Uncompromising Chess

CADOGAN CHESS BOOKS

Uncompromising Chess

CADOGAN CHESS SERIES ChiefAdvisor: Garry Kasparov Editor: Murray Chandler Russian Series Editor: Ken Neat

Uncompromising Chess

Other chess titles from Cadogan include:

Tbe Application of Cbess Theory

Paul Keres Best Games Vol.l

Yeftm Geller

Egon Varnusz

The Art of Chess Analysis

Paul Keres Best Games VoJ.2

Jan Timman

Egon Varnusz

Averbakh's Selected Games

Smyslov's

Yuri A verbakh

Vasily Smyslov

125 Selected Games

Bobby Fischer: His Approach to Chess

Sokolov's Best Games

Elie Agur

Ivan Sokolov

Chess in the Fast Lane

Studies and Games

Bill & Michael Adams

Jan Timman

Fire on Board: Shirov's Best Games

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

Alexei Shirov

David Bronstein & Tom Furstenberg

The Genius of Paul Morphy

Taimanov's Best Games

Chris Ward

Mark Taimanov

Half a Century of Chess

T imman's Selected Games

Mikhail Botvinnik

Jan Timman

Tbe Life and Games of Mikhail Tal

Vasily Smyslov: Endgame Virtuoso

Mikhail Tal

Vasily Smyslov

by Alexander Belyavsky

Translated and edited by Ken Neat

CADOGAN chess

For a complete catalogue of CADOGAN CHESS books (which includes the Pergamon Chess and Maxwell Macmillan Chess lists) please write to: Cadogan Books pic, 27-29 Berwick St. London, W I V 3RF Tel: (0171) 287 6555

Fax: (0 l71) 734 1733

LONDON, NEW YORK

Contents

English Translation Copyright «:l 1 998 Ken Neat

First published 1 998 by Cadogan Books pic, 27-29 Berwick St, London W I V 3RF.

Distributed in North America by The Globe Pequot Press, 6 Business Park Rd, P.O. Box 833, Old Saybrook, Connecticut 06475-0833, USA

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

British Library Cataloguing in Pu blication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

I SBN I 8 5 744 205 9

Typeset by Ken Neat, Durham

Printed in Great Britain by B PC Wheatons Ltd, Exeter

Introduction

7

Biographical Details

8

Selected Games 1972-1997

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 I3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

35

Belyavsky-Matulovic, Sombor 1 972 Belyavsky-Marjanovic, World Junior Championship, Teesside 1 973 Christiansen-Belyavsky, World Junior Championship, Teesside 1 973 Tal-Belyavsky, 42nd USSR Championship, Leningrad 1974 Spassky-Belyavsky, USSR Team Championship, Riga 1975 Belyavsky-Bronstein, Zonal Tournament, Vilnius 1 975 Belyavsky-Andersson, Cienfuegos 1976 Belyavsky-Ribli, Leningrad 1 977 Belyavsky-Petrosian, Vilnius 1978 Belyavsky-Romanishin, 46th USSR Championship, Tbilisi 1 978 Belyavsky-Taimanov, USSR Team Championship, Moscow 1 979 Belyavsky-Polugayevsky, USSR Team Championship, Moscow 1 979 Belyavsky-Kasparov, 47th USSR Championship, Minsk 1 979 Tseshkovsky-Belyavsky, USSR Championship First League, Tashkent 1 980 Rashkovsky-Belyavsky, 48th USSR Championship, Vilnius 1 9801 1 Portisch-Belyavsky, Moscow 1 981 Belyavsky-Timman, Tilburg 1 9 8 1 Belyavsky-Larsen, T ilburg 1 981 Belyavsky-Yudasin, 49th USSR Championship, Frunze 1 9 8 1 Gheorghiu-Belyavsky, Interzonal Tournament, Moscow 1 982 Belyavsky-Kasparov, Candidates Match (4th game), Moscow 1 983 Belyavsky-Geller, 50th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 983 Miles-Belyavsky, Wijk aan Zee 1 984 Psakhis-Belyavsky, European Champions Team Cup, Moscow 1 984 Belyavsky-Portisch, Thessaloniki Olympiad 1 984 Ljubojevic-Belyavsky, Thessaloniki Olympiad 1 984 Belyavsky-Dlugy, Interzonal Tournament, Tunis 1 985 Smyslov-Belyavsky, Chigorin Memorial Tournament, Sochi 1 986 Geller-Belyavsky, Chigorin Memorial Tournament, Sochi 1 986 Karpov-Belyavsky, Tilburg 1 986 Belyavsky-Bareev, 54th USSR Championship, Minsk 1 987 Belyavsky-Salov, 54th USSR Championship, Play-off (game 4) Belyavsky-Chandler, Linares 1 988 Belyavsky-Karpov, Brussels (World Cup) 1 988 Seirawan-Belyavsky, Brussels (World Cup) 1988

9 II 14 16 19 22 24 26 29 31 33 36 39 42 44 48 50 52 54 57 60 64 66 68 70 74 76 78 80 83 85 87 90

93

96

Uncompromising Chess

6

36 Khalifman-Belyavsky, 55th USSR Championship, Moscow 1988 37 Belyavsky-Petursson, Reykjavik (World Cup) 1988 38

Gulko-Belyavsky, Linares 1989

39 Belyavsky-Hjartarson, Barcelona

97 100

Foreword

102 104

40 Belyavsky-Vaganian, 56th USSR Championship, Odessa 1989

106

41 Smirin-Belyavsky, 56th USSR Championship, Odessa 1989

109

42

Belyavsky-Timman, World Team Championship, Luzern 1989

112

43

Belyavsky-Kasparaov, Linares 1990

115

44

Yusupov-Belyavsky, Munrch 1990

118

45

Dolmatov-Belyavsky, Moscow (GMA) 1990

121

In my youth 1 could sit for long hours at the chess board in complete solitude and feel

46

Nunn-Belyavsky, Amsterdam 1990

123

perfectly happy. I also liked reading. I made the acquaintance of Svetonius and Plutarch

47 Belyavsky- Vyzhmanavin, 57th USSR Championship, Leningrad 1990

'Prepare the horse for battle, but remember - victory comes from the Lord' - King Solomon.

127

fairly early, but they did not provoke in me an interest in Roman civilisation. This

48

Gelfand-Belyavsky, Linares 1991

129

occurred much later, when I had made the acquaintance of Seneca's way of thinking and

49

Belyavsky-Timman, Linares 1991

132

also the style of Sallustius Crispus. Since that time a feeling of joy arises in me on every

50 Belyavsky-Salov, Reggio Emilia 1991/2

135

occasion when, together with Gibbon and Mommsen, I can engross myself in the world

51 Belyavsky-Gelfand, Linares 1992

137

of my heroes. The disposition that arises helps me to retain my optimism, without which success in chess tournaments is improbable for any significant length of time.

52

Lautier-Belyavsky, Biel 1992

139

53

Belyavsky-Ivanchuk, Linares 1993

141

My other passion became sport, thanks to an accidental set of circumstances. After

S4

Belyavsky-Akopian, Novosibirsk 1993

144

finishing school I did not qualify for the University Law Faculty. The neighbouring

55 Romanishin-Belyavsky, Belgrade 1993

146

Sports College offered me a place without my having to pass any exam� since my

56

148

successes in chess had gained me a favourable image in the sports world, and chess was

57 Belyavsky-Shirov, Groningen 1993

152

revered then as a type of sport. True, there was no chess specialisation in the college, and

58 Korchnoi-Belyavsky, Leon 1994

155

girls gathered to watch my helpless attempts at gymnastics and swimming, in order to

59

Belyavsky-Bareev, Munich 1994

158

laugh to their hearts' content. The point was that, before entering the sports college, I had

60

Belyavsky-I.Sokolov, Groningen 1994

Kramnik-Belyavsky, Groningen 1993

159

not paid the slightest attention to physical exercise. I consider it a special favour of the

61 Karpov-Belyavsky, Linares 1995

161

immortal gods, that I went through the Sports rather than the Law Faculty, as practising

62

Belyavsky-Lobron, Dortmund 1995

165

sport has prolonged my chess career.

63

Zviagintsev-Belyavsky, Team Tournament, Yugoslavia 1995

167

Rome and sport, more than other factors, have formulated my attitude to the

64

Rublevsky-Belyavsky, Novosibirsk 1995

170

competitive process. I share the conviction of the Romans, that victory in battle is granted

65

Belyavsky-Azmaiparashvili, Reggio Emilia 1995/6

172

66 Belyavsky-Nikolic, Polanica Zdroj 1996

174

67 Belyavsky-Ehlvest, Yerevan Olympiad 1996

176

68

Belyavsky-Strikovic, Cacak 1996

69 Belyavsky-Khalifman, Ubeda 1997 70

Belyavsky-Illescas Cordoba, Ubeda 1997

180 182 184

71 Belyavsky-Shirov, Belgrade 1997

189

Index of Opponents

191

Index of Openings

192

by the immortal gods and is therefore outside the will of the commander. It is the same in a chess battle. Without at all pretending to resolve the philosophical question regarding the relationship between free will and predetermination, I will risk proposing that the result of a chess game depends considerably less on the efforts of a player, than is customarily thought. Therefore the task of a .chess commander reduces to trying to find the best of the possible moves, without worrying about the result. Fatigue and failure, more than other factors, influence the mood and competitiveness of a player after a game. A bottle of good wine may help to cope with fatigue, but, in order not to become dispirited by the result, you should seek inspiration from the thoughts of Seneca: 'In this life, stormy like a sea, there is one refuge: disdain future vicissitudes, stand dependably and openly, staunchly meet the blows of fortune, do not hide and do not flinch' .

Selected Games 1972-1997 At the tournament in Sombor (Yugoslavia) my youthfu l vanity was satisfied when I managed to take first place: only with great unwillingness had the organisers included me among the participants. This was my first appearance abroad in a tournament without an age restriction . Game l Belyavsky-Matulovic Sombor 1 972

Sicilian Defence B48

e4 c5 tOc6 tOo 2 exd� d4 3 W e7 tOxd� 4 tOf6 5 � e3 tOc.3 e6 6 7 f4 White exploits the fact that the black queen is at c7, so that he does not have to fear the pin on his knight that occurs in the game.

7

.i.b4?!

The opening books of that time recom­ mended 7 ... tOxd4 8 'i'xd4 (after 8 .i.xd4 B lack can take the pawn 8 . . .'i'xf4 9 e5 -

tOdS! 1 0 tOxdS exdS I I .i.e2 d6 or 9 g3 'i'c7 10 e5 tOd5 with a reasonable game) 8 ...tOg4 9 tOb5 'ilfc6, intending 1 0 tOxa7 11xa7 ! Two decades later B lack automatically tends to protect his queen by 7 ... a6, but here too 8 eS is rather unpleasant. For example, in the game Dysing-Carlsson (Stockholm 1 995) after 8 . . . tOd5 9 tOxd5 exd5 10 tOfS d6 1 1 tOxd6+ �xd6 12 exd6 'ilfxd6 13 Wd2 0-{) 1 4 G-O-Q Black again ran into difficulties. Of course, the simple 7 ... d6 is also possible. 'ilfa5 S tOdb5 9 e5! White fixes the weak d6 square and at the same time gains an obvious spatial advantage. a6 9 This leads to the exchange of B lack's b ishop. The alternative was 9 ... tOd5, when I was intending 1 0 .i.d2 tOxc3 1 1 bxc3!? (or 11 �xc3 0-{) 1 2 'ilfd2) 1 1...�e7 1 2 �d3 with advantage. 9 . . . tOe4 can be met by 1 0 Wd3 fS 1 1 exf6 tOxf6 1 2 �e2 0-{) 1 3 0-{) d5 1 4 a3 �e7 I 5 �f3 �h8 1 6 b4, again with advantage to White (Shmuter­ Saltaev, Volgograd 1 994). 10 tOd6+ 1 0 exf6 axb5 1 1 fxg7 11g8 1 2 �f2 �xc3 1 3 bxc3 Wxc3 1 4 .i.xbS also came into consideration. .i.xd6 10 ttJe4 11 'i'xd6 12 'i'd3 The tempting 1 2 b4 loses to 1 2 .. . Wa3 ! 12 tOxc.3 bxc.3 13 bS 'i'c7 14 .i.e2 1 4.. . 0-0 1 5 .i.e 5 is unpleasant for B lack.

10

Uncompromising Chess

15 16

0-{)

�b7

<3;n?

22

23 24

25

�b5 c4 lldl

lld8 liJb4

With the threat of Jtb6.

25 26 27 28 29

dS

c3 Jtb6 Jtc7 cxd5

COc6 llb8 nc8

exdS 29 . ..:Ixc7 30 dxc6 .Qxc6 31 c-l �e7 .

COe7

This pawn sacrifice does not achieve its aim, as White finds a way of taking play into an ending that is unpleasant for Black. Stronger was 16 ..bxa4, when [ was intend­ .

ing 17 :tfb I, retaining the advantage. 17

18 19 20

axb5 lha8+ �xb5 �c5!

axbS �xa8 COdS

Transposing into a favourable ending from a position of strength.

�c5 �h5

41

�f8

42

�e2

43

..t>d4

COg6 COh8 COn �c6

earlier. After examining my games, the 6th World Champion subjected them to such scathing criticism, that when [ went out onto the street [ was so mortified that I burst out crying. After that we used to

Here the game was adjourned, but Black resigned without resuming, as there

meet from time to time, and he became more condescending towards my play. In

is no defence against �f3 and c3-c4. After 43 ... �a4 White wins by the outflanking manoeuvre 44 Jta6! Jtc6 45 Jtc8+ �d7 46

contrast to the wonderful books of pre­

.Qb7.

vious World Champions, in my opinion the three-volume set of Botvinnik's games is the first systemised work capable of giving a player a grandmaster understanding of

At that time the World Junior Champion­

the game. Botvinnik's commentaries are so

lld6 the win for White is merely a question

ship was held in a single age group of up to 20 years old, and once c'very two years. [n

instructive, that for anyone wishing to become a grandmaster, [ would recom­

of time.

contrast to the World men's Champion­

mend that in the first place they should

ship, which (before 1972) was regularly

study his works.

was a tougher defence, although after 32

16

39 40

A mistake. 22 . . . �c6 was essential, to prevent White's next move.

a4

II

Uncompromising Chess

30

llal

30 .Jtd6 was also good.

30 31 32 33

Uxa8 �f2

34

'It>e3

35 36 37 38

g3 .2.e2 h3 gxf4

.2.b6

�b7 :a8 .Qxa8 �b7 '.t>e6 h6 g5 gxf4+

�xc5 �xcS f5 The incautious 2 1 . ..COxc3? would have lost material after 22 �f3. 22 �d4 20 21

decided in matches between Soviet grand­ masters. in the barrie for the junior title

defence of the kingside pawns.

38

COe7

Teesside 1973

Sicilian Defence B9b

title. [n 1973 [ was to become the third Soviet winner.

Since the Junior Championship was being

The visit to England was preceded by a qualification tournament in Riga, where I

held in England, the local press was hoping that Tony Miles and Michael Stean would

shared first place with Sergey :-Vlakarychev

offer me worthy competition. [nitially the

and gained the right to represent the USSR in Teesside. As preparation for this

prognoses

tournament, the USSR Chess Federation

(6� out of 7), in the final tournament I lost

arranged for grandmasters. Boleslavsky and

to both the English players. However, the optimism of youth subsequently enabled

opening stage of the game, much more than participating in actual play. His

For this he needs to divert the knight to the

World Junior Championship

and Anatoly Karpov in 1969 had won this

Isaac Boleslavsky loved analysing the

position involves playing his king to d4.

Belyavsky-Marjanovic

participation, only Boris Spassky in 1955

Botvinnik to give me personal lessons. This was of undoubted benefit.

The further strengthening of White's

Game2

Soviet players traditionally found it difficult. [n the tv{enty years preceding my

were

confirmed:

after

a

confident victory in the qualification stage

me to win four games in a row, and by the last round I had caught the leader Siavoljub Marjanovic, who I still had to play.

Unfortunately,

today

I

cannot

remember which of the organisers sugges­

analyses were noted for their high quality, and books on opening theory contained

ted that we should agree a draw in our

numerous original ideas of his, disputing practical conclusions. From my contact

off with Miles. But already then the

with Boleslavsky [ derived methods of working on the openings.

maximalist aspiration in me prevailed: I decided to play for a win. And although

My first meeting with Botvinnik had taken place in his flat in Moscow two years

this game

game, in order to stage a three-way play­

does

not

rank

among

my

creative achievements, I must nevertheless

12

Uncompromising Chess

offer it to the judgement of the reader, as the one that made me Junior World Champion. e4 1 e5 2 ttJf3 d6 d4 exd4 3 4 ttJxd 4 ttJf6 5 ttJc3 a6 a4 6 Not the best move, but a perfectly possible one. Fischer used to prefer 6 �c4 here, and 6 �g5 is even more popular. 6 'fIe7 6...g6 would have transposed into the Dragon Variation, where White is denied the option of the plan with queenside castling. At the time I thought that the presence of the pawn at a4 (in reply to ... a7-a6) also favoured White after king­ side castling, since he has the possibility by a4-a5 of taking control of the weakened b6 square. on which one of his pieces may be established. 7 ttJb3 ttJbd7 �e2 g6 8 � g7 9 �

White has not obtained anything special from the opening, but on the other hand Maljanovic, on encountering some un­ accustomed problems, had already used an hour and a half on his clock.

10

i.e3

()....()

11 ttJd2 lOe5 12 ttJd5 If 12 h3 I was afraid of 12 ... �e6. ttJxd5 12 �fS exd5 13 l::cl h5 14 1::ae8 h3 15 f4 16 ttJd7 16 ...�xc2 did not work because of 17 �e l and then 18 �dI. 17 e3 lOc5 17 ...ttJf6 was better, in passing setting a trap (18 ttJc4? ttJxd5! 19 'iWxd5 �e6). 'iWd7 18 ttJf3 19 1:: a1 ttJe4 ttJf6 20 �h2 e6 c4 21 dxe6 'iWxe6 22 flfe8 lla3 23 There was no need for Black to allow the exchange of his bishop for the white knight. 23...'iWe7 24 ttJd4 �e4 would have been better. 'iWd7 ttJd4 24 'iWxfS 25 ttJxfS �d3 'iWe6 26 l!Jd7 27 llf3

28 b4 In the opponent's serious time trouble it was tempting to attack with 28 f5 'iWe5+ 29 i.f4, but Black is not bound to capture the pawn with 29...'iWxb2. He can retreat

Uncompromising Chess

29...'iWf6, when the situation becomes more comp I icated. 28 fS 28...a5!?, breaking up the white pawn chain and obtaining the c5 square for the knight, was more promising, e.g. 29 bxa5 ttJc5 30 f5 (or 30 �fI �b2 31 lla2 'iWf6 with counterplay) 30...'iWe5+ 31 �f4 'iWd4 32 fxg6 fxg6 33 'iWc2 flfB, and Black has good compensation for the pawn. 29 as �h7 �f1 30 ttJf6 31 �d4 ttJe4 32 �xg7 If 32 nfe3 White has to reckon with 32 ... �h6. 32 �xg7 33 'iWf6 'iWd4+ 34 llad3 'iWxd4 34... l1e6, inviting White himself to exchange queens, would have saved at least one tempo. 35 llxd4 �f6 And here 35...11e6 36 lle3 .:tce8 37 �e2 h4 38 �f3 �f6 would have main­ tained equality. �d3 36 lle6 fle3 37

ttJc3 37 This allows White a tactical opportunity to gain a winning material advantage. However, other moves were no better:

13

(a) 37...ttJc5 38 llxe6+ ttJxe6 39 flxd6 �e7 40 llb6 and wins; (b) 37...ttJf2 38 flxe6+ �xe6 39 �bl with a clear advantage; (c) 37...11ce8 38 �xe4 fxe4 (or 38...h4 39 �xb7 llxe3 40 �xa6 with good winning chances) 39 g4 h4 40 �g2 with the plan of�f2-e2, llc3, �e3 and c4-c5; (d) 37 ...g5 38 fxg5+ (but not 38 �xe4 gxf4 39 fle I flxe4 40 lldxe4 fxe4 41 llxe4 �f5 42 fld4 �e5 43 lld5+ �e6, when the best that White can do is to repeat moves) 38 ... ttJxg5 39 l1xe6+ �xe6 40 llh4 !1h8 41 �e2�e5 42 llxh5 llxh5 43 �x.h5 �d4 44 h4 ttJe6 45 �f7 ttJf4 46 <j;>g3 and White must win this ending. llxe6+ 38 Missing 38 �xf5! gxf5 39 .:lxc3. e.g. 39 . .. h4 40 �g l llce8 41 :'c2 llg8 42 .llcd2 �e7 43 l1d5 when White's extra pawn in the rook ending must count. �xe6 38 White still has a better ending, but it is not easy to approach Black's weaknesses. ttJe4 �f1 39 lle7 40 �e2 l!Jf6 41 �f3 lld7 42 �g3 �f7 43 �b4 44 �g5 � g7 45 g4 I did not see any other solution to the position. Against 45 lldI, attempting to penetrate with the rook to e6, Black would have replied 45... ttJe4+ 46 �xe4 fxe4 47 :el d5! 45 bxg4 46 bxg4 fxg4 47 �xg4 ll c 7? After prolonged thought Marjanovic wrongly avoids going into the rook ending. After 47...ttJxg4 48 �xg4 �f6 49 lld5 �e6 (49 c5 was threatened) 50 �g5 llg7 51 lld I llg8 52 lld4 llg7 53 �h6 llg8 54 �h7 :c8 55 �xg6 llg8+ Black, despite

14

Uncompromising Chess

being a pawn down, has chances of a draw. With the minor pieces still on the board, White's possibilities are increased. �f3 48 lld7

Uncompromising Chess

Game 3 Christiansen-Belyavsky World Junior Championship Teesside 1973

English Opening A40

c4 2 3 4

49 fS! Now White breaks through to the e6 square. 49 tOb7+ 50 <.t>f4 tOf6? 50 ...g5+ should have been played. gxfS 51 lId1 ebn 52 �xfS ':'c7 llel! 53 54 lIe6 tOg8 ebg7 55 �b5+ lIxc4 llxd6 56 57 lId7+ ebh8 After 57...ebh6 58 �g6 there is no good defence against the mate. lIxb7 58 !:rd4 59 �e2 lId6 60 �e5 lIh6 lIb6 61 lIh4 � xa6 62 tOe7 �b7 63 Black resigns The play in the above game was dominated by strictly competitive aims, but in the creative sense my win over a currently well known American grandmaster makes a better impression.

ttJf3 d4 e4

c5 g6 �g7 'i'a5+

Oleg Romanishin once played this against me in a training game. One of the present-day supporters of this variation is grandmaster D.Sennek. 5 �d2 S tOe3 d6 is more natural, when White has two fundamentally different plans: (a) 6 h3 tUc6 7 d5 tUd4 8 �d2 tOxf3+ 9 �xf3 tOf6 10 �e2 0-{) 1 1 �d3 a6 12 O-Q with somewhat the better game for White (Tukmakov-Sermek, Bled 1995); (b) 6 �e2 �g4 7 dxc5 dxc5 8 O-Q tUc6 9 e5! with sharp play (Mikhalchishin. Sermek, Bled 1995).

5 'i'b6 6 tUc3 Modem pragmatists would prefer 6 �c3, not avoiding an endgame: 6 ... cxd4 (6...tUc6 7 d5 �xc3+ 8lOxc3 'i'xb2 9 tUbS can hardly appeal to Black) 7 .i.xd4 .i.xd4 8 'i'xd4 'i'xd4 9 tUxd4 d6 10 tUc3 iOd7 1I tUdb5 �d8 12 �e2, where White's

chances are better (Gulko-Pinski, Geneva 1997). But during his golden youth Larry Christiansen preferred to attack. 6 cxd4 7 tUd5 �d 8

�f4 8 d6 9 ttJxd4 e5 9 .. . e6 10 tUbS! exd5 11 �xd6
�d2 13 13 c5!? tUxcs 14 tUac7, liberating the knight, came into consideration, although after 14 ...�xb2 Black has sufficient compensation for the exchange. 13 tUC6 14 tUxC6? From the expression on Christiansen's face it was apparent that he was not happy with the outcome of the opening, although objectively his position is not so tragic. It is true that 14 ()....(}-D tUxe4 15 'i'xf4 (15 'i'c2 �fS 16 �d3 tUac5) IS . ...i.f5 16 g4?! h5! was risky, but 14 f3 �e6 15 ()....(}-D was possible, although even here White has to fight for equality. But after the exchange of his most active piece, White has nothing at all to show for his efforts.

15

�xf6 14 �e6 �e2 15 16 �xf4?! Even so, 16 0-0-0 �e5 17 g3 g5 18 h4 was better, trying to complicate matters before the capture of the knight at a8. Now Black can also avoid this. �xb2 16 'i'a5+ lIdl 17 ebg7 18 ebn

19 h4?! White should at least have picked up the pawn - 19 �xd6. 19 .i.e5 �c5 20 �e3 llxa8 'i'b3 21 First 21 ... �c6 was more accurate. 22 �xb7
16

Black's only problem is how to bring his knight to a protected square, such as cS. Therefore 29 .1:!.c4 was much better, although after 29 ... lla7 30 nhc1 (30 a4 CUc7 and the knight goes to c5) 30...a4 31 g3 a3 32 f4 �b2 33 ll l c2 Wf6 34 g4 �e7 3 S gS d7 36 .1:!.h2 dS 37 exdS CUd6 38 tl.b4 llaS Black is still winning. CUd4 29 30 g3 30 f4 was essential, and if 30 ... �f6 31 g4. CUb3 30 llc6 CUc5+ 31 32 nb8 We3 f4 nb3+ 33 �e2 CUxe4 34 White resigns 1 974 was memorable for me winning my first gold medal as USSR Champion together with Mikhail Tal, to whom I was to a certain extent indebted for this suc­ cess. Before the final round, the 8th World Champion was leading by a whole point. '1 got carried away' was how Tal explained his impulsive 1 4 CUeS, and then, having calmed down a little after the encounter, he added: 'This game confirms an old truth, that it is difficult to play a game of chess having in mind two possible results: you are happy with a draw, and you also want to try and win. This is a rather complicated exercise, as at some point the one excludes the other, although Belyavsky played the . second part of the game very strongly'. Tal, more than anything, valued impro­ visation at the chess board. He calculated variations well, but intuition was never­ theless his main strength. To a great extent it was this, rather than calculation, that suggested attacking solutions. In eval­ uating my strong and weak points, Tal thought that, for me too, intuition at moments of intense concentration would

17

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

suggest correct solutions, only aimed at acquiring a material advantage, rather than mating the enemy king. Once, in the early eighties, he observed my fascination with a computer. At that time this was a great rarity among chess players, and so they did not imagine what they could be used for in chess. 1 was interested in compiling a data­ base, as 1 did not greatly trust my memory, and in addition 1 was aiming for a better systemisation of the information that I had. Tal, however, assumed that 1 wanted to use the computer as a playing automaton. He said: 'Sasha, a computer does not suit you, since your strength is intuition, and Y9U should improve your intuition, rather than your calculation.' The idea of computers participating in tournaments with humans was to him 'not attractive', as he liked to put it, because Tal desired that the fairy­ tales he created on the board should fascinate people. He had no wish to provide fascination for machines. Game 4 Tal-Belyavsky -I2nd USSR Championship Leningrad 197-1

Queen's Gambit 040

cS c4 2 lLlD lLlC6 3 lLlc3 lLlc6 At this point Tal sank into thought. He had expected me to choose a more aggressive opening, and suddenly here is a symmetric position, demonstrating peace­ ful intentions - almost an invitation to the title of USSR Champion. But Tal would not have been Tal, had he not decided to try and beat me. Unfortunately, it is true that you learn only from your own mistakes, and not from those of others. I was frequently to repeat Tal's experience during my subsequent career, and with

equal 'success'. I recall my games with Boris Spassky in 1980 and 1988 in Baden and Reykjavik, where I declined his offers of a draw and lost. Memorable among recent examples is my game with Rustem Dautov at Reggio Emilia in 1 996. The cost of these last two rejections was the loss in each case of first prize. e6 e3 4 d4 d5 5 From the symmetric variation of the English Opening the game has gone into the symmetric variation of the Tarrasch Defence to the Queen's Gambit. Here White usually breaks the symmetry by 6 cxd5 exd5 7 �e2, transposing into an isolated d-pawn position after 7. . . cxd4 8 CUxd4 �d6 or 7...�d6 8 dxc5 .\txc5, where as compensation Black has active piece play. But Tal was an expert on this variation, and the fact that for the moment he decided to continue the symmetry was not unjustified. a3 a6 6 7 b3 With this move Tal demonstrates that he is prepared to play with hanging pawns. But subsequently, perhaps influenced by this game, he began to prefer play against the isolated d-pawn: 7 dxc5 �xc5 8 b4. For example, his game with Browne (Naestved 1 985) continued 8... �d6 9 �b2 0-0 1 0 cxd5 exdS II .i.e2 �g4 1 2 0-0 llc8, and here after \3 bS?! axbS 14 CUxbS �xf1! IS �xD .i.eS Black maintained the balance. Stronger is 13 nc I! .i.b8 1 4 CUa4 'i'd6 IS g3 CUe4 16 CUcS CUxcS 17 llxcS llfd8 18 CUd4 with tdvantage to White (Mikhalchishin-Stangl, Dortmund 1 992). 7 �d6 In recent times Black more often prefers to develop his bishop at e7. For example, the 4th game of the Gelfand­ Kramnik match (Sanghi Nagar 1 994) continued 7...cxd4 8 exd4 �e7 9 cS

(before this only 9 �e2 had been played) 9...b6 10 cxb6 (after 1 0 b4 bxcS II bxcS CUe4 Black has sufficient counterplay) 10...CUd7 (1 0...'i'xb6 1 1 lLla4) 1 1 �d3 as 1 2 CUbS! 'i'xb6 13 �f4 0-0 1 4 O-O!, and here after the poor move 1 4 ... CUa7? White gained the advantage: 15 CUc7 llb8 1 6 b4 ! �b7 1 7 bxaS! As shown by Gelfand, better was 1 4 ...CUf6 ! 5 llc1 �d7 1 6 'i'e2 llfc8 1 7 :tc2 lLle4 18 llfc1 �f6 1 9 'i'e3. when White's position is somewhat preferable. (}-() 8 � d3 9 b6 (}-() 10 �b2 cxd4 Black cannot continue the symmetry with 1 0... �b7?!, as after II dxcS bxc5 1 2 cxdS cxdS 13 'i!fc2, in view of the threat of CUa4. it is not easy to defend the hanging pawns. � b7 exd4 11 nel 12 The arrangement of the rooks at c I and d I looks more harmonious, with the queen at e2. lIc8 12 If 1 2.. .!uaS there could follow 1 3 cS. cxdS 13 White reverts to symmetry, but 13 'i'e2 came into consideration, and if 1 3 ... CUaS 14 CUd2. exdS 13

14

lLleS?!

18

Uncompromising Chess

In inviting a position with an isolated pawn, Tal underestimates Black's resour­ ces, otherwise he would have continued the symmetry with 14 llc l. 14 tUxd4! �xh7+ tUxh7 15 16 'i'xd4 �cS d4 'i'd3 17 18 tUe2? ! All the same the d4 pawn cannot be won, and therefore in his cramped position it was more logical for White to aim for simplification: 18 tUe4 tUg5 19 tUxg5 'i'xg5 20 tUfJ with roughly equal chances. lle8 18 Ignoring 19 tUxf7? in view of 19 ... 'i'f6, while 19 '-i'f5 is parried by 19.. .f6! If 19 tUxd4 I was again intending to play 19 ... 'i'd5! 20 tUefJ (20 tUdfJ llxe5') 20...tUgS with unpleasant pressure for the pawn, but perhaps this would have been better for White than the continuation chosen in the game. 19 tUg3 'i'dS 20 tUf3 tUgS �ffl 21 b4 22 tUh4

is completely won for Black: 23 tUxg2 tUh3+ 24 �f l �xg2+ 25 �xg2 tUf4+ 26 �fJ tUxd3 27 .u.xe8 .u.xe8 28 �xd4 tUe1 + 29 �g4 tUc2 30 .u.dI nd8 31 tUe2 b5! (even stronger than 31...tUxa3 32 llcl b5 33 �c5 tUc4) 32 lld3 g6 33 nd2 tUxa3 34 �c3 nxd2 35 �xd2 tUc2. .u.xel tUe6 23 Now 23...'i'xg2+ is not so effective: 24 tUxg2 tUh3+ 25 c;t(fl �xg2+ 26 �e2 tUf4+ 27 �d2 tUxd3 28 �xd3 as 29 �xd4 axb4 30 axb4 �xb4 31 ngI with a probable draw. 24 nd l ? ! If White wants to attack this pawn, it IS more useful to activate the 'errant' knight: 24 lOfJ, in order to answer 24.. Jof4 with 25 'i'xd4 liJh3+ 26 �fl (not 26 �h I 'i'xfJ!) 26..:i'b5+ 27 :te2 with a defen­ sible position. 24 as 25 bxaS b xa5

.u.xel+ 22 Both players looked at 22... 'i'xg2+!, and yet I did not realise that the endgame

28 tUgS 29 tUg3 White loses quickly after 29 lbxd4 lOh3+ 30 �f1 tUf4. 29 lOxf3+ �g2 30 lOh4+ C;Ph3 31 'i'h6 'i'e4 32 lOg6+ d3! 33 �g 2 �d4 34 llc4 SLxg7 'i'f4! 35

.

: '� '

.

.

:

,,

1.:.:'�;,' .t� .' .. � "

.

' .

""

;;,

'

.• "

Such pressure is more than White can withstand. 36 'i'a8 'i'g4 h3 'i'xd l 37 �xffl lOxffl 38 38...lDh4+ 39 �h2 'i'G is 'cleaner', but the prosaic move played is also good enough. lleI 39 'i'dS 40 'i'g5+ lOg6 White resigns

The d4 pawn is still immune: 22 �xd4? lled8.

lOe2? 26 A time trouble mistake. 26 Wd2 �as essential, although here too Black stands rather better. Now, however, White's position collapses. 26 'i'h5 27 1Of3 �xO 28 gxO Things are certainly no easier for White after 28 Will Will 29 gx.D .u.c2.

19

Uncompromising Chess

actor. In 1981 during the tournament in Tilburg, in the room where the participants analysed games that had just finished, the hearing-aid that Tigran Petrosian usually used stopped working, and so when anal­ ysing his games he used only his hands. Standing behind his historic opponent, Spassky began good-naturedly and jovially imitating Tigran's typical gestures. The attention of those present switched from the chess board to the actor. Petrosian continued moving the pieces, not hearing the general laughter. Finally, from the expression of the opponent sitting opposite him, he instantly realised that Spassky was entertaining the spectators. He turned round, burst out laughing, and spread his hands, saying to all with his appearance: what else would you expect from Boris. It seems to me that, both at the chess board and in life, Spassky has always sought some truth, great and eternal. And each time, when he has convinced himself that a truth is not eternal and not grandiose, he has turned it into a laughing-stock, in order to release his energy for a new search. That is how he acted both in his younger years, and now, when he has turned 60. And that is how he will also act in the future: cleverly ridiculing, creating and refuting. Game 5 Spassky-Belyavsky USSR Team Championship Riga /975

Grtinfeld Defence 088 In the following year, 1975, I was also lucky enough to win against the 10th World Champion. Unfortunately, winning this game against Spassky did me an ill service: in our subsequent games, when Boris offered me a draw I would refuse and go on to lose. If Spassky had not been a great chess player, he would have become a great

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 c4 1Oc3 cxd5 e4 bxc3 �c4 lOe2

lOf6 g6 d5 lOxd5 lOxc3 �g7 c5 0-0

20

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

9 ttJc6 10 At that time Spassky regularly used to play this variation, which brought him two victories over Bobby Fischer. 10 cxd4 11 cxd4 � g4 12 f3 ttJ a5

.i.d5 13 In what was then considered the main continuation, 13 �d3 �e6 14 d S .i.xa I IS 1Iixa I f6, at present White has still not m anaged to demonstrate an advantage, while the problems facing Black after 1 3 �xf7+! :z.xf7 1 4 fx.g4 J:.xfl + I S ..t>xfl were learned of only 1 2 years later at the match between Karpov and Kasparov in Seville. However, in preferring a quieter alternative, Spassky was possibly guided not only by creative considerations, but also by his responsibilities as leader in a team event (he was playing on top board for Leningrad). 13 �d7 a6 lXbl 14 �xb7 lXa7 15 Weaker is I S ...ttJxb7 16 lXxb7 .i.b5 1 7 :te l ! 'i'a5 1 8 a4 .i.xa4 1 9 'i'a l ttab8? (better 19 ... :tac8) 20 lXebI with advantage to White (Dolmatov-Malisauskas, USSR 1 985). �b5 �d5 16

Easier equality is promised by Gennady Kuzmin's improvement 1 6 . . . e6 1 7 �b3 ttJxb3 (after 1 7 ...�b5?! 1 8 e5 Black has no compensation for the pawn) 1 8 axb3 �b5, for example: 19 e5 ttd7 20 'i'el f6 2 1 exf6 .1Lxf6 22 ttf2 e5 with equal chances (Dolmatov-Kuzmin, USSR 1 9 85). a4 17 Nothing is achieved by 1 7 .1Lg5 1Iid7 ( 1 7 ... h6 18 �h4 g5?! 1 9 �f2 is risky for Black, as his king is exposed, and after exchanges White gains the advantage by advancing his e-pawn) 18 ..t>h I e6 19 .1Lb3 �xb3 20 axb3 �xe2 2 1 ihe2 �xd4 22 nfd I e5 and Black equalises. 17 �xe2 18 'i'xe2 e6

�xe6?! 19 Fighting for the initiative, Spassky goes . in for an apparently promising piece sac­ rifice. Modem theory prefers 1 9 �c4, when Black's best is 19.. . �xd4, although considerable accuracy is required for hir:n to equalise. For example, the game I.Farago-W.Schmidt (Prague Zonal Tourn­ ament 1 985) continued 20 ttfd 1 �xe3+ 2 1 'i'xe3 ttd7 22 �e2 ttxd I + 2 3 lXxd 1 "c8 (less accurate is 23.....c7 24 �xa6 "c2 2 5 "d4! e 5 2 6 " a l ttb8 27 .i.fl when White stands better, Yusupov-Korchnoi, Luzem 1 985) 24 e5 "c2 25 ttd4 ttb8 26 h4 'Wbl + 27 Wf2111c 6 with chances for both sides.

19 20 21 22

d5 �b6 lXfc l

fxe6 tta8 'i'd6

22 :tab8! This possibility was overlooked by Spassky. B lack exploits the weakness of the gl-a7 diagonal. It transpires that White cannot play 23 'i'xa6? because of 23.. . .i.d4+, while 23 .i.xa5 is not good in view of 23.. .ttxb I 24 :txb I 'i'c5+ and 25 ... 'i'xa5. 23 'i'f2 Of course, not 23 'i'e3 in view of 23 . . .�h6! 24 'i'xh6 :xb6, when the simplification is clearly in Black's favour. 23 ttxb6 24 'i'aJ ttxb6

2S

lXcbl?

21

This move costs White the game. 25 ttbb 1 was essential, removing the rook from the dangerous diagonal, after which the outcome would have been far from clear. "d3! 25 Now, in view of the weakness of the g l-a7 diagonal, it is not possible for White to exploit the undefended knight at as . �c3 26 tt6b4 'i'b6 27 If 27 'i'fl there would have followed 27 . . . 'i'e3+ 28 �h 1 .i.xb4 29 ttxb4lXc8. 27 .1Lxb4 28 ttxb4 ttJc4 'ili'xe6+ 29 �h8 h4 30 White has three pawns for a knight, but this material balance is favourable only in the endgame, and for the moment his king is in danger. If 30 'i'e7?? he is mated after 30 . . . 'i'e3+. 30 31 �h2 �h3 32

33 g3 The only way to defend against Black's threat to set up a m ating net by 33 . . . lllfl or 3 3 . ..111d l was with 33 ttbl , but then 3 3 . . . lllxg2!, and, after the forced elimination of the f3 and h4 pawns, Black drives the king into the comer and sets u p

22

Uncompromising Chess

a fresh mating construction: 34 �xg2 'i'xD+ 35 �h2 'i'f2+ 36 �h l 'i'xh4+ 3 7 �gl 'i' g5 + ! (K.Neat; not 3 7 ... 'i'g3+ 3 8 � h I l:tf2 3 9 'iWc8+ <j;g7 4 0 l:tb7+ �h6 41 'i'c1+ 1.'I.f4 42 l:tb2 with counterplay) 3 8 �h I l:tf4 39 'i'c8+ <j;g7 40 'i'c3+ <j;h6 4 1 l:tb2 l:tf 1 + 4 2 <j;h2 'i'g I + 43 �h3 l:t e I and w i ns. 'i'xD 33 'i'e5+ <j;g8 34 nn 'i'e6+ 35 1.'I.b8+ <j;g7 36 'i'e 5 + 'i'f6 37 <j;xf6 'i'xf6+ 38 l:!. b 3 39 39 l:b6+ <j;e5 40 1.'I.xa6 <j;xe4 is equa l l y hopeless. 39 40 41 42 43

44 45 46 47 48 49

1.'1.c3 hS 1.'I.c6+ hxg6 llxa6 as <j;h2 l:!.a8 a6 a7

CUc4 CUd6 CUxe4 <j;g 5 hxg6 1.'I.D 1.'I.xg3+ lld3 l:tx d 5 l:ta5

51 52 53 54

�n �fS �e6 <j;gl 'Ot>g2 <j;n <j;g 1 CUe8 White resigns

David Bronstein once suggested that you cannot beat an equal opponent unl ess you grant him counter-chances. In our game from the Zonal Tournament i n Vilnius I made use of his recommendation. Of course, there is much to be learned from a player who was the first to challenge Botv innik for the title of World Champion. Bronstein's book with the annotated games of the 1953 Candidates Tournament can be recommended to anyone aiming to im­ prove their play. Of course, a quarter of a century later, the strength of his play was not as great as in his match with Botvinn ik.

success in the present game, 8 �d3 �b7 9 a3 ltJc5 1 0 'i'D followed by g2-g4-g5 looks more natural. 8 bxa4 8 . . . b4? loses a pawn to 9 CUc6. 9 l:txa4 e6 10 'i'al Here is that opportunity. W ith this non­ routine manoeuvre I was hoping to exploit the weakness of the a6 pawn, but it also a llows B l ack a chance to activate his forces, which my experienced opponent is not slow to exp l o i t . 10 ttJb3! was better, maintaining pressure on the queens ide weaknesses. 10 11

ltJe5 CUe6 'i'b6! I n the event of 1 1 ... 'i'c7 12 � xc 5 'i'xc6 (12 ... dxc5 IJ ltJe5 ) \3 �eJ White has an obvious advantage on the queenside. 12 CUa5

Game 6 Belyavsky-Bronstein Vilnius Zonal Tournament 1975

Sicilian Defence B90

e4 c5 1 d6 CUD 2 cxd4 d4 3 ltJf6 CUxd4 4 a6 5 CUc3 CUbd7 �e3 6 Against the Engl ish Attack (character­ ised by the development of the bishop at e3), with which John Nunn and Nigel Short have gained numerous w i ns, the line usually preferred nowadays is 6 ... ltJg4 7 �g5 h6 8 �h4 g5 9 �g3 �g7, the prescription of Kasparov, who before settling on it encountered many problems after 6 . e5 and 6 ... e6. 7 b5 (4 8 a4! ? Although an unusual idea with system­ atic play on the queenside brought me ..

ltJf6 ! 49 The knight heads back t o win White's remaining pawn. lla3 50 �g2

Uncompromising Chess

12 �d7? After successfu l ly parrying the knight raid, Bronstein relaxes his gu ard and makes a move that takes away a defender from the a6 pawn, after which White's idea with the 'i'al manoeuvre achieves its aim. Given correct play, Black's hopes of exploiting the activity of the bishop pair prove i llusory, and therefore he should have reverted to prophylaxis, moving his queen out of the pin with 1 2 . . . 'i'c7.

23

'i'e7 13 ltJe4 'i'xe5 14 �xc5 lle8 l:txa6 15 d5 16 'i'a5 After the exchange of White's dark­ square bishop, a weakness of his dark­ square complex has become apparent, and it is logical that B l ack should aim to open the position, wh ile completing his develop­ ment - in this case he has more chance of exploiting the strength of his bishop pair. The attempt to resolve the situation with the sacrifice of a second pawn, 1 6 . . .'i'xa5 1 7 1.'I.xa5 ! (1 7 ttJxa5 d5) 1 7 ... d5 18 exd5 (1 8 CUb6 �b4 ! ) 1 8...�b4 19 dxe6 �xe6 20 :ta4 CUd5, would have been met by the tactical counter 21 1.'I.xb4! CUxb4 22 CUd6+, when White gains the advantage. �xc5 17 'i'xc5 18 exd5 exd5 I f 18 . .CUxd5 19 ttJxd5 exd5 20 CUe5 �f5 21 �b5+ with a dangerous i n itiative. 19 CUb6?! A careless move, which allows Black almost to free himself. Of course 19 CUeS! was stronger. �xb6 19 20 d4 l:txb6 21 ltJb5 .

21 ltJd5? I n aiming for counterpl ay, Black underestimates the threatened fork. After

24

2 1 ... 0-0! 22 !Dxd4 llfe8+ 23 �f2 (23 .li.e2 .li.g4) 23 . . .lle4 24 c3 .l:Ixf4+ 25 !DD g 5 his pieces would have been very active. llb7! 22

3 4 5 6

The threat is stronger than its execu­ tion ! I f 22 !Dd6+? <3;e7 23 !Dxc8+ llxc8 24 llb7 llxc2 B lack activates his p ieces and White 's lag in development tells. 22 !Dxf4? B lack is strangely resigned to his fate, yet 22 ... llxc2 was possible, when 23 llb8+ does not achieve anything after 23 . . . 'it>e7 24 llxh8 .li. xb S ! But by playing 23 !Dxd4! llc8 24 g3 ! White maintains his advantage. �d8 23 !Dd6+

7 8 9

2�

!Dxc 8

�x c8

25 26

.li.a6 �d 2 lln

lle8+ ll e4 rs

1:b7+ .li. b7

�d8 !Dxg 2

27 28 29 30 31

10

d4 !Dxd4 !Dc3

.li.e2 f4 0-0

.li.e3 �el

cxd4 !Df6 e6 .li.e7

16 rs Lengthening the 'operational' diagonal for the bishop.

0-0

A fter 16 ... e5 White would have estab­ l ished permanent control of d5: 1 7 !Dxc6 .li.xc6 1 8 .li.d5 .

16

!Dc6 a6 !D d 7 ! ?

U l f Andersson has the reputation of being one of the leading experts on the Scheveningen Variation, and the latent resources of the position are well known to him. Thus here he chooses a new and cun­ ning plan for Black. The usual continua­ tion is 10 ... �c7 or 1 0 . . . !Dxd4 II .li.xd4 b S . 11 J:t d l lle8

.li.xe4 fxe4 1117 Black resigns

17

fxe6

18

!Drs

S lumps in my playing strength have dogged me throughout my chess career. The first such period came in 1 97617. However, even then there were exceptions, affording creating satisfaction, including the following games against opponents who were hard to beat. At that time winning against U l f Andersson was n o less difficult that i t i s

the d6 pawn - 19 .ltc5. In this respect 1 8 ... b4 1 9 axb4 :txb4 20 !Dxd6 .li.xd6 2 1 :txd6 was no better. I f 1 8 ... 'i'c7 White would have attacked with 19 'itg3 g6 ( 1 9 ... !!Jfg6 20 h4) 20 .li.d4, threatening !Dh6+. 19 tOxd6 llrs

now, but 20 years ago h e w as younger and concerned with matrimonial matters, which made things easier for me. Game 7 Cienfuegos 1976

Sicilian Defence B 8 5

e4 !Do

12 13 Ensuring attacker.

Belyavsky-Andersson

1 2

White makes use of the opportun ity offered to switch his bishop to an attacking diagonal ( 1 2 ...tDa5? is not possible be- . cause of 13 .li.xe6 !), after which the f4-fS advance becomes imminent.

c5 d6

13 14 15

!Drs v! the

safety

o f the

main

.li.d7 'i' a

.li.al

b5

llbS

I f 1 5 ... !Da5 1 6 f5 .li.f6, with the idea of blocking the diagonal by . . tDc4, White has the unpleasant 1 7 fxe6 fxe6 1 8 !D fS ! .

20 21 22 23

l:re8 'it a

'i'd2

llxn !Drs !DdS!

!D fe 7 ! 26 This knight too is immune. If 26 . . . .li.xe7 27 !Dxe7 :txe7 White mates by 28 �f8+, while if 26 . . . !Dxe7 there fol lows 27 �xf8+! J:txf8 (or 27 . . . !Dg8 28 �f4 with a strong attack) 28 llxf8+ !Dg8 29 !De7 with an easy win. 26 'i'd6 27 !Dxg6+ !Dxg6

28

!Df6!

Now the second knigh t joins the attack, although later I did not exploit it in the best way.

28 l:rd8 I f 28 . . . gxf6 White mates by 29 �xf6+ �g8 30 'i'17.

llxn + 'i'c7

.li.rs

This purely Sicilian pseudo-sacrifice is not so difficult to find. After all, Black cannot take the knight because of mate by 24 'i'xd5+ and 2 5 'itg8.

23 24

�h8

fxe6

!Drg6

18

.ltc4!

24 25

!De5

Black prefers to give up a pawn immediately, if only to get rid of the pieces hanging over his position, since i f 1 8 . . . .li.c8 White would have switched his attack to

12

25

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

'i'c6 .li.d4

Now 25 .li.xe5 is threatened.

29

tDxd7?!

26

Uncompromising Chess

These events took place in time troubl e and t h e exchange of White's knight leaves him without an attack, although he does not lose his advantage. Correct was 29 e 5 ! "iie 7 (29 . . . tt:ixe5 is not possible because o f 3 0 'i' h 4 h 6 3 1 tt:ixd7 lDxd7 3 2 �xh6+, while if 29 . . . 'i'c6 White continues his attack with 3 0 h4) 3 0 tt:ie4 �c6 3 1 tt:id6 �g8 32 h4, and after 3 2 . . . tt:ix.h4 it a l l ends in a mating attack: 33 'i'xh4! �x.h4 34 .lhe6+ Wh8 3 5 tt:if7+ Wg8 36 tt:ixd8+ W h 8 3 7 llxfS mate. 29 �xd7 c3 30 �e7 31 'W g3 ? Here too 3 1 e5 ':f8 32 'i'e3 ':xfl + 3 3 Wxfl was best, retain ing a n advan tage thanks to the weakness of the e6 pawn. 31 eS �e3 32 Here Black lost on time, although White has squandered the greater part o f h i s advantage. Game 8 Belyavsky-Ri bli Leningrad 1977

Sicilian Defence 8 84

2 3 -'

e4 tt:if3 d4

tt:ixd4

cS

d6 c xd 4 tt:if6

tt:ic3 a6 .i.e2 e6 f4 7 .i.e7 0-{) 8 � �hl 9 A ft er 9 .i. e 3 Black can develop h i s second knight not a t c6 b u t a t d7, with the idea o f attacking the e4 pawn. 'i'c7 9 10 'i' e l After the matches between Karpov and Kasparov, 1 0 a4, with which White 5

6

restricts the opponent's flank play, became more popular. bS 10 1 0 . . . tt:ic6 leads to a standard type o f position, but the move played i s clearly more active. .i.b7 11 .i.f3 12 eS

12 dxeS A few years later the correct method of play in this position was suggested by Yegeny Errnenkov - 1 2 . . . tt:ie8. Now after 13 .i.xb7 'i'xb7 14 f5 dxe5 1 5 "iix e5 .i. f6 1 6 "ii e 3 ltJc6 1 7 ltJxc6 'i'xc6 1 8 fxe6 fxe6 1 9 ltJe4 'i'xc2 the position simplifies to Black's advantage (Nevednichy-Mikhal­ ch ishin, Moscow 1 983). 13 f5 dxe5 1 4 fxe6 looks more vigor­ ous, but here 1 4 . . . .i.xfJ is possible, and now after 1 5 -tJxO fxe6 1 6 .i.g5 llxfJ 1 7 :txfJ .i.xgS White does not have sufficient compensation for the material. The alternative is 1 5 exfl+ nxfl 1 6 ltJxo tt:id7 1 7 .i.g5 .i.xg5 (weaker is 17 .. . .i.fS 18 ':d 1 tt:id6 1 9 ltJe4 "c6 20 ltJxd6 .i.xd6 2 1 'i'd2 when White stands better, Zude-Morawietz, Germany 1 996) 18 'i'e4 ':c8 19 ltJxg5 :txf! + 20 l:txf1 ltJef6, and now: (a) 21 ltJd5 'i'c4 (not 2 l .. .llJxe4? 22

tt:ie7+ �h8 23 tt:ifl mate, but 2 1 . .. 'ifd6 is

possible, e.g. 22 llxf6 ltJxf6 23 ltJxf6+

Uncompromising Chess

'i'xf6 24 'i'd5+ �h8 25 lDf7+ �g8 26 ltJgS+ 'it>h8 and both sides must repeat moves) 22 llxf6 lDxf6 23 ltJxf6+ gxf6 24 �xh7+ �f8 25 'iii h 8+ �e7 26 "iig 7+ �e8 27 "ii xf6 � f4 28 �e6+ �d8 with a draw by perpetual check, S ibarevic-Ftacnik, Banja Luka 1 983); (b) 21 'i'f5 �c6 22 lld I h6, and a draw was agreed in Belyavsky-Ribli (Tilburg 1 984) . 13 fxeS lOrd7

14 'i'g3 F irst exchanging bishops is weaker: 1 4 .i.xb7 "ii x b7 1 5 "iig 3 �h8! (after 1 5 . . . "iic 7? ! 1 6 .i. f4 � h 8 1 7 tt:ie4 lDc6 1 8 lD o tt:ib4 1 9 tt:if6 White has a strong attack, Klovans-Pribyl, Hungary 1 979) 1 6 .i. f4 b4 1 7 ltJce2 tt:ic6 1 8 no nac8 1 9 :d 1 tt:ic5 and B lack has the more promising game (Chiburdanidze-Gufeld, Nikolaev 1 9 8 1 ). 14 .i. f4 ltJc6 is also played. Now after 1 5 ltJxc6 .i.xc6 1 6 'i'g3 �h8 1 7 tt:ie4 'i'b7! Black has a reasonable game (Rogovskoy­ Sulipa, Ukraine 1 992). Sulipa gives the following possible variation: 1 8 nae 1 ltJc5 1 9 ltJxc5 .i.xc5 20 .i.g5 .i.xfl 2 1 nxo .i.e7! 22 :tef! .i.xg5 etc. However, 1 5 �xc6 .i.xc6 1 6 'i'g3 �h8 1 7 ::tae 1 .i.b 7 1 8 .i.g5 .i.xg5 1 9 'i'xg5 h 6 20 'i'h5 ltJc5 2 1 :te3 looks stronger, when White has the

initiative (Illescas Cordoba-Kir.Georgiev, Linares 1 9 88).

27

�h8 14 The exchange 1 4 ... .i.xO I S lDxfJ �h8 16 .i.g5 merely assists White's attack. 15 .i. f4 tt:ib6? It only remains for White to include h i s knight in the attack with ltJe4, and B lack's last move does not prevent this, as, however, is also the case with 1 5 . . . lOcs 1 6 b4 lDcd7 1 7 lDe4. Therefore better is I S . . . ltJc6 1 6 ltJxc6 .i.xc6 1 7 ltJe4 llac8 1 8 c3 "ii b 7 with a double-edged game (Kudrin-Sax, Hastings 1 983/4). tt:i8d7 16 tt:ie4

17 .i. gS ! This is stronger than the obvious 1 7 tt:if6, when Black can defend by 1 7 . . . .i.xf3 18 ':xfJ "iic 4. But now, after the exchange of dark-square bishops, White creates unpleasant threats on the kingside. .i.xg5 17 Interposing 1 7 ... .i.xe4? 1 8 .i.xe4 .i.xg5 leads after 1 9 .i.xa8 'i'xeS 20 'i'xe5 tt:ixe5 21 ltJxe6 to the loss of the exchange without any compensation. .i.xf3 18 ltJxg5 � g8 19 nxf3 1 9 ... 'i'xeS 20 'i'h4 h6 2 1 lLlxf7+ and 19 . . . tt:ixeS 20 ltJdxe6 fxe6 2 1 lhfS+ U.xfS 22 tt:ixe6 'i'e7 23 ltJxfS are bad for B lack.

20 'i'h3 White misses an opportunity to conclude the game with an immediate

28

Uncompromising Chess

sacrificial attack: 20 lUxh7!, and if 20 . . .'�xh7 2 l lUfS ! exfS (or 2 I . . .'itxeS 22 'ii'h 4+ \Pg8 23 lUe7 mate) 22 'ith4+ �g8 23 llh3 f6 24 e6!, blocking the king' s escape, after which mate is unavoidable. 20 h6

21 lUxf7 ! The approach to e 6 l ies v i a f7. 'itc 4 21 I f 2 1 ...!:xf7 22 llxf7 'itxeS 23 lUc6 'itd6 (or :!3 .. .'i'xb2 24 'itxe6 'itxa l + 25 llfI +) 24 'i'f] lUf6 25 ::tb7 with dangerous threats. 22 WhS! An important follow-up. The knight is defended, and there is no defence against the threatened knight sacrifice at h6. 22 lUxeS

23

lUxh6+

gxb6

lUd7 Wxe5 . 24 25 We4?! Of course after 25 'i'xe6+ Black would be unable to save the endgame two pawns down, but it is more logical to continue the attack. However, a simpler way of doing this was 25 llg3+ �f7 26 llg7+ \Pe8 27 'i'xe6+ 'i'xe6 28 lUxe6, with further gain of material. 25 �h8 With the faint hope of 26 nafI?? 'i'xfI +! 26 'i'h4 ll x f3 'it x h6+ 27 �g8 28 lU x f3 'uf8 Wg6+ 29 �b8 30 ll e l l::t f6 'i'e8+ 31 lUf8 32 c3 'i'xa2 33 We7 l::t fS lUeS 34 �g8 lU g4 35 Black resigns 1 978 began dizzily. I was fortunate enough to win all \ 3 games at a tournament in A licante (Spain). The sound of the surf helped me to sleep, and for a time I believed that this was the reason for such an outstanding result. Subsequently I d iscovered that the sound of the sea helps m e to sleep, but not to win. The last example of this was my result at Portoroz in July 1 997. I made the close acquaintance of the 9th World Champion Tigran Petrosian in 1 9 8 1 , when h e invited me to work together for ten days at his home not far from Moscow. Before this meeting I thought that skill in manoeuvring the pieces was the distin­ guishing feature of his chess style. There­ fore an unexpected d iscovery for me was Petros ian 's brilliant combinational vision, which he demonstrated in training games and in subsequent analysis. Tigran

Uncompromising Chess

calculated variations very quickly and therefore he was a good lightning player. B ut he did not l ike bluff and he would avoid variations where for him the evaluation was not completely clear. This was perhaps his only chess defect, for I think that in competitions between people (but not computers) the words of Napoleon are applicable: ' We must engage in battle, and then let us see' . Game 9 Belyavsky-Petrosian Vilnius 1978

Queen 's Indian Defence E 1 9 d4

2

c4

3

lUf3 g3 �g2

4 5 6 7 8 9

tO f6 e6 b6 � b7 �e 7

�

�

lUc3

4Je4 lUxc3

'itc2

'i'x c3

�e4 9 At that time the occupation of e4 in this well known position was considered perfectly sound, but with the development of the variation, 9 . . . f5 and 9 . . . c5 began to be considered more prom lsmg. For example, Belyavsky-Adams (Belgrade

29

1 995) continued 9 ... c5 1 0 b3 (here 1 0 lld l is more usual) 1 0 ... � f6 (or 1 0 ... cxd4 I I lUxd4 �xg2 12 �xg2 � f6 1 3 �b2 d5 1 4 llfd ! ! dxc4 I S 'i'xc4 'i'c8 1 6 llac l 'i'xc4 1 7 l::txc4 and White's chances are better, Belyavsky-Portisch, Reggio Em ilia 1 987) I 1 �b2 cxd4 1 2 lUxd4 �xg2 13 �xg2 lUc6 1 4 We3 'itc8 1 5 ::tfd I l::td 8 with a double-edged game. 10 � f4 Later in the game Mikhalchishin­ Makarychev (Daugavpils ( 978) White managed to gain an advantage by 10 lld I fS I I tOe I �xg2 1 2 lUxg2 �f6 1 3 'i'c2 'i'e8 1 4 b3 cS 1 5 e3. 10 �f6 The 10th game of the Petros ian­ Korchnoi Match (C iocco ( 997) went 10 ... lUc6 I I J::t fdI dS 1 2 lUeS lUxeS 1 3 �xeS �xg2 1 4 �xg2 c6 I S llac I Y2-Y2. II l::t fd 1 lUc6 Black's idea of piece pressure on the centre proves ineffective. 1 1 ... d6 came into consideration, with the idea of . . . tOd7, . . . 'ite7 and . . . c7-cS.

