CHESS OPENINGS

IDEAS & ANALYSIS

by

INTERNATIONAL GRANDMASTER LARRY EVANS

$2.50

Published by:

CHESS DIGEST

P

.0.

BOX 21225

DALLAS, TEXAS 75211

MARCH 1973

EDITOR: Ken Smith, PROOFREADER: Bob Mapes, DIAGRAMS: BoL

Mapes, TYPIST: Kay UeVau1t, PASTEUP

&

FINAL CORRECTIONS:

Bob Mapes, PRINTER: Chess Digest Magazine, BINDER

&

TRI�lER: Smith Bindery Co. Inc.

2

About the Author

LARRY EVANS HAS BEEN ONE O F AMER ICA'S INTERNAT IONAL

GRANDMASTERS S INCE HE CAPTURED THE NAT IONAL CHAMP I­

ONSH IP IN

1951

AT THE AGE OF N INETEEN. HE REGA INED

THIS TITLE IN

1962,

THEN WAS RUNNER-UP TO THE PHE­

NOMENAL BOBBY F ISCHER BEFORE W INNING IT AGA IN IN

1969.

HE HAS BEEN A MEMBER, AND FREQUENTLY A H IGH

SCORER, ON S IX U. S. OLYMP IC TEAMS. HE HAS WON EVE­

RY MAJOR TITLE INCLUD ING THE U. S. "OPEN" (twice) .

HE IS THE REVISER OF THE MONUMENTAL 10th ED ITlbN OF

MODERN CHESS OPENINGS, AND A REGULAR COLUMN IST FOR

CHESS L I FE

&

REV IEW. IN

1971

HE JO INED KEN SM ITH AS

CO-EDITOR OF CHESS DIGEST MAGAZ INE.

INTERNATIONAL GRANDMASTER LARRY EVANS

PART ONE

1

p-K4, p-K4 2 �-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-04, B-B4 4 P-03 Page 5

4

•

•

•

P-Q3 Page

6

4

• • •

N-B3 Page 9

5

p-Q4, PxP

6

PxP, B-N5ch

7

B-Q2 Page 11

5 p-Q4, PxP

6

PxP, B-N5ch

7

N-B3 Page 14

7

•

•

•

NxKP 8 0-0, NxN Page

16

7

.

•

•

NxKP

8

0-0, BxN Page

17

9 P-Q5, N-K4 Page

18

9 P-Q5, 6-63 Page 19

4

• • •

Q-K2 Page 23

5 p-Q4, B-N3

6

0-0 Page 25

5 p-Q4, B-N3

6

P-Q5 Page 29

5 p-Q4, B-N3

6

p-QR4 Page 31

PART

n%

1

p-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-Q63 3 6-B4, B-B4 4 P-Q3 Page 32

PART THREE

1

p-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-64, B-64 4 p-Q4 Page 38

4

GIUOCO

I P-Klj

'2

B-84

PIANO

P-K4

P-f:4

ThE''>e

C'lre

t

h

e ch;,r",c:tt·,

i�tic moves "f the

ol{IE'�t

recorci­

c·J

{1�E'ninq, the Ciuoco Piano (lIquiet gameH).

WHITE'S IDEA

is

to

break quickly in the centert castle,

�nd �evel�p

a speedy attack against Black's

KBP

BLACK'S

IOEA

is t� pursue rapid development and castle

wltnLut getting mired

in

the complications.

The Gl,�oc.o

hils

(:1 1

but disa(:peared from tournament play

becausE'?

tt-,E'

deph)yr,ent of White's

Bisho�

0.,

QB4

ac.complis­

hf'�

littl e

h

the

vital

st'-uggle for the

K5

square

(nS

com­

cared to 3

B-N5

of

the Ruy Lopez).

Nevertheless Black

must

��

fa�i)l�r with

a

large body ef theory or he ma, succumb

to

an attAck before his pieces are out of the box; there

are several tricky gambit lines, and quiet continuatiuns

Lcntaininy

a

dr

op

of

poison.

There is still room for

ex­

ploration in even the most thoroughly analyzed main varia­

t i

ens,

Position after

3

.

•

.

B-B4

I

•

it

The most frequent continuation.

The quiet 4 P-Q3 is covered in

"l

I," and the gambit 4

p-Q4 in

"l

I I".

WHITE'S IDEA is to amass a steamroller in the center

time by attacking the �pposing Bishop.

BLACK'S IDEA is to counterattack against White's KP, or

to overprotect his own KP. Both methods are acceptable.

A

(1 P-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4 4 P-B3)

4

•

•

•

P-Q3

Position after 4

•

•

.

P-Q3

Before examining the main lines, let's take a look at

the third possibil ity. Black ignores the threat, allow­

ing his opponent a strong pawn center with the idea of at­

tacking it later. This method is unsatisfactory.

Against the sharp thrust 4

•

•

•

P-B4 the simplest reply is

5

P-Q3, N-B3

6

p-QN4, B-N3

7

P-QR4, P-QR3 8 0-0, P-Q3

9

QN­

Q2 with good prospects because Black's King is confined to­

the center for quite some time.

5

6

This tempo-gaining thrust assures White the initiative.

Ey tirstainln� fr0m castl i,g, W�ite r�tai�s the possi�illty

of

castlinq. long (0-0-0) .

•

•

•

PxF

Forced. If S . . . B-N37 6 F-xP, PxP 7 QxQd., k.xQ (or 7 . . .

NxQ

8

NxP) 8 E){P wins a P.:wn.

6 PxP

Ir.exact is 6 . .

.

P-NSch 7 N-B3 wltich cuntdbutp.s to Whi­

te's dfvetopment while

mc �

ing the Bi�hOp twice to no pur­

pose.

o�

6 . . . B-N5ch 7 K-BiI7 B-R4 8 Q-�4, P-QR3! Blac� \ave�

the piece aft�r

9

P-Q5 (or

5 f-Q),

Q-Q2 10 B-K3

,

B-N3) ,

P-QN4 10 Q-R3,

p�e

!l PxN, B-N3 etc.

Positiol1 after-6

• • •

E-N3

BLACK'S IDEA is to increase the pressure �gainst th� QF

by

•

•

•

thereby forcing that Pawn to advance

and close the diagonal for the KB .

WHITE'S I�EA is to mai�tdin his central Pawns intact,

exerting a cr�mping influence .

7 N-B3

7

White can forestall the threatened pin by

j

P-KR3, but

after 7

•

•

•

N-B3 8 N-B3, 0-0

9

0-0, NxKP! 10 NxN, P-Q4 Black

secures equality .

7

•

•

•

N-B3

The irT'mediate 7

•

•

•

B-NS 8 B-K3, N-B3 9 B-N3 transposes

to the text .

8 B-K3

Here White could also try 8 B-N3, but this is not nec­

essary since 8 .. . NxKP 9 NxN, P-Q4 10 B-N3, PxN 1 1 N-N5 wou­

ld invol�e Black in serious difficulties due to the attack

�galnst his KB2 .

On the other hand 8 0-0 is somewhat premature, for on

B-N5 9 B-K3, Q-K2 10 Q-Q3, 0-0-0 Black gets good counter­

play (Maroczy-Perlis, Vienna 1908) .

8

.

•

.

B-N5

The logical way of pres�uring White's QP .

9 B�N3

To prevent any freeing combinations with

•

•

•

NxKP follow­

ed by

•

•

•

P-Q4 . An alternative is

9

Q-Q3, transposing to the

text.

•

0-0

Since White has delayed castling, less effective is

9

•

•

•

Q-K2 10 Q-Q3, 0-0-0 1 1 P-KR3, B-KR4 12 r�-KR4!

10 Q-Q3

Brea�ing the pin, reinforcing the center, and opening

thp. �ossibility of Q-side castling.

10

•

• •

R-Kl

Stepping up the �ressure against White's KP.

11 0-0

8

More

c�u�ent

th2�

[ne double-edged I I 0-0-0,

B-KR�.

11 . . .

B-KR4

11

• • •

B

xN 12 PxB only reinforces White's center and op­

ens the KN file for attack (after K-Rl and R-KN1) .

