Botvinnik - Volume 2.pdf

BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMESVolume 2: 1942 -1956 Mikhail Bolvinnik Mikhail Botvinnik BOTVINNIK'S BEST GAMES Volume 2: 1942-1956 (Analytical & Critical Works) Translated and Edited by Ken Neat Olomouc 2000 Published in the Czech Republic in 2000 by PUBLISHING HOUSE MORAVIAN CHESS P.O. Box 101, 772 11 OLOMOUC 2 Czech Republic This book is an authorised translation ofMM Botvinnik Analiticheskie i kriticheskie raboty 1942-1956 (Moscow 1985) ©English translation copyright Ken Neat 2000 Chess Agency CAISSA-90 All rights reserved ISBN 80-7189-370-6 Contents 'Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown' 16 Selected Games 1943-1956 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 7 Botvinnik-Ragozin, 1943 Botvinnik-Konstantinopolsky, 1943 Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1943 Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1943 Botvinnik-Zagoryansky, 1943 Makogonov-Botvinnik, 1943 Botvinnik-Kan, 1943 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1943 Lyublinsky-Botvinnik, 1943/44 Zhivtsov-Botvinnik, 1943/44 Botvinnik-Ravinsky, 1944 Botvinnik-Khavin, 1944 Veresov-Botvinnik, 1944 Botvinnik-Flohr, 1944 Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1944 Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1944 Botvinnik-Makogonov, 1944 Kotov-Botvinnik, 1944 Botvinnik-Alatortsev, 1944 Lisitsyn-Botvinnik, 1944 Botvinnik-Flohr, 1945 Tolush-Botvinnik, 1945 Botvinnik-Koblenz, 1945 Chekhover-Botvinnik, 1945 Romanovsky-Botvinnik, 1945 Ratner-Botvinnik, 1945 Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1945 Lilienthal-Botvinnik, 1945 Botvinnik-Bondarevsky, 1945 Ru(iakovsky-Botvinnik, 1945 Goldberg-Botvinnik, 1945 Botvinnik-Kan, 1945 3 16 18 22 26 29 32 36 39 42 45 47 54 56 58 61 65 68 70 72 77 80 82 85 86 88 92 94 98 100 102 105 108 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 Denker-Botvinnik, 1945 Botvinnik-Denker, 1945 Lundin-Botvinnik, 1946 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1946 Steiner-Botvinnik, 1946 Botvinnik-Vidmar, 1946 Bemstein-Botvinnik, 1946 Botvinnik-Euwe, 1946 Stoltz-Botvinnik, 1946 Tartakower-Botvinnik, 1946 Botvinnik-Kottnauer, 1946 Botvinnik-Guimard, 1946 Reshevsky-Botvinnik, 1946 Botvinnik-Kottnauer, 1947 Gligoric-Botvinnik, 194 7 Kotov-Botvinnik, 1947 Botvinnik-Novotelnov, 1947 Plater-Botvinnik, 1947 Soko1sky-Botvinnik, 1947 Botvinnik-Ragozin, 1947 Keres-Botvinnik, 1947 Botvinnik-Euwe, 1948 Keres-Botvinnik, 1948 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1948 Botvinnik-Keres, 1948 Botvinnik-Euwe, 1948 Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1948 Reshevsky-Botvinnik, 1948 Botvinnik-Keres, 1948 Botvinnik-Reshevsky, 1948 Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951, 6th match game Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951, 7th match game Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951, 9th match game Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951, 10th match game Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951, 12th match game Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951, 18th match game Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951, 19th match game Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951, 20th match game Botvinnik-Bronstein, 1951, 23rd match game Botvinnik-Moiseev, 1951 Botvinnik-Lipnitsky, 1951 4 110 112 114 118 123 125 129 131 137 139 144 146 150 154 160 162 166 171 175 179 182 187 189 194 ·200 202 205 207 211 214 217 221 225 229 232 235 239 243 245 251 254 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1951 Botvinnik-Novotelnov, 1951 Botvinnik-Keres, 1951 Sliwa-Botvinnik, 1952 Szab6-Botvinnik, 1952 Kottnauer-Botvinnik, 1952 Botvinnik-O'Kelly, 1952 Troianescu-Botvinnik, 1952 Botvinnik-Pilnik, 1952 Botvinnik-Konstantinopolsky, 1952 Botvinnik-Goldenov, 1952 Tolush-Botvinnik, 1952 Bronstein-Botvinnik, 1952 Botvinnik-Keres, 1952 Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1952 Botvinnik-Boleslavsky, 1952 Botvinnik-Kan, 1952 Itivitsky-Botvinnik, 1952 Botvinnik-Geller, 1952 Moiseev-Botvinnik, 1952 Suetin-Botvinnik, 1952 Taimanov-Botvinnik, 1953 Botvinnik-Taimanov, 1953 Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 1st match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954, 2nd match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954, 4th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 5th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954, 12th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 13th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 15th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954, 16th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 17th match game Botvinnik-Smyslov, 1954, 18th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 19th match game Smyslov-Botvinnik, 1954, 21st match game Botvinnik-Stahlberg, 1954 Botvinnik-Minev, 1954 Botvinnik-Najdorf, 1954 Botvinnik-Pirc, 1954 Unzicker-Botvinnik, 1954 Antoshin-Botvinnik, 1955 · 5 256 260 265 269 273 278 281 283 285 288 291 294 297 299 302 305 308 312 315 318 323 328 332 ''335 341 344 348 352· 355 358 361 365 368 372 376 379. 383 389 . 392 395 400 ... •. 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 Kotov-Botvinnik, 1955 Botvinnik-Kan, 1955 Averbakh-Botvinnik, 1955 Botvinnik-Borisenko, 1955 Botvinnik-Stahlberg, 1956 Botvinnik-Benkner, 1956 Botvinnik-Padevsky, 1956 Larsen-Botvinnik, 1956 Botvinnik-Gligoric, 1956 Botvinnik-Ciocaltea, 1956 Padevsky-Botvinnik, 1956 Botvinnik-Najdorf, 1956 Sliwa-Botvinnik, 1956 Botvinnik-Stahlberg, 1956 Botvinnik-Szab6, 1956 Botvinnik-Uhlmann, 1956 403 408 411 414 417 420 421 423 425 428 430 432 436 441 443 445 Training Games Tournament and Match Cross-tables Summary of Tournament and Match Results (1942-1956) Translator's Notes Index of Openings 6 447 474 490 491 495 'Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown' A terrible time ensued - the War. On account of my eyesight I was not called up, and was evacuated from Leningrad to Perm.1 I worked as an engineer - as a specialist in high-voltage insulation. I took hardly anything with me, but my chess notebooks, the most recent publications and a chess set travelled . with me to the east. As soon as an everyday routine had been established, in the evenings I began writing notes to the games from the 1941 Match­ Toumament for the Title of Absolute USSR Champion. I had to preserve my chess strength for the years of peace to come (the government's decision about a match with the World Champion Alekhine had not been rescinded), and analytical work helped me to do this. When (after the victory at Stalingrad) I received an invitation to a tournament (Sverdlovsk 1943), it transpired that I was ready for battle. It was a double-round tournament. Against each of the other participants I scored I Y2 points and easily won first place. But there were also some adventures: for two weeks I tried to 'clean up' a continuation in the open variation of the Ruy Lopez (the regional authorities allowed me to prepare for the tournament at a state farm near Penn). But I worked completely alone, and my preparation proved to be inferior. Isaak Boleslavsky (against whom I employed this variation) conducted the game very skilfully, and could have given mate if in the diagram position he had played 61 �.f8! .. After he overlooked this opportunity, I was able to exchange my four con­ nected passed pawns for the opponent's bishops and on move 89 to draw this ending ... Yes, my analyses needed to be checked with Ragozin, this was clear! When I was preparing with him before the War, such problems did not occur ... The book of games from the match­ toumament was completed, and I had to 7 continue my training. The next event was the Moscow Championship (hors concours). Again I prepared alone, and again I suffered a fiasco in the open variation of the Ruy Lopez (this time against Smyslov). But the game with Zhivtsov (No.131) deserves particular attention. In 1941 in a training game, Ragozin and I tested a variation of the Queen's Gambit, which later became known as the 'Botvinnik Variation', but in the 1941 match-tournament my opponents avoided this variation. But Zhivtsov was not afraid and... he was immediately punished. For more than ten years I success­ fully employed this variation. Then it went out of fashion, but in recent years it has again begun appearing in tourna­ ment games. The power stations minister Zhimerin transferred me to the engineering de­ partment of the People's Commissariat, and in the next USSR Championship the first of the war years - I was already playing as a Muscovite. .On this occasion my good prepar­ ation told, and the title of champion, in competition with the young Smyslov, was won without any particular adven­ tures (for the fourth time). Significant in this respect was my game with Lilienthal: he prepared a new move in the Botvinnik Variation (Zhivtsov's experience was used!), and I found myself in a difficult situation. The · position of the black king is insecure, whereas White's king is fairly safe, and in addition he has the advantage of the two bishops. There followed 32 ...t'bd7! (to open the diagonal for the g2 bishop would, of course, be suicidal) 33 .txd5? (greed is the undoing of my opponent; 33 'it'c3 was essential) 33 ... 'i'xd5 (now, despite being the exchange up, it is only White who has difficulties) 34 �4 e5 35 .i.g5 lD:fS! 36 f3 lbe6, and Black's advantage is obvious. A game, typical of this open­ ing variation: in a sharp struggle the winner is the one who has studied more deeply all of its positional complexities! A year passed, and - a new Cham­ pionship, this time the first after the victory over Hitler's Germany. With Ragozin I prepared particularly dili­ gently, both physically and creatively. I was able to put my nervous system completely in order. Before the tourna­ ment Ragozin and I went to the hairdresser's. I ended up with some inexperienced girl, who made an un­ believable mess of my hair. 