approach will allow him to take a
3 -Jz! ! lead in development.
2 8 ef!J tfj t 8 . 0-0 ie7 9 . f4 0-0 1 0 . tiJ d2 if6

1 d - - ?.Mvr:-f- - - - 9,"
1 0 . . . exd4?! l l . cxd4 tlJ c6 1 2 .a3 ig4 1 3 . tiJ f3

b d f g h
<Jih8 1 4 .ic2 d5 1 5 .e5 already looked highly
____

a c e
In return for a pawn White has a huge
lead in development. Black hasn't got any
weaknesses but nevertheless he is totally
undeveloped. I've included a blitz game of
mine against a talented IM as an example of
what may happen.
9 . . . tlJ d7 1 0 .'We2 g6 1 1 . 0-0-0 ig7 1 2 .'We3
e5 1 3 .:!'!g3 Wh5 1 4.ie2 exd4 1 5 . tlJ xd4 Wa5
1 6. tlJ f5 if8 1 7 . tlJ c4 Wi'xa2 1 8 .e5 dxe5 1 9 . tlJ xe5
'We6 20 .ic4 Wi'xe5 2 1 .ixf7t @xf7 22.:!'!xd?t
ixd7 23 .'Wxe5
1 -0 Antidrome - MegaZZ, Internet 20 1 0 .
promising for White in Rausis - David,
France 2000.
l l . tiJ f3
l l . fxe5 is also possible although it seems a
bit committal: l l . . . dxe5 l 2.d5 c6 1 3 .tiJ g3
tiJ d7 1 4.<Jih l a5 1 5 .Wif3t Milov - Moor,
Switzerland 200 1 .
l l . . . tlJ c6 1 2 . h3 g6
1 2 . . . a6 1 3 .Wd2 exf4 1 4. tlJ xf4 ig5 1 5 . tlJ xg5
Wxg5 1 6.:!'!f3 tiJd8 1 7.'Wf2 tlJ e6 1 8 .h4 We?
l 9 . tiJ d 5 Kosten - Spiridonov, France 1 99 8 .

B41) 6 ... eS
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 35

1 6 .a3 tll a6 1 7.e5i Tugui - Van Wely,

Germany 20 1 1 , is murkier, but still seems to
favour White.
1 3 . . .J.g7 1 4.l'!ae U

8.0-0 J.d7
Black creates a threat to the d4-pawn as we
shall no longer have J.b5t at the end of the
sequence to pick up the queen.

8 . . . g5 is also common, taking us directly into a b c d e f g h

the note on 6 . . . g5 on page 32.
9.J.b5
This looks right to me.
My computer suggests 9 . d 5 , which is certainly
playable, but I do not find it convincing:
9.d5 tll e7 1 0 . f4 tll g6 l l . fxe5 Wlxe5 1 2 .tll d2
ie7 1 3 .tll g300 Rodi - Shumyatsky, Brasilia
20 1 1 .
9 ... a6 10.J.a4 V9g6
This was tried in a recent game.
1 2.J.xd7t
Surprisingly, l 2 .Wlb3! ? may be White's
best as 1 2 . . . b 5 ? ! doesn't work: 1 3 .c4 bxa4
1 4 .W/b7
1 2 . . . tll xd7 1 3 . tll g3 h5 1 4 . tll a3 g4 1 5 . f3 Wfg6
l 6. tll c4 J.h6 l 7. fxg4 hxg4 l 8 . tll f5 tll c5
l 9 .W/e2 ig5 20 .W/xg4 b5 2 l .tll a5 if4 22.l'!xf4
exf4 23.W/xf4;!; 0-0-0 ?
It was a blitz game!
24. tll e7t
1 -0 Antidrome - D-Ruzele, Internet Chess
Club 20 1 0 . I n fact, Darius Ruzele was the first
grandmaster I ever scored a draw against in
FIDE-rated play, when I played a tournament
in Germany as a young child.
1 0 . . . b5
It seems logical to force the white bishop
back.
l l .ic2 g5 1 2.a4 l'!b8 1 3 .axb5 axb5 1 4.d5
tll e7 l 5 .l'!a7 <it>d8 l 6.tll a3
This looks to be slightly better for White,
although it is a bit murky.
1 6 . . . h5

1 0 . . . g5
This advance is again similar to 6 . . . g5 (see
page 32) , but I would j ust like to include
a blitz game I played against a strong
grandmaster in this line.
l l .d5 tll b8
36 Richard Pert - Play ing the Trom p owsky

1 7.f3!N 1 6.dS i.dS

This is a good practical choice as Black is After 1 6 . . . !!c8 1 7. lll f3;!; White has a
now struggling co gee in his plan of . . . h4 comfortable space advantage and a lead in
followed by . . . g4. development.
l 7 .id3 h4 l 8 . f3 g4 l 9 . fxg4 Wfg5 20. lll c2 h3
2 l .g3 :!'!h7 22.:!'!a5 ih6 was unclear in Papa
- Pelletier, Zurich 2004.
1 7 . . . h4
17 . . . g4 1 8 .Wfd3 Wfg6 ( 1 8 . . . gxf3 1 9 .:!'!xf3
Wfg6 20.:!'!a5 b4 2 1 .lll b5;J;) 1 9 . f4t
1 8 .h3;!;
Black's kingside play has been halted.

l l . d2
White protects the e4-pawn whilst keeping
f2-f4 on the cards.
I l .d5 also looks fairly sensible: I 1 . . . lll b8
1 2 . lll g3t with lll f5 to come. a b c d e f g h
17.:Sxf7!
1 1 ...VNhs 1 2.f4 exf4 This tactic secures a plus for White.

17 ... xf7 1 8.xc7t g6 19.xaS i.aS

1 9 . . .ig4 20.:!'!fl ig5 2 1 .lll c4 :!'!xa8
22.lll xd6;!; looks promising for White with his
mobile central pawn mass.

20.c4 :Sxa8 2 1 .dS

B42) 6 ...g6 7.e2 i.g7 8.0-0 e5 9.f4

13 ...YAlxdl 14.:Saxdl i.e7 15.i.b3!

1 5 . lll d5 id8 1 6 .:!'!f2 0-0 1 7.:!'!dfl also gives
White a little edge to play with.

1 5 ...i.gS
1 5 . . . 0-0 ? 1 6. lll g6+- is the point.
 We are at a crossroads. We shall first look
at B42 1) 9 exd4, before turning to B422)
...
9 V!! e7, which Pete Wells himself- the author
...
of the excellent Winning with the Trompowsky
in 2003 - chose against me in 20 1 1 .
B42 1) 9 exd4 10.cxd4
..
1 0 i.g4
. 1 1 .e5!
1 O . . . lli c6?! simply doesn't work as Black can
no longer swing his queen over to b6 after he
takes on e5 . From here Trompowsky expert
Julian Hodgson won an important game in the
British Championships: 1 l .e5 V!! d 8 1 2 . lli bc3
0-0 1 3 .cl dxe5 1 4.dxe5 g5
1 5 . lli d 5 gxf4 1 6. lli exf4 lli xe5 1 7.xc7 i.g4
1 8 .i.e2 V!! g 5 1 9 .i.xg4 lli xg4 20.h3 llie5
2 1 . lli h 5 +- Hodgson - Ward, Millfield 2000.
10 . . . 0-0 l 1 .lli bc3 i.g4 1 2 .e5 dxe5 1 3 . fxe5
V!! d B (The queen must choose a passive square
because 1 3 . . . V!! b 6 1 4 . lli d 5 ! is good for White
- see the note to Black's 1 3th move below. )
1 4 .f4 i.xe2 1 5 .V!!xe2 lli c6 1 6.V!! e4 e8
1 7.afl and White had a strong attack in
Antidrome - A- 1 , Internet 2009.
I hope to breathe life into this rarely-played
move with which White takes up the challenge.
Previous authors have written off this move, but
I believe it has been underestimated because
White has never followed it up correctly in
tournament play. I intend to show you how
to do this.
The main move (and the choice of Tromp
owsky expert Pete Wells) has been 1 l .V!! a4t .
The idea is t o provoke . . . lli c6 s o that Black
can no longer swing his queen to b6 after
he exchanges on e 5 . That said, it is a bit of a
concession to place our queen out on the edge
of the board. Play may continue:
a) l I . . .lli d7 1 2. lli bc3 0-0 1 3 .e5 dxe5
1 4 . fxe5 V!! g 5 1 5 . lli f4 lli b6 1 6.V!ib3 i.f5
l 7.i.xf5;l; Wells - Fish, Germany 2002.
38 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

.i a ?it ..
..
s
.
b) l I . . .lll c6 1 2.lll bc3 0-0 1 3 .e5 dxe5
1 4.dxe5 Vfie700 Cebalo - Almasi, Reggio
. r'1r r.t.t
7 . J,m/. J -
.
... . . % .
6
Emilia 2008. Y.

g -0
,, .

. ... /.

: n fm
It is perhaps worth pomtmg out that the

.. -
natural developing move l I . lll bc3 ? allows

3 m
.. . .. :-
l I . . .V!ixd4t.

1 1 ... dxe5 1 2.fxe5 Wb6 13.lll bc3! 21 !

White focuses on developing and doesn't take
time out to protect his centre. This approach
is likely to be particularly effective against a
player who has his king in the middle of the
board and is unlikely to have spent much time
studying the position.
. { 31lri""
a b c d e f g h
1 4 .lll d 5 ! Vfixd4t
Black might think that this clever move,
forcing an exchange of queens, would leave
him in pole position with a two pawn
advantage - but he is wrong. White's lead in
development still takes its toll even with the
queens off.
1 4 . . . ixd4t?! 1 5 .@h l Vfic5 1 6.ib5t+-
1 5 . lll xd4 ixd4t 1 6.@h l ixd l 1 7.:!:%axd l ib6
l 8.:!:%de 1 t 'itid8 1 9 .:!:%xf7
White is winning back his pawns while
retaining a huge initiative.

l 3 . . . lll c6

B .i -JY
,,7 J-i f %'" " "

a b c d e f g h
6
"
. ,,s. . -,. .
z
13 ...he2
5 .
. .. .. ..

4 -. - 3.!.
This is the right move for Black, though

' - -w.
probably not easy to work out over the board.

-m:r
3

f 1ir
With 1 3 . . . 0-0 ? Black admits defeat and doesn't
try to take advantage of his queen's positioning:
b d f g h
Y. ' "
1 4 .lll d5! Vfia5 1 5 .Wb3 lll c6 1 6. lll f6t ixf6

l 7.:!:%xf6 and Black is in trouble.
1 3 . . . ixe 5 ?
Th i s i s a natural response, hoping t o show
that White should have taken time to
stop the queen going to b6. However,
Black is about to find himself in some
trouble.
a c e
Black tries to strike in the centre with his
knight, but the tempo allows us to cause
some havoc.
1 4.lll d 5 ! Wa5 1 5 .ic4 0-0-0
1 5 . . . 0-0?! looks wrong: 1 6.b4 lll xb4
1 7.lll e?t @h7 1 8 .ixf7;!;
1 6 . b4 lll xb4
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 39

Black should take on the challenge - if he 20.lll c7t e7 2 1 .lll xa8 xa8 Black has decent
tries to ignore this move he will find his compensation for the exchange.
queen misplaced: 1 6 . . . Wa3 ?! 1 7.b l hf8
1 8 .f4;!; 1 5 ...VNxd4
l 7.lll e7t b8 l 8 .a3 It's amazing that the seemingly prudent

-1f
""ef
l 5 . . . ig7? gets totally wiped out!

ft-""''"ai
8 -r,1- ,
'''''"%'"/
%
1. % 1..... m..
6 .. . ..% % % "
8
61 ""'" - -
1 .. %.
1i1 r .. %
- ef""'
B.\ rn 1.i
%... /, . . .

5
. ,,. w.-J. ..
%. . . ..

L
aY:j_f ..t..
.... .. .. %. :
. . . %

4
..

3 . . . . .. 7.
0". .
. . ..

2 L . 7. -
3 ? . .. :
-
ii
f'" - ?%' 2 8 j, 8 .

f"{ ii
l
.
. .

.;:o(
.
%

a b c d e h f g 1
/. . . . .

a
els
.

b c d e f g h
The knight has effectively been trapped on
b4. 1 6.ib 5 t and Black is going to find his
1 8 . . . Wb6 ! ? king helpless in the middle of the board:
1 8 . . . ll:\ c6? 1 9 . lll xc6t bxc6 20.b l t 'it?a8 1 6 . . . c6 1 7.We l t 'it?f8 ( 1 7 . . . d8 1 8 .xf7 e8
2 1 .Wc2 gives White a winning attack. l 9.Wg3+-) l 8 .We6 Wc7 l 9 .ic4 f5 20.Wxg6+-
1 8 . . . ll:\ a6? 1 9 .b l is also crushing.
1 8 . . .ixe2 1 9 .Wxe2 xd4 20.axb4;!; I6.Wb3 o-o
1 8 . . . ixe5 1 9 .axb4 Wb6 20.ll:\d5;!;

s .i. m
ii -- .
Y.-
l 9 . axb4 ixe2 20.Wxe2 he8 2 1 . lll d5
Things are complicated round here, but
essentially White holds the advantage with 7
6
. ;
% . -
. .%
. . . . . %

-0 ....
his extra well-placed minor piece counting
':

u. - m
for more than the black pawns.
sm
- -.....
2 1 . . .Wxd4t 22.'it?h l ixe5 23.ad l Wh4 24.g3

3 rw!
4

,u u
1rN''
ixg3 2 5 . ll:\ f6! h8 26.lll d7t a8 27.ia6!
27.id 5 ! is also possible; with either move
White holds some advantage.

rt/ Jn ., j
2

I
14.ixe2N
. . . .
1 4 .Wxe2! ? is also interesting. After 1 4 . . . ll:\ c6 .
1 5 .'it?h l 0-0 1 6 .e6! lll xd4 1 7.exf7t xf7 a b c d e f g h
1 8 .Wg4 White had good play for the pawn in 17.gxf7! gxf7 1 8.gfl if6 19.ic4
Reich - M. Bauer, email 2007. l 9 .Wxb7 c6 20.Wxa8 Wb4 is unclear; White
has regained the sacrificed material, but at the
1 4 ... ixe5 1 5.@hl cost of misplacing his queen.
After 1 5 .lll d5 Wxd4t 1 6.Wxd4 ixd4t
1 7 .'it?h l ie5 1 8 .ib5t lll d7 1 9 .ae l c6 1 9 ... @g7 20.ixf7
40 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

With Black playing all the right moves, the B422) 9 ...We7
position is starting to look more balanced.

.i ..t-
Wi{'
%,,,, % & ,;W,,,,,%
ilt{----- ,,Y,_Y.
20 ... tli d7 8
7 -
-
,,,,,%
ei
6
Black still has to play actively to stay on

5 '-'
terms.
' '
------
4 :
2 1 .gdl


f t!J f,,,,,
%
2 1 .Wxb7 :gfg 22 .i.b3 Wd3 23.Wb5 is level.

2 1 . .. tlic5 22.'Wc2 'Wg4 3wii' ' "' 11

2
{)' -!
s -,i
m-P.
m
-m
1 mltJ_V_ n
-
- -
,%-
1 w%,,,,
% l. f,,,,,
% a b c d e f g h
6
5 --- ' Here White has two main plans. The first is to

1
run the b I -knight to f3 , move the queen up to
d2 or c2 and then play the a l -rook somewhere
4 ., .
.
.
central, usually e 1 . If Black does not meet this

3 -,_,,,; % plan accurately then White can have a great

2 8 fii Bw
game, and I have included my game against
-----%
t!J
-

---- Dave Ledger from Southend as an example.

1
a
nb
-@
c d e f g h
However, things can be a bit trickier if Black
employs a plan involving . . . ll'l d7 and . . . c5. This
is exactly what GM Pete Wells did against me
23.tli ds gds in 20 1 1 . I switched my play to the queenside as
23 . . . xf7 24.lli xf6 i>xf6 looks dangerous, recommended by Richard Palliser in his book
but Black seems able to survive: 2 5 .:gfl t \t>g7 Starting Out: The Trompowsky Attack, but got
26.Wxc5 Wd7 and White should probably absolutely nowhere. Admittedly I might have
settle for 27.Wc3t @h7 28 .Wc4 g7 29 .Wc3t misplayed it - the game see-sawed back and
forcing a draw. forth and eventually ended in a draw.

24.!fl tli e4 25.tlie3 gd2
25 . . . Wh4?! 26.i.xg6! lli g3 t 27.@gl Wg5
28.:gf3 is promising for White.
26.Wxc7 Wd7 27.Wf4 Wxf7 2s.Wxe4 h5
29.h3
Finally things have settled down and a fight
can ensue from here.
The second plan is the one I am going to
recommend as my main choice - to advance on
the kingside with f4-f5 . This looks a little anti
positional, but can be tricky for Black to face.
In fact after my game with Pete Wells we had a
chat about this line and came to the conclusion
that f4-f5 is probably the way to go for White.
We shall start by looking at B422 1) IO.tlid2,
which keeps White's options open and can lead
to either plan, before going on to the more
accurate B4222) 10.f5!.
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 41

B422 1) 10.tLl d2 Richard Palliser came to the same conclusion

in his book as I did over the board, that this
was the right way for White to go. But I
made no progress in this game.
Perhaps it's still not too late to switch to
the plan of advancing the f-pawn: 1 4. f5
b5 1 5 . dxe5 lll xe5 ( 1 5 . . . dxe5 1 6. fxg6 fxg6
1 7.ixb5t) 1 6. tll f4 lll xd3 1 7.Wxd3 c4
1 8 .Wd2 gxf5 1 9 . exf5 Wa7t 20.'itih l t
1 4 . . . cxb4 1 5 .cxb4 b 5 1 6.E!:c l E:b8 1 7.E:c7 Wd8
White is going nowhere, though the position
is probably still equal .
1 8 .E:fc l ?!
1 8 .E!:c6 would have been safer.
1 8 . . . exd4
Now I have to watch out for tactics involving
. . . tll c5 .
1 9 .E:7c6
1 O . . . ig4 is possible, thanks to White's choice Black now takes over the initiative.
of 1 0th move, although White's chances look 1 9 . . . tll b6 20. tll exd4 ib7 2 1 .E:6c2 tll c4
preferable: l 1 .Wb3! ixe2 1 2 .ixe2;!; 22.Wf2 E:e8
Suddenly things are starting to feel a bit
1 o . . tll d7 1 1 .tll f3 ! ?
.
uncomfortable.
White's obvious choice, b u t not m y first
choice . . . at least, not anymore! 8 E1 i
Y. '> -
;. ,1 -
I believe White should play 1 l . f5 tll f6
76 ... ...
, - - ...

1 2 . fxg6! fxg6 1 3 .Wb3, when we have

5 ,I. rw
W.
U
,,,,,/, w."' I. W..t

transposed to the position after 1 0 . f5 tll d7

tei t
-r
4
1 l . fxg6 fxg6 1 2 .Wb3 tll f6 1 3 .tll d2 in line

.<.. i.m1
-
- - - wi jrJ ,,
B4222 - see page 45 for the continuation.
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 .Wd2 c5 1 3 .E:ae l a6 3
rw.z.I.
2 :
.

1 ta

a b c d e f g h
23.E:e l E:c8 24.E:ce2 tll a3 2 5 . E:e3 Wb6 26.e5
dxe5 27.fxe5 tll c4 28 .E:3e2 E:cd8 29.ixc4
bxc4 30. tll c2 Wxf2t 3 1 .'it>xf2 E:d3 32. tll e3
E:c8 33. tll g4 c3 34.tll f6t 'it>f8 3 5 .E: c l h5
36. tll g5 h4 37. tll g4 E:c4 3 8 . h3 E!:xg4 3 9 . hxg4
ih6 40. tll h7t!
Perhaps my opponent had missed this move
as the balance of power now starts to shift in
1 4. b4 White's favour.
42 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

40 . . . 'it>g7 4 l .g5 'it>xh7 42.gxh6 gg3 43. 'it>fl

xh6 44.gec2 gg5 45 .gf2 gg3 46.gxf7
Avoiding the repetition.
46 ... i.xg2t 47.'it>f2 id5 48 .gd7 gd3 49.'it>e2
gd2t 50.'it>e l gd3
-Y2 R. Pert - Wells, Hinckley Island
20 1 1 . I no longer saw any good way to avoid
a repetition of moves, missing 5 l .e6! with
excellent winning chances for White.

1 1 .fS
I now think this is the right way to go.

l 1 . lD f3
This is the start of my game against Dave
Ledger which I would really recommend
1 4 . . . gxf5
playing through if you have time.
1 4 . . . tlJ d7 1 5 .tlJ g3 i.xf3 1 6.gxf3 a5 1 7.gafl
l 1 . . . lD c6
tlJ f6 1 8 . c4 b6 1 9 .b3 tlJ d7 20.Wf2 g5 2 1 . f6
1 1 . . . i.g4 has also been tried:
tlJ xf6 22.tlJf5 Wi'd8 2 3 . lD xg7 lD g4 24.Wf g3
a) 1 2 .Wfd2 tlJ d7 1 3 .h3 i.xf3 1 4 .gxf3 c5
1 -0 Antidrome - niccroad, Internet Chess
1 5 .dxe5 dxe5 1 6.f500 Nakamura - Anand,
Club 20 1 1 .
Monaco (blindfold) 20 1 1 .
1 5 .exf5 c6 1 6.i.e4
b) 1 2.h3! ixf3 1 3 .gxf3;!; Doric - Meszaros,
1 6.Wi'a4?! would work well after 1 6 . . . i.xf3
Austria 2008.
1 7 .gxf3 cxd5 1 8 . f6 i.xf6 1 9 .Wfg4t i.g7
However, I think l 1 . . .tlJ d7 is Black's best
20.gg3 -+ , but is not so clear if Black responds
choice here, transposing to the Pert - Wells
1 6 . . . h5! 1 7.We4 cxd5 1 8 .Wfxd5 tlJ d700
game given above.
l 6 . . . cxd5 l 7.i.xd5 tlJ d7 l 8 . lD g3 lD f6 l 9 .Wi'd3

a b c d e f g h
1 2 .Wc2!
White's grip on the light squares ensures an
I came up with this clever move at the board.
edge.
It aims to play d4-d5 followed by f4-f5; then
1 9 . . . gad8 20 .gae l
Black can no longer exchange on f5 and then
20.lDd2! Wc7 2 1 .lD de4 may be more
play . . . e4, as we have that square guarded
accurate.
with our bishop and queen .
 Chapter 1 - 2 . . . e6 3 . e4 43

20 . . .Wc? 2 1 .h l Wa5 22.ib3 :B:fe8 23.tll h4
d5 24.h3 ih5 2 5 .tll xh5
Things are about to hot up as White's attack
starts to flow.
25 . . . tll xh5 26.f6! e4 27.We3 ixf6 2 8 .E:xf6!
tll xf6 29 .Wxh6 :B:e6 30.tll f5 tll e8 3 1 .Wg5 t
f8 32.Wh4! :B:g6
the move order involving an early f4-f5 to
combat Black's plan involving . . . c5 . 1 3 . . . ie6
1 4.ic4 ixc4 1 5 . tll xc4 :B:xfl t 1 6.E:xfl h7
l 7. tll e3 White's advantage is obvious, with
a lead in development and a knight ready to
j ump in. 1 7 . . . exd4 1 8 . tll d5 Wd7 1 9 .E:f8 h5
20.tll f6t ixf6 2 1 .E:f7t+- Pixton - Barbosa,

'I)-
Chalkidiki 2003.

Y. , 7,
8
1 A ..
. . . .
12.Wb3!?
6
. . ?. l
s s T
1 2 . fxg6 fxg6 1 3 .Wb3t h7 1 4 .:B:xf8 tll xf8

.
<
1 5 .E:fl Wg500

. . .
4 ,
. ,., .
T 12 ... gxf5
3 _,t -
.
,

7. % -
..

..
I very recently faced:

2 Wj /f- .7.

1 2 . . . h?! ? 1 3 .E:ae l c6 1 4. tt:l c4 tll f6

1 - . B<it> s ,1 .i. U,
b d f g h
7 wif
t .rY.
r . .1..,;.
a c e

A good training exercise is to spot White's 6

5 .... . 7..8 . . . .
move here! .

-87..
3 3 .:B:xe4 We? 34.Wh8t :B:g8 3 5 .:B:xe8t xe8
4

WW/f:f m
35 . . . :B:xe8 36 .Wh6t E:g7 37.Wxg?#
3

2 Jfl- ..7.
Jt3
36.WxgB t
36.ia4t f8 37.Wh6t E:g7 3 8 .Wxg?#
36 . . . d? 37.Wxf7t
1

r
h
1 -0 R. Pert - D. Ledger, Southend 20 1 0 .
a b c d e f g

1 5 .Wa3 !N
This is the right way to go.
My approach in the game was too slow:
1 5 . tll g3 ?! b5 1 6.tll e3 id? 1 7.d5 c5 and
Black was absolutely fine in R. Pert -
H . Hunt, Daventry 2 1 03 .
1 5 . . . c 5 1 6.tll b6 axb6 1 7. fxg6t fxg6 1 8 .Wxa8
cxd4 1 9 .cxd4 exd4 20.Wa3 tll g4 2 1 .E:xfB Wxf8
22.E:fl;l;
Black has some compensation for the
exchange, but White's chances look preferable.

1 3.exf5 exd4 1 4. e4
White musters up an attack.

14 ... dxc3
44 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

1 4 . . . tll c5 1 5 . f6 Wxe4 1 6.ixe4 tll xb3 I O . . . gxf5 1 l . exf5 e4?! 1 2 .tll f4

1 7.axb3 e8 1 8 .tll g3 ih8 1 9 . cxd4 e6 20.d5
xf6 2 1 .fc l;!; I O . . . exd4?! 1 l .cxd4 tll c6 1 2 . tll bc3 tll xd4 1 3 . f6
tll xe2t 1 4.ixe2 ixf6 I 5 .tll d 5 +-
15.<lD2xc3 c6
After 1 5 . . . We5 1 6 .'tt> h l c6 1 7.ae l White 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 .Wb3
has ample play for a pawn. l l . fxg6 ! ? is an additional possibility gained
via this move order, bur Black may be able
1 6.ael h4 17.f6 to hold the balance: l l . . . fxg6 1 2 .xf8t
White has a strong initiative. Wxf8 1 3 .Wb3t 'tt> h 7 1 4. tll a3 We7 1 5 .fl
if6 ( 1 5 . . . tll d7?! 1 6.Wf7 Wxf7 I 7.xf7
B4222) 1 0.f5! a6 l 8 .ic4 h5 l 9 .id5 b8 20. tll c4 'tt> h 6
[20 . . . c6 2 1 .tll xd6] 2 1 . h3;!;) 1 6.tll c4 tll d7

, , , , , ;- -- -,--rds
s -1.-.t- 1 7.tll e3 c6 1 8 .@h l tll f8 1 9 .Wc2 h5 20.a4
''''' Y. 'tt> g7 Yi-Yi Doric - Nikolov, Zadar 200 5 .
1 . , , % i r,
, ,,Y,_
6 - -B - - - - %i
_, ,% .1 .t -
.....-
'. % %
8

5 ' !
-d ----%- 7 ... i
J % "r
ml
. ... i
%.,,m -,.
6
".. . %f% ".. . %
-JrJ

%

4- -

J1
3 -%'f .i.-
"" - _:w. - - 3 ,--
lilriF' '"" '

!" j-
'% . .
2 z >1: ,.%
%

a b c d e f g h 1 . 'ICZJ
b d f g h
, Y.

a c e
Advancing the f-pawn immediately is the
l l . . . Wg5
most accurate move order. However, I think
This does not turn our well, so Black may
it is particularly important for readers to check
want to look to the alternatives here, though
out the comments on line B422 1 ) I O . tll d2 to
White still seems able to keep an edge.
realize why I have come to this conclusion, and
1 1 . . . 'tt> h 7 l 2 . fxg6t fxg6 l 3 . xf8 and Black
to fully understand the resulting positions.
suffers from not having his knight on d7
ready to recapture: I 3 . . . ixf8 I 4. tll a3 tll d7
1 5 .fl t
1 0 ... tll d7
Playing Harriet Hunt in a recent Sunday
I l . . .gxf5 1 2. exf5 exd4 1 3 .cxd4 tll c6 1 4.Wh l
morning 4NCL march (see page 43) , I casually
tll xd4 1 5 . tll xd4 ixd4 1 6.tll c3 Wh4 1 7.f3--+
played I O . tll d2 instead of I O . f5 . She told me
1 2 .f3 'tt> h 7 1 3 .tll a3 tll d7 1 4.afl tll f6
after the game she intended to meet I O . f5 with
1 5 . tll g3 h5 1 6.ic4 d5
I O . . . tll d7, which frustrated me as it could well
Desperation, bur Black has no good way to
have taken us into the main line given below.
defend against l 7.ixf7, which is even the
I expect she wouldn't have been alone in her
reply to l 6 . . . h4 .
choice as many Black players would find it
l 7.ixd5
daunting to castle here, though that may be
Kanep - A. Smirnov, Tallinn (rapid) 200 5 .
Black's best chance.
 Chapter I - 2 . e6 3 . e4
1 1 .fxg6!
The idea of taking on g6 and then going
Wlb3 to stop Black from castling isn't obvious,
but it seems effective as it suddenly becomes
very awkward for Black to complete his
development.
1 1 . .. fxg6 12.Wb3 tll f6
1 2 . . . tt:l b6 does not really work: 1 3 .a4 a5
1 4 . tt:l a3 ie6 1 5 .ib5t c6 1 6.ixc6t
13.tll d2
This position can also arise from line B422 l
after 1 0 . tt:l d2 tt:l d7 l l . f5 tt:\ f6 1 2. fxg6 fxg6
1 3 .Wfb3, but with the current move order we
have cut out a lot of Black's options.
1 3 ... c6
1 3 . . . b6 1 4 .ib5t;I;
1 4 . a4 ie6 1 5 .ic4 ixc4 was not so clear in
Rusev - Cebalo, Zadar 2007.
14 ... i.e6?
This obvious developing move for Black
has a massive pitfall. However, I would not be
. . 45
surprised if Black actually chose this move in
tournament play, as he has nothing else that
looks reasonable and so could play this move
without much thought.
14 . . . b5 is my computer's recommendation,
but it hardly looks convincing: 1 5 .tt:\a5 id?
l 6.a4 a6 l 7.axb5 cxb5 ( l 7 . . . axb 5 ? l 8 . tt:l xc6+-)
1 8 .c4!
Conclusion: We started by looking at the
interesting A) 3 . . . c5 ! ? which has grown in
popularity in recent years . After 4.d5 Black
may choose the solid A l ) 4 . . . d6, though in the
main line White has 8.e5! weakening the black
pawn structure and securing an edge. Against
Black's other main option of A2) 4 . . . h6, White
can again land 8.e5!! in the main line, with
even greater effect; Black does well to avoid
being blown away.
Turning to the standard 3 . . . h6, after 4 .ixf6
W/xf6 5 .c3 !? Black has a wide choice of 5 th
moves, but White seems able to claim a
comfortable plus against the minor options.
With the critical B3) 5 . . . d5 Black is looking
to equalize, in contrast to some of the other
46 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

lines where he is looking to counterattack. I

.

like the approach with 6 .ltJd2 c5 7.ltJ gf3,

keeping the centre fluid and using our lead
in development and stronger king position
to create problems from as early a stage as
possible.
Finally we looked at Black's most common
option of B4) 5 . . . d6. White's standard plan
of playing i.d3 , ltJ e2, 0-0 , f2-f4 seems
promising, especially if Black then allows e4-
e 5 . The critical set-up by which Black prevents
this advance is B42) 6 . . . g6 7 . ltJ e2 i.g7 8 . 0-0
e5 (which can also be reached by a 6 . . . e5 move
order) . We examined this in detail, and I
believe that the accurate 9 . f4 Wf e7 1 0 . f5 ! offers
White a significant advantage.
 Chapter 2

2 ... e6 3. d2!?

1 .d4 f6 2 . .tg5 e6 3.d2!?

A) 3 ... c5 4.e3 49
Al} 4 ... cxd4 49
A2) 4 ... b6!? 50
B) 3 ... d5 52
C) 3 ... h6 4 . .th4 54
Cl} 4 ... d5 54
C2} 4 ... c5 56
48 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 lll f6 2 ..ig5 e6 3.lll d2!? 4 . . . h6

Having looked at my main recommendation
of 3 . e4 in the previous chapter, we move on to
offer players a second option with this flexible
move. In the last year alone, this move has
been played by Morozevich, Nakamura and
Vitiugov, to name j ust a few. They have mainly
used this line in blitz and rapid games, but
nevertheless the fact they are using it makes me
stand up and take note. Whilst 3.e4 remains
my main choice, I certainly think this move
looks interesting.

s .1 -.x,
.,. ;_,% ,,--, .

5 .ixf6
Nakamura opts for the direct approach,
7
6

5
.
.
-
. .
/. .....,
-
, -
taking on f6 in order to avoid spending a
move retreating his bishop.
Bjorn Thorfinnsson, who is a keen

. n n
Trompowsky player (in fact he played it

4
against me some years ago) , preferred to

3 .,
W, '"'/,,
%?, '

A % Wi*l
keep his bishop with 5 .ih4 and obtained

2
A0 %'0% A A
a perfectly playable position: 5 . . . b6 6 . lll gf3
; 0 i0% %'0% 0
: . .. . %-=j
ib7 7.id3 d6 8 .We2 lll c6 9 . c3 a6 1 0 . 0-0

1
e5 1 1 .dxe5 lll xe5 1 2.lll xe5 dxe5 1 3 .:gfd l;!;
Bj . Thorfinnsson - Butt Khalil, Beij ing
a b c d e f g h 2008.
5 . . . ixf6 6.c3
Unlike the previous chapter where I went
I half expected Nakamura to follow up
into very specific detail in many of the lines,
with an immediate 6.e5 ie7 7.Wi'g4t,
in this variation you are far more likely to
which would have been in keeping with his
enter unchartered positional territory at an
aggressive character, but he had different
early stage, and so I have tried to explain ideas
ideas.
instead of showing exact moves. That said,
6 . . . d6 7.f4 e5 8 . lll gf3 lll c6 9 .ib5 0-0
we are still going to cover Black's three major
options of A) 3 ... c5 B) 3 ... d5 and C) 3 ... h6,
after a brief look at a fourth option.

3 . . .ie7
This move looks a bit passive to me, but it
was the choice of Kramnik as recently as
20 1 2, so we had better check it out.
4.e4
4 . e3 is also possible, but it seems rude not
to take the centre when our opponent is
offering.
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . . e6 3 . llJ d2!? 49

I O .ixc6 bxc6 I l .dxe5 dxe5 1 2 .fxe5 ih4t
1 3 .g3 ig5 1 4. llJ b3 Wi'e7 1 5 .Wi'd4 ig4 1 6 . llJ xg5
WI'xg5 I 7. 0-0 1'%fe8 1 8 .1'%f4;!;
White had managed to obtain an advantage
and went on to win in Nakamura - Kramnik,
Moscow (blitz) 20 1 2.
A) 3 ... c5 4.e3
bishops followed by landing the knight on f4,
which can make White's life awkward. There
are two sensible ways of dealing with this plan
which I want to touch on.
In our main line White will exchange his g5-
bishop for the f6-knight; this may be followed
by castling either side.
A rarer option is to develop with lLi e2,
keeping an eye on the f4-square.
This is not really a position for exact
moves, but more for understanding ideas and
choosing a route that you like. I have offered
you different ways of playing, so take your
pick!

6.tll gf3
White goes into a line that may also come
about from the Torre Attack.

6 .id3 ! ? seems an interesting way to avoid

Torre theory: 6 . . . b6 7 . lLi e2 As mentioned
above, Vitiugov's idea is to keep the f4-square
is under control.

. . i(
Black's most common move here is
Al) 4 ... cxd4, but sometimes he forgoes the
exchange with A2) 4 b6!?. 8 -- p{"'ii" Y.
..
.1 ..t
..
7 J - zA]
z. ..
t
%
..

.
... . .

6
. . % .
. ... . .

Al) 4 ... cxd4 5.exd4 fi.e7

. . . . . . :m
s w -
',

4
:r

. . Jfi. J.,, W"'
3
2 f[j
W"' % tfJt[j t
w-
1 : %vm . . %r
. .

a b c d e f g h
7 . . . ib7 8 . 0-0 lLi c6 9 . c3 lLi d 5 I O .ie3 0-0
1 1 . lLi f4 lLixf4 1 2 .ixf4 d6 1 3 . lLi c4 e5 1 4. dxe5
dxe5 1 5 .ig3 g6 1 6.ie4 f6 1 7.Wi'c2 'kt>g7
1 8 .1'%ad l Wi'c8 1 9 .1'%fe l 1'%d8 20.lLie3 id6
2 1 .1'%d2 lLi e7 22.1'%ed l White's advantage was
obvious in Vitiugov - Kulaots, Aix-les-Bains
20 1 1 .

6 b6 7.fi.d3 fi.b7 8.ixf6 !i.xf6

..
50 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 5.g4!?N
1 5 .tt'l eg5 h6 1 6.ie4 Wd7 1 7.ixb? Wxb7
1 8 . tt'l e4 tt'l d5 was comfortable for Black in
Ivanisevic - Gashimov, Internet 2006.

1 5 ... c7 1 6.g5
White has the initiative.

A2) 4... b6!?

s- -- - ---
.i ,,7, -.--
.i.Bti .'
7
- - -- %p % .,,,J -- --%
-
6 1
W/ {0
s m% -if

- --%%% ,;, ,
9.e2
9 . c3 d6 1 0 .We2 tt'l d7 1 l .ie4 White goes
for a positional approach which will involve
4
.% , ,. ll
3. ll
castling kingside. l l . . .ixe4 1 2 .tt'lxe4 ie7
l 3 . a4;l; Gormally - Palliser, Isle of Man 2000.
w- 0 A ,0
A --
fl
if
2 0 iOz % -,, /----7.w A
0
- - i'=
9 a6 10.c3 d6 1 1 .0-0-0 O : iOz 0 r.Oz

1
.

Castling chis side is more aggressive.

b d f g h
/, , , , , v. /,, , , , 7, 0. . ,, . .

a c e
1 1 b5 12.b l tll d7 13.tll e4 ie7 14.h4
.

c!LJ b6 Black aims to do without exchanging on d4.

1 4 . . . ixe4 1 5 .ixe4 d5 1 6.id3 b4 l 7.c4 dxc4
1 8 .ixc4 tt'l b6, and now 1 9 .ib3 gave White
an edge in Mamedov - Hammer, Lubbock
2009, but I prefer the more direct: 1 9 .d 5 ! ?N
exd5 20 .ixd5 tt'l xd5 2 1 .We4 0-0 22.:gxd5;!;
Whilst it is impossible for me to cover every
eventuality, I shall show you one idea which
you can use against this set-up.
5.tll gf3 ib7 6.J.d3 ie7 7.c3 0-0 8.0-0
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . . e6 3 . tlJ d2!? 51

As I write this, I am actually watching a posmon looks balanced, although White

live game between lvanchuk and Aronian in may hope to be able to muster up some
this line in the Candidates Tournament in kingside play in the future.
London. It seems to me that the attacking 1 2 . . . 'it>xh7 1 3 .h5 'it>g7 1 4.hxg6 l:!h8 1 5 .gxf7t
approach by lvanchuk is rather optimistic, and Wxf7 1 6 .Wi'g6t We7 1 7.l:'!:h7t l:!xh7 1 8 .Wi'xh7t
that he hasn't followed up correctly. I shall be 'it>d6 1 9 .Wi'h2t We7 20 .Wi'h7t Wf8 2 1 . tlJ e4
seriously surprised if lvanchuk goes on to win The game looks likely to end in a perpetual
the game. (Should that happen, then I hope check at some point.
that the Quality Chess team will edit out these
comments!) 8 ... tli c6
8 . . . cxd4 9 .ixf6 ! ? (9.exd4 tll d5 1 0 .ixe7
8 .ixf6 ixf6 9 . h4 tll c6 1 0 . tll g5 g6 Wi'xe7 1 1 .l:'!:e l with balanced play) 9 . . . ixf6
I O . exd4t takes us to a position similar to those
s .1 B
1 . " v,
in line A l , with Wi'e2, a2-a4 and tll e4 all on

.. . %.
1..fr. f
the cards .
6
. .
5 . . . % . . .
.

.....

3 .
,.
4 -:f
.....
. . .

2 'f
o aW" ":
'- %w.
_ i.0% o

1 -- .. n= n :a:
a b c d e f g h
I l .Wi'g4!N
This would have been a much better follow
up to the knight lunge.
The game continued: I l . f4? tll e7 1 2 .Wi'g4
h5 ( 1 2 . . . tll f5 !+ looks strong) 1 3 .Wi'h3 cxd4
1 4. exd4 b5 1 5 .a3 ?! Too slow. 1 5 . . . Wi'b6
9.a3!?
1 6 .l:!g I ? White denies himself the option of
This is an interesting idea, looking to take
castling. 1 6 . . . tll d5 1 7.tll ge4 ig7+ lvanchuk
advantage of Black not having clarified the
- Aronian, London 20 1 3 .
centre. White prepares expansion plans on the
I 1 . . .l:!c8
I I . . . tll e7?! looks to get another piece to the
queenside with b2-b4.
kingside as Aronian did in the game, but it is
9 ... cxd4 10.cxd4
a bit clumsy here as Black temporarily loses
White can now switch plans and take with
control of the g5 -square, allowing the pawn
the c-pawn.
advance: 1 2.h5 ixg5 1 3 .Wi'xg5 tll f5 1 4.W/g4;!;
and White has ongoing kingside pressure.
10 ... tli d5 1 I ..ixe7 flxe7 12.ic4 tli f6 13.e4
1 2 .tll xh7
White can play a normal move like 1 2.tll df3
d6 14.kU
Hebden - Grooten, Cappelle la Grande
threatening h4-h 5 , against which Black
2006. White's chances are preferable, with
should probably play 1 2 . . . h5 himself. The
more space and slightly better development.
52 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

B) 3 ... d5 6 . . . h6 7.ih4 ie7 transposes to variation C l .

- --, - - -% , _
,
6 . . . id6 7.id3 0-0 8 . 0-0 e5

7
i. -.i.B9
s Black plays ambitiously in the centre, but

f
,
Y. .
y,
White can counter effectively.
6
"" "
s m - ,
" 9 . dxe5 lLi xe5 1 0 .lLi xe5 ixe5

, E r
. . %
';-, , , , , ;,,_,..<: .0

4 - - % .. ,, Y.m
6 H-
L. % - -atl f
3 w- ,, ,,

"- "'" UW' ""

w- ....%
,,,,.

p - '
2 0 iOz. %
A A A A fl 5
ff%_ fl
r"

--- ml:m!
O ;. : 0 iOz 0 r.Oz 4 .
W-% W-%
.%
1
3
.

b d f g h w-. m -t w-
t::i. -tJ"
! Jw - " t::i -t%
,, , , . , y, z .. 7'-. . . . .

a c e
.
2
This line has the ability to transpose to line 1 r . {' .. %.vw:rd
1 -. , . .. . .
b d f g h
. . . . . Y. z z

Cl at any point if Black flicks in . . . h6, but I a c e

wanted to look at it independently because
I I . f4 ! ? id6 I 2 . e4 c4
White has a fantastic trap he can set if Black
1 2 . . . dxe4 1 3 .ixf6 gxf6 1 4.lll xe4;!; Dobrov
chooses not to play . . . h6 at all.
Toufighi, Abu Dhabi 2005.
1 3 .ic2N
4.e3 c5 5.c3 tll c6
1 3 .ixf6 Wxf6 1 4.e5 ic5 t 1 5 .\t>h l W/b6
5 . . . lLi bd7 6 . f4 (6.id3 ie7 7.lLi gf3 reaches
was fine for Black in Samoilov - Beresrnev,
a position played many times, usually arising
Kolomna 20 1 0 .
from a Torre move order. One possible
1 3 . . . ig4
continuation is: 7 . . . b6 8 . 0-0 ib7 9 . lLi e5
1 3 . . . W/b6t 1 4.lifh l Wffx b2? 1 5 .ixf6 gxf6
lLixe5 I O .dxe5 lLi d7 1 l .ixe7 W/xe7 1 2 . f4
1 6.exd5 Wxc3 1 7. lLi e4 Wb4 1 8 . lll x f6t+-
0-0-0 1 3 .Wie2 f6 1 4.exf6 gxf6 1 5 .e4t) 6 . . . ie7
1 4.W/e l ! W/b6t 1 5 .\t>h l Wxb2 1 6.:B:cl
7.id3 b6 8.lLi gf3 ib7 9 . lLi e5 0-0 1 0 .W/f3 h6
White has good attacking chances.
I 1 .h4 lLie8 1 2 .ixh6 gxh6 1 3 .W/h5 f5 1 4 .g4-+
G. Mohr - Anand, Belgrade 1 9 8 8 .
7.i.d3
6.tll gf3
I have decided to stick with this solid option.
As in the previous note, switching to
a Stonewall set-up with 6.f4!? is a major
alternative, one example being: 6 ... h6 7 .ixf6
W/xf6 8 . lLi gf3 id7 9.ib5 id6 1 0 . 0-0 Wid8
1 1 .ixc6 bxc6 1 2 . lLi b3 c4 1 3 . lLic5 0-0 1 4. lLi b7
W/b8 1 5 . lLi xd6 Wxd6 1 6.b3 cxb3 1 7. axb3;!;
White's knight dominated the black bishop in
Granda Zuniga - Miguel Aparicio, Peru 1 99 5 .

6 ...i.e7
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . e6 3 . tll d2! ?
. 53

7 ... 0-0 1 5 .a4 looks too dangerous for Black, so he

Black can play about with his move order, should settle for 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .Wi'h 5 , though
but more often than not we end up at the White keeps attacking chances.
same thing: 9 . . . c4 1 0 .ie2 0-0 1 l . b3 gives White an
7 . . . b6 8 . 0-0 ib7 initiative.
8 . . . 0-0 transposes to the main line. 1 o. tll e5

9 .Wi'a4 ! ?
White has a few interesting choices here,
all of about equal value, but I can't cover 8.0-0 b6 9.lLie5 h7
everything so I will j ust mention the other 9 . . . ll\ xe5 1 0 . dxe5 lLl d7

va .tX.....]zY.Fi
ideas and you can investigate them further

.. . . v. .
on your own if you wish to take that route. s

67 t. . . z.U.'Slll)

W." i t. .. . . z
i
.

9 . lLl e5 ll\ xe5 transposes to the position .

. . . zt0 m
z
reached in the note to Black's 5 th move
.

5 0 f

4 w-0 . z ..... z t....
above by the move order 5 . . . ll\ bd7 6.id3

.

m0
ie7 7.ll\ gf3 b6 8 . 0-0 ib7 9.lLle5 lLl xe5 .

9 .Wi'b l ! ? was recommended b y D e Dovitiis
in New in Chess Yearbook 97. White's idea 3 m J8l!J.m 0 m0
!::::, if!j . if!j !::::, i
.. . . ....
1 { RtiiRi
2
is to stay flexible, intending to expand with
b2-b4 on the queenside. Another point is

.
h
z

b d f g
that White may later play lLl e 5 , and if Black
. . .

exchanges on e5 then the f6-knight would
be driven away from the defence of the h7-
pawn .
9.a3!? also intends queenside expansion with
b2-b4.
9 . . . 0-0
9 . . . Wi'd7 1 0.dxc5 bxc5 1 1 .gad l 0-0 1 2 . ll\ b3
Wi'd6 1 3 .ixf6 ixf6 1 4 .Wi'b5t and White
wins a pawn .
9 . . . a6 1 0 .ll\e5 b5 1 1 .Wi'd l ll\ xe5 1 2 .dxe5 ll\ d7
1 3 .ixe7 Wi'xe7 1 4. f4 and now 1 4 . . . 0-0-0 ?
a c e
1 1 .if4 Kasparov himself shows the way.
( 1 l .ixe7 Wi'xe7 l 2 . f4 f5 1 3 . exf6 ll\xf6 1 4. ll\ f3
ib7 1 5 .Wi'e l tll d7 1 6.Wi'g3 gfe8 1 7.Wi'h3t also
looks playable, Hoang Thanh Trang - Daulyte,
Tbilisi 20 1 1 ) 1 1 . . . f6 1 2 . lLl f3 fxe5 1 3 . ll\ xe5
lLl xe5 1 4 .ixe5 if6 1 5 .Wi'h5 g6 1 6.ixg6
hxg6 1 7.Wi'xg6t <Jih8 1 8 . f4 ixe5 1 9 . fxe5
id7 20 .Wi'h6t 'l!lg8 2 1 .gf6 gxf6 22. exf6
Wi'f8 23 .Wi'g6t 'l!lh8 24.WTh s t <Jig8 2 5 .gn
Wi'f7 26 .Wi'g5 t 'l!lf8 27.gf4 'l!le8 28.gh4 ic6
54 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

29.l:'l:h8t 1 -0 Kasparov - Maiques, Cordoba 4 ..ih4

(simul) 1 992. Black now must choose between the solid
Cl) 4 ... d5 and the more complex C2) 4 c5 . ..

I O.%Ya4!
This seemingly innocent move has a hidden Cl) 4 d5 5.e3
..

sting in the tail.

m s R
s
,Jx.i..
/, .t.v.r.t.
f
J

%,,,,,,_ ,_,,.,, .. /,-

1
,, . , , ,,,,, ,

5 ---.. ,""'
4
, ,
,,
iii J 'iii'%
3 ,,, ,J%J% '0 /,'0

2 0A Fi'
0%
P,,J W A
0% 0 0%

,, % ,,,, ;t , ,/,
b d f g h

a c e
5 c5
..

10 xe5? Black usually carries out this advance at an

Black should prefer: I O . . . Wc7 I I . f4 (or
.

early stage, but he can try to do without it:

1 1 .tLl df3 !?) l l . .. a6 1 2 .l:'l:ae l b5 1 3 .IWd l This 5 . . . ltJ bd7 6.lLi gf3 ie7 7.id3 0-0 8 . 0-0 b6
certainly looks pleasant enough for White,
although a hard-fought game may lie ahead.

1 1 .dxe5 tll d7?

Black can set a counter-trap with I 1 . . . lLi h 5 ! ?
1 2.ixe7 Wxe7. Then 1 3 .g4? f5 ! 1 4.gxh5 1Wg5t
1 5 . <J;l h l d4t 1 6. f3 1Wxe3 would turn out well
for Black. However, the more circumspect
I 3 .ie2 highlights the poor position of the
knight on h5 and give White a clear advantage.

12.%Yh4!
Threatening mate on h7.
12 ... h6 13 . .ixe7 %Yc7 14.ixf8+
White is a full rook up.
C) 3 ... h6
This looks critical,
immediately.
9 . lLi e5
Here Vitiugov carries on as normal with our
standard plan.
9 . c4!? was Hodgson's choice, which is
generally a good recommendation: 9 . . . ib7
1 0 .cxd5 lLi xd5 I l .ig3 c5 1 2 .a3 cxd4
1 3 .exd4 a6 1 4.l:'l:e l (Ir looks interesting to
hitting the bishop play 1 4. lLi c4!?N before Black gets a chance
to stop it with . . . b 5 . ) 1 4 . . . b5 1 5 .1We2
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . . e6 3 . tiJ d2!? 55

b6 1 6 .E:ad l E:fd8 1 7.ib l E:ac8 1 8 . lli e5 9 . lli gf3

tll f8 1 9 .Wh5 f5 20.Wf7t mh8 2 1 . lli df3 I 'm not sure about this move.
Hodgson - Larsen, London 1 990. 9 .We2 would at least slow down Black's
9 . . llixe5 1 0 .dxe5 lli d7 1 1 .ixe?
. plans: 9 . . . cxd4 1 0 . exd4 a6 1 1 .lli gf3 ib5
Here 1 l .ig3 is not as effective as in the Zaichik - A. Ivanov, Kostroma 1 9 8 5 , and
main line, as Black has the option of playing now I propose 1 2 . 0-0N lli c6 1 3 . lli e5
. . . lli c 5 . ixd3 1 4.Wxd3 with a good fight to
1 1 . . .Wxe? 1 2 . f4 Wb4 1 3 .E:b l Wa4 come.
9 . . . cxd4 1 0. exd4 ib5 1 l .ic2 a5 1 2 .a4 ia6
1 3 .ixf6 gxf6 1 4 . lli fl
Morozevich finds his own way to arrange
to castle.
14 . . . lli d? l 5 . lli g3 h 5 l 6 . lli e2 h4 1 7. 0-0
White went on to win in Morozevich -
Bologan, Beij ing (blindfold) 20 1 2 .

7.tll gf3 J.e7

On to another Morozevich game:
7 . . . id6
Black chooses to aim for . . . e5 without
1 4. c4!N taking any time out to block the bishop pin.
1 4. b4? a5 1 5 . b 5 lli c5+ Vitiugov - Savchenko, 8 .id3 0-0 9 . 0-0 e5 1 0. dxe5 lli xe5 1 1 . lli xe5
Serpukhov 2008. ixe5 1 2 . f4 id6 1 3 . e4
14 . . . Wxd l Morozevich plays directly and gets an edge;
1 4 . . . Wxa2 ? 1 5 .Wc2 looks seriously risky for we saw a similar approach in the note to
Black. Black's 6th move in line B .
1 5 .E:bxd l
White has the initiative.

6.c3 tll c6
Bologan has tried delaying the development
of this knight and playing a French-like plan of
exchanging light-squared bishops on the b5-
square:
6 . . . ie7 7 .id3 Wb6 8 .E:b l id?

a b c d e f g h
1 3 . . . c4 1 4.ie2 Wb6t 1 5 .if2 ic5 1 6.e5
1 6. exd5 ! ? ixf2t 17 .E:xf2;!; is also promising.
1 6 . . . lli e4 1 7. lli xe4 dxe4 1 8 .ixc5 Wxc5t
1 9 .Wd4 Wxd4t 20.cxd4 ie6 2 1 .f5;!;
Here too, White went on to win m
Morozevich - Alekseev, Moscow 2008.
56 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

s.i.d3 0-0 9.0-0 b6 10.tlies White has a strong attack in this position. I
White seems to score amazingly well in these shall j ust briefly give a couple of examples of
positions. how che attack may develop.

1 3 ... c4
1 3 . . . h8 1 4.ad l We? 1 5 .Wh5 c4 1 6 .ic2
lll c5 1 7. lll f3 Wc8 1 8 .ih4 We8 ? 1 9 .if6! ixf6
20. exf6 lll d7 2 1 . fxg?t c;i> xg7 22.Wg4t c;i> h8
23 .Wih3 c;i> g? 24.Wg3 t c;i> h8 2 5 .d4 Wd8
26. lll e5 lll f6 27.h4 lll g8 28.g4 f5 29.g?
1 -0 Aleksandrov - Rakhmanov, Zvenigorod
200 8 .

14.i.c2 tll c5 1 5 .gadl V9c8 1 6.i.f4 Wh8

17.VNhS tll d3 1 8.hh6! gxh6 19.'9xh6t
@gs 20.i.xd3 cxd3 2 1 .f4
1 -0 Andres Gonzalez - Nunez Munoz,
Collado Villalba 2002.

C2) 4 ... cS

1 1 .dxeS tll d7 1 2.i.g3

1 2 .ixe? Wxe7 1 3 . f4 is another good way to
play: 1 2 . . . ib7 1 4.Wh5 fd8 1 5 .f3 f5 1 6 .g3
d4? l 7. cxd4 cxd4 1 8 .e4 with a winning attack,
Mehmeti - Boshku, Bar 2008.

1 2 ...i.b?
1 2 . . .f5 1 3 .exf6 lll xf6 1 4. e4t

1 3.V9g4

a b c d e f g h
5.e4!
This advance, aiming to generate a quick
attack, has recently become popular. I really
like this idea for White as he can put immediate
pressure on his opponent.

5 .e3 is also possible, after which 5 . . . cxd4

6. exd4 ie7 7. lll gf3 b6 is similar to line Al (see
page 49) . But I think this version is slightly
preferable for Black because he has managed to
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . . e6 3 . ltJ d2!? 57

get . . . h 6 in. In l i n e A l if Black follows u p . . . c5 1 0.ib5

with . . . h6 we would simply take on f6, which 1 0 . li:) e2 li:) c6 l l . li:) f4 li:) dxe5 1 2. li:) b3 id7
is one of White's main plans anyway. 1 3 .c3 Wf6 1 4.ib5 a6 1 5 .ia4 ih6 1 6. li:) d3
li:) xd3t 1 7.Wxd3 0-0 1 8 . 0-0 if4 1 9.l:%ad l
; ... cxd4
5 . . g5 6.ig3 cxd4 7.e5 is j ust a transposition
l:%ad8 20 .We2 li:)e5 2 1 .ixd7;!; Nakamura -
.
Caruana, Moscow (blitz) 20 1 2. The moves
ro the main line. look far from forced, but Black's weakened

5 . . . d5
king is always likely ro offer White a small
advanrage.
This has rarely been played, but it was
1 0 . . . li:) c6 l l .li:) e2 li:)xc5 1 2. 0-0 a6 1 3 .ixc6t
Caruana's choice on two occasions so should
bxc6 1 4.c4 a5 1 5 . li:) d4 Wb6 1 6.Wc2 li:) d7
be taken seriously.

a b c d e f g h
I 7.Wd3
6.e5
Vitiugov must have been tempted by
6.exd5 ! ? can lead ro a French Tarrasch-rype
l 7.li:)xe6! ? immediately: l 7 . . . fxe6 l 8 .Wg6t
position: 6 . . . Wxd5 7.li:) gf3 cxd4 8 .ic4
cjfds l 9 .Wxe6
Wc5 !?N (8 . . . Wa5 9 . 0-0 li:) c6 l O. li:) b3 Wb4
1 7 . . . ia6 1 8 . li:) xe6
l 1 .We2 ie7 1 2 . li:) bxd4 li:)xd4 1 3 . li:)xd4 0-0
Given a second chance, he now goes for the
1 4. c3t Yemelin - Neverov, St Petersburg
sacrifice.
20 1 1 ) 9 .ixf6 gxf6 1 0.We2 li:) c6 1 1 . 0-0
1 8 . . . fxe6 1 9 .Wg6t @d8 20.Wxe6 ie7 2 1 .l:%fd l
ie7 1 2 . li:) b3 Wb6 1 3 .l:%ad l e5 1 4.c3 dxc3
d4
1 5 . bxc3 l:%g8 1 6.@h l ig4 1 7.h3 ih5
1 8 .We4oo
6 . . . g5 7.ig3 li:) fd7 8 . h4 g4 9 . dxc5 h5

a b c d e f g h
58 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

Now instead of 22.c5 ?! Vitiugov - 1 1 .Wf3 ! ?

Caruana, Reggio Emilia 20 1 1 , White should 1 1 .g6! ?N fxg6 1 2.Wg4 :B:g8 1 3 .id3 gives
play 22.Wf5N intending e5-e6 with good White good attacking chances.
compensation. 1 1 . . .Wxf3
After 1 L. . ei c3 ! ? 1 2 . ei c4 Wxa2 1 3 .:B:cl
6.e5 g5 7.i.g3 c!ti dS 8.h4 ib4 1 4.:B:xh6 it's not easy for Black to take
advantage of his discovered check.

s
7
i. - ..t. Se
6 " ,, /, ,,
,,, , , ,

6 ' ' -f ..
.J. .
fi -
..... % -
.z
s .... %
'0

4 .
'
3 w-0
7,

2 8 rw
8m"'"//, ".J-w
8;./ m
.z - - - - %
- - - - ef - %% .,,, '
1 b d f g h
%

t 1fif n a c e

a b c d
8 ... gxh4
It is interesting if Black opts to grab the b2-
pawn.
8 . . . Wb6 ! ? 9 . hxg5 ! ?
This was tried recently in a clash between
two high-rated players and looks extremely
murky.
9 .ic4!? was another high-profile clash:
9 . . .Wxb2 1 0 .ixd5 exd5 1 1 . hxg5 ei c6
1 2.:B:b l Wxa2 1 3 .ei gf3 b6 1 4. 0-0 Wa3
1 5 . ei b3 was very unclear in Morozevich -
Ponomariov, Moscow (blitz) 2007.
9 . . .Wxb2 1 0 .:B:b l Wa3
1 0 . . . Wxa2 1 l .ic4
e f g h 1 4 . . . ei b 5 t ( 1 4 . . . ei e4t? 1 5 . d l ei c3t
1 6.Wxc3 dxc3 1 7.:B:xh8t rll e 7 1 8 . ei d6+-)
1 5 .rll d l :B:g8 1 6.id3 ei c3 t 1 7.rll e l ei e4t
1 8 .rll fl ei xg5 1 9 .Wf4 and White has a huge
initiative.
1 2. ei gxf3 ei c6 1 3 . ei e4 ei c3 1 4.eixc3 dxc3
The situation remained unclear in Ivanisevic
- Jobava, Plovdiv 20 1 2 .
9Jlm4 c!ti c6 10.lDgf3 d6
This looks natural but I believe White's
chances are still preferable.
1 0 . . . ie7
This was tried against me by Gawain Jones
in 20 1 1 , but it is not convincing as the move
holds an empty threat.
 Chapter 2 - 2 . . . e6 3 . 4J d2!? 59

l 1 .lll c4!N 1 1 . . .id7 1 2 . exd6 a6 1 3 .ixc6 ixc6 1 4.lll c4

Very strong, as Black can't take that rook ib5 1 5 .Wxd4 leaves White a pawn up,
without some serious suffering. Vitiugov - Maslak, Moscow 20 1 1 .
l 1 .:B:h5 ?! Wa5 1 2.id3 b5 1 3 .ie4 lll e3
1 4 . fxe3 dxe3 1 5 .if400 R. Pert - G. Jones, 1 2.xeS J.d7 1 3.J.xc6 hc6 14.VlYhS gh7
London 20 1 1 . 1 5 .gxd4 VlYaS?!
1 1 . . .ixh4?! 1 2 .ixh4 Wc7 1 3 .lll xd4 lll xe5 1 5 . . . Wb6 1 6. lll b3
1 3 . . . lll xd4 1 4. lll d6t c;t> fg l 5 .Wxd4
1 4 . lll b5 Wc5 1 6.c3 J.e7 17. dc4
14 . . . Wb8 ? 1 5 .ig3 f6 1 6.Wh5t c;t>e7 l 7. lll xe5 With a winning position for White who has
fxe5 1 8 .ixe5+- all sorts of threats, including lll xf7.
1 5 .lll bd6t
1 5 . lll xe5 is less accurate as 1 5 . . . Wb4t picks 1 7 ...VlYbS
up the bishop on h4.
1 5 . . . c;t> fg 1 6 . lll e4 Wc7 1 7.ig3
White pushes Black around with his
powerful knights.
l 7 . . . d6 l 8 .lll cxd6+-

1 0 . . . :B:g8 looks interesting, eyeing up a

potential exchange sac for the g3-bishop :
l 1 .:B:h3 ie7N ( l 1 . . .d6 l 2.ib5 id7 l 3 . exd6
e 5 ? was too loosening in Girya - Bodnaruk,
Tyumen 20 1 2; 1 4.'1We2!N would have been
very strong, as 14 . . . ixh3 l 5 .lll xe5 gives White
a winning attack.) 1 2 .a3 Wa5 1 3 .id3 b6
1 4.We2 and White has an initiative.

H .J.hs

18 ... 0-0-0 19.he7 llixe7 20,gxdSt @xd8

2 1 .0-0-0t +-
Vitiugov - Wang Hao, Ningbo (rapid) 20 1 0 .
Black's king is helpless against the oncoming
attack.

Conclusion: The lines in this chapter are

relatively undiscovered bur that said, the
resulting positions seem quite promising for
White, and the endorsement of so many strong
players in recent years in blitz and rapid games
indicates this may well be a line of the future!
Chapter 3

2 ... c5 3. c3!?

1 .d4 f6 2.i.g5 c5 3. c3!?

A) 3 ... cxd4 4.Nxd4 c6 5.Nh4 63

Al) 5 ... bS!? 64
A2) s ... d6 65
A3) 5 ... e6 6.e4 i.e7 7.0-0-0 68
A3 1) 7 ... 0-0? 68
A32) 7 ... d6 69
B) 3 ... d5 4.i.xf6 gxf6 5.e4!? dxe4 6.dxc5 72
Bl) 6 ... YNaS 73
B2) 6 ... f5 74
C) 3 ... YNaS 76
D) 3 ... Nb6 76
62 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 .d4 tlif6 2 . .ig5 c5 This quirky little sideline is a personal

...t
,. . 15l
'l!i' W
favourite of mine. It is relatively unexplored

,
a. mi:
and I have come up with some new ideas to
8 'ili' W !VB
7 " " ,/._.
breathe life into this variation. I hope that

'"af ,....:- ' ,Y.

6
the new analysis included in this book will

0 w .
give you plenty of opportunities to catch your

s em .... -

, ....Y._
. opponents out.

4
L. J a) 3 cxd4 is Black's main response and

will make up a large part of this chapter. It

3

'wffH- 'WffW is Black's most direct move and Dembo's
2 z .Z "
O :?.'O::< O
" 0[ . . xz .,,,;,z "
O :?.'O::< O :?.'O::< recommendation. Play typically continues

1 et:J v m .: 4.Wlxd4 lLi c6 5 .Wh4 and we will cover an

a b c d e f
This is Black's most aggressive response,
immediately challenging the white centre.
It is his fourth most popular answer to the
Trompowsky (after 2 . . . lLi e4, 2 . . . e6 and
2 . . . d5) and has been growing in popularity
recently, perhaps in part due to being Dembo's
recommendation in her excellent book on
assortment of 5th moves for Black.
g h
b) 3 ... d5 is met by 4.ixf6 and now 4 . . . exf6?!
5 .e3 and 4 . . . gxf6 5 . e3 are both covered in line
B of Chapter 8 (see page 1 62) . Answering
4 . . . gxf6 with 5 .e4! ? is an interesting alternative
which I will touch upon in this chapter.
c) 3 %Va5 is examined towards the end of this
..