12 lUeS! After the exchange of the light-square bishops Black can no longer maintain control of the centre. �xg2 12 13 l::tc 8 �xg2 We8 14 h4

30 15

lU g4

16

d5! b5

17

lUxf6+)

1i. e7 lU d 8 f6

Tigran Petros ian was always famed for his ski l l in defending cramped positions, and here he erects barriers in front of the attacking pieces. 1 7 . . . fS would also have been answered by 1 8 h6. 18 h6

29

32

lUxf6+) 29 'itb5 lUc5 3 0 b4 'iWa6 3 1 'iWxa6

�g l

lUe4

(28 . . . lUfS

33 34

lUxa6 32 lId7 lUxb4 33 :tg7+ <;Ph8 34 !Ixa7 with a winning endgame advantage for W h i te; (c) 25 . . . lI fc8 26 'iWfJ ! f5 ( B lack loses after 26 .. 5�fl 27 !Id7 llxd7 2 8 lIxc8 l:Id8 29 lUxf6 �xf6 30 :1c7+, or 26 .. Jlxc4 27 lUxf6+ WhS 28 :ld7 :t4c7 29 l:Ixe7 !Ixe7 30 lUd5+) 26 . . . f5 27 'i'xb7! l:xb7 28

g6

iLxc7?!

19

28

There was no need for this l i tt l e combination. A fter the natural 1 9 e 4 e5 2 0

!Ixc8+ 'l;fl 29 !Ih8 fxg4 30 .u.xh7+ W f6 J I l:Ixe7 :'xe7 32 !Ih l ':h7 33 f3 w i th

J1. e 3 d6 2 1 f4 White ' s spat i a l advantage

good w i n n i n g chances i n t h e rook end ing. 25 cxd5 e5

would have been very considerable. lIxc7 19 iL x d 6 d6 lO

21

!Ixd6

·if:i·e 7

22

23

nad l :l 6d�

lUb7 d5

2�

� d3

26

27

n b�

lUe3

4Jf7

lUc 4 'i' a3 ! lIxa7 11a6

35

� f6 'i'e7 'itd 8

11a7 lUa5

36 37

8 � At that time 8 g4 1i. g6 9 lUeS lUbd7 1 0 lUxg6 hxg6 was fashionable, and even today it has not lost its topical ity. Here is a

b5

kind of roll-call of the decades:

'it b6?

An oversight, but Black's position already hopeless. lU b7 38 lU xeS 39

IS

b4

1i.e2 cxd4 I S exd4 lUb6 1 6 �b I lUfdS 1 7 1i.d3 ! with somewhat the better chances for

fS n fc8

of the Ukrainian and Sloven ian teams at

'iWg5?

chess trainer Viktor Kart, who, apart from

com pensation. with his control of the c-file and active e5/fS pawn phalanx, supported

us, also coached grandmasters Adrian Mikhalchishin and Marta Litinskaya. To

The

(b) I I 'itO lIb8 1 2 1i.d2 ( 1 2 1i.fl ! ? is

I have been playing against my compatriot Oleg Roman ishin for many years, from junior competitions to a meeting as leaders

Ex- \Vorld

A

I S g5 lU fd7 1 6 �g4 0-0-0 1 7 l:Ib l �b8 1 8 b4 lUd5 1 9 lUa4 fS with a compl icated

also interesting) 12 . . . c5 1 3 0-0-0 b5 1 4

Champion has obviously gained reasonable

:a� o f time.

(a) I I 1i.fl c6 (now 1 1 ... e5 is more usual) 1 2 1i.g2 �c7 1 3 0-0 1i.e7 14 f4 lUb6

game (Kasparov-Petrosian, Tilburg 1 98 1 );

Black resigns

the 1 996 Olympiad. From our childhood years we studied together in Lvov with

28 loss

31

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

White (Larsen-Speelman, Hastings 1 990/ 1 ). 8

cS

B lack al lows his opponent to transpose into a favourable endgame, possibly over­ estimating the consequences of breaking up his pawns. It was not without reason that Alekhine and Botvinnik, back in the

by the knight at d6. Therefore 28 .. :tfd7

this day we all maintain close relations

pre-war years, preferred 8 . . . lUc6 as being

was in the spirit of the position, and if 29

with our first trainer.

bJ e4.

In the late 1 9 70s, after a series of successes, and especially his victory in the

more reliable. 9 dxc5 10 lIxd 1

'ite7 29 .1i' a3! The queen has to return, as 29 ... lUbS is strongly met by 30 ·1I'b4 lUd4 3 1 d6. 30

"'1'8

b3

'it xdl

major grandmaster tournament at Lenin­ grad in

1 977, Romanishin was rightly

considered one of the strongest p layers in the country. meetings,

Like many other of our

the one

i n the 46th USSR

Championship was uncomprom ising. Game 1 0

lUd 6 !

24

At the cost of a pawn

Belyavsky-Romanisbin

the knight

46th USSR Championship

occupies the excellent blockading square

Tbilisi 1978

d6, from where it takes part in the play on

Queen's Gambit Accepted D22

both flanks. Black

has

more

problems

after

24 . . . dxc4 25 :txc4:

(a) 25 . . . l:d8? 26 lIxc7 �xc7 27 lUxf6+ �fl 28 'i'O :txd I 29 lUd5+ and wins; (b) 25 ...l:I.xc4 26 �xc4 lUd6 (or 2 6 . . . l:I.d8 27 l:I.xd8+ lUxd8 28 e4 �fl 29 e5 f5 30 lUf6) 2 7 'Wb4 �b7+ (27 ... :td8 28

31 Switching

'i'b2! the

attacking position. 31

queen

to 11 c5

an

ideal

1

d4

dS

2

c4

dxc4

into a compl icated ending, but this by no

3

lUn

e3 1i.xc4 lUc3

lU f6 1i. 4 g

means guarantees Black an easy l i fe. After

4 5 6 7

b3

e6 a6 .tb5

The game has gone from the opening

all, apart from the queens, the remaining set of pieces is almost complete, and in addition to control of the d-file White also acquires the advantage of the two bishops.

32

Uncompromising Chess

spoil slightly the opponent's pawn struc­ tu re. In the event of I 0 . . . �xc5 1 1 g4 .i.g6

1 2 tDe5 lLlfd7 13 lLlxg6 hxg6 14 'it'g2 lLlc6 IS tDe4 �e7 16 b3 tDb6 1 7 .i.e2 0-0 1 8 .i.b2 White's position is again somewhat preferable (Gavrikov-A.Petrosian, Vilnius 1 978). 11 12 13

gxf3 b3 £4

�xc5 tDbd7 'it'e7

1 3 . . .l:Ic8 14 �b2 'it'e7 is more acc urate . l:Iac8 14 .i. n 15

�g2

20

a4 llx a4

21

�a3

19

10 �xf3 It is natural that Black should aim to

bxa4 as

Threatening 22 llxa5 as well as 22 �xb4. 21 22

36 37 38 39 40

e4 llc7

g5

3

d4

cxd4

4

tDxd4

e6

fxg5

�f8 e5

lLlfS

tDxfS

exfS

llxb5

�xa3

llxa3

tDc3 a6 5 so, the Paulsen Variation Taimanov's favourite weapon. tDge7 �e2 6 b5 f4 7 And

-

White wins a pawn, as 22 . . . lla7 fails to 23 tDd4, threatening a fork at c6. tDc5

22 23

tDd4

24

llxa5

tDce4 g6

25

b4

llc4

26

b5

�f8

� b4

It is useful first to push the knight back. After IS . . .:c7 1 6 tDa4 Sl.b4 1 7 :!ld4 Black has also to exchange his second bishop for a knight, as 1 7 . . . .i.d6? fails to 1 8 !:txd6! �xd6 19 �a3+, when he has great problems. llc7 16 llbc8 17 18

With the black king cut off on the back rank, the rook ending is an easy win.

27

�xe4!

With this exchange White brings his king into play. 27 tDxe4 28 tDc3 �g2 tDd5 lleI 29 30 31 32 18

b5? Of course there was little pleasure i n allowing the opponent enduring control of

both long diagonals, but this abrupt ad­

lUc4

lUc4

�f3

llb4

'it'e8 �f8

43

l:Ia7

llb8

44

'it'g4

b6

45

'it'g8

46

b4 �b5

47

bxg5

e4

48

g6 Black resigns

bx g 5

Game I I

Belyavsky-Taimanov USSR Team Championship Moscow 1979 Sicil ian Defence B46

In the late 1 9705 it was more usual for the

After the preparatory exchange of knights 7 . . .tDxd4 8 'ilfxd4 tDc6 9 'ilff2 bS White succeeds in exploiting the weak­ ening of the dark squares on the queenside: 10 .i.e3 �b7 I I �b6 'Wc8 12 l:Id 1 , and it is hard for Black to coordinate his forces (Vilela-Lebredo, Havana 1 9 84). 8

�

There is no particular point in avoiding the exchange of knights - 8 lLlt3 tDg6 9 0-0 .i.e 7 1 0 e5 .i.b 7 I I .i.d3 llc 8 1 2 a3 tDa5 1 3 lLle4 .i. d5 1 4 tDfg5 .i.c4! and Black is not worse, espec ially as after 8... tDxd4 9 'Wxd4 White has a solid initia­ tive, for example: 9 . . . .i.b7 10 5! tDc6 1 1 'Wf2 with advantage (Gufeld-Taimanov, ' Vilnius 1 975), or 9 ... 'i'c7 10 hl tDc6

II

generation of players bom after the Second

'i'f2 .i.e7 1 2 .i.e3 0-0 1 3 lladl d6 1 4 'i'gJ

l:Ib2

World War to meet their famous older

with the better chances (Tal-Taimanov,

rJ;g7

colleagues in team events, rather than

llc8

tDe7?!

individual ones. This and the fol lowing

4 1 st USSR Championship, Moscow 1 973). 8 .i.b7 9 bl

vance merely extends White's possibilities.

With this move Black allows his knight to be shut out of the game. 34 ... 11b I was a

B lack would have retained the option of

tougher defence.

3S

(6 l:Ie7+

lla8+

32

33 34

41 42

lla7

32 lla8+! rJ;g7 33 l:Ic8 would have saved White a tempo.

After the more modest 1 8 ... b6 1 9 a3 �d6 invading with his rook at c2.

33

Uncompromising Chess

llc2

llbl

game were p layed in the USSR Team Championship of the Union Republics. 1

e4

2

lLlf3

c5 tDc6

Theory considers this prophylactic king move to be the most consistent. 9

tDxd4

34

Uncompromising Chess

liJc6 10 if' xd4 11 if'f2 i.e7 12 i.e3 0-{) Uc8 13 l1ad l If Black prepares ...liJaS-c4 by 13...'i'e8, the queen becomes too passive, and, as recommended by Taimanov him­ self, White can exploit this with 14 i.h5!? followed by f4-fS , when he gains a danger­ ous attack on the kingside.

14

a4

A new idea in this position. Previously 14 �D or 14 i.b6 if'e8 15 i.D was played, but then after 14 ... liJb8, neutral­ ising e4-e5 and planning to play this knight to c5, Black achieves a good game. 14 b4 15 liJ b l 'i' e8 Black parries the threat of transferring the knight to c4 after 1 6 liJd2 liJa5 17 i.d3 by the central counter 1 7 ... dS, but he allows a reply after which White rids himself of the eternal ' Sic ilian' target for attack by B lack - the c2 pawn. Possibly best here was the earlier prescription of I S ... liJb8!? 16 i.d3 (after 1 6 i.b6 'i'e8 17

i.dJ B lack has 1 7 . . . d5) 16...'i'aS 17 b3 i.cs 18 liJd2 i.xe3 19 'i'xe3 'i'c5 with reasonable prospects. c4 16 ' I have to admit that this move came as an unpleasant surprise to me', comments

Taimanov. 'Belyavsky asserts his rights also on the queenside! ' bxc3 16 Black is forced to make this concession. If 16 ... liJaS White has the unpleasant reply 17 liJd2. 17 liJxc3

Uncompromising Chess

24 IS This typical 'Sicilian' conceding of the important e5 square is not supported by any concrete achievements, and therefore it was more logical for White to strengthen his position on the queenside by 24 l1c3, planning to double rooks. liJe5! 24 This occupation of the eS command post costs a pawn, but in the ending after 24...exf5 25 exd5 liJd6 (weak is 2S...i.xd5 26 :hf5 '1Iib7 27 tOc3 i.f7 28 i.e4 '1Iic8 29 liJd5) 26 .)ib6 llxc I 27 !1xc1 'i'e8 28 '1We6+ 'i'f7 29 !1c7 i.xd5 30 'i'xe7 if'xe7 3 1 :'xe7 �xa2 32 �xa6 the connected passed pawns are highly dangerous. 'i'xc7 25 l1xc7

If this position is compared with the previous diagram, the following dif­ ferences, favouring White, are evident: the absence of the pawn from b5 means that there is no eventual threat of . .. b5-b4, neither is there support for the manoeuvre of Black 's knight to c4, and in addition the a6 pawn has been weakened and may become a target. lUa5 17 Here 17...tOb4 was more appropriate. i.d3 f6 18 Preventing e4-e5. 19 'i' e2 l:tc6 20 lUa2 ! Now it becomes clear that White has won the battle on the queenside. 20 'lic8 21 b4 liJc4 22 i.g l After 22 i.xc4 l:txc4 23 llxd7?! Black would seize the initiative by 23 . . . l:tc2 24 l:td2 i.xe4. l:tc7 22 l:tel 23 d5

26 .)ixa6 dxe4 'i'b8 27 .:le I 'i'xb7 28 i.xb7 liJd3 29 fxe6 If immediately 29 ... f5, then White forces the exchange of queens by 30 'i'b5! 'i'xb5 31 axb5, with a clearly better ending. 30 IS l:tc4 31 b5

3S

'lidS 32 'lic2 After 32...liJxe6 33 l:tc6! White makes a decisive invasion. l:tc8! 33 By exchanging rooks White secures a clear road for his passed pawns. 'i'xe6 33 Or 33...liJxe6 34 b6 l:txc8 35 'i'xc8+ liJd8 36 a5! and the pawns break through. i.xfS 34 l:txfS+ e3 b6 35 e2 36 b7 liJg6 37 b8'i' 38 'i' b b3 White should have exchanged a pair of queens by 38 'i'bbl e l 'i' 39 'ilixel 'i'xel 40 'i'xf5, after which it would be the tum of the passed a-pawn. Now, however, Black's resources increase. 38 elif' as liJf4 39

40 'i'cc4? The last move in time trouble, with , which White virtually throws away the fruits of his preceding play. After the COrrect 40 a6! he would have achieved a winning position. �f7? 40 31 tOf4 ? ! By the paradoxical 40 ... �h8 ! , with the Black should have centralised his threat of 4 1 . . . 'i' xg l +! , Black could have pieces more energetically - 31...'i'dS ! 32 saved the position, for example: 4 1 'i'xe6 l:td4 'i'b3 (not 32 ... 'i'xe6? 33 l:txd3) 33 liJxe6 42 'i'e3 'lixe3 43 .i.xe3 l:i:k7 44 .i.f4 J:[d7 i.f6 with unclear consequences.

36

Uncompromising Chess

liJa6 45 �gl �g8 46 � f2 �f7 47 �e3 �e6 48 �d4 .td6!, and, despite the out­ s ide passed pawn, the knight ending after 49 .txd6 q"xd6 may not be won. 41 a6 .te5 42 'fib7+ �g6 43 'fixe5 'fixa2 44 a7 Black resigns The variation that occurred in the follow­ ing game bears the name of my opponent, and although it looks highly risky for Black, Lev Polugayevsky was not afraid to employ it even against the most dangerous m asters of attack.

However, things may not get as far as the development of the bishop at b7. e5 8 dxe5 fxe5 9 'fie7 exf6 10 'fie5+ 11 .te2 'fixg5 0-0 12 The result of the opening duel in this game did not wholly satisfy me, and in the Moscow Super-Grandmaster Tournament of 1 9 8 1 l chose 12 'i'd3 'i'xf6 1 3 J:(fl 'i'eS 14 lldl against Polugayevsky.

Game 1 2 Belyavsky-Polugayevsky USSR Team Championship A1oscow 1979

Sicilian Defence B96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e4 liJf3 d4 liJxd4


e5 d6 exd4 liJf6 a6 e6

b5

It is this early extended fianchetto that characterises the Polugayevsky Variation.

Here Black employed the unsuccessful innovation 14 ...'fic7? 1 5 .th5! g6 1 6 .tf3 lla 7 17 ttJc6
Uncompromising Chess

.bh5 .txgS 2 6 'i'xg5 'fie6+ 2 7 � f2 'fixa2 28 .tf3 liJb4 29 lld2 '1Wxb2 30 'fie3, threatening c2-c3, but later I discovered that 26 . . . 'i'e6 is not the best move, and that instead 26 ...
37

16 0-0 If 1 6 . . .f5 I was planning to continue the attack by 1 7 .thS+ g6 1 8 liJxh7 gxhS 1 9 liJef6+ �f7 20 'i'xhS+ �g7 2 1 llf3, but it transpires that Black has a better defence 1 8 . . . �f7 ! For example, the game Plaskett­ Gallagher (Telford 1 982) continued 1 9 liJhg5+ �g7 20 ttJxcS 'fixcs 2 1 .tf3 and here 2 1 . . . lla7 would have given him the better chances. 17 liJxf7 !

Th is entire operation, beginning with 1 3 tOf3, was prepared beforehand, and gives White the desired m inimal advantage . 17 llxf7 �xf7 llxf7 18 �g8 19 .tb5+ After 1 9 . . .g6 20 liJxcs lla7 2 1 ttJe4 �g7 (2l ...gxhS 22
38

54 bxe4 55 bxe4 'iPxh3 e5 56 ltJb2 ! The knight is ready to deal with the c­ pawn, for which the black h-pawn is a fully worthy opponent. 57 c6 lOa4 58 lOf4+ 'iPg3 h3 59 lOd5 60 h2 e7 hl� 61 e8'i' 62 �e7+

into consideration, depriving White of the main motif associated with h is next move.

21 lOxe6! �b7 After :! \ . . .�xe6? there follows n i. fJ with the double threat o f �xc8 and i.d5, and i f 22 . . . lOb6 White has the dec isive 2 3 �d8+ <j;; f7 24 i.h5+ g6 25 :n +. 22 � f3 � x f3 23 �xf3 .:xe8 24 lOd4 �el+ �b 4 25 �n 26 lO b3 lOf6 c3 27 'i' h 4 28 lOd4 LUg4 29 1Of3 'i'f2 h3 30 �xn+ LUf6 llxn 31

B lack ' s temporary activity has con­ cluded with a prosaic endgame, where for the moment h i s remaining forces are restraining White's queens ide. 32 'iPgl tte2 tta 33 tte3 ttd2 34 LUe4 35 tt d 8+ 'iPf7 36 'iPn ltJc5 37 ttd5 ltJa4 h6 38 ttd2 Now White will try to bring his king to c2 to protect the b2 pawn. lle4! 39 ltJd4 From here the rook controls both wings.

queen approaches using a pretty 'staircase' manoeuvre: 67 'i'a8+ �h2 68 'i'b8+ �g2 69 'i'b7+ 'iPh2 70 �c7+ �g2 7 1 'i'c6+ �h2 72 'i'd6+ �g2 73 �d5+ �h2 74 'i'e5+ �g2 75 'i'e4+ 'it>h2 76 'i'h4+ �g2 77 ltJf4+ �g l 78 'i'e l + 'iPh2 79 'i'f2+ and mate next move (K.Neat). �h2 64 'i'g5+ 64. . .�f2 65 'i'e3+ 'iPg2 66 tUf4+ leads to mate. � gl 65 �h 5+ �h2 66 �d l + 'i'x a4 'i'a1+ 67 �c5 68 'i'cl + �e4 �a3+ 69 70 �d4 'i'b2+ �e4 71 g5 'i'd2 72 � fS a4 as 73 � e4 74 �g3 'i'e3+ �x e3 75 �f3 LUxe3 76 77 �e2 ltJg 4 78 �e4 Black resigns

B l ack has gained the ma.x imum activ ity for his forces and it is not at all easy to find a way of realising the extra pawn. The reader will find playing through this ending highly instructive. 40 tUe2
41

h5!

'.tl e l

O n e senses the hand of a gre a t master.

While

39

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

observing

the

queenside,

Black

paralyses the kingside. 42 h4! '.tl d l B l ack has i n m i n d a possible knight ending and the advance of his k ing. 43 LUeS b3 44 :d4 'iPf6 :xe4 45 LUxe4 46 �e5 'iPe2 At the observation post the rook has been replaced by the king. 47 �d3 ltJf2+ 48 'iPe3 LUd l+ 49 'iPd2 LUa 50 �f4 liJd4 This is where the advance of the hpawn comes in useful. 51 �g3 ltJe 6+ 52 LUd l+ �e3 53 'iPd4 �xg2 e4 54 In a knight ending, as in a pawn ending, the main energy is embodied in a passed pawn.

62 'iP h 4 ? After conducting a bri lliant defence, Polugayevsky goes wrong and 'ties' his king to his queen, which costs him his knight. After 62 ... 'iPf2! 63 'i'c2+ 'iPg3 it is not apparent how White can strengthen his position. 'iPg3 63 'i'd8+ Other moves are no better: (a) 63 ... 'iPg4 64 ltJe3+, when White's queen and knight combine in a decisive attack: 64 . . . 'iPg3 65 'i'g5+ �f2 66 ltJg4+ �g2 67 ltJe5+ �fl 68 'i'c I + �g2 69 'i'c2+ 'iPg3 70 'i'd3+ �f2 (or 70 ... 'iPf4 7 1 'i'e3+ 'iPf5 7 2 'i'f2+ �g5 7 3 'i'g3+ 'iPf6 74 'i'g6+ �e7 75 'i'f7+ and mate next move) 7 1 liJg4+ 'iPg2 72 'i'e4+ �gl 73 'i'e l + �g2 74 ltJe3+ etc. (b) 63 ... 'iPh3 64 'i'b8+ �g2 65 ltJf4+ �gl 66 ttJe2+ �g2, and now the white

I

As it soon transpi red, a win against Garry Kasparov was to prove especially honour­ able. Everyone l ikes to have in his 'service record' a victory over a World Champion. But this became clear only later, and in 1 979 he was just 16 years old and not everyone could guess that from his second USSR Championship Garry would begin his ascent to the top. As for myself, I was simply aiming for revenge after my defeat in the previous Championship. Game 1 3 Belyavsky-Kasparov -17th USSR Championship Minsk 1979

Modem Benoni A 75

d4

ltJf6

40

Uncompromising Chess

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

c4 d5 lLlc3 cxd5 e4 �e2 lLlf3 a-o

c5 e6 exd5 d6 g6 �g7 a-o

This system of play for White fully deserves to bear the name of G l igoric, ",ho employed it for many years. �g4 9 At that time Kasparov had not only a l iking for this pin, but also great successes with it, whereas theory gave preference to 9 . . . Jle8. An interesting game with thi s latter move w as Belyavsky-Velimirovic (Moscow Interzonal 1982), which con­ tinued 1 0 lLld2 a6 I I a4 lLlbd7 12 f4 c4 1 3 � h I lLlc5 1 4 e 5 dxe5 1 5 fxe5 !txe5 1 6 llJxc4 !te8 1 7 �g5 h6 1 8 �h4 lLlce4 1 9 d 6 g5 20 � e I �e6 2 1 lLlxe4 lLlxe4 22 .i.a5 �xc4 23 �xd8 �xe2 24 d7 !te6 25 �xe2 and B lack resigned. However, it should be mentioned that, without the inclusion of 1 0 . . . a6 1 1 a4, the plan chosen by White is not so effective. 10 ..tf4 I later became interested in the plan with 10 ..tg5 (Tigran Petrosian's favourite way of opposing Indian set-ups). For example, the game Belyavsky-Kudrin

(Wij k aan Zee 1 985) continued 10 . . . h6 I I ..tf4 a6 1 2 a4 lLlh5 1 3 ..te3 lLld7 1 4 as �xf3 15 �xf3 lLlhf6 16 ..te2 ne8 17 f3 lLlhS 1 8 'i'd2 'i'h4 1 9 lU2! �h7 20 g4 and White soon won. tte8 10 In the game Belyavsky-Romanishin (Wijk aan Zee 1 985), where the moves 9 ... a6 1 0 a4 were included, after 10 . . . ..tg4 1 1 �f4 Black attacked the bishop with I I . .. lLlh5, but after 12 �g5 � f6 1 3 Jl.e3 �xf3 14 �xf3 lLlg7 15 ..tg4 .l:l.e8 16 'tic2 lLld 7 1 7 as lLleS 18 �e2 llb8 19 lLlb 1 h5 20 lLld2 lLlg4 2 1 �xg4 hxg4 22 tCc4 White's threats looked more significant. In play without the participation of the a-pawns, nowadays Black prefers 10 . . . �xf3 I I ..txf3 lLle8, opening up his bishop in a new and sharp strategic situation. �xe2 lLld2 11 12 "xe2 lLlb5 13 ..te3 liJd7 If 1 3 ... �d4 there can follow 14 ..txd4 cxd4 I S lLlbS 'i'b6 16 a4! with the threat of ttJc4. It will be apparent that, with the inclusion of 9 . . . a6 1 0 a4, the bishop move to d4 would gain in strength. a6 a4 14 15 a5 Such a move is usually made auto­ matically, but 1 5 g4 liJhf6 1 6 h3 is also possible, retaining a definite advantage.

Uncompromising Chess

15 "b4 1 5 ...�d4 1 6 11a4! �f6 1 7 "d3 is good for White. After a more restrained dev­ elopment of the queen, White drives back the knight, gaining a sign ificant spatial advantage: (a) 1 5 ... 'i'c7 1 6 g4 lLlhf6 1 7 f3 lLle5 1 8 �h l .l:l.ac8 1 9 lla4 h 5 2 0 g 5 lLlh7 2 1 f4 with an attack (Gligoric-Miles, Hastings 1 973/4 ) ; (b) 1 5 ... 'i'e7 1 6 llac l ( 1 6 g4?! is too early in v iew of 1 6 . . . �xc3 17 bxc3 lLlhf6 1 8 �gS 'i'eS ) 1 6 ... nf8 1 7 g4 lLlhf6 1 8 f4. 16 lLlc4 Serious consideration should be given to 16 .l:l.a4 lLle5 1 7 f3! lLl f4 1 8 �xf4 'tixf4 1 9 g3 'i'f6 (or 1 9 . . . 'i'h6 20 f4 followed by lLlc4) 20 f4 lLld7 2 1 e5 ! dxeS 22 lLlde4 'i'd8 23 f5 with a strong initiative for White (Naumkin-Minasian, Moscow 1 992). lLlf4 16 Black continues the pressure on the dark squares and creates the threat of 1 7 . . . lLlxg2 !, which follows after 1 7 'tid2 or 1 7 'i'd l . 17 'i'f3 White played more radically in the game Plaskett-Pritchett (England 1 983): 1 7 �xf4!? "xf4 1 8 g3 �f6 1 9 f4 'tie 7, and here he could have developed a dangerous initiative with the typical breakthrough 20 e5! dxe5 2 1 f5 e4 22 d6. 17 lLle5 B lack has to exchange the opponent's 'central attacker' - the knight at c4. ..txe5 18 lLlxe5 19 g3 �b5 20 �xb5 lLlxb5 ..tg7 21 lLla4 By his exchanging operation Black has equalised. Here 2 1 ...lLlf6 also came into consideration, in order after 22 f3 lLld7 to cover the weak b6 square, but he would have had to reckon with the pawn sacrifice 22 lLlb6!? .t:I.ad8 23 f3 .i.xb2 24 .l:l.ab I .i.c3

41

25 lLlc4 with unpleasant pressure on the queenside weaknesses.

f3 fS 22 n a b8 lLlb6 23 After 23 .. Jhd 8 ! 24 �g5 ..txb2 25 �xd8 ..txa l 26 �c7 ..td4+ 27 '1t;>g2 fxe4 28 fxe4 lLlf6 29 ..txd6 lLlxe4 30 �c7 the white d-pawn looks dangerouy, but with 30 ... ..te5! (simpler than 30 . . . lLld2 3 1 .l:l.f4) 31 ..txe5 :txe5 3 2 !te I !te8 B lack can e ffectively neutralise its advance. 24 lLlc4

fxe4? 24 Kasparov overestimates this exchang­ ing operation in the centre, as after the elimination of his d-pawn he will have to contend with a passed e-pawn. He should have restricted himself to defence with 24 ... .I:I.bd8 25 .i.g5 .i.f6.

42

25 26

lOxd6 lOc4

33 34 35

l::t e d8 Ihd5

It stands to reason that i f 26 . . . exf3 White would have defended his passed

lOxe6 .i.d8 lOxc7 .i.xc7 l::t d l Black resigns

pawn - 27 %tad I .

27

fxe4

43

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

The year of 1 980 was one o f the m ost successful i n my chess career, and was

13

game against me, and after 16 . . . .i.cS+ 1 7

b3

White's last move prepares a change i n the central pawn structure with d4-d5 fol lowed by c3-c4. Th i s is especially good

�h2 Ilxe4 1 8 1Oxe4 dxe4 1 9 .i.e3 .i.xe3 2 0

for

threat of . . . l::t d 2) 2 1 . . . lOxe3 22 '1i'xd8+ Ilxd8 23 .i.xb7 as 24 .i.c6 .trd l 25 llxd l lOxd 1 26 b4 the game was eq ual.

him

if B lack

plays

1 3 . . . .i.g7,

as

subsequently a l l the same he will have to aim for counterplay on the queenside with

Ilxe3 lOd5 2 1 .i.xe4 ( n o t 2 1 .trxe4 because of 2 1 . . .lOxc3 22 '1i'xd8+ Ilxd8 with the

crowned by my second gold medal i n the

. . . c7-c6, and then after dxc6 the d6 pawn

However, things would have been more

USSR Championship Prem ier League. But

is more likely to become a target for

d i fficult for m e if White had played 1 7

before that there was victory i n the First

attack . However, i n t h e present game White's

�h l .

League.

idea encounters a refutation. A fter the immed iate 1 3 d5 B lack gains an important

Game 1 4

Tseshko\'SI,.-y-Belyavsky USSR Championship First Leag ue Tashkent 1980

27

�d7

although B l ack can immediate ly restore

2 3 4 5

material equal ity by 30 . . . .i.d4+ 3 1 .i.xd4

6

�xd4 32 :'c I :lxe4, his kn ight is offside and the ending is lost. For example, 3 3

7 8

lOd6 :'b4 (or 3 3 . . . !:te2 3 4 b4 .i!b2 3 5 :lc8+

9

After 27 ... :::r. d 3 the c5 pawn fal l s : 28 !:ad I ':bd8 29 J:xd3 :'xd3 3 0 .i.xc 5 . and

�g7 36 l::t c 7+ �h6 37 :xb7 lO f6 38 b5 axb5 3 9 a6 b4 40 a7 :la2 4 1 'Llc8 and 42 :lb8) 34 :'c8+ �g7 3 5 :'c 7+ �f6 3 6 J:xb7.

28

e5

Parrying the threat o f 2 9 g4.

29

l::t a d 1

.ll b d8

Now the e5 pawn begins advancing. It could have been blocked only at the cost of a pawn: 2 9 . . . .:xd l 3 0 l::tx d l � f7 3 1 l::td 7+ 'i>e6 3 2 .llx h7, but perhaps this was the best chance.

30 31

!:txd7 e6

.ll x d7 .ll c 7

.i.xb5 1 8 'Llc4 'Lla6 1 9 .i.g5 lOb4 20 lOe3 .i.e7 2 1 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 22 a3 lOxc2 23 '1i'xc2,

e�

e5

and after Karpov's recom mendation o f

ttJD .i. b 5

lOc6

2 3 . . . lle7 !

a6

sufficient cou n terplay against the b3 pawn

�a� 0--{) :leI .ib3

lO f6

by . . . !:tb7 and . . . llab8) 1 6 . . . lObd7 1 7 .i.g5

.i.e7 b5 d6

.i.e7 1 8 .i.e3 '1i'c7 1 9 l::te l l::t e c8 20 .i.d3 bxc4 2 1 bxc4 .i.a6 22 lle2 l::t a b8 23 llec2 '1i'b7 24 :'c3 '1i'a8 25 lOg3 .i.d8 26 1la3

c3

O-n

:lb4 27

h3

.i.b7

Karpov-Belyavsky

A t that t i m e the Zaitsev Variation was

12

match, 1 994, went 1 6 dxc6 .i.xc6 1 7 cxb5

Ruy Lopez C92

my main weapon against 1 e4.

10 11

tempo: 1 3 . . . ttJb8 14 b3 c6 1 5 c4 as 1 6 lOfi (the 5th game of the A nand-Kamsky

d� lObd2 .i.c2

lOg7

lOe I , and here (50th

in

gained

the game

USSR

Cham­

!:te8

1 9 83 I played 1 2 . . g6 against Bronstein and

.i. tS

Klovans at the tournament in Minsk, and

g6

scored one and a half points from the two games, but even so my fee ling was that 12 .. g6 does not solve B lack's opening

and

pressure on

d5!

the

long

dark-square

diagonal.

.i.xe4 .i. b2 '1i'c2 b4

17 18 19 20 find

it

hard

'Llxe4 .i.g7 '1i'f6

c5 to

explain

why

Tseshkovsky fol lowed the same course as Rodriguez.

21

13

Ilxe4!

16

For the exchange B l ack gains a pawn

problems. The

bxc5

afore-mentioned

game

with

This move was introduced b y m e i n a

'Rodriguez went 2 1 llab I .c6 22 .d3 llc8

game with Am.Rodriguez at the tourna­ ment in Bogota in 1 979. It intends the

23 lle2 h6, beginn i n g the far from obvious

following exchange sacrifice.

aim of forc ing White to take on c5.

14 15 16 At

.i.g5

have

pionship, Moscow 1 9 83) Black could have

lOxe6 34 l::ta 7 the game is decided by the

32

would

achieved good play with 27 . . . hS. Later in

After 3 1 ... !:td5 32 .ll n lOg7 3 3 :xb7 passed a-pawn.

B l ack

dxe5 lOxe5

lOxe5 l::t x e5

1Of3

Ti lburg 1 986 Robert HUbner prepared the more dangerous 16 f4 for his

manoeuvre of the queen to h8, with the The game continued 24 l::tc I .c7 25 llcc2 vtie7 26 .i.a3 (after 26 a3 'i>h7 Black would have continued the plan indicated) 26 ....f6 27 .i.b2 'i>h7 28 vtie3 9d8 (with the threat of 29 . . .
44

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

ltJd4 lic7 3 1 D ltJg3 3 2 J:r.ed2 11c4 3 3 lid3 �c8! , and Black's compensation was sufficient for his position to be preferred. 21 ltJxe5 J:r.e8 J:r.e2 22 ltJe4 J:r.ae I 23 iib6 24 lid3 25 ltJd4 b5 �a l 26

White is tied to the defence of the c3 pawn and is obliged to await further events, since any activity will only worsen h i s position. But for a player of such aggressive style as Vitaly Tseshkovsky, this is equivalent to torture, and within a few moves he decides to transfer his bishop to an 'active' position, where it is in fact lost. 26 J:r.e4 27 ltJc2 lie7 28 tLle3 J:r.e5 ltJdl �r6 29 lie6 30 �b2 J:r.c4 31 �a3 �b4 32 White should keep his bishop at b2. It i s not clear that Black is definitely winning, but any player would prefer to have the black pieces. �b7 32 .c7 a3 33 as 34 ltJe3

35 36 37 38 39 40 41

�x d5 tLlxd5 lixd5 axb4 llxe4 J:r.xe4 J:r.xe4 bxc3 'We5 lid ! �g S 'WeI 'Wal f6 White resigns

The Prem ier League of the 48th USSR Championship, which commenced towards the end of 1980, had an unusual finish. Before the last round Artur Yusupov had five adjourned games, and given a favour­ able outcome in them, he could become have champion of the country. But this did not happen. A fter a 1 4-hour battle I managed to draw a difficult ending against him and to reduce the deficit to half a point. Only playing for a win in the last round against Naum Rashkovsky gave me chances of catching the leader. My task was eased by the fact that my opponent too was keen to win, as in this case he would retain his place in the next Premier League, without having to go through the qualifying competitions. However, fortune smiled on me, and when in addition Artur lost, I for the second time won the title of USSR Champion. On this occasion it was in tandem with the rapidly progressing Lev Psakhis. Game 1 5 Rasbkovsky-Belyavsky 48th USSR Championship Vilnius 198011

Catalan Opening E04 1 2 3 4 5 6

ltJf3 c4 g3 d4

.i.g2

"a4+

tLlf6 e6

d5 dxc4 c5

45

J:r.fxc I llb8 1 7 e4! and White gained some advantage in the endgame. 7 �d7 dxe5 8 Rashkovsky' s tournament situation forces him to deviate from the theoretical 8 'i'xc4 b5 9 lid3 J:r.cS, where Black has no particular problems. Besides, the exchange on cS is also in the spirit of the Catalan Opening, as with the clearing of the centre the role of the g2 bishop becomes more important. At the present time this continuation has gone out of use in favour of 6 0-0 tLlc6 7 tLle5 �d7 8 tLla3 cxd4 9 ltJaxc-l, which I chose in two games from the 1 988 World Cup: (a) 9 ... �c5 10 'i'b3 0-0 I I �f4 'Wc8 12 :fd l J:r.d8 13 J:r.ac l tLld5 14 tLlxf7 �x.f7 1 5 tLle5+ ltJxe5 16 �xeS b6, after which Black parried the attack and within a few moves a draw was agreed (Belyavsky­ A.Sokolov, Brussels 1 988); (b) 9 .. J:tc8 10 'i'b3 ltJxeS I I ltJxe5 �d6 12 �f4 �c6 13 �xe6+ bxc6 14 lia4 lic7 I S lixd4 and White gained an advantage, which he was able to convert into a Win (Belyavsky- Yusupov, Belfort ( 988). 6 tLlc6 Not yet known then was Korchnoi's idea of 6 ... �d7!, which he 'published' in his Candidates Match with Kasparov (London 1 983). After 7 lixc4 �c6 8 dxcS ltJbd7 9 �e3 �dS 10 lia4 �c6 1 1 'i'c4 �dS 1 2 lib4 lic8 1 3 ltJc3 �xcS 1 4 �xcS 'i'xcs Black achieved an excellent game. 7 � In this same Championship I also played this variation with White, but I preferred 7 dxcS �xcS 8 0-0. My game with Balashov continued 8 . . . 0-0 9 lixc4 lidS 10 ltJfd2 'i'xc4 I I tLlxc4 ltJd4 1 2 ltJc3 �b4 1 3 e3 �xc3 1 4 bxc3 ltJe2+ IS �h I tLlxc I 1 6

tLle5 8 In turning to unexplored paths, I was relying more on fate than on concrete analysis. The main continuation is con­ sidered to be S . . . ltJaS 9 'i'c2 �xcS 1 0 ltJe5 :tcS I I �g5 (after 1 1 ltJc3 ltJc6 1 2 ltJxc4 0-0 1 3 :td l B lack equalises by I L . ltJd4 or 1 3 ... lie7) I I . ..h6 1 2 �xf6 gxf6 1 3 lOxd7 'i'xd7 when, despite th e weakening of his pawn structure, Black retains sufficient counterplay: (a) 14 tLlc3 'i'c7 1 5 J:r.fd l 0-0 1 6 ltJe4 �e7 1 7 'i'c3 'i'eS I S J:r.d4! �g7 1 9 J:r.ad l J:r.fdS 20 :txdS l:txdS 2 1 l:txd8 lixc3 22 bxc3 �xd8 23 ltJd6 and White's initiative compensates for the sacrificed pawn, but that is all (Polugayevsky-Kupreichik, Moscow 19S3); (b) 1 4 ltJd2 �e7 I S ltJe4 'i'c7 16 f4 (1 6 l:tad I ! ? also comes into consideration)

46

Uncompromising Chess

1 6 ... f5 1 7 'l'c3 ng8 with a double-edged game (Fominykh-Morozev ich, A lushta 1 993). 'iWc2 9 'Ox f3 + �xf3 10 '1IVc8 Black invites a m iddlegame with opposite-colour bishops, where the attacking side's bishop is always stronger, as it has no opponent. IO".�xc5 I I �xb7 :b8 1 2 iLg2 .:rc8 1 3 �g5 h6 14 �xf6 1!t'xf6 1 5 'Od2, leavi n g White with h i s l ight-square bishop, wou l d have been playing into h i s hands. 11 iLe3 1 1 'Od2 �xc5 1 2 'Oxc4 came I nt O consideration, with pressure in the centre. 11 �xc5

12 .1xb7 Rashkovsky is eager for a fight, otherwise he would have restricted himself to 1 2 �xc5 'i'xc5 13 �xb7 .:rb8 14 �g2 �, which would have been much less interesting. 12 'i'xb7 ..txc5 13 ::rc8 It is usefu l to reduce the bishop' s scope, as after 1 3".h5? 1 4 'Od2! J:r.c8 15 'Oxc4 'Wd5 16 b4! Black has no compensation for the pawn. After the pseudo-active 1 3 " .'i'd5 14 b4 ..tc6 15 f3 0-0-0 1 6 lDc3 the black king would have been in greater danger than on its original square.

Uncompromising Chess

h5 ..taJ 14 A standard way of attacking the 'fian­ chetto' pawn structure, which becomes even more effective in the absence of the bishop. White is forced to make an additional weakening of his king's defences. h4 15

'iWe4! 15 B lack must hurry to occupy the key posts, otherv.. ise, with his king unable to castle, he may have problems after the white knight comes into play. Of course, here Rashkovsky could have gone into a roughly equal ending by 1 6 'lixe4 'Oxe4 1 7 'Oc3, but I had n o doubts about his frame of m ind, especially. as there is an objective reason for White to hope for success my dubious king position. 16 'Wd2 .i.c6 17 'lie5 f3 18 �f2 If 1 8 .i.d6 there would have followed 1 8 . . . 'Wf5, threatening to p i n the bishop by 1 9 . . . 11d8. lld8 18 The rook is transferred to a more functional position, where it not only controls the d-fiIe, but also participates in the defence of the king. 19 'Wb4 lld7 -

47

21 Black brings u p his reserves. 2 1 ".g5 22 llxd7 .1xd7 would have been inadequate on account of 23 'iWc3, while the exchange of rooks would have allowed the white queen to penetrate to d6. 22 llxd7

20 J:r. d l ? This obvious move proves t o be a mistake, but winning a pawn by 20 '1't'xc4? �b5 2 1 '1Ir'c2 g5 22 hxg5 h4! could also have boomeranged on White. However, Rashkovsky found the correct solution later, and demonstrated it in his game with Smirin (Nikolaev 1 983): 20 'iWc5 ! '1Ir'xc5+ 21 �xc5. After the exchange of queens the c4 pawn is weak, and Black sti l l has to spend time developing his king's rook. The game continued 2 1 . . . J:r.c7 22 �d6 .l:b7 23 .1a3 �d7 24 J:r.d 1 + �c8 25 J:r.c I .1bS 26 b3 J:r.c7 27 .1d6 :::' c6 28 'Oa3 and White won a pawn. a5! 20 'WeI 21 The queen has to retrea!, as if 2 1 'lixc4 J:r.xd I 22 'Wxc6+ �d8! (after 22".:::'d 7 23 'i'c8+ :'d8 24 'Wc6+ Black has to agree to a draw with 24".J:r.d7, as 24 . . . 'Od7 25 'Oc3 'i'd4+ 26 �g2 'Wb6 27 'Wa4 f6 28 lld l leaves White with a clear advantage) 23 'i'a8+ (or 23 �c5 lDd7 24 'Was+ 'i'b8 25 'Wxa5+ �e8, and White has the problem of how to develop his queenside) 23 ".�d7! (but not 23".�c7? 24 'Wa7+ �c8 25 'Od2! lha l 26 lDc4 'Oe4+ 27 �e3 ! when White neatly turns the tables) 24 'Wb7+ (after 24 'i'x.h8 'Wd4+ 25 e3 'Og4+ 26 fxg4 'Wf6+ there is a forced mate) 24".'Wc7 with a clear advantage to Black.

'Og4+! 22 �f1 23 23 fxg4 is not possible in view of 23 . . . 11f6+ 24 �g l 'iWe3+ 25 �h2 'uf2+, but White could have defended with 23 �g I ! 'i'e3+ 24 �f1 (but not 24 �g2 �xf3+!) 24...�xd7 25 lDd2 !H6 26 'ud l , when, despite Black's pressure, there appears to be nothing decisive. 23 �xd7?! An error that v irtually throws away the win, as White manages to 'plug' the holes in his leaky kingside. Of course the check 23".'Oe3+! should have been interposed, but here we were already in severe time trouble. e4 24 Defending against the threat of . . . lDe3c2. 'Wf6 24 25 �e2? With his flag about to fall, Rashkovsky misses 25 �g2! 'Oe5 26 'i'f2 llg6 (after 26."lLld3 27 'Wa7! 'Oe l + 28 �f2 Black has to take a draw by 28".'i'xf3+ 29 �e 1

48

Uncompromising Chess

�xe4+ etc., as i f 2 8 . . . lOc2 29 eS! and he is i n danger of losing) 27 lOd2 with possibilities of a defence.

25 26 27 28

"iWd4 ! llf6! fx g 4 'i'd3+ lOd2 �a4+ 'iti>dl White resigns

As regards the strength of the participants, the Moscow Tournament of 1 98 1 can be compared with the tournaments staged in the Soviet capital in 1 92 5 , 1 93 5 and 1 93 6 . Especially memorable among m y meetings with the strongest players in the world were my games with Tal and Portisch. Game 1 6 Portisch-Belyavsky Moscow 1981

Queen's Gambit 037

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

c4 1Oc3 d4 lOn �f4 e3 dxc5 �c2 %td l a3

e6 d5 �e7 lOf6 �

c5 �xc5 lOc6 �a5 � e7

11 12 13

Uncompromising Chess

lOd2 �g5 lOb3

e5 d4

'i'd8 13 Recently I have also played this varia­ tion as White. In Madrid 1995 San Segundo played 13 . . . '1t'b6 against me, and after 1 4 �xf6 �xf6 1 5 lOd5 'i'd8 1 6 �d3 g6 1 7 exd4 lOxd4 1 8 li)xd4 exd4 1 9 li)xf6+ 'i'xf6 20 0-0 .td7 2 1 :d2 :ac8 22 b3 .ic6 23 ':Hd I :fd8 Black gained equal chances. 14 .te2 It is useful for White to complete his development. After 1 4 exd4 tUxd4 I S lOxd4 exd4 1 6 tUbS he has to reckon with the resource 16 . . . .tg4 ! ? 1 7 ttxd4 :le8 (threatening a ' discovered' mate) 1 8 .te3 'i'b6 1 9 .td3 .icS with sharp play (Piket­ Van der Sterren, Lyon Zonal 1 990).

14 as! The idea of this move, which involves a pawn sacrifice, belongs to Yefim Geller. 15 exd4 The blockading I S lOa4 is more danger­ ous for Black: I S . . . g6 (how Black should not play is demonstrated by the game Yusupov-Belyavsky, Montpellier 1 985, which went IS ... �g4? 16 0-0 �xe2 1 7 'i'xe2 %te8 1 8 cS 'i'c7 1 9 �xf6 �xf6 20 lOb6 llad8 21 e4, when he had no counterplay) 16 �xf6 �xf6 17 0-0 �g7 1 8 cS 'i'h4 19 e4 �e6 20 �d3 , and here instead of 20 ... fS 21 lOd2 %tfl 22 %tde I :afB 23 lOc4 fxe4 24 %txe4 �gS 2S h4 �e7 26 lOd6 11f4 27 �c4, when the exchange of bishops allowed White to set up a light-square blockade (Shneider­ Kruppa, Podolsk 1 9 89), Shneider recom­ mends 20 . . . �h6 2 1 lOd2 �g4 22 :de l �f4 23 g3 �hS 24 gxf4 �f3 2S lOxf3 'i'g4+ with a draw by perpetual check. 15 a4 The a-pawn is sacrificed, but the white knight becomes badly placed. 16 lOxd4 lOxa4 1 6 ... !ha4 is bad because of 1 7 dS li)aS 18 d6 .ixd6 19 lDc s . 17 lOxd4 exd4 b3 18 If 1 8 0-0 there would have followed 1 8 . . . �aS 1 9 �xf6 �xf6 20 b3 .td7 with an equal game. 18 �a5+ 19 .td2 In my annotations to this game, against 19 �d2 I recommended 19 . . . .txaJ 20 �xaS ttxa5 2 1 .txf6 .tb4+ 22 �fl gxf6 23 :lxd4 %te8 with equal play. Later in the I I th game of the Korchnoi-Karpov match (Merano 1 9 8 1 ) B lack preferred 23 ... %te5 ! 2 4 g4 b5 when h e gained sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn. 1 9 ... 'WfS is also interesting, when after 20 �f4?! 'Wc2 he has the initiative.

49

.t f5 ! 19 'i'e5 20 'i'b2 .tb 4 21 2 1 �e3 can be answered by 2 1 . . . �xa3 . 21 .txb4+ 11fe8 axb4 22 %txd4 .te2 ! 23 Before White can consolidate, B lack makes use of h i s initiative to regain the sacrificed material, remaining with a slight positional advantage. 24 %td2 .txb3 'i'a1 + 'i'xb 3 25 'i'dl 'i'xd 1 + 26 %txa4 %txdl 27

28 n White should have considered 28 g3, with the aim of playing his king to g2, where it is more securely p laced.

50

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

28 l:[x b 4 �f2 29 l:[b2 l::t h el 30 g6 �n?! 31 of White's cause The primary subsequent difficulties. After 3 1 l:[d3 with the idea of :re3 the position would have been equal. 31 liJh5 32 liJg7 g3 33 nd7 liJe6 34 lled l

1 9 8 1 was made a memorable year for me by my victory in Tilburg, where, apart from Karpov and Korchnoi, who were playing their match for the World Championship in Merano, all the strongest players in the world competed. Among them was the 1 8-year-old Garry Kasparov, who at the end of that year was to become USSR Champion for the first time. Before the l ast round, Petros ian, Timman and I were leading. Tigran, as was his habit, agreed a quick draw, since he used to consider that a tournament should be won before the last round. Timman and I battled it our in what was then a fashionable variation of the Sicilian Defence, which was soon to lose its attraction.

10 is 1 0 e5 is also sometimes played here, although without particular success. 10 liJc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 liJxc6 bxc6 13 eS dxeS 14 �xf6 gxf6 15 liJe4 � e7 16 � e2 hS nb 3 'i'a4 17 18 � x f6 liJxf6+ c4 19

Game 1 7 Belyavsky-Timman Ti/burg 1981

Sicilian Defence B97

34 liJd4! I f 34 ... 8f4 there would have followed 35 ::'d8 ::'bxe2 36 gxf4 with an easy draw. Now, however, White is obliged either to allow the invasion of his 2nd rank by both rooks, or to sacrifice the exchange by 3 5 l:[xb7 ::'xb7 3 6 :!xd4 l:[b2, which also fails to save the game. l:[ lxd4 35 :rexe2 l:[xb7 36 l:[f2+ �gl 37 l:[g2+ �hl 38 l:[xh2+ �gl 39 l:[bg2+

�n 40 l:[c2 �gl 41 l:[hg2+ J:gf2+ �n 42 Now if 43 �g I there follows 43 . . . l:lxD 44 g4 l1a3 45 J:b 1 l:la4, winning White's remaining pawns. White resigns.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e4 liJf3 d4 liJxd4 tOc3 � g5 f4 'Wd2 .ct b l

c5 d6 cxd4 �f6 a6 e6

'i'b6 'i'xb2 'Wa3

By his piece sacrifice White has exposed the enemy king, and it is not easy for B lack to defend it without losing material. I already had some experience of playing this position. Early that year, i n the compelltlon for four USSR teams, Mikhalchishin played 1 9 ... c5 against me, and after 20 0--0 'Wd7 2 1 'i'xd7+ �xd7 22 :rxf6
51

went wrong with 25 . . . d7 25 'i'd4+ �d6 26 'iWa7+ �d8 27 l:[xc8+ �c8 28 'i'xh7 �c5+, and B lack stood better.

21 'We3 From here the queen controls the important dark squares. Timman decides to return the piece so as to activate his queen. 21 "xa2 'Wal+ l:lxf6 22 .tn 23 .ctg7 B lack could have put up a tougher defence with 23 ... 'i'd4, pinning his hopes on saving the endgame, although his

52

numerous pawns islands would have been easy prey for the white pieces. 24 25 26 27

l:rb8

�e7

l:rf2

'i'd4

'i'D

e4

'i'f4 llg4 I f 27 ....l:I.d8 White wins by 28 'i'c7+ 'i'd7 29 'i'e5.

same idea (the second occasion was three years later). 1 2 3

4 5

6 7

e4

d4 It:lc3 It:lxe4 It:lg3 h4 It:lfJ

c6 d5 dxe4

� fS �g6 h6

but after 10 �xh7 It:lxh7 I I 'i'e2 e6 12 �d2 �e7 1 3 0-0-() 'i'b6 1 4 It:leS l:td8 I S l:rhe l 0--0 1 6 It:lg6! (the 198 1 theme!) 16 . . . l:rfe8 17 It:lxe7+ .t!.xe7 1 8 It:lfS l:ree8 19 It:ld6 White gained a positional advan­ tage, which he converted into a win. 10 11

'i'xd3

12

�

It:lgf6

�f4 e6 At that time Black was not averse to castling on the kings ide. Nowadays he prefers to hide his king on the opposite side, and he prepares to castle long with the manoeuvre 1 1 ... 'i'a5+ 12 �d2 'i'c7.

It:ld7

The most critical plan. After 1 2 0--0 �e7 I J c4 0--0 14 l:tfe l l:re8 I S l:!.ad l it is easier for Black to gain counterplay. Thus Renet-Tukmakov (Budapest 1 996) con­ tinued I s . . . 'i'aS 16 a3 bs! 17 c5 lt:ld5 with sharp play. 15 . . .'i'b6 is also good. 12 28

'i'c7+

'i'd7?

28 . . . �d7 was a tougher defence, although after 29 :xh8 'i'xh8 30 ':d2 'i'd8 (30 . . . 'i'c8 3 1 Wd6+ �e8 32 :'b2 and White wins) 3 1 We5 :'g8 32 'i'c5+ White stands clearly better: Blac k ' s king is still exposed and all his pawns are weak. 29

l:rxc8

'i'xc7

Or 29 . . ..:xc8 30 :f7+. 30 31 32 33 34

�d6 l:rxc7+ l:ta7 e3 l:te2 .t!.e4 l:rxa6 �c5 l:raJ Black resigns Game 1 8 Belyavsky-Larsen Tilburg 198 1

Caro-Kann Defence B 19 My game with Bent Larsen was also memorable. It rarely happens that one i s able t o beat a n opponent twice using the

13 8

b5

Nowadays this move is made without thinking, but before the 1 966 Petrosian­ Spassky World Chanlpionship Match it was thought that the advance of the pawn to h5 would merely cause White additional problems over its defence. Spassky linked this move with the idea of playing the knight to e5, and was able to show that, after its exchange, the pawns at eS and h5, . blockading Black's kingside, secure White an enduring territorial advantage. And al­ though Botvinnik, following with a certain jealousy the play of his successor, remar­ ked: 'Not much progress has been made [n chess, if thirty years of research has resulted in a pawn being moved from h4 to h5', the superior path had been paved. 8 �h7 9

53

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

�d3

�xd3

Three years later in the USSR v. Rest of the World Match (London 1984) Larsen experimented against me with 9 . lDgf6?!, ..

lfJe5

The point of the sacrifice i s to disrupt the coordination of B lack's queen and knight, as after 2 1 . . . dxd5 22 'i'xe5 gxh6 (22 . . . f6 23 'i'xe6+ .t!.f7 24 h7+) 23 l:txh6 f6 24 'i'xe6+ .t!.f7 25 It:lh5 White has a winning attack . But, unfortunately, B lack is not obliged to take the rook, and the prosaic 2 1 ... .t!.xd5 22 cxd5 'i'xd5 23 hxg7 �xg7 proved sufficient only for a draw. When we concluded peace, we had in m ind a pretty variation that remained off-stage: 24 It:lh5+! g6! 25 It:lf4+! gxf4 26 Wh5+ �f6 27 'i'h4+ �f5 28 'i'h5+, and B lack has to settle for a draw, as after 28 . . . e4 29 'i'e2+ d4 30 :d 1 + c5 3 1 .t!.xd5+ �xdS 32 'i'd2+ he loses material, since both his rook and knight are unprotected. !4

.t!.be!

15

It:lg6!

a4?

�e7 as?!

At the Moscow super-Tournament of grandmasters in 1 98 1 , Tal played 13 ... 0--0 against me, and since the subsequent play was marked by such a pretty creative discovery, I cannot deny myself the pleasure of showing it to the reader: 1 4 'i'e2 'i'aS I S b l l:rad8 1 6 c4 It:lxe5 17 dxe5 lDd7 1 8 .t!.d2 �g5 ! 19 �xg5 hxg5 20 h6 It:lxe5 ! (20...'i'xe5? loses to 21 h7+ h8 22 .t!.xd7! 'i'xe2 23 .t!.xd8) 2 1 .t!.dS ! !

Compared with our game in 1 984, mentioned in the note to B lack's 9th move, this move looks even more effective. White is threatening not only the capture of the rook, but also the leap of his other knight to £5, as occurs in the game. Black cannot accept the offer in view of 1 5 ... fxg6 16 'i'xg6+ f8 1 7 .t!.xe6 'i'e8 18 .t!.de I 'i'xg6 1 9 hxg6 �b4 (if 1 9 ...:te8 there follows 20 .t!.xe7) 20 It:lf5 ! and now: (a) 20...�xe l 2 1 �d6+ �g8 22 It:le7+ �f8 23 It:lxc6+ �g8 24 It:le7+ �f8 25 It:lf5+ �g8 26 .t!.e7 and by the m ate threat

54

Uncompromising Chess

at g7 White regains the sacrificed material with interest; (b) 20 . . . 11e8 2 1 llxe8+ lLlxe8 22 c3 .li.a5 23 lle7 and wins; (c) 20 . . . 'ii7g 8 21 Si.d6 (or 21 lle7 .li.xe7 22 llxe7) 2 1 .. . .li.xd6 22 llxd6, again with devastating thrcats; (d) 20 ... lLldS 2 1 Si.d2 .li.xd2+ 22 �xd2 bS 23 lle7 lLlxe7 24 llxe7 �a7 (or 24 . . . lLlf6 25 l::t f 7+ �e8 26 lLlxg7+ �d8 27 lLle6+ ..t>e8 2 8 lLlc7+) 25 J::r. f7+ �e8 26 lLlxg7+ �d8 27 lLle6+ �e8 28 f4, and. with Black's forces virtually stalemated, he has no defence against the victorious advance of the white pawns. 15 lLld5 I S ... a3 would have set more problems: (a) 16 tLlxh8 axb2+ 1 7 ..t> b l ( 1 7 Wxb2 ':a3 ! ) 17 . . . :'a3 1 8 lLlxf7 "'a8 19 '1i'g6 ttJf8 20 ttJd6+ �d7 2 1 lLlc4 'i'a6, when it is B lack who is attacking; (b) 16 b3 lLldS 1 7 lLlf5 ! exfS (forced in view of the mate threat at g7) 1 8 ttJxe7 ttJxe7 ( 1 8 ... ttJxf4 19 ttJg6+ ttJe6 20 ttJxh8) 1 9 .li.d6 tOes 20 dxe5, and i f 20 . . . 0-0 2 1 e6, winning material. 16 lLlCS! .li. f8 ? 1 6 ... exf5 was more tenacious, trying to defend as indicated in the previous note. J::r.g 8 17 .li.d6 I f 17 ...fxg6 White mates by 1 8 ttJxg7+! 18 c4 ttJb4

19 �h3 ! Threatening 20 ttJxh6! gxh6 2 1 nxe6+! , and there i s n o longer any defence. 19 fxg6 J::r. x e6+ � f7 20 21 hxg6+ �xc6 22 nel+ lLle5 .li.xe5 23 Black resigns The rather widely analysed variation of the S icil ian Defence that occurred in my game with a representative of the new generation of Leningrad players, Leonid Yudasin, the winner of the Qualification Tournament for the USSR Championship. reminded me of an old story. kading to the amusing thought that sometimes it is ignorance that leads to progress. A decade earlier. in a game with Zhidkov from the Ukrainian Championship. in the main l i ne of this variation I encountered a new idea that had j ust been publ ished in the most recent issue of the 64 newspaper (with its help Elzi bar Ubi lava had just won a game with Black). Watching my torment, as I ' fell asleep' for a good hour, many of the already 'erudite' participants were chuckling, anticipating the development of events. Fortunately, I had not read that issue of 64 and I discovered a refutation.

