ДШ^1пШяепсе|
Я Ш 7
? Л Morozeyich
ппгр
is
World Class
With mere than jOpmienh unpuhhthri I»»'
Alexander Morozevich
6 Vladimir Barskij
NEW IN CHESS
The Chigorin Defence According to Morozevich
Alexander Morozevich & Vladimir Barsky
The Chigorin Defence
According to
Morozevich
New In Chess 2007
© 2007 New In Chess
Published by New In Chess, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
www.newinchess.com
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the publisher.
Cover design: Steven Boland Supervisor Peter Boel Translation: Ken Neat Proofreading: Rene Olthof Production: Anton Schermer
ISBN-10: 90-5691-200-3
ISBN-13: 978-90-5691-200-0
Contents
Foreword	7
Chapter 1	- A Straight Fight: 3.cxd5 WxdS	15
Section A	- Defending and Developing: 4.^f3	17
Section В	- Quietly Reinforcing: 4.e3	25
Section C	- The Immediate 3. e3 e5	60
Chapter 2	— From Steinitz To Kramnik: 3.£jf3 -£-g4	67
Section A	- Bishop outside the Chain: 4.£jc3 e6 S.Jlf4/JLg5 68
Section В	- Bishop inside the Chain: 4.£te3 e6 5.e3	86
Section C	- The Queen Sortie: 4 or 5.Wa4	94
Section D	- The Exchange: 4.cxd5	104
Chapter 3	- Infantry Against Cavalry: З.&сЗ dxc4	139
Section A	- The Advance: 4.d5	140
Section В	- Defending and Developing: 4.£}f3	162
Chapter 4	- Chigorin Motifs: Without c2-c4	209
Section A	- The Fianchetto: 3.g3	210
Section В	- The Bishop Sortie: 3.Af4	219
Section C	- Quietly Reinforcing: З.еЗ	224
Section D	- Other Third Moves	227
New In Chess Code System	233
Game Index	235
5
Foreword
In September 1992 I was studying Chigorin’s play, and I liked in particular those games in which Mikhail Ivanovich employed his patent defence 1.d4 d5 2.c4 £}c6!?, endeavouring from the very first moves to initiate active piece play in the centre.
After this I looked in the Malaya Debyutnaya Entsiklopedia (MDE - Small Openings Encyclopaedia), to learn the opinion of this fundamental work on this half-forgotten opening. The MDE was very critical about the move 2...4}с6: the expert theoreticians stated that blocking the c7-pawn with the knight was bad, and that the pawn should either go to c6, to support the dS-pawn, or attack the opponent’s centre by ...c7-c5. But it seemed to me that Black’s striving for active piece play also ’had the right to exist’.
Later I discovered with astonishment that for many variations of the Chigorin Defence which were evaluated by MDE in fa
vour of White, often altogether the opposite was true A critical analysis could completely turn an evaluation around, and in general nowhere was Black worse than equal In September and October of that year I did not have any particular tournaments, and I began studying this opening seriously: initially on my own, and then I was quite quickly joined by my friends - Vladimir Barsky, Sergey Zhurov and Maria Manakova (who at that time was not yet a grandmaster and our chess sex symbol). Several times with Volodya and Masha I travelled to Sergey’s native town of Elektrostal outside Moscow, specially in order to study the Chigorin Defence in the quiet atmosphere of the local chess club.
Summarizing the above, I can say: my attention was drawn to the Chigorin Defence. I began seriously analysing it because I liked the games that Mikhail Ivanovich had played with this opening, and I was staggered by the state of theory at that time.
Soon I switched from study to practice. In November 1992 in Moscow several competitions dedicated to the memory of Mikhail Tai and Alexander Alekhine were held. In a rapid tournament there occurred the game Shipov-Morozevich, in which one of the main variations of the opening was tested: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 £ic6 3.£f3 JLg4 4.cxd5 kxf3 5.gxf3 Wxd5
7
б.еЗ е5 7.2сЗ ДЬ4 8.^.d2 АхсЗ Э.ЬхсЗ Wd61O.Wb3l?
Strangely enough, Ю.’Й'ЬЗ!?, a very unpleasant move for Black, has hardly been tested at high level either before or since - perhaps because this game has not found its way into computer databases. I managed to obtain a winning position, but several blunders by Black in time-trouble allowed Sergey Shipov, the future grandmaster and on-line commentator, to save half a point. Later I took part in a junior tournament, this time with a classical time control, where thanks to the Chigorin Defence I wron several good games, including one against the future grandmaster Alexey Korotylev (this game, unfortunately, is one that I have not preserved).
So the start proved highly encouraging: it transpired that, on the whole, my opponents of that time were not prepared for this opening. Some players, on seeing the move 2...2c6 on the board, thought for a long lime. All the records were broken by the Peruvian grandmaster Julio Granda Zuniga in the Donner Memorial Tournament (Amsterdam 1995): on his 3rd move he spent as many as 42 minutes! If Julio Granda had warned me beforehand
about his thoughtfulness, at that time I would possibly have arranged to meet some charming lady. As it was, I sat, walked round the room, ate something, looked here and there, and didn’t know what to do with myself. Then the game was nevertheless resumed and, as it turned out, it became quite interesting. In my opponent’s time-trouble I avoided a repetition of moves and overstepped the mark. Other players noticed that I was regularly employing this opening, and they tried to prepare something at home, but at times their preparation proved rather amusing. It is sufficient to mention an unused novelty of Sergey Volkov, which he was intending to employ against me in the Russian Under-20 Championship (Moscow 1993): 1.d4 d5 2x4 <2x6 3.2x3 dxc4 4.d5 2e5 5.Wd4 2g6 6.2f3 (this was White’s idea - he prevents ...e7-e5), and if now 6—2f6, then 7.e4, Before the game Volkov shared his ideas with another participant in the same championship, Sergey Rublevsky (from whom I later learned about all this), and Rublevsky showed him that Black can nevertheless play 7„.e5, because in the event of 8.2ixe5? c5! he wins a piece!
In the mid-1990s I regularly employed the Chigorin Defence, and it was my
8
main reply to l.d4. Positions were reached with unusual pawn structures and incomprehensible strategic guidelines; my opponents spent much time, not knowing where to place their pieces, or what they were aiming for.
My trainer at that time, Vladimir Nikolaevich Yurkov - bless his memory -had an extremely sceptical regard for this undertaking of mine, so that I played the Chigorin Defence against his will. In this book you will fmd an analysis from 1993, conducted by me together with Yurkov and another of his pupils, Andrey Sokolov, on a train from Simferopol to Moscow. This was one of several joint attempts by Yurkov and Sokolov to refute this ‘rubbish’ opening, so that I should never play it any more and switch to the Queens Indian and Nimzo-Indian Defences. But in this unequal batde I nevertheless managed to uphold Blacks position!
In some way Yurkov was right, because at a young age it is not good to become ‘obsessed’ by one opening. On the other hand, you also have to know what I am like: I don’t accept any unfounded criticism, and everything has to be shown and demonstrated to me. One can argue for a long time about various abstract matters, but we have a board, and we have pieces: if you think that this or that move is bad, then show me why. No ‘dashing’ attempts to refute the Chigorin Defence have led anywhere. Once, in the heat of the moment, Vladimir Nikolaevich said that he would pay me a thousand dollars if I managed to make a draw in this opening against Kramnik. In 2000, in a rapidplay game at a tournament in Frankfurt, I employed the Chigorin Defence
against Volodya and managed to make a draw. True, objectively in the opening I experienced problems, but the fact remains! Of course, 1 did not demand my thousand dollars from the esteemed maestro, since I realised that Vladimir Nikolaevich was a person who got carried away easily, and he simply wanted to create a vivid image in order to remove any desire of mine to continue along these lines.
Here it is appropriate to remind you that at various times the Chigorin Defence was employed, and quite successfully, by the world champions Vasily Vasilievich Smyslov and Boris Vasilievich Spassky. Incidentally, in 2001 at the super-touma-ment in Wijk aan Zee, I shared the point with Anand in a Chigorin Defence, but no one had offered me any money for making a draw with Vishy!
I will permit myself a small ‘lyrical digression’. The constant employment of the Chigorin Defence significandy expanded my impressions of what Black can and cannot allow himself in the opening stage. Gradually I included in my repertoire another ‘incorrect’ opening - the Albin’s Counter Gambit l.d4 dS 2.c4 eS!?. Its ideas are in many ways similar to the ideas of the Chigorin Defence - Black aims to obtain active piece play, giving maximum scope to his pieces from the very start. If for the sake of this he has to sacrifice a pawn - which later there are chances of regaining - then I will also study such openings. Incidentally, in some variations a transposition from the Albin’s Counter Gambit to the Chigorin Defence is possible.
Thus, in 2005 in Dagomys, with the cheerful accompaniment of people relax
9
ing in a bar, I played a training blitz match of eight games with grandmaster Vlad Tkachiev. In one of the games I employed the Albin’s Counter Gambit and won quite easily. At the end of the match Vlad stated that he considered that moves such as 2...e5 show a lack of respect for the opponent, and that on principle he would always capture this pawn; even if I were to show with my analysis that Black is alright, he, Vlad Tkachiev, would not believe this.
It has to be said that Tkachiev’s opinion about 2...e5 is one that many grandmasters also involuntarily transfer to 2...Феб - that it is not a serious opening, but one that cannot withstand deep analysis. Possibly this is so, I won’t argue - as they say, the game will decide! Nevertheless, I would like to say that I have never employed either 2...Феб or 2...e5 from any negative viewpoint, out of lack of respect for my opponent, from a desire to deceive him as quickly as possible, to dislodge him from his preparations and lure him into a dubious variation, but one better analysed by me. 1 made both moves because I sincerely believed that these are possible ways of playing; perhaps not the very best, but perfectly permissible. In both cases I regarded the positions obtained as acceptable. I prefer open piece play in the centre rather than blocked pawn chains, which are more typical in set-ups such as l.d4 dS 2.c4 c6 or 2...e6. In addition, in the moves 2...Феб and 2...e5 there is a certain element of surprise. If these openings are employed by just one player, his future opponents are unlikely to spend much time studying them at home, since there are always a mass of problems in the openings that everyone plays. Of course, I took into ac
count these psychological factors when choosing rare openings, but 1 was never guided by the idea of trying to ‘con’ my opponent.
It is clear that the Chigorin Defence alone (like any other defence, however wonderful it is) cannot last a lifetime, and therefore a certain avoidance of this opening, which began with me after 1996, is quite understandable. I spent a long time seeking a new opening, which would correspond to my style of play, and from 19971 switched to the Slav Defence. Some of my followers, Vasily Ivanchuk for example, employed the Chigorin at top level only infrequently and not for long. Therefore those games of 2000-2001 in which I again employed the Chigorin Defence, again brought me a good number of points. However, at that time I had already decided that this opening should be employed either against weaker opponents or in order to sometimes vary my basic repertoire and to have something to replace the Slav Defence, which 1 very frequently employed. The effect of my opponents ’forgetting’ also played its part.
A new stage in the study of the Chigorin Defence began when International Master and journalist Vladimir Barsky and I began preparing the book which you now have before you. Analytical work with the help of modem analysis programs showed that many games played by me in the mid-1990s were not altogether accurate performances, and this included the opening stage. Therefore it was necessary to repair even those variations which had earlier seemed quite satisfactory for Black.
I was asked to write such a book five or six years ago. People sent me E-mail let
10
ters, and made such suggestions in personal conversations. I did not refuse, but I replied: ‘Wait a little, the time will come!’ Now I am not planning in the immediate future to employ the Chigorin Defence in serious competitions, and therefore I can share my analyses quite openly.
The authors are well aware that the variations given in the book can almost certainly be refined for both sides. The opening remains fairly fresh, and many of its secrets have not yet been revealed; moreover, in many cases the strongest directions, both for White and for Black, remain in the background. I sincerely hope that this book will provide a new impetus to the development of this interesting opening, that it will again occur in the very top events, and then - who knows! -within a few years I myself may want once again to try my faithful Chigorin Defence.
In this book not all the variations of this opening are analysed; this, as it follows from the title, is my ‘pet’ version of the Chigorin Defence. We have placed the accent on my games and analyses, and have showed how, with the passage of time, I have arrived at evaluations of different variations: what I played and analysed earlier, and what now. Over the course of 14 years my perception of this opening has changed significantly. During the preparation of the manuscript, old analyses were checked on the computer, and the machines suggested many new and interesting ideas.
The games in the book are largely given in full, although, of course, the main emphasis is placed on the opening stage. I
should like to draw the readers’ attention to the fact that on no account should they fall under the spell of the final result! Very often players avoid repeating perfectly promising variations, precisely because of the result of a game, and this is absolutely the wrong approach. And on the basis of statistics alone it is impossible to draw conclusions about the quality of an opening system, since it often happens that a particular system is more often employed with one colour by stronger players. The readers should take a critical viewpoint with regard to any conclusions and should be extremely cautious with accepting anything simply on trust.
In the mid-1990s, under the influence of my games, the Chigorin Defence acquired a number of adherents, mainly among young players. In particular, it was employed by pupils of the well-known Moscow trainer Viktor Arkadevich Cherny — Mikhail Kobalia, Andrey Rychagov and others. But some of them were clearly insufficiently prepared, and as a result already at an early stage they chose methods that, from my point of view, were not the strongest It should be clearly understood that the Chigorin Defence is not some magic wand for Black; its employment demands serious work at home. Generally speaking, it is not easy to play rather irrational positions on the basis of other players’ games; in order to understand this opening, you must experience it yourself. General reasonings fade into the background; here there is a continuous close-range fight. Fortunately, there is now the Internet, where one can experiment at will before switching to the practical testing of a new opening in serious tournament games.
11
Included in the book are many of my rapid and blitz games, which have previously not been published anywhere For example, in my training blitz matches in 2001-2002 with Vladimir Kramnik, White mainly aimed for the variation
1.d4 d5 2x4 2x6 3.4X3 dxc4 4.2f3 2f65dkg5l?
Ж	g
11 Illi
4	4
 ЖВ
a a
This is a very interesting and promising direction for White, which to this day remains practically unexplored.
In those years I played even more blitz games with the Chigorin Defence against Karpov. Anatoly Evgenevich chose various set-ups, but he most often settled on the variation 1.d4 d5 2x4 2c6 3xxd5 Wxd5 4.e3 e5 5.2c3 Ab4 6Jcd2
Jlxc3 7.bxc3
Later he usually played f2-f3, placed his king on f2 and tried to complete his
kingside development Karpov thought that Black’s ‘capers’ would gradually come to an end and that White’s long-term pluses, such as his strong pawn centre and two bishops, would be bound to tell in the subsequent play. But our blitz games (which, of course, must be accepted as blitz, and not as the truth in any instance) showed that all is not so simple After all, the white king is in the centre, and Black is excellently developed. In some ways this position is similar to that in one of the branches of the Nimzo-Indian Defence, where Black also gives up his bishop on c3 and aims for active piece play. I think that this set-up is clearly not one that Black should seriously fear, especially if White places his king on f2, which will also cause him headaches later on.
How is this book arranged? It consists of four chapters. In Chapter One the open piece play after 1.d4 d5 2x4 2x6 3.cxd5 Wxd5 or З.еЗ e5 is analysed. Chapter Two is devoted to the popular and solid move 3.2f3. Finally, in Chapter Three the tense and dynamic positions after 3.2c3 dxc4 are studied (I have never played 3...e5 or 3...2f6, and so these moves are not covered in this book).
It is curious that at some point a number of players, for some reason mainly young ones, began avoiding the Chigorin Defence with white and after 1x14 d5 began choosing 2.2if3, in order to then consolidate with 3JLf4 or З.дЗ. But all the same I replied 2—2x6 - what else could I do?! These positions, which strictly speaking do not belong to the Chigorin Defence (the index of which, according to Infor mat or, is D07), but to the Queen’s Pawn Opening (DO 2), are analysed in Chapter Four.
12
When the book was already practically ready for publication, I played several matches on the Internet, using the handles ‘Wanted’ and ‘Benefactor’, with various players, in order to once again check the reliability of the Chigorin Defence. My games with the mysterious ‘Raflael’ on the Playchess site proved especially interesting. The handle of this player is concealed, but it is obvious that he is a very strong grandmaster, possibly even Kasparov himself.
In the critical variation 1.d4 d5 2,c4 £c6 З.ЗДЗ Ag4 4.cxd5 £xf3 5.gxf3 Wxd5 6^3 e5 7.£c3 kb4 8.£d2 jLxc3 Э.ЬхсЗ I tested the little-studied move 9...4Л6!?.
From the opening Black obtained perfectly satisfactory positions, and he did not experience any particular problems. This mini-match reinforced my opinion that the Chigorin Defence can be employed against players of any standard, including the very highest. It would proba bly be hard to maintain in a match for the world championship or in games with a computer, but in a single individual game it can be tried against any human opponent. The outcome of the battle will depend, above all, on your own powers, and on your belief in and understanding of this opening.
If Black has a feeling for this opening, if he is imbued with its spirit, and he knows where to place his pieces, how to jump with his knights and create dynamic tension, he can certainly play the Chigorin Defence. Even against me, if I should play 1 .d4 with white!
Alexander Morozevich
December 2006
13
Chapter One
A STRAIGHT FIGHT
The Variation 3.cxd5 WxdS
In chess there ore only two styles - good, that is: leading to a win, and bad, that is: lead!ng to a loss. In every position a possible combination is concealed and every combination arises from the position. If after the opponent s move a so-called positional player is not capable of calculating a possible winning combination 5-6 moves ahead, then he is not a positional player, but simply a patzer...
Mikhail Chigorin
Introduction
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
d7-d5 £b8-c6l?
Black does not support his central d5-pawn, but endeavours to open up the position as soon as possible and create piece pressure on the opponent’s centre. This idea of the great Russian player Mikhail Ivanovich Chigorin (1850-1908) was further developed in such currently popular openings as the Nimzo-Indian Defence and the Grunfeld Indian Defence. The St Petersburg chess amateur Karl Rosenkrantz, a contemporary of Chigorin, testified: ‘Chigorin did not like the Queen’s Gambit and the Queen’s Pawn Opening. I would even
say that he hated these openings, which lead to slow pressure on the opponent’s position and a lengthy positional struggle. He disdained such play as being routine hack work. Chigorin’s intuitive mind was always aiming for play where there was a possibility of creating concrete plans and variations. Nevertheless, Chigorin was fully aware of the strength of these openings, especially after; due to his disdainful attitude to defence, he suffered a number of defeats in them in his matches with Steinitz and in the penultimate game of his match with Tarrasch.
Later Chigorin had an amazingly good knowledge of the Queen’s Gambit - he studied it as though it were a dangerous enemy, with whom he would have to fight tomorrow. He created a whole series of interesting defensive systems in the Queen’s Gambit; however, although he was fully aware of how strong the Queen’s Gambit was - especially after Pillsbury’s victory' in the Hastings Tournament of 1895, which was achieved to a significant degree thanks to his subtle knowledge of the Queen’s Gambit - he
15
himself nevertheless did not play it. Chigorin, who was always a true artist in chess, chose for his creative work not those methods which promised greater practical success, but those which gave him pleasure as an artist.’
A very interesting description, although in our pragmatic age one is unlikely to find many advocates of pure art, who would spend their time and money on the study of a new opening in which one would probably win one or two brilliant games, but in die rest would have to accept an unhappy outcome.
The authors would like to demonstrate that in its modern interpretation the Chigorin Defence is a fully correct fighting opening, in which Black can count on equal play with adequate counterchances. Of course, no one has yet abolished the advantage of the first move, and here, as in any opening, the initiative belongs to White, who already on the 3rd move has to make his first choice: in what direction to take die subsequent play.
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. c4xd5
d7-d5 £b8-c6 ^d8xd5
In this chapter we will examine attempts by White to immediately punish his opponent for his violation of the strategic rules. The immediate exchange on dS forces the black queen into the thick of things, where it may come under attack by the opposing minor pieces and pawns. But for the moment - for an instant! - the d4-pawn is under attack, and White has to spend a tempo	or 4.e3) on
defending it.
16
Section A
Defending and Developing: 4.£f3
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. c4xd5
4. ^g1-f3
d7-d5 £b8-c6 Wd8xd5
After die developing move 4.ФГЗ, Black is obliged to pour fuel onto the fire, since half measures will not do: after 4...Ag4? 5.2>c3 WaS 6.d5 0-0-0 7Jkd2± or 4...£tf6 S.£k3 ^aS 6.e3 eS 7.AbS!± White has an obvious advantage.
Therefore, the standard reply for Black is 4...e5.
GAME 1
□ Wilhelm Steinitz
 Mikhail Chigorin
Vienna 1898
1.	d2 d4
2.	c2-c4
3.	c4xd5
4.	£g1-f3
5.	2Ы-СЗ
d7-d5 £Ь8-с6 Wd8xd5 e7-e5
The immediate transition into an endgame with S.dxeS Wxdl + b.'&xdl
promises White litde, since after the loss of the right to castle he is forced to spend several further tempi on safeguarding his king. For example: 6...JLg4 7..&f4 (7.h3 0-0-0+ 8.Фс2 if5+) 7...&ge7 and now:
A) 8.e3 2>g6 9.Jkb5 0-0-0+, and 10.Фе2? is not possible because of 10...4W4+ Il.exf4^d4+;
B) 8.h3 2>g6 (8...Axf3?! 9.exf3 2>g6 1О.ДеЗ± Steinitz) 9.hxg4 (9Je!.g3 Axf3=) 9...£xf4 10.e3 £>g6 ll.AbS 0-0-0+ 12.Фе2 ^gxeS**;
C) 8.£ibd2 2>g6 9.Ag3 (9.g3 0-0-0 1О.Фс1 Ab4 ll.Ag2 £gxe5 12.£xe5 £>xeS 13.£te4 Hhe8+ Khamgokov-Barsky, Moscow 2001) 9...0-0-0 10.Фс1 Ab4 11.a3 J«Lxd2+ 12.£ixd2 £}gxe5 13.f3 Аеб 14.Дхе5 2>xe5 1 S.e4 Hd4 16.Ae2 Hhd8 17.Edl ^d3+? (Schukin-Barsky, corr. 1993).
5.	...	Af8-b4
The queen must remain on its central post, since in the event of 5_ .Wa5 6.d5! White firmly seizes the initiative. Generally speaking, when playing the Chigorin Defence as Black you must always be mentally prepared to exchange your bishops for the enemy knights, at the same time often allowing the opponent to reinforce his pawn centre by the recapture b2xc3. From the abstract positional standpoint such actions cannot be approved, but in concrete play Black’s pluses — active piece play plus the initiative - cannot be underestimated.
6.	d4xe5
17
Chapter One - Section A
White also has other plans: б.аЗ, 6.e3 and 6.Ad2. We will examine them later
6.	Wd5xd1 +
Black too has a certain freedom of choice. He can keep the queens on by playing 6...WaS. However, the approximate continuation 7.Ad2 2xe5 8.a3 2>xf3+ 9.exf3 We5+ 1О.Ае2 Ae7 11.0-0 2f6 12.fiel 0-0 13.2)bS!? Ad8 14.ПС11? (14.Ac3!?) shows that here White holds the initiative.
Should Black spoil the opponent’s pawn structure by the voluntary exchange of bishop for knight-6...Axe3+ 7.bxc3?
As a rule, he should wait for the ‘invitation’ to this exchange by a3 or Ad2, rather than himself display excessive zeal in this respect. Variations show that both with the queens on and in the endgame, White retains the better chances:
attempt to establish this bishop on the long diagonal is no success: 9.c4?! 2g6 10.Ab2
Деб H.e3 2a5 12.Hcl 0-0-0+ 13.2d2 fld7 14.Фс2 flhd8 IS.Hdl 2c6t, and 16/4? fads to 16...Ag4) 9...2g6 10.Ag3 0-0 П.еЗ Ag4 12.Ae2 5fe8 13.h3 (13.e6!?) 13...Axf3 14.Axf3±;
B) 7...Wa5 8.Ad2andnow:
Bl)	8...Ag4 9.Wb3 (9x4!?) 9...0-0-0 10.c4Wa6 ll.WbS WxbS 12.cxb5Axf3 13.exf3 2xe5 14.Ac3±;
B2)	8...2ge7 9.g3 2g6 10.Ag2 2gxe5 11.2xeS2xeS 12.0-0 2c4?! 13.Af4±;
B3)	8...2xe5 9.2xe5 (9x4 2xf3 + lO.exB WeS+ ll.We2 Wxe2+ 12.Axe2 Ae6 13.Ac3 f6 14.0-0 0-0-0 IS.Efel cS 16.f4 2e7 17.Habl 2c6 18.a4 Фс7+ Deveraux-ghost, ICC 2001) 9...Wxe5 10.Wa4+ Ad7 ll.Wd4 (U.Wc4 2/6 12.Af4 WfS 13.e3 Ac6 14.f3 0-0 15.Ad3 WhS 16.0-0 21dS 17.Wd4 Efe8₽t Deveraux-ghost,ICC 2001) 1 l...Wf6 12.e4 Ac6 13.Wxf62xf6 14.f3±.
7.	Фе1 xd1 Ac8-g4
8.	h2-h3!
The attempt to keep his extra pawn by preventing the king’s knight from going to g6 is no success: 8.Ag5?! h6 9.Ah4 2ge7 1О.Ахе7 АхсЗ П.АаЗ AaST (Ledn ev-Mo rozevich, Moscow 1992).
8.	..	Ag4xf3
9.	e2xf3	0-0-0+
18
Defending and Developing: 3.cxd5 IllfxdS 4.£f3
12. f3-f4
A questionable decision: Steinitz wants to bring out his light-squared bishop to an active position at c4, and in so doing he is prepared, as we will now see, to temporarily shut his queen’s rook in the corner on al. Would it not have been better to play 12.Ae2 followed by Badl, and only then drive away the enemy knight from the centre by playing f4?
12. -	^e5-c6
13. Af1-c4	<5c6-d4+
14. Фс2-с1	£ig8-h6
15. g2-g4	Ь7-Ь5
16. Eh1-d1	c7-c5
17. Ac4-f1	
17. -.	Eh8-e8?
A routine move: Black simply develops his inactive rook, whereas he should have used it to strengthen his control of the d5-square, where White will soon establish his knight. After 17...Hd7! 18.Ag2 Hhd8 19.ФЫ (Black was threatening to exchange on c3 and then move his knight from d4 with check) 19...fS 20.gS £)f7 Black's position is perfectly defensible White has to concern himself with his rook on a 1, for example 21 .a4!?. The initiative is still on his side.
1a Af1-g2	f7-f5
19. g4-g5	4 h6-g8
Too passive; 19...4if7 was better.
20.	£>c3-d5±	£id4-e6
21.	a2-a4	b5xa4
22.	3a1xa4	a6-a5
23.	£id5xb4	a5xb4
24.	Ea4-a8+	
24. AdS!	was even	stronger: 24...Фс7
2S.Af7 Exdl+ 26.*4»xdl Sd8+ 27.Фс2
£1е7 28.Axc5 and wins.
24.	- Фс8-с7
25.	Sa8xd8 fie8xd8
26.	Sd1xd8 -e6xd8
26...	&xd8 was more tenacious, but thus too should not have saved Black: 27.Ad5 &d7 28.Фс2 £ie7 29.Axe6+ Фхеб
30. AxcS	etc	
27.	Ae3xc5	<?d8-e6
28.	Ac5xb4	<5e6xf4
29.	Ag2-f1	h7-h6
30.	h3-h4	h6xg5
31.	h4xg5	<?f4-d5
32.	Ab4-f8	g7-g6
33.	Af1-c4	4g8-e7
34.	&c1-d2	*c7-d7
35.	Af8xe7	4d5xe7
36.	Ac4-f7	<id7-d6
37.	&d2-e3	Ad6-c5
38.	<±>e3-f4	ic5-d6
39.	b2-b3	id6-c5
40.	Af7xg6	<£e7xg6+
41.	&f4xf5	
Black resigned.
A Closer Look
Steinitz conducted the game very strongly and logically, and he would have retained the better chances even in the event of Blacks correct response on the 17 th move An improvement on Chigorin’s play must evidently be sought at an earlier stage of the game. We suggest studying 7...4ige7!? (instead of 7... Ag4).
19
Chapter One - Section A
The knight is heading for g6, in order to regain the sacrificed pawn. White can support it in good time (8.jStf4), begin a counterattack (8.&bS) or simply continue his development (8.e3 or 8.e4).
A)	8.Af4
Al) Now in the event of 8...£}g6 9.Ag3 0-0 Ю.еб Jfijce6 11 .Axc7 Hac8 12.jfi.g3 Sfd8+ 13.Фс2 Jfif5 + 14.ФЬЗ (14.e4 Axe4+T) 14...Ae6+ Black does indeed gain equality, but 10.e3!± is stronger.
A 2) Therefore Black should play more energetically, combining the attack on the eS-pawn with the rapid development of his queenside: 8...Ag4!? 9.e3 £jg6 lO.AbS (bad is 10.Ae2 0-0-0+ 11.Фс2 <Lxf4 12.exf4 Axf3 13.Axf3 #Jd4+ 14.Фс1 #Jxf3 15.gxf3 Axc3 16.bxc3 fid3T) 10...0-0-0+ 11.Фс2 Axf3 (here nothing is gained by 1 l...^xf4 on account of 12.Axc6 4Jxg2 13. Ae4±) 12.gxf3 £kxe5 13.Jfi.xe5 #JxeS 14.Jfi.e2 (or 14.f4 &g4 IS.fiafloo) 14...Ae7!?, and after .„Ah4 and	he gains
good counterplay.
B)	8.4Jb5 AaS 9.Ad2 Ab6 Ю.еЗ £g6 ll.jfi.c3 0-0® followed by ...a6 and ...Де8. Black will soon regain his pawn with equal chances.
C)	8.e3 Jfi.g4 (if 8...4ig6 Black has to reckon with 9.Ab5, while after 8...0-0 again 9.Ab5 is unpleasant: 9...a6 10.jfia4
Ag4 П.Фс2 Axf3 12.gxf3 #JxeS 13.f4 2>g4 14.f3±) 9.Ae2 0-0-0+ 1О.Фс2 jfif5+ 1 l.e4 (White loses after 11 .ФЬЗ? AcS 12.a3 &aS+ 13.<&a4 b6! 14.b4 Ac2 + 15.*b5 ФЬ7 16.bxa5 Ab3 17.аб+ ФЬ8 or 12.&a4 4Ja5+ 13.ФсЗ $JdS+) ll...Axc3 12.exf5 (or 12.ФхсЗ Jfiae4co; Black stands better after 1 2bxc3 Axe4+ 1З.ФЬ2 Axf3 I4.jfi.xf3 £Jxe5 or 14...^g6+) 12...AxeS 13.£lxe5 &xe5 14.g4£j5c6«>.
D)	8.e4 Ag4 (8...4Jg6 9.AbS Ad7 10.Фс2 #JgxeS I 1 .Фхе5 £Jxe5 12.Axd7+£xd7±)9.Ae2
DI) 9...0-0-0+ Ю.Фс2 Axf3 ll.Axf3 $Jd4+ 12.ФЫ Axc3 13.Ag4+±;
D2) 9...nd8+ 1О.Фс2 JLxf3 ll.jfijcft 4bd4+ 12.ФЫ Axc3 13.bxc3 4ixf3 14.gxf3 Dd3 15.АеЗ ПхсЗ 16.Sdl±;
D3) 9...^)g6! 1О.Фс2 Axf3 ll.Axf3 &d4+ 12.ФЫ £xf3 13.gxf3 ^JxeS 14.f4 4k4 1 S.^dS AaS 16.Ae3 0-0-0 17.Фс2ЙЬе8+.
GAME 2
□ Ljubomir Ljubojevic
 Hans Ree
Amsterdam 1972
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ъ8-с6
20
Defending and Developing: 3.cxd5 l^xdS 4.£)f3
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	£g1-f3	e7-e5
5.	£Ы-сЗ	ji f8-b4
6.	e2-e3
6.a3!? gives White little in view of 6...Axc3+ (6...AaS? 7.b4 Wc4 8.&e4!?) 7.bxc3 (7,..Ag4? 8.2>xe5 &xe5 9.dxe5 Wxe5 !0.Wd4±) 8.e3 (8.dxe5 ^xdl + 9.^xdl £}g4) 8...Ag4 9.Ae2 (9.c4 Wd6<x>) 9...0-0 10.0-0 (10.c4 Wd6 11 dS ^aSoo) 10..Had8!^.
Ж ± Й 4 Ж
ill ill
s iwi a
4 

6.	_	e5xd4
Black can also delay this exchange and play 6...Ag4 immediately, for example: 7.£tel exd4 (7...Axc3 + 8.bxc3 e4 9.2id2 Axe2 10.Wxe2 £if6 11.0-0 0-0 12.a4 fife 8 13>b5 b6 14.c4 Wd7± Soman-Sasikiran, Mumbai 2003) 8.0-0!? Axc3 9.bxc3 d3 (thanks to this bayonet thrust, .White’s pawn structure remains compromised) 10.Wxd3 Wxd3 1 1 .Axd3 Axf3 (also satisfactory is 11.. 0-0-0 12.Ac4 Axf3 13.gxf3 2fc5 14.Ae2 2if6 15.e4 2id3 16.Ae3 2>h5 17.Hfdl £ihf4 18.Afl She8= Chernov-Barsky, corr. 1993) 12.gxf3 0-0-0 13.Bdl= (Quinteros-Kavalek, Lanzarote 1974).
7.	e3xd4	j«x8-g4
8.	Af1-e2	Ag4xf3
9.	Ae2xf3	Wd5-c4
It stands to reason that the d4-pawn is taboo on account of 10.Axc6+. But it remains a target, and at the same time Black prevents his opponent from castling kingside.
But now a solemn moment has arrived, when we must disclose a ‘shameful secret’: in fact, in the Ljubojevic-Ree game the opening moves were completely different! Here they are: l.e4 eS 2.4if3 4te6 3.d4 exd4 4.c3 dS S.exdS ^xdS 6.cxd4 Ag4 7.Ae2 Ab4+ 8.&c3 Axf3 9.Axf3 Wc4, and we reach the position in die last diagram. This is the Goring Gambit (declined), Informator index C44. Subsequently we will encounter many such ‘jumps’ from one opening to anodier.
10.	Wd1-b3
This is considered the most unpleasant continuation. In the classic game Marshall-Capablanca (Lake Hopatcong 1926) Black equalized without difficulty after Ю.АеЗ JLxc34- ll.bxc3 Wxc3+ 12.ФП Wc4+ 13.&gl &ge7 14.Scl Wxa2 15.11a 1 =
White’s prospects are also not too rosy in the event of die exchange on c6, for example: 10.Axc6+ bxc6 ll.We2 + Wxe2+ 12.Фхе2 0-0-0 13.fldl (13.Ae3 £>7 14.Hhdl Hhe8 15.a3 AaS 16.<±>f3 Ab6 I7.^a4 £f5 18.£c5 HdS 19.flacl Hed8+ Miles-Nunn, Islington 1970)
21
Chapter One - Section A
I3..	.£te7 14.j5.e3 Ohe8 IS.XXdS 2>f5 16.fladl cS 17.dxc5 Hxd3 18.Exd3 ФхеЗ 19.Hxe3 Sxe3+ 2О.ФхеЗ J5.xcS+ 21.Фе2 &d7= (Spassky-Bondarevsky, Sochi 1964).
10.	-.	Wc4xb3
11.	a2xb3	4 g8-e7
Black needs to stabilize the position and bring on his reserves. There is no forced draw and complications favour White, e.g.: ll.J?Jxd4 !2.Axb7 £>c2+ (12...Sb8 13 Лха7 £cS 14.Sa8 Hxa8 15^.xa8 ?Je7 16.j5.e4 0-0 17j5.f4 4Je6± Ljubojevic-
14.Дс6+ (14.j5.xa8 ФхЬЗ 15.£.c6+ &d8 16.Hdl + Фс8 17.4JdS jStc5 18.j5.e3 J5.xe3 19.fxe3 4JaS 2O.J5.e8 c6, draw, Ljubojevic-Stein, Ohrid 1972) 14...ФГ8 15.j5jca8 2>xb3 16.£e3 £if6 17.4Jd5 J5.d6 18.21xf6 gxf6 19.j5.dS £>cS 20.Па1 Фе7 2 1 Пха7 ПЬ8 22.Па2± (Velimirovic-Toth, Nice 1974).
12.	0-0
12.j5.e3 0-0-0 13.0-0 аб 14.flfdl Hhe8 15.g3 ФЬ8 16.fia4 J5.d6 17.d5 £JeS 18.J5.e4fS 19.j5.g2 £ig4 2O.^d4 JLeS?* (Forster-Godena, Switzerland 2005).
12. «	a7-a6
13. Sa1-a4
13.j5.e3 0-0-0 I4.Sfdl ФЬ8 1 S.g3 Hhe8*=* (Mastrovasilis-Sturua, Istanbul 2003).
Black has deployed his forces harmoniously, and thanks to the defects in the opponent’s pawn structure he should have sufficient counter play.
14.	Ac1-g5	f7-f6
15.	J5f3-h54-	4Je7-g6
16.	Efl-eH-	4Jc6-e7
17.	J5.g5-d2	0-0-0
18.	02-g3	Фс8-Ь8
19.	£Jc3-e4	4Je7-d5
20.	2a4-a5	J5.d6-b4
21.	J5.d2xb4	
Draw.
GAME 3
□ Andrei Kharitonov  Evgeny Maliutin
Smolensk 1991
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	4Jg1-f3	6лЬ8-с6
3.	c2-c4	e7-e5
4.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
5.	&Ы-СЗ	Af8-b4
6.	J5.c1-d2	J5.b4xc3
7.	xd2xc3	e5-e4
It stands to reason that it is unfavourable to open up the centre, when the enemy bishop is already standing on the long di
22
Defending and Developing. 3.ad5 iSTxdS 4.4bf3
agonal and there is simply no way of opposing it: 7...exd4?! 8.£)xd4 4Jf6 9.f3 0-0? (9...&xd4 10.&xd4±) 10.e4 He8 ll.jfi.e2± (Unzicker-Barden. Hastings 1950/51).
8.	£f3-e5
The most aggressive move, although the alternative 8.£>d2 also demands serious consideration.
B) It is probable that Black should simply complete his development: 8...£jf6 9.e3 0-0 10>c2 (if 10.h3, then 10...h5!? with the idea of ...h4 is possible) 10...He8 H.Jlc4#f5 12.4jfl Wg6 13.£}g3oo (Petrov-Ravinsky, Moscow 1940). Black’s spatial advantage on the kingside (thanks to his e4-pawn) promises him a good game.
A)	The obstructive pawn sacrifice 8...e3 9.fxe3 £>f6 looks very tempting:
Al) 10.M 0-0 11.g3 &g4 12.jfi.d2 He8 13.Wcl ^xd4!; 10>c2 jfifS 11>ЬЗ£ге7оо;
A2) 10.^ЬЗ ^g5!? (10...£.e6 11 Wxd5 Jfi.xd5 12.Hgl 0-0 13.g4 Hfe8 14.g5 4jc4 15 .#Jxe4 jfijce4 16.^h3 Had8 17.Jfi.g4 4je7 18.Hcl 2kl5 19..fi.d2± Guliev-Etchegaray, Cappelle la Grande 2003) H.^f3 (ll.e4 0-0 12.&B We3! 13.d5 4Jxe4 14.dxc6 Wf2+ 15.&dl We3®) ll...^xe3 12.Ad2 ^xb3 13.axb3 Ae6 14.b4 Дс4 IS.Hcl .fi.b5 16.Пс5 аб 17.e3 Jfi.xfl 18.Hxfl 4ie4T (Wojtaszek-Barsky, Polanica Zdroj 2000);
A3) However, White can immediately return the unwanted gift - 10.e4, and after 10...4Jxe4 1 l.e3 £lxd2 12.Wxd2 0-0 13.ЬЗ He8 14 .fi.c4 Wg5 15.0 0± < Moskalenko-Lazovic, Hollabrunn 1998) the open f-file will come in handy.
a ...	e4-e3l?
Here this pawn sacrifice gains in strength, since in the event of its acceptance White will be left with tripled (!) pawns. As occurred in the following game, where Black’s plan also came into consideration:
A) 8...^JxeS 9.dxe5 jfi.e6 (9...W'xdl + lO.Hxdl Jfi.e6 ll.a3±; 9...2>e7 10.g3 e3 II.В Леб 12.^g2 0-0-0 13.Wa4 ФЬ8 (13...a6!?	14.0-0 WbS) I4.0-0±
Kremenetsky-Barsky, Moscow 1993) 10Wxd5 Jfi.xd5 1 l.g3 £je7 12.jfilg2 0-0-0 13.f3 Ehe8 14.fxe4?! jfi.e6 15.0-0 Sk6 16.b3 a5 17.£>f2 Hd7 18.ФеЗ b6 19.Hadi Hxdl 20.Hxdl Hd8 21.Hcl ФЬ7® (Matveeva-Wang Yu, Ergun 2006). Other continuations are less good:
В)	8...Де6?! 9.£ixc6 Wxc6? 10.d5! ^xd5 11 .^xd5 ^xd5 12..$Lxg7+-;
C)	8...4jge7 9.еЗ Деб 10jfi.c4 Wd6 И.Ахеб Wxe6 12.4jxc6 Ьхсб 13.jfi.b4 #JdS 14.ДаЗ± (Pham Minh Ho-Miladinovic, France 2003/04).
23
Chapter One - Section A
9.	f2-f3
After 9.fxe3 4ixe5 lO.dxeS Black equalizes by 10...£te7 or 10...Wxdl + 11.Hxd 1 Ae6. But in the event of 10...&е6?! ll.Wa4+ Ad7 12.e4 We6 13,Wd4 £e7 14.e3 2>c6 IS.WcS 0-0-0 1 6.Ac4 Wg6 17.0-0 White has a slight advantage (Filippov-Lindfeldt, Golden Sands 2000).
9.Wb3?! is unfavourable for White: 9...Wxb3 Ю.ахЬЗ &xe5 ll.dxeS Ae6 12.fxe3 &xb3 13.e4 ^e7T (Tomanovics-Bigaliev, Kobanya 1996). 9.43xc6 is also dubious: 9...bxc6 (9...exf2+ 10.^xf2 bxc6 11.e4 Wxe4 12.d5 £}f6 or 12.Ad3 Wf4+4 is also good) 10.Wd3 exf2+ 11 .ФхГ2 £}f6 12.Wf3 &e4+ 13.&gl 0-0 14.h4 Пев IS.hS h6 16.Hh4 AfS 17.3f4 Ah7 18.g4 Пе7 19.Ag2 Паев 2O.Hfl f6+ (LiltlePeasant-Benefactor, ICC 2006).
9. -	£g8-e7
A rather unusual pwn structure has arisen. Black is clearly ahead in development, whereas it is not so simple for White to approach the bold intruder on e3.
10.	Wd1-d3	<?c6xe5
11.	d4xe5	»d5xd3
12.	e2xd3	Ac8-f5
Less good was 12...£id5?! 13.g3 jStfS 14.d4 0-0-0 15..&C4 cS 16.flcl ФЬ8
17.dxc5 Ae6± (Veingold-Kikti, Helsinki 1996).
13.	d3-d4	0-0-0
14.	Af1-c4	if5-e6
15.	b2-b3!	Hd8-d7
16.	&e1-e2	' e7-f5
17.	Za1-d1	Sh8-d8
18. d4-d5!
The only way of maintaining the balance.
18.		s_e6xd5
19.	Hd1xd5	Hd7xd5
20.	ji.c4xd5	Hd8xd5
21.	g2-g4	£f5-e7
22.	Фе2хеЗ	Hd5-c5
23.	±e3-d4	Дс5-с6
24.	f3-f4	3c6-a6
25.	a2-a4	h7-h5
26.	h2-h3	Ha6-h6
27.	Hh1-g1	h5xg4
28.	h3xg4	g7-g6
29.	Sg1-g3	c7-c6
With 29...&d7 Black could have prevented the following breakthrough, but this would not have changed the evalua tion of the position.
30.	e5-e6	f7xe6
31.	id4-e5	£e7-d5
32.	Фе5хе6	g6-g5+
33.	Феб-fS	g5xf4
34.	Eg3-f3	d?c8-d7
Draw.
24
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 1ЙГх<15 4.еЗ
Section В
Quietly Reinforcing: 4.e3
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. c4xd5
d7-d5 £Ь8-с6 ^d8xd5
White stands better after 5.. ^d8 6.dS 2>ce7 7.&f3±or7.^a4+ Ad7 8.^b3±.
4. e2-e3
£ A
All 1A
4

А А А Д A
Temporarily leaving his knight on gl. White safeguards himself against the pin ...-SsLg4 and the tempo-gaining advance ...e5-e4. On the other hand, he immediately determines his pawn structure in the centre (d4+e3 instead of the possible and more ambitious set-up d4+e4) and restricts his bishop on c 1.
GAME 4
□ Alexander Khalifman
 Alexander Morozevich
Amsterdam 1995
1.	d2-d4
2.	c2-c4
3.	c4xd5
4.	e2-e3
5.	&Ы-СЗ
d7-d5 £jb8-c6 Wd8xd5 e7-e5 Af8-b4
By hook or by crook the queen must be kept at its dominating post in the centre.
6.	£c1-d2
6,£if3 exd4 7.exd4 leads to positions from the Goring Gambit Declined (C44) examined above.
White can also force the exchange of bishop for knight in another way - 6.a3!? АхсЗ+ 7.bxc3, but then the bishop on cl is passive and after the natural 7...£if6 Black completes his development in normal fashion and obtains sufficient counterchances, for example:
A) 8.£e2 0-0 9.c4 #d6 (9..>xc4?!
10.2)f4! Wc3+ ll&d2Wxal (ll...Wb2 12.£}d3 ^Ь6 13.ПЫ Wa6 14.^xe5 Wxa3 15.£}xc6 bxc6 16.Ab4-l—) 12>xal exf4 13JLd3±) lO.dS &e7 И.&сЗ c6 12.e4 bS 13.dxc6, draw’ (Nikolaidis-Mann, France 2004);
B) 8.c4 Wd6 9.d5 2)e7 (9...£b8 10.2)e2 2>a6 11.4te3 AfS 12.Ae2 0-0 13.0-0 c6 14.a4 Sfe8 lS.Aa3 Wc7 16.Wb3± Urban-Morozevich, Cappelle la Grande 1997) 10.Ab2 (or 10.a4!?c5 11.£>f3 e4 12.£)d2 Ag4 13.Wb3 b6 14.Ab2 21g6 15.h3 Ad7 16?ЙГс2 0-0
25
Chapter One - Section В
17 .£?jxe4 <£jxe4 18.Wxe4 life 8 19.Wc2 £h4® vadurem-BARS, ICC 2002) I0...0-0 11.&f3 llAel &e4 13.0-0 2>c5 14.a4 aS 15.Aa3 b6oo (Slavov-Chatalbashev, Plovdiv 2003).
6.	..	jLb4xc3
6...Wd6 7.d5 2>ce7 8.&b5 &xd2+ 9>xd2 Wd8 10.d6 (lO.Scl!?) 10...cxd6 1 l.£ixd6+±.
7.	Ь2хсЗ
White’s powerful pawn centre reminds one of the line-up of Teutonic Knights on the ice of Lake Peipus. The sharp wedge is ready to sweep away all the barriers in its path, but if it can be halted and then also blockaded, the heavy armour may drag the warriors to the bottom!
But let us leave aside these bleak medieval images and return to the chess world. In the long-term perspective Black’s position is difficult, since the opponent has both the two bishops and a pawn centre. Practically any endgame will be advantageous for White (without any radical worsening of his pawn structure, of course). But for the moment Black is better developed, and the No. 1 objective for him is to quickly complete the mobilization of his forces and do everything possible to prevent the opponent from bringing his reserves into play. It can often be useful to
provoke the advances c3-c4 and d4-d5, but in this case Black must be certain that he will be able to create a solid blockade on the cS- and d6-squares. In a half-open position, the knights, one of which will probably occupy an excellent outpost on cS, will be in no way inferior to the enemy bishops.
Another plan for White, involving the rapid opening of the centre after 7.ДхсЗ, will be examined later.
7.	_	< g8-f6
To hurry with the exchange on d4, when in reply the opponent can play cxd4 and remain with two solid central pawns, is something that Black should do only in exceptional cases: 7...exd4?! 8.cxd4 £}f6 9.£f3 ^e4 10.Ae2 0-0 11.0-0 Ag4 12.Wc2 &xd2 13.Wxd2 Had8 14.3fcl 3d6 15.Wb2± (Rubinstein-Tartakower, San Remo 1930).
7...	Wd6 is not bad, but even so it does not comply with Black's main objective - the rapid mobilization of his forces: 8.-£ld3 4/6 9.f3 0-0 10.4k2 £e6 11.0-0± (Kasparov-Ivanchuk, New York 1995).
7...	4ige7 is also possible, although on e7 the knight will be rather more passively placed than on f6: 8.c4 'ЙМб 9.d5 4ib8 10.4te2 £a6 11.21C3 c6 12.e4 0-0 13.Ае2 fS!?^ (Gagarin-Valaker, Gothen burg 2004).
26
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxdS WfxdS 4.e3
In this important position White has numerous logical continuations: 8.c4, 8>b3, 8.f3, 8.£>e2 and 8.2f3. We will examine them in turn.
a C3-C4	Wd5-d6
9.	d4-d5	2c6-e7
Thus White has immediately advanced his formidable pawns, and it is time for Black to concern himself with a blockade It would seem logical to direct the queen’s knight to cS, by playing 9...2b8.
In the following two games Black did indeed obtain good play:
A)	10.2f3 0-0 U .Wbl aS 12.ДсЗПе8 13.e4 2bd7 14.jfi.d3 2cS 15.2d2 2a4 16.Wc2 2xc3 17.Wxc3 2d 7= (Iskusnikh-Barsky, Moscow 1996);
B)	10>bl 2a6 1 l.Ad3 2cS 12.2e2 c6 13.e4 bS 14.2c3 b4 15.2dl cxdS 16.exd5 aS 17.2e3 HbS** (Yusupov-Beliavsky, Germany Bundesliga 1999/ 00);
C)	However, in the variation 10.ЙЫ!? aS ll.Wcl 2bd7 12.jfi.c3 0-0 13.2f3 Пе8 14Jfi.e2 2c 5 15.2d2 it becomes clear that the knight on f6 is not too well placed, since it makes it hard for Black to create counterplay on the kingside (if it were at g6 instead of f6, he would have the possibility of playing, for example, ...f7-f5 or ...2g6-h4). And after 15...4Yfd7 16.0-0 2f8 17.2b3± White
has an obvious advantage (Prcak-Barsky, PolanicaZdroj 2000).
10.	Wd1-b1
A multi-purpose move: White intends Jfib4 and at the same time he takes control of the important e4-square In the event of the simple-minded 10.Wb3 Black can play 10...2e4!? (10...0-0 is clearly worse: ll.Jfi.b4 cS 12.dxc6 Wc7 13>a3 He8 14.Jfi.d6 Wd8 15x74— Bonsch-Brynell, Germany Bundesliga 2000/01) 1 l.Jfi.b4 cS (White stands better after 11...Wf6 12.2f3 cS 13.Jfi.d3 2xf2 14.Фх£2 cxb4 15.Wa4+ Jfi.d7 16.Wxb4 b6 17.Wb2±) 12.dxc6 Wxc6 1 3.2f3 f6 14.Wa3 2f5!? with an unclear position.
Here are some other continuations that have occurred in practice:
A)	10.f3 0-0 ll.Wb3 (ll.Wbl 2d7 12 .fi.d3 h6 13.2e2 2cS 14.0-0 bS 15.Jfi.b4 aS 16.Aa3 b4 17.jfi.cl Jfi.a6+ Postl-Rabiega, Graz 2002)	1 1...aS
12.2e2 2d7 13.2c3 2x5 14.Wb2 c6 IS.Hdl bS 16.cxb5? (16.dxc6 was better) 16...cxd5 17.b6 Jfi.a6 18.Jfi.cl £xfl 19 Hxfl Hab8 20>аЗ ДхЬб 21 WxaS Паб 22.Wb5 ПЬ8+ (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001);
B)	10.Jfi.d3 0-0 H.e4 2d7 12.2e2 f5 13.f3 2cS 14.Jfi.c2 fxe4 15.fxe4 2g6
27
Chapter One - Section В
1 б.АеЗ ФЬ4** (Perez-Rabiega, play-chess.com 2004);
C) 10.Ebl £te4 11. Ab4 cS 12.Ad2 AfS!? 13.Hxb7 0-0 I4.f3 £lxd2 15.Wxd2 Bab8 16.Exb8 Exb8 17.e4 ЕЫ+ 18.ФГ2 Wb6 19.£le2 Ad 7 2O.g3 fS® (Erdogan-Miladinovic, Istanbul 2002).
10.	«.	0-0
11.	e3-e4?l
A loss of time, and also now Blacks counterplay with ...f7-f5 gains in strength. Let us consider other plans:
A)	ll.Ab4 cS 12.Ac3 (in the event of 12.dxc6 Wc7 13.cxb7?! Axb7 Black has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn) 1 2...b5?! (too sharp; the quiet 12...b6 was better) 13 Wxb5 Eb8 14. WaS ^e4 15.^f3 2>g6 16.^d2 f5 I7.f3 £>xd2 18.&xd2 &h4 19 Egl± (Yusupov-Rabiega, Frankfurt 2000);
B)	Possibly the strongest is straightforward development: 11 ,£}f3 Ee8 !2.Ae2 £ig6 13.0-0, and White’s chances are somewhat preferable.
12.	Af1-d3
Seven years later Ljubojevic played 12.Ab4 in this position - see the following game.
12.	-.	£d7-c5
13.	£g1-e2	f7-f5
14.	0-0	f5-f4l?
14...	fxe4 would have led to equality: IS.Axe4 ^xe4 (15...Af5 16.AxfS Ы5 17.Ab4!±) 16.Wxe4c6 17,Ac3=.
15.	f2-f3	g7-g5
Black has gained good counterplay on the kingside. The position resembles a King’s Indian Defence, only with Black’s dark-squared bishop exchanged.
16.	£e2-c1	Ef8-f7
17.	£c1-b3	b7-b6l?
If 17...4ixd3 !8.Wxd3 cS there could have followed 19 ,&h1!, in order to counter the breakthrough 19 ...g4 with 20 .g3.
18.	Ad2-b4l
The exchange 18.£ixc5 bxcST is advanta-
geous to Black.		
18.	•••	g5-g4
19.	f3xg4	Ac8xg4
20.	Ef1-f2	Bf7-g7
21.	r-b3xc5	b6xc5
22.	Ab4-a3	£>e7-g6
Possibly it made sense for Black to first safeguard his queenside somewhat: 22..c6!? 23.Wb7 Ed8! (weaker is 23...Ef8 24.Wxa7 2>xd5 2S.Axc5 Wf6 26.Wa3±) 24.Wxa7 2)xd5 25.Wxc5 WxcS 26.AxcS £>e3= or 24.Wa6 4^6?*.
28
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxdS WfxdS 4.e3
23.	..	<cg6-h4
It is not easy to choose between two tempting moves, but 23...f3! was apparently stronger, retaining the possibility of leaping with the knight to f4. For example: 24.g3 (24>xc5 &f4T; 24.Axc5 Wd8 25.g3 2>f4 26.АП ПЬ8^) 24...£)f4 2S.Afl 4&e2+ 26.Axe2 (26.ФЫ £кЗ 27>b7 Йе8 28Jld3 Wg6«*) 26_.fxe2 27.Axc5 Wg6»
24.	^fb5xc5
If 24. ФЫ	Black was intending
24...	^xg2!?.
24.	..	Bd6-g6
25.	Wc5-c6?l
An understandable human decision: White wants to exchange the queens as soon as possible and safeguard himself against an attack. But the computer assures us that Black’s threats are not so terrible, and they can perfectly well be ignored: 2S.d6! Ae6 26-jSlfl (things must not be taken too far; bad is 26.dxc7 ^ixg2 27.ФЫ 21e3t) 26...cxd6 27.Wxd6 Жб 28.ПЫ fid7 29.ПЬ8+ ПхЬ8 30>xb8+ with advantage to White.
25.	-	'И'дбхсб
26.	d5xc6
26. - Ha8-e8l?
Black had numerous tempting possibilities:
A) 26...АВ 27.g3 Hd8 (27...fxg3 28.hxg3 Hxg3+ 29.&h2±) 28.Дс2!оо;
В) 26...Hd8 27.i.fl (27.&c2 Ah3 28.g3 fxg3 29.hxg3 Sxg3+ ЗО.ФЬ2 ПхаЗ-+) 27...AhS 28.ФЫ (28.Ab2 HgS 29.ФЫ Jke8 30.Del Axc6?) 28...£.e8 29.g3£g6?=t;
C) 26...Ah3l? 27.АП i.xg2 (27...ФП 28.g3!±) 28.&xg2 f3 29.Ed2 Sb8!?t; 29...fxg2 30.Ed7oo.
27.	£аЗ-Ь21 Пе8-е6
Or 27...M3 28.jLfl £xg2 29,Axg2 f3=.
28.	c4-c5 Se6-g6
29.	£Ь2хе5 4jh4-f3+
30.	3f2xf3
Of course, not 3O.gxf3? Axf3+ 31.ФГ1 Sgl mate.
30.	- £g4xf3
31.	.•d3-c4+ Фдв-fe
32.	£.e5xg7+
32 .g3! ? came into consideration.
32.	.	Xf8xg7
33.	Ac4-f1	Фд746!?
33...	Axg2 34.Axg2 f3 3S.Hdl would have led to equality.
34.	£g1-f2?l
White should have played 34.Eel «filxg2 (Black too should not get carried away: 34...Фе5 35.Ф12, and if 35...Axe4, then 36.^d3±) 35.£xg2 f3 36.flfl Hxg2+ 37.ФЫ withequality.
34.		Jt.f3xe4
35.	Sa1-d1	ji_e4xc6
36.	Sd1-d8	*f6-e5
37.	д2-дз	f4xg34-
38.	Ь2хдЗ	2g6-f6+
39.	&f2-e1	Sf6-e6
40.	Фе1-12	Ce6-e8
41.	Hd8-d2	3e8-f8+
42.	if2-e1	h7-h6l?
43.	Af1-g2	iic6xg2?
29
Chapter One - Section В
Black has a slight advantage after 43...Ef6! 44.Дхс6 Exc6 45.Eh2 d?d4 46.&d2 ФхсЗТ. Now, however, die game becomes completely level.
44.	Ed2xg2	&e5-d4
45.	Zg2-b2!=	c7-c6
46.	ПЬ2-Ь7	a7-a5
47.	Eb7-a7	Ef8-f3
48.	Ea7xa5	Sf3xg3
49.	Ea5-a4+	id4xc5
50.	Ea4-h4	
Draw.
GAME 5
□ Ljubomir Ljubojevic
 Alexander Morozevich
Roquebrune 2003 (blind)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	7b8-c6
3.	C4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	£ib1-c3	Jkf8-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	• Ь4хсЗ
7.	Ь2хсЗ	Ijg8-f6
8.	c3-c4	Wd5-d6
9.	d4-d5	z.c6-e7
10.	Wd1-b1	0-0
11.	e3-e4	Srf6-d7
12.	^d2-b4	4id7-c5
13.	£)g1-f3	b7-b6
14. Wb1-b2?l
White plays the opening very dubiously: instead of trying to complete his development as quickly as possible, he launches into complications against an opponent who is far better mobilized.
14.	..	f7-f5
Of course, Black does not w aste time on the defence of the eS-pawn, but aims to
open die position		
15.	Wb2xe5	£ic5-d3+!
16.	Af1xd3	^d6xb4+
17.	£)f3-d2	£)e7-g6
18.	We5-d4	c7-c5!
19.	d5xc6	
Another central file has to be opened, since 19.We3 loses to I9...f4 2O.We2 (2O.Wf3 2>e5 2l.We2 f3) 20...f3 21.gxf3 (2l .We3 &f4) 21...S)f4 22>fl Ah3 or 22.We3 £g2+.
19.	..	£g6-f4
20.	e4-e5
This allows a pretty stroke, but White’s position is also unenviable after 20.ji.c2
20.		^Ь4-Ь2!
21.	Wd4xf4	Wb2xa1 +
22.	id3-b1	Ef8-e8
23.	0-0	^a1xe5
24.	Wf4xe5	Ee8xe5
25.	£d2-f3	
25.£)b3 was more tenacious.
30
Quietly Reinforcing. 3.cxd.5 $fxd.S 4.e3
25.	-	Be5-c5
26.	Sf1-e1	ic8-a6
There was a quicker win by 26. Пхсб 27.He8+ *f7 28.flh8&f6.
27.	ЗДЗ-е5	g7-g6
28.	.&.Ы-С2	Ea8-e8
29.	f2-f4	4.a6xc4
30.	Se1*a1
30.		Se8xe5
31.	f4xe5	Дс5хс6
32.	ic2-a4	Ь6-Ь5
33.	Aa4-b3	ig8-f7
34.	Ha1-d1	Ф17-е6
35.	Ed1-d8	a7-a5
36.	3d8-e8+	Xe6-d5
37.	He8-b8	id5xe5
38.	.sg1 -f2	&e5-d4
39.	ДЬ8-Ь7	h7-h6
40.	ib3-d1	b5-b4
41.	Eb7-a7	2c6*c5
42.	fla7-d74-	&d4-c3
43.	3d7-d6	flc5-d5
White resigned.
GAME 6
□ Vlastimil Babula
 Lukas Klima
Karlovy Vary 2005
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	<?b8-c6
3.	e2-e3	e7-e5
4.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
5.	£>Ы-сЗ	kf8-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	£Ь4хсЗ
7.	Ь2хсЗ	C:g8-f6
8.	Wd1-b3	
As we have already mentioned, on general grounds the transition into the endgame should be advantageous to White. Practice confirms this rather abstract thought: 8...1^xb3 9.axb3 exd4 (9...Де6 10.b4 exd4 ll.cxd4 0-0 12Jkd3 Hfd8 13.£>e2 £e7	14.f3 c6 15.<£f2±
Kiselev-Tishin, Tula 2000) 10.cxd4 Jke6 (10...^e4 ll.AbS AdZ 12.-5ЯЗ f6 13.Фе2 4)xd2 14.&xd2 £e7 15.Ad3 0-0 16.3hcl c6 17.Ac4+ ФЬ8 18.b4± Burmakin-Lindemann, Bad Wiessee 2003) 11 .Jkc4 0-0 12.£e2 flfe8 13.f3a6 14.ФГ2 Had8 15.ПЬс1± (Milov-Van Onzen, Zwolle 2003).
9. £d2-c1
A thematic move: White activates his bishop and simultaneously prevents Black from castling kingside. Other continuations create fewer problems, for example:
A) 9.£e2 0-0 10.£g3 (lO.Acl Пе8 И.АаЗ Wd7 12.Hdl exd4 13.cxd4 b6 14.4^g3 ДЬ7+ Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001) 10...b6 (1О...Пе8 11 Jke2 Ь6 12.0-0 Ab7 13 Hfe 1 (13. Af3
31
Chapter One - Section В
^Ja5 14.Wdl J*.xf3 15.Wxf3 Sad8 16.Sad 1 We6? lorenzo-Morozevich. ICC 2002) 13...Sad8 14.M1 h5 15.h3 g6 16.Sadi h4 17.2)e2 2)a5 18.Wb4oo Riazantsev-Benefactor, ICC 2004) I l.Ae2 £b7 12.0-0 Sad8 13.Sadl Sfe8 14.JLcl<» (Riazantsev-Benefactor. ICC 2004);
B) 9.Ab5 0-0 10.2)f3 e4 (10. Леб 11 .Wc2 e4 12 Лхсб Wxc6 13.£>eS Wa6 14x4 bS!? IS.cxbS WxbS 16.a4 Wa6 17.Wc6 Wxc6 18.#Jxc6 Ac4 19ЛЬ4 Sfe8 20.Scl± PenguinTail-Morozevich, ICC 1999) И Лхсб Ьхсб 12.$>5 Jka6 13x4 cS 14ЛсЗ Sab8 15.Wa4 cxd4 16.exd4	e3!?	17.fxe3	£>e4®
(PenguinTail-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
C) 9.£d3 0 0 10.2>e2 b6 11.h3 (11.0-0 Se8 12.£ig3 £b7 13.Sadl Sad8 14.B exd4 15.cxd4 #Jxd4! 16.exd4 Wxd4+ 17.ФЫ Wxd3—I- el-roedor-Morozevich, ICC 1999) U...Se8 12.0-0 Ab7 13.a4 4ia5 14.Wb4 cS IS.Wbl Bad8T (Tankist-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
D) 9.4)f3 0-0 10Ле2 e4 11.2>gl aS 12x4 a4 13.Wc2 Se8 14.3Ы Ьбоо (Kotofey 8-Zhurov. ICC 2000).
9.	4c8-e6
The exchange 9...exd4 proves justified in the event of 10.Jgla3 WeS 11.0-0-0 (evidently it would be better now for White to moderate his ambitions - 11 .^Jf3 WaS 12.4Jxd4 Ad7oo) U...&e4 (11..Леб 12.Wxb74~) 12.ЗДЗ WaS 13.&xd4 Wxc3+ 14.Wxc3 £ixc3 15.Sd2 (&xd4 16.Sxd4 ДебТ.
However, White can simply capture the pawn with 10.cxd4. In reply to the check 10...Wb4+ he blocks with his bishop -1 l.Ad2 We7 12ЛЬ5!? with the better chances (only, not blunder - 12Лс4? #Jxd4! 13.JeLxf7+ Wxf7 14.exd4 Wxb3
15.axb3 0-0 16.f3 .й.ебТ Smallville-BARS. ICC 2002). Also after 10.. Леб 11ЛаЗ Jiitxb3 12.^xd6 cxd6 13.axb3 Фе7 (13...0-0 14.£d3 $Jb4 15.<£d2±) 14.^d3 &b4 15.&d2 £jg4 16.£h3 2>xd3 17.ФхИЗ fS 18.f3 2if6 19.Shcl White has the advantage (Sinallville-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
10.	£с1-аЗ ^.ебхЬЗ
11.	жаЗхбб
11.	..	c7xd6
12.	a2xb3	e5xd4
12...	0-0 13.Jii.d3 Sfc8 14 Ael a6 15.&d2 g6 16.f3 h5 17.b4 £d5 18.Shbl± (Hoang Thanh Trang-Botsari, Istanbul 2000).
13.	e3xd4 £f6-d5
13...	&e4 14.Scl dS 15.^.d3 £d6 16.4Je2 0-0 17.0-0 bS 18.4Jf4 b4 19.4Jxd5 bxc3 20.Hxc3 £lxd4 21.Hdl± (Selin Tishin.Tula 2002).
14.	&e1*d2	0-0
15.	Af1-c4	£d5-c7
16.	£sg1-e2	d6-d5
17.	Ac4-d3	^c7-e6?l
17..	.aS!? is better, intending ...Efd8 and ...bS!? with counterplay on the queenside.
18.	Sa1-a3± Sa8-c8
19.	b3-b4	a7-a6
20.	Hh1-b1 ^e6-c7
32
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 tifxdS 4.e3
21.	b4-b5	a6xb5
22.	£d3xb5 g7-g5?l
An unforced weakening. Practically any sensible move (for example 22...flcb8!?) was better.
23.	£b5-d3	Йс8-Ь8
24.	Йа3-Ь3	£>с6-а5
25.	ПЬЗ-Ь6	Hf8-e8
26.	?№2-дЗ	Йе8*е6
27.	2>g3-f5	Eb8-d8
28.	ЗД5-еЗ	йеб-сб
29.	?e3-f5	Зсб-еб
30.	ЙЬ6-Ь4	
30.	«.	g5-g4?l
The pawn makes a second and final step tow'ards its doom.
31.	ЙЬ4-Ь6	h7-h5
32.	4if5-g3	fld8-d6
33.	Hb6xd6	3e6xd6
34.	£>g3xh5	fld6-h6
35.	£h5-f4	Sh6xh2
36.	£d3-f5	Фд8-д7
37.	Ad2-e2	Sh2-h6
38.	Jkf5xg4	Hh6-c6
39.	ie2-d3	b7-b6
40.	Jkg4-f3	3c6-d6
41.	92-g3	b6-b5
42.	£f4xd5	4uc7-e6
43.	ЙЬ1хЬ5	a5*c6
44.	£d5-e3	£x:6xd4
45.	c3xd4	Ild6xd4+
46. £d3-c3	2d4-a4
47. if3-d5
Black resigned.
A Closer Look
Let us return to the position after White’s 11 th move in the Babula-Klima game
Black has the possibility of an interesting pawn sacrifice: 11 .£a4l?
Here is a brief analysis of this continuation:
12Jkxc7
White is promised little by 12.dxe5 ^dS! 13.c4cxd6 14.cxd5 Фхе5 <»or 12.Jkxe5 £jxeS 13.dxe5 #3e4®.
12...exd413.cxd4£b4 14.ИЫ
In the event of 14.flcl Black easily equalizes: 14...#k2+ 15.Фе2 Йс8 16Jkf4Ab5+ 17.ФГЗ Ac6+.
14...£c24- 15.Фе2
Bad is 15.&d2?2ie4+-+.
15..ЛС8
15...0-0 is too slow: 16.йхЬ7 Hfc8 17.Ae5	18.2ih3 AbS+ 19.flxb5
4k3+ 20.&f3+-.
16J_e5
Or 16.ПхЬ7 Асб 17.ДЬ2 (17.Пха7 AbS+ 18.*d2 Axfl = ) 17...flxc7 18.flxc2Jkf3+ 19.&xf3 flxc2=.
16...la317.Sxb7*b5+
33
Chapter One - Section В
17...flc2+ 18.Фаз &g4 19.Ji.g3 0-0 2O.f3 Hfc8 2l.£)e2 is also possible. only not 21...Дха2 22.£te3 Jelc2+ 23.&d2 Ae4+ 24.^xa2 Hc2+ 25.Фе1 Axb7 26.#)b4±.
18Zxb5 £xb5 19.Af3 $£3 2O.£a6 Дсб 21Ае2 Дхаб 22АхсЗ Ф47 23.d5 Sc8oo
GAME 7
□ Andrey Rychagov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-сб
3.	e2-e3	e7-e5
4.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	Jkf8-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	Jib4xc3
7.	Ь2хсЗ	£g8-f6
he can play ...b7-b6 and ...Ac8-b7, and on the long diagonal the bishop will not feel so badly placed.
a _ o-o
The main thing for Black is not to scurry about, but to calmly continue the development of his pieces.
A) 8...e4?! 9.Wb3 Wd6 (9...Wf5 lO.WbS We6 11.4ЛЗ 0-0 12.£f2 Ad7 13>b3 ^e7 14Jke2 exf3 15.gxf3 b6 16.12g 1 2>a5 17.Wb4 We6 18.e4± Avrukh-Sune Berg Hansen, Bled 2002) lO.Wbl! AfS H.£te2 Ag6 (11...0-0-0 12.£g3 We6 13.£xf5 WxfS 14.Ae2 Wg6 15.0-0±) 12,Wb3 0-0 13.&f4 4Ja5?! (I3...b6!?) 14.Wb4 £k6 15.Wxd6 cxd6 16.h4!± (Smirin-Vallejo Pons, Leon 2001);
B) 8...Wd6 9.Ad3 0-0 10.^e2 Де8 11.0-0 b6 12.^c2 Ae6 13.fladl 12ad8 14.ФЫ h6 15.a4 Ad7 16.e4 exd4 17.Af4 WcS 18.cxd4 &xd4 19.WxcS bxcS 20.4ixd4 cxd4 21 ,Axc7± (Van der Sterren-Piket, Amsterdam 1999).
I A	X
AAA	AAA
4	4
Compared with die aggressive 8.c4 or 8.Wb3, this is a more solid move. White wants to reduce the opponent’s counterplay to the minimum and, under the cover of his powerful pawn barrier, quiedy complete his development. Now Black’s light-squared bishop effectively has no squares on the c8-h3 diagonal. But
9.	Af1-d3
Later we will examine 9.£te2, 9.Ф(1!? and 9 .e4.
9.	...	e5xd4
The bishop is not loo securely placed on d3, and Black can exploit this factor. In reply to practically any quiet developing move, White will bring out his knight to
34
Quietly Reinforcing: З.схЗЗ Жх<15 4.еЗ
е2 and then casde, when he can face the future with confidence. For example:
A) 9...He8 10.£e2 e4 (10...b6 11.0-0 Ab7 12.a4 Had8 13.e4 Wd6 14.d5 ^e7 15.c4 £>g6 16.Wb3 £jh5 17..«K '• hi t 18.£ixf4 £ixf4 19.c5± Ives-BARS, ICC 2002) H.fxe4^xe4 12.2)f4Wd6 13.0-0 AfS 14.Ael Had8 IS.flbl Ь6 16.ДЬ5± (A. Rychagov-Barsky, Moscow 2001);
B) 9...b6 10.£e2 .&b7 11.0-0 Had8 12.c4Wd6 13.d5 2fc7 14.4k3 c6 15.e4 &g6 16.Ae3 2)f4 17Wd2 &xd3 18.Wxd3 £ih5 19.Hfdl £f4 20.Wd2± (sol-BARS,ICC 2002);
10.	c3xd4 £c6xd4!
For die piece Black gains two pawns, but the main thing is that the white king remains in the centre for a long time Again, 10...fie8 ll.£}e2± is obviously worse; White calmly completes his mobilization.
11.	e3xd4 Wd5xd4®
12.	Ad3-e2
The bishop is forced to occupy the square for which the king’s knight was destined. However, in the event of 12.Jl.c2 He8+ 13.£e2 Black has 13...^g4! 14.Ilf 1 Дхе2 + 15.Фхе2 AfS 16.fxg4 2e8 + 17.ФГЗ Axg4+ 18.£>g3 Axdl 19.Saxdl, and in view of the cheerless position of the white king, the queen and three pawns wdl be superior to the rook and two bishops.
12. .- Jtc8-f5
13. Ad2-g5
13.ЙС1 Sad8 14.Ji.c3?? Wh4+ 0-1 FlyingPiket-Morozevich, ICC 1999;
13.g4 Ag6 14.2Й13 Sfe8 15.^f4 (Con-tora-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 15...Jtc2’t.
13. _	^d4-e5
I 3...Wc3+ is also not bad, for example: 14.&fl Had8 ISWcl WeS I6.Af4#e6 17 ^e3 Wd7 ®18.^b3? Wd4 0-1 (ga han-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
14. Фе1-Г1
White should not hurry with the exchange of his dark-squared bishop: 14.Jl.xf6?’ Wxf6 15.Пс1? flad8 16.Wb3 WgS. The double attack on the rook and the g2-pawn decides the outcome. 17.0c5 Wxg2 18.Hxf5 Wxhl 19.flg5 Wxh2 20.Wc3 Wh4+, and White re-
signed (Krush-Morozevich, ICC 1999).		
14.		Za8-d8
15.	Wd1-c1	Zf8-e8
16.	g2-g4	J.f5-g6
17.	h2-h4	h7-h5
18.	Jlg5xf6	We5xf6
19.	g4-g5	Wf6-d4
20.	Hh1-h2	Hd8-d6
21.	Wc1-e1	Zd6-e6
22.	2a1-d1	^d4-a4

Black still has only two pawns for the piece, and there are no immediate combinations that work. But this is a very diffi-
35
Chapter One - Section В
cult position for White to play: his forces are uncoordinated and his king is weak.
23.	We1-d2	2e6-d6
24.	Wd2-c1	2d6-c6
25.	Wc1-d2	fi_g6-f5
26.	2d1-c1	Zc6-d6
27.	Wd2-b2	Wa4-f4
28.	Jfi.e2-c4?	
The decisive oversight In the event of 2 8.2g 2 2b6 Black retains the initiative, but there is still all to play for.
2&		Zd6-c6
29.	Wb2-c3	Wf4xh2
30.	Wc3-b3	Jfif5-e6
31.	2c1-e1	fi.e6xc4+
White resigned.
GAME 8
□ Anatoly Karpov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-с6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2*e3	e7-e5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	Jfif8-b4
6.	.fi.c1-d2	jfib4xc3
7.	Ь2хсЗ	<2jg8-f6
8.	f2-f3	0-0
9.	£>g1-e2	
This accurate developing move was employed several times in blitz games in 2001 and 2002 by Anatoly Karpov.
9.	-	e5xd4
After this exchange Black no longer has to fear the idea of e3-e4 and d4-d5. However, other plans are also perfectly possible, for example:
A) 9...2e8 10.ФГ2 (10.e4 21xe4!? 1 l.fxe4 Wxe4 12.d5!? WxdS 1 3.£ig3 e4 14.-fi.e3 WaS 15.Wc2 21e5oo) 10...b6 (10...jfif5 11.4}g3 exd4 12.cxd4 2ad8 13.Wb3 Wd7 14.Wb2 hS 15.h4 Ag6 16.Ab5 a6 17.jfi.xc6 bxc6 18.2acl± Dydyshko-Kolesnik, Minsk 2004) 11 Wa4 Jfi.d7 12.Wb3 Wd6 13.Wb2 £a5 14.£g3 c5 15.jfi.e2 2ac8 16.2acl hS 17.h4 g6 18.jfi.a6 2cd8 19.e4 bS 20..fi.xb5 2b8 21.a4 a6 22.c4 (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2002) 22...&С6 23.dxc5 Wxc5+ 24.Jfi.e3?;
B) 9...e4 10.2f4 Wg5 ll.We2 2e8 12.h4 Wh6 13.0-0-0 2b8 14.Wb5 £>d7 15.fxe4 Sxe4 16.Jfi.d3 Де8 17.e4 a6 18.Wg5 Wd6 19.e5 $Jdxe5 20.dxe5 2xeS® (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001);
C) 9...Wd6 10.&f2 Se8 H.Wb3 b6 12.Wb2 £Ja5 13.2lg3 c5 14.2dl Ae6 15.jfiLb5 2ed8<p* (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001).
10.	c3xd4 2f8-e8
11.	&e1-f2
1 l.e4 £jxe4 12.fxe4 Wxe4t is extremely dangerous for White
11.	..	Wd5-d6
In reply to ll...b6 Karpov’s suggestion 12.Wb3! is very strong (but not 12.^Jf4?! Wd6 13.Jfi.c3 Jfi.b7 14..fi.e2 ДхеЗ! 15.ФхеЗ Пе8+ 16.ФП Wxf4+ Vlasov-Barsky, Moscow 2001), for example: 12...Wd6 13.Wb2Jfi.b7 14.^g3±.
36
Quietly Reinforcing 3.cxd5 UGfxdS 4.e3
12.	h2-h3
Karpov also tried other moves in this position, but they did not bring him particulardividends:
A) 12.'ЙЫ aS 13.g3 Наб 14.a3 a4 15.Wc2JS.d7 16.jS.g2^a5 17.jS.b4#e6 18.e4^b3 19.Hadi ^dS! 20.jS.el jS.b5l (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001);
B)	12.Wc2 &b4 13.Wbl cS 14.jS.xb4 cxb4 15.e4 Wb6 16.Wb2 aS 17.g3 a4 18.jS.g2 a3 19.Wd2 jS.e6 2O.Hhbl Ha4 21.g4 jS.c4 22.gS £}dS! 23.JS.fl Wc7 24.£ig3 4ЬсЗ 2S.Hxb4 Hxb4 26.Wxc3 Hb2+ 27.ФеЗ bS—+ (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001);
C)	12.g3,andnow:
Cl) 12...&b4	13.JS.xb4 Wxb4
14.Wcl b6 1 5.2)f4 jS_b7 16.jS.g2 Had8 17.a3 Wd6 18.Hdl gS 19.£jd3 h6 2O.Ha2? (2O.^e5 cS 21 ,&gl cxd4 22.exd4?*) 20...£>g4+! (for an instant the rook on a2 is hanging, and Black immediately exploits this factor. It is possible, however, that, instead of the spectacular knight leap, the simple 20...g4!? is even stronger, with the same idea - to weaken the a8-h 1 diagonal. For example: 21.41f4 (21.fxg4 -*.xg2 22.&xg2 Wd5 + ) 21...JS.xf3 22.JS.xf3 gxf3 23.<£xf3 c5+) 21.fxg4 at.xg2 22.Hc2 (Karpov-Morozevich
(blitz), Moscow 2001), and here Black could have won most simply by 22...jS.a8 23.ФП WdS 24.НГ2 cS-4-;
C2) 12...b6 13.Ji.g2 Ji.a6 14.Hel Had8 15 Wa4 jSjce2 16.Hxe2 bS! 17.Wa6 (17.Wxb5? 2ixd4 18.exd4 Wxd4+ 19.Jil.e3 Wxal—1-), and here instead of 17...£)d5?! far stronger was 17...Hb8! 18.jS.cl £>d5 19Wa3b4t.