Fighting the Anti-King's Indians. chapter.

Transpositions are rife in this variation to
chapters elsewhere in the book, so make sure d) 3 %Vb6 can be met with the Vaganian
.

you take the time to read this introduction to Gambit, 4.d5 Wlxb2 5 .id2 , which is starting
ensure that you are fully covered. to look quite promising for White according to
my analysis - this is covered in the next chapter.
3.tlic3!? For those who want an alternative approach, I
I am going to recommend White's most have mentioned an unexplored idea involving
direct move 3.d5 as our main choice, and I 4.ixf6 at the end of this chapter.
shall cover it in the following chapter.
 Chapter 3
1 .d4 llif6 2.J.g5 c5 3.t'ii c3!?
a b c d e f g h
We shall look at A) 3 cxd4, B) 3 ... d5, C)
3 ... a5 and D) 3 ...b6, bearing in mind that
lines B and D will often transpose into other
chapters.
3 . . . e6 is another move that will usually
transpose elsewhere: 4.d5 (4.tll e4! ? is
interesting alternative if you want to avoid the
transposition) 4 . . . d6 5 . e4 Play has transposed
into line Al of Chapter I.
A) 3 ... cxd4
- 2 . . . c5 3 . lli c3 ! ? 63
because White's 3rd move is relatively rare. The
line has several pitfalls for Black to avoid and
even if he steers his way through the mines then
White still has a chance to claim a very small
advantage; from a practical point of view it
seems a decent choice for White. The first two
times I played this line in tournament play I was
winning straight out of the opening and won
easily. It was only on the third occasion that my
opponent had a clue what he was doing; even
then I got a tiny advantage due to an important
novelty which I played in the main line.
4.xd4 t'ii c6
Black can try to play without this, but it
doesn't seem advisable. One example in which
I myself showed the way was: 4 . . . Wa5 5 .Wh4
Intending e2-e4 with easy play. 5 . . . tll d5
6 ..id2! tll b4?! Black tries to upset White's
plans, but he is too underdeveloped and pays
the price. 7.E:cl tll x a2 8 .Wc4! tll x c l 9 .Wxc8 t
Wd8 I O.Wxd8t @xd8 1 1 ..ixc l tll c 6 1 2.e4
White was already close to winning in R. Pert
- Jaunooby, Canterbury 20 1 0.
s.h4
64 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

5 . . . h6 was the choice of Sakaev, a strong Al) 5 ... b5!?

grandmaster, and so should be looked at, but
this game is typical of this variation - if White This has been recommended by some authors.
plays simple moves he will stand better.

,v.
, ,
% -. . %.
-
z. 3 , ..
s z ..t I]
7

.,,.,%

:4
.,a
.
,,,, % ...... .
.
..

F'" . ,

%Q.;Q
'K(8
!!
.
.

%Jiefifi!r .
1 di.kl
a b c d e f g h
6. 0-0-0 W'a5 7. lli f3 lli h7 8 .id2 g5 9 .W'c4
W'b4 1 0 .W'xb4 lli xb4 l l . lli b 5 lli a6 1 2 .ic3
i:%g8 l 3 . e4 (White should probably take
time out for 1 3 .h3!;!; to stop the g-pawn, but
either way he is doing well) 13 . . . g4 1 4.llih4
lli g5 l 5 .id3 lli e6 1 6.b4 lli ac7 l 7 . lli f5 lli xb5
6 . . . b4!?
1 8 .ixb5 a6 1 9 .ic4 b5 20 .id5t Moiseenko -
This looks more to the point.
Sakaev, Moscow 2003 .
7.llid5 W'a5 8 .ic4
This makes sense, covering the a2-pawn.
5 . . . W'a5 is reasonably common and has
8 . 0-0-0 is possible, and now:
been awarded an exclamation mark in Chess
a) 8 . . . b3 9 . cxb3 ! ? (9.axb3 makes the
Openings for Black Explained by the American
possibility of . . . W'a l t a constant worry:
grandmasters Alburt, Dzindzichashvili and
9 . . . lli xd 5 1 0 . exd5 lli b4 l l .Wd4 ib700)
9 . . . tli xd5 1 0 . exd5 lli b4 l l .id2 i:%b8 1 2 . a3
Perelshteyn, but after 6. 0-0-0 d6 7.e4 it is
nothing more than a transposition to line A2
W'c7t 1 3 .ic4 lli xd 5 1 4 .@b a White's lead
below.
in development gives him an edge.
Black does not benefit from avoiding the
b) 8 . . . W'xa2 9 . lli c7t @d8 1 0 . lli xa8 W'a l t
l l .@d2 W'xb2 1 2.id3 ib7 1 3 . lli e2 ixa8t
transposition: 6 . . . b5 7.@b l i:%b8 (7 . . . b4 is met
by 8 .ixf6 followed by lli d5) 8 .ixf6! gxf6 and
The position is messy, but here too I slightly
now 9 . e4 is possible with advantage, thought
prefer White due to his lead in development.
personally I prefer 9 . e3t, which can be seen
c) 8 . . . ib7 9 . @ b l (White could consider
as giving fewer targets for counterplay. White
9 .ixf6 ! ?N gxf6 1 0 .@b l ) 9 . . . b3 1 0 . cxb3
lli xd5 l l . exd5 lli b4 1 2 .a3 lli xd5 1 3 . lli f3
has the better pawn structure and thus the
better position. Black has no real attack, while
e6 1 4 .ic4 f6 1 5 .ic l ie700 Solaesa
on the other hand Black's king must choose
Navalpotro - Morales Rivera, Madrid
between staying in the centre and going to the
2002.
kingside, and neither of those options offer
8 . . . W'c5
him a problem-free future!
8 . . . b 3 t ? 9 .id2t
 Chapter 3 - 2 . . c5 3 . tlJ c3 ! ?
. 65

8 . . . ttJ xd5 was played in Lindam - Evertsso n , 7.lll f3 is a common alternative, but I believe
Internet 2 0 0 3 , a n d n o w 9 . exd5N tlJ e 5 that White should keep the option of playing
1 0 .ib3 would give White a n edge. f2-f4.
9 .ib3 ! ?
Th i s leads t o a position where White gives 7 ... h6
up a pawn but has a lead in development. 7 . . . d6 8 . f4 Wa5 9.@b l ie6 (9 . . . b4 1 0 .ixf6
9 . b 3 ! ? also looks playable: 9 . . . lll e5 1 0 .ie3 gxf6 1 I . lll d5) 1 0. f5 ic4 1 I .lll f3 White's
Wi'a5 ( 1 0 . . . Wc6 l I .lll f3 lll xc4 1 2.lll d4 Wi'b7 lead in development and additional space
1 3 . bxc4) l I .if4 lll xc4 1 2.lll c7t @d8 ensure a small advantage.
1 3 . lll xa800
9 . . . lll xd5 1 O.exd5 lll d4 s.tilf3 g8s 9 ..bf<i gxf6 10.tilds d6 1 1 .ttl d4
tilxd4 1 2Jhd4 Wa5 1 3.f4 b7 14.@b l
s .i B .i. -
, , , %..
6 r.r.- , , , %.
xd5 1 5.gxd5 ks 1 6.Wfl k5 17.e2

1 %,,,,% -,v. White has the safer king and the better
bishop, Berkes - Tolstikh, Zalakaros 1 99 9 .

5 -----
7.-

7,.ill ,,,,,%Ji. A2) s ...d6 6.e4
3 ''l, , ,; ,. -
&m 8-
:ef
4

s 1. m ..t. -
! ! -r1'""%!"'{""% l{t -- ---.--.
:
2

.
1
1 6
:%,. .0. . . . . :.
-- -,'
, f
/:ii--
""{"'%
. .

b d f g
..
"

.%

5 R R 8 R'-'" '"
a c e

4
1 I . lll f3 lll xc2t 1 2 .ixc2 Wxc2 1 3 . 0-0 f6
1 3 . . . ib7 1 4.l:'!fd l Wi'f5 1 5 .ixe7 ixe7
1 6.l:'!e 1 is unclear.
1 4.ie3
3 m
w%" ' HW"
--- %
White has decent compensation for the
pawn.
r r11m.
a

b c d e f g h
6 ... Wa5
Black's plan here is to encourage White
to castle queenside and then to play . . . ie6,
. . . l:'!c8 and . . . lll b4 with an attack. Although
it looks slightly awkward for Black to ignore
the development of his f8-bishop, we cannot
afford to be careless.

6 . . . ie6 7. 0-0-0 l:'!c8 8 . f4 Wi'a5 9 . a3 transposes

to our main line.

a b c d e f g h
7.0-0-0 e6
Black can also seek to clarify matters on the
7.0-0-0! kingside:
66 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
7 . . . h6 8 .ixf6 gxf6 9.@b l N
Sidestepping . . . \Wg5 t .
9 . f4 ie6 1 0 .a3 transpose t o the note to
Black's 8th move in the main line.
9 . . . g8
9 . . . ie6 1 0 .lll h3!? White uses his crafty 9th
move to switch plans and send his knight
to the f4-square. 1 0 . . . g8 l l .ie2! 0-0-0
( l l . . .xg2 1 2. lll f4 g7 1 3 .lll xe6 fxe6
1 4.ic4 looks very unpleasant for Black)
1 2.lll f4;!;
1 0 . f4 id? l 1 . lll f3 0-0-0 1 2 .f5 @b8 1 3 .'1Wh5
ie8 1 4.g3
To allow the development of the fl -bishop.
14 . . . c8 1 5 .ib5 a6 1 6.ixc6 xc6 1 7.lll d5;!;
8.a3!
This seems to be strongest, although it is
not mentioned in Chess Openings for Black
Explained. An important point is that it covers
the b4-square, countering Black's plan of
playing . . . lll b4 followed by . . . xc3 .
8 . @b l ?! can be met by 8 . . . lll xe4 ! ? 9 .lll xe4
'1Wxa2t 1 0 .'it>c l \Wa l t l 1 .@d2 Wxb2. The
engines prefer White's position, but in a
practical game I can imagine that Black would
be happy as he has already three pawns for the
piece and the white king is exposed.
8 .ixf6?! There is no need for us to give up our
Trompowsky bishop before Black invests time
with . . . h6. 8 . . . gxf6 9.'it>b l f5 This leads to a
slight advantage for Black according to analysis
in the aforementioned book.
s .. Jks
Black may also try:
8 . . . h6
The idea is to force White to capture on f6
so that Black has time to get the . . . f5 pawn
break in before White clamps down with
f4-f5 .
9 .ixf6
9 . f4? lll h7! 1 O .lll f3 f6 was the embarrassing
finish of Krgovic - Pantelic, Obrenovac
20 1 1 ; White's once-proud bishop is trapped!
9 . . . gxf6 1 0 . f4
1 0 .lll h3!?N seems an interesting way to
try and take advantage of our lead in
development: 1 0 . . . g8 l l . f3 c8 1 2 .lll f4
and the position looks slightly more pleasant
for White.
1 0 .. . f5
Although Black gets this move in, White still
has ways to obtain good play.
a b c d e f g h
l l .ib5 ! ?N
Putting the pressure on immediately.
l l .exf5 looks reasonable too: l I . . .Wxf5
1 2.id3 Wg4 ( l 2 . . . Wc5 and l 2 . . . Wa5 are both
playable and may be slight improvements;
in both cases the position look more or
less balanced, though White may hold a
 Chapter 3 - 2 . . c5 3 . 4J c3 ! ?
. 67

tiny pull due to his lead in development.)

1 3 .Wif2 .ig7 1 4.c!Oge2 .if5 1 5 .c!Od5;!; Sanchez
Enriquez - Ossa, San Jose 2009.
I I . .id3!?N is also interesting, and after
I l . . .g8 1 2 .4Jge2 White's superior structure
gives him a slight edge. Grabbing the g-pawn
can lead to some strange tactics: 1 2 . . . xg2?!
1 3 .'1Nh3 g5 ! ? This wacky move is the
only way to defend the f5-pawn . ( 1 3 . . . g8
1 4.exf5 allows White a clear advantage.)
1 4.fxg5 fxe4 1 5 .'1Nh4 exd3 1 6.gxh6;!; The
position remains complicated, but White's
h-pawn looks dangerous. a b c d e f g h
I I . . . fxe4 9 ... h6
I l . . .a6 1 2 .exf5 .ixf5 1 3 .ixc6t bxc6 1 4 . 4J f3 9 . . . c!O b4? doesn't work: I O .axb4 Wfa l t
b8 ( 1 4 . . . .ig7 1 5 .he l .ie6 1 6 . c!O d4;!;) I l .@d2 Wxb2 1 2 . .ixf6 gxf6 1 3 .ib5t @d8
1 5 .c!O d4 .id7 1 6.he l;!; 1 4. ltJ ge2+- and Black runs out of steam.
I l . . . .ig7 1 2 .exf5 .ixc3 ( 1 2 . . . .ixf5 ? 1 3 .d5)
13 . .ixc6t bxc6 1 4. fxe6t 1 0.i.xf<>
1 2. f5 The immediate I O . f5 ! ? is interesting, but
risks losing control: I O . . . .id7 ( 1 0 . . . c!O xe4 ?!
doesn't work: I l .'1Nxe4 .ixf5 1 2.'1Ne3 hxg5
[ 1 2 . . . .ixc2 1 3 .d5 '1Nd8 1 4 . c!O b 5 +-J 1 3 .d5)
I l . c!O f3 ( I 1 ..ixf6 returns to the main line)
I 1 . . .hxg5 ! ? 1 2 .'1Nxh8 g4 followed by 1 3 . . . lll e 5 ,
a n d Black obtains good activity in return fo r
the exchange.

a b c d e f g h
1 2 . . . .id7
After 1 2 . . . .ixf5 ? 1 3 .d5! the double threat
of xf5 and .ixc6t wins material.
1 3 .'1Nxe4
White holds the initiative.

9.f4!
This covers some key central squares. I also
like the idea of delaying the development of
the g l -knight as in some cases it can be useful
on the el-square to defend against . . . xc3 a b c d e f g h
sacrifices.
68 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
1 1 .fSN
I recommend limiting Black's activity in this
way.
1 1 .lll f3 was played in Meszaros - Dory,
Hungary 1 99 8 , allowing Black to play 1 1 . . . fS ,
although the idea we saw in the note to Black's
8th move, 1 2 .ib 5 ! ? may then give White
chances for an advantage.
1 1 ... id7 12.CLJf3 lll e5 13.CLJxe5 fxe5 14J;d5
We can't allow the exchange sacrifice on c3 .
14 ...b6 1 5.d3;!;
White has a pleasant position.
A3) 5 ...e6 6.e4 ie7 7.0-0-0
a b c d e f g h
We shall now look at A3 1) 7 ... 0-0? and
A32) 7 ... d6.
7 . . . Wa5 is quite often played, but then 8 . f4 d6
is j ust a transposition to line A32.
A31) 7 ... 0-0?
This is a common and serious mistake, castling
into the attack. In fact it happens nearly 2 5 %
of the time according t o m y database, so it is a
chance to gain some quick wins!
8.f4 h6 9.tDf3!!
The point White can maintain his
momentum without taking time out to move
his bishop. I have had this position numerous
times in blitz and have included some of those
games as examples.
9 ... hxg5
9 . . . lll h7 I O .ixe7 Wxe7 I I .Wxe7 lll xe7
1 2.e5 f6 ( 1 2 . . . f5 1 3 . lll b5 b6 1 4 . lll d6 a5
I 5 .ib5 lll d5 1 6.lll xc8+- Antidrome - CofC
Bercys, Internet 20 1 0) 1 3 .lll e4 fxe5 1 4. fXe5
E:b8 I 5 .ib5 E:d8 1 6. lll c5 lll f8 I 7.lll d4 a6
I 8 . lll dxe6 dxe6 I 9 .E:xd8 axb5 20.E:fl lll eg6
2 1 . lll xe6 ixe6 22.E:xb8+- Antidrome -
rpenquin, Internet 20 I 0 .
9 . . . d 6 I O.e5 lll d5 1 1 .lll xd5 exd5 1 2 .ixe7
lll xe7 1 3 .id3;!;
9 . . . Wb6 I O .e5 We3t 1 1 . <ii b l hxg5 1 2 . lll xg5
lll xe5 1 3 . fxe5 Wxe5 1 4.id3 g6 1 5 .Wh6 E:d8
I 6. lll ce4 lll xe4 I 7.Wh7t lii f8 I 8 .Wxf7#
Antidrome - TacticFreak, Internet 20 I 0 .
10.CLJxgS
The important thing to remember in this
line is to meet . . . g6 with Wh6. By keeping the
possibility of Wh7t available, this avoids the
threatened . . . lll h 5 . White may then continue
with E!:d3-h3 followed by mate.
 A32) 7 ...d6 8.f4 'Wa5

Black sensibly delays castling i nto the line of

fire and keeps his options open.

9.f3

9 ... h6
This leads to the critical line.
l l .e5 xe5
After 9 . . . a6 White should take the chance to
vacate the h4-square for the bishop: I O JWe l !
h6 1 I .i.h4 g5 1 2 .fxg5 hxg5 1 3 .ixg5 id7
1 4.@b l E:c8 1 5 .Wd2 E:c7 1 6.i.d3 CLJ b4
1 7.a3 CLJxd3 1 8 .cxd3 b6 1 9 .E:hfl E:g8 20.h4
ic8 2 1 .E:cl ib7 22.c;t>a2 1 -0 Miladinovic -
Dragojlovic, Kragujevac 2009; Black has no
good answer to the threat of 23.b4.

9 ... i.d7 1 0 . CLJ d2! This move has rarely been

played but the knight will be strong on the c4-
square. 1 0 . . . E:c8 1 l .CLJ c4 Wc5 White can now
embarrass the black queen:

12 ... exd5 13.fxe5 'Wxe5 14,gel 'Wf5 1 5.gxe7

White had a huge advantage in Krasenkow -
Degraeve, Cappelle la Grande 1 990.
70 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
1 2.a3!N ( 1 2 . ll'l a4?! Wb4 was unclear in Sell -
S . Berger, Germany 1 999) 1 2 . . . 0-0 ( 1 2 . . . b S ?
1 3 .ll'lxb S ! +-) 1 3 .eS! dxeS 1 4. b4 ll'l xb4 l S . fxeS
ll'l fdS 1 6.ixe7 ll'lxe7 l 7 . axb4 Wxb4 l 8 . ll'l a2+-
1 0.e5!
White sacrifices a central pawn but in return
the black king will be nudged over to f8 where
it sits uncomfortably.
1 0 ... dxe5 l 1 .fxe5 .!ll xe5 12.ll'lxe5 '1Wxe5
13.!b5t
1 6 .xd6 gS 1 7.We l g4?
This game highlights the dangers for Black if
he plays one wrong move.
Black should have tried l 7 . . . Wg7, although
White is still doing well after 1 8 .fl '\W cS
1 9 .d2.
1 8 .l'!fl WgSt 1 9 .Wb l a6 20 .id3 ll'l e8 2 1 .d4
f5 22. lll a4
With a huge lead in development and
the black king stranded in the middle of
the board, White's advantage is totally
overwhelming.
22 . . .Wg7 23 .Wb4t We7 24.Wc3 eS
1 -0 R. Pert - Perez, London 20 1 1 .
a b c d e f g h
I 5.Wg3!
This move keeps the whole variation alive for
White - so far I am the only person to have
played this move. The reason it is so strong is
that it keeps the eS- and c7-squares covered so
that White can play ie3 , leaving Black with
no decent square for his queen.
Previous games had seen only l S .We l , which
is at best unclear for White, but may even
be slightly worse. One example continued:
1 S . . . a6 1 6.id3 id7 1 7.fl ic6 1 8 .g4 d8
1 9 .ie3 Wes 20.Wf2 ib4 2 1 . lll e2 d7 22.h3
We8 23 .id4 'IWdS 24.ixf6 gxf6 2 S .Wb l ie7
26.lll f4 WcS 27.WxcS + Yi-Yi Miladinovic -
Gustafsson, Fuerth 2002.
1 5 ... h5 22.ie2) 2 1 . .. b5 22 . .if3;!; White stands better
The reason why everyone presumed White as Black is struggling to hold everything
could not play 1 5 .Wi'g3 . together.

If Black does not force the exchange of queens

he will pay the price: 1 5 . . . g5 ? 1 6.ie3 Wfb4
1 7. h4 and White is winning already!

16.YNe3! YMxe3t
1 6 . . . lt:lxf4? allows White to demonstrate the
point:

17.i.xe3
A pawn up with the queens off, Black might
think he is safe, but actually his complete lack
of development and precariously placed king
provide sufficient compensation for White.
My computer slightly prefers White in this
position.
17 ... f6!
17 . . . g6? 1 8 .E:hfl @g7 1 9 .id4t
20.E:xf6+- j ust doesn't work for Black.
17 . . . g5 1 8 .ie2 lt:l f6 ( 1 8 . . . lt:l f4 1 9 .if3 'itig7
20.lt:lb5;!;) 1 9 .id4;!;
1 7 . . . @g8 is a plausible attempt by Black to
untangle himself: 1 8 .E:hfl a6 l 9 .ie2 lt:l f6
20 .id4 @h7 2 1 . lt:l a4 (if he wishes White
can make a draw here with 2 1 .id3t @g8
a b c d e f g h
1 8Jhfl !?N
1 8 .id4 was my choice when I reached
this position in tournament play: 1 8 . . . lt:l d 5
( 1 8 . . . a 6 l 9 . .ie2 @g8 2 0 .E:hfl transposes
to the line after 1 7 . . . @g8 i n the previous
note) 1 9 . lt:l xd 5 N ( 1 9 . lt:l e4 ? ! a6 20 .ie2 id?
allowed Black to untangle i n R. Pert - Ziska,
Sunningdale 20 1 2) 1 9 . . . exd5 20.E:hfl ie6
My computer prefers White here, though I
would consider a draw the most likely result.
1 8 ... e5!
Black has to play this as he has no other
reasonable plan of development available.
Driving White's bishop away does not help
matters as it can redeploy to the f3-square:
if6
1 8 . . . a6 1 9 .ie2 e5 20.if3;!;
19.d5 j,g4
1 9 . . . lt:l xd 5 2 0 . E:xd5 if6 2 1 .id?!;!;
20.tll xe7 hdl
20 . . . @xe?? ? 2 1 .ic5 t leads to mate.
2 l .j,c5
72 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

s B -
,i0 %.,,,J.J,, . . "'
1 : .. -
. r. %_
6
.-.. .
%,, % /, , , , , , ,, .

5

,,,, ,,,,,%

Y,
4
,,,,, ,, , , . %

3

2 J[!J
8 , 8
. . . ..%%= r
, . . .
8 J[!J%
1
. %

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h
2 1 . ..J.h5 24.tll g6t
2 1 . . . a6 22.id3 ig4 23.tll d5t 'tt> g 8 24.gxf6 24 .id3 tll d7 2 5 .tll g6t 'tt> g 8 2 5 . lll e?t also
gxf6 2 5 . lll xf6t 'tt> g7 26.tll xg4 gae8 27.ie4 leads to a perpetual.
reaches an unusual type of ending with three
minor pieces for two rooks which looks to be 24 ... <>gs 25.tll e7t <i>f8
slightly in White's favour. With a perpetual - avoiding it with 2 5 . . . <i>h?
is dangerous for Black: 26 .id3t g6 27. lll xg6;!;
2 L .ig4 22. tll d5t (22.ge l e4 2 3 . tll g6t 'tt> g8
24.tll xh8 'tt> x h8 25 .id4 if5 26.ic4 ig6 is B) 3 ... d5
roughly balanced) 22 . . . 'it>g8 23.gxf6 gxf6
24. tll xf6t 'tt> g7 2 5 .tll xg4 reaches a similar
ending in which I would rather be White.

22.gfS
22.tll d 5 t ! ? leads to another version of
the above ending: 22 . . . 'tt> g 8 23.gxf6 gxf6
24. lll xf6t 'it>g7 2 5 . lll xh5 t 'tt> g6 26.g4 f5
27.id3 e4 28 .ie2 fxg4 29 .ixg4 ghe8 30 .ie3
Here too, my preference would be for White.

22 ...J.g4
22 . . . a6 23 .ia4 b5 24.ib3 'tt> e 8 25 .id5
lll xd5 26. lll x d5 <i>d7 27.gxh5 'tt> c6 2 8 . tll b6
'it>xc5 29. lll xa8 gxa8 30.gxe5 t 'tt> d 6 results in
a drawn rook ending.

23.gxe5
After this a perpetual becomes inevitable. 4.Lf6 gxf6
23. tll d5t <i>g8 24.gxf6 is the last chance to 4 . . . exf6? is a structural mistake. White replies
head for the unbalanced ending. 5 .e3, transposing to line B (note to Black's 4th
move) of Chapter 8 on page 1 62 .
23 ... a6
 Chapter 3 - 2 . . . c5 3 .tiJc3!? 73

5.e4!? 1 3 .lll xc3 We5t 1 4 .We3 Wxe3 t 1 5 .fxe3 ie6

I would like to take a quick look at this 1 6. 0-0;!;
aggressive option which is available to White White's lead in development gives him an
after this particular move order. advantage.

5 .e3! ? is a reasonable alternative which is again 6.dxc5

a transposition to line B of Chapter 8 . Black now chooses between Bl) 6 ...Wa5
and B2) 6 ... f5.
5 . . . dxe4
5 . . . cxd4 6.Wxd4 dxe4 7.ib 5 t ! ?
Bl) 6 ...Wa5
Th i s looks a n interesting option for White.
7.Wxd8t mxd8 8 . 0-0-0t gives White a safe
but small advantage: 8 . . . lll d7 9 .lll xe4 me?
1 0 .lll f3 e6 1 1 . lll d4 a6 1 2 .ie2 b6 1 3 .ih5;!;
Ibragimov - Sirigos, Peristeri 1 99 3 .
7 . . . lll c6
7 . . . id7 8 . 0-0-0 lll c6 9 .Wxe4 f5 1 0 .Wc4 e6
1 l .ixc6 bxc6 1 2 .lll f3;!; looks very pleasant
for White.
8 .Wxe4 Wd6
8 . . . id7 9 . 0-0-0 e6 1 O.ixc6 bxc6 1 1 . lll f3;!;
9 .lll ge2 f5 1 0 .Wf3 ig7 1 1 .l:"!:d l Wc5

8
J i -J.: :z
. , . % -...f. %....
7 f%
-,,.
.

6 1 --
: , . . J
3 1
2 -t. . ". '=
"'" -ctJf
-.:
-
1 ,.
. % ...%

'
b d f g h
z

a c e

1 2 .b4!?N
This daring move looks promising.
1 2.l:"!:d5 Wb4 1 3 .a3 Wxb2 1 4.0-0 0-0
1 5 .l:"!:b l Wxa3 1 6 .l:"!:b3 Wa l t 1 7.l:"!:b l Wa3
1 8 .l:"!:b3 Wa l t 1 9 .l:"!:b l Y2-Y2 Miroshnichenko
a b c d e f g h
- Parligras, Kon ya 20 1 1 .
1 2 . . . ixc3 t 8 . . . id7
The b4-pawn is untouchable: 1 2 . . . Wxb4? After 8 . . . lll c6 9 .lll ge2 f5 1 0 . 0-0-0 ie6
1 3 .ixc6t+- 1 l .g4 fxg4 1 2 .l:"!:hg l White has a strong
1 2 . . . Wb6? also loses: 1 3 . lll d5! Wd8 initiative for the pawn: 1 2 . . . Wc? ( 1 2 . . . 0-0
1 4 . lll f6t ! +- walks into 1 3 .ic4 ixc4? ? 1 4.Wxg4+-)
74 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 3 .llixe4 1We5 1 4.1Wxe5 ixe5 1 5 .lli g5 if5 8.0-0-0!

1 6. f4t White sets a trap.
9 .ic4N
This very tricky 9.1Wg4 should be reserved
for blitz games, as it doesn't quite cut it:
9 . . . g8 1 0 .d l ( 1 0 .0-0-0? ih6t-+)

%!. '" -.i

s ,i- ;
1 t i -
.. .... .
..t f
{@. iW .. . . i
6
.. .
. . . . . .
% % %

s SJ'
.
%

4 -. . . . .r
1
3

2 8;
,d' ....
-
.. . . f" {
1 : : :h
% % ' ""

a b c d e f g

1 O . . . f5 !+ Black's only move, but it does

the job as the weakness of the c3-knight
comes i nto play. (Clearly Black cannot
play 1 0 . . . .ixb 5 ? ? 1 l .1Wc8t 1Wd8 1 2.1Wxd8#
nor 1 0 . . . Wc?? 1 1 .lli d 5 1Wxc5 1 2 .1Wf5 '1Mfxc2
1 3 .llixe?+-.)
8 . . . f5 avoids the trap, but 9 . lli h3 heading for
the g5-square looks better for White.
9.clll xe4! 1Wxh5 I O.tLJxf6t e7 1 I .ttlxh5+
Ibragimov - Schut, Rochester 200 1 .

B2) 6 . .. f5

This looks critical and was Avrukh's

recommendation in Grandmaster Repertoire
11.

a b c d e f g h
9 . . . 0-0 1 0 .0-0-0
Black struggles to complete his development
as the b8-knight is temporarily tied to the
defence of the d7-bishop.
1 0 .. .f5 1 1 .lli h3!
Here comes the attack.
I l . . . h6 1 2 .g4 fxg4 1 3 . lli f4 1Wc7 1 4. lli g6
Black is in big trouble.
7.xdSt c.tlxd8 8.0-0-0t i.d7 9.g4!? 1 6.hxg4 ixg4 1 7.ih3 ixh3 1 8 .E:xh3 h6 From
I think this is White's most interesting here, 1 9 .a3 E:d8 20.:B:gl E:xd5 2 1 .:B:xg? E:f5 led
option. eventually to a win for Black in Wielecki -
Sherbakov, Polanica Zdroj 1 99 8 , but instead
9 . f3 has been the most common move, but 1 9 .E:g3 ! ?N would have kept a small advantage
Black has more than one playable response: for White.
a) After 9 . . . e3! ? White struggles to prove
an advantage and a draw looks the most 1 0.gxf5 i.xc3 1 1 .bxc3 c.tlc7 12.ll:ie2 i.xf5
likely result, for example: 1 0 .ib 5N ( 1 0 . f4? 13.tll d4 i.g6 14.h4 h5 1 5Jgl ll:id7
e6 l l . ll:i f3 ixc5 1 2 .ib5 @e7+ Saptarshi -
Iuldachev, Mumbai 2009) 1 0 . . . e6 ( 1 O . . . E:g8
l 1 . ll:i ge2 E:xg2 ? 1 2 .E:d3! @c7 1 3 . ll:i d 5 t @c8
1 4.ixd?t ll:i xd7 1 5 . ll:i df4 E:f2 1 6.:B:hd l +-)
l I . ll:i ge2 @c7 ( l L .ixc5 1 2 .:B:xd?t ll:i xd7
1 3 .:B:d l a6 1 4.:B:xd?t @c8 1 5 .ia4 b5
1 6.E:xf7 is given by Avrukh) 1 2 .E:d3 ixc5
1 3 .ixd7 ll:i xd7 1 4. ll:i b 5 t 'itic6 1 5 . ll:i bd4t @c7
1 6. ll:i b 5 t with a repetition of moves.
b) 9 . . . ig7! is the main line given by Avrukh,
and his analysis runs: 1 0 . ll:i ge2 exf3 l l .gxf3 e6
1 2 . f4 if8 1 3 .ig2 'itic7 1 4 . b4 a5t and Black is
doing well.

1 6.c6!?
Setting a trap.

1 6 ... tll e5
1 6 . . . bxc6?

9 . . . fxg4 1 0 .h3!N gives White a good initiative.

9 . . . ih6t looks an important alternative:

1 0 .@b l ig7 l 1 .ll:i ge2 fxg4 1 2. ll:i xe4 ll:i c6
a b c d e f g h
1 3 .h3 @c7 1 4 . ll:i f4 E:ae8 1 5 . ll:i d 5 t @c8
1 7.xg6! fxg6 1 8 .lll e6t i>c8 1 9 .i.a6t+- 1 8 .a l is also good) . . .i.f5 1 8 .i.d5 Wd8
l 9 . h4;!; De la Villa Garcia - Wiersma, Berlin
1 7.cxb7 i>xb7 1 8.fol 1 997.
White's ideas of i.g2 and f2-f3 or f2-f4 may
give him a tiny edge. After 5 . . . d5 White can choose between the
greedy 6.dxc5 e6 7.1Mf d4 g8 8 .Wfh4 lll c6
C) 3 ... Y!las 9.1Mfxh7;!;, and the sensible 6 .lll ge2 followed by
g2-g3 , i.g2 and 0-0 with an edge.

6.exd4 d6 7.i.bSt i.d7 8.i.xd7t lll xd7

9.Y!la e6 10.lll ge2

8 .1 m -
7 .,_, _ , , -- , Y,
6 ---
.. ..%

5 7: ... . % 7: .. . . %
,E-
4
r
3 ,,,.. ,%n f
.. .. % m
; m

W .. . . . , ,
2 8 f 8 -ltlf 8
af ... . %m =% .... %.lt .
.

I
a b c d e f g h
4.i.xf6 gxf6 5.e3 cxd4
5 . . . e6 6 . d 5 ! ? Switching back to the central White stands slightly better with superior
advance is a clever way to exploit Black's last coordination and more space. I 've left the rest
move. of the game in as White played the whole game
well, and playing through it should give you a
good understanding of the position.

10 dS 1 1 .0-0 i.b4 12.lll dl Y!lc7 13.tll e3

..

i.d6 14.h3 f5 1 5.c4 f4 1 6.cS fxe3 17.cxd6

Yllxd6 1 8.fxe3 0-0 1 9.facl f5 20.Y!/f4 Y!lxf4
2 1 .tll xf4 @f7 22Jk7 i>e7 23.gxb7 gab8
24.gc7 gxb2 25.tll d3 gb6 26.tll eS gd6
27.gb l c.i>d8 28.gbb7 tll xe5 29.dxeS gb6
30.gd7t i>c8 3 1 .gbc7t
h
1-0
a b c d e f g
De la Villa Garcia - Glavina Rossi, Mondariz
6 . . . i.g7 (6 . . . f5 7 .1Mff3;!;) 7.lll ge2 lll a6 8 .g3 1 997.
lll c7 9 .i.g2 lll b5 1 0 . 0-0 lll xc3 l 1 . lll xc3 f5
1 2 . e4 fxe4 1 3 .lll xe4 0-0 1 4 . c3 1Mfb6 1 5 .b l D) 3 ...Y!lb6
d6 1 6.dxe6 i.xe6 l 7 . lll g5 ( l 7.1Mf xd6 i.xa2
 In this position my main recommendation is
4.d5 going into the Vaganian Gambit - see the
next chapter. The position after 4.d5 can also
be reached via the more common move order
l .d4 ttJ f6 2.ig5 c5 3.d5 Wb6 4.ttJc3 , and so
forms a key part of your repertoire whether
you choose 3 . ttJ c3 or 3 . d 5 .
Th a t said, I would like t o touch upon the
following line which is made available to us
by the uncommon move order with 3 . tlJ c3 . In
my opinion it is not as good as the Vaganian
Gambit, but those looking to take play off the
beaten track may be attracted by the scarcity of
games played in this area.
4.Lf6 gxf6
4 . . . Wxf6 5 . e3 cxd4 6.Wxd4 Wxd4 7.exd4
leaves White ahead in development: 7 . . . e6
8 . ttJ f3 ib4 9 .i.d3 ttJ c6 1 0 . 0-0 ixc3 1 l . bxc3
0-0 1 2 .l'!ab l;:!;
s.l2Jd5 Wds
5 . . . Wa5t 6.Wd2 Wxd2t 7 . xd2 ttJ a6 8 . e3
l'!b8 9 . tlJ e2;!; This knight is heading to f4,
while the d5-knight makes it tricky for Black
to complete his development.
8 ... l2J a6
8 . . . ie7 9 . ttJ d6t ixd6 I O .Wxd6 We7
1 1 .Wd2 ttJ c6 1 2. e4;!;
9.l2Jxc5 l2Jxc5 10.Wd4 b6 l l .e3;!;
This is all unexplored. My gut feeling is
Black should be able to equalize, but if you
fancy entering new territory then it is worth
investigating further.
Conclusion: After the quirky 3 . ttJ c3 ! ? the
main line of A) 3 . . . cxd4 4.Wxd4 ttJ c6 5 .Wh4
often gives Whi te a dangerous kingside attack,
especially if Black castles too early. Black avoids
this pitfall in the critical line A32, but still has
to plot a fine line through the complications
in order to make it out of the opening. Even
if he does White often retains a tiny advantage
due to the important 1 5 .Wg3 , with which
I improved on previous practice. So from a
practical viewpoint, this is a useful tool to have
in your armoury.
Black's other options against 3 . ttJ c3 ! ? tend to
transpose to other chapters, but I have pointed
out some unexplored possibilities such as B)
3 . . . d5 4.ixf6 gxf6 5 . e4!? which may catch out
an unprepared opponent.
Chapter 4

2 ... cS 3.dS

1 .d4 f6 2.g5 c5 3.d5

A) 3 ... b6 4. c3 xb2 5.d2 b6 6.e4 80

Al) 6 ... d6 7.f4 81
Al l) 7 ... c7 82
A12) 7 ... e6 82
A2) 6 ... e5 7.f4! d6 8.f3 84
A2 1) 8 ... exf4 85
A22) 8 ... bd7 9.fxe5 dxe5 10.!bl 86
A22 1) 1 0 ... d8 87
A222) 1 0 ...c7 88
B) 3 ... d6 90
80 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
1 .d4 tll f6 2.J.g5 c5 3.d5
3 ...b6
This is Black's most popular response and
Dembo's recommendation in Fighting the
Anti-King's Indians - I've got some really good
ideas in this line so it's one to look forward to
playing.
3 . . . lll e4 4.J.f4 transposes into Chapter 5 .
3 . . . e 6 4.e4 transposes to line A o f Chapter 1 -
see page 1 3 .
3 . . . d 6 doesn't look particularly scary; I 'll touch
upon this line at the end this chapter.
4.tll c3
The Vaganian Gambit.
4 xb2 5.J.d2
. play the black side of this line against possibly
This brief introduction should help you
successfully navigate your way around this
chapter and its transpositional possibilities.
We are now going to start looking at some
lines - so enjoy!
1 .d4 tll f6 2.J.g5 c5 3.d5
We shall examine Black's most popular
choice of A) 3 ... b6 before taking a quick
look at B) 3 d6. The other main option of
..
3 . . . lll e4 4.J.f4 is covered in the next chapter.
A) 3 ...b6 4.tll c3
b d f g h
a c e
The Vaganian Gambit, which can also be
reached via the move order l .d4 lll f6 2 .J.g5 c5
3 . lll c3 '1Wb6 4 . d 5 , and so is a key part of your
repertoire whether you choose 3 . lll c3 or 3 . d 5 .
4 xb2
..
Taking the pawn is the only critical way
to play, as otherwise White obtains an easy
advantage: 4 . . . d6 5 . e4 lll bd7 6.b l g6 7. lll f3
J.g7 8 .J.e2;!; with lll d2-c4 to come later.
5.J.d2
I experienced firsthand what it was like to
the best ever Trompowsky player, Julian
Hodgson - I didn't last long! White's lead in
development and additional space gives him a
huge initiative, and I for one feel much more
comfortable playing the white side. Some of
the lines of theory are quite long, but the key
thing to remember is to keep developing; if
you stay ahead in development then Black will
struggle to live with you.
 Chapter 4 - .
2 . . c5 3 . d 5 81

s ...Wb6 6.e4 7 . . . ig4?!

Black now chooses between the old main
line of Al) 6 ... d6 and the modern A2) 6 ... e5 .
Al) 6 ... d6 7.f4
I personally suffered retribution for this
incorrect move:
8.ie2 ixe2 9.Wfxe2 a6 1 0 .:!'!b l Wi'c7 I l . e5 dxe5
1 2.fxe5 ll'lfd7 1 3 .ll'lf3 e6 1 4 . 0-0 exd5 1 5 .e6
fxe6 1 6.Wfxe6t ie7 l 7.ll'lxd5 Wi'd6

.1 -
'1rw.r --,v.
8

,.. .,.... . .
7

6
%.

5 w.---
4
- - - "


3
2

8 8 (%
8 r
!"
r-.rm h
1 ....
a b c d e f g

1 8 . ll'l g 5 ! ll'l c6 I 9 . ll'l c7t V!fxc7 20.Wf7t ct?d8

2 1 . ll'l e6t ct?c8 22.ll'lxc7 xc7 23 .if4t
1 -0 Hodgson - R. Pert, Bradford 200 1 .

7 . . . g6 ?!
7 . . . e5 gives White a choice of transpositions Talk about asking for it - Black makes no
into various lines: attempt to address the situation in the centre
of the board:
8 . e 5 ! dxe5 9 . fxe5 lli fd7 I O . ll'l f3 ig7 1 1 .:!'!b I
V!id8

.1 .t. -
7 &6i" i)-
8

6 " " - - - - - " . . .

5 u. -
W"
4 . . . ..8 !....
-- -
3 ltj
b d f g h
;
?J
2 8 -''8 ' 8 1r
, ra1r1:
a c e

a) 8 . ll'l f3 reaches line A2 on page 8 5 .

h
b ) 8 . dxe6 fxe6 9.l:!b l Wc7 1 0 . ll'l f3 a6
b d f g
transposes to line A l 2 on page 83. a c e

c) 8.fxe5 is also liable to result in a
transposition: 8 . . . dxe5 9 . ll'l f3 id6 (9 . . . lli bd7
1 0 .l:!b l V!fc7 transposes to line A222 on
page 88) 1 0 .ic4 ll'l bd7 1 1 .:!'!b l Wi'd8 transposes
to line A22 1 on page 87.
1 2.e6 fxe6 1 3 . ll'l g5 ll'l f6 1 4.ib 5 t ct?f8 1 5 .dxe6
a6 1 6.ie3 W!a5 1 7. 0-0 h6 1 8 .Wd3
White keeps the pressure up and Black
simply crumbles without ever getting into
the game.
82 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 8 . . . <.:!?g8 1 9 .V!fxg6 ixe6 20.llixe6 Elh7 9 dxe5

.

2 1 .Elxf6! lli d7 22 .ixd7 9 . . . lli fd7?! looks far too passive: 1 0 .ie2!?
1 -0 Vaganian - Kupreichik, Leningrad dxe5 ( 1 O ... ixf3 1 l .exd6 exd6 1 2.ixf3 ie?
1 974. 1 3 .V!fe2 lli f6 1 4.g4!-t) l 1 . lli b 5 V!fd8 1 2. lli xe5
ixe2 1 3 .V!fxe2 lli xe5 1 4 . fxe 5
Al l) 7 ...V!f c7
10.fxe5 .ixf3 l I .Vffxf3 V!fxe5t 12 ..ie2

8
7 :,
. ;!ifJ-l,J-
,,.,,%.r r
6
,,
. , . , %- ,,,. %. , . ,. %
5 -
,., . % rn
4
-
3m iftJ
, . ,. % m

*' " 11 ."'

r& ilmfiR
,,

a b c d e f g h

This was discussed by Vilela in New in Chess

Yearbook 86, but it hasn't caught on. Black's
plan is to delay committing his minor pieces,
with the idea of meeting lli f3 with . . . ig4.

s.llif3 13.gbl g4 14.V!fd3 .ig7 15Jxb7 0-0 1 6.h3

8 .ib 5 t ? ! was Vilela's own choice in practice,
but it looks wrong to give up your light
squared bishop so cheaply: 8 . . . lli bd7 9 . lli f3 a6
1 0 .ixd7t lli xd7 1 1 . 0-0 g6 1 2 .e5 ig7 1 3 .e6
fxe6 1 4.dxe6 lli f6 l 5 .We2 b5+ Vilela de Acuna
- Gonzalez Vidal, Barcelona 2007.
8 ... .ig4 9.e5
I like this ambitious advance.
The simple 1 6. 0-0! ?N;t should perhaps be
preferred.
16 ... hS 1 7.hxg4 hxg4 1 8.g3 lli bd7 1 9 ..if4
White may still have an edge, though Ehlvest
- Kudrin, Reno 200 5 , soon finished in a
draw.
A1 2) 7 ... e6 8.gbl V!fc7 9.f3 a6

9.h3!? also provides reasonable compensation, Black has also tried:

netting the bishop pair along with more
space and a lead in development: 9 . . . ixf3
1 0 .V!fxf3 a6 l l . a4 g6 1 2 .ic4 lli bd7 1 3 .a5 ig7
1 4 . 0-0 0-0 1 5 . lli a4 !!ae8 1 6 .!!ab l e6 1 7.dxe6
fxe6 1 8 .e5 dxe5 1 9 .Elxb7 V!f d6 20.V!f d3 V!f c6
2 l .ixa6 exf4 22. lli b6;t Solak - Romcovici,
Calimanesti 1 999.
9 . . . exd5 1 0 .ib 5 t ! ?
1 0 .e5!?N may b e even better: 1 0 . . . dxe5
l l . fxe5 lli e4 1 2 .lli xd5 Wd8 1 3 .if4 lli c6
1 4 .ic4 and White's centralized pieces give
him more than enough compensation for
the pawn.
1 o . . . lli c6!?
 .
Chapter 4 - 2 . . c5 3 . d 5 83

Th i s unlikely-looking move i s probably 1 1 .eS dxe5 1 2.fxeS g4 13.id3

Black's best try. White is ready to sacrifice a second pawn,
1 0 . . . .id? l I .e5 dxe5 1 2. fxe5 tll e4 1 3 .tll xd5;!; confident that his huge lead in development
and Black is way behind in development. will be sufficient for an advantage.

8
.a.A.
'SI jjW tk.W
i v , , a
!a'!

1 ,,, , ,/, m
Ui"B , , , , , % .i
. Y,m'
6
r%
s

lf r% lf m
%

4 . Ji 7:---- r
..
3 m.... ;'-r

8m
2 -8
, , , Y,W0-<.
8 r8%. %
...
'

l I . tll xd5 1 U M miV M

l l .exd5 a6 1 2.e2t ie7 1 3 .ia4 b5
1 4.ixb5 axb5 1 5 .tll xb 5 d7 1 6 .dxc6 xc6
1 7 . 0-0 tll e4 1 8 .gfe l f5 1 9 .c4=
l I . . .tll xd5 1 2. exd5 a6 1 3 . .id3 til e?
1 3 . . . tll b4 1 4.ixb4 cxb4 1 5 . 0-0 .ie7 1 6.e2
0-0 1 7.e4 g6 1 8 .xb4t
1 4.c4;!;
White's lead in development is well worth
a pawn.
a b c d e f g h
1 3 ... xeS
1 3 . . . c4 1 4.ie4 tll d7 ( 1 4 . . . ic5 1 5 . tll g5 .if2t
1 6.'it>fl lll xe5 l 7.'kt>xfL. 0-0t 1 8 .'it>e l +- and the
white king is quite safe) 1 5 . 0-0 ic5 t 1 6.'it>h l
tll fL.t 1 7.gxfL. ixf2 l 8 .tll g5 tll xe5 1 9 .ixh?
id4 20. tll ce4 White's attack is overwhelming
and even returning the exchange will not save
Black. 20 . . . gxh? 2 1 . tll xh? tll f7 22.h 5 +-

1 3 . . . tll d? 1 4 .e2 tll dxe5 1 5 .tll xe5 tll xe5

1 6. 0-0 tll x d3 1 7. tll d5 e5 1 8 .Wxe5 tll xe5
1 9 . tll c?t 'kt>e7 20. tll xa8;!;

14.ie4 tli bd7

Black is also in serious danger after:
1 4 . . . id6
84 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trom powsky

1 5 . 0-0 0-0 1 5.0-0 tlif7

a) 1 5 . . . lll g4?! 1 6.lll g5!
b) 1 5 . . . lll xf3t ? ! 1 6.Wxf3 f8 ( 1 6 ... !i.xh2t?
Black hasn't got time for all this. 1 7. ii h 1 !i.e5
1 8 .ixb7 a7 1 9.!i.xc8 Wxc8 20.Wh5t +-)
1 7 .Wh5 t g6 1 8 .!i.xg6t!

8 .. ..:
.1 .t . . ,v,
7 ...
6 , .
J0
@.i'%""'"
..t

: 1

3Rm. . ,:0 -"'
-
8
. Y. %- . . %
. . .
>,

2 8D 8
1 g
a b cg hd e f g

1 8 . . . hxg6 1 9 .Wxg6t ii d7 20.xf8 ixf8 1 9.llixf7 iixf7 20.he5 !i.e7 2 1 .YNhSt @gs
2 1 .Wf7t+- 22.!i.xf6 gxf6 23Jxf6
c) 1 5 . . . g6 1 6. lll x e5 fi.xe5 1 6.Wf3! and White 1-0
has a huge initiative. Moskalenko - Erdogdu, Ankara 20 I 0 .
1 6 . lll xe5 xfl t 1 7.iixfl ixe5 1 8 .ixh?t!
iixh7 1 9 .Wh 5 t ii g8 20 .We8t iih7 2 1 .lll e4! A2) 6 ... e5

A u% i;
2 I .Wh 5 t is a draw by perpetual check, but

,y,

- - ' ., --
'l!i' -
White has much better.
2 l . . . !i.f4 22.b3 8 B. : .JL
w
7

'!S m W '
Threatening h3t.

6
22 ... e5 2 3 .ixf4 exf4 24.lll g5t @h6 2 5 . lll e6!

7:. .. .
,.,.,,
5 .,
ixe6 26.l.Wxe6t g6
,% 7: . . . . %

: m. i
r""
2 8 a 8 r[j 8 r[j

... .
r ;m.

-Vm!
'y

1 ,
b d f g h
,, , , , Y, ,,, , , % % ..

a c e

This move has been recommended for Black

by several authors, most recently Dembo in
Fighting the anti-King's Indians. Dembo's idea

27.Wf6!+- is at a later point to drop her queen back to

And 28.h3t will win. c7 and place her bishop on e7, with the idea
of transferring her knight to d6 to create a
blockade. However, we intend to scupper .
7 . . d6 s.tlia
those plans well before she gets a chance to do
all of that.

7.f4!
I believe that this is objectively White's best
choice, although you might feel a bit spoilt for
choice here as White has another way to act
against Black's plans involving . . . Wlc7.

7.Ei:b 1 ! ? Wlc7
Black can only choose this if he is happy
to draw, although White does not have to
take the draw but can instead claim a small
advantage.
7 . . . Wld8 8 . f4 d6 9 . lD f3 lD bd7 1 0 . fxe5 dxe5
would transpose to line A22 1 below.

. :st. -.--.
z tt

s

6 .....7.. . . . . .. .
7
z,,,,% % A2 1 ) 8 . . exf4

5
w
-i.i%ef"""
i-.i% lS A useful tip for White in this line is that before
4 %,,, - "---- recapturing on f4 he should first play Ei:b 1

2
mlS i lS
3 lS -


while the d2-bishop is dissuading . . . Wla5 .

8 f if!1 ',, , , , , :f"'x - -%

1 nra1mtn
a b c d e f g h
8 . lD b 5 ! Wlb6
Playing for the draw is the best option, but
it hardly going to appeal to Black if he is the
stronger player.
With 8 . . . Wld8 ? Black tries to play for the win
but it is about to go all wrong: 9 . d6! lD a6
1 0.ic4 g6 1 1 . lD f3 and Black is already in
serious trouble.
9 . f4!?
Of course taking the repetition with 9 . lD c3
Wlc7 1 0. lD b 5 is possible. 9.eS!?
9 . . . d6 1 0 . lD f3 lD bd7 White can also nudge the queen immediately:
1 0 . . . a6? 1 1 . lD xd6t Wlxd6 1 2 . fxe5+- 9.Ei:b l ! ? Wld8
1 1 . fxe5 dxe5 1 2 . lD a3 Wlc7 1 3 .id3 ie7 9 . . . Wlc7?! 1 0 .ixf4 ig4 l 1 . lD b 5 ! (stronger
1 4. lD c4;!; than 1 1 .h3 ixf3 1 2 .Wlxf3 a6 1 3 .ie2 lD bd7
White has a comfortable plus. 1 4.0-0, although this also gives White
86 Richard Pert - Playing the Tro m powsky

reasonable compensation) l l . . . a5t

1 2.d2 xd2t 1 3 . tll x d2 <i>d7 1 4.tll c4 and
Black was struggling to keep all the threats
under control in Pankov - Frolochkin, St
Petersburg 2009.
1 0 .ixf4 ie7

1 0.ixf4 dxe5 l I .tll x e5 tll x e5 l 2.ixe5 f6

l I .ib5 t
1 3 .ig3 (The immediate 1 3 .ib 5tN is also
White has more than o n e way t o demonstrate
interesting: 1 3 . . . id? 1 4.h 5 t d8! [ 1 4 . . . g6
compensation for the pawn :
l I .id3 0-0 1 2 .0-0 tll bd7 1 3 .h3 tll e8 1 4.e5
1 5 .e2] 1 5 .ixb8 ixb 5 1 6.ig3;!;) 1 3 . . . id6
l 4.ib5t Perunovic - Ostoj ic, Kragujevac
dxe5 l 5 .tll x e5 tll x e5 l 6.ixe5 id6 l 7.e2
2009.
Nguyen - Karatorossian, Budapest 2004.
l 1 . e5!?N dxe5 1 2.tll x e5 0-0 1 3 .ie2 offers
1 0 Yds
Both 1 0 . . . c? l I .tll b5 and
..

good compensation as Black has to keep an

1 0 . . . a5
eye out for d5-d6 at any moment, making it
1 I .tll b5 are clearly good for White.
hard for him to develop with . . . tll bd7.
1 1 . . .tll fd?
l l .ib5t J.d7 1 2ixf4
1 1 . . . tll bd? 1 2 . 0-0 0-0 1 3 .e5? This is the
Black is already struggling to contain White.
wrong moment as Black can now take with
his knight, easing the pressure on his position
A22) 8 ... bd7 9.fxe5 dxe5 lOJbl
by an exchange of pieces . ( 1 3 .a4 would
offer White reasonable compensation.)
13 ... tll x e5+ De Prado Rodriguez - Milchev,
Arteixo 2007.
1 2. 0-0 0-0 1 3 .e5 dxe5 1 4.tll x e5;!;
White held a slight advantage in Antidrome
- Tripy, Internet 20 1 2.

9 ... g4
After 9 . . . dxe5 1 0 .tll x e5 White keeps good
pressure, for example: 1 0 . . . id6 l I . tll c4 d8
1 2 .tll b 5
 Chapter 4 - 2 . . . c5 3 . d 5 87

s
Black now withdraws the queen with A22 1 )
1. ,, ,, , ;/,
..ts
- v. ,, l,W

7 , , , , , ,
1 0 ...Wff d8 or A222) 1 0 ...Wff c7.

A22 1) 10 ...Wff d8
6
[
14
- -: Ii% ll -
5 m''8"."""-""'%
:i /i
% %'"//, -- , ,
This used to be considered Black's main choice,
but it fell a bit out of favour after the strong 4

3 - , mtt:Jm
:
grandmaster Nij boer lost twice at the hands of
up-and-coming youngsters.
2 /8 ,
1 1 .i.c4 i.d6
When the queen is on d8 , the bishop belongs
on d6 to blockade the d-pawn .
1
1:: M1W
a
ph;''
:m
b c d e f g h
1 4 ... a6
1 1 . . . i.e7?! I also looked at:
Black is mixing his systems here. 1 4 . . . lll b6
1 2 .ig5 h6? Black tries to untangle himself at the
Black should probably admit his mistake expense of weakening his protection of f6.
and play 1 2 . . . id6, accepting the loss of a 1 5 .Wd3!
tempo. I like the idea of not allowing Black to
1 3 .d6! exchange his bishop via . . . i.g4 .
Suddenly White breaks through with a 1 5 . . . lll xc4
decisive attack. After 1 5 . . . ig4 1 6.lll d2 g5 1 7.if2 ih5

tJj!.,,
-
1 8 .a4t Black's position is littered with
8

7 .... .
-n,,.,,
Y.. ... .
weaknesses for White to attack.

6 1 6.Wxc4 b6
. .. ... . .- .
% % . %

1 6 . . . a6 1 7.a4 b8 1 8 .Wd3t with lll d2-c4

5 -- ; % ""'"
% . . % , . ,.,
to come.

: i!-
%
1 7.a4 i.b7 1 8 . lll b5 We? 1 9 . lll d2 g5 20 .ig3
,.,,,

lll h5 2 1 .Wb3 lll f4 22.lll c4t

2 !., - --01.!
w----
.: if
1 5.a4 Wffa5
l 8- .l:
a b c d e f g h
1 5 . . . Wc? 1 6. lll d2 lll h7 was played in Avila
Jimenez - Movsziszian, Tarragona 2007, and
now 1 7.ie2!Nt intending lll c4 looks good.
1 3 . . . hxg5 1 4.lll xg5 0-0 1 5 . 0-0 lll b6 1 6.dxe7
Wxe7 l 7.xb6 axb6 1 8 . lll d5 lll xd5 1 9 .Wh5
1 6.i.el Wffd8 17.tll h4
Wxg5 20.Wxg5 lll f4 2 1 .Wxe5 ie6 22.xf4
White can of course repeat the position with
ixc4 23 .Wh5 xa2 24.h4 a l t 2 5 .@f2 f5
1 7.i.h4, but Nakamura has more ambitious
26.Wh7t @f7 27.exf5
ideas in mind.
1 -0 Bruzon - Nij boer, Wijk aan Zee 2004.
1 7 ... tli e8 1 8.tll fS
1 2.0-0 0-0 1 3.i.gS h6 14.i.h4
88 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

8 .i jj
,,,,,/,]'!ll --
v,

38.ge4!! gf5 39.WxfS !xf5 40.gxc4 tlif4

7 F
41.e4 !8 42.xg3 !d7 43.tlih5

,,,,.
%

,
- ! .
1-0
6
- -
m ,, .,,
Nakamura - Nijboer, Wij k aan Zee 2004.

5 - --8
4 8t 8

A222) 10 ...Wc?

3 Dembo's recommendation, but Black is about

,, W/'"'1
to come under some serious pressure.

2 % ., . .flj
- .a: "if .a: =
1 1 . h5 Wbs
In Fighting the Anti-King's Indians, Dembo

b d f g h
says "Note that 1 1 . tll b5 is met, as explained
a c e
above by 1 1 . . . Wb8" and ends her analysis
White's passed d-pawn, his lead in there. But anyone blindly following her book,
development and greater space offer good which on the whole is very good, is about to
compensation for the pawn. Obviously there get a shock!
is plenty of play left here, but I favour White.
In the rest of the game White failed to keep Black's best is probably 1 1 . . .Wb6, begging for
control and Black gained a decisive advantage, a quick draw, but White should turn down
before he in turn went astray. I have given the repetition. We reached this position by a
the remaining moves so you can see how different move order in the note to White's
Nakamura triumphed in the end - it's worth 7th move on page 8 5 , and pointed out that
playing through if you have the time. 1 2 . tll a3 Wc7 1 3 .id3 ie7 1 4 . ll:i c4;!; gives
White a comfortable plus.
18 ... df6 1 9.e3 !e7 20.!g3 d6 2 1 .Wd3
tli d7 22.f5 i>h7 23Jf3 g6 24.xd6
!xd6 25.!fl f6 26.h3 h5 27.!e3 gbs
2s.gbfl f6 29.Wd2 g5 30.h4 g4 3 1 .g3f2
f5 32.exfS g3 33J'!f3 Wxh4 34.gel Wxc4
35.!xh6 !xf5 36.!xfS gxrs 37.Wg5 !g6

12 . . . tll xe4 1 3 . tll c7t d8 1 4 .llixa8 Wxa8

( 1 4 . . . ixd6 1 5 . tll g5 tll xg5 1 6 .ixg5t f6
 Chapter 4 - 2 . . . c5 3 . d 5 89

1 7.ie3 ie3 1 8 .Wg4) 1 5 .ic4 lli xd6 1 6.id5;!;

Although Black has three pawns for the
exchange, White's huge lead in development
gives him the advantage.

1 3 ..ia5
White hits the d6-bishop, which cannot
move due to the need to keep the c7-square
under control.

13 ... rtle7
The other way of defending the bishop looks
very risky:
1 3 . . . ctJ xe4
I think it unlikely that Black would play this
in tournament play.

14 .. f8
J

1 4 . . . ctJe8 1 5 .ic4+-
1 4 . . . b6 1 5 . llixf7 <tlxf7 1 6.llixd6t <tle7
l 7 . ctJ f5 t;!;
1 4 . . . h6 1 5 . lli xf7 <tlxf7 1 6.tt::l xd6t <tlg6
1 7.ic4 <tlh7 1 8 . 0-0;!;

a b c d e f g h
1 4. lli g5 !
White aims t o deflect the e4-knight so that
he can pick off the d6-bishop.
1 4 . . . tt::l xg5
After 1 4 . . . lli df6 1 5 . lli xe4 lli xe4 1 6.Wd5
Black can save his piece with 1 6 . . . a6! but
then l 7 . ctJ xd6t llixd6 l 8 .Wxc5 lli f5 l 9 .ic7
Wa7 20.:B:b6;!; leaves the black queen shut
out.
l 5 . lli xd6t <tle7
l 5 . . . <tif8 1 6.llixb7 <tle7 l 7 . ctJ d8 Wd6
1 8 .Wxd6t <tixd6 1 9 .:B:d l t rj;; e 7 20.llic6t
'it>e8 2 1 .ic4;!;
1 6. lli f5 t <tif8 l 7.ia6 1 5 .. xf7?!
J

Black is totally tied down and has various Black should return material with 1 5 . . . 'it>xf7,
threats to worry about, including ixb7 though 1 6. lli xd6t is clearly good for White.
followed by Wxd7.
90 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 6.c!lixd6 Wxd6?! ixb2 1 3 . tll xd6t @e7 1 4.b l ( 1 4. tll ge4!?