White has been able to maintain his central steamroller

and stands slightly better . Here are some practical exam­

ples:

(1) 12 N-Q2, N-KN5 (if 12 ... B-N3 13 P-Q5! N-K4 14 Q-K2

holds the edge) 13 N-Q5, NxB 14 PxN, R-KBl 15 R-B2 with

pressure along the open KB-file (Becker-Mattison, Carls­

bad 1929) .

(2) 12 QR-Kl, B-N3 (if 12

•

•

•

P-KR3 13 N-Q2, B-N3 14 P-

•

B4, p-Q4 15 P-B5 White obtained an advantage in Leonhardt-

Teichmann, London 1904) 13 B-N5, P-KR3 14 B-KR4, B-KR4 15

N-Q5, p-N4 16 NxNP: with a decisive attack (Leonhardt-Mar­

oczy, Carlsbad 1907) .

B

(1 p-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QBJ 3 B-B4, B ... s4 4 -p�a3)

4

• •

•

N-B3

Black's most popular and active continuation. BLACK'S

IDEA is to exploit the fact that the KP cannot be

normally with N-QB3 .

WH ITE'S IDEA is to strike quickly in the center before

Black can consolidate .

See diagram at top of next page .

9

Position after

4

. . . N-B3

5 p-Q4

Consistent. 5 P-Q3 is examined in

"111".

The trouble with 5 Q-K2 is that the Queen no longer re­

inforces the p-Q4 advance.

On 5 0-0, NxP! 6 p-Q4, PxP 7 PxP, p-Q4! is in Black's

favor.

•

PxP

Forced. Not 5

.

.

•

B-N37 6 PxP, KNxP 7 Q-Q5 wins.

6 PxP

(1) Inferior is 6 P-K5, p-Q4! 7 B-QN5

(]

PxN, PxB 8 Q­

K2ch, B-K3 9 PxP, R-KNl is good for Black) N-K5 8 NxP

(Black is okay on 8 PxP, B-N3 9 N-B3, 0-0 10 B-K3, P-B3 11

PxP, NxN 12 PxN, QxP. Steinitz-Schiffers, Vienna 1898) B­

Q2 (also possible is a-a!) 9 BxN, PxB 10 0-0, P-B3! smash­

ing the center (Boutteville:Larsen, Le Havre 1966) .

(2) 6 p-QN4!7 B-K2 7 P-K5, N-K5 8 P-N5, N-R4 9 B-Q3,

NxQBP 10 NxN, PxN 11 Q-B2, P-Q3 12 B-KB4, PxP 13 BxKP, B­

B3 14 QxP, BxB 15 NxB (David-Jense, postal 1971) a-a! 16

QxN, Q-Q5 17 0-0, QxN is in Black's favor.

(3) An old variation tried recently is 6 0-0, NxKP

(better than 6 ... p-Q6 7,P-QN4 -- Estrin-Korelov, USSR 1970

10

-- B-K2=)

7

PxP. B-K2 (safe and good is p-Q41) 8 P-QS. N­

N I 9 R-Kl. N-Q3 (safer than 9

•

•

.

N-KB3 10 p-Q6! PxP 11 N­

B3. 0-0 12 RxBI QxR 13 B-KNS. N-B3 14 N-QS. Q-KS I S NxNch.

PxN 16 BxP. QxB 17 N-Q41 with a decisive attack. Bird­

Caro, Vienna 1868) 10 B-Q3. 0-0 11 N-B3. N-Kl (11 . . . N-R3

12 B-KB4 brings back 1 ittle re I ief--Corten-Perkins. 1969)

12 P-Q61 (12 Q-K2. B-B3 13 N-K4. P-Q3 14 NxBch. NxN IS B­

KNS --Estrin-Konovalov. Moscow 1969 -- B-NSI 16 BxN. QxB

17 Q-K4. Q-N3 holds) NxP 13 B-KB4 (worth investigating is

13 BxPch, KxB 14 RxB. QxR IS N-QS) N-Kl 14 BxPchl KxB IS

RxBI QxR 16 N-QS. Q-Ql 17 N-NSch. K-N3 18 Q-Q3ch. P-KB4

19 Q-KN3 wins (Hulsen-Brody. 1897) .

6

•

•

•

B-NSch

Of course not 6

•

•

•

B-N3 7 P-QS. N-K2 8 P-KS. N-NS 9 P-

Q61 with a positional bind .

•

Now White has a choice between 7 B-Q2 or the Pawn sac­

rifice with 7 N-B3.

a

(1 P-K4. p-K4 2 N-KB3. N-QB3 3 B-B4. B-B4

4 p-B3. N-B3 S P-Q4. PxP 6 PxP. B-NSch)_

7 B-Q2

Position after 7 B-Q2

This is the best and most solid continuation.

11

On 7 QN-Q27 NxKP 8 0-0, NxN 9 R-K1ch, B-K2 10 BxN (Gin­

guta-Dumitru, postal 1968) p-Q4! gives Black a fine game .

The Cracow Variation 7 K-B1, NxKP7 (stronger is 7 . .

.

P­

Q4! 8 PxP, KNxP 9 N-B3, B-K3 10 Q-K2, O-O! ) 8 P-Q5, N-K2

9 Q-Q4, N-KB3 10 B-KN5, N-N3 (or 10

•

•

.

P-B4 11 Q-K3, P-Q3

12 BxN, PxB 13 QN-Q2) 11 QN-Q2, P-KR3 12 R-K 1 ch, K-B 1 13

B-Q3, B-K2 14 BxN, PxB 15 N-K5! wins (Marsha1 1-Burn, Os­

tend 1905) .

The other"main variation 7 N-B3 is considered under

"b" .

7

BxBch

This exchange is the simplest .

Also possible is 7 .

.

. NxKP! 7 8 BxB, NxB 9 BxPch (better

than 9 Q-N3, p-Q4 10 QxN, PxB 11 0-0, Q-Q3) KxB 10 Q-N3ch,

p-Q4 11 N-K5ch, K-K3 (on 11.

•

.

K-B3 12 P-B3! is strong) 12

QxN, p-B4 13 Q-R3 (or 13 Q-R4, Q-N3! ) PxP 14 N-KB3 and

Black's King may become insecure .

Weak is 7

.

. . p-Q4 8 PxP, KNxP (8

•

•

•

BxBch 9 QxB, KNxP 10

0-0, 0-0 11 N-B3 with some chance for an initiative) 9 BxB,

N/3xB 10 Q-N3, Q-K2ch 11 K-B1 with advantage .

7 QNxB

Developing a new piece and defending the KP .

"

8

p-Q4

Safer than 8

•

•

•

NxKP 9 NxN (to be considered is the Pawn

sacrifice 9 P-Q5, NxN 10 QxN, N-K2 11 P-Q6, PxP 12 0-0-0)

p-Q4 10 Q-K2 (or 10 BxP, QxB 11 N-B3, Q-Q1 12 P-Q5, N-K2

13 Q-N3 with advantage . Rosso 1imo-Dunke 1b 1um, Dubrovnik

1950; however, Black can improve with 11

•

•

•

Q-K3ch) 0-0 11

0-0-0, B-N5 12 P-KR3, BxN 13 PxB, PxB 14 QxP, Q-R5 15 K­

N I with a slight initiative (Mednis-Fischer, New York

1964)

•

9 PxP

KNxP

White brings pressure to bear against his Q5 square be­

fore Black can conso1 idate and gang up on his isolated QP .

12

10

•

•

•

QN-K2

To maintain a staunch blockade, Black must release some

of the pressur£ against the rival QP.

Unsound is 10

•

•

.

0-0 11 BxN, N-R4 12 BxPch, RxB 13 Q-B3,

holding the Pawn.

On 10

•

•

•

N-R4 11 Q-R4ch, P-QB3 (Tarrasch recommended 11

•

•

•

N-QB3 inviting a draw by repetition after 12 Q-N3, N­

R4)

·H

BxN, QxB 13 0-0, Black's Knight on R4 is misplaced.

11 0-0

The King is safer on this wing than after 11 0-0-0! 1

11

The mos t so 1 id.