12.	_	b7-b6
13.	Wd1-a4	ic8-d7
14.	Ha1*c1	a7-a5
15.	Wa4-c4
In the event of 15.e4?! $Jb4 16.Wb3 Black has a very tempting positional rook sacrifice: 16...Hxe4!? 17.fxe4 <$Jxe4+ 18.Фе1 jS.b5. It is not clear how, without great loss of material. White can complete his kingside development.
15.	Ha8-c8
16.	e3-e4
Of course, the inclusion of the moves !5.Wc4 Hac8 was to White's advantage, but here too he should not have been in a hurry to advance in the centre. 16.#Jf4!? was more circumspect, maintaining the distance between his own and the oppo nent s pieces.
16. _.	£>f6xe44-
Black decides to restrict himself to the sacrifice of a minor piece, although here
37
Chapter One - Section В
too after 16...Дхе4!? 17.fxe4 Фхе4+ 18.Фе 1 £}xd2 19.Фх<12 £}b4® he would have had excellent compensation for the rook.
17.	f3xe4	Se8xe4
18.	Ad2-c3	^d7-e6
19.	Hfc4-d3	i_e6-d5
20.	h3-h4	Sc8-e8
21.	JXh1-h3	h7-h5
The combination starting with 21...Hxe2+? did not work: 22.Axe2 Wf4+ 23.Af3 Axf3 24>xf3 Wxcl 2S.Wxc6±, but it was also possible to improve his position in a different way: 21...&b4!? 22.-fi.xb4 axb4 23.&gl Axa2 24.Wc2 We6 2S.^xc7 Bxe2 26.Axe2 ^xe2T.
22.	si>f2-g1	g7-g6
23.	jfic3-d2	vc6-b4
24.	jfid2xb4	a5xb4
25.	Wd3-d2	c7-c6
26.	Sc1-c2	Йе4-д4
27.	*S)e2-c1	Se8-e4
28.	£c1-d3?l	Se4xd4
29.	Wd2-f2	c6-c5
GAME 9
□ Anatoly Karpov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2002 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4ib8-c6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	&Ы-СЗ	jfif8-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	£Ь4хсЗ
7.	Ь2хсЗ	5g8-f 6
8.	f2-f3	0-0
Black has an overwhelming advantage. There followed: 30.Se2 c4 31.&O5 2gf4 32.<f 3 Ed1 33.Ue8+ Фд7 34.We2 Sa1 35>e3 c3 36.2»5 BfxfU-
And White resigned.
What is the subtle point of this move compared with 9.4}e2 ? Now in the event of 9...exd4 10.cxd4 He8 White can first prepare the development of his fl-bishop to c4 or bS, and only then play £)e2 and complete the development of his kingside: 11 Wb3 Wd6 12.Hcl (caution is always called for:
12.Ac4?	£>xd4!	13.Axf7+ &f8)
12...aS 13.AbS±.		
9.		Ь7-Ь6
10.	^g1-e2	Bd5-d6
11.	£e2-g3	fi.c8-e6
12.	^d1-a4	~a8-d8
13.	Af1-b5	5 >c6-a5
14.	2h1-d1	c7-c5
15.	fi.d2-e1	^d6-c7
38
Quietly Ranforcing:3.cx<15 UifxdS 4.e3
15...e4!? came into consideration, for example: 16.c4 (16.fxe4 &}g4+ 17.Ф§1 £ixe3 18.fld3 ^)ac4?±, or 16.d5 Ac8 17.C4 a6 18.Ac6 £xc6 19.Wxc6oo) 16...exf3 17.gxf3cxd4 18.3xd4 Wc73=±.
16. Да1-с1?!
16.e4 exd4 17.cxd4 cxd4 1 8.Hxd4 Hxd4 19.^xd4= was better.
16. .. Ae6-d7?I
The diagram position also occurred in another game from the same blitz match: 16..Л16?! 17.e4 Ad7 18.Axd7 £xd7 19.£fS &h7 2O.Ad2± (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2002).
On both occasions Black missed an excellent opportunity to seize the initiative: 16...a6! 17J$Le2 (17 .Ахаб? Па8 18.Ad3 2ib3+) 17...Б5 18.Wa3 £c4T.
17.	d4xc5	JLd7xb5
18.	Wa4xb5	3d8-b8
19.	c3-c4±	£ja5-c6
20.	Sc1-b1	<>c6-e7
21.	Де1-Ь4	Zf8-c8
22.	Wb5-a6	h7-h5
23.	c5-c6	4te7xc6
24.	Ab4-d6	Wc7-b7
25.	Wa6-b5	Sb8-a8
26.	5g3-f5	g7-g6
27.	Jkd6xe5	a7-a6
28.	Wb5-b2	£f6-e8
29.	£>f5-d6	£je8xd6
30.	Sd1xd6 ^Ь7-е7
31.	Ae5-f4 b6-b5
32.	c4-c5
And White won.
GAME 10
□ Jeroen Piket
 Alexander Morozevich
Wijk aan Zee 2001
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£b8-c6
3.	C4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	&Ы-СЗ	if8-b4
6.	Jkc1-d2	.ib4xc3
7.	Ь2хсЗ	tig8-f6
8.	f2-f3	0-0
9.	e3-e4	Wd5-d6
In this situation the sacrifice on e4 does not give Black anything: 9...#ixe4 10.fxe4Wxe4+ 11 We2 WdS 12.Wf3±. The move 9...Wd8 will be considered later.
10. d4*d5
It is best to eliminate the tension in the centre immediately, since otherwise Black will again acquire the possibility of a piece sacrifice on e4, and the position may become very sharp. For example:
39
Chapter One - Section В
10.jS.e3 exd4 (10...Hd8 1 l.dS $Ja5 12.c4 £Jxc4! 13.Joi.xc4 Wb4+ 14.Wd2 Wxc4 15.Пс! ^аб 16.Пхс7^е8 17.flc2 4Jd6 18.j3.c5 fS** Berdichesky-RGfenacht, corr. 2001; 10...4Ja5 1 l.J»ld3 c5 12.£ie2 2>c6 13.d5 <£aS 14.c4 b6 15.0-0 We7 16.Jil.d2 4Jb7 17.£k3± Popov-Dubinsky, Smolensk 1997) ll.cxd4 fle8 12.^d2?! (12.&e2 $Jxe4 13.fxe4 Bxe4«) 12...jSlf5! ool3.jS.e2 Jkxe4! 14.fxe4 £lxe4 15.Wb2 4jg3 16.hxg3 ДхеЗ 17.0-0-0	2>b4t
(Gagunashvili-Souleidis, Rethymnon 2003).
10.	._	&c6-e7
11.	c3-c4
11.	-	<2tf6-h5
An aggressive plan in the spirit of the King’s Indian Defence. Black is ready to block the queenside by ...c7-c5 (after which the powerful protected passed d5-pawn will guarantee White the advantage in practically any ending) and to pin his hopes on an offensive on the right halfof the board.
The set-up where the knight at f6 is transferred to the blockading square cS looks more flexible: 11...4kl7 l2.<$Je2 (White directs his knight to c3, aiming at the b5-square. Another route looks less successful: 12.ЗД13 4kS (12...f5 13.4JF2
4Jc5 14.Jii.b4 b6 l5.Ji.e2 fxe4 16.£Jxe4
2ki3+	17.Ji.xd3 Wxb4+ 18.Ш2
^xd2+ 19.&xd2 Jkf5 20.Hhel Sad8±) 13.jS.e2?! (13.^f2oo is better) 13...JiLxh3 14.gxh3 f5 15.^c2 fxe4 16.fxe4 £)g6T
Giorgi-Morozevich, ICC 1999)
8 A Bi
12...	#Jc5 (in serious events and on the Internet other plans have also been tried: 12...b6 13.4k3 a6 14.JS.e2 4kS 15.0-0 fS 16.jS.e3 £ig6 (16...JS.d7 17.a4 4Jg6 18.a5 £jf4 19.axb6 cxb6 20.Bbl± Dautov-Miladinovic, Yerevan 1996) 17.Bel 2>f4 18.jS.fl fxe4 19.4ixe4 4ixe4 2O.fxe4 Wg6 21.Wc2 jS.d7a± (Korotylev-Tishin, St Petersburg 2001); 12...f5 13.£te3 a6 (13. Wg6t) 14.J4Ld3 (14.j3i.e2 2>c5 15.0-0 4Jg6 16.exf5 jS.xf5 17.jS.e3 Bae8 18.ФЫ 4jf4? Haba-Rabiega, playchess.com 2004) 14...#JcS 15.JS1.c2c6 16.0-0 b5^ KingLoek-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 13.4Jc3 f5 14.Jil.e3 fxe4 15.jS.xc5!? (for the sake of the central outpost at e4 for his knight, White does not begrudge parting with his dark-squared bishop. Less promising is 15.4Jxe4 4Jxe4 16.fxe4 Wb4+! (16...Wg6 17.Wc2±) 17 Wd2 (better is 17.Jil.d2 Wc5«^) 17...Hxfl+ 18.J5xfl Wxc4 I9.<X’f2 Wxe4T) 15...Wxc5 16.4Jxe4 We3 + 1 7 We2 £jf5 (it would be interesting to
40
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 SfxdS 4.e3
test 17. Wa3!?)	18.Wxe3 &xe3
19.Фё2± (Contora-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
But let us return to the Piket-Morozevich
game.
12.	Wd1-b3 C7-C5
13.	£g1-e2 f7-f5
14.	£>е2-сЗ	b7-b6
!4...Wg6!? is stronger, hindering the de velopment of White’s fl-bishop. There can follow: 15.0-0-0 b6 (it is unfavourable for Black to block the kingside: 15...f4 16 Wb2 Ь6 17.4jbS Wf6 18.ДсЗ &g6 19.d6 JLd7 20.4k7 5ad8 21 .£dS Wxd6 22.Oxf4 Wxdl+ 23.&xdl Aa4+ 24.Фе1 5dl + 25.ФГ2 4^hxf4 26.5g 1±) 16.exf5 Ы5 17>bl <?3d6 18.Wxg6 hxg6 19.£bS £bcbS 2O.cxb5 a6 21.d6 JLe6 22.bxa6 c4 with chances for both sides.
15.	£f1-d3	£e7-g6
15...	2>f4	16.Axf4	(16.0-0 2ixd3
17.21b5±; 16.4ibS!?) 16...exf4 17.0-0 We5 does not work on account of 18.Hfel!±, and the bishop on d3 is poisoned: 18...Wd4+? 19.ФЫ Wxd3? 20.5adl+—.
16.	д2-дЗ
With this modest move White simultaneously restricts both of the opponent’s knights.
16.	-	^d6-e7
Possibly the lesser evil was 16...f4l? 17.g4 2>h4 18.Ae2 4tf6 19.0-0 Ad7±, trying to erect a blockade on the dark squares.
17.	e4xf5!	£c8xf5
18.	6d3xf5	5f8xf5
19.	'c3-e4	£h5-f6
20.	£d2-g5	We7-f8
21.	jig5xf6	g7xf6
22. 0-0-0
The white knight has stationed itself in the centre, whereas the black rook on fS resembles a fishing boat cast up on the beach by the tide: it desperately wants to return to the sea, but die ’breakwaters’ on eS and f6 prevent this...
From the human point of view queenside castling is an almost ideal solution to the position, but the computer with its absolute vision of the geometry of the chess board suggests another way: 22.d6!?. White’s idea is fully justified in the event of 2 2...5115 23.Wdl! (eyeing both of the opponent’s rooks!) 23...5d8 (23...f5 24.f4!?±) 24.f4 5h6 25.f5 £h8 26.Wd2 4if7 27 .0-0-0±, and one cannot look at the black pieces without wanting to cry (the fate of the rook at h6 is especially tragic). But with the accurate move 22...5d8! Black can avoid all these sufferings, and after 23.0-0 5115 24.Wdl 5h6 2S.Wd5 + $g7 26.5adli he still has defensive resources.
22.	..	5f5-h5
23.	h2-h4	5h5-h6
24.	h4-h5
White did not need to hurry with the win of material. Thus 24.We3!? f5 25.4ig5± or 24.d6!? 5d8 25.Wd3± looks quite good.
24.	_	£>g6-e7
25.	дЗ-д4	f6-f5
41
Chapter One - Section В
26.	g4-g5
After 26.gxf5?! £bcf5± the black pieces would have become active.
The knight has occupied an excellent blockading square, and Black can catch his breath a little.
26.	.„	f5xe4
27.	g5xh6	Wf8-f4+
28.	Фс1-Ы	e4xf3
31. Sh1-g1+ ig8-h8
29. Wb3-d3?
White has won the exchange for a pawn, and in addition the king on g8 is very vulnerable. But thanks to his connected passed pawns, Black has acquired counterchances. In time-trouble Piket was unable to adjust to the suddenly sharpened situation; he lost the thread of the game, and even went on to lose. Meanwhile, White had a clear-cut way to win: 29.Bhgl + (the king must be driven into die corner, after which the eS-pawn will be immobilized, since almost any check by the queen on the long diagonal will be fatal for Black) 29...ФЬ8 (forced, since 29...Ф(В makes things easier for White: 3O.]Idfl f2 31.Wg3 We4+ 32.&b2 Wd4+ ЗЗ.ФЬЗ+-) 3O.Sgfl! Sf8 (3O...e4? 3l.^c3+; 3O...We4+ 3l Wc2 Wxc2+ 32.Фхс2 £f5 33.flxf3 2>d4+ 34.Bxd4 cxd4 35.Ш7+-) 3l.d6 2>c6 32.d7 &g8 33.Wd3 £kl4 34Exf3! Wxf3 35.Wxf3 ®xf3 36.d8W+-.
29. ...	4\e7-f5
30. Sd1-e1	£T5-d6
Another important achievement: Black has, as it were, released the noose from around the neck of his king.
33.	2g7-d7
Most probably Black also saves himself after 33.He7!? WxhS 34.Ee6 WfS 35,WxfS £xf5 Зб.ВбхеБ £d6?±
33.	-	2a8-f8
34.	Wd3-c3?1
Through inertia White continues playing for a win, not noticing that the position has radically changed: Black has largely safeguarded his king and has brought up all his reserves. A draw by perpetual check would have resulted from 34.Bfl e4 35.^c3+ Wf6 36.^xf6+ Hxf6 37.Hgl h6 38.Bd8+ &h7 39.Hd7+ £>h8 (or 39...*?3f7 4О.Пе7 Bf4 41.Фс2=) 4O.Bd8+=.
34.	_ Wh6-f6
35.	h5-h6?
This now loses. In the event of 3 5.ФЬ2 f2 36.ЙЛ b5!+ Black also has the advantage, but it is still possible to resist.
35.	...	f3-f2
36.	fie1-f1	Wf6-f5+
42
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxdS WxdS 4.e3
37.	ФЬ1-а1 4d6-e4
37...	#Jxc4! 38 Hxa7 We4—I- was more accurate
3a Wc3-d3	Wf5xd7
39. Wd3xe4	Wd7-f5
40. Sf1xf2
4O.Wxf5 SxfS 41.d6 Hf7—I- would not have saved White either.
40. .. Wf5xf2
White resigned.
10. _ 2sf6xe4
GAME 11
□ Alexey Korotylev
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	€^b8-c6
3.
c4xd5
Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	Af8-b4
6.	JS.c1-d2	xb4xc3
7.	Ь2хсЗ	4g8-f6
10. d4-d5
1O.jS.e3 exd4 1 1 ,cxd4 Де8 12.£>e2 jLfS!?
13.#Jg3 jS.xe4 14.fxe4 ^xe4 15.4Jxe4 Дхе4 16.Wd2 Wh4+ (16...Wxd4 17.Wxd4£Jxd4 18.0-0-0±) 17.g3 WgS 18.&f2 Wf6+oo.
11. f3xe4
It is this knight that should be captured. In the event of Il.dxc6 Wh4+ 12.g3 (12.Фе2 Wf2+ 13.*d3 £xd2 14.«Jh3 jS_f5 mate. Only-human-BARS, ICC 2002) 12...4Jxg3 13.hxg3 Wxhl Black has an attack with equal material:
A) 14.&Г2 bxc6 15.jS.g2 WhS 16.£)e2 (I6.f4 &g4 17.&ГЗ e4 18.Will Wxhl 19.flxhl JS.xf3 2O.jSacf3 exft 21.ФхВ ДаЬ8-+ energie-BARS, ICC 2002) 16...jS.e6 17.jS.e3 Sfd8 18.Wa4 ДаЬ8 I9/Wxc6 h6 20.Sei Sb2t (Riazantsev-BARS, ICC 2002);
B) 14.JS.e3 bxc6
Bl) 15.Wa4 Деб 16.Wxc6 (16.ДЫ Vulfson-Morozevich, Moscow 2002 16...Sfb8! 17.Sxb8+ Sxb8 18.Wxc6 ДЫ+ 19.&d2 g6+) 16...Sfd8 17.c4h5 18.We4 Sab8® 19.Wxe5? Se8-+ 20.Wc3 (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001), and here 2O...jS.xc4! would have won most simply;
B2) 15.jS.c5 Деб 16.We2 (16.^xf8? Wxgl 17..fi.a3 Ac4-4-) 16...Sfd8 17.&f2 Wh6 18.Wxe5 (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz) Moscow 2001), and here the most clear-cut way to win was 18...Wh2+ 19.&g2 Ah3! 20.4Jxh3 Ed2+ 21.ФеЗ Wxg2 22.£if4 Wf2+
43
Chapter One - Section В
23.Фе4 B+ 24.ФхГ5 (24>xf5 He8+) 24...Wxf3-+.
11. -	^d8-h4+
12. Фе1-е2
The only move. 12.g3 is bad: 12...Wxe4+ 13.ФГ2 Wxhl 14.Ag2 Wxh2 15.dxc6 bxc6+.
12.	-.	>ИЪ4хе4+
Alas, it is not possible to mate the king straight away: 12...b6 13.dxc6 Да6+ 14.ФГЗ Wf6+ 15.&g3+-.
13.	JLd2-e3?l
The position is very sharp, and it is hard to draw any final conclusions, yet 13.ФГ2 seems to be stronger, for example: 13...^xdS 14.ДеЗ ^aS (14..>e6!? 15.^f3e4 16.Ski4Wf6+ 17.&gl 4jeS?±) 15.4tf3 (15>b3 e4«) 15...e4 16.4Я4 17.&b3 Wxc3 18.Ad4 ^g4+ 19.£>g 1 Wc6 20.3c 1 Bg6 21 ,3xc7oo.
13.	...	£ic6-e7
14.	^d1-d3
In die event of 14.ФГ2 4ixdS Black also has a dangerous initiative: 15.'Bfd3 (weaker is IS.'S'fS 4)xc3!	16.Wxe4 4}xe4++)
15...4if6!? 16.JLg5 ^c6 (I6...&g4+ 17.&g3 Wc6 18.h3	19.ФЬ2«>)
17JLxf6 Wxf6+ 18.4tf3 £fS 19.We3 e4 20.4id4 Ag6+ 21 .&g 1 3ad8 etc.
14. -	We4-g4+
15. ie2-f2
It is hardly possible to escape to the queenside: 15 .S^?d2 Hd8 16.c4c6t.
15.	...	e5-e4
After 1 S...4jf5?! it is simpler for White to stabilize the position: 16.4^e2 e4 17 .Wd2 2>xe3 18.Wxe3 WfS+ 19.*gl 'g'xdS 20.4tf4 Wc6 21.3dl±.
16.	Wd3-d2
16Wd4 is worse: l6...Wf5+ 17.’S?g3 4ixd5+.
16.	-.	Wg4-f5+
17.	&f2-e1	4ie7xd5
18.	Af1-c4	3f8-d8
Black also has other tempting ways of developing his initiative, for example: 18...4jb6!? 19.Ab3 Деб, or 18...4^xe3 19.Wxe3 Деб 2О.Де2 (2O.JLxe6 Wxe6 21.4te25=9 2O.,.Wg6i=*.
19.	£g1-e2	Дс8-е6
20.	£>e2-d4	Wf5-g6
21.	£d4xe6	f7xe6!?
To the detriment of	his pawn structure
Black supports his knight on dS and opens another file.
22.	Ae3-d4?
It is always dangerous to remove die blockade on a passed pawn. 22.fldl Sd6?i was correct.
1	4
к к
к
4
IS Л Л к
22.	..	e4-e3
A natural decision, and one that is highly unpleasant for White, but 22...C5! was
44
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 fifxdS 4x3
even stronger. True, after 23.Af2 (23.JLxc5 Eac8 24.#f2 e3—1-) in a blitz game it was hardly realistic to expect the pretty geometrical combination 23...£)b6 24.We2 Bf6! 25.Bel еЗ! 26.Axe3 #h4+ 27.g3 #xc4—I- to be found.
23.	Wd2-e2?!
More tenacious was 23.Wb2 c5 24.Axc5 We4 25.Ad4 eS 26.Wxb7 exd4 27.Axd5+ Wxd5 28.#xd5 + BxdS 29.cxd4 Bxd4 ЗО.Фе2 Bd2+ 31-ФхеЗ Hxg2+.
23.	..	/d5-f4
24.	We2-f3	Bd8-f8?
The invasion of the queen into the enemy position would have quickly concluded the batde: 24...Wc2! 25Jbe3 (25.Wxf4 Wd2+ 26.ФП e2+ 17. Axel Wxf4+) 25...^xg2+ 26.ФЛ Bf8 27.Jlxe6+ ФЬ8 28.Af7 Bxf7 29.#xf7 ФхеЗ+ ЗО.Фе!
Bd8—+.
25.	g2-g3	< f4-d5?l
Here too 25... Wc 2! wa s very strong.
26.	Wf3-d1	Wg6-e4
27.	Bh1-g1	Ba8-d8
Better was 27...cS 28.JLxd5 WxdS 29.Axe3 We5 ЗО.Фе2 We4®.
2& Wd1-d3
After 28.Ad3! № 29.#xf3 Bxf3 3O.Bfl± the advantage would have passed to White
28.	We4-f3
29.	Wd3-e2 Wf3-f2+??
A blunder in a double-edged position.
30.	We2xf2	e3xf2+
31.	£d4xf2	£d5xc3
32.	Ba1-c1	£ic3-e4
33.	Af2-e3	Фд8-Ъ8
34.	Фе1-е2	c7-c6
35.	£e3xa7	^e4-d6
36.	ic4-b3	e6-e5
37.	Eg1-d1	^d6-b5
38. Bd1xd8 Hf8xd8
39. 4a7-e3
And White won.
GAME 12
□ Dimitrios Anagnostopoulos
 Igor Mi lad i no vic
Karditsa 1996
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	Qib8-c6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	AfB-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	Ab4xc3
7.	Ь2хсЗ	£ig8-f6
a £g1-f3
This simple development of the knight leaves Black with a wide choice of comfortable continuations.
8.	._	0-0
In the same spirit of free development. But Black can also immediately focus his attention on die knight on f3:
A)	8...Ag4!? 9.Л.е2 e4 10.21g 1 Axel ll.£}xe2 0-0 12.0-0 2a 5 13.2f4 We6 14.#c2 2с4** (Machelett-Brynell, Germany Bundesliga 1999/00);
B)	8...e4 9.2g 1 0-0 10.2e2 &g4 ll.h3 AfS 12.g4 Ac8 I3.2f4 Wd6
45
Chapter One - Section В
14.jS.g2 He8 15.0-0 4Ja5?± (Altajskij-FERARI, ICC 2003).
9.	Wd1-c2
White can also prevent the ...jS.c8-g4 pin by playing 9.h3!?.
To obtain equal play Black must display a certain degree of accuracy:
A) 9...^e4 !0Wb3 Wd6 (10...Wxb3 ll.axb3 exd4 12.cxd4 £jxd2 13.&xd2 aS 14.ФсЗ 4Jb4=) llAbS (ll.Acl Аебоо) 1 l...£Ja5 12.Wa4 b6 13.£xe5 4Jxd2 14li>xd2 c5±;
В) 9...Пе8 10.jS.e2 e4 (IO..>d6 11.0-0±) ll.£jh2 Wg5 12.4Jg4 $Jd7 13.h4^g6 14.h5±;
C) 9...b6!? 10.jS.e2 jS.b7 11.0-0 Sfe8 12.3Ы 5ad8 (12.,.^xa2 13.c4 exd4 14.exd4«) 13x4 (13.Hb5 Wd6 14.dxe5 4Jxe5T) 13...Wd6 14.d5 e4 (14...£e7 15.Ji.b4 cS 16.JS.c3 4Jg6 17.£d2±) 15.4Jd4 (15.dxc6 exf3 I6.cxb7 fxe2 17,Wxe2 Wxd2 18Bxd2 3xd2-4-) 15...£Jxd4 (15...^e5 16.Ac3±) 16.exd4 c6 17.dxc6 J*Lxc6 (17...'Srxd4!? I8.cxb7 Wxd2 19.c5 1Йгха2<х>) 18.jS.e3 with chances for both sides.
9.	~	i.c8-g4
This move cannot be delayed any further, since in the event of 9...Se8 10.c4 Wd6 ll.dxeS £Jxe5 12.4Jxe5 ’fefxeS 13.jS.c3 ^g5 14.h4! (14.jS.d3 jS.g4! 15.^xf6O
Wxf6 16.0-0 g6= Razuvaev-Morozevich, Rome 1995) 14...flxe3+ 15.fxe3 Wxe3+ 16.Де2 4Je4 17.Wd3 Wf2+ 18,&dl ДВ 19. JSe I White has an obvious advantage.
10.	c3-c4
Or 10.JS.e2 e4 with an unclear position.
10. ..	Wd5-d6
11. d4xe5	£sc6xe5
12. ^f3xe5	Wd6xe5
13. Дсй-сЗ	We5-g5
14. Ji.f1-d3	Za8-d8
15. jS.c3xf6	Wg5xf6
16. 0-0	g7-g6=
The chances are equal, and it is not easy for either side to improve their position.
17.	jS.d3-e4	c7-c6
18.	h2-h3	i.g4-c8
19.	Za1-d1	Zd8-e8
20.	Zd1-d4	Ze8-e5
21.	Hf1-d1	Sf8-e8
22.	3d4-d6	Uff6-h4
23.	^e4-f3	jS.c8-f5
24.	Wc2-b2	Wh4-e7
25.	Wb2-a3	a7-a6
26.	Hfa3-b2	^e7-c7
27.	3d1-d2	Af5-c8
28.	Wb2-d4	Wc7-e7
29.	Wd4-f4	Ze5-e6
30.	c4-c5	Ze6-e5
31.	Wf4-d4	^c8-f5
32.	Фд1-Ь2	h7-h5
33.	^fd4-b4	h5-h4
46
Quietly Reinforcing. 3.cxd5 UffxdS 4.e3
34. Sd2-d4
35. Af3-g4
36. Ed4xg4
jSf5-c8 жс8хд4 Де5-е4
Draw.
GAME 13
□ Yury Yakovich
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow Region 2000 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£b8-c6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	£>Ь1-сЗ	Jlf8-b4
6.	J.c1-d2	£Ь4хсЗ
7.	Ь2хсЗ	&g8-f6
8.	<£g1-e2	
As we have seen, on f3 the knight is exposed to a pin as well as the tempo-gaining thrust ...e5-e4, and so White decides to bring it into play via a quieter route. But in so doing he loses a tempo.
& .. Wd5-d6
8...0-0 is also good, for example: 9.c4 Wd6 (9. >xc4? 10.&f4+-) 10.d5 4)e7 H .Wb3 aS 12ЛкЗ сб 13.e4b5 14.cxb5 cxdS IS.exdS ^exdS 16.4bxd5 <?Jxd5 17.fldl Ag4 18.f3Jl.e6** (Kozul-Fercec, Ljubljana 2004). However, the move in the game is more cunning: in anticipa
tion of £)e2-g3 Black prepares a ‘warm welcome' for the knight, and for the moment he keeps his king in the centre.
9.	41e2-g3 h7-h5!?
The point of Blacks idea. The advance of die rooks pawn will weaken the opponent’s kingside castled position, while his own king can hide on the queenside.
10.	Af1-d3 h5-h4
11.	£>g3-e4
The character of the play is not fundamentally changed by 11.41fS JLxfS 12. JLxfS g6, for example: 13.Ad3 (13.jSi.h3 Фе4 14>c2 £xd2 15.Wxd2 fS 16.g3 0-0-0 17.0-0-0 £a5 18-Jlfl hxg3 19.fxg3 cST Evseev-Morozevich (blitz), Crimea 2001) 13...h3 14.g3 WdS IS.Ogl 0-0-0** (Evseev-Morozevich (blitz), Crimea 2001).
11.	- &f6xe4
12.	id3xe4 f7-f5
13.	Je4-c2
The drawbacks of die bishop’s position on d3 are demonstrated by the following blitz game: 13.ii.d3 h3 14.g3 WdS 15.f3 Jld7 16.0-0 0-0-0 17.ПЫ? exd4 18.cxd4 £lxd4! 19.JLc3
attractive decoy combination: 19...Aa4!
2O.Wxa4 &xf3+	21.Exf3 Wxf3
22.JLxf5 + WxfS—h. But now it is White’s turn to carry out a combination) 2O.JLe4! Wxdl 2lJtxb7+ ФЬ8
47
Chapter One - Section В
22.Hfxdl IXhe8 23.ПБ4 aS 24.ПБ2 Фа7 25.Hdbl ПЬ8 26.Дха5 21d8 27.Ad5 fixb2 28.йхЬ2 JSLc6 29.J«Lxc6 4Jxc6 30.Ji.xc7 and Black resigned (Evseev-Morozevich (blitz),Crimea 2001).
13.		Лс8-е6
14.	Лс2-Ь3	0-0-0
15.	Wd1-c2	Фс8-Ь8
16.	h2-h3	£jc6-a5
17.	0-0	£ia5-c4
18.	Sa1-d1	e5-e4
19.	f2-f3	Леб-dS
20. 21.	f3xe4 Wc2-c1	£d5xe4
ply no one to look after the white king.
Jke4xg2l
21. -
22. Jlb3xc4 vg2xh3
23. Ad2-e1
White resigned.
Wd6-g6+
GAME 14
□ Veselin Topalov
 Alexander Morozevich
Frankfurt 1999
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4jb8-c6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	jif8-b4
6. Ac1-d2 ib4xc3
7. Ad2xc3
As we have seen, when he plays 7.bxc3 White relies on the power of his pawn centre, which may be able to gradually advance and sweep away everything in its path. But, as practice has shown, it is not so easy to transform potential into kinetic energy. The capture on c3 with the bishop pursues quite different aims: White wants, by contrast, to clear the centre immediately and exploit the power of his bishops (one of which is already comfortably deployed on the long diagonal) in an open game. Black’s trumps remain the same: a slight lead in development and the active position of his queen in the centre.
7. ._	e5xd4
It is not possible to block the centre: after 7...e4 8.£e2 £f6 9.£f4 Wd6 lO.dS 4Je5 11 Wd4± White develops strong pressure. Therefore for a long time the move in the game seemed to be the only one, but then Black found a curious alternative, or even two For the sake of rapid development he can sacrifice his e5-pawn by 7...4>ge7!? 8.dxe5 Леб 9.£f3 (9.a3 0-0-0 10.£ft; 9.WxdS 4JxdS; 9.Wa4!?) 9...0-0-0 (9...^xdl+!? lO.fixdl Jilxa2) 10.^a4 Wc5 11 Wb5± or 7...Леб!? 8.dxe5 0-0-0 9.Wxd5 £xdS. Black will almost certainly
48
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 W'xd 5 4.e3
regain the pawn, and the only question is at the cost of what positional concessions. Those who like new ideas and independent analytical work may like to study more carefully the variations arising here.
8. £g1-e2!
Of course, 8.exd4, shutting in the bishop and remaining with an isolated pawn, is unfavourable for White. Exploiting the hanging position of the queen on d5, White intends to capture on d4 with his knight. In the event of 8.ЗДЗ there is the unpleasant reply 8...J»Lg4, and therefore the knight chooses a different route
8.	-	<с8-д4
Nevertheless a pin! The aggressive 8...Jlh3 encounters a refutation: 9.4ixd4! Axg2 lO.^bS (Ю.&хсб Wxc6 1 l.jfixg7 jSlxhl 12.ДхЬ8 f6 13.Scl± isalsogood) 10...Wxdl+ (10...0-0-0? H>g4+4—) 1 l.Dxdl jLxhl 12..fi.xg7±. The variation 8...Ae6 9.&xd4 0-0-0 Ю.^хеб Wxe6 ll.Wb3± does not inspire great optimism in Black, but, of course, it is possible to defend this position.
8...	£>f6 will be analysed later.
9.	1243
The immediate capture 9,^jcd4 does not create any particular difficulties for Black: 9....fi.xe2 10.Axe2 £lxd4 1 1,4^xd4 Wxd4 12.exd4 0-0-0. True, in the stem
game Black overestimated his chances and after 13.0-0-0 £>e7?! 14.Hhel Феб IS.dS &e5 16.f4 £g6!? 17.JLg4+ ФЬ8 18.f5 4)f8? (18...£)f4 19..fi.f3 She8 20.flxe8 Пхе8 21.&d2 He5!) 19.Se7± he got into difficulties (Bareev-Moro-zevich, Moscow 1999).
13...	&f6 was correct, followed by
9.	0-0-0
White has a slight but enduring advantage after 9...Аеб 10.4)xd4 4bcd4 ll.Wxd4 ^xd4 12..fi.xd4 f6 13.ФГ2 £>e7 14.Ae2 ФГ7 IS.Bhcl c6 16.b4± (Atalik-Miladinovic, Athens 1996) or 9...WgS 10.41xd4 JLd7 11.4ixc6 Дхсб 12>d4	13.0-0-0± (Woef-
wackyraces, ICC 2004).
Initially the sacrifice 9..Jkxf3 10.gxf3 Wxf3 brought Black some successes, but then White figured out what to do.
49
Chapter One - Section В
White has a rook and a bishop en prise, but on closer examination it becomes evident that the black rook on h8 is also in danger. White can take on d4 with his bishop or knight, and both captures leave him with the advantage:
A) 11.4Jxd4 Wxhl 12.4Jxc6 4Jf6 (12...bxc6 13.£xg7 Wxh2 14.Wg4 Hd8 IS.Edl Exdl +	16.&xdl Wd6+
17.Wd44— Baburin-Cobb, Scarborough 1999) and now:
Al) 13.4te5 0-014.Wf3 Wxf3 (Black is forced to go into a difficult endgame, since otherwise he quickly comes under attack: 14...Wxh2 15.0-0-0 Had8 16.Ad3 WhS 17.Wg2 Wh6 18.4Jc4 Exd3 (18...b5 19.ЕЫ Wxhl+ 20.Wxhl Exd3 21Jkxf6 gxf6 22.4Ja34—) 19.Bxd3±) 15.4Jxf3 4Jd5 16.Ad4 Efe8 17.ФГ2 b6 18.jSi.b5 Деб 19.flgl flg6 2O.Hxg6 hxg6 21.Ja.c4 Sd8 22.4Je5 fld6 23.e4 Ef6 + 24.4JF3 Exf3+ 25.&xf3 4te7 26.Jii.eS 1-0 (Ehlvest-Mertanen, Jyvaskyla 1998);
A2) 13.4ia5 Wxh2 14.Wa4+ c6 IS.0-0 0 Wc7 16.Wb4 (or 16.Д113 bS 17.Wh4 Ed8 18.Eg 1 We7 19.£.d4 c5 20.4k6 Exd4 21.Wg3 Дс4+ 22.&dl 1-0 Stiazhkina-Dushinok, St Petersburg 2002) 16...4Jd5 17.Hxd5cxdS 18.Ab5+ <£d8 19.4Jxb7+ Фс8 20.4Jd6+ ФЬ8 21.Даб+ Wb6 22.4Jc4 1-0 (Averkin-Batikiants, Krasnodar 1998);
B) ll.jfii.xd4 4ixd4 (both 11...0-0-0 12.Bgl±and 11...Wxhl 12.Jii.xg7 Wxh2 13.Wa4! (13.Jkxh8 Wh4+ 14.<£>d2 0-0-0+»)	13... 0-0-0	14.Axh8 f6
15.Wg4+ ФЬ8 16.Ed 1 ± are cheerless for Black) 12.Wxd4 Wxhl 13.Wxg7 0-0-0 (13...Wxh2? 14.0-0-0! Ed8 15.Exd8+ Фх68 16.Wxh8 1-0 Heine-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 14.Wxh8 Wxh2 15.Wg7 Wh4+ 16.Wg3 Wb4+ 17.<X-f2 4/6
18.jSlh34-! (the most accurate — the bishop is switched to fS, where it will restrict the jumps of the knight from f6. 18.Wf4 allows the opponent more chances of creating chaos on the board, for example: 18...Wxb2 19.Eel Ed6 2O.JeLg2 ФЬ8 21.Wc4 c6 22.Wf4 WeS 23 WxeS 4Jg4+	24.'S>g3 ^JxeS**
(Sweere-ArtofAttack, ICC 2003) or 18...4Je4+ 19.^gl Wxb2 20.Ecl 4Jd6 21.a4 Eg8+ 22.^f2 Eg6«^ (Heine-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 18...ФЬ8 19.JkfS Wxb2 20.Ecl Wb6 21.Wf3 Be8 22.a4 aS 23.Ebl Wa6 24.4Jd4 Фа8 25.Ad3 4Jg4+ 2 6. Фе 2-I— (Shipov-Zablotsky, chessassistantclub.com 2004).
10.	4ie2xd4
10.	..	£g8-f6l?
Black nevertheless gives up a piece, in return for completing his development and trying to sharpen the situation to the maximum. This measure is largely forced.
50
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 18fxd5 4.e3
since after other continuations White gains an advantage with far less expenditure of energy.
Thus in reply to 10...J«Lh5 White has the unpleasant 11 Wb3! will) the advantage in all variations, for example: ll...<?Jxd4 12.Wxd5	£c2+	13.&d2 Hxd5+
14.Фхс2±; IL.WeS 12.£ixc6! or ll...Wxb3 12.axb3±. The attack with ll.-.^gS is also easily parried: 12.4Jxc6 Wxe3+ 13jSte2 bxc6 14.jS.xg 7 Wd2+ 15.&fl4—.
In the event of 10...jS.e6 ll.<$Jxc6 (ll.Wa4 $Jge7 12.£ixc6 $Jxc6 13JS.b5 WcS 14.&f2 Ad7 15.Hhcl± Shtyren-kov-Tishin, Alushta 2001) ll...Wxc6 12.^cl f6 (12...4Jf6 13.jS.e2 Hhe8 14.e4 Wb6 15 Wg5±) 13.e4 Wb6 (13...2>e7 14.We3±) 14.b4^e7 15.a4± it is now Black who comes under attack.
Also unconvincing is 10..jS.f5 ll.Wa4 4Jge7 12.e4 jS.xe4 13.£Jxc6 ^Jxc6 14.fxe4 Hhe8 15.&f2 Wc5+ 16.&f3 £>d4+	17.JS.xd4 Wh5+ 18.g4+-
(Breier-Tripolsky, Santanyi 2004).
11. Wd1*a4
A practical decision: White is not in a hurry to capture the piece on offer, but first brings out his queen to an active position and prepares quick ways of evacuating his king from the centre. Generally speaking, here White has a wide choice
of sensible continuations, and in most cases with accurate play he will gain an advantage.
Perhaps the least danger for Black is presented by the variation ll.Wd2 Hhe8 12.0-0-0 'Bfxa2 13.fxg4 *?Jxg4®. We will examine the moves 11 Wb3, 11 ,jS.e2 and 11 fxg4 in more detail:
A) 1 l.Wb3 £xd4 (IL .WgS 12.£xc6 Wxe3+ 13.jS.e2 Hhe8 14.JS.e5! Wd2+ 15.*fl+-) 12_&xd4 (12.Wxd5 4k2+ 13.&d2 &xd5 14.Фхс2 2>xe3+ 15.ФЬЗ jS.e6+ 16.ФаЗ Sk2+ 0-1 Ziko36-BARS, ICC 2002) 12...JiLxf3 13.gxf3 (13JS.C4 Wa5+ 14.jSx3 Wg5 15.^xf6 (15.gxf3 Wxe3+ 16JS.e2 Hhe8 17.Wc2 $Jd5-+) 15...'Sfxg2 16.Jii.xd8 Sxd8 0-1 gahan-Morozevich, ICC 1999)	13...Wxf3
14_&xf6 Hhe8 15.jS.g5 5d5? (15...h6 16.Hgl hxg5 17.Hg3±) 16.jSh3+! ФЬ8 17 ZLfl We4 18.kf4 Hd3 19.jS.g2 1-0 (Heine-Morozcvich, ICC 1999);
B) ll.jS.e2 Hhe8 12.Wd2 (12>cl jS.d7 13.0-0 WcS 14.ФЫ $Jd5 15.£>xc6 JS.xc6T (bani-Morozevich, ICC 1999); 12.4Jxc6 Wxc6 13.Wcl Jilh5 14.0-0 Wb6 15.jS.c4 йхеЗТ EasyToGuess-Moro-zevich, ICC 1999) 12...jS.h5 (12..Wg5 13.h4! We5 14.0-0-0±) 13.0-0 Wg5 14.Hadi! &xd4 15.jS.xd4 *b8 (15...4Jd5 16.Wa5!±) 16.b4Hd6±;
C) 11 .fxg4 Hhe8
51
Chapter One - Section В
The situation has become tense in the extreme Here any general considerations fade into the background, and accurate play is required move by move. White can come unstuck very quickly:
Cl) 12&d2? WgS 13.Фс2 2>xg4 14.ФЬЗ ФхеЗ 15.Wd3 Wd5+ 0 1 (PenguinTail-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
C2) 12.^xc6 ЕхеЗ+ 13.ФП (13.Ae2 Wxc6 14.Wc2 Wxg2—l- GodGusti-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 13...^xdl 14.flxdl 4ixg4+ IS.^gl Exdl 16.h3 Exc3 17.bxc3 £)еЗ 18.ФГ2 (18.21xa7+ ФЬ8 19.2>c6+ Ьхсб 2О.ФГ2 2>xfl 21.ELxfl Sd2+ 22.ФеЗ Sxa2+ bani-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 18...Hxfl + 19.Hxfl ftrfl 20.&xa7+ФЬ8 21.£)c6+ Ьхсб 22.ФхЛ ФЬ7 23.Фе2 ФЬб 24.<±>d3 ФЬ5 25.Ф<И Фа4 26.Фс5 ФаЗ 27.Фхс6 Фха2 28.с4 ФЬЗ 29.с5 Фс4—I- (Heine-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
СЗ) 12.£}f5 leads to an unclear position: 12...*c5 13.We2 (13.W3 $3d5 14.&f2g6?) 13...^d5 14.^d2oo;
C4) In reply to 12.Ф12 Black had prepared the pretty stroke 12...ПхеЗ!!. However, it is sufficient only for a draw: 13.ФхеЗ (13.h3 We4!T) 13..>e5+! 14.ФГ2	(14.*X’d2 &xd4 15 Ad3
Wf4++) 14...^xd4 15.h3 (15Jkxd4 Exd4 16.'UM ^xg4+ 17^gl Edl—4; 15.&d3 Wf4+ 16/£gl ^еЗ+ 17.ФП Wf4+=; IS.Wcl &xg4+	16.&gl
Wc5=) 1 S...WcS 16.^g3^e4+ 17.Ф112 We5+ 18^gl WcS= (Nietsia-Goldmund, ICC 1999);
C5) White has a slight advantage in the variation 1 2.Wf3 £lxd4 13.Wxd5 Exd5 (13...4bc2+ 14. Фа 2 £>xal 15.Wd3 2)e4+ 16.ФС1+-) 14.0-0-0 £k6 15.Axf6 Exdl+ 16.&xdl gxf6 17.Ad3 h6 (17...Eh8 18.ДП 2>e5 19.АЫ Фd8
2O.Exf6 £>xg4 21.Пх17 £)хеЗ+ 22.Фе2 Пе8 23.ДхЬ7±) 18.ПП &e5 19.Фе2± (Bunzmann-Wisnewski, Heringsdorf
for example: 12...^xd4 13.Axd4 Wa5 + 14.Ac3 Wb6 15.JLxf6 Wxf6 16.Edl Exdl+ 17.^xdl4— Hobuss-Eschmann, Basel 2001, or 12...&e5	13.h3
(13.0-0-0?! Stexg4 14.6k2? Wxdl + IS.Wxdl flxdl+ 16.&xdl	&f2+
17 .Фе 1 &xh 1T Nietsia-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 13...2»e4 14.Wc2±.
Let us return to the Topalov-Morozevich
11.	-	^d5-g5
In the event of 11 ...£>xd4 12.J^xd4 JiLxf3 13.gxf3 Wxf3 14.Egl £)g4 15.flxg4 Wxg4 16.1H'xa7± White launches an of
52
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 I^xd5 4.e3
fensive, and in the centre his king feels completely safe.
If ll...flhe8, then 12.Фхс6! is very unpleasant, for example: 12..ЛхеЗ + (12...Jlxf3 13.^xd8 ПхеЗ+ 14.*f2) 13.Ф12 flxf3 + 14.^?gl WgS (14...We6 15.h3 We3+ 16.ФЬ2 Axh3 17.gxf3!+-or 16...Ad7 17.&ха7+ФЬ8 18.Wd4+-) 15.h3±.
12.	£d4xc6
The strongest; after other continuations Black succeeds in advantageously sharpening the position:
А) 12.ФГ2 Hhe8 13.Sei &xd4 14.Axd4 Jlxf3 15,gxf3 Wh4+ 16.<4’g2 (16.Фе2 Hxd4 17.Ji.h3 + Wxh3 18.Wxd4 Wg2+ 0-1 FitzliButzli-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 16...flxd4 17.Wxd4 Wxd4 18.exd4 flxel 19.Jl.c4 Пе7 0-1 (Can-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
В) 12.f4 WcS 13 .JtbS &xd4 14.&xd4 Hxd4 15.exd4	'Й'е7+*± (Krush-
Morozevich, ICC 1999);
C) 12.0-0-0 Wxe3+ 13.ФЫ Ad7 (13...^xd4 14.Jtxd4 JLfS+ 15.Фа1 flxd4 16.'Sfxd4 Wxd4 17.flxd4 Де8± Krush-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 14.Jlb5 ^ixd4 (weaker is 14...£kl5 15.Axc6! (lS.£}xc6 £}xc3+ 16.bxc3 JifS+’l; 16...Ji.xc6 17.Ji.xc6 Wb6+ 18.Фа1 Wxc6 19.Wxc6 Ьхсб 2О.ФЬ2 fld6T Krush-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 15...Axc6 (15...£ixc3+ 16.bxc3 Л.хс6 17.Wxa74—) 16.Wxa7±) 15.Axd7+ &xd7 16.Jl.xd4 2ib6 17.Jlxb6 Wxb6 18>g4+ We6 19>xg7 Wf5+ 2О.Фа1=.
12.	..	Wg5xe3+
13.	Af1-e2	Hh8-e8
14.	£c6-e5?1
White should have retreated a different piece - 14.^c2 Ьхсб 15.fxg4 £k!5 (15...^e4 16.flfl &d2 17.flf2 &e4
18.ДП ^gl+ 19.flfl+-) 16.g3 Пеб 17.flfl±.
14.	JLg4-f5
15. fla1-d1 Sd8xd1 +
16. Wa4xd1 Ce8xe5
Here Black could have gained some advantage after 17...JLc2! 18.^d2 Wxd2+ 19.*X*xd2 fldS 2О.ФсЗ Jlg6T.
18. 19.	JLd4xe5 0-0?	Wf4xe5
Now the position		i becomes equal.
19.Wd2	Jle6 20.a3	£d5 21.0-0
22.flf2^g5 23.ФЫ		± was correct.
19.	M*	We5xb2
20.	Ae2-c4	JiLf5-e6
21.	Wd1-d3	Wb2-b6+
22.	ig1-h1	J.e6xc4
23.	Wd3xc4	Wb6-e6
24.	Wc4-b4	We6-d6
25.	Wb4xd6	c7xd6
26.	ФЫ-д1 =	
53
Chapter One - Section В
26.	•••	ic8-d7
27.	Фд1-Т2	2>f6-d5
28.	ФТ2-е2	£d5-f4+
29.	Фе2-Т2	b7-b5
30.	g2-g3	2sf4-d5
31.	£f2-e2	a7-a5
32.	ie2-d2	a5-a4
33.	a2-a3	£d5-b6
34.	£d2-c3	Ф67-С6
35.	ФсЗ-Ь4	£b6-d5+
36.	ФЬ4-а5	£d5-e3
37.	Hf1-c1 +	<£e3-c4+
за	Фа5-Ь4	d6-d5
39.	Hc1-d1	^:c4-e3
40.	5d1-c1 +	£>e3-c4
41.	f3-f4	d5-d4
42.	Bc1xc4+	b5xc4
43.	ФЬ4хс4	d4-d3
44.	<^c4xd3	Феб-dS
45.	id3-c3	Фd5-c5
46.	g3-g4	f7-f6
47.	f4-f5	h7-h5?
48.	g4xh5	Фс5^5
49.	ФсЗ-Ь4	Ф^5-е5
50.	ФЬ4ха4	Фе5х(5
51.	Фа4-Ь4	ФТ5-д4
52.	ФЬ4-сЗ	f6-f5
53.	<±*c3-d2	f5-f4
54.	&d2-e2	
Black resigned.
GAME 15
□ Dorian Rogozenko
 Alexander Morozevich
Istanbul 2000
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	^b8-c6
3.	c4xd5	Wd8xd5
4.	e2-e3	e7-e5
5.	ФЫ-сЗ	Af8-b4
6.	Ac1-d2	Ab4xc3
7.	Ad2xc3	e5xd4
a	£ig1-e2	£g8-f6
9.	£>e2xd4	0-0
Before beginning active play, Black must remove his king from the centre: 9...^e4?! lO.^bS Wxdl+ U.IIxdl 0-0 (11...4ixc3 12.£>xc7+ Фе7 13.bxc3±) 12.4}xc7 ^xc3 13.bxc3 Ag4 14.£ixa8 Axdl IS.^xdl Пха8 16.Ae2± (Costa-Baumhus, Gelsenkirchen 1991).
10. ^d4-b5
The most critical continuation: White tries to exploit the weakness of the c7 -pawn, which is awkward for Black to defend. Simple developing moves create significantly fewer difficulties for him:
A) 10>b3 &xd4 H.Axd4 Wd6 1 2.Hd 1 c5 13.Ac3 We7 14.Ac4 £k4 15.0-0 b6 16.AdS fib8 17.f3 4)xc3 18.^fxc3 Ab7 19.e4, draw (Dautov-Morozevich, Germany Bundesliga 2000/01);
B) 10.Ae2 2te4 (10...&xd4 ll.Axd4 Wxg2 12.АГЗ Wg6 13.We2 cS 14.AxcS He8oo; 10...Wxg2 11.AB Wg6 12.&XC6 bxc6 13.Wd4 WfS? 14.Axc6+— ПЬ8 IS.Sgl Ф118 16.0-0-0 Hb6 17.Wd8! WcS 18.Hg5! 1-0 Kishnev-Rabiega, Germany Bundesliga 2000/01) 1 1.4ixc6 Wxc6 12.Ad4Wg6 13.0-0 cS 14.Ae5?±;
54
Quietly Reinforcing 3.cd5 l$\d5 4.e3
C) 10.Wf3 £te4 П.Ахсб Wxc6 12.flcl (12.jLd3 #Jxc3 13.Wxc6 Ьхсб 14.bxc3 Hb8=) 12...Wa4! 13.ДЬ5=.
10.	_ Wd5-g5
11.	h2-h4
ll.Wf3 £kl5 12.h4 (12.J2.d2 a6) 12...Wf5?± leads to play with chances for both sides.
The immediate capture 11 .#Jxc7 j2.g4 12,Wb3 leads to very interesting positions which have not been heavily studied yet. 12.f3 is dangerous in view of 12...£ie4! 13.£Jxa8 Wh4+ 14.g3 £}xg3 15.hxg3 ^xg3+ 16.&d2 J2.xf3 with an attack.
rook from a8, and not one of them is completely clear.
A)	12...йаЬ8 (perhaps the least successful move Here the rook is very passively placed, and how many pawns Black is down, one or two, is largely unimportant. He can gain compensation only
thanks to the activity of his pieces, which will enable him to create threats to the white king, still stuck in its central residence) 13.Wb5 (not 13.j2.c4 #}e4 14.£ld5 bS IS.&xbS &e6+) 13..Wh6 14.j2.c4 $Je4 (14...flfc8 15.2>d5 £>e4 16.0-0±) 15.0-0 a6 16.Wb3 Wd6 17f3 4ixc3 18.fxg4 №xc7 19.^xc3 4JeS 20.Пас 1 flbc8 21 JtdS 'й'хсЗ 22.bxc3±. The two other continuations, 12...flad8 and 1 2...Пас8, look rather more logical: -
B)	12...flad8 13.Wxb7 (13.h3 Дс8 14.Wb5 Wg6 15.^xf6 gxf6 16.ЙС1 We4 17.J&C4 Wxg2 18.j2d5 Wg6 19.Фе2 &h8 20.nhgl Wh6** Flear-Miladinovic, Ano Liosia 1999)	13...WcS (13...fld6!?
14.Wb5 Wg6 15.13 Hc8 16.Wc5 4Jd7 17>c4 SteeS 18.j2.xe5 2>xe5 19.Wc3 #Jd3+ 2O.j2jcd3 flxd3 Atalik-Morozevich, Moscow 2002) 14.j2.b5 fld6 15.4кб Wd5 16.0-0 Дс8 17>c7 Wxb5 18>xd6 &e4 19>f4 &xc3 2O.bxc3 ,£xa6 21.flfdl Wc4 22>xc4 J2jcc4 23.134 (Van \Wly-Miladinovic, Groningen 1997);
С)	12...flac8!? has hardly ever occurred in practice. Below we give a brief analysis, which undoubtedly requires further theoretical and practical checking.
So, 13>xb7.
White is two pawns up, but his forces are scattered around the entire board. How should Black hunch his offensive?
55
Chapter One - Section В
Cl) 13...^d$?! 14.^xd$ (14.Wxc6 Пхс7 15>b5 Шс8 ®16.Ad2 We5 17.h3a6!t) 14...Wxd5 IS.WbSi;
C2) 13...&eS!? 14,h3 AhS IS.Bcl Bfd8 16.Ad4^e8®;
C3) 13...£W	14.h3	(14.Wb5!?)
14...AhS 15.&e6 (IS.'B'bS!?) 15...fxe6 16 Wxe7 Wd5 17.f3 Axf3 18.gxf3 Sf7 19.Wa3 Wxf3;
C4) 13...Ad7 14.^b5 Bb8 15_Axf6 Wxf6 16.Wxd7 Bfd8 17.Wg4 (17>xd8+? Hxd8 18.£k3 19.Bcl Wf5+) 17..Wxb2 18.Bdl Bxdl4-19,Wxdl Wb4+ 2O.Wd2 Wbl + 21.Wdl=;
CS) 13...Wc5 14.^a6^d6 (14...Wg5 15.Wb$±)
C51) 15.h3 AhS 16.Ac4^e5 17.Ab4 &d3+ 18.Axd3 Wxd3 19.g4 Be 2 2O.Wf3 Bd8 2l.gxhS (21.Ae7 £xg4!-+) 21...Bxb2 22.Bcl Ы1;
C52) 15.f3 Bfe8!? 16.fxg4 ПхеЗ-Ь 17.ФГ2 Псе8 18>c7 We6 19>f4 Пе4 20Wg3 ВеЗ 2l£k7 £ixg4+ 22.*gl WfS—+;
C53) IS.AbS!? ^e4	(15...Scd8
16.0-0) 16.0-0 £xc3 17.bxc3±.
The queen is less well placed at g6, since it will soon be attacked with gain of tempo by Ad3: 1 l..?B'g6 12.^xc7 Ag4 13.Ad3 Wh6 14.Wa4 3ad8 15.Ac2 Ac8 16.Edl Zd7 17.Exd7 Axd7 18.Wc4 £g4 19>e4 bS 20.a3 aS 21.^id5± (Cifuentes Parada Miladinovic, Dos Her-manas2000).
12.	Af1-e2
The moves 12.4ixc7 and 12.W13 will be considered separately.
12.	- Ef8-d8
13.	Wd1-c2
Play with chances for both sides results from !3.Wa4 £d$ l4.Zdl (14.0-0-0 Ae6 IS.Af3 Zac8oo) 14...Ae6 IS.hS a6 16.HxdS AxdS 17.4ixc7 Пас8 18.£xd5 SxdS 19.Af3 Sdd8?* (Peng Botsari, Istanbul 2000).
13.	£f6-d5
14.	Ea1-d1
It is not clear where the king will be more secure: in the centre or on the queenside After 14.0-0-0 Ae6 15.g4^db4 16.Axb4 £lxb4oo a very sharp position arises.
14.	Ac8-e6
15.	a2-a3
Let us return to the Rogozenko-Moro-zevich game.
lit
a ± w
 К2Ф BS
15.	Sd8-d7
The following sacrifice is interesting, although also rather risky: 1 S...£}xe3!? 16.fxe3 Wxe3 17.fid3 Zxd3 18.Wxd3
56
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 fifxdS 4.e3
Wcl + 19.Wdl Wf4®. The move in the game leads to quieter play with roughly equal chances.
16.	&b5-d4 ЗД5хсЗ
The time has come to exchange the opponent’s strong bishop. 16...£ixd4 17.Axd4± favours White.
17.	Wc2xc3 &c6xd4
18.	Bd1xd4 Ea8-d8
19.	Bd4xd7
White avoids the trap: 19.Wxc7? Bxd4 2O.exd4 Hc8 21.We5 Wcl + 22.jSl.dl Ab3 23.0-0 Axdl 24.Wei Wxb2 2S.Wxdl Wxa3-+.
19.	..	Bd8xd7
20.	Ae2-f3
20>b4 b6 21.0-0 cS 22.We4 Wf'6T or 2O.h5 WgS 21.h6 gxh6 22.g3 Wg6T favours Black. 20.g3 Wg6 21.0-0 was the simplest way of maintaining the balance.
20.	...	Ь7-Ь6
21.	g2-g3	Wh6-f6l?
After 21...CS 22.0-0 Wf6 23.Wxf6 gxf6 24.3d I it is time to agree a draw. With the move in the game Black begins a fight forthed2-square.
22.	Wc3xf6	g7xf6
23.	h4-h5	h7-h6
24.	Bh1-h4	c7-c5
Thanks to his extra pawn on the queenside, Black has a slight advantage. For the
moment his spoiled pawn structure on the kingside does not play any particular role.
25.	Af3-e2?!
Evidently White should have by force entered the rook endgame: 2S.Ag4!? BdS 26.Axe6 fxe6 27.<±>e2 &f7 28.e4 3d4 29.3g4=. With the bishops on, it is harder for him to defend.
25. ™	Аеб-ЬЗ
26. Bh4-f4	Фд8-д7
27. дЗ-д4	Bd7-d6
28. Bf4-e4	Xg7-f8
29. Be4-f4	a7-a5
30. Bf4-e4	
It is possible that White rejected 3O.Ac4 because of the attractive trick 30...Hdl+! 31.&e2 Bbl, breaking through to the b2-pawn. But let us continue the variation: 32.&d3 Axc4+ ЗЗ.Фхс4 3xb2 34J2xf6 &g7 35.Bf4=, and White is not in any danger of losing.
30.		Sd6-d8
31.	Be4-f4	ФГ8-е7
32.	Bf4-e4+	£e7-d6
33.	Ae2-d1	Ab3-e6
34.	Ad1-e2?
34.Sf4 Фе5 35.Ac2= was stronger. Now Black gets rid of one of his doubled
pawns.		
34.		f6-f5
35.	g4xf5	Ae6xf5
36.	Be4*f4	Фд6-е5
37.	Bf4-f3	Ь6-Ь5
The pawn majority begins advancing.
38. e3-e4?
This untimely ‘jab’ merely aggravates the situation. White should have gone onto the defensive with 38.Bf 4.
38. -	Af5-e6!
39. Bf3-c3
57
Chapter One - Section В
White also loses after 39..fi.xb5 jfig4
4O.Ed3 (otherwise male on dl) 4O...Sxd3 41.-fi.xd3 .fi.xh5 42.&d2
Ф14—-H		
39.		c5-c4
40.	f2-f3	&e5-f4
41.	ПсЗ-с2	Hd8-d4
42.	Jfi.e2-d1	Ь5-Ь4
43.	a3xb4	a5xb4
44.	Jfi.d1-e2	sfrf4-e3
45.	Sc2-c1	Ed4-d2!
46.	Jfie2xc4	Hd2-h2
47.	Ac4-f1	Eh2-h1
48.	Пс1-с2	Jfie6-h3
White resigned.
A Closer Look
Let us return to the position after 1 .d4 d5 2.c4 лсб 3.cxd5 Wxd5 4.e3 e5
5.£x3 -fib4 6 JLd2 jLxc3 7.jfixc3 exd4 8Л е2 £f6 9.«xd4 00 10Zrb5 Wg5 11.h4Wh6
A2) 13.-fi.e2 Had8 14.Wc2 -fi.xe2 IS.Wxe2 2*4 16.^Jb5 (16.2dl 4Jxc3 17.bxc3 flxdl+ 18.Wxdl Hd8t) 16...flfe8 17.Edl (17.0-0 a6 18.£id4 £jxc3 I9.bxc3 ^Jxd4 2O.cxd4 Sxd4?) 17...a6 18.Hxd8 (18.£d4 £g3!+) l8...Hxd8 19.^a3^xc3 20.bxc3 SteSt;
A3) 13.Wd6 Sad8 (13...Hac8 14..fijcf6 Wxf6 15.Wxf6gxf6 16.^d5+-) 14.Wg3 4Je7 — transposing into variation Bl (12.Wf3jfi.g4 13.Wg3 Sad8 14.£xc7);
A4) 13.Wd3 Ead8 (13...Eac8 14.£)dS £xd5 15.Wxd5±) 14.Wb5&e4 IS.^dS .fi.e6 16.Hdl a6 17.Wc4£)xc3 I8.bxc3 jfijcdS 19.Hxd5 bS 2O.We4 flxdS 21.Wxd5 Sd8 22.Wf5 Wd6 23.Wc2 ^e5®;
AS) 13.f3 £>e4! 14.^xa8 (14.^d$ 4jxc3 15.bxc3 Jfi.e6t) 14...4jg3 15.&f2 £}xhl+ (15...£ie4+=) le.'i’gl 4ig3 17.fxg4 Hxa8 18.Wf3 Wxh4 19.Ac4 Sf8 20.flel<»;
A6) 13.Wb3
and examine the logical, but almost untried moves 12.#Jxc7 (A) and !2.Wf3 (B).
A)	12.4Jxc7 Jfi.g4
Al) 13.Wa4 Йас8 (13...Ead8!? 14.fi.b5 fld7 I5.£a6 Ee8®) 14.&b5 Efe8 15.jSlc4 (15.£Jd4?l &e4 16.jfib5 £xf2 17.0-0 &e4+) 15. ПхеЗ + 16.ФЛ; 16.fxe3 Wxe3 + 17.ФЛ Wf4+=;
A61) 13...Пас8 14.Wxb7 £e4 15.jfi.bS (IS.^JdS We6 16.^f4 Wd6 17.Ae2 Axe2 18.4Jxe2 2>c5 19.Wb5 Hb8 20.Wc4&d3+21.d?fl $Jxb2) 1S...^xc3 16.bxc3 (16.jfi.xc6? Hb8 17.Wa6 ДЬб 18.WaS Wxc6 19.Wxc3 Wxg2-4-) 16...Wd6 (16...4Je7 17.Wxa7 Wd6 18.4)e8! WdS (18...Sfxe8 19.i.xe8
58
Quietly Reinforcing: 3.cxd5 tifxdS 4z3
Пхе8 2O.Wa4 Ad7 21. Ed 14—) 19.0-0 WxbS 2O.^d6+-; 16...^e5 17.a4 Efd8 18.^d5 ^d6 19.e4 ЕхсЗ 2O.^xc3+-) 17.Wxc6 Wxc6 18.JLxc6 Exc7 19.Ab5 Exc3 20.0-0±;
A62) 13...Bad8!?	14.>xb7	&e4
(14...Sd6 IS.&bS Ee6 16.£d4 Eb8oo) 15.Ji.b5 Wd6 16.0-0 2)xc3 17.bxc3 2>e5 18.Wxa7 We7 19.f4 (19.WaS Wxh4 2O.Wb4 Ed2») 19...^d3 2O.Axd3 Exd3®;
B)	12>f3 Ag4 13.Wg3
Bl)	13..Bad8 14.2ixc7 (14.Ji.c4 a6 15.#}xc7 4}e4 16.1S'xg4 ФхсЗ 17.bxc3 •£e5	18.We4 Wd6 19.0-0 Wxc7
2O.Ab3± Timoschenko-Rossato, Padova 2000) 14...2ie7 1 5. Ab4 (15. WeS •S^edS!? 16.^xd5 ^xd5®) 15...4tf5 (15...Wg6!? 16.f3 Wc2oo) 16.We5 Efe8!? 17,Фхе8 flxe8 18.^cS ФхеЗ 19,fxe3 ПхеЗ+ 2О.Ае2 Zxe2+ 21.ФА Wf4+22.*gl h6®;
B2)	13...Eae8 14.Ji.xf6 (14.&xc7 Пе4! 15.Де2 (15.Jkxf6 Wxf6 16.Ji.d3 Wxb2 17.0-0	Eb4«=±)	15...2Й15
16>h2 Exe3 17.fxe3 *xe3S) 14..>xf6 15.Wxg4 Wxb2 16.fidl Hd8 17.^d4 Wc3+ 18.Ed2 (18.Фе2 Wb2+ 19.Bd2 Hxd4! 2O.Hfxg7 + (2O.Exb2 Sxg4 21.йхЬ7 Йа4<®) 2O...li>xg7 21.Hxb2 Bb4oo) 18...4}xd4
19.exd4 Efe8+ 2O.JLe2 Wal+ 21 .Hd 1 ^xa2 22.Hh3±;
B3)	13...a6 14.4ixc7 (14.£id4 21xd4 15.JLxd4 Efd8!t) 14...Пас8 (14...nad8!? also comes into consideration, for example: 15.Jlc4Jlf5 ^.^gS WxgS 1 7.hxg5 £ie4 18.Ecl ФхсЗ 19Exc3 Ed7! 20.£d5 Efd8T).
ations:
B31)	15.Jl.e2? Дхе2 16.Фхе2 &е4 17.Wh2 2ixc3+ 18.bxc3 Wh5+ 19.B Wa5—H
B32)	15.^xa6? Ьхаб 16.Л.ха6 Eb8 17.0-0 (17.^xf6 Wxf6 18 Wxg4 2sb4T) 17...fce7T;
B33)	15.Jl.d3 Efd8 16.Ac2 &e7 17.0-0 A. fS^;
B34)	15.hS Efd8 16.Sh4 2>e7 17.Exg4 £lxg4 18.Ui,xg4 Exc7 19.JLa5 b6 20.Edl Ee8 21.Ji.c3oo;
B35)	15.Ecl ^g6	16.f3	Axf3
17.Wxg6 hxg6 18.gxf3 Exc7±.
B36)	15.A.C4 £e7 16.Ab4 (16 Wd6 £f5 17.Wb6 4id7! 18.Wxh6 (18.Wxb7 £>xe3t) 18...4Axh6 19.Aa5 b6 2O.Ab4 Exc7 21.Ajcf8 Дхс4Т; 16.Ecl £if5 17.We5 Exc7!? 18.Wxc7 ^xe3^; 16.JLxf6 Wxf6 1 7.Wxg4 (1 7.^d5 Bxb2 18.&xe7+ ФИ8 19.0-0 Exc4=) 17...Wxb2 18.0-0Exc7=) 16...£f5:
59
Chapter One - Section C
- 17.Wf4?Wxf4 !8.exf4Hxc7 I9.£xf8
Пхс4 2О.ДаЗ Де4+ 21 .ФП Hxf4-+;
- 17.Wh2?ftxe3 18.£b3 3fd8t);
- 17.^eS &d7	(1 7...<£xh4?!
18.2h2±) 18.We 4 (18.Wh2? £xe3 19.fxe3 Wxe3 + 20.ФГ1 Wd4t; 18.Wc3? 2xc7 19.Axf74 2xf7 2O.Wxc7 ^xe3-+; 18.WdS? ftxe3 19.fxe3 Wxe3+ 20.ФЯ 2xc7 21.ДхГС Ы8 22,b3 Ь5—+) 18...£)f6 (18...2xc7?! 19.Wxg4 4}xe3 2O.fxe3 Wxe3 + (2O...£e5 21.Wg34~) 21.We2+-) 19>e5 (19.Wxb7? 2b8 (I9...£xe3 20.ДЬЗ 2b8 21.Wa7 2>xg2+ 22.ФП 2xb4 23.&xg2 Wg6t) 2O.Axf7 + ФИ8-+) 19...£ld7=.
Section C
The Immediate 3. e3 eS
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	<?2ib8-c6
After З.еЗ eS the play usually transfers to the variations examined in the previous Sections with a slight transposition of moves (4.cxd5 WxdS S.£lc3 Ab4 etc.), but sometimes White also chooses different lines.
GAME 16
□ Evgeny Bareev
 Alexander Morozevich
Elista 1997
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£b8-c6
a	e2-e3	e7-e5
4.	d4xe5
4.£}f3 <&g4 is not dangerous for Black (this position also often arises via a different move order l.d4 d5 2.c4 £}c6 3.£if3 ^g4 4.e3 eS), for example: S.dxeS dxc4 (Black has succeeded in connecting his queen with his rook at a8, and now this exchange is perfectly justified) 6.Wxd8+ Sxd8 7.iLxc4 £)xeS 8.Де2 4ki3+ 9.JiLxd3 2xd3 1О.Фе2 Ed8 11.b3 £f6 12.Ab2 £)e4 13.h3 JiLd7 14.ftc3 £xc3+ (14..jSLb4 1 S.lJhcl ДхсЗ is sufficient for equality;
60
The Immediate З.еЗ eS
only, Black must not outwit himself — 15. ..0 0? 16.Фхе4 £.bS+	17.Дс4)
15.ДхсЗ ДЬ5+ 16.Фе1 fld3 17.Дс1 Jb3 18.Дс2 0-0 19.Фе5 Hd5 2О.Фс4 Hfd8? (Amonatov Morozevich, Moscow 2004). Or 5.Де2 exd4 6.£}xd4 Axe2 7.'й'хе2 J*.b4+ 8.^.d2 ^.xd2+ 9.£}xd2 £}xd4 10.exd4+ Фе7 11.c5 0-0 12.0-0 2ifS 13>d3 g6 14.ФГЗ c6 IS.Hfel Wc7 16.g4?!	17.Де2 Феб 18.Wd2 b6
19.b4 aS 2O.cxb6 Wxb6 21.bxa5 Пха5 22.Heel ДаЗ 23.ДеЗ Hfa8 24.ДхаЗ ДхаЗ 25.<4’g2 Wa6+ (Nadezhdin-Moro-zevich, Moscow 2002).
4. ..	d5-d4
Of course, in this situation 4...dxc4? 5.'Brxd8+ &xd8 6.Axc4 is bad for Black - he is a pawn down, he is unable to castle, and also his f7-pawn is hanging.
The black pawn on d4 prevents the normal development of Whites queenside. And if it is exchanged, the d4-square becomes a convenient base for the black pieces.
11 ФсЗ Ag4+ Shinkevich-Barsky, Moscow 2002).
Ж
ill AAA
A A A
А -Л . E
Here several continuations give Black a comfortable game:
Al) 7...Ф116!?	8.АхЬ4?! Wxdl +
9.&xdl ФхЬ4 Ю.ФсЗ Ae6 H.h3?£tfS 12.g4 ФхеЗ+ 13.Фе 2 0-1 (Azmaipa-rashvili-DeadDookie, ICC 2005;
A2) 7...Ag4 8>b3? We7? (8...Axf3! 9.gxf3 'Bb4+ 1О.Фе2 -&.xd2 H^xd2 0-0-0+) 9.Axb4 Wxb4+ Ю.Ф1х12 0-0-0 11>хЬ4ФхЬ4 12.ФП= (Gelash-vili-Paz, Dos Hermanas 2004);
A3) 7..Age7 8.ДхЬ4 Wxdl + 9.sfc’xdl ФхЬ4 1О.аЗ ФЬсб П.ФсЗ -&g4 12.Jil.e2 0-0-0+ 13.^1 ДхГЗ I4.gxf3 Фхе5= (Hubner-ZaragaLski, playchess.com 2004);
В) After S.exd4 Wxd4 6.Wxd4 Фxd4 7 Jil.d3 J*tg4 the activity of the black pieces, in particular the knight at d4, should be sufficient to regain the pawn and gradually equalize.
5. a2-a3
Other possibilities are 5.ФГЗ (A), S.exd4 (B) and 5.Ae2(C).
A) In the event of 5.ФГЗ the 5...ДЬ4 check is unpleasant, and after 6.Ad2 dxe3 White has to take with the pawn: 7.fxe3 (bad is 7.Axb4? exf2+ 8.Фе2 Wxdl + 9.l4>xdl ФхЬ4 Ю.аЗ Феб
61
Chapter One - Section C
Bl) 8.£k3 0-0-0 9.Ag5 Ae7 10.Axe7 2)xe7 11.f3 AfS 12.0-0-0 Axd3 13.fixd3 flhe8 14.4Jh3 ^есб** (crafty-Goldmund, ICC 1999);
B2) 8.f3 Ae6 9.2>e2 (9.Ae3 0-0-0 10.Ji.xd4 Sxd4 Н.Фе2 4}e7 12.£d2 4ig6 13.Ji.xg6 hxg6 14.b3 AfST Reti-Bogoljubow, Kiel 1921) 9...Axc4 (9...0-0-0 10.4Jxd4 Hxd4 ll.Ji.e2 £e7 12.Ae3 fid7 13.4Jc3 £f5 14.Af2 Ab4 15.a3 Axc3+ 16.bxc3 Hhd8 17.g4 #Je7 18.f4± velimirovich-Morozevich, ICC 2002) 1O.Axc4 2k2+ ll.sfcdl 2>xal 12.£}bc3 Hd8+ 13Ad2 c6?± (Chem-berlen-ArtofAttack, ICC 2002);
B3) 8.Ae3 0-0-0 9.£c3 £k6 (9...Ab4 10.h3! (lO.ficl 4Je7 11.$Je2 $Jdc6 12.Abl 2>xe5T) 10...2>c6 ll.Ae4 Ae6 12.Axc6 Ьхсб 13.a3±) 10.Ae2 #JxeS ll.fcft Axf3 12.gxf3	2>d3+
(12...4tf6!?a*) 13.Axd3 Hxd3 14.£d5 #Je7 15.Фе2± (Donchenko-Maliutin, Smolensk 1991);
B4) 8.h3
B41) 8...Ae6 9.£c3 0-0-0 10.Af4! 4Jf3 + ! H.£xf3 Sxd3 12.£}d5?! (12.^d2 Ab4 13.Фе2 Hd4 14.Ae3 Axc3 15.bxc3±) 12..Axd5 13.cxd5 flxdS 14.Фе2 2>e7 ISJIhdl $Jg6! 16.Ag3 Hb5!= (Lputian-Nadanian, Armenia 1997);
B42) 8...Ah5 9.Ae3 (9.g4 Ag6+) 9...0-0-0 (9...nd8!?) 10.SJd2Ji.b4 11.g4 Ag6 12.Ji.xg6 hxg6 13.0-0-0± (Yuferov-Baumhus, Moscow 1990);
С) S.Ae2?! does not present any particular danger, for example: 5... AfS 6.SJf3 Ab4+ 7.Ad2 dxe3 8.fxe3 SJge7 -9.0-0 0-0 Ю.аЗ Axd2 U.Wxd2 Sig6 12.SJd4! Ad7 13.e6 fxe6 with equality (Rakhmangulov-Morozevich, Alushta 1993).
Let us return to the Bareev-Morozevich game.
With S.a3 White has prevented the unpleasant check on b4 and, given the opportunity, he himself wants to play b2-b4, in order to harass the knight at c6 and in some lines develop his bishop on the long diagonal Delaying the exchange on d4 is also advantageous to White: now it is more difficult for the opponent to develop counterplay.
5. -	a7-a5
Prophylaxis in reply: Black defends against b2-b4 and secures the c5-square for his bishop. Let us consider the alternatives:
A) Black can immediately regain the pawn — 5...dxe3 6.Wxd8+ &xd8 7.Axe3 #JxeS, but because of the loss of the right to castle he still has some work to do in order to achieve an equal game: 8.£k3 (8,£Jd2 Ae6 9.0-0-0 Фс8 10.4Jgf3±) 8...Ae6 9.0-0-0+ Фс8 10.cS 2if6 11 h3 a5 12.g4 hS 13.f4 2)c6 14.g5 2)d7 15.£)e4± (Nikolic-Piket, Monte Carlo 1996);
B)	The extravagant gambit S...f6?! 6.exf6 4Jxf6 is hardly good, fcr example: 7.£jf3 dxe3 8.Wxd8+ 4ixd8 9.jLxe3 4Jg4 10.Af4 AcS ll.Ag3 0-0 12.Ae2± (Alexandrov-Kobalia, Krasnodar 1998);
62
The Immediate З.еЗ c5
C)	5..Леб 6.2lf3 dxe3 7.Wxd8+ Hxd8 8.Axe3 £}ge7 does not give full equality.
Here White is promised little by 9.£}gS Ag4=, 9.Af4 £g6 10..fi.g3 hS 1 Lh3 h4 !2.Ah2 Ш15 (12...Ac5 13.£k3 ^d4oo) 13.Ae2 J3fS 14.0-0 SkxeS IS.AxeS £lxe5 16.#}xh4 Hf44, or 9.£>bd2 h6 10.^b3^1f5 lL.fi.e2 gS 12.fldl flxdl + 13.&xdl Ag7 14.£fd4 2>xe3+ 15.fxe3 4ixe5 16.£jxe6 fxe6 17.ПГ1 Фе7 = (Bareev Morozevich, Moscow 2006).
Significantly stronger is 9.4k3 £ig6 lO.^bS! (here, in order to later play the knight to d4; lO.^dS Hd7 11.0-0-0 4igxe5 leads only to equality) 10...Sd7 ll.(£lbd4 £)gxe5 12.4}xe5 Фхе5 13.2ixe6 fxe6 14.-fi.e2 2>d3+ 15Axd3 Hxd3 16.Фе2 Hd8 17.b4± (Lazarev-Barsky, Moscow 1994);
D)	S...£)ge7!? looks quite thematic, but here as yet there are few practical examples: 6.£if3 .fi.g4 and now:
DI) 7.e6 fxe6 8.Ae2 (8.exd4 Axf3 9.Wxf3 2>xd4 10>e4? 2>b3 0-1 Petrovich-Shredder 8, ICC 2004) 8...dxe3 9.Wxd8+ Hxd8 ЮАхеЗ 2if5 ll..fi.g5 .fi.e7 12.Axe7 Фхе7= (Mastrovasilis-A. Rychagov, Poros 1998);
D2) 7.Ae2 dxe3 8.Wxd8+ Hxd8 9.Axe3 Axf3 10Axf3 £}xeS ll..fi.xb7
&xc4 12.Axa7^a5 13.Af3^)b3 14.Да2 Ski 15.Hal 2>b3 16.Па2 £cl 17.flal, draw (Parker-Pert, Swansea 2006).
