Kasparov: How His Predecessors Misled Him About Chess

First published in the United Kingdom in 2009 by

Contents

Batsford The Old Magistrates Court 10 Southcombe Street London Wl4 ORA

Page

An imprint of Anova Books Company Ltd Copyright © B T Balsford 2009

Authors' Preface

5

Anatoly Karpov the 12th

9

Robert James Fischer the 11th

54

Boris Spassky the 10th

81

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

94

Text copyright © Tibor Karolyi, Nick Aplin

The moral right of the authors have been asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

ISBN: 9781906388263 A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. 17 16 I 5 14 13 12 II I 0 09 10 9876543 2 I

Mikhail Tal the 8th

123

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

143

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

169

Max Euwe the 5th

192

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

202

Jose Raul Capablaoca the 3rd

218

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

235

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1st

254

Reproduction by Spectrum Colour Ltd, Ipswich

Printed and bound by Athenaeum Press Ltd., Gateshead, Tyne & Wear This book can be ordered direct from the publisher at the website www.anovabooks.com Or try your local bookshop

2

3

Authors' Preface

that we briefly considered the title The

This book is a unique reaction to a unique collection of creative work. W hen Garry

Kasparov,

Great Successor would be appropriate. This present book now provides us

the most

with

successful world champion, retired, he title the

stimulation

reading

his

that prompted

from

the

obvious

opportunity

to

Kasparov - we think - subconsciously

My Great Predecessors and it was

excellent series

an

introduce some humour, particularly as

published a series of books under the

favoured some teasing of the great players and former champions more so than others. By doing so he invited

present work.

others to have ajoke at his expense too. on

Humour in chess - sometimes a rare

Kasparov's astonishing career, cover­

commodity - needs to take its rightful

ing his flnal period of active play from

place.

After

writing

two

books

1 993 to 2005, we realised that there were

similarities

between

The

Garry's

games and some of his predecessors -

World

chess

This characteristic is something that has not been reflected in his interviews

changed the single article into a series

in recent times, although there were

of articles. We had originally intended

glimpses of it when he came to write

to look only at the post-World War II

his

so

played by world champions can be

times that we were encouraged to write

especially interesting, entertaining and

whole book!

instructive. But it is also well worth

There was a stage during the writing of

Kasparov s Fighting Chess

My Great Predecessors books.

It goes without saying that games

many comparable games from earlier

a

was Tibor,

keen sense of humour.

The increasing number of examples

discovered

for

the future world champion revealed his

as we found more and more games

then

Championship

memorable

with Garry himself - during which time

resembling those of past champions.

but

our

because of the leisure hours he spent

magazine

Kingpin took on greater proportions

champions

Junior

particularly

Our original idea to write an article

satirical

of

the board in 1 980 and 1 98 1 . The 1980

bit of friendly leg-pUlling!

the

half

played in tournaments

with Garry and even faced him across

and this has opened the door for a little

for

Hungarian

co-authorship

loolcing at them from a new angle - and with a lighter touch.

J & 2

5

Alithors' Preface

Authors' Preface

The temptation is also there to look at

contact him at all and the words are

some of Kasparov's losses - which are

ours"

in fact well worth analysing. Anyone

mouth in the following way.

We just put our ideas into his

•

•

*

to

erode

My series on the world champions is

the

Kasparov

tremendous

respect

rightfully

earned

has

I

performances. It just reminds everyone emphatically what a great game chess is and that even the greatest players

remain silent any longer and must show

rosier side of their chess.

how

story. My career has been the best a

to

chess

culture

considered,

So I look at the c hampions in reverse

played.

order, starting with An atoly Karpov,

Though I have to admit that their games

who was crowned before me as the 12th

are very entertaining,

world champion.

really

that can only

I am satisfied with how

convinced I did not achieve everything that I could have done: for example, I

professionals and serious players read series,

champions

energy I spent on examining his play.

things went. On the other hand, I am

and

warmly recommend that both non­ the whole

the

champion was to me in time, the more

chessplayer has ever had and, all things

Great

Predecessors books represent a superb contribution

based on the fact that the closer a

Can you imagine how hard it has

justly deserved, but I only showed the

sold, so it is time to tell the rest of the

Also we consider that the My

present day, I adopt a different plan

been for me to hold back my true

complicated ...

past and working my way towards the

the first place.

opinions for so long? But now I cannot

sometimes! The royal game is just so

way. Instead of starting from the distant

was they who demonstrated the ideas in

the 12 champions, which is what they

By now most of the books have been

mistakes

out the material in the conventional

me - sometimes seriously. After all, it

hot cakes. I wrote nice things about all

lose

make

do

covered the development of

chess culture. Thank God they sold like

with his stunning and breathtaking

and

have

So as to underline the fact that this is not a totally serious book, I do not lay

mostly to blame because they misled

entering its final phase. In these books,

In no way does the present book try

they had on me.

shown here the world champ i ons are

•

clearly deserves due recognition for their triumph.

soften, but not erase, the negative effect

will see that for the particular defeats

who manages to force resignation from the most successful chess player ever,

Of course, I must also take some responsibility for my losses, but you

lost more games than was necessary.

as Garry's chess

And in the present work I reveal for the

genius shines brightly through his deep

first time how I came to lose quite a

analysis.

few important games simply because I

One of the intentions of the present

copied the world champions. It's a pity

book is to take a look at some lesser

that I dido't gain a fuller appreciation

known masterpieces of the champions,

of their methods.

as well as presenting the better-known examples, with shon explanations. We

Almost all chessplayers read books

hope you enjoy and learn from these

on the world champions. I did so as

games.

well and in my childhood I even went through their games in great detaiL In

It is great that Garry wrote his series, but

if

I

were

him

I

would

fact I frequently tried to memorise

have

their games, but it is more likely that

produced another version for reading

they

on New Year's Eve'

planted

themselves

in

the

subconscious pan of my brain. Their

Our book is designed to be light­

games were praised so many times and

heaned. So before we allow Garry to

in so many places that I came to trust

speak, let us emphasise that we did not

them implicitly.

6

7

Anatoly Karpov the 12th effect on my style. Of course I learned

Anatoly Karpov was my immediate predecessor.

to play simple positions - there were

He held the title from

1975 until 1985 and certainly had an

many of them - and I improved my

immense effect on my chess. I played

technique in this area.

him 23 times in regular tournaments. There is nothing special about that

In

but the 1 44 games in the five world

this

book

J

would

like

to

concentrate on the negative effects

championship matches we contested is

that I

unique in the history of chess.

experienced from the world

champions - effects which prevented me

Despite this large number of games, you might think they had little negative

from

becoming

even

more

devastating in my play.

One idea J picked up from Karpov was to push the a- or h-pawns all the way - and win. Below are positions from Karpov's games illustrating this theme and then positions from my own games where I followed his plan.

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

S.Sazontiev - A.Karpov

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

A.Karpov - P.MarkJand

Readers note:

throughout the text you will read the words

see diagram

with

a reference to a certain page. It's the diagTams in the frames to which we refer.

9

Ana/Diy Karpov

the 12th

First let me show you some games where Karpov employed one of his favourite concepts. S.sazontiev - A.Karpov Vladimir 1964

1 d4 tU f6 2 tUo e6 3 iLg5 d5 4 e4 j..e7 5 tUe3 0-0 6 e3 tUbd7 7 j..d3 .l:.e8 8 0-0 tUrs 9 tUe5 e6 10 f4 tU6d7 11 iLxe7 ilhe7 12 no f6 13 tUg4 tUb6 14 e5 tU bd7 15 :'g3 'iti>b8 1 6 tUn e5 17 'irb5 e4 18 j..e2 g6 19 'iWb6 b6 20 b4

Anatoly Karpov 26 "ih:g7+ �xg7 27 bxg6 bg6 28 %:tbl %:tabS! Now Black turns his attention to the side where he is stronger. 29 iLa6 %:tc7 30 tU fdl tUfd7 31 %:tb3?! White wants to transfer the rook to the queenside. On the other hand 31 j..e2! would have kept B l ack rather busy on the kingside and he would not then have had such a free hand for his queenside operations.

3S %:td2 %:tb6 39 iLn �f7 40 %:tee2

the 12th

A.Karpov - P.MarkJand Hastings 197111 972

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 tUc3 iLb4 4 eS e5 5 a3 iLxe3+ 6 bIe3 'ire7 7 llJo llJe7

40...a3! The pawn makes its final stride of a

glorious

march.

It

promotion and takes

gets

closer

control

to

S a4

of the

I wouldn't mind betting that Karpov

b2-square.

had not yet seen the final role this

41 �f2 %:tb4 42 g4 tUb6 43 .!:te2 %:tIe2 44 %:tIe2 %:tb2!

a-pawn had to play. Of course it is a well-known variation. Since that time

This is a poignant demonstration of

20...a5! Karpov starts pushing his a-pawn. It looks like it merely undermines White's pawn chain but in fact this move represents its debut performance in a very important role. 21 b5 iLb7 22 exb6 tUxb6 23 bxc6 iL xe6 See diagram on page 9. 24 h4 .l:.ee8 25 b5

7 "ii'g4 has taken over as the main line. S ...b6 9 j..b5+ j..d7 10 iLd3 llJbe6

the strength of the a3-pawn. 45 %:te2 tUa4 46 �e1

11 0-0 b6 12 %:tel llJ a5 13 'iWd2 l:teS

31...iL a4 ! Karpov starts exchanging on the queenside so as to prepare an invasion. He follows up this plan witb his customary and distinctive purpose­ fulness. 32 :'b2 j..xdl 33 tUxdl tU a4! 34 :' a l ttJe3! 35 g3 tUxdl 36 :'xdl %:te3 3711el

14 b4 Karpov uses his flank pawns wel l . Here he gains space and makes sure that . . . g7-g5 is prevented. 14 ...0-0 15 'ir f4 f5 16 exf6 %:txf6 1 7 the7 .!:txe7 18 dxeS bxeS 19 tUeS

iL eS Here 19 . c4 looks better. It restricts .

.

the light-squared bishop even though

that in tum grant s more freedom to his dark-squared brother.

46 ...tUc3 47 %:td2 tUxa2 0-1 Finally the fixed a-pawn falls, and Black wins easily. Karpov engineered this game beautifully, yet strangely he di d not include it in any books of his selected games. Maybe he did not want

37 .. a4! The pawn is becoming increasingly powerful.

25...'it'g7! To exchange the most dangerous white piece in the attack.

.

10

to alert his rivals to such an effective pawn-pushing device.

Naturally,

the

game did not escape my attention.

II

Anatoly Karpov the

Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h

J 2'h

Karpov continues to play with great

20 c4!

purpose.

Karpov gets rid of the doubled pawns and opens the position for his bishops.

20 ...lDac6 21 �b2 lDb4

See diagram on page 9.

He

will

exchange

our matches forced him to increase his

the

standard of play in the openings.

defending rook as well.

12 ... "xe5 13 dxe5 lLle8

4 1 ...nxd7 42 lDxd7 �e6 43 lDb8 �bS

The

variation

has

continued

to

develop ever since our game. The knight can also be retreated to d7.

22 as!?

14 h3 �xf3 1 5 �xf3 �xeS 16 �xe6 bxe6 17 �d4

This is a hard move to come up with. Perhaps it had been planned earlier.

White achieves domination along the d-file - which provides compensation

Had he already anticipated the role of this pawn or did he just want to prevent

for the pawn deficit.

3 1 a 6 ! n f7 3 2 ltJe4

Black from playing a5 - a move which

17...�f4 1 8 0-0

The a7-pawn is fixed. Karpov now

fixes White's a-pawn on the colour of

brings up his bishop to place it under

the c8-hishop?

closer surveillance.

See diagram on page 9. 1 8... a5?

32...lLlrs 33 �eS! .l:c8 34 �f2 .l:re7 3S.l:xe7

22 ....l:f8 23 �a3 23 h5, playing extravagantly with the

Now

other edge pawn, was also possible.

Karpov starts to

exchange

pieces around the weak a7-pawn. All

23 ... dxc4 24 lDxc4 .l:f4

part of the plan.

3S .. Jhe7 36 l:tbl lLle7 37 .l:b8 + <;Pb7 38 'iti>h2! This is a typical Karpovian king move.

It

delivering

prevents a

check

Black on

from

c 1, which

would be followed by an attack on the a6-pawn with .l:a1.

38 ...lLlg6? This only helps White. He moves away a valuable piece from the area where the battle will take place.

25 liJd6

39 lLleS l:te6?

Karpov sacrifices a pawn to keep his

Returning the knight was better.

opponent's rook out of the game. Here

40 nd8 nc7

25 .l:e4 holds on to the pawn by

At this moment I adopted Karpov's plan of pushing the a-pawn as far down

44 �xa7

the file as possible. And I really paid

Finally the ripened fruit drops quietly

the price for this misguided decision.

from the tree. White wins the pawn and

A

few

months

later

Timman

so the rest is simple.

improved on this game with 18 ...e5!.

44...lLle7 45 �b6 lLlc8 46 �cS �g6 47 a7 lLlxa7 48 �xa7 e5 49 d4 exd4 50 �xd4 <;Pf7 51 f4 g5 52 fxg5 bxgS" 53 Wg3 Wg6 54 Wf3 �r5 55 g3 1-0

Maybe he never bothered to investigate

Karpov won this game in impressive style. This plan was implanted in my

Karpov's earlier games. After 19 �e3 �xe3

Karpov in Tilburg

against

21

l:td7

draw

1986.

lLlf5

against

Black has

19 .l:fe1 a4? ! from Anatoly Evgenievich.

one of my own games. Quite incredibly chance

a

I stuck t o the plan that I had learned

opportune moment to carry i t out in my

lLle7

achieved

done well in this position ever since.

brain and I was just waiting for an

I had

20 fxe3

Timman

20 l:te4 �b6 21 �eS

Karpov

himself.

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

stopping ... nxc4.

Game 17, World Championship

2s ... lDlI.d3 26 cxd3 l:txh4 27 liJe4

LondonlLeningrad 1986

.l:hS 28 .l:ecl �b7?!

1 d4 lLlr6 2 e4 g6 3 lLle3 d5 4 lLlf3 �g7 5 "ifb3 dxe4 6 "xe4 0-0 7 e4 �g4 8 �e3 lLlCd7 9 .l:dl lLlc6 10 �e2 lLlb6 11 'ilfe5 'ifd6 12 e5

After 28...ndS 29 nc3 a6 Black can live with his position.

29 liJxcs �dS 30 f3 nfS Black could improve his knight with

This was my third match against

30... lDc6!? Then 31 a6 lDd4.

Karpov and he had prepared most

Not to be sidetracked, Karpov now

diligently for it. Here he sacrifices a

plays according to a well-formulated plan. Firstly he fixes Black's a7-pawn.

41 l:td7! 12

2 1 ...a3? I was still playing in the spirit of

pawn - something he had rarely done

Karpov, in the hope that somehow I

before in this kind of situation. I think

13

Anatoly Karpov the J2th

Anatoly Karpov the

J 2th

23 ... a2

would be able to get down to the a2-pawn. However it proves to be an

The pawn has got this far yet it is to no avail. I was so happy to see the open

illusion.

road ahead but should have checked

22 b3 CUa7

more carefu lly where that road would

This was not my day, I was Wlable to

lead.

push either of my rook's pawns, but

24 CUd3 lIa3 25 nal gS

putting the knight on the edge was also

A desperate attempt to stir things

unfortunate. 22 .�g7 was probably . .

up.

better.

23 l:.d7! �el 24 l:.xe7 ..Itb2 25 CUa4 20 CUb3!

CUbS 26 l:.xe6

A strong move that my team and I

Now White is already a pawn up.

missed during preparation. I hoped the

26 ... nfd8 27 l:.b6 l:.dS 28 �g3

g7-bishop would become a powerhouse on the long diagonal, but it stayed

26 hJ:gS hxgS 27 iixgS <;t>f7 28 ..Itf4 J:l.b8 29 1:tecl ..Ite6 30 l:.e3 l:.aS 31 l:.e2 l:.ba8 32 CUd 1-0

Here I re s ig ned and decided that in the future I would be far more cautious

Finally White wins the a-pawn.

ab out following Karpov·.� method of

Black spent four tempi advancing the pawn to its doom

pl ay

.

.

buried all the way to the end.

20 ... aS?

See diagram on page 9. Again I push the rook's pawn just like Karpov. 2 1 n 84 The plan must be pursued.

22 l:.hel !

Karpov contributed to one of my losses in the final of a knockout tournament I played on the internet. From the first position below he taught me that in a roo k ending, with 3 pawns versus 4 on one side of th e board, the game can be saved

.

The second diagram shows the very similar position that [ reached.

J.Piket - G.Kasparov V.Korehnoi - A.Karpov

Another strong move as it preserves the e5 pawn and makes sure the

28 ... CUe3 This is the closest I got to attacking

g7-bishop remains bottled up. I should

that a2-pawn.

have copied this aspect of Karpov's

29 CUxe3 �xe3 30 e6

style!

The c-pawn simply kills Black.

22 ... a3

30 ... �d4 3 1 l:.b7 1-0

Nothing will divert me from pushing the a-pawn.

To end the misery I resigned.

23 CUn A.Karpov - G.Kasparov Game 5, World Championship,

LondonlLeningrad 1986

. xe7

V.Korebnoi - A.Karpov

1 d4 CUf6 2 e4 g6 3 CUe3 dS 4 �f4 �g7 5 e3 eS 6 dxeS WaS 7 llc1 CUe4 8 exdS CUxe3 9 Wd2 Wxa2 1 0 bxe3 WxdH 11 �xd2 CUd7 12 �bS 0-0 13 �xd7 �xd7 14 e4 fS 15 eS e6 16 c4 nfe8 1 7 e6 bxe6 1 8 d6 eS 19 h4 b6

dxeS

Gam e 5, World Championship,

bxeS

Merano 1981

Two games later in the match Karpov played 13 .....Itb7 and drew.

1 e4 e6 2 CUe3 dS 3 d4 �e7 4 tUn

1 4 ..Itxa6 tUxa6

tUf6 S �gS h6 6 �h4 0-0 7 l:.c1 b6

14

15

Anatoly Karpov the

12th

Ana/oly KalpoV the

4 1...na3 42 nd6+ �g7 43 h4 11b3

Would you believe what happened? You will see it in the Fischer chapter.

44 nd3 nbS 45 'it>e3 '1z-'1z Karp ov effortlessly held this position.

J.Pikct

-

24...tbd4 25 <;t.;>g2 ncs 26 nbl nfd8 27 �xd4 l:txd4 28b4

G.Kasparov

In my case this plan did not work, so

KasparovChess G rand Prix

I was optimistic that I would do well

60 minute game, Internet 2000

Petrosian, the specialist of this line

This is a very useful refinement in

where White delays e2-e3, did not take

Here I realised I couldn't win. But

11 �xc6 �xc6

okay, no problem. It was a knockout

final and I thought I wo uld draw the next game with the white pie c es.

29 'it>g2 'it>g7 30 lla5 tbc6 He

IS...tbb4 16 'Wc4 'Wf6 17 tbh4 .](b2

28. ..axb4 29 axb4 �d7 30 bxcS bxeS

the ensuing rook ending.

the pawn and went on to beat Portisch this w ay.

against it.

1 tbf3 tbf6 2 c4 cS 3 tbc3 dS 4 cxd5 tbxd5 5 g3 tbc6 6 �g2 tbc7 7 d3 e5 8 0-0 �e7 9 tbd2 �d7 10 tbc4 0-0

28.. .hS!

15 �xdS

finally

agrees

to

12th

defend

3 1 11bb2 h6 32 .l:!.a2 Wh7 33 na5

the

4 against 3 ending. But Black was not

l::td8 34 'iVxe5 �xd3

forced to give up the pawn as 30... 'it>f6

180-0 W'xa2

was an option. This misled me and gave me the impression this it is an easy draw.

3 1 tbxc6 lh:c6 32

11xa7 ll](37

33 111.37 See diagram on page

15.

12 tbxe5

33 ...IIc2 Karpov

often

pins

pieces.

With

White's king on f2 the pawn can't go much further. I used to think it requires some

effort

position

guarantee of a draw as the knights are still on the board.

the

draw ease

this with

type

of

which

Karpov held this one made me think

Taking the last white queenside pawn

is an achievement, yet there is no

but

to

Black can't lose at all. I was wrong.

34 e4 11c3 35 l:ta2 'it'f6 36 f3 llb3 37 �a nc3 38 �e2 llb3 391b6+ r;I;e7

Piket accepts my pawn sacrifice.

12...�e8 13 'iltb3 �f6 14 tbg4 �d4 15 e3 �xc3 16 W'xc3 b6 17 f3 �b5 18 tba W'd7 19 e4 tbe6 20 �e3 as 2 1

35 11xd3

11adl l:tad8 22 11d2 'lir'c6

After 35 l:tb2 11e8 36 'li'f5+ ihf5

According to my opponent's a n aly sis

37 I1xf5 �c4 it is hard to do anything

the queen should go to b7.

with White's piece s .

23.l:!.cl ,*"7

35... l1xd3 36 tbxd3 1i'xd3 37 Ita2 'iWb3

40 lla5 �f6 4 1l:tdS

19 W'xa2 tbxa2 20 l'h:cS l:rfc8 21 l:!.aS tbc 1 22 tbfS 11c7 23 tbd4 11b8 24 IIai tbd3 Karpov is not yet ready to enter the 4 pawns against 3

rook ending.

If

24 ...tbb3 25 nfb I IIcb7 26 IIxb3 llxb3 27 tbxb3 nxb3 28 nxa7.

25 nfdl tbeS 26 11a2 g6 27 ndal

24 a3 I also tried a6 and b5 with Black in

11bb7 28 h3

a

number of Engl i sh opening games.

16

38 'tIfc2 17

Anatoly Karpov the 12,h

Anatoly Karpov the 12'h Korchnoi did not try anything like

With queens on the board White can't really push

the pawns,

therefore it

this - and Korchnoi was a really strong

should be an easy draw, but I knew how

endgame player

easily Karpov drew with Korchnoi, so I

4 2 ....:I.e3

decided to follow him. I was also aware

I

that Karpov wasn't able to squeeze a

just

keep

Karpov has played some very well-known games in which he moved his knight backwards to the first rank. I also know some games where he placed

moving

like

my

the knight on the rook file. Here are three of his positions - followed by three or mine.

predecessor before me.

win against Olafsson when he had an

43 'it>b4 �g7 44 'it>g5

extra pawn in this kind of endgame.

Here I deviated from Karpov and

Even before the Karpov game I knew

Sadovsky - A.Karpov

G.Kamsky - G.Kasparov

Z.RibU - A.Karpov

Y.Nikolaevsky - G.Kasparov

J.Nunn - A.Karpov

L.Zaid - G.Kasparov

removed the rook from the third rank.

this position was a draw, however it was Anatoly who convinced me it was easy and made me play too casually.

38 .. JlhcH 39 .:I.](c2 h5

44 ...l:tel ? This was m y independent idea - but it loses. I was short of time. Correct· was 44 ...1:ta3! 45 .:I.c? .:I.a5.

I play just like Karpov.

45 .:I.c7 .:I.e2 46 l:I.e7! .:I.a2

40 f4 g6

See diagram on page 15. Karpov also had his pawn on g6.

4 i e5 l:td3 I'm just following Karpov, who kept his rook on the third rank, did nothing and held easily.

47 f5! This is nasty indeed. I was in time pressure because it was a I hour game with no increment.

47 ... g](f5 48 e6! Oh no.

48 ... h4 49 .:I.d7+ �g8 50 r;t>f6 1-0 And I had to resign.

42 'it>h3 18

19

A natoly Karpov the 12t/!

Anatoly Karpov the 12th Sadovsky - A.Karpov USSR Olympiad 1967

1 c4 4Jf6 2 4Je3 es 3 g3 g6 4 �g2 jLg7 5 e4 d6 6 4Jge2 �e6 Karpov was fairly young when he played this game.

7 d4! 0-0 8 ds jLd7 9 0-0 tOhs

See diagram on page 1 9.

31...jLg4 32 f4?! �Ie2 33 'it'xe2

Karpov develops his knight on the edge.

ed4 34 �d4 .rI6f7 35 bs tOfS For a long time the knight which had been on h5 had no useful move, now it

10 jLe3 (5 11 'ii'd2 tOa6 The other steed does the same thing.

12 0 l:!.f7 13 a3 4Jcs 14 Wc2 We8

intervenes with decisive force.

36

�f2

fxg3

37

jLxg3

Karpov achieves symmetry with his

11 tOds The knights still look to the centre,

4Jxg3

38.1:1.xg3

15 b4 4Ja4

but maybe this just diverts the attention of the opponent.

1l...'ii'd 7 12 �h2 fs 13 f4 bs 14 .l:l.bl bxc4 15 dxc4 e4 16 b4? tOas!

knights and rooks on the two sides of the board.

16 tOe2 b5 17 ltJel ltJb6 18 ltJb3 ltJe4 19 l::thgl a5 20 .i.cl a4 21 tOeS .i.xe5 22 dIe5 ltJxes 23 'iWg3 ltJeO 24 llhl e5 25 .i.e4 'iWf6 26 .i.xo tOxo 27 t!.d3

See diagram on page 1 9. Karpov puts his knight on the edge and

wins

instantly.

What

a lucky

fellow!

17 tOd4 tOxc4 18 tOxe7+ 'lihe7 19 We2 �xd4 20 exd4 ltJb6 21 �b2 ltJd5 22 a3 ltJe3 23 We3 ltJxfl+ 24 �xfl �d5 25 �e4 We6 0-1 38...'ife5 The third knight move to the edge.

16 es f4 17 jLf2 fxg3 18 hxg3 Now

the

players

enter

a

long

39 .rIaa3 axbs 40 exd6 b4 41 llad3

not

selecting

lost

games

from

a

27...e4

champion, but here Karpov reached

Black is winning. If I wanted to be

CId6 42 WeI .rIe7 43 .rIgO .rIxO

a position with two krUghts on the

sarcastic I could say he has a winning

44 �xn l:!.c2 45 jLg2 ltel 46 ltdl

edge.

edge (advantage) in the middle of the

manoeuvring phase.

�e3+ 47 'it>hl ltIdl 48 'ii'xdl b3 49 'il'xb3 'iWg3 50 'ifxb7+ c;t>h6 0-1

18...tOxc3 19 4Jxc3 'il'e7 20 'ifd2 11af8 21 'ife3 a6 22 a4 jLf6 23 'ilfd3

board.

28 t!.xn exn 29 llel+ Wf8 30 .i.g5

J.Nunn - A.Karpov

Wf5 31 h4 ..t>g8 32 lles 'it'd7 33 lle7

3rd Amber-rapid, Monte Carlo 1994

�gs 24 fla3 tOg7 25 tOe2 'ifeS 26 'iWe2

Z.RibJi - A.Karpov

hs 27 jLel t!.f6 28 jLf2 'it>h7 29 jLel

Tilburg 1 980

jLh6 30 jLf2 jLc8 31 �fal? This is overdoing a good idea. One piece too many goes to the

The next game is unusual, as I was

The rest is simple.

1 c4 es 2 tOe3 tOe6 3 g3 g6 4 jLg2 �g7 5 d3 d6 6 e3 tOge7 7 4Jge2 0-0

edge.

8 0-0 �d7 9 h3 nb8 10 'ii'd2 �e6

31 nib I was correct. 20

Wfs 34 lles "e8 35 .i.f6 t!.h7 36 h5

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 e5 .i.rs 4 tOe3 e6

'it'f8 37 a3 'ii'xes 38 'ii'gl llh6 39 "gs

5 g4 �g6 6 ltJge2 ltJe7 7 �e3 h5 SltJf4

"f8 40 hxg6 fxg6? 40 . .l:!.xg6 wins.

hxg4 9 ltJxg6 ltJxg6 10 'iWIg4 ltJh4

41 l:te7 .l:l.e8 42 l:td7 lIh! + 43 Wa2

11 �d3 g6 12 0-0-0 �e7 13 bl tOd7

'ikh6 44 'iVg3 llhel 45 'ike7 ll1e7

14 tOe2 tOb6 15 tOr4 tOa4

46 llIe7 lhe7 47 the7 "f8 48 'ike6+

.

21

.

Anatoly Karpov the 12th

Anatoly Karpov the 12th

it'f7 49 'ill'Ic6 d4+ 50 'it>bl d3 51 cIdJ

17 g3 li:ldf6 18 cS �d7 19 :tb3 �h6

Black gets his knight to the h-file, but

�h7 52 it'd] it'b3 53 "h3+ 'it>g8

Against Karpov in Tilburg 1991 I

does not have enough fire-power to

54 'ill' h8+ �f7 55 it'g7+ 'iPe8 0-1

played

19... li:lxg3

and the game

back it up. This is rather transparent,

continued 20 hxg3 li:lh5 21 f4 exf4

but I also have one particularly nice

Karpov's knight on the brink was in

22 c6. I later drew the game, despite

my mind almost all the time. Let me

finding myself in an almost hopelessly

show you one of my games from the

lost position. See page 34.

time when I reigned as world champion

memory of a surprising knight check on h3. Here it is:

20 :tc3

and two when I was a junior player. The other knight follows to h5. I did

G.Kamsky - G.Kasparov

Karpov had not played with such ferocity.

1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 g6 3 li:lc3 �g7 4 e4 d6

23 gxf4li:lxf4

5 li:lo 0-0 6 �e2 e5 7 0-0li:lc6 8 d5

After 23... 'iWh4 24 :tf2li:lxf4 25 �fl

li:le79li:ld2 as 10 a3 li:ld7

�xb5 26 dxc7!! wins as Anand pointed

There is no chance of this knight a

Linares 2001

not pay due attention to the fact that

Dortmund 1992

going to h5, but with

A.Grischuk - G.Kasparov

out.

couple of moves

I manage to close the diagonal and

2o...�f4

make it' possible to place the other

This was a novelty in 1992.

knight in an attacking position on that

21 cId6

square.

I was hoping for 21 gxf4?! as I could

11 l:l.bl fS 12 b4 'iPh8 13 0

then

have

demonstrated

24 ... li:lh3+!! 25 c;t>g2 Ilxb5 26 �g3 li:lg5 27 �f2 �b7 28 �gl :tc8 29 h4

some

�xO+ 30 .thO li:lxo 3 1 �xO �xc5

remarkable footwork along the touch line.

32 lDxc5 :tbxc5 33 �xc5 J::txc5 34 c3

21...li:lxf4 22 �c4 (22 li:lb3

h5 35 gxh5 :txh5 36 b4 axb4 37 cxb4

li:l6xd5!) 22... li:l6h5. The other knight

:txh4 0-1

goes there as well. Please note that all Black's moves now will be played on the flanks. 23 li:lb3 fxe4 24 fxe4 li:lh3+

by now - (if 24 .....g5+ 25 �hl! 'iWh4+

If 25 Wg2 "g5+ 26 Wxh3? f4+

26 :th2 "e l + 27 �fl �xb5 28 :txc7

27 'it>h2 'i!t'g3+ 28 �hl 'iWh3+ 29 'itgl

li:lh5 - even this doesn't help - 29 'WWb2 wins.)

25..li:lxf2 . 26 'itxf2 'iWh4+ 27 Wg2

li:lc7

produced some analysis and concluded

(27

that Black has the initiative;

28 f2 'iWh4+=) 27 ...f4 28 �fl White

.

li:lg4+ 24 fxg4 'WIh4+ 25 nh3 wins.)

Mission accomplished.

23 d6! when Black is in trouble.

See diagram on page 19.

22 hIg3 lDh5 22

fl

"g3+=

"g5+!

26 Wxh3 "gl! leads to a checkmate.)

22

22 dxc7 'WIe7 (22.. �xh2+ 23 �xh2

16 axb4li:lh5

(25 Wg2?

�xg3!

2 I.. .cxd6

Not 2l...�xb5 22 dxc7; or 2l...�xg3

13 ...li:lg8 14 '\!i'c2li:lgf6 15li:lb5 axb4

25 �fl

23 hxg3 lDxg3 24 :tel li:lfh5 Anand

After

knight where Karpov had put it.

25 Whl

25 'it>h I 'ill'h4 26li:lxc7 J:hfl + 27 �xfl

21...li:l:xg3

worth spending a few tempi getting the

If 24 :tf2 li:lh3+ - a common theme

:tfS and Black's subtle play has earned him a winning attack.

The diagonal is now closed and it's

Now back to my game with Kamsky:

24 �c4!

'iWh1+ [27 . .. f4 28 �c4!l

survives the attack and wins with the extra material.

24... li:lh3+ If 24... 'iWh4 25 lDb3 lDh3+ 26 Whl; or 24.....g5+ 25 �f2 'iWh4+ 26 �e3. 23

Anato!y Karpov the J 2110

Anatoly Karpov the 12'10

2s...'ilVh4

34 .l:l.xf8+ 'it>xf8 35 J:!.xe5 'CIVg4+ 36'it>n

Y.Nikolaevsky - G.Kasparov Moscow 1976

'ifh3+ and White can do nothing with

1 tUf3 tUf6 2 g3 g6 3 �g2 �g7 4 0-0 0-0 5 d4 d6 6 b3 es 7 ..ITi.b2 tUe6

to make room for his king with 33 h3 as

This sets up a dangerous looking

his extra exchange. White has no time

banery.

26tUb3 fIe4 After 26...tUf2+ 27 �g2 there is not enough juice left in the banery. 27... f4

after 33...J:d2 34 lLle5 J:!.xf2 35 IOxg6 .l:l.2xO 36 lLlxb4 lhe3 the position

8 ds tUas The knight has reached its planned

28 �xf2 "itb3+ 29 �gl wins as Anand pointed out.

is equal.) 33...<;t>g7 34 lhf8 'it>xf8 35 J:!.O+ 'it>g7 36 'ii'e8 1!t'g5+ 37 11g3

destination on the edge of the board

27�h2 Not 27 fxe4?? tUf2+ 28 �g2 �h3+ 29 �gl 'il'g4+ 30 'it>h2 'il'g2 mate.

See diagram on page J 9.

27...nfs 28 f4! After 28 fxe4

nh5

l:[dl+ 38 Wg2 'iff6 39 'ilVg8+ 'if.oxh6

fairly early in the game.

(28...'ilVxe4+

9 .l:l.el ..ITi.fs

29 'il'g2) 29 nco wins as well.

Just like Anatoly Evgenievich I am

28..Jlhs

prepared to give up a tempo.

Black's pieces are picturesquely but

10 tUbd2 it'e8 11 e4

precariously placed on the h-file.

My opponent takes the free tempo, just like Karpov.

11. .�g4 12 e4 .

Black can build up pressure on the e4-square.

12...tUd7 13 �xg7 �xg7 14 .e2 �xf3 15 lLlxf3 'jie7 16 it'c3+ �g8

40 l:th3+ Wg5 41 .l:l.g3+.

23 .l:l.e3

33 .l:l.xf6

'ihf6

34

lLlh6+ Wg7

35 lLlg4 'ii'd4

The e7-pawn is an obvious target.

23...J:!.ad8 24 .l:l.f3 'ilVg7 25 J:!.e1 l:td6

After 35...'ii'g5 36 h3 White will quickly bring his queen over to the

26 b4 tUb7 27 'ilVa3 as 28 bxas tUxas It is a true delight that the knight can

kingside, while Black's knight has to remain on the queenside.

return to as.

29 'ilVa4 'ilVh6 30 J:!.ee3?! 30 tUd7 wins the exchange.

30 ... h4 31 gxh4 'ifxh4 32 tUxr7? An imaginative trick that wins the game, but objectively this thrust spoils White's position. 32 'ii'c2 keeps an edge.

17 ..ITi.h3 b6

36 lhe7+

29 �g3 'il'xg3

The pawn is gobbled up and Black's

This is tantamount to resignation but

king

other moves also lose. If 29...tUxf4+ 30 �xh4; or 29...it'f6 30 fxe5 'ilVg7

39l:te8 'ifn 40 l:te7 'ifh3 41 'ife6 'ifhs

31 'it>gl it'f6 32 �xf4.

1:hg3

exf4

31

�b2+

42 l:te8 <;t>g7 43 'ii'd7+ 1117 44 'ikc8

32...l:tf6?

�g8

'ifb7 45 d6 g5 46 d7 'ifb1+ 47 'it>g2

The exploitation of the pin along the

32 dxe7! �xbs After 32... fxg3 33 d6+ �e6 34 �xe6

18 es

is mate.

White correctly opens the position in

33 ii.xbs fIg3 34 Wg2! tUgS

the centre. Now the knight is missing

And after 34...e3 35 ..ITi.d7 wins.

from the action.

18... dxes 19 ..ITi.xd7 'il'xd7 20 lLlxes

35 d6 l::!.hH 36 �xg31hb2 37 �e4+ 'it>g7 38 d7 1-0

vulnerable. Black is

36...'.ti>h8 37 h3 'ii' c3 38 'ifd7 'ii'xb3

31 dxe7; or 29...it'd8 30 dxc7 tUxf4+

30

remains

simply lost.

�d6 21 lLlg4 hs 22 lLles .f6

24

1-0

fifth rank by 32...l:txd5!? allows many tactical possibilities, however Black

L.Zaid - G.Kasparov

almost miraculously survives in every

Leningrad 1977

variation. 33 tUh6+ Going after the king achieves no more than a perpetual.

1 d4lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLln �g7 4 g3 d6

(33 lLle5 wins the exchange but leaves

5 �g2 0-0 6 0-0 lLle6 7 tUe3 a6 8 d5

his king too exposed, e.g. 33...l:txeS

lLla5 25

Allatoly Karpov the 12th

Anaioly Karpov the 121A

The knight naturally goes to the edge.

Malta

9 tDd2 c5 10 �c2 nb8 11 b3 b5

Hamburg 1982. Two of these were

12 �b2

1980,

or

Bouaziz-Karpov,

played after this game and so I hadn't

See diagram on page

seen them. In a way my retreat is more

19.

effective than Karpov's. It ends the

12...bxc4 13 bxe4 �b6 14 tDebl e5 15 �e3 �d7 16 tDa3

game far more quickly, in just two moves.

I should have followed in Karpov's

25...lOb81! 261Of3 lOd7 27 'iftg31Oc5 28 .:td I a5 29 'iPf2 na6 30 We2 lOa4 31 d4 %:lb6

S.Bouaziz - A.Karpov Hamburg TV 1982

36 �e7 ne8 37 iVd5 1-0

Sad, but my opponent also knows the knight to the h- and a-file strategy.

16 ...�g7 17 nabl 'ite7 18 e4 b5

32 tDbl! tDg7 33 tDd2 tDe6 34 b4 .l:I.d8 35 tDc4 nd4 36 tDd6 .l:I.xb4 37 tDxb7 1:.b5 38 h4 h5 39 'iPf2 'ltd7 40 lOd6 lhc5 41 nb2 1-0

Leaving out the analysis, here are the three retreat pearls mentioned:

footsteps and played 18 ... tDh5.

A.Karpov - B.Spassky

19 f4 nb4 20 �d3 tDb7

32 dxe5 nxb2+ 33 Wfl lOxc3 34 exd6 cxd6 35 nxd6 nb I + 36 lOel Wf6 37 nd2 b5 38 nc2 b4

Game 9, Candidates semi-fmal

I wanted to leave the knight where it

Leningrad 1974

was, but the fact that it was undefended worried me.

39 Wf2 na I 40 e5+ 'iftxe5 41 1Of3+ 'lte4 42 lOd4 'iitd3 0-1

21 tDc2 nxbl 221hbl b4?1 There is no time to free the h5square for the knight. After 22 ... exf4

Karpov sacrificed the e5-pawn ill a sharp Sicilian against Ljubojevic.

23 gxf4 ne8 Black is in the game.

I decided to use this weapon as well.

23 fr:e5 dxe5 24 tDO! hxg3 25 �xe5 gxh2+ 26 �xh2

G.Kasparov

A.Karpov - L. Lj uboj e vi e

White's centre is rock solid.

26... 'i'c8 27 lbe3 lbg4 28 tDxg4 �xg4 29 tDe5 lba5 Now White no longer attacks the a5square. So I waste no time putting the knight back on the edge of the board.

30 no �h5 31 d6 �xe5? If 3l...�g4 32 lbxg4 �xg4 33 iVd5

24 lObi!! iVb7 25 h2 'it>g7 26 c3 lOa6 27 1:.e2 1:.f8 28 1Od2 Jtd8 29 lOD f6 30 %:ld2 �e7 31 'iWe6 %:lad8 32 %:lxd8 Jtxd8 33 .l:I.d I

�d4+ 34 Wh 1 'i'd7 Black still resists.

A.Karpov

32 �xe5�e6 33 JiLf6 the

d6-pa.wn

becomes

-

M.Quinteros

Malta Olympiad 1980

The exposes the weak black king and

lOb8 34 Jtc5 nh8

35 %:lxd8 1-0

more

A.Karpov - L.Ljubojevic

threatening.

33...tD e6

Turin 1982

He must come back to hold the pawn.

34 'lIke3! Wh7 35 'llr'xe5 tDb8 Karpov played

some

1 e4 e5 2 lOo d6 3 d4 lOf6 4 1Oc3

remarkable

cxd4 5 lOxd4 a6 6 Jte2 e6 7 f4 fie7

knight retreats during his career, for

8 0-0 b5?! 9 JtO Jtb7 10 e5 dxe5

example: Karpov-Spassky, 9th game,

11 fxe5 lOfd7 12 Jtf4 b4

Moscow 1974, or Karpov-Quinteros, 26

27

-

A.Yermolinsky

Anatoly Karpov the 12'h

Anatoly Karpov the 12'h 13 llle 4

21 .l:l.adl f6

Karpov sacrifices the pawn. This

Moving the knight with 2J...lllc6

game was

so

2 2 'ii xgS 'iixd6 23 lllfS 'iie5 24 lllh6+

convincing that the

wins, while if 2J...h6 2 2 h4 JLxh4

position never occurred again.

23 'iixh4 'iix d6 24 lllf 5 decides.

13 ...lll xes

22 JLxb8 .l:l.axb8

See diagram on page

27.

14 It'hl! JLe7 Not

14...lllbc6??

IS lll xc6 .i.xc6

9.. bS

16 JLxeS 'iixeS 17 lllf6+ winning nor 14... lllbd7 IS lllgS! and White has nice

IS lllgS! JLxgS 16 JLxb7! 'iixb7

White is better.

17 JLxeS 0-0 JLxg7

White's

is

'iffl+ 0-1

Back t o the game:

Torre's

masterpiece. 10... lllxd4 II .l:l.xd4 �6

12 .l:l.d.2 JLe7 13 JLd3 b4 14 llldl JLb5 15 lllf2 h6 16 JLh4 g5 17 fxg5 hxgS

I S JLg3 lllh5 19 lllg4 lllxg3 20 hxg3 .l:l.xhl 21 'Wxhl :leS 22 �bl JLxd3

18 'iig4 'iie7? this

Here

23 h4! JLxh4

19 lllxe6. After

'ifel.

Retreating with 23... JLh6 is met by 24 lllf5 'iic7 25 lll xh6+ �hS

.l:l.gS

10

"g4+ ..t>f6 48 lll c3

Karpov-Torre, Manila 1976.

Karpov was nicely beaten by Torre

with

17 JLxaS lllg6 IS ..e I 0-0 19 JLe4 and

IS

47

10 lllxc6

If 16... .I:I.a7 17 lllx e6 or 16 ... JLxf4

allows

..t>e6 45 'il'e8+ <;.t;>fS 46 "ilfd7+ <;t>g6

level. It leads to very exciting games.

play for the pawn.

17 ... lll d7

42.. .';:.od6 43 'WbS+ Wxd5 44 "iWd8+

.

This is a rarely played line at the top

advantage

23 exd3

is

decisive. Also after IS...h6? 19 lll xe6 'iid7 20 JLxg7 wins. Better is Is... llld7! 19 'iixgS f6 20 .i.xf6 but White is still somewhat better.

10 . JLxc6 11 it.d3 JL e7 12 eS dxeS .

.

1 3 fxe5 lOd7 14 Sixe7 'ifxe7 26 .l:l.dS+!! This lovely shot decides the game instantly.

24 'iixh4 :lc4 25 'iig3 .l:l.bc8 26 lllrs 'iia7 27 '-Dd6 .l:l.4cS 28 �3 1-0 G.Kasparov

-

A.Yermolinsky

LeningrasJ. 1975

19 'iig3! .l:l.c8 After 19 ... .I:I.dS 20 :ladl!.

1 e4 cS 2 lOn d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lllxd4

20 JLd6 'iid 7

lLlf6 5 '-Dc3 '-Dc6 6 JLg5 a6 7 "d2 e6

Or alternatively 20...'iidS 21 lllxe6!

8 0-0-0 JLd7 9 f4

2S

23... 'ifd4 24 'Wdl as 25 lOhl g4 26 lOxg4 SigS 27 .l:l.c2 .l:l.xc2 28

�c 2

a 4 2 9 a3 b3+ 30 ..t> b I d S 3 1 exd5 'iixd5 32 lOf2 'Wxg2 33 llle 4 JLe3 34 lOe3 "c6 35 d4 'Wc4 36 d5 e5 37 'itbl 'Wd3+ 3S �al Sid4 39 'iWhS+ ..t>d7 40 'iiaS

"[1+ 4 1 lObi 'Wc4 42 'ifb7+

15 JLe4

29

Anatoiy Karpov the J 2th

Anatoiy Karpov the J 2tA

I did not mind sacrificing the e5 pawn, hoping I would get enough play for it in return. 15 .. :.c5 16 l: bel l:a7 17 � xc6 " xc6 1 8 " fl " c5 1 9 l: e3 0-0

S.Garcia Martinez - A.Karpov

Karpov sacrificed the b6-pawn in a hedgehog position against Garcia

Black has equalised by moving his

and went on to win.

king into safety. 20 ltJe4 "xe5

And below is another example

See diagram on page 27.

from my

32...l:e5 33 "d2 l:fe8 34 l:e3 "b6 21 l:g3

35 g3 " b3 36 l:c6

Karpov also allowed short castling and caught Ljubojevic's king on the kingside. I hoped my attack would bring Yermolinsky down too. 21...l:aa8 22 l:xd7 "xe4 23 l:f3 "g6

annoying

predecessor,

followed by my game against him where he himself took the b6-pawn.

36 l:d6 is an alternative.

36.....f5 37 "c3 "d7 38 b3 l:f5 39 �b2??

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

J.Saren - A.Karpov

White has had to play carefully for quite some time, now a losing mistake leads to disaster. The king blocks the queen. After 39 �a2 l:f1 40 l:c5 "d1

41 'it'b2 White is in tbe game.

24 a3

Ga.rcia Martinez - Karpov

White's heavy pieces control many

Madrid 1973

files and ranks. 24 ...l:ac8 25 � bl e5!

I e4 c5 2 ltJf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4

Keeping White busy and holding on

39...l:fi!!

to the pawn. 26 l:g3 "e6 27 "d2 g6 28 l:h3 "f6 29 " h6 "g7 30 " g5 l:ce8 31 l:d6 e4!

Surprisingly catching the king on the

32 l:xa6 Material

equilibrium

has

been

must play with care.

30

Interestingly Karpov stopped playing

first rank:.

the Paulsen pretty soon after he became

40 l:f6 l:bl 41 " c6 "d4+ 42 l:c3 l:f8 43 l::d7 l: xf7 44 "xb5 l:xh2

confrontation suits his style better.

45 b4 l hc2+ 46 <,P xc2 l:fl+ 47 <,Pb3 "dl + 48 � c4 " e2+ 0-1

restored. White is still not worse, but he

a6

world

champion.

Avoiding

direct

13 ...ltJe6

5 � d3 ltJf6 6 0-0 d6 7 c4 We7 8 "ilfe2

A slightly unusu�1 way to develop.

g6 9 f4 � g7 1 0 � hl 0-0 11 ltJe3 b6

Here Black only defends the b6-pawn

12 � d2 lI.b7 13 ltJo

with his queen. 13 ... ltJbd7 is usual.

31

Anatoly Karpov the 12"

Anatoly Karpov rhe 12t' 14 l:lac1 l:lae8 IS �f2

2 6 tDxe4 dxe4 2 7 tDxfl! l:lxfl!

�c5 34 �e3 tDe6 35 g4 a4 36 gxb5

This is a mUlti-purpose move. White

Black has two pieces against the

gxb5 37 bxa4 Wxc4 38 %le i + �d5

can think about attacking the king with

rook. The position is roughly equal and

39 a5 �b5 40 %lg I tDd4 41 %lg8 c5

fVh4 or. . .

the stronger player will outplay his

42 %lh8 �c6 43 %lxb5 �xe2 44 %lh7

opponent.

�xf3 45 a6 �b6 46 a7 �b7 47 h5

15...tDg4 1 6 1IWgi White keeps an eye on the b6-pawn.

By the way, this game misled me in

16...fS 17 exfS gxfS 18 h3?! White diverts the knight to a better place and weakens b6 as well . He could play 1 8 tDd5 'iff? 19 tDxb6.

several ways. I lost twice by opting for

�xa7 4 8 %I f? �b8 49 %lxf6 �c8 50 �e4 �e6 5 1 h6 �xa2 52 �e5 1-0

two pieces against a rook. Once against

O.Romanishin

Kappe and once against Romanishin. Here are those examples:

18...tDf6 19 tDdS j1'd8 20 ,*xh6

See diagram on page 31.

-

G.Kasparov

4-teams, Moscow 1 9 8 1

38...tDxe5 39 fxeS �g7 40 llf7 '1t>b6 41 h4 �hS 42 �h3 �e8 43 :l.a7 �g6 44 .l:xa6 �d3 45 .l:f2 �xc4 46 .l:a3

A.Kappe - G Kas p arov .

Cagnes-sur-Mer, 1977

20.. .'i!h:b6 21 tDxb6 This is the idea implemented later. Black can give up the b6-pawn in such a situation.

21...tDe4 22 Jtxe4 fxe4 23 tDgS tDd8 Karpov sacrifices a pawn and can also afford to step back with his knight. Where is it going to? To the edge of the board of course'

26 %lxe7 tDb6 2 7 %lb7 tDa4 28 %lb8+

24 11fe l ? !

�fB 29 c4 �g7 30 �g2 �d6 3 1 %la8

I t is hetter to defend the f4-pawn by 24 Ike I ! d 5 2 5 cxd5 exd5 2 6 tDd7.

24...dS 2S tDd7 A fter 25 cxd5 ! ? exd5 26 tDd7 h6 27 tDxfB 11xfB 28 ii.b4 lhf4 ! 29 ii.e7

1 1 tDdxe4 'ifxd l 13

.l::r a xd 1

ii.xg5

1 2 tDxf6+ ii.xf6 14

ii.xb7

�e4

I S ii.xa8 ii.xa8

46...�h6?

tDb2 32 a4 tDxc4 3 3 a5 tDe5 34 %lc8

Karpov rarely misses

1 -0

pawns

are

menacing.

in

winning after 47 l1a5 �d5.

Back to the game.

47 l1g3 %la8 48 .1:17 llal 49 1:I.h7

hxg5 30 ii.xd8 !In 3 1 b3 d4 Black's central

a trick

endgames. However 46 . . . �xe5 was

.l:hl+ SO Wg2 11xh4 S I ..t>gl

The

position is hard to evaluate over the board, however White might be better

here. 2S... h6

1 6 h4 Jte7 1 7 ii.e5 tDa6 1 8 c3 ii.c6 1 9 � f4 ii.f8 20 l:ld2 f6 2 1 l:l fd 1 �f7 22 'it>fl h6 2 3 ii.e3 4Jc5 24 l:ld8 a6 25 l:lxe8 'it>xe8 26 f3 tDe6 27 wn h5 2 8 c4 ii.d6 29 llbl a5 30 �d2 tDd4 3 1 � f4 We7 32 ii.xd6+ 'it>xd6 33 Itd I 32

28 b4 �c6 29 a4 �xa4 30 lhe4 �c6

SI ...�e2 S2 �f2 �g4 S3 bS �f5

31 .l:e2 b5 32 h2 h4 33 g3 hxg3+

54 l1b8 l:lb4 SS l:lgl llbH 56 '\t>f3

34 �xg3 �h7 35 �c3 �h6 36 l1n

l1b3+ 57 �f2 �e4 58 l1g3 %lb2+

%lg8+ 37 �h2 tDf7 38 �e5?!

59 �gl �f5 60 .l:g2 .l:xg2+ 61 9o>xg2 33

Anato/y Karpov the 1 2,h

Anato/)' Karpov the 12'h �e4+ 62 'it>g3 'it> g6 63 b6 .t.d5 64 l:tb 8 'it>f5 6 5 b7 'it>xe5 If 65.. .�f4+ 66 'it>h4 'it>xe5 67 <;Pg4 �e3 68 'it>h5 holds.

Or should I say has any of my Predecessors had such an endgame?

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov Tilburg 1 99 1

I I .t.e3 �b7 1 2 0 l:tb8 1 3 'it'e! lbd7

1 4 ir'f2 lbc5 I S .l:tfd I f5 1 6 exf5 l:txf5

13 ... lbxe4 1 4 lZ:l xe4 �xe4 15 'ii'xd8 � xd8 16 ];[adl d5?!

1 7 lbc2 �h4 1 8 g3 �e7 1 9 b4 lbd7 20 f4

Maybe defending the pawn was better, but that would be slightly passive. An interesting psychological echo is that 1 6 years later I also gave a free pawn to my opponent in the World Championship

final

when

neither

player had yet scored a victory. 1 7 n � f5 1 8 cxd5 At the time, commentators thought 1 8 g4?! .t.g6 1 9 cxd5 exd5 20 lhd5? was a losing move, but after 20 . . . .l:I:e8 66 � g4? After 66 ];[h8 ! ! White contrives to engineer a miraculous escape. 66 ... .>i f4+ 67 \t.?g4 �xb7 68 ];[h5+ ! !

I I I lbg6+ <;Pg8

1 1 2 lbe7+ <;Ph8

1 1 3 lbg5 l:ta6+ 1 1 4 <;Pf7 .l:tf6+! 11,-11, Capturing the rook results in stalemate. Back to the main game:

20 . . . 'i!Vf8 2 1 b5 axb5 22 cxb5 lba5 23 �xb6 lbxb6 24 'i!Vxb6 �d8 25 ir'a7

2 1 ];[fd I ! White is still a bit better. 18 ...exd5 1 9 1hd5 �e6 If 1 9 .. Jle8 20 Wf2 �e6 2 1 J:td6.

J:!.c8 2 6 'i!Ve3 e5 2 7 �g4 lbc4 2 8 'ii'd3 .t.b6+ 29 'itJfl ];[xf4+ 30 gxf4 'it'xf4+ Oe l I tucked this idea away safely and

prepared a novelty for my first World Championship match. I employed it when the score was 0:0. Let's see how Karpov's idea worked against him. A.Karpov - G.Kasparov Game 3, World Championship, Moscow 1 984

Recovering a piece, Without this move White would lose. 68 . . . 'it>e4

Karpov sacrificed the b6-pawn not

1 e4 c5 2 lbO e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4 lb c6 5 lb b5 d6 6 c4 lb f6 7 lZ:l lc3 a6 8 lZ:l a3 �e7 9 �e2 0-0 1 0 0-0 b6 1 1 .t. e3 � b7 12 'iYb 3 lba5

only in this game but also in an earlier

This was my prepared novelty - you

66...�e3 67 'it>g3 .t. g5 68 �fZ .t.e7 0-1

69 ];[b5 ! and White wins a bishop. Luckily the position is drawish. Interestingly, it would take more time to win if Black had a knight on e6 instead of the pawn.

one where the circumstances were very

On the other hand in the next position

similar.

against Karpov from Tilburg 1 99 1 I did manage to salvage a draw with rook versus two knights and a bishop. People drew the conclusion from my body language that I considered my position lost at adj ournment. My reaction to this? No comment!

J.Saren - A.Karpov Skopje Olympiad 1 972

34

2 0 l:td6!? � xa2?! After

20 . . . �e7

21

lha6

J:txa6

(2 l . . ..t.xa3? 22 bxa3 lZ:lc4 23 lhe6 wins.) 22 �xa6 .l:I:b8 23 �d4 lbc6 24 .t.c3 �c5+ 25 'it> h l lZ:lb4 it would be hard to progress with White. 21 lha6 J:tb8 22 � c5 l:te8 23 iL b5! l:te6

can guess where it came from. 13 'ifxb6

Other moves were no better. If

See diagram on page 31.

23 . . . J:!. e 5 ? !

24

.t.d6

:!:texb5

25 lbxb5 l:txb5 26 l:ta8 lZ:lb7 27 �c7

I e4 c5 2 lZ:lo e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lbxd4

Black's pawns have not advanced as

lZ:lc6 5 lbb5 d6 6 c4 lbf6 7 lb I c3 a6

far as in the Garcia-Karpov game, but I

25 lZ:ld6 ! ? or 2 5 J:tdl �xb5 26 J:txd8

8 lba3 iLe7 9 �e2 0-0 10 0-0 b6

did not have to sacrifice a pawn.

l:txd8 27 lha5.

wins. If 2 3 .. Jhb5 24 lZ:lxb5 iLc4

35

Anatoly Karpov the / 2th

Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th 24 b4 lO b7 After

24 . . . l%xa6

25

.txa6

If 28 ....txc2 29 l%xe6 fxe6 30 :Xe7 1Od6 3 1 .td7 l%xb4 32 .tc5 Ab I + 33 � f2 wins as Taimanov pointed out. 29 A Ie6 A Id7 30 l%e l ! A c7 31 .tb6

lOb3

26 l%e l ! ? 2S .t f2 .t e7 26 lOc2 .t dS 27 l%d l .t b3 2 8 l%d7! l%d8

1-0

A.Beliavsky - A.Karpov Karpov won an opposite coloured bishop endgame where he had a strong light-squared bishop and a rook and won despite being a pawn

A.Beliavsky - A.Karpov

28 .t xd7? Better was 28 lOxf7! 'i;xf7 (28 ... :xf7 29 dxe6 :e7 30 l%xc8 wins) 29 dxe6+ 'lIVxe6 30 .tb3 lLld5 3 1 'ii'xe6+ q"xe6 32 Ac6+ ! ; 2 8 lLlxd7 lOxd7 29 'ifc3+ �h7 30 dxe6 fxe6 3 1 .tg3. In both cases White's advantage is sufficient to sail home with the full point. 28 ...lOxd7 29 dxe6 'ii'xe6 30 lUe4 .t a6 3 1 'ii'xe6 fxe6

USSR Championship, Moscow 1 97 3

1 d 4 lOf6 2 c4 e 6 3 lOc3 .tb4 4 e 3 c S S .t d3 0-0 6 lOo d S 7 0-0 dxc4 8 .t xc4 cxd4 9 exd4 b6 The Karpov line brought me my second loss in the Kramnik match, from there on it was hard to stage a comeback. 10 .t gS .t b7 11 We2 lLlbd7 12 A acl A c8 1 3 lOeS W e7 1 4 .t bS 'lIVd6 IS A fdl .t xe3 16 bxe3 'ii'dS 17 f4 'lIVd6

down. Furthermore, to make it even more misleading, he beat a very fine player - Beliavsky.

Remembering this particular game well, I twice opted for such positions

32 .t g3? Placing the bishop on a passive square. 32 g3 was a better way to simplify as the bishop is then far more active: 3 2 . . . :c8 33 :d 1 i.xc4 34 :'xd7+ � f8 35 :a7 i.d5 36 a4. 32... :e8 33 J:[d l i. xe4 34 :'xd7+ �f6 See diagram on page 36. White has an extra pawn but no longer an advantage. But Beliavsky is a great fighter and still plays for a win. 3S 83 After 35 J:[d2 :a8=. 3S....t dS

against Kramnik. In one of them (below. left) I was a pawn up, not down, and my opponent had no passed a-pawn and I only drew. But this was not all in the match. In the next example (below, right), I did not have a strong bishop, but the similarity is still there as my opponent was a pawn up and possessed a passed a-pawn. Out of these two games I totalled a miserable half a point whereas Karpov scored twice as much as that from a single game. To make matters worse, this happened to me during the World Championship match against Kramnik.

V.Kramnlk - G.Kasparov

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

36

18 e4 White's centre is huge. Black should undermine that zone as the more space White has the quicker he will suffocate his opponent. 1 8. . 'ii'c7 19 .t a4 a6 20 .t e2 g6 2 1 WeI � g7 22 .t a4 h6 23 .t h4 bS At a cost of a pawn Karpov gets rid of the nagging bind. 24 nbS 'lIVd6 2S bxa6 .t xa6 26 dS! Axel 27 A xel .t e8 .

37

Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th

Anatoly Karpov the 12th 45...1:. a8 4 6 'it' ll 'it'�6 4 7 lId7 1:.a3 48 1:.d8 110+ 49 'it' gl

36 h3? In this case, placing the pawn on the

The g2-pawn is weak and the bishop

�d5 1 4 .i.f2 c5 15 .i.b 5 11fd8 16 e4

colour of his opponent's b ishop means it's going to fall in the long

22 ...1:. d2 23 � c3 .i. b7

� b7 8 0 h6 9 � h4 d5 1 0 e3 � bd7 11 cxd5 � xd5 1 2 .i.xd8 �xc3 1 3 .i. b4

can target it, just as in the Karpov game.

run.

White can force matters and move

24 b4 l:I. f8 25 l:I. a2 1:. xa2 26 ttJxa2 ttJd5 27 .i. d4 l:I. a8

closer to a draw by 36 �h4+ 'it'f5 3 7 1:.f7+ 'it'e4 (37 . . . c;t>g4? 3 8 �el and White can play for a win again.) 38 11f6 (38 h3 Now he makes room for the king. 38 . . . 1:.c l + 39 'it'h2 'it'e3 40 1:.f6 �e4 4 1 f5 gxf5 42 1:.xe6 lIc2 43 'it'h l f4 44 11e8 and White holds. ) 38 . . . 1:.c 1 + 49 ...1:. xh3

39 e3) 40 .. .'�)d4 4 1 'it'g4 �e4 42 �g3. Black's

Karpov once held Torre in a single

advantage is no more than symbolic. 3 6 ...1:. c l + 37 'it' ll lIc2+ 38
rook and opposite colour bishop ending

1 6 ...�c7! !

but there Torre had h- and g-pawns.

At the time this was a very important

Karpov's position must have been lost,

Suddenly Karpov can start to squeeze. 39
but here he wins even though it takes

novelty. We had already played a few

time. 50 lIb8 1:. c3 51 .i. d6 11c2 52 1:. f8 1:.c6 53 .i.e5 g4 54 1:.f6+ 'it' g5 55 1:.f8 .i.f3 5 6 .i. f4+ h4 1:.e2 60 .i. g3

28 lLl c3

games in which I accepted a weakness �r a material deficit for better

After

development. 17 .i. xd7 lIxd7 18 dxc5 f5! 19 cxb6 axb6 20 �e2

because he can get the a- and the

20 l:I.d l ! ? would lead to an equal game.

b-pawn in exchange for the e-pawn,

For example: 20 . . .lIxd l + 2 1 'it'xd l fxe4 22 fxe4 .i.xe4 23 �f3 . 20... fxe4 21 fxe4 .i. xe4

reaching a rook ending a pawn up but which I evaluated as slightly better for Black only.) 30 lIc7 �e4! (30 . . . 1:.d2 3 1 l:I.xg7+ 'it'f8 32 .i.c3 holds.) 3 1 .i.e I (3 1 l:hg7+? �f8 32 �c3 .i.b I 3 3 1:.g3 lLlf5 34 1:.f3 Ad l + 35 �f2 h5 wins.) 3 l . . .lId 1 + 32 �f2 lLlg4+ (32 . . . lLld5? 3 3 lLlc3=) 3 3 'it'g3 lLlf6 3 4 .i.e3 l:I.d8!

70 'it.> f6 � d5 7 1 .i. h4 1:. 0+ 72 �g6 .i.f7+ 0-1

45 .i.d6 avoids the irrunediate loss

Black keeps his winning prospects as I pointed

of more material. 45 . . . lIb2 (After 45 . . . 1:.a4! 46 'it'f2 it is hard to tell if

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

Black can win.) 46 'it'd4 lIb3? (This

Game 8, World Championship,

direct attempt to win fails. Black

London 2000

can maintain his edge by 46 . . .lIe2.) 1 d4 liJf6 2 c4 e6 3 �c3 .i. b4 4 "c2 0-0 5 a3 .i. xc3+ 6 "xc3 b6 7 .i.g5

47 �e5+ 'it'g6 48 1:.g7+ 'it'h6 49 1:.g8 and White holds. 38

(28 . . . lLlxb4?

Probably Black has no win here,

Giving back the pawn at once with

Karpov wins by pushing the e-pawn

From being a pawn down, Karpov

g5!

upper hand. If 28 .i.b2 lLle3 29 l:I.c1

without using his king. 61 1:. b8 e4 62 11b5 11e3 63 1:.b6+ 'it'f7 64 'it' g5 1:.d3 65 'it'f5 e3 66 1:. d6 1:.b3 67 1:. d7+
reaches an endgame a pawn up! 44 � c7 1:. a2 45 lI h7

nf3

l:I.d8 (29 . . .�d5 30 lLlc3 lLlc4 31 1:.c2!

e5

43 ...1:.xg2

28

29 1:.g3) 29 lLlc3 lLlf4 Black has the

out

in

some

analysis

in

Informant. 28 ...lLl xc3 29 � xc3 lba3 30 .i. d4 b5

22 0-0? After 22 �c3 .i.xg2 23 l:I.g l .i.f3

See diagram on page 36.

24 lIg3 lId3 25 .i.xb6 �d5 26 �xd5 exd5 we could say it's a balanced yet

3 1 11 f4

fighting game. 39

Anatoly Karpov the l}Th

Anatoly Karpov the 12th

35 ':c4 White retains decent winning

V.Kramnik G.Kasparov Game 2, World Chess Championship -

chances. 31 f3 ':e7

London 2000

If 3 1 ... ':b5 32 a4 ':b2 33 h4 ! ?

32 a4

1 d4 tUf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltJ c3 d5 Against Kramnik, I had quite a few draws i n the GriinfeId during the second half of the 1 990s. Some were very close, maybe I should have sensed that sooner or later I would lose one. 4 exdS liJxd5 5 e4 tU xc3 6 bxc3 .i.g7

3 1 ... :d3 I was a pawn up whereas Karpov was

7 tU f3 cS 8 .i. e3 "a s 9 "d2 .i.g4 1 0 :b l

a pawn down. He won, so it made me too complacent and I missed a chance . . . After 3 1 . . . h5 ! 32 g4 h 4 33 g 5 :a2 34 :xh4 :g2+ 35 'it>f1 :xg5 the

21 f4! 'iWd8 22 'ifc3 .i. b 8 If 22 ...'ifh4 23 'ifg3.

23 'iff3 'ifh4 24 eS gS 25 ':e 1 'ifxf4 If 25 ... gxf4 26 e6 fxe6 27 ':xe6. Later, in my second loss in this match, I did not mind a battery when Krarnnik

32 : a7

moved a rook to e6. 27 . . ...g5+ 28 'iWg2

situation is almost identical to the

...

After 3 2 ... .i.a7+ ! ? 3 3 c;tg2 .i.e3

"xg2+ 29 o;t>xg2 c;tg7 30 :xa6. White

Beliavsky-Karpov game. The extra

Kramnik suggests several plans to

is a tempo up compared with that game.

b-pawns must increase the stronger

convert the pawn advantage . Here are

26 'ifxf4 gxf4 27 e6 fxe6 28 ':xe6 �g7

side's chances. 32 l1g4 g5 33 h4!

two of them. 34 o;t>h3 ! (or 34 :c6 ! ? : a 7 3 5 .i. c 2 ) 34 . . . ':es ! (34 . . . :a7?

Even 28 ... a5 is possible, but it leads

Now White holds.

35 ':xa7+ .i.xa7 36 c;tg4 .i.e3 37 as h6

to a miserable defence. 29 ':xa6

33 'it>f7 34 hxg5 hxg5 35 'it>n :d2+ 36 o;t> e3 ...