Letting White demonstrate the point of his is interesting, as 1 4 ... ixa l ?! 1 5 .W/xa l leaves
combination, though by now Black's position the black king very exposed) 1 4 . . . lilxd6
.
is beyond saving: 1 6 . . tli b6 1 7. tll xf7 +- l 5 . tll e4t @c7

. -
:.A .tU.
s x B
.,/
17.i.dst
-- . ..%. iw..%
_]': . . . .... %
61 U.
This picks up the black queen.
A
17 ... xdS 1 8.Wxd6+-
5 -!
-
! "
-- - .!.

u. . . .
B) 3 ... d6 4.c!lic3 4

WA iw.WM WM;,
3
2 o n
o
?? ru?. o ru,,

1
m':f ii= { "m
"lt
h
r

a b c d e f g

Gormally now went for the throat with a

risky piece sacrifice. 1 6 .d6t (the sensible
l 6.xb2 should suffice for an advantage)
1 6 . . . ltic8 1 7. 0-0 id4 1 8 .c3 ic6 1 9 .Wid3
White went on to win in Gormally - Mason,
Canterbury 20 1 0, but at this stage it was not
at all clear.
7.id3 ig7 8 .tll f3 0-0 9 . 0-0 tll d7 1 0 .tll d2 a6
l l . a4 tll e5 1 2 .ie2 f5

s i. U..t%
4 ... g6

6 ------ .,v,,
r
l - .
Black has also tried:
7
,.
4 . . . h6?!

s L-"f
To be honest, I am amazed how often this

"" ' " ' - -

move has been played - it looks all wrong to
me as Black takes time to force us to play a
move that we want to play anyway!
: i m i
2 efw.-8 ,, .,,,/, W-"''
'm.iJ 8 efw.-
Funnily enough, the two games I have

,- - ?.
-v-:m 3
chosen to illustrate this line, Gallagher -
Knott and Gormally - Mason, both won 1 .
b d f g h
,,. . . /,
prizes (for White!) as "Game of the Day" a c e

in the British Championships, in 200 1 and

1 3 . exf5 gxf5
20 1 0 respectively.
Black can't recapture his pawn with
5 .ixf6 exf6 6.e4 g6
l 3 . . . ixf5 as his pieces gets in a tangle: l 4 . f4
With 6 . . . f5 Black sacrifices a pawn, and
tll d7 l 5 . g4 and the bishop drops.
whilst the bishop pair does give him some
1 4 .a5 b5 1 5 . axb6 Wlxb6 1 6.a2 e8 1 7.@h l
compensation, I have to favour White.
Wd8 1 8 . f4 tll g4 1 9 .ixg4 fxg4 20.tll ce4 f5
7.ib 5 t tll d7 8 . exf5 ie7 9 . tll ge2 a6
2 1 .tll g3 a7 22. tll c4t
1 0 .ixd7t ixd7 l 1 .tll g3 if6 1 2. tll ce4
 Chapter 4 - 2 . . . c5 3 . d 5 91

Gallagher - Knott, Scarborough 200 1 ; 6 ... 0-0

White's position is preferable as he has the Although this is natural, Black may prefer
better pawn structure. not to submit to a kingside attack and instead
search for an alternative:
5.e4 6 . . . Wb6!? 7.ib 5 t
White intends to take a very direct approach 7.id3!?N may be appropriate for the more
against Black's fianchetto. attack-minded player: 7 . . . Wxb2 8 .Elb l Wa3
9 .tll f3
s ....ig7 6.VNd2 7 . . . id7 8 . a4 ixb 5 9 . axb5 lll bd7
White may also look to expand on the
kingside:
6 . f4 ! ?

a b c d e f g h
1 0 .lll f3N

h
1 O .ih6? is too direct and doesn't fir in with
b d f g
a c e
White's previous three moves in which she
6 . . . h6!? was playing positionally on the queenside:
Immediately putting the question to the 1 0 . . . 0-0 l 1 . lll ge2 ixh6 1 2 .Wxh6 a6
white bishop seems a critical option for 1 3 .bxa6 Wxb2! 1 4. 0-0 Elxa6+ Stefanova -
Black. Vallejo Pons, Gibraltar 20 1 1 .
6 . . . 0-0 7. tll f3 a6 (7 . . . b5 8 .ixb 5 tll xe4 1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 a6 1 2. bxa6 Elxa6 1 3 .Elxa6
9 . tll xe4 Wa5t 1 0 .@fl;j; Bosiocic - Rezan, Wxa6 1 4.h3 Ela8 1 5 .b3
Sibenik 2008) 8 . a4 tll h5 9 . f5 tll d7 1 0 .ie2 White has a slight initiative.
Elb8 1 1 . 0-0 lll hf6 1 2 .We l Ele8 1 3 .Wh4;!;
With ih6 and tll g5 on the cards, White has
attacking chances, Hodgson - Hjarrarson,
Bermuda 1 997.
7.ih4 Wa5
7 . . . Wb6 8 .ib5t id7 9 . a4 a6 1 0.a5t
8 .Wd2 lll h5 9 .ib5 t id7 1 0 .ixd7t tll xd7
l l . tll ge2 tll xf4! l 2.Wxf4
1 2.tll xf4 g5 1 3 . tll h5 ixc3 1 4. bxc3 gxh4
l 5 .tll g7t is also unclear.
1 2 . . . g500
Gelashvili - Kourkounakis, Leros 2009.
92 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
7.ih6! hh6 8.%Vxh6 a6 9.tlif3 tli bd7
10.tligS ges 1 1 .ie2 tlif8 12.h4
White's Route One tactics will prove difficult
for Black to stop.
Conclusion: It has to be said that White gets
excellent play for the pawn in the various lines
of the Vaganian Gambit. So much so that I
imagine even the more risk-averse of you
might be willing to give it a go! The key thing
to remember when investing material for an
attack is always look to develop; if you apply
that principle then White will have ample
compensation. I would draw your attention
once again to the strength of the novelty
l 2.d6!N in line A222 I reckon that readers
-
of Dembo's book will have to go back to the
drawing board on this one.
By contrast, B) 3 . . d6 is a much more solid
.
approach, but I hope that our quick look has
given you some ideas on how to play for the
attack against it.
Chapter 5

2 ... e4 3.if4 c5 4.d5

1 .d4 f6 2.i.g5 e4 3.i.4 c5 4.d5

A) 4 ... e6 5.f3 95
Al) 5 ... f6 95
A2) 5 ... i.d6 96
B) 4 ... 11Mb6 98
Bl) 5.d2!? 98
B l l) 5 ... xd2 98
B l 2) 5 ... 11Mxb2 1 00
B2) 5.i.cl 1 03
B2 1) 5 ... g6 1 03
B22) 5 ... e6 1 04
94 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 tll f6 2.i.g5 tll e4 3.i.f4 c5

a b c d e f g h
White now has an important choice to make:

So we move on to the main line. Black
first hits our bishop with his knight and then
attacks our centre with . . . c5, at the same time
creating a route for his queen to join the party.
I have covered several choices for White from
here, some sacrificial and some more solid, so
you can choose whichever you feel best suits
your playing style.
4.d5
If you choose to meet 2 . . . c5 with 3.d5 then
you should make sure you have this line in your
repertoire, as you can then get this position by
a direct transposition after 3 . . . tli e4 4.if4. If
you are looking to cut down on the number
of lines you have to learn, then opting for the
current line along with 2 . . . c5 3 . d5 should save
you some studying time.
a) s.tll d2!? sacrifices the b2-pawn for an
initiative. It is very much in the spirit of the
Trompowsky and I will focus on this line.
b) 5.i.cl provides a more solid, though slightly
bizarre-looking option, which seems to offer
White good prospects of an advantage. Note
that this line should be looked at together
with line B3 l in the next chapter, which arises
after 4.f3 '1Wa5 t 5 . c3 tli f6 6.d5 '1Wb6 7.ic l ;
often the only difference between the lines is
whether the white pawn is on c2 or c3 .

4.f3 will be covered in the next chapter. It can

also lead to a choice between sacrificial and
solid lines.

4 ...b6
4 . . . e6 is a key alternative which we
will examine. I have a couple of major
improvements for White in this line.
1 .d4 tll f6 2.J.gS tll e4
I would remind you chat 2 . . . c5 3.d5 llJ e4
4.if4 transposes co our main line.
3.J.4 c5 4.d5
We shall examine A) 4 e6 and B) 4 'Wb6,
..
after first looking at a few minor alcernatives.
1 2 . lD bc3 lD d7 1 3 .0-0-0 llJ f6 1 4 .h4 Wh8 1 5 .h5
lD fxh5 1 6.g4 llJ f6 1 7 . lD g3t White built up the
pressure co boiling point and won a good game
in Summerscale - B. Lalic, Coulsdon 1 999.
. A) 4 ...e6 5.f'3

4 . . . Wa5t 5 . c3 ( 5 . lD d2 is also possible: 5 . . . d6

6.c3 lDxd2 7.Wxd2 llJ d7 8 . e4 g6 9 . llJ f3 ig7
1 0 .ih6 0-0 l l .id3 llJ f6 1 2 .ixg7 c;!<xg7
1 3 . 0-0 ig4 1 4. llJ e l id? 1 5 . lD c2 Salgado
Lopez - Giri, Internet 2008) 5 . . . Wb6 (5 . . . d6
6.f3 llJ f6 7.e4 transposes co line B2 of the next
chapter) 6 . llJ d2 llJ xd2 7.Wxd2 d6 8 . e4 White
has a clear edge.

4 . . . g6 5 . f3 llJ f6 6.e4 ig7 7 . lD c3 0-0 8 .Wd2

Michael Adams cakes a direct route similar co
the 1 5 0 Attack against the Pirc. This fantastic
game indicates how quickly White can get on
cop if Black cakes a casual approach.

8.i llY..tN!z - 5 ... Wa5t 6 . c3 lD f6 7.e4 transposes to line B l

67 .
Wi-- ., _ ....
.iv.lf i in the next chapter (see page 1 1 3) .

n ' .
.
,, . . . . % %

5 . . . Wf6 is rather messy, but i t should end up

!
in White's favour: 6.ixb8 Wxb2 7 . fxe4 Wxa l
.,!
- -
8 .ig3 Wxa2 9 . e3 b5 1 0 . llJ f3 ib7 l l .ie2
3
...
%
Wa5t 1 2 . llJ bd2 exd5 1 3 . 0-0 f6 1 4. exd5 and

_ . z.,_ , .z.:1
2 !n-, .! White's advantage was clear in Nikolaev -
l
Kopasov, Sc Petersburg 2002.

a b c d e f g h AI) 5 tll f6 6.e4 exd5 7.exd5 d6

..

8 . . . d6 9 .ih6 ixh6 1 0 .Wxh6 e6 l l . O-O-O exd5

1 2. exd5 a6 1 3 . llJ ge2 b5 1 4. llJ g3 :i'!e8 1 5 . llJ ce4
lDxe4 1 6 . llJxe4 f5 1 7.llJg5 We? 1 8 .ixb 5 !
We3t 1 9 .Wb l :i'!e7 20.ie8 1 -0 Adams - Ki .
Georgiev, Burgas 1 993.

4 ... d6 5 . f3 llJ f6 6.e4 e5 (6 ... g6 7.lDc3 ig7

8.Wd2 0-0 9 .ih6 transposes co the above
Adams game) 7.ie3 ie7 8 . lD e2 0-0 9.c4 The
game has taken on the contours of a Czech
Benoni. 9 . . . llJ e8 1 0 .Wd2 g6 1 1 .ih6 lDg7

a b c d e f g h
96 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

s.ib5t!? Black, but chat was a lacer stage of the game

8 . tLl c3 is of course possible coo: 8 . . . ie7 and it was his opponent who missed the first
9 . lli ge2 0-0 1 0. tLl g3 ge8 l l .ie2 a6 1 2 .a4 chance.
lli bd7 1 3 . 0-0 if8 1 4.Wi'd2;!; Stefanova -
Areshchenko, Gibralcar 2006.

8 ... lli bd7 9.Ye2t Wi'e7 1 0.tlic3 a6 1 1 .!xd?t

@xd7
l l . . .ixd7 1 2 . 0-0-0 Wi'xe2 1 3 . tLl gxe2 0-0-0
1 4.g4 White has a small bur clear advantage
in the endgame and she steadily builds up her
position.

67 lt -., ,
8

. c,J. . . J
4
s

. . .
.r. . z.
8w2t


z

3 w ..... : W"{i
.
.. .
2 8 8 ttJ
i

. r.F . 0 ..

. r. - 1 8 .gS ie7 1 9 .gxh6 gxh6 20.ge2 f5 2 1 . tLl g3
a b c d e f g h lli g7 22.gg2 was unclear in Rodriguez Vila -
So, Khancy-Mansiysk (ol) 20 1 0 .
1 4 . . . h6 1 5 . h4 b5 1 6 . lli g3 b4 1 7. lli b l ie7
1 8 . c4 lli h7 1 9 .gde l if8 20.llid2 g6 2 1 . tLl de4
1 8 ... tli c7 1 9.b4 c4 20.h4 !e7 2 1 .ge2 ghe8
ie8 22.ge2 White's advantage was already
22.@b2;!;
of decisive proportions in Scefanova -
White has control of the board and a
T. Kosintseva, Krasnocurinsk 2006.
potential a3-a4 break on the cards.

12.0-0-0 Wi'xe2 13.tligxe2 b5 14.g4 A2) 5 ... !d6

The immediate 1 4. lli g3 ! ? also looks strong.

14 ... !b7 1 5.tlig3 h6 1 6.tlige4 tli eS 17Jhel

gds
We have been following a game by Wesley
So, and I remember chatting with him on
the internee about chis game. He had been
watching me play blitz - it seemed odd co
me chat he spent his morning preparation
watching ochers play blitz, but I remember
he went out and thrashed Ray Robson in the
afternoon, so it seemed co work.
In chis game he felc he was doing well with
 This move has been seen as quite a tricky
move for White to face, and in their books Joe
Gallagher, Richard Palliser and Pete Wells all
highlighted it as a potential problem for White.
Hopefully my new analysis presented here will
offer White prospects of an advantage.
6.i.xd6 lll xd6 7.e4
White's choice of move order is important, as
can be appreciated by looking at the inaccurate
alternative:
7 . lli c3 ? !
this opening to great effect on the club scene
when I was growing up as a kid. 8 . . . 0-0 9 .Wi'd2
Wa5 1 0. lli h3 White comes up with the clever
idea of developing his knight to f2, so that
his bishop can keep an eye on the c4-square
to stop the d6-knight getting into the game.
10 .. . f6 l l . l'll f2 a6 1 2.i.e2 lll f7 1 3 . 0-0 d6
1 4.a3 l'll d7 1 5 .i'l:fb l b5 1 6. b4 cxb4? ( 1 6 . . . Wc?
l 7.a4) l 7.axb4 We? l 8 . lli xb 5 +- Munson -
Jo. Hodgson, England 20 1 0 .
8.b3 f5 9.lll c3 fxe4

A w
; ...e...,
,
!aa
9 . . . 0-0 1 0 .Wd2 e5 ( 1 0 . . . fxe4 l 1 .fxe4 Wb4
8
.a. ; .JL
- --.%- /..,.
! --%
1 2 .a3 Wd4 1 3 . tll f3 Wi'xd2t 1 4. @xd2) l l .i.d3

6
%
f4 ( l l . . . fxe4 1 2. fxe4 lll f7 1 3 .l'll f3 d6 1 4. a4)

,, Q, -t '-

% 1 2 .lll ge2

5 @.
%
: m !

2 !8 ' ! !
1 ef . . % 1!i
a b c d e f g h
7 . . . W/h4t!N
I found this seriously strong new move a
long time ago, but it has yet to appear in a
serious game.
8 . g3 Wi'b4
I remember beating Nakamura as Black in
a blitz game in this variation in Gibraltar
2005 - something which doesn't happen
very often!
9 .i'l:b l
9 . dxe6 dxe6 l l .Wfxd6 Wi'xb2 favours Black.
9 . . . lli b 5
1 0 ... exf3?!
9 . . . lli c4 1 0 .e4 lli a3 ! also looks interesting.
This natural-looking move runs into trouble
1 0 .dxe6 dxe6 l l .Wi'd2 lli xc3 1 2 .Wi'xc3 Wxc3 t
as Black falls behind White in the race to
1 3 . bxc3 b6 1 4. e4 <tt> e7+
develop.

7 Wb6

1 0 . . . Wi'b4 l l .a3 Wd4 1 2 . fxe4 is better for
7 . . . e 5?! 8 . tll c3 transposes into a game played
White as . . . lli xe4 is not possible here.
by Shaun Munson, a former clubmate of
mine in Ipswich. I remember Shaun using
1 1 .lll xf3 0-0 1 2.0-0-0 lll f5 1 3.i.c4 lll a6
98 Richard Pert - Playing the Tro m powsky
1 4Jhfl
B) 4 ...VNb6
The critical move, giving White a decision
to make about the b2-pawn; he may sacrifice it
by Bl) 5.tLld2!? or defend it with B2) 5.i.cl .
Bl) 5.llid2!?
I like chis move with which White takes the
fight to his opponent. Black can now first
exchange knights with BU) 5 ... lLlxd2 or
take the proffered pawn immediately by
Bl2) 5 ... VNxb2.
B U ) 5 ... tLlxd2
This is most common but I am not sure if it's
best.
6.i.xd2
6 ...VNxb2
Black really has to take the pawn here;
otherwise he will find himself worse off as
White has more space.
6 . . . e5 7.e4
Plaskett simply develops, ignoring the
b2-pawn, confident chat White will gain
compensation should Black cake the pawn
at any point. Jim Plaskett was present at the
Pere - Hunt game given below, and at the
post-match evening meal he assured me chat
chis is right way to play.
7 .i.c3 was played in a recent game and is a
solid alternative: 7 . . . d6 8 . e4 i.e7 9 . lLi f3 0-0
I O .i.d3 Gareev - Mikhalevski, Las Vegas
20 1 2; if anyone is better it must be White,
but it's not a lot.
 7 e6
.

White also has good chances if Black opts to

fianchetto :
7 . . . g6 8 .gb l W/f6
8 . . . Wi'xa2 ? ? 9 .i.c3 +-
8 . . . W/e5 9 .id3 c4 1 0. tt:\ f3 Wi'c7 l l .i.e2 ig7
1 2 . 0-0 d6 1 3 .gb4 ig4 1 4 .gxc4 S. Ernst -
Scholz, Germany 2007
9 . tt:\ f3 d6

b d f g h s ,i .t. &
.
-"'-.-,Y. ,
a c e

7
" " .... 7.B '
7 . . . d6
6

5 -
7 . . . Wi'xb2? 8 . tt:\ f3 d6 9.gb l +- and the black

% -'>.....
queen is in trouble.
8 .i.d3 tt:\ d7 9 . tt:\ e2 g6 1 0 . c4 i.g7 1 l .Wi'c2 a6

43
''
o o ir'Af
1 2 .gb l 0-0 1 3 . 0-0 h8 1 4.a3
White had a clear advantage and went on 7.

1 imlmt_,
to win a good game, Plaskett - Hjartarson, 2 o
Reykj avik 1 992.
a b c d e f g h
6 ... d6 7.e4 e5 8 . dxe6 (8 .i.d3 is Plaskett's
approach and probably right, nevertheless l O .gb3
my method proved sufficient for an edge) When I played this line it became apparent
8 . . . ixe6 9 .ic3 tt:\ c6 1 0 . tt:\ e2 0-0-0 l 1 . tt:\ f4 to me how much pressure White can apply
tt:\e5 1 2.ie2 g5 1 3 . tt:\ xe6 fxe6 1 4 .ig4 ge8 with simple development.
1 5 .ixe5 dxe5 1 6. 0-0 R. Pert - A. Hunt, 1 0 . . .ig7 l l .i.b5t tt:\ d7 1 2. 0-0 h6 1 3 .i.c3
West Bromwich 200 5 . Wxc3 1 4.gxc3 i.xc3 1 5 .e5
R. Pert - Jaunooby, Hastings 20 1 1 . White
7.e4 has netted the black queen and continues
White has fantastic compensation for the to build pressure on the undeveloped black
pawn and stands better in my view. position.

8.lif3 exd5 9.exd5 i.e7

9 . . . d6? 1 0 .gb 1 Wf6 l Li.b 5 t tt:\d7 1 2 . 0-0
i.e7 1 3 .ge l h6 1 4.We2 and the king is in a
mess: 1 4 . . . @d8 1 5 .ixd7 @xd7 1 6.ic3 Wxc3
1 7.Wi'xe7#

10.gbl
Once again we see Jim Plaskett play this line
with real aggression.

1 0 .6
l l .ic3
..

1 0 . . . Wxa2 Threatening ga l .
l 1 . . .Wa4 1 2 .id3 0-0 1 3 . 0-0 d6 1 4 .ge l
1 00 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
White's compensation is massive. 1 4 . . . id8
1 5 .Wi'd2 Wl'g4 1 6 .h3 Wi'h5 1 7.Wi'f4 Wi'h6
1 8 .Wi'xh6 gxh6 1 9 .id2 l!.ig7 20 .if4 ic7
2 1 .E'!:e7 lll d7 22.ll\ h4;!; and White is cranking
up the pressure.
14 ...Ag4 1 5.Ac3 J.xf3 16.Axf6 J.xd1
17.J.xe7 ge8 1 8.gxb7 Ag4 19.AbS t!Ja6
20.J.xa6 Ac8 2 1 .@fl
1-0
Plaskett - Hebden, London 1 987.
Bl2) 5 ...Wi'xb2
This option is slightly less common, but may
be Black's best.
6.t!Jxe4 Wl'b4t 7.c3
This rare line is a speciality of Teimour
Radjabov. I prefer it to the main alternative of
7.Wl'd2 because it allows White to keep an eye
on both the b4- and a4-squares. No matter how
unlikely it seems at the moment, having control
of those additional squares may mean that
White can trap the black queen in the middle
of the board at a future point in the game.
7 ... Wl'xe4 8.e3 g5
This is widely regarded as strongest, though
Black has tried various other moves:
8 . . . b 5 ? ! was the choice of Areshchenko, a
strong grandmaster, but it seems too slow:
9 . lll f3 c4
s ,ij_ . , Y..,
.. . , . , % .... %. ..... %.
, .
,. . . %..
67 .
5 ,
4 r 1
3 . 't%''"% 't%J7:,. ,':f. %
'"--
2 87: . .
-J- -- %L .. ':
Vlt
>" " '
1
a b c d e f g h
I O .ie2 ( I O .Wi'd4!?N looks interesting as
after 1 0 . . . Wi'xd4 1 1 .lll xd4 a6 1 2 .a4 Black's
queenside falls: 1 2 . . . ib7 1 3 .e4 e6 1 4.axb 5;!;)
1 0 . . . d6 1 1 . 0-0 ib7 1 2. lll d2 Wi'f5 1 3 .E'!:b l
Wi'd7 1 4 .ig4 Wl'c7 1 5 .E'!:xb5 a6 1 6 .E'!:b4 ixd5
1 7.if3;!; Radj abov - Areshchenko, Moscow
200 5 .
8 . . . d 6 9 . lll f3 Wi'f5 1 0 .a4 ( I O .id3 Wi'f6 l 1 .Wi'b3
h6 1 2 . 0-0 g5 1 3 .ig3 ig7 1 4 .E'!:ac l ) 1 0 . . . g6
1 I .id3 Wi'f6 1 2 .Wi'b3 lll d7 1 3 .lll d2 ig7
1 4. ll\ e4;!; M. Popovic - Bojovic, Senta 2009.
8 . . . e6 9 .ig3
This move is reasonably common, but it The untested 9 . f3 ! ? may also lead to an
doesn't look good to me. interesting game: 9 . . . Wf5 I O.id3 Wf6
9 . c4 exd5 l l .ig3 d6 ( l I . . . e4 1 2 .ixe4 Wfxc3 t
1 3 . @f2;j;) l 2 .lll e2 ie7 1 3 . 0-0 0-0 l 4.f4 t
and White has active play for the pawn.
9 . dxe6 was my choice against Hebden,
and whilst it offers some compensation for
the pawn, White cannot really claim any
advantage: 9 . . . Wxe6 I O . lll f3 ie7 l I .id3
tll c6 1 2 . 0-0 d6 1 3 .ic2 id7 1 4.b l 00 R.
Pere - Hebden, Hastings 2006.
9 ... d6 1 0 .tll f3 tll d7
I also analysed:

b d f g h
a) 1 0 . . .Wg6 l l .id3 f5 1 2.Wfa4t id7
a c e
( 1 2 . . . tll d7? 1 3 .tll h4 Wf6 1 4. lll xf5;!;) and
1 O . tll f3! now:
I came up with this very strong idea; White a l ) 1 3 .Wib3 b6 1 4 .tll d2 ie7 1 5 . 0-0
ignores pawns and goes for development. intending 1 5 . . . e4 1 6.ib5;!; or 1 5 . . . 0-0
1 0 . . . dxc4 1 6.ixe5 dxe5 1 7.d6tt.
1 O . . . d4 is also met by simple development: a2) 1 3 .ib5 ie7 1 4.b l
l I .id3 Wfe6 1 2 . 0-0 dxe3 1 3 .e l Wb6 b ) I O . . . ie7 l I .id3 Wg4 1 2 .h3 Wf d7
1 4 .xe3t+- and even at this early stage in 1 3 .Wib l ! ? Threatening ib5 and keeping
the game, White's lead in development is an eye on the h7-pawn and the f5-square.
decisive. 1 3 . . . Wd8 1 4. 0-0
l I . tll g5 Wff5 1 2.ixc4 d5 1 3 .ixd5 f6 1 4.if7t
@e7 l 5 .Wd6#
' -
1 (V i 'll i W
8
i
6 , ..% - ". , , %
%,
Antidrome - Nazari, Internet 2009.

8 . . . e5 0. 0.
5 8 .
ef"3-0
This is a critical alternative and was the
4
-- - - "-W0 W$B
-
choice of GM Mark Hebden against me.
3 . t et)
0
8 - - - " "Oiwt!
1 g .1k it
2 -----

a b c d e f g h
l I . tll g5N
After l l .c4 Wg6 1 2.id3 Wh6 1 3 . tll d2 ie7
1 4 . 0-0 0-0 1 5 . f4 f5 White did not have
enough for the pawn in Kiik - Sepp, Tallinn
1 997.

b d f g h
l 1 . . .Wg6 1 2. h4 ie7 1 3 .id3 Wh6 1 4. f4 g6
a c e
1 4 . . . 0-0 ?! l 5 .ixh7tt
1 02 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 4 . . . lll f6? 1 S . fxeS dxeS 1 6.d6

l S .l:!b l
White has good compensation for the pawn .

a b c d e f g h
9.ig3
9 .ixgS ?! WeS favours Black.

9 ... ig7 lOJkl d6

1 0 . . . e6 l l . c4! exdS 1 2 .tll f3 d4 1 3 .id3
We7 1 4. 0-0 looked very strong for White in
Antidrome - pisher, Internet 2009.

10 ... bS 1 I . lll f3 g4 1 2. lll d2 WxdS 1 3 .Wxg4

0-0

s E.i. -- y,m
1 4 .ibSt
7 6"""
6 7.
z.... -
-
i "
1 4.c4N looks interesting, aiming to keep

-- % ii'-
,
the black queen stuck in the middle of the

5 t
board: 1 4 . . . WeS (normal developing moves

4 l" "
@. such as 14 . . . id??! run into trouble: 1 S .id3

3 t w


0 - "Mies 1 6.lll e6) 1 S .lll e6 Wb2 1 6.lll xg?t

,f-
"J:
F,{ "fA't*'
( 1 6.lll c?t ?! d8 1 7.lll xa8 ic3t 1 8 .l:!xc3
2 0
' =:r iCiz 0 iQ
Wxc3t 1 9 .Wd2 "Mla l t isn't what we want)
1 1 6 . . . Wxg? 1 7.Wc2 id? 1 8 .id3 White has

b d f g h
good compensation for the pawn.
a c e
1 4 . . . id? 1 S .ixd?t lll xd7 1 6 ."Mfxg4 l:!g8
1 4.ixbS ! N ( 1 4.e4 Wxa2 l S .ixbS was less l 7.We2 ieS 1 8 . f300
clear in Fontaine - Gladyszev, Val Thorens Radj abov - Vachier-Lagrave, Moscow 20 1 0 .
2006) 1 4 . . . Wxg2 1 S .e2 dS 1 6.WhS lll d7
1 7 .l:!hg l lll f6 1 8 .WgS Wh3 1 9 .ieS Black is 1 1 . . .Wg6
facing problems on the g-file. l l . . .g4 1 2 .id3 ixc3 t 1 3 .l:!xc3 "Mlb4
 Chapter 5 - 2 . . . ltJ e4 3 .if4 c5 4 . dS
1 4.Wc2 gxf3 1 5 .gxf3 offers White sufficient
compensation.
12.h4
White can also consider: 1 2 .id3 fS
( 1 2 . . . ifS ? 1 3 .e4 ixe4? 1 4.Wa4t+-) 1 3 . h4 h6
1 4 .Wc2t
1 2 ... gxh4
l 2 . . . h6 will transpose to the previous note:
1 3 .id3 fS 1 4.Wc2t
13.id3 f5
1 4 ...f7 1 5.a4t id7 1 6.b3 b6 17.if4
I prefer White here as it looks awkward for
Black to develop any of his pieces.
B2) 5.icl
White decides to hold on to the b2-pawn. As
I mentioned at the start of this chapter, this
line should be studied in conj unction with line
B3 1 in the next chapter, which arises after 4.f3
Wa5 t 5 .c3 lLi f6 6.dS Wb6 7.ic l . In particular,
1 03
if White plays his pawn c4 at a later stage there
can be a direct transposition between the two
lines.
Black now chooses between B2 1) 5 g6 and ..
B22) 5 ... e6.
B2 1 ) 5 ... g6 6.f3
6 . . . ltJ f6 7.e4 d6 8 . c4 transposes to line B3 1 1 of
the next chapter on page 1 22.
7.e4 ig7 s.ltJc3
8 . ltJ d2 looks a little strange, but it was clearly
prepared by Bauer against an opponent who
had previously played this exact line: 8 . . . 0-0
9 . f4 e6 1 0.eS ltJ fS 1 1 . ltJ c4 Wd8 l 2.dxe6 dxe6
1 3 .Wxd8 :gxd8 1 4. c3 b6 1 5 . lLi f3 ib7 1 6.ie2
ltJ d7 1 7. 0-0 f6 1 8 .g4;t; Bauer - Vachier
Lagrave, Pau 20 1 2.
8 ... 0-0
Black may also attack the centre immediately:
8 . . . fS 9 .exfS
9 .We2 has also been tried: 9 . . . fXe4 1 0 . fXe4
Wb4 1 1 .eS ltJ fS 1 2.id2 ltJ d4 1 3 .We4 Wxb2
1 4.:gb 100 J. Gomez - Sadorra, Manila 2008.
9 . . . ltJxfS
1 04 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

l l ... a6
1 l . . .ixb2 1 2 .Elb l WaS t 1 3 .id2 Wxa2
1 4.c3;l; leaves the black bishop in trouble.

1 2.c3 t[) c7 13.a4 t[) es 1 4.i.e2 t[)f6 1 5.0-0

d6 1 6.i.c4 i.d7 17.'ife2 fae8 18.t[)eg5
White has taken a very sensible approach
and stands better, Stefanova - Stellwagen,
Wij k aan Zee 2004.

a b c d e f g h B22) 5 ... e6 6.f3

1 0 .g4! ?
1 0 .lll e4 0-0 1 I .lll h3 makes some sense,
transposing to the main line.
1 0 .id3 0-0 1 1 .ixfS lhf5 1 2.lll ge2 c4
1 3 .lll g3 and now:
a) 1 3 . . . ixc3t 1 4.bxc3 i'!eSt I S .lll e4 WaS
Mensch - Beck, Germany 2008; here
1 6.d6N;l; gives White an edge.
b) 1 3 . . . i'!f8 is safer, and 1 4.We2 was level in
Adams - Gelfand, Cap D' Agde (rapid) 2003.
I O . . . lll h6
1 0 . . . lll d6!? 1 I .h4 c4 1 2.lll ge2 lll a6 1 3 .hS
a b c d e f g h
Elf8 1 4 .ig2 looks messy!
1 I .d6 e6 1 2.lll bS lll a6 1 3 .h4! ?--+
1 3 .if4 Wc6 1 4.ixh6 ixh6 1 S .c4 0-0 1 6. h4 6 ...Wa5t!?
if4 1 7.hS ig3t00 McShane - Kotronias, This was the choice of Kasparov himself, so
Gibraltar 2003. it needs to be taken seriously.
1 3 . . . Wc6?! 1 4.hS
Karhanek - D . Schwarz, Frydek Mistek 6 . . . lll f6 7.e4 exdS 8.exdS
2004.

9.t[)h3 f5 1 0.exfS t[)xfS n . t[) e4

a b c d e f g h
8 . . . d6
8 . . . id6 9 .lll a3 ! ? leads to an interesting pawn
sacrifice: 9 . . . Wb4t 1 0 .Wd2 Wxd2t l I .ixd2

a b c d e f g h
 tlJxd5 1 2. lll b5 ie7 1 3 . ttJ e2 lll a6 1 4 .lll ec3
lll xc3 1 5 .fi.xc3 0-0 1 6.fi.c4 d5 1 7 .ixd5
lll b4 1 8 .ixb4 cxb4 1 9 . 0-0-0t Yemelin -
Chytilek, Czech Republic 20 1 2 .
9 . lll c3
This is an additional option open to White
with this move order.
9 . c4 offers a direct transposition to line
B3 1 24 of the next chapter on page 1 27.
9 ... g6 1 0 .ib 5 t id7 1 1 .We2t d8 1 2 .a4 ig7
1 3 .Wi'f2
The immediate 1 3 .a5!?N is worth
considering.
1 3 . . . lll a6 1 4 .a5t
Stefanova - Makropoulou, Chalkida 2009.
7.c3 tli f6 8.e4 d6 9.i.g5!?
9 . ttJ a3 ? ! exd5 1 0 . exd5 ie7 1 l .ttJ c4 Wd8
1 2. ttJ e3 0-0 1 3 . ttJ e2 e8 1 4 .g4 lll fd7 1 5 .lll g3
ig5 1 6.ltif2 lll e5 1 7.ib5 id7 1 8 .ixd7
lll bxd7 1 9 .lll ef5 c4+ left White in trouble in
Van der Wiel - Kasparov, Moscow 1 9 82.
9 .fi.d2!? seems playable: 9 . . .ie7 (9 ... Wi'b6 1 0 . c4
Wxb2 1 l . ttJ c3 Wb6 1 2 .b l Wc7 1 3 . f4 offers
good compensation, similar to the Vaganian
Gambit but with a pawn on c4. ) 1 0 . c4 Wc7
1 l . ttJ c3 0-0 1 2 .id3 exd5 1 3 . exd5 lll bd7
1 4 .lll ge2t Mehmeti - Sutovsky, Istanbul (ol)
20 1 2 .
9 ... i.e7
10.dxe6
This is White's latest attempt, and in this
recent game White eventually managed to get
an advantage.
10 ... i.xe6 1 1 .tlia3 tli c6 12.tlic4 Yffc7
1 2 . . .ixc4 1 3 .ixc4 lll e5 1 4 .ie2 0-0
l 5 .lll h3t
13.hffi gxf6 14.tlie3 0-0-0 15.tlid5 Yff d7
1 6.i.b5 ghg8 17.fl f5 1 8.exf5 i.xf5
19.tfie2 gde8 20.tC!g3 i.ds 21 .tC!xf5 xf5
22.g3 h5 23.d3 Yffg5 24.4 g4 25.tll e3
Yff e6 26Jhel;!;
Yemelin - Hartikainen, Finland 20 1 2 .
Conclusion: After 4 . . . e 6 5 . f3 the tricky A2)
5 . . . id6 has previously been regarded as a
problem for White, but I believe that my
analysis, and in particular the improvement
1 0.Wi'd2!N, should allow White to face this
line with confidence.
Against 4 . . . Wi'b6 my personal preference is for
sacrificing a pawn with B l ) 5 . ttJ d2 ! ?; a lot of
the resulting lines are untested, but they seem
to offer White interesting play. For those less
inclined to give away material, B2) 5 .ic l is
also playable and may secure White an edge.
Chapter 6

2 ... e4 3.if4 c5 4.f3

I .d4 tll f6 2.g5 tll e4 3.f4 c5 4.f3

A) 4 ... tll f6 5.dxc5!? 1 09

Al) 5 ... tll a6?! 1 09
A2) 5 ... 'i'a5t 1 10
A3) 5 ... b6! 6.e4 bxc5 7.tll c3 tll c6 8.c4 111
A3 1 ) 8 ... d6 111
A32) 8 ... g6 1 12
B) 4 ... 'i'a5t 5.c3 tll f6 6.d5 1 13
Bl) 6 ... e6!? 7.e4 exd5 8.exd5 d6 9.'i'd2 e7 10.c4 'i'xd2t 1 1 .@xd2 1 13
B l l) l 1 . .. b5 1 15
B l 2) 1 1 . .. tll h5 12.e3 f5 13.tll c3 1 16
B l 2 1) 1 3 ... tll d7 1 17
B l 22) 1 3 ... 0-0 1 18
B2) 6 ... d6 1 19
B3) 6 ... 'i'b6 121
B3 1) 7.cl 121
B3 1 1) 7 ... g6 121
B3 12) 7 ... e6 8.e4! exd5 9.exd5 1 22
B3 1 2 1 ) 9 d6
. 1 23
B3 1 22) 9 ... 'i'c7!? 1 24
B3 1 23) 9 ... c4 1 26
B3 124) 9 ... d6 1 27
B32) 7.e4!? 'i'xb2 8.tll d2 'i'xc3 9.c7! 1 28
B32 1) 9 ... b6?! 1 30
B322) 9 ... e6 1 32
B323) 9 ... d6 1 35
1 08 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 f6 2 .ig5 e4 3 .if4 c5 4.f3

As in the previous chapter, I shall offer you
Having looked at 4.d5 in the previous an alternative approach with 7.ic l . Moving
chapter, we shall now examine attacking the the bishop for the third time in seven moves is
knight straight away. the solid option, believe it or not! White takes

.i -.i.-
time out to defend the b2-pawn and goes in
search of a small advantage. This line should
8
7
'i"m''l--.v.
be studied together with line B2 with 5 .ic l in

,
--

' the previous chapter on page 1 03 .

6
, - 7 ...'Wxb2 8.d2 'Wxc3 9 ..ic7!?
s w m
7.!&
r
: --

4
.

%

....
"'" 7.
,,,. . /:

!n!.!j
r. -0 ,,.!n
r. - - - - z - -,,,/,/' - - -
1ttJ7.v.t.m : ..

a b c d e f g h
4 'WaSt
.

Simply retreating with 4 . . . f6 is of course

a possibility. I then recommend the direct
5 . dxc5 ! ? looking to develop quickly with e2-

e4, tll c3 and 1Mfd2 while Black spends time
rounding up the c5-pawn.
5.c3 f6 6.d5 'Wb6
6 . . . e6! ? is a less popular choice for Black, but
interesting nevertheless - we'll check it out.
6 . . . d6 is the other main alternative, with which
Black aims to complete his development before
challenging White in the centre.
a b c d e f g h
White has given up two pawns but trapped
the opposing queen in his own territory! A
personal favourite of mine, this is the first
time this line has been investigated in depth.
I have spent a lot of time coming up with new
analysis, and I believe this line should be taken
seriously as an attempt to obtain an advantage.

7.e4!?
Hold on to your hat! Those looking to make
their opponent j ump out of their chair should
take a look at this highly aggressive double
pawn sacrifice.
I .d4 tlif6 2.i.g5 tli e4 3.i.f4 c5 4.f3 6 . . . e5 7.i.e3 i.e7 8 .Wi'd2 (8.c4 ! ? 0-0 9 . tli c3t)
This very much forces the pace. Black now 8 ... 0-0 9 . tli c3 tli bd7 1 0 .g4!?--+
chooses between A) 4 f6 and B) 4 ...%Ya5t.
. 7.tlic3 i.g7 8 .Wi'd2t
White intends standard play with i.h6 etc.
A) 4 ... tlif6
Black may aim to regain the pawn with Al)

- - ,, %_ .,Y,_' .,v.
5 ... tli a6?!, A2) 5 ...%Ya5t or A3) 5 ... b6!.
s .i -.i.B -
7
- ';&(
5 . . . g6 6 . tli c3 i.g7 7.Wi'd2 0-0 8 .i.h6 d5 9 . cxd6

5 -- ,,,,,,;
6 '' i.xh6 1 0.Wxh6 Wxd6 l l .e4 did not give Black
enough for the pawn in Hall - Hardarson,

- '-if[!f p -- 0 -
- - - - % , ; , ,%
Hafnarfjordur 1 997, which concluded:
4 fi l 1 . . . tli c6 1 2 .i.d3 i.e6 1 3 . tli ge2 tlie5 1 4.Wi'e3

3 .1,4% , 0fj
i.c4 1 5 .d l Wi'b4?? 1 6 .Wi'd4 1 -0

2 ' f)jll. 8 r' %Jl:%

Al) 5 ... tli a6?!

I lLluvm : Although quite common, this move is probably

a b c d e f g h
inaccurate. When faced with it myself, I made
short work of scoring a full point.
Black usually inserts the intermediate check
. . . Wa5 t in order to force White to block the 6.e4 tlixc5 7.tlic3
c3-square with a pawn . When Black chooses 7.e5 ? is too early; after 7 . . . tli e6 8.i.e3 the e5-
not to do that, the c3-square can prove very pawn drops to 8 ... Wi'a5 t .
useful for the b I -knight.

5.dxc5!?
I think this is a good enough choice, so I
don't plan to cover the alternative of advancing
the d-pawn. I will j ust mention how play
may develop in case you wish to investigate it
further:
5 . d 5 ! ? d6
a) 5 . . . Wb6 6 . tli c3 Wi'xb2 7.i.d2 Wi'b6 8 . e4
d6 9.f4 takes us into a Vaganian Gambit,
covered as line A l of Chapter 4 on page 8 1 .

b d f g h
b) 5 . . . tli h 5 ! ? 6.i.e3 (6.i.c l and 6.i.g5 are
a c e
also possible) 6 . . . e5 (6 . . . d6 7.g4 tli f6 8 . c4 e6
9 . tli c3 exd5 1 O . cxd5t Stefanova - Raj lich, 7 ... g6?!
Ekaterinburg 2006) 7 . tli h3 ! ?N This looks an This is inadvisable, though White is doing
interesting novelty to me, intending g2-g4 quite well in any case:
without letting the black knight settle on the 7 . . . d6 8.e5
f4-square. 7 . . . Wb6 (7 . . . d6 8.g4 tli f6 9 . tli c3t) This looks very much to the point.
8 . tli c3 Wxb2 9 .i.d2t 8 .Wi'd2 is also possible and looks slightly
6.e4 g6 preferable for White:
1 10 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
a) 8 . . . !Wa5 9 . 0-0-0 id? 1 0 .@b l d8?
l I .iLi d5 +-
b) 8 . . . ie6 9 . lLi ge2 a6 1 0. lLi d4 id? l I .lLi b3
tLi a4 1 2. tLi xa4 ixa4 1 3 .ie2t Hauchard -
Bacrot, France 1 99 8 .
c ) 8 . . . e5 9 .ib5t tLi cd7 1 0.ig5 a 6 l I .ixf6
'1Wxf6 1 2. lLi d S 1Wd8 1 3 .1Wc3 b8 1 4. lLi c?tt
Hodgson - Reinderman, Leeuwarden 1 993.
8 ... tLi e6 9 .exf6 tLi xf4 1 0 .1Wd2 tLi e6 l I .ib5t
id? 1 2.ixd?t Wxd7 1 3 . fxe? ixe7 1 4 . tLi ge2
0-0 1 5 .lLidS lLi c7 1 6 .tLixe?t '1Wxe7 1 7. 0-0-0
d5 1 8 .E:de l ad8 1 9 . lLi d4t
It is clear that White holds some advantage,
although in Ki. Georgiev - Relange,
Montpellier 2006, he failed to convert it.
8.1Wd2 ig7? 9.e5! tLlh5
9 . . . tLig8 1 0 .0-0-0
10.i.e3!
Winning a piece.
10 ... e6 l l .g4 i.xe5 1 2.gxh5 b6 1 3.0-0-0
i.b7 14.i.b5! i.c8?! 1 5.Wfd5 1-0
R. Pen - O'Shaughnessy, London 20 1 0.
A2) 5 ...Wfa5t
a b c d e f g h
6.c3
In Winning with the Tromp owsky, Wells
suggested that the move order 6.Wd2 Wxc5
7.e4 g6 8 . lLi c3 may be slightly more accurate
as it cuts out Black's option of playing . . . e6 and
. . . tLi d 5 , but I do not think that White needs to
be worried by that.
6 Wfxc5
.
6 . . . e6 7 .id6 lLi d 5 is unclear according to
Wells, but to me it still looks preferable for
White: 8 .1Wd2 tLi xc3 9 . e3 !Nt White takes
measures against . . . tLi a6 before recapturing the
knight.
7.e4 g6
7 . . . d6 8 .1Wd2 a6 9 .0-0-0 e5 (9 . . . g6) 1 0.ie3
We? l I .g4
8.Wfd2 d6
8 . . . ig7 9 .e3 Wc6 1 0 .e5 lLig8 l l . f4 b6
1 2 .b5 Wb7 1 3 . iLi f3 tLi h6 1 4.d3t Wang Yue
- Dao Thien Hai, Calcutta 200 1 .
9.0-0-0 i.g7 IO.i.h6
Mickey Adams takes a Route One approach
against Leko and wipes him out!
10 0-0 1 1 .h4 i.e6 1 2.h5 tLlxh5 13.i.xg7
..
@xg7 14.g4 tlJf6 15.Wfh6t @gs 16.tLlge2
Wlfl
1 8.exf6 exf6 19.tlid5 i.xd5 20.V:Vxh7t i>f8 9 . . . a6!
2 1 .V:Vhst i>e7 22.VHxcS V:Vxf3 23Jh8 V:Ve3t Black's most recent idea.
24.i>b l 9 . . . c!Li xe5 1 0.ixe5 dxe5 1 1 .xdSt ltixd8
1-0 1 2. 0-0-0t c!Li d7 1 3 . c!Li h3 g6 1 4.ic4 offered
Adams - Leko, Cap d'Agde (rapid) 1 996. White good positional compensation for the
pawn in I . Schneider - Stocek, Pardubice
A3) 5 ... b6! 2008.

- ..i.. , .,w.
9 ... dxe5 1 0.VHxdSt ltixd8 1 1 . 0-0-0t id?
s ,a
,mi, w .a

'&/.m,&m''i
1 2 .ig3 e6 1 3 . lLi h3 h6 1 4. c!Li a3 and again

" '
E"""
White has good compensation, Akopian -
1

:. .. 'Wf "
B . Socko, Cappelle la Grande 1 999.
6

m !% m m
1 O.exf6 axb5
W'd,,,,/.
r ,,,,,,,,
,, 8.
White seems to be struggling to gain any
s
4
advantage.
,
,,,,, /.
l l .d2 b6 1 2 . lLi e2 ie6
1 2 . . . gxf6 1 3 . lLi c3 c!Li d4+

"!n!
.'tJ nm!.!n
. 0 "VJ,, . . "'"""'?
1 3 .c!Li c3 b4 1 4 . fxe? ixe700
Rensch - Molner, Internet 2009.
1 mn
..

a b c d e f g h
Black's only real test of the white set-up; as we
have seen above, the other options leave White
with a clear positional advantage. Despite this
being Black's best, it has surprisingly not been
very popular.

6.e4
6 . cxb6 V:Vxb6 gives Black decent
compensation for the pawn.

6 ... bxc5 7.tli c3 tli c6 8.i.c4

Pete Wells advocated a different plan m
Winning with the Trompowsky back in 2003 :
8 . lLi b 5 ! ? d6 9 . e5
A31) 8 ...d6 9.e5 dxe5
1 0.VHxdSt i>xd8 1 1 .0-0-0t i.d7

Other moves do not solve all Black's problems

either:

1 1 . . . c!Li d? 1 2 .ig3 ( 1 2.id5 c7) 1 2 .. .f6

( 1 2 . . . e6 1 3 . c!Li h3 ie7 1 4. c!Li b 5 ) 1 3 . c!Li ge2 c7
1 4 .if2 lLi b6 1 5 .id3 e6 1 6. c!Li e4 c4 1 7.ixb6t
axb6 1 8 .ixc4;!;

a b c d e f g h
1 12 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 1 . . . <;tic? 1 5.h3 es 1 6.xf4 g6 17.<i>bl .ig7

1 8.e41;
Kasparov - Reinderman, Wijk aan Zee 1 999.

A32) 8 ... g6 9.tiJb5 d6 1 0.e5 dxe5

1 1 .'!WxdSt xd8 1 2 ..ig5!

This is the most accurate move order. Black's

f7-pawn remains weak, and it should be noted
that White threatens lli d6 with devastating
impact in various lines.

a b c d e f g h
An important game continued: 1 2. 0-0-0t
1 2.ig3N lli d7 1 3 .ie3 (with this move order 1 3 .ig5 can
l 2.ie3 looks wrong to me - the bishop be met by 1 3 .. . f6 1 4.ie300) 1 3 . . . a6 1 4 . lli c3 e6
should remain on the h2-b8 diagonal, 1 5 .lli e4 <;tic? 1 6.llig5?! h6 1 7. lli e4 f5 1 8 . lli d2
hitting the e5-pawn and potentially also the lLi b6+ Hodgson - Shirov, Groningen 1 996.
king. 1 2 . . . e6 1 3 . lli b 5 t <;t>b6 1 4. lli c300 lotov
- Babula, Kallithea 2008. 12 ... h6
1 2 . . . e6 1 3 .lli h3 1 2 . . . ib??? 1 3 .gd l t (better than 1 3 .0-0-0t
Threatening llig 5 . which could allow a later . . . ih6t! to rescue the
1 3 ... h6 1 4.ghe l lli d7 1 5 . lli b 5 t h8-rook) 1 3 . . . rJ;; c s 1 4. lli d6t! exd6 1 5 .ixf6+-
White's advantage seems clear in all
variations, for example: 1 2 . . . lli d4 can be met by 1 3 .gd };!; and again
1 5 . . . @b6 1 6. lli f2 lli d4 1 7. lli a3 gbs 1 8 . lli d3 White's threats include lli d6.
lli c6 l 9 .ib5;!;

a b c d e f g h

12 . .ib5 Also possible is:

Kasparov shows the way! 1 3 .ixf6 exf6 1 4 .0-0-0t
1 4.ixf7 gbs 1 5 . 0-0-0t lli d4 1 6.ic4 id?
12 ... exf4 1 3.hc6 gc8 14 ..ixd7 xd7 l 7 . lli a3 h5 l 8 . c3 lli f5 l 9 .ie6 gh7 was fine
 for Black in Thomsen - Kristjansson, corr.
1 999.
14 ... tt:l d4!? 1 5 . c3 id7 1 6.cxd4 cxd4 1 7.cJ;lb l;!;
White will likely give back the piece with
lll xd4 to get rid of the black central pawns,
keeping a small plus.

1 3 ... i.d7
The other ways of blocking the check also
concede an edge:

1 3 . . . lll d4 1 4 .ih4t
a b c d e f g h
1 3 . . . tll d7 1 4.id5 hxg5 ( 1 4 . . . ib7 1 5 . tll d6
c7 1 6. tt:l xb7 hxg5 1 7. tll a5t) 1 5 .ixc6 Elb8 7 ... exd5
1 6. tt:l xa7 Elb6 1 7.tll h3 ih6 1 8 .b l t White can try to take advantage if Black
delays this exchange:
14.i.xf6 exf6 1 5 .hf'lt 7 . . . d6 8 . dxe6!
The black king still looks awkward, and 8 .Wi'd2 looks likely to transpose to the main
White's chances seem preferable. line, but I prefer to challenge Black's last
move.
B) 4 ... V9a5t 5.c3 tll f6 6.d5 8 . . . ixe6 9 . tLl a3

9 . . . tt:l c6
9 . . . d5 1 0 .ixb8 Elxb8 l l .ib 5t cJ;le7 1 2 .e5
tll d7 1 3 .f4 g6 1 4 .tll e2 ig7 l 5 .ixd7 xd7
1 6. 0-0 :gbd8 l 7.lll c2 cJ;lc8 l 8.b4t White
secures the d4-square for his knight, with
B l ) 6 ... e6!? a small but clear advantage, Fressinet -
Dominguez, Wijk aan Zee 2004.
I find it surprising that this interesting move is 1 0 .lll c4 Wi'd8
not played more often. I O ixc4 l l .ixc4 ie7 1 2 . lZl e2 0-0 1 3 .0-0
. . .

:gad8 14.lZlg3 b5 1 5 .id5 ll\xd5 1 6.V9xd5 '1Wb6

7.e4 1 7. ll\ f5t Ancidrome - Skat, Internet 20 1 2.
1 14 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 1 .lll xd6t ixd6 1 2 .ixd6 to recommend chis line - no doubt I will try
1 2.11Mxd6!? Wb6 1 3 .b3 Wa5 1 4 . lll e 2 ixb3 again in the future, bur for now it's back co the
1 5 .1/Mc7 Wxc7 1 6 .ixc7 ie6 1 7. lll f4;!; looks simple recapture.
slightly better for White with the bishop pair.
1 2 . . . Wb6 8 ... d6

8 .1. U.
. 7' g{""
76.m..JLm:
i!' 'if.
5 ,., ,,7,.
".. , ?. !
,, , , . , ,

: !

2 ..Yllv-0 _t
-d ?.
%1:
r

I
a b c d e f g h
1 3 .Wc2!?N
1 3 .Wc l 0-0-0 1 4.ig3 l'!d7 1 5 .ie2
l'!hd8 1 6.if4 lll h5 1 7.ig5 f6 1 8 .ie300
9.d2
Miladinovic - Pavlovic, Subotica 2008.
Hodgson's move, which is considered to be
13 ... 0-0-0 1 4 .if4 l'!d7 1 5 .ie2 l'!hd8 1 6.ie3
the main line nowadays.
Wa5 1 7.f2 c4 1 8 . h4;!;
9 .We2t
At first sight this check looks awkward
for Black to deal with. Rather annoyingly
though, Black has a good answer up his
sleeve.
9 . . . ie7 1 0 .ixd6

a b c d e f g h
8.exd5
I spent a long time trying to make 8 . e 5 ! ?

h
work, and I d i d come u p with some promising
b d f g
new ideas for White. However, looking
.
a c e

at this line again recently I discovered an 1 O . . lll xd5 ! 1 1 .Wb 5 t

improvement for Black at an early stage in one The point i s that I 1 .ixb8 ? doesn't work
of the variations. This makes it difficult for me out too well after 1 l . . .l'!xb8 1 2.We5 , as
 Black can sacrifice: 1 2 . . . Wb6 ! ? 1 3 .Wxb8 0-0 l l . . .b5 1 2. lLi e2 (or 1 2 .mf2!? threatening
Threatening . . . id6 to pick up the white ge l t) 1 2 . . . lLi b6 1 3 .lLi c3 bxc4 1 4.lLixc4;!;
queen. 1 4.We5 ge8 1 5 .g3 ( 1 5 .Wxd5 ih4t 1 2 .g4 0-0 1 3 . 0-0-0 b5 1 4. lLi e2;!;
1 6. m d l Wxb2 1 7. lLi e2 gd8-+) 1 5 . . . Wxb2 White has an edge.
1 6.Wxd5 if6t 1 7. lLi e2 Wxa l 1 8 .Wd l
Wxa2+ White cannot easily untangle. 1 0.c4 %Yxd2t 1 1 . i>xd2
1 1 . .. Wxb 5 1 2 .ixb 5t id7 1 3 .ixe7 rtdxe7
1 4. lLi a3 ixb5 1 5 .lLixb5 a6
This endgame promises White absolutely
nothing.

9 ...e7
White should be aware what to do against
the rare:
9 . . . lLi bd7
This hasn't been mentioned by previous
authors, but is potentially critical as the
standard response for White doesn't work in
this case.
1 0. c4 Wxd2t

8 -*-
1 .t. B'AI U .t. .t.
' % -
ref . . ''l. . ,
6 B l l) 1 1 . .. b5 12.tll c3 bxc4

: f1 ' " 1 2 . . . lLi h S was the choice in a blitz game of

3 '
i\ill '
a strong grandmaster who has experience

2 8 f[j 8 t
in this line: 1 3 .ie3 b4 1 4 . lLi e4 ( 1 4 . lLi b S !N
tm
ttS-
. - - "=.lmi
rtdd7 1 5 .g4 lLi f6 l 6 . a3 b3;!; also looks good
l for White) 14 . . . f5 1 5 .lLi g3 lLi xg3 1 6. hxg3 if6
b d f g h
' " "' ' ,,, , . , /. " " "

a c e
1 7.ge l @d8 1 8 .@c2;!; Antidrome - }-Becerra,
Internet 20 1 0 .
1 l . lLi xd2!N
This looks like the right approach.
The standard l 1 . mxd2 looks a bit suspect
here: l 1 . . .b5 1 2 . lLi c3 bxc4 1 3 .ge l t
rtdd8 1 4. lLi h3 h 6 1 5 . lLi b 5 gb8!N ( a big
improvement over 1 5 . . . ia6 1 6 . lLi xd6;!;
Gasanov - Sutovsky, Zurich 2009) 1 6. lLi xd6
( 1 6.ixc4 ia6 1 7.lLixd6 ixd6 1 8 .ixd6
ixc4+) 1 6 . . . ixd6 1 7 .ixd6 gxb2t 1 8 .@c3
gxa2+ White has some compensation, but it
doesn't look enough to me.
l l . . . ie7
1 16 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

I 3.Lc4
s J.1-- m m s
7 . ...%
J..
a :-
.w K......-%
-&
- w
----Y-
White has a reasonable alternative in:
-

.-w -
1 3 .E:e l 'it>d8 1 4.ixc4 %
1 4. lli e4 hitting the d6-pawn has also been
6
sm 8 U. .t. U,'fl)
tried, and offers reasonable prospects:
1 4 . . . lli xe4t 1 5 .fxe4 ia6 1 6. lli f3 lli d7
l 7.e5t Pixton - Browne, Seattle 2002.
1 4 . . . lli bd7
ll Kll ll a
: llll' )ii
8 r .. 8q
n-JL- w
1 4 . . . ia6 has been played against me: 1 5 . b3!
2
lfesn-- "m
ixc4 1 6 . bxc4 lli bd7 1 7. lli h3;!; with lli b 5

1
and lli g5 on the cards, Antidrome - marcol,
Internee 20 1 0 .
l 5 . b3 lli b6 a b c d e f g h

..ti!.
m1. ...%.
%. Jr1A Wi1.. .;. %.1:
13.tLJc3

7s ...... .
This is the obvious choice for White, but I
-
6 , - % A have come up with an interesting novelty here:

..
%

.
1 3 .id3 ! ?N
5 . ., .
,,,,, . .
" . .;% ; 8% The point behind this move is linked to two

4
%
Hodgson games. In the first game Pete Wells

3 . 8m
. . .. ; 8

playing Black cascled before playing . . . lli d7,

.
%

2 J'""" . . ... " .. .. . .

1 m
a b c d e f
1 6 . lli h3 ! ?N
After 1 6 . lli e4? lli xc4t 1 7.bxc4 'ktid7 1 8 . lli h3
ia6+ Black's developing queenside play
gave him the better chances in Salimaki -
Schandorff, Saint Vincent 200 5 .
1 6 . . . ixh3 1 7 .gxh3t
White obtains play on the g-file.
1 3 ... tLJbd7
1 3 . . . 0-0 1 4.E:e 1 lli h 5 l 5 .E:xe7 lli xf4
1 6 . lli ge2! seems more pleasant for White,
Antidrome - weicp, Internet 20 1 0 .
14.i>c2 tLJ b6 15.ib5t i>d8 1 6Jdl ib7
17.tLJh3 tLJ bxd5 1 8,ghe l tLJxf4 1 9.tLJxf4 g5
20.tLJ d3 gcs 2 I .tLJe5 gfg 22.ic4t
Viciugov - Pap, Budva 2009.
B 1 2) 1 I . .. tLJ h5 1 2.ie3 f5
and Hodgson got a big advantage and won.
,z The second time around Lars Schandorff
z
played a quick . . . lli d7-e5 before cascling,
g h and managed to neutralize White's play for
a quick draw.
By switching our move order we are cutting
out Black's option of going for the immediate
. . . lli d7 as we can meet that with ixf5 winning
a pawn. That said, I have now found a major
improvement in the Schandorff game (see
line B l 2 1 below) , so it is not clear chat we
would want to avoid that variation anymore.
l 3 . . .f4!?
13 ... id7?! prepares an early ... b 5 , but chat
seems the wrong plan: 1 4 . lli c3 lli a6 l 5 . lli ge2
E:b8 1 6.E:hg l b5 l 7.cxb5 lli c7 l 8.a4 lli f6
l 9 . lli f4 g5 20.llie6 ixe6 2 l .dxe6 f4 22 .if2
lli xe6 23.E:ge l lli d4 24.ixd4 cxd4 2 5 . lli e4+
Antidrome - Aclus, Internet 2009.
13 ... 0-0 lli d7 1 4 . lli c3 transposes into
Hodgson - Wells; see the note to White's
1 4th in line B l 22 below.
1 4.if2 lli d7
With . . . llie5 co follow, the position is unclear.
As mentioned above, Black chooses between 1 5 ... lli hf6
B 1 2 1 ) 13 .. tll d7 and Bl22) 13 ... 0-0.
. 1 5 . . . fxg4? 1 6. fxg4 and the black king is in
for it in my opinion.
B I 2 1 ) 1 3 ... tll d7
1 5 .. . f4
SchandorfFs choice.
Inviting complications, but White can easily
I 4Jel <it>f7 avoid them and claim an edge.
1 6.if2 'Ll hf6

1 7.h4!?
Making the f4-pawn a target for a future
'Llh3 or 'Ll e2.
1 7.c l ! ?;!; also looks interesting. One of
Black's plans is ro play . . . 'Lle5, and after ixc5
there may be the possibility of the knight
1 5 .'Llh3
raking the f3- or c4-pawn with check before
This was the direction taken by all the old
Black captures the bishop. By stepping out
analysis by Wells, Davies and Palliser, but it
of the way of any future knight check, White
doesn't look very convincing.
cuts out that option.
1 5 . . . 'Ll e S 1 6.ie2
1 7 . . . a6
Wells gives this as an improvement over
This may be Black's best, preventing 'Ll b5
1 6.'LlgSt ixg5 1 7.ixgS h6 1 8 .ie3 id7
1 9 .ie2 g5 20.g3 f4 Y2-Y2 Hodgson -
and preparing . . . Ei:e8.
1 7 . . . Ei:e8 1 8 . 'Ll b S
Schandorff, Germany 200 1 .
1 7 . . . 'Ll e S 1 8 .ixc5;!;
1 6 . . . h6
1 8 .@c l
Palliser suggests that this is Black's best try,
1 8 . 'Ll ce2 b5 creates complications although
and he may well be right.
White's chances look preferable. But we
1 6 . . . Ei:f8 ? ! 1 7. f4 'Ll g4 1 8 .'LlgSt ixg5
might as well get the king safe first.
1 9 . fxg5;!;
1 8 . . . Ei:e8 1 9 . 'Ll ce2!?;!;
1 7. f4 'Ll g4 1 8 . 'Ll f2 'Llhf6 1 9 . 'Ll xg4 'Ll xg4
White wins the f4-pawn while Black lacks
20 .ig l
sufficient compensation.
Palliser prefers White, but I would evaluate
this position as equal (and so would my
16.gxfS
computer) .
118 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

It will not be a simple task for Black to regain
his material.
and then a player with the handle "DarcyLima"
played the same line against me on the internet
in 20 1 2. If I were a betting man then I would
say that it was the same person! His play
seems to be a lot more accurate than previous
attempts with Black.

14,gel!?
This move is slightly awkward to face.
believe that if White follows up as I suggest
then he should have good prospects.

1 4.id3
This was Hodgson's choice.
1 4 . . . lll d7 1 5 . f4
a b c d e f g h Denying . . . tll e5 possibilities.
1 6 J.H8
..
1 5 . . . lll df6 1 6.tll ge2
This may be Black's best. None of 1 6 . . . tll e5
1 7.ixc5 or 16 ... lll b6 1 7.id3 or 1 6 ... lll h5
1 7 . f4 lll df6 1 8 .ih3 offer him much
encouragement.

17.tiJh3;!;
It is going to take Black a while to recover
that pawn - if he manages to at all .

B l 22) 13 0-0
...

1 6 . . . lll g4!
Lima's idea and he showed his hand in an
internet game with me.
1 6 . . . g5 ? looks a terrible move and Hodgson
quickly built a winning position: 1 7.h3 (or
1 7. fxg5 !?) 1 7 . . . gxf4 1 8 .tll xf4 id7 1 9 . tll e6
ixe6 20.dxe6 ids 2 1 .ih6 !!e8 22.g4+
Hodgson - Wells, York 2000.
1 7.ig l id7 1 8 .h3 tll h6 1 9 .!!e l !!ae8 20 .if2
ids 2 Lg3
Antidrome - DarcyLima, Internet 20 1 2;
White may have a tiny pull, but it's not a lot.

14 . i.ds
..

1 4 . . . tll d7 isn't possible: 1 5 .ixc5

1 4 . . . if6 1 5 .lll b 5 ! is also problematic for Black.

1 4 . . . f7 1 5 .lll h3 lll d7 1 6. lll f4;!;

a b c d e f g h
This is a common choice, with which
Black neither contests the centre immediately

a b c d e f g h
nor challenges the vulnerable b2-pawn, but
instead focuses on development. Note chat chis
1 5 .tll ge2!N position can also be reached via the move order
I'm not sure about I 5 .id3 in chis position, as from the previous chapter of 2 . . . lll e4 3 .if4 c5
the bishop will become a target for . . . lll e5 and 4.d5 Was t 5 . c3 d6 6 . f3 lll f6 .
meanwhile the f5-pawn is securely defended:
1 5 . . . lll d7 1 6 . lll ge2 f4 1 7.if2 lll e5 and Black 7.e4 g6
gets his knight lodged on e5 and equalizes, Black quite often prefaces the fianchecco
Rodi - Lima, Guarapari 2006. with:
7 . . . lll bd7?!
I 5 .lll h3!N;!; also looks good, with the same
z
tlm &.,.. ",
plan of playing lll f4.
8 i. .t. -
... . . %.r
6 . . ..
7
1 5 ... tll d7
&.. -" '"""
... . .

1 5 . . . f4 1 6.if2 a6 ( 1 6 . . . lll d7? is not possible 5

here: I 7. lll b5 +-) 1 7. lll e4;!;
4 . .
L
! :
r
3 w -J

w -
j
1 6.tlif4! tlixf4
I 6 . . . lll hf6? 1 7.lll e6+-
2 J -0 "J
, Vtt
h
1 6 . . . lll df6 1 7.id3 looks much better for
a b c d e f g
White, with the black knights awkwardly
placed and lll e6 on the cards. This is slighcly inaccurate in my view as
it blocks the c8-bishop, giving White the
17.Lf4 additional option of using the h3-square for
Black is struggling co hold his d6-pawn. his knight. White can drop his knight from
h3 back co f2 at an appropriate moment, or
B2) 6 ... d6 occasionally it may j ump forward with lll f4
or lll g5.
1 20 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

8 . lD h3 ! ?
8 . lD d2 ! ? g 6 9 . lD h 3 White can play about
with the move order, but putting the knight
here still looks like the right plan to me.
9 . . . ltJ h S 1 0 . .ie3 lDe5 1 l .g4 lD f6 1 2 . lD f2 h6
1 3 .h4 .ig7 14 . .ie2 Wc7 1 5 . f4 and it was
starting to look very promising for White in
Moskalenko - Mateos Rozas, Sieges 2007.
8 . lD a3 g6 9 . lD c4 Wc7 1 0 .a4 .ig7 1 1 .lD e2
White of course does not have to put his
g l -knight on h3, but can aim fo r lD e2-
g3 . That said, it seems a shame not to take
advantage of Black's move order. l 1 . . . lD b6
1 2 . lD g3 Similar positions can arise in the
main line; White had an edge in Rahman -
Shen, Kuala Lumpur 2007.
8 . . . g6 9 ..ie2 .ig7 1 0 . 0-0
1 0 .a4 Wc7 l l . c4 lD h S 1 2 . .ic l Wa5 t
1 1 .Wi'd2
This is the main choice, keeping the door
1 3 . .id2 Wb6 1 4 .!!a2 0-0 1 5 .g4 ltJ hf6 open for a future 4Jh3.
1 6. ltJ f4;!; Agdestein - Scubberud, Calvi
2005. 1 1 . lD e2!?
1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 .Wc2 b5 1 2 . a4 b4 1 3 .lD d2 bxc3 Nakamura's choice - in fact he has played it
1 4. ltJ c4 Wc7 1 5 . bxc3 lD h S 1 6 . .ig5;!; three times according to my database. His
M. Gurevich - Niemela, Helsinki 1 99 2 . plan is to combine pushing his kingside
pawns with the knight coming to g3 to
8.tll d2 i.g7 9.tll c4 support them.
9 . .id3 is also a sensible way to develop,
allowing the knight to settle on the el-square:
9 . . . 0-0 1 0 . lD e2 Wd8 1 1 .Wc2 e6 1 2 .c4 lD a6
1 3 . a3 lD h S 1 4 . .ie3t Movsesian - Dyachkov,
Moscow 2007.

