The King-Hunt ·

John Nunn & William Cozens

Algebraic Classics Series Series Editor: Dr John Nunn GM

B. T. Batsford Ltd, London

The King-Hunt by W.Cozens was published by G. Bell and Sons in 1970 This selection of algebraicised games ©B. T. Batsford 1996' Additional material© John Nunn 1996

ISBN 0 7134 7945 0

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, by any means, without prior permission of the publisher.

Typeset by John Nunn and printed in Great Britain by Redwood Books, Trowbridge, Wilts for the publishers, B. T. Batsford Ltd, 4 Fitzhardinge Street, London WlH OAH

A BATSFORD CHESS BOOK Editorial Panel: Mark Dvoretsky, Jon Speelman Specialist Adviser: Dr John Nunn General Adviser: Raymond Keene OBE Commissioning Editor: Graham Burgess

Contents

Introduction 5

1 Hoffman-Petroff, Giuoco Piano, Warsaw 1844 7 2 Staunton-Amateur, Muzio Gambit, c. 1850 8 3 Matschego-Falkbeer, Kieseritzky Gambit, Vienna 1853 11 4 Max Lange-von Schierstedt, Scotch Gambit, c. 1856 12 5 Morphy-Amateur, Two Knights Defence, New Orleans 1858 15 6 Anderssen-Kolisch, Petroff Defence, Paris 1860 16 7 Steinitz-Rock, Evans Gambit, London 1863 19 8 Anderssen-Mayet, Evans Gambit, Breslau 1867 2 1 9 Steinitz-Anderssen, Vienna Game, Baden-Baden 1870 23

10 Riemann-Tarrasch, King's Gambit Declined, Breslau 1880 27 1 1 Ware-Weiss, Stonewall Attack, Vienna 1882 29 12 Dorrer-Chigorin, Steinitz Gambit, Correspondence 1884 32 13 Taubenhaus-Pollock, Allgaier Gambit, Nottingham 1886 34 14 Schlechter-Marco, Queen's Gambit Declined, Vienna 1898 37 15 Em. Lasker-Lee, Caro-Kann, London 1899 39 16 Kurz-Treybal, Salvio Gambit, Prague 1904 4 1 17 Chajes-Tartakower, King's Indian, Karlsbad 19 11 43 18 Ed. Lasker-Thomas, Dutch Defence, London 1912 47 19 Nirnzowitsch-Tarrasch, Queen's Gambit Declined,

St Petersburg 1914 49 20 Alekhine-Yates, King's Indian, Karlsbad 1928 5 1 2 1 Marshall-Bogoljubow, Queen's Gambit Declined, New York 1924 55 22 Richter-Kretschmar, Richter-Veresov Attack, Berlin 1925 57 23 Spielmann-S. Rubinstein, Queen's Gambit Declined, Vienna 1933 60 24 Botvinnik-Chekhover, Reti's Opening, Moscow 1935 62 25 Chekhover-Kasparian, King's Indian, Match 1936 66 26 Machate-Bogoljubow, Giuoco Piano, Bad Elster 1936 68 27 Ichim-Rosselli, Slav Defence, Munich Team Tournament 1936 71 28 Yanofsky-Dulanto, French Defence, Buenos Aires 1939 74 29 Szabo-Euwe, Queen's Gambit Accepted, Groningen 1946 76 30 Tartakower-Euwe, Giuoco Piano, Venice 1948 78 3 1 Smyslov-Florian, Grilnfeld Defence,

Moscow v Budapest Match 1949 81

32 Averbakh-Kotov, Old Indian, Zurich Ct 1953 83 33 Tal-Simagin, Pirc; Czech Variation, USSR Ch, Leningrad 1956 86 34 Botvinnik-Gligoric, English Opening, Moscow Olympiad 1956 88 35 D. Byrne-Fischer, Gronfeld Defence,

Rosenwald Tournament, New York 1956 91 36 Tal-Panno, Ruy Lopez, Portoroz Interzonal 1958 93 37 lvkov-R. Byrne, French Defence, Varna Olympiad 1962 96 38 Moser-Underwood, Sicilian, Correspondence 1962 100 39 Penrose-Popov, Sicilian, Enschede Zonal 1963 103 40 Stein-Korchnoi, Sicilian, Moscow Zonal 1964 106 4 1 Prins-Laurence, Sicilian, Lugano Olympiad 1968 108 42 Sporish-Sorokin, Sicilian, USSR 1968 1 1 1 43 Ostapenko-Yartsev, Sicilian, USSR 1969 1 14 44 Lukin-Vorotnikov, Ruy Lopez, USSR 1973 1 17 45 Th. Espig-Zinn, Modem Defence, East Germany 1973 121 46 0st Hansen-Nunn, Vienna, Teesside Student Olympiad 1974 125 47 Gusev-Zhuravlev, Sicilian, USSR 1976 129 48 Smagin-Bukhtin, Sicilian, USSR 1982 133 49 Kopylov-Korolev, Sicilian, Correspondence 1983 135 50 Kasparov-Portisch, Queen's Indian, Nik§ic 1983 140 5 1 Short-Ljubojevic, Sicilian, Amsterdam (Euwe Memorial) 1988 144 52 Shumiakina-Tazheva, Semi-Slav, USSR 1990 147 53 Rohde-Zsu. Polgar, English, New York 1992 150 54 Topalov-Bareev, French Defence, Linares 1994 153 55 Cifuentes-Zviagintsev, Semi-Slav, Wijk aan Zee Open 1995 156

Symbols

1-0 White wins 0-1 Black wins lf2-1f2 Draw ! ! Excellent move

Good move !? Interesting move ? ! Dubious move ? Bad move ?? Blunder + Check ++ Double check

Introduction

The original edition of this book, written by William Cozens, was published in 1970. At the time I was an aspiring young player spending long hours studying the nuances of the Sicilian Defence and the Benoni. Cozens's book was like a breath of fresh air. Reading this book transported me into a fantasy realm in which material was of little or no consequence. The only thing that mattered was to drive the enemy king into the open and pursue him to his death. I enjoyed the book enormously and played over every game, but finally I had to return to the comparative tedium of opening theory.

When Batsford started a program of algebraicising classic books, I imme­diately suggested The King-Hunt as a candidate. To my delight, this project came to fruition and you are holding the result in your hands. The original book has been converted to algebraic and re-edited. I then checked over the analysis, which in some cases has led to a substantial revision of the annota­tions. Four of the original 45 games were eliminated during this phase. Fi­nally, I added 14 new annotated games, taking the history of the king-hunt from 1968, where Cozens left it, up to the present day.

I selected the new king-hunts mainly on aesthetic grounds, although I did employ the purely formal criterion that the king had to reach at least the fifth rank during the hunt. In many king-hunts it is quite obvious that the king is going to be mated. This applies to some of the early examples in this book (the games are in chronological order), when the art of the king-hunt was still fairly primitive. I regard this as an artistic flaw, in that the excitement of the chase is severely diminished if the odds are so heavily stacked against the quarry that the result is a foregone conclusion. The hunter may face difficul­ties because of counterplay by the opponent-for example, if he is himself is under threat of mate in one the hunt often has to be conducted using only checks. However, the most common reason for uncertainty about the out­come is simply lack of attacking material. Extracting the king from its normal position usually involves sacrifices, and each investment of material reduces the possibilities available to the attacker. If, in addition, the defender's pieces control vital squares in the attacker's camp, administering the coup de grdce may prove unexpectedly troublesome.

Of course, opportunities to conduct a full-blooded king-hunt are rare in­deed, but if one arises in one of your games, be sure to make the most of it. A

6 Introduction

lifetime of warm memories awaits if you carry the hunt through to a success­ful conclusion, and a lifetime of vain regrets if you make a mess of it.

Four tips for aspiring king-hunters: 1 ) In most cases material sacrifice will be required to drive the enemy king

into the open. If the attack looks promising, don't be too lazy to calculate it to a conclusion, one way or the other. In quiet positions one can often rely on one's instinct, but there is no substitute for calculation in a king-hunt.

2) Unless you are under threat of immediate mate yourself, it may be bet­ter to play a quiet move than to keep checking. Cutting off the wandering king's escape route is often the best way to tighten the noose.

3) King-hunts can lead to a bewildering thicket of variations, yet the same mating patterns often arise in different lines. Try to reduce the burden of cal­culation by noting transpositions and spotting ways you can force the play into previously calculated variations. You may miss the quickest mate, but better a slower mate than no mate at all.

4) Don't over-sacrifice. The temptation to add the icing to the top of the cake may be hard to resist, but a switch to simple chess may be better than a dodgy 'brilliancy' . In game 26, for example, White's first sacrifice was cor­rect, but the second one only jeopardised the win.

I hope that readers will enjoy the 55 games in this book as much as I have, and will be inspired to pursue a few kings themselves.

Happy king-hunting!

Notation

Chess notation is written using a co­ordinate system. Thus the starred square is written 'c5 ' . A move con­sists of a figurine indicating the piece being moved, followed by the destination square. Thus the indi­cated knight move is written 'lDc 3' . The figurine i s omitted in the case of a pawn move, so the indicated pawn move isjust 'e4'. 'x' means a capture and'+' means a check.

John Nunn London, 1996

Hoffman - Petroff 7

Game l

One of the fathers of modern chess was Alexander Petroff (born 1794 ), the Russian after whom the defence 1 e4 e5 2 li:lf3 lLlf6 is named. He was an in­dependent thinker and never feared to disagree with the teachings of the great Philidor, the king of 1 8th-century chess. Not many of his games have sur­vived but among them is this evergreen which appropriately begins our col­lection of king-hunts.

Hoffman - Petroff Casual Game, Warsaw 1844

Giuoco Piano

1 e4 e5 2 m lLlc6 3 i.c4 i.c5 4 c3

This way of playing the opening is forte rather than piano. The genu­ine Piano development is 4 d3, an ex­ample of which is shown in Game 26.

4 ... lLlr6 If Black prefers solid defence he

can play 4 .. . i.b6 followed by 5 ... 1We7 as Euwe does in Game 30. The line chosen here attacks the white e­pawn instead.

5 d4 exd4 6 e5

The best move is 6 cxd4, as Greco had shown more than two hundred years before this game was played. To the present move Black has an ex­cellent reply.

6 •.• lLle4 But this isn't it, and 6 . . . lLlg4 is

even worse. The correct move is the counterattack 6 . . . d5 ! .

7 .td5 (D) 7 ... lLlxf2

B

Evidently this move had been Petroff's intention. King-hunts be­yond number have begun with the sacrifice of knight or bishop on f2 or f7. To question its soundness in the present case would be pernick­ety: this was before the days of tour­nament chess and t�e game was more important than the result.

8 � dxc3+ 9 �g3

Although not wrong it itself, this is an unnecessary risk. 9 �fl would have left him with a knight against three pawns, and prospects as good as Black's.

9 10 .txb2 1 1 lLlg5?

cxb2 lLle7

A mistake, although it requires brilliant play to exploit it. After 1 1

8 Game2

.i.e4 the position would be roughly equal.

1 1 ••• �dS At first sight 1 l ...lill5+ 12 �f4

.i.e3+ is very tempting, but White can coolly reply 13 �xf5 't!fxg5+ 14 �e4 c6 1 5 .i.xf7+, followed by 16 1Wf3+, leading to an unclear posi­tion.

12 �(D) With sardonic satisfaction, no

doubt, White returns the compli­ment of Black's 7th move. He is at­tacking queen, rook and knight, and if 12 . . . �xf7 White will get two pieces in return, with a winning posi­tion.

8

12 ••. 0-0!!

This completely unexpected re­source leaves White with nothing better than take the queen, after which his king will be hunted down by four black pieces and inevitably mated.

13 �d8 14 �bJ 15 e6

If 15 g4 Black has the exquisite 15 ... �f4#.

15 16 �g4 17 �e6

17 g3 is a slightly more tenacious defence, guarding f4 and h4. How­ever, Black can force mate in eight by 17 .. . �xd8+ 18 �g5:t'5+ 19 �g4 (or 19 �M l:f4+) l:f6+ 20 �h4 l:f4+ 21 �g5 �6+ 22 �h5 g6+ 23 �h6 l:h4+! 24 gxh4 .i.e3#. In this mating position, thirteen moves af­ter the diagram, Black is still virtu­ally a whole queen down.

After the move played Black mated in four by:

17 18 �g5 19 �g4 20 �bJ

Game 2

In the 1840s English chess was dominated by Howard Staunton (born 1810), a social lion but also a considerable scholar-not by any means only in the field of chess-who had read all the known literature of the game. At his peak he was the world's leading player at a time when the title of World Champion did not exist. His style in match play was, like that of many a master since, careful to the point of dullness; but he visited many provincial chess clubs and did great work for the game by exhibition play in a very different style.

Staunton -Amateur 9

Here is a Muzio Gambit, typical of the time. This obsolete opening re­mains the best standard example of advantages in space and time being more than adequate to overcome superiority of dead pieces.

Staunton - Amateur Exhibition Game, about 1850

Muzio Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 f4

Philidor had laid down the princi­ple that 2llJf3 was inferior because it obstructed the f-pawn. The corre­sponding principle on the queenside is still generally accepted today, but it is a matter of experience that the King's Gambit leads to so much tac­tical skirmishing that positional con­siderations take second place, and almost all masters have preferred 2 llJf3 throughout the 20th century. Akiba Rubinstein was a notable ex­ception.

2 ... exf4 Game 10 features the declined

form of the King's Gambit. 3 M g5

This is the classical method of holding on to the pawn. Much of the romance of the opening has been de­stroyed by the modem defences 3 . . . d5 and 3 ... llJf6.

4 .i.c4 g4 5 0-0

Black has moved only pawns, and White can afford to sacrifice a piece as early as the fifth move. Centuries of analysis have never really refuted the Muzio Gambit. Instead of cas­tling White can offer the knight in two other ways: 5 lbc3 and 5 d4.

5 .•. gxf3 6 1i'xf3 1i'f6

Black's position is critical, even though he is a piece up. The queen move defends f7 and even threatens to win a second piece by . . . 1Wd4+. White replies with a pawn sacrifice, opening yet more lines.

7 e5! 1i'xe5 8 d3

Many games have been won at this point by 8 .i.xf7+ and 9 d4, but White's game is so strong that there is no need to try to force it in this way.

8 ... .i.h6 9 llJc3 c6?

Yet another Black pawn move, af­ter which his chances of survival are practically nil. His idea of restricting the c3-knight and preparing .. . d5 is far too leisurely. It was essential to block the e-file by 9 .. . lbe7, when modem theory considers the posi­tion to be roughly level.

10 .i.xf4 So as to meet 10 ... .i.xf4 by 1 1

l:.ae l . 10 11 �hl 12 he1+ 13 .:.e4

1i'd4+ .i.xf4 (D) lbe7

Much better than 13 1Wxf4, which would allow Black the exchange of queens.

13 1i'g7 14 1i'xf4

10 Game 2

w

Deliberately allowing the fork. When one has every piece in strong play and the opponent has virtually none, this sort of luxury is permissi­ble.

14 ... d5 Now Black's position is demol­

ished by a further double sacrifice. Though a rook and bishop ahead he is given no chance to move anything except his king.

15 i.xd5! 16 l:.xe7+! 17 ti)xd5+?

cxd5 �xe7

The first sign of faltering. White could have won by 17 "ii'c7+ i.d7 (or 1 7 . . . �e6 1 8 lbb5) 18 lbxd5+ �e6 1 9 l:.e 1 + �f5 (or 1 9 . . . �xd5 20 c4+ �d4 21 Wd6#) 20 "ii'f4+ �g6 21 "ii'g3+ �h6 22 'it"h4+ �g6 23 lbe7#.

17 ... �e6 Relatively best, since 17 . . . �f8

would be followed by 1 8 "ii'd6+ �g8 19 lbe7+ �f8 20 "ii'd8#.

18 'it"e4+? Now White is no longer winning.

The far from obvious line 18 lbf6! �e7 19 W"c7+ �e6 20 lbe4! would still have been decisive.

18 ... �d7?

Had the black queen interposed she would have been lost for nothing after 19 l:.f6+, but 18.. .�d6! 19 'it"e7+ �xd5 20 l:.f6 i.e6 21 l:txe6 fxe6 22 Wxg7 lbc6 would have been slightly better for Black.

w

19 'it"e7+ �c6 (D)

20 'it"c7+? Once again White misses the win:

20 lDb4+! �b6 (20 . . . �b5 21 a4+ �b6 22 "ii'd6+ lbc6 23 lbdS+ mates in a few moves) 21 l:.f6+ 'li"xf6 22 "ii'xf6+ lbc6 23 'it'xb8 lbxb4 24 Wd4+ �b5 25 W"c4+ �a5 26 'tlkc5+ b5 27 a3, picking up the knight.

20 •.• �xd5 Not 20 . . . �b5 2 1 Wc4+ �a5 22

'it"b4+ �a6 23 "ii'a4#. 21 c4+ �d4??

An awful blunder allowing White to mate in four. After the correct move 2 1 . . . �e6, the only question is whether White has sufficient attack to force a draw. It is hard to answer this definitely, but I see no guaran­teed draw after 22 d4 (threatening d5#) W"xd4 (22 . . . lbd7 forces an im­mediate draw after 23 l:.e 1 + �f6 24 'it"f4+ �g6 25 Wg3+) 23 Wxf7+

�d6 24 .:tf6+ �c5 25 1i'e7+ �xc4 26 b3+ (26 'ii'e2+ �c5 27 'ii'e7+ �b5 28 'ii'e2+ �a5 29 1i'el+ �a4 evades White's checks) �d3 ! (not 26 . . . �b5?? 27 a4+ �a5 28 'ii'el+ 'ii'b4 29 1i'e5+ b5 30 'ii'c7#) 27 lXf3+ �d2 and the checks are running out. White's problem is that he must do more than win Black's queen for his rook.

Matschego - Falkbeer 11

22 'ii'd6+ �e3 23 'i'f4+ �e2

Or 23 . . . �xd3 24 .:tdl+ and 25 'iWd2#.

24 .:t'l+ �e1 25 'i'd2#

This pursuit of the king right across the board to the eighth rank recurs many times in the course of this book.

Game 3

Ernest Falkbeer (born 1829) is, like Petroff, remembered for a defence which is still played today: 1 e4 e5 2 f4 d5. He was a Hungarian but lived for many years in England. The following game, in which he does not employ the Falk­beer Counter-Gambit, shows him trifling with weak opposition; but the breathless nine-move chase, introduced by a queen sacrifice, is far too good a king-hunt to be omitted.

Matschego - Falkbeer Casual Game, Vienna 1853

Kieseritzky Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 lDf3 g5 4 h4

4 �c4, as played in Game 2, al­

lows Black a free choice between pushing on with 4 . . . g4 or setting up a pawn chain with the moves . . . �g7 and . . . h6. The present move, by con­trast, forces Black's hand.

4 •.. g4 5 lDe5

This is the Kieseritzky Gambit. One alternative is the Allgaier Gam­bit 5 lDg5, when White is committed to the sacrifice of the knight since it

has no retreat. An example is shown in Game 13.

5 ••• lDf6 6 �3

A developing move, but not a good one, for the knight on e5 will now be driven backwards to a poor square. 6 d4 is better; another supe­rior move would be 6 �c4 attacking f7.

6 d6 7 �4 �e7 s d4 lDh5

Black defends his front f-pawn, attacks the h4-pawn, and opens what is in fact nothing less than a mating attack.

9 �e2 10 �d2 11 �d3

12 Game 4

Apparently the only way to avoid a disastrous loss of material after 1 l ...f3+.

11 .•. lDc6 Black conjures up another deadly

threat: 12 ... .!Llb4+ 13 Wd2 f3+ 14 lLle3 .i.f2.

12 a3 .i.fl (D) Objectively speaking, this plan is

wrong, since Black has a simple win by 12 . . . f5, ripping through White's pawn centre to get at his king.

w

13 lbd5 .i.xd4 14 lL!xc7+ Wd8 15 lL!d5

White decides to recentralise his knight. It would have been better to try taking the rook, but after 15 .!L!xa8 dS! 16 c3 dxc4+ 17 Wc2.!Llg3 Black still has a very dangerous in­itiative.

15 ... r5 The right idea.

B

16 l'illld6 fxe4+ 17 Wc4 (D)

Trying to save his knight-but unsuccessfully !

17 ... 'iixd5+!! Of course, White can also resign

after 17 . . . .i.e6, but there is never anything wrong with a forced mate ! The white king is drawn into the cor­don of black pieces, and the whole of the nine-move king-hunt runs like clockwork. Every white move is ab­solutely forced. It might almost be a composed ending in the style of the period.

18 Wxd5 19 Wc4 20 Wb5 21 Wa4 22 .!L!xb5 23 Wxb5 24 Wxc6 25 Wd6

.!L!f6+ .i.e6+ a6+ b5+ axb5+ l:a5+ .i.d5+ lbe8#

Game 4

Yet another 19th-century master whose name is immortalised by an opening is Max Lange (born 1832). His famous attack, which can arise in half a dozen

Max Lange - V on Schierstedt 13

different ways (by transposition), kept the analysts busy for half a century. He was a very strong player, a match for most of his contemporary masters. The following game, however, is played against an amateur and Max Lange gives full rein to his imagination.

Max Lange - V on Schierstedt Exhibition Game, about 1856

Scotch Gambit

1 e4 eS 2 rn lbc6 3 d4 exd4 4 .ibS

If White does not wish to play 4 lt:lxd4 the usual moves are 4 .ic4 and 4 c3. The text move produces a crude sort of Ruy Lopez. By 4 . . . lt:lf6 Black could transpose into the Berlin De­fence, but his chosen line is probably better.

4 .tcS S 0-0 lt:lge7 6 lt:lbd2

Players of this line often try 6 lt:lg5 here, threatening to sacrifice on f7 and then pick up the loose bishop by 'ifh5+. Max Lange prefers to de­velop the other knight, but plays the same combination a few moves later.

6 dS 7 exdS 'ifxdS 8 .ic4 1i'd8?

Too passive. The queen should have moved to f5 or h5.

9 lt:lgs lt:les 9 . . . 0-0 was out of the question be­

cause of 10 'ifh5, but now White re­gains the gambit pawn, leaving the black king exposed.

10 lfJxrT 11 .ixf7+

12 'ifhS+ g6 13 'ifxcS

Material is equal. Black has the queenside pawn majority, but what carries more weight is the difference between the two king positions, es­pecially given the presence of bish­ops of opposite colours.

13 lbc6 14 lt:lf3 l:.e8 15 .ih6

With this move White makes the corner uninhabitable for Black's king. He threatens 16 lt:lg5+ after which 16 .. .'�g8 would lose outright to 17 'ifc4+. The opposite-coloured bishops, as usual, strongly favour the attacker.

15 ... .ifS 16 :aet?!

A very strange move, because there is no reason why White should not play 16 lt:lg5+ �f6 17 lt:lxh7+ �f7, and only then 1 8 l:.ae 1, reach­ing positions similar to the game, but with an extra pawn.

16 'ifd7 17 'ifc4+ .ie6 18 lt:lgS+ �6 19 'ii'e2

This looks like deliberate provo­cation, in full expectation of Black's next move. In fact, 19 'ifc5 ! would have been stronger.

19 ••.

As anticipated. .i.g4 (D)

14 Game 4

w

20 0!? The idea of sacrificing the queen

in order to open the f-file is beauti­fully conceived but objectively not the best.

20 ••. l:r.xe2 Black correctly accepts the sacri­

fice. 20 . . . .i.f5 would have forced White to find another way to make progress, and then he might have hit on the strongest line: 21 tbe4+ �fl 22 'ii'c4+ .i.e6 23 tt)g5+ �f6 24 'ii'c5 ! with a very dangerous attack.

The rest of the game is fascinat­ing to watch. The four white pieces cordon off the black king and with relentless subtlety shepherd him across the board towards a2. One intriguing feature of the play is that Max Lange makes no fewer than five non-checking moves during his mat­ing attack--one of them an elegant knight sacrifice.

21 fxg4+ �e5 There is no safe route backwards

for the king. 22 l:r.xe2+ �d5

22 . . . �d6 loses the queen after 23 �+ and 24 tt)f6+.

23 �

Threatening to fork the king and queen.

23 ...

24 a4! �c4

Cutting off escape via b5. Now Black tries in vain to get away to a5.

24 'ii'xg4 25 b3+ �b4 26 .i.d2+ �a3 27 M! (D)

Threatening 28 l:r.a1 + with the twin sequels 28 . . . �b2 29 l:r.a2# or 28 . . . �b4 29 �#. At the same time he defends the rook on e2. If Black takes the knight, White brings a bishop to c3 instead and the net is drawn tight.

8

27 ..• dxc3? This leads to instant death. Black

had two reasonable defensive tries: 1) 27 . . . �b2 28 h3 'ii'xe2 (forced,

because if the queen is not attack­ing e2, White mates by 29 l:r.b1+ �xc2 30 .i.el + �d3 3 l l:r.dl#; thus 28 . . . 'ii'h5 loses to 29 g4 !) 29 tt)xe2 �xc2 30 .i.g5 ! and, while White un­doubtedly has the advantage, this position is by no means a sure win. Black has two pawns for the piece,

his king is active and the d-pawn is dangerous.

2) 27 . . .'�b4 ! and it is doubtful if White has anything better than to re­peat moves.

28 .i.xc3 tDb4 Still Black fmds an answer to the

threat of 29 :tal#.

Morphy -Amateur 15

29 lh1+ 30 l:xa2+! 31 l:e1

� �xa2 1-0

For now :tal# is inevitable. Com­pare Game 39 in which, a century later, Popov's king found itself in a very similar situation against Pen­rose.

Game S

Paul Morphy (born 1837) is at once the most glamorous and one of the most baffling figures in the whole history of chess. The story is well known: his prodigious powers as a teenager; his defeat of all corners in Europe and Amer­ica by the age of21; his subsequent horror of the taint of professionalism; his eventual revulsion from chess and his abandonment of it when he was about 30; then the shadows closing in upon his last fifteen years up to his death at the age of 47.

Almost the whole of Morphy's serious chess is to be found in one tourna­ment (New York 1857) and two major matches (against Harrwitz and An­derssen) and it is here that one must look in making any attempt to assess his stature as what would now be called a grandmaster. But his fame rests almost equally upon some three hundred other encounters-exhibition games, most of them played blindfold-odds games and miscellaneous friendlies. We se­lect an odds game-a mere trifle.

Morphy-Amateur O dds Game, New Orleans 1858

Two Knights Defence First the rook on al is removed from the board. Then play begins:

1 e4 2 ffi 3 ..tc4 4 tDgS 5 exdS

eS lbc6 lUt'6 d5 �dS?

A well-known mistake, allowing the Fegatello sacrifice which was fa­miliar many years before Morphy's

day. Here Black has various play­able moves, for example 5 . . . tDa5, 5 . . . �4 or 5 .. . b5.

6 tDxrT Theory (with the rook on al !) rec­

ommends 6 d4, but in an odds game Morphy plays the most forcing line.

6 ... hn 7 'i'f3+ �e6

The whole point of the variation is that this king move is Black's only way of preventing a complete disas­ter by losing the knight on d5, so a king-hunt is already in full swing. It

16 Game 6

does not often end as decisively nor as prettily as in the present case.

8 lbc3 �4? The best way of making a real

fight of it would have been 8 ... tDb4 9 'ife4 c6 10 a3 �6 1 1 d4 �7 etc.

9 i.xdS+ �d6 10 'iff7!

With the attractive threat of 1 1 �#.

10 ..•

1 1 i.xe6 i.e6 �e6 (D)

Black has contrived-perhaps un­wisely-to exchange off a pair of bishops, on the principle that this gives added weight to his rook odds. But he will never get round to using his odds; the rest of the game is head­long flight.

12 lLle4+ �dS

w

13 c4+! �e4 14 'ifxe6 'ifd4 15 'ii'g4+ �d3 16 'ife2+ �cl 17 d3+ �cl 18 0-0#!

Compare with Game 4 1 in which White resigns just in time to avoid the move ... 0-0-0#.

Game 6

Adolf Anderssen (born 18 18) was undoubtedly one of the game's greatest natural players. In his insatiable zest for play and in creative imagination he is to be compared only with Labourdonnais before him and with Alekhine, Tal and Kasparov since. He was a Breslau mathematician, and the wonder is that he remained very little known outside his own country until he was over 40. In those days there was no official World Championship but there is no doubt that after Morphy's withdrawal from chess, Anderssen was the strongest player in the world. In 1 866 he narrowly lost a match to Steinitz, but An­derssen came back to win the tournament at Baden-Baden in 1 870 (see game 9), the best result of his whole career.

Over seven hundred of Anderssen's games are on record and to play through them leaves the brain reeling at his inexhaustible fertility. His oppo­nent in the following game-Baron Kolisch-was, unlike tbe losers of our five games so far, himself of master strength. The game was one of several played during Anderssen's visit to Paris in April, 1860. It develops into a gi­gantic king-hunt, with the black king hounded over seven files and all the eight ranks.

Anderssen - Kolisch Casual Game, Paris 1860

Petroff Defence

1 e4 eS 2 rn ltlf'6

This counter-attack is a solid way of avoiding the Ruy Lopez.

3 �eS 1fe7? Immediately regaining the pawn

with 3 . .. lilxe4 is bad, leaving Black in difficulty after 4 1i'e2. The stand­ard continuation is 3 . . . d6 and then 4 . . . lilxe4. Kolisch's move results in Black losing time with his queen.

4 rn 1Wxe4+ 5 i.e2 i.cS 6 0-0 0-0 7 d4 i.b6 8 c4 c6 9 M 1We7

Black is well behind in develop­ment and White's next move puts him in real difficulty.

10 i.gS A highly unpleasant pin. Black

adopts a radical solution of the prob­lem.

10 h6 11 i.h4 g5 12 i.g3

In addition to his backward devel­opment Black now has a seriously weakened kingside. There is bound to be trouble in store.

12 ... dS A predictable reaction from the

aggressive Kolisch. He strikes out bravely for freedom but in his dan­gerous situation the cautious 12 . . . d6 might have been more prudent.

Anderssen - Ko lisch 17

13 lile5 14 cxdS 15 �dS 16 f4

lilbd7 �dS cxdS

Anderssen is in his element: he breaks up the black kingside still more and opens a file for his own rooks. But there is a definite risk involved in leaving his d4-pawn pinned.

16 gxf4 17 �d7

He must make this exchange, for 17 .i.xf4 loses a piece: 17 . . . lilxe5 18 .i.xe5 1Wxe5. Most masters would have unpinned the d-pawn by 16 'ith1 before embarking on f4, but Anderssen was never happier than when juggling with disaster.

17 ••• fxg3 18 ltlf'6+!

The enemy king was always An­derssen's priority. In any case 18 lilxf8 would have been not only petty but decidedly bad, for Kolisch would not have missed the opportu­nity of playing 1 8 . . . 1Wh4 ! 19 h3 i.xd4+ 20 'ith1 .i.xh3 !-knockout!

18 .•• 'itg7 19 1Wd3

The first mating threat appears. 19 ••. l:.h8 (D) 20 .i.hS

White steps up the pressure and clears the e-file for possible rook ac­tion. 20 lL!xd5 would again have al­lowed the annoying 20 . . . 1Wh4; this is presumably why Kolisch deliber­ately refrained from 19 . . . gxh2+.

20 ..te6 21 1Wxg3+ 'itf8

18 Game 6

w

22 .eS Typical of Anderssen's style was

his subtle use of prepared batteries. In the present position the knight on f6 is screening potential attacks against f7 and h8, so there is a deadly threat of 23 lLlxd5.

22 .•• _.c7 23 _.e3?!

Surprisingly, Anderssen retreats just when he could have won the game with a pretty combination: 23 lLld7+ �g8 24 J.xf7+ ! J.xf7 25 _.e7 l:th7 (25 . . . J.xd4+ 26 �h l only introduces the extra threat of lLlf6+ winning the queen) 26 lLlf6+ �h8 27 _.xc7 J.xc7 28 �xh7 with a deci­sive material advantage.

23 ..• .d6 24 :C4

Given the initiative and some tar­gets to shoot at, the most complex winning schemes proliferated in Anderssen's brain. Here he is not only doubling rooks but also pre­paring 'ii'g3 with another subtle bat­tery aimed at the undefended black queen. He was a consistently far-see­ing player in the tactical rather than the strategic sense.

24 25 :an 26 .g3!

l:tc8 l:tc7

Anderssen now threatens to open his two batteries with successive sacrifices, thus: 27 �h7+ l:txh7 28 l:txf7+ J.xf7 29 'ii'xd6+. Kolisch ap­parently missed the threat; in any case the white attack is bound to win through before long.

26 l:tc4 27 l0117+! �e8 28 _.g7 (D)

Attacking the rook, putting a fourth attack on the f-pawn, and at the same time casually defending his own d-pawn. Something has to go.

8

28 •••

29 _.xb7 l:txb7 l:xd4

Black also lays a battery, hope­fully threatening to win both rooks by 30 . . . l:txf4+. But now comes the king-hunt.

30 J.xf7+ 31 -.xn+ 32 .g8+ 33 :t7+ 34 _.e8+ 35 �bl

J.xf7 �d8 �c7 �c6 �c5 l:tb4

Kolisch defiantly continues with a mating threat of his own. But now the pursuit is resumed in earnest and a blaze of eleven consecutive checks brings the game to an end.

36 .l:.cl + .l:.c4 37 b4+ 'it>xb4

Or 37 . . . 'it>d4 38 .l:.dl + 'i!tc3 39 .l:.f3+, mating in three more moves.

38 .l:.b 1 + 'it>a3 39 .l:.fJ+ 'ittxa2

Steinitz - Rock 19

No craven resignations in those days; they were game to the end. By now the moves were probably com­ing at table-tennis tempo.

40 1i'e2+! 'it>xb1 41 .:. b3+ 'it> cl 42 1i'e1+ 'it>c2 43 1i'b 1 + 'it>d2 44 .l:.d3+ 'it>e2 45 1i'd1+ 'it>fl 46 .l:.fJ#

Game 7

Wilhelm Steinitz (born 1836) bestrode the second half of the 19th century like a colossus. After beating the ageing Anderssen 8-6 in a match which had gone 4-all, 5-all and 6-all, he was regarded as World Champion and defied all challengers for twenty-eight years, yielding at last, at the age of 58, to Emanuel Lasker, thirty-two years his junior. Steinitz found chess a happy-go­lucky game to be played by the light of nature; he left it a thorough-going sci­ence.

What is not so well remembered today is the fact that he had his own ro­mantic period as a young man in Vienna, where he gloried in the name of 'The Austrian Morphy' . The following game was played in an exhibition in Lon­don and nothing annoyed Steinitz more than its attribution to Morphy by sev­eral chess writers.

Steinitz - Rock Exhibition Game, London 1863

Evans Gambit

1 e4 eS 2 lLlfJ lLlc6 3 ..1c4 ..tcs 4 b4

For sixty or seventy years this gambit held its own in first-class master practice and produced brilli­ancies galore, White winning the short games and Black the long ones.

In the end it was the cold appraisal of Lasker which evolved a simple treatment of the defence which was tantamount to a refutation-until Kasparov's successful revival in the 1990s!

4 s c3 6 0-0 7 ..1a3

..txb4 ..tas lLlf6

In the Evans Gambit the stand­ard attacking moves d4, 0-0, ..1a3, 1i'b3, etc., can be transposed in a

20 Game 7

bewildering number of ways, pro­viding plenty of chances for Black to go wrong. 7 .ta3, as played here by Steinitz, is less forcing than 7 d4 but it succeeds brilliantly because Black allows his king to be caught in the centre.

7 ... .tb6? 7 . . . d6, to be followed by . . . 0-0,

should give Black a safe game. 8 d4 exd4 9 'iib3 dS?

10 exdS � When White plays 'ii'b3 in the

Evans Black always likes to be able to counter with . . . ltla5, hoping to destroy the light-squared bishop. No doubt it was with this in mind that Black vacated the square with 7 . . . i.b6. But this time Steinitz is ready with an astonishing answer.

11 l:el+ Black's plan has more than one

refutation: the simple 1 1 i.b5+ c6 1 2 dxc6 bxc6 1 3 l:e1+ .te6 14 l:xe6+ would also have forced res­ignation.

1 1 ... .te6 (D) This must have been Black's in­

tention, for if 12 it'b4 Black escapes with 12 . . . ltlxc4 13 'ii'xc4 'ii'xd5. In

any case it is Black's only chance; the alternative 1 1 . . .�d7 is hopeless: 12ltle5+ �e8 13 i.b5+ c6 14 dxc6. However, as in many chess brillian­cies, someone has been taking too much for granted.

12 dxe6!! A game won by Staunton from

Cochrane some twenty years before (which may have been known to

w

Steinitz) ran, after White's 6 0-0 above: 6 . . . .tb6 7 .ta3 d6 8 d4 exd4 9 cxd4 ltlf6 10 e5 dxe5 1 1 'ii'b3 'ii'd7 12 dxe5 ltla5 13 exf6 ! ! lLlxb3 14 l:e1+ �d8 15 .te7+ �e8 16 fxg7 l:g8 17 i.f6+ 'ii'e6 1 8 .txe6 .txe6 19 axb3 with an extra piece for White. The sacrifice as played by Steinitz leads to an even more sum-mary execution.

12 ltlxb3 13 ext7++ �d7 14 .te6+ �c6 IS lLleS+ �bS 16 i.c4+ �aS 17 .tb4+ �a4 18 axb3#

Some sources claim that this game was played at queen's rook odds. Curiously enough this would make no difference, for Steinitz does not get round to developing even his queen's knight, and although the rook does give check on the last move it would still be mate even if the rook were not there. One sus­pects that some journalist, noticing this, introduced the 'queen's rook odds' in an attempt to gild what is already a perfect lily as it stands.

Other sources give the game as hav­ing been played at queen's knight odds; still the mate holds good. It

Anderssen - M ayet 21

only remains for someone to suggest odds of queen's rook and queen's knight. It would still be mate!

Game S

We revert now to Anderssen and one of his greatest chess friends-Cad Mayet (born 1 8 10)-who was one of the group of seven Berlin masters known as 'The Pleiades' . Anderssen and Mayet used to visit one another in Berlin and Breslau and they must have played hundreds of light-hearted games together. Their last meeting was in Breslau in August, 1867, and the following game is possibly the last they ever played. It is an exhibition of glo­rious skittles, not to be judged by the standards of tournament chess. At the finish Mayet is three pieces up, with his king mated on c 1 .

Anderssen - Mayet Casual Game, Breslau 1867

Evans Gambit

1 e4 2 lill3 3 ..tc4 4 b4 5 c3

e5 lbc6 ..tcS ..txb4 ..tf8

This is an experiment, of course, and Anderssen is only too happy to accept the challenge to refute it. Ste­initz also tried out this move-as one might expect-as well as 5 . . . ..te7 and 5 . .. ..td6 in his continual attempts to improve on the usual lines of de­fence.

6 d4 exd4 7 o-o .!Das

As in the previous game, Black adopts this method of trying to re­move the bishop from its strong di­agonal, and again he receives an unpleasant reply, though in the pre­sent case he must surely have been half expecting it from Anderssen.

8 ..txt7+ A move which Anderssen would

make without a second thought. Ob­jectively speaking, it is probably un­sound, but it creates many practical difficulties for Black.

8 9 tDtS+

10 cxd4 11 'ii'a4 12 w 13 f4

rbr7 �e7 'ii'e8 b6 c6

White has an enormous lead in development, but opening lines is by no means easy.

13 ... d6 14 ..ta3 �d8

A casual spectator at this point might have been excused for think­ing that Black had set up his king and queen on the wrong squares to begin the game. Seventy years later a similar state of affairs arose as follows: (Vecsey-Nagy, Budapest 1 937) 1 c4 e5 2 lbc3 f5 3 e4 �f6 4 exfS d6 5 g4 hS 6 g5 �g8 7 ..th3

22 Game 8

'ii'xgS 8 d4 'ii'f6 9 �dS 'ii't7 10 �f3 �d8 1 1 �gS 'ii'e8 (D)

w

Compare this position with An­derssen-Mayet: it is even more re­markable. Although this game is by no means a king-hunt its finish is noteworthy: 12 dxeS "ifxeS+ 13 �fl �h6 14 �6+ ..ixe6 15 fxe6 W'e4 16 ..igS+ �c8 17 e7+ �g4 18 ..ixg4+ hxg4 19 'ii'xg4+ 'ii'xg4 20 e8'ii'#.

Back now to Anderssen-Mayet: 15 �f3 ..td7 16 l1ad1 ctrc7

The king is being hunted at long range and is already on the run.

17 d5! (D) White is still a clear bishop in ar­

rears, but no doubt quite happy. In order to have any chance, he must break open the position before Black can mobilise his dormant kingside pieces.

17 ..• c5 18 'iWc2 b5

When Black wins an Evans Gam­bit it is usually because of his queen­side pawn majority. The black pawns are potentially quite dangerous, and already he seems to be threatening

B

19 . . . b4, but this is a little risky. He should have taken the chance to de­velop a kingside piece.

19 e5 a6 On second thoughts Mayet de­

cides that his 'threat' of . . .b4 had bet­ter not be carried out! After 19 . . . b4 20 ..ixb4 ! cxb4 21 �bS+ �b6 22 �c7 ! l1c8 23 "iff2+ �c7 24 'iWxa7+ White's attack is very dangerous.

20 e6 ..ic8 The only piece which ventured

off the edge retires to base. 21 lbd4?!

White has worked up quite a dan­gerous initiative, but the impending . . . �c4 makes it hard for him to break through. The move played aims to activate the f3-knight, but it has a fatal tactical flaw. 2 1 �eS !? dxeS 22 �e4 might have been a bet­ter chance.

21 ... �b7? Had Black played 2 1 . . .cxd4, the

drastic sequel would have been 22 �xbS+ �b6 23 1Vc7+ �xbS 24 l1b1 + �a4 25 'ii'c2+ �xa3 26 1Vb2+ and 27 'ii'b4#. However, by playing 2 1 ...�4 ! Black would threaten both . . . �xa3 and . . . cxd4, thereby

winning another piece and probably the game. The move played is less clear-cut.

22 � lLlf6 Development at last!

23 .!lJg5 lbxd5 24 lLlr5 ..txe6

Black has been busily picking off pawns and now has a colossal ma­jority of 4-1 on the queenside, but he has also opened lines for White's pieces.

25 :ret ..txf5! Well played; by now May et must

have had hopes of turning the tables after all, for he is still a bishop and two pawns ahead.

26 11fxr5 .!LJe7 27 .!lJe6+ �b6?!

Black starts to go astray; after 27 . . . �b8 White would have had problems justifying his sacrifices.

28 l:xd6+! A stunning blow. If 28 . . . .!LJxd6,

White continues 29 'ii'xc5+ �a5 30 'ii'c3+ lt>b6 3 1 'ii'c7#! Why did these gorgeous opportunities always hap­pen to Anderssen?

28 ... �aS??

Anderssen - Mayet 23

Possibly shocked by the previous move, Black recklessly exposes his king. 28 . . . .!LJc6 29 ..txc5+ lLlxc5 30 'ii'xc5+ 'ili>b7 would still have fa­voured Black.