See diagram

1 0. 8 6 ..

which did not even exist here. The a­ pawn never assumed a role in that game

position.

- and I was hoping for the same. I knew

with 3 3 . . . .i.c7 34 ':b4 .i.d6! 35 :c4

11 ':xb7 .i. xf3 12 gxf3 ltJc6 13 .i. c4 0-0 1 4 0-0 cxd4 1 5 cxd4 .i. xd4 16 .i. d5 .i. c3

in a match Kramnik would not be

:a5.

1 6 . . . .i.xe3 ?

1 7 "xe3 :ac8

"d8 and Black must suffer in this position a pawn down. If 20 . . . e6? 2 1 .i.xe6 wins. 17 'ifc1 ! ltJd4 18 .i.xd4 .i. xd4

pawns are too close to one another.

I

A gap of one rank is usually not

was

not

particularly

unhappy

here.

enough. 37 l:txg2 .i. xg2 38 .i.e5 lA-v]

19 ':n7 ':a7 20 ':Ia7 .i. xa7 40

B lack must suffer. 33 lIb6 .i. e5

ensuing opposite coloured bishops

1 8 lIc 1 tUb4 1 9 ':xc8 ':xc8 20 "d2

I win the g2-pawn as well, but sadly

which one was the best, but in all lines

29 ':fS Karpov still had to take'the g2-pawn,

here. I had already visualised the

Not

it only leads to a draw since my passed

38 o;t>fs wins.) 35 o;t>g4 h5+ 36 c;th4 .i.f2+ 37 o;t>h3. It's difficult to tell

page 36.

•..

Later I said I just gave up a pawn

36... :xg2

on

careless and lose

as

Maybe I should have tried to defend

34 :b4 ': d7 35 � g2 :d2+ 36 o;t> h3 h5 37 : b 5 o;t>C6 38 a s : a2 39 ':b6+

Beliavsky did, but

if Karpov won his game I should have at least made a draw. After 29 ...':f6 30 ':a8 (30 :a5 !?) 30 ...':b6 3 I a4 ':b2 32 as .i.d6 33 ':c8 White is likely to win. Indeed 33 . ':b5 .

.

34 a6 ':xd5 35 a7 f3 3 6 ':g8+ �f6 3 7 � h l is decisive in a nice line shown by Kramnik. 30 .i.e4 : e5 Upon 30 . . .':b5 ! ? 3 1 �g2 ':b2 32 a4 .i.e5 3 3 ':c6 ! ? .i.d4 34 .i.c2 ':a2 41

Anatoly Karpov the J 2th

Anatoly Karpov the J 2,h

39 . �e7?? .

45 .l:l.d5 White loses the opposite

.

This loses a piece

III

colour bishop ending as he drops a

one move.

second pawn or else allows White's

However, the position is lost anyway. Even after 39 . . .<.Pg7

king

40 a6 .i.d4

to

invade on

the

queenside.

4 5 . . . .I:I.xd5 (45 . . ..I:I.a2 46 .l:l.xh5 .i.gl

41 .I:1g6+ 'it>f8 42 .i.b7 ! is winning.

4 7
Here are Kramnik's lines. 42 . . . .I:I.a5

4 7 �g2 iLa7 48 h4) 47 'iti>g2 h4

(42 . . . .i.e3 43 .l:l.g5 h4 44 .l:l.g4 �e7

(47 . . .'it>f6 48 h4) 48 �h3 .i.f2 49 'it>g4.

45 .l:l.xh4 .i. g l 46 �g4 wins.) 43 .l:l.d6

40 .i.dS 1 -0

.i.g l 44 .l:l.d l ! .i.e3 (44 . . . lIg5 45 lhg l )

Having shown you the posItions

Quite

Karpov went on to win, I ' l l show you

incredibly

the

structure

occurred once again in the same

mine against Kramnik. I spoiled my

match

position and only drew - and ended

additional a-pawns in each camp and

-

only

that

there

up not winning a single game in the

there were no minor pieces on the

match.

board.

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

I should not have lost the title match against Kramnik. My flrst loss was related to Karpov while in the second as you will see in the Alekhine chapter

-

I

fol lowed

the

fourth

world

champion. See page 2 1 5. Why do my countrymen have such

an adverse

effect on me - forcing me to lose my title? Fortunately the crown at least remained in Mother Russia.

A.Antunes - A.Karpov

Karpov also had a game against Antunes which was very similar to The last kind of position that influenced me from Karpov's games had also

my second game against Krarnni k

occurred twice in my match with Kramnik. Karpov's contribution to the loss

and I thought that this time I would

of my title was considerable.

make it as Karpov won the position despite not even being a pawn up (his

The 12th world champion won a game where he had a sole extra c-pawn on the queens ide and both sides had four pawns on the kingside. He also won another game like this against Van Wely.

A.Karpov - P.Nikolic

opponent had a doubled pawn), but again I could not convert the material advantage.

L. van Wely - A.Karpov

A.Karpov - P.Nikolic Tilburg, 1 9 8 8

1 d4 li:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 li:lo b6 4 g3 A quick look in the database shows that Karpov has had this position with White 100 times in regular and rapid games and lost only twice.

4 ... .i.a6 5 b3 .i.b7 6 .i.g2 .i.b4+ 7 .i.d2 as 8 0-0 0-0 42

were

43

Anatoly Karpov the 1 2th

Anatoly Karpov the 1 2 th

9 �c2

l:I.xeS 20 'it'a4? 1ic7 21 e5 tOd7 22 f4

1 2 ...'iixcJ

The start of a long manoeuvring

b5!

I was two points behind and had

Winning a pawn.

phase. 9 ... cS

23 'ii a 3 bxc4

10 .tt d l tOa6 11 iLe3 a4

13 .llI. a 3 4:ldS! 14 libl '*f6 15 .llI. dJ h6

See diagram on page 42.

12 tOe3 axb3 13 axb3 dS?! 14 tOa4! queenside. 14 ... h6 15 'ifb2 lle8 16 tOeS l:I.b8 17 tOd3! dxc4 18 iLxb7 l:I.xb7 19 bxc4 .e7?

If 15 ... 'ifh6?! 16 b5.

24 lled! 4:lb6 25 lle3 g6 26 lld6 Waiting passively did not offer much hope either. 26 ... .tt e8 27 h4 tOd5 28 l:I.e2 llaS 29 .0 'iie5+ 30 <;t>h2 tOe3 3 1 l:1.ed2

Nicely applying pressure on the

1 6 bs l:I.d8 1 7 iLb2 'ike7 18 lla4 ? ! This i s both imaginative and risky. If 1 8 iLa3 ! '*f6. The alternative 1 8 . . . tOe5 ? ! is a risky way to play for win.

This is a hacking sacrifice. Karpov

a

1 9 iLh7+ �h8 20 tOeS. Now

1 9 .1l1.b2=.

easily neutralises the ploy and wins.

This loses a pawn.

to

try to win, even with Black.

29 �xfl e3+ 30 �g2 l:I.xcS 31 'ifbl

18 ... tOeS 19 iLh7+

l:I.bS 32 h4 'iWh5 33 .d3 l:I.fS 34 l:I.f1

Not 1 9 iLa3? tOe3.

lhfl 35 c,t>xfl "g4 36 �g2 1-0

1 9 ...�h8

Karpov had another game like this and won it as well.

L. van Wely - A.Karpov European Rapid 30 minute Championship, Cap d'Agde, 1 996 20 tOaxeS !

1 d4 4Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 tOo b6 4 g3 .ta6

bxeS 2 1 llxa6 4:lg4

5 b3 iLb4+ 6 .i.d2 .i.e7 7 .tg2 c6

22 �cl exd4 23 iLxd4

8 iLc3 d5 9 tOeS tOfd7 10 4:lxd7 tOxd7 11 tOd2 0-0 1 2 0-0 tOf6 13 l:I.el c5

See diagram on page 42 .

14 e4 CId4 15 iLxd4 dxc4 16 4:lxc4

White wins a pawn and steadily 23 ... eS looks

for

20 l:I.h4 Kramnik moves against the king. Krarnnik could play on the c-file with 20 l:I.c4 but 20 . . . .i.d7 followed by .llI. e 8 keeps Black in the game. Going after the king on the g-file with 20 l:tg4 1 ? might have led t o some very exciting tactics. 20 . . . eS ! 2 1 l:I.g3

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov Game 1 2 , World Championship,

London 2000 1 d4 4:lf6 2 c4 e6 3 tOc3 iLb4 4 e3 0-0 5 .i.d3 dS 6 4:l0 cS 7 0-0 dxe4 8 iLxc4 tObd7 9 a3 exd4 10 axb4 dxeJ 11 bxd .c7 12 iLe2 1 ?

converts his advantage. Pre drag

3 1 ...c3 The c-pawn makes its decisive advance. 32 l:I.d8+ <;t>g7 33 l:1.xc8 'iix c8 3 4 llc2 4:lxc2 0-1

counterplay.

Waiting passively with 23 . . .l:I.c8 ! ? may have prolonged the game. 24 iLal e4 2S 4Jxb4 llxb4 26 eS l:I.bS 27 llad6 .gS Trying to fish in muddy waters. 27 . . . e3 28 f3 tOf2 29 l:I. l d5 was also

1 6... iLxc4

hopeless.

Karpov creates a weakness. 17 bxc4 llc8 18 %lcl ..ieS 19 .txcS

28 h3 ! tOxfl

44

45

Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h 2 1 . . . e4 ! !

Anatoly Karpov the J 2,h

(2 J . . .lLlf6

22

lLlxe5 !

2 7 "ifb2 If 27 "ifb7 'Wd6; or 27 lLlh4 'Wd6 !

24 lLlc6 'Wf8 25 �xg7+ and Kramni.k

27 ... .I:[bS 28 'Wa3 lLlb6

prefers

White

In

his

Informant

analysis.) 22 lLle5 ! (22 lLld2 lLla4 ! ! ) 22.. .ltJf6 (22. ..'iPx.h7? 23 lLlc6) 2 3 �g6 !

Not 20 . . . lLlf6? 2 1 �xf6 'Wxf6 22 .l:[f4.

2 1 .1:[c4! Vladimir

wisely

returns

to

after which his dream of winning is

Moscow 200 1

gone. If 3 1 . . . �c6? 32 llxc5=. Best was

Karpov exchanged this at once. I did

3 1 . . .l:tc8 which keeps the extra pawn

not have the opportunity to follow suit,

and retains some chances of wiruting. Kramni.k mentions this move, but also

2S . . . ltJb4 ! ? was promising. Placing the

20 ... f6

the

queenside.

But Black blunders the pawn back,

Botvinnik Memorial rapidplay

so I had to think about alternatives.

�e6 24 f3 ! with an unclear position.

3 1 ...lLla4?

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

[22 �xe5 lLlh5] 22 . . . .I:[d5 23 f4 lLlx.h7

3 1 . . . c4 looks promising.

bishop on the long diagonal, just as Karpov had done, looks reasonable. Then 29 �b l (29 'Wa7 'Wd6) 29 . . .1l.c6 30 e4, intending 'We3.

2 1 . ..�d7 22 �a3?! A trip to the edge of the board with

33 .l:[a8+ lLlf8 34 'ifc2 g6 35 g3 �g7

22 lLlh4 ! would have kept the position

36 �g2 e5 37 1:I.a4 'ii'd 6 38 'ii'c4 lLle6

balanced. White has enough play for

39 Wd5 'iib 8 40 1:I.a8 'iib 2 41 .l:[a2 Wc3

the pawn.

42 'tWd2 'ii'b3 43 Wd5 'ii'b s 44 .l:[a8 Wc7

22 ... b6 23 �e4

45 .l:[a6 �d4 46 'tic6 'tWe7 47 l:ta8 'tWf6

I f 23 .l:[fc l �xb 5 !

48 'tic2 lLlg5 49 .l:a3 'We6 50 h4 'tWh3+

23 ... a6! A fter

23 ... .I:[acS

24

lLld4 !

�eS

25 .l:[fc I it is a matter of personal taste

24 bxa6?

29 .1:[4c3 Not 29 .l:[xc5? when �c6 ! ! wins; nor

bxc5 26 .l:[xc5 and White has just enough to hold. 25

�xd5

33 ttJc4 'tWxc5 112-112 and there is nothing left to play for. If 3 3 . . . l::I.xf2? 34 1.'tc8.

29 .l:[d4 ! ? .l:[cS.

A.Antunes - A.Karpov

29 ....I:[b4! 30 lLld2

Tilburg 1 994

Nor 3 0 �b l ?? when . . ..I:[a8 wins. And if 30 'WaS lLla4.

24 ... .I:[xa6 25 �Ic5 Here

If 32 . . .I:[bb8 3 3 l::I. 5 c3.

54 'Wf3 'tixD 0- 1 . Back to the game

This is a serious mistake as it allows 24 lLlh4 �eS ; or 24 1lfc l axb5 2 5 �xc5

5 1 �gl lLle6 52 .l:[b3 'ii'g4 53 'i!fd3 lLlc5

All the queenside pawns are gone

which colour you prefer.

the rook to come into play. After

32 .l:[xcS! .l:b2

.l:[xa3 !

26

lLlh4

(26 'Wxb6? lLla4) 26 ... �eS 27 �c6 and it is difficult to tell whether or not there is enough in the position to win.

1 ttJf3 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 d5 4 �g2

3 0 ... f5? This is too hasty. Also 30 . . . ltJa4?! points out the beautiful 30 . . . �c6 ! ?, 3 1 .l:[xc5 (3 1 ..i.xc6 .l:[xd2) 3 l . . ..I:[xe4 3 2 'WaS lhd2 33 'Wxd2 �d7 with

See diagram on page 43.

excellent wiIUling chances.

I beat Vladimir from a very similar

the same structure, perhaps I became a

position

little too casual.

Memorial, my first rapidplay match. 46

in

the

200 I

3 1 �f3? Having little time left White misses the draw ish simplification 3 1 .l:[xc5 ! . Then 3 l . . .l::I.xe4 (3 l ....I:[b5 32 � D �e8 33 lLlb l ! ; 3 l . . ..I:[a4 32 'ii'b 2) 32 lLlxe4

Black is a safe pawn up and as Karpov had won so convincingly with

8 ttJxc6 bxc6 9 ttJa3 �xa3

allows 3 1 llxc5. However Kramnik

C . . .l:c8 is a good move as well)

25 ... bIc5 26 %:tfc1 .l:[a5!

�e7 5 0-0 0-0 6 d4 dxc4 7 ttJeS ttJc6

Botvinnik

fxe4 33 'ii'b4 ! and White wins the e4'pawn, which is enough to hold on. 3 3 . . . lLla4

(33 . . . 'tWd6

34

'Wxe4=)

34 .l:[5c4 'ii'xb4 35 .l:[xb4. 47

Anatoly Karpov the J 2'h

Anatoly Karpov the 12'h 2S ...l:[e6?

44 l:lc7+ �f6 45 l:!.b7 Black has no time

53 .. .';Pc7 54 Ita3 �b6 55 naS l:tc3+

pawn

Thougb tbis wins tbis game, be

to defend fl therefore White gets away

structure often occurs in the Catalan

misses a clearer path to victory by

with

56 �d4 l:[e4+ 57 'ite3 l:te3+ 58 �d4

28 . . J:�b l ! ! 29 l:[xb l (29 'ii'c 2 l:[xfl +

42

10 .. �a6 11 �g5?!

30 'it>xfl 'itb I + 3 1 'iif e2 'ii'g2 wins.)

4 1 . . .l:t6xa4 42 l:[2xc3 1:lxa2 43 J:!.c7

Taking the pawn is the main line and

29 . . ...xf2+ 30 <'phI "xg3.

�g6 44 h5+ 'itxh5 45 l:[xfl and White

10 bxa3 This

somewhat

awkward

opening. .

29 l:[d4 "e2 3 0 l:[d2 'ii'fJ 3 1 Itd4

is more natural.

11 ... b6

'ii'e 2 32 l:ld2 "h5

12 .lhf6 "](f6 13 �Ie6

it.) 4 1 1:xa4

l:tc4 (4 1 l:[xa4

43

'ite2 l:l3xa4 �d3

l:ta3)

l:te4+ 59 We3 l:te7

probably bolds.

40 ... l:[3xa4 41 l:[exe3 lha2 42 l:tb7 l:[b6

nabS 1 4 "a4 l:[b6 1 5 l:[fd} l:[dS 1 6 �fJ e6 1 7 �g2 "e7 I S e3 nes 1 9 b4 �b5 20 �4 e5 21 dIeS

60 J:l.gS ? ! The

subtle

intermediate

check

60 Itb8+ ! ! would at least force Karpov to fight hard for the point. 60 . . . �a5

33 l:tb 1 l:td5

(after 60 . . . l:[b7 6 1 l:[g8 b4 62 'itd2 l:tc7

Black's advantage has by no means

63 g5 b3 64 l:[b8+ l1b7 65 lIg8 I think

evaporated.

34 'ii' e 2+ 'iVg6 35 'ii'x g6+ 'it>xg6 2 1 ...Ih:e5

36 l1e2 l:ld3 37 a4 na3 38 l:[b4 c3

Karpov creates a passed c-pawn.

39 'it>n l:la6

22 ItdS+ Wh7 23 Itadl �e6 24 "e3

43 l:[xb6 axb6 44 l:[b3 l:ta6 45 e4

White draws - by the way there is no

�f6 46 f4 �e7 47 �e2 Wd6 48 g4

beautiful win by 65 l:[xb7+ �xb7 66 f5

l:[a2+ 49 'ite3 �e6 50 l:tc3+ �b7

exf5 67 g6 as after . . . fxg6 Black's king

51 l:[d3 l:[e2 52 h5 b5

is close enough to stop the e-pawn.) 6 1 l:[g8 b4 62 lhg7 b3 63 Itg8 l:!.b7

�xfJ+ 25 'ito'xfJ

64 'iifd2 and White can hold as the b-pawn can't be pushed because the

See diagram on page 43.

rook check on a8 saves White.

60 ... b4 61 'itd3 ? !

25 .. JH5+ If 25 . . . �7+!? 26 e4 Itb2.

With

61

'itd2 !

White

has more

chances of getting behind the b-pawn.

26 �g2 1Vb7+ 27 �gl �fJ 2S l:[n

40 l:tb3 40 llg4+! ! would be an interesting cbeck that gives better chances as it drives the king further away from the centre. 40 . . . 'it>h7 ! (40 . . .'it>f6 4 1 nf4+

48

6 1 . . .'ita7 !

(Karpov

differently

from

the

should

play

game.

After

6 l . ..b3? 62 J:!.b8+ lIb7 63 l1c8 ..ta6

53 e5?

64 �c I

5 3 l:[d7+ would have produced a

chances.) 62 l:td8 b3 63 l:[d3 b2 64 l:tb3

better fight.

53 . . . l:tc7

l:[b7 65 l:txb7+ �xb7 66 �c2 'itc6 and

54 l:td8 �b6

Black wins.

55 g5 b4 56 l:[g8 �b7 5 7 l:td8 and

�e7 42 Itc4 It6xa4 43 112xc3 l:[xa2 (on

White still has chances of holding the

43 . . .11xc3 44 l:[xa4 ! and White holds]

game (57 l:[xg7?? b3 i).

White has decent drawing

61...b3 62 l:[bS+ l:[b7 63 nes 'ita7 64 l:[c1 49

AnalOly Karpov the 12th

Anatoly Karpov the 12th I decided not to give the pawn back.

64 .. J�b5!

isolating White's c-pawn. 19 ... h5 20 "f4 "c6 21 �If6! lLlIf6

king with a path to invade the kingside.

33 ':b6!

37 ... c3?

This is a nasty move, White now

n lLlxf6+

65 lIbl �b6 66 �c3 �c5 67 �b2 .l:l.b4 68 lIO si;>d5 69 .l:l.f3 si;>e4 70 lin lIb7 71 lIf2 It>e3 72 !;to si;>e2 73 l:I.g l

After 22 "e3 lLlxd5 23 cxd5 "c5 .

threatens simultaneously to take on a6

22...�If6 23 lLld5 �b2 24 ':bl �g7

and e6.

25 "g5 �f8 26 ':dcl e6 27 lLlf6 .l:l.ed8

�f2 0-1

28 h4!

a) If 33 ... c4 34 1::tx e6 .l:l.d l 35 lIc6

as Kramnik pointed out.

[42 �fl �c5 43 �e2 Wb4 44 lib I +

c) If Black tries to go after White's

1 lLlf3 lLlf6 2 c4 b6 3 g3 c5 4 �g2

Wc3 wins] 42 . . . l:ta6 ! 7 [42 . . . �c5 43 a6

king with 33 ... 1:I.dl there is a draw.

�b7 5 0-0 g6

Wb6

Kramnik shows some remarkable lines.

Once r drew a very important game

to my title - and I achieved my obj ective with this particular English 6 lLlc3 �g7 7 d4 cxd4 8 'ihd4 d6 9 .l:l.dl lLlbd7 10 �e3 .l:l.c8 11 !;tacl 0-0

I f 2 8 . . ...c5 29 ':b7 !

�d6 44 Wf! <j;; d 5 45 �e2 1:I.c3 ' )

2 9 c5!

3 8 h5

"f6)

4 1 . . .!;ta3 4 2 �fl 'itd6 43 'i!i>e2 (43 l:k8

'tWg5+ ( 3 9 ':b7? f6 ! ) 3 9 . . .WfS

Wd5 44 �e2 e5 ! [44 . . .Wd4 45 l:l:d8+]

If 1 5 �g5 ':c5 ! to prepare 1 6 . . . h6.

45

exposed to do anything.

44 llc7 �d4 45 .l:l.d7+) 44 We3 .l:l.a3 45

34 'iff3?

2 9 . . . dxc5

30

!;txc5

�xf6

3 0 .l:l.xc5 �If6 31 "If6 dxc5

See diagram on page 43.

is okay. •c7 16 �g5 'Wb7 17 lLle3 b 5

Almost the same pawn structure bas occurred in the match again. This time

1 8 lLled5 bxc4 1 9 bIC4 50

39

c5.

3 1 ':xc8=.

Then after 16 b4 l1e5! 17 f4 ':e6 Black

( 3 8 .. .'�h7?!

40 .l:l.xa6 ! and B lack's king is too

If

':e8! 1 5 b3

39

gxh5

c-pawn rather than let my rook get to 29 ...l:b:c5!

12 "h4 a6 13 lLle l ? ! �xg2 14 lLlIg2

Wf! ]

38 . . .':g8 39 hxg6+ ':xg6+ 40 �h3 ;

Kramnik prefers to sacrifice the

opening.

45

4 1 l:tc4 (4 1 a4 l:l:c8 42 l:tdl c2 43 1:I.e l

c2) 37 . . . Wh7 38 gxb5 (3 8 'iff6 'ifd7)

28 .....a8!

Wxa6

(40 llc 1 .ll a4) 40 ... c3 (40 . . . .lla4 4 1 f4)

e l ) 37 . . . c3 38 gxh5= c2? 39 h6 wins.

match when r needed a draw to hold on

llb 1 +

has a really difficult task.) 40 J::rd4

37 g4! hxg4

This was in the 23rd game of our third

44

43 Wfl Wc5 44 'i!i>e2 'itb4 and White

34 e4 'fi'c8 35 'tWe5 ! ':d8 3 6 �g2 ! ? c4

against Karpov with this variati on.

very carefully. I show Kramnik's line. 40 a4 ! ? ':a8 ! 41 !;ta l �d6 42 as

'tWa7 3 5 ':c6 'tWb7 36 a4 lIc8 3 7 ':xc5!

London 2000

chances to survive but he must play 38 �g2 <j;; e 7 39 1:td l ':a8 (39 . . . e5!?

b) Alternatively 33 .. .l::t b 8 34 �f3 !

Game 1 2 , World Championship,

Pushing the pawn too far. 37 ... W fS ' would have p u t much more of an obstacle in White's path. White has

33 ...!;te8 holds.

V.Kramnik - G.Kasparov

...

35 exf3 ':c8 3 6 ':xa6 c4 37 .l:l.d6

Black has at least equalised by

Karpov's subtle play has provided his

15

Not 34 ... 'ifc8? 35 ':c6=

32 Wh2! Wg8

�e3

f5 ) 43 . . J::tx a2+ (43 . . . �d5

f4 and maybe this position can be held.

After 34 'it'e5? 'ifd5 . But 34 'tWc3 ! ,

38 l:td 1 lla8

blocking the c pawn earlier, was

After 3 8 .. .'o1;>g7 39 Wg2 Wf6 40 f4 !

stronger. 34 ... ':c8 (34 ... 'ife4 3 5 'ifd3 )

<j;; f5 4 1 <j;; f3 c2 (4 1 . . .1:ta8 42 l:tc l l:ta3

3 5 'tWc4 'ifd5 (35 . . . lIc6 36 'ife4; 35 ... a5 36 ':xe6 ! ) 36 'ti'xa6 ! .l:l.a8 37 'iWb5 c4

43 ':c2) 42 .ll c l llc3+ 43 �e2 'if;>e4

38 a4 and White gets away with it.

44 �d2 ':fJ 45 'i!i>e2= 39 llcl

34 ... 'ifxf3 51

Anatoly Karpov the J 2rh

Anatoly Karpov the 1 2rh 43 .l:l. b 7 � e 8 4 4 .l:l.b8+ � e 7 4 S .l:l.b7+

l:tb3]

59 l:tf5=)

5 8 l:txO

B etter was 46 f4 !

(58 ... e4 59 .l:l.f4) 59 .l:l.e3; or 55 . . . lifd5 ! ? 56 l:td8+ (56 f4 e4) 5 6. . .lifc4 (56. . .<;t>c5

e5 47 l:[b6+ �f5 48 J:[b7 �e6

49 l:I.b6+ Iti>fS 50 l:tb7 f6

39 . . .11:.:a2 I had to allow the proud c-pawn to fall after all. From here on the position is drawish. After 39 . . . .I:I.a3 40 �g2 rJ;g7

Black pieces as the reigning world

Iifg4

46

•••

This was my last game with the

c;t;>g5 (57 .. .'it>e6 58 l:txO d5 [58 . . . e4 59

c;t>f6 46 1ti>n

champion.

57 fxg4 hxg4 5 8 l:tg8 .l:l.a4 59 life2=)

Tal said once that Karpov was the

57 fxg4 hxg4 5 8 l:tg8 �d3 59 l:txg4 and

honoured trainer of Azerbaij an. Yes ,

though the position is equal, White still

Tal has a point a s I improved during my

has to be careful.

matches with Karpov. On the other

56 l:tf8+ Iifg6? 57 l:tg8+ rJ;f5

hand you can see I lost games because

This allows a threefold repetition.

of him. Had I won these two games the

After 57 . . .f7 58 J:l.g5 <;t>f6 59 f4 exf4

aggregate score in our five World

60 gxf4 ,I:U12 6 1 lifg 1 .l:l.h3 62 �g2 life6

Championship matches would not have

63 1iff2=.

been 2 1 wins 1 9 losses for me, but 23 wins and 1 7 losses in my favour.

58 .l:l.f8+ th-I/z

41 f4 <;t>f6 42 .1:1.c2 e5 43 c;t>0=.

40 .l:l.xc3

5 1 .1:1.g7

If 40 c;t>g2? l:I.a3 41 c;t>f1 c;t>g7 42 �e2

Unnecessarily providing Black with

c;t>f6 43 l:I.c2 c;t>f5 44 c;t>d3 e5 45 l:I.xc3

another chance. 5 1 .l:l.f7 ! was called for.

(45 rJ;e3 t:!.b3 46 'it'd3 .l:l.b2 wins)

SL.gS

45 ... .I:I.xc3+ 46 c;t>xc3 e4 47 fxe4+ c;t>xe4

If 5 l . . ..I:I.d2 5 2 11g8.

48 rJ;d2 c;t>o 49 c;t>e l f5 wins according

S2 hxgS fxgS S3 .l:l.g8 g4

to IlIescas.

After 5 3 ... h4 54 .l:l.f8+ rJ;g6 55 l:I.g8+

40 ... .I:I.xf2+ 41 c;t>gl l:I.a2

c;t>f6 56 gxh4 gxh4 57 .l:l.g4 h3 58 <;t>g l h2+ 59 rJ;h 1 l:I.f2 60 .l:l.f4+ White holds with the help of the stalemate motif.

54 l:[f8+ c;t>e6 55 l:[e8+

42 t:!. c7 42 f4 ! looks dodgy because of the isolated king, however Black still can't win. 42 . . . rJ;g7 43 t:!.c5 rJ;f6 44 c;t>f1 .l:l.d2 45 l:[a5 .l:l.d5 46 .l:l.a7 c;t>f5 47 .l:l.xf7+

55 ... c;t>fS

c;t>g4 48 11 f6 c;t>o 49 �g l =.

This

42

.•.

was

just

not

my

World

Championship match. With 55 . . . c;t>f6 ! ?

c;t>f8

I could still have created problems.

If 42 . . . e5 43 l:[c5 f6 44 .l::t c 7 c;t>f8 45 rJ;fj 11d2 46 l:[a7 J:[d8 47 c;t>e2 t:!.e8

However White can save the game with

48 c;t>e3 l:I.e7 49 .l::ta4 c;t>f7 50 f4.

precise play. 56 .l:l.g8! gxO 57 .l::t f8+ 52

53

Robert James Fischer the 11th Then 2 l . . ..Ihf3 ! 22 ltJxf3 c4 23 tiJd4

14...exd4 15 cxd4 as

Rob ert J ames Fisch er th e 1 1 th Fischer won the title at the end of the

better chance to defeat me in our

1 969- J 972 cycle. On his way to the final he beat Taimanov and Larsen 6-0

matches. Fischer'S influence included bringing

and Petrosian 6'n-2',h. In the world title match he dethroned Spassky 1 2 'h - 8 '.h which ended a 24 year-long Soviet

dominance

of

the

With his last three moves Stein has

centre and opens the way for White's

strengthened

pieces to irritate B lack's king. I n

neglected to take precautions on the

the

queens ide

but

my Predecessors book 1 7 ..i.b2 was

other flank. 2 1 . . .l:te8 followed by tiJffl

recommended.

ensures a p layable position.

17... dn5 18 dn5

may have had even better results if I had not followed his games so closely. Let's see one of his games which is well known and a focal point for me later when I played against Karpov.

repertoire with the Black pieces, especially as we both played the

Fischer had a strong e-pawn, Black had a good queenside. Below you see his

Najdorf most of the time. B obby also had an opening repertoire which was ahead of his time.

position first and then my own:

Intriguingly, he actually helped me

Sousse Interzonal 1 967

playing

2l...ltJb6?

Fischer pins his hopes on the idea

will see from the following examples I

World

and the effect can be seen in my

not

attack with White.

was beneficial for me. However as you

It was only natural that I should have investigated Fischer's games deeply,

by

..i.c5 24 .IT&.b2 'ifb6 and it is not easy to

16 bxa5 c5 17 e5 that the e5-pawn provides space in the

more money into the game which also

Championship, which began in 1 948.

indirectly

Black starts to undermine the centre.

R.Fischer - L.Stein

against

means ' carp' and this darting fi sh eluded the reluctant fisherman ! - as h e

ltJf6 5 0-0 ..i.e7 6 l:te 1 b5 7 ..i.b3 d6 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 ..i.b7 10 d4 ltJa5 11 ic2

would have strengthened Anatoly with

ltJc4 12 b3 ltJb6 13 ltJbd2 ltJbd7 14 b4

the experience of additional match­

White intends to transfer his knight

play. Karpov would have had an even

to a5.

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov

like this.

against

22.....i.xe4

18...ltJd5

If 22 . . . h6 23 tiJh7 wins.

See diagram on page 54.

23 'ifxe4 g6 24 'ii'h4! No more preparatory work is needed

19 tiJe4

and Fischer forces matters with direct

White has to act quickly since if

threats.

Black gets to an endgame his chances

24...h5 25 'li'g3! tiJc4 Not

maj ority on the queens ide.

25 . . . 'ifd4?

26

tiJxf7

J:hf7

27 ..i.xg6 when White has a devastating

19...ltJb4

attack.

After 1 9 . . . l:txa5 20 ltJeg5 h6 2 1 'ifd3 g6, I showed that the tactical shot

26 ltJO?

22 tiJxf7 wins. (Fischer's 22 ltJe6

Fischer's move is slow. He could

is

not

so

convincing

because

land

of

a

potentially lethal harpoon by

22 . . . ltJb4 ! ) 22 . . .l:txf7 23 'li'xg6+ l:tg7

26 e6 ! ? f5 27 ltJf7 l:txf7 28 exf7+ Wxf7

24 'ife6+ �h8 25 'ifxh6+ �g8 26 e6

29 .IT&.xf5 gxf5 30 'iff3 Wg6 3 1 g4

tiJffl 2 7 l:te5 and White has a winning

generating a strong attack. Even more

attack. And if 1 9 . . . c4 20 ..i.g5 !

deadly

however

is

the

sacrifice

20 ..i.bl lha5 21 'ife2

26 tiJxf7 ! which leads to

Keres ' suggestion was 2 1 ltJeg5.

26 . . . .ll x f7 27 .IT&.xg6 11g7 28 ..i.h6 'lifE 55

54

operations

Black's king.

are encouraging as he possesses a pawn

A typically occurring situation in the main Ruy Lopez: White has a strong e-pawn, kingside majority and central advantage - and B lack a good queenside. R.Fischer - L.Stein

F ischer starts

adopted the idea of having an e-pawn

1 e4 e5 2 ltJo ltJc6 3 ..i.b5 a6 4 ..i.a4

Karpov - whose name in English

22 ltJfg5!

In one of my later games I also

a

win after

Fischer

Robert James

the 11th

Robert James Fischer the 11th

29 �xg7 .xg7 30 e6 h4 3 1 'ii'b 8+ .f8

33 l:[d7! .I1xe6 34 4Jg5 l1f6 35 � O !

32 �fl+
The most artistic way to win was

much the same Spanish centre as

26 ...
with 35 a3 . Then 35 . . . 4Jxa3 36 �e5

Fischer did against Stein. But, to put it

Upon 26 . . . 4Jd3 comes 27 l:[d 1 4Jxc I

4Jc4 37 � a l ! 4Jb6 3 8 l1b7 4Jc8

mildly, I should not have done this.

In the next game I constructed very

39 �b l !

28 l:[xc 1 .

35 ...l:[xf4 3 6 4Je6+

27 .f4 l:[b8

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov Game 5, World Championship, Moscow 1 985 1 e4 e5 2 lLlo lLle6 3 �b5 a6 4 �a4

35 a4 ! ! 4Jb2 3 6 l:[b l 4Jxa4 37 .e5

4Jf6 5 0-0 �e7 6 l:tel b5 7 �b3 d6

.e8 3 8 e7 Wbite has a winning attack.

8 e3 0-0 9 h3 �b7 10 d4 l:te8 U lLlbd2 �f8 12 a4 �d7 13 axb5 axb5 14 nxa8 �xa8 15 d5 lLla5 16 jLa2 e6 17 b4

30 �e4? Sacrificing the knight with 3 0 4Jh4! would

have

finished

off

Black.

.!Db7 18 e4 l:te8 19 dxc6

3 0 ... �xh4 3 1 .xh4 .xf5 (3 1 . . .•f6 3 2 .g3 .I1e8 3 3 � b l na7 34 �g5

28 e6 ! Wbite

has

to

hurry

with

.xa l

his

operations against the black king.

30

2 8 . . . � f6

f8=.+

29

exfl

31

.c7+

.xf8

This time another queens ide move

..t>g8

was required. B ener was 3 1 . ..l:[xa2! 3 2 1ha2 4Jxa2 3 3 4Je5 g5 34 �g3 4Jb4

�d4

3 5 4Jxc4 bxc4 36 �e5+ �f6 37 �d6

3 7 4Jxd4 cxd4 38 'ii'b 3 l:[b8 3 9 .g3 h4

ne8 3 8 �xc5 4Jd3 39 �xd3 cxd3

40 .g5 llb5 41 �fl+ wins as I pointed

Regaining

around the black king.

32 . . . .I1xa2

29 ... �f8

4Je5 !

(Hubner).

19 ...•xc6

advantage requires the technique that Fischer possesses. 37 4JIf4 4Je5 3 8 l:[b7 �d6 39 wn 4Je2

40

l:[e4

4Jd4

41

l1b6 l1d8

42 4Jd5+ ..ti>f5

the

does

extra pawn with not

solve

Black's

20 e5?! Just as in the Fischer game the

4Jc6 35 �g5 Wbite is better.

down which, however, sti l l requires 30

B lack has compensation.

game considerably. To convert White's

problem. After 33 nd7 l%.a6 34 �b l

Stein settles for an endgame a pawn

win.

�xd5 24 lLlxd6 �xd6 25 jLxd5 'iWxa I +

32 l:[adl l:[a6

Wbite demolishes the pawn chain

to

With an exchange sacrifice Black stabilises his position and prolongs the

endgame.

29 �If5!

skill

2 1 .!Dxc4 'ilVa7! 22 l:tal cxdS 23 exdS

and Black can simplify to a tenable

out in the Predecessors book.

spec ial

so nicely.)

30 ...•.d4 31 �xf4 l:[e8?

�xa l

32 �xg6 4Jd5 33 'ii'b7 4Jf6 34 lle6 l:[a8 3 5 .xb5 4Jd6 3 6 'ii' b 1

�h6+ wins

35 e7 wins as Fischer pointed out.

28 . . . f5 After

35

32 .e7+ 33 .d8+ r:tg7 34 .c7+ �g8

After 19 'ife2 .!Dd8 20 �b2 bxc4 36 ... Wf6

developing move 20 �b2 was stronger. 20 ... .!Dd8 21 jLh2 dxe5 22 bxe5 'iVxe5 23 �xe5

If 29 . . . 'ii'b 8 Alternatively

29 . . . gxf5 3 0 .g3+ (30 ' .xf5 .e 8

43 4Je3+

3 1 4Je5 4Jxe5 32 .xe5+ .i. f6 33 .g3+

Fischer sealed this move .

See diagram on page 54.

..t>h7 34 .c7+ "e7 35 "xa5 �xal

43 .. .'i<>e6 44 �e2 ..ti>d7 45 �xb5+

When I captured the pawn I was

3 6 Wxb5 looks bener for White . )

lLlxb5 46 l:[xb5 ..t>e6 47 a4 � e 7

inspired by the Fischer game. Here, just

3 0 . . .
4 8 We2 g 5 49 g 3 l1 a 8 5 0 l1b2 l:t f8

like the American champion, I had an

l1a3 !

33

.f4 .f8

34 .11 ad 1

l:[d3

(34 . . . 4Jd3 35 �g3) 56

5 1 f4 gxf4 52 gxf4 4J f7 5 3 l:[e6+ 4Jd6

extra pawn in the centre while Black

54 f5 l:[a8 55 l:[d2 l:[134 56 f6 1-0

had an extra pawn on the queenside. I 57

Robert James Fischer the J ] Ih

Robert James Fischer the ll'h

was hoping to create an attack on

birds with one stone. But the catapult is

3 0 'iig 4

Karpov's king and even dared to think

pointing backwards. The queen should

Just like Fischer I create some play

that I would conduct the attack without

have gone to the diagonal with 25 'ii'b l

against the king. However, in my case

any mistakes. Maybe this distracted me

as happens later in the game.

this proves to be insufficient.

from the reality of the game. intennediate

33 'ii' c l �e4 34 1:el 'liaS 35 it.b3 'ii' a 8 ! ? 3 6 'iib 2 b4

30 ....l:te8 3 1 .l:tdl

2S ...lLle5!

23...lLld7 24 R.b2 'Wb4! This

Karpov likes to restrict bis opponents and often does so with a pin.

Karpov takes no risks and declines

If 3 1 "'f4 it.d5 ! move

the pawn on g2.

3 1 . .. it.g6!

is

undoubtedly strong as it allows White

37 .l:te3 it.g6 38 lhe8 'lixe8 39 'ii' c l

White no longer has any realistic

no time to build up an attack on the

llJe4 40 R.dS llJe5 4 1 lLlb3 lLld 3 0-\

attacking chances against the king.

White has nothing for the pawn,

32 'ii'f4 'ilVb4

king. However I was still relaxed

which is why I resigned.

because another famous Fischer game Let's continue with another even more famous Fischer game - or should I

sprung to mind - one which was very

say endgame. This example of domination by the bishop in endgames is often

similar to the present one. Here it is:

taught to young players. Here the opponent's pawns are fixed and the pawns are positioned on both wings. My game which follows has similarities.

R.Fiseher - B.Spassky Game 1 0, World Championship, Reykjavik 1 972

k.Fiseher - M.Taimanov

26 it.a l

G.Kasparov

-

N . de Firmian

I gave up material in order to ensure play against the black king. It was possible to hang on to the pawn by 26 lLlxc5 and then defend passively but I did not like to do that as after 26 . . ...xb2 27 1:e2 'ii'c 3 28 lLld3 Black stands

rather better with

his

two

bishops and distant passed pawn. 26 ... it.:xe4 27 lLlfd4 lLldb7 28 'ii'e2 lLld6

26 .ltb3 axb5 27 'ii'f4 1:d7 28 lLle5

Karpov

'ii'c 7 29 1:bd l 1:e7 30 it.xD+ 1:xf7 31

.xf7+

'ii'x f7

32

lLlxD

it.xe4

3 3 1:xe4 �xD 34 l1d7+ �f6 3 5 1:b7

should have pinned my

queen to the defence of the a2-bishop by 28 . . . 11a8 ! ? His extra pawn would probably then be decisive.

1:al + 3 6 �h2 it.d6+ 3 7 g3 b4 3 8 �g2

29 lLlICS "xeS

h5 3 9 tlb6 tld 1 40 1ti>f3
R.Fiseher - M.Talmanov

3 3 a4 llJe7 34 h3 llJe6 35 h4 h5

Game 4, Candidates match,

3 6 1:d3+ �c7 37 1:d5 f5 38 l:td2 J::tr 6 3 9 l:te2 �d7 40 l:te3 g6 41 �b5 J:ld6

Vancouver 1 97 1

4 2 <;f;>e2 d8

1 e4 e5 2 lLlo lLlc6 3 d4 exd4 4 lLlxd4 'lie7 5 lLle3 e6 6 g3 a6 7 it.g2

nd5 42 f4 g6 43 g4 hxg4 44 hxg4 g5

lLlf6 8 0-0 lLlxd4 9 'ilfxd4 it.eS 10 R.f4

4 5 f5 it.e5 46 tlb5
d6 1 1 'ilfd2 h6 1 2 .l:tadl eS 13 R.e3

48 l:b6+ �e5 49 �f3 l1d8 50 1:b8 1:d7

�g4 1 4 it.xeS dxeS 15 0 �e6 1 6 f4

5 1 l:t4b7 1:d6 52 1:b6 1:d7 53 1:g6 ¢>d5

1:d8 1 7 lLldS �xdS 1 8 exd5 e4 1 9 l:tfe l

54 l'hg5 it.e5 55 f6 c,t>d4 56 tlb 1 1 -0

.l:txd5 2 0 l:xe4+ �d8 2 1 'ii'e2 .l:txdI + 22 'lixd 1 + 'lid7 23 "xd7+ �xd7

2s lLlb3 ? !

24 lle5 b6 25 .in as 26 �e4 1:1'8

B y defending one piece and attacking

27 �g2 �d6 28 �O lLld7 29 .l:te3 lLlb8

another, you might think this kills two

30 lld3+ �c7 3 1 c3 lLle6 32 .l:te3 �d6 58

43 l:td3! 59

Robert James Fischer the 11th

Robert James Fischer the 11th 34 .. .'�xe6 35 'it>f3 'it>d6

Fi scher exchanges rooks, after which the bishop's domination over the knight will be even more potent.

43 ... 'it>c7 44 1b:d6
See diagram

on page

44 c4 Black is in zugzwang and

Closing the queenside with 3 5 . . . ..IlLc l

White still has a spare tempo at his

would be clever, but White is not

disposal. 44 . . . �c7 45 Q;a7 'ifilc6 46 Wb8

obliged to allow that. 36 �e2 ..IlLxb2

and White invades.

37 �d2 ..IlLa3 38 1t.e3 White wins.

59.

37 ...'ifile6 38 ..IlLel ..IlLg5 39 'iti>e4 �e3

36 �e2 ..1lLcl

While has a winning advantage as Black's kingside pawns are fixed on the same colour square as the bishop and he has a route for a queenside invasion.

62 ..IlLIg6!

45...lLle7 46 1t.e8
White's

48
passed

pawn

will

be

decisivc.

62 ... lLlIg6 63 �xb6 'it>d7 64 e6

40 b4!

�b8 71 b6 1 -0 Fischer played the entire endgame very powerfully. an

endgame

with a very similar queenside pawn structure - just like the famous Fischer­

50 �b5 way

Fischer

improves

Taimanov encounter.

his

position is quite beautiful.

G.Kasparov

50 ... lLlc8 51 ..IlLe6+
37 'it>d3 I

Now let's have a look at

The

Aiming to open the position for

-

N. De Firmian

PCA!Intei-Grand Prix, New York 1 995

53 ..IlLn �b7 54 ..IlLb3 �a7 5S ..IlLd l
stopped

invasion. As B lack is in zugzwang the short

of

exchanging;

game continuation is forced.

luckily it did not spoil anything.

40 ... cxb4 41 cxb4 axb4 42 ..IlLxb4

After 37 ..IlLe3 the pawn ending was

..IlLel 43 �f8 �g5 44 ..IlLg7

simply winning. 37 . . . ..IlLxe3 38 'it;xe3 f6

As often happens in same coloured

(on 3 8 . . . c4 3 9 g 5 ! White soon promotes

bishop endings, the weaker side is

the pawn to a lady.) 39 'it;d3 'iti>d7

caught by a zugzwang.

40 �c4 'ifilc6 41 b3 (White has a lot of

44 f6

spare moves to lose a tempo.) 4 \ . . .�d6

A sad necessity. Black has to put one

42 �b5 'ifilc7 43 �a6 (White has to be

more pawn on the same colour as the

careful; he can 't do whatever he wants,

opponent's bishop. 44 .. .'�d6 was not

e.g. 43 g5? fxg5 44 g4 [44 �a6 g4]

any better. 45 Q;bS �e3 46 ..IlLf6.

•••

44 . . . �b7 and Black holds.) 43 ... 'Otc6 (43 . . . c4 44 bxc4 �c6 45 �a7 Q;c7 46 c5 bxc5 47 c;t>a6 'Otc6 48 �xa5 and White wins.)

34 ..1lLxe6! My pawn structure is very similar to

57 ..t>a6

the Fischer example. In that game

The white king invades.

Bobby swapped rooks. I knew the

57 ... lLlg8 58 ..IlLd5 lLle7 59 ..IlLe4 lLle6 60 ..IlLn lLle7 61 ..IlLe8
45 ..1lLh8! I was lucky to have an extra square

bishop was not the same piece but I

available on the diagonal.

followed his exchanging idea to invade. 60

61

Ro bert

Robert James Fischer the 'llt!'

James Fischer the 1 1 th I followed F ischer. It was a close call

45...'it>d6 46 'it>b5 'it>c7 47 �g7 in order to net a pawn.

In general I am not going to compare

47...lti>b7 48 �f8

the

Transferring the bishop to dS.

damaging

champion's my

e ffectiveness

career.

Maybe

at this

48 ...�c7 49 �e7 c;t>d7 50 �b4 �e3

'lucky' win makes Fischer's effect on

If 50 . . . 'it>c7

me less negative.

51

�e l

�e3

only

temporarily prevents the bishop from

Before I show the games in which I

invading. 52 g5 ! fxg5 5 3 g4 �c5

emulated Fischer's play, I would like to

(53

�d4 54 �b4 White wins. ) 54 a5

present one game on a topic already

'it>b7 55 axb6 (55 a6+ �a7 56 ..tc3

discussed in the Karpov section. This

�d6

57

�b2

and

zugzwang.) 5 5 . . . �fS fortress

can

identical

B l ack

sometimes

coloured

is

in

setting up a save

bishop

20 'iWg3 I usuall y play on the queenside

but nevertheless I won!

The bishop's objective is to get to dS

game was also planted in my mind as well as Karpov's.

against the hedgehog set-up.

20 �f6 21 �xf6 l'Llxf6 22 l:tfdl eS .•.

Black has obtained a fully playable game.

23 'it'h4 h6 24 ::td2 l'Lld7 25 �dl l'Lle5 26 f4 exf4 27 "ii'xf4 l'Lle6 According to Vasiukov the position is equal after 27 . . .lle7 ! 2S ..te2 l:te5 .

28 fig3 fie7 29 l'LldS "ii' eS+ 30 � h l ..te6 3 1 l:te3 l'LlgS 32 ..t e 2 ..txd5 White is just a little better after

32 ... :te8 3 3 h4 ! l'Llh7 34 l'Lle3 l:te6

an

ending.

R.Fiseher - M.Taimanov

Though this time it is ineffective, such a device can sometimes rescue the

Palma de Mallorca Interzonal 1 970

1 e4 e5 2 l'Ll13 l'Lle6 3 d4 eId4

weaker side. (55 . . . ..txb6 5 6 ..tb4 wins.)

4 l'LlId4 e6 5 l'Llb5 d6 6 e4 a6 7 l'Ll5c3

On 56 �c3 �d6 57 �b2 Black is in

l'Llf6 8 �e2 �e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 l'Lla3 b6

zugzwang.

3 5 l'Llf5 l:tg6 36 "ii'e 3.

33 1:txd5 fie7 ? ! This blocks the b7-rook. Better is

3 3 . . .'ii'e 6! 34 e5 (34 b3 l:te7) 34 ... l:tbd7 35 ..tf5 l'Lle6 when Black is safe.

11 �e3 So far the players have followed main line theory. Now the Russian grandmaster deviates from the most common 1 1 . . . ..tb7.

1l ... ..td7 12 l:tel 'Wb8 1 3 13 ':a7

40 ..t 13 ! The bishop is very nicely placed on the diagonal. If White creates a passed a-pawn it will get tremendous support from the long diagonal bishop. This is what I wanted to do against Karpov, but the circumstances there were far less fortunate than in Bobby's game. 40 ...l:I.d7 Black can live with his position after 40 . . . l:tc7 ! 4 1 l:tb5 l:tc5. 41 l:tbS l:td4? This wins a pawn but allows White to open the queens ide. Better was 4 \ . . ..l:dd8. 42 e5! l:I.xh4+ 43 Wgl ::tb4 44 l:txb4 axb4 4 5 l:te4 bxc5 Or 45 . . . l'Lld7 46 c6.

14 l'Lle2 .f;td8 1 5 'iWel ..te8 Black plays for b5. In the main line they play for d5 or even 'it>h8 and ':gS with g5.

16 "WIt'fl l:l.b7 1 7 a4

51 g5 ! !

This stops b5 once and for all.

This is a very nice and instructive breakthrough.

B lack's

pieces

17 ... a5 1 8 l'Lld4 l'Llxd4 19 �xd4 l'Lld7

are

overloaded.

34 eS! The more the position opens up, the more the bishop has

a chance to

dominate the knight.

51 ...bg5 52 g4 'it>e6 53 'it>c6

34 ... dxeS 35 'it'xeS .l:db8? !

The simplest option. Taking on b6

Vasiukov ' s move 3 5 . . .l'Lle6

wins more quickly than going after the

IS

more

46 l:txcS Now the bishop is a real powerhouse. 46 .. .'l;>g7 47 as l:te8 48 ::tel ! l:e5 49 l:a 1 l:e7 50 �fl! The a-pawn and the bishop are indeed strong, however they still need the help of the king.

natural.

h6-pawn. 5 3 ..tfS would be winning as

36 ..tf5 "ii'x e5 37 l:tIe5 g6 38 h4 l'Llh7

well, since after 5 3 ... <;Pf6 5 4 ..txh6 'it>n

After 38 ... f6 Black could exchange

55 'it>c6 �d2 56 'it>d5 �f4 57 'it>d6

the light pieces. Four-rook endings tend

Black is in zugzwang.

to give considerable drawing chances.

53 ... �d4 54 ..td6 1-0

39 ..tg4 l'Llf6 62

63

Robert James Fischer the 1 1 ,h

Robert James Fischer the J J,h

50 ... liJe8 51 a6 l1a7 52 'it>e3 liJc7 53 �b7 White buries the rook.

53 ...liJe6 54 l1a5! 'it>f6 55 'it>d3 'it>e7 56 'it>c4 'it>d6

This move was inspired by one of

24 fxe5 f4

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

Fischer's ideas - Random Chess. At the start

of the

game

Linares 1 993

the pieces are

positioned on the first rank in irregular or random positions. Somehow I must have thought we were playing his brand of chess, so I started to arrange my p i eces

on

the

first

rank

in

an

unorthodox manner.

1 7 liJd2 g6 Of course the knight can't retreat to b8 but liJe7-g6-h8 would have given a

most

exciting

Fischer

Random

position. B lack would then only have to transfer the c8-bishop to a8.

57 l1d5+ 'iii> c 7 58 'it>b5 1 -0

1 8 liJd5 f5 19 e:dS

The king soon invades on b6 as well and this decides the outcome of the game. In the next game Fischer had a

25 exd6 I

had

to

resign

here,

because

2 2 . . . c3

23

liJxa2

c2

24

'ikd4

White has a decisive battery: 25 . . . fxg3

cxd l =1!t'+ 25 c;t;>xd l liJdc5 26 1!t'xd8

26 'ii'e 8+ �ffl 27 1!t'xffl+ 1 -0

llxd8+ 27 ;tc2 1lJf2 0- 1

A most unfortunate encounter. Incidentally Karpov himself also got

After this effort my games against

caught by the Fischer Random virus.

Karpov were far less regular than they

Here is his position:

had been previously. . .

negative effect on my play like no other champion. Fischer won a game i n a I c 4 c 5 English type position, where h i s opponent had a c4-pawn, while he himself had a d6-pawn and undermined White's

V.Akopian - G.Kasparov Russia v The World, Moscow 2002

1 e4 c5 Z lilo lilc6 3 i.b5 e6 4 0-0 liJge7 5 b3 a6 6 .i.:lC6 liJ:n6 7 .i.b2 b S 8 c4 bxc4 9 bxc4 l1b8 1 0 .i.c3 d6 1 1 liJa3! e5 1 2 liJcz .i.e7 1 3 liJe3 0-0 14 d3 'iVe8 15 lIb 1 lb:b1 1 6 'iix b1

pawn structure with . . . a6 and . . . b5 and went on to win.

1 9 ... gxf5? Preoccupied with thoughts of Fischer Random Chess, I just wanted to keep my pieces on the back rank. But better was 1 9 . . . .i.xf5 .

20 f4! Akopian puts pressure on the centre and the king.

ZO .. Jln 21 �e1 l1g7 22 liJf3 it'g6 23 g3 Here it dawned on me that we were playing ordinary chess and that I was now simply lost.

Z3. ..nn 23 ... e4 was no better. 24 �xg7 'it>xg7

1 6...�d8?

I played . . . b5 under very similar conditions in three games, losing all three, against Romanishin (below) , Shneider and Anand (next page) .

25 dxe4 fxe4 2 6 liJd2 �a5 27 �a 1 + 'it>f7 2 8 [5 wins.

M.Aaron - R.Fischer

O.Romanishin - G.Kasparov

Robert James Fischer the 11th

Robert James Fischer the 11th 8... tLJxd4 I beat him in the Kosmos 1 998 blitz

V.Anand - G.Kasparov

A.Shneider - G.Kasparov

match with 8 . . .lLJg4.

9 'it'xd4 d6 1 0 'it'd3 a6 11 �e3 �d7 1 2 �d4 .i.e6 1 3 e4 l:le8 1 4 J:tfet neS 1 5 l:tadl 'it'a5 1 6 a3 b5

See diagram on page 65. I also undermine the centre. 1 7 exb5 axb5

24 ... d5 25 �d4 �xd4+ 26 'iWxd4 'ifb7! Fischer improves his position with strong, natural moves.

27 'iWf2 ? ! �a6 28 l:tdl l:te4

1 4 ...tLJxd5

M.Aaron - R.Fiseher Stockholm Interzonal 1 962

1 4 . . . � x d5 ! ?

15

exd5

�h6

1 6 'it'xh6 'iVa5+ 1 7 'iVd2 'iVxb5 leaves

1 d4 tLJf6 2 e4 g6 3 tLJc3 �g7 4 e4 d6 5 f3 0-0 6 �e3 tLJbd7 7 .d2 e5 8 tLJge2 a6 9 tLJg3 ? ! cxd4 1 0 �xd4 tLJe5 11 �e2 �e6 12 tLJd5 b5!

B lack slightly better. 1 5 exd5 �xd5 1 6 a4 e6 1 7 0-0 Wh4 1 8 tLJe2 nfc8 1 9 �e3

1 8 e5!

It would be more appropriate not to

I t 's a smart idea to weaken the

give up the rwo bishops by 1 9 rIfe I .

See diagram on page 65.

b5-pawn. 1 8 ... dxe5 19 �xc6 exd4!

Then after I 9 . . . �h6 20 l:txc8+ l:txc8

Fischer undermines Black's pawn structure.

2 1 'iVe I 'iVg5 22 'ili'g3 'iVf5 the position would be unclear.

1 3 cxb5 nbS

I planned this exchange sacrifice.

29 J:{d2?

Unlike the Fischer game, here the

A bad blunder in a tough position.

b5-pawn is really weak after 1 9 . . . l:txc6

29 ...l:txe3 0- 1

20 l:txe5.

20 �xe8 dxe3

This was a convincing game, sO decided to give the a6tb5 plan a try :

O.Romanishin

-

G.Kasparov

Moscow-4-teams 1 9 8 1

1 9 ... tLJc4 20 �xe4 'ili'xc4 2 1 l:tfel 14 �xb5

'ili'a6 22 llxe8+ nxc8 23 tLJc3 �e4

White could not have gone a pawn up

24 f4

by 1 4 tLJxf6+ since after 1 4 . . . �xf6

After 24 �d4 �xd4+ 25 Wxd4 e5

1 5 �xb5 comes the lovely tactical shot

2 6 'iVd2 (26 'iVe3 nb8) 2 6 . . . �b6+

15

27 'it>h I d5 it is easier to play Black's

tLJxf3+! 16 gxf3 �xd4 1 7 .xd4

Wa5+.

position. 66

1 tLJf3 g6 2 d4 �g7 3 g3 tLJf6 4 �g2 0-0 5 c4 e5 6 0-0 cxd4 7 tLJxd4 tLJe6 8 tLJe3 I had a few irregular games against Kramnik in this variation. Once he

dtew after playing an early d6 and .i.d7

2 1 �d7!

instead of castling - and once when I

This subtle intermediate

move

forces

the rook to a less effective square.

withdtew my knight to c2. 67

Robert James Fischer the J J th

Robert James Fischer the 11th 2 1 ..Jld8

despite being the exchange down.)

why my text move was a big mistake.

Black has nothing for the exchange

27 . . .h6 2 8 h4 c2 (28.. .�xb4 29 l:td4

Black still has the rook to hold the

after 2 1 . . J:tb8 22 �xc3. If 2 1 . . .l:tc7

[29 g5 'ifg4+=] 29 . . . l:te7 30 l:txb4 l:txe5

queens ide pawns until his minor pieces

Black can exchange all of White's

3 1 l:txe5 �xb4 32 �a4 [32 D?? c2]

come over to help.

queens ide pawns, but only just - and it

32 . . .iLd6) 29 l:ta l (29 g5 cxd l =�=)

requires very precise calculation. But

29 . . . �xal 3 0 �xa l (30 l:txal

23

bxe3

l:txd7

34 1Ie8! Now r can't even sacri fice

a

single

one of my pieces.

1 0 -

24

l:txd7 �xd7

2S 'ifxd7 ltJxd7

A.Shneider

there is no point entering into this when

-

G.Kasparov

EU Cup, Lyon 1 994

there is a more comfortable line in

1 d4 ltJf6 2 c4 g6 3 ltJf3 �g7 4 g3 eS

22 b41 �xa3 23 �xb5

S �g2 cxd4 6 ltJxd4 0-0 7 0-0 ltJc6 8 ltJc3 ltJxd4 9 'i!fxd4 d6

30 ... iLd6 ! ! 31 �xf6+ 'it>xf6 32 l:tc I l:tc7 B l ack is safe.) 30 . . . l:txa l 3 1 l:txal ltJd5

( B lack

can

also

draw

by

26 l:txe7 Black has no pieces on the queens ide to hold back White's pawns.

2 3 . . .�fB ! ! (After 23 . . . l:tc8 24 �a6

3 1 . . .iLxb4 as well as White has no time

26 ... ltJb6

White is better.) 24 �d8 (24 l:tb I �a2

to keep all his kingside pawns. 32 l:te l

After 26 ... ltJc5 27 .l:te8+ �fB 2 8 l:ta8

25 .l:r.e2 [25 �d8 ltJe4 26 l:tn ltJxf2 !

ltJxg4 33 l:txc2 h5) 32 lLa4 ltJxb4

27 na l ltJh3+ 28 'it>h l �e6 29 l:tae l

3 3 11c l �d6 and Black has no problem

�a2 and White is unable to take the

at all.

ltJe4 29 a4 Black is in trouble as well.

10 Wd3

27 l:tb7 ltJa4 2 8 l1b8+ .tfB 29 c4

I knew that Fis cher had beaten

�g7 3 0 �g2 �d6 31 l:ta8 ltJb2

Spassky in the 8th game of their 1 972

2 2 'ifxb5

rook, so Black is not worse.] 25 . . . c2

match but had an idea I wanted to try

26 l:tc I ltJd5 ! Black wins the b-pawn

out to combat Fischer's plan. I must

and survives. 27 .l:r.exc2 ltJxb4 and

admit that those games where two

Black gets away with it.) 24 . . . l:ta7

champions played each other always

25 'ifd4 e 5 ! 26 'ifxe5

gave me such a headache. Which champion to follow? When I began to realise that they could also be inaccurate even when they won, then it became even more confusing.

10 ... a6 11 .td2 nb8 12 l:tacl bS 32 a4 ltJxc4 33 as ltJeS? 2 2 .....c 7 ? After

26 .. ';!?g7 ! !

27 g4 (27 �d4 I.%b7

22 . . . �xb5

nb8

offers no chances of holding the game.

13 b3

24 bxc3 (upon 24 a4 cxb2 the pawn on

23

�xb5

r had virtually the same position against

Oops, what to do now - they took on

b2 is really strong and compensates for

Speelman in Graz

the

ltJd5

converted my advantage. However, if

13 . . .ius

symbolic.)

White 's pawn were on h4 and Black

I wanted to close the diagonal,

exchange. After 25

l:te2

[27 ... ..Ii.xb4) 2 8 l:ta l �xb4 29 �xb4

White's

�xb4 30 �d3 .ltc5 and Black holds

24 ... l:txb5 25 lhe7 Now one can see 68

See diagram on page 66.

Taking the pawn was possible, but it

advantage

is

198 1

b5 in the previous examples.

and easily

had one on h5 that might be a draw.

thinking it was worth a tempo. 69

Robert James Fischer the 11 tn

Robert James Fischer the 11th In

14 e4 Ji(.d7 IS h3 ! ?

23 11dl tLJe8

This stops . . . tLJ g4 .

Here 23 . . . 11fd8 24 �b6 (24 a3 it'c3

the

preceding

game

(against

Shneider) White did not take and that

IS ... bxe4 16 it'xe4 'il'aS

2S it'xbS 11bS 26 l:txd6 wins prettily.)

1 6 . . . jtlJ6 is le ss pro vocat ive.

led to trouble. Maybe it was primarily

24 . . . l:td7 2S a3 it'c3 26 it'xc3 .Ihc3

17 it'd3 it'a3?

27 l:ta8+ Ji(.f8 28 iLd4 and Black must

because

su b co ns c i ous ly

resign.

I

did not expect my

Taking the b5 -pawn simply wi ns.

13 ... 1<.g4 Perhaps it is would be more efficient

Black doesn·t lose just one pawn, but two.

to prepare bS, e.g. by 1 3 . . .lhbS 14 h3 bS.

22 ... axbS 23 lOxbS tLJbc6 24 a3 dS

14 1!t'e3 lOd7 IS lOdS iLxb2 1 6 l:t1b2

I t m ay

th a t

22 nbS

26 .. J:[c3 27 �1 "'xb3 28 'ilt'xb3

retreating

game

to stop the h-pawn with 2 1 .. . hS.

Simpler is 26 b4.

25 exdS AxdS 26 nxdS exd5 27 b4

1<.1f3 17 1<.xf3 e6 IS lOe3

18 ne2! Ji(.bS?

that

opponent to capture here. It was better

24 a3 'ifc3 2S it'xbS iVb2 26 it'd3

l:t1b3

of

'iWa4

seem weird but perhaps with

the

queen

was

objectively stronger than this mov e . Not I S . . . nfcS? when 1 9 tLJb I ! traps the

queen.

19 tLJxbS axbS 20 nc7 e6 2 1 �e3! nbe8

29 a4 In Fischer's game the queenside

Other moves were miserable as well.

pawns played no role. My opponent,

a) 2 l . . .'Wxa2? 22 l:ta7 'i!fb2 23 iLd4

unlike Fischer 's, opened the back rank,

wins.

so there was no real hope.

b) 2 1 . . .lla8 22 nfc I it'xa2 23 eS

29

hurts.

..•

hS 30 as l:ta3 31

a6 1<.eS

32 1<.h6 1<.g7 33 iLgS iLf6 34 1<.d6 tLJIf6 3S l:t1d6 l:tal + 36 'iPh2 11a2 37 eS tLJh7 38 l:: a d7 111f2 39 l:td2 1 -0

c) 2 l . . .nfc8 22 l:: a7 (22 nfc l l:txc7

23 nxc7 tLJe8 (or 23 . . .it'xa2 24 l:ta7 'il'b2 2S 'il'xd6) 24 na7 iVb2) 22...�4 23 11 d l tLJe8 and Black is passive.

V.Anand - G.Kasparov

22 l:: a 7 iVb4

PCAlIntel-Grand Prix, Moscow 1 995

1 e4 eS 2 tLJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 'iWxd4 In 1 999 Peter Svidler tried this line against me. That time I won.

4 ...1<.d7 S c4 tLJe6 6 'il'd2 g6 7 iLe2!? Anand now stops 7 . . . Ji(.h6, as 8 'ilt'c3 is then possible.

7 ...iLg7 8 0-0 lOf6 9 1Oe3 0-0 10 Abl a6 11 b3 'WaS 1 2 Ji(.b2 nfe8 13 nfdl 70

1 8 ...l:td8?

2S lhdS 1-0

This is too passive. Usually playing a 1 8 . . . bS I ? would

There are many elements to Fischer's

come naturally to me. Fischer also did

dynamic move like

contributions to chess culture, some

not move his centre much, maybe that

of which are quite complex. However,

is why I postponed it. 1 9 l:txd6 tLJceS

in

2 0 1<.e2 (20 l:tbd2 lOf6 2 1 cS 'tWa3)

contribution t o his own pet opening -

2 0 . . . bxc4 2 1 b4 'iWa3 2 2 'iWd2 as 23 bS

the Najdorf - is the biggest. He adop tcd

pure

chess

terms,

perhaps

his

it in almost all his gamcs when faced

lOd3 and Black is i n the game.

1

1 9 l:tbd2 ! ?

with

When the rook took on b 2 , i t was

variations at times but the Najdorf was

I employed some other

my most common response.

simultaneously building up White's

position.

e4.

Suddenly the d6-pawn is

Fischer was so good at taking pawns

vulnerable.

and calculating precisely. I also took

1 9 ... lOdeS 20 1<.e2 tLJb4 21 h4 b5??

the eS-pawn oncc . . . but let's start with Fischer's game.

See diagram on page 66. 71

Robert James Fischer the J J th

Robert James Fischer the 11th B.Lanen

-

R.Fischer

27 lhb6 gxh4 28 ltJd5 1I.. xd5 29 'it'xd5

17...�S!

lle8

Gaining an important tempo.

