WINNING

By

Nigel Short

Quality Chess
www.qualitychess.co.uk
 Contents
This contents page has been abridged to fit into one page. The full contents pages in the book detail
Short’s games in each tournament round by round.

Foreword by Peter Svidler 3

Introduction 9

1 My Lucky Number 1 13
Wijk aan Zee 1987

2 Don’t Stop Me Now 73

Reykjavik 1987

3 We are the Champions 117

Amsterdam 1991

4 Happy 161
Tallinn/Parnu 1998

5 Bulls on Parade 219

Pamplona 1999-2000

6 An der Schönen, Blauen Donau 263

Budapest 2003

7 China Girl 305

Taiyuan 2004

8 A Hard Day’s Night 343

Anzali 2016

Name Index 410

Opening Index 414
Index of Opponents 416
 Introduction
This is my first book, and it has taken a global pandemic for me to write it.

Some of you may be puzzled by this statement. Dozens of tomes have been published about me,
and in a few of them, I have even been listed as the author. While it is true that I have composed,
with pleasure, many hundreds of newspaper and magazine articles, I must confess that all books
with my name on the cover – and with profound apologies to those who bought them – were all
ghost-written.
All, that is, except an old, theoretical treatise of unexceptional quality called simply: The French
Defence.
The story of that monograph is quite interesting, as it negatively affected my attitude towards
chess publishers for decades afterwards. In the late 1980s, I was approached by the veteran New
Zealand International Master, Bob Wade, to write a pamphlet on the French Defence, for a series
on opening trends that he was producing with his chum, Hilary Thomas (best known, at the
time, as an author of the collected games of Mikhail Tal).
As I was then one of the strongest players in the world, it was undoubtedly a coup for the
publisher that I accepted; particularly as the pay was rather modest. I asked Bob how long he
thought it would take. He answered, somewhat optimistically, as it would transpire: “About a
weekend.”
To my great surprise, I was then handed paper printouts of over 2,000 games, asked to arrange
the material and, if possible, add some deep and meaningful comments. If I had not been
concerned about the deforestation of the Amazon prior to that moment, I certainly was thereafter.
More than a tad suspiciously, I began work on this project, and it was quickly confirmed
that I had been totally duped. It was a Sisyphean task, barely distinguishable from slave labour.
After a couple of weeks, and more, I was nowhere near finishing the job. Having been so grossly
misled, I submitted an incomplete manuscript, albeit with a strange, irrational feeling of guilt,
and informed Bob that was all he was going to get.
When The French Defence duly appeared in print, it was not a pamphlet of no more than 60
pages, as the contract specified, but a whole book! I generally got on pretty well with Bob, but
this was the only time I was really annoyed with him. However, he had such a bumbling affable
manner, I was never quite sure how much of the blame for this deception was his, or that of his
business partner, and so I forgave him.

Since this incident, I had always harboured suspicions about Hilary Thomas being a somewhat
unscrupulous character. This hunch was confirmed in 2017, when Thomas, who by this time
had changed his name to Richard Pentreath, was jailed for 35 years for attempting to burn down
the house of a woman in revenge for having testified against him in a rape trial. In fact, he had
10 Nigel Short – Winning

the wrong address, having apparently been led astray – as many of us have, in hopefully different
circumstances – by Google Maps.
Thankfully, no one was hurt. The innocent victims of this dastardly deed – a single mother and
her child who were alone in the house – became aware of the blaze and escaped unscathed.
Absurd and egocentric as it is, I like to think that Hilary Thomas’ lengthy custodial sentence
was due to bad karma from the earlier publishing incident, rather than the proximate cause of
rape, arson and attempted murder.