Nowadays this i s a l l well establ ished, but in the previous USSR Championship (Vilnius 19801 1 ) grandmaster Gennady Kuzmin, the author of many interesting opening ideas, surprised me with 7 ... lLlg4, although after 8 h3 lLlge5 9 .li.e3 ttJxd4 1 0 �xd4 ttJc6 I I 'i'd2 g 6 1 2 .li.c4 llc8 1 3 .li.b3 'i'a5 1 4 .li.h6 �xh6 I S �xh6 .li.e6 1 6 0-0 it transpired that it was not easy for Black to castle. 8 � lLlxd4 9 �xd4 �a5 10 f4 e6 11 eS dxeS 12 fxeS

Game 1 9

49th USSR Championship Frunze 1981

Sicilian Defence B 6 1 e4 ttJO d4 lLlxd4 ttJc3 .li. g5 9d2

c5 ttJc6 cxd4 lLlr6 d6 .li.d7 nc8

for Black. Since 1 970, when Zhidkov surprised me with 14 . . . g6, and I found the refutation 1 5 b4! which casts doubts on the exchange sacrifice, this idea has been avoided by theoreticians, and the game that found its way into the books was Belyavsky-Ubilava, played in the 1 978 USSR Cup, where after IS . . . ttJd5 16 .li.c4 .li.h6+ 1 7 J::r.d 2 "'a3+ 1 8 .li.b2 "'xb4 1 9 .li.xd5 White won a piece, as i f 1 9 ...... xd2+ 20 'i'xd2 .li.xd2+ 2 1 �xd2 exd5 he has 22 e6 llg8 23 exd7+ �xd7 24 .li.d4 a6 25 �d3 lle8 26 llb I b5 2 7 lla I J::r.a 8 28 g4, and in this ending the bishop is worth more than the three pawns. 13 � bS For some time 1 3 .li.xf6 gxf6 14 ttJe4 was considered the strongest, but the game Dolmatov-Ruderfer (Moscow 1 98 1 ) dis­ pelled this il lusion: 14 . . . !ld8! I S ttJxf6+ �e7 and Black is not worse, as 1 6 'iWh4 can be met by 1 6 . . . !lxd l + 1 7 �xd l �d8. Of the modem searchings in this posi­ tion, Judith Polgar's idea of 13 .li.c4 ! m ust be mentioned. Her game with Groszpeter (Hungarian Championship 1 99 1 ) con­ tinued 13 . . . ttJd7 14 llhe I h6 15 .li.d2 'iWc5 16 �f4 g5 17 �fl .li.g7 1 8 h4 ttJxe5 1 9 .li.b3 0-0 2 0 hxg5 hxg5 2 1 �e2 ttJg6 22 �h5 and White built up decisive threats. 13 ttJd5 14 lLlxdS Weaker is 14 .li.xc6+ bxc6 1 5 lLle4?! ( I S a3 is better) 15 �xa2 1 6 c4 h6 1 7 .li.d2 c5 1 8 � d3 lLlb6 with advantage to Black (Petrushin-Yudasin, USSR 1 98 1 ). 14 .li.xb5 15 ttJc3 Before this White had unsuccessfully tried the tempting 1 5 �xa7, which is parried by 15 . . . .li.b4! 15 .li.c6? The lesson was not wasted, for two rounds later Yudasin demonstrated the correct solution in this game with ...

Belyavsky-Yudasin

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

55

Uncompromising Chess

12 .tc6 At one time the exchange sacrifice 12 ... 11xc3 13 .li.d2 9xa2 14 .i.xc3 was considered a radical method of counterplay

56

Uncompromising Chess

Dolmatov: 1 5 . . . �c5 1 6 'ifg4 �b4! 1 7 �xb5 �xb5 1 8 'ife4 ()....{) and Black successfully solved his opening problems.

16

Ilhfl ! � b4 �d5 �e4 It transpires that now 1 7 . . . ()....{) is not possible because of 1 8 �f6+ Wh8 1 9 'ifh4. �xd6 �d6+ 18 19 exd6 f6 17

�xf6! 20 gxf6 'ifxf6 21 'iPd7 22 'ife7+ 'itc6 d7! 23 The inclusion of 23 nf7 'itb6 24 d7 leads only to a draw: 24 . . . nxc2+! 2 5 'itxc2 'ifa4+ 26 'iPd2 'ilid4+. ncd8 23 24 c4! �xc4 'itbS 'ilid6+ 2S

26 Ilfe ! ! �d5 Comparatively best. 26 ... '1l'xa2 27 l!e5+ .td5 (visiting the white king's residence by 27.. .�a4 28 �c7 'ifa 1 + 29 Wc2 .tb3+ 30 �c3 resembles a help-mate) 28 r:.exd5+ exd5 29 l:rxd5+ �xd5 30 �xdS+ �b6 3 I �d6+ Wb5 32 g4 would have led to a similar ending to that in the game. Ilxd5+! 27 exd5 28 ne5 An amusing picture, where White threatens a linear mate in the centre of the board. However, there was also a false trail: 28 nd I d4! 29 a4+ (or 29 t1xd4 'ife 1 + 3 0 �c2 nc8+ 3 1 dxc8='if nxc8+ 32 Wb3 nc3+! 33 bxc3 'iib l+) 29 ... 'iixa4 30 nxd4 J:c8+ 3 1 dxc8'if (or 3 1 Wb 1 'ifc2+ 32 �a2 ncs 33 d8'ii nxd8 34 'ifxd8 �a6 35 'ilif6+ b6 36 'iifl + 'itb7 37 'if 0+ 'ita6) 3 1 ... :.xc8+ 32 'itb I 'iic2+ 33 'ita2 nc5 34 'ilid7+ �a6 35 na4+ na5 36 t1xa5+ 'iPxaS 37 'ilixb7 'ilia4+, and in all these lines the game ends in a draw by perpetual check. 28 'iPc4 29 ne3! It was still possible to throw away the win: 29 ne4+ �d3 30 nb4 t1hfB 3 1 'ilig3+ 'ite2 32 'ilig4+ 'itfl 33 'ilid l + �f2 3 4 'ilid4+ 'itfl 35 'ili d 1 + an d White h as to be content with perpetual check. b6 29

57

Uncompromising Chess

No better is 29 ...nhf8 30 nc3+ 'itd4 3 1 'ife7! nn + 3 2 'iPd2 nf2+ 33 'ite I with mate at e3, or 29 ... 'ifxa2 30 'ilic7+ �b5 3 1 �xb7+ 'itc5 32 nc3+ 'itd4 3 3 'ii b4+ etc., but now the attack concludes with the transition into an easily won ending. 30 nc3+ �xc3+ 31 bxc3 'iPxc3 32 b5 'ifxd5 33 'itdl as 34 'ite2 a4 35 �e3 'iPb4 36 �d6+ 'iPa5 37 'ikc7 b4 38 �e4 'ita6 39 �e5 n h 5+ 40 'ite6 nh6+ 41 �dS nb5+ 42 �d4 nhh8 43 'itc4 ndg8 44 'itb4

nxg7+ 64 �f6 nc7 65 'ilid5+ 'ita7 66 as) 60 �c8+ Ilxc8 61 dxc8'ii + �a7 62 as bxa5 63 'ifc5+ �a6 64 �d6+ �b7 65 �d5+ 'ita6 66 'ifd3+ 'iPb7 67 'ifb5+ and wins. In 1 982 I qualified for the World Cham­ pionship Candidates cycle by taking second place in the Interzonal Tournament in Moscow. Before the last round five participants were contending for the sole remaining place, since Garry Kasparov had already qualified. Since it seemed probable to me that at least one of my rivals would win, I decided to play for a win with Black against Florin Gheorghiu. Two years earlier a sim i lar situation with the same opponent had arisen in Baden (Austria), only with the significant difference that a draw then did not satisfy Florin, as it could have left him outside the prize list. In Moscow he no longer had any corres­ ponding stimulus, and was satisfied with a draw. The difference in my opponent's motivation in these tournaments influenced my choice of opening. In Baden I granted him the opportunity to play actively and chose the Queen's Gambit. In Moscow, by offering a more uncompromising gambit, I myself took on all the risk. Game 20 Gbeorghiu-Belyavsky

Black resigns, as the winning proce­ dure for White, although lengthy, is quite straightforward, for example: 44 ... ng4+ 45 'ita3 ngg8 (45 ...J:d4 46 'ilic3) 46 'itxa4 nf8 47 �b3 :fg8 48 a4 :f8 49 �c3 :fg8 50 'itd3 :f8 5 1 'ite4 :fg8 52 'ite5 :f8 53 'ite6 l:rfg8 54 g4 hxg3 55 hxg3 :f8 (5s...�a5 5 6 'ilic4) 56 g4 :fg8 57 g5 :a8 (57 ...'ita5 58 'ilic4 t1xg5 59 'ilic3+) 58 g6 t1hg8 59 g7 :xg7 (59 ... :gd8 60 'iPe7 :g8 6 1 'l'c4+ 'itb7 62 'l'xg8 :xg8 63 d8'1'

�

Interzonal Tourna ent Moscow 1 982

Benko Gambit AS8 �f6 d4 c5 c4 2 dS 3 b5 a6 cxb5 4 S bxa6 Ten years later, playing White in Tilburg against Michael Adams, I chose 5 e3 and after 5 . . . axb5 6 .i.xbS 'l'a5+ 7 �3

58

Uncompromising Chess

�b7 8 e4 ! lUxe4 9 lUge2 g6 1 0 0-0 lUd6 1 1 a4 ! �g7 1 2 �g5 h6 1 3 � f4 0-0 1 4 �xd6! exd6 1 5 f4 f5 1 6 g4! White's attack bore fruit. 5 � xa6

It is also possible to take on a6 with the kn ight: 5 . . . g6 6 b3 �g7 7 �b2 ()....() 8 g3 d6 9 �g2 ttJxa6 1 0 ttJc3 �b 7 II e4 e6 1 2 ttJge2?I ( 1 2 dxe6 fxe6 1 3 ttJge2 i s better) 1 2 . . . exdS \ 3 exd5 ttJb4 14 a3 0.fxd5, and B lack regained his pawn while retaining the InitIatIve (Ravi-Hebden, British Championship 1 9 89). 6 g3 To me the fol lowing plan seems more promising: 6 ttJc3 d6 7 e4 .Q.xfl 8
after 14 11e I 11a7 1 5 f4 ttJe8 1 6 lUn lUb6 17 �xg7 ttJxg7 IS ttJc3 ttJfS 1 9 g4 lUg7 20 e4 White gained the advantage in the centre and held the initiative. 'i'a8 12 nel ttb8 e4 13 14 �c3

For the sacrificed pawn B lack exerts strong pressure on the a- and b- files. and White has to concern h imsel f over the defence 'of his a2 pawn . An important feature of the position i s the d i fference in the structure of the pawn chains, which is c learly in Black's favour. 14 lOe8 Probably B lack could also have trans­ ferred his knight to e5 without exchanging bishops, as if 14 ... ttJeS ! ? it is unfavourable to reply 15 �xeS dxe5, when he transfers his remaining knight to the comfortable square d6. After 1 5 f4 lOd3 1 6 !1e3 c4 Black has the i nitiative, while 1 5 lUf4 �h6! is also good for him. lUxg7 15 �xg7 lOeS 16 lUd2 17 lUr4 The .ev iction' of the knight by 1 7 f4 0.d3 1 8 :'e3 aids Black's queens ide play after 18 . . . �b5 ! If 1 9 a4 �a6 the weakness at a2 is replaced by one at b3, while after 1 9 �fl ttJb4 20 �xbS l:tx.bS 2 1 a4 he can undermine the centre by 2 1 . . . f5 !

Uncompromising Chess

17 �b5! a4 18 �a6 19 lOxf3 + ttJf3 20 'tixf3 nb4 Black switches his attention to the b3 pawn. h4 21 nab7 22 11e3 'i'b8 .!:ra3 23 lOe8 The knight is aiming for eS, from where it will control the weakened l i ght squares. �xn 24 .Q.fl 25
29 'i'e2 Now B lack regains h i s pawn, while retaining all the advantages of his position. 29 .llc2 'i'a8 3 0 11ca2 was the alternative: (a) 30 . . . lUe5 3 1 'i'e2 'i'b8 32 lUd3 nxb3 33 lUxeS dxeS 34 'i'c2, and Black regains his pawn, but in a version favour­ able to White; (b) 30 ... ttJf6 3 1 ne2 nxa5 32 11xaS 'i'xa5, and Black retains the advantage, as 33 eS dxeS 34 l:txeS, breaking open the centre to attack the e7 pawn, can be met by 34 . . . 'i'd8, and if 3 S 'i'e3 'i'd6! , winning a pawn. 'i'a8 29 nb8 lOd3 30

59

nxaS 31 f3 l:txa5 'i'xaS 32 33 l:tc4 lOf6 34 b4! Tactics can also be of service to strategy when one is playing for a draw. 34 cxb4 35 lOd7 'tid 2 l:txb4 l:tc8 36 37 l:tb2 'tia4 11a2 38 'i'c4

39 lOb4? This position, which at first sight looks almost equal, is by no means drawn: the exposed position of the white king gives B lack hopes of an attack. Therefore White's desire to transfer his knight, which can take part in the defence of his king, to the pretty, but useless c6 square, is faulty. Correct was 39 lOn, preventing the invasion of the black pieces. 39 l:tb8! l:tb2 40 A second time trouble illusion. Now White can escape from the pin only at too high a price. He should have brought h i s knight back with 4 0 lOd3 l:tb3 4 1 lO c I (weaker is 4 1 lOe l lOe5) 4 1 ..J:tb l (after 4 1 ... nc3 42 ttJe2 nd3 43 'i'c2 White can defend) 42 11c2 'i'bS 43 'i'e2 'i'b6 44 'i'n lOc5 ! , and although B lack has achieved a great deal, White can stil l hold on.

60

Uncompromising Chess

40

lUeS!

Uncompromising Chess

dubious variation of the Queen's Gambit, and seeking my chances as White. Against a player who was beginning his ascent to the top, such tactics proved inadequate. They justified themselves only once. Game 2 1 Belyavsky-Kas p arov Candidates Match (Ith game) Moscow 1983

Nimzo-Indian Defence E54

Zugzwang! I f 41 �f2? Black wins by 4 1 . .. llxb4 ! White has to move his knight to the distant periphery, from where it does not return. 41 lUa2 llxb2 42 �xb2 �d3 43 �f2 �a3! 44 . . . lUxD is threatened, so that White has to weaken his position still further. lUg4 44 f4 45 'i!fd2? This loses quickly, but after 4 5 'i!fe 2 lUf6 B lack is threatening to take on e4. 45 lUe3+ 46 �f2 Or 46 �gl lUc4 4 7 'i!f f2 'i!fd3 . 46 lUc4 47 �e2 lUb2! The knight is trapped! If 48 lUc I there follows 48 . . . �c5+. White resigns.

The I nterzonal Tournament used up much of my strength, and at my first Olymp iad in 1 982 I felt the onset of another creative slump. Therefore, instead of preparing openings fo r my match with Kasparov, I began 1 983 with a trip to the hills, to recharge my emotional batteries by going skiing. This explains the tedious strategy in my match with Kasparov, which consisted in playing for draws with Black in a highly

lUf6 d4 e6 c4 .1L b4 lUc3 0--0 e3 c5 �d3 dS lUn dxc4 0-4l cxd4 �xc4 exd4 b6 9 10 'i!fe2 Here White can also include 1 0 .2.g5 lUbd7, and then I I '1Ir'e2 �b7 12 .::r ae I ::c8 13 lUeS. .1Lb7 10 lld l 11 2 3 4 S 6 7 8

.2.xc3 11 1 1 ...lUbd7 is considered more flexible, when one of White's aggressive plans involves 12 �S l:tc8 1 3 .2.g5. The game 1 9 89) Skembris-Belyavsky (Haifa

continued 1 3 . . . �xc3 1 4 bxc3 �c7 1 5 lUxd7 lUxd7 1 6 �b5 �d5 ( 1 6 ... h6 is more circumspect) 1 7 'ii'g4 f5 1 8 �h3 h6 19 c4 .hg2 20 'ii'xg2 hxg5 2 1 'i!fxg5 lIf6 22 lId3 lUf8 23 llg3 �f7 24 c;.hl f4 2S llgg 1 ll f5 26 'ii' g4 lUh7 27 llae I lld8 28 d5 e5 with a double-edged game. 1 2 �g5 �xc3 13 bxc3 'i!fc7 is also possible, when White can offer a pawn sacrifice with 14 �d3, and in the event o f its acceptance by 1 4 . . . �xc3 h i s initiative is very dangerous: IS lUeS 'i!f as 16 'i!f e3 'l'dS 17 'i!fh3 h6 1 8 �c4 �d6 1 9 � f4 'i!fe7 20 lld3 lUxeS 21 dxe5 lUe4 22 �xh6 (Azmaiparashvili·Farago, Albena 1 984). Probably safer is 1 4 ... h6 I 5 �d2 llfe8 1 6 :e l llac8 1 7 llac l 'i!fd6 1 8 a4 lled8 1 9 .1a6 'i'd5 with a defensible position (1Ilescas Cordoba·Magem Badals, Terrasa 1 990 ) . 12 bxc3 'ii'c 7 13 .2.d3 White has a wide choice. All possible developments of the bishops at b2, d2, b3 and d3 have occurred in practice, and it is no wonder that I thought for a good half hour. 13 'Wxc3 Now if 1 3 ...lUbd7 White has 1 4 c4 : fe8 1 5 �b2 with an attacking position, but Euwe's recommendation of 13 ... lUd5 came into consideration, when 1 4 'We4 lUf6 can lead to a repetition of position, while if 1 4 c4 Black plays 1 4 . . . lUf4, exchanging one of the white bishops, only not 14 ...1Uc3 IS .2.xh7+ �h8 ( 1 5 ...�xh7 16 'Wd3+ lUe4 1 7 lUg5+ �g8 1 8 lUxe4, winning a pawn) 1 6 'Wd3 lUxd l 1 7 lUes, when if 17 ... lUxf2 18 �xf2 f6 White has 1 9 lUg6+ �xh7 20 lUe7+, forc ing mate. 14 .2.b2 In the game Hmadi-Vadasz (Budapest 1 995) White successfully tried 14 .2.g5 'i'a5? ! ( 1 4 . . . lUbd7 I S l:tacl 'WaS was essential) 1 5 .2.xf6 gxf6 16 d5 .2.xd5 1 7

61

lUeS f5 1 8 'Wh5 f6 1 9 l:tac I b5 2 0 l:tc8 [xeS 2 1 'i!fg5+ �f7 22 .2.e2 1 -0 .

14 'i!fc7 The white bishops are trained threateningly at Black's kingside, and after the inevitable d4-d5 they are ready to destroy it. Therefore it is important to find a square for the queen from where it is able to come to the aid of its king. The best known game at that time was Tukmakov-Fuchs (Zinnowitz 1 967), where after 14 ... 'i!fb4 I S a4 lle8 16 as 'i!fd6 1 7 d 5 lUbd7 Black achieved a good game. B u t all is not so simple. More v igorous is I S dS! �xd5 (not 1 5 ... lUxd5 1 6 lUgS, and if 16 ... h6 17 'We5 lUf6 1 8 � h 7+ �h8 1 9 'i!fxf6!) 1 6 .2.xf6 gxf6 1 7 lUd4! (if immediately 1 7 'We3 'Wg4, but now the bishop sacr i fice at h7 is threatened) 1 7 . . . fS 1 8 'We3 ! ( 1 8 .2.xf5 exfS 19 lUxfS 'We4 is less clear) 1 8 .. . lUc6 1 9 .2.xfS with a strong attack. Kasparov chooses a more natural 'square for his queen, but also of interest is the more active plan of defence employed in the game Michenka-Mikhalchishin (Karvina 1987), which continued 14 . . .'Wc6 IS d5 exdS 1 6 lUd4 'i'e8 1 7 'WD 'We5 ( 1 7 .. .lUe4 1 8 lUf5 f6 19 llac I 1Uc6 is also interesting) 1 8 lleI lUe4 19 l:te2 fS 2 0 lUb5 'i'e7 2 1 .i.a3 'i'f6 2 2 .2.b2 'i'f7 with sharp play.

62

Uncompromising Chess

15

d5!

�xd5

After I S . ..tbxd5 1 6 lOgS White launches a strong attack: (a) 16 ... g6 17 lOxh7 lId8 ( 1 7 . . . ..txh 7 1 8 '1Wh5+ and mates) 1 8 '1Wg4 with strong threats against Black's weakened kingside; (b) 16 ... lOf4 1 7 �xh7+ 'it>h8 1 8 'i'g4 f6 1 9 1Oxe6 tDxe6 20 .!i..g6 tDgS 2 1 gac l 'i'e7 22 'i'h5+ ..tg8 23 h4 with an obvious advantage; (c) 1 6 ... h6 1 7 'i'h5 e5 (if 1 7 . . . tDf4 1 8 'i'xh6!, forcing mate) 1 8 �xeS 'i'xeS 1 9 �h7+ o;t>h8 20 tDxt7+ t:.xt7 2 1 'i'xeS �xh7 :!2 :'xd5 with a winning material advantage. .!i.. x f6 16 gxf6 17 18

'fie3! :tacl

g7 tDc6

Black must maintain control of e5, as if 1 8 ... 'i·b7 there follows 19 tDeS ! tDd7 (after 19 ... fxe5 20 'i'g5+ 'it>h8 2 1 'i'h6 White forces mate) 20 .!LJg4 f5 2 1 '1I'h6+ �g8 22 tDf6+ g8 2 5 :'c3 , when a possible tin ish would be 25 . . . :'fc8 26 1:a3 a6 27 JLe2 ':c2 2 8 :rg3+ q;,f8 29 �h5 :ac8 30 ':g7 l:.l2c7 3 1 llxh7 and wins.

'i'g3+ h8 2 1 'i'h4 f5 22 'i'f6+ g8 2 3 tDxf5 exf5 2 4 'i'xf5 llfd8 2 5 'i'xh7+ f8 26 %te l tDe7 (26...�e6 27 llxe6) 27 'i'h6+ g8 (27 . . ...te8 28 �b5+) 28 llxe7 and White wins; (b) 1 9 ... tl.fd8 20 �b5 'i'b7 21 'i'g3+ �f8 22 �xc6 �xc6 23 '1Wf4! f5 (no better is 23...�g7 24 '1Wg4+ 'iPf8 25 tDxc6, 23 . . .r.t>e7 24 tl.xc6 llxd4 25 llc7+, or 23 . ..�xg2 24 lOxe6+!) 24 lle l .ilxd4 (24 ... .!i..e4 25 lOxe6+ fxe6 26 tl.c7) 25 'i'xd4 when White is the exchange up with an attack. 'i'd6! 19 Kasparov removes his queen from · th e p i n and places it o n a better square. After 1 9 ... 'i'd7 White wins by 20 ''i' f4 ! tDe7 2 1 'i'gH 'it>h8 (2 1 ...tDg6 allows 22 �xd5) 2 2 'i'h3 f5 2 3 tDg5. 20

21 19

�e4?

The correct decision was 1 9 lOd4! , after which it is not easy for Black to defend: (a) 19 .. :11>7 (this allows the enemy queen to make a decisive invasion) 20

�xd5

After 20 :'xc6? 'ilr'xc6 21 .:Ixd5 exd5 22 tDd4 Black defends by 22 . . . 'i'a4! 23 �c2 'i'e8. 20 21

63

Uncompromising Chess

exd5 :tc4

.d7?

A mistake, which again leaves Black on the verge of defeat. Correct was 2 1 . ..tDe7! 22 l:tg4+ (after 22 l:th4 tDf5 23 llg4+ �h8 24 'i'd3 l:i}e7 the attack is parried) 22 ... �h8 23 'i'h6 tDf5 (after 23 ...l:tg8 24 tDg5 ! l:txg5 2 5 l:txg5 or 23...ltJg6 24 :h4!

lOxh4 2 5 lOgS fxg5 26 'i'xd6 White wins material) 24 'i'h5, when 24 ... lOg7 2 5 'i'h6 leads to a draw, while after 24 . . . 'i'e6 White retains some compensation for his material deficit. 22 tl.h4 'i'rs 23 tl.xd5 tD e5 All these events took place in serious time trouble, and therefore it is not surpris­ ing that Kasparov plays solidly. The alter­ native was to interpose 23 ... 'i'b I + 24 lOe I , when after 24 . . . �h8 2 5 tl.dh5 nfe8 26 llxh7+ 'i'xh7 27 llxh7+ �xh7 28 'i'h3 + �g8 29 'i'g4+ �f8 30 tDc2, or 24. . .,:[g8 25 :rd3 (25 :tdh5 is also possible) White continues his attack. 24

h3

llfe8

24 . . . tDxD+ 25 gxD 'i'b l + 26 �h2 �h8 27 'i'd4 'i'g6 28 ng4 'i'h6 29 :th5 and White wins. Or

25 26 27

tDd4

28 29

llxd8 'i'e4

29

'i'f4 tDfS+

With the threat of f2-f4, which did not work immediately because o f 3 0 . . . tDD+. 30

llc4

After 30 ... l:td8, preventing 3 1 f4 in view of 3 1 . . .tDD+! , White would have continued 3 1 g4, for example 3 1 . . .'i'g8 3 2 l:t h 6 'i'g5 33 f4 lOxg4+ 3 4 hxg4 'i'xg4 3 5 tDe3 ! "g7 3 6 lOg4 f5 (otherwise 3 7 'i'f5 with a complete bind) 3 7 'i'xf5 'i'b2+ (or 37 ... 11d2+ 38 �h3 'i'c3+ 39 'it>h4) 38 �h3 'i'c3+ 39 �h4 "e I + 40 g5 1:g8+ 4 1 ..tf6 l:tg6+ 42 l:txg6 hxg6 43 'i'c8+ �h7 44 ..txt7, forcing mate. 31 32 33 34 35

'i'a8+ 'i'xa7 tDxh4 'i'a8+ 'i'e4

'i'g8 llxh4 'i'g5 �g7

'i'g6 llad 8

�h8 llxdS

l:tc8?

The final and decisive m istake. 29 .... g8 3 0 ttJe7 (30 f4 ltJg6 3 1 'i'c6 l:tdl+ 32 �h2 .d8 favours B lack) 30 ....g7 3 1 ltJf5 "f8 32 lOe7 "g7 would have enabled Black to hold the position. �h2 ! 30

h5? 35 The ending is clearly better for White, but after this move the game quickly concludes. Black should have defended with 3 5...ltJg6 3 6 ttJfS+ �g8 3 7 g3 .d2 3 8 'i'a8+ ltJf8, when for the moment he can still hold on. tDfS+ �g6 36 tDe7+ �h6 37 f4 38 Black resigns

My first experience as a World Champion­ ship Candidate had proved unsuccessful,

64

Uncompromising Chess

and in the 50th USSR Championship Premier League I was in poor form . Game 22 Belyavsky-Geller 50th USSR Championship Moscow 1983

Quee n ' s Gambit D3 1

1 dS d4 2 c4 e6 0.c3 3 i.e7 Th is bishop development, which was fash ionable at that time (and also later), has the aim of avoiding the Carlsbad Variation 3 . . . 0.f6 4 cxd5 exd5 5 �g5 . exdS cxdS 4 5 i. f4 c6 e3 6 i. rs 7 g4 Th is pawn attack was first employed by Botvinnik in his match with Petrosian i n 1 963. Along with it, 7 ttJge2 .!Od7 8 tlJg3 has often been played i n recent times. 7 i.e6 7 . . . i.g6 is sometimes chosen, but after 8 h4 Black again has to worry about his bishop, as 8 . . . �xh4 9 '�b3 b6 1 0 0.0 � e 7 I I 0.e5 is risky for h im, and after 8 . . . h5 9 g5 i.d6 10 'ti'0 0.e7 I I 0.ge2 or 8 ... h6 9 0.0 (9 h5 is also good) 9 ... 0.d7 10 .1d3 �xd3 I I 'iiix d3 0.gf6 1 2 lIg I 'iiia 5 13 tlJd2 0.f8 14 0 0.e6 15 �e5 he is seriously cramped (Knaak-Raicevic, Athens 1992). 8 h4 Now many players make this move (however, 8 h3 is also played), but it took Botvinnik himself seven years after his match with Petrosian before he first em­ ployed it i n his final tournament (Leiden 1 970) against the then World Champion Boris Spassky. By advancing his pawns on the kingside, White as though warns the black king of the dangers that await it there.

As for the pawn capture 8 . . . i.xh-t. it is considered dangerous - after 9 ·tII·b3 ! Black has problems over the defence of his b­ pawn: 9 . . . b6 (9 . . . .1c8 1 0 e4 is good for White) 10 .!OO �e7 I I i.xb8 ;:[xbS 12 tlJe5 .:rc8 13 'iiia-t b5 14 '1!fxa7. At that time Botvinnik also 'gave his blessing' to I I ttJe5. and this was confirmed nearly a quarter of a century later in the game Gulko-Lputian (Glendale 1 994), which continued I I . . . ttJf6 12 g5 0.fd7 1 3 g6 0.xe5 14 .lxe5 .lf6 1 5 J:xh7 0-0 16 �g3 fxg6 17 lh2 �f7' I S 0-0-0 ':hS?! ( 1 8 ...ttJd7! 19 e4 i.e7 followed by . . . 0.f6 is stronger, although here too White stands better - Gulko) 1 9 l1xhs 'Wxh8 20 e4! '1th5 21 lle l ! with a strong attack for WhIte. As for Yefim Geller, he evidently took an optimistic view of Black's possibilities, . and six months before our game he was able to hold his own in a very sharp clash with Vaiser (Sochi 1 982), which after 8...�xh4 9 'Wb3 g5 I 0 �e5 f6 I I �h2 i.xg4 12 'Wxb7 'We7! 13 'WxaS 'Wxe3+ 1 4 i.e2 i.xf2+ 1 5 �fl i.h4 1 6 'Wxb8+ �f7 1 7 ttJd I �xe2+ IS ttJxe2 ended in a draw. 8 0.d7 A few years later I tried to uphold B lack's position using the new idea 8 ...cS. The game Flear-Belyavsky (Szirak Inter­ zonal 1 987) continued 9 dxc5 .i.xcs 1 0 ttJge2 0.e7 ( 1 0...ltjc6 I I It)d4 .i.xd4 12

Uncompromising Chess

exd4 ttJge7 13 i.g2 0-0 also comes into consideration, with roughly equal chances) I I ttJd4 0.bc6 12 ttJxe6 fxe6 13 �g2 0-0 1 4 0-0 0.g6 1 5 �g5 �e7 1 6 h 5 ! (best, otherwise after 1 6 �xe7 'ikxe7 1 7 h5 0.h4 1 8 i.h I llad8 1 9 f4 d4 White could find himself in a difficult position) 1 6 ... �xg5 1 7 hxg6 hxg6 1 8 f4 i.e7 19 ttJxd5, and here after the poor move 1 9 . . . exd5? 20 �xd5+ �h7 2 1 1H2! I came under a strong attack, although in the end things turned out a l l right. After the better 1 9 ... g5! 20 0.xe7+ �xe7 Black can hold the position. 9 hS White seizes space on the kingside; Black's counterplay involves attacking the centre with . . . c6-c5.

9 'Wb6 The 2 1 st game of the 1 9S5 Kasparov­ Karpov match went 9 ... ttJh6 1 0 i.e2 0.b6 I I l'lc I i.d6?! (Kasparov considers 1 1 ... ttJc4 1 2 �xc4 dxc4 1 3 �xh6 gxh6 to be better) 1 2 ttJh3 i.xf4 1 3 ttJxf4 �d7 1 4 l'lg l ! g 5 (or 1 4 .. :i'h4 1 5 g 5 ttJf5 1 6 llg4! 'i'h l + 17 �d2 with advantage to White) 1 5 hxg6 hxg6 16 �d2! 'We7 1 7 b3 ! g5 I S ttJd3 (}..{)....Q 1 9 l'lh I f6 20 'Wg I ltjf7 2 1 'Wg3 'Wd6 22 'Wxd6 ttJxd6 23 f3 with an obvious advantage in the endgame, since play against the weakened squares c5 and f5 is possible. 0.gf6 10 l'lbl

65

0-0 11 f3 Also after l l ...h6 1 2 �d3 the black king cannot feel secure: (a) 12 . . . 'iiia 5 1 3 0.ge2 b5 14 0.c l ! 'WdS I S ltjb3 0-0 16 0.e2 as (Botvinnik­ Spassky, Leiden 1 970), and here White could have gained a decisive advantage by 1 7 l'lc l a4 1 S 0.c5 0.xc5 1 9 dxc5 0.d7 20 �b I ! (Botvinnik); (b) 12 ... c5 13 ltjge2 llcS 14 �fl 0-0 I S g5! hxg5 1 6 i.xg5 l'lfeS 1 7 'iii'e I and after transferring his queen to the kings ide White developed an unpleasant initiative (Knaak-Geller, Moscow 1 982). i.d3 cS 12 13 0.ge2

13 l'lac8?! An inaccuracy. I t was essential to halt the g-pawn by 1 3 ... h6 14 �fl <1Jh7, as now White could have played 14 g5 ltje8 ' 1 5 'Wc2 f5 1 6 gxf6 lZXixf6 1 7 �d2!? with an attack on the kingside, for example: 1 7. . .c4 IS i.g6 hxg6 1 9. hxg6 .i.fS 20 'WxfS ltje4+ 21 fxe4 l'lxf5 22 exf5 with more than sufficient compensation for the queen. 14 �fl A familiar idea: for the moment the rook is needed at h i . cxd4 14 Now if 14 ... h6 White could have attacked a la Knaak' - 1 5 g5 ! •

66

Uncompromising Chess

15

exd4

Black's problem is that both his knights are restricted (by the d4 and f3 pawns), and since the pawn structure is qu ite stable he has no counterplay. A l l he can do is to try at the appropriate moment to cover the b 1 h 7 diagonal by . . . fl-f5. I n the meantime, White w i l l try to develop an attack against the black king.

15 16 17

18 19 2G

"i!fd2

�g2 llbel �bl "i!fd3

�d6 tiJe8 �d8 tiJb6 tiJc4 CS?!

21 llJf6 After 2 1 . . . tiJc7 22 tiJg3 .txg3 23
25

tiJg3 llxe6 �xg3 tiJxe4 "i!fxf3 tiJg5

28

�xh7+ �f8 :tn Black resigns

creative age of a chess player is from 323 7. But in recent years chess has undoubtedly become younger, so that at the indicated age it is almost time to retire. In 1 9S4 I reached 3 0 and it was a good year for me.

A n active response t o t h e line-up of White's queen and bishop. However, this

21

�c1!

White is threatening 22 tiJg3 with a discovered attack on the bishop at e6, and it is not easy for Black to protect simultaneously the bishop and the f5 pawn.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

14

'i'c2?

On encountering a surprise, M i les c hooses one of the worst possible contin­ uations, allowing Black to carry out a

11

lld2

For a period this move replaced the earlier I I tiJd2 (cf. game 1 6, Portisch­ Be lyavsky, Moscow 1 9 S I ), but the present game demonstrated the equalising possibilities available to B lack.

tiJe4!

11

The idea of this move belongs to Murray Chandler. By sacrificing a pawn Black hopes to exploit the drawbacks of keeping the white king in the centre.

12 13

tiJxe4 'i'xe4

dxe4

pawn offensive in the centre. Of course, 1 4 .td3?? i s not possible because o f 1 4 . . . f5 , trapping the queen. When I prepared 1 3 . . . 11dS I also considered the possibil ity of 14 g4. In one of my oId notebooks there is the following variation: 1 4 . . . llxd2 I S tiJxd2 e5 1 6 .tg3 .t e6 1 7 .i.d3 g6 I S �e2 :tdS 19 'i'f3 ( i f 1 9 :td 1 f5 20 'i'g2 f4 2 1 exf4 .i.xg4+ 22 f3 tiJd4+ with a very strong attack) 19 . . .'i'b6 20 b4 :ld4! 2 1 h 3 'i' d S with a n overwhelming advantage. In the game Meduna-Velikov (Tmava 1 9S4) White played

14 .te2, and after

1 4 . . . e5 I S b4! 'i'xa3 1 6 :txd8+ tiJxdS 1 7 0-0 'i'xb4 I S fue5 he obtained the better game. However, Black could have first

Game 2 3

played 1 4 . . . :lxd2 1 5 tiJxd2 and only then

Miles-Belyavsky Wijk an Zee 1 984

1 5 . . . e5 16 .i.g3 .i.e6 1 7 'i'c2 lldS, with more than sufficient compensation for the pawn in view of White's d ifficulty in freeing his king.

c4 tiJc3 d4 tiJf3

14 15

e6 d5

e5 .tg3 If 1 5 .i.g5 I had prepared 1 5 . . . f6 1 6

tiJf6

.te7

.th4 e4

.tf4

�

threats.

e3 dxeS 'Wc2 a3 lldl

c5 .txc5 tiJe6

'i'a5

In recent times 10 ()-{}-{) has become more usual (cf. Game 4S, Gelfand­ Belyavsky, Linares 1 99 1 ).

10

lld8

employed for the first time. Before this 13 ... f5 had been played.

Queen's Gambit 037

move removes the support of the e6

llhS+ �g7, when Wh ite has t o b e satisfied with a draw by 2 S llh7+, as 2S llxf8? fai l s to 2S . . . 'i'g5+.

13

In the present game this move was

.txg3 fxg4 llJe4+ llxf3+ gxf3 tiJd 6

Botv i nnik in his time, based mainly on his own experience, asserted that the best

bishop, without parrying the threats on the b I -h7 diagonal. 20 . . . g6 was stronger, and now the direct attack 2 1 hxg6 fxg6 22 llxh7 is parried by the counter-sacrifice 22 . . . .tf5! 23 gxf5 � 7 24 fxg6+ �g7, and if 2 5 llh I .txf4 26 llh7+ �gS 2 7

2 5 'i'hS+ � e 7 w i t h a great advantage to B lack.

26 27 I f 27 . . . h6 White wins by the same manoeuvre as in the gam e .

29

67

Uncompromising Chess

.te7

In my oId notes I discovered what I was

1 7 'i'xe4 .t f5

15 16 17 18 19

'i'xe4 'Wf4 tiJxd2 e4

w ith decisive

e4 .tCS 1:txd2 lld8 .tg4!

intending to p lay in reply to 1 3 tiJd4 1 3 . . . e5 14 tiJxc6 bxc6 IS 'Wxe4 11d8 1 6 b4 .i.xb4 1 7 axb4 'Wa l + I S �e2 .i.g4+ 19 f3

Black threatens . . . .tg5, and 20 h4 is met

exf4 20 fxg4 1:txd2+ 2 1 �d2 lldS+ 22

by the decisive 20 . . . .tb4.

.i.dJ fxe3+ 23 �e3 'Wxh l 24 'Wxh7+ � f8

Depriving the king of the e2 square.

20

cS

68

Uncompromising Chess

The other main moves are 8 �e2 and 8 �d3 .

(c) 16 . . . J::.c 8! 17 �h7+ (here 1 7 �c4 d xc4 1 8 J::. xd8 J::.exd8 19 ttJd2 can be answered by 19 . . . bS) 1 7 . . .�h8 1 8 �fS ttJe6. Wh ite cannot prevent . . . �xc3, when he is forced to recapture with the pawn, and B lack gains excellent play by doubling rooks on the c-file (Belyavsky-Kramnik, Belgrade 1 997).

12 13 14

There is no other defence. Black ' s subsequent moves are also spectacular, but obvious enough. ttJ b4 ! 20 o gS! 21

22 23 24 25 26

axb-t �e2 �xf4 �eS

'i'al+ gxf4 � e6 Wcl

8

9 10 11 12

� x f6 cx d 5

l:1d l

� b7 �xf6 exd5 ne8

a3 For a time this move of Korchnoi re­ placed the main continuation 1 2 �d3 c5 1 3

The following game proved highly important for my team i n the European

dxc5 ttJd7 1 4 c6 (after 1 4 cxb6 ttJcS I S 'i'c2 'i'xb6 Black threatens . . . d5-d4, and 1 6 (}...() al lows 1 6 . . . JLxc3 1 7 'i'xc3 ttJxd3 1 8 ':xd3 �a6) I ·L�xc6 1 5 � ttJc5 1 6 'i'c2. More recently [ have had experience

Champions Cup of 1 984.

of this position for both sides:

�c3 �g5 White resigns

2

ttJO

4 5 6 7 8

ttJcJ

ttJf6 d5 e6 �e7

�g5

0-0

ttJxe4 �xb2 22 'i'xb2 J::.xe4 2 3 'i'aJ JLb5 24 'i'xa7 c3 25 'i'xb6 J::.d 5 26 'Wb7 with a ' clear advantage to White (Lautier-Bel­ yavsky, Dortmund 1 995); (b) 16 . . ..e7 17 �b5 �xb5 1 8 ttJxb5 J::.e d8 1 9 ttJbd4 ttJe6 20 'Wb3 J::. a c8 21 J::.d2 J::.c 4! 22 'i'd l ttJxd4 23 ttJxd4 .i.xd4 24 J::.xd4 Xhd4 25 .xd4 'i'e4 26 l:tc l .xd4 27 exd4 J::.e8 28 �f1 J::.e4 29 l:tc8+ �h7 3 0 J::.c7 a5 3 1 J::.xf7 l1xd4 3 2 ¢>e2 l:tb4 3 3 b3

e3

b6 b6

a 4 3 4 J::. O axb3 3 5 axb3 g5 3 6 h3 � g 6 3 7 �d2 d4 38 �c2 J::.b S 3 9 g4 h 5 4 0 �d2

Psakhis-Belyavsky European Champions Team Cup Moscow 1984

Queen's Gambit D58

, .3 '

c4

�b4 .-b3

c5! dxc5 ttJxd5

ttJd7

If 14 cxb6 I was planning to p l ay 14 . . . ttJcS with the possible continuation I S 'i'b4 JLe7 1 6 'i'd4 ttJe6 1 7 'i'd2 'i'xb6 1 8 �bS !red8 1 9 (}...() d4 20 ttJxd4 ttJxd4 2 1 exd4 JL f6, regaining the d4 pawn and for

obtaining sufficient compensation White's slight material advantage. ttJxc5

14 15

'i'a2

uncastled king comes under the fire of a l l

the black pieces.

l:te6

17

1 7. . . l:te7 is more accurate. 18

0-0

19 20 21 22

'i'e5 ttJd4 '-xg5 f3

l:td6 J::. d 7 '-g5! bxg5

If 22 f4 I was intending 22 . . . gxf4 23 J::.xf4 g6 24 h4 �g7 with equal chances. 22 23 24 25 26 27

g6

�f2

JLb7

ttJb5 e4 J::. b l ttJxa7? !

l:te7 ..t>g7 J::. b 8

This pawn exchange i s unfavourable for White, as the opening of the a-file gives him problems over the defence of his aJ pawn. After 27 ttJd6 �c6 28 JL b 5 the game is level.

27 28

ttJbS

29

h3?

�xe4 � f5

(a) 1 6...�b7?! 1 7 JLc4! dxc4 1 8 llxd8 J::.axd8 19 ttJd2 �a6 20 ttJce4 ttJxe4 2 1

Game 24

d4

69

Uncompromising Chess

A popular continuation in the Tartak­ ower-Makogonov-Bondarevsky Variat ion .

hxg4 4 1 hxg4 �g7 42 �e2 l:tb4 and a draw was agreed (Kir.Georgiev-Belyav­ sky, Belgrade 1 997);

15 16

.i.xb2! .xb2

White cannot exploit the resulting pin on the d-file. 16 .i.c4?! would be met by 1 6 . . . b5!, and if 17 .i.xb5? .a5+. .i.xd5 16 .i.e2 17 Black also has no problems after 1 7 .i.b5 l:te6 1 8 � l:td6 1 9 .e5 ttJe4 followed by 20 . . . �b7.

1 7 .i.c4? would be a blunder, as after 1 7 . . . .i.xc4 1 8 l:txd8 l:taxd8 White's

Now the initiative definitely passes to Black. It was essential to activate the

rooks: 29 l:td6 g4 30 l:thd l ! (weaker is 3 0 ttJc3 g3+! 3 1 �g3 l:te3 3 2 l:tc I llJb3 3 3 �f2 l:the8 with advantage to Black) 30. . . l:txh2 3 1 ttJd4, although here too Black's position is somewhat preferable.

70

Uncompromising Chess

na8 29 l%as nd6 30 �c4 31 I f 3 1 nxb6 there would have followed 3 1 . . . nxe2+ 32 �e2 �d3+ 33 c;t>f2 �xb 5 . 31 �e6 32 �e2 After 32 �xe6 ::Ixb5 33 �c4 llb2+ 3 4 c;t>g3 lle3 the black rooks break through with decisive effect into the enemy rear (3 5 . . . ltJe4+ is threatened). 32 �d7 33 !ha3 ltJd4 !la 2 nxb6 34 35 nd6 No better was 3 5 .l::r h b 1 :'d2 36 :d6

!lexe2+.

35 36

� b5 nd S

given to me. But it was not only this that was unexpected. Also unexpected was the need to move the pieces with my right hand, since my ' working' left hand, after an unfortunate game of football, ended up in plaster. Possibly out of sympathy for the ' invalid', my first five opponents lost to me. My team col leagues did not need any such 'stimulus', and in the end our result exceeded all expectations: the USSR team finished ahead of its nearest rivals by four whole points. Our main rivals in those years - the Hungarian team - were defeated in the third round by 4·0 . Game 2 5 BelyavskJ'-Portisch Thessaloniki Olympiad 198-1

Queen 's Gambit Accepted 020 d4 d5 1 d xc4 c4 2 ltJf6 e4 3 At that time 3 ... eS was more often played, but Portisch gives preference to this move, of which he had made a close study. 4 eS ltJdS ltJc6 5 �xc4 Nowadays 5 ... ltJb6, which restricts White's possibilities, is more often played:

36 ltJb3 ! Now 37 �g3 is the only way for White to escape from the pin, but then follows the forcing variation 3 7 . . . ltJxd4 3 8 �xb5 ltJf5+ 3 9 �h2 ltJh4 40 � f 1 l:te I (threatening . . . l:taa l ) 4 1 �g3 l:txf l 42 l:txf l :'xg2 mate. White resigns. In November 1 984 Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov were sti l l engaged in thei r World Championship Match i n Moscow, and therefore the role of leading the USSR Team at the Olympiad in Thessaloniki was

71

Uncompromising Chess

After 6 �b3 ltJc6 the main continuation for White is 7 It:le2 �fS 8 ltJbc3 e6 9 aJ, preventing . . . ltJb4. Here for a certain time Black used to play 9 ... �e7 10 ().....() 'i'd7, the best known game being Kamsky­ Magem Badals (Madrid 1 994): 1 1 �a2 ()..-Q.-{) 1 2 �e3 f6 1 3 exf6 �xf6 14 'i'e l ltJxd4 1 5 ltJxd4 �xd4 1 6 �xd4 'i'xd4 1 7 �xe6+ �xe6 1 8 'i'xe6+ 'i'd7 1 9 'i'b3 a6 20 l:tac I llhe8 with double-edged play. In 1 997 at SI. Petersburg, Korchnoi improved Black's play in his game with Epishin: 9 ... 'i'd7!? 1 0 ().....() Q-...{)....{) I I �e3 f6 12 exf6 gxf6 1 3 ne I (l did not know this game, and in the European Team Championship at Pula 1 997 I played against Korchnoi 1 3 ltJa4 h 5 1 4 nc l h4 1 5 ltJc5 �xc5 1 6 ::Ixc5 c;t>b8 17 �c2 ltJe7 1 8 ltJf4 ::Ihg8, when Black developed an unpleasant initiative) 13 ... 4.Ja5 14 �f4?! e5 ! I S �e3 hS 1 6 %:.c l ltJbc4 with some advantage to Black. 6 �d3 It:lc6 7 �e3 may be more promising: (a) 7 ... ltJb4 8 �e4 c6 9 ltJc3, when the game Belyavsky-Yakovich (Sochi 1 986) continued 9 . . . �e6 10 ltJge2 li:l4dS II ().....() 'i'd7 1 2 ltJg3?! f 5 ! 1 3 exf6 exf6 1 4 lle l 0-0-0 I S �d2 ltJc4 with very unclear play, but 12 ltJc I !? came into consider­ ation, with the idea of ltJd3-cS ; (b) 7...�e6 8 ltJc3 'i'd7 9 ltJf3 Q-...{)....{) is the plan usually carried out nowadays. For example, the game Kir.Georgiev-Green­ feld (Burgas 1 994) continued 10 ().....() �g4 I I h3 �h5 1 2 aJ (Greenfeld recommends 12 e6!? 'i'xe6 1 3 ltJg5 �xd l 1 4 ltJxe6 fxe6 1 5 1:taxd l with compensation for the pawn) 12 ... e6 1 3 1k l �b8 14 b4 f5! 1 5 exf6 gxf6 16 ltJe4? 'i'g7 and B lack gained the advantage. Stronger, as shown by Green­ feld, was 1 6 b5 ltJxd4 1 7 �xd4 'i'xd4 1 8 ltJxd4 �xd I 1 9 ltJxe6 l:txd3 20 l:tfxd I l:txd 1+ 2 1 llxd I �xa3 22 ltJe4, although here too White faces a battle for a draw. ltJb6 6 ltJc3

7 8

�bS ltJf3

�d7 e6

9 ().....() ltJe7 I f 9 . . . ltJb4 there can follow 1 0 �e2 �e 7 I I aJ li:l4dS 1 2 ltJe4 �c6 1 3 'i'c2 h6 1 4 �d3 a6 1 5 It:lc5 �xc5 1 6 dxc5 ltJd7 1 7 :'eI CDe7 1 8 �e4 with a cramped position for Black (Gavrikov-Lukas, Biel 1 995). 10 �d3 � c6 11 tOgS ! ? With the threat of a n attack b y 'i'h5, White transfers his knight to e4, at the same time provoking a weakening of Black's kingside. However, accurate play is also required of B lack after II aJ. For example, in the game Razuvaev-Fominykh (Stacy Smokovec 1 990) after the unfor­ tunate flank manoeuvre I I . . . ltJg6 1 2 �e3 �e7 13 :tc l ltJh4?! 1 4 It:lxh4 �xh4 I S 'i'g4 g6 1 6 �h6 �e7 1 7 %:.fd l 'i'd7 1 8 'i'f4 �f8 1 9 'i'f6 B lack ended up in a difficult situation. 11 b6 Black cannot play 1 1 ... 'i'xd4? because of 1 2 ltJxf7! ( l 2 . . . �xf7 1 3 �g6+). 12 'i'bS g6? After stopping for a second beside our board, Rafael Vaganian later quite reasonably remarked: ' I don't understand how Black could have failed to sacrifice the exchange by 1 2 ... hxg5 1 3 'i'xh8 'i'xd4' .

72

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

'1Ir'h4 21 f6 �xh6 �xh6 22 23 'i'xh6 'tt'g7 B lack practically forces th e exchange of queens (if 24 '1Ir'h3 fxe5 25 dxe5 Ilxd 1 + 26 Ilxd I 'tt'xe5 27 'tt'h 6 'tt' f6 with equal chances) but, as I am a pawn up, I am quite happy with this. 24 '1Ir'xg7+ 'it>xg7 25 Ilf7 f3 26 fxeS lDe2 Black has to stabil ise the pawn structure, as if 26 . JUd7?! 27 lDf4 cj;f7 White forces a favourable rook ending with 28 d5 ! , when he breaks through to the c7 pawn: 28 . . . ..txd5 29 :xd 5 ! J:xd5 30 lLlxd5. !Hd7 dxe5 27 28 llxd7+ Ihd7 29 lle2 'it>f7 .

13 lDge4! �g7 If 1 3 . '1Ifxd4 Black has to reckon with 14 lDf6+ Wd8 1 5 ..-e2, with the terrible threat of 1 6 .:.!d I . 14 'tt' g4 lDrs �e3 15 lDd5 16 lDxd5 'tt' x d5 17 lDc3 '1Ir'd7 After 1 7 ... '1Ir'a5 1 8 aJ with the threat o r b2-b4 the queen is unable to find an y peace llfd l lld8 18 � llac1 19 Later, instead of this pawn sacrifice, Portisch suggested the solid 19. . '1Ir'e7 followed by .. J:d7 and .. :ilfd8. .

.

35 lle7 li)cs 36 li)b3 In time trouble I should not have forced matters. After 36 a3 and the preparation of the g-pawn's advance it wo u l d have been more difficult for Black to defend. 36 a4 b4 37 li)d4 38 li)c6 Here too 38 a3 was stronger, and after 38 . . . b3 39 lIc ! ! �xg2 40 lDb5 White breaks through to the queenside weak­ nesses: 40 . . . c6 41 li)d6+ �f8 42 Ilc4 lla7 43 lIb4 c5 44 llb8+ �g7 45 llc8. But, understandably, it is not easy to decide on such manoeuvres in time trouble. b3 38 axb3 axb3 39 lle8 lIc3 40

.

73

session, in order to find a way to realise White's advantage. c6 41 42 g3 lla8 No better is 42 . . . 11h8 43 h4 lla8 44 lDxb3 llb8 45 lDc5 llxb2 46 lDd7 and 48 lDf6, evicting the bishop from its best base at d5. llal lDxb3 43 44 lDd4 llxb2 llb6 llc2 45 lla6 h3 46 lla2 llc3 47 After 47 . . . �g2 48 lDf3 ! Black cannot go into the rook ending. 48 lD f3 ! llg2 After 48 ... c5 White wins with 49 lDg5+ followed by 50 llxc5. �e7 49 lDg5+ lld2+ �d4 50 51 llal �eS 52 lla5+ h4 �b6 llal 53

.

20 ..txfS! gxfS After 20 .. exf5 2 1 -.n3 Black would have to reckon with the threat of d4-d5 (e.g. 2 1 . g5 22 d5 !). .

.

.

Black is practically obliged to observe passively the development of events, as after 29 ...lld l + 30 �f2 and �e3 with the threat of lDd4 the rook is forced to return.' 30 �f2 lld5 31 f4 lld7 32 lDc3 as 33 b5?! �e3 33 ... b6 is sounder, when I was intending to play 34 g3 followed by lDe2d4. 34 lDa4! ..td5

41 lOd4?! This untimely haste was to force my opponent to make the sealed move. After 4 1 lDb4! the game might well not have been resumed, but at this point our team was leading 3-�, and it appeared that the ' fork' of the c7 and b3 pawns would complete the 'whitewash' of the Hungarian team. However, in analysis it transpired that 4 1 . . .c6 is possible, when 42 lOxc6 fails to 42 . . lle8 43 �4 llxc3+ 44 bxc3 b2. A fair amount of work had to be done in the two-hour break before the adjournment .

54 lDh7! After the knight reaches f6, from where it both supports the passed h-pawn and attacks the bishop, it becomes clear that the end is near. llbl+ 54 55 �c7 llb5 No better is 55 ... c5 56 llxc5 llb7+ 57 �c8 llb3 58 lDf6 llxg3 59 llc7+ �f8 60

74

h 5 J:rh3 6 1 tOxdS exdS 62 �d8, when the advance of the e-pawn is decisive. 56 c5 tOf6

57 58 59

tOxd 5+ Wc6

exd5 d4

l:.a3 Black resigns

With everything turning out well for me at the Olympiad, there was no reason not to throw caution to the winds in a double­ edged variation of the french Defence. Game 26

Lj uboj evic-Belyavsky Thessaloniki Olympiad 1 98-1

French Dc!fence C 1 8

e4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

d4

tOc3 e5 a3

bxc3 W'g4 W'xg7 W'xb7 tOe2 f4

e6 d5 � b4 c5 �xc3+ CUe7 W'c7 ttg8 cxd4 CU bc6 dxc3

75

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

present game. Even so, it takes too much time, although subsequently the advance of the h-pawn was used as an end in itself. The main continuation here is 12 'i'd3 .

12 13

�d7 tth3

Th is direct way of e l iminating the c3 pawn suffers a fiasco. The old-fashioned 1 3 '1!t'd3 CUfS 1 4 lIb l is stronger. Here are some exam ples: (a) 14 . . 0-0-0 15 hS d4 1 6 l':t g l CUh6')! ( 1 6 . . . f6 ! ? comes into consideration) 1 7 CUxd4 CUxd4 1 8 'i'xd4 b6 1 9 :::t b 3 Jlg3 20 �d3 tOf5 21 W'b4 �b8 22 !rxc3 �c6 23 'tfc4 :::t c S 24 'i'xc6 'i'xc6 2 5 llxc6 :lxc6 26 �f2 Jlg8? ! 27 g4 and the white pawns began to advance (Djurhuus-lohannessen, Norwegian Championship 1 996). 26 . . . :::t g4 27 :::t h I ttcB was stronger, with only a .

slight advantage to White; (b) 14 ... CUa5 1 5 h5 0--0-0 1 6 :g l 4Jc4 1 7 g4 'i'c5 1 8 'i'xc3 a5 with chances for both sides ( Djurhuus-Antonsen, Torshavn 1 996).

15

'i'b5

Winning another pawn by 15 'Wxf7? d4 16 ttd3 tth8 involved the risk of losing the queen.

20 21 22

'Wg4 ..t>f2 'W b3

'Wa5+ CUde3 'Wd5!

d4

15

A normal idea i n this variation: Black is cramped, and the d5 square i s vacated for his pieces. ttd3 16 If 16 nh3 I was intending 1 6 . . . d3 ! ? 1 7 ttxd3 tOcd4! 1 8 tOxd4 CUxd4 with an attack. CUce7 16

17

.ib2

White should have considered 17 .id2, maintaining control o f e3, which is where the knight is aiming for. After the direct 1 7 . . . �b5 possible was 1 8 'i'xf7 ng6 1 9 .ib4 .ixd3 2 0 cxd3 with compensation for the exchange, but Black could have increased his initiative by 1 7 . . . tthS 1 8 'i'fJ .ic6 19 'i'f2 .ie4.

Now, after the inevitable invasion of the queen, the fate of the white king will be sealed.

23

tOxd4

tOxd4

Now White has several possi bilities, but none is satisfactory: (a) 24 nxd4 'tftJ+ 25 We I CUg4! threatening mate; (b) 24 .1xd4 'i'tJ+ 25 We I (or 25 �g l

13

ttxd4 26 ttxd4 Jlg8) 25 ... llxd4! 26 ttxd4 CUg4! with a mating attack; (c) 24 llxe3 CUfS 25 lld3 W'cS+ 26 �e l (or 26 ..t>e2 llxd3 27 cxd3 'We3+) 26 . . . 11xd3 27 cxd3 'We3+ 28 ..t> d l 'Wf2 29 �e2 lld8 with a decisive attack. There only remains the continuation i n the game . . .

17 18 14

12

b4

This idea of attacking the c3 pawn with the king's rook was first tried in the

ttxc3?