30

1I.. h 3

'Wic7

31

':c6 llxc6

32 1I.. xe6 ltJc6 33 'Wig5 'iVd6 34 1I.. d 5 ltJb4 3 5 'iVf6 'ii'xf6 3 6 1I.. x f6 ltJxc2 37 1I..c 3 h6 38 b4 �h7 39 b5 axb5

Fischer took the centre pawn on

e5

with

his

knight

40 axb5 ltJh5 4 1 b6 ltJg3+ 42 �h2 1 -0 .

and

calculated precisely to win.

just a matter of time.

20 a4 'WieS 21 'ii' e2 :tae8 22 e4 bllC3 23 1I..a3 'iVe7 24 1I.. xe7 'iWxe7 25 'iWxeS

Back t o the Fischer game.

':cS

7... e6 8 f4 bS 9 11.. f3 JiLb7

So I decided I would try the

18 'life! il.. e7 19 b3 0-0 Fischer has survived and the win was

Fischer calculated so well.

same thing.

26 'Wie2 1hgS 27 "iVxa6 'ifb4 28 ':fbl l:d8 29 as b6 30 'lIfc4 'ilhc4 31 bxc4 c2 32 .l:!.c1 0-1

H.Lehmann - R.Fiseher

B.Larsen - R.Fischer

Velibekov - G.Kasparov

Game 6, Candidates match, Denver 1 97 1

1 f4 cS 2 ltJo g6 3 e4 1/..g7 4 il.. e2 ltJc6 5 0-0 d6 6 d3 e6 7 ltJa3 ltJge7 8 c3 1 0 eS

0-0 9 il.. e3 a6 10 d4 cxd4 n ltJxd4 bS

White feels like forcing the issue

12 ltJxc6

without delay.

10...il.. xo 11 ltJxo dxeS 12 fxeS ltJg4 13 'Wi e2 b4 14 ltJe4 White scores well without sacrificing

H.Lehmann - R.Fiseher

1 1 'i!7h l 'it'h8 1 2 a4 nb8 1 3 g4 b6 14 g5

Capablanca Memorial, Havana 1 965

tOeS 1 5 1I.. g 2 JiLb7 1 6 b3 ir'dS 1 7 h4 g6 I S 1I..b2

1 e4 cS 2 ltJo d6 3 d4 nd4 4 ltJxd4 ltJr6 5 ltJc3 a6 6 il..e2 ltJbd7 7 0-0 I had a nice and

the e5-pawn. He could opt for 1 4 ltJa4.

14 ...ltJgxeS 15 ltJxeS ltJxeS

See diagram on page 72. 16 ltJgS White has to react quickly since if

in my opinion very

Black castles then that's it.

instructive win against 7 a4, as played

1 2 ...ltJxc6

16...�6+ 17 <Jo>hl

Black has equalised effortlessly.

by Short in the Moscow Olympiad

13 'ii'd2 'Wie7 14 l:adl ':d8 15 ltJc2

1 994. White should try to follow my

l:b8 16 a3 ltJaS 17 eS

plan despite the different move order.

At this point the match stood at 5-0 such a shock for Larsen. Nevertheless,

G.Kasparov - N.Short

he presses on as he has nothing really to

Moscow Olympiad 1 994

lose.

I e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 ltJxd4

I S . . . ltJg7 1 9 I!.d l I!.cS 20 f5 c5 21 f6

ltJf6 5 ltJc3 a6 6 1I..e2 e6 7 f4 il..e7

exd4 22 fxe7 'i!t'xe7 2 3 11xd4 f6 24 ir'd2

8 0-0 ,*,c7 9 ,*,e I ltJbd7 1 0 11.. £3 0-0

17...1I.. rs 18 b4 ltJc6 19 ltJd4 dIeS 20 fxeS ltJxeS

fxg5 25 llxfB+ llxfB 26 llxd6 ltJe5 72

See diagram on page 72. 73

Robert James Fischer the 1 1 th

Robert James Fischer the 11 th

Fischer again takes th e e5-pawn in a

S icilian.

30 1:[xf7 is one way to draw. Then 30 .. '.Pxf7 3 1 1:[fl + ltfS 32 "xh7+.

21 � gS 1:[ dS 22 'iff4 � g7 23 b4 1:[ b7? !

30

has almost nothing for the sacrificed materiaL

30 f5 31 "f6??

30 Wf2 ..I1.c5+ 3 1 We2 �d6 3 2 c4 bxc4 Karpov also took an e5-pawn and

Larsen fm al ly cracks. How else to why

a

world-class

.i.xc4

�xg3

34

.i.xa6

It'Jf4+

3 8 a4 f7 39 It'Jdc4 J:b8 40 It'Jc2 g4

V.Ivanehu k - A.Karpov

p l ay er

33

35 �xf4 �xf4 36 It'Je3 gS 37 It'Jd2 fS

went on to win.

...

explain

24 �f6? �xf6 25 "xf6

such a good player. 26 . . . hS 27 .t g l It'J e 7 2 8 � d 3 It'J d S 29 .i. d 2 �e7

It'Jxe6 is another. Then after

30 . . . .i.xe6 3 1 1:[xd5 �xd5 32 "g5+.

Alternatively, 23 . . . 'ifxc3 ! and White

38 It'JxgS :t xe1 39 1:[ x e 1 ..I1. dS 40 1:[ e8+ �g7 0-1

4 1 It'Jd4 h4 42 lt'Jc6 :ta8 43 �b5

S ic ilian tournament,

makes a losing move like this.

Buenos Aires 1 994

3 1 �h2 allows the knight to move. 3 l . . . ..c7 (3 1 . . . .i.c8?? 32 It'Jxe6 wins.) 32 "gS+ 'iit f7 3 3 'iVh5+ and there is After 3 1 'ii'g S+ 'it>f7 32 'iVh5+ Black's king should not try to

I e4 c5 2 It'Jf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 It'Jxd4 It'Jc6 5 It'Jc3 �c7 6 .i.e2 a6 7 0-0 It'Jf6

another perpetual. run

away from

the checks by 32 . . �e7 33 "g5+ �d6?

8 h I �e7 9 f4 d6 1 0 .i.e3 0-0 1 1 'ili'e I .i.d7

1 2 'ili'g3 c;Ph8

1 3 1:[ad I ltac8

14 It'Jf] It'Jb4 1 5 It'Je l bS 1 6 a3 It'Jc6 1 7 e5 dxe5 1 8 fxe5 'ifxe5

43 . . . h3 44 gxh3 gxh3 4S lt'J6e5+ f6

2s ... ihc3 26 hS gxbS 1:[d3

46 It'Jd7+ 'it>e7 47 It'Jdb6 :th8 48 .i.c6

28 iH4 Ihd l 29 ltxd l �d7 3 0 1:[d3

h2 49 a5 ..I1.b8 50 a6 c;Pd8 5 1 ..I1.h I :tg8

White has compensation.

52 It'Je5 'i;c7 0- 1

After

26 . . .l:hd4

27

"xe5

27 �hl

Of course I too developed an appetite

27 It'Jxe6 simp l i fies to an equal

for swallowing the e5-pawn in the

p o si ti on after 27 . . . �xe6 (27 . . ...e3+ 28

�h2

�xe6

29

1:[xd5

Sicilian.

. . . as 34 :txf5 ! ! and suddenly Black's

�xd5

30 .d8+) 28 lhd5 �xd5 29 'ii'd 8+.

king is under flIe.

27 ... lt'J g4 28 �xg4 hxg4 29 " h6

3 1 ...�c8 32 1:[ff1

�d7

19 �f4 'ili'c5 20 .i.e3 'ilke5 2 1 1:[xf6

Velibekov - G.Kasparov

'ifxg3 22 hxg3 .i.xf6 23 l:[xd7 �g8

USSR 1 97 6

24 It'Jd 1 1:[fd8 25 1:[xd8+ l:[xd8

1 e4 c5 2 It'Jf3 e6 3 d4 cxd4 4 It'J xd4 It'J f6 5 It'Jc3 d6 6 �e2 a6 7 0-0 It'J bd7 8 f4 b5 9 �f3 �b7 10 a3 My opponent may have known the Fischer game.

10 •e7 1 1 <;;P h I ...

I t would also b e nice t o know whether he was aware of the following

32 . 1:[17 .

30 1:[ f4

.

It's all over now.

33 .h6 �b7 34 It'J xe6 "f6 3S "e3 lI e7 36 lI del lI d6 37 "g5+ 'ifIg5

Larsen refuses to force a perpetual, still hoping to break his duck. 74

game between two former champions . After I I 'i¥e l �e7 1 2 Wh l J:b8 1 3 b3

26 It'Jf3 It is hard to imagine how

0-0 1 4 �b2 :tfe8 I S 'ili'g3 ..11. f8

Karpov can win this endgame against 75

Robert James Fischer the ]J th

Robert James Fischer the 11th Yugoslavia

1 9 5 9 . What a hacking

When the King's Indian becomes a Benko Gambit. . .

game.

V.Ivanchuk

M.Cuellar - R.Fischer

-

G.Kasparov

1 6 nae l e5 1 7 llJf5 �h8 1 8 'ifh4 exf4 1 9 'it'xf4 lLle5 20 J:.e3 g6 2 1 llJh6 iLg7 22 llJd5 lLlxd5 23 exd5 f6 24 �e4

1 l ... h5?!

g5 25 'ii' f5 iLxh6 26 'ii' xf6+ iLg7

This is a risky move! 1 2 �e3 llJ c5 13 e5 dIe5 1 4 fIe5 llJ g4 1 5 �xb7 'ilV xh7 1 6 iL g5 llJxe5

27 -.f5 llJg6 2 8 l:[h3

I took the pawn - just as Fischer liked to do. 1 7 'ilVe2 llJcd7 1 8 J:. adl �e7 19 llJ e4

See diagram on page 72. Suddenly Black has difficulty

m

finding a continuation. 1 9 ... 'Ii'c7 20 iL xe7 �xe7 Steinitz didn't mind placing his king 28 . . . iLxb2

Black

is

winning.

in the centre. 2 1 llJ g5 J:. afS 22 'ii' e l

29 'ilVxg6 J:.e7 30 nh6 11g8 3 1 'ilVf5 �c8 32 'ii'f3 g4 3 3 -.d3 �e5 34 c4 bxc4 35 bxc4 l:[eg7 36 c5 dxc5 37 d6 'it'a7 3 8 iLd5 nd8 3 9 'li'e4 iLd4 40 'li'f4

The Najdorf was my pet opening. whereas the Benko Gambit was a rare choice. I played it only a few times. I should clarify that the Benko type of position in the King's Indian sometimes transposes to the Benko and then a similar pawn sacrifice occurs.

well. On the other hand, I already hinted that a Benko type pawn sacrifice might occur. 1 3 llJxa5 'ii'xa5 1 4 llJ xb5 �xb5

15 cxb5 l1 fb8 1 6 �f3 llJf6 1 7 a4 a6

See diagram above! 1 8 bxa6

M.Cue lIar - R.Fischer

After 1 8 iLd2 ' ? 'tib6 I 9 e3 .

Stockholm Interzonal 1 962

1 d4 llJ f6 2 c4 g6 3 g3 iL g7 4 �g2 0-0 5 llJf3 d6 6 0-0 llJ c6 7 llJc3 .i.fS 8 d5 llJ a5 9 llJ d4 �d7 1 0 'ifd3 c5 1 1 llJ b3 llJg4 1 2 f4

1 8 ...'it'x a6 For players who do not know the Benko, it comes as a small surprise that Black exchanges pieces when he is a

2 2 ... llJc5??

pawn down. But the idea has its logic. Black exchanges in order to clear

This is a dreadful mistake. I came to the conclusion that it is not as simple to take the e 5-pawn as one may think. 23 'li'xe5! 1-0

40 . . . ngd7?? (40 . . . -.d7 was wilUling. ) 4 1 nf6 ! 1 -0 Tal-Smyslov, Candidates, 76

1 2 ... b5 This pawn sacrifice

squares for an invasion by his well­ is rather a

positioned pieces. Black has no need to

surprise as the knight can capture as

fear the endgame. 77

Robert James Fischer the 11th

Robert James Fischer the 1 1 th

22 'it>xf2 c4 23 b4 iVa7 is unpleasant for

19 lIa3 -.xd3 20 exd3 J:tb4 21 a5

32 ... lLlxdS

IS axbS

21 b3 ' ? keeps the pawn, but Fischer

Black moves ahead in material and

The pawn

would have compensation anyway.

33 J:tb3 lLlb4 34 fS gxfS 3S �gS e6

I s ... lLl hS Black could try swapping pieces on the queenside with 15 ... lLla4 ! ?

deteriorates

36 .i.d8 J:ta8 37 .li.b6 lhc8 0-1 I beat B areev with the Benko at Linares 1 994 and in the last round of the

Dubai

I

Olympiad

defeated

Sclunidt when the Soviet Union needed to win 4-0. Evgeny took the pawn whereas Schmidt kept the position c losed.

makes him feel more comfortable, however he is not yet better as the white a-pawn stymies him and h i s

to

assume

a

25...1!;>f8 26 �dl llb2 27 �c1 �d4+ 28 1!;>ht lln

29 .i.g4 lLlf6 30 �h3 J:tc2 3 1 a6 J:ta7

16 . .i.d4 .

.

I also manage to put my bishop on the dominating d4-square.

17 �h6

22 b4 Not 2 2 'i!fxc5? lLlf4 2 3 0-0 d4 ! 24 'il'xd4 'llVxa2 25 llf2 (25 lLlxa2?? lLle2+) 25 .. .'iIt'a5 and this time the three

V.lvanchuk G.Kasparov Linares 1 99 7 -

pawns are not enough for the piece.

22 .. :ika3? !

I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 �g7 4 e4 d6

After 22 . . . cxb4 23 lLlxb4 dxe4 24 0-0

S f3 0-0 6 .li.g5 a6 7 'Wd2 c5 8 dS bS

See diagram 12

32 �c8 If 32 .i.g2 lLlg4.

I S bxc3 f6 1 9 � h6 11fbS Black bas compensation in an unusual form.

another Linares tournament.

on

page 77.

lLlcl

nbS

14 lLlla2 If 14 �xa6 'itxa6 ! 1 4 ... .li.xbS

13

�xbS

exD 25 'il'xD Black should be able to live with his small disadvantage.

17 ...11fe8 Bobby put his rook here too. Of

23 hxcS lLlc4 I f 2 3 . . . dxe4 24 0-0 exD 25 'iWd4 fxg2

course he was defending the e7-pawn

White has the usual problem in the Benko of keeping his position together.

20 �e3 �xe3 21 'i!ixe3 dS

1 6 ltbl After 1 6 0-0 �d4+ 1 7 �h I �xc3

The next defeat helped Karpov to win

9 exbs iUbd7 10 a4 fr'aS l l lLlge2 lLlb6

dominating role.

18 b3 e6 19 dxe6 11xe6!? After 19 ... fxe6 ! ? comes 20 .li.e3 .

Gambit it is the Fischer effect that is the

23 �c3 l:I.b7 24 lIet lLle8 2S �d2 bishop

pl easant

lovely for Black.

most pronounced and it really hurts.

to invade.

dark-squared

these

memories, when I think of the Benko

opponent's position is not loose enough

This defends a5 but allows Black's

Despite

White) 20 . . .'iIt'xb5 2 1 lLlac3 'i!fa6 is

s l ightly

different from that in the Fischer game.

position

quickly.

22 �d2 1hb2 B l ack recovers the pawn which

is

very

White's

21 ...J:lbS

formation

.li.a6

whereas I was looking for dynamic

26 1112 lLla4 27 c6 White's passed

play, but his rook move affected me and

pawns are menacing.

24 'ii'd 4 lLlf4

played a negative role in my decision making. Maybe the simplest way was to exert pressure

on

the

queenside

with

1 7 ... J:tfb S ! ? and try to gobble up the b5-pawn. I S b3 lLld7 1 9 .i.e3 ( 1 9 b4 'iit'a 3; 1 9 �e2 lLle5) 1 9 . . . .i.xe3 20 'iit'x e3 J:txb5 and B lack i s better. I also suggested the dynamic attempt I 7 ... f5 ? sacrificing the exchange. Then I S .i.xfS ltxfS 1 9 b3 ( 1 9 b4 ' ? 'iWa7 and Black has nice play for the material.) 1 9 ... fxe4 20 lLlxe4 (20 fxe4 1:lf2 2 1 'ilVxf2 .i.xf2+ 78

2S O-O! 79

Robert James Fischer the 11th Ivanchuk simply sacrifices a knight to neutralise B l ack's play and get his passed pawns rolling.

2 7 tUxd5 White's can't

25 ... 1ha2 26 .un! Not 26 tUxa2? because of tU e2 +. 26 .. J/Va3

be

connected contained

passed pawns and

he

has

a

Boris Sp assky the 1 0th

completely winning position.

27 ..JWd3 28 'iVxd3 tUxd3 29 l:!.c2 tUa3 30 1:1a2 tUxc5 After

30

. . .

tUxb l

31

l:!.xa8+

IPg7

32 c6 wins.

31 nbal f5 32 tUc7 l:!.e5 33 tUxa8 tUxb5 34 exf5 gxf5 35 liJb6 tUc3 36 nc2 1-0 And here I lost on time.

The tenth world champion reigned

that mantle, and in 1 972 won the title.

from 1 969 to 1 972. He defeated Tigran

Spassky,

like

Petrosian at the second time of asking.

Smyslov,

Tal ,

Beating the Annenian world champion

never successfully defended the title.

Capablanca,

Euwe,

Fischer and Topalov

was in itself a great achievement, but

Of these, Fischer was the only one who

winning the Candidates matches twice

did not actually try to do so. I wrote in

was also great. In the second half of the

the Predecessors book that Spassky 's

60s he was probably the strongest

style

player. From 1 97 0 Fischer took over

universal.

was

more

attacking

than

I copied a positional idea from S passky, but it did not pay off. He used to create many problems for Black in queenless variations of the Queen's Gambit Accepted. The pawn structure is symmetrical and yet Spassky managed to inject power into the proceedings. I also tried the idea of pressing in a symmetrical queenless opening. Here are the positions:

B.Spassky - R.Fiscber

G.Kasparov - P.Leko

Let's start with a game by two world

This is one of Spassky 's pet lines. He managed

champions.

to

breathe

l i fe

into

this

seemingly dead boring variation and

B.Spassky - R.Fiscber

after his return match with Fischer the

Game 4, St StefanlBelgrade match

line caught on. Krarnn i k tried it against

1 992

me as well. Now we understand this position

1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 liJo tUf6 4 e3 e6 5 �xe4 eS 6 0-0 a6 7 dxeS! ?

much

better

Fischer-Spassky 1 992.

80

81

tban

before

Boris Spassky the 1 0'h

Boris Spassky the 1 0,h

7 . .'ihdl

9 . liJbd7 1 0 � b 2 b 6

l::r.b2 40 lle7+ 'Wt>f8 4 1 lle6 'Wt>g7 42 'Oth3

I n a match, players tend to be happy

This was Fischer 's first reaction to

ne2 43 lld6

with a draw. For a long time people did

the problem. He holds back b5 as he

not understand how many pitfalls there

doesn't

were in this variation.

attacked by a4.

..

.

want

On the

8 1hlil �xc5

American

the

44

�f6+ �g8

Wfl 48 :g5 �e6 49 �c7 l:ta2 50 �b6 tDd3 5 1 �h2 tDe 1 52 �h3 tDd3 5 3 �c7

two

next no

queenside to be

liJe l

4S �xe5 Ihe3 46 �f4 ne2 47 l::r. g6+

occasions the

longer

rejected

the

nc2 54 �b6 1:.a2 5 5 Wg3 tDe l 5 6 l:txh5 lhg2+ 57 Wf4 tDd3+ 58 We3 tDe5

tempo-gainin g I 0 . . . b5 and after 1 1 �e2

59 l:th6+ Wd5 60 �c7 ng7 6 1 �xe5

�b7 1 2 tDbd2 Fischer castled when he

..txe5 In- In Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade

faced the

line for the

third time.

1 992)

13

Ihc l

: fc8

1 4 h3

'itf8

1 2 . . . 0-0. Interestingly, castling has an

(Fischer still returns to the centre.)

unusual advantage compared to what

1 5 Wfl 'Wt>e7 1 6 tDe l �d6 17 a4

b7 bishop, for example against Karpov

happened in his second attempt at this

in the second game of our 1 990 World

variation. Here the king defends the

Championship match. However, as you

g7-pawn. The more natural king move

will probably guess, this plan is not as

1 2 .. .'3,e7 was Fischer's choice upon

sparkling as it looks.

facing tbe line for the second time, when

endgame provides White with more opportunities to fight for an advantage

play

14 ... bS 15 .>te2 �c5! 16 Wfl! We7

a4 bxa4 14 l::r.xa4 l::r.h b8 1 5 l::r. c I �d5 1 6 liJe5 �d6 1 7 lDxd7 tDxd7 1 8 l::r.xa6 l::r.xa6

Despite its symmetrical nature, this

continued

13

9 b3

1 9 �xa6 f6 20 .i.c4 �xc4 2 1 l::r.xc4 tDc5 22 l::r.c3 f5 23 �a3 tDe4 24 l::r. c7+

Spassky tried this move three time s

'it>d8 25 �xd6 liJxd2

than was at first thought.

against Fischer in the m atch.

1 7 . . . �c6

In the fourth and fmal occurrence o f

(Black

defends

the line Boris changed over t o another

axb5

1 9 l:tc2 1:.c7

20 lldc l

nxc7 24 l:txc7 ioxc7 25 liJc2 tDe4

endgame advantage. 9 ... 0-0 10 a3 b 5

17 e4

26 liJa3 b4 27 tDc4 f6 28 liJe l liJdc5

1 1 � e 2 �b7 1 2 b 4 � e 7 1 3 .i.b2 liJbd7 14 l:t ac 1 nfc8 This way of developing

29

looks very convincing for Black and he has equalised the position. 1 5 liJb3

Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade 1 992.

tDc2

tDxb3

30

liJxb4

This is the position that confused me.

tDbd2+

The outcome o f the game and the

3 1 tDxd2 tDxd2+ 32 �e2 tDc4 lh-In

nxc 1 1 6 nxc I nc8 17 llxc8+ .i.xc8

And after 26 l:txg7 Bobby survived this lost position.

1 8 tDfd4 tDb8 19 �f3 �f8 20 liJa5 .i.d6 2 1 liJdb3 e5 22 liJc5 'l;e7 23 h3 tDfd7 24 tD d3 f6 25 �e4 g6 26 f4 exf4

games, but I have not worked out yet in

27 exf4 liJb6 28 tDb7 .i.c7 29 liJbc5

which one. 26 . . . l:txb3 27 h4h5 28 .i.f4

tDc4

32 tDxc5 .i.b6 33 .i.d3 .i.xc5 34 bxc5 .i.e6 35 'l; f2 ..t>d7 36 .i.xc4 .i.xc4 In- lh

'it>e8 29 'it>hl l::r.b2 30 'it>h3 liJe4 31 f3 liJf2+ 32 'it>g3 tD d3 3 3 .i. g5 e5 34<,Ph3 liJf2+ 3 5 'it>h2 liJ d3 36 .i.h6 liJe I

Spassky-Fischer, Belgrade 1 992.

3 7 <,Pg 1 ttJ d3 38 .i.g5 lIb 1 + 39 <,Phl

'l;n

nac8

21 iof3 �xf3 22 tDdxf3 e5 23 l:txc7

had l earned how to neutralise the

liJd7 3 1

the

queens ide in a different way.) 1 8 axb5

plan with 9 tDbd2 . By this time Fischer

30 .i.c 1

14 f3 ! ? I also won a few games b y freezing a

It may have affected me in some

tDxc 5

82

pressure Boris managed to exert in this line prompted the idea of going for a

11 tDc3

position with a similar pawn structure .

This was Boris' deviation from one

See diagram 1 7 . gS

of his earlier games.

on page

81.

..

11 ... .i.b7 12 l:tacl �e7

Bringing

After 1 2 . . . h6 comes 1 3 tDa4 ! which

the

h8-rook

to

the

queens ide was playable for Black.

is the point of White's I l' h move. Then

1 8 tDbl g4 19 .>ta3 b4?

1 3 . . .�e7 14 �xf6 �xf6 I S l:txd7 ! and

Taking on a3 was better.

Black loses a pawn.

20 l::r.x cS! The

13 tDd4 llc8

exchange

sacrifice

Fischer into an eternal pin.

Not 1 3 . . . 0-0? 1 4 liJxe6! 83

brings

Boris Spassky the I ()
Boris Spassky the J 0'· 20 ...tUxc5 2 1 ..I1I.. x b4 :ahd8?!

If 33 ..111..d3 :abc8 34 e5+ �e7 35 b5+ lZ'lbcS 3 6 lZ'lb4 ..I1I..b 7 (36 . . . l:th8 37 ll'la6

This twns out t o be a loss of tempo.

wins. ) 3 7 b6 wins. 33 f4 wins as well.

B etter was 2 1 . . .tUfd7

This is not the best despite the fact

play b7 which wins.

1 4 . . . b5 looks more natural but my It's

of developing the

knight

22 ... gxfJ 23 gxfJ tUfd7 After 23 .. tUe8 24 lZ'lc4 (or 24 :ac t

time

to

look

at

the

games

opponent may have been worried that I

in which Spassky's ' instructive' play

had analysed it all previously at home.

affected me. We start with his strategy

Then 1 5 D, Spassky's idea to cut off

in the symmetrical Queens Gambit

the b7-bishop in this pawn structure,

Accepted pawn structure.

lhd4 2S ..I1I..x cS+ 'it'd7 26 nc2 and B l ack has nothing

that piece play is fully in the spirit of the Griinfeld Defence.

33 ... tUbe5 34 tUd4 e5

22 tUa3 ! A subtle way

50 h 5 + ! 1-0 Black resigned as White can soon

(other moves can be met satisfactorily, e.g. 1 5 a4 b4; I S �D lZ'le S ; 1 5 lZ'lc6

for the paw n . )

2 4 . . . tU d 6 2S tUb6 l:t c 7 26 l:t c I White

G.Kasparov

P.Leko

�b7) I S . . . ..I1I..b 7 1 6 lZ'lb3 and White has

wins.

Fuj itsu-Siemens G iants,

a small edge as the knight soon reaches

Frankfurt 2000

as . But then it will be difficult to decide

-

which small advantage to go for as any

35 lZ'lxe5! After 3S tUfS ! l:txb5 3 6 l:txh5 wins,

35 ... tUxe5 36 l:tf5+ �g7 37 l:txe5 has

obtained

of them might prove to

a

winning

position.

be more

significant than expected. Alternatively

The Hungarian variation, played by a

as Ftacnik pointed out. W h i te

1 d4 lZ'lf6 2 lZ'lfJ g6 3 e4 ..I1I.. g7 4 lZ'le3 d5 5 'iWb3 dIC4 6 'ilhc4 0-0 7 e4 36 Hungarian grandmaster.

14 . . . b6 ! ? deserved some consideration. Pushing the b-pawn only one square

8 'iWb3

allows him to control more squares.

White makes a third move with the

37 ... tUxe4 38 ..I1I.. d 3!

queen. This subtle move order is the

If 3 8 fxe4 l:tc3 + .

result of experience.

24 lZ'le4

38 ...I:te3

It is remarkable that the knight on c4

If 38 . . . lZ'lc3 39 ..I1I.. d6 wins.

8 ... c5 9 dxe5 WaS 10 'iYb6 'ifxb6 11 cIb6 tUbd1 12 ..I1I.. e 2 lZ'lxb6 13 ..I1I.. e3

actually blocks the c-file, thus helping

39 ..I1I.. b 4 l:tId3+

lZ'lbd1

Black to defend the cS-knight. Yet it

Giving back the exchange in order to

paralyses B lack's position. Fischer may

prolong the game but really it changes

have underestimated the move.

nothing else in the position.

24 ... ..I1I.. a 8 25 �f2 ng8 26 h4 :Ie7 27 lZ'le2 :ab8?!

'it>h7 43 ..I1I.. e5 lZ'le8 44 l:tIh5+ 'it'g6

1 5 fJ

45 l:tg5+ It>h7 46 ..I1I.. f4 f6 47 l1f5 �g6 48 b6 l:td8 49 l:ta5 ..I1I.. x fJ

In the queenless middlegame I am

40 'it>Id3 lZ'lf6 4 1 ..I1I.. d 6 ne8 42 l1g5+

After 2 7 . . .�f6 2 8 ..I1I.. a S :Ib7 29 ..111..d2 'it>e7 30 lZ'ld4 White has nice play for

building up my pawn structure in the same way that Spassky did. In my case

the exchange.

it did not bring the same result.

28 ..I1I.. a 3! hS?

See diagram 1 5 ... e5

Giving up the g-file twns out to be a

1 4 lZ'ld4!

huge mistake. After 28 . . . J:[g8 29 b4

An

tUa4 30 b5+ 'it>d8 3 1 b6 llc8 32 lZ'l2e3

endgame

has

arisen

Or

which

on

I S . . . lZ'le6

page 81. to

get

rid

o f the

greatly resembles that mastered by

dominating d4-knight and develop his

29 ngl 'it'f6 30 It>e3

Boris Spassky in the Queens Gambit

bishop on e6. Then 1 6 lZ'lb3 1 and B lack

30 l:tgS is met by 30 . . . ..I1I.. x e4!

Accepted. I follow Spassky's strategy.

is still under pressure. His queens ide is

Let's see where it led me!

vulnerable and he must also reckon

Black is in trouble.

30 ... a5 3 1 llg5 a4?! 32 b4 tUb7 33 b5

with e 5 . 1 6 . . . ..I1I.. d 7 ( 1 6 . . . b5 1 7 Wf2 �d7

1 4 tUe5?! •..

84

85

Boris Spassky the 1 (}1"

Boris Spassky the 10'" [or 1 7 . . . �b7 1 8 tOa5] 1 8 llhdl and

23 . .'.ti'f7!

White has an edge.) 1 7 f4 ..i.c6 1 8 ..i.B

Black has improved his pieces. Now

.

he has play of his own.

i.h6 1 9 g3 llfd8 20 �e2. White's space advantage in the centre makes Black's

24 b3 as 25 l:te2 lOf6!

game difficult.

Black has

certainly played very

purposefully over the last six moves and managed to equalise.

26 %hd8 llxd8 27 exf5 Defending the e4-pawn would not 18 c;t>fl?! A t least an inaccuracy as it allows the c8-bishop to move to e6.

1 8 i.c4!

is a better move as it hampers the opponent's bishop. Having the king on

This is the only jump that causes headaches for Black - otherwise Black

After 3 9 �g6? llh4+ 40 <.t>g7 J:lg4 the pin is lethal.

27 ...gd5 28 lOa4 i.d5 29 i.b6 l:ta8

Or 39 l:tf2 l:th4+ 40 >t>g7 llxh2 4 1 l:txh2 lOxh2 42 'ifo>f6 and White

30 i.c5 tOd7 31 i.xe7 �xe7 32 We3 'ifo>d6

achieves a draw.

39 .. Jlh4+ 40 'ifo>g7 lOxh2 The

4 1 lOc3 1Of3 42 lOe4+ �c7 43 lOf6 tOd4 44 lOxd5+ cxd5 45 l:td2 'i\>d6 46 i.d3?

J:lhc l ! ?

looks

better.

I was already short of time in this

Then

rapid game. After the text my bishop lands in a losing pin. Maybe I was

1 9 . . . l:td2 ( l 9 . . . tOd7 20 �e3 a5 [20 . . . f5

doing all right.

angry that the strategy did not work as

2 1 tOa4] 2 1 lOa4 l:tdc8 22 i.c4 and

If 1 6 tOc2 tOe6 17 0-0-0 b5 1 8 tOd5

was

is 1 8 .lil.b6 ! ? which would create some

19

18 ..i.b6 l:te8 19 l:rd I i.e6 and Black is

40 ... lOd4!

winning at once, e.g. 4 1 l:te8 lOe6+.

1 8 ... i.e6 19 l:tbdl

1 7 i.xc5 lld8

intermediate

castling might be possible. Another try confusion in Black's camp.

will just complete his development. 1 6 tOf5 gxf5

39 l:te2??

action.

e2 would be better and even queens ide

1 6 tOe6 !

After

leave White very much scope for

defending c6 is not going to be fun.)

33 ..i.d3 ? !

well for me as it had done for Spassky

16 ... bxc6

20 b3 i.h6 2 1 ..i.e3 ..i.xe3+ 22 �xe3

I had t o w i n t o have a chance o f

and that affected my concentration.

Leko takes on a pawn weakness. On

and Black's TOok is active on d2 but

.lil.b7 the position is safe for Black.

may soon corne under pressure.

the other hand the move considerably loosens White's grip.

1 9 ... tOd7! 20 i.e3 i.fS! 21 l:td2 f5!

Black could think of sacrificing a pawn instead with

22 l:tadl �e7! 23 g3

1 6 . . . tOe6. Then

catching up with Anand who was

Black could try playing on but White

can proba? ly hold with 46 �b 1 .

leading the event. Of course White does not stand at all worse after 33 tOc3.

33...f4+! Black seizes his chance to take the

1 7 tOxe 5 ! ( 1 7 tOe7+ 'it>h8 1 8 tOa4 !?)

initiative.

17 ... tOxe4 18 tOxg6 hxg6 ( 1 8 ... tOxc3

34 gxf4 exf4+ 35 'iPxf4 l:tf8+ 36 �g5

19 tOxfS 'it>xfS 20 bxc3 ..i.xc3+ 21 'it>f2

lOe5 37 i.xh7

i.xa I 22 lha I and the endgame is not

After 37 i.e4 lOxf3+ 3 8 i.xf3 l:txf3

attractive for Black.) 1 9 fxe4 tOd4 and

39 lOc3 'ifo>e5 Black's king is somewhat

Black has some cOW1terplay, though he

troublesome, yet White should be able

is a pawn down.

to live with it.

46 ...lOe6+ 47 'ifo>f6 l:tf4+ 0-1 White resigned as after 48 'it'g6 J:ld4

37 ... lOxf3+ 38 'ifo>h6 l:tf4 !

17 ..i.xc5 J::1 d 8 86

Black wins. 87

Boris Spassky the l {)lh

Boris Spassky the 1 0th 13 ... f6? B.Larsen - B.Spassky

I also made a similar knight sacrifice

This buries 13 . . .lob5 ! ?

We now look at how Spassky

the

in my game against Chiburdanidze.

g7-bishop. After

1 4 .i.xc4 lDd4

1 7 ... gxf5 18 1i'h5+ �g8 19 gxf5 .l:l.n 20 .i.e2 lDc5?!

1 5 'ira

White should do well - nevertheless

This allows a forced checkmate, but

Black is still alive and kicking.

used the h-file as a stulUling

Black is completely lost anyway. If

14 h5 We7?

avenue for attack.

Black played

20 . . . �f8

1 3 . . . f6 to make an

I knew these games and wanted to hanuner my opponents in the

blocks the path with this

same way along the h-file.

looking

yet

losing

move.

-

lDb5

B etter

'ire8

(2 l . . .'it>e8

23

lhg7

(Capturing with the

queen would be more elegant but this is

resistance was offered by 14 . . . .I:I.f7.

far more decisive.) 23 ... .I:I.xg7 24 .i.h6 WillS .

G.Kasparov - V.Anand

J. van Oostel"om

lldg 1

delivers a nice checkmate .) 22 1i'h7 !

natural­

15 bxg6 hxg6 B.Spassky

21

22 .l:l.xg7; 2 I . . . lDb 5 22 1i'h8+ and White

escape route for the king, but now he

21 .l:tdgl 'ird7?! Other moves

would

have

lasted

longer but it's all the same now.

16 1i'b2 ! It is worth seeing Spassky's games.

flank. The alternative I I . . . f6 12 h4 'iPf7 is depressing for B lack but he can at

B.Spassky - J. van Oosterom

least last longer than in the game.

Junior World Championship,

1 2 lDg3 bxc4

Antwerp 1 95 5

S o natural. And what makes i t even nicer is that it wins directly.

22 'ti'h8 mate

16....ti>n After 16 ... lDb6 1 7 1i'h7+ �f7 18 .l:l.h6

The next game is probably Spassky 's

g5 19 1i'g6+ wins.

most famous masterpiece and of course

1 d 4 lDf6 2 c 4 g 6 3 lDc3 .i.g7 4 e 4 d6

I knew it well.

5 f3 0-0 6 .i.e3 e5 7 lDge2 lDc6 8 'ird2 lDd7 Black opens the diagonal

B.Lal"Sen - B.Spassky for his

USSR v Rest of the World,

bishop. In fact this move is still played

Belgrade 1 970

competitively.

1 b3 eS 2 .i.b2 lDc6 3 c4 lDf6

9 0-0-0 a6 10 d5 lDa7

4 lDf3?! e4 5 lDd4 .i.c5 6 lDxc6 dxc6 7 e3 .i.f5 8 'irc2 'fIe7 9 .i.e2 0-0-0

1 O . . . lDe7 looks more natural than putting the knight on the edge.

11 g4 b5

1 3 h4

Black doesn't get enough play on the

Spassky conunences operations on the h-file.

queenside and wastes time on the other 88

10 f4? Black is ahead in development, so White has no time for this.

17 lDf5 ! ! 89

Boris Spassky thi!'J b�A '

Boris Spassky the l Orh 14 .. .l:lh l ! !

See diagram o n page 88. B l ack sacrifices a whole rook for a decisive tempo.

15 lbh l g2 1 6 11fl ? ! In a hopelessly lost position White walks into a checkmate. But if 16 llg l 'ii'h4 + 1 7 'it>dl 'ii'h l wins.

10 ... lDg4! Spassky acts at once, before White can bring his pieces into the game. 11 g3 hS! To open the kingside. 12 h3? White allows the opening of the kingside. After 12 h4 f6 Black stands better anyway.

16 ...'it'h4+ Spassky's queen invades on the h-file and checkmates White.

17 <;Pd t gxfl='it'+ 1-0 White could make only three more moves. We saw how effectively Spassky used the h-file for attack. I was not careful enough when I tried to emulate his play. This game was unfortunate indeed! G.Kasparov

-

1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 lDd2 eS 4 exdS The first sign that White may castle queenside.

S ... �xcS 6 ltJgf3 lDf6 7 �d3 0-0 8 'it'e2 White persists with h i s idea of

B l ack would rather give up the than

fal l

'ifICS!

11

behind

in

development.

lDxcs

12 �d4 �b7 90

position.

'it'e7

this

complicated

13 ... lDeS ! 14 �eS

1 8 �If6 If 1 8 .l:txe4? lDxe4 1 9 'lIVxe4 'lIVa l +

B lack's pawns because of 14 . . . lDxd3+

2 0 d2 'ifxh I 2 1 'iWg4 f6 wins.

1 5 .l:txd3 'iWf4+.

1 8 ... �g6!

14 ... lDxd3+ 1 5 %hd3?! 'iWe4!

B lack

Grabbing a counetrattacking chance,

can't

1 8 . . . 'ifa l +?

win

as

the

rook with

White's

attack has

offered by the unprotected state of the

grown too strong.

a2-pawn.

20 .l:l.xe4 gxf6 2 1 'ifg4+ 'it>h8 22 'iWh4

1 9 'it>d2 'ifxh 1

.1:1.&8 23 'ifxf6+ ng7 24 l:!.g4 nag8 25 lDD and quite incredibly Black is

tenabl e ending with 1 6 �xf6 was

defenceless.

White's best option. After 1 6 . . '''f4+

19 na3 'ifdS 20 h4

1 7 <;Pb I 'ifxf6 White can live with this

After 20 �e5 f6 2 1 .\tg3 1 'iWxd4

position. But not 1 6 'it>b I ?! �e4 1 7 lle3

22

'ifxe2 1 8 .l:l.xe2 �xf3 and the doubled

according to Ernst.

for White.

1 6 . . . 'ifxa2

17

�xf6

'ifxe6+

the

position

is

equal

20._.gxf6 21 hS 'it'xd4 22 hllg6 hxg6

pawns make it a really tough endgame

gxf6

1 8 'ifg4+ h8 1 9 'ifh4 'ifaH 20 �d2 'ifa5+ 2 1 l:I.c3 'ifgS+ 22 'ifxg5 fxgS 23 l:!.c7 White has some compensation

�e3

right in

After 14 �xf6 White can't double

After

8 ...ltJbd7 9 lDe4 b6!

10

bearings

attack on the kingside.

16... �e4

castling long.

bishops

White can consider launching a snap

Going for a s l ightly worse but

'it'IdS 5 duS

two

17 ... 'ifxa2! Black is confident that he has got his

1 6 lDd4?!

V.Anand

Reggio Emilia 1 992

12 ... h4! Black opens the h-file at the cost of a piece - which turns out to be a low priced but highly fruitful investment. 13 hxg4 h:lg3 14 ng1

13 0-0-0 It has taken some effort but at last

for the pawn.

1 7 l:!.e3 91

Boris Spassky the 1 0th

Boris Spassky the 1 0th

23 l:1ah3 See diagram on page 88,

up his hopes of creating an effective

This is the position I was hoping for,

attack on the h-file,

A sad moment for White, who gives

Spassky's raids on the h-file were very much the models I had in my mind, He succeeded with

this

theme several

times,

After 44 Wc3 Ernst gives 44".'iic6+

Black who creates a winning attack

45 llc4 axb4+ 46 �xb4 Ilb5+ 47 �c3

from an edge file. This was exactly

'iix f3+ wins,

3 1 lld4 "e5 32 J:[hf4 "c7 33 "e3 e5!

what I wanted to do to my opponent

34 lhd8 Ilxd8 35 l:1e4

and now I get checkmated in the same

44 ... Wa2+ 45 r;i;>e3 a4 46 bxa4 'iia3+ 47 ..te2 'ii:l 34+ 48 <;Pc3 �a3+ 49 �c2

way. So not only Spassky but also

Ild3 0-1

a

check on the h-file, B l ack replies

__

44 b3

This is particularly annoying as it is

28._.We5 29 g3 "e1 + 30 �c2 J:[cd8

35 llb4 would allow no more than

23 .f5 24 llh4

43 ... 'iia 4+

Anand gets it right - just not me!

35 " ,"d6.

35 ...l:1d5 Black gradually makes progress with his extra pawn.

36 g4 b5 37 g5 "d6 38 f3

24 ... f4 ! Black correctly keeps his queen i n the centre where it can easily deny its counterpart access via the h-file. If instead

2 4 " ,,*f6

25

,*e3 ! ?

llfd 8

2 6 'ii'h 3 'iP fB 27 J:[h8+ 'iPe7 28 "a3+ 'iPd7 29 J:[d I + and White has an attack.

38 ... a5!

25 '*13 J:[ae8 26 1hf4

Now he starts opening up White's

The queen can reach the h-file with

ldng.

26 'ii'h 3, but it would all be in vain,

39 'We2 We6 40 Wh2

26., ,"xf2 ! 27 Ilh8+ �g7 28 J:[h7+

A useless demonstration on the h-file.

(28 'Wh6+ �f6) 2 8 . . .� f6 29 c3 "e3+

40.....f5 4 1 Wg3 Wd7 42 Wel b4 43 cxb4

and Black wins,

26 ..:it'e5 27 c3
Upon 43 J:[xe5 Wa4+ 44 'iPc l bxc3! wins,

28 J:[hh4 92

93

Tigran Petros ian th e 9th

J. Van der Wiel - G.Kasparov

Tigran Petrosian the 9th I lost all these games after sacrificing the exchange. Petrosian 's wish came true in 1 96 3

challenged. Tigran is in many ways the

when he defeated Botvinnik. The first

closest to me, as he is from a Caucasus

Soviet

not

republic. He spent his childhood in

afforded the privilege of a rematch, so

Tbilisi, G eorgia, just a few hundred

world

champion

was

Petros ian enjoyed a complete three

kilometres away from B aku where I

year cycle as Champion before being

grew up.

Let's look deeper into them and see what went wrong!

24. . . g4

In which particular way did Tigran Vartanovich affect me? He is known for

his exchange sacri fices. I also tried them a few times. made my own.

S.Reshevsky - T.Petrosian

A.Yusupov - G.Kasparov

1 4 "ilfe2 c4

S.Reshevsky - T.Petrosian

Here are a couple of his exchange sacrifices which I had in mind when I

1 5 �c2 b5

1 6 e4 �e6

Candidates tournament,

1 7 'ire l itJd7 1 8 "i!fg3 [6 19 � f4 rJ.n

Zurich 1 95 3

20 lHe I itJfll 2 1 �d6 :td8 22 �c5

1;'- 1;' Rabar-Petrosian, Belgrade 1 9 54.

1 d4 4Jf6 2 c 4 e 6 3 4Jc3 �b4 4 e3

White obtained some advantage and

0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 4Jf3 c5 7 0-0 4Jc6 8 a3 �xc3 9 bxc3 b6

probably convinced P etrosian that he

This is a relatively rarely played line.

line.) 1 4 'ilfe l itJd7 1 5 e4 c4 1 6 �c2 f5

should switch to another Nirnzo-Indian

Petrosian adopted it four times in 1 9 5 3

1 7 e5 .l:!.n 1 8 a4 as 1 9 [4 b5 20 axb5

and 1 954, then h e stopped using it.

Wxb5

Before him, Keres was the only great

23 :to itJc8 24 �a4

21

�a3

itJb6

22 'ifh4 'ife8

player to emp loy this line. For example, he drew against Alekhine with it in 1 93 8 . Petrosian used this move for the

25 . rJ.e6!!

14 . . . gxf5 1 5 �h5 ile8 16 iLe7 rJ.e8

. .

M.Tal - T.Petrosian

J.Timmao

-

G.Kasparov

fITst time in this game.

10 cxdS exdS 11 �b2 At the 1 95 3 Candidates tournament in Switzerland, Petros ian played the line twice more. In the first two games the bishop move was played. In a third game at Zurich, Taimanov beat him after

11

Petros ian

itJe5

when,

tried

a simi lar exchange

24 . . . :t:J.d7

interestingly,

sacrifice but this time it didn't work

1 6. . :t:J.b4 .

94

25

e6 wins .)

itJa7 28 �e7 �n 29 'ilr'g5 �g6 30 h4

1 1 . . . 'ifc7

itJc6 3 1 �a3 lLld8 32 h5 lLle6 33 'ilfh4

1 2 itJxc6 Wxc6 1 3 0 �e6 (after 1 3 . . . a5

� n 34 h6 g6 3 5 'ilff6 'ifd8 3 6 �e7

just as

3 l . . . �4!!

(24 . . . �d7

25 1:tb 1 'ird8 26 �xd7 "ilfxd7 27 :t:J.g3

in my games !

95

Tigran Petros ian the 9th

Tigran Petrosian the 9th After 28 1:1D b4 1 29 l:tefl

'iVc7 37 1:txg6+ hxg6 3 8 h7+ 'it>xh7

22 .1i.g4

39 it'xf7+ 0.g7 40 c;t>f2 1 -0 Taimanov­

By inserting this move he announces

lOd5

30 'ii' g5 l:lb8 Black stands well

as

I

Petrosian, Zurich 1 953

his intention of pushing the e-pawn.

pointed out in the above-mentioned

I I ...c4 12 .1i.c2 .1i.g4

Alternatives were 22 h4 ! ? and 22 1:1e3 1 ?

analysis.

Reshevsky played

1 2 . . . lOe7

in a

match against Najdorf the same year.

22...it'e8 23 e5

28 ... lOd5 !

Both Karpov and I were unable to hurt

There are no open files for the rooks

him.

open up the position with e6. However

and both Black's minor pieces have

it gives up the dS-square and the bishop

wonderful play.

won both games.

Crouch recommends 25 1:1eD as it

B l ac k blocks

the

e6-thrust,

and

diverged and pl ayed what was perhaps

at the same time Petros ian clears the

his

e7-square.

most

famous

game.

Against

Smyslov he went 1 8 ... f5 and the game

26 a4? ! I n the Predecessor series I indicated a

2 1 'WIg5 'WIf7 22 .1i.a3 h6 23 it'g3 lhe 1

preference for the immediate capture

24 l:txe I ne8 25 l'he8+ it'xe8 26 'it>f2

2 6 ..txe6. Then 26 . . . 'tIVxe6! (26 . . . fxe6

lOa5 27 'iVf4 lOb3 28 .1i.xf5 .1i.xf5

27 l:lg3 lOe7 2 8 nn ltJd5 29 'iVg5 "iWe7

29 it'xf5 'iVxa4 30 'iVc8+ c;t>h7 3 1 'iVf5+

[29 . . Jld7

<.t>g8 32 "iWe6+ <.t>h7 33 it'e4+ c;t>g8

3 1 .1i.xg5 nb8 32 .i.d2 and White has

34 'iVa8+ c;t>h7 35 it'e4+
an advantage in the endgame.) 27 1:1g3

38 ,*,f5+ 'it>g8

30

h4)

30

.1i.c l

easily

against Karpov in Milan 1 975 with

compensates

for

the

pawn

1 5 . . .l:l fc8.

30 ... exd3 3 1 1hd3 b4 32 exb4

1 6 lOd2 1:1fe8 17 f4 l:tad8 18 fxeS

If 32 c4 lOb6.

If 1 8 f5 exd4 ! or 1 8 d5 exf4 .

32 ... axb4 33 as

'tIVa2+ 4 2 c;t>g3 'iVd2 43

reasonable fortress. If 32 .1i.c 1 lOxc3.

iVh4

.1i.d3

and

B l ack

has

a

33 ...l:la8 Black does not even stand worse.

47

112 - 112

34 1:tal 'iVe6 35 i.el 'iVe7 36 a6 'itb6 37 i.d2

1 9 fn4 1He8 20 it'f4 b5 2 1 iJ.. d l ne7

If 3 7 h3 lOc7 picks up the pawn, as

48

d8='iV

Smyslov-Petrosian, Zurich 1 95 3 .

22 as!

Even though he is a pawn down,

44 'it>g4 lOd3 45 it'd5+ 'it>h7 46 d7 it'e5 cxd3

1 8 ... dxeS 1 9 dS i.d7 20 e4 l:tb8

lOe7 28 h4 lOd5 29 'iVg5 1:1d7 30 h5 h6 31

'iVxdH

Tal wants to exchange the light­ squared bishop in order to remove an important defensive piece.

22 ...l:tfB 23 ..ta4 i.xa4 24 l:lxa4

pointed out by Crouch.

37... b3 38 'iVe4 b6 39 h3 b2 40 l:lbl �h8 41 i.e1 t;S-t;S

M. Tal - T.Petrosian USSR 1 958

26 ... lOe7! Tigran

Vartanovich

radically

improves the position of his knight.

27 .i.xe6 fxe6 28 it'n 96

nowadays it's c6. Tigran drew

it'xg5

3 9 'iVf8+ <.t>h7 40 it'f5+ 'it>g8 41 d5 d6 it'e l +

e6

21 a4 b4

continued 1 9 exd5 'iVxd5 20 a4 lHe8

'it>h7 37 iJ..e7 ltJc l

Players no longer put the bishop on

Black's knight remains very strong and deficit.

See diagram on page 94. 25 .. J1e6! !

A couple of rounds later Petros ian

14 b3 is the main line.

14 ...lOxe3 15 ..txe3 i.e6 ? !

White gives back the exchange, but

23 ... a5 24 ne3 l:ld8 25 1:1fe1 prevents 25 . . . f6.

1 5 it'xd2 .1i.h5 16 13 .1i.g6 1 7 e4 it'd7 1 8 l:tllel dxe4

13 'On lOe4 14 lOe3

29 1:.13 i.d3 30 l:lxd3

on b2 is out of play.

A Soviet player Ababkarov played

line seven

This is menacing since White can

games.

1 4 . . . ..tf5 twice in 1 957, interestingly he

Petrosian pl ayed this

times, holding three world champions.

He drew one and lost one out of these

13 it'd lO e4 14 lOd2 lOxd2

8 e3 d6 9 h3 lOaS 1 0 .i.e2 e5 11 d4 'ike7 12 lObd2 i.d7

1 e4 eS 2 '00 lOe6 3 i.b5 a6 4 i.a4 lOf6 5 0-0 i.e7 6 l:le1 b5 7 i.b3 0-0 97

Trgran Petrasian the 9th

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

24 ... .I:I.bd8!

I f 36 h6 f5.

Black improves the rook, but his

36 ... b6 37 .l:l.ae 1 ?

'iff6 69 '1!i'e4+ 'it>g8 70 'ife8+ 'iWf8 7 1 'ifxf8+ �xf8 72 <;i;>g4 'it>f7 73 �f5

After 37 b3 ! ? c4 38 ltJxd6 (38 bxc4

liz-liz

position remains troublesome.

25 'Wo ftd6 26 llJb3 llJd7 27 .l:l.aal

.ltb8) 38 ...•xd6 39 lhel f6 40 bxc4

l:tg6 28 .l:l.fl it.d6 29 h4 'Wd8 30 h5 .l:l.f6

.l:l.c8 41 .l:l.e4 .c5+ 42 'it.>h2 'iha5

3 1 .g4

43 .f5 the position is unclear.

See diagram on page 94.

37

..•

Here is my game against Timman.

J.Timman - G.Kasparov Tilburg 1 98 1

�b8 38 .l:l.dl

3 1 ..Jlf4 ! !

1 d 4 ltJf6 2 e4 g6 3 g3 it.g7 4 .tg2 0-0 5 ltJfJ d6 6 0-0 c5 7 ltJc3 ltJc6 8 d5

A great saving concept, Pen-os ian

47 'ih:dl nb8 48 .l:l.0?

sacrifices the exchange for a blockade.

ltJa5 9 ltJd2 a6 10 'ifc2 nb8

He should play 48 'iWd3 b3 49 a6 .

A

48 .I:I.a8?

with

..•

After 48....I:I.b5 49 'iWe I �h7 50 .l:l.b3

World

60 'il'd5?

Tal

could

not

resist

taking

the

exchange. Tal could have retained an

.xc4

ltJxb2

Tal was not yet prepared to defend passively with 45 .l:l.xdl I ? , but maybe it

moves White will stand clearly better,

was the better option as after 45 ... �b8

ftn ;

33 .. .ti:lf6

34

'lif3

ltJg6 23 .ltg4 ltJxf4 24 .l:l.xf4 .l:txf4 25 it.e6+ llf7 26 ltJe4 'iWh4 27 ltJxd6 'il'g5+ 28 <;i;>h 1 ]:taa7 29 .txf7+ lhf7

46 ltJd5 it.xd6 47 ltJe7 'it'xe7 48 .xd6

.ltxf4

'1!i'xd6 49 .l:l.xd6 .l:l.a8 50 l:tb6 nxa5

35 'iltxf4 llJxh5 36 'it'e3; 33... llJe5

51 Ilxb4 White probably holds.

34 .g3 fte8 35 h6 g6 36 ftcl .c7)

45 ...•)(d6?

and Black can either try to blockade or

P en-osian misses a win. Black can

break out. There might follow 34 h6 g6

force the issue after 45 ... ltJc3! 46 .e7

35 .g3 it.xf4 36 'iixf4 f5 37 .l:l.e ! .

gxf6 47 .l:l.xf5 .xe7 48 dxe7 .l:l.e8

32 ... ed4 33 ltJd2 ltJe5 34 'ihf4?

49 .l:l.xf6 'it>g7 50 Ilb6 (50 ng 6+ �f7

White had two moves to obtain the

51

nxh6

ltJa4 1 !

wins.)

50 . . . .I:I.xe7

51 .l:l.xb4 l1e5 52 g4 .l:l.xa5 53 ftb7+ 'it.>f6

better prospects. Either 34 'ilfh3 'iig5, or

I S fJ e4 1 6 �b2 exf3

45 'iWxa7

32 . . . exf4 33 it.xf4 .e7 (After other

36

match

f4 20 gxf4 � h3 2 1 ltJe3 �xf1 22 ftxfl

44 .)(36 ltJxdl

advantage by playing 32 l:txf4. Then

e.g. 33 ... it.xf4 34 'it'xf4 .e7 35 h6 g6

final

1 7 .txf3 .txb2 1 8 'il'xb2 ltJe5 1 9 .te2

40 ... it.a7+ 41 'it.> h l f5 42 ltJf6+! <;Ph8 43

Championship

1 4 ltJ d 1 b5

41 'Wd4 with a still unclear position.

Even such a broad-minded player as

line

Tigran's

went: 1 1 b3 ltJg4 12 e4 f5 1 3 exf5 gxf5

59 'it>gl ]:ta2

4 1 .l:l.d5! 'it'd7 42 ltJc5 .c6 43 .l:l.ff5!)

32 it.)(f4?!

this in

against Spassky. Here is how that game

l:I.e5 55 ..t>gl .l:!.e5 56 'it'f2 .t!.e5 57 'it'fJ Better was 40 .e3! f5 (40...ltJxb2

fro m

resulted

famous combination from the 1 966

49 'it'el nu5 50 '1!i'xb4 ne5 51 'it'f4 'it>h7 52 ..t>b2 .l:l.d5 53 .l:l.fl 'ii'g5 54 'iffJ .l:l.a5 58 'it>b2 �b8

10 . . . e5

Vartanovich's most beautiful and most

.l:l.xa5 5 1 'it'xb4 .I:!. a I + 52 �h2 .1:!.f1 wins.

38 ... c4 39 d6 ltJd3 40 .g4?

deviation

34 'iWf5 g6 35 'Wh3.

54 llb6+ 'it.>g5 55 <;Pg2 ltJe4!

34 ... ltJ)(C4 35 e5 ltJn5 36 ltJe4

46 .d7 .d6 98

60 ....t!.c2? 60 .. .'*,e3+ ! !

would

have

been

decisive. Then 61 'it>h2 .l:l.a4 62 '*'d8+ �h7 63 .l:!.xf5 .l:l.d4 64 .l:l.d5 .l:l.g4 65 .l:l.d3 ,*,e5+ 66 ..t>g l 'iVel+ (66 . .. 'it'e4 67 'ii'd 5

30 'ifh8+ ! !

.l:!.xg2+ 68 r;to>h I 'ii'x d5 69 .l:l.xd5 .l:l.gS

1 -0 Petrosian-Spassky,

Moscow 1 966.

Black wins.) 67 'it>h2 fth4+ 68 .l:l.h3 ,*,e5+ 69 'it>gl J:td4 and Black catches

11 b3 b5 1 2 .ltb2 bxc4 13 bxc4 .i.h6

White 's king.

In the databases Donner is credited

61 'it'a8+ ..t>h7 62 'iWfJ .l:l.cI 63 .1:1.xcI

with playing this for the first time

'ii'x cI + 64 ..t>h2 'il'e7+ 65 'it>h3 'iWe5 66 g4 fxg4+ 67 'it>xg4 'ii'g5+ 68 <;Ph3

against Botvinni!<, way back in 1 958.

14 ltJcbl 99

1igran Petros ian the 9th

Tigran Petros ian the 9th

According to the database this move

did not offer this exchange sacrifice at

41 l:I.b6 1-0 Petrosian-Toran, Bamberg

was introduced by Udovcic. It was then

once. I lost a game against Zaid after

1968.

seen regularly, although it has never

playing 16 ... �g7.

I have not

yet

22...b3 23 ll:lxb3 �a4 It looks like White can live with this pin. 24 ll:l1d2

19 e3

l:I.b8 2S l:I.abl ll:lxb3 26 ll:lxb3 1ib6

been played as often as 14 f4. Petrosian

decided

champion I

Two years later Kurajica tried an

tried 14 f4 unsuccessfully with White

should blame for that. 17 nabl it'c7

27 c5 �xb3 (27... dxcS 28 "xcS �xb3

interesting idea, he gave up the c-pawn

against his problem opponent in the

18 e4 hS 19 f4 l:I.b4 20 it'd3 lLlb7

29 'CWxb6 l:I.xb6 30 1:[ec I and White

sixties.

21

with 19 c5 in order to open the file.

soon

19... 1hcs 20 1ib2 ll:lg4 (20...it'b5!?)

28 'ii'xfS gxf5 29 cxb6 l:I.xb6 30 l:I.ec I

21 ll:le4 'iltb6 22 �D �g7 23 ll:lbd2

and White is better.

14... e5 15 l:tael (Petrosian

which

liJc2

world

l:I.xbl

22

l:I.xbl

h4?!

deviated from Portisch's play when he

(22... exf4!?) 23 fxe5 dxe5 24ll:lD! and

faced the young Chiburdanidze by

White's centre pawns will be strong.

playing 15 dxe6 fxe6 16 l:tab 1 �g7

24...hxg3 25 �xeS gxh2+ 26 �xh2

17liJce4 l:I.xb2 18 l:I.xb2liJg4 19 l:I.bb I

it'c8 27 ll:le3 ll:lg4 28 lLlxg4 �xg4

�d4+ 20 'it>hl liJe3 21 it'cl R.b7

29 ll:leS tLlaS 30 llfl i..hS 31 d6 �xe5

lLlh6 24 l:I.abl fS 2S 'ii'xb4 White is

invades

on

the

queenside.)

20 lLle4 �xe4 21 �xe4 lLlb7

ready to give up a piece to open files

In a closed position one usually has

for his rooks. 25...'ii'xb4 26 lhb4 fxe4

time to manoeuvre, however Black

27 liJxe4 liJf5 28 l:I.cl ll:ld4 29 �g2

now lacks just one move to obtain a

22 ..liD liJxfl 23 it'xfl �xe4 24 liJxe4

32 i..xeS it'e6 33 i..f6 ll:lc6 34 it'e3

it'e7 25 liJg5 �h8 26 it'h3 e5 27 liJe6

�h7 3S it'xc5 ll:lb8 36 ..Iie7 l:I.e8

�bS 30 l:I.c7 �f6 31 ll:lxf6+ l:I.xf6 32 a4

favourable

l:I.e8 28 �d5 exf4 29liJxf4 it'f6 30 it'd7

37 it'dS 1-0 Zaid-Kasparov, Leningrad

�xe2 33 �xe2 ll:lxe2 34 l:tb6 ll:ld4

22 'ii'xe4 f5 23 'iWc2 'i!i'xc4 24 'iWa4 'ifcs

it'd8 31 "iWxd8 l:I.xd8 32 J::tb 6 ..Iic3

1977.

35l:1.xa6 ll:lab3 36 aS1:[f7 37 1:[a8+ �g7

25 lLld2 f4 26 exf4 exf4 27 l:I.ad I White

33

liJe6 1-0 Petrosian-Chiburdanidze,

Vilnius 1978) 15...exf4 16 gxf4 liJh5

White's rooks have no open files,

has

Luka 1983.

21. .'iWxc4 22 'ii'xc4 lLlxc4 23 i..d3

therefore the sacrifice

consideration. However, Black doesn't

23 'i!i'c2 �fS 24 it'a4 'it>f8 2S J::tb 6 J::tbd8

even have a pawn for it.

comes into

19. . �f5

the

better

prospects.

And

if

White retains an edge.

.

I wanted to retain the knight for use

22 lLld2 lLlc5

against the bishop. The alternative

26 'ifb3 �c8 27 liJfl l:I.d7 28 liJfg3 30 1ib2

21. .. lLlxe4

38 l:I.aa7 1-0 Kurajica-Filipovic, Banja

17 e3 l:te8 18 liJce4 �f5 19 ..Iic3 liJb7

29 hxg3 �g7

After

17 ..Iixb4 cxb4 18ll:labl

20 it'a4 a5 21 l:I.b I it'e7 22 l:I.fe I i..d 7

liJxg3

setup.

19 ...l:I.c8 has not disappeared from

f5

grandmaster practice and here is a

31 ..Iixg7+ it'xg7 32 liJf6 1-0 Portisch­

recent example of it. 20 a3 b3 21 ll:lxb3

Petrosian, Santa Monica 1966. 14 ...e5

�a4 22 lLl I d2 lLlxb3 23 liJxb3 l:I.b8

In the debut game, Suetin preferred

24 l:I.ab I �6 25 l1b2 ll:lg4 26 'iYe2

14...�d7 which then became routine.

lLlxe3 27 fxe3 �xb3 28 l:I.fb I �xe3+

15 �c3 ..Iid7 16 liJa3

29 �bl �d4 30 c5 �xc5 31 'ii'd3 �c4

See diagram on page 94.

32 l:I.xb6 1::tx b6 33 'ii'd l llxbl 34 'ii'x bl

16 .. Jlb4

�xa3 35 'llVb8+ �g7 36 1ib7 �c5

18...'ii'c7

I got excited when I read about exchange sacrifices in a chapter in

Petrosian's opponent followed up the

Petrosian's book. What advantages

exchange sacrifice with 18...ifb6. Theo

does Black accrue with this exchange?

came 19l1:lb3ll:lb7 20 ll:l1d2l:1.c8 21 a3

The position is closed so the rooks do

a5 22 axb4 a4 (22...'clhb4!?) 23 ll:la5

Interestingly this move fights for the

hxg5 44 hxg5 1-0 Psakhis-Avrukh,

cS-square. Chess can be stunning, indeed. The bishop will cut Black's

Israel 2001. Maybe gaining space in the centre by

not work well. In addition the c5-

ll:lxa5 24 bxa5 it'xa5 25 e3 �g7 26l:1.a2

square is firmly under Black's control

liJe8 27 llfal l1a8 28 e4 "cS 29 'ii'c3

19...ll:lg4!? is after all a reasonable

and he has an outside passed pawn. I

l:I.c8 30

�xd2

option. 20 l:I.e I f5 21 h3 (21 ll:lb3?! is

did not pay attention to the interesting

32 ii'xd2 'CWxc4 33llb4 'i!i'cl+ 34 "xci

Timman's recommendation but Black

fact that Petrosian himself had opted

l:I.xc I + 35 <;i;>g2 �g7 36 �e2lLlf6 37 f3

has an aggressive and good reply in

for this position. In my younger days I

g5 38 g4 h5 39 h3 hxg4 40 hxg4 lLlg8

2L.f4!) 2 l ...ll:lf6 22 a3 (22 c5 e4)

100

�D

�h6

31 l:I.b I

23 i..g2!

37 g4 �d3 38 g5 a5 39 h4 a4 40 �h3 �f8 41 'ii'a8+ �g7 42 'ii'xa4 h6 43 �e6

kingside knight off from the queenside. If 23 a3? b3. 23 ...l:I.b8 24l:1.fbl as 25 a3! Weakening b4 and opening the a·file for the rook.

101

25 ... e4 26 axb4 axM 27 i..h3!

Tigran Petros ian the 9th

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

A subtle move which cuts off the f6-knight

I sacrificed the exchange, just like Petrosian.

27 ...1Lg7 28 1:ta2 hS 29 LOb3 LOdJ

But

after

some

mutual

mistakes I went down to Artur.

30 l:!.dl tDeS

17 1LIe8 'ikxe8 18 .i.h4 e4 19 'ikc2

It's more corrunon to develop the

After 20 ...g5 21 'iPh I gxf4 22 1Lxf4

10 ..\i.e3 LOe6 11 0-0 0-0 12 "el

LOdxe5 23 J:tg I the position is unclear.

..\i.xfJ 13 l:!.xfJ e6 14 'ifh4 'ikd8

2 1 11d! fS

'ikh5 20 1Lg3 %1f8 2 1 .Ji..f4 'ikg4 22 g3

The queen retreats to defend the king.

LOgS 23 'it>hl

ISl:!.h3 hS 16 .i.e2

LOfJ 24 l:!.acl tDeS

20 ..Ii.xg4 11ad8

bishop on b7.

Black wants to carry out g5 under better conditions than in the previous

25 tDxfJ 'ikxfJ+ 26 'it>gl LOd3 27 'it'd2

line. 221Lf3!

1Ld4

Van der Wiel is alert. He stops g5. 22...1H7 If 22 ... g5 23 tDxd5. 23 '1Phl! He wastes no time and goes after the weakness on g6. 31 cS!

23 ...gS

Black loses an important component

If 23 ...LOfS? 24 ..Ii.c5.

of his compensation for the exchange. He relinquishes the c5 post for his

This

34 na6 "d7 35 nxf6 35 d6!? was also attractive.

is

thematic.