'Misha', said my companion, 'you endured this so calmly, that you are already guaranteed first place ... . My friend was right: I scored 16 points out of 18; this time there was no ' 8 up in a I ended but later the USSR team played against hopeless position against ... the rest of the world (in 1970 and in competition. True, in one game 1984), and quite successfully: 20Y2-19Y2 Ragozin. and 21-19! Unofficially we were told of Stalin's evaluation of the match score: 'Well done lads ... '. The American Ambassa­ dor A.Harriman invited us to a reception and showed the film Casablanca with Paul Robeson. 2 But the main result was that, despite the difficult war years, Soviet chess had moved forward. And those masters, who early had been somewhat critical of my play, on this occasion all united and sent a letter to Stalin suggesting that a match I overlooked the unexpected inter­ mediate move 22 %ld l !, when the in­ vasion by the white rook onto the eighth for the World Championship be organ­ rank is inevitable... There followed positively, but a few months later the 22 .. Jla8 23 %ld8+ ii.f8 (23 ... �h7 is no World Champiori suddenly died ... ised between Alekhine and the Soviet Champion. The question was decided · 'Troubled times' began - there had better) 24 axb3 (the critical point of the game; after 24 cxb3 ii.b7 25 ii.b8 a5 26 not been such a situation in the chess a4! Black's position would have been world before; never previously had the lost, whereas now his rook escapes from Champion died undefeated. The first imprisonment) 24....ab7 25 ii.b8 a5 26 f3 a4 27 bxa4 l:txa4, and the game post-war FIDE Congress in Winterthur (Switzerland, 1946) decided that a match-tournament of the six strongest ended in a draw! My friend was fatally unlucky with me in tournament games - he several times gained winning positions, but was unable to take them to their logical end. players should be held to determine the new champion. This signified that from then on FIDE would be staging such events. But at the congress only six delegates were present - rather few for It was no accident that he once presented me with a diagram stamp with an expressive inscription: 'To my friend, the boa constrictor, from his such responsible decisions. An important say was due to be made by the tournament in Groningen (Au­ friend the rabbit...'. Then came the USSR-USA Radio gust 1946). After the war this was the · first big international tournament. It was Match. The Soviet team astonished the no accident that Holland was the organ­ entire world - the score was 151/2-4Y2. iser of this event. The calculation was simple: former World Champion Max Yes, at the time this seemed fantastic, 9 Euwe would win, and he would have to be proclaimed World Champion. Dutch half of the match-tournament. The scheduling of the rounds was drawn The competitive struggle in Gron­ up without any regard for the element­ ary demands of competition. A tourna­ ingen was exceptionally tense, but Euwe only finished second. After this there ment should proceed at a measured followed the team match USSR-USA (Moscow, September 1946), where all pace, so that the participants become accustomed to a definite playing six participants in the planned match­ rhythm. It is then that one can expect tournament assembled: Euwe (he was high creative achievements. the match arbiter), Reshevsky and Fine The Dutch organisers had disre­ garded this. They had not taken account (USA), Botvinnik, Keres and Smyslov. Agreement about the match-tou rnament of the fact that the numerous free days was reached, but then (on the initiative (due to holidays, and also because the of the Soviet Chess Federation) it was number of participants was odd - at the annulled ... last moment Fine had withdrawn) would cut myself off from chess to work on the disrupt this rhythm and could upset a player's mental balance. dissertation for my doctorate. But in the summer of 1947, at the Congress in The When I established that before the last round of the second cycle, one of Everything was up in the air, and I Hague, the Soviet Chess the participants would be 'resting' for Federation joined FIDE, and the match-tou rnament six days in a row, I suggested to my of six players was confirmed. From colleagues Keres and Smyslov that we September my scientific work was put should make a joint protest. Alas, they did not support me! In a fit of temper, I aside, and I returned to chess. Again - creative collaboration with told them: 'You'll see - one of us in Ragozin, which benefited us both. In the The Hague will be "resting" for six days Chigorin Memorial Tournament (Mos­ in a row, and on the seventh he will lose cow 1947) Ragozin finished second! I without a fight ... managed to win, but of no less impor­ tance was the winning of my game against Keres, who many (after his And the first part of the prediction came true: after a six-day break, Keres sat down at the board opposite me ' victory in the 193 8 A VRO Tournament) looking as white as a sheet, evidently saw as a future World Champion. fearing that the second part would also And finally, the match-tournament. I be confirmed. And that is what in fact was excellently prepared (with Rago­ happened ... zin's support!) - for the first time I went After the 'half in The Hague (the out on skis with rigid bindings. Unfortunately, before the Moscow part of the match-tournament was longer, and consisted of three cycles) ·I was 1 Y2 points ahead of my Soviet players set off to The Hague a conflict arose. There were some heated argu­ nearest rival, Reshevsky. In our third ments regarding the regulations for the meeting 10 (the first in Moscow) the American grandmaster held the initia­ tive; my nerves let me down, and I suffered a defeat. But this did not affect the battle. Before the start of the last cycle my lead was so great, that in my last game with Euwe I was happy with a draw ... public. A little time later the film cameramen suddenly realised that they had not 'immortalised' the moment when I had made my last move ·1 4 b4, which had brought the title of World Champion to the Soviet state. Then they noticed that Yakov Estrin, the demon­ strator of the game, was wearing a suit of the same colour as the new champion. The audiences had nq sus­ picion that the 'historic' move b2-b4 at the chess board in the film clip was made not by the hand of the participant, but of the demonstrator. The 'history' of the b-pawn did not end at that. It was taken away as a talisman by Elizaveta Bykova in the certainty that this pawn would help her to become Women's World Champion. And this did indeed happen! In the diagram position I was due to Incidentally, the demonstrator who make my 15th move. Here I sensed that touched I could not play any more, and I offered subsequently my opponent a draw. At that point the Champion, in correspondence chess. tournament position of the former this truly 'magical' also became pawn World · Thus a Soviet player had become World Champion was hopeless, and I World was in no doubt that he would accept the offer. To my surprise, Euwe replied that he would like to play on. isolated success, since a whole group of I became angry, and my fighting mood immediately returned. 'Very well', I said, 'we will play on'. Here Euwe sensed the change of situation and extended me his hand, congratulating me on my victory in the tournament. Draw. The excitement and noise in the hall were indescribable. Play on the other Champion. This outstanding Soviet was not an grandmasters had assumed a leading position in the chess world. The broad popularity of chess was the direct result of the upsurge in popular culture, aroused by the October Revolution, and also the research work in the field of chess. All this contributed to the triumph of the Soviet Chess School. After the match-tournament I returned to the work on the dissertation board had to be halted. It was only after for my doctorate. I thought that there several i:ninutes that the chief arbiter would be sufficient time to prepare for Milan Vidmar was able to calm the the forthcoming World Championship match in 195 1 (by the new FIDE rules, matches were due to take place every three years). However, the work dragged on, and all this time I did not take part in any tournaments. It is not surprising that, when in the spring of 195 1 I had to sit down at the chess board, to defend my champion's title in a match with Bronstein, I found myself in a difficult position. David Ionovich Bronstein (born 1924) was undoubtedly a colourful fig­ ure among chess grandmasters. A brilliant master of attack, capable of taking original decisions, he forced his way through to a m atch for the World Championship at the age of 27, pushing aside such outstanding players as Keres, Smyslov, Boleslavsky and others. The situation in our match was favourable for him, since, as already mentioned, for three years I had not played a single tournament game. One should not be surprised that Bronstein, who was inferior to me in experience and positional understanding, did not lose the match, but should rather ask the question: why did he not defeat his out of practice opponent? My lack of practice can be demonstrated, for example, by the 16th game of the match. · In the diagram position Black is two pawns up with a positional advantage. For the moment his king is not threat­ ened, and be could have calmly played 72...b4, when after 73 'ifxb4 ltlxg3 White can only resign. In time trouble I was let down by my nerves - I played 72...:xg3+, and the game ended in per.petual check . . . Several similar examples could be given! So why in fact was I fortunate enough to draw the match? Two factors played their part. Firstly, Bronstein displayed a clear weakness in endgame play, and in the match he lost three endings in which I stood by no means better (this is also explained partly by non-objective analysis). The second factor was deficiencies in human character: a leaning towards a certain eccentricity and complacency. Alekhine pointed out long ago how important it was for a strong master to have a proper sense of danger! It is probable that this deficiency of Bronstein's revealed his comparatively weak positional under­ standing. Thus, the champion's title had been upheld, but I still had to regain my form! I also did not succeed in doing this in the 195 1 USSR Championship. Initially I took the lead, but then my nerves failed me; the same can be said about the international tournament in Budapest, with the difference that there I did not even take the lead. · 12 However, there followed 44 ... 