9 ... Wi'ds
9 . . . Wc7 1 0 .a4 0-0 1 I .Wd2 lD bd7 1 2 . g4!?
( 1 2 . lD h 3 lD b6 1 3 . lD f2 is of course also
possible) 1 2 . . . lD e S 1 3 . lD xeS dxe5 1 4 . .ie3t
Hall - Van den Doel, Germany 1 99 6 .

1 0.a4 0-0
It looks right to meet 1 0 . . . 4J bd7 with
l 1 .lD h 3 , with similar ideas to those we saw
after 7 . . . 4J bd7 above.
1 l . . . b6
1 1 . . . lD h S ? ! 12 ..ie3 b6 1 3 .g4;!; Nakamura -
Laxman, Internet 2006.
1 1 . . . lD a6 1 2 .g4 lDc7 1 3 . lD g3 b6 1 4 .Wd2
.ia6?! 1 5 . h4 lD d7 1 6.hS .ixc4 17 . .ixc4
looks very promising for White who can
 muster up an attack, Nakamura - Daskevics, 1 9.tl)xe6 fxe6 20.0-0 a6
Oslo 20 1 0 . 20 . . . dxe4 2 l .Wifxd8 xd8 22.fxe4 llixe4
1 2. lli g3 ia6 1 3 . h4 h5 1 4 .Wifd2 lli bd7 1 5 .ih6 23 .ic4
I 5 .id3N;!; may be better, when White holds
a small edge. 2 1 .ad l
1 5 . . . ixc4 1 6.ixc4 llie5 1 7.ie2 e6 1 8 .c4 Miladinovic - Milanovic, Bar 2008.
Nakamura - Lie, Oslo 2009; White holds
the initiative, alchough it is not clear if he has B3) 6 Wifb6
.

any real advantage if Black plays accurately.

Attacking the b2-pawn is by far Black's most
1 1 Jfos
popular option. White now has a choice
Teeing up . . . e6 whilst keeping an eye on the between defending the pawn with B3 1) 7 ..icl
h3-square. or offering a double pawn sacrifice with B32)
7.e4!?.
I 1 . . . lli bd7 1 2. lli h3 lli b6 1 3 . lli f2;!;
B3 1 ) 7 . .icl
1 2 ..ie2
White intends co play llih3 even if he has co This odd-looking move is actually a very
prepare it by playing g2-g4 first. sensible way co protect the b2-pawn; the
bishop steps out of the way so chat White can
12 tl) bd? 1 3.g4 tl)b6 14.llie3 .id? 15.aS
focus on playing e2-e4 and developing his
tlJ cS 16.tl)h3 e6 1 7.dxe6 J.xe6 ocher pieces. Now Black can simply develop
with B3 1 1) 7 .. g6 or go for the more critical
.

B3 12) 7 ... e6.

B3 1 1) 7 ... g6

1 8 dS
.

Practically forced, as otherwise Black will

find himself squeezed out of space.
1 22 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

8.e4 d6 9.c4 i.g7 10.ltie2! i b 7 20.fxg6 hxg6 2 1 .Wd3 tll f8 22.if4;!;

This is an interesting idea to remember. Rowson - Ziegler, Porto Mannu 2007.
Rather than developing the b l -knight to c3
and getting his knights tangled up aiming for 1 2.cxd5 0-0 13.i.e2 a6
the same squares, White sends the g l -knight 1 3 . . . tll bd7 1 4. 0-0 a6 1 5 .a4 White aims
to c3 ; later the b l -knight may head to c4 after straight for the standard plan of playing a2-
a likely cxd 5 . a4, tll a3 , ie3 , b l , and later b2-b4. l 5 . . . b8
1 6.'tt> h l Wd8 1 7.ie3 e8 1 8 .tll a3 h6 1 9 .Wd2
1 0 ... e6 'tt> h 7 20.ab 1 tll h5 2 l .g4 tll hf6 22.h3;!;
Black can also go for an idea involving . . . e5 McShane - Woj taszek, Goa 2002.
and .. .f5 , bur once he has got these moves in it
is not clear what he can do, and his g7-bishop
will be blocked in. As White I'd be tempted
to hold off castling until it becomes obvious
which way you should go. An example of how
play may develop is: 1 0 . . . 0-0 l 1 . tll ec3 e5
l 2 .ie2 tll h5

s ,i.; Y.l?u
j_ i'
76 "it)! -t"' B--r r
.....
. ..
.
.

er l.
5 %.8% %
.

.87. .87.
.

4
. . .

<?m ' w-
3 w
2 .1.p; !, j!j
j) ..
From here we once again see White execute
.

the standard plan mentioned in the previous

1 ltJV li
.

note.
b d f g h
. .
.

a c e
14.a4 tll bd7 15.tll a3 Wds 16.0-0 gbs
1 3 .g3 ( 1 3 .tll a3 ! ? also looks sensible: 1 3 . . . tll f4
17.i.e3 tll e8 18.Wd2 lti c7 1 9.gab l We7
[ 1 3 . . .f5 1 4.exf5;!;] 1 4.g3 tll xe2 1 5 .Wxe2 f5
20.b4
l 6.ie3 tll a6 1 7. tll ab5;!;) 1 3 . . . f5 1 4. exf5 gxf5
White has executed his plan and stands
1 5 .f4 tll f6 1 6. fxe5 dxe5 1 7. 0-0 tll a6 1 8 . tll d2;!;
better.
Richter - Elsness, Norway 2008.
20 .. ,ges 2 1 .i.fl b6 22.lti c4 b5 23.axb5 axb5
1 1 .tLlec3 exd5 24.lti a5 Wf6 25,gfcl gas 26.tll xb5 tll xb5
Black may try to do without this exchange:
27.i.xb5 cxb4 28.Wxb4 gds 29.tll c6 gf8
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2.ie2 tll bd7 ( 1 2 . . . a6 1 3 . 0-0 Wc7
30.i.d4 Wg5 3 I .i.xg7 @xg7 32.Wxd6+-
1 4.a4 tll bd7 1 5 .ie3 b8 1 6 .tll a3 exd5 1 7. cxd5
White has won a second pawn and Black
is similar to our main line: 1 7 . . . e8 1 8 .Wd2
soon called it a day in Nakamura - Lie, Gj ovik
tll f8 1 9 .ab l id7 20.b4 cxb4 2 1 .xb4 Wa5 ?
(rapid) 2009.
22.fb 1 +- Laznicka - Solodovnichenko,
Internet 2006) 1 3 . 0-0 e8 1 4.'tt> h l a6 1 5 . tll d2
B3 12) 7 ... e6
Wd8 1 6 .dxe6 fxe6 l 7.f4 b6 l 8 . tll f3 Wc7 l 9 . f5
 White's main plan here is to develop along
the lines of c3-c4 , llJ c3 , id3 , llJ ge2 and 0-0 ,
and then to aim for kingside play. In Laznicka
- Zubarev (line B 3 1 24) , we shall see a great
example of how effective this plan can be.
Black can try to disrupt this idea at an early
stage, and we'll have a look at the options
B3 1 2 1 ) 9 ... J.d6, B3 1 22) 9 ... c7!?, B3 1 23)
9 c4 and B3 1 24) 9 d6.
.

B3 1 2 1 ) 9 ...J.d6

a b c d e f g h
8.e4!
Surprisingly this move is a relatively new
idea. Previously 8 . c4 was often played here,
though that move looks a little awkward to
me, and the modern consensus is for White to
aim for quick development with the text move.

8 ... exd5
8 . . . d6 looks a little wet in combination
with . . . e6, and Kasparov soon took over the

a b c d e f g h
initiative in one of his exhibition games: 9 . c4
ie7 1 0 . llJ c3 e5 l l .id3 0-0 1 2 . llJ ge2 llJ bd7
1 3 .Wc2 a6 1 4 .ie3 We? 1 5 .g4 b5 1 6 .b3 bxc4 10.a3
l 7.bxc4 l:!b8 l 8 . llJ g3;!; Kasparov - Grup Equs, This move looks t o take advantage of Black's
Madrid (simul) 1 997. awkwardly-placed bishop and queen .

9.exd5 The standard move 1 O . c4 ? ! is a bit clumsy

here: 1 0 . . . 0-0 l l .id3 ie5 1 2 .Wc2 llJ a6
1 3 .a3 Wa5t and Black will play . . . llJ b4 next.
We really do not need to be getting involved
in all this.

1 0 ... 0-0 1 1 .J.d3!

White has scored well with this move,
setting up llJ e2 to block a check on the e-file.

l l .ie2 also looks playable: l l . . . a6 1 2 . llJ c4

We? 1 3 . a4 b6 1 4 .i.g5;!; Tu Hoang Thong -
Sadorra, Singapore 2002.

1 1 ..J::i e St
1 24 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

It's important to note that l 1 . . . tll xd5 ? Again Smirnov plays this move with good
isn't playable: 1 2 .tll c4 Wfc6 1 3 . tll x d6 Wfxd6 effect.
1 4.i.e4+-
1 6.a4 looks good too: 1 6 . . . i.h6 1 7.tll c4 i.xc l
1 1 . . .a6 1 2. tll c4 Wf c7 1 3 .a4 b6 1 4.i.g5 1 8 .xc l b6 1 9 .tll g3;!; Ivanisevic - Kotronias,
tll h5 1 5 .tll e2 h6 1 6.i.e3 e8 1 7.@f2 i.b7 Kavala 2007.
( 1 7 . . . i.xh2 ? is well met by 1 8 .d6! +-) 1 8 . tll xd6
Wfxd6 1 9 .c4 Wff6 20.g4 Wfh4t 2 1 . tll g3 tll f6 1 6 ... hS 1 7.a4 h4 1 8.tll e4 tll h7 1 9.f4
22.Wf d2;!; Ivanisevic - Solak, Vrnj acka Banja A. Smirnov - Gajewski, Plovdiv 2008.
200 5 .
B3 122) 9 ...W/c7!?
I l . . .h6 1 2 .tll e2 a6 1 3 . tll c4 Wfc7 and White has
a pleasant choice between 1 4.a4;!; A. Smirnov
- Dinev, Plovdiv 2008, and 1 4. tll xd6N Wfxd6
1 5 . c4;!;.

12.tll e2 i.f'8 13.tll c4

White switches the knight to the centre.

13 ... W/ds 1 4.tll e3 d6 1 5.0-0

a b c d e f g h
This is Black's latest move-order refinement.
He wants to play a plan involving . . . i.d6 but
he is electing to wait for White to play c3-c4
so that he won't get hit with tll a3-c4. Okay,
chis plan is very sophisticated, but it is far from
clear that Black really wants his queen on c7.
Personally I think here we can j ust get on with

b d f g h
our standard plan and have good chances of an
a c e
advantage.
1 5 ... g6
1 5 . . . tll bd7 1 6. tll g3 ! ? ( 1 6.a4 tll e5 1 7.i.c2 10.c4 i.d6 1 1 .i.d3 0-0
b6 1 8 .c4 a6 1 9 .h3 a7 2 0 . f4 tll g6 2 1 . tll g3;!; 1 1 . . . b5 tries to mix it up, but again Black finds
Damljanovic - Vuckovic, Subotica 2008) that his queen and bishop are targets: 1 2 .tll c3
I 6 ... tll e5 I 7.i.c2 b5 1 8 .a4 i.d7 1 9 .h3 c4 20.f4 bxc4 1 3 .i.xc4 0-0 I 4. tll b5 Wfb6 1 5 .tll e2 i.a6
tll g6 2 l . axb5 Wfb6 22 .Wff3 i.xb5 23. tll gf5 l 6.a4 i.xb5 1 7.axb5;!; White's bishop pair and
tll e7 24. tll d4 a6 2 5 . g4t A. Smirnov - Givon, greater space ensure an advantage, Moskalenko
Plovdiv 20 1 2 . - Llaneza Vega, Barcelona 2008 .

1 6.tll g3 Despite Black placing his bishop and queen

on the b8-h2 diagonal it is dangerous for him 1 7 . . . Wxf4 1 8 .Wd2
to grab the pawn with l l . . .ixh2, as he falls This looks highly prom1smg for White.
way behind in space and development. No Black will surely be in for a miserable time if
Black player has risked this, so let me j ust give he exchanges queens as it will be very difficult
you an example of how play could develop: for him to develop his queenside.
1 2 . lll e2 ig3t 1 3 . lll xg3 Wxg3 t 1 4.c;t>fl d6
1 5 . lll c3 lll a6 1 6 .id2--+ lll b4 1 7.We l t Wxe l t
1 8 .xe l t c;t>f8 1 9 .ib 1 id? 20.a3 lll a6 2 1 .if4
lll e8 22. lll e4+-

12.c!Lic3 a6 13.c!Lige2 ges

Black has also tried:
1 3 . . . b5 1 4.ig5 !
Taking the b5-pawn is possible, but would
give Black some queenside play. It all seems
a bit unnecessary when simple development
favours White.
l 4 . . . lll h5 l 5 .lll e4 lll f4?
This move is too ambitious. a b c d e f g h
Black should play a normal move like 14.%Vc2
l 5 . . . ie5 and settle for a slightly worse 1 4.a4 aims to stop Black expanding with
position: 1 6.Wd2 f5 l 7. lll 4g3 lll xg3 . . . b 5 , and has also been played with success:
1 8 .hxg3;!; White has a lead in development, 14 . . . ie5 (Black might consider 14 . . .ixh2 so
more space and good prospects of a future as to at least have something for his cramped
kingside attack. position, though 1 5 .c;t>f2t looks promising for

--- - -- -.v,
s .i A
White) 1 5 .Wc2 b6 1 6.id2 ib7 1 7.'it>f2 d6

6 ,%. ..... z " "

1 8 .h3 lll bd7 1 9.ie3 lll f8 20.f4 ixc3 2 1 . lll xc3
7 ic8 22 .id2t White's additional space

-%'"' "
provides an advantage, Martinovic - Vorobiov,
5
4
i ,,ef.lil?i"
--;, - ,,<
, ,, ;
Rijeka 20 1 0 .

3 z p-tl)-
14 ... bS!?N

C"{" 0 .
effj.. .
-0 This must be critical, hoping to show that

1 ; --- -
2
0
White should have taken the time to play

1 4.a4.
a b c d e f g h
l 6 . lll xf4!N
14 ... ie5 1 5 .ig5 h6 1 6.ixf6 ixf6 1 7. lll e4
ie7 1 8 . 0-0 d6 1 9 . lll 2g3 lll d7 20.ae l b5
l 6 . lll x d6 lll xd3 t l 7.Wxd3 was only slightly
2 1 . b3;!; led to a small but safe edge for White
better for White in Rahman - Konguvel,
in Moskalenko - Alsina Leal, Barcelona 20 1 1 .
Kolkata 2008.
1 6 . . . ixf4 1 7 .ixf4
1 5.i.gS bxc4 16.i.xc4 i.eS 17.0-0!;t
l 7 . d6 doesn't win a piece as Black has
This clever move secures an edge for White,
1 7 . . . Wa5 t .
based on the variation: 1 7 . . . ixh2t ? ! 1 8 .c;t>h l
1 26 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
ie5 1 9 . f4 id4 20.ae l ! With lll xd4 on the
cards, this is very strong for White.
B3 1 23) 9 c4 ..
a b c d e f g h
An important move to take into
consideration. Black is willing to sacrifice a
pawn for immediate activity.
I O.ixc4
Taking the pawn is most common, and
White's chances look preferable.
1 o .lll h3!?
I like this rarely played idea too. This move
pre-empts . . . ic5 and has the idea of taking
the c4-pawn with the queen's knight.
1 0 . . . ic5 l 1 . lll d2
l l .Wfe2t @d8 1 2 .Wfxc4 e8t 1 3 .ie2
d6 1 4.lll g5 ie3 offers Black decent
compensation.
l 1 . . . lll x d5
Black could consider 1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 . lll xc4
e8t 1 3 .ie2 Wa6 1 4. lll d2 and now:
a) 14 . . . W/b6 1 5 .b4;!;
b) 1 4 . . . d6 1 5 .b4!? Probably strongest,
though a bit murky. ( 1 5 . lll g5 followed by
lll ge4 is a safe route to an edge for White.}
1 5 . . .ixh3 1 6.gxh3 ib6 1 7.@fl ( 1 7. lll e4
lll xe4 1 8 . fxe4 xe4 1 9 .@fl xe2 20.Wfxe2
Wla4 2 l .if4;!;) 1 7 . . . xe2 l 8 .Wfxe2 W/a4;!;
c) l 4 . . . lll xd5 l 5 .lll e4;!;
1 2 .lll xc4 Wfe6t 1 3 .ie2 h6 1 4.lll f4
White has achieved a comfortable lead in
development.
14 . . . lll x f4 1 5 .ixf4 d5 1 6. b4! ixb4 1 7.cxb4
dxc4 1 8 .id6
This stops Black from castling, and it begins
to look really promising for White.
l 8 . . . lll c6 1 9 . 0-0 id? 20.c l 0-0-0
2 1 .ixc4+-
Efimov - Kotronias, Heraklio 2007; Black's
position has suddenly collapsed, his weak king
giving White a decisive advantage.
1 0 ...ic5
a b c d e f g h
I I .lll e2
Developing in this way seems most sensible.
l l .Wfe2t @d8 1 2 .@fl looks rather risky:
1 2 . . . e8 1 3 .Wfc2 ( 1 3 .Wfd3 ?! was played in
Rojas Keim - Gomez Jurado, Sabadell 2009, 15.\Wb3!N
and now 13 . . . d6N intending . . . tll bd7-e5 would 1 5 .1%xh2 Wc7 1 6.d6 Wxc4 1 7.ig500 Gomez
have offered Black ample compensation.) Ledo - Pena Gomez, Sanxenxo 2009.
13 ... d6 1 4 .tll e2 tll bd7 Here too, Black intends
. . . tll e5 with decent compensation. 15 ...\Wd6
1 5 . . . Wc7? 1 6.d6 Wxd6 1 7.ixf7t+-
1 1 ... 0-0
1 1 . . .d6 1 2 . tll d4 0-0 1 3 . 0-0 (or 1 3 .b4!? 1 5 . . .ic7 1 6.'1Wxb6 (or 1 6 . d6!?) 1 6 . . . ixb6
Ele8t 1 4 .f2 ixd4t 1 5 .Wxd4;!;) 13 ... tll bd7 1 7.ig5 and White has a huge lead in
1 4 .ib3 1%e8 1 5 .lifh l h6 1 6 . tll d2 a6 1 7 . tll e4;!; development.
Gruenenwald - Georges, Switzerland 2007.

l 1 . . .a5?! 1 2 .Wb3 Wa7 1 3 .ig5 d6 1 4.ixf6

16.tlib5 \Wc5 17.@fl a6
White is also doing well after 1 7 . . . ie5
if2t 1 5 . d l gxf6 1 6. tll d2 f5 l 7.ib5t liff8
1 8 .d6+- or 1 7 . . . id6 1 8 .tll xd6 Wxd6 1 9 .if4.
1 8 .Wa4 Stamenkovic - Sega, Santos 2006.

12.t[)d2 1 8.d6!?
White can also aim for an edge with: 1 2 .Wb3 The simpler l 8.1%xh2;!; is promising too.
Wd8 1 3 .ig5 h6 1 4 .ih4;!; Duijker - Dij khuis,
Hoogeveen 20 1 1 . 18 .. ,gxe2 1 9.Lflt @f8 20.lll d4! lll c6
21 .tlixe2
12 ... ges
1 2 . . . d6 1 3 .tll b3 tll bd7 1 4. tll xc5 Wxc5 B3 1 24) 9 ... d6 1 0.c4!
1 5 .ib3;!;

13.lll b3 .igl
1 3 . . . if2t 1 4 . fl Wc7 1 5 . xf2 Wxc4
1 6 .1%e l tll xd5 1 7.Wd4;!; Peelen - Trygstad,
Copenhagen 1 999.

14.lll bd4 .ixh2!?

Black has regained the pawn, but now his
lagging development will come into play.

10 ... .ie7
1 O . . . g6! ? aims for optimal bishop
development on the long diagonal, but to
achieve this Black must allow his king to be
a b c d e f g h
1 28 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
displaced: l l .'1We2t! @d8 1 2 .'1Wc2 ig7 l 3 .id3
lll a6 1 4. a3 !!e8t 1 5 . lll e2 @e7 1 6. lll bc3 lt>f8
1 7.0-0 lll b4 1 8 .axb4 cxb4t 1 9 .@h l bxc3
20.lll x c3 Movsesian - Kotronias, Moscow
2007.
1 O . . . if5 is met by White's standard plan:
l I .lll c3 lll bd7 1 2. lll ge2 h6 1 3 . lll g3 ig6
1 4.id3
1 1 .c3 0-0
1 1 . . . tll bd? 1 2 . f4 lll f8 1 3 .id3 lll g6 1 4 .tll f3
ig4 1 5 . 0-0 lll h4 1 6 .'\Wa4t id? ( 1 6 . . . lll d??
1 7. lll x h4 ixh4 1 8 .h3+- Stamenkovic -
Bortoloso, Vitoria 2007) l 7.'1Wc2
1 2.id3 ges
1 2 . . . lll e8 1 3 .lll ge2 lll d7 1 4. b3 Barsov -
Grigore, Sitges 2007.
1 3.ge2 bd7
14.b3
Preparing to meet . . . lll e5 with the retreat
ic2 to keep the bishop.
1 4. f4 is of course also possible: 14 . . . '1Wd8
1 5 . 0-0 a6 1 6. a4 b6 1 7.h3 tll f8 1 8 . g4
Madakov - Yumakhuzhin, Rybinsk 2008.
1 4 ...if8 1 s.o-o g6 1 6.h3 .ig7 1? ..id2 V;Yds
1 8.4 a6 1 9.a4
White has positioned all of his minor pieces
optimally and now needs to focus on the major
pieces.
19 ... f8 20.ga b6 2 1 .V;Yc2 h6 22.gafi ga7
23.g4 gae7 24.g3
White has the advantage with more space
and prospects of play on the kingside.
25.hxg4 .L:g4 26.fS!
A direct and effective move.
26 ... .id4t 27.@g2 hat 28.gxf3 @h7
29. ce4 .ie5 30.'IWcl
1-0
Laznicka - Zubarev, Polanica Zdroj 2006.
B32) 7.e4!?
As I mentioned at the start of the chapter,
this is a personal favourite of mine - White
sacrifices two pawns to draw the black queen
into his territory.
7 ...V;Yxb2
It is awkward for Black to decline the gambit
as White has played very directly:
7 . . . e6 ?! 8 . tll a3 exd5 9 . exd5
1 3 .@g3 ie7 1 4. tll d6t ixd6 1 5 .ixd6 tll c6
1 6. tll h3 b l 1 7. tll g5 lll d8 1 8 .ib5 xb5
After this relatively forced sequence, White
now missed a forced mate and went on to
draw the game. This is surprising for such a
highly-rated grandmaster, but it happens to
everyone!

9 . . . xb2
9 . . . d6 looks too passive, and this is
highlighted by a blitz game of mine. Whilst
these moves are not forced, it is totally clear
White has a huge advantage; compared to
some of the variations with ic 1 in line B3 1
he is effectively two tempos ahead. 1 0.ib 5 t
id7 1 1 .e2t @d8 1 2 .ixd7 lll bxd7 1 3 .tll h3
lll xd5 1 4 . 0-0-0 c6 1 5 .ig3 ie7 1 6.1::1 h e l
1::1 e 8 1 7.l!.ib l lll 7f6 1 8 .c4 lll c7 1 9 . tll g5 @d7 s.c!Lid2 Wxc3 9.J.c7!
20.tll xf7 1 -0 Antidrome - spark, Internet
20 1 1 .
1 0 .tll b5 tll xd5 1 1 .xd5 xa l t 1 2 .@f2

a b c d e f g h
If your opponent hasn't seen this before he
might get a shock at this point! This is the
starting position of this double pawn sacrifice
variation. I have done some serious analysis in
this line, greatly exceeding any previous work
on this variation. Whilst the bizarre nature
1 30 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

of the resulting positions makes them quite

hard to accurately evaluate, on the whole the
positions do seem to favour White. Certainly
from a practical viewpoint I would consider
White favourite, especially if he is familiar
with the following extensive analysis.

Black's main choices are now B32 1) 9 b6?!, ...

B322) 9 e6 and B323) 9 d6.

... ...

9 . . . g6?! was played in the first game in this

line, bur it doesn't seem to work and it has l l . . . b5
rarely been tried since: I O.l:'lcl We3t l l .ctJ e2 l l . . .d6 1 2 .ic3 Wa3 1 3 . ctJ c4 Wa6 1 4 . ctJ g300
ctJ a6 1 2. ctJ c4 Wh6 1 3 .if4 Wg7 1 4 .Wa4 g5 1 2 .a4 b4 1 3 . ctJ c4 Wd8 1 4 .d6 e6
1 5 .ie5 g4 1 6. f4 Wg6 1 7. ctJ g3 Chernyshov I 4 . . . ct:J c6 l 5 . dxe7 ixe7 l 6 . ct:J d6t00
- Grischuk, Dagomys 200 5 ; Black is totally 1 5 . ct:J f4 ct:J c6 1 6.ib2
passive and White's advantage is significant. With e4-e5 on the cards.
1 6 . . . g5 1 7. ctJ d3 ig7 1 8 . ctJ xc5 0-0 1 9 .Wd2
B32 1) 9 b6?!
... ctJ h 5 20.e5

Black seems to be struggling in this line.

l OJ'k l !
This move i s White's best; the reason is
that if Black retreats with . . . Wa5 , he cannot
subsequently play . . . b5 as the c5-pawn would
drop to Elxc5.

I 0 . ctJ e2
I played this move in a London League
game against Bob Eames, who kindly told
me after the game that 1 0 .l:'lc l is White's 20 . . . ct:J f4?
best. The reason I say "kindly told me" is This allows White to break open the h-file.
because the next year he advised his good 20 .. . f6! 2 l .id3t
friend Dave Ledger to try this line against 2 1 .h4 f6 22.hxg5 fxg5
me in Hastings, and I got a chance to try out 22 . . . fxe5 23 .id3t
the improvement - I am not quite sure what 23 .id3 ctJ xd3t 24.Wxd3 h6 2 5 .Wg6 Elf4?
Bob's logic was there, but thanks anyway! 25 . . . '1We8 26.Elxh6 Wxg6 27.Elxg6 Elf4
Despite the substandard knight move the (27 . . . Elf5 2 8 . ctJ e3) 28 .l:'lc l iif7 29.Elxg5
position remains interesting, so I have 26 .Elxh6 ct:J d4 ?
included the game. 2 6 . . . Elh4 27.Wh7t +-
1 0 . . . '1Wa5 27.ixd4 Elxd4 28 .Wh7t iif8 29 .Elg6!
10 . . . '1Wa3 l l .l:'lb l ia6! 1 2 .l:'lb3 Wa5 1 3 .Wc 1 00 1 -0 R. Pert - Eames, London 2009 .
l l .ie5
 .i -.t-
.--- - -%-. 8% . ', , , ;
I S . . . Wb2 is no improvement for Black:
8 - - - 0 %j'ef""' Y.%j'ef'
. %-_,,%_ .t. r. .t. r. .. %_
. . %.. .t.
" " Y. 1 6. ll:J e2 Wes 1 7.ibSt d8 1 8 .0-0 g6
1
%1'-
1 9 .if4 WhS 20.ll:Jg3 Wh4 2 1 .Wd2 h6
6

%,,
22.eS !+- Pavlovic - Aleksandrov, Vrnjacka

5 L' -
Banj a 200 S .

1 6.:gc3

4 B,
White plays a great game and never lets his
opponent get round to solving his problems

'" %.
, , J,%,
with the queen. I 've included the rest of the

)!. . . . . : J
game as it is well worth playing through.

m ii= :s
0
1 6 . . . Wb2 1 7. lLi e2 bS 1 8 .ib3 Wa3 1 9 . ll:J d4 g6
20.eS dxeS 2 I .d6 Wb4 22.l'k4 Wxc4 23 .ixc4
a b c d e f g h exd4 24.Wb3 e6 2 S .ixe6 E!:a7 26 .ixf7t
I O f;Ye3t
..
:gxf7 27.We6t ie7 2 8 . 0-0 0-0 29.dxe7 :ge8
If the black queen stays on the queenside it 30 .Wd6 ll:J bd7 3 1 .:ge l c4 32.ib4 d3 33.Wxa6
will soon be in danger again: l':lb8 34 .Wd6 E!:c8 3 S .ic3
1 0 . . . Wi'aS I Lies ia6 1 -0 Trent - Hebden, Southend 2006.
I Ld6? 1 2 . .ic3 Wi'xa2 ( 1 2 . . . Wi'a3 1 3 .ll:J c4
Wi'xa2 1 4.:ga l +-) 1 3 .ic4 Wa3 1 4 . ll:J b l +- 1 1 .ll:i e2 d6 12.ll:ic4 f;Yh6 13.f;Ya4t!
1 2 . .ic3 Wa3 And the b6-pawn will drop.
1 2 . . .ixfl doesn't really work: 1 3 .ixaS ixg2
I 4.ic3+- and Black will not be able to 13 ... id7
keep enough material for the queen, Bhat - I 3 . . . ll:J bd7? I 4.ll:J xb6+-
Panchanathan, Internet 2006.
1 3 . ll:J c4 ixc4 1 4 .ixc4 14.f;Ya3 a6 15.tlixb6 ga7 16 ..ixb8 gb7

-
;:: " " %
-:'0.
White's chances are clearly preferable.

-
8
% "/ .i.e 1 -
81 . 1
Y. Y.
1

..' . /,. ;.lj',.8%. .;/ \',,.,,.,;J, ;;::;(S

. "'. . .,
...
6 & ? ,: ?
; .J - ,r . /.::::

5 - L'
/ ;

: ii ,,
2 ':ii;"
b d f g h
. . ! . ,
ai .
=,.,, L
!o
b d f g h
a c e

a c e
1 4 . . . d6
1 4 . . . e6 I S . ll:J e2! exdS 1 6.ixf6 dxc4 1 7.Wd S ! 17.tlia8!!
also looks much better for White: l 7 . . . ll:J c6 This is one of the favourite moves I have ever
1 8 .:gd l played. The idea is to follow up with lLi c7t
1 4 . . . e S I S .Wd2 d6 1 6.:gb a driving out the black king for White to attack.
I S .id2 a6 I remember when I spotted it at the board
1 32 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

- I couldn't believe my eyes that playing my

8 -j_ . . '
. -
.-,
knight into the corner could be such a strong
7 . . . . % . . . - ,. .. . .%.
6 if
. - ',. , . , ;
move. 7.

17 ... e6
5 1u.
: a %""-i!-
l 7 . . . Ei:xb8 1 8 . tll c7t @d8 1 9 .Wi'aS +-

,,. , . , P,

.. . . ...... .
1 8.c!ic7t @ds 19.c!ixa6 exd5 20.e5 dxe5
2 t!J

ttJ t!J rl!1..
:%'0
1 ,B BiiW:J.B
2 1 .Wi'aSt @cs 22.he5 ga7 23.f4 Wi'g5 .. %

24.Wi'c3 c6 25.b4 d4 26.xd4 Wi'xf4

27.c!ixc6 gxa2 28.e5 'i!Ya4 29.c!i b4 ga3
30.a6t @d7 3 1 .'i!Yd2t @e6 32.cSt @xe5
33.f4t @e4 34.gc4#
R. Pert - D . Ledger, Hastings 20 1 0.
B322) 9 e6 .
a b c d e f g h
1 1 .l"i:b l !N
This move is far stronger than 1 1 .El:c 1 ?
because the rook is going to the 3 rd rank
and on the c3-square it can be attacked by
. . . tll xd5 , whereas that is not the case on the
b3-square: 1 1 . . . exdS 1 2 .Ei:c3 Wa6 1 3 .Ei:e3
( 1 3 .exdS lll xd5-+) 1 3 . . . ie7+ Walton -
G . Buckley, Coventry 2007.
1 1 . . . exd S ? !
Black should probably prefer l 1 . . . c 4 1 2 .dxe6
and:
a) 1 2 . . . fxe6 1 3 . tll xc4 Wc5 1 4. tll d6t;!;
b) 1 2 . . . WfcS 1 3 . exf7t @xf7 1 4.if4 c3 ?
1 5 . tll xc3 Wfxc3 1 6 .Ei:cl Wf d4 l 7.El:xc8+-
c) 12 . . . dxe6 1 3 . c!i xc4 ib4t 1 4.@f2 ic5t
l 5 . tll d4 Wf c3 1 6. tll d6t @e7 1 7 . tll 6b5
ixd4t 1 8 .Wi'xd4 Wfxd4t 1 9 .tll xd4 tll bd7

b d f g h
20 .ie2;!;
a c e
1 2 .Ei:b3 Wa6
I consider this as an important option for
Black and one we should be ready for. There
are very few games in this line so much of the
analysis below has not been tested in practice,
but I have spent a lot of time on this variation
to ensure that the analysis can be trusted.

I O.c!ie2 'i!Yd3

.
Swinging the queen over to the kingside with
1 O . . We3 ?! seems wrong when the white bishop
can come back to the f4-square: l 1 .tll c4 Wi'h6
1 2 .if4 g5 1 3 .tll d6t ixd6 1 4.ixd6;!;

1 0 . . . Wi'a3
 this is not just possible but very strong - 1 2 .ie5 ! ?
perhaps even winning. This was the first idea I looked at, preparing
1 3 . . . l'll xd5 l'll c3 .
Virtually forced as l'll c3 threatens to win the 1 2 . . . exd5
queen. 1 2 . . . ic5 1 3 .l'll xc4 Wxd l t ( 1 3 . . . Wxc4
1 4 . l'll f4 l!Mc6 1 5 .ib5 Wxc7 1 6. t'li xd5 l!Md6 1 4 .l'll c3) 1 4.E:xd l and White has
1 7.l'll c4+- compensation for the pawn.
White will quickly develop his rooks to the 1 3 .l'll c3 We3t 1 4.We2 Wxe2t 1 5 .ixe2 dxe4
e-file and mate looks likely. At chis exact moment White may be four
pawns down, but the compensation is
I Ub l ! obvious.
As against 1 0 . . . Wa3 , White threatens E:b3
which would be close to winning.

1 1 . .. c4!
It may not be obvious to the unprepared
player, but this move is close to being forced.

1 1 . . .exd5 1 2.E:b3 l!Ma6 1 3 .exd 5 ! transposes to

the note to Black's 1 0th move above.

% '""-0 , z ..-::
8 i. J.. -
%

7
6
.:1-
% -m
%.... fm' - - %-1
IY-m
r.- Y,
1 6 . t'li b 5 ! ?

11$11$ !1(
,,,,,

1 6.ixf6 ! ? exf3 ( 1 6 . . . gxf6 1 7. l'll dxe4 f5

11$
1 8 .l'll f6t @d8 1 9 .ixc4) 1 7.ixf3 gxf6

: 11$11$ f11$ !11$ 11$11$
1 8 . t'li b 5 ( 1 8 .l'll xc4 t'li c6 1 9 .l'll b5 @d8

11$'!1$'w.-
20.t'li bd6) 1 8 . . . t'li a6 1 9 .l'll xc4

3 11$
1 6 . . . l'll a6
% '"//,
- - - -- - j
l 6 . . . exf3 1 7.l'll c7t @d8 1 8 .l'll xf3 t'li c6
2 8 m mtt:Jm 8 eftJ

1 9 . l'll xa8 ic5 20 .ic7t rJle7 2 I .ixc4 d5

m a rilfm . a
22.ie2;:l;
1 6 . . . t'li c6 1 7.ixf6 gxf6 1 8 . l'll c7t @d8
a b c d e f g h l 9 .l'll xa8;:l;
I 7. l'll xc4 d5 1 8 . t'li cd6t ixd6 I 9 . l'll xd6t @e7
12.i.f4!
20.t'lixb700
This move looks totally bizarre and I had
Although White has compensation in
been aware of this position for some months
all these lines, it is not clear chat he has any
before I realized it may well be the way to go.
advantage.
The idea is to follow up with E:c l and either
E:c3 or l'll c3 , while l'll g3 is also on the cards.
White's plan seems slow, but it is effective and
12 ... exdS
I have looked at various ocher possibilities:
it puts the onus on Black to come up with
something.
12 . . . c3 ? 1 3 .l'll xc3 Wxc3 1 4 .E:c l +-
1 34 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

1 2 . . . icS ? ! 1 3 .E:c l ;!; and White threatens E:c3 . position remains somewhat murky: l S . E:xc3
ixc3 1 6.Wc l ixd2t 1 7.Wxd2 0-0 1 8 .ieS
1 2 . . . ia3 ?! 1 3 .lll g3 Wc3 1 4.ixc4;!; d6 1 9 .ixf6 gxf6 20.Wf4
l S .lll bS Wes
1 2 . . . lll h S ? ! 1 3 . lll g3 lll xf4 1 4.ixd3 cxd3 l S . . . Wb6 1 6.lll c7t @f8 l 7.lll xa8+- picks up
1 S . lll c4 lll xg2t 1 6.@fl ;!; the a8-rook with tempo.
1 6 . lll d6t lt> f8
1 2 . . . lll a6 1 3 .E:c l lll h S ( 1 3 . . . ib4 1 4.lll c3 1 6 . . . @e7 1 7.ixc4;!;
Wd4 l S . lll b S Wb6 1 6.E:xc4 0-0 1 7.E:xb4
lll xb4 l 8 . lll c7 lll h S ? l 9 .lll c4+-) 1 4.lll c3 (or
1 4 . lll g3 !?) 1 4 . . . Wd4 ( 1 4 . . . lll x f4 1 S .ixd3;!;)
l S .lll bS Wes ( 1 S . . . Wb6 1 6.lll xc4) 1 6.E:xc4
Wb6 1 7.ieS

1 3.kl

1 7.a3
White can also consider I 7.ixc4 ! ? with the
idea: I 7 . . . dxc4? I 8 .E:xc4+-
1 7 . . . ixd2t
I 7 . . . ixa3 I 8 .lll 6xc4;!;
1 8 .Wxd2 lll c6 1 9 .lll fS lll e8 20.WxdS WxdS
2 1 .exdS;!;

14.lll c3

13 . . . dxe4? 1 4.E:xc4 lll c6 l S .lll c3 lll eS 1 6.ixd3

lll xd3 t 1 7.lt>fl +-

1 3 . . . lll h S 1 4. lll c3 lll xf4 1 S .ixd3 lll xd3t

1 6.@fl lll a6 17 .E:b l;!;

1 3 . . . ib4
Black looks for quick development.
1 4. lll c3 Wd4
Black can give up his queen with 1 4 . . . Wxc3
but White should be better, although the
 White keeps an edge against all the 1 8 . . . c3 1 9 . 0-0 ic5 t 20.Wh l cxd2 2 1 .ixd2
alternatives: Wa3 22.gxc5 Wxc5 23 .if4 d5 24.ixb8 id?
2 5 . ll'l c7 d4 26.Wd2
1 4 . . . ll'l a6 1 5 . exd5 ib4 1 6. ll'l b 5 Wa5 1 7.ixc4;!;
19J'hc4 d5 20,gc2 dxe4 2 1 .0-0 exf3
14 . . . lll h5 l 5 .ie3;!; 22.lLixB
With two pawns for the exchange, material
14 . . . Wa5 1 5 . exd5 ib4 1 6 .We2t Wd8 is roughly level, but the misplaced black king
1 7.Wxc4;!; offers some encouragement to White.

15.lLibS Wa5 16.lLic7t @8 B323) 9 ... d6

16 . . . e7 1 7. exd5 c3 1 8 .We2t Wd8 1 9 . ll'l b3
c2t 20.Wf2 Wb6t 2 1 .We3 Wxe3 t 22.Wxe3 d6
23.gxc2;!;

a b c d e f g h
1 0.gb l !
I believe this i s strongest.

1 o . ll'l e2!?
This move works well against ... We3 , but the
problem is that it gives Black an additional
It was only after carrying out the above analysis option:
that I discovered that there had been an email 1 0 . . . Wd3 !
game which followed this route: Black should take this option although the
1 7.ll'l xa8 ! ? c3 1 8 .f2 position remains murky.
1 8 .gc200 1 0 . . . We3 1 1 .gb l transposes into a very
1 8 . . . ic5 t 1 9 . e2 favourable line for White - see 1 0 . . . We3 t in
1 9 .W e l ib4! is a repetition of moves. the following note.
1 9 . . . cxd2 20 .Wxd2 Wxd2t 2 1 .Wxd2 ib4t 1 1 .gb l
22.d3 dxe4t 23.fxe4 ll'l c6 24. ll'l c? ia3 1 1 .g c l ll'l bd7 1 2 .gc3 Wa6 1 3 . ll'l d4!? cxd4
25 .gc3 ib4 26.gc l ia3 27.gc3 1 4.ixa6 dxc3 gives Black enough material
Yi-Yi Klausen - Serradimigni, email 2007. for the queen.
l 1 .ll'l g3 We3t l 2.ie2 ll'l a6+
17 ... dxc4 18.lLixa8 lL! c6 l l . . .b6
1 36 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
1 2 .gb3
1 2 . lli g3 We3t 1 3 .ie2 id? ( 1 3 . . . lli a6
1 4.Wa4t lli d7 1 5 . lli f5) 1 4. lli c4! ( 1 4.Wc2?
g6 1 5 .lli c4 Wf4 1 6.id3 ig7 1 7. lli e2 Wh4t
1 8 .g3 Wh6-+ and White was running out of
ideas in A. Smirnov - Maslak, St Petersburg
2007.) 1 4 . . . Wc3t ( 1 4 . . . Wh6 1 5 . 0-0t)
1 5 .'it?f2 b5 1 6.gc l Wd4t 1 7.Wxd4 cxd4
l 8 . lli a3 a6 l 9 . lli c2 White is regaining one
pawn and will have decent compensation for
the remaining pawn deficit.
1 2 . . . Wa6 1 3 .ixb8 gxb8 1 4. lli c3
1 4. lli d4!? Wb7 1 5 .ib 5 t ( 1 5 . lli c6 gas
1 6. lli c4 We?) 1 5 . . . id? 1 6.ic6 ixc6
1 7.llixc6 offers White some compensation,
but maybe not enough.
1 4 . . . Wb? 1 5 . lli c4
1 5 .ga3 is well met by 1 5 . . . a5+.
1 5 . . .id? 1 6.eS dxe5 1 7. lli xe5 g6
l 7 . . . a6! ? is also interesting.
1 8 . lli e4!
White's compensation was eventually
enough for a draw in Stavrianakis - Tukhaev,
Chalkida 2009.
10 l'ilfd7
...
This is now considered the main move, as
Black frees the f6-square for his queen to drop
back to.
1 0 . . . lli bd? 1 1 .lli e2 We3 1 2. lli c4 Wh6 1 3 .Wa4
g6 1 4. h4! (Black is able to allow 1 4 . lli b6 as
the time spent pocketing the rook gives him
enough time to complete his development:
1 4 . . .ig? l 5 . lli xa8 0-0 1 6.Wc2 lli e5 l 7 . lli c3
id? 1 8 .Wd2 Wh4t 1 9 .Wf2 Wh6 20 .Wd2 with
a repetition of moves) 14 . . . ig? l 5 .ia5 g5
1 6.id2 Wg6 1 7.hxg5t
1 0 . . . We3t l 1 . lli e2 lli a6 1 2 . lli c4 Wh6 1 3 .ia5
g5 1 4. lli g3 g4 ( 1 4 . . . Wg6 1 5 .eS!t; 1 4 . . . ig?
l 5 . lli e3t)
a b c d e f g h
1 5 .gxb?! ixb7 ? 1 6. lli f5 1 -0 Miladinovic
- Gozzoli, Nancy 2008; a very impressive
victory. The reason for Black's resignation
is lines such as 1 6 . . . Wg5 1 7. lli cxd6t exd6
l 8.ib5t lli d7 1 9 .ixd?t 'it?xd7 20 .Wa4t
'it?c8 2 1 .We8t with mate next move.
1 0 . . . b6?! l I .i b 5 t id? 1 2 .Wa4 Wa5 ?
1 3 .Wxa5 bxa5 1 4.ic4+- and White picks up
the b 8-knight, Trent - Kotronias, Liverpool
2008.
I O . . . tt.J a6 I l .ixa6 ( I l .ib5 t ! ? id? 1 2 . tD e2
'1fe3 1 3 . tt.J c4 Wg5 1 4 .ixa6 bxa6 1 5 . 0-0 is
another way to obtain good compensation
for the pawns) 1 l . . . bxa6 1 2 . tD e2 ! ? ( 1 2 .Wa4t
may lead to a draw, but White should not
be satisfied with that: 1 2 . . . id? 1 3 .Wxa6 g6
1 4. tt.J e2 Wc2! 1 5 .Wb7 gc8 1 6.gb2 Wa4 1 7. tD c3
Wd4 I 8 . tt.J e2 Wa4 I 9 . tD c3 with a repetition of
moves) 1 2 . . . Wa3 1 3 .Wc2 id? 1 4.gb3! ia4
( 1 4 . . . Wa4 1 5 . tt.J c3 Wd4 1 6.Wb l ) 1 5 .gxa3
ixc2 1 6. f2 The misplaced bishop on c2
gives White the advantage.
1 1 .J.hs
This keeps the d3-square covered and intends
tD e2 hitting the queen.
1 l . . .a6! ?N 1 2 . tD e2
1 2 . . . Wf6
1 2 . . . We3 1 3 . f4!? is an enterprising idea
aiming to trap the queen: 1 3 . . . axb5
( 1 3 ... Wa3 1 4.ic4 b6 [ 1 4 ... b5 1 5 .gb3
Wxa2 1 6. tD c3 nets the queen] 1 5 .gb3 Wa5
1 6.e5;!;) 1 4.gb3 Wxb3 1 5 .axb3 tD a6 1 6.ia5
b4 I 7 . tt.Jc4t
1 3 .Wa4 g6
1 3 . . . e6 1 4. 0-0 ie7 1 5 .f4 0-0 1 6.ic4 and
White threatens e4-e5 .
1 4. 0-0
1 4. tt.J c4?! axb5 1 5 .Wxa8 bxc4 1 6.ixb8 ih6
1 7 .ixd6 0-0+
1 4 . . . ih6
1 4 . . . ig? 1 5 .f4 0-0 1 6.id3 ga7 ( 1 6 . . . e5
1 7. f5t) 1 7. tD f3 b5 1 8 .Wa5 ih6 1 9 .e5 dxe5
20.fxe5 Wg7 2 1 .@h l
1 5 .f4 0-0 1 6.id3
1 6 .e5 ? is too early: 1 6 . . . dxe5 l 7 . tt.J e4 Wh4+
1 6 . . . ga?
This move looks a bit clumsy, but it may
be Black's best choice as he has to try to get
organized somehow. The immediate e-pawn
breaks don't seem to work out too well for
him:
a) 16 . . . e5 1 7 . fxe5 Wg5 ( 1 7 . . . Wxe5 1 8 .tt.J c4
Wg5 1 9 .Wc2 b5 20.tDxd6 c4 2 1 .ixc4 bxc4
22.tDxc4 a5 23.gb3 ig7 24.gg3) 1 8 .ixd6
'1fe3t 1 9 .h l Wxd3 20.ixf8 ixd2 2 1 . e6
b) 1 6 . . . e6? l 7.ixd6+-
l 7.e5 dxe5 1 8 .tt.J e4 Wh4
1 9 .g3 !
1 38 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trom p owsky

l 9.fxe 5 ? b5 20 .Wa5 c4 2 l .ic2 xc7 1 3.0-0!N

22.Wxc7 ie3t 23.@h l ib6-+ This time it
is White's queen which gets caught out! I'm
starting to lose count of how many times
someone loses their queen in this variation!
1 9 . . . WhS
l 9 . . . Wh3 20 .Wc2 (not 20.fxe5 ? ie3t
2 1 .@h l b5-+ nor 20.ixb8 ?! lli xb8 2 1 .fxe5
ie3t 22.@h l lli d7 23 . lli f4 ixf4+) 20 . . . exf4
2 1 .lli xf4 ixf4 22.ixf4
20 .ixb8 lli xb8
20 ... b S 2 1 .Wc2 lli xb8 22 .Wxc5
2 1 .d6 b 5 ? ! 22.xb 5
Amazingly this obvious move is a novelty.
l 3 . f4 has been tried, but it looks premature:
1 3 . . . ig7 ( 1 3 . . . Wh4t! ? N 1 5 .g3 Wh5 may be
slightly more accurate) 1 4 . e S ? ! White really
needs to play a couple of developing moves
before this expansion . ( 1 4. 0-0! returns to our
main line.) 14 . . . Wi'h4t 1 5 .g3 Wh5 1 6. lli e4
0-0 1 7. exd6 exd6 1 8 . lli xd6 lli f6+ and it
was clear that White had overextended in
Miladinovic - Volokitin , Murska S obota
2008.

.
.. . ... . -
.- r l
8
7 . . - r
1 3 . lli c4 ! ?

6 -.,Y.. n--.
Th i s has been a popular choice in the few

5 . ... %.
, . games which have reached this position.
Despite White winning a couple of nice

4 ,.... 3.lhD
games, I am slightly wary of this idea.

3 .i. wr
Although White still has excellent practical
.

2 8 tt:J. . 3
%
chances, the knight on c4 provides a

1 .
target for Black's queenside pawns and the

1.m ,
position can become murky.

b d f g h
% %

a c e

This wacky position is typical of this

variation. Obviously a lot of this is not forced
but it does give a flavour of what might happen
and some of the ideas which White should try
to implement.

12.llie2 Y:Vf6

a b c d e f g h
1 3 . . . ig7
l 3 . . . a6!N looks like a good move to me,
calling White's bluff and saying that if you
want to win some material you are going to
have to misplace all your minor pieces to do
so. 1 4. lli b6 axb5 1 5 .llixa8 and:
a) 1 5 . . . lli a6 ! ? 1 6.xb5 Wh4t ( 1 6 . . . ih6
1 7.0-0 0-0 1 8 .ia5t followed by ic3)
1 7.g3 Wh5 1 8 . lli f4t
 b) 1 5 . . . b4? 1 6 . .ixb8 llixb8 1 7.Wa4t
c) 1 5 . . . .ih6 1 6 . .ixb8 lli xb8 1 7 . lli c7t;!;
d) 1 5 . . . Wg5 1 6 . 0-0 We3 t 1 7.@h l Wa3
1 8 .ixd6 exd6 1 9 . lli c7t @d8 20.llixb500
1 4 .e5
14 . .ia5 ? 0-0 1 5 ..ic3 Wh4t 1 6.g3 .ixc3t+
1 4 . 0-0!? Now ia5-c3 really will be an
option with no annoying . . . Wh4t to worry
about. 1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .ia5 a6 1 6 . .ic3 Wg5
1 7.id2 Wh5 1 8 . .ixd7-+
1 4 . . . dxe 5! ?
1 4 ... Wg5 1 5 . 0-0 dxe5 1 6.f4 W h 5 1 7.b3-+
Bosiocic - Fercec, Sibenik 2008.
1 5 . .ixe5 Wh4t 1 6 . .ig3!
1 6.g3 Wh6 1 7.d6 e6 1 8 ..ixg7 Wxg7 1 9 . 0-0
0-0+
1 6 . . . Wh5
After 16 . . . Wg5 1 7.h4 Wf5 1 8 . lli e3 Wf6
l 9 . lli g4 Wf5 20 . .ia4! the black queen is in 1 5 . . . e 5 1 6.dxe6 Wxe6 1 7 . .ixd6;!;
trouble.
1 7.h4 a6N 1 6.e5 W/f5 17.id3 W/h5 1 8.c!lig3 Wlg4
1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8 . .if4 Wf5 l 9 . g4 ic3 t 20.@f2 1 9.exd6 e6 20.dxe6 Wfxe6 2Uel Wfxa2
.id4t 2 1 .Wg2 Wxd5 22.llic3 We6 23.e l
was excellent for White in Alf - Gorokhov,
email 2007.
1 8 .ixb8 axb5 1 9 .g4 Wh6 20.g5 Wh5 2 1 . lli g3
bxc4 22 . .if4;!;
And the black queen is trapped; but despite
this there is still plenty of play left in the
position as Black has a whole host of minor
pieces and pawns to pay for his queen .

13 ... ig7
1 3 . . . a6 1 4.Wa4 transposes to the note to
Black's 1 1 th move above.

14.4
1 4 . .ia5 is perhaps premature: 1 4 . . . 0-0
1 5 .ic3 Wh4+

1 4 ... 0-0 15.c!lif3

Now all of White's pieces are well positioned
22 ... c!li c6 23.ic4 Wla4 24.ib3 Wlb5
and he is ready to bring his bishop from c7 to
25.ixf7t
c3, or to play e4-e5 .
1 40 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom powsky
White has the option of a repetition of
moves with 2 5 .c4.
25 ... gxfl 26.gxb5 axb5 27.f5 gal 28.e3
gxel t 29.xel ti de5 30.lig5;!;
Conclusion: This chapter featured various
contrasting lines. In line A) 4 . . . lt:l f6 5 . dxc5 ! ?
White obtains comfortable development and
good control of the centre, and is slightly
better.
Turning to the more critical 4 . . . 1Wa5 t 5 . c3
lt:l f6 6.d5 1Wb6, I offered you a choice. After
defending the b2-pawn with the solid B3 1 )
7.c l , White has a simple plan o f development
and good chances for a small advantage.
But if you fancy ruffling your opponent's
feathers then sacrificing two pawns with B32)
7.e4! ? looks interesting. A lot of the analysis
of this line is my own work, due to the lack of
games in this variation. This analysis has been
built up over several months and years and so
hopefully will add significantly to the theory
of this line. Whilst it is impossible to analyse
everything, this provides a good start and in
my opinion should be more than enough to
tempt you to give this line a whirl.
Chapter ?
a b c d e f g h

2 ... d5 3.ixf6

1 .d4 f6 2.J.g5 d5 3.J.xf6

A) 3 ... gxf6!? 143

B) 3 ... exf6 4.e3 J.d6 5.g3 c6 6.J.g2 147
Bl) 6 ... 0-0 7. e2 148
B 1 1) 7 ...b6 149
B 1 2) 7 ...J,f5 149
B13) 7 ... d7 1 50
B2) 6 ... f5! 7. e2 151
B2 1) 7 ... J.e6 151
B22) 7 ... d7 1 52
1 42 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
I .d4 c!ll f6 2 ..ig5 d5
This move is a solid option for Black, who
is just looking to get himself into the game
without anything going wrong. It can be a
frustrating move for a Trompowsky player
to face, as it is more difficult to create a free
flowing initiative against this move than it is
against many of Black's other options. In fact,
I would estimate that in recent years I have
devoted more time to the analysis of 2 . . . d5
than to any of Black's other options on the
second move. It was the choice of Michael
Adams, David Howell, and Pavel Tregubov
against me, just to name a few, so it is clear
that it is highly respected. I am going to look
at two key ways of tackling this move, the first
based on taking the f6-knight.
a b c d e f g h
3 . .ixf6!?
The more positional system involving 3 . e3
will be covered in the next chapter.
Exchanging the f6-knight is White's most
popular choice in this position and there is
a case for saying it is White's strongest move
although personally I feel like that the decision
comes down to taste. It is important that we
have a look at this line and so I have attempted
to build on previous authors' analysis in this
variation.
a) 3 .. gxf6!? is an ambitious approach. I
.
have some exciting new ideas here, having
prepared against this move for a league game
early in 20 1 3 .
b) 3 . exf6 is the more popular recapture, and
..
we will have a look at plans involving g2-g3 .
This system was championed by both Pete
Wells and Richard Palliser in their respective
books, but we will have a look to see what's
new since then.
 Chapter 7 - 2 . . d5 3 .ixf6
. 1 43

I.d4 tll f6 2.J.gS d5 3.Lf6 so it is always worth keeping an eye out for
Black has A) 3 ... gxf6!? and B) 3 ... exf6 . her games.

A) 3 .. gxf6!?
.

a b c d e f g h
7 . tt:l ge2! ?
White aims t o use her knight on g3 .
7 . . . b6 8 .d2 dxc4 9 .lll g3 id3 1 0 .ixd3
cxd3 l 1 . lll h5 lll d7 1 2 .g4 0-0-0 1 3 . 0-0-0
a5 1 4.c.tib l g8 1 5 . h3 f5 1 6. f3 e5 1 7.xd3;1;
White's chances are preferable, Stefanova -
Kovalevskaya, Sochi 2006.
4.c4
4. . .c5!?
I think this is the logical follow-up to the
Th i s alternative looks a b i t more like i t
exchange on f6 .
to me.

-,-- ,,
% "r
, '
?I
. %
4.e3 is also playable and is likely to transpose
s .l J..
to line B of the next chapter after 4 . . . c5. 7

6
(
...

z ...

4 ... dxc4
". % "-
5 "
This has to be considered the main line,
.

"fi Wfj. . %
though Black has tried various other moves. 4

3 - -
4 . . . c6
2 zJ& (/J&/;J/J-%
1 g ti\ : m .a:
This is quite commonly played, but it is a
bit wet and White should have no problems
securing a small advantage.
a b c d
..

5 .e3 if5
5 . . . e6?! looks too passive: 6 . tt:l c3 f5 7. lll f3
ig7 8 .c2 tt:l d7 9.h3 dxc4 1 0 .ixc4 c7
1 1 . 0-0-0 b5 1 2 .ib3 ia6 1 3 .g4;1; Hodgson
- A. Martin, Plymouth 1 992.
6. lll c3 e6
We are following one of Stefanova's games;
she is a leading expert on the Trompowsky
e f g h
5 . cxd5 xd5 6 . tt:l f3 cxd4 7.lll c3 a5 8 . tt:l xd4
id?
8 . . . ig7 9 . e3 0-0 l O .id3 ( 1 0 .ic4!?_.
looks to me like a better square, though it
is probably j ust a matter of taste) 1 0 . . . d8
1 1 . 0-0 f5 1 2.h5 e6 1 3 .ad l e5 1 4 .lll f3
f6 1 5 . e4 tt:l c6 1 6 .fel ( 1 6.ic2! keeps
some advantage: 1 6 . . . g6 l 7.xd8 t tt:l xd8
1 44 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
1 8 .Wfh4;!; and in contrast to the game . . . Wfg4
is not possible as the knight is hanging on
d8.) 1 6 . . . Wfg6 1 7.Wi'h4 Wi'g4 1 8 .exfS Wfxh4
1 9 . llJ xh4 if6 20.g3 1h-1h Wells - Sulskis,
Isle of Man 2003; even in the final position
I still prefer White.
9.g3 ! ?
I like this way of developing, although 9.e3!?
is also possible, as is 9 .Wfb3 .
9 . . . llJ c6 1 0 . liJ b3 WfeS
1 0 . . . WfhS 1 1 .Wi'dS WfxdS 1 2 .llJ xdS 0-0-0
1 3 .ig2 @b8 1 4. 0-0 ig7 1 5 .l:!ac l e6
1 6. llJ f4 fS 1 7.lD cS;!; Martinovic - B. Lalic,
Zadar 2008.
1 l .ig2 l:!d8 1 2 .Wfc l e6 1 3 . 0-0 h S 1 4. f4 Wfc7
1 5 . llJ e4 Wi'b6t 1 6.@h l ie7 I 7.Wfc3 l:!h6
1 8 .llJ ecS ic8
This was Cebalo - Cvitan, Stari Mikanovci
2009. Here White should play:
4 . . . eS
This is also playable, though very rare.
5 . llJ c3 ib4
5 . . . dxc4 6 . llJ f3 exd4 7.llJxd4 cS 8 . lD c2
( 8 . lD db S a6 9 .Wfxd8t 'itixd8 1 0 . 0-0-0t
lD d7 l 1 . liJ d6 ixd6 1 2.l:!xd6) 8 . . . Wfxd l t
(8 . . . Wf aS 9 . e4 ie6 1 0 . lD e3;!; gives White
plenty of activity) 9 . l:!xd l ie6 1 0 . e4 llJ c6
1 1 .lD e3 and White wins back the pawn in
view of 1 1 . . . lD e S ? ! 1 2. f4 ih6 1 3 . llJ ed S or
1 1 . . .lD aS 1 2 . lD b S;t .
6.cxdS WfxdS 7.Wi'a4t lD c6 8.Wi'xb4 lD xb4
9 . liJ xdS lD xdS
h
a b c d e f g
I O .e4!N
White should take the opportunity to get
this move in while he has the chance!
1 0 . 0-0-0 is well met by: I O . . .ifS ( I O . . . e4
1 l . e3 l:!g8 1 2.g3 ig4 1 3 .l:!d2 @d7 1 4.ic4
c6 1 5 .h3 ie6 1 6.ixdS ixdS 1 7. b3 fS
1 8 . lD e2;!; Nikolov - Vuj ovic, Budva 2009)
l l . e3 0-0-0 1 2 .ic4 ie400 Polaczek - Van
den Doel, Germany 2006.
1 0 . . . llJ b4
White also keeps an edge after 1 0 . . . llJ e7
1 1 . 0-0-0;!; or 1 0 . . . llJ f4 1 1 .dS;!;.
1 1 .l:!c I;!;
White's better pawn structure ensures an
advantage.
5.e3
5 . e4 is also possible, but after looking at it
some depth I have concluded that it is too
loose.
5 ... c5
5 . . . ie6 6 . llJ e2 cS 7 . lD bc3 (7. llJ f4 WfaSt
8 . lD c3 is j ust a transposition) 7 . . . Wf aS 8 . lD f4
cxd4 9 .exd4 id7 1 0 .ixc4 White has a lead in
development and stands better, Hoang Thanh
Trang - Szeberenyi, Budapest 2004,
6 ..ixc4 cxd4
 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6 14 5

7
8 .1

?""/
..t.
:/" L;
-- ,,..,%--,
,
, , , , 9 . . . Wf a5
It looks natural for Black to try to exchange
L' L' ,
,

queens to neutralize White's pressure, but it

6 proves difficult for him to do this effectively.
" ' 9 . . . Wc7 1 0 .exd4;!;

: - I O .Wxa5

m

-j,,
J
J I O .ib5 also looks interesting: 1 0 . . . id?

rt '
3 ll? """'>rt
m""'
(not 1 0 . . . dxc3? I I .ixc6t bxc6 1 2 .Wxa5)

2 J)J y -r1/d:/J.fj
l l .xd4oo

m

1 0 . . . lt:lxa5 I I .ib5t lll c6

1 tIJ-il
1 1 . . . .id? 1 2.ixd?t \t>xd7 1 3 .xd4t @c7
1 4. lt:l ge2 lll c6 1 5 .c4;!; with lt:l d4 to come.
a b c d e f g h 1 2. exd4 id? 1 3 .d5 ih6t 1 4.@b l lll e5
7.exd4 1 5 .ixd?t lll xd7 l 6. lll f3 lll c5 l 7.dxe6 fxe6
I have discovered a particularly interesting 1 8 .b4!
unplayed idea here: White plays he l next and Black will
7. lll c3 !?N struggle to hold his central pawns together.
White can get away with delaying the capture
of the d4-pawn on tactical grounds, with 7 ...ig7 8.c3 0-0
the idea of taking it under more preferable 8 . . . f5 9 .lll ge2 lt:l c6 1 0.d5 lll e5 1 I .ib3 id?
circumstances at a later stage. This was my ( 1 1 . . . 0-0 would transpose to the main line
intended novelty when I recently prepared after 1 2. 0-0 and is perhaps the option Black
this line for a game, but the position never should have taken) 1 2. 0-0 Wb6 1 3 .c l Wh6
came about. 1 4.ia4!;!; Povah - D. Ledger, Birmingham
7 . . . lt:l c6 200 1 .
7 . . . dxc3 ? is certainly not advisable: 8 .ixf7t
\t>xf7 9 .Wfxd8+- 9.ge2 ti c6 1 0.0-0
8 .Wh5 I O .Wfd2 has been played on a few occasions
8 . exd4 ig? transposes into the main line. and mentioned by previous authors, White
8 . . . e6 9 . 0-0-0 wants to play d l to support the pawn on d4,
but it all looks a bit slow and clumsy to me.

1 0 ... fS
146 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trom powsky

1 1 .d5 l 9 . E:xf7!! and Black loses after all of

White nearly always goes for this plan. He
gains space, but yields the e5-square to the
black knight.
1 1 .E:e l ! ?
I'm not sure why this move hasn't been
repeated since Georgiev played it in 2007.
White keeps his pawn on d4 to cover the e5-
square.
1 1 . . . tt:\xd4
Black has to really take this pawn if he hopes
to prove that 1 1 .E:e 1 is incorrect.
1 2 .tt:\xd4 ixd4 1 3 .d2
19 . . . E:xf7 20.xb8t or 19 . . .xf7 20 .ixe6
or 1 9 . . . @xf7 20.E:xe6.
1 9 .E:d6 ib7
1 9 . . . E:ac8 ? 20 .ia6 E:c7 2 1 .c l +-
20 .E:d? ic6 2 1 .E:c7
White decides he can do better than force
a draw.
2 1 . . . id5 22 .ixd5 exd5 23 .E:ce?;!;
Ki. Georgiev - Ruck, Sibenik 2007.
1 1 . .. tll e5 12.ib3 %Vd6
1 2 . . . a6 1 3 .d2 d6 1 4 .f4 h8 1 5 .E:fe l
f6 Black doesn't seem to come up with a
plan and shuffles his pieces around. 1 6.E:ad l
E:g8 l 7 . tt:\ d4;!; White has developed wisely and
can claim an advantage, Palliser - McPhillips,
Millfield 2004.

a b c d e f g h
1 3 . . . if6
1 3 . . . ig? 1 4.xd8 E:xd8 1 5 .E:xe?;!; looks
better for White.
1 4 .tt:\ d5 e6 1 5 . tt:\ xf6t xf6 1 6.E:ad l b6
This is almost an only move as Black must
try to catch up in development.
1 7.f4 ib7 1 8 .E:d? ic6
1 8 . . . E:ab8? cannot be recommended.
13.h3
1 3 . tt:\ d4 ! ? id? ( 1 3 . . . tt:\ g4?! 1 4. tt:\ f3 @h8
1 5 .h3 tt:\e5 1 6.E:e l was a fraction better for
White in Bui Vinh - Wittmann, Budapest
2007) 1 4.E:e l E:fe8 1 5 .h3 b600 Muukkonen
- Borisovs, corr. 20 1 0 .