Now the white queen is cut off from the centre of events. It was not yet too late to return with 14 Wd3, although the time wasted on the rook manoeuvre is very

significant. 14

tOd5! ncl

18 .1xd4? leads to the exchange o f this bishop after 1 8 . . . CUxf4 ! 1 9 lOld"4 lOxd4, which exposes the dark squares in White's position. But it is already hard to offer him good advice: 18 Wo .1c6 19 Wf2 lOde3 allows Black to begin a decisive invasion.

18 19

g3

.ic6 nb8

24 25 26

..t>xe3 ..t>d2 ..t>c3

The dS square is like a transit base for the black pieces.

27

ttxd4

l:txd4

A fter the capture with the queen, the king would have hidden at a2. But now 2 8 ..t>b3 i s met b y 2 8 . . . Jld2 (preventing ..t>a2 and threatening ...id5+) 29 .ic4 b5 30 .

.id3 .id5+ 3 1 ..t>b4 ..t>b7 32 .ixb5 ..t>b6 33 ..t>a4 Wc5 34 Wf1 a6 and wins.

76

Uncompromising Chess

28 29

�d3 hS

.ll h d8 .!l8dS

Game 27 Belyavsky-DIugy Interzonal Tournament Tunis 1985

Queen's Gambit Accepted D24

2 3 4 5 6

7

d4 c4

dS dxc4

lUn lUc3

lU f6 a6

e4 eS a4

bS tiJdS

Threatening 30 . . . :xd3+. It is interest­ ing that, after its journey into black terri­ tory, the powerfu l white queen is unable to come to the aid of its own king: 30 '1!fn =txd3+ 3 1 cxd3 =tc5+ 3 2 � b 3 :b5+.

30 31 32 33

a4 .Ilc5+ <,Pb3 �dS+ <,Pa3 .Ilxd3+ llxcl cxd3 White resigns

I n 1 98 5 I had to break my trad ition of participating i n USSR C h ampionships. The 52nd Championship was also a World Championship Zonal Tournament, and therefore it would not have been ri gh t to

the Slav Gambit reached after I d4 dS 2 c4 c6 3 lUfJ lUf6 4 llJc3 dxc4 5 e4 b5 6 eS lUdS 7 a4. However, there is an important d i fference. In the Slav Gambit B lack can

'influence the battle for the qualifying places. At the Interzonal stage I took part i n the one in Tunis, where the entire tournament was spent in rivalry with Artur Yusupov. Unfortunately, last rounds have not always turned out well for me - it is

reply 7 ... e6 8 axbS lUxc3 9 bxc3 cxbS 1 0 tLJgS �b7, whereas here 7 . . . e6 involves a pawn sacrifice. And i f . . . � b 7 is then played, this bishop no longer controls the e6 square, and White can exploit this by the pawn sacrifice eS-e6, with the idea' of

too difficult to win 'to order' with B l ack, and on this occasion I lost my sense o f measure and was defeated b y Morovic, which left me in second place. At the Candidates Tournament i n Montpellier I was off form, and in the end I finished half a point short of qual ifying for the next stage.

' freezing' Black's kingside development.

This position seems simi lar to that in

7

77

Uncompromising Chess

fuc3

In recent times Black has often given u p retaining his extra pawn, using Miles's

prescription of 7 . ..e 6 8 axbS liJb6, clearing the situation on the queens ide. Now in the event of 9 �gS i.e7 1 0 .i.xe7 "'xe7 I I bxa6 llxa6 1 2 l:txa6 i.xa6 1 3 i.e2 (}....O 1 4

llJc6 the chances are 0-0 (Tukmakov-Miles, BieI I 995). 9 �e3 is stronger:

equal

This was prepared beforehand. The idea of the move is to mobilise the kingside as quickly as possible. 1 0 g3 is quite effectively met '1!fxe6+.

by

10 . . . 'i'd5

11

i.g2

(a) 9...�e7? 10 lUd2 axb5 1 1 .!lxa8 lUxa8 12 lUxb5 and Wh ite gains the advantage (Chemin-Miles, Biel 1 995); (b) 9 . . . �b4 10 lUd2 axb 5 I I l:Xxa8 lUxa8 12 '1!fg4 ( insufficient is 1 2 lUxc4 �xc3+ 1 3 bxc3 bxc4 14 '1!fa4+ lUd7! 1 5 '1!fxa8 llJb6 - Kramnik) 1 2 . . <,P fS 1 3 lUxb5 lUb6 1 4 lUc3 lUc6 (Kramniks's suggestion of I4 ... h5 ! ? is i nte rest i n g : 1 5 '1!fe4 �d7 1 6 lUxc4 �c6 1 7 '1!fc2 llJxc4 1 8 �xc4 �xg2 1 9 .!lg i �d5) 1 5 �e2 h5 1 6 'i!fe4 �b7 1 7 0-0 g6 1 8 � fJ �g7 1 9 '1!ff4 �e7 2 0 .!ld l �a8 2 1 d 5 ! with an en du rin g advantage for Wh ite, since it is not easy for Black to bring his rook at h8 into play (Kram nik­ Korchnoi, Budapest 1 996). 8 bx c3 �b7 This allows eS-e6, freezing Black's k ingside. More subtle is 8 . . .'i!fd5 9 g3, and now:

.!leI 12 At the cost of two pawns \Vh ite has gained a significant lead in development

(a) 9 ... �e6 10 �g2 '1!fb7 I I 0-0 �d5, when White carries out the thematic 12 e6! �xe6 13 llJg5 �dS 1 4 �xdS '1!fxdS 1 5 axb5 axbS 1 6 :Ixa8 '1!fxa8 1 7 dS, with

and detained the black king in the centre, wh ich for 1 9th century romantics would be sufficient to capture it. However, even with the modem improvement in defensive

compensation for the sacrificed pawns;

technique, such positions are not easy to

(b) 9...�b7 10 �g2 'i'd7 I I e6 'i'xe6+ 12 �e3 'i'c8 13 dS lUd7 1 4 0-0 lUf6 1 5 lUeS e6 1 6 dxe6 fxe6 1 7 �g5 �d6 1 8 �xf6 O-O ! and Black held the position

defend. For the moment 1 3 lUgS fxgS 1 4 .i.hS+ i s threatened.

(Belyavsky-Illescas, Linares 1 995). 9 e6 f6 The capture 9 .. fxe6 is considered risky, and perhaps for this reason it occurs very rarely. For example, the game Bronstein­ Chikovani (USSR 1 967) continued 1 0 lUgS 'i'dS I I 'i'g4 'i'fS 1 2 'i'g3 e S 1 3 'i'xeS 'i'xe5+ 1 4 dxeS lUd7 I S lUe6 .!lc8 16 axb5 axbS 17 lla7 with the initiative for White. 1 0 .i.e2 'i'dS I I lUg5 'i'xg2 12 llfl IS

.i.fJ is unpleasant for Black.

'ilidS 'i'xe6

10 11

.

.

also interesting.

10

�e2!

12

'i'd7

1 2. ..'i'dS?! 1 3 lUh4 with the threat of

13 liJh4 1 3 liJd2 came into consideration, aiming for the e4 square. g6 13 14 �g4 f5 lUc6 Is .i.n h6? ! 16 .i.gS It is not easy to withstand the pressure of the pieces impending over the kingside, but after the more solid 1 6 . �f7 I would also have attacked as in the game - 1 7 d5 lUd8 1 8 l:ta2. For example: 1 8 . . . h6 19 i.f4 .

.

78

Uncompromising Chess

�g7 (or 1 9 . . . g5 20 �e5 J:th7 2 1 g8 22
In the Spring of 1 986 I played badly in the 53 rd USSR Championship in Kiev, but on the other hand at the end of the year I managed to win for the second time i n Tilburg. Between these main tournaments I played wel l at the Chigorin Memorial Tournament in Sochi, where I shared 1 st3rd places and won for the first time against the 7th Champion of the World. Game 28 Smyslov-Belyavsky Chigorin Memorial Tournament Sochi 1986

Dutch Defence A85

dS f7 25 ttJe5+ and White wins. 18 ':xeS hxgS 'lWd6?! 19 ttJxg6 19 . . ..:.h6 20 xf8 is a tougher defence, although here too after 2 1 'lWd2 White has a strong attack. 20
79

Uncompromising Chess

fS d4 ttJf6 c4 2 3
gain in strength i f the white queen moves away from there, as occurs in the game. Before this game S ... h6 6 �xf6 �xf6 7 e4 had been played, when 7 . . c5 is again good, with double-edged play. dxcS 6 I spent more time looking at 6 d 5 .

,

which would have led to complicated play. For example, Anastasian-Vasyukov (Novi Sad 1 988) continued 6 . . . d6 7 h4! ttJbd7 8 ttJh3 ttJe5 9 e3 ttJe4 1 0 ttJxe4 fxe4 I I �f4 'lWb6 12 ':c l as 1 3 �e2 'i'b4 with double­ edged play. The more modest 6 ttJf3 cxd4 7 ttJxd4 ttJc6 8 e3 is also possible. 6 tUa6 6 .. .'i'a5 is not possible in view of 7 �xf6 ! �xf6 8 ttJd5 'i'xd2+ 9 c;t>xd2, and if 9 . . . �xb2 10 ':b l �e5 I I ttJf3. 7 �b6 7 ttJh3 ! ? ttJxc5 8 f3 0-0 9 e3 d6 1 0 �e2 came into consideration. 7 �xh6 After 7 . .. 0-0 8 �xg7 �xg7 9 h4 Black comes under an attack. ttJxcS 8 'i'xb6 9 ttJh3?! The winning of the h7 pawn requires too m uc h time, which B lack promptly exploits. 9 f3 'i'aS 10 0-0--{) looks more logical, and if 1 0 . . . b5 I I cxb5 a6 1 2 e4! with double-edged play. 9 'i'aS

10 0--0--{) There is no way back: 1 0 'i'd2? ttJb3. bS! 10 With this pawn sacrifice Black seizes the initiative. 11 ttJgS?! I was expecting I I cxb5 a6 1 2 b6 'lWxb6 1 3 f3 Ub8 1 4 'lWd2 ( \ 4 Ud2 is also good) 1 4 . 0-0 I S e3 with roughly equal chances. �b7 11 Developing and preparing an escape route for the king. White's idea would have been justified only after 1 1 ... b4 1 2 'lWg7 :tf8 1 3 ttJd5 ttJxd5 1 4 ttJxh7 ttJe6 I S 'i'xg6+. 12 'i'g7 White ' implements' his idea, but also after 12 cxb5 the play would have gone in my favou r : 12 . . . ttJce4 13 ttJcxe4 �xe4 1 4 ttJxe4 ttJxe4 etc. 12 ': 1'8 .

.

13

cS! 5 White is clearly planning to castle queenside and to exchange the dark-square b ishops, and after the routine S . . . O-O 6 �h6 d6 7 ttJf3 c6 8 h4 h is attack can become very dangerous. Therefore Black forestal ls him by beginning a counterattack on the queenside. which will particularly

tDxh7?

Now White falls hopelessly behind in development and B l ack does not need to castle. After the attempt to get at the king by \3 e4 b4 14 e5 bxc3 I S exf6 :txf6 1 6 ttJxh7 it would have sl ipped away with 16 . . ()....{}-{) ! ( 1 7 ttJxf6 'i'xa2). White should have decided on 1 3 ttJxbS :c8 (but .

not 1 3 ... 'i'xa2?? 1 4 ttJc7+ � d 8 I S llJce6+), although Black still has the in itiative.

13

ttJxh7

80

Uncompromising Chess

14 ..wxh7 b4 Paying no attention to 1 5 'ii'xg6+. ttJd5 15 .1xd5 16 Ihd5 d6 17 �bl b3 18 axb3 llb8 White's bishop and king's rook have no way of coming into the game. 19 ..wxg6+ �d7 ltx fS 1It'e1+ 20 21 ttJxb3 �c2

W hite resigns Of course, a victory over Smyslov would have been more meritorious in 1 954, but at that time I had other interests, as I had not yet celebrated my first birthday. I have managed to win only this one game against him, although I have had numerous promising positions. Resource­ fulness in the defence of difficult positions - this is the feature of Smyslov's play that time has not affected. My meetings at the chess board with Smyslov began when his best years were already long past. It was nearly 25 years since he had been contesting the World Championship. This makes all the more amazing his competitive achievements i n tournam ents now, when h e i s already over 77 years old. The best result among all the participants in the Veterans v. Ladies

Uncompromising Chess

match in Copenhagen in the summer of 1 997 was no accident and not an isolated phenomenon: it is sufficient to recall his success at the recent Keres Memorial in Tallinn. It would appear that he has already surpassed the great Emanuel Lasker. This chess longevity is explained by a special disposition, which has always been inherent in Smyslov, or at least as long as we have been acquainted. Smyslov never hurries, because together with Ecclesiastes he realised long ago that 'All is vanity and vexation of spirit'. I have heard this phrase come from his lips many times, only not i n a pessimistic interpretation, b u t in the fully optimistic sense that one should not worry regarding temporary misfortunes and con­ flicts. One should calmly go about one's business, wholly trusting to Providence, the work of which we are not capable of understanding, let alone of changing any­ thing in its predestination. Life is a price­ less gift, which should be used joyfully, carefully, and with love for him who gran­ ted it. This is how the 7th World Cham­ pion feels, how he lives and how he wins. To engage in a discussion on the Ruy Lopez with Yefim Gel ler, one of the greatest specialists on the opening, was equivalent to crossing a m ine-field. Game 29 Geller-BeJyavsky Chigorin Memorial Tournament Sochi 1 986

Ruy Lopez C95

2 3 4 5 6 7

e4
e5 ltJc6 a6 ttJr6 �e7 bS d6

c3 8 U-{) 9 h3 lle8 10 .1 b7 d4 ttJbd2 11 .1f8 .1e2 12 ttJb8 The Breyer Variation served me faithfully right up to the 1 990s, when in competitive interests I had to switch to the Archangelsk Variation. 13 b3

The classic ' Spanish' plan, involving manoeuvring the knight to g3 , is con­ sidered later, in the game with Sm irin (No.4 I ) . The continuation chosen here, preparing pressure against Black's queen­ side, is also fairly unpleasant. In passing I should mention that perhaps the most difficult problems I had to face in the Breyer Variation were after 1 3 a4
81

ttJe6 20 h4 White's position is nevertheless better; (b) I S ttJ n d5 1 6 .1g5 dxe4 1 7 ltxe4 .1e7 1 8 lIe2 exd4 1 9 ttJxd4 �f8 20 lId2 ..wc7 2 1 .1f5 c5 22 ttJO ttJe5 23 ttJxe5 lIxe5 24 ttJe3 and White retains the initiative (Anand-Belyavsky, Linares 1 992). ttJbd7 13 d5 14 The alternative plan 1 4 .1b2 g6 I S a4 .1g7 1 6 .1d3 c6 1 7 ..wc2 lIc8 leads to no less complicated play (Korchnoi-Portisch, Belgrade 1 970). 14 c6 15 c4 ..we7 B lack can also consider 1 5 . . . a5 1 6 a4 bxc4 1 7 bxc4 ttJc5 1 8 ttJb 1 .1 a6 1 9 ttJaJ ..wc7 20 .1d2 lIeb8 when he has a good game (Sigurjonsson-Ornstein, Reykjavik 1 984). ttJn 16 If 1 6 a4 there can follow 16 . . . bxc4 1 7 bxc4 lIec8 1 8 1Ia2 a5 1 9 ttJb3 .1a6 20
82

invasion of his queen) 27 �e2 �xe4 28

�xd6 'i'xe2 29 nxe2 lLlc3 30 'i'xfS lLlxe2+ 3 1 �f1 lLlxd6 32 'i'e6+ after which White would have retained the advantage. 5 26 �e7 f3 27 � f2 ? ! 28 After the conceding of t h i s important d iagonal, Black's counterplay assumes real proportions. 28 �h I �h4 29 n d I came into consideration, when 29 . . f4 30 �g I favours White. 28 �g5 29 ex5 This allows Black to exchange his 'bad' bishop. 29 � fI was more logical. 29 �xd 2 ! .

�c5 a3 ! 20 21 axb4 axb4 It transpires that it is unfavourable for Black to play 2 1 . . �cxe4 22 bxa5 �c3 23 �xc3 'i'xc3 24 �c4 �xd5 (24.. .�xd5 25 �e4) 25 �b6! 'i'xc2 26 'i' xc2 !::X c 2 2 7 �xa8 �xa8 28 nec I , when the a-pawn w i l l cost him a piece. But now White's knight occupies the key c4 square. llxa8 nxa8 22 23 'i'b l ! 'i'b6 'i'b5 24 � c4 �e8? ! �e3 25 25 ... �fd7!?, with the same idea, was more logical. .

26 �fd2 After the game Geller suggested the better 26 �d I ! fS (with his knight at d7 B lack could play 26 . . . 'i'a6 followed by the

30 31

83

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

� xd 5 lLle4 �xe4 � f6 � xe4 32 33 �xdS+ lLlxdS 34 'i'd l The immediate 34 'i'c I was accurate. l:ta2 34 35 'i'e!

(6 l:txf2 39 With the idea of 40 �xf2 'i'a2+ 4 1 �e3 'i'xb3+ 42 �d2 'i'c3+ 43 �d I b3. White resigns. My victory i n the double-round tourna­ ment in Tilburg was memorable both for my starting ' handicap' (I began with two defeats) and for my close rivalry with Ljubojevic, who I managed to beat twice. I was also able to inflict the only defeat on Anatoly Karpov, although not without his help, as at one point I was very dubiously placed.

Tilburg 1 986

Queen's Gambit D3 5

35 'i'a6! 36 'i'g5 b6 37 Wg6?! An empty threat. 37 Wg4 was better. 37 lLlC4 We8+ 38 �b7

axb4 Black failed to equalise (Dreev­ Belyavsky, Reggio Emilia 1 995/6). ne8 a-o 9 10 'i' c2 lLlf8 �e6 h3 11 In later years against Karpov I defended the continuation I \ .. g6 1 2 �xf6 �xf6 1 3 b4 �e6 1 4 nfd l a6. Black's idea i s to gain counterplay against W hite's kingside, which has been weakened by the advance of the pawn to h 3 . The point is that, i n order t o support t h e advance o f his b-pawn, White has to take control of c5 (otherwise after b4-b5 there may fol low . . c6-c5), but then the absence of the knight from' f3 al lows the black knight to attack the h3 pawn from gS. The game Karpov­ Belyavsky (Linares 1 99 1 ) continued I S �fl 'i'd6 (also interesting is I S . lLlg7 ! ?, with the idea of advancing the g- and h­ pawns) 1 6 a3, and here, instead of the incorrect 16 ... �d8? 17 e4! with advantage to White, 1 6 . . . �gS would have maintained the balance. 12 � r4 .

.

Game 30 Karpov-BeIyavsky

� xd 2

more

()....{) 12 nab l a5 1 3 a3 lLlg7 1 4 b4 axb4 I S

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 c4

�c3 cxd5 �g5 e3 �d3 lLlo

d5 e6 lLlf6 exd5 � e7 c6 � b d7

8 have also played the plan with the exchange of the light-square bishops, but after 8 ...lLlf8 9 'i'c2 lDe6 I 0 �h4 g6 I I ()....{)

..

have also played this position with White. For example, the game B elyavsky­ Yusupov (50th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 983) continued 12 a3 lLl6d7 1 3 �xe7 Wxe7 1 4 b4 lLl g6 1 5 nfc i Wf6 1 6 'i'd i .irs 1 7 b 5 .ixd3 1 8 Wxd3 .!bb6 1 9

84

Uncompromising Chess

bxc6 bxc6 20 lO b I ! with advantage to White. 12 �d6 �xd6 13 After 13 tOeS Black underm ines the knight's base with 1 3 . . oll c 8 fol l owed by 1 4 . . . cS. ifxd6 13 ife7 ? ! a3 14 T o o passive. 1 4 . . . a S ! ? 1 5 tOa4 t06d7 1 6 tOcs b6 1 7 tOxe6 fxe6 1 8 e4 e5 came into consideration, with reasonable counterplay. llaeS b4 15 16 1:trc1 t06d7

tOeS, depriving the opponent of any hopes on the kings ide. tOh4! 19 tOb3 20 'ii'g S �h2 21 This is not prophylaxis, but a h int at a possible opening at an appropriate moment of a 'second front' by f2-f4. rIe7 21

22 23 24

tOe5 Ilel rIac1

5 6 7

tOn 0-0

c6 �d6

� f4

�e8 g6 hS

31 rIxe5! 32 ifxeS White also loses after 32 dxcS d4+ 33 c6 dxc3 34 cxb7 ifxc 1. 'i'xd3 32 'i'e2+ 33 'i'c3 �gl 34 tOe6 35 tOxd4 rIel 36 lObS �bl Now if 37 lhe2 B lack interposes 3 7 . . . d4+! Wbite resigns.

Here Black had a choice between this . manoeuvre on the kingside and . . . tOe8-d6 after the preparatory 1 6 . . . rIed8. 17 tOe2 The knight is aiming for f4, which Black cannot allow, and he has to divert his fS knight away from the potential route fS-e6-gS in order to ful fi l defensive functions. 17 tOg6 18 tOg3 tOdfS

19 tOd2 This allows B lack to activate his forces somewhat. Up till here White has conduc­ ted the game very consistently, forcing Black into passive prophylaxis, and the logical completion of the manoeuvre tOc3e2-g3 was 19 tOfS ! "d7 20 g4 tOe7 2 1

85

Uncompromising Chess

b5? 25 Here this standard move involves an oversight. With the prophylactic retreat 25 �fl ! White would have defended his g2 and retained the better chances, as there is no way for Black to oppose the plan with b4-bS. 25 tOxg2! This is not a sacrifice, but a simple exchange of knights, after which several targets for attack are created on the kingside. 26 b4 'it>xg2 bxc6 bxg3 27 fxg3 rIxe3 28 "xe3 rIxe3 29 30 cxb7 �xb7 31 -.c3 An oversight, but White's position is also unenviable after 3 1 'ifb2 tOe6!

The 54th USSR Championship of 1 987 was sim ul taneously a World Champion­ ship Zonal Tournament. Here, for the third time, I shared first place, on this occasion with Valery Salov. In contrast to previous Championships, in the event of a tie the regulations provided for an additional match. Salov played badly and I won with a score of 3- 1 . Game 3 1 Belyavsky-Bareev 54th USSR Championship Minsk 1 987

Dutch Defence A90 1 2

3 4

d4 c4 g3 .i.gl

f5

tOf6 e6

d5

In the Dutch ' Stonewall' since the time of Botvinnik White has aimed for the ex­ change of the dark-square bishops, after which it is easier for him to exploit the weakness of the eS square for knight man­ oeuvres. White used to carry out this plan by b2-b3 and �a3 . Black then:fore began developing his bishop not at e7, but at d6, in order to prevent by . . . 'i'e7. In the present game I considered it feasible to allow a worsening of my pawn structure for the sake of weakening the dark squares in the opponent's position. White's subsequent plan is to play his knight to e5, and in the event of its exchange to capture on e5 with the d­ pawn, vacating d4 for the second knIght. However, this plan must be carried out energetically, without allowing Black to gain counterplay with . . . g7-gS. An example is provided by the game Belyavsky-Van der Wiel (Amsterdam 1 990): 7 ... .1xf4 8 gxf4 0-0 9 e3 tObd7 1 0 tOeS tOxeS (this exchange assists White's plan; 10 ... �4 1 1 f3 tOd6 12 cS tOn is more flexible, although after 13 tOe3 and tOe2 White's chances are better) 1 1 dxeS ! tOd7 (after l l ...tOe4 1 2 b4 'i'b6 1 3 a3 as 1 4 cS "a7 1 5 f3 or 13 ...dxc4 14 .1xe4

S6

fxe4 I S lOd2 White gains the advantage) 1 2 1Od2 '*e7 1 3 trc 1 trdS 1 4 ,*c2 1OfB I S lOb3 ltJg6 1 6 cxdS exdS 1 7 ltJd4 (the culmination of the plan).

pawn is lost) 1 2 ltJbS 'tid7 1 3 ,*c7! nc8 14 'tixd7! ltJbxd7 1 5 ltJd6 trc7 1 6 trfc l ..tc6 1 7 !1c2 with advantage to White.

10 11 12 13 14

tracl exdS lObS

'i'a.t

lOa6 ..tb7 exd5 ,*e7 lOe8

After 14 .. J:tfc8 I S lUes lOe8 16 !1xc8 !1xc8 1 7 ltJxa7 a pawn is lost.

15 16

1 7 . . . ltJh4 I S �h3 g5 19 �h I ! g4 (also inadequate is 19 . . . gxf4 20 exf4 c;t>h8 2 1 ':'g l ) 20 = g l h5 2 1 � f1 J:If8 2 2 G 1:.f7 2 3 '\lin tDg6 24 � d 3 c;t> g 7 2 S b 4 ! as (or 2S . . . 'iI'xM 26 e6 !lf6 27 �xfS) 26 ,*c2 tLlh4 27 b5 with a clear advantage.

7 8 9

0-0

�xd6 'tie2

'iYxd6 b6

ne3 tDxe7

lOee7

1 6 .!:t fe ! could have led to interesting com p l ications: 1 6 . . . l!f'e8 (after 1 6 . . . :lfc8 1 7 ltJxa7! White wins at least a pawn. as i f 1 7 . . . .:.xa7 1 8 ':'xc7 :txc7 1 9 J:.xe7 tixc7? he has 20 'tie8 mate) 1 7 :xc7 ltJxc7 1 8 :xc7 �c6 ! 1 9 'i'a6 ( 1 9 ':'xc6 'i'txc6 leads to an unc lear situation, where White has three m inor pieces against Black's two rooks) 1 9 . . . �xbS 20 'i'b7 '*g6 2 1 ttJe5 'i'f6 22 �xd5 :rfb8 (best - if 22 . . . :ab8 23 �xe6+ �h8 24 ltJf7+ �g8 25 ttJd8+ White wins, while after 22 . . . exdS 23 'tixd5+ �h 8 24 '1txbS he has ample com­ pensation for the exchange) 23 ..txe6+! 'tixe6 24 trxg7+ �f8 25 :f7+, and Black must agree to a draw by 25 . . . �g8 26 1:.g7+, as after 25 . . ':O'e8 26 'tiG White ' s threats are too strong, despite him being a rook down (K.Neat).

16

S7

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

17

h3!

With this unobtrusive move White begins a highly aggressive plan of an attack on the king.

17 18 Defending

tree8 g6

g4 the

f5

pawn,

as

after

I S ...lUe8 19 gxf5 exfS 2 0 trxcs i.xc8 2 1 tDe5 B lack's dS pawn is weak. Changing the pawn structure by 1 8 ... fxg4 19 hxg4 is unfavourable for the e6 pawn, since the bishop may join the attack on it from h3. Even so, this should have been preferred, as after the move played White is able to carry out his planned attack.

19 20 21 22 23

gxfS ltJe5 trg3+ �h2 trg1

gxfS lOe8 �h8 lOf6 .l:[e7

With this clever move B lack wants to include his bishop in the defence of the kingside. 23 . . .a6 24 'itb4 wins quickly for White - 24 . . . lOg4+ 25 trxg4 'tixb4 26 1Of7 mate.

24 25

�O 'tib3

�e6

After 25 ltJxc6 'tie8 26 'ifaJ trxc6 27 'ife3 'iff7 it is easier for Black to defend.

25 26

trg8 i.hS

If 26 ...trxg3 27 'ifxg3 'iffB White has either 28 ltJg6+, winning the exchange, or 28 ..tG (with the threat of 29 'iWh4), continuing the attack.

27 28 29

trxg8+ 'ifg3 'ifh4

ltJxg8 ..tbS lOf6

Black also l oses after 29 . . . 11g7 30 llxg7 �xg7 3 1 'i'g5+. i.f7! 30

Black resigns. There is no defence against 3 1 ltJg6+. Game 32

Belyavsky-Salov j.Jth USSR Championship 1987 Play-Off (game 4)

Dutch Defence A90

2 3

d4 c4 g3 i.g2

fS ltJf6 e6 �b4+

4 Before this last game of the match was leading 2- 1 , and so Salov deviates from the theoretical paths in favour of a less wel l-studied continuation. S

..td2

More aggressive is 5 lOd2 ()....{) 6 ltJgD b6 7 ltJe5 ltJe4 8 ()....{) i.xd2 9 i.xd2 i.b7 1 0 i.e! We7 I I b3 with advantage to White (Gelfand-Epishin, W ijk 1 992).

tDxe7

5 6

aan

Zee

..te7

ltJo

After the premature advance 6 d5 eS 7 liJG d6 8 cS ()....{) 9 0-0 lObd7 B lack does not stand worse.

6 7

10

1Oa3! After the 'natural' 1 0 ltJbd2 i.b7 I I %:tac l lObd7 1 2 %:t fd I %:tac8 1 3 'tia4 �S Black gains counterplay with . . . c6-cS. But now i f 10 ... ..tb7 there follows I I cxdS ! cxdS ( l l . ..exdS is not possible, as the f5

�?! �?!

White returns the compliment. Black's

26

avoidance of 6 ... d6 or 6 ... dS could have been exploited by the energetic 7 dS! exdS 8 cxdS ltJxd5 9 �3 c6 1 0 ltJd4. 7 c6

88

Uncompromising Chess

17

liJbS

22

.txd6!

31

This combinational blow crowns White's central strategy. I have to adm it that I had planned in advance 22 'iWe8, with the idea o f answering 2 2 ... dxe5 with 23 liJe7+, but then I noticed a defence 22 . . . 'iWh6! 23 i.f4 'iWe6.

22

.td7

After 22 ... i.xd6 2 3 'iWe8+ .tfS 24 liJe7+ �h8 25 liJxc8 (not 25 .ud8? i.d7 ! ) the threats o f 2 6 l:t d 7 and 26 lld8 are highly unpleasant.

23 24

8

'itb3 8 if'c2 can be met by 8 . . . dS 9 .uc l liJe4 1 0 �e l tLld7 I I liJbd2 �d6 1 2 b4 g5 (not 12 . . ..1xb-l 13 liJxe4 �xe l 14 ttJeg5 , win­ n i ng material) 1 3 b5 g4 with a sharp gam e . 8 �g5 d5 9 liJbd2 liJbd7 1 0 '1lt'c2 ( i ntending cxd5) is i nteresti ng, e.g. 1 0 . . . h6 I I �xf6 .1Lxf6 ( 1 1 ...liJxf6 1 2 liJe5) 1 2 cxdS cxd5 ( 1 2 . . .exd5 1 3 '1lt'xf5 .txd4? 1 4 '1lt'e6+) 1 3 =fc l b 6 1 4 e 3 .tb7 1 5 liJe l and White has a slight advantage. 8 liJa6 The development of the knight at d 7 after S ... d5 9 .t f4 liJbd7 i s more natural.

9 10

liJc3

'iWe8

dS!?

1 0 liJe5 !? d6 I I liJd3 fol lowed b y e2-e4 also looks quite good.

10 11 12

'iW c2

l:tadl

The pawn is rega ined, and Black's queenside remains undeveloped.

17 18 19 20

CiJc7

::' f7 .:t b8

liJ xd 5

� f8

'1lt'a4

I f 20 �d4 Black plays 2 0 . . . b6 2 1 'ific7 .:ta8, and the queen has to retreat without having achieved anyth ing.

20 21

a6

�e5

2 1 liJb6! was simpler, and if 2 1 . . . i.c5 22 liJxd7 .txd7 23 ':xd7 'Ilfxe2 24 :xfl �fl 25 '1it'f4 ! .1a7 26 :e I '1lt'g4 27 'iWc7+ �g8 28 .:re7 with a crush ing attack.

21

89

Uncompromising Chess

d6

.:re8 .:rexfS

24 .. :tfxf8 B lack has to reckon with 25 liJf6+ l:txf6 26 l:txd7, while if 24 . . .�xfS White has the unpleasant 25 'iWd6+ �g8 26 liJf4 'iWg5 27 h4 'iWg4 28 �h2 with the threat of f2-D . .

25 26

l:td2 f3

i.c6

'iWg6 'iWf6 'iWe7 g5

liJc3 l:td6 l:tfdl

How otherwise activated?

'iWd4

can

the bishop

31 32 33 34 35

l:txfS+ fxg4 bxg3 l:t n !

g4 lhfS fxg3 'iWe6 l:te8

Black retains his rook, as otherwise the queen + knight duo would not allow their opponents any chances.

l:trs

'iWe3+

To avoid the worst Black has exchange the queens (36 ... h6 37 'iW(4).

37 38 39

'iWxe3 �f2

lLld5

to

l:txe3 lle6 �g7

The rook ending after 39 . . . .txd5 40 l:txd5 l:tb6 41 b3 l:tb4 42 �f3 is hopeless.

40

liJf4

The alternative plan was 40 �D �g6 4 1 e4.

This dispels any i llusions that the black bishop may have had.

26 27 28 29

brings me closer to victory in the match.

36

Salov has not yet lost hope of somehow using his light-square bishop. After

30

liJcs 'iWhS exdS

'iWf4 .txfS

l:td8!

Every exchange not only reduces Black's chances of counterplay, but also

40 41 42 43 44

g5 lld5 l:td6

l:te4 .td7 i.c6

l:te5

lQe6+

be

f4

The immediate 1 2 ... liJce4 is stronger, but in this case too after 1 3 dxe6 dxe6 1 4 � f4 White has a c lear advantage.

13 14

cxd5 liJd4

liJce4 liJxc3

After 1 4 . . .ttJxd2 1 5 .uxd2 g6 1 6 e3 c 5 1 7 d6 i.d8 1 8 lLldb5 Black's position i s much worse, aggravated b y the fact that h i s

�g8 44 44 ... �fl is bad because of 45 liJd8+

bishop a t c 8 is shut in.

15 16

.i.xc3 .i.xdS+

lLlxd5 cxd5

There is nothing better. After 2 1 . ..b5 22 'iWf4 l:tb7 23 llc l Black stands badly.

�e7 46 truc.c6+.

45

lLld4

i.e4

90

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

I f 45 ... �d5 46 liJf3 ! �xf3 47 exD .l:%.xg5 48 .l:%.d8+ �f7 49 .l:%.d7+ with a won rook ending. 46 .l:%.e6 .l:%.xe6 47 liJxe6 �d 5 48 liJc5 �f7 49 '.Pe3 �xa2 50 liJxb7 �d5 51 liJc5 �c4 52 liJd3 �e6 53 '.Pd4 �b 5 54 e4 �d6 liJC4 55 �e8 56 e5+ �c6 e6 57 �d6 '.Pe4 58 �c5 The pawn ending after 58 . . . �g6+ 5 9 liJxg6 hxg6 6 0 e7 ! rj;;x e7 6 1 rj;; e5 i s easily won for White. 59 'ito>e5 'ito>c4 60 liJd5 a5 61 liJC6 �g6 62 liJxh7! The final touch (62 . . . �xh7 63 � f6 �e4 64 e7 �c6 65 g6). Black resigns. In 1 988 I played in five Category 1 5 tournaments, which by present-day stan­ dards would correspond to FIDE Category 1 7- 1 8. After the Christmas tournament i n Reggio Emilia I played successfully i n Linares, where I finished second to t h e brill iantly performing Jan Tirnman. B u t the main event was of course the start of the World Cup with the participation of all the leading grandmasters, and i n one o f its tournaments, in Reykjavik, I was close to achieving one of the best results of m y career. For this a l l I needed t o d o was accept the draw offered in the last round by Spassky, but u n fortunately the lesson with the same opponent from Baden 1 980 had not been learned. The result was a defeat, and, instead of a shared first place with Kasparov, I finished second. It should also

be mentioned that ' sandwiched' between the World Cup was the very strong 5 5th USSR Championship i n Moscow, which I ended with a 50% score. Game 33 Belyavsky-Chaodler Linares 1988

Queen's Gambit D39 liJC6 d4 2 liJf3 d5 3 c4 dxc4 4 liJc3 e6 5 e4 � b4 6 � g5 c5 7 e5 At that time this variation was only j ust coming into fashion. Nowadays I prefer 7 �xc4 cxd4 8 tLlxd4 �xc3+ (Anan d ' s experiment 8 ... �d7 after 9 O-D tLlc6 1 0 :r c I h6 I I �f4 0-0 1 2 e5 fib8 1 3 �g3 liJxe5 1 4 t.e l i.. d6 1 5 liJdb5! tLlxc4 1 6 �d6 left him in great difficulties in his game with Kramnik from Dos Hermanas 1 997) 9 bxc3 'i'a5 I 0 �xf6 gxf6 (risky is 10 . . . 'i'xc3+ I I �f1 gxf6 1 2 .l:%.c l 'W'b4?! 1 3 �xe6! ttJc6 1 4 liJxc6! bxc6 1 5 �xc8 .!:%.xc8 16 h4! when B lack has a difficult ending, Ribli-Belyavsky, Barcelona 1 989) I I i..b5+ �d7 1 2 fib3 a6 1 3 �e2 ltJc6 1 4 O-D 'i'c7 1 5 :rad l .l:%.c8 1 6 'i'a3 ! lUa5 1 7 .l:%.dJ 'i'c5 1 8 'i'c l !:g8 1 9 'i'h6 �e7 20 :rfd 1 :Ic7 (or 20 . . . �a4 2 1 �e6! with a decisive attack) 21 'i'xh7 llgc8 22 e5t fxe5 23 'i'h4+ �e8 24 �e6! 1 -0 (Belyavsi)y­ Lukacs, Austria 1 997). 7 cxd4 7 ... h6 also comes into consideration. 8 'i'a4+ If 8 liJxd4 there can follow 8 . . . ..aS 9 exf6 �xc3+ 1 0 bxc3 'i'xg5 I I fxg7 "xg7 with double-edged play. 8 ttJc6 9 G-O-O

9 h6 Black tries to eliminate the pin. A very sharp variation with the sacrifice of a piece is also played: 9 ... �d7 1 0 tLle4 �e7 (the queen sacrifice 10 . . . tLlxe4 I I �xd8 :Ixd8 is hardly correct, as after 12 tLlxd4 liJxf2 13 !tJxc6 liJxd I 14 'i'xb4 �xc6 1 5 �xc4 Black is unable to castle) I I exf6 gxf6 1 2 �h4 !:c8 (or 1 2 ... liJb4 1 3 'i'xb4! �xb4 1 4 tLlxf6+ � f8 1 5 llxd4 with sufficient compensation for the queen) 13 �b I ttJa5 14 W'c2 e5 1 5 tLlxd4 (White is practical ly forced to return the piece) 1 5 . . . exd4 1 6 llxd4 'i'b6 and i n this sharp position B lack has sufficient counter-chances: (a) 17 lld5 �e6 1 8 'i'a4+ liJc6 1 9 �xc4 'i'b4 20 'i'xb4 tLlxb4 2 1 �b5+ �f8 with an equal ending (Khalifman-Ribli, Groningen 1 993); (b) 17 .l:%.xd7 �xd7 1 8 �e2 �e8 1 9 'i'c3 (weaker i s 1 9 �g4? .l:%.d8! 20 .l:%.e l �f8 2 1 'i'cl h5 when Black goes onto the of­ fensive, V.lvanov-Dragomaretsky, Russia 1 996) 1 9 ....I:%.c6 2 0 .l:%.d l .l:%.e6 2 1 � f3 .l:%.g8 22 :rd5 llxe4 23 �xe4 .l:%.g4 24 'i'xa5 .l:%.xe4 with equal chances (Goldin-Gelfand, Vilnius 1 988); (c) 17 .l:%.d6 .l:%.c6 1 8 .i.xf6 :rxd6! 1 9 �xh8 .if5! and 20 liJxd6+? loses to 20 . . . 'i'xd6. 10 exf6 Very sharp play results from 1 0 liJxd4

91

�xc3 1 1 tLlxc6 (or 1 I bxc3 hxg5 12 liJxe6 'i'xd I + 1 3 'i'xd 1 �xe6 1 4 exf6 gxf6 1 5 'i' f3 �e7 with compensation for the queen, Conquest-Van der Sterren, Dortmund 1 988) 1 1 ...�d7 1 2 'i'a3 ! bxc6 1 3 �xf6 �xb2+ 1 4 'i'xb2 gxf6 1 5 i..xc4 'i'b6 ( 1 5 ... fxe5 16 .l:%.he l ) 1 6 exf6 'i'xb2+ 1 7 <;Pxb2 .l:%.g8 1 8 �c3 ! .l:%.g6! 1 9 .l:%.d2 .l:%.xf6 20 .l:%.b I c5 2 1 f3 a6! 22 .l:%.b6 �b5 with equal chances (Azmaiparashvili-Chernin, Dort­ mund 1 990). 10 hxg5 11 fxg7 .l:%.g8 12 liJe 4

This irrational position has not occurred as rarely as might be expected. Here it would have been easy to run into a surprise, for exam ple in the almost un­ explored 1 2 h4 �d7. On the other hand, I also did not want to simplify the game with 12 liJxd4 �xc3 1 3 bxc3 'i' as 14 "xc4 ( 1 4 ttJxc6 "xc3+ 1 5 � b I �d7 1 6 .!:%.xd7 �d7 1 7 ttJa5+ �e7 1 8 �xc4 � f6 19 .l:%.c l 'i'e5 is probably all right for B lack) 1 4 ... i.. d 7 1 5 liJb5 .l:%.xg7 1 6 'i'c5 Q..-O-() 1 7 i..c4 fib6 1 8 'i'xb6 axb6 1 9 .l:%.he I tLle7 20 h 3 i.. x b5 2 1 :rxd8+ �xd8 22 i.. x b5 liJd5, when Black equalises (Nikolic-Belyavsky, Brussels 1 988). Therefore I decided to be the first to change course, by employing a recom­ mendation of Tukmakov. 12 i..e 7

92

Uncompromising Chess

The psychological move has its effect. My opponent immediately aims to play sol idly, since after the obvious 1 2 ... �d7 ! ? 1 3 lDxd4 �e7 h e d id not care for 1 4 lDxc6 bxc6 (after 14 .. :�c7? 1 5 lDxe7 �xa4 1 6 lDxgS B lack risks losing: 1 6 . . . Wf4+ 1 7 lld2 f5 I S g3 'i' fJ 1 9 lDgf6+ <J; f7 2 0 lDxgs+ or 1 6. . .�xd I 1 7 lDgf6+ <J;e7 I S �xd I ) I S h4 when the position opens up to White's advantage. However, after the optimistic 1 2 . . .d3 ! ? the consequences seem totally unclear. For example, in the event of 1 3 �xd3?1 cxd3

15 lDxc6 bxc6 After 1 5 . . . Wc7? 1 6 lDxe7 'i'f4+ 1 7 11d2 .)txa4 I S lDxgS f5 19 .Ilxh4 'fi'xh4 20 lDd6+ �d7 2 1 lDxf5+ B lack loses. 1:txg7 16 'fi'xc4 11g8 17 Wd4

18

93

Uncompromising Chess

29 30

Wd7+ Wxa7

�c5

all preoccupied with S a4 and i f S . . . �d7 9 Wxc4 �c6 1 0 �g5. 8 bS

9 10

�b 7

'fi'c2 � d2

.Ilh3!

14 :txd3 lIfe7 ! White does not appear to have sufficient compensation for the piece.

13

hot

gxh4

Black could have resigned at this point.

Now after 1 3 . . . �d7 1 4 hxg5 'tIrc7 1 5 'i'xc4 (weaker is 1 5 lDf6+?! �xf6 1 6 gxf6 'i'f4+ 1 7 �b I 'i'xf6 I S 'i'xc4 e5 when B lack has the advantage) 1 5 . . 'i'fH 1 6 lDfd2 0-0-0 1 7 g3 �·e5 I S f4 '+i'xg7 1 9 lDb3 <J;bS 20 <J;b I ncS 2 1 lDec5 :gdS 22 � g 2 B lack is again not guaranteed p�ace. .

14

lD x d 4

White has a clear advantage. The black king is unable to find a secure shelter, and at the same time 19 :hd3 is threatened.

18 19

We5

20

�a6

.Ilb8 llb7 :tb6

0+

llf2

If he

The winner of the Brussels World Cup Tournament, Anatoly Karpov, lost only one game.

when White retains a dangerous attack.

21 llhd3! f5 Black also loses after 2 1 .. ..Ilxa6 2 2 llxd7 .xd7 23 'WbS+ � d 8 24 lDf6+. •

.llxd6, and although White's position i s better, Black retains practical chances.

�d 3 �e2 llxb2 �el

Black resigns

llb3, and i n view of the threat o f 2 2 llxd7 :xd7 23 .IlbS he is forced to open up his k ing: 2 1 . . . f6 22 'fi'h5+ �f8 2 3 lDc5 �xcS (23 .. :ii'e8 24 :tbS Wxb8 25 11xd7) 24 Wxc5+ 2'LWe7 (or 24 . . . �f7 25 'ii'h 5+ �f8 26 Wxh4) 25 llb8+ �e8 26 'ii'h 5,

He should have taken the chance offered to go into an ending: 14 ... Wc7 IS lDxc6 'Wxc6 16 Wxc6+ bxc6 17 lDd6+ �xd6 1 8

f4 ll eb4 �c4

a4 'fi'e7+ �xe6+ �c l 'fi'xh4 �c4+

concedes the b-tiIe by 20 . . J::tc 7, then 2 1

B lack accepts the inevitable.

14 �d7 This move is somehow fated. Now Chandler ends up in a d ifficult situation.

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

.llxd7 .llx d7 lDr6+

'i'xf6 'i'17+ .i.c8 �bl

'Wxd7 �xd7 �xf6 llg4 �d6 .llc4+ .lle 4

Game 34

Belyavsky-lCarpov Brussels (World Cup) 1988

Catalan Opening E05

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 c4 g3 .i.g2 lDo

lDf6

0-{)

dxc4 a6

'i'c2 'i'xc4

e6

d5 .i. e7 0-{)

At that time everyone regained the pawn immediately, whereas now they are

With

the

idea

of

preventing

the

thematic . . . c7-c5 by the pin �a5. The bishop is more often developed at a more active position, but here too Black has sufficient counterplay. Typicaf are two games of mine with U l f A ndersson, where I was the defend ing side: (a) 10 �f4 lDc6 I I .Ild l lDb4 12 'fi'c l llcS 13 lDc3 lDbd5 1 4 �e3 'fi'd6! I S lDxdS lDxd5 1 6 �g5 c5 and Black solved his opening problems (Andersson-Belyavsky, Debrecen 1 992); (b) 10 �gS lDbd7 I I �xf6 lDxf6 1 2 lDbd2 llcS 1 3 lDb3 c 5 1 4 dxcS �e4 I S 'i'c3 .i.d S 1 6 llfd 1 liJe4 1 7 'i'e I 'ii'c 7 with an equal game (Andersson-Belyavsky, Ubeda 1 997).

10

lDc6

It would appear that Karpov had prepared this variation for his first match with Kasparov. Also quite acceptable in this situation is 1 0 . . . �e4 I I 'ii'c l , with the possible continuations: (a) 1 1 ... lDbd7 1 2 �aS llc8 13 lDc3 .i. b 7 (or \ 3 ... .i.a8 14 a4 llb8 I S axb5 axbS 1 6 b4 .i.d6 1 7 'i'c2 'We7 1 8 llab 1 eS 1 9 e4 g6! 20 llfe I c6 and B lack maintained the

94

Uncompromising Chess

balance, B e lyavsky-Vaganian, Brussels 1 988) 14 a4 b4 ! ? I S lba2 'ilt'e8 1 6 ..ixb4 c 5 1 7 dxc5 lbxcs 1 8 'i' d I lld8 1 9 �c2 ..ie4 20 'i'c4 ..idS 2 1 'i'f4 ..id6 22 'i'e3 lbb3 with sufficient counterplay for B lack (Belyavsky-Speelman, Am sterdam 1 9 89); (b) 1 1 ... ..tb7 1 2 ..i f4 lbd5 13 lbc3 lbxf4 14 'i'xf4 c 5 I S dxcS ..ixc5 1 6 llac I ! ? ( 1 6 llfd I '1i'b6 1 7 lbe5 is also satisfactory) 16 ... '1i'e7 17 .:t fd l !la7 ( 1 7 ... lbc6 ! ?), and here instead of 1 8 tOe4 ..ixe4 19 'iWxe4 lIc7, which eased Black ' s defence i n t h e game Piket- Karpov (Dort­ mund 1 99 5 ), White should have included 1 8 a4 ! b4 19 tOe4 J(.xe4 20 'i'xe4, maintaining a prom ising position. e3 tOb4 11

12 13

..ixb4 a3

�xb4

post, but instead prefer 1 3 tObd2 with the idea

0 f tOb3 .

iLd6

13

In view of a poss i ble e3-e4, 1 3 . . .iL e 7 is sounder.

14 15

tObd2 b4

ne8 as!

Battling for the dark squares ( 1 6 bxa5 c5!). iLe7 e4 16 1 6 ... tOd7 is also possible.

17 18 19 20

ltabl axb4 llfc1 '1i'e3

axb4 lta8 lIa4 '1i'a8

The obvious move, but 20 ... tOd7 ! ? also came into consideration, controlling e 5 . 21 tO eS lld8 Black sacrifices a pawn, counting on the activity of his pieces, especially as 2 1 . . Jlc8 al lows 22 tOd3 ! fo llowed by tOcS .

22 23

'i'xe7 d5

b4 1 9 tOe 1 iLxg2 20 tOxg2 �a8 2 1 �c2 tOe4 22 tOe 1 tOgS! (forc ing a weakening of the light squares) 23 h4 tOe4 24 tOd2 tOc3 I was able to create some threats and in the end to win. However, perhaps White should not drive the bishop from what is not its best

after 2 4 �b6 exd5 25 exd5 iLxd5 2 6 iLxd5 llxd5 he retains equal chances. 23 . . .exd5

39 40

24 exdS iLxdS 2S tOg6+ fxg6 26 '1i'xe7+ ¢>g8 was also possible.

24 25 26 27 28 29

W'xb8 tOb3 J:l.eel exd5 lIdl tOe6

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49

A fter 29 ... ltc8 30 tObd4 b4 3 1 tObS the passed d-pawn becomes mobile, but on the other hand now it is transformed into a passed c-pawn. tOe8 30 dxe6

31 32 33 34

tOd4

b4

tOrs

iLe5

J:l.d7 J:l.b7

lIa7

c7 c8'i'

lte8

40 J:l.b8 would have won immediately.

lIxb8 ..ixb4 exd5 iLa3 iLd6 iLxe6

ltxe8

..ixc8 J:l.b8 lteI+

iLe6 ¢> g2

iLd5 lle6+

lte6 h4

lLld6


'iPg7 iLe7

The pawn at g6 is a clear target. B lack has no counterplay and can only wait.

49 50

iLe4

lla5 lta7

Otherwise White will play his rook to b7.

34

ltd8?

It was essential to play 34 ... ltaxb7 3 5 cxb7 g6! (but not 3 5 . . .t2ld6 3 6 J:l.c l tOxfS 37 llxcS lOd6 3 8 llaS ! when White wins), The only chance o f exploiting the active, although insecure position of the queen is this breakthrough in the centre. Unexpectedly it achieves its aim.

23

After 38 . . . lLlxb7? 39 lLlxd8 lLlxd8 40 c7 the pawn slips through.

�f8

A couple of months later in the 5 5 th USSR Championship, I p layed this varia­ tion as Black against Rafael Vaganian, who slightly transformed the position: 1 3 lId 1 lIc8 1 4 a3 iLd6 1 5 b4, but after I S . . . aS ! 1 6 bxaS lIa8 1 7 �d2 lIa6! 1 8 a4

95

Uncompromising Chess

'i'b8?!

By exchanging queens, Black concedes control of the c-fiIe and condemns himself to a gruelling defence. But the queen could have been harassed by 23 ... lta7 !?, when

when the position is still far from clear. Now, however, we have a situation demon­ strating the strength of the attacking side ' s opposite-colour bishop, coordinating well with the rooks.

35 36 37 38

lId .i.b3! lLlb6 lLlxf7!

lIaS g6 lLld6 lLlxf7

51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

bS! bxg6 ltxb4 i.d3 ltd4 lId7 iLe4 iLxf7 ¢>f3

lLld6 bxg6 llat g5 lLlf7 llet ¢>f8

¢>xf7 �e8

lta7 Black resigns

96

Uncompromising Chess

Game 3 5

Sci rawan-Belyavsky Brussels (World Cup) 1 988

S lav Defence 0 1 4

2

3 4

d4 c4 lOc3 exd5

dS c6 lO r6

exdS

5

� r4 lOe6 e3 6 � f5 lOO 7 e6 �b5 8 [n this same tournament U l f Andersson played S lOeS against me, but after ·S . . . lOxe5 9 �xeS lOd7 Wh ite cannot count on any advantage.

lOd7

8

The Exchange Variation of the S lav Defence is not as hamlless as it appears at first sight. [f Black continues the symmetry with S ... �b4, hoping for a draw, then after 9 lOe5 ! 'i'a5 10 �xc6+ bxc6 I I 0-0 �xc3 1 2 bxc3 he runs into difficulties. [t is sufficient to recall the famous I I th game of the Botvinnik- Tal Return Match of 1 96 1 , where Tal incautiously took the pawn 1 2 . . .'1ihc3?, and after 13 'ilfc I ! 'ilfxc l 1 4 ::I.fxc l 0-0 I S f3 h6 1 6 lOxc6 the symmetry concluded with an attack on the a7 pawn.

At that time White also used to play 9 'i'a4 ncs 1 0 0-0 (the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice by 1 0 �xc6 nxc6 I I 'i'xa7 is dangerous in view of I I . . . 'i'cS) 1 0 . . . a6 I I �xc6 nxc6 1 2 ruc I �e7 1 3 lOd I b5 1 4 �bJ nc4 (weaker i s 1 4 . . . 'ilfb6 I S a4! 0-0 1 6 ::I.xc6 'i'xc6 1 7 axbS axbS I S !%.a7 ncs 1 9 'Wc3 ! and White gained the advantage, S h i rov-Komarov, USSR 1 985) I S tiJd2 ::I.xc l ! 1 6 nxc l 0-0 1 7 'ilfc3 b4! I S 'lifc6 �d3 19 'i'b7 lOf6 20 l':c7 �d6 2 1 �xd6 'i'xd6 2 2 f4 'i'd8! and Black maintained the balance (Kramnik-Rubl evsky, U S S R 1 990).

9 10

�e7 �xc6? '

After the passive 1 0 h3 0-0 I I ::I.c I ':'cS 12 :e I 'i'b6 1 3 ':::' e 2 lOf6 B lack easily equalises (Andersson-Belyavsky, Belfort World Cup 1 985), but 1 0 nc I comes into consideration.

10 11

bxe6 ::rcl

The outward 'calm' of the position is deceptive. White's attention i s focused on the queens ide and he wants by simple means to attack B lack's weaknesses and in particular to block the pos s i b i l i ty o f . . . c6-cS. B u t Black in t u m h a s a veiled plan of a pawn offensive on the k i ngside. For the moment it is premature - he must wait for the knight to move to a4, otherv.·ise there can follow a counter-break in the centre, which is dangerous for h i m with his uncastled king. For example: I l . . .gS?! 1 2 �g3 h5 1 3 h3 g4 14 hxg4 hxg4 1 5 ttJd2 and White opens the position after e3-e4.

11 12

:re8 lOa4?

Incautiously moving the knight away from the centre. 12 lOeS seems best, although then after 1 2 . . . lOxeS 1 3 �xe5 f6 1 4 .tgJ cS B lack gets rid o f his weak c6

9

0-0

97

Uncompromising Chess

pawn. Now, however, the m in e explodes!

The black k i n g makes way for its queen.

19

nel ?

Yasser overlooks the main threat, and hopes to run away with h is king after 1 9 ... 'ilfg8 20 �fl followed by �e2. It was essential to play 19 fJ gxfJ 20 'ilfxfJ , although even then after 20 . . . 'i'gS Black's attack is pretty unpleasant.

nbS

19

12 13 14

�g3 b3

gS! b5 g4

The uniform advance of the pawns by 1 4 ... h4 1 5 �h2 g4 achieves its aim only i n t h e event of 1 6 hxg4 �xg4 1 7 'ilfe2 h3 , but after 16 lOeS ! ttJxe5 I 7 �xeS :rgS I S hxg4 �xg4 1 9 f3 �h3 20 l':f2 B lack ' s attack comes to a halt.

15

hxg4

hxg4

With the calmness of an assassin B lack prepares a mating set-up on the h-file, since if 20 �fl h e has 20 . . . 'i' as ! , and after 2 1 �e2? White is mated by 2 1 . . . 'i'bS+ 22 �d2 'i'd3 . �e4! 20 'i'd2 �fl 21 After 2 1 lOc3 White could have held out somewhat longer, but the pattern o f the attack is the same: 2 1 . . . '1ifhs 22 �fl �fJ ! 23 lOe2 :rh I + 24 109 I '1ifh5 25 e4 nxg I + 26 �xg l ::I.h8. 21 �ol

16

lOeS If 1 6 lOh2 the simp lest is 1 6 . . . lOf6 (after the tempting 1 6 ... �h4 White has 1 7 �d6) 1 7 lOc5 �xcS I S dxcS lOe4 1 9 lOxg4 'ilfg5 with a winning attack for B lack ( i f 20 �f4 �xg4) . 16 lOxe5

17 18

.i.xe5 .i.g3

f6 �fi!

White resigns Game 36

Khalifman-Belyavsky 55th USSR Championship Moscow1 988

Ruy Lopez C9 1

1 2 3 4 5

e4 lDo � b5 � a4 0-0

6

ne1

7 8 9

c3 d4

�b3

e5 lOc6 a6 lDf6 � e7 b5 d6 0-0

This variation also occurs occasionally i n my games with White.

9 10 11

dS

.tel

.i.g4 lDaS

98

Uncompromising Chess

�e3
11 'i'e8 This move was first played by Oleg Romanishin. The point of it is that after 12 h3 the bishop can retreat to d7, which is not good after 11...c6 12 h3 �d7? because of 13 ttJxeS! dxeS 14 d6. Nevertheless the energetic attack on the centre by II ... c6 occurs more often: 12 h3 .1xD (after 12...�h5 13 dxc6 ttJxc6 14 �g5 �6 15 ttJbd2 :1ad8 16 �b3
(b) 16...
Uncompromising Chess

22 ... a5 with the idea of ...bS-b4 Black would have gained reasonable counterplay. 15 b4 After IS ttJf1
20 dS This breakthrough is a classic solution to the 'Spanish torture'. In the event of the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice 21 exdS

99

�xd5 22 'jjxe5?! �xb3 23 axb3 lld5 24 'jje3 llc7 25 !fie7 Even for the sake of a pawn there was no point in Black spoiling his pawn structure: 26...dxe4 27 !fixf6 29 >!fixeS 'jjxeS 30 ttxeS �xb3 31 ttxd7 ttxd7 32 axb3, although the rook ending after 32 ...ttd l + 33 �h2 llbl 34 tte8+ �h7 35 :a8 :xb3 36 ttxa6 ttxc3 37 ttb6 would hardly have promised more than a draw. 27 dxe4 28 ttg3 ttd3! 29 llee3? White should have reconciled himself to equality: 29 �c2 llxg3 30 'i'xgJ lld2 31 �xe4 �xe4 32 ttxe4. llxe3 29 30 fxe3 �h8! After this it becomes clear that White's attacking forces have been tied up on the kingside: 31 'jjiS lld6 32 >!fic8+ �h7 33 'jjxa6 g6 34
100

Uncompromising Chess 3 4 5 6 7 8

31 �c2 g6 ttJxf6 "xf6 32 �xe4 h5! 33 'i'xf3 �f3 34 gxf3 35 3S �xtJ e4 36 �e2 l:td2 is equally hopeless. 35 �xe4 36 fxe4 l:tc8 llxc3 37 :t g5 �f2 38 .l:tc4 39 a3 llxe4 �f3 ll h 4 40 41 l:txe5 llxb3+ �g 2 42 llh4 ne8+ �g7 43 na8 44 .l:te4

White resigns At the World Cup Tournament in Reyk­ javik, in a topical variation of the Petroff Defence I was able to pose an opening problem, which Black was able to solve only later. Game 37

Belyavsky-PeturssoD Reykjavik (World Cup) 1988 Petroff Defence C42

1 2

e4 ttJO

e5 ttJf6

101

Uncompromising Chess ttJxe5

ttJf3 d4

�d3

(}-{)

c4

d6

liJxe 4 d5 �d6

�

c6

17

cxd5 9 9 ttJc3 ttJxc3 to bxc3 dxc4 II �xc4 �g4 gives the play a different direction, with Black having piece play against the potential 'hanging' pawns. 9 lle 1 is also played. cxdS 9 ttJxc3 10 ttJc3 11 bxc3 �g4 h3 �hS 12 ttJd7 :tbl 13 14 l:tbS More subtle than 14 a4 b6 IS l:tbS. ttJb6 14 c4 15 Before this I S a4 used to be played. Modem chess is often a battle of prepared variations, but sometimes they can boomerang. This is what happened in the present game. .i.xf3 15 Petursson is the first to deviate from the familiar path 15...�c4 16l:txd5 .i.h2+ 17 liJxh2 'i'xd5 18 .l.xc4 'i'xc4 19 "xh5, where White is nevertheless slightly better. dxc4 16 'i'xo

�c2!

