GAMBITS

YAKOV ESTRIN

World Correspondence Chess Champion

197S - 1980

Translated From The Russian By

Jim Marfia

1982

Coraopolis, Pennsylvania

Chess Enterprises, Inc.

© Copyright 1982, Chess Enterprises, Inc,

ISBN 0-931462-20-7

Editor: B. G. Dudley

Cover Design : E. F. Witalis, Jr.

Witalis Burke Associates, Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA

This book was translated from an original manuscript

which has not been published in the Soviet Union.
 Instead of a Foreword

The history of chess consists of more than just the World Championship
matches; it 1s also the struggle between theoretical schools of thought and di­
rection - the battle of ideas. Replacing the early Italian School of the begin­
ning of the 17th Century, whose foremost proponent was Gioacchino Greco,
in the latter half of the 18th Century came the teaching of the Frenchman
Andre Danican Philidor, who may be considered the first chess strategist.
The Italian School was characterized by its striving for the open game,
wherein the forces of both sides come into close contact in the opening. It
was, in fact, the 17th Century that gave birth to the so-called Gambit Strategy
- playing for quick development of one's pieces, for the sake of which one
sacrifices pawns, even pieces.
After the First International Tournament of London, 1851, the chess
world fell under the influence of the Romantic Movement: the Combinative
School of Adolf Anderssen. It was, for all practical purposes, a further devel­
opment, on a new, and better-developed basis, of the ideas of the Italian
School.
The next major influence on chess minds was that of Wilhelm Steinitz, the
first official World Champion, and the founder of the new Positional School.
The natural question then arises: is it worth the chessplayer's time, in our
day, to study gambits? It is, undoubtedly; and here's why. First of all, play­
ing gambits shows the chessplayer a wealth of tactical ideas, aiding in the de­
velopment of his combinative acuity. Additionally land this is most impor­
tant), playing gambits helps shape the chessplayer's character, teaching him to
understand the dynamics of play, and not to fear giving up material.
Only by playing gambits will the chessplayer begin to understand that get·
ting active positions, with the possibility of landing combinative shots will
compensate him for the material _ sacrificed
The path followed by the chess player in his development will thus repeat
the historical path followed by the art of chess itself. Its starting point is com­
binational creativity, on whose basis thereafter was laid the art of positional
play. The development of a chessplayer's combinative feel is best aided pre­
cisely by those openings in which the opposing sides come into close contact
at a very early stage of the game - that is, tactical play.
Occasionally, the evolution of an opening system leads to the conviction
that its positional plans and tactical possibilities are exhausted, and the natu­
ral tries to enliven the game lead nowhere. As a result, that opening system is
considered to have been studied through and through, and a categorical eval­
uation is affixed But toiling analysts do not always follow these evaluations,
preferring instead to search for the gambit solution, the brave and unexpected
sacrifice. In this manner, sometimes an opening variation is "exploded", rad­
ically altering the existing evaluation.
The all-important prerequisite of such a combinative "blast", its positional
3
basis, is the lead in development. And one means of bringing about such an
advantage in the opening is to employ gambits.
What is a gambit? The word "gambit" comes from the Italian expression,
Dare ii gambetto,: '·to trip up". The "tripping·' consists of sacrificing a pawn
or even a piece in the opening, so that one side, in the interests of quicker de­
velopment, may gain time, creating favorable conditions for combinative play
and attacks on the enemy position. To put it another way: at the price of a
sacrifice in the opening, one side attempts to change the character of the game
sharply in his favor.
Gambits can either be accepted - when the chessplayer meets his oppo­
nent's intentions head-on and accepts the proffered material - or declined.
Sometimes, one also sees the so-called countergambits, when the chessplayer
meets a proffered gambit by sacrificing a pawn himself.
In the open positi:>ns that arise from gambit openings, the struggle be­
comes exceptionally fierce. A single tempo becomes immensely significant,
and each move requires a momentous decision. Constant pr\lctice in gambit
openings leads to the expansion of the creative horizons of the chessplayer,
teaching him to combine in the game's early stages.
Gambit systems have received a lot of development in our day; they occur
in all kinds of openings. The internal makeup of gambit systems has become
deeper and more varied, thanks to the fact that they now embrace the whole
gamut of strategic and tactical ideas, sometimes totally new and original ones.
Gambit play always wins the appreciation of those who love chess by its pret­
ty and surprising combinations, its energetic attacks, and its unique romanti·
cism.
The best players in the world have, in their day, employed gambit systems;
and they still com:inue to do so. Present-day theory numbers many gambits,
per se, but this does not exhaust all the gambit systems. Even in the Ruy Lo­
pez, apparently so quiet, there is a whole slew of classical gambit lines.
This work will acquaint the reader, in broad outline, with the gambit open­
ings which occur in current practice. It is based on a standard openings se­
quence, and uses complete games as examples to demonstrate the methods of
playing the attack. The author has not set himself the task of hacking through
the debris of all the possible variations; such a work would have taken too
much space. Rather, the particular gambit systems and the few examples of
them we shall study in this book should serve as a sort of prologue, helping
the chessplayer to steer through the boundless sea of variations, to evaluate
them critically, and to select according to his own taste the ones which he
will then begin to use in tournaments.

J. Estrin

4
 Contents

Irregular Openings 7
Latvian Gambit 9
King's Gambit 10
Falkbeer Countergambit 11
Urusov Gambit 15
Danish Gambit 19
Scotch Gambit 21
Scotch Game 27
Giuoco Piano 28
Evans Gambit Accepted 36
Evans Gambit Declined 39
Two Knights' Defense 40
Max Lange Attack 43
Wilkes-Barre Variation 46
Ruy Lopez 47
Marshall Attack 58
Rabinovich's Gambit 59
Alekhine's Defense 67
Caro- Kann Defense 68
French Defense 70
Sicilian Defense 74
Queen's Gambit 81
English Opening 85

s
 Irregular Openings

This is the name given to all openings which are so rarely met in practice,
that they have no accepted name.
1 e4 es
2 Nf3 dS

Diagram 1

White attacks Black's central pawn; Black, in tum, rather than defend it,
tries to wrest the initiative by means of a central counterattack. Practice has
shown that this counterattack is insufficient for equality.
This was the continuation in the game Boleslavsky-Lilienthal (Match-Tour­
nament for the Absolute Championship of the USSR, 1941):
3 NxeS
Another possible continuation is 3 ed e4 4 Qe2 Nf6 5 d3 Be7 6 de 0-0 7
Nc3 Re8 8 Bd2!, and Black does not have compensation for the two pawns he
has sacrificed.
3 .... Qe7
After 3 ... de 4 Bc4 Qg5 5 Bxf7t Ke7 6 d4 Qxg2 7 Rfl Bh3 8 Bc4 Nf6 9
Bf4 Nbd7 10 Nc3, White's position would also be clearly better, in view of the
unfortunate position of the enemy king.
4 d4 f6
S Nd3 dxe4
6 Nf4 Qf7
7 Nd2I BfS
8 g4 Bg6
9 Bc4 Qd7
10 Qe2 Qxd4
After making nothing but queen moves, Black is now far behind in develop­
ment, and in serious trouble. White now achieves a decisive advantage without
much trouble:
11 Ne6 Qb6
12 Nxe4 Nd7
13 Bf4 NeS
14 0-0-0
7
 Although we are not even out of the opening, Black's game is hopeless -
something that rarely happens in games between grandmasters.
14 Bf7
15 N4g51 fxg5
16 Bxe5 Bxe6
17 Bxc71
Black resigned, since after 17... Q)(.c7 18 Q)(.e6t it is mate next move.

1 e4 es
2 Nf3 f6

Diagram 2 After 2...f6

This defense of the center pawn is also unsatisfactory. White can continue
favorably with 3 Bc4 now, seizing the important a2-g8 diagonal, but the fol­
lowing knight sacrifice is considerably more spectacular:
3 Nxe51 Qe7
Accepting the sacrifice, 3...fxeS , leads to a loss after 4 QhSt Ke7 (if 4... g6,
then 5 Q)(.e5t and 6 Q)(.h8) S QxeS t Kf7 6 Bc4t dS 7 Bxd5t Kg6 8 h4 h6 9
Bxb7 Bd6 10 QaS, when Black must lose a rook, since 10...Bxb7? is answered
by 11 Qf5 mate.
4 Nf3 d5
After 4. ..Q)(.e4t 5 Be2, followed by 6 0-0 and 7 Nc3, White is also consid-
erably ahead in development.
5 d3 dxe4
6 dxe4 Qxe4t
7 Be2 Nc6
After 7•.. Bf5 White could play 8 0-0! Qxc2 9 Qel Be7 10 Nc3 Nc6 11 Bb5,
with a tremendous attack.
8 0-0 Bd7
9 Nc3 Qf5
9...Qg6? would be an error, owing to 10 NeS !, threatening 11 Bh5.
10 Bd3 Qh5
11 Relt Be7
12 Bf4
and Black has trouble developing; 12... 0-0, for example, is met by 13 NbS .

8
 Latvian Gambit
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 f5
This gambit was introduced to tournament play by the Latvian players Aps­
cheneek, Behtin, et al. This may be considered a form of King's Gambit play­
ed by Black, who is thus a tempo down; in view of this, Black is unlikely to a­
chieve equal play.

Diagram 3 After 2...fS

3 Nxe5!
The strongest. White can expect less from 3 d4, in view of 3...fxe4 4 NxeS
Nf6 or 3 exfS e4 4 NeS Nf6 S Be2, when there could follow S... d6 6 BhSt
Ke7 7 Nf7 Qe8 8 Nxh8 (or 8 Nc3 NxhS 9 NdSt Kd7 10 QxhS Rg8) 8... QxhS
9 QxhS NxhS 10 g4 Nf6, leading to a complex and unclear game.
3 .... Qf6
4 Nc4
Also possible is 4 d4 d6 S Nc4 fe 6 Nc3 Qg6 7 Qe2 Nc6 8 Be3 Be7· 9 0-0-0
Nf6 10 dS Nb4 11 NaS 0-0 12 Qc4 Na6 13 h3 Kh8 14 Be2, with advantage to
White (Kofman-Wishnevsky, Kiev 1947).
4 .... fxe4
S Nc3 Qg6
6 d3 Bb4
7 Bd2
In the famous game Trifunovic-Apscheneek (Stockholm 1937), after 7 de
Qxe4t 8 Ne3 Bxc3t 9 be Nf6 (9 ... Ne7 10 Bc4 d6 11 0-0 Be6 12 QhSt Kd7
13 Bxe6t Qxe6 14 c4 also leaves White with a clear advantage) 10 Bc4 c6 11
0-0 dS 12 Nxd5!, White pressed his attack home in fine style. The finish was:
12... Qxc4 13 Relt Kf7 14 Nxf6 Kxf6 lS Qd6t Be6 16 BgSt! KxgS 17 Rxe6
Nd7 18 Qxd7 Qxc3 19 f4t Kh5 20 ReSt Kh6 21 Rh5t!, and Black resigned,
as it was mate in two.
7 .... 8xc3
8 Bxc3 dS
9 NeS QfS
10 dxe4 Qxe4t
11 8e2 Nf6
12 0-0 c6
9
 On 12... 0-0 White plays 13 Bf3, winning a pawn.
13 Bh5t Kf8
14 Rel Qh4

Diagram 4 After 14... Qh4

This was the course of the game Smyslov--Kamyshov (Moscow Ch 1944).

It's not difficult to discern that Bla,k, behind in development and deprived of
castling, is in trouble. The finish was:
15 Bg6! Na6
16 Qe2 Bh3
17 Nf3
and Black resigned.
King's Gambit

This ancient opening is now more than 400 years old - and it still has not
lost its romantic freshness. The following variation is of interest:
1 e4 e5
2 f4 exf4
3 Nf3 Nf6
4 e5 Nh5
In his day, Grandmaster Keres introduced the move 5 Qe2, winning a num­
ber of fine games with it. And his successors have rightly shared in his suc­
cesses as well.
In a game Koblents-Zagoryansky (Vilnius 1946), Black made what would
seem to be a perfectly natural reply: 5... g6; after 6 d4 he fianchettoed his king
bishop with 6...Bg7? (6.•. Be7 was correct), which turned out to be a terrible
mistake! Here's why: 7 g4!
(See diagram at top of next page)
After just 7 moves, Black's position is already hopeless: he must lose a
piece with no compensation, since 7.._.fg? is met by 8 BgS! f6 9 eft Kf7 10 fg
when_ White achieves an enormous plus in material, ending up with an extra
rook and minor piece.
World Champion Alekhine was the first to demonstrate Black's proper de­
fensive plan in this variation. In his game against Keres at Saltzburg 1943,
10
 Diagram 5 After 7 g4

Alekhine met 5 Qe2 with S...Be7 6 d4 �O, and after 7 g4 fg 8 Nc3 dS 9 Bd2
Nc6 10 ��O Bg4 11 Be3 f6 achieved a good position, finally winning the
game.

Falkbeer Countergambit

Many players spend lots of time at home, trying to find a meaningful im­
provement over accepted theoretical opinion. This far from simple task re­
quires tense, exacting labor; if and when the player succeeds, his work will be
rewarded, first of all, in the next game he plays with this line.
The author spent considerable time analyzing one of the variations of the
Falkbeer Countergambit. After 1 e4 eS 2 f4 dS 3 ed e4 4 d3 Nf6, Keres had
been using the move S Nd2 back in the prewar years. One possible continua­
tion is: S ... BfS 6 de Nxe4 7 Qe2, leading to the following position:

Diagram 6 After 7 Qe2

For a long time, theory held that the diagrammed position was in White's
favor. And in fact, 7... Qxd5? loses a piece to 8 g4!; while 7... Qe7 8 Ngf3 (but
not 8 g4? on account of 8 ... Qh4t 9 Kdl Qxg4, with advantage to Black),
White clearly has the better of it.
1 had noticed this position as a schoolboy, and resolved to try here the im­
teresting and unexpected piece sacrifice 7... Bb4!?, which gives Black a power­
ful attack.
11
 The opportunity soon arose. In the spring of 1941, Grandmaster Keres
gave a simultaneous exhibition in"the Moscow Hall of Pioneers, and I had the
opportunity to test the results of my research.
Here is how the game Keres-Estrin went:
8 c3 0-0
9 Nxe4 Re8
10 cxb4 Rxe4
11 Be3 Qe7
12 Kf2 Nd7

Dia,;ram 7 After 12 ... Nd7

Clearly, Black has a very dangerous attack; it will not be easy for White to
find a satisfactory defense.
Later, in the game Steinsapir-Estrin (Moscow Ch 1949), White played 13
QhS? here, but his position was hopeless after 13 ...g6. 13 Qd2 is met by 13 ...
Re8, and if then 14 Bd3, 14...Rxe3 15 BxfS Qf6!; while 14 Bd4 Nf6 15 h3
allows Black to force a repetition of moves after 15...Rxd4! 16 Q,cd4 Ne4t
17 Kf3 Qh4 18 Ne2 QhSt 19 Ke3 Qh4! In the last variation, however, instead
of 1S h 3, 15 Nf3 ! is strong, with good chances for a successful defense.
Let's go back to my game with Grandmaster Keres. He continued with:
13 Rel Nf6
14 h3 Re8
15 Qd2
White is still a piece ahead, but he is far behind in <,levelopment, his king
stands badly, and the threat of Ne4 is very unpleasant.
15 .... Rxb41
Of course not 15 ... NxdS?, on account of 16 BcS!
16 Bd3 Bxd3
17 Qxd3 Rxb2t
18 Re2
Practically the only move possible, since Black threatened 18... Rxa2 and
19••• Ra3.
18 .... Ne4t
19 Kf3 Qh4
20 Bf2
White misses his opponent's reply; otherwise he would have played 20 Q,ce4
12
Rxe4 2 1 Rxb2, although then too Black would keep the initiative after 2 1...
Qe7.

Diagram 8 After 20 Bf2

Now comes the decisive combination.

20 .... Qxf2t!
21 Rxf2 Rxf2t
22 Kg4
Of course, White loses at once after 22 Ke3?, because of 22... Nc5t 23 Kxf2
Nxd3t 24 Kf3 Rel, when he is helpless.
22 .... Rxg2t
23 Kh4 Rg6!
24 Rh2
The threat was 24... Rh6t 25 Kg4 Nf2t. White defends f2, but his king can
no longer escape from the mating net. After 24 Qb5 c6 25 de be 26 Qa5 f5 !
27 Qxf5 Rf6, Black also soon wins.
24 .... fSI
25 Qf3 Rh6t
26 QhS RxhSt
27 KxhS Rd8
Resigns.

Sometime later, an interesting theoretical polemic arose between Keres and

your author. In the magazine Shakhmaty v SSSR, 1950, Keres expressed
doubts as to the correctness of the above sacrifice, and suggested that White
could refute it as follows :
8 QbSt
Instead of 8 c3.
8 .... Nc6
9 c3
"I see no way for Black to save all his hanging pieces here," wrote Keres.
But I did manage to find such a way: the powerful reply:
9 .... a61
This leads to an advantage for Black (cf. Sbakhmaty v SSSR, No 1, 1951).
(See diagram at top of next page)

13
 Diagram 9 After 9... a6

Let's look at the variations.

1) 10 Qxb7. After 10.. , Nd6! 1 1 Q)cc6t Bd7 1 2 Qxa8 Q)ca8 13 cb 0-0, de­
spite White's material advantage, he has trouble on account of his serious lag
in development.
2) 10 Qd3. This can be met by 10 ... Nxc3 1 1 Q)cf5 Qe7t 1 2 Be2 Nxe2 13
Nxe2 Qxe2t 14 Kxe2 Nd4t 1 5 Kf2 Nxf4, with advantage to Black.
3) 10 Qc4. Now Black continues 10...b5! 1 1 Qb3 Qe7 12 Be2 Nc5 13 Qd l
0-0-0! , with a strong attack on the enemy king's position. For example: 14
cb Nxb4 or 14 de Nd3t lS Kfl Qe3 1 6 Bxd3 Bxd3t 17 Ne2 Rhe8, and White
must resign. Or if (instead of 1 1 Qb3) White plays 1 1 Qxc6t Bd7 1 2 Qxa8
Qxa8 13 cb Qxd5 14 Nxe4 Qxe4t l S Ne2, then after 15 ...Qxb4t 16 Kf2 0-0
17 a3 Qb3 18 Nd aS Black · s chances are to be preferred.
4) 10 Qa4. Qe7 1 1 Be2 NcS 1 2 Qdl 0-0-0!, and so forth, as in the above line.
White's position is indefensible.
5) 10 Qe2 Nd4! (but not 10... Q)cd5?, in view of 1 1 g4! 0-0-0 1 2 Bg2) 1 1 cd
0-0 and Black has a tremendous attack, e.g. : 12 a3 Ba5 13 b4 Bb6 14 Nxe4
Re8 15 Be3 Rxe4 16 Rdl Qe7 17 Kf2 Re8 18 Rd3 Rxe3 ! , and wins. Or if
White plays (instead of taking the knight with 1 1 cd) 1 1 Qd3 (note too that
1 1 Qc4 Nc2t 1 2 Ke2 Nd6 ! 13 Qb3 Qe7t leads to immediate mate), then 1 1. . .
Nc2t 1 2 Qxc2 Qh4t 13 g 3 Nxg3 14 Qa4t bS 15 Bxb5t ab 1 6 Qxa8t (if 1 6
Q)cb5t, then 16. . .KdS) 1 6. . .Ke7 17 h g Q)cg3t 18 K d l Rxa8 1 9 c b Qg2 leads
to a decisive advantage for Black. And after 17 Qxh8 (instead of 17 hg) 17 ...
Nxh l t 18 Kdl Nf2t 19 Ke2 Bd3t 20 Kf3 Qg4t 21 Kxf2 BcSt, White is
mated in three moves.
Thus, my "novelty", 7... Bb4, was fully justified; in recent years, in fact,
it has become a serious choice for Black in the Falkbeer Countergambit.

Another line of the Falkbeer is also of interest.

1 e4 es
2 f4 d5
3 exdS e4
4 d3 Nf6
S dxe4 Nxe4
14
 6 Nf3 Bc5
7 Qe2 Bf5
In the game Spielmann-Tarrasch (Mahrisch-Ostrau 1923), White continued
8 g4?, but after 8... 0-0! 9 gf Re8 Black obtained a crushing attack for the sac­
rificed piece.
8 Nc3 Qe7
9 Be31
The game Kuznetsov-Pozharsky, 196 3, continued:
9 .... Nxc3
10 Bxc5 Nxe2
1 1 Bxe7 Nxf4
12 Ba3 Nxd5
13 0-0-0 c6
14 Ng51

Diagram 10 After 14 Ng5

Now White threatens 15 Rel t followed by 16 Nxf7, or 15 Bc4. On 14 ...