The format of Winning is highly unusual. Indeed, I believe it is unique in the vast literature
of chess. Rather than attempting to squeeze my entire career into a single volume, and failing
miserably, or produce an entertaining, but grossly distorted, “best games” selection, in which I
might con you into believing that I am a brilliant player; I have chosen instead to focus in detail
on eight tournaments spanning several decades. Each a case study if you will.
The happy coincidence that I won all these events satisfies the author’s vanity, but at the same
time I hope the inclusion of each partie, in order, will also serve a useful and instructive purpose.
For it is only by examining all the games from a tournament that one gets a proper appreciation
of how an event unfolded.
The selection is subjective and can by no means be described as the definitive list of my eight
greatest tournament victories; although it also includes some of those. These are basically just
some events that I am proud of in one way or another. As I have won over 70 tournaments,
I could easily have chosen others. With the exception of the Anzali tournament (Chapter 8),
which featured the rather rare Scheveningen System format, all the events contained herein were
round-robins. This was a deliberate choice, as I am intending (if the book sells) that matches and
open tournaments will be covered separately in future editions.

No doubt my editor, the renowned trainer, Jacob Aagaard, would have preferred the structure of
this particular tome to be more thematic and didactic, but it is not really how my brain works.
That is probably why I rarely read chess books from beginning to end, preferring to start in the
middle, when I have found something of interest, and then constantly hopping backwards and
forwards, batrachian-style. If I were organised, I would have become an accountant, but thankfully
I am not. If there is any method to this apparent madness, I do not know, but perhaps, as a
consequence of this haphazard process, I have become a firm believer in the value of eclecticism.
Knowledge can be gleaned from many sources.

The quality of games ranges from the exceptional to the utterly dire. It is a typical human failing
that while we all admire our own genius, we tend to brush bad experiences under the carpet. One
of the best ways to improve is to examine one’s own failings in a dispassionate, objective manner,
without resorting to masochism. Self-loathing is rarely good for anything.
Unfortunately, I only acquired proficiency in the art of analysis relatively late (if, indeed, I ever
really succeeded at all) and this deficiency has undoubtedly hampered my career.

I hope, first and foremost, that the reader finds this book enjoyable. For a book that spends all of
its life on the shelf is, frankly, worthless.
 Introduction 11

Secondly, I hope you find it instructive. I used some material from this book for an online
lecture that I gave in 2020. Irina Krush, who had organised the event and was an enthusiastic
participant, told me that she found my comments inspiring and that they helped her win the US
Women’s Championship a short while later.
Such a strong player as Irina is more than capable of winning the national championship
without the slightest assistance from me, as she has proven previously, but I am nevertheless
thankful for her flattering words. I owe her a debt of gratitude, as she spurred me to finish the
project, which had ground to a halt.

One final note: Winning contains a handful of short draws. It is not something I am greatly proud
of, but they are a part of the narrative. If you want, just skip them completely: you will not suffer
great loss, as you will still have more material than in Bobby Fischer’s My 60 Memorable Games.

Nigel Short
Athens, 2021

Acknowledgements
Many thanks to my wife, Rhea, for the constant encouragement to write this book.

To my son, Nicholas, for providing translations from Dutch for Chapters 1 & 3.

And to my daughter, Kyveli, for being a brilliant film producer.

My dear friend Peter Svidler was extremely kind to agree to write the foreword. Other people may
know him as the eight-time Russian Chess Champion. I know him as Russia’s foremost expert
on cricket.

Thanks to Douglas Griffin, Johann Hjartarson and Shohreh Bayat for helping with the photos.

John Upper, from Canada, generously provided a little computer-checking of my endgame

against Judit Polgar, from Pamplona (page 221).