0-0

r-®3

Another plan 12

•

•

•

N-QN3 13 B-Q3, N-B3 is risky since

the K-side is unprotected: e.g., 13 QR-Bl (better than 14

Q-B2, P-KR3 15 Q-B5, B-K3 16 B-K4, B-Q4 with a good game)

K-Rl 15 R-B5 (neater is 15 B-Nl! since on NxP 16 NxN, QxN

17 N-B3 White can regain his Pawn next with Q-B2) NxP 16

NxN, QxN 17 R-KR5 with great compl ications which finally

resulted in a draw (Rossol imo-Portisch, Wijk Aan Zee 1968)

<#

13 P-QR4

White has a variety of other plans.

(1) 13 QR-Bl, Q-N3 14 Q-R3, B-K3 15 N-K4, QR-Ql 16 N/

4-N5 with some chances for initiative (Rossolimo-O'Kelly,

Hastings 1950/1) .

(2) 13 N-K4, Q-N3 14 N-B3, QxQ 15 BxQ (Bogoljubow-Euwe,

1941)

•

(3) 13 N-K5, Q-N3 14 BxN, NxB 15 QxQ, PxQ with at least

equality (Nyholm-Opocensky, Baden 1914) .

13

.

•

•

Q-B2

Now Black has come to a parting of the ways.

13

•

(1) 13

•

•

•

Q-N3 14 P-RS (superficial is 14 Q-R3. B-K3 IS

P-RS. Q-B2 16 N-K4. QR-Ql 17 N-BS. B-Bl with good play.

Tarrasch-Capablanca. San Sebastian 1911) QxQ IS NxQ. R-Ql

(Black got in trouble with lS

•

•

•

B-B4 16 N-KS. N-NS 17 QR­

Bl in O'Kelly-Euwe. Amsterdam 19S0) 16 N-BS. R-Nl 17 N-KS.

K-Bl and Black is ready for

•

•

•

P-QN3 with a satisfactory

position (O'Kelly-De Jong. Winterwijk 19S1.

(2) 13 . . . N-B4 14 BxN. QxB 1S QxQ. PxQ 16 N-N3. P-B3 17

QR-Bl. B-Q2=. Leonhardt-Rubinstein. Pistyan 1912.

(3) 13

•

•

.

N-KN3 14 P-RS. R-Nl IS N-K4. B-B4 16 N-BS. P­

N3 17 N-R6. R-Bl 18 N-N4 with a s I ight edge. Tarrasch­

Schlechter. San Sebastian 1�11.

(4) 13

•

•

•

P-QR4 14 N-K4. B-B4 IS N-N3. B-N3 16 N-KS. N­

NS 17 NxB. RPxN 18 R-KS with a puii (Giigoric-Kramer. Am­

sterdam 19S0) .

(S) 13

•

•

•

P-QN3 (weak) 14 N-KS. B-N2 IS P-RS. R-Bl 16 N­

K4. Q-B2 17 p-R6. B-RI 18 Q-KR3 with chances for an attack

(Rossolimo-Reissman. San Juan 1967) .

14 QR-B

1

Threatening to win a piece with IS BxN. NxB 16 QxN etc.

14

.

•

•

Q-BS

Better than 14

•

•

•

N-BS IS N-NS. N/2-N3 16 R-K8! (Schif­

fers-Harmonist. Frankfurt 1887) .

IS N-K4

B-B4

We have been following Schlechter-Breyer. Baden 1914.

which continued: 16 N-BS. P-QN3 17 N-Q3. BxN 18 BxB. QR­

Ql with approximately equal chances. The weakness of

Black's QBP is offset by the weakness of White's QP.

b

(1 P-K4. p-K4 2 N-KB3. N-QB3 3 B-B4. B-B4

4 p-B3. N-B3 S p-Q4. PxP 6 PxP. B-NSch)

7 N-B3

See diagram at top of next

page.

14

Position after 7 N-B3

WH ITE'S IDEA is to avoid an exchange of pieces and str­

ive

attack even at a cost of a Pawn .

BLACK'S IDEA is to snatch the KP and consolidate quick­

I y .

This gambit continuation was already known in the 17th

century and reconmended by Greco . There are many tri.cks

but it is essent i ally harml ess if --B'I ack knows how to de­

fend.

�

NxKP

Black takes advantage of the pin to. win a Pawn.

Less accurate is 7

•

•

•

BxNch 8 PxB, NxKP 9 P-Q5, N-K2 la

Q-Qlt.

Black involves himself in needless difficulties (and

does not gain a Pawn) with 7

•

•

•

P-Qlt 8 PxP, KNxP 9

0-0,

B­

K3! la B-KN5, B-K2 11 BxN (also feasible is 11 BxB, QNxB

12 N-Klt or 12 Q-N3) QBxB 12 NxB, QxN 13 BxB, NxB Ilt R-K I,

P-KB3 15 Q-K2, Q-Q2 16 QR-B I (another try is 16 Q-Klt, P­

B3 17 R-K2, K-B2 18 QR-K I, N-Qlt 19 Q-Rlt) , K-B2! (better

than 16

• • •

P-B3 17 P-Q5! PxP 18 N-Qlt, K-B2 19 N-K6 with a

virulent attack--Steinitz-Bardeleben, Hastings 1895) and

Black's game is tenable.

8

0-0

15

The idea beh i nd th is Pawn "sac" is to ut

i

1 i ze open

lines, especially the K-file.

Position after 8 0-0

Black has two ways of capturing the Knight: 8 .

.

. NxN or

8 ..

.

BxN, which we shall examine in some detail.

I

•

1 P-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-Q63 3 B-B4, B-B4 4 1'-B3,

N-B3 S p-Q4, PxP 6 PxP, B-N5ch 7 N-B3,

NxKP 8

0-0)

•

o

u

•

•

•

NxN

This is not recommended because White recaptures with

a tempo-gain.

Also inferior is 8 .

.

. 0-0 9 P-QS, BxN 10 PxB, N-K2 11

R-Kl, N-KB3 12 P-Q6 (Spielmann-Cohn, Carlsbad 1907) .

9 PxN

Risky is 9

•

•

•

BxP (or 9

.

•

•

B-K2 10 P-QS, N-R4 1 1 p-Q6!

PxP 12 BxPch, KxB 13 Q-QSch, followed by N-NS) and now

White comes out on top after:

(1) 10 Q-N3, p-Q4! (lO ... BxR loses to 1 1 BxPch, K-Bl 12

B-NS, N-K2 13 N-KS, BxP 14 B-N6! p-Q4 IS Q-B3ch) 1'1 BxP, 0

-0 12 BxPch, K-Rl (if 12 ... RxB 13 N-NS, B-K3! 14 QxB/3! R­

B3 IS NxB, RxN 16 Q-B4) 13 QxB, RxB 14 Q-N3!

16

(2) 10 B-R3! (sharpest) N-K2 (if 10

•

•

.

p-Q4 1 1 S-N5, BxR

12 R-Klch, B-K3 13 Q-R4, R-QNl 14 N--KS with a decisive at­

tack. Corte-Bolbochan, Parana 1946; or 10 . .. P-Q3 1 1 R-Bl,

B-R4 12 Q-R4, P-QR3 13 B-QS, B-N3 14 RxN! B-Q2 IS R-Klch,

K-Bl 16 RxQP! ) 1 1 Q-N3, p-Q4 12 QxB, PxB 13 KR-Kl, B-K3

14 BxN, KxB IS P�QS! QxP 16 QR-Ql, Q-QB4 17 R-K5, Q-N3 18

RxBch! QxR ( 18 ... PxR 19 QxPch) 19 R-Kl wins.

10 PxB

PxB

1 1 R-Kl ch

If 1 1 P-N5, N-K2 12 B-R3, 0-0 13 Q-K2, R-Kl 14 QxP=.

1 1

N-K2

12

Fewer winning chances are offered by 12 Q-K2, B-K3 13

B-N5, Q-Q4 14 BxN, KxB 15 Q-B2, P-KB3! 16 N-N5! PxN 17 R­

K5, QxP 18 QR-Kl, QR-Kl, 19 RxBch, K-Q2 20 R-Ql, Qx�ch! 2 1

QxQch, KxR 22 Q-N4ch, K-B3= (Bogoljubow).

12

.

..

Black's better on 13 B-B4, 0-0 14 Q-K2, N-Q4 15 QxP,

K-Rl (Leonhardt-Perl is, Vienna 1908).

13 . . .