Bg6, 15 Bd3! is a strong reply. Clearly White has more than enough for the
-sacrificed pawn. The game Bronstein-Weissman (Sandomir 1976) went some­
what differently:
9 .... Bxe3
10 Qxe3 Nxc3
11 Qxe7t Kxe7
12 bxc3 Bxc2
13 Kd2 Ba4
14 Rel t
but White also obtained the advantage.

Urusov Gambit

1 e4 es
2 Bc4 Nf6
3 d4 exd4
4 Nf3 Nxe4
This gambit, which gives White a dangerous attack for the sacrificed pawn,
also goes by the name of Keidansky's Gambit. Instead of accepting the pawn
by 4•.. Nxe4, Black does better to play 4... Nc6, avoiding all the complications
15
and transposing into the Two Knights' Defense.
5 Qxd4

Diagram 1 1 After 5 Q,cd4

White has a lead in development, with good chances to expand his initia­
tive. Black's knight now has to retreat. Here arc his choices:
1) 5 ••.• Nd6?
An error, for which the punishment is severe.
6 0-01 Nc6
6 ... Nxc4 would be met by 7 Rel t Bc7 8 Qxg7 Rf8 9 Bh6, with a decisive
advantage for White, since Black has to give up a rook (9 ... d6 10 Q,cf8t).
7 Relt Ne7
8 Bb3 ! f6
9 QdS g5
10 Bf4I

Diagram 1 2 After 10 Bf4

Anyway ! Black cannot take the bishop: 10... gf? allows 1 1 Qh5 mate.
Now White threatens 1 1 Bxd6 and 1 2 Qf7 mate, to which Black has no satis­
factory defense.
2) 5 .... Nc5
This knight retreat also gives White the opportunity to launch an immed-
iate attack.
6 Bg5 I f6
7 Be3 c6
8 Nc3 d5
16
 9 0-0-0 Be7
10 Qh4 Nbd7
10... 0-0 would be met by 1 1 Nxd5 !; and if 10 ... Be6, then 11 Rhel.

Diagram 13 After 10... Nbd7

The game Estrin-Taimanov (Leningrad 1949) continued:

11 N.xd51 cxd5
12 Qh5t g6
On 12... Kf8 White would have played 13 Qxd5 Qe8 14 Rhel, and Black's
position would have been hopeless. If 14 ... a6, then 15 Ng5 (threatening 16
Qg8t!! Rxg8 17 Nxh7 mate) 15 ... fg 16 Bxc5 Nxc5 17 Qf3t, or 15 ... Qg6 16
Nxh7t!, and White wins.
13 Qxd5
Now the best Black can do is to return the piece and end up a pawn down.
1 3 .... Ne5
14 Qxd8t Bxd8
15 Nxe5 fxe5
16 Bxc5
and White exploited his advantage without difficulty.
3) 5 .... Nf6
The best reply, although here i:oo White's initiative is sufficient compensa­
tion for the pawn.
6 Bg5 Be7
7 Nc3 Nc6
Sometimes Black uses a different defensive plan: 7 ... c6 8 0-0-0 d5 9 Rhel
Be6 10 Qh4 Nbd7 11 Bd3 Nc5. In this line, theory recommends that White
continue 12 Nd4, maintaining the initiative. Also worth looking into is 12
Bf5 !? , which occurred in the game Estrin-Khachaturov (Moscow 1944).
Here is the continuation of that game: 12... Bxf5 13 Bxf6 Ne6 14 Bxe7 Qxe7

(See diagram at top of next page)

After 15 Nxd5! cd 16 Qa4t Kf8 17 Rxd5 Bg6 18 Rd7 Qc5 19 Ne5 Rc8
20 Rxf7t!, White won.
8 Qh4 d5
8•.• 0-0 9 0-0-0 d6,is dangerous, since White continues 10 Bd3 h6 11 Bxh6
gh (11••• Ng4 is met by 12 Bg5) 12 Qxh6, with a strong attack. And if Black
17
 Diagram 14 After 14... Qxe7

Estrin-Khachatu rov
plays 12 ... Nb4, then White can play 1 3 Ng5 Nxd3t 14 Rxd3 Bf5 1 5 Rg3 Bg6
16 Ne6! ; while on 1 2... Ne5 1 3 NxeS de 1 4 Qg5t Kh8 1 5 BfS wins for White.
9 0-0-0 Be6
10 Rhel 0-0
1 1 Bd3 h6
An exceptionally complex position. ECO continues as follows: 1 2 Bxh6
Ne4 1 3 Qf4 Bd6 14 Qe3 BcS 15 Qf4 Bd6, or 12 Rxe6 fe 13 Bxh6 gh 14 Qg3 t
Kh8 1 5 Qg6, which leads t o a draw. However, one should also note the pow­
erful move
1 2 Kbl !

Diagram 1 5 After 12 Kb l

In this position, Black has the following replies:

a) 1 2 ...hg 13 Nxg5, threatening 14 Rxe6 fe 15 Bh7t Kh8 16 Bf5t. Black
also loses after l 3...Bd7, in view of 14 NxdS !, while after 1 3 ... g6 White simply
plays 14 QM.
b) 12 ...Qd7. The correspondence game Hmelnitsky-Eventov ( 1 95 5-57) con­
tinued: 1 3 Bxh6 Ne4 14 Bg5 Bxg5 1 5 Nxg5 Nxg5 16 QxgS Ne7 1 7 h4 c6 18
g4 Rfe8 19 Rgl f6 20 QhS, and White won.
c) 12 ... NeB. After 1 3 Bxe7 Qxe7 14 Qxe7 Nxe7 1 5 Nd4 Nc6 16 Nxe6 fe 1 7
Rxe6 Rxf2 1 8 Nxd5 Rxg2 a n the correspondence game Laett:itterio ( 197 1/
72), White should have continued 19 Bc4!, and if 19...Kh8, then 20 Rdel Nd6
18
21 Nxc7 RdS 22 Bd3 ! (threatening 23 Rxd6) 22...KgS 23 Bg6, with great ad­
vantage to White.

Danish Gambit

1 e4 es
2 d4 exd4
3 c3 dxc3
The continuations 3 ...Nf6 4 eS Ne4, 3...d3 4 Bxd3 dS and 3...dS 4 ed QxdS
are classified as the Danish Gambit Declined.
4 Bc4 cxb2
The continuation 4...Nf6 5 Nxc3 Nc6 6 Nf3 leads to the Scotch or Goring
Gambits, which are examined later on.
S Bxb2

Diagram 16 After 5 Bxb2

s .... Bb4t
The safest defense here is considered to be 5 ... dS! After 6 BxdS (6 ed can
be met by 6 ... Nf6 7 Nf3 Bd6) 6 ... Nf6 7 Bxf7t Kxf7 8 QxdS Bb4t 9 Qd2
Bxd2t 10 Nxd2 White wins back both his sacrificed pawns, leading to a posi·
tion with roughly equal chances.
6 Nc3
6 Nd2 is also possible here ; in that event, 6... QgS 7 Nf3 ! Qxg2 8 Rgl Bxd2t
9 Ke2! Qh3 10 Qxd2 Nf6 11 Bxf7t Kd8 12 Rxg7 Nxe4 13 QgSt NxgS 14 Bf6
would leave Black mated.
6 .... Nf6
7 Ne2! Nxe4?
This was the continuation of the game Linden-Maciejewski (1864). Black
is too greedy, snapping up another pawn this way. 7... Nc6 was the proper
move. Here is how that game ended:
8 0-0 Nxc3
9 Nxc3 Bxc3
10 Bxc3 QgS
Naturally, Black cannot castle, since after 10... 0-0 11 Qg4 g6 12 Qd4 he
would be defenseless against the mate threat.
11 Relt Kd8
11. ..KfS also loses, on account of 12 Bb4t d6 13 Bxd6t, and Black is
19
mated.

Diagram 17 After 1 1 Kd8

In this position, Black has three extra pawns, but he is without a satisfac­
tory defense against enemy attack.
12 £4! Qxf4
There is no salvation for Black either in 12 ... Qg6 13 Qe2 ·Nc6 14 Bd5, or
in 12 ...QcSt 13 Khl Qxc4 14 Bxg7; in either case, he is mated.
1 3 Bxg7 Rg8
14 Qg4 Qd6
15 Bf6t Resigns.
Yuchtman - Ravinsky
Moscow 1 959
1 e4 e5
2 d4 cxd4
3 c3 dS
This game is a clear demonstration that even if Black declines the Danish
or the Scotch Gambit, he must still reckon with various attacking possibilities.
4 exdS Nf6
5 Nf3 QxdS
6 cxd4 Bg4
7 Be2 Bb4t
8 Nc3 Nbd7
Black selects an improper plan, which costs him time. 8...Nc6 is the usual
move here, leading to the Scotch Gambit Declined by transposition ( cf. the
next game, Estrin-Sheveczek).
9 0-0 Bxc3
10 bxc3 Nb6
Black seeks to establish control of c4, thus paralyzing White's initiative on
the queenside, As we shall see, this plan does not work out.
1 1 NgS !
Utilizing his advantage in development, White strives to open up the game
and create threats against the enemy king.
11 Bxe2
12 Qxe2t Kd7
13 Qd3 Raes
20
 Diagram 1 8 After 1 3 . . . RaeB

It might seem as though Black has managed to solidify his position and con·
solidate his forces. But with the next move, White demonstrates convincingly
that further line- and diagonal-openings will give him a lot of initiative.
14 c4!
This pawn sacrifice enables White to hold the Black king in the middle of
the board, and to develop a dangerous attack against him.
1.4 ... . Nxc4
1 S Qh3t Kd8
16 Rbl h6
17 Nf3 Ne4
18 NeS !
White offers the sacrifice of still another pawn, aiming to open the d-file.
18 b6
19 Qb3 Ned6
20 Ba3
In this manner, White induces an important weakening of the enemy posi-
tion. Now he can proceed to the decisive charge.
20 . ... bS
21 Bxd6 . cxd6
22 Nxc4 Qxc4
2 3 Qf3 dS
24 Rfcl Qxd4
2 5 RxbS
White's heavy pieces dominate the open files. And although Black still has
his extra pawn, he no longer has any defense. Therefore, Black resign ed.

Scotch Gambit

1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 d4 exd4
4 c3
When White does not play Bfl·c4, the opening is called the Goring Gambit.
For a long time, it was considered that White has insufficient compensation
for his pawn in the Goring Gambit. But recent tournament practice has reaf·
21
firmed that the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice - 4... dc 5 Nxc3 - assures
White a steady initiative. After 5... Bb4 6 Bc4 Nf6 (or 6... d6 7 Qb3 Qe7 8 0-0
Bxc3 9 be Nf6 10 Bg5!, and White has the initiative, Minev-Matanovic, Mos•
cow 1956) 7 0-0 Bxc3 8 be d6 9 c5 !

Diagram 19 After 9 e5

Black must defend carefully. For example:

9...de 10 NgS 0-0 11 Ba3 Qxdl 12 Raxd l Bf5 13 Bxf8 Rxf8 14 Rfel h6 15
Nf3 Bg4, and now White could have continued 16 Bb5 !, in the game Yucht­
man-Tal (Tbilisi 1959), with the advantage.
9. .. NxeS 10 NxeS de 11 Qxd8t Kxd8 12 Bxf7 Ke7 13 Bb3 Be6 14 c4 Rad8
15 Rel e4 was better, with an even game (Yuchtman-Furman, Tbilisi 1959).
Worth considering is the continuation
4 .... Nf6
5 e5 Ne4
6 Qc2 f5
7 cxf5 d5
Black's active position is sufficient compensation for the missing pawn.
The unfortunate position of White's queen allows Black to take the initiative
by means of this pawn sacrifice.
8 Nxd4 Nxd4
9 cxd4 Kf7
10 fxg7 Bb4t
1 1 Kdl Re8

Diagram 20 After l l ...Re8

22
 In Volume I of ECO, this position is considered to be equal. The basis for
that evaluation is the game Levy-Boey (Siegen Olympiad 1970), which was
drawn after 12 Be3 Kg8 13 QhS Be6 14 Bd3 Qd7. Now Levy played 15 h3
BfS 16 Bc2, but if Black had replied 16... Ng3 !, he would have had the advan­
tage.
In a game Nordstrom-Erlandsson (Swedish Corr. Ch 1975/76), White play­
ed, not h3, but 15 Qh6. Here too, however, after 15 ... BfS 16 Bc2 Nxf2t ! 17
Bxf2 Bxc2t 18 Kxc2 Re2t, Black had an obvious advantage. After 19 Kdl
Rxf2 20 QgS Qa4t 21 b3 Qc6 22 Qc l Qe6, White resigned.
This is undoubtedly a most interesting gambit.

Another way of declining the gambit after 4 c3 is by means of 4... dS.

Black strikes a counterblow in the center himself. An interesting game in this
line is Estrin-Sheveczek (VI World Corr Ch Final, 1968/70), where White in­
troduced an important theoretical improvement. After 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6
3 d4 ed 4 c 3 d 5 :
S exdS Qxd5
6 cxd4 Bb4t
In the game Penrose-Ujtumen (XVlll Olympiad, Lugano 1968), Black
played 6 ... Bg4 7 Be2 0-0-0 8 Be3 Nh6, but after 9 Nc3 Qh5 10 Qa4 NfS? 11
dS! Nxe3 12 fe Bxf3 13 Bxf3 Qe5 14 0-0-0! White obtained a winning advan­
tage.
7 Nc3 Bg4
7 ... Nf6 8 Be2 Ne4 9 Bd2 Bxc3 10 be Nxd2 11 Qxd2 0-0 is stronger, with
equal chances (Klovan-Averbakh, 36th USSR Ch 1968). Also possible is 8 ...
0-0 9 0-0 Qd8 10 Bg5 h6 11 Bh4 Be7 12 Re l Bg4, with about an even posi­
tion (Velimirovic-Kholmov, 1966).
8 Be2 0-0-0
9 0-0
9 Be3 Nf6 10 0-0 is possible too. In the game Levy-Kraidman (Lugano
Olympiad 1968), the continuation l0 ... Qd7 11 Qa4 Nd5 12 NxdS QxdS 13
a3 Bd6 14 h3 Bh5 15 b4 a6 16 Rfcl lead to a strong attack for White.
9 .... QaS
10 Be3 Nge7
Acceptance of the pawn sacrifice by 10... Bxc3 11 be Q,cc3 is dangerous,
because of 12 Rel Qa3 13 Rxc6! be 14 Ne5 Bxe2 15 Q/ce2 or 13 Ne5 Bxe2
14 Q,ce2 NxeS 15 de, when Black has a difficult time defending himself. In
thee.game Mieses- Forgacs (St. Petersburg 1909), Black tried 10 ... Nf6, but af­
ter 11 Qb3 NdS 12 NxdS Rxd5? 13 a3 !, he had to resign, since l 3...Be7 14 ··
Bd2 leads by force to the loss of material.
(See diagram at top of next page)

11 Na4I
This powerful new move completely changes the evaluation of this well­
known position. Before, 11 Nb5 or 11 Qb3 were what was played here, with
a complex game. But now Black is hard-pressed to find an acceptable contin-
23
 Diagram 2 1 After 10 ... Nge7

uation.
1 1 .... Ng6
l l ••• Nxd4 1 2 Bxd4 Nc6 is tempting, but then comes 13 a 3 ! , and after 1 3 ...
Bxf :S 14 Bxf3 Nxd4 15 ab Black loses a piece.
12 h3 Be6
1 3 a3 Be7
After 13 ... Bd6 14 b4 Qh5 15 Ne5 Qh4 16 Nxc6 be 17 Qcl !, threatening
either 18 Qxc6 and 19 Bg5 or 14... Qd5 1 5 Nc3 Qb3 16 Qc l ! , Black is de­
fenseless; and after 14 ... Qt'5 1 5 g4! he loses his queen.
14 b4 Qd 5
1 5 Nc3 Qd7
16 Qa4
Now White's attack develops without hindrance.
16 .... Bxh3
17 dS
The simplest means of realizing White's advantage.
17 .... Nb8
If 17 ... Bxg2, then 18 de! Qh3 1 9 Nh2; while after 17 ... NceS 18 NxeS NxeS
19 Q}ca7 QfS White may continue 20 Qa8t Kd7 21 BbS t c6 22 Qxb7t Ke8
23 Bxc6t Kf8 24 d6! (but not 24 Radl or 24 BcS on account of 24 ... Nf3 t !
2 5 Kh l Bxg2 t ! and mate i n two) 24... Bxd6 2 5 Radl, with a winning position.

Diagram 22 After 1 7 ... Nb8

18 NbS I
24
 This quiet move is, thanks to the mating threat it contains, considerably
stronger than the natural-looking continuation 18 Qxa7. Now Black is really
defenseless.
18 .... Rde8
1 9 gxh3
Once again the simplest; White keeps his extra piece, while his attack con­
tinues unslackened. If now 19 ... a6, then 20 Rfcl ab 21 BxbS Qxh3 22
Rxc7t! Kxc7 23 Rclt, with mate soon to follow. 19...Qxh3 would be met
by 20 Rfcl Na6 21 Nxc7 Nxc7 22 Rxc7t Kxc7 23 Rel t Kd8 24 QaS t, and
White wins.
Therefore, Black resigned.

1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 d4 exd4
4 Bc4 Bc5
5 c3
This old line occurred in a game Estrin-Belinkov (Moscow 1966). The
reply 5. .. Nf6 would have led to a position known to theory. However, Black
preferred 5 ... dc. The next few moves were nothing new to theory either.
5 dxc3
6 Bxf7t Kxf7
7 Qd5t Kf8
8 Qxc5t Qe7

Diagram 23 After 8...Qe7

9 Qxe7t Kxe7
10 Nxc3 d5I
11 0-0 dxe4
12 Ng5 h6
13 Ngxe4 Bf5
and a draw was soon agreed.
The queen exchange on move 9 has always been considered obligatory for
White; But what if he plays 9 Qxc3!, sacrificing a pawn instead? After 9...
Qxe4t 10 Be3 or 9...Nf6 10 Nbd2 Nxe4 11 Nxe4 Qxe4t 12 Be3 he would ob­
tain excellent play.
25
 Another line played instead of 4 ... Bc5 is 4... Bb4t.
4 .... Bb4t
5 c3 clxc3
6 0-01

Diagram 24 After 6 0-0

In not hard to see that in this position White has an extremely dangerous
initiative for his two-pawn sacrifice. A possible continuation is:
6 .... cxb2
After 6...d6 7 a3 Ba5 8 b4 Bb6 9 Qb3 Qf6 10 Nxc3 White also obtains tre-
mendous prospects.
7 Bxb2 Bf8
A very passive move, which allows White a good opportunity to bring all
his pieces into play. 7 ...Nf6 is better, when White could continue either with
8 eS dS 9 Bb3 or the sharper 8 a3 BcS (if 8... BaS, then 9 eS d5 1 O ef de 1 1
Qe2 t Be6 1 2 Rdl Qc8 1 3 fg Rg8 1 4 Bf6 and White wins) 9 NgS 0-0 1 0 Nxf7
Rxf7 1 1 Bxf7t Kxf7 1 2 eS, and after the enemy knight retreats, White gives a
queen check at dS, picking up the bishop.
8 Nc3 Be7
9 NdS Nf6
10 NgS ! 0-0
1 1 Nf4 d6
One gets the impression Black has safely covered all his weaknesses. . .
12 Bxf6 Bxf6
1 3 Nxh7!

Diagram 25 After 13 Nxh7

26
 Now White has a decisive attack, as the following variations demonstrate:
13 ...Kxh7 14 Qh5t Kg8 15 Ng6, and mate is inescapable; or
13 ...Bxal 14 Qh5 Ne5 15 Ng5 Re8 16 Nxf7 Nxf7 17 Qxf7t Kh8 18 QhS
mate.

Scotch Game

One can find gambit ideas even in such a quiet-looking opening as the
Scotch. In the game Kopayev-Zhukovitsky (XIV USSR Ch semifinal, Kiev
1945 ), after the opening moves:
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 d4 exd4
4 Nxd4 Nf6
5 Nxc6 bxc6
6 e5 Qe7
7 Qe2 Nd5
8 c4 Ba6
White selected the "mistakerl" continuation
9 Nd2
9 Qe4 was considered best at that time. After:
9 .... Nb4
1 0 Nf3 d5
the following position arose.