29 11fc2! lLlxd6 (D)

w

29 . . . .!LJc6 was the last chance, but Black can be forgiven for overlook­ing the next move, which forces mate in seven.

30 ..tb4+!! 31 11fc7+ 32 tbc5+ 33 11fa5+ 34 11txb4+ 35 l:r.e2+ 36 11fel#

cxb4 �a4 �a3 �b2 �c2 �cl

Game 9

All our examples so far have been casual or exhibition games. Tournament chess is made of sterner stuff and only occasionally produces the really big king-hunt; nevertheless most of the games to come are tournament games. The next is a historic one which played a decisive part in the great interna­tional congress at Baden-Baden in 1870. This was a double-round tourna­ment of nine heavyweights. Anderssen, now aged 52, scored his greatest triumph by winning it with a score of 1 1/16. When his last round game against Louis Paulsen--one of the greatest of all defensive players-began to

24 Game 9

look drawish, Anderssen cheerfully staked his chances of first prize on an in­tuitive sacrifice of the exchange, and won.

But what pleased him most, no doubt, was his cracking pair of wins against Steinitz, who had recently defeated him in match play for the World Champi­onship. Both games were very fine, but in the second one Steinitz was made to suffer as few World Champions have ever done. He had to watch helplessly while his king performed a lively dance over fourteen of the sixteen squares in his quarter of the board with the old assassin from Breslau shooting at his feet all the way.

Steinitz - Anderssen Baden -Baden 1870

Vienna Game

1 e4 eS 2 lDc3 i.cS

Black has considerable choice in the Vienna, White's second move be­ing less forcing than 2 �f3. After 2 . .. �c6 3 f4, many of the normal King's Gambit lines are playable. The most active defence is 2 . . . �f6, aiming at an early . . . d5. The theme of Anderssen's move is to play the solid . . . d6 without shutting in the bishop.

3 f4 d6 4 �f3 �6 5 i.c4 c6

Other moves commonly played here are 5 . . . 0-0 and 5 . . . �c6. An­derssen selects an elastic pawn for­mation, for which both he and Steinitz had a predilection. Steinitz commonly used it, for instance, on the white side of the Ruy Lopez.

6 fxeS Unnecessarily releasing the ten­

sion. He could have continued to build up with 6 d3.

6 dxeS 7 -.e2

He cannot win the pawn: 7 �xe5? 1Wd4.

7 ... 8 d3

�bd7 bS

Anderssen begins a big queenside advance, which leads eventually to a breakthrough in this sector, the white king being meanwhile unable to castle.

w

9 .ib3 10 a3 11 �1 12 i.a2 13 �3

14 �fS

aS �6 a4 0-0 i.a6 (D)

Steinitz has aggressive inten­tions of his own on the kingside but Anderssen keeps him too busy else­where.

14 15 u:b4 16 c3

b4! 1Wxb4+ 1WaS

Since he goes to b6 two moves later, he might very well have moved there direct; however, the tempo lost doesn't have a great deal of signifi­cance.

17 lL!gS l:.ad8 18 1Wf3 1Wb6 19 i.b1 a3?

White intended to step up the pressure on Black's weak a-pawn by .i.c2, but Black could have coun­tered this by 19 . . . 1Wb5 followed by ... lLlb6. Instead, Black panics and offers a piece sacrifice.

20 b4! Accepting the offer is best. but he

could also have played safe with 20 bxa3. If Black then continued with 20 .. .'tfb3, he could play 21 d4. How­ever, Steinitz tended to accept any sacrifice which was not obviously sound (and a few which were).

20 ••• i.xb4 The necessary consequence of the

previous move. 21 cxb4 1Wxb4+ 22 �e2

Since 22 i.d2 would be met by 22 . . . '1Vb2, the king's travels begin.

22 ••• a2! (D) The best practical chance of con­

fusing the issue. 23 i.d2!

Again the best move, gaining a useful tempo. 23 l:lxa2 'ti'xbl (not 23 ... lLlc5 losing to 24 .i.a3) 24 J:lxa6 lLlc5 25 J:lxc6 1Wa2+ 26 �1 1i'c2 27 J:lxc5 1Wxc5 28 �e2 also favours

Steinitz - Anderssen 25

w

White, but not 23 .i.xa2? �5 24 lLle7+ �h8 25 lL!xc6 1Wc3 26 .i.d2 i.xd3+ 27 �e3 'iVb2! with advan­tage to Black.

23 .•• 1Wbs 24 J:lxa2

Not bad, but a simpler line was 24 .i.xa2lLlb6 (24 . . . �5 25 i.c4 wins) 25 J:lhbl 'ti'xd3+ 26 'ti'xd3 i.xd3+ 27 �et i.xbl 28 J:lxbl returning some material in order to reach an ending which should be a fairly comfortable win for White.

24 ••. lLlcs The threats are mounting, and not

only against the d-pawn; Black may also drive away the knight by . . . h6 and then play . . . lL!fxe4. Steinitz de­cides on a policy which was to win or save many a difficult game for him later in his career-to return some of his winnings. Nevertheless, in this case it is a serious mistake. After 25 J:laS! 'ifb6 26 'ti'e3 ! Black's position collapses, since 26 . . . J:lxd3 loses to 27 .i.xd3 .i.xd3+ 28 1Wxd3! lt!xd3 29 lLle7+ �h8 30lbxf7+! and White forces mate.

25 J:lxa6? 1Wxa6 26 i.b4? (D)

26 Game 9

All part of the typical Steinitz de­fensive scheme. He intends to swap off the dangerous knight, but An­derssen seizes the opportunity to turn the tables. Simply 26 'W'g3 g6 27 ll:Je7+ �g7 28 ..i.c3 would have given White an enormous attack on the dark squares.

B

26 ... li:tb8!! Thus Anderssen finally achieves

his long-range object of outflanking the stranded king on the queenside and now, absolutely in his element, follows up the attack with blow after blow.

27 ..i.xc5 li:tb2+ 28 �e3 1Wa5!

With the threat of 29 . . . 'ii'd2# he now regains one piece.

29 li:td1 1Wxc5+ 30 d4 exd4+ 31 'M4

If 3 1 li:txd4, then Black mates in four: 3l. . .'ii'c1+ 32 �d3 1Wd2+ 33 �c4 1Wb4+ 34 �d3 1Wb3#. Or if 3 1 li:Jxd4, Black simply takes the other knight, winning easily.

31 h6! 32 ll:Jh3 liteS!

Threatening 33 . . . We5#. 33 Wd3 g5+ 34 � g4+ 35 �g3 li:txe4 36 •n (D)

36 lbxh6+ is useless, for after 36 . . . �f8 Black is threatening to play 37 . . . li:te3+.

B

36 •.• We5+ 37 �h4 gxh3+

By a neat piece of play Black has contrived to take the knight with check. White cannot reply 38 ..i.xe4 because of the reply 38 . . ."ti'xe4+ 39 �xh3 •g4#.

38 �3 li:tb3+ And now if 39 ..i.d3 Black wins

the knight by 39 . . . li:tf4!. 39 g3 li:tf4!

The same move is still playable. 40 li:Jxh6+ �f8 41 Wc4

Steinitz has somehow managed to conjure up a double threat of his own: 42 'ii'xf7# or 42 Wxb3. But his sufferings are not yet over.

41 ... li:th4+!! 42 �g2

If 42 �xh4, then 42 .. . 'ii'h5#.

42 43 �xh2 44 �h1 45 �g1

0-1

llxh2+! 1i'xg3+ 1i'h3+ llg3+

Riemann - Tarrasch 27

The end of the dance would have been 46 �f2 llg2+ 47 �e1 1i'g3+ 48 ..tn 1i'f2#-the final phase of the hunt was conducted under threat of mate in one.

Game 10

Another of the game's most famous players now appears as victim of the hunt. Tarrasch was in fact not yet twenty years of age. He reappears as the hunter in a famous chase in Game 19.

Fritz Riemann (born 1859) was only three years older than Tarrasch, who far outstripped him as a player in later years. In the present game, however, Riemann certainly shows to great advantage.

Riemann - Tarrasch Casual Game, Breslau 1880

King's Gambit Declined

1 e4 eS 2 f4 .tc5

This quiet way of declining the King's Gambit puts difficulties in the way of White's castling.

3 ll:lf3 d6 4 c3

Equally playable is 4 ll:lc3, a line in which White has the option of eliminating the black bishop by ll:la4.

4 ••• .tg4 5 .te2

At this point Marshall later intro­duced a complicated line beginning 5 fxe5 dxe5 6 1i'a4+.

5 6 .txf3 7 d3 8 1i'e2 9 rs

.txf3 lLlc6 lLlr6 0-0

This constricting advance is often used by White in the King's Gambit Declined and Vienna Opening. In the present case it would seem to achieve little, since Black has al­ready exchanged his light-squared bishop, but in fact it works out very well.

9 ••• h6 In later years Tarrasch would cer­

tainly have reacted immediately with 9 . . . d5, an advance which he never achieves in the present game.

10 g4! �7 11 h4! f6

Black is playing to prevent White from advancing g4-g5, but he does not long succeed.

12 b4! Riemann proceeds in masterly

fashion to gain ground on both sides of the board, leaving his king in the centre for the time being.

12 .tb6 13 a4

28 Game 10

It is most unusual to see a double outflanking manoeuvre carried out so early in the game. At move 13 White has already moved every pawn.

13 ••. a6 14 � 1i'd1 (D)

Encouraged by this removal of one guard from the square g5, Rie­mann now decides to sacrifice a pawn and then try for an immediate mating attack on the h-file.

w

15 g5! 16 hxg5 17 .i.xg5 18 .i.h5!

fxg5 lilxg5 hxg5

The attack is very strong. When this bishop goes to g6 there will be an immediate threat of .:.hS+ fol­lowed by 1i'h5+ and 1i'h7#. Black just manages to stave off the worst, helped by the fact that Riemann has not castled, and so has to spend a move mobilising his other rook.

18 �8! 19 .i.g6 lN7 20 0-0-0

It is hard to see why White did not first play a5, so as to remove the

pawn from the attack of Black's queen with gain of tempo.

20 ••• lDh6 When annotating the game a

dozen years later Tarrasch realised that this last defensive move was superfluous and that he could have played 20 . . . 1Wxa4 instead. He gives analysis to show that the black king could have weathered the storm and that when the immediate kingside threats had subsided he could have taken over the initiative; but this sort of thing is not so easy to see in the heat ofbattle�specially for a teen-ager.

21 1i'a2+ �h8 22 lDc4 .ta7 23 .:.d2 b5 (D)

At last Tarrasch finds time to be­gin a counter-action, but it comes too late: he is over-run.

w

24 .:.dh2!! 25 :X..6+! 26 :X..6+ 27 'W'hl!

bxc4 gxh6 �g8 1i'g7

Tarrasch pointed out that by in­terpolating 27 .. . .i.e3+ he could have given Riemann more trouble in the

later stages, as the g-pawn would have been defended.

28 d4! This is masterly play, shutting out

the bishop. The tempting 28 :h7 on the other hand would have been a blunder: 28 .. .'ii'xg6 ! ! 29 fxg6 :n+ and 30 . . . :f2+, when Black wins.

28 ... exd4 After 28 . . . :f6 29 :h7 :xg6 30

fxg6 1t'f6 31 g7 ! White has a deci­sive attack.

w

29 i..h7+ rMT (D)

30 f6! ! With a beautiful piece of queen

virtuosity in view: 30 .. . 'ii'h8 31 'iWhs+ �e6 32 'ii'g4+ �n 33 1ld7#; or 32 . . . �e5 33 'ii'f5#. Tarrasch sees it

Riemann - Tarrasch 29

and gives up his queen instead, re­maining indeed with two rooks for the queen, only to succumb to the big king-hunt.

30 .•.

31 :xt6+ When one's king is as exposed as

this, a queen is a much deadlier en­emy than two rooks, especially with a bishop and advanced pawns to pro­vide support.

32 .... 6+ 33 'ii'xg5+ 34 i..f5+ 35 i..e6!

�e7 �d7 �c6

The key move, threatening 36 1i'd5+ �b6 37 a5#. The non-check­ing move shows the master-hand, as usual.

35 �b7 36 i..dS+ c6 37 1t'g7+ �b6 38 aS+ �b5 39 1t'b7+ �a4 40 1i'xc6+ �a3 41 'ii'xc4 1-0

4 l . . .�a4 42 'ii'b3+ �b5 43 c4#. Tarrasch generously included this game in his own collection Dreihun­dert Schachpartien.

Game 1 1

Visits to Europe by American chess players in the 19th century were ex­tremely rare. One of them was the entry of Preston Ware in the Vienna Tour­nament of 1882. This was one of the strongest meetings ever, with eighteen of the world's best players in a double-round tournament. Ware would almost certainly have finished in last place but for the fact that two players withdrew at the halfway point and defaulted all the rest of their games. However, he had the consolation of a win against the World Champion (who also won the tour­nament) and he must certainly also have enjoyed the following game.

30 Game 11

Ware - Weiss Vienna 1882

Stonewall Attack

1 d4 d5 2 f4

These two pawn moves, together with the supporting moves e3 and c3, form the Stonewall, which can be used either by White or by Black. It was with this same pet opening that Ware succeeded in winning a mara­thon game against Steinitz.

2 e6 3 tbf3 lLlf6 4 e3 i.d6 5 i.d3 c5 6 c3 lDc6 7 0-0 a6 8 .td2

In an opening which sets six white pawns on the dark squares, the prob­lem piece is certainly the queen's bishop, which would seem to have no prospects at all. Ware used to tackle the problem methodically, playing the bishop outside the pawn chain through the one gap which re­mains-to h4.

8 ... 0-0 9 a3

Now he has seven pawns on dark squares·.

9 10 h3 11 .tel 12 tbbd2 13 'ifxd2

b6 .tb7 tbe4 tbxd2 tba5

Black's knight play is unfortu­nate. First he gratuitously exchanges off the one which was a key defender

at f6; now he starts a pointless raid with the other one. The threat of . . . tbb3 is an empty one, White hav­ing time to evade it, while at c4 the knight will be out of play. He would have been wiser to play this remain­ing knight across to the deserted kingside.

14 l:td1 15 'ii'e2 16 i.h4

With the problem of this piece solved White now has a powerful kingside attack in the making.

16 ... 'ifc7 17 tbg5

The fortress of the black king is now certain to be destroyed. This method of attack is sounder than 17 .txh7+ 'iti>xh7 1 8 tbg5+ 'iti>h6 ! , which is not at all clear.

17 ... h6 18 'iib5! tLlc4 (D)

This knight alone has wasted enough time to lose the game irrevo­cably. The excuse for returning to c4 is the possibility of a fork at e3 or b2. Meanwhile his house is on fire.

w

19 tbxe6! fxe6

He has little hope now of surviv­ing, with the white rooks ready to join the attack.

20 1i'g6! Threatening the simple 21 "ii'h7+

�f7 22 .i.g6#. White's dark-squared bishop turns out to be a very power­ful factor in the attack.

20 :.rs 21 1i'xe6+ :n 22 1i'g6

Now the threat is 23 "ii'h7+ �f8 24 W'h8#.

22 ... �fB 23 W'h7 �e8

Only by flight can the king avoid mate.

24 .i.g6 .i.fB (D)

w

Protecting the g-pawn; but now the white f-pawn threatens to com­plete the destruction of the position by marching to the sixth rank. The pinned rook is beyond salvation, so the black king continues his flight.

2s rs �d7 26 .txn lilll:eJ

So the knight achieves his ambi­tion at last. The exchange will be re­gained, but the king is homeless.

Ware - Weiss 31

27 .i.e6+ This allows Black's king to es­

cape, at least temporarily. White could have won straight away by 27 Wg6! (cutting off the king's escape route) "ii'd6 28 .i.e6+ �c6 29 .i.g3 1We7 30 :de l .

27 ••• �c6 28 1i'g6! .i.d6

Desperately trying to improvise a new shelter, but this in turn will be violently destroyed.

29 :Cel lDxd1 c4 (D) 30 .:Xd1

w

Black has emerged only a pawn down, and now he tries to delay the opening of files on the queenside.

31 .i.xdS+! ! With a new and fatal extension of

the king-hunt, Ware brings the game to its close. The black queen's rook never has a chance to show that it even exists.

31 �xdS 32 1i'e6+ �c6 33 •xc4+ �d7 34 .e6+ �c6

All the time the bishop on h4 is playing its part.

32 Game 12

35 d5+ 36 1i'e2+ 37 1i'c2+

�b5 �a4 �b5

38 a4+ 1-0 38 . . . �a5 39 b4+ �xb4 40 cxb4+

�xb4 41 �el + �a3 42 :al#.

Game 12

Our next game introduces one of the most original and creative players in the whole of chess history-Mikhail Chigorin (born 1850). His full strength de­veloped late, and few games remain even from his twenties, but eventually he came to challenge many of the more dogmatic aspects of the teachings of Ste­initz. At about the age of 40 he played much superb match chess, including two good attempts at the World Championship and a drawn match with Tar­rasch.

Dorrer - Chigorin Correspondence, 1884:

the game lasted eight months Steinitz Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 M lDc6

Compare the note at this stage in Game 9. In the present position 3 f4 is often played, and some of the usual defences to the King's Gambit also hold good here. There are, how­ever, some differences, and the pre­sent game illustrates one of them.

3 f4 exf4 4 d4

The Steinitz Gambit. With the two knights still at home this move would be unplayable. Steinitz tried stubbornly for many years to prove that it is good in the present position, but although White won some fine victories, analysis eventually drove the opening out of use.

Steinitz was prepared to accept the immediate displacement of his

king to e2, maintaining that it was in no great danger. In the present game Chigorin sees that it does not stop there, but is driven up to d4, back to b l , up to the centre again and finally right away to be mated on a7-a six-teen-move tour.

4 ..•

5 �e2 Chigorin experimented tirelessly

in all the gambits, both with White and Black, and the present move is a case in point. Commoner lines were S . . . gS, S . . . b6, S . . . dS and, probably best, s . . . d6.

6 m g5 7 lbd5

This is one common theme of White's play in the Steinitz Gambit. The early move of the black queen has left c7 undefended. In some vari­ations Black permits the fork.

7 .•. �d8 8 g3 &ike7

Black prepares to expel the white knight and then to break up the

white centre pawns, letting the gam­bit pawn go.

9 t;)xe7 10 gxf4 11 (i)e1 12 ..tg2

..txe7 g4 t;)f6 d5

The first assault on the centre pawns.

13 eS t;)e4 14 �e3 (D)

Quite in the spirit of the gambit. 'The king is a strong piece,' declared Steinitz.

B

14 .•• f6 At first sight Black could have

won material with the combination 14 . . . t;)f2 15 �xf2 g3+, but White would reply 16 �e3 ! 'W'xd1 17 ..tf3 , regaining the queen with a roughly level endgame.

15 c4? fxeS?! However, now there seems to be

nothing wrong with 15 . . . t;)f2! be­cause the black queen could escape to a4. Therefore, White would lose the exchange for nothing.

16 dxe5 �e8! This quiet move bears all the

hallmarks of correspondence chess.

Dorrer - Chigorin 33

Chigorin safeguards his central po­sition by simply avoiding the check, visualising 17 'W'xd5 ..tc5+ 18 �xe4 ..tf5#.

17 t;)d3 d4+! This is the trouble with using the

king in mid-board. In any hands but those of Steinitz himself (and some­times even in his) it gets too hot to hold.

18 �d4 To 18 �xe4 Black replies 18 ... c5 !

threatening 19 . . . ..tf5#. 18 ..trs 19 ..txe4 .l:.d8+ 20 ..td.S c6 21 b4 bS

With the white king on d4 and all the long-range black pieces still on the board Black of course plays to break up the position. Chigorin is in his element in this sort of game. Watch his queenplay.

22 �c3 cxd.S 23 cS

Dorrer plays to keep lines closed. 23 Wh3! 24 'iVn d4+ 25 �c2 Wh6! 26 ..td2 'iVe6!

Threatening to win a piece by 27 ... 'W'c4+.

27 �b2 'iVc4 28 (i)e1 d3 29 .l:.cl 'iVdS 30 t;)g2 ..te6

Now the threat is 3 l . . .'iVxa2+ 32 �c3 'W'b3#.

31 .l:.a1 aS! Reinforcements are arriving all

the time. Since White cannot play 32

34 Game 13

a3 because of mate in two by means of 32 . . . 'ii'b3+, nor 32 bxa5 because of 32 . . . i.xc5 Black is bound to get the a-file for his rooks.

32 'it'f2 axb4 33 i.xb4 :.as

Black is now threatening to win the queen by 34 ... l:r.xa2+.

B

34 �b1 l:r.a4 35 a3 (D)

35 •.. d2!!

Clearing the lines beautifully for the finish. If now 36 'ii'xd2 the queen is overloaded: 36 ... l:r.xb4+! 37 'it'xb4 'ilt'xg2 while 36 i.xd2 creates a self­interference: 36 . . . 'ilt'b3+ 37 lt>cl l:r.c4+.

36 �c2 37 axb4 38 'iPxd2 39 �e3 40 �e4 41 �dS

l:r.xb4! 'it'b3+ 'it'b2+ 'it'c3+ i.f5+!

If 41 �xf5, then Black replies 41 . . .'ii'd3+ with mate the following move. But it makes little difference now.

41 42 �c6 43 �b6 44 �a6 45 �a7

0-1 It is mate next move.

'it'd3+ 'it'd7+ i.d8+ 'it'c6+ i.e4

Game 13

Jean Taubenhaus, Polish born ( 1850), spent most of his life as a chess profes­sional in Paris, competing in a dozen tournaments between 1885 and 1 9 14. Here he has a rare old set-to with Pollock. First White has his king driven to the third rank and both rooks captured by the black queen; then the tide of bat­tle turns and the black king has to start running. A skittle? Not a bit of it: this was an important international tournament game!

Taubenhaus - Pollock Nottingham 1886 Allgaier Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 00 g5

4 h4 g4 5 tbg5

The Allgaier Gambit, deliberately offering the knight which could be safeguarded by 5 tbe5, as played in Game 3.

5 ••• h6

6 &rucn The king-hunt may be said to have

started, but before it reaches its con­summation White himself has much to suffer.

6 ... � 7 d4

This move (instead of 7 ..tc4+) bears the name of Edmund Thorold of Bath, a strong amateur who seems to have had no contact at all with London chess. In the present game the move amounts to no more than a transposition.

7 ... f3 From Black's point of view this

is the most vigorous line, seeking to render the white king's position as insecure as that of his opposite number. Black could also play 7 . . . d6 but probably his best policy-as in most King's Gambit lines-is the immediate counter-sacrifice of the d­pawn by 7 . . . d5.

8 ..tc4+ d5! 9 ..txd5+ 'iii>e8

10 gxf3 g3 According to contemporary the­

ory, 10 . . . lLif6 is the most accurate move.

11 f4 After 2 1 single moves there is

only one piece off the back rank, but there is havoc among the kingside pawns. With the benefit of a century of hindsight, one can say that 1 1 ..te3 is better.

11 12 ..tc4 13 llg1 14 11M3

lLir6 g2 ..tg4

Taubenhaus - Pollock 35

The white queen, having been driven away from her original di­agonal, takes up position on another, with the threat of 1 5 e5, intending either 16 exf6 and 16 1Wg6+. To this Pollock prepares a wicked reply.

B

14 lLic6! 15 e5? (D)

15 ... lLie4!! Threatening mate in two starting

with 16 . . . 1Wxh4+. White must take the knight.

16 1Wxe4 'ii'xb4+ 17 'iii>d2 'ii'f2+ 18 'iii>c3 'ii'xg1

Black is now a rook ahead and seems to have a won game. If, for in­stance 19 'if g6+ 'iii>d8 20 'ii'f6+ 'iii>c8 21 'ii'xh8, then 2l . . .'ii'xd4+ 22 'iii>b3 lLia5+ 23 'iii>a4 'ii'xc4+ 24 'iii>xa5 b6#.

19 ..te3! Taubenhaus begins a desperate

rescue operation involving the sacri­fice of his other rook.

19 ... 'ii'el+? A natural enough continuation

in the heat of battle, but it lets the game slip. When a player has con­ducted his attack in the brilliant vein

36 Game 13

of Pollock thus far it seems some­how ungracious for the annotator to point out, after quiet analysis, what he should have done; but Black could surely have won here by forc­ing the exchange of queens by play­ing 19 . . . i.f5 ! 20 'ifxc6+ (20 'ifxf5 'ifxe3+ and 20 'iff3 'ifh2) bxc6 21 i.xg l . Then the connected passed pawns should certainly carry the day.

20 lDd2 g11i' 21 i.xg1? (D)

When one's opponent has two queens one hurries to annihilate one of them, but this, nevertheless, is too hasty. Now was the golden opportu­nity to interpolate ii'g6+.

B

21 .•. 'ifxa1?! Making life far more complicated

for himself. There were two better options. Firstly, Black could have exchanged queens, remaining with rook against two pawns. Care would still have been needed against the strong white centre pawns but the extra material should have carried the day. Secondly, and even more convincingly, Black could have played 2 l . ..i.b4+ 22 �b3 lba5+ 23

�xb4 'ii'xd2+ leading to an easy win.

Instead, with a greedy impulse rare indeed in Pollock, Black takes the other rook, and in the process buries his queen away out of play. The rest of the game is pure king­hunt.

22 'ifg6+ 23 1i'f6+

�d8 �c8?!

This further slip puts in another step in the wrong direction. Black could have continued 23 ... lbe7 24 'iWxh8 �d7, when, compared to the game, Black has the extra defen­sive move . . . lbe7. In this case Black would retain a near-decisive advan­tage.

24 'ifxh8 �d7 25 'fih7+ i.e7?

Even here 25 . . . lbe7 was correct, when Black could still look forward to victory. The move played finally dissipates Black's advantage.

26 e6+ i.xe6 Not 26 . . . �e8 27 1Wg8+ i.f8 28

1Wn+ �d8 29 1Wd7#, nor 26 . . . �d6 27 lbe4#.

27 i.xe6+ �e6 28 d5+! (D)

Taubenhaus is making the most of his chances. When he unwillingly played 18 �c3 he could hardly have foreseen that, ten moves later, his own king would be playing a useful part in the encirclement of the black one.

28 ... �xdS? A disastrous move giving White a

forced mate in seven. After 28 ... �d7 29 dxc6+ bxc6 30 lbf3 the position

8

is very unclear-a draw would be the most likely result.

29 'ii'f5+ Missing 29 'ii'f7+ �d6 30 o!De4+

�d7 3 1 lLlf6+ �c8 32 1i'e6+ �b8 33

Schlechter - Marco 37

lLld7 + �c8 34 lLlb6+ and mate next move, but the move played is amply sufficient for victory.

29 .•• lbe5 Forced. 29 . . . �d6 leaves White a

pleasant choice of three mates on the move.

30 'ii'xe5+ �c6 31 'ii'xe7 'ii'xg1

Now White has mate in five, but there was nothing better.

32 'ii'e6+ �b5 33 a4+ �xa4 34 'ii'b3+ �aS 35 lLJc4+ �a6 36 'fi'a4#

Game 14

Karl Schlechter (born 187 4) was one of the greatest players never to become World Champion. He came within a hair's-breadth of it in 1910 when Lasker just saved his title by halving a challenge match 1-1 with 8 draws.

Schlechter in his prime was so nearly unbeatable that they called him 'The Drawing Master' but his magnificent tournament record and string of brilli­ancy prizes bear witness to his devastating power of attack. When it came to hunting a king he was as happy as the next man.

Schlechter - Marco Vienna Jubilee 1898

Queen's Gambit Declined

1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6

The Queen's Gambit-and par­ticularly this method of declining it-was the fashionable opening of the late 1890s. Its popularity can be ascribed largely to the influence of Pillsbury from Hastings 1 895 on­wards.

3 lLJc3 lLlf6

4 lLJf3 5 .i.g5 6 e3 7 .i.d3

b6 .i.e7 0-0 .i.b7

Black's sequence of moves can lead to a debacle, as Marco found to his cost two years later at the Paris Tournament of 1900.

8 0-0 Schlechter quietly develops. Mar­

shall's incisive line at Paris was to omit castling and launch an immedi­ate onslaught against h7 by 8 cxd5 exd5 9 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 10 h4 ! . Against

38 Game 14

Burn the result was a famous mini­ature: 10 . . . g6 1 1 h5 :es (Marco pre­ferred 1 1 . . . c5 but lasted only five moves longer than Burn) 1 2 hxg6 hxg6 13 'ifc2 j.g? 14 j.xg6! fxg6 15 'it'xg6 tbd7 1 6 tbg5 'iff6 17 :h8+! �xh8 18 'ii'h7#. Later it was discov­ered that Black should play 10 . . . c5, because in this position the sacrifice on h7 is not correct (see Game 23).

8 lDbd7 9 'ife2 c5

10 :ad1 a6? Black ought rather to have re­

solved the problem of the centre here by removing all four of the pawns. After this loss of time White devel­ops a strong initiative.

11 dxcS! tbxcS 12 j.b1!

This retreat not only safeguards the bishop against exchange, it also prepares to set the queen as a projec­tile in front of the bishop gun.

12 •.• 'fkc7 13 'ifc2

Already threatening to win a piece by 14 j.xf6.

13 g6 14 j.xf6 j_xf6 15 cxd5 j.xcJ? (D)

This cannot be wise. The dark­squared bishop is vital for the de­fence of the king's position, which will now be helpless with all its pawns on light squares. Black would have done better to exchange his other bishop: 15 . . . exd5 16 tC!xd5 j.xd5 ! and, although a pawn down, the opposite-coloured bishops offer some drawing chances.

w

16 d6! A powerful interpolation. The

black queen is driven back and a most uncomfortable wedge is forced into the black lines. The pawn is re­linquished almost at once but White gains time for a decisive kingside attack.

16 17 'fkxc3 18 lDeS!

'ii'b8 :d8

En route for g4 and a deadly in­vasion on the dark squares. Black would have been in far less danger with a bishop on g7 instead of b7.

18 :Xd6 19 lDg4 'ii'd8 20 lllli6+ � 21 'ii'h8+ �e7 22 'fkxh7 'fkfB

To prevent 23 'ifxf7#, but now the rook is guarded only by the king, who must perforce resume his head­long flight.

23 :Xd6 24 tbxf7+ 25 lDe5+ 26 'ii'h4!

�xd6 �c6 �b5 (D)

Threatening destruction by 27 'it'c4+.

26 .td5 27 b4 lDb7 28 a4+!

At the cost of this pawn two more pieces are enabled to join the hunt and mate is in sight.

I.Asker-Lee 39

28 ... �a4 29 .tc2+ �a3

29 . . . �b5 30 .td3+ would lead to a similar finish. Now White can force mate in six.

30 h1+ �b2 31 .. d4+! �cl

Black continues to the bitter end. 32 .. d3+ �b2 33 .,a3+ �c2 34 l:cl+ �d2 35 .,c3+ 1-0

After 35 . . . �e2 White has the em­barrassing choice of five mates on the move. Oddly enough, Schlechter could have mated one move more quickly by 35 "ii'b2#.

Game 15

Emanuel Lasker was unique among World Champions. Chess was no con­suming passion with him; he was able and willing to leave the game alone for years at a time. He founded no school, had no disciples, was no pioneer of new openings; yet his mastery of middlegame and endgame has seldom been approached. There is something almost visionary about the way he extracted wins from barren or even downright bad positions. Yet he himself described his methods-incredibly-as 'common sense' .

Lasker-Lee London 1899

Caro-Kann

1 e4 c6 Although this move had been re­

corded as long ago as the 16th cen­tury, at this time it was still a novelty in tournament play, dating from the 1880s and being played only very rarely.

2 d4 d5

3 lbc3 4 lbxe4 5 ltJg3 6 ltJCJ

dxe4 .tr5 .tg6 lbd7

All this is still played today. Black prevents White from playing lDe5.

7 h4 7 .td3 is a perfectly good alterna­

tive but Lasker's line leaves Black with fewer options.

7 ... h6

40 Game 15

8 .td3 9 1Wxd3

10 .td2

.txd3 lbgf6 e6

Thus Black gets a satisfactory de­velopment for all his pieces. His po­sition, however, is wholly defensive. Against the World Champion, this was presumably Lee's ambition-an impression which the rest of the game confirms.

1 1 0-0-0 12 l:hel 13 'ifb3

fic7 0-0-0

Lasker was, par excellence, an improviser-prepared at the drop of a hat to conduct any sort of defence or attack. At this moment he is in the act of deciding on the king as his ob­jective-a natural enough decision in view of Black's defensive attitude.

13 ... .td6 14 lbe2 lDg4

A faint flicker of aggression-just about Lee's only one in this game.

15 .:.n 006 16 fia4 'itb8 17 c4!

The real assault begins. Lasker fearlessly denudes his own king, Black being very ill-placed for any sort of counter-offensive. There is now an immediate threat of 18 c5 and 19 .i.f4.

17 •.•

18 tDc3 fie7 fic7

Now that White has released his control of f4 there is no venom in playing c4-c5. Black therefore re­turns to c7 with his queen, intending to force off the bishops by 19 .. . .tf4. This is pure spoiling tactics, and

Lasker decides not to let him have his way.

w

19 g3! 20 b4! 21 dxeS

22 .i.e3!

eS ltlxeS (D)

Typical Lasker: he suddenly pro­duces bewildering multiple threats: 'iVxa7+, .txa7+, l:.xd6, c5 . Lee de­cides to eliminate the troublesome c-pawn and it is difficult to find any­thing better for him to do. But now he is in the hands of the greatest of all masters of middlegame compli­cations.

22 23 .i.xa7+ 24 l:.d4!

ltlxc4 �c7

Now 24 . . . lDb6 would allow 25 .txb6+ 'itxb6 26 'ii'a5#; the alterna­tive 24 . . . lDe5 would be no better due to 25 tDxe5 .i.xe5 26 fia5+ and mate next move.

24 .•• b5 25 ltlxb5+!

A knight is a small enough price to pay for the utter destruction of Black's king-shelter.

25 .•• cxb5

26 1i'xb5 lDa3 Removing the knight from the c­

file sets up a discovered check from Black's king-an unusual but occa­sionally effective defensive idea. Lasker shows that the cross-check need not be feared.

B

27 1i'a5+! �b7+ 28 i.cS! (D)

Threatening 29 'ii'b6+ and 30 'ii'a7#. Meanwhile the outlying black knight on a3 is left, apparently un­heeded, until in due course-at move 34-its time comes to be captured with check.

28 29 bxcS 30 lDxd4

i.xc5 lbd4

There has been a great deal of bloodletting but White still has all

Lasker-Lee 41

the material he needs for the final hunt of the black king from b7 to his destiny on h2.

30 ••. 1i'd8 After 30 . . . 'ii'a8 White would play

3 1 c6+ �b8 32 'iib6+ �c8 33 lbf5 mating on e7 or d6.

31 c6+

32 1i'a8+ 33 11Va7+

�c8 1;c7 �d6

Now at last White can take the knight with check; but Black had no option: 33 . . . 1;c8 34 'iib7#.

34 'fixa3+ Black is two pawns down and

could now resign with a clear con­science. Instead he continues to watch with fearful fascination the march of his king to execution.

34 �dS 35 l:r.d1! 1IVb6 36 00+ �e6

If 36 . . . 1;e4 White mates on the move with 37 'fid3#.

37 1i'd6+ �5 38 1i'd3+ �g4

After 38 . . . 1;e6 Black would be quickly mated by 39 l:e1+.

39 lbe5+ 1-0 Mate is unavoidable: 39 . . . �h3

(or 39 ... 1;h5 40 'ii'f3+ and mate next move) 40 'fifl+ �h2 41 'fih1#.

Game 16

Karel Treybal (born 1885) was a Czech master who seldom ventured far from his native land. He competed in a dozen international tournaments over a span of thirty years and was seen in England at the Folkestone Olympiad in 1933. No less a judge than Alekhine described him as 'conspicuously endowed with the imaginative sense' . Treybal was only nineteen years old when he played the following game at a Prague chess club.

42 Game 16

Kurz - Treybal Casual Game, Prague 1904

Salvio Gambit

1 e4 e5 2 f4

The sixth and last King's Gambit in our king-hunt collection.

2 exf4 3 m g5 4 i-c4 g4 5 lbe5

On the face of it, the Salvio Gam­bit would seem less inviting than the Muzio idea of leaving the knight to be taken (see Game 2) for it invites an immediate queen check with the consequent displacement of White's king. Yet it was the choice of Steinitz in serious match play against Zuker­tort and Anderssen.

5 ... d5 In the heyday of the King's Gam­

bit Black invariably checked at once; but the counter-sacrifice . . . d5 is good against nearly any form of the King's Gambit.

6 i-xd5 'ir'h4+ 1 'iii'n

The necessity for this move, both here and in the Bishop's Gambit (3 i-c4) seems to spoil one primary ob­ject of the opening-the use of the f­file for attack. In practice the loss of time by the black queen often allows White to get quick counterplay with his minor pieces.

7 ••• lDf6 Black invites White to take the f7-

pawn, either with bishop or with knight. He could, of course, have

defended by 7 . . . ltJh6. White's main headache is that he must constantly watch the possibility of sudden black attacks by . . . f3 or . . . g3.

8 i-xt7 + Cit>d8 The addict of the King's Gambit

cares little, as a rule, for the safety of his own king; his interest is exclu­sively in the other one.

9 d4 ltJc6 10 ltJxc6+ bxc6

Again, the fact that his pawns are now well and truly wrecked does not worry Black, but the new diagonal now available to his queen's bishop probably gives him great pleasure.

11 ltJc3 f3! (D) Sooner or later this move usually

means the break-up of the white kingside in the Salvio Gambit.

w

12 g3? White should have brought his

outlying bishop back into the game at c4, preventing Black activating his own bishop by . . . i-a6.

12 ..• 'ir'h3+ 13 c;t>n

The white king begins his fatal journey to the eighth rank. He has no

option, for 1 3 �e1 is followed by 1 3 .. .'ti'g2 14 :n .ta6.

13 ... 'ii'g2+ 14 �e3 i.a6!

Threatening 15 . . . i.h6#. 15 �f4

What else? There is no escape by 15 d5, for Black would promptly plug the flight by 15 . . . c5 .

15 i.h6+ 16 � 'ti'h3 17 �xf6

There is nothing better because Black threatens 17 . . . r.t>e7 followed by a quick mate, but now Black has a

Chajes - Tartakower 43

forced mate in six, starting with a quiet move.

17 :f8 18 d5 lbt7+! 19 � 'ii'h5+ 20 �6 i.g7+!

Willy-nilly the white king must capture his third piece in five moves. If 21 �e6, then 21 . . .'ti'g6#.

21 �g7 .. g6+ 22 lfrf8 �d7#

A royal mate. Compare this with similar finishes by Morphy (Game 5), Edward Lasker (Game 18) and Lawrence (Game 4 1).

Game 17

In the Karlsbad Tournament there occurred another example-like Game 10-of a minor master scoring a spectacular victory against an admittedly much greater player. In this mammoth tournament of twenty-six players Os­car Chajes (born 1873) finished in joint bottom place. Yet against Tartakower he showed superb form, first winning material and then returning it in order to drive the black king across to c7 and back again to be mated on his starting square, g8.

Tartakower, who ended up in joint eighth position, himself never lost his boyish relish for a good king-hunt; once thoroughly outplayed he was often willing to give his opponent the pleasure of mating him. He probably thought it was the least he could do for the unfortunate Chajes; one imagines him watching the process with a professional detachment and thinking how he might perhaps have done it better himself.

Chajes - Tartakower Karlsbad 1911 King's Indian

1 d4 �6 2 00 d6

These were the very early days of the Indian defences, of which Tar­takower was one of the pioneers. The

present order of moves usually fore­shadows what is now known as the Old Indian, with a black bishop on e7. Game 32 is an example.

3 c3 lDbd7 4 lDbd2 g6 5 e4 i.g7

Black has, after all, chosen a King's Indian formation. White's

44 Game 1 7

position, with the c-pawn advanced only one step, certainly takes some of the sting out of the placing of the bishop on g7.

6 .i.d3 0-0 7 tbn e5 8 tbg3

The knight has reached a good de­fensive post, screening the king's position and observing some impor­tant light squares. On this square it stands motionless for 26 moves. It then makes one more move-a move which more than justifies its career.

8 .:.eS 9 0-0 c6

10 l:.el 'fic7 In the centre the state of tension

persists, with much manoeuvring behind the lines, each waiting for the other to commit himself with an ex­change or an advance.

11 .i.d2 ll)f8 12 h3 .i.e6 13 tbg5

The first step over the frontier. Nowadays even this would probably have been prevented by . . . h6 before placing the bishop on e6.

13 .•. h6 Now, however, there seems less

point to creating the kingside weak­ness: White was probably going to take the bishop anyway.

14 lbxe6 tbxe6 15 .i.e3 lbd7

Still the jockeying for position continues in the centre. This knight move puts two extra defences on the black e-pawn and one extra attack on the white d-pawn. Yet it may be

tactically wrong, for Black's most sensitive point is the h6-pawn, and a knight would have been handy within reach of g8.

16 .i.c2 l:.ad8 17 'tWd2

Now Black feels the weakness of h6.

17 ... 'iii>h7 18 f4

Thus things come to a head in the centre; White threatens f5.

w

18 exf4 19 .i.xf4 c5 (D)

Strategically this is logical play, seeking to unleash the latent power of his bishop, on which the whole black game is based. With this move and his next Tartakower is playing to loosen up the white queenside, but within half a dozen moves it be­comes clear that he has loosened his own position even more. The white formation is resilient.

20 .i.e3 1i'b6 21 l:.ed1 cxd4 22 cxd4

Chajes has achieved his object of keeping two centre pawns, and he

dares Black to take the undefended b-pawn.

22 ... l:.c8 23 i.a4!

A decidedly awkward pin, which Tartakower may not have taken into consideration. White seizes this moment to make a well-judged ex­change of bishop for knight, intro­ducing a complex passage of play based on the position of the black queen on the same diagonal the e3-bishop. The fianchettoed bishop is allowed to achieve his ultimate am­bition of mastering the whole long dark diagonal across to the rook on a1-but it costs Black two minor pieces.

23 lle7 24 i.xd7! l:.xd7 25 d5! l2Jc5 26 b4! i.xa1 27 l:.xa1 'ii'd8 28 bxc5 dxc5

Black has rook and pawn against bishop and knight. His game looks by no means lost for he has a 3-1 queenside majority, the c-pawn ap­pearing particularly menacing. His trouble is the weakness of his king position, and this is the usual penalty of winning the exchange at the cost of relinquishing the bishop on g7.

29 'iii>h2? An unnecessary precaution, as

White could have grabbed the h6-pawn without more ado: 29 i.xh6 'ii'h4 30 i.f4 g5 3 1 i.e5 f6 (31 . . .l:te8 32 'ii'c3) 32 'ti'f2 !, with a deadly check to come on f5. In this case White would have had a winning

Chajes - Tartakower 45

position, whereas the move played allows Black's c-pawn to become more of a menace.