'i'gl+! 45 tDfl 00+ 46 l:txf3 'i'xc5 47 l:.d3 'i'f5, and Black, not without difficulty, gained a draw. Late in December 1952, in Moscow, the 20th USSR Championship was coming to an end. When I resumed my game from the last round, I was not in the best of spirits. Initially I had retained every chance of winning, but I played weakly, and before Black's 58th move it was already clear that the game should end in a draw: there were opposite­ colour bishops. Meanwhile, only suc­ cess in this game would enable me to catch the leader Mark Taimanov, and keep open an opportunity of fighting for the championship of the country. And to win this title was simply essential. A few months earlier, on the proposal of other participants, I had been excluded from the Olympiad team, since, in the opinion of my colleagues, I was now a poor chess player. The 20th Championship was the first after the Olympiad, and, naturally, I wanted to demonstrate that the World Champion could still perform successfully. I managed to win that last round game (No.215) and to share first place in the tournament with Taimanov. Our match concluded successfully for me, and for the last (and 7th) time I won the title of USSR Champion. True, there were a number of adventures in the match. Here is one of them (see diagram). The game had just been resumed (this was the third game of the match) and it was Taimanov to move. He played 44 l:txf4, in the hope that after 44... 'i'xg3+ 45 l:tf2 'i'e3+ 46 �1 'i'd3+ 47 @g l ltle2+ 48 l:txe2 'ilfxe2 49 'i!fd4 the queen ending would be won for White. A year later came a match for the World Championship with Smyslov (the FIDE rules were in operation). By that time the 33-year-old Smyslov had reached the peak of his chess strength. In the period from 1953-1958 he was undoubtedly the strongest tournament player in the world. He played safely: he did not end up in difficult positions, went in for exchanges, with each ex­ change he accumulated some positional plus, and the outcome was a favourable endgame. If his opponent was able to defend it, the result would be a draw, but otherwise, using his very fine end­ game technique, Smyslov would gra­ dually win the game. The combination of good calculation of variations, character, boldness, independence and natural health made Smyslov practically invincible. Why then in 1954 did he not win the match for the World Championship? I think that there can be only one answer: 13 in positional understariding I was never­ same in the knight ending, since the white king is as far away as it can be theless somewhat superior to the challenger ... The final score was 12-12, from the bl square. There was a win by 98 ... �5 99 00 tl'lg5 ! 100 tl'lh4+ '1ti>g4 and I won my third laurel wreath. 101 tl'lg6 lill3 ! , and after ...�g5 my But, I have to admit, I was now over forty, and the time of my successes in the 1940s had passed. Then there had opponent would have promoted his h­ pawn unhindered. not even been any competition, whereas Tired after an adjournment session now I was playing opponents who were lasting several hours, Simagin (who was my equal. But with equality of strength, never noted for his stamina) played there is always some advantage on the 98...GDd2, but this allowed side of the player who is more skilled in bring up his king with gain of tempo, research work. It was this that enabled me to retain my crown, White to and after 99 'it>b4 ! '1t>f5 100 '1t>c3 ! tl'le4+ (or 100 .. �xe5 101 �d2, and the draw however uneasily ... is obvious) 101 �d4 tl'lg5 102 tl'ld3 the knight ending could no longer be won. In 1955 for the last (12th!) time I took part in the USSR Championship. Before the last round I still had reasonable chances of becoming USSR Champion for the eighth time. But, On this occasion too there was no 'purity' in my play. I think that my three-year break from chess (1948- apparently, in some way I had angered - the the chess goddess Caissa: feeble play in nervous system possesses great inertia. my game with Keres pushed me back In the tournament there were 'adven­ from first to third place. 1951) was continuing to tell And then came the last test before a tures', for example in my game with new match with Smyslov - the Alekhine Vladimir Simagin. Memorial Tou rnament in Moscow. In 1956 it was decided to mark the tenth anniversary of the great player's death. On this occasion I played with composure, and in the last round it was sufficient to draw my game with Keres to become sole winner of the tour­ nament. But here too I suffered a defeat, and Smyslov caught me. The training games given at the end of the book deserve particular attention. They clearly demonstrate the research aspect of preparing for events and its practical benefit. It stands to reason that, White's position is lost. The pawn ending is lost, and hence, in accordance without specific research ability, this with Ragozin's rule, it should be the method cannot be used! 14 From time to time the research tendency (and it ensured the lengthy and solid achievements of the Soviet chess school) has come in for criticism. Thus in 1950, on the pages of the magazine Shakhmaty v SSSR, Grigory Levenfish expressed the view that the use of preparation in tournament play reduces the creative aspect of chess. Today too they sometimes try to reject the research method as being outdated, as a method that could only be used in the 'stage­ coach' era. I think there is little basis to either of this conceptions. The research method did not appear out of thin air (it was also used earlier, although to a lesser degree), and the practical results achieved have been very impressive. The games given in this book demonstrate fairly clearly both a steady rise to the chess summit in the period 1943-1948, as well as some reduction in creative achievements immediately after my three-year break from play, and then my play stabilising at a fairly high level, despite the fact that I was already in my fifth decade. Here I was undoubtedly helped by my ability in self­ programming. But it can only be used with the aid of painstaking work. Yes, the poet was right - 'Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown!' 3 15 Selected Games 1 943-1 956 Also in Groningen, O'Kelly played the interesting move 8 . b5 against me. However, it would seem that Black cannot equalise in this way. After 9 dxe6 fxe6 10 lbxb5 c5 White should have continued 11 fl with an obvious advantage. He can also advantageously decline the sacrifice - 9 e4. Game 122 M.Botvinnik-V.Ragozin . A1aster Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 ltlf6 e6 d4 c4 ltlc3 e3 ltlge2 ..tb4 4 b6 5 .ib7 A few years later 5...iLa6, which leads to more interesting play, began to be employed. In particular, this con­ tinuation occurred in my match with Bronstein (1951), and also slightly later in my games from the 19th USSR Championship with Moiseev (No.193) and Novotelnov (No. 196), and in my 1954 match with Smyslov (No.2 19). 6 a3 · . 9 10 .tel e4 c6 ltla6 11 dxc6! .ixc6 Now White has an opportunity to begin immediate active play on the queenside, which could have been avoided by 10... cxd5 11 cxd5 exd5 12 exd5 t'Da6. This recommendation was subsequently employed in a game Bondarevsky-Kan ( 1949), and indeed after 13 0--0 lD.c7 14 ii.f3 'ilfd7 Black achieved a satisfactory game. ..te7 7 d5 This was played several times by Reshevsky, but even earlier by Rubin­ stein, for example in Moscow (1925) against Rabinovich. 0-0 7 • 8 • • ltlg3 The alternative plan is to fianchetto the king's bishop. For example, Euwe played 8 e4 d6 9 g3 against O'Kelly (Groningen 1946). 8 . . • d6 16 12 13 b4 0-0 li::Jc7 11fb8 14 15 16 17 ..te3 a4 b5 .i.xc4 b5 bxc4 .i.b7 17 18 19 20 exd5 li::J xd5 .i.xd5 d5 li::Jcxd5 li::Jxd5 .i.xd5 21 22 li::Jf5 ! i.d4 .i.f6 exf5 ll'ixd5 l::td 8 26 'il'e3 exd5 27 l::tfd l the ending is favourable for White. However, the energetic reply 22...'i'f4 (23 .i.xf6 'ii'xf5) would have left White with only a symbolic advantage - with opposite-colour bishops, there is no way that he could have exploited his extra pawn on the queenside. Black intends the freeing advance ... d6-d5, but for this he must first exchange his b-pawn for the white c4 pawn. The drawback to this plan is that White gains a queenside pawn majority. 23 .i.xf6 24 l:Z.aJ! 24 25 26 l:r.g3+ 'i!fd4 i!fb7 It was on this move that Ragozin was pinning his hopes, since now the bishop and the g2 pawn are simultaneously attacked. However, disillusionment awaits him. An unexpected turn of events. Black cannot reply 24.....txg2 on account of 25 :g3, while if 24 ... 'it>h8 there follows 25 'i'd4 l:.g8 26 :g3, and there is no way of defending the g7 square. Therefore he is forced to accept the breaking up of his kingside. ; Thus Black has carried out his plan, and he has even gained the advantage of the two bishops. Immediately, however, this latter factor will no longer apply, as White has available an interesting tactical stroke. A mistake, as a result of which Black's position sharply deteriorates. It is also unlikely that he could have resisted successfully with 22...i.xd4 23 'i'xd4 f6, as 8.fter 24 tlle7+ 'it>h8 25 gxf6 'it>h8 The bishop is regained, since only the queen can save the black king from being mated. 