& &g1-f3
White played the opening badly in the following game: б.ЬЗ?! AcS 7.ФГЗ AfS 8.Ae2 2)ge7 9.Ab2 dxe3 10.Wxd8+ Hxd8 1 Lfxe3 АхеЗТ (Lazarev-Tishin, Tula 2000).
6.	_ Af8-c5
6...	Ag4 7.Ae2 dxe3 8.Axe3 Axf3 9..fi.xf3 Wxdl+ lO.Axdl ^>xe5 lL.fi.e2 0-0-0 12.0-0 21f6 13.£te3± (Delchev-ALIAS, ICC 2003).
7.	e3xd4
7.Ae2 ^ge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.exd4 ^xd4 10.£te3 Af5® (Volkov-Ragnaroek, ICC 2003).
7.	.. Ac5xd4
Of course, on positional grounds Black would like to establish his knight on d4 after all the exchanges, but this is not so easy to achieve. The more direct 7...#}xd4 promises him good counterplay: 8.Ae2 (8.4k3 Ag4 9.Ae2 4ixf3+ 10.Axf3 Wxdl+ ll.Axdl Axdl 12.£ixdl Ad4 13.f4 f6® Franco Ocampos-Miladinovic, St Vincent 1998; 8.Ae3!?) 8...Af5 9.£)xd4 Axd4 (9...1Brxd4 10.1Sfxd4 Axd4 1 Lf4 f6 12.^d2 fxeS 13.&f3!± Bacrot-Mellado Trivino, Enghien les Bains
63
Chapter One - Section C
1995) 10.0-0 Дхе5 11. Wei 2»e7 12.4ic3 0-0 1З.ДеЗ £g6 14.Ed 1 Wh4= (Hiibner-Rabiega, playchess.com 2004).
8.	JLf1-e2
White has a slightly better endgame after 8.^xd4 Wxd4 9.£}c3 Wxe5+ 10.We2 Аеб 1 l.WxeS 2>xe5 12.Af4 f6 13.0-0-0 £}e7 14.b3± (Petrovich-Silicon, ICC 2001).
8.	£ig8-e7
9.	0-0	0-0
10.	&Ы-СЗ
10.JlgS is a trap into which it is pleasant to fall: 10...Axb2! 1 l.Ea2f6=.
10.	..	i.d4xc3?!
Black somewhat overestimates his chances. After 10...JLxeS!? 11.4)xe5 £}xe5 12.Jl.g5 f6 13.Jle3 Деб he would have gradually equalized.
11.	Ь2хсЗ	£>e7-g6
12.	Ac1-g5	Wd8-e8
White would also have retained a slight advantage in the event of 12...Wxdl 13.Eaxdl (13.Efxdl £}gxe5 14.ELabi±) 13...Де8 14.Sk!4 f6 15.ДеЗ £)xd4 16.cxd4 fxe5 17.cS exd4 18.XLxd4 Jlf5± (Deveraux-ghost, ICC 2002).
13.	Ef1-e1 a5-a4
Or 13...£}gxe5	14.£)xe5 $Jxe5
15,Wd5!?±.
14.	Дд5-еЗ
14.-fi.d3!? EaS 15.£)d4 ExeS 16.ДеЗ±
was interesting.
14.	-	We8-e7
15.	Wd1-c2	Ef8-e8
If 15...4kxe5, then 16.JLd4± is possible.
16.	JLe2-f1	£c6xe5
Black is also not completely happy in the event of 16...Ji.g4 17.£)d4 (ZicxeS 18.f4 4k6 19.£)xc6 Ьхсб 20.h3 Ad7 21.g3!?±.
1a Wc2-b2
This move secures White a slight and enduring advantage, but wasn’t it possible to try for more? In reply to 18. JLd2 Black is saved by 18...jS.f5=, but it was possible to force the exchange of the queen for two rooks — 18JeLf4!? Wxel 19.Exel Exel. It would seem that after 20.Wd2 Ee8 21 .Jlxc7 White has quite an appreciable advantage: he will support his bishop on d6 by playing c4-c5, and will create pressure on the b7-pawn. It is not so easy for Black to defend, since for the moment his forces are scattered about.
1&	«. We5-e4
19.	Wb2-b5
Here too 19. Jfif4 was possible.
19.	... Se8-e5 20. c4-c5
It is not possible to win a pawn: 2O.JLd2 Exb5 21.Дхе4 Ее5 22.Exe5£)xe5 23.Af4 f6 24-fijte5 fxeS 25.Eel EaS 26.f4 &f7=.
64
The Immediate З.еЗ eS
20.	_	Дс8-е6
21.	2a1-d1	h7-h6
21...Wc6 22>xc6 bxc6 23.f4 HdS 24.2b 1 ± also favours White.
22.	Af1-d3l?
White disposed of the curious ’jab’ 22.f4!? here. Now 22...2h5 23.£d3 Wc6 24?Bfxc6 bxc6 2S.c4± leaves Black with a rather unpromising position, while the capture 22...&xf4!? involves a piece sacrifice: 23.2d4 £ih3+ 24.gxh3 Wg6+ 25.ФГ2 2fS+ 26.2f4 2xf4+ 27.£xf4 Wf6 28.&g3 Wg6+ 29.&f3 2d8!?®. The white king is very insecure, and Black has definite compensation.
22.	^e4-g4?
Now the queen is pushed to the side and it becomes extremely hard to create an attack. Black should have reconciled himself to a somewhat inferior endgame: 22..Web! 23.^xc6 bxc6 24.f4 (24.Axg6 fxg6 2S..£Lxh6 2xel + 26.2xel Sb8) 24...fld5 2S.c4 Sd7 26.h3 (26.fS? 2ad8 27.Ac2 -fi_xfS!) 26...£)e7 27.g4±.
23.	h2-h3 Wg4-h5
24.	£d3-e2 Wh5-h4
25.	Wb5xb7 Sa8-e8
26.	Wb7xc7+-
26. 27.	f2xe3	Se5xe3 Wh4-g5
No better was 27..		.ДхЬЗ 28.gxh3
29.&g2	Wg5+	30.Ф112 «ГхеЗ
31.Ah5+—.		
28.	Ae2-f1?l	
28.&h2	or 28.ФЫ	was a simpler way of
parrying the opponent’s threats.		
28.	•••	ie6xh3
29.	Wc7-c6	Пе8-с8
In the	event of	29...2хеЗ ЗО.ПхеЗ
'Й'хеЗ+	31.ФЫ Jlg4 the simplest is	
32.2d8+ ФЬ7		33.Wxa4 Деб
34.Wd44—.		
30.	Wc6xa4	.i.h3-e6
Or 3O...2xc5 31.Wd4+—.		
31.	c5-c6	h6-h5
32.	Hd1-d2	h5-h4
33.	Wa4-e4	^g5-c5
34.	2e1-d1	2c8xc6
35.	2d2-d8+	ig8-h7
36.	Af1-d3	f7-f5
37.	We4-f3	&h7-h6
38.	£d3-e2	ФИ6-д5
39.	2d8-d5	Wc5xc3
40.	2d1-f1	ig5-f6
41.	Sd5xf5+	£f6-e7
42.	Ef5-f7+	&e7-d6
43.	2f1-d1 +	id6-c5
44.	2f7-b7	
Black resigned.
Conclusion: In the variation 1 .d4 dS 2.c4 £k6 З.еЗ eS 4.dxe5 d4 White has some initiative. With accurate play Black can gradually equalize, but to achieve this he often has to enter a somewhat inferior ending first.
6S
Chapter Two
FROM STEINITZ TO KRAMNIK
The Variation 3.£tf3 Ag4
The skill of making combinations, the ability in every given position to find the most purposeful move, leading most quickly to the f ulfilment of your plan, is higher than all principles, or, more correctly, it is theonly principle in the game of chess which lends itself to such a definition.
Mikhail Chigorin
Introduction
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	<b8-c6
3. ^g1f3
As we saw in Chapter One, after 3.cxdS 'SfxdS it is not so easy to evict the queen from the centre. Black whirls around as if in a frying-pan. attacking the d4-pawn with everything he can, giving up bishops for knights, and trying to complete his development as quickly as possible and maintain the activity of his pieces. This leads to an open, lively game where all three results are possible Evidently it has to be acknowledged that the Chigorin Defence cannot be refuted by an impulsive attack
If White reconciles himself to this surprising fact, he will begins to seek more solid ways of developing, involving a
gradual building up of positional pressure. The move 3.&f3 is fully in accordance with this strategy: White develops his knight on its ‘lawful’ square, inhibits ...e7 -eS and supports his d4-pawn. Now the exchange on d5 followed by the occupation of the centre by £»c3 (with gain of tempo; the d4-pawn is defended!) and e2-e4 becomes a serious positional threat. White’s plan is very logical and strategically well-founded: it is no accident that in this chapter you will find games where 3.<2if3 was employed by the world champions Wilhelm Steinitz, Alexander Alekhine, Anatoly Karpov, Garry Kasparov and Vladimir Kramnik.
How should Black defend against the threat of a positional squeeze? 3...e6 in combination with the knight on c6 does not look good, and this also applies to continuations such as 3...dxc4 4.d5 or 3...<?3f6 4.cxd5 £)xd5 S.e4 (a very inferior version of the Griinfeld Defence...). There remains one reply: 3..Jkg4, in order, in the event of 4.cxdS, to give up the light-squared bishop. After 4...Axf3 S.gxf3, S.. Wxd5 then gains a tempo by attacking the d4-pawn.
67
Section A
Bishop outside the Chain: 4.4^c3 e6 S.^Lf4/^LgS
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4 a £g1-f3
4. £Ы-сЗ
d7-d5 £ib8-c6 Дс8-д4 e7-e6
In Section A we will investigate all the lines in which White waits with e2-e3 and brings his queen's bishop out first. There are many different move orders here.
GAME 16
□ Loek van Wely
 Alexander Morozevich
Tilburg 1993
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£>g1-f3	4iib8-c6
3.	Ac1-f4	£.c8-g4
4.	c2-c4	e7-e6
5.	e2-e3	if8-b4+
6.	£Ь1-сЗ	4jg8-e7
6...£)f6 transposes into the 5...^f6 variation, which we will examine later.
7.	Ha1-c1 04)
Here White has tried various plans, but none of them have brought him any par ticular dividends. Black has succeeded in coordinating his forces, and the worst is over for him.
8.	&f1-d3
Let us consider White s other possibilities.
А)	8.аЗ АхсЗ+ 9.йхсЗ ^aS (Black hurries to clarify the situation on the queenside. The plan of breaking in the centre by 9...dxc4 1О.Пхс4 4ig6 1 l .Ag3 jkxf3 12.Wxf3 eS is not good in view of )3.d5^ce7 14.h4£}xd5 15.h5±) 10.h3 khS
ill a
4	1	*
Ш 3
11 ,c5 (alas, it is not possible to capture on dS on account of the knight fork, so White
68
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 J£g4 4.£)c3 e6 5.j£f4/ -igS
is forced to release the tension in the centre But now the c7-pawn can sleep easy) ll...Jslxf3 12.Wxf3 4ig6 13.Jb.h2 £>c6 14.Jb.d3 eS (here this break gains significantly in strength and practically equalizes the chances) IS.dxeS fle8 16.JLxg6hxg6 17.0-0 £}xe5 18.jbxe5 flxeS, draw (Wojtkiewicz-Miton, Geneva 2001);
B)	8.h3 JbhS 9.аЗ АхсЗ+ Ю.ПхсЗ dxc4 11.Дхс4 £>g6 12.Jb.h2 Axf3 13 Wxf3 eS! (exploiting his significant lead in development. Black starts tactical skirmishes over the entire board. White
cannot exchange on eS, but neither can he leave his d 4-pawn en prise. This means that the bishop on h2 has to reconcile itself to the fact that from its dug-out, only the ravine immediately before him and the very edge of the copse are visible) 14.d5&a5 15.Hc3c6
I6.dxc6 (the knight cannot be trapped: 16.b4?! cxdS 17.bxa5? Wxa5-+. AU White’s pieces are stuck on the opposite flank, and there is no one to come to the aid of the rook...) 16...^xc6 17.Дс4 4^4 !8.Wg4&h8 !9.Zd3 We7 20.Hd7 f5 21.Дхе7 fxg4<» (Akesson-Moroze-vich, London 1994).
Let us return to the Van Wdy-Morozevich game.
8.	„	£>e7-g6
Black fell into a typical trap in the following game: 8...dxc4? 9.JLxh7+! Ф118 (it is bad to capture the bishop on account of the knight check at gS) 10.Jb.bl £ki5 ll.Jb.g3 4ke7 12.0-0 c6 13.Wc2 AfS 14.e4 Jbg6 15.£te5± (Topalov-Rabiega, Frankfurt 2000).
9.	h2-h3	Ji.g4-h5
10.	Af4-h2	£jg6-h4
Black is the first to create threats on the kingside. White is forced to begin a pawn offensive on the flank al a time when his
king is firmly stuck in the centre.
11.	g2-g4	£)h4xf3+
12.	^d1xf3	Ah5-g6
13.	id3xg6	h7xg6
14.	c4xd5	e6xd5
15.	Фе1-П	£>c6-e7
At just the right time Black succeeds in removing his c7-pawn from the X-ray attack of the rook on cl and the bishop on h2.
16. h3-h4	Ab4xc3
17. Дс1хсЗ	c7-c6
The position is roughly equal. Each side has both well-placed pieces and pieces that are out of play. Van Wely overrates his chances, begins a direct offensive on the kingside and gradually ends up in a difficult position.
69
Chapter Тио - Section A
1a h4-h5	g6-g5
19. h5-h6	f7-f6
20. h6xg7 Xg8xg7
The f6- and gS-pawns have fenced in die bishop on h2, whereas the knight has acquired a convenient post at g6 and the fixed pawn on g4 has become more vul-
nerable.		
21.	Ah2-g3	Wd8-d7
22.	ФН-д2	Sf8-h8
23.	Sc3-c1	Sh8xh1
24.	Sc1xh1	Wd7-e6
25.	^f3-e2	Sa8*e8
26. 27.	f2-f3 ПЫ-е1	£}e7-g6
27. - f6-f5l
The knight has taken control of the eS-square, and so the f-pawn can be used to break up the fortress of the white king.
28.	g4xf5	We6xf5
29.	e3-e4	Wf5-d7
30.	We2-e3	d5xe4
31.	Фд2-д1	Wd7-f5
32.	f3xe4	Wf5-g4
33.	d4-d5	c6xd5
34.	We3-c3+	Фд7-Ь6
35.	e4xd5	Ee8-c8
36.	Wc3-e3	JZc8-d8
37.	d5-d6	Sd8xd6
38.	We3-f2	£jg6-f4
39. £g1-f1	Sd6-f6
40. Яе1-е4	Wg4-d1 +
White resigned.
GAME 17
□ Konstantin Aseev  Alexander Morozevich
Elista 1995
This game was played in the Russian Championship in the Kalmykian capital. The player with the white pieces was the well-known theoretician Konstantin Aseev, who suffered an untimely death.
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4ib8-c6
a	^g1-f3	A.c8-g4
4.	ФЫ-сЗ
A solid developing and consolidating move. White as though says: 'We don’t need any swift attacks and Informator prizes for the most brilliant game of the year, but we will foster and cherish our lawful «±»!’ A highly pragmatic approach, which is very difficult to combat! We should mention in passing that ФВ-eS, which was extremely unpleasant later in the game, does not give White anything on the 4th move This is confirmed, for example, by the following game from a simultaneous display: 4.&e5 Фхе5 S.dxeS d4 6.h3 JoifS 7.e3 dxe3 8.Wxd8+ JLxd8 9.АхеЗ еб 10.a3 &e7 H.£)c3 4k6 12.f4 Де7 13.&f2?! f6! 14.exf6 Axf6 15.Де2 0-0T (Chistia-kova-Morozevich, Moscow 1997).
Another 'solid* continuation - 4.e3 - severely restricts White’s possibilities. Here is a typical example: 4...e6 S.Ae2 ^Af6 6.0-0 a6 7.£>c3 dxc4 8.Jkxc4 Ad6 9.h3
70
Bishop outside the Chain 3.£)f3 Ag4 4. £k3 e6 S.Af4/AgS
AhS 10.Ae2 0-0 11.a3 We7 12.b4
Sad8?* 13.Wb3?! eS 14.d5 e4 15.£}xe4?! (15.dxc6 exf3 16.gxf3 ЬхсбТ) 15...£lxe4 16.dxc6
A
4
П А ИФ
16...&g5! (16...Axf3 17.Axf3 We5 1 8 .fid 1 (18.g3 £xg3 19.fxg3 Wxg3+ 2O.Ag2 Wh2+ 21.&f2 Ag3 + 22.ФГЗ Ah4—+) 18...^g5 19. AdS ^h2+ 20.ФП AeS ll.fibl Ьхсб 22.Axc6oo) 17.^xg5? (17.Ab2 Axf3 18.Axf3 &xf3+ 19.gxf3 Wg5+ 20.ФЫ WfS?) 17...Axe2 18.fiel 'S'xgS 19.Cxe2 WeS. and White resigned (Amateur-Morozevich,Solingen 2001).
4. -	e7-e6
White has a choice between 5.Af4, S.cxdS, S.AgS and S.e3. Aseev chose the first of these moves.
5. Ac1-f4
All in the same unpretentious, but highly venomous style. If White can calmly complete his development roughly along the lines of e3, Ae2, cxdS, 0-0, Bel and Wb3, he will create strong pressure on the queenside with Black having no counterplay at all. If events develop relatively calmly, the drawbacks of the knight’s position at c6 will tell: it is hard for the c- and d-pawns to link up, and as a result they both tum out to be vulnerable.
5. _ Af8-b4
The exchange S...Axf3 will be examined later, using the example of the Kramnik-Morozevich game. In tournaments from recent years the moves 5...dxc4 and 5...ЗД6 have also occurred, but to us they seem positionally less justified, and we will not dwell on them.
6. 2>f3 e5!
A very unpleasant reply, which forces Black to part with his dark-squared bishop (in view of the threatened check Wa4+ after the exchange of knights on eS), which leaves his bishop at g4 rather out of play. In general, Aseev’s manoeuvre casts doubt on Black’s plan with 5...Ab4.
6.	...	4uc6xe5
7.	Af4xe5
The g7-pawn is under attack and 8 ,Wa4+ is also threatened.
7.	..	Ab4xc3+
8.	Ь2хсЗ	£g8-f6?l
The bishop at eS is well placed and it should have been driven away from there. After 8„.f6 9.Ag3± White’s chances are better thanks to his two bishops, but, as the following games show, Black can defend quite successfully:
A) 9...c6 10.Wb3 ^d7 ll.fibl b6 12.Wa4 fid8 13.cS AfS 14,fib2 b5
71
Chapter Tvw - Section A
15 Wa6 Wc81? 16.Bxa7 Wa8 17.Wxa8 Exa8® Samuelsen-Simonsen, Oyrar-bakka 2005;
В) 9...&e7 10.Ebl Ь6 ll.Wa4+ c6 12.e3 0-0 13.1d3 Wd7 14.Ecl AfS 15.Де2 аб 16.Wb3 bS, draw (Doric-Fercec.Porec 2004).
9.	Ea1-b1
The energetic pawn march 9.f3 AhS 10.g4 Ag6 ll.h4± would have placed Black in a difficult position with no counterplay.
9.	0-0
10.	f2-f3	1044151
11.	Eb1xb7	d5xc4
12.	^d1-d2
This is the virtue of the bishop retreat to hS: White cannot play 12.e4 on account of 12,..Фхе4 (13.g4? Wh4+), and therefore he lias to spend a tempo moving his queen from dl.
12.	..	Ea8-c8
13.	Eb7-b5?
Too subtle; White should have simply captured another pawn- 13Exa7!±.
13.	-.	Ah5-g6
14.	e2-e4	c7-c6
Forcing the rook to declare its intentions: if it leaves the Sth rank Black will play ...сб-cS, when his c4-pawn may unexpectedly remain alive
15.	Ae5xf6
If 15.Bc5.then 15...#ie7 is unpleasant.
15.	..	Wd8xf6
16.	Sb5-c5	5c8-b8
17.	Wd2-c2
Instead of developing, for the moment White has to make defensive moves
17.	•••	Eb8-b5
18.	Ec5xc6	Bf8-b8
19.	Af1-e2	ЕЬ5-Ы
20.	Ae2-d1	
20.	..	Wf6-d8!
Defending the back rank and preparing the invasion of the second rook on b2. Despite White’s extra pawn and the fact that the bishop at g6 is shut out of the game, it is not easy for him even to maintain equality.
21.	0-0	Eb8-b2
22.	^c2-a4	h7-h5
23.	3c6-c5
23?S'xc4 Wg5 24.1e2 We3+ is bad for While
23.	Eb2-d2
24. Ad1-e2
24. Ac2 Exfl + 25 .ФхП Wh4-+.
24.	...	Eb1-b2
25.	Ef1-e1	Ed2xd4l
26.	Wa4-a6
26.cxd4 Wxd4+ 27.ФЛ WxcS 28.Wxc4 ^a3+.
26. ...	Wd8-f6
27. Ec5-c8+	Ed4-d8
28. Ec8xd8+	Wf6xd8
29. Wa6xc4	Wd8-d2
30. *g1-f1	Eb2xa2
31. ^c4-d4	^d2-g5
32. Ee1-d1	&g8-h7
33. g2-g3	e6-e5
34. Wd4-d3	a7-a5
35. Wd3-b1	Sa2-d2
36. ^Ь1-с1	Ed2xd1+
37. ^c1xd1	Wg5-e3
72
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 j£g4 4.£)c3 e6 5.J^f4/JcgS
за C3-C4	f7-f5!
The bishop, which for a long time has been dozing on the edge of die board, comes into play widi decisive effect.
39. e4xf5 Ag6xf5
40. g3-g4
White lost on time, but after 4O...hxg4 41.fxg4 Ae4 his position is hopeless in any case.
GAME 18
□ Vladimir Kramnik
 Alexander Morozevich
Frankfurt 2000 (rapid)
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£ЛЬ8-с6
3.	4Jg1-f3	jlc8-g4
4.	&Ы-СЗ	e7-e6
5.	Jkc1-f4	ig4xf3
Black has voluntarily parted with one of his bishops, slightly spoiling the opponent’s pawn structure. This is no great achievement, but at least he doesn’t have to fear the £tf3-eS manoeuvre.
6.	«.	£f8-d6
In themselves the words ’bishop pair’ already harbour some mystical threat, and therefore Black wants to exchange one of
the white bishops as soon as possible. If Black aims for counterplay this usually favours White, who, apart from the notorious bishops, also has a lead in development and superiority in the centre. For example:
A) 6...£lf6 7.e3 2>h5 8.cxd5 exdS 9.Ag3 Wd7 !0.Wb3 0-0-0 ll.Ecl Jkb4 (ll...fS 12.Ah4 Ae7 13.^Lxe7 &xe7 14.^b5 c6 15.&xa7+ ФЬ8 16>b6±) 12.Jlb5^.a5 13.Wa4±;
B) 6...Ab4 7.e3 2>ge7 8>b3 0-0 9.Hgl a6 10.0-0-0 dxc4 11.Axc4 Axc3 12.Wxc3 4Jd5 13.jS.xd5 WxdS 14.&Ы Hfc8 15.e4Wa5 16.Wxa5 2>xaS 17.d5± (Dlugy-Wanted, ICC 1999);
The plan of relieving the pressure in die centre looks sensible:
C) 6...dxc4 7.e3 Jkd6 (clinging onto the c4-pawn can prove costly: 7...£Ja5 8.Wa4+ c6 9.b4 схЬЗ Ю.ахЬЗ 'ЙЪб U WxaS WxaS 12.fixa5 £.b4 13.Hc5 £)f6 14.Ec4 £kl5 15.Sxb4 £ixb4±) 8.Ag3 eS (8...4ige7 9.Jlxc4 0-0 10.Wc2 eS 1 l.dSi is also possible) 9.dxe5 4Jxe5 1O.Axc4 4Jxc4 ll.^a4+ c6 12.^xc4 jS.e7 13.Wg4 hS 14>f5 Wc8 lS.We4 0X6 16.Wc2 We6 17.0-0-0 0-0 IS.sfcbli (Sharavdorj-Stripunsky, Philadelphia 2006). White has retained a small advantage, but Black should be able to hold this position.
7.	i_f4-g3
White does not object to this exchange (simply because it is hard to object to it, without retreadng die bishop to cl), but he invites it to be made on his own territory, in order to correct his pawn structure
7.	...	£sg8-e7
8.	e2-e3	Wd8-d7
9.	Wd1-c2	f7-f5
With the	unpleasant threat of 10...f5-f4.
However, this move weakens Black’s
73
Chapter Тио - Section A
defences on the kingside, and White can now create strong pressure on the half-open g-file.
10.	£g3xd6	Wd7xd6
11.	0-0*0	0-0
12.	f3-f4	a7-a6
13.	Фс1-Ь1	£ic6-d8
14.	Eh1-g1	c7-c6
15.	£>c3-e2	7d8-f7
16.	£>e2-c1	<£ie7-c8
17. 18.	Eg1-g3 c4-c5±	Wd6-e7
ж *
A
g* 1
W4AA
A A
a a a
: a a i
Black’s position looks very sad: he lacks both space and counterplay, and his knights are pitifully placed. He can only stand and watch as White unhurriedly brings up cannons, battering-rams and assault ladders.
18.		We7-c7
19.	Jkf1-e2	<±>g8-h8
20.	Sd1-g1	Ef8-g8
21.	^c1-d3	£>c8-e7
22.	h2-h4	g7-g6
23.	h4-h5	Eg8-g7
24.	h5xg6	&e7xg6
25.	5g1-h1	Ea8-g8
26.	Eg3-h3	7g6-f8
27.	Wc2-d1	Wc7-e7
28.	Ae2-h5	£if7-d8
29.	a2-a3	£f8-d7
30.	ФЬ1-а2	£d7-f6
31. £>d3-e5	7f6-d7
32. £h5-g6 £d7-f8
No better was 32...Exg6 33.Hxh7 + Wxh7 34.Exh7+ ФхЬ7 3S.£ixd7 4if7 36.Wb3+-.
33. Jjtg6-h5
For some reason the trumpeter sounds the retreat... The bishop sacrifice would have decided the game: 33.Axh7 Exh7 34.Hxh7+ £jxh7 3S.WhS Wg7 36.Hh3
aS 37.a4 Wc7 39.Wxg6+-.		38.2ig6+	Exg6
33.		7f8-d7	
34.	<e5-f3	-7d7-f6	
35.	£if3-g5	£Л6-е4	
36.	^g5xe4	d5xe4	
37.	f2-f3	e4xf3	
38.	Ah5xf3	Eg8-f8	
39.	e3-e4	Ef8-f6	
40.	e4xf5	e6xf5	
41. d4-d5?
To win without calculating any variations at all has not proved possible for White And this move resembles a blunder.
41.		We7xc5
42.	Wd1-e2	c6xd5
43.	Be2-e5	Wc5-d6
44.	if3xd5	£sd8-c6
45.	We5xd6	Ef6xd6
46.	kd5-b3	<^c6-d4
47.	ДЬЗ-с4	Eg7-c7
48.	£c4-d3	Bc7-e7
74
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.<ЙГЗ Jfcg4 4,<йсЗ e6 5.J&f4/JifyjS
49.	2h3-h5	Bd6-f6
50.	5h5-g5	£d4-e6
51.	Zg5xf5	Sf6xf5
52.	Ad3xf5	5.e6xf4
3. Ac1-f4
4. e2-e3
5. c2-c4
6. &Ы-СЗ 7. 2a1-c1
Ac8-g4 e7-e6 £f8-b4+ £>g8-f6 0-0
55. Af5-e4?
A draw would have been reached by 55Jke6 21'6 56.2x1'6 £xf6 57Jkc8 b6 58.Jlxa6h5=.
55. 56.	£e4-f3	2>d5-f6 *h8-g7
57.	Eh6-h2	Фд7-д6+
58.	Sh2-g2+	Xg6-f5
59.	2g2-h2	*f5-g5
60.	2h2-g24-	Ag5-f4
61.	£f3-d1	h7-h5??
A blunder, although with the flag about to fall (the time control was 25 minutes for the whole game).
62. jld1xh5 Sf7-e7
Draw.
GAME 19
□ Vladimir Kramnik
 Vasily Ivanchuk
Linares 1998
1.	2>g1-f3	&b8-c6
2.	d2-d4	d7-d5
A typical position and one that is very important for an understanding of the entire system.
Alexander Morozevich:
Initially in this scheme I endeavoured as quickly as possible to develop my bishop to b4 and play ...4)g8-e7, but in time I came to the conclusion that the plan with the development of the knight to f6 is more promising. When Black chooses the Chigorin Defence, he aims above all for active piece play, and at e7 the knight is more passively placed. It makes sense to place the knight on e7 only if White has already exchanged in the centre (cxd5 exd5). Then Black disposes of the plan with ...f7-f6, ...g7-g5 and a pawn offensive on the kingside. On this theme we later give the games Harikrishna-Morozevich (Hyderabad 2002) and Karpov-Morozevich (Moscow 2001).
8.	h2-h3
White is a little behind in development, and therefore some extra caution won’t do any harm. The simple developing
75
Chapter Two - Section A
move 8_.fi.e2 looks perfectly sound, for example: 8...dxc4 9.J«Lxc4 4ki5 10.jfi.g3 eS ll.dxeS #Jxc3 12.bxc3 Wxdl + 13.&xdl Jfia3 14.3Ы 2>a5 15.Ad3 Hfd8 16.Фс2± (Dlugy-Benefactor, ICC 2005).
The pin 8.Jfi.g5 is unlikely to present any danger for Black, since White’s kingside is not yet developed and his bishop has taken two moves to reach g5. It is simplest for Black to immediately clarify the further intentions of this bishop - 8...h6 (weaker is 8...dxc4?! 9.jfijcc4 eS lO.dS £a5 ll.Ad3 c6? 12.^a4 c5 13.0-0 Jfi.xf3 14.gxf3 a6 15.J&.bl Jlxc3 16.Sxc3 c4 17.jfi.xf6 gxf6 I8.Wc2h— Jobava-Zaragatski, Bad Zwesten 2005), for example: 9Jfijcf6 Wxf6 lO.cxdS exd5 1 l.Jfi.e2 We6 12.0-0 fifd8 I З.^ЬЗ £f8 14.2>a4 ^a5 15.Wc3 b6 16.Bfel c6 17.4te5 Jfi.xe2 18.Пхе2 Sac8 19.Пес2 Jkd6 20.4Jd3 We7?* (Cramling-Yeo, Malaga 2004).
The move 8.a3 will be examined later.
8.	_	ig4xf3
9.	^d1xf3 Wd8-e7
9...	Jlxc3+ comes into consideration. After Ю.йхсЗ &e4 ll.ficl e5! 12.dxe5 We 7 13.Wdl?’ (13.a3 2lxe5 14.Jfijce5 Wxe5 15.He 2 d4?*) 13...£Jxe5T Black seized the initiative in the game Graf-Rabiega (Heringsdorf 2000).
10.	Jfi.f4-g5
Preventing both the knight leap to e4 and ...e6-e5. In the event of 10.Jfi.d3 e5! 11 .dxeS 4JxeS Black would have equalized.
10.	«.	Jfib4xc3+
11.	Hc1xc3
П.ЬхсЗ? is bad in view of 1 l...Wa3 12.Hc2 £ie4!.
11.	-	We7-b4
12.	Jfig5xf6 Wb4xb2
13.	ДсЗ-ЬЗ
Annotating this game for ChessBase, Vishy Anand suggested the unexpected rook sacrifice 13.Wg3!?.
Here are some of the pretty variations given by him: 13...Wxc3 + 14-^dl g6 15.Wg5 Wal+ (15...^b4 16.g4! 4kl3 I7.^xd3 Wxd3+ 18.Фе14—) 16.Фе2 Wbl 17.g4 We4 18.<t’d2 &xd4 19.exd4 e5 20>e3 WblJoo.
But at that time ’Rybka’ with its unearthly insidiousness did not yet exist, and it quickly found the manoeuvre 16..>xa2+ 17.ФГЗ (17.&dl Wxf2, attacking the bishop on f6; 1 7.Фе1 Wa5+ 18.Фе2 dxc4 19.Wh6 Wh5 check!) 17...Wa3!. Now if 18.Wh6 there follows I8...4Jxd4+ 19.Jfijcd4 f6, but otherwise Black moves his rook from f8 and vacates this square for his queen, when White has to forget about giving mate at g7.
13.	Wb2-c1 +
14.	Wf3-d1	Wc1xd1 +
15.	&e1xd1	d5xc4
16.	Hb3xb7	g7xf6
17.	&d1-d2
It will soon become evident that 1 7.Фс2! was stronger, in order to deprive the black rooks of invasion squares on the b-file.
76
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 Jtg4 4.£)сЗ еб 5.А14/AgS
17Hxc7 Sfc8 18.Hxc8+ Sxc8 19.Axc4 21xd4 2O.Ad3 2>c6 21.&d2 2>e5 22.Ae2 4k4+ 23.&d3 2>e5 + 24.d?d2 £te4+, draw (Pikaso-Benefactor, ICC 2006).
17.		Ha8-b8!
18.	Hb7xc7	&c6-a5
19.	<±>d2-c2	Sb8-b4
20.	Hc7xa7	Hb4-a4
21.	Sa7xa5!	
With a solid structure in the centre and a lack of open lines, Whites bishop and two pawns will be stronger than the enemy rook. Black faces a difficult struggle for a draw.
21.		Ha4xa5
22.	Aft xc4	h7-h5
23.	h3-h4	Hf8-c8
24.	&c2-d3	
24. ..	Ec8xc41?
A radical solution to the defensive problem. Black enters a rook endgame a pawn down, where he hopes to gain a draw dunks, in particular, to the active position
of his rook.		
25.	&d3xc4	Ha5xa2
26.	Hh1-f1	f6-f5
27.	d4-d5	Xg8-f8
28.	d5xe6	f7xe6
29.	£c4-d4	£f8-e7
30.	..d4-e5	Ha 2-a 4
31.	f2-f3	Ha4-a5+
Of course, 31...Hxh4? is not possible because of 32.Hal.
32. &e5-f4	Sa5-a2
33. Hf1-b1	*©7-f6
Here too Black cannot allow the activation of the king: 33...Hxg2? 34.Фе5 He2 35.Sb7 + *d8 Зб.Фхеб ДхеЗ+ 37.*xf5
Hxf3+ 38.^g5 and White wins.
34.	&f4-g3	Ha2-e2
35.	НЫ-ЬЗ	e6-e5
36.	Hb3-b6+	*f6-g7
37.	Hb6-b3	*g7-f6
38.	Hb3-a3	if6-g6
39.	ФдЗ-ИЗ	£g6-f6
40.	g2-g4	h5xg4+
41.	f3xg4	f5xg4+
42.	ФЬЗхд4	*f6-g6
43.	h4-h54-	&g6*h6
44.	Ha3-a6+	d?h6-h7
45.	Даб-аЗ	&h7-h6
46.	&g4-f5	e5-e4
47.	if5xe4	&h6xh5
In the database of five-piece endings it is stated that this position is drawn. In practice, of course, Black still has to display a certain accuracy.
48.	ie4-f5	Se2-f2+
49.	if5-e6	Hf2*e2
50.	Фе645	He2-f2+
51.	*f5-e5	&h5-g6
52.	e3-e4	Hf2-b2
77
Chapter Two - Section A
53.	Sa3-a7	ДЬ2-Ь5+
54.	±e5-e6	ДЬ5-Ь6+
55.	Фе6-е7	ДЬ6-Ь5
56.	Sa7-a6+	Фд6-д5
57.	Даб-еб	Фд544
58.	&e7-f6	ДЬ5-И5
Draw.
GAME 20
□ Maxim Dlugy
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 2004
As we have already remarked, blitz games mainly show the direction in which the hand should move the pieces. Although, if you think about it, the correct direction isnot so unimportant!
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	с2-с4	tb8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	Ас8-д4
4.	£Ы-сЗ	е7-е6
5.	Ac1-f4	<£ig8-f6
6. e2-e3
White can hardly hope for a serious advantage after 6.£>e5!? £\xeS 7.Axe5, but a certain accuracy is still required of Black: 7...c6 8>b3 Wb6 9.f3 AfS Ю.еЗ Wxb3 ll.axb3Ac2 12.c5!?£id7 (apparently, 12...Axb3!? is stronger: 13.s£?d2
(13.ДаЗ Ac2 14.e4 dxe4 15.&d2 Ad3 16.Axd3 exd3 17.flhal a6 18.&xd3 0-0-0 19.Фс4!?®) 13...aS 14.<£a4 £d7 15.Ac7 Дс8 16.AxaS Да8 17.ФсЗ flxaS 18.ФхЬЗ bS 19.cxb6 £>xb6 20.Ad3 &xa4 21.Дха4 Дха4 22.Фха4 d?d7=) 13.Ag3 АхЬЗ 14.ДаЗ Ac2 15.&d2 Ag6 16.b4 Ae7 17.b5® Фхс5?! 18.dxcS AxcS 19.ЙЬЗ 0-0 2O.bxc6 bxc6± (Kasimdzhanov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001).
6.	-. Af8-b4
If Black begins playing in excessively academic style, he will face a lengthy struggle fa- equality: 6...a6 7.Дс1 h6 8.a3 dxc4 9.Axc4 Ad6 10.Ag3 We7 1 l.Ae2 Axg3 12.hxg3 0-0 13.£ie5 Axe2 14.&xc6 bxc6 15.£ixe2± (Maximenko-Miladinovic, Bralto 2004).
7.	Да1-с1
For the moment it is rather early to dispatch the queen to the left flank: 7.Wb3 0-0 8.Ae2 dxc4 9.Wxc4 £d5 10.Ag3 ftaS ll.'fi'dS cS 12.0-0 cxd4 13.exd4 Дс8 14.Дас1 AfS 15.Wd2 4k4 16.Axc4 Дхс4 17.£ie5 Дсв^ (Dlugy-Wanted, ICC 1999).
White also achieves nothing with 7.a3 Axc3+ 8.bxc3 0-0 9.Ae2 dxc4 10Axc4 2d5 11 AxdS exdS 12.h3 AhS 13.0-0 £jaS 14.g4 Ag6 15.4teS f6 16.£ixg6 hxg6 17>d3 gS 18.Ag3	(Kasim-
dzhanov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001).
7.	-	0-0
8.	a2-a3	Ab4xc3+
9.	Дс1хсЗ	Wd8-e7
The immediate 9...dxc4 comes into consideration, for example: 1O.Axc4 £>d5 11.AxdS exdS 12.Wb3 (12.h3 AhS 13>b3 Axf3 14.gxf3 ftaS I5.Wc2 c6 16.b3 Wd7 17.h4tf?h8 18.h5f6 19.ФП Hae8 20.&g2 SgB^ Pikaso-Benefactor,
78
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£>(3 J&g4 4.£k3 еб 5.J&f4/j£g5
ICC 2006) 12...^)а5 13.Wc2 Axf3 14.Axc7?! WgS 15.gxf3 ^g2 16.ПЯ 5k6= (Pikaso-Benefactor, ICC 2006), but 16...Фс4! was even stronger: 17.Фе2 (17.Wf5^d2!) 17...Sae8T.
10.	&f1-e2
In the event of the careless 10.h3?! Black obtains the standard counterplay: 10... JLxf3 11 .^xf3 eS 12.dxe5 £>хеЗ 13.Axe5 WxeS 14.Jte2 4k4 15.flc2 d4 16.exd4 Wxd4T (Leonardo-BARS, ICC 2005).
10. ..	d5xc4
11. 2c3xc4	Za8-d8
12. Wd1-c1	&f6-d5
13. Jf4-g3	<$c6-a5
14. Sc4-a4	b74>6
15. Ь2-Ь4±	
destined to take any part in the battle), and he gradually converted it.
To complete the picture after the moves 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Фев 3Af3 i.g4 4.^c3 еб 5.И4 we will also examine the reply 5,.dxc4.
By calmly completing his development after 6.e3, White retains some advantage:
A)	6...2lf6 7.Axc4 a6 8.h3 AhS 9.0-0 Jkd6 10.&xd6 Wxd6 ll.Ji.e2 0-0 12.He! Had8 13.a3 Sfe8 14.b4± (Georgiev-DusantheGreat, ICC 2003);
B)	6...Ad6 7.Ag3 £lf6 8.Jlxc4 0-0 9.Де2 ^e7 10.0-0 &f5 П.ЖЬЗ Hb8 12.Sfdl We7 13.2acl± (Kohlweyer-Miladinovic, LidoEstensi 2003).
By parrying the opponents threats and building up the pressure, White has gained a serious advantage. But here the natural course of events is disrupted by the laws of blitz, and everything is instantly turned on its head.
GAME 21
□ Merab Gagunashvili  Alexander Moiseenko
Kusadasi 2006
15. ..	We7-e8
16. Wc1-c2?	Ag4-f5
17. e3-e4	Jtf5xe4!
18. Wc2xe4	We8xa4
19. Ь4ха5	Wa4xa5+
20. *e1-f1	£id5-c3
Now it is Black who has an overwhelming advantage (the rook on hl is hardly
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£ib8-c6
3.	£>g1-f3	ic8-g4
4.	2)Ы-сЗ	e7-e6
5.	c4xd5	e6xd5
6.	J.c1-f4	
6.e3 promises White little, for example:
6..Ж6 7Jke2 Jlb4 8.Jld2 0-0 9.&e5
79
Chapter Two - Section A
Jfi.xe2 10.Wxe2 Jtxc3 ll.Jfi.xc3 £>xe5 12.dxe5 $Je4 13.Wc2 fie8 14.0-0 c6 IS.fiacl fic8 16.f3^xc3 17.Wxc3 We7 18.f4 fif8 19.e4 dxe4 20.Heel fS 21.exf6 fixf6 22>c4+ Wf7 23.fixe4 fid8= (Short-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
Thus before erecting the pawn barrier, White should liberate his dark-squared bishopi
in ВШ a
s	-S
6.	-	fi.g4xf3
Without this exchange it is hard for Black to gain any counterplay, for example:
A)	6...£jf6 7.e3 .fi.d6 8.Jfi.g5! &e7 9.Jfi.xf6 gxf6 10.Jfi.e2 c6 11 Wc2 Eg8 12.4М14 Jfi.e6 13>xh7 fS 14.^d3 &d7 IS.JLxfS £Jxf5 16.£hcfS± (Olsen-Miladinovic,Genova 2003);
B)	6...Ab4 does not solve all problems either 7.e3 4Jge7 8.2c 1 (8..fi.d3 'tt'd7 9.ficl f6 Ю.аЗ .fi.a5 И.b4 ДЬб 12.&a4 fic8 13.£k5 ^xcS 14.fixc5 £d8 15.jfi.g3 £>e6 16.fic3^g5 17Jfi.e2«k4 18.ficl c6 19.4id2 Axe2 2O.Wxe2 $Jxd2 21>xd2 0-0«=f Dragomaretsky-Morozevich, Moscow 2001) 8...0-0 9.h3 Jfi.e6 10Jfid3 f6 1 l.Wc2 &h8 12.a3 Ad6 13.^e2 Ag8 14.0-0 aS IS.fifel Jfijcf4 16.exf4 №<16 17>c5 WxcS 18.fixcS Jfi.e6 19.£c3± (Kramnik-Morozevich, Moscow 2001);
C)	6....fi.d6 is better, forcing the opponent’s bishop to retreat to g3 - 7.Jfi.g3.
However, in the game S.Savchenko-Miladinovic (Bad Worishofen 2003) Black did not in fact cope with his opening problems: 7...Jfijcg3 8.hxg3 №d6 9.e3 2>f6 Ю.аЗ 0-0 1 1Wc2 fife8 12Jfi.e2 a6 13.ficl fiad8 14.ФП g6 1 S.Jfi.d3 £h5 16.^e2 Wf6 17.£f4 Jfixf3 18.gxf3 #3xg3+ 19.fxg3 flxe3 20.Wf2 №xd4 21.fidl Wb6 22.£)g2 Неб 23.Wxb6 cxb6 24.'±>f2±. It looks more logical to manoeuvre the knight to g6, from where it controls the important eS-square and is ready to leap to h4 at the first opportunity: 7...£jge7 8.e3 0-0 9.Jfi.e2 £>g6 lO.ficl &ce7 U..fi.xd6 Wxd6 12.0-0 c6 13.&a4 <5k8 14.^c5 We7 15.b4 43d6 16.a4± (Sundararajan-Roy Chowdhury, Visakhapatnam 2006).
The following were blitz games, and so please take a critical attitude to the favourable outcome for Black of the opening duel:
- 6...^d6 7-.fi.g3 &f6 8.e3 0-0 9.Ad3 ^3e7 10.Wc2 i.xf3 11 ,gxf3 2)g6 12.£b5 &Ь4+ 13.ФЛ c6 14.4te3 &d6 15.&e2 fie8 16.*^g2 £*115** (DJShrek-Benefactor, ICC 2004);
- 6...Ad6 7..fi.g3 hS 8.e3 ^ge7 9.Wc2 AfS 10.Ш2 f6 ll.Jfi.bS a6 12.jfia4 gS 13.Jfi.xd6 Wxd6 14.h4 g4 15.4Jgl g3 16.ГЗ Ь5 17.Дс2 Дхс2 18.Wxc2 £\aS 19.b3 cSt (DJShrek-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
7.	g2xf3 fiif8-d6
7	...Ab4 favours White: 8.e3 #Jge7 9.Wc2 2>g6 10.Jfi.g3 Wf6 11.0-0-0 0-0-0 1 2.f4±.
Black employed an interesting plan in the following game: 7...4Jf6 8.e3 (8.Ag5!?) 8...$JhS 9.jfi.g3 filb4 10.Jfi.d3 0-0 ll.Wb3 aS 12.ФН ^7 13.аЗ ДхсЗ 14.Wxc3 сб 15.Wc2 &h8 16.f4 Wd7
80
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 Jig4 4.<2)c3 e6 SJ&f4/jigS
17	.f5 g6!?* (Kuljasevic-Fercec, Zagreb 2004).
8.	&f4-g3
Going into an endgame by 8.4JxdS -&xf4 9.^xf4 Wxd4 10.Wxd4 £)xd4 does not create any particular problems for Black. Only, after 11.0-0-0 Ed8 12.e3 ?Je6 13.Exd8+<t'xd8 14.£ixe6+ fxe6 15.Ji.c4 he should play 1 S...siPd7! (15...&e7,as in the game Seirawan-S B. Hansen, Bled 2002, is weaker, since after 16.Egl g6 17.Bg5! with the threat of 18.Ee5 Black had to play 17...ФГ6, and by 18.EaS аб 19.ПаЗ± White seized the initiative) 16.Egl g6 17.f4 $Jh6^.
8.	_.	£jg8-e7
Attacks on the kingside are parried fairly easily: 8...f5 9.Wd2	10.JLh3 g6
ll .Egl 2>h5 12.e3 0-0 13.f4! 4te7 (alas, it is not possible to keep the bishop at g3 imprisoned: 13...JeLb4 14.jS.g2 JaLxc3 15.Wxc3 £)Ь8 16.'ЙЪЗ has dismal consequences) 14.Ah4 c6 1 S.?Je2 aS 1 b.’X’f 1 Wc7 17.£tel cS 18.dxc5 WxcS 19.^e2 £jf6 2O.Jixf6 Hxf6 21.Edl Bd8 22.JS.g2± (Roiz-Raetsky,Biel 200S).
9.	e2-e3
ranks, for example, 9...h5 10.a3 h4 ll.Jlxd6 Wxd6 12.Ah3!± (Atalik-Jurkovic, Subasic 2004).
9...	a6 10.a3 (10.Wc2!? hS 11.0-0-0 h4 12.jS.xd6 ^xd6 13.Ah3 g6 14.ФЫ f5 15.f4 0-0-0 16.2)a4b6 17.аЗФЬ7 18.Bd3 Ehg8 19.Ec3 g5 2O.fxg5 f4 21.Eel fxe3 22.fxe3 ExgS 23.Jifl± Epishin-Bromann, Copenhagen 2002) 10...h5 ll.Wc2 h4 12.^xd6 Wxd6 13.f4 (13.^Ji3 4Jd8 14.f4 4be6 15.£>e2 aS 16.$Jgl gS^ Hellsten-Ricardi, Santiago 2005) 13...g6 14JS.d3	15.£le2 $Jb8 16.Ecl c6
1 7.2)gl $Jd7 18.M Ec8 19.0-0± (Kar-pov-Piket, Monaco blind 2000).
10.	a2-a3	f7f5
11.	£>c3-b5	id6xg3
12.	h2xg3	$Jc6-d8
13.	4Jb5-c3	4Jd8-f7
14.	£ic3-e2	Ь7-Ь6?!
15.	3a1-c1	g7-g5
16.	f3-f4	g5-g4
17.	Eh1-h5l	0-0-0
18.	Ec1-c2	£ie7-g8
19.	Wd1-d3	£f7-d6
20.	4Je2-c1	£jg8-f6
21.	Wd3-a6+	Фс8-Ь8
22.	Eh5-h6	Wd7-g7
23.	£c1-d3	4Jd6-c4
 4A 1
&Д a
9.	Wd8-d7
The march of the h-pawn is unlikely to cause any confusion in White’s solid
24.	£)d3-c5! b6xc5
25.	Eh6xf6 ^c4-d6
81
Chapter Tvw - Section A
26.	d4xc5 27. 2c2*c3 28. Ь2хсЗ 29. 'Й'аб-сб
^g7xf6 Wf6xc3+
^d6-e4
Black resigned. To be fair, it should be said that in no opening it is possible to withstand such an attack by White, so here Mikhail Ivanovich was not to blame...
GAME 22
□ Pentala Harikrishna  Alexander Morozevich
Hyderabad 2002
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£ b8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4.	£Ы-сЗ	e7-e6
5.	c4xd5	e6xd5
6.	£c1*g5	
As it was said by one of the classics: ‘One piece stands badly - the whole game stands badly’. White reckons (and, it must be admitted, not without justification) that the knight on c6 is badly placed, so therefore he should exchange as many as possible of the remaining pieces, and the importance of this positional factor will merely increase. This is logical, but Black is not obliged to fall in with his opponent’s wishes.
6.	-	f7-f6
Here is an example of what White is aiming for: 6...Ae7 7.Jlxe7 ^gxe7 8.e3 0-0 9.£e2 Wd6 10.0-0 2ad8 ll.Scl a6 12.h3 &xf3 13.i.xf3 2fe8 14.a3 2>b8 1 5.Wb3± (Boleslavsky-Aronson, Kharkov 1956). There is no disputing the fact that his advantage is slight, but also there is hardly any risk, and only two results are really possible.
7.	£g5-f4 Jkf8-b4
7...	^d6?! is bad, because, when ...f7-f6 has been played, the transition into an endgame favours White — the weakening of the еб-square will tell: 8.^xd5! JaLxf4 9.4^xf4 lkxf3 10.gxf3 Wxd4 1 l Wxd4^xd4 12.0-0-0 2d8 13.e3 gS (forced, since 13...4ic6 14.Ab5 2xdl + 15.2xdl £te7 16.£ie6 is bad for Black) 14.^h5 £e6 1 S.Jkh3 2xdl + 16.2xdl Фе7 17.i.xe6 Фхеб 18.2d8 &f7 19.2c8± (Portisch-Antal, Hungary 2003/04).
The immediate 7...£}ge7 is possible, for example: 8.e3 g5 9.jtg3 h5 10.h3 Ae6 11.4id2 Stf5 12.Ah2 Ad6 13.Jlxd6 Wxd6 14.£b3 ФАЗ 15.Де2	16.Wd2
aS?* (De Vita-Miladinovic, Genova 2004).
8.	e2-e3
The following game shows that the advance of the black pawns on the kingside combines badly with kingside castling: 8.2c 1 &ge7 9.e3 gS 10.Ag3 h5 11.h3 Деб 12.Wb3 2b8 (Black has to worry about the b7 -pawn, but now his king can no longer be moved to the queenside) 13.£ki2 h4 14.ДЬ2 0-0 15.Ad3 £d6 16.£xd6 Wxd6 17.^e2 4ki8 18.f4 ^f7 19.0-0 <£>g7 20.Wc2 c6 21.e4± (Jovanic-Cvitan, Rijeka 2005).
a —	£>g8-e7
82
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 -&g4 4.£k3 e6 5.-&f4/j£g5
9.	4f1-e2
In the game Milev-Spassky (Havana 1962), after 9.h3 AfS lO.Bcl 0-0 11 .Де2 Wd7 12.a3	13.£xd6 cxd6
14.0-0 Hfc8 15.b4± the players soon agreed a draw. This decision was probably influenced by the Bulgarian grandmaster’s respect for the future world champion; in principle. White has retained an opening ’plus’ and he could have tried to build on it.
But at the ICC no one suffers from particulardeference, and close-range fights develop over the entire board: 9.jLd3 Wd7 10.h3 Деб ll.Wb3 0-0 12.Bcl aS 13.0-0 gS 14.Ji.g3 hS IS.^bS a4 16Wdl AaS 17.АЫ Sf7 18.£el h4 19.Ji.h2 Eg7 20.£>d3 &b6 21.f3 £fS 22.Bel £g3 23.^d2 £aS 24.Sk3 $k4 2S.Wf2 c6 26.£>e2 £fS 27.^c3 £kxe3! 28.Bxe3 Jlxd4 29.£idl a3 30.£}c5 axb2 31.ficc3 JtxcS 32.flxcS £ixe3 ЗЗ.ШхеЗ JlfS 0-1 (Igrok-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
9.	Wd8-d7
10. Ba1-c1
Here is another Internet battle with similar motifs: 10.0-0 gS ll.J.g3 hS 12.£}b5 AaS (the same method of defending the c7-pawn) 13.h4a6 14.£}c3 <5ifS 15.a3 4ixg3 16.fxg3 Jlxc3 17.bxc3 We7 18 Wd2 0-0-0 19.&d3
Hhe8 20.Efel Jlxf3 21.gxf3 gxh4 22.gxh4 Bg8+ 23.ФЫ Bg3 24.J&.f54-ФЬ8 25>f2 Bdg8 26.Sgl Exgl + 27.Exgl Exgl+ 28.^xgl Wxa3 29 Wg8+ Фа7 30.Wxd5 Wxc3 31.Wc5+ WxcS 32.dxc5 aS 33.Jlg6a4 34.Ji.xh5 £eS 0-1 (SANS68-Moro-zevich.ICC 1999).
10.	_.	g7-g5!?
11.	Jf4-g3	h7-h5
12.	h2-h3	Ag4-e6
Black has been the first to play actively, but this is not the start of a pawn storm (on the kingside there is nothing to storm), but rather a prophylactic measure: Black has seized space and arranged his pawns well, for the middlegame as well as the endgame.
13.	£jf3-d2	J.e6-f7
14.	J.e2-d3	h5-h4
15.	J.g3-h2	ib4-d6
16.	Jlh2xd6	c7xd6l?
A radical solution to the problem of the c7-pawn, typical of the Chigorin Defence Black has taken control of the cS- and eS-squares (giving the f-pawn the possibility of advancing), and it is not easy to exploit the weakness of the dS -pawn - it is securely defended.
17. a2-a3	0-0-0
18. Ь2-Ь4 Фс8-Ь8
83
Chapter Тио - Section A
19.	£d2-b3	Ed8-c8
20.	£e1-d2	i_f7-h5
21.	Wd1-g1	f6-f5
22.	Wg1-h2	ФЬ8-а8
23.	£)c3-a2	Sc8-f8
24.	Ь4-Ь5	£jc6-d8
25.	Фа2-Ь4	f5-f4
26.	&d2-c2	f4xe3
27.	f2xe3	Bf8-f2+
28.	Фс2-Ь1	£h5-f3
29.	Ec1-c2	Bf2xc2
30.	Jcd3xc2	H3-e4
31.	xc2xe4	d5xe4
32.	Hh1-c1	<d8-e6
33.	a3-a4	2>e7-f5
34.	Wh2-g1	Bh8-c8
35.	Bg1-f2	Bc8xc1 +
36.	^b3xc1	£ie6-c7
37.	ФЬ1-Ь2	Фа8-Ь8
38.	£>c1-a2	a7-a5
39.	Ь5ха6	Ь7хаб
40.	d4-d5	£>f5-e7
41.	Wf2-f7	ФЬ8-с8
GAME 23
□ Anatoly Karpov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	' b8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	ic8-g4
4.	ФЫ-сЗ	e7-e6
5.	c4xd5	e6xd5
6.	Дс1-д5	f7-f6
7. Jtg5-h4
46. <7d5-e7+ £c8-d7
47. £e7xg8 £c7-d5
48. Xb2-b3
It would seem that the bishop is less well
placed here than on f4 — it has fewer		
prospects. 7. „		kf8-b4
a	e2-e3	€jg8-e7
9.	i_h4-g3	h7-h5
10.	h2-h3	£g4-e6
11.	£f1-d3	Wd8-d7
12.	Wd1-c2	g7-g5
13.	a2-a3	jkb4xc3+
14.	Wc2xc3	h5-h4
15.	i.g3-h2	a7-a5
16.	Ad3-b5	Фе8П
17.	Ea1-c1	Sa8*g8
18.	£f3-d2	g5-g4
19.	h3xg4	Eg8xg4
20.	£d2-b3	
Black resigned.
20. «.	3g4xg2
20...h3! was stronger, practically forcing the white bishops ‘self-wrapping’ after 21 .g3.
84
Bishop outside the Chain: 3.£)f3 Jtg4 4. £кЗ еб 5.-fif4/jfig5
21.	Ah2-f4?	Wd7-c8
22.	4jb3-c5	h4-h3
23.	Ab5-f1	i.e6-g4
24.	e3-e4	d5xe4
25.	Jfif1*c44-	&f7-g6
26.	d4-d5	Wc8-f5
27.	^c3-d2	Hh8-d8
28.	Ac5-e6	Sd8xd5
29.	JLc4xd5	£>e7xd5
29...WxdS!-+.
30. 31.	Hc1-c5 £ie6xc7	£»c6-e7 Wf5xf4
31...h2 32.-fi.xh2 eluded the game.		e3—F would have con-
32.	£ic7xd5	4ie7xd5
33.	Ec5xd5	Wf4xd2+
34.	Sd5xd2	h3-h2
35.	Фе1-П	Ag4-f3
36.	Ed2-d8	e4-e3??
36...&fs	• 37.Hh8	Sg7 38.й I xh2 Sd7—+
would have won.
37.	Sd8-g84-	&g6-f5
38.	Sg8xg2	e3-e2+
39.	&f1-e1	fi.f3xg2
40.	Eh1xh2	Ag2-f3
41.	Sh2-h4	£f5-e5
42.	£e1-d2	f6-f5
43.	Eh4-h3	fi.f3-c6
44.	£d2xe2	a5-a4
Of course, with both flags about to fall the evaluation of the position has changed markedly, but Karpov did not have any time left to convert his advantage, and so a draw was agreed.
GAME 24
□ Maxim Dlugy
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 1999
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	'b8-c6
3.	4jg1-f3	ji.c8-g4
4.	£Ы-сЗ	e7-e6
5.	Ac1-g5
Ж
All	111
4 1  A A
a -
A A A A
a
(7-f6
Here too exchanges favour White: S...i.e7 6.Дхе7 2)gxe7 7.e3 0-0 8.Ad3 £)g6 9.cxd5 exdS 10.h3 Ae6 11.h4 Ee8 12.<5jgS h6 13.Axg6 fxg6 14.£)хеб Пхеб 15.Wg4± (V.L Ivanov-Barsky, Moscow 1996).
6.	Ag5-f4
The attempt after 6.Ah4 Ab4 to exploit the pin on the f6-pawn by 7.£)eS succeeded in the game Onischuk-Morozevich (Alushta 1994): 7...4ixe5 8.dxe5 c6 9.cxd5 WaS? 10.f3 exdS 1 l.fxg4±, and White converted his extra piece. However, after the cool-headed 9...exdS 10.Wd4 Wb6! ll.Wxg4 Axc3+ 12.bxc3 Wb2= the game would have ended in perpetual check.
The exchange 6.cxd5 exdS transposes into the variation S.cxdS exdS 6.fiLg5 which was analysed above.
6.	-.	5f8-b4
7.	e2-e3	£>g8-e7
8.	^d1-b3	Wd8-d7
9.	Af4-g3	h7-h5
85
Chapter Two - Section В
10.	h2-h3	Jkg4xf3	21.	Jke2xh5	^d7xh3
11.	g2xf3	£>e7-f5	22.	ДИ2-дЗ	£ih4-g2+
12.	Ag3-h2	5jf5-h4	23.	Пд1хд2	Wh3xg2
13.	£.f1*e2	a7-a5	24.	Ah5xf7+	ig8xf7
14.	a2-a3	a5-a4	25.	d4xe5	£ie7-f5
15.	Wb3-c2	£Ь4хсЗ+	26.	e5xf6	ЗД5хдЗ
16.	Wc2xc3	£>c6-e7	27.	^c3-e5	’ifg2-f1 +
17.	ПЫ-д1	o-o	28.	±e1-d2	Wf1-e2+
18.	Ba1-c1	c7-c6	29.	&d2-c3	4ig3-e4+
19.	c4-c5	Bf8-f7	30.	лсЗ-Ь4	We2-b5
20.	f3-f4	e6-e5	Mate.		
Section В
Bishop inside the Chain: 4.£k3 e6 5.e3
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4jb8-d6
3.	£g1-f3	Дд8-с4
4.	4jb1-c3	e7-e6
5.	e2-e3
X W-SA4X
1П AAA
* A
A '
A A £ й A J
Ai И Й'АА
Д’г-
In this section we will investigate lines in which the white queen's bishop stays inside the pawn chain, when White reinforces his position with a quick e2-e3.
GAME 25
□ Wilhelm Steinitz  Mikhail Chigorin Havana (m/12) 1889
1.	^g1-f3	d7-d5
2.	d2-d4	Дс8-д4
3.	c2-c4	4jb8-c6
4. e2-e3	e7-e6
5. &Ы-СЗ
By transposition of moves we have reached the starting position of this variation, involving the move e2-e3 with the bishop still on cl. As you will see, this was played in a world championship match as long ago as 1889. In choosing this emphatically solid set-up, Steinitz was as though asking Chigorin: well now, where are you intending to find complications here?!
5. ..	£f8-b4
86
Bishop inside the Chain: 3.£)f3 Jfcg4 4.4dc3 еб S.e3
Here too it is possible to delay this move, for example: S...43f6 6.h3 Jfixf3 7.Wxf3 Jfi.b4 8.Jfi.d3 e5 9.cxdS ftxdS 10.Jfi.d2 2>de7 11.a3 .fi.a5 12.b4?! (12.0-0± is better) 12...exd4 13.£ja4? dxe3? (returns the favour. Black would have gained a big advantage after 13... 4k 5 14.We4 dxe3 IS WxeS (1 S.Jfi.b5+ c6 16.jfi.xe3 Wd5+) 15...exd2+ 16.&xd2 jfi.b6+) 14.Wxe3 Jfi.b6 1S.41xb6 axb6 16.Jfi.c3 0-0 17.0-0 Be8 18.Wg3 4kl4 19.Jfi.xh74 ФхЬ7 2O.Wh4+ *g8 21>xd4 Wxd4 22.^Lxd4 'Ll 5 23.Jfi.c3T, and Black won (Kar-pov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2002).
6. Jfi.c1-d2
In the event of 6.cxd5 exdS 7.Jfi.e2 4f6 Black has no reason for complaint, for example: 8.0-0 0-0 9.jfi.d2 fle8 lO.Hcl jfi.xc3 И.АхсЗ 4k4 12.jfi.el Пеб 13.h3 &h5 14.b4a6 15.13 Jfi.xf3 16.jfi.xf3 4te7 17..fijce4 dxe4 18.f3 £dS 19.3fi.d2 We7 20.f4 f5 21.a4 gST (V. Sokolov-Spassky, Leningrad 1960).
6.	.«	4jg8-e7
6...	416 is also quite acceptable, for example: 7.cxd5 exd5 8.5c 1 0-0 9.Jfi.e2 4}e7 10.Wb3 aS 11.a3 Jfilxc3 12.ДхсЗ сб 13.Scl 4se4 14.Jfi.c3 Wc7 15.0-0 4fS 16.a4 Hfe8₽t (Kawas-Wanted, ICC 1999).
7.	Jfi.f1-d3 kg4-f5
We have already encountered the trap 7...0-0?? 8.jfiLxh7+ &xh7 9.4}gS+.
8.	Jfi.d3xf5	4ie7xf5
9.	c4xd5	e6xd5
10.	Wd1-b3	jfi.b4xc3
11.	Jfi.d2xc3	Sa8-b8
12.	0-0	0-0
13.	Ea1-c1	Sf8-e8
The structure of the resulting position most resembles the Karlsbad Variation, and to complete the picture one only needs to move the c7 -pawn to c6.
The bishop on c3 is rather passive and Black does not experience any particular difficulties in switching his forces to the kingside, where in the Karlsbad he is ‘supposed’ to attack. On the other hand, for the moment his pieces are insufficiently well coordinated, and his b7 - and d5-pawns need defending. On the whole, the chances of the two sides are roughly equal.
14.	jfi.c3-d2 <4c6-e7?l
The straightforward 14...йе6 was stronger.
15.	Hc1-c2
White had the possibility of the curious manoeuvre IS.AaS!?, trying to provoke the weakening move 15...b6. Black would probably have had to play this, since 1 S...4Jc6 16.Hc5! 4ife7 17.Jfi.d2 is altogether unfavourable for him, and the pawn sacrifice I6...43xa5 17.Пха5 сб 18.Дха7 ^c7 looks dubious: he does not have enough forces for an attack on the king.
15.	_	c7-c6
16.	Hf1-c1	4>e7-g6
Black’s chances are on the kingside, and White’s on the queenside Control of the e4-square is very important for Black. The absence of the opponent’s light-squared bishop suggests the idea of 16...43d6, but Chigorin has a different plan: he intends to
87
Chapter Two - Section В
exchange the knight on f3 and, with his kingside superiority, attack the white king.
17.	Ad2-e1
ж *
11 All
S'
 &&&
A 4
А й a
17. _	4Л5-И4
The computer likes this move, but after the exchange of a pair of knights the bishop on el acquires some clear prospects. Would not the standard Karlsbad manoeuvre of the knight via d6 to e4 have been better?
1a £if3xh4 4 g6xh4
19.	f2-f3!
This is the whole point: White establishes communication between the flanks, in time the bishop can come out to g3, and the knight is left hanging. Black must urgently forget about an attack and prepare for a pawn offensive by the opponent in the centre.
19.	_.	&h4-f5
20.	Ae1-f2	Wd8-g5
20...	W6 is aho not bad, for the moment maintaining the pressure on the d4-pawn.
21.	Sc1-e1	He8-e6
22.	e3-e4	Sb8-e8l?
23.	Hc2-e2
Steinitz sensibly avoids the complications after 23.Wxb7 dxe4 24.fxe4 Hg6 25.g3 ^h4 26.Wb3 Wg4 27.fle3 hS or 24.Дхе4 Дхе4 2S.fxe4 4ie3 26.АхеЗ Wxe3+ 27.ЙГ2 f6. Incidentally, Chigorin did not need to sacrifice a pawn, but
could have played 22...We7 and only then 23...йе8.
23.	.«	£rf5-d6?l
23...	We7 or 23...b6 wasbetter.
24.	e4-e5
‘Rybka’ suggests simply grabbing a pawn - 24.Ae3 We7 25.exdS exdS 26.^xdS. It is not easy to refute this rather cynical recommendation, although one somehow does not want to voluntarily agree to a mortal pin on the e-file.
24.	_	Wg5-d8?
Now Black loses a pawn without any particular compensation. 24...^f5 was essential, and if 2S.Wxb7, then 2S...Hg6 26.g4 (26.g3?l £ih4!) 26...hS with great complications.
25.	&g1-f1	£d6-c4
26.	Wb3xb7	Wd8-g5
27.	Wb7-b4	He6-g6
28.	Jkf2-g3	h7-h5
29.	b2-b3	4)c4-b6
30.	Wb4-d2	Wg5-f5
31.	^d2-c2	Wf5-g5
32.	Wc2-d2	Wg5-f5
33.	&f1-g1	£sb6-c8
34.	Wd2-c2	Wf5-d7
35.	Ag3-h4	Cc8-b6
36.	Wc2-d3	£Ь6-а8
37.	f3-f4	£ia8-c7
38.	Ah4-f2	
88
Bishop inside the Chain: 3.<£)f3 J^g4 4.£)c3 e6 S.e3
White would have won more quickly by 38.fS Sg4 39.g3 £jb5 4O.e6 fxe6 41 ,fxe6 Wc7 42.h3! Hxd4 43.Wg6. It would appear that Steinitz wanted to avoid any complications whatsoever, but subsequently Chigorin nevertheless found a way to sharpen the position.
38. -.	Wd7-g4
39. Jtf2-e3	f7-f5
40. Se2*f2	Sg6*e6
41. Wd3-e2	Wg4-g6
42. Sf2-f3	Wg6-f7
43. Sf3*g3	*g8-h7
44. £e3-f2	Пе6-Ь6
45. He1-c1	2e8-c8
46. Sg3-c3	4_.c7-e6
47. We2-a6	Пс8-д8
48. ДсЗхсб	£)e6xf4
49. 2c6xh6+?
White could have won by force with 49.ДеЗ! Пхсб 5O.Bxc6 4jg6 5I.We2! 0x1 52.Sc7or5l...£f8 52.e6!.
49.	..	g7xh6
50.	£f2-g3	Sg8-g6
51.	Wa6-f1	£>f4-e6
52.	«rf1-d3?	2g6-g4?
Chigorin misses his chance: 52...h4! 53.jS.xh4 Zxg2+! 54.&hl (54.<£>xg2? #Jf4+) 54...йха2! with excellent drawing chances.
53.	h2-h3 Sg4xd4
54.	Wd3-a6
55.	kg3-e1
56.	Sc1-c6
57.	Псбхеб
58.	*g1-h2
59.	Ee6-f6
60.	Wa6*e6
61.	Hf6-f7
Black resigned.
Sd4-d2
Zd2-d4
Sd4-e4
Se4xe1+
He1-c1
Wf7-g7
Hc1-f1
GAME 26
□ Amos Burn
 Mikhail Chigorin
Berlin 1897
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	2)b8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	jic8-g4
4.	e2-e3	e7-e6
5.	£jb1-c3	£f8-b4
6.	Bd1-b3	
Slightly (though not much) more active than Steinitz’s move 6.Ad2; in particular, Black has to reckon with the additional possibility of £if3-e5. Now, more than a hundred years later, it seems surprising that at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries this rather harmless set-up enjoyed great popularity, and Chigorin several times had to defend Black’s position in games with the leading players of the time.
6.	_	jSg4xf3
6...	J«Lxc3+ is also possible, after which 7.bxc3?’ is bad on account of 7...J«Lxf3 8.gxf3 OaS 9.Wc2 £ixc4 1 O.Axc4 dxc4 11 Wa4+ c6 12.Wxc4 Wd5¥.
7.	g2xf3 4jg8-e7 8. Ac1-d2
8.Bgl was tested in the Internet match Dlugy-Morozevich (ICC 1999). In one of
89
Chapter Two - Section В
the games White gained an advantage after 8...0-0 9.Ad2 АхсЗ Ю.ДхсЗ Hb8 11.0-0-0 dxc4 12.Дхс4 4*15 13.£.d2 bS 14.Ad3 aS 15.Axh7+ ФхЬ7 16.Wc2+ &g8 17.Wxc6±. In another Black played more successfully: 11...4^g6 (instead of ll...dxc4) 12.f4 4ke7 13.ДБ4 He8 14.ФЫ 4tf5 15.£.d3 c6 16.^xf5 exfS 17.cxd5cxd5 18.Sg5^d7 19>d3 He4 2O.Hdgl HbeS** (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
8.	...	0-0
9.	a2-a3?l
Essentially a waste of a tempo, since sooner or later Black himself would have had to exchange on c3, in order to develop his offensive on the queenside In addition, White was planning to castle queenside, and now the position of his king will be weakened.
The diagram position is noteworthy above all for the fact that the great Jose Raul Capablanca once lost from it with White. Admittedly, it was a game from a simultaneous display, but even so, even so...
9.0-0-0 Hb8 10.h4 dxc4 ll.Axc4 b5 12.£.d3 ДхсЗ 13.ДхсЗ 4*15 14^.d2 ЙЬб 15.ФЫ aS 16.ЙС1 Wa8 17.fic5 a4 18.^2?! b4 19.Wdl flfb8 20.Фа1 4)a5 2l.JiLc4? (2l>xa4!)
21...4ib3+! 22.Axb3 axb3 23.Wxb3 Паб 24.НЫ Hbb6 2S.HxdS exdS 26.Hel Hxa2+ 27.Wxa2 Наб 28.'Й'хаб Wxa6+ 29.ФЫ Wd3+ 0-1 (Capablanca-Marin у Uovet, Barcelona 1920).
Chigorin also had to play against 9.0-0-0. In the game Leonhardt-Chigorin, Ostend 1905 after 9...Hb8 lO.cxdS exd5?! Il.^.d3 bS 12.fldgl ДхсЗ 13.Wxc3 ЙЬб 14.#c2 fS IS.HgS h6 16.flg2 b4 17.Hhgl Hf7 18.ФЫ Black found himself in difficulties and was unable to save the game. However, 10...41xd5 was stronger, analogous to the way Chigorin played in one of his games with Pillsbury that is analysed later.
Three years later, in a new game with Chigorin, Bum tried to improve White’s play, but again he was disappointed: 9.Egl dxc4 10.Wxc4 Hb8 11.f4 bS 12.We2 4jg6 13.flg5 a6 14.Wg4 Де7 IS.HhS b4 16.4*t4f5 17.Wf3^e8 18>h3
90
Bishop inside the Chain: 3.4df3 jig4 4.£k3 еб 5.e3
18..	.£ixd4! 19.exd4 Wxa4 2О.ДхЬ7 b3 21 a3 Wxd4 22.Wh5 ФП 23.ДсЗ We4+ 24.jS.e2 Hg8 25.Wh6 £xf4 26.flxg7 + Uxg7 27.Wxg7+ Фе8 28.Wh8+ JS’J'8 29. We 5 4jd3+ 0-1 (Burn-Chigorin, Paris 1900).
But let us return to the first Burn-Chigorin game.
9.	_. Jtb4xc3
As shown by a more modern example. Black can also postpone this exchange: 9...Jla5 10.0-0-0 ЙЬ8 11 Wc2 dxc4 12.Jl.xc4 -£Lxc3 13.jS.xc3 bS 14.d5 exdS 15.jS.xd5 £Jxd5 16.jS.xg7 &xg7 17.Wxc6 Wf6 18.Wxd5 b4 19.Shgl + &h8 2O.Wd4 Wxd4 21Sxd4 bxa3 22.bxa3 ПЬЗ 23.a4 Sfb8® (Maher-ramzade-Kaminski, Halle 1995).
10.	id2xc3 Sa8-b8!
Effectively Chigorin’s patent: with the aid of this rook manoeuvre (‘mysterious’, by Nimzowitsch’s later definition) he prepared numerous attacks on the queenside.
11.	Hh1-g1 £e7-g6
In general, a useful prophylactic move, but it was also possible to play 11 ...Wd6!? immediately.
12.	0-0-0	Wd8-d6
13.	Sg1-g3	d5xc4
14.	Wb3xc4
In the event of 14.Дхс4? Ь5 1 5 JS.d3 b4 16.axb4 £jxb4 the white queen is awfully placed, whereas now it heads for c5.
14. ...	Ь7-Ь5
15. Wc4-c5	Ь5-Ь4
16. a3xb4	£>c6xb4
17. Jtf1-c4	ПЬ8-Ь6
18. Bd1-g1	Sf8-b8
19. *c1-d2?	
The queens have faced each other for so long that White would appear to have be-
come accustomed to thinking that he could enter an endgame at any moment But with his last move Black has defended his knight on b4 one more time and he can now relieve his queen of this duty. Therefore it was time for White to play 19.Wxd6 cxd6 and only then 2O.’X’d2, intending Jid3 and h2-h4-hS.
19.	.. Wd6-d7l
Now the centralized king will feel extremely uncomfortable. Black is already threatening 2O...Wa4 and 21...Sc6 (after the immediate 2O...fic6 there is 21.Ab5).
20.	Дд1-а1 a7-a6
21.	&d2-e2? Sb6-c6
22.	Wc5-a7
When he played 21.Фе2 Bum undoubtedly had this move in mind, hoping with its help to turn the course of the game. And yet this brazen invasion provokes an inner protest. It would be one thing if this game had been played in recent times, when computers have instilled the thought that queens are never trapped and that any poisoned pawns can be eaten safely, but to voluntarily walk into a trap in those pure, naive times!...
22. -	Wd7-c8!
23. &c3xb4 Пс6хс4
24. ib4-c5 Sb8-a8
91
Chapter Тио - Section В
25. Wa7xa8 Wc8xa8
26. *e2-d3
White also hopes to win at least the exchange for the queen, but he is not destined to.
26. _	£}g6-e5+!
27. Xd3-e2 £e5-d7
And White resigned in view of 28.lX’d3 &xc5+ 29.Фхс4 Wd5+ 30.ФБ4 Wb3+! 31 .Фхс5 WbS mate.
GAME 27
□ Harry Nelson Pillsbury
 Mikhail Chigorin
London 1899
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	C2-C4	€Jb8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	jSic8-g4
4.	e2-e3	e7-e6
5.	4Jb1-c3	Af8-b4
6.	Wd1-b3	£.g4xf3
7.	g2xf3	£g8-e7
8. 9.	Ac1-d2 if1-d3	0-0
At the famous tournament in St Petersburg, the capital of the Russian Empire, Harry Nelson Pillsbury chose 9.f4, apparently in order to prevent the opening of the centre by ...e6-e5. But Chigorin had something quite different in mind, and he immediately began carrying out his flank strategy: 9...ЙЬ8 10.0-0-0 dxc4 11.Axc4 b5 12.^d3 ДхсЗ 13.Wxc3 ПЬ6 14.ФЬ1 aS IS.Hhgl &Ь4!? 16.Де4 £led5 17.W'c5 (diagram).
Black has acted very consistently and forcefully, but factors such as the two bishops and a strong pawn centre play a very important role, so that the diagram position is clearly favourable for White
Chigorin decided to sacrifice a pawn and after 17. .'й'а8 18.Axb4 axb4 19.jSi.xd5 exdS 2O.Wxb4 Даб 21.Wb3 ДЬ8 he managed to save the game, albeit with great effort and a considerable degree of luck (Pillsbury-Chigorin, St Petersburg 1895/96).
9.	..	Za8-b8
10.	c4xd5	£e7xd5
11.	0-0-0	ДЬ4хсЗ
12.	id2xc3
Akiba Rubinstein recaptured with the pawn and after 12.bxc3 b5 13.e4£jde7 14.Bhgl aS? 15.Jke3 2ig6 I6.f4 Wh4?! 17.d5 a4 18.Wa3 exdS 19.exdS 4ke7 2O.WcS £xf4 21J.xb5 £f5 22>c4 £d6 23>xf4 Wxf4 24.Axf4 ДхЬ5 25.Фс2 he gained a significant advantage (Rubinstein-Chigorin, Lodz 1906). However, much stronger was 14...b4! IS.AgS W’db 16.^a4 ДЬбТ with the initiative. 14,..Фа5!?«> also comes into consideration.
Ж W
I
I:

E ФДЛ a
92
Bishop inside the Chain: 3.£)f3 jfig4 4.£)c3 e6 S.e3
12. ..	b7-b5?
Consistent and energetic, but... bad. Black has no open files on the queenside, and to develop an attack against the two bishops and strong pawn centre is extremely diffi-cult. It was essential to exchange one of the bishops - 12...£>xc3!. Now in the event of !3.Wxc3 Black gains good counterplay by both 13.. Wd5 and 13...4W followed by I4...£ki5. And if 13.bxc3 he has 13...21a5! 14>a3 c$!®. slightly exposing the white king.