If 13

.

•

•

PxB 14 QxP Black's survival chances are slim

with his King confined to the center.

14 B-B4

K-B2

15 QxPch

According to an analysis by Sacharov White can hold the

edge with

1G

N-Q2! (on 16 B�P, R-QB 1!

17 3�Q, RxQ

wins) B­

K3

17 B-N3, R-Kl

18

N-K4! bui. after P-QN3 Bia�k luoks sol­

id enough.

..,

'.

(1

P-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4 4 P-B3,

N-B3 5 p-Q4, PxP 6 PxP, B-N5ch 7 N-B3, NxKP 8 0-0)

8

BxN!

17

The Holler Attack, White's only chance for any init ia­

t ive. On 9 PxB, p-Q4! 10 B-R3, PxB I I R-KI, B-K3!

(White

gets a small attack after 11

•

•

.

p-B4 12 N-Q2, K-B2 13 NxN,

PxN 14 RxP, Q-B3 IS Q-K2. Steinitz-Lasker, 1st match game

1896) 12 RxN, Q-Q4 13 Q-K2, 0-0-0 White has zero (Steinitz­

Lasker, 3rd game 1896).

Position after 9 P-Q5

Black has two main defenses: 9 ... N-K4 and 9

•

.

.

B-B3, ex­

amined in 2a and 2b, respectively

•

•

2a

9 ...

N-K4

This holds the Pawn and averts any immediate danger.

Alternatives are palpably inferior:

(l) 9 ... N-Q3 10 PxN, NxB I I Q-K2ch, Q-K2 12 QxN, B-R4

13 B-N5.

(2) 9

.

.

•

N-K2 10 PxB, 0-0 I I R-KI, N-KB3 12 p-Q6! as

mentioned earlier.

(3) 9

•

.

.

N-R4 10 B-Q3, N-B4 I I PxB, NxB 12 QxN, 0-0 13

N-N5! P-KB4 14 p-Q6! P-B3 IS R-KI w ith a b ind.

(4) 9 ... B-R4 10 PxN, NFx� {also JO .

.

. QPxP I1 Q-R4, B-

13

N3 12 BxPch, KxB 13 QxN; or 10

.

•

•

0-0 11 Q-Q5, N-Q3 12 B­

Q3, B-N3 13 BxPch! ) 11 N-K5! (an improvement over 11 Q-R4,

B-N3

12

BxPch, KxB 13 QxN, p-Q4 14 Q-QR4, R-Kl! Haroczy­

Janowsk i, Carlsbad 1907) N-Q3 12 Q-N4, Q-B3 13 p-N4! w ith

a strong attack, according to an old analys is by Molier.

10 PxB

Not 10 Q-K2, NxNch (or simply 0-0)

11 PxN,

6-B3

12 PxN,

P-Q3

13

P-K5,

PxP 14 P-B4, P-K5 w ith advantage.

10

11

NxB

MB4

Th is is cons idered the main line, although my own pref­

erence is to avoid this weakness with 11

•

.

.

0-0 12 QxN/K4,

N-Q3 13 Q-Q3, N-K I followed by

•

•

•

P-Q3 (Mieses-Sucht ing,

Vienna 1908).

Faulty is 11

.

•

.

N/B-Q3 12 QxNP, Q-B3 13 QxQ, NxQ 14 R­

Klch, N/B-K5! (avoiding the well known trap 14

•

•

•

K-B I 15

B-R6ch, K-N I 16 R-K5! N/Q-K5 17 N-N5! ) 15 N-Q2, P-KB4 16

P-B3 w ith a s I ight edge in the ensuing endgame.

12 QxN

�

-

�

-

0-0

Wh ite has some attacking chances for the Pawn after 14

P-B3, N-B4 (or 14 .. . N-B3 15 B-N5) 15 R-K I, K-Rl 16 B-R3,

P-QN3 17 N-B6, B-R3 18 Q-Q4, Q-N4 19 BxN, QPxB 20 Q-K5

(Romanov-Kotkov, USSR 1964).

2b

( I P-K4, P-K4

2

N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4 4 P-B3, N-B3

5 p-Q4, PxP 6 PxP, B-N5ch 7 N-B3, NxKP 8 0-0, BxN 9 P-Q5)

9

.

.

•

B-B3

See d iagram at top of next page.

19

Position after 9

•

•

•

B-B3

BLACK'S I DEA is to return the piece painlessly, castle,

extra Pawn.

WH ITE'S IDEA is to create complications before Black

can consolidate.

� __ ._� � _ . . �_ �_� •

•

or _

10

R-K 1

After 10 PxN, NPxP 1 1 R-Kl, P-Q4 Black is solid and can­

not be prevented from castling.

10

•

.

•

N-K2

White got strong pressure against 10

.

•

.

0-0 1 1 RxN, N-R4

( 1 1 . .. N-K2 12 p-Q6! ) 12 B-Q3, P-Q3 13 P-KN4! p-B4 14 P-NS

(simply Q-K2 comes into consideration) B-K2 15 B-Q2, P-QN3

16 Q-K2, B-B4 17 R-Kl (Thomas-Markwell, 1966).

1 1 RxN

P-Q3

After 1 1

.

•

.

0-0 12 p-Q6 (on 12 P-KN4, P-Q3 13 P-NS, B-K4

is the simplest defense) PxP 13 QxP, N-B4 14 Q-QS, N-K2

can lead to a draw by repetition. A Pawn ahead, Black is

looking for more. He might try 14

•

.

•

P-Q3 15 N-NS, N-R3.

12 B-KNS

Schlechter's "bayonet attack" is double-edged: e. g., 12

P-KN4, 0-0 13 P-NS, B-K4 14 NxB, PxN 15 RxP, N-N3 and

White's own K-side is weakened.

20

,

"

12 ...

BxB

Bad is 12 . . . 0-0 13 BxB, PxB 14 Q-Q2, N-N3 15 QR-Kl w ith

strong pressure ( Spielmann-Duras, Carlsbad 1907).

Also weak is 12 ... B-B4 13 B-N5ch! K-Bl 14 R-KB4.

13 NxB

0-0

Th is is the oldest defense, but Black has important

alternat ives.

( 1) 13 ... P-KR3 14 B-N5ch (unsound is 14 Q-K2, PxN 15

QR-Kl, B-K3 16 PxB, P-KB3; or 14 Q-R5, 0-0 15 QR-Kl, N­

B4! ) B-Q2 (if 14

.

.

•

P-B3 15 NxP! KxN 16 Q-B3ch w ith a str­

ong attack) 15 Q-K2, BxB (White gets strong pressure for

the Pawn after 15 ... K-Bl 16 R-Kl, N-Nl 17 N-B3. Gavr i lov­

Shaposnikov, postal 1953) 16 QxBch, Q-Q2 17 Q-K2 ( 17 Qx

/f

ch,

KxQ 18 NxP, KR-KBl w ins a piece) K-Bl 18 NxP (insuffici­

ent, but otherw ise Black repl ies with ... NxP) KxN 19 R-Kl,

N-Nl 20 R-K6, K-Bl 2 1 �-B4, N-B3 22 R-K7, R-Kl! winn ing

(Barczay-Port isch, Budapest 1963).

(2) )3 . .. B-B4 14 Q-B3, Q-Q2 15 B-N5! QxB 16 QxB w ith a

dec is ive attack.

14 NxRP!

.

White gets h is Pawn back wh i le the getting is good,

even if it leads to noth ing better than a draw.

14

KxN

Compl icat ions fol low 14 ... B-B4 15 R-R4 ( 15 RxN, QxR 16

NxR, RxN is draw ish) R-Kl 16 Q-R5 (alsu poss ible is 16 N­

N5,

N-N3 17 R-R5) N-N3 18 R-Q4 ( 17 N-N5, Q-B3! is better

for Black) R-K4 18 P-B4, R-K5 (better is 18

•

•

.

NxP 19 RxN,

B-N3! ) 19 RxR, BxR 20 N-N5, Q-B3 2 1 Q-R7ch, K-B 1 22 NxB,

Q-Q5ch 23 N-B2, QxB 24 P-B5, N-K2 25 P-B6, PxP 26 Q-R6ch,

K-Nl 27 QxP with advantage (Jlndersson-Johansson, 1969).