17 26 27 28 29 1!Fxd5 9'd4 1!fh4 29 30 31 l:ldl l:l.xg4 · 38 39 11e7 1t'e6 l:lfd8 g3 1!f'h3 'fff3 h5 This counter-attack, alas, is too late. 40 b6 axb6 41 axb6 1t'c8 Black resigned, without waiting for A new threat has appeared: 30 l:lh3. llg8 Jlg4 fxg4 42 b7 'flc7 43 lhl (or 43 l::td7). The situation seems to have eased for Black: he has slightly improved his · pawn formation and has exchanged a pair of rooks. But with simplification, the organic defects of his position become even more evident. . Game 1 23 M.Botvinnik-A.Koristantinopolsky Master Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Caro-Kann Defence 1 2 3 4 5 e4 d4 exd5 c4 c6 d5 cxd5 it)f6 e6 ft)cJ 5...lbc6 would nevertheless seem to be stronger, since then after 6 JJ..g5 (cf. Game 56*) Black can reply 6 ...e6, and the position of White's pishop at g5 restricts his choice of plan. In the game, by contrast (after 5 . e6), he can also opt for other continuations. . 32 6 7 Ilg8 h3 1!fxh3 is no better. hxg4 llxg4 1!fe7 1ih6 a5 32 ... gxh3 33 33 34 35 . 1ih3 • • :g6· • 9'e2 36... 1t'b7 was rather more tenacious, '' but Ragozin, as usual, was aiming to play actively. 37 1i'd3 .i.g5 JJ..e7 Premature was 7 c5 0-0 8 JJ..d3 b6 9 b4 a,5, when Black achieves double­ edged play. On the other hand, the quiet continuation 7 cxd5 exd5 8 i.b5+ i.d7 9 '1Vb3 assures White of a slight, but enduring advantage. 7. 0--0 In the end the outcome is C:iecided by White's main trump - his queenside pawns. 35 36 ft)f3 . • • * Games 1- 12 1 have been published in the first book. Botvinnik's Best Games 1!Fg4 Volume 1: 18 1925-1941. 8 Act equal 14 0-0 e4 or 14... exd4) 14...ll:lxe5 15 dxe5 d4 16 'iig 3 Ji..f5 17 0-0 d3. Black's activity is sufficient compen­ sation for the sacrificed pawn. There is no simpler way for Black to resolve this problem: if l 1...ltlxc3 12 l:f.xc3 e5 there would have followed 13 tt:lxe5 ttlxe5 14 l:f.e3. A similar situation had already occurred in my game with Krnoch (No.62). White aims to exploit his extra pawn on the queenside, but this plan involves a loss of time, and Black could later have avoided any difficulties. A mistake, as a result of which the e5 square is irreparably weakened. Why defend the knight again, when for the moment it was not threatened? After 12...f6 13 b4 ltJxc3 14 l:f.xc3 a6 15 0-0 l:f.fd8 Black would have gradually prepared ... e6-e5. It can be mentioned that again after 8 c5 White cannot gain an advantage, on account of 8 ... b6 9 b4 a5 10 a3 ll:le4 11 Ji..xe7 1!fxe7 12 ll:lxe4' dxe4 13 ll:le5 ltld7. 8 8 ... ltle4 chances. 9 9 10 ... would ltlc6 have given cs Ji..xe7 ll:le4 1!fxe7 12 a3 13 Ji..bS! fS Perfectly consistent. White aims to exchange Black's queen's knight, in order to gain control of e5. 13 ll:lg5 Black, in turn, wants to eliminate White's king's knight, in order to hinder the opponent's occupation of e5. • • • 11 .i.e2 . • • .i.xc6 1!fxf3 'lff4! 0-0 18 9xeS 18 19 . ltlxf3+ bxc6 l:lae8 es In this way Black prevents the manoeuvre of the white knight to e5, but later one of the white pieces will be able to occupy the no less important d4 square, which is now vacated. This move is made in order to block the e-file inunediately, in view of the possible threat of ... e6-e5. For example, if 11 Ji.. b5 there could have followed 11 ... ll:lxc3 12 .l':xc3 e5. 11 14 15 16 17 White transposes into a favourable ending. .ild7 • • dxeS 1!fxeS l:beS After 19...d4 20 ltle2 d3 21 ltlr4 d2 22 '1cdl l:txe5 23 I:txd2 White would have emerged a pawn up. Interesting complications would have resulted after l 1...l:ld8 12 'i'c2 (if 12 0-0 e5) 12...ll:lxc3 13 'i'xc3 e5 14 tt:Jxe5 (if � 19 Defending the b2 pawn and preparing White's next move.. 25 . 20 f4 It is important to blockade the f5 pawn, which restricts the black bishop. 20 • . • :e7 20... l:te3 there would followed 21 <ifi>f2 d4 22 l:lfdl. If 21 l'!fel 21 22 23 l'!xe7 have .tlfe8 l:lxe7 c;t>n <if.Jf2 After 23...d4 24 lDe2 d3 25 tLlc3 (25 ... .i.cS 26 l:lel) the loss of the d­ pawn was inevitable. l'!dl 26 27 28 �eJ �d4 28 29 l1b8 l:lbJ • . • <itr6 llb8 �a2 The white pawns cannot be blocked: 29...a5 30 tDcl l:tb8 31 b3 etc. 30 . • • 25 lle2 Thus the central d4 square has been occupied, and Black is obliged merely to observe the development of events such is the fate of the side with a bad bishop. A useful move. fixing the unfavourable arrangement of the black pawns. It would have been wrong to play for further simplification: 24 l:te I l:txel 25 <ifi>xel d4 26 tDe2 �e6 27 �xd4+ ltid5, and Black should not lose. 24 l1e8 In the variation 24....i.c8 25 tLle2 l:te4 the simplest for White is 26 ;cld4 h6 27 l::txe4 fxe4 28 ttid4 with an obvious advantage. . 26 In contrast to the vanation given earlier, 24 l:tel l:txe l 25 lttxel, in which the king moved away from the centre of the board, now after 26.. J:txe2+ 27 tLlxe2 White would gain time to play his knight to d4. White needs to exchange one pair of rooks in order to activate his king. 24 h6 b4 g5 On the queenside Black is obliged to remain inactive, since if 30 . aS there would have followed 31 bxa5 l:!a8 32 lDc3 l:lxa5 33 a4, and the black rook is condemned to a passive role - it is .. l'!d2! 20 obliged to halt the advance of the opposing outside passed pawn. There­ fore he makes an attempt to create counterplay on the kingside, but nothing significant can come of this. 31 32 33 gxf4 a6 :gS g3 gxf4 tt'lc3 39 40 41 ltb2 lDe2! are never � llfl :&t.el 41 The e5 square cannot be defended (41...�6 42 c6 llf2 43 c7 I:txh2 44 llb6, and Black must resign). 42 <!>es d4 43 'it>xd4 <io>g6 44 tLlc3 45 lle2 46 l£lxe2 <io>h5 :xe2 �g4 47 �e5 48 ll'ld4 49 ll'lxf5 Ac8 h5 i.d7 This delays slightly the inevitable end. After 42...<Jo>e7 43 c6 and only now 43 ... d4 there is no point in White wasting time on the eliminating the d­ pawn, since he can decide matters with 44 llb7+ 'it>d8 45 'it>d6! l:be2 46 l:tb8+ i.c8 47 c7+. ng4 �e6 a4 J:tf2 tt'lcJ! If 41 <Jo>e5 Black would not have replied 41...:e I + on account of 42 ft'le2, but immediately 41 ... d4 with . some altogether unnecessary complications. A rare situation: the invasion of the black rook does not bring any gains. Now, when I am working on formalising the way that a chess master searches for a move, I can explain this easily: the point is that that the black rook has no feasible trajectories for attacking the white pieces. 34 35 39 Precautionary measures superfluous. White would have won more quickly after 35....i.e8 36 b5 axb5 37 axb5 cxb5 38 tLixd5+ <Jo>e6 (38.. <M? 39 <Jo>e5) 39 �e2+ '3if7 40 .l:txe8 �xe8 41 tLif6+ rl;e7 42 tl:ixg4 f.xg4 43 f5. However, now too the breakthrough on the queenside is unavoidable. . Now 44 'it>e5 would be a mistake because of 44 ...i.c4. Even an active king can no longer do anything to help. If 49. 36 b5! 37 . axb5 38 lllxb5 axb5 cxb5 l:tgl .. i.xf5, then of course 50 h3+. 50 ! tt'lg7 · i.a4 <io>g5 51 f5 52 'tlle6+ Black resigns A classic �xample of exploiting a bad light-square bishop: ·White controlled the dark squares of the.. board in 21 combination with the exploitation of his pawn majority on the queenside. Game 124 ing .tc l -g5xf6. The point is that if 8 .tg5 there follows 8 ...tt:lxe4 9 lllxe4 .txg5 10 tt:lxd6+ <l;e7, and his position is sound enough. 8 0-0 9 f4 M.Botvinnik-LBoleslavsky 0-0 Alaster Tournament Sverdlovsk I 943 Sicilian Defence 1 e4 One of the few games of that period in which I opened with the king's pawn. After a training game with Ragozin (Zacherenye, 1936), which was men­ tioned in the notes to game 77, I largely lost my taste for open games. However, I knew that against Boleslavsky it was advantageous to play 1 e4, since the opening variations that my opponent employed after this with Black were rather passive. In such a situation my somewhat superior positional under­ standing could bear fruit without any particular risk. 1 2 3 4 5 6 ltlf3 d4 ltlxd4 ltlcJ i.e2 c5 ltlc6 cxd4 ltlf6 d6 e5 I made this move in order to enliven the play somewhat. Modem theory gives preference to 9 .te3 ..ie6 10 ..if3 llla5, which, however, is also harmless for Black. 9 10 11 One of Boleslavsky's numerous clever opening set-ups. Black achieves a comfortable development. and the weakness of the d5 square proves immaterial. However, giveri careful play by White, Black will be unable . to achieve any activity. 7 ltlb3 .te7 Black should not waste time on the prophylactic advance ...h7-h6, prevent- . . • exf4 Now White gains an important tempo for the development of his queen's bishop. Later it was shown that Black should play 9 ...a5 10 a4 lllb4 11 .tf3 i.e6, when after ...�c8 and ....tc4 he has the initiative. .txf4 ..td3 i.e6 In the game Bronstein-Leven:fish from the 17th USSR Championship (1949) White played 11 �bl immediately, on which there followed 11 ... d5, but Black did not succeed in equalising fully: 12 e5 tt:le4 13 .Jld3 f5 14 exf6 lllxf6 15 'ilfe l 'i'd7 16 llla4 .i.fl 17 tt:lac5. 22 for Black. Now, however, the initiative passes for a long time to White. 11 In this situation too Black could have played 1 l . ..d5 (to which White was intending to reply 12 e5), since in the given position the opening of the d3-h7 diagonal has no great importance. Boleslavsky, however, avoids sharpen­ ing the play. 12 13 'it>hl 11fb6 cxd3! J.eJ? . • • ... .i.d4 We6 .i.d8 19 20 1i'g4 21 'l'gJ . . • lnd7 And now White wants to give mate. ll)eS 20 lnxdJ • • • Of course, it would have been a mistake to play 21 Iixf7 'i'xf7! 22 l:.xf7 tlixg4, and 21 i.xe5 dxe5 22 l:.xf7 11fxf7 was also unfavourable for White. J.xb3 21 22 f6 tlid5 a6 Although in this position it is hard for Black to do anything active, White's task is also not easy: the opponent is well entrenched. There is nothing else, other than to make a pawn offensive on the kingside. In this situation Boleslavsky should have tried to use his Opening the f-file with gain of tempo and preparing to play the bishop to d4. 15 17 18 · Black was unable to refrain from making this exchange, assuming that White would be bound to recapture with the queen, when there would have followed 14 ... Itac8 with a good game. 14 15 1lfxbJ Black aims to consolidate his material advantage, since it is dangerous for White to regain the pawn: 19 l1xa7 l:txa7 20 .i.xa7 b6. However, the white rook was in any case aiming for the kingside. 