29 ... c4 Given the choice of defending his

h-pawn by 29 . . . \i'f8 or going all-out for counterattack, Tartakower opts for the latter. It would be interesting to know how long he took in consid­ering this move.

30 i.xh6 c3 31 'ii'f4

Now there is a crisis in the air. On the one hand White threatens 32 i.g5 followed by 'ii'h4+ and i.f6, with a mating attack. On the other hand the black c-pawn has reached the sixth rank, with three major pieces well placed to support it.

31 ... f6 Tartakower prevents 32 i.g5 and

33 'i1Vh4, but by shutting off the queen he permits White to play the same moves in reverse order. Black is doomed.

w

32 ft4! c2 (D)

33 i.g5+? It turns out that the combination

initiated by this move is far from

46 Game 1 7

clear-cut. Black wasn't threatening anything, so White could have mobi­lised his reserves by 33 l:r.fl , when there is not the slightest chance that Black will survive, for example: 33 . . . l:r.f7 34 .i.cl+ �g8 35 'ii'g4 �h7 (or 35 . . . g5 36 e5) 36 e5 f5 37 'ii'f4 'ii'xd5 (to prevent e6) 38 �6+ �g8 39 'ii'xg6+ .l:tg7 40 'ii'xf5, complet­ing the destruction of Black's king­side.

33 ... �g7 34 tt:lf5+!

Black thought that by guarding the f-pawn twice he had prevented the breakthrough, but this sacrifice deflects the g-pawn so that after 35 'ii'h6+ the f-pawn will fall. Black cannot refuse the knight: 34 . . . �f8? 35 'Wh8+ �f7 36 'ii'g7+ 'it>e8 37 'Wg8#. Or 34 . . . �g8? 35 .i.xf6 with much the same result.

34 35 .... 6+ 36 .i.xf6

gxfS �g8

White simultaneously threatens the queen and mate in three begin­ning with 37 'ii'h8+. Black parries both threats, his pawn meanwhile waiting impatiently on the seventh rank.

36 'ii'c7+ 37 g3 .l:th7 38 'ii'g6+ 'iPf8

If Black tries 38 . . . l:tg7 White can simply reply 39 .i.xg7 after which 39 . . . 'ii'xg7 allows 40 'ii'e6+ and 4 1 'ihc8, while 3 9 . . . c1'ii' leads to 40 .i.c3+! followed by 41 .l:txc1 , com­ing out a bishop ahead.

39 'ii'xfS (D)

B

Again Black has a threatened dis­covery hanging over his head. This time he makes his new queen, but it turns out to be the fatal error. After 39 . . . .1:tf7 ! Black would have every chance of saving the game.

39 ... c1'ii'? 40 .l:txcl 'ii'xcl

The position is still fascinating. For the moment Black has two rooks against a bishop and three pawns. White cannot afford to play 41 .i.b2+ .l:tf7 and he must certainly avoid 41 'ii'xh7 .l:tc2#! But he can make better use of his discovered check:

41 .i.c3+! Cutting Black's communications

on the c-file so that if now 4 l . . . .l:tf7 White can play 42 'Wxc8+.

41 ... �e7 White could now play 42 'ii'xh7+,

but this is his day and he is not going to be satisfied with anything less than the most precise play. He draws his cordon tight around the fleeing king and still gets his rook with check five moves later on.

42 'ii'e6+ �d8 43 .i.f6+ �c7

44 i.e5+ 'iird8 Just as in the previous game the

black king begins his return journey. 45 1i'g8+ 'iird7 46 'it'xh7+

Had White played this five moves earlier the black king could have run out to the queenside via d6. Chajes has preferred to confine him where the white centre pawns can have their effect. It must be remembered that all this time Black is threatening mate on the move.

46 47 1i'g8+ 48 d6+

�e8 rtle7 rtld7

Edward Lasker - Thomas 47

49 11i'g4+! Subtly confining the king within

the cordon. If now 49 . . . �c6 Black loses both his pieces !

49 �d8 50 i.f6+ �e8 51 'ilt'e6+ � 52 'ite7+ 'iirg8

Home! 53 'itg7#

Black still threatens mate in one ! Similar strings of forcing moves while under threat of mate may be seen in Game 19 (Nimzowitsch-Tar­rasch) and in Game 28 (Yanofsky­Dulanto).

Game 18

The illustrious name of Lasker has sometimes been the cause of confusion in the chess world. Emanuel was the great World Champion who reigned from 1 894 to 192 1 . Berthold, his brother, was eight years older and, although he never took chess very seriously, a few of his games are in print. Edward was also a German but became an American citizen after the First World War. He was not related to the others but was a friend and admirer of Emanuel, al­though eighteen years his junior. He played in several international tourna­ments, but the following game-perhaps his best-known one-was only a skittle. It was played in the City of London Chess Club just a few hours after Lasker arrived in England from Germany, and he understood so little of the English language that he was not aware of his opponent's name until after the game. Mr Thomas-later to become Sir George-was at the time and for many years after one of England's strongest players.

Edward Lasker - Thomas Casual Game, London 1912

Dutch Defence

1 d4 f5 The Dutch Defence has gone in

and out of fashion. Botvinnik won

many fine games with it, but thereaf­ter it suffered a long-lasting decline until its revival in the late 1980s.

2 lDc3 This forthright development is

simple and good, though less often seen than some other possibilities.

48 Game 18

2 c4 permits Black to play an early . . . .ib4+ and exchange off a pair of bishops. 2 g3 is a shrewd line, as the bishop is useful on g2 no matter what central pawn formation Black adopts.

2 lilf6 3 lill3 e6 4 .ig5 .ie7 5 .ixf6

White's plan is quite simple-to force e4 without making a gambit out of it.

5 .ixf6 6 e4 fxe4 7 lbxe4 b6 8 lbes?!

Objectively speaking, this attack­ing attempt is premature. 8 .id3 is sounder.

8 ... 9 .id3

0-0 .ib7

It is easy for the armchair critic to blame Black's play after seeing the catastrophe that overtakes him. If Black had played 9 .. . .ixe5 10 dxe5 ltlc6 ! , then he would have won an important pawn, since 10 'ii'h5 can be met by 10 .. . l:f5.

10 1Wh5 (D)

B

Lasker threatens 1 1 lilxf6+ fol­lowed by taking on h7. Even here Black could have gained the advan­tage by 10 . . . .ixe5 1 1 dxe5 ( 1 1 lLlf6+ l:xf6 12 'ii'xh7+ �f8 1 3 'ii'h8+ �e7 14 'ii'xg7+ l:f7 15 'ii'xe5 'ii'g8 wins for Black, while 1 1 'ii'xe5 lbc6 wins the d4-pawn) l:f5, followed by tak­ing on e5.

Thomas, however, prefers a dif­ferent and apparently satisfactory defence:

10 ... 11e7?? The idea is that after 1 1 lilxf6+

Black recaptures with the pawn, and the h-pawn then stands guarded by the queen. What only Lasker had seen is that White has a beautiful forced mate:

11 ._xh7+! ! �xh7 12 lbxf6++ �h6

He has no choice: 12 . . . �h8 13 lLlg6#.

13 lbeg4+ �g5 14 h4+ �4

Every move is forced, just as in the Falkbeer game, No. 3.

IS g3+ � 16 .ie2+

White could have mated one move more quickly, by 1 6 0-0 (or 16 �fl), followed by 17 lbh2#, but to complain at this would be pedantic in the extreme.

16 17 l:b2+ 18 �d2#

�g2 �gl

Thus every white piece partici­pated in the king-hunt, the whole black army being meanwhile cut off from the battlefield.

Nimzowitsch - Tarrasch 49

Game 19

Nimzowitsch the iconoclast challenged many of the dogmas ofTarrasch the classicist, in print and at the board. There was no love lost between them, and victories were always a source of satisfaction to the winner. Probably the one that pleased Tarrasch most of all was the following game, played when he was 52 and his rival 28. Not only is the white king chased to the seventh rank but the game is embellished by the celebrated double bishop sacrifice made fa­mous by Lasker in his game with Bauer at Amsterdam a quarter of a century earlier.

Nimzowitsch - Tarrasch St Petersburg 1914

Queen's Gambit Declined

1 d4 d5 2 .!Dn cS

Tarrasch generally played this move straight away as a matter of principle when facing 1 d4. He pre­ferred to accept the slight loosening of his position which it involves rather than endure the cramped situ­ation which is Black's lot in the Or­thodox (Games 21 and 23) and Slav (Game 27) Defences.

3 c4 e6 4 e3

On this occasion Nimzowitsch continues with the symmetrical de­velopment which Tarrasch himself thought best. Schlechter and Rubin­stein worked out the line based on 4 cxd5 followed by g3 and i.g2 which is still regarded as best today.

4 .!Dr6 5 i.d3 tDc6 6 0-0 i.d6 7 b3 0-0 8 i.b2 b6 9 .!Llbd2

The first break in the symmetry. The knight accepts a modest posi­tion rather than obstruct the b2-bishop and al-rook, which will soon come to c l .

9 10 :et 1 1 cxd5

i.b7 'ile7

Black was threatening to swap off the b2-bishop by means of l l . . .cxd4 and 12 . . . i.a3.

11 ... exd5 12 .!Db4

This is subtle and logical. The threat of .!Df5 induces Black to play . . . g6, weakening the dark squares and making the b2-bishop a poten­tial game-winner. Nimzowitsch con­siders the loss of time a good investment.

12 g6 13 .!Dhf3 :ads 14 dxcS

The power of the fianchettoed bishop is now clear, but it is Black who will have the better pawn con­trol in the centre. The clash of two ideas makes fascinating chess.

14 bxcS 15 i.b5

50 Game 19

The light-squared bishop intends to augment the effect of his dark­squared colleague by removing the knight that guards the central dark squares.

15 tt::le4 ..i.xc6 tt::lxd2 d4

16 ..i.xc6 17 'ii'c2 18 ltJxd2

A sharp reminder that Black also has a bishop on the long diagonal: the pawn move simultaneously opens the line of the black bishop and closes the line of the white one. Worse still, Black has two bishops, as Nimzowitsch soon has cause to re­gret.

B

19 exd4 (D)

19 ..i.xh2+! 20 'iitxh2 'ii'h4+ 21 'iitg1 ..i.xg2!!

The white king is so isolated from all his forces that Tarrasch can afford to immolate both bishops to expose him. If now 22 'i2i>xg2 Black plays 22 . . . 'iig4+ followed by 23 . . . l:i.d5. So the king prepares to make a bolt for it.

22 f3 l:i.fe8

Mercilessly cutting off the e-file escape route. If now 23 �xg2 Black wins at once by 23 . . . l:i.e2+.

23 tt::le4 'ii'h1+ 24 <Ji>f2 ..txn

The unkind point is that after 25 .l:.xfl the white queen would be lost to 25 . . .'ii'h2+, so now the hunt is re­ally on.

25 d5 White reopens the long diagonal,

hoping that even yet he may make something of his threats of 'iWc3 and ti::lf6+.

25 .•. f5! Tarrasch could have won crudely

but safely enough by 25 . . . 'ii'g2+ fol­lowed by the exchange of queens. He chooses a neater way which in­volves allowing White to achieve his ambition of occupying that long dark diagonal.

26 'ii'c3 (D)

B

Nimzowitsch at last gets in his attack, threatening 27 'ii'g7#. But it is too late: Black has a forced mate in five.

26 27 �e3

'ifg2+ l:i.xe4+!

28 fxe4 f4+ 28 . . . 'ii'g3+ 29 �d2 'ii'f2+ 30 lt>d1

'i!Ve2# was simple and clear, but the move played is also fully adequate.

29 �xf4 l:.f8+ 30 �eS 1Wh2+ 31 �e6 l:.e8+ 32 �d7 .i.b5#

Alekhine - Yates 51

A pure mate brings the king-hunt to an end.

Had White played 32 �f6 the mate would have been 32 . . . 'ii'h4#. Meanwhile Nimzowitsch has been threatening mate in one for the last seven moves. Compare Games 17 and 28.

Game 20

In the next game a World Champion is handled very roughly by the British champion, Frederick Yates. F. D. Yates (born 1884) was a stolid Yorkshire­mao. He was slow to mature as a player, not making any great stir in the chess world until his late twenties, but after this he became more and more a men­ace to the world's top grandmasters and scored many fine victories.

His style of play curiously echoed the pattern of his own career-slow in the initial build-up period, with no attempt at wild play, but powerfully ag­gressive in the middlegame. Alekhine always found Yates a handful, losing two tournament games to him and having several frights at other times.

In the present game Alekhine's king is smoked out by a fine sacrificial combination and undergoes a fifteen-move hunt all within a little square 3x3. For the ultimate in close chasing like this see Game 37, Ivkov-Byrne, Varna 1962.

Alekhine - Yates Karlsbad 1923 King's Indian

1 d4 lbr6 2 c4 g6

Fashions in the chess openings have often been moulded largely by the influence of a single player. Before the First World War, the In­dian defences made only the most sporadic appearances. It was very largely Yates himself who shaped the King's Indian into a reliable defence in the early 1920s and gave it its first

popularity. In the present game he is playing his pet defence against a very great master, soon to become World Champion, and a very good case he makes out for it.

It was Euwe who drove it out of fashion in the 1930s, and probably Bronstein and Boleslavsky, in the late forties and early fifties, who did most to bring about the renaissance which still persists today.

3 g3 .i.g7 4 .i.g2 0-0 5 llJc3 d6 6 00 llJc6

52 Game 20

This was the way Yates played the defence, provoking d5, after which he liked to retire the knight to b8 and then redevelop it via d7 or a6 to the strong square c5.

7 d5 8 e4 9 0-0

lbb8 lbbd7 aS

With an eye to the future he safe­guards the square c5 against the pos­sibility of b4 by White.

10 J.e3 Alekhine typically plays to cross

his opponent's plans, and Yates now seizes the opportunity to plant a knight on e5 instead.

10 11 J.d4 12 lbxe5 13 c5

lbg4 lbge5 lbxe5

White opens operations on the queenside, hoping presently to ex­tend the range of his g2-bishop which for the moment is blocked by his own pawns.

13 14 J.xcS 15 J.d4 16 .::te1

dxc5 b6 J.a6

Now White threatens to play 17 f4, driving away the knight and then following up with 1 8 J.xg7 , leaving Black with weak dark squares on the kingside.

16 ... ..d6! (D) A diabolically subtle reply. After

17 f4 Black intends 17 . . . lbd3 18 J.xg7 1i'c5+ ! 19 �h1 lbf2+ 20 �g1 lbh3++ 21 �h1 'ii'g1+ ! 22 .::txg1 lbt2#. This was evidently Yates's day.

w

11 J.n J.xn 18 .:.xn

The biter bit! It is the white king­side which has been weakened.

18 •.. c5 Undeterred, Yates lays another

snare: the enpassant capture would now be answered by 19 . . . 'ii'xd4! 20 'ii'xd4 lbf3+ winning a piece.

19 J.xeS -.xe5 20 �3 .:tabS 21 �5 f5

Alekhine was of course a master of every phase of the game. Yates on the other hand excelled particularly in the late middlegame, and here he is in his element. Three-quarters of the minor pieces have gone, he has an excellent bishop and good chances of a breakthrough with his rooks in the region of the white king. In reserve he also has a queenside majority of pawns, but for the mo­ment his interest is elsewhere.

22 .::tae1 f4! 23 1i'd7 .::tbd8 24 gxf4 -.xr4

White is now obviously in danger from Black's heavy pieces. He can hardly take the e-pawn, for after

25 . . J:tfe8 followed by . . . �e5 White would be swiftly mated.

25 We6+ �b8 26 f3 Wg5+ 27 �b1 l:td6 28 Wh3

By a devious route White's queen has found her way to the threatened sector; but the black pieces are con­verging ominously, with invasion points at e5 and f4 which the white knight is powerless to cover.

28 �e5 29 l:te2 l:tdf6 30 ttJd1 ltf4 31 lDe3

The knight is now within range of defensive points at g2 and g4, but Black's initiative keeps him one vital move ahead all the time. He now ex­pels the white queen from the imme­diate vicinity.

31 ... l:tb4 32 'i\fe6

From this point the white queen never returns; but it is an unavoid­able desertion (32 'it'g2 l:txh2+).

32 ..• 'ii'h5 Threatening immediate destruc­

tion by 33 . . . l:txh2+. 33 lDg4 (D)

White totters on the brink, and yet his defence seems to hold, for he not only protects the h-pawn, but also threatens to smash the attack at once by lDxe5.

33 ... l:txg4!! A superb permanent sacrifice of

the exchange which must have been based more on intuition than analy­sis. Yates's courageous play was

Alekhine - Yates 53

B

never better exemplified than in this combination, played, we have to remember, against Alexander Ale­khine.

34 fxg4 Of course the queen could not

take, but now, after the white king is driven to g2, Black will have queen and rook simultaneously attacked, and will have to embark on a pro­tracted king-hunt with queen and bishop against queen and rook. The dark-squared bishop, however, is as strong as a rook, as White finds him­self with nearly all his material on light squares, obstructing his king's escape.

34 35 �g2 36 � 37 � 38 �g3 39 �b3

l:txfl+ Wxb2+ 'ii'h1+ �d4+ 'ii'g1+

39 l:tg2 'ifel + 40 �h3 g5 trans­poses to the game.

39 .•.

40 l:tg2 The rook is forced from one light

square to another, obstructing the king still more.

54 Game 20

40 ••.

41 'ittg3 'Will+

In reply to 41 l:th2 Yates gave 4 l . . .'l'f3+ 42 'itth4 .tf6+ 43 g5 'l'f4+ 44 'itth3 .tes ! 45 l:tg2 'l'f3+ 46 'itth4 'l'h5#.

41 42 'itth3

w

'jj'et+ g5! (D)

Yates quietly closes the cordon, threatening 43 . . . 'l'h4#. Checking now does White no good, the king move does not prevent the mate, and since 43 l:th2 allows 43 . . ,'jj'e3+ 44 'ittg2 'iff2+ 45 'itth3 'Wf3#, White has nothing to do but take the rook right away to c2.

43 l:tc2 This is the only available square,

and certainly it gives air to the white king. But the rook itself is now unde­fended, and Yates immediately takes advantage of this fact.

43 •.. 'iffi+ 44 'itth2

If 44 l:tg2 Black can continue 44 . . . 'ii'hl+ 45 'ittg3 'ifh4+ 46 'ittf3 'ii'h3+ 47 l:tg3 'ii'fl#.

44 45 'itth3

46 �g3 46 l:th2 would have allowed mate

on the move; but now Yates plays a second non-checking move, subtly exploiting the position of the outly­ing rook and forcing a win in all variations.

46 ••• ..dl!! Now the rook cannot return to the

kingside without producing a fatal self-block; e.g. 47 l:th2 'ii'd3+ 48 'ittg2 'ii'e2+ 49 'ittg3 'ii'e3+ 50 'ittg2 'fi'f2+ 51 'itth3 'ii'f3#, or47 l:tg2 1i'el+ 48 'ittf3 'ii'e3#. Alekhine might have tried 47 'ii'f7 (47 . . . 1i'xc2?? 48 'ii'f8#) but Yates would simply have played 47 . . . 'ii'd3+ winning the rook with check (if 48 'ii'f3, then 48 .. . .i.e5+).

This sixteen-move ending, so rich in epaulettes and half-epaulettes, is as fine an example as any extant of queen and rook being completely dominated by queen and bishop.

47 l:tc3 1i'gl+ Of course Yates is not interested

in exchanging his triumphant bishop for the miserable rook. This is a king-hunt and it must move to its predestined end.

48 �h3 48 'ittf3 'iff2#.

48 ••. 'ir'fi+ 49 'ittg3

49 'itth2 .i.gl +, followed by mate in three more moves.

49 .i.f2+ 50 'ittf3 .tgl+ 51 'ittg3 'ir'f2+ 52 'itth3 'Wh2#

Amazingly, Black's e-pawn never moved!

Marshall - Bogoljubow 55

Game 21

F. J. Marshall (born 1 877) held the championship of the USA for twenty­seven years and seldom played a dull game. This last statement could be ap­plied also to his present opponent, who appears later on (Game 26) as the hunter.

Marshall - Bogoljubow New York 1924

Queen's Gambit Declined

1 d4 ltif6 2 m e6 3 -*.g5

After 3 c4 Bogoljubow's favour­ite line was 3 . . . .i.b4+. The early move of the c 1 -bishop prevents this, but it leaves Black with a strong re­ply in 3 . . . c5 ! . However, Black pre­fers to revert to classicism.

3 d5 4 e3 .!Dbd7 5 c4 c6

The game has now become a standard Queen's Gambit Declined, with Black apparently aiming at the Cambridge Springs Defence-6 .!Dc3 _.a5. This Marshal! prevents in the simplest way, by going into the Exchange Variation.

6 cxd5 7 lDc3

exd5 'ii'a5?!

Half the strength of the Cam­bridge Springs consists of the latent attack against the white bishop on g5. After the exchange of pawns this no longer exists and the queen move achieves little.

8 .i.d3 9 'ii'c2

10 .!Dxg5

lDe4 .!Dxg5 h6

11 .!Df3 12 0-0 13 a3!

-*.e7 0-0

The awkward position of the black queen allows Marshal! to start a minority attack, threatening b4-b5. Black has to spend two moves on preventive measures, after which White is justified in turning his at­tention to the black king.

13 'ii'd8 14 l:lae1 a5 15 'ii'e2 .!Df6

The white pieces are all set and Marshal! now goes all-out for a mat­ing attack in the style of many of Pillsbury's games.

16 .!DeS! 17 f4 18 .i.b1 19 'ii'c2

.i.d6 c5 .i.d7

This manoeuvre with queen and bishop, which we have already seen in Game 14 (Schlechter-Marco ), puts strong pressure on h7, introducing the threat of 20 .!Dxd5 ! .

19 .i.c6 20 dxc5 .i.xc5 (D) 21 'it>h1

Once the black knight is dis­lodged from f6 the white attack must break through. One threat is .!Dg4, but Marshall also frees the e-pawn for the advance e3-e4-e5 .

56 Game 21

w

21 22 e4 23 lbxc6 24 e5 25 1Wh7+

lle8 i.d4 bxc6 ltlg4

Thus White achieves his main aim. But meanwhile Bogoljubow has made an escape route for his king and the mate is not yet in sight. In fact the black king will be mated on a4 !

25 ..• � 26 g3

Black also had his threat, namely 26 . . . 'ii'h4 ! .

26 ... 1ih6 27 i.f5

Attacking the knight but also cov­ering d7 in readiness for the inevita­ble king-hunt.

27 ... lLlr2+ 28 :.xn

Alekhine called this an unneces­sary sacrifice, and recommended 28 <t>g2. The idea that sacrificial lines should be played only when neces­sary shows that Alekhine, for all his attacking genius, could also be very pragmatic. In fact, both moves are about equally effective.

28 29 1Wb8+ 30 'ifxg7!

i.xfl �e7

The hunt is really on; Black can­not stop to take the rook without be­ing mated in six by 3 1 'fi'f6+ �f8 32 'fi'xh6+ �g8 (32 ... �e7 33 'fi'd6#) 33 i.h7+ �h8 34 i.g6+ �g8 35 'fi'h7+ �f8 36 'fi'xf7#.

30 31 1i'f6+

w

32 e6!

�d8 lle7 (D)

There are many ways to win. Two more are 32 lldl i.c5 (or else White sacrifices on d5) 33 b4! axb4 34 axb4 when Black cannot take on b4 with either piece, and 32 'fi'xh6 (threat 33 'fi'f8+ lieS 34 'fi'd6#) l:ld7 33 lle2 when White has a material advantage and a crushing attack.

The move played takes immedi­ate advantage of the helpless black rook; 32 . . . i.xel is met by 33 exf7 ! and the pawn promotes.

32 i.d4 33 ext7!! i.xf6 34 f8'ii'+

The queen does a vanishing act on f6, instantly reappearing at f8

and making a clear rook profit on the deal.

34 �c7 35 lbe7+ i.xe7 36 'fi'xa8

The game is as good as over, for White is knight and pawn up and threatening 37 'ifc8+. Black might have resigned, but he lets us see the elegant finish of the hunt.

36 �d6 37 'ifb8!

Richter - Kretschmar 57

White threatens 38 'ife5+ �c5 and either 39 'ifxe7+ or 39 o!Da4+ winning the queen. Black avoids both threats but is summarily mated.

37 'fi'd8 38 We5+ �c5 39 o!Lla4+ �c4 40 'fi'c3+ �b5 41 i.d3+ �4 42 Wc2#

Marshall announced this mate af­ter Black's 37th move.

Game 22

One of the great tacticians of the 20th century was Kurt Richter of Berlin (born 1900). Apart from the tournament at Podebrady in 1936 he was content to remain inside Germany, quietly enjoying his chess and writing many at­tractive books in the process. The following game is phenomenal-studded with sacrifices and showing a king-hunt from e8 to e l .

Richter - Kretschmar Berlin Championship 1925

Richter-Veresov Attack

1 d4 d5 2 o!Dc3

Richter played this move so often that it ended up bearing his name. It has an anti-positional look in its ob­struction of the c-pawn, and it leaves Black with plenty of options, but White can develop rapidly.

2 ... .!Df6 When Black played 2 .. . e6 Richter

continued with 3 e4, transposing into the French Defence, against which he scored some fine victories, par­ticularly with the line 3 . . . o!Df6 4 i.g5 i.e7 5 i.xf6 i.xf6 6 e5 i.e7 7 'ifg4.

3 i.g5 h6 Black has a large choice here:

3 . . . i.f5, 3 . . . c6, 3 . . . g6, 3 . . . .!Dbd7 and 3 . . . o!De4 are all reasonable moves.

4 i.h4 i.f5 5 f3

Black has been playing to prevent White's e4, but White plays to force it; this is an essential part of Rich-ter's scheme.

5 .!Dbd7 6 o!Dxd5 .!Dxd5 7 e4 i.xe4 8 fxe4 o!Lle3

White has established mobile centre pawns, but Black seizes an unusual opportunity of seeing that he does not retain the two bishops as well.

58 Game 22

9 'ifd3 � 10 'ifxfl g5 11 i.g3 c6 12 0-0-0

Black's castling prospects are not very promising on either wing, and White has a fine open game with various attacking possibilities. Rich­ter asks for nothing better.

12 WaS 13 �b1 i.g7 14 lbe2 :m

Black protects his f-pawn in readiness for castling queenside, but Richter gives him no peace.

15 h4 r5 16 e5 e6 17 hxgS hxgS 18 llh7 llg8 (D)

With characteristic vigour Richter has been making threat after threat to prevent Black from castling. Now, however, it does look as though he has run out of steam and that Black will quietly equalise.

19 dS! This type of sacrifice-indeed

this very move--often occurred in Richter's games. He extends the

range of his rook and vacates a square for his knight, with a still more remarkable sacrifice in view.

19 cxdS 20 �4 llW 21 �xe6!

Black's last move was intended, of course, to prevent this very cap­ture. Richter decides, even at the cost of a piece, to prevent castling. He can hardly have been sure of a forced win, but he combines by in­tuition. He can expect at least a per­petual check, and there are always winning chances when the king is on the run.

21 ... tme6 After 2 l . . .�xh7 22 llxd5 ! 'ii'b6

23 lld6 'ifa5 24 'ifxf5 White has a crushing attack.

22 wxrs 'fib6 23 'ii'g6+ �e7

The primary object is attained: Black cannot castle. The perpetual check is already available (by 24 'iff6+, etc.) but Richter is not inter­ested, even though this is objectively the best course.

24 c4?! More open lines !

24 ••. d4 (D) 25 llxd4!

Throughout the attack Black has seemed to be just one move short of salvation-a not unusual state for Richter's opponents ! White there­fore burns his boats and goes in for the kill. He is sure to regain a minor piece, as 25 ... 'ifxd4 removes a guard from the knight, while 25 . . . �xd4 re­moves one from the bishop. Even so,

w

he will remain a rook down, and still the win is not forced.

25 ... 'ifxd4 After 25 . . . lDxd4! 26 l:.xg7+ l:.xg7

27 'ii'xg7+ �e8 there is no perpetual check, and White would be hard­pressed to make even a draw. It is less accurate to play 25 . . . :af8, for after 26 l:.d 1 ! (not 26 :d6 'ii' g 1 +) White has two pawns and a danger­ous attack for the piece.

26 'iff6+ 'it>d7 27 'ii'f7+ 'it>c6?

After this slip White has a draw. 27 . . . �d8 ! 28 'ii'xg8+ i.f8 would have forced White to attend to the mate on d l , and then he would have inadequate compensation for the piece.

28 'ifxe6+ �cS? (D) By playing 28 . . . �c7 Kretschmar

would still have drawn the game, for White seems to have nothing better than perpetual check on the sixth and seventh ranks. With a whole rook in hand, however, Black is evidently hoping for a win. If he can work his king round to a6 he will be able to develop his extra piece at last. He cannot achieve this aim by 28 . . . �c7

Richter - Kretschmar 59

because of 29 'ii'f7+ �b6? 30 ..tf2 winning the queen, so he tries to go via c5; and indeed it is difficult to see how White is going to stop him. Black still threatens mate in one.

w

29 ..tfl!! A worthy finishing touch to this

elegant game. Black has no option but to take the bishop, after which his king, deserted in mid-board, will be completely at the mercy of the white queen-while his own queen, bishop and two rooks look on pow­erless to intervene.

29 30 .. d5+ 31 .. d6+ 32 b4+ 33 .. d7+

_.xfl �b6 �aS �a4

This manoeuvre allows the rook to participate in the attack with gain of tempo.

33 �b4 34 'iVb5+ q;,c3 35 l:lh3+ �d2 36 'iVb2+ 'it>e1 37 l:lh1+ 1-0

After 37 . . . ..-n 38 •cl + White takes the queen with check.

60 Game 23

Game 23

Rudolf Spielmann (born 1883) was known in his day as 'The Last Prophet of Romanticism', nobody foreseeing the advent of Mikhail Tal ! Spielmann loved a king-hunt, kept a sharp eye open for it at every stage of the game, and devoted a whole chapter to the subject in his book Richtig Opfem.

His opponent here is not the great Akiba Rubinstein but his son, a com­paratively minor master. Whether Spielmann would ever have dared to treat Akiba quite like this is doubtful, but the method is absolutely typical of him. In the first fourteen moves he sacrifices two pieces-not for mate nor for any forced winning line but seeing only, as he admitted, that he could get the black king on the run.

Spielmann - S. Rubinstein Trebitsch Memorial Tournament,

Vienna 1933 Queen's Gambit Declined

1 d4 2 c4 3 M

�6 e6 dS

For the opening stages compare Game 14 (Schlechter-Marco) and particularly the note to White's 8th move.

4 llli3 i..e7 5 i..gS 0-0 6 e3 b6 7 i..d3 i..b7 8 i..xf6 i..xf6 9 cxdS exdS

10 h4 All this is exactly as Marshall

played at Paris 1900. Both Bum and Marco continued 10 . . . g6 and were demolished forthwith by 1 1 h5. The alternative defence IO .. . h6, provok­ing 1 1 g4, does not look any more inviting. Rubinstein decides to leave the kingside alone and counter clas­sically against the white centre-not

a bad idea if only the kingside will hold.

10 •.• cS 11 i..xh7+

A hackneyed enough beginning, to be sure, but the rest is not so simple. If Black plays the best de­fence-and he does-there is no mate. White has to invest a second piece and develop a great lateral hunt which eventually embraces all eight files.

1 1 ... �7 12 ltlg5+

Black has evidently foreseen that he has just one reply which keeps the game alive. Not 1 2 . . . i..xg5 1 3 hxg5+, nor 1 2 . . . �g8 1 3 'ii'h5, with immediate mate, nor 12 . . . �g6 1 3 'tWd3+ �h5 14 g4+ �xg4 15 :g1 + �h5 16 'ii'h7#.

He therefore plays: 12 •.• �h6! 13 'ii'd3

Threatening 14 'tt'h7#. 13 ... g6

He cannot play 1 3 . . . :hS because of 14 ltlxf7 +, but now he intends

. . .<l;g7 followed by ... llh8 with a ten­able position.

14 h5! (D) This second piece sacrifice is the

best chance. The threat now is 15 lt'lxf7+ followed by 'Wxg6#.

B

14 .•• .i.xg5?! The first slip. After 14 ... �xg5 ! 15

f4+ ( 1 5 e4 .i.xd4 !) �h6 16 hxg6+ 'i;g7 17 llh7+ �g8 White cannot justify his sacrifices.

15 hxg6+ 'i;g7 16 l:r.h7 + <j;f6

The black king must keep run­ning. If 16 . . . �g8 there follows 17 gxf7+! llxf7 1 8 1!i'g6+ and mate the following move.

17 0-0-0! White, still two pieces down, qui­

etly castles, tucking his king away and mobilising the second rook. Meanwhile Black has two pieces right out of the game, still unmoved.

17 ••. c4 Rubinstein gains a tempo and pre-

vents the opening of more lines. 18 'ti'e2 <i;e7 19 f4 .i.f6 20 e4!

Spielmann - S. Rubinstein 61

Spielmann forces open the centre fearlessly, so that his little army of four pieces may decisively overrun Black's force of six. The threat is 21 e5, with an avalanche of pawns.

20 ... dxe4 21 lt'lxe4 �d7

Level exchanges would of course suit Black admirably; but unfortu­nately for him 2l . . . .i.xe4 would not have been a level exchange, for after 22 1Wxe4+ the aS-rook would go as well.

22 d5 lt'la6? At last! But the knight is hardly

more 'developed' here than on b8. 22 . . . 'ti'e7 was a much better defence, preventing d6 because of the attack on e4, and intending . . . 'i;d8 fol­lowed by . . . lt'ld7, when Black has solved the problem of developing the queenside pieces.

23 g7 l:r.g8 After 23 . . . .i.xg7 24 1Wg4+ ! �c7

25 'ii'xg7 White still has a very strong attack, for example 25 . . . <i;b8 26 'ii'e5+ lDc7 27 d6 lt'le6 28 lt'lg5 ! .

24 llh6! After this White is bound to begin

winning back material. If 24 . . . .i.e7 White plays 25 d6, winning the bishop and opening the game still further. Rubinstein chooses, perhaps a little more promisingly, to let his queen go. For it he will have rook and two bishops-normally more than equivalent-and also removes the advanced g-pawn.

24 25 l:r.d6+ 26 'ii'xc4+!

.i.xg7 �c7

62 Game 24

Masterly precision. Black's king still takes precedence over the queen as a target. Now he is forced to shut in his aS-rook.

26 27 11xd8+

w

28 �b1

�b8 l:r.xd8 (D)

Black was threatening to return the compliment and win White's queen with 28 . . . 11c8.

28 29 30 31

d6 fS 'ikxe4

.i.xe4+ lbcs

Black rearranges his forces clev­erly, but in vain. His misplaced king cannot escape the white queen and rook.

32 'ii'c6 33 WdS 34 Wxf7 35 Wg8+ 36 'ikdS+ 37 Wc6

l:c8 l:d8 l:d7 �b7 �b8

The seventh queen move in suc­cession-and there are still three to come-threatens to win one of the black pieces by 38 b4.

37 38 'ii'xb6+ 39 Wc6 40 Wc7+

aS lbb7 l:d8 1-0

Thirty moves ago the hunt started on h7. The end of the long trail would be40 . . . �a7 after which White could continue by simply taking the bishop or, more conclusively, by 41 l:d5 threatening 42 l:r.xa5#; then 4 l . . .�a6 42 Wc6+ �a7 43 l:b5 forces mate.

Game 24

The next game shows a World Champion in the bud-Botvinnik at the age of 24. The fact that this devastating win is not even included in Botvinnik's own selection of his hundred best games between 1926 and 1 946 is an eloquent comment on the standard of his play during those years.

Botvinnik - Chekhover Moscow 1935 Reti's Opening

1 lLlf3 dS 2 c4

Reti pioneered this order of moves but it is not so much an open­ing as the basis of a complex of openings which melt bewilderingly into one another.

2 .•• e6

White is aiming to provoke 2 . . . d4, but it is not commonly played. After Black's present move, White can re­vert to the Queen's Gambit Declined by 3 d4, but this also is not so com­mon, for the simple reason that peo­ple who intend that opening are likely to play either 1 d4 or 2 d4.

3 b3 Now the opening is taking shape.

The present system was often used by Nirnzowitsch, whose name is sometimes given to it. It has much in common with the system known as Bird's Opening ( 1 f4) and also, with reversed colours, with a form of the Dutch Defence. White's main aim is to control the e5-square.

3 li)f6 4 ..tb2 ..te7 5 e3 0-0 6 ..te2 c6 7 0-0 ltJbd7 8 M a6 9 lbcl4

The best square for the knight in Bird's Opening and related systems is e5 . This in fact is where it is head­ing but it must first make way for the advance of the f-pawn.

9 dxc4 10 bxc4 ltJcS 11 f4! 'fkc7 12 lbf3! .::td8 13 'fkc2 ltJcd7 14 d4

Black is badly cramped, his c8-bishop and aS-rook being useless for the time being. White on the other hand has a mobile centre and varied attacking possibilities.

Botvinnik - Chekhover 63

14 ... cS Black is in a quandary. He must

have air, and as White has prevented . . . e5 this seems the next best thing. With this and his next three moves he gets a certain amount of freedom, but manages to free White's game even more-a not uncommon result when trying to break out of a con­stricted position.

15 lbeS The basis of many a kingside at­

tack. Pillsbury, for instance, made quite a trademark of it in the Queen's Gambit Declined, but of course it was a favourite move long before his time. Where it stands, the knight is almost intolerable for Black, but its capture immediately opens the f-flle and displaces Black's knight from its best defensive square, f6.

B

15 b6 16 ..td3 cxd4 17 exd4 (D)

White has the hanging pawns. If one of them could be induced to ad­vance, Black might blockade them and prove them weak, but there is no chance of this. On the contrary they

64 Game 24

exert a powerful crippling influence over Black's whole game.

17 •.• i.b7 1s 'ife2 m

Black over-protects h7 so that the displacement of his other knight would not be so serious; but a knight on f8 does have the tactical disad­vantage of making the defence of f7 rather more awkward-as Chek­hover presently finds to his cost.

19 �1 With all deliberation Botvinnik

starts walking his knight round from c3 to f2 whence it will be able to pro­ceed either to g4 or else, via h3, to g5.

19 ••• l:r.a7 Presumably to protect the king­

side along the second rank. But there is an awful lot of wood in between.

20 lLlf2 fibs 21 lLlh3 h6 (D)

Played to prevent 22 lLlg5 . This, however, is one of the not infrequent cases where it is found on further in­spection that the preventive move does not in fact prevent.

w

22 lLlgS!

The sacrifice of this knight (and only by taking it can Black defend f7) is amply justified by the power­ful play it gives to the rooks.

22 .•• hxgS 23 fxgS lLlsd7

He dare not move the other knight and let in the white queen. But now comes:

24 lLlxr/? This may be in the true spirit of

the king-hunt, but the simple fact is that this move not only throws away the win, it even puts White in danger of losing. What makes it especially unnecessary is the fact that White has a direct win by 24 lLlxd7 l:r.xd7 (or 24 . . . lLlxd7 25 l:r.xf7 ! �xf7 26 'ii'h5+ forcing mate) 25 gxf6 i.xf6 26 l:r.xf6 ! gxf6 27 _.g4+ r;11f8 28 i.a3+ .l:.d6 29 'ii'g3 <J;e7 30 c5 ! with overwhelming threats.

B

24 rbf7 25 g6+! (D)

25 ••• �g8? Now Black's king gets chased

right across the board. The best de­fence was 25 . . . �f8 26 'ii'xe6 lLle5 and now:

1) 27 dxe5 .i.c5+ 28 �h1 .i.xg2+! 29 'itxg2 l:xd3 30 l:xf6+ gxf6 3 1 'ii'xf6+ is given as a draw by Botvin­nik, but I cannot see any draw after 3 1 . . . �g8 32 'ii'e6+ 'ith8 33 'ii'f6+ l:g7.

2) Botvinnik himself gave 27 l:xf6+ ! gxf6 28 'ii'h3 .i.b4 29 l:e 1 .i.c8 3 0 'ii'h6+ 'ite8 3 1 dxe5 .i.xe1 32 'ii'h8+ �d7 33 'ii'g7+ 'itc6 34 ._,xf6+ �c7 35 e6, etc. However, there are improvements for Black in this line. First of all, 29 ... .i.xg2! 30 �xg2 .i.xe1 3 1 dxe5 fxe5 leaves White strug­gling. Secondly, 28 . . . .i.b4 is by no means forced; one reasonable al­ternative is 28 . . . .i.c5 ! ? 29 dxc5 .i.xg2 30 'ii'h6+ �g8 3 1 .i.f5 l:e8 32 �xg2 'ii'a8+ 33 �g1 'ii'c6 activating Black's pieces, and now it is White's king that is looking exposed. All in all, White's attack is unconvinc­ing-he might hope for a draw, but certainly not more.

26 'ii'xe6+ 27 1i'h3+ 28 .i.fS!

�h8 �g8

Threatening mate in three by 29 .i.e6+ and 30 'ii'h8+.

28 29 .i.e6+ 30 'ii'xe6+

Chekhover is happy to see the forces reduced for he is still two pieces up. The agony of the king­hunt awaits him nevertheless.

30 �h8 31 1i'h3+ �g8 (D) 32 l:xf6!

The crown of the combination. White will have rook and bishop

Botvinnik - Chekhover 65

w

against Black's two rooks and two bishops, but mobility makes all the difference. Just a move or two to release the pieces in the north-west corner would win the game for B lack but, alas, he must spend all his time moving his king.

32 .i.xf6 33 1i'h7 + 'iPf8 34 l:el

Threatening 'ii'h8#. 34 ... .i.eS!

What else? The e-file must be closed and 34 .. . .i.e7 would be a self­block.

35 1i'h8+ �e7 36 'ti'xg7+! �d6

If 36 . . .'iPe8, then 37 'fif7#, so the black king has to obstruct the queen, and the bishop can then be taken without setting her free. It is now mate in seven.

37 'ii'xeS+ �d7 38 'ti'fS+ �c6

Or 38 . . . �c7 39 l:e7+ �c6 40 'ii'f3+ �d6 41 .i.a3#.

39 dS+ �cS 40 .i.a3+

The bishop, fianchettoed at move four, has stood ever since on b2,

66 Game 25

motionless, yet powerfully influenc­ing the play. Now it makes its second and third moves and the mating net closes.

40 ... �xc4

41 1i'e4+ �cJ 41 . . . �b5 is no better because of

42 1i'b4#. 42 ..tb4+ �b2 43 1i'h1#

Game 25

Chekhover (born 1908) is out of luck in the present collection, for he loses the next game too. It was played in a match between two Russian masters best known as composers of endgame studies. In this field their names are world famous, but both were also fine players, a statement which is borne out by the fact that each achieved the considerable feat of reaching the final of the USSR Championship. Kasparian (born 19 10) was particularly original in the mid­dlegame and the following exhilarating chase to the eighth rank is an excel­lent example of his play.