13. ^c3-d2l
It would appear that this brilliant prophylactic move was not properly appreciated by any of the commentators. It is probable that Black was counting mainly on 13.e4 b4! 14.Ad2^xd4 15>c4^b6 16.Wxb4 cS! with favourable complications.
13.	. Eb8-b6
13...	aS was stronger, and after 14.ФЫ a4 15.Wc2 (not 15.Jlxh7+ ФЬ8!) 15...£}cb4!«^ Black has adequate counterplay. Chigorin probably rejected 13...aS because of 14.JLxh7+ ФхЬ7 15>c2+ &g8 16>xc6 ЙЬб 17.Wc5± and decided first to defend the knight However, after 15...f5!?® Black would have gained quite good compensation for the pawn.
14.	Sd1-g1?
White incorrectly engages in a race. After 14.ФЫ! aS 15.flcl± Black’s activity on the queenside would soon have petered out, and White could himself have developed pressure on the c-file.
14.	_	a7-a5
15.	f3-f4?
Essential was 15.ФЫ a4 16.Wdl! or 16.Wc2	£)cb4!? I7..fi.xb4 4ixb4
18..fijch7+ ФЬ8 19.^e4! with a doubleedged game
15.	-	f7-f5!
With one simple move Black significantly restricts the opponent’s offensive possibilities in the centre and on the kingside.
16.	Йд1-д3?1 a5-a4
17.	Wb3-d1
The interesting attempt to halt the pawn storm by 17.^аЗ!? Wa8!? 18.b4! (bad is 18.5hg 1 b4!—4, 18.Ae2 b4 19.Wd3 b3+ or 18>c5 £te5!? 19-fijcbS nfb8+-thisis where the omission of the prophylactic ФЫ is felt), does not work in view of 18...ФсхЬ4!? (little is promised by the transition into the endgame: 18...axb3? 19.Wxa8 flxa8 2O.axb3<®) 19.jkxb4 £ixb4 20.Bhgl 4}xd3+ 21^xd3 ПГ7—4.
17.	-	^c6-b4i
18.	.fid2xb4
Not 18.^bl?flc6+.
18.	£d5xb4
19.	Hh1-g1 flf8-f7l
20.	£d3*b1
93
Chapter Two - Section C
20.	._	a4-a3!
Opening lines for the heavy pieces.
21.	Ь2хаЗ	^b4-d5
22.	Wd1-b3	b5-b4
23.	a3xb4
23.a4 would not have saved White in view of 23...ЙС6+ 24.&d2 ДсЗ 2S.Wb2 cS!.
23.		ДЬ6хЬ4
24.	Wb3-d3	c7-c5-+
25.	d4xc5	Wd8-a5!
26.	ДЫ-С2	Wa5xa2
27.	f2-f3	ДЬ4-с4
28.	Sg3-g2	Ef7-d7
29.	c5-c6	Cc4xc6
30. 31.	Wd3-d4 &c1-d2	Wa2-a3+
31. -	Дс6хс2+!
32. £>d2xc2	4ud5xe3+
33. &С2Ы	2d7xd4
34. Дд2хд7+	*g8-f8
35. Пд7-д8+	*f8-e7
White resigned.
Section C
The Queen Sortie: 4 or S.Wa4
1. d2-d4
2. < g1-f3
3. c2-c4
4. £Ы-сЗ
d7-d5
4ub8*c6
й.с8-д4
e7-e6
5. Wd1-a4l?
A logical manoeuvre: the early development of the light-squared bishop to g4
has undoubtedly weakened Black's queenside, and White wants to exploit this factor by creating, in particular, the threat of 4if3-e5. The plan with Wdl -a4 was highly rated by Alexander Alekhine; true, he himself played this on the 4th move, as we will see later.
GAME 28
□ Petr Romanovsky  Evgeny Terpugov
Moscow 1951
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£>g1-f3	£b8-c6
3.	c2-c4	£c8*g4
94
The Queen Sortie: 3. £)f3 -iig4 and 4 or 5. &^a4
4.	^Ы-сЗ e7-e6
5.	Bd1-a4l? Wd8-d7?!
Annotating this encounter in his book of selected games (Moscow, 1954), Romanovsky reported: ‘If S...Jkxf3 I would have captured with the g-pawn.’ For some reason, Petr Arsenevich did not say a word about an interesting game of his, in which he captured the bishop with the other pawn: 6.exf3 a6 7.Ae3 £T6 8.c5 Ae7 9.Де2 0-0 10.f4 Sfc>h8 11.0-0 2>d7 12.b4 £f6 13.Sadi £>e7 14.£.d3 Hg8 IS.Abl g6 16.Wc2 £>f5 17.g4 £lxe3 18.fxe3 Ag7 19.g5 f5 2O.h4 Jkf8 21.21'3 hS 22.a4 Де7, and White was unable to extract any benefit from his spatial advantage (Romanovsky-Bogo-Ijubow, Triberg 1915). Perhaps Romanovsky did not want to mention the ‘trainer of the motherland’ Bogoljubow. Besides, this game was played during the First World War on German territory, when the Russian subjects Romanovsky and Bogoljubow had been interned by the German authorities.
The move made by Terpugov is too passive, and it does nothing to counter the opponent’s plans.
6.	c4xd5 e6xd5
7.	Ac1-f4
‘White’s plan becomes clear: he intends to undertake an energetic attack against the opponent’s queenside, in particular the сб-point. He has in mind the moves 2c 1, e3, JalbS and others, depending on how Black responds to this attack.’ (Romanovsky)
7.	-	<g8-f6
8.	e2-e3	^c6-b41?
Otherwise 9.Ab5 is extremely unpleasant.
9.	£f1-b5
Romanovsky avoided 9.£}b5 because of 9...£}a6 lO.^eS ДЬ4+. It is possible to take this variation a bit further 11 Wxb4 ^xb4 12.^xd7 &xd7 13.2cl c6 14.2ld6 £>xa2 15.Sal &b4 16.Sa4 aS 17.2>xf7 2hc8 (17...b5!?), White is a little better, but the position remains tense.
9.	-	c7-c6
10.	4.b5-e2
Having provoked 9...c7-c6, White is threatening to play I l.a3.
10.	...	i.g4xf3
11.	g2xf3	^d7-f5
12.	*e1-d2l?
Suppressing Black’s counterplay associated with the threats of £k2 + and £\13+. Behind the powerful pawn screen the white king feels quite comfortable, and the opponent’s scattered pieces will soon have to begin retreating. In the event of the routine 12.0-0-0 b5 13.Wb3 aS 14 2dg 1»? a4 IS.Wdl a3 16.b3 h6 the knight on b4 is very strong.
12. _.	£f6-d7l?
Black continues to seek clever tactical resources. Nothing good was promised by 1 2...&h5 13.Ag3 or 12...aS 13.аЗ.
13.	2a1-c1
13.2agl! would evidently have been stronger.
13.	.. Jkf8-e7?l
95
Chapter Two - Section C
Black could have sharply complicated the position by 13...g5!? l4.lSi.g3 hS I5.a3 ЗДб 16.Wdl h4 17.e4 Wd7 18.Ае5 ПЬ6, although here too after the solid 19.h31? White’s chances are better.
14.	a2-a3	41d7-b6
15.	Wa4-b3 4ib4-a6
’Here I was at a crossroads. As was to be expected, Black’s slight tactical initiative has not come to anything, and now White faces the question of how to plan his offensive.
The first thing that I examined was the plan of an offensive on the queenside. It promised comparatively quick and sure success. The following continuations were possible:
16.£}a4 jSld8 (if 16...£}xa4, then 17.Wxb7 is strong) 17.4k5 Wc8 18.4jxa6bxa6 19.Hc2 and then flhcl.
The pawn sacrifice 16.4}a4 0-0 17.41xb6 axb6 18.Wxb6 was hardly correct.
All this was convincing enough, but I was aiming for a different sort of game. I began examining possibilities associated with the open g-file, and although in this case I would have had to reckon with counterplay by ...сб-cS, it seemed to me to be more promising and interesting than chasing after a pawn on the
queenside. The following day I showed this game to Viacheslav Ragozin, and he criticized me for not choosing the quiet alternative with 16.4}a4.’ (Romanovsky)
Indeed, 16.4ia4! was very strong, and Black would have had to sacrifice a pawn by 16...0-0 without gaining full compensation. But White would have had to consolidate his position, and Romanovsky preferred attacking. Besides, the plan chosen by him does not make Black’s life easy either.
16.	h2-h4	0-0
17.	Ae2-d3	Wf5-h5
1a	Hc1-g1	c6-c5?
The pawn capture	l8...Wxf3 would have
had dismal consequences for Black. True, in the variation given by Romanovsky 19.jJLe2 WxfZ 2O.£jdl 4k4+ 21.^d3 he has a pretty trick: 21../t)e5+! 22.jilxe5 £kS+! 23.dxc5 Wf5+ 24.$d2 WxeS with an unclear position. But there is a clear-cut way to win: 19.5h2 *hS 2O.Hg5 Bh6 21.fle5 Wd6 22J&.xh7+! etc
But the text move also meets with a combinative refutation; as a result the dS-pawn is lost, and the white queen joins the attack with decisive effect. Black could have continued the fight with 18...Пас8, and if 19.Wd I (threatening 2O.HgS!),then 19...f6!.
19. jSf4-e5! g7-g6?l
If 19...f6 Romanovsky was intending 2O.£kxdS &xd5 21.Wxd5+	&h8
22.Hxg7! etc. A pretty variation, but 20...Ф118! is far stronger. Now after 21.4}xe7 fxeS 22.lS.xa6 bxa6 23.dxc5 Паев! the situation becomes sharper: after all, the white king has no business wandering about in the centre on a board full of pieces. Better is 21.4Jxb6 axb6
96
The Queen Sortie 3. <£)f3 Jig4 and 4 or 5. ЙГа4
22.^e6!? Bae8 23.Af4 cxd4 24.WfS!? WxfS 2S.AxfS with an advantage in the endgame
20.	4jc3xd5	4±6xd5
21.	Wb3xd5	c5xd4
22.	e3xd4	Sa8-d8
23.	Wd5xb7?	
This move, strangely enough, throws away the win. 23.We4! 16 24.^g3± was essential.
23.	_	-ra6*c5
24.	Wb7xe7 £c5xd3
25.	*d2xd3 Wh5xf3+
2S...	Hfe8 26>g5! Wxf3+ 27.&d2 was bad for Black.
26.	&d3-d2
26.Фс2 ^e4+ 27.ФЬЗ Wd5+ would have led to a simple draw.
32.Sgl+ Ф17 33.Hg7+ Фе8 34.^e6 mate
GAME 29
□ Geza Fiister
 David Bronstein
Budapest 1949
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	2>g1-f3	£>b8-c6
3.	c2-c4	ic8-g4
4.	Wd1-a4
As we have already mentioned, Alexander
Alekhine liked to employ this move
4.	_.	Jug4xf3
5.	e2xf3	e7-e6
6.	£Ы-сЗ
kkk kkk
* к
к
26.	.. f7-re?
Black could have saved the game by 26...Wxf2+ 27.Фс1 ПЬ8!! 28.ДхЬ8 (28.d5 We3+ 29.ФЫ Sfe8) 28...flxb8 29.b4 Hc8+ 30.ФЫ 'Й'с2+ with perpetual check.
27.	^е7-еб4- Фд8-д7
27...	Ф118 would also have been answered by28.hS.
28.	h4-h5 f6xe5
29.	Sg1xg6+
Black resigned in view of 29...hxg6 30>xg6+ Ф118	31.WH6+	Ф88
6.	.-	£д8-е7!
The well-known Belgian master and theoretician Edgar Colle twice chose 6...ДЬ4 against Alekhine, and twice he was unsuccessful: 7.a3 (7.cxd5 exdS 8.Ab5 Wd7 9.0-0 &ge7 10 Jlf4 Ad6 11 J&xd6 ^xd6 12.Дхс6+ Ьхсб 13.Wc2 0-0 14.Eadl Wg6 15.^xg6 hxg6 16.£la4 £)f5= Tsemekhman-Finegold, Dearborn 1994) 7...ДхсЗ+ 8.bxc3 £e7 9.Ebl ДЬ8 (9...0-0 1О.ДхЬ7 eS 1 l.cxdS WxdS 12.Ac4 'H'de 13.0-0 exd4 14.Sdl £te8±) and now:
97
Chapter Two - Section C
A)	10.Ad3 dxc4 (10...0-0 1 1.0-0 e5!?oo) H.Axc4 0-0 12.0-0 2)d5 13Wc2 £ice7 !4.Ad3 h6 15.c4± (Alekhine-Colle, Baden-Baden 1925);
B)	lO.cxdS WxdS ll.Ad3 0-0 12.0-0 Wd6! 13.Wc2 2ig6 14.f4 £)ce7 15.g3 Sfd8 16.Hdl b6 17.a4 £>dS 18.Ad2 cS 19.f5 exfS 2O.AxfS cxd4 21.cxd4± (Alekhine-Colle, Paris 1925).
Largely under the influence of these games and the world champion Alexander Alekhine's negative opinion on the opening, in the 1920s-1940s the number of supporters of the Chigorin Defence was extremely small. The improvement found a quarter of a century later by David Ionovich Bronstein not only changed the evaluation of this individual position, but also substantially improved the ‘image* of the Chigorin Defence in general. Subsequently it augmented the opening arsenals of the world champions Vasily Vasilievich Smyslov and Boris Vasilievich Spassky.
7.	Ac1-e3
Looking ahead, we should say that for many years Bronstein’s plan killed While’s desire to go in for the variation 4.Wa4 Axf3 5.exf3. Since then it has been employed literally only a handful of times at high level, and here it has not won White any particular laurels. For example:
A) 7.Ag5 Wd7 (7...a6 8.0-0-0 Wd7 9.Ae2 h6 Ю.АеЗ £>c8 ll.cxdS exdS 12.f4 £Ъ6 13.Wc2 2)b4 14.Wbl Ae7s* Rivera-Sariego, Manzanillo 1995) 8.Udi (8,Axe7?l £)xe7 9.Wb3 c6 10.0-0-0 g6T) 8...h6 9.Af4 gS 10Ae3 Ag7 ll.cxdS exdS 12.h4 0-0-0 13.b4 We6 14.b5 ^lxd4 15.JIxd4 Axd4 16.Wxd4 4tf5 17.Wxa7 U^eS I8.fta4 Wal + 19.Фе2 Wxa2+ 20.&dl Wbl + 21 ,&d2 Wa2+ 22.&C1 Wai4- 23.Фс2 Wa2+, draw (IIvanov-Watson, New York 1984);
B) 7.cxd5exd5
Bl) 8.Ad3 g6 9.Ag5 Ag7 lO.AbS Wd6 11.0-0 0-0T;
B2) 8.Ab5 a6 9.Axc6+ £1xc6 10.0-0 Wd7 ll.fiel+ Ae7 12.Wb3 £»xd4 (12...0-0-0 13.Ae3 She8 14.Sacl<») 13.Wxb7 Hd8 14.Edl (!4.Wxa6 ^c2+) 14...CS 15.Wxa6 0-0 16.Ae3 Af6®.
7.	g7-g6!
This is the whole point: the pressure on the d4-pawn will restrict While’s activity.
Here is an example of the modem interpretation of Bronstein’s idea: 7...a6 8.f4 g6 9.g3 Ag7 10.Ag2 0-0 ll.Sdl b5! 12.cxb5 axbS 13>xb5 ПЬ8 14.Wc5?! Sxb2 15.0-0 Wd6 16.ДЫ? (a blunder, but in any case White’s position was difficult) 16...Wxc5 0-1 (Tomashevsky-Moro-zevich, (blitz), Moscow Region 2004).
98
The Queen Sortie: 3.£)f3 _£g4 and 4 or S. Ж14
8.	c4xd5 e6xd5
8...	4jxdS 9.ДБ5 Wd7 10.£jxdS± favours White.
9.	Af1-b5
Or 9.Ad3 Ag7 10.0-0 0-0 11 teel a6 12.Had Wd7 13.Пс5 Hfd8 14.Hfcl Sac8 1 S.Wb3 nb8«=* (Davies-Flear, Brighton 1984).
9.	«.	Af8-g7
10.	0-0	0-0
11.	ДЬ5хс6?!
The result of this pseudo-active operation will be a difficult endgame for White.
11.		£>e7xc6
12.	Wa4-b5	£}c6xd4
13.	ji.e3xd4	Ag7xd4
14.	Sa1-d1	c7-c6!
15.	Wb5xb7	Wd8-b6
16.	Wb7xb6	_*.d4xb6
17.	2f1-e1	ib6-a5
18.	Ze1-e7	Zf8-e8
19.	2e7xe8+	2a8xe8
20.	£g1-f1	□i_a5xc3
21.	Ь2хсЗ	2e8-b8
22.	Sd1-d2	Фд8-18
23.	£f1-e2	Af8-e7
24.	&e2-d3	c6-c5
25.	£d3*c2	3?e7-d6
26.	Zd2-e2	
On the left half of the board Black has an extra pawn and an open file. Bronstein in-
cludes his a-pawn in the offensive, securing an invasion square on the second rank for his rook.
26.	•••	a7-a5!
27.	Фс2-с1	a5-a4
28.	Se2-d2	a4-a3
29.	c3-c4	d5-d4
30.	Фс1-с2	g6-g5
31.	£c2-d3	f7-f5
32.	&d3-c2	h7-h5
33.	&c2-d3	h5-h4
34.	h2-h3	5b8-b1
35.	g2-g4	ДЫ-С1
36.	g4xf5	^d6-e5
37.	Sd2-c2	Дс1 xc2
за	&d3xc2	Фе5х!5
39.	&c2-d3	&f5-f4
40.	&d3-e2	d4-d3+
White resigned.
GAME 30
□ Vladimir Malaniuk
 Alexander Morozevich
Alushta 1994
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	чсЬв-сб
3.	£g1-f3	ic8-g4
4.	Wd1-a4	ig4xf3
5.	g2xf3	
99
Chapter Iwo - Section C
Black intends first to bring out his bishop to b4 and then to develop his king’s knight to e7. Practice has shown that other plans are less good:
A)	S...dxc4?! 6.e3 eS 7.dxe$ WdS 8.2»c3 Wxf3 9.ngl 0-0-0?? lO.Aei 1-0. This trap has featured in at least two games: Schmidt-Grabarczyk (Cetniewo 1991) and Novikov-Finegold (New York 1993);
B)	S...£f6 6.£k3 e6 7.&g5 dxc4 8.0-0-0 Ae7 9.fc4 £d5! 10.^xe7 #kxe7 И.ФЫ £}xc3+ 12.^xc3 £kl5 13.Wcl ^e7 14.Zgl g6 15.e4 £)b6 16 Wc5± (Portisch-Smyslov, Portoroz 1971).
6. &Ы-СЗ
б.еЗ Jkb4+ 7.4k3 &e7 8.Ad2 0-0 promises White little, for example:
А) 9.<c2 £g6 10.f4 £lh4 11.0-0-0 12.ФЫ c6 13.jS.d3 &h8 14>b3 aS IS.cxdSexdS 16.Acl Axc3 17.Wxc3 &c8 1 8.Wc2 £d6 19>e2 Wd7 20.f3 fS 21.fihgl Ьбг* (Georgiev-Morozevich, Tilburg 1993);
B) 9.cxd5 £xdS lO.Hcl £ke7 И.аЗ JbLxc3 12.bxc3 cS!? 13.dxc5 Wc7 14.c4
IS.AaS?! b6! 16.Ac3 WxcS 17.Jld4Wf5 18.Де2 eS 19.Ab2 £>d7 20.0-0 £lcS 21.WbS ^g6 22.&hl £h4 23.Hgl &xf3 24.Hg3 &h4 25 Ocgl g6 26.f3 2ad8 27.e4 &xe4 0-1 (FlyingPiket-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
С) 9.0-0-0 a6 10>c2 AaS’l (a poor plan; 10...&g6 is better, as in the Georgiev-Morozevich game) 11. Ф b 1 &h8 12.f4Hb8 13.flgl bS 14.cxd5exd5 15.^e2 Axd2 16.Wxd2 £>c8 17.£tel £M6 18.&d3 Sk4 19.We2 £e7 20>g4 g6 21.h4 Hg8 22.5± (Novikov-Skembris, St Vincent 2000).
6. -	£f8-b4
As we will soon see, this is a very risky move After 6...4jf6 the reply 7.Ag5 leads to a position from the Portisch-Smyslov game considered earlier, but White also has other possibilities. 7.cxd5 £lxd5 or 7.Hgl dxc4 8.еЗ аб 9,'Йгхс4 g6 is not too dangerous for Black, but 7.e4!? is much more unpleasant. Now 7...ДЬ4 8.cxd5 exdS leaves Black with an unfavourable pawn structure in the centre (he needs the dS-square for piece manoeuvres), while if 7...dxe4 White has 8.d5 exdS 9.cxd5 £\xd5 and now the highly unpleasant stroke 10.Ааб!. There only remains 7...dxc4, but here too after 8.^.xc4 (8.ДеЗ 2ki7) 8...Wxd4 9.ДеЗ ^d6 lO.jLbS £}d7 ll.fldl Black's position does not inspire confidence
The safest path for Black is 6...dxc41.
cepting the gambit - 7...Wxd4 - is very
100
The Queen Sortie: 3.<£Y3 Ag4 and 4 or 5. a4
dangerous: 8.Ae3 Wf6 9.f4 0-0-0 lO.Agl Wg6 (or 10...e5 U.^dS flxdS 12.exdS) 11.0-0®), and now 8.d5 exd5 9.exdS is parried by 9...b5 10.£jxb5 axbS 11 WxbS Ab4+.
The following lines do not look very tempting for White: 7.Ag2 1S'xd4 8.Ae3 Wd7 9.f4 £f6 10.3d 1 Ad6, or 7.f4 Wxd4 8.Ae3 Wd7 9.3d 1 Ad6 10.3gl £ige7.
Evidently he should play 7.e3, but then Black has quite a wide choice of continuations, for example:
A) 7...Wh4!? 8.Axc4 Ad6 (8...0-0-0!?) 9,£jb5 £lf6 10.£lxd6+ cxd6 1 L Aa6 bxa6 12.Wxc6+ Фе7 13.Wxa6 Hhc8 14.Ad2 3ab8 IS.Scl Зхс 14- 16.Axel WbS 17.Фе2 3bS® (Kozul-Mohr, Ljubljana 1994);
B) 7...a6 8.Wxc4 Wd7?! (here too the plan with 8.. Wh4 is more promising) 9.f4 £b4 10.Wb3 cS ll.dxcS AxcS 12.Ad2 Ae7 13.3gl 3d8 14.0-0-0 g6 1 S.a3 £)c6 16.£e4 £lf6 17.Ac3 Wxd 1 + 18.Wxdl Dxdl-b 19.&xdl eS 20.&xf6+ Axf6 2hAg2 *d7 22.fxe5 £xe5 23.Axb7 1-0 (I.Novikov-Muse, Berlin 1995).
It is probable that other sensible set-ups can also be found here for Black; his position has quite a large safety margin.
7. c4xd5
7.e3 transposes into variations analysed above-7...£te7 8.Ad2 0-0 etc
The most accurate is 7.a3 Axc3+ 8.bxc3 &е7 9.h4 etc.
7. ..	e6xd5
Black should have gone into a slightly inferior endgame after 7...Wxd5?! 8.Wxb4 £>xb4 9.£JxdS £ixd5 10.e3i.
8. a2-a3
8.Af4!? also comes into consideration.
8.	..	Ab4xc3+
9.	Ь2хсЗ	<£g8-e7
9...	Wf6!? is interesting, attacking the f3-pawn and trying to prevent White from completing his development. For example, lO.^bS 0-0-0 or 10.3b 1 £>e7!? 11.3xb7 0-0®. However. 10.h4! h6 (10...&e7 H.AgS) 1 l.WbS! is more cunning, for example:
A) 11...0-0-0 12.ПЫ b6 13.AgS!;
B) 11...2>e7 12.Wxb7 0-0 13.Wxc7 #Jxd4 14.cxd4 Wxd4 15.ЙЫ 3fc8 16. Wf4, parrying the attack.
10.	Ba1-b1	3a8-b8
11.	h2-h4	0-0
12.	h4-h5
It was better to first bring on the reserves - 12Af4! and 13.e3±. Black’s position is strategically very dangerous, since he is deprived of counterplay, whereas the opponent has all the trumps: the two bishops, a pawn centre, and an open file directly against the king on g8. As soon as White succeeds in switching his queen to the kingside, it w ill become very difficult to defend.
A similar paw n structure for White arises in the variation 1.d4 d5 2.c4 3.£f3 Ag4 4.cxd5 Axf3 5.gxf3 ^xd5 6.e3 e5 7.£jc3 Ab4 8Ad2 Axc3 Э.ЬхсЗ, which we will analyse later.
101
Chapter Two - Section C
* 41
Ui 1Ш

Д A & £
For an understanding of the general ideas of the Chigorin Defence it is useful to compare the last two diagrams. In the Malaniuk-Morozevich game the e-pawn is still on e2 rather than e3, and this is to White’s advantage, since it does not block the cl-bishop’s path to the kingside and also the f3-pawn is not hanging. White does not have to waste a tempo on defending it (Де2 or Jig 2), and he can make active moves far more quickly. Also, the black pawn on d5, in contrast to the pawn on eS, does not exert any pressure on the centre, and indeed it deprives its own knight of an important square. If Malaniuk had not advanced e2-e4, it would have been extremely difficult for Black to initiate any counter play in the centre.
12.	-	Wd8-d6
Connecting the rooks and denying the white bishop an important diagonal
13.	h5-h6?
It is not clear why White blocks the play on that part of the boar d where he should be mounting an offensive.
13.	_.	g7-g6
14.	e2-e4?l
All in the same pseudo-active style The dS-pawn unexpectedly finds employment
14.	«. Wd6-e6
If 14..Sfe8, then 15.Ae3. The complications after 14...dxe4?! 15.fxe4#ki5 16exd5
'S'xdS 17.flh4! (preventing 17...We4+) 17...gS I8.Sg4 3fe8+ 19.ji.e3! (but not 19.Ji.e2? because of 19...йхе2+! 2О.Фхе2 Зе8+ 21.Ji.e3 Wa2+ 22.&f3 Wxbl 23.Sxg5+ result in an obvious advantage for White Therefore Black should stick to positional methods.
15.	Af1-h3 f7-f5
16.	0-0
Little was promised by 16.eS?, which blocks the centre. 16.Ji.g5 would have been parried by 16...dxe4 17.0-0 £»dS 18.^b3 Wf7!, Possibly the strongest was 16.Wc2!, after which I6...dxe4 17.fxe4 Wxe4+ 18.Wxe4 fxe4 does not work in view of 19.Ji.e6+ ФЬ8 20.3h4±. Therefore Black would have had to reply 16...Wf6! withan unclear position.
16.	.	We6-f6
17.	e4xd5	4Je7xd5
18.	Wa4-c4!
Leaving the b-file open for the rook.
1& -	Eb8-d8
19.	аы-Ь5
Of course, not 19.3xb7? 4JaS.
19.	- Wf6-d6
The sacrifice 19...$Je7 is incorrect, since after 2О.ПхЬ7 Black has no convenient way to regroup his forces for an attack
20.	Ac1-g5	3d8-d7
21.	Sf1-e1	a7-a6
Forcing White to declare his intentions.
102
The Queen Sortie: 3. <2)f3 and 4 or 5 ШГа4
22.	Hb5xd5l?
Possibly the correct decision. 22.ДЬЫ bS! 23.Wa2 ФИ8 favours Black, while in the event of 22.HcS £>d8! he also creates certain problems for his opponent: 23.f4 c6! or 23.Ji.e7 Дхе7 24.Дхе7 ^xe7 2S.WxdS+ Hf7 followed by ...c7-c6.
22.		Wd6xd5
23.	Ah3-f1	b7-b5
24.	Wc4xd5+	Sd7xd5
25.	f3-f4	Sd5-d7
26.	a3-a4	Hf8-b8
27.	Af1-g2	£>c6-a5
28.	a4xb5	
If 28.Se6, then simply 28...fld6 29.йе7 bxa4, and White cannot create any real threats.
28. _	a6xb5T
29. Пе1-а1?
After this incorrect move White ends up in a difficult situation. The correct continuation 29.йеб! would have made it very hard for Black to convert his material advantage.
29.	...	4за5-ЬЗ!
Here, rather than c4, where there is nothing for the knight to do.
30.	Да1-а7	Ь5-Ь4
31.	c3xb4	££3xd4
As a result Black has centralized his knight and White is left with a weak b4-pawn.
32.	Да7-а5	c7-c6
33.	5a5-a6	Bd7-c7
34.	Ag5*f6	Hb8xb4
White’s counterattack is parried without particular effort.
35.	Да6-а8+ *g8-f7
36.	Jf6-e5 Hc7-d7
37.	£g1-h2
The king	moves away from possible checks.	
37.		ДЬ4~с4
38.	Sa84i8	ФП-еб
39.	ДЬ8-е8+	fld7-e7
40.	"e8-d8	4id4-b5
41.	Ag2-f3	g6-g5
42.	Af3e2	
42. „	3c4-e4l
After a long think Black concluded that to win it was necessary to return the exchange.
43. Ae2-d3
Or 43.Jl.f3 Дхе5 44.fxeS £>a7! 45.JLxc6 £jxc6 46.Hd6+ Фхе5 47.Дхсб Деб 48.Дс5+ ФТб 49.&g3 'A'gb followed by Kf6and <4>xh6—F.
43.		Де4хе5
44.	f4xe5	Фе6хе5
45.	J_d3xb5	c6xb5
46.	fld8-b8	Де7-е6?
46...st?f4!	47.ДхЬ5 Деб 48.&g2
(48.ДЬ4+ $f3!) 48...g4! was far more methodical.
103
Chapter Two - Section D
47. £h2-g3! Ee6xh6	Not much better		was S6.st?g2 Eh3
48. ПЬ8хЬ5+ Xe5-f6 49. Sb5-b6+ *f6-g7	57.Sb6+ ФЬ4.	ФЬ5 S8.Ef6 Ee3 S9.ExfS +	
50. Hb6-b7+ Фд7-д6	56.		Фдб-hS!
51. f2-f4	g5-g4	57.	Zb6-b7	Eh6-c6
52. 5Ь7-Ь6+ Фд6-д7	58.	Sb7xh7+	Ah5-g6
Black does not immediately notice the	59.	3h7-a7	Ec6-c3+
winning plan with S2...d?h5!.	60.	ФдЗ-д2	2c3-f3
53. ЙЬ6-Ь7+ Фд7-д8	61.	2a7*a4	*g6-h5
54. ДЬ7-Ь8+ Фд847	62.	Ea4-b4	&h5-h4
55. ДЪ8-Ь7+ ФП-дб 56. НЬ7-Ь6+	63. Eb4-a4 White resigned.		Bf3-g3+
Section D
The Exchange: 4.cxd5
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. £g1-f3
4. c4xd5
d7-d5 £ib8-c6 _й.с8-д4
The point of the immediate exchange 4.cxd5 is that 4...jkxf3 is forced. In the event of 4...Wxd5 S.£k:3 Black has to lose a tempo, and the idea of the move 3.£}f3 (which has defended the d4-pawn in good time) is completely justified.
After the capture on f3, play becomes sharp. This line was a favourite with Chigorin himself.
GAME 31
□ Richard Teichmann
 Mikhail Chigorin
Cambridge Springs 1904
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£b8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	£c8-g4
4.	c4xd5	i.g4xf3
5.	d5xc6	ИЗхсб
‘With this opening, which in my opinion is favourable for Black, I had success in several games against Pillsbury and others.’ (Chigorin)
104
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 jcg4 4.cxd5
Why, one wonders, did this variation so appeal to Mikhail Ivanovich? Perhaps because in many branches of his defence Black has to play without his bishops and without a centre, and here he is only without a centre?’
But seriously, in thematic content the given set-up can be called the forerunner of such modem openings as the Griinfeld Indian Defence or the Nimzo-Indian Defence. Yes, White succeeds in setting up a fine-looking pawn centre, but in return Black exerts strong piece pressure on it. And not only piece pressure - at the first convenient opportunity the f7-pawn is thrown into the battle.
6. ФЫ-сЗ e7-e6
7. Ac1-f4
Of course, 7.e4 is stronger - we will return to this move later. But for the moment let us consider other continuations,
which are not particularly popular, but occur from time to time:
A) 7.f3 Wh4+ 8.g3 Wf6! (8.. WhS 9.Ag2 0-0-0 Ю.АеЗ AcS H.Wd3 £e7 12.Wc4 Ab6 13.АГ2 4fS (13...Wh6 14.e4± Ivkov-Skembris, Yugoslavia 1982) 14.g4 WgS 15.h4!? (IS.gxfS Wxg2 16.Hgl Wxh2 17.fxe6 fxe6 18.Wxe6+ ФЬ8+)	15...£je3	16.hxg5 £ixc4
17.0-0-0±) 9.Ae3 £h6 10.Ag2 4/5 11 .A.Q 0-0-0 12.e3 hS 13.We2 h4 14-Hgl hxg3 15.hxg3 e5 16.d5 Ae8 17.0-0-0 Ab4 18.Wc4 Wb6 19.We4 Ad 7 2O.g4 Axc3 21 .bxc3 £d6 22.Wb4 AbS?* (Wisniacki-Soppe, Mar del Plata 1999).
B) 7.a3!?
occupy the centre by e2-e4, in which case Black will not have counterplay with ...AfB-b4. This plan is not prevented by 7 ...4/6 in view of 8.f3, and the knight prevents the f7-pawn from coming into play.
This is how one of the first games on this theme continued: 8...e5 9.dxe5 Wxdl + lO.^xdl 0-0-0+ П.Фс2 4к17 12.f4g5 (12...f6 13.exf6 4xf6+) 13.b4a6 14.e3 £b6 IS.Bgl Ag7 16.a4 f6 17.bS axbS 18.axb5 Ae8 19.e4± (Galliamova-Duckstein, Vienna 1993).
Generally speaking, it is not so simple for Black to find a place for his dark-squared bishop, for example:
105
Chapter Тио - Section D
7...Ad6 8.e4± or
7...g6 8.e3 (8.Af4 Ag7 9.e3 (9 jfiLeS Axe 5 lO.dxeS f6 ll.exf6 £>xf6=) 9...£f6 10. Ab 5 Wd7 И.Ахсб Wxc6 12.0-0 0-0 13.Дс1 Wd7±; 8.e4 Ag7 9.Ae3 Wd7 10.Wd2 (10.b4 b6?*) 10...0-0-0 ll.Hdl fS 12.d5 (12.f3 fxe4 13.fxe4 &f6T) 12...exdS 13.exdS Aa4oo) 8...Ag7 9.b4 a6 10.a4 4A7 1 1ШЬЗ (П.АаЗ ^d5!=) 11..0-0 (ll...b5!? 12.axb5 axbS 13.Hxa8 Wxa8 14.2>xbS &d7!<x>; 1 l...e5 12.dxe5 AxeS 1 3.Ab2 Wd6 14.Cdl±; 11...^dS 12.b5 axbS 13 AxbS AxbS 14.Wxb5+ c6 15>xb7 0-0 16.Ad2±) 12.Aa3 bS! (12...£)d5 13.b5±) 13.axbS axbS 14.^xb5 WdS! 15.Wd3± (IS.WxdS £ixd5T).
The early development of the queen also does not promise Black rapid equality: 7...Ш6 8.e3 0-0-0 9.b4 Wg6 lO.bS Axg2 ll.Hgl Af3 12.Wxf3 Wxgl 13.0?e2^f6 14.Ag2 £ri5 IS.^xdS flxdS 16.Wg3 Ad6 17.f4 gS 18.Ab2 gxf4 19.exf4 Axf4 20.Axd5 Axg3 21.Sxg 1 ±.
Even so, in time Black found a way to create counterplay: 7...f5 8.e3 a6 9.b4 £lf6 10.Ab2 Wd7 11.f3 4bd5 1 2,Wd2 Ae7 13 Ad3 Ah4+ 14.g3 AgS 15.£jxd5 exdS 16.<4>f2 0-0«₽* (Dumitrache-Bukal, Zagreb 1997).
11 also transpired that he can in fact play 7...£if6, only after 8.f3 he should reply 8. ..£>hS! w ith the threat of a check on h4, for example: 9.g3 fS 10.e3 Ad6 1 l.Ag2 0-0 12 Wb3 Wf6 13.0-0 Wg6 14.^e2 ФЬ8 15.Ad2 Hae8 16.Ab4 Wh6 I7.Axd6 cxd6 18.Sadi a6?* (Pobochy-Yashtylov, Ufa 1999).
But it is time to return to the Teichmann-Chigorin game.
7.	..	£jg8-f6
7...	4W 8.e3 £g6 9.Ag3 a6 10.Wb3 Ae7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.dS exdS 13.£>xdS Wc8 14.Ae2 Ad8 15.Af3± (Teich-mann-Chigorin, Berlin 1897).
8.	e2-e3	Af8-b4
9.	^d1-b3?l	2>f6-d5
10.	Af4-g3	0-0
11.	Af1-d3	Wd8-g5l?
Preventing kingside castling: 12.0-0?
АхсЗ 13.ЬхсЗ £ixe3.
12. Wb3-c2
13. Ag3-e5 14. 0-0-0 15. Ь2хсЗ
f7-f5 Hf8-f7 Ab4xc3 b7-b5l
‘The position is of great interest; it gives an indication of Chigorin’s outstanding counter-attacking ability. It is also of interest for the fact that in those times no one had managed to obtain such positions for Black from the Queen’s Gambit. If we didn’t know that this position was played by Chigorin, it could be imagined that the black pieces were under the command of one of the modem masters. It could have been Ragozin, and I myself would not have minded playing such a game with Black.
With 15...b5 Black has secured the impregnable position of his knight on dS. It should be mentioned that in similar posi-
106
The Exchange: 3.<?)f3 J^g4 4.cxd5
lions grandmaster Nimzowitsch used to support a knight in the centre (with the help of two pawns on bS and fS) — a quarter of a century later...
It is paradoxical that the main drawback of White’s position is the ’strong’ position of his bishop on e5, although it is evident that all his hopes were associated with it. However, this bishop is unable to take part in the defence of its king, against the position of which Black begins an energetic counter offensive. Only four moves were required for Black’s attack to become irresistible.’ (M.Botvinnik, ShakhmatyvSSSR 1949 No. 2)
16. Sh1*g1 Wg5-e7!
17. 5d1-f1?
The origin of White’s subsequent difficulties. Correct was 17.ФЬ2 ПЬ8 18.e4! fxe4 19,ilxe4 with chances for both sides.
17. ...	We7-a3+
1a &c1-d2	Ь5-Ь4!
19.	c3-c4
This loses by force. 19. Wb3 was more tenacious.
19.	...	Jic6-a4!
20.	Wc2-b1	£d5-c3
21.	m>1-a1	Sa8-d8!
22.	g2*g4	£c3-e4+
23.	d?d2-e2
Also after 23.Axe4 fxe4 White would evidently have been unable to save the game; if 24.Wbl, then 24...Wc3+ and ...Ac2.
23.	_.	<e4-c5!
24.	Wa1-b1
After 24.Jkbl Black would have won the queen by 24...4ib3.
24.	_ £c5xd3
25.	Wb1xd3 Wa3xa2+
26.	&e2-f3 Jla4-c2!
White resigned. It is curious that Chigorin’s last 12 moves coincided with the first choice of ‘Fritz’. How ever, at that time people could not even imagine such a concept as ’cheating’...
GAME 32
□ Harry Nelson Pillsbury
 Mikhail Chigorin
St Petersburg 1895/96
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	^b8-c6
3.	£>g1-f3	jic8-g4
4.	c4xd5	Jkg4xf3
5.	d5xc6	Jkf3xc6
6.	£>Ь1-сЗ	e7-e6
7.	e2-e4	6f8-b4
a	f2-f3	
It is bad to defend the e-pawn with the queen: 8.Wd3? Wh4 9.d5 0-0-0+. For adventure lovers the little-studied move 8.h4!? can be recommended. The first indications are that Black should nevertheless obtain a comfortable game after 8...Axc3+ 9.bxc3 Axe4 10.'S'g4 (10.f3 Ac6 11.c4 £if6 12.Ab2®) 10 ...£f6 (10...Ag6 11.hS £if6 12.WgS h6 13.hxg6!±) 1 l.Wxg7 Hg8 12.Wh6 Hg6 13 Wf4Axg2 14.Axg2 2xg2T.
8.	..	f7-f5
107
Chapter Two - Section D
cxd6 17.jS.e6 Wc7 18.d5 jS.e8 19.&e4± Budo-Rovner, USSR 1929) 10>xe6+ £e7 ll.jS.d2 Wd6 (ll...fxe4!? 12.0-0-0 exf3 13.gxf3®) 12.exf5 Zd8 13.Wxd6 Hxd6 14.jS.c4 £)xf5 15.0-0-0 &d7 16. £14 llxdl+ 17.flxdl+ £jd6 18.4Je4± (Seifert-Lupor, Bad Wiessee 2002);
D) The strongest is evidently the gambit continuation 9.JS.C4!?
Chigorin s plans were linked with this undermining move. His brilliant win over Pillsbury created such a strong impression, that for many years it was thought that 8...f5 was virtually the winning move! But gradually emotions died down, White began creating problems for his opponent, and as a result 8 _. Wh 4+ became more popular.
9.	e4-e5?l
The positional defects of this move are obvious: the d4-pawn becomes backward and Black gains eternal control of the dS-point... Let us consider the alternatives:
A) 9.Ae2 Wh4+ (9...fxe4 10.0-0®) 10.g3 Wh3 ll.JLfl WhST 12>d3 £tf6 13.jS.g2 0-0-0 14.0-0? fxe4 !S.fxe4 Hxd4—+ (Isaev-Simagin, corr. USSR 1952);
B) 9.exfS Ш14+!? (9...exfS 10.JS.e2 Wh4+ 11.g3 We7 12>d3 £jf6 13.a3 £aS 14>xf$ Axc3+ 15.bxc3 0-0 16.Wd3 Пае8® D. Gurevich-Khmelnitsky, Modesto 1995) 10. g3 Wf6 11.JS.c4 exfS 12.a3 jS.a5 13.Jtf4 0-0-0 14.jS.e5 We7 15.0-0 21f6 16.Wd3 g6 17.Hfel Hhe8T (Toshev-Altgausen, 1971);
C) 9.Wb3 Wxd4 (9...We7 10.Ac4fxe4 ll.jS.xe6 exf3 12.0-0 $Jf6 13.jS.f4 Jkd6 14.Hfel ФГ8 15.jS.g8 Wd7 16.£.xd6+

a
a - a
Dl) Accepting the gift - 9...fxe4 10.0-0 exf3 — is extremely dangerous: ll.&xe6! (Il.gxf3 Wf6 12.jS.xe6 £e7«>) ll...Wf6 (ll...fxg2 12.Wh5+ g6 13.jS.f74- &f8 14.jS.h6+ 2)xh6 15>xh6+ Фе7 16 Hael+4—; 1 l...£>e7 12.d5 f2+ 13.flxf2 AcS 14.£.f7+ ФЙ 15 Wf3+-; ll...$Jf6 12.gxf3 &f8±; ll...Wh4 12.g3 BhS 13.Wb3-i—) 12.d5 (there is no time for White to go back on his word and regain the pawn: 12.jS.g4 ^g6 13.JS.xf3 0-0-0 14 Wb3 jS.xf3 15.flxf3 JS.d6 16.4Jb5 ФЬ8 17>a4 a6 18.£xd6 Wxd6 19.jSf4 Wd7= Inkiov-Sahovic, Bor 1983) 12...f2+ (or 12...AcS+ 13.ФЫ fxg2+ 14.&xg2 Wxe6 15.Пе14—)	13.ФЫ jSlxc3
14.dxc6 'Ш'хеб 15.cxb7-l— (Razuvaev-Koski, Puerto Rico 1971);
D2) There only remains 9...Wh4+!?, in order to weaken the opponent’s kingside.
108
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 Ag4 4.cxd5
After 1O.g3 the black queen faces a choice of moves, none of which are very good:



D21) 10...We7	11.0-0	0-0-0
12 Wb3±;
D22) 10.Wf6 Il.Wb3 Axc3 + 1 2.bxc3 fxe4 13.Axe6	14.0-0 exf3
15.Af4+—;
D23) 10...WhS Н.Ахеб fxe4 12.d5 2d8 13.fxe4 Wxdl+ 14.$xdl 4}f6 IS.AgSi;
D24) 10...Wh3	1 l.Wb3! Axc3+
12.bxc3 Wg2 (12...fxe4 13.Axe6 Wg2 14.Af7+ &d8 15.Ag5+ 4if6 16.0-0-0+-) 13.ЙП fxe4 14.Sf2! Wgl + (14...Whl + IS.Afl Фе7 16.Ag5 h6 17.0-0-0 hxgS 18.AbS Wxf3 19.Axc6+ bxc6 20.Hxf3 exf3 21.Wxe6+-) IS.Afl 0-0-0 16.Ae3 &h6 17.0-0-0 StfS 18.Ah3+—.
If Black is unable to radically change the evaluation of these approximate variations, he has to reject 8...f5 and switch completely to 8...Wh4+. We will examine this move using the example of the following game, but for the moment let us return to Pillsbury-Chigorin.
9.	-.	£>g8-e7
In a game played five years later Chigorin employed another move order and also gained an excellent position: 9...Wd7 10.Ac4 AaS 11.0-0 Ste7 12.AgS Ab6
13.Ae3 0-0-0 14.Wb3 AdS IS.Sfdl h6 16.3acl ФЬ8 17АГ2 gS 18.^a4 2k6 19.5Axb6 cxb6 20.AxdS WxdST (Boyarkov-Chigorin, Moscow 1901).
Here is a modern example: 9...Wh4+ 10.g3 WhS H.Ae2 (ll.Ag2!? 0-0-0 12.0-0 with unclear play) 11...0-0-0 12.Ae3 4fte7 13.0-0. Here Black chose 13...g5? and after 14.Wb3± Axc3 15.Wxe6+ 3d7 16.bxc3 f4 17.g4 Wh3 18.Wf7 Wh6 1 9.Ac4 he went on to lose (Movsziszian-Mateos Gomez, Navalmoral de la Mata 2004). But in the event of the correct 13...f4! 14.Axf4 AcS the advantage would have been on his side.
10.	a2-a3 Ab4-a5
11.	Af1-c4
H.b4 Ab6 12.Ae3 0-0 13.Ac4 AdS 14.Wb3 c6 IS.Sdl £^6?* (Reggio-Chigorin, Monte Carlo 1901). In the 8...f5 variation Chigorin won all his three games, and it was no accident that for a long time White avoided it.
11.	..	Ac6-d5
12.	Wd1-a4+?l
As Kasparov rightly pointed out in Volume I of My Great Predecessors, both 12.Wb3 and 12.AxdS ^xdS !3.Wb3 and 12...Axc3+ 13.bxc3 WxdS 14.НЫ bS 15. AgS were better.
12.	-.	c7-c6
109
Chapter Two - Section D
13.	ic4-d3 Wd8-b6!
Threatening to trap the queen by 14...ДЬЗ.
14.	JLd3-c2 Wb6-a6!
Now 15...b5 is threatened with the same consequences.
15.	Jlc2-d1
By timid zigzag moves the light-squared bishop has retreated right onto the back rank. Better was 15.b4 Wc4 16. Ab2 Ab6 !7.4Jxd5 WxdS (I7...£ixd5 !8.Wb3 'В'хЬЗ 19.ДхЬЗ=) 18.jii.b3 Wd7 19.Дс4 0-0 20?Sfb3 £jd5 - Black’s position is a little better, but not more.
15.	-	Ad5-c4l
Preventing 16.Jii.e2 and vacating the dS ‘transit point’ for the knight.
16.	f3-f4?
White should have exchanged queens and tried to set up a defence in the endgame: 16.b4 ДЬ6 17.Wxa6 Дхаб 18.Ae3 f4 19.АГ2 fld8 2О.Де2 Axe2 21.4Jxe2^d5?.
16.	..	0-0-0
17.	Ac1-e3?
Now Black can start an attack. It was now essential to exchange - 17.b4 J«Lb6 18.Wxa6, although here too Black has a significant advantage: 18...^.xa6 (18...bxa6?! 19.£e2 aS 20.Ad2T) 19.Ab3	(19.2>e2 Jkxe2 2O.Jlxe2
.&xd4+) 19...^xd4 2O.Jtxe6+ ФЬ8 21.^d2 (21J.bl 2)g6 22.g3 ^xeS! 23.fxe5 ELhe8—»-) 21...Af2+! 22.&xf2 Hxd2+ 23.&gl Shd8+.
17.	£e7-d5
18.	Ae3-d2	^d5-b6
19.	Wa4-c2	Hd8xd4
20.	JSa1-c1	Jkc4-d3
21.	Wc2-b3
No better was 21.Ae2 АхсЗ 22.ДхсЗ Пе4—+.
21.	_	&Ь6-с4
22.	&e1-f2	4Jc4xd2
23.	Wb3xe6+	Фс8-Ь8
24.	£d1-f3	Wa6-b6
25.	ФГ2-дЗ
25. ._	£>d2xf3
Here, as well as on the 26th and 27th moves, the capture of the b2 -pawn would have won more quickly, for example: 2S...Wxb2	26.£ia4 Wxa3 27.Да1
Wb4-+.
26.	g2xf3	Ad3-c4
27.	We6xf5	Jka5xc3
28.	Ь2хсЗ	Hd4-d2
29.	^f5-h3	g7-g6
The computer finds some shorter ways, for example: 29...Wf2+ 30.*&g4 Деб+ 31.fS h5+ 32.ФТ4 g5+. But these minor refinements are insignificant; White’s position is absolutely hopeless.
110
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 Ag4 4.cxd5
30.	£g3-h4	h7-h6
Or 30...Wd8+ 31 &g3 hS.		
31.	Wh3-g4	^b6-f24-
32.	Wg4-g3	g6-g54-
33.	£h4-g4	h6-h54-
34.	£g4-f5	Ac4-d3+
35.	d?f5-e6	Wf2-b6
35...Wc5 36.f5 Hh7 37.Wxg5 Wd5+ 38.ФГ6 Wf7 mate.
3a >»g3xg5 c6-c54-
37. ie6-f7 Ad3*c4+
38. isbf7-g7 Sh8-g8+
White resigned. ‘The young Pillsbury did not understand this unfamiliar position. Lasker would not have lost so feebly!’ (Kasparov)
GAME 33
□ Julio Granda Zuniga
 Alexander Morozevich
Amsterdam 1995
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	^b8-c6
3. £g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4. c4xd5	Ag4xf3
5. d5xc6	Af3xc6
6. &Ы-СЗ	e7-e6
7. e2-e4	Af8-b4
a f2-f3	Wd8-h4+
Black postpones	...f7-f5 and prepares
queenside castling, after which the pres-
sure on the d4-pawn will increase. At the same time White’s kingside is weakened.
9. g2-g3	^h4-h5
9...Wf6. with a similar idea, also occurs, for example: 10.Ag2 0-0-0 1 l.Ae3 AaS 12>d2 Wg6 13.0-0-0 fS 14.d5 exdS IS.exfS Wxf5 16.Ad4 £f6 17.a3 HheS** (Alberton-Miladinovic, Venice 2004).
The critical position of the variation. White has an enormous number of set-ups:
A) 10.a3?!. The loss of another tempo may cost White dearly: 10...Axc3+ И.ЬхсЗ fS 12.d5 0-0-0 13.c4 fxe4 14>d4 exd5 15.Wxg7 exf3 16.Af4 (16.Wxh8 dxc4—+) 16...4W 17.0-0-0 3he8 18.Hel? Hd7 19.Ad3 f2 20.EeS Wf3 21.Dd I dxc4 22.ПеЗ Wxdl+ 0-1 (Matukin-Barsky, Moscow 1994);
B) In general, any inaccuracy in such a sharp position may prove fatal, e.g.: 1O.Ag2 0-0-0 (10./5 11>ЬЗ±) Н.АеЗ fSoo 12.Wb3 Axc3+ 13.bxc3 fxe4 14.fxe4^f6 1 S.Af4 *Ь8 16.0-0 Axe4 17>xe6 Axg2 18.'i’xg2 Hhe8—I- (Stantic-Kovacevic, Nova Gorica 2002); 12.0-0 (instead of 12.Wb3) 12...£f6 13.exf5 exfS 14>b3 Ehe8 1 S.dS £)xd5 16.4}xdS ExdS 17.Axa7 Ad6 18.Af2 Ed2 19.Eacl Пее2+ (Kaabi-Repkova, Cairo 1997);
С) Ю.АеЗ, and now:
Cl) 10...f5 ll..£.g2 (1 l .Wb3? Wxf3+; ll.Ac4 fxe4 12.fxe4 Wxdl+ 13.s4?xdl Axc3 14.bxc3 Axe4 15 . He I &d7T) 11...0-0-0 12.0-0 (12.Wb3 Axc3 + 13.bxc3 fxe4 14.fxe4 £jf6 IS.Ebl She8 16.Wb2 Wg6 17.0-0 Axe4 18.d5 b6 19.dxe6 Пхеб 20.Ah3 4>g4 21.Hbel Ж15+ Franchini-Fercec, Reggio Emilia 2005/06) 12...£>f6 13.eS (13.Wd3 Axc3 14.bxc3 fxe4 15.fxe4 Wg6T;
1 11
Chapter Two - Section D
13,Wb3 АхсЗ 14.bxc3 fxe4 15.fxe4 &g4 16.Wxe6+ Ad7—+) 13...Axc3 (13...2>dS 14.£ixd5 AxdS 15.Wa4 Ae7 16.Wxa7±) 14.exf6! (14.bxc3 4idS 15.Ad2 43b6 16.a4 Ad5T) 14...Axb2 15.fxg7 Hhg8 16.ПЫ f4 17.АГ2 fxg3 18.hxg3 Axd4 19.Axd4 eS 2O.Wb3 exd4 21 We6+ Ad7 22.We4®;
C2) 10...0-0-0 11 Ag2 fS 12.0-0 2tf6:
C21) 13.eS АхсЗ 14.bxc3 ^dS 15.Ad2 f4!? 16.We2 Wg6 17.WC2 fxg3 18,hxg3 hS 19.flfel Hdf8 2O.c4 £b6 21.Ab4 h4 22.Axf8 hxg3 23.We3 Hxf8^ (Akopian-Reprintsev, Podolsk 1990; Akopian-Brock, Los Angeles 1991);
C22) 13.Wb3 fxe4! (13...Axc3? 14.bxc3 fxe4 lS.Wxe6+ ФЬ8 16.We5 Wxe5 17.dxe5 exf3 1 8.Axf3 £)d5 19.Ad4 Hhe8 2O.Sael± Kharlov-Bene-factor, ICC 2004) 14.d5 (14.Wxb4? exf3 IS.Ahl? 4ig4—4;	14.fxe4? 4ig4;
14.£>xe4 ^klS**) 14...AxdS 15.£}xd5 &xd5 16.Axa7!?b6 1 7.Hacl«=f;
D) 1O.Ac4 0-0-0 (10 . WaS 11 .Ad2 (H.Wb3? Aa4-+) 11...0-0-0 12.a3±; 10...Wh3?! ll.We2 Ad6 12.Wf2±; 10...Ad6 11.0-0 Wh3 12.d5 Axg3 13.We2+-) 11.Ae3 (11.0-0? IIxd4-+):
DI) 11...4te7!? 12.We2 Wg6 13.a3
AaS 14.b4 Ab6 IS.bS Ad7 16.&a4
Aa5+ 17.ФГ2 fS 18.eS Ae8 19.£cS
£}dS 2O.Hhcl Ab6= (Adamski-Zhurov, Warsaw 1993);
D2) II..-AcS 12.0-0 2te7 (12...Axd4? 13 Axd4 eS 14.AdS exd4 1 S.Wxd4 ФЬ8 16.Wxg7 &h6 17.Hadi Hhg8 18.Wf6 Hd6 19.Wf4 1-0 Inkiov-Lovati, Bemate 1999) 13.&e2 (13.Wd2 Axd4 14.Axd4 e5=; 13.Hcl eS 14.^d5 21xd5 15.exdS exd4 16.Axd4 Ab6!<»; I6...Axd4+ 17.Wxd4±)	13...e5	14.Wd2 exd4
15.^xd4 Hd6 (15...Hxd4 16Axd4 Hd8 17.AdS AxdS I8.Axc5 Ac4 19.WF2 Axfl 20.Axe7 Hd7 21.flxfl Hxe7 22.Wxa7+-; 15...WeS 16.Hadl±; 15...f5 !6.Wc3! fxe4 (16...Axd4 17Axd4 fxe4 18.fxe4 Axe4 19.Пае I £)dS 2O.Wa5±) 17.Ae6+ Ad7 18.Haclt) 16.Wf2 Ab6 (16...nhd8?!	17.^3xc6 Дхсб
18Axf7!+-) 17.Hfd 1 nhd8=;
D3) ll...g5!? 12.We2 (12.g4!? Wg6 13.h4oo)	12...Axc3+	1 З.ЬхсЗ g4
14.fxg4 Wg6 1S.0-0-0 £f6 16.Hhfl #3xe4 17.ФЬ2 h5<»;
E) The gambit continuation 10.Wb3!? is interesting:
12.Ag2 fS (12...6W? 13.Wa3+-) 13.0-0	14.Af4±;
E2) 10..AaS H.Ag2 (ll.Ae2 0-0-0 12.Ae3 Ab6 13.0-0-0 4>7 14.h4!?Hd7 (14...e5!? 1 S.f4 Wh6oo) 15.Hd2 (15.g4 WaSoo) 15...nhd8 16.nhdl Wg6
112
The Exchange. 3.£)f3 Ag4 4.cxd5
(16...eS 17.f4 Wh6oo) 17.g4hS (17...e5 18.hS Wf6 19.g5±) 18.gS eS 19.Ac4 exd4 2O.Axf7 dxc3’+) 11. ..0-0-0 И&еЗ Ab6 13.Hdl (13.0-0-0 eS 14.£e2 exd4 15.4ixd4 ^e7±; 13.&e2 WaS-Ь (13,..Wb5!?) 14.Wc3 В 15.a4 (15.b4 Wa4oo; 15.0-0 fxe4 16.fxe4 lS..Wxc3 + (15...fxe4? 16.b4±) 16.bxc3 AaS 17.eS (17.sfc>d2 fxe4 18.fxe4 £f6 19.^d3 £jg4 2O.Ah3 &e5+T; 17.exf5 exfS 18.<&f2 Ad5 19.Hhcl Ac4 20.^f 4 fcf6 21Afloo) 17..Ad5 18.Ad2 cS (18...£le7 19.&f4 Ac4 20.АП Axfl 21.Bxfl±) 19x41? (19.dxc5 £>e7=;	19.£}f4 cxd4<»)
19...Axd2+ 20&xd2 Ac61T) 13...e5 14.#le2 (14.d5 Axe3 15.dxc6 Sxdl + 16.£lxdl (1 6.&xdI Ьхсб*») 16...Ab6 17.cxb74-ФЬ8 (17...ФхЬ7 18.Wd54—*) 18.Wb4 £jf6 19.a4 Hd8 2O.a5 Ad4 21.a6Wg5®) 14...exd4 15.&xd4WaS4-16.ФГ2 2>e7 17.Wxf7 ПЬе8 (17...Wb4 18.Wb3 Hxd4 19JIxd4!±; 17...£>g6 18.4bcc6	АхеЗ+	19.ФхеЗ	Ьхсб
2O.Ah3+	ФЬ7	21.Wb34-	Фа 8
22.nxd8+Hxd8 23.ndl±) 18,Wc4!±. Black’s play can be improved somewhat by 15...£te7, for example, but after 16.0-0± he still has problems.
E3) Evidently the gambit should be ac-
E32) 11. Wxhl 12.d5 exdS 13.exd5 0-0-0 (13...AxdS	14.Ag5 Wxh2
15.0-0-04--) 14.dxc6 Wxc6 15.Ad2 fie84- (15..Af6 16.0-0-0±) 16.&f2 £f6 17.Ag2 Wb64- 18.Wxb6 axb6±;
E33) ll...a5!? 12 Wc5 Wxhl 13.d5 Ad7 14.dxe6 Ахеб 15.£ib5 Wxe44-16.*f2flc8 17.4ixc74-Sxc7 18.Wxc7®.
Granda Zuniga decided to continue his development, placing his bishop on the same diagonal as the enemy queen:
10.	Af1-e2
10. ...	0-0-0
11. Ac1-e3
It is not possible to force Black to exchange on c3, since on 1 l.Wb3?l he has ll..J3xd4 12.Ae3 Aa4!. After 13A.xd4 Axb3 14.Axg7 Aa4 15.Axh8 f6 16.0-0 Асб 17.Пас 1 WgS his chances are better.
11.	-.	f7-f5
In the event of a quiet developing move such as I l...4be7, 12.Wb3± is now very unpleasant. But 1 1...Ac51? was possible. With the move in the game Black shifts the attack from the d4-pawn to its neighbour on e4.
12.	Wd1-b3 Ab4xc3+
13.	Ь2хсЗ f5xe4
13...Пе8 14.Wa3 fxe4 15.f4 Wh3 16.Wxa7 2>f6 17.^d2 2>d5 18.Wc5
113
Chapter Two - Section D
flhf8 19.Bafl Ф<17 20 .^аЗ Да8 2 l.Wb2 HaS 22.Hf2 flfa8 23.Ac4 ^b6 24.Ab3 AdSt (Gasparian-Gara, St Vincent 2005).
14.	Wb3xe6+
Not 14.fxe4? ^g6T.
14.	- Ac6-d7
14...	ФН8 15.fxe4 or 15.f4!? is advantageous to White.
15.	^e6xe4 Zd8-e8
The more direct I5...^f6 l6.Wd3 Hhe8 !7Af4! AbS I8.c4 Aa6® would also have promised Black good compensation.
16.	^e4-d3 £>g8-e7
17.	c3-c4
17.Af4? was bad in view of I 7...£}g6T.
17.	-	£>e7-f5
18.	Ae3-f4
The endgame after 18.g4!? йхеЗ 19.gxh5 Kxd3 2O.Axd3 £}xd4 is not easy to evaluate: on the one hand, White is a clear exchange ahead, but on the other hand all his pawns are shattered and the knight on d4 is very strong.
18.		Ad7-a4l
19.	£>e1-f2	Sh8-f8
20.	h2-h4	Wh5-g6
21.	2a1-b1!	
21.	..	Wg6-f6!
21...	Ac2 22.Wxc2 ^xd4 was premature because of 23.Ad3 4^xc2 24.Axg6 hxg6 25. Ehd 1 with a slight advantage to White.
22.	Ae2-d1 Aa4-d7
23.	d4-d5	Hff6-e7
24.	лы-ьз	We7-c5+
25.	&f2-g2	Ef8-f7
26.	Wd3-d2	Ef7-e7
27.	Af4-g5	He7-e5
28. Ag5-f4 Attack and defence		have balanced each
other, and now the most sensible thing would have been to agree a draw’ by repetition. But Black overrated his chances and soon he ran into difficulties.
28. _	2Т5-еЗ+
29. Af4xe3	He5xe3
30. ИЬЗхеЗ	ДевхеЗ
31. Ad1-c2	Ь7-Ь6
32. Ac2xh7	ЛеЗ-аЗ
33. Ah7-b1	Wc5xc4
34. 2h1-c1	Wc4-b5
35. ^d2-c2	Wb5-c5
36. Wc2xc5	Ь6хс5
37. Пс1хс5	Фс8-Ь7
38. g3-g4	ФЬ7-Ь6
39. Пс5-с2	ЛаЗ-а4
40. Sc2-d2	ФЬ6-с5
41. h4-h5	*c5-d6
42. Ab1-e4	Ad7-b5
43. g4-g5	id6-e5
44. Фд2-дЗ	Ab5-c4
45. Hd2-c2	Фе5ч14
46. h5-h6	g7xh6
47. g5xh6	
Black resigned.
114
The Exchange 3.£)f3 Jtg4 4.cxd5
GAME 34
□ Viktor Moskalenko
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 1994
1.	d2-d4
2.	c2-c4
3.	4>g1-f3
4.	c4xd5
5.	g2xf3
6.	e2-e3
d7-d5 £ib8-c6 Jkc8*g4 Jlg4xf3 ^d8xd5 e7-e5
White has set up a powerful pawn phalanx in the centre, which the two bishops are ready to support. Even so, his pawn structure is not ideal, his kingside is weakened, and it is there, most probably, that he will have to shelter his king. In addition, Black has a lead in development and he can quickly create unpleasant pressure in the centre. It would be advantageous for him to force White to release the tension in the centre, for example, by advancing the pawn to dS, and then transfer his knights to blockading squares. In order to carry out his plans, Black must play energetically. For this reason 6...e6, which occurs quite often, seems to us to be too slow. It leaves White many possibilities of comfortably and unhurriedly developing his pieces and only then deciding on his further
plans. The move 6...e5! is more forceful and concrete.
7.	&Ы-СЗ
7.dxe5 Jkb4+ 8.4te3 Jkxc3+ 9.bxc3 WxeS= does not create any problems for Black.
7.	-	*f8-b4
8.	a2*a3l?
White must force the exchange of the bishop, in order to support the d4-pawn, but with this aim 8.jLd2 is more often played.
The move 8.a3 was advocated by the outstanding Soviet-Franco grandmaster Andrey Sokolov. Below we give (along with examples from later games) a joint analysis by Sokolov and Morozevich, which was made in 1993 in a train from Simferopol to Moscow under the watchful eye of their trainer Vladimir Nikolaevich Yurkov.
8.	... £Ь4хсЗ+
9.	Ь2хсЗ
9. -	&g8-e7
A) 9...&a5?	10.Bbl c6 1 lJ3g 1
(11 ,e4±)	ll...£e7	12.Bxg7 £g6
13.Wa4 b6 14.e4 Wd6 15.Дс4 Фхс4 16.Wxc4^f6 17.AgS±;
B) 9...exd4?! 10.cxd4 £ige7 11.Bbl 0-0-0 12.Ae2 Bhe8 13.Wb3 Wxb3 14.Bxb3	15.ДЬ2± (Hecht-Schiner,
Schwarzach 1997);
115
Chapter Two - Section D
C) 9...fid8!? 10.Sbl (10x4 ^d6 H.d52b8 12.Wa4+2d7®) 10...b6: Cl) 11.a4 2ge7 12.ДаЗ 0-0 13.5b5 We6 14.jS.e2 Hfe8oc>;
C2) 11x4 ^d6 12.d5 2a 5 13.Ad2 2e7o°;
C3) 11 Hgl!? 2ge7 12.5xg7 exd4! 13.cxd4 2g6 14.ДЬ5 Ф18 15.e4 Wxd4 16>xd4 2xd4 17.jS.h6 2xbS 18.Hxb5 Фе 8oo;
C4) ll.Wa4!? exd4 I2.cxd4 2e7 13.jS.e2 0-0 14.Sb5 Wd6 15.0-0 2d 5 16>c2±;
D) 9...2f6 10x4 Wd6 11.d5 2e7 12.a4 2d7 13.Aa3 2c5 14.Ad3 c6 15.0-0 0-0 16.ФЫ b6 17.Wc2 ФЬ8 18.Sadi fS** (Moskalenko-Fluvia Poyatos, Badalona 2005).
10. c3-c4?l
A rather premature move - White discloses his plans too early.
A) 10.e4 Wd6 1 I d 5 2b8 12.jS.e3 2d7 13.5gl 0-0 14.Wd2 2g6 15.Ae2 Ф118 16.ФП f5 17.exfS Sxf5 18.Sg3 Eaf8** (SuperBueno-Wanted, ICC 1999);
В) lO.Sbl!?.
As is shown by the variations given below, it is not easy for Black to defend, but against correct defence White’s initiative will not grow into anything more threat-
Bl)	10...0-0 1l.Sb5 ^d6 12.Sxb7±;
B2)	10...^aS?! 1 l>d2 0-0 12.Hb5 Wa4 13,Wdl'Wxdl+ 14.5t?xdl±;
B3)	1O...b6 ll.HbS Wd6 12.dxe5! (12.f4 exf4 13.e4 a6 14.3g5 g6 15.Hg4 f5 16.flxf4fxe4 17.Wg4 2f5 18Sxe4+ 2ce7 19.jS.c4 0-0-0 2O.Se6 Wd7 21.We4 ФЬ8 22.-SI4 2c8 23.We2, draw, Grabarczyk-Kaminski, Brzeg Dolny 1996) 12...Wxdl + (12...Wg6 13.f4 Ed8 14Wa4 0-0	15,Sb2±;	12...2xe5
13.Wxd6 cxd6 14.f4±) 13.^xdl a6 14.Sbl 2xe5 15.f4±;
B4)	10...0-0-0 11x4 (1 l.Wb3 Wxf3 12.Sgl (12.Wxb7+ &d7+) 12...b6 13.Sxg7oo; 11.e4 Wa2 12.5b2 Wxa3 13.flb3 Wa4 14.ДЬ5 WaS 15.d5 ^d4 16.ПаЗ WxbS 17.cxd4t; H.a4f5 12.fib5 Wd6 13.Wb3 b6 14.jLa3 Wf6 15.Ac4a6 16.flxb6 cxb6 17.Wxb6	Фч17<®)
H...Wd6 12.d5^b8 13.a4^d7 14.a5±;
B5)	10...Hd8!?	11x4 (ll.flxb7
2ixd4?; И.ПЬ5 We6 12.ПхЬ7 (12.Wb3 Шбоо) 12...exd4 13xxd4 £ixd4 14.Sxc7 (14.^.b2?! Wc6!T) 14...0-0»; 11 Jke2 0-0!±) ll.. Wd7 12.d5 2ia5 13.J&.b2! (13.JLd2 b6 14.e4 (14.Ji.xa5 bxa5 15.e4c5 16.flb5 Wd6 17.flxa5 0-0 18.Hxa7 £»g6®) 14,..&b7 15.Ac3 0-0!? (15...f6 16x5!? 2>xc5 17. Jib5 c6 18.dxc6 Wxdl+ 19.Hxdl Exdl + 20.<ixdl &d8 21.5gloo) 16.AxeS 5fe8 17.5gl £>g6 18.Ad4 c5 19.ДеЗ f5 20.jS.h3	2ki6®)	13...f6 (13...^g6
14.h4±) 14.h4b6 15.h5£ib7 16.^h3±.
10.	..	Wd5-d6
11.	d4-d5	£ic6-b8
12.	Дс1-Ь2
A)	12.a4 &d7 13.Jia3 Sk5 14.5Ы b6=;
B)	12.Wb3 £id7 (12...b6 13.a4 £>d7 14.£.a3 2x5 15.Wb5+ c6 16.dxc6
116
The Exchange: 3.4^13 -&g4 4.cxd5
Wxc6±) 13>xb7 Hb8 14>xa7 0-0 15 .Wa4e4®.
12. ..	4ib8-d7
Black has safely solved his opening problems: the opposing central pawns are blockaded, whereas his own are ready to begin advancing at the required moment.
13. h2-h4?l
This move smacks of carelessness: how can there be any question of an offensive, when nearly all the pieces are still in their initial positions?
13.		0-0
14.	Af1-d3	c7-c6l
15.	d5xc6	Wd6xc6
16.	4d3-e4	^c6-e6l?
Had the pawn been on h2. White could now have castled and then sheltered his king on h I.
17. Eh1-g1 f7-f6l?
18. ^d1-c2
Both 18.&xb7 ПаЬ8 19.j3.d5 £xdS ZO.cxdS Wa6 followed by ...Hfc8 and ...SkSTt, and 18.fi.d5 £xdS 19.Wxd5 (19.cxd5 'ЙМбТ) 19...Hfe8T are in Blacks favour.
18. ._	&g8-h8l?
19. Sa1-c1
Both 19.^.xh7 f5+ and 19.0-0-0 Hac8 20.ФЫ Hxc4 21.Wd3 4ic5+ were very
dangerous. Possibly the lesser evil was 19.&xb7 ДаЬ8 2О.Де4&с5®1.
19.	-.	£d7-c5
20.	h4-h5	h7-h6
21.	a3-a4
21. JiLdS ’В'абТ is advantageous to Black.
21.	..	Sa8-c8
22.	Jfib2-a3	Ь7-Ь6
23.	fi.a3xc5?
This aggravates the situation. Correct was 23-Hdl! #Jxe4 24.'Sfxe4 (24.fxe4 Exc4 25>b3 Efc8+) 24...Дхс4 25.Wb7 Ef7 гб.'й'ха?!?.
23.	..	Sc8xc5+
24.	Фе1-е2?!	f6-f5
25.	Ae4-d3	We6*f7!
26.	Фе2-е1
White loses after 26.Hhl?e4l— 4-.
26.	-.	e5-e4l?
The simple 26...Wxh5—I- was very strong.
27.	Ad3-e2
The exchange on e4 loses: 27 .fxe4 fxe4 28.Axe4 (28 J3.fl IIxhS-4-) 28...Hxc4 29.Wxc4 Wxf2+ 30.&dl Sd8+ 31.Ad3 ^xgl + 32.Фс2 Wxe3—4.
27.	...	e4xf3
2Я Ae2xf3	f5-f4
29.	e3xf4?
The final mistake. 29.e4 £>c6+ or 29.Wc3! fxe3 30.fxe3+ would have enabled White to resist.
117
Chapter Two - Section D
29.	...
30.	Wc2-c3
31.	Фе1-Н White resigned.
Wf7xf4
Пс5-е5+
W4xf3
GAME 35
□ Garry Kasparov
 Vasily Smyslov
Vilnius (m/11) 1984
This game was played at the end of the final Candidates’ match. Smyslov was losing by a considerable margin and so he was obliged to aim for complications in every game: both with White and with Black. It was then that Vasily Vasilievich remembered about the Chigorin Defence, which he had occasionally employed before, and rather successfully.
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	tg1-f3 £b8-c6
3.	c2-c4	j«x8-g4
’Annotating a game withGligoric in his 125 Selected Games, Smyslov wrote that this defence ‘merits greater consideration, especially if Black is aiming for active piece play.’ Therefore I reckoned with the possibility of the Chigorin Defence occurring in the match, but I did not analyse it in detail. Why? Tigran Petrosian once joked: ‘If your opponent wants to play the Dutch Defence, you shouldn’t prevent him!’ There is a mass of openings for which this joke is justified, and the Chigorin Defence is one of them... I fancy that Vasily Vasilievich is of roughly the same opinion, and that his choice was explained exclusively by the match situation. It was simply that in this game Black’s active piece play was more precious to him than White’s two bish
ops and predominance in the centre!' (G. Kasparov)
Unfortunately, Garry Kimovich’s opinion on this opening did not prevail, White players have begun studying it very seriously, and, unfortunately, usually the move 2...4k6 no longer causes the opponents to sink deep into thought, either at the board or at the screen...
4.	c4xd5	£.g4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
&	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	ФЫ-сЗ	Af8-b4
a	Ac1*d2	жЬ4хсЗ
9.	Ь2хсЗ	
One of the basic positions in the Chigorin Defence. It is fairly typical: two knights oppose two bishops, and in addition White has a strong centre.
Alexander Morozevich:
Black's first objective is to complete his development. He does best to castle on the kingside, where his king will be quite securely defended. I have several times employed the plan with ...£}ge7, ...0-0 and ..f5, which on the whole is not bad, but subsequently, if the position is opened up, the fact that the king is exposed on g8 may tell. Now I think that there is no need to hurry with the advance of the
118
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 Ji2g4 4.cxd5
f-pawn, and that it is better to play strictly by squares: develop the king's knight to f6 or e7, castle 0-0, place the rooks in the centre - ...Ha8-d8 and ...Sf8-e8, play ...b7-b6 and perhaps ...£)c6-a5, and possibly advance ...c7-c5. That is, endeavour to deploy the pieces harmoniously and wait to see what White will do: whether he will advance f3-f4, how he decides on the problem of his king - whether he will leave it in the centre or quickly castle to one side or the other. Black plays something of a secondary role, changing his plans depending on the opponent's actions, but at the same time constantly remembering his primary objective - the mobilization of his forces The plan with ...0-0-0 seems rather dangerous to me, since White has the b-file which his queen and rook can quickly occupy. I do not believe in this plan, and I myself have never castled queenside.
9. ..	^d5-d6
Black should not hurry with the exchange on d4: After this he no longer has any central pawn, and any opening of the position is usually to the advantage of the side with the two bishops. For example: 9...exd4?! 10.cxd4 (Black completely concedes the centre, and presents his opponent with another open file, the c-file) 10...£>ge7 (10...4if6 1 L&g2 (1 l Jke2 0-0 12.ВЫ Wxa2 13.Exb7 Eab8± Tarrasch-Schiffers, Nuremberg 1896) 11...0-0 12.0-0 Eab8 13 Wbl Efe8 14.Bcl±) ILfilgZ (ll.Ae2 0-0 12.0-0 (12>b3 Wg5±) 12...Ead8 13.ФЫ fid6 14.Egl Efd8 15.Ecl!±) 11...0-0 12.0-0 fS 13.f4 We6 14.Ebl ^xa2 15.fixb7
Eab8 16.Hxc7 Ef6 17>c 1 Eg6 18.ФЫ Eb2 19.Axc6 Exd2 20.Exe7 Ec2 21.^bl Wxbl 22.Ad5 + ,and Black resigned (Khairullin-Howell, Kirishi
The prophylactic queen move is directed against both the possible transition into an endgame by 10.Wb3 (but first White has to concern himself over his f3 -pawn), and also the tempo-gaining advances c3-c4 and d4-d5 followed by Ac3 or Vb4.
Alexander Morozevich:
In the diagram position I have studied and employed several different moves for Black. The main theoretical continuation here is 9... tifc/6. Sometimes 9...£)ge7 occurs, with the idea of quickly completing development and at the same time, just in case, supporting the knight on c6. In several blitz games I have played 9.Wd7 and this move, incidentally, very much appeals to 'Rybka'. However, as a result of theoretical investigations and practical tests I have come to the conclusion that the most promising continuation for Black is 9...4Df6/?z which has not been employed much in practice.
10. Ea1-b1
119
Chapter Тио - Section D
A)	10.fi.e2 4}ge7	11.0-0	0-0-0
(11...0-0 12.ФЫ fiad8= is better) 12.ФЫ gS?! (another inaccuracy; 12_.f5 13.Sgl Wf6 14.Wb3 f4 IS.Hadi Bhe8 16.fi.cl fxe3 17.fxe3 exd4 18.cxd4 4/5 would have led to an unclear game) 13.2gl Hdg8?! (13...Hhg8 14>b3 fS 15. Hadi Hg6 16.ficl±) 14>b3 f5 15.Hadi! exd4 16.cxd4 Hg6 17.fi.cl Hd8 18.d5 П116 19.Hg2 4Je5 2O.e4 f4 21.Wa3 g4 22.Wxa7 4J7g6 23.fxg4 Hh3 24.f3! 4>h4 25.fixf4 <hxl'3 26.Wa8+ s4?d7 27.fi.g34— (Panno-Planinc, Mar del Plata 1971);
B)	10.Ji.g2?! 4Jge7:
Bl) 11.f4 exf4 12.e4 0-0 13.eS ^g6 14.0-0 (14.Wf3 4/5?*) 14...4Jf5?! (14.X5! 15.Wft gST) 1 5.fixf4 4Jh4 16.fi.g3 43xg2 17.&xg2Had8 18.^bl!± (Moskalenko-Morozevich, Moscow 1994);
B2) 11.0-0 0-0 12.ФЫ (12.f4 exf4 13.e4 4}g6 14.eS Wd7 15.НЫ flad8 16.^a4 (1бДхЬ7 4Jxd4!) 16...ft! 17.Ji.xf3 4kxe5 18.fi.dl (18Wd 1 4}xf3+ !9.Wxft b6—+) 18...4/34- 0-1 (Wannabee-Morozevich. ICC 1999)) 12...Had8 13.ЙЫ b6 14.f4 exf4 I5.e4 4Jg6 16.Hb5 ^ce7 17.Hh5 сб 18 >c2 We6 19.fih3 (19.Hgl») 19...Wc4T 20.&gl?Bxd4 21.Hdl ^e2 0-l (Kham-gokov-Morozevich, Moscow 2002);
C)	10.fid3 4Jge7 11.0-0 Ь6 12.ФЫ 0-0 13.figl Had8 14.^e2 fS 15.Hg2 4Jg6 16.Sagl Hd7?* (Krush-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
10.	..	Ь7-Ь6
10...	0-0-0 1 l.Wb3 b6 12.Wxf7 4Jh6 13.Wc4 Hhf8 I4.ji.d3 Hxf3 15.fi.e4 Hf6 16.d5 43b8 17.Hfl Hdf8 18.ft 4/5** (Marzolo-Miladinovic, Gonfreville 2006).