19 fiaf5 On the kmgside the first threat has appeared: 20 �xf6! ilxf6 21 �xf6! gxf6 22 tlid5 with a decisive attack. 11f'e2 ... axbJ .:,35 White does not waste time capturing the a7 pawn, but transfers his rook by the shortest way to the kingside to join the attack. This plan can prove success­ ful, since for the sacrificed pawn he achieves an excellent arrangement of his pieces. A cunning idea. White sacrifices a pawn in order to gain several tempi and exchange the active bishop at e6. 13 16 17 'i'b4 The young Boleslavsky demonstrates that he has a good appetite! It was not yet too late to decline the sacrifice: 15...'i'c6 16 axb3 d5 with counterplay 23 pawn maJonty on the queenside, for which, without loss of time, 22 ... a5 should be played immediately. What should White do next? For the moment g4-g5 does not work, and Black has already created the threat of 28 ...b4 followed by 29 ... :tc2. But White finds another latent possibility. 28 23 'ilh3 l:te8 Now the threatened 24 l::txf6 is no longer possible. 24 25 g4 1fg3 h6 26 .i.cJ a5 27 h4 b5 1llb3 ! A quiet move, but an unpleasant one for Black. The white queen continues manoeuvring between g3 and h3, on this occasion seemingly without any point. In reality, in this way the queen's vulnerable position at e6 is exploited. If Black allows the �dvance 29 g5 fxg5 30 ii.xe5 dxe5 31 hxg5 hxg5 or 3 L ..i.xg5, then White wins by 32 l:liS+! In reply to 28 ...&bd7, so as in the above variation to take the rook with the knight at f8, there follows 29 lLJf4! 1Wb3 30 g5 fxg5 31 hxg5 ii.xg5 32 l::txg5 hxg5 33 lbg6 with a mating attack. The only saving move was 28...<ifi>h7!, in tum exploiting the insecure position of the white queen (29 g5 fxg5 30 hxg5 ..txg5!). In this case Black would probably have achieved an equal game. Boleslavsky, however, becomes neivous and overlooks a tactical stroke. First the queen made way for the g­ pawn, and now for the h-pawn. :cs 25 Admitting his error on the 22nd move. 28 tl)f7 Now White gains the opportunity to go into an ending with queen against two rooks. Despite the material equality, Black's chances are unfavourable on account of the poor position of his king and the weakness of his pawns. 29 .i.xf6! 29 30 Jt 32 33 lbxf6+ :xr6 l::txf7 An unpleasant surprise! 24 .. :xn .i.xf6 gxf6 11fd7 'lfxf7 <iti>-xn 39 1!fe6+ 40 1ld7+ @g7 40 41 @gS White defers making a decision Wltil after the time control. • • • @g2 If 41 "ii'xd6 there would have follow­ ed 41 ...l:.c2. Now White improves the position of his king, but spends some precious tempi in so doing. 41 42 <itig3 l:.c2+ In the new situation the main thing for White is to avoid the pursuit of his king by the black rooks. This could have been achieved by 34 <t>g2! l:.c2+ 35 � d5 (or 35...lhb2) 36 g5 dxe4+ 37 dxe4 l:tf8 38 'it>e3, when he has every reason to coWlt on a win. Instead of this White hastens to force events, which is highly tempting, but equally incorrect. 34 g5 Now a pawn is quickly won, but Black succeeds in cutting off the white king's retreat from the kingside, and its position becomes insecure. 34 35 ... 11'f5+ Now Black should have played 42...lhb2! 43 1i'xd6 l:.bf2 44 'ild5+ l:.2f7 45 e5 a4, when he would possibly have gained a draw, since he could have checked with his rooks on the f-file thanks to his outside passed pawn. Instead he makes another . error, which this time proves decisive. 42 l:.cf2 hxg5 After 35 'i'd7+ 'it>g6! 36 ifxd6+ 'it>h5 3 7 hxg5 l:.cd8 the passive position of White's king would again have made it hard to convert his material advantage. 35 36 37 1bg5+ 1fxb5 'it>g7 <itih7 l:tftl! 38 ild7+ ..t>g8 . 43 . • 9xd6 l:l2ti Now White succeeds in panying the attack by the enemy rooks, and wins by combining defence with the advance of his central pawns. Now both black rooks are on open files, and the path of the white king to the centre is blocked. 44 9'd5 45 . e5 . 25 �h8 l:lg7+ · 46 WhJ 3 4 5 6 7 l: g6 In order after 47 e6 l:te8 48 e7 <li/g7 to win the e7 pawn. 47 d4 :a. Again hindering 48 e6, when there would have followed numerous threats. 48 49 11fe4 d5 48 .. Jle l 50 51 'it>g4 Wh5 llggl llhl+ 1 15), Smyslov played differently: after the standard development 7 00, 8 .td3 52 e6! and 9 'i'd2 he launched an immediate pawn llhgl+ llti . The whole point is that .tb4 cs .i.xcJ+ l£ie7 In our previous meeting where the French Defence was employed (Game with 49... l::te l would have offered a more tenacious resistance. lhc3 e5 aJ bxcJ a4 attack on the kingside. This strategy did not prove successful. 7 8 9 10 lL'ifJ .te2 0-0 lL'ibc6 .i.d7 'ilc7 if 52 .. J%h7+ there follows 53 'i'xh7+, and one of the 10 white pawns soon becomes a queen. Black resigns. h6 This is not only a loss of time, but also a weakening of the kingside that for the moment is quite unnecessary. After the immediate attack on White's pawn . Game 125 centre by 10 ...f6 he has the unpleasant V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik 11 exf6 gxf6 12 .i.a3 (suggested by Master Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Uhlmann). A step forward is 10...b6, as I played against Tolush in the 1943/44 Moscow Championship. French Defence 1 2 e4 d4 11 12 e6 d5 26 J.aJ dxc5! b6 bxc5 20 'iff3 After 20 'ilfxf7 Black could have forced a draw: 20 . . . l:tafS 2 1 'W'g7 l:tfg8, but he would have been unable to exploit the bad position of the enemy queen by 2 1 . . .'i'e6 on account of22 f4. In the event of 12 . . . tt'lxeS 13 tt'lxe5 "it'xe5 White's queen's bishop would have been very active. 13 14 .i.xc5 tt'lxe5 tt'lxe5 1!fxc5 Black cannot leave such a dangerous bishop on the board. Besides, if 14 . . . 'i'xe5 there could have followed' 1 5 i.d4 'i'g5 16 f4 with a dangerous initiative for White. 15 tt'lxd7 20 �xd7 21 22 23 16 i.b5+ 'i!lh5 'i'e5+ 11i'f6 24 25 26 <3Jc7 g6 'ifd6 Black's pos1tion looks very hazardous, but he nevertheless finds defensive resources. 19 ilg7 11i'xf6 llaf8 '&f6 :xr6 White's slight advantage consists in his doubled, but nevertheless extra pawn. In order to activate his pieces, he must open up the position. After gaining an advantage from the opening, White promptly makes an impulsive move. The bishop at b5 will be badly placed, since White will have to reckon with the threat of . . . a7-a6 (in the event of c3-c4 ). He should have consistently opened up the position of the black king by 16 c4. 16 17 18 19 e4 In view of Black's insecure king, 20 ...f5 leads to great difficulties, since the queens remain on the board. Now, however, if White wants to achieve anything, he has to accept the pawn sacrifice, but then the exchange of queens is unavoidable. 21 'ifxf7 Even in his youth, Smyslov very much liked playing endgames. He conducts this one with great skill, but . . . e5 27 :adl :ret ..tfl :ds tt'lf5 lte6 36 l:ta5+ Black is saved by the possibility of driving back slightly the very active white king. If 37 'it>e6 there follows, of course, 37 . . . llf5. Smyslov prefers not to move his king away from his c-pawns. Black's main objective is to be able to answer c3-c4 with . . . d5-d4; it follows that the e4 pawn must be securely defended. Therefore White must switch to attacking the enemy pawn centre by f2-f3 . Then, however, after the exchange of White's f3 pawn for the black d5 pawn his material advantage is somewhat flevalued, since he is not able to exchange his doubled c3 pawn. 27 28 29 g3 • 37 38 39 40 i.g2 If29 c4, then 29 . . . exf3 . 29 30 31 32 33 l:td6 dxe4 ltlxd6 fxe4 lbd6 <it>f.2 Or 33 lldl (to answer 33 ...l:ta5 with 34 l:td4), but then 33 . J:tcs. . 33 34 35 i.xe4 <itxe4 'it>d4 c4 ci?d6 l:lf5 l:te8 h4 41 42 43 44 c5+ Ae3 llaJ c4 45 �e4! <iftd7 a5 «ii?c6 a4 Smyslov played unsuccessfully in this tournament, but he conducted some individual games with great strength. Back in 1938 Alekhine had spoken respectfully about the play of the young Smyslov, and my opponent conducts this ending at a very high level. lle5 �e3 • llf2 llg2 40 ... llxc2 was bad in view of 4 1 J:lg8. h5 J:le7 f3 • l:ta5 ltlxe4 J:lxa4+ Now, with the appearance of a passed pawn on the a-file, Black's drawing chances improve. 36 �d5 The only possible winning try. Smyslov intends to return his extra pawn, but to exploit the remoteness of the black king from the g- and h-pawns. 28 SmyslQv was always very strong in tactics. Black must now defend with excep­ tional precision. 45 46 47 48 49 @fl l:lxa4 �4 <.tel <it>xc5 l:ld2 l:ld3+ l:ld4+ lld6 59 Aal <i>f4 <ote5 �xc4 lld4+ lld3 53 54 J:lct+ J:lgl 'it>b5 llf3 60 �e2 ltb7 l:la4 with a ckaw. However, the move played also does not change anything. 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 The black king is remote, but White's is also cut off. ci>e6 g4 g5 llal l:ta7 • If 60 llg7, then 60 . . Jtxh4 61 'it>f6 52 . . . l:lg4 was not possible on account of 53 l:la4+. 55 56 57 58 59 • . . . There is no question of Black going into the pawn ending, but he is quite satisfied with the status quo: because of the passive position of his rook, White is forced to sacrifice his c4 pawn. 50 51 52 . Here too care was essential. In the event of 59 ...� 60 :t7 White wins easily in the pawn ending: 60 :xn 6 1 ri;}xf7 'it>g4 62 @xg6 �4 63 @h6 'it>g4 64 g6 h4 65 g7 h3 66 g8'ii'+. 'it>e3 l:lh6 D.xh4 <it>f6 l:la4 'it>xg6 h4 @fl 'it>h5 b3 g6 Wg5 Draw agreed A game which typifies the play of the young Smyslov. He was capable of making errors in the transition to the midcllega.me (16 i.bS+), but he con­ ducted the endgame with staggering precision and composur� I was able to make partial use of the experience gained in this rook ending 27 years later in my game with Spassky (Leiden 1970). 'it>c4 llf4 �d3 �e3 Game 126 M.Botvinnik-Y.Zagoryansky Master Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Reti Opening 1 2 3 Apparently with the aim of attacking the g6 pawn, but in fact a clever trap. 29 li)f3 c4 b3 d5 e6 lDf6 4 5 6 ..tb2 el �CJ ..te7 0-0 c5 ... cxd5 �xd5 8 �xd5 exd5 Now Black is left with an isolated pawn. After 8. . . 