Chekhover - Kasparian 2nd Match Game, Erevan 1936

King's Indian

1 d4 lLlf6 2 c4 d6 3 ltJf3 g6 4 g3 ..tg7 5 ..tg2 0-0 6 0-0

The g3 line against the King's In­dian has been used a great deal since that period. Normally it presents no great dangers to either side, but in the present game things soon take an un­usual turn.

6 ltJbd7 7 ltJc3 eS 8 dxeS

The natural way to stabilise the centre would be for White to play 8 e4, reserving the option of d5 later on. Chekhover wants to make an

open game of it from the start; later on he finds it a little too open.

8 ... dxeS 9 1i'c2

White's intention is to fianchetto his other bishop and then play l:.adl, but the mobility of the black e-pawn proves to be his undoing .

9 ••• l:e8 10 b3

Still White refrains from e4, and Kasparian now makes a vigorous advance which succeeds in loosen­ing the position of the white king.

10 e4! 11 ltJd4 e3! 12 f4

After playing 10 b3 Chekhover is understandably unwilling to play 12 ..txe3. Black would exchange off the bishop by 1 2 . . . ltJg4, leaving his own dark-squared bishop very pow­erful.

12 •.• c6 13 .i.b2 .. aS!

This, surprisingly enough, is the queen's shortest route to the king­side.

14 tlJf3 'irh5! 15 ttJd1 tlJc5 16 i.e5

White is still bent on using the long dark diagonal. He could, no doubt, have won the outlying e-pawn, but in any case his king will now be very exposed, for Black can remove the defensive g2-bishop at any time by . . . .i.h3.

B

16 .i.f5 17 �2 (D)

17 ..• :Xe5! ! A fine positional sacrifice. The

rook can be taken three ways, and in all of them the diagonal of the g7-bishop opens with devastating effect: 18 1Wxe5 tlJfe4, or 18 tlJxeS tlJg4 19 h4 .i.e4 ! 20 .i.f3 .i.xf3 21 :xf3 tlJd3 ! , the latter line being a novel way to step up the pressure on e5.

18 fxe5 19 h3

tlJg4 tlJxeS!

Chekhover - Kasparian 67

White's kingside is ruthlessly stripped. The knight pinned against the queen will be easily regained.

20 liJxeS .i.xh3! 21 :et

There is nothing better to do than mobilise the reserves. White cannot keep his winnings by 21 .i.xh3 for after 2l . . .1i'xh3 22 :f3 :e8 23 1Wd4 .i.xe5 24 1Wxe3 (24 'ifxc5 .i.xg3) 'ifd7 ! 8 lack ends up with a material advantage.

21 ... .i.xe5 22 ._c2 .i.xg3

The white king stares destruction in the face, and seems likely to be mated where he stands. In fact he will make a journey to e8.

23 tlJxe3 Chekhover no doubt took some

satisfaction in removing the original cause of all the trouble !

8

23 .i.xg2 24 �xg2 �2+ 25 �f3 .i.h4

Threatening mate by .. :ii'g3. 26 :gt �3+ 27 �4 (D)

27 .•. :eS

68 Game 26

Missing mate in five by 27 . . . g5+ 28 .:txg5+ (or 28 'lti>e5 'ilr'xe3+, etc.) ..txg5+ 29 'it>xg5 (29 �e5 'ii'e6+) tDe6+ 30 'it>f6 'ii'h4+ 3 1 'it>e5 'ii'f4#.

28 tL'lg4 tL'le6+ 29 'it>e5 tL'lg5+

Now there was a possible mate in four by 29 .. . ..tg3+ 30 .:txg3 (30 �e4 'ii'xg4+) 'ii'xg3+ 3 1 �e4 'ii'f4+ 32 �d3 'ii'd4#.

With the move played, Kasparian, one of the greatest ever masters of the mating study, crosses his fin­gers and hopes for 30 'it>f4, to which he will reply 30 . . . 'iff3+ ! ! 3 1 exf3 tL'lh3#, and be happy for the rest of his life. But Chekhover is also a mas­ter of the study. He avoids both this and 30 <ifi>f6 .:te6#, and continues his headlong flight.

30 'it>d6 31 l:bg3 32 'it>d7 (D)

..tg3+ 'ili'xg3+

Another neat little study has arisen and Chekhover finds it too in­teresting to be resigned. Kasparian rises to the occasion by offering the second exchange and demonstrating that queen and knight are sufficient for his needs.

32 ... 'ii'xg4+!

33 'it>xe8 34 'it>e7 35 �e8

'ii'c8+ 'iVc7+

If 35 'it>f6 Kasparian can reply quietly 35 .. . h6! threatening mate not only by . . . 'ikd6 but also by . . . tL'lh7.

35 ... lbe6! This move also threatens two

mates. 36 l::tdl

Chekhover prevents one of them, 36 . . . 'ii'd8#, but not the other:

36 .•. tL'lg7# Such finishes are the regular

stock-in-trade of these men, two of the world's greatest composers. One imagines them now eagerly seizing the pieces and demonstrating to one another all the other fascinating things that nearly happened.

Game 26

Efim Bogoljubow was one of the greatest of Ukrainian grandmasters. He was born in 1889 and reached his prime in the 1920s, his zenith being the tourna­ment of Moscow 1925 which he won ahead of Lasker and Capablanca. In 1929 and again in 1934 he tried unsuccessfully to wrest the world champion­ship from Alekhine. He became a naturalised German and spent the last twenty-five years of his life in Germany. The following game was played in a

Machate - Bogoljubow 69

small all-German tournament. His opponent was little known internationally so the game has not been much publicised; but the elegance of the hunt, with one knight being offered four times before being finally accepted, makes it one of Bogoljubow's best productions.

Macbate - Bogoljubow Bad Elster 1936

Giuoco Piano

1 e4 e5 2 ll:lf3 llJc6 3 ..i.c4 ..i.c5 4 d3 d6

The Giuoco Pianissimo may be old-fashioned but is not so dull as some of its critics make out. The clash comes more quickly when White plays 4 c3 (see Games 1 and 30) but there is plenty of play in the more deliberate method of the pre­sent game.

5 ..i.e3 ..i.b6 6 llJc3 ll:lf6 7 li'd2 ..i.g4

In spite of its name the opening provides rapid and effortless devel­opment to both sides. In the modern Sicilian, by contrast, it is not unusual after seven moves to see the black kingside still untouched. The fact that both sides can develop so easily is, of course, the very reason why most modem masters avoid the opening.

8 llJd5 9 ..i.xd5

10 c3

lbxd5 0-0

In the Giuoco Piano it is common practice to keep the opponent guess­ing as to one's castling intentions, but the trouble with the present move

is that it will leave the white king un­comfortable on either wing: it loos­ens the queenside and at the same time permits Black to break up the kingside.

10 ll gxf3 12 f4

..i.xf3 1i'f6

Here White might have staked everything on 12 r,t>e2 with immedi­ate use of the g-file. Bogoljubow would no doubt have reacted sharply in the centre, forcing . . . d5 without delay.

w

12 13 fxe3

..i.xe3 ll:le7! (D)

This is the grandmaster getting to work to force the game, conscious that the opposition is not quite up to his own class. He invites 14 ..i.xb7, after which 14 . . . Ab8 would give him a powerful initiative; e.g. 15 ..i.d5 (not 15 ..i.a6? which loses a piece after 15 . . . d5 !) ll:lxd5 16 exd5 exf4,

70 Game 26

tearing the centre wide open. White avoids this but however he plays now he is bound to be in difficulties, sim­ply because his king is so much less secure than Black's.

14 i.b3 aS! 15 0-0

Machate chooses the kingside; not very inviting, certainly, but Black has a ready-made attack on the other wing too.

15 •.. a4 16 i.c2 a3

Bogoljubow had a particular pre­dilection for spreading his opera­tions over the whole board. In typical fashion he has taken the initiative on the queenside, but it is still not easy to see how he will manufacture his win. Both his bishops have gone and there is no direct way of getting at the exposed white king. Meanwhile there is considerable potential in the central white pawn-mass.

17 b4 cS 18 fxe5 ii'xe5 19 bxcS 'ii'xc5 20 i.b3 d5 21 d4 'ii'c6 22 exd5

White's object is to engineer a concerted advance of the centre pawns; a good idea but it might have been better achieved by 22 e5 ! with e4 to follow soon.

22 ••• tiJxd5 23 c4

For eight moves Bogoljubow has restrained himself from attacking in the region of the castled king. Now the time has come and he gives a

remarkable demonstration of the power of queen and knight in combi­nation, not calling on his rooks for another ten moves.

23 ..• 'ii'g6+! 24 �

Compulsory, alas, for 24 �hl al­lows 24 . . . 'ii'e4+ winning at least a pawn and forcing the queens off.

24 ..• lDf6! Now the knight gets into the at­

tack, either at e4 or at g4. 25 i.c2 lDg4+ 26 �e2 'ii'h5!

Quietly inducing the king to keep walking.

B

27 �d3 lDe5+! 28 �c3 (D)

28 ..• lDfJ? Missing 28 . . . lDxc4 ! 29 i.xh7+

(after 29 �xc4 l:fc8+ 30 �d3 'ii'b5+ 31 �e4 'ii'c6+ 32 �d3 'ii'c4+ Black wins an important pawn) 'it'xh7 30 �xc4 l:fc8+ 3 1 �b3 'ii'e4 with a de­cisive attack.

29 'ii'e2? After 29 'ii'g2 ! Black would cer­

tainly have had no advantage, for example 29 . . . 'ii'a5+ (29 . . . lDxh2? 30

l:fS ! 1i'h6 3 1 l:h1 1i'xe3+ 32 .i.d3 l:ad8 33 dS wins the knight) 30 �d3 l0h4 3 1 1i'xb7 l:ab8 32 1i'e4 l0g6 33 .i.b3 and Black has little to show for the pawn.

After the move played, the knight, pinned against the queen and twice attacked, appears for a moment to be lost, but everything has been fore-seen.

29 ••.

Even the black a-pawn, advanced at moves 14-16, is now playing a part in the encirclement of the white king. And still the knight wizardry continues.

30 �d3 ltJe5+!! An echo of move 27. Had the

knight been accepted then, the king and queen would have been crudely skewered by . . . l:d8+. This time the offer is more subtle: 3 1 dxeS l:ad8+! 32 �e4 l:d2 (with the queen on g2, White has the defence l:f2) 33 1i'el f6 with a decisive attack.

31 �e4 f5+ 32 �f4 l0g4

With a nasty threat of . . . 'ii'c7+. The knight has made six of Black's last ten moves-and there are more to come!

33 �g3 l:ae8 (D) Apart from castling, this is the

first rook move in the whole game.

Machate - Bogoljubow 71

w

34 :o 'Protecting' the e-pawn; but this

is another of those preventive moves which do not prevent.

34 .•• lbxe3! It's that knight again! If 35 l:xe3

Black forks with 35 . . . f4+. 35 ._d3 ._c7+ 36 �h3 l:f6!

The final achievement of the knight is to stand passively en prise at e3, giving Black the one tempo he needs to administer the coup de grace with queen and rook. White must capture, for there is a threat of 37 . . . l:h6#.

37 lhe3 38 �g2

0-1 Foreseeing the mate which Black

can force after 39 �fl (or 39 �f3 l:h3#) 'ii'h1+ 40 �f2 l:h2+ 41 �g3 'ii'g2+ 42 �f4 .. g4#.

Game 27

The Olympiads, which draw together players with a wide range of ability and varying styles and methods, never fail to produce plenty of out-of-the-ordi­nary chess. (See Games 28, 37 and 4 1 .)

72 Game 27

The Munich Team Tourn;unent of 1936 was an unofficial Olympiad, inter­polated between Warsaw 1 935 and Stockholm 1 937. The matches were con­tested on eight boards instead of the usual four, and although there was a clash of dates with the grandmaster tournament at Nottingham, a wealth of good chess was played. The following game-yet another eight-rank hunt-is too good to be missed.

Ichim - Rosselli Munich Team Tournament 1936

Slav Defence

1 d4 d5 2 m tDr6 3 c4 c6

This Slav Defence differs from the Orthodox 3 . . . e6 of Games 14, 2 1 and 2 3 not only i n leaving the c8-bishop unobstructed, but also in preparing in some variations to take on c4. The system was very popular about this time on account of its thorough exploration during the 1 935 Euwe-Alekhine World Cham­pionship match, in which both play­ers adopted it repeatedly.

4 tDc3 dxc4 5 a4

After this move Black develops the bishop which is usually such a problem in the Orthodox Queen's Gambit Declined. Another method sometimes used by White is to allow Black to play . . . b5 and then attack with a4.

5 ... �f5 6 tbe5

Simply 6 e3 is another way to re­cover the pawn. 6 tbh4 on the other hand achieves little; the black bishop retires to c8, leaving White's knight rather out on a limb.

6 7 l2Jxc4 8 g3

tbbd7 "ilc7

This is the idea of retaking the c4-pawn with the knight: the bishop is to be developed on g2.

8 ... e5 Thus Black secures total freedom

for his pieces. 9 dxe5

10 �f4 11 �g2

tbxeS lDfd7 0-0-0?!

The pinned black knight is not in danger: it can always be sustained by . . . f6. Queenside castling, how­ever, is certainly tempting provi­dence, for two white bishops point that way, and there are open files for both rooks. Euwe, a connoisseur of this defence, won a fine game from Alekhine by refraining from castling until move 26, and then choosing the kingside.

12 'ii'cl f6 13 0-0 hS

This rapid opening of the h-file was no doubt Black's idea in cas­Hing queenside, but White is also well-placed for similar tactics and the white pieces are more aggres­sively placed to support an attack on the king.

14 a5 g5 15 tbxeS! (D)

B

Already the complications are critical and the result of the game may hang on a single tempo. To this excellent move Black cannot reply, as he would no doubt prefer, with l 5 . . . gxf4 because he would then lose the exchange after 1 6 ti:lf7; so four pieces come off, leaving White with the vital tempo for a6, which will open an even more dangerous file and strengthen the fianchettoed bishop.

15 ti:lxeS 16 ..txe5 'ii'xe5 17 a6! h4 18 axb7+ �b8

If Black plays 1 8 . . . 'itixb7 White finishes beautifully: 19 ti:lb5 ! ! 'iixb5 20 .i.xc6+!. 1ihc6 2 1 lha7+! win­ning the queen, and mating before the black pieces can intervene.

19 tt:la4 hxg3 Black opens the h-file, and ap­

pears to be not without chances of his own.

20 hxg3 .i.e4 A strong move-indeed essen­

tial-both for attack and defence. The white g2-bishop is neutralised.

21 'ii'c4! :d4

lchim - Rosselli 73

Black could have killed the attack stone dead by 2 1 . . . ..txg2 22 �xg2 'iid5+, although White would retain an edge in the resulting endgame. Instead, Rosselli decides to keep up the tension, but this turns out to be a serious misjudgement.

22 1i'a6! 'ii'b5 (D) After 22 . . . .i.xg2, White mates by

23 ti:lb6! . The move played aims to force the queens off, which here would lead to a more or less equal position. But chess is an unkind game: Rosselli's ingenuity has in fact let him in for an immortal king­hunt.

w

23 1i'xa7+! ! �xa7 24 ti:lc5+ �b6

24 .. .'�b8 is no better: 25 l:ta8+ �c7 26 :c8+ �d6 27 tt:lxe4+ lhe4 28 b81i'+ 1i'xb8 29 l:td 1 + �e5 30 l1xb8, followed by l:te8+ and .l:.dd8, leaves White a clear enough win. Af­ter 24 . . . .l:.a4 White reaches an end­ing with a safe extra pawn, which should be enough to win.

25 b81IV+ �xcS The white queen has reappeared

without delay, and the real sacrifice

74 Game 28

amounts to a bishop for a pawn-a small investment which has brought the black king to the fourth rank, with the certainty of further travels in the near future.

26 'ira7+ �dS 27 :aS

Had Black played 26 . . . 'ili'b6 this same rook move, with check, would still have won the queen. Black could now resign, but he lets us see the rest of the hunt.

27 ..tcS 28 l:xbS cxbS 29 .. d7+ ..td6 30 ..txe4+ �xe4 31 "fie6+ .tes 32 f4 gxf4 33 l:xf4+ �e3 34 "ft'b3+ 1-0

The black king will be driven to the eighth rank to be mated: e.g. 34 ... �d2 35 'ili'c3+ �xe2 36 l:f2+ �d1 37 l:fl+ �e2 38 l:e1#.

Game 28

The Buenos Aires Olympiad of 1 939 was in progress at the outbreak of the Second World War. It is hard to believe that the game which we select from it was the work of a schoolboy, A be Yanofsky, playing top board for Canada at the age of 14. At move 21 White's queen is attacked and it appears that any at­tempt to save it pennits mate. Black might have been excused for anticipating a win rather than a king-trip to the eighth rank!

An even more prodigious performance, by an even younger player, may be found in Game 35.

Yanofsky - Dulanto Buenos Aires Olympiad 1939

French Defence

1 e4 e6 In later years Yanofsky became an

authority on the French Defence. Here he is quite happy playing the white pieces against it.

2 d4 dS 3 lDc3 �6 4 ..tgs dxe4

The surrender of the centre at this point avoids the highly analysed Classical Defence and gives Black a safe though not very active game.

5 l2Jxe4 6 llJfJ 7 l2Jxf6+

l2Jbd7 i.e7 l2Jxf6

7 . . . ..txf6 is probably a safer line. 8 i.d3 cS 9 dxcS .aS+

10 c3 'irxcS 11 0-0 0-0 12 l:el l:d8 13 ttJes

White opens his attack. Its first objective is the weakened f7-pawn, but the queen's road is also cleared to h5, from which point she will op­erate simultaneously against f7 and h7.

13 ... b6? Oblivious of what his schoolboy

opponent is preparing. 14 .txf6 .txf6 (D)

w

15 .txh7+ The most hackneyed sacrifice of

all, which nevertheless leads to an infinite variety of afterplay. Con­trast, for instance, the sequel to a similar sacrifice played by Spiel­mann in Game 23. If now 15 .. .'it>xh7 White has the familiar mating proce­dure 1 6 1i'h5+ 'it>g8 17 'iixf7+ 'it>h7 1 8 l:e3, etc.

15 ••• 'it.tf8 16 1i'h5 .txe5

There is little choice. If 16 . . . g6 White can play 17 i.xg6 fxg6 1 8 'ii'f3 'it>g7 19 ll:Jg4 ! .

17 lhe5 18 .te4

'fic7 .tb7

Presumably this was why Black played his queen back to c7. But it is the unfortunate position of the queen on b7 which plays an important part in the king-hunt which follows. Yan­ofsky records that he had planned it all, including the rook sacrifice at move 22, before playing 14 .txf6.

w

Yanofsky - Dulanto 75

19 .txb7 20 'fibS+ 21 'fixg7

22 :Xe6+!!

'fixb7 'it.te7 l:g8 (D)

Without this key move the whole line of play would be false, for the white queen is tied to the g-file on pain of instant mate.

22 ••• �e6 23 l:r.el+

The black king has four possible moves. If 23 . . . 'it>f5 White mates in 3 starting with 24 l::te5+, 23 . . . 'it>d7 24 'ii'xf7+ costs the queen and 23 .. .'�d5 24 c4+ 'it>c6 25 'ii'f6+ is similar to the game. He therefore tries:

23 ••• 'itd6 24 'ii'f6+ 'itc5

Any other move and the black king and queen are skewered by queen or rook.

25 l::te5+ 'itc4 26 b3+ 'itd3

26 . . . 'itxc3 would be met by 27 l:r.e2+ 'iPd3 28 l:te3+ 'itc2 29 'iVc3+, etc.

27 'fid6+ 'itc2 If 27 . . . 'itxc3 White mates by 28

l::te3+ 'iPb2 29 :Z.e2+, as in the game.

76 Game 29

28 :e2+ 1-0 28 .. .'�xc3 allows mate in one by

29 tlld2#; while if he goes to the eighth rank it is mate in two by 29

'ilfd2+, etc. White had to conduct the whole chase with checks since he was continuously under threat of mate in one.

Game 29

International chess was quick to revive after the end of the Second World War. The first real encounter of top-class players since 1 939 took place at Groningen in Holland. This was during the interregnum after the death of Alekhine, and the line-up contained enough talent to make it stronger than Interzonals of the present day. Top place was shared between ex-champion Max Euwe and Botvinnik, who was to become the new champion two years later.

The Second World War was particularly cruel to the career of Euwe (born 1 901) , swallowing the years which should have marked the very peak of his achievements. The following game, in which Euwe mercilessly pursues the Hungarian grandmaster Szabo, is probably the most spectacular he ever played. It is the only one in the present collection in which the king is made to traverse all eight files as well as all eight ranks.

Szabo - Euwe Groningen 1946

Queen's Gambit Accepted

1 d4 dS 2 c4 dxc4 3 ltJf3 a6

Euwe played the openings with great skill. His favourite treatment of the Queen's Gambit was either direct acceptance, as here, or else the Slav Defence with an early capture of the c4-pawn. The move . . . a6 is usually played sooner or later in the Gambit Accepted, and by playing it now Euwe restricts White's choices, in particular preventing him from play­ing tlla4+, the Mannheim Variation.

4 e3 lbt'6 5 .txc4 e6

6 0-0 7 'ife2 8 :d1 9 .tb3

c5 lbc6 bS c4

Black establishes a queenside pawn majority, but the real motive of this move is tactical-namely to ex­change off the white bishop.

10 .tc2 lbb4 11 lbc3 lbxc2 12 11i'xc2 .tb7 13 e4

Understandably White wants to make something out of his centre pawns, but this advance is prema­ture, as Euwe immediately shows. White had at his disposal a combina­tion which has won many games in similar positions of the Queen's Gambit Accepted (e.g. Reshevsky-

Vidmar, Nottingham 1936): 1 3 d5 exdS 14 e4 ! with dangerous play against the black king and queen.

13 ..• b4! 14 e5

Practically forced. 14 15 exf6 16 'ifa4+ 17 'ifxc4 18 We2

bxc3 gxf6 'ifd7 l:.c8 l:.g8 (D)

With queen, two rooks and two bishops readily available, Black has a tremendous attack, and in view of all the open lines it is doubtful if White's game could possibly be saved. The black king is safest in the centre.

19 li)e1 "ii'd5 20 f3 ..td6 21 �h1 1ih5 22 h3 l:.g3 23 ..te3 <j;e7 24 wn l:.cg8 25 bxc3 (D)

For ten moves this pawn has stood unmolested, both sides having been too busy to do anything about it. White takes it now, having literally

Szabo - Euwe 77

nothing better to do. But the white barricades are bound to be overrun.

25 ... l:lxg2! 26 'ifxg2

If 26 lbxg2 Black wins by means of 26 . . . '6'xh3+ 27 �g1 ..txf3.

26 ... lbg2 27 �xg2

White has managed to get two rooks for his queen, but the hunt is only just beginning.

27 28 � 29 �e2

'iWg6+ ..tg3+ ..txel!

The hide-bound classicist may be surprised to see the bishop pair squandered in this way, but, as Euwe himself has pointed out, the pres­ence of bishops on opposite colours is a distinct asset to the side which is attacking the king. Certainly he now demonstrates that he has all the at­tacking material he needs with queen and the unopposable bishop on the light squares.

30 l:.xel 31 'iti>d3 32 a4 33 'it>c4

'ifg2+ ..txf3 ..te4+ 'iWc2 (D)

78 Game 30

33 . . . .i.c2! was even quicker, when White is helpless to meet the threat 34 . . . 1Wd5+ 35 �b4 a5+.

34 dS Black was threatening a quick

mate with 34 . . . .i.d5+. White must clear d4 to give room to his useless bishop.

34 ... 35 �b4

.i.xdS+ �d7

A forgotten ally comes across to complete the mating net; but this plan is not without risk, for White

still possesses two potentially dan­gerous rooks. They have the d- and b-files already at their disposal and now Szabo deliberately gives up an­other pawn to open the c-ftle as well. Black will have to be careful not to give the rooks a single chance to en-ter.

36 c4 37 �aS 38 �xa6 39 �b7 40 .i.b6

1Vxc4+ 'iVc3+ .i.c4+ 'iVh3+ 'iVf3+

The whole of this ending has been a superb exhibition of the lateral and diagonal powers of the queen.

41 �b8 .i.a6! Now White allows himself one

consolation check but mate must follow.

42 l:ted1+ �e8 0-1

Because of 43 �c7 'ii'b7+ 44 �d6 1i'xb6#.

Game 30

Here is another example ofEuwe's vigorous play in this period. The redoubt­able and well-loved Tartakower is unfortunate in this selection, appearing for the second time as the victim.

Tartakower - Euwe Venice 1948

Giuoco Piano

1 e4 eS 2 lbf3 lbc6 3 .i.c4 .i.cS 4 c3 .i.b6

This move and Black's next two constitute the strongpoint system of

defence in the Giuoco Piano. Black avoids exchanging his e5-pawn, keeping it well protected as a perma­nent feature of his game.

S d4 'iVe7 Now that the black bishop has

retreated from c5 the exchange of pawns is no longer compulsory. For comparison see Game 1 .

6 0·0 d6

White is at liberty at any time to play d5 or dxe5, but either of these moves would open a diagonal for the b6-bishop.

7 h3 8 l:te1 9 lDa3

lDf6 0-0 lDd8

Euwe conceives a remarkable plan in the Steinitz manner, with­drawing both knights to the back rank in order to have . . . c6 and . . . f6 available. However, this plan is ex­tremely time-consuming and Black soon runs into trouble.

10 ..tn 11 lbc4

lDe8 f6

B lack had no other reasonable way to meet the attack on e5, but now the opening of the b3-g8 diago­nal costs Black a pawn.

12 a4! c6 13 lbxb6 axb6 14 'it'b3+ lDe6 15 'it'xb6

This is the critical position. White has both won a pawn and gained the bishop pair; moreover Black's knight is sitting immobilised on e8. It seems incredible that a player of Tartakower's class could lose this winning position, yet, incredibly, twenty-eight moves later his queen, still unmoved at b6, has the option of being lost or forming a self-block in her own king's mating net!

15 g5 16 i.c4 h6 (D) 17 h4?

A serious error. Black's only hope is a desperate kingside attack, yet White spends time opening lines

Tartakower - Euwe 79

w

which can only assist Black's at­tack-one could hardly wish for a more co-operative opponent. Any normal plan of development, such as 17 i.e3, or 17 b3 followed by i.a3 and l:tad1, should suffice for victory. Perhaps 17 d5 cxd5 1 8 i.xd5 lD8c7 19 i.c4 is most accurate of all, in­tending b3 and i.a3, since this not only opens more lines for the bish­ops but also allows the queen to re­treat to e3, if necessary.

17 �h7 18 hxg5 hxg5 19 dxe5 dxe5 20 i.e3 :b8 21 g3 �g6

Thanks to White's faulty play, Black already has serious threats on the kingside, and accurate defence is required .. .

22 �g2? (D) . . . which is not forthcoming. 22

i.fl , intending i.g2, was the way to meet the h-file threats. White in­tended, no doubt, to exchange off one pair of rooks, but he is one move too late: the lightning strikes.

22 lLif4+! ! 23 gxf4 i.h3+

80 Game 30

B

24 �g3 White must return the piece in this

way, for if 24 �gl Black continues 24 . . . gxf4 threatening either . . . 'ifh7 or . . . fkg7, with immediate destruc-tion.

24 .••

25 �xf4 exf4+ 'i'd7!!

Euwe's conduct of the attack is the essence of perfection. After this surprising finesse White's only way to avoid mate in two or three moves is to retire his knight to the pathetic square h2.

26 ll:Jh2 gxf4+ 27 �xf4 l:.h4+ 28 �e3 �g2

Black threatens 29 . . . llxe4#, but this is easily prevented. After his next move White probably saw vi­sions of rallying his forces and get­ting away with his two extra pawns after all.

29 ll:Jf3 (D) 29 ... llxe4+!!

Black forces a renewal of the hunt. Now the white king will stand in the centre of the board, exposed to the full power of Black's four re­maining pieces.

B

30 �e4 31 �d3

Anything else is worse, for in­stance 3 1 �f4 'ii'f5+ 32 �g3 fkh3+ 33 �f4 fkxf3#. Other moves lose the outlying queen either by a fork or a discovered check.

31 32 �d4 33 �d3 34 �cl

'6'f5+ 'ii'f4+ 'ii'xc4+ �xf3

At last White has a moment's res­pite to bring his queen back into the game, but now that Black has picked up two minor pieces he can hardly invite the exchange. He decides in­stead to make an escape route for his king to get away to the a-file via the dark squares.

35 b3 36 �b2

The non-checking moves are al­ways the difficult part of a king­hunt. Now White can give a check or two.

37 llg1+ rM7 38 llacl

He decides against the second check. After 38 fkc7+ �e6 White's queen would be more remote than

ever, and in no less danger, for ex­ample 39 l:lacl fails to 39 . . . '1id2+ 40 �a3 lbb5+!.

38 ... 'ii'd2+ 39 �a3 (D)

For the third time the game corus­cates into brilliance. The white king has been driven into the line of fire of the unmoved rook and the game ends with successive sacrifices of knight and rook, reminiscent of Black­burne-Lipschutz, New York 1 889. Every chess master hopes to create one immortal game in his lifetime. This is Euwe's.

39 40 bxc4

lbc4+!! l:lxa4+! !

Smyslov - Florian 81

41 �xa4 42 �b4

0·1 For 43 �c5 loses the queen to

43 . . . 'fixf2+, and the only alternative is 43 �a5 'lia3#.

Game 31

Vassily Smyslov (born 1921) won the World Championship i n 1 957 but held it for one year only. He is one of the giants of the game; the massive style which marks his maturity alarms even his fellow grandmasters. The follow­ing game, played in his twenties, is not really typical. It shows another king being driven straight across the board to be mated on the eighth rank.

Smyslov - Florian Moscow v. Budapest Match,

Moscow/Budapest /949 Griinfeld Defence

1 d4 lbf6 2 c4 g6 3 lbc3 dS

Smyslov later became one of the leading authorities on this defence.

4 lbCJ i..g7 5 'lib3 dxc4 6 'ii'xc4 0-0 7 e4

The usual state of affairs in the Griinfeld Defence is that White gets a strong-looking centre which, how­ever, generally breaks up under pres­sure from the g7-bishop combined with an early . . . c5.

7 lba6 8 i..e2 c5 9 d5 e6

The destruction of White's cen­tral formation proceeds systemati­cally. Black has also achieved the endgame advantage of a majority of pawns on the queenside. It is a long

82 Game 31

time before there is any hope of mak­ing use of this; in fact, in the present game, White keeps his opponent so busy on the kingside that the queen­side pawns never move at all.

10 0-0 exd5 11 exd5 'ir'a5 12 a3

Here this move indicates not a timid player but a resolutely aggres­sive one, for it prevents 12 . . . 'ir'b4 af­ter which White would either have to exchange queens or else retreat with loss of time and initiative.

12 .if5 13 'it'h4 lUeS 14 .ih6

White methodically removes the dark-squared bishop-a standard procedure against the kingside fi­anchetto formation.

B

14 15 .ixg7 16 lDg5 (D)

lDe4 'it>xg7

The attack which Smyslov opens with this move should not have been decisive. Black undoubtedly ought to have played 1 6 . . . lDxg5 1 7 1Wxg5 1i'd8 with a defensible game and

good prospects in the ending, but no doubt he relied upon the fact that White cannot take the h-pawn with­out losing a piece. Black does in­deed win a piece, but he could hardly have foreseen the full cost!

16 lDxc3? 17 'iVxh7+ �6 18 bxc3!

Now Black can take knight or bishop. After 1 8 .. Jhe2 White plays 19 f4 and one continuation given by Smyslov was 19 . . . 1i'c7 20 d6 1i'd7 21 .l:tae1 llxe1 22 llxe1 lle8 23 l:.e7 ! l:.xe7 24 'ii'h8#.

B

18 'it>xg5 19 1i'g7!! (D)

The non-checking moves are al­ways the difficult ones to foresee, and no doubt this is the one which Florian overlooked. He is invited to take the bishop as well, but if he does he is mated; e.g. 19 . . . .:.xe2 20 f4+ �g4 21 h3+ �g3 22 .l:tf3+ �h4 23 'ii'h6#.

19 .l:te4 20 f4+ .l:txf4 21 .l:txf4 'itxf4 22 .l:tfi+ �e3

If22 . . . �e4, Smyslov had another quiet move in readiness: 23 .i.c4! .

23 'ife5+ �d2 24 .tc4! 'ifxa3

Averbakh - Kotov 83

The condemned man eats the pro­verbial hearty breakfast.

25 l:tf2+ 1-0 25 . . . �dl 26 'ii'e2+ �cl 27 l:tfl#.

Game 32

Most of our games-since the flrst eight-have been from international tour­naments. The next one is, if possible, even more deadly serious for it comes from the penultimate stage of a World Championship series. The reader may be forgiven if after playing through the game he flnds this difficult to believe!

Alexander Kotov (born 1913) reached the peak of his form hereabouts. In 1952 he won the Saltsjobaden Interzonal by three clear points and the follow­ing game was played in the subsequent Candidates Tournament in Switzer­land.

The spectacular sacrifice of queen for only a pawn can hardly be paralleled in master play, for it does not lead to any clear mating line but merely brings the white king into a sector from which there is no escape. Averbakh has to make no fewer than thirteen king moves in the 3x2 rectangle h4-h5-f4-f5.

Averbakh - Kotov Neuhausen-Zurich

Candidates Tournament 1953 Old Indian

1 d4 2 c4 3 lLJf3 4 lLlc3 5 e4

lbt'6 d6 lLlbd7 e5 .i.e7

Black settles for the Old Indian formation. By 5 . . . g6 he could still have gone over to the King's Indian.

6 .te2 0-0 7 0-0 c6

Black's position is now identical with the Hanham Variation of Phili­dor's Defence, in which, however, White would probably have a bishop instead of a pawn at c4. The solid

pawn formation here employed by Black is one in which Steinitz al­ways placed great faith.

8 'ii'c2 l:te8 9 l:td1 .tf8

These last two moves of Black are designed to over-protect his e5-pawn and also to bring latent pres­sure to bear on the white e4-pawn . With many players the ulterior mo­tive is to induce White to react by closing the centre by d5, after which Black will have time for a leisurely build-up against the white king.

10 l:tb1 aS Just as in the Hanham Variation it

would be unwise to allow White un­challenged expansion on the queen­side.

11 d5 ltJc5

84 Game 32

12 .te3 'flc7 13 b3 .td7 14 :bet g6 15 lOd2 :Sb8 16 tiJb3

So far the game's centre of gravity is well over towards the queenside; the kingside is as yet undisputed no man's land. This last move invites Black to close up the centre com­pletely-an invitation which he ac­cepts. During the next dozen moves both sides turn their attention to the kingside and there is a general mi­gration across the board.

w

16 �b3 17 'flxb3 cS 18 �b2 'it>b8 19 'flc2 tlJgS 20 .tg4 lDb6 21 .txd7 1Vxd7 22 11i'd2 tiJg8 (D)

23 g4 An extremely risky plan. As

Bronstein puts it: 'Averbakh goes to put out the frre with gasoline.'

23 ... rs Now the battle for the kingside

is really on. White's king position is

considerably weakened but he is hoping his rooks will take control.

24 f3 .te7 2s :g1 :rs 26 l:r.cfl :n 27 gxf5 gxf5 28 :g2 f4 29 .tn lU6 30 tiJe2 (D)

In view of Black's threatened 30 . . . :h6 White must defend the h­pawn. The knight comes across, cre­ating an incidental threat of 3 1 'ikxa5, to which White expects the reply 30 . . . b6 as a matter of course. Then 3 1 tlJgl and everything is un­der control. Even if Averbakh had seen Kotov's idea, there was little he could have done to prevent it.

B

30 31 'ii?xb3 32 �g4

Now the white king is in a box, and there is no way out. But how to actually mate him is another matter. The trouble with sacrificing a whole queen is that the opponent can al­ways afford to give back even two pieces and still win the endgame.

32 •.. lLlf6+ 33 r,Prs lLld7

The threat is 34 . . . l:lf8+ 35 �g4 l:lg8+ 36 �f5 l:lf6#.

34 l:lgS! 35 �g4 36 �

Black needs time to work out his mating procedure so, with a whole range of discoveries at his disposal he now makes use of some see-saw checks to catch up on the clock.

36 ... ll:lg8+ 37 �g4 lLlr6+

It turns out that 37 . . . i.xg5 would have been the most efficient win, but Black wanted to reach move 40 be­fore making any irrevocable deci-si on.

38 r,Prs lLlxdS+ It is a little risky to give the white

queen a possible point of entry, but Black dare not risk a draw by repeti­tion of position.

39 �g4 ll:lf6+ 40 �fS lLlg8+ 41 �g4 lLlr6+ 42 r,Prs lLlgS+ 43 'iti>g4 i.xgS

Kotov is ready to try again to find the decisive line. His precious pieces are being thinned out: only knight and two rooks are left to finish the job. White is still a vast amount of material ahead and he needs only a move or two of respite from the checks to get it into action.

44 �gS l:lr7 (D) Black must play forcing moves,

but this does not necessarily mean checks. He now threatens 45 . . . l:lg7 +

Averbakh - Kotov 85

w

46 �f5 l:lf6#. White must concede a piece, but this he can well afford.

45 i.h4 l:lg6+ 46 �hS l:lfg7

Threatening 47 ... l:lh6#. 47 i.gS l:lxgS+ 48 �h4 lDr6!

White still has a queen against rook and two pawns but Kotov plays inexorably for mate. Now he threat­ens 49 . . . l:lh5#.

49 ll:lg3 This propitiatory sacrifice of an­

other piece is forced, and it brings the material situation to something like equality. But Black will not be denied his mate.

49 ... l:lxg3 Not 49 . . . fxg3 of course, for White

would be only too pleased to play 50 'ii'xg5. Now for one moment Black does not threaten mate in one, and the white queen can make a despair­ing effort to get into the game.

SO 1i'xd6 l:l3g6 st 1i'b8+ .:.gs

0·1 Certainly the most spectacular

king-hunt ever seen in the World Championship series.

86 Game 33

Game 33

The Soviet Championship was by far the strongest national championship in the world-stronger than most international events. When a nineteen-year­old Latvian found his way into the final in January 1 956, there was some sur­prise. When he finished one point behind the winners there was astonishment. We who know the subsequent history of Mikhail Tal (born 1936) tend to take the sheer fantasy of his early games as a matter of course; at the time the vet­erans could hardly believe their eyes, but decided to wait for another tourna­ment to see whether he could keep it up.

Tal - Simagin USSR Ch, Leningrad 1956

Pirc; Czech Variation

1 e4 c6 2 d4 d6

Tal's reputation had preceded him. Whether it was wise for Sima­gin-an experienced master, nine­teen years senior to Tal-to adopt not merely the Pirc, which gives White a free hand in the centre, but this ultra-conservative version of it is doubtful. Probably nothing could have pleased Tal better.

3 lLlcJ lLlf6 4 f4 ifh6 5 lLJf3 .tg4 6 .te2 lLlbd7 7 eS

True to his temperament Tal opens battle without waiting to castle or complete the development of his mi­nor pieces. The black kingside is cluttered up and White has no inten­tion of giving him time to play . . . e6 or . . . g6 and release his dark-squared bishop.

7 8 0-0

To Tal, at least at this early stage of his career, the doubled c-pawns meant merely another open line for a rook.

9 bxc3 10 lLlgS 11 -.rxe2

e6 .txe2 h6 (D)

The master calls the youngster's bluff, forcing him to choose between sacrifice and ignominious retreat. The idea that anyone should ever have provoked Tal by confronting him with such a choice is now hardly believable. Without more ado the hunt is on.

w

12 lDxf7! 13 fS! 14 fxe6++

A knight is a reasonable enough price to pay for a king on e6, while the white heavy pieces have plenty of open lines at their disposal. White seems to have a choice of inviting continuations.

15 l:lbl!! This fantastic move, which would

not have crossed the minds of most players, is recognisable today as pure Tal. If Black refuses the rook, White has simply placed it in play with gain of tempo, and after captur­ing the e-pawn will soon be cutting Black to pieces on the centre files.

15 ••• W'xb1 16 W'c4+!

The point is that the black king must now move to a dark square, af­ter which the black queen will be lost by a discovered attack.

16 �d6 17 i.a3+ �c7 18 l:lxb1 i.xa3

Black seems to have obtained rook, bishop and knight for his queen, but the key to the whole com­bination is the double threat con­tained in White's next move, which

Tal - Simagin 87

leaves Black the choice of giving up the bishop or allowing the king-hunt to start all over again. To the delight of the reader he chooses the latter course and Tal sets to work with re­newed vigour, in spite of the fact that he now has only two pieces left.

19 W'b3! i.e7 20 W'xb7+ �d6 21 dxeS+?

After 21 l:tdl ! e4 22 d5 Black's position would have collapsed im­mediately, whereas now Black's wanderings continue.

21 22 l:td1+ 23 W'h3+ 24 l:tfi+ 25 l:tel+ 26 g4+!

Tal's resources are inexhaustible. If this pawn is taken either by king or knight Black loses a piece.

26 �6 27 l:tfi+ �g6 28 W'e6+ �b7

Simagin resigns himself at last to the loss of a piece. 28 . . . i.f6 also would not save it: 29 _.f5+ �f7 30 _.xe5 ! .

29 W'xe5 .:he8 30 l:tt7! i.f8 31 W'f5+ �g8

Castled at last? Black finally gets his rooks into play, and the tempo of the game slackens. But White is now comfortably ahead and soon forces a won ending:

32 � 33 �g3 34 �h4

i.c5+ l:le3+ l:lae8 (D)

88 Game 34

w

35 l%xg7+! Even at this late stage Tal takes

the elegant way. In return for the des­perado rook he gets the bishop and one of the queenside pawns. The re­sulting passed pawn, coupled with the exposure of the black king, gives the queen an easy win against the two rooks.

35 ... �xg7

36 'ifxc5 37 'ifxa7+ 38 'ifaB

l%8e6 �g6 �6

Black cannot even snatch the c­pawn: 38 . . . l%xc3 39 'ti'g8+ �f6 40 'ifhS+ and 41 1Vxc3.

39 a4 This is the winner.

39 �e5 40 a5 �d5 41 'iVdB+ �e4 42 a6 � 43 a7 l%e2

A last hope: 44 a81W l%xh2#! 44 1Vd3+ :6e3 45 1Vxe3+! 1-0

This is an appropriate finish to the game, which has been played throughout with such magnificent verve. Whichever way Black re­captures, the a-pawn queens.

Game 34

The next game must surely be unique among king-hunts. Botvinnik is the winner, and just as in Game 24, played twenty-one years earlier, he chases the black king from the frrst rank to b2. The difference is this: that whereas the 1935 result was obtained by means of a barrage of checks, the present hunt is carried out, from beginning to end, without a single check! Playing it over, one catches a whiff of brimstone in the air and gets a strong impression that some sort of black magic is involved.