As

White

is

See diagram on page 95.

28l:!.c2 'it>b7 29 h3l:!.g8 30 'it>h2 'it'h5

attacking on the flank, Black switches

3 1LOdi tDeS 32 13 tDd3 33 tDe3 tDxf4

to the centre. B lack could ease the

34 gxf4 ..Ii.b6 35 'ik12 'iVg6 36 lle2 ..Ii.c5

attack by getting rid of the strong queen

exchange, and White's rooks have no

37 fxe4 fxe4 38 fS 'ikhS 39 11d2 11g5

on h4 with 16...LOg4. Then 17 ..Ii.xg4

open files - however that factor can be

knight. 3 1...tDd3 32 cxd6 'ikxd6 331Ln tDeS

24..1i.hS!?

16...d5

3S...1Lxf6 36 'iVxe4 nc8?

(17 "xd8 l:!. fxd8

Black gives up the pawn for free.

19 l:!.g3 f5 and Black has a nice game.)

18 ..Ii.xg4

hxg4

24...g4? Black

gets

some

rectified. After

play

24 ... 11ffS

for

25

the

fxg5

LOdxe5 (After 25 .....Ii.xe5 26 ..Ii.g6 'ifb4

36 ..."a4 would still enable him to

17......xh4 18 l:!.xh4 ..Ii.f6! 19 l:!.h3 hxg4

27 ..Ii.h7+ 'iti>g7 28 g6 B lack's king is in

continue resistance but in the end

20 l:!.g3 tDb4 and Black has a good

danger.) 26 ..Ii.c5 (26 ..Ii.b6 1lc8 27 g6

White's extra pawn should prevail.

endgame. And after 16 ...tDb4 17 l:!.c\

LOd7) 26 .....xg5 27 .i.xfl! nxfS 28 ng I

37 'ikxb4

tDg4 29 "e2 tDce5 30 tDd I and Black

tDd7 18 'ife I 'ifc7 Black is doing well.

White is just wirming with his two extra pawns. 37 ...h4 38 'ikf4 'it>g7 39 gxh4 'ikd6

17 eS tDd7

has to work hard to keep his position

The queen can still be swapped by

together. 25

means of 17 ...d4. Then after 18 l:!.d I

40 tDd2 1-0

tDg4 19 ..Ii.xg4 "'xh4 20 l1xh4 dxe3 40 'ikf4 'ike8 4 1 tDg4 1-0

A.Yusupov - G.Kasparov

21 ..Ii.f3 f6 Black has nothing to worry about.

World Cup, Barcelona 1989

J. Van der Wiel - G.Kasparov

1 tDfJ tDf6 2 c4 g6 3 tDc3 1Lg7 4 e4

World Under 16 Championship,

d6 5 d4 0-0 6 1Le2 eS 7 dS as 8 1LgS

Wattignies 1976

h6 9 .i.h4 tDa6 10 LOd2 'ike8 11 0-0 tDh7 12 a3 1Ld7 13 b3 f5 14 edS

1 e4 eS 2 tDfJ d6 3 d4 exd4 4 tDxd4

See diagram on page 94.

tDf6 5 tDe3 a6 6 f4 'ike7 7 a4 g6 8..\i.d3

14...gxfS 15 ..\i.hS 'ikc8 16 .i.e7 l:!.e8

..Ii.g7 9 tDfJ ..\i.g4 102

.i.xf7+

'i'xf7

26

27 '1Pg2 LOrs 28 LOe2 LOg6

18 "'12 'it'e7 19 g4 bxg4 Black can also stir up things with 19 ...�4!? Then 20 gxb5 d4 21 ..Ii.c\ dxc3 22 bxc3 �6 23 h6 'ii'xf2+ 24 'iPxf2 ..Ii.h8 25 h7+ �g7 26 f5 tDdxe5 27 ..Ii.h6+ 'iPf6 28 ..Ii.xfS l:!.xfl! 29 fxg6 and Black has compensation for the excbange. 103

11g3

"hS

Tigran Petrosian the 9 th

1igran Petros ian th e 9tA

29 h3!

This mistake completely relaxes the

Interestingly, a similar fonnation

pressure. White's king is no longer in

occurred in my game against another

danger and the rooks start to work.

Dutchman, Timman, where I sacrificed

Black should protect g4 with 32...J:tg8.

the exchange. In that game I had a

Then 33 l:tdd3 (33 We2 �f8) 33. .�f8 .

34 c3 �e7 35 cxd41Ob4 36 J:tb3 b6 and

b-pawn (which has the same qualities as the g-pawn). He undennined it with a single move of an edge-pawn. With

20 ... �d8! 2 1 l:[.xe6

B.Gurgenidze - T .Petrosiao USSR Championship 1967

After 21 �n 1t'b5+; or 21 'iVdl �5 22 b3 ..ta5 and Black wins.

1 e4 e5 2 1Of3 d6 3 �b5+ �d7 4 ..txd7+ Wxd7 5 0-0 lOf6 6 e 5 dxe5 7 lOxe5 'ife 8 8 d4 e 6 9 lOe3 lOe6 1 0 lOxc6 �xe6 1 1 ..tg5 0-0-0

2 1 ...fxe6 22 'iVxe8 lhe8 23 l:tel Black dissolves the doubled pawns, but the knight has a chance to force

though Black's position is troublesome

matters and improve his situation.

it has Dot fallen apart.

the same result - he beat me too. Had Black stopped all that he would have had a decent position.

2 3 ...�c7 !

33 'ife2 ! 'iheH 34 1O:xe2

Just in time, the king lends a hand

Black is just the exchange down.

thanks to the fact that the e I -rook is

34 ... lOg6 35 J:t xh3 �rs 36 l:tb3 :d7

unprotected.

37 J:tbd3 �c5 38 c3

29...lOh4+ 30 'it>n 'it>n 31 lOgl

24 lOg7 l:te7 2 5 lOh5 r5 26 b3 'it.>d6

Now John wins a pawn in addition to

White is not in a hurry to take on g4, which would free the f5-square.

2 7 g4 fxg4 28 bxg4 e5 29 lOg3

the extra exchange. It's all over now.

38 ... �a7 39 �e3 ltd5 40 ud4 lOb4

3 1 . ..d4 32 �cl gxh3?

41 :b3 as 42 �d2 1-0 Petrosian puts pressure on d4 at once.

12 ..txf6 White sacrifices a pawn in order to Petrosian

also

remarkable game

had

V .C beskovsky - G.Kasparov

one

where

1 2 ... gxf6 13 d5 exd5 14 'iVf3 J:td6

he

See diagram

allowed himself to be saddled with a doubled f-pawn and it when

I

took

on

on page

104.

It looks like Petrosian is defending the f6-pawn with the rook.

has remained in my memory.

But

create a doubled pawn in Black's camp.

1 5 J:tfe 1 d4

the

29...Wd5

The rook can recapture on c6, which

responsibility of doubled f­

was the po int of 14 ... J:td6. 16 'iVf5+ �b8 17 lOe4 The knight's aim is to get to f5. 1 7... lte6

pawns, I lost, as you will see in the following two examples ...

B.Gurgenidze - T .Petrosian

A.Beliavsky - G.Kasparov

Black's

active king prevents an

effective blockade by the knight.

30 f3 If 30 lOe4 :g7 31 f3 h5 wins.

Petrosian organises his pieces while

30 ...J:tn 3 1:0

White's knight heads for f5.

18 lOg3 ..te7 1 9 'iVhs "e8 20 lOr5

The natural king

move 31 <;!tg2

allows an exchange

of bishop for

knight by 31...�h4.

3 1 ...�g5 32 Wg2 b5 White has blocked the kingside but Black has a winning pawn majority on the queenside.

33 lOe4 .i.e3 34 lIhl h6 35 b3 J:trs 36 J:tbl J:tf4 37 a4 b4 38 J:thl 104

105

Tigran Petros ian the 9'h

Tigran Petros ian the 9'h

1 8 d5! See diagram on page 1 04.

1 8 .. .exd5

With a pawn sacrifice, White blocks the d5 square. I was not worried that Petrosian had won with the doubled pawns and without having any knight. 19 liJd4 'ili'a6 20 'it' b l .ii. d 6 2 1 _13 �xf4 22 jt'xf4 liJe5 23 jt'f5+ 'it>b8

3 8 .. Jixe4 The exchange sacrifice wins because Black has too many pawns for White to cope with. 39 be4+ 'it'xe4 40 ltdl as 41 <;t>g3 'it'd5 42 11n �f4+ 43 'it'f3 c4 44 'it'e2 After 44 bxc4+ 'it'xc4 45 'it>e4 'it'c3 46 l:!.f2 d3 47 cxd3 b3 48 d4 b2 wins. 44 ... Cl:b3 45 cxb3 'it'e4 ! 46 nf3 �g5 4711n If 47 l:!.d3 'it>d5. 47 ... d3+ 48 'it'dl 'it'd4 0-1

1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 liJd2 dxe4 4 liJxe4 �f5 5 liJg3 �g6 6 h4 b6 7 h 5 .ii. h 7 8 liJf3 liJd7 9 �d3 Jixd3 1 0 Wxd3 "*,c7 11 �d2 liJgf6 1 2 0-0-0 e6 13 liJe4 0-0-0 14 g3 c5 15 .ii. f4 c4 This was my novelty. It is an ambitious move which aims to place a knight on d5. 16 We2 'ili'c6 17 liJxf6 gxf6

This position with 13... lUbd7 14 c4

the board does not lead to salvation.

has been played many times. 13...liJd5

After 33 ...f6 34 ..tel (34 a4!? nd5

has not been tested. Black is treading a

35 �a2) 34.. Jid5 35 ..td2 a6 36 �e2

very narrow path but objectively the move might be playable. 14 �d2
l:!.d3

15 .ii.xc3 (15 .ii.xh7+ Wxh7 16 lUg5+

36 llf8+ �c7 3 7 .l:[g8 �d7 38 ng6 b5

�g8! 17 'ifh5 liJe2+! 18 Wh I [18 'ii'xe2

39 a3 .l:t d 1 + 40 �a211g 1 4 1.1:[d6+ �c7

lUd7] 18... 'lWc2 and Black is in the

34

24 f4

Gurgenidze,

Cheskovsky

liJxh5

35

liJxf5

game.) 15 .. .'.wxc3 16 .l:[del 'il'a5 17 .l:[c7

After 24...lUc6 25 Wxf6

lUxd4

26 .xd4 White has a small edge. 25 it'xd5 lUeS 26 it'e4 lUg4?

He should try to enter a slightly rook

Black loses a second pawn after

White has compensation for the pawn.

which his position is hopeless.

1 4.ii. b 2

ending by 26 ... liJc6

If 14 .ii.g5 liJbd7

�e6 46 llxa7

It's all over now.

1 4 •c7

46 ... liJc5 47 liJd4+ 'it'd6 48 liJ f5+

After

...

�d5 49 lUe3+ We4 50 l:tc7 lUd3 5 1 lle7+ 1-0

14 ...'iVb4

15

d5

.>ixd5

(15...liJxd5? 16 liJg5 h6 17 'ii'e5 h8 19 'ifxf6 wins.) 16 .ii.xf6 gxf6 17
27 lUxc6+ 'ili'xc6 28 "il'xc6 bxc6.

'it>h8 19 'ifh4 f5 20 Jixf5 and White

27"i1'e2

A.Beliavsky - G.Kasparov

White has obtained a better position.

Game 4, Candidates match,

mates.)

quarterfinal, Moscow 1983

[18...liJc6 19 .>ixf5±] 19 .>ixf5 c;i;>h8)

2 7 .. .'ilfb 6 I f 2 7... l:!.hg8 2 8 nhe1.

28 c3 f5 29 l1he l Wc5 30 We7 'it'xe7 3 1l:!.xe7l:!.he8

Black could try to hang on the material by playing 31...llhfB. After 32 ':del l1d5 33 'it'c2 Black is rather passive. 32 l1de l ':xe7 33 lhe7 106

'il'd5 (17....ii.d5 18 liJg5!) 18l:!.acl and

43 ... liJe4 44 liJxb5+ 'it>d7 45 llh7+

24 ... lUd7?!

inferior

llxn

42 l:l.xh6 liJxg3 43 liJd4

manages to win back the pawn.

USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1978

Reducing the number of pawns on

Black is struggling.

Unlike

V.CheskoYsky - G.Kasparoy

1 3 ... 'lWxc3 ?!

33 ... liJr6

18

�xf5

(18

'ii' e3


18... exf5 19 liJxf5 'ife4 20 liJe7+ �h8 1 d4 lUr6 2 c4 e6 3 lUc3 �b4 4 e3

21 'lWb2+ f6 22 liJxd5 and White stands

0-0 5 .i.d3 c5 6 lUf3 dS 7 0-0 dxc4

much better. If 14...'ii'c6 15 d5 exd5

8 .ii. x c4 cxd4 9 exd4 b6

16 liJd4 'il'e8 17 'ii'd2 liJe4 18 .>ixe4

This

system

of

development

is

'ifxe4

19 nel

'ii'g 4 20 l:!.e7 .>ia6

21 'ii'c3 and White has tremendous

Karpov's favourite variation. 1 0 'il'e2 .ii. b7 1 1 .l:[ d l .i.xc3 1 2 bxe3

compensation for the two pawns. 1 5 dS .>ixdS 1 6 Jixf6 gxf6

.c7 13 .i.d3

107

Tzgran Petros ian the 9th

1igran Petrosian the 9,h

Just like Petrosian, I did not mind having the doubled f-pawns.

I was happy with the doubled f-pawn.

compensation for the pawn. (31 lLlf5

21 ':c4 Wd7?

�f8 32 lLle7 'iig7=; 31 'if;>h2 l:te8 32

b l) 33 f4 lLlxg4+ 34 hxg4 'il'xg4 35lLle3! 'il'g7 (35....:d2+ 36 'it'hl 'iig7 37lLlg4) 36lLlg4 wins.

I gave back one of the pawns but this

lLld5 ':e6 and Black may be able to

was an Wlllecessary concession. After

hold on.) 31...a6 (3l...lLlg6 32 �h2;

b2) 33 ':xf6 "iWc5 34 lLlh6 'itt g7

2 l ...lLle7 22 l:th4 lLlf5 23 ':g4+ c;t>h8

31...l:te8 32 lLld5 ':e6 33 lLlxf6. This is

35 l:I.f5 'il'd6 36 g2 �xh6 37 l:txe5

24 .d.3 lLle7 25 l:th4 lLlg6 26 :th5

the point of putting the rook on h5;

�g7 and though Black's king is

White retains a small edge.) 32 �h2

exposed, it is not easy to exploit the

and Black must be. careful.

situation.

Black is safe. 22 ':h4 -.f5

31 "iWaS+ 'il'gS

32 'il'xa7 l:txh4

33 lLlxh4 'tIfg5 34 1!faS+ c;t>g7 35 1!fe4

17 �e3! c;t>g7

Not 17...�7 18lLlg5! IS l:tacl lLlc6

After I 8...� 7 19 lLle5 lLld7 20 'ifh3 f5 21 .li.a6 'iixa6 22lLlxd7 Black's king remains vulnerable. 19.1i.e4?

After

23 l:txd5 lLle5

19 lLld4 'ii d6!

surprisingly

loses.

(19 .. .lHd8

20

.li.b5

�7

After

23 ...�1+

25 ':dh5 ':fe8 lhh7+

24 lLlel

26

c;t>xh7

'it>h8

':xh7+ .xh7

2 1 �g3+ c;t> f8 2 2 .li.xc6 .i.xc6 2 3 'ii'f4!

27

28

�3+

�g8

:td7 [Other moves also lose. 23....i.xg2

29 'iig4+ c;t>f8 30 lLlc2 is dangerous

24 lLlxe6+;

24 lLlxe6+;

according to Be1iavsky. The knight

23...f5 24l:tel; 23....i.d5 24 :tc7 �8

aims to get to f5 after creating a flight

25lLlb5] 24 'iixf6 c;t>g8 25 h4!! [25 :td3

square for his king with h4.

23.. .l::t ac8

.i.e4] 25... .li.xg2 26 f3 and White wins.)

24 h3 :tfeS

Not 24...lLlxf3+? 25 gxf3 and White's

20lLlxc6 (20 'ifh3 l:th8 21lLlxc6 .li.xc6) 20....li.xc6

and

Black

probably

19 �b5! l:tfd8

20 :td3!?

25lLld4 'ii'g 6

Not 25...•g5? 26 ':g4 winning.

(20 lLld4 also wins as it transposes

26�f4

to the line with 19 lLld4) 20...l:tac8

Not 26 f4? 'Wb I + 27 c;t>h2 lLlg6

21 lLld4 'iie5 22 lLlxc6 'ii'xe3 23 fxe3

35...h5??

TItis is a bad blunder as Black drops

30.. J�c4?!

This looks active but it just drops a pawn. After 30....:d8?! 31 g4 (31 f4 lLlf3+!) 31...'tlfg8 32 ':h6 �f8!

the

Better

was

35... lLlg6

doubtless has problems but he is still in

a) 32....:d2? 33 lLle7 'il'g7 34 'il'a8+

the game.

wins;

36 itJf5+ �g6 37 lLle7+ 'ith6 3S f4

b) 32...�g5?

1-0

Similarities in a rook versus bishop endgame - with rook's pawns too. G.Kasparov -A.Yusupov

T.Petrosian - L.Aronin

26.. J:tadS 27 lLlf5+ c;t>h8 28 ':xd8 ':xd8 29 'lWe4 l:tc8?

19...'ii'd6! 20 �xd5

If 29 .. J:tg8 30 g4. Alternatively

If 20 l:txc6? 'iixc6 21 l:txd5 exd5

knight.

36 lLlf5+ �g8 37 g3 �d2 when Black

28 "g3 :te l .

l:td6 24 �a4 a6 25 :tc2 and White wins.

Not 30 f4? ltJf3+.

heavy pieces catch the king.

survives. After

30�h2

29 .....g8! to free the g6-square for his

22 �d4 'ii'a4! 23 �c2 'lIVe8 and Black

knight. 30 lLle7 (30 ':h6 lLlg6; 30 £4

wins as BeJiavsky pointed out.

lLlg6 31 "iWc6 l:td I + 32 c;t>h2 �d8

20 ...exd5

33 lLlh6 'it>g7 34 lLlf5+ is a repetition.)

See diagram on page J 04.

30... �g7 31 :th5! J08

and White has 109

Tigran Petros ian the 91h

Tigran Pelrosian the 9';'

Black can resist.

T.Petrosian - L.Aronin USSR Team Championship, Riga 1 954

Petrosian

though bis

8l...iJ.. f2

38 'ii'c 2 'it>c7 39 1:g2 �c6 40 �dl

lll f6 5 lllc3 a6 6 ..tg5 e6 7 'it'D lllb d7

even

had every reason to be optimistic.

35 1:113 h5 36 b3 :lh4 37 h3 lif4 1 e4 c5 2 lllo d6 3 d4 cId4 4 lll x d4

won

opponent bad an additional f-pawn. I

32 ... iJ.. d6 33 1:e2 iJ..e5 34 'ii' b l 1:c4

The forthright 8 1 ...£3 82 .rIe8 f2

lin+ 41 'ii'e 2

83 :Irs sets up a zugzwang.

8 0-0-0 tic7 9 'it'g3 b6 10 iJ..If6 gxf6

82 1:g2 iJ.. g3

This is a risky option.

11 c,t>bl lll b6 1 2 f4 iJ.. d7 66.. .'�b4 Black is likely to take the a-pawn and with the h4-pawn he has chances to draw even with the exchange deficit.

67 l1a7 (5 68 �f3 f4 69 :a8 Wa3 70 �g2 �b4 7 1 :a6 'it>a3 72 :a7 Wb4 73 �O �a3 74 �e4

4 1 ...rIf4 The rook is actively placed on the

83 1:b2!

fourth and causes much inconvenience.

I recalled that Tigran Vartanovich

42 rIg8 as 43 1:h8 1:h4 44 rIa8 'it>b6 13 'iVh4! iJ.. e7 14 'it'h5

45 a4 .rIe4+ 46 c,t>01H4+ 47 'it>e2 11e4+

Black has serious problems with his

48 :e3 .rIh4 49 1:c8 :ld4 50 :ld3 :le4+

special Rauzer pawn formation.

lid4 54 .rIc2 1:h4 55 1:d3 1:e4+ 56 'ottO

Alternatively 1 5 ... 0-0-0 1 6 fxe6 fx.e6

rIf4+ 57 'ii'g 2 lie4 58 �O 1:f4+

1 7 'lWh3 c,t>b8 1 8 iJ..e2 and White's

Alternatively, 84 ... iJ..h 2 85 Wc7 n+ 86 �c8 f2 87 1:b2 Wa7 88 :xfl iJ..g 3 89 :lb2! White must keep Black's king in the corner. 89 :lf6 was winning as

74...lt>b4 After 74 ...�b3 75 a5 �b4 76 a6 Wb5

16 lll e6 'it'c6 17 'it'g4 .i.f8 18 'it'g8

well.

77:a8 'it>b6 78 '1ttd5 .i.fl (78...0 79 a7

fxe6 1 9 'it'1h7

fl

White has won the exchange, and in

lll 1 d5

nrs

'it>xa7

81

�c6

wins.

83 1:bI] 83 �d7 White cuts off the king

19 ... 0-0-0 20 fIe6 iJ..1e6 21 iJ.. e2 d5 23

80

8 1 .. .fI='if 82 :lxfl 'it>b8 [82...iJ..h 2

return Black has very little.

lll1 d5

After 84 . . .n 85 lid7 Wb8 86 1:h7 fl 87:£7 wins.

59 'it>e2 1:e4+ 60 1:e3 1:f4

advantage is smaller than in the game.

n:d5

83 ... Wa8 84 1:b7 iJ..f2

51 'it>f3 :f4+ 52 'it>e2 1:e4+ 53 1:e3

14 ... .I:[h7 1 5 f5 e5?

22

had won this endgame.

from bI and his king goes to g5 and

..t1d 5

takes

24:1h n ?

the

(79...iJ..g 3

Best was 2 4 iJ..g4+! c,t>b8 25 .i.f3

a7

'it>b7

80 :lg8 �xa7 8 1

h4-pawn. )

79

�c6

transposes to the game.) 80 1:rs �xa7

winning.

81 1:xf4 iJ.. g3 82 1:b4 wins.

6 1 l:tc4

24 ... c,t>b8 25 'ilr'f5 iJ..e7 26 .i.o e4

Finally he removes Black's rook.

27 iJ..e 2 .l:!.c8 28 *'1d5 tixc2+ 29 c,t>al

6 1 ...1:txc4 62 b1C4 �c5 63 lib3

'it'xe2 30 l1fel 'it'1g2 3 1 'it'1e4 '�he4

'ottx c4 64 1:Ib7 h4

32 :lxe4

66 1:ha5 110

65 .l:[b5 iJ.. g3

75 1:a8 Wb3 76 as �b4 77 a6 Wb5

85 Wc7! White not only stalemates the black

78 Wd5 �b6 79 a7! Wb7 80 1:g8!

king

�xa7 8 1 �c6 See diagram

on

page 109.

but

checkmate. 11 1

also

creates

threats

of

Tigran Petros ian rhe 9th

1igran Petrosian the 9th

85 ... .i.gJ 86 'it> e 8 fJ 87 .l:r.e7!

93 ...<,Pa4 94 'it>e6 <,PaS 95 <,Pf5 'it>a4

Black is in zugzwang. After 87 .l:r.b3

37 .i.f4

1 8 h3 llfd 8 19 'iVg3 lOb4 20 lOc3 lOxd3 2 1 J:[ xd3 .i.fS 22 J:[d2 " e6

96 'it>g4 <,PaS 97 .l:r.b7 1-0

Reducing the amount of material. On

23 .l:r.cdl h5 24 h4?!


G. Kasparov

87 .. . fl

-

A.Yusupov

Taking the pawn with 24 ltJxd5 was

more freedom of movement for his

better thanks to a little tactic. 24 ...lhd5

king. Another idea is 37 J:[a4 a5

25 J:[xd5 h4 26

Linares 1993

the other hand White will now have

"0

38 l:tc4!?

�e4 27 .l:r.e5!

37 ... �d4 38 J:[ xf4 rjo>d6 39 rjo>e3 'iii> e5

24 ... J:[ e S 25 fJ 'ife6 26 e4

40 J:[d4 �e6 41 a3 as 42 r;!;>e4 b5

1 d4 d5 2 e4 e6 J lOc3 .i.e7 4 eIdS exd5 5 .i.f4 lLlf6 6 eJ �f5 7 lOge2 0-0

After 42...f6 43 f4 White can breach

8 lLlg3 .i. e6 9 .i.dJ c5 10 dI eS iLxe5

the fortress by defending the queenside

11 0-0 lLle6 12 J:[c 1

with the king on cI and invading with the rook on d8.

43 'Wte5 a4 44 f4 We6 45 1o>f6 'itc5 46 J:[b4 �e4 47 'l;e7 �e6 48 J:[e4 'Wtd5 49 lld4+ 'Wtc6 50 'itd8 88 llf7

White cannot penetrate yet.

Black has no choice but to drop the

50 ... �f5 5 1 rjo>e8 �e6 52 Wf8 .,p eS

pawn because of the zugzwang.

88 ... .i. e5 89 J:[Ifl �a7 90 .l:r.fS! .i.g3

26 ... J:[ xe3!

53 'Wtg7 �c6 54 'Wtg8 'Wt e 5 55 'l;f8..t>c6

The exchange sacrifice offers real

56 'Wtg7 'Wt e5 5 7 'Wth8 'l;c6 58 Wh7 '1t> c5 59 'it h6 �f5 60 'l;g5 �e6 6 1 'it>f6..t>c6

chances of survival.

27 12 ....i.d6

b x e3

it"b6+

28

Wh2 d xe4

29 lbd8+ �xd8 30 �e3

Artur is ready to defend the isolated

30 fxe4!? offers White

a

more

pawn middlegame. It looks like Black

promising way to enter an endgame.

gets away with exchanging all the

30 ... �xe4 31 "e3 �c6 32 "e5!?

central pawns if he were to play

(32 "xb6 .i.xb6 33 .i.e5) 32...Wh7

12...d4!? 13 lLlce4 (after 13 lLlb5 iLb6

33 J:[d2 "a5 34 'it'xa5 �)(a5 35 .i.e5.

14 e4 lLlg4 Black has a nice position,

30 ... 'it'a5 3 1 "b8 "e7+ 32 "xe7

as in Lautier-Marciano, France 1999)

�xe7+ 33 rjo> g l exfJ 34 g xfJ b6

91 J:[b S!

13 ....i.e7 14 lLlf5 .i.xf5 15 lLlxf6+

35 rjo>f2 rjo>f8 36 J:[d4

White must make sure Black's king

.i.xf6

16

�xf5

'ilfa5

(16 ... dxe3

stays in the comer. It is remarkable that

17 �xe3 'ilfxd I 18 J:[ fxd I J:[fd8 19 il.d7

Black loses this type of endgame if his

lLle5 20 il.b5 J:[xd I + 21 J:[xd I

king is in any comer, whereas he can

22 .i.e2 J:[d8 23 11c I lLlc6 and Black is

draw if his bishop gets on the e l-h4

able to live with White's two bishops as

diagonal and his king reaches the

in Karo1yi-Zahilas, Hungary-Greece,

centre. It can be very useful to know

E-mail Olympiad 2000) 17 Si.bl J:[ad8 18 iVb3 J:[d7 19 exd4 11fd8! and Black

simultaneously freeing the f4-square for the rook.

62

13

It was 62 f5 that enabled him to play

67 ... 'Wtd6 68 .l:r.b4 'itc5 69 a7 il. e2

lLl h S

�e7

14

lLlb5

lLlxh5

I S Wxh5 g 6 1 6 'fifJ ll e8 1 7 J:[ fd l _d7 112

� xf5 63 'it xf7 'Wtc5 64 'itf6 �c2

this move.

2000.

White just collects the h-pawn and

•..

65 'Wt e7 �f5 66 'Wtd8 'it e6 67 J:[f4!

is not worse, Gulko-Shabalov, Seattle

91 ...<,Pa6 92 llb l
Reducing the number of pawns while

a6

these secrets. Incidentally 91 11f6 wins as well.

62 f5 !

73 J:[e4 �d3

36 ...�e7?! This allows the exchange of bishops.

113

But not 73... �c4?

74 'Wta6 b4+

Ttgran Petrosian the 9th

Tigran Petros ian the 9th

75 lhc4+! and having the king on c4

88 lIc3! .i.f7 89 lIc2
otherwise White's king invades, e.g.

enables the g-pawn to promote. If

(90...h4? 91 l:I.xb5 'it>g2 92 lIb2+ 'it>gl

89... .i.e8 90 �g4) 90 'it>g4 ..id3.

75.. ';!i'xc4 76 cxb4 g5 77 hxg5 wins.

[92...
74 nb4 .i.c4 75 �a6 �dS 76 �aS

88 ... b:u4 89 1:I.d4+ �e5 90 lIIC4

93 �g4 �f 1 94 �xh4

'it> eS Black can't stay on the queenside with 76...�c5, because of zugzwang. 77 lIbl .i.d3 78 nb2. Then 78....i.c4 79 l:d2 i..f1 80 l:td4! .i.e2 (80... .i.g2 81 lId8 i..f1 82 l:tc8+ 'it>d5 83 'it>b4)

86 nd l ! ! White exchanges the weak c 3 pawn.

81 l:te4 i..f 1 82 l:te5+ wins.

After 86 'it>xh3+ �f4 87 ng3 �e4

77 lIb l

88 �g4 �d5 89 �f4 �c4 Black's king Black's king is in a poor position and now be loses. If his king were instead

86 ... h2 87 �xb2 �f4

understand this type of endgame much

If 87 ... �f5 88 lId4! and White cuts

better. Now the bishop can't reach b3.

off the king. (On the other hand 88 c4

90 ... �d5 9 1 l:I.b4 <;j;>c5 92 <;f;>g3

obtain a draw. If Black's bishop were

allows

Not 92 l:tb2? i..d5'

Black

to

escape

into

a

dark-squared and situated on f8, the

favourable version of the game. On

position would also be a draw even

88...bxc4 89 l:d4 c3 90 l:tc4 .i.d5

92....i.b5 93 'it>f4 c;t;b6 If 93.....ic6 94 'ite3 it.b5 95 We4

though White could defend the a-pawn

i..c6+ 96 ot>d3 ..ib5+ 97 �c3 i..e8

with his rook along the third rank.

98 l:tf4 wins.

94.. .'�el 95 d l 96
Black reduces the number of pawns

97 �e3 �cl 98 lIh1 .i.c2 99 'it>d4 <;t>b2

but the final endgame is unfortunate for

100 'it>c5 wins. [but not 100 'it>c4??

him.

Keeping the pawns on with

'it>xa3].) 91 lIxh5+ �g2 92 'it>e3 �f1

77...c,t>f4 was just enough to survive:

93 .J:g5 .i.e2 94 d2 .i.c4 95 lIf5+

78 l:g l .i.d3 79 c,t>b4 <;t>fJ 80 c4!?

gI! 96 <;t>e3 �g2 and White can make

(80 <;t>c5 'it>f2 81 l:g5
no progress as I pointed out in my

(80...bxc4? 8 1 �xa4 'it>e3 82 'it>b4 'it>d2

Informant analysis.

78 bIgS 'it> fS 79 lIg l b4

83 1:I.g2+ .i.e2 84 a4! c3 85 l:txe2+

h 4 8 1 d4

89 g7 h1 90 g8='ii' h l ='ii' 91 'iVg4+!

Not 82 lIh I? .i.e6 83 �xb5 �xg5

[or 91 'ii'e6+!]9 l...<'pf2 92 "'f4+ White

84 'it>xa4 'it>g4 85 'it>b5 i..d5! and White

can swap queens and win.) 81 l:xg6

has to give up the rook for the pawn,

<;t>f4 82 l:tg5 .i.e2 83 �c5 i..g4 84 'ii;>d4

while the bishop contains the a- and

e3 'it>xh4 86 �f4 Black's

c- pawns.

82 ... .i. e6 83 f4 it. c6

king is choked, and it's scary, but Black can hold. 86 ... i..d7' 87 lIc5 i..e8!

Since the computer programs have reached new levels of analysis we can

on f6, that would be enough for him to

77 ...gS?

xc3 g5 87 hxg5 h4 88 g6 b3

is active.

85 �g3 <'pIg5

114

94 <;j;> e3 Wa5 95 'it>d4 i..e2 96 l:b l i.. h 5 97 nel .i.f7

the bishop would reach b3, and that would save him as his king is in the centre and can't be forced into any comer.) 88 .. .'t>e5 89 'it>g3 and White's Now the bishop reaches b3

king has time to return to the centre and

and yet

Black is lost because his king is in the

push Black back.

88 c4

corner. If Black's bishop were dark­

Now cutting off the king by 88 l:I.d4+

squared and stood on f8 it would be a

is ineffective, as it is only temporary.

draw.

98 Wc5 ..ib 3 99 lle8 Wa6 100 ..t>c6

88...�e3 89 �g3 (if 89 l:d6 .i.e4) 89... .i.e4! (Black has to approach c3

�a7 101 'it>b5 'it>b7

1'15

Trgran Petrosian the 9th

Trgran Petros ian the 9th

112 f1c7+ 'it>b8 [112...c,t>d8 113 f1a7

rush his king to the b-file and win. He

wins.) 113 'it>c6 �c2 114 �b6 �b3

can't allow the black king to reach g5

115 1:0 c;t> g7 116 f1f6 �e4 117 'iti>fS

115 .l:td7 �c8 116 .l:td4 is the same

earlier.

�b3 1 1 8 'it gS �e2 VI-VI

113

'ii' d6

'it g S !

114

'iteS

'ii' g 6

zugzwang.) 112 �c6 �d8 113 f1d7+

l l l ...'iti>n 1 1 2 f1f4+ <,f,;> g6 !

�c8

wins.)

Not 112 ...�g7? which loses after

114 f1h7�f3+ 115 �b6 �dl 116 f1h4

113 Wc6 Wg6 114 'itb5 and the king

was in fact Black and actually lost this

.i.b3 117 f1d4! wins. 102 f1e4!
can't get to c8.

game.

(113 ... We8

114

f1d4

When I went home I quickly checked the Petrosian game and noticed that he

103 f1d4 �b7 104 1:d7+ 'it>c8 105 �c6 107 f1f7 �b3

I had the most annoying experience of all with Petrosian, as he beat me with

108 f1b7�dl 109 'it>c6 .i.f3+ 110
a particular central pawn structure seen in the diagram below. I learned from

�dl III 1:h4 �b3 112 1:d4 also wins.

that and wanted to use my new found knowledge against Karpov when exactly

�c2 106 'it>d6 �dl

102 f1e7+?? Petrosian

won

because

his

102... �c8 103 �c6 �d8

opponent's king was too far away, I

the same structure arose.

hoped that I could chase the king t o

G.Kasparov - T.Petrosian

wbere Tigran's opponent's king was.

A.Karpov

-

G. Ka s p a rov

Better was 102 f1d8! as the king has to be kept in the corner, White wins even if the bishop is on b3. This is the case if Black's pawn were on a5, his bishop on b4 and White's pawn on a4. 102... 'it>c7 103

l:td3

�c8

Postponing

the

inevitable. If 103...'it>b7 104 f1c3 �dl 105l:tcl �b3 106'it>a5'it>a7107t!.c7+ 'it'b8 108 �b6 .i.a2

104 f1d7+ <;Pe8!

[if 108... �g8

109 l:te7) 109 t!.a7�b3 110l:td7'it>c8 111 f1d4

Black escapes from the corner and that saves him.

105 107

�c7

�c2

106

1:d2

f1eH

�n

108

�d6

�b3! �c4

109 1:e7+ 'it>f8 110 l:te4 �b3

First

here

is

the

game

How

against

could

I

try

the

Petrosian

variation against its inventor? Could that in itself have been a mental blackout? 4 . �b7 5 lLle3 dS 6 exdS lLlxdS 7 e3

Petrosian. G.Kasparov - T.Petrosian Moscow, 1981

.

1 d4 This is perhaps my most unfortunate

.

�e7 8 � bS+ c6 9 �d3 lLlxc3 10 bxe3 eS 11 0-0 0-0

game. I picked up the idea from Petrosian when he beat me. Then I used it at a most critical moment against Karpov in a World Cbampionship

The key position. Black is in a lethal

match. I lost that game as well when I

zugzwang.) 104 'it'c6 �a2 105 f1d4 leave the diagonal.

needed a draw to retain the title. While

1 1 1 <;Pd7

R.f7 106 .l%f4 �e8+ The bishop has t o

I 0 7 �c5 'it>c7

If White had one more move, then a

108 1:e4 �d7 109 1:e7�c8 110 'it>d6

rook check would help - just as in the

R.b5

III

f1f7

�e2

(11l...�d3

Petrosian game

116

and he could then

analysing it for my Predecessors book I realised some of my earlier comments were not quite correct.

1 2 'We2 g6 1 3 e4 4Je6 14 �h6l:te8

1 ...lLlf6 2 e4 e6 3 lLlo b6 4 a3 1-17

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

TIgran Petrosian the 9th

This time

lIfxh6

Now I can save it. 25....liLd6 26 ':'0 jVg7 27 a4?!

IS l::tfdl jVc7 16 We2 l::ted8 17 jVe3

Dvoretsky and Yusupov found the

e5 18 d5 ttJa5 19 c4 After

37.. J:td6! 38 'ilVg8+ 'it'f8 39 'ilr'g3

25.liLd2!

there is no exchange

sacrifice.

19 a4 c4 20 it.c2 it.c8 the

right

move

which

was

27 .liLb4,

stopping .i.d7. 27... jVe7 28 f4 leaves

position is equal.

White a bit better. 27...a5 2811b2 it.c5 29 f4.liLd7 Petrosian suggested 29...h6!. 30 h5 .liLxa4? If 30...gxh5 3 1 'it'h4 .liLg4. This move was

not

mentioned

in

my

198 1

analysis. The position is unclear.

35 Wf6+? In time trouble I lose my way. Best was

35 f6! 'fIfl 36 lIfxe5 11e8

(if

36... lIfg6 37 11xb6! lIfxh6 38 'fIe7+! wins) 37 'fIg5 lIfg6 38 11f5 and the

401:[xa4?

white pawns are too dangerous and he

When

will win. I lost to Kramnik in a 1994 19...ttJb3

Intel rapid game in a similar fashion. I

Petrosian centralises the knight. I lost

consolidated a piece on d4, he took it,

quite a number of games by leaving a

then he sacrificed

knight on a5 or h5. Nikolaevsky, Zaid,

exchange. He went on to defeat me.

Magerramov, Beliavsky and

You can see that game on page 166 in

Gulko

beat me in those games.

the Smyslov chapter. So even my own

20 1:[a2 f6 21 h4 .liLe8 31 h6

that Black should have exchanged the

As we have already seen, Karpov

bishop with 2 L..>tfB!.

end. 24 'it'g3 See diagram on page 117.

24....liLf8

chapter

on

41 'itxfB+ <;i<xfB 42 11xa4 and Black is somewhat better. However it is hard to tell whether he can win. 40...'ii'cl+ 41 <;ifl 0-1

really the most unfortunate game of all! 35...'it>e8! 36 l::ta1

My fourth

31..:ii'c 7 32 f5?!

I thought the d4-pawn was not bad,

but hoped to get a good game in the

the

still stay in the game or at least

pushed his pawns as far as this.

22 l::tb 1 ttJd4 23 ttJId4 C](d4

wrote

resist with 40 lIfg8+. Then 40... 'it'fB

analysis helped my rival, making this

Dvoretsky and Yusupov pointed out

I

Petrosian I discovered that White could

World

Championship

match with Karpov stood at II- I I and

In 198 1 I did not spot that 32 fxe5!

I needed to score one more point to

would give me an advantage. Then

retain the title. This was the dramatic

3Lfxe5 33 .liLg5 11fB 34 .liLf6. I shall

end ofthe match.

not repeat the analysis from My Great Predecessors. Suffice it to say W hite

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

retains the advantage against all Black

Game 23, World Championship,

defences. 32... g5 33 .liLIg5! fIg5? Better was 33... 'it?fl. Petrosian often used his king with great style. For example when he beat Fischer in the 1959

Candidates tournament. After

34 .liLcl 11g8 35 'it'h3 White has a slight edge. 34 1hg5+ 'it?f8 118

Seville 1987 36...We7!! This is a great defensive move. I

I e4 e5 2 ttJO ttJf6 3 ttJe3 d5 4 exd5

understand now why Botvinnik did not

ttJxd5 5 d4 ttJxe3 6 bxe3 g6 7 e3 it.g7

always anticipate Petrosian's moves.

8 it.d3 0-090-0'ite7 10l:[b1 b6

37 'ilr'e6? I should have swapped queens and

The pawn structure is becoming very similar to my game against Petros ian.

defended in the endgame.

11 'it e2 l:[d8 12 it.e4 119

Iigran Petrosian the 9th

Tigran Petrosian the 9th

If 48 nxe5 �d6 49 l:th5+. I was

19 nfc1 nac8 20 �d2 :f7 21 a4

hoping that sacrificing material would

fxe4 22 Wh.e4 l:tcfS

not bring any luck, as had happened

I even control the f-file.

16 years earlier. After 49 ...gxh5 50 e5+

23 B

�g8 5 1 exd6 'ii'xd6 52 'ii'xd4 'ii'f 6 Karpov and Zaitsev evaluated the position as equal.

48...l:tfl 49 .i.d2 .i.c5 50 .!lc6

33 fxe4

12 �a6! ..•

The central pawns are configured in

To weaken the d4-square.

the same way.

13 c4lDc6 14 d5 f5 15 �d3 e5! 16 e4

33...:f7 34 Wg3 bu5 35 �xa5 l:tf4

lDd4 I got very excited and realised I did

23...�c8

not even have to expend tempi like

I had yet to become acquainted with

Tigran Vartanovich.

the analysis of Yusupov and Dvoretsky

17lDl:d4 nd4

who pointed out that ...�c8 was not the best move for Petrosian. I just copied

See diagram on page J J 7

his play.

24 a5 I felt things were really going my way.

Karpov did not let me fix the a5pawn. Okay, you can't have everything.

It is the same pawn structure and I would be able to use the knowledge

36.!leI 'ii'a6 37 �d2l:tf7 38 Wd3.!lefS 39 h3 Karpov doesn't push the h-pawn two squares like I did.

39....!lf2 40 .!lat 'ii'f6 41 l:tgl h5!?

50...n7B??

42.!la5 Or 42 �e l ! ? l:tfl 43 �g3 :xgl+ 44 q,;,xgl .

A

horrible

blunder.

thought

everything was going my way and it was time to reap the fruit of my lexical

42...'ii'e7 43 :bl

knowledge. 1 felt it was time for a knockout

24 ... �f5 25 'it'e2 l1e8 26 �e4 �fS

punch.

In a

way

I was

successful as the battle does indeed end

27 'it'd3

fairly quickly. But after the game I was

I had gained from my loss against

not satisfied. A much better alternative

Petrosian.

was 50 ... .i.b4!?

18 �g5

51 gxB .!lxB 52 l1e7+ �h8

43...h4 Showing my optimism, I don't need to worry about putting pawns onto the

27...�c5

colour of Karpov's bishop as there will

Now my bishop has arrived at the

be no bishop ending here.

same square as Petrosian's. Life can be sweet, I thought.

18 ....I:I.fS

28 nal 'ii'd 7 29 nel We8 30 �hl

In addition I have more space on the queenside.

l1c7 31 nabl �g7 32 .!lec1 �xe4 1 20

44 :a6 :8f7 45 nc6 If 45 .l:te6 'ii'fS.

53 .i.h6!

45...'ii'flI 46 :gl .i.e7 47 :e6 �h7!

What a shock it was to be on the

48 .i.eI

receiving

121

end of this

intermediate

Tigran Perrosian the 9th In the end I won the last game and

move. Suddenly Black is completely lost.

thus kept my title but, my word, it was

53 ...l:I.xd3 54 �d"8 l:I.xh3+ 55 <;i;>g2

a close run thing. Had I lost the match,

l:I.g3+ 56 <;i;>h2 l:I.xgl 57 �xc5 d3

Petrosian would have had something to

1-0

do with it.

Mikhail Tal the 8th Tal decisively defeated Botvinnik in

and certainly picked up many ideas

1960 to become world champion, but

from these experiences. His calculating

he lost a return match in a similarly

ability was one of his strong points. I

convincing fashion one year later. T he

believe this features in my chess as

magician

well.

from

Riga

was

the

last

champion to gain the title before I was born

and

is

famous

for

aggressive attacking style.

his

very

I

do

have

very

nice

associated with Tal,

I played

some training and blitz games with him

memories

but also some

painful ones. Let's have a look at a few examples.

With synunetrical pawn islands of four kingside pawns and a- and c-pawns, whoever exerts greater pressure on the opponent's pawn structure should gain the upper hand.

N.Rashkovsky - M.Tal

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

N.Rashkovsky - M.Tal

He previously beat Gulko with the main move 8 .. c5. Tal was extremely

Chigorin Memorial, Sochi 1973

.

good in positions where one player had

1 d4 g6 2 e4 tOf6 3 tOe3 d5

a rook versus bishop and knight and

Interestingly, Tal rarely employed the

I

lost

a

slightly

similar

game to

Tal

Romanishin

only four times. It is a bit of surprise as

played extremely

this

there was unbalanced material on the

opening

often

provides

very

in Moscow

1981.

Griinfeld - according to the databases

powerfully

when

dynamic positions, ones which Misha

board and my most bitter memory in

would have handled so well.

such circumstances was

4 exd5 tOxd5 5 e4 tOxc3 6 bxe3 .ltg7

my loss

to

Anand in Tilburg 1991.

90-0 b6 10 �e3 .ltb7 11 'ii'd2 liJa5

7 �e4 0-08 liJe2 liJc6 122 123

Mikhail Tal the 8th

Mikhail Tal the 8th

12 .i.d3 e6 Let me stress the effect this game had on me. In my game against Korchnoi in the World Cup in Reykjavik 1988 I also played a similar e6 in a main line Griinfeld. 13 �h6 eS 14 .i.xg7 'it>xg7 IS 'it'f4 Korchnoi put his queen on the queenside - that game ended in a draw. Is ...LOc6 16 �bS 'it'f6 17 'ihf6+ 'it'xf6 18 dxeS

14 ... 0-0! 15 cxb6 axb6 However the pawn structure doesn't always give Black a good game. For example, Smyslov beat Ribli with White the same year in a Candidates match. 16 0-0 'it'c7 17 .i.b5 .i.xe5 18 .i.h6 .i.g7 19 .i.xg7 'it>xg7 20 'it'd4+ 'it'g8 21 lLlg5 h6 22 lLle4 .i.xe4 23 'it'xe4 lLla6 24 'it'e3 'it'c5 25 'it'xc5 lLlxc5 26 l:fbl l:fd8 27 l:b4 l:d6 28 .HI �f8 29 a4 l:a5 30 g3 �e7 31 'it>g2 f5 32 .i.b5 l:d2 33 l1d4 l:xd4 34 cxd4 lLlxa4 35 lha4 l:xb5 36l:a7+ \t>d6 37l:h7 h5 38l:g7 l1d5 39l:xg6 b5 40 'it'0 b4 41 'it>e3 b3 42 'it>d2 l:xd4+ 43 'it>c3 b2 44 �xb2 11d2+ 45 'it>c3 l:xf2 46 h4 f4 47 l:g5 110+ 48 c;t>d4 l1xg3 49 l1xh5 l1e3 50 l:h6 'it>e7 51 h5 e5+ 52 c;t>d5 0 0-1 Kasparov-Korchnoi, London 1983.

�xb7 29 �a4 g5 White is rather passive and his pawns are loose.

T his is the very same queens ide pawn formation that Tal had against

28 �xe6 l:b7 29 l:a3 fxe6 30 lbn

Rashkovsky.

l:d4 31 lIf6ne7 32 l1al

See diagram

32 J:lci J:le4 33 f4 l:I.f7 34 l:xe6

32 ...l:e4 33 f4 lhe4 34 'it>e2 l:I.e2+ 3S 'it>d3 lhh2 36 ::tel l:h3+ 37 'it>e4?? The king is frequently well-placed

Misha's game, therefore I thought White had better drawing chances. Nevertheless I had no inkling of what was about to happen. Another famous game by a champion

in the centre, but not always. T hese exceptions

make

chess

such

a

wonderful game. White finds himself in a difficult endgame after 37 'it>c4!,

page 123.

Black's king is less active than in

l:fxf4+ 35 'iPgI h5 is tough for Black, but not hopeless.

on

suggested to me that I have a good position because of the pawn structure. Here it is: L.Portisch - R.Fischer

although he has chances of holding on.

Piatigorsky Cup, Santa Monica 1966

19 lLlcl Whoever starts exerting pressure on the opponent's pawn structure will be the one who gets the upper hand.

18 ...bxcS We have reached a key position. Alternatively, 18...lHc8 would also have been interesting. Korchnoi beat me only once in our many encounters , the only time I suffered was during our

19 ...lLlaS! 20nel nab8 21 eS+ \t>g7 22 lLlb3 22 �fl!? keeps the pawn structure as it is. 37...l:d7! Tal

Candidates match in London 1 983. He used the pawn sacrifice motif under rather similar conditions after 1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 e6 3 lLlo b6 4 lLlc3 �b7 5 a3 d5 6 cxd5 lLlxd5 7 e3 g6 8 �b5+c6 9 .i.d3 .i.g7 10 e4 lLlxc3 I I bxc3 c5 12 �g5 lfd6 13 e5 'it'd7 14 dxc5

grabs

the

chance

to

net

Rashkovsky's king.

27 ne4 'it'd5 28 h4 lLle3 291:[Jxe3 fxe3

38 l:e4 l:dd3! 0-1 Out of the blue White's king

21 -tf4 h6 22 ne2 g5 23 �e5 "d8 24 l::tfe l 'iPn 25 h3 f4 26 ..t>h2 a6

IS

30 l:xe3 'li'xa2 31 110+ <Ji>e8 32 �g7 'li'c4 33 hxg5 hxg5 34 J:lf8+ ..t>d7

getting checkmated. Now we look at the game which was

35 lh8 <Ji>c6 0-1

inspired by Tal. A.Karpov - G.Kasparov Game 27, World Championship.

22 ...�xg2! Tal weakens Rashkovsky's pawns on the kingside. 23 c4 lLlxb3 24 axb3 �b7 2S l:xa7 l1fd8! 26 It>n .i.n 27 �d7nxb3 27... l1b7

also

gives

reasonable

winning chances as after 28 l1xb7 124

Moscow 1984 1 lLln dS 2 d4 lLlf6 3 e4 e6 4 lLle3 �e7 S �gS h6 6 �xf6 �xf6 7 e3 0-0 8 'li'e2 eS 9 dxeS dxc4 10 �xe4 'li'aS 11 0-0 �xc3 12 'li'xe3 'li'xe3 13 bxe3 lLld7 14 e6 bu6 125

15 nabl lLlb6 16 -te2 e5

Mikhail Tal the 8th

Mikhail Tal the 8th

22 tDel Such a superb endgame player as

to equal ity. After 26 ... lZ'lxc5 27 l:txc5

own pawn instead of occupying an

Karpov is now retreating. This made

l:I.b2 28 nxc6 ndd2 Black's rooks are

open

me feel that I was on the right track.

good enough to draw.

file.

felt

I

good as he was

defending the c-pawn before advancing it and generally it is reassuring when Karpov doesn 't go for Rashkovsky's pawn formation with 1 7 tDe5 when after 1 7 . .. .i.b7 1 8 tDd7 nfc8 1 9 tDxb6 axb6 the position is equal .

1 7...�b7?! Since this game other players have developed the bishop on d7, following up with .l:1fd8 and <;t>f8. But I felt I was ready to start applying pressure.

18 <;t>n .i.dS?!

Exerting pressure on the c-pawn.

Out of 1 7 games played since this with Black. Perhaps they didn't know Ta l's

game

and perhaps

I

was

overconfident. Tal also developed his

Now the sobering reality of the game made me forget about Tal's win. I wish

follow up with tDd3 (but not 23 tDd3

I had not known about that game at all. 27...lZ'lxc5

.i.xg2+). 22 . . .i.e4 is also met by 23 f3 and

White is just a pawn up for nothing.

after 23 ... .i.g6 24 e4. Later I will show

Very annoying indeed. Misha, Misha

how I was misled in my judgment of

what did your magician's spell do to

such a bishop. Alekhine and Euwe are

me?

.

guilty for creating that impression.

28 nxc5 l:I.d6 29 'iPe2 'iPe7 30 l:I.dl

Then 24 .. J:tb7 25 tDd3 l:.c8 enables

l:I.xdl 31 <1f;1xdl �d6 32 l:1.85 f5 33 �e2

B lack

h5 34 e4!? fxe4 35 fxe4

survive

without

losing

power of the edge-pawn due to his

23 .i.dl

game against Taimanov. Tal is not the

Karpov keeps going backward. I was

only one who can be blamed for my

pulling his strings just as i f he were a

loss in this game. However he played

puppet.

the biggest role in it. Simplifying with

2 3...l:.b7

bishop on this square.

45 ... ltb2 did not help either as then

Here I got a bit confused - suddenly

19 nbS tDd7 Not 19 . . . .i.xa2? when 20 c4 wins.

comes 46 c5+ ..t>c6 47 ..t>c4 .i.a2

I had to retreat as well.

48 .i.xa2 l:txa2 49 1:[a6+ 'it>b7 50 .l:1b6+

24 f3 nd8 25 tDd3 gS

Bener was 1 9 . nfc 8 ! ..

45 ...l:.xh2 Fischer also misled me with the

material.

game, nobody has lost this position

well on the seventh.

43...l:.t1I 44 .l:1xa7 :Lf2 45 ..t>h 4

After 22 . . . nb2? 23 f3 ! White can

to

Classical principles. The rook stands

26 ...'1f;1t11 27 lZ'lxcs

2 2 ...l:.b4

your opponent feels obliged to defend.

42 g3 ne8 43 ng7!

Taking the pawn with 26 lbxc5? led

1 7 1Hcl Karpov places the rook behind his

'iPc7

20 naS When Karpov made this move I

3S....i.xe4

started to feel even bener about l ife. H e

5 4 ..t>e4!

Tal was able to take the g2 pawn.

had already used his other rook to

remembered that - and hoped to do it as

defend a pawn, thereby giving up the

well. But it never happens.

open file. He must have been feeling

36 l:1.xg5 .i.f5 37 �e3 h4 38 <1f;1d4 e5+

troubled.

39 'iPc3

20 ...nlb8 21 c4 .i.c6

In his analysis Tal preferred 41 h3 to to be

in trouble.

piece, when it is not even attacked. However the picture is not so rosy for Black. 1 26

-

a

..t>d5

l:I.h l

54 c;t>d6 ! )

very strong switch.

analyse for him.

the game continuation but he did not seems

52

In an adjournment it was easy for

39....i.bl 40 83 l:.e7 41 l:.g4

Karpov

lhh2

Karpov. He had so many seconds to

going to play on the queenside again.

Indeed he defends c4 with one more

.l:1h6

46 c5+ �c6 47 .i.a4+ ..t>d5 48 :Ld7+!

Karpov sends a message that he is

26 .i.b3

51

53 l:.h7+ Wb8 (53 .. .'it>c8

mention his Rashkovsky game - maybe he did not dare to !

4 1 ...h3 I made the h-pawn push one of my trademarks. The legacy of Karpov. 1 27

48.. .'ote4 49 c6 .l:1b2+ 50 <1f;1a5 ltb8

Mikhail Tal the 8t�

Mikhail Tal the 8th

51 c7

5 5 lldl �a2 56 nel +

11 tUbd2

That same c-pawn that I pressurised

Now even the e-pawn falls.

Smyslov also won this position with

56...'iPf4 5 7 ne4+ 'it>g3 58 llxeS

with nb4 finally decides the outcome 5 1 ..J.tc8 52 'iPb6 We3 53 �c6 h 2 S4 g 4 nh8

Tal refused to work for either of us in our world championship matches. In this game however he helped Karpov.

Here 54 . . . e4 5 5 nh7 wins.

1 95 6 .

shot like this. He sweeps the white pieces away from the d-pawn, which in

Smyslov i s covered i n the next chapter.

'it>xg4 S9 ll e2 1 -0

of the game. It was hard to take.

B lack against Golombek i n

2 5... tUe3! Tal, of course, finds a sweet tactical

1 l ...�e6 1 2 nel 0-0 13 b3 'iWd7

turn decides the outcome of the game. An alternative sacrifice, 25 . . . tUxf2, was

1 4 �b2 llad8 1 5 a3 as

also promising. 26 �dS+ (26 lldxf2 �xf2+ 27 llxf2 d2 wins.) 26 . . . 'tiVxd5 27 cxdS tUe4+ 28 'ii'x c5 bxc5 and

Let's have a closer look at Tal's win as B lack with a particular queenside

Black should win with the extra pawn.

pawn fonnation where B lack has a potentially powerful passed d4-pawn. Tal's game against Rashkovsky was played in 1 973 when I was 1 0. Of course

26

that age is a very fonnative period for a young and ambitious player and I was keen to pick up all available knowledge from the fonner champion's games. A.Kochyev

V.Saigin - M Tal .

-

fI e3 �Ie3+ 27

'it>h 1

.lt xd2

2 8 'ii'x d2 ne2 29 'ii'c 3 nxg2

29 . . . 'it'e7 wins as well . 3 0 WJ.g2

M.Tal

1 6 tUeS If White can block the d-pawn and

exchange many pieces, it can become a nice target. However it is not easy to achieve both objectives. 16 ...tUxe5 17 llxeS b6 18 tUo �c5 1 9 'iWd2 tUg4 20 lleel d3 21 nO 'ifd6 22 'iWc3?

30 ... dl

This is too optimistic. After 22 h3 N.Andrianov

-

G.Kasparov

comes 22 . . . tUxf2 (22 ...tUf6 23 tUeS)

23 nxf2 'iWxg3. Tal was so good at

Tal 's game plan works so well; his d-pawn is irresistible. 3 1 11dl �g4 32 tUo 'iWd3 0-1

playing positions with two pieces In the first two diagyam positions Tal was B lack, whereas in the third I played B lack.

versus a rook. He won many games like that with both colours.

A.Kochyev M.Tal Moscow 4-teams, 1 9 8 1 -

2 2 ... f6 23 %:tad l llfe8 24 lld2 �f5 25 tUgS

I guess you already know the results of these games.

1 d 4 tUf6 2 c 4 e 6 3 g 3 c S 4 tU o cxd4 5 tUxd4 d 5 6 �g2 eS 7 tUb3

Retreating the knight is the most

V.Saigin

-

M.Tal

8 0-0 tUc6 9 e3 �e7 1 0 exd4 exd4

Game 8, match, Riga 1 954

popular choice here. 7 ...d4 8 e3 as! 9 exd4 a4 10 tU3d2 exd4

See diagram above.

1 d4 tUr6 2 c4 c5 3 tUo e6 4 g3 exd4 S tUxd4 dS 6 �g2 e 5 7 tU o d4

1 28

a

It's a fine line between a pawn being strong point on d4 or a target.

See diagram

on

page 12 8.

Again Tal pins his hopes on the d-pawn. 1 29

Mikhail Tal the 8th

Mikhail Tal the 8th

11 0-0 iLe7 12 ttJa3 ttJc6 13 ttJf3 iLe6 14 iLf4 0-0

2S ...d2!

White wins the d-pawn but overall he loses material. 26 'iixd2 tUd3

Black wins the exchange and his position is winning. 27 l::t e3 tUxcl 28 .](CI ttJe5 29ttJb5 ttJg4 30 l::t e2 �xe4

Tal exchanges some pieces in order to invade.

IS ttJgS

The grandmaster from Leningrad doesn't go for exchanges at all.

14 �If6

My d-pawn gets to the third rank as

And he sticks to his plan. Tal drove

well.

his opponents crazy with his knight

20 l:tel 1fb4 21 �c6 l:tfS

moves. Although I was left with no

Trying to retain as many pieces as

knight, I did not feel there were any

possible, but it gives White time to

drawbacks.

organise his defence . After 2 1 ...d2

14..:iVxf6 15 tUd2 1fb6 16 ttJb3 �e6

22 l::t e3 �d7 23 �xd7 l:txe3 24 fxe3

17 �xb7

l:txd7 and the strong d-pawn secures a draw, but no more. If 2 1 . . . l:te7 22 �d5

31 iLxe4 tUf6 32 l::td2 'ike7 33 �f3

�xd5 23 l:txe7 'ilt'xe7 24 cxd5 J::txd5

l1ad8 34 c;t>g2 b6 35 lhd8 l::txd8

25 "'d2 White is a bit worse but with so

36 ttJc3 nd4 37 b3 axb3 38 axb3 .e5

few pieces he may get away with

39 .c2 .el 40 ttJbl lLld7 41 �2

blocking the d-pawn.

l:td3 0-1

22 l:te3

Is ...iL g4 ! 16 iLf3 �fS 17 .l:tel ttJd7 ] 8 b4 h6 19ttJe4 tUdeS 20 iLg2 iLb4 2] tlf1

N.Andrianov - G.Kasparov

Azerbaijan Team Championship, Baku 1 978 1 d 4 ttJ f 6 2 c 4 c 5 3 ttJf3 cxd4 4 ttJxd4 e6 5 g3 d5 6 �g2 e5 7 ttJf3 d4

back the pawn and simplify to a

When I played this move I hoped the pawn would perform heroically like the d-pawn in Tal 's games.

drawish endgame. I felt the d-pawn has

8 0-0 ttJc6 9e3 �c5 10 exd4 eId4 See diagram on page 128.

21...d3

Somehow Tal's d-pawn has become a powerhouse again. 22 .l:tcl ttJg6 23 �d2 .l:te8 24 iLxb4

17...l::tad8

I was still optimistic, B lack can win

11 iLf4 0-0 12 lLle5

My opponent went for exchanges.

the same latent power as in Tal 's game, while White's extra queenside pawn won't start working at all. Tal probably 22

would have won even if he had been missing the b-pawn in those positions. After 1 7 ......xb7 1 8 ttJxc5 "'xb2.

d2

Tal's game. 23 'ilt'e2 l:td6 24 �e4 l:tfd8 25 l:tdl

18 ttJIc5 "'Ic5 19b3

12 ...lLlxe5 13 �xe5 ne8

...

This looks just as strong as it did in

But the difference is that it is well blockaded this time.

ttJxb4 25 l1el

25 ... g6 26 h4

White makes room for his king in case of mating threats and will perhaps push his h-pawn all the way to h6 in

an

attempt to create his own threats. 26 ...h5?

I j ust wanted to stop the further 19...d3

1 30

advance of the h-pawn. 131

Mikhail Tal the 8/�

Mikhail Tal the 8/�

In both these diagrams White's king is better centralised than Black's aDd surrounded by the opponent's pawns. First we will look at how Tal snares Augustin's king - similar to the way he trapped Rashkovsky on page 1 25 1 I was hoping that I might catch my opponent's king in the centre as Tal did. In any eveDt, no way could I lose with an extra pawn. . .

S.Rublevsky - G.Kasparov

J.Augustin - M TaI .

27 �xg6

46 1bd2 1-0

My last move was a blunder, which

Now even the d-pawn falls.

gave away a pawn.

27 ... �xc4 28 lle8+ llu8 29 "ihe8+ �g7 30 'iVeS+ xg6 31 'iVgS+ I did not lose just one pawn but several

moreover

Black's

king

becomes exposed.

3 1 . ..'it>b7 32 'iVxbS+ Wg7 33 'iVg4+ �f8 34 'iVc8+ e7 35 'iVxc4 'iVaS 36 b4 'iVeS 3 7 'it>n 'it>d8 3 8 'iVcs lldS

Let me just add that I finally had something to cheer about when I defeated

tough

opponent

the

This victory was sweet indeed and I went OD to win the tournament as

J.Augustin

-

1 9 h3 �e6 2 0 'ifb3 'fWd7 21 '1th2 llea8

M.Tal

2 2 �f4 ll l a3 23 'iWc2 llc3 24 'fWd2 b6

European Team Championship,

well.

25 �h6 �e5 26 �f4 �b8 27 .l:l.a2

Moscow 1 977

39 'iVf8+ 'it>c7 40 'iVxf7+ 'it>b6 4 1 'iVn 'iVd6 42 'iVe3+ 'it>bS 43

a

knockout world champion Khalifman.

G.Kasparov - A.Khalifman

a 3 'it>a4

FIDE Grand Prix, Moscow 2002

44 'iV:u7+

.l:l.ac8 2 8 l:[ b l �f6 29 �gS 'fWe7 1 c4 eS 2 lLlc3 lLlf6 3 lLln lLlc6 4 d3

3 0 �x:f6 'fWx:f6 31 'fWf4 'fWxf4 32 gxf4

d6 S g3 g6 6 �g2 �g7 7 0-0 0-0 8 llb l

.l:l.c2 33 l:[bb2 l:[xb2 34 .l:l.xb2 llcS

a s 9 a 3 lLld4 1 0 b 4 axM 1 1 axM c 6

3 5 ..t>g3 ..t>f8 3 6 .l:l.b4 �e7 37 lhd4

1 2 b S �g4 1 3 lLlxd4 exd4 1 4 lLle4

.l:l.xbS

lLlxe4 I S �xe4 lle8

1 5 ... lLlc6 16 b 5 axb5 1 7 cxb5 lLlb4

44 ... 'it>b3 Other champions have won so many games

with

long

king

marches.

However I did not have as much luck as

I S lLlc4 'iVf5 1 -0

45 . . .
46

47 We2 White also wins.

'iVe4+1

lld3

With this imaginative pawn sacrifice the Czech player opens a route for his

seems to have a dominating king in the

the game White doesn 't have to defend

king to the centre. It seems to improve

centre, but it can also become a target

his b-pawn.

his rook.

In the next game Tal 's opponent

45 'iVe3+ .l:I:d3

38 f5 16 llb2 ? ! I f 1 6 bxc6 bxc6 1 7 llb2 and unlike

they did. After

1 9 lle5 1It'c2 20 �f4

'iVxdI + 2 1 lhd I WaS 22 a3 f6 23 axb4

as we will see . . . 132

38 . . gxf5 39 .l:l.a4 �d6 40 d4 llb2

16 ... dS 17 cxdS exdS 18 �g2 llal

.

133

Mikhail Tal the 8th

Mikhail Tal the 8th

41 .i.fl l:tb I 42 �g2 bS 43 .tta 6+ q;,c7

S.Rublevsky

44 q;,f4

-

G.Kasparov

EU Cup, Izmir 2004

See diagram

All so classical

Black can hold on tight to the c4-pawn, but his central pawn chain becomes somewhat rigid.

on page 133.

1 e4 cS 2 1Of3 lOc6 3 .i.b5

White's king can become menacing

Rublevsky is quite an expert in the

in the centre.

Rossolimo variation, but I also have

44 ... .tt b4 4S q;,eS

p leasant memories with White. For

The king looks like a powerhouse o n

instance I beat Salov with it.

t h e e5 -square.

3 ... e6 4 0-0 lOge7 5 c3 a6 6 �a4

19

�c2

lOeg6

20

getting to the

seventh with the rooks.

2 7 llle 6!

�Ig6

lOIg6

Forcing more exchanges.

2 1 1Oc2 e5 2 2 lOe3 �f5 23 lOxCS! Sergei gets closer to the pawns by exchanging the pieces around it. After 23 .tte I �d3 ! 24 lOxd5 e4 25 lOd4 .:I.fb8 B lack has some compensation according to Rublevsky. Alternatively 23 lOxd5 .i.e4 24 lOe3 .i.xf3 25 gxf) .tt f4 26 .ttc6 lOh4 and B lack has nice

2 7....tt 2f6 After

2 7 . . . 11 8 f5

28

nb8+

lO fS

(2 8 . . .�f7 29 lOg5+) 29 .tt xfS+ lhfS 30 lllx fB .:I.xfB 3 1 a4 ' White has decent winning chances.