'ii'xd5 9 ..tc4 he would have given the opponent an important tempo for development, as in one of the games from the Botvinnik-Levenfish match, 1937 (the ending of which is given in the introduction to Volume 1). d4 1!fxd4 12 ..tel ..te6 13 14 15 0-0 1'xb2 :fdl ..txb2 Wa5 15 16 17 18 19 l:td2 J:tadl bl �e5! • . . 12 ... ..tg4 was somewhat more active, whereas 12 . . . ..txb2 13 1!fxb2 'i!fa5+ 14 'i!fd2 'i!fxd2+ 15 <it?xd2 would have given White a significant advantage in the endgame. A role would have been played not only by the weakness of the black d5 pawn, but mainly by the centralised position of the white king. More complicated problems arise in the event of 7 . . . exd5, as Euwe played against me in a similar situation (AVRO Tournament 1938). 9 10 11fd2 The exchange of the dark-square bishops is now unavoidable, after which White's control of the blockading d4 square becomes even more appreciable. � 11 At that time this continuation was considered almost obligatory. 6 ...b6 leads to more complicated play. In an analogous position Chekhover chose against me 6 c6, which is undoubtedly passive (Game 70). 7 ..tf6 10 11 White embarks on a systematic siege of the weak d5 pawn. The fact that such a position gives White good prospects was known to me after studying the game Duz-Khotimirsky-Romanovsky (4th USSR Championship), which I had personally observed in the Leningrad House of Scientists in the summer of 1 925. cxd4 llfd8 lld7 llad8 h6 Thanks to this non-routine decision the game is simplified, the dark squares in the opponent's position are weakened still further, the bishop obtains an excellent post at f3, and the white queen acquires complete freedom of move­ ment. How could White refrain from such a continuation? The point of the manoeuvre begun with 9 d4. After any other capture of the pawn on d4 there would have followed 10 . . . ..tb4+, to Black's advantage. 30 At the cost of weakening the position of his own king (which is possible only thanks to the fact that the enemy pieces are tied down), White opens up the play on the kingside. It soon transpires that Black is unable simultaneously to defend his king's fortress and the ill­ starred d5 pawn. 19 20 21 1!fxe5 .fLf3 1!fb2 1!fe5 ltlxe5 1!fc5 :ld4 25 g4! 11fc6 hxg5 f6 29 1!fg3 f5 30 31 32 33 1!lg5 <ifi>hl :gt 1!fb6 'iie6 1lre5 llf8 l:l.b8 An impulsive move, assisting the development of White's initiative, al­ though the inevitable transference of the rook from d l to g l would in any case have set Black insoluble problems. b6 llc8 White has an obvious positional advantage, but he does not immediately find the correct, although highly paradoxical, plan of further action. 23 24 g5 1!fxg5 The doubling of heavy pieces on the h-file was already threatened (28 l::th4 and 29 Wh5), and Black has to take ilmnediate measures to oppose this plan. 28 1lfg6 1Lf7 With the threat of winning a pawn by 22 e4. 21 22 23 25 26 27 l%.cd8 a5 33 . !!d6 was not possible on account of 34 l::txg7+, but something had to be .. 31 done against the threat of 34 l:.h4. If 33 ... g6 the pawn advance h3-h4-h5 is decisive. Therefore Black vacates the f8 square to allow his king to flee, and at the same time defends his b6 pawn. @f8 34 l:th4 35 36 1!fb8+ l:X.f4 Game 127 V.Makogonov-M.Botvinnik Master Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Slav Defence .i.gS A new target has appeared - the f5 pawn, which White easily wins. 36 37 38 l:tg5 1!fh5 39 40 41 42 Wg2 1!fxg6 1!fd6+ 'lld8+ One of checks . . those l:tbb7 %!ti 1!fal+ so-called 1 2 3 d4 c4 lhcJ d5 e6 c6 4 5 6 e3 lbfJ lhe5 lhf6 lhbd7 In those years I often went in for this position, which may lead to the Meran Variation, the Dutch Defence, the Queen's Gambit. . . All these openings (or more precisely, systems) I had prepared in every detail. As Furman picturesquely expressed it, in such situa­ tions the opponent feels like a wolf in a forest, when the hunters surround its location with red flags. For me things were much easier, since all these openings had also been tested in training games before the War. 'spite' . g6 iLh7 l:X.be7 White's aim was merely to adjourn the game, since it was obvious that Black would not bother to continue it. For this it was simplest to give a check, without thinking about which pawn to capture and with wl)at. Black resigns. Vladimir Andreevich Makogonov ( 1 904-1993) was without doubt an outstanding chess master. In style he was close to the great Rubinstein, and he often created games that were deep and interesting in the positional sense. The somewhat one-sided nature of his style prevented him from rising even higher. We together gained the master title in the 1 927 USSR Championship, by sharing 5th-6th places. The move played is typical of Makogonov. He, of course, avoided 'my' systems, and employed Rubin­ stein's anti-Meran variation. In this position Nimzowitsch used to make the In its time a strong impression was made on me by Bogoljubow's win against Reti at the tournament in Bad Homburg ( 1 927). As it seemed to me, White exploited in classical style the drawbacks to the enemy position with an isolated pawn at d5. Later this method became widely adopted in tournament play. And I, for example, tried to create a similar situation in my afore-mentioned 1938 game with Euwe, who, however, preferred play with hanging c- and d-pawns. See what an influence on the praxis and theory of chess can be made by one single game ! 32 waiting move 6 'ifc2, but this was not in accordance with my opponent's style. 6 7 8 dxe5 f4 9 cxd5 slight distinction, but it is of consider­ able importance. iiJxe5 iiJd7 iLb4 Intending subsequently to play the knight from d7 via c5 to e4. Makogonov liked Clarity and certainty, but now Black easily solves the problem of activating his queen's bishop. Stronger is 9 Ad2, as played by Rubinstein against Vidmar in San Remo ( 1930). The point of this move is that after 9 . . . dxc4 10 iiJe4 ! (but not 10 iLxc4 t'Dxe5 1 1 fxe5 'i'h4+) White has the advantage. Makogonov evidently did not know this opening subtlety, and he exchanged on d5 so that he would not have to worry about tl1e defence of his c4 pawn. 9 10 J.d3 exd5 10 11 iLc2 11 12 g3 Played on general grounds - the bishop must be retained, but now White gets into difficulties. Therefore he should have preferred 1 1 0-0 ( 1 1 . . . d4 1 2 liJe4!) with approximate equality. 12 1!fh3 Creating two threats: 13 . . llfg2 and 1 3 . . . il.f5. It is already clear that the cen­ tral squares are under Black's control. 13 <it;f.2 Axc3 This later allows the black knight to comfortably establish itself at e4. . 16 33 'ilh4+ White still refuses to accept the fact that his position is worse, and he makes a move that allows Black to exchange the light-square bishops. This leads to a critical position. Meanwhile, after 12 <t>fl it would not have been so easy for Black to demonstrate his superiority. 14 15 This position, only with the differ­ ence that Black's king's bishop was at e7, had already occurred in the game Makogonov-Yudovich . ( 1 1th USSR Championship, i93 9). A seemingly iiJcS bxc3 i.xf5 . g4! Af5 Wxfs 19 A brilliant move. It seems to be merely a further weakening of the position. But no, White lures the black queen to e4 (which is where the knight should go), and if he had succeeded in this, then after 16 . . . 'ife4 17 .ia.3 ! tLld3+ 1 8 'it>g3 Vxe3+ 1 9 VD Vxt3+ 20 �xf3 c5 2 1 Ilhdl c4 22 .l:labl 0-0-0 23 J.d6 in the endgame he would have had definite compensation for the pawn. 16 11i'e6 J.a3 ttie4+ h3 . f6! 20 c4 hxg4+ 21 22 23 hxg4 'ifxhl ltdl l:Cxhl 0-0--0 If 23 cxd5 there follows 23 . . . Vxd5, when White has to parry the threats of 24 ... fxeS and 24. . . liJd2+; he cannot cope with all the adversities! cii1'3 Now after 18 ... tLlxc3 19 'ifb3 tiJbS 20 J.b2 0-0-0 21 f5 the initlative passes to White. From this it follows that Black moved his queen to the wrong square. 16 . . . 'i'd7 was correct, when here he would have been able to play 18 . . . tiJxc3, and if 19 'i'b3 to move his knight back to e4. However, Black can still develop pressure on the opponent's position, if he avoids being tempted by immediate gain of material. 18 19 • It is useful to draw the enemy queen to the edge of the board, as far as possible from the d-file. As will be evident later, this is not the most accurate move. 17 18 • The winning move. Since after 20 exf6 tLlxf6 the position ofthe white king collapses, Black wins a pawn while retaining all the advantages of his position. 23 24 25 26 27 cxd5 Itel+ 1!ht4 f5 This is simpler than fxe5 cxd5 �b8 l:le8 1ff7 27... 1ila6, when there could have followed 28 11ih5, which, incidentally, White was also ob­ liged to play now, trying to provoke the exchange of queens. The passive move in the game leads to further difficulties. h5 28 29 :.c2 .i.b2 29 30 �e2 g6 With the threat of 30 J.xe5+. a6 A forced retreat. After 30 .i.xe5+ :xe5 3 1 'i'd8+ rl;a7 32 :cs :xrs+! Black's attack is the stronger, whereas now White is ready to demonstrate (for example, after 30 ... gxfS) that his threats (3 1 �xe5+ �xe5 32 'ifdS+ 'it>a7 33 l:!.c8) are more effective. rl;a7 30 • 34 • • 41 42 The tactical tricks have been exhausted, and White's position has become hopeless. 31 32 33 11ih2 fxg6 1!ig2 ii.xeS 'ifxf2 .id4+ l:tc7+ .ie5 ilf4 40 %le7 45 46 47 :at 'ittf2 47 48 49 Wd8 a5 b5 1!ib3 <it>f3 'ittf4 a4 Wc2 <bd7 One gets the impression that the white king is aiming to try and mate its opponent, and so just in case its access to the d6 square is blocked. �xg4 �! A so-called little combination, which Black has had in mind for a long time. 50 51 52 53 White is forced to allow the black king out of the danger zone. 40 llc7+ l:tct �d4 If 47 .tb6+ 'ittd7 48 :xas there would have followed 48 . . . 'itic6 4 9 .ids 'ifxe3+. !tf2+ �xf2 b6 'ittb8 Of course, the win would have been more difficult after 37 ... 'itta8 38 'ittxf2 1!fxg4 39 ..ixb6. 38 39 43 44 45 Or 45 ..i�7+ 'ittd7 46 .txb6 'ifb2 47 1:1c7+ <t>d6 48 l:tb7 'ittc6 49 :bs 'i'xb6. 1118 White does not gain sufficient compensation for his queen, but there is nothing else he can do. 34 35 36 37 'iti>c8 1Wxa2 After the loss of the a2 pawn, further resistance is pointless. 