13 ... id7 I 4.J.a4

A common plan for White, which we also
saw in Povah - Ledger above.

14 ... tlic4 15.i.xd7 %Vxd7 16.b3 tll b6 17.%Vd3

 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6 1 47

l:fac8 1 8Jadl gc5 19.Yllif3 ffc8 20.gd3 @hS our c2-c4 pawn thrust.
1/2-1/i 7 . . . a5 8 . tli e2 a4 9 . tli d2 if5
The position is balanced and the players
agreed a draw in Miladinovic - Ki. Georgiev,
Bar 2008.

B) 3 ... exf6

1 0 .e4
Stefanova switches plans and gains an edge,
but it seems more natural to me to continue
with queenside play.
However, the immediate 1 O.c4 is a bit
awkward for White after: I O . . . axb3 I I .axb3
!!xa l 1 2.Wi'xa l i.b4 1 3 .cxd5 0-000
1 O .bxa4!?N may be a better solution:
10 ... !!xa4 1 1 . 0-0;!; White tucks the king
4.e3 id6 away safely before continuing with c2-c4.
Black has numerous moves here but a lot of 10 ... dxe4 1 1 . 0-0 ie7 1 2 . tli c4 Wi'd8 1 3 . tli c3
them will transpose. Often he goes for plans 0-0 1 4.tlixe4t
involving . . . f5 and transferring the b8-knight Stefanova - Romanishin, Solin 2006.
to f6 in order to have a bit more influence on
the kingside. 4 . . . c6! ?
This can be played with an interesting idea
4 . . . ie6
for countering White's anticipated fianchetto.
This will often transpose but I will j ust
5 . tli e2
mention a couple of ways Black can deviate
This rare move order may avoid Black's idea.
at an early stage.
5 . g3 h 5 ! ?
5 . g3 c6
5 . . . c5?! doesn't look right to me as Black
saddles himself with a weak isolated d5-
pawn: 6 . tli e2 tli c6 7.i.g2 Wi'b6 8.tli bc3
cxd4 9.exd4 Wi'xb2 1 0 .!!b U Ki . Georgiev -
Moreno Ruiz, Leon 20 1 0 .
6.ig2 Wi'b6
6 . . . id6 7 . tli e2 f5 transposes to line B2 I .
7.b3
Black has spent time forcing this move, but
we often want to play it anyway to support
1 48 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

Only played once, but it looks interesting to Bl) 6 ... 0-0

me. Black aims to force White to clarify his
kingside straight away. 6 . h4 .ig4N 7.V*'d200 Black's most common move, but not his best.
It all looks a bit awkward for White. White can transpose into line B2, but there is
5 .. . f5 6.g3 lll d7 7 . .ig2 lll f6 8 .V*'d3 g6 9 . b3 a more promising option involving the idea of
.ig7 1 0 .c4 0-0 l 1 . lll bc3 .ie6 1 2 . 0-0 lll e4 an early b2-b3 and c2-c4, when the b I -knight
1 3 . cxd5 cxd5 1 4.fc l;!; may then j ump to c3 . White does not want
Stefanova - N. Kosintseva, Moscow 20 1 0 . to play this plan with his king uncastled, as
b2-b3 and c2-c4 weakens the a5-e 1 diagonal
5.g3 to his king, but an important point is that
since Black has castled, White can in turn
% '''/0. './'" '" % ' ' ' ' '/.
8 i. al..iJ
-,- - -%
-
castle without worrying about the possibility
7
of . . . h 5 .
.,- Y.
6 ,,

5
{@j
, , %
.- -
- - - , .

, ,

7.lll e2

4 - w
r m
-
,
3 -- , , % wr
2 8 8-""% , , , %
1 -vm!
,,, , . , %
,, , , , Y,

a b c d e f g
'./,-, , , , , ;

h
This is the line which Wells recommended,
and he has backed up his belief in this line
by playing it on several occasions. Palliser
too followed in his footsteps. The only thing
which slightly disappointed me about their
books was they did not try to find White's
most precise move order - instead they focused
on model games, although to be fair to them
transpositions are likely via many different
routes. I am going to further explain the
ideas of these two players, and in addition I 7 . . . .ig4 was played recently against Georgiev,
shall aim to give you an exact move order for who has considerable experience in these lines:
White to cause Black the most problems. We 8 .V*'d3 .ixe2 9.V*'xe2 V*'b6 1 0 .b3 Again the
shall also have a look at some important recent standard move when the b-pawn is attacked.
games. 1 0 . . . V*'a6 l l .c4 .ib4t 1 2.'kt>fl dxc4 1 3 .V*'xc4
V*'a5 1 4.a3 .ie7 1 5 .b4 V*'h5 1 6 . lll c3 lll d7
s ... c6 6.J.g2 l 7.V*'e2 V*'xe2t 1 8 .'kt>xe2;!; White's better pawn
Black now chooses between Bl) 6 ... 0-0 and structure and more active bishop give him a
B2) 6 ... fS!. clear advantage in the endgame, Ki . Georgiev
- Codenotti, Arvier 20 1 2 .
 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6 1 49

7 . . . ie6 8 . 0-0 ll\ d7 9 .iWd3 f5 1 0 . ll\ d2 ( 1 0.b3!

seems more consistent with White's plans, and
after 1 o . . . ll\ f6 l l .c4 play has transposed into
line 8 1 3 below) 1 0 . . . ll\ f6 l l . c4 ffe7 1 2 .E:fc l
g6 1 3 .a3 E:fd8 1 4 .b4 ll\ e4 1 5 . c5 ic7 1 6 .a4t
Andreikin - Tomashevsky, Khanty-Mansiysk
20 1 1 .

B l l ) 7 ...Wb6

l 3 ... tl)d7
Black backtracks, vacating the b6-square for
his queen.

14.c4 dxc4 1 5.xc4 if8 1 6.V:'fc2 b5 17,tl)d2

Wb6 1 8.ig2 gac8 19.b4
White's advantage is totally clear, with the
backward c6-pawn firmly in my sights, R. Pert
8.b3 - Povah, Hinckley Island 20 1 1 .
As previously mentioned, this is the logical
response to . . . Wfb6, looking to set up a future B 1 2) 7 ... if5
c2-c4 .

8 ... ges 9.0-0 ig4!?

Craftily threatening to take on e2 and then
play . . . 'Wxd4, when my e3-pawn would be
pinned.

IO.gel!
Avoiding the trap; now the black pieces are
asking to be hit by c4-c5 .

I O ... tl) d7 1 1 .a3 'Wa6 12.d2 tl) b6

1 50 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

This was tried against me in a London
League match, but Black soon finds his bishop
misplaced and has to take time to move it
again.
8.d2 d7 9.0-0 ges 10.c4 dxc4 1 1 .xc4
!J.c7 12. lil c3 /J.e6 1 3.d5 cxd5 14.xd5 e5
15.gcl xc4 16.gxc4 /J.d6 17.'iMd2 gcs
18Jhc8 !J.xc8
29 .id3;!; White may still be better, but Black's
counterplay is quite scary.
23.YMxa7 YMxd4?? 24.exd4 gel t 25.!J.fl !J.h3
26.e3
1 -0 R. Pert - Coles, London 20 1 1 .
B 1 3) 7 ... d7 8.0-0 f5

9.b3!
Having castled, White can execute his plan
of b2-b3 and c2-c4 without worrying about
possibilities such as . . . ib4t.

9 ... f6 1 0.c4 !J.e6

1 9 ... /J.fS 1 O dxc4?! does not work out well for Black:
. .

1 9 . . . ig4 is perhaps an improvement: 20.f3 l l . bxc4 '1We7 1 2 . lli bc3 :ge8 1 3 .:gb l lli e4 1 4 .c5
ie6 2 1 . xf6t '1Wxf6 22.'1Wxd6 ixa2 23.'1Wxf6
gxf6 24. @f2;j;

20.'iMc3
20 .'1Wc2 ! ? Wa5 2 1 .:gd4 '\We i t (2 1 . . .'1Wxa2 ?
22 .ie4+-) 22 .ifl h5 23.'1Wa4 a6 24.llib6 ig4
(24 . . . ih3 2 5 . :g d l +-) 2 5 .:gxg4;!;

20 ...YMd6 2 1 .gd4 YMe5 22.'iMa5 b6?

22 . . . ie6! is the move that I was worried
about: 23.'1Wxa7 :gc8 24.if3 :ge l t 2 5 .'tt> g2
'1Wf5 26. lli f4 'IWb l 27.ie4 (27.llixe6? :ggl t
2 8 . 'it>h3 Wfl t 29.'tt> g4 fxe6 30 .'1Wxb7 h5t
3 1 .'tt> f4 '1Wh3-+) 27 ... :gg l t 2 8 .'tt> f3 We l
 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6 151

l 5 . lli xe4 fxe4 1 6. tli c3 f5 l 7 .Wa4 gd8 l 8 .gb2
h5 1 9 .gfb l h4 20.gxb7 ixb7 2 1 .gxb7 Wd7
22.ih3 hxg3 2 3 .hxg3 gdb8 24.ixf5 Wxf5
2 5 . gxc7 gf8 26.Wc2 Wells - Howell, Halifax
(rapid) 2004.
1 3.cS ic7 I4.b4 hS 1 5 .h4 gfeg 1 6.tll f4
ixf4 17.exf4 tll e4 18.tll e2 bS 1 9.a4 a6 20.f3
tll f6 2 1 .ga3 b7 22.d2 gas 23.gfal geb8
24.ifl tll e8 25.tll cl tll c7 26.lLJd3;!;
Ki. Georgiev - A. Horvath, Fuegen 2006.

1 1 .d3 B2) 6 .. fS!

.

l I . . .Wa5 1 2 .c5 ie7 1 3 .a3 b5 1 4 . b4 Wc7 7.tll e2

1 5 .a4 bxa4 1 6. tli bc3 a5 1 7. b 5 cxb 5 1 8 . tLl xb5;!; Black now decides which of his queenside
Sedlak - Vukic, Subotica 2008. minor pieces to develop first: B2 1) 7 ... ie6
and B22) 7 ... tll d7.
l l . . . a6 1 2.c5 ic7 1 3 . b4 b5 1 4.cxb6 id6
1 5 . b7 ga7 1 6.a3 Wb6 1 7. tli bc3 gxb7 1 8 .gfc l B2 1) 7 ...ie6
gc8 l 9 . tli a4 Wa7 20.tlic5 ixc5 2 1 .gxc5 tli d7
22 .gc3;!; Stefanova - Peptan, Dresden 2004. Flicking in this move before developing the
b8-knight to f6 has the bonus of making c2-c4
l I . . .g6 1 2 . tli bc3 ic7 1 3 .gfc l ge8 1 4 .cxd5 a more difficult task for White.
lli xd5 l 5.llixd5 ixd5 l 6.ixd5 Wxd5 l 7.tlic3
Wf3 1 8 .We2 Wxe2 1 9 . lli xe2 id6 20.gab l 8.tll d2 tll d7 9.b3
'it>g7 2 1 . b4 gac8 22.tlic3;!; Mensch - Boursier, It is still important not to castle too early,
France 2009. as an incoming . . . h5 can be a big problem.
The ideal situation is if Black castles, when
12.tll bc3 gac8 the option of castling then becomes available
1 2 . . . gad8 1 3 . gfc l gfe8 1 4. lli f4;!; Gonzalez to us.
Rodriguez - Pujol Clua, Barcelona 2003 .
9 ... lLJf6 10.c4 ib4
1 52 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 0 . . . h5 l 1 .h4 occurred in a game by Pete 1 1 .0-0 .txd2 1 2.YHxd2 dxc4

Wells which he discussed in derail in his book.
Again you should note chat White delays
castling until Black commits his king, first
carrying out an advance on the queenside.

--
' ' " Z
8
7
!"- -; . '

6 r..-0 zJ...
.. . .

@. . . . - '" ""
5
. . . ... .
AA
4

3 -- .... w-% w -l- ....
8 if .. t%
z , ,J@-P.
"

2 8 t

1 ,_9. r------
ii -i( -- %
:@ h
. ... ..

a b c d e f g

l I . . . ltJ e4 1 2 .c5 ic7 1 3 . b4 g6 1 4.a4 'itif8

1 5 .Wc2 'tt> g7 1 6 .Wb2 id7 1 7. ltJ f4 gb8 1 8 .E:a3
Wells - Parker, West Bromwich 2003. We
have a strategical manoeuvring game where
1 3 ... cxb3 14.tll xe6 fxe6 1 5 .l:Ub l 0-0
White's chances are slightly preferable due to
1 6.gxb3 Wd7 17.Wb4 Ub8 1 8.gab l ii;
an eventual b4-b5 break being on the cards.
White had good compensation for the pawn

1 O . . . ltJ e4 l l . c 5 ! ? This move was recommended

in Hodgson - Tiviakov, Groningen 1 994.

by Wells. 1 1 . . . ic? 1 2 . b4 g6 1 3 .Wb3 'tt> f8 1 4 .a4

B22) 7 ... tll d7
Walton - Schaefer, Bad Woerishofen 2003; the
position is similar to Wells - Parker above.

1 0 . . . 0-0 1 1 . 0-0 g6 1 2 .cxd5 ixd5

 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6 1 53

still in the middle: 8 . . . lll f6 9 . c4 (9.lll d2?! lll e4! 9 . . . ll\ e4 1 0 . 0-0 lll xd2 I 1 .Wxd2 dxc4

J.% . . .s JI
looks uncomfortable for White) 9 . . . ib4t!

8
The point - Black can cause problems with

1 f.....
r. . . . . .,

6
this check. 1 0 .'>tifl 0-0 I l .c5 ia5 1 2.a3 ic7
iB % B i i . %

- -- -,--
1 3 . lll bc3 b600 Laznicka - Howell, Liverpool

: ,
2008.

8 ... tlJf6
.... r.WKWM
After
3 riJ-Pz
2 iffj @11r. 1 .i. ..

w--
wnL.m %
8 . . . 0-0
it is a bit frustrating that White cannot play
the standard plan that we saw in line B 1 3 , as ,
1 - -.f- -
'

a
"'

b c d e f g
.

h
.

his knight is already on the d2-square:

9 . 0-0 ll\ f6 1 2.gfd l ! ?N
1 2 .d5 c5 1 3 .Wc3 0-0 1 4.Wxc4 b5
1 5 .Wxb5N ( 1 5 .Wc200 Rewitz - J . Nielsen,
Copenhagen 1 987) 1 5 . . . gbs 1 6.Wc4 gxb2
1 7.gab l;!; White's passed d-pawn should
secure a small advantage.
1 2 . . . 0-0
1 2 . . . ie6?! 1 3 .d5 cxd5 1 4.ixd5 ie5
( 1 4 . . . ic7? 1 5 .Wc3 ixd5 1 6 .Wxg7 ms
1 7. lll c3 +-) 1 5 .Wb4 ixd5 1 6.Wb 5 t Wd7
1 7.gxd5 and White regains the pawn with
advantage.
1 3 .gac l ie6 1 4.d5;!;
I O . c4
The correct approach here is to leave out b2- 9 ... h5N can be met by 1 0 .h4 and the white
b3 altogether. king is still not under threat, or by 1 0 .Wb3 ! ?
1 0 . . . ie6 with active play for White.
1 0 . . . dxc4 1 1 .lll xc4 ic7 1 2 .Wb3 transposes
to our main line. 10.tlJxc4 !J..c7
I 1 .c5 ie7 1 2 . b4 a5 1 3 . a3 axb4 1 4. axb4 b5 If Black instead gives a check, then White
1 5 .Wb3 Wc7 1 6.ga3 ga7 1 7.gfa l;!; has to play accurately to gain an advantage:
Ward - Akesson, Isle of Man 2000. The 1 0 . . . ib4t 1 1 . lll c3 ie6
position is slightly better for White, who will I 1 . . . lll d5 can be met by an interesting pawn
gain control of the a-file and still has knights sacrifice: 1 2. 0-0! ?N ( 1 2 .Wc2 is also quite
which can j ump in. possible: 1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .0-0 lll xc3 1 4. bxc3
ixc4 1 5 .cxb4 ixfl 1 6.gxfl 0-0 1 7.Wxf5
9.c4 Ponomarev - Gabrielian , St Petersburg
9 . 0-0 ?! h5 is still a problem. 2009) 1 2 . . . ixc3 1 3 .bxc3 lll xc3 1 4 .Wd3 lll d5
1 5 .gab l ( 1 5 .Wa3 We700) 1 5 . . . 0-0 1 6 .Wa3t
9 ... dxc4 1 2.Wd3 lll e4
9 . . . ie6 1 0 .b3 transposes to line B2 1 . 1 2 . . . id5 1 3 .ixd5 Wxd5 ( 1 3 . . . lll xd5
1 54 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 4.Wxf5 ! lll xc3 1 5 .a3 Wd5 1 6.Wxd5 tll xd5t and d3 . The other option is to expand on the
1 7.axb4t) 1 4. 0-0;!; queenside with b2-b4.

12 Y;ie?!
..

Probably Black's most accurate - preventing

both b2-b4 and lll e5 and waiting to see what
else White has in mind.

12 . . . h5 1 3 . b4 White goes for the second plan

I mentioned. 1 3 . . . a6 1 4.a4 h4 1 5 .fd l hxg3
1 6.hxg3 ie6 1 7.lll e5 We7 1 8 .lll f4;!; Schneider
- Dautov, Halle 20 1 0 .

1 2 . . . ie6 1 3 .lll e5 lll d5 ( 1 3 . . . g6 1 4 .lll d3 id5

1 3 . 0-0!N l 5 .ixd5 cxd5 1 6.ac l c8 1 7 .Wb3;!; Galyas
1 3 .tll d2 lll xd2 1 4 .Wxd2 ic4 did not give - Dencsi, Budapest 2004) 1 4. lll d3 g6 1 5 . lll c5
White any advantage in Gustafsson - ic8 1 6.lll c3 lll f6 1 7.b4 a6 1 8 .a4 id6

.... . v.
Burnett, New York 1 999.
13 ... ixc3 1 4. bxc3 ixc4 s .i B..t
--- .. z
1 4 . . . 0-0 1 5 .lll d2;!;
1 -0 %lB
0""' "
l 5 .Wxc4 lll d2
6 .\ i - '
,,.;
4 .::.n!..
5
Winning an exchange, but the black b-pawn
drops, leaving White with a very powerful
g2-bishop.
3 'lt::
,: iQ fl'%,
'effl'%. 'i,
%'0%
-:i-
.
...
.. .
l 6.Wb4 lll xfl l 7.Wxb7 0-0 1 8 .xfl Wa5

2 ,/, if.

%
1 9 . c4;!;
1 ,f"
.
. .:;..if% . . ..
h
l l .Y;ic2 0-0 1 2.0-0
b d f g
, z

a c e

1 %,,'i.f'. %iW
s

-."n 1-.f
.1. m ..t.. B - 1 9 . b 5 axb5 20.axb5 xa l 2 1 .xa l Wc7
22.bxc6;!; White has the advantage with a

6
.
, - - - "
-- weak queenside pawn to attack, McDonald -
Lukacs, Budapest 1 99 5 . Incidentally, a great
!fil
:
game from Neil McDonald that is still of
theoretical relevance eighteen years on.

-- ,
32 -l-lt 13.d2
This looks best to me, seeking out an

---- - -!"""
alternative route to the c5-square.

1
1 3 . lll f4?! ixf4 1 4 . exf400
a b c d e f g h
White has two main plans here. One is to 1 3 .a3 ! ? is interesting, with the point that if
transfer the c4-knight to c5 - if possible via e5 Black prevents b2-b4 with l 3 . . . a5 then l 4. lll f4
 Chapter 7 - 2 . . . d5 3 .ixf6
is more effective: 1 4 . . . .ixf4 1 5 .exf4;!; and this
time the b6-square is vulnerable.
13 ... hS I 4Jacl id6
14 . . . .ie6 1 5 . ttJ b3 g6 1 6. ttJ c5 .id6 1 7.lll f4
ixf4 1 8 .exf4 id5 1 9 .l'!fe l Vfic7 20 .ixd5
lll x d5 2 1 .Vfib3 1'!ab8 22.h4 1'!fd8 23 .1'!e2;!;
a b c d e f g h
15.ttJb3N
Heading to the c5-square.
1 5 . lll c4 can lead to a repetition of moves:
1 5 . . . .ic? l 6 . ttJ d2 .id6 l 7.lll c4 ic7 l 8 . ttJ d2
Y2-Y2 lotov - Kolev Sunny Beach 2009.
1 5 ...1'!e8 16.cS e4 17.b4 h4 1 8.a4
This position is quite finely balanced, but
I slightly prefer White who has simpler play
with a queenside minority attack on the cards.
1 55
Conclusion: In line A) 3 . . . gxf6!?, the main
line with 1 l .d5 has been quite well worked out
and it is hard for White to gain an advantage.
However, I have highlighted a couple of
interesting moves for White, my new idea of
7. ttJc3 ! ?N and the rare 1 1 .l'!e l ! ? - these ideas
look promising to me and I would be happy
to test out one or both of them in tournament
play.
Turning to B) 3 . . . exf6, it has to be said that
meeting this with 4.e3 and 5 . g3 is a very solid
positional approach, but nevertheless a serious
one in which White looks for queenside
pressure and more often than not obtains
a small but lasting advantage. I would again
remind you of the importance of both players'
choice of move orders in this line.
Chapter 8

2 ... d5 3.e3

I .d4 tli f6 2.i.g5 d5 3.e3

A) 3 ... tli bd7 159

B) 3 ... c5 4.i.xf6 gxf6 5.tlic3 tli c6 162
Bl) 6.dxc5!? 1 64
B2) 6.YNh5 1 65
B2 1) 6 ... e6 1 66
B22) 6 ... cxd4 167
C) 3 ... c6 1 69
1 58 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom powsky

I .d4 f6 2.J.g5 d5 3.e3 Trompowsky Attack. The resulting posmon

This Torre-like move has been included
in the repertoires of virtually all the serious
Trompowsky players of the last decade; for
example it was the choice of Hodgson when
playing White against me.
Although this move is becoming increasingly
popular, it hasn't been written about by any
authors in recent years. All the Trompowsky
books in the last decade have prioritized
3 .J.xf6 as their main line, and so this will be
the first book for a while to have an in-depth
look at this option.
is also endorsed from Black's side by Boris
Avrukh in Grandmaster Repertoire 11, where
it is reached via a Veresov move order. This is
of course a worry from White's point of view
as Boris tends to be very much on the money
with his evaluations. I agree with these authors
that this move is hard to answer. Nevertheless
we will have a look at some ideas which can at
least get White into some interesting positions
where we can fight for an advantage.
c) 3 tli e4 4.J.f4 transposes directly into the

variation 2 . . . ltJ e4 3 .J.f4 d5 4.e3 c5, which

- A \ntJ:W
,,Y,_,,v.
;
s
,, , -,_,
.a.
, , %_
is covered as line D in the next chapter on
: .JL mm-m
.
7
page 1 79 .

6
;
/, , , , , % ,,,,,% , , , , , /, ,,,,%

d ) 3 e6 i s the most common choice for Black,

s % - , , , ,Y,

' ;-, , , ;m

but White has a good chance of obtaining a

m

small advantage with 4 . ltJ d2, which transposes
4

into line B of Chapter 2 - see page 5 2 .
L 'W'J,
3 -n: frn e ) 3 c6 i s a solid choice and was the move
2 8 rtl 8 - rtl 8 rtl

vra-r{:fti
David Howell picked against me in 20 1 0 .
Although Black's position is very solid, White
- , , L , , , , , ; should be able to get a small edge. We look at
a b c d e f g h this line at the end of this chapter.
Black has many options here and there
are several transpositional possibilities, so f) 3 g6 4.J.xf6 transposes to a favourable

the following summary should let you know
where to look.
a) 3 bd7 was the choice of Michael Adams
against me in 20 1 0 . However, I have some new
ideas in this line included in this chapter.
version of line B of the previous chapter, where
Black has mixed his systems - he wants his f8-
bishop to be placed on d6 but has invested
time playing . . . g6 already.
g) 3 J.f5 4.J.xf6 exf6 also gives White a

favourable version of line B of the previous

b) 3 c5 is a very direct answer and is the

chapter, where the bishop on f5 is blocking
move which seems to have scared Richard Black's natural plan of playing .. . f5 to free the
Palliser the most in his Starting Out: !he f6-square for his queen's knight.
 Chapter 8 - 2 . . . d 5 3 . e3 1 59

1 .d4 f6 2 ..igS dS 3.e3 4... h6

The choice of Adams - he said to me after
the game that if he can have chis move for free
then he'll cake it. There are not many stronger
players than him in the world, so who am I to
disagree?

4 . . . e6 5 . bd2 will transpose to Chapter 2 .

For example 5 . . . c5 is line B on page 52, while
5 . . . h6 6.ih4 is the note to Black's 5 th move of
line C l on page 54.
Of course S . c4 is also possible if you have
knowledge of the Queen's Gambit Declined.

4 . . . cS S . dxcS

A) 3 .. bd7
.

This important variation was the choice of

England's top player Michael Adams against
me in the top board clash at the British
Championships in 20 1 0 . Mickey is a former
Trompowsky player himself, so the fact chat he
chose chis line is significant.

S . . . lll xcS
4.f3
With this move order Black cannot use the
I chink White really has to play this move
plan which Adams used against me, as S . . . h6
otherwise Black will play . . . e 5 .
is met by: 6.ixf6! (6.ih4 gS transposes to
the Pert - Adams game given in the note to
White's 6th move) 6 . . . ll:\xf6 7.c4;l;
S . . . 'WaS t 6. lll bd2 'WxcS (6 . . . e6 7.a3 'WxcS
8 . c4 ie7 9 , gc l 'WaS 1 0 .cxd5 'WxdS I l .ic4
'Was 1 2. 0-0 0-0 1 3 .h3 bS 1 4.id3;!;
Antidrome - maradona, Internet 20 I O)
7.c4 e6 8.gcl 'IWaS 9 . cxdS lll xd5 1 0 .a3 ie7
I l .ixe7 lll xe7 1 2 .ie2 ll:\ c6 1 3 . 0-0 0-0
1 4 . ll:\ c4;l; Antidrome - notsogood, Internee
2009.
6.ixf6 gxf6 7.ib S t
7.c4 dxc4 8 .'Wxd8t cj{xd8 9 .ixc4 ie6
I O .ixe6 fxe6 1 1 .lll c3 gc8 1 2 . iie2 ig7
1 60 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
1 3 .E1hd l t @e8 1 4 .E1ac U Antidrome -
maradona, Internet 20 1 0 .
7 . . . .id7 8 .Wxd5;t;
4 . . . g6
This doesn't look critical .
5 . c4 .ig7 6.lll c3
6 . . . c6
I faced this in a London League match in
April this year and it is my computer's
preference, but it's hardly convincing.
6 . . . h6 7 . .ih4 c6 8 . cxd5 lll x d5 9 . .id3 lll b4
1 0 . .ie2 c5 1 1 .0-0 0-0 1 2.d5 lll b6 1 3 .e4 g5
14 . .ig3 e6 1 5 .a3;!; Antidrome - Yardbird,
Internet 20 1 1 . My opponent in this blitz
game was GM Lobron, and this game
allowed me to notch up my second of three
wins against him in quick succession in this
line as he struggled to find a suitable way to
combat these ideas.
7.cxd5 cxd5 8 .'1Wb3 '1Wa5
White has a pleasant choice here.
9 . .ib5
9 . .ixf6 ! ? lll xf6 1 0 . .ib5t and Black has no
suitable way to meet this check: 1 0 . . . @f8
1 1 . 0-0
9 . . . e6 1 0 .lll e5 0-0 I l ..ixd7 lll xd7 1 2.lll xd7
ixd7 1 3 .Wxb7 h6?! 1 4.ie7+-
Already a pawn up, White now wins more
material, R. Pert - Bowmer, London 20 1 3 .
s.i.h4
Adams suggested that exchanging the bishop
could be considered, and I tried this in a later
game in the same tournament:
5 .ixf6!? lll xf6
6.c4
6. lll e5 ! ? followed by going for a Stonewall
set-up was Adams' suggestion.
6 . . . e6 7.lll c3 ie7 8 . cxd5 exd5
8 . . . lll xd5 9 .ie2 0-0 1 0 . 0-0 b6 ( 1 0 . . . lll xc3
l l . bxc3 b6 1 2.lll e5 ib7 1 3 . f4) l 1 . lll xd5
Wxd5 1 2 .lll e5 promises White a small edge.
9 .id3 0-0
9 . . . ig4 1 0 .Wa4t!? ( 1 0.Wb3 ! ? ixf3 l l .gxf3
0-0 1 2 . 0-0-0--+) 1 0 . . . c6 1 1 . lll e5;!;
1 0 .lll e5 id6
1 0 . . . c5 1 1 . 0-0 '1Wb6 1 2 .E1b l id6 1 3 .lll a4
Wc7 1 4. f4;t;
l L f4 c5 1 2 .Wf3
1 2 .0-0 cxd4 I 3.exd4 Wb6=
1 2 . . . \Wb6 1 3 . 0-0-0 cxd4 1 4.exd400
R. Pert - Ynojosa, Canterbury 20 1 0 .
Black has responded accurately to my plan,
and White's advantage is minimal if at all.
On reflection I came to the conclusion that
5 .ih4 is the right approach but that I needed
to follow up in a different way to my game
against Adams.
5 .. cS
.
Black's plan is to combine . . . Wb6 with
the idea of . . . g5-g4 pressuring both b2 and
d4 .
 Chapter 8 - 2 . . d5 3 . e3
. 161

board, though arguably it's Black's best:

8 .Wd2! (8.tlJxe5 ? Wa5 t! 9 . tlJ c3 ic5 1 0 .Wf4
id6-+ and the white knight is trapped)
8 . . . Wb6 (8 . . . Wc7 9.cxd5 ttJ e4 1 0 .Wd l Wa5 t
l 1 . tlJ fd2 ib4 1 2.a3 ttJ df6 1 3 .id3) 9 . cxd5
ttJ e4 1 0 .Wc2

8.ig3 J.g7 9.cxd5

White can also consider: 9 . tlJ c3!? dxc4
1 0 .0-0-0 0-0 l l .h4 g4 1 2 .tlJe5t

9 ... tlih5
9 . . . 0-0 1 0. tlJ c3 ttJ b6 was tried against me in
6.c4!? a blitz game, but Black quickly got into a mess:
This rare move looks interesting with . . . h6 I l . d6 ttJ fd5?! 1 2 .dxe7 Wxe7 1 3 .ttJxd5 ttJxd 5 ?
thrown in, as Black now doesn't have the ( 1 3 . . . We6 1 4.ie5) 1 4.Wxd5 ixb2 1 5 .El:d l
option of . . . tlJ e4 hitting a bishop on g5 . ie6 1 6.Wd2 Wa3 1 7.id6 Wxa2 1 8 .ixfB 1 -0
Antidrome - Yardbird, Internet 20 1 1 .
6 . dxc5 was my choice against Michael Adams,
and whilst there is nothing wrong with it, the 10.'1Vd2 0-0 1 1 .tli c3 tlixg3 12.hxg3 tlic5
resulting positions look balanced: 6 . . . g5 7.ig3
ig7 8 . ttJ bd2 ttJ h 5 9.c4 tlJ xg3 I O .hxg3 tlJ xc5
I I . b4 ttJ e6 1 2 . cxd5 Wxd5 1 3 .ic4 Wd6 1 4.El:b l
Here 1 4 . . . 0-0 was played in R. Pert - Adams,
Canterbury 20 1 0 , and now Adams suggested
that 1 5 .Wc2 with the threat of tlJ e4xg5
would have given White some initiative. So
he reckoned that delaying castling for the
moment with 14 . . . id7!?N00 would be more
accurate.

6 ... cxd4
White seems to be able to claim an edge
against the alternatives:

6 . . . g5 7.ig3 ttJ e4 8 . tlJ c3 Wa5 9 .Wc2

6 . . . llJ e4 7 . tlJ c3 1 3 .ic4? if5 1 4 . ttJ d4 ig6 was unclear in

6 . . . Wb6 7.tlJc3 Wxb2 (7 . . . cxd4 8.Wxd4)
8 . tlJ b 5 cxd4 9.El:b l Wxa2 1 0 . ttJ c?H
7.'1Vxd4 g5
7 . . . e5N might be hard to spot over the
Shuvatkin - Kuznetsov, Kazan 2009.
13 ...'1Vb6!
If Black is careless he can lose very quickly:
1 3 . . . ig4 1 4. ttJ xg5 +- or 1 3 . . . ixc3t 1 4.Wxc3
ttJ e4 1 5 .Wd4 Wa5 t 1 6.b4+-.
1 62 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 4.ie2 So we move on to what is arguably Black's

The clever point of Black's previous move most critical response. If you are going to
is that 1 4 .lll xg5 :B:d8! gives him strong choose 3 . e3 against 2 . . . d5 then you certainly
counterplay. need to be ready for this. I admit that it is hard

.
to force an advantage against this move, but
14 . JMS 1 5Jdl ig4 1 6.d4 ixe2 the positions remain interesting and White has
1 7.Wfxe2 e6 a lot of choice - there are several ideas in this
chapter so hopefully you can find a route that
appeals to you.

4.Lf6 gxf6
4 . . . exf6?! looks wrong as Black leaves his
d-pawn vulnerable to attack: 5 . lll c3 ie6
6. dxc5 ixc5 7.Wlh5 ib4 8 .ib5 t lll c6 9 .lll ge2
0-0 1 0. 0-0-0 lll e5 l 1 . h3 Wb6 1 2 .ia4 :B:fd8
1 3 .ib3 The pressure is mounting on the d5-
pawn and Black feels obliged to give up the
bishop pair in order to save it.

,i U . -
61 .rr . .. . % r
r
s

. V,.
.. . .% .
r-/, .
.
...

./,.
z

5 .., /. .
.
fl
- ''l. .. . :
.. . . ..

4 -l . .,/, ./, '0 .

3 ... 8
1 9.0-0;!;
..tm
.

2 t, . 8 al2JD
,- 8 a
If Black wishes to recapture his pawn then .. ..: .....%

1
he is going to end up with weaknesses round
his king, in particular the f5-square. ..
:
a b c d e f g h
B) 3 ... c5
1 3 . . . ixc3 1 4.lll xc3 d4 1 5 .exd4 :B:xd4 1 6.:B:xd4
Wxd4 1 7.We2 ixb3 1 8 .axb3t R. Pert -
Giffard, Montpellier 2002. White's advantage
is clear, because all king and pawn endgames
will be winning. Furthermore, White's
queenside majority means that knight and
pawn endgames are likely to be winning
too, and that is in fact what happened in the
game!

5.c3
This brings us into a line of the Veresov.
Note that this position can also arise after
2 . . . c5 3 . lll c3 d5 4.ixf6 gxf6 5 . e3 , although in
 Chapter 8 - 2 . . . d5 3 . e3
Chapter 3 my recommendation was the more
aggressive 5 .e4! ? in that move order.
If you fancy quieter waters then you can
choose: 5 . c4 cxd4 (5 . . . dxc4 6.ixc4 transposes
into line A of the previous chapter) 6.Wfxd4
dxc4 7.Wfxd8t @xd8 8 .ixc4 e6 9 . ltl c3 a6
1 0 . ltl f3 Although my computer prefers White,
the position looks drawish with the queens off.
5 . dxc5
This was the regular choice of Hodgson, who
once played it against me in a rapid game.
5 . . . e6
5 . . . Wfa5t leads to positions which slightly
favour White who usually picks up a pawn,
though Black obtains some compensation:
6 . ltl c3 e6 7.Wfd4 lt:l c6 8 .ib5 (8.Wfxf6 1'!g8
9 . ltl ge2 ixc5 1 0 .0-0-0;!;) 8 . . . 1'!g8 9 . ltl ge2
id? 1 0 .Wfxf6;!;
6 . ltl c3
6.c4 leads to a drawish endgame: 6 . . . dxc4
7.Wfxd8t @xd8 8 .ixc4 ixc5 9 . ltl c3 @e7
1 0.a3 a6 I I .ltl f3 lt:l c6 Y2-Yi Miladinovic -
Popovic, Vrnjacka Banja 20 1 2.
6 . . . ixc5 7.Wfh5
7 . . . lt:l c6
7 . . . f5 ! ? is slightly annoying, intending to
use the f6-square either for the knight or
the queen . In the following game Black
used this square to transfer his queen to g6,
and I could find no good way to avoid a
1 63
repetition: 8 . lt:l f3 Wff6 9 . 0-0-0 ltl c6 I O. ltl b 5
0-0 I I .1'!g l Wfg 6 1 2 .Wfh3 Wfg 4 1 3 .Wfh6
Wfg6 1 4.Wfh3 Wfg4 Yi-Yi R. Perr - Crouch,
Birmingham 2002.
8 .ib5 id? 9 . ltl ge2 a6 I O.ia4 Wf a5
1 0 . . . Wfe? 1 1 .0-0-0 b5 1 2.ib3 b4 1 3 .1'!xd5 !;!;
1 1 . 0-0-0 b5 1 2.ib3 b4? 1 3 . ltl xd 5
Th i s i s a typical example of Hodgson's plan,
with the switch of the bishop to b3 being
followed by a knight sacrifice on d 5 . There is
more analysis on these types of position in line
BI below.
5 c6
...
After 5 . . . Wf a5 White can play 6.dxc5 ,
transposing to the previous note (after 5 . dxc5
Wfa5 t 6 . ltl c3 ) , though 6.ib 5 t ! ? id? 7.ixd7t
lt:l xd7 8 .Wfh5;!; looks interesting too.
5 . . . cxd4 6. exd4 h5
This is quite a common plan; this strange
looking move has the idea of stopping White
from landing his queen on its optimal h5-
square.
a b c d e f g h
7.Wff3
This makes a lot of sense to me - this square
is also decent for the white queen, as it eyes
up h 5 , d5 and f5, as well as providing cover
along the third rank.
7 . . . e6 8 .0-0-0 lt:l c6 9 . ltl ge2 f5 1 0 .'itib l ig7
l I .h4
I l .Wfg3 ih6 1 2. h4 a6 1 3 . ltl f4;!;
1 64 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

l l . . .'Wb6 1 3 . ll'i c3 t ie7 1 4. tt'i xd5-+ Hall - Salmensuu,

Preventing lt'i b 5 . Panormo 200 1 .
l l . . .id7 looks a b i t sloppy: 1 2.'Wg3 if6 8 .ig2 b6 9 . 0-0 ia6 1 0 .l:'!e l ie7 l 1 . ll'i f4 l:'!c8
1 3 .ll'ib5;!; 1 2.Wh5 'Wd7
1 2 .We3 ii f8 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 . ll'i cxd5 exd5 1 4.Wxf5;!;
1 3 .dxc5 ixc5 1 4.l:'!ad U
Dromedar - Antidrome, Internet 2007.

a b c d e f g h
Here I have decided to cover two approaches
l 7 . . . dxc4? l 8.d5+-
for White, B l ) 6.dxc5!? and B2) 6.'@h5.
1 8 .c5

Bl) 6.dxc5!?

a b c d e f g h
This is an interesting idea, aiming for
Hodgson's set-up mentioned above after
7 . . .f5 5 . dxc5 , but not allowing Black as many
7 . . . cxd4 8 . exd4 Wb6 9 .ig2 Wxb2 options as capturing on the 5 th move.
1 0. 0-0 Wb6 1 1 .l:'!e l ib4 1 2.ll'ixd5 exd5
 Chapter 8 - 2 . . . d5 3 . e3 1 65

6 e6 7.'!Wh5 i.xc5 8.0-0-0 '!We7 9.i.b5 i.d7

.

10.ti:)ge2 0-0-0
1 O . . . a6 1 l .i.a4 b5 l 2.i.b3 b4 1 3 .xd 5 !;!; was
mentioned in the note to White's 5th move on
page 1 63 .

1 6.a3 ci>a7
1 6 . . . b6 1 7. a2 ie7 1 8 . f3 ib5 1 9 .'ll xb5
xb5 20.d2 c4t (20 . . . c6? 2 1 . 'll d4+-)
2 1 .b l b5 22. 'll d4 b6 23.d3;!;

17.tli d4 i.d7 1 8Jd3

1 l .e4 is perhaps too ambitious: 1 1 . . .d4 1 2 .'ll a4 White gradually prepares e3-e4.
id6N This novelty is given by Avrukh . ( 1 2 . . . e5
1 3 .'ll g3 ib4 1 4.b l was unclear in Breder - 18 i.e7 1 9.f3 '!Wb6 20.ti:)b3 '!Wc7 2 1 .edl
..

Ciron, Internet 200 5 , though White's position ci>a8

is simpler to play.) 1 3 .b l ( 1 3 . c3 ! ? could be
worth a try, when 1 3 . . . dxc3 1 4. 'll axc3 leads
to a balanced position, but 1 3 . . . e 5 ! ? might
keep an edge for Black) 1 3 . . . eS 1 4 .'ll g3
ic?+
It is difficult to suggest any ideas for Black.
22.ti:) d4 '!Wb6 23.ci>al ci>a7 24.e4;!;
B2) 6.'!Wh5

1 1 . .. ci>bs 12.ci>bl a6 1 3.i.xc6

1 3 .ia4 ! ? is of course playable too.

1 3 ...i.xc6 14J'.!:hel :!ks 1 5 .'!Wh6

Objectively the position may be equal, but
it is not so easy for Black to come up with a
plan, whereas White can gradually improve
his position and may look to prepare an e3-e4
break further down the line. The following is a
plausible continuation:

a b c d e f g h
1 66 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

Black now chooses between B2 1) 6 ... e6 and 8 . . . cxd4 9 . exd4 a6

B22) 6 ... cxd4. 9 . . . '\M!b6 1 0. 0-0 a6 looks less accurate:
1 1 .ixc6 bxc6 l 2 . lLi a4 'lM!bS 1 3 .b3 ie7
B2 1) 6 ... e6 1 4 .l'!fe l t
1 0.ixc6! ? ixc6 1 1 . 0-0 ie7 1 2 .l'!ae l '\M!d7
White has three reasonable ways to meet this 1 3 .l'!e3t
move, all of similar worth.
7 ... id7 8.lDge2
7.0-0-0!? 8 . f4 cxd4 9 . exd4 ib4 1 0. lLi ge2 f500 leads to
This is covered in Avrukh's Grandmaster a solid position for Black.
Repertoire 1 1 , and I have decided to take it as
the main line. 8 ... f5

7.dxc5 ! ? transposes to line B 1 above.

7 . lLi f3 ! ?
This was Hector's choice; White keeps open
the option of kingside castling.
7 . . . id7
7 . . . cxd4 8.exd4 transposes to line B22.

s B -

1 St :iB'i 'B 'i
6 :
, , , /. 1- L.. 7.

-
: r,J. . 7.-r


1

3 >' t ltJ-

2 08". ""' 7,
1 . , /.. =:r 9 . g4 was played in Van der Werf - Jakovenko,
h
.

b d f g
a c e
Saint Vincent 200 5 , and here Avrukh gives:
9 . . . fxg4N 1 0 .'\M!xg4 '\M!f600
8 .ib S ! ?N
With 8 . dxc5 ixc5 9 .id3 White is aiming to
9 ... cxd4
go kingside. Black may respond: 9 . . . ig7?! is met by 1 0 .g4 with the initiative.
a) 9 . . . '\M!b6 holds an empty threat. 1 0. 0-0
'lM!xb2? 1 1 . lLi b S ! leaves the black queen
1 0.exd4 '?Nf6 1 1 .ih5
vulnerable.
This looks most sensible to me.
b) 9 . . . '\M!e7 1 0 . 0-0 f5 1 1 .ixfS ! exf5
1 2. lLi xd S --+ looks promising for White.
1 1 .'lMle2 was Avrukh's main focus: 1 1 . . . 0-0-0
c) 9 . . . lLi b4 1 0 . 0-0 lLi xd3 1 1 .cxd3 and White 1 2.'lM!e3 id6 1 3 .g3 a6 1 4 .ie200 and it looks
has the initiative.
pretty balanced.
d) 9 . . . f500 is perhaps Black's best, intending
'\Mf f6.
.
1 1 ... id6
 Chapter 8 - 2 . . . d5 3 . e3 1 67

8 - --
7 .:r- % r- :-- , -
6
% .... - ; r- -
5 r .,Y. 'l" l
4

m-- -

m
ill
3
r- - ---; - -%
,

2_ .. . %(b'.8'0 rf!j
- -
1
8 rf!j
m . nm mn % 8 r .
- -
....

a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h
12.c!Licxd5!? 7 e6
..

This idea ofmine looks seriously tempting and
White seems to obtain decent compensation.
Certainly in a blitz game I would struggle to
stop myself playing this move immediately!
1 2 .g3 (Avrukh) and 1 2 . lll ce2 are both unclear.
7 . . . gg8 has the idea 8.Wxh7 gg600 Shrentzel
- Hodgson, Tel Aviv 1 98 8 , bur instead
8 .Wxd5!N give White an edge.
7 . . . lll xd4 ? 8 . 0-0-0 e5 9 .lll f3 ic5 (9 . . . lll xf3
1 0 .ib 5 t id7 1 1 .gxd5 +-) 1 0 . lll xe5 +-

1 2 ... exd5 13.c!Lixd5 g6 7 . . . Wb6 8 . lll x d5 Wxb2 9.gd l gb8 (9 . . . e6

1 3 . . .'g7 1 4 .ghe l t ! ? ( 1 4.Wh4 is similar 1 0 .lll xf6t md8 1 1 .id3 ib4t 1 2.mfl ie7
to our main line) 14 . . . s!if8 (not 14 . . . ie6? ? 1 3 .Wf3 id7 1 4 .lll e2) 1 0 . lll f.3
1 5 .gxe6t+-) 1 5 .Wh4 and again White has
play similar to the main line. s.tlia
White has a major alternative in:
14.h4 8 . 0-0-0! ? ib4
Threatening lll f6t . 8 . . . id7 9 .lll ge2 f5 1 0 .mb 1 f6 l 1 .Wf3
Threatening g3-g4. l 1 . . .ie7 1 2.Wf4 Wh4
14 .. fS
. 1 3 .We3 0-0-0 1 4.g3
Black cannot stop the threat with 1 4 . . . ie7?? 9 . lll ge2
in view of: 1 5 .ghe l ie6 1 6.Wxe7# 9 . lll ce2! ? is also possible: 9 . . . id7 1 0 .c3
id6 l 1 .lll f3 We7 ( l I . . .Wa5 1 2. s!i b l lll e7
15.c!Lif6 1 3 .ll\ c l ;!; Scho - ltter, email 2000) 1 2. lll g3
White can also try l 5 .lll f4! ? ixf4t 1 6.Wxf4t 0-0-0 1 3 .id3 With ghe l to come, chis
with d4-d5 on the cards. looks reasonable for White.
9 . . .id7 1 0.h4 ! ?
1 5 .ie6 1 6.d5
. A n interesting way t o develop the h l -rook.
White has the initiative. 1 0 . . . We7 l 1 .gh3 0-0-0 1 2 .ge3 Wf8 1 3 .g3
'.!?b8 1 4.Wf3!
B22) 6 cxd4 7.exd4
. Improving on an earlier game. Although
1 4 .lll f4?! lll e7?! turned our fine for White
in G . Mohr - Farago, Bled 200 1 , instead
1 68 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

14 . . . e5 !+ would have been problematic. 1 9 .lll a4 !!g8 20.'it>h l 00) 1 6.Wi'fl Suddenly
14 .. . f5 1 5 .a3 ie7 1 6.'it>b l lll a5 1 7.lll f4 Black has to worry about an attack on his
king. 1 6 . . . 'it>b? 1 7.lll a4 f4 1 8 .E:ad l Bosch
8 -

:
w: - F tacnik, Hamburg 2009; White intends to
7 ,% :f-'i" 'i
6 ,,,
continue with E:d3-b3.
.

. . 3 ,,
5.

T T 8 . . . f5 9 .ib5 ig7 1 0 . 0-0 id? I l .ixc6 ixc6 ?

;
4 . . .. :" W'0 ""''/, w- Arutinian - Kashlinskaya, Olomouc 2009, and
.J8l\WI
.

WA'0 %'"' ,.,. . ,

White now missed a great chance: 1 2.lll g5!N
3 !1Jr
"" 8 n I
-- ' . . . . . Y. "
Wi'd7 1 3 . lll xe6 Wi'xe6 1 4.E:ae l +-
2 w-
,d': " '
1 - -..t
; .. 8 . . . Wi'b6!?

b d f g h
Making White decide on his king position.
a c e
9 . 0-0-0! ?
1 7 . . . !!c8 ?! 9.ib 5 ! ? a6 1 0 .ixc6t bxc6 1 1 .!!b l c5
After 17 ... id6!N the resulting position 1 2 .dxc5 ixc5 1 3 . 0-0 id? 1 4 .Wi'h600
looks fairly balanced, though I slightly prefer 9 . . . id7
White. 9 . . . ib4 1 0 .Wh6
1 8 . lll cxd5 exd5 1 9 .Wi'xd 5
Black had two minor pieces hanging in
Jugelt - Farago, Deizisau 2008.

I O .ib 5N
1 0.id3 E:c8 1 1 .E:he I ie7 I 2.E:e3 lll b4
gave Black good play in Atanasiu - Zozulia,
Antwerp 20 1 1 .
a b c d e f g h 1 0 .a3 E:c8 1 l .ib5 a6 1 2.ixc6 bxc6 1 3 .Wi'h4
8 ...ih4 ie7 1 4.lll a4 Wb5 1 5 . lll c3 Wi'b7 1 6. lll a4
Black has various other moves: could lead to a draw by repetition.
10 ... ib4 I l .ixc6 bxc6 1 2 .Wi'h6 ixc3
8 . . . id7 ! ? 9 .id3 f5 1 0 . 0-0 Wi'f6 1 1 .!!fe l 0-0-0 1 3 .bxc3t
1 2 .ib5 Wg6 1 3 .Wi'h3 f6 1 4.ixc6 bxc6 1 5 .g3
Wg4 ( 1 5 .. . f4 is mentioned by Lakdawala with 9.id3 id7
the following analysis: 1 6.Wi'fl 'it>b7 1 7.E:ad l 9 . . . f5 1 0 . 0-0 Wf6 1 1 .E:fe l 0-0 1 2 .E:e3 Wi'g6
h5 [ 1 7 . . . Wxc2? 1 8 .E:d3 'it>a8 1 9 .E:b l ! !!b8 1 3 .Wi'h3 Wg4 1 4 .Wh6 Wg6 1 5 .Wf4 Hector -
20.lll e l ! +- traps the queen] 1 8 . lll h4 Wg4 Heinemann, Nuremberg 2008.
 Chapter 8 - 2 d5 3 . e3
. . . 1 69

1 0.0-0 i.xc3 1 1 .bxc3 lll aS?! out how White should handle this position in
1 1 . . .Wi'e? 1 2 .ab l 0-0-0 1 3 .fe l;!; order to gain an advantage.

1 2.fel Vffe7 4.Ad3 Ag4 s.f3

5 . lll e2 lll bd7 6.c4?? Amazingly a player of
Aronian's standard allows the most basic trick
in the Trompowsky. 6 . . . dxc4 7.ixc4 W/a5 t-+
Aronian - Radj abov, Monte Carlo (rapid)
2007.

s ... Ahs 6.lll e2

Here too, 6.c4? falls for the same trick.

6 ... lll bd7

C) 3 ... c6

... --
- ,
8
7 /,- , , - v,
, !.
, , ,
'(4f "
5 T ,
6 ,,
7.0-0

4 - -9
. ,. .3.W1i Removing any possibility of the . . . Wi'a5t trick.

.
If White can now get c2-c4 in unchallenged
3

. "ir;r"m-
and develop with lll bc3 , he will certainly hold
w'm.%
an advantage with better queenside and central

iliR
prospects than Black, as well as more space.

/, , , , , v,

a b c d
;.',, , , , /,

e f g
0, , , , , ;

h
7 ... es
This has to be critical.
This move was played against me by
David Howell in 20 1 0 . He is an occasional 7 . . . ig6
Trompowsky player himself, so it is worth This has been the usual move here, perhaps
checking out this rare line. That game was not indicating that the Black players don't trust
particularly interesting, ending in a stale draw, the advance of the e-pawn. However, the
but it inspired me to have a look in more detail compliant bishop move hands White a small
at this variation. I think I have now worked but risk-free advantage.
1 70 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

s .i B - 8 ...i.e7 9.i.xf6 Lf6 1 0.c:x:d5 c:x:d5 1 1 .tll bc3

76 . z 4)
' 1 '
. . z- tlJ b6 12.i.b5t @m 1 3.dxe5 i.xe5 14.VNb3

f ''l ;
z. White's advantage is dear, with the black

5 . . j
king misplaced in the centre of the board.

4 . . 8 - %/
.....
;
Conclusion: Both A) 3 . . . lll bd7 and C) 3 . . . c6

.1 . 8ttS- 8
3 . -
..
are quite sensible though slightly passive

2 c ii rJ. . . %
moves. I believe that White can expect to

ltJii'
z .... achieve an edge against both of them.
Line B) 3 . . . c5 is a more serious challenge,
h
. .

a b c d e f g highly regarded by many authors . In some of

8 . c4 i.xd3 the variations it is difficult for White to prove
8 . . . e6 9 . lll bc3 i.e7 1 0 . cxd5 cxd5 1 Uk l an advantage. That said, I have given a few
0-0 1 2.lll f4 c8 1 3 .lll xg6 hxg6 1 4.Wb3;!; ideas of how White can try and cause Black
White stands better with the bishop pair and problems, and I hope there are enough ideas
queenside pressure, Iotov - Gopal, Enschede and options here to give you at least one line
2009. which you would be happy to play.
9 .Wxd3 dxc4
9 . . . e6 I O . lll bc3 i.e7 1 1 .ad l 0-0 1 2.e4
c8 1 3 . b3 b6 1 4.@h l;!; White's additional
space ensures an advantage, Stefanova - N.
Kosintseva, Dresden 2008.
1 0.Wxc4 e6 l 1 .lll bc3 i.e7 1 2.e4 0-0 1 3 .i.e3
c8 1 4 .fd l;!;
Again White's space advantage ensures an
edge, Lputian - Vescovi , Moscow (ol) 1 994.
Chapter 9

2 ... e4 3.if4 d5 4.e3

1 .d4 f6 2.i.g5 e4 3.i.f4 d5 4.e3

A) 4 ... e6 5.i.d3 i.d6 6. e2 173

Al) 6 ... f6 173
A2) 6 ... 0-0 174
B) 4 ... i.f5 5.f3 175
Bl) 5 ... d6 175
B2) 5 ... f6 176
C) 4 ... c6 177
D) 4 ... c5 5.i.d3 179
D l ) 5 ... b6 179
D2) 5 ... cxd4 181
D3) 5 ... c6?! 1 83
D4) 5 ... f6 1 85
D41) 6.f3!? 1 86
D42) 6.c3 1 87
1 72 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 tlJf6 2.J.g5 tll e4 3.i.f4 d5
This solid move is not as popular as 3 . . . c5,
but nevertheless it is an important option as
it has been backed by many experts in this
variation. Boris Avrukh recommends this line
in his recent book Grandmaster Repertoire 11.
It was also the choice of Trompowsky expert
Pete Wells when playing me in 20 1 2, and I
noticed that it has slipped into the repertoire of
Mark Hebden, who is known for his excellent
opening preparation. Despite the backing of
these players I still feel happy with White's
chances of an advantage here.
This is Black's best, although we will check
out his other moves.
4 . . . e6 and 4 . . . c6 both get the standard
treatment of 5 .id3 intending ixe4 .
4 . . . if5 is met by 5 . f3 , after which White is
then able to grab space with either c2-c4 or
g2-g4.
s.i.d3!
As mentioned already, White intends ixe4.

4.e3
Unlike with 3 . . . c5 where I gave several
options for White, against 3 . . . d5 I am only
offering this single recommendation, for the
simple reason that I believe it is clearly the best 5 . . . tlJ c6 6.ixe4 dxe4 7.d5 looks promising for
choice for White. White.
For those who intend to meet 2 . . . d5 with
3 . e3, you need to be aware of this line as Black 5 . . . Wi'b6 6.ixe4 dxe4 7 . tlJ c3 and I prefer
can transpose into it with 3 . . . tlJ e4 4.J.f4. White here.
White's plan is to play id3 and ixe4.
Although Black may know what White's plan 5 . . . cxd4 6.exd4 and once again I like White.
is, it is nevertheless difficult for him to find an
effective way to deal with it. The latest try is to 6.c3
spend time dropping the e4-knight back to f6 This seems to give White a small but
when it is attacked. comfortable edge according to my detailed
analysis.
4 ... c5
I .d4 f6 2.i.g5 e4 3.i.f4 d5 4.e3 6.ixe4 ixf4 7. exf4 dxe4 8 . lll c3 is the
alternative, with a small edge for White.

Black usually chooses between Al) 6 ... f6

and A2) 6 ... 0-0.

6 . . . f5 ? looks like a mistake, as Black leaves

himself with a weak square on e5, whereas
White is able to control the e4-square: 7 . f3 !
lll f6 8 . c4 0-0 9 .lll bc3;!; Yemelin - Sgnaolin,
Rijeka 20 1 0 .

6 . . . lll d7 7.ixe4 dxe4 8 .lll d2 f5 9 . lll c4 \We?

1 0 .1Wd2 ixf4 l 1 . lll x f4 0-0 1 2.0-0-0 lll f6
a b c d e f g h 1 3 .h4 b5 1 4.lll e5;!; Akopian - Mohandesi,
Elista (ol) 1 99 8 ; White has a comfortable
We shall take a look at A) 4 ... e6, B) 4 ... i.f5 advantage with the better pawn structure
and C) 4 ... c6, before examining the main line and strong knights dominating Black's light
of D) 4 ... c5 . squared bishop.

4 . . . g6 receives the standard treatment: 5 .id3 Al) 6 ... tli f6

ig7 6.ixe4 dxe4 7. lll c3 f5 8 . f3 exf3 9 . lll xf3
lll a6 1 0 . 0-0 c6 l l .1We2 ie6 1 2 .l:!ad l lll c7
1 3 . lll g5 ig8 1 4 . e4;!; Bui Vinh - Bubalovic,
Harkany 2009.

A) 4 ... e6 5.i.d3 i.d6

7.0-0
7.ig5 was tried recently: 7 . . . e5 (7 . . . c5!?N
may be the way to go for Black) 8 . dxe5 ixe5
9 . lll bc3 c6 1 0.1Wd2 h6 l l .ih4 lll bd7 1 2 . f4
ixc3 1 3 .lll xc3 1Wa5 1 4 . 0-0-0;!; Bosiocic -
Rogulj , Sibenik 2009.
1 74 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

7.c4!? dxc4 8.ixc4 7 liJ c6 s.J.xd6 Vflxd6

.

8 . . . ixf4
8 . . . ltJ c6 9 .ib5 id? 1 0 . lD bc3 a6 1 l .ia4
b5 1 2 .ic2 ixf4 1 3 . lD xf4 e5 1 4.dxe5 lDxe5
1 5 .Wd4;!; Gallagher - Vogt, Lenk 200 5 .
9 . liJ xf4 e5 1 0 .dxe5 'Wxd l t 1 1 .@xd l lD g4
1 2 .liJd3
9 . f4 liJ b4 1 0 .liJ bc3 0-0 1 1 . lD g3 c5 1 2 . lD b 5
1 2 .@e2N lDxe5 1 3 . lD d5 @dB slightly
Vfle7 1 3 . dxc5 Wxc5 1 4 . liJ d4 Fridman - Arnold,
favours White.
Helsingor 20 1 1 ; perhaps White has a tiny edge
1 2 . . . if5 1 3 .@e2
but it's not a lot.

8 .1 U. D fl

,'----"
- --.i(Wf' fm0.....1-
--&
9 ... dxc4 1 0.J.xc4 0-0 1 1 .tlibc3
7 %
.....

: .
A2) 6 ... 0-0
: ,. ,.
.
4
....
.
3 @, .., ltj-- - - "r0 r
8 @ 8
g(- -- - - "]1
2

1
a b c d e f g h
1 3 . . . liJ d?!N
13 ... ixd3t 1 4 .ixd3 lD xe5 1 5 .ie4;!; White's
good bishop versus knight gave him the
advantage in Wang Yue - Macak, Istanbul
200 5 .
1 4 .d l
1 4. f4 liJ b6 1 5 .cl 0-0-0 1 6. liJ fL.
lDxc4 l 7 .xc4 lD xf2 gives Black good
7. c4
This looks a logical follow-up.
compensation for the pawn.
1 4 . . . lD gxe5 1 5 .lDxe5 lD xe5 1 6.ib3 0-000
7 . ..hf4
 7 . . . b6 doesn't get Black anywhere: 8 .Wc2 The knight may now retreat with
ixf4 (8 . . . ib7 9 . cxd5 exd5 1 0. tll bc3 f5 B l ) 5 lll d6 or B2) 5 ltlf6.
. .

1 1 . 0-0 We7 1 2 .:gae l tll d7 1 3 . f3 tll xc3

1 4 . bxc3;!;) 9.ixe4 ih6 1 0 .ixh7t;!; Hodgson - B l ) 5 lll d6
.

Thiruchelvam, Bradford 200 1 .

8.tll xf4 lll f6 9.lll c3 dxc4 1 0.ixc4 lll c6

1 1 .lll d3!
Targeting Black's only real idea, that of
playing . . . e 5 .

l l . .. e5

8 jj . --
7<
6
% t-
%....
'fa)- --- - ,Y.m----%
t
s jJjJ jj!Jjj!J jj!Jm" R jJjJ
4
3
jj!Jjj!J

m ttJef m
!o"
%""/- - - - W-'1'j"jj!J
0jj!J

2 c'i}
8d- '- ----%- - -
-JDfj ----%_z ----%
..

6 e6 7.c4 dxc4
1
.

a if n 7 . . . tll xc4 8 .tll xc4 dxc4 9 . e4 ib4t 1 0 .id2

b d f g h
ixd2t 1 1 .Wxd2 ig6 1 2 .ixc4 0-0 1 3 .tll e2
a c e
We7 1 4. 0-0;!; Lputian - Ilincic, Yerevan 2000.
1 2.dxe5
This is enough for an edge, but 1 2 . tll xe5!N 8.lll xc4 lll xc4
looks even stronger: 12 ... tll xe5 1 3 .dxe5 8 . . . tll d7 leaves White with slight but lasting
tll g4 1 4.Wxd8 ( 1 4 .Wd4;!; is also quite good) pressure: 9.:gcl tll xc4 1 0 .ixc4 id6 1 l . tll e2
14 . . . :gxd8 1 5 . tll b5 tll x e5 ( 1 5 . . . c6 1 6. tll c7 :gb8 0-0 1 2 .e4 ig6 1 3 . 0-0 e5 1 4.dxe5 ixe5
1 7. e6) 1 6. tll xc7 :gb8 1 7.ie2;!; 1 5 .Wb3 ixf4 1 6. tll xf4 lll b6 l 7.We3 tll xc4
l 8 .:gxc4 c6 l 9 .:gd4 Wb6 20.Wf2 f6 2 1 .:gd7;!;
12 lll g4 13.id5 lll cxe5 14.lll xe5 lll xe5
.. Hodgson - Hertneck, Germany 2000.
1 5.0-0;!;
Shimanov - Jerez Perez, Leon 20 1 2. 9.ixc4 ih4t 1 0.@fl id6 1 1 .lll e2 0-0
l 1 . . .h6 1 2 .Wb3 ( 1 2 . e4! ?;!;) 1 2 . . . ixf4
B) 4 ifS
.. 1 3 . tll x f4 tll d7 Winants - Van Haastert,
Netherlands 200 1 , and now 1 4. e4!N ih7
This move provides a target for White's pawns, 1 5 .:gad l , with d4-d5 on the cards, gives White
with f2-f3 and later g2-g4 gaining space on the a clear advantage.
kingside.
12.g4 i:xf4 13.lll xf4 '?Nh4t
5.B
1 76 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

6.g4 also looks promising: 6 . . . ig6 7.h4 h5

8 . g5 tll fd7 9 . c4 e6 1 0 . cxd5 exd5 1 1 . tll c3 c6
1 2.id3 ixd3 1 3 .Wfxd3 ie7 1 4 . 0-0-0 tll f8
1 5 .tll ge2 White has a rather pleasant position
with more space and a lead in development,
Yemelin - Laurusas, Warsaw 2009.

6 ... c6
6 . . . c5 ?! lets White grab material: 7.cxd5
tll x d5 8 .ixb8 tll xe3 (8 . . . xb8 9. e4) 9.ib5t
id7 1 0 .ixd7t Wfxd7 l l .Wfe2 tll xg2t 1 2.Wfxg2
xb8 1 3 .dxc5;!; Black did not have quite
enough compensation in Adams - Van Wely,
Tilburg 1 996.

6 ... ixb l hands White a small but safe

advantage: 7.xb l c6 8 .id3 e6 9 . tll e2 and
White has more space, Adams - Emms, Hove
1 997.
I4 ...Ag6 1 5,gc1
6 . . . e6
If Black plays passively then White has a
comfortable advantage, but active play from
Black may make matters worse, for instance:

15 ... tll c6 1 6.AbS e5 17.tll xg6 fxg6 1 8.bc6

White has a serious advantage.