28 lll x ffl nxa6 29 lOxg6 h x g6 After 29 . . ..ttxg6 3 0 'it> f2 ! (30 .tt b 5 nd6) 30 ... .:I.a6 3 1 nb5 d4 3 2 cxd4 lha2

play.

33 �e3 Black is struggling.

23 .:I. X C5 •..

4S .. .:I.a4! .

6 ... c4

Out of the blue, Tal virtually traps White's rook and also exploits his unfortunate king.

This is an ambitious move. The pawn can be a target too.

7 'ife2 bS 8 �c2 lOg6 9 b3 'ifc7

46 .:I.d6 b4 47 �IdS

1 0 bJ:C4 lOf4 11 'ife3 bIC4 1 2 .i.a3 �e7 13 �J:e7 lOxe7 1 4 lOa3 This softens up the c4-pawn.

me.

14 ... 0-0 I S .:I.abl

26 lll x e5 .:I.ae8 27 llld 7 lllh 3+

This is Rublevsky's novelty.

28 .:I.b8) 28 ":';'g2 lOf4+ 29 �f3 .:I.f7

l S. . . fS 1 6 'iWb6 'ifxb6 1 7 .ttx b6 fxe4

1 8 �J:e4

30 ":';'f2 ! !

24 .:I.fb I ! .:I. a ffl Getting to the second rank attracted Not

24 . . . lOf4?

25

g4!

.:I.ffB

(27 . . . .ttf7

Bringing the king into the centre. hoped I was going to catch White's king

that Tal did.

30 .ttb 8 and White is c learly better as

tactics against the king, I thought the extra pawn would still guarantee a

24 . . . .:I.f6! although White still has the

draw.

3 0 .:1.132 •••

25 .ttx a6 e4 26 llld4 lhf2

After 30 ... d4 31 cxd4 na3 32 llc l .ttd 3 33 �e2 .ttxd4 34 nc3
47 ... .:I. aS! lethal

way

the winner pointed out. Better was upper hand after 2 5 .:I.xf6 26 .:I.b7.

A

the same

And in case there were no efficient

pin

shows

j ust

wins according to Rublevsky.

how

31 �e3

precarious White's king is on e5.

The king is lured into a cage in the

48 .tt c 6+ 'it>d7 0-1

centre of the board.

Tal 's b-pawn will win the game.

3 I ...�f7 32 .tt b 7+!

I wanted to plagiarise the idea! And

Unlike Tal's opponent, White doesn't

ny punislunent came not in court but I S .. d S

Iver the board. .

step further into the danger zone.

3 2 ... ":';'f6 33 .ttb 6+ �n

.

1 34

1 35

Mikhail Tal the 8,h

See diagram

Mikhail Tal the 8,h

on page

133.

chances. Interestingly, Black should

40 .J:le6+ 'it>d7

41 .J:lxe3 .J:lxd2+

42 'it>xc4 .J:lxg2 43 .J:le5 'it>d6

now look for exchanges.

g7-pawn. On the other hand, giving up the g6 pawn to advance the passed

If Black could exchange his last

I f 33 ... o;1;>f5 34 nd6 'it>e5 3 5 Ihg6

White could go back with 39 'it>d4 ! ?

na7 36 l1g5+ 'it>e6 37 h4 Black has a

and push his g-pawn before doing

pawn the game would be a draw.

5 5 'it>b7? llg2 5 6 .J:ld l .J:lxg6 57 c6 .J:lg2

very tough ending.

anything else. (After 3 9 .J:ld7+ 'it>e8

44 .J:la5 .J:lg4+ 45 'it>b3 .J:l g l ? !

and White i s not far enough ahead in the race.

pawn would let Black off the hook, e.g.

34 11d6 %laS

40 .J:lxg7 [40 .J:lxd5 e3! 41 dxe3 .J:lxc3

According t o m y opponent I should

H ere I realised White's king could

Black should be able to hold) 40 . . . e3 !

have played 45 . . .'iPe6 and then 46 c4 g6

52 'it>c6 ngl

not be caught, but still didn't appreciate

4I

47 'it>b4.

After 52 . . . 'it>f5 5 3 'it>d7 .J:lc l 54 .J:lc6

the full scale of Black's problem.

43 'it>xd5 c3 and Black saves himself.)

35 h4

dxe3

.J:lxc3

42

.J:lxg6

.J:lxe3+

.J:la l 55 c5.

Then 39 . . .l:tb2 40 'it>e3 l:tb5 41 g4 .J:la5 42 g5 .J:lb5 43 'it>f4 Rublevsky gets

to

this position by a different move order. He stops analysing here, evaluating the position as a clear win. However Black seems to be able to live with passive defence. 43 . . . .J:la5 44 'it>e5 .J:la3 45 .J:ld7+ 'it>e8 46 .J:lxg7 e3 47 dxe3 .J:lxc3 48 'it>f4 (48 'it>xd5 l:l.xe3 49 .J:lxg6 .J:lh3 and B l ack survives.) 48 . . . .J:lc l 49 .J:lxg6 c3 50 'it>e5 c2 5 1 llc6 d4 and Black is safe.

35 ... g5?

36 hxg5 o;1;>e7 37 .J:lc6 .J:lal

46 'it>b4 nbl + 47 'it>c4 'it>e6 48 .J:la6+ 'it>f5 49 g6 %lgl 50 'it>b5 o;1;>e5 53 'it>d7!

After 50 . . ..J:lb l + 5 1 <;Pc5 .J:lgl 52 c4 .J:le l 53 .J:lc6 'it>e5 54 'it>b6 White's king

Aware o f the trouble, I resorted to desperate measures. However, with

penetrates.

35....Ilb5 Black could wait and see -

and wins. According to my plan I was

51 c4 .J:lhl+

and he has a hidden resource that

If 5 1 . .. .J:lg2

White simply collects the g7-pawn supposed to hurt this king in the centre,

52 c5

%l g I 5 3 .J:ld6

provides tough resistance if White

(on 5 3 'it>b6 .J:lxg6+ Black would not

further improves his king. Then 3 6 g3 ! ?

lose) 53 . . ..J:lg2 54 o;1;>b6 .J:lgi 5 5 o;1;>c7!

(White could also play 3 6 g4 at once,

White's king walks over to collect the

just like Tal did - but instead it invaded my territory with fatal results.

53 ....J:l d l + 54 'it>e7 .J:lbl 55 .J:la5+ 'it>d4 56 'iPflI .J:lb7 57 .J:lf5 1-0

which might create more obstacles for Black.) 36 . . . .J:la5 37 'it>f4 .J:lb5 38 'it>e5

G.Kasparov - Y.Anikaev

38 'it>d4 The king is in the cage, but there is

From Tal I picked up a way to

no way to hurt it. Furthermore, I can 't

crack the Rauzer formation when

prevent it from carrying out its threat.

Black castles kings ide.

A l l so tragic.

38 ....J:ldl

38 . . . .J:lb3 ! !

This

move

prompts

enough exchanges to create drawing

This time I show my position fust

3 8 . . .na3? 39 'it>xd5 e3 40 .l:e6+ wins.

followed on the next page by two

39 'it>xd5 e3

misleading ones from the Magician

Forcing simplification but not to the

from Riga.

desired extent. If 39 . . . nxd2+ 40 'it>xe4 .J:lxg2 4 1 'it>f5 .

1 36

1 37

Mikhail Tal the 8'h

Mikhail Tal the 8'•

M .Tal - Y.Sakbarov

M.Tal - I.PlatoDov

1 4 tUb3

23 . . . .CI.D ! ! 24 .CI.xg7+ 'it>h8 2 5 'We i

In this earlier game White wasted a

lhfl + 26 'Wxfl 'We3 and the position is

tempo by puning his rook on b I

equal.

23 'Wb6 Ihg3 We still start by looking at Tal 's

-

and

his anack still broke through. This increased my confidence.

15 .CI.afl tUa5 16 .CI.b3

1 4 nd8 IS fS tUeS 16 .CI.g3

games.

..•

See diagram above.

M.Tal - I.Platonov

See diagram on page 138.

Dubna 1 973

16

1 e4 c5 2 tUo d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tUxd4 tUf6 5 tUc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 �6 8 'Wd2 'Wxb2 9 tUb3 Nowadays the popularity of this line is increasing.

..•

tUxb3 17 axb3 .CI.ac8 18 q., b l f5

1 6 .. .'�b8 17 .CI.n 'Wb4 18 'it>bl dS

1 9 exf5 �4 20 f6 �xf6 2 1 f5 .CI.xc3?

19 exdS exdS 20 tUd4 "i!ffS 21 ':h3 b5

B l ack misses a win here by 2 1 . . .exf5 ! Then 2 2 'ir'h6 (22 .CI.ff3 f4) 2 2 . . . � g7 23 l:!.g3 'ii'x c3 ! decides.

9 ... 'IIi' a3 10 �xf6 gxf6 11 �e2 tUc6 24 �g6! ! 1-0 White

sets

up

an

unstoppable

checkmate threat.

Here is his second game cracking the Rauzer fonnation.

2 2 .CI.f4 Tal brings another piece into the

M.Tal - Y.Sakbarov 22 .CI.g3+ 'it>h8?? 12 0-0 �d7 1 3 �h5 �g7 14 .CI.O

This loses to a wonderful fmesse.

anack.

USSR Championship, Kiev 1 964

22 ... �b7 23 .CI.fh4 'ii'g 8 24 'ii'f4 .CI.ac8

1 e4 c5 2 tUo d6 3 d4 cId4 4 tUxd4

2S liJ d l I f 25 ll h 5 tUd7.

Bringing the rook into play.

With 22 ... �g7 Black has a beautiful

14 ... 0-0

defence thanks to the weak back rank.

Portisch later put his king on the

23 f6 (23 .CI.xg7+ �xg7 24 "i!fg5+ Wh8

queens ide and defeated Tal in a well­

2 5 .CI.f4 .CI.O ! I forces White to accept a

gxf6 1 1 �e2 �g7 1 2 0-0 0-0 1 3 n o

now it is the distant knight that joins the

known game in 1 9 76.

perpetual check.)

tUc6

anack.

138

tUf6 5 tUc3 a6 6 �g5 e6 7 f4 'Wb6

2S .CI.e8 2 6 tUe3 •..

8 'Wd2 'WIb2 9 %1b 1 'Wa3 1 0 �xf6

First it was the rooks and the queen,

139

Mikhail Tal the 8110

Mikhail Tal the 8,10

Now here is my game: G. Kasparov - Y. Anikaev USSR championship, Minsk 1 979 1 e4 c5 2 ltJf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 li'lxd4 ltJf6 5 ltJc3 ltJc6 6 �g5 a6 7 'ilfd2 'iWb6 8 ltJb3 e6 9 .i.e2 "ii'c 7 1 0 a4 b6 11 � xf6 gxf6 I was happy to have the typical Rauzer pawn formation. One year

2 6... l:tc3

earlier, back in my home town, I lost a

Black has not obtained enough play

game to Sideif Zade with reversed

on the queenside. He'll make Tal pay

colours. Here it is: I li'lf3 li'lf6 2 c4 g6

attention to that.

3 ltJc3 d5 4 cxd5 li'lxd5 5 'ifa4+ �d7

27 l:th5 ltJd7 28 �d3 l:te5 29 "ii'b 4

6 'iJb4e6 7 ltJxd5 exd5 8 'ifd4 f6

ltJflI 3 0 ltJg4 l:e8 Giving

up

the

exchange

Kasparov

Sideif Zade, Azerbaijan

13 0-0 �b7 1 4 :13 l:d8 1 5 l:th3 �g7 1 6 fS 0-0

thought if he castles long I was ready,

Black's king could still walk over to

as I knew Tal's game. By the way the

the queens ide, but I decided to look for

Rauzer formation with B lack caused

safety on the kings ide. And I did not

me another painful memory. I held a

even have to sacrifice for an attack that

record of winning or tieing for first i n

looked very promising.

all tournaments for a period o f 9 years See diagram

and 9 months. I did not make it a clean 10 years because I came 2-3,d i n

on page 1 3 7.

1 7 .f4 ltJe5 1 8 lt d l 'ife7 19 'ifh4 h6

Linares 1 9 9 1 where Ivanchuk was the

2 0 'iff2

winner. He beat me in the very first

I decided to improve the bishop as

round.

well. 2 0...'ifc7 21 li'ld4 �c8 2 2 'iffl '1Ifb7

V.Ivanch u k - G.Kasparov

1 2 �d2 �g4 1 3 0-0-0 �xf3

30 ...l:te4 removes some of the attacking

This gains a tempo.

Team Championship, Baku 1 97 8 . So I

9 'ili'xd5 ltJc6 1 0 'ifb3 'i!ie7 I I d3 0-0-0

with

1 2 f4 �h6

24 . . . l:txa5 25 bxa5 li'lc2+ 26 'itb2 l:tb8+ 27 'it>c 1 li'ld4 28 �d2 1itb4+ 0- 1

23 �c4 d5 24 ndS

Linares 1 99 1

pieces and gives him more practical chances after 3 1 �xe4 lhh3 32 'ifxh3

I e4 c5 2 li'lf3 d6 3 �b5+ lLld7 4 d4

dxe4.

li'lgf6 5 0-0 cxd4 6 'ifxd4 a6 7 �xd7+

3 1 Wg l

.i.xd7 8 �g5 h6 9 �xf6 gxf6

A careful move. 3 1 .. .l:tc4

24 ...exd5

14 gxf3 ltJd4 1 5 'i!ia4 ltJxe2+ 1 6 'it'b 1 ltJd4 1 7 'ifxa7 'ifc5

At first it all looked similar to Tal's

1 8 'iWa8+ 'it'd7

game against Platonov, but by now the

1 9 �h3+ f5 20 'ifxb7 'ifc2+ 2 1 �a l �d6 22 .d5 na8 23 �a5 'i!ia4 24 b4

pawn structure is the same as in the 10 c4 e6 I I li'lc3 l:tc8 1 2 'it>h l h 5

Sakharov game. I knew that game as

1 3 a4 h4 1 4 h 3 �e7 1 5 b 4 a5 1 6 b 5 32 ltJxf6

well so I was still optimistic.

'if c 7

1 7 li'ld2 .c5 1 8 . d 3 l: g 8 1 9 l:tae l 'ifg5 2 0 l:g l .f4 21 l:e fl b 6

Tal has reached his optimum position so starts the decisive operation which

2 2 li'le2 '1Ifh6 23 c5 l:txc5 24 lLlc4 'it>f8

leads to a win of the exchange with no

2 5 li'lxb6 �e8 26 f4 f5 27 exf5 l:xf5

compensation for Black. 3 2 ...�xf6 33 'ifxf6+ 'ifg7 34 'ifxg7+ Wxg7 35 l:tg3+ �h8 36 �xc4 dxc4 37 l:h6 %td8 3 8 c3 �e4 39 a3 l:a8 40 l:td6 a5 41 l:b6 b4 1-0 1 40

25 �b3 %tfe 8 26 l:tg3 'ith7 27 1*'f2 Bringing the queen closer to the king by 27 1i'f4, as Tal did, was preferable. 27 ... li'lc4 28 li'lde2 bS 29 axbS axbS

28 l:t e l 'it>g7 29 g4 l:tc5 30 l:txc5 dxc5 3 1 li'lc8 �flI 32 .d8 'ifg6 33 f5 '1Ifh6

30 ltJf4 Tal transferred the other knight to g4,

34 g5 'iih 5 3 5 l:tg4 exf5 3 6 ltJf4 "ifh8 37 'iH6+ 'it>h7 38 l:xh4+ 1 -0

but I was happy with my choice. 141

Mikhail Tal the 8'�

Black takes th e exchange. 51 'it'xd4 'Wd8 s2 lDh5 l:te8

52 ... l:ta6 fol lowed by 'it'b6 wa: wi nni ng

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

.

53 g5 hIg5 S4 l:txg5 l:tg8 55 l:tIg8

After 55 'Mfh4 fxg5 56 liJf6+ ..t>g7 57 'it'xg5+ �f8 58 liJh7+ It>e8 59 'i!t'xg8+ ..t>d7 60 'it'xf7+ It>c8 6 1 �g4 White has some practic al chanc es . 55

30 .. J:te5 3 1 liJh5 �h8 32 l:tf3 liJIb2

•..

�Ig8 56 lDb5 l:tc6

56 . . . l:ta6! gains a winning tempo.

33 l:!.d4 liJc4 34 �Ic4 bIC4 35 g4

57 'i!t'g4+

This is something Tal did not play,

Unfortunately the queen stands on

liked it. Sadly my position

the same diagonal as the bishop. Best

yet I

gradually

de te r i o rat es

as

Anikaev

steadily improves his pieces. 35 ..:We7 36 'iWd2 �b7 37 1t>f2 l:te8 38 liJf4 �g7 3 9 l:th3 �g8 40 liJce2

was 57 "it'g l + ! �f8 58 liJd 4 :a6 59 liJe6+ l:txe6 60 fxe6 �e7 61 exf7 and the position is equal according to

Smyslov won the world title in 1 9 5 7

the champions and with that many

by beating Botvinnik 12th-9th. They

games he bad a stronger effect on me. I

had already played a match three years

had the most games against the other

earlier, when they drew 1 2 - 1 2 . In 1 95 8

champions, but only played matches

Botvinnik

with Karpov and Smyslov. Against the

won

the

rematch

but

Smyslov kept on playing successfully

rest I just played a few games. Let me

for four decades. Incredibly he made it

give you a few examples of Smyslov 's

to the Candidates matches fmal, where

influence on me.

I met him. The age difference between

Firstly, here are a couple of positions

us is 42 years . He had the longest

from Smyslov's games that caused me

career, playing the most games of all

particular damage.

A nikaev.

S7.....t>fB 58 lDd4 l:ta6

�fB 4 1 liJc3 W'c5 42 lDh5 'ifb6 43 l:tf3

White's queenside pawn majority, spearheaded by the pawn on c5 ,

often occurs in the Alekhine defence and Panov attack versus the Caro-Kann.

It>h7 44 It>g3 l:td8

V.Smyslov - W.Schmidt

G.Kasparov - A.Yermolinsky

V.Smyslov - H.Azizi

G.Kasparov - A.Dreev

59 liJe6+ l:txe6 60 fIe6 q;e7 61 'i!t'g7 �xe6 62 lDf4+

45 It>b4

Steinitz liked to walk with his king . . .

45 ... �b4 46 'ii' f4

After 46 l:tn l:te2! 47 'ii'xe2 'ii'x d4

Sometimes Tal caught the king in the centre in endgames even though he had no queen. Th i s time White has no chance even with the queens.

White is in trouble.

62 ...�e5 63 �g3 'i!t'a5 64 �f2 'it'b6+

46 .. :it'd6 47 l:tg3 'ire7 48 ..t>h3 �c5 49 'i!t'd2 l:td6 50 lDf4 �xd4

65 �f3 d4+ 66 �g4 d3 67 'i!t'xf7 'it'gl + 68 �h4 'it'gS+ 0-1

1 42 1 43

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smys/ov the 7'h

25 l:tb4

'!We7 35 '!Wxf6+!

are even worse, but to lose two games

It is quite an unusual role for the rook

with White is really pathetic. Making it

to defend the d4-pawn from b4 in the

The sixth world champion finishes with an eleg ant petit combination.

almost impossible to bear is the fact

middlegame.

Any loss is very painful, two losses

35 .. ."iVxf6 36 nd7+ �h6 37 l:I.xf6 l:I.e5 38 h4 1-0

2 S .. .l::t e 8 2 6 l:I. n l:te6?!

that one of the games was a regular one. Even now, decades later I need time to calm down when I think about it. It stil l upsets me that much!

26 ... e4 would lead to an unclear

,

29 �Ic6 1hc6

Even Tigran Vartanovich did not come up with double exchange sacrifices too often.

position after 27 �b I It:lc4 28 'ilfc 1

� g5 29 l:I.xc4 dxc4 30 �a2.

30 It:lxc6 'iWIc6 31 '!Wg3 It:ld7 32 'ilt'c7 It:lhfS 33 .l::tb 1 Ji.g5 34 Ji.cl Ji.xcl

Smyslov had another win with this pawn structure.

35 lIncl g5 3 6 nn g6 37 f4 gxf4 3S nxf4 'it>g7 39 .l::tb n f5 40 'iWIc6

V Smyslov - H.Ami

bIC6 41 g4 It:lf6 42 'it>f2 It:lSd7 43 'it>e3

Rilton Cup, Stockholm 1 998

It:lb8 44 n4f2 It:lbd7 45 gxf5 exf5

.

V.Smyslov

-

W.Schmidt

Warsaw-Moscow, 1 980

46 lIg2 'it>f7 47 nfgl It:lfS 48 b7 It:l6d7

1 e 4 It:lf6 2 e 5 It:ld5 3 d 4 d6 4 It:ln ..I1l.g4 5 ..I1l.e2 e6 6 c4 It:lb6 7 exd6 cxd6

1 e4 It:lf6 2 eS It:ldS 3 d4 d6 4 It:ln

S h3 �h5 9 0-0 �e7 10 It:lc3 0-0 1 1 b3

�g4 5 �e2 e6 6 c4 It:lb6 7 exd6 cxd6

It:lSd7 1 2 �b2 It:lr6

8 h3 �hS 9 0-0 il.. e 7 1 0 It:lc3 0-0

Here are some of my own games.

1 3 nel l:I.cS

14 lt:lh4

l 1 l:tel a6 12 b3 It:lc6 13 �e3 dS 14 cS

G.Kasparov

A surprising decision.

White often gains space like this in

14 ... �xn IS �xn lt:lc8 1 6 l:tb l � f6

Better is 14 ... �xe2 because you are

27 e4!

17 b4

2 7 ... exd4? After 27 ... dxe4 28 lt:lxe4 � g7 29 l:ta4

See diagram on page 143.

f5

(29 . . . exd4

is

met by

30 It:ld6)

3 0 ..I1l.bl Wbi te is better. 2 8 lt:lxdS �eS

Smyslov fights to prevent Schmidt's knights from taking up positions i n the

.lig4 5 ..I1l.e2 e6 6 0-0 �e7 7 h3 �b5 8 c4 It:lb6 9 nd6 cxd6 10 It:lbd2 0-0

1 5 lt:lxg6? ! hxg6 16 ..I1l.d3

1 1 b3 It:lc6 1 2 �b2

The bishop is strong now.

To retain the bishop. On e3 it would have been vulnerable to . . . tLlf5 .

1 6 ... a6 17 '!Wn 'iWc7 I S l:I.acl 'iWd7 1 9 a4 d5 2 0 c5 lt:la8

1 2. . .�f6 1 3 a 3 d 5 14 c 5 tLlc8 15 b4

To put it mildly, this is not exactly

Of course I was satisfied. I thought I would just copy Smyslov's play.

classical chess.

centre.

21 b4

18 ... g6 19 a4 hS 20 bS axbS 21 axbS It:laS

A. Yermolinsky

1 e4 It:lf6 2 e5 It:ld5 3 d4 d6 4 It:ln

supposed to exchange when you have a disadvantage in space.

A nice riposte.

-

UI8 USSR Championship. Vilnius 1 975

14...�g6?

the Alekbine.

17 . ..ti:J8c7 1 8 il.. g 4

49 h4 1-0

1 5 ... a6

See diagram on page 143.

The knight never comes back into

See diagram on page 143.

2 l ...Ji.d8 2 2 b5 It:lc7 23 b6 It:lceS

play.

1 6 ncl tLl8e7 17 tLlb3 �xn 18 .lixn

24 as It:lh7 25 �c2 It:lef6 26 �a4 nc6

22 �e2 It:lrs 23 ..I1l.d3 It:lxe3 24 fIe3

27 lt:la2 Ji.e7 2S It:lb4 nfc8

eS

tLlf5

29 'lWn

With remarkable ease, Smyslov has gained space on the queens ide and now wins the game on the other side of the board.

29 ... f6 30 It:lf4 il..d4 31 Wxf4 c;f;>g7 32 l:I.a4 l:I.eS 3 3 'iff2 l:I.xc5 34 Ihd4 1 44

1 45

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

7t�

Vassily Smyslov the

19 �g4

remember any game with this motive

My predecessor put this bishop on

from any champion. 28 . . . l:[xc3 29 nac l

g4. I reckoned that had to be correct.

13 ... a6 14 ii.a4

l:[c4 30 b7 l:[b8 3 1 bxa6 tt'lc7 32 tt'la5

19 ... g6 20 'ii'd 3 �g7 21 �c3 _f6 22 �J:fS 'tWxfS 23 'tWxfS exfS 24 a4

See diagram on page 143.

tt'lxa6 33 tt'lxc4 dxc4 34 nxc4 l:[xb7

14 ... h 6 15 ii.e3

35 d5 and White has the upper hand.

28 ... bxeS 29 b6 exd4 30 �b2 l:[ab8

tt'ldS

Vassily also developed the bishop on e3 in one of his games.

31 as After 3 1 l:[xc8+ l:[xc8 32 l:[c I White

IS ...liJeS 16 ifd2 'i!th7 17 ttJg3

is still no worse.

I provoked him into pushing his

3 1 ...l:[e4 3 2 tt'ld2 l:[xc1+ If 3 2 ...nb4 3 3 �a3 l:[b5 34 ii.d6 nd8 3 5 .:lab ! . 34 . . .� e 7

35

�a3+

�d7

3 6 tt'lc5+ tt'lxc5 3 7 llxc5 �e5 Black does better than in the game.

point.

I

no

longer

remember

troubl e .

Had

Smyslov

17 ...e6 18 ttJge2 g5 19 ii.c2 it.xc2 2 0 ifxc2+ f5 2 1 l:tab l liJf6 22 a4 We8 23 it. f2 it'g6 24 b5

published

been able to memorise it and play faster,

All goes according to the Smyslov

d2 42

I must admit that for just a second I lost my discipline and omitted . . . b6,

time

winning

ne8 46 'i!td4 ttJb3+ 47 c;t>xd5 ttJ:ta5 48

3S ii.a3+ �e8? In principle it is right to bring the king to the centre, however in this particular position it has its tactical drawbacks.

36 l:[el f6 37 f4 ! tt'lxf4 3S ii.d6 l:[d8 3 9 ii.c7 d3? This is a bad move in a bad position. B lack

could

have

played

on

the

able

to

Here is my second game with the

G.Kasparov - A.D reev Kremli n Stars, Moscow 1 996

1 c4 c6 2 e4 dS 3 exd5 cxd5 4 d4

b7

ttJc6

42

ttJc5)

and the protected b6 passed pawn is too strong to live with.

1 46

3 0 tt'ld3 f4 31 'iVdl nf7 3 2 lD62 l:ta8 33 h3 h5 34 it'd3 na7 35 h4 g4

Moscow PeA-Grand Prix,

tt'lf6 5 tt'lc3 tt'lc6 6 it.g5 it.e6 7 a3 ii.g4

41

25 bxa6 l:[xa6 26 nb5 ttJd7 27 nfbl liJb8 28 liJa2 lDbe6 2 9 tt'lb4 na7

same pawn structure.

exchange down with 39 . ..ttJd3, but his

41 ii.xd8 �xd8 42 l:[d2 tt'lb4 43 tt'lxd4 was not

ii.f4 c;t>cS 0-1

position has to be lost. 40 l:[e2 Wd7 (40 . . . liJb4 with

The knight may become strong on c4.

43 'i!te3 tt'leS 44 ii.xe5 c;t>d7 4S lDn

26 ...l:[fcS 27 l:[Cdl

taken

24 ...tt'la5

41 l:[xe5+ fxeS 42 tt'lxd2 tt'ld3+

what a harsh pWlishrnent!

have

'i!t t2 tt'ld4

40 ... d2!

improvisation and I ended up losing -

27 ... b6! 2 S l:[dcl

tt'lxd2 tt'le2+ 43

Oh, no. White has to resign.

I felt I could improvise. But a single

I

this

The

44 ii.xd8.

thereby deviating from Smyslov's plan.

cxb6, but

avoiding

b lunder.

continuation was 40 l1xe5+! fxe5 4 1 b7

2S ... tt'le6 26 l:[ a l

should

thereby

trouble

concept.

28

full

exactly but I suspect I was in time

interes ts.

annotations to his game I may have

2S bS

White

I not only missed a forced win with this move but actually squandered the

33 Ihc1 �f8 34 liJb3 �e5 ? ! After

pawns, but maybe it was not in my best

40 c;t>f2?

8 n ii.e6 9 c5 g6 10 ii.bS ii.g7 11 ttJge2 0-0 12 0-0 ii.fS 13 b4 36 'iifx g6+ c;t>xg6 37 liJd3 it.h6

The pawn structure again reminds m e o f Smyslov's.

3 8 it.el lDc4 39 l:[al gxn 40 gxn �fS 1 47

Vassily Smyslov the 7'�

Vassily Smyslov the 7'�

4 1 as 11g7+ 42 <;Ph I l:La8 43 .i.c3 lUe3

draws.) 70 l:Lxc6 d4 7 1 �g2 (7 1 l:Ld6?

ending. In the games Karpov-Kasparov

44 l:Lgl ? ! l:Llg I + 45 lU1g1 11a7 46 lUeZ

'it>xf3 wins.) 71 ...l:Lc2+ 72 �f1 �e3

Las Palmas 1 996, Kramnik-Kasparov,

lUe4 47 Wg2 lU4xa5 48 .i.:u5 lUxa5

73 l:Le6+ �d3 74 c6 and White holds.

Intel rapid 1 995 and in my match in

49 lUeS lUe6 50 lUxe6 bxe6 51 l:Lb6

67 ... ¢>g3 6 8 l:Lg6+ �h3 69 nh6+

l:Lc7 52 �f2 .i.g7 53 �e1 .i.f6 54 �d2

Wg3 70 l:Lg6+ <;txf3 7 1 .l�he6 �g3

serious

72 l:Lg6+ �f3 73 c6 l:LeZ

changed or could have changed the

After

73 . . . �e4

74

l:Lg2

2003 against Azmaiparashvili, I made mis takes,

some

of

which

result of the game. I did not make these

11a l +

(74 . . . l:La7 7 5 11c2 Ac7 7 6 �xh2 �xd4

mistakes in pawn endings in a simul

77 �g2 draws) 75 �xh2 l:L c l 76 l:Lg6

against an amateur but against my arch­

�xd4 77 �g2 White draws.

rivals,

Karpov

and

Kramnik.

Yes,

80 11h2??

Smyslov and Levenfish really should

What a dreadful mistake! Even i f it

have written a book on pawn endings.

was a rapid game this should never

80 . . . 'it>xe4 (80 ... dxe4 8 1 d5 or 8 1 ¢>e l

have been played. In a way Smyslov is

is also an elementary draw.) 8 l 'it>e2

a guilty party for influencing me to

¢>xd4 82 'it>d2 resulting in one of the

54 .i.xh4

conduct the opening the way he did. I

best known drawn positions in chess.

Losing a second pawn should be the

must say Levenfish is also partly to

80 ..'it>xd4 81 Ild2+ 'it>c4 0-1

end, but i t was a rapid game so you

blame for this. Together they wrote a

I miss a successful frontal attack by

•..

never know.

55 l:Lb8 .i.f6 56 l:Lrs b4 57 lUgl Wg6 58 ¢>d3 l:La7 59 lUb3 l:La3+ 60 �eZ

74 l:Lh6?

�f5?

Cutting off the king with 74 l:Le6 '

61

lUxf4 � x f4

6Z l:Lxf6+ WgS

63 l:Lxe6 h3 64 Wf2 l:La2+ 65 'Ot>gl h2+ 66 Wh l �f4

classic book on rook endings, which I

three tempi. My rook should check him

studied deeply. But they neglected to

from cl and my king should be on f2. I invested so many hours on his rook

publish a book on pawn endings.

was correct.

60 . . . l:Le3+! simply wins.

.

80 l:Lxe4 !

problem. I tried to erase this weakness

I f 76 .l:g4 Axc6 77 ..t>xh2 l:Lc4 wins

from my play but even in the very last

76 ... l:Lxc6 77 AM

to gain three tempi.

was the solution to the

74 ...<;te4 75 l:Lh4+ <;td3 76 11xh2 as well.

ending book and yet here I was not able

Simplifying to a pawn ending with

By the way, this tournament was on a knockout system

game of my career I made a losing

rwo games and reached the next round of the competition.

against

Topalov

in

a

pawn

Once Smyslov planted a knight on

I also planted his idea in my mind and reached the foHowing position:

W.Fairhurst - V.Smyslov

Y.Seirawan - G.Kasparov

67 11f6+ 67

l:Lxc6 was

7 7 ltcZ?

another option, but

..•

Here 77 ... Ac4 78 �g2 Axd4 79 l:Lh l

stalemate finesse probably saves the

We2

position.

7 7 ... Ag6.

67 . . . l:La4

68

l:Le6

l:Lxd4

69 'It>xh2 l:Lc4 (69 . . .�xf3 70 l:Lxc6 1 48

80

'Ot>g3

l:Lc4

wins,

as

ru n

I won the next

move

c4. Here is the position:

more fun was 67 l:Le2 ! . This nice

-

does

78 Wgl 11eZ 79 �n Ae4 149

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smys/ov the 7th

A.Karpov - B.Spassky G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik

Game I I , Candidates Semifinal, Leningrad 1 974

I wanted to encourage m y

I d4 �f6 2 c4 e6 3 �O d5 4 lOc3

opponent to place a knight on c4.

SLe7 5 SLg5 h6 6 SLh4 0-0 7 e3 b6

KIamnik was oblivious to the

8 SLe2 SLb7 9 SLxf6 SLxf6 1 0 cxd5 exd5

dangers of having such a knight -

II 0-0 'ili'd6 1 2 .l:l.cl a6 1 3 a3 lOd7

and beat mel

14 b4 b5 1 5 lOe 1 c6 1 6 lOd3 lOb6 1 7 a4

1 5 ... b5 1 6 lOe5 a4 1 7 We3 lLlb6

SLd8 1 8 �c5 SLc8 1 9 a5 SLc7 20 g3

18 �d2 .l:l.ae8 19 l:[fe 1 l:[e7 20 SLO

lOc4

W.Fairhurst - V.Smyslov

l:[fe8 Now I prefer to transfer the bishop to

22 ... 'ii' a 7 ! 23 �e2 dxe4 2A fxe4 SLg4 !

Hastings 1 954/55

g6 after 20 . . . g 5 ! ? and start pushing the f-pawn.

Suddenly White's centre falls apart.

claims

he

is

f5 24 b4

2 7 SLe3 'ili'd3 2 8 'i!ib2

0-0 5 tOge2 d5 6 a3 SLe7 7 1Og3 b 6 ! ? Smyslov

2 1 g3 �h3 2 2 SLg2 SLxg2 23 'it>xg2

25 SLxc4 bxc4 26 lOg3 'ii x d4+

I d4 lOf6 2 c4 e6 3 1Oc3 SLb4 4 e3 always

See diagram on page 1 4 9.

searching for hannony but he often goes in for unbalanced fights. Here

24 ...lOe4

7 . . . c5 was better, just to equalise.

I managed to position the knight

8 cxdS exd5 9 iLe2 SLb7 1 0 �f5 .l:l.e8 2 1 e4 SLh3 22 .l:l.el dxe4 23 103xe4

I I lZ"lxe7+ 'iWxe7 12 0-0 lObd7 13 b4 c6

1 4 SLd2 1 4 ... a6 15 'it'b3 b 5 ! ?

.g6 24 SLh5 'li'b7 25 "lifO f5 26 lOc3

Smyslov's knight i s heading for c4.

g6 27 .xc6 gxh5 2 8 lOd5 f4 29 l1e7

16 .I:bel lOb6 17 SLcl a s 18 f3 axb4

'ii' fS 30 thc7 .l:l.ae8 3 1

1 9 axb4 SLc8 2 0 SLd3 SLe6 21 'ii'b l

32 l1xf7 'it>xf7 3 3 'ii'xf4 ne2 3 4 "iWe 7+

2 8 ...lOxe4

tOc4

'ii'xh6 .l:l.f7

just like Smyslov and at this point I was satisfied and thinking appeciatively of

him. 25 lOo SLf6 26 l1e2 .l%g7 27 l1 b l "iWe7 2 8 .!:t e e l b6 2 9 "iWd3 .l:l.f8 30 lOd2 "iWe8

�f8 3 5 tOf4 1 -0

The rest is uninteresting.

29 lOxe4 .l:l.xe4 3 0 'ilffl r6 31 SLc5 SLe2 32 nal l1ae8 33 nrel c3 34 'iWr5 c2 3 5 h4 'ilfd5 3 6 'ilffl h5 3 7 .l:l.acl SLdl 3 8 .l:l.xe4 .l:l.Ie4 39 n a l 'iWe5 0-1

Y.Seirawan

-

G.Kasparov

Dubai Olympiad 1 986

This Smyslov game was against a relatively unknown player whereas 1 used

his

idea

against

a

genuine

contender. I should add that it was not only Smyslov who made me think that

22 e4?

a knight

White pushes forward without proper

decisive

preparation.

on

c4

would

be

but

also

two

almost other

champions misled me in one game. 1 50

1 d4 tOf6 2 e4 g6 3 �e3 d5 4 lOo SLg7 5 SLg5 lOe4 6 exd5 lOxg5 7 lOxg5 e6 8 tOo exd5 9 b4 "iWd6 3 1 lOxe4

This move was a novelty then.

10 a3 0-0 1 1 e3 c6 12 SLe2 SL f5 13 0-0 tOd7 14 tOa4 as 1 5 'iib 3

White would have done better not to have taken the c4-knight.

151

Vassily Smyslov the

7th

Vassily Smyslov the

3 1 ...dIC4 32 �dl :te7 33 :ten 'ifn

Objectively this neither spoils nor

34 'i!ff3 'i!fd5 35 'i!fxd5+ cxd5 36 �f3

improves the position, but puts Black

�g7

(Not

59 . . .l:ta l ? 60 g6 �e l

63

6 1 f4 ! Two

'it>c6

64 'it>f3

a3

65

.Ila7 d4

and this unusual position with two

into a situation where be has to find a

advanced together. [t is best not to

connected passed pawns in both camps

39 l:tddl �rs 40 l1dgl �g7 4 1 l:td l

very subtle plan in order to draw. The

separate them by sending only one out

is probably equal.

rs 42 �d2 �e7 43 �ddl �d6

practical move 55 . . . fxg4 56 �xg4 l:[h5

44 l:th2 ¢>c6 45 � h h 1 �rs 46 l:td2

offered an equal endgame.

�rn

38

�d2

�e8

are

l:tfl+

often

37 � d l

connected passed pawns

7'"

59 l1 d l d4

in front. 6 1 . . .c3

56 uf4 �IB3 57 fIgS �a2+ 58 �f3

�d6 47 �dd1

60 g6 d3

62 �d I ! ! I not only investigated the

47 ... �IC5 ? ! A n impatient move. I should have

58 ... c3?

further improved the positions of my

This natural move loses. The c-pawn

other pieces, for example by 47 . . .�ee7.

is closer to promotion than White's g5-

Then after 48 l1d2 (48 �h2? �xc5 !

pawn, but Black's rook has less effect

49 dxc5 l:te4 wins.) 4 8. . . �h7 4 9 l:tdd l

on it than White's on c3 . And that

g5 Black can exert pressure.

matters

48 dIC5 �e4 49 l1he1 �d7 50 lld4 g5 51

at

this

point.

Better was

58 . . . �a3+! 59 � g2 (59 �f4 �a2)

champions' games but also those of

Many champions won games by

other world class players. How hard it

pushing two passed pawns all the way

was to balance my time between them!

to

Timman also liked to give up his rook on

that I planted like Smyslov was later

54, .. l:th3

defeat.

61 c,t>e3 l1xfl

king after queening his g-pawn first,

A fter

62...�e2+ 63 cJig3 [63 �f3

66 11 fl

d3

67 f6 d2 68

fl

d 1 ='iW

'iWf6+

¢>c7

70

g8='iW

I

68

'iWc8

C.Kasparov

gains a tempo to help win the race.

1 52

c6

¢> g 3

60. . .11e2 61 l:t f4

c3

neB

61

V.K.ramnik

Kasparovchess.com 200 I

1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJf3 b6 4 ttJc3

14 0-0 ttJf6 15 'iWc2 ttJe4 16 l:tfc1 l:tc8 17 �el ttJd6 18 a4 a6 19 ttJd2 llc7

White catches B lack's king.) (60

-

Champions Club, 5 minute game

�b7 5 a3 d5 6 exd5 ttJxd5 7 e3 g6 8 ttJxd5 exd5 9 �b5+ c6 10 �d3 �g7 1 1 b4 0-0 12 �d2 ttJd7 13 l1b 1 l:te8

73

60 g6

i n detail my

'it>h4

temporarily stops White pushing h i s

is

pas seq f and g-pawns a s a team. I t also

55 ... f4? !

[67 . . . c l =W"

68 'iWfl+ ¢>c6 69 'iWe6+ ¢>c7 70 'iWe7+

f-pawn

not analyse

mate]

�h3 l:th I + 66 'it>g3 l:tg I + 67

'it>c6 7 1 'iWd6+ 'it>b7 72 'iWd7+ <Ji>b8

o f the

will

there I could not resist a little smile.

�fl+

an

pin

c2

blitz gamf'. I happily let my opponent's

�xg8

extremely difficult move to find. I t

This

g7

encounter with Krarnni k as it is j ust a

wins. Or 6 3 g7 c2 64 g8=" l:tg I +

65

62

knight go to c4 and when it arrived

7 1 'iWb6+ �c8 7 2 .e6+ 'it>b7 73

�c7

comes

62 g7 1-0

d3 66 fl l:td8 67 g7 d2 68 f8='ih d l ='iW 69

6 1 . .. d2

63 ¢>xd2 cxd I ='W+ 64 'it>xd I .

l1e8

b) 62 ... l1e8 63 f5 d4 64 f6 c2 65 �fl

59 . . . l1a2 ! !

knight

Belgrade 1 994. The rook can't be taken as White surprisingly checkmates Black's

69 fxe8='if+ wins.

5 5 g4

c4

transformed into this pawn - but in the

64 f5 d4] 63 ... d4 64 g7 �e8 65 f5 c2

I f 54 . . . �h l 5 5 �d L

The

end its slow pace is responsible for my

a)

54 g4 was interesting.

rank.

Ivkov at Amsterdam 1 9 7 1 and Kramnilc at

analysis. Alternatively:

53 lhd4 l:tb7 54 �e2

sixth

the back rank as in his games against

as I first pointed out in my Informant

hxg5 hxg5 52 �edl lhd4

the

g6 l:te2)

62 � f6+ <J;; c 7

2 0 ttJb3

1 53

Vassily SmyslOIl the 7th

Vassily Smysloy the 7th

38 g4 '*g5 39 �xh3 40 �b l ? ! lOeS 41 1fg3 42 1he6?

�xd4 lOxg4

that he has lovely piece play. However

Smyslov makes i t so easy to remove

White's d-pawn can become dangerous

the d6-pawn. A fascinating fight starts

as i f he can push and then consolidate it

in the centre.

on d6, it could stifle Black.

24 1Of6+

1 4 �e3 ne8

If 24 lOxd6 'ir'a6+.

24 ... 'i!tb8 25 �d4 SLeS 26 lOd7

20 ... bS 2 1 LUeS �e8 2 2 1:I.al lIee7 23 �c3 LUc4 See diagram on page J 50. 24 l:ra2 'lid6 2S BIbS BIbS 26 l::t a 8 lO b 6 2 7 l:ra2 h S 2 8 %:'cal b 4 29 'li d l h 3 30 g 3 LUe4 3 1 �fl �b6 3 2 %:. a 8 �fS 33 %:'xe8+ %:.xe8 3 4 � d 2 'iff6 3S �c1 �g7 36 lIa6 �h7 37 "ilff] �g8

42 ...�xe5 43 l:ru5 'ifb5 44 ..I1.g2 ? LUr6? 45 f] ? ? lOe4 46 'fIe7 LUxeS 47 bxeS �h3 0-1

15 d6 got the

I

Smyslov and I both played the Griinfeld quite regularly. Assessing the strength of the d6 passed pawn is not always a simple matter. I knew his win against Euwe, so I also went for a variation in the Griinfeld with a d6-pawn. Very sadly the result was not 0- 1 as in Smyslov's game. Actually the position I reached against Piket was virtually the same.

M.Euwe - V.Smyslov

J.Piket

-

G.Kasparov

impression

from

26

this

particular game that the d6-passed pawn is not something Black can't handle, especially in the Griinfeld.

1 5...�d3 16 �xb7 nb8 17 �g2 �xfl 1 8 'i!txfl White has reasonable compensation for the exchange. 18 ... lOd7 1 9 lOc4

..•

f6? !

Smyslov takes a huge risk. After 26 . . . SLxd4 27 'lixd4+ 'i!tg8 28 LUf6+ 'i!tfS! (Euwe spotted that the natural continuation battery,

28 . . .'i!th8,

gives

more

allowing than

just

a a

perpetual: 29 lOd5+ 'i!tg8 30 lOe7+ 'i!tfS 3 1 'lWh8+ 'i!txe7 32 ne I + 'i!td7 33 'Wd4+ lOd5 34 SLxd5 nb4 3 5 'iWe5 'iWa6+ 36 'i!tg l 'fId6 37 'Wc3) 29 LUxh7+ 'Ot>g8 30 LUf6+ 'i!tfS the players have to settle for a repetition.

27 �xeS fxeS

19 ...lOeS M. Euwe

-

Nowadays players who develop the e2-knight on c3 go thcre at on c c with

V.Smyslov

Candidates Tournament, Zurich 1 95 3

1 0 lOec3.

1 d 4 lOr6 2 c 4 g 6 3 g3 �g7 4 � g 2 dS

S exdS LUxd5 6 e4 lOb6 7 LUe2 eS

10 ... lOa6 11 lOa3 exd5 1 2 exd5 ..I1.f5 1 3 1Oc3 lOb4

8 d5 e6 9 0-0 0-0 1 0 a4

Black bases his strategy on the fact 1 54

Smyslov exchanges to get closer to the d6-pawn.

20 LUxeS �xe5 2 1 �Ic5 ? ! After 2 1 lOe4 ! ? 'fIa5 22 lOxc5

28 'Wd2?

2 1 ...'fIaS 22 �e3 1:I.fd8 23 lOe4

Going

�xd6

after

B lack's

king

with

2 8 'iWd6 would force Black to return the 155

Vassily Smyslol' the

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

7th

J.Piket

exchange and settle for a position a pawn

down.

2 8 . . . l:lbc8

(28 . . . l:lxd7

-

G.Kasparov

Euwe Memorial, Amsterdam 1 995

prepared this move to counter h i s

match: 1 9 . . . tUdJ ! 20 �g3 c4 2 1 'iWc2

preparation.

1:[c8 22 l:lad l 'it'd7 23 h4 f5 24 nxd3

position

29 "xd7) 29 .f6+ �g8 30 'fie7 l:lxd7

I d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 d 5 4 lLln

3 1 .xd7 and White should win this without too much of a problem.

2S ... l:lbcS 29 �gl ?

Then

Gulko

defended

differently with

14 lLlb5 �d7

'Wb3 !

'Wb6 ? !

the

I3 ... lLle4.

1 5 a4 ! lLlb4?

I7

.i.e3

\h-Ih

Karpov-Kasparov,

Game

21,

Seville 1 987. And I had also come up

�g7 S "ifb3 dxc4 6 "ifxc4 0-0 7 e4 lLla6

16

.i.xb5

against 19 �g3 in a quite different kind

8 �e2 eS 9 ds e6 1 0 0-0 exd5

1 8 .i.xb5 tUc6 19 d7 l:led8 20 'ifc4 lLlf6

of event: 1 9 . . . 'ifd7 20 a3 tUc6 2 1 'iWb5

2 1 �xc5 'ifc7 22 �xc6 bxc6 23 .i.d6

l:lc8 22 l:lad 1

game. After 29 . . . 'ifa6+ 3 0 'l!fxa6 lLlxa6

'iWxd7

24 'it'xd7 and I went on to win in

3 I lLlxe5 it looks balanced.

Groningen 1 990.

29 "d6 was still better than the

24

lLle5

1 -0

Piket-Gulko,

a simultaneous exhibition game, Rao­

14 �f4

Kasparov, New York 1 98 8 .

I had already played against 1 4 h3?! when

I

managed

to

show

1 9...l:l e4?

that

19 ... tUxa4 deserves consideration.

20 .1Lg3

Black's pieces work well and he can even take over the initiative with his

29 ... ,*,e5 ! He makes sure White doesn't get out of the pin.

30 �h3 'fie7 31 'fie2

22 'iWd3 lLlc4.

1 6 l:ld2 a6 1 7 'Wb3 b5 1 8 'ifd l c4 1 9 a4!

20 ... tUc4

11 cxdS ne8

tUc5 20 axb5 lLlbd3 2 1 .i.xd3 tUxd3

If 20 . . . lLla6 2 1 lLlxb6 'ii'xb6 22 'ifc2.

In an earlier game - with 1 1 . . . � f5 -

22 l:lxd3? cxd3? (22 . . . �xd3 ! ) 23 lLld5 !

2 1 lLlxc5

the d-pawn did not move yet assumed a

axb5

great role just by threatening to move.

Kasparov, Game 1 5 , World Champion­

24

tUe7+ !

Sadly, I lost that one as well. 12 .1L f4

ship, Seville 1 98 7

'12- '12

Karpov­

ne8 1 3 nad I lLle4 1 4 lLlb5 'iif f6 1 5 �d3

1 4 ...tU d 7 1 5 lld2 lLl b 4 1 6 'Wb3 � e6

lLlb4 1 6 tUc7 lLlxd3 1 7 lLlxe8 llxe8

Just like Smyslov I exchanged pieces

If 3 1 11d l nc7.

1 8 'lixd3 'fixb2 1 9 l:lde I 'lWb4 20 lLld2

around the d6-pawn in order to weaken

'fia4 2 1 'iifc 4 'lixc4 22 lLlxc4 �c3

it.

Black wins a piece. Euwe resists but

23 lLld2 �xd2 24 �xd2 �d7 25 .1Lf4

17 � c4 lLlb6 18 .i.xe6 l:lxe6

�b5 26 f3 g5 (26. . . �xfl 27 Wxfl lLlf6

32 �xd7 "xd7 33 'ifxe5+ ..t>g8

28 nxe8+ lLlxe8 29 �e5 lLlg7 30 d6

34 'ife4 as 3 5 h4 'ifd5 3 6 'ir'g4 nnJ

Now the d6-pawn wins.) 2 7 �xg5

37 l:ldl 'iifn 3 8 "e4+ 'ifn 39 "ifc5 'it'f5

�xfl

40 'i!fe4+ 'fin 4 1 'lie5 'fif5 42 'fie4+

30 �xc5 l:ld8 3 1 l:[e5 f6 32 nf5 b6

..t>g7 43 'iif d 4+ 'iif f6 44 'ifc5 l:ln

33 .1Ld4 lLle7 34 .1Lxf6 l:[xd5 35 ng5+

45 lld2 'ife7 46 "ife3+ nf6 47 nd4

nxg5 36 �xg5 lLlc6 37 �e2 ..t>f7 38 �d3 �e6 39 Wc4 lLle5+ 40 Wd4

51 l:lb5 'iif d 7 5 2 �g2 "ife7 53 'ilVc4+

tUc6+ 1 -0 Karpov-Kasparov, London!

..t>g7 54 'lid3 �h6 5 5 1:[d5 l:ln 56 l:ld6

Leningrad 1 986.

lLle5 57 'lie3+ �h7 58 l:[b6 .e7 0-1

See diagram on page

Everything goes according to plan . Just like Smyslov I win the exchange.

22 tUxd2 lle2 Here

23

tUf3

l:lxd6 !

25 'iJ'xb4 (25 lLlxd8 l:lxb3 26 axb3

1 54.

l:lxd8s) 25 . . . nd l + 26 nxd 1 'iWxd l +

Tal recommended this and I lost

and White consolidates his

material advantage and has decent chances to win with the two pieces

in the next game and was hoping I

13 d6 b6

where

Piket has his own lines, which he has

controversial

developed and refined to a high level. I

27 'ife l

against it. This is one more example

could prove I was able to neutralise the

1 56

22 . . . l:ld4

(23 . . . l:lg4 24 lLle6 wins.) 24 lLlxb7 l:ldJ 19 tUa4 ! ?

1 2 l:[ d l �fS

I suspected I would face the variation

2 1 ...lLlxd2

2 8 ..t>xfl lLld6 29 �e7 lLlc8

lLle6 48 l:ld5 'iife 6 49 l:lc5 h5 50 b3 ..t>n

d6-pawn at least as well as Smyslov.

After 20 ..Ile3 tUc6 ' 2 1 tUxc5 llb4

piece play. 14 ... tUb4! 1 5 .i.f4 ! tUd7

3 1 ..Jhd7 in the long run he has no chance.

�xc3 23 bxc3 lLle5

a

world

champ ion

effect

had

a

on my career.

against the rook.

I had faced 1 9 a3? ' in a world title 157

23 ihb4 as 24 'iWxb7 l:lxd2

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Here 29 ... ':a7 30 ltJe4 wins. Alternatively

2 9 . . . 'iff8

30

ltJe4 !

'it'xd6 (30 . . . 1:I.d8 3 1 ltJf6+ .t>g7 32 'ifd4 lHs

33

lOe8+

'it?h7

34

g4

.l:tb5

35 ltJf6+) 3 1 ltJxd6 .l:tbb8 32 .l:tc I l:td8 33 l:tc8 .t>g7 34 1:I.xa8 wins.

30 h3 1:I.bl 3 1 nxb! .l:txb 1 + 32 .t> h 2 1:I. b6 If 32 . . .l:tb8 33 'ife5 'it>f8 34 ltJe4 l:tb7 3 5 1It'h8+ rJ;e7 36 'ife8+ wins.

25 d 7 as Euwe's d-pawn never got this far, already has a lost position.

And here 3 3 . . .l::t b 8 is countered by 34 ltJb7 ! .

34 'ifb8+
25 .. Jb.b2 26 'ifd5 ltb5 After 26 ... � f8 27 ltJe4! intending �e5 is better than 27 ltJd3 ltd2 28 �f4 1:I.a7! 29 �xd2 1:txd7 30 'ifxa5 nxd3 3 1 'ifxd8 1:I.xd8 32 �e3.

Here I resigned because I saw that I had run out of plausible moves. I never

three other possibilities.

got rid of that daITUled d6 pawn.

a) I f 38 ... f6 39 'iWeI ! . b) 3 8 . . ..l:tc6 3 9 'iWh8 + 'l;e7 4 0 'iWxh4+ wins. c) 38 . . .1:I.b4 3 9 'iWh8+
The conclusion of the game mght have been 4 \ . ...l:tg6 (If 4 \ .. ..l:tc6 42 g3.) 42 'ii> h l (Black has no move.) 42 .. J:tb6 43 g6 .l:txg6 44 'i!fb8+ 'l;e7 45 'iWxh4+

f6 4 1 'i!fe I + 'l;d6 42 'iWe8 wins.

39 'iWb8+ 'l;e7 40 'iWe5+ '.t>f8 4 1 fxgS

IIf6 46
1 -0

33 'ife5 rJ;f8

Here some doubt came into my mind but I still did not worry. In reality B l ack

This i s a desperate attempt, but it

can't loosen White 's grip. There are

After 3 6. . .g 5 3 7 f5 'ifb8 3 8 'ifxb8+ l:txb8 39 f6 .l:td8 40 .t>g3 wins. And

An attacking player like me often obtains positIOns with unbalanced

material. Therefore it quite often happened that my opponent had several connected pawns, while I preferred to have a piece. In this way Smyslov had a very strong influence on me. Two of his games impressed me very much. Here are a couple of critical positions from his games. Then come my games.

after 36 . . . f6 ! 7 37 'ifd5
V.Smyslov

- D.Bronstein

G.Kasparov - B.Spassky

27 1:I.dl �f8 After

27 . . . .l:ta7

28

�fS

'ife4!

(28.. .�f6 29 'ife8+ .t>g7 30 � eS ! ) 2 9 'ife8 .l:ta8 3 0 ltJe4 White wins.

28 �d6 �xd 6 28 . . . ':a7?

Not

29

�xf8

.t>xfS

30 'ife5.

29 'ifxd6

37 'ifd5 h4

V.Smyslov - J.Timman

G.Kasparov - J.Lautier

Now the pawn ending will not bring

victory: a) 37 .. :vPe7 38 'ifgS+. b) 3 7 ... gS 3 8 ltJd3.

c) 3 7 ... a4 38 IOb7 .l:txb7 39 'ifxb7

rJ;e7 40 Wg3 and Black can't enter the

29 ... 1:I.ab8 Now

the

pawn ending. d-pawn

is

3 8 'ifeS!

almost

suffocating me. Black treads a narrow path but it is not enough to stay in the

After

38

IOb7

comes

3 8 . . . l:txb7

39 'it'xb7 .t>e7.

game.

38 ... g5 IS8

I S9

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smysloy the 7"

V.Kramnik

Till s is the third of my losses where

there

was

-

G.Kasparov

unbalanced

material and a mass of pawns coming in my direction. No mistake, I lost three games in this way! In fact I may have lost even more, but (luckily for

1 8 ... ng8

me) I can't remember them.

V.Smyslov

-

D.Bronstein

See diagram

on

page J 59.

USSR Championship, Moscow 1 95 1

37 lL\xd6

White has three pieces against a rook

Smyslov not only takes a pawn, but

and four pawns. This kind of position

with his enormous piece power also

with unbalanced material is really hard

very quickly catches Bronstein's king.

to judge. I have already mentioned one

l S . Jte6

painful experience against Anand in

..

1 e4 c5 2 lL\c3

Tilburg 1 99 1 ; in that game he had a

Smyslov played 5 6 Closed S i cilians

queen, I had three pieces.

in his career. His first game and first

Black has invested two moves to

in 1 99 8 . His fust victim was Kottnauer, last Arakhamia.

exchange the bishop for the knight. H e

5 2 years had

could have made two pawn moves

elapsed between these two games.

2 ... lL\c6 3 g3 g6 4 ..Itg2 ..Itg7 5 d3 d6

21 �xe2 �d7 2 2 l:tdl a5 23 lL\e5+ �c7 24 lL\xf7 a4 25 e5 a3 26 .ltal

9 b3 lL\e5 1 0 lL\ce2 'ii' b 6 11 (4

l::t ge8 27 �g5 l::t a 5 28 lL\e6+ <;t>d7

1 6 ..1tc3

V.Smyslov - J.Timman Hoogovens, Wijk aan Zee 1 972

1 lL\n g6 2 e4 .ltg7 3 d4 d6 4 lL\c3

bxc6 Interestingly, Smyslov himself took on doubled c-pawns with Black against

Timman

in

1 9 84.

Even

more

interestingly, several decades earlier in

Smyslov prefers to face the three pawns with a piece, rather than have a

1 94 3 , Smyslov also had a similar

rook against four pawns. After 1 6 nxb2

position against Botvinnik. He lost the

comes

first and drew the second game.

1 6 . . . lL\xb2

17

..Itc3

lL\d3

8 h3 ..ItxfJ 9 ..wxn e6 10 e5 ! lL\e7

1 8 ..Itxh8 f6 19 ..It g7 h 5 20 g4 ri,tf7 2 1 Jth6 ..Itxa2.

1 6 . . ..Itxa2?! .

After 1 6 . . ...It x c 3 Bronstein avoids the equation of three pawns against a piece.

1 1 ...lL\xc2+

1 7 lL\xc3 ..Itc4

This is a cute move, but not really a

lL\b4 + 1 9 c;t>e l Jta6) 1 8 .. Jtb8 and it is

1 8 lL\ge2 ( 1 8 lhb7

hard to pick a colour. Everyone to their

12 ..wxd .xb2 13 ..wxb2 lL\xd3+

39 lL\c4+ 1-0

..Itg4 5 ..Ite3 lL\c6 6 ..Itb5 a6 7 ..Itxc6+

instead.

6 ..Ite3 lL\h6 7 ..wcl lL\g4 8 ..Itd2 lL\d4

good deal.

He does not see a checkmate in two, but his position was hopeless anyway.

i 9 �f2 .ltc4 20 lL\n .ltxe2

win with it came in 1 946, his last was his

37 ...nxb3 3 8 ..Ite5 na8

own taste.

1 4 ¢>n ..Itxb2 15 n b l

1 7 nxb2 lUxb2 18 ..Itxb2

1 60

29 ..1td5 White simply has too many pieces.

29 ... a2 30 g4 l:tc8 31 lL\g5 l:tf8 3 2 f5 gxfS 33

gxfS

b6 34 ..It e6+ �c7

35 exd6+ exd6 36 lL\e4 na3 161

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

11 lLle4

2 6 ... eS 2 7 lLle2 'ii'd 2 ? !

Smyslov plays powerfu l ly.

Timman adopts a risky app ro ach . It i s

l l ...lLld5 1 2 �g5 'Wbs 13 0-0 h6 14 �f6 �xf6 1 5 exf6 it'xb2 1 6 c4

37 >Ph2 d2

If 1 5 . . . fxg6 1 6 'ilfh3 'ilfg5+ 1 7 <;t>b l :txb2+ 1 8 'iPxb2 l1b8+ 1 9 <;t>a I lLlb4 20 'Wxe6+!

f6-pawn.

gave 20 a3 as winning. I can no longer remember why, since it only leads to a

2S n 'ih:a2

it'xd4 17 exd5 cxdS

(In my Informant analysis I

dangerous to release the p re s sure on the

draw. 20 . . . lLlc2+ 2 1 >Pa2 'it'a5 22 lLlb I [22 a4?? 'iWb4] 22 . . . lLlb4+ 23 'iPa l and

See diagmm on page 159.

B l ack

has

a perpetual.)

20. Ai'hS

Black has three pawns for the piece.

2 1 a4 ! ! This move wins. 2 1 . ..lLle2+

If they start rolling they will be like an

(2 l . . .'iVa5 22 lId2) 2 2 >Pa2 lLlb4+ (22 . . . lt'a5 2 3 It'xg6) 2 3 >Pb l ! and

avalanche. On the other hand th e problems

for

B lack.

The

Interestingly,

29 ..we3 ! �h7 30 'iib 6 Of course White's queen is free to

sacri fices a p i e ce for three passed

30 .. :iib3 3 1 �g2 d4 32 'ilh:d6 lWe6

the piece of c o urs e ) in Linares 200 I .

power in the bartery. 16 l:td2 lIe8 17 lLlgl ! dS IS lLlo as

41 'ilfd6 as 42 'it'dS 1-0 Here are my exciting games featuring

the topic of a pieee against three

33 'i!t'xb4 'ii'xf6

connected passed pawns.

H o wev er the line is st i l l playable for

decades

B lack's

invade.

pawns. I beat S hi ro v in that l i ne (I had

three

in

3s ..Jlff6 39 lLle4 'ilff4+ 40 >Pg2 l:tc2

important novelty which established a new variation. In that line B lack also

nearly

pawn

it all hope goes too.

lLlbd2 vari ati on, introduced a very

B lack

strongest

position has now disappeared and with

seven years later Smyslov, i n the

9

White wins as there is not enough

38 lLlxd2

choking f6-pawn can cause a lot of

after G.Kasparov - B.Spassky

Smysl ov first played it.

Niksic 1 9 83

IS lLle3 0-0 19 :tad l 'iWe5 20 g4 l:tabS 2 1 nfe! 'iWgS 22 lIbl

1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 lLlc3 �g7 Sp a s sky

doesn ' t

often

play

19 e5?! the

King's Ind i an .

20 nhS+ ! ! is rather similar to Spassky's

4 e4 d6 5 0 lLlc6 6 �e3 a6 7 lLlge2 lIbS 8 'ilfd2 0-0 9 h4 bS 1 0 hS bxe4 11 g4 �xg4 ! ? 12 fxg4 lLlxg4

34 lLlg3!

. . . nh I

l:txhS + !

23

lLlg5

See diagram on page 1 59.

The knight will really dominate and

moves.

23 'iPg2 nb4 24 lhb4 exb4 25 lLle2 Smyslov

pushing the pawn.

B l ack

into

about

to

19 ...lLle7 20 �h3 Black has three pawns for the piece

20 lLla4 was not a clear win, though White is berter after 20 . . .lLlf5 2 1 'ilff4 'ilfe7.

After 35 . . . f5 36 gxf5 gxf5 37 it'e7+

preferred to retain the piece. B lack's

20 ... eS 21 dxeS

pawns are a long way from promotion.

Black has only two pawns, but the

36 . . . g5 l o n g er.

1 62

is

the h-file. I knew how much Smyslov

would

path

These two factors made me confident.

3 6 it'flI d3 provokes

White

'ilfh6+ 'iPgS

and no real weaknesses - perhaps only

wins.

:teS 26 lLld4

22

34 ... it'e6+ 35 lLle4 ne7

sooner or later White will penetrate.

Finally the first pawn of the herd

and

20 . . . �xhS

Larsen.

>PxhS

22 lLle5 White wins.

are no longer in a mass, but separated. 2 2 ... eS

against

21

checkmate.) 20 lLlxe4 f5 2 1 lLlc3 lLlxd4

The ' three pawns for the piece' balance is restored, but Black's pawns

Berter was 1 9 11dh 2 ! dxe4 (I9 . . . lLle7

have

resisted

fo r

13 O-O-O ! lLlxe3 14 'ilfxe3 e6 15 hxg6

for

his

d-pawn

is

open.

2 1 lIdh2 lLlc6. 2 1 ...�e7 22 'ilff4 lLle6! 23 net d4

hxg6 1 63

If

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassi/y Smys/ov the 7th

wins.]

llf2] 37 . . . 11f2 B lack wins.) 35 . . . .d2+

B lack wins.)

3 1 'itb7+ �fS 3 2 llxf7+ [32 'iixg7+

(Or 3 5 .. �e7 ! 36 �f5 .xa4.) 36 'it>b l

Black is doing fine here.

xg7 33 llxf7+ �h8 34 llh7+ <;Pg8

llD 37 llc I .i.h6.

31

'ith7+

WfS

32

liJxnr

1 9 . . . 11e8 20 .f1

and

17 exf6 .If6 18 lOb3

35 liJf6+ �fS 36 liJxe6 mate] 32 . . . 'ito>e8

G.Kasparov

33 liJf6+ ..t>d8 34 liJxe6+ 'ito>c8 35 llc7 mate) 30 "iWh7+ �fS 3 1 llfl llc3 + 1 I

-

J.Lautier

See diagram on page 159.

Linares 1 994 Remembering Smyslov's example

This incredible move saves B l ack. 3 2 bxc3 'iWa3+ 3 3 Wdl lld8+ 34 lOd2

llxd2+ and Black has a perpetual. 29 . . 'iPfli 30 lOIe6+ be6 31 l:tfl+ .

B l ack

gets

nice

play

holds

Four pawns may not be one too many. White has chances to block them as there are holes on Black's queenside.

19 �b1

recovers

Although

other

1 8 ...liJxb4

back

24 ... liJxd4 Black

but

nothing but gloom.

intentionally

14 axb5 axb5

24 . . . liJxe5 25 liJf6+ �xf6 2 6 liJxe5 c 3 .

piece,

�e6 9 �c2 �a7 1 0 'ite2 'ife7

1 1 b4! d5 12 a4 b5! 13 0-0 0-0

after

the

continuations, like 1 8 .d3 g6, offered

castling.

I knew Smyslov played 24 liJe4, but here

retained

liJf6 5 d3 d6 6 .i.b3 h6 7 h3 a6 8 liJbd2 B lack

<;Pe8 3 2 'itg8+ �flI

24 lbd4

1 e4 e5 2 liJf3 liJc6 3 �c4 �c5 4 c3

the

the

material

After 19 .liLe3 .liLxe3 2 0 fxe3 lOxc2

exchange. no

2 1 'iVxc2 b4 22 liJfd4 .g5 favours

longer

favours White, he still has a dangerous

Black; 1 9 .i.a3 lOxc2 20 .xc2 1:tfd8

attack.

and the d-pawn can't be blocked.