'li'f6 'ifxg6 If 33 ..ixe5 Black wins immediately by 33 . . . 1!fxg4+ 34 'itte l :xe5. 33 34 'ittet .txe5 'itte5 Wf6 'ittg6 lifl We4+ ife7+ a3 b4 Now Black can even give up his queen. 1!fc2+ 35 1!ht7+ 54 :n Of course, not 54 . . . b3? on account of 55 l'!xe7+ @xe7 56 .i.c5+. 55 @xf7 b3 White resigns 8 9 10 f4 0-0 .to 11 f5 tt'lbd7 b6 .i.b7 In this game Makogonov was unable to display his positional understanding, but in a difficult position he demon­ strated another aspect of his talent tactical ingenuity. Game 128 M.Botvinnik-LKan }.Jaster Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 e4 tl'if3 d4 lDxd4 lDc3 When Black's bishop has left the h3c8 diagonal, this pawn thrust is unpleasant for him, since the e6 awn cannot be comfortably defended. And since Black also cannot exchange on f5 (the white knight at f5 will occupy a strong position), he is obliged to weaken his d5 square. Another continuation occurred in the game Kopaev-Alatortsev ( 1938): 1 1 g4 tl'ic5 1 2 'We2 .te7 13 'ii'g2 0-0 14 g5 tl'ie8 15 .te3 e5 16 tt'lde2 .iii.c6 17 f5 with a significant advantage to White. c5 e6 cxd4 lDf6 d6 p In this, the so-called Scheveningen Variation, once can basically distinguish two systems of development of Black's queenside pieces: . . . tt'lc6 and ... .td7, or . . . tt'lbd7 and the fianchetto of the queen's bishop. Kan chooses the second possibility, .which is quite logical from the point of view of piece pressure on the centre. 6 .te2 11 12 a6 . • . tl'ib3 e5 tl'ic5 Kan evidently assumed that this move would force the exchange 1 3 . tt'lxc5 'i'xc5+, easing Black's defence. However, disillusionment awaited him. More logical was 1 2 . . . .te7 1 3 'ife2 0-0 14 'it>hl l:tac8 1 5 .i.d2 l:lfe8 followed by . . . d6-d5, as subsequently occurred in the game Romanovsky-Kan ( 1 4th USSR Championship, 1945). 7 a4 An old-fashioned system of develop­ ment. Four decades ago there was not a great deal of experience in this opening, and masters were largely guided by recommendations given in Becker's monograph on the ' Sicilian Game'. 7 • • • 'i'c7 36 13 an equal nwnber on the d 5 square. 1ie2! White thereby is indeed forced to ex­ change knights on c5, which he rightly It transpires that 1 3 . . .ltlxb3 14 cxb3 is unfavourable for Black, as White is the first to exploit the open c-file - a avoided on the 1 3 th move. However, standard idea of Bolesla\.'sky. that which was unfavourable in the 13 14 @bl i..e7 opening now proves successful, since on the implementation of his ill-fated ideas Black is spending too much time. Instead he should have risked castling · on the kingside. 17 18 lldl /i)xc5 'i'a8 dxc5 Of course, the opening of the d-file for further simplification is welcome, but this capture leads by force to Black's defeat on account of his lack of development. After 1 8 . . . bxc5 White's offensive could not have been so swift, but he would have possessed a signifi­ cant and obvious positional advantage, especially in view of the weakness of On which side should Black castle? If on the queenside, then here the king the c4 and d5 squares. Many regarded Kan as a player of will not have a secure pawn screen, and positional style. I think that he was a will be unable to find safety. Castling clever tactician. A deficiency of his play kingside immediately invites a pawn storm by g2-g4-g5. Therefore was an excessive striving for simplifi­ Kan cation. decides to leave his king in the centre, but in the end here too it comes under attack. 14 . . b6 15 16 i.. d2 .tel l1d8 . Preventing i.. g5 and i..xf6. After . Black has deprived White's bishop of the g5 square, this is a natural and quite suitable way of bringing it into play (via h4 ). 16 . • . 'ifc8 By playing his queen to a8, it wol,lld seem that Black achieves · gains · thanks 19 to his fourtl1 attack on the e4 pawn and 37 i..g3! The central e5 pawn becomes the main target of attack. 19 20 ... l:.xdl l:.xdl 1!fb8 21 tl'ld5 tl'lxd5 22 exd5 ii.d6 23 f6! g6 The defence by 20 . . . tl'id7 was not possible, as this _would have removed Black's control of d5 . But now too it proves insufficiently well defended! Black himself is forced to assist White's attack on the e5 pawn: if 2 1 . . .'ifd6 (otherwise the b6 pawn cannot be saved) there could have followed 22 tl'ie3 and tl'ic4, if there is nothing better. Black was evidently pinning his hopes on this move, since 22 . . . .tf6 23 d6 or 22 . . .f6 23 d6 .i.xf3 24 d7+ and 25 Wxf3 was bad for him. Now it only remains for him to reinforce his centre by . . . f7-f6, after which he will be able to count on a successful defence. But for this last step he is not given the necessary respite. After 23 ... gxf6 24 ..te4 Black is completely tied down and he is unable to prevent ..th4 and l:tfl . as a result of which White regains his pawn while retaining all the advantages of his position. 24 ii.xe5 An obvious move, which Black could not have failed to foresee. Now if 24 . . . .txe5 White decides the game with 25 nel, or, even more energetic, 25 d6. But despite the loss of his important central pawn, Black is not without hopes of saving the game, since the d5 pawn appears to be solidly blockaded. 24 ... This i s Black's plan: now h e will finally occupy the open file with his rook and obtain a viable position, even though a pawn down. But this plan proves impracticable on account of an unexpected tactical refutation by White. To be fair, it should be mentioned that after the other king move, 24 ... 'it>d7, although the combinative solution would not have worked (as will be shown below), after the quiet 25 .lc3 ! (this bishop must be retained) 25 ....:.e8 26 'it'c4 (26 . . . .lxh2 27 d6) Black's position would have been pretty bad. 25 i.. xd6 26 1!fe7+! 26 27 fxe7+ 1!fxe7 Wd7 28 d6 ii.xf3 'iixd6 A terrible check! The ending is hopeless for Black, although the win is not so easy in view of the blocked nature of the position. • • • Of course, not 27 ...@xe7 28 d6+, but if the black king had already been at d7 (cf. the note to Black's 24th move), there would have followed 2 7 . . . 'it>d6 ! with an obvious draw. ®d8 38 29 gxf3 30 ' @gl :cs g5 This makes tllings easier for White, as the weakening of the f5 . and h5 squares allows his king to break through on the kingside. However, otherwise it would have headed for c4 (after l:l.dl­ d5), and when the black rook moves from c8 the breakthrough a4-a5 wins. 31 lld5 Here the rook is invulnerable. 31 32 33 34 <"atig3 �g4 �h5! :gS f6 �e6 White's plan is clear: to win another pawn, and then at the cost of the e- and d-pawns to exchange rooks. 34 • • . a5 If 34 . . .l:l.h8 there follows 35 'i¥tg6. 35 �xh6 � 36 37 @h5 �g4 lih8+ llh4+ 38 39 40 �g3 f4 @xf4 :hs gxf4+ �e6 Suppose White were to play 38 �f5? Then 38 . . J lf4 mate. Now, when an outside passed pawn has been created, it is simplest to go into the pawn ending. Of the other possibilities the following can be mentioned (without the participation of the kings): advance the h-pawn to h7 and then play d6-d7. 41 42 43 44 d7 d811'+ llxd8 @f5 �xe7 J:txd8 �xd8 Black resigns . After 44 . . . @e7 the quickest way to conclude the game is by 45 @g6 <it>e6 46 h4 f5 47 'i¥tg5 ! 'i¥te5 48 h5 f4 49 h6 f3 50 h7 f2 5 1 h81!1'+. In my notes to Game 124 I have already mentioned that, after losing a training game to Ragozin, I began rarely opening with the king's pawn. But at the tournament in Sverdlovsk my play was so assured that I was able to permit myself an exception to the rule. Game 129 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov . Master Tournament Sverdlovsk 1943 Three Knights Game 1 e4 2 ltlf3 3 ' ltlc3 e5 ltlc6 3 4 .i.b4 1 My toumament position at this point was so good, that I was ready even to play the qufot Four Knights Game. But Black aims ' to complicate the play, in ' which, however, he does not succeed. 39 ltld5 JJ..e7 This well known vanation is considered by theory to be unfavourable for Black. 4 . . .tbf"6 is somewhat better, although even then after 5 lL'ixb4 tl'ixb4 6 tl'i.xe5 'i!fe7 7 d4 d6 8 a3 White's position is to be preferred. 5 d4 d6 6 jLb5 .tg4 8 h3 ..id7 It is doubtful if 5 . . . exd4 6 ll'ixd4 lbxd4 7 'ilfxd4 is any better for Black. In the game Alekhine-Tartakower (New York 1924) there followed 7 . . . lbf6 8 lbxe7 1Wxe7 9 jLd3 . .txc6 bxc6 10 lbxe7 'ilxe7 would not have given White any advantage. 9 10 • • .ig5 ll'if6 0-0 Black should have eased his defence by simplification: 10 . . . lbxdS 1 1 exd5 .ixg5 1 2 dxc6 bxc6 13 'i'xe5+ 'ife7, although even in this case after 14 .ic4 White has the superior pawn formation, and therefore he is assured of an ad­ vantage in the endgame. Now, however, Black's position is subjected to a more severe test. 11 12 Irnprndently played. White gains the advantage, since he is the first to occupy the d•file. In addition, the e5 pawn will need to be defended. Instead of this Alekhine played 6 ... exd4 7 lbxd4 jLd7 against Znosko­ Borovsky (1922), but then too White retained the initiative: 8 0-0 tt'lf6 9 l:l:el 0-0 10 �xc6 bxc6 1 1 tt'lxe7+ 'i'xe7 12 .ig5. 7 dxe5 dxe5 • .ixf6 0-0-0 .ixf6 12 . . . .i.e6! Smyslov has prepared a clever rejoinder. After the obvious 1 3 tl'ib6 there follows 13 . . . .ig5+! 14 �bl axb6 15 l:l:xd8 .ixa2+ 16 'iti1al .ic4+ 17 l:l:xa8 l:l:xa8+ 18 �b 1 .i.xe2, and Black emerges a pawn up. However, this is not the only possible variation. 9 13 .ixc6 bxc6 14 15 tl'ixf6+ 1!f'e3 'i!f'xf6 l:lfb8 Here too 14 tt'lb6 does not work on account of that same bishop check at g5. 1!fe2! The rook must go to d l as soon as possible. The exchanging operation 9 40 16 l:r.b5 a3 If possible this rook should have been kept at d5 (or d6), since the ex­ change by White would have improved Black's pawn formation. Now, how­ ever, things are easier for White, in that his king is free to move into the centre. Here Black should have spent time on the prophylactic move 16 ... h6, in order to prevent the exchange of queens. Now White forcibly transposes into an ending where he has a significant advantage, thanks to his superior pawn formation. 