15 Q-R5ch

._m_

� __ _ _

K-Nl

rr:KB4

A w inn ing attempt. With 16 ... P-KB3 17 P-KN4, R-Kl 18

B-Q3, K-B 1 19 Q-R8ch, N-N 1 20 B-R7, K-B2 2 1 B-N6ch! K-B 1

2 1

(21 ... KxB 22 Q-R5 mate) 22 B-R7 a draw is forced.

Position after l6

•

•

.

P-KB4

This crucial position has been subjected to intensive

analysis by the world's leading theoreticians. The cons­

enSlJS is thdt White's attack cannot be reinforced decis­

ively. But is it a draw? Here are some of the main lines.

(1) 17 Q-P,7ch, K-B2 18 R-�6! R-KNl (if l8., .. B-Q2 or R­

Kl, 19 B-K2! is a powerful rep-lyt 19 R-Kl

f

K-Bl (not 19

•

.

.

B-Q2? 20 R/l-K6! BxR 21 PxBch, K-Kl 22 R-N6[ P-B3 23 RxNP

wi�s; Bogoljubow's winning try 19

•

•

•

Q-Bl 20 B-N5! R-Rl!

21 QxR, PxR 22 Q-R7ch, K-B3 23 RxN, QxR 24 QxPch leads to

draw by perpetual) 20 R-R3, B-Q2 (interesting is 20

.

•

•

P­

B5 21 R-R4, P-KN4--but not 22

.

•

•

N-84

23 RxP,

Q-N4

24 R­

K8ch! --22 R-R6, N-B4 23 R/6-K6, BxR 24 PxB, Q-B3 25 P-K7

ch, NxP 26 RxN, R-N2! 27 RxR, QxR 28 Q-B5ch, with a draw

by perpetual check) 21 R/3-K3, N-Bl 22 B-Q3, P-KN3 (if 22

.

•

•

Q-B3 23 BxP! ) 23 P-KR4, R-N2 24 Q-R8ch, R-Nl 25 Q-R7

(if 25 Q-R6ch, K-B2 26 R-K6, Q-KB1! ) draws by repetition.

(2)

17 R-R3 (to meet the threat of .. . N-N3) P-B5! 18 Q­

R7ch (White can play to lose with 18 P-KN4, BxP! 19 QxB,

Q-Bl. Campbell-Mendoza, 1946) K-B2 19 Q-R5ch, and the

�'�-'··moS"t"Sens·ible conclusion is the repetition after 19 . . . K­

NJ 20

Q-R7ch, K-B2 21 Q-R5ch, although K-63! ? might be a

try for Black.

-

r ..

"0lil j

� j

... ·-���.�(3)-

..

17--B-K2, R-Kll 18 R-Kl (insufficient are 18 Q-R8ch,

K-B2 19 B-R5ch, N-N3; or 18 Q-R7ch, K-Bl 19 R-R6, N-Nl! )

K-Bl (also good is 18

•

.

•

B-Q2 19 Q-R8ch, K-B2 20 B-R5ch,

22

N-N3) 19 B-fJ5, B-Q2 (after 19

.

.

.

P-B3 20 PxP, PxP 2 1 BxP and

regains some material) 20 R-K6, and now Black can choos�

b�tween the drawing line 2C ... BxB 2 1 R-86ch, PxR 22

�-R6

ch, or tne complicated winninq try with

'O

... N-Nl 2 1 QxKBP

ch, Q-B3!

(4) 17 R-Kl, N-N3 18 R-R3, R-B3! (better for White is

l8 . . . P-BS 19 R-K6; or l8 ... N-BS 19 Q-R7ch followed by RI

3-K3: finally if l8 . .. Q-B3 19 R-K6! BxR 20 PxB, KR-Ql 2 1

Q-R7ch, K-Bl 22 R-KN3. N-K2 23 Q-R8ch, N-Nl 24 RxP!) 19

Q-R7ch, K-B2 20 R-K6, N-Bl (20

•

.

.

8xR 2 1 PxBch, RxP 22 Bx

Rch, KxB 23 QxNch, Q-B3 leads to an approximately even

ending) 2 1 Q-RSch, P-KN3 22 Q-R8, BxR 23 PxBch, Rx P 24 Bx

Rch, KxB 2S Q-N7, P-BS and White's attack has run out of

steam.

(S) 17 P-KN3? (again to stop ... N-N3) B-Q2 (equally good

are l7 ... Q-Kl or R-Kl) 18 R-Kl, R-B3

19

RxN (otherwis

�

the

attack is at a standstill) QxR 20 Q-R8ch, K-B2

21

QxR, Q­

K8ch 22 K-N2, P-BS! with a decisive counterattack.

It is obvious that all the problems are still not sol­

ved in this fascinating variation.

c

( 1 P-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4 4 p-B3)

4

Q-K2

Sometimes 4 ... B-N3 is played first, transposing to the

main variation after S P-Q4, Q-K2. ( For S ... PxP 6 PxP see

"A")

•

See diagram at top of next page.

23

Position after 4 ... Q-�2

BLACK'S IDEA is to overprotect his KP and maintain a

blockade in the center .

WH ITE'S IDEA is to smash open the center and exploit

the eariy development of Black's Queen.

Less suitable is 4 ... Q-B3 5 p-Q4, B-N3 (but not 5

•

.

•

PxP 6 P-K5! NxP? 7 Q-K2 winning a piece) 6 0-0, P-KR3 (6

... P-Q3 7 B-KN5, Q-N3 8 PxP, PxP 9 NxP! is unpleasant) 7

P-QR4, P-R3 8 PxP, NxP 9 NxN, QxN 10 Q-B3 with advantage .

5 p-Q4

5 0-0, P-Q3 6 p-Q4, B-N3 eliminates White's option of

continuing with P-Q5-6 in some variations.

5 ...

B-N3

Black struggles to maintain his "strong point" on K4

come hell or high water. Inconsistent is 5 ... PxP 6 0-0!

and now:

( 1) 6 ... P-Q6 7 P-K5! (also strong is 7 P-QN4, B-N3 8

P-K5, P-Q3 9 B-KN5, P-B3 10 PxP, PxP? 1 1 R-Kl, N-K4 12

NxN, QPxN 13 Q-R5ch with a considerable advantage. Estrin­

Shivzov, Moscow 1945) P-KR3 (a better defense is 7

.

.

. P-Q3

8 B-KN5, P-B3 9 PxBP, NxP 10 QN-Q2 but White is still to

be preferred) 8 P-QN4, B-N3 9 P-QR4, P-QR4 10 B-R3, PxP 1 1

PxP, Nx�P 12 Q-N3, B-B4 13 N-B3 with an irresistible attack

24

(Rossolimo-Evans, Hastings 1949/50.

(2) 6 ... N-K4 7 NxN, QxN 8 p-B4! PxPch 9 K-R I, PxP 10

PxQ, PxR/Q 11 Q-Q5 with a crush.

(3) 6 .

.

. PxP 7 NxP, P-Q3 8 N-Q5, Q-Q I 9 P-QN4! with a

good attack for the Pawn.

Position after 5

•

•

•

B-N3

6 0-0

6 P-Q5 and 6 P-QR4 and covered under 112" and 11311 res­

pectively.

6

6

•

•

•

N-B3 7 R-K I, P-Q3 usually leads to the main line.

See diagram at top of next page

•

.., ...

"-

:;)

•

Position after 6

•

•

•

P-Q3

P-KR3

Preventing the pin and restricting Black's QB from dev­

eloping normally.

Another approach is 7 p-QR4, P-QR3 and now:

(1) 8 N-R3, B-N5 9 N-B2, BxN 10 PxB, Q-B3 11 N-K3, KN­

K2=. Keres.

(2) 8 p-QN4, N-B3 (stronger than 8

.

.

.

B-N5 9 P-R5, B-R2

10 P-Q5, N-N1 11 P-KR3, B-R4 12 B-K3, N-KH3 13 BxB, RxB

14 Q-Q3, BxN 15 QxB, QN-Q2=. Keres-Ney, Parnu 197 1; but

Keres recommends 10 P-N5, PxNP 1 1 BxP as a White try

for

advantage) 9 B-R3, B-N5 10 p-N5, N-QR4 1 1 QN-Q2, NxP! with

a clear advantage (Rossetto-Euwe, Buenos Aires 1947).