11.	f3-f4
White sacrifices a pawn, in order to advance his centre and activate his bishops. There are many alternatives:
A) 11.h4?! 4Jge7 12.h5 0-0?! (12...0-0-0!T) 13>c2flfe8 14.^d3 h6 15.ФП Sad8 16.&g2 &a5 17.3bdl cS 18.Ji.cl! cxd4 19.cxd4 Дс8 20.dxe5 WxeS 21.Wa4 £}dS 22.Wg4 4Jf6 23.Ш5 ^xfS 24.^xf5 HcS 2S.e4± (Mitenkov-Barsky, Moscow 1993);
B)	ll.Ji.e2 4Jge7 12.0-0 0-0 13.ФЫ 4jg6 (13...fS I4.Sgl ILf6oo) 14.Sgl flad8^;
C)	ll.Sgl!?:
Cl) U...4Jge7 12.Bxg7 &g6 13.Ji.c4 4Jd8 14.f4 (14>b3 Wf6T; 14.ЙЬ5 &f8 15.13xg6 hxg6 16.fixeS fixh2T; 14.e4 Wf6 15.fih6 2ih4+) 14...&f8 (14...exf4 15.Wh5±) 15.nxg6 hxg6 16.fxe5 Wc6 17.Де2ДхЬ2? 18.£.ft±;
C2) ll...g6 12.h4 hS 13.Sg5 2>ge7 14.f4exf4 15.e4±.
11..	i.g2 will be examined in the following game.
11.	„	e5xf4
Bad was 11 ...e4? 12.c4 4/6 13.Ac3±.
12.	e3-e4	4jg8-e7
13.	Wd1-f3
l3.Hgl?! 0-0 14.e5 We6 IS.Wg4 4Jg6 16.h4 f5 17.Wg2 ft 18.Wg5 Hf7 19.&dl Wxa2 20..fi.d3 We6 21 hS 4jge7
120
The Exchange: 3.4)f3 J2.g4 4.cxd5
22 Wf4 Bd8 23.^xf3 £aS 24>e2 cS 25.dxcS bxcS 26.c4 £)ec6 27.EgS Efd7—F (Douven-Osterman, Bad Woris-hofen 1993).
13. ._	0-0
Much stronger was 13 ...Wa3’,
pawn with his bishop 14.jSiLxf4? on account of 14...£lxd4 1 5.Wd3 £>e6—F. In the event of 14.J^.d3 O-Ooo Black has quite good counterchances in a complicated struggle. We will examine some other possibilities for White, both those which have occurred in practice, and those which have not:
A)	14.Wd3 Wxa2 15.Axf4 0-0 16.Де2 fS 17.exf5 W5 18.0-0 £Txd4 19.cxd4 Exf4 2O.Wc4+ Wxc4 21.J«Lxc4+ ФГ8 22.Ad5 5f6 23 Hfcl £xd4 24.Axa8 £e2+ 25.ФП 2>xcl 26.Excl c5 27.Де4, draw (Jose Abril-Narciso Dublan, Tordera 1995);
B)	14,Wxf4 0-0 15.Ae2 (15.£c4£a5 16.ДЬЗ (16.jfiLd3 Wxa2 17.0-0 2ig6 18>e3$k4—f) 16...£)xb3 17.axb3 f5 18.e5 c5 19.0-0 cxd4 2O.cxd4?! Sad8 21 .Efd 1 a5 22.b4 £d5 23.Wg3 ^xg3+ 24.hxg3 a4—F Dereviagin-Zhurov, Moscow 1992; 15.^.d3 4}xd4+; IS.^xc? i»xa2 16.Ad3 fife8«>) 15...Wxa2 (15...£g6!?) 16.Edl (16.0-0 £>g6
17 We3 Ead8?) 16...£g6 17>g3 Hfe8 18.£d3<£aS 19.h4^b3 20.Egl (20.h5 4ixd2 21.Sxd2 (21.hxg6 £ixe4<») 21...Wal + 22.Edl Wxc3+ 23.ФП £)f8oo; 20.ДеЗ!?1) 20...&xd2 21.Exd2 ^al+ (21..>a5oo) 22.Фе2 Wxc3 23.h5 Wxd4 24.hxg6 hxg6 25.Wh4 Ead8 26.Ehl f5T;
C)	14>xf4 Wxa2 IS.Edl We6 16.Ae2 &g6 17.Wf3 2la5 18.h4 h5 19.Ag5 c6 2O.flgl Ес8 21.ФЛ, draw (Sakaev-De Firmian, Copenhagen 2005);
16..Ag6! (16...f5 17.eS Wd5 (17...Sad8 18 flgl &h8 19 Wg3 Eg8 20>h4 ^e6 21Ed3 h6 22.flh3± Alpert-Barsky, corr. 1993) 18>xd5+ 2>xd5 19.^d2±) 17.Axc7 (17.Ag3 f5 18.e5 2ice7T) 17...fiac8	18.^d6 (18.Ag3 Ske7
19.0-0?» (19.h4!?) 19...Wb2 2O.Ecl f5^) 18...flfd8 19 ,&g3 (19.eS f6 20>e4 (20>e3 №i?±) 20...Wa5oo) 19...£a5 2O.h4Wb2^.
These variations were first analysed by the authors of this book back in 1992 in the town of Elektrostal on the outskirts of Moscow, together with our friends Sergey Zhurov and Maria Manakova (now a grandmaster).
The move in the game is rather slow, but even after it - and Kasparov admits this in
121
Chapter Two - Section D
his commentary' — Biack could have gamed quite good counterchances. Evidently, in the Chigorin Defence, as in the majority of correct openings, there is a definite safety margin, and the first inaccuracy or slight mistake does not prove fatal.
14.	£d2xf4
Little is promised by 14.Jig2?! £}g6! I S.eS £>cxe5 I6.dxe5 £jxe5-> or !4.Wxf4 Wa3<».
14.	.. Wd6-a3
15.	Jlf1-e2!
If 15.Ag2?!, then 15,..£g6 16.Ag3 fS! 17.exf5 Sae8+ 18.ФЛ £)ce7t is unpleasant (Kasparov).
15.	-.	f7-f5
16.	0-0!
16.e5 Wxa2 17.Hdl (17.0-0?! 2sg6?) 17...Wd5 18.Hgl &h8 19. Wg3t.
16..	f5xe4?
Correct was 16...£}g6! 17.Axc7 We7 I8.exf5 Wxc7 19.Wd5+ ФИ8 2O.fxg6 <£}e7! 21 WhS £ixg6 22.Jid3 2f6». In Kasparov’s opinion, White can still gain a small advantage after 17JLc4+! Ф118 18.Дс1 fxe4 (I8...&xd4? 19.Wd3) 19.Wxe4 Wd6±. It is hard to disagree with this evaluation, but in this variation Black’s position looks quite defensible.
17.	Wf3xe4 Wa3xc3
18.	vf4-e3!
A brilliant consolidating move! It somehow becomes apparent that Black’s knights are essentially hanging, and nothing is guarding his king. White has many threats, the most ‘crude’ of them being 19.Ebel.
18.	Wc3-a3
The following variation vividly demonstrates that Black’s life is not easy: 18...Ead8 19.3fcl WaS 2O.£c4+ ФЬ8 2l .Sb5 Wa3 22.flh54—.
19.	Jke2-d3! Wa3-d6
Black tries at least somehow to coordinate the actions of his pieces, to gather them together. Everything else loses more quickly, and it Is hard to add anything to the variations given by Kasparov: 19...g6 2O.Ac4+ &g7 21.d5; 19...41fS 2O.We6+; 19...ПГ5 2О.ЙЬ5 ExbS (2O...Baf8 21BxfS BxfS 22.We6+ Bf7 23.Дс4 £>d8 24.Wd7) 21 JaLxbS Wd6 22.Bcl.
According to the computer, at least five moves lead to a win: 21.Дс4+, 21 Wh5 + , 21.Wh4, 21JiLg5... The path chosen by Kasparov is more than logical: White includes his queen’s rook in the attack.
21.	Eb1-b5 <Lc6xd4!
As they say, in for a penny, i n for a pound! 22. Wh7-e4?
White could have won by 22.JLxd4! Wxd4 23.Eg5! Феб (23...Eh8 24.Ac4+!) 24.Wh3 +d?d6 25.JbLc2.
122
The Exchange. 3.£lf3 j£g4 4.cxd5
22.	-.	Za8-d8!
Kasparov writes that he had overlooked this move and expected 22...&xbS? 23.Ac4+ <±>f6 24.Wh4+ Фе5 2S.f4+ Фе4 26,f5+ ФхеЗ 27.Wf2 + or 22...c5 23Jkxd4 and 24.jfi.c4+. After this oversight, White sensibly decided to force a draw.
23.	fi.e3xd4	Wd6xd4
24.	Hb5-f5+	4te7xf5
25.	We4xf5+	ФП-д8
26.	«rf5-h7+	*g8-f7
Draw.
GAME 36
□ Vladimir Kramnik
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£}b8-c6
3.	£g1-f3	xc8-g4
4.	c4xd5	Jkg4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
6.	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	&Ы-СЗ	• f8-b4
8.	Jfi.c1-d2	Jkb4xc3
9.	Ь2хсЗ	Wd5-d6
10.	Za1-b1	b7-b6
11.	Jfi.f1-g2	
On the long diagonal the bishop is sure to find a target to attack, and in addition it will perform a defensive function, by covering the king against checks on the g-file. But in order to activate the bishop. White will have to sacrifice a pawn by f3-f4, and it may not be so simple to regain the temporarily sacrificed pawn.
11.	£g8-e7
12. 0-0
A game with a ‘long’ time control took a similar course: 12.f4 exf4 13.e4 Sd8 14.0-0 ^g6 15.eS Wd7 16 Wf3 £>ce7 17.jfi.xf4 2>h4 18>e2 ^xg2 19.&xg2 c5»* (D. Gurevich-De Firmian, San Diego 2004).
12.	..	0-0
13.	f3-f4	e5xf4
14.	e3-e4	Ha8-d8
15.	^d1-g4
An improvement compared with the following Internet game (it is unlikely, however, that Kramnik knew it): 15.eS We6 16.£xf4 'Н'хаг 17.Wf3 Wc4 18.ФЫ f6 19.e6 Wxe6 20.Axc7 Hd7 21JfiJi3 fS^ (Sammour-Hasbun-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
15.	5e7-g6
16.	Ad2-c1	£ic6-e7
17.	h2-h4	Wd6-e6?l
Black chooses an unfortunate moment to liquidate to an endgame Better was 17..J5! 18.exf5 £xf5 19.h5 4Я16 20.Wh3 4}e7 21.Bel - White has compensation for the pawn, but not more.
18.	^g4xe6 f7xe6
19.	Ag2-h3 h7-h5
I9...	e5! was stronger, and after 20.hS £sh4 21.Деб4 ФЬ8 2 2-.fi. a 3 for Black everything ‘fits together’: 22...Hfe8 23.^.f7 £if3+ 24.&g2 £\d2 with counterplay.
20.	jfi.h3xe64- &g8-h7
123
Chapter Two - Section D
21. f2-f3?l
21.Aa3 Sf6 22.Ah3± was correct.
White makes two mistakes in succession,
and the advantage passes to Black.		
21.		2f8-f6
22.	d4-d5?l	£>g6-e5
23.	&g1-f2	c7-c6
24.	Ac1-a3	£>e7-g6
25.	3b1-d1	c6xd5
26.	e4xd5	^e5-c4
27.	Aa3-c1	S>g6xh4
28.	Bf1-h1	g7-g5+
44.	Ed3-e3+ £e7-f6
45.	£c6-c7 Ed8xd7+
46.	Af5xd7 Ef4xc4+
47.	Фс7хЬ6
And the game soon ended in a draw.
GAME 37
□ Sergey Shipov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 1992 (rapid)
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-с6
3.	£g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4.	c4xd5	Ag4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
6.	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	ФЫ-сЗ	Af8-b4
8.	Ac1-d2	Ab4xc3
9. 10.	Ь2хсЗ Wd1-b3	Wd5-d6
In a difficult situation Kramnik finds an interesting exchange sacrifice, sharpening the position, and manages to
save the game.		
29.	Ed1-d4	х4-е5
30.	Eh1 xh4l?	g5xh4
31.	Ac1 xf4	sLe5-d3+
32.	3d4xd3	Sf6xf4
33.	ФТ2-еЗ	Qf4*a4
34.	d5-d6	*h7-g7
35.	f3-f4	ig7-f6
36.	Ae6-h3	Sa4xa2
37.	d6-d7	Ha2-h2
38.	ie3-e4	*f6-e7
39.	Фе4-е5	a7-a5
40.	Ah3-f5	a5-a4
41.	c3-c4	Sh2-e2+
42.	£e5-d5	He2-f2
43.	*d5-c6	Sf2xf4
This logical move has been overshadowed by Kasparov’s 10.ЙЫ. Nevertheless, as is shown by the following analysis, bringing the queen out to an attacking position creates considerable problems for Black.
10.	_	£jg8-e7
А)	Ю...ПЬ8?! is too passive in view of 11.dS (but not 11.Ac4 Wf6 12. AdS £ge7 13.Ae4 0-(M) H...£>d8 12.c4
124
The Exchange. 3.£)f3 Jiftg4 4xxd5
4je7 13.^b4 cS 14.dxc6 'й'хсб 15.Jft.e2 2fc6 16.Wa3±;
B)	10...0-0-0 has been employed with some success by Igor Miladinovic, for example: 11.НЫ (H.Wxf7 $Jh6 12.Wb3 exd4 13.cxd4 ФЬ8 14.НЫ b6 15.jfth3 Hhf8® Jacimovic-Miladinovic, Kavala 1996) ll...b6 12. jft.c 1 £>ge7 13.ДаЗ Шб 14.jft.xe7 4ixe7 15.Де2 Hhe8 16.13g 1 exd4 17.cxd4 #Jf5 18.ФП ФЬ8г* (Qendro-Miladinovic, Cortina d’Ampezzo 2004). Even so, after 1l.jft.e2 fS (Il...^ge7?! 12.^xf7±) 12.0-0 £>ge7 13.13fbl b6 14.a4t White’s initiative is very unpleasant, whereas it is difficult for Black to create threats on the kingside.
With the move in the game Black sacrifices a pawn for development The sacrifice looks very thematic (a file is opened for his rook, and White is forced to waste time on the retreat of his queen), but Black does not gain full compensation for the pawn.
Another possible continuation for Black -10...b6 - will be examined later.
11.	Wb3xb7 Sa8-b8
12.	Wb7-a6 04)
12..	Wg6!? 13>d3 f5 14.dS e4 is also interesting.
13.	Jftf1-d3l
13. .. Sb8-b2
White also has the advantage in the event of 13...f5 14.Jft.cl Wg6 13.ДаЗ e4 (15...Wg2 16.Hfl Wxf3 17.jft.xe7 2>xe7 18.We6+±) 16.jftae7 ^g2 17.^.xf8 exd3 18.0-0-0±.
The alternative 13...ПЬ6 is evidently more cunning, but here too White has a clear-cut way to gain an advantage with either 14.Wa4 or 14.^c4 £jg6 15.jft.e4 £>h4±.
A)	14...Wf6 15..ft.e4 (15.Фе2 16.d5 Ske7 17.We4 3d6 18.c4 c6 19.dxc6 g6 20.c7!±; IS.dS?! $Jxd5 16.We4 Hd8 17.Wxh7+ &f8 18.Egl g6 19.jft.xg6 fxg6 2O.Sxg6 Wf7 21.^h6+ Фе8 22J3xc6 ^xf3oo) 15...We6!? 16.h4 f5 17.jft.c2 Wg6 18>c4+ ФЬ8 19.d5±;
B)	14...£)g6	1 S.h4 (15.jft.xg6?!
fxg6**; 15.jft.e4 f5 16.jft.xc6 Йхс6?2; 15 .Hgl f5 16.Edl $Jh4 17.Eg3±) 15...exd4 (15...h5 16.ПЬ1±) 16.cxd4 Wf6 17.Jft.e4 (17.h5 &h4«>; 17.Фе2 He8±)	17...#Jxh4	18.Фе2±, and
18...Де8 does not work on account of 19.d5 &xf3 2O.jft.xf3 S)d4+ 21.ФП+-.
14. .ftd2-c1?
Now Black succeeds in achieving a good game. 14.Edl! would have been far more unpleasant for him, for instance: 14...f5 (the pawn grab 14...Wd5 15.Jft.e4 Wxa2 16.Wxa2 Exa2 17.Фе2 ДЬ8 18.ПЬ1+— is even worse) 15.jft.cl ПЬ6 16.jft.a3±.
14.		Eb2-b6
15.	Wa6-a4	e5xd4
16.	c3xd4	£jc6-b4
17.	Wa4-d1	c7-c5!
18.	£c1*a3	c5xd4
19.	0-0	
125
Chapter Two - Section D
19.	_	4e7-d5?
19...	dxe3 2O.Axb4 (2O.fxe3 ^eS+)
2O...exf2+ 21.Bxf2 Wxb4+ was stron
ger.
20.	£d3-c4	Wd6-g6+
21.	Фд1-М	Wg6-h5!
The trappy 21...'b'fS (hoping for 22.e4? Wh3 23.Bgl Bh6 24.Sg2 2>f4-+) is less good on account of 22 .Eg I Bc8 23.Wxd4Wxf3+ 24.Bg2 Bg6 25.Bgl±
22.	f3-f4	Wh5-h3
23.	Bf1-g1	Eb6-h6
24.	Bg1-g2	£d5xf4l
25.	e3xf4	Wh3xa3
26.	Wd1xd4	g7-g6?l
A reckless move: Black voluntarily shuts in his rook on the edge of the board, and he has insufficient force for an attack.
Better was 26...Bg6 27.Exg6 hxg6 with equality.
27.	Пд2-дЗ?!
It was time for White to launch a counterattack: 27.fS £jc2 28.Wd2 &xal 29.Wxh6 Wf3 3O.h4 (3O.fxg6 Wdl + 31. £fl hxg6=) 30...W5 (3O...Bd8 31.1Lxf7+! &xf7 32.Wxh7+ Фе8 33 WH8+ &d7 34.Wxal±) 31.hS ^e4 32.hxg6 hxg6 3 3.Wxg6+ Wxg6 34.Bxg6+ ФЬ8 3S.Ba6±.
27.	..	Wa3-a5
28.	НдЗ-д5	^a5-c7
29.	Ea1-d1?l
A blunder. The balance would have been maintained by 29.^e4, when Black can not play 29...Sh4? on account of 3O.Bxg6+ hxg6 31.Wxg6+ ФЬ8 32.Wf6+ and wins.
29. ...	Eh6-h4
30. Ac4-b3	Eh4xf4
31. Wd4-e3	Wc7-c6+
32. &h1*g1	Wc6-f6
33. Bg5-g2	ib4-c6
34. Ed1-d5	^c6-d4T
35. ДЬЗ-dl	Ef8-b8
36. Eg2-g4	^d4-f34-
37. Ad1xf3	Ef4xf3
38. We3-d4	Eb8-b1 +
39. Фд1*д2	Eb1-b2-+
40. ^d4xf6	Bf3xf6
41. Eg4*a4	Ef6xf2+
42. Фд2-дЗ	
42. .. Ef2xh2?l
The quickest way to win was by 42...flg2+ 43.ФГ4 Bbf2+ 44.Фе5 Exa2. With both flags about to fall. Black makes two further blunders and in the end he throws away the win.
43.	Bd5-a5	h7-h5
44.	Ba5xa7	д6-д5
45.	Еа7-а5	Фд8-Ь7??
The g5-pawn is supposedly poisoned, but, alas, this is not so...
46.	Еа5хд5 Eb2-g2+
126
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 Jcg4 4.cxd5
47.	ФдЗТ4 ih7-h6
If 47...Hh4+ White has 48.ФГЗ, and all four rooks are enprise.
48.	3g5xg2	Hh2xg2
49.	*f4-f3	3g2-g6
50.	Sa4-f4	£h6-g7
51.	a2-a4	Пдб-аб
52.	ФТЗ-дЗ	Фд7-д6
53.	&g3-f3	Фд6-д5??
53..	.f5 would have retained some winning chances.
54.	3f4xf7 3a6xa4
55.	Af3-g3
Draw.
A Closer Look
1.d4 d5 2.c4 2x6 3.^f3 vg4 4.cxd5
AxfS 5.gxf3 Wxd5 б.еЗ e5 7.4зсЗ ДЬ4 8.i_d2 АхсЗ Э.ЬхсЗ Wd61O.Wb3 b6
11.d4-d5
The position is extremely sharp, on every move both sides have a mass of possibilities, and there is hardly any practical material.
A) ll.Egl g6 (11...2)ge7 12.fixg7±) I2.Ac4 Wd7 (12...2Л16 13.e4±) 13.Wa4 £>ge7 14.0-0-0 a6 IS.dS £>aS 16.Wxd7+ s£>xd7 17.Де2 £f5 18.e4 £>d6 19.£.g5 &ac4 2O.£.f6 Shb8<* (Fridman-MASIAKKOSTIA, ICC 2005);
B)	ll.Jkcl also looks slow: 11. .0-0-0 12.Wxf7 (12.ДаЗ Wf6=) 12...£>h6! 13.ДЬЗ+ФЬ8 14.Wxg7 (14.We6Wxe6 15.Axe6 exd4 16.cxd4 4^xd4 17.exd4 Ehe8+) 14...Shg8	(14...Hdg8!?
15 Wd7 Шб®) 15.Wxh7 exd4 16Wd3oo; 16.cxd4 #)xd4 17.exd4 Wxd44;
C)	In reply to the pin ll.^bS £>e7 (11...0-0-0 is dangerous on account of 12.Wxf7 ^h6 (12...exd4 13.cxd4 4A6 14.Wc4®te5 I5.We2±) 13.Wc4±; also insufficient is ll...a6 12.dxe5 Wc5 13.Axc6+ Wxc6 14.e4±) 12.d5 Black has the counter-pin 12...0-0-0 (bad is 12...£>xd5 13.c4	14.Ab4 Wf6
15.Дхе7 Фхе7 16. Wa34- Wd6 17.Wxd6+ &xd6 18 Sdl+ Фс5 19.Sd5++-)	13.C4 4)b8	14.ДЬ4
'ЙТб**, when he disentangles himself.
D)	11 JLc4 is very unpleasant for Black:
ж I Hti
DI) 11...0-0-0	12.Axf7	ФЬ8
13.We6±;
D2) ll...ftaS	12.Axf7+	&f8
13?B'd5±;
D3) ll...^h6l? 12.^.d3 0-0 13.£cl Hfe8 14.ДаЗ Жб 15.Де4 Sad8 (it would be interesting to try 15...exd4 16.cxd4 Йхе4!? (16...4ig4 17.Wd5±) 17.fxe4 Wf3«) 16.Wb5 (16.Wc4 &a5 17.Wxc7	3c8	18.Wxa7	£c4®)
127
Chapter Two - Section D
16..	.£ib8 (16...^)a5 17.0-0 c6±) 17.0-0 £ki7 18.Wc6fie6 19.Wxc7±.
But here too it is possible to maintain the tension:
D4) 1 1...W6 12 .fi.d5 (12.f4 exf4 13.e4 &ge7 14.e5 WfB=) 12...0-0-0 13.Де4 2ige7 14.d5 &a5 (14...Wd6 15.dxc6! Wxd2+ 16.ФП Wd6 (16...f5 17.Wc4+—)	17.Wxf7±) IS.WbS
(15.Wa4 ФЬ8 16x4 2ib7 17.Ab4 Wh4**) 15...ФЬ7 16x4 £kS, and if 17.ДЬ4?а6—к
11.	-.	£с6-а5
A)	11 ...£ib8 is too passive: 12.ДЬ5+ сб 13.dxc6^xc6 14.c4<?3e7 15.JLb4±;
B)	П...ЗД8 12.Ab5+ ФГ8 is little better:
Bl)	13.Wb4^e7 14x4 &b7 15 Wxd6 cxd6=;
B2)	13.JsLcl ФЬ7 14.Дс6 £c5 15.Дха8 ФхЬЗ 16.axb3 £e7 17.ДаЗ (17.fixa7 £)xd5 18.Aa3 cS 19.AxdS WxdS 2O.e4 Wc6oo) 17...Ш6 (17..Wd8?!	18.ДЬ7±;	17..Wg6
18.0-0-0±) 18.&e2 g6± 19.d6!? cxd6 2O.fihdl £15 (20...&g7 21.fixd6 Wh4 22.Де4 2x8 23.fid7 fid8 24.Де7»±) 21. Де4 <ifcg7 22x4 fid8®;
ВЗ)	13.Даб2е7 14.c4c5±;
B4)	13x4 2b7 14.Ac6 (14.Ab4 2c5«>) 14...2x5 15.Axa8 (15.Wa3 fid8
16>xa7 2e7^) I5...2xb3 16.axb3 ^e7 (16...aS 17.b4 axb4 18.Па4 Фе7 19.ДхЬ4 Wf6 2О.Па7±) 17.Пха7 g5 18 fig 1 h6 19J.C3 £g6 2О.Дс6 ^g7 21.f4!±.
12.	Wb3-a4+
A)	12.^b5+ c6 13.dxc6 ^xc6 14.c4 Фе7=;
В)	12.£.b$+ &f8 13.Wb4 ^e7 14>xd6 cxd6 15x4 2>b7!?oo; 15...a6 16.Axa5 axb5 17.Ab4 bxc4 18.Axd6±.
12.	*e8-f8
12...	C6 13.C4 4W !4.Ab4 Wf6 I5.d6±.
13.	c4 4Л7 14JLc3 ^c5 15.Wc2 4W16.h4
The concluding position of this approximate variation is rather dangerous for Black: with his king on IB it is difficult for him to connect his rooks. If he plays ...f7-f5, his eS-pawn will be in danger, while after ...f7-f6 the fl-bishop acquires the e6-square.
In our view, 10.Wb3! in reply to 9...Wd6 sets Black serious problems. Possibly the readers will not agree with us and will find an improvement for Black in the variations given above As devotees of the Chigorin Defence, this would only please us!
128
The Exchange 3. £)f3 jfeg4 4.cxd5
GAME 38
□ Ian Nepomniachtchi
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow Region 2004 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-с6
3.	£g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4.	c4xd5	ig4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
6.	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	ФЫ-сЗ	JLf8-b4
a	Ac1-d2	Jkb4xc3
9.	Ь2хсЗ	Wd5-d7l?
The theory of this move constitutes practically virgin territory'. What in general is the point of the queen’s retreat from the centre, where for the moment nothing is threatening it? As we have already commented - it does not allow the opponent to play c3-c4 and d4-d$ with gain of tempo. Both this and the other move (i.e. 9...Wd6) are risky, since Black loses time, and he does not have any lead in development. Here nuances come into play: on which square will the queen be better placed (in one case it is quite active, in the other it is safe)? On d6 in a number of variations the queen comes under attack after c3-c4 and .£Ld2-b4 or J^d2xf4 (if events develop along the lines of the Kasparov-Smyslov game), whereas at d7 nothing is threatening it. And in the event of d4-d5 the сб-knight can now go to aS, since the white queen does not have a check on a4 or bS.
Of course, 9...Wd7 also has its drawbacks. For example, after JnLfl-bS it is much harder to unpin the knight on сб, since it is now covering not one piece, but two. In addition, on d7 the queen is less mo
bile, and it is more difficult fcr it to reach both the kingside (from d6 it attacks the h2-pawn and can be moved along the 6th rank) and also the queenside. The question is, which are more significant: the pluses or the minuses?
10. vf1-g2
A) Black’s defences cannot be breached by a sudden attack: 10.Wb3 b6 ll.dS (П.^а4 4)ge7 12,ДЬ5 аб 13.£.xc6 4)xc6 14.Sdl 0-0 15.0-0 bS 16.Wc2 We6 17 Дс1 J3ad8 18.ДЬ2 Wh3 19.We4 Hd6 2O.f4 exf4 0-1 MSK-BARS, ICC 2003; П.ДЬ5 a6«) 11 ...£)a5 I 2-.fi.b5 (nothing is given by 12.'ЙЪ5 сб 13.dxc6 £ixc6 14.c4 4ige7<») 12...C6 (the endgame after 12...4)xb3 13.Axd7+ S&xd? 14.axb3#)e7 I5.c4c6 16.e4cxd5 17.exd5± is advantageous to White) 13.dxc6 Wc7! 14.Wa3 £le7 15.c4 0-0 with an unclear position (but not 15 ...a6 16.£xa5 axbS 17.Axb6 ПхаЗ 18.jilxc7 bxc4 19.^xe5 4)xc6 2O.^Lxg7 Sg8 21.Ab2±);
B) 10.£d3 £ge7 1 I>c2 f5 12.5Ы b6 13.h4 0-0 14.h5 h6 15.Фе2 Hae8 16.Sbgl ФЬ8*=* (Messir-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
We will examine the move 10.НЫ separately.
10.	£sg8-e7
129
Chapter Two - Section D
11.	0-0	0-0
12.	Ea1-b1	b7-b6
13.	Wd1-c2	4ie7-g6
14.	Фд1-Ы	£g6-h4
15.	Ef1-g1	f7-f5
16.	Wc2-a4	f5-f4
17.	e3-e4	Ea8-d8
Black sensibly declines the pawn sacrifice: 17...exd4?! 18.cxd4 Wxd4 19>b3 + ФИ8 2O.Ji.c3 Wc5 21 ,Ebcl±.
18.	d4-d5	^c6-a5
Simpler is 18...£ixg2!? 19.Dxg2 £sa5 with an equal game.
19.	^a4xd7 Sd8xd7
20.	Ag2-h3	3d7-d6
21.	jkh3-e64-
2&		^c4-d6
29.	f2-f3	&g8-f7
30.	Ed1-d5	&f7-f6
31.	Фд2-{2	g7-g5
32.	ФТ2-е2	
Better was 32.ЙЫ 4ja4 33.Scl bS**.
32. -	h7-h5
33.	h2-h3	g5-g4
34.	h3xg4	h5xg4
35.	Ag3-h4+	Af6-g6
36.	f3xg4?l	4^d6xe4?
Black has a slight advantage, and in the subsequent play he was able to convert it into a win.
GAME 39
21.	•••	2d6xe6!
22.	d5xe6	£h4xf3
23.	Hg1-d1	Sf8-e8
24.	ФИ1-д2	£f3-g5
25.	ЙЬ1-Ь5?!	
Aninaccuracy; 25.f3= was correct
25. .	&a5-c4
After 2S...cS*¥ Black would have had the advantage.
26.	vd2xf4!	<Lg5xe6
27.	vf4-g3	£e6-c5
28.	Hb5-b4
White could have advantageously returned the exchange: 28.Hxc5! bxc5 29.JJd5±.
□ Raffael
 Alexander Morozevich
Playchess.com 2006 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ъ8-с6
3.	£g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4.	C4xd5	£.g4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
6.	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	£Ь1-сЗ	Jkf8-b4
8.	Ac1-d2	J«b4xc3
9.	Ь2хсЗ	Wd5-d7
10.	Еа1-Ы	b7-b6
130
The Exchange 3. £)f3 Ag4 4.cxdS
11. f3-f4
Raffael employs the same plan as Kasparov in his game with Smyslov - he temporarily sacrifices a pawn, in order to activate his bishops and advance his central pawns. Raffael is a ‘handle’, and one can only guess who is concealed behind it It is obvious only that it is an elite grandmaster, some think that it is Garry Kasparov himself.
In the diagram position White has various alternatives:
A) 1 L Ag2?! Sige7 12,Wc2 0-0 13.Hgl?! Sad8? 14.Acl Sig6 IS.Afl Sfe8 16.Ae2 Wh3 17.Wa4 Slce7 18.Aa3 Sid 5 19.Wc4 exd4 2O.cxd4 Wxh2 21 .Hfl Неб! 22.&d2 cS 23.<&c2 Sxe3 24.dxc5 J3xa3 2S.cxb6 Hc3 + 26.Wxc3 Sxc3 27.ФхсЗ We5 +—4 (Orlinkov-Morozevich, Moscow 1993);
B) ll.Ae2 Sge7 12.0-0	0-0
(12...0-0-0!? 13.ФЫ gS (13..Wh3 14.Hgl Hd6 15.Jttg3 Wh4 16.Wgl±) I4.Sgl Shg8 !S.Wa4 3g6?i) 13.ФЫ Ead8 14.Sgl &h8!? 1 5.ДЬ2 fS 16.Acl f4 17.fid2 fxe3 18.fxe3 exd4 19.cxd4 20.nd3«>;
C) H.AbS a6 (ll...Sge7 12.dxe5 WdS 13.c4^xe5 14.Wc2 0-0-0 15.Ac3 We6<»)	12.Axc6 Wxc6 13.dxe5
0-0-0®.
We will examine the move 11 .Sg 1 separately.
11.	-.	e5xf4
12.	e3-e4	Sg8-e7
13.	Ad2xf4
Bad is 13.dS SxdS! 14.exd5 Wxd5 IS.Hgl (15.We2+ &f8+) 15...0-0-0+, and little is also promised by 13.AbS абоо.
13.	-.	0-0
14.	d4-d5
Black's position looks very dangerous, but analysis shows that he has adequate defensive resources:
A)	14.Ac4 Sa5!? 15.Ad3 fS 16.e5 cSoo;
B)	I4.Ag2
Bl)	14r„f5 15.eS SklS 16.Ad2 Sa 5 17.We2 Г4 !8.Ae4 (18.c4 f3 19.Axf3 JZxf3! ? 20.Wxf3 Sxc4±) 18...C6 19.Wd3 h6 20.C4+-;
B2)	14...Sg6 15.Ag3 (15.Ae3Sh4t) 15...f5 16.exf5 Пае8+ 17.ФП flxfS 18.Wd3 (18.dSi.h3?! Hxf2+ 19.ФхГ2 *xh3) 18...Ske5!oo;
C) 14.flgl 3fe8 (14...Sig6 15.Ae3 fS 16.exf5±; 14...f5 15.eS Skis 16.Ah6 ПГ7 17.Wf3±) 15.Ad3 (15>g4?! Wxg4 16.fixg4 SkiS 17.Ad2 Sff6+) 15...Sid5 16.Ah6 S>xc3?! (I6...g6Uf*) 17.Hxg7+ d?h8 18.Wh5 Sixe4! 19.ФП Wxd4 2O.Wxf7 Wxd3+ 21 Sfc-g2 J3g8 (21...Ski6®) 22.Hb3 SteS 23.Wf5 Ski6ao;
D) 14.Ad3 fS 15.eS Skl8!? (15...Sig6 l6.Acl±) 16.Ac4+ (16.AgS S)e6 17.Axe7 Wxe7 18.Wd2 flad8oo) I6...Ski5 17.Wb3 сб 18.0-0 Sie6 19.Ad2 flad8 2O.f4 (2O.a4 f4t) 2O...bS 21.Ae2a6 22.a4 We7oo.
14.	...	Sie7-g6
15.	Af4-g3	Sic6-a5
131
Chapter Iwo - Section D
Weaker is lS...^e7 16.Jtg2 4JceS 17.0-01.
16.	Af1-b5
Too sweeping is 16.h4?! Паев, and Black seizes the initiative.
16.	-	Wd7-h3
17.	Ab5-f1	Wh3-d7
18.	f2-f4	Hf8-e8
Black would have gained a dangerous attack after 18...Паев 19.Jig2 fS 20.eS £hce5 21.fxe5 f4.
19.	Af1-g2 £a5-c4
20.	^d1-d3
20.	h7-h5?
Black should have simply defended his knight - 20...bS. and then undermined the enemy centre. For example: 21.0-0 c6 (or 21...Had8!? 22.Wd4a6oo) 22.Wd4 (22.eS 3ad8 23.d6 f6«*) 22...cxd5 23>xd5 Wc81? (23...Wxd5 24.exd5 4Jd6 25.f5 4jeS 26.f6 4Jec4±) 24.e5 Hb8?±.
21.	Wd3xc4 h5-h4
22.	0-0
This is the whole point: White is by no means obliged to remove his bishop from the attack! Black’s idea would have been justified in the event of 22. Af2 £}xf4, for example: 23.Hgl £}xg2+ 24.Hxg2 3xe4+! 2S.Wxe4 Ее 8 26.^xe8+ ^xe8+ 27.&d2h3«A
22.	_ МхдЗ
23.	h2xg3	Wd7-g4
24.	^c4-d3	Ea8-d8
25.	c3-c4
26.	e4-e5
27.	>d3-f3
£g6-f8
Srf8-d7
White is a pawn up with an overwhelming position, and the remainder is no longer interesting.
A Closer Look
1.d4 d5 2.c4 4Jc6 3.£sf3 Ад4 4.cxd5 Jixf3 5.gxf3 Wxd5 6.e3 e5 7.&c3 Ab4 8Jkd2 Axc3 Э.ЬхсЗ Wd7 10.ПЫ b6 11.Дд1!
11.	_.	£д8-е7
The most critical reply. Of course. Black can agree to a somewhat inferior position after 1 l...g6 12.f4exf4 13.e4£if61.
12.	Sg1xg7 £>e7-g6
13.	Wd1-a4!
The operation to save the rook at g7 reaches the decisive stage Black would have succeeded in carrying out his idea after 13 Jkb5 a6 14.Wa4axb5 !5.Wxa8+ Фе7 16>a3+&f6Tor 13.£.c4£id8?*.
13.	._	£>c6-d8
Alas, neither of the following works: 13...&f8? 14.Hxg6 hxg6 1 S.£.bS 3xh2 16.Дхс6+-, or 13...£>b8 14.ДЬ5 сб 15.Ac4b5? 16.ПхЬ5+—.
14.Wxd7+£xd715.e4±
132
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 Jig4 4.cxd5
The concluding position is clearly advantageous to White. So, does this mean that 9...Wd7 cannot be played? In a match for the world championship or a super-tournament, probably not But in an open event or an Internet blitz game, why not try it? Do some work on this analysis, switch on your imagination, and you will certainly find many interesting possibilities for both sides!
A doser look
1.d4 d5 2.4jf3 £x6 3x4 Ag4 4.cxd5 Axf3 5.gxf3 Wxd5 б.еЗ e5 7.£c3 ib4 &Ad2 ДхсЗ 9.bxc3 ftge7
Here too there is not much theory, although slightly more than after 9...Wd7. Black provokes his opponent into immediately (with gain of tempi!) advancing his central pawns.
10.	c3-c4
Accepting the invitation. On the Internet other plans have also been tested:
A) 10.Wb3 Wd6 I l .Wxb7 0-0 12.Wb3 flab8 13.Wc2 flfe8 14.£.d3 £g6 15.ФП Wf6 16.£.e4 £a5 17x4 Wa6 18.Axa5 WxaS 19.2gl exd4 2O.exd4 Wh532 (aparcana-BARS, ICC 2002);
В) 10.ЙЫ b6 ll .IXgl 0-0 12x4 ^d7 13.d5^d8 14.ДсЗ f6 15.Wc2£f7 16.f4 c6 17.dxc6 ^xc6 18.^Lg2 ^xc4 19.jS.xa8 Пха8® (DJShrek-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
10.	-	Wd5-d6
10...	Wd7 1 l.dS £d8 12.Jlc3 f6 1ЗДgl 0-0 14.flg3 &h8 15.Wd2 c5 16.jS.d3 £fS 17.jLxf5 WxfS 18.Фе2 b6 19.Eagl Ш7 2O.e4± (Benitah-Mirzoev, Salou 2006).
11.	d4-d5	^c6-b8
12.	Wd1-b3	4Jb8-d7
Black has to part with the pawn, since White is better after 12...b6 13.13g I! (13.jS.b4 Wf6 14.Hgl 4И7 15.jS.h3i) 13...0-0 (13...£jg6 14.£.b4±) 14.£b4 Wf6 15.^Lc3 £ki7 16.f4± or 12..>b6 13 flgli.
But he could also have given it up in a different way - 12...£>a6, for example: 13.Wxb7 0-0 (13...Hb8? 14x5+-) 14.Wb3 (14.Wb2!?) 14...Hab8 IS.Wdl c6 16.e4 f5 17.£.g2 £g6 18.ДЫ £ih4 19.Hgl fxe4 2О.йхЬ8 Wxb8 21.fxe4^jc5 22.-S.c3 Wb6 23.Фе2 Sxf2+ 24.&xfl #Jxe4+ 0-1 (Pecot-Renet, Rance 2000).
13.	Wb3xb7 Sa8-b8
13...	0-0 14.Ab4! &c5 15.Wb5+-.
14.	^b7xa7 0-0
15.	Wa7-a4
The queen must urgently return ‘to base’. I 5.1ke2? 12a8 16.Wb7 Hfb8—b is bad for White, as is 15.f4? Sa8 16.fxe5 Фхе5
133
Chapter Two - Section D
17.cS Wf6 18.Wxc7 4Jg4 19.Фе2 Wxf2+ 2О.Ф<13 5аЗ+ 21.Фс4 Wxd2 22.Wxe7 Па4+ 23.ФЬ5 Wa5+ 24.Фс6 Wa8+ 25.ФЬ6 ЙЬ8+ 26.Фс7 ЙЬ7 + 27.ФИ6 Wb8+ 28.Феб 4Je5+ 29.Wxe5 Wc8 + ЗО.Фбб Wd7 mate (Fritz2-Morozevich, Moscow 1994).
IS.WaS!? comes into consideration.
15. ..	e5-e4l?
Black must urgently create threats, disregarding loss of material, since any delay is inadmissible:
А) 15...Hb6 16.3.e2 ШЪ8 (16...4kS 17.Wc2 (17 Wdl Wg6 18.АсЗ 5fb8») 17...П1Ъ8 18.jS.c3+—) 17.0-0 4ic5 18 Wdl! (18.Wa3 4Jg6 19.ФЫ 41h4® 20.flgl? 4Je4-+) 18..Wd7 19.ФЫ Wh3 20.5g 1 Hh6 21 .Sg2+-;
B)	15...4fcS 16.Wc2 c6 17.dxc6 Wxc6 18.jS.e2 4^g6 19.jS.c3± (19.Sgl &h4 20.3g3 e4®).
16. Wa4-c2
A cautious move Let us consider the alternatives:
A)	1 6.jSx3 exf3oo;
В)	16.f4?! ^c5 17.Wc2 4/5 18.Ac3 (18.h4 4Jxh4 19.Hxh4 Wf6T) 18...4)h4 19.jS.e2 Wg6 20.0-0-0 Wa6 21.fldgl g6 22.Hg4 4/3 23.Axf3 exf3 24.Hg5 f5®;
С)	16.Де2 exf3 17.Axf3	4k$
(17...W16 18.Wdl±) 18.Wdl (18Wc2
Wf6 19.Фе2 Sb2—+; 18 Wa3‘?) 18...4Jd3+ 19.Фе2 (19.ФП Wf6 2O.Hgl ПЬ2 21.Dg3	nxd2-+)
19...4Je5®;
D)	16.fxe4 fS (16...WeS 17.ficl 4teS
DI) 17.e$ WxeS 18.ЙС1 4Jc5®;
D2) 17.Ag2 4te5 18.Wc2 Wg6 19.0-0 fxe4 20.jS.c3 4af5®;
D3) 17.exf5 4WS 18.3x3 4ih4!? (18...4Jc5 19.Wc6 We7 20.agl 4)e4±) 19.0-0-0 (19.Wc6 Wa3!+; 19.jke2 4jg2 + oo; 19.3.d3 4>eS±) 19...flxf2 20.Od2 Wb6 (20...nf3!?<x>) 21.Wc2 Wxe3 22.3.d4 (22.3.d3 4Jf3 23.Axh7 + ФЬ8 24.Wd3 Wxd3 2S.jSjcd3 4>xd2 26.jS.xd2 4Je5¥) 22...Wa3+ 23.3.b2 We3 24.jS.d4 Wel+ 25.Wdl We4 26.Wc2=;
134
The Exchange: 3.£)f3 ig4 4.cxd5
D41) 17...fxe4 18.-S.gZ! (18.Wxe4^c5 19>c2 (19.Wg4!?±) 19_.Sxf2 20.&xf2 Wf'6+ 21.&g2 Hb2+) 18...4k5 19JsLxe4 WeS 2O.^xh7+ ФЬ8 21.£c3+-;
D42) 17...£k5!?
D421) 18.Ae2fxe4 19.0-0 £if5T;
D422) 18.£.g2Wg6®;
D423)	18.exf5	WS	19.£.c3	2>h4
20.0-0-0'йУаб®;
D424)	18.fi.d3	Hb2	19.Wc3	fxe4
20.jfi.e2 ДЬ6±;
D425)	18.eS»?	WxeS	19.Ac3	^d6
2O.Ad3 (2O.Hgl &g6 21.h4^h2 22.Hg2 '®rxh4ao; 2О.Де2 €Jg6 21.h4 f4oo), and White succeeds in more or less consolidating his position, since Black cannot play 20...&xdS? 21.cxdS WxdS 22.^e2!+-.
16. „	e4xf3
A) 16...Bf6 17.Jfi.c3 Wxf3 18.Hgl £fS 19.Ag24~;
B) 16...4teS 17.fxe4f5±;
C) 16...&e5 17.fxe4 (17>xe4 f5 !8.Wf4	$J7g6	19.Wg3	ПЬ2®)
17...2>f3+ 18.&e2 4Jxd2 (18...f5 19.eS!±) 19.Wxd2 WeS 20.Scl± 17Jfic3 £дб 18.И4 ДЬе8 19.h5 ^ge5 20.2 g 1 f5®
The analysis given above shows that, on the whole, in the 9...£jge7 variation White holds a strategic initiative In the fight for dynamic equilibrium Black is
obliged to act very enterprisingly and resourcefully. The most critical continuation is evidently 16.fxe4!?, after which the situation becomes extremely sharp, and any mistake at the board or in home analysis may immediately conclude the struggle.
GAME 40
□ Raffael
 Alexander Morozevich
Playchess.com 2006 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	^b8-c6
3.	2>g1-f3	Ac8-g4
4.	c4xd5	ig4xf3
5.	g2xf3	Wd8xd5
6.	e2-e3	e7-e5
7.	ФЫ-сЗ	Af8-b4
8.	Jfi.c1-d2	Ab4xc3
9.	Ь2хсЗ	£g8-f6!
143 8
I
Ait
а ж
1H
Wi
H
This move is fully in accordance with Black's main objective - to quickly complete the mobilization of his forces and deploy them as actively as possible.
What should White do now? He can immediately advance his central pawns (c3-c4 and d4-d5), or first complete his development (file2 or .fi.g2 and then
13S
Chapter Two - Section D
O-O). If White leaves his king in the centre and plays more aggressively - Eg 1, then subsequently after . ..Wd6 his h2-pawn will be hanging, and Black should capture it, not fearing that his queen may become stuck in the enemy camp. And after ...0-0 and ...Bfe8 Black will have an ‘X-ray’ attack on the king at e 1. He should have sufficient counterplay.
10. c3-c4
The other typical thematic move is lO.Egl:
А) Ю...0-0!? I l.c4 (I l.e4 Wd6 12.d5 2>e7 13.Ebl b6 14.c4£ld7 15.ДЬ4^с5 16.Wcl fS 17.Wg5 g6 18.We3 a6?± Burkel-Bronznik, Vai Thorens 2002) H...Wd6 12.d5^e7 13.Wb3a5 14.ДсЗ Bfe8 15. Де 2 b6 16.0-0-0 £g6 17.EgS сб 18.h4 h6 19.dxc6 Wxc6 20Exg6!? fxg6 21 Ed6 Wxd6 22x54- We6 23.Дс4 Wxc4 24.Wxc4+ Ф117 25.c6 Bac8?* (Gaprindashvili-Al Modiahki, Groningen 1999);
B) 10...exd4 Hcxd4 0-0 12.Де2 &e7 (12..Bfe8 13.Wb3 Wd6 comes into consideration) 13.Ecl Wd6 14.f4 Ь6?! (incorrectly weakening the light squares on the queenside; 14...C6 15.ФП EfeS** was better) 1 S.Wc2 Eac8 16.Даб Bcd8? (16...Eb8	17>xc7 Wa3 18.Дс4
(18>с4Л bS 19.Wb4 Wxa6 20.Wxe7 Efe8T) 18...Ь5 19.ЕсЗ (19.ДЬЗ? Bbc8)
19..	.Wa6 2O.Wxe7 (20.ДЬЗ £edS 21.^xd5 £ixdS 22.We5 &f6®)) 17.Wxc7 Wa3 18.Wc4 £ed5 19.ДЬ5± (Ralfael-Morozevich, Phychess.com 2006). In reply to 10.Ebl we recommend 10...0-0!? 11.c4 Wd7 12.d5 4id8?s. 10...b6 is risky in view of 11 .c4 (11 Eb5 does not work: 11. Wd6 12.f4 exf4 13.e4 &xe4) 1 l...Wd7 12.d5 &e7 13.ДсЗ! £jg6 14.h4 h5 15.Д113 with an unpleasant initiative.
The following game once again demonstrates the power of bishops in an open position. Black grabbed the worthless a2-pawn and conceded complete control of the centre, for which he was made to pay: 10.Ebl exd4 ll.cxd4 0-0 12.^g2 Wxa2 13.0-0 Eab8 14.f4 Efe8 IS.Wcl We6 16.Edl £)e4 17.Де1 2ie7 18.f3 43 d 6 19.e4 c6 20.ft Wd7 21.£g3± (Palac-Bukal, St Vincent 2002).
Another standard white reaction is 10.^g2, after which there can follow 10...0-0 11.0-0 Ead8 12.Wb3 b6 13.f4 e4 14.c4 Wh5 15.d5 &e7 16.f3 41fS 17.fxe4 4Я14** (LittlePeasant-Benefactor, ICC 2006).
10.	..	Wd5-d6
11.	d4-d5	£>c6-e7
Stronger, evidently, is 12. Ebl b6
1 З.ДЬ4! (13.ДЬЗ сб 14.Ab4 c5 15.ДсЗ
136
The Exchange: 3. £)f3 Ag4 4.cxd5
0-0 16.Hgl 2>g6 17.^c2 Hfe8 18.Hg3 &h4 19,Фе2 <£h5 20.5g4 &g6«* Shalimov-Sepman, St Petersburg 1999) 13...^d7 (White is better after 13...c5 14.dxc6 Wxc6 1 S.Wd6 Wxd6 16.Axd6 £d7 17.ДЬЗ f6 18.Фе2±) 14.h4 0-0 15.Ah3 Wd8 16.d6! cxd6 17.Axd6 e4 18.Ae5 Wxdl+ 19.flxdl exf3 2O.Axf6 gxf6 21.Hgl + ФЬ8 22.Hg3 ^g6 23.Hxf3 4)xh4 24.3xf6± (Saidy-Al Modiahki, Las Vegas 2001).
12.	-.	4tf6-d7
It would also be interesting to test 1 2...c6 13. Ab4 Wd7 14.0-0-0 aS etc.
13.	Ad2-b4
13.Ah3 с6 14.Ab4 £kS 15.0-0-0 0-0 16.dxc6 4ixc6 is not too dangerous for Black.
13.	• M	c7-c5
14.	d5xc6	Wd6xc6
15.	Wa4xc6	£>e7xc6
16.	Ab4-a3	
Black’s defences also hold after 16.Мб b6 17.cS 2>xc5 18.Ab5 flc8 19.Фе2
(19.AxcS bxcS 20.Фе2 Фе7) 19...a6.
16.	0-0-0
17.	0-0-0	f7-f5
18.	Af1-e2	&d7-f6
19. Фс1-с2
20. Фс2-сЗ
21. Sd1xd8
22. Sh1-d1
23. Ae2xd1
Фс8-с7 g7-g6 Hh8xd8
Sd8xd1
The endgame is slightly more pleasant for Black, but with accurate play White will gain a draw.
From the theoretical point of view it can be concluded that at present in the variation l.d4 d5 2.c4 4jc6 3.2if3 Ag4 4.cxd5 Axf5 S.gxf3 WxdS 6.e3 eS 7.4te3 Ab4 8.Ad2 Axc3 9.bxc3 ФГ6!? Black is quite successfully solving his opening problems, so that the ball is now back in White’s court.
137
Chapter Three
INFANTRY AGAINST CAVALRY
The Variation 3.4te3 dxc4
Often 'theoretical * is a synonym for routine. Because that which is 'theoretical 'in chess is nothing other than what can be found in books, and which players endeavour to adhere to when they cannot devise anything stronger, or equally good and more original.
Mikhail Chigorin
Introduction
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£jb8-c6
3.	£)Ь1*сЗ	d5xc4
sure on dS and tries to take play along the lines of the Queens Gambit, again, even
more persuasively, inviting the opponent to capture on c4. It is no accident, incidentally, that in certain cases play transposes into positions from the Queen’s Gambit Accepted. In reply to 3.£te3 many devotees of the Chigorin Defence try to uphold Black’s position after 3...£if6 or 3...e5, but we recommend 3...dxc4. After this White can immediately begin pursuing the knight on сб with 4.d5, or he can create a strong pawn centre by 4.£>f3 &f6 S.e4, but either way the threats of d4-d5 or e4-e5 will be in the air. Black’s main objective remains the same: to blockade and aim for a counterattack on the enemy centre.
I 39
Section A
The Advance: 4.d5
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. &Ы-СЗ
4. d4-d5
d7-d5 £>b8-c6 d5xc4
This is the most natural reaction - to advance the pawn with gain of tempo and immediately pose the question: where in fact is the knight intending to go?
GAME 41
□ Sergey Lebedev
 Mikhail Chigorin
corn 1900
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£lb8-c6
3.	&Ы-СЗ	d5xc4
4.	d4-d5	£>c6-a5
5.	Bd1-a4+	c7-c6
6.	b2-b4	
White does not achieve anything with 6.dxc6 £ixc6 7.e3 Ad7 8.Дхс4 еб 9.4if3 £'if6 10.0-0 Пс8 etc., as in another correspondence game played by Chigorin.
6.	c4xb3
7.	a2xb3	e7-e6
8.	Дс1-Ь2	Wd8-b6!
9.	Wa4xa5	ВЬбхЬЗ
10.	Ca1-b1	_U8-b4
11.	^a5-a1	<^g8-f6
12.	d5xc6	ЗД6-е4
13.	ПЫ-d	
13. ...	a7-a5!
As was shown by Chigorin, I3...£)c5 is not good in view of l4.Wbl! ^ia4 1 S.^Lal ЖхЫ 16.Sxbl Axc3+ 17.Jkxc3 4bxc3 18.cxb7.
But now in the event of 14.f3 the rook’s pawn joins the battle with decisive effect: 14...a4! 15.fxe4 a3! 16.<£f2 axb2 17>xa8 bxcl'i' 18>xc8+ Фе7 19.Wc7+ (19.^d7+) 19...&f6, and
Black wins.		
14.	2ig1-f3	a5-a4
15.	£if3-d4	Wb3-d5
16.	e2-e3	a4-a3
17.	£Ь2хаЗ	£>e4xc3
18.	ka3xb4	Ea8xa1
19.	Sc1xa1	£>c3-a2!
20.	Af1-b5	£e8-d8
21.	_i.b4-a5+	£d8-e7
22.	0-0	e6-e5
140
The .Advance: 3.£)c3 dxc4 4.d5
23.	e3-e4	Wd5xd4
24.	Sa1xa2	b7xc6
25.	ДЬ5хс6	Дс8-е6
26.	Sa2-a4	Wd4-d3!
27.	Да5-Ь44-	*e7-f6
28.	f2-f4	ПЬ8-с8
29.	f4xe5+	if6-g6
30.	Дсб-dS	
lead in development prove more valuable than the three pawns For example: 10...d4 H.£c4Wd7 12.£>d5 bS 13.£d3 ДЬ7 14,&f3 Ad6 15.0-0 exdS 1б.ДхЬ5 Ac6 17.Axc6 Wxc6 18.nfcl Wd7 19.Wxd5 fid8 2O.Wxd4 £xh2+ 21.ФхЪ2 Wxd4 22.4ixd4 Sxd4 23.ДсЗ 1 -0 (Vera-Formanek, Andorra 1996).
For a time Black pinned his hopes on the variation 6...b5 (instead of 6...cxb3) 7.'S'xa5 (nothing is given by 7.^xb$ cxbS 8.Wxb5+ Ad7 9>xaS ^xa$ lO.bxaS 4}f6 И.e4 Пс8 12.f3 e6 13.dxe6 Дхеб** Daschian-Barsky, Moscow 1994) 7.JSfxa5 8.bxa5 b4 9.^dl exdS. But here too the move 10.e4!, breaking up Black’s ‘great pawn wall’, proved very unpleasant.
30. .. Sc8-c11
White resigned in view of 31.Пхс1 We3+ 32.ФП Wxcl + ЗЗ.Де! Wf4+ and 34...AxdS, or 31.Де1 ^e34- 32.ДГ2 flxfl + ЗЗ.ФхП ^d3+ 34.Фе1 Ji.g4 etc Energetic play by Black, with a spectacular finish!
However, later it was established that White gains the advantage after 8.^d2! (i nstead of 8. ДЬ2).
1 A

A и a Й
а a a &
S -v , -?:2
8...4}xb3 9.Wxb3 exdS 10.e4!, and in this open position the extra piece and the
Here is a comparatively recent example on this theme: 10...e6 11.exdS exdS 12.ДеЗ 2>e7 13.&e2 2>c6 14.g3! 41xaS 15.Ag2 Деб 16.2>f4 0-0-0 17.Дха7 ФЬ7 18.ДеЗ 43сб 19.<£>Ь2 gS 2O.£ixe6 fxe6 21.2cl± (Hertneck-Grabher, Schwarzach 2002).
Therefore Black should play 4...£leS.
In this position (see next page), which bears some resemblance to the Alekhine Defence (but with an extra pawn for Black!), the following lines promise White little:
141
Chapter Three - Section A
GAME 42
□ Svetozar Gligoric  Vasily Smyslov
Amsterdam 1971
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4b8-c6
3.	£Ь1-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	d4-d5	tc6-e5
5.	Ac1-f4	
A) 5.^13 ЫЗ+ 6.exf3 e5 (6...e6 7.Axc4 exdS 8.Axd5±) 7.Axc4 Ad6 8.0-0 ^e7=, for example: 9.AbS+ (9.^e2 0-0 lO.flel a6 ll.fte4 2if5 !2.AgS f6 13.Ad2 ^d4 l4.Wdl b5 1S.Ab3 Ab7 16.f4 ФИ8 17fxe5 fxeS 18.£g5 W6 19.АеЗ £xb3 2O.Wxb3 Wg6 21.Пас! Паев 22.Ad2 e4 23.^e6? йхеб! 0-1 Dvalishvili-Morozevich, Moscow 2003) 9...Ad7 10.Wb3 b6 ll.^e4 AxbS 12.Wxb5+ Wd7 13.Wb3 0-0 14.Ae3 fS IS.^igS f4 16.Ad2 EfS I7.^e4 ^g6 18.Пас1 $M14 19.g3 EhS 2O.gxh4 Hxh4 21.Efel Wh3 22.Пхс7 ПЬ6 23.йсб 2g6+ 24.£}g3 fxg3 2S.hxg3 Ef8 26.Wd3 e4 27.WH WhS 28.Пхе4 Axg3 0-1 (Kasimdzhanov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001);
В) S.e4 e6 (S...^Jg6 6.Axc4 eS 7.dxe6 Wxdl+ 8.4}xdl Ахеб 9.Axe6 fxe6 Ю.ЗДЗоо Ijzarev-Barsky, Moscow 1992) 6.Af4 Ad6 7.AxeS AxeS 8.Axc4 exdS 9.exd5 (9.'®fxd5 WxdS 10.£lxd5 сб 1 l.£f3? exdS? 12.Ab5+ Фе7 13.4ixe5 dxe4 14.0-0 4}f6+ Ulko Morozevich, Moscow 2002) 9,..4tf6 10.4tf3 Axc3 + И.ЬхсЗ 0-0 12.0-0 Ag4 13.h3 Axf3 14>xf3 Wd6 15.Ab3 Hfe8 16.Hfel a6 17.Sadi Sad8= (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz),Moscow 2002).
S.Af4, $ Wd4 and S.f4 are more dangerous for Black.
к
ui
It was in this game that the knight move to the centre of the board first occurred. On encountering a novelty, the Yugoslav grandmaster chose a fairly active continuation, but not the most committing one.
5.	._	te5-g6
6.	Af4-g3	e7-e5
7.	d5xe6
7 .e4 will be examined later.
7.	Асвхеб
a
In the variation 8.Wxd8+ Exd8 9.Axc7 Hd7 White does not win a pawn, but merely restores material equality, and it is unlikely that he will be able to approach the c4-pawn.
8.	...	£g8-f6
9.	£i3-d4	Ae6*d7
10.	e2-e3	Af8-b4
11.	Af1xc4	0-0
‘The result of the opening is favourable for Black. While White has been regain-
142
The Advance: 3.£к3 dxc4 4.dS
ing his pawn. Black has managed to complete his development Now he is threatening 12...^e4, which was not possible before castling, in view of JLxf7+ and Wb3 + .’ (Vasily Smyslov, 125 Selected Games).
12. Wd1-c2 c7-c6
13. h2-h3
In Smyslov’s opinion, 13.0-0 was more advisable, since now White falls behind in development. He preserves his g3-bishop from exchange, although it was not performing many useful functions.
13.	~	Wd8-e7
14.	0-0	ЛЬ4хсЗ
15.	Ь2хсЗ
The first consequence of 13 .h3 — White is forced to recapture with the pawn, since if 1S.^xc3?1, then 15...<$>4 and 16...£ixg3 is unpleasant, breaking up his kingside pawns.
15.	4if6-e4
16.	JLg3-h2
White is forced to lose a further tempo on the retreat of his bishop.
16. _	c6-c5
17. £d4-f3	£d7-c6
‘Black’s pieces are very promisingly placed. His knight occupies a splendid square in the centre, and from сб his
bishop exerts strong pressure on the white king’s position. With his next move Gligoric prepares to evict the knight from e4.’ (Smyslov)
ia	£c4-d3	f7-f5l
Avoiding a trap: l 8...Hfe8 19.£ie5!.		
19.	Sf1-d1	Za8-d8
20.	£d3-e2	We7-f6
21.	2d1xd8	Zf8xd8
22.	5a1-c1	h7-h6
23.	ie2-d3	Фд8-Ь8
24. White is	^f3-e1?l intending	to drive away the
knight by f2-f3, but he apparently overlooked Black’s reply.
24. _. c5-c4l
25. £d3xe4
Forced, since otherwise the rook invades at d2 (with his last move White, has incautiously removed his control of this square).
25.	._ f5xe4
After 25...Дхе4 Smyslov did not like 26?й'а4. Of course, the pawn on e4 restricts his own bishop, but the knight on el has ended up in an altogether tragicomic position.
26.	Wc2-e2	Ь7-Ь5
27.	Ah2-g3	£g6-e7
For the moment the knight cannot break through to d3 -	in the	event	of
27...	£te5?! White	would happily	ex-
change his bishop and then establish his knight on d4. Therefore the black knight heads for dS, from where it will attack the сЗ-pawn and support a possible breakthrough by ...b5-b4.
28.	We2-b2	2>e7-d5
29.	Wb2-a3	a7-a5!
30.	£g1-h2
The pawn is taboo: SO.^xaS? Ha8!, trapping the queen.
143
Chapter Three - Section A
30.	..	h6-h5
31.	h3-h4	Wf6-f®
The hand of a great Master is evident: in a situation where others would have either sought an attack on the king, or calcu lated the ...b5-b4 breakthrough (with gain of tempo!), Smyslov is ready to play a favourable ending! At the same time he as though excuses himself in his comments: '31. .Wf8 was not played simply w ith the intention of going into an ending. It prevented the possible manoeuvre Wa3 -cS, with threats along the fifth rank.’ Threats or no threats, in the art of playing the endgame the 7th World Champion had few- equals, and Gligoric thought it best to decline the queen exchange.
32.	Wa3-b2	<£id5-f6
33.	*h2-g1	£f6-g4
34.	Wb2-e2	Wf8-f6
It is hard to offer White any good advice; it is not apparent how he can activate his pieces, and in particular release his knight from el. Tired of defending passively, Gligoric ‘flinched’, but in so doing he weakened his kingside and activated the bishop on c6.
35.	f2-f3	e4xf3
36.	g2xf3	£jg4-e5
37.	e3-e4	£e5-d3
3a	Sc1-c2	£d3xe1l
One can only repeat what was said in the note to Black’s 31 st move: the hand of a great Master is evident! The black knight has made a long and difficult journey, travelled round half the board and finally established itself in the very heart of the enemy position. And all for the sake of what? In order to exchange itself on the next move for a miserable, wretched creature - the knight on el. This is indeed play without complexes! On the other hand, now the rook invades on d3 and the weak white pawns begin to ‘creak’.
39.	Ag3xe1	Hd8-d3
40.	Фд1-д2	Wf6-g6+
41.	Ae1-g3	*h8-h7l
The sealed move For	those who have for-
gotten or did not know those remote times: until the mid-1990s games used to be adjourned. One of the last events with this ‘anachronism’ was the Karpov-Kamsky match (Elista 1996).
’This essentially places White in zugzwang. since any move now' worsens his position. For example: 42.^*h2 Hxf3! 43.Wxf3 JeLxe4, or 42.^el 'ЙТб, and White cannot simultaneously defend his c3- and f3-pawns. Or, finally, 42.Hd2 Jslxe4 43.flxd3 cxd3.’ (Smyslov)
42.	Sc2-c1	Wg6-f6
43.	Ag3-e1	Wf6-f4
White resigned.
144
The Advance: 3.£)c3 dxc4 4.d5
GAME 43
□ Anatoly Karpov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2002 (blitz)
Three Karpov-Morozevich blitz games show what plan Black should adopt with a closed centre (pawns on e4 and d5 against pawn on eS and bishop on d6). We will discuss this in more detail using the example of the next game.
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	' b8-c6
3.	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	d4-d5	4_c6-e5
5.	Ac1-f4	<Le5-g6
6.	Af4-g3	e7-e5
7.	e2-e4	a7-a6
The immediate 7...jSLd6 8.4Af3 is also possible.
8.	Af1xc4 Af8-d6
8..Л	/6 9.h4 Ad6 10.hS to 11.116 g6 12.Ah4 ^8d7 13.g4?! 0-0 I4.&h3 Ae7 15.Ag3 bS 16.Ad3 Ab7 17.f3 сб! 18.dxc6 Axc6 19.a3 Wb8 2O.We2 Hd8 21 Udi to 22.ДЫ Sxdl + 23.Wxdl b4 24.axb4 Wxb4 25.Axe5 Bd8 26.We2? AbS 27.Wh2 &xg4! 28.fxg4! Ah4+ 29.Ag3 Axg3+ 3O.Wxg3 Wxb2 0-1 (Karpov-Morozevich, (blitz) Moscow 2001).
9.	£g1-f3	£jg8-f6
10.	0-0
10.	..	0-0
10...	£ih5! is more energetic, for example: 11,4)xeS (11 Wa4+ Ad7 12.Wb3 4ixg3 13.hxg3 Hb8T) 11...4)xg3 12.£)xg6 hxg6 13.hxg3 t^gS 14.^d4 WhS 1 S.f4 b6 16.b4g5 17.e5Axb4 18.Ab5+axb5 19Wxb4 Wh2+20.ФГ2оо.
11.	Bf1-e1‘
ll.Ae2 h6 12.flcl Ad7 13.£id2 bS 14.a3 We7 IS.flel Sfb8 16.Afl aS 17.tol hS 18.h3 h4 19. Ah 2?* £>h7?’ 20>h5! Wf6 21.to b4 22.toi2 bxa3 23.bxa3 a4 24.£te4+ (Karpov-Morozevich, (blitz), Moscow 2001).
11. ..	Ac8-d7
12. Ea1-c1	Ba8-b8
13. a2-a3	h7-h6
14. Ac4-f1	Wd8-e7
15. to-h4	<£g6xh4
16. Ag3xh4	g7-g5
17. Ah4-g3	c7-c5
18. d5xc6	Ad7xc6
19. Af1-c4	Ad6-c5
20. Wd1-f3	Ac5-d4
21. h2-h4	g5-g4
22. Wf3-f5	Фд8-д7
23. 5 c3-d5	Ac6xd5
24. e4xd5	Bf8-e8
25. 4c4-e2	Bb8-d8
26. Jke2xg4	Sd8xd5
27. Bc1-c4?	
A blunder, but White’s position was already worse.
27. ..		e5-e4
2&	Wf5xd5	£f6xd5
29.	Bc4xd4	^jd5-f6
30.	Ag4-e2	We7-c5
31.	Hd4-c4	Wc5-f5
32.	Bc4-c7	Bf5-a5
33.	Se1-d1	e4-e3
34.	f2-f3	to-h5
35.	jig3-h2	
145
Chapter Three - Section A
With the aid of a pretty geometrical manoeuvre the queen penetrates into the opponent’s position:
35.	Wa5-b6
36. b2-b4	Wb6-f6
37. Ec7-c4	Wf6-b2
38. Фд141	£h5-f6
39. g2-g4	b7-b5
40. Пс4-с6	Wb2xa3
41. £h2-d6	Se8-e6
And Black won.
GAME 44
□ Alexander Goldin
 Alexander Morozevich
St Petersburg 1993
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	ФЬ8-с6
3.	&Ы-СЗ	d5xc4
4.	d4-d5	4зс6-е5
5.	^d1-d4	
A more aggressive plan than 5Jkf4. It is well known that a queen in the centre is very powerfully placed, if, of course, it cannot be driven from there with gain of tempo by attacking it with minor pieces and pawns. This principle - 'strong queen in the centre’ - is the basis of many of the variations of the Chigorin Defence which were examined in Chapters One and Two.
And now Black’s own weapon is used against him!
5.	ж	465-дб
The knight retreats to where it is safe and sound.
A) S...f6 6.f4 41f7 7.Wxc4 looks rather artificial, for example:
Al) 7...a6 8.e4 (8.4tf3 bS 9.Wb3 cS 10.dxc6 еб !L&.e3 4)e7 12.^d4 e5±) 8...b5 9,'Й'ЬЗ cS 10.dxc6 еб П.ДеЗ
Фе7±;
A2) 7...e5 8.dxe6 4)d6 9.Wb3 сб 10.e4 Wb6 11.f5 Wxb3 12.axb3 g6 13.Ad3+-;
A3) 7...4kl6 8>b3 fS (8...c6 9.dxc6 (9.e4 cxdS 10.exd5±) 9...bxc6 10.4if3 4)h6	11.e4 Wb6 12>c2 4ig4
13.Ad3±) 9.g3 (9.4}f3 4tf6±) 9...4tf6 10.Jtg2 g6 11 ,4jh3 (11 ,£)f3 £g7 12.0-0
146
The Advance: 3. £ic3 dxc4 4.d5
0-0 13.^e5 ^d7 14.&C6 We8 15.ДеЗ 2>b6 16.2teS ФИ8 17,Hfdl gS 18.a4 gxf4 19.Axf4 e6 20.a5 <£xdS ll.cxdS exdS 22.Wxd5± Grigore-Sulava, Benasque 1999) H...£g7 12.0-0 0-0 13.&f2 He8 14.ДеЗ e6 IS.Sadl ФИ8 16.Ad4exd5 17.Jsi.xd5 ^xdS 18.Axg7+ &xg7 19.21xdS Деб 2O.Wc3+ Ф17 21.Wxc7+ *g8 22.Wxd8 1-0 (Chu-chelov-Van Houtte, Antwerp 1997);
B) The attempt to provoke immediate complications by 5...4}g4!? may lead to a cheerless endgame for Black: 6.Wxc4 a6 (6...218f6 7.4}f3 e6 8.dxe6 Дхеб 9.Wb5+ Ad7 10.Wxb7 Дс5 И.еЗ ПЬ8 12.Wa6±) 7.ДГ4 eS 8.dxe6 Дхеб 9.Wxc7 Wxc7 1О.Дхс7 ДЬ4 11 ,аЗ ДхсЗ+ 12.bxc3 Зс8 13.ДЬб 2>е7 14.f3 4id5 15.^d4 £>gf6	1б.е4 ФхсЗ
17.Дс1±.
6.	e2-e4
Other plans also occur, for example:
A) 6.h4e5 7 Wxc4 £d6 8.&П h6 9.e4 a6 10.a4 1 l.g3 0-0 12.JLg2 ^g4s=* (Korsunsky-Zhurov, Moscow 1992);
B) 6.4f3 £}f6 7.h4 (7.e4 e5 8.2>xe$? cS—h; 7.еЗ еб 8.Дхс4 exdS 9.£lxd5 &xd5 lO.AxdS Де7 11.0-0 £f6=) 7...e6 8.e4 exdS 9.exdS £d6 lO.hS ^e7+ И.Де2 £eS 12.£ixeS WxeS 13Wxc4 0-0 14.h6 g6 15,ДеЗ** (Volkov-Gustafsson, Internet 2004).
Regarding 6.Wxc4, see the following game.
6.	..	e7-e5
7.	Wd4xc4 if8-d6
7...	a6, immediately taking control of the bS-square, is more accurate. For example: 8.ДеЗ £d6 9.2>f3 (9.f3?l &8e7 10.h4 hS H .a4 c6 12.fldl exdS 13.exd5 2>f5 14.ДГ2 0-0 15.Ad3 4tf4+ Comette-Istratescu, France 2004) 9...h6 10.h3
£f6 ll.£d2 0-0 12.b4 £d7 13.Wb3 We7 14.ПЫ Ь5 15.аЗс6 1бЯхсбДхсб I7.g3 Wb7 18.£Lg2 4>7 19.0-0 IIad8 20.Hfdl Hfe8 21.ДЬс1
21...4/5 22.4Ш JaLxdS 23.exd5 e4 24.2>fl £f8 2S.^c2 HxdS 26.1Ixd5 ^xdS 27.Wc6 Se6 28.WxdS &xd5 29.g4 ЗДхеЗ ЗО.ФхеЗ £}f4 31.5c8 g6 32.fld8 ‘X'g?, and Black won (Ljubo-jevic-Morozevich, Monaco (blind) 2002).
a £g1-f3
A routine developing move The 8.Wb5l? check is rather unpleasant Now in the event of 8...Wd7 White liquidates to a favourable endgame The pawn sacrifice 8...JeLd7 9.Wxb7 is tempting, but, despite the dangerous position of the queen, nothing concrete is apparent for example: 9...4if6 10.4}f3 0-0 11.Де2, when White is not so far behind in development and he has no weaknesses. Generally speaking, his pieces are well placed even in their initial positions. The pawn sacrifice is evidently advantageous to White. It is nothing terrible that his queen comes under attack, since even on c4 it would have been insecure, and here at least he has an extra pawn.
After 8...l»fef8 White calmly completes his development, whereas Black will have to
147
Chapter Three - Section A
play ...h7-h6 and ...^f8-g8-h7, and all the same his king will stand worse on h7 than on g8. White also has this promising set-up: g2-g3, jSLfl-g2, and £)gl-e2 with a somewhat better game.
8.	^g8-f6
9.	h2-h4?
A move to which we can confidently attach a question mark Now 9.Wb5+ would not have given White anything because of 9...4id7!. but he should have completed his development by 9.Де2 0-0 10.0-0 with an equal game.
How should Black proceed in this typical position? The pseudo-active plan 10...h6 followed by ...£if6-h7-g5 is unsuccessful. White easily gains an advantage by beginning play on the queenside with Acl -e3, JJal-cl, b2-b4 and so on, and he meets the knight manoeuvre with the simple £}f3xgS and g2-g3!, after which Black has no counterplay on the kingside The correct set-up is undoubtedly 10...a6 11 .ДеЗ Wc7 and ...ild7 with the idea of ...c7-c6, starting action in the centre, and the rook at c8 will emphasize the unfortunate position of the queen on c4. There is an interesting struggle in prospect.
But let us return to the Goldin-Moro-zevich game.
9.	-.	h7-h6l
This move is the simplest way of emphasizing the drawbacks to White’s idea. The pawn is allowed only as far as hS, where it will become an excellent target and will create problems only for White.
10.	h4-h5?
All in the same frisky style... White should have admitted his mistake and preferred the more modest 10.g3, Ag2 and 0-0, although in this case the black knight would have acquired an excellent post at g4.
12.	Af1-e2
After 12.£}bS!?, with the idea of capturing the bishop and thereby safeguarding himself against a possible opening of the game, Black has the unpleasant 12...a6 13.£xd6 cxd6 14Jie2 bS 15>c2 &g4 16.Jkd2 fS with a strong attack. But now Black prevents this exchange
12.	._	a7-a6
A useful move in all respects. By taking control of the bS-square, Black preserves his bishop and also prepares a possible advance of his b-pawn with ...b7-b5-b4, in order to drive the knight from c3 and then attack the e4-pawn. I3.a4 does not prevent this — 13...b5!, and after I4.axb5!
148
The Advance: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
(14.Wd3 b4), 14...axbS!, the rook at a8 is taboo, since the queen is en prise.
13.	5f3-d2?
13.Hdl ! is undoubtedly stronger, inhibiting the undermining move ...c7-c6. After 13...&g4! 14.Wd3 (14.Дс5 loses to 14...bS 1 5.Wb4 aS 16.Wxb5 Даб, while 14.Дс1 allows Black to develop a strong attack after 14...bS 15.Wb3 (15 Wd3) 15...b4! 16.^a4f5) 14...&xe3 (14...bS!? is also interesting) 15.Wxe3 сб 16.dxc6 (16.0-0 exdS 17.^xdS <£xdS 18.Hxd5 ДебТ) 16...^xc6T Black has the advantage, and the endgame after 17.Wd2 Дс7 1 8 Wxd8 Hxd8 is difficult for White due to problems with his hS-pawn and the opponent’s bishop pair.
13.	-	c7-c6
Exploiting the fact that the knight has gone from f3 to d2 (i.e. it is not controlling the centre!), and also that White can no longer create an unpleasant opposition of rook and queen by Hd I, Black strikes a thematic blow' in the centre. White is now practically forced to exchange on сб, since otherwise Black will capture on dS himself and give White an obvious weakness. For example: 14.0-0 exdS IS.exdS, and here, apart from 1 S...£)f$ (followed by capturing the bishop), 15...b5 and 1б...ДЬ7, ‘piling up’ on the dS-pawn. But after the exchange on сб Black will also dominate the centre.
Here the struggle largely revolves around the knight on e7: if Black can find good employment for it, he will stand well, but if not, he may end up in an inferior position, as White has more pieces in play.
14.	d5xc6 ^e7xc6
15.	Ha1-d1
An incorrect decision. White should have castled as soon as possible - 15.0-0 Деб
16.Wd3 (weaker is 16.Wa4 bS 17.Wdl We7 with the idea of 18...Hfd8+, and the queen has no good square) 16...We7 (16...^d4 is also interesting), and if 17.$te4, then 17...Дс5, exchanging bishops and maintaining a positional advantage.
15.	..	£c6-b4!
Black exploits the same motif - the unfortunate position of the queen on c4. Strangely enough, it is rather hard for White to defend, since his minor pieces are badly placed.
16.	Wc4-b3 b7-b5
Taking away the c4-square and renewing the threat of 17...Деб - the white queen unexpectedly finds itself trapped! Now the drawbacks to the move IS.Hdl are evident — the rook has taken away this square from the queen.