Botvinnik - Gligoric Moscow Olympiad 1956

English Opening

1 c4 g6 2 g3 c5 3 �g2 �g7 4 M �6

5 lbr3 �6 This deliberate breaking of the

symmetry is a clear indication that Gligori6 is looking for a win and not a draw. His idea is that the knight will head for f5 in order to restrain White from playing d4. The flaw with this plan is that White has not

castled. Botvinnik, with his usual courage, opens an immediate attack along the h-file and sets off a remark­able train of events.

6 h4! d6 7 d3 l:lb8

This move is usually good in such positions. It has the negative virtue of removing the rook from the atten­tions of the white g2-bishop and the positive aim of supporting the ad­vance of the b-pawn.

Under the present circumstances, however, it is a strategic mistake as it leaves Black virtually unable to cas­tle on either side.

8 hS With the black knight on f6 it

would have been much more diffi­cult to force this advance.

w

8 i.d7 9 i.xh6 i.xh6

10 hxg6 hxg6 (D)

11 .cl!! Thus the queen forces her way

into Black's position. An interesting echo of all this oc­

curred in the game Morra-Suttles at the Tel-Aviv Olympiad eight years

Botvinnik - Gligorit 89

later: 1 e4 g6 2 h4 i.g7 3 lbc3 lLlc6 4 h5 d6 5 i.c4 lLld4 6 d3 lLlh6 7 i.xh6 i.xh6 8 lLlge2 i.g4 9 hxg6 hxg6 (D)

w

10 'i'c1 i.h5 (taking the queen would result in the loss of a piece af­ter l:lxh8+ followed by l:lxd8+ and l:lxc 1) 1 1 f4 e5 12 lLlxd4 i.xf4 1 3 0-0 i.xc 1 1 4 i.xf7+ �d7 1 5 i.e6+ 'it>e8 16 .i.f7+ 1h-lf2 .

In Botvinnik-Gligoric Black has no way of blocking the h-file.

1 1 i.g7 12 l:lxh8+ i.xh8 13 'int6 i.xc3+

Black has virtually no choice, for White threatens not only 'ifxh8# but also lLlg5. This latter move is not prevented by 13 . . . i.f6 for after 14 lLlg5 Black could not capture.

14 bxc3 e6 15 lLlgS

Flohr, the perfectionist, pointed out that 15 �d2 would have been still better, inducing Black to de­fend with 15 ... 'ii'e7 and only then 16 lLlg5. The idea is that Black would have been deprived of the defensive resource that he now employs.

90 Game 34

15 ... �e7! Thus the black queen is given an

avenue to reach the kingside. How­ever, this voluntary move of Black's king is the first of a long, long trail.

16 �d2 i.e8? But this is a fatal change of plan.

16 . . . 'ifh8 would have eliminated the worst of the danger. Now the queen is enclosed again.

17 Wg7 �d7 From now on the black king is the

hare, keeping one jump ahead of the hounds.

18 f4 19 .:.h1

'ii'e7 lDd8

This ugly agglomeration of black pieces will result before long in not only the king but also the queen be­ing in danger of checkmate!

w

20 lLle4 �c7 21 .:.b8 ..ic6 (D)

22 lLlf6! �b6 If 22 . . . i.xg2, White does indeed

checkmate the black queen by 23 .:.es. The tract of territory chosen by the black king is the safest part of the board for the moment-but it is not safe enough!

23 i.xc6 lbxc6 24 .:.h7 lL!d8 25 'ifxg6! �a6

After 25 . . . fxg6 26 .:.xe7 White soon picks up a second pawn, so the king continues his travels.

26 a4 �aS 27 'ifg5 �a4 (D)

As no reasonable defensive plan presents itself Black decides at least to give himself a passed a-pawn! But from this excursion the king will never return.

w

28 .:.h1! This rapid shift from the north­

east corner for service in the south­west recalls the finish of the fme game Alekhine-Chajes, Karlsbad 1923.

28 ... �b3 Straight into the jaws of death.

But if 28 . . . �a5. then 29 .:.a1+ �b6 30 lbdS+.

29 'ii'h4 �b2 30 g4 1-0

Mate is inevitable. Probably the most original game in this collec­tion, epitomising the genius of Bot­vinnik.

D. Byme - Fischer 91

Game 35

The 1950s saw the emergence of the greatest chess prodigy of all time in Robert Fischer. He eclipsed the fabulous exploits of Morphy, Capablanca, Reshevsky, Yanofsky and Pomar, at least in point of age. The greatest of these, Capablanca and Reshevsky, only entered the international arena seriously at about twenty-three years of age after being infant prodigies. Fischer was already an international grandmaster at 15; while still a teenager he wore the battle honours of Portoroz, Mar del Plata, Zurich, Bled, Belgrade, Leipzig, Stockholm and Varna, to name only the most important events.

It is unlikely that Fischer will ever play a better game than one of the ear­liest of his ever to be recorded, the win against Donald B yrne in the Rosen­wald Tournament when he was thirteen years old. Move after move is astonishingly unexpected, and Byrne's king is eventually chased for fourteen moves, all but one of them back and forth along his own back rank.

D. Byrne - Fischer Rosenwald Tournament,

New York 1956 Griinfeld Defence

1 .!Of3 2 c4 3 t0c3 4 d4 5 i.f4

.!Of6

g6 i.g7 0-0 dS

At the age when many a school­boy is just learning the mysteries of Scholar's Mate, Fischer plays a so­phisticated transposition into the Grtinfeld Defence, with which he has won many a victory since.

6 'iWb3 dxc4 7 'ii'xc4 c6 8 e4 .!Obd7 9 l:.d1 .!Ob6

10 'ii'cS Already the game is taking an

original shape. White should have played 'tfb3 or 'tfd3 and followed up with i.e2 and 0-0. Although the

danger is far from obvious, it turns out that his queen has ventured too far afield.

10 ... i.g4 Black is in sight of complete free­

dom by means of . . . .!Ofd7, soon forc­ing . . . e5.

11 i.gS (D)

B

White hopes to prevent Black's ... .!Ofd7, but he is now given cause to regret his delay in getting his king into safety. The next seven moves provide one of the most remarkable

92 Game 35

passages in the whole of recorded chess.

1 1 ... l004!! This knight cannot be taken, e.g. :

12 lLlxa4 llJxe4 with the variations: 1 ) 13 "ifxe7 lbxg5 14 "ifxg5 l:le8+

15 'ifild2 .i.xf3 16 "ifxd8 l:laxd8. 2) 1 3 "ii'b4 lbxg5 14 lbxg5 .i.xd1

15 'ifilxd1 .i.xd4. 3) 1 3 "ifc 1 "ifa5+ 14 lbc3 .txf3

15 gxf3 lbxg5. In all cases Black has a winning

position. 12 "it'a3 13 bxc3

tDxc3 lbxe4!

Black's moves look like over­sights, but he is seeing everything.

14 .txe7 "ifb6! Even the exchange is taboo after

15 .txf8 .txf8 ! 1 6 "ii'b3 "ifxb3 ! 17 axb3 l:le8 18 .te2 tbxc3 1 9 l:td2 .i.b4 20 'ifilfl tDb1 , followed by . . . .txf3 and . . . tbd2+, so White makes one last attempt to get castled.

15 .i.c4 lbxc3! If the knight is taken this time

Black regains the piece by . . . l:fe8 with a winning game; or if 1 6 .txf8 he gets the advantage by 16 . . . l:te8+. But he has another move which surely Black has overlooked:

16 .tcs Apparently a complete refutation,

for White is now attacking queen, rook and knight; but now comes the final ferocious kick of the combina­tion.

16 ..• :reS+ 17 'ifi1f1 .te6!! (D)

An utterly fantastic position. The combination works without a flaw,

w

for example 1 8 .txe6 ( 18 'ilhc3 "ifxc5 ! 19 dxc5 .txc3 and 18 .te2 lbb5 also win for Black) "ifb5+ 1 9 'ifilgl lbe2+ 20 'ifilfl l2Jg3++ 21 �g1 'iffl + 22 l:r.xfl lbe2#.

18 .txb6 White takes the queen and awaits

his fate. For the next twenty-four moves we are treated to a very con­vincing king-hunt by the black mi­nor pieces.

18 ... .txc4+ 19 'it>g1 lbe2+

Black proceeds to use a string of see-saw checks to pick up some ma­terial, at the same time gaining some useful time on the clock.

20 'ifiln tbxd4+ 21 'ifilg1 tbe2+ 22 'ifiln liJc3+ 23 'ifilg1 axb6 24 'Wb4

Still Black has only two bishops and two pawns to balance the queen. 24 . . . l2Jxd1 would be answered by 25 "ifxc4 with chances of survival.

24 .•• .1Xa4! On this day Fischer could do no

wrong. The only way now for White to guard his rook would be 25 "ii'd6,

but then follows 25 . . . ttJxd1 26 1i'xd1 .:.xa2 with immediate destruction by 27 . . . .:.at . White must therefore con­cede the rook, after which he is lost on material alone, but he chival­rously-or stubbornly-plays on, and lets us see how a won game is won.

25 •xb6 .fu:d1 26 b3 .:.xa2 21 �h2 ttJxn 28 .:.e 1 .:.xe 1 29 .. d8+ .tf8 30 ttJxe1 .tdS 31 ttJfJ lbe4 32 ...,8 b5

Black could, if he so wished, march right ahead with this pawn; but he has other ideas.

33 h4 34 tOeS

h5 �g7

The release of the dark-squared bishop brings about a quick finish,

Tal - Panno 93

for rook and two bishops constitute a deadly mating machine even with­out the help of a knight. The imme­diate threat of . . . .td6 induces White to take his king off the diagonal.

35 �g1 .tcS+ 36 �

If the king moves to h 1, then mate is delivered by 36 �h 1 tlJg3+ 37 �h2 tOn+ and 38 . . . i.xg2#.

36 tlJg3+ 37 �e1 .tb4+ 38 �d1 .tb3+ 39 �cl t0e2+ 40 �b1 lL'cl+ 41 'it>cl .:.c2#

Not many better games than this one have ever been played-by any­one. The only comparable brilliancy by one so young is Capablanca's last match-game against Corzo, played in 1900.

Game 36

Tal's elders prophesied that his zest for happy-go-lucky chess would lead him to disaster in the international arena. They were stunned when he won the In­terzonal in 1 958, the Candidates in 1 959 and the World Championship in 1 960. His prodigious genius was now undeniable.

The following game against the Argentinean Grandmaster Oscar Panno is a good illustration of the rich complexity of his style at this time .

Tal - Panno 6 .:.et b5 Portoroz IZ 1958 7 .tb3 d6

Ruy Lopez 8 c3 0-0 9 h3 ttJd7

1 e4 e5 The Closed Defence to the Ruy 2 ttJfJ t0c6 Lopez has been pretty well ham-3 .tb5 a6 mered out, but hereabouts the mas-4 .ta4 tiJf6 ters begin to differ in their treatment 5 0-0 .te7 of the middlegame. Some like to

94 Game 36

play the black rook to e8 and follow with . . . .if8, possibly prefacing these moves with . . . h6 to keep the white knight away from g5 . Another old and popular line is . . . llJa5 followed by . . . c5. Pan no does indeed use this idea later on, but first brings the f6-knight over to b6, within jumping distance of c4.

10 d4 1 1 .ie3 12 cxd4 13 .ic2 14 e5

llJb6 exd4 llJa5 c5

A predictable reaction from Tal : the absence of the black king's knight from its usual defensive post prompts him to open up the lines for his bishops to attack the kingside, even though it may mean the com­plete disappearance of his pawn cen­tre.

14 15 llJxeS 16 'iVdJ 17 .ib3

dxe5 llJbc4 rs f4

Panno's defensive scheme is to shut out the dark-squared bishop and then capture the light-squared one, after which he hopes to have good play with his own two bishops.

18 .id2 ltlxb3 (D) 19 lbc6!?

Complications proliferate of their own accord in Tal's games. Whether the transaction implicit in this move ought to have won is doubtful-but it does !

19 .•. llJxa1! Undoubtedly the best way. To

have saved the queen would have

w

cost material, but now Black gets rook and two knights for the queen, with, one would have thought, ex­cellent chances. It has been said, however, that Tal's queen is worth more than other queens, and the final phases of this game bear out this hypothesis.

20 ltlxd8 21 'ii'O 22 lbe7 23 .ixf4

.ifS l:.axd8 .ixb1 l:.xd4

Black might have tried 23 ... cxd4 instead, with threats of pushing the d-pawn. The present move, which leaves Black with a queenside ma­jority as well as his five pieces, also looks good, but now the white queen begins to show her paces.

24 'ii'g4 .ig6 25 'ii'e6+ .if1 26 'ii'f5 lbc2 27 b3 .i.g6? (D)

Panno had kept things under con­trol up to this point, but now, in time­trouble, he goes wrong. There were several other possibilities, but the soundest line was 27 . . . l:.dl+ 28 �h2 ltld2 29 .i.xd2 l:.xd2, which keeps the draw in hand and even offers

Black slight winning chances. How­ever, the idea that an opponent who is already, numerically, reduced to three pieces against five should be considering sacrificing two of them in order to conduct a king-hunt with the remaining one is not what one usually considers. Yet this is pre­cisely what Tal now does.

28 llxg7+! ! 29 ..th6+! 30 'ii'xf8+ 31 bxc4

�g7 �6 �g5 bxc4

3 1 . . .l:r.xc4 appears more natural; presumably Panno wanted to pre­vent 3 1 'it'd8+. Black still has his rook and two minor pieces against the bare queen, but the exposure of his king-always paramount in queen endings-now tells heavily against him. White's king and pawns also play a vital part.

32 g3! ..te4 Black takes the opportunity to

threaten something on his own ac­count: 33 . . . l:r.dl+ 34 �h2 l:r.hl#.

33 h4+ �g4 Still threatening mate; and after

34 Wf4+ �h3 Black wins at once.

Tal - Panno 95

34 �h2! White avoids the mate and now

threatens 35 'it'f4+ �h5 36 'it'g5#. 34 ••• ..tr5

There is nothing better, though it loses a piece. White could play 35 f3+, but he has something better:

35 'ii'f6! Tal threatens instead to win two

pieces by 36 Wg5+ �f3 37 1!i'xf5+. 35 .•• h6 36 'ii'eS

Now the threat is 37 'ike2#. What a queen!

36 l:r.e4 37 'ii'g7+ w 38 'ii'c3+ lbe3 39 �g1 ..tg4 40 fxe3 h5 41 'ii'e1 (D)

Yet another threat of mate in one: 42 'it'f2#. Tal has used the black self­blocks with great virtuosity.

41 ... l:r.xe3? Panno finally makes a serious er­

ror, ironically just when the time­control had passed. After 4 1 . ..l:r.e6 ! 42 e4 c3 43 'ii'xc3+ �xe4 44 'ii'xc5 Black would keep his a-pawn, and

96 Game 37

set up a fortress with all his pieces defended. In this case the result would have been a draw, but it is hard to keep a clear head after the sort of battering that Tal has handed out.

42 'it'n + �e4 43 'it'xc4+ W 44 'it'n + 'it>e4 45 1i'xa6

This is the last straw: White pro­poses to make a second queen!

45 .•. �d4 Black would have had more draw­

ing chances after 45 . . . l:txg3+, but Tal's queen would probably have been too much for him in the end.

46 1i'd6+ 'itc4 47 a4 l:tel+ 48 � l:te2+ 49 ct>n 1:ta2

Behind the pawn, but there is no stopping it.

50 1i'a6+ 51 a5

�d4 c4

Panno, game to the last, also tties for a promotion, but still his king is hounded by the enemy queen.

52 ...,6+ �d5 53 a6 hl+ 54 � c3 55 a7 c2

It has been a battle royal but with the black king now all alone in mid­board the white queen is bound to have the last word. Tal solves the problem neatly:

56 1i'b3+ �d6 57 'l'd3+ 1-0

If the king goes to the c-file the pawn falls with check, 57 . . . �e5 would lose to 58 11fc3+ and finally 57 . . . �e6 fails to 58 1We4+ �n 59 11fxc2 l:txa7 60 1Wh7+ followed by 61 1i'xa7.

Game 37

Bora lvkov (born 1933) became World Junior Champion in 1951 and in the Varna Olympiad of 1962 he won a remarkable game which did not receive much publicity, being a little too long for most of the magazines and columns. Robert Byme, brother ofFischer's opponent in Game 38, was battered by the young grandmaster to such effect that he had to make no fewer than twenty­five king moves, almost all in the little triangle h7, h6, g7.

Ivkov - R. Byme Vama Olympiad 1962

French Defence

1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 lDc3 �b4 4 e5 &De7

5 a3 In this line White reckons that the

two bishops and dark-square pres­sure will more than compensate for the long-term weakness of the dou­bled c-pawns.

5 6 bxc3

�xc3+ b6

The idea behind this emerges a\ moves 9 and 10. These days the com­bination of . ..&/Je7 and . . . b6 is not highly regarded, and the move . . . b6 is usually coupled with ... 1Wd7.

7 'W'g4 This move is one of White's

standard reactions to the Winawer Variation of the French, since the black g-pawn has been left without defence, and the whole course of the game is often influenced by the method Black uses to defend it. Sometimes he prefers to let it go.

7 ••• l'Dg6 8 h4

A vigorous line which has an un­settling effect on Black's attempts to get a comfortable position.

8 ... hS 9 'ii'd1

The white queen retires, well sat­isfied with the weakening induced in the black kingside pawns. It may be argued that the white kingside has been equally weakened; the differ­ence lies in the central pawn struc­ture. One does not need to be a grandmaster to see that White is bound to have the initiative on the kingside of the board, where it will be difficult for Black to get any play at all.

9 ... .i.a6 The point behind Black's sixth

move. The theory is that owing to the black pawn-chain on d5, e6 and f7, the c8-bishop is a 'bad' bishop, with little scope, whereas the correspond­ing white bishop on f1 is much more active since most of the white pawns

Ivkov - R. Byrne 97

are on dark squares. The exchange of these two bishops is therefore reckoned as a strategic success for Black. The danger is that Black's knight ends up on a6, and the time taken to bring it back into the game will allow White to develop a dan­gerous initiative. In this game it stands immobile for the next forty­five moves, and then Byrne gives it one token move before resigning.

10 .i.xa6 �a6 11 .i.gS 'W'd7 12 lDe2 'W'a4?! (D)

Black is correct in judging that his attack-if any-must be on the queenside, but as played the queen joins the knight in the wilderness, and it is the absence of these two pieces which provides White pres­ently with the opportunity of play­ing a remarkable combination.

Instead, Black should have tried 12 . . . lLlb8 followed by . . . lLlc6 to im­prove his knight position. Later on the knight might move to a5 and c4.

w

13 llh3 liJe7 Black is also reduced to desperate

measures to defend the h5-pawn

98 Game 37

against the threat of lbg3. His move allows . . . g6, but results in a further weakening of the dark squares.

14 lbf4 g6 15 ... d2 �d7 16 J.xe7 �xe7 17 .:o .:at'8 18 l2Jh3!

White plays relentlessly against the weakened dark squares: invasion at g5 or f6 cannot be staved off.

18 •.. c5 This comes much too late to in­

convenience White. 19 lbg5 c4 (D)

It is difficult to see what Black hoped to achieve with this further advance. Perhaps he hoped that by completely solidifying the wall that cuts the board into halves he could create an impregnable region on the queenside into which his king could escape in due course. But, as so often, it is the little miracle of a sacri­fice which upsets all the calcula­tions.

w

20 lbxf7! .:xr7 21 ... g5+ 'iPf8 22 .:xr7+ �xf7

This is evidently the position that White had visualised. Whenever he checks from f6 or on the back rank the black king is tied to the defence of his rook, and White can do a fair amount of damage with his checks. But the situation remains quite tricky, for White has only two pieces and one of them is right out of play. If he is to achieve more than a per­petual check he must mobilise the rook, and any roundabout method of doing so would allow Black to bring queen and knight into action. Ivkov has set himself an intriguing prob­lem and his solution to it provides one of the most fascinating passages of play in this book.

23 24 25 26

... xg6+ ... ,6+ •xe6+

Three pawns for the knight al­ready provide White with a fair bargain and he might be thinking in terms of a win based on his two passed pawns. In fact his plan is: first open a file on the kingside, then bring the rook across the back rank to join the attack. He must never al­low Black to play . . .... xc2, for then it would be extremely difficult to get the rook across.

27 ..,e7+ 28 ... ,6+ 29 ... f7+ 30 g4!

�g6 �h7 �h6 (D)

Nicely timed: 30 . . . 11fxc2 3 1 g5#! 30 bxg4 31 ... ,6+

w

The next stage is to win the g4-pawn with check.

31 �h7 32 1Wf5+ �h6 33 1Wg5+ �h7 34 1Wh5+ �g7 35 1Wxg4+ �h7

Now the ideal plan for White would be to drive the black king on to the g-file and then play �d2, threatening l:tgl with check. This proves to be an impossibility, but the series of exploratory checks which follows serves the incidental purpose of gaining moves as the time control draws near.

36 1Wf5+ 37 1Wg5+ 38 'iih5+ 39 1Wg4+

�h6 �h7 �g7

The position is identical with that on move 35. No doubt Black is keep­ing a sharp look-out for the draw by repetition of position.

39 .•• �h7 40 1Wf5+

Now it is identical with move 36. 40 �h6 41 1We6+ �h7 42 1We7+ �h6

Jvkov - R. By me 99

�h7 (D)

w

44 �d2! Black, of course, has resolutely

refused to quit the h-file, so Ivkov takes the plunge. The rook is to come across, even though not with check. This means that Byrne now has one precious move at his dis­posal for strengthening his defence.

44 ... 1We8 45 l:tg1

Each side now has queen and rook in action but still there is no peace for the black king. Mate in one is threatened, and as soon as the black rook emerges it will be ex­changed off. The white pawns will then prove too much for the black knight. The white queen is retained for harrying the enemy king: in the absence of queens the black king would suddenly become a strong piece.

45 l:tg8 46 1Wf5+ �h6 47 1Wf4+ �h7 48 1Wf5+

No harm in gaining a little more time.

100 Game 38

48 49 lb:g8 so e6

�h6 1Wxg8

The threat of e7 and 'ii'f8 brings the end in sight.

so ... 'illg7 50 . . . 'ii'g6 loses to 51 'ii'e5 ! 11t'e4 52

'iff6+ 'it'g6 53 1i'h8+ 'ii'h7 54 'ii'f8+ 'fkg7 55 e7 &lx7 56 'ii'f4+.

51 'ili'xdS The cruel annexation of a fourth

and then a fifth pawn simply under­lines Black's helplessness.

51 'ili'f6 52 .-xc4 'ill:xf2+

After all he has gone through Black probably found considerable satisfaction in this check, though it does him little good: the white king has an even better shelter on b2.

53 �cl .-r4+ He must attend to rescuing his

wretched knight. 54 �b2 SS e7

tbc7 1-0

The knight which has just made its second move (out of 54 !) is lost. The way in which a denuded king can paralyse a whole game could hardly be better illustrated.

Game 38

Chess played by post is far from being the long-drawn-out dull affair some players imagine. The chance to consult books (this is perfectly legitimate) lends precision to the opening and ending stages, while the opportunity of analysing by moving the pieces to one's heart's content brings about deep and surprising combinative play which would be difficult to handle over the board. We had one example in Game 12. Here is another, in which a brilliant sacrificial attack sweeps the black king right down to the eighth rank to be mated.

Moser - Underwood Correspondence, Canada 1962

Sicilian

1 e4 cS 2 b4

The Wing Gambit-<>ne of the liveliest replies to the Sicilian. Since one point of the Sicilian is to gain an extra centre pawn it often gives White an immediate psychological advantage to buy a strong centre himself at the cost of a wing pawn.

2 ..• cxb4 3 a3

Another way of playing the gam-bit is 3 d4.

3 4 axb4 5 c3 6 d4

e6 .txb4 .te7

This centre-perhaps not so strong as it looks-is White's aim in the Wing Gambit. Black already has an endgame asset in his passed a­pawn, but the endgame is far away.

6 •••

7 lbf3 d6 'fic7

Black dawdles. It is an urgent matter to get the knights out; or he could have taken an immediate crack at the white centre by . . . f5.

8 i.d3 lDf'6 9 0-0 0-0

10 e5! Now the black king is in real dan­

ger. White will soon be able to play f4 and have every piece available for the attack.

10 dxe5 1 1 lbxe5 lbbd7 12 f4 b6 13 c4 i.b7 14 lDc3 a6

Partly to prevent lDb5 but also to free the aS-rook. The open a-file which White obtained from his gam­bit is playing its part.

15 i.b2 'fid6? An artificial move; the threat to

the d4-pawn is easily met, where­upon the queen is simply misplaced. After 15 . . . .U.ad8 White would have no immediate way to make progress.

16 :a By preventing a check White in­

directly defends the d-pawn; if now 16 . . . 'ii'xd4 the queen is lost after 17 i.xh7+.

16 17 g4! 18 gS 19 lDe4

:res lbf8 lb6d7 'fic7

Over the last few moves Black has simply marked time, while White's pieces have moved up to threatening positions.

Moser - Underwood 101

20 'fibs lbg6 (D)

With all the pieces still on the board White has a colossal attack, but how is he to smash it home? This is where home analysis comes in useful!

21 lDxf7?! This sacrifice isn't really correct,

so objectively White should have preferred a slower build-up, for ex­ample 21 lbxg6 hxg6 22 'fih4, in­tending .U.f3-h3. However, it is hard to criticise this move too harshly when one sees what happens next!

21 ... lDxr4?? Black backs down from accepting

the sacrifice-but runs into an even larger one! There were two good al­ternatives for Black:

1) 2 l . . .�xf7 22 'ii'xh7 lbdf8! 23 'ii'h5 'iPg8 24 lDf6+ i.xf6 25 i.xg6 (25 gxf6 'ii'f7) lbxg6 26 Wxg6 .U.f8 ! 27 gxf6 .U.xf6 and Black has the ad­vantage since it is now White's king which is more exposed.

2) 21 . . .:.f8 !? 22 lbe5 lbdxe5 23 fxe5 i.xe4 24 .U.xf8+ .U.xf8 25 i.xe4 'ii'xc4 and Black is clearly better, as White's king is again in danger.

102 Game 38

22 'ilxh7+!! (D)

The postman innocently drops a grenade through Mr Underwood's letter-box. If Black takes the queen, White simply plays 23 lDf6, and al­though there are two ways of inter­posing to the bishop, one way of capturing the bishop and three ways of taking the knight, all are equally invalid. It is double check and there­fore mate.

But this is not all: Moser's letter proceeds to announce that he now mates in twelve ! The rest of the let­ter, which Underwood must have read with bulging eyes, went as fol­lows:

22 ... �1'8 If 22 . . . �xf7 White mates in two

by 23 g6+ and 24 'ifh8#. 23 'ilh8+ � 24 g6+! �xg6 25 l:.g2+!!

All this is beautifully played. If Black refuses the rook by 25 . . . �f5 White has 26 lDd6++ (double check again) �f6 27 1kxg7#. If, on the other hand, he plays 25 . . . lDxg2 then

the white bishop is freed from attack and a discovered single check be­comes possible.

25 ... lDxg2 26 lbd.6+ �g5

If 26 . . . �f6 White's other rook comes across.

27 'ilxg7+ �h4 28 'ilh6+ (D)

White could have mated one move more quickly by 28 'ifg3+ and two moves more quickly by 28 .te2, as I suppose Mr Underwood should have immediately pointed out.

B

28 29 .te2+ 30 .txf3+ 31 l:.n+

�g4 .to �xf3 �e2

If 3 1 .. . �g4 White mates in two by 32 h3+ and 33 lDe4#.

32 l:.fl+ �dl Or 32 . . . �d3 33 'ild2#.

33 'ilcl# Another advantage of postal chess

is that when you get a lovely forced line like this your opponent doesn't get a chance to spoil your fun by re­signing !

Penrose - Popov 103

Game 39

Until recent times, Jonathan Penrose (born 1934) was one of the most suc­cessful of all British champions. In the 1963 Enschede Tournament of seven­teen competitors he finished just one point behind the winner, Gligorie. The most spectacular of his ten wins was scored against Popov of Bulgaria, the black king having to make a thirteen-move trek from g8 to a2. After giving up over-the-board play, Penrose went on to even greater success in the field of postal chess.

Curiously enough, in this same tournament Popov played possibly the fust over-the-board game with the provocative line 1 e4 lDf6 2 e5 00 3 d4 d6 4 o!Df3 dxe5 5 o!Dxe5 lbd7. White sacrificed on f7, Popov's king went for a walk and he won! Against Penrose, however, Popov's king was not so lucky.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Penrose - Popov Enschede Z 1963

Sicilian

e4 cS 00 e6 d4 cxd4 o!Dxd4 a6 .te3 llli6 .td3 dS?

This cannot be good, since Black has to waste a lot of time. Any nor­mal developing move is better, for example 6 . . . tiJc6 or 6 . . . d6.

7 eS lDg8 He cannot play 7 . . . .!Dfd7 because

of 8 lDxe6! fxe6 9 'ihl5+, etc. 8 lDd2

Backward play by Black in the openings is acceptable in some posi­tions, but the present situation, in which White has developed all his minor pieces while Black has appar­ently not yet made a start, is an ex­treme case. Perhaps Popov thought, as Steinitz might have done, 'Now I have no weaknesses' .

8 9 f4

10 .txd4 11 0-0 12 .txcS

lbc6 t'Dxd4 'flc7 .tcS 'fixeS+

Still Black has only his queen in play; but by destroying the white pieces he is catching up in develop­ment.

13 �h1 lbe7 14 c4

A shrewd move. If Black should push . . . d4 White gets an excellent square for his knight at e4. On the other hand if Black refrains from this advance, the threat to open the c­file will make it out of the question for him to castle queenside; and if he castles kingside White is nicely poised for an attack with pieces.

14 .•. 0-0 1s 'fibs

As usual the absence of a defen­sive knight on f6 brings immediate danger.

15 h6 16 l:.f3 dxc4 (D)

104 Game 39

w

17 �c4 This knight threatens to pene­

trate powerfully to d6. A plausible defence would be 17 .. .lidS so as to answer 18 ltld6 with 1 8 .. .lhd6 (the e-pawn is pinned), but White could simply play 18 'ii'h4 which not only unpins his e-pawn but pins the black knight and enforces ltld6.

17 •.. liJfS 18 .txrs 'ii'xc4

Black has evaded the danger from the knight but the pressure from three pieces in the region of his king is still serious.

19 .i.dJ 'ifb4 20 :g3!

White threatens 'ii'xh6, and the obvious defence 20 . . . 'ii'xf4 would only invite 21 :n, after which the black king's position would rapidly be overrun by the combined weight of four pieces. Black takes the only alternative:

20 ... �h8 21 'ii'e2?

A puzzling retreat: perhaps he was hoping to force his queen to e4 later on. At any rate the move con­ceals a vicious trap: 21 . . .'ii'xf4 22

:g4 !, checkmating the black queen in mid-board. But the offer of the pawn is so blatant that Popov could hardly be expected to assume that it was accidental.

As we will reveal later, White had a much stronger move.

21 ... .i.d7 Black has almost equalised. He

now intends 22 . . . .i.b5, destroying the white bishop and remaining with a tenable major-piece ending.

22 a3 'ii'a4 (D) If Black had had any inkling of

what was in Penrose's mind he would certainly have played 22 . . . 'ii'e7. But he is determined to play 23 ... .i.b5.

w

23 :xg7! ! The dramatic start to a spectacu­

lar king-hunt. It is interesting to know from Penrose himself that he had considered the combination two moves previously, when his queen stood on h5. Being unable to see his way through all the complica­tions he dismissed the whole idea as unplayable in such an important game. Post-mortem analysis, how­ever, established that at move 2 1 the

sacrifice would have been even more effective than it is at move 23.

In view of the fact that Popov is now threatening to draw anyway by exchanging the bishops, and since the rook sacrifice can hardly yield less than a perpetual check, Penrose now starts his hunt, and conducts it triumphantly across all eight files and seven ranks.

23 24 .. g4+ 25 'iih4

�g7 �h8

The threat of 26 "W'xh6+ and 27 "W'h7# now compels Black to shed two more pawns, after which the sac­rifice of a whole rook looks a little less vast.

25 f5 26 exf6 l:r.t7 27 'ti':xh6+ �g8

Had White played the sacrifice on move 21, when the black bishop was on c8, he would now have an instant win by �h7+ :Z.xh7; "W'g6+ �f8; "W'xh7 with mate to follow.

28 'ti'g6+ � 29 'iih6+

These last two checks not only gain useful time but also give Black the opportunity of trying to run away by 29 . . . �e8, after which 30 'ifh8+ l:r.f8 3 1 �g6+ would win both rooks.

29 ... �g8 Thus White is assured of his per­

petual check; but how is he to win? 30 .. g5+ �1'8 31 �g6!

This is the winning move. Pen­rose threatens not only 32 �xfl, af­ter which 32 . . . �xt7 would allow 33

Penrose - Popov 105

"W'g7+ �e8 34 "W'e7#, but also 32 1Wh6+ �e8 33 1Wh8#. The attempt 3 l . . .�e8 is no defence: White still mates in three by 32 1i'h6+, etc.

31 ... e5 By creating a flight on e6 Black

just contrives to escape the mating variations given above; but now he starts his journey down the diagonal, straight as an arrow from g8 to a2.

w

32 1Wh6+ �g8 33 �xf7+ rbl7 34 .. g7+ �e6 (D)

35 _.e7+ �d5 Here he had the option of dou­

bling back by 3S . . . �f5 but then would follow: 36 1Wxe5+ �g6 37 'ir'gS+ �f7. Now there is no black e­pawn, therefore 38 l:r.e1 ! l:r.g8 39 l:r.e7+ �f8 40 1Wh6+ and mate next move.

36 _.xe5+ �c4 36 . . . �c6 37 l:r.c1+ �b6 38 _.cS#.

37 l:r.cl + �b3 Or 37 . . . �d3 38 l:r.c3+ �d2 39

"W'e3+ �d1 40 l:r.c1#. 38 .. c3+ �a2 39 b4 1-0

He is mated by l:r.al.

106 Game 40

Game 40

Viktor Korchnoi (born 1931 ) and Leonid Stein (born 1934) each won the USSR Championship three times during the period 1960-67. These two fine players thus between them took this strongest national championship six times in eight years-Petrosian and Spassky taking the other two.

The following game was played not in the actual Soviet Championship but in the Soviet Zonal Tournament of seven top contenders for world honours which was played during the early months of 1964. On this occasion it was Stein's turn to get the better of a rousing encounter.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Stein - Korcbnoi Moscow Z 1964

Sicilian

e4 cS lt:lf3 d6 d4 cxd4 lru!:d4 lLlf6 lLlc3 a6 .te2

White relies on an old, well-tested variation. The more aggressive alter­natives 6 .i.g5 and 6 .tc4 are not necessarily stronger.

6 ... e6 Black also chooses an old forma­

tion, the Scheveningen Defence, rather than the schemes based on 6 . . . e5.

7 0-0 .te7 8 f4 'flc7 9 'flel

The first really significant move: he makes for the kingside.

9 ... 0-0 10 'flg3 'flb6

These two moves indicate the re­spective spheres of influence in which the two players intend to oper­ate. White moves to the kingside,

preparing e5; Black moves the other way, attacking and pinning White's knight. This provocative move com­pels Stein to choose between retrac­ing his steps with 1 1 'flf2 or letting the b-pawn go.

11 .i.e3 Stein accepts the challenge with

alacrity . . . 11 ... 'flxb2

. . . and Korchnoi in turn accepts White's challenge. It has been rec­ognised for a hundred years and more that winning the b-pawn with the queen in the early stages of a game is very dangerous. Over the years the majority of recorded ex­amples show that the loss of time and position involved are fatal in the long run, although the result is not a foregone conclusion.

Korchnoi's love of grabbing ma­terial is legendary and such is his defensive skill that he gets away with it far more often than not. How­ever, in this game he is taking on too much.

12 .tf2 This excellent retreat not only de­

fends the c3-knight but threatens to

win a piece by 13 .:tab1 'ii'a3 14 00! 'ii'xg3 15 ll:Jxe7+.

12 irb4 13 e5 dxe5 14 fxe5 liJeS

He cannot play ,JJ . . . ll:Jd5 because of 1 5 ll:Jf5 ! exf5 16 ll:Jxd5 and again White will win the bishop on e7.

15 .id3 1i'a5 16 ll:Je4 (D)

This is the way it usually works out. Stein has a six-piece attack against the black king while the black queenside pieces are as yet un­touched. Yet Korchnoi's talent in de­fence brings him within an ace of survival.

B

16 ll:Jd7 17 lDf3 g6 18 .id4 &!Jg7 19 &!Jf6+ .txf6 20 exf6 &!Jh5 21 1i'b4 1i'd8

Black has matched White move for move, and still has his pawn, but now the last white piece joins the at­tack. The strain of finding viable de­fensive moves in such a position is tremendous.

Stein - Korchnoi 107

22 l:ael liJdxf6 23 ll:Jg5

With the threat 24 .:txf6 &!Jxf6 25 .txf6. Black's only way then to save king and queen appears to be 25 . . . 'ii'b6+ 26 �h1 h5, but after that comes 27 1i'xh5 ! ! gxh5 28 .th7#. Korchnoi now returns both his extra pawns, but the resulting position fa­vours White.

23 e5! 24 .txe5 h6 25 .txf6 hxg5 26 1i'xg5?!

This move is hard to understand; White's dark-squared bishop is the mainstay of his attack, so he should preserve it by 26 .ixg5.

26 - &!Jxf6

27 .:txf6 Wd4+ 28 �h1 Wg4

Black is still in the game. The point g6 is protected against sacri­fice, and he is ready to complete his development at last by ... .if5.

29 1i'b6 .tf5 (D)

w

30 h3? An odd move which throws away

much of White's advantage. After 30

JOB Game 41

.i.xf5 gxf5 1!, l:lefl l:lae8 32 h3 'fkg7 33 l:l lxf5 White reaches a pleasant four-rook ending with a clear extra pawn. Although his broken queen­side pawns mean that the ending is not a certain win, White's practical chances would be good.

30 .•. "ii'd4? Korchnoi has defended resource­

fully, but here he slips up just when he might have reached the draw. Af­ter 30 . . . 'fkb4, attacking the rook on e1 , the game might still have been held.

31 l:lxf5! Stein pounces on Korchnoi's mis-

take-suddenly it's a king-hunt. 31 gxf5 32 l:le3! "ii'g7 33 1Wh4 'iia1+ 34 'it>h2 lUeS (D)

Yet again Korchnoi has managed to save both king and queen, but now he is at the end of his resources. His queen and one rook are stuck in corners, and his king is now hunted across to c6, back to h5 and finally home again to be mated on the square that he now occupies.

35 l:lg3+ 'it>f8 36 1i'h6+ 'it>e7 37 l:le3+ 'it>d7 38 .i.xf5+ 'it>c7

39 "ii'f4+ 'it>c6 Or 39 . . . 'it>b6 40 'it'd6+ 'it>a7 41

'it'c5+ b6 42 'it'c7#. 40 'it'c4+ 'it>d6

Or 40 . . . �b6 41 l:lb3+ 'it>a7 42 'ii'c5+ 'it>b8 43 'ii'd6+ 'it>a7 44' 'it'b6+ �b8 45 'ii'xb7#. So the king starts on the return crossing.

41 'it'b4+ 42 l:ld3+ 43 'it'd6+!

'it>d5 'it>eS

An elegant finishing touch. 43 ... 'it>xf5 44 l:lfJ+ 'it>g5

Or 4i . . . �e4 45 'fkd3+ 'it>e5 46 l:lf5+ 'it>e6 47 'ii'd5+ 'it>e7 48 I:.xf7#.

45 'ii'f4+ 'it>b5 46 g4+ �g6 47 'it'xt7+ 1-0

The conclusion might have been Q . . . �h6 48 'ii'h5+ 'it>g7 49 l:lf7+ 'it>g8 (Home!) 50 'ii'h7#.

Game 41

For our next game we return once more to the Olympiads. Since their begin­ning in London in 1927 these great biennial gatherings have produced a vast reservoir of chess in every conceivable opening, played by every grade of player from World Champions to unashamed skittlers.

Prins - Laurence Lugano Olympiad 1968

Sicilian

1 e4 c5 2 00 e6 3 c4

Unusual at this point. White aims to set up a kind of Maroczy Bind position. Over the next few moves Black makes little attempt to ob­struct this plan.

3 4 .te2 5 0-0 6 lbc3 7 a3?

a6 lDc6 lDf'6 'flc7

A waste of time-White could have played d4 straight away. White need not fear . . . i.b4 and . . . .txc3, which would weaken Black's dark squares too much.

7 b6 8 d4 cxd4 9 lLlxd4 .tb7

10 .te3 .td6 Black is not anxious to advance

his d-pawn and cheerfully obstructs it. He is more concerned to develop dark-squared pressure and for this he needs his bishop actively placed, not blocked in on f8 or e7.

11 h3?! This is far too timid. White could

have started operations at once by 1 1 f4.

1 1 ••. .te5 Threatening 12 . . . lLlxd4 13 .txd4

lLlxe4. Black takes full advantage of the fact that White has wasted two tempi.

Prins - Laurence 109

12 'ii'd3 h5 A violent and rash move which

pays off in the present game. For­tune favours the bold-sometimes !

13 :rct .th2+ 14 �fi?!

This move leads to tactics favour­able for Black. White should have played 14 �h1 , even though the king is lined up with both the h8-rook and the b7-bishop.

14 lLle5 15 'ii'd1 lLlxe4 16 lLla4

With all the pieces still on the board, complications readily prolif­erate. Prins has a remarkable scheme in mind.

16 ..• lDc5 (D)

w

17 lLlxb6!? Regaining his sacrificed pawn.

After White's forthcoming 18 lLlf3, attacking an undefended bishop on h2 and simultaneously pinning a knight on c5, he is certain to get his piece back. The idea is certainly in­genious but, as so often happens, initiating tactics while in a position­ally inferior position leads to a sad

1 10 Game 41

end. In this case the idea is tactically sound, in that White does regain his piece, but White's position is shat­tered.

17 ••.

18 lbf3 1Wxb6 1Wc6?

Unpinning the knight and also preventing 19 lbxh2 because of the reply 19 . . . 1lt'xg2+. However, Black had a much stronger continuation in 18 . . . lbg4 ! 19 lbxh2 (19 hxg4 hxg4 is very bad after 20 lbe1 i.f4 or 20 lbg1 'iWc6) lbxe3+ 20 fxe3 lbe4 2 1 'iWd3 'iWc7 !, followed by . . . 'iWg3.

19 i.xc5 i.f4 All fascinating. Black now threat­

ens both 20 . . . 'iWxc5 and 20 . . . i.xc l . 20 i.e3

This saves everything and is the only way to do so. The position is now equal.

20 •.• i.xe3 21 fxe3 lbg4!

When Black played 12 . . . h5 it was probably with this move in mind sooner or later. Although the knight sacrifice only leads to equality, it gives White plenty of chances to go wrong.

22 hxg4?! White could have simply de­

fended his e-pawn by 22 'iWd3 or 22 'iWd4, with an equal game. Taking the knight is more risky.