This retreat with the threat of a4-aS was underestimated by Petursson, who prompt­ ly goes wrong, hurrying to drive away the rook. Perhaps he had reckoned only on 17 �e4 'i'd7 18 a4 nab8, when 19 ngS? does not work because of 19...f6! �xg6 fxgS!, while if 19 �fS Black defends by 19 ... 'i'c620 �e4 'i'd7. 17 a6? This game immediately came under the scrutiny of the experts, who fervently tried to defend Black's position. In Kudrin­ Machado (Thessaloniki Olympiad 1988) Black played 17...l:tb8 18 a4 a6, and after 19 �g5 'i'c7 20 �xh7+ �xh7 21 'i'h5+ �g8 22 �f6 �h2+! 23 �h I he missed a chance to parry the attack by 23 ... 'i'f4 ! In my notes to the present game I recommended 17...'i'd7 18 a4. The simplest way to equalise was demonstrated by Akopian in his game with Topalov (Madrid 1997): 18 ... g6! �xc3 l:tac8 2 1 .i.e4 l:tc4 22 l:tfb I l:tfc8 23 l:tSb3 liru4 24 .i.d2 l:txd4 25 .i.e3 l:txe4 26'i'xe4liJc3 27 l:txc3 v,-v,. 18 �gS! Now if 18...'i'c7 there follows 19 .i.f6! .i.h2+ (after 19... axbS White mates by 20 .i.xh7+ Wxh7 21 'i'hs+ �g8 22 'i'gS g6 23 'i'h6) 20 Wh I 'i'f4 2 1 l:txb6 gxf6 22 'i'hS h623 g3, winning the bishop.

18 ... f6 19 'i'hS h6 20 .i.xh6 axb5 2 1 'i'g6 does not look any better, but by precise defence Black may be able to hold on: 2 l...l:tf7 22 l:te l l:te7 23 l:te6! 24 Whl (after 24 �xh2 'i'c7+ 25 g3 l:txe6 26 'i'h7+ �f8 27 'i'h8+ �e7 the black king escapes) 24...ttJd5 25 .i.fS �f8 26 'i'h7 gxh627 'i'h8+ �f7 28 'i'h7+ �f8 29 'i'h8+ with a draw by perpetual check. Petursson decides to part with his queen, but in the resulting open position the white queen is able to combat the black pieces with ease. axbS 18 l:tfxd8 .i.xd8 19 g6 'i'hS 20 'i'xbS 21 �c7 l:txd4 a4 22 'i'c5 l:td7 23

24 g3! This quiet move emphasises that Black's hopes are in vain, as the a-pawn is immune: 24...ttJxa4? 25 .i.xa4 l:txa4 26

'i'bS. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

as 'i'b4 'i'xb7

a6 Wc8+ Wxc4 'i'a4

l:te8 l:teS ttJdS l:tde7 .i.b6 Wg7 l:tc7 l:tel

102

Uncompromising Chess

32 �b3 lOc3 W'b 4 33 �a7 llc2 �c4 34 �d3 lld2? 35 An oversight, but Black also loses material after, for example, 35 ... lla2 36 '1:iid6 �b8 37 'i'b6 llc8 38 'i'b7 1:[f8 39 lle1 �d6 40 'i'c6 �b4 41 lIe8 lIxe8 42 'tlt'xe8 �d6 43 �c4 lIa I+ 44 �g2. 'i'f4 36 Black resigns Early in 1989 a creative crisis again bega n to show, and this made itself felt at the tournaments in Linares and Barcelona. And although I managed to win in Amster­ dam, a loss in the last round of the 56th USSR Championship thoroughly spoiled my mood. Unfortunately, my forebodings were born out at the Christmas Tourna­ ment in Reggio Emilia, where I played extremely badly. Game 38 Gu\ko-Be\yavsky Linares 1989 Queen's Gambit D31 c4 1 e6
this point of view the game Kasparov­ Short is very instructive (cf. note to Black's 11th move).

lOf6 8 f.3 c5!? 9 This standard positional reaction to fl­ O is also appropriate here. Also possible is 9 . . . O-Q 10
103

Uncompromising Chess 19

12 g4? White should not have pushed the bishop back to e6, where it defends the d5 pawn, allowing Black to transfer his king's knight to the queenside. 12 �b5! (Kas­ parov) was correct. Black would evidently have had to play 12 ... 'i'a5, with the idea of castling queenside, but here too it is not easy to defend: 13 �g7 llg8 14 �xf6 �xf6 15
�e7

20
104

Uncompromising Chess

25 llfl! Attacking the f7 pawn and the f6 square. 25 tLlc8? In aiming to allow his king to go to b6, Black allows his opponent to activate his bishop, which leads to equal chances. Essential was 2S ...11e8 26 llJc1 f6 27 'i'f3 tLld7 28 tLld3 .taJ with the threat of a queen invasion at e4. .tg7 26 lle8 �b6 .te5 27 Not 27... .td6? 2811f6 �c7 29 'i'f3. 28 'Wf3 'Wd7 lle7 'W xf7 29 �a7 'Wf3 30 lle8 31 b3

32 tLlf4? Gulko is indeed unlucky with this manoeuvre. He should have consolidated his position with 32 'Wd3. Now Black deftly by-passes the centralised bishop at eS, which is striking at thin air. 32 IUS! 33 llel Things are also difficult for White after 33 'Wd3 .taJ 34lDg2 'Wc6, when 35 tLle3? loses to 35. . . llxfl + 36 'Wxfl 'Wc3. 33 tOe7 h4 34 Or 34 'We3 .taJ 35 lldl tLlc6 followed by .. . llJb4.

Uncompromising Chess

.ta3 34 tLlc6 lldl 35 36 'Wg3 Mate follows after 36 'WxdS 'i'xg4 37 11ft 'i'fS+ 38 �al 'i'c2. llJb4 36 37 tO d3 After 37 'i'g2 the black rook penetrates on the c-file: 37 . . .11c8 38 'i'e2 .llc2. llJxd3 37 lln+ llxd3 38 ll c1 + �c2 39 llal � d2 40 41 'i'c8 �e3 41 ...11xal 42 llc3 'i'bS 43 .tb8+ �a8 44 llc8 lle2+ 45 �f4 'i'd7 was also good enough to win. 'i'g2 42

b5! 42 llfl+! �f4 43 Inviting the king into the black rearguard: 44 �gS .tcI +. Wbite resigllS. Game 39

Belyavsky-HjartarsoD Barcelona (World Cup) 1989 Sicilian Defence B38

1 2 3 4

e4

tOf3 d4 tLlxd4

cS tLlc6 cxd4 g6

5 6 7 8 9 10

c4 .te3 llJc3 .te2 ()....{) 'Wd2

.tg7 tLlf6 d6 � .td7

Black's plan is to exchange minor pieces, leaving White with his light-square bishop. He will then restrict the queens ide pawns by ... a7-aS, leaving White with no active plan. However, this involves exchanging the dark-square bishops, which weakens the position of the black king, and there is a temptation to begin an attack against it. For this White needs to switch his rook to h3. 10 tLlxd4 11 .txd4 .tc6 12 .td3 a5 13 llfe1 tLld7 �xg7 14 .txg7 All is going according to plan, with Black exchanging pieces, and White clearing the way for his rook. I think that Hjartarson can hardly have guessed White's cunning intentions, and for the moment he continues with his idea. 15 lle3 tLlf6?! After this it can be said that White's plan has justified itself: although he has insufficient force for an attack on the king, the opponent too has given up the blockade

\05

of the queenside pawns, where the place for his knight is at cS. The result is that White's hands are freed for strengthening his position on the queenside by preparing the advance of his pawn to b4 after the possible series of moves b2-b3, al-aJ and llab l . The question arises: what if Black had continued his plan and played I S...llJcs ? Then the immediate 1 6 llh3 leads only to a draw after 16 ... hS 17 llxhS gxhS 18 'i'gS+. In reply to 1 6 .tfI there can follow 16 ...f6 17 b3 llf7 18 11bl eS 1 9 aJ (if 19 lld I the d6 pawn can be defended by 1 9 ...11d7) 1 9...f5 20 exfS gxfS 21 b4 f4 with chances for both sides. Objectively, therefore, the plan of an attack by I S lle3 is better replaced by the more utilitarian 15 .tfl llJcs 16 b3, with the idea of llabI , al­ aJ and b3-b4.

16 lldl White should "have refrained from this move , until it was clear where the rook would be most useful. The immediate 16 .tfI was better. 'Wb6 16 .txd5 17 !Od5 llfeS exdS 18 19 .tfl! Creating the option of playing the rook from e3 to b3. 'Wb4 19

106

Uncompromising Chess

20

'i'd4

a4

This leads to the loss of the queen. However, also after 23...'i'c5 24 'i'h4! axb3 25 llbxb3 lOe5 26 l:1h3 h5 27 l:1bg3 �f8 28 'i'g5 e6 29 dxe6 l:txe6 30 l:1xh5! gxh5 31 'i'g8+ �e7 32 'i'xa8 lOg4 33 'i'xb7+ �f8 34 l:1f3 White would have gained a material advantage.

24 25

b4 'i'd!!

'i'a2

Now Black is unable to defend against 26 'i'c I followed by l:te2 or l:1a3. a3 25 l:1c3 26

Black resigns 21

b3

White wrongly avoids the natural 2 I llde I �f8 22 g4. It would not have been easy for Black to defend against the attack on his king: 22 ... 'i'c5 23 'i'f4 b5 24 llf3! with the threat of g4-g5, or 22...lla5 23 g5 l:!.xd5 24 'Wxf6 exf6 25 llxe8+ �g7 26 gxf6+ �xf6 27 cxd5.

21

�g8

Black could have gone into an endgame: 21...axb3 22 llxb3 'i'c5 23 'i'xc5 dxc5 24 .ttxb7 l::txa2 25 lle I �f8 26 llc7 !la5 27 g3 h5, where White never­ theless retains the advantage. Possibly therefore Hjartarson was hoping to extract more from the position.

22 23

llbl a3!

lOd7 'i'xa3?

107

Uncompromising Chess

The strong 56th USSR Championship was to be one of the last, although of course the participants had no suspicion of this. I held the lead until the final round, but after a defeat with White at the hands of Vladimir Tukmakov, first place was taken by Rafael Vaganian. Some moral consolation was provided by my win over the new USSR Champion.

demonstrated in the game Azmaiparash­ vili-Ricardi (Yerevan Olympiad 1996), where after I I �xdS
10

cxd5

Now 10 e3 lObd7 is usually included, and only then I I cxd5, e.g. I I ... lOxd5 12 �xdS ttJxc3 13 �h4 ttJd5 14 �f2 f5 15 �b5 c6 16 �a4 e5! 17 iDe2 llaeS I S 0--0-0 (if I S 0--0 Timman was intending 18 ... exd4 19 ttJxd4 ttJxe3 20 l:1fe I f4 21 �xc6 �xc6 22 ttJxc6 lOe5 with equal chances) 18...e4 19 lOc3 lO7f6 20 l:1he I :lc8 21 ttJxd5 cxd5+ 22 ebd2 �c6. The game is equal (Lautier-Timman, Wijk aan Zee ml8 1994).

10 11 12

exd5 e3 l:1e8 ttJh3 An innovation, which provoked a lively discussion. Before this 12 �f2 had been played.

Game 40

Belyavsky-Vaganian 56th USSR Championship Odessa 1989

0-0 'i'e7 with equal chances) 14...g5 15 �f2 cxd4 16 'i'xd4 i.d71 17 0-0 (or 17 0--0-0 tLlc6 I S 'i'd2 lOa5 19 ebbl i.a420 l:1de I llcS and ... lOc4 with counterplay) 17...ttJc6 18 'i'd2 iDe5 with chances for both sides (Am.Rodriguez-Polugayevsky, Palma de Mallorca 1989). The preparatory 12...'i'e7 is also satis­ factory: 13 .i.f2 c5 14 i.b5 .i.c6! 15 i.e2 �d7 160-0 (16 tLlf4? is not good in view of 16... g5 17 lOd3 cxd4 18 'i'xd4 ttJc6 and ... d5-d4) 16...�xh3 17 gxh3 lObd7 18 �h I ttJh5 19.ttg I lOdf6 (Gulko-Chandler, Hastings 19S9/90.

13

i.e2

c5

The most logical reply. At the European Team Championship (Haifa 1989) Green­ feld tried to clear the position against me with 13...ttJe4?! 14 i.xdS lOxc3 15 �xc7 l:1xe3 (or 15...lOxe2 16 �xe2 l:1ac8 17 l:1ac l ) 16 bxc3 l:1ae8 17 lOf4 �a6 (the situation is not eased by 17...g5 I S �f2 gxf4 19 i.b5) IS �f2 llxe2+ (after 18...�xe2 19 l:1he I l:1xc3 20 i.d6 llc6 21 �b4 White retains the advantage) 19 ttJxe2 l:1xe2+ 20 �g3 and finished up in a difficult ending. 'i'e7 14 0-0

Nimzo-Indian Defence E32

d4 c4

lOf6 �b4 0-0 �xc3+

6

lOc3 'i'c2 a3 'i'xc3

7

�gS

�b7 b6

1 2 3 4 S

e6

b6

f3 dS �b4 Pushing back the bishop by S ... h6 is important, as after S... d5 9 e3 ttJbd7 10 cxdS Black is practically obliged to recapture with the pawn 10... exdS, since the drawbacks of 10 ... tUxd5?! were

8

9

12

liJbd7

Vaganian's first try proved unsuccess­ ful. He hit upon the right track only at the end of the year. It transpired that the weakened e3/f3 pawn structure is better attacked immediately by 12...c5 13 .i.b5 .i.c6 14.i.e2 (or 14a4a6 15 .i.e2 tLlbd7 16

And here after 14...ttJe415 fxe4'ii'xh4 16 e5 ttJf8 17 l:1f4 'i'e7 IS l:1afl White creates dangerous threats on the f-file ( I S ... f6 19 .i.b5 fxe5 20 J:tf7).

!O8

Uncompromising Chess

In the event of 14 ...c4 White prepares a breakthrough in the centre: 1S b3 bS 16 bxc4 bxc4 (or 16 ...dxc4 17 �cl) 17 �d l �c6 I 8 �c2 Ub8 19 tOf2. llac8 jLrz 15 cxd4 Ufel 16 Rafael goes in for a position with an isolated pawn, but problems over its defence force Black subsequently to weaken his position. Later, at the World Team Championship (Luzern 1989) Am.Rodriguez played 16...tLlfB against me, but after 17 �f l .!tJe6 18 �·d2 tLlh7 19 tOf4! ned8 (no better is 19 ..tLlxf4 20 exf4 'iWd7 21 dxc5 bxcS 22 b4) 20 ':!ad llL'lf6 21 ·�d3 �d6 22 lL'le2 he also failed to solve his opening problems. �xd4 17 tOeS 18 na d l tOe6 The attempt to gain control of the c-file looks tempting: 18...�c6 19 b4 lL'le6 20 �b2 �a4 21 .:td2 :red8, but this weakens the defence of the d5 pawn, which White can exploit by 22 tOf4 lL'lxf4 23 exf4 'ii'd6 (or 23 ...�c7 24 �a6 na8 25 bS and then nd4) 24 �d3 ne8 (24...�xf4? loses to 25 �g3 �g5 26 :eS) 25 l:e5 with advantage. 19 'ii'd2 tOeS ned8 �b5 20 21 tOr4 g5 .

22 tOe2 a6 23 �d3 tOfe4 have proved unjustified, and the weakening of his kingside quickly provokes a crisis. 22 tUfe4

If 22...lL'lce4 23 fxe4 dxe4 24 'iWb2 gxf4 Black loses because of the pin 2S �h4! r1;g7 26 exf4 e3 27 'iWe5. He encounters similar problems after 22...gxf4 23 bxcS bxc5 (also insufficient is 23 ... �xcS 24 a4 �c3 2S �xc3 nxc3 26 exf4 followed by J:e7) 24 �h4! fxe3 (24...�d6 25 e4) 25 lhe3 �d6 26 l:rde I �a6 27 .1xa6 �xa6 28 ne7
tUxf2? 24 Allowing White to interpose his next move, after which Black loses quickly. However, after 24...gxf4 25 exf4 '¥ic7,26 �d4 '¥ixf4 (or 26...'¥ic2 27 �al and �d3 ) 27 nfl '¥ig5 28 l:to White doubles rooks and then plays his bishop to d3, again with a winning advantage. ll'lb3+ 25 ll'lh5

22

b4!

Black's hopes of a counterattack after

26 27 28

109

Uncompromising Chess

gxh3

e4!

IS dxe4

i.d7

Black resigns

Ruy Lopez C95 This game was one of the last in which I was successful with the Breyer Variation. 1 e4 e5 2 tOo tOe6 3 a6 �b5

4

5 6

7 8 9

�a4 � l:tel .i.b3

tOr6

c3

�

h3

tOb8

d4

13 14

tOg3

g6

�e7 b5 d6

The idea of this strange move (which characterises the Breyer variation) is not completely stupid. With his last move 9 h3 White prevented ...�g4 in the event of 9 d4, but did not create any immediate threat. Meanwhile Black plans to relocate his knight from c6 to d7 to free his c-pawn and to allow his bishop to put pressure on the e4 pawn from b7. Still, it is a defensive rather than an offensive conception, and I switched to it from the Zaitsev Variation mainly to avoid the possible repetition of moves that White has available after 9...1b7 10 d4l:te8 I I ll'lg5l:tfS 12 tOO.

10

tObd2 �b7 l:te8 �e2 12 13 tOn White follows the standard path. For a discussion of the alternatives, see Game 29.

11

Game 41

Smirin-Belyavsky 56th USSR Championship Odessa 1989

tObd7

15 �g5 But here Smirin avoids the main contin­ uations. The one that has provoked the most discussion is IS a4 c5 16 d5 c4 17 �g5 h6 18 �e3 tOc5 19 'ifd2 h5: (a) 20 ll'lg5 i.h6 21 f4 (or 21 ne2 'ife7 22 l:tae1 h4 23 tOfI tOhS 24 g3 hxg3 2S fxg3 f6 26 g4, and here in Nunn­ Belyavsky, Szirak Interzonal 1987, Black could have obtained the better game by 26 . . .ll'lf4 27 i.xf4 �xg5 28 i.xg5 fxg5 29 nf2 nfS 30 ll'lh2 nf4) 21...h4 22 £XeS l:txe5 23 ll'lO �xe3+ 24 'i'xe3 ll'lxd5 25 'i'd4 (better is the immediate 25 'i'd2 ll'lf6 26 ll'lxe5 dxe5 27 tUfl �xe4 28 �xe4 ll'lfxe4 29 'i'xd8+ nxd8 with an equal game) 25... ll'le6 26 'i'd2 ll'ldf4 27 ll'lxe5 'i'g5! and Black's chances are better (Nunn-Belyavsky, Linares 1988); (b) 20 i.g5 �e7 U-i.h6 �fS (or 21...ll'lh7 22 na3 l:tb8/23 l:teal �c8 24 axb5 axbS 25 l:ta7 �b7? [hoping to exchange all the rooks on the a-file, but 25...i.d7, covering the b5 pawn, was

110

Uncompromising Chess

correct) 26 'ii'e3 and White gained the advantage, Adams-Salov, Wijk aan Zee 1991) 22 �gS �e7 23 lIa3 llb8 24 �h6 �c8 25 axbS axb5 26 �e3, and here in Kir.Georgiev-Belyavsky (Haifa 1989) Black should have played 26 ...lUfd7 with an acceptable game. 15 b3 is often played, and in a game with the 14-year-old ludith Polgar (Mun­ ich 1991) I successfully tried IS...dS!?

There followed 16 exdS (after 16 �g5 h6! 17 �xf6 'ii'xf6 18 exdS exd4 or 16 dxeSlUxeS 17 lUxe5 ':xe5 18 f4 llxe4 19 lUxe4 dxe4 Black gains good counterplay) 16...lUxd5 17 dxe5lUxc3 18 'ti d3 �dS 19 �gS 'tic8 20 'tid4 �g7 21 �f5!? gxfS 22 �xf5 lle6 23 'ith4 �f8 24 �d4 c5 with an active game for Black. IS...i-g7 16 d5 ciJb6 is also possible, planning to undermine the centre, for example 17 �e3 J:rc8 18 'ite2 c6 19 c4 cxd5 20 cxdS lUbxd5! 21 exd5 ciJxdS 22 i-e4!? 1Oc3 23 �xb7 ciJxe2+ 24lUxe2 dS! with a double-edged game (Kamsky-Van der Sterren, Wijk aan Zee mJ2 1994). 15 h6 �d2 16 �g7 'itcl 17 �h7 Avoiding the exchange of the dark­ square bishops. A few rounds earlier Georgadze played 17...hS against Smirin, and after 18 .i.h6 lUh7 19 'itd2 �xh6 20

'ii'xh6 'itf6 21 a4 he experienced some difficulties. 18 h4 The alternative is 18 a4. 18 d5 A t the time this was considered an innovation, but this move is always in the air, as it satisfies completely the demands of the classical rule: the most effective counter to a flank attack is play in the centre. exdS 19 The direct continuation of the anack by 19 h5 dxe4 20 hxg6+ fxg6 21 �xe4 exd4 22 4:legS+? does not succeed: 22... hxgS 23 4:lxgS+
20 lill:d 4? But here White should have ventured the pawn sacrifice 20 hS!? dxc3 21 �xc3 �xdS 22 4:lh4 4:lf8 23 4:lhfS!? gxf5 24 4:lxf5, when he builds up the threats. Now, however, Black takes the initiative, seizing the opportunity to launch a counterattack against the enemy king along the long diagonal. 20 4Je5! 21 4:le6 'itxd5 lUf4 22 'itc6 h5 23

Uncompromising Chess

After 23lUe4lUc4 24 lUxf6+ �xf6 2S hS White clearly lacks the support of his queen, and at the same time Black retains the possibility of continuing his attack: 2S.. .'�g8! 26 hxg6 fxg6 27 J:rxe8+ J:rxe8 28 �xg6 J:rd8 29 �e3 (or 291t'c2 J:rxd2 30 �h7+
'itbl! 25 Now the queen succeeds in coming to the aid of its king. 25 J:rxd2 �g8 i.xg6+ 26 Here I had to overcome my fright and find the only move. Of course, 26...4:lxg6 fails to 27 'tixg6+ <;t>h8 28 4:15 J:rg8 29

I II

J:re6, when White wins, while after 26...�h8 the king comes under attack by the white cavalry: 27 i-xe8 lUxe8 (27...'ii'cS is better, but after 28 lle2 llxe2 29 4:lgxe2 4:lxe8 30 4:ld4 White gains counterplay) 28 J:rxeS �xeS 29 4:lg6+ �g7 30 lUhS+
J:rxf2! 28 <;t>xf2 29 4:ld3+ lUxd3 30 'itxg2+ 31 <;t>e3 4:ld6! I foresaw this 'quiet' move when I was calculating the combination. The 0 square has to be defended, since mate by 32...4:lc4+ 33 <;t>f4 'WO is threatened, and if 32 'Wdl there follows a new 'quiet' move 32... �f6! with the threat of 33....i.g5+ 34 �d4 'itdS mate, and after a

112

Uncompromising Chess

parting check White has to give up his queen (33 �g4+ �g5+ or 33 �b3+ 'Dc4+). That only leaves the move in the game. llO 'Dc4+ 32

33 34 35

'i'd5 �c8+ 'i'd8+ The impression is that Black is setting up the pieces for a new game. 'i'e8+ 36

White resigns In the first five rounds of the 1989 World Team Championship in Luzcm, I played for the USSR on top board. A game that sticks in my memory is the one with Tim­ man, where in order to try and win I risked taking a seemingly 'poisoned' pawn.

have been included) 14 ...ltJxe4! 15 �xd8 ltJxc3 16 �e7 l:!.fe8 17 �h4 g5 18 �g3 ltJa4 19 �f5 llcd8 20 ltJe4
Game 42

Nimzo-Indian Defence E32 d4 'Dc3

�b4

4 5 6

�c2

� �xc3+

7 8

c4

a3 �xc3 � g5

f3

Sometimes this idea of occupying the

White's chances are better (L.Hansen­ Steinbacher, Ostende 1991).

10

d5

lLlbd7

The exchanging operation 10...lLlxe4 II �xd8 'Dxc3 is also possible: (a) 12 il.e7 lIe8 \3 il.xd6 exd5+ 14 �d2ltJa4 15 b3 dxc4 16 �xb8 cxb3, when Black has more than sufficient compen­ sation for the piece, and after for example 17 �c7 he can continue the sacrificial theme: 17 ... :tad8+! 18 �xd8 llxd8+ 19 �e3 (or 19 �el ltJc3) 19...b2 20 llb l ltJc3 and wins; (b) 12 il.h4 ltJa4 13 b3 ltJc3 14
ll e8 � f4 12 12 ...exd5 looks more logical. With the committing move in the game, Timman throws down a challenge, realising that there is little risk involved after the modest 13 �e2 ltJf8 14 'i'd2 lLlg6 15 �g3 e5 16 0--0 il.c8, when Black has reasonable counterplay, while after 13 dxe6 fxe6 White is practically forced to accept the sacrifice of the d6 pawn (since he cannot allow the central break ...d6-d5) and then it would seem that the bishop cannot escape. However, I thought that it would not be easy to get at the bishop and, despite the dangers of the situation, I was· able to extract benefits from its position.

13 14 15

dxe6 �xd6 a-o-o

fxe6 e5 lle6

�c8 16 �e2 Of course, not 16 ...lLle8 17 �xe5 llxe5 . 18 :txd7. 'De8 lld3 ! 17 18

llbdl

19

b4!

'i'c6

both sides) 13 ...h6 14 �f4 �e7 15 �d2 ltJhS! 160--0 f5! 17 �bS fxe4 18 fxe4 a6! 19 �c6 �xc6 20 dxc6 ltJes 21 :tad I llac8, and here White could have maintained the

'Df6 e6

b6 �b7

(b) II l:td I �e7 12 ltJe2 'Dc6 13 'Dg3 ltJd4! 14 �d3 (or 14 'Dh5 llfd8! 15 �d3 lId6) 14......e6 15 0--0 lLld7 16 'Df5! and

type of endgame which is nevertheless n favour of White. b6 11 ltJ b3 Events took an interesting course in the game Salov-Granda Zuniga (Amsterdam 1995): II...exd5 12 cxd5 lle8 13 �e2?! (Salov recommends 13 �b5!? ltJxd5 14 'i'd2 �c8! IS O-O-Q ltJc7 with chances for

Belyavsky-Timman World Team Championship Luzern 1989

1 2 3

113

Uncompromising Chess

balance by 22 "'e2. 8

9

e4

d6 c5

9 ...eS 10 dxeS (if 10 dS Black has the . interesting reply 10 ... c6 II lLlh3 bS) ' 10...dxeS is also played:

centre is implemented by playing the knight to f2: 8 'Dh3 d6 9 f3 h6 I0 �h4 'Dbd7 II lLlf2. In this variation I played an

(a) 11 'tixeS ltJc6 12 il.xf6 (after 12 'tif4 'i'd4 \3 il.xf6 gxf6 14 'i'd2 'tieS 15 ()....()....Q llfd8 16 'i'e l llxdl+ 17 'tixdl lld8

interesting game with Mozetic (Belgrade 1993): 11...llc8! (by defending the c7 pawn, this prevents e2-e4 for the moment

18 'tie I f5 or 12 'i'c3 ltJxe4 \3 i.xd8 lLlxc3 14 il.xc7 .l:tfe8+ 15 �d2ltJa4 16 b4 llac8 Black has good play) 12...ltJxe5 13

because of the reply ... 'Dxe4) 12 e4 e5 13 i.d3 i.a6! 14 O--O?! (14 llc l should first

i.xd8 J:taxd8 with compensation for the

With this move White is able to maintain the position of his bishop, if of course he is not agreeable to a draw after 19 �c7 lLlef6 20 �d6 (after the exchange of rooks 20 lld6? llxd6 21 il.xd6 lle8 22

pawn;

b4 lle6 23 b5 'tic8 24 'tid2 'De8 25 i.c7

114

Uncompromising Chess

ltJdf6 the trap snaps shut) 20 ...ltJeS 21 iLc7. 19 cxb4 The bishop has to be released, as after 19...ltJxd6 20 b5 "fic7 21 "fid2 the over­ loading on the d-file goes into action: 21. ..ltJxe4 22 Uxd7ltJxd2 23 lhc7ltJb3+ 24 q;,b2 ltJd4 25 iLd3 e4 26ltJf4 lleeS 27 llxb7 exd3 2S .llxd3, and if Black risks regaining the pawn by 2S...g5 29 ltJd5 lle2+ 30 q;,cI llxg2 31 lle3, he comes under a dangerous attack. But this implies an admission that Black's compensation for the sacrificed pawn is not so obvious. ltJdf6 1Lxb4 20

21 22 23 24

"fib3 1Lc3 ll3d2 Wbl

�a2 'i'xdl 31 "fixeS). Black is obliged to play on a pawn down.

26 27 28 29

cxb6 �al

ltJb5 'i'xb6 a4

1990 was memorable for my victories in three tournaments (Munich, Amsterdam and the USSR Championship), but in Linares I did not play so well.

"fib4

Belyavsky-Kasparov Linares 1990

'i'xa6? 'i'b3.

llb8

29

d4

a5 1La6 ll c S

7

8

f4!

c4 ltJc3 e4

f3 1Le3

"fid2 tLl ge2

9

ltJcl

10 11 12 13

ltJb3 tLlxd4 lldl

1Le2

14 15 16

16 17 18

King's Indian Defence ES4

2 3 4 5 6

which Black would easily advance . .. d6dS and seize the initiative.

b4 ltJc2

axb5 c5

After 16 bxc5 b4 17ltJa4 'i'a5 18 ltJb6 dxc5 19 tLlxc8 cxd4 20 ltJe7+ ¢>h8 21 1Lxd4l:rfd8 Black seizes the initiative.

Game 43

Avoiding a little trap: 29 'i'xa4 ltJc3 30

30

liS

Uncompromising Chess

ltJxb4

cxb4 1Le6

0-0 After the obvious 18 f4 there follows 18 ... tLlc4 191Lxc4 1Lxc4 20 tLlc6 'i'eS 21 tLlxb8 b4 with a strong attack for Black. Attempts to win the bS or d6 pawn do not come to anything, so White takes his king into safety, retaining both the threats to the pawns, as well as the possibility of a blockade at d5.

ltJf6 g6 iLg7 d6

0-0 ltJc6

a6 l:rb8 e5 exd4 ltJe5

18

"fia5

c6

b5!

White creates a passed pawn, as 30...exf4 31 tLlxf4 llxe4? is not possible because of the pin 321Ld3. 'i'c7 30

31 32 33

� h7 ? ! 24 Black wants to capture the c4 pawn when it is most convenient for him, but this does not work out. He should have agreed to an inferior ending: 24...iLxc4 25 iLxc4 'i'xc4 26 'i'xc4 llxc4 27 1Lb2, where White can attack the weakness at e5 after playing his knight to d3.

25 26

1Lb2 c5!

tt:ld6?!

Now it transpires that after 26...1Lxe2 27 .xe6 hd I 28 nxd6 'i'xc5 29 nxd1 White emerges a piece up (29 ... 'i'c2+ 30

fxe5 l:rcl 'i'xe7

l:rxe5 'i'e7

White does not allow his opponent the slightest illusions by accepting the exchange sacrifice with 33 1Lxe5. The ending is absolutely won, as the e-pawn is free to advance. nxe 7 33

34 35 36

eS e6

ltJ f4

liJd7 ltJf8 gS

After 36...ltJxe6 37 1Ld3+ �gS 3S tt:lxe6l:rxe6 39 1Lc4 the pin is decisive.

38

ltJd 5 ltJf6+

39

1Lh5+

37

nxe6 �g6

Black resigns

As Kasparov mentioned later, he had prepared this variation for one of his matches. Annotating our game in lnformalor, the World Champion rated very highly the play of both opponents, attaching exclamation marks to most of the moves in the range 13-22.

14

cxb5

White must prevent

... b5-b4,

after

19 'i'xd6! By the invasion at d5 White could have gone into a drawn ending: 19 tLlbd5 lbxd5 20 tLlxd5 .xd2 21 llxd2 ltJc4 22 1Lxc4 bxc4 23 llc I 1Lxd5 24 l:rxd5 c3 25 1Ld4 llfcS 261Lxg7 �xg7 27 nd3 c2 28 llb3, but I was wholly caught up in the excite­ ment of the struggle. The capture of the d6 pawn is based on tactics: 19... nfd8? 20 1Lb6!, while if 19...11fc8? White does not take on e5, but plays 20 ltJcd5.

116

Uncompromising Chess

19 20

tlJc4

bxc4 .i.xc4 This is stronger than 20 ....i.xc4? when Kasparov gives 21 .t!.fe1 '1i'aJ 22 tlJc6 '1i'xc3 23 �d4 with advantage to White. tlJc6 21 If 21 :tb1 White has to reckon with 21 ... 'i'a3 22 '1i'd2 nxb4 (after 22...tlJg4 23 �d4 White maintains some advantage) 23 .i.cS lIb2! 24 '1i'e3 (24 'ilfd4 'i'aS favours Black, K.Neat) 24...tlJg4 2S �xa3 tlJxe3 (after 2S.. J:txg2+ 26 Wxg2 tlJxe3+ 27 Wf2 tlJxfl 28 .QxfS ..txfS 29 lIc 1 tlJxh2 30 c;tw>g2 �e5 31 a4 Black's knight is out of play and the passed a-pawn is a danger) 26 .i.xb2 �.'(fl 27 .t!.xfl (or 27 �xfl :tb8 28 .i.c1 lhb1 :! 9 tlJxb1 c3 30 a4 .1c4+ 3 1 �e1 c2 32 tlJaJ �c3+ 33 �f2 .1b3 34 �e2 �b4 35 Wd3 �xaJ 36 .1l.xaJ �xa4 with a drawn ending) 27... fS, when Black has compensation for the pawn.

21 22

Uncompromising Chess

Kasparov's games always demand very complicated calculations, so that by this point. not surprisingly. both players were rather tired, and the World Champion commits an inaccuracy in a comparatively simple situation. A year later Loginov (Azov 1991) found against me a simpler way to equalise: 26....:la8 27 tlJcs nxa2 28 .t!.f2 .t!.a7 29 tlJxe6+ fxe6 30 .t!.e2 �f6 31 .lle4 lIa6 32 llde1 lIc6 33 �f2 c3 34 .llc I tlJe 7 3S h4 tlJdS. and it proved impossible to breach Black's position. .t!.c6 27 tlJb6

28 29 30 31 32 33

l:tb4 l:tc1 'iii>f2 'iii>e2 'iii>d2

34

'iii>xc2?

'1i'xc3

28

tlJxe4!

23 24 25 26

tlJxb8

tlJxd6 �x g7 tlJrs

tlJd7

J:c8

�xc3 .i.x g7

l:td6+

White ends up in a lost position. 34 We2 would have maintained the balance. tlJe3+ 34

35

22

.i.xa2 c2 h5! .i.e6

A blunder in time trouble, after which

�d4

After White's 19th move both players had to anticipate this position and to assess the consequences of the subsequent tactical duel.

c3

'iii>b2

tlJxg2

After 3S...l:td2+? 36 'iii>c3 l:txg2 White is saved by 37 l:tb2.

llbl?

White should have played 28 �a4 c3! (if Black regains the exchange by 28 ...tlJe3. after 29 ttJc3 he runs into difficulties, as after the possible exchange of rooks the passed a-pawn becomes dangerous) 29 lld3! c2 30 llc3 lla6 31 ttJcs l:txa2 32 l:tcl ttJd4 33 'iii>f2 .t!.b2 (intending ...l:tb I) 34 ttJd3! (with the idea after 34..Jtbl of winning the pawn by 3S J:3xc2; 34 �e3 .t!.bl 3S ttJd3 .i.f5 36 �d4 .i.xd3 leads to a draw) 34...J:b8! 3S �e3 ttJfS+ 36 �d2 tlJd4 37 tlJc5 ttJb3+ 38 ttJxb3 �xb3. Here Oleg Stetsko found a way to win after 39 l:td3! �f6 (or 39 ...i.a4 40 lld4 .i.b3 41 'iii>c3 with the threat of 42 J:b4) 40 l:td4 'iii>e5 41 l:te4+ �d5 42 �c3 � c5 43 l:teS+ �d6 44 :a5 hS 45 l:ta3, and the c2 pawn is lost. .

36

�c4

l:td3?

An answering mistake in time trouble, after which the game quickly ends in a draw. 36.. J:dS! 37 tlJb6 l:td2+ 38 l:tc2 l:txc2+ 39 �c2 ltJel+ 40 'iii>dl tlJxD 41 llb2 gS would have led to a won position. 37 tlJe5 l:te3 �f6 38 l:te4 39 l:txe3 ttJxe3 .

40 41

�d3

.i.d5

ttJe1 Draw agreed

It is hard for me to speak impartially about Kasparov. In 1993 he invited me to be one of his seconds for his World Championship Match with Nigel Short. The help that I rendered him was insignificant, since even

117

in my best state I am ill-suited for training work. for the reason that I am able to generate serious chess ideas only when I achieve a high degree of concentration. and for me this is possible only during a tournament game. But if it is borne in mind that for the greater part of 1993 I was in a state of depressed mental activity (the situation improved only after this match), for this reason I could not be useful to Kasparov even to a moderate degree. On the other hand. the benefit that I gained from the contact with him. supported by a significant fee, put me in his debt, since I do not consider myself to be an ungrateful person. Strictly speaking, when preparing for games Kasparov does not need purely chess helpers, since he himself generates nearly all the opening ideas. and his critical evaluation of these ideas is of an extremely high level. Rather what he needs is an attentive listener, capable of understanding his thoughts. asking reasonable questions, and, in so doing, not resorting to flattery. In brief, the main function of the trainer is to maintain in Kasparov a high degree of creative activity. After his match with Short. Kasparov decided to optimise his budget of preparing for competitions under the item 'payments to trainers'. This was undoubtedly a sen­ sible step, in the light of what I have said. At the same time he lost his taste for philanthropic activities, which to a great extent were hi s efforts at collecting funds for the PCA (professional Chess Asso­ ciation), since a significant part of these found their way to Kramnik, Anand, Ivan­ chuk and certain other grandmasters, each of whom preferred to spend his time studying chess, leaving the function of prize fund collector to the World Cham­ pion. However, Garry's passion for public activities is too deep, and I think that

1 18

Uncompromising Chess

when, sometime early in the next m i llen­ n ium, he considers that he cannot achieve anything more in chess, we will see him in the higher echelons of executive power in Russia. Kasparov ' s chess talent outshines all the champions that preceded him. His mental stam ina enables him to maintain his quality of play for seven hours, which makes his practical strength enonnous, although by this criterion Karpov in his best years could wel l be considered his equal. However, as regards his ability to work between toumaments, he signifi­ cantly surpasses Karpo\', as well as all the other grandmasters known to me. Karpov is superior to Kasparov only in one sense: he is a game player by nature. [n the majority of mind games he requires the m inimum time to understand the al­ gorithm, 'W hether it be cards, board games, or games such as Monopoly. On one occasion in 1 990 in Amsterdam, a director of a pension bank remarked that Karpov wou l d make a first-rate banker. Who knows, perhaps he will yet become one. Kramnik will not make a banker, but perhaps he w i l l become a worthy opponent to Kasparov, and possibly his successor on the chess throne. Kasparov was one of the first to draw attention to the 1 6-year-old Kramnik's amazingly subtle sense of position, and predicted that he would soon be competing for the supreme chess title.

6 0-{) 0-{) 7 d5 A sharp variation with a pawn sacrifice, which began to be practised in the 1 980s, and has not yet received a definitive assessment. As compensation White gains active piece play. The main continuation is 7 lOc3. 7 exd5 8 e6 lOh4 exd5 lOxdS 9 I also used to play this variation with White, until that memorable game with Boris Spassky at Baden 1 980, where my rejection of his draw offer virtually cost me first prize. The continuation was 9 . . . cxd5 1 0 4Jc3 4Ja6 I I �f5 tLJc7 12 � f4 �c5 1 3 :tc I �c6 1 4 lOa4 g6 1 5 lOxcs bxc5 1 6 SLxc7 'f¥xc7 1 7 tDe7+ �g7 1 8 tLlxd5 �xd5 1 9 SLxd5 :rab8 and B lack achieved a reasonable position. It is true that the plan chosen by Spassky does not promise more than equality, but I continued playing for a win, overstepped the mark, and lost. 10 lOrs lOe7

Game 44

Yusupov-Belyavsky Munich 1990

Queen's Indian Defence E 1 7

1 2 3 4 5

d4 c4 lOo

g3

i. g2

lOf6 e6 b6 i.b7 i.e7

11 lOc3 In some later games there occ urred I I e4 d5 1 2 l:t.e l dxe4 1 3 'i'g4 (after I 3 he4 .i.. f6 1 4 W'g4 ¢>h8! Black has the better chances, Cummings-Timoshchenko, Brati­ slava 1996) 1 3 ... .1f6 1 4 lbc3 .i..c 8 I S he4.

1 19

Uncompromising Chess Here in the game Barlov-Abramovic (Yugoslavia 1 994) Black incautiously played I S . . . lOdS?, and after 1 6 i.h6! he found himself in difficulties. 1 5 ... �xf5 is better, when Pigusov­ Tiviakov, Lee Cup 1 997) continued 1 6 'WxfS g6 1 7 'W D lOe6 1 8 i.h6 lOd4 1 9 'Wg2 11e8 2 0 �e3 a6 2 1 lOe2 l:t.a7 2 2 lOxd4 �xd4 23 �xd4 'Wxd4 24 �xc6 l:t.xe l + 2 5 l:t.xe 1 tLlxc6 2 6 'Wxc6 ¢>g7 with a n equal position.

11

dS

One of the latest attempts was 1 1 ... lOe6 1 2 e4 d6 13 f4 liJd7 14 i.e3 ( 1 4 lOxd6 i.a6 IS l:t.e l lOdeS) 1 4 . . . lOf6 I S l:t.f2 d5! 1 6 exd5 cxd5 1 7 lOxdS �xd5 18 �xd5 lOxd5 19 'Wxd5 l:t.e8 20 :rd I SLf8 2 1 lOd6 i.xd6 22 'Wxd6 'Wc8 (or 22 ... 'Wxd6 23 l:t.xd6 lled8 24 l:t.fd I ¢>f8 25 f5 'i;e7 26 :r6d2) 23 f5 with slightly the better chan­ ces for White (Salov-Adams, Madrid 1 996). 12 e4 lOba6

13

.i..f6

13

I f 1 3 ... l:t.e8 White attacks with 1 4 'i'g4. 14 lOd6 A committing move, since now White has to reckon with the threat of . . . g7-g5 . Although he regains his pawn, he is forced to exchange his active pieces. 1 4 'Wg4!? came into consideration, making way for the rook ( 1 5 l:t.ad I ). �e8 14

15

exdS

White cannot build up the pressure with I S l:t.c l ? because of 1 5 . . . gS! 16 lOxc8 gxf4, when he loses a piece. � x c3 ! 15

16 17 18

bxe3 �xdS 'WxdS

lOxdS exd5 �e6

i.f4

Also possible is 1 3 exd5 lOxd5 1 4 lOxd5 cxd5 I S i.f4 lOcs ( l S . . .lOc7 also comes into consideration) 16 �xdS i.xdS 1 7 W'xdS with equal chances (Bukic-lelen, Yugoslav Championship 1 98 1 ). In the game Romanishin-Orlov (Bel­ grade 1988) White tried 13 l:t.e I , and after 1 3 . . . dxe4? he could have gained the ad­ vantage by 1 4 lOxe4 lOd5 I S 'Wg4, when a possible variation is 1 5 ... g6 ( l 5 ... �f6 loses to 1 6 ttJed6!) 1 6 �h6 l:t.e8 1 7 lOed6 �xd6 1 8 lhe8+ W'xe8 1 9 lOxd6 W'e7 20 lOxb7 W'xb7 21 W'd4 f5 22 l:t.c l lbc5 (or 22 ... l:t.e8 23 lhc6 l:t.e 1 + 24 i.f1 ) 23 b4 lOe6 (or 23 ... tDe4 24 l:t.xc6 lOxb4 2 5 'Wc4+) 24 W'e5 l:t.e8 25 bS W'f7 26 bxc6 lOec7 27 W'd6. Instead of 1 3 . . . dxe4 B lack should consider 13 ...i.f6 14 e5 i.e7 I S 'Wg4 g6 16 lOxe7+ 'i'xe7 1 7 i.g5 'i'b4! 18 'i'D (or 1 8 'WhJ hS ! with the idea of ... .i.. c 8) 1 8 ... lOe6 19 .i.. h 6 l:t.fe8 with a complicated game (Orlov).

Here we can take stock. White has not achieved anything from the opening; more­ over, the h l -a8 diagonal and his queenside pawns have been weakened. C learly the m iddlegame is more promising for Black. Even so, by centralising his heavy pieces with 19 'Wd4 (not forgetting about the weakness at c3) and 20 l:t.fe l , White would have held firm. However, Yusupov was still under the illusion of his former initiative, and he makes his next move based on his tournament position (at the time Artur was lagging behind), and not on the demands of the position. This is a

1 20

Uncompromising Chess

m istake which practically everyone makes: I do not know anyone who is fortunate

enough to b� above such temptation. 19 'i'h5? 'i'd7 20 llfel ttJc5 lle3 21 If 2 1 llad I ? there would have followed 2 1 . . . �g4, and 22 'i'g5 �xd 1 23 ttJfS does not work because of 23 . . . f6. llad8 21 llael 22 This leads to the loss of a pawn. S tronger was 22 ttJe4, which after the exchange of knights would have allowed White to central ise his dark-.square bishop at d4. 22 fia4 a3 23 Hoping after 23 ...'i'xa3 24 !Db5 'i'a4 2 S ttJd4 to gain at least some compensation. lld7 23

A weakness is a pennanent feature, and for the moment B lack has to complete the mobilisation of his forces. �xfS 24 ttJfS ttJe6 25 'ii'x fS �e5 26 With the faint hope of 26...'ii'xa3? 2 7 lle4 and lth4 with a counterattack, but Black has no reason to hUrry. 26 ltfd8 'ii'xa3 27 ltD

Uncompromising Chess

h4 28 'ike7 After winning material it is useful to consolidate your forces. The queen has it sights set on the long light-square diagonal. lld5 <Ji>g2 29 'i'g4 'ikb7 30 lld l <Ji>h2 31 lle4 32 Now White's pieces are crowded together and are in one another's way, but things are also bad for him after 32 :t.xd I lhd I 33 fif5 a5 . hS! 32 Tying the queen to the rook. lln 'tffS 33 Not only in order to invade, but also as a defence against 34 g4, on which there follows 34 . . . :dd l 35 :g3 :xf2+. 34 lld5 �d4 llxe5 lleS 35 lle1 � xe S 36 ll d 1 <Ji>g2 37 'li' h2 lld5 38 lla5 <Ji>g2 39

had to play for a win. And although, as they say in Poland, an old love will not be forgotten, in 1 990 I had to expand my Spanish repertoire and take up the sharp Archangelsk Variation - the tried and tested weapon of my friend and trainer Mikha1chishin. Adrian had achieved excel­ lent results with it, and his ' first aid' soon came in useful. In order to reach the final of the World Cup, in the qualification tournament I needed to win with Black in the last round against grandmaster Dolmatov. Game 4S D o l m atov-Bely avsky

Moscow (GMA) 1990

Ruy Lopez C78 e4 eS 2 ttJO ttJc6 3 �b5 a6 4 �a4 ttJf6 5 bS � 6 �b3 � b7 This extended fianchetto characterises the variation that in its time was analysed in detail by Archangelsk players. 7 ltel �c5 8 c3 d6 9 d4 �b6

Zugzwang! c4 40

llc5 White resigns

At that time in the Breyer Variation of the Ruy Lopez I was increasingly having to solve difficult problems, especially when I

10

.l.gS

121

This makes the position more tense, although it may not be better than 1 0 �e3, as played in Ljubojevic-Belyavsky (Reggio Emilia 1 99 1 ): 1 0 . . . 0-0 I I ttJbd2 h6 12 h3 ttJd7 1 3 iLlfI ! ? (or 1 3 �d5 llb8 14 a4 exd4 1 5 cxd4 iLlb4 1 6 �xb7 llxb7 1 7 as �a7 1 8 d5 iLld3 with counterplay for B lack) I 3 . . .ttJe7 14 iLlg3 c5 1 5 lle2?! ( 1 5 iLlh4! ? would have maintained some initiative) 1 5 . . .'ii'c7 I 6 lld2 ttJf6 1 7 �c2 11ad8 with a good game for Black. I f 10 'i'd3 there can follow 10 . . . h6 I I iLlbd2 0-0 1 2 d5 (or 1 2 ttJfI exd4 1 3 cxd4 iLlb4 14 'i'c3 c S ! with counterplay) 12 ...iLle7 1 3 ttJfl c6 14 dxc6 �xc6 I S ttJg3 'i'c7 16 �e3 llad8 with complicated play (Szalanczy-Mikhalchishin, Budapest 1 990). 10 h6 g5 11 �h4 A committing move, but without get­ ting rid of the pin Black cannot solve his opening problems. As shown by the Uk­ rainian player Bondarets, he need not fear 1 2 �xg5 hxg5 1 3 iLlxgS in view of 1 3 . . . .Ilf8. At various stages of the Archangelsk Variation 's development, Black has tried both 1 1 . .. O-Q and I \ ...'ii'd7 followed by 12 . . . 0--0-0, but in the resulting sharp play White's chances were nevertheless better. 12 �g3 � 12 ...'ii'e7 with the idea of . . . h6-hS is also interesting.

1 22

The critical position of the variation. White is at the cross-roads. How can he exploit the pawn weaknesses on both wings? The first idea that suggests itself is the elimination o f the central pawn tension by 13 dxeS liJxeS 14 liJxe5 dxe5, trans­ posing into a stable structure where these weaknesses should te ll. However, this is not so, and i n Van der Wiel-Be lyavsky (Am sterdam 1 990) after 1 5 'lifO ne8 1 6 liJd2 �e7 1 7 h3 liJd7 1 8 liJfl '1Wf6 1 9 liJh2 'iih o 20 liJxO �g7 2 1 �ad I lle7 Black achieved a completely level endgame. I n the game Prandstetter- Mikhalch ishin (Donmund 1 990) White tried attacking the g-pawn by 13 h4, but a fter I J . . . g4 14 liJh2

The logical follow-up to the previous move. After 16 4.Jb3 B lack carries out his idea of 16 . . .�h8, . . . llg8 and . . . liJf4, probing the weak point g2.

16 17

4.Jxg3 h xg3

The attempt to achieve more by 1 7 axb5 axb5 1 8 'ifixb5 exd4 1 9 �xc6 �xc6 20 'lIt'xc6 dxcJ 2 1 bxcJ allows B lack to attack on the kingside after 2 1 . . . 4.Jh5 with the threat of . . . g5-g4.

17 18 19

axb5 �xc6

�xd5 22 :aa l

�a8 would have given

hS 1 5 'ftc I ( I S 'lifd2 ! ? 'i'h7 1 6 .!iJa3 ! ? 'ifie7

B lack a good gam e.

came into consideration, with a com p l i ­ cated game) 1 5 . . .'.t> h 7 16 'i'g5 :g8! Blac k developed a dangerous attack. Dolmatov takes a different path, but i t turns out that it too has its minuses. 13 'lIf d 3

19 20

The queen suppons the pawn centre, but in so doing it comes within range of B lack ' s king's knight. Under the influence of this game, Dolmatov later experimented

exd4 axb5

19 'i'xbS dxc3 20 bxc3 4.Ja 7 21 Z:xa7

4.Jxd4

�xc6

20 cxd4? g4 21 e5 ·tlfg6 would have led to loss of material.

20 21

4.J2f3?

22 23 24

!Drs exrs bxc3

Now B lack has the prospect of an outside passed pawn on the queenside, which to a cenain extent restricts White's play.

24 25 26

llxel 4.Jh2

l:txe 1+ �g7

26 g4 came into consideration.

26 27 28 29 30

g4

h5 h4

4.Jf3 �d2

l:ta8 l:ta4

4.Jh2

Equally hopeless is 3 0 �xg5+ �xg5 J I 4.JxgS �g4 32 4.Je4 d5 33 liJd2 h3 .

30 31 32

l:tcl �e3

41

�xrs bxc3

this. Adrian, who was one of the leading experts on the A rchange lsk Variation but had given up playing it, became convinced of the effectiveness of this new idea, and as a result expressed the desire to return to his old love. B ut I was the one who had the fortune to carry it out first.

l:tc4 �a5

Game 46

Nunn-Belyavsky Amsterdam 1 990

�d7

Ruy Lopez C 7 8

e4

This defence of f2 leaves the knights overloaded. 21 :e2 ' was stronger. Now B lack firmly seizes the initiative.

2 3 4 5

The

7

'i'f6 Cladouras-Mikhalch ish i n

of an attack on the g- file (after .. .' �h8 and . . . :g8) \Vhite successfully counterattacks on the queenside with 1 7 a4.

llae8 a4

liJf3 � b5 �a4

� �b3 c3

e5 liJc6 a6 4.Jf6 b5 �b7

It was in this branch of the variation

4.Jh5

game

15 16

6

that a surprise awaited Nunn. The English grandmaster, wel l known for his opening erudition, had of course no suspicion of

4.Jbd2

( B udapest 1 990) continued 1 4 . . .liJxg3 1 5 hxg3 'ifif6 1 6 �d5 g4 1 7 liJh4 .:lae8 with a compl icated game, 15 �d5 A subtle manoeuvre. Now in the event of IS . . .4.JN'l! 16 �xf4 gxf4 with the idea

l:tb4 �b3 Wbite resigns

Once, when reviewing the latest informa­ tion, I came across a game played with the Archangelsk Variation, in which I was not an expert, where I discovered the idea of a piece sacri fice which seemed wonh trying. [ told my colleague Mikhalchishin about

against Zak (Tel Aviv 1 99 1 ) with 13 'lIfd2, but here too after 1 3 . . . liJh5 1 4 a4 liJxg3 I 5 hxg3 '1l'f6 1 6 �dS exd4! B lack solved his problems.

13 14

1 23

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

32

d5!

this.

Defending the rook. The c3 pawn will not run away.

21

b4!

Black immediately emphasises the drawbacks to White's previous move by striking on the flank where j u st now the opponent was attacking, since 22 cxb4? is not possible because o f 22 . . . g4.

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

�e8 �d7 l:tdl �xb2 l:tel g3 fxg3 �g2

�xc3 �e5 �xb2+ c6 l:txg4 bxg3+ l:tb4 l:tb2+

7 8

d4

liJ.le4 liJaS

Black has also tried 8. ..�e7 9 .e2 dS 10 dxe5, but now after 1 0 . . . 4.Ja5 1 I �c2 c5 12 4.Jbd2 liJxd2 13 �xd2 o!tJc4 14 .i.f4

are not easy him (Kindermann-Nikolic, Munich 1 990). He also has problems after I O . . .�

(}--{) I S b3 4.Jb6 1 6 e6! things

for

I I l:td I , e.g. I I . . . ttJaS 1 2 .i.c2 .c8 1 3 4.Jbd2 •g4 1 4 h 3 • g6 I S liJxe4 dxe4 1 6

1 24

Uncompromising Chess

lLld2 .!lad8 1 7 J::re I f5 1 8 exf6 'ii'xf6 1 9 lLlxe4 fr'c6 20 �e3 lLlc4 2 1 �d4 lLlxb2 22 "'g4 with an attack for White (Kalegin­ Ibragimov, Russia 1 997).

9 �c2 White commences a forcing l ine. 9 lLlxe5 has also been played: 9 . . . lLlxb3 1 0 fr'xb3 'iii f6 I I f3 ( I I c4 'i'e6! or I I tLld2 can also be considered) 1 1 . .. �c5 1 1 !LJg4' (after 12 lid I !LJe6 13 a4 �d6 14 'i'e2 c5 ' B lack ' s chances are better, Anand­ Mikhalch ishin, Moscow GMA 1 9 89) 1 2 ... lLlxb3 13 lLlxf6 + gxf6 (at Linares 1 99 2 I f1 ippantly played 13 ...e 7?? against Ivanchuk, and got away with a sl ight fright after 14 axb3 �xf6, after discovering to my surprise in later analysis that after 1 4 �g5 ! tiJxa I W h ite has a forced mate: I 5 !:re l + -;t1d6 1 6 �f4+ �c6 1 7 dS+ �c5 1 8 b4+ �c4 1 9 !LJa3+ �xc3 20 lLle4+ �xb4 2 1 :Ib I + �a3 22 lLlc3 ! and 23 � c l mate) 1 4 :e l + �e7 15 axb3 d6 16 �f4 �d7 1 7 lLld2 a5 1 8 lLlf1 �d5 1 9 c4! with the better ending for White (Wolff-Tal, San Fran­ cisco 1 990). 9 exd4 10 b4 The most popular move at that time, After 10 :e I ? ! d5 1 1 lLlxd4 Black obtains active counterplay: (a) l l .. .c5 12 lUf5 'ii'd 7 1 3 lUe3 (Mi los recommends 13 f3 ! 'ii'xf5 14 fxe4 dxe4 1 5

Uncompromising Chess

lild2 (}-{H) 1 6 'ii'e2 with the idea of lilxe4 and a2-a4) 1 3 . . . {}-{H) 1 4 D d4' 1 5 cxd4 cxd4 with slightly the better chances for Black (Zapata-Milos, Recife 1 99 1 ); (b) 1 1 . .. .ltd6 1 2 lUf5 (after 1 2 D Black can force a draw by 1 2 . . . .ltxh2 + 1 3 �xh2 fr'h4+ 1 4 g I 'ill' f2 + or attack with 12 . . . fr'h4) 1 2 . . . 0-0 1 3 lLld2 tIeS 14 lLlxe-l ' dxe4 1 5 'tifg4 'i'f6 1 6 �gS �g6, and hert! in the game Sadvakasov-V . I vanov (Russia 1 996) White should have played 1 7 Ihe4 ' ixe4 1 8 ixe4 h5 1 9 'i'h4 '1'ie6 20 D , although evt!n here after 2 0 . . . ::::' a c8 Black's chances are better. 10 lLlc-l 11 12 13

.I.

.ltxe4 .!leI lLlxd4

17

�hl

Nunn prefers to remove h i s king from the pin immediately. It stands to reason that later this position was subjected to a serious analysis. When in the last, decisive round of the 57th USSR Championship (Len ingrad 1 990) I again chose the Arch­ angelsk Variation, my opponent Semion Dvoiris was well prepared: 1 7 .!lxe4 fr'd5.