Last, but not least, special thanks to my editor and publisher, Jacob Aagaard, for not suing me
when I failed to hand the manuscript in on time.
Chapter 2
Don’t Stop Me Now

Reykjavik 1987

Round 1 Nigel Short – Ljubomir Ljubojevic 75

Round 2 Viktor Korchnoi – Nigel Short 81
Round 3 Nigel Short – Jon Loftur Arnason 87
Round 4 Margeir Petursson – Nigel Short 91
Round 5 Nigel Short – Helgi Olafsson 94
Round 6 Nigel Short – Jan Timman 98
Round 7 Lajos Portisch – Nigel Short 102
Round 8 Nigel Short – Johann Hjartarson 104
Round 9 Lev Polugaevsky – Nigel Short 109
Round 10 Nigel Short – Mikhail Tal 113
Round 11 Simen Agdestein – Nigel Short 114
74 Nigel Short – Winning

In cricket, it is well known that even the best batsmen are often dismissed for low scores. That is
why it is important, when striking the ball sweetly, to go on to make a landmark; at least a 50 or,
better still, a century.
But the greatest batsmen are even greedier. Graham Gooch, who for a long time held the record
for the most number of runs by an England cricketer, spoke about the importance of making
“Daddy hundreds” – i.e. really huge scores. You never know if or when you will have the chance
again. So when you are in “the zone”, make the most of your opportunity. Plunder the bowling
until your boots overflow. And then some more.
Reykjavik 1987 is to me a source both of pride and regret. It is undoubtedly one of my
finest victories. But I know it could have been much better still, perhaps +7 or even more, in a
world-class field. I have only myself to blame for losing concentration when so far in front.

A word or two about the country: Iceland was a quite different place back in the 1980s. Rather
off the beaten track, and before budget flights made it a popular destination for those seeking a
different holiday experience than the usual sun and sand.
It was pricey, and alcohol was ridiculously expensive. I liked to joke that you had to take out
a second mortgage before buying a round of drinks. Laughter eased the pain in your wallet.
Extortionate cost, however, did not seem to stop the locals from getting hammered regularly.
Curiously, beer was banned at the time, but wine was legal – a legacy of an old trade deal with
Spain. And for one day a week, there was no television at all.

It was nevertheless an excellent place to play chess. The game appears frequently in Icelandic
sagas and, at the distinct risk of causing a cultural war of words between Iceland and Norway, it is
perhaps also the birthplace of the Lewis Chessmen – the exquisite walrus ivory and whale tooth
Viking carvings, placed in the British Museum and the National Museum of Scotland.
In 1958, Fridrik Olafsson qualified for the Candidates Tournament, becoming a Grandmaster
and national hero in the process. And, of course, the 1972 World Championship Match, in
Reykjavik, between Bobby Fischer and Boris Spassky, was arguably the most important chess
event of all time. It caused a great boom among the populace. The generation of Icelanders
who achieved the remarkable result of 5th place at the 1986 Dubai Olympiad, and who were
participating in this tournament, owed much to that seminal event.
 Chapter 2 – Don’t Stop Me Now 75

Round 1 19.02.1987

Nigel Short – Ljubomir Ljubojevic

Reykjavik, Sicilian Defence, Najdorf Variation

It was my second occasion to be facing Ljubo in just a few weeks – this time with colours reversed.
I was buoyed by my previous win. I had suffered at his hands as a teenager, when starting my
international career, but henceforth felt I could face him with confidence.

1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥e3 e6 7.f3


Ç 
Æ 
Å  
Ä    
à   
Â   
Á 
À 
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
Given that I had defeated Garry Kasparov just two months earlier with the same variation,
which later became known as the English Attack, it was understandable that I should wish to try
it again.

7...¥e7
This is not the place to give a modern theoretical survey of a line which was then very much
in its infancy. Suffice it to say that the plan adopted by Ljubojevic – castling short and thereby
presenting a clear object of attack – is over-committal.
Experience has demonstrated it is more flexible to first expand on the queenside, oft combined
with a counter-strike in the centre (e.g. ...b5-b4 followed by ...d6-d5), and also more effective.

8.£d2 b5 9.g4 ¥b7 10.0–0–0 0–0 11.h4 ¤c6

76 Round 1 Nigel Short – Ljubomir Ljubojevic

 In the long term, Black may very well be unable

Ç   to enjoy his bishops, on account of being dead.
Æ  14...d5
Å  Immediately attempting to exploit that
Ä    the knight no longer covers the d5-square.
However, Black’s modest development
à   and tactical vulnerability mean that this is
Â    ineffective. His position is already unpleasant.