B2) 5 ... tll f6

a b c d e f g h
7.tll c3
I prefer 7.Wb3! to cut out Black's option of
playing . . . ib4. Then after 7 . . . b6 8 . tll c3 c6
play transposes into the main line.
7 . . . ib4 8 .Wb3 tll c6 9 .a3
9 . g4 ig6 1 0 . h4 h5 1 l .g5 dxc4 1 2 .ixc4 tll d5
1 3 .ixd5 Wfxd5 1 4.Wxd5 exd500
9 . . . ixc3t 1 0 .Wfxc3 0-0 1 1 . tll e2 ig6 1 2 .h4
a b c d e f g h
e8 1 3 .g4 dxc4 1 4. e4 tll xe400
This led to unclear complications in Carlsen
6.c4 - J. Polgar, Rishon Le Zion 2006.
7. c3 e6 8.b3 b6 I 've faced 5 . . . if5 ? ? on several occasions in
8 . . . Wi'b6 9 .c5 Wi'xb3 1 0 . axb3:t internet games.

9.g4 .ig6 1 0.h4 h6

5 . . . tll d7 6 .tll e2 g6 7.ixe4 dxe4 8 . tll bc3 f5

9 . d 5 ! ? (9.h4t secures a safe edge) 9 . . . ig7
1 0. dxc6 bxc6 l I .tll d4 tll c 5 ? ( l I . . .Wi'b6! 1 2 . tll e6
l I . tll h3 ie7 1 2. 0-0-0 a5 1 3 . cxd5 and now
Wi'xb2 offers Black counterplay) 1 2.tll xc6 Wi'b6
instead of 1 3 . . . exd5 1 4.id3:t Winants -
1 3 .ie5! ixe5 1 4. tll xe5 Wi'xb2 1 5 . 0-0! 0-0?
Wiedenkeller, Neum 2000, Black should
( 1 5 . . . Wi'xc3 1 6.Wi'd5) 1 6 .Wi'd5t ie6 1 7.Wi'xc5
play 1 3 . . . tll xd5 !N00 which hits h4 and has the
gac8 1 8 . tll c6 1 -0 Fier - Zwahr, Zurich 20 1 2 .
point that 1 4 . tll xd5 cxd5 leaves the white king
looking vulnerable.
6.Le4 xb2 7. d2 dxe4
1 1 ... xd5
l l . . . exd5 1 2. tll h3 ie7 1 3 . 0-0-0:t

1 2.xd5 exd5
1 2 . . . cxd5?! 1 3 .Wi'a4t! tll d7 1 4. h 5 ih7
l 5 .ia6 and the a8-rook is in trouble.

1 3.0-0-0;!;
White has a pleasant position.

C) 4 ... c6 5 . .id3

a b c d e f g h
The standard response, looking to take on e4.

5 ...b6 s.lll e2
1 78 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

White should prioritize development here 1 2.ic7

and look to keep the momentum on his side.
8 . tt:l xe4 Wb4t 9.c3 WaS 1 0 . tt:l f3 tt:l d7 1 1 .0-0
g6oo
8 ... tli d7
After 8 . . . fS 9 . 0-0 tt:l d7 1 0 .a4 Wb6 1 1 . f3 exf3
1 2.tt:lxf3 White has excellent compensation for
the pawn .
8 . . . ig4 9 . 0-0 White continues to develop,
even at the cost of a second pawn. 9 . . . ixe2
1 0.Wxe2 Wxc2 1 1 .B:fc l Wd3 1 2.Wg4 tt:l d7
1 3 .tt:l c4 g6 1 4.B:ab l ig7 1 S .B:xb7 tt:l f6
1 6.WgS 0-0 1 7.B:b2 tt:l d S 1 8 .B:d2 Picking
up the queen. 1 8 . . . h6 1 9 .Wg4 1 -0 Yemelin -
Trofimov, St Petersburg 20 1 0.
White aims to make his opponent's queen a
little uncomfortable.
1 2 . . . b6 1 3 .B:ab l Was 1 4. tt:l d6t?
Too aggressive.
1 4.c4;!; is simple and keeps an edge.
1 4 . . . exd6 l S .We4t tt:l e S ! 1 6 .ixd6 ifS 1 7.Wh4
gS 1 8 .WxgS tt:l g6+
White found himself a piece down for
insufficient compensation in Popovic -
Solomunovic, Valjevo 20 1 1 .
1 2.a4 0-0 1 3.a5 Yds

9.tlixe4
White can further delay the recapture of
the pawn: 9 . 0-0 tt:l f6 1 0 . c4 Wa3 1 1 . tt:l g3 g6
1 2 .ieS ig7 1 3 . tt:l gxe4 tt:l xe4 1 4.ixg7 tt:lxd2
1 S .Wxd2;!; Black is unable to castle kingside
and short of space, Hodgson - Hjartarson,
Copenhagen 1 996.

9 g6
..

9 . . . tt:l f6 1 0 . tt:l xf6t exf6 1 1 . 0-0 ie7 1 2.Wd3

0-0 1 3 . c4 Wb6 1 4. e4 and White's strong
central pawns gave him the advantage m
Gorovykh - Trofimov, St Petersburg 20 1 0 .
14 ... a6
1 4 . . . B:e8 l S .B:fd l cS 1 6 . tt:l xcS tt:lxcS
1 0.0-0 J.g7 1 1 .Wd3 Wb6
1 7.WxcS ig4 1 8 . f3 ifS 1 9 .c3 b6 20.axb6
1 1 . . .Wb4
axb6 2 l .Wc7 B:c8 22.Wxd8+- left White a
pawn up for absolutely nothing in D. Pavlovic
- Solomunovic, Kraljevo 20 1 1 .

1 5Jfdl h6 1 6.B:ab l tli f6 17.tlixf6t exf6

18.a3
White's advantage is totally clear. He has
the superior pawn structure and his ongoing
pressure against the b7-pawn keeps Black's
queenside bishop and rook out of the game.
 Black has a variety of options here: D l )
5 . . .Wb6, D2) 5 . . .cxd4, D3) 5 . . . c!Li c6?! o r D4)
5 ... c!Lif6.

5 . . . ifS ? ? i s a version of a blunder w e have

already seen: 6 . f3 ! ll'i d6 ? (6 . . . WaS t! is the only
way to save the piece, but White has various
routes to a clear plus, for example: 7.c3 ll'i d6
8 .ixd6 ixd3 9.Wxd3 exd6 1 0 . ll'i e2) 7.ixd6
ixd3 8 .ixb8! 1 -0 White wins a piece,
Antidrome - Jaskier, Internet 20 1 0 .

D l ) 5 ...Wb6

28 .. J:!:b8 29.c!Lixc8 gxc8 30.Wb2t .if6

3 1 .gxc8 Wxc8 32.Wxb7
Another masterclass from Hodgson.

32 ...We6 33.Wxa6 Wa2 34.Wd3

1-0
Hodgson - Smejkal, Germany 1 996.

D) 4 ... c5 5 ..id3 This was previously seen as the main line,

but now that role has very much been taken
over by 5 . . . lll f6. I think the main game which
I have chosen here, Mickey Adams against
Xie Jun, is a major reason for the switch away
from this move. I was playing in the Hastings
Challengers at the time and I remember the
news spreading around the playing hall that
Adams had crushed his opponent in the
Premier tournament in ultra-quick time.

6 ..ixe4 dxe4
6 . . . Wxb2?! 7.ixd5 gives White huge
amounts of play for the exchange: 7 . . . Wxa l
8 . ll'i f3 e6 9 .ib3 cxd4 1 0 .0-0 lll c6 l l . exd4 ie7
1 2 .id2 ib4 1 3 .c3 ie7 1 4. c4 ib4 1 5 .ixb4
ll'i xb4 1 6.Wd2 Black needs to sacrifice material
1 80 Richard Pert - Play ing the Trom p owsky

to save her queen. 1 6 . . . lll d3 1 7.1Wxd3+ 1 0 .d6 f5 l l .g4 id? 1 2 .gxf5 exf5 1 3 .a3
Stefanova - Grobelsek, Rabac 2003. tli c6 1 4. tli d5 +- Antidrome - StepByStep,
Internet 20 1 2 .
7.c!lic3 9 . 0-0 tli d7 1 0 . a4!
I like this move, grabbing some space on the
queenside.
1 0 . . . a6 1 l . a5 l&d8 1 2 .ig3
1 2 .dxc5 !?N ixc5 1 3 .id6;!;
l 2 . . . tli f6

7 : , . . ,7. ,Y.
s i. U ..t B
. . .
6 , !
. . -.)% r-%
54
Jt. . .
:
..
. . . l< 0

,J
% .
3 R m r
7 ...'Wxb2
a b c d e f g h
2

1
- 8 % ''=
'- ft'8. . . %

7 . . . cxd4 8 .Wxd4 Wxd4 9 . exd4 f5 1 0 . f3 a b c d e f g h

tli c6 1 1 . 0-0-0 exf3 1 2 .tlixf3 id? 1 3 .d5 tli d8
1 3 .dxc5 !?N
1 4.he l with a big lead in development,
Again this move looks interesting.
Hodgson - Jackson, London 1 99 8 .
1 3 .l&b l ?! seems the wrong plan: 1 3 . . . id?
1 4.d l cxd4 1 5 . tli xd4 We? 1 6.tlia4 e5 !00
7 . . . if5 ? loses material : 8 . tli d5 Wa5 t 9 . b4 cxb4
Moskalenko - Cabrera, Salou 20 1 2 .
1 O.lll c?t +- Woj taszek - Gajdzica, Koszalin
1 3 . . . ixc5 1 4 .'l&xd8t 'kt>xd8 1 5 .fd l t @e?
200 5 .
1 6 . tli a4 ia7 1 7.id6t;!;
7 . . . e6 8 . tli ge2
8.c!lige2 i.g4?!
8 . . . tli a6?! hardly looks a problem: 9 . 0-0 g6
1 0 .b l l&a3 l l .d5 ig7 1 2 .d6 ie6 1 3 . lll b5
'l&xa2 1 4 .dxe? Wd5 1 5 .tli d6t 'kt>xe7 1 6.xb?t
'kt>f8 1 7.Wb I +- Winants - Harovelo, France
2004.

Perhaps Black should try 8 . . . cxd4, though

after 9.b l Wa3 1 0 . exd4;!; White is obviously
doing well.

9.c!lixe4! i.xe2 10.'kt>xe2!

8 .. . f5 White does not fear moving his king as his
8 . . . tli c6?! is provocative and I showed how clear lead in development means it is the black
to handle it in a blitz game: 9 . d 5 ! tli b4 monarch which is more vulnerable.
 Chapter 9 - 2 . . ttJ e4 3 .if4 d5 4.e3
. 181

1 0 ... cxd4 6 ... tli c6

6 . . . if5 ? ? is a third version of this blunder, in
j ust slightly different circumstances: 7.f3 ttJ d6
(Black also loses a piece after 7 . . ."l&a5 t 7 . tli d2
ttJxd2 8 .ixd2+-) 8.ixd6 ixd3 9 .ixb8+-

6 . . . Wb6 7 .tli c3!

This rarely played move looks really
interesting to me.
7.ixe4 is the alternative, but I do not think
that White should rush to give up his bishop
now that Black has clarified the centre.
7 . . . ttJxc3 8 . bxc3 lli c6

.i .i..
zl3.
.
8
7 -
.%. -f%'"%"""
.. '?j. %

:4 L--a,.
, -
:f-"'""
- -
14 ...Wc3 1 5.Wxc3 dxc3 1 6Jhb7 @f7 3
2
l2r-. - l
1 , lm Zmjf
17.tlid4 'it>f6 18.ic7 tlixd4t 1 9.exd4 a6
20.ga7 e6 2 1 .gbl ie7 22.ieSt
b d f g h
... v. %- . % 0 . .

1-0 a c e

White wins the bishop to wrap up a great 9 . tli f3 ! ?N

game, Adams - Xie Jun, Hastings 1 996.
D2) 5 ... cxd4 6.exd4!
I prefer this to the commonly played 6.ixe4 .
My view is that we can always take the knight
later, so why cut down our options?
9 . lli e2 g6 1 0 .Wd2 ig7 1 1 .ih6 0-0 1 2.h4
tli a5 1 3 .h5 Neiman - Trassaerc, France
200 1
9 . . . g6
9 . . . ig4 1 0 . 0-0;!; and the upcoming l:l:b l
looks a major problem for Black to deal with.
1 0 . 0-0 ig7 1 1 . h3 0-0 1 2 .Wd2 Wa5 1 3 .l:l:ab l
a6 1 4.a4;!;
Black has serious problems completing his
development, whereas White's play is relatively
simple with l:l:fe l to come.

7.ixe4
Transposing back into the main line which
arises from 6 .ixe4, having cut out some of
Black's options along the way.

If you would prefer to delay the exchange even

longer, you could consider 7 . tli e2 ! ? .
1 82 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

7.. dxe4 s.tll e2

. 9 ... e6
I had hoped to make 8. d5 work, but found The main alternative is:
a massive improvement for Black which makes 9 . . . Wa5 1 0 .h3 ih5 1 1 . 0-0 0-0-0
this line inadvisable for White: 8 . . . e5 9 .ig3
Wa5 t!N 1 0 . lli c3

a b c d e f g h

h
1 2 .We l N
b d f g
a c e
I think this solid approach should secure
1 0 . . . ia3! ! 1 1 .Wc l ib4 1 2 .dxc6 ixc3t White a small plus.
1 3 .bxc3 Wxc3t 1 4.@fl bxc6 1 5 .We l ia6t l 2.d5 was played by Joe Gallagher and
1 6. lli e2 ixe2t 1 7.@xe2 Wc4t+ endorsed by Pete Wells, but it looks a little
risky to me: 1 2 . . . e6 1 3 . dxc6 gxd l 1 4. cxb7t
8 ...i.g4 @xb7 1 5 .gfxd l ixe2!N Wells points out
8 . . . e5?! loses a pawn for insufficient that this move may be an improvement,
compensation. A game by Pete Wells shows the and I would agree. ( 1 5 . . . ib4? 1 6.g4 ig6
way here: 9.dxe5 Wxd l t 1 0 .xd l ig4 l l .lli bc3 1 7.gd7t @a8 1 8 .ie3 ic5 1 9 . lli d4t
0-0-0t ( l 1 . . .llid4 1 2.h3 llixe2 1 3 .llixe2 0-0-0t Gallagher - Rytshagov, Elista [ol] 1 998)
1 4.e l t) 1 2.cl h6 1 3 .gel g5 1 4.id2 ig7 1 6. lli xe2 ic5 ! This is my improvement on
1 5 .llixe4 llixe5 1 6.ic3 ghe8 1 7. lli 2g3 h5 1 8 .h3 previous analysis; by covering the a7-pawn
h4 1 9 .hxg4 hxg3 20 .f3 c7 2 1 .a4 f5 22.gxf5+ (against gd7 followed by ie3) Black ensures
Wells - Visser, London/Crowthorne 2006. that his king will be safe. 1 7 .gd7t @a8+ The
situation remains murky, but the material
9.tll bc3 advantage of queen for rook and knight
should give Black an edge.
1 2 . . . llixd4
1 2 . . . e6 1 3 .a3 ( 1 3 .lli xe4 Wxe l 1 4.gfxe l
ixe2 1 5 .gxe2 gxd400) 1 3 . . . lli xd4 1 4.llixd4
gxd4 l 5 . b4 Wa6 l 6.We3 l'!c4 l 7 . lli xe4t
1 3 .llixd4 l'!xd4 1 4.ie3 l'!d8 1 5 . lli xe4
l 5 . a4!? is another idea, aiming for queenside
play.
1 5 . . . Wxe l 1 6.l'!fxe l t
I slightly favour White, who has some
prospects on the queenside.
 Chapter 9 - 2 tt:J e4 3 .if4 d5 4.e3
. . . 1 83

1 0.h3 ih5 2 1 .b4! ixb4 22.ih4t rtle8 23.gc?;!;

1 0 . . . i.xe2 I l .'Wxe2! lll xd4 1 2.'Wxe4;!:; White has a dominant position .

1 1 .tlixe4 ixe2 1 2.'Wxe2 tlixd4 13.'Wd3 tli c6 D3) 5 ... c6?!

1 4.o-o-o Wxd3 I 5J'hd3 tli b4 I 6Jb3 ds
17.ig3 b6

Although this move is reasonably common,

after studying this position I have come to the
conclusion that the whole line is really j ust
dubious.

6.ixe4 dxe4 7.d5 b4

1 8.c3!N
This looks to be a strong novelty.
1 8 .d l c8 1 9 .@b l 00 Hodgson - Wells,
Oxford 1 99 8 .
1 8 ... xc3 19Jxc3 ic5 20,gdl rtle7
This may be the consistent follow-up to
Black's 5 th move, but in practice White has a
huge score against it.
7 . . . e5
Black should probably resort to this, but
White's chances are still preferable.
8 .i.g3 lll e7 9 . tLl c3

a b c d e f g h
1 84 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

9 . . . f6 players. Again you can see that White has a

9 . . . tli g6 1 0 .h4 h5 1 1 . 8 ( 1 1 . tli xe4 is playable: clear initiative.
1 1 . . . f5 1 2. tli g5 f4 1 3 .'<Mfd3 '<Mff6 1 4.exf4 exf4 l 1 . . . f6 1 2.ig3 '<Mfb6 1 3 .0-0 gd8 1 4 .h3
1 5 .i.h2;!;) 1 1 . . .i.e? 1 2.tlixe4 ( 1 2 .'<Mfd2!?N e6 1 5 .ih2 ig7 1 6.g4 ixg4 1 7.hxg4 exd5
i.xh4 1 3 .ixh4 lll xh4 1 4.tlixe4;!;) 1 2 ... f5 1 8 .tlixd5+-
1 3 . tli c3 ixh4 1 4.ixh4 lll xh4 1 5 .'<Mfd2;!; Nakamura - Mamedyarov, Moscow (blitz)
Radjabov - ]. Polgar, Benidorm 2003 . 20 1 0 .
1 0 .Wh 5 t tli g6
1 0 . . . g6 l l .'<Mfe2 i.f5 1 2. f3 exf3 1 3 .tlixf3 9.d6 c\i) c6
Wb6 1 4. e4;l; Note that 1 4 . . . 1Mfxb2 would lose 9 . . . Wa5 1 0. tli ge2
material to 1 5 .Wb5 t . 1 0 .'<Mfd2 also seems prom1smg: 1 0 . . . id?
1 1 . 0-0-0 '<Mid? 1 2 . tli xe4 Wf5 1 3 .'<Mfxf5 i.xf5 1 1 .gd l f5 1 2. f3 h6?! [ 1 2 . . . exf3 1 3 . tli xf3;!;]
1 4. tli d2 b5 1 5 .e4;l; 1 3 . fxe4 fxe4 1 4 .a3 tli c6 1 5 .tlixe4 and it
Laznicka - Huzman, Eilat 20 1 2 . looks great for White, Iotov - Spiridonov,
Albena 2009.
8.c\i) c3 10 ... id? 1 1 . 0-0 f5 1 2 .a3 tli c6 1 3 . b4 cxb4
1 4 .axb4 Wb6
1 4 . . . 1Mfxb4 1 5 .!b l
1 5 .b5
Hodgson - Tseitlin, Ischia 1 996; White
has a very comfortable position with a lead in
development and more space.

9 . . . a6 1 0 .a3 ! ?N Forcing the knight to retreat

without giving it the option of going to the d5-
square. (1 o . tli xe4 tli d 5 1 l .'<Mf d2 Wb6 1 2 . tli e2
f5 1 3 .tli g5 h6 1 4 . tli f3;!; Yemelin - Gheng,
Deizisau 20 1 1 ) 10 . . . tli c6 1 1 .tlixe4 f5 1 2 .tlixc5
e5 1 3 .d?t ixd7 1 4.ig5 !;!;
a b c d e f g h
8 ... e6
The alternative allows Black's knight to be
driven back to the a6-square:
8 . . . i.f5 9 .a3 tli a6 1 0. tli ge2 g6
1 0 . . . 1Mfb6 was one of my blitz games in
which you can see how easily White's play
flows: I Ub l 0-0-0 1 2. tli g3 e6 1 3 . tli xf5
exf5 1 4. 0-0 id6 1 5 . tli a4 Wa5 1 6.ixd6
gxd6 1 7.c4 gg6 1 8 . b4 cxb4 1 9 .axb4 lll x b4
20.'<Mfb3 b5 2 1 . tli c5 tli d3 22.c\i)xd3+
Anridrome - gaito, Internet 20 1 0 .
l l .ie5
We are following another blitz game, though
this one is between two of the world's top
 Ivanchuk won a famous game in this line
with an alternative approach:
1 0 .lll ge2 f5 ? !
1 0 . . . e 5 ! ? 1 1 . lll b5 exf4 1 2.lll c7t d7
1 3 .Wd5 Wf6 1 4. 0-0-0 ( 1 4. lll xa8 ixd6;!;)
1 4 . . . :gb8 1 5 .Wxe4;!;
1 1 . lll b5 @f7 1 2. lll c7 :gb8 1 3 .g4!
Ivanchuk opens up lines against his
opponent's king.
1 3 . . . fxg4 1 4 . lll g3 lll b4?!
Jobava plays this move for the second time
in the game, and neither time is it inspiring.
14 . . . g5 was the critical move, though
Ivanchuk was ready with an impressive piece
sacrifice:

s
7 :- Y,m, "
. . .AX
6 % i'f/ :
54 .. . % -
% -
l
. .. 13 ... gxf6 14.Wfh5t @g7 1 5.dxcSW gxc8

% 16.J.h6t @gs 1 7.0-0-0

The black king is a target for White's ongoing
ft rJj
2 ,. % , . . . %% '
attack.
3 %
1 rs{ 1 vf -111
D4) 5 ... tll f6

h
.. .

a b c d e f g

1 5 . lll xe4 gxf4 1 6.Wxg4 ixd6 1 7.Wh 5 t e7

1 8 . 0-0-0 Wxc7 1 9 .Wg5 t f8 20.Wf6t and
White wins.
1 5 .a3 lll d5 1 6. lll xe4 lll x f4 1 7.exf4 g8
1 8 .Wxg4+-
Ivanchuk - Jobava, Havana 200 5 .

1 0 ... 6
1 0 . . . e 5 ? 1 1 .ig5 Wa5t 1 2.c3 ie6 1 3 . lll f3
f6 1 4.ixf6! gxf6 1 5 .lll x f6t @f7 1 6. lt:\ e4 (or
1 6. lll xh7+-) 1 6 . . . h6 1 7.lll h4 ig7 1 8 .Wh5t+
Stohl - Kreisl, Austria 2008.
So we move on to the main move, which has
1 1 .J.g5 Wb6?! been the recent choice of GMs Boris Avrukh,
Black should have considered 1 1 . . .Wa5t Mark Hebden and Pete Wells. Trompowsky
1 2 . lt:\ c3 Wb6! with some counterplay, though expert Wells played this line against me in
White's chances are still preferable. 20 1 2; as you shall see below I got an advantage
1 86 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
against him, but let him off with too easy a
draw when I should have made him work a bit
more for it. Boris Avrukh improved on Wells'
play in his excellent Grandmaster Repertoire
11, and whilst his analysis is hard to break,
I disagree with the final evaluation he has
given in the main line - I believe that White's
chances look slightly preferable.
We shall take a quick look at the rare D4 1 )
6.f3!? before concentrating on m y main
recommendation of D42) 6.c3.
6.dxc5?! has been reasonably popular, bur it
looks dubious to me as White gives up his
centre and makes his d3-bishop look awkward.
Ir may be an interesting option against an
unprepared opponent, but I think I will save
this one for another time!
D41 ) 6.f3!?
6 . . . cxd4 7.exd4 ig4 8 . c3 ixf3 9 .Wxf3 c6
1 0 .g4 e6 l l .g5 tlJ d7 1 2.h4 ie7 1 3 . tlJ d2 tlJ b6
1 4.0-0-0 id6 1 5 .'it>b l ixf4 1 6.'Wxf4 and
White was clearly better in Zhang Pengxiang
- Li Haoyu, Hefei 20 1 0 .
6 . . . ig4 is best met by 7 .c3 when Black can
transpose to the main line by 7 . . . tlJ c6 . If Black
instead tries to be creative and take advantage
of White's unusual move order with 7 . . . 'Wb6
then he can find himself in trouble: 8 . dxc5 !
'Wxb2 9 .Wb3!;!; 'Wxa l ? ? 1 0 .'Wxb7 e5 l l . tlJxe5
ie7 1 2 . tlJ xg4 tlJxg4 1 3 .ib 5 t 'it>f8 1 4 .'Wc8t
with mate to follow.
6 . . . tlJ c6 7.h3 e6
This passive approach is not uncommon and
so having a look how this game proceeds
could be beneficial .
7 . . . 'Wb6 8.b3 transposes to our main line.
8 . 0-0 id6
9 . dxc5 !
A n important idea t o remember.
9 . . . ixc5 1 0 . tlJ bd2 tlJ b4 l 1 .ie2 0-0 1 2.a3
tlJ c6 1 3 .c4 a5 1 4.c l 'We7 1 5 .cxd5 exd5
1 6. tlJ b3
It's amazing how quickly Black can come
under pressure in this line.
1 6 . . . ib6 1 7. tlJ bd4 id7 1 8 . tlJ b 5
Ir is clear that White holds the advantage
here and can have a risk-free attempt at
exploiting Black's weaknesses.
1 8 . . . fc8 1 9 . tlJ d6 cb8 20.tlJb5 c8 2 1 .id6
'We8 22 .ic5 ixc5 23.xc5 'We7 24.c l
ie6 2 5 .'Wa4 tlJ e4 26.tlJ bd4 id7 27.fd l
h 6 28 .Wb3 ie6 29 .Wb6 ab8 30 .id3 tlJ f6
3 l .c3 tlJ xd4 32 .'Wxd4 xc3 33.'Wxc3 b6
34.'Wc6 'Wd8 3 5 . tlJ d4 id7 36.'Wd6 'Wf8
43 . i.xg6!
1 -0 R. per t - Britton, Sheffield 20 1 1 .
.

IO.t/:)c3! N
This is more am bitious than 1 0 . c300 Torre -
Duini, 01 0 ngapo C1ty 20 1 0 .
.

1 0 ... c:xd4 1 1 .exd4 i.g7 12."Lla e1

4 VNa5 1 3 .!::!.

0-0 14.c3 gac8 1 . g c 1

-: h lt::i c5 and b3-b4.

White may con tmue wit

D42) 6.c3

'*
" z

.
8 ... g6
8 . . . g 5 .1 . 1s a c I ever idea: 9 . i. xg 5 lt::i e4 1 0 .i.f4
( I O . liJ bd2 "l..J C 3 ) 1 0 . . . .::.
J":\
i:oi g 8 1 1 .g3 cxd4

;;
1 2 fil 2!;!; ' 1 1 . . . i.g7 1 2 . C3 i.f5

iii :'.'.i id;

(I I
1 3. 14 . ll.xe4 ) I o 4 %\' b4t 1 3 . c3
lt::i xc3 1 4 . xc3 %\' xc3t ; fl t Wo h
m
. :
reac h ed an interes ting posmon who Whire
1 88 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

6 ... tli c6 1 3. . .e5!?

Black has also tried: Returning the pawn seems t o be the way to
6 . . . Wlb6 go.
This is quite rare, but it looks interesting to 1 3 . . . ig4 ? ! 1 4 . f3 id? 1 5 .a6 b6 1 6 . it:) xc6
hit the b2-pawn when b 1 is not an option. ixc6 1 7 . it:) d4 id? 1 8 . it:) b 5 gives White an
overwhelming amount of play!
1 4 . it:) xc6 bxc6 1 5 .ixe5 .id6 1 6 .ixd6 Wxd6
1 7 .h3 0-0 1 8 . 0-0 c5 1 9 . c4
White keeps a slight initiative .

7.tlid2

a b c d e f g h
? . it:) d2!?N
An interesting sacrifice.
7.Wi'c l and 7.b3 are both possible, with
normal development to follow.
7.Wi'b3 c4 8 . Wi'xb6 axb6 9 . .ic2 is very similar
to a position from the London system with
White having a tiny advantage, but it's
nothing to shout about. a b c d e f g h
7 . . . Wxb2
7 . ig4
..

7 . . . c4 8 . .ic2 Wi'xb2 9 . it:) e2 Wb6 1 0 . 0-0-t

7 . . . e6 seems too passive and White has a
and e3-e4 will give White excellent play.
good chance to get an advantage: 8 . it:) gf3 ie7
8 . it:) e2 it:) c6 9 . a4 Wi'b6
(8 . . . id6 9 . dxc5 is similar to Pert - Britton
Black evacuates his queen before White
given in the note to Black's 6th move in line
starts targeting it.
04 1 ) 9.h3 Wb6 1 0 .Wc2 id? 1 1 . 0-0 c8
I O . dxc5 Wxc5 I l . it:) b3 Wb6 1 2 .a5 Wd8
I 2.a3 0-0 I 3 . dxc5 Wi'xc5 I 4.b4 Wi'b6 I 5 . c4
1 3 . it:) ed4
a6 1 6 .ac l Wi'a7 1 7.Wb a White had a
White's lead in development offers good
pleasant edge in Laznicka - Werle, Germany
compensation.
2008.

7 . . . g6 8 . it:) gf3 ig7 9 . h 3 0-0 1 0 . 0-0 it:) d?

1 l .ib5 a6 1 2 .ixc6 bxc6 1 3 . b4 c4 1 4. e4
Anastasian - Ghaem Maghami, Stepanakert
2004.

7 . . . Wlb6
With this move order White can defend the
b-pawn naturally.
8 . l:'!: b l 9.0-0
Sacrificing the pawn with 8 . lLi e2!?N is
interesting and now:
a) 8 . . . Wxb2 transposes into the previous
note on 6 . . . Wb6.
b) 8 . . . ig4 9 . dxc5 Wxc5 1 0 . b4 ixe2 l l .Wb3!
Wb6 l 2.ixe2;!;
c) 8 . . . g6 9 . 0-0 ig7 1 0 . dxc5 Wxc5 l l . b4
Wb6 1 2 . b 5 lLi d 8 1 3 .ie5 lLi e6 1 4 . lLi b3;!;
d) 8 . . . c4 9 .ic2 Wxb2 1 0 . a4 e6 1 1 . 0-0 Wb6
1 2 . e4 ie7 1 3 .l:'!:b 1 Wd8 l 4 . lLi g3 0-0 l 5 . e5
lLi d7 1 6 .Wf3t and White's compensation is
obvious.
8 . . . ig4 9 . lLi gf3 e6 1 0 .h3 ih5 1 1 . 0-0 cxd4
1 1 . . .ie? 1 2 . dxc5 ! Wxc5 1 3 . b4 Wb6 1 4 . c4;!;
1 2 .cxd4 ie7 1 3 . b4 0-0 1 4 . a3;!;
White holds an edge with more space on the
queenside, Cao Sang - Gupta, Kuala Lumpur
20 1 0 . 9 . . . ie7
This looks natural and was the choice of Pete
8.gf3 e6 Wells against me in 20 1 2 .
It seems a bit premature for Black to 1 0 .h3
exchange pawns: It is a tricky debate as to whether White
8 . . . cxd4 9 . exd4 e6 1 0 .Wb3 should insert this move or not, but it
1 0 .Wa4 lLi d7 1 1 . 0-0 ie7 1 2 .h3;!; probably leads co much the same thing.
1 0 .Wb3 Wc8 l l . dxc5 lLi d7 1 2 .id6 lLi xc5
1 3 .ixc5 ixc5

8 :::.,
'!--r).
. . ; ... . .7.
16 .7. r &
5 - r
4 - ,

r r
2 f:j f. f:j f
3 JJ8l!Jw
a b c d e f g h
1 D
. . 7.
'

L.
1 0 . . . Wb6
1 0 . . . Wc8 l 1 . lLi e5;!; a
.

b

c d e f g h
10 ... lLiaS? l l .Wb5t lLi d7 1 2 . b4 and White 1 4 . c4!N Black has problems handling
wins the b7-pawn. this move and White already has a plus.
1 0 . . . id6 l 1 .Wxb7 0-0 1 2 .ig3;!; ( 1 4.l:'!:ac l ?00 Le Quang - Pruijssers,
l 1 . h3 ih5 1 2 .Wxb6 axb6 1 3 .ib5 lLi d7 Gaziantep 2008, missed this opportunity)
1 4 . lLi e5;!; 1 4 . . . dxc4 ?! 1 5 .Wxc4 ixf3 1 6 .Wxc5 'Wd7
1 90 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

( 1 6 . . . id5 1 7 . e4+-) 1 7 . tll xf3 Wxd3 1 8 .gfd l cannot afford to let White take the b7-pawn :
and Black i s i n serious trouble.
1 0 . . . ihS 1 1 .Wb3 Wc8 1 2 . dxcS ! lll d7 a) I O . . . dxe3 ?! I 1 .Wxb7 and now:
1 2 . . . ixcS is again met by the simple 1 3 . c4 a l ) I 1 . . . exf2t 1 2 .gxf2 Wc8 1 3 .ia6+-
dxc4 1 4 .Wxc4;!; a2) I l . . .gc8 1 2 . fxe3 with ia6 to come.
a3) 1 1 . . . eS 1 2 .ixeS exf2t 1 3 .gxf2 id7
8
,.i'-
ii'

. J 1 4 .ixf6+-

7 : t .t.
; r
a4) I 1 . . .Wc8 1 2 .Wxc8 t gxc8 1 3 . fxe3 ie7
6 '- '
w-



'
1 4 .ia6 gd8 1 5 .ib5 gc8 1 6 . tll e5 g5 1 7 .ig3+-

5

0
-
4 .z . . . .. z W.;'..t.
b) I O . . . dxc3 I 1 .Wxb7 Wc8 1 2 .Wxc8t gxc8

l "
1 3 . bxc3 ia3 ( 1 3 . . . tll aS 1 4 .ib S t) 1 4 .ia6

. .
3a n'. zWB 8
ff
f.'%
2 0 /..J:. O'l. 0 c) I O . . . Wc8 I l . cxd4;!; White will continue
t '
..
'

1
.

-. .:
'.
0 . with gac l , building up serious pressure on

h
,

Black's queenside.
b d f g
.....

a c e

1 3 .id6 ixd6 1 4 . cxd6 tll c5 1 5 .WbS tll xd3
1 6 .Wxd3 Wd7 1 7. c4 Wxd6 1 8 . cxdS Wxd 5
1 9 .WxdS exd5 20.gac l ;!;
Yi-Yi R . Pert - Wells, Daventry 20 1 1 . Really
I should be playing on this position.
9 . . .id6 I O .%Vb3!N;!; looks difficult for Black
to meet: I O . . . ixf4 ( 1 O . . . gb8 1 1 . dxcS leaves
White a pawn up) I 1 .Wxb7 and White wins
a pawn .
1 0.'?;Va4 tll d7N 1 1 .tll e5 tl:Jdxe5 1 2.ixe5
'?;Vd7 1 3.ig3 ih5
1 3 . . . c4 1 4 .ic2 ie7 1 5 . b3 cxb3 1 6 .axb3
gives White good pressure down the a-file:
16 . . . 0-0 I 7 . b4 b6 So that b4-b5 can be met
by . . . tll a5 . ( I 7 . . . a6 1 8 . b S axb 5 1 9 .WxbS looks
promising for White, with ongoing queenside
pressure) I 8 . h 3 ih5 I 9 .id3 id6 20 .ixd6
Wxd6 2 1 .gfc l gc7 22.ibS gfc8 23.ixc6;!;

9 . . . cxd4

s .i B
-
t
%... ; . . .
7 - - ,
-
6
.
5 . r
',.... . :
4 0 .%
..t.
3 efn
,.,,,;,(- r0
2 A ii"
O r.0% ':-?

:
'ii" A !"0
r.Oz O

1 m
J
v1
-.

'
.j
..

b d f g h
. ,

a c e

Avrukh gives this position as unclear, but I

I O .Wb3 !!N This powerful novelty is given in
marginally prefer White.
Avrukh's book, though I was already aware of
the idea. The following lines show that Black
14.gfern
 Chap ter 9 - 2 . . . ttJ e4 3 .i.f4 d5 4.e3 191

This multipurpose move seems like a good 1 4 i.e7

...

starting point. Either Black is going to open 1 4 . . . cxd4 looks a solid option: 1 5 . exd4 id6
up the e-file for our rook by taking on d4 1 6.ixd6 ( 1 6 . tll b3 is also possible, for example:
when we shall recapture with the e-pawn , or 1 6 . . . ixg3 l 7 . hxg3 b6 1 8 .Wa3i) 1 6 . . . Wxd6
alternatively we shall aim to play an e3-e4 1 7 .l:!e3 0-0 1 8 .l:!ae l ;!; I slightly prefer White,
break at some point in the future to unleash who has the more active pieces and perhaps
this rook. some prospects of an attack on his opponent's
king.
1 4 . dxc5 ! ?
Clarifying the centre immediately and 14 . . . c4 1 5 .ic2 ie7 1 6. e4 ! ?
thereby cutting down Black's options. Th i s opens u p the e-file for o u r rook, though
1 4 . . . ixc5 in this position it has the downside of giving
Black the option of .. . f5 at a later stage to
harass our g3-bishop.
The otherwise desirable 1 6.b3 runs into a
tactic: 1 6 . . . cxb3 l 7.axb3 tll b4! and Black is
doing well .
1 6 . . . 0-0 1 7. exd5
l 7.b3 cxb3 l 8 . axb3 f5 leads to the same
thing.
1 7 . . . exdS 1 8 . b3 cxb3 1 9 . axb3 f5 20 . f3
It is also possible to play: 20.f4 a6! (20 . . . l:!fe8
2 1 . tll fl ;!; favours White, who can attack the
weak pawns on a7, d5 and f5)

u.U. .i ,_ . Y..,
1 5 .Wh4
1 5 . tll b3 ! ?
1 5 . . . ib6
also looks
( 1 5 . . . ie7
quite
1 6 . f3 0-0
interesting:
1 7 .l:!ad l
8
7
6 ' " .;. , . '..7:
. ...

Intending e3-e4. 1 7 . . . fS 1 8 . c4;!;) 1 6 .Wa3 ....

White's idea is to stop Black from castling.

1 6 .. . f6 1 7 .l:!ae l t 5 ..,.r

r
1 5 . . . g6 4 !.J%
.8 "
3 8 lf
W@=
This makes the bishop on h5 look a bit funny,
.

m .
2 -J: . . .
but the alternative is hardly appealing.
1 5 . . .ig6 1 6 .ixg6 fXg6 1 7 . tll f3 0-0 1 8 . e4;!;
definitely looks better for White, who will

continue with l:!ad l and Wg4 to pressure a b c d e f g h
Black's weak central pawns . Black is aiming for a quick . . . b 5 -b4. We have
1 6 . tll b3 ie7 the possibilities:
1 6 . . . ib6 1 7 .if4;!; a) 2 1 . tll fl ? b5 22.Wa2 b4+
l 7.Wa4 0-0 l 8 . f3 b) 2 1 .id l leads to an in teresting position
With the black bishop shut out on h 5 , I with chances for both sides: 2 l . . . b5 22 .Wxa6
slightly prefer White. ixd l 23.l:!axd l b4 24 . c4 tll xd4 2 5 .if2 if6
1 8 . . . a6 1 9 .l:!ad l l:!fd8 2 0 . e4 d4 2 1 .ib l e5 26. tll f3 l:!a8 27.Wb6 l:!fb8 28 .Wc5 tll xb3
22 .if2;!; 29 .We3 ic3 3 0 . l:!xd500
1 92 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

c) 2 I .!d3 b5 22 .Wxa6 b4 2 3 . c4 lll xd4 1 6 . . . !e7 l 7 . e4 ( I 7.f3 also looks interesting:

results in a complex position with balanced 1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8 .ad l;!;) 1 7 . . . 0-0 1 8 . exdS Wxd5
chances . 1 9 .ie4;!;
20 . . . a6
Again I like this idea for Black, keeping a 1 6 . . . !d6 is similarly met by: 1 7 . e4;!;
quick . . . b5 -b4 on the cards.
2 1 .id3 f4 17.h4!?
2 1 . . . b S 22.Wxa6 b4 2 3 . c4 lll xd4 24.cxdS;!; White swings his queen over to take
seems slightly better for White, who benefits advantage of the tempo on the h5 -bishop.
from having his pawn on f3 rather than f4 .
22 .!2 f6 2 3 . b4 !g6 24 .!fa 17 ... !g6
White has a tiny pull and may be able to In this particular variation I 7 . . . g6 looks a
break with b4-b5 at some point. bit awkward after I 8 .!f4 . White threatens
g2-g4 and so 1 8 .. . fS may be necessary, but

-m.1 wm then White clearly holds the advantage.

s
7 /_,
6

-"if
% -
,-
%

ef" "'Y.
1 8.J.xg6 fxg6 1 9.lll d4

% ....%

,-.!,
. -----%

My preference is to bring the knight across

to the kingside, though the immediate I 9 . e4 is
5 0 also possible: 1 9 . . . 0-0 20 . ad l t
'! %

43 1%/..JwPw0 w
%!J8l/. .J%
1 9 ... 0-0 20.g4 ke8 2 1 .lll f3

2 :ef--. . ... :ef . % . .

White's knight is very well placed on this
A W /
m J:
Wf\' A W
-
square, providing additional cover to the f2-

;-;
0 iO iU 0 z-O

% ------ -- . .. %
pawn and hitting the important e5 -square.
1
b d f g h
,, , . . Y. . . . .%

a c e
/, , , , ,

2 1 . ..J.c7 22.e4!
1 5.dxc5! I prefer White, who has good central pressure
Releasing the tension in the middle now that with ad l to come.
Black has spent a move with his bishop. This
makes way for a future e3-e4 from White. Conclusion: 2 . . . ll:\ e4 3 .!f4 d5 is a solid
option for Black, but I have endeavoured to
1 5 ...i.xc5 1 6.lll b3 show that 4.e3, intending to follow up with
The immediate 1 6 .Wh4 ! ? also looks strong: id3 and at the right time !xe4, offers Wh ite
1 6 . . . g6 ( 1 6 . . . !g6 again leads to a clear an edge against various Black options.
advantage for White: 1 7 .ixg6 fxg6 1 8 . lll f3;!; The critical battleground occurs in line
with ad l , e3-e4 and Wg4 to come, pressuring 04 after 4 . . . c5 5 .id3 ll:\ f6, which was
the centre) 1 7. lll b3 !e7 1 8 .Wa4 0-0 1 9 .f3 recommended for Black by Avrukh in
This slightly favours White with the bishop Grandmaster Repertoire 11. While I agree with
stuck out on h 5 . the majority of what Avrukh says, my maj or
point of divergence is in the evaluation of
1 6 ... !b6 the position after 1 3 . . . ihS on page 1 9 0 - I
This looks Black's most ambitious, keeping hope that I have demonstrated that White's
his bishop actively placed in anticipation of a chances should be considered preferable in this
future e3-e4 push . position.
Chapter 10

Rare 3rd Moves

I .d4 f6 2.i.g5 e4 3.i.f4

A) 3 ... g5?! 1 95
B) 3 d6
1 96
C) 3 g6?!
. 1 96
D) 3 e6!? 1 97
E) 3 e5?!

.. 1 97
1 94 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 .d4 Cll f6 2.i.g5 lti e4 3.i.4 a) 3 ... g5?! This provocative move looks

8
misplaced to me and we'll have a look at the
correct antidote. It seems to be a common

76 choice of aggressive blitz players, but it doesn't

cut it in long play.

5
b) 3 d6
. was the choice of Luke McShane
against me. I managed to take an advantage

4 out of the opening in that game, as we shall

32 see.

c) 3 ... g6?! seems a little strange inviting

1
f2-f3 and e2-e4 with easy play for White;
nevertheless it is surprisingly common so we
had better take a look.

To make sure chat we have the Trompowsky d) 3 e6!? is an interesting idea recommended
..

totally covered we must deal with various
odds and ends, and in chis chapter we are
going to cover Black's rare 3 rd move options.
These variations include an assortment of
lines ranging from the out-of-date to the
by Andrew Martin in an article some years
ago. Black aims for an early . . . id6 to offer an
exchange of bishops.
e) 3 e5?! Unbelievable - it is amazing that
.

ridiculously new! chess has got to a point where we need to look

at moves like chis! This pawn sacrifice was
recently suggested in an article in New in Chess
Yearbook 1 03 .
1 .d4 tll f6 2.i.g5 tll e4 3.i.f4 7 . c3 ? !
Perhaps White could try 7 . dxc5 ! ?N ,
'=' A
:\\it/: W though t o be honest I don't really feel that
8 .a. .JL EW Bf
.
7 J.11 '%, .&. x-%,
%. & !', %' & r &
!"%. comfortable playing these positions as
rlf"""r .
ix A ix A i% A ix A
.

""' - , , ,% "" ' -

6 ""' -
----- . ..

?,ii
White.
7 . . . cxd4 8 . cxd4 Wlb6
Although this gives Black good play,
5
. . . -m
m -, , 0,% 41) 8 . . . tli c6!N may be even stronger.

4 -
.

9 . tli c3 ixd4 1 0 .e3 ixc3 t l l . bxc3 f6 1 2 .if4

32 8 -wfj0 8 8 -wfj0 8 wt!J e5 1 3 .ig3 Wxe3 t 1 4 . tli e2 Wc500

m
Talbot - Gormally, Leeds (rapid) 20 1 2 .

1 ltS "if=JZm
a
/, . ,
. v.

b
..
c d
/,

e
.
%

f g
%-. . . . . .

h
4 ... 6 5.e3 h5

So what else can Black do here other than

the standard moves 3 . . . c5 and 3 . . . d5 that
we have already exam ined? We shall look at
A) 3 ... g5?!, B) 3 ... d6, C) 3 ... g6?!, D) 3 ... e6!?
and E) 3 ... e5?!.

A) 3 ... g5?!

Aggressive but too loose.

4.i.e5
The main alternative is the retreat:
4.ic l
Palliser gives this move an exclamation 6.i.d3
mark, and although White may be better, I think that this relatively rare move is the
it seems to me that it is far from clear. In best way to exploit Black's weakness on the
this game Danny Gormally, who knows e8-h5 diagonal. I 've included a couple of blitz
the Trompowsky well , comes up with some games of mine due to the lack of "real" games
interesting counterattacking ideas for Black. in this line.
4 . . . ig7! 5 . f3 lll d6 6 .ixg5 c 5 !
6 ... d5 7.f3 fxe5 8.fxe4 exd4 9.exd4 i.g7
9 . . . dxe4 1 0 .ixe4 Wd6 l I . tli c3 a6 1 2 . tli f3
lll c6 1 3 .Wd3 tli b4 1 4 .ig6t+- Antidrome -
Abul l 1 48 , Internet 20 1 1 .

1 0.eS!?N!
The threat of ig6t gives White a small plus.
The more fluid 1 0 . tli c3;l; also sufficed
for an edge in Antidrome - baza, Internet
20 1 1 .

a b c d e f g h
1 96 Richard Per t - Playing the Trompowsky

B) 3 ... d6 5.e3 xd.2 6.YMxd.2 tD d7 7.6 e6 8.id3

ixd3 9.'iMxd3 ie7 10.0-0
White's additional space gives him an
advantage. I 've included the rest of the game
to show how White's position is easier to play
than Black's.

Luke McShane's choice against me in an

important last-round game in the Politiken
Cup.

4. d2 if5
4 . . . f6 5 . e4 g6 6 . gf3 ig7 7 .ic4!? bd7?!
(7 . . . 0-0 8 . 0-0 bd7 9 .We2 c6 1 0 . h3;!; White
has more space)

J -Ji'
JJ;J: . 'tt
8
7
6 " ""lifi"
.t. 'Jl) i i .

54 @ -r
jJ
-'0
"0
8
3
2
-0 " % '"'/,
'0 ,
8 r 8 m r 8 rt!f 36.YMest @h7 37.YMg6t @gs 38.YMest
11z_11z
l -?. iim
t "r %v,{' "W
:.... . R. Pert - McShane, Copenhagen 2002.
a b c d e f g h
8 .ixf7t!? ( 8 . 0-0 0-0 9 . c3;!;) 8 . . . 'iti xf7 9 . g5t C) 3 ... g6?!
'iti g8 1 0 . e6 We8 1 1 . xc? Wd8 1 2 . xa8
f8 1 3 .e5 d5 1 4 .ig3;!; Richter - Albinus, This doesn't look like a good move to me. White
Berlin 2007. is invited to play f2-f3 and e2-e4, and has the
future idea of Wd2 and ih6. I 've included a
4 . . . xd2 5 .Wxd2 d7 6 . 0-0-0 c5 7.e3 a6 typical game to show what can happen .
8 . f3 h6 9 .ig3 We? 1 0 . e4;!; Miladinovic -
Damljanovic, Vrsac 2007. 4.6 f6 5.e4 d6 6. c3 ig7 7.Wd.2 o-o
8.0-0-0 bd7 9.ih6 c5 10.d5 a6 1 1 .h4 b5
 Chapter 1 0 - Rare 3 rd Moves 1 97

12.i.xg7 xg7 13.h5 tlig8 14.g4 a5 1 5.bl 8 . . . 0-0

tlib6 16.e5 tlic4 17.i.xc4 bxc4 18.hxg6 fxg6 8 . . . d5 9 . tt'l f3 0-0 1 0 .id3 b6 1 l . c3 ia6
19.exd6 exd6 20.h2 h6 21 .xd6 b4 1 2 .ic2 g5 1 3 . g4 fxg4 1 4 . tt'l xgS tt'l xg5
22.e5t h7 23.tlie4 tlif6 24.tlixf6t 1 5 .Wi'xg4 h8 1 6. fxgS We7 1 7 . tt'l d2 c5
1-0 1 8 . 0-0-0;l; Vitiugov - Deszczynski, Warsaw
Lin Weiguo - Mai Dongqi, Jinan 200 5 . 2008.
9 . tt'l c3 d 6
D) 3 ... e6!? I remember the article saying that Black
should look to play . . . b6 at some point, so
let's take a look it here: 9 . . . b6 1 0 .Wd2 ib7
1 1 . 0-0-0 tt'l c6 1 2 . tt'l f3 tt'l e7 1 3 .ie2 a5
1 4 JhgU with g2-g4 on the cards .
1 0 . tt'l f3 c5 1 1 .dxcS dxe5 1 2 .Wi'xd8 xd8
1 3 . tt'l xeS tt'l xe5 1 4 .fxeS tt'l c6 l 5.ic4 tli xe5
1 6 .ib3 Wh8 1 7. 0-0 g6 1 8 . tt'l b S t
Kamunen - Nevanlinna, Finland 2007.

4 ... tlixd2 5.xd2 d5 6.e3 i.d6 7.tlif3 0-0

8.i.d3
White's slight lead in development gives him
an edge.

I remember Andrew Martin recommending E) 3 ... e5?!

this move in an article some years ago. It looks
an interesting idea, although I slightly prefer
White.

4.tli d2!?
I find it difficult to pick between this and the
more complex:
4 . f3 ! ? id6
Black's idea.
5 .ixd6 tli xd6 6 . e4 f5 7.e5 tlif7 8 . f4

GM Rusev wrote an article about this move

in New in Chess Yearbook 1 03 , claiming that
it could become one of the future main lines
against the Trompowsky. But the truth is that
it is rather dubious as Black struggles to prove
that he has compensation for the pawn .
1 98 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

4.dxe5 7 . . . if5 8 . lll d4 lll xd4 9 . cxd4 (9. lll xe4!?

4 .ixe 5 ? ! looks all wrong: 4 . . . lll c6 5 . lll f3 d5 lll e6 1 0 .Wa4t Wd7 1 1 .Wxd?t 'kt>xd7
6.h3 lll xe5 7 . dxe5 c6 8 . e3 Wb600 Nuding - I. I 2 . lll g3 lll xf4 I 3 . lll xf5 'kt>e6 I 4 . tli g3 'kt>xe5
Schneider, Frankfurt 2 0 1 1 . 1 5 . 0-0-0t) 9 . . . Wb4 1 0 . f3 lll c5 l 1 . e3 lll e6
1 2 . g4 ig6 1 3 .Wb3 h5 1 4 .g5t
4 ... d5 8 . lll xe4
This is Black's idea, trying to grab some space The more complicated 8 . h3!? should also
i n the centre. secure a plus: 8 . . . ixf3 (8 . . . ih5 9 . lll xe4
dxe4 1 0 . lll g5t) 9 . exf3 (9. gxf3 lll c5 1 0 . lll b3
5.tll d2 0-0-0 l I . lll xc5t) 9 . . . lll xd2 (9 . . . lll c5
5 . exd6 ? Wf6! plays into Black's hands . 1 0 .ib5t) 1 0 .Wxd2 lll xe5 1 1 . 0-0-0 0-0-0
1 2 .We3 lll c6 1 3 .id3t
5 ... We7 8 . . . dxe4 9 . lll g5 f6 1 0 . lll xe4 lll xe5 l l . f3 if5

.1at.tm-
1 2 .Wa4t id? 1 3 .Wb3 0-0-0 1 4 . 0-0-0t

White is a pawn up for not a lot.

s
%ef , , , , , ;r '%" " ' '/.
. . ,,." . . . & .. .. ,,&
, :<,N 'V.(' ""Y,
7
& iai,, ff-- g :%'./, 6 ... dxe4
i/,
6

. . . , ,, , , , , , ,, .

5 "'01 0 .i -..tUm
. % ..
s .

43 - -
-

.. .. ,Y.
7
.. . . . % ..
,,.,,% ..
.. . %
6 *
%. .. . . .. .

w-0 %'"//, % ,, % '0

2 %8 r. %vm 5 t .0
-

8 ID 8 8
, 1 .... ,Y.
4
..

1
3 " " "
.

b d f g
%-. . . . . .

h
2 "!l *P,/2,P:
,.,, , , %

a c e

6.tll xe4
6 . lll gf3 ? ! resulted in an advantage for White
1 iiJ.. m :
b d f g
after: 6 . . . lll c6 ? ! 7 . e3 ig4 8 .ie2 0-0-0 9 . lll d4
id? 1 0 . lll xc6 ixc6 1 1 . c3 g5 1 2 .ig3t I .
a h c e

Schneider - Dausch, Deizisau 20 1 1 . But as 7.c3!N

Rusev points out, replying 6 . . . Wb4!00 would Again this important move holds the key
instead lead to a murky position. - White prevents . . . Wb4, at the same time
preparing to develop his own queen.
6 . c3 ! ?N
This stops Black's queen from swooping to 7 .Wd4 ?! if5 8 . e3 g5 was unclear in Duckworth
the b4-square, where it would hit the b2- - Casella, Los Angeles 20 1 2 .
pawn , pin the d2-knight and also attack
sideways. 7 ... tll c6 8.a4 g5
6 . . . lll c6 7. lll gf3 8 . . .if5 9 . 0-0-0 Wc5 1 0 . e3 ie7 l l .ib5
Now Black is struggling to claim full 0-0 1 2 . lll e2 !!ad8 1 3 . lll g3 ig6 1 4 .ie2 lll xe5
compensation. 1 5 . lll xe4+-
7 . . . ig4
 Chap ter I 0 - Rare 3rd Moves 1 99

9.i.e3 i.5 1 0.0-0-0 Conclusion: It has to be said that some of the

Again White finds himself a pawn up for lines in this chapter are quite tricky and it is
minimal compensation. important to be ready for them . But if he is
ready, then White's chances are preferable.
10 ... i.g7 l 1 .g4 i.g6 12.i.g2

1 3.h4 h6
This attempt to shore up the g5-pawn does
not really work, so Black would do better to
try 1 3 . . . gxh4, although 1 4 . xh4 followed by
tll h3-f4 gives White a comfortable plus.

14.hxg5 hxg5 1 5Jlxh8t i.xhS 16.tLJh3 i.f6

17.i.d4
Black can't hold everything together.

1 7 ...YMe7 1 8.Lf<i YMxf6 1 9.i.xe4+-

Chapter 1 1
a b c d e f g h

Rare 2nd Moves

1 .d4 lLi f6 2 . .ig5

A) 2 b6
. 203
B) 2 ... g6 3 ..ixf6 exf6 4.e3 .ig7 5. g3 d6 6 . .ig2 f5 7.lLi e2 0-0 205
Bl) 8.c4 206
B2) 8.0-0 206
C) 2 ... lLi c6 208
D) 2 ... c6 209
202 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 .d4 lll f6 2.J.g5 b) 2 ... g6 has totally fallen our of fashion as

players are no longer keen to hand White more
space and easy development. Black's most
dangerous idea involves trying to play an early
. . . c 5 , but I have a new idea against that.

c) 2 ... ti c6 goes for a Two Knights Tango

approach co the Trompowsky. This move is a
speciality of Ipswich player Steve Gregory, but
he has had a bit of a hard time in this line,
so we'll have a look at some of the ideas his
opponents came up with .

d) 2 . c6
.. has been played against me on a few
occasions - hoping for 3 . e 3 ? ? Wa5 t picking up
the g5-bishop. However, it looks a bit slow to
me.

e) 2 .. d6
. is reasonably common, but does not
a) 2 .. b6
. This quirky move is the suggestion have much independent significance as Black
of GM Nigel Davies, who wrote an article on usually follows up with a quick . . . g6.
this line. He backed his belief in this line by
playing it against me in 2009, but I think that
White stands better here with accurate play.
I .d4 f6 2.ig5 3 . . . gxf6 does not look right: 4 . e3 e5 5 . lll c3;!;
and it's not clear what Black's plan for
completing his development should be.
4 . e3 g6 5 .g3 ig7
Play has transposed into line B below.

A) 2 b6 ...

s %1'' ' ' ' ' '%1 '-- - - - %%1''1{'" ' ':>:%1 ''1/' ''''Y.
-.tB
7 1;.:.1& 1.
6
& 1 & z A ?.I, , , , , /,z A ?.I, _ , , /,z A

.....
7.
% , , , , ;.: :%1 , , , , /,

5 8
4 ,, '
1
.,;.c '-,. .
Ztt:J '- ,,,,m
w!n! !n!n ,;z. '-

2 . . . d6
This has the idea of playing . . . lll bd7 to
a
b c d e f g h
support the f6-knight, and so encourages When Nigel Davies played this line against
White to make a decision about taking on me in 2009, having previously endorsed it in
f6 straight away. an article, I did not choose the critical line
and the game fizzled out to a relatively quick
draw. H aving now spent more time on the
position, I believe that White can cause Black
problems.

3.d2
I like this move. White keeps everything
tight and flexible and waits for Black to show
his hand. Black's natural set-up involves . . . e6,
and White can meet this with e2-e4 and gai n
some space.

3 .ixf6 There is one other important move which I

3 . lll c3 is a possibility if you fancy taking
on your opponent in a set-up likely to arise
from a Philidor, for example 3 . . . lll bd7
4 . e4 e5 5 . lll f3 . Having knowledge of your
opponent's openings may help you to decide
whether to go along this route.
3 . . . exf6
would consider in certain situations:
3 . c4 ! ?
I f you believe you have greater knowledge
of the Queen's Indian than your opponent,
then this is an option, as it is awkward for
Black to avoid transposing.
3 . . . ib7 4 . lll c3
204 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky
4 . . . g6 ? !
Here m y opponent didn't feel comfortable
transposing into a main line Queen's I ndian
and so played an alternative move, but it
is bad.
4 . . . e6 5 . lll f3 would transpose into a main
line Queen's Indian.
5 . f3 J.g7 6 . e4 d6 7 .J.d3 lll bd7 8 . lll ge2 c5
9.d5t
R. Pert - Graham, Birmingham 2 0 0 6 .
Black's light-squared bishop is doing nothing
and . . . b 6 looks like a waste of a move. I went
o n to win in 2 8 moves.
3 ....ib7
3 . . . e6 4 . e4 h6 leaves Wh i te with a pleasant
choice as both options followed by simple
development appear to leave him with an
advantage: 5 .J.h4 ( 5 .J.xf6 Wxf6 6 . lll gf3 J.b7
7 .J.d3 Wd8 8 .We2 J.e7 9 . 0-0-0 d6 1 0 .h4
a6 l 1 . lll c4 lll d7 1 2 . lll e3 Lerner - Yudasin,
Nikolaev 1 9 8 3 , is given by Palliser as better for
White) 5 ... g5 6 .J.g3 d6?! 7 . h4 J.g7? 8 . hxg5
hxg5 9 . xh8t J.xh8 1 0 .e5 dxe5 l l . dxe5 lll d5
1 2 .Wh5 J.g7 1 3 . lll gf3+- Adhiban - Kaushik,
Chennai 2 0 1 1 . Black's play could certainly
be improved, but i t still looks good for
White.
4.c!Li gf3
4 e6
..
4 . . . d5 stops White from playing e2-e4, but
on the other hand it blocks in the b7-bishop
and so doesn't really look right in my opinion.
White can aim for a set-up involving lll e5
followed by f2-f4 and should stand better. Here
are a couple of examples: 5 . e3 e6 6 .J.b 5 t (the
immediate 6 . lll e5 looks like a decent attempt
too : 6 . . . J.e7 7 .J.d3 0-0 8 . 0-0 lll e4 9 .J.f4 f6
1 0 . lll ef3 g5 l l .J.g3 h 5 1 2 .h3 lll xg3 1 3 . fxg3
J.d6 ? ? [ 1 3 . . . We8t] 1 4 . lll xg5 +- Murshed -
Ahmed, Dhaka 2003) 6 . . . c6 7 .J.d3 J.e7 8 . lll e5
lll bd7 9 . f4 a6 1 0 . 0-0 c5 l 1 .Wf3 We? 1 2 . c3
h6 1 3 .Wh3 lll e4 1 4 .J.xe4 dxe4 1 5 .J.xe? rtlxe7
1 6 . lll xd? Wxd7 1 7. f5t Madeja - Munizaba,
Vrsac 2006.
5.e4 h6 6.J.xf6 Wxf6 7.J.d3 d6 8.We2 Wd8
9.a4 a6 1 0.0-0 J.e7
 Chapter 1 1 - Rare 2 n d Moves 205

1 1 .dS! Kengis, Yaroslavl 1 9 82, and even ended up

This clever move takes advantage of White's losing the game.
lead in development.
1 6 ...Wd7
1 1 ... exdS 1 6 . . . lll d?? l 7 . lll c4 lll f6 l 8 . lll xd6t ! xd6
1 1 . . . lll d??! 1 2 . dxe6 fxe6 1 3 . lll d4 lll c5 1 9 .'1Wc8 t +-
1 4 .\Wh 5 t lff d7 1 5 .ic4;!;
17.c4 Wx5 1 8.x5
1 1 . . . 0-0 1 2 . dxe6 fxe6 1 3 .e5 '1Wd7 1 4 . exd6 cxd6 The position is very comfortable for White -
1 5 .fe l e5 1 6 . lll c4 '1Wc6 l 7.a5 b5 1 8 . lll b6 a7 perhaps even close to winning.
1 9 . c4;!;
B) 2 ... g6
1 2.exdS ixdS
1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 .'1We4 (or 1 3 . c4;!;) 1 3 . . . g6 ( 1 3 . . . f5 ? This old-fashioned line used to be popular
1 4 .\We6t h 8 1 5 .ixf5 ic8 1 6 .\Wxc8 +-) back in the 1 9 80s when the Trompowsky
l 4. lll d4;!; and White threatens the nasty lll e6!. was in its infancy. It is still used from time to
time, often with the idea of striking early in
1 3J3fel the centre with . . . c5 . However, delaying c2-
In return for the pawn White has tied the c4 seems quite an effective antidote to this
black king to the defence of the e7-bishop, plan . This pretty much leaves Black with the
thereby preventing Black from castling. main line as his only way to play. Let's have a
look.
13 ... cS 14.h4 a7 15.Whs ic6
3.ixf6 exf6 4.e3 ig7 S.g3 d6
5 . . . 0-0 6 .ig2 d6 7 . lll e2 f5 is j ust a
transposition.

6.ig2 5 7.lLJ e2 0-0

a b c d e f g h
1 6.W5!N
This means that . . . lff f8 can be met by lll g6t ,
a n d . . . 0-0 can be met b y '1Wh7#, leaving the
black king stranded in the centre.