(3) 8 P-R57 NxRP 9 RxN, BxR 10 Q-R4ch, p-QN4 1 1 QxB,

PxB with a plus (Gunsberg-A1ekhine, St. Petersburg 19 14.

(4) 8 B-K3, N-B3 (somewhat premature is 8

.

.

. B-N5 9 P­

Q5, N-Nl 10 P-R5, BxB 11 PxB with a good game. A1ekhine­

Tarrasch, t�annheim 19 14) 9 QN-Q2, N-KN5 10 Q-K2, NxB 1 1

PxN, 0-0=. (Alekhine-Salwe, Carlsbad 19 11).

(5) 8 P-R3, N-B3 9 R-K1, 0-0 transposes to the main

variation. An interesting idea is 9

.

•

•

P-R3 10 N-R3, P-N

4! 7 1 1 PxP, PxP 12 N-R2, P-N5! 13 PxP, R-KNl 14 P-N5, PxP

15 B-K3, BxB 16 RxB, R-Rl with a Black initiative (Honfi-

26

Damjanovic, Sarajevo 1966).

7

• •

•

N-B3

Now if Black tries 7 ... P-R3 (with the above idea of

.

•

•

p-N4) 8 P-QR4, P-QR3 9 B-K3 (with the positional threat of

Pxp) leaves him dislocated.

8 R-Kl

Q:.Q.

Position after 8

.

.

. 0-0

•

This position is considered basic to this variation of

the Giuoco Piano. Black is somewhat cramped but is hold­

ing his own in the center. White has two fundamentally

different approaches in his quest for an advantage: the

Pawn-roller p-QR4 followed by p-QN4, etc. or the quieter

positional deployment with N-R3, unlimbering his Q-side

pieces. Often both methods are combined. In either case

it is difficult to demolish Black's solid fortress.

Recently this plan is more popular. Often 9 P-QR4, P­

QR3 are interpolated, with the following possibilities:

( 1) 10 N-R3, K-Rl 1 1 B-QS ( 1 1 N-B2, N-KNl 12 N-K3, B-R2

13 N-QS, Q-Ql is satisfactory for Black. Contedini-Euwe,

Leipzig 1960) PxP 12 PxP (better is 12 BxN, PxB 13 P-KS! )

N-QNS 13 B-N5, P-R3 14 B-R4, R-KN 1 15 B-QN3, p-N4 16 B-N3,

N-KK4 with a marked advantage (Paoli-Zuidema, Le Havre

1966.

27

(2) ID P-QN4, N-QI (if 10

•

•

•

P-R3 11 3-R3, N-Q2 12 P-fl5,

N-QI 13 QN-Q2, Q-B3 14 B-ro, N-K3 IS P-R5! Keres-Bernards,

1935; but Black can improve with 10 ... K-RI I I B-R3, PxP

12 PxP, NxKP 13 QN-Q2, p-B4. Klovan-Aronin, Sverdlovsk

1963) II B-R3, N-Q2 12 QN-Q2, Q-B3 13 N-BI, N-K3 14 N-K4

with slightly better prospects (Samarian-Czerniakov, 1948).

(3)

ID B-K3 (another try is ID B-KN5, P-R3 II B-K3, Q­

QI 12 B-Q3, R-KI 13 QN-Q2, B-R2 and Black is rock-solid.

Tarasch-Alekhine, Baden 1925) PxP (quite ap�ropriate nuw

to

give

up the

ceflter since 14 PxP, QxP is a questionable

gambit)

11

BxQP, NxB 12 PxN, B-K3 13 QN-Q2, N-R4 with a

good position (Christoffel-Smyslov, Groningen 1946).

9

.

.

•

K-RI

A healthy waiting move. Less favorable is the maneuver

9 ... N-QI ID B-BI, N-KI II N-B4, P-KB3 12 p-QR4 with a spat­

ial advantage (Tartakower-Euwe, Venice 1948).

The idea behind the text is to reinforce the center

with N-KNI and P-B3.

ID N-B2

A good retreat to reinforce the center.

Less energetic is ID B-BI, P-QR3 II N-B4, B-R2 12 Q-Q3,

N-KNI 13 N-K3, P-B3 (Castaldi-Blau, 195 1). Even possible

is ID B-BI, PxP I I NxP ( 1 1 PxP, NxKP) NxN 12 PxN, p-Q4!

•

Another try is ID B-KN5 (if ID B-N3, N-KNI II N-B4, N­

R4!) N-QI II B-R4, P-KR3 12 B-BI, p-N4 13 B-N3, N-KR4

with initiative (Callezo-Euwe, Gijon 195 1).

Weak is ID P-Q5 (closing the center is a victory for

Black's strategy) N-QI I I B-BI, P-B3 12 N-B4, B-B2=. Rag­

ozin-Panov, USSR Champ. 1948.

ID

If 10 ... N-KNI II N-K3 is hard to meet. The text prep­

ares

.

•

•

P-B3 guarding against an invasion on Black's Q4

square.

II

With the unpleasant menace of B-R3.

28

1 1

12 B-Bl

Naturally White avoids exchanges since they only ease

Black's congestion.

Inadvisable is the Pawn grab 12 PxP, PxP 13 NxP, BxRP

14 NxPch, NxN 15 PxB, N-K4!

Without sting is 12 B-Q3, N-Nl 13 N-K3, P-KB4 14 N-Q5,

Q-B2 with a fine setup (Rossol imo-Euwe, Gijon 195 1).

12

13 N-K3

N-Nl

P-KB3

Both sides have played well. White has a freer position

but no targets or points of entry. Bouwmeester-Euw., Dut­

ch Champ. 1952 continued: 15 P-B4, B-R4 ( 15 ... P-QB4 is a

possibility) 16 R-K2, N-B3 17 B-N2, PxP 18 NxQP, NxN 19
BxN with a slight spatial advantage.

2.

( 1 p-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4,

B-B4

4

P-B3, Q-K2 5 r-Q4, B-N3)

6

P-Q5

Position after 6 P-Q5

29

WH ITE'S I DEA is to gain a tempo and then shove his QP

again, bottling Biack

UjJ

at

the

cost

ef

a

Pawl'.

BLACK'S IDEA

is to

hold tight, snatch

everything

in

sight and aim for

�

favorable ending.

The intended Pawn sacrif ice p-QS-6 may hold more pro­

mise if preceded by 6 P-QR4, P-QR3

7

P-QS, examined under

subvariation "311•

6

•

•

•

6

... N-Nl also has its merits; then on 7 p-Q6, QxP (7 ...

PxP 8 N-R3, N-KB3 is also possible) 8 QxQ, PxQ 9 N-NS (if

9 N-R3, N-KB3 10 B-QS, NxB 1 1 PxN, P-B3 12 N-Q2, K-K2 13

N/2-B4, B-B2 Black is better. Bosch-Ahues, Bad Mauheim

1936) N-KR3 10 P-QR4, N-B3 (a position examined later is

reached with 10 .. . P-R3 11 B-QS) 11 P-QN4, P-B3 12 N-B3, N­

B2 13 P-RS, B-B2 14 N-R3 with some compensation for the

Pawn according to an analysis by Haberditz.

7

Consistent, although the positional 7 0-0 also comes

into consideration since the disadvantages of P-QS are

greatly offset by the miserable position of Black's QN.

On 7 P-QR4 White must reckon with BxPch 8 KxB, Q-BQch 9

B-K�, QxB 10 QN-Q2 with dubious compensation for his Pawn.

. ..

�

Not to

be ruled out is 7 .

.

. PxP 8 N-R3, N-KB3 9 Q-Q3,

P-QR3!

10

B-KNS, P-R3 11 BxN, QxB 12 R-Ql, B-B2 13 B-QS,

N-K3 with a good game (Medina-Alekhine, Gijon 1944).

8

�

Black has an easier time after 9 0-0, N-KB3 10 B-QS,

NxB 11 PxN, p-B4 12 N-R3, N-B2 (Alburt-Daskalov, Odessa

1968) .

•••

Also tenable is 9

•

•

•

B-B2.