Á   14...¤e5 15.¤d4 ¥b7 16.h5 ¦c8, threatening

À  17...¤xf3, was arguably better. But even here,
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ 17.£g2! maintains a strong initiative.
12.¤xc6! 
An important decision, thwarting, for the Ç  
moment, one of Black’s main plans, which is
to bring the knight to c4, via e5 or b6. If left Æ 
there unmolested, Black’s attack often assumes Å 
alarming proportions with great alacrity.
Ä  
12...¥xc6 13.g5 ¤d7 14.¤e2!? Ã   
A prepared novelty – John Nunn’s suggestion,
if I recall – and a pretty good one at that.
Â   
From d4 the white knight performs multiple Á 
functions: defending f3 while attacking c6 and À 
probing e6.
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
15.¤d4
But it is by no means the only way to proceed. More accurate was 15.h5!, so as to meet
Even the crude: 14.h5 ¤e5 15.f4 ¤g4 15...dxe4? with the crushing 16.h6!, with
 multiple threats. Especially £d2-c3!, forking
Ç   g7 and c6. Black is in deep trouble.
Æ   15...¥b7 16.¥h3?!
Å  Having just mentioned the importance of
Ä   the c4-square, it should be clear why this move
à   is wrong. But poor strategic decisions are often
Â     made, not because of lack of understanding,
Á   but because of an inability to calculate
correctly.
À 
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ In this case, I failed to see that 16.h5 e5 17.¤f5
16.¦g1 ¤xe3 17.£xe3, disdaining long-term d4 could have been well met by 18.¦g1!, with
considerations, like the bishop pair, had its a clear advantage, thanks to a pin down the
merits. The attack is already highly accelerated. d-file.
 Chapter 2 – Don’t Stop Me Now 77

 
Ç   Ç  
Æv Æ 
Å   Å  
Ä   Ä   
à  N  à   
Â  b Â   
Á   Á  
À   À 
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
16...¤e5! White’s pieces are ready. It is time to roll the
Obviously not 16...dxe4? 17.¤xe6 fxe6 dice.
18.£xd7 and Black will lose material.
21.¤xe6! ¦fe8?
Also after 16...e5? 17.¤f5 d4 18.¥xd4, Black This wildly optimistic move is absolutely
is not long for this world. fatal. By now, however, Black’s path to any sort
of safety is extremely narrow, and neither of
17.£e1?! us saw it.
The stronger 17.f4 would have reduced
Black’s options. After the obvious 21...fxe6 22.¥xe6† ¢h8
23.¦d7, comes the crossroad:
17...¤c4
The easiest path to equality lay in 17...¥c5!

18.f4 ¥xd4 19.¥xd4 ¤f3 20.£e3 ¤xd4 Ç   
21.¦xd4 £a5 22.a3 dxe4 23.¥g2 and Black Æ 
has been allowed to solve his problems. Å  
Ä   
18.f4 ¤xe3 19.£xe3 £a5
I thought this move was inaccurate at the
à   
time, but it is perfectly playable, and indeed Â    
best. Á  
À  
A less precarious practical alternative is ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
19...£b6 20.e5 ¥c5 with chances both ways. a) The first idea to calculate is: 23...¥c8
White may also try 20.g6!?, but the outcome 24.¦xe7
is not very clear.