After playing so well until here, White went

wrong with 1 6 . lll c4 f800 in Vaganian -
206 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky
Bl) 8.c4
This does have the benefit of delaying castling,
which can be useful if Black goes for a direct
hit on the kingside. However, it allows Black
to play this . . . c5 plan that I have mentioned.
I've not gone into great detail here, but will
j ust point out some of the pros and cons of
playing in this way.
8 ... c5
8 . . . lD d7 9 . lD bc3 lD f6 1 0 .Wd3 e8 l l . b4
h5 1 2 .b5 i.h6 1 3 . a4 h4 1 4 . lD d 5 lD e4 1 5 . 0-0
Hodgson castles only now chat his opponent
has committed to playing . . . lD e4 instead
of . . . lD g4, where the knight would attack
the h2-square. 1 5 . . . id? 1 6 .a5 c6 l 7 . lD dc3
We? l 8 . a6;l; Hodgson - Howell, London
2000.
1 0.exd4 tll c6 I I .'iNd2 ges
l l . . . f4 1 2 . gxf4 Wh4 1 3 .d5 lD e7 1 4 . 0-0
lD f5 ( 1 4 . . . ih3 !) 1 5 . lD g3 lD h6 1 6 . lD ce4 lD g4
l 7 . h3t I . Sokolov - Har Zvi, Wij k aan Zee
1 99 3 .
12.0-0 id7 13,gab l gcs 1 4.gfdl b6 1 5.b3
a6 1 6.c5 dxc5 17.dxc5 tll bs 1 8.cxb6 YNxb6m
I. Sokolov - Spasov, Elenite 1 992.
B2) 8.0-0
a b c d e f g h
White waits for Black to play . . . lD d7
before playing c2-c4, as then Black won't be
in a position to play . . . c5 followed by . . . lD c6
hitting our centre.
8 ... tll d7
Advancing the c-pawn does not achieve
much here:
8 . . . c5 9 . c3 !
Black's plan t o undermine o u r centre i s
nipped in t h e b u d . We have a free hand
to try and expand on the queenside with
b2-b4, and have an absolute monster of a
bishop on g2 hitting down the diagonal.
Black certainly can't say the same about his
bishop. I really like White here.
9 . . . lD c6 1 0 . lD d2 id? l l . a3 Wc7
l l . . . a5 1 2 . a4t and Black has lost control of
yet more squares.
1 2 . b4 ad8 1 3 .Wb3 b5 1 4 . lD f4 c4 1 5 .Wb2
lD e7 1 6 .a4 a6 1 7 .axb5 axb 5 1 8 .a5
Antidrome - Raspj eRuignek, Internet 20 1 0 .
White's advantage is clear, with total control
of the board.
 Chapter 1 1
9.c4 tlif6 10.lli bc3
1 0 . . . h5
This direct move from Black looks scarier
than it is.
1 1 . b4 h4 1 2 . a4 hxg3 1 3 .hxg3 lt'i g4
1 4.a5
White can get away with ignoring Black's
plan, and it seems strong to do so. Bur for
those lacking the composure for such an
approach, I can suggest 1 4 .i.f3 ! ? as an
interesting defensive move to bear in mind.
White frees the g2-square for his king so that
he can swing his rook to the h-file. 14 . . . Wg5
- Rare 2nd Moves 207
1 5 . g2;!; with l:'l:h l to come.
14 . . . Wg5 1 5 .l:'l:e l Wh6
1 5 . . . Wh5 1 6 . lli f4 Wh2t 1 7 . fl i.h6 l 8 .Wf3;1;
1 6 .Wd3 c6 1 7 .b5 l:'l:e8 1 8 .a6 Wh2t 1 9 . fl ih6
20 . lt'i g l l:'l:b8 2 1 .l:'l:e2
2 1 .l:'l:a2!;!; looks more natural to me, making
use of the second rook.
2 1 . . . cxb5 22 . ll'i xb5 bxa6 23.ll'if3
23 . ll'i xd6 l:'l:xe3 24. l:'l:xe3 ll'i xe3t 2 5 . fxe3 Wxg3
26.llixc8 i.xe3 27.llie?t f8 2 8 . l:'l:a2;!;
23 . . . Wh 5 ?
2 3 . . . lt'ixe3t 24 .l:'l:xe3 l:'l:xe3 2 5 . fxe3 Wxg3;!;
makes more sense.
24 . lt'i xd6+-
Buhmann - Poldauf, Nuremberg 2006.
1 0 . . . l:'l:e8 1 1 .Wd3
1 1 .b4!? h5 1 2 .b5 h4 1 3 .gxh4 ih6 1 4 .llig3
lt'i g4 1 5 . h3 ll'i xf2 1 6 .l:'l:xf2 ixe3 1 7.f3 ixd4
1 8 .l:'l:d l t Ivanisevic - Indj ic, Vrnjacka Banj a
20 1 2 .
1 l . . . h5
l 1 . . . c6 1 2 . b4 transposes to the main line.
1 2 .b4 h4 1 3 .b5 hxg3 1 4 .hxg3 lt'i g4
Play is similar to that after 1 0 . . . h5 above.
1 5 .if3 Wg5 1 6.g2
1 6 . . . a6
It's worth noting that 1 6 . . . lt'i xe3 t ? doesn't
work: 1 7 . fxe3 l:'l:xe3 1 8 .Wd2+-
1 6 . . . Wh6? 1 7.l:'l:h U
1 6 . . . l:'l:b8 is a bit passive but may be Black's
best. White secures his kingside with
20 8 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 7.!!h l;!; and may then go back to playing

s m.i.B-
7 if.I/, I. f'ii
.t. f .t. f.l i
%1'0 m%1_&', ... ,/.%1 ,.. , , , Y,%1,%''''''v.
on the queenside.

. . . /,. . --
1 7.l:!h l N

6
1 7 .a4?! axb5 1 8 . lLi xb 5 ? ! We7+ Polaczek -
" " ". '0 '

-,,,,,/,@_,
,,,,, ,, .,,

s m
Schweda, Internet 2004

. . , ,_
1 7 . . . axb 5 1 8 . cxb5
White has play on both flanks . 4
'
3 :IJ>r :IJ:IJ :110 " :110 "
2 ,$.D' il1m4PP
l l .b4 !!e8 12.d3 e7 1 3.b5 tt'l e4 1 4.l:!ab l
ie6
1 4 . . . id7 1 5 . bxc6 bxc6 1 6 .!!b7
1t2J li w
1 5.bxc6 bxc6 1 6.tt'lxe4 fxe4 17.ixe4 d5 a b c d e f g h
1 8.cxd5 cxd5 1 9.if3 if5 Steve Gregory - who was a clubmate of
Black wins the exchange, but White clearly
mine when I was growing up in Ipswich - has
stands better as he picks up a second pawn
a passion for quirky little openings and he has
after which his protected passed d-pawn is a
made 2 . . . lLi c6 his choice . That said, he seems
great strength .
to have run into problems in this line on a
regular basis, so let's see how his opponents
handled this position.

3.tDc3
This seems logical .

3 ... e5 4.d5 tt'l e7 5.d6! tt'lf5

5 . . . cxd6 6.e4 lLi c6

s .1 AB
7 efT tw.-" ,,.,., ,;.].,.... . % ,z
6 . . . . %
r... . z d' . . . 'wr
7.

'fA)
5 . i. % .
'%

4
@
m'% 7:
8 ,;. . , ;,..

. .... :
3 - w
2 /J
rrn
.Jl!J/dft!3%
1 . :t
20 .Wd2 ixb l 2 1 .l:!xb l also gave White an

h
edge in Aleksandrov - Janev, Sas van Gent
b d f g
1 9 92.
a c e

7 . lLi f3!N (7.ixf6 Wxf6 8 .ic4 is slightly

20 ...hb l 2 1 .l:!xb l !!ac8 22.ixd5 !!ed8 less accurate, though White still has ample
23.if3 h5 24.tt'l f4;!; compensation for the pawn : 8 . . . Wg6 9 . lLi f3
ie7 1 0 .'!We2t Trent - Gregory, Torquay 2002)
C) 2 ... tt'l c6 7 . . .ie7 8 .ixf6 Inflicting further damage on
the black pawn structure . 8 . . . gxf6 9 .ic4
 Chapter 1 1
6.dxc7 'ffxc7
This leads to problems for Black, but 6 . . . 'ff e7
is even worse: 7 . e4 llJ d4 8 . llJ ge2 '!Mfb4 9 .ixf6
gxf6 I O . llJ xd4 exd4 1 1 . a3 '1Mfa5 1 2 .'1Mfxd4 ig7
1 3 .Wb4 We5 1 4 . 0-0-0 +- Black could already
think about resigning, Coleman - Gregory,
Hinckley Island 20 1 2 .
7.i.xf6 gxf6
8.d5
This is sufficient for an advantage, though
White has a tempting alternative in: 8 . '1Mf d3!?N
8 . . . llJ d4 (8 ... llJ e7 is no longer possible: 9 . llJ b 5
'!Mfa5 t 1 0 . b4 '1Mfxb4t 1 1 . c3 and llJ d6 t is
coming) 9 . e3 llJ c6 1 0 . 0-0-0 White has the
pleasant choice of llJ d 5 or ttJ b5 to come.
8 ... 'ffc6 9.e4 e7 10.i.bS;!;
Walton - Grego ry, Scarborough 2004.
D) 2 ...c6 3.i.xf6 gxf6
- Rare 2nd Moves 209
3 . . . exf6 4.c4 (White may also choose 4.e3,
when 4 . . . d5 5 . g3 id6 transposes to line B of
Chapter 7 on page 1 48) 4 . . . d5 5 . cxd5 Wxd5
6 . llJ c3 ib4 7 . e3 ixc3 t 8 . bxc3 0-0 9 .'1Mfb3;!;
4.e3 d6 5.c3 'ffb 6 6Jbl ll:i a6 7.a3 c7
8.'ffh 5 d5 9.ge2 i.e6 1 0.xdS i.xd5
1 1 .c3 e5
In these structures with . . . d6 and . . . gxf6 you
will often see Black aim for . . . e 5 . However,
as long as White doesn't exchange this pawn,
Black's doubled f-pawns will look weak.
Conclusion: There is not too much to trouble
White in this chapter. By far the most common
of these lines is B) 2 . . . g6, but as I pointed out,
by employing an accurate move order in the
main line (delaying c2-c4 until Black plays
. . . llJ d7) , White should gain an edge.
Chapter 12

2.igS against the Dutch

l .d4 f5 2.i.g5

A) 2 ... h6 3.i.h4 215

Al) 3 ... c5?! 215
Al l) 4.e3 215
Al 2) 4.e4! 217
A2) 3 ... g5 4.e4 217
A2 1) 4 ... i.g7?! 218
A22) 4 ... h7!? 218
A22 1) 5.h5t 218
A222) 5.i.g3!N 220
A23) 4 ... f6 22 1
B) 2 g6
. 222
Bl) 3.d2!? 222
B2) 3.c3!? 223
B2 1) 3 ... h6 223
B22) 3 ... i.g7 4.h4!? h6 5.i.f4 225
B22 1) 5 ... f6 226
B222) 5 ... d6 227
C) 2 ... f6?! 228
D) 2 ... d5?! 230
212 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 f5 2.g5 2 ... h6

This critical move aims at trapping our
bishop, but it looks decidedly risky for Black,
who opens up the e8-h5 diagonal.

2 . . . g6 is Black's most popular move and

probably also his strongest. 3 . tll c3 is the line
I will focus on. ( 3 . tll d2! ? is another interesting
possibiliry, used by my brother on a number
of occasions, and I will touch upon this line.)
3 . . .ig7 4.h4!? This aggressive move leads to a
promising position for White.

2 . . . tll f6 ?! is a common choice for Black but it

a b c d e f g h looks strategically wrong to allow the f-pawns
2 .ig5 is not only an effective move against to be doubled: 3 .ixf6 exf6 (3 . . . gxf6? 4 . e4)
1 . . . tll f6 ; it can also work well against other 4 . e3 We shall explore how White should go
openings. In this chapter we shall see it being about targeting Black's weak f-pawns.
used against the Dutch Defence, where it was
once j ust a sideline but is now considered to 2 . . . d5?! and various other rare moves will be
be one of the most dangerous moves for Black investigated so as to provide a comprehensive
to face. I think that White's prospects in this White repertoire. Wh ite's chances look
line are excellent despite the relative lack of preferable in all of these rare variations.
theory, and I have used this move on a number
of occasions myself with great results . A good 3.h4
friend of mine, Simon Williams, who is well
known for his Dutch exploits, now regularly
plays 1 . . .e6, looking to transpose into the
classical Dutch via a different move order
specifically aimed at avoiding this line.
There have been three authors of note who
have written about this line in the past decade
- the first being my twin brother GM Nick
Pert several years ago. More recently GM
Moskalenko did an excellent pair of articles in
New in Chess Yearbooks 94 & 9 5 , and finally
GM Schandorff annotated some games in
his book Playing l . d4 - The Indian Defences.
I have cherry-picked the best bits from these
three, then added in my own analysis where 3 ... g5
I believed that improvement was possible. The ultra-aggressive 3 . . . c 5 ? ! is a regular in
Hopefully this should leave us with an excellent blitz chess . It aims to move the black queen
repertoire with this opening, so let's take a look and free the d8-square for the king, so it can
at what might happen. run away from a future Wh 5 t ; then Black can
 Chap ter 1 2 - 2 . ig5 against the Dutch 213

proceed with . . . g 5 and . . . f4 . To b e honest, this

plan sounds better than it is. In reality, moving
your king and queen around so early in the
game whilst delaying development can hardly
be right. I have come up with a couple of
recommendations for White which may force
Black to have a rethink here.

4.e4!
Threatening mate in one.

4 ... f6
Th e main move.

4 . . . ig7 ? ! is the old main line, but frankly it

should be placed on the scrapheap. 5 .ig3
f4 6 .ixf4 gxf4 7.1Wh 5 t 'i!lf8 8 .Wf5 t Black is
already facing difficulties as 8 . . . c;tie8 hoping
for a perpetual is well met by 9 .ie2 with ih5
mate on the cards, and 8 . . . tLl f6 9.e5 is also 7 ... fxg3?!
clearly better for White. This natural-looking response can run into
trouble.
4 . . . !l:h7!? This wacky move aims to meet 1Wh5t
with . . . sf7. Simon Williams played this move
8.hxg3
against a former housemate of his, Danny It may appear that Black can keep his extra
Gormally, in a crucial game in 2006. But being piece here, but White has a much bigger target
such an enthusiast about the Dutch, Simon i n mind!
had let this idea out the bag before this game,
so Danny knew what was coming and went
8 ... dS? 9.ig6t @e7 1 0.W6!+-
on to win an excellent attacking game. That
said, there were ways that Simon could have Black can only stop Wf7 mate by giving up
improved on his play, so we have to take this material .
move seriously and I have had a good look at We'll have a look at this line in more detail
this line. to see what other ideas Black can try, and how
White can counter them.
5.eS e6
So we see Black's plan . His aim is to meet
exf6 with . . . Wxf6 and then go about picking
up the h4-bishop.

6.ig3
6 . exf6 is more common: 6 . . . Wxf6 7.ig3 f400

6 ... 4
214 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

1 .d4 f5 2 . .ig5 Cordova - Roj as Barrero , Bogota 20 1 2 .

2 . . . d6?!
I feel that this is asking for it.

s :;,;"'..tr
iA))
r
. . % " .. . %.". . %
'- %' " ' " '
7
6
7:. . %
- -- - - - -

if if. if. ,
-

- -
z. ..3

45 . ----

" . ..%
-

W" -
32 ,J-l]" t!J
4Jlllf..t}
1 . JttJV.t ,:
a b c d e f g h
3 . e4! fxe4
3 . . . ltJ c6 4 . ltJ c3 liJ f6 5 . d 5 ltJ e5 6 . liJ f3 fxe4
7 . ltJ xe5 dxe5 8 .ib5t id7 9 .We2;!; Bareev -
Gunnarsson, Gothenburg 200 5 .
2 . . . c5?! 3 . d 5 ! ?
4 . ltJ c3 ltJ f6
Th i s advance looks tempting.
4 . . . if5 ? ! 5 . f3 exf3 6 . ltJ xf3 '&d7 7.ic4
3 . dxc5 is a solid choice: 3 . . . ltJ a6 4 . e4 fxe4
c6 8 . 0-0 d 5 ? 9 . ltJ e 5 We6 1 0 . ltJ xd5 cxd5
5 . ltJ c3 ltJ xc5 6 .ie3 ltJ e6 7 . ltJ xe4 ltJ f6 8 .id3;!;
1 1 .ib 5 t ltJ c6 1 2 .Wf3 0-0-0 1 3 .ixc6 ie4
Miles - Meulders, Amsterdam 1 97 8 .
1 4 .Wxf8 +- Moskalenko - Palatnik, Kiev
3 . . . Wb6
1 9 84.
3 . . . h6 4.id2!?;!;
5.f3 e3
4 . ltJ c3 Wxb2 5 .id2 Wb6 6.1:%b l Wd8 7 . e4!
5 ... exf3 6 . ltJ xf3 c6 (6 . . . e6 is the main move
acco rding to Schandorff, and he mentions
7.ib 5tN c6 8 .id3 ie7 9 . 0-0 0-0
I O .We a) 7.id3--+
6 .ixe3 c6 7 . ltJ ge2 Wc7 8 . liJ g3 ltJ bd7 9 .id3;!;
The position looks very comfortable for
White, Atalik - Bogdan, Romania 1 994.

2 . . . c6 3 . e3 ( 3 . liJ d2 Wb6 4 . liJ b3 with a

positional game is the solid choice given
by Schandorff) 3 . . . Wb6 4 . ltJ d2 White will
a b c d e f g h have great compensation for the pawn and
This compares favourably with the Vaganian shouldn't be scared co sacrifice it. 4 . . . Wxb2
Gambit and offers White more than enough 5 .1:%b l Wa3 6 . g4 fxg4 7.Wxg4 ltJ f6 8 .ixf6 gxf6
compensation for the pawn . 9 .id3 Wxa2 1 0 . c4! White cuts off the black
7 . . . e6 8 .id3 g6 9 . exf5 exf5 1 0 . liJ f3 We7t queen and has a great attack, Vaisser - Narciso
l l .ie2 d6 1 2 . 0-0 h6 1 3 .1:%e l Wf7 1 4 .ic4+- Dublan, Benasque 1 9 97.
 Chap ter 1 2 - 2 . ig5 against the Dutch 215

2 . . . lD c6 3 . e3 g6 4 . llJ d2 ig7 5 . c3 lD f6 6 . h4 d6 Al l) 4.e3

7.Wfb3 a6 8 .id3 e5 9 . h 5 h6??

a b c d e f g h
Here both players, and even a subsequent
annotator of the game, missed the instantly
winning 1 O . hxg6 ! . Perhaps the tension got to
my brother as he was playing for a GM norm
in this game. Fortunately after 1 O .ixf6?;!;
4 ... Wfb6 s.tlic3 cxd4 6.exd4 g5
N . Pert - Cherniaev, Hastings 2000, he went
A critical option, but it may not be best.
on to win the game anyway - well played!

6 . . . Wfe6t!?
A) 2 ... h6
It seems odd to keep moving the queen, but
So let's take a look at this critical choice. I believe this move is underrated.
Black goes straight for the white bishop, with 7.ie2 g5 8 . lD f3 gxh4 9 . lD e 5
no thought for the safety of his own king. White undoubtedly has some compensation
Black is looking to use tricks to try to catch for the piece, but the position remains very
his opponent out and this move is regularly murky and hard to evaluate.
seen on the blitz circuit, but I don't think
it is entirely sound. The analysis that I give
here shows White to be doing very well, and
hopefully will really turn the pressure on the
Black tricksters .

3.ih4
Black sometimes attacks the centre with
but usually he continues chasing
Al) 3 ... c5?!
the bishop with A2) 3 ... g5 .

Al) 3 ... c5?!

9 . . . lD f6
White has two interesting choices here. I 9 . . . d6? 1 0 .ic4 +-
have played Al l ) 4.e3 myself, but I would 1 0 . 0-0 h5
recommend A12) 4.e4! as being stronger. 1 o . :B:h7!? 1 l .ih 5 t iid8 may make it harder
. .
216 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

for White to show that his compensation is 8 . . . gxh4 9.b l '&a2 1 0 .b3+- followed by
sufficient. ltl c3 winning the queen .
1 1 .e l '&b6 1 2 . ltl dS ltl xd5 1 3 .ixh S t @d8 9.b l Wxb l
1 4 . ltl f7t 9 . . . Wa2 1 0 . ltl c7t+-
Gormally - Zeidler, Dyfed 1 99 9 . Although 1 0 . ltl c7t @d8 l 1 .'&xb l t
Danny went on to win this game quickly,
he told me that he was concerned about his 7.Yhst @ds
position at some points in the game. Personally
I would be happy p laying White, but it is a
matter of taste.

6 . . . Wxb2! ?
This leads to a draw according to Moskalenko,
but I am not convinced.
7 . ltl b 5 ! ?
Avoiding the repetition which features i n
Moskalenko's analysis: 7 . ltl ge2 g5 8 . b l
'&a3 9 .ig3 f4 1 0 .b3 Wa5 1 1 .bS Wa3 =
7 . . . g5
7 . . . ltl a6 8 . ltl d6t! 'iti d8 (8 . . . exd6? ? 9 .'&h5t
with mate to follow) 9 . ltl f7t (9.b l ! ? also a b c d e f g h
looks good : 9 . . . '&c3t 1 0 .'&d2;!;) 9 . . . @c7
s.i.xgS!
1 0 . ltl xh8 '&c3 t 1 1 . @e2 g5 1 2 . ltl g6 ig7
This leads to wild complications which
1 3 .ig3 t f4 1 4 . ltl xf4;!;
favour White.

8 8 . 0-0-0 ? is not the right move because, to use

7 a poker term, we are already pot-committed.
6 After 8 . . . ltl f6 Black's chances are preferable as
5 he will pick up the dark-squared bishop, Bauer
- E. Berg, Internet 2004.

3 8 ...Yxb2 9.@d2 Yxal?!

2 9 . . . W b 6 is relatively best, b u t simply 1 0 . ltl f3
is most promising for White.

8 . a3!?N 10.'Wf7! Yxfl

I ntending to trap the black queen with b l This almost looks like a game of Pac-Man,
b3. where both sides' queens are going around
8 . b l '&xa2 9 . ltl c7t @d8 was unclear i n gobbling up the opposing pieces!
Dornieden - Borngaesser, Germany 1 9 84.
8 . . . a6! 1 0 . . . hxgS 1 1 .'&xf8t @c7 1 2 . ltl b S t @b6
This is probably Black's best, accepting that 1 3 .'&d8t @ a6 1 4 .id3+- Lindberg
he is going to lose his queen and trying to Agdestein, Kiel 2000.
get as much as he can for it.
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 217

15.f4t @xd4 16.%Yc3t

1-0
R. Pert - Pelling, England 2008.

A12) 4.e4!

1 3.%Yxc8t @xd5 14.ll\h3!?

White can also win with : 1 4 . lll e2! Wfxf2
1 5 .Wic5 t e6 1 6 .d5 t+-
5.exf5 %Yxb2 6.ll\ d2 %Yxd4
6 . . . ll\ c6 7 .i': b l Wfxd4 8 . lll gf3 Wfg4 9 .id3
lll b4 Hodgson - White, Monmouth 2004;
here 1 0 . lll c4N is given as better for White by
Moskalenko, and I would agree.

7.ll\ gf3 %Yc3 8.gbl c6 9.gb3 a5 10.i.c4

White had a huge amount of play for the
pawn in J. Cobb - Zeidler, Cardiff 1 99 8 .

A2) 3 ... g5 4.e4

4.e3 lll f6 5 .ig3 is legal, but hardly in the spirit

of the position. Given how positive 4.e4 looks,
it would seem a shame not to play it.

Black defends against the threatened mate

with A21) 4 ... i.g7?!, A22) 4 ... gh7!? or A23)
4 ... ll\f6.
218 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

A21) 4 ig7?!
. A22) 4 .. Jh7!?

So we move on to this wacky recommenda

tion of Simon Williams. Black's plan is to
meet Wh5t with . . . ;gf7. The move doesn't look
5.ig3 f4 serious at first sight, but on closer inspection
With 5 . . . fxe4 Black gives up trying to win it is a legitimate attempt from Black. One
the dark-squared bishop. It doesn't look very thing in its favour is the shock factor, but I
threatening to me, for example: 6 . h4 c5 believe that accurate play leaves White with an
7.ie5 Wa5 t 8 . .!D c3N ( 8 . b4t Boyd - Barber, advantage.
Adelaide 2004) 8 . . . .!D f6 9 . hxg5 hxg5 1 0 .ixf6!
;gxh 1 l l .ixg7 and White is better. Note White usually continues with the obvious
that 1 1 . . .:gxg l ? is not possible as White picks A22 1) 5.ti'h5t, though A222) 5.ig3!N is a
up the rook: I 2 .Wh 5 t md8 1 3 .WhBt rti c7 worthy alternative.
I 4 .Wh2t+-
A22 1) 5.ti'h5t gf7
6.Lf4 gxf4 7.Whst c.t>m s.Wf5t tll f6
8 . . . rtfe8 9 .ie2 Once more mate on h5 is
threatened. 9 . . . .!D f6 1 0 .e5 d6 1 1 .Wxf4 dxe5
I 2 . dxe5 .!D d 5 I 3 .ih5t md7 1 4 .Wg4t mc6
I 5 .Wxg7 +- Mah - Siebrecht, Highgate
1 9 97.

9.e5 d6 10.ti'xf4 dxe5 1 1 .dxe5 tl'l c6 12.tlif'3

ti'd5 13.exf6 ti'e6t 14.ie2 ixf6 1 5.tl'lc3
White is a pawn up for no compensation,
Ward - A. Rasmussen, Copenhagen 2000.
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 219

6.tll f3
6 .ixg5 is also possible: 6 . . . hxg5 7 . lli f3 lli f6
8 . Wf g6 Alzate - Rodi, B uenos Aires 200 5 , and
now 8 . . . e6N 9 . lli xg5 Wfe7 is unclear according
to Moskalenko.
6.Wfg6 lli f6 (6 ... lli c6 7.Wfxg8 lli xd4 8 . lli a3;!;
Moskalenko) 7.ixg5 hxg5 8.llif3 transposes
the line above with 6 .ixg 5 .
9 . . . gxh4
9 . . . e6 1 0 .ie2;!; is given by Schandorff.
9 . . . lli xe4 should probably also be met
by 1 O .e2, when White's chances are
preferable.
9 . . . lli g4 looks interesting, although 1 0 .g3
slightly favours White after 1 0 . . . f4 1 0 .xf4
or 1 0 . . . c6 l 1 . lli d2 .
1 0 . exf6 fxe4

>%
8 !. .i.J -
.-
. . 7.m-ra
' . x
6 ... tll f6 7.g6 tll c6
7
6 7. 7. 7.1
".

45
.... ". ....


-
- -
3 -x



2 1 -
I , :tt)- k-,-11
a b c d e f g h
l l .e2N d5 l 2 . c4
This leads to an advantage for White
according to Schandorff, though the position
remains highly murky. His experimental
analysis runs:
1 2 . . . Wfd6 1 3 .h5 e6 1 4 . cxd5 0-0-0 1 5 . dxe6
xf6 1 6 .Wfxe4 Wfc5 1 7 . 0-0 Wfxh 5

8 . lli e 5 ! ?
This i s recommended b y Schandorff.
8 . . . llixe5 9 . dxe5

l 8 . lli c3
This perhaps favours White, but in my
opinion Black is still well in the game.
220 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

8 ... fxe4 9.tlJe5 tlJxe5 1 0.dxe5 hxg5 1 1 .exf6 Gormally - Williams, Liverpool 2006 . A
exf6? great attacki ng game from White, and I know
Black starts to go wrong. that Simon Williams had a hard time dealing
with it.
l l . . . e6! 1 2 . lll d2 Wxf6 was unclear in
Kharitonov - Gajewski, Aviles 2003. A222) 5.ig3!N

12.t2Jc3 ib4? 1 3.0-0-0 ixc3

14.ic4!
Great attacking play from White. 5 ... f4 6.ie2 gf7
6 . . @f7 7.ixf4 gxf4 8 . lll h3
.

1 4 ...!xb2t 1 5.<i!i>xb2 fie7 1 6.h4 d5 1 7.hd5

fie5t 1 8.c3 !e6 1 9.!xe6 6 . . e6 7.ih 5 t <t!?e7?! (7 . . . Ef.f7 transposes to our
.

main line) 8 .ixf4 gxf4 9 .Wg4 lll f6 1 0 .Wh4

ig7 l l . e5;!;

7.ih5
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 22 1

7 ... e6
7 . . . fxg3 ?! 8 .Wf3 lt:l f6 9 .ixf7t xf7 1 0 .e5
gxf2t l 1 .Wxf2 c5 1 2 .exf6t

8.tlif3 tlif6 9.ixflt @xf7 I O.ixf4 gxf4

1 1 .tll c3 ib4 12.d2;t
This is given by Moskalenko as better for
White, and I agree.

A23) 4 ... tli f6

a b c d e f g h
This has now replaced 4 . . . ig7?! as the main 8 . exf6
line. 8 .ig6t!? gave me a quick victory in a blitz
game: 8 . . . <Jle7? (8 . . . d7 is an improvement,
5.eS e6 6.ig3 f4 keeping the queen free to take on f6: 9 .ixf4
gxf4 1 0 . lt:l h 3 ) 9 . exf6t <Jlxf6 1 0 .Wh5 id6
l 1 . lll h3 fxg3 1 2 . fxg3 <Jlg7 1 3 . 0-0 f8
1 4 . lt:l c3 lt:l d7 1 5 .if7 1 -0 Antidrome - gsvc,
Internet 20 1 2 .
8 . . . Wxf6 9.Wh 5 t
Displacing the black king gives White an
edge.
9 . . . <Jld8 1 0 . lt:l f3 lt:l c6 l l . c3 id? 1 2 .h4 fxg3
1 3 . hxg5 gxf2t 1 4 .<Jlxf2 We? 1 5 . lt:l bd2 ig7
1 6 . ae l hxg5 1 7.Wxh8 t ixh8 1 8 . xh8 t
Hoang Thanh Trang - Bellin, Budapest
200 5 .

8.exf6
I have also tried out:
8 . lt:l c3 ! ? fxg3
8 . . . lt:l c6 9 . lt:l ge2 fxg3 1 0 . hxg3 Antidrome
fcorodent, Internet 2007.
7 .. g8
J 9 . hxg3 d6
7 . . . fxg3 ?! 8 . hxg3 lt:l d 5 ? (after 8 . . . g8 White 9 . . . lt:l d5 tries to save the knight, but i t's not
can choose between 9 . lt:l c3 ! ?t transposing going to be fun for Black: 1 o .Wh 5 t <Jle7
to the following note, or 9 . exf6t with a lead l 1 . lll xd5 t exd5 1 2 .ih7 ig7 ( 1 2 . . . g7
in development and a safer king) 9 .ig6t 1 3 .Wxh6+-) 1 3 . lt:l f3 (or 1 3 .ixg8 Wxg8
<Jle7 1 0 .Wf3!+- with mate threatened on 1 4 .Wg6t) 1 3 . . . f8 ( 1 3 . . . h8 1 4 . lt:l xg5 )
f7. 1 4 . lt:l xg5 d6 1 5 .Wg6
1 0 . exf6 Wxf6 1 1 . lt:l e4
7 . . . ig7 8 .ixf4 gxf4 9 . exf6 Wxf6 1 0 .Wh5tt Antidrome - Raspj eRuignek, Internet 200 8 .

7 . . . d5 8 ...xf6
222 Richard Pert _ Playing the Trompowsky

This has been heavily investigated by my

brother Nick, who sent me some analysis on
it. The following should give you a flavour of
_
the line; I shall leave you to decide if you wish
to investigate it further.

3 ...i.g7 4.e3 til f6?!

The standard move, but my personal opinion
is that it is too early.

Perhaps 4 . . . d6 should be played first, when

5 . f4 ! ? lll f6 6 . .id3 c6 7. lll gf3 was j ust slightly
in Whi te's favour in Andersson - Yusupov,
Ubeda 1 997.

4 ... lll h6 5 . .ixh6! ? This seems logical, since the

knight would be well-placed on the f7square.
5 . . . .ixh6 6 . h4 Black is close to equality, but
White's position looks easier to play, Gormally
10.f3 fxg3 1 1 .hxg3 _Rendle, West Bromwich 2004.

B) 2 g6

5.h4!?
5 . c3 is the solid alternative.

A ml1 'S'
s i. :mt i %mu- ....w
7 wi/a- 'w.Wa-,,,,
."&Y.
- - - - i- .
6
/,,,, , /,'"" -
"- .,
"'" '

5 -"
4

o ."".
3 8 ' m8 - "'""

Wc'W
P cj
8 -
2 ""ifr.;: \WJ.
-

r.:f
1 l'.2.Jq '' diib .
,,, b d
c f g h
e
a b c d e f g h
It is important to be ready for this move,
because it is Black's most common choice. We s ... h6?!
shall take a quick look at B l ) 3.tll d2!? before Nick couldn't believe his eyes, the same

turning to my main recommendation of B2) mistake being made against him twice within
3.c3!?. a fortnight.

Bl) 3.d2!? 6.i.xf6 i.xf6 7.i.d3 d6

The earlier game continued:
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 223

7 . . . d5 8 . g4 e6 9 . lLi e2 lLi d??! 3. . .d5?!

I believe . . . lLi c6-e7 is the most solid defence, Th i s looks a bit suspect, leaving t h e e5 -square
though of course White stands better vulnerable. Schandorff covers this well in
anyway. Playing J . d4 - The Indian Defences, and we
1 0 .gxf5 shall follow a game that he annotated.
1 0.h5 e5! l l . gxf5 ( l l . hxg6 e4 1 2 .ib 5 4.Vfid2 ig7 5 . f3 c6
c6 1 3 .ia4 fxg400) l I . . . e4 1 2 .ixe4 dxe4 5 . . . ltJ c6 6.e3 a6 7. 0-0-0 h6 8 .if4 lLi f6 9 . h3
1 3 .hxg6 Vfie? 1 4 . lLi g3 b6;!; ie6 I O . g4;!; Shishkin - Lannaioli, email
1 0 . . . gxf5 2006.
1 0 . . . exf5 ? 1 1 . h 5 + 5 . . . lLi f6 6 . lLi h3 ie6 7. 0-0-0 lLi bd7 8 .ih6
l I . lLi f4 lLi f8 0-0 9.ixg7 rilxg7 1 0 . lLi f4 if7 I 1 . h4;!;
Kempinski - Krasenkow, Warsaw 1 9 97.
6 . 0-0-0 h6 7 .if4 ltJ f6

1 2 . c4!
After 1 2 .Vfih 5 t rile? Black would soon kick
the white queen away with . . . Vfie8 or . . . id7-
e8.
1 2 . . . c 6 1 3 .gc l ;!;
N . Pert - Koch, France 2003 .
8.g4 e6 9.e2 fle7
9 . . . ixh4 I O . ltJ f4 ggs ( l O . . . @f7 l I . gxf5 exf5
1 2 .ic4t i;t>g? 1 3 .gg l ig5 1 4 . lLi xg6!! i;t>xg6
l 5 .Vfih 5 t ! rilxh5 I 6 .if7t @ h4 I 7 . liJ f3 t rilh3
1 8 .gg3#) I 1 . lLi g2 ig5 1 2 . f4 ie7 1 3 .gxh6;!;
1 0.f4;t
N. Pert - G. Buckley, Coulsdon 2003.
8 . h4!
Preventing Black from expanding with . . . g 5 .
8 . . . liJ bd7 9 . e3 b 5 I O . liJ h 3 a5 I 1 .ih2
Intending lLi f4 .
l I . . . @f7
I I . . . ltJ b6 I 2 . lLi f4 @ f7 I 3 .h5 g5 1 4 . lLi g6 ges
I 5 . lLi e5 t +- Schandorff.
1 2 . lLi f2 ges 1 3 . g4! e5 1 4 . gxf5 gxf5 1 5 .ih3
exd4 1 6 . exd4 liJ b6 1 7 . lLi d3
With lLi e 5 t t o come, White's advantage i s
obvious, Douglas - Krzyzanowski, email 2 0 0 9 .
B2 1 ) 3 ... tli h6

B2) 3. c3!? This move is a favourite of IM Gavin Wall;

he has scored well with this line, but it hasn't
Black now has an interesting option in B2 1 ) really caught on. I got the chance to play him
3 . . . h6, although the natural B22) 3 . . .ig7 earlier this year and thought I would test the
is the main line. line. Let's see what happened.
224 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 2 . c4 e6 1 3 .Wd2 lll f6 1 4 .ih6;!;

Arkell - Talsma, Hastings 2009.

4 lbf7 5 ..if4 .ig7

..

5 . . . c6 6 . lll f3 Wb6 7.b l ig7 8 . e3 d6 9 .ic4

d5 1 0 .ib3 lll d7 l 1 . h5;!; Gordon - Narciso
Dublan, Oslo 20 1 2 .

6.e3 d6 7.tLl f3

s .i -..tB-
%1 -------r,----/'.Jr r-----

1 r r r
6
, . , , ,/'.., , . , , /'. -,-
/'. , . , . /'.-

w
4.h4!?
5
This is relatively untested, but it looks better
for White.
4
-
r m rtJ
0 -
-- - - /'.nttS- - - %
!ft'8 'nf.
4 . e4!?
3
2
This is more common, and may also offer

gt - - %I= 1t
Whi te chances for an edge.
4 . . . lll f7 5 .ie3 fxe4 6 . lll xe4 1 -- LJ
a b c d e f g h
7 ... tli c6
Black would like to fight for the centre with
. . . e 5 , but it can be difficult to get this move
in. It doesn't work here: 7 . . . e 5 ? 8 . dxe5 dxe5
9.Wxd8t xd8 1 0 .igS t ! lll xg5 1 1 . lll xgS and
Black can't hold everything since l l . . . e8 ?
loses to 1 2 . lll d S .

h
8 ..ic4 h6
b d f g
8 . . . e5 still fails to solve Black's problems:
a c e

6 . . . d5 9.dxe5 dxe5 1 0 .ig3 Wxd l t 1 1 . xd l lll d6

6 . . .ig7 allows White to support the knight l 2 .ib3 id7 1 3 .hS gxh5 Otherwise h5 -h6
coming to g5 with his other knight: 7 . lll f3 ! followed by lll d5 will be difficult for Black to
d5 8 . lll eg5 lll d6 9 .id3 lll f5 1 0 .We2;l; meet. 1 4 . lll dS 0-0-0 1 5 .ih4 de8 1 6 . lll f6
Antidrome - QvC, Internet 2009.
7 . lll g5 lll xg5 8 .ixg5 ig7 9 . lll f3 0-0 1 0 .ie2 9.Wie2 e6
lll d7 Rather than aiming for . . . e 5 , Black switches
1 0 . . . c S ! ? could be tried. to a solid plan with . . . e6 and . . . d 5 .
1 1 . 0-0 We8 ?!
After l 1 ... lll f6! White's advantage is very 9. . .e5?! 1 0 . dxe S ! ? (or 1 0 .ig3 ) 1 O . . . dxe5
small. 1 1 . d l lll d6 1 2 .ig3 e4 1 3 . lll d4 lll xd4
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 225

1 4 . exd4 c6 ( 1 4 . . . Wi'e? 1 5 . llJ d5 ) 1 5 . 0-0 llJ xc4 1 7.E:xhst

1 6 . Wi'xc4 Wi'e7 1 7. d 5 l 7.ie5 ! is a bit trickier for Black to face . I
considered this move during the game and am
10.0-0-0 dS l l .i.b3 disappointed that I didn't play it . 1 7 . . . E:xh 1
l I .id3 id? 1 2 . a3t ( 1 7 . . . llJ xe5 1 8 . llJ xe5 g4 [ 1 8 . . . ixe5 1 9 . dxe5
f7 20.e4!] l 9 . E:xh8t ixh8 20.E:h l ixe5
l l ... i.d7 1 2Jhgl 2 1 . dxe5 Wf7 22.e4 dxe4 23 . Wi'd2+-) 1 8 .E:xh l
1 2 .a3 a6 1 3 . b l b5?! 1 4 . llJ e l if8! Black must find this manoeuvre in order
to limit his disadvantage. 1 9 . ig3;!;
1 2 .E:dg l ! ? may have been more accurate:
l 2 . . . g5 1 3 . hxg5 hxg5 l 4.E:xh8 t ( l 4.ig3 ) 17 ... i.xh8 1 8.liJbS g4 19.liJeS heS 20.heS
1 4 . . . ixh8 cxd4 2 1 .exd4 hbS 22.YxbSt Yd7 23.Ye2
aS! 24.i.4 E:a6 25.E:d3?!
, . ; ;. 0.
8
J i J $,I.
2 5 .E:e l a4 26.b4 f8 27 . Wi'd3;!; would keep

: 1.,_
an edge.

: ,_ ra.
- 25 ... VbS 26.E:e3 Yxe2 27.E:xe2=

45 - -jJ ef -
R. Pert - G. Wall, Surrey 20 1 3 .

' %n.
3 - r % B22) 3 ...i.g7

2 8 8 ii' 8 -

W
1 W

b d f g h
, % ' .

a c e

l 5 . llJ xg5 llJ xg5 1 6 .W/h 5 t llJ f7 l 7 . llJ xd 5 ! exd5

1 8 . ixd 5 Wi'e7 1 9 . ixf7t Wi'xf7 20 .Wi'xh8t Wf8
2 1 .Wi'xf8t xf8 22 . ixc?;!; With four pawns
for the piece, the endgame should be enj oyable
for White.

12 ... gS 13.i.g3 aS 1 4.hxgS hxgS l SJhl

xb3t 16.axb3 cS

4.h4!?
4 . e3 is also playable and may be similar if
White follows up with h2-h4 . An example
which continued i n the fashion of line B2 l
above is: 4 . . . llJ h6 5 . llJ f3 llJ f7 6.if4 c6 7.h4 d5
8 .Wi'd2 ie6 9 . 0-0-0 liJ d? 1 0 . h 5 llJ f6 l l . hxg6
hxg6 1 2 . E:xh8t ixh8 1 3 . llJ e5 llJ xe5 1 4 .ixe5
f7 1 5 . f3;!; N. Pert - Grafl, England 20 1 0 .

4 ... h6
4 . . . llJ f6 ? ! is asking for it!
 226 Ri chard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

JjJ.BJi>f.
;) .JZ "
.
Black chooses between B22 1 ) 5 ... tll f6 and
8
JJ
1% r" r . . .

6 .
B222) 5 ... d6.
1 ,
..

5 ' i ' I(
z. . " "
.
B22 1 ) 5 ... tll f6 6.e3 d6 7.'i:Vf3

4 -
i -il} '. . . .

. . " . .
Another approach is 7. tll h3 ! ? intending ih2
3 followed by tll f4 , which should also give White

2
1 z
n- -!
7'= r
..
..
good chances of an edge.

b d f g h
' ' " <h

a c e

5 . h 5 ! d6 (5 . . . tll xh5 6 . E:xh 5 ! gxh5 7 . e3 [or

7 . e4 ! ? with '!Wxh 5 to follow] 7 . . . 0-0 8 .ic4t
c;f;>h8 9.'!Wxh 5 The black king is in the firing
line of White's attack. ) 6.h6 if8 7 . e4 fxe4
8 . f3 exf3 9 . xf3t Dziuba - Gergel, Pardubice
2003.

4 ... tll h6?! I f Black is going to play the knight

to this square, I think that the previous move is
a better time. 5 .'!Wd2 tll f7 6 . tll f3 d6 (6 . . . tll xg5
7 . hxg5;!;) 7 . 0-0-0 h6 8 .if4 tll c6 9 . e4 0-0
1 0 .id3;t Moiseenko - Abeln, Ohrid 2009.

4 ... d 5 ? ! concedes the e5-square to White: 5 . e3

( 5 . tll h3 is also possible) 5 . . . c6 6 . tll f3 (or 6.id3
'!Wb6 7.E:b U) 6 . . . tll d7 7 .id3 tll gf6 8 . h 5 ! ?
7 . . . tll bd7 8 . 0-0-0 c6 9 .ih2N ( 9 . e4 fxe4
lll xh5 9 . E:xh5-+
1 0 . tll xe4 0-000 Prie - Santo Roman, Rochefort
2005) 9 . . . 0-0 (9 . . . Wa5 1 0 . tll h3 e5 l l .Wi'g3 @ f7
s.if4
1 2 .ie2 E: e 8 1 3 . a3 tll b6 1 4 . h 5 g5 1 5 . tll xg5 t-+)
1 0 . tll ge2 '!We8 1 1 . tll g3 e5 1 2 . h 5 tll b6 1 3 . dxe5
dxe5 1 4 . hxg6t

7 . . . c6

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 227

8 .Wi'g3 !N I was ready to claim this as my 1 1 ..ig5! e8 1 2 .bfci .bf6 1 3.0-0-0 e5

novelty, but then found that Schandorff had 1 4. d5

beaten me to it and included it in his book. Th i s was seen in Fressinet - Kindermann,
( 8 . 0-0-0 ie6 9 .id300 Prie - Philippe, Aj accio Germany 2002. The position looks very
2007) 8 . . . @f7 9 .ic4t d5 1 0 .ie2;!; pleasant for White, who has attacking
potential o n the kingside and well-placed
7 . . . e6 8 . 0-0-0 lli c6 9 .Wi'g3 lli e7 1 0 .ie2 id? p ieces in the centre.
1 l .if3 ic6 1 2 .ixc6t bxc6 1 3 . lli ge2 0-0
l 4 . f3;!; Stefanova - Zysk, Peristeri 20 1 O; White B222) 5 d6 6.e4! c6
.

will continue with e3-e4.

8 Jj;}illxj!)'li
7 f
7 . . . llih5 8 . 0-0-0 c6 9 .ic4 Wi'a5 1 0 .ih2 lli a6
l 1 . lli ge2 id? l 2.g4 lll f6 l 3 . gxf5 ixf5 1 4 .Wi'g2 f i f
6
lli b4 1 5 . ib3;!; Bauer - Haub, Cappelle la
Grande 20 1 2 . . . /, .,",,Y,_

'i""
.

c.,
5
4 m .r
m . . ,, - - -Y- . . /,
8
8.i.c4t

3
8 . 0-0-0 was the choice of a grandmaster who
has written a lot on this line: 8 . . . Wi'e8 9 .ic4t
e6 Moskalenko - Bonafede, Hoogeveen 20 1 0 ,

2 /)J wi' /[rJW"-'zfd.
.

and now I like 1 O . lli ge2N;i; intending ih2

followed by lli f4 .
1 -V j,, m n
a b c d e f g h
8 e6 9.tlJge2 tlJ c6 10.a3 'i!?h7?! This position occurred in the game Jones -
10 . . . Wi'e8 l l .ih2 a6 1 2 . lli f4 Wi'f7 1 3 . 0-0-0
..

Rendle in the 2 0 1 1 British Championship.

llig4 l 4.ig3;!;
1 0 . . . a6 l 1 .ih2 Wi'e8 1 2 . lli f4 b5 ( 1 2 . . . id?
1 3 .ia2 @h7 1 4 . 0-0-0 b5 1 5 .ixe6 ixe6
1 6 . lli xe6 Wi'xe6 l 7.Wi'xc6;!;) 1 3 .ixe6t ixe6
1 4 . lli xe6 Wxe6 1 5 .Wi'xc6;!;
I n a later round of the same tournament I
was paired against Rendle, and I planned to
play the following novelty against him. But
uncharacteristically for him, Rendle avoided
the Dutch in that game!
7.exf5!N
The point of this move is that neither
recapture is particularly good fo r Black.

7 . lli f3 ! ?
Th i s was Whi te's choice in the
aforementioned game.
7. . .e5?!
Th i s looks wrong. I am n o t certain about
the most precise way fo r Black to play, but I
am sure he can do better than this.
7 . . . tlJ f6 8 . e 5 lli g4 doesn't seem too bad for
Black.
22 8 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

7 . . . fxe4 ! ? would probably be my choice:

8 . tll xe4 .if5 9 . tll g3 e 5 ! ? (9 . . . Wf d7 may also
be playable for Black) 1 0 . dxe5 (or 1 0 . .ie300)
1 0 . . . dxe500 Compared with the game, Black
will be able to recapture on d8 with his rook
rather than his king.
8 . dxe5 dxe 5 ?
8 . . . fxe4 ! looks more like i t : 9 . tll xe4 .if5
1 0 . tll c3;!;
9 .Wfxd8t mxd8 1 0 . 0-0-0t .id? I I ..ih2
tll ge7 1 2 . .ic4 mes 1 3 . exf5 gxf5 1 4 . d2 f4
1 5 . tll e4 .ig4 1 6 . tll c5 tll d8 1 7 .hd l +-
G . Jones - Rendle, Sheffield 20 1 1 .

7 . c!lixd4
..

Recapturing on f5 gives White easy play

and a safe advantage, so Black really wants to
make the text move work, but it doesn't quite
seem good enough .
1 1 ..id3 .ie6 12.c!lie4 Wi'b6 13.c3!
With the black knight kicked out of the
7 . . . gxf5 8 .Wfh5 t @f8 9 . d5;!;
middle of the board, White will be a pawn up
for very little.
7 . . . .ixf5 ? ! is worse:
13 ... llixBt 14.WfxB 0-0-0 1 5.0-0-0;t

C) 2 ... tlif6?!

This move looks slightly suspect, allowing

White to double the black pawns, but despite
this it is quite a popular choice.

3 .ixf6 exf6
.

After 3 . . . gxf6? 4 . e4! the threat of mate in one

a b c d e f g h is a problem for Black.

8 . g4! .id? (8 . . . e5 9 . gxf5 exf4 1 0 .We2t tll ge7

4.e3
[ 1 0 . . . Wfe7 1 I . tll d5 Wfxe2t 1 2 . tll x e2 f3 1 3 . tll ef4
The immediate 4.c4 ! ? is also possible.
0-0-0 1 4 . fxg6+-J 1 I . tll f3 gxf5 1 2 . 0-0-0 Wd7
1 3 .g l g8 1 4 . tll d5 0-0-0 1 5 .xg? xg7
4 ... d5
1 6 . tll f6+- with "smothered mate" on the
Black occasionally tries:
black queen) 9 . .id3 ! The g6-pawn is a massive
4 . . . g6
target and White stands much better. 9 . . . mf7
Usually Black waits for White to attack the
1 0.h5
f5 -pawn with .id3 and Wf f3 before playing
this move.
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 229

5 . h4 up with lli e2-f4 and h4-h5 attacking the g6-

Immediately looking to target the g-pawn . pawn .
5 . . . d5 6 . c4 ie6 7 . cxd5 ixd 5 8 . lli c3 lli c6
9 . lli ge2 if7 That said, White has another move which
promises an advantage, and I have included
some analysis:
5 . c4

1 0 .d5!N
I prefer this to 1 O . g3;!; Grischuk - Moiseenko,
Sochi 200 5 . a b c d e f g h
1 0 . . . lli e 5 1 l . h5 g 5 1 2 . lli d4 5 . . . ib4t
Now White targets the f5 -pawn . 5 . . . c6 ? ! looks too passive to me: 6 . lli c3 ie6
1 2 . . . ixd5 1 3 .Wa4t c6 1 4 . 0-0-0 7 . cxd5 cxd5 8 .Wb3 Wd7 9 . tt'l ge2 g5 1 0 . g3
Black is going to lose the pawn back while lli c6 1 I .ig2 l"!d8 1 2 .l"!c l ie7 1 3 .a3 \!?fl
White maintains his initiative. 1 4 . h4;1; Ricardi - Rodriguez Vila, Villa
1 4 . . . Wd? Martelli 1 997.
1 4 . . . ie7 1 5 . lli xf5 +- 6 . lli c3 0-0 7 .Wb3 ixc3 t 8 . bxc3 lli c6 ! ?
1 5 . lli xd5 Wi'xd5 1 6 . lli xf5 +- 8 . . . f4 doesn't quite work o u t : 9 . cxd5
l"!e8 1 0 .ib5 id? 1 I .ie2 fxe3 1 2 .Wxb?
exf2t 1 3 .\!.ixf2 We? 1 4 .Wxa8 We3t
1 5 .\!.ifl Wxc3 1 6 .l"!e l lli c6 1 7 .Wxe8t;1;
Moiseenko - Melnikov, St Petersburg
2000.
8 . . . dxc4 helps White's development, at the
same time undoubling his pawns : 9 . ixc4t
\!.ih8 1 0 . lli e2 c5 1 1 . h4 cxd4 l 2 . cxd4
g6 1 3 . lli f4 lli c6 1 4 .l"!c l ;i; Moskalenko -
Karlsson , Sitges 2 0 0 9 .
9 . cxd5 lli a5 1 0 .Wb 5
There is a safe alternative in 1 0 .Wb4 b6
1 1 . lli h3 , giving back the pawn but stopping
any . . . f4 ideas: 1 1 . . .Wxd5 1 2 . lli f4 Wf7
1 3 .ie2;!; White has a fractio nal edge with
the better pawn structure.
1 0 . . . b6
230 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

the advantage of the bishop pair, whereas

White still has all the advantages of the better
pawn structure.

6.'Wf3 'Wd7 7.tLJ e2 tLJ c6 8.a3 0-0-0

a b c d e f g h
1 1 .ie2
1 1 . lll e2N is given as an improvement by
Schandorff: 1 1 . . . a6 1 2 .Wi'b4 Wi'xd5 1 3 . lll f4
Wf f7 1 4 .id3;!;
1 1 . . .ib? 1 2 .if3 a6 1 3 .Wi'd3 Wi'd7 1 4 . c4 b5
1 5 . cxb5 axb 5 1 6 . lll e2 ixd5 1 7 .ixd 5 t Wi'xd 5
1 8 . 0-0;!;
Fominyh - Guliev, Kazan 1 99 5 . Although
it's not a lot for him to shout about, White has
a small edge.

r ., 'm1 .
-, - - -
.i .tmff '11
s %1-- - - - - -r- - - -/:
- - . , , '/.
7 r,,, , ,%
Y.

, ,,% m
r, - ----%
,,,,.
%
D) 2 ... d5?!
6
-
5 "' , ,
3 --%-
4 :l[j -% -%
-
- -% m
2 8 -- - 8
, ifalm -m
a b c d e f g h
5 ... .ie6
Black's most stubborn defence is to go for

b d f g h
. . . ie6, . . . Wi'd7 and . . . lll c6-e7, trying to delay
a c e
. . . g6 for as long as possible. Nevertheless White
stands slightly better with normal development. This solid move looks a bit ugly, but it is not
uncommon .
5 . . . id6 6 .Wi'f3 g6 7 . lll e2 ie6 8 . lll bc3 lll c6
(8 . . . c 6 9 . h4!t) 9 . lll f4 ixf4 1 0 .Wi'xf4;!; Kharlov 3.e3 c6
- Perukhov, Sochi 200 5 . Black no longer has 3 . . . lll f6 4 .ixf6 transposes into line C above.
 Chapter 1 2 - 2 .ig5 against the Dutch 23 1

4.c4 \Wast 1 8.f3!

Black unpins his e-pawn so he can play . . . e6,
but White is ahead in development and has
good pieces.
4 . . . '\Mfb6 is similar: 5.'\Mf c2 e6 6 . lll c3 lll d7
7 .i.d3 lll gf6 8 . lll ge2;!; Benj amin - De Fotis,
USA 1 990.
s.tlic3 e6 6.tl)f3 tl)f6
With the black king stuck in the middle,
White decides to open up the centre.
18 ... hS 1 9.e4 ih6 20.kdl dxe4 2 1 .fxe4
ie3t 22.hl igS 23.YMh3 ixe4 24.tlixe4
fxe4 25.d5!
White's strategy of smashing open the centre
has succeeded.
25 ...YNb6 26.d6t! d7 27 ..ic4 f5 28.he6t!
Finishing off a game that has pretty much
been one-way traffic.

28 ... xe6 29.YMxfS#

R. Pert - 0 . Ledger, London 2004.

Conclusion: Chasing the bishop with A2)

9 ....ib4 10.YNhSt e7 l Ukl .id7 12.YMh6
f7 13 ..ie2 .if8 14.YNhSt e7 l S.tl)b3
\Wb4 1 6.0-0 ieS 17.\Wh4 ic6
2 . . . h6 3 .i.h4 g5 is clearly a critical line, though
I like White's prospects after 4 . e4. Since White
has then done well against the "normal" moves
4 . . . i.g7 and 4 . . . lll f6 , attention has turned to
the bizarre 4 . . . l:!h7! ? but here Moskalenko's
recommendation of 5 .i.g3 !N seems to promise
White an advantage.
B) 2 . . . g6 is a much more solid approach.
Here I recommend 3 . lll c3 (usually followed
by 4.h4) as a route to an edge for White.
Black has tried various other 2nd moves, but
I believe that White should be happy against
all of them.

a b c d e f g h
Chapter 13

1 .d4 d5 2.ig5

l .d4 d5 2 ..ig5

A) 2 ... h6 3 . .ih4 237

Al) 3 ... c5!? 237
A2) 3 ... c6 4.f3!? YNb6 5.YNcl 240
A2 1 ) 5 ... .if5 241
A22) 5 ... g5 242
B) 2 ... f6! 246
Bl) 3 . .if4 c6 4. f3 246
B l l) 4....ig4 247
B l 2) 4 ... 1f5 248
B 1 3) 4 ... g5! 248
B2) 3 ..id2!? 250
B3) 3.1h4 h6! 4.e3 f5 5.1g3 h5!
6 ..ie2 h4 7 ..ih5t d7 8.14 g5 9.e4 dxe4 252
B3 1) 1 0 ..icl 254
B32) 1 0.d5!?N 255
B32 1) 1 0 ... g7!? 255
B322) 1 0 ... gxf4 256
B33) l 0.1g4!?N 257
C) 2 ... g6 259
D) 2 ... c5 260
234 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 .d4 d5 2 . .ig5 point, although I will look at a couple of

independent possibilities .

% ;
"'
'fi!!'
,,%-%''""%-
---
,

.i ll .i.
8 ------- W 0. '".tr
,

z :-%,_, -- 2 . . . lli d7 aims to play . . . lll gf6 without having

l. W
1. W w
z

? I. to worry about being given doubled f-pawns .

: ,I;
,,,,, % ,,,,, % ,,,,, % ,, , , , %

I recommend that w e play 3.e3, when

,
3 . . . lll gf6 transposes into line A of Chapter 8
on page 1 5 9 .
4

3 ,,
WI'" Jtl"Jl!
%-" W"'1
2 . . . f6! i s a relatively rare choice for Black, but

/Yfl
I find this surprising as it seems difficult for
2

1
aVmJl M
a b c d e f
In this chapter we move on to the next logical
step of using 2 ,i.g5 against 1 . . .d5 - known as
the Pseudo-Tromp. I don't believe this move
is as accurate here as it is against 1 . . . lli f6 or
l . . . f5 , and with correct play I think that Black
can reach a balanced position. That said, it
can be a good practical choice as it is low in
theory and the positions are interesting - this
is backed up by the fact that in my database
White scores 5 8 % with this move, which is the
same percentage as the "main line" 2 . c4 . This
line was particularly popular with top English
grandmasters Mickey Adams, Julian Hodgson
and Tony Miles during the 1 9 90s, I 'm not
going to offer as many choices in this line as
I have done in the Trompowsky, but instead
will focus on giving one repertoire for White,
White to gain an advantage against this move.
This has resulted in my spending more time
than I had originally intended on this line. The
g h positions look balanced and interesting for
both sides, and we will look at 3 .i.h4 , 3 .i.f4
and 3 .i.d2 .
2 . . . c5 and a few other rare options will be
covered in this chapter.
3 ..ih4 c6
3 . . . c5 is an aggressive alternative which has
been used by Shirov, and we will have a look at
it in this chapter.
3 . . . lll f6 is possible, but I would be tempted
to whip the knight off. After 4 .i.xf6 exf6 the
position is analogous to those we looked at in
Chapter 7, and Black can hardly profit from
having a pawn on h6.

.
picking out my favourite variations.

2 . h6
The main line - Black immediately attacks
the bishop, encouraging White to make a
decision about its future path .
2 . . . ll\ f6 is Black's second most popular
choice, transposing to a line of the Trompowsky
that is covered in Chapters 7 and 8 .

2 . . . c 6 i s likely t o transpose into the main line

as Black probably should play . . . h6 at some
 Chapter 1 3 - l .d4 d5 2.ig5 23 5

4.llJf3 1 .d4 d5 2.ig5

4 . c3 i s a solid alternative with which White
has scored well . He opens the door to play
either W/c2 or Wlb3 to neutralize . . . W/b6 - I'll
touch upon this line.

4 . e3 is White's most common option, but I

am not going to recommend it. After 4 . . . Wb6
5 .W/c l e5! I find White's position rather
uninspiring; unfortunately 6 . dxe5 ? ? is not
possible because it drops the h4-bishop to
6 . . . W/b4 t .

4 ...Wb6 s.Wcl g5
This is critical, though I shall also look at a b c d e f g h
5 . . . f5 . Black has a wide range of moves . A) 2 ... h6
together with B) 2 ... f6! look like the most
6.ig3 g4 7.llJ e5 Wxd4 8.c4!?-+ critical options . We shall also examine C) 2 ... g6
Wh i te loses a pawn but gets a tremendous and D) 2 c5, hut fi rst
... we will rake a quick
amount of play for it. It will be no surprise look at four other possibilities:
for you to learn that this was one of Hodgson's
favourite weapons! 2 . . . lll c6 is of little independent significance
as Black will usually follow up with a quick
. . . f6 . For example, 3 . e3 f6 4.h4 transposes
to the note to Black's 3 rd move in line B 3 on
page 2 5 2 .

2 . . . g4
Black has learnt something from us!

3 . c4
It seems a sensible idea to strike in the centre
to try and benefit from our extra move.
236 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

3 . . . c6 1 2 .'Wxc4 0-0 1 3 . l:!fd l l:!fd8 1 4 .l:!ac l ;!;

3 . . . dxc4 4 . lt:l c3 h6 5 .if4 lt:l f6 6.f3 ih5 7 . e4 Miladinovic - Giretti, Salsomaggiore Terme
e6 8.ixc4;!; Meduna - Euler, Passau 1 9 96. 2004.
4.'Wb3 'Wd7 5 . e3 e6 6 . lt:l d2 ie7 7.h4!?
Setting a sneaky trap. 2 . . . c6
7 . . . lt:\ f6? 8 . f3 if5 9 .ixf6 ixf6 1 0 .g4+ In the majority of cases Black will soon play
White cleverly wins a piece, Bauer - . . . h6 and transpose into line A2 - let's see
Wolfangel, Bethune 1 997. what happens if he tries to avoid this.

2 . . . if5 3 . e3

a b c d e f g h
3 . . . lt:l f6
3 . . . lt:l d7 4 . c4 h6 5 .ih4 c6 6 . lt:l c3 lt:l gf6
7 . lt:l f3 e6 8 .Wb3 'Wb6 9 . c5 'Wxb3 1 0 . axb3;!;
White has a risk-free advantage, M iles -
Lovlu, Sakthi 1 99 6 .
3 . . . c6 4 . lt:l f3 'Wb6 5 .'Wc l lt:l d7 6 . c4 h6
7.if4 dxc4 8 . lt:l bd2 lt:l gf6 9 . lt:l xc4;!; M iles -
Murshed, Sakthi 1 9 96.
4 .ixf6 exf6
We have reached a position that can arise
from the Trompowsky, except that Black
has p layed the inaccurate . . . if5 , when he
would prefer to put his pawn there followed
by bringing his queen's knight to the f6-
square.
4 . . . gxf6 5 . lt:l e2 e5 6 . lt:l g3 ie6 7 . c3 c6
8 . lll d2 lll d7 9 .Wh5 'Wb6 1 0 .l:!b l c5 l 1 .ie2
cxd4 1 2 . exd4 0-0-0 1 3 . 0-0 l:!g8 1 4 . a4;!;
Miladinovic - Gromovs, Salsomaggio re
Terme 2004.
5 .id3 'Wd7 6 . lt:l f3 id6 7 .ixf5 'Wxf5 8 . 0-0
c6 9 .We2 lt:l d7 1 0 . c4 'Wh5 l 1 . lll c3 dxc4
a b c d e f g h
3 . lt:l f3
3 . c3 is a solid possibility, preparing to meet
. . . 'Wb6 with 'Wc2 or 'Wb3, though I find it
a little unambitious. 3 . . . if5 4 . lt:l f3 lt:l d7
5 . lt:l bd2 lt:l gf6 6 . lt:l h4! Taking advantage of
the fact that our bishop has not been driven
back to this square. 6 . . . ie6 7.Wc2 h6 8 .ixf6
lt:l xf6 9 . e3 This fractionally favours White,
who will complete his development with
id3 and 0-0 , and then follow up either
with f2-f4, or with f2-f3 and e3-e4.
3 . . . Wb6 4.Wc l ig4
4 . . .if5 5 . e3 lt:l d7 (5 . . . h6 6 .ih4 transposes
to line A2 1 on page 24 1 ) 6 . c4 e6 7 . lt:l c3
lt:l gf6 8 .ie2 dxc4 9 . lt:l d2 id3 1 O . lt:l xc4 ixc4
l l .ixc4 c5 1 2 .d5 exd 5 1 3 . lt:l xd5 lt:l xd5
1 4 .ixd5 Wa5 t 1 5 .Wc3 'Wxc3t 1 6 . bxc3 f6
1 7 .if4 0-0-0 1 8 . l:!d l;!;
5 . lt:l bd2 lt:l d7 6.e3 e6 7 .id3 ie7 8 .if4 lt:l gf6
9.h3 ih5 1 0 . 0-0
1 0 . c3 looks too insipid: 1 0 . . . 0-0 l l . b4 a5
1 2 .a3 ig6 1 3 .ixg6 hxg6 1 4 . 0-0= Povah -
Law, Birmingham 200 1 .
1 0 . . . 0-0
 3 . . . lll d7 4. lll f3 lll gf6 5 . e3 transposes to line A
of Chapter 8 on page 1 60 .

3 . . . if5 4 . e3 c 6 5 . c4 looks a b i t better for White

with normal development. One example was :
5 . . . %li'b6 6 .%li'd2 dxc4 7.ixc4 e5 8 . lll c3 lll d7
9 . lll ge2 lll gf6 1 0 . lll g3 ig6 l 1 .ixf6 lll xf6?
( l l . . .gxf6;!;) 1 2 . dxe5 lll g4 1 3 . e6+- Gallagher
- Mitkov, Lisbon 2000.

Al) 3 ... cS!?

- A mli ta0a.J.@ Jk.. %.

s
7 - .a.
- _ , -
m1igM. ,, Y,

"jjjj jjjj. "&

,, _ , , . ,,,,.

% 'S
6

5 -.T
"
A) 2 ... h6 4 ... . %!l5%
r :
" -

, , ,
%"!!!!
This is an important choice for Black and is .
regarded as the main line.
./ " - ",,., ,,/,(
3.i.h4 lt:J vm ..t m :

b d f g h
" , ,x - - , ,

a c e

This aggressive approach is often used

by attacking players . Black wants to take
advantage of White not having played c2-c4 ,
and stake a claim over the centre himself.

Avrukh recommends this move in his recent

book Grandmaster Repertoire 11. The positions
look roughly balanced, and I have i ncluded
Avrukh's analysis where appropriate.

4.dxc5!?
Well, if you're offering! White grabs the pawn
in the hope that during the time it takes Black
to recapture it, White can seize the initiative.