Diagram 26 After 10 .. . dS

1 1 a3! Bxc4
12 Qdl Bxfl
13 Kxfl Na6
White has been deprived of castling and lost a pawn; however, the active
position of his pieces was more than enough compensation.
14 Qa4 Nb8
15 Bg5!
White's attack has become decisive. One possible continuation might be
15. . . Qd7 16 e6! fe 17 Ne5 Qd6 18 Qf4, and Black has to resign.
Kopayev's improvement is still good if Black plays, not 10... dS , but 10...
27
c5. A game Estrin-Zinser (Moscow 1 968) continued: 1 1 a3 Nc6 12 Bd2 Qe6
1 3 Bc3 Be7 1 4 0-0-0, and White had the advantage.
The opportunity to offer an unexpected pawn sacrifice in a well-known po­
sition, as Kopayev discovered, permits us now to give this position a complete­
ly opposite evaluation.

Giuoco Piano

This and the Two Knights' Defense (q.v.) are among the oldest openings;
Italian players were studying it back in the 16th Century.
1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Bc5
4 c3
The most interesting continuation, owing to the sharp play it leads to.
4 Nf6
5 d4 exd4
6 cxd4 Bb4t
7 Nc3!?
7 Bd2 Bxd2t 8 Nbxd2 is quieter and safer; the continuation 8... d5 9 ed
Nxd5 10 Qb3 Nce7 leads to an approximately even position. With the text
move, White sacrifices his central e-pawn for the sake of the initiative.
7 Nxe4
8 0-0 Bxc3
9 d5! NaS?
Black's usual move here is 9... Bf6 or 9 ... Ne5.
Black's move here, which occurred in the game Estrin-Zlatkin, 1 9 3 8
(when the author was still a schoolboy) is a mistake.

Diagram 27 After 9... NaS

10 Bd3 1
Had White played 10 be Nxc4 1 1 Qd4, the game would have transposed
back into a well-known theoretical line, where Black's best continuation
would have been 1 1...0-0! 1 2 Qxe4 Nd6 1 3 Qd3, when White has an initiative
for his sacrificed pawn. The attempt by Black to retain the extra piece by
28
1 1...Ncd6 12 Q}cg7 Qf6 comes a cropper after 13 Q}cf6 Nxf6 14 Rel t Nfe4
(Black is also in a hopeless position after 14... Kf8 15 Bh6t Kg8 16 Re5 Nfe4
17 Rel f6 18 Re7!; while 16... Nde4? 17 Nd2 d6 18 Nxe4! also loses) 15 Nd2
fS 16 f3, when White has a clear advantage.
10 .... NcS
1 1 .bxc3 Nxd3
Black is forced to exchange off White's lightsquare bishop thus, as 11. .. (}.0?
allows the standard piece sacrifice, leading to a decisive attack: 12 Bxh7t!
Kxh7 13 NgSt Kg8 (if 13. .. Kg6, then 14 Qg4 fS 15 Qg3 Kf6 16 c4!, with a
clear advantage for White) 14 Qh5 Re8 15 Qxf7t Kh8 16 Qh5t Kg8 17 Qh7t
Kf8 18 Qh8t Ke7 19 Q}cg7t, and Black must lay down his arms.
12 Qxd3 0-0

Diagram 28 After 12 ... (}.0

At first glance, nothing seems to threaten Black, with the dangerous king's
bishop no longer among the living. But the active position of White's pieces
and the unfortunate placement of Black's knight on a5 allow White to obtain
a concrete advantage.
13 NgS!
This powerful move exposes all of Black's weaknesses. Q}ch7 mate is
threatened, and 13 ... g6 can be m�t by 14 Qh3 hS 15 d6!, followed by 16 g4,
with a tremendous attack for White.
13 .... fS
14 d6 c6
15 Rel h6

Diagram 29 After 15 ... h6

29
 Once again, it looks as though all Black's troubles are behind him. From a
tactical standpoint, this might indeed be the case; but strategically speaking,
Black's position is absolutely hopeless. Like the point of a knife, the White
pawn at d6 paralyzes Black's entire position, while his pieces on the: queensidc:
arc: unable to come to the assistance of their king.
16 Re7 1 hxgS
17 BxgS Rf7
18 Rael!
White also obtains an obvious advantage after 18 Rxf7 (vcgS 19 Rxf5 Qd8
20 Re 1, but the text move is still more energetic.
18 Rxe7
19 Rxe7 Qf8
20 Bh61
White's pieces are clearly too much for the lone Black queen.
20 .... gxh6
If 20... Qf6, then 21 Bxg7 Qxg7 22 QxfS !, and Black is hc:lpless.
2 1 Qglt Kh8
22 Qg61 Resigns.
Along with 8...Bxc3, one also finds 8.•• Nxc3.
8 .... Nxc3
9 bxc3 Bxc3
Now White should consider playing...
10 Qbll
Contemporary theory also recommends 1 0 Bal.

Diagram 3 0 After 10 Qb3

White sacrifices a rook, obtaining in return a powerful attack. This is what

Greco played in the 17th Century against one of his contemporaries.
1 0 .... Bxal?
The White rook makes a tempting dish, and Black is unable to resist the
temptation. But now White's attack becomes irresistible. The right continua­
tion for Black was 1 0... dS ! 1 1 BxdS 0-0 12 Bxf7t Kh8, and after 13 Qxc3
Rxf7 14 NgS White's advantage is insignificant.
11 Bxf7t Kf8
12 BgS Ne7
13 NcS I
30
 Diagram 3 1 After 1 3 NeS

Four White pieces take part in the attack. Black is in no condition to ward
off all the threats.
13 .... Bxd4
14 Bg6! dS
15 Qf3t BfS
16 BxfS BxeS
17 Be6t Bf6
18 Bxf6
Despite his extra rook, Black is helpless.
18 Ke8
19 Bxg7 Qd6
20 Qf7t Kd8
21 Bxh8
Now it is White who is a piece ahead - and Black must lose still more ma­
terial

The Giuoco Piano has been known for three centuries, and it would seem
that all of its paths and byways would by now have been studied and research­
ed to the last tum. Nonetheless, even in our day important improvements are
still being found in this opening, which either result in a reevaluation of that
variation or allow the player to score his point in the particular game he is
playing.

Sometimes, Black replies to 7 Nc3, not with 7...Nxe4, but with 7 ... 0-0 8
cS Ne4. A possible continuation is 9 0-01 Nxc3 10 be Bxc3 11 NgS ! (again,
a sacrifice for the attack) 11 ••.Bxal 12 QhS h6 13 Nxf7! Rxf7

(See diagram at top of next page)

14 Bxf7t Kf8 I S BdS Qe8 16 Ba3t d6 17 ed! QxhS 18 d7t Ne7 19 d8

(Q)t Qe8 20 Bxe7 mate.
Until recently, the above move order was considered the only one for
White, if he wanted to win. Not so long ago, another possibility was found
for White: instead of 14 Bxf7t, White can play 14 Qxf7t, and then 14... KhS
31
 Diagram 32 After 13... Rxf7

leads to the following position:

Diagram 33 After 14 ... KhS

Now after 15 BgS I I Black must resign, since 15 ...QxgS is met by 16 Qg8
mate, while 15 ...hg allows 16 QhS mate.
This example underscores the frequently repeated point, that every recom­
mendation should be critically examined, and that one should never trust au­
thority blindly. In any position, even one that has been studied and research­
ed up one side and down the other, one can always find a new move, overlook­
ed by theory, but stronger.
The following line is worth examining.
1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 BcS
4 c3 Qe7
5 d4 Bb6
6 dS Nb8
7 a4 a6
8 d6I
Sacrificing a central pawn, White cramps the opposing forces and prevents
their normal development.
8 •••• Qxd6
9 Qxd6 cxd6
32
 10 Bd5 Nc6
11 Na3 Bc7
12 Nc4

Diagram 34 After 1 2 Nc4

In the 3rd Soviet edition of his textbook, Kurs Debyutov (Moscow 1 96 1 ),

Master Panov recommends 12 ... Nce7 in the diagrammed position, continuing
with either 13 Ne3 Nf6 14 a5 Rb8 and 15... b6, or 13 Be3 Nf6 14 Rd l NexdS
15 ed b5, in either case with advantage for Black.
However, on 12 ... Nce7 White has 13 b 3!, and after 13...Nf6 14 Ba3 NexdS
15 ed NxdS 16 Nxd6t Bxd6 17 Bxd6 f6 18 c4 Ne7 19 aS! he is assured the
better chances.
In the game Estrin-Karnowitz (Moscow 1966), Black did not play 1 2...
Nce7, but 12.••b6. White answered 13 b3!

Diagram 35 After 13 b3

and after 13 • ••Nf6 14 Ba3 0-0 (if 14... NxdS, then 15 ed Na5 16 Bxd6 Bxd6
17 Nxd6t &7 18 Nf5t ! Kf6 19 Ne3, and White stands considerably better) ..
15 Bxd6 Bxd6 16 Nxd6 Nxd5 17 ed Na5 18 b4 Nb7 19 Nc4! won a pawn.

After 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Qe7 5 d4 Bb6 6 d5 Black, instead

of 6.•• Nb8, also not infrequently plays 6...Nd8.
In the game Estrin-Kots (Tula 1951), the continuation was: 7 a4 a6 8 d61
Qxd6 9 Qxd6 cd 10 Bd5 Ne7 11 0-0 Nxd5 12 ed f6 13 Nbd2 Nf7 14 Nc4
Bd8 15 Be3.
33
 Diagram 36 After 15 Be3

Now 16 Bb6 is threatened, when Black's queenside would be paralyzed.

So Black must return the pawn.
15 ... b6 16 Bxb6 Bb7 17 Bxd8 Kxd8 18 Nb6 Rb8 19 aS ! , and again White's
advantage is indisputable.

In the game Estrin-Zhivtsov (Moscow 1945), after the opening moves 1 e4

e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Qe7 S d4, Black, instead of playing 5 ... Bb6, play­
ed 5 . .. ed?, which is a mistake, of course, since the reason Black played the
move 4.•. Qe7 was to hold the center. White continued 6 0-01, and after 6. . .d3
7 b4 Bb6 8 e5 ! d6 9 Bg5 he obtained a strong attack.
The continuation was: 9 ... f6 10 ef gf 1 1 Rel NeS 12 NxeS de 13 Qh5t
Kd8 14 Bh4 a5 15 RxeS Qf8

Diagram 37 After 15 ...Qf8

Now the decisive continuation: 16 Bxg8 Rxg8 17 Re8t ! Qxe8 18 Bxf6t

Qe7 19 QdSt , and Black resigned.

In the old Giuoco Piano, after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 0-0 Nf6 5
d4I?, we reach the following position:

(See diagram at top of next page)

What is Black's proper reply? After S ... ed, Black must be prepared to face
the Max Lange Attack, a system wherein he who knows the ground better and
34
 Diagram 38 After 5 d4

is better prepared will win out.

5...Bxd4 is risky in view of 6 Nxd4 Nxd4 7 Bg5 (7 f4 immediately is also
possible), and after 7 ...h6 8 Bh4 g5? 9 f4! gf 10 Rxf4! White has a decisive ad­
vantage. 7... Ne6 8 Bxe6! fe 9 f4 Qe7! may be better, with a complex game.
But here too, White has compensation for the pawn, and may continue the at­
tack with 10 Khl or 10 Bxf6.
At first glance, it might seem most natural and logical to play 5 ...Nxd4 6
NxeS �O?, but after 7 Be3 ! Black is in great difficulties at once. (Only seven
moves, and already Black is nearly lost !)

Diagram 3 9 After 7 Be3

In the game Estrin-Ravinsky (Leningrad 1955), after 7 ...dS 8 ed b5 9

Bxd4 Bxd4 10 Qxd4 be 1 1 Nc3 and 12 Nxc4 Black was two pawns down, and
eventually lost. In Estrin-Klaman (Leningrad 1957), Black played 7 ...Qe7
instead, but after 8 Bxd4 Bxd4 9 Qxd4 cS 10 Qc3 1 Nxe4 1 1 Qe3 Qxe5 12
Nc3, he resigned, since he must lose a piece.
Twenty years later, the diagrammed position again occurred, in the game
Estrin-Solovyev (Moscow 1977): yet another experienced master (the 1954
Moscow Champion) caught in the same trap. He selected a different defen­
sive plan: 7 ... Ne6 8 Bxe6 Bxe3 9 Bxf7t Kh8. After the further moves 10 Bb3
Bb6 1 1 Nf7t Rxf7 12 Bxf7 Nxe4 13 Nd2 White, the exchange up, won quick-
ly.

35
 From these examples one can see that not every natural, "logical'· move is
actually playable in the opening. It is in this stage that the player at the
board should be especially alert to any new and unexpected move. Practice
shows that the force of a "novelty" most often boils down precisely to the
effect of surprise, causing the opponent to lose his bearings. Since the time
allotted for thinking is limited, sometimes the player will find it hard to deal
with an unexpected turn of events over-the-board. As time goes on, such
"novelties·' are not infrequently refuted, and effective antidotes found for
them; then, no one else ever uses them again. But the ''novelty" has already
done its job, by helping the player win that particular game. Thus, the end is
achieved.

Evans Gambit Accepted

1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 BcS
4 b4
A gambit introduced by the English sea-captain Evans in 1824.
4 Bxb4
5 c3 BcS
6 d4
6 0-0 d6 7 d4 ed 8 ed Bb6 is also possible, leading to a transposition of
moves.
6 .... exd4
7 cxd4 Bb6
White can answer 7 ... Bb4t with 8 Kfl , gaining the initiative.
8 0-0 d6

Diagram 40 After 8. . . d6

The critical position of the Evans Gambit Accepted. White has an active
position for his sacrificed pawn, which assures him a persistent initiative. An
example of how the attack should be played is provided by the famous game
Anderssen-Zuckertort (Berlin 1 868):
9 dS
Anderss�n•s i�ea. 9 Nc3 has also been seen here. In that case, 9 ... Bd7 would
be too passive, since 10 eS de 1 1 Rel ! Nge7 12 NgS Be6 (if 12 ... 0-0, then 13
QhS) 13 Bxe6 fe 14 Nxe6 gives White a strong attack, The continuation
36
might then be: 14 ... Qd6 1 5 Nxg7t Kf8 16 Qg4 Bxd4 17 Ne4 Qb4 ( 1 7... Qg6
is correct) 1 8 Ne6t Ke8 19 Nf6t Kf7 20 Ng5t Kf8 2 1 Ba3 ! Qxa3 22 Qe6 Nd8
Z3 Qf7t ! Nxf7 24 Ne6 mate.
After 9 Nd, another mistaken line is 9... Nf6? The game Muller-Lehmann
(Match, Switzerland-E. Germany 1 9 5 5 ) continued: 10 e 5 ! de 1 1 Ba3 Na5 1 2
Nxe5 Nxc4 1 3 Qa4t Bd7 1 4 Qxc4 Be6 1 5 d 5 ! , with a decisive attack for
White. After 1 5 ... Bxd5 16 Qa4t c6 17 Radl Nd7 18 Nxd7 Qxd7 1 9 Nxd5
cd 20 Bxd5 ! Black resigned, since he cannot avoid mate (20 ... Qxa4
. 21 Rel t).
9 .... NaS
10 Bb2 Nge7
1 1 Bd3 0-0
12 Nc3 Ng6
1 3 Ne2 cSI
1 4 Rel Rb8
1 5 Qd2 f6
16 Khl 8c7
On 1 6... NeS White would have continued 17 Nxe5 fc 18 f4.
17 Ng3 bS
1 8 NfS b4?
A mistake; Black should have played 18 ... Bxf5 19 ef Ne5 to slow up his
opponent's attack.
19 Rgl Bb6
20 g4 NeS
21 BxeS de
22 Rg3 Rf7
White has concentrated almost all his pieces on the king·s wing, and now
begins the decisive assault.
2 3 gS ! BxfS
24 exfS QxdS
25 gxf6 Rd8
2 5 . . . Rxf6 loses at once to 26 Bc4!

Diagram 4 1 After 2 5 ... Rd8

Now a n elegant finish :

2 6 Rcgl l Kh8
On 26 .•. Qxd3 White wins by 27 Rxg7t Rxg7 28 Rxg7t Kf8 29 Qxd3 Rxd3
30 Ng5. 37
 27 fxg7t Kg8
If 27... Rxg7 28 Rxg7 Qxf3t, then 29 RlgZ and Black is defenseless.
28 Qh6 Qd6
Now White mates elegantly:
29 Qxh7t! Kxh7
30 f6t! Kg8
31 Bh7t! Kxh7
32 Rh3t, and mate next move.
Worth examination is the game Cafferty-van Geet (Amsterdam 1972):
1 e4 e5
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Bc5
4 b4 Bxb4
5 c3 Be7
This bishop retreat is also seen from time to time.
6 d4 Na5
7 NxeS
The most current line today is the continuation wherein White sacrifices a
pawn for the initiative with 7 Bd3 !
7 Nxc4
8 Nxc4 dS
9 exdS Qxd5
10 Nc3 QaS
11 0-0 Nf6
12 c4 c6
13 Bb2 Be6
14 Nc3

Diagram 42 After 14 Nc3

White stands somewhat more actively, but Black has the Two Bishops, and
no weaknesses. The chances should be considered roughly equal.
14 .... Rd8
15 d5! cxd5
15 ... 0-0 is also possible, and if 16 Qe2 or 16 Qf3, then 16... Rc8 which
transposes.
16 Ncxd5 Nxd5
17 cxdS o-o
38
 18 Qf3 BxdS?
A mistake with disastrous consequences. 18... Bc8 19 Qg3 f6 was correct,
with a solid position for Black.
19 Qg3 f6
If 19 ... g6, then 20 QeS.
20 NfS Rf7
21 Nxe7t Rxe7
22 Bxf6, and White won.

Evans Gambit Declined

1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 BcS
4 b4 Bb6
Black declines the gambit pawn, rather than give his opponent the chance
to occupy the center with tempo.
S a4 a6
6 Nc3
White's last two moves were introduced by I. Kan in a game against Bot­
vinnik in 1929. Master Sokolsky later subjected them to detailed analysis.
6 •••• Nf6
7 NdS NxdS
7 ...Nxe4 is a mistake: the Kan-Botvinnik game quoted above continued
8 0-0 0-0 9 d3 Nf6 10 Bg5 d6 11 Nd2!, and White had a strong attack. But
after 7 ... Ba7 8 d3 h6 9 Be3 White also has a definite advantage, thanks to his
control of d5.
8 exdS e4
Here 8... Nd4 is worth consideration. In a game Bednarsky-Minev (Warsaw
1961), after 9 Nxe5 0-0 10 0-0 d6 11 Nf3 Bg4 12 Be2 Nxe2t 13 Qxe2 Re8
14 Qd3 Qf6, Black's initiative was .sufficient compensation for the pawn.
9 dxc6 0-0
10 Bb2 I exf3
11 Qxf3 dxc6
12 Qc3 Rest
1 3 Kfl

Diagram 43 After 13 Kfl

39
 Here White's pieces stand much more actively, which gives him the advan­
tage. In the game Sokolsky-Goldenov (Kiev 1 945), after 1 3 ... Qg5 14 h4 Qh6
15 a5 Ba7 16 h5 Be6 1 7 Rh4 Rad8 1 8 d3 Bxc4 1 9 de! c5 20 Rg4 f6 2 1 Qxf6
that advantage reached decisive proportions.

Two Knights' Defense

The game Estrin-Berliner (Final, V World Correspondence Ch 1 965-67)

was published all over the world. After the usual moves...
1 e4 es
2 Nf3 Nc6
3 Bc4 Nf6
4 Ng5 d5
5 exd5 b5
6 Bfl Nd4
7 c3 Nxd5
8 Ne4 Qh4
9 Ng3 Bg4
10 f3
... the American Master played a new and tremendously interesting contin­
uation, involving a piece sacrifice:
10 .... e4?!
1 1 cxd4 Bd6
This sacrifice was so unexpected, in fact, that White at first thought Black
had simply overlooked the knight on d4. After...
12 Bxb5t Kd8
1 3 �o exf3
... the following position arose:

Diagram 44 After 1 3 ... exf3

14 Rxf3 Rb8!
15 Be2? Bxf3
16 Bxf3 Qxd4t
17 Khl Bxg3
18 hxg3 Rb6
19 d3 Ne3
20 Bxe3 Qxe3
40
 21 Bg4 h51
22 Bh3 g5
Black has seized the initiative. Berliner's play thereafter was impeccable,
and he went on to a well-deserved win.
Somewhat later, it was shown that White couid have defended himself by
playing either 15 Bf l or 15 a4; but Black·s attack would still be enough to
guarantee him a draw. Some were even heard to say that perhaps Berliner's
novelty would be the refutation of 4 Ng5 in the Two Knights' Defense( ! ).
Your author would find it very hard to agree with this. Can it be that Black
can give up a piece in the opening, and gain the initiative? Nor for a moment
did I lose my conviction that Berliner's novelty, while it might be interesting,
still had to be unsound. For Black's king is left in the center, and White still
has many counterattacking resources. Finally, the "counter-novelty·' was dis­
covered.
In the game Estrin-Nielsen (Final, VII World Correspondence Ch 1972-75),
White played 14 Qb3 ! , and Black was in hot water immediately.