20.¢b1 dxe4
The consistent continuation. 20...£b6 just
loses a tempo compared to the previous line.
78 Round 1 Nigel Short – Ljubomir Ljubojevic

a1) The critical move is 24...£b4. After 28...¦f7 29.¦d4 £e6

 
Ç    
Æ     
Å     
Ä     
à      
Â      
Á    
À    
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
At this point I had intended to simply keep 30.¦xe4 £d5 31.h5 White has a winning
a solid positional edge with 25.¥d5, which is attack for no material investment.
reason enough to enter the variation.
a2) Objectively better is 24...£d8 25.£c5
But the brilliant 25.¦xg7!! simply blows Black ¥xe6 26.¦xe6 ¦xf4 27.£e5, although White
away. After 25...¢xg7 26.a3! wins on the spot. keeps a serious pull.
e.g. 26...£d6 27.£c3† ¢g6 28.h5#
25...¥xe6 is thus the most tenacious. b) Only 23...£b4! comes close to maintaining
26.a3! overloads the black queen, which the balance.
can only prevent her counterpart coming 
with devastating effect to the long diagonal Ç   
by engaging in ultimately unsuccessful
contortions. 26...¥a2†! Best. Black cannot
Æ 
allow the queen to enter the diagonal. (Both Å  
26...£c4 27.b3 £c6 28.£d4 and 26...£d6 Ä   
27.£c3 are hopeless.) Ã   
 Â    
Ç    Á  
Æ    À  
Å    ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
Ä    24.a3! (24.¦xb7 ¥c5 would give Black
à    counterplay) 24...£c5 25.£xc5 ¥xc5 26.¦xb7
¦xf4 27.¢a2 Black still has a few problems to
Â     solve, despite the simplifications. But he would
Á   be over the worst.
À  
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
27.¢a1! The only way! (27.¢xa2? £c4† would
give Black a free tempo and drop the rook.)
27...£c4 28.¦d7! Black is just too tangled.
 Chapter 2 – Don’t Stop Me Now 79

 
Ç  Ç  
Æ  Æ  
Å  
Å   Ä   
Ä    Ã   
à    Â    
Â    Á  
Á   À 
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
À  White mates with 26.¦xh7† ¢xh7 27.£h3†
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ ¢g6 28.£f5† ¢h5 29.¦h1#.
22.h5!
Of course, White will not retreat! 22...¥f8 23.¤xf8 ¦xf8 24.h6 is just hopeless.
22.¤d4? £b6 leaves Black firmly on top.
23.¦d7 ¥c6
But to give you an idea just how utopian After 23...¥b6 White is winning with both
Black’s strategy has been, even 22.¤xg7! ¢xg7 24.£b3 ¥c6 25.¤d8!, and 25.¦xf7 ¢xf7
23.f5 is crushing, due to the breakthrough: 26.¤d8† ¢e7 27.¤xc6†, forking the royals.
23...¥f8 24.f6† ¢g8 
 Ç 
Ç 
Æ  Æ 
Å    Å 
Ä    Ä  
à    à   
Â    Â   
Á  
À  Á  
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ À  
25.g6! hxg6 26.h5 I didn’t consider this. But ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
to be honest, this should come as no surprise. 24.£d4
With just a dark-squared bishop protecting the The simplest, but for those who enjoy
king, it is no wonder that Black cannot survive complications, I should add that 24.¦xf7!
with all these open lines and a white army ¢xf7 25.£b3! ¢e7 26.¤xg7 is completely
ready to fight for the light squares. winning as well.

22...¥d8 24...¥f6
The key tactical point is that after 22...fxe6 Black has to try something. After 24...¦xe6
23.¥xe6† ¢h8 (23...¢f8 24.h6 makes no 25.¥xe6 ¥xd7 26.£xd7 fxe6, White has the
difference) 24.h6! ¥f8 25.hxg7† ¥xg7: undeniable option 27.£e8#.
80 Round 1 Nigel Short – Ljubomir Ljubojevic

25.gxf6 ¥xd7 26.£xd7

Also 26.£g1! was strong.

26...£b6 27.¤xg7 ¦ed8 28.£g4 ¢h8


Ç   
Æ  
Å   
Ä  
à  
Â   
Á  
À  
ÈÉÊËÌÍÎÏ
29.¤e8!
A pleasing interference. And a great start to
the tournament.
1–0

Short, Ljubojevic, Timman,

Polugaevsky and a nice lady