.ltxe4 d5

� . 1. X i .l � '

c5! 13 It was this discovery that I discussed with Mikhalchishin. It turns out that Black's position is sustained by this piece sacrifice: he is able to exploit the fact that White's queen 's knight is undeveloped. Before this Black used to play 1 3 ... �d6 1 4 D li'h4, sacri ficing a piece, but not obtaining any real attack. 14 �xcS bxc5

15

i t i s not apparent how White can develop his queenside.

f3

�

fxe4 dxe4 16 The outcome of the opening is this: B lack has only one pawn for the piece, but

1 8 .:r.h4 (after 18 'i'D lUeS ! 19 'i'fS :ae8 20 lUd2 b4 2 1 !:rh4 g6 22 lUe4! �xd4+ 23 cxd4 li'xd4+ Black has a good game, Hellers-Shirov, Stockholm 1 990) 1 8 ... !tad8 (with the idea of . . . bS-b4) 1 9 'i'd3 fS 2 0 �g5 !:rde8 2 1 lUd2 lUeS 22 li'f1 f4 23 �h I (nevertheless it transpires that White cannot manage without this move, as if 23 !:rxf4 !:rxf4 Black gains the advantage after both 24 �xf4 �xd4+ 25 cxd4 li'xd4+ 26 �h I l:t£8 27 g3 g5, and 24 li'xf4 lilg6 25 'i'g4 hS 26 'ii'x.h 5 �xd4+ 27 � h l �xc3 28 l:tf1 l:te6) 23 ... lUg6 24 l:th5 �xd4 25 cxd4 h6 26 'i'd3 'ii'f5 2 7 �3+ !:rf7 28 lUD l:te3 with a complicated game, which finally ended in a draw. 17 l:te8 According to analysis by Zadrim, after 1 7 ... b4 1 8 lUd2 �xd4 1 9 cxd4 'ii'xd4 20 !:rb l ! lile3 (20 ... lUxd2 21 'i'xd2 'ii'xd2 22 �xd2 fS 23 �xb4 also favours White) 2 1

125

'i'e2 lUc2 22 'i'xe4 'ii'c3 23 l:tb3 'i'c5 24 l:tg l l:tfe8 25 'ii'c 4 White gains the advantage. �e3 18 There is no time to prevent . . . b5-b4, since if 1 8 a3? there follows 1 8 . . . e3 ! Simplifying by 1 8 lUd2 �xd4 1 9 cxd4 'i'xd4 20 lUb3 'ii'x d I 2 1 l:txd I e3 is also no better. lUxe3 18 llxe3 b4 19 20 bxc3?! tiJd2 A careless move, which allows White adroitly to block the c-pawn with his knights. After 20 ...�xd4 21 cxd4 li'xd4 22 lUf1 fr'e5 it would have been much more difficult for him to hold the position. 21 ttJ2b3 c2 22 'i'd2 �b6 22 ... !:rc8 ! ? also came into consideration, but I did not want to give up the pin. !:rc3 23

Here I though for a long time over how to exploit the pin on the d-file, but I failed to find anything decisive. For example, 23 ... 'i'd5 succeeds only after the immediate capture of the pawn: 24 tLlxc2? 'i'xd2 25 lUxd2 �a5 or 24 l:txc2? e3 25 Wd3 !:rad8 26 lld l �xd4 27 lLlxd4 (27 'ii'xd4 loses immediately to 27 . . . e2 ! ) 27. . .h5 28 'We2 ( 2 8 h3 Wxd4 29 Wxd4 l:txd4 30 l:txd4 e2 leads to a rook ending

126

with Black a pawn up) 2 8 .. Jle4 29 llc4 llg4 30 Ir.a4 (or 30 h3 l:txg2 3 1 'iWxg2 'iWxc4 32 'i'e4 e2 and wins) 30 ... 'tWe4, when White's pieces are completely pin­ ned and the infiltration of the black pieces is merely a question of time. But by first playing 24 tZ:le2, White unravels his forces after 24 . . . 'ilf'xd2 25 tZ:lxd2 .!lac8 26 tZ:lc4, and then picks up the pawn. B lack also does not have time for 2 3 ... 11a7, strengthening the pin: 24 l'lxc2 lld7 25 llc4 ! ? as 26 a4 e3 27 'tWc3 e2 2 8 lle l 'i'f6 2 9 'li fJ ,*xfJ (29 .. JIxd4 3 0 'tWxf6 lld I fails to 3 1 'tir'h4) 3 0 gxfJ and White eliminates the e-pawn wh ile . retaining his extra piece. e3 23 llxe3 llxe3 24 25 'tWxe3 a5 '*d7 26 a4

27

llci

'tWxa4

After 27 . .. llc8 Black feels the weakness of his back rank: 28 '*h3 ! 'tf'd8 29 'i'd3 'Wf6 30 h3 , and all the same White picks up the c2 pawn. But now he has another passed pawn on the a-file, which gives him hopes. 28 llxc2 'W b 4

29

lld2?

Fortunately for me, my opponent, who was in rather bad time trouble, leaves the queens on, whereas after their exchange it

would have been easier to block the a­ pawn: 29 'Wd2! 'Wxd2 3 0 lIxd2 a4 3 1 tZ:la l Ir.c8 32 tZ:le2.

29

would have led t o a heavy piece ending with all the pawns on one flank.

a4

a3 30 tZ:lc1 Reminding White that his back rank is also weak: 3 1 tZ:la2? 'tWb 1 + 3 2 'Wg i 'ti'xg l + 33 �xg l lld8 and wins. 'iWbl b3 31 Ir.d8 32 'tWgl 3 2 ... llc8 was also possible. a2 tZ:lcb3 33 Ir.d l 'tWb2 34

35

127

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

'tWel

�d2

4

�e7

Black tries to disrupt the development of the white pieces: for example, now White is unable to fianchetto his queen's bishop .

g6

How long can the tension be maintained? But in this respect 3S ... h6 was more accurate, threatening to capture on d4. After the immediate 3 S ... �xd4 3 6 :xd4 (not 3 6 tZ:lxd4? h6 and 36 . . . :xd4) 36 . .. .l:tf8 3 7 lld3 'ir'b I White consolidates w ith 3 8 'iWd I . 36 'tWe7? White m isses a good chance with 3 6 lld2 ! : (a) 3 6 . .. 'tWb 1 3 7 lld l 'Wb2 3 8 lld2 'tWaJ 39 'tWa l Ir.a8 40 :1c2 �d8 4 1 ttJc 1 'tWe3 , and after, say, 42 tZ:lce2 �f6 43 :1xa2 llxa2 44 'iWxa2 �xd4 45 tZ:lxd4 'Wxd4 Black's pawn advantage is insufficient for a win in the queen ending; (b) 36 . . . 'Wc3 37 tZ:lfS ! llf8 38 ttJe7+ �h8 39 ttJd5 'Wxb3 40 'Wa l + f6 4 1 tZ:lxb6. 'iWxb6 42 'Wxa2, and again Black has no real winning chances. 36 'Wc3 ?! A mistake in reply. Black could have regained his piece by 3 6 ... llxd4 37 'We8+ �g7 38 'We5+ �h6, when his king escapes from the checks, whereas now White finally is able to approach the next queening candidate. 'Wc4 37 lln 'Wf6 38 38 'We2 'Wa4 39 Ir.a l �xd4 40 lilid4 llxd4 4 1 :txa2 lld l + 42 �h2 'Wf4+ 43 g3

4

have not felt well d is posed to the move 4 tZ:ld2 since the time of my game with Makarychev (47th USSR Champion­ ship, Minsk 1 979), where after 4 . . . c5 5 a3 �xd2+ 6 'ti'xd2 cxd4 7 ll:\o b5 8 cxb5 �b7 9 'i'xd4 'i'a5+ 1 0 'i'b4 'i'xb4+ I I axb4 a6 Black achieved a good game.

38 39

l:txd4! tZ:lxd4?

The last of a series of errors, which can be explained only by severe time trouble. After 39 lle I ! lle4 40 llxe4 'tWxe4 4 1 'Wxb6 'tWb l + 42 �h2 a l 'tW 43 'Wd8+ the queen ending should again be a draw.

�xd4

39 40

'Wf4

'i'xn +!

White resigns In my 1 4th and last USSR Championsh ip i n 1 990 I was leading before the last round. After a draw with Sem ion Dvoiris I was caught by three other players, but on the tie-break the title of USSR Champion went to me. This was for the fourth time.

4 . . . cS is sometimes played here, in analogy with the similar variation of .the Queen's Indian Defence, where instead of 3 g3 White has played 3 ll:\ O . But, as shown by the game Belyavsky-Grosar (Portoroz 1 996), there is a sign i ficant difference: 5 �xb4 cxb4 6 �g2 0--0 7 e4! (White develops his knight at e2, where it controls d4 from an invulnerable position) 7 . . .d6 8 tZ:le2 e5 9 0--0 ll:\c6 1 0 a3 bxa3 I I tZ:lxa3 as 1 2 'i'd2 b6 1 3 llfd I �a6 1 4 b3 :e8 1 5 ll:\c2 'i'c7 1 6 ll:\e3 g6 1 7 tZ:lf5 �c8 1 8 '1lI'gS �xf5 1 9 exfS
7

0-0

c6

Game 47 Belyavsky-Vyzhmanavin

5 7th USSR Championship Leningrad 1990 Catalan Opening E l l

2 3

d4 c4 g3

tZ:lf6 e6

�b4+ With this check Black lures the bishop to d2, as he assumes that it is less well placed there than at c I .

On the other hand, Black too is obliged to choose the closed variation, since after

128

Uncompromising Chess

7 ... dxc4 8 'i'c2 a6 9 'i'xc4 b5 1 0 'i'c2 White has the threat of �a5 - i.e. he is simply a tempo up on the main variation.

8

�r4

8 'i'c2 is the alternative: (a) 8 . . . b6 9 tl.d l �a6 10 b3 lLIbd7 I I a4 c5 1 2 lLIa3 i.b7 \ 3 cxd5 i.xd5 1 4 lLIb5 a6 1 5 lUc3 i.xf3 16 i.xf3 cxd4 with a double-edged game (Belyavsky-Yusupov, 55th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 988); (b) 8 . . . lUbd7 9 :!ld l b6 10 i. f4 i.b7 I I lLIc3 llc8 1 2 lLIe5 lLIh5 1 3 �e3 lLIhf6 1 4 h3 b5 1 5 lLIxd7 lUxd7 1 6 c 5 and White has the better chances ( Belyavsky-Yusupov, Ubeda 1 988). b6 8 lUeS lLIrd 7 ? ! 9 Hardly a good idea. After all, as yet the standard 9 ... i.b7 followed by 1 0 . . . lLIbd7 has in no way been discredited. The removal of the control of e4 allows White to open the h l -a8 diagonal and to convert his main 'Catalan' trump - the strength of the bishop at g2. 10 cxdS cxdS

11

12

exdS!

This interposItion also comes under typical 'Catalan' ideas, as White succeeds in clearing the long diagonal. For example: 12 ... lLIg6 13 d6 lLIxf4 14 dxe7 lLIh3+ I S h l 'jIxe7 1 6 �xa8 �b7+ 1 7 �xb7 'jIxb 7+ 1 8 f3 fol lowed by g2, and Black has no compensation for the exchange.

12 13 14 IS

dxeS i.xdS

16 I7

lLIc3 lLIb5 :!leI

18

tl.e 1

Black tries by tactical means to use the strength of his d-pawn, whereas trickery such as 22 ... a6 23 �xd8 'jIxe6 24 tl.xe6 lUxd8 25 lUc7 lUxe6 26 lLIxe6 %:rf5 27 b4 would have led to the loss of this pawn. � xf2 + i.xd8 23

24 25

�b7 �xdS exdS d4

26

27

lLIxe5

After 1 l ...�b7 1 2 exd5 �xdS 1 3 �xd5 exd5 1 4 ttJc3 lLIf6 1 5 �a4 the c6 square is seriously weakened and it is not easy for Black to complete his development. But now he is left with a weak isolated d-pawn.

lUxd4

Unfortunately for B lack, this is quite sufficient to neutralise his initiative. If instead White concerns himself with blocking the long diagonal by 27 'i'e4?, then after 27 . . . !le8 28 lLId6 ':xe4 29 lLIf7+ �g8 30 lLIxd8 �e3 3 1 lLIb7 !le6 his knight cannot escape, and the d2 pawn becomes a real force.

19 20

27 28 29 30 31 32 33

'i'b3!

�b8 e6

It now transpires that the d4 pawn is relying on the shaky support of the knight at c6.

20 21 22

fxe6 'i'xe6 �c7

�c5

d3

Game 48

'i'xd8 d2 lLId4

lLIc6 'tj'd7 .!lad8

e4

At Linares 1 99 1 I finished third, but after this my results began to deteriorate. The depth of the slump came at Reggio Emilia, where I scored only one and a half points.

Gelfand-Belyavsky Linares 1991 Queen's Gambit D37

1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8

The threat of . . . d4-d3 is parri ed by the counter-threat of e5-e6.

11

g2 nn ncd 1

Preparing the further advance of the d­ pawn, which did not work immediately because of 1 8 ... d3 19 lUd6, when 19 . . . lLIxe5? fails to 20 i.xe5 i.xd6 2 1 'jIxd3 J:.ad8 22 !lcd I with a winning pin. However, the initiative is still with White.

19

1 29

Uncompromising Chess

'i'e2 �b3 'i'g4 'i'e2 g4 'i'e4

d5

d4 c4 lUc3 i. f4 e3 dxcS

lUf6

e6 � e7 �

c5

�xcS

'jIc2 At Belgrade 1 993, Vladimir Kramnik played 8 a3 lLIc6 9 llc I against me, but after 9 . . . d4 1 0 lLIxd4 e5 I I lLIb3 i.xa3 1 2 bxa3 exf4 1 3 'jIxd8 :!lxd8 1 4 exf4 i.e6 Black gained good compensation for the pawn. 8 lUc6 9 aJ 'jIaS

'i'xd4 'i'd5+ 'i'f5+ 'i'dS 'i'f5+ 'i'f6

It was still possible for White to lose: 33 ':xd2?? 'jIh6+ 34 �g2 'i'c6+ 3 5 �h3

llf3+. 33

lUf3

�g8

Here Black lost on time, but his position is hopeless, as after 34 �g2 White picks up the d2 pawn.

Since the variation where White castles queenside is considered dangerous for Black, 9 ... �e7 comes into consideration, when after I 0 � he gains an important tempo to launch a counter-attack on the c­ file by 1 0 ... �d7, since i f I I cxd5? lLIxd5

130

1 2 lUxd5 exd5 1 3 .!lxd5 .!lc8 with a clear advantage.

10

a.--o-()

This variation was devised by grand­ masters Mikhail Gurevich and Grigorj Kaidanov.

10

�d7

I n later games of m ine there were some amusing developments in the alternative variation 10 ... �e7 1 1 g4 . The following year in Linares I played against Gelfand 1 1 ... dxc4 12 �xc4 a6?! 1 3 g5 lUh5 1 4 �d6 �xd6 I S llxd6 lUe5 1 6 �e2 lUxo 1 7 �xO 'iWxg5 1 8 lUe4 "iWf5 1 9 �xhS "iWxh5 20 llg l .

f6 is probably 20 . . . �h6, but of course this does not solve all B lack ' s problems. Instead of 12 . . . a6? ! , more vigorous is 12 . . . eS, as played in the game Van Wely­ Short (Wijk aan Zee 1 997), which continued 13 g5 exf4 14 gxf6 �xf6 1 5 lUd5 lUe7 1 6 lUxf6+ gxf6 1 7 .!lhg l + �h8 18 e4 b5 19 �d5 lUxd5 20 exd5 b4 2 1 axb4 "iWa I + 22 q;,d2 �a6 23 'i'c6 !td8 24 '1t>c3 ! �b7 25 'i'xa6 �xa6, and B lack maintained the balance.

11

g4

This may not be the best move. I I q;,b I I ?, as played against me by Chemin in a quick-play game (Aubervilliers 1 996). not only moves the king to a safer square, but also threatens the d5 pawn (it is not possible to win it immediately: I I cxd5 lUxd5 1 2 lUxd5 exd5 13 .l:xd5? �xe3+).

11 12

!tfc8 '1t>bl

'Wb6 1 7 !tc I lUe4 with dangerous threats; (c) 14 lUc3 �xa3 ! 1 5 bxa3 'i'xa3 1 6 'Wb2 .!lab8 1 7 �xb8 llxb8 1 8 lUb5 'i'a5 and B lack regains his piece with a continuing attack. Wh ite also cannot be satisfied with 1 3 cxd5 b4! , when he comes under a fierce attack after both 14 dxc6 �xc6 I S axb4 �xb4 1 6 �e2 .txc3 1 7 bxc3 �e4 1 8 !td3 :lab8+, and 1 4 lUa4 �f8 I S dxc6 �xc6. The inclusion of 13 g5 lUh5 and now 1 4 cxb5 runs into 1 4 . . . lUxf4 ! (not 1 4. . .lUe7? 1 5 �e5 a6 1 6 b4 'Wxa3 1 7 bxc5 axb5 1 8 'i'b2, when White parries the threats, retaining his extra piece) 1 5 exf4 (both 1 5 bxc6 �xc6 1 6 exf4 d4 1 7 lUe4 �xa3 and 1 5 'Wa4 d4! also favour B lack) 1 5 . . .lUe7 1 6 lUeS �e8, when Black gains the advantage. 13 lUe 7 14 lUd2 White threatens a fork, and defends against the threat of 14 ... �xa3, on which there follows I S lUbJ 'i'b4 16 lld4. But 1 4 �eS ! ? and 1 4 !tc I ! ? are also interesting.

14 15 Here Boris offered a draw, which I accepted. However, this game was 'con­ tinued' at the 1 996 Olympiad. Vladim ir Akopian did not offer a draw, and I decided to prevent the threatened check at f6 by 20 ... f5, after which I was consider­ ably surprised by the reply 2 1 lUf6+! It turned out this move had been analysed i n one o f the issues of New in Chess, which I had not seen. The game continued 2 1 . . J 1xf6 22 �c7 �h6 23 .!ld8+ !tf8 24 .!lxf8+ �xf8 25 !td 1 �d7 26 !txd7 b5 27 �b I .!le8. and when Akopian failed to find the best continuation 2 8 !tf7+ �g8 29 �d7 !tf8 30 !te7, and played instead 28 �e5? !te7, I managed to escape from the vice. The best defence against the check at

12 13

131

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

b5! exb5

After 1 3 lUxb5 a6 ( 1 3 ...liJe7 ! is also good - Ftacnik) White is drawn into forc­ ing play, where Black' s attack develops of its own accord: (a) 14 �c7 llxc7 1 5 lUxc7 'Wxc7 1 6 cxd5 �6!? 1 7 dxc6 �xc6 with the threat of . . . �O and . . . �e4; (b) 14 liJbd4 lUxd4 1 5 lOxd4 ( 1 5 exd4 �xa3 16 bxa3 �xa3) 1 5...�a4 1 6 'ird2

'i'd8! lUb3

15 �e2 was simpler, completing his development, but White was hoping after I S ... �b6 to develop his bishops more actively by 16 �d3 lUg6 17 �g5. However, disillusionment awaits him. 15 lUe4! Attacking the c3 knight, which i s covering the queen. Now if 1 6 lUxe4 there follows 1 6 . . . �xe3 1 7 �xc8 !txc8 1 8 �xe3 dxe4 with advantage to B lack, while if 1 6 �e5 Black diverts the bishop with 1 6 . . . �d6 ! 1 7 �xd6 liJxd6, gaining the advantage.

16 17

lUxeS .i.e5

llxcS lUxc3+

The simplest. If 1 7 ... lUg6 1 8 �d4 lUxc3+ 1 9 bxc3 llcc8 20 f4 and White stands better, while after 17 ...�xb5 1 8

�xe4! dxe4 1 9 11xd8+ llxd8 20 �d4 !txc3 2 1 bxc3 .txfl 22 !txfl lUc6 23 �c2 he again has the better chances, e.g. 23 . . . e5 24 �c5 lld5 25 �b4 as 26 c4.

18 19

�xc3 �xb5

�xb5

Of course, not 1 9 b4 �a4!

19 20

llxb5 h4

The situation appears to have clarified, but the apparent simplic ity is deceptive. White's king is less securely covered, and he has to reckon with the possible man­ oeuvre of the knight to c4, from where it attacks the a3 and b2 pawns. White hopes by the advance of his h-pawn to lengthen the a l -h8 diagonal for h i s bishop, but even so I was more afraid of 20 f4! ? with the idea of f4-f5.

20

.!le8? !

Too slow. After 2 0. . .lOe8! th e knight could have gone via b6 or d6 to c4 with dangerous threats: 2 1 h 5 lUd6 22 h6 ltJc4 23 �a l (23 'Wxh7+ does not work: 23 . . .�xh7 24 hxg7+ �g6 25 llh8 liJxb2 26 �xb2 :'xb2+ 27 �xb2 �f6+) 23 . . . g6 24 �d3 :tab8 2 5 f4 'iii'b 6 . Things are even worse for White after 2 1 'Wa4 liJd6 22 'Wd4 f6 23 g5 e5 24 'Wg4 f5 25 'irg3 lOe4 26 �xe5 �6.

21 22

h5 'Wa4?!

�d6

132

Uncompromising Chess

A mistake in reply. Gelfand did not l ike 22 h6 tixa3 23 hxg7 lUg6 24 lld3 'i'a6! with the threat of . . . lla5, when Black' s attack gets there first: 25 'i!i'e2 llb3 2 6 llc I llcb8! or 25 'i'd l e5 26 g5 d4 ! 27 'i'h5 Wxg7 etc., but in defending the a3 pawn White removes a defender from the b2 pawn. The simplest was 22 Wa l l , with less predictable consequences. 22 'i'b8! �es 'i'b7 23 2..

gs?!

The im med iate 24 :tc I was better, although after 24 . . . lUc6 25 h6 f6 26 JLc3 llb8 B lack's initiative is very dangerous. 2.. lUc6 llcl 25

25

26 27 28

�xd4 �c3

gxf7+ 'i'f4+

.::I.a 6 �x f7 �g8

lUd4! White resigns

"d6

Game 49

Belyavsky-Timman Linares 1 9 9 1 King's Indian Defence E86

1

d4

2

c4

3 4 5

lU c3

6

7

lUgc2 'i'd2

e4

lUf6 g6 �g7 d6

f3

0--{)

�e3

e5 c6

8 ttJbd7 9 � The alternative here is 9 dS. For exam ple, the game Timman-Kasparov (Am sterdam 1 996) continued 9 . . . cxdS 1 0 cxd5 a6 I I g4 h5 1 2 h 3 lUh7 1 3 :g l ! h4 14 tOc l :;h8 I S -Db3 � f6 1 6 g5 �e7 1 7 0--0--0 f6 with complicated play. 9 a6

c 5 ! b4 1 2 lUa4 d 5 ! with a complicated game), I chose the simplest one, not often seen in grandmaster play.

10

b5

A race typical of this variation now

commences. The blockading 1 0 ... h5 is un­ favourable in view of I I dxe5 dxe5 (after l l ...lUxe5 1 2 lUf4 the d6 pawn is a serious weakness) 12 lUa4 ( 1 2 � b l followed by lUc l is also good) 1 2 ... 'i'e7 1 3 c5, fixing the weak b6 and d6 squares in B lack's position. 11 h5 "as It is well known that after 1 1 ... lUxh5 1 2 �h6 with the threat of g2-g4 White i s the first to get at the enemy king. Now the queen is attacking the a2 pawn, but it is unsupported, and White's threats on the kingside are more real. 1 1 . . . lUb6 looks more logical.

12

�h6

13 14 Black prepares a flank attack. 9 .....a5?! I 0 �b 1 bS is premature in view of 1 1 cxbS cxbS 12 tUdS ! ? "xd2 1 3 ttJe7+ �h8 1 4 :xd2 �b7, and here in Meulders-Minero (Novi Sad Olympiad 1 990) White could have gained the advantage by 1 5 d S ! llae8 (weaker is 1 5 ... a6 1 6 1Dc3 ttJc5 1 7 b4) 1 6 ttJc6 with the idea o f tUa5 (Meulders).

10

h4

Of the numerous continuations (of which the most common is I 0 �b I bS I I

"xh6 lU b !

133

Dolmatov played the spectacular 23 . . .11xfS ! (instead of 23 . . . .i.x(5) 24 exfS .i.xf5, when White cannot hold out against the pawn avalanche. The logical comple­ tion of White' s opening idea was 1 8 g5! tUxh5 and only now 19 lLlg3 with a dan­ gerous attack, e.g. 1 9 . . . fS 20 lLlxh5 gxh5 2 1 �c4+ �h8 22 llxhS 'i'g7 23 llch2 etc.

�xh6!

It is useful to divert the queen from the centre. After 1 2 . . . b4 I J lUb I ..-xa2 14 lUg3 exd4 I S �xg7 �xg7 ( 1 5 ... lUc5 is not dangerous: 1 6 "h6 lUb3+ 1 7 �c2 lUa l + 1 8 �d2 'i'xb2+ 1 9 �e I lUc2+ 20 f2 tOe3+ 21 �g I tiJfg4 22 fxg4 lUxg4 23 �xd4 "xd4+ 24 .::I.xd4 lUxh6 25 hxg6 with a decisive material advantage) 1 6 "xd4 the queen controls the situation: 16 . . . a5 1 7 "xd6 c5 18 hxg6 fxg6 1 9 e5 with an obvious advantage to White.

d"! llb8 ll:c:b2+

�a! .::I. b6 29 g6 After 29 "c2 'i'a6 30 �a2 Black wins by 30 . . . l:b4! 3 1 g6 hxg6 32 hxg6 (or 32 h6 .::I.a 4 33 h7+ �h8 3 4 �xg7+ �xg7) 32 . . ..::I.a4 33 gxf7+ �xf7 34 "g6+ �xg6 35 .::I. c g l + �f5 .

29 30 31 32

Uncompromising Chess

b4 'i'xa2

15 lUg3 Two years later, after Kasparov had neutralised the plan associated with this move, I found another continuation 1 5 :d2, which I employed against Dolmatov (Novosibirsk 1 993). The game continued I S . . . 'i'xc4+ 16 l:c2 "e6 1 7 g4 'i'e7 and here I could not refrain from 1 8 lUg3?!, when after 18 ...exd4 1 9 g5 lUg4! 20 fxg4 lUeS 2 1 hxg6 fxg6 22 lUf5 gxf5 23 gxfS I would have been virtually lost, had

15 lLlb6 It also looks good to include this knight in the attack via c5, which can be vacated by 1 S ... exd4. Now in the event of 1 6 llxd4 lLlcs 1 7 llxd6 lUb3+ 1 8 �c2 lLla l + 1 9 �c I lLlb3+ Black gives perpetual check. The attack 1 6 'i'g5 looks more dangerous: (a) 1 6 ... 1L1c5 (this knight raid proves unsuccessful) 1 7 "xf6 lLlb3+ 1 8 �c2 1Lla 1 + 1 9 �d2 'i'xb2+ 20 �e l lUc2+ 2 1 �f2 lLle3+ 22 lld2 'i'b3 2 3 .i.d3 and wins (but not 23 h6? lLlg4+!); (b) 16 ... 1L1e8 1 7 lLlf5 ttJcs and White breaks through Black's defences by 1 8 1Lle7+ �g7 1 9 hxg6 lLlb3+ 2 0 �c2 lLla l + 2 1 �d3 'i'b3+ 22 lLlc3 fxg6 23 llxh7+; (c) 16 ... :e8 1 7 lLlf5 lLlc5! and after vacating an escape path for his king, Black holds the position: 1 8 'i'xf6 (or 1 8 lLlxd4 lLlfd7 with chances for both sides) 1 8 ... .i.xf5 1 9 h6 lLlb3+ 20 �c2 1Lla1 +, and if White persists with 2 1 �d3?, after 2 1 . . . 'i'b3+ 22 ttJc3 �f8 he risks losing.

1 34

16 17

c5! lld2

lUc4

21

'i'g5

Here also it was not too late for 2 1 �c4 !

21 22 23 24 25 26 27

1 35

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

33 34

tDd2 lLle4

Game 50 BelYllvsky-Salov Reggio Emilia 199112 English Opening A30

�g7

'lWd8 lLld7 g5! �xfS f6 �h8

dxe5 'i'h6 tDrs

exfS �c.H e6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

tDf3

tD f6

c4 tDc3 g3 i.g2

e6 b6 c5 i.b7 tDc6

0--{)

e4

The other method of development is 7 d4 lLlxd4 8 tDxd4 i.xg2 9 �xg2 cxd4 1 0 'i'xd4 'i'c 8.

17 tD x d 2? Winning the exchange proves to be the decisive m istake, as Black 's attack peters out, whereas White ' s is still to come. 17 . . .tDa5 was essential. as played in the game Belyavsky-Kasparov (Linares 1 99 3 ), which after I S cxd6 lUb3+ 1 9 �c2 tUa 1 + 20 �c l 8b3+ 2 1 �c2 tDa l + 22 �c l ended in a draw by perpetual check. 18 19 20

lLlxd2 tDbl cxd6?!

'i'a1+ �e6

White m isses a chance t o break up t h e opponent's k i n g position b y the divertin g 2 0 i.c4 ! , exploiting the fact that Black cannot take the bishop w ith 20 ... i.xc4? because of 2 1 tDf5 gxfS 22 'i'g5+ �hS 23 'lWxf6+. However, defending the e6 bishop i s also inadequate: (a) 20 ... llae8 2 1 cxd6 �a5 22 d7 lle7 (22...�xc4 23 tD f5) 23 tDf5 �xf5 24 exf5 llxd7 (B lack also loses after 24 . . . exd4 2 5 hxg6 'lWxfS 2 6 'lWx..f8+) 25 hxg6 'lWdS 2 6 dxe5 with a winning position; (b) 20 ... llfeS 2 1 cxd6 'lWa5 (or 2 l ...�xc4 22 lLlfS gxfS 23 �g5+ �f8 24 'lWxf6) 22 tDfS ! �xf5 23 exfS exd4 24 hxg6 with a quick win.

20

�1l5

34 In time trouble Timman misses the

Can one exchange?

27 28

want

any

:!.d 1

more

for

the

tDe5 tDxc4

By giving up a piece: 28 ... lla7 29 e7 llxe7 30 dxe7 'lWxe7 3 1 lLld2 lId8 32 b3 lLlxc4 33 lLlxc4 :xd I + 3 4 'it>xd I �g8 Black could have forestalled the pawn invasion. B ut not for long: after 35 tDd2 and tDe4 he is doomed.

29

e7

'lWe8

After the 'exchange' of queens 29 ... tDe3 ? 30 exd8'i' :r.axd8 3 1 lle l furs 32 �x..f8 + .llxf8 the d-pawn has the final word: 33 d7 tDd6 34 lle6 tDb7 35 tDd2
31 32

exf8'IW+ l:td4

llxf8 lUeS

If 32 . . .tDe3 White has the decisive 3 3 d7 l:td8 3 4 lle4.

chance for 34 . . . c5, as White cannot play 3 5 tUxc5? :rcS 3 6 :!.d5? :txc5+. But after 3 5 ':d l ! tDd7 3 6 �c2 as (or 3 6 . . . c4 3 7 !la l !la8 38 :!.a5) 37 �b3 ':a8 3 S �a4 �f7 3 9 ': e I and tDd2 h e breaks through on the e­ file.

35

tDc5

lla8

36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

llxb4 .lld 4
lla7
35 ... aS loses immediately - 36 lLle6 !lb8 37 d7. But now too, after the capture of the b-pa ....n . the end is close.

44

45

The quickest way to win is by creating another passed pawn.

45 46 47 48

fxe5 �e8 (6
d6 7 cxd4 d4 8 ncB tDxd4 9 Less flexible is 9 ... tDxd4 10 'iW xd4 �e7 I I b3 0-0 12 �a3 'i'b8 1 3 J:lfd I !ld8 1 4 !:ac l i.c6 1 5 h 3 a6 1 6 i.b4 'i' b7 I 7 '1Ike3 b5 1 8 cxb5 axbS 1 9 ':'c2 �f8 20 ::Icd2 with

advantage

to

White

(Vagan ian­

Hellers. New York 1 990).

10

tDxc6

The exchange of knights makes it easier for White to put pressure on the weakness at d6. Apart from the plan in the game, also interesting is 1 0 b3 i.e7 1 1 a4 0-0 1 2 tDxc6 �xc6 1 3 �a3 'IWd 7 1 4 ll e 1 llfd8 1 5 'lWe2 'lWb7 1 6 tDbS 'lWb8 1 7 e S lLle8 1 8

136

Uncompromising Chess

i.xc6 :'xc6 1 9 llad 1 with advantage to White (polulyakhov-Arseniev, USSR 1 989). 10 11 12 13 14

i. f4 �e2 nfd 1 llac l

i.xc6 i. e7 �

'i'c7 'tt' b8

A favourable consequence for White of the exchange on c6 is that 1 4 .. .llfd8? can be met by I S ll)dS ! , so B lack is forced to remove his queen from the 'X-ray' action of the rook, although the knight advance remains a threat.

15

exd5 b3

exd5 i.a4 J:[ce8!

After 1 7 ...J:[fe8 1 8 bxa4 lUd7 19 i.h3 the pin on this rook is unpleasant. 18 19

'i'b4 fibS

lOcs 'i'd8!

A clever retreat, with the idea of exchanging the dark-square bishops at g5, leaving White with a light-square bishop, running up against the dS pawn, after which the advantage of the knight will tell. 22 23 24

fic6 i.e3 as

gS! x f6

White could have avoided the exchange sacrifice by 24 i.xc5 bxc5 25 ':'e I and fought for control of the c-filc, b u t after 25 . . . i.d4 26 �h3 ':xe l + 27 :'xe l ·'i'f6 :: 8 :e2 .:r.b8 the opposite-colour bishops favour Black.

lUd5

This looks spectacular, but in view o f t h e reply i t would have been preferable to put pressure on the d6 pawn - 1 5 lUb 5 l:tfd8 (after I S ...i.xbS?! 1 6 cxbS l:txc l 1 7 thc I .:tc8 1 8 :c6 White exploits the weak c6 square) 1 6 e5 dxeS 1 7 !:.xd8+ i.xd8 ( i f 1 7 . . ..:txd8 1 8 i.xeS �7 1 9 i.xc6 'Wxc6 20 ti:Jxa7 'Wa4 2 1 ti:JbS 'Wxa2 22 i.c7 White creates an outside passed b-pawn) 1 8 i.xeS 'Was 1 9 i.xc6 J:[xc6 20 lUd6, and White retains s lightly the better chances. 15 16 17

20 21

bxa4 'Wd2

liJd7 'Wc 7

24 25 26 27

fxe3 ·i' bS

28 29

J:[n J:[cel

i.xe3 i.gS

Better is 29 ...�gS 3 0 �bl fS with counterplay. Now, however, Black is no longer able to play . . . f7-fS. 30 31

�bl ! i.e4

The possibility of . . . f7-f5 has been blocked, and in the event of the active 3 1 ... hS 32 i.fS �b7 (32...�d8 33 �g6 and wins) 33 i.h7+ Cit>g7 34 fifS f6 35 i.g6 ':'h8 36 i.e8 the attack on the king is decisive. �g7 32 �fS 33 .bg4 After the fall of this pawn Black has no compensation for the exchange. 33 i.d2 34 i.e6+ 'it>h8 35 J:[e2 i.c3 1:1f4 36 i.eS 37 J:[h4 lUxe6 ne8 dxe6 38 'i'g8 39 �fS 40 c;t>g2 l:te7 40 ... :xe6 is met by 4 1 l:txh7+. But now comes an explosion.

l:txe3 ! bxaS g4

xg5?!

Evidently tired after his brilliant strategic play, Salov hurries to regain the e3 pawn. He could have achieved the same aim by 27 ... .i.e5 ! with the threat of an attack on the kingside, for example: 28 :fl fS 29 'i'b l 'WgS 30 J:[f2 (or 30 l:tce l h S ! ) 30 . . .'i'xe3, and now after 3 1 J:[cfl lOdJ 3 2 J:[xfS l:txfS 33 l:txfS B lack has perpetual check by 33 . . . lUf2+.

41

l:txe5!

fxe5

Black also has a lost position after 4 l ...dxeS 42 'i'xf6+ 'i'g7 43 'WfS followed by J:[g4. 42

l:tg4

43 44 45 46

�d7 f6

�hl First 27 J:[fl is more accurate, and only i f 2 7 . . . .i.gS 28 �h l . 27

1 37

Uncompromising Chess

l:tg7

h5 'i'f6 'Was+ llg6 'Wb7 �h3 l:th6+ Black resigns

Game 5 1 Belyavsky-Gelfand Linares 1992

Slav Defence D 1 0 1 2 3

d4 c4 lUc3

d5 c6 e5

At that time White had not yet found a clear-cut way to gain an advantage in the Winawer Gambit. dxe5 d4 4 5 6

lUe4 lUd2

'Wa5+

When this game was played, Kasparov had not yet demonstrated the virtues of 6 xd2. This occurred in his game with Nikolic at the 1 992 Olympiad in Manila: 6 . . . 'WxeS 7 lUg3 'Wd6 8 lUD lUf6 9 'i'c2 i.e7 (9 ... xe6 1 0 lUe4 ! ) 1 0 (}...()....{) ()....{) I I e3 dxe3 1 2 fxe3 'Wc7 1 3 xc3 xg4? 14 i.d3 lObd7 IS �f5 xxfS (or 1 5 ....:tad8 16 i.xg4 lUxg4 1 7 xxg7 lOxe3 1 8 'Wd2! �xg7 19 'Wxe3 with advantage to White) 1 6 lUxfS llfe8 1 7 lUxg7! �xg7 1 8 'WfS lUf8 1 9 h4! h6 and here, as shown by Kasparov, 20 'Wg4+! lUg6 (20 ...�h8· 2 1 lUgS! i.d8 22 llxd8!) 2 1 h 5 'i'b6 2 2 hxg6 'i'xe3+ 23 � b l fxg6 24 'Wh4 would have . led to a quick win. Subsequently the stronger 1 3 ... lUa6 was played, but after 1 4 a3 lUg4 (or 1 4 ...lUc5 1 5 b4 lUcd7 1 6 liJf5 lle8 1 7 cS b5 1 8 g4! with the initiative for White, Krasenkov­ Yanofsky, Hastings 1 99213) 1 5 J:[e l xf6 1 6 i.d4! g6 1 7 .i.d3 J:[e8 1 8 �b 1 xd7 1 9 ti:Je4 White still has the better chances (Marin-Cosma, Bucharest 1 994). 6

lUh6

138

Uncompromising Chess 1 99 1 ) continued 12 0-0 .i.xd2 13 'i'xd2

2 3

�xd2 1 4 tUxd2 tUd7 I S tUo as with equal chances. 1 0 ... tUd7 runs into I I e6. However, at f5 the bishop has no future, and with 10 ... tUa6 ! ? I I �g2 .i.e6 1 2 0-0 exd2 1 3 �xd2 �b6+ B lack could have hoped for more.

Gelfand chooses a sharp vanatlon, originally recommended by Euwe. 6 ... tUd7 is considered sounder, although B lack has to reckon with 7 e6 fxe6 8 g3 , for example : 8 . . . tUeS 9 'i'c2 tUf6 1 0 �g2 �e7 I I tUh3 tUf7 1 2 0-0 eS 13 f4 ! with the in itiative for White (Timman-Nikolic, Manila Olympiad 1 992), or 8 ... tUgf6 9 �g2 eS 10 tUgf3 .i.e 7 I I 0-0 �c7 1 2 b3 0-0 1 3 �b2, and here i n the game H.Olafsson-Hertneck (Man i l a O lympiad 1 992) B lack should have played 1 3 . . . lle8, which would have led to an unc lear position. 6 . . . �g4 has also been played. For example, the game Epishin-Shabalov (Tilburg 1 993) continued 7 h3 �hS 8 g4 .i.g6 9 tUgf} hS! 10 .i.g2 hxg4 I I tUxd4 ( I I hxg4 lWl I + 12 �xh l tUh6 ! favours B lack) 1 1 . . . tUd7 1 2 e6 tUeS 1 3 exf7+ �xf7 1 4 ttJ4b3 �c7 I S ttJe4 tUxc4 1 6 �g5 ! .i.dS with equal chances, but perhaps Black could have tried for more with 1 5 . . . l::td 8 ! ?

7 8

tUgO g3

12 13 14 15

fxe3

15 16 17 18

<7Jrs <7Je3

dxe3

a3 Preventing the bishop from going to b4. The usual continuation here is 1 0 .i.g2 exd2+ I I .i.xd2 .i.b4. For example, the game Seirawan-C.Hansen (Wijk an Zee

b4 ax b4

I}-{)! 'iFxd2

�xb4 �xal exd2

�b2 <7Jg5 e6!

I}-{) � a6 .i. g6 f6

4

5 6

20

l::te 8

exd4 <7Jf6 bxc6 tUe 4

A very rare continuation, counting on the effect of surprise. And although it worked in this game, I nevertheless cannot recommend this move for serious play. The main continuation is 6 .. .'�e7.

.i.h3!

20 21 22

23

c5 .i.e6+

llxf6!

�b6+ �c7 �h8

tUd7

After 23 ... 'i'xe7 24 llxg6 hxg6 25 'i'd4 White mates from the other side.

24

llxg6!

There is no defence. 24 . . . hxg6 25 'i'd4 tUf6 is met by the decisive 26 'i'xf6.

Black resigns. Game 52

Lautier-Belyavsky Biel 1992

.

e7

tUxd4 tUxc6 e5

Now it is the tum of the other bishop.

Otherwise there is no way of opposing White's dark-square bishop, for example: 1 8 .. 'i'xc4 19 exf7+ .i.xf7 20 llf4 "'5 2 1 llxf7 llxf7 (2 1 . .."'6+ 2 2 .i.d4) 2 2 'l'd8+ l::t fS 23 'iFe7.

19

<7Jc6

d4

3

�c5?!

Now it is clear that the exchange is too small a price for White's initiative.

After 8 ... ttJd7 9 e6 fxe6 1 0 .i.h3 tUf6 I I �c2 White takes the initiative.

9 10

�g2

Black should have been satisfied with I l . . . tUd7 12 tUd4 exd2+ (weaker is 12 ... tUxe5 13 tUxf5 tUxc4 14 'i'c2 exd2+ 1 5 .i.xd2 tUxd2 1 6 �xc6+) 1 3 �xd2 '�xeS 14 .i.c3, although it is by no means easy for him to develop further.

tUo

Thanks to the efforts of Kasparov, in recent years the Scotch Game has begun to rival the Ruy Lopez i n popularity.

.i.f5

10

11

1 39

Uncompromising Chess

Scotch Game C45

1

e4

e5

'i'd4?! 7 After this the knight move proves justi­ fied, as the advanced position of the queen aids the development of the fS bishop with gain of tempo. 7 'iff} is a more natural way of attacking the knight, although here too Black has his arguments. For example, the game Kamsky-Korchnoi (Buenos Aires 1 993) continued 7 . . . tUgS 8 'iFgJ tDe6 9 .i.d3 d6!? (9 ... d5 is the alternative) 1 0 0--0 g6 I I ttJc3 dxe5 1 2 'i'xe5 �g7 1 3 'i'e4 0--0 1 4 'i'xc6 l::tb 8 1 5 'i'a4 a6, and in view of Black's powerful activity, White decided to return the pawn by 1 6 �e3 llxb2 1 7 'i'a3 llb8 1 8 llad I 'iVh4 1 9 lOd5 .i. b7 , after which the game became equal. After the quiet development 7 .i.e3 Black carries out the 'prescribed' 7 . . . dS.

1 40

Uncompromising Chess

The game Timman-Korchnoi (Sarajevo 1 984) continued 8 exd6 cxd6 9 �d3 liJf6 1 0 0-{) Jt.e7 1 1 c4 0-{) 1 2 !Dc3 �e6 1 3 lle 1 d S with equal chance s . However, White can consider the mod­ est 7 liJd2 !DcS (after 7 ... liJxd2 8 �xd2 d6 9 Jt.c3 he stands better) 8 liJO d5 9 exd6 cxd6 (9 ... �xd6 !?) 10 �e2 �e7 I I 0-0 0-0 1 2 !Dd4! �d7 1 3 �O 'i'b6 1 4 b3 �f6 1 5 �e3 when he has the better chances (Mi lyutin-Bezgodov, Krasnodar 1 996). 7 f5 8 f3 ? ! B lack simply ignores th is move. White should have played 8 exf6. 8 �c5 9 'ii'c4 d5 Now after 1 0 exd6 �D+ I I �e2 -tJxd6 1 2 '1!Vxc6+ ..1d7 the position of the white king is unenviable. 10 '1!Va4 ().....{) ! A l l this is the consequence of 8 f P I While the white queen has been rush ing around the board, Black has been energetically developing. The capture of the knight I I fxe4 fxe4 is unsatisfactory for White. 11 'i'b4+ 'ii' xc6 12 g3 !Dxg3 13

14 15

bxg3 �d2 'ii'xc5

The material gain resulting from Black's initiative may be insignificant, but White is still undeveloped. 16 'ii' rz 'i'h6+ f4 17 �d l 18 c6 'ii'f3 Now in amazing fash ion White some­ how defends, although the avalanche of kingside pawns is not easy to stop. More vigorous would have been 1 8.. .'i'g5 19 ..1e2 (risky is 19 'tlhd5+ ebh8, when Black is threatening . . . .2.g.H) 1 9 . . .the S . 19 20 21 22 23 24

Jt. d 2

-tJc3 'i'g2

..1 e l '� b l

28 29 30 31 32

�cl �bl 'ii'e3

13+ 'ii' xe7 � e8

�f2

�f5

�c4

33 34 35

36 37 38

a3 �a2 'ii'e 4 'ii'xc4 ..1h4 lld l

h4 �e6 �xc4+ h3 'i'd7

38

g l'ii'

'ii'e6. 24

bS

but pushing his already advanced pawn

pair was quite sufficient: 24 .. . ..1g4+ 2 5 �c l 0+ 26 � b l (or 26 �d2 'ifh5 27 'ifxh5 ..1xh5 28 ..1e3 f2 29 �f1 g2) 26 ... ..1f5 27 'i'xo g2. !Dxd5

g2

Here too 25 .. .�g4+ 26 �c l 0+ was effective: 27 �b 1 'i'xe5, or 27 ..1d2 'i'xe5 28 liJe3 �e6. 26 27

liJe7+ 'i'gl

�f7 �g4+

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

llxd7 e6+

Game 53

Be1yavsky-Ivanchuk L inares 1993 Queen's Gambit D36

2 3 4 Ivanchuk

Denying White the satisfaction of giving an 'epaulette mate': 3 8 ... 'ii'x d l ?? 3 9

Black wants to win with every comfort,

Linares with wins over Ivanchuk and Anand, but I was unable to cope with growing fatigue and lost several games.

lld8

�d3

'ii'x f3! 'ii' x h l

I began my first tournament of 1 993 i n

32 ... h4 33 'ii'h 6 lld8 34 a3 lld I + 3 S a2 llxa l + 36 �xa l �d7 37 'ii'd2+ �c8 38 �a6+ �b8 would have won more quickly.

g5 g4 'i!ih4 'tr' g 5 g3

'ii'xg3+

2S

141

Uncompromising Chess

�xd7 �e7 }:te8 llxfS 'ifg8+

e7 exf8'i' 'i'b4 b3 llf7 'i'g6 ..1n �b7 'i'c4 as ..1g3 h2 ..1n �e8 'i'c5 hl'i' 'i'e4 Wbite resigns

d4 c4

lLlf3 lLlc3

liJf6 e6 d5 liJbd7

agrees

to the Carlsbad Variation, which, it seems to me, does not suit his active style too well . exd 5 5 cxd5 6 �g5 � e7 7 e3 c6 ().....{) 8 'ifc2 With Black I have sometimes employed the plan with an attempt to exchange the l ight-square bishops: 8 ... liJf8 9 �d3 !De6 1 0 �h4 g6 1 1 0-{) lLlg7 and B lack is ready for . . . ..1f5 . In the game Hort-Belyavsky (Munich 1 99 1 ) White prevented this by 1 1 h3 !Dg7 1 2 g4 �e6 1 3 (H)-() liJd7 1 4 ..1g3 0-0 I S � b l llc8 1 6 �3 b5 1 7 llc l , and gained an advantage.

9 10

�d3 h3

lle8

A prophylactic move with the aim of preserving the dark-square bishop from exchange in the event of 1 0 . . . h6 1 1 � f4 !Dh5, and also of keeping the opponent guessing about which side White is going to castle.

10 11

!DfS � r4

A common plan, but also interesting is the sharp 1 1 (H)-()!?, with which I had to contend in the 1 989 European Team Championship: 1 1 . . . ..1e6 1 2 g4 }:te8 1 3 �b l e5?! (essential was 1 3 ...liJe4! with

1 42

Uncompromising Chess

reasonable counterplay) 1 4 dxc5 llxc5 1 5

Ivanchuk avoids. By retreating his kni ght,

lUd4 �b6 1 6 'i'b3 ! and White gained a

B lack prevents lUeS , and plans a poss ible

great

exchange

advantage

(Hort- Belyavsky,

Haifa

of

l ight-square

bishops

28 29 30 31

by

. . . �f7-g6 (after . . . f7-f6).

1 989).

1 43

Uncompromising Chess

13

'ii' f4 �12 'ii'13 as

l:te8 g5 h5

ttJb6

llabl

Now after 1 8 . . . 'i'xb4 1 9 lUc5 'i'a5 20 llb3

White makes short

work

of the

opponent's queenside.

I I 0 0 .�d6 1 2 �xd6 'tl¥xd6, as then

queenside play by means of the wel l-tested

he has a choice over which side to castle. r

minority pawn attack. the aim of which is

had to contend with this when playing this

after b4-b5 and the exchange on c6 to give

llc7 18
variation as B lack.

the opponent a weak pawn . At the same

the opponent any play on the queens ide.

time it is not easy for B lack to approach

Now,

the enemy king.

himself.

11

� e6

Until White has castled, it is premature to play

At the Montpe l l i er

Candidates Tournament in Spraggett

played

13

0-0,

1 9 8 5 , Kev i n and

after

1 3 . ..'i'e7 1 4 11ab l ttJe4 1 5 b4 � f5 16 ttJa4

For White it is easy to continue his

square bishops takes time:

b6! I took control of the c-file and grad­

�f7 1 5 .:tfc I �g6 and White's attack on

ually outplayed my opponent. In the 5 5 t h

the queenside gets there first: 16 bS ttJb6

USSR

1 988)

17 bxc6 bxc6 1 8 lUd2 l:tc8 19 �xg6
Vyacheslav Eingorn chose 1 3 O-O--O !?, t o

20 �g3 cS 2 1 dxcS �xc5 22 'iib 3 (Flear­

which

made

unfortunate

is

able to free

as l:txd7

lUxd 7

24 25 26

playing 3 1 . . . 'Wd8 32 l:txb7 (if 32 ::'a3 an

l:txa5 'i'a3

l:tb6

attack on the e3 pawn by 32 . . . l:tde7 is possible) J2 ... l:txb7 33 l:txb7 'i'xa5 Black

l:t fb l !

dxe4 1 7 lUd2 c5 1 8 dS and White dev­

'i'b3 bS 1 7 a4 a6 1 8 as White has an

loses

eloped an unpleasant initiative. 1 3 0 0 .�e6

enduring initiative.

intensifies the pressure on the queenside

game

14 15 16

Be lyavsky-Ivanov ic

(Cetinje 1 993) there fol lowed 1 1 . . .'!tJe6 1 2 �e5 g6 1 3 0-0--0 lUg7 1 4 g4 as 1 5 �gJ

Possibly

b4 �xd6 a4 Black

should

have

played

great advantage to White.

1 7 " . cS ,

12

()....()

lU6d7

1 2 . . . �d6 would have led to a position from the game Karpov-Belyavsky (Tilburg

1 986), which for understandable reasons

the

knight

at

b6

lUd2

l:te7

Here too 1 7 ... lUbd7 was sti l l possible.

18

to

27

l:t6b3)

Wh ite

is

l:ta8!

26 After

the

pressure,

weakening

somehow

of

liJb3!

a

the e3 pawn. It is in order to attack it that

27

l:t6b3

'i'e7

32 33 34 35

lDa4 lDcS

lUxb7 �n

'i'd8 l:tde7 'i'c7 Wg7

tries through inertia to carry out his idea of White's

imperceptibly

the rook returns.

could have held on.

Even with his flag about to fall, Black

weakness has appeared in his position -

unprotected.

17

queen

standard Carlsbad weakness at c6.

1 6 . . . ttJbd7, in order to answer 1 7 bS with now

the

the b7 pawn is easier to defend than the

a4 1 6 ttJeS ttJd7 1 7 W b I 'ii'a 5 1 8 f3 with a

as

With the h e l p of tactics ( 2 6. . . 'i'xc3?

and tries to make up for his omission, but

�d6 'ii' x d6 a6

Therefore Black should have attacked it

l:txb7 with advantage t o White, but by

24 bS can be met by 24 . . . c S .

I S ... .ttc 8 to be best, but here too after 1 6

the

and also the as pawn becomes a real force.

the idea of 32 l:ta I bS) is ineffective, i n

Bartels, Guernsey 1 990). Flear considers

In

appears at cS, this time winning material,

view of 32 lUa4! l:txa5 3 3 ttJ c S ::'c7 3 4

bxa5

reply

would have been stronger.

easily parried, and the white knight again

manoeuvre. It is true that 3 1 ... lla8 (with

l L . b6?! 1 4 g4 �b7 I S g5 ttJe4 16 �xe4

r

the

(Moscow

13 .. . f6 1 4 b4

Black

course. However, the threat o f 3 2 . . . �hS is

and at the same time h indered the knight

22 23 24

The plan with the exchange of l ight­

llad8 1 7 bS lld6 1 8 bxc6 =xc6 19 'ltd I

Championship

however,

h4?

31

Ivanchuk, in time trouble, maintains

. . . � h S . More cunning was 3 S .. .'i'h2, not releasing the white king, although this wou l d not have saved h i m .

36 37 38

Wgl a6

Wh6

'ii' 12

liJd7

�bS

1 44

Uncompromising Chess

39

11c1 Black resigns

At a critical point of the tournament i n Novosibirsk, in a wel l known position I was able to employ an innovation that subsequently found many fol lowers. Game 5 4

Belyavsky-Akopian Novosibirsk 1993 S lav Defence D 1 8

2 3 � 5 6 7

8 9

d4 c4 QJf3 QJc3 a4

dS c6 QJf6 dxc� i. f5

e3

e6

i.xc 4 (}...O

i.b4 QJbd7

'i'e2

i.g6

e4 10 This pawn sacrifice for the sake o f preventing B lack from castling kingside has long been a standard idea, but I had also prepared a second sacrifice. 10 i. x c3 I n recent times B lack has preferred to decline the sacrifice by 1 0 ... i. h 5 . bxc3 11 QJxe4 12 i. a3 'JiIc7

13

tHe l ! ?

Before this game only 1 3 11 fc I had been played, as it was considered essential to defend the c-pawn.

13

1 45

Uncompromising Chess

�

On encountering a surprise, Akopian avoids taking the second pawn. In some later games Black took the pawn with 1 3 ... QJxc3, although at first time it looks very dangerous. It so happened that the discussion of this topic was ' carried over' to the Munich tournament of 1 994, where the games played ended in White ' s favour, although defensive resources for B l ack were also found. Let us consider them:

HUbner-Belyavsky continued 14 'ii'b 2 QJe4 (weak is 14 ... QJxa4? 15 'i'b3 ! , when after 1 5 . . . QJab6 or 1 5 . . . QJdb6 the bishop sacrifice 16 i.xe6 fxe6 1 7 'i'xe6+ is · decisive; 1 4 .. . QJd5?! is als o inadequate because of I S i.xd5! cxd5 16 'i'b4 ttJb6 1 7 llacl QJc4 I S ltJe5 llc8 1 9 lOxc4 dxc4 20 llxc4 and wins) IS as QJdf6 (other moves leave White with the advantage: 1 5 ... tOd 6 16 i.xe6, 1 5 . .. 0--0-0 1 6 a6, I S ... QJef6 1 6 QJe5, o r 1 5 . . .a6 1 6 QJe5) 1 6 ttJe5 a6 1 7 J:[ac I J:[dS 1 8 i.xa6 bxa6 1 9 QJxc6 ttJg4 20 QJeS 'i'xaS 2 1 lOxg4 'i'b5, and here White should have gone into an only s lightly better ending by 22 'i'xb5+ axb5 23 llc7. In the game Lutz-Bareev White chose 14 'i'e3 QJe4 1 5 lbes QJxe5 (risky is

1 5 ... Q--O..-{) 1 6 QJxfl i.xfl 1 7 'JiIxe4 or 1 5 ... QJef6 1 6 i.xe6!? fxe6 1 7 QJxg6 hxg6 1 8 'lWxe6+, but I S . . . QJdf6!? comes into consideration) 1 6 dxe5 'JiIb6 (further ' pawn-grabbing' is too dangerous: 1 6 ... 't'ixe5 1 7 i.d3 f5 1 8 i.xe4 fxe4 1 9 llad I ) 1 7 't'if4, and here, instead o f the losing 1 7 ... 'JiId4?? 1 8 't'ih4, essential was 1 7 . . . Q--O..-{) 1 8 11xe4 i.xe4 1 9 'i'xe4 'i'd4 20 J:[e l (after 20 'JiIxd4 J:[xd4 2 1 11c ) 11hd8 22 i.d6 Black again gives back the exchange: 22 . . . 118xd6 23 exd6 �d7 with a similar ending) 20 ... 'i'xe4 2 1 J:[xe4 11d I + 22 i.fl J:hd8 23 i.d6 ll8xd6 24 exd6 'i1.Jd7. According to Bareev this ending is sl ightly better for White, but I find it hard to agree, e.g. 25 f3 �xd6 26 �f2 as 27 .i.e2 llb I 2S lld4+ �e7 29 �e3 b5 30 �dJ :b2 31 :e4 b4 32 �c4 �d6 and it is White who is fighting for equal ity. Therefore 1 3 . . . QJxc3 may be a serious problem for him. In the game HUbner-Hertneck Black declined the sacrifice: 13 ... c5 14 d5 eS (HUbner recommends 14 ... Q--O..-{) ! ? I S dxe6 fxe6 1 6 QJh4 QJxc3 1 7 'i'xe6 with an unclear game) I S i.d3, and here, as suggested by HUbner, essential was 1 5 . . . QJef6 ! ? ) 6 ttJxeS Q--O..-{) 1 7 ttJxd7 :txd7 I S c4 with only slightly the better chances for Wh ite. 11he8 14 'i'b2 15 as Depriving the knight of the b6 square, as after 1 5 ... 'ii'xa5 1 6 i.b4 'ii'b6 1 7 'i'c I the threat of i.aS is unavoidable.

15

e5

llab l 16 Now the knight is tied t o its insecure post at e4, as 1 6 ... ttJef6? loses to 1 7 i.d6.

16 17

c5

i. fl ! There was a false trail - the activ e 1 7 i.dS?! QJd6 1 8 dxeS QJxeS 1 9 QJxe5 (no better is 1 9 llxeS llxeS 20 QJxe5 i.xb I 2 1

'i'xb l .!Db5 ! with advantage to Black) 1 9. . . i.xb I 20 'i'xb I 'i'xa5 and in view of the threat of . . . c5-c4 Wh ite has to part with another piece. But now this exchang­ ing manoeuvre would leave White with two pieces for a rook. (6 17

18

11al ? !

Moving the rook out of 'X-ray' range of the bishop allows Black a certain respite. White should have eliminated the opponent's active pieces, beginning with the bishop - I S QJh4! Now B lack is unable to consolidate his position by I S . . . QJd6 because of 1 9 QJxg6 hxg6 20 11ed I ! (in my calculations I had underestimated this move). Now White threatens 2 1 dxc5 QJxc5 22 bxc5 'ii'x c5 23 llxd6! , diverting the defender of the b7 pawn, and after 20 . . . l1e7 2 1 dxcS lOxc5 22 'i'b4! the queen is lost. Therefore there only remains 1 8 . . .lOxc3 1 9 'ii'xc3 exd4 20 'ii'b 3 i.xb I 2 1 llxb I , after which Black has a whole series of positional problems: the c5 and d4 pawns are paralysed, his queen is tied to the defence of the b7 pawn, and at the same time g2-g3 and i.h3 is threatened. Strangely enough, the best here is 2 1 . . .b6 22 ltJf5 lbes 23 axb6 axb6 24 .i.a6+ �b8, although after 25 lOxg7 llg8? a line leading to mate is possible: 26 lbe6 .c6

146

Uncompromising Chess

27 'iWxb6+ 'iWxb6 28 Uxb6+ q;a7 29 llb7+ �a6 3 0 lDxcs+ q;aS 3 1 .i.b4 mate. 18 tDd6 19 lDd2 �b8

20

36

lld6

2 3 4 5

llec1

d4 tt::le 3 .i.d3 .i.xe4 .i.g5

d5 .i.b4 dxe4 tt::l f6

6 The usual continuation here is 6 � f3 or 6 �d3.

tt::l b d7

6

7 tt::lge2 7 �d3 !? came into consideration. 7

20

�a8?