Diagram 45 After 14 Qb3

Black played 14... Nf4 (if 14 ...fxg2 15 Rf2 Nf4, then 16 Rxg2) 15 Rxf3
Rb8 16 Rxf4 RxbS (or 16. .. Bxf4- 17 Qd5t Bd6 18 d3 with a clear advantage
for White) 17 Qxb5 Bxf4 18 Qd5t Bd7 19 Nfl Bxh2t 2 0 Nxh2 Qel t 21 Nfl
Qxcl 22 Qc5, and White had a great advantage; after 22...Qel 23 b3 Re8 24
Nc31 Qxal 25 Nd5 that advantage became decisive (the game ended 25...Bc6
26 Qxc6 Qxd4t 27 N ( l )e3 Qe5 28 Qa8t Kd7 29 Qxa7 Re6 30 Qa4t Kd8 31
Qa8t Kd7 32 Qf8 Rh6 33 Qxf7t Kc8 34 Ne7t I<b8 35 N(7)f5 Qal t 36 Kf2
Rhl 37 Qf8t Kb7 38 Qb4t Kc8 39 Ne7t Kd7 40 N7d5 Qe5 41 Qg4t Kd8 42
d4 Qd6 43 Qxg7 Kc8 44 a4 Qh2 45 a5 Ral 46 b4 Kb7 47 b5!, and Black re­
signed, since White answers 47 ...RxaS with 48 b6J.
Should Black play, instead of 12 ...KdS, perhaps 12 ...Kf8? Well, Black's
king is safer then; but at the same time the king's rook loses its freedom of
movement, and consequently its ability to participate in the game.

The Two Knights' Defense is one of the very oldest of openings; even in
this apparently played-out opening, once in awhile one sees new continua­
tions in assorted variations.

41
 This was the continuation of the game Sundqvist-Gabran (Correspondence
match Sweden-USSR 1 973-74) : 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d4 ed 5 0-0
Nxe4 6 Rel d5 7 Bxd5 Qxd5 8 Nc3 Qa5 9 Nxe4 Be6 10 Neg5 0-0-0 1 1 Nxe6
fe 12 Rxe6 Bd6 1 3 Bg5 Rdf8 14 Qe2 Kd7.
After these well-known moves, White played 15 Rel ! (prior to this game,
theory rejected this move in favor of 15 Bh4 Re8, with even chances):

Diagram 46 After 1 5 Rel

15 ...Rxf3 1 6 Qxf3!
Here's the point: 1 6 Bd2 would be bad in view of 1 6... QhS 1 7 Qxf3 Bxh2t
18 Kfl Qxf3 1 9 gf Bd6 20 R6e4 Rf8 2 1 Kg2 h5, when Black has compensa­
tion for the exchange (Timgren-Novikov, Correspondence match, Sweden­
USSR 1960-62).
16 ... QxgS 17 Qf7t Ne7
Black cannot save himself by 17 ... Be7 18 f4 Qc5, on account of 19 R6e5 !
Nxe5 20 Rxe 5 ; while after 17 ... Kc8 White wins by 18 Re8t Rxe8 19 Rxe8t
Nd8 20 Qe6t Kb8 21 f4! Bxf4 22 Qd7.
18 £4 QcS 19 Rxe7t Bxe7 20 Re5 Qb6 (if 20. . . Qd6, then 2 1 Rd5) 2 1
Rxe7t Kd8 2 2 Qxg7, and White won easily.

In the same correspondence match, Fagerstrom (Sweden) played Rozen­

berg. From the position diagrammed above, Black followed the ECO recom­
mendation, and played 15 ... d3 (instead of 15 ... Rxf3). But White had a very
strong reply to this move also. In all likelihood, the Swedes had thoroughly
analyzed this variation, since White had an important improvement ready in
this game, too, and obtained a clear advantage.
16 Qxd 3 !
T h e only way; after 1 6 cd Rxf3 17 Bd2 Qh5 Black has t h e advantage,
while the text move leads to a strong attack for White, reminiscent of Sund­
qvist-Gabran.
1 6... Rxf3
On 16 ... h6 White can favorably reply 1 7 Bh4.
17 Qxf3 QxgS 18 Qf7t Be7 19 b4I !
42
 Diagram 47 After 19 b4

19 ... a6 20 c4 Kd8 2 1 f4! Qg4 22 Rxc6! be 23 (hce7t Kc8 24 Qe4! Kb8

Black's position is hopeless. after 25 bS ab 26 Qxc6 QfS 27 QxbSt Qxb5
28 cb Rf8 2 9 Re4 Rf5 30 a4 he gave up the ghost.

This novelty of the Swedes is of great theoretical interest. The author

finds himself reminded of Chigorin's saying: "The words best defense, best
move, strongest move make me afraid. Oh, I say them myself. But do you
notice how often the strongest move is only the strongest move today, and
considerably weaker tomorrow? "

Dr. V. H. Vreend of Holland says that he used the position after 15 Re l

for a doctoral dissertation at the University of Amsterdam on ''the analysis
of an optimal model". Dr. Vreend further tells us that the position occurring
after this move used to come up frequently in his games during 1971-72. Un­
fortunately, neither these games nor Dr. Vreend's dissertation have been pub­
lished in the chess press, and have thus remained unknown to the chess
world. And Dr. Vreend also neglects to mention the names of his opponents
in those games. ·

The move 1 5 Rel was analyzed back in 1950 by the Moscow C/M Igor
Glazkov, but those researches also were never published. That is why the
Swedish players should still be considered the authors of the move.

On 1 5 ... Qxa2 , Vreend recommends that White play 16 b3 QaS 1 7 Bh4;

however, after 17 ... QdS ! Black defends himself. Glazkov's 16 Qe4! is strong­
er, which in fact does give White the better of it, since 16 ... Q)cb2 is met by
1 7 Qg4! , while after 16 ... Qa5 White unexpectedly plays 17 Be7 ! , with the
advantage.

Worth examining is the sharp Max Lange Attack, which continues to be

seen in tournaments to this day. The main attraction of this opening is the
plethora of combinative possibilities open for White.
After 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d4 ed 5 0-0 Bc5 6 e5 d5 7 ef de 8
Rel t Be6 9 Ng5 Qd5 10 Nc3 Qf5 1 1 Nce4 Bf8 12 Nxf7 Kxf7 1 3 Ng5t Kg8
43
following position arises:

am
,:, ...
14 g4 Qxf6? (a mistake: 14... Qg6 is correct) 15 Rxe6 Qd8 16 Qf3 Qd7 the

w.:i··�
�

•
Diagram 48 After 16 ... Qd7

Now White wins spectacularly with 17 Re7 ! ! (Samisch-Riemann, Berlin

1 927). Despite the fact that Black can take White's rook with any one of
three pieces, he has no way to save himself from the mate.

Along with 8... Be6, one also sees 8... Kf8 9 BgS gf 10 Bh6t Kg8 1 1 Nbd2
Bg4, which also leads to an advantage for White after 12 Ne4 b6 1 3 c3 Ne5?

Diagram 49 After 1 3 ... NeS

This position occurred in Kazic-Vukovic ( 1 940). Black has two extra

pawns, and at first glance appears to have no problems. But White has a pret­
ty combination which leads to victory: 14 NxeS!
The basis for this unexpected queen sacrifice 1s the unfortunate position of
Black's king.
14 ... Bxdl 15 Nd7 ! !
The decisive blow i s truly magnificent. There is n o defense against mate.
15 ... Be7 16 Nexf6tl Blcf6 17 Re8tl Qxe8 18 Nxf6 mate.

The game Cvidenko-Levertov ( 1963) is also of indisputable interest to the

theory of the Two Knights' Defense:
1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 NgS dS 5 ed Na5 6 d3 h6 7 Nf3 e4 8 Qe2
Nxc4 9 de Bc5 10 Bf4 0-0 1 1 Nfd2 Bg4 12 Qfl Re8.
44
 Here theory formerly recommended two lines, which were considered equal,
namely 13 Nb3 and 1 3 Be3. However, this game demonstrates that the former lin,
at least, is dubious.
1 3 Nb3 e 3 I 1 4 NxcS eft 1 5 Kxf2

Diagram 50 After 1 5 Kxf2

Theory examined 1 5 ... Re2t 16 Kgl here; however, Levertov stepped off
the theoretical path with 1 5 ...Bc2 I, and after 1 6 Qcl Ng4t 1 7 Kgl (if 1 7 Kg3,
then 17 ... gS ! ) 17 ...Qc7 18 Nb3 Bdl ! ! White had to resign.
White fares no better after 16 Qxe2 Rxe2t 17 Kxe2, on account of 1 7 . . .
Qe7t. Thus, the only correct reply to 1 2. . . ReB i s now 1 3 B e 3.

Two more short games from the "evergreen" Two Knights' Defense :
Obukhovsky-Gusev (Moscow 1 975): 1 e4 cS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 NgS
dS S cd NaS 6 d3 h6 7 Nf3 c4 8 Qc2 Nxc4 9 de Bd6 10 Nc3
An inaccuracy! 10 h3 was correct, preventing Bg4.
1 0... 0-0 1 1 Nd4 Bg4 1 2 Qc3 Rc8 1 3 h3
Too late!
1 3 •.•Bf3 ! 1 4 0-0?
The decisive error. 14 Kfl was necessary.

Diagram S I After 1 4 0-0

1 4•..Ng4l 1 S Qcl Qh4 1 6 Nxf3 cf 1 7 Nc4 Bh2t 18 Khl Rxc4 I 9 Qxc4

Nxf2t 2 0 Rxf2 Qxf2!, and in view of the inescapable mate, White resigned.
45
 Syromyatnikov-Petrov ( Elabuga 1975): 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4
Ng5 d5 5 ed Nd4 6 Nc3 h6 7 Ngc4 Nxe4 8 Nxe4 Qh41 9 d3 Bg4 10 Qd2 Bf3 1
11 0-0?
In this game too, castling is White's decisive mistake. 1 1 Kfl was correct.

Diagram 52 After 11 0-0

l l ... Ne2t 12 Khl Nf4t 1 3 Kgl Qh3 1 White resigned.

Wilke11-Barre Variation (Traxler Counterattack)

This highly interesting, double-edged counterattack was introduced into

practical play in 1 896 by the Czech player Karel Traxler. Traxler's Counter­
attack is an integral part of the Two Knights· Defense; but in view of its un­
usual nature and its multiplicity of attacking and counterattacking ideas, it
deserves separate study.
At the very beginning of the game, Black offers the sacrifice of an entire
rook, in return for a dangerous attack on the enemy king position.
Here is one line of this original gambit:
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 Ng5 Bc5 5 Nxf7
These days, theory prefers the alternative 5 Bxf7t. Although White gets
little from this move, Black's tremendously strong counterattack is also con­
siderably weakened.
5 ... Bxf2t 6 Kfl Qe7 7 Nxh8 d5 8 ed Bg4 9 Be2 Bxe2 10 Qxe2 Nd4 1 1
Qxf2 0-0-0 1 2 Na3

Diagram 5 3 After 1 2 Na3

46
 White has an extra rook and minor piece, but his pieces are split up, while
all of Black's are actively placed.
In a correspondence game Braun-Walter (1970), White had to resign after
1 2... RfS 1 3 Ke l Ne4 14 Qe3 ? Qh4t 1 5 g3 Nxg 3 ! .
But here White's 1 4th move was a n error. Instead of 14 Qe3, he should
have played 1 4 Qxf8t Qxf8 1 5 Rfl , when he has hopes of repelling the enemy
attack with a material advantage.
However, it must be emphasized that Black tDo did not play his best in
this example. In the diagrammed position, for example, the strongest move
is 1 2 ... Nc41
Now 13 Qf7 is not good, on account of 1 3 . . . RfS 14 Qxf8t Qxf8t with
mate in two moves. And if White plays 13 Qe3, then there follows 13 ... RfSt
14 Kgl (if 14 Ke l, then 14 ... Qh4t, as in the Braun-Walter game) 14... Qf6!
15 h3 (White's only playable move, since he loses at once after 15 Qel ? Qb6 ! )
1 5 . . .Qh4!, and White has nothing to play against the murderous threat of 16 . ..
Nf3t !

Ruy Lopez

As we said before, even the solid, quiet Ruy Lopez has a number of gambit
lines. Let's examine a few of Black's gambit possibilities first.
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 f5
This is the so-called Janisch Gambit (Schliemann Defense), which occurs in
all sorts of tournaments.
4 Nc3 fe 5 Nxe4 d5 6 Ng3
The generally-employed 6 Nxe5 will be treated further on.
6 ...e4 7 Nd4 Qf6!
A new and strong move. Theory only examines 7...Qd6 here, and after
8 d3 ed 9 Qxd3 White has the better position.
8 Qh5t Ke7 !
White has no time to take the d-pawn, with his knight on d4 en prise.
9 Nxc6t be 10 Ba4 g6 1 1 Qe2 h5
Now Black has an excellent game. One game continued: 1 2 f3 h4 13 Nfl
h3 14 fe hg 15 edt

(See diagram at top of next page)

And now the surprising and spectacular I S ... Qe6 ! 1 decided the game for
Black. White had nothing better than to give up.

47
 Oiagram 54 After 1 5 edt

Another interesting game was the correspondence encounter ljim-Medler

(197 3-74): 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS fS 4 Nc3 fe 5 Nxe4 d5 6 Nxe5 de 7
Nxc6 Qd5 8 c4 Qd6 9 Nxa7t Bd7 10 Bxd7t Qxd7 1 1 Qh5 t g6 12 Qe5 t Kf7
1 3 Nb5 c6 14 Qd4
This last move, first played in a 1956 telephone game between the Swedish
players Verner and Engvall, represents a considerable strengthening of White's
resources. The earlier continuation here was 14 Qxh8 Nf6 15 Nc3 Re8 16 b3
Bc5 17 Qxe8t Kxe8 18 h3 Qd3 !, with good counterplay for Black.

Diagram 5 5 After 1 4 Qd4

After the text move, Black does not have such an easy time finding the
right plan. Two mistaken lines, for example, are: 14 ... Qg4?, on account of
15 0-0! cb 16 f3; and 14... Nf6? on account of 15 Qxd7t Nicd7 16 Nc3 Nc5
17 0-0 Bg7 18 f3, in either case with a clear advantage for White.
Your author spent the spring of 1966 in Bucharest, training the Ruman­
ians; at that time, l acquainted them with the move 14 Qd4. Like all opening
novelties, the move was quickly put into practice, with successful results. In
the semifinals of the European Team Championships of 1966, the Rumanian
Master Ciocaltea used the move against East Germany's Malich; after 14. .. QfS
15 Nd6t Bxd6 16 Qxd6 White had the advantage, and confidently brought
the point home.
Later it was established that Black's proper response in the diagrammed po­
sition was 14...Qe7. The Ijim-Medler game continued: 1 5 Nc3 ( 1 5 Qxh8 Nf6
48
16 b3 Rd8 1 7 Bb2 Bg7 18 (vcd8t Kxd8 19 Nc3 was probably better here,
with good chances for White) l 5 ... Nf6 16 0-0 Rd8 17 Qe3

Diagram 56 After 17 Qe3

Theory rates this position as favorable to White, since after the normal 17 ...
Rd3 18 Qe2 and 19 f3, Black is in difficulties. But Black's l 7... Rd3 is the cul-
prit here; Medler's 17 ...QeS ! is stronger. Now he threatens 18 ... Bc5 or 18 ...
Bd6, so White decides to return one pawn.
After 1 8 d4 Rxd4 19 Qe2 Bd6, Black's good play is quite enough compen­
sation for the pawn.
Instead of 16 0-0, stronger is the immediate 16 Qe3, and if 16 ... RdB, then
1 7 d4!
Other possible continuations from the preceding diagram are 1 4... Qxd4 1 5
Nxd4 Bg7 1 6 Ne2 Ra4 or 1 4... RdB 1 5 (vcd7t Rxd7 1 6 Nc3 Nf6 1 7 0- 0 Bc5
(Augustin-Mohring, Stary Smokovec 1976), when the active position of
Black's pieces may even be worth two pawns.

Another position worth studying in the Janisch Gambit is that occurring

after 1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS f5 4 Nc3 fc 5 Nxe4 dS 6 Nxe5 de 7 Nxc6 Qg5
8 Qe2 Nf6 9 f4 Qh4t 10 g3 Qh3 11 Nc5t c6 12 Bc4 Bc5 1 3 d3 Ng4 14 Nf7
Bf2t 1 5 Kdl e 3

Diagram 5 7 After 1 5 ... e 3

A s far back a s mid-1974. Black was thought to have good chances i n this
position. But at the Olympiad in Nice that year, Nieto played 16 Qf3 ag� inst
_
Boey, and obtained the upper hand after 16 ... Nf6 17 NeS. Then 1t was d1s-
49
covered that the continuation 1 6... Nxh21 17 Nd6t Kf8 18 Nxc8 Nxf3 1 9
Rxf3 Ngl ! would have led to a decisive advantage for Black.
In July 1 975, in Amsterdam, Kavalek met Ljubojevic's 1 6... Nxh2 with 1 7
Qe4t! Kf8 18 Bxe3 Bg4t 1 9 Kd2 Re8 2 0 Ne5, and once again the advantage
lay with White. That game continued 20... Qxg3 2 1 Bxf2 Qxf2t 22 Kc3 g6
23 Rxh2 ! Qxh2 24 Qd4 Ke7 25 Nxg4 Qe2 26 Ne5 Rhf8 27 Qd7t Kf6 28
Ng4t, and Black had to concede.
But then the Moscow C/M Nesterenko found an important improvement
for Black: not 12 ... Bc5, but 12 ...h S I

Diagram 5 8 After 1 2. . . h 5

In a correspondence game Kunzelman-Nesterenko ( 1 975-76), the contin­

uation was 1 3 Nf7 h4! 14 Rgl hg 1 5 Nxh8 gh 16 Rhl Bc5 17 Qxh2 ( 1 7 Rxh2
loses on account of 17 ... Qg3t 18 Rf2 Bg4 19 Qfl Bh3 20 Qe2 0-0-0, when
even an extra rook will not be enough to save White from losing), and it seems
White has the better chances - after all, he is a rook ahead:

Diagram 59 After 1 7 Qxh2

But Nesterenko's idea became clear after 17 ...Bf2 t ! I - the point! Now
18 Kxf2? loses to 18 ... Ng4t. In the game White played 18 Qxf2, but after
18 ... Qxh l t and 1 9... Qxh8 Black restored the material balance, with a prom­
ising position to boot.
Nesterenko·s idea received its over-the-board tryout in a game Hangele­
Manne (Oslo 1978), when White replied to 1 3 ... h4! with 14 Nxh8 (instead of
14 Rgl). After 14... hg 1 5 Ng6 Bc5 16 d4 Bxd4 17 Be3 Bg4! 18 Bxd4 (the
only move; White must give up his queen, since 18 Qd2 is beaten by 18 ... Bxe3
50
19 Qxe3 Bf3 ! ) 18...Bxe2 19 Bxe2, and now Black should have played 19. . .
Rd8!, maintaining his advantage.

All the opening texts give 3 . . . Nge7 in the Ruy Lopez a poor evaluation, but
it is quite playable.
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Ne6 3 Bb5 Nge7 4 d4 ed 5 Nxd4 g6 6 Nc3 Bg7 7 8e3 0-0
8 Qd2 leads to a position which has always been evaluated in White's favor.
But in the game Voskanian-Obukhovsky (Kirov 1974), Black unexpectedly
played 8.. ,d5 ! 9 ed Nxd5 10 Nxe6 be, sacrificing a pawn. White replied 1 1
Bxe6 Nxe3 1 2 Bxa8?
This is a serious error. After 12 fe Qxd2t 13 Kxd2 Rb8 14 Rabl Rd8t
15 Ke2 Bxc3 16 be Be6 the chances would have been equal. 12 Qxd8 Nxc2t
1 3 Kd2 Rxd8t 14 Kxc2 Rb8 is weaker, however, and gives Black the better
chances. And after the text move, White is subjected to a crushing attack.