22 ••• hxg4 23 lbe1?

Now he is suddenly lost. Steinitz would certainly have relinquished his winnings by 23 'iWd4 gxf3 24 i.xf3 Wc7 (24 . . . d5 25 Wxg7 0-0-0 26 �f2 is also very good for White),

but the position is still rather uncom­fortable for White. After 25 Wxg7 0-0-0 Black has a very dangerous at­tack, while otherwise White will al­ways suffer from his ragged king position.

23 l:.h1+ 24 � (D)

24 g3+! Did Prins overlook this? Or per­

haps Black's next? 25 �xg3 l:.xe1! 26 1Wxe1

There is nothing better, but now Black has mate in five.

26 •.• Wxg2+ 27 �4

Or 27 �h4 Wh2+ 28 �g5 f6+ 29 �g4 f5+ 30 �g5 Wh6#.

27 ... g5+ 27 . . . e5+ was one move faster!

28 �e5 1We4+ 0-1

White resigned to spare his king the indignity of 29 �f6 Wf5+ 30 �g7 Wg6+ 31 �h8 0-0-0#!

A neat partner to Game 5 in which Morphy, 1 10 years earlier, played 0-0#.

Sporish - Sorokin 111

Game 42

In chess, unlike real life, excessive greed is usually brutally punished. The player who chases after material gain at the expense of development is asking to be on the wrong end of a king-hunt. However, the dividing line between a courageous capture and a foolhardy one is often very fine. This is especially so in that most controversial of all chess openings, the Poisoned Pawn. Every since Bobby Fischer started playing 8 . . . 'ifxb2, the soundness of Black's pro­vocative manoeuvre has been debated in both practical play and theoretical journals. Even today, nobody knows for sure whether or not Black can really get away with his audacious plan.

In the following game, Black not only plays the Poisoned Pawn, but he adopts an especially risky sideline which practically invites a king-hunt. White is ready to oblige, and for a long time the struggle hangs in the balance. Finally Black makes a slight misstep, and in such a position a slip can only have one result-mate!

Sporish - Sorokin USSR 1968

Sicilian

1 e4 c5 2 w d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 tl:Jxd4 ti:Jf6 5 tt:Jc3 a6 6 .tgS e6 7 f4 'ifb6

This move, taking aim at b2, initi­ates the Poisoned Pawn. White can avoid sacrificing the pawn by 8 ti:Jb3, but then the knight is less actively placed and Black's queen can later retire to c7.

8 1Vd2 9 l:lb1

10 eS

1Vxb2 1Va3

These days 10 f5 is considered more dangerous, but in 1968 10 e5 was 'Hot Theory' .

1 0 ... h6

The main line is 10 . . . dxe5 1 1 fxe5 ti:Jfd7, which today is thought satis­factory for Black. Although the vari­ation Black adopts is unusual, there is no known refutation.

11 i.xf6 gxf6 12 tZJe4

All the black pieces bar one stand on their original squares, and White has the deadly threat of 13 tl:Jxf6+, but despite this the position is far from clear. Potentially, Black's iS­bishop is a major asset, as White's dark squares have been weakened by both 8 . . . 1Wxb2 and 1 1 i.xf6.

12 ••• fxeS (D) 13 l:lb3

In such positions, the attacker must avoid having a rush of blood to the head and over-sacrificing. After 13 fxe5 dxe5 14 ti:Jf6+ We7 15 ti:Jf5+ Wxf6 16 l:lb3, for example, given in some books as winning for White, Black can play 16 . . . 1Vxb3 17 axb3

112 Game 42

w

exf5, returning some material to halt the attack, and it is not White, but Black, who wins.

13 ••• 'ti'xa2 As we shall see, this capture is

motivated not only by greed; Black has a definite idea in mind which re­quires the queen to be on a2. The al­ternative 1 3 . . . 11ka4 14 fxe5 dxe5 15 lDf6+ �e7 16 lDf5+ leads to a prob­able draw after either 16 . . . exf5 17 lDd5+ �e6 1 8 lDc7+ <l;e7 19 lDrl5+ or 16 .. . �xf6 17 'ii'd8+ �5 18 i.d3+ e4 19 0-0+ 'iii>e5 20 'ii'f6+ �d6 21 'ii'xh8 lDd7 22 l:txf7 exd3 23 l:txd3+ �c6 24 l:txf8 lDxf8 25 'ifxf8 �b6 26 'iff2+ �c7 27 'ikg3+ (that's what opening theory says, anyway).

14 lDf6+ �e7 15 fxeS dxeS 16 lDfS+ (D)

A critical moment. Which knight should Black take?

16 ... �6 Black could have forced a draw

by 16 . . . exf5 17 00+ �e8 18 lDc7+ �e7 and White has nothing better than returning to d5, since 19 lDxa8 'ika1 + 20 �e2 lDc6 gives Black a crushing counterattack. Instead he

8

bravely goes for the win, but if you play with nitro-glycerine then you have to be very, very careful.

17 'iWd8+ �g6 Forced, as 17 ... <l;xf5 1 8 l:tf3+

<l;g4 19 h3+ �h5 20 g4+ �g6 21 'ii'f6+ 'iii>h7 22 'ifxf7+ .tg7 23 .td3+ leads to mate.

18 lDe7+ The point of Black's 13 . . . 11kxa2 is

that 18 .l:.g3+ �h7 19 'ii'f6 may be met by 19 . . . exf5, and the queen de­fends f7.

18 ••• .txe7 Good judgement, as 1 8 . . . �h7 19

i.d3+ e4 20 0-0 is extremely dan­gerous for Black. The continuation might very well be the spectacular variation 20 ... .tg7 2 1 .txe4+ f5 22 lDxf5 ! exf5 23 l:.xf5 ! 'ika4 (the only move) 24 'ike7 l:.g8 25 l:r.f8+ �h8 26 l:r.xg8+ �xg8 27 'ikd8+ � 28 l:r.f3+ �e6 29 i.d5+ <l;e5 30 l:r.e3+ �f4 3 1 l:te4+ 'ifxe4 32 .txe4 �xe4 33 'ikxc8, with a clear advantage to White, since he will win one of Black's minor pieces.

19 'ii'xe7 (D) Taking the rook would be ridicu­

lous, since after 19 'ii'xh8 i.h4+ 20

g3 'ilfa5+ 21 �f2 'ilfd8 Black would bring the attack to a dead stop.

8

19 •.•

Giving a check is certainly cor­rect, because White is more or less forced to reply �e2, blocking in his bishop. Although it would have been very hard to appreciate why at this stage, 19 .. . 'ilfal +! 20 �e2 lDc6 would have been better (we shall see the reason later). The game hinges on the extremely subtle difference be­tween the two checks.

20 �e2 Not 20 'it>f2? 'ii'd2+ 21 i.e2 'ilff4+

22 l%.f3 lDc6!, and White's attack col­lapses.

20 ... lDc6 There is nothing else Black can do

against the threat of l%.g3+, but now the king-hunt begins in earnest.

21 l%.g3+ 'it>f5 22 :0+!

Not 22 'ilfxt7+ 'it>e4 23 'ii'f3+ �d4 and, astonishingly, White has no fol­low-up.

22 23 l%.e3+ 24 c4+

�e4 �d5

Sporish - Sorokin 113

Black threatens not only White's queen, but also the crushing ... tal4+, so every move must be with gain of tempo.

24 •.• �c4 (D)

w

25 'i'd6! Having driven Black's king onto

the fl-a6 diagonal, White is ready to

meet . . . tt:ld4+ with a check of his own, so he can afford a quiet move. After the direct 25 �f2+ �d5 26 i.c4+ �xc4 27 l%.cl + �d.S 28 l%.dl + tal4 the situation is much less clear.

25 ••• �b5 Black has no good defence, for

example 25 . . . 1i'd5 26 'i!Va3 ! (not 26 �f2+ �d4 27 'ii'a3, when 27 . . . 'il'a5 ! is strong) 'il'd4 (now 26 . . . 'il'a5 loses to 27 �f3+! �d5 28 l%.d3+ and Black cannot sneak out via e4, so White wins by means of 28 . . . tal4+ 29 l%.xd4+ 'it>xd4 30 'ilfxa5) 27 �f2+ 'itd.S 28 i.e2 and Black cannot meet all the threats.

But now suppose that Black's queen were on a l instead of a5; then 25 . . . l%.d8 ! would win, since after 26 �d2+ (or 26 �f2+ 'ilfxfl+) 'ilfxf1 27 l%.c3+ �b5 28 l%.b3+ �a5 Black's

1 14 Game 43

king escapes to a7 . Thus 19 . . . 'ii'a1 + would have been better for the un­likely reason that on a1 the queen stands ready to eliminate the f1 bishop when it gives a discovered check. This apparently insignificant finesse might have tipped the bal­ance in Black's favour.

26 l:tb3+ Now it is White who doesn't want

the draw, which he could have forced by 26 l:txe5+ tt:'lxe5 27 �e3+ �a4 28 'ii'd1+ �a3 29 'ii'a1+.

26 . • . 'iPc4 27 ltbl! (D)

White tightens the noose around the royal neck with a move which, amazingly, forces mate in a further eight moves. Note that 27 l:tb2? fails to 27 . . . tt:'ld4+ 28 ..te3 ..tc3 ! and now White's rook is under threat, so the attack grinds to a halt.

27 ••• l:td8 After the alternative continuation

27 . . . tt:'ld4+ White has a beautiful

B

forced mate by 28 'it>e3+ ..tc3 29 ..td3 tt:'lb3 (to cover c l ) 30 ..tb5 ! ! 'ii'xb5 (or 30 . . . axb5 3 1 l:thc1+ tt:'lxc1 32 'ii'c5#) 31 l:thc 1 + tt:'lxc 1 32 'ii'd2+ �c4 33 l:r.xc1+ 'iPb3 34 'ii'c3+ 'iPa4 35 lta1#.

28 'iPe3+ 'iPc3 White is a knight and four pawns

down and his queen is under attack, but Black's king has simply ven­tured too far into enemy territory.

29 ..td3 1-0 Black can only delay l:thcl # with

the spite check 29 . . . 'ii'b6+.

Game 43

In the following game, White plays 17 moves of opening theory but wins with a spectacular and very deep combination which starts as early as move 19. I cannot say whether this was over-the-board improvisation or good opening preparation, but it raises the question as to whether a game that consists largely of home analysis should be described as 'brilliant' . Some might argue that true brilliance depends on spontaneous creativity, and not on long hours of home analysis. My own view is that when referring to the game, only the moves are relevant, and it doesn't matter whether they were the result of in­spiration or diligence. However, when alluding to the player it does make a difference. If, indeed, much of this game was home analysis, then the game is brilliant, but Ostapenko might be better described as industrious.

Readers interested in the theory of this very sharp line, the so-called 'Velimirovic Attack' , should consult a good opening book.

8

Ostapenko - Yartsev USSR 1969

Sicilian

1 e4 c5 2 �f3 lDc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �xd4 lill'6 5 lDc3 d6 6 ..tc4 e6 7 ..te3 ..te7 8 W'e2 0-0 9 ..tb3 'ikc7

10 0-0-0 a6 1 1 :hg1 b5 12 g4 b4 13 �xc6 'ii'xc6 14 ll)d5 exd5 15 g5 (D)

15 ... dxe4 This is not an opening theory

book, so I have passed over these moves in silence. Thanks to Osta­penko's magnificent attack in this game, 15 . . . dxe4 has now fallen out of favour, and current theory consid­ers 15 . . . �xe4 the critical line.

16 gxf6 ..txf6 17 ..tdS ••4

Ostapenko - Yartsev 115

1s -..5! Ostapenko's discovery. After 18

..txa8? ..te6 19 ..td4 (19 ..txe4? ..txb2+ 20 �xb2 W'a3+ wins) ..txd4 20 :xd4 W'xa2 Black has good corn-pensation for the exchange. Bole-slavsky once recommended 18 ..tg5 ..txg5+ 19 :xg5 ..te6 20 ..txa8 :xa8 2 1 'ii'xe4 as good for White, but this does not seem to have been tested in practice.

18 ... ..te6 (D) Yartsev could hardly have antici-

pated the storm which White now unleashes. In any case, there can hardly be a better move for Black. Note that 18 . . . g6 loses to 19 :xg6+.

w

19 :xg7+!! ..txg7 20 :g1 :res

The only move. Black must cre­ate an escape route for his king, e.g. 20 ... :ac8 loses to 21 :xg7+ �xg7 22 .. g5+ �h8 23 ..td4+ f6 24 ..txf6+ :xf6 25 •xf6+ �g8 26 ..txe6#.

21 :Xg7+! ! White disproves the old adage

that lightning never strikes twice in the same place. The alternative is 2 1

116 Game 43

.i.xe4, but then 2 1 . . .'�'f8 (The Sicil­ian Sozin by Harding, Botterill and Kottnauer suggests 2 1 . . .l:txc2+ 22 .i.xc2 l:tc8, even though 23 l:txg7+! �f8 24 l:tg8+! �xg8 25 tlfxh7+ �f8 26 1t'h8+ �e7 27 tlfxc8 wins by force) 22 l:txg7 b3! 23 tlfxh7 tlla5 ! (23 . . . bxa2? 24 •g8+ �e7 25 .i.g5+ �d7 26 l:txf7+ forces mate) is com­pletely unclear.

21 22 1i'b6+ 23 .i.xe4 (D)

�xg7 �g8

White threatens mate in three by 24 .i.xh7+ �h8 25 .i.d4+, so Black is compelled to prevent the dark­squared bishop arriving on the long diagonal.

23 ... b3 This covers d4 and sets up even­

tual counterplay based on . . . bxa2. The alternative was 23 . . . l:tc5, but then 24 .i.xh7+ �h8 25 .i.d4+ l:te5 26 .i.e4+ (better than Ostapenko's 26 .i.f5+ �g8 27 .i.xe5 dxe5 28 1t'h7+ �f8 29 .i.xe6, when 29 ...• e8 ! is unclear) �g8 27 .i.xe5 dxe5 28 tllg5+ �f8 29 .i.xa8 gives White a clear extta pawn in the ending.

After the move played, the king-hunt moves into top gear.

24 .i.xh7+ �h8 25 .i.fS+ �g8 26 1i'h7+ � 27 .i.h6+ �e8 28 Wg8+ �e7

After 28 .. . �d7 29 1i'xf7+ �c6 30 .i.xe6, the position is the same as in the game, except for the insignifi­cant difference that the white bishop is on h6 instead of g5.

29 .i.gS+ �d7 30 Wxt7+ �c6 31 .i.xe6 (D)

Black has a free move, but the at­tacking force of a queen and two bishops severely restricts his op­tions.

31 ••• �b6? Loses by force, as does 3 l . . .'ifxa2

(3l.. .bxa2 fails to 32 'ifd7+) 32 .i.d5+ �c5 33 .i.e3+ �b5 34 tllb7+ �a4 35 .i.xb3+ •xb3 36 1i'xb3+ �a5 37 .i.b6#. The only way to continue the game is by 3 1 . . .1i'e4! (not men­tioned by Ostapenko ), when White appears to have nothing better than 32 1i'd7+ �b6 33 tlfxd6+ l:tc6 34

.i.d8+ l:xd8 35 'ilfxd8+ �a7 36 .i.xb3 'ii'el+ 37 'ilfdl 'ilfxf2. White cannot save his h-pawn without al­lowing perpetual check, so Black has some drawing chances.

32 i.e3+ �aS There is no longer any defence,

e .g. 32 . . . l:c5 33 .i.d5 l:b8 34 'fie7 'ilfc6 35 .i.xc6 bxa2 36 'ilfxd6 al'ilf+ 37 �d2 'ilfa5+ 38 c3 and Black's king succumbs.

33 ..txc8 l:xc8 Material equality is restored, but

the onslaught continues neverthe­less.

Lukin - Vorotnikov 117

34 ... f5+ l:cS After 34 . . . �b4 35 .i.d2+ �c4 36

axb3+ Black loses his queen. 35 .i.xc5 1i'bs

Alternatively, 35 . . . bxa2 36 b4+ �b5 37 1i'd7+ �c4 38 1i'g4+ �d5 39 c4+ �e5 40 .i.d4#. Black has never been able to fmd time for . . . bxa2-he has been too busy at­tending to White's threats.

36 .i.b4+ �xb4 37 a3+ �c4 38 'it'xbS+ axbS 39 cxb3+ �d3 40 �d1 1-0

Game 44

Sometimes it is quite unclear which king is going to be hunted. In completely wild tactical battles, it often happens that both sides are doing their best to expose the enemy king and drive it out into the open. These situations are par­ticularly mind-bending, because each move has to be a compromise between guarding one's own king and furthering one's attacking ambitions. Getting the balance right is as much a matter of judgement as calculation, because at tournament time-limits it is impossible to calculate precisely every variation.

In the following game, Black adopts an ultra-sharp opening variation in­volving an early piece sacrifice. His blitzkrieg soon has White struggling to avoid being mated, but he has one reason for optimism-Black's king is trapped in the centre of the board. Eventually Black's attack reaches its apo­gee, and at this point Black could have forced perpetual check. Either Vorot­nikov didn't see it, or he unwisely decided to press for the win, and soon White was able to return all the sacrificed material to start his own king-hunt.

Lukin - Vorotnikov USSR 1973 Ruy Lopez

1 e4 2 ll'lf3 3 i.bS

eS lDc6 a6

'I

4 ..ta4 s 0-0 6 h3

d6 .i.g4 hS

The game has hardly started, and already Black offers a piece. This line was quite popular in the 1970s, but today it has virtually vanished.

l iB Game 44

7 d4 By threatening d5, White brings

his c l-bishop into play with gain of tempo. The immediate capture on g4 is bad, because after 7 hxg4 hxg4 White's knight cannot move on ac­count of 8 .. .'ii'h4.

7 8 i.b3 9 hxg4

b5 tL!xd4

Now the cl-bishop covers g5, so White can accept the sacrifice with­out incurring an immediate disaster. Nevertheless, Black gains reason­able compensation in the shape of two pawns and dangerous attacking chances.

9 •••

10 tLlgS hxg4 tLlh6

Black must defend f7, so he is forced to block the menacing h-file. On the other hand, the knight on g5 has no retreat, so l l . . .i.e7 is a sig­nificant threat.

11 f4 This move lends further support

to the knight on g5, prepares a possi­ble attack against f7 and undermines Black's knight on d4. The negative side is that it opens the a7 -g 1 diago­nal against White's king. 1 1 g3, 1 1 i.e3, 1 1 i.d5 and 1 1 c3 have also been tried, but a discussion of the relative merits of these moves be­longs to a book on opening theory!

11 ... d5 (D) Black immediately sets about oc­

cupying the newly opened diagonal, even at the cost of a further sacrifice.

12 i.xd5 .icS 13 i.e3 'iVd6

w

Supporting the bishop ready for the knight on d4 to move away.

14 b4! As an indication of how careful

White must be, the obvious 14 c3 fails to 14 . . . tLlc2 ! 15 1Wxc2 (15 i.f2 g3 16 'tfxc2 tLlg4 ! wins for Black) i.xe3+ 16 �h2 tLlf5+ 17 tLlh3 exf4 with a decisive attack, for example 18 exf5 g3+ 19 �hl 'tfxd5 mates in four more moves.

The move played is part of a scheme to eliminate Black's threat­ening dark-squared bishop.

14 ... i.b6 15 c4?

Extreme accuracy is required, or White's king will be hunted, for ex­ample the greedy 15 i.xa8? loses to 15 . . . tLlxc2 16 i.f2 (after 16 'tfxc2 i.xe3+ 17 �h2 tLlf5+ 18 tLlh3 tLld4 19 'iVc3 exf4 Black's attack is far too strong-White's king cannot survive if it is driven to the h-file) i.xf2+ 17 �xf2 'ii'b6+ 18 �g3 'ii'e3+ 19 �h2 tLlf5+ 20 tLlh3 lbh3+ 21 gxh3 'ii'xh3+ 22 �gl 'ii'g3+ (first Black transfers his queen to h4 with gain of tempo, or else White will mate by i.c6+) 23 �hi 'iVh4+ 24

�g1 l0g3 25 .i.c6+ �fB with a win­ning attack for Black.

However, here White probably missed the strongest continuation: 1 5 fxe5 ! 'ihe5 (tricky moves by the d4-knight don't work-White is just too far ahead in material) 16 .i.xa8 and Black has no good follow-up, for example 16 . . . W'xg5 17 .i.xd4, 16 . . . g3 17 l0h3 or 16 . . . l0hf5 17 l:txf5 W'h2+ 18 �fl W'hl+ 19 .i.gl . It ap­pears dangerous to bring the black queen within range of h2, but it is more important that the queen loses contact with c6, and so moves by the d4-knight can be met by .i.c6+ forc­ing mate.

15 ••. bxc4 Forced, or else c5 shuts out the

bishop, but now White's hi -knight can head for c4.

16 l0a3 lDdfS! Blow and counter-blow ! White

has no time for 17 l0xc4, because 17 ... .i.xe3+! 18 l0xe3 l0xe3 19 W'a4+ �e7 20 .i.xa8 lOxfl gives Black a clear advantage.

w

17 .tfl g3 (D)

18 l0xc4

Lukin - Vorotnikov 119

White is forced to part with his bishop, as 18 'Wa4+ �e7 19 l0xc4 is met by 19 . . . gxf2+ 20 :xf2 l0g4! 21 l0xd6 .i.xf2+ 22 �fl l0g3#.

18 gxf2+ 19 :xn .i.xf2+ 20 �xfl

It often happens that material and the initiative counterbalance one another. Now White is the exchange down rather than a piece up, but he has eliminated Black's dangerous bishop and moved over to the attack himself. Now he threatens l0xd6+, .i.xa8 or exf5.

20 ... W'xb4 Eliminating the pawn on b4 gives

the queen access to c5. 21 .i.c6+

In such a chaotic position, piece activity is more important than ma­terial. After 21 .i.xa8? W'xc4 22 exf5 W'xf4+ 23 W'f3 'i*'xg5 24 W'c6+ �f8 Black's king is heading for safety on h7, and suddenly White's king is again the more exposed.

21 ... �e7 Black could have forced a draw

by 21 ... �fB 22 .i.xa8 (22 exf5 W'c5+ 23 �e1 'i*'xc6 wins for Black) 'Wc5+ 23 �e1 'ii'g1+ 24 �d2 'ii'd4+ 25 �e1 'Wc3+ (or simply 25 . . . 'i*'g1+) 26 � l0g4+ 27 'ii'xg4 'Wd4+ 28 � 'ii'c3+, but he courageously tries to win.

22 W'd7+ �f8 23 e:xfS (D)

White has activated his queen with gain of tempo, and now he can remove one of the minor pieces en­'4ngering his king. Not 23 .i.xa8?

120 Game 44

lbg4+ 24 �f3 'ii'c3+ 25 �xg4 W'g3+ 26 �xf5 'iVxf4#.

B

23 •.•

But this is going too far. After 23 . . . 1Vxc4 24 .txa8 lbg4+ 25 �f3 W'xf4+ 26 �e2 'ii'e3+ 27 �dl l:Z.hl+ 28 �c2 'iVc5+ 29 �b3 'ifb6+ 30 �c2 the complications would have burned out into perpetual check-a fair result to a titanic struggle. In­credibly, this is how an earlier game Ciric-Scholl, Amsterdam 1970, fin­ished. One may speculate as to whether Lukin or Vorotnikov knew of the earlier encounter, but I would guess not in view of the subsequent inaccuracies.

After the move played, the mate­rial balance once again swings to­wards White.

24 <MJ?! 24 �el ! is simple and strong. Af­

ter 24 . . . 'ifxc4 (24 . . . 'iVgl+ 25 �e2 W'xal 26 .txa8 1Vxa2+ 27 lbd2 forces mate) 25 .txa8 W'c3+ 26 �e2 'ii'c2+ 27 'iVd2 W'c4+ 28 'iVd3 Black has no perpetual check, so White can liquidate to an endgame while pre­serving his material advantage.

24 1Wxc4 25 .txa8 1Wxf4+ 26 �e2 1Wxg5?

At this critical moment, Black decides to regain his material and even go two pawns up; readers will not be surprised to learn that such materialism is going to be drasti­cally punished. 26 . . . Wc4+ 27 �d2 1Wf4+ 28 �c3 would also have been very good for White. The correct move was 26 . . . g6!, giving the king a flight square on g7. After 27 f6 11'xf6 28 lDe4 11'b6 29 l:Z.hl the position would have been totally unclear.

27 'iVc8+ �e7 28 'ii'xc7+

And not 28 1Wxh8? W'g4+ 29 .tf3 W'c4+ 30 �d2 'ti"d4+, when Black wins. This game must set some sort of record for the number of en prise rooks declined.

w

28 ••• � (D)

29 1Vc8+?! The large number of alternative

checks has confused White. He could have won more simply by playing 29 11'b8+ �e7 30 Wxe5+ �f8 3 1 Wb8+ �e7 32 'ii'b4+ �f6

33 'iVd6+ �xf5 34 :n + �g4 35 .i.f3+, but he probably didn't want to take the e-pawn for fear that it would allow a later . . . lle8 with check.

w

29 �e7 30 ... cS+ � 31 ... d6+ hfS 32 :n+ �g4 33 .i.f3+ �g3 (D)

I suspect that White didn't imag­ine that the king would be relatively

Th. Espig - Zinn 121

safe on g3. Only his accurate follow­up guarantees success.

34 1Wb4! The only dangerous check is on

e 1 , and the queen finds an excellent route to this key square. The threat is 35 'i'el + �f4 36 'iVd2+ �f5 37 .i.h5+. Black is curiously unable to defend himself.

34 ... e4 Or 34 .. .f6 35 'it'e1 + �f4 36 .i.h5+

�e4 37 'it'b4+ �d5 38 lld 1+ �e6 (or 38 . . . �c6 39 'it'd6+ �bS 40 llb1 + �c4 4 1 llb4+ �c3 42 ... cS#) 39 'iVd6+ �fS 40 'iVd7+ �f4 41 llfl+ �g3 42 'it'h3#.

35 •e1+ 36 ... d2+ 37 .ixe4+ 38 .if3+ 39 .ihS+ 1-0

Black is forced to part with his queen.

Game 45

Some king-hunts cover a wider area than others. The following one is excep­tional in that the black king visits all eight files and six ranks. Moreover, many such king-hunts are rather uninteresting because the king is obviously going to be mated in the end, and indeed there are often several methods of execution-but in this example it is far from clear whether the prey is going to escape. Add to that the spice of time-trouble and you have the recipe for a classic royal chase.

Th. Espig - Zinn East Germany 1973

Modern Defence

1 e4 g6 2 d4 .ig7 3 lbc3 c6

4 f4 dS 5 eS hS

Black's plan in this opening is to set up a fll1Jl blockade on the light squares, hoping that if he can con­tain White's kingside ambitions, then he will be able to develop a later

122 Game 45

queenside initiative. Both sides usu­ally adopt a slow manoeuvring strat­egy, but not in this game!

6 ltlf3 .i.g4 Since Black intends occupying

the light squares with his pawns, he doesn't mind the eventual exchange of his 'bad' bishop.

7 .i.e2 8 .i.e3

e6 liJd7

This game is slightly unusual in that Black's king's knight remains on g8 instead of being developed to h6. Black's idea is to wait until it becomes clearer whether the knight belongs on e7 or h6, but Black's blockade is less secure than normal, since the knight is not covering g4 and f5 . It is White's attempt to ex­ploit this omission that causes the game to catch fire.

9 g3 White's plan is to force the ex­

change of the g4-bishop and then expand on the kingside by h3, g4 and eventually f5 . However, the im­mediate 9 h3 is premature because of 9 . . . .i.xf3 10 .i.xf3 h4, blocking White's kingside ambitions.

9 b5 10 b3 .i.xf3 1 1 .i.x£3 .ifS

Although retreating the bishop may look odd, it is quite normal in this line. The bishop is needed on the f8-a3 diagonal to support Black's queenside advance.

12 <itf2 Also quite normal; White con­

nects his major pieces on the frrst rank, and prevents Black meeting g4

by . . . hxg4 followed by . . . :xhl + and . . .... h4+. In this variation White's king is usually best placed on g2.

12 •.• lL!b6 13 b3

Thanks to Black's omission of . . . lL!h6-f5, White has managed to save a tempo by avoiding ... d2. When the queen does move, it will be to a more effective square.

13 ... "fic7 This was Black's last chance to

steer the game into more conven­tional channels with 13 . . . lL!e7, al­though after 14 g4 Black's knight cannot occupy f5 and is poorly placed on e7, blocking in the f8-bishop. It is clear that Black's open­ing strategy has failed.

14 g4 h4 (D)

w

15 CS! The start of the complications.

White could have continued qui­etly with lL!e2 or "fid3, aiming for f5 under less double-edged circum­stances, but the continuation shows that this brave decision was justi­fied.

15 ... gxf5

Black must accept, or else fxg6, followed by 1i'd3 and ll:Je2-f4, will shatter Black's position.

16 gxfS exfS 17 1i'd3 1i'd7

After 17 . . . ll:Je7 18 .i.g5 0-0-0 19 l:.hg 1 l:.e8 20 l:.af1 Black has almost no active play, so White need not be in any hurry to regain the f5-pawn with i.xe7.

18 �2 0-0-0 Black must have felt relieved to

remove his king from the centre, but White strikes on the queenside too.

19 a4! bxa4 After 19 . . . b4 20 a5 ll:Ja8 21 c4

bxc3 22 l:.hc1 White will develop a crushing attack down the c-file.

20 c4! The point. 20 bxa4 ll:Jc4 would al­

low Black to block White's attack, but now he cannot prevent the posi­tion opening up completely. More and more Black is missing his light­squared bishop.

20 •.. dxc4 Alternatively 20 . . . axb3 21 cxd5

cxd5 (2 l . . .li:Jxd5 22 1i'xb3 ll:Jxe3 23 l:.hb1 1i'c7 24 .i.xc6 1i'xc6 25 l:.cl wins) 22 1Wxb3, with a truly gigantic attack.

21 bxc4 Threatening to win by means of

22 c5 .i.xc5 23 1Wa6+. 21 • . • cS 22 dS f6 (D)

Undoubtedly Black's best chance, provoking an immediate crisis be­fore White brings his last attacking pieces into play with li:Jf4 and l:.hbl .

23 e6

Th. Espig - Zinn 123

w

This move is more or less forced, as White cannot allow . . . fxe5, while 23 exf6 li:Jxf6 brings Black's reclu­sive knight surging into the game.

23 ... 1i'xe6 24 ll:Jd4 1i'd7

After 24 . . . 1i'e5 25 ll:Jc6 1Wg3+ 26 'ifte2 l:.e8 27 1i'xf5+ �b7 28 d6 White has a winning attack, for ex­ample 28 . . . 1Wxd6 29 lLlb4+ 'iftc7 30 ll:Ja6+ 'iftd8 31 l:.hd 1 .

2s ll:Jxfs �7 Black must eliminate the domi­

nating knight on f5 . 26 ..tg4 'iftb7 27 ..tf4

White aims to play d6, opening the long diagonal onto the enemy king.

27 28 ..txfS 29 d6

ll:Jxfs 1i't7 ..th6

Once again, Black seeks to defuse White's attack by exchanges, but de­spite his systematic defence White's attack is simply too strong. The threat was 30 1We4+ �a6 3 1 l:.xa4+ ll:Jxa4 32 1Wc6+, and 29 . . . 1i'xc4 loses to 30 1i'f3+ li:Jd5 3 1 l:.xa4 1Wxa4 32 1Wxd5+ �b6 33 l:.b1+.

124 Game 45

30 'it'e4+ �b8 31 d7+

If Black had not played . . . .i.h6, this would lead to immediate mate.

31 .i.xf4 32 'ii'xf4+ <it>b7 33 'ii'e4+

This position is won for White, but there is no absolutely clear-cut winning line. Therefore White re­peats moves to edge closer to move 40.

w

33 34 'ii'f4+ 35 .i.e4+

36 l:ha4+!?

�c7 �b7 'ii?a6 (D)

White can hardly be blamed for missing a somewhat simpler win while short of time-the position is enormously complicated. After 36 "ilc7 (not 36 'ii'd6? "ilxd7 defending a4) "ilxc4 (36 . . . 'ii'xd7 37 .i.b7+ 'iii>a5 38 'ii'xc5+) 37 l:xa4+ "ilxa4 (or 37 . . . �xa4 38 .i.b7+ �b5 39 l:lbl+ '6'b4 40 'ifc6+ �c4 4 1 'ife4+ �b5 42 l:txb4+ cxb4 43 'fic6+ �a5 44 W"a6#) 38 .i.b7+ 'ii?a5 39 'ii'xc5+ W"b5 40 l:al+ �a4 41 'fixa7+ �b4 42 l:tbl+ �c4 43 .i.a6 Black could

no longer resist, but then we would have missed the full king-hunt.

36 �a4 37 'ii'd6+ �aS 38 'it'c7+ 'iii>b4

Black's moves are forced to avoid immediate mate.

8

39 l:b1+ (D)

39 .•. �c3 Black faced a critical decision on

move 39-never a pleasant circum­stance. After 39 . . . �a3, suggested in /nformatorwithoutfurther analysis, White wins by 40 'ii'b7 (as indeed I scrawled in my copy of lnformator 15 during 1973 ! ) �b6 4 1 'ii'a6+ �a4 42 .:tal+ �b2 43 'W'b5+ �c3 44 �e3 followed by l:lcl#.

However, 39 . . . 'iii>xc4 would be a tougher defence. White then has two possible winning lines:

1) 40 .i.c6 l:txd7 41 .i.b5+ �c3 42 'ii'a5+ �c2 43 'fiel l:ld2+ 44 �fl c4 45 .i.xa4+ ..ti>d3 (45 . . . 'iii>c3 46 l:cl + ..ti>d3 47 .i.c2+ l:lxc2 48 .:.dl +) 46 .i.b5 (threat .:tb3+) 'iii>c3 47 'ii'c l + �d3 48 .:.b3+ �e4 49 .i.c6+ �f5 50 l:tb5+ 'iii>g6 5 1 'ifxd2 should be a comfortable win. Black has three

pawns for the piece, but they are all isolated and White still has a very strong attack.

2) 40 l:c1+ (this is even more conclusive, but it is fairly complex) and now (D):

B

2a) 40 . . . �b5 41 'ii'b7+ �a5 42 'ii'xa7+ �b4 43 l:b1+ (or 43 .. .'�a3 44 l:a1 +) �c3 44 'ii'xa4 wins.

2b) 40 .. .'�b4 (40 . . . �b3 41 'ii'b7+ lUb6 42 'ii'xa7 is the same) 41 'ii'b7+ lUb6 42 'ili'xa7 l:b8 (42 . . . lUa4 loses as in line 2a) 43 dS'iW 'ii'xa7 44 11i'd2+ �b5 45 l:b1 + mates.

2c) 40 . . . lUc3 41 'ii'a5 �d4 42 'ii'xc3+ �xe4 43 'ii'e3+ (White wins

Th. Espig - Zinn 125

with a long series of checks which removes Black's defensive pawns one by one) �f5 44 'ii'xc5+ �f4 (44 . . . �g6 45 l:tg1+ �h6 46 'ili'e3+ 'ifi>h5 47 'ii'f3+ �h6 48 ti'f4+ 'it>h5 49 'ii'g4+ 'iii>h6 50 'ii'xh4+ mates, much as in the game) 45 'ii'e3+ �f5 46 'ii'f3+ 'ifi>e6 47 l:e1+ �d6 48 'ii'a3+ 'ifi>c6 49 ti'a6+ �c5 50 'ii'xa7+ 'iitb5 51 .:.b1 + �c6 52 l:c 1 + 'it>d6 53 'ii'c5+ 'it>xd7 (53 .. . 'it>e6 54 l:e1 +) 54 l:d1+ �e8 55 l:e1+ 'it>d7 56 'ii'a7+ winning Black's queen.

40 1Wa5+ 'it>d4 41 'ii'd2+ 'it>xe4

After 4 l . . .�e5 42 .i.d5 'ii'h5 43 l:e1+ �f5 (43 . . . �d6 44 .i.f3+) 44 l:e7 White has the decisive threat of 45 .i.e4#.

42 l:tel+ 1-0 Black gave up in view of 42 . . . 'iii>f5

43 'li'd3+ �g5 44 l:g1+ 'it>h6 (or 44 .. .'iPf4 45 l:g4+ �e5 46 l:e4+ �f5 47 l:e7+) 45 'ii'e3+ 'it>h5 46 'ili'f3+ �h6 47 'ii'f4+ 'it>h5 48 'ii'g4+ �h6 49 'ii'xh4+ 'ifh5 50 'ii'xf6+ �h7 5 1 'ikg7#. In this line Black's king walked from a6 to h7, via c3 !

Game 46

It is time for that traditional piece of self-indulgence, a game by the author. The opening of this game is one of the sharpest in the book, since it involves Black in the sacrifice of a whole rook. It is true that White ends up with a knight trapped on a8, so some might say that it is really only an exchange sac­rifice, but since Black usually cannot afford the tempo required to actually take the knight, it usually stays on the board far longer than one might expect! In addition to the possible eventual capture of this knight, Black also has a strong initiative. The theory of this line is very complex, but the risks associ­ated with it are so great that these days it is usually only seen in correspon­dence chess. I introduced an innovation on move 13, and such is the volatile

126 Game 46

nature of the position that even one slight inaccuracy by White was enough to plunge him into difficulties. Soon White's king was prised out from behind his defensive pawns and a full-scale king-hunt was in progress.

0st Hansen - Nunn Teesside Student Olympiad 1974

Vienna Opening

1 e4 eS 2 lbc3 tDf6 3 i.c4 ofu:e4 4 'ii'hs lbd6 5 ..tb3 tbc6 6 tbbS g6 7 "iff3 fS 8 "ifdS "ife7 9 tbxc7+ 'itd8

10 tbxa8 b6 1 1 d3

Readers interested in the exten­sive theory of this line should refer to The Complete Vienna by Tseitlin and Glazkov, or Harding's old book Vienna Opening, which is still worth consulting. White's main alterna­tives are 1 1 d4, 1 1 tDxb6 and 1 1 "iff3, but to this day nobody is sure which move is best!

11 12 h4 13 "iff3

..tb7 f4 i.h6 (D)

This is the new idea which was introduced in this game. Hitherto, Black had usually played 13 . . . tbd4 14 1i'g4 i.h6. My idea was to invert these moves, which at least has the benefit of setting White new prob­lems. Curiously enough, Black has recently reverted to 13 . . . lDd4, but with the idea of meeting 14 1i'g4 by 1 4 . . . ..tg7. This was played in the

w

important game Ekebjrerg-Timmer­man, Corr 199 1 , a game which is regrettably not mentioned in the above-mentioned book by Tseitlin and Glazkov (indeed, it virtually re­futes one of the lines given by them).

14 "ifg4? White makes the mistake of try­

ing to transpose back into the old line, and Black's new idea notches up an immediate success. There are various alternatives, but we can only summarise the analysis here:

1 ) 14 i.d5 i.xa8 ! 15 tbe2 tbf5 16 c3 tbxh4 17 1i'h3 i.g5 18 g3 tbf5 is unclear.

2) 14 ..td2 tbd4 15 1i'g4 e4 16 0-0-0 e3 17 fxe3 tbxb3+ 18 axb3 fxe3 19 i.e1 ei+ 20 l:r.d2 .i.xd2+ 21 'itxd2 l:r.e8 22 tbxe2 "ife3+ 23 'itdl h5 24 1i'g5+ "ifxg5 25 hxg5 .i.xg2 with an edge for White.

3) 14 tbe2 tbd4 15 1i'h3 tbxe2 16 'itxe2 i.xa8 17 i.d2 l:r.f8 18 f3 tbf5 19 l:r.ae1 tbg3+ 20 "ifxg3 fxg3 2 1 i.xh6 'itc7 is roughly equal.

14 ••• e4! This is the key difference. Black

can spend his tempo on a much more useful move than . . . lDd4. The imme­diate central breakthrough not only gives White no time to organise his defence, but it also creates the option of ... lbe5.

15 .i.xf4 Other moves are no better: 1) 15 dxe4 is bad after 15 ... 'ii'xe4+

16 �e2 lt:ld4 17 �d 1 ( 17 .i.e3 fxe3 1 8 'ii'xe4 exf2+ 19 �fl lt:lxe4 20 lt:lxd4 .i.e3 wins for Black) �xe2 18 l:e1 (not 18 'ii'xe2 'ii'xg2) 'ifd4+ 19 �xe2 (19 .i.d2 'ifxb2 20 �xe2 .i.a6+ 21 �f3 �f5 with a crushing attack) .i.a6+ 20 �f3 �e4 ! and now White is helpless, since 21 l:xe4 loses to 2 l . ..'ifd1+.

2) 15 �e2 exd3 16 cxd3 �e5 17 'ii'h3 f3 18 gxf3 .i.xc1 19 l:xc1 lt:lxd3+ 20 �d2 lbxi2! 21 'ifg2 lt:\xh1 22 lt:lxb6 l:e8 ! and White is in seri­ous trouble.

15 .•• exd3+ 16 �

After 16 �d1 �e4! 17 �3 lt:le5 18 .i.xe5 'ii'xe5 19 c3 lt:lxf2+ 20 lt:lxf2 'ii'e3 White has to give up most of his pieces to prevent mate.

16 .i.xf4 17 'ii'xf4 .WS (D) 18 'ii'g3

Although the queen can move to many different squares, none of the alternatives is at all appealing:

1 ) 18 'ii'g5 (18 'ii'd2 lbe4 leads to a similar position) l:xf2+ 19 �xf2 lt:le4+ 20 �fl �xg5 2 1 hxg5 dxc2 22 .i.xc2 .i.a6+ 23 �f2 1Wc5+ 24

�st Hansen - Nunn 127

w

�g3 1Wxg5+ 25 �f2 'ifcS+ wins for Black.

2) 18 'ii'c1 d2! 19 'it'd1 (19 'ii'xd2 lt:le4 20 'ii'e3 lt:lxf2 21 1Wxf2 l:xf2+ 22 �xf2 'ifcS+ 23 �fl �4) .i.a6+ 20 �e2 'ii'e3 21 �gl l:xf2 and now White's position collapses.

3) 18 'ii'h6 lt:lf5 19 'ii'f4 lbe3+ 20 fxe3 lhf4+ 21 exf4 dxc2 22 .i.xc2 .i.a6+ 23 �f2 'ii'cS+ 24 �g3 'it'xc2 with a large advantage for Black.

4) 18 'ii'h2 lt:\e4 will transpose to the game.

5) 18 'ii'g4 lt:\e4 19 lt:lf3 lt:le5 20 lt:lxeS (or 20 1Wh3 ltlxf3 21 gxf3 ltld2+) 1Wxe5 21 �g1 l:f4 22 1i'dl �xf2 23 'ii'e1 'it'c5 24 'ii'c3 ltlxh1+ 25 1Wxc5 bxcS 26 �xh 1 l:xh4+ 27 �g1 l:g4 and wins.