It was essential to defend the c 5 pa\vn again - 20 .. . :tc8. lDb3 e4 21

22

23

24

.i.xd6 .i.xe4 �n!

'1fxd 6 a6

The productivity of this bishop is simply amazing, and, in v iew of its desire to occupy the long diagonal, Black had to play the prophylactic 24 . . . .i.e4. But he overlooks this resource. 24 lle 8 lDd2 25 lle6 g3 26 .i. f7 27 llebl llb8 28 lla4 exd4 llxd4 29 'iWe7 'iWb4 30 tt::le 5

31 32 33 34

f4 lleI

tt::lg4 lle 5

tDb6 'iWb6! It is not often that one is able to strengthen an attack by exchanging queens. 'iWxb6 34 axb6 llb 5 35

1 47

Uncompromising Chess

lDg8 36 Black cannot simultaneously defend the b 7 and a6 pawns that are covering h is king. He parries the attack from the centre (J:e7b 7), but is powerless against the attack from the flank. llal llfB 37 38 39 40

e4 c5 llxa6+

41

tra7

42

trd7

b6

8 9

.i.xf6 .i.f3

lDxf6

10 11 12

()....{)

tt::le4 .i.xe4

e6 lDxe4

()....{)

2 1 'iWxd4 'iWxd4 22 cxd4 with an equal ending.

17 18 19 1 9 trfe 1 consideration.

19 20 21 22

'iWf6 tDd 4

.i.d 7 c3 trae8 2 0 lle3 came

'iWa4

into

trae8 a6

lUb3

.i.e8

'iWb4 lDa5?

lle7

23 White does not sense the danger. The knight stands better at b3 than at a5, as is confirmed by the course of the game. 23 trfe I trfe8 24 tre3 was correct, aiming for exchanges.

Itb2 tt::le 7 q;b8 tt::le 6

Black resigns I was more successful at the tournament in Belgrade, where everyth ing seemed to work out wel l and after an interval of three years I took first place. Although in the penultimate round Vladimir Kramnik was confident that in his game with me he would wipe out my lead, fate had decreed that I would win the tournament. Our game ended in a draw, and in L'le last round the gap increased to one and a half points.

� g2

Game 5 5

Romanisbin-Belyavsky Belgrade 1993 French Defence C I S

1

e4

e6

12 .i.d6! Black prepares . . . e6-eS and in passing he threatens . . . .i.xh2+. 13 'iWd3 fS!

14 15 16

� f3 dxe5

e5 .i.xe5 q;b7

'iWe4+ lladl 17 c3 'iWf6 1 8 tt::ld 4 is better, as Black is not able to exploit the defects of the isolated pawn, for example: 1 8 . . . .i.xd4 1 9 cxd4 .1e6 2 0 d 5 .i.f7 (nothing i s achieved by 20 . . . cxdS 2 1 .i.xd5 trac8 22 'iWb3 .i.xd5 23 "i'xd5 'iWxb2 24 llab l with an equal game) 2 1 'iWb3 with roughly equal chances, or 18 ... .i.d7 19 trae 1 trae8 20 tre3 .i.xd4

17

23

g5!

B lack carries out an operation aimed at restricting the white bishop. The immediate threat is 24 ... g4 25 .i.e2 .i.xh2+.

24 25

g3 .i.g2

g4 r4

26 llfe! e5! Having restricted the bishop, B lack also sets about restricting the knight.

27

'iWa4

The queen sacrifice 27 'iWxc5 fxg3 28 hxg3 (28 fxgJ b6 29 'iWxe7+ 'iWxe7 3 0 lUc6 'iWc5+) 28 ... b 6 29 'iWxe7+ 'iWxe7 3 0 lUc6 'iWc5 is inadequate:

148

(a) 3 1 lDxe5 �xf2+ 32 �h 1 (32 �h2 l:tf5) 32 . . .'�'xg3, when Black must win; (b) 3 1 l:txe5 �xf2+ 32 �h2 llf3 3 3 l:te7+ �g6 34 l:td6+ �h5 35 l:te5+ �f5 , when B lack captures the g 3 pawn, where­ by he not only safeguards his king but even enables it to take part in the attack, e.g. 3 6 �h I 'i'xg3 37 �xf3 �xf3+ 3 8 'iPg l �h4 and wins (K.Neat). 27 �g7 28

lDb3

3S �xh2 'ifh4+ 39 �g2 'ifh3 mate (Ftacnik). 35 36 37 38

�xg4 lD n �e4

�xg4 �b6 ttg7

3 4 5 6

lDf3 d3 cxd5 e3

lDc6 d5 lDxd5

6 e4 is also played. Tal-Chemin (Sochi 1 986) continued 6 . . . lDxc3 7 bxc3 �c5 S �e2 0--0 9 0-0 �hS 1 0 ttb I ttbS I I lDxe5 lDxe5 1 2 d4 .i.d6 1 3 dxe5 �xe5 14 �c2 with some advantage to White, but 6 ...lDb6 is possibly more logical for B lack. 6

b6

�e7

7

�e2

�

8

�

�e6

9

38

� x g3 !

Now this wins. 39 lD xg3 40 41

B lack has prevented the knight from going to c4, and since from b3 it needs some time to come into play, he is able to develop his attack on the kings ide quite comfortably. 29 �bl b5 30 lDd2 f3 �n 31 h4 32 33

lle4 fxg3

hxg3

Or 33 hxg3 tthS+ 34 �g l 'iff5 with the threat of . . . 'ifh5. �b8

33

�e5+ lln

'ifb3 �e2 White resigns

In my starting series of four 'wins in the PCA tournament in Groningen, the games . with Kramnik and Shirov are particularly memorable for me. In the first I was able to make use of motifs from a famous study by Lasker, and in the second I surprised my opponent with an original opening idea. .

3 3 ...ttd8 is simpler, when it not easy for White to escape from the pin. 34

.i.d3

Game 5 6

C2

Kramnik-Belyavsky Groningen 1993

34 ...�xg3? would be premature: 3 5 l:txe7 'ifxe7 36 hxg3 f2 37 �g2. 35

English Opening A2S

l:txg4

If 3 5 l:te2 there follows a mating attack: 3 5 ... .i.b7+ 36 .i e4 tth7 37 .i.xb7 ttxh2+

llxg3 llg7 �h4

If immediately 4 1 .. .'ifh3 , then White forces a draw by 42 .::txf2 .::txf2 43 �e8+ l:tgS 44 'ife5+. 42

1 49

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

1

c4

2

lDc3

e5 lLlf6

a3 f5 White has developed his forces as in the Scheveningen Variation of the Sicilian Defence, where he effectively has an extra tempo. Apart from the move played, also possible is 9 ...a5 I 0 �c2 f5 I I lDa4, when experience has shown that Black has a comfortable game: (a) 1 1 . .. 'ife8 12 �d2 �g6 13 lDc5 �xc5 14 'ifxc5 e4 1 5 lDe I lDe5 1 6 f4 lDd7 17 'i'c2 lD7f6 and Black gained a great advantage (Nei-Tal, Moscow 1 979); (b) 1 1 . ..�hS 1 2 b3 �d6 1 3 �b2 'ife7 with the more pleasant position (Ubilava­ Razuvaev, Moscow GMA 1 9 89). 10

'ifc2

�h8

Any true Scheveningen player makes this move almost without thinking. 11

lDa4

�d6!

11

A good quality ' Scheveningen' move. In this specific position it is new, but from the viewpoint of experts on this variation it is a natural one, since the bishop defends the c7 pawn and assists the attack on the kingside, by making way for the queen. b4 12 A natural move, but not an accurate one. After 1 2 lDc5 Black is forced to play 12 . . . �c8, as after 12 ... �xc5 13 �xc5 �f6 14 �c2 and the fianchetto of the dark­ square bishop, the queen becomes vulner­ able to its attack. 12 13

�f6

13

l:tae8

�b2 Now after 1 3 lDc5 �xc5 14 bxc5 l:taeS 1 5 l:tb I �cS Black has everything in order. 14 lDc5 After this B lack's position is preferable, and therefore it would have been better to return the knight by 14 lDc3, with roughly equal chances. 14 � c8 15

'ifc4

This appears to lose a tempo. In the spirit of the Sicilian, I S .::t fe I followed by �fl looks more logical. 15 16

'ifc2

lDb6 'ifh6 .

White's fighting intentions could have been tested by 1 6...lDd5, but the move played is more energetic. 17

.::trdl ?

By now the position demands more concrete play. Black is threatening . . . e5e4, and therefore 17 e4 is again more in the spirit of the Sicilian: 1 7 . . . fxe4 can be met by either I S dxe4 or I S lDxe4, while if 17 ... f4 White has 1 8 b5 lDd8 1 9 d4. 17 18

lDd5 'ifc4?

Kramnik overlooks B lack's inter­ mediate 1 9th move. I S g3 was more

[ 50

Uncompromising Chess

circumspect, blocking the action of Black's queen and bishop against the h2 pawn.

18 tDxe3 e4! fxe3 19 I f 19 ... 'Wxe3+ 20 �f1 e4 there follows 2 1 .¥i.c 1 , trapping the queen. 20 dxe4 fxe4 21 tDxe4 'i'xe3+ 22 tDf2 'i'xe2 23 'i'xe2 llxe2 �g8! 24 i.c3 After 24 ... i.x.h 2+?' 2 5 �xh2 llxf2 26 bS White would have acquired definite counterplay. Following the win of a pawn, Black shows discretion i n consolidating h i s forces, and keeps this idea in reserve. lle3 25 �n 26 llacl tDe7 26 . . . a6 carne into consideration, main­ taining the knight at its observation post c6. tDd5 27 l4e1 lUe3 tDxe3+ 28 lle8 29 �gl 29 ... liJd5 also carne into consideration. tDd5 30 i.d4 b6 l4dl 31 32 ttJd3 � b7 33 �f2 lOf6? In the spirit of the position was 33 .. lLlf4 ! 34 lOxf4 i.xf4 when it i s .

Uncompromising Chess

difficult for White t o defend h i s h-pawn, since if 35 h3? �d8 and Black has a winning pin. gxf6 i.xf6 34

tiJd4! 3S As a result of Black's mistake on the 3 3 rd move, White has gained drawing chances. 3S It is risky to win a pawn by 35 ... 1Lxh2 36 g3 :td 8 37 �6' because of the imprisonment of the bishop, for example: 37 . . . lld6 38 -tJef4 �e4 39 tUb2 :xd l 40 tUxd I c5 4 1 bxc5 bxc5 -12 lLle3 with the threat of winning the bishop by tDg4 or lLlfl . 36 lLlb5 lld8 37 lOxd6+ llxd6 38 :tel c5 This move could have led to the creation of a weak c-pawn. 38 ... llc6 was stronger, practically forcing the exchange of rooks. 39 tDf4 llc6 40 bxc5 l4xc5 lld l 41 4 1 llxc5 bxc5 42 g3 looks more logical, with the threat of attacking the c5 pawn after �e3-d3. l4c2+ 41 i.c6 42 �g3 lld6 43

151

but activated his rook by 59 llb8 ! , taking play into an ending with f- and h-pawns.

b5 43 This move should have been prepared by -I3 .. J:tc5 ! , restricting the enemy knight. Now, however, its activity forces Black to go into a less ' productive' rook ending. 44 tDd5 llc5 45 tDb4! llg5+ i.xg2 46 �f4 47 h5 l4a6 �g6 48 llxa7+ tDd3 1Ln 49 1Lxd3 50 �e3 Black is forced to exchange the rampaging knight, but now there is the prospect of the notorious rook ending with f- and h-pawns, known for its drawing tendencies. 51 �xd3 llg2 llxb2 52 lla5 53 llxb5 f5 If Black wins the a-pawn: 5 3 ... llh3+ 54 �e2 llxa3 55 �f2, the king succeeds in blocking the pawns and a theoretically drawn position is reached. 54 h4 l4bl llg2 55 �e3 56 �f3 llg3+ llg4+ 57 �r4 �g5 58 �f3 59 llal ? Here the rook is passively placed. White should not have held on to his pawn,

59 llg3+ 60 �f2 �g4 61 ll b l In the pawn race 6 1 a 4 h 3 6 2 a s :tg2+ 63 �fl f4 64 a6 f3 65 a7 h2 it is Black who wins. h3 61 llg2+ 62 llb8 lld2 63 �n 63 ... lla2 is more accurate. f4 64 �gl �f3 65 llg8+ lldl+ llh8 66 �fl 67 �b2 a4 68 In rook endings a reduction in the activity of the rook may be irreparable. In the given situation this is not crucial, but after 68 llxh3 f3 69 llh8 lld3 70 a4 �e2 7 1 llfB lle3 ! 72 as lle7 73 a6 f2 B lack would have won more quickly. 13 68 �n 69 as l4al 70 a6 f2 71 lla8 lla6! a7 72 �hl 73 I f 73 �xh3 Black would have won with the help of the idea from Lasker's study: 73 . . . �g l 74 llg8+ �h [ 75 llfB lla3+ 76

1 52

Uncompromising Chess

�h4 �g2 77 ng8+ c;t>h2 7 8 nf8 lla4+ 7 9 �h5 c;t>g3 80 llg8+ <;t>h3 8 1 llf8 lla5+ 8 2 � h 6 <;t>g3 83 ng8+ <;t>h4 84 .!lf8 lla6+, and the a7 pawn is lost.

73 74

h2 llb8 White also loses after 74 �xh2 llh6+ 75 �g3 �g l 76 llf8 .=g6+ 77 �h4 :ta6. 74 llxa7 <;t>e2 nb1+ 75 �e3 llb2+ 76

77

78

llb3+ llb4+

79

nbl

nn

80 81

lln

�e2

�e4 �d3

nxf2+

The last chance. Suppose Black were to play 8 1 .. .%:xf2? with stalemate? 81 �xf2

White resigns Game 57

Belyavsky-Shirov Groningen 1993 Sicilian Defence B33 1

e4

c5

2 3 4

lLlf3

e6

d4 lOxd4

cxd4

5 6

lLlc3

lLlf6 lLlc 6

lOdb5

d6

7 8

9 10 11

1 53

Uncompromising Chess .tf4 .tg5 lLla3 .txf6 lLld5

e5 a6 b5 gxf6

fS

The Sveshnikov Variation, in which a year earlier at the European Team Chanl­ pionship (Debrecen 1 992) against Adams I played as B lack 1 1 . . . .tg7 1 2 c3 f5 1 3 exf5 .txfS 1 4 ltJc2 0-0 1 5 CDce3 .1e6 1 6 �d3 f5 1 7 'i'h5 e4 1 8 .tc2 !iJe7 19 .tb3 !iJxd5 20 tUxd5 a5 with a roughly equal game. 12 .td3 .te6 13 'i'h5 With 13 0-0 it seems to me that White determines the position of his king too early, and it is easier for Black to plan his play. For example: 13 . . . .txd5 14 exd5 tUe 7 15 c3 'i'd7 16 'iWh5 .!lg8 1 7 .!lad I .!l g6 1 8 .1b I .1g7 1 9 tUc2 f4! 20 tUb4 :h6 2 1 'i'e2 � f8 and after playing his king to h8 followed by .. .l:tg8 Black achieved a promising position. 1%g8 13 The fashionable trend. Earlier Black more often played 1 3 . . . f4, with very modest results. 14 g3 tiJd4 This is regarded as the main continuation, although the author of the variation, Yevgeny Sveshnikov, recom­ mends 1 4 ... 1%g5!?, which was tested in the

game Sideif-Zade-Yurtaev (USSR 1 9 80). White retreated: 1 5 'i'd 1, and after 1 5 . . ..txd5 1 6 exd5 CDe7 1 7 c3 �g7 1 8 h4 llg6 1 9 ltJc2 e4 a double-edged position was reached. I should mention that it is risky to play 1 5 'i'xh7? !, when that inde­ fatigable analyst Andrei Lilienthal recommends 1 5 . . . 'i' a5+ 1 6 c3 �xd5 1 7 exdS ltJe7 with the threats o f . . . lLlxdS and . . . b5-b4.

Before this 1 9 �fl had been played. For example, the game Magem-Zs.Polgar (Madrid 1 992) continued 1 9 . . . 11g5 20 ltJf6+ �e7 (after 20 ... 'i'xf6 2 1 .tc6+! �e7 22 'i'xf6+ �xf6 23 .txa8 Black has no compensation for the exchange) 2 1 'iih 8 CDd2+ 22 �g2 lLlxe4 (weak is 22 ... d5? 23 tUxg4 dxe4 24 'i'f6+ �e8 2 5 'i'c6+ �e7 26 CDe3 .tg7 27 llad I 1%c8 28 'i'b7+ �f8 29 llxd2 and wins, or 23 ... lLlxe4 24 CDxeS 'i'd6 2S tUf3 with a clear advantage to White) 23 tUxe4 llg6 24 'i'h4+ �d7 25 'i'xd8+ llxd8 26 f3 .te6 27 llhd I �c7 with compensation for the exchange.

c3! 15 Risky is 15 O-O--Q , after which Black's attack develops of its own accord: I S . . . nc8! 1 6 �b l fxe4 1 7 .txe4 b4! 15 16

17

.txe4 'i'xh 7

fxe4 .tg4

The pawn sacrifice has to be accepted, as bad is 1 7 'iWh4? CDf3+ 1 8 .txf3 'i'xh4 1 9 gxh4 .txf3 2 0 tUf6+ �d8 2 1 tUxg8 .txh I with advantage to Black.

17 18

1%g7 'i'h6

Janis Klovans recommends 1 8 'i'h8 ltJf3+ 1 9 �e2 ltJg5+ 20 f3 with a complicated game. lLlf3+ 18

19

�e2!

This was not home preparation, as certain commentators thought. This unexpected idea occurred to me during the game.

19

lOg5+

By the method of elimination it can be established that none of the other checks is dangerous. 20 f3 lOxe4

21 22

fxg4

'iic 8

'i'e3! Bringing back the queen is the best way of consolidating the position arid supporting the centralised knight. The attempt to defend the g4 pawn ends in fiasco: 22 h3? :xg4 23 'iWh7 'iic 5. Also unsatisfactory is 22 �d3 'iixg4 23 :ae 1 'i'f3+ 24 �c2 nxg3 25 'ii'e 3 1%g2+ 26 �c 1 (or 26 �b l CDd2+ 27 �a l 'i'xd5) 26 ... 'i'xe3+ 27 CDxe3 �h6 when B lack has a won position.

22

'i'xg4+

1 54

Uncompromising Chess

After 22 ... 11xg4?! White has a pleasant choice between 23 'i'o and 23 lUb6. 'lif3 23 'iY'xf3+ fS 24 �xf3 lUc2 25 25 c4 is also interesting, but for the moment I did not want to break up the flexible b2/c3 pawn structure, which supports a possible a2-a4. 25 q;n lUce3 26

26 �e6 ? ! Shirov is unable to refrain from a very sharp pawn sacrifice, after which the end­ game is in my favour. Sounder was 26 ... lUf6! 27 a4 lUxd5 28 lUxd5 �e6 29 .tI.hd 1 :b8 with a resilient enough position. For example, if 30 lUb4 there can fol low 3 0 . . .a5 3 1 lUc6 .tI.b6 32 axb5 .tI.xb5 33 .tI.d2 ':c7 34 ':xa5 .tI.xa5 35 lUxa5 d5, when the sol id central pawn phalanx gives reason­ able compensation for the pawn. If 30 b4 there fol lows 30 . . . a5 ! 3 1 blCaS bxa4 3 2 llxa4 .tI.b2 and after 3 3 a6? .tI.xh2 the white king unexpectedly comes under attack. 27 lUxfS With the obvious idea of 27 .. .'>PxfS 2 8 lUe3+ q;e6 2 9 q;xe4. lUg 5+ 27 28 q;g4 The king boldly steps into a discovered check, but here this is not dangerous.

ll n 28 ll h fl 29 29 lUc7+?! llxc7 30 �g5 is not good, as after 30 ... i.g7! the white king may indeed be in danger. In this respect 29 .tI.ae I �xd5 3 0 'it>xg5 i.e7+ 3 1 lUxe7+ .tI.xe7 32 �g4! is better, but perhaps the soundest is 29 lUfe3 lUe4 30 .tIhfl fol­ lowed by c;t;>h3 . Then 30 . . . lUf2+ does not work because of 3 1 .:hf2 and 32 lUc7+. 29 lUe4 30 .tI.ad l ?! 30 lUfe3 was correct, when after 30 . . . lUf2+? 3 1 .tI.xf2 ':xf2 32 lUc7+ �d7 33 lUxa8 :Ixh2 34 ':fl �h6 35 lUb6+ \t;c6 36 lUed5 !1xb2 37 ': f7 Black has no compensation for the piece, and indeed he has to give up his rook to avoid mate, e.g. 3 7 . . . b4 38 llc7+ �b5 39 c4+ a5 40 c 5 b 3 4 1 lUc4+ �b5 4 2 lUxb2 bxa2 4 3 lDc3+. At the same time the pair of connected passed pawns on the g- and h- files is a weighty factor in the endgame, and it only remains for White to consolidate the posit­ ion of his king: 30 . . . !1h7 3 1 .llad l i.h6 32 q;O, or 3 0 ... .tIaa7 3 1 �h3 i.h6 3 2 c;g2. 30 .tI.aa7 30 . . . .tI.d8, with the idea of evicting the knight from d5 and playing . . . d6-d5, can be met by 3 1 h4 lUf6+ 32 lDxf6 ':xf6 3 3 h5, and if 33 . . . d5 34 .tI.de I , winning material through the threat of 3 5 lUd4+.

I SS

Uncompromising Chess

31 lOde3 .tI.ad7 32 �f3! The white monarch is as though laughing at his adversaries (32 . . .11xf5+? 3 3 lUxf5 �xf5 3 4 �e3+). 32 d5 33 g4 i.c5 h4 34 lUf6 Otherwise . . . d5-d4 cannot be played. b4 lldel 35 36 lle2 bxc3 37 bxc3 i.xe3 Possibly it would have been stronger to activate the rook first by 3 7 ... .tI.b7. 38 .llxe3 lUe4 .tI.c7? ! 39 �g2 The second rook would have operated better on this square after the preparatory 39 ... ':b7. Now White fills the ' void' . 40 .ll b l ! .tI.b7 After all B lack has to give in, as he cannot al low the check at b6. l:b3 41 lUd2 42 .llxb7 .tI.xb7 43 .lle2 lObI 43 . . .lUe4 44 c4 is unpleasant for Black. 44 .tI.c2 lUa.3 45 .ll f2 lUbl

46 g5? 46 h 5 lUxc3 47 h6 was stronger: (a) 47...lbe4 48 lbg7+ q;d6 (or 48...�e7 49 J:tfS) 49 J:tf8 lbg5 50 .tI.f5 lUfl

5 1 .tI.xfl! .tI.xfl 52 h7 J:tf8 5 3 g5 q;e7 54 g6 �f6 55 lUe6 the pawns are unstoppable; (b) 47 ... d4 48 lUg7+ q;e7 49 h7 J:tb8 5 0 g5 ! (after SO lUf5+ �f6 ! 5 1 lUxd4+ �g7 52 lUc6 .tI.e8 B lack has drawing chances) 50 ... lOe4 5 1 g6 lUg5 (White wins after 5 l ...lUxf2 52 lUf5+ �f6 53 g7, or 5 1 .. .lUf6 52 lUf5+ �e6 53 lUh6 e4 54 lOg8 llxg8 5 5 .tIxf6+) 5 2 .tI.fl+ lUxfl 5 3 lOf5+ �f6 5 4 g7 llb2+ 55 �g3 lOh6 56 g8'1i lOxg8 5 7 hxg8� �xf5 5 8 'iY' fl + and wins. 46 lLlxc3 47 g6 lld7? Shirov in tum goes wrong, and the game now concludes quickly. After the correct 47 ... lLle4 48 g7 lUf6! Black could have held on: 49 �h3 ttJg8 1 50 h 5 .tI.c7, and if 5 I �g4 llc I ! when the rook assists the knight from the rear. �n 48 g7 h5 �g8 49 h6 50 �h7 51 lUe3 Black resigns The anguish from my failure in the peA tournament was great, but I did not then know that the main unpleasantness lay ahead. The 1 994 Linares Tournament concluded for me with nine defeats and a loss of 35 rating points. The impression from such a ' promising' beginning was somewhat smoothed by successful per­ formances at tournaments in Leon (Spain) and Munich, but I only managed to defer the creative crisis, and not avoid it. Game 58 Korchnoi-Belyavsky Leon 1994 Queen's Gambit D45 In the race for first place with Ljubomir Ljubojevic this game proved decisive, as his game with Korchnoi ended in a draw.

1 56

Uncompromising Chess

1 2 3 4 5

e4 d4

e3 tee3 teD 'i'e2 b3

e6 d5 tef6 e6

tebd7 6 �d6 7 7 SLe2 or 7 SLd3 causes Black more problems. 7 (}-t)

8 9 10 11 12

SLb2 exd 5 dxe5 JLe2 SLxD

e5 exd5 texe5 texD+

Uncompromising Chess

�xc3 1 7 �xc3 llc8 1 8 �b4 �d3 , when B lack wins material) 1 5 . . . �e6 1 6 liJf4 nc8 with active play for the pawn. As Korchnoi later mentioned, he did not like 14 .5te2 �g4 1 5 fJ .5th5 16 0-0 -IJkc7 1 7 h3 .5tg6 1 8 JLd3 liJh5 when Black has the initiative on the kingside. 14 � a5 Threatening 1 5 . . . �f5. �b4 15 '1!fd l �d 7 llel 16

Now if 16 ... �f5 there can follow 1 7 g4, but 1 6 . . . �e6 ! ? also came into consider­ ation. 17 a3 A difficult decision, but how I S 1 7 . . J lac8 to be averted? O f course, 1 7 �xb7? is not possible - 1 7 . . . �xc3 1 8 JLxc3 'it'b5+, winning a piece.

17 18

22 22 23

�xc3

llxc3 1:e3

�al White loses after 2 3 �d2? llxfJ+ 2 4 gxfJ �xfJ+ 25 'Ot>g l � c 6 . In order t o bring his rook into p lay, he has to part with his queens ide pawns.

23 24 25

1:xb3

�f2 �xa4 1:e1 f6 After opening an escape square for his king, Black is threatening to win the queen by 26 . . JIb2+. White parries this, but then comes an attack on the f3 and g2 pawns. 26 �c l �c6

27 28 29 30

'it'f4 h4 � g3

lla3

�c3

�f7

31

'WlS

h5 1:a2

�xc3

.Ihe3 After 1 8 �xc3 �xaJ 1 9 �xb7 :ab8 20 !la l �e7 2 1 �fJ liJe4 22 �xe4 �xe4 White may also have problems on the h 1 a 8 diagonal.

18 19 12

d4!

It is well known that Korchnoi likes accepting pawn offers.

13

exd4?

After this White is deprived of the right to castle and the coordination of his pieces is disrupted. It was correct for him not to take the pawn, but to sacrifice one h imself: 13 liJe4 liJxe4 14 �xe4 dxe3 1 5 0-0 ext2+ 1 6 'it'xt2, with active play in compensation.

13 14

1:e8+

�n In my database I discovered a lighting game Seirawan-Speelman (Roquebrune 1 992), which continued 1 4 liJe2 �b4+ 1 5 �fl (no better i s 1 5 �c3 � f5 ! 1 6 'it'd2

liJd5 �xd5

19 .l::.c 5? loses to 19 . . . �b5+, and i f 20 'Ot>g l lle l +.

19 20 21

a4 D

'Wxd5 1:ae8

This loses immediately, but after 3 1 'Ot>h2 'Wg6 3 2 �d2 Black wins by 32 . . . �xf3 (32 .. .'Wd3 33 �e3 a5 is also good), for example (a) 33 gxfJ 'it'd3 3 4 'Ot>g3 1:xd2 35 1:e8+ 'Ot>h7 36 1:e4 "c2 3 7 'it'f5+ �h6 38 'it'f4+ 'Ot>g6 39 'Wb8 �h7 40 1:e8 'Wg6+, or (b) 33 'it'xf3 1:xd2 34 'ii'xb7 1:xd4 35 'Wb8+ 'Ot>h7 36 1:e8 1:xh4+ 3 7 �g l 'it'd3 38 :11 8+ �g6 39 "e8+ 'Ot>gS. 31 'it'e7+

White resigns

1 57

At the age of 66 Viktor Korchnoi has maintained an amazing chess strength, as I experienced last summer at the European Team Championship (Pula 1 997). I n contrast t o Smyslov, whose emotional balance helps him to retain his compet­ itiveness, the basis of Korchnoi ' s longevity lies in his passionate love for and devotion to chess. Viktor did not grasp the secrets of chess with such ease as Karpov, but that which he mastered, he mastered pro­ foundly and for ever. He had to work a great deal, and he absorbed many ideas, evaluations and methods of working, both from his adversary of the 1 960s Tigran Petrosian, and from the fundamental approach of Boleslavsky and Geller. For me he will always be a symbol of those happy times, when chess ideas were generated in the analysis of games, and people aimed to clarify causes and generalisations. Now, however, they aim to classify games in their chess database and to check with Fritz or Rebel whether or not there is a m istake in their calculations on the 4th half move. The elements of research and art are being increasingly excluded, and chess is losing those of its supporters for whom the competitive element is not the main attraction. In an interview more than 1 5 years ago, Karpov called Korchnoi 'a spent force ' . He evidently based this on the fact that Viktor is upset by defeats and does not spare his nervous energy, the reserves of which are not unlimited. But he underestimated Korchnoi's strength of character and his devotion to chess. In his competitive qualities Viktor Korchnoi (I flatter myself with the thought that this also applies to me) resembles a Russian doll : however much it is pushed about, it always ends u p o n its feet. Or, if y o u would like another comparison - the staunch tin soldier from the tales of Hans Christian Andersen.

ISS

Uncompromising Chess

After failing on one occasion to win a game after blockading an isolated pawn, Bent Larsen remarked: 'An isolated pawn should not be blockaded, but won .' My game with Bareev is an ill ustration of Larsen 's idea. Game 59 BelyavskJ'-Bareev Munich 1 994

French Defence COS 2 3 -'

5

e4

e6

d-' 4J d 2 ex d S .lt bS+

dS cS exdS �d 7

'i'e2+ 6 'i'e7 Of course, this move has the right to exist, but 6 . . . .lte7 is nevertheless more interesting. However, when preparing for a game with Yevgeny Bareev one always has to be ready for a psychological battle. In our game a few months earlier, at the 1 993 Groningen Tournament, after the inclusion of 5 4JgO 4Jf6 he successfully blocked the check 6 �b5+ .ltd7 7 .e2+ with 7 . . . .lte7. After S dxc5 0-{) 9 4Jb3 ':eS 10 �e3 a6 I I �d3 as 1 2 a4 4Jg4 1 3 0-{) 4Ja6 1 4 �xa6 ( 1 4 .ltd4 was stronger) 14 ...:lxa6 1 5 :fd l 4Jxe3 1 6 fxe3 �cS! 1 7 :::txd5 �e6 I did not achieve anything sig­ nificant. Therefore Yevgeny had grounds for assuming that [ had prepared an improvement, and so he changes course. 7 8

�xd7+ dxc5

tUxd7 .xe2+

B lack should not have developed the white pieces without necessity. S ... 4Jxc5 was better, as for example in the 1 6th game of the Karpov-Korchnoi World Championship Match (Bagiuo 1 975), where after 9 tUb3 .xe2+ 10 lOxe2 lOxb3 I I axb3 �c5 1 2 �d2 1Oe7 1 3 lOf4 0-{) 1 4 0-{) .l:tfdS I S tUd3 �b6 B lack managed to

equalise. But by following Miroslav Filip's recommendation of 1 4 lOd3 ! �b6 1 5 �b4 .ll feS 1 6 �xe7 Ihe7+ 1 7 'iPd2 White would have retained slightly the better chances. �xc5 9 lOxe2 10 11

lilb3

14 15 16

� g3

.l:tc4 .l:tfc8

�b l !

.ltb6

�f4 lLlgf6 The game Sa."<-Andersson (Polanica Zdroj 1 993) continued 1 1 . .. lLle7 12 0-0 tUc5 1 3 lilxcS �xc5 1 4 lilc3 0-0-0 1 5 :lad I !ld7 1 6 :lfe l �b4 1 7 �d2 '12- '.1, . Bareev prefers a more active development of his knight. 12 13

:lac8

A fairly typical position with an ' isolani' has arisen. In the game Balashov­ Korchnoi (Gennany 1 9S0), where 13 . . ..l:tfc8 was played, Yuri Balashov did not heed Larsen's recommendation and blockaded the d5 pawn with the usual 1 4 li:Jbd4, but after 1 4 . . . g6 I S g4 a6 1 6 �g3 .l:te8 1 7 b3 :lacS 1 8 �b2 li:Je5 the game soon ended in a draw. As for me, I was in agreement with Larsen.

14

1 59

Uncompromising Chess

li:Jc3!

This move demanded deep and precise calculation, but then Larsen did not say that the isolated pawn could be won without any effort.

16 d4 After this the white knight at c3 develops incredible energy. The alternative was 1 6 ... lilf8, and if 1 7 :the I ( 1 7 �e5 4JSd7 I S �d4 blockades the d-pawn, but White was wanting to win it) 17 . . . d4 (Black has no time for the prophylactic 1 7 ... a6, as I S �e5 wins the d-pawn after I S . . . lOsd7 1 9 lilxd5, while if 17 ...tOe6 White defends h is c2 pawn with I S :e2, renewing the threat of tOxd5, after which B lack's defence is very difficult) I S lilb5 ':xc2 1 9 tOd6 .l:t8c6 20 105 .l:t6c4 2 1 li:Jd2 .l:txd2 (in the similar position reached in the game, Black does not have this resource, as the white rook is sti l l at h I ) 22 .l:txd2 �a5 23 :cl .l:txc l + 24 'iPxc l �xd2+ 25 �d2, and White quickly regains h is pawn, after which the ending is slightly in h is favour, although B lack should be able to hold the draw (K.Neat). 17 18 19

lObS lOd6 li:J CS !

.l:txe2 .l:t8e6

What a knight! B lack is unable to defend against the forks at e7 and d4. Thus if 19 ....l:t6c4 there follows 20 tt:Jd2 .l:tc5 2 1 li:Jxd4, while the move in the game loses the exchange.

19 20 21 22 23

li:JdS li:Jbxd4 li:Jxe6 .l:the! li:Jh4

.l:txg2 b xc 6 li:J7f6

Now Black can avoid the loss of the second exchange only by 23 . . . .l:tf2 24 �xf2 �xf2, but after 25 li:JfS �xe I 26 �e I �f8 27 .l:tc I the c6 pawn is lost. Black resigns.

Game 60 Belyavsky-I.Sokolov Groningen 1 994

Griinfeld Defence DSS 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d4 e4 ltJc3 cxd5 e4 bxc3 ltJf3 .l:tbl �e2

li:Jf6 g6 d5 ltJxd5 ltJxc3 �g7 c5

� "as?!

Nowadays the main problems that White encounters in his attempt to gain an advantage come in the variation 9 ...cxd4 10 cxd4 .a5+ I I �d2 'i'xa2. Things are also not totally clear after 9 .. .ltJc6. .xc3 � 10 �d2 11

1 60

Uncompromising Chess .)1.b4 B lack can exchange queens by 1 4 . . . 'iVa4 I S 'iVxa4 .)1.xa4, for which I d id not feel inclined, although after 1 6 .)1.xe7 l:[c8 1 7 eS ctJc6 1 8 �d6 .)1.c2 1 9 .)1.a6 the initiative remains with White (Gelfand­ Itkis, USSR 1 983). 14 .)1.a4 as? 15 'iVbl

The best continuation is I I d5 �a5 1 2 .)1.g5, e.g. 1 2 . . . Ile8 1 3 .)1.b 5 ! 'Lld7 1 4 e 5 a6 I S .l1.xd7 .hd7 16 �xb7 .)1.b5 ( 1 6 ... .)1.g4 1 7 :xe7 1.xeS 1 8 :!.xe8+ ':xe8 1 9 d6 also favours White) 17 :Xe I f6 1 8 .)1.h4 with the better chances for White (Kopyonkin­ Konopka, Zalakaros 1 994). 'iVaJ 11 12 .)1. d 7 1 2 . . . ctJc6 i s stronger. .!:txb 7 13 Th is turns out to be psychologically the correct decision. I had the experience of my game with Tukmakov in the 50th USSR Championship, where after 13 dxcS .)1.c6 14 .)1.b5 ctJa6 I S 1:1fc l toc7 16 :b3 'iVxb3 17 'iVxb3 toxbS B lack gained reasonable counter-chances. In our analy­ sis after the game we came to the conclu­ sion that "\ihite should take the b7 pawn. 13 cxd4 In the game Miniboeck-Konopka (Eger 1 985) 13 ... .)1.c6 was played, and after 1 4 .!:tb3?! Black defended successfully with a manoeuvre of his light-square bishop: 14 . . . .)1.a4 1 5 .!:txaJ .)1.xc2 1 6 dxc5 .)1.xe4. Of course, 14 .!:tc7 cxd4 I S .!:te l would have set him more difficult problems, i n particular over how t o develop h i s knight. 14 .!:tel For the sacrificed pawn White has domination of the b- and c-fiIes. After 1 4

Black radically parries the threat of 1 6 .1b4, trapping his queen, but this frees the b6 square for the white rook. 1 5 . . . toc6 1 6 h4 llab8! 1 7 :Xxc6 :xb7 1 8 �xb7 �xc6 19 �xc6 1ha2 20 'i'b5 :c8 2 1 .)1.d3 h5 looks sounder, with roughly equal chances. I S . . . .)1.c6 can lead to more forcing play, and now if 16 �b4 White has to reckon with the queen sacrifice 1 6 . . . fixc I + 1 7 tixc l .)1.xb7 1 8 .)1.xe7 .!:tc8 ( 1 8 . . . .!:te8? 1 9 fic7 .)1.xe4 is weaker, as White is able to . create dangerous threats to the enemy king: 20 .)1.c4 CiJc6 2 1 .)1.f6 .!:tf8 22 �xg7 �xg7 23 togS .!:tac8 24 fif4 .)1.f5 25 g4 .)1.d7 2 6 ctJxf7 d3 2 7 'Wh6+ �f6 28 g 5 + �e7 2 9 fig7 d 2 3 0 fif6+) 1 9 fif4 ctJd7, and in the resulting clash the more numerous black pieces have the better chances. I hope that I will not tire the reader by examining a possible development of events: 20 h4 llc3 2 1 h5 lle8 22 fid6 ctJcS 23 h6 lDxe4 24 fid7 .)1.c6 2S fixa7 .)1.xh6 26 COxd4 .!:tc l + 2 7 �h2 .tf4+ 2 8 g3 COxg3 2 9 COxc6 ctJxe2+ 30 �g2 .!:txc6 3 1 'ii'd 7 .!:tecS 3 2

161

Uncompromising Chess � f3 (or 3 2 .)1.d8 .)1.d6 3 3 'iVe8+ .)1.f8) 32 ... .!:t6c7 with a great material advantage for Black. But all this is from the realms of intuition, and common sense suggested to me the more realistic 1 6 1:1c7 'iWd6 1 7 .)1.a5 with prospects of an initiative. 16 .!:tc4 Threatening to win the bishop by 1 7 .)1.c l . 16 .)1.c6 'iVd6 17 1:1b6 If 17 ... eS White can continue to build up the threats by 1 8 'iVc2 llc8 1 9 h4. .!:tc8 18 'iVc 1 19 eS

19 tic7 The pawn cannot be taken by 19 ... .txeS? 20 lDxeS fixeS because of the loss of a piece after 2 1 .tf3 fic7 22 .txc6 'Wxb6 23 .txa8 lhc4 24 fixc4 � I + 2 5 'Wfl fixa2 26 fie 1 . 20 llb2 lDd7?! This last chance for Black to complete his development results in a dead ly pin, but after 20 ... fid7 2 1 lDxd4 .txeS 22 .!:txb8 ! loss of material is again inevitable: 22 . . . .)1.xb8 23 lDxc6 .td6 24 .th6 e6 (or 24 ... f6 25 .tg4 e6 26 fic3 f5 27 lDe7+) 25 'Wc3 .tf8 26 lDe7+ fixe7 27 .!:txc8. 21 .!:tbc2 lDxe5 'i'xeS 22 toxeS

23

.t d 3 Black resigns

In the competitive sense 1 995 was one of the worst years in my chess career. The fal l in my rating from 2650 t o 26 1 5 signified the end of invitations to all-play-all tourna­ ments and a turning to 'general work' in open events. And even my supporters thought that I would not pick up again. A characteristic feature of my performances at that time was a reasonable start, and then fatigue and a slump at the finish. It seemed that this would also happen in Linares, where I had to with­ stand the pressure of the leading group, including Anatoly Karpov, who was fighting for first prize. Usually I have lost to him on account of m istakes committed in the last hour of play. But on this occasion, after a gruel ling defence (the result of careless play in the opening), where I had literally to balance on a knife­ edge, Karpov was the first to tire. Game 6 1 Karpov-Belyavsky L inares 1995 Queen's Gambit D42

1 c4 c6 e4 2 dS 3 exdS cxdS 4 d4 tof6 S lDc3 An amusing situation. This is a classic position from the Panov-Botvinnik Attack . We have as though exchanged roles, since in recent times Karpov has been playing the Caro-Kann as Black. e6 S .)1.e7 6 lDxd5 cxd5 7 0-0 .td3 8 toc6 0-0 9

1 62

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

10 11

lI e l �g5

lOC6

After I I . . . h6 B lack's attention should have automatically switched from h7 to the h6 pawn (he has to watch for a possible bishop sacrifice), and so his first thought should have been to play his bishop to fS after 1 3 . . .:re8. Now he is unable to do this, and White firmly seizes the in itiative. 14 'i'd2

(a) 1 6 . . . lOxdS 1 7 �xh6 gxh6 1 8 'i'xh6 fS 19 "'g6+ �h8 20 �xfS ! exfS 2 1 lOgS with irresistible threats; (b) 1 6 . . . exdS 1 7 �xh6 gxh6 1 8 'i'xh6 lOe4 (or 1 8...�g4 1 9 .!:teS lOe4 20 �xe4 dxe4 2 1 lOgS) 1 9 .t1xe4 dxe4 20 �xe4 fS 2 1 "'g6+ q;,h8 22 lOeS J:[fS 23 �xa8 with a great material advantage; (c) 1 6 ... 'i'xd5 1 7 �xh6 gxh6 1 8 .!:te5 ....b3 1 9 'i'xh6 and wins. 16 'i'd3 To disclose the dynamic possibilities in the position it is also interesting to exam ine 1 6 dS!?, a typical breakthrough in such situations. The capture of the pawn clearly involves a great risk: (a) 16 . . . exd5? 1 7 �xh6 gxh6 1 8 '1i'xh6 �fS 1 9 ::'xe8 'i'xe8 20 'i'xf6, or (b) 16 . . .lOxdS 17 lOxdS 'i'xdS 1 8 'i'c2 � f6 19 'i'h7+ �fS 20 �e4 'i'd7 2 1 .!:ted l 'i'c7 22 the ! �b7 23 lOd4 etc. However, after 16 ... lOaS White's chances are not so clear: (a) 17 �xh6 is most simply parried by 17 ... lOb3 1 8 'i'gS �fS 1 9 .:ta2 exdS; (b) 17 �a2 (this quiet move is more promising) 17 . . . exdS 18 lOxdS �e6 1 9 lOxe7+ 1:txe7 (after 1 9 ... 'i'xe7 2 0 �xh6 gxh6 21 '1ixh6 White has dangerous threats) 20 'i'xd8+ :'xd8 2 1 �d2 with a slight endgame advantage. 16 �b7 17 lOe4 �f8! Useful prophylaxis against the imminent check at h7. �d2 18 A fter I 8 lOxf6 �xf6 19 '1ih 7 B lack can pick up the d4 pawn, whereas now it is indirectly defended: 1 8 ...lOxe4 1 9 'i'xe4 �f6 20 'i'h7 lOxd4? 2 1 �b4+ and White wins. 18 as 19 �r4! The result of this bishop manoeuvre is a weakening of Black's queenside.

1 63

lOd5 19 20 �a6 �g3 21 lIc8 'i'd2 �g8 22 �a2 lOC6 23 lIac1 �f8 24 lOc3 At last the bishop has reached 'The Promised Land ' .

·

h6!? 11 By transposition of moves, this position can be reached not only from the Panov­ Botv i nnik Attack, but also via the Tarrasch Defence Deferred to the Queen's Gambit (as classified in ECO). A fter I I �gS the routine reply is considered to be 1 1 ... lOb4, aiming for the maximum control of dS, but then in a number of variations Black has to keep a close look out for attacks on h7, such as 1 2 � b l b6 13 aJ lObd5 14 "'d3 g6 1 5 �h6 :re8 1 6 lOe5. Karpov himself prefers 1 1 ... b6 in this position. For example, his game with Ivanovic in their training match in Bijelo Polje 1 99 6 continued 1 2 'i'e2 �b7 1 3 :ad l lOb4 1 4 � b I llc8 1 5 lOe5 lObd5 (weaker is IS . . . lOfd5 1 6 �d2) 16 'It'd3 g6 1 7 �h6 .!:te8 18 'tWh3 �fS 19 �g5 �e7 20 �h6 �fS 2 1 �d2 ! ? lOxc3 22 bxc3 b S ! with counterplay for B lack. My radical attempt to solve thi s problem turned out, strangely enough, to be an innovation - in the all-knowing Chess Base I did not find this move. 12 �e3 If 1 2 �h4 B lack can exchange bishops: 12 . . . lOh5 13 �xe7 lOxe7 1 4 lOe5 lOf6. 12 lOb4 b6? 13 �bl

14 lIe8 Black has to hastily ' patch up the holes ' . After the natural 1 4 . . . �b7 White carries out the bishop sacrifice and develops a dangerous attack: 1 5 lOes (the immediate 1 5 �xh6 �xf3 1 6 �xg7 is also possible) I S ... lle8 1 6 �xh6 gxh6 17 J:[e3 lOh7 1 8 aJ and now: (a) 1 8 ... f6 1 9 .i.xh7+ �xh7 20 :h3 �f8 2 1 lOg4 lOdS 22 lOxh6 �g7 23 llg3+ (or 23 '1ie2) 23 . . . �h7 24 'i'c2+ fS 2 S . lOxfS and wins; (b) 1 8 ...lOd5 1 9 1Ig3+ lOgS 20 h4 f6 2 1 'i'c2 fxeS 22 'i'h7+ � fS 23 "xh6+ �t7 2 4 �g6+ �g8 2 S :txg5, forcing mate; (c) 1 8 ... lOc6 19 �xh7+ �xh7 20 "d3+ �g7 (or 20 ... f5 2 1 lOxc6 �xc6 22 :txe6 �d7 23 'i'xf5+ �h8 24 lIxh6+) 2 1 :g3+ �g5 ( 2 l ...�fS 22 'i'h7) 22 lOxc6 �xc6 23 h4 f6 24 hxgS hxg'S 2 5 f4 lIh8 26 fxg5 f5 27 lIe I with a clear advantage. 15 a3! lOc6 The only move. After I S ... lObdS 1 6 liJxdS B lack i s lost:

25 d5 This game is a good illustration of the possibilities in positions with an isolated pawn. As soon as a piece moves from the blockading square, the idea of the pawn breakthrough arises. The only question is, what dividends does it give? Whereas on the 1 6th move White had definite grounds for the advance of the pawn, here an unfortunate moment is chosen. After 2S �h4! Black is practically forced to weaken his kingside: 25 . . . g5 26 �g3, and now after 26...�g7 27 lIcd I White is still threatening d4-d5, while the pin of the pawn by 26 ... g4 27 lOe5 "xd4 is highly risky: 28 "c2 �g7 (28 .....c5 fails to 29 lOe4) 29 lOe2 �xe2 30 lOxc6 :txc6 3 1 'i'xc6 'i'xb2 3 2 lIc2 and White gains a material advantage. Now, however, the position is simplified, and for the first time after my error on move 1 3 I was able to breathe a sigh of relief. exd5 25 "xe8 lIxe8 26

1 64 27 28 29 30

4Jxd5 �xd5 �a2 'i'xc1

ttJxd5 4Je7! llxcl+ �b7!

46

�cl

4Jb3+

The worst is over for B lack, who has nothing to fear. 31 32 33 34 35 36

4Je5

�bl 'i'd2 4Jd3 'i'd !

�d5 ttJc6 'iWe6 'i' fS 4Jd4

53 lDe4 �e7 54 h4 .i.b2 55 4Jg5 f6 56 ttJe4 �c8 57 g3 .i.h3 58 �e3 .i.a3 59 .i.c4 .i.c8 60 �e2 .i.b4 61 �d3 i.b7 62 �e3 .i.a3 63 4Jc3 i.c5+ 64 �e2 �f8 65 4Jd5 �g7 66 4Jf4 �b6 67 4Je6 i.a3 68 4Jf4 g5 69 4Jd5 .i.xd5 70 .i.xd5 Draw agreed

The low level of my play in 1 995 is typified by my game with Lobron, which I had to win twice. Game 62 BeIyavsky-Lobron Dortmund 1995 47 48

�c2?! �d3 ? !

N imzo-Indian Defence E32

Karpov cannot reconc ile himself to the repetition of moves, and he exceeds the bounds of risk. Now it is [ who am no lon­ ger agreeable to a draw, although Black's chances are only sl ightly preferab le. 48 49 50 36

�b3!

37 38 39 40 41 42

�xfS �d3 �n �e1 �d2 � c4

43 44

�c2 �bl

45

�d5

b3 a4

tOfS! i.d7 b5

50 ... tLlxg3 5 1 hxg3 h5 was more accurate, weakening White 's pawns. 51 52

lUe2 lOxg3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d4 c4 tLlc3 '1ic2 a3 '1ixc3 '1ic2 e3 4Je2?

4Jf6 e6 i.b4 �

i.xc3+ 4Je4 fS b6

tLlxg3 �f8

�xd l �b3 g6 �g7 �a4 4Jb3+

For the moment the b2 pawn is attacked, so the threat of 4Jxg6 is immaterial and Black can pennit himself a l ittle activity, but objectively simpler and sounder was 42 ...4Jf5 43 b3 �c6 44 �d5 .i.xd5 45 4Jxd5 4Jxg3 46 hxgJ �d4 etc. lDd4+ ttJb3 tiJd2 +

piece after 1 3 lUxgS '1ixgS 1 4 f4) 1 3 0-{) with the better chances. I O . lOf6 I I i.e2 lUc6 transposes into a position from Kir.Georgiev-Damaso (Yerevan Olympiad 1 996), which continued 1 2 b4 lOe7 1 3 i.b2 lOg6 1 4 0-{) '1ie7 I S llfe l and White retained a solid initiative. But 1 0 ... lDd6 followed by . . . cS was possibly stronger. ..

9 10

i.b7 lOd6!

f3

The alternative is IO .. tLlf6 1 1 lOc3 c5 12 d5 �h8 1 3 e4 fxe4 14 �g5 exd5 1 5 cxd5 exfJ 1 6 O--O--D d6, and here in the game Azmaiparashvili-Adams (Madrid 1 996) White could have retained · the advantage by 1 7 lOe4 d6 1 7 lOe4 f2 (or I 7 . . . lObd7 1 8 lOxd6) 1 8 .i.c4 '1ie7 1 9 i.xf6 gxf6 2 0 llhfl lDd7 (if 2 0. . .f5 2 1 '1ic3+ �g8 22 '1ig3+ �h8 23 '1ixd6) 2 1 llxf2 Ir.ae8 22 lOg3 with a strong initiative. I O ...'1ih4+? is not good: 1 1 g3 '1ih5 1 2 i.g2 lOg5 1 3 lDf4, and 1 3 . . . tDxfJ+ does not work because of 1 4 �f2 '1ig4 1 5 h3. .

ttJf4

With the approach of the first time con­ trol, the situation has changed radically, although, objectively speaking, the resulting ending is drawn.

1 65

Uncompromising Chess

Uncompromising Chess

11

12 13 14 15 16

Also after 52 ... b5 53 axb5 .i.xb5+ 5 4 .i.c4 .i.c6 5 S ttJe4 � f8 5 6 fJ White's pieces are sufficiently wel l centralised to hold the position.

A new and not altogether successful idea in the given position; this is usually played after 9 .i.d3. If White is planning to push away the knight from e4, he should consider 9 lOh3 .i.b7 1 0 fJ, when 1 0 . . . '1ih4+?! is unfavourable for Black: 1 1 gJ '1ih5 1 2 .i.g2 lOf6 ( l 2 ...lDg5? loses a

�d2

c5?!

Here 1 1 ... '1ih4+ would now have been good. Since White cannot block the check either with his knight ( 1 2 lOg3 f4 1 3 exf4 lOf5), or with his pawn ( 1 2 g3 '1ih5 1 3 i.g2 .i.xfJ 1 4 lDf4 '1ig4), h e has to play 1 2 �d l , after which Black's position i s better, since it is not easy for White to coordinate his forces. dxc5! 0-6-{)

lDC4 .i.c3 .i.e2

bxc5 4Jc6 1ie7 :n

The immediate 1 6 :g l was stronger, preparing an attack on the g-file. 16 17 18

"d2 :hgl

as 4Jc8 lDb4?

Spectacular, but White is not obliged to take the knight. I S . 4Jb6 with the idea of 1 9. . . 4Ja4 was stronger. .

.

1 66

Uncompromising Chess

19

Wbl

.i.xc4 Wf8 46 .i.b5 <j;;e 7 47 .i.d7 <j;;d 8 (or 47 . . . 4Jxd7 48 exd7 <j;;x d7 49 Wb3, and White wins easily with his outside passed pawn, e.g. 49 . . . d5 50 <;Pc3 <;Pc6 5 1 <;Pd4 <;Pd6 52 h4 h5 53 b4 �c6 54 b5+ �xb5 5 5 <;pxd5) 48 �a3 <3;c7 4 9 �a4 4Jd5 (or 49 ... 4Jg4 50 b4 4Jxh2 5 1 b5 4Jg4 52 <j;; a5 4Je5 53 b6+ <j;; b7 54 e7) 50 <j;; a 5 �b7 5 1 b4 4Je7 5 2 b5 �a7 5 3 .i.c6 4Jc8 54 b6+ b8 5 5 b7 'De7 56 <;Pb6 d5 57 .i.b5 d4 5 8 .i.d3 h 6 59 h4 and White wins.

Not 1 9 axb4? axb4 20 .i.e5 because of 20 . . . d6 21 .i.xd6 b3 22 Wb I .i.e4+! 23 fxe4 �a7 etc.

19 20 21 22 23

4Jd 5

exdS e4 llgO

e5 .i. x d S 4J b 6 d6 'ii' e8

Planning the queen raid e8-a4-b3-a2.

J:te 1 + 32 Hoping for a time trouble m iracle, especially as 32 . . . �d8 is parried by 33 .i. f6. 33 34 35 36

24

f4!

Not so much for the sake of an attack, as a defence against the invasion of the queen.

24 25

llxf4

exf4 'ii' a 4?

An empty threat; 2 5 ... fxe4 should have been played.

26 Now .i.xb4.

ll O

i f 26 ... �b3

26 27 28 29

lldO llxfS llxfS

there

follows 2 7

lle8 llxe4 llxfS .e8

In view of the threat of 3 0 .g5, the queen has to return. If Black persists with 29 . . . 'ii'b 3, then 30 axb4 4Ja4 (or 30 . . . axb4 3 1 'ii'g 5) 3 1 .i.xg7 and wins. lIe7 30 'ii'g 5

31 32

axb4 i.b5!

axb4

.i.xel �a2

�xb3 <j;;a 2? !

�xel + b3+ e4+

Lobron was not so m istaken. In time trouble I failed to find the more decisive 36 .i.xc4 'ii'd I + 37 �c3 4Ja4+ 38 �b4. 36 �aS+

37 38 39 40

<j;; b l

'ii' e 1 +

<j;; a2 �bl

�aS+ �el+

'ii' e l ? !

Here too the perpetual check could have been avoided by 40 <j;; c 2 �e2+ 4 1 <j;;c 3 'ii'd 3+ (4 I ...'ii'e 1 + 4 2 .d2) 4 2 <j;; b4 .

40 41 42

<j;; a2

b5 <j;;a 5!

<j;;c5

Now both sides promote: 52 . . . d4 5 3 b6 d3 54 b7 d2 55 b8W d l �, but after 56 'ifc8+ <j;;d 5 57 �d8+ the black queen I S lost. Therefore Black resigned. I like the chess atmosphere in Yugoslavia. Although the country is recovering from the effects of the war, it will soon rival Spain in the quantity and quality of tournaments staged, because here they have the best chess enthusiasts and many potential sponsors. For the last few years I have been playing regularly for the Agrouniverzal club (Zemun) in team competitions. Game 63

Team Tournament Yugoslavia 1995 King's Indian Defence E92

43 44 45 46 47 48

'ii' e8+ 'ii'e 6+ �xf7+ .i.xe4 b4 .i.xdS

�f8 �f7 <j;; x f7

49 50

<j;; b3 <j;;a4

<j;;d 4 d5

<j;;e6 �eS <j;; x d 5

'ii' e4+ .xfS

We3!

4JxdS

Black prefers to maintain material equality. In the minor piece ending he would have had to part with a pawn after 42 ... lD
51 52

Zviagi n tsev-Belyavsky

It appears that Lobron has emerged unscathed from the time scramble, but now the exchange of queens is forced, and both types of ending are lost.

42

1 67

Uncompromising Chess

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

d4 c4 lfJc3 e4 lfJo .i.e2 dS h3

4Jf6

g6 .i.g7 d6 � eS as

1 68

Uncompromising Chess

A favourite variation with Zviagintsev, which he has successfully employed in several games. White prepares a retreat for his bishop at e3, which is unfavourable after 8 �g5 h6 9 �e3 liJg4. In addition, in the plan with queens ide castling the pawn at h3 assists the attack with g2-g4. It is not easy for Black to find an antidote. For example, in the event of queenside play he may run into difficulties, as shown by the game Polulyakhov-Belyavsky (lgalo 1 994): S ... liJa6 9 �g5 liJc5 10 lLld2 c6 I I 0-0 'i'e8 ( 1 1 .. .�d7 and 1 2 . . . 'i'bS is better, although this does not change the evaluation) 1 2 b3 �d7 13 aJ cxdS 14 cxd5 bS I S b4 axb4 16 axb4 liJa4 1 7 traJ (White also has the advantage after 1 7 liJxa4 bxa4 I S '1Ifc2 �b5 1 9 �xbS 'i'xb5 20 ::: fb I :tfcS 2 1 'i'd 1 llc3 22 'i'f1 '1!fd3 23 '1!fxd3 trxd3 24 b5) I 7 ... lLlxc3 1 8 trxc3 hS 1 9 trc7 lLlh7 20 �e3 and White stands better. In a previous game with Zviagintsev (Budva 1 995) I avoided the pin on my knight by 8 ... lLlfd7, after which my opponent launched an offensive on the kingside: 9 h4! fS 1 0 hS liJf6 (1 0 .. .f4 I I hxg6 hxg6 1 2 g3 gS 1 3 lLlh2 favours White) I I hxg6 hxg6 1 2 �g5 lLla6 1 3 lLld2 lLlc5 1 4 liJb3 b6 1 5 �xc5 bxcS 1 6 exfS ! �xfS (things are no easier after 1 6 ... gxf5 1 7 �h5! with the threat of �g6) 1 7 g4 �d7 1 8 ,*"d3 'i'e8, and here after 19 'i'hJ? I was able to break out with 19 . . . e4 ! , but by 1 9 liJe4! White would have retained the advantage. 8 liJh5 The idea of this move is to provoke g2g3, after which kingside castling for White will become problematic. 9 lUd2 The first pleasant symptom. This retreat would look much better with the bishop at e3 . More critical was 9 g3, when Zviagintsev's other main idea is revealed exploiting the weakening of the b l -h7

diagonal, if B lack carries out the standard plan: 9 . . . f5?! 1 0 exfS gxfS 1 1 lUgS ! �f6 1 2 g4. However, I was not intending to play this. After all, the aim of weakening the kingside has been achieved, and now it is possible to switch to the queenside. Therefore I was intending 9 ... lUa6 followed by . . . c7-c6, which is very appropriate should White castle queens ide. 9 �f4 10 �a6 �n 11 g3 �h5 12 �b3 A fter 12 �e2 Boleslavsky's old idea (from his game with Szabo, Budapest 1 950) looked tempting: 1 2 . . . 0c5 1 3 .lixh5 lUd3 + 14 'it>fl gxh5 1 5 'i'xh5 fS, but unfortunately White can avoid it by 1 3 lUb3 ! with a good game. Therefore 1 was intending 1 2 . . .lLlf6 (fol lowed by . . . c7-c6), when White is not able to open the h-file ( 1 3 h4 h5). 12 c6 12 ... fS was the alternative. 13 �d7 �e3 14 84 In view of the threat of . . . as-a4 White has to weaken his queens ide. 14 �b4 On the agenda now is I S . . . fS, when after 16 exfS Black recaptures 1 6 . . . �xfS, with the threat of . . . �c2.