Diagram 60 After 12 Bxa8

12 .•. Qxd2t 1 3 Kxd2 Ne4t 14 Kcl Bh6t 15 Kbl (if 15 Kdl , then 15 . . .
Nxb2t 16 Ke l Re8t 1 7 Ne2 Ba6 1 8 Bf3 Na4! and 19. .. N c 3 ) 1 5 ... Nd2t 16
Kcl Ne4t! 17 Kbl Nxe3t 18 be Be6 tBlack now threatens 19 ... RbSt). After
19 Kb2 Rxa8 White resigned.

The game Hesse-Bowen ( European Corr Ch 1974) is instructive:

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Ne6 3 Bb5 8e5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 ed 6 eS Ne4 7 0-0 d5
The immediate 7,.,0-0 is bad on account of 8 cd Bb6 9 d5 Ne7 10 Bd3 f5
11 Nbd2 Nc5 12 d6 Ng6 13 Bc4t, when White has the advantage (Smyslov­
Randiviir, Parnu 1947).
8 ed 0-0 9 de Qxe71
This natural move is probably stronger than the theoretical 9 ...Qf6, which
led, in Stein-Spassky, Moscow 1961, to an advantage for White after 10 Bxc6
be 11 cd Bd6 12 Rel Bf5 13 Nc3 Rfe8 14 Nxe4 Bxe4 15 Bg5 !
1 0 ed Nxd41
After 10... RdS 11 Qc2 ! or 10... Bd6 11 Nc3 Bf5 12 Rel White has the bet·
ter chances.
(See diagram at top of next page)
51
 Diagram 6 1 After l0... Nxd4

Now White has practically n o choice.

11 Nxd4 Qb6 12 Bd3
There is nothing better. If 12 Be3, then l2 ... Rd8.
12 ... Nxf2 ! 13 Rxf2 Bxd4 14 Qf3
In the correspondence game Erdelyan-Bowen ( 1966), White chose 14 Qc2,
and after 14... Rd8! 15 Bfl RdS ! 16 Nc3 RfS 17 Ndl Bd7 18 Bd3 Re8! 19
Kfl RfeS 20 Bd2 Qh6 ! he lost.
14... Bg41 1 5 Qxg4 Bxf2t 16 Kfl Rfe8 17 Bd2
If 17 Bxh7t Kxh7 18 QfSt Kg8 19 Qxf2, then 19... QbS t 20 Kgl Re2 2 1
Qfl Rae8, and Black wins immediately.
17 ... Rad8 18 Qf5

Diagram 62 After 18 QfS

Now comes an elegant final combination.

18 ... Rxd31 19 Qxd3 Bgl 20 Qf3
Other moves also fail to save White, e.g. : 20 Qg3 Bd4 or 20 Bel Bxh2 2 1
Bf2 Qxb2 22 Bd4 Qcl t 2 3 Kf2 Qe l t 2 4 Kf3 Qg3 mate {Bowen's analysis).
20... Bxh2 and White resigned.
A brilliant game, which presents this interesting variant of the Ruy Lopez..
in a whole new light.

52
 White has gambit possibilities in the Ruy Lopez too. In the Final of the
VII World Correspondence Championship (1972-7 5), Krziston-Nielsen:
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Bc5 4 c3 Nge7 5 0-0 Bb6 6 d4 ed 7 cd d5 8 ed
Nxd5 9 Relt Be6 10 Bg5 Qd6 11 Nbd2 h6 12 Ne4 Qb4 13 Bxc6t be
Here Grandmaster Igor Zaitsev, playing White, selected 14 Qcl I

Diagram 63 After 14 Qcl

Black must accept the sacrifice; if he plays 14 ... 0-0, then White plays 15 a3
Qb3 16 Bxh6! gh 17 Qxh6, and wins.
14 ...hg 15 Qxc6t Ke7 16 Nfxg51
In Euwe's opinion, 16 a3 is also good enough to win. In the game Bogdan­
ovich-Damjanovich (Pee 1964) this was met by 16 ... Qxb2 17 NexgS Nf4
(White threatened 18 Rxe6t!, and mate in two) 18 Qe4 Ne2t 19 Qxe2 Qxe2
20 Rxe2 Rad8 21 Rael Rh6 22 Nxf7!, and White won without difficulty.
But Zaitsev's suggestion is still more energetic.
16 ... Qxd4 17 Nc5! Nf4 18 Ngxe6 fe 19 Rxe6t l Kf7 20 Re41 Ne2t 21
Rxe2 BxcS 22 Qf3t Kg6 23 Re6t Kh7 24 Rdl Qh4
Black could drag out the game by 24... Qxf2t 25 Qxf2 Bxf2t 26 Kxf2,
but not save it.
25 g3 Qh3 26 Qe4t Kg8 27 Qxa8t Kf7 28 Rd7t l Kxe6 29 Qd5t Kf6 30
Qf7t, and Black capitulated.

The game Dorfman-Gulko (USSR Qi 1976) proved exceptionally impor­

tant to theory. It went as follows:
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 Nf6 4 0-0 Bc5 5 Nxe5 Nxe4 6 Qe2 Nxe5 7 Qxe4
Qe7 8 d4 Nc6 9 Qg4 f5
If 9... Bxd4, then 10 Bxc6. And 9 ... Nxd4 fails to 10 Qxg7.
10 Qh5t l
Also playable is 10 Qxf5 Nxd4 11 Qh5t g6 12 Qdl c6 13 b4 Bb6 14 Bd3
0-0, with chances for both sides.
10... g6 11 Qdl
So White is sacrificing a pawn for the initiative.
53
 l l ... Nxd4 12 b4 Bb6

Diagram 64 After 12 ... Bb6

A critical moment. In Kuzmin-Knezevic (Varna 1971), White played

13 Nc3? c6 14 Na4 Ne6 15 Nxb6 ab 16 Bc4 d5 17 Bb3 Q,cb4 18 Bb2 0-0 19
Rel b5 20 Qe2 Qd6, and Black went on to win.
There was another game (not publilihed, unfonunately) in which Timoschen­
ko employed this novelty. Dorfman knew of the game; Gulko - alas! - did not.
13 c4! ! Qe2
13... Ne2t would have held out longer. After the text move, 14 Rel fails
to 14... Nf3t.
15 c5 Qxdl 16 Rxdl Nxb5 17 a4! Nd6 18 cd cd 19 Nc3 d5 20 Bg5 !
Black is ahead in material, but his pieces stand very badly.
20... 0-0 2 1 Be7 Re8 22 Nxd5 Kf7 23 a5 I Bd8 24 Bxd8 Rxd8 25 Rel gS
Of course, 25 ..•Re8 is bad, on account of 26 Rxe8 Kxe8 27 Nc7t.
26 h4! gh 27 Re7t l(g6 28 b5 d6 29 Rel l, and Black soon resigned.

The Open Variation of the Ruy is a frequent guest in today's tournaments:

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Nxe4 6 d4 b5 7 Bb3 d5 8 de
Be6 9 c3 Bc5 10 Nbd2 0-0 1 1 Bc2 Nxf2 I ? 12 Rxf2 £6 13 ef Bxf2t !
This move is now considered strongest, drawing the White king to the f-file.
On 13 . .. Q,cf6 White replies 14 Qfl (Smyslov-Botvinnik, Moscow 1943).

■••t•ii•·i
--==,.,.,,,,'=""""=""=
14 Kxf2 Qxf6 15 K 1 Rae8

la· "■
• •
L.�.-

■ ■
Diagram 65 After 15 ... Rae8
l2J
, .,.• rm
� .u.<),. w�
��
54 -���
G'� "�-
� ,
 After 16 Nfl Black could play 16... Ne5 17 Be3 Nxf3t 18 Qxf3 Qxf3 19 gf
Rxf3 20 Bd4 Bh3 21 Ng3 g6 with about even chances. Another known line is
16 h3 Ne5 17 Nxe5 Qxe5 18 Nf3 Qg3 19 Qd3 g6, with initiative for Black
(Kartavov-Grozdensky, corr 1973 ).
In Kozlov-Estrin (Voskresensk 1973), White decided to try 16 Qfl . After
16... Kh8 17 h3 Bf7 18 Nb3 Bh5 19 Bg5 Qd6 Black had dangerous threats, and
White's 20 Qd3 was met by 20 ...Bg6 21 Qdl Rxf3!

Diagram 66 After 21...Rxf3

If now 22 Qxf3, then 22...Bxc2, and Black is a pawn up. Kozlov played
22 Bxg6, but the reply 22... Ref8! (White has a good game after 22 ...Qxg6 23
Qxf3 Qxg5 24 Rdl, with compensation for the pawn minus) 23 gf (if 23 Bd3,
then 23... Rxh3! decides) 23...Qg3t 24 Khl Qxh3t 25 Kgl Qg3t 26 Khl
QxgS 27 Qgl (if White retreats the bishop, Black plays 27...Rf4 and 28... Rh4)
27• .•Qh6t 28 Qh2 Qxg6 gave Black, in effect, two extra tempi, and he went
on to win without much difficulty.
In the game Vujevic-Estrin (Strasbourg 1975), White played 15 Nfl (in­
stead of 15 Kgl ) . This move is weaker, allowing Black to play 15 ...Ne5 im­
mediately. After 16 Kgl Nxf3t 17 Qxf3 Qxf3 18 gf Rxf3, the following po­
sition arose:

Diagram 67 After 18...Rxf3

White's best here would have been 19 Be3 Bh3 20 Bc5, preventing Black
from doubling his rooks on the f-file by 20. .. Rf8. Vujevic, however, played
19 Bdl Rf7 20 BhS ?, in order to provoke 20... g6. This in turn would allow
White's darksquare bishop the use of the square h6 - or so White thought.
55
 Unfortunately, the move ..• g7-g6 was actually part of Black's plan, so the
move 20 BhS is a loss of tempo for White.
20... g6 2 1 Bel Re8 22 Bh6 Bh3 23 Ne3?
Now Black has an elegant opportunity to win the game. Had White played
23 Ng3 instead, then 24 ... Re6, threatening 24 ... gS ! 25 BxgS Rg7 26 Bf4 Rxe2.

Diagram 68 After 23 Ne3

23... gS I 24 BhS
If 24 BxgS, then 24..•Rg7 wins a piece.
24... Rxe3 25 Bxf7t Kxf7 26 Kf2 ReS 27 Kg3 Kg6!
Now if 28 BxgS KxgS 29 Kxh3, Black wins by 29...Re3t 30 Kg2 Re2t and
3 1...Rxb2.
28 Bf8 g4 29 Kh4 Rh5t 30 Kg3 Rf5 White resigned.
If the bishop retreats, then 3 1...KhS and mate next move.

A very interesting and instructive pawn sacrifice in the opening was that
employed by Grandmaster Smyslov (White) against former World Champion
Euwe in the World Championship Match-Tournament of 1948:
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 S 0-0 Nxe4 6 d4 bS 7 Bb3 dS 8 de
Be6 9 Qe2 NcS 10 Rdl Nxb3 1 1 ab Qc8
Black eliminates the opposing bishop and removes his queen from the d·
file. The same position had occurred a round before this game in Keres-Re­
shevsky. There White continued 12 BgS, but achieved nothing after 12... h6.

B -�
····· , ,, �
iii
" �

t ■ 'I
•

Diagram 69 ■i■ After 11... Qc8

"
ft
Ir¢.

�i ft
56
,���-•·- ·
���fl
 12 c41 1
A new move, which "blows up" the Black central position.
12 ...dc 13 be Bxc4
Black has nothing better than to accept the pawn sacrifice.
14 Qe4!
Now White's queen is firmly ensconced in the center. 14 ...Qe6 would be
met by 15 Rd6! Bxd6 16 Qxc6t &7 17 edt, while 14... Nb4 1s answered by
15 Bg5 ! , threatening Rd8t.
14...Ne7 15 Na3 !
Euwe probably underestimated this move. 15... Bb3 would now be met by
16 Rd3 Be6 17 NxbS BfS 18 Nxc7t.
15 ... c6 16 Nxc4 be 17 Qxc4
White ha.� recovered his material, and continues to develop his attack
against the marooned enemy king.
17 ... Qb7
If l 7... Qe6, the following combination is possible: 18 Rxa6 ! Qxc4 19
Rxa8t Nc8 20 Rxc8t Ke7 21 Rc7t &6 22 Rxc6t Qxc6 23 Nd4t.
18 e61 f6 19 Rd7 QbS 20 QxbS cb 21 Nd4
22 NxbS was the threat.
21... Rc8 22 Be3 Ng6 2 3 Rxa6 NeS 24 Rb7 BcS 25 NfS 0-0
If 25 ... Bxe3, then 26 Nd6t Kd8 27 e7 mace.
26 h 3 1 Black resigned, since 26... g6 is met by 27 Nh6t Kh8 28 Bxc5 RxcS
29 Raa7, threatening Rxh7 mate.

Sixteen years later, Haag, playing Black against Gipslis (Piech 1964), at­
tempted to rehabilitate this line for Black, meeting 14 Qe4 with 14...Nb4.

Diagram 70 After 14... Nb4

White played 15 Na3 1 (stronger than Smyslov's recommendation 15 Bg5)

15 ... Bb3 16 Nxb5 Bxdl
In a game Ostap-Bloch (California 1967), Black played 16 ... RbS, when
57
White sacrificed another piece: 17 Nd6t ! cd 18 edt Qe6 1 9 d7t Kd8 20 Bg5t
f6 21 Qf4 Rb7 22 Nd4, with a decisive attack.
17 Nxc7t Qcc7 18 Qxa8t l{d7
On 18 ... Qd8, White continues 19 Qxd8t Kxd8 20 Bg5t and 2 1 Rxdl.
19 Bg5!
Sacrificing another piece, White obtains a tremendous attack against the
enemy king.
19 ... Bxf3 20 Qxf3 Be5 2 1 Rdl t Ke8 22 Rel Re8 23 Qa8t Kd7 24 Rdlt
Bd6 25 Qe4 Re6 26 QfS f6 27 Bxf6 Nd5 28 ed QaS 29 Bc3 and Black resigned.

Along with 14 ... Ne7 and 14 ... Nb4, Black has also tried 14... Qb7. Now 1 5
Nc3 Rb8 leads t o the following position :

Diagram 7 1 After 1 5 ... Rb8

As Smyslov pointed out, White has a quick win by continuing 16 e6! 8xe6
17 Ng5 Nd8 18 Rxd8t Kxd8 19 Nxe6t fe 20 Qxe6 Be7 21 Bg5 1 - a thorough­
ly convincing example of a gambit solution to the problem of the opening.

Marshall Attack
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Ne6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Rel b5 7 Bb3 0-0 8 c3
dS
This surprising pawn sacrifice was first seen in the famous game Capablanca
-Marshall, 1 918. In remm, Black obtained a dangerous attack on the enemy
king position.
9 ed e4
In the above mentioned game, Marshall continued 9 ... Nxd5 10 Nxe5 Nxe5
1 1 RxeS Nf6 12 Rel Bd6, and White had some little trouble stemming the on­
rush of his opponent's well-placed pieces. Later on, l 1...Nf6 was replaced by
l l...c6 in tournament praxis. Even today, this continuation is successfully
employed by Black, having seen service for over sixty years in all sorts of
tournaments. The move played by Black here, 9..•e4, is also worth smrying.
10 de ef 1 I QxO
Nowadays 1 1 d4! is considered strongest.
58
 11 ... Bg4 12 Qg3 Bd6
This was the continuation of a game Morh-Hausen, played in Norway in
195 1. 12... Re8 is also possible here, and if 13 f3, then Black has a favorable
13 ..."Qd3 ! , sacrificing a piece.
13 Qh4
13 f4 was safer. Now Black has the chance to develop a dangerous attack.
13 ...ReS 14 Rxe8t Qxe8 15 f3

Diagram 72 After 15 f3

15 . . .Qe2 !
Here's the point: White is still two pawns up, but all Black's pieces partici­
pate in the attack on the 1,ing. White cannot take the bishop, since after 16 fg
Nxg4 he would be unable to defend against the mate threat.
16 Bc2 Re8 17 fg Nxg4 18 Qxh7t Kf8 19 Qh8t Ke7 20 Qh4t g5 ! 21
Qxg5t Kf8
White is a lot of material ahead, but has to resign.

Rabinovich's Gambit, which entered tournament praxis in the prewar

years, is interesting:
1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 �0 b5 6 Bb3 d6 7 Ng5
One might get the impression that Black's last move was a mistake, allow­
ing White to gain the upper hand by means of this knight sortie. Not at all!
By sacrificing one, or even two pawns, Black has the opportunity to develop
a very strong attack.
7... dS 8 ed Nd4 9 Qel BcS ! 10 Qxe5t Kf8!
The point! Black gives up castling, but now threatens 1 l... Ng4 and 11...
Nd7.
(See diagram at top of next page)

A game Bogatyryev-Dzagurov (Moscow 1939) continued: 11 c3

If 1 1 h3, then after 11...Nd7 12 Qe3 h6 13 Ne4 Nxc2 14 Qc3 Nxal 15
Nxc5 Nxb3 Black keeps an exchange plus.
59
 Diagram 73 After 10... KfB

1 l. .. Ng4 12 Nxf7
Desperation. 12 Qel also loses, in view of 12... Nxb3 13 ab Qxg5 14 d4
Qh4 15 h3 Bd6, when Black comes out a piece ahead.
12•.. Qh4I 1 3 Qxc7 Ne2t 14 Khl, and now Black wins immediately with
14... Nxf2t 15 Rxf2 Qxf2.

An alternative to 9 Qel is 9 Rel, which leads after 9... Bc5 ! 10 Rxe5t Kf8
to a similar position:

Diagram 74 After 10. ..KfS

From this point, there have been the following continuations:

1) 11 h3 Nd7! 12 Nxf7 Qf6 13 Nxh8 NxeS. White has an extra rook, but
Black's attack is unstoppable. In Bonch-Osmolovsky-Dzagurov (Moscow '3 9)
White was mated after 14 d3 Nxb3 15 ab Qxf2t 16 Kh2 Bg4 17 Qh l Nf3 :f:.
2) 1 1 Nc3 Ng4 12 Nge4 Qh4 1 3 RhS Qxh5 14 h3 Qh4 15 NxcS Qxf2t 16
Kh l

(Sec diagram at top of next page)

This position arose in the game Korchnoi-Estrin (Leningrad 195 1). Black
won without difficulty after 16..• Qg3 17 hg Bxg4 18 Qfl Nf3 19 gf Bxf3t 20
Qxf3 Qxf3t 21 Kgl Rc8; however, he would have won much more spectacu­
larly and quickly after 16 ... Nf3 !; and if 17 N5e4, then 17... Qg3 ! !, and mate is
60
 Diagram 75 After 16 Khl

forced, since 18 Nxg3 is met by 18... Nf2 mate, while 18 Qgl loses at once to
18.•. Nf2 t !

Another interesting gambit line i s the following, introduced b y the gifted

Tartar master Rashid Nezhmetidinov,
1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS a6 4 Ba4 d6 S c3 fS 6 ef BxfS 7 d4 e4 8 NgS
Nezhmetdinov also pointed out the possibility 8 0-0?!, considering that
8, .. ef 9 Qxf3 would give White an attack worth the sacrificed piece.
8... dS 9 f3 h6!
This was his idea! Black's usual continuation has been 8... e3 9 Bxe3 h6 10
Nh3 Bxh3, breaking up White's kingside pawns. But instead of 9 Bxe3 White
can play 9 f4 !, followed by 10 Nf3.
10 fe hg 1 1 ef Bd6
-
---
�
-�-
-
, �� =
.--
�� --,
���- i
■1 ■tr�00
fl ■■r�■
-� .-
- L.¼ � <. '

Diagram 76 ■ ■ifflt ■ftm After 11... Bd6

,� •■•■•ft��
• • w.i,q � -
r�
i��a�� ■ E!
4 t�
J..!. �� •
•
• • Ir. ;
.� . .. . .