19 ... d4!

25 liJId4!

Not I 9 . . . c5? 20 .i.a3.

After 25 'i!fxd4 "ifb7 2 6 .£2 �h6+

33 'iix g6 +

27 �b l lled8 2 8 c6! ii'xc6 2 9 �g2 the

I did not see the possibil ity of

position is balanced.

33 lOd5 ! ! which forces a draw. Then

25 ... '1Ii'xc5 26 liJf3 ! lled8 If 2 6 . . . ii'b6 27 lle2 lled8 and I

33 .. '>t>d7 taking the pawn would lead

preferred Black's position even a good

to

two decades ago.

34

the

same

lhfS+

perpetual .

ji'xfS

35

(33 . . . exd5

it'e6+

'Vie 7

27 liJg5! �e7?

3 6 'i'g8+; 33 . . . 11xd5 34 llxfS+ 'itxfS

White has no more than a draw after

35 'iixe6+) 34 lOxe7 �h6+ 35 �c2

27 . . . l:td7 28 �xe6 fxe6 29 '1Ifh2 �h8.

llxg8 36 lOxg8 llxh3 and the endgame should end in a draw.

28 'Vih4 lld3 29 'ith7+

33 ... '>t>d8 0-1

Here I started to have problems with my time. The situation has changed,

Here I lost on time. Maybe I spent

so, just like Smyslov, I might have

too much time trying to work out the

considered 29 liJce4 1 copied

the

Sometimes I

champions

too

much,

sometimes not enough. They should have

written

instructions

on

simi larities between this game and Smyslov's. But the position is lost anyway.

their

For example: 34 .i.xe6 "'4! (After

games. I f you buy a television you get

34 ... 11b6 35 ji'g8 1 llxc3+ 36 �b l !

a manual. 29 . . . �xe 5 ! I missed this

llxb2+1 3 7 ..t>xb2 ji'a3+ 3 8 ..t>b l llb3+

move in my 1 983 Illformant analysis.

draws nicely.) 35 lOa4 (If 35 lOd I

(29 . . . c3

"i!t'd2+ 36 �b l llD ! 37 llg l [37 llh l

30

lln !

"Wb4

[30 . . . 11b6

1 64

1 5 d4 Opening up the centre doesn't favour White, and other options o ffer nothing either. I f 15 .i.b2 llfd8; 1 5 exd5 liJxd5 1 6 .liLb2 lOf4 1 7 'Vie4 �d5.

1 5... eId4 Not 1 5 . . . dxe4? when

20 llu7?!

1 6 lOxe5 is

In such a complicated position it is

better for White.

16 e5

natural that players cannot always fwd

Other moves were also harmless for

the best moves. The best choice was

Black.

20 .i.a3 ! This extremely complicated

1 6... dxc3 ! ?

position could take pages of analysis,

I saw that Black has time t o step

but for now I ' U just show the best

aside with 1 6 . . . .i.d7 ! . Then 1 7 cxd4

defence for White. 20 . . . d3 2 1 .i.xd3

( l 7 lle I dxc3 ! ) 1 7 . . . �xd4!

(2 1

1 8 llxa8

iVe4 �xb3

22 .i.xb4 .i.xf2+!

( 1 8 .d3 .i.xe5 wins) 1 8 . . . 11xa8 1 9 .lIe I

23 'i1>xf2 llxa I 24 .i.xd3 'iVb6+ 25 'it>g3

( 1 9 lOxd4 liJxd4 20 .d3 .xe5 and

f5 26 .e7 .g6+ 27 <;Ph2 White is still

1 65

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

Vassily Smyslov the 7'}'

26 fIe5!

in the game.) 2 L.lLlxd3 22 .i.xf8 lLlf4! 23 Wxb5 lLlxh3 + ! 24 \t>h l lLlxf2+

These kinds of positions are harder to play in a rapid game. Maybe that's an

Kramnik sacrifices a piece. His

25 \t>g I and White is still alive. 20 ... e2 Good is 20 . . . 11xa 7 ! 2 1 lLlbxd4 (2 1 lLlfxd4? .i.e4 22 We4 �g6! 23 lLlf5 c5 ! ) 2 l . . .11a 1 ' 2 2 'ife4 �g6! 23 'ifxg6 fxg6 24 lOxe6 l:tf6 and White is i n trouble. 2 1 lluB exb l =W 2 2 l:txfS+ \t>xfS

excuse for my loss. Because it was a rapid game our analysis was limited.

pawns are closer to promotion than those o f Smyslov's opponents.

32 llg4+! 'it>f8

26 ... lOxh4 V.Kramnik

-

G.Kasparov

PCA Intel-Grand Prix, Moscow 1 994 1

lOn lOf6 2 e4 g6 3 lOe3 �g7 4 e4

d6 5 d4 0-0 6 .i.e2 e5 7 d5 lObd7 8 .i.e3 lLlg4 9 .i.g5 f6 10 .i.h4 h 5 1 1 lOd2 lLlb6 1 2

n 1Of7 1 3 'ife2 .i.h6

1 4 0-0-0 c5 1 5 dxc6?!

1 5 ..tb 1 came into consideration. 1 5 ... bxc6

If 26 . . . lLlxe5 27 llxf5 gxf5 28 c6. 2 7 exd6 lOe5 2 8 llxd4 See diagram on page 1 60.

28 ... lOf5

After 28 . . . llb4 2 9 llxb4 axb4 30 .e4 lO f5 3 1 il'xb4 the five queenside pawns

33 il'e6! nb7 34 c6 White's central pawns are just too

might be too much to handle even for Smyslov.

much to bear. 34 .. Jhb2+

The rook sacri fice causes some tension, but not much else. 35 �xb2 'ifb6+ 23 Wx b5?? This is a bad mistake or should we say that it misses the opportunity to play a great move. The position was so exciting that I forgot about Smys10v completely. The surprise is 23 �g5 ! ' 'i'fg6 (23 . . . 'fhfl + 2 4 'ifxfl hxg5

25 tt'xb5 lOd5 26 lLlbxd4 !=) 24 """xb5 \t>g8 25 'WIfb8+ ( 2 5 lhb 1 """x b 1 + 26 .t>h2 .xb3 27 lLlxd4 White i s a pawn behind, but i t is n o t easy to do anything with the extra pawn.) 2 5 . . .�h7 26 llxb l 'flfxb l + 27 h2 lLla6 28 .a7 'lixb3 29 lOxd4 'lic4 Despite Black's extra material White can resist. 23 .... xb3 White has only a rook agains t B lack's queen. 24 'i'b8+ \t>e7 25 'ifxe7+ �e8 26 .i.d2 .d8 B etter was 26 . . . lLld3 L 27 -.te5 �fS 28 lLlxd4 lLld3! 29 'flfe3 -.te4 0-1

16 IP b l as

B etter was 1 6 ... lLlc5 ! . 1 7 lOa4 c 5 1 8 1Oc3 .i.e3?

There is no need to think about moving the bishop to d4. 19 lLld5 .i.d4 20 lOb3 .i.b7 21 lOxd4 cxd4 22 f4 l:tb8 23 llhO lOh6 24 c5!? .i.xd5 2 5 exd5 lOf5

1 66

29 llxf5! gxf5 30 .xf5 Black has a rook for the pawns, but it

is hard to make a breach. 3o...'it>g7

After

(3 1 . . . 1Of7

30 . . J%b4 32

31

llxb4

.e6+ axb4

33

�h8 d7

(33 .i.xh5 is also sufficient.] White must be winning, e.g. 3 3 ... �g7

36 �a3!

The king moves up and finds a shelter near the central pawns.

34 .i.xf7 llxf7 3 5 c6) 32 lhb4 axb4

36 ... iI'c5+ 37 'it>a4 il'c2+ 38 ..t>b5

33 il'e7! and White's pawns will soon

'ifb2+ 39 �a6 il'e2+ 40 �b7 nh7+

move forward decisively.

41 d7 1 -0

3 1 �xh5 ll h 8?

The rook shifts out of play. It was not

After all these losses I gave up

at all hopeless for Black after 3 1 .. J%b4!

trusting in the piece against connected passed pawns. The following position

32 nd2 ! (32 nxb4 axb4 33 il'e6 .a5 ! )

32 . . . iI'c8 3 3 'ilfxc8 lhc8 34 c6 1Oc4 and he is still alive and kicking.

occurred in my game against Radjabov at Linares 2003.

1 67

Vassily Smyslov the 7th

G.Kasparov - T.Radj abov

26...Wd6

Linares 2003

The young Estonian grandmaster centralises his king.

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

2 7 l:tdl 'it>e6 2 8 f4 �fS Black's king is very active.

M·i kbail

Botvinnik was the first

- or

he lost to Petrosian in 1 963, FIDE

immediate predecessor, Alekhine, i n a

denied him the right of a re-match and

title match. Botvinnik convincingly

he was finally dethroned.

won the title of world champion in a Radjabov has just sacrificed a piece on e5 and in the game I decided not to take it but play 2 2 We3. However 22

�xe5 ! ?

llJxe5

23

dxe5

'ilc7

2 9 g4+ ! !

24 0-0-0 would have given White a

People who bum the candle at both

clear advantage. I had lost confidence

ends live shorter lives.

so much in Smyslov's piece against

29 ..t>Ie4 30 1lJf2+! �xf4

in

which he played all his rivals four

computer chess programs, something

times. He scored 14 points out of a

he had started much earlier. He also

possible 20,

1 970 but continued working on

beating each opponent

opened his own school for teaching

in their individual match. Thereafter, in

juniors and I was one of his pupils. He

duels with Bronstein, Smyslov and Tal,

influenced my play not only as a great

he retained his title only by drawing

player but as a trainer as well.

did not opt for this possibi lity which

Botvinnik liked to play on the edge

promised a winning position. B lack has

of the board, especially the h-file.

only two pawns for the piece. Later I

Though I

even blundered and lost. This painful

won games with

A.Uyin Zbenevsky - M.Botvinnik

this

method I also lost some. On the right

game prevented me from winning

is a position I remember so well.

Linares one more time.

The patriarch attacked on the h-file

Smyslov also influenced me with a

while his opponent played along the

lovely checkmate of his opponent's

g-file

centralised king, just like Tal did.

and in the two positions

below I tried to copy Botvinnik's

Here is that sweet finish! -

Botvinnik retired from active play

5-player match-tournament in 1 948, in

...

connected passed pawns method, that I

V.Smyslov

winning rerum matches! But when

world champion who did not defeat his

3 1 J:l.g l ! 1 -0

L.OII

method.

Smyslov allows Lembi! to decide

Rostov 1 993

whether he wants to be checkmated by

LSokolov - G.Kasparov

P.Svidler - G.Kasparov

the bishop or the knight, but he has no say as to how many moves it will take to do the deed. Smyslov was 72 when he set up this lovely checkmate. Vassily is the oldest living world champion. Though I have suffered from his influence, I wish him an even longer and very healthy life . 168 1 69

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'h

A.llyin Zheuevsky

-

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'1,

M.Botvinnik

34

21 'it'e2 h5! 2 2 �hl b 4 23 gxh4

USSR Championship, Moscow 1 927

White opens the g-file for himself

Wfl

e4 !

35

lLl x d6

l:I.xb2+!

P.Svidler - G.Kasparov

36 Wxh2 l:I.h6 37 :te2 'ilho+ 3 8 l:I.eg2

Tilburg 1 997

and the h-file for Botvinnik.

1 e4 e6 2 lOc3 d5 3 g3 dxe4

1 e4 c5 2 lLlo d6 3 c3 This little move is not as hannless for

2 3 ... lOf4 24 Wd2 l:I.b6 2 5 iLe3 lhb4

White applies little pressure in the opening. 4 iLg2 iLd7 5 lOb3 iLc6 6 0-0 lOd7

Black as it looks.

See diagram on page 1 69.

7 lOxe4 lOgf6 8 d3 iLe7 9 lOf4 0-0

3 ...lLlf6 4 iLe2 lLlbd7 5 d3 b6 6 0-0 iLb7 7 lLlbd2 g6 8 d4 ! ? cxd4 9 cxd4

26 iLxf4 l:I.xf4 27 l:I.ael Wn 2 8 1fg2

10 iLd2 e5 11 lOx f6+ lOxf6

lLlxe4

'ifh5 2 9 l:I.e3 l:I.e6 30 l:I.gl

Black can simply develop, but I could not resist taking the central pawn. 1 0 lLlxe4 jLxe4 38 ...l:I.xh2+

White survives the attack but has to settle for a lost ending. 39

�xh2

Wh5+

40

'iii> g3

cxd6

4 1 dxe4 "g4+ 42 'it>fl "f4+ 43 'it>e2 "xe4+ 4 4 'it;ld2 'ii'd 4+ 4 5 'i!.>e2

1 2 iLxc6 White finally doubles Botvinnik's pawns on the queenside. In exchange Black has a small space advantage. 12 ... bxc6 13 lOg2 Wd7 1 4 lOe3 lOd5 1 5 lOc4 f6 1 6 iLe3 l:I.ae8 1 7 a3 a6

3 0 ... W'b6

Defending

the

g7

pawn

while 1 1 lLlg5 d5 White's attack is very dangerous. The

assisting his own attack on the h-file. 31 b4 l:1.h4

text is probably an 'onJy move' Black

Botvinnik neatly brings up more fire-power to the h-file.

1 8 �g2 iLd6 19 0 f5 2 0 iLgl

has no time to retreat the bishop with I I . . .iLb7? as then comes 1 2 .l1.c4 e6

3 2 'ii' e 2 'it'f4 33 'ii'g 2?

1 3 iLxe6! fxe6 ) 4 lLlxe6 Wh4 ( 1 4 .....c8

White hopes to attack on the g-file, B otvinnik repulses the move nicely.

•

1 5 l:I.e I �f7 16 in>3 d5 1 7 "0+ lOf6 1 8 iLg5 iLe7 1 9 llac ! iLc6

45 . 'i!.>n .

.

Black's two connected passed pawns are too much to cope with. Winning the game takes time but is never in doubt. 46 :tg6 "c3 47 'it;ldl d5 4 8 116g3 'ii'd 4+ 49 'iii> e2 "e4+ 50 'it>d2 "f4+ 51 �e2 1i'b6 52 Il l g2 g6 53 a4 f4 54 llc3 g5 55 b5 "h5+ 56 �d2 cxb5 57 nbS axb5 58 :tc7+ �f6 59 1:1c6+ c;11 f5 60 llc5 'ii'n 6 1 lhb5 g4 62 c4 0 63 l:I.gl fl 64 nft g3 65 llxd5+ �g4

20 .. ..I:tr6 !

Botvinnik slowly but surely builds up an attack on the kingside.

33 ... 11g6!

Cute and effective.

1 70

66 lld4+ 'it;lb3 0-1 I also like to attack on the h-file.

20 lLlg7 ! ! 1:1£8 2 1 1:1e6 wins according to Winants.) 1 5 l:I.e l iLe7 ( 1 5 . c;11 f7 .

171

.

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6'h

1 6 �g5 'iVh5 1 7 'ifb3 d5 1 8 h3 ' ! traps

that I should try and have some fun. I

perpetual as pressing forward would

the queen.) 1 6 �g5 ! �xg5 1 7 g3 ! !

know that it doesn't sound the way

land him in checkmate.

'ith6 1 8 lOxg5+ <Ji> f8 1 9 'ti'd2' <Ji>g8

serious and professional chessplayers

20 lle7 �c6 21 lOe6 ' and White wins

are supposed to think during the game,

according to Peter Svidler's remarkable

especially if it's a game against the

analysis.

world champion, but that's exactly

A fter

I L . �d5

12

� f3

what I

�xf3

1 3 'i'xfJ lOf6 1 4 ,*c6+ lOd7 1 5 'ifd5 e6

thought. And,

after all,

�e7

for hope. In reality, Black simply has insufficient compensation for the pawn.

27 ... 'i'f6 28 llg3 ! 'i'rs 29 �xg5 lOxgS After

13 ...� rS 14 g4 h6 My plan was based on play along the

ifxe6+

goes to hi with his king, so I had reason

worked."

1 8 'i'fJ lOf6 1 9 ifc6+ lOd7 20 'iff3 I/,- I/, Degraeve-Bacrot, France 1 996) 17

Svidler, just like l l i n-Zhenevsky,

19 �e3 lOr6 20 'i'd2 'i'd6 21 llf2

it

1 6 lOxe6! ( 1 6 'ifO lOf6 17 ,*c6+ lOd7

16 . . . fx e6

24 ... lOhS 2 5 � fS lOf4 26 �xh3 lOxh3+ 2 7 � h l

2 1 ...11ah8

18 'i'd5 llb8 ! 1 9 �g5 lOf6 20 'it'b3 ! 21

l:tfe l +

lOxg5

30 1hgS

continuations lead nowhere. ( 1 7 ... 'Wie7

[20 . . . ifg7

'i'g2

33 ':h5 ! wins.

IS gxfS hxgS 16 fxg6

stands better. Two of three possible

'iff7

30

given by Winants, then 32 l:tg l .tf6

h-file.

White

29 .. Jhd4

3 1 lhg5 'iVh7 (3 1 . . .'i'f6 32 l:tg l ) is

I directed all my heavy pieces against

�e7

the h2 pawn, actually more so than

22 lle6±] 21 llfe l + �e7 22 l:te6' 0-0

Botvinnik, therefore I was optimistic,

23 llxe7 and White has won a pawn . )

22 llg2 ! I

was

not

opponent's

worried

play

on

about the

my

g-file,

Botvinnik's opponent also had the g-file but got nowhere with it.

I

was

not

certain

whether

my

opponent saw this in advance.

See diagram on page J 70.

Trying to forcc mattcrs on the h-file.

llc7 2 1 llac l l:td7! Now all the normal

1 8 ... 'i'c7 ! 1 9 llf2 JIh4 20 �e3 l:tah8

moves do not succeed: 22 'ifO ! ! Peter's

2 1 llc l and White can force a draw if

move is very strong indeed. (22 iH6

he wants (Alternatively 21

<Ji>f7 ! ! )

lhe7

2 2 �c2 ! ? lOb6 23 b3 '*g3+ also leads

24 llxe7+ 'i'xe7 25 llc8+ and White

to a safe position for Black and in fact

Here I quote Peter's words from h i s

2 8 llxg7+ ¢>xg7 29 �xd2 he has a very

�g6+

�xg6

27

llxg5+

Chessbase analysis: "Then I realized

slight edge.) 2 1 ...l:txh2 22 llxc7 llh I + 23 ¢>g2 ll8h2+ 24 ¢>g3 llh3+ 25 'it>g4

and promising positions and decided

llh4+ and White must settle for a

1 72

this

case own

If 3 1 ....i.xd4 32 'i'd3.

3 2 1i'd3 ':xd4 33 'i'g6+ cbe6 34 'i'e8 llc4 After 34 .. . �d6 comes 3 5 'iWb8+ 'it>c6 36 1i'a8+ 'it>b5 37 a4+!

'>1;>f7

that 1 3 fJ leads to some very interesting

in

31 l:tg2 �r6

after 24 llg2 llxh2 25 ':xg3 llxd2 26

not

king.

'Wid2 b5

12 �bS �g7 13 f3

but

because o f the weakness of hi s

23 ':n ':8h4?

compensation.) 19 'ife4 ]:tc8 20 llfe I

WinS.

Black might have hoped for serious counterplay,

22 . . . lOh7 or 22 . . . ..if6 should have been

�e8 20 llfe l and White has very nice

�xe7

been defending. Botvinnik won so I felt

tried.

1 8 �g5 ! lO f8 ( 1 8 . . . <Ji>f8 1 9 �h6+

23

I kept attacking when I should have obliged to play for a win as well.

17 gxf7+ ¢>xf7 1 8 �a4 llhS?!

22 . . . h6

30 ... ifh3

2 2 ...llh3 ? !

1 6 ... a6!

24 �c2! Here I had to realise that my rook on h3 was trapped. 1 73

Mikhail Botvinnik th e 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik th e 6th

35 .d8!

This is a sideline.

Just like llin-Zhenevsky.

damage. Thus 24 . . . '1Ifh5

Black's king will stay where it is.

13 ... exd4

2 1 ...:xh7

(25 . . :e8 26 'ilt'e4 f6 27 �c3 ! ) 26 'ilt'c4

After 13 ... c4 1 4 �xc4 exd4 1 5 cxd4

3 5 .. :itf5 36 l:.el + �e5 37 'iWb8 Black loses more material, therefore I resigned.

attacked along the h-file while my opponent was looking for a result along

king

with

2 L .'iii> f8

(26 'ilt'g6 'ilt'xg6 27 :xg6 and White is

and, if necessary, walking over to the

1 8 : e l ll'ld6 1 9 � f4 lUac4 20 �b3 �f5

somewhat better in

queenside, occurred to me. However

26 ... 'iIt'f7 27 'ilt'xc 5 ! (If 27 'ifd3 :h6

�c8

This game was not the only time I

the

lUa5 1 6 �d3 'it'xc2 I 7 �xc2 IOxe4 2 1 lUe5 �e6 2 2 lUdJ :ad8 23 lUe5

1 -0

Hiding

(23 . . . �d5??

24

�xd6

wins)

24 �xc4 lUxc4 25 �c7 Rogers went on to beat Solomon in Sydney 1 999.

14 exd4 �g4 1 5 eS

Botvinnik kept his king on g8, so gave

28 'ilt'd2 'ilt'h7 29 'ilt'f4 b6?? [29 . . . .I:le8 or 2 9 . . . .I:l fll

told me this in his school.

30 :h3 and White was winning i n the

2 2 :gl+ �h8

ideas I.Sokolov - G.Kaspar-ov

along

the

h-file,

not

sacrifice.) 27 . . . lUe2

my

23 . . . b6? when we see White's threat: 24 �xd4+ :xd4 25 iVf5 and wins.

the Nirnzo - my Psakhis game comes to

in a row. My opponents were strong grandmasters, but only two of them made it into the top 1 0. Among these

4 e3 I expected 4 ,*e2 as that is Ivan's

all page

fxg3

lld6

White

lUxg3+

certainly

has

compensation for the exchange and Black must be careful. Nevertheless, to

input from me. My opponent missed an almost winning continuation in 25 f4 ! when White opens the second rank for the queen to get to g 2 ! 25 . . . 'ilt'h5

Of course I could select this game

( 2 5 ,.'iWd6

under the motif of the doubled f-pawns, and I was not worried about the g-file

line. Maybe he did it because this was

as Botvinnik dealt with this problem well. There was no reason to think that

I was not going to handle things equally as well.

21 �hl

I I �xe4 e5 12 �d3 ne8 13 e4

30

in the end he does, but he needs some

1 70.

be certain why he changed to the 4 e3

8 a3 �xc3 9 bxe3 fie7 10 'ite2 dxc4

'ilt'g5 nd I +

Ivan wants t o improve his queen, and

but I was hoping to attack on the h-file

4 ... 0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 lUo e5 7 0-0 lUe6

1 999.

2 5 'ilt'e l ?

15 ... �xO 16 exf6 lUxd4 17 �xh7+ �h8 1 8 fxg7+ �xg7 19 �b2 Ihd8 20 gxO :h8

main weapon against the Nirnzo. I can't

Botvinnik's main line.

tried . )

be objective, Black may well survive.

24 :agl

See diagram

seven Topalov was the strongest.

28

is equally unclear.) 29 ng l

On e5, the queen stops a threat. Not

mind here - but before this game in the

been

(28 . . . lUxg3+ 29 fxg3 nd6 30 nc2 .I:lh5

23 :g3 'ilt'e5

1 d4 lUf6 2 e4 e6 3 lUc3 �b4

have

But Sokolov is thinking of an exchange

opponent's play on the g-file.

I have never performed really well in

should

game Joshi-Shankar, Mumbai

brain was preoccupied with aggressive

Hoogovens, Wijk aan Zee 1 999

this endgame.)

me no hint what to do. He should have

I decided to step over to the edge. My

the g-file.

tournament I had j ust won seven games

25 : l g2 f6

( 2 6 . . . :h3

26 27

'ilt'f5) ng4)

26 27

f3 ! .g2 !

'Wb6 'ilt'fS

28 :g7 White overwhelms Black on the g-file. Then 28 . . .l%h6 29 'ilt'g5 wins.

24...:h4 Ftacnik

writes:

first

"The

independent move is very unfortunate, it seems that Black's position instantly becomes

hopeless . "

The

S l ovak

grandmaster did not know that it was not fully independent. I just copied Botvinnik who had put the rook in front and

the

queen

behind.

When

one

attacks a pawn the rook goes in front,

2 5 ...c;t>h7??

however when the king is the target,

1 74

then often the queen goes in front as an

Botvinnik gave no instructions on his

invasion is feasible and it wreaks more

game. I lost track of what to do with

1 75

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

my king. Anyway I wanted to attack

M.Botvinnik - V.Smyslov

27 ... W'e6 28 W'g2

own. Better was 25 . . . 'ifh5 ! 26 .::I. I g2

U 11 l i l my matches with Karpov these

(26 l:t3g2 f6 (26 . . . b6 27 'iVe3 'iVd5

two gr.:at players held the record of

28 'fie7 wins . ) 27 W'e3 .::I.e 8 28 �xd4

playing the most games at the very top

cxd4 29 'iib 3 'iih 7 and though Black is

of world chess. This game was their

living very dangerously, according to Tsetsarsky, he will get away with

first since their fmal match in 1 95 8 . In

it.)

the sixties they played seven games .

26 . . . l:te8 27 'fig l W'e5 28 l:tg8+ l:txg8

Botvinnilc won two and the rest were

29 l:txg8+ �b7 3 0 l:tfB 'i!ff4 (30 ... W'g7

drawn. My score after my last match

31 'iib l + i q.,h6 3 2 �C \ + q.,h5 33 � e 3 and Ftacnik c a l l s it a w i n a t t h e e n d o f

26 'i!fb l + ! A subtle check forces the king t o h 8 . 26 . . . f5

27

�xd4

similar picture - relatively few games

Both

l:tg8+ and l:th3 ! , threatening

and one champion who won no more

'*g7 mate, are menaced. I could have

games. I won 5 of the 1 2 regular games

postponed the checkmate for another

we played together.

six moves, but there was no point in

26...�b8 A fter

with Karpov produced a somewhat

1 -0

h i s line.) 3 1 W'g8+ � h 6 3 2 'ili'g2 �h7 33 'ill' g3 White i s better.

cxd4

2 8 W'xb7+ q.,h8 29 'ili'f7 ! B l ack gets checkmated.

1 1 ...�b7 1 2 'ili'el lObd7

USSR Spartakiad, 1 964

Sokolov 's king, not start defending my

doing so. It is remarkable that there are

0-0 5 a3 �xc3 6 bxc3 e4 This is quite ambitious.

in the database and only one draw,

7 lOb3 .::I. e 8 8 0-0 d6 9 lOf4 b6

27 ifn

when I was White

Black can't ease the g-file

Sokolov in the USSR Championship

against Andrei

13 ... b6 14 h4 A pawn move that I also employed regularly.

14 ... lOf8 15 'ili'g3 lOg6 16 lOb3 lOb7 17 h5 lOb4

10 f3 e3

It is quite unusual to put a knight on the edge like this, but Smyslov soon

See diagram on page J 76.

pressure with . . . .::I. g8 as White would

1 988 - the other 8 times the result was

take the rook with check. On other

1 -0. In addition I lost to Andrei at the

moves Black's king will be caught on

Reykjavik 1 98 8 World Cup where I

return

the g- file.

missed a battery and dropped a piece.

pawns.

g-pawn was one of

Botvinnilc's specialities.

1 c4 lOf6 2 lOc3 e5 3 g3 �b4 4 �g2

nine Kasparov versus Sokolov games

Now

1 3 g4 Push i n g the

makes sure he can rescue it. Smyslov sacrifices

the

e-pawn

18 � h l f5 1 9 �b2 '*f6

m

for the doubling of White's

1 1 d3 Botvinnik affected my play in many ways. I also picked up his idea in the English Opening of allowing the opponent to push a black pawn to the e3 -square and letting him keep it there.

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov

M.Botvinnik - V.Smyslov

2 0 f4 White can exploit the fact that the Botv innik doesn't take i t - i f he had

queen is on f6 .

20 ... il. x b l 2 1 g5 bIg5 22 fIg5 We5

done so, then the game would become unclear. Now the e3-pawn cuts White's camp into

two

23 'iix h4 il.c6 24 l:tf4 g6

but at the same time it

176

Opening the kings ide helps White.

2 5 bxg6 lOf8

can itself become a target. 1 77

Mikhail Botvinllik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6U.

26 'it'h6 'it'g7 27 J:bf5 /tJxg6 2S 1:80

43 e4 c51

White has not only exerted pressure against Black's king but has cleared the way to the e3-pawn.

Black resigned as White will deliver checkmate. G.Kasparov

�h7

-

A.Karpov

Game 2, World Championship, Seville 1 987 1 c4 e5 2 /tJc3 lUf6 3 /tJf3 /tJc6 4 g3 .tb4 S .tg2 0-0 6 0-0 e4 7 /tJgS .txc3 8 bxc3 neS 9 f3 e3 ! ? See diagram

0 11 page

It was Igor Zaitsev's idea.

32 'irh6 mate) 27 'it'h l lLlg3+.

according to Karpov and I. Zaitsev.

20 ...1:adS 21 1: b3 lLld4

1 7 ... dxc4 1 8 .txf6

Doubling the f-pawn, as we know, is a tricky matter. 18 ... gxf6 1 9 /tJe4 ..ti'g7

After

1 9 .. .lhe4 ! ?

20 .txe4

f5 !

24 lUe i 'iWxc4 Black is safe. 20 dxc4

This is an inaccuracy. I thought I was getting closer to the e3-pawn - just like

I could have taken b u t I knew

Botvinnik.

Botvinnik's game, he had beaten such a

32 ... :gS 33 /tJg5+ �xh6 34 .txe3

great player as Smyslov. Why not just follow him?

White is now winning easily.

1 0 ... dS

35 .. .l:1es 36 llh7+ �g4 37 �f2 /tJe7

Karpov plays differently.

3S /tJe6 /tJfS 39 /tJd4 /tJxd4 1 !

�h6 30 lhf6+ ! 'it'g5 3 1 "g7+ �f4

1 7 :fe I ! and White has an edge

1 0 d3!

Botvinnik captures the e3-pawn. �h5 35 1:f7

27 1:xc7 e2 28 "xa7 e l=" 29 Ibf7+

1 9 :fc I �h3 2 0 c 4 White is a bit better.

2 1 �O /tJd4 22 dxc4 �xO 23 exO e2 1 76.

A novelty in this particular position.

32 .tel

"xg3 wins) 26 ... /tJe2+ (26 . . . /tJxfl

After 17 /tJO "d7 18 .ta l 1:e7 ! ?

44 .tf6 1-0

29 . . :ihh6 30 gxh6 Ihf6 31 lhf6

25 . . . lLlxg3+ ! 26 ..ti'g I ! (26 hxg3?

1 7 c4

Black is lost anyway.

1:f8 29 J:H6

1 1 'W!fb3

22 1:xe3

Finally I took the pawn, but there are too many pieces left on the

a) If 20 "c3 "d8 ! (not 20 .. .'.e7 2 1 nxb7).

board, many more than in Mikhail Moiseevich 's game. 22.. ...xc4

b) 20 h3 �xe2 2 1 /tJxf6 .txfl 22 "c3 ne5 ! and with this beautiful move Black takes charge.

After 24

22 ... /tJc2

"xf6+

'iPf8

23

"c3

25

'irh6+

lLlxe3 ..ti'e7

they miss the precise check 26 "g5+!

Smyslov makes sure h e loses. After

I changed sides because Karpov was

c) 20 lUd6 Karpov and Zaitsev show

which covers the c5-square. (26 "f6+

39 ... /tJxe3 40 /tJxc6 /tJd l + 41 �e l

playing on a different flank. I was able

a very nice way to a perpetual, and I

�d7) 26 .. .'it>d7 27 /tJc5+ and White is

/tJxc3 42 �d2 /tJxe2 43 1:xc7 Black

to adjust.

should have gone for it. 20 . . . ne6

in the game.

struggles with his cut-off king. 40 cxd4 1:cS 41 d5 .t84 42 .td4 86

1 1 ...lLlaS 12 "a3 c6 1 3 cxdS cxdS 14 f4 /tJc6 IS :bl 'it'c7 16 �b2 �g4

178

21 tUxc4 1:d8 22 f5 1:ee8 23 1:b2 liJd4 24 1:xb7 tUxe2+ 25 ..ti'h l

23 ..ti'h l /tJf5 24 l'Id3 �xe2 25 1:xd8 1:xd8 26 1: e 1 :re8

1 79

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

To make things even more annoying,

N.Short - G.KlIsparov

with Black I pushed my e-pawn all the way to e3 in a Romanish i n .

Do

V. Anand - G.Kasparov

1 982 game against you

know

what

happened? I lost the following position as well!

O.Romllnlshin - G.Kasparov U S S R 1 982

27 .aS After 27 'Dd6 'Dxd6 28 �xd6 �o ! ! and the battery exploits the weakness o f the back rank.

M.Botvinnik - A.Pomar

27 ... bS 2S 'Dd2 .d3 29 'Db3

IBM, Amsterdam 1 966

1 e4 e6 2 'Dc3 dS 3 cxdS Though I played a few Exchange S lavs

and

French

defences,

these

variations do not suit my style. By the way I beat Dolmatov in an Exchange

29 ... � f3 ! ! 30 �xf3 .xf3+ 31 W g I

3 2 ...e3 33 f4 gxf4 34 lbf4 J:[xf4

Slav. I didn't select my loss against him

35 gxf4 'itfS 36 J:[xdS 'ihdS 37 'ili'e7+

for this book but he did beat me in a

Wg6 38 'iWe2+ Wf6 39 a6 'ili'1I8 40 'ili'c4

Youth tournament in the U S S R in 1 97 7 .

lte4 4 1 'itcs 'i!fb l + 42 Wg2 ltd 1

I s e t u p a battery but it v e ry quickly

43 .gS+ �f7 44 .hS+ Wg7 45 a7

lost. The opening of the Botvinnik

1-0

game did not catch my imagination but

J:[ x e 1 + 3 2 .xel 'De3 0-1

the game did.

3 ... exdS 4 d4 'Df6 5 'Df3 'De6 6 �f4

12 . . . g 5 ! 1 3 �g3 h5 14 h3 g4 15 hxg4 hxg4

One of my specialties was to push my g- and especially my h-pawn. I

See diagram on page 1 8 0.

18 tOxc4 dxc4

Going after the bishop also occurs in

won games with both, but sometimes

this line, sometimes Black can even do this to White, one example being

di agram

of

the

inspirational

Botvinnik game and then, on the next page, my games.

Seirawan-Beliavs\cy, Brussels 1988. That game went like this: I d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 'Dc3 'Df6 4 cxd5 cxdS 5 �f4 'Dc6 6 e3 � f5 7 'Do e6 8 �b5 'Dd7 9 0-0 �e7 I 0 �xc6 bxc6 I I J:[c I J:[c8 1 2 'Da4

1 80

17

�xe5

f6

Black saves the bishop, but it will remain rather passive.

the idea backfired. First I show you a

tOxe5

1 4... �g6 1 5 cS tOe4 1 6 f3 tOd2 1 7 J:[f2 tOc4

1 0 �xe6+ bxc6 11 0-0 �xc3 1 2 bxe3 nc8 1 3 c4 0-0 14 g4

tOe5

2 1 'iPfl �f3 O- \ .

� fS 7 e3 e6 8 �bS �b4 9 'DeS 'WaS

M.Botvinnik - A.Pomar

16

1 8 �g3 q"fl 1 9 J:[e l nh5 20 if d2 �e4

181

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

1 9 �d6

34 ... e5 35 �xe5 nb7 36 Wf4 as 37 %:1f2 �b3 3 8 d5 cxdS 39 c6

The bishop targets nothing but still it is very useful as i t keeps both black rooks very p as s ive

Botvinnik chooses to win with the c-pawn. He could have triggered

.

19 .. .l:tre8 20 e4 f5 21 .c2 fxe4

an

execution on the long diagonal as well.

3 9 ...%:1a7 40 c7 'ife7

22 fxe4 'ii a3 23 %:1el 'iih 3 24 %:1g2

The

sacri flee

standard

14

liJd5?

Black has fully equalised.

2 2 'ii'e3 'ittg 8 2 3 'it>gl 'ittf8 24 'iff2

need not worry Black, e.g. 14 ... exd5

%:1cd8 25 tlg3 'iWh6 26 'iix c4 'ilVd2

�a8 25 ttJe2 g6?

15 exd5 liJxd5 1 6 'li'xg7 �d7 1 7 .x£1? 'it'xd5

I should have exchanged queens and

1 9 l'lxe7+ 'it>b8 Black is very active.)

settled for an equal endgame. However

(17

'ifg4+

'itt c 7

IS

�xd5

I had won the previous game quite

17 . . . l'ldeS IS �g5 tlhgS! 1 9 iLxe7

convincingly and had not yet lost a

27 'iWc3 .xa2 B l ack

wins back

the

pawn,

single game in the match. All of which

but

made me fall asleep.

material often doesn't count in opposite

coloured

bishops

26 liJd4 'i'ie5 27 l'lel g5

middlegames.

White's pieces are pretty active.

See diagram on page 181.

28 .!:tg2 'iWa6

I advanced my g-pawn further - the same way Botvinnik did so many times.

41 iLd6 1-0

28 c3 'itt g 7

1 9 . . .%:1xg2+ ! ! Black finds an effective

N.Sbort - G.Kasparov

way to destroy White's king. 20 'ittx g2

Game 1 6, PCA-World Championship,

ttJe3+ 2 1 'itt g3 .g2+ 22 �f4 .e4+

London 1 99 3

23 'itt g5 (23 'itt g3 'li'g4 mate) 23 . . . h6+! 24 �xh6 (24 'itt h 5 .g4+ 25 �xh6

29 h4

1 e 4 c5 2 liJ f3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 liJxd4

Pushing the h-pawn is a nice plan and further restricts the bishop.

29 .. J:td7 3 0 h5 �f7 31 %tal 'ii'c 8

'ifh7

liJf5

mate; 24 'itt f6

liJf6 5 liJc3 a6 6 �c4 e6 7 �b3 bS

'li'e5+

8 0-0 iLe7

25 'itt g 7 'li'h7+ 26 �f6 1i'h4+ 27 'itt g 7

I tri ed several set-ups against the

32 'li'f3 'ii'd 8 33 g5 g 6

.!:th8+ 26

Sozin, but this was my final choice in

the match.

9 'iWf3 'iWc7 10 'i'ig3 ttJc6 11 liJxc6 'i'ixc6 1 2 nel �b7 13 a3

25

'itt g 6

�e4+)

24 . . . %:1h8+

'li'h6 mate.

14 ... 0-0 15 �h6 liJe8 16 � h l 'itt h 8 17 �g5 �.J:g5 18 iW'Ig5 liJf6 19 .!:tadl

2 9 �c2 !

%:1d7 20 %:1d3 tlfd8 2 1 %:1ed l

Now Nigel starts so ftening up my queens ide with a strong regrouping of his pieces.

29 ...l'lg8 3 0 liJb3 'it>f8 31 .!:td4 �e7 My king presented problems on the e7-square not only in this game, but also when I was Black against Kramnik in the Korchnoi-tribute tournament at Zurich 200 l .

34 b6 B otvinnik's

h- and g-pawns

3 2 a4! h 5 3 3 axb5 axb5 34 tlb4 h4

are

13 ...tld8! 14 f3

suffocating the Spanish grandmaster.

I S2

2 1 .. ••c5

35 liJd4

I S3

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

1 0 ... b5

3 1 'ilfe2 We4 32 l:I.f2 lLld5 33 ':e I

Black's problem i s that he can do

Of course I advance my h-pawn.

Wxe3?? A dreadful mistake. 33 . . . 0-0

nothing as any move would expose his

11 �xg4 �xg4

wins simply. 34 Wxg4! Suddenly White

own king. But in the long

I later played the simpIer 11. . . hxg4.

is winning. 34 . . .0-0 35 l:txe3 lLlxe3

will still open up Black's king.

12 f3 �d7 13 �f2 lLlc6 14 it'd2 lLle5

36 Wxh3 and though I played on I

run

White

27 ...Wc8 28 �b2 �7 29 lLldc2 f6 3 0 lLld4

no longer was in a position to save the game.

15 ... e6 1 6 lLlde2 ! ':c8 17 �d4! bS I S lLld l ! ':g8 19 lLle3 ! as [ decided to do what Botvinnik did

35 ... g4 It

was

too

late

to

back

on the other side of the board

down

as

well.

from Botvinnik's pawn onslaught. If 35 . . . l:tb8 36 �d3 .

36 l:1.xb5 The unusual queen exchange with

IS b3!

36 . . .'i!fh2 offered no hope either.

36 ... d5 37 �xh4 'ilVh5

If 15 0-0 then 1 5 . . . g4 ! After all,

After 37 . . . gxf3 38 lLlxf3 'ifh5 3 9 '1!ff2

play-off in

the

PCA Geneva rapid

our rapid game from the same event, I

Frankfurt Giants 1 998

pushed my g-pawn. I got a fabulous game, yet I spoiled it.

1 e4 c5 2 lLlf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lLlxd4 lLlf6 5 lLlc3 a6 6 �e3 lLlg4 7 � g5 h6 8 �b4 g5

1 6 f4 lLlc4

1 7 it'e2 Ik8! 18 b3 lLla3 19 lLld5 e6 20 lLlb4 it'a5 2 1 it'e I

181.

This is not the Botvinnik-effect as the

have

tightened

absolutely nothing!

my

grip

on

That's because

Anand has no pieces on the kingside -

tournament. In the blitz, improving on

V.Anand - G.Kasparov

o n page

I

really work. Two years earlier we had a

38 lLlr5+! 1-0

See diagram

3 0 ... b4

sometimes Mikhail M oiseevich's ideas

White wins.

and especially not his king.

20 O-O-O !

31 g3 g4

Vishy has handled the opening i n great style, but that offers m e little consolation.

Maybe

The same push but with a different

Botvinnik had

effect.

mentioned that the opponent could

32 r4 lLlf3 33 lLlxf3 gIf3 34 f5 hIg3

castle on the other side, but he certainly

35 bxg3 ':xg3 36 'ilfb2 ':g5 37 �cl

did not emphasise it sufficiently.

':g7 3 8 'Wb5+ ':f7

20 ... a4 2 1 'iti>b 1 ub3 22 cxb3 ':a8

variation goes like this, but maybe

23 �c3 ':a6 24 lLlc2 �f8 25 lLlb4 ':a8

indirectly there is an effect as I was

26 liJd4 iLe7

entering a g- and h- pawn pushing line.

9 �g3 �g7 10 �e2

2 1 . . .h4 ! I keep following Botvinnik's play. 22 �e3 h3 23 g3 lLlb5 24 l:td I lLlc3 25 iDd3 '1!fc7 26 l:.c ! lLlxe4 White

3 9 'iVIf3 1-0

has very little for the pawn, yet Black has to play carefully. 27 f5 e5 28 f6 lLlxf6 29 lLlf5 �xf5 30 l:.xf5 it'c6 1 84

I resigned as in a moment or two my 2 7 nhel

king will be caught.

1 8.5

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

.i.a4 27 g4 lLle8 28 .i.xe7+ �xe7 29 h4 Botvinnik's influence came from so many different directions. It is almost

lLld6 30 �d2

impossible to surrunarise. 1 ' 11 just show you one more example where, wi thout any fear of losing, I went for a queenless isolated pawn endgame.

G.Veresov - M . Botvinnik

A.Karpov

-

G.Kasparov

4 8 ... d4?! Botvinnik

pushes

his

pawns,

although there were other candidate

30 ... .i.bS

moves.

Karpov also had a similar example,

48 . . . gxh5 49 nh l ! ? You will see that I

he

beat

Karasev

brilliantly

by

G. Veresov - M . Botvinnik

It is an interesting idea to exchange

U S S R Champi onship Semi-Final

when you have an isolani, but Black's

Leningrad 1 93 8

quick play justifies it.

17 I d 4 lLlf6 2 e4 e 6 3 lLl e 3 .i. b 4 4 'iWel

':xc3

':xc3

18

'il'xc3

1r'b6

1 9 -.d4 -.xd4 20 lLlxd4 11c8

dS S cxdS exdS 6 .i.gS .i.e6 7 lLlo

c4-square

See diagram above.

lLlc4 34 lLld4 l:te8 35 lLlc2

48 . . . g 5 ! ?

did

or

not automatical1y

after I took

Botvinnik

did

not

his

h-pawn.

mention

this

possibility in his school.

49 hxg6

After 35 lLlxb5 ':xe3+ 36 'it>d4 Ihf3

Best

37 'it>xd5 lLlb6+ 38 'it>e4 ':h3 39 ':c l

was

Botvinnik

49

g5!

missed

a

Interestingly, similar

pawn

breakthrough in his book on Karpov. I

35 ... lLle5+ 36 'it>e2 11c8 37 lLld4

11 �e2 eS 12 0-0 ':eS 13 ':fel a6 1 4 dxeS

recapture

isolated pawn endgame.

White is not worse.

lU b d7 8 a3 .i.e7 9 e3 h6 1 0 .i.h4 0-0

my opponent

in a queenless

31 �Ib5 axb5 32 �d3 �d7 33 lLlb3

was

have to face a problem like this when

exchanging pieces to obtain control over the

Possible

discovered it and published it first in

Black has solved his problems.

the

21 0 �f8 22 �O �d7 23 �d3

Predecessors

book.

49 . . . hxg5

(49 ... lLle5 50 gxh6 ':xf3+ 5 1 \t>g2 ':f5 5 2 ':h l

the h- pawn is dangerous.)

50 h6 nd2+ 5 1 'it>g I lLle5 52 ':0 ':c2 53 lLlxd4 l:tc8 54 'it>g2 White has an edge.

49 ...fxg6 50 a4 After 50 ne l ! lLlxa3 5 1 lLlxa3 ':xa3 52 ':e4.

50 ... ':d2+ 51 'it>g3 d3

37 ...':c3 Botvinnik's rook became anno ying.

14 .. . lUxcs 23 ... g6

Botvinnik had quite a number of nice wins

in

isolated

The d-pawn becomes strong. On the

I also played this

pawn middlegame

positions.

it covers the

f5-square.

24 q"e2 l:te3 25 �d2 ':eS 26 cbe2

I S b4 lLlce4 16 'ilkd3 lLlxc3 1 86

38 ':a2 ? ! lLlc4 39 lLlxb5 11xe3+

other hand I lost to Karpov when I had

40 'it>f2 l:td3 4 1 'it>e2 l1b3 42 ':c2 b6

a d6-pawn with the white pieces. That

43 l:I.a2 l:te3+ 44 'it>f2 ':d3 45 \!te2 l:tb3

was the sixth game of our first 1 984

46 ':al l:I.e3+ 47 'it'f2 ':d3 48 h 5

match. 1 87

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

bishop. If it is a mistake I will have to

I should have kept the rooks on, but

Game 9, World Championship,

work out who encouraged me to do

his rook was a tower of strength on d4.

this.

I hoped my d-pawn would work like

Moscow 1 9 84

Botvinnik's.

28 a3

3 6 exd4 �e7 37 lLla2 �c8

1 d4 d5 2 r4 e6 3 lUn c5 4 c.xd5

Geller suggested 37 . . . lLle4 which is a

exd5

Karpov-style move.

In the Predecessors book I looked at

In this work I

38 d6 39 n
do not go into details of the giants other

4 1 'it>n
than the champions. Nevertheless do

44 �xfS �xfS

chess culture in general.

keep in mind that this defence is named

In this game, however, the d-pawn outcome, whereas in the earlier game I just dropped it.

Karpov

after Siegbert Tarrasch.

becomes so powerful that it decides the

5 g3 lUr6 6 �g2 �e7 7 0-0 0-0

11e2 55 lUd5??

11 �e3 l:[e8 1 2 iVb3 lUa5 13 'iWe2 �g4 1 4 lUr5 11e8

Another pawn goes to the white squares, but Botvinnik played this move as well.

29 e3 I!i>g7 3 0 �b2 l:[e4 31 �n b5

have been a mistake by Karpov. After

Wiel

in

had a bishop versus a knight, but a pair of rooks remained on the board. I thought, okay, I will not win but there was no way I could imagine losing it.

32 �g2 l:[7c5 33 11xe4

55 lUe4 1 d2 56 lUxd2 lhd2 57 a6 lUb6

der

pawn islands were tbe same). Karpov

2 8 ... g6

In my game the same move would

Van

similar pawn structure endgame (the

8 lUe3 liJc6 9 �g5 exd4 10 lUxd4 h6

52 a5 bu5 53 bu5 11b2 54 lUe3

beat

Amsterdam 1 980 when they had a very

J. van der Wie1 - A.Karpov

58 a7
IBM, Amsterdam 1 980

55 ... d2 56 .l:l.dl l:[e l 57 lUe3 �e6 58 �r4 ct>b5 59 �e4

1 5 �d4 �e5 1 6 �xeS 11xc5 l 7 lUe3 �e6 1 8 l:[ad l

'ikc8

1 9 'iWa4 11d8

2 0 l:[d3 a6 21 l:[fdl lUe4 2 2 lUxc4 l:[xe4 23

"ifa5 l:[e5 24 'ilfb6 nd7

2 5 l:[d4 We7 2 6 'iWxc7 l:[dxe7

33 ... l:[xc4 I had a chance to recapture with

See diagram on page 1 86.

either pawn. 33 . . . dxc4 maintains the

Just like Karpov I strengthened the

comes to

But back to my game . . .

45 lLle3 � b l 46 b4

balance by dynamic means, which

59 ... b5 60 gxh5 gxh5 61 �d3 b4 62 �e2 h3 63
me more naturally, but

Daniel King mentions in his analysis

c-file, toying with idea of invading on

Botvinnik's game was in my mind and

that the position was reminiscent of the

the c-file.

I wanted to follow it. After 33 . . . dxc4

game Saidy-Fischer, New York 1 964.

3 4 l:[d6 a5 35 .l:l.b6 (3 5
This was the U.S. Championship where

Botvinnik paid a lot of attention to

35 ...
Fischer made 1 00 percent. Maybe he spent less time investigating the games of the world champions.

27 h3 h5

I trusted Botvinnik so much that I even employed one of his ideas in my

gaining space. For this reason, it is a

Black retains a material balance and

very first world title match against

question whether I should put my pawn

has a secure position.

Karpov in 1 984.

on the same colour square as Karpov's 1 88

46 ... gxh4?

34 .l:l.d4 1!i>f8 35 �e2 l hd4 189

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Mikhail Botvinnik the 6th

Taking the pawn is a mistake, as

I missed Karpov's reply, but at least I contributed to

the

development

of

endgame theory. Daniel King analyses in depth the position after 46...�g6. His conclusion is that Black can hold.

Black's king can cause problems by approaching the

queenside. On

the

other hand 55 tiJh5!! wins. 55 ... �xf3 56 tiJxf6. From this point g4-e5-c6-a5b3-c5 attacks the a6-pawn; then with king

move

White

will

bring

a

the

opponent into zugzwang. When Black drops tbe a6-pawn,

then the direct

manoeuvre tiJb8-c6-tiJa7 forces him to defend the b5-pawn. After any casual king move the knight returns to e3 via c6-e7-f5. If White accomplishes these things, he just has to march to a7 to win

47 tiJg2! This is against all principles, I did not

the game.

55.. .'�e6

think that when I have the bishop, and he a knight, that he would open the position. You can see how fair I

am,

Better

this

move.

Such

a

move

becomes part of our chess heritage, but

69 tiJxb5 '.t>a4 70 ttJd6 1-0 BotviTUlik also set an example that

holds. I thought of this but could not remember

to

Geller

was

any

champion

sadly followed. He trained me and

playing

passed on his knowledge. I also gave

anything like it before. 67 tiJf5 �d5

lectures to young juniors, including

This is the difference compared with

Shirov and Kramnik. But BotvilUlik

the game: here the �hl stops �d3.

undertook coaching only after he had

After

according

68

It>f4

�e4

69

tiJd6

�c2

retired, whereas I made the mistake of

70 tiJxb5 �c4 Black draws.

doing the same thing while I was still an active player. So I helped to improve

67 tiJf5 �g2?

55...Wd6. He is right.

tiJxa6 �xf3

That damned g2-square in this game!

58 �xf6 Wd6 59 ";'f5 Wd5 60 Wf4

Key moves keep taking place there.

dethroned me.

67...'it>d5 was the best move, but the

was! Had he worked on his own maybe

56 tiJe7+

here I could blame my seconds for missing

66...�b7 The amazing move 66...�h I!! still

";'d7

57

�hl 61 We3

the

play

of

the

champions

What a mistake

who that

why does it happen against me? It

legacy ofBotvilUlik's game is to remain

I

would take pages to show you all

active on the c-file, therefore I did not

longer. However, when all is said and

finesses of this endgame. I'll just show

return with my king.

68 tiJd6+ �b3

you some interesting points.

would

have stayed champion for

done, overall I am of course very appreciative of our· great first Soviet world champion.

47... hxg3+ 48 Wxg3 We6 49 tiJf4+ c;t>f5 50 tiJxh5 We6 51 tiJf4+ c;t>d6 52 Wg4 �c2 53 Wh5 �dl 54 Wg6 We7

6I...'.t;>c4 Finally I do something active on the c-file, just like BotvilUlik did.

62 tiJc5 �c6 63 tiJd3 �g2? Averbakh and Taimanov suggested 63 ...�e8! keeping the bishop on this diagonal.

64 tiJe5+ We3 65 tiJg6 'iti>c4 66 tiJe7

55 tiJxd5+? 190

191

Max Euwe the 5110

M.Euwe - A.O'Kelly de Galway Groningen 1 946

Max Euwe the 5th

1 d4lDf6 2 e4 e6 3lDe3 �b4 4 e3 b 6

5lDge2 � b 7 6 a 3 �e7 Euwe was the last champion still alive when

I

was born.

He

cODvincingly regained his title with a final score of 1 5 1;2- 91;2 .

and

Petrosian were able to form an opinion

In 1 946 Euwe still played very well,

on my play as they both died in the

but the 1948 World Championship final

1980s when I was already a decent

showed that he had lost touch with the

player. Not everyone knows that Euwe

very

won the world title back in 1 92 8 .

Nevertheless he continued to write

But

many fine articles and books. Though

that

was the World Amateur

Championship.

Later, in

he was

1 935, he

defeated Alekhine by the narrowest of 151;2- 1 41/2.

best

I

an

always

players

of

the

world.

considered him to be a

true world champion too and began

rematch began with Euwe dominating,

studying his games when I was young -

in the sixth game Alekhine commenced

and not only for my Great Predecessors

a winning streak of three games and

series.

Though

I show the position of my last rapid

I fo llowed Euwe's play where he cut the position into two with a

game where I should have drawn

d5-pawn and paralysed the b7-bishop.

- and thereby won the match - by

Then he gave up the strong d5 pawn.

world champion increases the pressure in a very subtle way.

22 ... Wb8 23 We3 1fa7 24 %ta2 �e6

amateur world champion

their

margins:

22lDa4! In the next few moves the Dutch

adopting Euwe's idea.

25 %td2 %tad8 26 e5 1fe7 27 exd6

7 d5 The pawn chokes Black. It is quite

�xd6

hard to undermine it.

7 .. 0-0 8 e4 d6 9 g3 c6 1 0 dxe6 .

See diagram

on

page 192.

White hopes to get play on the e6-square which is why he gives up the strong pawn.

10 .. fxe6 11 lDd4 �c8 12 .i.g2 e5 .

13 lLlf5 lDa6 14 0-0 lLlc5 1 5 �e3 'iPh8

2 8 1L1e5

This game was extremely important

M.Euwe - A.O'Kelly de Galway

By now the position has crystallised

to me because I wanted to prove my

thanks to very fine positional play by

superiority over Kramnik after losing

Euwe. Black has two many weak

the title - and so there was a lot of

pawns.

28 ... �xc5 29 Wxe5 Ihd2 30 'iihf8+

pride at stake.

.i.g8 31 Ita 1 Wb6

G.Kasparo" - V.Kramnik

1 6 �xc5 I played the same idea in a very

important last round rapid stage of

a

Rather a sw-prise. Euwe voluntarily keeps on taking pieces.

16 ... bxc5 17 b4 cxb4 18 axb4 �e6

match against Kramnik. We drew 4

1 9 lLle3 a6 20 Wd3 lDg4 2 1 lDxg4

regular games, I won the first rapid

�xg4

and then we drew 4 games. 193 192

Max Euwe the 5,h

Max Euwe the 5,h

1 5 f4 .e7 1 6 J:tadl 1:I.cd8 1 7 'it>hl

32 �n l:tb2 ? A bad blunder i n

an

inferior position.

1!t'n 18 1!t'c2 ..t>h8

My mam weapon throughout my

22 ... 'Wg6 23 .i.f3 nc8 24 'Wbl e4

career was to stir up complications and

25 liJh4 .n 26 iLe2 a6 27 liJc3 dxc4 28 'Wb2

After 32 .. J:l.d4 33 l:txa6 " xb 4 34 .xb4

because

1::r.xb4 35 f3 Black would suffer with his

when there was a jungle of variations I

pawn structure.

outplayed my opponent many times.

33

iLc4 'ii'd2+ 34

"xn

of my

special

orientation

However after my game with the black

1:I.xn

pieces against Kramnik at Linares 2000

35 �xg8 1-0

I realised that I should play for open positions.

G.Kasparov

-

succeed

V.Kramnik

In in

our match I

getting

those

did

not

positions

because of the damned Berlin defence.

Botvinnik Memorial 2001

Later, in the first rapid game of the I d4 liJf6 2 c4 e6 3 liJc3 �b4 4 e3 b6

happily

followed

However, under

to beat Kramnik after obtaining an open

different circumstances. I wish I knew

position, despite the fact that he had an

28 . . b5

why Kra llU1ik refrained from placing

edge early on.

I

Just like Euwe.

5 ltJge2 �b7 6 a3 iLe7 7 d5 I

200 I Botvinnik Memorial, I managed

1 9 b4

the

same

variation.

Here,

objectively,

keeping

the

7...0-0 8 liJg3

his knight on c5 earlier. Because of this

I too did not allow the g3-square to

I was prevented from taking it with the

position closed with 20 f5! was a better

bishop. You know, it's hard to adjust to

plan. I have never investigated deeply

n ew situa tions.

how far the Dutch world champion

remain vacant. 8 . .1::l. e8 9 iLe2 iLfli 10 e4 d6 11 0-0 .

liJbd7 12 �e3 c6 13 "d2l:tc8 14 dxe6

adapted his way of playing against

1 9 e5 •..

particular opponents, or whether he played the same way whoever he faced.

See diagram on page 192.

I see now that I had made a mistake

.

was expecting to

create some

weaknesses, instead I had to live with a protected passed pawn.

Slowly my

compensation

pawn

for

the

was

dissipated.

29 ltJf5 liJd5 30 liJxdS .xfS 31 ltJc3 liJ f6 32 h3 ncd8 33 l:txd8 nxd8 34l%dl

in this game, but why did I receive such

Playing 7 d5 was somehow a way of

harsh punishment?

following Euwe, but this is an opening

20 ... dS 2 1 exdS cxd5

line. On the other hand here it is in black and white that I am behaving like a pupil foll<;lwing his instructions. But I

should have been more cautious as, all,

White

centre.

But

after his

hereby Euwe

gives

played

up

20 liJfS

this

because he appreciated the special circumstances.

He

did

such

a

Missing the best move because of the desire to

obtain a certain type of

tremendous job with his writings,

position against a particular player. It is

adding significantly to chess culture.

interesting that before he beat me I

How unfortunate he did not publish his

called him V l adi

analysis here.

dare to give me a rematch I referred to

14 ... fxe6

him as KrallU1ik. We know language

.

But when he didn't

I knew I would not be able to attack

constantly changes, but Russian has not

e6 like Euwe, but I was able to gain

changed that much in the last few

space.

years 194

.

34 ...l:lxd1 + With a n extra pawn it is not out of

22 liJb5

place to exchange. Tigran Vartanovich

Maybe White is still okay, but from

might have played 34 ...l%d3.

now on Black is kicking. After 22 fxe5

35 .i.xdl 'ilfd7 36 �e2 �c6 37 'il'cl

ltJxe5 23 cxd5 was nice for White and

g6 38 'lWgI .i.g7 39 .i.d4 g8 40 .i.e5

in little danger of losing.

liJd5 41 .i.xg7 'lWxg7 195

Max Euwe the 5th

Max Euwe the 5th

42 lOxd5 Si<..xd5 43 'it'c5 ifa l+

46 'il'c7

G.Fontein - M.Euwe

20 ... tiJf4

Putting the queen on the edge of the

I try to pin like Karpov, but for me

Dutch Championship,

Black's

board is fraught with danger. Better

here it did not work.

46 ..:.f6 47 � d l h5 48 a4 'ili'd4

was 43 ...W'd7

44 �h2 Si<.. f7 45 Si<.. g4

49 �c2 e3 50 f5 e2

If 45 'ili'a7 'ili'f6 (but not 45... 'iIi'xa3?)

Amsterdam 1924

the

1 d4 lOf6 2 lOO g6 3 c4 �g7 4 lllc3 0-0 5 e4 d6 6 h3 eS 7 dS lObd7 8 Si<.. d3 h6 9 �e3 �h7 10 'il'c2 b6

4s...�g7

pieces

f4-knight

has

are

alive

special

and

vitality.

Nevertheless White panics by taking the f4-knight, thus opening up the g7 bishop and giving Black the e5-square.

21

Players no longer play ... b6 in such

� x f4

exf4

22

tiJe3

Si<..xd3

23 'il'xd3 lOeS 24 'it'e4 f3! 25 g3

positions.

11 0-0 lOeS 12 lOe1 lObS 13 �e2

51 fxg6 el="it' 52 'il'xf7+ 'iPh6 0- 1

Time and again Euwe was happy giving up the e4-square in the King's Indian. And unfortunately I too didn't mind giving up the e4-square - twice!

G.Fontein - M.Euwe

A.Veingold - G.Kasparov

2S ...'it'g5 13 ...'il'h4 14 b4 lOa6 1 5 lOO 'il'e7

Euwe plays fluent chess.

16 :tabl fS 17 exfS

26 nfd l nae8 27 lll b 5 'il'd8 28 nb3

Or 17 nfe l fxe4 18 lOd2!?

'il'd7 29 �h2 nf5 30 g4?

l7 ... �xf5 18 �d3

Once more Fontein panics. This time he creates an even bigger problem.

See diagram on page 196.

30 lOd4 lllxc4 3 1 tiJe6 lOxd2 32 nxd2

l8 ...lOb8

c6 leads to a position in which he is just

Playing such a casual move on the

a pawn down.

other side of the board shows that he is not paying much attention to the e4-square at all.

KJeefstra - M.Euwe

FRITZ X3D - G .Kasparov

19 lll d2 lOd7 20 lllc e4

30 ...ngS! 31 'il'f4 lllxg4+ 0-1 This sacrifice wins against any reply by White.

196

197

Max Euwe the 5th

Max Euwe the 5 th

Kleefstra - M.Euwe

A.Veingold - G.Kasparov

Amsterdam Chess Club Championship

USSR Spartakiad 1979

1 8...lUxf6 My

1927

1 d4 lUf6 2 lUf3 g6 3 c4 .i.g7 4 lUe3 1 e4 g6 2 d4 d6 3 .i.e3 lUf6 4 lUd2

d6 5 e4 0-0 6.i.e2 eS 7 dS as 8.i.gS h6

.i.g7 5 .i.e2 0-0 6 c3 eS 7 dS lUbd7

9.i.h4 lUa6 10 0-0 .e8 11 lUd2 lUh7

S ,*,c2 b6 9 h3 as 10 a4 lUcS

12 a3 fS

knight

never

reached

h5

as

Euwe's had done.

1 9 .d2 lUeS 20 .i.e2 'i&>g7 2 1 nae! lUb3 22 .d3

20...�b7 Interestingly, Euwe did not mind that both his

bishops had

very limited

prospects on their respective diagonals.

21 'if d3 l:lfll 22 tbe4 .i.cs 23 lUgS 'iWf6 24 lUe4 '*'fS 25 l:lael

'ifhS

261i'g3 2 2 ... gS 11 .i.xcS ?

13 exfS

This is clearly not a testing move.

In

l l...bxcS 12 .i.bS lUh5 13 lUdf3 f5

my

14 lUe2 fxe4 1 5 'iWxe4 lUf4 1 6 lUxf4

There is very little dynamism in

1977 I played a game against trainer

Nikitin

in

which

Black's position.

23 .i.g3 lUeS 24 .d2 .£1 2S h4

he

replied 13 n. That game ended in a

lUh7 26 .i.xh7 gxh4 27 .i.xeS+ dxeS

draw.

28.i.bl

1 3 ... .i.xfS Maybe I should have taken with the g-pawn.

1 4 g4 .i.d7 26 ...l:lh4 Euwe puts his pieces on the edge. I played something similar when r lost to Ivanchuk at Linares in 1991. I did not realise this game might have had

1 6 .. .lhf4 There is no black knight to go to a vacant e5-square. This explains why he captured this way.

17 'iWe2 'iWf6 18 lUd2 See diagmm

on

See diagram

on

page 196.

15 lUde4 a4 16 0 b6 1 7.i.d3 .i.f6 1 8 lUxf6+

an

effect in that respect as well. This was the flrst tournament I did not win fOT

28 ....f4

almost a decade. What a pity I was not able to make it a full ten years.

27 'ifgS?

Defending the king was also

29 .xf4 lhf4 30 l:lxeS l:1afll

White blunders a piece in a playable

page 196.

It looks as though Black has achieved

position.

27 .. .'ilhgS 28 lUxgS lhe4 0-1

IS .. :i!t'£1 19 0-0 ot.>h8 20 .i.c4

198

an

unpleasant choice.

some activity.

199

M= Euwe the 5th

M= Euwe the 5th

FRITZ X3D

-

G.Kasparov

Euwe also put his rook and queen on

Match, New York 2003

the g-file, however in this particular position I drop a pawn.

33 lIuS!

1 e4 eS 2tOf3tOe6 3 i..bS tOf6 4 d3 d6 S e3 g6

Chopping off

my

pawn!

If

the

electricity had gone off maybe the

This time the King's Indian pawn

blackout would have driven the chips

structure arises from a Spanish.

6 0-0 i..g7 7 tObd2 0-0 8 rLel rLeS

of the computer crazy and they might

9 d4 i..d 7 10 dStOe7

have missed this tactical shot. But no such luck for me.

31 rLe7+

33...dxeS 34 'iifxfSlbd4?!

2S rLle2

But this check hurts.

This is not very natural, yet it defends

3l...rLsn 32 rLxn+ �xn 33 tOe4

f2 satisfactorily. 2S... g4 26 'Wb3 rLafS 27 eS .g6

tOb3 34 wa i..xg4 35 �e3 rLfS

28 cxd6 exd6 29 bS axbS 30 .xbS

Stepping into a battery.

In a bad position this merely hastens the end.

3S �xd4 exd4 36 IleS l:tg8 37 .e7+ Ilg7 38 .d8 ngS

i..h6 31 'Wb6 �h7 32 'Wb4 Ilg7?

36 rLa i..bS

11 i..x d7 Without the light-squared bishop Black's attack develops more slowly.

11 ...tOxd7 12 a4 h6 13 as a6 14 b4 fS IS e4tOf6 16 i..b2 it'd7 17 rLbl 39 'iWd7+ 1-0

37tOd6 + exd6 38 i..xf'S Wf6 39 i..c2 tOeS 40 l:lh2 WgS 41 i.. dl 1-0 What a miserable defensive game that was' The Veingold accident happened when I was only 14. Sadly I lost one

17 ... gS 18 edS .xfS 19 tOn 'lih7

game like this when those numbers turned around to 41 ! Everything has advantages and disadvantages

20 t03d2tOrs

my See diagram

memory has served me well during my

career,

but

in

these

page J 96.