17.	Hd1-a1
After 17.Нс I Black could have gained an advantage in two ways:
A)	17...ftg4, and 18J«Lxg4? fails to 18...£d3 + ;
B)	17...Деб 18.Wdl 2>xa2 19.£lxa2 Дха2 20.ЬЗ ДЬ4 21.Hal (21.0-0 Axd2 22.Axd2 ДхЬЗ—+) 21,..£lxe4 22.Hxa2 4k3 23.Wai 4}xa2 24.Wxa2f5 25.Дс5!! (25.0-0? f4) 25..Дхс5 26.b4+ &h8 27.bxc5 Wd4 28.0-0 WxcS^.
149
Chapter Three - Section A
Now White was hoping, after 17...Ae6 18.Wdl We7 19.0-0	(19...2K6!?
is better) 20.a4! to gain some counterplay. But a second knight thrust sideways...
17. _.	£if6-g4!
... enables Black to conclusively seize the initiative.
1a £d2-f1
White’s entire defence is supported by the bishop on e3 and, of course, he would like to preserve it from exchange. But in the event of I 8.Axg4 there is an extremely unpleasant piece sacrifice -I8...£d3 + 19.Фе2 Stf4+! (19...Axg4+ 20.‘&xd3). After 20.^fS &xg4+ 21.<i’xg4 Black gives mate - 21 .. Wg5+ 22.<X’f3 Wxg2X, but also after 2О.ФЛ Axg4 21.f3 AcS!? (21...Ae6 22.Wc2 b4+) or 2O.JLxf4 ^xg4+ 21.f3 Ae6!+ he has the advantage. Thus after 18.Jilxg4 £)d3+ Black would have gained a strong attack, and therefore it would seem that 18.4Ш was simply forced.
1a	«.	Qg4xe3
19.	4jf1xe3	*d6-c5
20.	0-0	£c8-e6
21.	£e3-d5
If 21.Wdl Black has the unpleasant 2l..Jkxe3 22.fxe3 WgS with a very strong attack. And after 21.£ted5 (with the idea of answering 21....&xe3 with 22.Wxb4!T) he plays 21...€k6! all the same, e.g. 22.^сЗ £)d4 23.Vxc5? £1хе2+ 24.ФЬ2 Wh4 and White is mated!
21.	-	<b4-c6
Black, naturally, moves his knight to d4 and places his queen on gS and his rooks on c8 and d8, after which his pressure becomes unbearable.
22.	Wb3-d1 4jc6-d4
23.	Па1-с1
The attempt to exchange the light-squared bishops by 23 -&g4 did not work. After 23...WgS 24.Axe6 fxe6 and 25...&f3+ Black would have won.
23.	...	Bd8-g5
Setting a simple trap: if 24.^xbS?, then 24...Wxcl! 2S.Wxcl 4}xe2+, winning the rook. In passing Black threatens by 24 ...b4 to drive the knight from c3 and then to strike will) 25...Wxcl.
White defended with...
24.	£d5-e3
... after which there followed
24.	-	Sa8-c8
25.	Wd1-d3	5f8-d8
The deadly 26...^f3+ is threatened. 26.'Й,Ы does not help in view of 26...b4, winning a piece. There only remains...
26.	£>c3-d5 ...butthen...
26.	..	f7-f5!
... is decisive.
White’s position is hopeless. In severe time-trouble there followed...
27.	Ь2-Ь4
...and after...
27.	-. f5xe4
28.	^d3-d2 Sd8xd5!
he resigned, since if 29.bxc5, then 29...4if3+ 3O.^.xf3 JLxd2 is decisive.
150
The ЛЛшке. 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
GAME 45
□ Babakuli Annakov
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 1999
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	4b8-c6
3. ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4. d4-d5	пс6-е5
5. ^d1-d4 6. Wd4xc4	2e5-g6
The most accurate move. Now if 6...ЗД6 there is the unpleasant 7.4^b5, when 7...^xd5? fails to 8.Wxd5, and 7,..c6 to 8.dxc6 4^eS (8...bxc6 9.1fifxc6+ Ad7 10.£>c7+) 9.cxb7 Axb7 10.^c7+ &d7 H.BbS+ Ac6 12.Wxe5 Wxc7 13.^f3±. Finally, if 7...4te5 White has the decisive 8.^хс7! (weaker is 8.Wc3 c6 9.Wxe5 cxbS 10.e4a6 H.ftf3e6 12.Ad2 Ae7*±) 8..Wxd5 (8...Ad7 9>xd8+ &xd8 10.&C3+-) 9.Wa5&d7 10.Af4+-.
The immediate 6...e5 is no better in view of 7.dxe6 Axe6 8.Wb5+ Wd7 9>xb7±.
6. ..	a7-a6
7. ^c4-b3
After 7.£if3 Black achieves a comfortable game without any problems:
A) 7...£}f6 8.e4 eS 9.dxe6 Axe6 (it becomes evident that the queen has come
into play rather early) 10.^d4 h6 1 l.h4 Ag4 12-АеЗ Axf3 13.gxf3 Ad6 14.h5 £te5 15.Ae2 £>c6 16.Wc4 We7 17.a3 AeS 18.J3dl 0-0 19.Ad3 Had8 2O.^dS £bcdS 21.exd5 £>d4 22.Ae4c5 23.dxc6, draw (Agrest-Morozevich, Orel 1992);
B) 7...eS 8.e4 Ad6 9.g3 &f6 10.a4 0-0 11 .aS Ad7 12.h4 h6 13.Ae2 c6 14.dxc6 Ахсб 1 S.Ae3 Hc8 16.Ab6 We7 17.Wd3 Ab4 18.^d2 Hfe8 19.f3 QA7 20.Af2 2ed8 21.Wc2 £gf8 22.0-0 2ie6? (Karpov-Morozevich (blitz), Moscow 2001). The 7.Wb3 manoeuvre has become popular largely thanks to the efforts of the Moscow grandmasters Evgeny Naer and Vladimir Kosyrev, who have successfully employed it for many years. The queen moves away in good time from the tempo-gaining ...b7-b5 and creates pressure on die b7 -pawn, as a result of which it is not so easy for Black to develop his c8-bishop and play ...e7-e5 or ...e7 -e6 (bad is 7„.eS 8.dxe6 Axe6 9.Wxb7). He either has to spend time on the defence of the b7 -pawn, or be reconciled for some time to die presence of die enemy pawn wedge at dS. But sooner or later something has to be done about this pawn, since it prevents Black from developing normally.
7.	..	Па8-Ь8
Until recendy the authors considered this to be the strongest and only acceptable continuation. Other moves did not help Black to cope with his opening difficulties, for example:
A)	7...£f6
Al) 8.e4 e6 9.dxe6 Axe6 (9...fxe6 10.2>f3±) 10.^xb7 AcS (10...Ad6!? Il.&f3 0-0) 1 1Wc6+ £kJ7 12,&f3 0-0 13.Ae2^;
A2) 8.h4’? e6 9.dxe6 Axe6 (9...fxe6 lO.hS^eS ll.h6±) 10>xb7Ac5®;
151
Chapter Three - Section A
A3) 8.2Ш 2kl7 9.Ae3 ftgeS 10.0-0-0 g6 ll.^xeS £)xeS 12.Jtd4 Ah6+ 13.f4 f6 14.e3 2tf7 15.Ae2 0-0 16.h4± (Naer-Maze, Warsaw 2005);
В) 7...b6?! 8.h4 (8.£)f3 e5 9.g3 10.Ag2 AcS?» 11.0-0 0-0 12.AgS Ae7 13.Sfdl±) 8...eS (8...e6!?) 9.h5 £>6e7 10.2tf3 e4 ll.£)g5 2tf5 12.£)gxe4± (Naer-Barsky, Moscow 2002).
However, while this manuscript was being prepared a verification of the analyses forced the previous conclusions to be revised. 7...£}f6! was deemed to be the strongest, only, in reply to 8.£}f3 Black should not play 8...£sd7, as in the Naer-Maze game given above, but 8...b5!
Compared with other continuations, this creates die greatest difficulties for Black:
A) 9.a4b4;
B)	9.h4 e6 10.AgS exdS (10...h6
11.Axf6 Wxf6) 11 .hS £>e7 12.h6 c5;
C)	9.AgS h6 10.Axf6 exf6 11 ,e3 Ad6;
D)	9.e4e5;
E)	9.^d4 e6 (9...c5 10.£k6 Wd6 11.e4) 10,Ag5exd5.
9...e6
Black must urgently eliminate the dS-pawn, and in the most resolute way. Odier set-ups do not get him out of trouble:
A) 9...e5	10.AgS (10.Ag2 b4)
10...Ad6 11.2k4 0-0;
B) 9...b4 10.Wxb4 e6 ll.Wa4+ Ad7 1 2>c4;
C) 9...Ab7 10.Ag2 £ixdS (10...AxdS 11.2^xd5 WxdS 12.2)114 Wxb3 13.axb3) 1 1.2xb5 e6 12.0-0;
D) 9...h6 10.2d4 (10.Ag2 e6 11.2d4; 10...eS 11.2d2 Ad6 12.a4) 10...c5 11.2c6Wc7 12.Ag2.
10. AgS
Nothing is given by 10.Ag2 exdS.
10...exdS
10...Ae7 is bad on account of 1 l.Sdl 2)xd5 12.2xd5 AxgS 13.2f4.
11 .Axf6
After 11.0-0-0 сб 12.e4 h6 Black succeeds in setting up a defensive line.
1 l...Wxf6 12.2xdS Wd6
12... Wd8 is worth studying.
13.Ag2 Ab7 14.0-0-0
White is promised little by 14.2)g5 c6<» or 14.Udi Axd5 IS.ZLxdS Wb4+ 16.2)d2 Wxb3 17.2xb3 Ab4+ 18.&dl fid8=.
ХИ ЯеА H
1 A 1
фн 1  -s
14...Ae7!
Things are bad for Black after the frantic 14...Wc5+ 15.ФЫ Ad6 16.2gS or die careless 14...0-0-0 15.2b6+!. But this cool-headed bishop move enables him to complete his development normally, and
152
The Advance: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
there is no way for White to exploit the opposition of rook and queen.
1 5.4/4
А) 15.ФЫ c5 (15. ..0-0 16.4Jd4;
1 5...0-0-0 16.e4 ФЬ8) 16.e4 0-0;
B) 15.Hd20-0-0 16.fihdl ФЬ8.
15...0-0-0 16.4)xe7+
Or 16.4/5 ’HeS.
16...4ixe7 17.£xb7+ ФхЬ7 18.Wxf7 ^c5+ 19.ФЫ 5xd4 2O.Sxd4 Wxd4 21>xe7 Wxf2 22.ПС1 flc8=.
Of course, this analysis needs to be tested in practice.
Let us return to the Annakov-Morozevich game.
& e2-e4
If 8.4/3, then 8...b5 9.h4 еб 10.^g5t is too slow, but Black can initiate play in the centre immediately with 8...e5, e.g.: 9.h4 (9.e4 b5 10.h4 £d6 ll..fi.g5 4/6 12.h5 4/8 13.h6 g6oo) 9.. J.d6 10.h5 (10.4/4 h6 U.h5 4/e7 12.i.d2 A.Bs±) 10...4J6e7 11 ,e4 b5 with chances for both sides.
a _	b7-b5
9. a2-a4
Both sides have an enormous choice of continuations, and it is not to easy to find the correct way:
A) 9.4/3 e5 10.dxe6 £.xe6 11 >c2 4/6 12.jS.e2 jS.d6 13.4/4 jS.d7s* (gahan-Wanted, ICC 1999);
B) 9/4 e5 (9...e6!? 10.dxe6 fi_xe6 U.Wc2 b4 12.4/e2 b3 13.axb3 5b6?±; 10.4Jf3±) 10.f5 4/4 11.4/3 Ad6 12.g3 4Jh5 13.g4oo;
C) 9.jSe3 4/6 (9...e5) 10.0-0-0 (10.4/3 e5) 10...4Jg4 ll..fi.c5 e5 12,dxe6 Wg5+ 13.jfie3 jSjce6 14.jSj(g5 ДхЬЗ 15.axb3 4jxf2 16.4/13 4Jxdl 17.&xd 1 «*;
D) 9.h4! is very strong for White, for example:
DI) 9...4/6 10.h5 4/5 11.4/3±;
D2) 9...e6 10.jS.g5! (/ter 10.h5 4/5!? Black manages to emerge more or less unscathed: 1 LjSf4 Ad6 12.jS.xe5 jS.xe5 13.43/3 jS/4 14,g3 Ah6 IS.fidl (15.jS.h3 exd5 16.Wxd5 jSjch3 17.2x113 4/7 18.Wxd8+ Exd8=) 15...Wf6 16.4/4 4/7 17.dxe6 fxe6 18.£.h3 ПЬ6 19/4 c5 20.4/3 c4 21.Wc2±) 10...jSe7 11.4/3 JSxg5 12.hxg5 4J8e7 (12...e5 13.a4 b4 14.4Jdl±) 13.0-0-0 exd5 (13.. Wd6 14.ФЫ±) 14.4Jxd5 4Jxd5 15.JS.C4 0-0 16.jS.xd5±.
9.	..	Ь5-Ь4
10.	4Jc3-e2
Black can also obtain good play /ter 10.jS.c4 4/6, for example: 11,4Jf3 jS.b7 12.4/2 (12.Wxb4 jfilxdS 13.ДЬ5+ axb5 14.exd5 еб; 12.4/2 4ixe4 13.jS.e3 Wd6) 12...4jxe4 13.4Jxb4 e5 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.Axe6 Axb4+ 16.Wxb4 4Jxf2 (16...jSd5 17>d4 jS.xe6 18>xe4Wd5 19.4Jg5±) 17.0-0 Axf3 18.Wc3 Hb6 19.Wxf3 Hxe6 2O.Wxf2 Sf8.
10.	...	4Jg8*f6
11.	4Je2-d4	jSc8-b7
12.	Wb3-c2?
Overlooking Black’s reply. There would have been a complicated struggle with chances for both sides /ter 12.f3 еб 13.dxe6 'S'xd4 14.exf7+ <£>d7 15.ДеЗ
153
Chapter Three - Section A
WeS or 12.5}gf3 Фхе4 13.5кб Ахсб 14.dxc6e6 15.Ae3 AcS 16.Axa6.
12. «	Ь4-Ь3!
13. 5ШхЬЗ e7-e6
Black has a big lead in development plus the initiative White became rattled and he lost the game almost within 5 moves.
14.	d5xe6	f7xe6
15.	Ac1-g5	Af8-b44-
16.	Ag5-d2	Ab7xe4
17.	Wc2-c1	0-0
18.	f2-f3	Ae4-d5
19.	Af1-c4	4ig6-e5
White resigned.
GAME 46
□ jaws
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 2002
1.	d2-d4
2.	c2-c4
3.	&Ы-СЗ
4.	d4-d5
5.	f2-f4l?
d7-d5
5b8-c6
d5xc4
rc6-e5
An extremely concrete and forceful move White boldly occupies the centre with his pawns, and does not fear possible checks along the weakened a7-gl and el -h4 diagonals.
5.	_	5>e5-g4
In the event of S...5}g6?! 6.e4 e6 7.dxe6 Wxdl+ 8.&xdl Black lias to capture on e6 with his pawn - 8...fxe6 (8...Axe6? 9.f5), and after 9.Axc4Ad7 10.5}f3±he faces the thankless task of defending an inferior endgame.
S...	5)d7 will beexamined later.
6.	e2-e4
Regarding 6.h3, see the following game.
6.	..	e7-e5
7.	f4-f5
A)	In the event of 7.fxe5 £>xe5 8.Af4 Black succeeds in establishing himself on the dark squares: 8...Ad6 9.5Y3 Ag4 lO.AxeS AxeS ll.Wa4+ Ad7 12.Wxc4 We7 13.0-0-0 #if65* (Dlugy-Moro-zevich, ICC 1999);
B)	Not very good is 7.Ae2 5^8h6 8.f5 AcS 9.^a4+ Ad7 10.Wxc4 Axgl ll.IXxgl Wh4+ 12.g3 Wxh2+ (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
C) White gained a serious advantage after 7.£f3 AcS 8.Axc4 We7?! 9.2>xe5 2>xe5 lO.fxeS WxeS ll.AbS+ &f8 12>f3	13.Af4 Wd4 14.h3 Ad7
15.Ad3 Ab4 16.a3 Axc3+ 17.bxc3 Wxc3+ 18.&f2 J3e8 19.Hhel c6 20.ФП h6 21.Ad6+ £g8 22.Habl± (Moiseenko-Adam Horvath, St Vincent 2005). The following piece sacrifice comes into consideration: 8...exf4?!
154
The Advance: 3. £)c3 dxc4 4.dS
9.Axf4 &8f6 10.eS 0-0!? Il.exf6!?
Wxf6®.
7.	_	<Lg8-h6
7...	h5 is weaker, for example: 8.£}f3 AcS 9.Axc4 £)f2?! 10.Wb3 a6 11.flfl &g4 12.d6 cxd6 13.Axf7+ &d7 14.Ag5 £}8f6 15.0-0-0-1— (Vera-Arencibia, Las TUnas 1996).
8.	£g1-f3
Other moves create fewer difficulties for Black:
A)	8.h3? Wh4+ 9.&d2 £f2 lO.Wel Ab4 11 .g4 Wg3 12.Axc4£lxhl 13.£>e2 Wxh3 14.Фс2 &xg4 15.Ab5+ Ad7 16.Axd7 + <X’xd7 0-1 (jaws-Morozevich, ICC 2002);
B)	8.Wa4+ Ad7 9.Wxc4 Ae7=;
C)	8Ae2 Ac5 9.Axg4 Wh4+ 10.g3 Wxg4 11 .Axh6 Wxdl + 12.flxdl gxh6 13.£f3 f6 14.£d2 Ad7 15.2>xc4= (Jakab-Aschenbrenner, Zalakaros 2003);
D)	8.Axc4Ac5;
DI) 9.Axh6 2>xh6 10 £f3 2>g4 1 l We2 0-0 12.h3 £e3 13.Ab3 a6 14.£>a4 Aa7 IS.flcl Wd6 16.5c3 b5 17.Hxe3 bxa4 18.Adl Hb8+ (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
D2) 9.4ih3 Wh4+ lO.&fl £e3 + И.АхеЗ АхеЗ 12.Ab5+c6 13.dxc6 0 0 14 Wf3 Ad4 15.c7 2>g4 16.Del a6
17.Aa4 bS 18.Adi £tf6 19.4tf2 fla7+ (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
8.	- Af8-c5
9.	Wd1-a4+
In the event of 9.Axc4 the immediate 9...ЗД1?! is bad because of 10.Wb3 a6 11.flfl bS 12.Ae2 b4 13.M &xe4 14.Wc4 Ad4 1 S.Axh6 £>d6 16.Wxb4 gxh6 17.£>xd4 exd4 18.Wxd44— (Priehoda-Bae, Batumi 2002).
Black does better to begin with 9.. 0-0 or 9...a6.
9.	-.	Ac8-d7
10.	Wa4xc4	Ac5-f2+
Black must not forget to drive the king into the centre: 10...Ab6? 11.h3 &e3 12>d3 £hxf5 13.exf5 AxfS 14.^e4 Ы1 IS.flxfl 0-0 16.g4 Ag6 17.Ad2 сб 18.d6 We8 19.£jh4± (babloo-Bene-factor, ICC 2003).
11.	Фе1-е2	Af2-b6
12.	h2-h3	£}g4-f2
13.	flh1-h2	£h6xf5l?
The other version of the piece sacrifice is apparently weaker 13...^xe4 14,Wxe4 MS 15.&dl 0-0 16.Ad3 g6 17.g4 2ld4 18.M5 fS 19.Wei fle8 20.gxf5 AxfS 21.Axf5 'S.ixf'S 22.fle2± (babloo-Benefactor, ICC 2003).
14.	e4xf5	Ad7xf5^
15.	Фе2-б2	e5-e4
16.	2>f3-d4	Af5-g6
17.	*d2-c2	e4-e34-
18.	Фс2-Ь3	Wd8-e7
19.	Wc4-b54-	&e8-f8
20.	£d4-f3	Sa8-e8
21.	Af1-e2	if8-g8
22.	a2-a4	a7-a6
23.	Wb5-c4	h7-h6
24.	h3-h4	h6-h5
25.	a4-a5	Ab6-c5
26.	Sa1*a4	Ac5-d6
155
Chapter Three - Section A
win.
GAME 47
□ Maxim Dlugy
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 1999
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£>Ь8-с6
3.	2>b1-c3	d5xc4
4.	d4-d5	£ic6-e5
5.	f2-f4	4ie5-g4
6.	h2-h3	
As we saw in the previous game, in a number of variations the knight on g4 can get seriously on White’s nerves, and therefore Dlugy’s desire to drive it away is understandable. But at the same time this knight demanded constant concern on the part of Black, it was constantly hanging, and now it retreats to a perfectly safe position. In addition, with the text move White further weakens the el-h4 diagonal.
6.	-	<g4-f6
7.	e2-e4	e7-e6
Here is a graphic confirmation of what was said: with his knight on g4 Black would not have had this useful undermining move.
a £jg1-f3
After 8.Axc4 events develop in the style of the best-known variation of the Danish Gambit: 8...exdS 9,#JxdS #JxdS 10.Ji.xd5 2if6 ll.Axf7+ &xf7 12.Wxd8 Ab4+ 13.Wd2 Ji.xd2+ 14.Ji.xd2	2>xe4
15.2if3=.
The endgame after 8.dxe6 Wxdl + 9.&xdl Ji.xe6 deserves a separate analysis.
White has a fine pawn centre and a spatial advantage. Black’s pieces on the kingside are cramped, but he has a slight lead in development and for the moment he is a pawn up.
Which of these factors will prove more important? Here are some sample variations:
A) lO.fS 0-0-0+ ll.Ji.d2 (И.Фс2 Jid7 12.Ji.xc4?! £jxe4 13.4Jxe4 JixfS 14.Jid3 Exd3 15.Sfc’xd3 £>f6+; better is 12.g4 Ji.c6oo) H...Ji.d7 12.Ji.xc4 (12.eS 2>h5 13.4)ge2 Дсб 14 Eh2 g6 15.g4 Ji.h6+) 12...Ji.c6 13.£if3£jxe4 14.&xe4 Ji.xe4 15.4Jg5 4Jf6 16.Фс1 Ji.xg2 17.£xf7 jSlxhl 18.Ji.e6+ФЬ8 19.&xd8 ji.cS 2O.4Jf7 Пе8+ (Litus - Zhurov, Moscow 1992);
B) 10.g4	0-0-0+ Н.Фс2 Ji.b4
12.4Jge2 £te7 13.Ji.g2 £Jc6oo;
C) 10.21f3 0-0-0+11 Ji.d2;
156
The Advance: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
Cl) 11...4Л5 12.f5 43g 3 (12...Ad7 13.Axc4±) 13.fxe6 43xhl 14.exf7 43f6 15.Axc443f2+ 16.Фс2^2хе4±;
C2) ll..jStc5 12.f5 (12.Фс2 43xe4 13.43xe4 Af5+) 12...Ad7 13.Axc4«>;
C3) ll...Jlb4 12.Фс2 (12.43g5 JLxc3 13.bxc3 h6 14.43xe6 fxe6 15.Фс2 43xe4?) 12... 43e7 (12...Axc3 13.JLxc3 43xe4 14.Ji.xg7 43g3 IS.flgl Ji.f5+±) 13.43gS Sd4 (13...4k6 14.f5 43d4+ 15.Фс1 Ad7 16.43xf7±) 14.f5andnow:
C31) 14...43xf5 IS.exfS (15.43xe6 Hxd2+!! 16.<i’xd2 43xe4+ 17.Фс 1 АхсЗ 18.bxc3 fxe6 19.Ji.xc4	Фс17?)
15...Axf5+ 16,Фс1 Де8 17.a3 Ad6 18.43f3 (18.4Axf7? Af4-+) I8...Sxd2 19.*xd2 Af4+ 20.&dl JId8+ 21 .Фе2 (21.Фе! Ag3+ 22.Фе2®) 21...Яе8+ 22.Ф12 Ae3+ 23.<*>g3 43h5+ 24.ФИ4 g6 25.g3f6 26.Hel±;
C32) 14...nhd8!?	15.Ji.e3 Axc3
16.bxc3 Дхе4 17.fxe6Sxe3 18.exf7.
Let us return to the Dlugy-Morozevich game.
8.	e6xd5
9.	e4-e5	c7-c6!
A positional piece sacrifice, the compensation for which will be the powerful pawn group on the queenside
10.	e5xf6	-ig8xf6
11.	Ac1-e3	Af8-d6
12.	Wd1-d2
White chooses an aggressive but doubleedged plan involving queenside castling. However, after the quiet 12.Ae2 it is also not so easy for him to solve all his problems, for example: 12...0-0 13.0-0 Пе8 14.Wd2 b5 15.a3 aS 16.Ji.d4 Ab7 17.Hael b4 18.4^bl 4k4 19.Wcl 4}g3 2O.Ef2 f6 21.Afl cS 22.Дхе8+ Wxe8 23.Ae3 4ixfl 24.flxfl Wf7 25.^bd2 Де8 26.Sei c3 27.bxc3 bxc3 28.^c2 cxd2 29.Ji.xd2, and White resigned (bani-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
12.		0-0
13.	0-0-0	b7-b5
14.	4jf3-e5	Ь5-Ь4
15.	4jc3-e2	Wd8-a5
15...4te4 was more accurate.
16. Фс1-Ь1
White misses a good chance - 16.4ixc4 dxc4 17.Wxd6 Wxa2 18.Wxb4 4 ,d5 19.Wc5.
16.	Ad6xe5
Now the opponent’s most active piece is
eliminated.		
17.	f4xe5	4if6-e4
ia	Wd2-e1	c4-c3!
19.	b2-b3	c3-c2+
20.	ФЬ1хс2	Wa5xa2+
21.	Фс2-с1	Wa2-a3+
22. 23.	Фс1-с2 4je2-d4	Ac8-f5
157
Chapter Three - Section A
23.4k 1 4k 5+ 24.Ad3 Jkxd3+ 2S.I[xd3 4ixd3 2 6.4ixd3 was more tenacious.
23. „	Wa3-a2+
24. Фс2-с1
25. Фс1-с2
26. 41d4xf5
White resigned.
Wa2-a3+ 4je4-c5+ Wa3-a2+
GAME 48
□ Vasily Ivanchuk
 Alexander Morozevich
New York 1995 (rapid)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	41b8-c6
3.	4ib1-c3	d5xc4
4	d4-d5	4k6-e5
5.	f2-f4	£e5-d7
The knight heads for b6. where it will defend the c4-pawn and exert pressure on the dS-pawn, since Black’s main plan will now involve the undermining move ...e7-e6 (and possibly also ...c7-c6, after, for example, ...Ac8-d7).
White will eventually regain die sacrificed material, of course, but to do this he will in all probability have to exchange one of his bishops for the wandering knight.
6. e2-e4
Ivanchuk recommended 6.Wa4!?, but then Black has the possibility of an interesting pawn sacrifice: 6...c6 (6...a6 7.e4 Hb8 8.^xc4 bS 9.Wb3±) 7.dxc6 bxc6 8>xc6 Hb8 9.e4 e6 l0.2>f3 Ab4 U.JSLxc4 Jkb7, and his pieces become very active, while f2-f4 proves to be an unnecessary weakening of White’s king’s position.
6.	£d7-b6
7. a2-a4
In the event of 7.£>f3 Black has everything ready for the undermining move 7...e6s=s.
With the move in the game White provokes 7...aS, in order to then capture the b6-knight with his dark-squared bishop and compromise the opponent’s queenside pawn structure We will consider an alternative continuation, involving die exchange of this same knight for the light-squared bishop: 7Jkxc4 41xc4 (7...c6!?oo comes into consideration) 8.Wa4+ Jkd7 9.Wxc4 сб 10.J»Le3 (things did not turn out too well for White in the following game: 10.4}f3 exdS (10...Wb6!?) ll.exdS (ll.exdS Hc8oo) 11...4^6 12.Ae3 g6 13.0-0 Jkg7 14.Wb4 bS 15.4k5 aS 16.^c$ Пс8 17.4кб b4! 18.4ib5 4}xd5! 19.Wxd5 Axc6 2O.Wxd8+ Hxd8 21.4k7 + sfc’d7+ Moreno Trujillo-Gonzalez de la Torre, Sevilla 2004) 10...e6 (10...cxd5!? is also not bad: 11.exdS 4}h6 12.443 4if5 13Jkf2 g6 14.0-0 Ag7 15.4kS 0-0=) 11.0-0-0 exdS 12.exd5 Uc8 (12...exdS is premature: 13.Wxd$ 446 14>xb7±) 13>b3 exdS 14.443 446 IS.Shel (15Jkxa7! is interesting, after which 1 S..Jke7? is not good for Black on account of 16.Ab6 ПхсЗ+ 17.bxc3 Wa8 18.Ehel) 15..Jke7 16.it.xa7 0-0 17.Jkb6 We8 18.ФЫ ФЬ8! (in the event
158
The Advance. 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
of 18... Ae6 19.^d4 Wd7 2O.^xe6 fice6 21 f5 White seizes the initiative) 19.Фа 1 £)e4! 20.^>xd5 Aa4T.
12.	0-0	0-0
13.	d5xe6	Ac8xe6
14.	Ac4xe6	f7xe6?
Let us return to the Ivanchuk-Morozevich
game.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Ac1-e3
АеЗхЬб Af 1xc4
a7-a5 e7-e6 c7xb6 Af8-b4
And here 14. JW'xdl! IS.Haxdl fxe6= was good.
15. ^d1-b3!± Фд8-Ь8!
16. £f3-g5	4f6-g4?
After this mistake White gains a decisive advantage. 16...’Bfd4+ 17.ФЫ £}g4±
was necessary.		
17.	<2>g5xe6	Wd8-h4
18.	h2-h3	Sa8-e8
19.	&c3-e2!+-	-Де8хе6
20.	Wb3xe6	Ab4-c5+
21.	Фд1-И1	h7-h5
22.	Sa1-d1	Hf8-d8
23.	3d1xd8+	Wh4xd8
24.	We6-d5	Wd8-h4
25.	Wd5-g5	£ig4-f24-
26.	Ef1xf2	Wh4xg5
27.	f4xg5	Ac5xf2
11. £g1-f3
Here White has also tried other continuations:
A)	ll.dxe6 ^xdl + 12.fixdl Axe6 13.Axe6 fxe6 14.^e2 £>f6 15.&f2 hS 16.h3 Hf8 17.eS 2id7?± (Gomez Esteban-Romero Holmes, Spain 2005);
B)	ll.AbS+!? &f8	(ll...Ad7?
12.dxe6fxe6 13.Wh5+&f8 14.0-0-0±) 12.d6!? (12.dxe6 Axe6 13.WC3 £lf6 14.f5 Ad7 15.£ie2 AxbS 16.axb5 We7 17.0-0 Дев** Bacrot-COMP Virtual Chess 2, Cap d’Agde 1998) 12...'Sfxd6 13.Wf3 g6 (better is 13...e5!? 14.Edl We7 1 S.£)e2 AcS 16.^d5 Wh4+₽*) 14.£te2 <£>g7 15.0-01 (Gyimesi-Rabiega, Austria 2004/05).
11. -.	7g8-f6
Black could have gained equal chances by 11...exdS!? 12.Axd5 £/6 13.0-0 0-0 14>d3=.
28.	g5-g6	ФЬ8-д8
29.	g2-g4	h5xg4
30.	h3xg4	ig8-f8
31.	ФЬ1-д2	Af2-c5
32.	e4-e5	if8-e7
33.	Фд2-13	£e7-d7
34.	&f3-e4	Xd7-c€
35.	£ie2-d44-	Ac5xd4
36.	£e4xd4	$c6-d7
37.	&d4-d5	&d7-e7
159
Chapter Three - Section A
38.	e5-e6
39.	&d5-d6
40.	b2-b3
41.	e6-e7
Black resigned.
Фе7-е8 &e8-d8
Ad8-e8
GAME 49
□ Larry Christiansen  Alexander Morozevich
New York 1995
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4jb8-c6
а	21Ы-СЗ	d5xc4
4.	e2-e3
A not very ambitious move, which allows Black to land an immediate counter-blow in the centre.
4.	._	e7-e5
5.	d4-d5	£>c6-e7
6.	Af1xc4
The immediate 6...£lf6 is also possible, for example: 7.£>ge2 £>g6 8.0-0 Ad6 9.£g3 0-0 10.Ad2 аб П.аЗ &h8 12.Aa2 £>g4 13.h3 2ih6 14.^ce4 Ae7 15.d6 cxd6 16.Ab4 aS 17.Axd6 fS 18. Axe 7 ^xe7 19.4k3 f4t (Sebenik-Fercec, Ljubljana 2005).
7.	Ac4-b5+
In the event of 7.4ftge2 Ad6 8.e4 £lf6 9.AbS+ Black does not have to exchange his light-squared bishop: 9...£)d7 10.2)g3 a6 ll.Aa4 bS 12.Ac2 Ш 13.4}f5 0-0 14.0-0 h6 15.Wf3 2>h7 16.£te2 £ih4 17.£ixh4 Wxh4«* (Guliev-Barsky, Moscow 1996).
7.	-	Ac8-d7
8.	Wd1-b3	Ea8-b8
9.	^g1-e2
Or 9.e4 a6 10.Axd7 + ^xd7 ll.£if3 AcS 12.0-0 £}f6 13>c4 Ad6 14.^e2 15.^g3 2>xg3 16.fxg3 0-03* (Yusupov-Henley, Lone Pine 1981).
9.		£ig8-f6
10.	0-0	Af8-c5!=
11.	Ab5xd7+	Wd8xd7
12.	Ac1-d2	0-0
13.	Da1-d1	b7-b5t
14.	Wb3-c2	Ь5-Ь4
15.	7c3-a4	Ac5-d6
16.	Ad2-c1	e5-e4
17.	2>e2-g3	Zf8-e8
18.	£ia4-c5	Wd7-e7¥
As we have already seen, this type of position is not too dangerous for Black, if, of course, he is not too far behind in development and is not forced to concede any weaknesses. Here, in addition, White has already made the not very useful move e2-e3, blocking in his dark-squared bishop.
6. _	£ie7-g6
160
The Advance. 3.£k3 dxc4 4.d5
Black's position is the more promising: he has gained space and is threatening to build up an attack on the kingside. However, subsequently he was unable to exploit all the advantages of his position.
36.	£id4xe6 We1xf2+
37.	We4-g2 Wf2xg2+
38.	&>h2xg2 f7xe6
19.	5 .c5-b3	5g6-h4
20.	Sd1-d4	Sb8-b5
21.	Sf1-d1	Ad6xg3
22.	h2xg3	5h4-f5
23.	Hd4-c4	Sb5xd5
24.	Sd1xd5	£>f6xd5
25.	Sc4-c5	We7-e6
26.	Ac1-d2	h7-h5
27.	Wc2c4	Se8-d8
28.	Jld2-e1	h5-h4
29.	g3-g4	£f5-e7
30.	£b3-d2	We6xg4
31.	Wc4xe4	Wg4-e2
32.	£d2-f3	h4-h3
33.	g2xh3	Sd8-d6
34.	Фд1-И2	Sd6-e6
35.	-f3-d4	We2xe1
39.	e3-e4	^d5-f4+
40.	<ig2-f3	£f4-d3
41.	5c5xc7	£>e7-g6
42.	Ь2*ЬЗ	a7-a5
43.	Sc7-a7	i?'id3-e5+
44.	Ф(3-е3	&e5-c6
45.	Ha7-c7	<g6-e5
46.	ФеЗ-14	*g8-h7
47.	Sc7-c8	dth7-g6
48.	h3-h4	Фд646
49.	h4-h5	g7-g5+
50.	h5xg6	<^e5xg6+
51.	ФТ4-еЗ	2jg6-e5
52.	Пс8-с7	Af6-g6
53.	ФеЗ-14	Лд6-16
54.	&f4-e3	&f6-g5
55.	Пс7-д7+	Фд5-16
56.	Hg7-c7	
Draw.
161
Section В
Defending and Developing: 4.£if3
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. &Ы-СЗ
4. £>g1-f3
d7-d5 £>b8-c6 d5xc4
For the moment White does not determine his plans: he defends his d4-pawn and makes a useful developing move.
GAME 50
□ Vasily Ivanchuk
 Ruslan Ponomariov
Linares 2002
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	5b8-c6
3.	^Ы-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	2ig8-f6
5.	Wd1-a4	
White wants to regain the sacrificed material without yet determining the position of his e2-pawn. Incidentally, this position arises more often from the Queen’s Gambit Accepted (D23). The Ivanchuk-Ponomariov game in fact began l.d4 dS 2.ЗДЗ £if6 3.c4 dxc4 4.Wa4+ 4k6 5.4k 3.
5. -	4jf6-d5l?
A manoeuvre which is fully in the spirit of the Chigorin Defence, since in this opening Black aims, above all, for active piece play. S...e6 is also possible, but with this move Black voluntarily restricts his c8-bishop. It would appear that here White can count on a slight advantage:
A) 6.e3 Ad6 7.Axc4 0-0 8.0-0 eS 9.d5 4ie7 (9...e4 10.^ixe4 4ixe4 ll.dxc6 Ag4® is interesting) 10,e4#}g6?*;
В) б.аЗ аб (6...Ad7!?) 7.Wxc4 Ad6 8.Ag5 h6 9.Ah4 0-0 lO.fldl g5 I l.Ag3 Hb8!? 12.e4 bS 13.Wxc6! (13.We2 b4 14.axb4 Axb4 15.Wd3?! Aa5!t Sosonko-Piket, Amsterdam 1995) 13...Ab7 (13...fib6 14.Wa8±) 14.Wxb7 ПхЬ7 15.e5±;
C) 6 Wxc4 Ab4 (6...^b4 7.Wb3 cS 8.dxc5 AxcS=) 7.a3 Aa5 8.e3 (8.Ag5!?) 8...0-0 9.Ae2 He8 10.b4 Ab6 11.0-0± (Averbakh-Spassky, Leningrad 1960).
6. Wa4xc4
If this capture is postponed, Black will cling on to the pawn and gain equal chances: 6.e4 4b6 7 Wdl Ag4 8.d5 4te5 9.Af4 £>g6 10.Ag3 (the following game is mainly of historical importance: Ю.АеЗ еб, draw, Botvinnik-Petrosian, Moscow 1963, and Tigran Petrosian became the 9th champion of the world) 10...e6 ll.dxe6A.xe6 12.Wxd8+Sxd8 13.Axc7 Hd7 14.Axb6 axb6 15.£)g5 2>eS 16.f4 £>d3+ 17.Axd3 Sxd3 18.£ixe6 fxe6 19.Sdl Hxdl+ 20.*£>xdl l4?d7!= (Akopian-Brunner, Luzern 1993).
6. ..	£d5-b6
162
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
7. Wc4-b3
After the alternative retreat 7 Wd3 the undermining move 7...e5 would appear to gain in strength. We give a few examples:
A) 8.4ixeS £sb4 (8...Wxd4 9.£lxc6 ^xd3 10.exd3 Ьхсб 1 l.Ae2 AfS 12.0-0 00-0г4 Reshevsky-Portisch, Tel Aviv 1964) 9.Wbl Wxd4 10.4}f3 Wd6 1 l.e4 Ag4 12.a3 Axf3 13.gxf3 £ic6 14.^b5 We7 15.Ae3 0-0-0 16.Ah3+ ФЬ8 17.0-0 Wh4 18.&g2 a6 19.£k3 Hd6 20.£e2 Sk4 2hAf4 Eg6+ 22.Ag3 £}d2—P (Conquest-Dlugy, New York 1984);
B) 8.e3 exd4 9.#Axd4 £\xd4 10.exd4 Ae7 1 l.Ae2 0-0 12.0-0 Ae6 13.ndl сб 14.Af4 Пе8 15.Af3 £id5T (Ritter-Dlugy, New York 1993);
C) 8.dxe5 Wxd3 9.exd3 &b4 10.&dl AfS llAtel 0-0-0® (Goormachtigh-Velikov, Haifa 1989).
7.	~.	e7-e5
Nevertheless this pawn thrust. In the event of 7...Ag4 8.d5 AxfJ 9.gxf3 4x14 lO.Wdl eS П.еЗ 12.f4! (Bukal-L Hansen, Sitges 1999) White has an unpleasant initiative
8.	d4xe5
Or 8.4Ae5’? £ixe5 9.dxe5 Ae6 10.^c2 ^d4!?*±. The importance of the d4-square for Black’s counterplay is some
thing that we have already talked about in Chapter One
a «.	Ac8-e6
9.	^b3-c2	Ac6-d4
10.	Wc2-d3
If 10.We4 there would also have followed 10..AcS?4.
10.	.. Af8-c5
11.	e2-e3
In the event of ll.£>xd4 Wxd4 12.Wxd4 Axd4 13.Af4 43d7 14.Sdl AxeS IS.AxeS £ixe5 16.41b5 Йс8 17.Фха7 Sd8 18.£ib5 (otherwise Black will play ...c7-c6, and the knight will be unable to return from its pirate raid) 18...Xlxdl+ 19.&xdl Axa2 20.£>xc7+ si?d7 21.ФЬ5 Йс8® the activity of Black’s pieces compensates for his material deficit.
11.	...	£d4xf3+
12.	g2xf3	Wd8xd3
13.	Af1xd3	0-0-0®
14.	Ad3-e2
14. -.
15. Ac1-d2
16. a2-a3
17. Ad2xc3
18. Ь2хсЗ
19. f3-f4
20. Sa1-c1
Ac5-b4 <fcb6-a4 Ab4xc3 £a4xc3 Sd8-d5
Ed5-c5
Draw.
163
Chapter Three - Section В
GAME 51
□ Andrey Rychagov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	4jb8-c6
3.	£Jb1-c3	d5xc4
4.	^g1-f3	?g8-f6
5.	d4-d5	/Лс6-а5
With the inclusion of the moves 4.#}f3 5)f6 the attack S.dS is no longer so dangerous, since in the main line, which involves the win of a piece for two pawns, White is deprived of the important resource e2-e4 (cf. also the notes to the Lebedev-Chigorin game). But we are running ahead a little - let us examine the variation move by move
6.	Wd1-a4+
Other continuations also do not promise White any particular benefits:
A)	6.e4 e6 7.jS.g5 jS.e7 (7...c6!? 8.e5 exdS 9.exf6 gxf6oo) 8.JSjtf6 gxf6 9.'S,a4+ сб 10.dxc6 £Jxc6 11 .JLxc4 jS.d7=;
B)	6.jS.g5 h6 7.jS.xf6 exf6 8.e3 (8>a4+ сб 9.0-0-0 jS.d7oo) 8...jS.d7 9.jS-e2 bS 10.0-0 JS.b4 (10...a6!? 11 .#d4 f5») ll.$Jd4 a6 12.jS.g4 g6 13.Axd7+ ^xd7 14.£)e4 jS.e7 15.Wf3 fS 16.2>g3 Ed8 17.e4 fxe4 18.4Jxe4 0-0*=* (Ziiger-Ye Rongguang, Luzern 1989);
C)	6.^Je5!? is interesting. Now after 6...e6 7.Wa4+ сб 8.dxc6 £Jxc6 9.#Jxc6 Ьхсб 1О.'й'хс4± or 6...a6 7 #а4+ сб 8.b4 (8.dxc6 b5+) 8...cxb3 9.axb3 e6 10.JS.d2 $Jxb3 (10...jS.d6!?) 1 l Wxb3 exdS 12.e3 White gains the advantage. Therefore it is better for Black to play 6...jS.d7 7.e4 еб<» (but not 7...b5? 8.b4 cxb3 9.4Jxd7±).
6.	c7-c6
7.	Ь2-Ь4
If White does not win the piece, Black simply completes his development and achieves a good game, for example: 7.dxc6 £1хс6 8.e4 a6 9.jS.xc4 e6 10.0-0 jS.d7 ll.Wdl bS 12.jS.d3 Wc7 13.h3 JS.cSг* (Angskog Brynell, Stockholm 1998/99).
7.	._	Ь7-Ь5
8.	Wa4xa5	Wd8xa5
9.	Ь4ха5	b5-b4
10.	£>c3-a4
If White is afraid, he can immediately return the piece, but this does not do him any good: 10.dxc6 bxc3 11.ЕЫ jS.a6 12.£>e5 0-0-0 13,2>xf7 c2 14.Bb8+ ФхЬ8 15.4Jxd8 e5+ (Meins-Rabiega, Heringsdorf 2000).
The withdrawal of the knight to the back rank is perhaps somewhat more promising: 104)dl exdS 11.g3!? e6 12.JS.g2 Sb8 13.JS.e3 EbS 14.JS.xa7 ExaS
164
Drfending and Developing: 3. £k3 dxc4 4. £)f3
15. Ad 4 Ad7 16.2>e5± (Ward-Fries Nielsen, Copenhagen 1998).
10.	..	c6xd5
11.	a2-a3
As we have already commented, White lacks the resource e2-e4, and therefore it is hard for him to combat the opponent’s pawn chain, the root of which extends back to f7 (and after the move in the game its head will be on b3). 11 .АеЗ еб 12. AcS ^e4 13Jkxf8 &xf8 14.£id2 Ad7 15.£&e4 Axa4 16.£>cS AbS 17.a4 Ae8 18.<&d2 Hc8 19.&a6 b3-4-(Igrok-ArtofAttack, ICC 2003).
11.	_	Ь4-Ь3
12.	Ас1-Ь2	e7-e6
13.	£ia4-c3	Af8-c5
It is also possible	to deal with the
aS-pawn immediately, without fearing the undermining of the pawns by e2-e4: 13...Ae7 14.e4 0-0 IS.exdS exdS 16.Ae2 Ad8 17.0-0 AxaS I8.3fdl Ab7 19.&d4 Hfd8 2O.jSLf3 5ie4 21.Axe4 dxe4 22.($}f5 Hd3+ (Kogan-Barsky, Moscow 1994).
14.	e2-e3	0-0
15.	0-0-0 Ac8*b7
16.	e3-e4?l Ac5xf2
17.	e4xd5 e6xd5
18.	a5-a6 Ab7xa6 19. £c3xd5 2if6xd5 20. Hd1xd5
Here 20...Ae3+! would have won, for example:
A)	21.ФЫ Had8 22.Hxd8 Uxd8
23.Ae2c3 24.Axa6 Sdl +!;
B)	21 ,&dl Hac8 22.Ac3 Ab7 23.fie5 Af4 24.Пе7 Hfd8+ 25.Фе1 AdS-+;
C)	21.£>d2 flfd8 22.Hxd8+ Sxd8
23.Ac3 Axd2+ 24.Axd2 b2+—H
In the end Black also won, but only after great adventures.
GAME 52
□ Evgeny Gleizerov
 Alexander Morozevich
St Petersburg 1993
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4
3. ФЫ-сЗ
4. £g1-f3
5. e2-e3
£>Ь8-с6 d5xc4 4g8-f6
White literally ‘cements’ his d4-pawn, against which the opponent’s blows are directed. Nevertheless, Black can destroy this monumental edifice in the centre.
5. -	e7-e5!
Only with dynamite, since half-measures do not help: S...Ag4 6.Axc4 a6!? (Black faces an unpleasant defence after 6...e6 7. AbS Ab4 8.Wa4 Axf3 9.gxf3 Wd6
16S
Chapter Three - Section В
1О.Фе2 ДхсЗ П.ЬхсЗ £dS 12,Wb3 43e7	13.Ji.a3 Wd7 14.Eabl 0-0
15.JeLa4± Curt Hansen-Brynell, Torshavn 1997), and now:
A)	7.0-0 еб 8.Ji.e2 Ji.d6=;
B)	7.Wb3e6 8.4Je5t;
C) 7.h3! ? Jiof3 8.Wxf3 еб 9.0-0 Ji.d6 10.a3 0-0 11.b4 eS 12.d5 &e7 13.e4 Bc8 14.Edl &d7 15.Ji.d3 c5 16.dxc6 <2Jxc6 17.£le2 Ji.b8 18.ДЬ2± (Shishkin-Panchenko, Kiev 2005);
D) 7.dS Фе5 8.Де2 4ixf3+ 9.£xf3 Axf3 10.Wxf3g6 11.0-0 £g7 12.e4 0-0 13.£f4±.
& Af1xc4
White can capture the offered pawn, but it will not be easy for him to retain it:
A)	6.dxe5= 1^xdl+ 7.4Jxdl Ji.b4+ 8.Ji.d2 Ji.xd2+ 9.&xd2 2>g4=;
В)	6.4Jxe5 £JxeS 7.dxe5 Wxdl + 8.4Jxdl £.b4+ 9.Ji.d2 £.xd2+ 10.&xd2 £>e4+! (10...^g4 1 l.f4 Деб 12.h3 2>h6 13.g4±) П.Фе! Деб 12.f3fcc5T.
6.d5 will beexamined later.
7. e3xd4
7.^b3?! is too reckless: 7...dxc3 8.Ji.xf7+ Фе7 9.bxc3 £k:4 1О.ДаЗ + ФГб+ and the king escapes from the threats; therefore White has to agree to a position with an isolated pawn.
7. -.	if8-d6
a 0-0
Transposing into an endgame by 8.We2+ Ще7 9.^xe7+ £)xe7 10.0-0 is not as harmless as it might seem:
A) 10...h6 11.Eel a6 12.$Jd2 0-0 13.4Jde4 &xe4 14.4)xe4 Ji.b4 15.Ji.d2 &xd2 16.&xd2 Stf5 17.£f3 &d7 18.Eacl Eae8 19.£ie5± (Blagojevic-Fercec, Neum 2004);
В) 10...c6 1 l.Bel and now:
Bl) 11...0-0 12_fi.g5 £jedS 13_fi.xd5 cxd5 (Black’s position after 13...£ixd5!? 14.^xd5 cxd5 15Ji.e7 Axe7 16.Exe7 b6 17.Bc 1 ± looks dismal, but it is not so easy to break it open) 14.Jijcf6gxf6 15.£lxd5± (Kiriakov-Barsky, Moscow 1995);
B2) ll...h6 12.$te5 0-0 13.£.f4 £b4 (13...4Jf5 14.Eadl g5 15.Дс1 &g7 16.h3± Blagojevic-Ostojic, Herceg Novi 2005) 14.аЗ ДхсЗ 15.bxc3 2>ed5 16.Ji.d2 £f5 17.В Efd8 18.a4± Kiria-kov-Summerscale, Hastings 1998/ 99);
С) 10...0-0 11.Eel h6 12.4k5 Деб!? (we have already encountered this typical idea; weaker is 12...a6 13Ji.f4 Ь5 14.ДЬЗ b4 15.4Ja4 2>fd5 16.£.g3 Деб 17.4k5 JLxcS 18.dxcS aS 19Jia4± I. Sokolov-Fercec, Neum 2005) 13.Ji.xe6 fxe6 14.#k4 &f7 15.£jxd6+ cxd6 16.Jif4 Efd8= (J Petrov-Fercec, Sibenik 2005).
a - оч)
til
166
Defending and Developing: 3.<йс3 dxc4 4.£)f3
9. h2-h3
It is more important for White to prevent the pin from g4, than for himself to pin the enemy knight: 9.AgS h6 10.Ah4 (10.Axf6 leads to simplification and equality: 10...Wxf6 ll.£te4 Wf4 12.£lxd6 cxd6 13.h3 (13.Hel Ag4T) 13...Ad7=) 10...Ag4 11.h3 (11.dS Axf3 12.Wxf3 fceS 13.We2 21g6 14.Ag3 a6 IS.fife 1 Пе8 16.Wd2 Axg3 17.hxg3 Wd6 18.Ab3 cS!?₽s Dlugy-Wanted. ICC 1999; 1 l.£d5? g5 12.£ixf6+ Wxf6 13.Ag3 Axf3 14.Wxf3 Wxf3 15.gxf3 Axg3 16.fxg3 £lxd4+ Ubiyca-Morozevich, ICC 2000) 1 l...Axf3 1 2.Wxf3 £lxd4 1 3.Wxb7 £f5 (13...Hb8 14.Wxa7 Ha8 15>b7 Hb8 16>а7Па8 17.Wb7 Bb8 18.Wa7,draw, M.Gurevich-Azmaiparashvili, St Vincent 2003)	14.Axf6 Wxf6 IS.Bfel
(15.Bael?!£>g3! 16.fxg3 Wd4+ 17.ФЬ2 Wxc4T; lS.Wf3!? Bab8 16.b3 WeS 17.g3 £)d4 18,We4 SfeS*2 Berkes-Rabiega, Germany Bundesliga В 2003/ 04) lS...Ae5!? 16.£)d5 (16.2ie4 Wb6 17.Wd5 (17.Axf7 + &xf7 18>d$+ We6 19.Wxe6+ Фхеб 20.£k5+ &d6+) 17...Sae8oo) 16. Wd6 17.Badl Bfb8 18.Wa6 (18.Wxc7!? Wxc7 19.^xc7 Axc7 20.Hd7 is an interesting sacrifice) 18...йхЬ2Т (Lempert-Morozevich, Moscow 1998).
9.i$3bS is not dangerous on account of 9...Ag4, when 10.h3 (Ю.АеЗ аб 1 l.£ixd6 Wxd6 leads to a comfortable game for Black) does not work in view of IO...Axf3 H.Wxf3a6 12.^xd6(12.£te3 2)xd4 13>xb7 ЙЬ8 14.Wxa6 Ba8 15.Wb7 ПЬ8 16.Wa7 Па8= 17.Wxd4? Ah2+) 12...Wxd6 1З.АеЗ b5!T and 14...4^xd4.
9.	..	h7-h6
Black avoids 9...AfS on account of lO.AgS, when the pin is rather unpleas-
games from the De La Bourdonnais-McDonnell matches (London 1834), but the evaluation of it is still not completely clear. It is curious also that the diagram position arises more often not from the Chigorin Defence, but from the Queen s Gambit Accepted or the Exchange Variation of the French Defence!
10.	a2-a3
Let us consider the alternatives:
A)	lO.Sel (intending 11.4&e5) 10...AfS!? (1О...Пе8 is weaker in view of ll .Hxe8+ Wxe8 12.£)bS! with a slight advantage, for example 12...Wd8 13.Wb3!)and now:
Al) after 11.dS £ie7 White has to pay for his spatial advantage with the ‘blunt’ bishop on c4 and the weakness of his dS-pawn, which renders chances equal;
A2) 1 l.£ie5 AxeS 12.dxe5 Wxdl 13 £ixdl 2>d7 14.Af4 (14.f4 Oc5«*; 14.e6 Axe6 15.12xe6 fxe6 16.Axe6+ Bf7 17.Af4 Пе8 18.Axf7+ &xf7 19.&C3 4ide5=) 14...flae8 1 S.£ie3 £kixe5 16.AbS=;
АЗ) Н.АеЗ a6 12.a3 Wd7 13.dS£eS 14.Afl Bfe8 15A.d4	16,Wxf3
167
Chapter Three - Section В
Hxel 17. Hxel He8 18.He3 (18.Hxe8+ £>xe8=)	18...Hxe3	19.fxe3 Ag6
2O.Axf6 gxf6 21.^xf6 We8 22.Wd4 We7 23.£kllT (Timman-Morozevich, Moscow 1994);
B)	lO.^bS (without White’s fian-chettoed bishop this attack is not dangerous) 10.. Леб!? (10...AfS!? and П..Ле4= is also not bad) 11Лхе6 (11.2ixd6 Wxd6T) ll...fxe6 12.&xd6 Wxd6T.
10.Wc2 will be considered separately.
10. .. Ac8-f5
11. Ь2-Ь4
Other possibilities:
A)	11.dS 2ie5 12.^xe5 AxeS 13>f3 Ag6 14.Bel He8 15.Af4 Axf4 16.^xf4 a6 17.Hadi Wd6= (Erdos-Boros, Budapest 2005);
B)	ll.Hel a6 IZ.fceS AxeS 13.dxe5 'fi'xdl 14.^xdl £k!7 15.e6fxe6 16Af4 2)b6 17.Aa2 £kl5 18.Axd5 exdST (Legky-Lautier, France 1996).
11.	..	4if6-e4
A faulty manoeuvre. Il...a6! was correct, preserving the d6-bishop from exchange (1 l.. Wd7 was also possible, for example: 12.Hel Hfe8 13ЛеЗ аб 14.Afl Had8 15.^a4	Ae4?±
Serafimov-Mukhutdinov, Azov 1996), with the approximate variation 12.Ab2
^d7 13Hel (13...Axh3 14.gxh3 Wxh3 was threatened, with an attack and a guaranteed draw by perpetual check; now in reply to the sacrifice there follows IS.Afl Wg4+ 16.Ag2; 13.dS 2)e5 14.£>xe5 AxeS 15.f4 Ad6 16.g4 Ah7 17.Wf3 Hfe8 18.f5 He7 19.Hael Hae8<» has also been played, Ristic-Kizov, Bar 2006) 13...Sfe8, and if 14.b5 (14.Hxe8+ Hxe8 15.Wb3 Axh3 16.gxh3 Wxh3 17.Axf7+	Ф118
18.Axe8 £bcd4!), then 14...axbS (14...Hxel + ! 15 Wxel axbS 16.(£)xb5 He8 17.W11 Ae4T may be more accurate) IS.^xbS (15..AxbS Hxel + 16.Wxel Axh3; better is 15.Hxe8+! Hxe8 16.AxbS with the threat of 17.dS) 1 S...Ae4! with an excellent position.
In principle, after b4-b5 Black always has the reply ...£te6-a5, initiating play on the queenside, where White has numerous weaknesses. It can be concluded that by 11 ...a6 Black suppresses the opponent’s play on the queenside, and in the centre his position is even preferable
12.	Ac1-b2 ^e4-g5
This is the point of the manoeuvre - to exchange the f3-knight and create threats to White's king and his d4-pawn. However, this plan must be deemed artificial and and-positional.
13.	£c3-b5!
A typical move, with the idea of exchanging the d6-bishop and then playing dS, opening the diagonal of the b2-bishop. Here the player with the black pieces felt that something was wrong, and he decided to try and find the best move in reply. In addition, his sense of danger told him that White had the advantage and that the slightest mistake could prove fatal.
168
Defending and Developing: 3.<£k3 dxc4 4.4df3
XB
В ХФ A A
4 A
А. A A 4
A
л а д
& A A
s
13.	Af5-e4
After more than half an hour’s thought this poor move was made Let us consider the alternatives in turn:
A)	13...Wf6 (naturally. 13...43xf3+ is bad because of 14.Wxf3) 14.43xd6 cxd6 IS.^xgS;
Al) 15...Wxg5 16.Wf3±;
A2) 15...hxg5 16.Wd2 2>e7 (16...Ead8 17.dS £«5 18.£.e2± and 19.f4; 16...dS!? 17.Axd5 Had8 18.Дхс6±) 17.d5 Wh6 18.f4g4 19.fiael±;
B)	13...a6 14.£xd6 Wxd6 15.£)xg5! hxgS 16.Wd2l? (16.dS 2>eS 17.Wd4f6; 16.Wh5!?) 16...£>e5!? (16...Де6 17.d5!) 17.Ae2f6 18.f4gxf4 19.Hxf4±;
C)	13...^e71? 14.2ixg5 hxgS 15.Wf3 сб 16.4ixd6 Wxd6 17.Пае! 3ke6 18.J»Lxe6 fxe6 19.We3±.
As is apparent from these variations. Black’s main troubles stem from the fact that he is unable to prevent the opponent’s crystal-clear plan:
1 - exchange die d6-bishop;
2 - activate the b2-bishop by d4-dS;
3 — attack the king or transpose into an advantageous endgame
Therefore it is desirable for Black to preserve hisd6-bishop from exchange.
D)	13..JaLf4! 14.d5 (there is nothing else, as otherwise there follows 14...a6!, driving hack the knight from bS):
DI) The tempting 14..Jic2 does not achieve anything: 15.Wxc2 4}xf3 + 16.ФЫ14— (but not 16.gxf3 WgS-t-17.ФЫ WhS!= with a draw);
D2) 14...Ae4
D21) 15.dxc6 £>xf3+ 16.gxf3 (or 16.ФЫ Wh4 with a strong attack) 16...Wg54- 17.ФЫ Wh5 18.&g2 Дхсб 19.43d4 Sad 8 with a very strong attack;
D22) ISAxgS WxgS:
D221) 16.f3 Wg3 17.fxe4 (17.dxc6 W112+ 18.ФГ2 Wg3+= 19.Фе2? Паев—4-) 17...W112+ 18.ФГ2 Wg3+ with perpetual check, since 19.Фе2?? We3 mate is not possible;
D222) 16.Wg4 Wxg4 (16...^e5 17.JiLxeS WxeS? 18.g3+-) 1 7.hxg4.
ж
AAA
4
НФ s
A A
B
AjL A A! AR
ВФ
Black reached this position in his calculations and further considered only 17...£)e5 18.Axe5* &xe5 19.Hael a6 (19...c6 2O.dxc6! Ьхсб! 21.flxe4 cxbS
169
Chapter Three - Section В
22.Jkd5! Паев 23.ПГе1+-) 2О.Пхе4 axbS 21 JstxbS Ad6 22.a4. when he faces an unpromising defence.
However, there was also the move 17...$W! with the idea of 18.1Ifel JLxdS!. Also unfavourable for White is 18.g3 Ad6 19.£xd6 cxd6 2O.Hadl Jlf3 21Hd4 f5!T. There only remains 18.£)c3! Ag6 (18...J«Le5 19.2)xe4 Axb2 2O.fla2 Ad4 2I.fldl £b6 22.£cS±) 19.Hfel±. In the concluding position While has a slight advantage, but for Black this is die best of all the variations given above.
14.	£f3xg5!
The most methodical solution. Also possible were both 14.$Jd2, forcing the bishop to move (14...£ixh3+? is bad: 15.gxh3? Wg5 +	16.^g4 Wxd2
17.Wxe4 Wxb2 18.Ha2!4—), and 14.4Je5. Even so, die move in the game is the simplest way for White to secure an advantage.
14.	..	Wd8xg5
15.	Wd1-g4±
An endgame that is very unpleasant for Black inevitably ensues.
15.	..	Hf8-e8
16.	flf1-e1	Wg5xg4
17.	h3xg4	же4-д6
I 8.d5 was threatened, when the knight would be unable to move onto the e-file, since the bishop at e4 is en prise. Now White wins a pawn, transforming his enormous positional advantage into a material one
18.	d4-d5	£c6-e5
The only move. 18...£>e7 would have lost to 19.$Jxd6 cxd6 20.JibS.
19.	£jb5xd6 c7xd6
20.	£.c4*b5 Ze8-d8
2O...	fie7? loses to 21.f44—.
21. ДЬ2хе5 d6xe5
22. Be1xe5
The endgame is winning for White, although certain difficulties still remain. The active placing of his pieces and the mating threats to the opponent’s king ease his task.
22.	..	a7-a6
Other possibilities:
A) 22.. Паев 23.Hael Ф117!? 24.Пе7 (24.Пе8 a6±) 24...a6 25,£fl bS 26.Sa7 (26.f4!?4~ and 27.fS) 26...HxdS 27.йха6+-;
В) 22...<£f8 23.flael (23.Hcl f6!= and 24...flxd5) 23...a6 (23...f6 24.He7 SxdS 2S.£Lxb7+—) 24.jSi.fl Паев 2S.a4! Пс7 (25...f6 26.He7+—) 26.d6! Hcd7 27.Пе7+-.
All Black’s misfortunes stem from the fact that he is unable to exchange his passive bishop on g6. In a rook endgame his saving chances would be gready improved.
23.	Jtb5-e2!
White switches his bishop to its optimum post: f3. Now Black cannot play 23...Пе8 24.Пхе8+ Дхе8 25.Jii.f3 (25.ФЙ4~ is also good) 2S...Jii.e4? 26.Пе14—.
23.	..	Ag8-f8
After 23...aS!? the simplest is 24.Пс1 axb4 2S.axb4 Да4 26.Дс4 Ф1'8 27.Hd4!+- and 28.d6.
170
Defending and Developing. 3.£k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
24.	Za1-c1 Па8-с8
After 24...f6 25.Se3 HxdS (25...йас8 26 Йхс8 Йхс8 is stronger, but even this is unable to change the result) 26.flc7 Hb8 (26...bS 27.AB+-) 27.flee7 White has a very strong attack. And in the event of the passive 24...fld7 he can consistently improve his position in various ways: a4-a5 and f2-f4 followed by the approach of his king.
25.	flc1 xc8 Sd8xc8
26.	d5-d6
30. 4e2xd3
3O.d?fl was more methodical. However, in any case die position is won without particular difficulty.
30.	-	fld6xd3
31.	a3-a4	Zd3-d4
Black was in severe time-trouble and had no time to choose. How'ever, there was no longer any choice.
32.	a4-a5!	g7-g5
32..f	lxg4 33.b5 axbS З4.а6 Za4 35.a7+—.
33.	f2-f3	&f8-g7
34.	flb7-b6	Sd4-d1+
35.	<±>g1-f2	Hd1-b1
36.	if2-e3	ЙЬ1-Ь2
37.	ie3-d4	f7-f6
38.	&d4*c4	Sb2xg2
39.	ЙЬбхаб	Zg2-f2
40.	Ь4-Ь5	
Black resigned.		
Conclusions		
26.	_.	Ec8-e8?
The decisive mistake. 26...fld8! was correct, and now the strongest for White is 27.йе7 Ь5 28.fla7 flxd6 29.Af3 f6 3O.Jei.b7 Де8 31.Axa6 Hd3±. Black succeeds in activating his forces to some extent, and White would still have to work hard for his win.
27.	Ze5-c5!
This reply was underestimated. Now 27...flxe2 is not possible on account of 28.йс8+йе8 29.d7+-.
27.	-.	Ue8*d8
28.	Йс5-с7	fld8xd6
28...	Ae4 would also have lost after 29.JS.c4!.
29.	йс7хЬ7 jS.g6-d3
The only move, as otherwise the pawn at a6 is lost.
On the basis of this game, certain conclusions can be drawn about the plans of the two sides with the given structure (black knight on c6, with the inclusion of the moves h2-h3 and ...h7-h6).
White:
1)	The raid £jc3-bS and the exchange of the important dark-squared bishop on d6;
2)	The advance d4-d5 with the activation of the bishop on b2;
3)	By playing the knight toeS and the queen to b3 (f3) - an attack in the centre and on the kingside;
4)	Inhibiting the development of Black’s queen’s bishop by h2-h3 and Wdl-c2 (d3);
5)	In the event of the pawn advancing from eS to e4 (if Black avoids its ex
171
Chapter Three - Section В
change on d4) - either its undermining with £id2 and f2-f3 followed by e3-e4-e5, or the manoeuvre Ac4-e2!, intending £)d2-c4 with the exchange of the bishop on d6;
6)	Neutralizing the activity of the black pieces in the centre and on the kingside (control of thee4- and d5-squares);
7)	In the event of the f3-knight being exchanged, its place is taken by the queen or the bishop via the route Ac4-e 2-f3.
Black:
1)	Control of the bS-square by ...a7 -a6;
2)	The need to control the eS-square, in order to be able to answer d4-d5 with ...£k6-e5 and not allow the f3-knight to go toeS;
3)	Control of cS (against the manoeuvre £k3-a4-c5),d5 and, above all, f7;
4)	Solving the problem of the queen’s bishop;
5)	Attack on White's castled position by ...Jilc8-f5, ...Wd8-d7 and ...AfSxh3 or the manoeuvre ...£>f6-e4 with the aim of provoking a favourable exchange of pieces (bishop on e4, queen on f6), and also ...£)f6-e4(h7)-g5 - the exchange of an important knight;
6)	The possibility of blockading the central pawn by ...£)c6-e7-d5 or ...^c6-b4-d5, and also by the move ... Ас8 -еб! ?;
7)	The manoeuvre ...4^c6-e7-g6-f4 for an attack.
Summarizing all this, it can be concluded that the struggle is very sharp and tense, and that Black’s chances are quite good. Every move or manoeuvre (after all, this game is governed by plans) must be treated with great responsibility, and everything must be very accurately calculated.
GAME S3
□ Alejandro Ramirez Alvarez
 Alexander Morozevich
Bled 2002
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	<?b8-c6
3.	£Ь1-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£jg1-f3	£g8-f6
5.	e2-e3	e7-e5
6.	Af1xc4	e5xd4
7.	e3xd4	Af8-d6
8.	0-0	0-0
9.	h2-h3	h7-h6
10.	Wd1-c2	
Undoubtedly die most unpleasant move, the aim of which is to take away the fS-square from the black bishop. In fact the game which we will now examine reached the diagram position from a French Defence: 1.е4 еб 2.d4 dS 3.exd5 exdS 4.#}f3 Ad 6 5.c4 dxc4 6.Axc4 <?2>f6 7.0-0 0-0 8.h3 h6 9.Wc2 &£ Ю.ёкЗ. Alejandro Ramirez annotated this game, played at die 2002 Olympiad in the first round Costa Rica-Russia match, in New In Chess 2004/1, and subsequently we will make use of some of his variations and comments.
10.	_	£c6-b4
10...	£ja5 1 l.Ad3 Ae6± is favourable for White.
172
Defending and Developing: 3.£)c3 dxc4 4.£)f3
11.	Wc2-b1
White can hardly be satisfied with either 1 l.Wb3 JlfS 12.<&eS We7T or U.Wg6 £>bdS!?.
11.	-	Дс8-е6!
A typical idea when playing against an isolated pawn, which was employed, for example, by Botvinnik in a famous game of his against Boleslavsky (from the Match-Tournament for the title of Absolute Champion of the USSR, Leningrad/ Moscow 1941). Black gains the important dS-square for his knights and the f-file is opened for his rook, while it is very hard for White to get at the еб-pawn.
Black does not have time to establish his knight on dS ‘in comfort’: ll...c6 12.Axh6!? gxh6!? 13.Wg6+ ФЬ8 14.Wxh6+ &h7 15.a3 ^dS 16.£>xdS exdS 17.JiLxd5 withan unclear position.
12.	JLc4xe6 f7xe6
13.	Hf1-e1
Now White no longer achieves anything with 13.Jlxh6 gxh6 14.Wg6+ ФЬ8 15.Wxh6+ 2>h7 16.4k4 £14 17.Wxe6 WdST.
13.	-.	Wd8-e8
Despite the weakness of the g6-square. Black has good piece play.
14.	£ic3-e4
Black would have obtained slightly the better position after 14.a3 £)bd5
IS.^xdS 4^xdS 16.We4 Ef6 17_fi.d2 Ф118 18Jkb4 WhS 19.Jlxd6 cxd6 (Evseev-Morozevich (blitz), Crimea 2001).
14.	_	43b4-d5
15.	£e4-c5	£d6xc5
16.	d4xc5	£f6-d7
17.	Wb1-c2?
Ramirez considers this move of his to be a mistake and he suggests 17.c6 bxc6 18.<£)d4 instead. After this there would probably have followed 18...eS (weaker is 18_.nf6 19.2ixc6 Wf7 2O.Wc2 Hf8 21.f3) 19.^xc6 We6 2O.Wc2 flf6 21.£id4 Wf7 22.ФГЗ with chances for both sides.
17. -.	c7-c6
18. Дс1-еЗ
IB BWB*B
il % к к к к
AW A A.:
18.	._	Ef8xf3!
Not allowing White to play Ae3-d4 and comfortably pile up on the еб-pawn. The white king unexpectedly finds itself in danger.
19.	g2xf3	We8-h5
20.	Wc2-e4	£id7-e5
21.	Фд1-д2	£d5-f6
Weaker is 21...Ef8 22.f4£jg6 23.Wxe6+ ФЬ8 24.Wg4 ?}gxf4+ 25.ФЬ2 and White is alright.
22.	We4-f4 £e5-g6
Black is looking for more than the simple regaining of the exchange by 22...£>d3
173
Chapter Three - Section В
23.Wg3 £ixel + 24.3xel, when both sides have their pluses and minuses.
23.	Wf4-g3	<?g6-h4+
24.	£>g2-h1	Фд8-Ь7
24...	?Jxf3? does not work because of the pretty counter-stroke 25.JBt.xh6!. The draw after 24...£jf5 2S.Wg2 £ih4 26 Wg3 does not satisfy Black, and so he removes his king from the g-file.
25.	JLe3-f4 4h4xf3
26.	He1-e3
26.3xe6 is worse in view of 26...^d5 27.3d6 We4 with unpleasant threats. For example: 28.ДеЗ #Jh4+ 29.f3 Wxe3 3O.Wxh4 Wxf3+.
26.	._	£f3-d4
27.	3e3-e5	ЗД445
2a	Wg3-g2	Ea8-d8
29.	f2-f3?
White should have urgently created his own threats: 29.Jig 1 3d I ЗО.Пхеб 3xgl + 31.'4>xgl £kl4 32.3e7 Wdl + 33.Wfl 4if3+ 34.&g2 &h4+ 35.&gl, and Black is forced to agree to a repetition of moves (35...£jf3+), since 35...Wxfl+?! Зб.ФхП 4jg6 37.Hxb7 £)xf4 38.3xa7 looks extremely dubious-the a-pawn represents an enormous danger for die black knights.
29.	...	Bd8-d4
30.	Af4-h2	3d4-h4
31.	Sa1-g1!
31.	- Wh5-f7
Black, afraid of selling his advantage too cheaply, several times disregards a highly promising continuation. Thus here 31.3x113 32.Bxf5 3xh2+ 33.Wxh2 Wxf 5 looks very strong.
32.	3g1-e1	£f6-d7
33.	3e5xe6	*?d7xc5
34.	3e6-e2	Wf7-h5
35.	He1-g1	Eh4xh3
36.	3e2*e5	£.c5-d3
37.	3e5xf5	Bh3xh2+
38.	Wg2xh2	Wh5xf5
39.	3g1-g3	£d3-f4
40.	Eg3-g4	g7-g5
41.	Wh2-d2	h6-h5
42.	Sg4-g3	&h7-h6
43.	ih1-h2	Wf5-e5
44.	*h2-h1	£f4-e2?!
And here 44...h4 45.3g4 Wd5! was very promising. White can hardly exchange on dS, giving his opponent another passed pawn, but otherwise, after occupying dominating positions in the centre with his pieces, Black will simply begin the gradual advance of his queenside pawns.
45.	ВдЗ-д2 £е2-дЗ+?
The knight was excellently placed on f4, because, among other things, it forced the white rook to occupy a passive position at g3. Now the picture changes radically very quickly.
46.	ФЫ-д1	h5-h4
47.	3g2*h2	&g3-f5
48.	Bh2-e2!
The rook has broken free, reminding Black that his king also cannot feel secure.
48.	_	We5-f6
After 48...£jd4!? 49.3xe5 #Jxf3 + 50.ФЫ! £jxd2, for an instant Black has three pawns for the exchange, but White’s rook invades the 7th rank and his
174
Defending and Developing: 3.£)c3 dxc4 4.<2)f3
king confidently stops the connected passed pawns: 51Ле7 g4 52.ПхЬ7 h3 53.ФН2 W3+ 54.&g3 h2 55.*g2 g3 S6.flb3, and it is doubtful whether Black
can save the game		c6-c5
49.	Ле2-е4	
50.	Фд1-д2	*h6-h5
51.	^d2-d7	Wf6xb2+
52.	ig2-h3	4tf5-g7
Black no longer had any defence, for example: 52..>f6 53.Леб Wf8 S4.*h7+ ^h6 55.Wg6 mate.
‘At this moment I was surprised to see how many people had gathered around us to watch our game. The greatest surprise was to see Garry Kasparov taking a chair and sitting down next to us to watch the game. I could see that he was worried, because he knew that if I played accurately, Alexander would lose.’ (A. Ramirez)
Black could again have tried fighting for an advantage after S4...Wa3+ 55.ФЬ2 Wxa2+ 5б.Ле2 1^d5 S7.flg2 bS S8.fxg5+ *i’g6 59. Wxh4 £f5, but he decided that there had already been enough excitement for one game.
55.	&h3-h2	^c3-d2+
56.	ФЬ2-д1	Wd2-c1 +
57.	Фд1-Ь2	Wc1-d2+
58.	ФЬ2-д1	Wd2-c1 +
59.	Фд1-И2	Wc1-d2+
Draw.
GAME 54
□ Bator Sambuev
 Vladimir Barsky
Moscow 2004
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	tb8-c6
3.	^Ь1-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	?g8-f 6
5.	e2-e3	e7-e5
6.	d4-d5	£ic6-e7
White has a clear advantage after 6...£>b4 7Jkxc4 сб 8.e4 cxdS 9.exd5 Ad6 10.a3 ^аб HJkgS 0-0 12.0-0 Ag4 (12...£k5 13.b4 £kd7 14.^e4t;	12...Пе8
13.Ab5!) В.АхабЬхаб 14.^e4±.
7. £f3xe5l? ^e7xd5
8. £f1xc4
53. ^d7-g4+?
‘After I had made this move, Garry got up and exhaled strongly. Either my inexperience or the immense pressure prevented me from playing S3 Леб!, and Black will be mated in four moves! There is no way out as 53...£lxe6 54.Wh7 is mate straightaway.’ (A. Ramirez)
53. -	*h5-h6
54. f3-f4	^Ь2-сЗ+
175
Chapter Three - Section В
This line was introduced by the Russian players Alexander Lastin, Bator Sambuev and Andrey Rychagov.
a	Ac8-e6
This is the most natural reply - Black defends both his knight on dS and his f7-pawn, at which White is clearly aiming.
A)	Black’s defensive problems are not solved by 8...Ab4 9.0-0 АхсЗ Ю.ЬхсЗ Wd6 (10...0-0 1 l.e4 We7 12.£>g6 hxg6 13.exdS Wd6 14.Wd4 bS 15.-fi.f4 Wd7 16.Ab3 Ab7 17.fladl±) 11.4W7 &xf7 12.e4 Ae6 13.exdS AxdS 14.Af4 Wc6 15.Axd5+ WxdS 16.Wc2± (Sambuev-Tishin, Tula 2004);
B)	8...c6!? is interesting, with the following approximate variations:
Bl) 9.e4We7:
Bl 1) 10.exdS?! Wxe5+ П.АеЗ AcS 12,We2 Ag4 13.Wd2 0-0-0 14.0-0 Axe3 15.fxe3 cxd5 16.Ad3 d4 0-1 (Lastin-Morozevich, Moscow 2002);
B12) 10.f4^xc3 H.bxc3Ae6=;
B13) 10.Wd4!?^b4 ll.Axf7+ Wxf7 12.&xf7 2>c2+ 13.ФЛ £xd4 14.&xh8 Ае6<»;
Bl 4) 10.Af4	&xf4!	(10...£>xc3
ll.bxc3 Ae6 12.0-0 Axc4 13.^xc4 We6 14.Wb3 bS IS.ftaSt) ll.Axf7+ Wxf7 12.£>xf7&xf7 1 3.0-0 Аебоо;
B2)	9.2)xd52ixd5 10.e4:
B21) 10...Ab4+?! llAd2 (П.ФА is also unpleasant) ll...Wg5 (ll...Ad6 12.£>xf7) 12.Axb4Wxe5 13.AxdScxdS 14.0-0 dxe4 15.Ad6±;
B22) 10...Ad6!? 11.exdS (ll.£xf7 &xf7 12.exd5 Пе8+ 13.ФП (13.Ae3? Йхе3+! 14.fxe3 Wh44- lS.g3 Wxc4) 13...W114 14.Wb3 cS=?) 11...AxeS 12.dxc6 0-0 13>xd8 Sxd8 14.cxb7 (14.Ag5 Sd4) 14...Axb7	15.0-0
Sac 8=.
9.	Ac4-b5+ c7-c6
The critical reply, although Black can, of course, try to defend die somewhat infe-rior position after 9...Фе7 10.We2 Wd6 11.2)f3 сб 12.Ad3 g6 13.0-0 Ag7 14.4}gS Zhd8 15.41xe6 £ixc3 16.bxc3 fxe6 1 7.Ac2± (A. Rychagov-Tishin, Tula 2004).