6) 18 1Wa4 bS ! 1 9 1Wa3 b4 20 1Wa4 l:xf2+ 21 �xf2 ltle4+ 22 �e3 'ii'c5+! 23 �xe4 1Wd4+ 24 �f3 lt:le7+ followed by mate.

18 ltle4 19 1Wc7+ �e8 20 �3

The alternative is 20 ltlf3 (20 f3 loses to 20 . . . 'ii'c5 ! 21 �3 lD<i2+ 22 �e1 1We3+ 23 �d1 1We2+ 24 �cl ltlxb3+ and mate) 1Wc5 2 1 �gl

128 Game 46

llxf3 ! . In my 197 4 notes I had as­sessed this position as better for Black. Undeterred by this, the 1986 correspondence game Wibe-Bryson continued: 22 �h2 (22 cxd3 1Wxf2+ 23 �h2 l:tf4 ! wins for Black) 'ii'h5 (22 . . . 'ikxf2 is also very strong) 23 l1hf1 t:Dd4 24 l:tae1 (24 .i.e6 'ikxh4+ 25 .i.h3 .7:.xh3+ 26 gxh3 lDf3+ 27 �g2 'ii'g5+ 28 �h1 lDh4 wins) d2 0- 1 .

B

20 tDxf2 21 lDxf2 (D)

21 ... 'ike2+ Here I missed a chance to win

more quickly by 21 . . .1i'e3 ! 22 �g1 l:txf2! (threatening 23 ... l:tf4+ 24 �h2 l:txh4#) 23 1:.h2 (or 23 .:.h3 l:tf3+ 24 'iii>h2 l:.xh3+ 25 gxh3 'ii'f2+ 26 'iii>h1 lDa5+) l:te2+ 24 �h1 l:te1+ followed by mate. The reason for overlooking this is purely psychological; given the chance to take various white pieces with check, it is hard to imag­ine that there might be a stronger continuation which doesn't involve checking at all.

22 �g1 23 'iii>h2

'ii'xf2+ 1i'xh4+

24 �g1 25 �h2

'ti'd4+ tDes

Spurning the perpetual check and closing in for the kill. The immedi­ate threat is 26 . . . 1i'h4+ 27 �gl 'ii'f2+ and 28 . . . 1i'xg2#.

26 m.n The only defence, for example

26 11t'xb7 lDg4+ 27 'ith3 lDf2+ 28 'ith2 'ii'h4+ 29 'iii>g1 'it'xh1# or 26 l:taf1 'ii'h4+ 27 'itg1 l:txfl + 28 'iii>xfl 1i'xh1 +, but now the white king is levered out and the king-hunt gets under way.

26 •.. lDg4+ 27 'itg3

Both 27 �h1 and 27 'ith3 run into 27 . . . .i.xg2+! 28 �xg2 tDe3+ mat-ing.

27 ..• 'ii'e3+ 28 �g4 (D)

After 28 �h4, Black forces mate by 28 . . . 'ii'h6+ 29 'itxg4 (29 'iii>g3 1i'h2+ 30 �xg4 'ii'h5+ is the same) 1i'h5+ 30 �g3 1i'g5+ 31 �h3 1i'xg2+ 32 �h4 g5+ 33 �h5 1i'h3+ 34 'iii>xg5 h6+ 35 'itg6 .i.e4+ 36 �g7 1i'g4+ 37 'itxh6 \i'g6#.

B

28 .•. h5+

It would have been simpler to play 28 . . . 'ii'e2+ 29 �h4 'fkh5+, transpos­ing into the previous note.

29 �h4 gS+ 29 . . . 'ii'e4+ is a quicker win: 30

�g5 'ii'e7+ 31 �h6 (3 1 �xg6 .te4+ 32 �xh5 :h8+ 33 �g4 'fkh4#) :hs+ 32 �xg6 .te4+ 33 :fs 'ii'h7+, but the move played also leads to mate.

30 �:xh5 :h8+ 31 �g6

Or 3 1 �g4 :h4+ 32 �f5 'ii'e4+ 33 �f6 :h6+.

31 ••. .te4+ 32 :rs

32 �g7 'fkd4+ 33 :f6 l:th7+ 34 �g8 'ii'xf6 with a rapid mate.

Gusev - Zhuravlev 129

32 ... 33 �xf5

.i.xf5+ :m+

This forces mate in seven more moves.

34 �g6 34 �g4 'fke4+ 35 �xg5 'ii'xg2+ is

no better. 34 ... 35 �g7

'ii'e4+ 'ii'e7+

Now the king has to turn around and go back.

36 �g6 37 �hS 38 �g4

Slightly accelerating the end, but 38 �g6 :f6+ 39 �xg5 'ii'g7+ only lasts two moves longer.

38 'ii'h4#

Game 47

The phrase 'playing with fire' might have been invented to describe the adop­tion of certain opening systems. Many lines of the Sicilian Najdorffall into this category. In the following game, Black is confronted by a slightly un­usual move, and replies in a way which positively invites White to sacrifice on b5. Gusev duly obliges, and after an inaccuracy by Black we are treated to a king-hunt from e8 to h2. It must have been scant consolation for Zhuravlev when, seven years later, an improvement for Black was discovered which vin­dicated his decision to allow the sacrifice on b5.

Gusev - Zhuravlev 7 f4 .te7 USSR 1976 8 i¥f3 'fic7

Sicilian Najdorf 9 0-0-0 t0bd7 10 "i¥g3

1 e4 c5 This is the slightly unusual move 2 00 d6 mentioned above ( 10 g4 and 10 .td3 3 d4 cxd4 are more common). The safest reply 4 t0xd4 lLlf6 is 10 . . . h6 1 1 .th4 g5, transposing 5 tOc3 a6 to a standard position; lO . . . tLlcS is 6 .i.g5 e6 certainly a playable alternative, but

130 Game 47

much less is known about this possi­bility.

10 ••• b5 One of the points of 10 ... g3 is

that, by supporting e4-e5, it sets up the possibility of a sacrifice on b5. It follows that this move, by which Black dares White to do his worst, is a critical test of White's idea.

1 1 i..xb5 ax:b5 12 lbdxb5 'ii'b8

The best square. 12 . . .... c5 13 e5 0-0 (or 1 3 . . . dxe5 14 fxe5 tLlxe5 15 i..e3 and Black must return the piece since 15 . . . tLlh5 runs into 16 i..xc5 tLlxg3 17 tLlc7+ �f8 18 :td8#) 14 exf6 tLlxf6 15 tL!xd6 tL!h5 16 ... f3 i..xd6 17 ... xa8 is very good for White, Petri-Wessman, Baguio City jr Wch 1987.

13 e5 dxeS This is the most natural move, but

1 3 . . . :ta5 14 exf6 gxf6 may also be playable. After 15 lDd4 fxg5 16 lbc6 'iWa8 17 tLlxe7 �xe7 18 f5 :txf5 19 'iWxd6+ �e8 20 :the1 'ii'a6 21 'ii'd4 :tg8 22 tLle4 :tf4 23 g3 :txe4 24 :txe4 "iba2 Black was clearly bet­ter in Strenzwilk-Renet, St Martin 1992. 15 i..h6 :txb5 16 tLlxb5 'iWxb5 17 'iWg7 :tf8 18 Wxh7 'ii'h5 is more critical, with an unclear position.

14 fxe5 lill:eS 15 :the1 (D) 15 .•• .!Ded7?!

15 . . . tLlc4? is even worse, for ex­ample 1 6 'iWc7 tL!d5 (16 . . . i..b7 17 'iWxc4 0-0 1 8 ..tf4 is a better chance, but still good for White) 17 :txd5 0-0 18 ..txe7 1-0 Vitolins-Anetbaev, Riga 1975. Black's correct reply was

8

eventually discovered by Waiter Browne: 15 ... tLlg6 16 lbc7+ �f8 17 tLlxa8 'iWxa8 18 ... c7 h6 19 ..te3 tLle8 and Black has the advantage, Shi­razi-Browne, USA Ch 1983. This game effectively killed off the vari­ation from White's point of view.

16 i..f4 'ii'b7 Best, as 16 . . . e5 17 :txe5 tLlxe5 18

i..xe5 ... b7 19 i..xf6 gxf6 20 ... g7 :tf8 21 tLld5 �d7 22 Wg4+ �c6 23 _.c4+ ..tc5 24 lM4+ �d6 25 tLlc7 ! �xc7 26 ... xc5+ �b8 27 tLlc6+ wins for White.

17 i..d6 (D) Threatening 18 lbc7+ �f8 19

i..xe7+ �xe7 20 tLlxe6 ! . Grabbing material by 17 'iWxg7 :tg8 1 8 tLlc7+ 'ii'xc7 19 'iWxg8+ tLlxg8 20 i..xc7 i..b7 is far less clear, since the b7-bishop is very active and in an end­ing Black need not worry about his king.

17 ... .:a6?! Only this move finally allows

White a clear advantage. 17 . . . � is also doubtful after 1 8 i..xe7+ �xe7 19 tLld6 ... b4 (or 19 . . . 'iWc6 20 'iWxg7 :tf8 21 tLlf5+ �e8 22 :d6, followed by a deadly sacrifice on e6) 20 lbe6+

B

(20 'iixg7 'iif4+ 21 �b1 l:tf8 is less effective) fxe6 (20 . . . �f8 21 lZhl5) 21 'iixg7+ �d8 22 'iixh8+ �c7 23 ltJcb5+ �c6 24 'iid8 'li'a5 25 ltJd4+ �xd6 26 liJb3+ 'iid5 27 l:xd5+ exd5 28 liJd4 and White's two connected passed pawns combined with his continuing attack will make life vir­tually impossible for Black. The best defence was 17 . . . ltJh5 18 'li'h3 (18 'ii'g4 ltJdf6 19 'ii'c4 0-0 20 g4 ltJxg4 21 'ii'xg4 lLlf6 is fine for Black) ltJhf6 19 lLlc7+ (avoiding the repeti­tion of moves; 19 lbe6 fxe6 20 ltJc7 + �f8 21 'ii'xe6 .i.xd6 22 'li'xd6+ �f7 23 'ii'e6+ is a draw at best) �d8 20 .i.xe7+ �xe7 (20 . . . �xc7 21 'ii'g3+ �b6 22 l:d4 wins for White) 2 1 ltJxa8 'iixa8 2 2 'ii'g3, with an unclear position.

18 19 20

liJc7+ .i.xe7+ ltJxe6!

�

�e7

Going for the king-hunt is the most incisive continuation. In lnfor­mator, Gufeld gave 20 'ii'xg7 l:g8 21 lLl3d5+ ltJxd5 22 ltJxd5+ 'ii'xd5 23 'li'xg8 as good for White (for exam­ple 23 . . . 'ii'xa2 24 'li'xc8 'iial + 25 �d2 l:d6+ 26 �e2 'ii'xb2 27 �fl

Gusev - Zhuravlev 131

and White escapes with an extra exchange), but 20 . . . 'ii'xc7 21 'li'xh8 .i.b7 is better, with a murky position. If White wanted to continue quietly, he could play 20 ltJxa6 'li'xa6 21 'ii'xg7 l:f8 22 'i!fg5, with an un­doubted advantage, but the move played is even stronger.

20 l:xe6 21 lbe6+ �e6 22 l:el+ �5 23 h4

White would not have sacrificed on e6 if his intention had been merely to force a draw by 23 :n +. By threatening mate in one, White takes away the g5-square with gain of tempo.

23 ••• h6 24 'li'd3+ �g4

After 24 .. . �4. White forces mate by 25 ltJe2+ �e5 (or 25 . . . �g4 26 'ilfg3+ �f5 27 ltJd4#) 26 ltJg3+ �4 27 'ilff5+ �xg3 28 l:e3+ �h2 29 'li'h3+ �g1 30 l:e1+ � 3 1 'li'e3+ �xg2 32 l:.gl + �h2 33 'ii'g3#.

25 'li'h3+ �h5 Black's moves are all forced:

25 ... �f4 26 g3+ �f3 27 'li'f5+ �g2 28 l:e2+ �xg3 29 l:e3+ leads to mate.

26 'li'f5+ g5 (D) 27 hxgS?

Having played more or less fault­lessly so far, White, at this critical juncture, overlooks a quick win: 27 ltJe2 ! (27 l:.h1? is met by 27 . . . 1Wxg2, so White must first deflect the queen) 'ilfc7 (there is no other an­swer to the threats of 28 lLlf4+ and 28 lLlg3+) 28 l:h 1 forcing mate.

132 Game 47

w

27 ••• 'ii'J:gl Forced. This meets the threat of

28 gxf6+, as 28 . . .... g5 is check. 28 �2 �?!

After this White is again winning comfortably. 28 . . . �h4 would have been a much tougher defence, but White could still have won by 29 lbf4! ... c6 (the only move; 29 . . . �2 30 gxf6, 29 . . .... f3 30 lbg6+ �g3 31 l:tgl+ �f2 32 l:tfl+ and 29 . . .... b7 30 gxf6 are all hopeless) 30 l:tgl ! tillS (30 . . . lbc5 3 1 lbg2+ ... xg2 32 ... f4+ �h3 33 l:txg2 �xg2 34 ... xf6 wins more material) 3 l lbg2+ (3 1 lbe6 is ingenious, but only leads to a draw after 3 l . . .lbxe6 32 ... xf6 ... e4 33 ,..f2+ �h5 34 ... xf7+ �h4 35 ... f2+ �h5) ... xg2 32 ... f4+ �h3 33 l:txg2 �xg2 34 ... xf6 l:tg8 (there is nothing better; 34 . . . lbg6 loses to 35 'ifxf7) 35 gxh6 .i.e6 (or else Black loses his last pawn) 36 'ii'g7+ and the pawn promotes.

29 lbg3+ �h4 30 l:te4+ �g3

After 30 . . . 'ii'xe4 3 1 lbxe4 lb7b6 32 'ii'e5 l:tg8 (32 . . . l:td8 33 gxh6) 33 c4 White picks up the knight and wins on material.

31 l:tg4+ Rather surprisingly, White misses

a forced mate by 3 1 ... g4+ �h2 32 'ifh4+ �gl 33 l:tel + •n 34 Wg3+ �hl 35 l:txfl#, but the move played is also sufficient for an easy win.

w

31 ••• �h2 (D)

32 l:txgl+ �g2 33 _.xdS+ �h3 34 gxh6

Black's position is hopeless; his king is horribly exposed to forks by the white queen, so he cannot counter the h-pawn.

34 ••• f6 Desperately trying to secure e5

for the knight, but White's reply immediately frustrates this plan. 34 . . . l:txh6 35 Whl + and 34 ... lbf6 35 _.f3+ were also terminal.

35 h7 lDf8 35 ... lbe5 loses straight away after

36 Wg8. 36 .. f3+ 37 .. xf6 38 'ii':xf8

�h2 l:txh7 1-0

Black did not care to see White gradually advancing his three con­nected passed pawns!

Smagin - Bukhtin 133

Game 48

Double check is one of the most forcing moves in chess-the only possible reply is a king move-yet it is quite rare in over-the-board play. When it does occur, it usually signals the rapid end of the game. It is therefore exceptional for a protracted king-hunt to start with a double check, and even more so for the double check to be a deeply calculated rook sacrifice.

Smagin - Bukhtin USSR 1982

Sicilian Najdorf

1 e4 c5 2 00 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 �d4 lbf6 5 tt)cJ a6 6 .te3 e5 7 ltlb3

This move signals White's inten­tion to adopt an aggressive system based on castling queenside and aiming for a kingside pawn advance. Play usually develops very sharply since Black must react quickly on the queenside if he is to deflect White from his own attack.

7 ••. 'ii'c7 This is slightly unusual-Black

doesn't normally commit his queen so early, usually preferring to play more flexible moves, such as . . . .te6 and . . . ltlbd7, before making any re­ally committal decision.

8 'ii'd2 .te7 9 0-0-0 0-0

10 f4 ltlbd7 Another unusual move; Black

normally plays . . . .te6 first in order to make sure that White cannot es­tablish a knight on d5.

11 g4!? A very brave decision; such at­

tacks are normally prepared by .te2 (sometimes with h3 or l:[g1). Here White is trying to exploit Black's omission of . . . .te6 to accelerate his attack; objectively, this idea is prob­ably not entirely sound, but over­the-board play and home analysis are different worlds.

1 1 . . • �g4 The Informator notes by Dolma­

tov and Smagin claim that if Black declines the offer by 1 1 .. .b5, then White gains a clear advantage after 12 g5 b4 13 gxf6 bxc3 14 'W'd5 .tb7 15 fxe7 i.xd5 1 6 exf8'ii'+ :xf8 17 exd5. However, Black has a massive improvement in this line: 14 . . . cxb2+ 1 5 �xb2 i.xf6! 16 11ha8 i.b7 17 'fia7 :as and it is not White but Black who ends up clearly better. Moreover, White's chances are not improved by a preliminary exchange on e5, since 12 fxe5 dxe5 1 3 g5 b4 14 gx.f6 bxc3 15 'fid5 cxb2+ 16 �b2 ltlxf6! 17 'ii'xa8 .tg4 18 'fixa6 .txdl 19 .td3 .tf3 is again very good for Black. It follows that White would have to play more quietly after 1 1 . . . b5, so this is just as good as the move played.

12 lDd5 'it'd8

134 Game 48

13 0.xe7+ There is nothing better for White,

as after 13 f5 0.xe3 he would have to take on e7 in any case. Of course, it is not bad to take the bishop, but given that White has sacrificed a pawn to occupy d5 with his knight, the fact that he immediately has to exchange it makes the whole concept appear faintly illogical.

13 ... ._xe7 14 fS

After 14 i.g1 exf4 15 'ifxf4 0.gf6 the pressure against e4 gives White no time to develop his own attack.

14 ... 0.xe3 15 ._xe3 0.16

White has sufficient play for the pawn, but no more.

16 l:.g1 �h8?! 16 . . . g6 was a more accurate way

to nullify the g-file threats-it weak­ens the dark squares slightly, but White is not in a position to exploit this since he has no dark-squared bishop.

11 lb&s Intending 0.c4, attacking d6 and

threatening 0.b6. Black's next move is designed to prevent this, but some­thing worse happens instead.

17 ..• bS? Definitely wrong. After 17 . . . i.d7

18 0.xb7 ( 1 8 0.c4? i.c6 19 0.xd6 l:.ad8 is good for Black) d5 19 ._c5 ! ._xc5 20 0.xc5 i.c6 21 0.d3 dxe4 22 0.xe5 i.dS White has a slight end­game advantage, but nothing more.

18 lDc6 White must not invert moves by

18 l:.xg7 �xg7 19 ._g5+ �h8 20

0.c6, since 20 ... l:.g8 21 'ifh4 l:.g4 22 'ii'xg4 (not 22 'ifh6? 0.g8 and Black wins) 0.xg4 23 0.xe7 i.b7 24 l:.xd6 i.xe4 leads to an unclear ending.

w

18 .•. ._c7 (D)

19 l:.xg7! ._:xc6 The alternatives are even worse,

for example: 1) 19 . . . l:.g8 20 l:.xg8+ 0.xg8 21

f6 0.xf6 (or 2 l . . .'ifxc6 22 ._g5 0.xf6 23 'ifxf6+ �g8 24 'ifd8+ �g7 25 l:.xd6 winning) 22 'ii'h6 0.g8 23 ._xd6 'ifxd6 24 l:.xd6 and, thanks to Black's passive knight, White has a very promising endgame.

2) 19 . . . 0.xe4 20 l:.xh7+ �xh7 21 W'xe4 f6 (there is nothing better) 22 l:.d3 l:.t7 23 .. g4 �h8 24 'ifh5+ �g8 25 l:.g3+ l:.g7 26 ._e8+ �h7 27 l:.h3#.

3) 19 . . . 0.e8 20 l:.xh7+ �xh7 21 'ifh3+ �g8 22 .. g4+ �h7 23 l:d3 with a decisive attack.

20 \Wh6 ._xe4 Not 20 . . . d5 21 l:.xh7+ winning

the queen. 21 .. xf6!

The exclamation mark is for not being tempted by the alternative 21

llg5 Wf4+ 22 �b1 11fxg5 23 Wxg5 lDe4 24 Wh4 .i.xf5 25 .i.d3 d5 26 Wh5 .i.g6 27 Wxe5+ f6 28 11fd4, which is a risk-free line giving White good winning chances. The fact that White preferred to continue his at­tack shows that he had it worked out to the end.

21 ••. 'it'f4+ The preliminary check means that

Black will later be threatening to take the rook on d 1 . This possibility makes no difference in the game continuation, which works equally well whether White's king is on b1 or c l .

22 �b1 "ikxf5 (D) White's preliminary tactics were

just the starter for the main king­hunt, which begins with the follow­ing rook sacrifice.

w

Smagin - Bukhtin 135

23 llxh7++! �7 24 i.d3 e4 25 'ft4+ �g7 26 .i.xe4

Much better than 26 llg1+ "ikg6 27 llxg6+ fxg6 28 1i'xe4 i.f5, when Black would have survived the worst.

26 ... 'tlt'g4?! Thanks to the check on f4, Black

is threatening mate on d1, but it is of no help as White can force mate using only checks. 26 . . . Wc5 would have prolonged the game, but after 27 "ikg3+ �f6 (27 . . . �h8 28 lld5 Wxd5 29 "ikh4+ �g7 30 i.xd5 llb8 3 1 'ikg5+ �h8 32 i.e4 wins) 28 lld5 1i'xd5 29 i.xd5 llb8 30 1i'xd6+ .i.e6 31 'ifxa6 the final result would have been the same.

27 1Wh7+ �6 28 1Wh6+ �e5 29 'tlt'xd6+ �xe4 30 'tlt'd5+ �e3

Or 30 . . . �f4 3 1 llfl + �e3 32 'tlt'd3#.

31 lle1+ � 32 'it'd2+ � 33 1i'e3+ �g2 34 .l:r.g1+ 1-0

After 34 . . . �xh2 35 "ikf2+ it is mate next move.

Game 49

We have already seen a couple of postal games in this book (see Games 12 and 38), but this game, between two top-flight correspondence players, is surely the most amazing and creative of the three. Play develops along very unusual lines right from the opening, with both sides forfeiting the right to castle. White finds a whole series of original tactical ideas to keep his attack

136 Game 49

going, but as a result ends up with his bishop trapped on h8(!). Just when Black appears to be rounding up the errant piece, a new sacrifice starts the king-hunt. Black's king is pursued all the way to al, whereupon White finally forces mate with a problem-like idea. The play takes place over the whole board-1 have not seen any other game in which Black accepts a sacrifice on h8, and as a result his king is mated on al !

Kopylov - Korolev Correspondence 1983

Sicilian

1 e4 c5 2 00 lDr6

An unusual line which combines elements of the Sicilian and Alek­hine's Defence. These days it has a poor reputation and has virtually dis­appeared from master play, but one can never tell what the next turn of the wheel will bring.

3 e5 4 lbc3 5 tDe4

�5 e6

The main reason for the current disfavour is the line 5 lL!xd5 exd5 6 d4, but Kopylov's move is also quite dangerous.

5 ••. lbc6 6 c4 �b4

The leading alternative, 6 . . . lL!b6, also leads to sharp play. The main danger of playing . . . lL!db4 is that the knight will soon be forced back to a6, where it may end up out of play.

7 a3 .. a5 8 ...,3

The immediate 8 :bl is met by 8 . . . lL!a2, and Black solves the prob­lem of his wayward knight by ex­changing it for White's bishop. The move played intends l:tb1 without

allowing the reply . . . lL!a2. However, it is by no means clear that 8 1fb3 is the best move; 8 i.e2 and 8 lL!c3 are the alternatives, for example 8 lL!c3 d5 9 exd6 i.xd6 10 lL!b5 i.b8 1 1 b3 lL!d4? (1 1 .. .lL!e5 is better) 12 lL!bxd4 cxd4 1 3 i.b2 tLlc6 14 b4 'W'f5 15 b5 was good for White in an­other Kopylov-Korolev correspon­dence game (1984).

8 ... dS 9 exd6 e5

Curiously enough, ECO consid­ers this whole line to be good for White, omitting to mention Kopy­lov's recommendation in 1nforma­tor, namely 9 . . . f5 . After 10 lL!xc5 'ihc5 1 1 axb4 'ifxb4 White has at most a slight advantage. In the game Black decides to improve his pawn structure before regaining the pawn on d6, but the danger with such a policy is that an apparently dead pawn can easily turn into an invul­nerable Frankenstein monster.

10 l:tb1 liJa6 (D) During the next phase of the

game, the struggle revolves around the pawn on d6. If White can main­tain it, then Black will be unable to develop his f8-bishop and castle kingside. If it falls then Black will have a positional advantage due to White's backward d-pawn.

w

1 1 g4 An amazing move; drastic meas­

ures were necessary to prevent Black kicking the knight away by .. .f5 . Black cannot capture on g4, because his own b7-pawn is hanging, but he finds another way to threaten the ad­vanced pawn.

1 1 ... 'ii'd8 12 d4!?

Once again White finds a way to keep Black off-balance.

12 ... exd4?! 12 . . . i.xd6 would have been an­

swered by 13 d5 tDd4 14 lLlxd4 exd4 15 'iVb5+ �f8 16 h3 (16 i.g2 is in­teresting, as it isn't clear if White really needs to spend a tempo de­fending the g4-pawn) 'iVe7 17 i.g2 f5 18 i.g5 'ikc7 19 gxf5 i.xf5 20 0-0 and Black's exposed king and poorly placed knight give White the advan­tage, for example 20 . . . h6 21 i.h4 i.xe4 22 i.xe4 g5 23 i.g3 i.xg3 24 fxg3+ �g7 25 i.g2, followed by llb1-e1-e6.

Black could also have tried play­ing 12 . . . cxd4 13 c5 lLlxc5 14 lLlxc5 'iVa5+ 15 i.d2 'iVxc5 16 lLlg5 'iVxd6 17 'iVxf7+ (not 17 lLlxf7? 'iVg6 and

Kopylov - Korolev 137

Black wins) �d8 18 'iVc4 �e8, when White can either repeat moves or play 19 i.g2, when Black's inability to castle gives White very good at­tacking chances.

The '? ! ' attached to the move played is perhaps rather harsh, be­cause it would be virtually impossi­ble, even in correspondence play, to predict that the game continuation would turn out to be good for White.

13 i.f4 White's sacrifice has temporar­

ily secured the d6-pawn, so Black now tries to dislodge the supporting knight on e4.

13 ... 'ii'd7 Not 13 . . . ltla5 14 'iVc2 i.xg4 15

lLle5 i.d7 (15 ... i.e6 16 'iVa4+ lLlc6 17 lBxc6 'iVd7 18 .i.g2 wins for White) 16 1We2 with deadly threats along the e-file.

14 i.g3 White cannot afford to waste a

tempo on 14 h3, because then 14 ... f5 is very good for Black.

14 ... h5 If Black can induce gxh5, then

. . . f5 will drive the knight away. Ac­cepting the pawn by 14 ... 'iVxg4 was too hazardous, for example 15 lLlfg5 1i'h5 16 i.h3 b6 (or 16 . . . i.xh3 17 1Wxb7 llc8 18 lLlxh3 'iVxh3 19 'iVxa6 and Black hasn't solved the problem of his f8-bishop) 17 'iVa4 i.b7 18 d7+ r,i;>d8 19 'ii'd1 'iVg6 (19 . . . 'iVxd1+ 20 .:.xd1 and f7 falls) 20 'iVf3 with decisive threats.

15 �d2! Not 15 gxh5 f5 16 i.h3 l:.xh5 and

White's position is in disarray. It is

138 Game 49

worth offering the g-pawn to bring the rook to the e-file.

15 hxg4 16 l:e1 �d8 17 lUes tru.:es

After 17 . . .'ii'f5 18 lDxc6+ bxc6 19 1Wa4 White threatens both 1Wxc6 and 'iWa5+.

18 .txeS 'ii'c6 The obvious 18 . . . f5 fails to 19

lDf6 ! 'ii'c6 20 lDd5 .txd6 21 .txg7 l:xh2 22 .tf6+ �d7 23 .td3 l:xf2+ 24 �d1 with an overwhelming at­tack.

19 lDg5 m.s (DJ Black deserves great credit for his

resourceful defence. Accepting the rook would be fatal : 19 . . . 'ii'xhl 20 lDxt7+ �d7 21 lDxh8 .txd6 (or else White has a very strong attack with­out any sacrifice) 22 .txd6 �xd6 23 'ii'g3+, followed by .tg2.

w

The move played looks ridicu­lous, as White can reply 20 lDxt7+, but then Black would reveal the point of his defence-20 . . . �e8! , when White lacks any really danger­ous discovered checks, and the t7-knight is unexpectedly trapped!

20 .txg7! Blow for blow! With his rook and

knight hanging, White also puts his bishop en prise.

20 ••• .txd6 Of course 20 . . . .txg7 fails to 21

lDxt7+ �d7 22 l:e7#. Other moves are also bad, although the reasons are more subtle: 20 . . . .te6 21 .txf8 'ii'xh1 22 f3 1Wxh2+ 23 �d1 b6 24 1Wb5 lDb8 25 lDxe6+ fxe6 26 l:xe6 lDd7 27 1Wc6 mating, 20 . . . 1Wxh1 21 lDxf7+ �d7 22 1Wb5+ 1Wc6 23 .txf8 1Wxb5 24 cxb5 is again forced mate, and finally 20 . . . l:xg5 21 .txf8 'iWxh1 22 .te7+ �d7 23 .txg5 gives White a crushing attack without any sacri­fice.

21 lDxt7+ �c7?! Once again, a tiny inaccuracy has

far-reaching consequences. In In­formator, Kopylov gave 2 1 . ..�d7 without further analysis, but it seems to me that White can force a favour­able ending by 22 lbxd6 1Wxd6 (not 22 . . . 1Wxh l ? 23 lDe4 1Wxh2 24 lDf6+ �c7 25 lDxh5 1Wxh5 26 .te5+ �d8 27 .tf6+ �c7 28 'ii'g3+ winning) 23 1Wg3 (not 23 .tg2? l:g5 ! 24 .th8 1Wh6 25 .txb7 .txb7 26 1Wxb7+ lbc7 27 l:e7+ �xe7 28 ... xc7+ �f8 with advantage to Black) 1Wxg3 (Black has little choice, as otherwise White rescues his bishop by .te5, and once White completes his development by .tg2, Black's exposed king will be sliced to ribbons by the bishops) 24 fxg3 �d6 25 .tg2 l:b8 26 b4! and, with the opening of the position, Black's vulnerable king and back­ward development become serious.

22 lbxd6 1i'xd6 23 i.g2

Note that 23 1i'g3 'ihg3 24 fxg3 is not dangerous with the king on c7, as Black can immediately develop his bishop.

23 ... l:.gS Black's position is structurally

wrecked; he cannot develop his queenside because of the pressure on b7, his knight is out of play and his king is exposed. It follows that his only chance is to exploit the one feature of the position operating in his favour-the fact that the g7-bishop might be trapped. If White can rescue his bishop, then the game is effectively over, so Black must act quickly.

24 i.h8 1i'h6 After 24 . . . l:.h5 25 l:.e8 l:.b8 26

1i'g3 1i'xg3 27 hxg3 lhhl 28 i.xhl the ending is lost for Black. Black appears to have achieved his aim with the text-move, since not only is the bishop trapped, but there is also a discovered check in the air.

25 'Wg3+ �b6 After 25 .. .'.td7 (or 25 . . . Cit>d8 26

�dl , and here 26 . . . 'ihh8 loses to 27 'ii'd6+ i.d7 28 1i'e7+ Cite? 29 \i'xg5) White continues 26 1i'f4 l:.g6 27 i.e5 1i'xf4 28 i.xf4 !tJc7 29 l:e5, with a huge endgame advantage.

26 �dl Now White threatens i.e5, hence

Black is forced to accept the sacri­fice.

26 27 1i'd6+ 28 Cit>d2!

1i'xh8 Cit>aS (D)

Kopylov - Korolev 139

w

A remarkable switchback by the white king. Having moved to dl just two moves ago, the king returns to d2 to clear the way for White's rooks. The threat is 29 b4+ Cit>a4 30 i.c6+ bxc6 31 1i'xc6+, forcing the king to a3 or b3, followed by a rapid mate using the rooks.

28 ... ..trs After 28 . . . d3, White wins by 29

b4+ Cit>a4 30 i.c6+ bxc6 3 1 1i'xc6+ 'it>b3 32 l:.bl + Cit>a2 (or 32 .. .'.txa3 33 l:al + Cit>b3 34 l:.hbl+ Cit>xc4 35 l:.c 1 + 'it>d4 36 'ii'd6+ Cit>e4 37 l:.c4+ 'ii'd4 38 l:.xd4+ cxd4 39 l:.e1+ Cit>f5 40 l:e5+ 'it>f4 41 l:.e6+) 33 1i'a4 'ii'b2+ 34 l:.xb2+ Cit>xb2 35 l:.bl + 'iti>xbl 36 1i'b3+ 'it>al 37 Wc3 cxb4+ 38 axb4, followed by mate.

29 i.xb7 Black's last move prepared a cun­

ning defence if White tried to exe­cute his threat: 29 b4+ Cit>a4 30 i.c6+ bxc6 31 1i'xc6+ Cit>b3 32 l:.bl + Cit>a2! (not 32 ... i.xb1 33 l:.xbl + mating af-ter 33 . . . Cit>a2 34 1i'a4 Cit>xbl 35 1i'b3+ Cit>al 36 �cl or 33 . . . Cit>xc4 34 1i'e6+ Cit>b5 35 a4+ 'it>xa4 36 1i'xa6#; the point is to retain the bishop so as to cover both b1 and c2) 33 1i'a4 1i'h3!

140 Game 50

and suddenly not only does White have no mate, he is even faced by a mating attack from Black! This line proves how finely balanced the cur­rent king-hunt is.

29 ... :g6 30 b4+ �a4

Forced, as White wins easily after 30 . . . cxb4 3 t axb4+ �a4 32 :at+ �b3 33 'ii'g3+ d3 34 :hbt+ �xc4 35 'ii'f4+ �b5 36 'ii'xf5+.

31 .tc6+ �b3 Black continues to defend ingen­

iously. 3 1 . . .�xa3 fails to 32 'ii'g3+ �b2 (or 32 ... d3 33 :at+ �b3 34 :hbt + �xc4 35 'ii'f4+ 'ii'd4 36 :c1 + �b3 37 .td5+ 'ii'xd5 38 :cbt#) 33 :bt+! .txbt 34 :xbt+ �xbt 35 'ii'b3+ �at 36 'ii'a3+ �bt 37 .te4+, so Black avoids taking the a3-pawn, thereby denying White the crucial move 'ii'a3+.

32 'iWg3+ �b2 (D) White wins on material after

32 . . . d3 33 :bt + �a2 34 :at+ 'ii'xat 35 :xat + �xat 36 'ii'e5+ �a2 37 .txa8, while 32 . . . �a2 33 :at+ �b2 would only last one move longer than the game.

33 :bt+!

w

A wonderful finish involving the sacrifice of both rooks.

33 .txbl 34 :xbl+ �bl 35 'iWb3+ �at 36 �cl! 1-0

Certainly not 36 �c2?? d3+, opening the way for Black's queen to come to b2. The correct method is first to deflect the queen to h6, when there is no defence: 36 . . . 'it'h6+ 37 'iti>c2 d3+ (after 37 . . . 'ii'd2+ 38 �xd2 White also wins the rook on a8) 38 'ii'xd3 'ii'g7 39 'ii'dt + �a2 40 'ii'bt + �xa3 4t 'ii'b3#.

The final king triangulation is a fitting end to one of the most inven­tive and complex games in the book.

Game 50

Many of the most spectacular games in this book feature relatively unknown players, at least on the losing side. Readers may conclude from this that top players don't get their kings hunted, but this is only partly true. Top players are more likely to see the king-hunt coming, and choose an alternative which offers more practical chances. In these games the king-hunt occurs only in the notes, and may not be apparent without the winner's own commentary. How­ever, it can happen that a leading grandmaster falls victim to a king-hunt, es­pecially if, as in the following game, Garry Kasparov is his opponent.

Kasparov - Ponisch 141

This game is a typical Kasparov powerhouse performance-an opening innovation creates immediate problems, then a small tactical interlude erodes the defences to Black's king. Next a blockbuster sacrifice rips away the re­maining pawn cover, and we are soon treated to a thrilling king-hunt.

Kasparov - Portisch Nik!ic 1983

Queen's Indian

1 d4 lill'6 2 c4 e6 3 m b6 4 ttJc3 .tb7 5 a3 d5 6 cxdS .!DxdS 7 e3 .!Dxc3 8 bxc3 .te7 9 .tbS+ c6

10 .td3 c5 1 1 0-0 lDc6 12 .tb2 l:c8 13 'ife2 0-0 14 l:lad1 'ii'c7?! (D)

After this game, players were understandably reluctant to repeat Portisch's move. Instead, attention switched to 14 . . . cxd4 15 cxd4 .tf6, when the two main lines are 16 e4 and 16 l:fe 1 . The main merit of the immediate pawn exchange is that it forces White to recapture with the c­pawn (since 14 . . . cxd4 15 exd4? .!Da5 controls c4 and thereby imprisons the bishop on b2), which makes it harder to activate the two bishops against Black's kingside.

15 c4! An earlier game, Polugaevsky­

Portisch, Plovdiv Echt 1983, had ended tamely by 15 e4 .!Da5 16 l:fe1 lf2_ lf2, but Kasparov's innovation

w

pinpoints the flaw in Black's strat­egy. White is already on the point of playing d5, opening up the long diagonal, when both bishops are aimed at Black's vulnerable king­side. Black's main problem is the lack of defensive minor pieces near his king.

15 ... cxd4 After 15 . . . .!Da5 (15 . . . .tf6 16 d5

.!DeS 17 o!Dxe5 .txe5 18 .txh7+, fol­lowed by -.ns+, wins for White) 16 d5 exd5 17 cxd5 c4 18 .i.f5 l:cd8 19 e4 White's central majority and kingside attacking chances are more dangerous than anything Black can muster on the queenside.

16 exd4 .!Das This move is the critical test of

White's plan. If he is now forced to defend the c4-pawn by 17 l:c1, then 17 . . . .tf6 followed by . . . l:fd8 will nullify White's attack and step up the pressure on the weak hanging pawns to breaking point.

142 Game 50

17 dS! exdS It turns out that Black has no time

to take on c4: 17 . . . lLlxc4 18 'We4 g6 19 .i.xc4 'Wxc4 20 'We5 f6 21 'Wxe6+ :n 22 :c 1 'ii'a6 23 d6 :xc 1 24 llxc 1 .i.d8 25 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 26 llc7 and White wins.

18 cxdS .i.xdS 19 .i.xh7+ �7 20 llxdS

This transaction has not upset the material balance, but positionally it has been in White's favour. The cen­tre has been swept away, and the de­fences to Black's king have been weakened by the disappearance of the h7-pawn. All the white pieces, with the exception of the rook on f1 , are ready to attack Black's king.

20 ••• �g8 (D) After 20 . . . 'Wc2 White has the happy

choice between Kasparov's line 2 1 lld2 'Wc5 22 lLle5, moving towards Black's king, and the simple 21 'We5 .i.f6 (2l . . .f6 22 'Wxe7 'Wxb2 23 llh5+ 'iPg8 24 'We6+ wins) 22 'Wh5+ �g8 23 .i.xf6 gxf6 24 llf5, with a decisive advantage.

w

21 .i.xg7!!

This sacrifice has a special beauty because it doesn't lead to an immedi­ate and easily calculated holocaust, but rather to an all-round strengthen­ing of White's attack.

The more obvious 21 lLlg5 was less effective. Curiously, Kasparov gave 2l . . .'Wc2 ! as unclear (his ' ! ' ), but then 22 'ii'xe7 'Wxb2 23 'We4 g6 (or 23 . . . 'Wc2 24 lld3 g6 25 'Wh4 �g7 26 'Wd4+ �g8 27 llh3) 24 'Wh4 'Wg7 25 lld7 is crushing. 2 1 . . .lLlc4 22 .i.xg7 �xg7 23 'Wg4 is also win­ning for White, so the best defence is 21 . . . .i.xg5 22 llxg5 (22 .i.xg7 �xg7 23 llxg5+ �f6 24 'ii'g4 'Wc3 25 lld l llfd8 is unclear) f6 when White's advantage has more or less dissipated.

21 ••.

22 lLleS �g7 :Cd8

Other moves are worse: 1 ) 22 . . . f5 23 lld7 'Wc5 24 lLld3

wins . 2) 22 . . . 'Wc2 23 'il'g4+ �h7 24

.:td3 llc6 25 'ir'f5+ finishes Black off.

3) 22 . . . l:.h8 23 'Wg4+ �f8 24 'Wf5 f6 25 l:tel lLlc6 (25 . . . 'Wcl 26 l:tddl and 25 . . . llh6 26 'ii'e6 fxe5 27 'Wxh6+ are also winning) 26 lLld7+ �f7 27 l:txe7+ is crushing.

4) 22 . . . l:tcd8 23 'ii'g4+ �h7 24 lLld7 f5 25 lLlxf8+ llxf8 26 llxf5 l:.xf5 27 'ii'xf5+ with a decisive ad­vantage.

23 'ii'g4+ �f8 24 'ii'fS!

More accurate than 24 lLld7+ llxd7 25 :Xd7 'ir'c5 (lnformator gave 25 . . . 'We5, presumably a misprint as

it allows l:l.xe7), when White lacks a forcing continuation. The move played provokes a further weakness before cashing in with tD<I7 +.

24 .•• f6 White mates after 24 . . . �d6 25

'ii'f6 �g8 (25 . . . �4 26 tl:lg6+ �e8 27 l:l.e1 + �d7 28 l:l.e7+) 26 'ii'g5+ � 27 'ii'h6+ �g8 (27 . . . �e8 28 l:l.el) 28 l:l.d4 f5 29 .. e6+ �g7 30 'ii'g6+ �f8 3 1 'ii'xf5+. The greedy 24 . . . �xa3 fails to 25 tl:ld7+ l:l.xd7 26 l:l.xd7 'ii'c4 27 l:l.fdl (threat 'ii'f6) �6 (27 . . . �e7 28 .. e5) 28 l:l.7d3 winning material.

2S tl:ld7+ Kasparov gave 25 tl:lg6+ a ques­

tion mark, but actually this move is also good: 25 . . . �g7 (25 . . . �e8 26 'ii'h5 ! l:l.xd5 27 tl:le5+ mating) 26 tl:lf4 l:l.xd5 27 tl:lxd5 ! (after 27 .. g6+ �h8 White had better take the draw since 28 tl:le6 l:l.g5 29 'ii'h6+ �g8 30 tl:lxc7 l:l.xc7 is fine for Black) .. e5 28 tl:lxe7 'ii'xf5 29 tl:lxf5+ and Black has to put his king on a bad square because of the knight forks. The re­sulting ending with an extra pawn is very good for White.

2S ... l:l.xd7 Not 25 . . . �g7 26 l:l.e1 'ii'c l 27

'ii'g4+ �f7 28 'ii'e6+ �g6 29 'ii'xe7 and wins.