21 tOe4 tOxe4 22 rLxe4 b5 23 'tIfdJ

influenced by Euwe it helped only my opponent.

on

games

rLf'S 24 nbe1 nn 200

201

Alexander Alekhine the 4'h

A.Alekhioe - E.Bogolyubov Game 5, World Championship,

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Gennany/Holland 1929

1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 ltJf3 ltJf6 4 ltJc3 dxc4 5 a4 .i.f5 6 ltJe5 e6 7 .i.g5 .i.e7

Alekhine is

the last champion

to

precise to say Alekhine) avoided each

be born in the 19th century. He beat

other for nine years and their next game

Jose Raul Capablanca by 6-3 in 1927.

took place only in 1936. In fact they

the

played only three more games against

greatest interest of all matches until

each other. In 1935 he lost his title to

World War Two. Looking back, that

Euwe, however two years later he took

duel still attracts my interest like few

his revenge and' beat him 15'12-91/1. He

other matches in the whole history of

died in 1946 in Portugal. As Fischer

Maybe

that

match

generated

chess. Alekhine won the all-Russian Championship in

1909 for the first

time. I won it in a tie with Karpov in 1988 and on my own in 2004.

8 f3 h6 9 e4 .i.b7 10 .i.e3 See diagram on page 202.

16 'ii'x d8!

10 ... ltJbd7 11 tLl:xc4 0-0 12 .i.e2

W hite

domination in chess history. Alekhine

hard to follow. Even so I tried to use some of his ideas.

1 9 ... ltJd4 20 l:tac1 '1t>f8 21 .i.n ltJe8 2 2 lOc3 f6 Black's last three moves indicate that

12 ... cS

he clearly wants to bring the bishop

This is a difficult decision. In a way

into play.

it helps, as Black exchanges the d4-

23 ltJa5 l:1ab8

pawn, plays e5 and f6 and the bishop Alekhine was such an imaginative player, playing some stunning attacks,

may come back. Then, with the control

but, interestingly, the strongest effect he had on me was positionally: freczing

over the b4 and b3 squares, the flow of

the Slav bishop on the kingside , opening the position in the centre and then

play could go Black's way. On the

forcing a win on the queenside where Black misses his Slav bishop.

other

hand

following A.Alekhine - E.Bogolyubov

G.Kasparov - GENIUS

this plan:

may by

prompt

the

opening

the

queenside and exchanging a number of pieces he will effectively have piece

with

which

to

an

extra

invade

the

queenside. Let's have a look to see

24 ltJb5!

whose strategy prevails.

13 dIc5 .i.ICS 14 .i.:xc5!

Further exchanging.

The fewer pieces

24 ... lOIb5

00

the queeoside,

is .l:!.xd8!

Enviable dedication to the task.

the easier it is to invade.

25 ... .I:!.:xd8

14 .. .luIc5 15 b4 tLla6 203 202

on

Intending t o exchange even more

champion.

and Capablanca (probably it is more

keep

pieces.

predecessor who died as the defending

Maybe there is a similarity between

to

16... .I:!.fId8 1 7 lOa2 ltJb8 18 'it>f2

number I, while Alekhine is my only

his play and mine. Both of us are very

happy

nonnally that would just

lOc6 19 nhd l

the only player who retired as world

In the late 19205 and early 1930s he

-

help the opponent develop.

played a rematch with Spassky, I am

enjoyed one of the strongest periods of

IS

exchanging

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

he r�eived for his win over Petros ian, but it may have just been a copy, almost plagiarising Alekhine when he took a bishop with his knight on d7' If there is a reprint of My Great Predecessors I may add an extra comment on that. 39 ...'it>xd7 40 �O l:lb6 41 'ittc5 lIb8

17 e4 I was optimistic about this game as

the bishop on g6 is really out of play. 17...�g6 See diagram on page 202.

18 ltd3 "b4 20 lLle2 1fb6 21 �f4

19

b3

iDe8

29 1'bd8+

Tbe first element was not in my plan, r wanted to exchange queens not the rooks but I tbougbt, okay, it is after all an excbange. 29 .....xd8 3 0 .ltn b6 3 1 "c3

The computer's 24 ... e5 was strong as it gained space.

42 b5 �d8 43 �c6 We7 44 :a3 '>t>f7

3 1...f6 32 .ltc4+

45 �e4 We7 26 lLlxb7!

He is not only playing a great strategic game, but the tactics are on Alekhine's side too. 26....l:tb8 27 lLleS We7 28 axbS

It was not necessary to accept the doubled pawns. After 28 �xb5 lLld6 29 lLla6 :b7 30 �c 6 wins.

21...c5

All goes according to the super instructive Alekhine game !

28...lLld6 29 11al lLle8 30 �c4 it.g8 31 f4 �f7 3 2 e5

46 We6

Alekhine pushes his opponent back. 32... fxe5 3 3 fxe5 nb6 34 We3 �e8 35 J:[aS jLd7

Finally the world champion invades nicely with his king. 46 ...Wd8 47 tld3+ '>t>e7 48 'it>c7 1-0

The bishop finds another diagonal but it is not too active here either.

G.Kasparov

36 Wd4 �e8 37 h4 jLd7 3 8 jLe2

-

22 �e3 cxd4 niDxd4 �c5 24tladl e5 25 iDe2 lbd3 I am not at all against exchanges. 26 "xd3 lLle7 27 b4 �xe3+

3 2 .ltn •..

Black offers another exchange which fits into my plan, but I was no longer happy as the computer's bishop was supposed to be frozen on the kingside.

GENIUS

3 3 iDe3 "d4

PCAJlntel-Grand Prix rapid 1994

nb8

Black keeps exchanging!

34 .ltxf7+ �If7 35 "ifb3+

1 c4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 lLlo lLlf6 4 "c2

Maybe entering an equal knight ending would have been more practical against a never tiring opponent.

dxc4 5 .xe4 �f5 6lLlc3 lLlbd7 7 g3 e6 8 �g2 �e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 e3 iDe4 1 1 'i!Ve2 'i!Vb6 12 tldl :ad8 13 lLlel ' lLldf6 14 lLlxe4lLlxe4 IS 0 lLld6 16 a 4

3 5.. �f8 36 'it>g2 .

If 36 'it>f1!? 'ilfd2 37 iDc4

"ifb3

3 6.....d2+ 28 "Ie3

39 lLlxd7!

In order to invade, he keeps on exchanging. Now, when I analyse this game, it occurs to me that maybe Fischer too was copying the other champions! How many congratulations 204

Further swapping just like Alekhine and an invasion will not be long coming as well. I was already thinking how nice it would be to penetrate with my king. 28 .. tld8 .

The computer doesn't know those classical games. It (or should I say he or she) seems to play into my hands. 205

.

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Going a pawn down is already a very

37Wh3

... so here are a couple of my attempts at checkmate on the back rank.

gloomy prospect.

Alekhine had activated his king. I wanted to start a march as well, but on

46 'ti'd2 '6'r4+ 47 �g2 'iWd4 48 'tixd4

the edge the king remains isolated.

The knight ending gives little hope of

G.Kasparov - N.Short

DEEP BLUE - G.Kasparov

E.Bogolyubov - A.Alekhine

2 11bc 1 %1ad8 22 d6 lLlb.ld6 23 ltJxd6

survival.

37...'tie2 38 ltJg2 h5 39 'tie3 'ti'c4

48 ... exd4 49 ltJc4 ltJc6 50 b5 ltJe5

40 'ii d 2 -'e6+ 4 1 g4 hxg4+ 42 fxg4

51 ltJd6

White's pawns have been separated and e4 is now a target.

42 .. .'ii'c4 43 "el 'ifb3+ 44 ltJe3 'iid 3 45�g3

5I...d3 52�f1 ltJxg4+ 53�el ltJxh2

.Game

45 .....xe4

57 �e4

ltJd2+ 58 �d5 g5

59 ltJd6+ �g6 60 �d4 ltJb3+ 0-1

%1.ld6 24 'fixa6 'fid7

GermanylHolland 1 929

54 �d2 ltJf3+ 55 �xd3 �e7 56 ltJr5+ �n

22, World Championship match

The position is equal.

25 llc2 c5 26 a4 f4 27 �d2 g5

1 e4 eS 2 ltJf3 ltJc6 3 �b5 a6 4.li.a4 d6 5 c3 �d7 6 d4 g6 7 �g5 r6 8 �e3 ltJh6 9 0-0 �g7 1 0 h3 ltJn 11 ltJbd2 0-0 12 dxe5 dxeS 13 �c5 %1e8 1 4 �b3

Alekhine caught some of his opponents on their back rank. I was really

b6

impressed by those examples and it is natural that I wanted to do something similar to that..

E.Bogolyubov - A.Alekhine

A.Alekhine - E.Colle 28

'iWbs

Bogolyubov panics unnecessarily, as Black's attack is not yet that dangerous.

28 ...'fi.lb5 29 nbS %1d3 30 llalltJd6 31 lla6

15 ..ie3 'fie7

The rook leaves the first rank, but it

Alekhine stabilises his position.

16 "e2 ltJcd8 17 ..idS ..ic6 ?! 1 8 c4 ..ixdS

206

19

is not yet a matter of decisive concern

cxdS fS 2 0 lLlc4 ltJb7

207

3I...l1b8

.

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

d4-pawn.

A.Alekhine - E.CoUe

However only one move

Paris 1925

had entered my head and as the time control had been passed I was able to

spend

17 .minutes

checking the

variations before writing down...

me once in our Candidates match fmal.

4IltJd7!! Even today, this move still pleases me. It threatens 42 ltJfS+ �h6 43 l:tb8! followed by 44 ltJxg6 and 45 l:th8+ mating the boxed in king.

32 �c3?

41...l:txd4

White opens the way to his back rank. He should exchange the active rook by 32 l:tc3!

Karpov takes the pawn in the hope of swapping queens, but...

In a bad position he goes for a direct loss. Better was 33 �e I .

3 3. . .�xe5 3 4 ltJxe5 l:tdl + 35 � h 2 ltJd 2 !

Ruling out his intended 43 ... 'iff4, while upon 43... l:txb4 I had planned the beautiful idea 44 axb4 d4 45 b5 d3 46 b6 d2 47 b7 d l ='it' 48 b8='ii' 'ii'cl 49

See diagram o n page 2 06.

ltJxg6

'it'xg6

50

3 It)fJ .i.g4 4 "a4 �xfJ 5 ufJ e6 6 It)e3 �b4 7 a3 �xc3+ 8 bxe3 It)ge7 9 l:tb l l:tb8 10 exd5 "xdS 1 1 .i.d3 0-0 12 0-0 "d6 13 'ife2 White has got little from the opening.

30 'ifxd7 ! !

13 ... lt)g6? ! 14 f4 It)ee7 1 5 g3 l:tfd8

A wonderful and unusual way of

16l:tdl b6 17 a4ltJdS 18 .i.d2 e5 1 9 fS exfS 20 �xfS cxd4 2 1 cxd4 It)de7

43 l:tb4!!

32 .. .loxe4 33 �xe5

1 d4 dS 2 e4 It)e6 Sill) ;lov played the Chigorin against

'it'h8+

'ifh7

22 .i.b4 'iff6 23 �xe7 'ifxe7 24 l:tbc1

exploiting the weakness of the first rank.

30 ...l:txd7 3 1 l:te8+ 'it>b7 32 nec8

l:td5 25 �e4

Black can do nothing.

White only has a small advantage.

32...l:td8 33 l:texd8 1-0

25 ... l:td7 26 d5 'iff6 27 l:tel l:tbd8 28 'ifc6

G.Kasparov - N.S hort

51 'ifgxg7 mate. 43... l:tc4 44l:txc4 dxc4 45 'ifd6!

Of course I found this move because

Now I have a mate from a different

of my talent not because of Alekhine 's influence! Incidentally I also caught

Game 3, exhibition match, London 1987

angle. If 45...f6? 46 'ifd2+.

Karpov like this in our 1986 world title

45... c3 46 'ifd4

1 It)fJ dS 2 d4 �g4

match.

And Karpov resigned as the c3 pawn

The bishop develops

is lost and with it game, set and match!

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov World Championship, Leningrad 1986

fashion

Black must be able to hold with

e6 7 g3 �b4 8 �g2 It)e7 9 0-0 0-0 10 �3 as 1 1 a3 �xe3

28... lt)e7!

29 �xg6!! bxg6 See diagram on page 206. 29... fxg6!

would

have

prolonged

the game and delayed resignation.

My

Nevenheless

3 8...l:tee1 ! Setting up a lovely mating net.

now expecting 41 l:tb4. covering the

39 �h3 b5 0-1

208

game.

3 It)e5 .i.fS 4 c4 f6 5 It)fJ e6 6 It)e3

2 8 ... 'ifgS?

seal my move at adjournment.

Alekhine

rank chances.

36 b4 l:te8 37 It)fJ It)xfJ+ 38 gxfJ

seconds and all the commentators were

the

Narurally I did not anticipate any back

But back to Alekhine's game:

In Game 22 of the match, I had to

to

in a similar

after

30

'ife6+

l:tf7

31 l:tc8 l:txc8 32 'ifxc8+ l:tfS 33 'ife6+ l:tf7

34

d6

White's

advantage

is

overwhelming. 209

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

It is worth giving up a pawn in or der

12 bxe] White has emerged from the opening wi th

a

small ad vantage, but it will

ev aporate .

46 �cl 'it>hS 47 na8 'il'cS ? Here

to open t he positi on.

39 ...lLlxd5 40 'it'c5 �xfJ 4 1 nxb5 l1c7

47 ... lLle3+

wins.

3 exdS "xd5 4 d4 lLlf6 5 ttlfJ �g4 48

�el

6 �e2 e6 7 b3 � b5 8 0-0 ttlc6 9 �e3

(48 ..i.xe3 'ilr'xe3 49 'ilr'xe7) 48... ..i.xa8.

cxd4 1 0 exd4 �b4! 1 1 a3 �a5 1 2lLlc3

48 nc8 ?

"d6 13 lLlbS We7 1 4 ttle5 �xe2 15 'ilr'xe2 0-0

1 2 ...lLl d7 13 lLld2 a4 1 4 �a2 �g6

White could keep Black busy with

15 e4 �n 16 l1bl l1b8 1 7 �c2 b5

defensive duties. 48 .Ile8 should have

1 8 cxd5 cxd5 1 9 'it'd3 �a5 2 0 l1el

been played.

l1fc8 2 1 .Ilb4 lLlc6 2 2 :!.b2

42 :!.b8 + Suddenly

Alekhine's

back

Black has eq ual ised.

rank

1 6 nacl nac8 1 7 ..i.g5 �b6 1 8 .i.xf6

checkmates came to mind. I should have just taken the a-pawn after 42 l1a5

22 ...lLle7

and pushed my own a-pawn. 42. ..'ii'c8

By now Nigel has equalised. There

43 "d6.

23 :!'c2 lLlb6 24 b4 l1b 7 25 �h3 l1c6

See diagram on page 207.

26 nb2 lLlc4 27 l1b4 �c7 28 lLlxc4

I was trying to catch the h7-king just

:!.xc4 29 �d2 Wc6 30 e5 f5 31 �n �h5 32 We3 h6 33 :!'ebl cJo>n 34 nlb 2

Suddenly Black's pieces can attack

2 1 l1fdl f5 22 'ilr'e3 'iit' f6

49 g4 + ..i.xg4 50 l1xc4 "al 0- 1 I trusted the back rank attack of Alekhine so much that I even played for it against the calculation monster

like Alekhine.

43 ... 'iVa7+ 44 �n ne7 45111b2

cJo>g8 35 fJ �86 36 nbl

gxf6 1 9 ttlc4 :!.fd8 20 lLlxb6 axb6

White's king, leaving him lost.

42...� b7 43 -;tf8

follows a long manoeuvring phase.

48 .....xa3

super computer Deep Blue. Normally knowledge is an asset but, though I knew Alekhine's back

rank

tactics,

after my experience in the next game they left me feeling blue. Even today, a

23 dS !

decade later, whenever I think of that

I was taken completely by surprise.

computer, it makes m e

dee ply blue!

This is the kind of positional sacrifice computers are not supposed to play.

DEEP BLUE - G.Kasparov

Later we found that by sheer brute

Ma tch, Philadelphia 1996

force Deep Blue had calculated that it could win back the pawn after 23 "g3+

1 e4 cS 2 c3 dS

4S...Wg6! 36 ... lLlc6

Nigel had a

similar win against

Nigel sacrifices the exchange. The

Timman in an Alekhine defence in

position is very closed, so the move is

Tilburg 199 I! In th at game he set up a

justi fi ed.

mating net, here Nigel escapes with his

37 �xc4 dxc4 38 .Il4b2 lLle7 39 d5

king intact.

210

'it>f8.

I beat Sveshnikov with the other

23 ...nxd5

main line in the USSR Championship

Friedel pointed out that White is

at Minsk 1979. My opponent missed a

better after 23...exd5 24 "xb6 'ilr'xb2

very interesting blockade of my king in

25 'il'xb7 nb8 26 "xc6 .Ilxb5 27 nc3.

a bishop ending.

24 nxd5 exdS 211

Alexander Alekhine the 4'h

Alexander Alekhine the 4'· 36LDg5+

29LDxb7

We have anived at the next motif I

Sadly White has time to grab a pawn.

learned from Alekhine and this position

29 ...LDe5 30 'Wd5 f3 3 1 g3 LDd3

is an example of his effect on me. I

Forcing my way through on the g-file

underestimated

with 3 1 . . . "f4 did not work.

the

power

of

the

discovered check arising from the battery.

36 . . . c;t>b6 37 l:xh7+ 34 .LDxf1

25 b3!

..

1 set up a mating net just like

Deep Blue adopts my style! A quiet move after a sacrifice. Maybe I have a

Alekhine.

way to stay in the game, but it is very

difference between our games - my

hard

checkmate can be panied.

to

find

among

the

many

25 'iPh8 I have already shown games in which

32l:tc8!! (32 ..t>h2? l:xg3 ! ! and B lack

I tried to force a checkmate on the g­

a

small

file. I think Botvinnik passed on this

in trouble. White can control matters

(This

with 33 l:c5 ! as well.

suggestion.

After

26 l:xc8+ LDxc8 27 ir'e8+ 'l;g7 2 8

But not 3 3 h4?? when 3 3 . . . l:txc8!!

'Wxc8 'Wa l+ 29 'l;h2 ir'e5+ 3 0 g 3 ir'e2

34 bxg5 l:tel + 3 5 'l;h2 LDg4+ 36 'it>h3

3 1 ir'xf S 'Wxb5 Black should hold.) 26 . . . ..t>f8! and Black stands his ground .

3 2l:tc7 %ie8

l:d7 White has a small edge.

After 32 . . .LDf4 33 'iix f3.

26 ir'xb6 %ig8 27 'iVc5

33LDd6!

Not 27 ir'xb7?? ir'g5.

After 3 3 'iVxf 7 the Alekhine-like back

If 2 7 ... ir'g5 28 g3 ir'd2 29 LDd6

1-0 I resigned as

rank play 3 3 . . . l:te I + 34 'it>h2 ir'xf 7 35 l:txf7 occurred to me and some

Black's pawns are all separated.

commentators thought it would win as

just desperately lost. After comes

37 . . .'it>g6

38

'iWg8+

<;Pf S

39 LDxf3 and now Black's

mating threat has disappeared and I am hopelessly behind on material. I continue to show Alekhine's effect on me when it came to handling batteries. In the next game he rightly ignored the power of the opponent's battery.

V.K.ramnik

M.Euwe - A.Alekbine

well. But after 35 . . .LDe5 36 l:tf8+
33 . l:tel+ 34 'l;h2 ..

212

I drop the f3-pawn

which cages in the Icjng. Without it I am

LDxf2+ 37 ..t>h4 l:h l is mate.

Alternatively, after 2 5 . . . l:td8 2 6 �xb6

27...d4

�xf7 38 .d5+ 'it>e7 39 'ii'x f3 wins.

mates) 32 ... 'ii g5 33 LDd8 ! leaves Black

idea to me. After 25.JiJe7 26 'Wg3+!?

28LDd6 f4

IS

1 f 3 5 ... 'ii'xf7 36 'iWd8+ <;t>g7 37 l:xf7+

..•

Nunn's

there

35 LDxf7+ �g7

complicated variations.

is

But

213

-

G.Kasparov

Alexander Alekhine the 4'h Most

chessplayers

Alekhine

and

Euwe

Alexander Alekhine the 4'"

know

that

played

two

14 ... cxd5 15 lOxd5 �d7 16 lOd4 f4

See diagram

beat him 6-4 with

Bogolyubov

no

become a world champion, then I could

page 213.

Alekhine intentionally steps into the

Later on Euwe also

discovered check of a battery. I

played a match against Capablanca,

who

on

blame him for losing the second game

they also had a third or should I say a

1926.

In the match the Griinfeld did not work welL It is a pity Griinfeld did not

matches for the world title. However

first match in

24 ...llxf7 25 lOxf7+ �g8

this

losses.

example when I played my last

I employed Karpov's variation, but

26 lOe5+

Alekhine is also not 100 percent free from guilt for this loss.

two different matches.

10 �g5 �b7 11 llel ttJbd7 12 1:cl

In the Alekhine-Euwe match of 1926

nc8

early on but

drew the

decisive last

ninth.

We look at their

This is a bit too subtle. Winning a pawn

Game

10,

-

17...•d8

17

18

b4 was the

lOxf6+ "xf6

19 �xb7.

standing at 4V,-4V,.

M.Euwe

nothing with

for

simplest.

the match

game with

13 "b3 .i.e7 14 �xf6 lOxf6

15 .i.xe6

17 lldel?

lost the seventh and the eighth, and

they

4 e3 0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 ttJf) c5 7 0-0 exd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 .i.xc4 b6

World Championship match.

also beat him 51/,-41;' i n

Alekhine won two games

of this match.

knew

17 ...lOxd5 18 �xd5+ '>Ph8 19 lOe6 l:H6 20 lbg5

A.Alekhine

match, Am ste rdam

1926

26..... xd5!! Euwe must have missed this.

27 cId5 lOe2+

1 lOo e6 2 c4 f5 3 g3 lOc6 4 d4

And Euwe resigned.

�b4+ 5 �d2 �xd2+ 6 ir'xd2 d6 10 0-0 lOg6 11 ,*c2 c6

20 . J:tars .

into the

game.

21 'i!tb3 fxg3 22 ,*xg3 White pawn

h as

compensation for after 22 b.xg3 llxfl 23 'i!fe3.

the

Black's pieces have now become threatening.

23 ne7 llg6 24 Itf7?? 12 e4

Even after 24

12..... a5 13 ed5 ed5 14 d5!

lOn+ llxn 25 llxn ttJe2+ 26 >Ph 1 ttJxg3+ 27 fxg3 h5 28 Itxd7 White is worse, but it is far

Euwe cuts

from over.

occupies the centre. Black's camp

I've already showed you that I was

You might say Euwe was Wllucky.

Black's pieces come

White

15 ... fxe6

0-1

7 lOc3 lOf6 8 �g2 0-0 9 lldl lOe7

into two.

214

not worried by the battery, and in fact

Yes and no. Looking at this match only,

this time the battery is not dangerous

yes, but probably

after I5... Itc7!. Then 16

he

learned from the

ttJg5 (16

�c4

extremely tense situation. When he

�xf3 17 gxf3 lld7 and Black is safe.)

played the last game of the 1935 match

16..."xd4!

he was able to handle the pressure

18

and

he was successfuL He probably

became wiser because of this painful experience,

whereas

benefit from it because

I

derived

I got no chance

of a return match. V.Krawoik

no

18

ttJe5+ ttJxn

17

ttJe2

(17 lOxn �c5

'i!th8 is okay; 17 llcd I '1Ifh4 �c5 and Black can move

despite the discovered check.) 18

ttJxn "xe2 and

17 .....d2

Black is doing all

ri ght. In this game all the motifs are here that I picked up from Alekhine -

-

G.Kasparov

Game 10, World Championship London

2000

1 d4 ttJf6 2 c4 e6 3 ttJc3 �b4

the back rank included.

16 'ii'xe6+ 'it>h8 17 li'xe7 �xf) 18 gxf) After 18 "xd8 Itcxd8 19 gxf3 comes 19 ...llxd4.

215

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

Alexander Alekhine the 4th

lS ,*:td4 19 LObS

24 lLlg5+ <;Ph8 25 '*f5 fi'xa2 (25...'*c3

...

26

%1e6

[26

%1e7

,*c5]

started

to

with me till I die as happened with Alekhine. It was a very important

check follows.) 26 "g6 ,*a3 (26 ..%1£8

game.

If 23 ...h6 24 lUxh6+ �h7 25 -.f5+! (25 ...�xh6

26

match

'*f4+

�h7

negative

effect

on

me,

how to avoid a rematch. He never gave me a chance to prove my superiority over him in a match, the same way that Alekhine denied Capablanca. So

26lUf7+ �g8 27lLlg5 ,*xa2 (27...W'c3

them never to be behind at a decisive

Alekhine had

28 %1e7 -'c5 29 ':'xg7+) 28 %1e6 %1c8

final stage of a World Championship

controversial influence on my career.

wins; or 28 ... ..Ild8 29 'ito>g2) 29 W'g6 wins. 24lUdS+ The battery looks innocent as the

walk in the centre. 20 %1xc8 %1xc8

knight wins nothing, however it still

21 lLld6 'ir'xo 22 lUxc8 'ir'g4+ 23 �f1

blocks the eighth rank.

'Wh3+ 24 �e2 ,*xc8 25 �d2 and went on to win in Hazai-Danie1sen, Valby 1994. 20 %1:tcS lhcS 21 lLld6 llbS

21 ...%1a8 was better as the rook would be less vulnerable if Black's king goes in front of its pawns. 22 lLlf7+ 'ito>g8 23 'ir'e6 h6 24 lLlxh6+ �h7 25 lLlf7! (25 lLlg4 %1fl!) 25...lle8 (25 ...fi'd2 26 ne41?) 26 '*f5+1 and White has good winning chances. 22 lLlf7+ Wg8 23 'ii'e 6

24 �h8 ...

I did not have the same luck as Alekhine and was not able to take the

213.

piece at the base of the battery. This is the battery I did not mind.

25 ,*e7 1-0

Thanks to Alekhine.

I resigned, because the d8 knight makes it possible to trap my rook or,

23

...

11fS

if it moves away, there is a back rank

Trying to include the rook in the

checkmate or even worse a nightmare

defence, but in vain. Other moves did

smothered mate. All Alekhine's motifs

not help either. Krarnnik showed how

that I wanted to employ played a role in

White

wins

with

23...h5.

Then

as

well, since Krarnnik learned from him

The world champions have had a strongly

me

everybody's attention. I learned from

19 ...'*f4. He did not mind taking a

on page

was

27 fi'xbS This is why putting the

had a game where he was faced with

See diagram

I

rook on a8 creates a bigger obstacle.)

junior

trainer Hazai, playing the White pieces,

Euwe,

Indirectly, Alekhine affected

(28 ...%1e8 29 %1xe8+ lUxe8 30 �g2 Hungarian

unlike

something which has probably escaped

,*xb2

excellent

but,

against Krarnnik.

[26...�g8 27 h4!] 27 .g6 %1fl! 28 %1xf6 gxf6 29 'Wh6+ �gS 30 ,*xfl!+ a nice

�h8

...

game

inexperienced when I played this game

27 ne7) 27 ne6 �g8 28 h4 White wins.

19

this

understand that the crown won't stay

.

The

After

26 ...•c7

this game. I knew them all and still lost.

216

217

an

especially marked and

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td 13...'it>h6?? loses to 14 lLlxf7+; and there is no way back with 13...<.ti>g8 as after 14 1t'h5 l:I.e8 15 l:I.ad1 �d7

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd

16 'ili'xf7+ <.ti>h8 17 1t'h5+ 'it>gS 1S b4 WillS.

1 4 'ili'g4 f5 Capablanca beat Emanuel Lasker in

1921

strong player who beat him and never

world

gave him a chance for a rematch. What

champion. Capablanca won 4 games

did I pick up from him? Well, there are

to

become

the

third

and 10 were drawn, therefore the result

a few indications of his style in my play

was 9-5. The match took place in Cuba,

. but these are rather superficial. First I'll

where the weather favoured him, but

show you the games that inspired me -

anyway the great Cuban was destined

and also cost me dearly.

to become world champion. Actually

Europe

1

and

li'lbd7 S e3

Capablanca was performing at his best champions he is the most dissimilar whereas

I

lLlf6

prefer

Capablanca had a positional style,

worker and have conflicts. Of course there are similarities too, He was very

very hard to foresee all the components

talented and had

of this sacrifice.

results in

<.ti>h6

2 1...lUdf4

enough

compensation for the material deficit.

but also very sharp tactical vision. It is

better

15 'ili'g3

I 2...�xh7 13 lUgs +

'itr>g6

And after

I S ...l:th8 19 l:tfdl 'ilff6

J.CapabJanea - L.Molina

G.Kasparov

-

DEEP JUNIOR

22 'ilfe3 lUgf4 23 g3 and White wins back the piece. Or 21...llJgf4 22 'ilfg3 l:ths 23 h4 �e6 24 nfe 1 l:teS 2S lUe2 and Black's position has deteriorated. 22 'ilfg3 'ilVc7

20.Ihc I he will play b4with an edge.

After 22...'ilfaS 23h4.

If 15 ...'it>f6 16 l:tadl 'ii b6 (16...'ilfaS

23 l:tfe! lUe2+ After 23...l:tdS 24 l:txdS 'ilfxd8 25 h4

leaves White two ways to look for play. 17lUh7+ 'it>f7 18 lUxfS <.ti>xfS 19 l:td4or 17e4lUxe418 lUcxe4+ fxe419 lUxe4+

Because Capablanca had won with the bishop takes h-pawn sacrifice, I settled for a draw when I was faced with it - instead of trying for more.

There's nothing better. If 21...l:thS

After IS...f4 16 exf4 lUfS 17 'ili'g4 and play for the piece

easy-going person, whereas I am a hard

'it>f7 20b4) 17e4(17llJh7+) 17...lUxe4 IS

llJcxe4+

fxe4 19 'ilff4+

Black is in trouble. And if 23...lthS 24h4lLlxh42Sl:td6+! 'ilfxd6 26lUce4+ White wins.

lUfS

20 lUh7+ 'it>f7 21 lUxfS <.ti>xfS 22 'ilfxe4 with easier play for White. 1 6 'ilfh4 + 'it>g6

17 'iVh7+ 'it>f6

Not 17 ...'it>xg5?? IS 'iVxg7+ 'it>hS 19l1Je2! f420exf4llJf5 21 'iib7+ lUh6 22 lUg3+ <.ti>g423'ilfxh6and checkmate follows on the next move.

18 e4! lLlg6

219 21S

'iVh3!

2l..Jlh8 22 llJce4+ fxe4 23 llJxe4+

lUh6 J S 'iib4 White has two pawns

1 2 �xh7+!?

individual tournaments against a very

<.ti>f7

f6 2SllJe4+ 'it>f7.

lLln iLe7 7 exdS?!

See diagram below.

complications. He was a laid back

exfS+

19 exfS exfS 2 0 l:tadl lLld3 2 1

4 �gS

0-0 1 1 dxeS lUxeS

type of player to myself. He had a very style,

e6 6

'iPxe6 22

21 'il'hs could lead to a perpetual.

1911

lLlxd S 8 1Lxe7 lUxe7 9 iLd3 eS 10 0-0

in America. In a way, among the world

positional

d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 lLlc3

lUxe6+

23 'ilfc4+ 'it>e8 24 b4 lUa6 25 llJe4 and White has nice prospects.

Casual game, Buenos Aires

earlier or, more precisely, during World War I. At that time there was hardly chess activity in

If 18 ...e5 19 ltad I 'iib6 20'iib4�e6 21

J.CapabJanea - L.Molina

he may have been the best player

any

This is the only move.

24 l:txe2 'ilfxg3

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rr1

25 lO b 7+

b) 1 6 . . . 'iWh5 17 :h l lOxe3+ 1 8 lb.h5

14 �d2 'ifh2+ 15 �f3

This is an effective intennediate move. It crushes Black's position.

25 ...<;t>n 2 6 hIg3 Ilh8 2 7 1Og5+ �r6

Maybe White is somewhat better, but

�g4+ 1 9 �f2 lOxc2 20 :ah l .txh5

this is by no means certain and things

21 :xh5 1O a l 22 �xh7+ wins.

can

17 �f2 lOg4+

28 f4 1-0

wrong

for White.)

starting 2 1 . . . dxe4+ which might end in a particular perpetual check. 22 tLlxe4

Game 5, Man v Machine,

[22 .txe4 lOdf6] 22 . . .gxf5 23 104c3

New York 2003

:e3+ 24 .txe3 lOdeS+ 25 dxeS lOxeS+

1 d4 lOf6 2 e4 e6 3 lOe3 �b4 4 e3

26 'it>f4

0-0 5 �d3 d5 6 exd5 nd5 7 1Oge2 lle8

15 .. JiM

8 0-0 �d6 9 a3 c6 1 0 'ifc2 all

go

c5 (Black is not worse in the line

G.Kasparov - DEEP JUNIOR

See diagram

easily

20 . . .lOd7 (threatening tLle5 mate) 21 e4

The pieces are placed in a similar

page 2 J 8.

fashion to the Capablanca game.

1 0 . .. �Ih2+? Seeing this move on the screen had

Now White's king can run away with

the effect of a cold shower. It struck me that perhaps it was my

tum

1 8 �e l ! .

to lose to an

opening trap, the same way that Karpov

Before we continue with this line

once lost honibly to Korchnoi. Then,

let's see the continuation if White's stays

in the area with 1 8 'it>g2,

with the Capablanca game rapidly

king

flashing across my mind, my heart

which allows Black to hold. There 26 . . .'iWh6+ 27 �xe5 '-g7+ leads to a

follows 1 8 . . . 'ifh2+ 19 'it>f3 g6 ! ! ( 1 9 . . . f5

nearly missed a byte's worth of beats.

draw.) 22 .i.gS (White should settle for

20 � x f5 'iWh5 2 1 .i.xg4 wins.)

11 <;t>xh2 lOg4+ 16 .txh7+?

a draw. It is too risky to play for a win

Here I was ·virtually settling for

by 2 2 'it>xg4? cxd4 23 .i.g5 [23 :h l ??

a draw because of the game of the

lOeS+ 24 �f4 h6 - 24 . . . g5+ 25 �xg5

Cuban champion. I thought it would

h6+ 26 �f4 'ii'f2 mate - 2S lOxd4 'ii'f2+

be

dangerous

to p lay on because

and checkmate on the next move.]

Capablanca had won with the sacrifice.

23 . . . dxe4 24 lOxe4 'iWh5 + 2S 'it>f4 gxfS

However I should have continued with

26 1Oxd4 'ii'g4+ 27 e3 'ii'xgS+ 28 �f2

1 6 g3 ! ! as the centre is not as open as in

fXe4 29 .i.xe4 lOf6 and Black takes

the Capablanca game.

over.) 22 . . . gxfS 23 lOxdS cxd4 24 exfS

Then 1 6 . . .lOh2+

12 q;.g3

a) 1 6 . . . 'it'h2 This is surely the move

The only move - and just like th e

Capablanca would have chosen. 17 f5

Capablanca game.

( 1 7 Il ae l ) 1 7 . . . lOd7 ( 1 7 . . . h5 1 8 e4 or

12 ...'ifg5 13 f4

1 7 . . . 'Wh3 1 8 Ilh l lOh2+ 19 �f2 wins.)

Things are developing in a very similar way to the Capablanca game.

1t'h5 20 f5 (20 e4 dxe4+ [Black can force

25

�g2

'ifh2+

is

another

perpetual.

a draw by 20 . . . 'iWh5 2 1 �g2 - 2 1 Ilh l tLle5+

2 l . . . 'ifh2 + 22 �f3 'itb5]

Meanwhile back to 1 8 �e I ! when 1 8 . . . 1t'h3 ( 1 8 . . . 'it'h2 ! ?

1 8 '1Pxg4 'ifg2 1 9 e4 lOf6+ 20 'iPf4 dxe4

21 .i.xe4 lOf6 22 f5 'iWh5+ 23 �f2

play continues

21

tLlxe4+ 24 lOxe4 'ii' xf5+ 25 �e3 'ii'g 5+

1 9 lOd I lOd7 2 0 e 4 dxe4 2 1 .i.xe4 Wb5

.i.xe4

lOxe4

22

lOxe4

.-xe2

13 ..JlfhS

23 lI a e l

This represents a slight difference.

25 'ife3 and B l ack runs out of play. 220

.Ihe4+ 24 .xe4 .xd2+

26 �d3

[26 �f2 'ii' f5+ 2 7 'it>e3]

26 . . .tfS 27 102c3 'ii'xg3+ 28 .te3 'iWh3

22 :h 1 1Oh2 23 lOe3 lOf6 24 .Jtg2 tDfg4 25 'ii'c 5 leaves White an edge.)

22 1

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td

16 ...'it'h8 17 <1Jg3 ciJh2+ 18

�f2

<1Jg4+

J .CapabJanca

-

A.Alekhine

Game 29, World Championship, Buenos Aires 1 927 1 d4 dS 2 c4 e6 3 <1Je3 ciJf6 4 .1gS ciJbd7 5 e3 c6 6 ciJo WaS 7 ciJd2 .1b4 8 Wc2 dxc4 9 .lhf6 ciJxf6 10 ciJxc4 We7 11 aJ

19

l: g I

(Had

not

known

2 1 'iWb3 ciJdS

Capablanca's game I might have tried 19 ciJd l I ? � I am not saying this wins but I knew he had won with the rook move

and I trusted his idea.) 1 9 . . . ciJd7 20 e4 dxe4 2 1 ciJxe4 'iVh2 (2 l .. . ciJ df6 22 ciJ d6 l: e6 23 ciJ c4 and White keeps his position together.) 22 'it' d I ciJ df6 23 ciJ xf6+ ciJxf6 24 l:e I .li. g4 25 'ifc4 and White is tied up.

Capablanca beat Alekhine in an endgame in which he was a pawn up and with a particular pawn structure. J.Capablanca

-

Here Alekhine missed a chance to reduce his disadvantage with 2 1 . . .b5. Then 22 <1Jc5 .li. xc5 and Black is only a fraction worse.

19 'it'O ciJh2+ Ij,-Vl

And the game ended in a perpetual. But I should have won this game or at least pressed harder. So, planted deep in my mind in my junior years was Capablanca's game - and it returned to me much later when I played Deep Junior.

Here is my position - also from a world title match - and with similar characteristics. G.Kasparov - A.K a rpov

A.Alekhine

22 b5 exb5 23 .-xb5 l:a8 24 IIc1 l:a5 2 5 'Wc6

White soon wins the b6-pawn. 2S ... .li.a3 26 l:t bl .i.f8 27 .i.xd5 l:xdS

1l ....li.e7

There are problems assessing this type of middlegame. This bishop may be worth as much as White's extra space. For example, players once considered the Moscow variation to be slightly better for White. By the end of the 1 9905 masters be gan to sacrifice the c4-pawn instead. I also beat Dreev with this idea in an extremely important game in the 2004 Russian Championship. 12 g3 0-0 13 .li. g2 .li. d7 14 b4 b6 15 0-0 as 16 ciJeS axb4 17 axb4 l:xal

If 17 ... .li. xb4 1 8 ciJb5 Wc8 19 ciJ a7 wins. 18 .l:b:al l:c8

If 1 8 . . . .li. xb4 19 <1Jb5 Wc8 20 .li. xc61 Capablanca liked this continuation and he had a point. 19 ciJxd7 WId7 20 ciJa4 'Wd8

222

28 <1Jxb6

White has excellent chances of converting his advantage. 2 8 ...l%d6 29 'Wb7 h5 30 tDe4 l:d7 31 'ife4 l:te7 32 ciJe5 We8 33 'it>g2 .li. d6 34 .I:1 a l IIb7 35 ciJd3 g6 36 l:a6 .i.f8 37 l:tc6

It is interesting that Capablanca chooses not to attack with h3 and g4. 37 ...l1c7 3 8 l:txe7 Wxc7 3 9 ciJeS .li.g7 40 'Was+ 'it>h7 41 tUo .i.f6 42 'ifa6 'it> g7

223

Jose Raul Capobianco the 3rr1

Jose Raul Capobianco the 3rr1

bishop along both diagonals was better so perhaps b6 is the best square for the bishop. Then B lack has real chances of survival. 56 lUeS! .t.d4

If56 . . . f5 57 d6! fxg4+ 58 �g2 ! wins. Alternatively, 56 . . . .t.a3 57 d6 �f6 58 d7 �e7 59 lUxf7 is decisive. 57 lUxf7+ �f6 58 lUd8 �b6 59 lUc6 �c5 43 'iVd3

Capablanca starts creating a passed d-pawn.

After 62 . . .'it>g7 63 d6 wins.

1 8 0-0 a6 1 9 ltJa3 .l:l.e8 20 ltJc2 .l:l.xe2

63 lUxg6+

11 ihe2 �b5 22 .l:l.xb5 axb5 23 'iWxb5

Winning a second pawn. The rest is simple.

.l:l.132 24 lUe3

63 ...�d6 64 �e4 �g3 65 lUf4 e5 .iel 67 d6+

d7 68 g6 �b4 69

d5

Not 69 g7?? �c3+ draws. 69 ...<;t>e8 70 d7+ 1 -0

This game looked very convincing to me. G.Kas p arov - A.Karpov

Game 40, World Championship, Moscow 1 985

43 ... 'Wi'b7 44 e4 'iWc6 45 h3 .c7 46 d5 exd5 47 e:xd5

Had the Cuban not exchanged rooks ten moves earlier, and if the game had proceeded in a similar way, by now his advantage would have been greater.

24 ....I:I.a5?

Karpov hangs on to the pawn, but soon he has to relinquish it. Geller recommended 24 ...ltJa6! ? which loses the pawn but might hold the game. For example, 25 l:tc l (25 ltJxd5 .l:l.a5 26 lUe7+ 'it?ffi 27 ltJc6 lhb5 28 ltJxd8 ltJb8) 25 ... g6! 26 lUxd5 (26 "'7 .f6) 26 ... .I:I.a5 27 ltJe7+ �g7 28 ltJc6 .l:l.xb5 29 lUxd8 ltJb4 30 .l:l.b l .l:l.b8 and Black seems to escape.

1 d4 lUf6 2 c4 e6 3 lUn d5 4 lUc3 .ie7 5 �g5 h6 6 .ih4 0-0 7 e3 b6 8 �e2 .i.b7 9 �d6 �If6 1 0 cxdS

47 ... 'ifc3 48 '1!t'xc3

e:xdS 11 b4 c5 12 buS bxc5

Another small swprise when it was possible to keep the queens on. 48...�xc3 See diagram o n page 222.

49 �n �r6 50 �e2 �b4 51 iDd4 .ic5 52 lUc6 �r5 53 �n � f6

60 �f4 !

Capablanca can now use his king and returns a pawn for a winning endgame. 60 �e2 �d6 (60 . . . �g5 6 1 lUe5) 6 1 'OPd3 �g5 62 lUd8 �xg4 63 'iPe4 also wins.

25 'Wi'b7 "e8 26 ltJxd5 .l:l.b5 27 .a8 .d7 28 lUc3 .l:l.b4 29 d5 "c7 30 ltJdl

60 ....ixfl 61 gS+

l:tb5

As Capablanca played g5, I too opted for the same idea - see the next game! 6 1 .....t>f7

If 6 l . ..'iPg7 62 d6.

54 g4 hxg4+ 55 hxg4 �g5

An unfortunate move, as it fixes White's king. However, it does provide freedom for the knight. Moving the 224

There are 1 2 6 games with this particular position in the database. Karpov and I played this position five times in our World Championship matches, all ending in draws. These games do not belong to the most exciting pages of World Championship history but as far as I was concerned they were justified because of my standing at the time in those matches. 13 .l:l.bl .as 14 .d2 exd4 I s lUxd4

62 lUeS+ 'OPe7

3 1 lUe3

White has consolidated his extra pawn. However it is not so simple to convert it.

.ixd4 16 exd4 �c6 17 lUb5 "d8

225

3 1 .. .•a5

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3..0

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3..0

I had no choice, but it was

42 11d4

not

against my wishes as Capablanca had

After 42 gxf6 comes 42 ... 'it>f7!

exchanged queens as well.

42 ... Wn 43 tOe4 �e6 44 wn 11e5

32 'ii'x a5 11xa5 33 l:[dl

swapped

and

30 lOe4 ifb2 3 1 lOc5 .i..xc5 32 lIc3

against one piece. But I was not so

.i..xf2+ 33 llxf2 lla l + 34 lIf1 Wb6+

lucky as Capa.

35 11e3 llxf1+ 36 �xf1 Wd4 37 Wc7

48 tOeS �xd6

the

tOc6 24 tOc I

27 tOc3 Wb3 28 11e3 d5 29 .i.. h6 .i.. f8

We too have simplified to one piece

Black has a knight. But I thought the be

22 . . . 'i!t'c4 23 11ae I

Wxd4 25 tOe2 Wa4 26 Wg3 11fd8

�Id5

There are rooks on the board and could

Astana 200 1

45 �e3 l:[b5 46 Wd2 J:[d5 47 11Id5

See diagram on page 222.

rooks

A.Shirov - G.Kasparov

Wc4+ 0- 1

difference between having a knight instead of a bishop is not significant. Capablanca won his game, therefore I was hoping to win my endgame as well. 33 ...tOd7 34 g4 g6 3 5 Wg2 11a4

I have sacrificed a piece on b5 a few times, of course this occurs most

36 h3 �g7 3 7 d6

frequently in the Sicilian defence. So my main recourse to employing this idea

Capablanca advanced his pawn at a

came from other games and I very clearly remembered one of Capablanca's

much later stage. 37 ...11a6 38 f4 11e6 39 h4 �f8

49 tOIg6

wins where he sacrificed a bishop on b5. He played i t in his first European

My simplification is di fferent from

tournament at San Sebastian 1 9 1 1 after which he was universally regarded

the previous game. White's king is

as a world-class player.

unable to improve its position and so no progress can be made. Oh, it's all so Here

sad! 49" ,ltJc5 50 ltJh4 �e6 5 1 �e3 ltJe4 52 tOn 'it>n 53 �d4 �e6 54 �e4 tOa 55 ..ti>d4 [55 tOg I !?] 55 ...ttJe4 56 tOel �d6

57

is

the

position

where

Capablanca had just sacrificed on b5: J. Capablanea

-

And here you can see the moment when I unleashed the same move.

O.Bernstein

G.Kasparov - J.Lautier

tOe2 tOeS 58 �e3 tOe6

59 ttJd4 tOg7 60 Wd2 �e5 61 �d3 �d5 62 tOe2 tOh5 63 We3 tOg7

40 g5 The great Cuban pushed the g-pawn later. But he pushed nevertheless and why shouldn't I do the same? That's

64 tOg3 ..ti>d6 65 'iPn ..ti>e7 66 tOe2 tOe6 67 ttJg3 tOg7 68 tOn �n 69 tOe3 ..ti>g6 70 tOd5 ttJe6 Vz-Vz

what I thought. On the other hand Geller preferred 40 h5.

But not all my memories were sour as regards the particular pawn structure

4 0. . .h x g 5 4 1 hxg5 f5 !

with three pawns on the kingside and

Karpov does not allow my king t o

o n e extra d-pawn. Here is m y game

penetrate.

against Shirov: 226

2:27

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3'"

30 h3

J.Capablanea - O.Bernstein SI. Petersburg 1 9 1 4

White is a rook down but has plenty of pawns for it and, more importantly,

I d4 d S 2 lUn lUf6 3 c4 e 6 4 lUe3

far too many pieces around Black's

lUbd7 S �g S �e7 6 e3 e6 7 �d3 dxc4

king.

8 �J:C4 bS 9 �d3 a6 10 e4 eS II dxeS

30 ... lUe8 If 30 . . . lUh6 3 1 lUg3 mate.

31 hxg4+ 'it>xg4 32 �xd8 l:lxd8 Black has avoided direct loss, but he

22 lUxc8 This is a surprising solution. He gives up h i s

well

placed

knight for an

undeveloped bishop.

has given back the rook. Now he is

12 a3 bS

absolutely constrained with his three pawn deficit.

One year earlier Ivanchuk castled against

22 ... 'ihe6 23 W'd8+ 'ike8 .

.i.e7+

wn

2S

in

this

position.

Joel

obviously had time to prepare.

If 23 . .Wn 24 lUd6+. 24

me

lUd6+

1 3 �xbS!?

g6

26 LDh4+ �hS 27 lUxe8 l:lxd8

See diagram on page 227

I have had two games in which my opponent had doubled e-pawns in the opening and I lost. One was only a blitz

I also had time to prepare and felt this

game again Kramnik, but the second

sacrifice would wreak psychological

one was a regular game against Hubner.

damage.

Tal, Euwe and Steinitz all won games

13 ... axbS 1 4 lUdIbS 'ikb 6 ? !

33 g3 %td2 34 'it>g2 :te2 3S a4 LDb6

against such a pawn structure.

3 6 lUe3+ 'it>hS 3 7 as lUd7 3 8 lUhfS

I J ...ltJg4 12 �f4 �eS 13 0-0 'ike7

lUf6 39 bS �d4 40 'it>n %ta2 4 1 a6

1 4 l:le l f6 IS �g3 fxeS

�a7 42 l:lel l:lb2 43 g4+ 'it>g6 44 l:le7 28 lUxg7+

Against Hubner I did not mind him taking back the e-pawn, as I based my play on my queenside pawn maj ority.

Capablanca

had

luck

with

knight-saving intermediate moves.

28 ... �b6 29 lUgfS+ �hS

1 6 b4 �a7 1 7 �xbS!

such

l:lxf2+ 45 'it>If2 lUxg4+ 46 'it>n 1 -0

After 1 4 . . . 'ikc6 1 5 �xc5 dxc5 1 6 e5 �a6

17

a4

lUd5

18

lUxd5

exd5

1 9 lUd6+ 'it>e7 20 l:lel h5 21 'if13 Lautier evaluates his line as giving

This b5 sacrifice is nice indeed and I

enough compensation.

15 �xe5 dIe5 16 lUd6+

have also tried it.

Also after 1 6 e5 �a6 1 7 a4 ! �xb5 See diagram on page 227.

G.Kasparov - J.Lautier

( 1 7 . . . lUd5 1 8 lUd6+ 'it>e 7 1 9 tLixd5+

Euwe Memorial, Amsterdam 1 995

exd5 20 'ikxd5 wins.) 1 8 lUxb5 lUd5

In return for the bishop Capablanca obtains

three

pawns

and

prevents

1 e4 e5 2 lUn e6 3 d4 exd4 4 lUxd4 ltJe6 5 lUe3 'ike7 6 �e3 86 7 �d3 lUf6

Bernstein from castling.

17 ... axbS 1 8 lUxbS W'd8 19 lUd6+

8 0-0 lUe5 9 b3 �eS 1 0 'it> h l d6 1 1 f4

( 1 8 . . . lUe4? 1 9 'ik13) 1 9 c4 lUe7 20 'ikd6 White has decent compensation for the piece.

1 6 ... 'it>e7

tLied7

�f8 20 lhe6 lUb6 21 �b4 'ifd7

228

229

Jose Raul Capablanca the Jrd

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rt!

28 . . :r5 29 Wb5 lUr6 3 0 'ilhb6+ 'i!tf7 .

3 1 ..t>gl

1 7 lUxc8+

27... g5!

22 g4!

Capablanca captured the bishop after

B y now I had already cleared my

Black saves the g-pawn which is a

the d6-check. I did not do the same

head of the Capablanca game. I just

very important achievement for h im.

even though I had had the controversial

used my own brains and made a

His queen stands well on the long

experience

computer

reasonably good move, which creates

sacrificed the bishop on hl. I still fully

chances. H owever, sadly, it is not

diagonal.

trusted Capablanca's way of attacking.

enough. If 2 2 :g3 Wf2.

After

17

when

e5 �a6

( l 7.

the

.

1 7 ... :hxc8

was. But I still felt relaxed.

on me.

exd6+ �xd6 !

Not

20 . . . Wxb2? 2 1 f5 ! Wxc3 22 fx e 6 fx e 6 23 :f7+ ..v d 8 2 4 :d l and White has

jj'xe6+ Q;c7

surely

have

been

G.Kasparov

Capablanca played a very famous

-

J.Tlmman

game where he froze his opponent's bishop on g3 with his g5 and e5

Impatiently and prematurely parting with the d6"-knight. After 25 . . . l:tb8 26 �gl :d5 ! 27 :f2 iOxd6 28 exd6+

pawns. W.Winter

-

J.Capablanca

�d8 Black wins.

26 exd6+ �f8 27 .Ilg1?

compensation even for the doubl e knight deficit.

would

25 lUd6 lUxd6 27

25 lUd6 iOxd6? !

Lautier consolidates his king and now I started to realise things would

he

Once again taking the b2 pawn was decisive: 24 ... 'ii'x b2!

.

my way.

embarrassed at his negative influence

28 fxg5+ :f5 29 :gg3 iOe5 wins.

in material.

20 . . [5 !

go

precariously placed. For example, after

28 :d l lUb6 and Black is too far ahead

Not 20 f5 7 lUxe5 2 1 fxe6 'ii'x e6.

necessarily

23 ... :a5! Not 2 3 ...jj'xb27 24 f5 .

26

18 e5 lUe8 19 Wh5 b6 20 tIae!

not

this,

24 lUe4 Wc6?!

It i s a bit worrisome that Lautier's rook is not stuck on h8 as Bernstein's

Had Capablanca actually observed my position collapsing in ruins like

advance. But White'S king remains

After 23 hxg4 Wc6.

unclear.

28 .Ilgg3 D efending the vulnerable f3-rook in

22 ... fIg4 23 W:lg4

. lUe8 1 8 lUc4)

I 8 :f2 :hd8 1 9 :d.2 the position is

3 1 ...:g8 0-1

This move is a bad time-trouble mistake. 2 7 :xe6 was necessary. Then

2 1 :13

after 27 . . . :e8

(27 . . . iO f6?? 28 d 7 1 )

After 2 1 exf6+ lUexf6 22 Wg6 �fll

No doubt you have already noticed

2 8 :xe8 + ( 2 8 :e77 :xe7 2 9 dxe7+

that while Winter had a frozen bishop,

�f7)

Timman has a knight. It's so annoying

Black wins.

28 . . . �xe8

29

�gl

'ilhM

2 1 ...c4 ? !

30 Wxg7 B l ack has just a few pawn!

that this could happen. Go through the

Knaak's move 2 1 . . . ..xb2 wins. After

left and his king has no shelter. All

game and you can see why I say this!

0

22 :d I (22 g4 :xa3) 22 . . . lUfS it is all

which makes it very hard to win witl

over.

the extra knight. 230

23 1

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3rd

W.Winter

-

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3Td

J.Capablanca

In the later part of the analysis you

Hastings Victory Congress 1 9 1 9

Now we return to my game:

can see why I thought Timman had a bishop on g6. But here I had some

1 e4 e5 2 lDn lDc6 3 lDc3 lDf6

14 ... e6 1 5 .0 d5 I 6 lDn a5 I 7 lDg3 �eS 1 8 a4 �e7 1 9 �a2 .!:ta6 20 ill b 5

chessic doubts when a Steinitz game

4 �b5 �b4 5 0-0 0-0 6 �J:c6 dJ:c6 7 d3 �d6 8 �g5 h6 9 �h4 c5

suddenly occurred to me. A.Scbwarz - W.Steinltz

Vienna 1 873

23 ... e4! 24 nb5 CJ:b3 25 CJ:b3 :lJ:b5 26 l:la4 :lxb3 With such a frozen kingside White is hopelessly lost.

27 d4 l:lb5 28 :le4 'l:tb4 29 lhe6

2 0 ...l:lb6

l:hd4 0-1

Timman's rook play is interesting.

10 lDd5? gS 1 1 ill d6+ "d6 12 �g3 �g4 13 h3 �xn

2 1 1i'e2 .d6 22 0-0 l:I.d8 23 .!:tfdI d4

14 "iJ'xo 'ilt'xf3

24 .!:td2 .e5 G.Kasparov

15 gxn

-

J.Timman

See diagram on page 2 3 1 .

1 e4 e5 2 lDo ille 6 3 �c4 ltJr6 4 d3 �eS 5 c3 d6 6 �b3 0-0 7 �gS

White's bishop on g 3 i s dead.

15 ...f6 16 'it>g2 as 17 a4 Wf7 18 :lh l �e6 1 9 h4 l:lfb8 20 hIgS hJ:g5 21 b3

�e6 8 lDbd2 a6 9 b3 �a7 10 �h4 Wb8

Jan should have played 24 . . . dxc3

1 6 ...lDJ:g3

Wereldhaven Festival, Rotterdam 1 999

This confused me. Steinitz captures the bishop which seems to imply that a bishop like this may not be so bad after all. Steinitz went on to win the game. On the other hand Capablanca won by saddling his opponent with this bishop. I

was aware of the

messages

these

25 bxc3 'Wa3 26 l1ad l 'li'xc3 27 lDe3. White has some play for the pawn but Black should be better.

25 ':c2 .d6 26 lDel l:tg8 27 lDn .d7 28 'itbl e5 29 �u6 be6 30 ill d2 l:ta6

contradictory

champions

were

sending but thought, as the Cuban was the

later champion, he must have

played better than Steinitz, therefore it was his principle I followed.

17 l:hh8 lDu2+ 1 8 �J:e2 l:hb8 19 dxeS dxe5 20 l:lgl l:tg8 21 'ite2 ill d 8 2 2 .d5 .e7 23 l:I.dl e6 24 �3 11 g4

2 1 ...c6 Having

centralised

his

king,

Capablanca now opens the queenside. He can afford a lot of things on that side as White is virtually a piece down.

When I was really young I also gained space like this against Petrosian.

1 l ... ille 7 1 2 � xf6 gJ:f6 13 lDh4 lDg6 1 4 ttJg2 See diagram on page 231.

22 :la2 bS 23 :lhal

232

b5 25 e4? 3 1 lDc4

Giving up the d4-square was a huge mistake of course.

Somehow I have gained a small edge.

25 ... lDe6 26 <;PbI lDd4 27 .e3 l:th8 28 .d2 l:tb2 29 �n b4 30 'We3 'Wf6

3 l ...�d8 32 l:lecl .!:trs 33 n �e7 34 l:la3 :laa8 35 ':b3

3 1 l:td3 g4 32 bg4 %hrz 0-1 White resigned in this lost position.

It is my turn to use the rook the way that Timman did.

233

Jose Raul Capablanca the 3"<1

35 ... 'lIh,a4 36 lhb7 it'c6 37 .:tb3 f5

cranes. Their shapes were somewbat

38 lLld2 .:t n 39 c4 a4 40 l1b 5 ? !

similar and I mixed them up. I was so

[40 l:ta3] 40 ...�a5 4 1 lLln

happy that I could copy Capablanca's Creeze technique.

E manuel Lasker the 2nd

He is DOt solely

responsible for my loss here but shares the

blame

with

the

heavy

metal

designer. Maybe chess events should be

The second world champion beat

Lasker had to win the last game to save

outdoor - so this game would not count

Wilhelm Steinitz l O-5 with 4 draws in

the match. In the same year he beat

against my indoor record.

Philadelphia 1 894. It was 2-2 with two

Janowski again. This event was even

47 'iW0?

draws after the sixth game, then Lasker

more convincing as he dropped only 3

I was so stunned tbat J made a losing

raced away with five consecutive wins.

draws out of 1 I games. In the final of

separated as in tennis

move,

4 l . . .JLb4

but

Timman

indoor and

stood

better

anyway.

47 ... lLlIh5 48 'ilh h 5 _f2 49 lLle2

Timman's bishop is very much better

'iW0+ 50 'ilho

than Winter's as it traps the b5 rook.

Two years later Lasker started with four

the

consecutive wins. In the first eleven

he scored 7 out of 8 and won the

games the ageing Steinitz made only four draws. Then Steinitz won two

42 lLlCg3 fxg4 43 fxg4 l1ars

games in a row. In the last four games

Black takes over the C-file.

Emanuel

44 l1n 'iWe8 45 .:tIn '�lhn 46 g5?

scored three

more

wins,

winning the match 1 0-2 with 5 draws. Lasker held the title for the longest period - 27 years in all. However he was the champion who played the least. After the

51 cot>g2 l1Id3 52 lLlg3 cot>g7 53 l:tb6 JL e l 54 lLln cot> n 5 5 lLlh2 .:td2+

This came as a huge shock. I thought piece was a bishop and DOW

match

During World War I Lasker lost his wealth, so consequently he had to put his title at stake i n 1 92 1 . It was here that he lost to Capablanca in Cuba, However he still scored some fine tournament results, including a victory at New York 1 924 ahead of Capablanca

Lasker played very little. He frrstly

and Alekhine, In 1 93 5 he took third

defended his title in 1 907, demolishing

place in an extremely strong event in

Marshall 1 1 th-3th, winning 8 games

Moscow - at the age of 67.

ageing Tarrasch

The chess he played is quite different

1 0 th-5 th , He won 8 games, lost 3 and

from the style of the late twentieth

later

That's it.

this

Steinitz

tournament ahead of both Capablanca and Alekhine.

and drawing 7 with no losses. One year

50 . ..1110

46 ...lLl r4

second

5 6 cot>hl l1e2 57 lLlg4 l::t x e4 58 lLlc6 11e2 59 lLlIh 7 0-1

he

beat

the

century. So his effect on me is less than

drew 5 . In

the

famous

St.

Petersburg

tournament Lasker and Rubinstein both

suddenly it moves like a knight! The

say Smyslov's. Nevertheless, he still p layed games that influenced me.

scored 1 4 th out of 1 8 games, although

piece on g6 has not moved for so long,

Alekhine praised Capablanca's talent

Rubinstein beat him in their individual

and in my mind it remained like a

so highly after the Cuban died and

encounter, Rubinstein also showed his

slumbering bishop on g6. How could

Krarnn i k said Leko was

a tougher

class in other tournaments. Sadly a

this happen? This game was an outdoor

opponent in the final than me. I think

match between the two never took

exhibition in which pieces and pawns

his true thoughts lie in the fact that he

place. In the same year he destroyed

were large steel containers moved b y

never gave me a chance of a rematch.

Janowski 8-2, winning 7 games and losing one with two draws.

He

title with a 5-5 score against Schlechter.

won

Alekhine

many

games

defence

with

pawn

the

structure

b4-c5 -d4 against Black's b7-d5-e6, but those we have discussed in the Smyslov chapter.

In the following examples we see how

In 1 9 1 0 Lasker again defended his 234

1 9 1 4 St Petersburg tournament

Lasker

gained

space

on

the

kings ide with g4 and then backed up his attack with the aid of his knights.

235

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2M

A classical manoeuvre. White cracks

I found Lasker's pawn and knight s etup rather attractive so I gave it a try.

G.Kasparov - R.Hiiboe..

KLaske.. - W.Steioitz

confident because of the plus I had on

Black from both sides of the board.

the kings ide.

a very effective method when it

13 ... d4 14 llJf5 lLlc5 IS l:[gl 11f7

comes to exploiting a space advantage.

16 cxd4 �xf5 17 gxf5 lOxd4 18 tLlxd4

23 ... g6 24 'We3 fS

'Wxd4 19 <;t>n <;Ph8 20 nbl

A desperate attempt to get some play. Waiting passively was also hopeless.

20 ...lXd7 E.Laske.. - W.Steinitz

I was already gaining the impression

25 lOxeS!

Hastings 1 895

that my kings ide play was possibly no stronger than Hubner's initiative on the

This takes Black apart; the rest is not

I e4 eS 2 llJo llJe6 3 �bS a 6

other side of the board.

very interesting.

4 �a4 d6 5 0-0 llJge7 6 e3 �d7 7 d4 lOg6

2S ...dxeS 26 'Wxe5+ llJf6 27 �d4

21 l1g3 as 22 �e3 'Wd6 23 ndl lOa6

fIg4 28 hxg4 �xg4 29 'Wg5 'Wd7

24 �b3 �d4 25 l1 g4 llJc5 26 �c4 'WfS 27 nh4

Though this setup is a bit passive it i s

30 �xf6+ <;Pg8 3 1 �dl �h3+ 32 <;PgI

steady and was still being played more

lOxd5 33 �xd8 lOf4 34 �f6 'Wd2

than a century later. Timman won

35 l:[e2 llJ xe2+ 36 �Ie2 'Wd7 37 lXdl

a

Masters still play moves likc this in

the European Team Championship in

the King's Indian. I also played lO gS a

2005 where Holland went on to win the

few times in a King's Indian position

event!

(this game is similar). I won with this

G.Kasparov - R.Hiiboer

move against Korchnoi in B arcelona

Game 4, Cologne TV blitz 1 992

8 ne1 �e7 9 lObd2 0-0 10 llJn 'ife8 White is

a

slightly bettcr.

12...�g4 13 dS llJb8 14 h3 �e8 IS lOfS �d8 16 g4 llJe7 17 lOg3

white

kn i gh ts

provide

proper

34 �xb3 axb3 35 .l:l.cl l:[ad8 36 l:[c3

1 e4 e5 2 �e4 lOc6 3 d3 �cS 4 lOo d6 5 c3 lOf6 6 �b3 0-0 7 b3 �e6

Fischer Random chess position. Only

8 lObd2 a6 9 'We2 �a7 10 g4

'ii' g 8 3 7 'ii' g 6 l1 d6 3 8 llg4 nSd7 3 9 l:[ gl 'WdS 40 l:[xb3

I intentionally postponed castling.

10 ...lLld7

11 �c2 d5 12 lLln f6

13 lOg3

chcss game.

1 8 'it'g2 llJd7 19 �e3 llJb6? Players

no

longer

develop thcir

See diagram on page 23 6.

queen's knight in this way.

20 b 3 �d7 2 1 c4 llJe8 22 'ifd2 llJce7

support.

17 ... llJg8

At the end o f his plan Hubner nicely cuts off the dangerous bishop.

in 1 99 1 . The position seems to be like a

space advantage on the kings ide and the

llJb3

my victims in the Paris Immopar rapid

three of the eight B lack pieces are on

Whitc's g4-pawn providcs a DIce

30 'it>e2 c6 3 1 a 3 b 5 32 �a2 a4 33 .l:l.g1

1-0

1 989, and Khalifrnan and Gelfand were

their starting squares of a conventional

See diagram abo ve.

27 ...'We8 28 'Wg4 �xe3 29 fIe] h6

'Wf7 3 8 �c4 �e6 3 9 e5 �xc4 40 lLlfS

crucial game with it against Motylcv a t

11 �c2 >t>h8 12 lOg3

Putting the rook on the edge doesn't achieve enough to gain an advantage.

23 eS! 236

Hiibner's position is stronger on the queenside than Steinitz's, but I was still

237

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2""

40 ... cS!

s o nice I really want to share them.

This was a blitz game, so I had little time to

think.

Nevertheless

Maybe I was enjoying calculating

did

I

them.

49

J:lf7

J:lxe3 + !

(49 . . . 1i'g8

remember that Lasker managed to

50 :!.ec7 .l:[bb3) 50 c;t>f2 (50 c;t>xe3?

attack Steinitz's king. For a while I was

It'a3+

hoping to do the same, but from now on

51

¢>d2

'VIVb2 +

and

I also allowed this - but regrettably with a different result.

B l ack

delivers a checkmate in 8 moves . )

I had to divide my attention between

In the first two examples the second world champion allowed his opponents to have a strong rook on the seventh and yet he still won. Recalling his games

Heydebreck - E.Lasker

D.JaDowski - E.Lasker

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov

V.Topalov - G.Kasparov

5 0 . . . J:lb2+ 5 1 c;t> fl .1:0+ 5 2 c;t>g l .l:g3+

attacking and taking care of my own

53 1i'xg3 'ifixf7 5 4 .l:c8+ c;t;h7 and it

king.

looks like Black is winning.