10.	£>e5xc6
The ‘crux’ of White’s idea: for two minor pieces he gains a rook and two pawns, and, above all, he seriously hinders Black’s development
10.	_	Ь7хс6
11.	Ab5xc6+ Фе8-е7
12.	Асбхав Wd8xa8
13.	0-0
Even so, the position is not so dangerous for Black as it might seem. In order to dis-
176
Defending and Developing: 3.<2)c3 dxc4 4.<2)f3
nipt the coordination of his opponent’s forces, White lias exchanged his active pieces.
Also, one can hardly maintain that White has a lead in development: it is very difficult to bring the al-rook and the cl-bishop into play, and furthermore the central pawns cannot immediately be advanced.
13.	..	<Ljd5xc3l
No good is 13...g6 14.e4 £}xc3 15.bxc3 when it is extremely dangerous to capture the e4-pawn. With the text, Black exchanges the opponents last developed piece and at the same time spoils his paw n structure, after which he intends to transfer his knight to cS, play ...f7-f6 and place his king on f7.
Now White essentially has no active plan, other than to prepare the advance of his central pawns.
14.	Ь2хсЗ Фе7-е8
The immediate 14...^d7 was possibly better.
15.	Wd1-d4	£f6-d7
16.	Hf1-d1	f7-f6
17.	Wd4-a4	Wa8-b7l?
17...	AcS 18.АаЗ АхаЗ 19>xa3 &f7 was also good.
1a еЗ-е4	<±>e8-f7
19.	Ac1-e3	£d7-c5
20.	Wa4-b4
The game would have been equal after 20^a5 Wb6 2l.Wxb6 axb6 22.Sabl £ixe4 23 Sxb6 £lxc3 24.Hd8 Axa2 2 5.Hb7+ &g6 26.Hbb8 ФГ7 27.Ac5 AxeS 28.Hxh8 ^g6=.
20.	«Ъ7-с7
If 2O...Wc6, there would have followed 21.Wb8.
21.	Ha1-b1 Af8-e7
22.	f2-f4
22.	..	g7-g6
The threat of f4-f5 is very unpleasant, and this is virtually the only way of countering it:
A)	22..jSLxa2 23.Hb2 &d3?l 24.Wb7 £jxb2 2S.Wxc7 £>xdl 26.Axa7 He8 27.AcSt;
B)	22...£>b3 23.Wa4 (23.f5!? Axb4 24.fxe6+ Фхеб 2S.cxb4 Wc2 26.axb3 Hd8=)23...£>c5 24.Wc2t;
C)	22...fS 23.exf5 AxfS 24.Wc4+ Ae6 2S.We2t.
23.	f4-f5
Nevertheless. Otherwise Black will play ...&g7 and after f4-f5 he will be ready to retreat his bishop to f7.
23.	-. g6xf5
The combinative trick 23...Axa2 24.Hal £)b3 2S.Wa4 ^xc3 does not help on account of the simple 26.Af2.
24.	e4xf5 Ae6xf5
25.	Wb4-c4+ Йс5-е6?!
Black has a dangerous position after 2S...Ae6 26>h4 hS 27.Hflt, but 25...Ф^7! is better, for example: 26.HbS Hc8 27.JLf4 (27.Hd5? Ae6) 27...Wc6 28 .He 1 Af8 with chances for both sides.
26.	^c4xc7	£e6xc7
27.	Hb1*b7	Hh8-c8
27...	4te6! would have led to equality: 28.Hdd7 He8 29.Hxa7 £gS 3O.Hdc7 £te4=.
177
Chapter Three - Section В
2& Ae3-f4 Ae7-c5+
In the event of 28_.£»e8 29.Bel Ae6 30.йха7 йхсЗ 31.a4± all Black’s forces are tied up, and therefore he is forced to return the two pieces for a rook.
29.	$g1-f1	£c54>6
30.	Bd1-d6	£f5-e4
31.	Bd6-d7+
If 31.2dxb6 axb6 32.Sa7, then 32...bS (32...Ha8! ЗЗ.Пхс7+ Фе6= is also possible) ЗЗ.Ахс7 Ha8=.
31.		ФТ7-е6
32.	fib7xc7	ДЬ6хс7
33.	Hd7xc7	Hc8xc7
34.	Af4xc7	Феб-dS
35.	g2-g4	Фd5-c4
36. Ac7-a5
36.	..	£c4-d3
A simple draw could have been reached by 36...h6! 37.j5.d8 fS 38.g5 hxgS 39.jSLxg5 ФхсЗ 40.ФГ2 f4=. Later Black lost his way in broad daylight
37.	ФМ-Г2	f6-f5
38.	g4-g5	f5-f4
39.	va5-b4	ФdЗ-c4
40.	h2-h4	Фс4^3
41.	a2-a4	ФdЗ-c4
42.	a4-a5	a7-a6
43.	ФГ2-е2	Jle4-d5
44.	Ae2-d2	f4-f3
45.	Фс12-еЗ	Фс4-Ь3
46.	h4-h5	£d5-f7
47.	g5-g6	h7xg6
48.	h5-h6	£f7-g8
49.	ФеЗхТЗ
Black resigned.
GAME 55
□ Alexander Beliavsky
 Alexander Morozevich
Germany Bundesliga 1999/2000
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	C2-C4	£ib8-c6
3.	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	<2jg1-f3	sLig8-f6
5.	e2-e3	e7-e5
6.	d4-d5	£x6-e7
7.	JLf1xc4	£>e7-g6
8. h2-h4
White can win a pawn by 8.Wa4+ Ad7 9.Wb3. Now if 9...Bb8? there follows 10.d6±, while if 9...Ac5 - 10.£}g5 0-0 1 l.£e6± or 10...h6 11 d6±. 9...Ad6 is correct, and after Ю.'Й'хЬ/ (10.J5.d2 0-0 11.h3 a6 12.Wxb7 e4 13.&d4 4Je5t Kosenko-Barsky, corr. 1993) 10...0-0 ll.Wb3 (11.0-0 e4 12.4Jd4 Axh2+ 13.ФхЬ2 2>g4+ 14^gl Wh4 15.Wxc7 £>6e5-+; 11.h3!?) Il...e4 12.$id4 Ee8 13.Ad2 ^e5® Black has good compen
178
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.<2)f3
sation for the material he lias given up - a spatial advantage and prospects of an attack on the kingside.
8.e4 Ad6 9.h3 a6! is not dangerous for Black, for example: 10.0-0 JsLd7 11.Del h6!? 12.JLfl £)h7 13.Ae3 2)g5 14.&d2 0-0 15 Ad3 (15.$k4 fS 16.ef JilxfSl; IS.WhS!?) 1 S..Wf6 16.£k4£)f43*.
With the text move White wants to disturb the knight on g6, which is quite unable to find a safe shelter, and also to weaken the dark squares on the kingside.
8. »	i.f8-d6
8...h5 is worse, since then White gains the excellent gS-square for his knight: 9.4}gS £d6 10.fJ 0-0 11 .Wc2±.
ft h4-h5	£g6-f8!
The right place for this knight is on d7, where it will be able to support its colleague on f6. On e7 the knight is very badly placed, preventing Black from coordinating his pieces. Here are some approximate variations:
9...£ie7 10.h6andnow:
B) 10...a6!?:
Bl)	U.hxg7 Sg8 12.&g5 Sxg7 13.£>ge4 4ieg8 14,#}xd6+ (14.£)g3 3xg3! 1 S.fxg3 e4 16.^e2 bS 17.Ab3 Ag4 18>с2 Axe2 19.Фхе2 Wc8®) 14...Wxd6*±;
B2)	11 Wd3!? (A. Sokolov) ll...gxh6 12.£>e4 Фхе4 1 3.Wxe4 £jg6 14.3xh6 fS 15.Wc2 Ad7 16.JiLd2 We7 17.0-0-0 0-0-0 18.fldhl Hdg8±;
B3)	ll.^gS! gxh6 12.£)ge4 ^xe4 13.2>xe4&g6 14.1Ixh6f5 15.Wh5±;
C) 10...g6 11.e4 Ag4 12.Wa4+ Ad7 13>c2 0-0 14.AgS 6te8 15.0-0-0± (Smyslov-Rogers, London 1988).
10. h5-h6
If 10.e4, then 10...h6=, taking control of the gS-square and preventing h5-h6.
10. -	g7-g6
There are too many holes in Black’s position after !0...gxh6? 1 Цв1Ь5+ (in order to also weaken the fS-square) 11 ...J&.d7 12.^ЬЗ, for example: 12...a6 13.JaLxd7+ &8xd7 14.e4b5 15.аЗ Дс5 16.&h4Hg8 17.f3 hS 18.Wc2 Wb8 19,<£fS Wb6 2O.^h6 3g6 21 .Hdl± (Kiriakov-Moro-zevich, Moscow 1993).
11. e3-e4?l
Now Black succeeds in solving all his opening problems. 1 l.£ib5 is interesting, for example: 1 l...Ag4	(ll...a6
12.£xd6+ Wxd6oo) 12.Wa4 2>8d7 13.^xd6+ cxd6 14.&h2 0-0 15.&xg4 £)xg4 16.Ae2 (16 .fi.b5 £gf6T) 16...f5 17.ilxg4^b6 18.Wb4a5oo.
1	4 1
All	A	l
 A №&

11. ..	41f8-d7=
12. Ac1-g5
179
Chapter Three - Section В
An unclear position results from 12.$Jg5 аб 13.fi 4Jf8 14.g4 (14.ДеЗ ^hSoo) 14...£lg8 15.ДеЗ ^e7oo. 15...f6 is less good in view of 16.4Je6 (16.&113 g5 17.£>f2 $Jg6 18.flh2 <£f7 19.4Л11 Wf8 2O.^g3	2>xh6?)
16...^Jxe6 17.dxe6t.
12.	...	a7-a6
As we have already seen several times, this is a useful move in all respects. It is not bad to cover the b5-square, and it is not bad to have the possibility of playing ...b7-b5 at the required moment... Nevertheless, is it not possible for Black, if not to manage without ...a7-a6 altogether, then at least postpone the advance of the rook’s pawn for some time? Here are some approximate variations:
12...	0-0 13.£ki2 and now:
A)	13.Де2 Jte7 14.0-0 2>e8 15.jSle3 (15.Дхе7 ^xe7 16.Яс1 аб 17.Wd2 4Jd6oo) 15...£d6 16.Пс1 аб 17.a4 f5 18.exf5 gxfST;
B)	13.Wc21? аб 14.0-0-0 b5 15.Де2 £k5 16.2)d2±.
13... Де7 14.ДеЗ Дс5 15.We2 (15.jS.xc5 &xc5 16.b4 £>cd7 17.£>b3 2>e8 18.^d2	19.jS.e2 £b6 20.^a5
J«Ld7 21.Пс1 Ф118 22.f3 f5^) 15..>e7 16.£b3 ДхеЗ 17.Wxe3 2)e8 18.0-0-0
2O...a4
(20...b6 21.a4! Даб 22.ФЫ £>b7
23 .Дхаб йхаб and now:
А) 24.Пс1 #Jdc5 25.4Jxc5 4Jxc5 2б.Фа2 Wd7 27.b3 f5 28.f3 (28.exf5 Wxf5 29.f3 £d3 30.2>e4! £xcl +
31.flxcl±) 28...fxe4 29.fxe4 Baa8?i;
В) 24.Фа2 fiaa8 25.£lb5	Wb4!
26.#Jxc7 Wxa4+ 27.ФЫ Дас8<®;
C)	24.#Jb5 2>dc5 25.#Jxc5 2)xc5 26.b3 Saa8 27.fi f5 28.exf5 IxfS 29.&d4 Hf4 3O.g3±)
21 ,&d2 Ь6 22.ФЫ £Jc5 23.fi JS.d7?.
Let us return to die Beliavsky-Morozevich game.
13.	£tf3-d2
White played badly in one of the first games in which this pawn structure occurred: 13.a4?! 0-0 14.^е2Де7 15.fldl $Je8 1б.Дс1 4Jd6 17.JS.d3 £f6 18.$Jd2 £k5 19.&С4 £)b3 2O.jS.e3 £id4 21 ,JSjcd4 exd4 22.<£>bl ДИ7 23.b3 b5 24.axb5 axbS 25.4kd2 Sa2 26.ficl He8 27.Пс2 Hxc2 28.JS.xc2 c6 29.dxc6 Дхеб 30.0-0 AgS 31.f4 ДхЬб 32.e5 f6 33.4jf3 Axf4 34.£}xd4 HxeS 0-1 (Khalifman-Moro-zevich, Yalta 1995).
13.Де2 is better, with die following approximate variations: 13...0-0 (13...Де7!?) 14.4Jd2 Де7 15.ДеЗ (15.Sk4? 2>xd5+) 15...Дс5 16.$k4 (1б.Дхс5!? $Jxc5 17.b4 Sted7 18.$k4 £e8 19.Wd2 &d6 20.0-0±) 16...b5 17.Дхс5 Фхс5 18.4ixe5 #Jcxe4 19.4Jxe4 $Jxe4 20.^d4 &f6 21.0-0 (21JS.f3 Wd6 (21...ДЬ7? 22.4Jg4±) 22.0-0 cSoo) 21...WxdS (21...3e8 22.ДВ ^d6 23.fifel±) 22.Wxd5 4Jxd5 23JS.fi ДЬ7 24jS.xd5 JSjcdS 25.4id7 Hfd8 26.£>f6+ $h8 27.Hfdl c6 28.g4 g5!=.
180
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
13.	•••	0-0
14.	д2-дз	i.d6-e7
15.	f2-f4	b7-b5
16.	Дс4-Ь3	Ac8-b7
17.	Wd1-f3	c7-c5
18.	0-0-0	c5-c4
19.	d5-d6	Ae7xd6
20.	£d2xc4	b5xc4
21.	2d1xd6	Wd8-c7
22.	2d6xf6	
30.	Sd1-d4	a6-a5
31.	^f3-e3	2e6xh6
32.	We3xg5+ 2h6-g6	
33.	Wg5-e3	h7-h6
34.	лс1-Ь1	ig8-h7
35.	2d4-d2	£Ь7хе4+
36.	We3xe4	5c8xc3
37.	e5-e6	ПсЗ-еЗ
White resigned.
Also in the event of 22.fxe5 it all ‘comes together’ for Black: 22...Фхе4 23.Hxd7 Wxd7 24.£lxe4 cxb3 25.£}f6+ Ф118 26.^ixd7 kxf3-+.
22.	.-	C4xb3
23.	a2xb3	2a8-c8
24.	Sh1-e1	£d7xf6
25.	Ag5xf6	Wc7-b6
GAME S6
□ Vadim Milov
 Alexander Morozevich
Tilburg 1994
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-с6
3.	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	£ig8-f6
5.	Дс1-д5	
X	X
AAA AAA A
AA
a
One of those cases when there’s many a slip ‘twixt cup and lip! How to bring the queen tog7?
28. £e7-d6
28.Wf6 does not work on account of 28...ДхсЗ + 29.bxc3 Wxc3+ 30.&Ы ^xel +	31.ФЬ2 Wd2+ 32.ФаЗ
Wxh6—1-. There is no mate, and White is a rook down.
28. _.	2e8-e6
29. He1-d1	g6-g5
A move aimed at a large-scale and complicated battle. It contains something from the Botvinnik Variation and something from the currently fashionable Anti-Moscow Variation...
5. .-	h7-h6
The little-studied move 5...4ki5, which has been successfully employed by Igor Miladinovic, is also interesting. For example: 6.e4 £ixc3 7.bxc3 f6 (7...^a$!?
181
Chapter Three - Section В
8.&d2 bS 9.Де2 h6 10.Jlh4 c5*± Di Caro-Miladinovic, Rome 2005) 8.ДеЗ ^aS 9.2>d2 сб 10Axc4 g6 (10...Ae6?? ll.Wh5+ 1-0 Iskusnikh-Tishin, St Petersburg 2001) ll.Wc2 Деб 12.&d2 jLg7 13.Де2 0-0 14.0-0 f5 IS.exfS AxfS 16.Wa4 ФЬ8 17.Hadi bS 18>a3 Деб** (Gelfand-Miladinovic, Belgrade 1995).
6. Дд5-Ъ4
б	.ДхГб will be considered separately.
6.	..	a7-a6l?
A) 6...g5 7.Ag3 a6 8.d5 £aS 9.e4 сб 10.dxc6 Wxdl + ILflxdl £ixc6 12_Дхс4 Ag7 13.h4 g4 14.£\e5 0-0 15.£1xc6 Ьхсб 16.h5± (vaska-Moroze-vich.ICC 1999);
B) 6...e6 7.e3 2>a5 8.£ie5 a6 9>a4+ (9.^xc4 c5 10.Hcl±) 9...c6 10.^xc4 &xc4 ll.Wxc4 Wb6 12.0-0-0 Ad7 13.e4 WaS?! 14>b3 b5 15.eS 2>dS 16.^e4 c5 17.dxc5± (Dreev-Moroze-vich, Alushta 1994).
In both lines the play favours White
7.	d4-d5?l
7	.e4 bS 8.d5 £iaS is more accurate, obtaining by force the position from the next diagram, which Black could have avoided after the move order chosen by Milov.
If in reply to 7.e4 Black plays 7...Ag4, then 8.d5 £eS 9.Ag3 £fd7 1О.Де2 is unpleasant, for example: 10...JaLxf3 ll.gxf3 g6 12.f4 2>d3+ 13.£xd3 cxd3 14.Wxd3 Д87 15.0-0-0 4kS 16.Wc4 Wd6 17.f5 Bb6 18.fxg6 fxg6 19.eS 0-0-0 2O.Hhel± (Ivanchuk-Ghibukh-chian, Yerevan 2004).
7.	—	Cc6-a5
8.	e2-e4	Ь7-Ь5?!
Better is 8...c6!? 9.dxc6 Wxd 1 + 10.Дxd 1 Ь5 (10...21XC6 11 Дхс4±; 10...bxc6
ll.Ag3 Йа7 12.Де2±) ll.eS (ll.&dS Па7 12.^b6 Пс7оо) IL.gS 12.Ag3 £diS 13.^d5Sa7oo.
9.	e4-e5
A)	9.b4 cxb3 10.axb3 is not dangerous for Black in view of 10...e6 11 .UxaS ДЬ4 12.ДхЬ5+ Ad7 13.Axd7+ Wxd7 14.Па4 ДхсЗ+ 15.<A’e2exdS=;
B)	A fitting reply can also be found against the plan with queenside castling: 9.Wc2 сб (9...g5 10.Ag3 Ag7 11.0-0-0 0-0 is worse because of 12.e5 4}h5 13 .h4 ^Axg3 14.fxg3 g4 15.4}gS hxgS 16.hxg5 fle8 17>h7+ ФГ8 18.e6 Wd6 19.exf7 ixf7 20.&XC4 £1xc4 21.1Idfl++-) 10.0-0-0 cxds ll.eS b4 12.exf6 bxc3 13lxe7 (13.Wxc3 gxf6oo) 13...cxb2+ (13...Дхе7 14Jjce7 Wxe7 15.Wxc3±) 14.Wxb2 Axe7 15.Wxg7 HfB (15...ДаЗ+?! 1б.Фс2 £fS+ 17.ФсЗ!+-) 16_&xe7 Wxe7 17.1Ixd5 £еб 18.Дха5 Wb4 19.We5 c3 2O.Ab5+ Фе7<х>.
9.	..	Ь5-Ь4
Regarding 9...g5, see the following game 10. e5xf6
Equality results from 10 Wa4+ сб ll.dxc6 ЬхсЗ 12.c7+ Wd7 13.Wxa5 cxb2 14.ЙЫ WbS! 15.Wxb5+ axbS 16.Hxb2 (16.exf6oo Дха2 17.Де2 exf6 18.0-0 JlcST is advantageous to Black) 16...^d5 17.AxbS 2ixc7=.
182
Defending and Developing: 3.<£k3 dxc4 4,<Sf3
10.	—	Ь4хсЗ
11.	Ь2хсЗ	e7xf6
12.	Wd 1-a44-
Nothing is given by 12.Axc4 сб!
13.We2+ We7=.
12.	..	c7-c6
13.	d5xc6l
The strongest After 13.Axc4 Ad7= Black obtains equal chances. Also in the event of 13.fldl Wb6 14.d6 gS (14...Wb5 is worse: 15.Wa3 (15.Wc2 AfS 16.We24-&d7 17.£\d4 WdS 18.W5 Wxf5^) 15..AfS 16.Ae2 d?d7 17.0-0±) Black successfully defends: 15.Ag3 (15.Axc4 £ixc4 16.Wxc4 Ae6 17.d7+ *£ч18Т) I S...Ag7 1 6.Axc4 (16.^d2 0-0 1 7.2)xc4 He8+ 18.Ae2 £1xc4 19.Wxc4 Ae6<») 16...&ХС4 17.Wxc4 0-0 18.0-0 (18.d7 Axd7 19.flxd7 Wbl+ 20.Hdl Efe8+ 21.£d2 Bad8+ 22.&d4a>) 18...Ae6 19.Wb4 Wxb4 2O.cxb4f5.
13.	...	Wd8-e74-
14.	Af1-e2	We7-a3
Thanks to this manoeuvre, Black saves his knight which is stuck on die edge of the board.
15.	Wa4xa3
1 $ Wc2 is bad because of 15...AfS 16.Wxf5 Wxc3+ 17.*fl Wxal4-18.£el Ab4-».
15.	- Af8xa3
16.	0-0?
Now Black brings his knight back into play, at the same time eliminating the dangerous pawn, and his life returns to nor mal. And yet White had the possibility of a very strong exchange sacrifice: 16.£ki4! Ab2 17.<&d2! Axal 18.flxal Ae6 19.3bl±. Both bishops, knight and rook are ready to support the dangerous passed сб-pawn, whereas the knight at aS is still off side. Black faces a difficult defence.
16.	-	£:a5xc6
17.	Ae2xc4	0-0?
The сЗ-pawn is weak and the bishop on h4 is idle - Black’s chances are now preferable
1&	Ac4-d5	Ac8-d7
19.	Bf1-d1	Ha8-c8
20.	Sa1-b1	Zf8-d8
21.	h2-h3	Ad7-e6
22.	c3-c4	£>c6-a5?
22...Af8!T is better. Now the position		
becomes equal.		
23.	Ed1-d3!	Aa3-f8
24.	Eb1-d1 =	Ed8-e8
25.	Ed1-e1	<a5xc4
26.	Ad5-b7	Ec8-c5
27.	Ab7xa6	Se8-a8
28.	Aa6-b7??	
A mistake on almost level ground. Of course, 28.Axc4 Sxc4 29.Ag3 Ecc8= was correct
I 83
Chapter Three - Section В
2a ..	Sa8-a7
29. M>7-e4 f6-f5
Unexpectedly, the bishop is trapped in the middle of tire board! White resigned.
GAME 57
□ Vladimir Kramnik
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow Region 2002 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ь8-с6
3.	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£sg1-f3	£g8-f6
5.	М1-д5	h7-h6
6.	Ag5-h4	a7-a6
7.	d4-d5	£>c6-a5
8.	e2-e4	Ь7-Ь5
9.	e4-e5	g7-g5l?
something of a strange impression: dur-
ing the 12 years following that Tilburg tournament the position after 9.e5 did not occur once in official events! Moreover, it was assiduously avoided not only by Black, but also by White, although, as we have seen, after the correct move 16.^d4! instead of 16.0-0? he would have gained a great advantage, and it is not at all easy to improve Black’s play between the 10th and 1 Sth moves. But then in a training blitz match the world champion Vladimir Kramnik displayed healthy optimism and encountered a new continuation - 9...g5!? instead of 9...b4.
10.	£h4-g3	4tf6-h5
11.	e5-e6	£jh5xg3
12.	ЗДЗ-е5
White has a mass of tempting alternatives: A) 12.Wd4!?;
B) 12.exf7+!? &xf7 13.£e5+ &f6! 14.Wd4 (14.hxg3 Фхе5Т) 14...C5! 15.£}g4+ &g6 16.Wxh8 Jkxg4 17.hxg3 Ag7 18.^xd8 5xd8®;
C) 12.hxg3 Ag7 13>c2 2ffi7 14.0-0-0 &f8 (14...£d6 15.^xg5!+-) 15.2>e4 (15.-S.e2! £d6 16.£d4±) 15...£kl6 16.£texg5 hxgS 17.Hxh8+ Mch8 18.^xg5 Мб 19>h7?? Mcg5+ 2O.f4 Мб 21Jke2 fxe6 22.M3 0b8 23.Де1 сб 24.dxe6 WaS 25.Пе2 Wxa2 26.fie5 c3 27.bxc3 Дхеб 0-1 (Kramnik-Morozevich, Moscow Region 2002).
184
Defending and Developing: 3. £k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
12.	..	И8-д7!
13.	£ie5xf7	£jg3xh1
14.	£>f7xd8
In case of 14.WhS Black also balances on a tightrope: 14...0-0	15.€lxd8 flxd8
16.W(7+ ФЬ8 17>хе7 ДхебО 18.dxe6 Пе8 (18...£te6 loses to 19.Wxc7 £>b4 20JIdl &c2+ 21.Фе2 £d4+ 22.Hxd4 £Lxd4 23.Wc6 Ha7 24.g3 Se7 25 J.g2+-) 19.Wf7 £W2!? 20.e7 (20.&xf2 ПГ8 21.Де 2 £Lxf7+ 22.exf7 £d4+ 23.<±>g3 Ш8?; 2O.£dS Феб 21.e7 2>g4oo) 2O...£k6 21.ФхГ2 Пхе7 22.Wd5 Bf8+ 23.$g 1 Hef7 24.Де2 &d4 25.ДЬЗ HfW.
14.	..	ie8xd8
Black has more than sufficient material for the queen - a rook and two minor pieces. The bishop at g7 and the rook on f8 are well placed, but in general his forces are disunited, his queenside is practically frozen, and the knight on h 1 is about to be lost. However, all this could be endured, but for Black’s main misfortune: his bad king. If its pawn shell is scratched off, it will prove completely defenceless. At blitz tempo Black was unable to solve this problem. Perhaps in home analysis the readers may improve his play?
17.	..	£b7-d6
In the event of 17...c3 18.bxc3 b4 there is the unpleasant 19.Bcl±!.
18.	<be4xd6 c4-c3
Also after 18...Bxf2 19.4tf7+ Фе8 20 Wa5 Ba7 21.a4± Black’s position leaves a lot to be desired.
19.	Ь2хсЗ
19.We3 cxb2 20.Bbl BxfZ 21.4tf7+ Фе8 22.Де2-1— would also have won.
19.
20. f2-f4
21. g3xf4
22. Sa1-c1
c7xd6 g5xf4 Дс8-Ь7 Sa8-c8
25.	Wa5-b6
The queen enters the enemy camp. Enormous losses fcr Black are now inevitable
25.	..	JLb7xd5
26.	c4xd5 Sc8xc1 +
27.	d?e1-d2	Hc1-c8
28.	Wb6-b7
Black resigned.
GAME 58
□ Vladimir Kramnik
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. c2-c4	£b8-c6
185
Chapter Three - Section В
a	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	4£8-f6
5.	Ac1-g5	h7-h6
6.	Ag5xf6	
This move has enjoyed a certain popularity in recent years, probably for the reason that it allows all these wild complications after 6. Ah4 a6 to be avoided.
6.	-	e7xf6
7.	e2-e3	Af8-d6
White stands better after 7...4ia5 8.Axc4 4jxc4 9.'Йга4+ Ad7 10.Wxc4 Ad6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Sacl±
8.	Af1xc4
White’s minor pieces are occupying optimal positions and his pawn centre resembles an impregnable cliff. To counter this Black must try, with the support of his two bishops, to advance his pawns on one of the flanks. Which side he chooses will depend on where the white king castles.
a .. o-o
This was the course taken in another blitz game with Kramnik: 8...a6 9.a3 fS 10.Wc2 0-0 11.0-0 Ad7 (Black should not be in a hurry to move the knight fromc6: 11...4W?! 12.Eadl сб 13.Aa2 Wc7 14.^a4b6 15. Ecl ПЬ8 16.b4Ae6 1 7.Axe6 fxe6 18.4te5 bxcS 19.bxc5 Axh2+ 20.£xh2 eS 21.Wc4+ *h7
22.dxe5 WxeS 23.&f3 We4 24.Sfdl Wxc4 25.Дхс4 ДЬЗ 26.Да4± P.H.Niel-sen-Brynell, Stockholm 2000/01) 12.g3 ФЬ8 13.Hfel gS 14.Eadl Wf6 IS.^dS Wg7 16.Ad3 f4 17.exf4 Ag4 18.Ae2 gxf4 19.4}h4?l (this allows die following combination; 19?Bfd2 Sae8<® was better) 19...fxg3!? 20.hxg3 Axg3! 21.fxg3! £lxd4 22Wd2	41xe2+
23.Hxe2 Axe2 24.4/5 (24>xe2 Wxg3+ 25.4ig2 Ead8+) 24...Wg5 2S.WxgS hxg5+ 26.Sd2 Дае8 27.4Ade7 Дхе7 28.4ixe7 Ag4 29.EdS Деб 30Exg5 Ed8 31.Ь4 Ф117 32.Дс5 сб 33.4/5 Ed3—4, and Black won (Kramnik-Morozevich, Moscow Region 2002).
9.	a2-a3	f6-f5
Here are two more examples from recent events:
9...	a6 10.Wc2 Де8 11.0-0 fS 12.fladl Wf 6 and now:
A)	13.4jdS Wd8 14.4/4 Wf6 15.g3 Ad7 16.b4± (Agrest-Brynell, Skara 2002);
B)	13.Efel Ad7 14.b4 gS IS.Afl g4 16.4Ш hS 17.41c4 2>e7 18.e4 fxe4 19.2>xe4 Wg6 20.Ad3 Wh6 21.4texd6 cxd6 22.Wc7+— (Schandorff-Willsch, Germany Bundesliga 2004/05).
186
Defending and Developing. 3.£)c3 <ixc44.£)f3
Black carried out an unsuccessful plan in the following game: 10.0-0 £1е7?! 1 1Wc2 2>g6 12.g3 сб 13.Б4 We7 14.Ad3 Wf6 1S.£d2 He8 16.b5 Ad7 17.bxc6 Ьхсб 18.4Ja4 Sad8 19.Hfel hS 20.£>c5 &c8 21.Afl± (P.H.Nielsen-Rabiega, Germany Bundesliga 2000/01).
10.	•ее	a7-a6
11.	^d1-c2	g7-g6
12.	h2-h4	Фд8-д7
13.	0-0-0	Ea8-b8
14.	h4-h5	g6-g5
15.	£c4-d3	Zc6-e7
16.	<f3-e5	
16.d5!? with the idea of £Jd4 came into
consideration.
16.		Ь7-Ь5
17.	f2-f4	g5-g4
18.	e3-e4	f5xe4
19.	£юЗхе4	Ь5-Ь4
20.	a3xb4	Sb8xb4
S
A#   фа П
21. d4-d5?
An oversight. White should have played 21.Jei.c4 Ж15 22 She 1 with a sharp position.
21.	..	JLd6xe5
22.	f4xe5	Wd8xd5
23.	Eh1-e1
23.4if6 Wc6T was more tenacious.
23.	...	»c8-e6
24.	?e4-c5	Wd5-a2
25.	Wc2-b1 Wa2-a5
26.	£>c5xa6
This loses immediately, but 26 Wc2 would not have saved White either: 26...5fb8 27.£>xe6+ fxe6 28.Де4 2xb2 29 Wxb2 Hxb2 30.ФхЬ2 £}dS-+.
26.	..	Eb4-b6
27.	Ь2-Ь4	Eb6-c64-?
With the flags about to fall, the two players trade mistakes. 27...Wa3+ 28.Wb2 Exa6—+ was correct.
28.	Фс1-Ь2?
28.£k5+ would have enabled White to prolong the struggle.
28. . Wa5-a4
White resigned.
1. d2-d4
2. c2-c4
3. 4Jb1-c3
4. £g1-f3
5. e2-e4
d7-d5 £ib8-c6 d5xc4 £g8-f6 vc8-g4
One of the most critical positions in the Chigorin Defence. With his Sth move White has created an ideal pawn centre, and Black has immediately attacked the d4-pawn. Now White has two main continuations: he can advance his pawn (6.d5) or he can bring on an extra defender (б.АеЗ).
187
Chapter Three - Section В
GAME 59
□ Anatoly Karpov
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 2001 (blitz)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	I:b8-c6
3.	£Ы-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	£g8-f6
5.	e2-e4	Ac8-g4
6.	d4-d5	
Black replies to the pin with 6.Wa4 in a way with which we are already familiar -transferring his king's knight to b6: 6...&d7 (6...Axf3 7.gxf3 ^d7 8.d5 £ceS 9. Wdl g6 10.f4 4kl3+ ll.Axd3 cxd3 12.Ae3 Ag7 13Wxd3 0-0 14.0-0-0±) 7.d5 &b6 8.Wdl &e5 9.Ae2Axf3 10.gxf3e6oo.
The following temporary pawn sacrifice does not bring White any particular benefits: 6.Axc4 Axf3 (6...e6 7.AbS Ab4 8.Wa4±) 7.gxf3 Wxd4 (7...&xd4 8.Ae3 cS 9.Axd4 cxd4 10.Ab5+ 4id7 llWxd4 аб 12.Axd7+ Wxd7 13.Wxd7+ &xd7±) 8.Wb3 0-0-0 9.Axf7e5 Ю.АеЗ Wb4=.
6. —	tc6-e5
Queen’s Gambit Accepted via the move order 1 .d4 dS 2.c4 dxc4 З.е4 Феб 4.£>f3 Ag4 S.dS^eS 6.2>c3 4tf6.
7. Ac1-f4
In an old game White gained a slight advantage after 7.Axc4 £1xc4 8.Wa4+ £k!7 9.Wxc4e5 lO.AgS f6 ll.Ae3± (Wade-Kortchnoi, Buenos Aires 1960). However, for some reason this idea did not find any followers; perhaps on account of the interesting reply 8...c6!?, which remained off-stage.
7.Wd4 looks promising for White, for example: 7...£ixf3+ 8.gxf3 Axf3 9.Hgl e6 10.flg3	(10.Axc4 exdS ll.cxdS
(11.exdS Ad6 12.Hxg7 We7+ 13.Ae3 AeSoo) 1 L.^xdS 12Axd5c6 13.We5+ We7T; lO.AgS Ae7T) 10...AhS H.Axc4 c6 12.Ae3 (12.Af4 Wb6 13.Wxb6 (13.Wd2 0-0-0 14.Hcl exdS IS.exdS Ab4T) 13...axb6 14.dxe6 bS 15.exf7+ Axf7 16.Axf7+ &xf7 17.eS?! &h5 18.fif3 Феб?; 12.Ag5 Ae7=) 12...a6!? 13.dxe6 (13.ФЯ bST) 13..fxe6 14.Axe6 We7 15 Wc4 Af7 16.Axf7+ Wxf7 17.Wxf7+&xf7 18.0-0-0!±.
7. _	£tf6-d7
White stands better after 7...Axf3 8.gxf3 (8.Wa4+ Wd7 9.£b5 Wg4!!-4-) 8...&g6?! 9.Ae3 eS 10.dxe6 fxe6 1 1.Axc4 2>e5 !2.Ae2 (12.Axe6!?) 12...Ab4 13.Wa4+ S)c6 14.fldl We7 IS.AbS 0-0 16.Axc6 Ьхсб 17.Wxc6± (Razuvaev-haijia, ICC 2003).
However, 8...Wd6! is far stronger, for example:
A) 9.Wa4+ 4tfd7 lO.AxeS (10.0-0-0 2>d3+ ll.Sxd3 Wxf4+ 12.Se3 аб) 10...Wxe5 И.АЬЗ e6 (ll...Hd8 12.Axd7+ Hxd7 13.Wxa7 g6 14.Wxb7 Ah6 15.Wa8+ Hd8 16.Wc6+ &f8 17.Wxc4) 12.dxe6 fxe6 13.Wxc4 0-0-0 (13...^)c5 14.0-0-0 aS) 14.Wxe6 ФЬ8 15.0-0-0 Ad6 (or 15...Wf4+ 16.ФЫ Ad6);
188
Defending and Developing: 3. £k3 dxc4 4. £)f3
B) 9.Axc4 0-0-0 10.jSl.g3 4J1S (10...h5 ll.h4) llAel Wf6 (ll...g6 12.f4; Il...g5 12.Ж14 Ag7 13 Wxa7 Wb4 14.0-0) 12.Пс1 (12.4Jb5 a6 13.&xc7 Фхс7 14.f4 *£>xg3 IS.fxeS WxeS I6.hxg3) I 2...e6 (12...ФБ8 13.2Jb5 £jxg3 14.hxg3 сб) 13.0-0 (13.4Jb5!?) 13...ФЬ8 with an unclear position.
Thus 7...J«Lxf3 constitutes a serious alternative to 7...£}fd7 and 7...£)g6 (this popular move will be examined later).
8. Jkf4xe5
An unpretentious, but very unpleasant continuation. White simply exchanges the opponent’s active pieces and thanks to his advantage in space and development he gains the better chances.
Let us consider the alternatives:
А) 8.Де2 JiLxf3 9.gxf3 e6 10.dxe6 fxe6 11 Ag3 Ab4 12.f4 £d3 + 13 .Axd3 cxd3 14.Wxd3 &c5 1 S.Wc4 ДхсЗ+ 16.bxc3 Wd3 17.Wxd3 &xd3+ 18.Фе2 0-0-0?* (Lalic-Kraut, Belfort 1989);
B) 8.Wd4
Bl) 8...C5 9.We3 Axf3 lO.gxfJ g6 11.0-0-0 (ll.AxeS £xeS 12.f4 Ah6 13.Wg3 #Jd3+	14.Axd3 cxd3«>)
ll...JeLg7 (И...ПЬ8!?) 12.jSl.h6 JSlf6? (12...ДхЬб 13.Wxh6 ^3xf3 14.jS.xc4 Wb6±) 13.2g 1 !± (Razuvaev-Moroze-vich, Moscow 1993);
B2) 8...W3+! 9.gxf3 eS 10.dxe6 (lO.jSlxeS jSlc5+) 1О...Дхе6 ll.jSlxc4 jSlxc4 1 2>xc4 сб 1 3.0-0-0 Wf6«>;
C) White also has the rather unpleasant move 8.#a4!?, which for the moment has hardly been tested in practice, but which may cause Black considerable problems. Therefore we recommend that the latter should focus his attention on the idea 7...jSLxf3 8.gxf3 Wd6!?.
8.	_. £Jd7xe5
9.	Jkf1xc4
White would have obtained a dangerous initiative with 9.Wd4 <£uxf3+ 10.gxf3 Ad7?! 1 l.jSLxc4 e6 12J3gl c5 13>e5 Wb8 14.Wg5 bS 15.dxe6 fxe6 16.jSt.e2 b4 17.$Jdl *xh2 18.^e3t (Ulko-Barsky, Moscow 1996). Black should have captured the offered pawn - 10...Axf3! ll.flgl Wd7 12.2g3 Ah5 13>xc4 ебоо.
9.	~ £je5xc4
10.	Wd1-a4+ Wd8-d7
11.	Wa4xc4 jkg4xf3
12.£}e5 was threatened, and in general it is not easy for the light-squared bishop to find employment.
12.	g2xf3
12.	-	g7-g6?l
This logical move - after all, Black needs above all to solve the problem of his
189
Chapter Three - Section В
kingside development — allows White to develop unpleasant pressure. But what can be suggested instead?
The typical undermining move 12...c6 (at the same time restricting the knight on c3) runs into 13.Wd4 cxdS (or 13...e6 14.0-0-0) 14.0-0-0!, and it is very hard for Black to come up with a good next move For example: 14...f6 IS.^xdS ^c6+ 16.ФЫ eS 17.^d3±.
However, the computer recommendation 12...0-0-0!? is very interesting. The move seems quite crazy, since Whites hands appear to be freed for an attack on the queenside. But it transpires that they are not entirely freed, since his own king is not exactly sitting on a cloud either, for example: 13.Wd4 (13.Hcl ^>b8 14.0-0 еб?*) 13...ФЬ8 14.a4 аб 15.b4 (15.0-0 Wh3 with the threat of JId8-d6-h6;	15.&e2 еб) 15...e5
16.Wc4 Wh3 17.Фе2 3d6?*. The rook heads for f6, where it will press on the f3-pawn and simultaneously defend the
6th rank.		
13.	4ic3-b5!	c7-c6
14.	d5xc6	b7xc6
15.	Sa1-d1	Wd7-b7
16.	Wc4-c3	Hh8-g8
17.	<5b5-d4	Af8-g7
18.	b2-b4±	
Wliite has created and fixed the weakness chi сб, and also detained the opponents king in the centre. Black has no counterplay and his position is unpleasant to defend.
18. ..	Sa8-c8
19. Wc3-c4	jig7-e5
20. Sd1-c1	Фе8-Г8
21. £d4xc6	Zc8xc6
22. Wc4xc6	Wb7xb4+
23. £e1-f1	£f8-g7
24. Wc6-d5	Wb4-b2
25. &f1-g2	e7-e6
26. Wd5-a5	&g7-f6
27. Hc1-d1	g6-g5
28. Sd1-d2	Wb2-b8
29. h2-h3	h7-h5
30. Sd2-d7	g5-g4
31. h3xg4	h5xg4
32. Wa5xa7	g4xf3+
33. £>g2xf3	Wb8-f8
34. Hh1-h7	if6-g6
35. Sd7xf7	Wf8-d8
36. Hfa7-e3	Wd8-d1 +
37. We3-e2	<d1-g1
38. We2-d2	Ae5*g7
39. Sf7xg7+ 4й ^d2-h6+	Sg8xg7
Black resigned.
GAME 60
□ Alexander Baburin
 Igor Miladinovic
St Vincent 2000
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	^Ь8-с6
3.	£Ы-сЗ	£\g8-f6
4.	£>g1-f3	d5xc4
5.	e2-e4	Jlc8-g4
6.	d4-d5	£ic6-e5
7.	£c1-f4	£ie5-g6
190
Defending and Developing: 3.4bc3 dxc4 4.£)f3
««A 1-lAftA  **
A A A A A а ал..' s
A

The most analysed move and, according to statistics, the safest one for Black. By gaining time with the attack on the bishop, he succeeds in playing ...e7-e5. He thereby stabilizes the situation in the centre and prepares the evacuation of his king to g8.
8.	Jkf4-e3
Or 8.JaLg3 eS 9.Axc4 &d6 10.AbS+ J5.d7 ll.JLxd7+ Wxd7 12.&d2 0-0 13.0-0 Дас8 14.Wb3 hS IS.^ft сб 16.Eadl Hfd8 17.dxc6 Wxc6 18.2>g5 lift 19.ft h4 20J.f2 AcS₽t (Kekelidze-Quinn, St Vincent 2005).
8, -	e7-e5
If 8...e6, then 9.Wa4+ Wd7 10.Wxd7+ £}xd7 11 .£ki4 is unpleasant.
9.	JLf1xc4
In reply to 9.dxe6 Axe6 10.4id4 Black has a promising pawn sacrifice: 10...£)g4 11 ,<<ixe6 Wxdl + 12.1Ixdl fxe6 13.JLxc4 £}xe3 14.fxe3 JbLcS 15.Дхе6 сб® (Gor-mally-Baburin, Bunratty 1998).
9.	.-	a7-a6
10.	0-0
In the opinion of the well-known theoretician Yury Razuvaev, White can count on a slight advantage after 10.h3 Ad7 11.0-0 -£td6 12.Пе1 h6 13-fi.fi 0-0 14.&d2±. This is a fairly standard position; as we have seen, with the given structure Black has his counterchances.
10.	«. Af8-d6
11. Ac4-e2 4g4-d7
12. 2rf3-d2
12. -.	b7-b5
12...0-0 occurs more often, but then too White keeps the initiative Here are two examples, not the most uplifting ones for Black, but fairly representative:
A) 13.Scl bS 14.a3 c5 15.dxc6 Axc6 16.2ia4 Дс8 17.&C5 Stf4 18.Axf4 exf4 19.4hca6 Wb6 2O.£ib4 jkxb4 21axb4 £lxe4 22.4bce4 Дхе4 23.Wd7 Uxcl 24.Пхс1 ft 2S.gxft Wf6 26.Пс8± (A. Kuzmin-Baburin, Andorra 1998);
B) 13.^c4 Ab4 14.Wd3 bS 15.^d2 jLd6?! (15...C6!) 16.Wc2£)g4 17.£xg4 jLcg4 18.&b3	19.ft Дс8 2O.flfel
fS 21.jfi.xf4 exf4 22.e5 Ab4 23.fladl jfi.b7 24.Wd2 WgS 25.a3± (Lugovoi-M. Ivanov, Moscow 1998).
Miladinovic takes control of the bS-square in good time, but now White immediately directs his fire against this pawn.
13.	a2-a4	Ha8-b8
14.	a4xb5	a6xb5
15.	Wd1-b3	Ь5-Ь4
16.	£ic3-a4	fcf6-g4
17.	jLe2xg4	4d7xg4
18.	f2-f3	A.g4-d7
19.	^a4-c5	£d7-b5
20.	ПН-С1	£g6-f4
21.	Jke3xf4	e5xf4
22.	Wb3xb4	0-0
191
Chapter Three - Section В
the pawn: White’s centre is very solid and for the moment the bishops cannot significantly expand. Although, of course, it is also not easy for White to convert his material advantage.
23.	£d2-b3	J5.d6-e5
24.	£>b3-d4	Jib5-e8
25.	Wb4-d2?
This allows the undermining of the dS-pawn, after which the black bishops finally gain some freedom of movement. 25.^c3 was better.
25.		c7-c6!
26.	£Jd4-b3	c6xd5
27.	e4xd5	f7-f6
28.	Фд1-М	Jke8-f7
29.	Sc1-d1	^d8-b6
30.	Да1-а6	Wb6-b5
Draw.
GAME 61
□ Vasily Gagarin
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 1996 (rapid)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	£Ъ8-с6
3.	£ib1-c3	d5xc4
4.	4ig1-f3	£jg8-f6
5.	e2-e4	Jkc8-g4
6. J5.c1-e3	e7-e6
Black can slightly catch his breath: after 6...e6 the danger of the breakthrough d4-d5 or e4-e5 is significantly reduced. In addition, he does not anticipate any particular difficulties with development, since it is hard for White to prevent ...J5.f8-b4 (or, at the least, ...J5.f8-e7) and ...0-0. There basically remains only one problem, but a serious one - the opponent’s powerful pawn centre. After all, White too will soon complete the mobilization of his forces and place his rooks in the centre, and Black will gradually begin to suffocate from lack of space. So that af-ter two or three natural moves by Black, the time for important decisions will arrive
7. Af1xc4
If 7.Wa4 there follows 7...^.xf3 8.gxf3, and then the knight sets off along the familiar route: 8...4Jd7 9.Wxc4 (9.j5.xc4 £>b6 10.Wb3 £ixd4+;9.d5 £b6 10.*c2 2>b4T) 9...£)b6 10.Wd3 J5.e7 11.0-0-0 0-0 12.f4 f5 13.Wc2 (13.J5.h3 We8 14.exf5 WhSoo) 13...We8 14>b3 Wf7 15.h4 Had8 16.j5.g2 fxe4 17.J5jce4 ^JdS*4 (Mesropov-Zhurov, Moscow
192
Defending and Developing: 3. Sc 3 dxc4 4.Sf3
As we have already mentioned, pawn advances here are not too effective:
A)	8.d5 exdS (also not bad is 8...Axf3 9.gxf3 J«txc3+ Ю.ЬхсЗ exdS 11.exdS $Je7 12.Ab5 + сб 13.dxc6 bxc6 14.^xd8+ 3xd8 15Jla4 SfdS 16.c4 Sb6 17.Joi.b3 Sf5= Zviagintsev-A. Ivanov, Ashkhabad 1990) 9.exdS J*Lxc3+ Ю.ЬхсЗ Se7 (or 10...&eS!? ll.AbS+ &f8oo) H.Wa4+ JiLd7 12>b3 Se4 13.Ad3 Sd6 14.c4 b6 15.0-0 0-0 16.3fel AfS 17.Afl Ae4?± (Strating-L’Ami, Wijk aan Zee 2003);
B)	8.e5 Sd5 9.Wd3 Sa 5 10. AgS Wd7 1 l.jAxdS WxdS 12.0-0 Axc3 13.bxc3 f6!? 14.exf6 Axf3 15.Wxf3 WxgS 16.3fel Sc6 17.fxg7 Wxg7 18Дхе6+ &d8 19.3ael® (Gulko-Miladinovic, Elenite 1995).
So for the moment White simply defends his e4^pawn. The alternative — 8.Wc2 -will be examined later.
9. h2-h3?l
This game with the Moscow' international master Vasily Gagarin, a well-known journalist and trainer, was one of the first in this variation (in particular, with the move 8.^d3), the subtleties of which were then not yet well known. In playing 9.h3 White must have assumed that he
was forcing the exchange of the bishop, since on hS it would almost be trapped, and the threat of g2-g4 followed by Sd2 and f2-f4-f5 would be constantly in the air. But it is not so easy to carry it out, and in this game Black was able to put forward his counter-arguments.
Let us consider White’s other possibilities:
A)	Driving the other bishop to a position from where it can attack Whites centre is not too advantageous either 9.a3 AaS 10.Sd2 Ab6 (10...We7 И.В AhS 12.Sb3 Ab6 13.3dl Bfd8 14.We2 Se8?! 15.0-0 Sd6 16.Ad3± Epishin-Nenashev, Frunze 1989) ll.£b3 AhS 12.Sa4 Ag6 13f3 Sd5 14.Sxb6 axb6 15.Ad2 W6 16.0-0 Sf4 17.We3 eS 18.d5 Sa7 19.a4 Sc8 20.3fcl Sd6 21.Afl ^e7?* (Jankovic-Fercec, Rabac 2004);
B)	The attempt to leave the g4-bishop offside does not succeed: 9.Se5 SxeS lO.dxeS ^xd3 11 ..Axd3 Bad8 12.Ac2 Sd7 13.h3 (13.f4 gS!®) 13...Ah5 14.g4 Ag6 1 S.f4 f6 16.Ab3 Af7oo, and the bishop escapes into the open;
C)	If the invasion on eS is prepared with 9.Ab5!?, Black simply exchanges the enemy knight and preserves his own from an exchange which would break up Iris pawn structure: 9...Axf3 10.gxf3 Se7 11.0-0-0 a6 12.Ac4 bS 13.Ab3 Sg6 14.ФЫ eS 15.Sd5Sxd5 16.AxdS 3b8 17.3hgl Wfbs^ (Neuman-Kuba, Pula 2003);
D)	9.Sid2 looks very thematic. White threatens to begin pursuing the bishop at g4, and urgent measures must be taken to save it:
DI) 9...e5 lO.dS Se7 (10...Sa5?! 11.f3 Ad7 12.a3 Sxc4 13.Sxc4 Ad6 14.0-0 Sh5 15.Sxd6cxd6 16.Sb5 Sf4
193
Chapter Three - Section В
17.Wb3 AxbS 18Wxb5± Akimov-Barsky, corn 1993) 11.a3 Ad6 12.£>b5 &g6 13.f3 Ad7 14.&xd6 cxd6 15>b3 Ь5 16.Afl £e8	17.g3 hS*±
(Damljanovic-Miladinovic, Pancevo 2006);
D2) 9..a6 10.ГЗ (10.0-0 Ь5 И.АЬЗ AcSoo; 10.h3 AhS 11.f4 (ll.g4 Ag6 12.f4 bS l3.Ab3 eS!? 14.fxe5 £xe5 15.We2 ^c6«=?) И ...bS 12Ab3 AcSt) 10...b5 ll.Ab3 (Il.fxg4bxc4 12.'S'xc4
D21) 12.4te2 £e5 В.'В'сг ЫЗ + 14.gxf3 Axf3 1 S.Hfl Axe4oo;
D22) 12Hdl Ag6 B.^fl We7 (13...^d5 14.Acl Wh4+ 15.^g3oo) 14.&g3 Hfd8T;
D23) 12.Ac2 AaS В.аЗ (13.ШЗ!? £b4 14.Wd2±) 13...Ab6 14.2)b3 We7 IS.Hdl Efd8 16.We2 Hd7 17.0-0 Had8 18.Wf2!±;
D24) 12.Hcl Wd7 13.0-0 (13.£te2) 13...AcS 14.&d5 Axd4 IS.Axd4 &xd4 16J7W6+ (16.Wxd4 exdS 17.eS ' e8 18.^e4 c6 19.£g3 Ag6 2O.f4±) 16...gxf6 17.AdS±;
D25) 12.0-0 AcS 13.&e2 2)xd4 !4.Axd4 eS 15.Had Axd4+ (15...Ab6!?) 16.^xd4exd4 17.HcS±;
E)	Here is an example of an opening catastrophe suffered by White: 9.0-0 аб
Ю.аЗ AaS 1 I.b4 Ab6 12.Hadi Axf3 I3.gxf3 ^hS 14.ФЫ Wf6 15.f4^xf4 16>d2 Had8 17.eS WfS 18.£te2 QnS 0-1 (Kasimdzhanov-Morozevich, Play-chess.com 2006).
Let us return to the Gagarin-Morozevich
9. ..	Ag4-h5
10. ЗДЗ-42	Ah5-g6
11. f2-f4?
Consistent and aggressive, but it was better to play more calmly, for example 11.0-0.
11.	..	£f6-d5
Apparently this reply was underestimated. A check on h4 is threatened, as well as ...4ixe3 winning the d4-pawn.
12.	2ri2-f3	Wd8-d6!
13.	g2-g3	Za8-d8
14.	Ha1-d1	4jd5-f6?
This places Black in a dangerous position. Meanwhile he had two reasonable ways of building up his initiative: 14...^a5 15.AbS аб 16.Aa4 Ste4 17.Acl bS or 14...Hfe8!T.
15.	f4-f5	e6xf5
16.	e4xf5	Ag6*h5!
The only possibility of avoiding major problems. Both 16.. 'Sfxg3+ 17.Af2 Wg2 18.Hh2 Hfe8+ 19.&d2 Wxh2
194
Defending and Developing. 3.£k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
20.4ixh2 4ie4+ 21Wxe4! flxe4 22.fxg6 hxg6 23.Фс1±, and !6...Hfe8 17.fxg6 Wxg3 + 1 8.ФИ2 hxg6D 19.fldfl!± were bad for Black.
17.	g3-g4
17 .ФП came into consideration.
17. ..	Ef8-e8
18. *e1-f1
The eccentric move 18.Фе2!?, in the style of the Steinitz Gambit, would have won a piece, but after 18...ji.xc3! 19.bxc3 Ji.xg4 2O.hxg4 4jxg4 Black would have gained serious compensation for it.
18.	_	£>c6-a5!oo
18..W	g3 did not help because of 19.ji.f2. But now the white bishops are hanging, and this allows Black to emerge unscathed.
19.	Ae3-f2?
This allows Black to regain his lost initiative.
Two other bishop moves were stronger
A)	19.Ji.b5 сб 2O.Aa4 $k4! 21.Ji.cl Wg3 22.4ie2n flxe2 23.^xe2 #Jxg4 24.hxg4 ji.xg4;
B)	19.Ji.g5!
Bl)	19..Wg3	2О.ДЬ5!	(20.Ji.xf6
2ixc4; 20.ji.h4!? Wf4 21.£g5=) 2O...c6 (2O...Ji.xg4 21.hxg4 £>xg4 22.Ji.h4±) 2 l.gxh5!±;
B2)	19...Ji.xc3 2O.bxc3 (2O.Jijcf6 gxf6! 21.'8fxc3 #Jxc4 22.Wxc4 fle3 23.fld3
Hde8! 24.йхеЗ йхеЗ 25.&g2 Wf4 26.flfl Ji.xg4+) 2O...£Jxc4 21.Wxc4 Wg3 (21,..£Je4 22.Ji.xd8 Wf4 23.Wd3 4ig3+ 24.*&g2! fle2+ 2S.^gl Ji.xg4 26.hxg4 fle3 27.flel+—) 22.fld3! $Je4 23.Ji.h4 £jd2+! 24.flxd2 Wxf3+ 25.<£gl fle4 26.flg2 flde8 27.Wxc7 £xg4! 28.hxg4 flxg4 29.ji.g3! flxd4! 3O.cxd4 ^d 1 + 31 ,ФЬ2 Wh5+ =;
B3)	I9...&xc4 2O.^xc4 Wg3 21.fld3 ji.xc3 22.J«lxf6 Ие1+ 23.Фхе1 Wxel + 24.*g2 We2+ =.
19.	..	Wd6-f4
20.	4jc3-e2?
Tins second successive mistake leads to disaster. Correa was 20.ji.b5 сб 21.4ie2 flxe2! 22.^xe2 £jxg4 23.hxg4 ji.xg4 24.Ф^2 cxbS, and there is still all to play for
Йе8хе2!
20.
21.	&f1xe2 ^ja5xc4
22. Wd3xc4
In the event of 22.gxh5 Black wins by both the prosaic 22...£}xb2—h and 23...£ixdl, and the more spectacular 22...fle8+ 23.$je5!^d5!!-4-.
22.		Sd8-e8+
23.	£f3-e5	Йе8хе5+
24.	Xe2-f1	£if6-e4
25.	Wc4-c2	fle5xf5l
26.	g4xf5	Ah5xd1
White resigned.
195
Chapter Three - Section В
GAME 62
□ Alexey Shirov
 Alexander Morozevich
Amsterdam 1995
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	^b8-c6
3.	£Ы-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	£ig1-f3	5g8-f6
5.	e2-e4	.4.c8-g4
6.	Ac1-e3	e7-e6
7.	£f1xc4	jkf8-b4
8.	Wd1-c2
This move is more popular than 8.Wd3: probably players are simply more used to seeing the queen on c2 than on d3. Seriously speaking, when White now brings his rook to dl, its opposition with the queen will be unpleasant for Black Incidentally, the d4-pawn is not hanging, since 8....&xf3 9.gxf3 #Jxd4? l0.jilxd4 Wxd4 11. Wa4+ leads to the loss of a piece.
8.	«	0-0
8...	We7 is premature in view of 9.J«Lb5! 0-0 Ю.Ахсб Ьхсб 1 l.^eS cS 12.f3 AhS 13.4k6 Wd7 14.4ixb4 cxb4 15.£Je2± (Finegold-Denefle, Paris 1989).
9.	0-0-0
An aggressive plan, but Chigorin showed long ago that in this opening the white king cannot feel safe on the queenside.
9.Edl will be examined later.
4 A 4
4 A
9.	...	jLb4xc3
10.	Ь2хсЗ	^d8-e7!
Eyeing the a3-square and clearing the way for the second rook to the queenside.
11.	h2-h3
The provocative 11.ФЬ2 bS 12..&d3 eS? is not good for White. In die event of lLfi.d3 eSoo or ll.eS SkiS 12.Jil.d3 Wa3+ 13.s£?d2 h6= Black also has sufficient counlerplay.
11.	..	Jkg4xf3
In the following game Black first retreated his bishop to hS, but then changed his mind and exchanged on f3: 1 l...jSlh5?! 12.JLd3 J«.xf3 13.gxf3 eS 14.Shgl &h8 15.h4 $Jd7 16.h5 h6 !7.Wb2 (Mazzilli-Miladinovic, Rome 2005). But White could have played 12.g4 J»Lg6 13.Jii.d3!±, when Black would have been unable to change his mind.
12.	g2xf3 Ef8-b8l-*
In accordance with the precepts of Mikhail Ivanovich.
13.	_«c4-d3	b7-b5!
14.	e4-e5
Also in the event of 14.^d2 eS IS.dS £JaS 16.ЕЫ сб! the game opens up to Black’s advantage, for example: 17.dxc6 Wd6 18.Фе2 Wxc6 19.flb4 a6 20.a4 £k4 21.axbS axbS 22.JLxc4 bxc4 23.Sxb8+ Hxb84 (Jedynak-Karpatchev, Marseille 2006).
14.	-	<f6-d5
15.	Jkd3xh7+ Фд8-Ъ8
It is hard to say which direction is better, toh8orf8.
16.	J2.h7-e4 b5-b4l
17.	Jke4xd5
The only move Bad is 17.c4? b3! 18.axb3 <£>a5! 19.Edgl (19.Ed3 £>b4-+) 19...£)xe3 20.fxe3 Wa3+ 21.&d2 Exb3
196
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc44.£)f3
22.ЙЫ Bab8 23.П1К1 Bxbl (23...Bb2 24.&dl Wxe3 2S.Bxb2 Wxd4+ 26.Wd2 Wxb2 27>xb2 Bxb2 28.Bal $kc4 29.Bxa7 gST) 24.ДхЫ Bxbl 25.Wxbl 41xc4+ 26.Фс2 41xe3+ 27.<&d2 £te4+ 28.&c2g6+.
17.	_	e6xd5
18.	&c1-d2
Here 18x4? was even worse: 18...b3 19.axb3 dxc4 2O.Wxc4 4}a5 21.Wc3 ШаЗ+22.Фс2 Bxb3-+.
1a ...	£sc6-a5
19.	&d2-e2 £>a5-c4
20.	Ae3-d2
20.	-	c7-c5?l
A stumble, thanks to which White succeeds in creating counterplay. 2O...Bb6T was better, and if 21.cxb4 aS, opening new lines.
21.	Bh1-g1loo Hb8-b6
22.	Bg1-g5! g7-g6
Should one be surprised if a computer’s recommendation looks inhuman? 22...Bh6!? 23.Bdgl cxd4 24.cxd4 g6 2S.B5g3 BhS** was interesting - the rook is rather strangely placed, but White’s attack is halted.
23.	d4xc5 £c4xd2
24.	Wc2xd2 Ь4хсЗ
24..?	Bfxc5 25.cxb4 Bxb4 26.ФП± favours White.
25.	Wd2xc3 Bb6-a6?
It would have been wiser for Black to think primarily of his own safety. For instance, after 25.. .^xgS 26.cxb6 axb6 27.e6+ st?g8 28.exf7+ Фх17 29.Wc7+ (29>b3 BaS®) 29...We7+ 3O.Wxe7+ Фхе7 31Bxd5 Bxa2+ 32.ФеЗ Bb2 he should be able to defend this end
game.
26.	f3-f4
26.Bxd5! would have given White a decisive advantage:	26...Bxa2+
(26...'S'xg5? 27.e6+) 27.ФП Bb8 28.Bg3 Sbl+ 29.&g2 Baal
(29...Bbb2? 30.e6+ &g8 31Bd7
Bxf2+ 32.&gl+-) 3O.f4+-.
26. ..	Ba8-c8
Stronger was 26...Bxa2+ 27.ФЛ Bd8 28.h4±.
28. Bd5-d2?l
And here 28.'йгс4! would have won, for example: 28...Ba4 (28...Bd6 29.Bd4 Bxd4 30>xd4 Wxa2+ 3l.d?fl4—) 29.'IBrxa4 (29.fS!? Bxc4 3O.fxe6 fxe6 31.Bd6	&h7	32.Bxe6 B8xc5
ЗЗ.ФВ+-) 29...Wxd5 ЗО.еб! Wxe6+ 31 BeS ^xh3 32.Be8++-.
28.	-	Ba6xa2
29.	Bd2xa2 We6xa2+
30.	Фе2-П Xh8-g8
197
Chapter Three - Section В
Weaker was 30...Wb 1 + 31^g2 We4+ 32.f3 Wxf4 (3 2...We2+ 33.&g3+-) 33.e6+ £>g8 34.fig4+-.
31.	f4-f5 Ec8-d8
In the event of 31...Wbl+ 32.&g2 We4+ 33.f3 W4 the cunning move 34.h4! leads to a win. for example: 34...Wxh4 35.flg4 Wd8 36.fxg6 WdS 37.gxf7+^xf7 38.e6+4—.
32.	ФА-д2 Wa2-d5+
33.	Фд2-И2 Wd5-e4
34.	e5-e6	We4-f4+
Again the most tenacious; Black would have lost quickly after 34...fld3 3S.exf7 + ФхГ7 36.fxg6+ Феб (36...&g8 37.Wf6+-) 37.Wxd3 Wxd3 38.g7+-.
35.	Wc3-g3 Wf4xg3+
36.	Дд5хдЗ?!
36.<&xg3H— was more accurate.
36.	«	f7xe6
37.	f5xe6	a7-a5
38.	ДдЗхдб4-
In time-trouble White begins to commit inaccuracies. He could have won by force with 38.e7 Де8 (or 38...Дс8 39.fld3 Де8 40x6 Дхе7 41.fld7 Де2 42x74—) 39.flxg6+ ФГ7 4О.Даб4—.
3a .. Фдв-fS
39.	Дд6-д4?
Both З9.е7+ Фхе7 4О.Даб fld2 41.&g3
Да2 42.h4 a4 43.h5 Дс2 44.h6 Ф!7
45.йха4 Дхс5 46.Hg44— and 39f4!4— would have won.
39. ..	Ф18-е7?
Black in turn misses an excellent chance of a tenable defence - 39...Дс8! 4О.Дс4 Фе7±.
40. Дд4-а4??
On the 40th move, the last before the time control. White had no time to remember Tarrasch s advice that a rook is usually best placed behind a passed pawn, whether its own, or the opponent’s. There was a simple win by 4O.flg7 + Фхеб 4!.Да7 fld2 42.&g3 Да2 43.h4-l—.
40. ._	Ed8-a8
41. f2-f4?
It would seem that this definitely throws away the win. 4!.Де4 (in accordance with Tarrasch!) was correct, for example: 41...Даб! (41...a4 42x6 a3 43x7 a2 44.Де! £>d6 45.e7! Фхс7 46.fldl Де8 47.Да! Дхе7 48.Дха24—) 42.h4 Дсб 43.Ф^З ДхсЗ 44.f4±.
41.		Фе7хе6
42.	ФИ2-дЗ	Феб-dS
43.	ФдЗ-д4	Фд5хс5=
44.	Фд4-д5	Фс5-Ь5
45.	Да4-а1	Да8-д84-
46.	ig5-f6	Hg8-f8+
47.	Ф16-е5	Ef8-e84-
48.	&e5-d5	Ee8-d8+
49.	ȣd5-e4	Ed8-e8+
50.	&e4-f3	Де8-Ъ8
51.	Ea1-h1	ФЬ5-с5
52.	f4-f5	Фс5-аб
53.	*f3-f4	а5-а4
54.	Ф14-д5	Фд6-е7
55.	f5-f6+	Фе7-Т7
56.	ДЫ-Ы	ДЬ8хЬЗ
57.	ДЬ1-Ь74-	ФП-Т8
Draw.
198
Defending and Developing: З.ФсЗ dxc4 4.ФГЗ
GAME 63
□ Jeroen Piket
 Alexander Morozevich
London 199S
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	ФЬ8-с6
3.	ФЫ-сЗ	d5xc4
4.	Фд1-13	Фд8-16
5.	e2-e4	Ас8-д4
6.	Дс1-еЗ	e7-e6
7.	JLf1 xc4	JLf8-b4
8.	Wd1-c2	0-0
9.	Ea1-d1	
ill Hi
4 A 4 ;0i

a &'
A aw A a a a* e
The critical position of the variation. All the natural developing moves have come to an end, and Black must decide what to do next.
9.	^d8-e71?
Let us examine some alternatives:
A) 9...Jlxf3 10.gxf3 ФЬ5 ll.eS Фе7 12.0-0 сб (12...ФГ5 13.ФЫ Wh4 14.Hgl Ead8 1 5.Фе4 ke7 16.Eg4Wh3 17.£ki2 cS 18.Ji.fH— Van der Sterren Lobron, Munich 1994) 13.Jlg5 h6 14.Acl £d5 15.Фе2 Wh4 16.We4 Jte7 17.JLd3 fS 18.exf6 Wxf6 19.Wg4 Wxf3 2O.Wxe6+ Wf7 21.®e4± (Magerra-mov-Al Modiahki, Dubai 2000);
B) 9... AaS 10.a3 Ab6 11.Фе2 AxfJ 12.gxf3 &h8 13.0-0 We7 14.ФЫ Sad8
IS.ngl £hs 16.b4 fS 17.f4 g6 18.d5 exdS 19.exdS АхеЗ 2O.fxe3 ФЬ8 21?B'c3+ 4^7?* (Riazantsev-Georgiev, ICC 2003).
9...Фе7 will be examined later.
10. Дс4-Ь5
10.eS 4}dS 11.Jtd3 &xf3 12.gxf3 Wh4 13.0-0 £ixd4 14.Jkxd4 ФГ4 is unfavourable for White
Regarding 10.Ae2, see the next game.
10.	e6-e5!
Black has no time for a calm regrouping of his forces: 1О...ФЬ8? 11.0-0 Ed8? (11...C6 12.Jke2 £bd7±) 12.eS £d5 13.Ad3 h6 14.2>xdS ExdS 15.£.e4+-(Kortchnoi-Morozevich, London 1994).
11. Ab5xc6
If 11 .dS Black was intending the pawn sacrifice ll...£kl4 12.JLxd4 exd4 13.Bxd4 5ad8!?®.
11.	..	Ь7хс6
ll...	exd4 12.Bxd4 bxc6 does not work on account of 13.eS !±.
12.	d4xe5
Pretty variations arise after 12.0-0 exd4:
A) 13.Bxd4 Jlxc3 14.Wxc3 (14.bxc3 cS 1S.Ec4 2id7 16.Па4 2>b6 17.EaS Axf3 18.gxf3	4}c4T)	14...^)xe4
1 S.^xc6 ixf3 16.gxft 2>cS 17.ФЫ Феб 18.2a4^f6^;
B) 13.J«Lxd4 ДхсЗ 14.Wxc3 Фхе4 15.Wxc6 Axf3 16.gxfJ ^d2! 17.Efel
199
Chapter Three - Section В
Wd6!!	18.Wc3	Wxd4	19.Wxd2
(19.Hxd2 Wxc3	2O.bxc3	Hfd8=)
19...Wf6=.
12.	_	Af6-d7
13.	a2-a3	Ab4-a5
14.	Ae3-f4
Double-edged play results from 14.Hcl jilxf3 15.gxf3 <£)xeS 16.Фе2 We 6^, while in the event of l4.jLg5 We6T or 14.e6?! Wxe6 15.h3 Axfc 16.gxf3 £e5 17.f4 £k4 18.Фе2 Wh6 19.Дс1 Wh5+ 20.f3 Uae8t (Marjanovic-Miladinovic, Korinthos 1999) Black’s chances are even preferable.
26.	fid3-d8	Zf8xd8
27.	We7xd8+	Фд8-д7
28.	e4-e5	flh4-f4
29.	Фд1-д2	g6-g5
30.	h2-h3	Wh6-g6
31.	Bf1-d1	h7-h5
32.	Wd8-e7	g5-g4
33.	Sd1-d8	g4xf3+
34.	Фд2-И2	Wg6-c2
35.	We7-g5+	Фд7-Ь7
36.	Wg5xh5+ ФЬ7-д7	
37.	Wh5-h8+	
Black resigned.
14.		£g4xf3
15.	g2xf3	£>d7xe5
16.	Af4xe5	We7xe5
17.	0-0	Sa8-e8
ia	£ic3-e2	Де8-е6т
GAME 64
□ Kiril Georgiev
 Alexander Morozevich
Tilburg 1994
A Ail
д^д®
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	'Ь8-сб
3.	&Ы-СЗ	d5xc4
4.	£g1-f3	£g8-f6
5.	e2-e4	ic8-g4
6.	Ас1-еЗ	e7-e6
7.	ji.fi xc4	fif8-b4
8.	Wd1-c2	0-0
9.	Sa1-d1	Wd8-e7
10.	Дс4-е2	

А Ж
Black has a slight advantage, but White’s position is perfectly defendable. However, die tournament situation obliged Black to play for a win, and as a result at some point he overstepped the mark.
19.	£>e2-g3	We5-f4
20.	Wc2-c5	ia5-b6
21.	Wc5-f5	Wf4-h6
22.	Sd1-d3	Se6-f6
21	Wf5-d7	g7-g6
24.	b2-b4	Zf6-f4
25.	Wd7-e7	Sf4-h4
10. ..	e6-e5l?
200
Defending and Developing. 3.£)c3 dxc4 4.£)f3
Without ‘surgical intervention’ Black cannot achieve good play, for example: 10„.Had8!? 11.0-0 AaS 12.£a4± (12.a3 Ab6=).
11.	d4-d5
Neither version of the exchange on eS gives While any advantage:
A)	ll.dxeS £ixe5 12.£ixe5 Axe2 !З.Фхе2 WxeS 14.f3 Had8=;
В)	1 l.^ixeS ^xeS (I l...Axe2 1 2.£ixc6 Ьхсб 13.Wxe2 ^xe4<») 12.dxe5 Axe2 13.exf6 Axdl 14.fxe7 Axc2 15.exf8W+ ФхАЗ=
11.	4jc6-d4!
This pawn sacrifice is the crux of Black’s idea. More restrained continuations are worse:
A) H...Axf3 12.Axf3 £}a5 1 3.a3±;
B) 11.,.£>b8 12.0-0 AxB 13.Axf3 AcS 14.Axc5 ^xcS 15.b4 Wxb4 16.ПЫ WcS 17.Sb5 Wd6 18.flxb7 сб 19.Wa4± (Saric-Fercec.Rabac 2004).
12.	<Lf3xd4	\
It is unfavourable to exchange the dark-squared bishop: !2.Axd4exd4 13.Sxd4 Ше8 14.0-0 (14.h3 AhS®; 14.^d2 Axe2 15.Фхе2 Had8®) 14...Axc3 15.bxc3 £ixe4T.
12.	_. e5xd4
13.	Sd1xd4
White must hold on to the e4-pawn, even if this means making a few ugly’ moves.
After 13.Axd4 Axe2 14.Wxe2 (14.Axf6?! Axdl 15.Axe7 Axc2 16.Axb4 Sfe8 17.f3 Ad3 18.&d2 Aa6+) 14...Wxe4 (14...&xe4 is also not bad: 15.0-0 ФхсЗ 16.Wxe7 Axe7 17.bxc3=) 15.Axf6 Wxe2+ (only not lS.Wxg2? 16.*d2! Hfe8 17.Wc44—) 16.Фхе2 gxf6= Black has no problems.
13.	_. Ag4xe2
14.	Фе1 xe2 Ab4-c5
White has a slight advantage after 14...£ig4 15.£kll Пае8±, but in this variation 15...f5!® is better.
15.	Sd4-d2
This would appear to be the optimal square for the rook:
A)	15.Hc4 Axe3 16.&xe3Sad8 17.f3 &xd5+ 18.£bcd5 Sxd5 19.Hxc7 We 5 20.Sc8 Sdd8 21.Hxd8 Sxd8 22.Sdl flxdl 23,Wxdl h6=;
B)	15.fld3 Axe3 16.Sxe3 2>g4 17.Sg3 fS® 18.113 &f6 (18...£)e5 19.exf5oo) 19.Sei fxe4 (19...f4!? 20.Bd3 £d7 21 .f3 2)e5®) 20.ФП =;
C)	IS.Sddl ^g4!? 16.AxcS WxcS 17.ФП fS 18.exf5g6!?®.
15.	.. Ac5xe3
16.	Фе2хеЗ &f6-g4+
17.	ФеЗ-е2 We7-g5
The immediate 17...f5!? came into consideration.
1& *e2-d1!
White resists the temptation to advance his rook’s pawn: 18.h4 Wf4 19.f3 Wg3oo or 18.h3 2>e3!*.
18.	..	f7-f5
19.	e4xf5
19.Пе1! was better: 19...f4 (or 19...^>xh2 20.f3±) 20>b3! ФЬ8 2Lh3 £te5 22.f3±, and White stabilizes the position. remaining with a clear advantage.
19. «	Па8-е8!
201
Chapter Three - Section В
Weaker was 19...ELxf5 20&e4 WhS (2O...Wh6 2I .Wxc7±) 21.Фс1 (21.£g3 2>еЗ+ 22.Фс1 2>xc2 23.£ixh5 2>b4 24.&g3 Sxd5=), when 21...fixd5? fails to22.Wb3 c6 23.£k3+-.
20. h2-h3!
2O.£)e4 leads only to equality: 2O...Wxf5 21.Eel Bxe4! 22.Sxe4 4W2+ 23.Exf2 Wxf2 24.Wxf2 Bxf2 2 5. Be 2= or 25.Ee7=.
20. -	£>g4-e5
21. Bh1-e1
21.We4!? Bxf5 22.Eel EffB was also interesting.
21.	-	Wg5xg2
22.	Sd2-e2 Wg2-f3
23.	Wc2-e4! Wf3-h5
23...	Wxh3 was weaker: 24.f4 4}d3 25.Wxe8 Exe8 26.Bxe8+	&f7
27.Ele7+ £>f6 28.Be3!±.
24.	f2-f3!	h7-h6!
The only move 24...4ЫЗ? loses to 25.Wxe8 Exe8 26.Exe8+ &f7 27.Ele7 + Ф16 28.&e4+ £>xf5 29.4)g3+4—, and after 24...&f7, suggested by Valery Salov, 25.d6! is very strong, for example: 25...сб 26.d7 Ee7 (26...£xd7 27.Wc4+ *f6 28.Be6++-) 27.f4! Exd7+ 28.Фс2+-.
25.	f5-f6! g7xf6
Again Black has no choice: 25...<£ixf3 26.Wxe8 Exe8 27.fixe8+ ФИ7 28.Ble7 2>d4+ 29.£te2! (29.<4’d2 Wg5+ 30.&d3 Wxf6 31.^e4 Wb6oo) 29...&g6 3O.fxg74—.
26.	d?d1-c1
Weaker was 26.f4?! ^d7oo.
26.	._	£g8-g7!
Black loses after 26...Wg5+? 27.f4 Wxf4+ 28.Wxf4 £d3+ 29.&d24—, while if 26...Ф118 there now follows 27.f4±.
27.	We4-c2
27	.d6! gave a clear advantage: 27...сб (27...cxd6 28.Wxb7+ fif7 29>b5±) 28.Wc2± (28.f4?	29 Wxe8 Exe8
3O	.Exe8 £xel 31.d7 Wf5 32.Пе7+ &g6 33.sfc’dl ^d3+ 34.Фхе1 ^d6-+).
27.	.. ^h5xf3
Or 27...M3 28.Пе7+ (28.Hxe8? Exe8 29.flxe8 Wxe8 3O.Wg2+ £g5 + ) 28...Дхе7 29Sxe7+ Sf7 3O.Exf7 + &xf7 (3O...^xf7	31^g2+	&g5
32.h4±) 31 >h7+	32.Wxc7±.
28.	ФС1-ЫН *g7-h8
With his safer king, Wliite retains the initiative and it is not easy to defend. If 28...Ее7, 29.He3 Wh5 3O.£te4-* is unpleasant.
29.	£c3-b5	Ee8-c8?
Better would have been 29...c6 30.4k7±.
30.	£b5xc7 Ef8-d8
31.	Ee2-e3 Wf3-h5
32.	Ee3-c3!+-Wh5-g6
33.	Wc2xg6 ^e5xg6
34.	Ee1-e6 Ed8-d7
Or 34...'4>g7 35.d6 with the threat of 36.2>e8+ Дхе8 37.d7!.
35.	d5-d6	Ec8-f8
36.	£c7-d5	Hf8-f7
37.	£d5xf6	&g6-f8
38.	Ec3-g3	Hf7-g7
39.	Ee6-e8	Ed7-f7
40.	d6-d7	
Black resigned.
202
Defending and Developing: 3.2c3 dxc4 4.2(3
GAME 65
□ Loek van Wely
 Alexander Morozevich
Amsterdam 1995
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	c2-c4	2b8-c6
3.	2Ы-СЗ	d5xc4
4.	2g1-f3	2g8-f6
5.	e2-e4	Ac8-g4
6.	Ac1*e3	e7-e6
7.	Af 1xc4	Af8-b4
8.	Wd1-c2	0-0
9.	Sa1-d1	2c6-e7
Black clears the way for his c-pawn, with which he intends to attack the enemy centre If he desires, he can set his opponent a cunning trap - so ‘cunning’, that up till now not a single decent player has fallen into it.
10. Ac4-e2
10.0-01? is alsonot bad.