26 :.Xd7 .. cS 27 'Wh7 l:l.c7 28 'Wh8+

This preliminary check is essen­tial because of a cunning trap: 28 l:l.d3? 'ii'xf2+ ! 29 �xf2 �c5+ 30 �g3 l:l.xh7 and Black is at least equal.

28 ... rk1

Kasparov - Portisch 143

29 l:l.d3 (D) The immediate complications

have subsided, but this is scant com­fort for Black. Material is approxi­mately equal, but his king remains horribly exposed. Even if he sur­vives the onslaught of White's heavy pieces, there will always be the passed h-pawn to contend with.

B

29 ... lbc4 Or 29 . . . �f8 (29 ... t0c6 is bad after

30 l:r.g3) 30 l:r.g3 lLx:4 3 1 'ii'g8+ �e7 32 l:l.c3 b5 33 l:l.e1+ �d8 34 l:l.d3+ l:r.d7 35 l:l.xd7+ �xd7 36 'ii'e6+ �c7 37 a4 with a large advantage for White.

30 l:l.rdt tOes 30 . . . �d6 would have been more

resilient, but after 3 1 l:l.h3 ! (Kas­parov's 3 1 l:r.d5 'ii'c6 32 h4 is less clear-cut) �e6 (3 l . . .l:l.c8 32 l:l.h7+ �e6 33 .,g7 tOes 34 l:l.e1 and 3 1 . . .l:r.e7 32 l:r.h6 are both very good for White) 32 'ii'g8+ l:l.f7 33 l:l.h7 'ii'c7 34 'ii'e8+ l:l.e7 35 l:l.xe7+ �xe7 (35 . . ... xe7 36 'ii'c8+) 36 .. g8+ �f5 37 g4+ White forces a quick mate.

The move played is a natural at­tempt to bring the knight over to the

144 Game 51

kingside, but it allows Kasparov to start the final king-hunt.

31 'irh7+ �e6 32 'ii'g8+ � 33 g4+! �f4

Or 33 . . . �e4 34 ifh7+. 34 l:d4+ � 35 1i'b3+ 1-0

In view of 35 ... 'i!fc3 36 'ifd5+ �e2 37 'ife4+ and mate next move.

Game 51

Almost every player has a particular opponent that he simply cannot play against. When you are facing such an antagonist, it doesn't seem to matter what you try: the end result is the same. After a few losses, you start to expect defeat even as you sit down at the start of the game. The Germans have a pithy word for such an opponent: angstgegner. Leaving aside for a moment what the lack of an exactly equivalent English word tells us about the different psychology of English and Germans, what can you do when you play an angstgegner? Perhaps the best advice is to build up your confidence by mak­ing a couple of draws. It is tempting to try to avenge your earlier defeats by sweeping him off the board, but this strategy usually results in a further de­feat. A solid draw or two will prove to yourself that you can play reasonably against him, and provides the foundation for winning attempts in later games.

In the following game, Ljubojevic is facing his angstgegner Nigel Short. During the period 1988-92, these two players met twelve times. There were four games with Short playing Black, and all these were drawn, but the eight games where Short was White ended 7112-lfl in his favour, a remarkably one­sided score for two leading grandmasters. This game is an example of how not to handle such a situation. Ljubojevic adopts a double-edged opening in­volving castling on opposite wings, handing Short a straightforward attack­ing plan. When Ljubojevic provokes Short by removing a defensive knight from the kingside, Short is only too happy to oblige: a double piece sacrifice leads to a deadly king-hunt and another '0' for Ljubojevic on the score-chart .

Short - Ljubojevic 6 .tg5 e6 Amsterdam (Euwe Memorial) 1988 7 'ii'd2 a6

Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer 8 0-0-0 h6 9 .te3 .td7

1 e4 c5 10 f4 b5 2 m d6 11 .td3 .te7 3 d4 cxd4 12 �b1 b4 4 lbxd4 lill6 The big danger for Black in such 5 lbc3 lbc6 positions is that . . . 0-0 will allow

White an automatic kingside attack by h3 and g4-g5. This attack is par­ticularly strong when Black has played . . . h6, because when White's pawn arrives on g5 Black will be un­able to avoid some open lines in front of his king. Forcing the knight back to e2 doesn't help, because a later lLlg3 will enable this knight to join in the kingside attack.

Black's most common alterna­tives are 12 . . . 'ii'c7, 12 . . . lLlxd4 and the immediate 12 . . . 0-0; for a detailed discussion of these lines, readers should refer to Beating the Sicilian 3 by John Nunn and Joe Gallagher.

13 lLlce2 0-0?! In combination with Black's pre­

vious move, this is really asking for trouble. 13 . . . 'ii'c7 is more accurate, whereupon 14 h3 may be met by 14 . . . lLlxd4 15 .i.xd4 ( 15 lLlxd4 'ii'b7 awkwardly attacks e4) e5 16 .i.f2 a5; Black intends delaying . . . 0-0 un­til he has made further progress on the queenside (Kavalek-Korchnoi, Ostrava 1994). 14 :bel is a more ac­curate reply, supporting e4 so as to meet . . . liJxd4 by liJxd4.

14 h3 fkc7? After this second casual move,

Black's position is already critical. 14 . . . lLlxd4 15 .i.xd4 .i.c6 was better, forcing White to make a choice about how to defend e4. 16 e5 dxe5 17 fxe5 lLle4 is fine for Black and 16 lLlg3 blocks the g-pawn, so White would probably have to play 16 'ii'e3, but then 16 . . . 'ii'b8, intending either . . . e5 or ... 1Wb7, gives Black counterplay.

Short - Ljubojevit 145

15 g4 Of course. Now White can meet

an attack on e4 by lDg3 and :bel.

8

15 1rb7 16 lDg3 lDxd4 17 .i.xd4 .i.c6 18 :het (D)

18 ... :rea Black is in big trouble whatever

he plays. White already threatens to rip open Black's king position by g5, while Black hasn' t made the slight­est progress on the opposite wing. Short proposed 18 . . . lDd7, but his own suggestion of 19 g5 ! hxg5 20 :gt looks very strong, for example 20 . . . e5 21 lLlf5 :res 22 fxe5 lLlxe5 (22 . . . dxe5 23 :xg5) 23 .i.xe5 dxe5 24 :xg5 .i.xg5 25 'ii'xg5 f6 (or 25 . . . g6 26 'ii'h6 mating) 26 i.c4+ �f8 27 'ii'h5 with a forced mate, or 20 .. . :ac8 21 lDbs g6 22 f5 .i.xe4 23 f6 .i.d8 24 'ii'xg5 e5 25 :dn with a decisive attack.

19 gS hxgS 20 fxgS lDd7 (D)

20 . . . lLlh7 21 h4 would have pre­vented an immediate breakthrough by White, but the h7-knight would

146 Game 51

be sidelined and White would be able to build up his attack by 'ifg2, lbh5 and so on.

21 .i.xg7! Short starts the king-hunt with a

spectacular piece sacrifice. All the white pieces will take part in the at­tack, while Black's forces will be mere spectators, far away from the main action.

21 ... �xg7 22 %5+ �g6

Other moves lose even more quickly, for example 22 . . . �g8 23 g6 fxg6 24 'ifh6 .i.f8 25 'tli'xg6+ �h8 26 .l:.g1 mating, 22 . . . �f8 23 g6 .i.f6 24 lbxf6 lbxf6 25 .l:.fl �e7 26 'ii'g5 winning material or 22 . . . �h8 23 g6 .i.f8 24 .l:.g1 fxg6 25 .l:.xg6 tl:k5 26 .l:.h6+ .i.xh6 27 1i'xh6+ 'ifh7 28 1i'f6+ �g8 29 .l:.g1+ with a quick mate. The move played prevents g6 by physically blocking the g-pawn, but the king is the worst piece to use as a blockader.

23 eS+! �xhS 24 .. ,4

Threatening 25 1i'g4#. 24 ••• .i.xgS

Or 24 . . . .tf3 25 1i'xf7+ �h4 26 1i'h7+ �g3 27 .l:.g1 + .tg2 28 .te4 with a total catastrophe.

25 .. xf7+ �h4 26 �7+ �g3 21 'ints �h2 (D)

Black's position is beyond sav­ing: 27 .. . .l:.g8 loses to 28 _.g4+ �h2 29 'ilkg1+ �xh3 30 .tfl+ �h4 (or 30 . . . .i.g2 31 .l:.d3+ �h4 32 .i.xg2) 31 .. h2+ �g4 32 .l:.d4+ �f5 33 1i'h7+ .l:.g6 34 .th3#.

w

28 _.xgS Short's only slight inaccuracy in

the whole game. White had a forced mate in seven by 28 1i'e2+ �xh3 (28 . . . .i.g2 29 l:r.h1+ �g3 30 .. g4+ �t2 31 'ilkxg5 and mate in two more moves; 28 . . . �g3 29 .l:.gl + .tg2 30 .te4 �f4 31 _.g4+ �xe5 32 1i'xg5+ �xe4 33 .l:.ge1+ �f3 34 1i'e3#) 29 1i'h5+ .th4 30 .l:.e3+ mating in three more moves. However, the move played is also quite sufficient to win.

28 .l:.g8 29 .l:.d2+ .tg2 30 .. ,4+ .l:.g3 31 .i.e4 _.xe4 32 _.xe4 1·0

Shumiakina - Tazheva 147

Game 52

The three Polgar sisters have put women's chess firmly on the map, but there are plenty of other women players competing in grandmaster tournaments. The Polgars, Cramling, Chiburdanidze and Xie Jun have all proved that women can be successful, even against top-class opposition. However, de­spite these successes, women remain severely under-represented at all levels of chess-a situation which will probably only change very slowly.

The following game is between two women players who are not so well­known, but it is a tremendous struggle all the same. In a razor-sharp opening, Black makes a slight inaccuracy and White responds with a long-term sacri­fice of a queen for two minor pieces. White's compensation is mainly based on the black king being caged on g8. Ironically, Black finally manages to release her king, only to see it pursued to its death.

Sbumiakina - Tazbeva the text is 17 .. .'ii'e7, which is based USSR 1990 on the tactical point 18 .tg5 ! 'ii'xg5 Semi-Slav 19 lbxe6 'ii'xg2+! 20 �xg2 lbf4+ 2 1

�fl lbxe2 22 :ad 1 ! fxe6 2 3 .txd7+ 1 d4 lbf6 �f7 24 .txc8 .txc8 25 �xe2 .ta6+ 2 c4 e6 26 �e3, with a roughly equal end-3 m d5 ing (I.Sokolov-Shirov, Stockholm 4 lDc3 c6 1989/90). 5 e3 lbbd7 18 i.xa6 .txa6 6 .td3 dxc4 19 'ii'xa6 :as? 7 .txc4 bS With the benefit of hindsight, it is 8 .td3 .tb7 possible to say that this move is a 9 e4 b4 mistake. The best line is 19 . . . .tg7

10 lba4 c5 (19 . . . lbc5 has also been tried, but 11 eS lbds this is more risky) 20 .tg5 lbc7, 12 0-0 cxd4 when both 2 1 'ii'b7 :b8 22 .txd8 13 lbxd4 lbxeS :xb7 23 .txc7 :xc7 24 lbb5 :c2 14 .tb5+ lbd7 25 :acl :xc l 26 :xc1 0-0, Vyzh-15 :et :cS manavin-Novikov, Moscow 1990 16 'ii'hs g6 and 21 'ii'a5 :as 22 .txd8 :xa5 23 17 'ii'el a6 .txc7 :xa4, I.Sokolov-Chemin, Wijk

If readers are interested in the aan Zee 1991 were at least equal for theory of this ultra-sharp variation, Black. they should consult Peter Wells's 20 'ii'c4 (D) book The Complete Semi-Slav. Suf- Not 20 'ii'c6? ! lbe7 ! and Black fice to say that the main alternative to equalises.

148 Game 52

B

20 ••• i..e7 This is actually the first original

move. The earlier game Timman­Nogueiras, Rotterdam 1989 contin­ued 20 .. Jba4 21 'ifxd5 i..e7 22 �xe6! fxe6 23 'ii'xe6 l:a5 24 i..h6 l:lf8 25 i..xf8 �xf8 26 'ii'c4 with a clear advantage to White. Timman's notes to this game mentioned the possibility of 20 . . . i..e7, and gave the following queen sacrifice as being good for White. Why, then, did Black adopt precisely this line? Read on!

21 lDc6 'ilc7 The Rotterdam tournament book

expressed the opinion that the queen sacrifice would be less strong after 2 1 . . .'ilc8, but in fact it seems to be just as good: 2 1 . . . 11'c8 22 1i'xd5 ! (Timman suggests 22 i..h6) exd5 23 �xe7 ! 'ii'c2 (23 . . . 'iia6 loses to 24 lDc6+ �5 25 :Xe5+ �d7 26 �5+) 24 �xd5+ �d8 25 i..g5+ f6 26 �xf6 'iixa4 (26 . . . �xf6 27 i..xf6+ �d7 28 .l:.ad l + wins) 27 .l:.edl �c7 28 .l:.acl + �5 29 .l:.xc5+ and now:

1 ) 29 . . . �b7 30 .l:.d7+ �a6 3 1 .l:.d6+ �b7 3 2 b3 (the immediate �d5 is impossible because of mate on d l ) Wxa2 33 llJd5 .l:.af8 (to cover

f4) 34 .l:.d7+ �a8 35 �b6+ �b8 36 l:lc8+! .l:.xc8 37 i..f4+ l:lc7 38 .l:.xc7 g5 39 i..g3 and Black is helpless.

2) 29 . . . �b6 30 b3 'ilxa2 3 1 i..e3 l:lad8 32 llJd5+ .l:.xd5 33 .l:.cxd5+ �c6 34 .l:.c5+ �b7 35 .l:.b5+�c7 36 .l:.xb4 with a clear advantage for White.

22 'ilxdS! exdS Black must accept, as 22 . . . .l:.xa4

23 'ii'b5 .l:.a8 24 �xe7 �xe7 25 'ii'xb4+ is winning.

23 .l:.xe7+ 24 i..h6+

w

25 �!

�

�g8 (D)

This must have been an unpleas­ant shock for Black. Timman's analysis had continued '25 .l:.ael and wins' but Tazheva had probably noticed that 25 . . . 'ii'xc6 ! 26 .l:.e8+ �f8 then wins for Black. However, Shumiakina did not fall into the trap of blindly following Timman, but found a strong move which justifies the queen sacrifice.

25 .•• 'ilxc6 26 lillcd7

At the moment White has only bishop, knight and pawn for the

queen, but the black king is com­pletely imprisoned. The immediate threat is 27 l:tael , setting up irresist­ible threats, so Black is forced to jettison another pawn to free her king. The material balance is still in Black's favour, but White's initiative is more important and Black never completely solves the problem of what to do with her king.

26 ... gS 27 .i.xgS h6

White wins after 27 . . . l:td8 (27 . . . b3 28 a3 doesn't change the situation) 28 �e5 1Wd6 29 fuf7 1Wxe7 30 .i.xe7 �xf7 31 i..xd8.

28 i..f6 l:td8 29 .td4!

Better than 29 l:tael l:txd7 30 :es+ �h7 31 l:txh8+ �g6 32 .i.d4 f6! and Black has covered up her dark-squared weaknesses.

29 ... l:txd7 Other moves are also uninviting: 1 ) 29 . . . 'it'c4 30 l:tdl (threatening

b3 followed by l:tdel ) 1Wxa2 3 1 l:tdel 'ii'a4 32 �f6+ �f8 3 3 �5 �g8 (33 . . . l:th7 34 i..c5 ! �g8 35 l:te8+!) 34 l:t7 e3 ! with a decisive at­tack.

2) 2 9 .. .f6 30 li:)xf6+ �f8 3 1 .l:.ae 1 again with an enormous attack for White.

3) Shumiakina suggested the al­ternative 29 . .. h5 !? , but then 30 li:)f6+ � 3 1 bl is very good for White in any case.

After the move played, the king­hunt gets under way.

30 l:te8+ 31 l:txh8+

�h7 �g6 (D)

w

Shumiakina - Tazheva 149

32 l:tg8+ �5 Or 32 . . . �h5 (32 . . . �h7 33 l:tg7+

�h8 34 l:tg6+ f6 35 l:txf6 'ii'c4 36 l:tf7+ 'ii'xd4 37 lbd7 'ii'd2 38 a4 winning on material) 33 :et f6 (if 33 . . . f5, then 34 f4 and Black cannot meet the threat of 35 g4+ fxg4 36 l:te5+ �h4 37 i.f2+) 34 g4+ �h4 35 �g2 h5 36 f3 hxg4 37 fxg4, with i..f2# to come.

33 l:te1 White slowly tightens the net

around Black's king. The rooks seal off all possible escape routes.

33 ... f6 33 . . . 'ii'c7 34 g4+ �f4 35 �g2

l:te7 36 i.e3+ l:txe3 37 l:txe3 is also hopeless.

34 g4+ �4 35 �gl h5

There is no defence to the various threats, for example 35 . . . 'ii'b7 36 l:te6 l:tg7 37 h3, or 35 . . . l:td6 36 l:tg6 'ita6 37 l:te7.

36 .teJ+ �e4 Or 36 . . . �e5 37 l:te8+ �d6 38

i..f4+ �cS 39 :et+, also winning the queen.

37 l:te8+ �d3 38 l:td1+ 1-0

150 Game 53

Game 53

The borderline between genius and insanity is very narrow, so it is said. This is certainly true on the chessboard (also amongst the players, some might add). If a leading player tries an outrageous idea and it succeeds, then it is de­scribed as 'a brilliantly original concept' and is universally praised as the work of genius; if it fails, the chess journalists ask 'how could such a strong player have been so ignorant of basic principles .. .' , etc. Superficial assess­ments, backed up by a repertoire of trite, hackneyed phrases are depressingly common. Yet it often happens that the result of the game is not determined by the merit of the idea itself, but by the accuracy (or otherwise) of the follow­up.

In the following game Zsuzsa Polgar tries just such an idea involving an early king advance. Everybody knows that you are not supposed to play like this, but here there were sound positional reasons behind the plan. Without Rohde's vigorous response, Black would probably have got away it, but in the game White's piece sacrifice stirred up a hornet's nest of complications. After missing the best defence, Black was subjected to a cross-board king-hunt.

Robde - Zsuzsa Polgar New York 1992

English

1 c4 eS 2 lDc3 lDc6 3 00 f5

4 d4 e4 5 lbgS h6 6 �h3 gS

An ambitious plan. The question is whether Black has gained space without loss of time, or whether White has tempted Black into over­extension.

7 lbgl! An improvement over 7 f3 exf3 8

exf3 .i.g7 9 d5 'ii'e7+ 10 �d2 lbd4 1 1 .i.d3 �d8 12 lbg1 b5 !, which proved good for Black in Seirawan­Browne, Lone Pine 1979. The idea behind lbg1 is to follow up with h4

and possibly lbh3, trying to force Black to commit the g5-pawn. If Black plays . . . g4 then her king side prospects will have vanished and White will gain f4 for his knights, so it would be better if Black could maintain the pawn on g5, but this is not easy.

7 ••• .i.g7 It turns out that Black's best plan

is to meet h4 by . . . g4. It is possible to fight for the f4-square by . . . lbf6-h5 and, if necessary, . . . �7-g6. Admit­tedly Black's pawns have lost their flexibility, but White has lost a lot of time and this makes it hard for him to gain any advantage. One example of this plan is Polugaevsky-Seir­awan, Haninge 1 990, which contin­ued 7 . . . lbf6 8 h4! g4 9 e3 lbh5 ! 10 lbge2 �7 11 .i.d2 .i.g7 12 'ii'b3 d6 13 lbds lbg6 14 lbg3 lbxg3 15 fxg3

h5 16 j,a5 b6 17 j,c3 c6 18 lLlf4 lLlxf4 19 gxf4 lfl.lh.

8 e3 lLlf6 9 h4 �?!

This is the double-edged idea mentioned above. Black could still have adopted the ... g4 plan, for ex­ample 9 . . . g4 10 lL!ge2 lLlh5 ! l l lL!d5 lL!e7 1 2 lLlef4 lLlxf4 13 lL!xf4 h5 14 j,d2 l:.h6 15 'ii'b3 d6 16 l:.c 1 lL!g6 with equality, Rohde-Browne, Phila­delphia 1992.

10 lL!h3! �g6 (D) The logical consequence of the

previous move, but this will be the last voluntary move made by the black king. Black defends the g5-pawn with her king, relying on the closed nature of the position to save it from serious harm. If White had continued quietly, then Black would have completed her development by . . . d6, . . . 'fie? and so on, when the knight on h3 would have ended up out of play. However, White, quite correctly, decided to open the posi­tion, even at the cost of material sac­rifice.

w

1 1 CJ! 'ii'e7

Rohde - Zsuzsa Polgar 151

Black is trying to avoid ending up with a weak pawn on e4, for exam­ple 1 l . . .d6 12 lLlf2 •e7 13 fxe4 fxe4 14 h5+ �h7 15 g4, followed by j,g2 and, if necessary, 'fkc2; Black can­not defend the e-pawn adequately. 1 1 . . .l:.e8 is no better, for example 12 hxg5 hxg5 13 fxe4 lL!xe4 ( 1 3 . . . fxe4 14 lLlf2 followed by either g4 and j,g2, with pressure on e4, or an at­tack by j,e2 and j,h5+) 14 'fih5 + ! ! �f6 (14 . . . �xh5? 15 lLlf4+ �g4 16 j,e2+ �g3 17 l:.h3#) 15 lL!xe4+ and 'fkxg5+, winning.

12 fxe4! lbxe4 13 ltJxe4 'ifxe4

After 13 . . .fxe4 14 lLlf2 (White is already threatening lL!xe4) d6 15 lL!xe4 lL!xd4 16 j,d3 j,f5 17 lL!g3 White is winning.

14 j,dJ! The start of White's sacrificial

attack. 14 ... 'ii'xgl (D)

Not 14 . . . 'fkxh4+ 15 lLlf2 'fkg3 16 'fkh5+ �f6 17 j,xf5 ! , winning since 17 . . . �xf5? fails to 1 8 'fif7+ j,f6 19 e4#.

w

15 j,:xfS+!

152 Game 53

Black has to take, or else l:g1 wins.

15 ... hi'S 16 l:fl+ �e6

Better than 16 . . . �g6 17 'ii'd3+ �hS 18 l0f4+! gxf4 19 'ii'f5+ �xh4 20 :xf4+ �g3 21 l:g4+ �h2 22 l:h4+ �gl 23 .id2 with 0-0-0# to come.

17 'iibS! Not 17 d5+? �e7 and Black es­

capes with a decisive material ad­vantage. The strength of White's attack is quite unexpected, in that White does not have a large lead in development-only the queen and the rook are actively participating. Moreover, White's own king is not very safe. This is one of those combi­nations which isn't based on general principles; it just happens to work because of chance elements in the position.

17 ... �S? Black correctly decides to return

the extra piece in order to break up White's threatening pawn centre, but this was not the best way to do it. After 17 . . . 'ii'g3+ 18 �e2 Black has various continuations, but only one is good:

1) 18 ... gxh4? 19 'ii'f7+ �d6 20 c5#.

2) 18 . . . J:f8 19 'ii'g6+ .if6 (White also wins after 19 . . . l:f6 20 d5+ �e5 21 'ii'xg7) 20 hxg5 hxg5 2 1 :xf6+ l:xf6 22 l0xg5+ �e7 23 'ii'g7+ and White wins.

3) 1 8 . . . .if6 19 'ii'g6 'ii'g4+ (after 19 . . . J:f8 we have transposed to line 2) 20 �d2 and White wins.

4) 18 . . . .ixd4! (itlooks wrong to give up this important bishop, but it turns out that the centralised knight is more effective at co-operating with Black's queen) 19 exd4 (inter­posing 19 'ii'g6+ �e7 or 19 'ii'f7+ �d6 favours Black) l0xd4+ 20 �d2 �d6! (intending . . . �c6 and then . . . d6) 2 1 hxg5 'ii'e5 and although Black's position hangs on a knife­edge, I cannot see any way for White to gain the advantage. One line runs 22 l:e1 'ii'a5+ 23 �d3 l0e6 24 'ii'g6 hxg5 25 l0xg5 :cs and the possibil­ity of . . . 'ii'fS+ saves the day.

Even though this possibility may save Black, the plan of . . . �f7 and . . .�g6 certainly deserves its ' ? ! ' ; putting yourself in the position of having to find 15 consecutive 'only' moves to stay on the board simply is not practical.

18 dxeS .ixeS Or 1 8 . . . 'ii'g3+ 19 �e2 'ii'xe5 20

'ii'f7+ �d6 21 :rs 'ii'h2+ 22 l0f2 winning.

From now on, White conducts the attack very accurately and Black has no chance to escape.

19 'ii'f7+ �d6 (D)

w

20 %lf6+! The king-hunt hots up. 20 ... i.xf6

loses to 2 1 'ifxf6+ �c5 22 b4+! �xb4 23 l:.bl + �a4 24 'ifc3.

20 �c5 21 b4+ 'it>xb4 22 i.d2+ �a3

There are plenty of alternatives, but they all lose: 22 . . . i.c3 23 i.xc3+ �xc3 24 l:.f2 'ifhl + 25 �e2 'ifxh3 26 'iff6+ �b4 27 1i'b2+, 22 ... 'ifxd2+ 23 �xd2 i.xal 24 :n , 22 . . . �a4 23 'ifg6 i.g3+ 24 �d l 'ifhl + 25 �e2 and finally 22 .. .'it>c5 23 lDf2 i.xf6 24 'ifxf6 d6 25 lDd3+ �c6 26 lDb4+ �d7 27 'ii'xh8.

23 c5! d5 24 cxd6 i.g3+

Interpolating 24 . . . �b2 25 l:cl doesn't help: White wins just as in

Topalov - Bareev 153

the game after 25 ... i.g3+ 26 l:.f2 i.xf2+ 27 lDxf2 'ifgl + 28 �e2 i.g4+ 29 lDxg4 'ifxg4+ 30 �d3.

25 m! The last finesse. After 25 lDf2?

i.xf2+ 26 l:.xf2 'ifgl + 27 :n 'iig3+ Black would either give perpetual check or exchange queens.

25 ... 'inll+ Or 25 ... ..txf2+ 26 lDxf2 'iigl + 27

�e2 i.g4+ 28 lDxg4 1i'xg4+ 29 �d3 and Black's checks come to an end.

26 �e2 i.g4+ 27 �d3 i.dl 28 i.cl+ �a4 29 'ifc4+ �aS 30 i.d2+ 1-0

In view of 30 ... �b6 3 1 l:.bl+ fol­lowed by mate.

Game 54

In the following game, another leading grandmaster finds his king being sub­jected to a humiliating king-hunt at a remarkably early stage-indeed, the whole game lasts just 23 moves. The reason for Topalov's embarrassment was his reluctance to accept that he had gained no advantage from the open­ing. In top-class games, exploiting the advantage of the white pieces is very important, because you can be sure that you will be tortured when you are Black, but it is easy to fall into the trap of trying too hard with White. A slight inaccuracy is all that is required to throw away the advantage of the frrst move, and then it is better to accept that the position is just equal, rather than continue to press hard without any justification. Topalov makes just this error and Bareev is quick to exploit his misjudgement; a double rook sacrifice in the style of the 19th century sets up an astonishing forced mate in ten.

Topalov - Bareev Unares 1994

French Defence

1 e4 e6

2 d4 3 lDc3 4 i.g5 5 lDxe4 6 ..txf6

dS lDr6 dxe4 ..te7 ..txf6

154 Game 54

7 c3 A slightly unusual move. The

most common continuation is 7 .!Llf3 0-0, and then the main line is 8 1i'd2, although 8 c3, 8 .i.c4 and 8 1lt'd3 have also been tried. The idea of de­laying .!Llf3 is that White can some­times play f4, which prevents Black breaking out in the centre by . . . e5.

7 ••• .!Lld7 8 'iVc2?!

8 .!Llf3 0-0 transposes into the 7 .!Llf3 0-0 8 c3 line mentioned above. The move played is designed to wait for Black to play . . . 0-0, and then White will reply f4, followed by 0-0-0, .i.d3 and .!Llf3, with good at­tacking chances on the kingside. However, Bareev effectively nulli­fies this plan, so if White wanted to play f4, he should have done so straight away.

8 ... eS! This crosses White's idea of play­

ing f4, and equalises. Just to show the antiquity of this line, it is worth quoting the game Maroczy-Betbe­der, Hamburg OL 1930, which con­tinued 8 . . . 'iVe7 9 0-0-0 b6 10 f4 .i.b7 1 1 g3 0-0-0 12 .i.g2 c5 13 .!Llf3 cxd4 14 .!Llxd4 .ixd4 15 l:txd4 .!Llc5 16 l:te1 with an equal position, although Maroczy won in the end.

9 dxeS Bareev suggests 9 0-0-0, which is

certainly more combative, although I doubt if it gives White any advan­tage.

9 ••• .!LlxeS White faces a slightly awkward

situation; at the moment he cannot

castle queenside, and his kingside pieces are hard to develop because he cannot play .!Llf3.

10 f4 This is a sensible way to solve the

problem. White drives the knight away from e5, so that he can play .i.d3 and 0-0-0, bringing his king into safety. Of course, this involves some more non-developing moves, so White has to be very careful, but he can just about get away with it . 10 .i.e2, intending .!Llf3, is another safe continuation, but 10 .ib5+ is bad after 10 . . . c6 1 1 l:td1 'iVe7 12 .!Lld6+ �f8 13 .ie2 .ie6-neither side can castle, but whereas Black can solve the problem of his king by . . . g6 and . . . �g7, White will have more trouble finding a safe spot.

10 .!Llg6 11 g3 0-0 12 .id3

The best line. Trying to castle kingside is worse: 12 .i.g2 l:te8 13 .!Lle2 .if5 and White is already in big trouble, for example 14 0-0 1le7 15 .!Llxf6+ 'iVxf6 16 'iVd2 l:tad8 17 1le1 .i.g4 18 l:[f2 'iVb6.

12 ••• 'iVdS! White was threatening 0-0-0, but

once again Bareev does his best to interfere with White's plans.

13 a3? (D) This is one non-developing move

too far, and now the storm breaks with devastating ferocity. The alter­natives were:

1) 1 3 .!Llxf6+? gxf6 14 0-0-0 11xh1 15 .i.e4 .i.f5! and Black ends up with an extra exchange.

2) 1 3 0-0-0 1fxa2 14 lLlxf6+ gxf6 and White doesn't have sufficient compensation for the pawn.

3) 1 3 lLlf3 ..tg4 (13 . . . ..th3 14 lL!xf6+ gxf6 15 �f2 is fine for White) 14 0-0 ..i.e7 and the two bish­ops, coupled with White's weakened kingside, give Black an edge.

4) 13 lLle2! ..i.e7 14 a3 ..i.g4 15 0-0-0 (15 h3 ..tf3 16 .:th2 .:tad8 17 0-0-0 c6 18 .:tt2 ..i.xe4 19 ..i.xe4 1fxdl+ 20 1fxd1 .:txdl+ 21 �xd1 is equal) 'Wh5 (better than 15 . . . .:tad8 16 lLlf2 1fe6 17 lL!xg4 'ii'xg4 18 ..i.e4, with an edge for White) with an unclear position.

8

13 ••• lL!xf4! A shattering blow.

14 lLlxf6+ White cannot accept the sacrifice:

14 gxf4 ..th4+ 15 �fl (15 �d2 .:td8 and 15 �e2 ..tg4+ 16 lLlf3 f5 are also lost) f5 16 lLlf3 (16 1fe2 'it>h8 and 16 lLld2 Wxh1 17 lLldf3 ..te7 are very good for Black; in the latter case White cannot exploit the trapped queen) fxe4 17 ..txe4 ..i.h3+ 18 'it>g1 'ii'c5+ 19 lLld4 .:txf4 with a decisive attack.

Topalov - Bareev 155

Topalov decides to regain the pawn on h7, but his king remains trapped in the centre.

14 gxf6 15 ..i.:xh7+ 'it>g7 16 1t'e4 (D)

The only move, as 16 ..te4 l:l.e8 and 16 gxf4 .:te8+ 17 'it>f2 'ii'xh1 are hopeless.

8

16 ... l:l.e8!! By far the strongest continuation.

16 . . . lL!d3+ 17 �fl (not 17 'it>e2? l:l.e8 18 Wxe8 ..i.g4+) Wxe4 18 ..i.xe4 lL!xb2 19 lLlf3 l:l.e8 and 16 . . . Wxe4+ 17 ..txe4 .:te8 18 gxf4 l:l.xe4+ 19 'it>f2 l:l.xf4+ both lead to a favourable ending for Black, but Bareev cor­rectly decides to go for a clean kill. Note that 16 . . . f5? would be a serious error, since 17 Wxf4 ! l:l.e8+ 18 Wf2 Wxh1 19 Wg5+ 'it>xh7 20 'ifh5+ 'it>g7 21 'ii'g5+ 'it>f8 22 'ii'h6+ 'it>e7 23 .:te1 + 'it>d7 (23 . . . ..te6 24 lLlf3 Wxe1 + 25 'it>xe1 is fine for White) 24 l:l.d 1 + 'it>e7 is just a draw.

17 1fxe8 ..tfS! 18 1fxa8 (D)

There was little choice, since 18 We7 lLld3+ 19 'it>fl ..txh7 wins the

156 Game 55

rook on h 1 and 18 1Wa4 1Wxh1 1 9 0-0-0 lbd3+ 20 l:txd3 1Wxg1 + 21 l:td 1 1We3+ picks up the bishop on h7. However, after the move played Black can force mate in ten.

B

18 .•• "it'e4+ 19 �

1 9 �d1 1Wc2+ 20 �e1 lbd3+ 2 1 �fl 'ilkf2# and 19 �fl �h3+ 20 ltJxh3 1fe2+ 2 1 �g1 1Vg2# result in immediate mate, while 19 �d2 1Wg2+! 20 �e3 (or 20 �e1 tb<i3+ 21 �d 1 �g4+ and mate next move) transposes to the game.

19 ... ..g2+ (D)

w

20 �e3 21 �d4 22 �cS

Or 22 �c4 lClb6+ 23 �b4 1fxb2+ 24 �a5 ltJc4+ 25 �a4 b5#.

22 ... 1i'e3+ 23 �c4

White can choose his fate: 23 �xd5 �e6#, or 23 �b5 1i'b6+ 24 �c4 ltJe3#.

23 ... lClb6+ 0-1

In anticipation of 24 �b5 (24 �b3 1We6+ 25 �b4 1Wc4+ 26 �a5 1Wc5#) 1fd3+ 25 �a5 1Wa6+ 26 �b4 1Wa4+ 27 �c5 1Wc4#.

Game 55

There is no better way for a young player to make his reputation that to win a brilliant game which is reprinted all over the world. These days, there are so many promising young players that it takes something special to stand out from the rest, and a queen sacrifice followed by a king-hunt is just what is needed. The 18-year-old Zviagintsev achieved exactly this type of instant fame when he won the following spectacular game at the start of 1995. White made early headway on the kingside, but his threats were repulsed and a sharp, but roughly equal, position resulted. All it took was one natural-look­ing but erroneous move and Zviagintsev struck, first with a knight sacrifice and then with a queen offer. White's king was pursued to its death on h6.

Cifuentes - Zviagintsev Wijk aan Zee Open 1995

Semi-Slav

1 d4 e6 2 00 d5 3 c4 lDt'6 4 M c6 5 e3 lbbd7 6 'ii'c2 b6

Peter Wells, in his excellent book The Complete Semi-Slav, comments that 6 . . . i.d6 is 'almost universally played' , and doesn't mention this move at all. The plan of coupling the queenside fianchetto with . . . i.e7 has suddenly become quite popular, per­haps out of boredom with the stand­ard lines.

7 i.e2 A quiet reply. 7 i.d3 i.b7 8 0-0

looks more dynamic, but of course this is largely a matter of taste.

7 i.b7 8 0-0 i.e7 9 .:.d1

It can be useful to put the rook op­posite Black's queen, but here Black can simply side-step the danger by playing . . .'fic7. A more common plan is 9 b3 0-0 10 i.b2.

9 .•. 0-0 10 e4

White could still continue with 10 b3, but he decides to open the centre immediately.

10 ...

1 1 lbxe4 dxe4 'ii'c7

It is dangerous to open the d-file while the queen is still on d8, for ex­ample after 1 1 . . .c5 12 lbxf6+ i.xf6

Cifuentes - Zviagintsev 157

13 dxc5 bxc5 14 i.f4, the weakness of d6 and Black's broken queenside pawns give White the edge.

12 M Better than 12 lbxf6+?! ( 12 i.g5

leads to safe equality) lbxf6 1 3 c5 (trying to block in the b7-bishop) bxc5 14 dxc5 a5 and the bishop can emerge at a6, while d5 is a very good square for the black knight.

12 ... c5 13 d5 (D)

An ambitious response. If White can maintain the pawn on d5 then Black's pieces will have less ma­noeuvring room, but there is an ob­vious danger that the advanced pawn will become weak. After 13 lbb5 ( 13 i.g5 is also possible) 'fibS 14 g3 cxd4 15 lbbxd4 the position is roughly equal.

B

13 ... exdS 14 cxdS a6

With a view to . . . b5-b4, driving away a defender from the d5-pawn.

15 lbh4!? For a second time White does not

shrink from a double-edged course of action. Now Black is more or less

158 Game 55

forced to play . . . g6, which slightly weakens his king position, but if White's kingside initiative comes to nothing, then the knight on h4 will have to retreat, losing time.

15 ..• g6 After the immediate 15 . . . J..d6

White could continue with 16 g3, as in the game, or he could play 16 tDfS J..xh2+ 17 �h 1 J..d6 18 tDe4 tDxe4 19 'ilhe4 tDf6 20 'ii'h4, offer­ing a pawn to enhance his kingside threats. Black prefers to play safe and stop the knight moving to f5.

16 J..h6 l:r.fe8 (D)

w

17 'ii'd2?! White wants to make use of the

knight's position on h4, so with this move he introduces the possibility of tDfS. Unfortunately the knight never reaches fS, while Black is given the chance to advance on the queenside. 17 a4 J..d6 1 8 g3 was correct, pre­venting . . . b5, with equality.

17 J..d6 18 g3 b5! 19 J..f3

Suddenly it is clear that 19 tDfS would backfire after 1 9 . . . b4 20 tDa4

(20 tDxd6 'ii'xd6 2 1 tDa4 'ii'xdS) tDe4, when Black can safely take the knight. White is therefore reduced to simply defending the weak dS­pawn, but now the knight on h4 is looking out of play.

19 •.•

20 tDe2 b4 tDe4?!

According to Zviagintsev's com­ments, it would have been more ac­curate to play 20 . . . tDe5.

21 _.c2 tDclf6 (D)

w

22 tDg2! A good defensive move. Black's

slight inaccuracy has given White a breathing space, and he correctly uses it to bring his knight back into the game. White might follow up with J..f4, exchanging bishops (the immediate 22 J..f4 fails to 22 . . . J..xf4 23 tDxf4 g5), or play the knight to e3, lending further support to the d5-pawn.

22 ••. ..d7 23 M

The point of Black's last move lies in the line 23 J..f4 J..f8, and White has problems holding onto the dS-pawn.

23 ••• l:r.ad8 24 �g2? (D)

One mistake is enough. This move leads to tactical ruin for the seemingly innocuous reason that it leaves g4 insufficiently protected. After 24 l:r.ac 1 ! the position would be balanced-the combinative continu­ation 24 . . . lDxf2 25 �xf2 'ii'h3 fails to 26 �f4 'ii'xh2+ 27 lDg2 �xf4 28 lDxf4 and White wins.

8

24 ... lDxf2! Zviagintsev doesn't hesitate to

lob a grenade into White's kingside. 25 �xf2 l:r.xe3! 26 �xe3

Of course, anything is better than getting mated, but it is easy to under­stand Cifuentes's decision to avoid 26 �xe3 lDg4+ 27 �d2 lDxh6 28 �cl 'ii'e7-White's al-rook is to­tally blocked in and his dark squares are horrifically weak; after 29 .-e4 1he4 30 �xe4 lDg4 Black has a large advantage.

26 27 w 28 � 29 w

lDg4+ itlxh2+ lDg4+ .. e6! (D)

Cifuentes - Zviagintsev 159

w

No draw! White's extra rook is largely irrelevant as Black's pieces converge on the enemy king.

30 �f4 Leads to a brilliant finish, but

there was nothing better: 1 ) 30 .-e4 1Wxe4+ 31 �xe4 l:r.e8+

wins. 2) 30 'ii'd2 l:r.e8 3 l lDf4 �xd5+!

32 lDxd5 (32 'ii'xd5 lDh2+ 33 � 1Wxe3#) 'ife4+ and White loses all his pieces with check.

3) 30 �g5 l:r.e8 is much like the game.

4) 30 �cl c4 ! (with two threats: 3 l . . . ..i.xd5+ 32 l:r.xd5 'ii'xd5+ 33 'ii'e4 lDh2+ 34 �f2 �c5+ 35 �e3 �xe3+ 36 �xe3 1Wc5+ 37 lDd4 l:r.xd4 38 'ii'xd4 lDg4+ 39 �e4 'ii'f5#, and the simple 3 1 . . .�c5 with an overwhelming attack) 3 1 'ili'e4 (3 1 lDf4 lDh2+ 32 �f2 �c5+) .-xe4+ 32 �xe4 lDf2+ 33 �d4 lDxdl 34 �xc4 l:r.c8+ 35 �d3 �e5 with a won ending for Black.

30 ••• l:r.e8 The alternative 30 ... ..i.xf4 31 1We4

1Wxe4+ 32 �xe4 �e5 was not bad, but Black is playing for mate. The immediate threat is 31 . . ...i.xd5+.

160 Game 55

31 'i1Vc4 (D)

3 1 'ii'd2 runs into 3 l . . . .txd5+ 32 'iVxd5 'iVxe2#, but the move played allows a beautiful mate in six.

31 ••.

The final king-hunt of the book would not be complete without a queen sacrifice.

32 .txe3 llxe3+ 33 �g4 .tc8+ 34 �gS

Or 34 �h4 .te7#. 34 .•. h6+!

Not 34 . . . �g7 35 llhl and White can prolong the game.

35 �6 lleS 0-1

There is no defence to the twin mating threats of 36 . . . .tf8# and 36 ... llh5#.

John Nunn is one of the world's top grandmasters, especia l ly noted for h i s

attacking s k i l l s . He has w o n fo u r i n d iv i d u a l gold medals at chess olympiads,

and won the Hasti ngs tourna ment twice. He f in is hed t h i rd i n two Wo rld Cup

:e i n 1 989.

and tra nsl ator, but his g reatest

other books i n c l u d e Lessons in

:ummit.

Planning Pawn Power

N e i l McDonald Angus D u n n i ngton

Gambits Think Like a Grandmaster -.1

G raham B u rgess Alexa nder Kotov 0

� Piece Power Steve Davis Plays Chess �

..,

Peter Wel l s Steve Davis & David N o rwood ..... .1:) .r:-. l.n .r:-.

I "" -D .&--V1

I 0