4 . lll c3
3 . . . lll f6 4.ixf6 exf6 is similar to Chapter 7; This was an interesting try by Hodgson in
having ... h6 thrown in should not be any 1 990, but it hasn't really caught on.
advantage for Black. 4 . . . lll c6 5 . lll f3
238 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

After 14 . . . E:c?! White might struggle to find

enough compensation.
1 5 .'1Wa3 lll xa6 1 6 . lll c3 Wxfl t 1 7.xfl;!;
Hodgson - Engqvist, Gausdal 1 99 0 .

8
7 - , ,. ,%--,------Y.
..t-'11)
6 ' ' ' ' '-
-mew
%,

: O.Ji -
5 . . . ig4
3 L!

'' 'fi
'tE'jlI{
It is important that 5 . . . g5?! doesn't win a

2
pawn : 6 .ig3 g4 7 . lll e5 lll xd4? 8 . e3 lll c6
9 .Wxd 5 +-

I
5 . . . lll f6 6 .ixf6 gxf6 (6 . . . exf6 looks wrong:
7.e3 cxd4 8 . lll xd4;!; and simple development
will lead to pressure against the d5-pawn) a b c d e f g h
7 . e4!? This looks the way to go. (7.e3 ig4 4 g5
...

8 . dxc5 e6 9 .ib5 ixc5 1 0 . h300) 7 . . . cxd4
(7 . . . dxe4 8 . d 5 exf3 9 . dxc6 fXg2 ?! 1 0 .ixg2)
8 . lll xd4 dxe4 9 . lll xc6 bxc6 1 0 .WxdSt 'ltixd8
1 1 . 0-0-0t 'ltic7 1 2 . lll xe4 f5 1 3 . lll d2 E:b8
1 4. lll b3 It looks fairly drawish but White
can play on.
6 . lll e5 cxd4 7 . lll xc6 bxc6 8 .Wxd4 Wb6 9.Wxg4
This leads to typical Hodgsonesque play -
perhaps not entirely sound, but he came out
on top.
The more solid 9 . e3 is unclear.
9 . . . Wxb2 1 0 . lll d l Wxa l l l .'Wa4 E:c8
White seems to be able claim a comfortable
edge after the more popular:
4 . . . Wa5t 5 . lll c3 e6 6.e4 ie7
6 . . . g5 7.ig3 (or 7.Wd4 ! ? E:h7 8 .ib 5 t
id? 9 . b4t Drazic - Kadimova, Formia
1 99 5 ) 7 . . . ig7 8 . lll ge2!N (8 .e500 Yedidia -
Macintyre, Boston 1 996) 8 . . . lll f6 (8 . . . dxe4 ?
is not possible: 9 .ixb8 E:xb8 1 0 .Wd6 gas
1 1 . 0-0-0 +-) 9 . exd5 lll xd5 1 0 .'1Wd2;!;
7.ixe7 lll xe7 8 .'1Wd2

8 . . . Wxc5
8 . . . 0-0 9 . exd5 exd5 1 0 . lll b5 Wxd2t
l l . 'ltixd2 lll a6 1 2 . lll e2 lll xc5 1 3 . f3 id?
 Chapter 1 3 - l .d4 d5 2 .ig5 239

1 4 . lLi bd4 lLi e6 1 5 .E:d l lLi xd4 1 6 . lLi xd4 lLi c6
1 7 . 'iti c3;!; Drazic - Mariano, Milan 2004.
9 . exd5 exd5 I O .id3 0-0 1 1 . lLi ge2 lLi bc6
1 2 . 0-0 d4 1 3 . lLi e4;!;
Moskalenko - Magem Badals, San Sebastian
1 992.
continuation : 1 1 . h4 g4 1 2 .e3 lLi h6 1 3 .id3
lLi f5 1 4 . lLi e2 lLi xg3 1 5 . lLi xg3 lLi c7 1 6 . 0-0-0
e600 I reckon play is balanced here.) l 1 . e4
lLi e7 1 2 . lLi gf3 f6 1 3 . exd5 ixd5 1 4 .ib 5 t The
situation was murky in Kamsky - Shirov,
Moscow 2007.

5.ig3 ig7 6.c3 tli a6

6 . . . lLi f6 7 . lLi d2 a5

8
. . . :.,. ...z.ef z
.1 .t.
: , 1,,-
s .
r . n
1
1. a
'''t..ef% ..

4 .

t;rn
z .....z

!w.m
z

3
2 o ,-maef,,-
A ef/fl
J'/. OJU
"""f mfl- o .."efm
A A
u
1 =m :
; -'
' . " h
' a b c d e f g

8 . h4!N ( 8 . e3 0-0 9 . h4 g4 I O .a4!?N [ 1 0 . lLi e2

lLi a600 Hodgson - Rahman, London 1 9 9 1 ]
I O . . . lLi a6 1 l .ixa6 E:xa6 1 2 . lLi e2 lLi h 5 1 3 .'.Wb3
lLi xg3 1 4 . lLi xg3;!;) 8 . . . g4 9 . e4 ! ? dxe4 1 0 . lLi c4
and White has the initiative.
7 . . . lLi xc5 ! ?N was suggested as interesting by
Avrukh. 8 .Wxd5 Wxd5 9 . exd5 lLi a4 I O .ib 5 t
id? Now instead of I I .ixa4 ixa4 a s given
by Avrukh, perhaps White could try 1 1 .ixd?t
c;!;>xd7 1 2 . lLi e2 lLi xb2 1 3 . lLi a3 b6 1 4 . 0-0 E:c8
1 5 . d6 exd6 1 6 . lLi b 5 with a murky position.

7 ... dxe4 8 .'.Wxd8t 'iti xd8 9 .ixa6 bxa6 1 0 . 3

e3 1 1 . lLi a3 f5 N (Avrukh's improvement over
I l . . .ie6? 1 2 . lLi c2 Rojas Keim - Peralta,
Sabadell 2009) 1 2 . 0-0-0 t c;!;>e8 1 3 . f4 e5
1 4 . fxe5 f4 1 5 .ie l ixe5 1 6 . lLi c4 ic7 1 7 . lLi f3
ib7 Avrukh slightly prefers Black here, b u t I
chink it is quite unclear.

7.e4 8.ixa6!?N
7 .a4t is a playable alternative: 7 . . . id7 8 .ib 5 t also looks interesting: 8 . . . id7
8 .'.Wa3 '.Wc8 9 . c6 ixc600 1 0 . lLi d2 e5 ( 1 0 . . . h 5 ! ?N 9 .ixa6 bxa6 I O . exd5;!; and White can make it
is given by Avrukh, with the following difficult for Black to regain his material .
240 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

8 . exd5 ?! tll xc5+ went well for Black in

PhilHellmuth - Antidrome, Internet 2009.

8 bxa6 9.exd5 '1Wxd5

.. 10.'1Wxd5 tll xd5
1 1 .tlif'3 g4 12.tlih4

a b c d e f g h
5 .Wlb3
5 .Wlc2 ! ? is possible as the attempt co deflect
the queen from the defence of the b2-pawn
with 5 . . . .if5 ? ? backfires : 6.W/xf5 Wlxb2
7 .Wlc8#
5 .. ,.if5 6 . lll d2 tll d7 7 . tll gf3 e6 8 . e3 .ie7 9 . .ie2
a5 1 0 . 0-0 a4 1 I .Wlxb6 tll xb6 1 2 . c4 lll f6 1 3 .c5
A2) 3 c6
lll bd7 1 4 . b4 axb3 1 5 . axb3 0-0 1 6 . b4 g5

l 7 . .ig3 lll e4 1 8 . tll xe4 .ixe4 l 9 . tll e5 lll xe5

s 1. m.t.B'!liI
7 rifi" ,,,,,%--,-"'"
20 . .ixe5

-----Y.
--
" "
6 liJI ' "'"' s .I B
..
B

5 w. A

5:
,,.,, ..
I,,,,, % - 7

P' -0 -J
4
'"" ' 4 .. . . %n:ra-----%
f
. , .
z
f
3 If!" '0" Wi"' . . . %
n %
3
2 'j[j J[j%(dj[j
1
.i. 2 .t. .
%, %r' r
ct:JmV 1 :--rli"" '
a b c d e f g h a b c d e f g h

4.ti:)f'3!? So White has managed to sneak an extra

This is my first choice, though I j ust want co move or two on the queenside and he makes
mention a solid alternative for chose looking his slight initiative count. I 've included
for a quieter life: the whole game for chose who want co
4 . c3 have a look, but as this is not my main
White and Black effectively mirror each recommendation I don't want co spend coo
other's play, and White's hope is chat long on it.
 Chapter 1 3 - l .d4 d5 2 .ig5 24 1

20 . . . 1'!fc8 2 1 . b 5 f6 22. bxc6 bxc6 23.ig3 @ f7 think it is worth seeing how he handles the
24.:!'!fc l e5 2 5 .ig4 :!'!xa l 26.:!'!xa l f5 27.ih 5 t position.
<it> e 6 2 8 . f3 i.d3 29.1'!a7 1'!b8 3 0 .i.xe5 :!'!b l t
3 I . c;t> f2 1'!b2t 32.<it>e l 1'!xg2 3 3 .i.dG i.xd6 6 e6 7.c4 ie7
.

34.iflt @ f6 3 5 . cxd6 f4 3 6 . exf4 gxf4 37.1'!a8
if5 3 8 .1'!f8 ie6 3 9 .ih 5 t @g7 40.1'!e8 @ f6
4 I .i.g4 1'!xg4 42. fXg4 i.xg4 43.@f2 h5 44.h4
i.d7 45 .1'!e7 i.g4 46. 1'!h7
1 -0 Rodriguez Vila - Cubas, Asuncion
2009.
4 YMb6 5.VMcl
.
7 . . . i.xb l 8 . :!'!xb l Wa5 t doesn't win a pawn :
9 . lll d2 %Vxa2 ? ? 1 0 .:!'!a l +-
8.ig3
Keeping the pieces on seems the right way
to go - it is rather early to go for exchanges
and a draw.

Sacrificing the b-pawn with 5 . lll bd2 ! ? has 8 ... tll f6 9.tll c3
occasionally been played. In some ways it
appeals to me, although maybe it should only
be used in blitz, as obj ectively White may not
obtain quite enough compensation. 5 . . . YMxb2
looks critical, with the possible continuation:
6 . e4 dxe4 7 . lll xe4 lll f6 8 .:!'!b l Wxa2 9 .id3

A2 1 ) 5 ... if5 6.e3

This is a common position which can arise

from a number of different move orders , and
so is important to understand how to play it.
Miladinovic has played this position at least
twenty times over the last two decades, so I
242 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

Here l 5 . f3 !N;!; would be my choice, with a 1 1 .0-0

pleasant plus for White. This seems most natural, although
Miladinovic has also tried: 1 1 . c S ! ? Wi'd8 1 2 . b4
9 . . . lli bd7 1 0 .cS lli e4 1 3 . ll'l xe4 ixe4 1 4. 0-0 ixf3 ( 1 4 . . . a6
1 0 .ie2 may be the best way to go, when 1 5 . ll'l d2;!; with queenside play for White,
1 o . . . dxc4 1 1 . ll'l d2;!; is similar the above game, Miladinovic - Pavlovic, Podgorica 2008)
while 1 0 . . . 0-0 returns to our main line. 1 5 .ixf3 ih4 1 6 .if4 ig5 1 7 .Wi'c3 ixf4
1 O . . . Wi'd8 1 1 . b4 lli h 5 1 8 . exf4 Miladinovic - Jankovic, Sibenik 20 1 0 .
This looks pretty drawish to me, although
White can play on.

1 1 . .. dxc4
1 1 . . . cS!?N is another way to try and suggest
that White ought to have played c4-c5 to fix
the pawn structure. 1 2 . cxdS lli xd5 1 3 . ll'l xdS
exd5 1 4 . dxcS ll'l xc5 1 5 .Wi'd2 :B:fd8 1 6 .Wi'd4
:B:ac8 1 7 .:B:fd l White has long-term play
against the d5 -pawn.

a b c d e f g h
12.tll d2 a6 13.tll xc4;1;
1 2 .ieS Miladinovic - Ki. Georgiev, Niksic 2008.
It seems a bit strange to spend two moves
provoking . . . f6 , though White did end up A22) 5 ... g5 6 ..ig3 g4 7.tll e5 xd4
with a small edge.
Another approach is 1 2 .ie2 ll'l xg3 1 3 .hxg3
0-0 1 4 . 0-0 with queenside play to come,
Mehmeti - Abramovic, Obrenovac 200 5 .
1 2 . . . f6 1 3 .ig3 ll'l xg3 1 4 . hxg3 e 5 1 5 . lli h4 ih7
1 6.g4 ll'l f8 1 7 . lli 5;!;
Miladinovic - Pikula, Tivat 20 1 1 .

I O ..ie2 til bd7

8.c4
8 . e3 is likely to lead to the same thing after

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter 1 3 - I . d4 d5 2 .ig5 243

8 . . . Wc5 9 . c4 ig7 .

8 ...ig7 9.e3 YNc5

9 . . . Wb6 1 0 . cxd5 lll d7 1 1 . lll c4 Wb4t 1 2 . lll c3
cxd5 1 3 . lll d2 lll gf6 1 4 . lll b 5 0-0 1 5 . a3 Wc5
1 6 .Wxc5 lll xc5 1 7 . lll c7 b8 1 8 . lll xd 5 (White
can force a repetition with 1 8 . lll b 5 a8
1 9 . lll c7) 1 8 . . . lll xd5 l 9 .ixb8 ixb2 20.E:a2
ic3 2 1 .ixa?t Stefanova - Chiburdanidze,
Elista 2004.

;-

. . %_ -,_,-, , % ,,,,,-
'0 '
1 4 .ic7!
8 .i -.i. -"
, , , , , , , *""' Targeting the a5 -pawn.
1 w
6
1 4 . h 3 ! ? is an interesting alternative, looking

"'s.a.m
/, ,

to open a file for the king's rook: 14 . . . gxh3

5 1 5 . gxh3 lll gf6 1 6 .ic?t with g l on the

4 , , , cards .

, , 7 1 4 . . . Wa7

3 m m" i
1 4 . . . Wg6 ?! provides a target for White:

"r% , , , , . ,,r,,,,,%w,
1 5 . lll f4 Wg5 1 6 . h4 gxh3 1 7 . xh3
2 J..!l, .,,. -J!l jll 1 4 . . . Wc6 1 5 .Wxc6 (or 1 5 . lll b3 Wxc l t

I
, _,t-
? ttJ 1 6 . xc l b 6 1 7 . lll d4) 1 5 . . . bxc6 1 6 .c l c5
l 7.b3t and White will regain the pawn .
a b c d e f g h 1 5 . h3!
10.tll d2 After 1 5 . lll b3 b6 1 6 . lll d4 ia6 White's
This was Hodgson's choice, bur Miladinovic compensation seems limited.
had a different idea: 1 0 . lll c3 ?! dxc4! ( 1 0 . . . d4 ? 1 5 . . . gxh3 1 6. xh3 lll gf6 1 7 .g3
1 l . exd4 Wxd4 1 2 .Wc2 lll a6 1 3 .d l Wc5 In return for the pawn, White has the
l 4.a3;1:; Miladinovic - Godena, Bratto 2004) initiative on both flanks .
l 1 . lll xc4 ie6 l 2 . lll d2 lll f6 1 3 .id3 lll bd7 1 4 . a3
lll e5 1 5 .ie2 d8 1 6 .Wc2 lll d5 Miladinovic 1 3.cx:d5 tll xd3t 14.ixd3
- Bruno, Frascati 200 5 . White doesn't really
seem to have enough compensation .

1 0 ... tll d7 1 1 .tll d3 VNb6 1 2.a4!?

Intending a4-a5 .

12 ... tll c5
It makes some sense to block White's plans
of advancing o n the queenside:
1 2 . . . a5N 1 3 . cxd5
1 3 .ie2 also looks quite playable, though less
critical .
1 3 . . . cxd 5
244 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

14 ... c:x:d5 1 6.0-0

Taking the b-pawn looks risky:
1 4 . . . .txb2 1 5 . a5!
This zwischenzug assures White of good
attacking chances .
1 5 . . . %%4 1 6 .Wb l lli f6
1 6 .Wc2!?N has the idea of preven ting . . . if5 ,
and looks quite interesting. 1 6 . . . a 6 can then be
met by 1 7 .:gc l with complicated play.
1 6 ... J.f5!?
Black has also played:
1 6 . . . a6! ? 1 7 . e4 ie6 1 8 . exd5 ixd 5 1 9 .ic4 :gc8

l 7 . :ga4!?
Typical Hodgson.
1 7. dxc6 bxc6 1 8 . 0-0! also offers White 20.a5!
decent compensation . 20 .ixd 5 ? was an adventurous idea o f
1 7 . . . Wxa4 1 8 .Wxb2 Wxa5 1 9 . d6 Wd5 Hodgson's which didn't work o u t : 20 . . . :gxc l
l 9 . . . if5 ? 2 0 . e4 ixe4 2 l .ixe4 lli xe4 22.0-0! 2 1 .:gaxc l ixb2 22.:gcst <;t>g7 23 . lli c4 Wb4
was really promising for White in Hodgson 24.:gb l lli f6 2 5 .:gxh8 <;t>xh8 26 .ixf7 <;t>g7+
- B. Lalic, Scarborough 1 99 9 . Hodgson - Schandorff, Germany 200 1 .
20. <;t>e2 :g g 8 2 1 . dxe7 lli h 5 2 2 . lli e4 20 . . . Wg6!?N
White's dangerous attack provides ample 20 . . .Wb4 2 1 .Wd l ixc4 22 .:ga4 Wb5
compensation for the exchange. 2 3 . lli xc4 lli f6 24.lli b6 gave White excellent
play for the pawn in Lawson - Lesiege,
1 5 .J.h5t @f8 Montreal 2003.
2 1 .Wd l ic6

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter 1 3 - l . d4 d5 2 .ig5 245

22.Wi'b3 with 20 . . . tli d7!? 2 1 .ixg7t cJ;ixg7 22 .Wi'xd5

White has reasonable compensation for the Wfe6 23.Wi'a5, when White only has a slight
pawn. edge.
2 1 .Wi'b4 tli d7 22.ixg7t <;tixg7 23 .Wi'xb7 Wi'd6
17.ic7 Yg6 18.Vc5 ti) f6 24.Wi'xa6
The passed queenside pawns make it look
quite promising for White.

a b c d e f g h
24 . . . Wi'b4
24 . . . Wi'xa6 2 5 .ixa6 c2 26.tlib3 xb2
2 7 . tli d4 ih7 28 .ib5;!;
2 5 . e4 dxe4 26.Wi'b5 Wxd2 27 .Wx5 tli f6
28.ixg4 c2 29.ae l e6 3 0 .Wi'e5 Wi'g5
1 9 .a5 a 6 20 .ia4 tli e8 2 1 .if4 ixb2 22. ab l
3 1 .Wi'xg5 t hxg5 3 2 .e2 c4 3 3 . b 3 b4 34.h3
c8 23 .Wi'xd5 ixb l 24.Wi'xb7 c l 2 5 . xc l
xb3 3 5 . a l a8 36.a5 a7 37.a6 b6
ixc l 26.tlixb 1 cJ;ig7 27.ie5 t tli f6
3 8 . ea2 tlid5 3 9 .a5 <;tif6 40 .ie2 tli f4 4 1 .ifl
tli d5 42.e l
Yi-Yi Povah - Shaw, West Bromwich 2003.
Even in the final position, White may still have
an edge.

1 9 .ie 5 ! ? a6 20 .ie2 c8
Black could consider returning the pawn
246 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 9 ... a6 20.j,e2 :gcs 2 I .'i;Yb4 My initial intention was to recommend

Attacking the b7-pawn - I rather like the this move, but on closer inspection I found
look of White's position. a couple of drawbacks. Firstly Black has the
opportunity to transpose into a playable line
B) 2 f6! . of the Blackmar-Diemer with colours reversed.
Secondly it seems that White may struggle
'l!i' A .\(tt/.; rf' 1'1-. .t against an accurate but rarely-played plan from
s
f "''
a mf: i mW.-.ia,
76 %i(1: ;i.z
,,, % .
%_ . . . % - - - %-. . . %_
" A
.... z-z .1:
i.z A
Black involving . . . g5 and . . . h 5 .

%7*.i . 3 ... lll c6

....

5 ;'/,
.
'
3 . . . c5 is also playable: 4.ixb8 (4.e3 lll c6

4 &
- - 5 .ib5 cxd4 6 . exd4 e6?! [6 . . . a6! ?00] 7 . c4

3
-
'
dxc4 8 . lll c3 id6 9.h5t 'i!tf8 1 0 . lll ge2 a6
l l .ixd6t xd6 1 2 .ixc4t Drazic - Kreis!,

2 Ill" ,,Jw.)j;i"
J[j J/JJ::/J0"'
l]
Zadar 2009) 4 . . . E1xb8 5 . e3 a6 6 . c4 e6 7 . cxd5

.
cxd4 8 .xd4 xd5 9.xd5 exd5 I O .lll c3
White may have a fraction of an advantage,
1 --w :
Miladinovic - Buhmann, Heraklio 2007.
a b c d e f g h
This move is relatively rarely played, but 4.lll f3
it looks in teresting - Wh ite may struggle White should not allow Black to play . . . e5
to prove an advantage here. Because this too easily: 4.e3? e5 5 .ig3 exd4 6 . exd4 if5
line seems critical I have gone into it in 7.c3 id6 8 .ib5 lll ge7+ and White's position
considerable detail, and I have given three wasn't exactly inspiring in Miladinovic - Prie,
choices for White. We shall look at the natural Asnieres 2006.
Bl) 3.j,f4 and the odd-looking B2) 3.j,d2!?
before going on to my main recommendation
of B3) 3.j,h4.

B l ) 3.j,f4

4 . . . e 5 ! ? 5 . dxe5
 Chapter 1 3 - l . d4 d5 2 .ig5 247

8 1.%1J;;
B m
. -!Jm
5.ttl bd2
7
3 W@_3
1. -
This was H odgson's choice.
6
. ..

fo %
.. ...

5 . c4 is a very aggressive alternative: 5 . . . dxc4

.

5

4 . . 3
6 . d 5 e5 7.ic l tlJ b4 8 . e4 c6 9 . a3 lli d3 t

3 l5'
I O .ixd3 cxd3 1 1 . dxc6 bxc6 1 2 . 0-0 ic5

1 3 .h3 ih5 1 4 .b4 ib6 1 5 . a4 Morozevich

2 :-
- Van Wely, Monte Carlo 2 00 5 . White has

1 ,dlt5u.l1 :
some compensation for the pawn , but not
enough for an advantage.
a b c d e f g h
We have reached a line of the Blackmar 5 . c3 is rather solid: 5 . . . e6 6 .Wlb3 b8 7 . CLJ bd2
Diemer with colours reversed. This usually id6 8 .ig3 CLJ ge7 9 . e3 0-000 Agdestein -
arises from 1 . d4 d5 2 . e4 dxe4 3 . CLJ c3 tlJ f6 4 . f3 Shen Yang, Gibraltar 2 0 0 8 .
.J5 , and is known as the Vienna Defence.
I do not think that this is an appropriate place 5 ... e6
for an in-depth investigation of Blackmar Th e main alternative is:
Diemer theory (and as I have mentioned, this 5 ... CLJ xd4 6 . tlJ xd4 e5 7.h3 ih5
is not my main recommendation) , so I shall
j ust say that I believe the position is roughly
balanced. Black may continue 5 . . . fXe5 6 . CLJ xe5
Wlf6 7 . CLJ d3 if5 8 . e3 0-0-0 , when he has
decent play for the pawn , or may go for the
aggressive 5 . . . g5 ! ? 6 .ig3 h 5 in similar fashion
to line B 1 3 below.

BU) 4 ...ig4

a b c d e f g h
8 . tlJ 2b3!?N
This is my preference.
8 . c4 may also suffice for an edge:
8 . . . exd4 9 .Wb3 g5 (9 . . . id6? 1 0 .ixd6 Wfxd6
1 1 .Wlxb? Hodgson - Yeo , Southampton
1 9 86) I O .ih2 dxc4 l l . CLJ xc4 b8 1 2 . e3 CLJ e7
1 3 .id3t
8 . . . exd4
8 . . . exf4 9 . CLJ e6 Wld6 1 0 .Wlxd5:t
9.Wfxd4:t

6.J.g3 J.d6 7.c3 f5 8.c!ie5 ixe5 9.dxe5 tige7

Black's most common option, but White's
10.ttlb3 0-0 1 1 .f4
chances look preferable.
 Richard Pm
.
248 - Play mg t he Trompowsky

Toking time out to avoid any pro blem with

.
sueh as we saw m the pn,vio>B note.
. . . ltJ b4,

"' 3 etJge7 8.c4 0-0 9.etJ c3 ig6

0:
6 id6 7.s.g

1 b4 a6 U .!fb3

m -s
W . _,-
.
8n
7
A : &
,.J ;. ,,. .,,, --- -Y.w
&

'M"i ll.t.
- : L. A% A
6 m '
'.
%

5. fl"
b c
4 Wl'W'1XX!.. .. %1im:z.AJ4f.b....%%rfWA'0.: WM...h'm..
.. . 70% O_ /. .
,

3
'; ill WM o
1 1 ... gS.".
?!

. . . . rll LS u
d2 a5 1 3 . e3 a4 1 4 . lil d4 lil xd4
1 1 . . . b6 1 2
%g J: '
2

'" db. B'.l:i

"

1 5 . exd4 c5 1 6 . id3 c4 1 7 . .i.

c2 +
1 !Wi,1,


=

. -,

1 1'l' d2 gd'4
"
h
;'
12. '<> c5 1'l' c8 13. lil d3
a b c d e f g
s e8 1 .Ah4 1'l'g6
" xf4 xf4
,.
15. lil xf.. 1 6.1'!'
1 8.0-0-0= 1 1 ...J.7 "
.

Hodgon - DIB hman, Birmingham 200 1 . Thi, look. too P "' ive .

B 1 2) 4 ...if5 1 1 . . . a 5N '""" more like '" 1 2 . b5 a4 1 3 .Y!! b 2

lt:i a5 1 4 .c5 ixg3 1 .hxg3 w ith inte,.,tmg .
.
%,ii
8 1K 8 .I.
!W,@j .J--'j"J!I

z
p I ay. I wou Id be quite happy with White's
extra pace on the queens1'd e, but 0 bJ' ectively
'iE

1
,

jij"' .. lial!,
0 ' aef.,

6
w
the poition may be bolance d
.l)\ wm

m
D

. H
.i.c4 B h 4 e5 14 hl'7 t
-
4 W/.I.'0 m.W
5 %B

12 c
Sh w, Aberdeen 1 9 96 .

M
on


-

2 .
-
.
8"j"
!W%
,0, . ,0, zo,
1 7.1
. - 'l z . ,!r" if:f.,.l:i
a b c d e f g h

: ;
c4 ?! i adventuro>B f; r too loose:
5 . . . 5 6 . cxd5 ?! lt:i b e 8 .1'l'a4t c6
9 . dxe5 ixb l 1 0 . x i Y!!x d5+ Adams -
.
Morozev1ch Tilburg 1 9 9 3 .
'

s ... e6 6.a3

a b c
 Chapter 1 3 - 1 . d4 d 5 2 .i.g5 249

After analysing this line I have come to the

conclusion that this rarely-played move is the
most awkward for White to face.

5.i.g3 h5!
This seems the right way to go.

5 . . . g4
This is more co mmon, but White's chances
look preferable.
6 . lLi h4 e5
6 .. . f5 7 . c4N e6 8 . lLi c3 f4 9 .i.xf4 Wfxh4
1 0 . cxd5 exd5 1 1 . lLi xd5 Wfd8 1 2 . e4t
7 . e3 i.e6

8 . . . g4 ? 9 . hxg4N hxg4 1 0 .ixc? Wfxc7 1 1 .l:!xh8

gxf3 1 2 .Wfxf3 and White's threat of 1 2 .Wfh5 t is
awkward for Black.

8 . . . ig7 9 . c4 e6 (9 . . . g4 1 0 . cxd5 Wfxd 5 1 1 . lLi c3

Wfd7 1 2 . lLi d2 g3 1 3 .ixg3 lLi xg3 1 4 . fxg3;!;
looks better for White.)

8 i. :.r ----
-J
6 . . z 6) .
..tif
;
7 t ...... %
- ----

. ---3.-
'A)l
'-

5 i i
4 . ffz
..... .0 . . .z.

0
.
0-
3

6.h3
I prefer moving the h-pawn only one square, 2
as then Black cannot easily play . . . g4 to hit the
f3-knight.
I <--( lr:1--
a b c d e f g h
From here 1 O . lLi c3 g4 l 1 . cxd5 exd5 1 2 . lLi d2
6.h4?! g4 7 . lLi g l e5!N 8 . e3 exd4 (or 8 . . . i.f5
g3 1 3 .ixg3 lLi xg3 1 4 .fxg3 Wfd6 gave Black
9 .i.b5 Wf d6t) 9 .i.d3 Wf e7 (9 . . . lLi ge7 is a solid
compensation in Povah - Lock, Hinckley
choice: 1 0 . exd4 ie6 1 1 . lLi c3 a6+) 1 0 .ig6t
Island 2009.
'it>d8 1 1 . lLi e2
I would prefer l O . lLi fd2!N;!; to sidestep
Black's . . . g4-g3 plan.
6 ... tll h6 7.e3 tll 5 8.i.h2
250 Richard Pert - Playing the Tromp owsky

9.dxe5 g4 ixf5 1 3 .ie2 lll xe5 1 4 .ixh 5 t lll f7) 1 2 . lll h4

The point of Black's move order is that now lll xe5 l 3.B:xh2 id6
White doesn't have the option of taking on g4
followed by ixc7. l l .exd4 g3 12 ..L::g3 llixg3 13.fxg3 fxe5
14.dxe5!?
1 4. lll c3 e4

1 4 ...'?NgS 15.J.hSt c6 1 6.0-0!

a b c d e f g h
1 0 . lli c3 ! ? could be worth a punt, aiming for White's idea is that 1 6 ... cxbS?! l 7 .Wi'xd5;!;
a murky position: 1 0 . . . gxf3 l l .Wi'xd5 fxe5 looks better for him.
1 2 .Wi'xf3 Wi'g5 1 3 . lli e4 Wi'g7 1 4. 0-0-0 White However 1 6 ...J.e6! is more of a problem.
has some play for the knight, though Black is Black has full compensation for the two
probably doing fine. pawns, and given the choice I would prefer to
play Black.

B2) 3.J.d2!?

1 0 ... llicxd4!?
Black has an interesting alternative:
1 0 . . . g3 ! ? l 1 . lll xf5 gxh2 ( l l . . .gxf2t 1 2 . @xf2
 Okay, this move may appear totally 0-0-0 1 2 . tll bd2 '&h6 1 3 . tll xe5 id6 1 4 .'&g4t
ridiculous, but given that we are struggling to id? l 5 .'&f4 g5 1 6 .'&d4 c5 l 7 .'&c4 ie6
prove an advantage with other moves, it could 1 8 .'&a4;!; Torre - Claesen, Leuven 2003)
be worth a try. The resulting positions look 6 . exd4 ie6 7 . tll e2 id6 8 . tll f4 if7 9.'&g4 'it>f8
pretty balanced, and at least we're into a game 1 O.ixc600 Torre - Sasikiran, Doha 2 0 0 3 .
where our opponent cannot blindly follow
theory.

3 ... cSN
This move looks most natural so I have
concentrated my analysis on it.

3 . . . e5N 4.e4

4.dxc5
4 . e4! ? could transpose to our man line after
4 . . . dxe4 5 . dxc5 e 5 .

a b c d e f g h 4... e5
Black can also develop with:
4 . . . dxe4 (4 . . . exd4 5 .'&h5t g6 6.'&xd5 '&xd 5
4 . . . tll c6
7 . exd5i) 5 . dxe5 i

3 . . . tll c6 has been Black's most common reply:

4 . e3 e5 5 .ib5

5 . b4!?
An interesting way to make use of the bishop
a b c d e f g h development.
5 . e4 is also possible: 5 . . . dxe4 6 . tll c3 f5
5 . . . exd4 (5 . . . id7 6.ixc6 ixc6 7.dxe5 d4
7.'&h 5 t (7.ic4!? tll f6 8 . tll h300) 7 . . . g6 8 .'&h4
8 . tll f3 dxe3 9 . fxe3 fxe5 1 0 . 0-0 '&d6 l l .ic3 ig7 9 . 0-0-0 Wa5 1 O . tll h3 tll f6 l l .a3 '&xc5
252 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 2 .ie3 We5 1 3 .if4 Wc5 1 4 .ie3 This looks 7 lli c6 8.i.c4 ks 9.tll ge2;1;
.

about equal, although both sides could find White has a comfortable lead in development.
reasons to play on.
5 ... e5 6 . e3 a5 7.b5 lD b8 8 . c4 d4 9 .id3 ixc5 B3) 3.J.h4
1 0 . lli e2
1 0 .Wh 5 t ! ? c;t.[8 1 0 .We2 also looks slightly
better for White.
1 0 . . . dxe3 l l .ixe3 ixe3 1 2 . fxe3 lli d7 1 3 . lli bc3
lli c 5 1 4 . l2J d 5 --+

This is my main recommendation against

this difficult line.

3 ... lli h6!

The critical choice.
3 . . . c5 4 . dxc5 transposes to line D at the end
of this chapter.

3 . . . lli c6
This looks a bit slow.
4 . e3 l2J h6 5 . c4 lli f5
5 . . . e6 6 . lD c3 ib4 7 .id3 0-0 8 . lD ge2 dxc4
9.ixc4;l; Meduna - Dobrovolsky, Stary
Smokovec 1 9 82.
6 . cxd5 Wxd5 7 . lD c3 Wf7 8 . d 5 lli e 5 9.ig3
lD xg3 1 0 .hxg3 e6 l l . f4 lD g6

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter 1 3 - l . d4 d5 2.ig5 253

1 2 .ib StN (6.ig3 ? transposes to the next note) 6 . . . ixf5

1 2 .ic4 id6 1 3 .Wfa4t e7 1 4 . tlJ f3;!; 7 . h3 e6 8 .ig3 h4 9 .ih2 c5 I O.ixb8 gxb8
Berkovich - Grushevsky, Podolsk 1 993. l 1 .tlJ f3 fl 1 2 . tlJ bd2 ig6 1 3 .0-0 cxd4
12 . . . id7 1 3 .dxe6 Wfxe6 1 4.ixd7t Wi'xd7 1 4. exd4 Wc7+ Rogers - Bosch, Wij k aan Zee
I 5 .Wfxd7t xd7 1 6 . 0-0-0t id6 l 7 . tlJ ge2 1 997.
gae8 1 8 .e4;!;
5 . tlJ f3 g5!
4.e3
White quite often clears the f2-square as
a retreat for the bishop, but I am not too
impressed by that idea:
4.f3?! c5! 5 . dxc5
Black now has a pleasant choice between
two moves.

a b c d e f g h
6 .tlJxg5
6.ig3 h5 gave Black the initiative in
Kravtsova - Yul. Yakovich, Samara 2003.
6.ixg5 fxg5 7.tlJxg5 Wd6!+ prepares to meet
8 .Wh5t with 8 . . . Wg6.

h
6 . . . fxg5 7.Wfh S t 'tt> d 7 8 .ixg5 Wi'e8
a b c d e f g
White does not seem to have quite enough
5 . . . tlJ f5 for the piece.
5 . . . e5 6.if2 ie6 (6 . . . d4 7.e3 ixc500
Chepukaitis - Milov, Internet 2002) 7.c3 s ... hsi
a5 8.e4 dxe4 9.Wfa4t tlJ c6 I O.Wfxe4 f500 R.
Bagirov - Andriasian, Aix-les-Bains 20 1 1 .
6.if2 d4 7.g4 tlJ e3 8.ixe3 dxe3 9 .Wfxd8t
'tt> x d8 1 0 . tlJ c3 e5 1 1 .0-0-0t id7 1 2 . tlJ e4
1 2 .g5 f5 1 3 .gd5 tlJ c6 1 4 .ih3 g6 1 5 . f4
exf400 Ilhomzoda - I . Sokolov, Dubai 20 1 2 .
1 2 . . . tlJ a6 1 3 .g5 f5 1 4. tlJ d6 ixd6 1 5 . cxd6N
I 5 . gxd6 'tt> c 7 I 6.gd3 f4+ Mohrlok - Ter
Minasj an, Germany 1 99 9 .
1 5 . . . gc8

4 ... ttJ f5 s ..ig3

5 .id3 is White's most common move,
but it doesn't inspire me: 5 . . . h5! (5 . . . tlJ xh4
6.Wh5t g6 7.Wxh4 looks about equal) 6.ixf5 6 ..ie2
254 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

As pointed out by Eric Prie, 6.id3? fails to

work: 6 . . . h4 7.Wg4 ltJ d6! 8 .Wg6t ll:i f7 9 .if4
e5 1 O.dxe5 fxe5 l l .ixe5 l'!h6-+ and Black
wins material.

6 ... h4 7.J.h5t @d7 s.J.f4 g5 9.e4

9 .ixg5 ?!N doesn't quite work: 9 . . . fxg5
1 0 . ll:i f3 .ig7 l 1 .ll:i xg5 c6 1 2. ltJ f7 Wa5t
1 3 . ll:i c3 l'!f8 1 4.Wg4 me? White holds some
compensation, but it does not seem to be
enough.

9 ... dxe4 a b c d e f g h
9 . . . gxf4 1 0 . exf5 looks pretty reasonable for
This has been considered the main move,
White as the king is misplaced and the f4- and
but I think White's compensation for the
h4-pawns look weak. 1 0 . . . c6 1 1 . ll:i d2 mc7
pawn looks a bit speculative.
1 2 .Wg4 ih6 1 3 . 0-0-0 ll:i a6 ( 1 3 . . . Wg8 1 4 .l'!e l
Wxg4 1 5 .ixg4 l'!h7 1 6 . ll:i df3 ll:i d7 1 7. <tt> b l
10 ... c6 1 1 . c3
ig5 1 8 . ll:i h3t) 1 4.ll:i gf3 l'!g8 1 5 .Wh3t
l 1 .ig4?! <tt> c7 1 2 . ll:i e2 ll:i d6 1 3 .ixc8 Wxc8
1 4 . ltJ bc3 h3 1 5 .g3 Wg4+ Adams - Van Wely,
s i. -..i.. B -, Wij k aan Zee 1 99 8 .

" ,Y,
1
6
11.fi"Em--, - - - - - Y.
11 ... @c7 12.d5 e6 13.dxc6 Wi'xdl t 14.J.xdl

m!
" " ,

s
n4l i. -..i.. -
..
- &" 8
,,,,,Y, - - 7.rJ
r 7 ..

43
w-
r, 0
, . , ,% ,, . .%
6
%. J ti l-
,,,,, 7, . , ,

5 -
"m
. w0 w,,
INJ81Jli!i
a b c d e f g h
43 nmn n fn" '
n"
We shall examine B3 1) 1 0.J.c l , B32)
1 0.dS!?N and B33) 1 0.J.g4!?N, after quickly
.'m,,.J'

u 'm .'m11
2 [)J[j wJ0%jl$
disposing of a couple of the other bishop 1 ..t m .:
retreats. a b c d e f g h
14 ... xc6!
1 0 .ie3 ll:i xe3 1 l . fxe3 c6 1 2. ll:i c3 f5+
14 . . . e3 1 5 . fxe3 ll:ixc6 ( 1 5 . . . bxc6? 1 6.e4;t

1 0 .id2 c6 l 1 . ll:i c3 me?+

Galyas - I. Almasi, Budapest 2000) 1 6.e4 ll:i d600

1 4 . . . ib4 1 5 .id2 ixc3 1 6.ixc3 e5 1 7.cxb7

B3 1) 10.J.cl <tt> x b7 1 8 . f300 Mikhalevski - L. Milov, Dieren
1 997.
 Chapter 1 3 - l . d4 d5 2 .ig5 255

15.lll xe4 ie7 1 6.c3 I I .ig4 t was my first thought, but

l 6.id2 b6+ is also pleasant for Black. White struggles to demonstrate sufficient
compensation: I l . . . f5 1 2 .ixg5 fxg4 1 3 .Wlxg4t
1 6 b6N:j:
. 'tt> e 8 1 4.W/xe4 Although the position remains
I prefer this to I 6 . . . lll d6, as played in murky, objectively Black's chances are
Matozo - Kaufmann, email 2002, though that preferable.
may also be a touch better for Black.
1 1 . gxf4 12.lll c3
.

B32) 10.d5!?N There is no easy way for Black to safely create

breathing space for his king, and he has to be
We shall see in the following analysis that if careful not to get into deep trouble.
Black defends accurately, then White will
be obliged to deliver perpetual check. If you
are determined to avoid a draw (I guess it
could depend who your opponent is) , then
you should investigate line B33 with I O .ig4
instead.
Black now chooses between B32 1)
1 0 lll g7!? and B322) 1 0 gxf4.
. ..

B32 1) 10 lll g7!?

..

Initially I thought this move would cause

h
White problems. Black steps his knight out of
the way of a future pin by ig4, whilst attacking a b c d e f g
both white bishops. 12 5
...

1 2 . . . c6? 1 3 .dxc6t 'tt> c7 1 4 . lll b 5 t wins the

black queen .

1 2 . . . e6? 1 3 . dxe6t 'tt> e 7 1 4 . lll d 5 t+-

256 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

Note that White is now threatening l 5 .ie6t 1 5 . . . tll xe6 1 6. dxe6t e8 l 7.Wfxd8t xd8
tll x e6 1 6. dxe6t! c6 1 7.!!d l ! trapping the 1 8 .tll f7t e8 1 9 .tll x h8 ic8 20.tll d5
black queen.
1 4 . . . ia6!
1 4 . . . ib7? 1 5 .ie6t tll xe6 1 6 .dxe6t!
( 1 6.Wfxe6t e8 1 7.Wfg6t is a perpetual)
1 6 . . . c8 ( 1 6 . . . c6 l 7.Wfxf5 +-) 1 7.!!d l
and the black queen is trapped.
1 5 .ie6t tll xe6 1 6.Wfxe6t
After 1 6.dxe6t c6 the black queen and
king both escape: 1 7.E:d l Wf c8 l 8 .Wfxf5
b7-+
1 6 . . . e8 1 7.Wfg6t d7 1 8 .Wfxf5 t e8

1 6 ... tll xe6 17.dxe6

l 7. tll xd8 tll x d8 l 8 .Wf d4 tll f700

a b c d e f g h 17 ...Ylfxdl t 1 8Jxdl tll c6 1 9.tll xhS tll d8

20.tll g6 tll xe6 2 1 .tll xh4;t
1 9 .tll h3!?
White does not need to take the perpetual B322) 10 ... gxf4 1 1 .ig4
that is on offer by 1 9 .Wfg6t.
19 ... Wfd6 20.tll xf4 ig7 2 1 . tll e6-+
White has great compensation for the piece.

13.tll h 3! b6!
This is j ust about Black's only move, looking
to move the c8-bishop and create an escape
square for the king.

l 3 . . . tll a6? I 4. tll x f4 tll c5 l 5 .tll e6+-

14.tll gS!
1 4. tll xf4 ib7 1 5 . tll e6 tll xe6 1 6.ixe6t e8
l 7.Wfd4 also gives White reasonable play, bur
is less clear.

14 ...ib7 15.ie6t <i>eS

 Chapter 1 3 - 1 . d4 dS 2 . i g S 257

l l ... e6 This is my computer's suggestion, but it

This clever move uses a trick to exchange would take a brave (or foolhardy) man to
queens. play like this.
1 2 .dxe6t Wxe6 1 3 .Wxd8 ib4t 1 4.Wd2 1 2 . . . c6? tries to free c7 for the king: 1 3 .dxc6t
ixd2t l 5 . lt:l xd2 mc7 1 4. lt:l b S t mxc6 1 5 .Wxd8+-
The position looks balanced, with the 1 2 . . . e6 tries to free e7 for the king: 1 3 .dxe6t
e-pawn likely to drop at some point. me7 1 4.Wxd8t 'itixd8 1 5 .ixfS
1 3 . b4t

i, ;!'al'
8 if
.. j_ \lf

&D
{ z

6 " 7, "
7
,. . . . 7.

-
ef" . 0
54 -!
3 . . . 7, "
t .t. t.EJ.. ti
. "

'8 '
2 !.'
z0 ;v,d'!
"z. ,,z//
b d f g h . = li
h
a c e

b d f g
1 5 . . . g8 a c e

1 5 . . . e3 1 6. fxe3 fxe3 1 7. lt:l fl mf7 1 8 .ixfS
ixf5 l 9 . lt:l xe3=
l 6.h3 e3 17 . fxe3 fxe3
1 7 . . . mf7 1 8 .ixfS ( 1 8 . exf4 lt:l g3) 1 8 . . . ixfS
l 9.e4 ie6 2 0 . lt:l e2=
1 8 . lt:l fl Wf7 1 9 .ixfS ixf5 20.lt:lxe3=
l L .md6?
This avoids the repetition but, frankly,
walking your king into the middle of the
board is asking for it.
This clearly must be good for White. I 'll
leave it for you to enj oy working out how you
would finish off the black king from here!
1 1 . . . c6 is playable, returning the extra material:
1 2 .dxc6t mc7 1 3 .Wxd8t 'itixd8 1 4.ixf5 lt:l xc6
1 4.ixe4 with a balanced position.
1 2.ih5t c!>d7
258 Richard Pert - Playin g the Trompowsky

1 3 .ig6?! avoids the repetition, but I really 13.h3 @c7

cannot recommend it. Black may choose the 1 3 . . . ih6 1 4.0-0 f5 1 5 .ie2 c7 1 6. tli a4--+
safe 1 3 . . . e6, with play similar to 1 1 . . . e6 in the with c2-c4 to follow.
previous note; or the more ambitious 1 3 . . . tlih6
1 4. tli c3 ig7, and although the position is a
litcle murky, it must surely favour Black.

1 3 ... @es
With a repetition of moves.

B33) I O.ig4!?

s .! ;fli/.ti.E
; v;
- -
.

,

7
6 61 " ""9""'"' .. .. .
L. J:,..
. . ,f
.. .. . . . : wc@
4
s

w-it. 0. % I. .
0

-
iY
3
1 0 ... e6 1 I .J.d2N
. .
. -.
w 0 l&
w- '= z.8 iw-j;!
Earlier we noted chat 1 0 .id2 was not
promising for White, but now with 1 0 .ig4 2 8 iZ. 8 ii'i
e6 thrown in, the f6-pawn is softened up and
1rf. .
b d f g h
provides a target after tli c3xe4.
a c e

1 1 ... c6
1 1 . . . tli c6 1 2. tli c3 e8 1 3 . tli xe4 Wi'xd4
( 1 3 . . . tli cxd4 1 4.c3 tli c6 1 5 .Wi'e2;!;) 1 4.Wi'e2
Wi'xb2 1 5 .ih 5t d8 ( 1 5 . . . e?? 1 6.ic3 +-)
1 6.ic3 ib4 1 7.Wi'd2t and White has an
initiative.
12.c3 d6
1 2 . . . c7 1 3 .tlixe4t
1 5 . . . ie?!?
This looks a good practical choice to me.
1 5 ... Wi'e8 1 6.if6 E:h6 ( 1 6 ... E:g8 ? 1 7.ih5
WT d7 1 8 . f3;!;) 17 .ie5 offers White some
compensation.
1 6.ixe7 Wi'xe7 1 7.ih5
Whilst we have regained our material it
has been at a cost, with our bishop being
awkwardly placed.
 Chapter 1 3 - l .d4 dS 2 i g S
. 25 9

1 7 . . . lli d?+ 3.c4

The knight is heading for the f6-square. This looks very much to the point,
immediately pressuring the d5-pawn with c2-
14 ... ie7 c4 and lli c3 .
Supporting the g5-pawn so that . . . f5 can be
played. 3 ... dxc4
3 . . . c6 4.cxd5 '1Wxd5 (4 . . . cxd5 5 . lli c3 lli c6
15.ie2 f5 6.e3 '1Wb6 7.a3 ig7 8 . lli f3 lli f6 9 .ixf6 ixf6
1 0 . lli xd5 \Wa5t 1 1 .lli c3 0-0 1 2.b4 \Wd8
1 3 ,:gcl if5 1 4.id3;t Knezevic - Gonsior,
H radec Kralove 1 977) 5 . lli f3 ig7 6 . lli c3 \Wa5
7.e3 lli f6 8 .ie2 0-0 9 . 0-0;t Hasangatin -
Volodin, Canak 2003.

3 . . . ig7 4. lli c3 and now:

a b c d e f g h

1 6 lli d7 1 7.c4
.
a) 4 . . . h6 5 .if4 lli f6 6.e3 0-0 7.\Wb3 c6 8 . lli f3
White has good attacking chances in return \Wa5 9 . lli e5 e 6 1 0 .ie2 g 5 1 1 .ig3 lli e4 1 2.:gd l
for the pawn. lli d7 1 3 . llixd7 ixd7 1 4 . 0-0 lli xg3 1 5 . hxg3;t
Bui Vinh - Novita, Kolkata 2009.
C) 2 ... g6
b) 4 ... lli f6!?N is possible, sacrificing the d5-
pawn. Although this move has never been
played here, it reaches a position from the
Griinfeld Defence after l . d4 lli f6 2 . c4 g6
3 . lli c3 d5 4 .ig5 ig7 ! ? that has been the focus
of much recent attention. I would advise you
to check up on Griinfeld theory if you want to
learn about this variation.

4.e4!?N
The lines after this are not totally clear, but
it certainly seems to be the way for White to
keep up the momentum.
260 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

4.e3 is a solid alternative: 4 . . . c5 (4 . . . c6 5 . lli f3 3.dxc5!?

ie6 6.lli bd2 b5 7.b3 cxb3 8 . axb3 ig7 9 .ie2
looks like good compensation for White)
5 .ixc4 ig7 6 .Wl'b3 Wl'a5 t 7.llic3 e6 8. d5
Wl' b 6 9 . 0-0-0 Th i s seemed very promising
for White in Meduna - Oizdar, Trencianske
Teplice 1 98 5 .
This seems an interesting option, though
3.e3, 3 .e4 and 3 . lli c3 all look quite playable.
3 . .. f6
3 . . . h6 4.ih4 transposes to line A l on
page 237.

8 .i -J. % - 41) 3 ... lli c6 4.e4 h6 5 .ih4 dxe4

7 1 ;- , ,,, _., y, . .
6 , , ,
5
"
'
4

!! ' '11
, I!
3

2
8 r
r
,
m r
,
8 r
1
1=m1
% h
b d f g h b d f g
y, ,,, '""

a c e
/, , , ,

a c e

6.Wl'xd8 tN
4 . . .i.g7 5.tlia c5
6 . lli c3 g5 7.ig3 Wl'a5 8 .ib5 ig700 Hodgson
5 . . . lli c6 6.ixc4 (or 6.Wl'a4 ig4 7 .ixc4
- Hillarp Persson, York 2000.
ixf3 8 .gxf3 Wfxd4 9 . lli c3) 6 . . . lli xd4 7. 0-0
6 . . . lli xd8 7 .lli c3 f5
ig4 8 . lli bd2 Wl'd7 (8 . . . lli xf3 t 9 .gxf3 ih3
Threatening to trap the h4-bishop.
1 0 .Wl'b3;!;) 9 .Wl'c l llixf3 t I O . lli xf3 1 0 . . . ixf3
8.f3 g5
l l .gxf3 lli f6 1 2.E:d l and White has excellent
8 . . . e3 ? 9 . lli d 5 g5 I O . lli c7t 'it> f7 I 1 . lli xa8
gxh4 ( l I . . . lli e6 1 2.ic4 gxh4 1 3 . lli c7
compensation.

6.hc4 cxd4 7.'b3;t ig7 1 4 . 0-0-0+-) 1 2 .E:d l lli c6 1 3 . c3 lli f6

The f7-pawn is vulnerable. 1 4. lli c7
9 .if2 ig7 I O. fxe4;t;
D) 2 ... c5

a b c d e f g h
 Chapter 1 3 - l . d4 d 5 2 .i.g5 26 1

3 . . . lll f6 4.ixf6 5.e4! dxe4

4. lll d2 !? lll a6 5 . e4 lll xc5 6.exd5 lll x d5 5 . . . ie6 6.exd5 Wxd5 7 .Wxd5 ixd5 8 . ttJ c3
7.Wf3 f6 8 .b5 t 'it>f7 9 . 0-0-0 e6 1 0 .ic4;l; ie6 9 . ttJ b 5 lll a6 1 0 .f4 (or 1 0 .lll d6t ixd6
Miladinovic - Blagoj evic, Curro 200 5 . l l .cxd6;!;) 1 0 . . . ixc5 1 l . fxe5 fxe5 1 2. 0-0-0
4 . . . gxf6 lll f6 1 3 . ttJ f3 0-0 1 4.lll x e5;l; Hodgson -

s .! 11r..tS9 . ,
I . Sokolov, Groningen 1 996.

7 " /,, . ,,..,Y. .,

6 ... /?Ji:: R . 5 ... d4 6.ic4 ixc5 7 . ttJ e2 (or 7 . ttJ f3 ! ? lll e7 8 . c3
.... %" lll bc6 9 . 0-0 ig4 1 0 . lll bd2;l; with pressure on

5
z
"'"
the light squares) 7 . . . Wb6 8 . ttJ d2 ie6

4 .! -'!i)
3 R %1 8 8 7
8
6.. . .,.,
2 8 f.U 8 8 0 8 6 .Ear
... . %. " " -
if=
.i:.'98"
1
%

5
b d f g h 4

3 -- - - - .. .
a c e

5 . e4!?N

A " "// ' f{%
ff A -"' A ff..-

rr "i'm "
2 : iQz Q 7.Q
. Y.

0 r.Oz
5 .e3 transposes to Chapter 8 - see the note

1
on 5 . dxc5 on page 1 63 .

h
5 . . . dxe4
b d f g
5 . . . d4 6.h5 lll c6 7 . ttJ d2 Wa5 8 . lll gf3 e6 a c e

9 . 0-0-0 xc5 1 0 .Wxc5;l; 9 . 0-0! ? N (9.ixe6 Wxe6 1 0 . ttJ b300 Mohrlok

6.Wxd8t cJ;; x d8 7 . ttJ c3 f5 8 . f3 - Beikert, Germany 1 993) 9 . . . lll e7 1 0 . c3
White has the initiative. dxc3 1 l .tlJ xc3 ttJ d7 1 2.l:!c l l:!c8 1 3 .lll a4 Wd6
1 4.Wh5 t;t
4.i.h4 e5
4 . . . e6 ? ! 5 .e4 xc5 6 . ttJ c3 ttJ e7 7.Wh 5 t g6 6.xd8t c.f:?xd8 7.tll c3 Les 8.0-0-0t tll d7
8 .Wh6 d4 9 . 0-0-0t Hodgson - Strij bos, 9.tll xe4 i.e7 1 0.f4 exf4
Netherlands 1 996; it already looks really
promising for White who has lots ofweaknesses
to attack.
262 Richard Pert - Playing the Trompowsky

1 I .tll f3 c7 1 2.tll c3 tll b6 1 3 .a4 .ib4 1 4.a5!

ixa5 1 5 .tll b 5 t @b8 1 6.!!d4 was slightly better
for White in Hodgson - Van Wely, Horgen
1 99 5 .

1 1 . .. g5 1 2 ..ifl
White will attack the black pawn structure
with h2-h4.

12 ... h6 l3.h4 g4 14.J.d4

White has strong pressure.

Conclusion: A large portion of this chapter

is dedicated to the relatively rare B) 2 .. .f6 ! .
I fi n d this l i n e t o be quite playable, and I
would even go so far as to recommend it for
Black! However, I have suggested various
possibilities for White, and I hope you can
find something that appeals to you. I would
again stress that I do not fully trust B 1 ) 3 . .if4,
but would recommend B3) 3 ..ih4 as leading
to interesting and unclear play.
Against the various other (more common)
2nd moves, I feel that White has decent
chances of demonstrating an edge.
So to sum up, whilst I do not believe
that the Pseudo-Tromp is as accurate as the
Trompowsky, it is still a dangerous weapon
and a non-critical response from Black can
leave him struggling.
 Variation Index
Chapter 1 - 1 .d4 liJf6 2 .lg5 e6 3.e4
Chapter 4 - 1 .d4 ctl f6 2 . .lg5 c5 3.d5

A) 3 . . . c 5 ! ? 4.d5 13 A) 3 . . . '!flb6 4 . li:\ c3 '!flxb2 5 .id2 'iflb6 6 . e4 80

A l ) 6 . . . d6 7.f4 Bl
A2) 4 . . . h6 1 6
A l ) 4 . . . d6 1 4
Al I) 7 . . . '!flc7 82
B ) 3 . . . h6 4.xf6 %l/xf6 5 .c3 ! ? 20 A 1 2) 7 . . . e6 82
B l ) 5 . . . liJ c6 21 A2) 6 . . . e5 7.f4! d6 8 . li:\ f3 84
B 2 ) 5 . . . c5 23 A2 1 ) 8 . . . exf4 85
B3) 5 . . . d5 6 . li:l d2 c5 7.li:\gf3 24 A22) 8 . . . li:\ bd7 9 . fxe5 dxe5 1 0.l:'lb l 86
B3 l ) 7 . . cxd4 8 . li:\ xd4 .lc5 9.li:\2b3!? 25 A22 1 ) 1 0 . . . %lfd8 87
B3 1 l ) 9 . . . xd4 26
.

A222) 1 0 . . . '!flc? 88
B3 1 2) 9 . . . ib6 27 B) 3 . . . d6 90
B32) 7 . . . tD c6 8 . .lb5 cxd4 9 . li:l xd4 id? 1 0. 0-0!? 28
B32 1 ) 1 0 . . . e? 30 Chapter 5 - 1 .d4 liJf6 2 . .lg5 ctl e4 3 .lf4 c5 4.d5

B322) 1 0 . . . %lfd8 3 1
A) 4 . . . e6 5 . f3 95
B 4 ) 5 . . . d6 6.d3 32
A l ) 5 . . . li:\ f6 95
B4 1 ) 6 . . . e5 34
A2) 5 . . . id6 96
B42) 6 . . . g6 7 . li:\ e2 ig7 8.0-0 e5 9 . f4 36
B) 4 . . . '!flb6 98
B42 1 ) 9 . . . exd4 37
B422) 9 . . . '!fle7 40
B l ) 5 . li:l d2!? 98
B l I ) 5 . . . li:l xd2 98
B l 2) 5 . . . '1Wxb2 J OO
B422 1 ) 1 0 . li:l d2 41
B4222) 1 0 . f5 ! 44
B2) 5 .ic l 1 03
Chapter 2 - 1 .d4 liJf6 2 . .lg5 e6 3.liJd2!? B2 1 ) 5 . . . g6 1 03
B22) 5 . . . e6 1 04
A) 3 ... c 5 4.e3 49
A l ) 4 . . . cxd4 49 Chapter 6 - 1 .d4 liJf6 2 . .lg5 liJ e4 3 ..lf4 c5 4.f3
A2) 4 . . . b6!? 50
B) 3 . . . d5 52 A) 4 . . . li:\ f6 5 . dxc5 ! ? 1 09
CJ 3 . . . h6 4 .h4 54 A l ) 5 . . . ctla6?! 1 09
C l ) 4 . . . d5 54 A2) 5 . . . '1Wa5t 1 1 0
C2) 4 . . . c5 56 A3) 5 . . . b6! 6 . e4 bxc5 7 . li:\ c3 li:\ c6 8 . .lc4 1 1 1
A3 1 ) 8 . . . d 6 1 1 1
Chapter 3 - I .d4 ctlf6 2 ..lg5 c5 3.ctlc3!? A32) 8 . . . g6 1 12

A) 3 . . . cxd4 4 .'iflxd4 li:\ c6 5 .%l/h4 63

B) 4 . . . '!fla5t 5 .c3 li::i f6 6.d5 1 13
B 1 ) 6 . . . e6!? 7.e4 exd5 8 . exd 5 d6 9 .'1Wd2 ie7 1 0 . c4
A I ) 5 . . . b 5 ! ? 64
B l I ) 1 l . . .b5 1 15
'iflxd2t l J .@xd2 1 13
A2) 5 . . . d6 65
A3) 5 . . . e6 6 . e4 1J.e7 7. 0-0-0 68 B 1 2) 1 1 . .. li:\ h 5 1 2 .ie3 f5 1 3 .lt'l c3 1 1 6
A3 1 ) 7 . . . 0-0 ? 68 B l 2 1 ) 1 3 . . . li:l d? 1 1 7
A32) 7 . . . d6 69 B l 22) 1 3 . . . 0-0 1 1 8
B ) 3 . . . dS 4 .xf6 gxf6 5 .e4! ? dxe4 6.dxc5 72 B2) 6 . . . d 6 1 19
B l ) 6 . . . '!fla5 73 B3) 6 . . . '!flb6 121
B2) 6 . . . f5 74 B3 1 ) 7.ic l 121
C) 3 . . . 'iflaS 76 B3 1 l) 7 . . . g6 121
0) 3 . . . '!flb6 76 B3 1 2) 7 . . . e6 8 . e4 ! exd 5 9.exd5 122
B3 1 2 1 ) 9 . . . id6 123
B3 1 22) 9 . . . 'iflc7!? 124
B3 1 23) 9 . . . c4 126
264 Richard Pert - Playing the Trom p owsky

B3 1 24) 9 . . . d6 127 Chapter 1 1 - 1 .d4 tt:lf6 2.ig5

B32) 7.e4!? %'i'xb2 8 .lll d2 %'i'xc3 9 .ic7! 128
B32 1 ) 9 . . . b6?! 130 A) 2 . . . b6 203
B322) 9 . . . e6 132 B) 2 . . . g6 3 .ixf6 exf6 4.e3 ig7 5 . g3 d6 6.i.g2 f5
B323) 9 . . . d6 135 7.lll e2 0-0 205
B l ) 8 .c4 206
Chapter 7
C) 2 . . . lll c6 208
- 1 .d4 tt:lf6 2.ig5 d5 3.Lf6 B2) 8 . 0-0 206

A) 3 ... gxf6!? 143 D) 2 . . . c6 209

Chapter 1 2 - 1 .d4 f5 2.1g5

B) 3 . . . exf6 4.e3 id6 5 .g3 c6 6.ig2 1 47
B l ) 6 . . . 0-0 7.lll e2 1 48
B l I ) 7 . . . %'i'b6 149
B 1 2) 7 . . . if5 1 49 A) 2 . . . h6 3 .i.h4 215
B 1 3) 7 . . . lll d7 150 A l ) 3 ... c5?! 215
B2) 6 . . . f5! 7.lll e2 151 A l I) 4.e3 215
B2 1 ) 7 ... ie6 151 A l 2) 4.e4! 2 1 7
B22) 7 ... lll d7 152 A2) 3 . . . g5 4 .e4 217
A2 1 ) 4 ... ig??! 218
Chapter 8 - 1 .d4 ttlf6 2 . .ig5 d5 3.e3 A22) 4 . . Jih7!? 218
A22 1 ) 5 .%'fh5t 218
A) 3 . . . lll bd7 159 A222) 5 .ig3!N 220
B) 3 . . . c5 4.ixf6 gxf6 5 .lll c3 lll c6 1 62 A23) 4 . . . lll f6 221
B l ) 6.dxc 5 ! ? 1 64 B) 2 . . . g6 222
B2) 6.%'i'h5 1 65 B l ) 3 .lll d2!? 222
B2 1 ) 6 . . . e6 1 66 B2) 3 .lll c3!? 223

C) 3 . . . c6 1 69
B22) 6 . . . cxd4 167 B2 1 ) 3 . . . lll h6 223
B22) 3 . . . i.g7 4.h4!? h6 5 .if4 225
B22 1 ) 5 . . . lll f6 226
Chapter 9 - 1 .d4 tt:lf6 2.1g5 tt:l e4 3.14 d5 4.e3
C) 2 . . . lll f6?! 228
B222) 5 . . . d6 227

A) 4 . . . e6 5 .id3 id6 6.lll e2 1 73

D) 2 . . . d5?! 230
A l ) 6 . . . lll f6 1 73
A2) 6 . . . 0-0 1 74 Chapter 1 3 - l .d4 d5 2.1g5
B) 4 . . . if5 5 .8 1 75
B I ) 5 . . . lll d6 1 75 A) 2 . . . h6 3 .ih4 237

C) 4 . . . c6 1 77
B2) 5 . . . lll f6 1 76 A l ) 3 . . . c5!? 237
A2) 3 . . . c6 4.lll f3 ! ? %'i'b6 5 .Wfc l 240
D) 4 . . . c5 5 .id3 1 79 A2 I ) s . . . if5 211
D I ) 5 . . . %'i'b6 1 79 A22) 5 . . . g5 242
02) 5 . . . cxd4 1 8 1 B) 2 . . . f6! 246
0 3 ) 5 . . . lll c6?! 1 83 B l ) 3 .if4 lll c6 4.lll f3 246
04) 5 . . . lll f6 1 85 B l 1 ) 4 . . . .ig4 247
04 1 ) 6.lll f3 ! ? 1 86 B l 2) 4 . . . .if5 248
042) 6.c3 1 87 B l 3) 4 . . . g5! 248
B2) 3 .id2! ? 250
Chapter 10 - 1 .d4 ttlf6 2.1g5 tt:l e4 3.14 B3) 3 .ih4 lll h6! 4.e3 lll f5 5 .ig3 h 5 ! 6 . .ie2 h4
7.ih5 t d7 8 .if4 g5 9 . e4 dxe4 252
A) 3 . . . g5?! 195
B3 1 ) 1 0 .ic l 254

C) 3 . . . g6?! 196
B) 3 . . . d6 196
B32) 1 0.d5!?N 255
B32 1 ) 1 0 . . . lll g?! ? 255

E) 3 . . . e5?! 197
D) 3 . . . e6!? 197
B322) 1 0 . . . gxf4 256

C) 2 . . . g6 259
B33) 1 0 .i.g4!?N 257

D) 2 . . . c5 260