10. ... Ab4xc3+!
Here is the trap: 10...2g6 11.0-0 Wc8 12.аЗ? Axc3 13.bxc3 2xe4!+, and the knight cannot be taken because of 14...Af5, winning the queen. The move 1 2.a3 resembles a helpmate problem -practically any other move is not only better in itself, but also secures White an advantage. For example: 12.h3 Axf3
13.Axf3 cS 14.d5 eS 15.d6 Axc3 16.Wxc3 2h4 17.Ae2 Wc6 18.f3± (Baikov-Barsky, Moscow 1995).
Not all Black’s problems are solved by 10...Wc8 11.0-0 (11 .a3 comes into consideration: H...Axc3+ 12.bxc3 b6 1 3.0-0 Wb7 14.Ag5!±) 11...C5 12.dxc5 AxeS 13.eS 2d7 (13...AfS 14.Ad3 Axd3 15.Wxd3 2e8 16.Axc5 ^xcS 17.2e4 Wb6 18.2eg5 g6 19.We4 2d5 20#h4 hS 21Sd2± Gavrilov-Barsky, Moscow 1995) 14.flxd7 (14.2e4 Axe3 15.Wxc8 2xc8 16.Hxd7 2b6 1 7.Sxb7 Axf3 18.Axf3 Ad4=; 14.Axc5 2xc5 1 S.2bS±) 14...Axe3 IS.Xlfdl (15.flxe7 AcS?) 15... AcS 16.We4±.
11.	Ь2хсЗ	c7-c5
12.	0-0	Wd8-c7
13.	^c2-b1	b7-b6?l
Insufficiently energetic. Correct was 13...Sfd8 14.h3 Ah5 15.g4Ag6 16.Ad3 2c6 17.Hfel Hd7! withequality.
14.	h2-h3 Ag4-h5
15.	g2-g4 Ah5-g6
16.	Ae2-d3 Sf8-d8?l
Another inaccuracy. Both 16...2c6± and 16...Wb7 17.2d2 cxd4 I8.cxd4 h6 19.Sc 1 ± would have been better.
17.	2f3-e5
With the simple but unpleasant threat of
203
Chapter Three - Section В
17. ._	Wc7-b7
After 17...4}c6 18.f4 cxd4 (18...&xe5 19.fxe5 (19.dxe5 Exd3 2O.Wxd3 JaLxe4 21.Wd6 'grxde 22.Sxd6	£d5±)
19...&d7 2O.Hf2±) 19.cxd4 &xd4 20.Eel (2O.Wb2 £>c6 21.Eel Wb7) 2O...Wb7 21.Bc4± Black would start to have problems not only with his bishop, but also with his knight.
Probably the lesser evil was 17...£>d7!? 18.f4^xe5 19.dxe5 c4 2O.Ac2 hS±.
1Л f2-f3 c5xd4?l
Here too 18...£te6?! was not good: 19.£xc6 Wxc6 2O.Wb5 Wc7 21.&g2±. However, 18...Bac8 19Wb3± was possible (but not 19.dxc5 Wc7 20.f4 bxcS?*).
19.	c3xd4	Ea8-c8
20.	Ed1-c1	Bc8xc1
21.	Ef1xc1	2>f6-d7
22.	£je5xd7?l
White has a slight advantage after 22?ЙГЬ5 2>xe5 23.dxe5± (23.<xe5 4k6 24>b5 Wb8!?*). But it was better to aim for the restriction of the black pieces: 22.4)xg6 hxg6 (22...&xg6 23>c2) 23,WbS±.
22.	...	Wb7xd7
23.	Wb1-b5	Wd7-d6
24.	Фд1-д2	h7-h6
25.	h3-h4?l
Better was 25.f4 fS 26.gxf5 exfS 27.e5 We6 28<a6 AhS 29.&h2 £>d5 3O.£d2±
25.	...	f7-f5!
An unexpected change of scene: White still has the advantage, but his opponent gains counterchances.
26.	g4xf5	e6xf5
27.	Wb5-c4+	&g8-h7
28.	d4-d5
28.eS <£ldS 29..&d2± was better.
28.	-	Bd8-e8
29.	Ec1-e1	f5xe4
30.	f3xe4	Wd6-d7
31.	Фд2-дЗ	h6-h5
One needs the coolness of a computer to find 31...M5! 32.Ф112 (32.e5+ £f5+) 32..Ag6?=t.
32.	*g3-f2?
White panics. Correct was 32.Ф112 Wg4 33.e5 Axd3 34>xd3+ &g8 3S.AgS Ef8 36.Egl Ef2+ 37.ФЫ Wd7 with a double-edged position.
32.	._	Wd7-h3
32...	Wg4? was bad on account of 33 Eg 1 or ЗЗ.-й-gS.
33.	&f2-e2?
33Egl Wxh4+ 34.Фе2 Wh2 + 35-^dl h4 36.'S'd4 Bd8? was more tenacious.
33.	..	£e7-f5!
34.	&e2*d2
Or 34.Ad42>xh4 35.&d 1 +.
34.	«	4if5-d6?l
34...	#ixh4—Ь would have won quickly. 35. Wc4-c6?
White could have prolonged the resistance by 3S.Wd4 Фхе4+ Зб.Фс! £if6 37.d6 JiLxd3 38.Wxd3+ ФЬ8+.
35.
36.	£.d3xe4
37.	d5-d6 3a &d2-c1
39. &c1-d1
White resigned.
£Ld6xe4+ Ee8xe4 >h3-g2+ Wg2xa2 Ee4"C4
204
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc4 4.£)f3
GAME 66
□ Viswanathan Anand
 Alexander Morozevich
Wijk aan Zee 2001
1.	d2-d4
2.	c2-c4
3.	£>Ь1-сЗ
4.	£>g1-f3
5.	e2-e4
6.	Ac1-e3
7.	g2xf3
8.	d4-d5
d7-d5 £>b8-c6 d5xc4 £g8-f6 i.c8-g4 4g4xf3l?
e7-e5 £c6-b8
At the cost of several tempi Black has spoiled the opponent's ‘hairstyle’ on the kingside and blocked the centre. For complete happiness he would also like to remove the dark-squared bishops from the board. But for the moment it is White who holds the floor, with his two bishops and lead in development
9.	Af1xc4
9.f4 leads to interesting complications, but, as is shown by the following correspondence game, White is not able to unblock the centre: 9...Ad6 10.fxe5 J«Lxe5 I LJkg2!? We7 12.Wa4+ (12.0-0 2>bd7 13.2>bS 0-0 I4.£d4 Hfe8 IS.Zel £>c5T)	I2...£bd7 l3.Wxc4 &g4
14.Ad2 Wh4 15.^dlD (15.We2 0-0 16.h3?	15..JLxb2«»
(Raedeker-Koroljev, corr. 1990/94).
9.	_	£b8-d7
10.	Wd1-b3
Here too, if 10.f4, there follows 10...Jld6<» (Tirabassi-Koroljev, corr. 1987/92).
lO.Hgl!? comes into consideration, for example: 10...g6 11?ЙЪЗ JLcS 12.^h6 Af8 13.AgS &g7 14.Wxb7 5b8 15.Wxa7 Hxb2 16.Ab3 0-0 17.Wa3 5xb3 18.Wxb3 h6 19.Ae3± (Saric-Fercec, Rijeka 2005). Of course, Black's play in general and the bishop manoeuvres in particular do not create a great impression, and as an improvement one can suggest, for example, 10...a6!?.
10.	4f8-c5
11.	0-0-0
Capturing the pawn is not without its dangers: 1 l.Wxb7 5b8 12.Wa6 JbLxc3 13.fxe3 Uxb2 14,Wa3 5b6! (14..>b8?! 15.0-0 Wb4 16.Wxb4 5xb4 17.Де2±) 15.ДЬ5 We7 16.Wxe7 + Фхе7 17.&d2 Bhb8 18.5abl 4k8 19.Slid 2116 20.5111 (Kiss-Antal, Hungary 2004).
11.	xc5xe3+
As an alternative one can suggest ll...Ab6 12.5hgl 0-0 13.iLh6 &h5 (13...^e8	14. AgS) 14.5g5 Wf6
15 .5x115 gxh6i=*.
12.	f2xe3 5a8-b8
205
Chapter Three - Section В
This breakthrough essentially proves to be a blank shot. Meanwhile. White could liave practically forced the transition into a favourable endgame: 13.Wa3 аб 14A.fl We7 15.Wxe7+ Фхе7 16.ФЫ £e8 17.5c! 4Ad6 18.&a4 Sbc8 19.Ah3 g6 2O.Axd7 &xd7 21.4kS+ (21Hc2) 21 ...Фе7 22.Ис2 etc.
13.	0-0
14.	£хЗ-Ь5
White could have gained some advantage with I4.dxc7 Wxc7 IS.^bS Wb6 16.ФЫ (16.1Id6 WcS 17.ФЫ аб 18.2c I axbS 19.Axf7 + 2xf7 2O.SxcS 21xc5 21.Wxb5oo) 16...a6 17.2>d6 Wxb3 18.Axb3 2>cS±.
14.	-.	c7-c6
15.	£)Ь5-с7	b7-b5
16.	Ac4-e2
16. Af 1!? came into consideration.
16.	_	2b8-b6
17.	2d1-d2	a7-a6
18.	2h1-d1
In the event of 18.Wa3 Wc8 (I8...c5 19.£)xa6 Wa8 2O.Sk7 Wxa3 21.bxa3 c4 22.Фс2±) 19.b4 Фе8 (19...cS is worse: 2O.bxc5 2c6 21.2c2) Black would have swapped the knight-'spy’ on c7 and gained counterplay: 20.4^xe8 2xe8 21 .Йс2 cS 22.bxc5 £сб<».
18.	-.	c6-c5
19.	Фс1-Ь1	Wd8-b8
20.	Wb3-a3?l
It was possible to fight for an advantage with 2О.'ЙгсЗ, for example: 20...c4 21 .b3 cxb3 22.axb3 Wb7 23.Hc2 2c8 24.Afl 4ie8 25.Ah3±.
20.	..	Wb8-b7
21.	Ae2-f1	c5-c4
22.	^a3-b4
If 22.Wa5!? there would have followed the same reply — 2 2...Псб.
23.	£>c7-d5
The position has become much sharper, and it is now not easy for White to find the correct plan. Thus 23 .a4 ЙЬ8 24.axbS axbS 2S.Ah3<» did not give anything.
The strongest was evidently 23.Ah3, for example: 23...^)b6 24.Wc3 2c5 (24...h6 25.Wxe5 c3 26.2g2+-) 25>a3 (2S.b4 2ia4 26>al 2xc7 27.dxc7 Wxc7T) 25...&a4 26.2>d5 2>xd5 27.2xd5 Wb6 28.d7 Sd8±.
23.	..	£if6xd5
24.	2d2xd5 Sf8-c8
25.	Wb4-c3?!
It was now essential to bring the bishop into play: 25.Ah3 c3 £6.bxc3 ПхсЗ 27.Axd7 Wxd7 28.Дхе5 #сб 29.Wb2O Дс2 ЗО.ШаЗ b4 (ЗО...ЙСЗ 3l>b2=) 31.d7 ^xd7 32.flxd7 ЬхаЗ 33.He8+ Дхе8 34.Фхс2 ЙЬ8 3S.Bd3 Hb2+ =.
25.	-.	Ь5-Ь4
26.	Wc3-c2	Ь4-Ь3
Also good was 26...сЗ!? 27.А113Т (27.ЬЗ Wb6 28.Ah3 Sd8+ is even better for Black!).
27.	Wc2-c3 b3xa2+
28.	&b1-a1l?
An attempt to use the opposing pawn as a shield for the king. If 28.Фха2, then 28...Sb6t was unpleasant.
206
Defending and Developing: 3.£k3 dxc44.£)f3
28.	..	2c8-b8
The careless 28.. .Hb6 would have been answered by the cool-headed removal of the pawn: 29.Дхс4 (29.Jih3 flb3 3O.Axd7 Wxd7 31.Wxe5 c3 32.bxc3 Wb7! 33.HbSD), and the attempt to win the pinned bishop would be severely punished: 29...flb4 3O.Jixa6! (only not ЗО.ЬЗ aS 31.Дха5 Псхс4-+) ЗО. ПхсЗ 31.ДхЬ7±.
29.	Jtf1-h3 h7-h6
On the threshold of time-trouble it is always useful to make an escape square for the king. If 29...Hb6 there would have followed ЗО.Дх<^17 5b3 (3O...Sxb2 31.Да44—; 3O...Wxd7 31.aSd2«>) 31.Jkc8.
30.	Jkh3xd7 Wb7xd7
31.	Hd5-d2
White loses after 31 WxeS c3—F, but 31 .Фха2 was possible.
31.	_	Ec6-c5?
31...	Hb3 32.Wxe5 would have led to mind-boggling variations, almost im-
possible to calculate w hen short of time. Analysis shows that with best play by both sides the game would have ended in a draw. For example: 32...C3 (32...Hd3 33.Hgl! g6 (33...f6 34>e7 Wxe7 3S.dxe7 Ee6±) 34.Sxd3 cxd3 3S.WdS! d2 (3S...Wxd6 36.fidl) 36.Wxd2 Hxd6T) 33.Eg2 (33.We7 *C8	34.Фха2 cxd2—F) 33...g6
(33...cxb2+	34ДхЬ2)	34.Sc2!
(34.We7 Wc8) 34...aS (34...5cb6 35 We7!4—; 34...cxb2+ 35.йхЬ2; if 34...ПЬ5, then 3S.We7 cxb2+ 36.ПхЬ2 ^c8 37.ExbS axbS 38.d7= leads to equality, but Black also has to reckon with 3S.Wd4) 3S.Sxc3 йсхсЗ Зб.ЬхсЗ Wb7 37.Фха2 flb2+ 38.Фа! Wb3 39 ^X35 flxh2 40.Ebl Ha2+ with perpetual check on the squares aS, c3 and el.
But Black could have defended his eS-pawn more securely - 31...f6’, after which White would have been in a critical position: 32.f4 (32.Hg2 Sb3—F is completely bad) 32...ДЬЗ 33.Wa5 Ф117 34.fxe5 c3 3S.bxc3 Eb5+ (3S...Ecb6), and 36.Wxa2 loses to 36...Exc3 37.EdS Sbb3—+.
32.	Sd2-d5 Hc5-c6
In the event of 32...ScbS 33.2xb5 axbS 34.^xe5 b4 3 S.Hgl g6 36.Wd5± only Black would have had problems.
3a Ed5-d2 Ec6-c5
Draw.
207
Chapter Four
CHIGORIN MOTIFS
Lines without 2.c4
When several enthusiasts at the chess board are examining some position from a game or piece of analysis,you always find someone who will oppose you, whichever side you take. I, with my inherent predilection for attacking, always try to take the side which seems to me to have at least a hint of an attack.
Mikhail Chigorin
Introduction
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. 5 g1-f3	ФЬ8-с61?
In his booklet Combinations and traps in the opening (Moscow, 1960), Boris Vainstein related an amusing story, which since then has been retold many times, sometimes changing the original beyond recognition. Thus, some lady player liked the Italian Game And she played l.e4 eS 2.ФГЗ Феб ЗЛс4, expecting 3...JLcS or 3...&f6, when suddenly came the reply 3...d6.
‘Excuse me,’ she said to her opponent with some displeasure, ‘I’m playing the
Italian Game but what are you playing?'...
After l.d4 dS some especially cautious players bring out their knight to f3 on the second move in order, in particular, to avoid unnecessary additional dangers such as die Albin’s Counter Gambit or die Chigorin Defence. But whereas it would indeed not occur to anyone to play 2...e5? after 2.ФГЗ, the move 2...Феб!? is nevertheless perfecdy possible. And it is not important what set-up White then chooses - Black insists on his lawful right in reply to 1 .d4 to employ the Chigorin Defence!
Strictly speaking, the position after I.d4 dS 2.Ф13 Феб belongs to the Queen’s Pawn Opening (index D02), provided only that on one of the next few moves White does not play c2-c4 (for example, directly now or after 3.J«lf4 JiLg4 4.e3 e6). However, without this chapter, which we have called ‘Chigorin Motifs’, our account of the Chigorin Defence ‘a la Morozevich’ would be incomplete.
209
Section A
The Fianchetto: 3.g3
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. £g1-f3	£Ь8-с6
3. g2-g3
fcr the regrouping of his pieces by
One of the most logical continuations The light-squared bishop will be rather well placed on the long diagonal, and White intends to carry out the undermining move c2-c4 at the most appropriate moment. Incidentally, this position often arises from a different move order 1.4if3 dS 2.g3 £c6!? 3.d4.
GAME 67
□ Predrag Nikolic
 Alexander Morozevich
Moscow 1994
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£>g1-f3	4ib8-c6
3.	g2-g3	4c8-f5
This developing move creates the additional threat of ...£lc6-b4. Of course, this raid is not fatal for White, but in reply he has to play his knight to a3, where it is not too well placed, and Black gains time
The grandmaster author has also tried both 3..J«Lg4 and 3...g6 in tournament play, but in the end he came to the conclusion dial 3...JkfS is the strongest. It is this move that we recommend to the readers.
4.	Af1-g2
Black’s plans can be radically forestalled by 4.c3, but in reply to this defensive move there are several promising set-ups. For example: 4...Wd7 (also good is 4...e6 5.£.g2 £>f6 6.£bd2 Ji.e7 7.0-0 0-0 8.b3 &e4 9.Ab2 Af6 10.c4 2>xd2 ll .Wxd2 jSLe4 12.Hfdl (£te7 13.Sacl c6= Csom-Bisguier, Palma de Mallorca 1971) 5.&bd2 f6 (or S...£f6 6.h3 ^e4 7.Ag2 h6 8.Фхе4 Axe4 9.0-0 gS!? 10.b4 Vg7 11.a4 аб 12.Jke3 0-0 13.Wd2 fSt C. Foisor-Stefanova, Dresden 2004) 6.Ф114 Ag4 7.h3 Л-hS 8.&b3 eS! 9.ЛеЗ 0-0-0 10.g4Af7 H.Jlg2e4 12.f4?!g6 13.Wc2 b6 14_W_f2 Ad6 15.e3 2>ge7T (LB. Hansen-Nakamura, Turin 2006).
In the event of 4.c4 e6 5.Jkg2 Black can transpose into variations analysed later by
210
TheFionchetto: l.d4 dS 2.4)f3 £)c6 3.g3
S...	&b4!?. Paul Keres has demonstrated another way of equalizing: 5...£)f6 6.0-0 Ae7 7.4k3 £e4 8.cxd5 exdS 9.Wb3 &хсЗ Ю.ЬхсЗ £laS 11 .Wa4+ сб 12.£)d2 0-0= (Acevedo-Ke res, Mexico 1972).
4.	...	e7-e6
4...£}b4 5.ФаЗ еб (or 5...c6 б.сЗ Фйб 7.£lh4 Ag4 8.h3 AhS 9.Wb3 Wb6 10.g4 Ag6 ll.£lxg6 hxg6 12.e4 Wxb3 13.axb3 еб 14.Af4± Tunik-Barsky, Yalta 1996) 6.c3 £ia6 is premature in view of 7.£h4! Ag4 (7...Ae4 8.f3 Ag6 9.e4±) 8.h3 AhS 9.Wb3 Hb8 (9...Wc8 10.g4 Ag6 11 .<£jxg6 hxg6 12.e4t) 10.e4!t.
5.	0-0
The young Levon Aronian once chose die ultra-cautious move S.a3, and after S...Ae7 6.0-0 £tf6 7.c4 £e4 8.e3 0-0 9.We2 He8 10.4)fd2 a6 Black gained good counter-chances (Aronian-Kozul, Portoroz 1999).
5.	«.	£c6-b4!?
6.	£Ы-аЗ
In the event of 6.£iel £>f6 7.a3 ^a6 8.c4 сб chances are equal.
In 1994 grandmaster Vadim Zviagintsev suggested an interesting positional sacrifice of the exchange - 6.c4!?. This move was seriously tested only 12 years later (see the later game Maletin-Kobalia).
& _ Af8-e7
Black takes control of the h4-square, in order to safeguard himself against £if3-h4. Aldiough, practice has shown that this is not so terrible for him: 6...£f6 7.c3 (7.£)h4 Ag4 8.c4 сб 9.4k2 £ixc2 10.Wxc2 Ae7 11.h3 AhS 12.g4 Ag6 13.2>xg6 hxg6 14.Af4 Ad6 lS.Axd6 Wxd6*± Savon-Aronin, Yerevan 1962) 7...4ic6 8.Wb3 Sb8 9.Ag5! (stronger than 9.£h4!? Ag4 10.f3 AhS ll.e4 Ae7 12.g4! Ag6 13.gS 2>h5 14.exd5 AxgS lS.£ixg6 Axel 16.£ixh8 Ae3 + 17.Sf2 Axf2+ 18.&xf2 exdS 19.c4 ФГС 20.cxd5 Wh4+ 21.ФП	£xd45=*
Nikolic-Arencibia, Yerevan 1996) 9...Ae7 10.Axf6 Axf6 11 ,£ki2 0-0 12.e4 dxe4 13.£ixe4± (Chuchelov-Bakhmatov, Bad Zwesten 2000).
In the following blitz game White did not drive the knight away from b4, and as a result the opponent was able to seize the initiative on the queenside: 6...c6 7.c4 (7.2>h4!?) 7...2if6 8A/4 Ae7 9.Wb3 aS I0.c5 Ь6 П.схЬб Wxb6 12.flfcl 0-0 13.Wdl cS 14.Ag5 flfcS 15Ae3 c4T (Bochkarev-Benefactor, ICC 2005).
7.	c2-c3
As long as the white knight is standing on a3, its opposite number at b4 feels perfectly comfortable: 7.c4 сб 8.Ad2 aS (8...^a6?! 9 Wa4 £f6 10.2)e5 Wc8
211
Chapter Four - Section A
11.Пас! 0-0 12.b4 We8 13.Wb3 2e4 14.Ji.el h6 15.ft 2f6 16.Ad2± Mohebbi-Bouton, France 1996) 9.2e5 2f6 1O.ft 0-0 1 1 Ac3 h6 12.e4?! dxe4 13.We2 exft 14.Hxft c5?l (14...2g4+) IS.dxcS? (IS.dSioo) 15... J-xcS+T (severomorskij-Morozevich, ICC 2002). The following pawn sacrifice is too reckless: 7.2h4?! Jlxh4 8.gxh4 Wxh4 9.c4 сб 10.Wb3 aS ll .3t.d2 2f6 12.Axb4 axb4 13.Wxb4 ^xd4 14.Wxb7 0-0 15.Wxc6 Wxb2 16.2b5 flac8 17.^a6 Hxc4—4 (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
The attempt to provoke an immediate crisis promises White little, since it runs counter to his unhurried play during the initial moves. For example: 7 .2e5 2f6 8.c3 2a6 and now:
A) 9.c4 сб (9...0-0 10.2 c 2 Jle4 ll.ft Дхс2 12.Wxc2c5 13.Ji.e3 2b4 14.Wb3 dxc4 15.Wxc4 cxd4 16.JLd2? Wb6+ slint-Aronian, ICC 2003, but 16.Hadl = is better) 10.£f4 0-0 H.Wb3 Wb6 12.cS Wxb3 13.axb3 2b4 14.Hfdl b6 15.Had bxcS 16.dxc5 a5+ (Visam-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
B) 9.Wa4+ сб 10.Jlf4 Wb6 1 l.b4 0-0 12.Had Hfc8 13.ft h6 14.Hfel 2c7 1 S.e4 Ah7 16.ПЫ 2b5 17.2xb5 cxbS 18.Wb3 j3.d6T (Aronian-Vera, Ubeda 1998).
7.	2b4-a6
8.	Wd1-b3
8.2c2 promises White little, for example: 8...c6 9.2e5 (or 9.2e3 Jte4 10.Ah3 2f6 11.2g5 jfiLg6 12.2ft 2d7 13.2g4 Jlf5 14.&g2 0-0 15.2ge5 2xe5 16.2xeS £.xh3+ 17.ФхЬЗ f6 18.2f3 Jld6T Agokoy-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 9...2f6 10.2e3 Jle4 ll.ft &g6 12.2xg6 hxg6 13.Wd3 2c7= (jaws-Morozevich, ICC 2002).
8.c4 will be examined later.
8. ..	Wd8-c8
9.	c3-c4
A year after the Moscow Olympiad, at which the Nikolic-Morozevich game was played, grandmaster Evgeny Bareev made an attempt to improve White’s play: 9.Hel сб (if 9...h6 Evgeny was intending 10.2d2, and if 9...2f6 - 10.2h4) 10.AgS, and he gained a slight advantage after 1О...Ае4 ll.JLxe7 2xe7 12.2b!! JLxft 13.J.xf3 0-0 14.e4 Hd8 15.2a3!? (15.2d2 cS 16.exdS 2xd5 17.dxc5 2xc5 18.Wc2=) 15...С5?! (15...2c7 is better, with the idea of 2e8-f6<») 16.exdS 2xd5 17.Hadl± (Bareev-Moro-zevich, Elista 1995). 10...h6 ll.Ji.xe7 2xe7 12.2d2= would have been stronger for Black.
The immediate 9.JLgS!? is interesting, for example: 9...Axg5 (9...h6 10.Ji.xe7 2xe7 11.2d2 0-0	12.e4 dxe4
13.2xe4±) 10.2xgS 2f6 H.e4!?2xe4 12.2xe4 Дхе4 13.Дхе4 dxe4 14.Had 0-0 15.Hxe4 Hb8!? 16>bS!? (16.Hfel Ь5з*) 16...C5 17.Hdl± (Chuchelov-Godena, Mondariz 2000).
9. «	c7-c6
10. Jtc1-f4
In the event of 10.2e5 (with the idea of 11 .exdS exdS 12.e4) Black achieves a
212
The Fianchetto. I.d4d5 2.£)f3 £k6 3.g3
comfortable game by 10...ЗД6 ll.J«i.g5 0-0 12.Dacl Hd8=.
White gained a slight advantage after lO.AgS h6 ll.Axe7 £)xe7 12.^d2 0-0 I3.e4dxe4 14.^xe4fld8 15.Sadi Wc7 16.Wc3± (Aronian-Pinski, Yerevan 1999).
The less active 10.JLd2 allows Black to comfortably deploy his forces: 10...4Jf6 11. flacl 0-0 12.cxd5 exdS I 3.AgS Sk7 14/beS h6 15.Axf6 Axf6 16.e3 Se8?* (Heine-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
10.	-.	-g8-f6
11.	fla1-c1	0-0
12.	£f3-e5
After 12.^h4 Де4 White can outwit himself: 13.f3?! dxc4!, and in the event of 14.&XC4? AdS 15.e4 bS 16.exd5 bxc4 17.'®fxc4 4ixdS 18.Ad2 gS he unexpectedly loses a piece!
12.	..	5f8-d8
13.	&a3-c2
13.fifdl!? came into consideration, intending ФЫ-сЗ and then a possible e2-e4.
13.	...	h7-h6
14.	Hf1-d1	&a6-c7
15.	a2-a3	a7-a5
Black has successfully solved his opening problems, and his pieces are quite harmoniously placed. Willi his next move
While begins to create difficulties for himself.
16.	Wb3-a2?l
The queen voluntarily hides away in a remote understair cupboard... There was much more life in the line 16.g4!? Ah7 (I6...£)xg4?	17.^xg4 Axg4
18>g3+-; 16...Дхс2 17.Пхс2±)
A)	!7.Wh3’? (intending ФЫ andBgl with an attack) 1 7...dxc4 1 8.£>xc4 5kdS 19.Ae5 £>e45=*;
B)	17.Wg3 £)ce8 18.gS (18.f3 gS!? 19..&e3 2>g7 2O.h4 &fe8 and ...f6<x) 18...hxg5!?	(18...4Jh5«>)	19.Axg5
4£id6oo.
16.	.«	a5-a4
17.	if4-d2?l
The bishop also experiences a period of depression, and it hurries to hide from human view... 17 .^b4 Ad6= was simpler.
17.	..	<?f6-e4
18.	£d2-e1	£e7-f6
19.	£c2-b4?
After this incautious nrove Black seizes the initiative 19.f3 £kl6 20.£te3 Ah 7 21.Ab4 was belter, with an unclear game.
19.	c6-c5!
Bad was 19...Дхе5?! 20.dxe5 d4 21 ,2>d3
#Ja6 22.c5!±, and the d4-pawn, cut off from base, becomes a headache for Black.
20.	£b4-d3 c5xd4
21.	c4xd5 e6xd5r
22.	£e5-f3	£»4-g5l
23.	Ae1-b4
After other continuations Black also retains the better chances: 23.^xg5 hxgST; 23.$tf4 2>xfJ+ 24.Axf3 Wd7 25.£ih5 AeST; 23.Ad2 £xf3+ 24.Axf3 Axd3!? 25.exd3 WfS 26.<±>g2 2)e6T.
23.	-.	S,g5-e6
24.	^d3-c5	Wc8-b8
213
Chapter Four - Section A
25.	&с5хе6	&c7xe6
26.	b2-b3	^Ь8-а7+
27.	£f3-e1	jfi.f5-e4
Activating the bishop and, at die same time, defending the dS-pawn. Nothing was given by the combination 27...d3? 28Axd3 axb3 29.Wxb3 &d4 in view of the simple 3O.Wa2<».
28.	£e1-d3	Па8-с8
29.	Ec1 xc8	Ed8xc8
30.	.fi.g2-f1	b7-b6l
It is useful to take control of the cS-square, where at a convenient moment the еб-knight may go.
31.	b3xa4 Wa7xa4
The immediate 31 ...£ic5 would have proved too hasty on account of 32.a5! 4}xd3 33.exd3 bxaS 34.dxe4 axb4 35.eS $Le7 36.a4<».
32.	fld1-c1 Пс8хс1
33.	£d3xc1
jfi.a7—+; 38.£b2 Дс2-+) 38...£Lxd3 39.exd3 bxaS 40.jfi.g2 ^xd3 41 .jfi.xd5+.
34.	£id-d3 Wc6-c4
35.	Wa2-b2l? £e6-g5?l
3S...h5!? followed by 36...h4was better.
36.	ifb2-b1
Weaker was 36.^d2?! Wc8 37.jfi.g2 .fi.xg2 38,&xg2 №+.
36.	..	Wc4-c8
37.	Wb1-b3
White would have lost after 37.h4? £h3+ 38.&h2 £>xf2—but 37.Wdl!? was also possible.
37.	-	^c8-g4
If 37... hS, then 38. f3 oo.
38.	Wb3-d1Q
The only move 38.f3 4jxf3+ 39.exf3 Wxf3-+ and 38.£jel d3! 39.4jxd3 £}f3 + 4O.exf3 Wxf3—4 were both bad for White, and in the event of 38.£f4 d3 39.h3 Wf3!! + Black also has a big advantage.
38.	._	)»g4-c8
In the event of 38...hS? 39.f3 4^xf3+ 4O.exf3 jfi.xf3 41.Wel± Black is a piece down without any attack. 38...£>h3+ 39.jfi.xh3 ^xh3 4O.f3T would have retained a slight advantage.
39.	h2-h4	tg5-e6!
40.	Wd1-a4
33. _	Wa4-c6?
This allows White to catch his breath a lit-tle. 33. JSfdl! was significantly stronger, for example 34.'S'd2 (34.£ld3 £ig5! with die threats of 3S...4jh3 and 3S...£lf3—4) 34...Wxd2 3S.£xd2 Де7 36.a4 (36.Ab4 Axb4 37.axb4 £f8+)	36...Ad8!
(36...Дс2 37.a5=) 37.£jd3 (37.2>b3 Ac2-4-) 37...«k5 38.aS!? (38.&xc5 bxcS 39.aS c4 40.аб ДЬб 41.Да5
214
The Fionchetto: l.d4dS 2.2)f3 2)c6 3.g3
Such a committing decision should not have been taken on the 40th move, the last one before the time control. It would
have been far more sensible to play 40...g5!? or even 40...g6!?, giving the opponent the move
41.	g3xh4!	4be6-c5
42.	ДЬ4хс5	Wc8-g4+
4i	&g1-h2	^g4xh4+
44.	Af1-h3	Jte4-f5!
White stands better after 44...bxc5? 4S.We8+ ФЬ7 46.Wxf7 c4 47.Ckc5±. But after the move in the game the players agreed a draw in view of 45.Ad6! Wxh3 + 46.£>gl Де4 47.f3 £xd3 48.exd3 ^xf3 49.Wxd4 bS with an
equal game.
8. .-	c7-c6
9. 7a3-c2
The switching of the knight to c3 by 9.£ibl!? comes into consideration. White played too sharply in the following blitz game: 9.ilf4 Ш 10.AeS 0-0 1 1 .e3 #te4 12.h4?! h6 13.h5? £g4 14.Wb3 Wb6 15.Wxb6 axb6+ (FlyingPiket-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
9.	•••	£g8-f6
10.	b2-b3	0-0
11.	Ac1-b2	Af5-e4
12.	£ic2-e3	£f6-d7
13.	a2-a3	f7-f5
Ж81 W 1*1
4 A A
GAME 68
□ Alexey Vyzhmanavin  Alexander Morozevich
New York 1995 (rapid)
ДА
аад|

s s® нф
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	^g1-f3	^Ь8-с6
3.	g2-g3	£.c8-f5
4.	Af1-g2	'.c6-b4
5.	^Ы-аЗ	e7-e6
6.	0-0	Af8-e7
7.	c2-c3	£b4-a6
8. c3-c4
Black intends a mass offensive on the kingside. For rapid chess the availability of a simple and clear plan (in addition, an active one!) is a substantial plus.
14. Ea1-c1
It is not possible to trap the bishop on e4: 14.Ah3?! We8 15.$Ad2 Wh5 16.Ag2 Axg2 17.£ixg2.£d6 18.e3=.
14.	Wd8-e8
Before beginning the assault. Black must bring up his reserves. Double-edged play would have resulted from 14...f4 15.^Ag4 ^Ld6 16.e3 fxe3 I 7.fxe3 We8^.
15. 7f3-e1
In the event of 15.b4 $}c7 16.Wb3 WhST Black is clearly ahead of his opponent.
15. _	jie4xg2
215
Chapter Four - Section A
16.	£>e3xg2	Zf8-f6
17.	e2-e3	W6-h6
18.	£>e1-d3	4jd7-f6
19.	h2-h4	
19.£igf4 Ad6 20.13 gS 21.^e2 WhS
22.Sf2 Sf8 23.4ie5a> came into consid-
eration.
19.	-	£f6-e4
20.	Wd1-e2	<a6-b8
This knight has been standing on the edge of the field, but now along with all the other pieces it is lime that it set to work.
21.	£g2-f4	£b8-d7
22.	Xg1-g2	Ae7-d6
23.	Hf1-h1
23.f3 £tef6 24.£}е5«^ doesnot look bad.
23.
24. £d3-e5
25. a3*a4
26. d4xe5
a7-a5
^e8-e7
Ad6xe5
26.	..	Be7-b4!?
The principle of the two weaknesses in action! White is excellently entrenched on the kingside, and to break through there is almost unrealizable, and so Black looks for a new target to attack. And as it was said long ago by Nimzowitsch: the further apart these targets are, the more difficult it is to defend them.
27.	c4xd5
With tills and his next move White tries to seize the initiative on the kingside, but he merely weakens his own position. 27.Wc2!? was preferable, and in die event of die possible variation 27...Фес5 28.ПЬ1 dxc4 (or 28...Wxb3 29.Wxb3 £xb3 3O.cxd5 exdS 31JLd4 £ixd4 32.exd4 b6 33.Hhcl32) 29.bxc4Wxa4 3O.Wxa4£lxa4 31 .Slid 1 ® the unfortunate position of lhe black rook on h6 may tell.
27.	-	e6xd5
28.	g3-g4?
Black stands better after 28.£ki3 Wxb3 29.13 Wxa4 3O.fxe4 Wxe4+ 31.ФЬЗ (3l.*gl a4T)31...b5 32.Hhfl gSt.
But here too 28.Wc2!? was better, for example: 28...£>ec5 29.Ac3 Wxb3 3O.Wxb3 Slxb3 31.ЙЫ £bc5 32.e6 ^3f8 33.Ad4 ОДхеб 34.Фхе6 Фхеб 35.Sxb7 &xd4 36.exd4fle6 37.Del®.
2a ._ f5xg4
29.	e5-e6
In the event of 29.Wxg4 Wxb3 30.Ji.d4 Wa2 3l.Hhfl £)f8+ Black stabilizes the situation on the kingside, while on the queenside he has many extra pawns.
29. ...	£id7-f6
32. £T4-d3	Wb4-f8
33. £>d3-e5	Wf8-f5
216
The Fianchetto: 1. d4 dS 2 .<2)f3 £)c6 3.g3
34.	^c2-e2	Zh6xe6
35.	<e5xg4	Se6-g6
36.	f2-f3	£e4-f6
37.	We2-c2	
If 37.ФИЗ or 37.Jkxf6, then 37...ЗД4+ is decisive.
37. _
White resigned.
£>f6xg4
GAME 69
□ Pavel Maletin
 Mikhail Kobalia
Tomsk 2006
1.	£g1-f3	d7-d5
2.	g2-g3	5b8-c6
3.	d2-d4	jkc8-f5
4.	c2-c4	e7-e6
5.	Af1-g2	2>c6-b4
6.	0-0	
The following variations and evaluations were given by Morozevich in the notes to his game with Nikolic in biformator No.62:
A) 6...Ac2 7.Wd2 Axbl (7...dxc4? 8.4ia3±) 8.ПхЫ £ixa2 9.cxd5! exdS (9...£)xcl 10.dxe6!±) 10.We3+ Jke7 (10...We7 11. £>e5! ^xcl (11...C6 12J.d2 f6 13.^d3 ^xe3 14.fxe3+-; 11...2>b4 12.Ad2!4—) 12JkxdS 0-0-0 13.ДхЬ7+!+-) 11. Ad2 aS 12.flal 2>b4 13.Axb4 axb4 14.flxa8 Wxa8 1 S.WeSi;
B) 6...£)c2 7.£h4 £>xal 8.£lxfS (8.cxd5? ДхЫ+) 8...exf5 9.£k3 (9.Axd5 сб with the idea of ...£tf6, ...Де7±) 9...2if6 lO.AgS!? Jke7 ll.Axf6 £xf6 12.£ixd5 (12.£xdS 0-0=) 12...c6 13.£>xf6+ Wxf6 14.e3 0-0 IS.Wxal aS (15...Sad8 16.b4!±) 16.Пс1!?±.
6...h6!? or 6...c6!? comes into consideration.
Grandmaster Mikhail Kobalia did not agree with the evaluation of the second variation, made back in the pre-computer era.
7.	£f3-h4	£>c2xa1
8.	4h4xf5	e6xf5
9.	ФЫ-сЗ	£jg8-f6
10.	Ac1-g5	Jkf8-e7
11.	i.g5xf6	£e7xf6
12.	4x3xd5	0-0
13.	e2-e3	c7-c6
14.	£d5xf6+	Wd8xf6
15.	Wdl xa!	Ef8-e8l?
By transposition of moves we have reached a position which could have occurred in the Nikolic-Morozevich game, if White had played c2-c4 on the 6th move (after l.d4 dS 2.£if3 £lc6 3.g3 JkfS 4J«Lg2 еб 5.0-0 £ib4). White offers an exchange sacrifice, pinning his hopes on his domination of the centre and his powerful bishop on g2.
6. _.	£ib4-c2
 I 'I sB
ill
Ml
W
217
Chapter Four - Section A
Evidently it is this move that should be regarded as a novelty, since all the preceding moves were given 12 years earlier.
16. c4-c5	g7-g5
The two sides’ plans become clear: White wants to expand his bishop’s sphere of influence by b2-b4-b5 or d4-d5 and create a dangerous passed pawn on the queenside, while Black, in turn, is beginning counterplay against the enemy king.
17. Ь2-Ь4
Planning to enter an endgame, which in fact proves to be advantageous to Black. The play would have been more tense in the event of 17 .Wdl Sad8 18.b4<® or 17...f4 18.Wg4 &h8 19.b4flad8oo.
17. ._	f5-f4
1a d4-d5
After I8.exf4gxf4 19.d5 Wxal 2О.йха1 exdS 2 lAxdS fle7 22.АГЗ!? Sd8 23.b5 fxg3 24.hxg3 Hd2T there are many open lines, and the black rooks are very active.
1a -	Жбха1
19.	Sf1xa1	f4xe3!
This is stronger than 19...cxd5 2O.gxf4 gxf4 21.Axd5 fle7 (or 21...fxe3 22.Axb7 flab8 23.c6 e2 24.flel flbd8 25.f3 Se7 26.ФГ2 Ed2 27.a4**) 22.e4 ^'g7 23.<i>g2<», when the white bishop occupies a dominating outpost, and both central files are closed to the black rooks.
20.	d5xc6	e3-e2
21.	Да1-е1	Ea8-d8
22.	f2-f4
White would have lost after 22.cxb7? fldl. He needs to vacate the fl-square for his king.
22.	..	Ь7хс6
23.	f4xg5
Black also stands better after 23.Axc6 Пеб 24.AD gxf4 25.gxf4 fld4 26.fS fleS 27.a3Sd3 28.flxe2 flxf5+.
23.	_	Ee8-e6
24.	*g1-f2	fld8-d2
25.	a2-a3	Ed2-a2
26.	b4-b5
26. ._ 3a2xa3?l
Of course, 26...cxb5? 27 .AdS was bad, but 26..fle5! was stronger: 27.bxc6 flf$+ 28.ФеЗ flxa3+ 29.<&d4 3a4+ 3O.*»fc,d3 HxgS 31 ,flxe2 Sxc5+.
27. Ь5хс6?
And here White could have made things much more difficult for his opponent by 27.Axc6! &f8 28.Ad7 Пе5 29.c6 Фе7 3O.Ag4 &d6 3 1 .Axe2 fla2 32.ФЛ.
27.	_ 28.	Йе1 xe2 29.	£f2-e1 30.	&e1-d2 31.	&d2-d3 32.	&d3xe2 33.	£e2*d3	Ee6-e5 Se5-f5+ Ea3-a1 + Sa1-a2+ 3a2xe2 Ef5xg5 ±g8-f8!
Possibly this move	was underestimated
by White in his	calculations. Black
would have lost	his advantage after
ЗЗ...ЙХС5 34.ФН4 Дс1 (34...ЙС2 3S.Ae4 flci 36.<£d5=) 3 5.<±>e5 &f8 36.$d6**.
34.	Ag2-e4	h7-h6
35.	&d3-c4	Ф«-е7
36.	Ae4-d5	f7-f6
White resigned.
218
Section В
The Bishop Sortie: 3J$Lf4
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. £g1-f3	£Ь8-с6
3. Ac1-f4
A solid developing move. If now While plays c2-c4 on the 4th or Sth move, we transpose into positions analysed in Chapter Two. However, quite often either White altogether avoids this move, or he postpones it for an indefinite time. But without c2-c4, in our view, it is hard for him to hope for any serious advantage.
GAME 70
□ Andras Adorjan
 Alexander Morozevich
Alushta 1994
1.	<g1-f3	£>b8-c6l?
Even this is possible, only Black must be prepared for 2.e4 and he should not be especially surprised if, instead of a Chigorin Defence, a Ruy Lopez is reached!
2	d2-d4	d7-d5
3.	Ac1-f4	Дс8-д4
SB WsliX
ill 1111 * A
E
4.	e2-e3
Here are some other possibilities, tested both in the virtual and in the real world;
A) 4.£bd2 e6 S.h3 ДЬ5 (5...ДВ!? б.еЗ &Ь4 7.ДЬ5+ сб 8.Да4 £d6 9.&е5 f6 10.g4 fxeS 11 .dxeS -£xc2 12.Дхс2 £1хс2+ 13.'8fxc2 Vb4 14.0-0-0± Donchenko-Barsky, Moscow 1995) 6.e3 Ad6 7.Ae2 -iLxf4 8.exf4 £>ge7 9.c3 Wd6 10.£teS Дхе2 H.Wxe2 f6 12.£d3 b6 13.0-0 0-0= (Wannabee-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
В) 4.4>e5!? Фхе5 5.Axe5 2)f6 6.c4 dxc4 7.^a4+ £kl7 8.jiLg3 JLe6 9.£)сЗ сб 10.e4 £b6 11.^aS g6 12.0-0-0 Ag7 13.f4?! f5! 14.d5 exdS IS.exdS Af7 16.Ae2 0-0+ (Hebden-Nakamura, Gibraltar 2005).
4.	e7-e6
219
Chapter Four - Section В
5.	£b1-d2
The diagram position has occurred many times both in Internet blitz and in normal events. If White postpones c2-c4, Black usually plays ...Af8-d6, offering the exchange of the dark-squared bishops. The further plans of the two sides depend on which square this exchange takes place on — d6, f4 or g3. In the first case Black usually recaptures on d6 with his pawn, places his rook от c8 and prepares an offensive on the queenside Af ter the exchange on g3 he can consider advancing ...еб-eS. Another plan, which is also possible after the exchange on f4, is to move his knight from сб and support the centre by ...c7 -сб.
Here is how these ideas have been implemented in practice:
A)	S.Ae2 Ad6 (Black can also begin with 5...£if6, but then after 6.0-0 Ad6 he has to reckon with 7.J»Lg5; however, the exchange on f6 is hardly dangerous for him, for example: 7...h6 8.Axf6 Wxf6 9.c4 0-0 10.cS Ae7 11,2ic3 аб 12.ВЫ BfdS?* mikenty-Benefactor, ICC 2005):
Al) 6.£>bd2 £f6 7.c3 0-0 8.0-0 h6 9.Ag3 Axg3 10.hxg3 Wd6 11.c4 £ie4 12.cxd5 £htd2 13.^xd2 Axe2 14.Wxe2 exdS, draw (Sundararajan-Shorl, Gibraltar 2006);
A2) 6.Axd6 cxd6 7.0-0 43f6 8.c4dxc4 9.Axc4 0-0 10.£k3 Bc8 ll..fi.e2 a6 12.Bel Wb6 13.£a4 WaS 14.a3 bS 15.£jc3 0^7 <=* (Dlugy-Benefactor, ICC 2005);
A3) 6..fi.g3 £lf6 (6...4ке7 is rather artificial, as White was able to demonstrate in the following game: 7.4}bd2 43f6 8.c4 сб 9.Wb3 Bb8 10.-fi.xd6 Wxd6 H.h3 Axf3 12.^xf3 0-0 13.0-0 &g6 14.Ad3 a6 15.Wc2 Bfd8 16.Badl We7 17.Bfel Bbc8± Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999):
A31) 7.0-0 0-0 (7...^e4 8.c4 £xg3 9.hxg3 dxc4 10.Qbd2 hS 11.43xc4 Wf6 12.£)xd6+ cxd6 13.d5! exdS 14.Wxd5 0-0-0 15.b4 ФЬ8 16.b5 £)e5 1 7.b6 a6 18.Sac it Riazantsev-Benefactor, ICC 2004) 8.c4 4ie7 9.£ic3 Axg3 10.hxg3 сб 11.Bel 2>g6 12.b4 a6 13.Wb3 Be8 14.a4 4ie4 15.Bc2 hS!?** (Riazantsev-BARS, ICC 2002);
A32) 7.2Ы2 0-0 8.c4 (8.c3 2>e7 9.0-0cS 10.Wb3c4 11.Wc2 bS 12.b4aS 13.a3 AfS 14.Wb2 Axg3 15.hxg3 h6 16.Bfel 4k6T Bochkarev-Benefactor, ICC 2005) 8...&e7 9.c5 Axg3 10.hxg3 сб 11.b4 Wc7 12.^e5 Axe2 13.Wxe2 4}g6 14.4)df3 £№4** (Wannabee-Moro-zevich, ICC 1999);
B)	S.AbS Ad6 (Black can ignore the pin on his queen’s knight, since the exchange on сб with the loss of a tempo is unfavourable for his opponent) 6.Ag3 (6.h3 AhS 7.4>bd2 £e7 8.0-0 Axf4 9.exf4 Wd6 10.g3 0-0-0 11.c3 h6 12.Ae2 f6 13.b4 gS 14.b5 2>b8 15.c4 gxf4 16.cS Wd7 17.g4 Bdg8?* Leroy-Boy-Wanted, ICC 1999) 6...£le7 7.£>bd2 a6 8.Ae2 (8.Aa4 0-0 9.Axd6 cxd6 10.h3 AhS 11.0-0 Bc8 12.c3 eS 13.Wbl e4 14.&h2 fSt Dlugy-Moro-zevich, ICC 1999) 8...0-0 9.c4 21f5 10.Axd6 &xd6 11 .Bel &e7 12.Wc2 сб 13.0-0 AfS 14.Ad3 Axd3 15.Wxd3
220
The Bishop Sortie: 1. d4dS 2.£)f3 <Sc6 3.Af4
4}g6 16.a3 fS 17.b4 <^e4?± (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
‘Creeping-prophylactic’ moves have also occurred, after which the play also develops in accordance with the scenario described above:
C)	S.c3 Ad6 6.Axd6 cxd6 7.Ae2 &ge7 8.0-0 0-0 9.£bd2 flc8 10.3Ы Wd7 1 l.h3 AfS 12.ЙС1 h6 13.Eel Ag6 14.Afl Hc7 15.e4Hfc8*± (velimirovich-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
D)	S.a3 Ad6 6.Axd6 cxd6 7.c4 dxc4 8.Axc4 Sc8 9.Ae2 Wb6 10.b4 aS 1 l.bS 2>ce7 12.£ibd2 dS 13.2ie5 Axe2 14.Wxe2	15.a4 О-Оз^ (stein-Moro-
zevich, ICC 2000).
Let us return to the Adorjan-Morozevich game.
5.	.. Af8-d6
6.	Af4xd6
A)	In the event of 6.Ag3 Black has numerous tempting possibilities:
Al) 6...Axg3 7.hxg3 8.Ae2 0-0 9.0-0 4)e7 10.£e5 Axe2 ll.Wxe2 сб 12.c4 &f5 13.b4	14.cS &de4
15.£lxe4 ^xe4 16.&B aS 17.a3 bS 18.4kJ2 fST (kocho-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
A2) 6...&ge7 7.c4 0-0 8.Wb3 аб 9.c5 Axg3 10.hxg3 h6 ll.Ad3 bS 12.0-0
Axf3 13.4ixf3f5 14.Wc3 gS 15.b4g4*± (Buzzo-Wanted, ICC 1999);
A3) 6...&f6 7.c4 0-0 8.Ad3 &b4 9.АЫ cS 10.0-0 cxd4 ll.exd4 Axg3 12.hxg3 dxc4T (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999);
B)	6.c3 hardly creates any serious difficulties: 6...Axf4 7.exf4 4}ge7 8.Ae2 Wd6 9.£teS Axe2 10.Wxe2 f6 И.&хсб 4)xc6 12.g3 0-0-0 13.&F3 h6 14.h4 aS 15.0-0 gS** (Bochkarev-Benefactor, ICC 2005).
6.	.- c7xd6
7.	Af1-e2
Little is changed by the inclusion of the moves 7.h3 AhS: 8.c4 £>ge7 9.Ae2 0-0 10.0-0 Wd7 (10...Hc8 ll.Ecl Wd7 12.Wa4Sc7 13.cxd5 4ixdS 14J$Je4Ag6 15.£c3 4ib6 16.Wdl £e7 17>d2a6^ kocho-Morozevich, ICC 1999) ll.Scl 3fc8 12.a3 dxc4 13.Пхс4 Sc7 14.b4 Sac8 15. Wai £d5 16.Bel h6 17.Ad3 4)b6 18.Bc2 4W 19.Seel A.g6= (Karpov-Ivanchuk, Monaco blind 1998).
7.	_	£ig8-e7
The king’s knight is also quite well placed on f6: 7...£Af6 8.0-0 0-0 9.c3 (9.c4 dxc4 10.£>xc4 Sc8 ll.Scl bS 12.4ted2 Wb6 13.h3 AhS 14.Wb3 a6 15.a4 £)a5 16.Wb4 2>d5 17.Wa3 b4 18.Wa2 b3 19.Wa3 4ib4T Shtopor-Benefactor, ICC 2005) 9...a6 10.h3AhS H.a4h6 12.b4 Hc8 13.Sei Wd7 14.Scl Bc7 IS.bS axbS 16.axb5 4ia5 I7.b6 Ессв^ (velimirovich-Morozevich, ICC 2002).
a o-o	o-o
9. h2-h3	Ag4xf3
10. Ae2xf3
10.£ixf3 Hc8 I l.c3 a6 leads to play with chances for both sides. Now White prepares to open up the centre with e3-e4.
10.	..	b7-b5
11.	c2-c3	Ea8-b8
12.	a2-a4 I
221
Chapter Four - Section В
12. ..	Ь5ха4?!
A rather reckless move, since the white rook on a4 is more actively placed than its opposite number on b8. 12...b4!? 13.We 1 Wd7 was more circumspect, with an unclear position.
13.	Wd1-c2	e6-e5
14.	Sa1 xa4	a7*a5
15.	e3-e4	d5xe4
16.	jif3xe4	
The capture with the knight is less good: 16.^xe4 dS 17.£te5 (17.2ig5? ^g6+: 17.£}g3 exd4T) 17...exd4 18.cxd4 Wd6?=t.
16.	f7-f5
17.	ji.e4xc6 &e7xc6
18.	d4xe5
After 18.d5 £se7 19.c4 ^g6!?*=* Black can quickly create dangerous counterplay in the centre and on the kingside.
20.	Wc2-d1l?
Beginning a contest for the central file. White would not achieve anything with 20.Ufa 1 Hb5 21.We2 Sd5?±.
20.	.. Wd8-f6
Black avoids the exchange of queens, since in the endgame the weakness of the a5-pawn would be bound to tell.
21.	Wd1-d5+ ig8-h8
22.	Ef1-d1 h7-h6?l
Underestimating White’s reply. 22...Sbd8 was stronger, and then with computer help one can compose an amusing (although somewhat cooperative) variation, in which both sides try in turn to give perpetual check: 23.£id6 2>e7 24.Wd4 Феб 2S.Wc5 (25.Wd5 £>e7=)	25...&e5	26.Ed5	£>f3+
27.gxf3 (27.ФП £h2+=; 27.ФЫ £h4?*) 27...Wg5+ 28.ФЫ Wcl + 29.&g2 Wg5 + 30.ФП Wcl+ 31.Фе2 Hb8 32.Hd2 exf3+ 33.&d3 Hxb2 34.flxb2 Wxb2 3S.£f7+	&g8
36.2>h6+ =.
23.	Wd5-c5!
From here the queen controls the entire board, and the rook gains access to d6.
23.		Zf8-d8
24.	Ed1-d6	Sd8xd6
25.	^c4xd6	£c6-e7
26.	Ea4xa5	Sb8xb2
27.	2)d6xf5±	e4-e3l?
222
The Bishop Sortie: 1. d4 dS 2. £)f3 4^6 3.^f4
This unexpected complicating of the play in time-trouble created too strong an impression on the opponent...
28.	Wc5xe7?
Of course, 28'Й'хеЗ? ^xf5+ was not good, but 28.fxe3! was far stronger. Black is then unable to launch an attack -28...^gS 29.g4 Bbl + 30.&g2 Bb2+ 31.ФГЗ Hh2 32.Wxe7 Exh3 + ЗЗ.Фе2 Wxg4+ 34.&d3 Ehl (34,..Wdl + 35.Фе44~) 35>e8+ ФЬ7 36.4И44—, and therefore he is forced to enter a rook endgame a pawn down: 28...43xf5 29.Wxf5 WxfS 3O.Bxf5 Bc2 3l5c5 Ее2 32.Bc8+ ФЬ7 33.c4±. Now, however, the situation changes radically.
2ft .	Wf6xe7
29.	Srf5xe7	Sb2-b1 +
30.	ig1-h2	e3xf2
31. Ba5-f5
32. Ef5xf1
f2-flW
Eb1xf1 +
The knight is not the most mobile piece, and it is not easy for it to defend on two flanks.
33.	&h2*g3 Hf1-d1
34.	^>e7-g6+ d?h8-h7
35.	&g6*e5 Bd1-f1
36.	c3-c4	g7-g6
37.	h3-h4	&h7-g7
38.	^e5-g4
A similar position would arise after 38.£f3 si?f6 39.&h2 Eel 40,&g4+ &g7 4l.2)e5 h5!?T.
38.	_.	h6-h5
39.	£g4-e3 Ef1-h1
40.	£e3-d5 Xg7-f7
41.	41d5-e3	*f7-e6
42.	&g3-f4	Bh1 xh4+
43.	g2-g4
43.^gS Be4 44.43d 5 Sxc4 45.4/4+ ФГ7 46.£ixg6 Eg4+ would also not have saved White
43.	-	Eh4-h1
44.	g4xh5	Eh1xh5
45.	<£>f4-g4	Фе6-е5
46.	c4-c5	Фе5-е6
White resigned.
223
Section С
Quietly Reinforcing: З.еЗ
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. 2»g1-f3	£>b8-c6
3. e2-e3
It is hard to give any detailed characterization of this move. White simply opens the diagonal for his light-squared bishop, and, to all appearances, intends to develop his dark-squared bishop to b2.
GAME 71
□ Vladimir Malaniuk
 Alexander Morozevich
Yalta 1995 (rapid)
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£g1-f3	£)b8-c6
3.	e2-e3	Ac8-g4
4.	Af1-e2
4.Ab 5 is of independent interest. The pin on the knight is certainly not too dangerous, but Black has no right to altogether ignore it or carelessly waste time.
Thus While gained the advantage after 4...a6 S.Axc6+ bxc6 6.c4 Axf3 7.Wxf3 e6 8.0-0 £tf6 9.b3 Ae7 Ю.АаЗ АхаЗ П.&хаЗ We7 12.£te2 0-0 13.Hfcl aS 14.£jel a4 15.^d3± (Lputian-Brynell. Istanbul 2003).
Black does better to continue his development with 4...e6, for example: S.c4 (S.Axc6+ bxc6 6.c4 Axf3 7.gxf3 cS 8.cxd5 exdS 9.'8fc2 Wd6 lO.dxcS WxcS ll.Wa4+ сб 12.Ad2 &f6 13.£ra3 Wb6 14.ЙС1 Hc8= Sulava-Brynell, Plovdiv 2003; 5.0-0 Gtel 6.£bd2 a6 7.Ae2 £g6 8.c4 £>h4 9.£bch4 Axe2 10.Wxe2 Wxh4 11.^f3 We4 12.b3 Ad6 13.Ab2, draw, Mchedlishvili-Reinderman, Pulvermiihle 2005) S...^e7 (S...Ab4+ 6.Ad2 Axd2+ 7.£)bxd2 &e7 8.^b3 Axf3 9.£xf3 Hb8 lO.cxdS WxdS H.WxdSexdS 12.&d2± Shengelia-Chibukhchian, Batumi 2003) 6.0-0 (6.cxdS exdS 7.£k3 a6 8.Aa4 Wd6 9.Ad2 0-0-0 10.a3 fS 11.h3 AhS 12.4)e2!? Axf3 13.gxf3 g5 14.h4 Ah6 IS.hxgS AxgS 16.f4 Af6** Gelashvili-Zaragatski, Deizisau 2006)	6...a6
7.Axc6+ £}xc6 8.£lbd2 dxc4 9.&xc4 WdS 10.b3 bS? (10...Ae7= leads to equality; 10...0-0-0!? 1 l.Ab2 fS** is also
224
Quietly Reinforcing. I.d4d5 2.4/3 4кб З.еЗ
interesting) 11.4kd2 Ab4 !2.Wc2 0-0 13.Ab2 Ad6 14.e4 £>b4 15.Wc3 Wc6 I6.a3? (blitz is blitz, and here White misses his chance: 16.£k4! Wxe4 I7.£ixd6 cxd6 I8.^xb4 jSlxf3 I9.gxf3 WdS 20>c3+-) 16...Wxc3 17.Axc3 4k2 18.Sa2 4xa3 19.b4 4x4 20.4xc4 bxc4 21.Hfal= (DJShrek-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
Let us return to the Malaniuk-Morozevich game
4.	и.	e7-e6
5.	0-0	4g8-f6
S...Ad6 was tested both five, and a hundred and twenty five years ago, but the same conclusion was reached - both sides have their chances: 6.4bd2 4f6 7x4 (7.h3 Ah5 8x4 0-0 9.a3 aS 10.b3 4b8 ll.Ab2 сб 12.4e5 Axe2 13,Bxe2 4bd7 14.f4 c5!? 15.4df3 a4!? 16.dxc5 4xcS 17.b4 4ce4 18x5 AxeS 19.fxe5	4d7?± Increase-
Morozevich, ICC 2002) 7...a6 8x5 Ae7 9.b4 0-0 Ю.аЗ Axf3 11 ,4xf3 4e4 12.Wb3 fS 13.Ab2 g5*± (Blackburne Winawer, Vienna 1882).
& Ь2-Ь3
6.	-	4c6-e7l?
Now the c7-pawn will be able to participate in the erection of a defensive wall in
the centre, while a post for the dark-squared bishop is prepared on g7.
7.	h2-h3	Ag4xf3
8.	Ae2xf3	g7-g6
9.	c2-c4	Af8-g7
10.	4Ы-сЗ	0-0
11.	Ac1-a3	c7-c6
12.	Sa1-c1	^d8-d7
13.	^d1-e2	Ef8-e8
14. Hf1-d1 4e7-f5
Black has done everything possible to make it hard for his opponent to open the game with e3 -e4. Al the same time he is threatening ...4f5-h4 with further simplification.
ж ж *
11 *u u
к 111 A 4

® a &
на Ф
15. g2-g3
Taking control of the h4-square. White decided against provoking complications with 15.g4!?. Now in the event of 15...4d6 16.g5 4fe4 17.4xe4 4ixe4 18.Axe4 dxe4 19.Wg4 ^d8 2O.h4 (20.Ab2?! WaS 21.a3 Wf5=) 20...Wa5 21.Ad6 Wxa2 22.Wxe4 Wxb3 23.hS he could have developed a dangerous initiative. Black would probably have had to go in for the variation 1S...4h4l? 16.Ahl gSoo, after which the situation would have become much sharper.
15.	4f5-d6
16.	Af3-g2	4id6-e4
17.	4c3xe4	4f6xe4
225
Chapter Four - Section C
18. h3-h4	a7-a5
19. -£g2xe4 d5xe4
20. We2-c2 f7-f5
33.	Wh5xh7+?l
ЗЗ.Фе1 is more accurate, and after 33...Wxh5 (it is not clear how Black can otherwise strengthen his position) 34.2x115 Sh7 35.2xh7 ФхЬ7 compared with the game White has an extra tempo, thanks to which he succeeds in creating adequate counterplay on the queenside For example: 36.2b2 *g6 37.b4 axb4 38.Sxb4 jS.d8 39.Фа 1 На6 40.йхЬ7 Йха4=.
33.	...	Sd7xh7
34.	Hh1xh7	Xg8xh7
35.	Sc5-d6
The e4-pawn is securely defended, and all the lime White has to reckon with ...a5-a4 or ...еб-eS. He is forced onto the defensive.
21.	Ed1-d2	^d7-f7
22.	2c1-d1	Ee8*d8
23.	Фд1-д2	h7-h6¥
24.	Jta3-c5	Bd8-d7
25.	a2-a4	д6-д5
White has more or less safeguarded one flank, but now Black starts an offensive on the other.
26.	h4xg5	h6xg5
27.	Hd1-h1	Wf7-g6
28.	Wc2-d1	f5-f4
29.	Wd1-g4	f4-f3+
30.	3?g2-f1	Wg6-f5
Black has a slight advantage in the line 35.Фе1 2h8 36.Ab6 &g6 37&d 1 jS.d8 38.Axd8 2xd8T.
35.	-	ФЬ7-д6
36.	Ed2-d1	Sa8-d8?l
Preparing to set a cunning trap, into which, in the end, White falls. But objectively it was stronger to occupy the open h-file straight away, creating threats to the white king and the weak g4- and h2-pawns. For example: 36...flh8 37.Фе1 flh4 38.jS.c7 Exg4 39.jS.xa5 Eg I + 40.Фа2 2g2T.
37.	jS.d6-c7	2d8-d7
38.	JS.c7xa5	c6-c5
39.	d4-d5?
The first step into a deep pit, which has been carefully camouflaged with
226
Quietly Reinforcing: 1. d4 dS 2.£)f3 <?)c6 3.e3
branches and fallen leaves. 39.Ab6 was correct, after which it is Black who has to make efforts to maintain the status quo: 39...Hh7 4О.Фе1 cxd4 41.Axd4 (41.exd4	£h2	42.Aa7 flg 2**)
41...Ш14 42.Axf6 &xf6 43.cS Hxg4 44.b4 (44.Hd7? Hgl+ 45.&d2 Sfl-+) 44...Sgl+ 45.<±>d2 Hg2 46.Фе1=.
39. ...	Dd7-h7
40. &f1-e1?
The branches crack and break... However terrible it was to enter what seemed like hell itself, there was no choice: 4O.^gl AeS 41.d6 (41 .Ael Ah2+ 42.ФЫ exdS 43.cxd5 Д114—h) 41...Ah2+ 42.ФП Axd6 43.Фе1 AeST.
40. -.	Ь7-Ь61
The bishop is trapped. If 41 .Axb6 there follows 41...ЛсЗ+, while if 41.Ad2 -41...Shi mate! Therefore White resigned.
Section D
Other Third Moves
1. d2-d4	d7-d5
2. Qg1-f3 <£ib8-c6
In conclusion we give a few further examples of which White’s main objective, upon further examination, seems to be to surprise die opponent as early as the 3rd move Some of these continuations have a definitive logical basis, whereas others resemble the currently popular ‘Random Chess’...
GAME 72
□ Anthony Miles
 Jan Timman
Plovdiv 1983
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£sg1-f3	£b8-c6
3.	Ac1-g5
This thrust into mid-air occurs more often that it deserves. Compared with the variation l.d4 dS 2.Ag5!? White’s knight already stands on f3, and it can come under attack with gain of tempo after ...f6, ...gS and ...g4. In addition, White can never play f2-f3 and withdraw his bishop tof2.
3. ... Ac8-g4
The bishop on gS can be disregarded for die moment, but Black can also begin ‘dealing with it’ immediately: 3...f6!? 4.Af4 (4.Ah4 2>h6 S.e3 &f5 6.Ag3
227
Chapter Four - Section D
#Jxg3 7.hxg3 eS 8.J»lb5 e4 9.£fd2 аб 10.jS.e2 2>e7 1 l.c4 сб 12.£k3 g6 13.c5 J«Lg7 14.b4 fS?* Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 1999) 4...Jlg4 (in a tournament game between two grandmasters Black immediately launched his kingside pawns forward and within ten moves the opponents arrived at a peaceful agreement: 4...g5!? S.JiLg3 hS 6.h4 g4 7.#Jgl AfS 8.e3 Wd7 9.AbS аб 10.jS.a4 еб 11.4Je2 £ige7 12.0-0 &c8 13.c3 £id6 !4.#Jd2 Ag7. draw, Mikhalchishin-Levin, Lvov 1995) S.h3 (Black successfully solved his opening problems after S.£)bd2 Wd7 6.c3 0-0-0 7.еЗ еб 8.jS.b5 jS.d6 9>a4 $Jge7 10.0-0-0 аб ll.jS.xd6 ^xd6 l2.jS.e2 ФЬ8 13.2)b3 £Jc8 14.4Jc5 £Jb6 15.Wa3 eS** Panfilionok-Reprintsev, Podolsk 1990) 5...AhS (5...jSjcf3!? 6.exf3 eSoo) 6.c3 Wd7 7.4Jbd2 0-0-0 8.b4 e5 9.jS.e3 e4 lO.^Jgl fSt (Burmakin-Ruck, Oberwart
4. e2-e3
Here is another curious example of Internet creativity: 4.#Jbd2 f6 5.jS.h4 еб б.еЗ 4Jge7 7.jS.e2 g5!? 8.Ag3 hS 9.h4 £f5 lO.hxgS &xg3 1 l.fxg3 jS.d6 12.4Jfl fxgS 13.£J3d2 jS.xe2 14.'йгхе2 g4 I5.c3 WgS I6.e4 0-0-0 I7.e5 jS.f8^ (gahan-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
4. -	Wd8-d7
Here too sharper play is possible: 4...f6 5.JS.h4 £)h6 6.h3 ^Ji5 7.g4 jSf7 8JS.g3 Ш7 9.£bd2 еб 1О.а4 аб И.сЗ 2>g8 12.jS.d3 h5 13-Hgl gS** (chaozz-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
5.	£b1-d2	e7-e6
6.	c2-c4	£ig8-e7
7.	Wd1-a4	f7-f6
8.	jS.g5-h4	£e7-f5
9.	c4xd5	Ag4xf3
10.	4Jd2xf3	Af8-b4+
11.	d?e1-d1	e6xd5
12.	Af1-b5	ji_b4-d6
13.	Za1-c1	
Draw.
The peace agreement stopped the game, as they say, at the most interesting point. We should remark that Timman has solved his defensive problems by simple means: he has left his g- and h-pawns in their place and merely developed his pieces, incidentally, without missing an opportunity to prevent the enemy king from castling.
GAME 73
□ Athanasios Karagiannis
 Igor Miladinovic
Kavala 1998
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	4jg1-f3	£b8-c6
3.	4Jb1-c3	ic8-g4
What results is a kind of hybrid of the Chigorin Defence and the Veresov Opening. If we remember that the Veresov Opening is sometimes called the Chigorin Defence with reversed colours, our head starts spinning...
228
I.d4d5 2. £1(3 £кб: Other Third Moves
4.	Jfi.c1-f4
The handle ‘Udav’ on the ICC conceals none other than Gata Kamsky. In 1999 he had not yet returned to top-level chess from his rather extended break, but he continued to play now and then: 4.g3 еб 5.Jfi.g2 2tf6 6.0-0 Jfi.b4 7.4te5 SixeS 8.dxe5 £>d7 9.Wd4!? .йлсЗ Ю.'ЙГхсЗ Jfiace2 11.Eel AhS 12.Wb4 b6 13.c4c5 14.Wa4 d4!? 15.Jfi.g5 Wc8 16.Дс6 aS 17.b4 Па7 18.bxc5 bxcS 19.Eabl 0-0 2О.Де7 Ag6 21.fi.xf8 kxbl 22 .fi.d6 Ac2 23.Jfi.xd7 Jfi.xa4 24.Axc8 d3 25.Jfi.xc5 d2 26.d?fl Ec7 0-1 (Udav-Morozevich, ICC 1999).
Kamsky’s compatriot, Maxim Dlugy, has for a long time been concentrating on Internet games. We have already encountered several examples of his play on the pages of this book, and here is another one: 4.jfi.g5 f6 5.Jfi.h4 £jh6 6.e3 4JfS 7.Jfi.g3 hS 8.Jfi.d3 еб 9.h3 £Jxg3 10.fxg3 Jfi.f5 Il.jfi.xf5 exf5 12.4ih4 #Je7 13.'ЙЮ g6 14.g4? hxg4 15.hxg4 g5—I- (Dlugy-Morozevich, ICC 2000).
4.	..	e7-e6
Also possible is 4...jfi.xf3 5.exf3 еб 6.Wd2 Jfi.d6 7.0-0-0 £}ge7 8.h4 0-0 9.g4 a6 lO.hSbS 11.ФЫ SlaS 12.^xd6cxd6 13.Jfi.d3 4Jc4 14.Wg5 ^Зсбг* (Ribicic-Fercec, Omis 2005). Even so. it is not
clear whether Black should hurry with the exchange on f3.
5.	e2-e3	Jfi.f8-d6
6.	h2-h3	Jfi.g4-h5
7.	g2-g4	Jfih5-g6
8.	Jfi.f1-b5	f7-f6
11.	Jfi.f4xd6	c7xd6
12.	fib5-d3	Jfi.g6-f7
13.	e3-e4	e6-e5
14.	e4xd5	£jc6xd4
15.	4Jf3xd4	e5xd4
16.	<tJc3-e4	0-0
17.	0-0-0	Ea8-c8^
GAME 74
□ Athanasios Karagiannis
 Igor Miladinovic
Kalavryta 1997
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	4Jg1-f3	£Ь8-с6
3.	h2-h3l?	ic8-f5
Laugh if you will, but in MegaBase 2006 one can find more than 50 (!) games with 3.h3!?. In reply Black can probably also permit himself certain liberties. For example: 3...f6!? 4.jfi.f4 gS 5.Jfi.g3 #Jh6 6.e3 2Jf5 7.jfi.h2 h5 8.4jfd2 Jfi.e6 9.c3
229
Chapter Four - Section D
Wd7 10.b4 g4 П.ФЬЗ b6 12.4ild2 aS 13.a3 Sg8 14.jS.d3 jS_f7 IS.bS ^d8 16.a4^h4 1 7.Afl gxh3 18.gxh3 Феб?* (Kharlov-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
4.	Ac1-f4
4x3 еб 5.АГ4 Ad6 6.e3 £>ge7 7.Ad3 0-0 8.0-0 -S_xd3 9.Wxd3 £g6 10.£xd6 ^xd6 ll.£ibd2 eS 12.dxeS 4)gxeS 13.Wc2 Bad8 14.Badl Hfe8 IS.Bfel Wf6 16.Be2 h6 17.&xe5 £)xe5= (Moyano Morales-Narciso Dublan, Catalunya 1996).
4.	..	e7-e6
5.	e2-e3	Af8-d6
6.	Af4xd6
6.£)bd2 4}ge7 7x3 h6 8.dSjcd6 Wxd6 9.Ae2 gS!? 10 Wa4 f6 1 l.b4 *f7 I 2.b5 ^b8 I3.c4 Ag6 14.cxd5 exd5 15.Del hS 16.^b3 b6 17.a3± (Kharlov-Benefactor, ICC 2004).
6.	..	c7xd6
7.	c2-c3
7.Ad3 jS.g6 8.0-0 9.Axg6 hxg6 10.43bd2 0-0 11x3 bS 12.We2 Wb6 I3.e4 b4 14.eS dxeS IS.^xeS £)xe5 16.dxe5 ^hS** (Handke-Bauer, Montpellier 1999).
7.	-	£g8-f6
8.	<£b1-d2	h7-h6
9.	Af1-e2	0-0
10.	g2-g4	£f5-e4
11.	£id2xe4	d5xe4
12.	^3f3-d2	d6-d5
13.	£d2-f1	Ba8-b8
14.	£f1-g3	2rf6-h7
15.	h3-h4	g7-g6
16.	Wd1-d2	b7-b5^
Andhereisonefinal example:
GAME 75
□ pap
 Alexander Morozevich
ICC 1999
1.	d2-d4	d7-d5
2.	£g1-f3	&ib8-c6
3.	c2-c3
For this move the authors no longer have any descriptions left Please, feel free to add one yourself!
3. ..	jic8-g4
4. Wd1-b3	jSg4xf3
5. g2xf3	Да8-Ь8
6. e2-e4	e7-e6
7. Bh1-g1	4g8-f6
а Дс1-е31?	
In blitz it is hard to distinguish a blunder from a sacrifice 8.e5 £ld7 9.jSlg5 4ie7 would have led to play with chances for both sides.
230
1. d4 dS 2. £)f3 £k6: Other Third Moves
8.	•••	d5xe4
9.	f3xe4	£>f6xe4
10.	£f1-g2	2>e4-d6
11.	2>b1-d2	if8-e7
12.	0-0-0	0-0
13.	Wb3-c2	&g8-h8
14.	£d2-e4	&d6-f5
15.	Ae3-f4®	
With this we will take our leave It is impossible to anticipate everything, and if
one of your future opponents should ‘dumbfound’ you with a move such as З.аЗ!?, then react to it with philosophical calm, and endeavour, above all, to deploy your own pieces harmoniously.
Play the Chigorin Defence, and may this dynamic opening bring you good competitive results and vivid creative revelations!
231
New In Chess Code System
White stands slightly better	±
Black stands slightly better	T
White stands better	±
Black stands better	+
White has a decisive advantage	+-
Black has a decisive advantage	—h
balanced position	=
unclear position	<»
compensation for the material	=
strong (sufficient)	>
weak (insufficient)	<
better is weaker is	<
good move	!
excellent move	••
bad move	?
blunder	n
interesting move	•?
dubious move	?j
only move	□
with the idea	Д
attack	-*
initiative	t
lead in development	ft
counterplay mate	X
correspondence	con.
233
Game Index
Steinitz	- Chigorin	17
Ljubojevic	- Ree	20
Kharitonov	- Maliutin	22
Khalifman	- Morozevich	25
Ljubojevic	- Morozevich	30
Babula	- Klima	31
Rychagov	- Morozevich	34
Karpov	- Morozevich	36
Karpov	- Morozevich	38
Piket	- Morozevich	39
Korotylev	- Morozevich	43
Anagnostopoulos	- Miladinovic	45
Yakovich	- Morozevich	47
Topalov	- Morozevich	48
Rogozenko	- Morozevich	54
Bareev	- Morozevich	60
van Wely	- Morozevich	68
Aseev	- Morozevich	70
Kramnik	- Morozevich	73
Kramnik	- Ivanchuk	75
Dlugy	- Morozevich	78
Gagunashvili	- Moiseenko	79
Harikrishna	- Morozevich	82
Karpov	- Morozevich	84
Dlugy	- Morozevich	85
Steinitz	- Chigorin	86
Bum	- Chigorin	89
Pillsbury	- Chigorin	92
Romanovsky	- Terpugov	94
Fiister	- Bronstein	97
Malaniuk	- Morozevich	99
Teichmann	- Chigorin	104
Pillsbury	- Chigorin	107
Granda Zuniga	- Morozevich	111
Moskalenko	- Morozevich	115
235
Kasparov	- Smyslov	118
Kramnik	- Morozevich	123
Shipov	- Morozevich	124
Nepomniachtchi	- Morozevich	129
Raffael	- Morozevich	130
Raffael	- Morozevich	135
Lebedev	- Chigorin	140
Gligoric	- Smyslov	142
Karpov	- Morozevich	145
Goldin	- Morozevich	146
Annakov	- Morozevich	151
jaws	- Morozevich	154
Dlugy	- Morozevich	156
Ivanchuk	- Morozevich	158
Christiansen	- Morozevich	160
Ivanchuk	- Ponomariov	162
Rychagov	- Morozevich	164
Gleizerov	- Morozevich	165
Ramirez Alvarez	- Morozevich	172
Sambuev	- Barsky	175
Beliavsky	- Morozevich	178
Milov	- Morozevich	181
Kramnik	- Morozevich	184
Kramnik	- Morozevich	185
Karpov	- Morozevich	188
Baburin	- Miladinovic	190
Gagarin	- Morozevich	192
Shirov	- Morozevich	196
Piket	- Morozevich	199
Georgiev	- Morozevich	200
van Wely	- Morozevich	203
Anand	- Morozevich	205
Nikolic	- Morozevich	210
Vyzhmanavin	- Morozevich	215
Maletin	- Kobalia	217
Adorjan	- Morozevich	219
Malaniuk	- Morozevich	224
Miles	- Timman	227
Karagiannis	- Miladinovic	228
Karagiannis	- Miladinovic	229
pap	- Morozevich	230
236
IN !H И 5131
n a top-t 'iginal pl.
Games / Chess € 28.95 $ 28.95
A century after its invention by the great attacking player Mikhail Chigorin (1850 1908), the Chigorin Defence is very much alive and kicking. The reason is simple: Alexander Morozevich, one oi the most popular chess players in the world, has extensively used it in his rise to the top. Morozevich almost single-handedly transformed this half forgotten opening with a shady reputation into a ready-to-use weapon for chess players who like a dynamic game with active piece play.
Grandinaster player lor almost a de< has won him the adm over the world. Whenei cast online, it immedia
(1969) is an International Master, a success erienced journalist and an intimate friend oi evich. And no mean player of the Chigorin De
Alexander Morozevich reveals I A the ideas behind his pet lines in the Chigorin Defence. He has thoi presents instructive material Iron
A World Class Chess Player on the Opening He Made Popular
The Chigorin Defence
According to Morozevich
Alexander Morozevich
NEW 1N CHESS