41 .r:txbS .I:hd3 42 c;t>o After 4 2 .I:txc5 .r:txe3+? there is no perpetual, but 42 .. .l:l:d2 transposes back

to the game. 42...J:ld2 43 J:lxcs J:lxb2 44 J:lgc l J:lb8 45 a4 Bringing 45

'iit' g 2

back

the

was not

queen

with

e ffective.

After

45 . . J:ld2 46 J:lc8 J:lxc8 4 7 llxc8 'VIVxc8 .

48 'VIVxd2 'VIVa6 4 9 'VIVc l 1i'a4 the queen is tied to the defence of the pawn and the

55

idea of a perpetual. White probably

.l:c7 ! !

.l:b 1 +

56

c;t>h2

fi'a2+

57 .g2 'iWxg2+ (57 ... .l:b2? 5 8 .r:txg7 + I )

can't make any progress.

4S . . 'iit' f8 46 as J:la7 47 36 llba8 !

5 8 ¢>xg2 .l:b4 B l a c k c a n press o n , but

Hiibner's feel for chess doesn't let

probably White holds.

.

him down. H e patiently takes back the pawn, or should I say tries to take back - as you will see. Recapturing at once with 4 7 ... J:lxa6? was clearly a worse option. 4 8 J:lc7? ! (White is a pawn u p with

some

winning

chances

after

48 J:lxe5 ! )

Heydebreck - E.Lasker

l .1:d 7

Berlin 1 889

48 J:lc6 0-1 In playing my move I overstepped

This time t h e rook on the seventh i s n o t particularly dangerous. However i t looks n o fun for Black either. See diagram aboye.

the time limit! The position is equal as

l....l:b l !

Black could take the a6-pawn.

What a nice riposte!

2 .1:ddl

Luckily this Lasker-affected game was only blitz, so it was not important. 48 . . . .l:a3 ! !

It is rather strange to

analyse a blitz game, but the lines are

However the next one hit me at a crucial moment.

238

Losing without much resistance. Blit taking the queen with 2 J:lxb7 leads to a beautiful win. 239

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

2 . . . lLlf2+ ! ! 3 lLlxf2 l:hg l + ! 4 �xg 1 .l::te 1 mate.

1 9 .. :iWa6 ? !

27 .1::t x e7

Staying closer t o the centre with

Janowski plays in optimistic fashion.

34 lLle8+ 'it.>h6 35 h4 g5 1 [35. hxg4 36

fB='ii+

.l::t x fB

37

�d2+

<;P h S

3 8 .l::t h 7 mate] 36 hxg5+ 'iti>xgS 37 .l::t e 5+

2 ....l::t x dl 3 llxdl lLlxc3 0-1

1 9 . . . 'ifc6 seems better. Then 20 lLlxe7

White resigned.

�xe7 2 1 'Wh6 � e6 22 f5 gxf5 23 'ife3

27 ...ltJf3+ 28 'iix f3!

<;Ph4

.l::t a 6!

White sacrifices his queen based o n

[)9 . . 5.Pxg4 40 lLlf6+] 40 .l::te 3+ o;i.>xg4

and B lack keeps his position

-

Cambridge Springs 1 904

Capturing

a

pawn

B lack back into

I e4 eS 2 lLlf3 lLlc6 3 lLlc3 lLlf6

was

21

lO x e 7 !

but

..•

� xe7

22

d5

�g8 3 1 .l::t e e7 �d5 32 .ll g7+ �f8

Better � fB

4 �bS �cS 5 lLlxeS lLlxeS 6 d4 �d6

23 'Wh4 � xc5+ 24 1;h I and Black is in

7 f4 lLlg6 8 eS c6 9 �c4 �c7 10 exf6

trouble .

•xf6 11 0-0 dS

3 9 � e l + <;Ph)

'iix a2

remains very complicated.) 30 IIf7+

allowing

the game.

b3

of this long tactical line the position

28 �xf3

20 'ifh6 �e6 2 1 lLlxf6+? !

E.Lasker

38

4 1 lLlf6+ o;i.>f5 42 lLlxd5 and at the end

the strength of a rook on the seventh.

together.

D.Janowski

After 27 ""f2 the position is unclear.

2 1 . . . 'it'f7 22 ltJe4 ltJfS 23 'ifb3 �e7 24 �c3

29 llf7+? Janowski probably misses Lasker's 32nd move. Bringing his other rook across with 29 .l::t a e l ! leads to some fascinating tactics. 29 ... 'iic 6 (29 ... .i.d5 30 fS hS ! [30 . . . gS? 3 1 f6 'Wc6 32 f7 'iia4

12 �xdS

An interesting piece sacrifice. 12

24

.l::t l e6 ! !

and

the

game

should

Black can't do anything useful in the ensuing ending. (33 f5 'iia4 1 ! wins. 33

.l::t g f7+

�x f7

34

.l::t x f7+

't>g8

.i.xe6

3 5 .l::t g 7+ 'iti>xg7 36 d5+ 'iti>g8 37 dxc6

34 dS+ <;PfB 3 S .l::t x e6 wins - 3 3 .l::tc 7

bxc6 and Black should be a bit better.)

lhd8

26 .l::t a dl ltJe2+ 2 7 'it>h l ltJxc3 2 8 llxd8

36 ltJ f5 White wins.] 3 1 f6 [3 1 fxg6?

35 ltxf7+ g8 36 .l::t g7 + �xg7 3 7 d5+

.l::tx d8 the position is equal.

.l::th6 32 .l::t 7 e5 .l::t xg6J 3 l . . .'iic 6 3 2 f7

'iti>g8 38 dxc6 bxc6 39 b4 White is

'iia4 33 .l::tc 7 r;t>g7

longer worse. ) 34 f5 gxf5 (34 . . . hxg4

cxdS 13 lLlxdS 'ifd6 14 'ife2+

Black wants to play 1 7 . . . 1; f7.

�dS

33

queen

probably end in a draw. I t looks like

'iti>g7 34 fB='ii+ r;t>x.f8 35 .l::t fl + g8

After

•..

lLle7 15 llet �d8 16 c4 f6

..•

32 . . . ""g7

33 b3 ! White has compensation for the

17 �d2 as 1 8 'ifhS+ g6 19 cS

24 . . . ltJ xd4

25

'iWh6

25 g4 ltJb4 26 ltJd6+ 'it>f8 240

3 3 . . . h5

24 1

(33 ... a4

34

.ll gf7+

�xf7 no

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

35 f6 J:l. h3 36 11en+ Sl.xn 37 11 xn+ Wg8 38 J:l.g7+ 'it.;>f8 is equal, but not 38 . . . W h8?? 39 l1:J n and checkmate) 35 11c7 fxg4 3 6 11xc6 bxc6 37 11b7 and the position is still unclear.

43 . . . l:la l 44 � c3! ll e I 45 �e5 .I:1 c2+ 46 'it>e l J:l. xc4 (46 . . .l:l dd2 47 J:l.h6+! ! 'i&.> g5 48 .I:1h 7 .I:1 e2+ 49 'it> d I l1:J e8 50 J:l.b8 Black has no more than a perpetual.) 47 .I:1b6 e3 48 fxe3 J:l.e4 49 lld6 (49 SL xg7? l he3+ 50 � f2 l:l dd3 ! ! wins.) 49 . . . J:l.xe3+ 50 'it> d2 J:l.xe5 5 I .I:1xd8 .I:1xa5 White holds as I gave in my book of the match.

10 SLg3 We7 11 34 as 12 b4 llg8 13 hxgS hxgS 14 'ilfb3 l1:Ja6

29 ... Wg8 30 dS Sl.xdS 3 1 l:lg7+ �f8 32 11el

44 a6 ? 37 'ilt'd4 15 11b l !

I made sure Karpov would not castle long. 15 ... W f8 He got the message. 16 It'dl SLc6 17 11h2 ! Wg7 18 c5

32 . . :wWc6 !

buS 19 �bS l1:Jb8 20 dxcS d5 2 1 SLe5

The only move to win. It stops 33 J:l.c7

c;t>f8 22 llh6 l1:Je8 23 'ilt'h5 f6 24 11h7 l1:Jg7 25 'WIff3 wn 26 'WIfhS+ W f8

33 b4 J:l.d8 34 �d4 J:l.xd6 3 5 cxd6 SLh l 0-1

Karpov has done well to stay in the game, but I still had the preferable position.

After 44 � c5 l1:J h5 45 g3 J:l.xc4 46 � e3 n a4 47 11b6 White is okay.

37 .. .l:la7 38 l:lh7+

38 � c5 was strong. 38 ...l1:Jg7 39 as?

Better was 3 9 � c5 ! 39 .. .'ltg6?

After 39 . . . 'iIt'xb5 ! 40 'ilt'xa7+ � g6 4 I J:l.h4 J:l. d8 42 'ilt'e3 l1:Jh5 White is in trouble. 44 ....l:tcZ+!

40 'ilt'xd7 J:l.xd7 4 1 J:l.h4

Karpov gets his rook to the second rank but I was not worried as Lasker coped with it even when his opponent's minor pieces were backing it up. If 44 ... 11 a l 45 � d2 J:l.a2 46 J:l.h6+ 'it'f7

This was my sealed move.

G.Kasparov - A.Karpov

Game 1 8, World Championship LondonlLeningrad 1 986 1 d4 l1:Jf6 2 c4 e6 3 l1:Jf3 b6 4 l1:Jc3 �b4 5 �gS �b7 6 e3 h6 7 SLh4

Lasker's spirit was alive in this game. One game earlier I had a 4- I lead against Karpov and wanted to finish him off once and for all. So even though he had won the previous game, I still wanted to clinch the match with a decisive result. What does this have to do with Lasker? Well, he was the champion who won the most one-sided world title matches, doing comprehensive demolition jobs on both Janowski and Marshall. 7 ...SLxc3+ 8 bxc3 d6 9 l1:Jd2 g5

27 'Cif3

With the help of imaginative play I have forced him to defend doggedly. My problem was that it took too long to calculate and I was already short of time. 27 . . c;t>n 2 8 llh6 l1:Je8 29 e4 g4 .

30 'WIff4 �xb5 31 l:lxb5 l1:Jd7 3 2 �xc7 l1:Jxc5 33 'iWe3 l1:Jxe4 34 l1:Jxe4 dxe4 35 �xa5 f5 36 SLb4 'i!fd7

242

4 1...11gd8!

Karpov goes after my king. 42 c4 J:l.dI+ 43 'it>e2 l:lcl ! ?

Karpov controls himself s o well when his opponent has passed pawns. Perhaps he would play this move anyway but the must-win situation helps to prompt a move like this. After

47 'it> e3 ! I (White 's king creates sufficient counterplay. After 47 11b7+ 'it> g8 48 11 g6 .l:taxd2+ 49 �e3 11 2d7 50 c5 the subtle intermediate move

243

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

50 . . . 'it>h7 ! ! wins. [On the other hand

However, as played, he is really hurting

5B...e3

50 . . . e5 is met by 5 1 1:d6.] 5 1 1:f6 g3

the king.

I had to resign

52 fxg3 l:I.d3+ 5 3 �f4 e5+ 54 �xe5

54 l1h3 f4 55 l1b4 Wr5 56 l1b5+ e5

1:e8+ 55 'itf4 e3 56 1:fD 1:e4+ 57 'it>g5

59

Makarychev says this squanders the

4 7 . . . 1:axd2 (47 . . .e 5 4 8 l:td5) 48 1:b7+

win. I was right - it makes Black find

Wg8 (48 . . . 112d7 49 c5) 49 �f4 l:I.2d7

more good moves.

(49 . . . 1:xf2+

50

�g5 ! )

50

c5

e5+

l1n

lOh5

60

aB=.

53 l:I.xd7 l:txd7 54 l:th 1 and White

fight. Pushing 58 c7 would have given me some practical chances, but in

45 'itel l:ta2 46 l:I.b6 1:dJ! 47 c5

reality it was losing as well. After

After 47 �c5 g3 ! (47 . . . f4 48 1:b l )

5 8 . . . e3

.xa 1 + 1 9 'it>f2 .xc3 20 .xc3 l1xc3 2 1 fxg7 l1g8 22 ttJe4 Speelman's line is winning for White. 17 �xg4 .xb 2 ? I f 1 7 . . . �xg4 ! 1 8 ttJa4 'ilf b 5 1 9 hxg4 .xa4 20 'tWd5 .a5+ 2 1 c3 White has a

1 e4 c5 2 lOn d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 lOxd4

small edge.

lOf6 5 lOe3 a6 6 �e3 e6 7 g4 b6 In those days the Perenyi variation B f4 lOc6

5 1 l1 h I lOh5 52 l1d8 lOf4 5 3 a8=..w

In Wijk aan Zee 1 999 I played 8 . . . e5

l:I.xa8 54 lha8 l:tc2+ ! 55 'itd l l:td2+

like this game . Timman forced a

'>tc l lOd3+ 57 �b l lOxc5 Black

perpetual after 9 lOf5 h5 1 0 gxh5 exf4

wins.

II

47 ...l:I. a l + "8 �e2 l1a2+ 49 'ite1 gJ

�xf4 lOxh5

1 2 lOxd6+ �xd6

13 �xd6 'ilfh4+ 1 4 'it>d2 'ili'g5+ 1 5 'it>e l

49 . . . Wg5 ! was even stronger.

'ilfh4+ 1 6 'it>d2 Ih- Ih. I did not dare to

50 fIg3 l:tIg3 51 'Wt>n

play on as I knew Steinitz liked to walk into the centre with his king. But we

18 e5 ! ?

have one more chapter to deal with

This temporary rook sacrifice allows White

that. 5 9 11h2 ! ! l:tcc l ! is the simplest move. (If 5 9 . . .llxb2 60 c8=.+ lOe6 6 1 11f2+ !

'ikc3

...

86nsch's move I 9 . . . lOc4 , underlines Lasker's play in the previous examples - and Alekhine's play in relation to

65 l:ta3+ ..t>e2 and Black

batteries. 20 llxb2 lOxd2 2 1 ..Itxe6 fxe6

wins.) 60 l1e2 lOe6 61 a7 lOxc7 wins.

22 1hb7 �xc3

At this stage I was not certain whether I should have all owed both to

the

second

rank.

However, I was still relaxed. Lasker did 14

not mind things like this either. 52 �el

...

• b6

Since Fischer's time we Najdorf

As a junior Karpov liked to double

believers p lay this kind of move. B6nsch suggested 14 ... d5 as a standard

on the seventh. 52 ... l1gc2 53 c6 l1 a l

kind of response.

H e gives u p the idea of doubling. 244

initiative.

1 8 ttJxc5 1 9 l:t b l 'ilVxcJ

�e4 64 'itb7+ [64 l:txe5+ 'it>xe5 ]

to go

the

1 8 . . . 'tWxa l + 1 9 'it>f2 �2 20 l:tb l .

at his disposaL] 62 'it>g I lOd4 63 �c8+

5 1 ...!!.gxg2

maintain

perhaps just winning for White after

12 �xf4 �e6 13 l1n l1eB 14 bJ

[if 6 L.lOd4? 62 'ikc8+ 'it>e4

64 . . . Wd3

to

However 1 8 ttJge2 ! was even better,

9 �e2 e5 1 0 lOf5 g6 1 1 lOg3 exf4

63 'ifb7+ White has a perpetual check

rooks

more

had not yet been exhaustively analysed.

48 fxg3 .lhg3 49 l1d6 l1gxg2 50 a7 e 3

56

was

After 16 . . . lOd4 1 7 e5 ' ? .xb2 1 8 exf6

Moscow Olympiad 1 994

holds.

b2-pawn

1 6 �xd6 lOxg4 lOg3+

V.Top alov - G.Kasparov

I went down without putting up a

the

consistent.

61 l1xg3 11f2+ 62 'it>gI 1be1 mate

58 a7?

c6) 5 1 'Wt>xe5 g 3 52 fx g 3 e3

(50 . . .1: f7 5 1

the rooks and the

knight deliver a checkmate.

57 11a5 11 d l

1:g4+ 58 Wf6 1:g6+ B lack wins . )

Taking as

15 'ili'd2 �g7 245

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

23 1::.ff7 (The doubled rooks on the seventh can force no more than a draw).

23 . . . ltJe4+

24

'1t>d l

ltJxd6

25 l:tbe7+ and the game ends in a perpetual.

20 'it'xc3 1::.x c3 21 �xe6 fxe6 is

B l ack

22 . . . fxe6

Now here are positions I had against Kramnik in my ill-fated

Petroff) in honour of his homeland.

World Championship match in

He kept playing the Berlin defence

London 2000.

(or walI). Lasker could not have

After 2 J . . .1::.xg3 22 l:txb7 (22 ii.xf7+ Wd7 ! )

Kramnik did not play the Russian defence (known in the West as the

G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik

anticipated the existence of the

living

Berlin wall. More importantly he

dangerously, but I see no win for

did well against the Berlin defence

White.

and exceptionalIy welI against the

26 ltJd4! Moving the rook away from the f-file with 26 l::. fe7+! was more precise. Then 26. ..'iPd8 27 ltJd4 �g3+ 28 'it.>e2 and Black can ' t even sacrifice the piece.

exchange Ruy Lopez where Black has a rather similar pawn structure a half a pawn down.

Here is the

position from which Lasker went on to win.

2 6...lle3+ I f 26 . . . �g3+ 27 We2! l::.h2+ 28 'iPfJ

G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik

E.Lasker - HerzILewittIKeidanski

l:tf2+ (28 . . .�h4 29 l::. fc7 ltJd2+ 30 'it.>f4 ii.d8 3 1 l::.b 8 wins.) 29 'if.Jxg3 l::.x f7

22 1::. x b7 From what I had learned from Lasker

I was confident that there is no point just

panicking

because

one

30 l::. b 8+ 'iPd7 3 I l::.x h8 and Black has only two pawns for the piece.

27 wn lle4 28 l::. fe7+

rook

Checkmate comes very soon.

reaches the seventh rank.

28 ... 'iPd8 29 4Jc6+ 1-0

22 ... ltJc4 If 22 . . . ltJd7 ! ? 23 l:ta7 ii.f6.

23 �b4 1::. e3+ A fter

23 .. Jbg3

24

1::. x g7

a5

(24 . . . ltJe3 2 5 l:te7+ (25 1::. ff7 ? ltJf5) 25 . . . '1t>d8 26 l:tff7 wins.) 25 �c5 1::.g 5 Black still resists.

The last motif is not really a motif at all, more a variation. Maybe it is best to call it a defence. So far I have not paid attention to where the champions were born. In this case strangely enough it

24 ltJe2 ii.e5 25 lHf7

adds to the interest. I was born in Baku, no other champion was born there. The

See diagram on page 239.

closest was Petrosian who was born in

25 ...l:txh3?

nearby Tbilisi. Emanuel Lasker was

I became too casual because of the

born

Lasker

examples.

A fter

25 . . . �d6

a

long

way

from

Baku

in

B erlinchen, which of course sounds so

8

E.Lasker - HerzILewittIKeidanski

1 e4 e5 2 ltJn ltJc 6

3 ii. b5 ltJf6 4 0-0

ttJxe4 5 d4 ltJd6 6 .ltxc6 dxc6 7 dxe5 ttJ f5 The first game with this position in the database is from Leipzig 1 879. Bier

White can keep up the pressure with

similar to the German capital . My last

26 ii.c5 ! ! Then 26 . . . 1::.e4 (26 ... �xc 5 ?

world title match took place in London,

27 1::. fc7) 27 1::.g 7 ii. e 5 2 8 lhg6 �d8

yet thinking of the German capital

second game was indeed played in

29 1::. a7 and White has an edge.

generates rather painful memories.

Berlin in 1 8 80.

246

.xd8+

xd8

10 ltJc3 h6 11 h3

Consultation game, Berlin 1 896

was White against Flechsig. But the

247

9

l: d 1 +

e8

1 1 ...�e7

1 7 1Oxd2

The next time this position occurred was in

1 990 in the game Yudasin­

He prepares to advance his pawns.

1 7 ... gS 18 g4 1Og7

Rogers. Manila 1 990.

12 lOe2

Black's knight has moved five times

Lasker plays the move which is still

to get to g7 from g8. Chess i s weird

popular.

sometimes,

12. ..�d7 Later

I played

Emanuel Lasker the 2 nd

14 ... 11gS I s 11d2 .i.cs 1 6 11adl 11xd2

but

it

didn't

confuse

Lasker' a different move in this

8 'ilt'xd8+ c;t>xd8 9 lOe3 ii.d7 1 0 b3

an advantage. This forces exchanges, which allow

an

h6 11 ii.b2 'it'c8 12 h3 b 6

invasion.

27 ..�:d8 28 ndS .

White invades.

28 ...lOe6 29 nxc8 'itt g7 30 lOdS hS 31 gxhS .l:.h6

19 lOe4 lOe6

position with B l ack and lost to Judit Pol gar. Here are the moves. 12 ... lOh4 1 3 lOxh4 �xh4 1 4 �e3 � f5 1 5 lOd4 �h7 16 g4 �e7 1 7 �g2 h5 1 8 lO f5

�f8

19

�O

�g6

20

11d2

hxg4+

21 h.x.g4 11h3+ 22 'lPg2 11h 7 23 �g3 f6

1 3 nad l

24 .i.f4 .i.xf5 25 gxf5 ixe5 26 11e l .i.d6

At the same time I wanted to copy

27 �xe5 'lPd7 28 c4 c5 29 �xd6 cxd6

and

30 11e6 11ah8 31 11exd6+ c8 32 112d5

My finesse was to use the a I-rook on

11h3+ 33 �g2 11h2+ 34 'lPO l:t2h3+ Showing intelligent flexibility. The bishop is no longer useful on the a l -h8 diagonal. B l ack plays confusing moves just like Krarnnik did later against me.

21 �e3 eS 2 2 102g3 b6 23 lOhS lOg 7 lOhr6+

Flexible thinking again. He returns to the queenside and wins.

3 2 . . 11hS 33 g2 c;t>h6 34 h4 .i.g7 .

35 hxgS+ lOxgS 36 nxh8+ .i.xh8

20 ...11g6

24

the d-file.

3 2 1Of6 !

20 .i.cl !

3 5 �e4 b6 36 11c6+ �b8

�rs

2S

lOh7+

'lPg8

26 lOef6+ �hS

37 lOe4 1 -0 Here are my first two games against the Berlin. In the fust game I tried to copy Lasker's play. It contributed a lot

G.Kasparov

on the seventh. 39 . . . 11xf5 40 11b7+ 'lPc8

Game

4 1 .l:.dc7+ �d8 42 11xg7 �c8 and I was J . Polgar-Kasparov,

Moscow

With

some

-

j umping

around here and there Emanuel obtains

l i m i ted

switched to 248

I

with

manoeuvre

All goes according to

it.

by

Zoltan

See diagram on page 24 7

plan.

V.Kramnik

experience

a

1 4 lOe2

1 4 ...lOg6

This line came as a surprise. I had had

is

match so I had no time to analyse it.

lOrs remarkab l e

from

p layed it just a few weeks before our

1 e4 e5 2 lOo lOc6 3 .i.b5 lOf6 4 0-0 2 7 lOrs

grandmaster

Almasi . The Hungarian grandmaster

lOxe4 S d4 lOd6 6 .i.xc6 dxc6 7 dxeS

13 b3 11d8 1 4 .i.b2 See diagram on page 24 7.

This

London 2000

rapid,

the

although I beat him too.

World Championship,

I,

so upset I just rushed off home. 1 -0 2002.

I allowed

Lvov defeated me a number of times,

against the Berlin the sharpness of my

37 . . . 11h2 3 8 �e3 11£8 3 9 11cc7 I even

exchange,

play.

This is an idea Romanishin introduced. Incidental ly,

sword was lost for a good while.

allow the second rook to join the first

Lasker's

Krarnn i k's king to go to the queenside.

for being formidable i n the opening but

37 11d7 and again I did not mind my

In

on

1 3 ...ti:)e7!?

to the loss of my title. I had a reputation

opponent invading on the seventh.

improve

I

e4 as a main weapon only

in the early 1 990s. 249

the Lasker

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

G.Kasparov

1 5 tOel Lasker moved his knight to d2, so I

V.Kramnik

have been played when Black can

lOxb3 29 l:txb7 lOc i 30 lOxc 1 l:lxc3

almost equalise.) 1 8 tOfS �c8 1 9 lOxh6

Ill- Ill

London 2000

.l:xd I 20 l:lxd 1 .l:h8 2 1 lOfS f6) 1 8 tOfS

World Championship, London 2000.

also paved the way for my kingside

Kasparov-Kramnik

Game

9,

l:lh7 1 9 � f6 l:lc8 20 �xg7 (20 f4 ! )

pawns.

1 e4 e5 2 tOn tOc 6 3 �b5 tOf6 4 0-0

15 ... h5! 1 6 tOd3 c5 Not 1 6 .. .'Jo>b7? 1 7 tOcS+ ! .

1 7 c4 17

-

Game 3 , World Championship,

l:ld2 ! ?

was

the

right

way

according to Lasker.

1 7 ... a5 IS 84 I wanted to keep the a-file closed.

J S h4

20 . . . �xg7 2 1 tOxg7+ l:lxg7 22 tOf6+ <Ji;e7 23 lOxd7 l:ld8 24 lOeS

l:lxd I

Vladimir played 9 .. .'iite8, a move he did

tOrs S 'ir'xdS+ 'Ot>xdS 9 tOe3 �d7

25 .l:xd l lOf4 (2S . . . tOd4!) 26 �h l ! l:lg5

not use against me earlier. I got very

27 lOg4 l:ldS 28 l:le 1 +! �f8 29 lOxh6

close to beating him, but he escaped.

In the third Berlin game or the match Kramnik did not repeat his previous

1 0 h3 i.e7 I I �g5 i.xg5 1 2 lOxg5 h6

.l:d2

play and devi ated here with 9 . . . h6.

1 3 lOge4 b6 1 4 l:lfd 1 lOe7 I S f4 lOg6

Then 10 nd l + ( 1 0 h3 was my choice in

1 6 lIf! hS 1 7 lIae I � f5 1 8 lOg3 lOe7

the fourth and last Berlin of the match.

1 9 lOxfS lOxfS 20 'itt f2 lOd4 (20 .. h4

I also employed it in our seventh and

2 1 l:ld I 'itte 7 22 l:ld] with a slight

•.•

This is confusing. Kramnik's last three moves were cS, as and h4. What is he playing for?

1 9 tOc3 �e6! 20 tOd5 'Ot>b7 2 1 tOe3

In our first Berlin after the match

lOxe4 5 d4 lOd6 6 �xe6 dxe6 7 dxeS

final Berlin as well. 1 O . . . 'lPe8 He drew

advantage) 2 1 l:lc 1 lId8 22 lIfd 1 'itte7

with ease in the last game of the match

2] lOe4 h4 24 b4 l:lhS? This is what

with 1 0 . . . �d7. Still he changed for this

happened in my game against Kramnik

one. I show you an abbreviated version

at Wij k aan Zee 200 I , but better would

of Dokboian's analysis.

have been 24 . . . lOfS ! 7 . Here I missed

I I b3 'lPe8

1 2 �b2 l:ld8 1 3 nad l lOe7 14 l:tfe l tOg6 1 5 tOe4 tOf4 1 6 e 6 tOxe6

30 l:le5 ! l:lxf2? This is a mistake, but he was already in time trouble. 3 1 .l:fS

the opportunity to gain an almost winning advantage.

'itt g 7 3 2 lOg4 l:lxg2 33 llxf4 llxc2 34 l:lf2 l:lc3 3S �g2 bS 3 6 h4 c4 37 hS cxb3 3 8 axb3 l:lcS 3 9 h6+ <Ji;f8 40 lOf6 .l:gS+ 4 1 <Ji;h l Finally I brought down the Berlin wall. It was a last round game; I had to win to grab the first

2 1 ..J:th5

place

By means of unorthodox play Black

fe elings about the Berlin Defence.

from Kramnik.

It eased my

1 -0 Kasparov-Kramnik, Astana 200 I )

has equalised.

22 �c3

1 7 lOd4?! ( 1 7 �e5 ! ! This magical

I I lOe4 cS 1 2 c3 b 6 1 3 lle l �e6 1 4 g4

1f 2 2 f4 tOe7.

move would have given Kramnik a

'.Iz-Ill Kasparov-Kramnik, Game

22 ...l:leS 23 l:ld2 ..t.>cS

severe headache.

London 2000)

1 7 . . . nc8

[ 1 7 . . . �c8

1 0 . . 'it>e8

II

h3

13, as

Going back with the king.

1 8 tOf6+ 'Ot>e7 19 tOh4 g6 20 tOd7 ! ]

12 � f4 �e6 1 3 g4 lOe7 14 lOd4 lOdS

24 f4 tOe7

1 8 lbh4! White follows u p with f4; and

I S lOce2 i.c5 ! ? (New) 1 6 lOxe6 fxe6

Now he even goes back with the

has

17 c4 lOb6!

knight and he has a reasonable and safe position. Everything goes against logic.

25 tOrz tOes 11>_11>

2S

g4 ! We both overlooked this

simple move. 2S . . . l:lhh8 (25 . . . hxg3+ 26 lOxg3 l:lxh] 27 l:lxd4 ! ) 26 [S and B lack is in big trouble.

10 b3

1 8 b3 a4 1 9 �d2 �f7

In 200 I 1 had already played 10 l:ld I

1 9 tOxe6

20 i.c3 l:lhd8 2 1 l:lxd8 l:lxd8 22 <Ji;g2

against Kramnik, but I still could not

l:lxd l 20 lOg7+ ..t.>d7 2 1 nxd l + and

lld3 23 l:lc 1 gS 24 .l:c2 axb3 2 S axb3

get it right.

White is better. But 1 7 . . . l:tg8 ! should

lOd7 26 l:la2 �e7 27 .l:a7 lOc5 28 f)

1 2 lOge4 b6 1 3 h] <;Pb7 14 g4 lOe7

a

clear

( 1 7 . . .i. c 8

250

advantage.)

1 7. . . cS7!

1 8 lOf6+ gxf6

2S 1

1 0 . . . 'itt c 8

I I lOg5 �e8

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

Emanuel Lasker the 2nd

1 5 �f4 h5 1 6 f3 c5 1 7 1t>f2 tiJc6

doesn 't mean the disappearance of

39 1%e7

1 8 tiJd5 tiJd4 19 c3 tiJe6 20 �g3 �c6

Black's difficulties.

According

23 exf6 tiJc6 24 1%d3 1%fl! 25 1:te4

2 1 1%d2 hxg4 2 2 hxg4 c4 2 3 g2 1%d8

>Pc8

24 1%ad 1 �a4 25 11e I �c6 26 1%ed I

47 h4?! to

Kramnik

39

�c3

would have given an edge. 3 9 ... tiJd3 40 f7 tiJxfl 41 1%e8+ 'i!?d7 42 1%xfl! 'i!?e7 43 1%c8 �xf7 44 1%xc7+

�a4 27 .l:1e l �c6 LA- LA Kasparov­

�e6 45 �e3 tiJdl 46 �xb6 c3

Kramnik, Zurich rapid 200 1 .

Allowing an easy draw. Better was 47 �h2! 1%a6! which however also draws. 47 ...11a6! 48 �d4 1%a4 49 ..txc3 tiJxc3 50 lh:c3 lhh4 51 1%f3 IA-IA

10 ... h6 1 1 �b2 �c8 1 2 1%ad l b 6 13 tiJe2 ! ?

Probably, of all champions,

See diagram

on

page 247

Lasker

the was

past world the

least

'professional' in his approach to chess - he had no need to be so focused -

I still trust Lasker's plan, but use an

maybe my own attitude represents the

improved version and hold back h3. In

modern approach

our last Berlin, when I finally stopped

26 f4 ? !

the slight embarrassment caused by this

More testing was 2 6 h4!

defence, I developed the knight on e4.

2 6 ... gxf4 27 1%xf4? 1%e8 28 �c3 ? ! lte2 29 1% f2 1%e4

But even in my second game with the

The initiative is gradually drifting

line I followed Lasker.

away from me.

13 ... c5 14 c4 �c6 1 5 tiJf4 c;i;>b7 1 6 tiJd5 tiJe7

30 1%h3 as! 3 1 1%h5 a4 32 bxa4!? 1%xc4 33 �d2 lha4 34 ltxh6 11g8?

1 6 .. Jle8 1 7 ltd3 . 1 7 1%fel 1%g8 18 tiJf4 ! g5 1 9 tiJh5 .l:1g6

B l ack

is

somewhat better

after

34 . . . 1%xh6! 35 �xh6 c4 36 g4 c3 . 35 11h7 1%xa2 36 1%xf7 tiJe5 37 1%g7 1%fl! 38 h3 ! ? After 3 8 h 4 comes 34 . . . tiJd3 !

20 tiJf6 The knight is jumping around just 3 8 ... c4

like it did in the Lasker game.

Kramnik had little time left for the

20 ... �g7 21 1%d3 ! �xf3 ? ! 22 1%xf3

next few moves. Best was 3S . . . tiJd3 !

�xf6 My knight will not become a hero l ike Lasker 's, but its disappearance

39 f7 d7! 40 1%gS na 1 + 4 1 �h2 tiJxf2 42 nxfl! e7 and Black is safe.

252

of being highly

professional in all aspects.

253

Wilhelm Steinitz the }SI

J.Lautier - G.Kasparov

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1 st Steinitz

declared

champion after his over

Zukertort.

world

1 2 6 years earlier than me. In a way

defence against any ploy on the

1 2 V,-7 'j, victory

this is true, yet I was a good pupil

back rank. That is why I did not IIy

himself

B efore

Stei n i tz,

Morphy was the best player, but they never met. Before Morphy, Anderssen was the :world's best player. Steinitz met Anderssen in a match i n 1 866 and beat him 8-6 with no draws. Steinitz

Once Steinitz misled me because

I thought my opponent must have a

contributed

a

who was taught to respect all world champions. My junior trainers Oleg Privorotsky and Alexander Shakharov also showed me Steinitz's games and I remembered his ideas and employed them. So let me

lot

to

the

They

had many sacrificial games.

resemblance as those in the previous

One might think his chess was too as

he was born

W.Steinitz

show you how his games affected me.

foundation of modem chess and also

distant from mine,

to exploit White's boxed in king

standing there all alone.

may

chapters,

not

yet

bear

such

Stein i tz's

a strong

very

strong

spiritual effect can still be traced back.

-

18 'it'g2 lOh5 19 nn lOc6

Ph.Meitner

Vienna 1 88 2

Black's knights control White's weak spots most e ffectively.

lOf4+ 23 'iit h l .Il f6 24 nacl lOd4

�g4? O f co urse my opponents never made

W.Steinitz - P.Meitner

25 'ilfa5 'ilfh3 26 �xf4 exf4 27 nn lOxfJ

mistakes like this. Here, Steinitz had a very nice

20 b3 nhfll 2 1 �e3 lIbd8 22 'ilfd2

1 e 4 e 5 2 f4 � e 5 3 lO fJ d 6 4 �e4

5 fxe5 dxe5

riposte when his opponent tried to play on his first rank. In the next two examples from my career, my opponents played on my back rank. I ' m sure there must have been an answer to all this, but I failed to find it.

28 e5 A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

G.Kaspal"ov - E.Magerl"amov

White retains the advantage.

6 �xf7+! ct>flI 7 �b3 lOe6 8 lOe3 g6

28 ....Ile6 2 9 e6 lIxd3

9 d3 ct>g7 1 0 lOa4 �b4+ 11 e3 b5 12 exb4 bxa4 13 �xa4 ltJxb4 14 �b5?

See diagram on p.254

14 0-0 was almost winning.

Black tries to take advantage of

14 . . . �xfJ 1 5 gxfJ lIb8 1 6 .i.e4 'iWh4+

White's unprotected rook on the back

Blac k has managed to get some

rank.

30 e7! 'ilfe6

compensation for the pawn.

Black seems able to hold the passed

17 ct>n lOf6 Better was 1 7 . .'ilfh3+! .

pawn.

255

254

Wilhelm Steinitz the lSi

Wilhelm Steinitz the jJt

29 ...'Wa3 ! !

31 �el %hc4

32 'We6+ 'it>f8 33 'Wc8+ 34 exf6+ lhf6 35 'Wg4+ �h8

See diagram o n page 254

�g7

I have run out of play.

0-1 I thought I had a riposte, just like the very first world champion.

A.Karpov - G.Kasparov

30 lIdl

Game 1 7, World Championship,

My plan was to play on his back rank

Lyon/New York 1 990

as well by 30 �e8+. But, after 30 . . �fS .

3 1 'Wxc4+ 'iii> h 8

1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 g6 3 �c3 d5 4 exd5

2 1 ...a5 32 �xe6 ! ! White still takes the queen despite h i s visibly very weak back rank.

�xd5 5 e4 �xc3 6 bxe3 �g7 7 � e3

Magerramov sacrifices a pawn. He

Kramnik started with 7 �D in the

was not able to hang on the pawn with

second game of our world title match in

2 1 . . .axb5 because then 22 �xa8 lha8

London. I just gave him a pawn and

23 �xf5 wins.

lost. Okay, he played well, but still.

22 1i'f3 l:tac8 23 b3 l:lc5 24 bxc4 dxc4 25 l:tfd 1 I felt there was no need to waste time defending the pawn. 25 �ab I was also

32 ... �c1+ 33 lIel ! ! A beautiful defensive move.

33 ... �xel 34 'ilVe5+

7 . . . c5 8 �e3 'Wa5 9 'Wd2 �g4 10 lib I a6 I I l:lxb7 .ltxf3 1 2 gxD �c6 1 3 .ltc4 0-0 1 4 0-0 cxd4 1 5 cxd4 �xd4 1 6 �d5 �c3

strong.

This leads to checkmate.

25 ... l:txb5 26 �d6 'ir'e7 27 'ir'c6

1-0

32 'Wa4, I missed 3 2 ... �c5 which

White is about to win.

27 ...l:lb2 G.Kas p arov - E.Magerramov Moscow 1 976

25 lIel 'Wxf4 26 'ii'xf4 gxf4 27 e6 fxe6

Then 33 'Wxa3 �xa3 34 �xfS+ .ltxfS

28 �xe6 'iii> g7 29 lha6 �f5 30 �e4

35 g3 �b5.

�e5 3 1 D �e7 32 a4 �a7 33 nb6 .lte5

30... �xf4

34 �b4 �d7 35 'iii> g2 l:td2+ 36 <;t>h3 h5

pawn.

1 e4 e5 2 �f3 �c6 3 �b5 a6 4 �a4

1 -0

Kramnik-Kasparov,

7 ... c5 8 'Wd2 0-0 9 �f3 �g4 1 0 �g5 cxd4 II exd4 �c6 1 2 h3 �d7 13 l:lbl

II � c2 f5 12 �b3 'ilVd7 13 �bd4

.!::tc 8

�xd4 1 4 �xd4 c5 1 5 �xe6 ii'xe6 16 f3 �g5 1 7 �xg5

28 �xf5?

This is not the main line. Spassky

This is a dreadful mistake. White should just divert the queen first with

USSR 1 972, and I was following that

28 l:td7! and then would win after the

game.

decisive

28 . . . 'ife8

29 �xf5 !

�xf5

30 �xg7+.

28 ...l:txf5 29 l:te6?

In the above-mentioned game Black

1 9 ..t>hl �b6 20 a4 c4 2 1 nbS

�d5

London 2000.

8 dxe5 � e 6 9 c 3 � e 7 1 0 � b d 2 0-0

went back to e7.

37 �b5 <;t>f6 38 a5 1h2 39 lIb6+ <;t>e7 40

�f6 5 0-0 �xe4 6 d4 b5 7 �b3 d 5

17 ... �xg5 18 f4 �d8

22 'ii'c 3 .ltb8 23 'ir'D 'Wh4 24 e5 g5

defends two pieces with one move.

Black can even afford to take this

played like this against Chekhov in

1 7 'Wc I �d4 1 8 �xd4 .ltxd4

1 9 �xe7 �a7 20 l:txa7 .ltxa7 2 1 f4 'Wd8

29 �d7 was still good enough to stay in the game. Then 29 . . . 'ilVfB is met by 30 'ife6+ l:tn 3 1 �b7.

256

3 1 1H6 Neat but ineffective.

3 1 ...gxf6! White not only has no mating attack, he does not even have a perpetual.

14 �f3 257

Wilhelm Steinitz the J."

3 0 .c3 .l::l. e8 Karpov did not take the pawn with

Of course

1 4 lhb7? I thought Kramnik would not either. But Vladimir did not investigate Karpov's play. �xd4

with

such

domination

White must be winning.

31 83 �g7 32 g3 �eS 33 .c5 h5

1 4 .. .lZlxd4 1 5 �xd4

34 �c7 �al 35 �f4 .d7 36 ltc7

1 6 'ili'xd4 .l::l. c l + ( 1 6 . . . 'i!r'a5+?

This is more or less the end.

1 7 1i'b4) 17
36

...

• d8 37 d6 g5 38 d7

.l::l. fB

39 �d2 �e5 40 .l::l. b 7 1-0 1 4 ...'it'e8 1 knew how to neutralise White's

J.Lautier - G.Kasparov

2S �xd2!

witty pawn sacrifice.

Tilburg 1 997

One can easily can miss the fact that

15 ltJxc6 bxc6 1 6 .l::l.a 4 f6 17 .l::l. fa l

the bishop can take back the knight.

2S ...ltc8

1 c4 c5 2 ltJf3 ltJf6 3 ltJc3 dS 4 cxd5 ltJxd5 5 e4 ltJb4 6 .i.b5+ ltJ8c6 7 d4

See diagram on page 2 5 4.

cxd4

And now Black wins the queen with the lovely finesse 1 7 ... Ild I + I 1 8
26 J:[c6!

�a4+.

Oh

14 .. .lZlstS IS �d3 �e6 1 6 0-0 �c4

no !

'it'f7 1 8 J:[xa7+ .l::l.x a7 1 9 ltxa7+ �e7

White

is

able

to

gain

domination over the c-file.

26... �eS

17 .l::l. fdl bS

26 ... llxc6? 27 dxc6 'ifxc6 (27 .. .'ikc7

Maybe this is a bit optimistic.

18 �gS! 86 19 J:[bc1 �xd3 20 lhc8 'ili'xcS 21 'ifxd3

28

'it'd 7)

28

'i!r'd8+

D amn,

unlike

Steinitz I have no riposte against the back

rank

mate

as

after

2 8 " .�f8

20 .l::l.c 7?? In-v'

29 �h6 wins.

27 �c3 �b8 27 ... �xc3 28 'i!r'xc3 1:hc6 29 dxc6 (29 'ili'xc6 'ifa7 30 e5 'i!r'd4) 29 . . . 'iIi'c7 is no fun for Black at aIL

28 'ili'd4 f6 29 �a5 �d6 B l ack still can't take the pawn.

With this bad mistake Lautier offered

8 a3

a draw. I accepted. 1 thought that had I

This is the start of the so-called

played to exploit the back rank, the

Dream Variation. This move occurred

Frenchman would have a riposte just

first in a dream of Hungarian

1M

Navarovszky. His friend Csom played

like Steinitz. But 20 ... c 5 ! would win a pawn as 2 1 bx:c5? nb8 wins.

it first and beat Stean with it in Las

21 ... lleS? Black should defend the e7-pawn with the queen from d7 or b7.

Palmas

1 978. However for me this

game proves to be not a dream but a nightmare.

22 ltd 1i'b7 23 dS ltJc4 After 23 ... h6 24 �f4 ltJc4 25 ltJd2 g5

8 ... dxc3 9 Wxd8+ 'it'xd8 1 0 axb4

26 �g3 ltJxd2 27 Ilc7 ! White is better

cxb2 11 �xb2 e6 12 0-0 .i.d7 1 3 �xc6

as Mikhail Gurevich pointed out.

�xc6 1 4 ltJe5

As well as Botvinnik, Steinitz also contributed to my understanding of the concept o f attacking on the h-filf when the opponent has play on tht g-file. Here is the game I had in my mind:

24 ltJd2 ltJxd2 259 258

Wilhelm Steinitz the lSI

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1"

Reiner - W.Steinitz

17 ng2

Game 4, match, Vienna 1 860 1 e4 e5 2 �O �c6 3 d4 exd4 4 ..tc4 �c5 5 0-0 d6 6 c3 �g4 7 'Wb3 �xO 8 �xn+ .t>(8 9 �xg8 1hg8 1 0 gxO g5 1 1 "'e6 �e5 12 .f5+ 'it>g7 1 3 "'hI <;fo>h8 1 4 llgl g4 IS f4 lll o 16 llxg4

1 6 ... 'ii h4 ! !

What a nice way to show the superiority of the h-file attack over that on the g-file!

1 7 ... 'ii'x h 2+! ! The sacrifice on the h-file provides a cute mate on the g-file. Chess is confusing isn 't it? But marvellous for sure. By the way I also used the motif of having a knight on f3 and a g-file rook to beat Sunye in Graz 1 9 8 1 in a sacrificial game.

V.Top alov - G.Kasparov

G.Kas p arov - V.Kramnik

18 lhh2 llgl mate

Checkmate and what a neat one!

Steinitz's openings are no longer played in high-class tournaments, though he has left his mark on this phase of the game. Also I had a completely d i ffe rent repertoire. Steinitz's legacy was that the king can take a walk to the centre and several times I used this technique myself. Here are two of Steinitz's games where his king successfully took an active role. W.Steinitz - G.Neumann

W.Steinitz - J.Zukertort

G.Kasparov - V.Kramnik

In my garnes, I did not mind taking risks and played with my king in the centre too. You saw my 1 993 World Championship loss to Short. I selected it for the Botvinnik chapter where I pushed my g- and h- pawns. But I have plenty more examples of king play in the centre - in fact you can see this even in the very last regular game of my career.

5 'it>e2

W.Steinitz - J.Zukertort

London 1 872 1 e4 e5 2 lllc3 �c6 3 f4 exf4 4 d4 "ir'h4+

This is Steinitz's variation. White has occupied the centre and in return for the loss of castling rights his king will seek shelter behind his central pawns. Of course if Black can demolish these pawns, White's king will be exposed. Between 1 900, when Chi gorin played, and 1 963 when Averbakh employed the opening as White there was only one game with Steinitz's line. 5 ... d5 6 exd5 .li.g4+ 7 �f3 O� O-O 8 d.xc6 .li.c5

This is quite a wild line. 260

261

Wilhelm Steinitz the lSi

Wilhelm Steinitz the l Si

9 cxb7+ <;Pb8 10 ltJbS ltJf6 11 <;Pd3 ! ?

Just like the previous game he moves away from the centre. l l . d5 12 �g4+ 'it>b8 13 e5

See diagram o n page 260.

..

White can keep the position closed. n .. :iWg6

Steinitz continues to walk with his king in the centre. 1 1 ...1ihS

After I I . . . � f5+ 1 2 W c3 ltJ e4+ 13 <;Pb3 1i f6 Lasker lost to Shipley, USA 1 893. 21 Wa3

42 .. .lhh3

The king continues on his journey . .

.

2 1 ...gS 22 b4 "1IJb6 23 1id4

Zukertort keeps on playing despite having to swap queens. 23 ...'iWxd4 24 cxd4 ltJb6 2S �b2 ltJc4+ 26 <;Pb3

The king has to move because of the check but Steinitz liked to move his

White still has one extra pawn, and that is enough. 43 ':fS l:[h7 44 l:[cS f5 45 lbf5 l:[e7 46 l:[gS l:[d7 47 l:[e5 l:[g7 48 ':e8 t!.gl

26...ltJxb2 27 <;pxb2 l:[xd4 28 'it>c3

Zukertort misses his chance to play 1 2 . . . a6!

It is symbolic that Black resigns in

reply to a king move.

Exchanging queens pressure off the king.

takes

the

18 gxO g6 19 ltJe2 ltJf5 20 �xf5

Dundee 1 867

gxf5

31 l:[dl l:[f6 32 �c2 <;pxb7 3 3 �xh7 <;Pb6 34 h3

14 ... hS 1 5 �h3 f6 1 6 exf6 ..wxf6+ 1 7 'lio 'lixO+

W.Steinitz - G.Neumann

l:[hd8 29 l:[ad l l:[4d6 30 l:[xd6 ':xd6

13 ltJbxd4 1icS+

Returning the king to the centre.

1-0

king voluntarily as well.

1 2 'itc3 �xd4+?

14 'it>f2

49 .i.e4 l:[cl + SO 'it>b4 cS+ 5 1 'it>b5

Black's pawns are vulnerable. 1 e4 e5 2 ltJc3 ltJc6 3 f4 exf4 4 d4 ..wh4+ 5 'it>e2 d6 6 ltJo �g4 7 .i.xf4

2 1 c3 �d6 22 �f4 'it>c8 23 llhgl 'it>d7 24 l:[g7+ tOe7 2S l:[agl

�xo+ 8 'it>xo See diagram on page 260.

8 ...ltJge7 9 �e2 0-0-0 1 0 �e3 ..wf6+

14 'itb3 'ii'b 6+ IS �bS

White has enough extra materia1 to give back some to cover his king.

34 ... 0

IS ... �xO 1 6 'iho l:[xd4

1 7 'iWc6 'iraS 1 8 c3 l:[d6 1 9 1ic4 a 6 20 �a4 ltJdS

25 ...'it>e6

Black can exchange some pawns but

Recovering one piece but he is still i n arrears.

The king helps the pawns but B lack's king becomes a target in the centre.

not all of them. 35 gxO l:[xO+ 3 6 lld3 llfl 3 7 a4 a5

26

3 8 bxaS+ <;PxaS 3 9 l:[d5+ Wb6 40 as+ <;Pa7 41 �d3 l:[ o 42 lhgS

262

1 1 �g3

�xd6

t!.xd6

27

28 ltJd3 llb6 29 b3 l:[h6 263

ltJf4+ �f6

Wilhelm Steinitz the I"

Wilhelm Stein it;; the Is/

9 ... a6 10 e4 cS 11 dS c4 12 �c2 ,*,c7

too exposed. However an alternative is

1 3 ltJd4 lDcs 14 b4 cxb3 15 axb3 b4

21 h3 "e5 22 f4 "f6 23 �b2 with a

16 ltJa4 ltJcxe4 17 �xe4 ltJxe4 1 8 dxc6

complicated middlegame. 2 1 . 0-0 ••

Nor can the black king take an early stroll: after 2 1 . . .4Jc5? 22 J:te 1+ �f7 23 4Jf5 ! "xf5 24 "xd6 White wins. But

after

2 1 . . .4Jxg3 !

22

hxg3

(22 "e l + 4Je4 23 J:ta2 0-0) 22 . . . 0-0 23 J:ta2! (23 �g2? .g4) 2 3 . . .�xg3

30 ltJeS

White way.

trap s

the rook in a remarkable

Black's p iec e s look scary, but i f they are not able to make any tangible

U s ing the king in the centre was a te chn i q u e I employed right up to my very last game. Here is the fi rst loss

threats he can have problems.

from the mid- 1 990s.

castle. There is nothing wrong with 1 9 . . . 'it>xf7 initi ati ng a march to the centre and meet in g 20 'iWh5+ with 20 . . . g 6.

0jfJ 4

ltJf3 e6

23 4Jf3?!

22 fxe4 ""3! On

22 . .lhfl +? !

would

I

.

Bringing the a I -rook into the defence

have

with 23 l:ta2 was the right move.

undertaken a glorious king-march in

23 . . .�xe4 (23...�xg3? 24 ltJf5 ! lhf5

19 uf7+ 'it'xf7

the centre. Had Steinitz seen it he

25 l:txf5 �xe4 26 J:tg5 wins.) 24 ne l

Kramnik prefers to retain the right to

would

"xfl

�b7 (24 ... nae8 25 :e3 ! �b7 26 J:txe8

(Recapturing with the king simply

J:txe8 27 "f1 (27 ne2 .!:tfB 28 lZle6

loses)

�xe4

�xg3 29 ltJxfB �xh2+ 30 J:txh2 "g3+

25 l:ta2 ! The most precise way of

3 1 'it>f1 "xh2 32 "g4 'ifh l + White's

preparing the king march. (25 "e2 ! ?

king is too exposed, and B lack holds.)

20 f3

1 d4 dS 2 c4 c6 3 ltJc3

king in the centre.

to Kramnik.

1 8...�d6

33 ltJd 7+ �e6 34 ltJcS+ 1 -0

Dos Hennanas 1 996

winning as Black can do harm to the

�c 8 ! Black is slightly better according

30 ... J:tbS 3 1 a4 J:taS 32 b4 J:ta6

G . K asparo\' - V.Kramnik

27 <;Pe3 "xa2 28 'it>xe4 and White is

24 :g2 �e5 25 4Jc5 l:tad8 26 �e3

'ifh l +

This is one of my specia l iti es , I like

career I

have

loved

23 . . . �xg3

2 6 f2

it.

24

""2+

23

hxg3

27 .....g4 (27 ... 'ifh5 2 8 ltJf5 !) 28 lZlf5 !

[26 . . . l:tf8+?

"e4 2 9 "c4+ and Black i s active but

27 �f4]

has only one pawn for the piece.)

5 e3 ltJbd7 6 �d3 dxc4 7 �xc4 bS

to block th e b 7-bish o p . I n my

8 �d3 �b7

beat Karpov five times in the main Ruy

25 "d3 (25 lZle6 �xg3 26 J:te3 l:t0 ! )

Lopez and in e ach of those games I

25 . . . J:tae8 26 l::t x e8 J:txe8

block e d his b7-b is h op . I did it by playing d5 or D. Perhaps my win in the second game of our 1 990 world title match in New York, where my f2-0 w a s a theoretical novelty, virtually refuted Karpov's opening. B u t I also scored nice victories against the Hedgehog where I reinforced e4 against a b 7 b i s hop. -

The

9 0-0

Unlike Steinitz, I castled here but as

immediate

27 �e I ! [27 <;Pe3 "xg3+ 28 <;Pd2 "g5+ 29 "e3 "g2+ 30 We2 'iVg5+

20 ...'*'bS 21 g3

king

exc urSIOn

with a perpetual is given by

Kramnik]

resulting from 2 1 fxe4 would b e fatal.

27 .....g l + 2 8 "fl "xd4 29 "e4+ and

... and though Black has only a pawn

ltJo �g3+

Black has problems in the ending.)

for the piece his bishops provide him

2 5 ... 'ifh 1 + 26 'it>f2 'iWh2+

with sufficient compensation.

you will see I d i d not mind returning to

2 l . . .'*'xh2+ 22 �f2 0-0+ 23

the centre.

24 �e3 'it'xg 2 wins as White's king is 264

265

Wilhelm Steinitz the lSI

Wilhelm Steinitz the J"

23 .....Iihg3 24 lUc5?

25 ... ':xfl + 26 'ii'x o 'ii'x O + 27 ..ti>xo

30...':xe4+ 31 'it>d2

13 .. Jifd5

After 24 .e2! l:b:f3 25 l:hO �x.h2+

':c8 28 �e3 �f4.

If 3 1 �e3 .g2+ 32 :tf2 'ii'x f2 mate.

I had already decided not to castle.

•g2+ 32

c1 .xa2 33 :txg3

26 �f2 (26 �h l �xe4 ! ) 26 . . . 'iWh4+

25 ... 'ii' x b2+ 26 �fl

31..

(26 . . . �g3+ 27 l:hg3 l::[[8 + 28 ':0

I thought Black had no more than a

Here 33 ':f8+ �xf8 34 .0+ �f4+

perpetual .

'iWh4+ 29 �e3 .xe4+

.

14 ':dl 'it'h5 15 h3 If 1 5 e4 lUg4 16 �b5+ �f8.

1 5 .. .l:ld8! 1 6 lUd4

leads to a checkmate.

If 1 6 e4 lUxe4. 1 6... 'iVd5 Exchanging queens was safe enough but I wanted a sharper fight.

1 7 lU13 'it>e7 See diagram on page 2 61.

This is clearly Steinitz's influence . I intentionally did not castle and now 30 �d2 Aftcr the king march in the centre the position transposes to an equal endgame.) 27 �O �e5 Black has other playable moves as well (27 . . .�d6 28 �b2 �xe4 29 1!i'c4+ �h8 30 �xg7+ and White can force a draw by 30 . . . .t>xg7 3 1 'lit'd4+ .t>g8 32 .c4+ .t>h8 33 'jfd4+) but White can stay in the game. After 27 ... �e5 Black can

2 6...�c6! Thi s came as a cold shower. However, I still hoped that Steinitz's method would work. 27 �g5 ! ? After 27 'lit'd3 '1i'h I + 28 ,.pe2 'lit'e I mate; 27 ':a2 �b5+ 28 lUd3 �xd3+ 29 ':xdJ (29 .xdJ 'iWh 1 +) 29 . . .l:tf8+ also leads to a checkmate. If 27 .l:!.a5 �c7 ! . 2 7 ... �b5+ 2 8 lUd3 ':e8!

exploit the king in the centre. 28 .c4+ �h8 29 'lit'f7 'iWh I + (29 . . . h6 30 'lit'xb7 ':d8 3 1 �e3=) 30 �e2 .g2+

Kramnik

conducts

the

33 .... al+ 34 'it>c2 .c3+ 35 'iit b l .l:!.d4 0-1 I did not want to risk eventually

effectively.

29 ':a2 Other moves also don't offer much resistance, e.g. 29 ':e l '1i'h I + 30 �e2 ':xe4+ or 29 ':a5 �xd3+! or29 �e3 ':xe4 30 ':f8+ �xf8 3 1 'ilV0+ .tI.f4 ! . 2 9...'Iit'hl+ Kramnik was already in time trouble

have lost this game if I had played safely.

1 8 e4

being checkmated, therefore I resigned.

Kramnik sacrifices a pawn to get some play.

V.Kramnik - G.Kas parov

18 ... lUxe4 19 �e3 �Ie3 20 .xe3

Zurich rapid 2001

.c5 2 1 .el lUf6 I did not feel like playing 2 1 . . .f5,

1 d4 lUf6 2 c4 e6 After losing my title in 2000. like

attack

advance with my king. I would never

Muhammad Ali I started to float like a

though it was playable. Then 22 :tae l 'itb6.

butterfly and broadened my opening

22 nac 1 'Wb6 23 lUeS :td4?

repertoire.

One move leads to two different tactical motifs. I became too optimistic.

3 lUo d5 4 lUc3 dxc4

I knew how many times Wilhelm won

This was one of my new openings.

5 e3 a6 6 �xc4 b5 7 �d3 c5 8 a4 b4

with his march in the centre. I couldn ' t

9 lUe4 lUbd7 10 lUxf6+ lUxf6 11 0-0

wait to score with h i s brand of king

�b7 12 dIC5 �Ic5 13 .e2

play.

and misses 29 . . . �xd3+! which is a forced checkmate.

30 ':xd3 'ii'h 1 +

3 1 �e2 .g2+ 32 �e3 ':xe4 mate.

30 �e2

3 1 ,.pc3 .g5+ 32 �f2 '1i'h4+ with a

See diagram on page 26J.

perpetual check.

24 ... .I:I.x13 25 ':x13

I hoped that my king would survive,

I did not want to enter a worse endgame after 25 ':a2. Then comes

just like Steinitz's, especially in view of the time trouble.

266

267

Wilhelm Steinitz the JS I

Wilhelm Steinitz the J.I

24 ..l ha6! ! ?

Kramnik

I thought he might have missed this.

sees

a

very

29 lOxb4

deep

exploitation of the risky placement of

White has only one pawn for the

the black king. But he misses a simple

piece, yet Black is struggling.

win with 24 lOc4 ' . Then 24 .. .lhc4

29 ...�e2

(24 . . .'ifc5 25 lOe3 'ih15 26 lOf5+ wins . )

After 29 . . . �b7? 30 as ¢>e7 3 1 %l.b8

25 l::h c4 a 5 26 .e5 a n d Black has

�dS

nothing for the exchange.

the lovely 34 llc8 ! wins.

24 ... Jb dl

32

a6 %l.fll

S l i ghtly

33

better

lOxdS+ exd5

was

2 9 . . . <,Pe7

2 4 ... %l.e4 would have resisted for

30 lOc6+ �f6 3 1 b4 gS 3 2 b5 �b7

much longer. 25 .d2 %l.xe5 26 �xb7

33 lOaS ! �dS 34 b6 �e7 3S b7 (3S %l.b8

lOd5

%l. f8 ) 3 5 . . . �xb7 36 lOxb7 and the

(26 . . . %l.d8

27

"tt'x d8+

'it'xd8

2 8 llxd8 �xd8 29 llc4 b3 30 llc3

knight ending will be tough for Black.

%I.e I + 3 1 �h2 %l.e2 32 %l.xb3 %l.xf2 3 3 a5

Black's best was to divert the rook

34 'it'd3 lIg3 3S as %l.xO+ 36 'it'e4

J

resigned because White's

from d8 by 29 . . . �c4! 30 llc8 ' �e2 3 1 0 �e7 (3 1 ...h5 32 �f2 �d l 33 a5)

V.TopaJov - G.Kasparov

somewhat better.) 27 . . . 11xdS 2 8 .f4

3 2 �f2 Wd7 33 %l.c3 and White wins

L inares 2005

and with his king under pressure, Black

back

has to fight to survive.

promising chances.

whi l st

16

'ifxfll

17

lOxd4

exd4

1 e4 eS 2 lOO lOe6 3 lOe3 eS 4 �e4 d6

2S . . . �dS is met by 26 �bS .

1 played this line a few times against

Alternatively 2S . . .•xa6 26 'iWxb4+

Leko, who repeatedly rejected castling

28 %l.xa6 lOxb4

even though he normally plays safe.

29 %l.b6 wins.

S d3 �e7 6 0-0 lOf6 7 lOh4 lOd4 19 . . .lIfll

After 7 . . .lOxe4 8 dxe4 �xh4 9 f4

Now, in order to launch an attack

White has very nice compensation.

first, I sacrificed a pawn.

8 g3 �g4 9 0 �e6 10 �gS lOg8

10 lOb I , as Karpov played against Spassky, is a rather similar knight 30 f3!

KraITUlik's great idea is to trap the bishop. Black is paralysed because of the pin. 26 .xb4+!

30 .... hS

KraITUlik sees a great idea on the

After 3 0 ... �e7 3 1 lOc6+ �f6 3 2 b4

horizon.

gS 3 3 b S ¢>g7 3 4 �f2 �c4 3 5 b6 wins.

26 ... ..xb4 27 lO c6 + Wfli

3 1 b3 ! l:I.h6

I had Steinitz in mind and thought I

I f 3 l . . .�e7 3 2 lld2.

move.

20 lOxd4 lOe6 21 ..n .xn+

See diagram

on

principles

.xf6

%l.xf6

though once, i n Game 32 o f their world

of

a

world

checkmate threat.

The rook finally becomes active, but

the centre. IS lOO

22

d5 ! ) 25 . . . g4 Black probably bolds,

page 26J.

Even in the last game of my career I the

2 1 . . . lOxd4

23 cxd4 1ID 24 %l. d l g5 25 ¢>g2 (25 g4?

32 wa %l.g6 33 It>xe2 %l.xg2+

268

to a complicated position, as Topalov

After

champion. The king should be safe in

it is too late.

lOd8 23 lOxc3 .e3+ 24 g2 %l.c8 leads pointed out.

fxe6 14 lIxf4 'it>d7

follow

1 9 . . . dxc3

20 .a4+ lOc6 2 1 11n .g5 22 'ifb3

11 �xe7 lOxe7 12 f4 exf4 13 .i.xe6

would be able to handle any back rank 28 lld8+ lOe8

%l.x fll

retaining

2S 11xdl �u6

�e8 27 %l.d6 lOdS

'it'e8 Black can do a lot with his king. 18 lOe2 .-f6 19 e3

wins according to KraITUlik.) 27 �xd5

p i ece,

two

After 1 5 . . . 'ifb6 1 6 eS lOg6 1 7 %l.f7+

queenside passed pawns are too strong.

(27 �c6 %l.c8 2 8 �b5 and White is

the

I S . . JUS

"..

1-0

title match in Buenos Aires

1 92 7 ,

Alekhine freed a passive rook against Capablanca and managed to beat bim. So who knows? But who do you trust when

two

world

against each other? 269

champions

play

Wilhelm Steinilz the J SI

Wilhelm Steinitz the 1-"

22 lhO lbO + 23 'i!;>xo iOxd4

I

knew the principle of having little

used Steinitz's idea. It made me realise

career, the best a chessplayer has ever

had

that somehow they were able to use the

produced. He was the dominating force

close rivals,

a

plus

score

against

all

except Kramnik

his and

chance of survival in a pawn ending,

champion's legacy better than myself.

in world chess for approximately two

against some of them very convincing

but during the game I lost faith i n all

At

decades. He was world champion for

plusses.

this

stage,

Predecessors

champions and principles.

24 cxd4 dS

way.

I played this instantly. Maybe playing

dramatic

for a fortress with 24 . . . �e7 was better.

writing

books

After

this

was

the

Great

well

Wlder

I made the

game

announcement

of

my

retirement from professional chess.

25 �(2 �e7 26 'iti>n �f6

remind you I gained the chess crown in

quality and we are inclined to agree

my

Karpov.

with him. In fact if one counts the great

Maybe I will become president after

games he lost or drew maybe he played

entering the race for a second time and

even

will then rule for 1 5 years just as I did

superlative

in chess?

other

second

Putin

match

may

than

against

think

the

I ' d rather fight

new

generation

of

chessplayers on the chessboard.

27 Wg4 wins after 27 . . . g6 (27 . . . h6 h5 3 0 g4 h.x.g4 3 1 xg4 g6 32 �f4 'it>f6 33 h5 wins . ) 28 h3 ! (28 h4? h6=) 28 . . . h6 (28 . . . h5+ 29 IPh4) 2 9 h4 as Krnic pointed out.

played our game. Kasparov himself estimated 250 of his games were of top

Some

28 'iti>h5 ; 27 . . .Wg6 2 8 �f4 'it>f6 29 h4

He produced the greatest number o f

let me

But

But now

I ' ll

make

more

than games.

player

three

hundred

faced

such

confession . . . I stopped playing chess

need

•

Now

I resigned here. Topalov was a point behind me before this last round game, therefore

I

at

last

commentary

we

from

take

back and

opposition as him.

Kasparov's career. His losses and the

World Championship.

champions' wins were i nstructive and

I suddenly Wlderstood that I could trust nobody - not even the champions. Then who could I follow? How was I to

Very few won as many individual

were

a necessary part

one of the players who gained the most material rewards from chess. He also

Kasparov's impact on chess will be felt for as long as i t is played.

of

one can learn and profit considerably himself did. What did these losses help him to achieve?

270

He

completed

a

unique

new generations of chess fans.

from studying them. Just as Kasparov

carry on playing chess? My successors Kramnik and Topalov beat me when I

they

his

them, nor for a single moment forgot

Maybe these losses were hard to take,

sensed that Veselin would win the next

but

telling factor.

that they will continue to bring joy to

the

but

a

This time we dared to joke around

with our own voice!

had to share the first prize.

a

with his games, but we never trivialised

speak

Once I finished the game I somehow

form

no

•

Garry

anyway,

artistry has been

since i f 2 8 'it>g4 then 2 8 . . . g6.

28 b4 bS 29 �f4 h6 30 �g4 1-0

to

of computers, chess culture would have developed

game made me lose all faith in my

•

although we

time

He left the game in a different state

not because of any particular interest in

•

immense, more

from when he found it. Partly because

Predecessors.

27 ... g6??

is

comprehensive judgement.

Russian politics, but because my last

A blWlder in reply. 2 7 ... h61 draws,

still

strong

Furthermore

tournaments as him - and he must be

a sensational

His contribution to the development of chess

superb creations b y anyone w h o ever

You may joke that I retired to become an amateur in politics.

27 h4??

1 5 years. He was a world-class player for 25 years.

fabu lous

271