30

10

White's compensation for the Pawn is not obvious. Per­

haps White shoul d first try 6 p-QR4 before entering this

1 i ne.

3.

(1 p-K4, p-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4,

B-B4 4 P-B3, Q-K2 5 p-Q4, B-N3)

6

Staking a claim for space on the Q-side. If first 6 B­

KN5, N-B3 7 p-QR4, P-Qk3 8 P-Q5, N-Ql 9 P-Q6, PxP is okay

for Black.

•

6

•

•

•

Making "luft" for the Bishop. As usual 6

•

•

•

PxP is ef­

fectively countered by 7 0-0.

7 P-Q5

N-Ql

Also possible is 7

•

•

•

N-Nl 8 P-Q6, PxP (better is 8

•

•

•

Qxp) 9 B-Q5 (or 9 N-N5, N-KR3 10 B-Q5, N-B3 11 N-QR3,

0-0 12 N-B4, B-82 13 N-KR3, �-B3 14 0-0, R-QNl 15 p-B4

with pressure for t�e Pawn. Heidenfeld-Byrne, Dublin

196B) N-KB3 10 B-N5. N-B3 11 N-R4 with good play (Kinzel­

eouwmeester, Vienna 1955.

8 P-Q6

After 8 0-0, P-03 9 QN-Q2, B-N5 10 B-K2, N-KB3 Euwe

claims that Black achieves approximate equality.

8 ...

QxP

Again 8 ... Pxp must not

be

ruled out.

By

trading Queens,

however, White's chance of ubtaining an initiativ� is dim­

inished.

9 QxQ

PxQ

31

10 B-Q5, N-KB3 1�2d5

to a

variation

previously examined.

1

0

•

•

•

6-B2

Also playable is

10

•

.

•

N-QB3 II B-QS, QN-K2 12 N-B4, B­

B2 13 P-QN3, N-B3 (Keres suggests 13

•

•

•

P-B4! ) 14 B-R3, NI

2xB IS PxN, NxP 16 NxPch, BxN 17 BxB, P-B3.

1 1 B-QS

N-QB3

12

•

•

•

QN-K2 can transpose into the above variation.

13 p-QN4

Less weakening is 13 P-QN3.

I ...

1

R-NI

N-R4

Black stands well (Estrin-Prokhorovich, Moscow 19S9).

All in all this Pawn sacrifice seems to give White an up­

hill struggle; it is not recommended.

11

(I P-K4, P-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4)

4

This quiet continuation contains no direct threat and

poses Black with few problems; yet White banks on his extra

move to wrest the advantage.

4 N-B3, N-B3 S P-Q3 transposes into the main line and

can also arise from the Four Knights' (I P-K4, P-K4 2 N­

KB3, N-QB3 3 N-B3, N-B3 4 B-B4, B-B4 S P-Q3).

Also without independent value is 4

0-0,

N-B3 (4

•

.

•

p­

Q3 S P-B3, B-KNS 6 p-Q4, PxP 7 Q-N3, Q-Q2 8 BxPch, QxB 9
QxP, K-Q2 la QxR, BxN 1 1 PxB, N-K4 12 N-Q2, NxPch 13 NxN,

QxN leads to perpetual check) S p-Q4! ? BxP! (inferior is

S

•

•

•

NxQP 6 NxP; and S

•

•

•

PxP transposes to the infamous Max

lange Attack of the Two Knights' Defense) 6 NxB, NxN (Str­

onger than 6

•

•

•

PxN 7 P-KS, F-Q4 8 PxN, PxB 9 PxP, R-KNI la

Q-RS, Q-B3 1 1 R-Klch with advantage) 7 p-B4 (if 7 B-KN5, P-

32

Q.3

8 .P-B4, Q-K2) P-Q3 8 PxP,

p)(p

9 B-KN5," B-K3 10 N-R3, Q­

�2

with advantage to Black.

Position after 4 P-Q3

•

WHITE'S IDEA is to complete his development before mas­

sing for control of the center with p-Q4.

BLACK'S IDEA is to maintain parity and meet each new

threat as it occurs.

4

•

•

•

N-B3

This Is customary, yet

used to prefer 4

•

•

•

P-Q3 fol­

lowed by

•

•

•

P-KR3 and

•

•

•

KN-K2, preparing an eventual break

wi th

•

•

•

P-KB4.

5 N-B3

This is undoubtedly the best post for the QN, yet 5 P­

B3 is also playable. Then on 5

•

•

•

P-Q3 (too loose is 5

•

•

•

p-Q4 6 PxP, NxP 7 0-0) 6 p-QN4 (or 6 p-QR4, P-QR3 7 N-R3,

p-Q4

8

PxP, NxP 9 B-N3, 0-0 10 N-B4, Q-B3 II 0-0, N-B5=.

Najdorf-Reshevsky, match 1952) B-N3 7 p-QR4, p-QR4 (more

flexible is

•

•

•

P-QR3) 8 P-N5, N-QNI 9 0-0, 0-0 10 B-N5, P­

R3 II B-R4, p-N4 12 B-KN3 (12 NxNP!7) B-N5 with active

play (Lutikov-van Scheltinga, Amsterdam 1968) .

5

P-Q3

33

The

Canal V�rietion is White's best chance for an ini­

tiative. Here

�r�

some other e�amp1es:

(1) 6 B-K3, B-N3 (6

•

•

•

Bx� 7

rxo,

N-Q��

8

B-�3, Nxb 9

RPxN, N-N5

10

Q-Q2,

p-A4

11

PxF,

Bx� 12

0-0, 0-0

13 P-�j

is slightly in White's favor. S�lwe-Schlechter, G�r1sbad

1907; if 6

•

•

•

0-0

Keres recomrrp.nds the �in with 7 B-k.r�5! )

7 Q-Q2, B-KN5 (simpler is 7

•

•

.

8-K3

8

&-QN5,

a-c) 8

N-KN5,

B-KRG

J

P-B3, P-KR3 (9

•

•

•

N-Q5 10 BxN, BxB 11 N-K2, B-QN3

12 N-N3, B-N3 13 P-KR4, P-KR3 14 P-k5! i� in White's fav­

or. Tchisorir,-Jano\l.!.ld, St. Petersburg 1900) 10 N-R3, N­

Q5 11

BxN,

&x� 12 N-r�l! (Tartukower�5 improvement over 1:

N-K2J B-QN3 13

0-0-0,

P-Q�! with initiative. lchigorin­

Janowski, Cambridge- Springs 1904) followed by KN-K2 \Jith

equa 1 play.

(2)

6

0-0

(this involves

White

in

a

troublEsome pin) B­

KN�!

7 B-K3 (if

J

P-KK3, 6-R4

-

but not 7

•

•

•

P-KR41

8

P�B,

PxP

9

N-KN5, p-N6 10 B-K.}) N-Q5

8

6xN, BxB 9 P-KR3, E:-R4,

and if

10

P-KN4, B�I� 11 QNPxB, NxNP! 12 PxIJ, BxP·with.3r>

attac� in the offing.

(�)

6 N-QR4, B-N3 7 NxB, kPyN

8

B-KN5, F-R3 9 B-R4,

0-0

1

0

P-KR3, Q-K2 with equal ity (Bf-nko-Pyt1akmJski, Marianske

Lazl1e 1951).

(4) 6 P-KR3, B-K3 (6

•

•

•

N-QR4 is also good)

7

N-Q5, BxN

a

PxB, N-K2 9 p-Q4 (another possibility i� 9 B-KN5, Q-Q2

10

BxN, P�B) PxP

le

NxP, N/3xP (also good is simply

In

•

•

.

0

-

0

·

11 &-KN5, N-N3) 11 BxN, NxB 12 N-B5, P-QB3 13 NxPch,

K-Q,2 l1t

0-0,

R-KNl and B1cJck seizes the initiative (Kov­

acs-Keres, Budapest 1970).

See diagram at tup of next page.

34

Position after 6 B-KNS

6

•

•

•

P-KR3

Putting the question to the Bishop. Other repl ies a'so

come into serious consideration.

( I)

Probably the simplest way to take the sting out of

'Jhite's fulminant attack is 6

•

•

•

N-QR4 7 BxN (harmless is

7

N-QS, NxB

8

PxN, P-B3 - not

8

•

•

•

BxPch 9 K-K2! - 9 NxNch,

PxN

la B-R4 [or la B-K3, Q-N3 11 Q-Q2, B-K3 12

0-0-0, 0-0

-0=.