Uncompromising Chess 'i'e7 ! ? trcl 15 A difficult choice. I was happy with the outcome of the opening battle. Now if 1 6 �g2 fS 1 7 exfS lLlf4 ! the knight comes into play more effectively. 16 c5 cxd5 17 cxd6 '1!fd8 White 's attack achieves its aim only in the event of 1 7 . . .ii'xd6? 18 �cS 'i'f6 1 9 lLlxaS! llxaS 20 �xb4. 18 �xd5 After 1 8 exdS b6 19 �bS trb8 20 �xd7 '1i'xd7 2 1 lUbS lUf6 22 trc7 'i'fS the initiative passes to B lack. lUxd5 18 19 lLlf6 'i'xd5 20 � xa4 'i'd3 21 lUcs Zviagintsev m ust evidently have overlooked my 22nd move, otherwise he would have preferred 2 1 �g2 �xb3 22 'i'xb3 'i'xd6 23 0-0. 21 �c6 22 �g2 'i'b8! Unexpectedly it transpires that the d6 pawn is doomed. If 23 0-0 there follows 23 . . . trd8 24 trfd l �f8, while if 23 �gS h6 24 �xf6 �xf6, intending . . . l:[d8 and . . . �e7. lUb5 23 f4 24 l:[d8 �f3 25 l:[xd6 �xh5 'i'c4 26 gxbS 27 'i'e8 � The black queen has shown considerable mobility. It participated in the preparation of . . . f7-fS, then in the besieging of the d6 pawn, and finally it has come to the defence of the kingside, creating in passing a threat of winning the exchange. White could have answered the direct 27 ... trg6 with 28 fS ! trxg3+ 29 �t2 h4 30 trg l , gaining counterplay. l:[g6 28 fxe5 29 l:[13

1 69

�xe5 29 Stronger was 29 ... b6 30 lUb3 (if 3 0 lLld3 there follows 30 . . . bS 3 1 'i'd4 l:[d8 3 2 'i'c3 �xe4) 30 ...� d 7 3 1 l:[xhS trxg3+ 3 2 Wt2 trg6 33 � f4 �e6 34 'i'dJ ( 3 4 'i'c3 �f8) 34 ... l:[d8 3 5 'i'e3 'i'bs, winning the b2 pawn and obtaining two connected passed pawns on the queenside. 30 g4 bxg4 l:[d8 b4 31 32 hS l:[gd6 33 'i'e2 Wh8 34 'i'xg4 f6?

There was no need to engage in prophylaxis. After the simple 34 ... b6 (I was unlucky with this move) 3 5 �b3 (or 3 S �g5 bxc5 3 6 ..i.xd8 l:txd8) 3 5 ....i.xe4 36 l:[xeS 'i'xeS 37 .i.f4 'i'g7 3 8 'i'xg7+ Wxg7 39 .i.xd6 l:txd6 Black wins easily.

170

Uncompromising Chess

35 � f4 '1tg8? I should have boldly played for mate with 3 5 . ..�d4+ 36 �h2 �xc5 37 lUxeS 'i'xe4, when White suffers further losses: (a) 38 h6 llg8 39 �xg8+ c;t>xg8 40 lIg I + ..t>h 3 4 1 �xd6 'i'h4 mate; (b) 38 :l.5c2 llg8 39 'i'xg8+ c;t>xg8 40 �xd6 �h4+ 4 1 �g I 'tifd4+. llxg8+ 36 'tifxg8+ 37 Wf2 �xf4 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

llx f4 ltJb3 llc4 ltJd 4 ltJ13 ltJh4 llc7

b6 �e8 �xh5 �g6 lle8 �g8

44 llde6 ! W inning a third pawn by 44 . . . �xe4 4 5 :g4+ would have allowed White a strong initiative. Thus after 45 . . . �f8 the white rooks take charge of the seventh rank: 4 6 llgg7 :ee6 (weaker is 46 ... :e5 4 7 ltJO �xO 48 �O llde6 49 llcf7+ �e8 50 llb7) 47 llcf7+ �e8 48 lla7 �dS 49 ltJfS lld2+ 50 �g l �cS and Black is balancing on a knife-edge. 4 5 . . .�h8 is sounder, but then comes 46 llxe4! l::txe4 47 llc8+ �g7 48 ltJf5+ �g6 49 11Jxd6 l:td4 50 ll'lc4 b5 5 1 ll'lxa5 :td2+ with a probable draw.

45 46

ll'lxg6

bxg6

�13

l:t8e7

171

Uncompromising Chess

47 l:tc8+ Not 47 lhe7 llxe7 48 llxf6? Uf7 with a won pawn ending. � g7 47 lle8 tIM 48 49 llc7+ 116e7 g5 50 llc6 W hite resigns Game 64 Rublevsky-Belyavsky

Novosibirsk 1 995 French Defence C07 e6 e4 d5 d4 c5 3 ttJd2 ·ff xd5 4 exd5 �xc5 dxc5 5 ltJ g13 ltJf6 6 7 �d3 Th is move was introduced by Kasparov. Before that 7 �c4 was played. 0-0 7 ll'lbd7 'tife2 8 2

at the kingside, and Black ' s defence i s not at all easy. At the Reggio Emilia Tournament of 1 99 1/2 Kasparov played 9 ll'le4 against Anand, but after 9 . . . b6! 1 0 ll'lxc5 'tifxc5 1 1 �e3 �c7 1 2 �d4 �b7 1 3 0-0-0 ( i f 1 3 0-0 ll'lc5 with an equal game) 1 3 . . . ll'lc5 ! 1 4 �e5 ( 1 4 �xf6 'tiff4+ 1 5 �b l gxf6 ! ?) 14 ... ll'lxd3+ 1 5 l:txd3 'tifc4 1 6 lOd4 ( 1 6 ll'ld2 'tifg4! ) 1 6...�e4 1 7 lle3 'tifxa2! Black gained good counterplay. 9 as?! A loss of time. It would have been better for Black to complete his development with 9 ... b6 1 0 �b2 �b7. 10 �b2 b6 11 � �b7

12

llbel

A good move, but not afraid of 1 2 g4 ! with the ll'lh5 1 4 �e4, while after ll'ldS 1 4 fie4 White would a dangerous attack. 12

13 Evidently the best position for the knight with this structure, as after 8 ... lOc6 9 ll'le4 .i.e7 1 0 0-0 White's chances are better. b3 9 An interesting plan. After the fianchetto the white bishops are threateningly aimed

the best. I was threat o f 1 3 g5 1 2 ... tr'd6 1 3 g5 have developed

a4

ll'le4?

Again a natural move is not the best. White should have forced an endgame by 1 3 .ie4! ll'lxe4 1 4 ll'lxe4 tr'xe4 1 5 tr'xe4 .ixe4 16 llxe4 llfd8 1 7 b4! (after 1 7 l:txa4 llxa4 1 8 bxa4 f6 Black's king approaches the centre, and he has nothing to fear) 1 7 ....i.e 7 I S lled4 ll'lf6 1 9 llxd8+ l:txd8 20

llxd8+ .i.xd8 2 1 lLleS, where Black has weak pawns at a4 and b6. 13 14 ll'lfgS 15 �bl 16 axb3

'tifh5 'tifh6 axb3

16 .ia3! Black seizes the initiative and he should get his attack in first. 17 llJxf6+? A rare instance of a grandmaster calculating a long variation that transposes into an endgame, but 'on the way' over­ looking a mate to his own king. 1 7 .id4 was essential, when I was intending to continue the pressure with 1 7 . . . ll'ld5 ! , not fearing 1 8 ll'lxh7 in view of I S . . . llfc8 with the threat of 19 . . . �b4. 17 fuf6 18 .i.xf6 tr'xf6

19

.i.xh7+

�b8

fibS 20 Here White considered only 20 ... 'i'h6 2 1 tr'xh6 gxh6 22 �e4, but. . . 20 tr'b2 mate! I started 1 996 at the Christmas Tournament in Reggio Emil ia, where I played more cautiously than in the previous year's tournaments. I was leading before the last round and, despite a solid series of draws, I should nevertheless have made one more,

1 72

Uncompromising Chess

by accepting the offer of Rustem Dautov. Then I would have finished first, rather than fourth.

game P iket-Kasparov (Amsterdam 1 995), which continued 1 2 .l:[d l � fS 1 3 d6 h6 1 4 � f4 lOd7 1 5 .l:[d2 1Ob4 1 6 'i'b3 �e6 1 7 �c4 lOb6 I S �xe6 nxe6 1 9 lOa4! (here Karpov played 1 9 a3, and after 19 . . . lOd3 ! 20 �g3 c4 Black achieved an excellent

Game 6 5

Belyavsky-Azmaiparashvili Reggio Emilia 1 995/6

3

g6 d5

4 5

lOn

�g7

'Wb3

2

.l:[eS

�e3

12

'iif b 6 .tIad l 13 B lack attacks the b2 pawn and brings his queen out to an active position. Now, apart from the move played, White has two

in his reperto ire, and I thought that the Botvinnik Variation would be more appropriate than fashionable continuations.

5

dxe4

6 7

'i'xc4

().4)

e4

8

� e2

9 10 11

d5 ().4)

lOa6 e5 e6 exd5

other possibilities: the practically untested

20

1 4 lOa4 and the more common 1 4 b3: 14 lOa4 'iifb4 ( i ntending . . . '1!ixc4 fol­ lowed by . . . �c2; after 14 . . . 'iif a5 1 5 lOxcs B lack is virtually obliged to make the exchange sacri fice I S . . . .l:[xe3, which after 1 6 lOxb 7 'i'b6 1 7 fxe3 looks somewhat speculative)

1 5 b3 lOe4

(after 1 6 ... lOd6?!

1 6 lOd2 1:acS

17 'i'c l �d4 I S �xa6

':'xe3 1 9 a3 ! 'WaS 20 �xb7 1Oxb7 2 1 lOc4

exd5

inadequately defended, for which it is fu lly

by

1 4 . . . 'i'xb2

is

to d4 (after which the d6 pawn is weak­ ened), and prevents White from controlling this square with his bishop from e3 . 20 . . . lOc6 would have been met by 2 1 �e3, not fearing 2 1 . . . �xc4 22 �xc4 �xb2 in view of 23 �xh6 (weaker is 23 1Oc7 1Oxc7

However, the acceptance of the sac­ dangerous,

not

24 dxc7 .l:[dcS, when 25 .l:[d7 is not possible because of 25 . . . lOe5). Here B lack still has to solve the problem of activating his knight at a6, whereas White can now

initiative ( 1 7 'iifx bS ·iixc3 I S 'iifxa6 .l:[xe3 !

attack on

the

or 1 7 .l:[xb2 bxc4 1 8 �xc4 lOe4), but i n

tempting exchange sacrifice 1 4 ... llxe3 1 5

view o f 1 5 lOgS ! .l:[fS 1 6 �f3 ! h6 1 7 1Oge4 lOxe4 1 8 tDxe4 with a strong initiative that

23 ....l:[d7 24 f4 (24 .l:[fe I also looks good, but after 24 . . . .l:[c8 and 25 . . . lOabS B lack

b3

is

more

natural,

when

fully compensates for the pawn.

14 15

'i'b5

brings

his

the

kings ide,

second

for

knight

example:

into

play)

24 ... lOd4 25 g4 with the threat of f4-fS.

21 22

�e6 h6

Preventing lOg5.

lOa5 �r4!

.l:[ d 7

The start of strictly concrete play.

16

lOe5! W ith this move White not only supports

White defends h i s pawn and threatens 23 .l:[d2. If 22 ... lOd4 there follows 23 lOxd4 �xd4 24 �b5, and the role of the passed d-pawn sharply increases. B lack cannot

advantage; (c) 1 6 ...'i'f6 1 7 e4 1Oe3 I S 'Wbs and all

his passed pawn, but also threatens to play his bishop to 0 , from where it attacks the

B lack's pieces are hanging;

b7 pawn and deprives the f6 knight o f

observe with indifference the course of

(d) 1 6 . . . 'i'dS 17 e4 �d7 I S e5 I S ...lUxeS 19 'i'f4 again with a strong

important central

events, although the signs were that my opponent was content with their development. 22 g5

was especially s o after the 'sensational '

looks to be 1 4 . . . .l:[ad S ! ? 1 5 iOa4 'i'a5, when

IS

in itiative.

squares.

The

tactical

justification for it is 1 6 ... �xa2 1 7 1Oxg6.

16 17

been

new

worth giv ing up the b2 pawn.

However, a more solid reply to 14 b3

recently

a

implication. After the opening of the a2-gS diagonal, it transpires that the f7 square is

experiencing something of a crisis. Th i s

has

with

::'xb I bS ! , after which Black takes the

(b) 1 6 ... 'i'a5 1 7 e4 ttJe3 I S 'Wd3 lUxd l 1 9 exfS 1Oc3 20 lOxc3 'Wxc3 2 1 'i'xc3 �xc3 22 .l:[c I with a clear endgame

Seville,

but

lOxb4 with counterplay for B lack, as after

'i'f4 with a strong initiative;

1 9 S7 in the Karpov-Kasparov

idea,

rifice

White: (a) 1 6 ... 'i'd6 1 7 e4 �d7 I S eS lOxeS I 9

in

d6!?

old

because of the obvious 1 5 :tb I ? ! �xb I 1 6

fxe3 lOg4 1 6 lOa4 would appear to favour

1 1 . . J:teS, which was

14 An

White stood clearly better in Ree-Miralles,

14

11

lOc2

Black aims to penetrate with his knight

Cannes 1 992) 1 7 lOxe4 .l:[xe4 I S 'Wxb4 1 9 �f3? llxe3 20 fxe3 bS he stands better.

tested in

a3

in outplaying the World Champion.

lOf6

Zurab Azmai parashvili had then only

match

lOdb4

�el

and in the subsequent play Piket succeeded

j u·st begun including the Griinfeld Defence

The alternative

19 20

B lack forestalls d5-d6 and actively deploys his forces . However, it seems to me that White is not obl iged to defend h is b2 pawn.

game) 19 ... .l:[e4 2 0 �g3 ! lOc4 2 1 lOxc S ! ,

Griinfeld Defence D97

d4 c4 lO e3

1 73

Uncompromising Chess

.l:[edS lOe4 lOxb5

'i'xb5

lOd5

23

.i.g3

f5

1 74

Uncompromising Chess 24 25

.td3 lIfe 1

But before this I had to take part in open

ltJd4

1 75

Uncompromising Chess

bxc6 bxc6 I S 'i'a4 ltJgS 1 6 'i'xc6 ltJh3+ 1 7

events. This caused immediate problems

"' h i .tg4 ( 1 7

...

ltJxf2+ does not work: 1 8

In v iew of the threat of 26 ltJxd4 cxd4

with my opening repertoire, since m y play

27 nxe6, B lack does not have time to play

with Black was largely aimed at m a i n­

e6 1 9 lIb7 l:tf7 2 0

2S . . . f4 .

taining the balance. This is not a bad idea

22 dxe6+ .txe6 23 'i'a4 I-D.

25

in

all-play-all

tournaments

of

lIxf2 l:txf2 1 9 'iixa8 l:txg2 20 lIb8) 1 8 f4

even

composition, but with it one can hard ly expect to score wins in open tournaments, where the rating d i fference of opponents can be as much as SOO

points. I

evils, as after 16 . . . .td7 1 7 1Ib7 c5? 1 8 'i'a5

even

his losses are even heavier.

with

my

oId

repertoire,

it

was

9 10

began

the

Rubinstein

Memorial '

White

changes

d4

from

the

fxe4 ltJd2

d5

knight.

ltJe6?!

19

Black is a pawn down and has no particular compensation, but even so he

position.

the one at

His choice of the Dutch Defence ind icates

b5 e3

ltJc7

a2.

21 22

cxd5 ltJxe4 'i'b3

23

.*.d6!

20

'i'xd5 'i'xa2 l:te2

his intention of playing for a win.

ltJxb 5 30

ltJxd4

ltJe5+ was no

better.

32 33

queen

should not have exchanged his e4 pawn for

and 34 .txa8.

l:txe6 l:te7+ dxe7

his

'gaze' of the rook at c8, as after 1 9 .tb2

White achieves the weakening o f a whole

13

30 31

'1Wa4

White removes

complex of dark squares in the opponent's

repertoire is t h e Nimzo-Ind ian Defence.

ltJxd3 3 1 :xe6 ltJxe I 32

be

.txb2 20 lIxb2 ltJe6 he cannot play 2 1

3 1 .txfS ! .!Oxe6 32 .txe6+ �e8 33 .td5+

29 . . . ltJc5

will

After 1 l . . ..txd4 12 ltJxe4 .tg7 13 .tb2

f5 in

play

'i'xd5? because o f 2 1 . . . lld7, winning the

12

alternative

opening

the

will be unable to create counterplay on the

N iko l i c ' s

The

main

all

10

Dutch Defence A80

The

that

.txe5 lle8

dxe5 'i' xe6

kingside.

11

Polanica Uroj 1 996

away the barriers on the e-file. I f 2 8 . . . bxa5

ltJxc4

structure,

transferred to the queenside, and that Black

T h e game is decided, a s W h i t e sweeps

29

pawn

managed to win three out of my rem a i n i ng

Game 66

e4

the

assuming

Belyaysky-Nikolie

17 18 19

ltJe4 ltJxe4

Tournament with seven draws. but then I

JLxe5 b6

28

e5

pawn sacrifice is the l east of the various

Dispe l l i ng Black's i l l usions.

there fol lows 29 8xd4 cxd4 30 ':xe6 8c5

'1Wa4

although in practice it turned out than.

four games, which brought me first prize.

28

16

ment of h is i nitiative. Black decides that a

.te5!

lIxe5 lIdel

bxe6 llf7

was

I

27

bxe6 � a3

obliged to try and master something new,

positions.

26

14 15

White is clearly ahead in the develop­

possible to win from both equal and simple

26

l:txfl �f7 2 1 cxdS lIc8

ltJd4

l:txe7 ltJe6

e8'i'+

Black resigns I began 1 996 with a rating of 26 1 0, so that there was little expectation of inv itations to

high category tournaments. The exception was the tournament in Polanica Zdroj , to which I was inv ited by Andrei Filipowicz.

2 3 4

g3 .tg2

5

ltJo

6 7

0-0

ltJf6 g6 .tg7 0-0 d6

ltJc3

ltJa6

e4

8 l:tbl c6 b4 9 A com parati v e ly new plan invo l ving an attack on the queenside. For a long time it was considered almost obl igatory in this position to put pressure on the centre by 9 d5 .td7 1 0 bJ, followed by 'smoking out' the g7 bishop from the weakened long dia gona l.

13

1 J . .ltJe6 seems more energetic, but a .

game ROder-Beim ( 1 996) revealed that this continuation also has its drawbacks: 1 4

White forces

mass exchanges, after

which the game enters the technical phase.

1 76

Uncompromising Chess

23 ... .ixe4 24 'iixa2 llxa2 25 .ixe4 �xd6 26 .id5 leads to an unusual position, where Black cannot escape even by giving back his extra piece.

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

llxb3 lUxd6 lUxfS llbS llxcs

'iix b3 �xd6 lId7 gxfS llcs lUxeS lUd3

lleI lla l The exchange of rooks after 30 .tId I lUc5 would favour Black.

30 31 32 33

.a.a5 .ib3 .in

�g7 �g6 un

lUe l 33 ... lUb4 34 :'a4 lU d 5 3 S .ic4 : d 7 3 6 .ixd5 llxdS 3 7 fha7 leads t o the loss of a second pa\�n and a hopeless rook ending.

34 35 36 37 38

.ie2

.tIc7

.a.al

lUc2

.a.c 1 �bS �b l !

.a.c6 1Ic3

This move emphasises the strength of the pin, whereas after 3 8 .ia4 lUd4 3 9 lhc3 4Je2+ Black would have freed himself. Black resigns. A Siovenian passport, in contrast to a Ukrainian one, allows one to travel around the world without a visa. For a chess professional this is a great help, as it saves a mass of time. Game 67

Belyavsky-Eblvest Yerevan Olympiad 1996 French Defence C03

1 2 3

d4 e4 1lJd2

e6 dS dxe4

The Rubinstein Variation, characterised by this exchange in the centre, is nowadays a universal reply. Many ' French' players consider it to be the most efficient way of playing for equality, especially as in recent years the Winawer Variation 3 lUc3 �b4 has been experiencing something of a crisis.

4 5

tUxe4

lUxf6 .id3

A fter 7 �gS h6 8 i(.h4 Black can again play 8 . . . cS.

7 8

c5 ()....{)

With 8 dxc5 1.xcs 9 ·"e2 'fic7, assisting Black's development, White can hardly count on an advantage: (a) 1 0 0-0 0-0 I I .igS (or I I lUeS b6 1 2 .2.f4 .2.b7 1 3 .tIad l :rfd8 14 .2.g3 �d6 w ith equal chances) I I ...b6 12 lUeS .2.b7 1 3 .ixf6 gxf6 1 4 .ixh7+ �7 1 5 'iWh5+ y:'-Y2 (Ivanchuk-Karpov, Las Palmas 1 996); (b) 10 .2.d2 0-0 I I 0-{}-{) b6 12 lUeS .ib7 1 3 f4 tLlds 14 �b l f6 1 5 lUf3 tLlxf4 1 6 .ixf4 'i'xf4 1 7 'i'xe6+ �h8 1 8 .a.hfl Y2-Y2 (Topalov-Nogueiras, Yerevan Olym­ piad 1996).

8 9 10

lUxd4 .ie3

cxd4 .ics

It is strange that, even in such a well­ studied variation, there is room for an innovation in the fonn of such a logical move ( I I lUxe6 is threatened). Earlier 1 0 lUb3 was played.

10

11 12

()....{)

c3 .a.el

lUd7

lUgf6 lUf3 6 lUxf6+ After 6 .2.gS h6 White also has to exchange his bishop : 7 �xf6 lUxf6 8 lUxf6+ 'iWxf6, although after 9 �b5+ c6 1 0 .id3 he retains the advantage of the first move. 6 7

1 77

Uncompromising Chess

.ib6

.a.e8 12 12 .. 4JdS was better, as B lack need not .

fear 1 3 'iih S g6 1 4 'iWh6 lUxe3 1 5 llxe3 'ii f6, while after 1 3 .2.d2 .ixd4 1 4 cxd4 .id7 he gives White an isolated pawn and retains equal chances.

13 14

.ixe3 'iie7

lUb5 .a.xe3

Black had to reckon with the threat of lUd6. a6 15 'ii f3 16 lUd4 g6

17 18 19

lld8 �g7

.a.ael .ic4 'iWr4

23 24 25 26

lUfS+! llxcS 'iig5+ 'iix f6

gxfS 'iixcs �f8 �g8

Alas, this is B l ack's only move, as he cannot play 26 ... fxg4 27 lle5 'iWd6 28 llf5 ! with inevitable mate. B ut now the game goes by force into an ending, where White effectively has an extra pawn on the queens ide with the prospect of becom ing a passed pawn.

27 28 29 30

gxfS 'iix fS llxe8+ .idS

31

f4?

'iix fS exfS .ixe8 b6

It would have been better to restrain slightly the development of Black's queen­ side with the useful prophylactic move 1 9 .ib3 !

19 20 21

.id7 llac8 lle8

g4 .i b3

21 ... .a.c5 was better, preventing the development o f White's initiative on the kingside.

22

llcS?

lleS

And this move merely creates the motifs for a straightforward combination. The queen should have been moved out of the line of the rooks - 22 . 'iid 6. .

.

Unfortunately, at this point I did not yet appreciate all the subtleties of the resulting ending and I made it easier for Black to

1 78

Uncompromising Chess

defend his f-pawn. After 3 1 q.,g2 q.,g7 3 2 f4 the black king is tied to the defence of the f5 pawn, and White is completely free to exploit h is potential passed pawn on the c-file. 31 Wf8 32 <3;c7 33 as 34 'it>d6 35 b3 f6 a3 36 h6 37 e4 �hS b� 38 axb4 �dl a x b� 39

�O �1

�a4 �g2 � fl �c8 42 �d3 �g6! A fter describing a c ircle (e8-h5-d l -a4e8), the bishop occupies a modest square, but the best one for defending the f5 pawn. After 42 . . . �d7 43 �e3 rJ;e7 44 �c2 .ltc8 4 5 Wf2 rJ;;> f7 46 <3;g3 'itJg6 the battle of the kings con c l udes with a breakthrough by the passed pawn 47 c 5 . 43 .lte2 We6 44 �a4+ <3;d6 -

45

e5+

bxc5+

46 'l;c7 bxe5+ .ltb3 47 .ltb5 .ltg6 48 .ltc2 After 48 ... .ltg4? 49 �d5 the bishop i s o u t of the game.

White's positional advantage is obvious. The c-pawn guarantees his king access to the kingside weaknesses, but first he must deal with the f5 pawn. It can be won if he is able to post his bishop at e6, king at d5, and pawn at h3. But how can he divert the black king away from the e6 square? <3;c3! 49 Such moves give satisfaction. It seems that the king should be going to the right, and in fact it goes to the left. White sets about i m p lementing the first part of h i s plan - im proving a s much a s possible the plac ing of his king and b i shop. 43 '� c6 We7 Wb4 50

A fter 5 0 .. .'>Pd5 White conti nues 5 I .ltb3+ Wc6 (or 5 1 . . . <;/;>e4 52 c6 �e8 53 c 7 �d7 54 c;> c 5 �xf4 5 5 Wd6 .ltc8 5 6 .lte6 �a6 57 Wc5 We5 58 Wb6 Wd6 59 .ltxfS h5 60 h4, and B lack is in =ug='wang) 52 �e6, with play simi lar to that in the game. 51 h3! Another imperceptible but i mportant subtlety - the bishop must be deprived of the g4 square. 51 �c6 52 .lt b3 We7 53 Wc6 .lte6 54 �e4 �c7 55 �d5

1 79

Uncompromising Chess Zugzwang. In order not to allow the further advance of the white king, B lack has to give up his f5 pawn. 55 .ltb5 After 55 ....lth7 56 .ltf7 the black bishop has no moves. 56 .It f7+ .ltxfS 57 Wd4 Now White begins implementing the second part of h is plan - h i s king heads for h4 in order to attack the kings ide pawns. But wil l it be able to approach right up to them? 57 �c6 �e7 58 .lte4+ .lte6 59 �e3 .ltf7 60 .lt g2 .lt g6 �f2 61 Wd7 62 � g3 �e7 63 .ltd 5 Wd7 64 �g4 �e7 �h4 65 66 .ltn

70 �g4 �d7 71 f5 .lte8 72 .ltg8 �c6 73 .lth7 �c5 74 .ltg6 .ltd7 75 Wh5 Wd6 76 �xh6 �e7 77 �g7, reaching the same winning position as in the game; (b) 68...�c7! 69 �h5 .ltxh3 70 .ltd5 �d7 7 1 �xh6 We7 72 'itJg6 .ltc8 73 .lte4 .lth3 74 c6 (or 74 �b7 .lte6 75 c6 .ltd5 76 �a8 .lte6) 74 ... .ltfl 75 .lt f5 �d6 76 �xf6 �xc6 77 �e7 �c7 78 .lte6 .ltd3 and B lack gains a draw. .lth5 .lte4 67 68 .lt g6 .lt e2 .lt fS �c6 69 70 .ltg4 .ltd3 71 �h5 �xe5 �xh6 72 �d 4

.ltd7! 73 There was still a chance of only drawing in the event of the incautious. 73 f5?, after which Black just succeeds in catching the h-pawn: 73 . . . �e5 74 �g6

.ltf7? 66 It is better to keep the bishop at g6. Correct, therefore, is 66 ...�d8 ( i f 66 ... �d7 White has the winning manoeuvre 67 .lth5 �e4 68 .ltg4+, when the king approaches the h6 pawn) 67 .lth5 .lt f5 68 .ltf7, and now: (a) 68...�e7 69 .ltd5 (after 69 .lth5 �d8 Black holds the position) 69 . . . .ltg6

.lte4 75 h4 � f4 76 .lth3 �g3 77 h5 �3 78 h6 �g4 . �e4 73 �e5 74 f5 ! �d6 h4! 75 After 75 ... .ltxf5 76 .ltxf5 �xf5 77 h5 White's pawn is the first to queen.

76 77 78

.lte6 q;g7 .ltf7

q;e7 .lt e2

Black resigns

1 80

Uncompromising Chess

At the tournament in Cacak, as in Polanica Zdroj, I managed to win and to improve my rating. With one round to go Peter Leko and Zoltan Almasi were level with me, but in the last round I was the only one to win.

varied situations. But what else can be suggested for Black? Chemin-Mark Tseitlin (Beer Sheva 1 992) continued I l ...c4 1 2 �c2 h6 1 3 i.e3 �bd7 14 0--0 b6 (or 1 4 ... �cS I S eS with the initiative) I S l:le I liJcs 1 6 as ! liJfd7 (if 1 6 ... bS Black has to reckon with 1 7 eS liJhS 1 8 e6) 1 7 "d2 'iPh7 1 8 axb6 "xb6 1 9 �a4 with a positional advantage for White. Chemin's recommendation of l l ...h6!? 12 i.e3 �xe4 1 3 �xe4 fS, with a complicated game, deserves a practical testing.

Game 68 Belyavsky-Strikovic Cacak 1 996

King's Indian Defence E7 1 1 2 3 4

5

d4 c4 �c3 e4 b3

It:'lf6 g6 �g7 d6

Grandmaster Alexander Chemin, with whom I worked a great deal in 1 996 and 1 997, advised me to take up the Makogonov Variation, with which he h imself had achieved impressive results. And although I am not really convinced that with a move such as S h3 one can count on an advantage against the King's Indian Defence, my results have exceeded all expectations. 5 6

0-0

�g5

With 5 h3 White has prepared a retreat for his bishop at e3, and now he tries for even more: if B lack plays 6 ... h6, then 7 �e3 followed by 8 "d2 gains a tempo by the attack on the h6 pawn. 6 cS In our game a few rounds earlier, Paunovic played against me 6 ...c6 7 �f3 h6 8 �e3 eS 9 d5 cxdS 1 0 cxd5 a6 I I �d2 �bd7 12 �e2 liJe8 13 0--0 fS 14 exfS gxfS, but after 1 5 f4 ! exf4 1 6 �xf4 �eS (as is often the case i n such situations, chasing the b2 pawn is too risky: 1 6 .....b6+ 17 'iPh I "xb2 1 8 l:lc\ .1xc3 1 9 1Dc4 'i'b4 20 a3 ! ) 1 7 �b3 'iPh8 1 8 "d2 'i'f6 19 �4 he failed to equalise.

12 7

dS a6?! In such situations this move is better not included. Those who l ike sharp play usually decide on 7 ... b5 without prepara­ tion. The ' moderates' prefer 7 ... e6. 8

a4

e6

8 .. .'�aS can be met by 9 �d2 e6 1 0 i.d3 .:re8 I I �ge2 �c7 1 2 0--0 exdS 1 3 exd5 �bd7 ( \ 3 . . . b6!? Dokhoian) 1 4 f4 b6, and here in the game Dokhoian­ Skembris (Yugoslavia 1 994) White could have retained the better chances by 1 5 g4 ! ? 9 i.d3 ex d S 00000

10 11

181

Uncompromising Chess

exd5

Ue8

�f3

19 20

d6 tDd5

"d8

The white pieces arrive in the centre, as if in accordance with a timetable. e4

20

000000{)!

White sacrifices a pawn, although the simple 1 2 '!!fc 2 is also possible, for if 12 ... �xe4 1 3 liJxe4 fS 1 4 �fd2 fxe4 I 5 �xe4 and Black stil l has not solved all his problems. 12 13 14 15 16

Uc1 liJd2 liJc4 f4

"xb2 liJbd7 "b6 'Wc 7

White has succeeded in posting his knight at c4, where it actively supports the advance e4-eS and restricts Black's possibilities by attacking the d6 pawn. This gives h im more then sufficient compensation for the pawn. 16 �b6

White is two pawns down, and he has to make a choice: should he win the exchange by 2 1 �c7 �d7 22 ltJ.xa8 "xa8, or a piece by 2 1 d7 �xd7 22 �xf6+ �xf6 23 i.xf6 "xf6 24 "xd7 :re7 25 'WdS "d4+? However, in neither case does he gain a clear advantage, since his main trump, the pin on the f6 knight, is sold for too low a price. In order exploit the pin with maximum effectiveness, the sacrifice of a third pawn is required. 21 'i'b3! The start of an offensive manoeuvre; White creates threats to the f7 pawn. 21 �e6 22

d7!

�xd7

After 22 ... :f8 White again has almost a forced win: 23 liJxf6+ .1xf6 24 .1xe6 fxe6 25 "xe6+ 'iPg7 26 :XcS .1xg5 27 fxgS l:txfI+ 28 'it>xfl "f8+ 29 'i'f6+ 'iix f6+ 3 0 gxf6+ 'iPxf6 3 1 :e8. 23 24 11 "b6 A committing move, since on numerous occasions the attack on the b2 pawn has been 'welcomed' by White in the most

17 18

eS! �xe4

tDxc4 dxe5

l:lcd 1 ! f5

l:le6

This wins, but 24 tDxf6+ would have been simpler: 24... :xf6 25 'i'xb7 l:lb6 26 i.xf7+ 'iPf8 27 'i'xd7, and 27 . . . .1d4+ can be met by 28 :xd4.

1 82

Uncompromising Chess

24 25

gxfS lhfS

having evidently discovered some deficiencies in my handling of the Makogonov Variation, which I had been employing in recent tournaments.

3 4

Now White obtains the maximum price for the pin on the f6 kn ight. 25 e3 26 tDxf6+ l:(xf6 27 l:( fd S ! The final stroke, completing the manoeuvre begun with 2 1 �b3.

27 28 29 30

31

l:(xd7

b5 'it'e8 axbS e2

lDc3 e4

�g7 d6

h3 S Evoking pleasant memories of C acak 1 996. After all, my last success had been associated with this continuation. 0-0 S 6 iLgS lDbd7 At the Vidmar Memorial Tournament (Porloroz 1 997) Zdenko Kozul played 6 ... lDa6 against me. The game continued 7 JidJ e5 8 dS �e8 9 g4 c6 1 0 �ge2 �c5 I I �c2 cxdS 1 2 cxd5 as \J a3 a4, and here, instead of 1 4 tDg3 as played. 1 4 '1j'd2 should have been preferred. retaining some advantage for White. 7 eS tUf3 8 dS h6

9

�e3

10

tUd2

tUe5 as

11 lDe8 After the game Viktor Korchnoi inquired why B lack had not played 1 1 ...'i'e8 (with the idea of . . . a5-a4), and if I 2 b4 lDcxe4 ! ? 13 lDcxe4 lDxe4 1 4 lDxe4 f5 1 5 lDc3 axb4 1 6 axb4 l:(xa I I 7 �xa I e4 with unpleasant threats. All this is so, but if 1 6 lDb5 ! is interposed, then B lack does not have sufficient compensation for the sacri ficed piece. 12 13 14 15 16

b4 axb4 'i'xal 'i'a3 tUb3

axb4 th a I

1 2

d4 e4

18

The first surprise. Khalifman avoids his favourite Benko Gambit 2 ... c5 3 d5 b5,

23 24

�d2 g4

f3

24 gxfJ ! was the clearest way to win, as it leaves Black with no counterplay at all, for example: 24 ... lDh5 25 tUa7 lr'f7 26 'i'xc8 'i'xf3 27 llh2 tUef6 28 �e2 and wins (K.Neat).

tUxg4

24 A forced sacrifice.

tUa5

lDdf6

2S

tUa7

After 25 hxg4 'i'xg4 26 ltJe7 Black plays 26 ... tUf6 27 ll'lxc8 ll'lxe4, retaining possibilities of an attack. But instead of White's last move, better was 25 tUa.s lr'e7 26 "xc8 tUxf2 27 �f2 (or 27 l:(h2) 27 ... 'i'h4+ 28 'it>e3 lDf6 29 "e6, when Black's attack is not worth the two sacrificed pieces.

19

ll'lf6 g6

f4

tUb8?

[ ended 1 996 with an increase in my rating of 45 points. This gave hopes that I would again be invited to tournaments with the strongest players in the world participating.

King's Indian Defence E7 I

�b5!

Probably the decisive mistake. 16 ... b6! ? was correct, not fearing 1 7 c 5 bxc5 1 8 bxc5 �xc5 1 9 tUxc5 dxc5 20 i.xc5 �d6 2 I i.dJ when White has only a minimal advantage. The move played opens the 'sluices' for the white pieces. 17 c5 lDd7

This game, the last I played in 1 996, was one of the best in my chess career.

Belyavsky-Kbalifman Ubeda 1997

22

I f 22 ... lDxe4 there fol lows 23 lDxe4 fxe4 24 lDa7.

tUa6 fS

axbS �xbS �xe2 Black resigns

Game 69

1 83

Uncompromising Chess

a3 ! 11 I 1 �e2 would transpose into another variation of the King's Indian Defence, which after my game with Sher (Bern 1 995) did not particularly appeal to me. 1 1 a3 is the prelude to a more thematic plan: White immediately begins preparing the c4-c5 breakthrough.

e6!

bxc6?!

Careless. 1 9 ... b6 was a tougher defence, although after 20 lDb7 "e7 2 1 "a8 f4 22 �d2 �h8 23 "xc8 tUg7 24 tUd8 l:Cx.d8 25 'iib 7 White still has the advantage.

20 21 Defending capture on c8.

lDxc6 "a8 against

"d7 � b7 the threatened

25 26 27 28

hxg4 ll'le6 'i'd8? !

The immediate 28 � d l was simpler.

28 29

� f6 'i'b8

After 29 l:txh6+ �g8 3 0 'i'b8 ll'lg7 3 1 'fia7 lDhS the white rook could have been trapped.

29

h5

1 84

Uncompromising Chess

30 31 32

"a7 c;i;>dl �c2

i.g7 ll\f6

32 i.d3, defending the e4 pawn, is also good.

32 ll\ xe4 ? In time trouble Black overlooks White ' s concluding move. i.fS?! 33 ll\x e4 33 ... 'i'xd5 was more tenacious, when White has the winning manoeuvre 3 4 ll\g5+ � h 8 3 5 ll\e7 "xb5 3 6 ll\xg6+ �g8 37 'i'a2+ d5 38 "xd5+! 34 35

1 85

Uncompromising Chess

dxc4 7 ll\xc4 bS 8 ll\eS i.b7 9 e4 e6 1 0 0 c5 1 1 ll\xd7, and here my opponent imp­ roved with I I . . . lLlxd7! (in a previous gan1e with Korchnoi, Vienna 1 996, he played 1 l . .. ..xd7), and Black stood better. Recently, in a blindfold game at Monaco 1 997, Anand tried against Shirov an old idea of Tukmakov: 5 i.gS ll\e4 6 i.f4 ll\xc3 7 bxc3 dxc4 8 g3 b5 9 SLg2 i.b7 1 0 ll\eS f6 I I lLlxc4 (Black' s problems arise from the fact that i t is very di fficult to develop his knight and bring his king to safety) 1 1 . . . gS! (in this way Black gains a tempo, as after 1 2 i.xb8 bxc4 he recaptures on b8, simultaneously protec­ ting the bishop at b7; Tukmakov-Bagirov, USSR 1 983, went 1 1 . . .bxc4 1 2 l'tb l e5 1 3 ':'xb7 exf4 1 4 'i'a4 'i'c8 1 5 ttb6 5td6 1 6 "xc4 We7 1 7 ()....{) .tIa7 1 8 :fb l :d8 1 9 gxf4 with compensation for the material) 1 2 i.e3 bxc4 13 h4, and although Anand won this game I am not convinced that White's compensation is sufficient.

ll\d4! 14 �e3 ! ll\xe3 I S fxe3 ll\fS 1 6 b4! i.a7 1 7 l%ad I f6 1 8 i.xb7 i.xb7 19 l%d7+ �e8 20 l%xb7 fxeS 2 1 g4 ll\xe3 22 ll\d6+ Y>-Y> (Bareev-Shirov, Groningen 1 993). 8 9

ll\xd4

Itfc 1 lDxe4 ? !

18

'i'c7

9

A new move. The game Kamsky­ Bareev (Linares 1 994) continued 9 ... i.cS 1 0 i.e3 >!fie7 I I ll\c2 ()....{) 1 2 as ll\c6 1 3 ll\a4 i.xe3 1 4 ll\xe3 l%d8 I S 'i'e I ll\d4 1 6 ll\b6 .l:I.b8 with roughly equal chances.

12 13

Game 7 0

Playing to restrict the black pieces, whereas if 1 6 lLlxc4 B lack has 1 6 . . . Wb4. 16 17 18

as ll\c2 i.f4

ll\bd7 i. cs

It is useful to provoke a weakening of the dS square.

Belyavsky-lllescas Cordoba Ubeda 1997

lDa4 lDxe3 >!fid6!

>!fibS a5

With this move White risks losing all his opening gains. 1 8 ttxc4 was stronger, controlling the important b4 square.

10 11 12

i.d3 'i'xds ll\e7 Black resigns

cxd4

14 15 16

e5

i.e3

Ita6

Black misses an advantageous chance to exchange queens: 1 8 ...'i'b4 1 9 'i'xb4 a.xb4 20 lLlab6 l%xa I 2 1 Itxa I lLlxb6 22 lLlxb6 i.e6 23 i.xb7 Itb8 with a favourable ending. The attempt to avoid the exchange 1 9 "c7? lLle8 20 Wd8 lLld6 21 We7 lLlxc4 does not succeed, and after 22 Wxb4 axb4 23 ttxc4 ItaS 24 Itac I bS 25 l%xc8 bxa4 White remams a pawn down. 19

>!fie7

Wb4

Now White manages to drive away the queen and retain control of the central files. 20 21 22 23 24

lLle3 l%c4 Ite2 lDc3 Itdl

g6 Wd2 >!fid4 �g7

�

Slav Defence D I S 1 2 3 4

5

d4 c4 ll\f3 ll\c3 a4

dS c6

ll\f6 a6

White has tried in various ways to d isclose the drawbacks to Black's last move, but in the majority of cases without success. At the 1 996 Yerevan Olympiad against Shirov I played 5 lDe5 ll\bd7 6 i. f4

5 6 7 8

g3 i.g2

e6 dxc4 cS

�

After the exchange of queens 8 dxc5 Wxd I + 9 ll\xd I it is easier for Black to defend: 9 . . . ll\c6 (9 ...i.xc5 1 0 i.e3 i.b4+ I I i.d2 ll\c6 is also possible) 1 0 tOe3 i.xcS I I ll\xc4 �e7 12 ()....{) ll\d5 ! 1 3 lDfe5

24

'ifb4?

1 86

Uncompromising Chess

The domination of the white pieces is so great that obviously Black is simply bound to seek the exchange of queens. But on which square? After 24 . . .. b6 the black pieces are badly coord inated: 25 'i'xb6 ttJxb6 ( i f 25 .. Jlxb6 \Vhite builds u p the pressure with 26 ttJc4 lla6 27 ttJd6 ttJb6 28 ttJcb 5 a 4 29 ;Xc7 � d 7 3 0 ll x b 7 �xb5 3 1 ttJxb5 ttJc4 3 2 llc 1 and regains the pawn in a favourable situation) 26 liJb5 a4 27 lUd6 . Now 2 8 ttJxc8 is threatened, 27 . . . .:1a5 2 8 llc7 is good for White, and after 27 . . .a 3 2 8 bxa3 llxa3 2 9 llc5 he maintains a sl ight advantage. 24 .. :'i'c5 looks better: 25 ttJcd5 ( i f 2 5 ttJa4 �xc7 26 ;Xxc7 B lack has 2 6 . . . b5 27 tDc3 b4 28 ttJa4 lle6 29 �h3 llee8 30 �xd7 �xd7 31 lldxd7 ttJxd7 32 llxd7 lld8 3J lla7 lla8 34 llxa8 �:Xa8 35 ttJc4 Wf6, when in this ending the rook is quite active: 36 b3 We6 37 e4 f5 3 8 0 :d8 3 9 ttJc5+ �f6 40 �f2 ll d I ) 2 5 . . .lOxd5 2 6 lOxd5 'ifixc7 2 7 lOxc7 ( 2 7 llxc7 llc6 2 8 llxc6 bxc6 29 1Oe7 ttJb8 3 0 ttJxc8 llxc8 3 I lla I ttJd7 32 llxaS llc7 leads to further simplification; Black has good drawing chances, although his position is somewhat unpleasant) 27 . . .llb6 28 lldc I ttJf6 29 ttJa8 lla6 30 :'xc8 llxa8 3 1 �xb7 and Whi te regains h is pawn, retaining a positional advantage. However, White can play in the same way as after 24 ...'ilfb6 - 2 5 ttJcdS lOxd5 26 1Oxd5 'i'xc7 2 7 liJxc7.

25 26

lOcd5 tDxd5

28

28 29

tDe7

Loss of material for B lack is inevitable.

llcd2

lla8 e4?

This accelerates Black's defeat. ..t'h6 30 '1tc3+

31 32

lld4 ttJxc8?!

'tIfb5

Of course, this also wins the game, but after 32 llxe4 f6 33 :Id5 'lWb6 3 4 ttJxc8 l:axc8 3S :Ih4+ <1;g7 36 l:txd7+ White would have developed a mating attack.

32 33 34 35 36 37 38

llaxc8 'i'e3+ llxd7 l:td 1 llxd l 'i'xe4

�g7 ll c l +

nxd l+ .xb2 b5

ll b l

Black resigns Game 7 1

Belyavsky--Sbirov Belgrade 1997

lOxd5 'ilfb3

26 . . . 'i'd6 was the last opportunity to exchange the queens, but after 27 l:tdc 1 'i'xc7 28 l:txc7 l:ta8 (if 28 . . . l:tc6 29 l:t I xc6 bxc6 3 0 tOe7 lOb6 3 1 lOxc6 with a c lear advantage) 29 tOe7 liJb6 30 ll l cS White retains the initiative. 27 l:td3 'i'a4

1 87

Uncompromising Chess

Slav Defence 0 1 7

1

lOo

After studying the games of Shirov that I have on my database, I was justified in expecting the King's Indian Defence for three reasons: ( 1 ) In 1 997 Shirov had played the King's Indian more often than the Slav; (2) My poor play at the tournament in

Belgrade should have encouraged a more aggressive opening: before the last round he was two points ahead of me, and a win would have assured him of first place; (3) Recently in the King's Indian I have been choosing the variation 1 d4 lOf6 2 c4 g6 3 lOc3 �g7 4 e4 d6 5 h3 � 6 �g5. I myself do not believe that with 5 h3 White can count on an advantage, and I think that Shirov is not afraid of this set-up, which is aimed at less experienced experts on the opening. My very first move (usually I choose I d4) showed that the 5 h3, 6 �g5 variation in the King's Indian was not to be. For me it remains a mystery: whether Shirov had prepared for the variation stated, and on seeing that I had prepared something else, decided to play the Slav Defence, or whether the decision to play the variation that occurred in the game had been taken beforehand. If one assumes the latter, this signified that he was happy with a draw. 1 d5

2 3 4

d4 c4

c6 ttJf6 dxc4

1Oc3 A surprise. In recent times Shirov has successful ly upheld 4 ... a6, for example in his game with me at the 1 996 Yerevan Olympiad. The Botvinnik Variation also occurs more often in his games than 4 . . . dxc4. 5 a4 �f5

6

lOe5

A more pretentious move than the alternative 6 e3. Exploiting the absence of the black pawn from the centre, White wants to seize space by f2-0 and e2-e4, assuming that the slowness of this plan will be compensated by the fact that the pawn goes to e4 with gain of tempo, forcing Black to spend time on moving his bishop at f5 .

6

e6

7 8

0 e4

�b4

. � x e4 8 This sacrifice is quite in accordance with common sense: Black gains at least three pawns for the piece and exposes the white king to an attack.

9

fxe4

My attempt at a counter-sacri fice twenty years ago did not succeed: 9 lOxfl �xfl 1 0 fxe4 ttJxe4 I I 'ilfh5+ g6 1 2 .0+ ttJf6 \ 3 �d2 �xc3 14 bxc3 '1i'd5 1 5 'tIfg3 lObd7 16 �e2 liJe4 1 7 ().-4r �g8 1 8 •e3 liJxd2 19 'i'xd2 �g7 20 'i'f4 eS with ad­ vantage to Black (Belyavsky-Peresypkin, USSR 1 977).

9 10

lOxe4 �d2

It has long been known that after 1 0 '1'0 'iWxd4 I I 'iWxf7+ �d8 1 2 �g5+ ttJxg5 13 'iWxg7 �xc3+ 1 4 bxc3 "xc3+ 1 5 �e2 "c2+ the game perpetual check.

10 11

ends

in a draw by

"xd4 "xe4+

lOxe4

During the game I thought that S hirov had prepared an improvement in the less popular branch 1 1 . .�xd2+ 1 2 ttJxd2 'i'xe5+ 1 3 �e2 bS 14 � This line has been explored less, and therefore the possibility of a surprise is more likely. .

.

12

'We2

�xd2+

1 88

Uncompromising Chess 13

�x d2

'iifdS+

lhc2 lllxc2 2 6 .xc2 .eS 2 7 h 3 l:I.d8 2 8 l:I. d l l:I.xd l + 29 'Wxd l g 6 3 0 .d3 b4 3 1 .i.d I h5, which B lack can probably hold.

14 15

li:la6 lllxc4

0-0

In 1 997 Khalifman thought up a new idea for B lack: 1 5 ... b5 1 6 axb5 lbb4+ 1 7 � c 3 ( 1 7 �b3? ! cxbS 1 8 �xb4 bxc4 1 9 'ii'xc4 l:I.b8+ 2 0 �a3 .a5+, and with the loss of the b2 pawn White also loses chances of winning, Bareev-Khalifman, U beda 1 997) 17 ... cxbS,

This position has occurred in numerous games. I have played it with both White and B lack, and I can say that ( do not like it with either colour: in the space of one m inute both players make 13 moves, on Vv'h ich, if this position were occurring for the first time, two hours each would not suffice since, if White is relying only on common sense, it is hard for him to give up four pawns for a bishop and in so doing send his king off on a hazardous journey. Nevertheless, it turns out that one pawn is regained immediately, and the three remaining pawns do not fully compensate for the piece in the event of the queens being exchanged. Therefore Black tries either to avoid the exchange of queens, in order to attack the white king, or else he seeks a version of the endgame where the three pawns are not weaker than White ' s piece. Sometimes he succeeds, but more often he is obliged to endure difficulties i n the endgame.

14

�c2

The alternative is 1 4 �c3. B lack can try to exploit the impudence of the white king by 14 . . . b5 15 l:I.d l 'i'c5 16 axb5 cxb5 1 7 .e4 0--0 1 8 �c2 as 1 9 .xa8 .xe5 20 'i'b7 .c5 21 .e4 lbc6 22 .i.e2 lllb4+ 23 �b I c 3 24 l:I.c 1, although here too matters conclude in an ending after 24 . . . c2+ 2 5

1 89

Uncompromising Chess Later in the same tournament Salov against IIIescas p layed 20 �d2, removing his king to the safe wing, after which, by forcing the advance of B lack' s pawn to eS, he prevented him from setting up a fortress: 20 ... 0-0 2 1 'We5 l:I.ac8 22 .i.e2 .rr. fd8 23 l:I.c I lllb6+ 24 �e I l:I.d5 25 'We3 l:I.bS 26 l:I.c2 g6 27 g4 l:I.ccS 28 l:I.d2 llld S 29 'iife 5 l:I.b3 3 0 h4 h6 3 1 �f2 as 32 �f3 l:I.d3 33 l:I.e2 l:I.b3 34 'Wd6 lll b4 35 �e4 llld 3 + 36 �f1 .ll e5 37 'Wc7 lIcs 38 'Wd8+ �g7 39 1i'd4+ e5 40 'Wd6 llbbS 4 1 .i.xd3 and IIIescas resigned. 16 'iif fJ

In the event of 1 6 ... l:I.ab8 White plays 1 7 l:I.d I , since the d I square is defended by the queen, and after . . . lll b4+ he does not have to defend h i s rook with the king.

17 18 19

�bl �e2 l:I.cl

lllb4 l:I.ad8 .g5?!

This proves to be a waste of time, since the threat of 20 . . . 'i'g6 can be parried. 19 ... l:I.d4 was better.

20

'i'g4!

Now if 2o ...ifh6 there follows 21 lIa3 with the idea of l:I.h3, while after 20 ... 'iif f6 2 1 l:1.f1 the queen is driven back to e7.

20 21 22

l:I.33 'i'hS

'iifc5 lld4 'iifd5?

Even so, 22 ... 'WxhS was better, although White definitely has an advantage.

23 24 25

'iifx d5 tUd6 ne3

exd5 b6

in order after 1 8 lllb6 'iif c5 + 19 �b3 tUc6 ! (with the threat of . . . li:ld4+) to gain a draw by perpetual check with 20 .xbS .e3+ 2 1 �c2 (2 1 .i.d3 O-O ! ) 2 1 ...•f2+ 22 �b3 .e3+ (Shirov-Khalifrnan, Ter-Ape! 1 997). The correct way to play in the d iagram position 'was demonstrated at Dos Herrnanas 1 997. Topalov p l ayed 1 8 l:I.d l !, with the idea after 1 8 ...•c5 1 9 .e5 llld 5+ 20 l:I.xdS ! 'i'xdS 2 1 llld 6+ �f8 22 .xd5 exd5 23 �xb5 of gaining the advantage. Anand's imagination suggested to him the heroic decision 1 8 ... bxc4!? 1 9 llxd5 lllx d5+. Here Topalov went wrong and Anand's heroism was rewarded: 20 �c2 0--0 21 .e4 llfc 8 22 h4 :rcS 23 l:I.h3 l:I.ac8 24 l:I.a3 as 25 �c l h S ! , and Topalov was forced to admit that having a queen for a rook is sometimes insufficient for a win.

A new move. Previously only 1 6 .e5 had been played, against which Milov devised the good move 1 6 . . . l:I.ab8, both with the possible idea of . . . b7-bS. and defending the b7 pawn in the event of an endgame. After 1 6 . . . llab8 White has to play 1 7 �e2, if he does not want to agree to a draw after 1 7 l:I.d I lbb4+ 1 8 �c I lba2+. In a recent game Mikhalevski-Milov after 1 7 llc I f6 1 8 .xd5 cxd5 1 9 lbd6 llfd8 20 lllb S l:I.dc8+ 2 1 �b I l:I.xc I + 22 �xc I lbc5 23 �e2 a6 24 llld4 �f7 25 as l:I.c8 26 �b I llle4 27 lllb 3 f5 28 �f3 lllf6 29 llc I llxc l + 30 �c l liJd7 3 1 llld4 �e7 32 b4 �d6 3 3 �d2 g6 Black managed to hold on.

16

'i'c5

The white rook penetrates onto the 7th rank and Black begins to have problems over the defence of his king, since all four white pieces join the attack.

25 26 27 28

l:I.e7 l:I.O g4!

g6 a6 f5

lld8

After 28 ... fxg4 29 li:lf7 the threat o f lllh 6+ i s decisive. 28 . . . f4 is also not good

1 90

Uncompromising Chess

i n view of 29 g5, when the threat of .tg4e6 creates irresistible threats to the king. Black also fails to save the game after 28 .. Jlf6 29 Ild7 Ild2 30 .td l or 29 .. .lle6 30 gxf5 !lxe2 3 1 f6 with the i rresistible threat of lId8.

33 34 35

.txa6 liJxg4 .llxf4+

Index of Opponents

llxa4 llxa6

Akopian 1 44 Andersson 24 Azmaiparashvili 1 72 Bareev 85, 1 58 Bronstein 22 Chandler 90 Christiansen 1 4

29

Ile6

30

liJe8!

fxg4

Threatening 3 1 lIe7, 32 Ilg7+ and 3 3 :t f8 mate.

tUd3

30

A fter 30 .. Jle4 3 1 liJf6+ �f7 32 Ilxe4 dxe4 33 liJd5+ White wins another piece.

31 32

liJf6+ .lhc6

W f7 liJf4

Here we can take stock: Black's two pawns do not compensate for the piece. For White it only remains to make the time control at move forty before the fall of his flag.

We7 35 36 liJeS 36 ::'ff6 is more accurate. lld6 36 37 We6 .!:c7+ 38 liJd3 Black resigns

D1ugy 76 Dolmatov 1 2 1 Ehlvest 1 76 Gelfand 1 29, 1 37 Geller 64, 80 Gheorghiu 57 Gulko 1 02 Hjartarson 1 04 I\lescas Cordoba 1 84 Ivanchuk 1 4 1 Karpov 83, 93, 1 6 1 Kasparov 39, 60, 1 1 5 Khalifman 97, 1 82 Korchnoi 1 5 5 Kramnik 1 48 Larsen 52 Lautier 1 39 Ljubojevic 74 Lobron 1 6 5 Marjanovic I I Matulovic 9

Miles 66 Nikolic 1 74 Nunn 1 23 Petros ian 29 Petursson 1 00 Polugayevsky 3 6 Portisch 4 8 , 7 0 Psakhis 6 8 Rashkovsky 44 Ribli 26 Romanishin 3 1 , 1 46 Rublevsky 1 70 Salov 87, 1 3 5 Seirawan 96 Shirov 1 52, 1 86 Sm irin 1 09 Smyslov 78 Sokolov, 1. 1 59 Spassky 1 9 Strikovic 1 80 Taimanov 33 Tal 1 6 Timman 50, 1 1 2, 1 32 Tseshkovsky 42 Vaganian 1 06 Vyzhmanavin 1 23 Yudasin 54 Yusupov 1 1 8 Zviagintsev 1 67

Index of Openings

Benko Gambit A 5 8 - 57 Caro-Kann Defence B 19 - 52 Catalan Opening E04 - 44; E05 - 93 ; E l l - 1 27 Dutch Defence A80 - 1 74; A85 - 78; A90 - 85, 87 English Opening A28 - 1 48; A30 - 1 3 5 ; A40 - 1 4 French Defence C03 - 1 76 ; C07 - 1 70; C08 - 1 5 8; C I S - 1 46; C I 8 - 74 GIiinfeld Defence D85 - 1 59; D88 - 1 9; D97 - 1 72 King's Indian Defence E7 1 - 1 80, 1 82 ; E84 - 1 1 5 ; E86 - 1 3 2 ; En

-

1 67

Modem Benoni A 75 - 39 Nimzo-Indian Defence E32 - 1 06, 1 1 2, 1 65; E54 - 60 Petroff Defence C42 - 1 00 Queen's Gambit 03 1 - 64, \ 02; D35 - 83 ; 036 - 1 4 1 ; 037 - 48, 66, 1 29; 039 - 9 D40 - 1 6 ; D42 - 1 6 1 ; D45 - 1 5 5 ; D58 - 68 Queen's Gambit Accepted D20 - 70; D22 - 3 1 ; D24 - 76 Queen's Indian Defence E I 7 - 1 1 8 ; E I 9 - 29 Ruy Lopez C78 - 1 2 1 , 1 23 ; C9 1 - 97; C92 - 42; C95 - 80, 1 09

Scotch Game C45 - 1 39 Sicilian Defence B 3 3 - 1 52 ; B38 - 1 04; B46 - 3 3 ; B48 - 9; B6 1 - 54; B 8 4 - 26; B85 - 24; B90 - 1 1 , 22; B96 - 36; B97 - 50 Slav Defence D I O - 1 37; D I 4 - 96; D I 5 - 1 84; 0 1 7 - 1 86; D 1 8 - 144