This position first occurred in the game Shishov- Nezhmetdinov (Tbilisi

1947). White selected what would seem to be a natural move: 1 2 Qg4; but
after 1 2 ... Nf6l 13 QxgS Kf8l it was clear that, although Black is two pawns
down, he has very dangerous threats. The game continued: 14 Bxc6 be 1 5
Qg6 Qd7 1 6 BgS Re8t 1 7 Kdl Ne4 1 8 Kc2 Qf7l
Black's advantage in development is so telling that he can even go quietly
into the endgame, and there recover his sacrificed material with interest.
61
 19 Qxf7t Kxf7 20 Bel Ng3 2 1 Rgl Rxh2 22 Nd2 Ne2 23 Rdl Rxg2
Now that the material balance has been reestablished, Black's positional ad­
vantage is beyond question - he went on to an easy win.
Instead of 14 Bxc6, the game Baturinsky-Estrin (Moscow 1947) continued
14 Bf4, followed by 14••. RhS 1 S Qg3 Qe7t 16 Kdl Ne4 17 Qf3 Rxf5 18
Bxd6 Nxd6 1 9 Rel Qf6 20 Qh3 - and here, with 20... Ne4! Black would have
obtained an irresistible attack for the pawn.

Besides 12 Qg4 (from the position in the last diagram) White has also tried
12 Qe2t and 12 Qf3. Let's look at these too.
The first occurred in a corresponden,;e game Shaposhnikov-Estrin (VI
USSR Corr Ch 1963/64). After 12 Qe2t Kf8 13 h3 Black once again sacri­
ficed the g-pawn, but in a slightly different version 13••• g4!

Diagram 77 After 13•.. g4

White had nothing better than to accept, but once again this gave Black a
powerful attack. Here's how it developed:
14 Qxg4 Rh4 1 5 QgS Re4t 16 Kdl Be7
White has two extra pawns, but the unfortunate position of his king and
the active placement of Black's fiercely threatening pieces require us to prefer
Black's position.
17 Qg6 Nxd41 1 8 Nd2
It's quite obvious that after 18 cd Rxd4t and 19... Rxa4 Black would recov­
er his material, while keeping all the advantages of his position.
18... b5 19 cd ba 20 Nf3
Once again, White could have won the exchange with 20 Nxe4 de 21 Be3,
but after 2 1•••c'S ! he would have been subjected to a practically irresistible at­
tack. On the other hand, the defensive move White chooses also fails to rid
him of his problems.
20 •.. Bf6 2 1 BgS Rb8 22 Bxf6 Nxf6 23 Rel
White's position is indefensible. On 23 Rb! there follows 23... cS 24 de
Qe7, with decisive threats; while after 23 NgS Black wins by 23... Rxd4t 24
Kcl Rc4t 25 Kdl Qe7 26 Rel Ne4, with unstoppable threats.
62
 23 ... Rxb2 24 Qg3 Ree2

Diagram 78 After 24... Ree2

White resigned. On 25 Qxc7 Qxc7 26 Rxc7 Black replies 26 ... Ne4, with an
easy win.

Opening theory develops very quickly. Many variations have been reevalu­
ated in recent years, after toiling analysts have found previously undiscovered
possibilities.
1 e4 eS 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 BbS a6 4 Ba4 d6 S c3 fS 6 ef BxfS 7 d4 e4 8 NgS ct5
9 f3 h6 1 0 fe hg 11 ef 8d6 1 2 Qf3 g4!
Once again the Nezhmetdinov line, and a similar pawn sacrifice.

a■■-t L.aJ,"ii'
•
..a..■
%",
� � ,,8t,
%=

• r� • ■ 7-!��
if� 1!'.'�

■
�
-

l"i•'�
� z t� '.a
-
�
•-
■ ■ t ■ ft ■
■ r� ■ t ■
Diagram 79 After 1 2 ... g4

• a - ■�•
ft � ■ ■ ft fi
lr¢,1i r..... ff{ii � � �
�t:::51,<z_.11� ;'Gj .b
1 3 Qxg4 Nf6 14 Qxg7 Rg8 1 5 Qh6 Rxg2 16 Bdl Qe7 t 17 Kfl
The correspondence game Ekstrom-Svennebi, 1965-67, continued: 17 ...
Rg8 18 Bf3 0-0-0 19 BgS Rdf8, and White gradually fought off the attack. In
the later game Nyman-Estrin (XII European Corr Ch 197 4-7 5 ), Black prefc;.r­
red a rook sacrifice for a decisive attack: 17.•. 0-0-0 1 1
(See diagram a t top o f next page)
This unexpected, but fully justified move convincingly demonsi:rates the
hopelesmess of White's position.
18 Kxg2 Rg8t 19 BgS
19 Kf2 would be met by 19 .•. Qe4 20 Rgl (if 20 Bf3, then 20 ... QxfS)
63
 Diagram 80 After 17•.. 0-0-0

20 ... Q'xfSt 21 Bf4 Re8, with numerous threats.

19 ... Qe3! 20 h4
Of course not 20 Q.xf6, on account of 20... R'xgSt 21 Kfl Qf4t. The rest
is simple.
20 ... Qg3t 21 Kfl Re81 22 Bd2 Ng4 23 Bxg4 Qxg4 24 Qe6t Rxe6 25 fe
Bg3 ! White resigned.

Interesting complications occurred in Tille-Estrin (VII World Corr Ch

1972-75):
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7 6 Qe2 b5 7 Bb3 0-0 8 a4
b4 9 a5?
This mistake allows Black to develop a dangerous kingside attack.
9...d5 1 0 ed e41 1 1 de Bg4 12 d4
In Polyak-Estrin (Leningrad 1953) the continuation was: 12 Rel Bd6 13
h3 ef 14 Qd3 Nh5 ! 15 g3 (15 hg is met by 15 ... Bh2t ! 16 Kxh2 Qh4t 17 Kgl

. .•.1.•
fg 18 Kxg2 Nf4t, and White must resign) 15 ... Nf4 ! 16 gf Qh4 17 Re4 Qxh3
18 Qfl Qh5 19 Qel Bh3, and White resigned.
12... Bd6 13 Bg5 ef 14 gf Bh5 15 Qd3 Bg6 16 Qc4

• • • f•"'·
• f"�" ■ t �� t
t ■ ft�
•·· · •

Diagram 81 e��w��
■ ■m�■ After 16 Qc4

■a ■�i�■
�,ir,.M,� - �, ,

P'Q .c,. - � �
�.Lri/, A . tfr.!li:
½l"f
J '-"m •
f� "7_}· - t=,�
��
In this position I at first intended to continue: 16... Qc8 17 Bh4 Qh3 18
Bg3 Ng4 19 fg Be4 20 f3 Bxg3 2 1 Qe2 Bxf3 22 Rxf3 Bxh2t 23 Kf2 Qxg4,
but came to the conclusion that after 24 Nd2 Qxd4t 25 Kg2 Bd6 26 Qf2 !
White obtains the better chances. The path actually chosen by Black to pur·
sue the attack is undoubtedly more promising.
16 •.. BxhZt! 17 Kxh2 Ng4t 18 fg Qxg5 19 Kg3 h5 20 Qe2 !
The only defensive chance. On 20 f3 Bf5 2 1 d5 Rae8 Black's attack rolls
on unopposed.
20 ... Rae8 2 1 f4 Qh6 ! 22 Qh2 (if 22 g5?, then 22 ... h4t ! wins quickly) 22 ...
Re3t 23 Rf3 Rel 24 d5 Rfe8 25 Bc4!
White defends very resourcefully. The inviting 25 d6 is refuted by 25...
R8e2 26 d7 Rxh2 27 d8(Q)t Kh7 28 gS Rle2 !, and Black wins.

Diagram 82 After 25 Bc4

25 ...Bxc2
2S ... Bc4 could be met by 26 Nd21 Rxal Re3 h4t 28 Kf2 Rhl 29 Qxh l
Bxhl 30 Rxe8t Kh7 3 1 Bd3t g6 32 g5 Qg7 3 3 Re5 Qf8 34 Kgl ! Qc5 t 35
Kxh l Qf2 36 Ne4! Qf3 t 3 7 Kgl Qxf4 38 Re8, and now it is Black who must
scramble for a draw.
26 d6
White could not take the enemy bishop, since 26 Qxc2 runs into 26... hg!,
with decisive threats.
26._Qxd6
26... cd 27 c7 d5 28 Bxd5 Qd6 is probably no better, on account of 29
QxhS.
27 Qxcl Rglt
And now 27... hg is unsatisfactory, since White can gain the upper hand by
means of 28 Qf5 gf 29 Bxf7t !
28 Kh2 R8el 29 QfS Rhlt 30 Kg2 Rhgl t
After 30... R�gl t 3 1 Kf2 Qd4t 32 Re3 Qxb2t 3 3 Re2 Black has nothing
better than to repeat moves by 3 3 ...Qd4t 34 Re3 Qb2t, on account of the
threatened "R.e8 mate.
3 1 Kh2 Draw.
65
 After the opening moves 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 0-0 Be7
6 Qe2 bS 7 Bb3, Black usually plays 7 •.. d6, when White's best reply is 8c3.
After the trappy 8 a4, Black should not play 8... b4 on account of 9 Qc4! dS
10 Qxc6t Bd7 11 Qb7 BcS 12 NxeS Ra7 13 Nc6! His best reply is 8...Bg4 9
c3; now he can continue 9... 0-0, and if 10 ab ab 1 1 Rxa8 Qxa8 1 2 QxbS, then
12... Na7! recovers the pawn with good play, as in the well-known game Fine­
Keres, AVRO 1938.

-- . . .
Instead of 9... 0-0, however, Black can walk bravely "into the trap" by play­
ing 9... b4, as in the brilliant game Bagirov-Halilbeli (Baku 1 958): 10 Qc4

■••� •u;•• d �D'j

fl • t il t
.�

■ft •g,,,.mft ■•p

t •4)[� • �
Diagram 83 - �. . . ., - After 10 Qc4

� Br.-...
�� �'LJ
ra n.
�a � r�
■ E!�
� l�
.o. S:4-i
f�
i�a
Now Black would appear to be in a bad way, since he must now lose ma­
terial. But now, sacrificing a pawn and giving up castling as well, Black man­
ages to seize the initiative, and successfully prosecute an attack on the enemy
king.
10 ... NaS I 1 1 Qxf7t Kd7 1 2 NgS Nxb3 1 3 Qxb3 h6 14 f3
There is nothing better. 14 Nf7 would be met by 14... QgS, when White
would have to give up his knight.
14 ... hg l S fg Rxh2I
A decisive rook sacrifice, after which Black's attack becomes irresistible.
16 Rxf6
16 Kxh2 is met by 16 ... Nxg4t 17 Kgl (or 1 7 Kg3 Qh8 1 8 Kxg4 Qh4t 1 9
Kf3 Rf8t and mate i n two) 1 7...Qh 8 18 Rf7 Qh2t 19 Kfl Qhlt 2 0 Ke2
Qxg2t 2 1 Kd3 (or 21 Kdl) 2 1 ... RhS, and Black wins. White removes the
dangerous knight, but it's too late to save him.
16... gf 17 Kxh2 Qh8t 18 Kg3
After 18 Kgl Qh4 19 Qdl Rh8, White's position is also indefensible.
18 ...Qh4t 19 Kf3 Qel
(See diagram at top of next page)
As a result of Black's lengthy combination, White's king is now defenseless.
Black's piece sacrifice has allowed him to set up unstoppable threats.
20 Na3 Rh8
66
 Diagram 84 After 1 9... Qel

Naturally, Black could have taken the knight, restoring material equality;
but he preferred not to be distracted from his intention. The finish was:
21 d4 fS ! 22 gf g4t and White resigned, since after 23 Kxg4 Qe2t he gets
mated.

Alekhine•s Defense
The following sharp line of Alekhine's Defense is of fairly recent vintage:
1 e4 Nf6 2 eS NdS 3 d4 d6 4 c4 Nb6 S f4 de 6 fe Nc6 7 Be3 BfS 8 Nc3 e6
9 Nf3 Be7 10 dS Nb4 1 1 Rel!
GM Alexander Zaitsev suggested this interesting move. 11 Nd4 was the
usual move here.
1 1 ... f6
This attempt to sharpen the game turns out to be very risky. Much safer
is 11. ••0-0 12 a3 Na6 13 Bd3 Bxd3 14 Qxd3 NcS.
12 a3 Na6 13 g4!
A sudden, but wholly correct pawn sacrifice. This example shows once
again that in any opening line, even the most solid and peaceful ones, it is pos­
sible to find gambit opportunities.
1 3 ... Bxg4 14 Rgl l

Diagram 85 After 14 Rgl

67
 The idea of this sacrifice to open the g-file belongs to the Yugoslav GM Vel­
imirovic. Praxis shows that Black is hard put to defend. A few examples:
1) 14... fS 15 h3 Bxf3 16 �3 0-0 17 Rc2 Qd7 18 Rd2 Rae8 19 d6!, with
a clear advantage to White (Vclimirovic-G1pslis, Havana 1971);
2 ) 14...fS 1S h3 Bh4t 16 Kd2 BhS 17 Rxg7 ed 18 cd Nxd5? 19 Qa4t, and
White won (Tringov-Rodrigues, 1971);
3) 14...BhS 1 5 Bc2 fe
If White now plays 16 NxcS, there follows 16... Bxe2 (but not 16...Bh4t
17 Kd2 Bxe2 18 (vce2 0-0, in view of 19 Bh6! with a powerful attack for
White in Hecht-Cafferty, Holland 1972) 17 Qxc2 0-0 18 Qg4 Bf6 19 Qxe6t
Kh8 20 Ne4 Qc8! (Sultan-Cafferty, Corr Olympiad 1973), -or 20 Nf7t Rxf7
21 (vcf7 Nxc4, in either case with sufficient counterplay for Black.
However, instead of 16 Nc5, White has the powerful move 16 Ng5 !, giving
him a dangerous attack.

Diagram 86 After 16 Ng5 ·

After 16... Bxc2 17 (vce2 BxgS 18 Rxg5! 0-0 19 Qg4 Qc7 20 de c6 21 Ne4
g6 22 h4 Rac8 23 hS (vcc6 24 hg Qxg4 25 ght Kh8 26 Rxg4, White achieves
a clear advantage.

Car�Kann Defense
In this defense, the so-called Panov Attack has been a successful line for
White for quite a few years now:
1 e4 c6 2 d4 dS 3 ed cd 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3 Nc6
Besides this active move, 5... c6 or 5 ...g6 arc also quite often seen.
6 BgS
In this manner, White increases the pressure on the d-pawn, forcing Black
to take concrete action.
(Sec diagram at top of next page)
6••.Qb6
And this reply leads to the so-called Rejfir Gambit. After 6... dc, White se­
cures the advantage with the continuation 7 dS NeS 8 Qd4 Nd3t 9 Bxd3 cd
68
 Diagram 87 After 6 Bg5

10 Nf3 ! as in the 9th match game Botvinnik-Flohr (Leningrad 1933). After

6••.Be6, White has a favorable continuation in 7 Bxf6 and 8 c5 !
A game Tai-Bronstein (Leningrad 1971 ) continued: 6... Bg4 7 Be2! Bxe2
8 Ngxe2 de 9 d5 NeS 10 0-0 h6 1 1 Bf4 Ng6 12 Qa4t Qd7 13 Q){c4 Rc8 14
Qb3, and by returning the pawn, White secured a clear advantage.
The most solid defense is 6. .. e6.
7 cd Qxb2 ?
This mistake was played in the famous game Botvinnik-Spielmann (2nd
Moscow International Tournament, 1935). 7... Nxd4 was correct, but then
White has the promising continuation 8 Nf3 ! (great and unclear complications
result from 8 Be3 e5 9 de Bc5! 10 eft Kxf7, when Black has the initiative for
his pawn) 8.•. Nxf3t 9 Qxf3 Q){b2, and now 10 Bb5t or 10 Rel gives White
the initiative for a pawn.

Diagram 88 After 7 ...Q){b2

8 Rel
The point! This important improvement found by Botvinnik refutes the
whole Rejfir line. Spielmann counted only on 8 Na4? Qb4t 9 Bd2 Q){d4 10
de Ne4 1 1 Be3 Qb4t 12 Ke2 be, when Black has a strong attack for the piece.
But now Black has to give up a piece in circumstances absolutely unfavorable
to him.
8...Nb4
69
 On 8.•. Nd8, 9 NbS NxdS 10 Bc4!, with the threat of 1 1 Rb 1 is dccis ive;
and on 8..• NaS 9 Qa4t black loses his knight.
9 Na4 Qxa2 10 Bc4 Bg4 1 1 Nf3 Bxf3 12 gf Black resigned.
It's not often that a grandmaster announces his resignation on move 12( ! ).

French Defense
This classic opening contains several gambit variations. Here are a few.
1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nd2 c5 4 Ngf3 Nf6 5 e5 Nfd7 6 c3 Nc6 7 Bd3 Qb6 8 0-0!
A pawn sacrifice for the initiative. After 8••• cd 9 cd Nxd4 10 Nxd4 Qxd4
11 Nf3 Qb6 12 Qa4 Qb4 (if 12... Be7, then 13 Qg4 ! ) 13 Qc2 we reach the fol­
lowing position:

Diagram 89 After 13 Qc2

Now after 13...h6 14 Bd2 Qb6 15 Rael Black has considerable trouble de­
veloping.
In the game Estrin-Iljagujev (Moscow 1971 ) the continuation was: 13 ... g6
14 a3 Qc5 15 Qa4 Bg7 16 Bd2 a6 17 Rael Qa7 18 Bb4 and after 18...Bf8 19
Bxf8 Rxf8 20 Rc7 Rb8 21 Bb5 Kd8 22 Rfcl Qb6 23 Bxd7 Q,cc7 24 Rxc7
Kxc7 25 Qb4! Black resign ed.
Theory considers the strongest defense to be 13 ... Nc5. After 14 Bd2 Qa4
15 b3 Qd7 16 Be2 (also possible is 16 Rael Nxd3 17 Q,cd3 Be7 18 Rc2 0-0
19 Rfcl Bd8 20 Bb4, with active play for White) 16... Be7 17 Be3 b6 18 b4
Na6 19 a3 Bb7 20 Nd4 0-0 21 BbS Qc7 22 Qe2 White obtains a considerable
positional advantage.
In the game Estrin-Bergdahl (corr match USSR-Sweden, 1973-75), Black
decided upon a piece sacrifice: 22... Nxb4 23 ab Bxb4 24 f4 Rfc8; however,
White's initiative remained very dangerous.
(See diagram at top of next page)
Here is the continuation of that game: 25 Rf3 Bf8 26 Bd3 g6 27 Nb5 Qd8
28 Bd4 Bc5 29 Qe3 Rc6 30 Rh3 a6 3 1 Nd6
Now Black's kingside dark squares are quite weak. So the exchange of his
darksquare bishop for White's knight only helps me.
70
 Diagram 90 After 24... RfcS

3 1. .• Bxd4 3 2 Qxd4 Qc7 3 3 fS ! ef 34 Qf4 f6 3 5 BxfS ! Qe7 (on 3 5 ... gf

White wins by 36 Rg3t Kh8 3 7 Qh6 Qe7 38 ef) 36 Qh4, and Black resigned.
I n the game Muratov-Av. Bykhovsky (Moscow 1975), Black answered 1 5
b 3 , n o t with 1 S• . •Qd7, b u t with 1 5. . .Qg4; however, after 16 h 3 QhS 1 7 BbS t
Bd7 18 Bxd7t Kxci7 19 b4 Na6 20 Rael f6 2 1 Qa4t Kd8 22 QaS t he also
had to call it quits.
The examples given show that the acceptance of the pawn sacrifice rele­
gates Black to a difficult defense.
I n this regard, one interesting attempt is for Black to refrain temporarily
from exchanging in the center: 8 ... a5 (instead of 8 ..• cd). After 9 a3 cd 10 cd
Nxd4 1 1 Nxd4 Qxd4 12 Nf3 we reach the position examined above, with the
moves a2-a3 and a7-a5 thrown in - which is of course in White·s favor. The
game Estrin-Tille (VI World Corr Ch 1969- 7 1 ) continued: 12 ... Qa7 1 3 Qa4
b6 1 4 Nd4 Ba6 1 5 Bxa6 Qxa6 16 Be3 BcS 1 7 NbS Kd8 18 Rael Rf8 19 Bf4,
and White obtained an excellent position.