Korchnoi-Bronstein, USSR Champ. 19S2] R-KNl 11

0-0,

S-K3 El iskases-Brownstein, Mar Del Plata 1960) QxB [on 7

.

•

•

PxB

8

N-KR4, NxB 9 PxN, P-B4 la NxP, BxN 11 PxB, Q-RS

:2 Q-B3! QxP 13 QxP is better for White Cortlever-Trifun­

Qvic, Holland vs. Yugoslavia 19S0}

8

N-QS, Q-Ql 9 P-QN4,

NxB

10

PxB, P-QB31 (After 1

0

•

•

•

N-R4 11 Q-Q2 White is freer)

11 PxN, PxN 12 BPxQP/S (nothing is gained by 12 BPxQP/6,

PxBP 13 NxP? Q-R4ch followed by QxN; or if 12 QxP, Q-R4ch

13 K-Bl, QxBP 14 QxQ, PxQ IS NxP, B-K3 is satisfactory for

Black) Q-R4ch 13 Q-Q2, QxBP 14

0-0, 0-0

IS QR-Nl, P-QN3

and Black has the better Pawn formation as well as a Bis­

hop against a Knight (Blau-Euwe, Lenzerheide 19S6) .

(2) 6

•

•

•

B-KNS (this symmetrical reaction is not comple­

tely adequate 7 N-QS, N-QS

8

P-B3! (White gets nothing with

8

BxN, BxN 9 BxQ, BxQ la BxP, BxP) NxNch 9 PxN, B-K3 la P­

Q4 with a pu 11

•

(3) 6

•

•

•

B-K3 7 N-QS (stronger than 7 B-NS, P-KR3

8

B­

KR4, B-QNS) BxN

8

BxB, P-KR3 9 BxN, QxB la P-B3,

0-0

with

deadeye equal ity (Tartakower-Vidmar, Carlsbad 1911) .

3S

BJ<N

The

retre�t

7

8-

K3

results

In los� of tine.

And if 7 B-R4,

P-KN4

8

B-KN3

(8

N:xNF!�

fxN

9 BxP,

R-KNI

10

P-KR4,

B-�3 1I Q

-

8

3

,

R-N3

hclds t�e

pIece),

B-KN5 with

Initiative.

�

8

£CQ.l

'Tempting

but

risky

is 8 ... Q

-

N

3

9

Q-K2!

(not

9

NxPch,

K-Ql le NxR,

QxNP

II R-KBI, B

-K

N

S

)

B-KN5

ID P-B3

(again

dangerous is

10

N:xPch, K-Q2 11 NxR, N-QS

12 Q-QT, RxN

1

3

fJxB, Q-N7) 8-N3

11

p-QR4, P-KB4

(no

better

is ll

•

•

•

N-R4 12

e-R2,

p-QB4 13 p-R3)

12

N-B4

(Keres

recommends

1

2

F-QN4)

Q-F2 13

N-K6,

PxP

14

QxP, QxQth

15

PxQ, R-R2!

and white

t1as

trouble

with his

ventureSVrTI€ Knight

(111

K6

(Foltys-Ker­

es,

Munich 1936)

•

•

Position after

9 P-B3

9

.

• ,

N-K2

The

�)st

usual

reply, yet

Black has several

other

ac­

ceptable

continuations

at

his disposal.

(1)

9

.

•

•

P-R3

10

p

-

Q

4

(more logical than 10

p

-

Q

N

4 ,

8-R2

It

P-QR4,

B-K3

1

2 Q-N3, 0-0

13

N-K 3,

Q-Q2=.

Cortlever­

Flores, Dubrovnik

1950)

PxP 11 PxP, e-R2

12

P

-

KR3

,

0-0 13

36

0-0, B-K3 14 R-QB1, N-R4! and Black's two Bishops stand

him in good stead.

(2) 9

.

•

•

0-0 (inferior) 10 p-QN4! B-N3 11 P-QR4, P-R3·

12 NxB, PxN 13 P-R3 with the better Pawn structure.

(3) 9

•

•

•

P-QR4 (also inferior) 10 p-Q4, B-R2 (if 10

•

•

•

PxP 11 PxP, B-R2 12 P-KR3, 0-0 13 0-0, B-K3 14 R-QB1 Black

is

deprived of the essential freeing maneuver

.

.

•

N-R4) 11

PxP, PxP (also advantageous for White is 11

•

•

•

NxP 12 NxN,

PxN 13 Q-R5) 12 Q-K2, B-QB4 13 0-0-0 with advantage (Tar­

takower-Treyba1, Car1sbad 1929) .

(4) 9

•

•

•

B-K3 (the weakest alternative) 10 p-Q4, PxP 11

PxP, B-N5ch (not 11

•

•

•

B-N3? 12 NxB, RPxN 13 P-Q5, N-R4 14

B-Q3 winning a piece; also unsatisfactory is 11

•

•

•

N-R4 12

PxB, NxB 13 Q-R4ch) 12 NxB, BxB 13 NxN, PxN 14 Q-B2 gain-

ing a Pawn.

•

(5) 9

•

•

•

N-R4 is similar to note (1) on 6

•

•

•

P-KR3.

10

Other moves also give White little hope for an advant-

age.

(1) 10 p-Q4, PxP (simpler is 10

•

•

•

NxN 11 PxB, N-B5 12

B-N5ch, B-Q2 13 BxBch, QxB 14 P-KN3, N-K3=. Tartakower­

Fine, Hastings 1935/6) 11 NxP (another try is 11 PxP, B­

N3 12 NxB, RPxN 13 Q-N3) NxN 12 BxN, 0-0=. Tartakower­

Rubinstein, Budapest 1929.

(2) 10 N-K3, 0-0 (dubious is 10

•

•

•

B-K3 11 BxB, PxB 12

Q-N3, Q-B1 13 p-Q4, PxP 14 NxP!

Capab1anca-E1iskases,

Moscow 1936) 11 0-0, B-N3 12 p-Q4, N-N3 with a solid pos­

it ion (Keres) .

10

•

•

•

�

Squelching any hope for a White edge after 10

.

•

•

B-N3 11

NxB, RPxN 12 p-Q4, PxP 13 NxP, 0-0 14 0-0, N-B3 (or B-Q2) =.

11 PxB

12

N-

White has nothing. The whole variation does not offer

him anything attractive.

37

III

(1

p-K4, P-K4 2 N-KB3, N-QB3 3 B-B4, B-B4)

4

An unusual gambit which does not offer White much pro­

mise.

Position after 4 P-Q4

WHITE'S IDEA is to give up a-Pawn but profit from the

open .1 i nes for a qu i ck attack.

BLACK'S I"DEA is to hold the Pawn without giving White

adequate compensation for it.

If

•

•

•

Crossing White up.

There can be a transposition into the Scotch Game with

4

•

• •

Pxp S P-B3 (on

so-a,

P-Q3 is adequate, whi le S

•

•

•

N­

B3 transposes into the Two Knights' Defense) PxP 6 NxP (6

BxPch, KxB 7 Q-QSch, K-Bl

8

QxBch, Q-K2

9

QxQch, KNxQ

la

NxP, p-Q4! leads to equality Schlechter-Spielmann, Baden

1914)

P-Q3 7 B-KNS, KN-K2 (also good is 7

•

•

•

P-B3)

8

N-QS

with some attacking chances for the Pawn; if

8

•

•

•

P-B3

(8

•

•

•

0

-

0

9

0-0,

B-K3

10

N-B6ch! is dangerous)

9

BxP! PxB

la

NxPch, K-Bl

11

Q-Bl retains the initiative.

3

8

NxB

6 p-B4

NxN

More energetic than 6

•

•

•

P-Q3 which is examined in Var­

iation

" 1 111

in the note to· 4 P-Q3.

8

B-Bl

Unsound is

9

PxP, Q-N7 10 QxN (10 R-B 17 NxPch) QxRch,

etc.

Black has an enduring initiative (Fahrni-Spielmann,

Baden

1914).

If

1

0 B-Q3, P-K5.

39