Sometimes after 1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 c5 4 Ngf3 Black replies, not with

4... Nf6, but with 4 ... Nc6. One possible reply to this is 5 BbS a6 6 ed! ab 7
dc6. In Estrin-Kuligowsky ( Leipzig 1976), Black continued S ..• Bd6 (instead
of S ... a6), which gave White the chance to gain the upper hand by 6 eS !.
Black continued 6... Bb8, sacrificing a pawn. 6•.. Be7 could be met by 7 de
BxcS 8 0-0 Qb6 9 Bd3 Qc7 10 Nb3 Bb6 11 c3 Nge7 12 Rel Ng6 13 Nbd4 a6
14 Qe2, with good prospects for White, as occurred in Estrin-Abramov (8th
World Corr Ch 1975-76).
7 de Nge7 8 0-0 Ng6 9 Rel 0-0 1 0 Bxc6 be 1 1 Nb3 (Black would meet 11
b4 with 1 1...aS 12 c 3 f6, with counterplay) 11 ..• f6 12 ef Qxf6 1 3 c41
(See diagram at top of next page)
This new move u nderscores Black's difficulties: the e-pawn remains a weak­
ness now, and must be given up.
1 3 ... NeS (naturally not 1 3 .•. dc, on account of 14 NaS) 14 Nbd4 de 15 BgS
Nxf3t 1 6 Nxf3 Qf7 1 7 Qd4 e5 1 8 NxeS BxeS 19 Rxe5,. and White obtained

71
 Diagram 91 After 13 c4

a clear advantage.

In the game Estrin-Myasnikov (Moscow 1975), the following old-fashion­

ed line of the French Defense saw a practical test :
1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 Nd2 Nf6 4 eS Nfd7 5 Bd3 cS 6 c3 Nc6· 7 Ne2 Qb6 8 Nf3
cd 9 cd Bb4t

Diagram 92 After 9 ... Bb4t

Theory rightly considers this line a difficult one for Black. In the well­
known game Alekhine-Capablanca (AVRO 1938), White played 10 Kf l, and
gradually put together a tremendous attack against the enemy king. White's
loss of castling may be considered a sort of sacrifice in this position, for which
he gets the initiative as compensation. But this is not White's only possibility.
In this game White selects a quieter plan, seeking the favorable exchange of
dark-squared bishops.
10 Bd2 Bxd2 1 1 Qxd2 Qb4 1 2 a3 Qe7?
A serious error. Black should not have avoided the exchange of queens,
even though this would leave him in an inferior position. As a rule, simplify­
ing exchanges are always good for the inferior side. After the text move,
White's initiative develops unhindered.
1 3 b4 f6 14 b5 Nd8 1 5 ef gf 16 0-0 0-0 1 7 Rfel Qd6 18 Nf4
It is becoming clear that Black will be unable to hold the position; almost

72
all White's pieces are bearing down on the Black king.
18 ... Rf7 19 Nh4 Nb6 20 NhS Qf8 21 Rc3 Bd7 22 Rg3t Kh8
Now comes the final combination.
2 3 Bg61 Nc4 24 Qcl Re7

Diagram 93 After 24... Re7

25 Bxh71
Black can only take the bishop with his king, which makes White's attack
unstoppable.
2S •.• Kxh7 26 Ng6 Qf7 27 Qf4 fS 28 Qg5 f4 29 Nf6t Qxf6 30 Qxf6 fg
31 Nf8t and Black resigned

The variation 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 e5 c5 5 a3 cd 6 Qg4 (6 ab de

7 Nf3 ! ch 8 Bxb2 is stronger) 6 ...Ne7 7 Qxg7 Rg8 8 Qxh7 de 9 ab ch 10 Bxb2
was long considered by theory to favor White. The Swedish played Ekelund
disagreed, and suggested the new move 10...Qb61 for Black.

Diagram 94 After 10... Qb6

The following replies for White were attempted from this position:
1) 11 b5 Bd7 12 Qd3 Rg4 13 Nf3 Re4t 14 Kdl Nf5 15 Ng5 Rb4 (but not 15
... Qxf2 16 Nxe4 Ne3t, on account of 17 Qxe3 Qxe3 18 Nf6t Kd8 19 h4, and
White has the better of it) 16 Bc3 Bxb5;
2) 11 c3 Nbc6 12 Nf3 Bd7 13 Bel Qc7 14 Qd3 Rg4 15 Be3 Ng6 16 Nd4
Ncxe5 17 Qd2 Nh4! 18 f3 Rxd4!!
73
3) 11 Bd d4! 12 Bd2 Nd7 13 f4 Nf8 14 Qd3 Bd7 15 Nf3 NfS 16 bS Rc8
Black obtains a good game in all three lines. Undoubtedly the move 10 ...
Qb6 deserves serious consideration.

An interesting gambit variation occurred in the correspondence game Fried•

man-Beneda, 1974:
1 e4 e6 2 d4 dS 3 eS cS 4 c3 Qb6 5 Nf3 Nc6 6 Bd3 cd 7 cd Bd7 8 0-01 ?
Nxd4 9 Nxd4 Qxd4 10 Nc3I QxeS
Theory considers the acceptance of the second· pawn risky for Black; how­
ever, genuine practitioners have often been known to disbelieve theory's con·
clusions.
1 1 Rel Qc7 (if 1 1... Qd6, then 12 NbS ) 12 NxdS QaS

Diagram 95 After 12 ... Qa5

Black evidently thought that his queen would be safe on aS ; nothing threat·
ens his king right now, either. But Black's lagging development cannot help
but be a factor, and White's next move, like thunder out of a clear sky, is still
quite justified.
13 Rxe6t I Bxe6
This reply leads to a quick loss for Black. 13.•. fe was better, but even then,
after 14 QhSt Kd8 (not 14. .. g6? on account of 15 Nf6t) 15 BgS t Nf6 16
Nxf6 Be7 17 Ne4, White has sufficient compensation for the exchange.
14 BbStl �8 lS a4I (threatening 16 Bd2 ) lS ... BxdS 16 QxdSt, and Black
resigned.

Sicilian Defense
Naturally, in this, perhaps the most popular opening of our day, both sides
have interesting gambit possibilities. Let's examine a few of them.
The game Bellon-Andersson (Pula 1976) went as follows: 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3
e6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 a6 5 Nc3 Qc7 6 8e2 Nf6 7 0-0 d6 8 Be3 Be7 9 f4 0-0 10
Kh l, and here Black played 10.••bS ?, which was a serious error ( 1 0. .. Nc6 was
correct). White answered 1 1 eS de 12 fe Nfd7 (of course not 12 ... QxeS?, on
account of 13 Bf4 and 14 Bf3), and here White played a new move 13 NfS I
74
 Diagram 96 After 13 Nf5

Pretty and energetic too ! This unexpected piece sacrifice turns out to be
wholly correct - Black appears to have no acceptable reply.
On 1 3 •.. Bc5, for example, White has a favorable 14 Bxc5 Qxc5 15 Ne4
Qxe5 16 Ne7t Kh8 17 Nd6, with threats of 18 Nxc8 and 18 Nf7t; while after
l 3... Nxe5 White achieves an advantage with 14 Nxe7t Qxe7 15 Ne4 Nbd7 16
Qd6 ! . So Black accepts the piece, but still fails to find an acceptable solution.
1 3 ... ef 14 NdS Qd8 15 Nxe7t Qxe7 16 Bf3
White ends up with the exchange plus for a pawn, while keeping the initia·
tive.
16 ... NxeS 17 Bxa8 Nbc6 18 Bf4 Qa7 19 Bxc6 Nxc6 20 Rel Bb7 2 1 Qd6
Qa8 22 R.adl Na5 2 3 Rd3 ! Bxg2t 24 Kgl Bf3 25 Rxf 3 ! , and Black resigned,
since 25... Qxf3 is met by 26 Qxf8t !, and mate in two moves.

In the 3 7th USSR Cllampionship Semifinal at Barnaul 1969, great interest

was generated by the game I. Zaitsev-Savon:
1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bc4 e6 7 Bb3 bS 8 0-0
Bb7 9 Rel Nbd7 10 BgS Nc5
Here White played 1 1 Bd5!, thinking it was a major theoretical novelty.
Alas, there's nothing new under the sun! The same sacrifice had occurred in
the 1968 Polish Team Championship, in a game Stepanich-Bednarsky.

Diagram 97 After 11 BdS

75
 Bednarsky accepted the sacrifice, but after 11.••ed 12 edt Kd7 13 b4! Na4
14 Nxa4 ba 15 c4 Be7 16 Nf5 Re8 17 (vca4t Kc8 18 Bxf6 gf 19 (vce8! (vce8
20 Nxd6t Kd7 21 Nxe8 Rxe8 22 a3 White had an obvious advantage.
In the diagrammed position, Savon preferred 11. .. b4, to which White re­
plied 12 Bxb7 Nxb7, and then sacrificed another piece: 13 Nd5! After 13...
ed 14 edt Kd7 15 Nc6 Qb6 16 Bxf6 gf 17 Qf3 White obtained an excellent
position. Here's how the game ended: 17 ... QcS 18 Radl Rg8 19 (vcf6 Rg7
20 Re7t ! Bxe7 21 (vce7t Kc8 22 Qf8t Kc7 23 (vca8 (vcc2 24 Qb8t kb6 25
Qa7t Kc7 26 Rel f6 27 Nxb4 (vcb2 28 Nxa6t �7 29 Qb8, and Black resign­
ed.
The natural question arises: where was Black's mistake? For now, that
question remains unanswered. Zaitscv believes that, instead of 10... NcS,
Black should play 10... h6. But then White obtains the better game with 11
Bxf6!

The following variation, known to theory as Fischer's line;, deserves study.

Curiously, Fischer himself never recommended such a line for Black; he only
used it once, against Minic at Rovinj-Zagreb 1970, and never used it again.
1 e4 cS 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 Nf6 S Nc3 a6 6 BgS e6 7 f4 Be7 8 Qf3
Qc7 9 0-0-0 Nbd7 10 g4 bS 11 Bxf6 Nxf6 12 gS Nd7 13 a3 Rb8 14 h4 b4 15
ab Rxb4 16 Bh3

Diagram 98 After 16 Bh3

From the diagrammed position, Black has employed a myriad of continua­

tions. For example, there are 16 ... Qb7, 16 ... Qb6, 16 ... QcS and 16... Nc5.
In the above mentioned game Minic-Fischer, Black tried a fifth continua­
tion 16... 0-0. After 17 Nf5 Nc5! 18 Nxe7t Qxe7 19 Qe3 Bb7, White achieved
nothing. 17 g6 also does not promise him anything, on account of 17 ... Nc5;
nor does 17 Rhfl, on account of 17... Qc5 18 Qf2 Nb6.
Later, however, White found the gambit continuation 17 Nxe6I fe 18
Bxe6t Kh8 19 NdS, which gives him a dangerous attack. How are we to take
this sacrifice? Is it correct, or not? ECO believes the chances should be rated
equal, but praxis does not support this. It may be safely stated that this ver­
sion of Fischer's line is good for White. That appears to be the reason Fischer
never played it again.
76
 Let's look at examples from praxis.
First of all, the natural reply 1 9... Qb7? leads to disaster after 20 Nxe7
Rxb2 2 1 Ng6t!

Diagram 99 After 2 1 Ng6t

After 2 1 ... hg 22 h S ! , mate is forced.

1 9...Qc4 is correct, and after 20 Bxd7 Bxd7 2 1 Nxe7 Ba4 (if 2 1...Rfb8,
then 22 Qd3 ) 22 Qd3 Qa2 2 3 Qa3, leads to the following position:

Diagram 100

I n the game Shadchnev-Sorok� (X USSR Corr Ch 1 97 1-2) the continua­

tion was: 2 3...Qxa3 24 ha Rxe4 25 Rhel Rfxf4 26 hS BbS 27 Rxe4 Rxe4 28
NfS ReS 2 9 Nxd6 Kg8 30 NxbS ab 3 1 g6! hg 32 hg Kf8 33 Rflt Kg8 34 Rf7
RgS 35 Rb7 Rxg6 36 RxbS, and White entered a rook endgame a pawn up.
Black had every reason to expect to draw that endgame, but he chose the
wrong plan, and lost. This might be a good time to remind the reader that, al­
though he might be studying gambit play and amusing himself with pretty
combinations, he should not forget his endgame technique!
Here's how that endgame continued: 36... Ra6 37 Kb2 Kf7 38 c4 Kf6 (the
king should have gone to the queenside, leaving the g-pawn to its fate) 39 Kb3
gS 40 a4 Ra8 41 aS g4 42 RdS g3 43 Kb4 g2 44 Rdl Rg8 45 Rgl Ke6 46 a6
Kd6 47 a7 Ra8 48 Rxg2 Rxa7 49 Rg6t, and Black resigned.
An attempt by Black from the diagrammed position to avoid the exchange
of queens brings him no relief. I n Hansen-Buchol, 1 972, White secured his
advantage after 23 ...Qc4 24 Rh2 Rfb8 25 Nd5 Rxb2 26 Qxb2 Rxb2 27 Kxb2
Qxe4 28 Rd3 Bb5 29 Rc3 ! ; nor did he have any problems for the rest of the
77
game. 29... Kg8 30 Rd2 Qel 3 1 Rd4 Qxh4 32 Re4! Qg4 33 Rc8t Kf7 34 g6t!
Kxg6 35 £St, and Black was forced to give up his queen.
In reply to 19•••Qc4, instead of 20 Bxd7, the more energetic 20 Bf51 is de­
serving of special attention:

Diagram 101 After 20 BfS

Two replies for Black must be examined here:

1) 20...Rxf5.
Naturally not 20•.. Bd8, on account of 21 Bxh7!; if then 21. .. Kxh7, then
22 Qh5t Kg8 23 g6.
21 ef Bb7 22 Rhcl 8£8
In the game Bellin-Kicks (England-Holland Match, 1971), the continua­
tion was 23 Qd3 (how about 23 Re8! Kg8 24 Rd8!, and if 24... BxdS 25
Qxd5t Qxd5 26 Rxd5 Nb6 27 R5xd6 Rxb2, then 28 g6! h6 29 f6, and White
wins?) 23... Qxd3 24 Rxd3 RbS? (24..• BxdS was better) 25 Ne7 d5 26 h5 Nc5
27 Rd2, and White obtained the advantage.
2) 20...NcS.
For some time, this continuation was considered Black's strongest. Now
White cannot play 21 Bxh7, on account of 21...Bg4! 22 Qxg4-Rxb2!
Still, in the game Estrin-Sorokin (X USSR Corr Ch 1971/72), White man­
aged to demonstrate that 21 Nxe7 Bxf5 22 Nxf5 Rxb2?1 23 Kxb2 Rb8t 24
Kcl Nb3t 25 Qxb31 Rxb3 26 Rxd6 gives him excellent prospects.

Diagram 102 After 26 Rxd6

78
 For his queen, White has rook, knight and two pawns - enough material.
However, the active p_osition of White's pieces and the weakness of Black's
back rank make Black's position very difficult. The rest of the game you
should find interesting:

•'■·•··
26 ... Rb8 27 Rhdl Rg8 28 R6d4 Qc3 29 hS Qf3 30 eS Qh3 (on 30... (vchS,
White wins with 31 Ne7 Re8 32 Rd8 QJ7 33 Rxe8t Qce8 34 Nc6!) 31 Nd6
Qe3t 32 Rld2 Qel t 3 3 Kb2 Rb8t 34 Kc3 Kg8 35 Re4 Qalt 36 Kc4

t [l

.
•■•■• • •
Diagram 103 �
� � .. �
··. After 36 Kc4
� .§ � ,.

ft � • •
�'�
� $, • �
� �
�
An interesting position. Under the fire of the enemy pieces, White's king
marches bravely forward to help his own_pieces. And Black is helpless.
36 ... Rb6 37 Red4 Qa3 38 fS a5 39 KdS Qc3 40 Nc4 Qf3t 41 Re4 Rb5t
42 Ke6 Rb8 43 Nd6 QxhS 44 f6 QxgS 45 R2d4 g6 46 Rc4 Qg3 47 Rc7 and
Black resigned.
The examples presented show quite clearly that 16... 0-0 leads to an advan­
tage for White. So it's not surprising that Fischer only risked it once.

Master Boris Katalymov, from Kazakhstan, not infrequently uses the fol-
lowing line:
1 e4 cS 2 Nf3 b6 3 d4 cd 4 Nxd4 Bb7
The Yugoslav GM Sahovic also plays this.
5 Nc3 a6 6 Bc4! e6
Compared with the usual Paulsen Variation, Black has lost a move; nor is it
entirely clear what he has obtained in return. Now the attempt to win a pawn
by 6 ... b5 7 Bb3 b4 8 Na4 Bxe4 would be very risky. In the game Kantikhyev­
Schussler White replied 9 Nc5!, and after 9... Bxg2 10 Rgl Bc6 11 Bxf7t!
Kxf7 the following position aro�e:
(See diagram at top of next page)
White has sacrificed a piece, and it's not immediately apparent how he is
to prosecute the attack. But White unexpectedly played 12 Rxg7t!!, and
won quickly, since 12•.. Kxg7 is met by 13 Nce6t, while 12... Bxg7 leads to
mate in two after 13 Ql!St.
7 �0 bS 8 Bb3 b4 9 Na4 Bxe4
79
 Diagram 104 After 1 1 ...Kxf7

This position was reached in the game Estrin-Katalymov (Barnaul 1969).

Black accepted White's pawn sacrifice, but at great cost in development.
10 Rel Nf6
White gets a terrible attack after 10 ... Bb7 1 1 Qh5 Nf6 1 2- Rxe6t Be7 1 3
Rxf6.
1 1 Bg5 Bc6 1 2 Qe2 Qa5 1 3 Bxf6 gf 14 Rad l !
White's last undeveloped piece comes into play.
14...Bxa4
After this Black's position is indefensible. But after 14 ...Be7 1 5 Bxe6! fe
16 Nxe6 QeS 17 Qg4 Q,ce6 18 Rxe6 de 19 Nb6 Ra7 20 Q,ce6 Black is also in
dire straits.
1S Bxa4 Qxa4 16 Qf3 Nc6 17 b31
Black overlooked this, but he really has no chances anyway.
17 . . .Qxa2 18 Nxc6 Rc8

Diagram 105 After 18. ..Rc8

Black's queen is shut out, and White let himself be led astray by the spec­
tacular sacrifice 1 9 Rxe6t ? I de (not 19 ... fe?, then 20 Qh5 mate) 20 Qxf6,
which, however, after 20.•. Bd6 2 1 Q,ch8t Kd7 2 2 NeSt left him still with
some difficulties in the way of his win.
As GM Averbakh pointed out, 19 QdS! would decide at once. After 19...
80
Rc7 White can now play 20 Rxe6t; while on 19... d6 20 Rxe6t ! Kd7 21 Rxd6t !
h e also wins right away.

In the Rubinstein Variation (which we call the "Nimzowitsch "-Tr.) , after

1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 e5 Nd5 4 Nc3 Nxc3 5 de Black generally plays either 5...
d5 or S... Nc6. Instead, 5...b6 might look like a good move for Black. But it
allows White a sudden opportunity to sacrifice a pawn and gain the advantage.
6 e6!

Diagram 106 After 6 e6

The idea of this move is that Black must accept the pawn, and leave himself
open to an attack. One more example of a gambit solution to the problem of
the opening.
6... de
On 6... fe White replies 7 NeS!, threatening 8 QhSt and 8 Qf3. This at
least simplifies the position.
7 Qxd8t Kxd8 8 Ne5 Ke8 9 Bb5t Bd7
9 ... Nd7 loses to 10 Bc6 Rb8 11 Bf4
10 Nxd7 Nxd7 1 1 Bf4
Now the threat is 12 0-0-0. Black finds no salvation in 11 ... a6 12 Bc6 Ra7,
in view of 13 Bb8! The best is 11 ... eS 12 BxeS f6 13 Bg3 eS, but here too,
after 14 f4! ef 15 Bxf4, Black's position remains difficult.

Queen's Gambit
After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 Nf3 c5 5 cd Nxd5 6 e4 Nxc3 7 be cd
8 cd Bb4t 9 Bd2 Bxd2t 10 Qxd2 0-0 11 Bc4 Nc6 12 0-0 b6 we have reached
a critical position from the Tarrasch Defense:
(See diagram at top of next page)
The well-known game Alekhine-Euwe (2nd World Championship Match
1937) continued: 13 Rfdl Bb7 14 Qf4 Rc8 15 dS ed 16 BxdS Qe7 17 NgS
NeS! 18 Bxb7 Ng6 19 QfS Q)cb7 20 Rd7 Qa6! and Black's counterthreat of
2 1... Q)ca2! allowed him to maintain the balance against White's threatened
81
 Diagram 107 After 1 2 •.. b6

21 Rxf7. On the basis of this game, for over 30 years it was believed that this
variation gave White no advantage. But during his preparations for the 1969
match with Petrosian, Spassky noted that Alekhine, in the diagrammed posi­
tion, committed a serious inaccuracy. Spassky found the CO/:I"ect plan. In·
stead of 13 Rfdl here, he played 1 3 Rad l !
The continuation of the game w as 1 3 ••• Bb7 14 Rfel Rc8 1 5 d 5 e d 16 BxdS
Na5 17 QJ:4 Qc7 18 QJ:5! BxdS (Black cannot suffer such a powerful centraliz­
ed bishop for long; it must be traded off) 19 ed Qc2 20 QJ:4 (also playable was
20 Qxc2 Rxc2 2 1 d6 Rcc8 22 Re7, with good winning chances) 20.•. Qxa2 2 1
d6 Rcd8 2 2 d7 Qc4 2 3 QfS h 6 2 4 Rel Qa6 2 5 Rc7 and White had no difficul­
ties in realizing his great positional advantage.
Placing the White rooks at dl and el turned out to be the most logical and
active plan, after which Petrosian was unable to find a good defense.
An attempt to strengthen Black's play was made in the game Polugaevsky­
Tal (37th USSR Ch, Moscow 1969). After 1 3 Rad l ! Bb7 14 Rfel Black play­
ed 14 .••Na5, immediately, to drive the enemy bishop back. The continuation
1 5 Bd3 Rc8 16 d S ! ed 17 e S ! led to the following position :

Diagram 108 After 17 e 5

This unexpected pawn sacrifice gives White a decisive advantage. H e gets a

strong attack on the Black king's castled position, while its natural defenders,
the bishop and knight, are on the opposite wing. All White's pieces are ideally
placed, and Tai was unable to find a good defense.
82
 17 ..• Nc4
Other possibilities from the diagrammed position should also be looked at:
1) 17 ...d4 18 Nxd4 QdS 19 QgS ! , and White has many threats, with even ma­
_
terial.
2) 17 •.. h6 18 QH Nc6 19 Qf5 g6 20 Qf4 Kg7 2 1 h4! h5 22 Ng5, with the tre­
mendous threat of 2 3 e6 !
3) 17 •..g6 18 Qh6 Qe7 19 Ng5 f6 20 ef, and White wins.
4) 17 ... f6 18 e6 Nc6 19 Qf4 Ne7 20 Nd4, and White's positional advantage is
quite serious.
1 8 Qf4 Nb2
Black tries to get rid of the dangerous enemy bishop, but he is in for a dis·
appointment.
19 Bxh7tl
The point! This piece sacrifice gives White a terrific attack.
19... Kxh7 20 NgSt

Diagram 109 After 20 NgSt

20... Kg6
20... KgB loses at once, in view of 2 1 Qh4 Re8 22 e6! felif 22 ... Rxe6, then
23 Qh7t Kf8 24 Rxe6 ! ) 2 3 Qh7t Kf8 24 Qh8t Ke7 2 5 Qxg7t and 26 Nf7t.
2 1 h41 Rc4
The only defense; Black must attack the enemy queen. White threatened
22 h5t Kxh5 23 g4t Kg6 24 Qf5t Kh6 25 Nxf7t Rxf7 and 26 Qh5 mate, and
2 1...f5 is met by 22 Rd4!, keeping all White's threats.
22 hStl kh6
22 ... Kxh5 could be met by 23 g4t Kh6 (but not 23 ... Kg6? because of 24
Qf5 t Kh6 25 Nxf7t and mate next) 24 Nxf7t Kh7 25 Qh2t Kg8 26 Nxd8
Rxg4t 27 Khl Rxd8 28 f3 ! and White wins.
23 Nxf7t Kh7 24 QfS t Kg8 25 e61
(See diagram at top of next page)
83
 � �·-0

Diagram 110 ft After 25 c6

Polugacvsky's outstanding gambit idea has led by force to this position.

The powerful pawn at c6 is full compensation for the piece, and in fact de­
cides the game. On 25..• Bc8, for example, the finish is 26 h6 Bxc6 27 h7
mate.
25 .•.Qf6 26 Qxf6 gf 27 Rd2
Not the best continuation. As Polugacvsky points out, 27 Nd6! was strong­
er, leading to a decisive advantage for White. Herc arc some variations:
1) 27 ... Rc6 28 Rxd5 Rc7 29 Nxb7 Rxb7 30 Rd7! Rbb8 (if 30... Rxd7 .31 cd
Kf7, then 32 h6! Rd8 33 h7, and White wins) 31 Rc3; or
2) 27 .•.Nxdl 28 c7 Rel (if 28... Rb8, then 29 c8(Q)t) 29 h6! Nc3 (the threat
was 30 ef(Q)t Kxf8 31 Rc8 mate) 30 h7t.
In either line, White wins without difficulty.
27 •.. Rc6 28 Rxb2 Rc8
The last mistake. 28... Bc8! appears to save Black. Now White wins easily.
29 Nh6t Kh7 30 Nf6 Rxc6 31 Rxe6 Rxe6 32 Rc21
Material equality has been re-established, but White's positional advantage
assures him a clear plus.
32 ... Rc6 3 3 Re2 Bc8 34 Re7t I<h8 35 Nh4 f5 36 Ng6t Kg8 37 Rxa7, and
Black gave up.
Grandmaster Polugacvsky's centerpawn sacrifice requires the reevaluation
of one of the main variations of the Tarrasch Defense.
Besides 14... NaS, Black has also tried 14..•Ne7. In a game Petrosian-Korch­
noi (ii Ciocco, 1977), this was met by 15 d51 ed 16 ed Nf5 17 Ne51 Nd6, and
now White achieved an advantage with the strong and surprising move 18 Nc6!1
(See diagram at top of next page)
The continuation was:
18... Bxc6
On 18... Nxc4 White could play 19 Nxd8 Nxd2 20 Nxb7, and after 20...
Rab8 (or 20.•. Rfb8 21 Rc7 Nc4 22 d6 Na5 23 Nxa5 ba 24 Rc5) 21 Re7 Nc4
84
 Diagram 1 1 1 After 1 8 Nc6

22 d6 NaS 23 NxaS ba 24 Rxa7 White comes out a pawn up. After 18 ... Qf6
1 9 Bb3 White also keeps the better chances.
1 9 de Nxc4 20 Qf41 Nd6 21 Rxd6 Qc7 22 g3 h6 23 QeS Rac8 24 QdS, and
White kept a clear positional advantage.

English Opening
Even in the most solid of contemporary openings, hard-working analysts
are finding interesting gambit lines to develop an initiative.
After 1 c4 c5 2 Nf3 Nf6 3 Nc3 d5 4 cd NxdS 5 e4 Nb4 White usually con­
tinues 6 Bc4. Recently the new line, which involves a pawn sacrifice, has be­
come fashionable: 6 Bb5t N8c6 7 d4 cd 8 a31 de 9 Qxd8t Kxd8 10 ab cb
1 1 Bxb2

Diagram 1 1 2 After 1 1 Bxb2

This position was reached in the game Chekhov-Werner (Moscow Area Ch

1 979). For his pawn, White has an active position, and Black has a tough
time defending. Black followed the line recommended by theory: 1 1 ... e6 1 2
0- 0 f6, but could not manage to shake off the pressure.
Here is how the game continued: 1 3 eS fS 14 Nd4 Nxd4 1 S Bxd4 Bd7 16
Bxa7! Ke8 1 7 Bxd7t Kxd7 18 Rfd l t Kc6 19 Rdc l t Kd7 20 Rc4. White has
85
recovered the pawn, and kept his active position. 20... gS 21 b5 Bg7 22 Rdlt
Ke8 23 Rc7 Rxa7 24 Rxg7 Rf8 25 b6. With the fall of the b-pawn, the game
is effectively over, since White's passed pawn is unstoppable.
25... RaS 26 Rxb7 Rf7 27 Rb8t Ke7 28 Rbd8 Rxe5 29 b7, Black resigned.

An interesting variation is the one that arises from the moves:

1 c4 Nf6 2 Nd e6 3 e4 dS 4 cd
After 4 e5 d4 5 ef de 6 be Qxf6 7 d4 cS 8 Nf3 cd White's best continuation
is 9 BgS QfS 10 cd Bb4t 1 1 Bd2 QaS 12 Bd3, with the better chances. He
gets less from 9 cd (instead of 9 BgS), since 9•.• Bb4t 10 Bd2 Bxd2t 11 Qxd2
Nc6 12 Be2 0-0 13 0-0 Rd8 14 Rfdl Nxd4! 15 NxdS eS leaves him a pawn
down.
In addition to 7... c5, Black has one other choice - 7 ... eS !, which allows
him to equalize.
4...ed 5 e5 Ne41
In this manner, Black offers a pawn sacrifice for active play. In fact, after
6 Nxe4 de 7 Qa4t Nc6 8 Qxe4 Qd4! 9 Qxd4 Nxd4 10 Kdl (if 10 Bd3, then
10... Be6 11 Ne2 0-0-0) 10.•. Bf5 11 d3 0-0-0 Black has a dangerous initiative.
6 Nf3 Bf51
And again, for the sake of quick development, Black sacrifices a pawn,
while his lightsquare bishop zeroes in on the strategically important square
d3.
7 Qb3
7 d3 Nxc3 8 be c5 or 7 d4 Bb4 8 Qa4t Nc6 9 Bb5 Bd7 leaves Black with a
perfectly good game.
7...Nc5 8 QxdS Nc6 9 Bb5 Qxd5 10 NxdS 0-0-0 11 Bxc6 be 12 Nf4
This was the way the game Korj-Markhouse, 1981, continued. It's easy
to see that Black has a dangerous initiative for his pawn. Nor is 12 Nb4 bet­
ter: in the game Gipslis-Roizmann (Moscow 1964), Black played 12... Kb7!,
threatening 13 ... aS, and also obtained excellent play.
12 ..• Nd3t 13 Nxd3 Bxd3 14 b3 BcS 15 Bb2 RdS 16 h4 Re8
Black's two bishops cover the entire board, all his pieces are ideally placed,
and the enemy king is stranded in the center. Clearly, White is in great diffi­
culties.
17 Rh3 f6 18 Rg3 fe 19 Rxg7 e4 20 NgS RfS 21 Nh3
(See diagram at top of next page)
Now comes the decisive stroke, after which White's position becomes hope­
less.
21...e 3 1 22 f4
86
 Diagram 1 1 3 After 2 1 Nh3

22 de loaes at once to 22... Bb4t 23 Kdl Rxc3 ! and White is defenseless.

22 ... RdS 2 3 BeS RdxeS I
White resigned., since h e gets mated after 2 4 fe Rf8 2 5 0-0-0 Ba3 mate.

I should like to conclude with two short examples, in which one side or the
other had to capitulate in the very early opening stages, even though exper­
ienced grandmasters were playing.
1 c4 eS 2 Nc3 Nf6 3 Nf3 Nc6 4 g3 Bb4 S NdS NxdS?
Too hasty. 5•.. 0-0 was correct.
6 cd e4?
And this is decisive. After 6 ... Ne7 7 Nxe5 Nxd5 8 Qb3 c6 9 Bg2 Black is
only a pawn down.

Diagram 114 After 6•••e4

This position was reached in Petrosian-Ree (Wijk aan Zee 1971). After
7 de ef 8 Qb31, Black resigned, as he loses a piece.

And one more curiosity:

1 c4 cS 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 Nf3 fS 4 d4 e4 S BgS Nf6 6 dS?
Premature. 6 Nd2 should be played, and if 6 ... Nxd4, then 7 Ndxe4.
87
 6... ef 7 de fg 8 cdt?
Once again, the decisive mistake comes early, White fails to see the reply.
After 8 Bxg2 he would be down a pawn.

Diagram 1 1 5 After 8 cdt

8... Nxd7 !
This unexpected move decides the game immediately in Black's favor. It
is interesting to note that in Soviet chess tournaments no fewer than three
games ended in this identical fashion: Razuvaev-Kupreichik (Dubna 1970),
Doroshkevich-Tukmakov (Riga 1970), and a still earlier game Katalymov­
Voronin.

In conclusion, the author would like to draw the reader's attention to the
fact that the gambit lines we have been examining offer limitless scope for
your own analysis and researches. And if the reader succeeds in finding some­
thing new in a wellknown line, it means that he will be possessed of an excel­
lent tournament weapon. That is the point of this book.

88
 Games Index
Alekhine-Capablanca, AVRO 1938 7Z
Alekhine-Euwe, Match 1937 81
Anderssen-Zuckertort, Berlin 1868 36
Augustin-Mohring, Stary Smokovec 1976 49
Bagirov-Halilbeli, Baku 1958 66
Baturinsky-Estrin, Moscow 1947 62
Bednarsky-Minev, Warsaw 1961 39
Bellin-Kicks, England-Holland Match 1971 78
Bellon-Andersson, Pula 1976 74
Bogatyryev-Dzagurov, Moscow 1939 59
Bogdanovich-Damjanovich, Pee 1964 53
Boleslavsky-Lilienthal, USSR 1941 7
Bonch-Osholovsky-Dzaburov, Moscow 11>39 60
Botvinnik-Flohr, Leningrad 193 3 69
Botvinnik-Spielmann, Moscow 1935 69
Braun-Walter, Corr 1970 47
Bronstein-Weissman, Sandomir 1976 15
Cafferty-van Geet, Amsterdam 1972 38
Capablanca-Marshal� 1918 58
Chekhov-Werner, Moscow 1979 85
Ciocaltea-Malich, European Team Ch 1966 48
Cvidenko-Leverton, 196 3 44
Dorfman-Gulko, USSR Ch 1976 53
Doroshkevich-Tukmakov, Riga 1 970 88
Ekstrom-Svennebi, Corr 1965-67 63
Erdelyan-Bowen, Corr 1966 52
Estrin....:.Abramov, 8th World Corr Ch 1975-6 71
- Belinkov, Moscow 1966 25
-Bergdahl, Corr Match 197 3-5 70
-Berliner, World Corr Ch ·1965-67 40
-lljagujev, Moscow 1971 70
-Karnowitz, Moscow 1966 33
-Katalymov, Barnaul 1966 80
- Khachaturov, Moscow 1944 17
- Kots, Tula 1951 33
-Kuligowsky, Leipzig 1976 71
-Myasnikov, Moscow 1975 72
-Nielsen, VII World Corr Ch 1972-75 41
-Ravinsky, Leningrad 1955 35
-Sheveczek., VI World Corr Ch 1968 72
-Solovyev, Moscow 1977 3S
-Sorokin, X USSR Corr Ch 1971·2 78
-Taimanov, Leningrad 1949 17
-Tille, VI World Corr Ch 1969-71 71
-Zhivtsov, Moscow 1945 34
89
Estrin- Zinser, Moscow 1968 28
- Zlatkin, 1938 28
Fagerstrom-Rozenberg, Corr Match, Sweden-USSR 1960-62 42
Fine- Keres, AVRO 1938 66
Friedman-Beneda, 1974 74
Gipslis-Roizmann, Moscow 1964 86
Haag-Gipslis, Piech 1964 57
Hangele-Manne, Oslo 1978 50
Hansen-Buchol, 1972 77
Hecht-Cafferty, Holland 1972 68
Hesse-Bowen, European Corr Ch 1974 51
Ijim-Medler, Corr 197 3-4 48
Kan-Botvinnik, 1929 39
Kantikhyev-Schussler 79
Kartavov-Grozdevsky, Corr 1973 55
Katalymov-Voronin 86
Kavalek- Ljubojevic, Amsterdam 1975 so
Kazic-Vukovic, 1940 44
Keres-Alekhine, Saltzburg 1943 10
Keres- Estrin, Simultaneous, Moscow 194 1 12
Keres-Reshevsky, World Ch 1948 56
Klovan-Averbakh, USSR Qi 1968 23
Koblents- Zagoryansky, Vilnius 1946 10
Kopayev-Zhukovitsky, Kiev 1945 27
Korchnoi- Estrin, Leningrad 1951 60
Korfman-Wishnevsky, Kiev 1947 9
Korj-Markhouse, 1981 86
Krziston-Nielsen, VII World Corr Ch 1972-75 53
Kunzelman-Nesterenko, Corr 1975-6 50
Kuzmin-Knezevic, Varna 197 1 54
Laes-Citterio, Corr 1971-2 18
Levy-Boey, Siegen 1970 23
Levy-Kraidman, Lugano 1968 23
Linden-Maciejewski, 1864 19
Mieses- Forgacs, St Peterburg 1909 23
Minev-Matanovic, Moscow 1956 22
Minic- Fischer, Rovinj-Zagreb 1970 76
Morh-Hausen, Norway 1951 59
Muller-Lehmann, Match Switzerland-E. Germany 1955 37
Muratov-Bykhovsky, Moscow 1975 71
Nieto-Boey, Nice 1974 49
Nordstrom-Erlandeson, Swedish Corr Ch 1975-6 23
Nyman-Estrin, XII European Corr Ch 1974-5 63
Obukhovsky-Gusev, Moscow 1975 45
Ostap-Blach, California 1967 57
Penrose- Ujtumen, Lugano 1968 23
Petrosian-Korchnoi, ii Ciocco 1977 84
90
Petrosian-Ree, Wijk aan Zee 197 1 87
Polyak-Estrin, Leningrad 1953 64
Polugaevsky-Tal, 37th USSR Ci, Moscow 1969 82
Razulaev-Kupreichik, Dubna 1970 88
Samisch-Riemann, Berlin 1927 44
Shadchnev-Sorokin, X USSR Corr Ch 197 1-2 77
Shishov- Nezhmetidinov, Tbilisi 1947 61
Smyslov-Botvinnik, Moscow 1943 54
Smyslov-Euwe, World Ch 1948 56
Smyslov-Kamiphov, Moscow Ch 1944 10
Smyslov-Randiviir, Parnu 1947 51
Sokolsky-Goldenov, Kiev 1945 40
Spassky-Petrosian, Match 1969 82
Spielmann-Tarrasch, Mahrisch-Ostrau 1923 15
Stein-Spassky, Moscow 196 1 51
Steinsapir- Estrin, Moscow Ch 1949 12
Stepanich-Bednarsky, Poland 1968 75
Sultan-Cafferty, Corr Olympiad 197 3 67
Sundqvist-Gabran, Corr Match, Sweden-USSR 1973-4 42
Syromyatni.kov-Petrov, Elabuga 1975 46
Tai-Bronstein, Lenmgrad 197 1 69
Tille-Estrin, VII World Corr C h 1972-5 64
T1mgren- Novikov, Corr Match, Sweden-USSR 1960-2 42
Trifunovic-Apscheneek, Stockholm 1937 9
Tringov-Rodrigu ez, 197 1 68
Velimirovic-Kholmov, 1966 23
Verner-Engvall, Telephone Match 1956 48
Voskanian-Obukmovsky, Kirov 1974 51
Vujevic-Estrin, Strasbourg 1975 55
Yuchtman-Furman, Tbilisi 1959 22
Yuchtman-Ravinsky, Moscow 1959 20
Yuchtman-Tal, Tbilisi 1959 22
Zaitsev-Savon, Barnaul 196 1 75

91
 Fine Books From Chess Enterprises
Botvinnik, Fifteen Games and Their Stories $4.9S
Watson: 6... Nc6 in the Siimisch Variation, King's Indian Defense $S.00
Mednis: Practical Rook Endings $4.00
Estrin: Three Double King Pawn Openings $4.95
Christiansen: 1981 U. S. Championship $5.00
Marfia: The Annotated Open, 1981 U. S. Open Palo Alto $4.95
Wall: 300 King's Gambit Miniatures $2.95
Nimzowitsch: Blockade $4.00
Koltanowski: Colle System, Tenth Edition $4.9S
Filipowicz & Konikowski: 4 ... d5 in the Cordel Defense, Spanish Game $2.95
Tejlcr & Marfia: Euwe Defense, Blackmar-Diemer Gambit $2.50
Williams: The Real American Wilkes-Barre Variation $2.9S
Estrin:. Wilkes-Barre Variation, Two Knights Defense $4.00
Christiansen: 1980 U. S. Championship $5.00
Fine: Amsterdam Chess Congress 1936 $3.50
Platz: Chess Memoirs $10.00
Sheffield: Tension in the Chess Position $4.00
Marfia & Dudley : The Double Fianchetto Opening System $2.00
Koltanowski: CHESSNICDOTES II $5.00
Watson: Chessman Comics # 2, Treachery in Transylvania! $2.50

Available from your favorite chess dealer or postpaid from:

Chess Enterprises, Inc.

107 Crosstree Road
Coraopolis, PA 1 5 108