11 18 'iig5 b3 If 18 . . . J.xb3 replied 1 9 'iixf6. 19 20 llab8 h6 White 'iixf6 l:t.d3 would have 24 . 25 26 a4 liJd2 ltJe4 lla5 lld5 !txdl+ liJf6 30 31 32 33 liJg8+ ttlxh6 l:lg7 <ltie7 <ifi>e6 f5 li.d7 34 llg6+ �d5 35 g4 f4 Passively played, of course, but what else was there to do? After 33 . . . i..h5 + 34 g4 Black would have also lost his c7 pawn, while if 33 . . .lld7 the . simplest was 34 llxd7 il.xd7 35 g4. . .td7 .te8 30 Now the black h-pawn is doomed. It is natural that Black should want to get rid of his doubled pawn, and in addition more space is cleared for his bishop. However, the subsequent use of the bishop as a defender of the c6 pawn leads to a passive position. Perhaps, therefore, 20 . . � 2 1 llc3 ll5b6 22 nd 1 �e7 would have been preferable. 21 exf5 J.xf5 llc3 !tdl <itixdl �e2 29 ltlf6+ was already threatened. 29 l:lg3+ � gxf6 f5 22 23 lld8+ �g7 27 28 Or 34. . .�e7 35 g4. Black tries to create counterplay in the centre thanks to his extra pawn on that part of the board. . All this, however, is easily parried. 41 36 :gS lbg8 38 39 40 lDf6 f3 h4 i.cS 'it>cJ 8 37 lill:g8 Here Black could have tried chasing after the aggressive knight, but this would not have achieved anything: 37 ...<iti>e6 38 f3 <,ftf7 3 9 tLlh6+ <iti>g6 40 tfil5 i.xf5 4 1 gxf5+ <ifi>xf5 42 �d3 with a won pawn ending for White. 37 @d4 There is no way of stopping the h­ pawn. Black resigns. It only remains to add that Smyslov also played badly in certain other games from this tournament. Game 1 30 Moscow Championship 1943144 Ruy Lopez 4 5 e4 lDfJ .i.b5 i.a4 i.xc6 e5 tDc6 a6 lDf6 bxc6 6 iDcJ d6 3 This capture leads to a unexplored game than 5 . . . dxc6. 10 11 tDe2 iDgJ 0--0 l1b8 12 13 14 bJ i.eJ cJ l1e8 g6 as 15 16 11 1!fc2 l:lfdl LDel 'fle7 lDc5 lDe6 Black does not fear 12 lbr5 in view of 1 2 . . . tLlc5 followed by 1 3 . . . i.xf5 14 exf5 e4. more Of course, Black wants to bring out his bishop at a6, although he knows that at some point the fl -a6 diagonal will be blocked by c3 -c4, but then a 'hole' will appear at d4! 7 d4 This position has also occurred in other games. Later, for example, it was reached by a different move order: 5 tLlc3 d6 6 i.xc6+ bxc6 7 d4. Here, however,. Black conceded the centre and after 7 . . . exd4 8 lbxd4 i..d7 9 'iff3 he was an inferior position (Westerinen­ Lewi, Stockholm 197017 1). 7 iDd7 • • dxe5 Chigorin liked playing such positions as Black. It was shown by Rauzer that they are dangerous for Black when White's queen's knight is not yet deve­ loped, in view of the manoeuvre lbb l ­ cl2-c4-a5. With the knight at c3 this system gives Black a satisfactory game. 9 0--0 Ad6 V.Lyublinsky-M.Botvinnink 1 2 dxe5 A positional error. l 7 . . . i.a6 was necessary, and only if 18 c4 18 . . . tLle6, subsequently occupying the d4 square. - • 42 order after 24 . . . .1lc7 to immediately exchange a pair of rooks. The manoeuvre of the knight to f4 proves to be a significant loss of time. 18 19 20 �dJ f3 c4! 24 25 �f4 .1la6 c5 'Bd2! 11f.xd3 �xd3 lled8 The preparatory 22 ... a4 23 tt:le2 (of course, not 23 bxa4 l:tb4) would later merely have led to the opening of the a­ file. 23 24 �e2 �c3 l:td4! 25 Tiris sacrifice could not be delayed. It is possible only if Black retains one rook for the attack. After the exchange sacrifice Black's pawn chain is repaired, he obtains a passed pawn, the closed nature of the position deprives the white rooks of any activity, and what tells is no longer the material, but the positional advantage. White has exploited excellently the opponent's faulty strategy - diverting his knight away from the d4 square. Now, in view of the threats of 22 ifxa5 and 22 �xf4, Black is forced to exchange knights, after which he is left with his weak pawns and without the slightest compensation. 21 22 JJ..c7 Black's position appears hopeless. His pawns are broken, his bishops have no prospects, but . . . Forced. Black does not have time for 20 . . .tt:le6 on account of 2 1 'iic3 , when loss of material is unavoidable (but not 2 1 c5? .1lxd3). 21 11fc2 c6 26 �e2 26 27 28 �xd4 .1lfl White prefers to take the rook with his knight and to retain the bishop. A questionable decision, since the knight would have been well placed at d3. .ic8 cxd4 c5 White is completely without counterplay and is obliged to await the development of events. An imperceptible, but significant error. First 24 'it'c2 was essential, in 43 29 30 .tg3 31 Aadl l:lfl f5 .td7 . .i.f2 g4 .txg3 :n Jifd2 Ad3 �bl l:tgl 1!i'dl 42 f4 g5 fxg3 i.h3 h5 h4 . • • 'ifh5 44 45 46 47 111xf3 i.xg5 .i.xd8 .i.b6 47 48 . 49 59 5� 52 .i.xc5 :dt h3 b4 .i.d6 l:[xfJ l:lxd3 Ae3 After 47 .i.xa5 Axe4 48 l:lel Black wins both by exchanging rooks, and by . 48 . . . l:lf4. With every move White becomes ever more restricted. l:lftl 37 .tf2 38 39 40 42 1!i'f7 Of course, not 42 ... g4 43 fxg4, and the bishop at h3 is attacked. Now, however, 43 . . . g4 is threatened. White's last hope - an ending with opposite­ colour bishops - is not realised. 'ifxfJ+ 43 J.e3 A vain attempt to forestall the opponent's assault, although to allow 3 3 . . . g4 would have been even worse. Now the black pieces are free to take up their most active positions. 33 34 35 36 1!i'e2 As was shown by home analysis (the game was adjourned), after 42 J.e l g4 43 fxg4 i.xg4 44 l:lxg4 l:lxg4 45 'i'xg4 1!i'fl + 46 1!i'gl 1!i'xd3 47 'i'g4 1!i'fl + 48 'i'gl 'ife2 the e4 pawn would also 1¥,tve been lost. Of course, the exchange 3 1 exf5 gxf5 was dangerous, since in the end Black would have created two co1U1ected passed pawns in the centre. But now he gains the opportunity to restrict the enemy pieces still further and to launch an attack on the kingside. 31 32 33 41 l:t.f4 �h7 J.d8 44 Axe4 :.e2 .i.g4 .ixh3 .tf5 (Helsinki 1946). For more details of this variation, cf. the notes. to Game 195. Otherwise (for example, · after 52 b5) there follows . . . h4-h3-h2 and . . . .ie4 mate. 52 53 d3 bxa5 ' h3 White resigns The gan1e is instructive as regards both Black's faulty strategy (the unfortunate manoeuvre of his knight from c5 via e6 to f4), and also the correct positional sacrifice of the exchange. The second half of the game was easy for me to play, since the structure of it resembled my game with Rabinovich (No.98). Game 1 3 1 A.Zhivtsov-M.Botvinnik Moscow Championship 1943144 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 ll'lc3 tt'lfJ .i.g5 d5 e6 c6 ll'lf6 dxc4 As was mentioned in the notes to my game with Lilienthal from the Match­ Tournament for the title of Absolute USSR Champion in 1 94 1 (No. 120), already then I was ready to employ this sharp and complicated continuation, but my opponent avoided 5 .ig5. 6 7 8 9 e4 e5 .i.h4 lbxg5 9 hxg5 Attempts to gain counterplay for Black by 9 . . .tbd5 10 tbxf7 'i!fxh4 1 1 tbxh8 Ab4 have not been successful: after 12 'ifd2 c5 13 d...:c5 tbd7 14 0-0-0 White has a clear advantage. It can be added that 9. . . tbd5 was tried by Sokolsky in a training game (1937), and then two years later by Ragozin. I began analysing this variation (with 9 . . . hxg5) after the game Szabo-Euwe (Hastings 1 938/39), in which White gained a slight advantage: 10 .ixg5 l°Dbd7 1 1 'iff3 .i.b7 1 2 .ie2 l:l.g8 13 .ixf6. Then this same vanatJ.on occurred in a game Van Scheltinga­ Grilnfeld (1940), which after 10 ... .ie7 did not turn out well for Black. Even so I decided t9 check all this; since I trusted the positional sense of the well known theoretician Ernst Grtinfeld, although to me 10 . . . .ie7 seemed to� passive. When preparing for the 1 94 1 match­ toumament I decided to venture taking up this variation., and in a training game b5 h6 g5 9 exf6 began to be employed in 1945. · Then Ragozin played this against Book 45 with Ragozin (given in the chapter 'Training games') we tried it out. However, neither in the match­ tournament, nor in Sverdlovsk, was I able to employ the prepared continu­ ations. since my opponents, who had heard of my analytical searchings, avoided possible complications. And now, finally, in the Moscow Champion­ ship, the insufficiently experienced Zhivtsov decided to find out what in fact had been prepared. 10 i.. xg5 t'Llbd7 This move, made by Euwe in the afore-mentioned game, seemed to me to be worthy of consideration. 11 1Wf3 As was shown by later games played with this variation, the move that sets Black the most difficult problems is 1 1 g3 . Also quite strong is 1 1 exf6, and only after 1 1 . . . il.b7 - 12 g3. On the other hand, 1 1 . . il.e2, as chosen by Ragaozin in a training game in 194 1 , cannot be recommended (cf. also Game 154). 11 12 exf6 i..b 7 . .. ife3 13 14 0-0-0 �bl 16 h4 1ia5 t'Llb6 Black not only brings up his reserves for the attack, but also defends the c4 pawn, after which . . . b5-b4 becomes a real threat. 16 i..e2 was more correct, in order to connect the rooks, but even this could no longer have averted the attack. . . • li)e4 b4 cs The thematic move in this variation. In this way not only Black's king's bishop, but also his queen's bishop, comes into play. 18 f3 Again 18 i..e2 was slightly better. Wb6 This move is useful mainly for the fact that it puts the d4 pawn under fire. 13 14 15 16 17 In the event of 12 .i.e2, as Szabo played against Euwe, I was not intend­ ing to continue 12. . J::tg8, but rather 12 . . . 'i'b6 with a good game for Black. lZ what else can be suggested? Kingside castling is equally dangerous, and leaving the king in the centre is even worse. Intending if 1 3 . . . c5 to reply 14 d5. 0-0-0 18 19 ... i..e2 19 20 aJ cJ! If 1 9 bxc3 there would have followed 1 9 . . . lbd5 and 20 . . . t'Llxc3+. It soon transpires that on the queenside the white king is not safe. But 46 i.. d5 happily headed for the proposed variations, like . . . moths to a light! Game 132 M.Botvinnik-G.Ravinsky 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1 944 Queen's Gambit 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 b3 is met by the decisive 20 . . . c2+, but now too defeat cannot be avoided. 20 21 • • . dxc5 ltla4 ..txc5 ltlxc5 bxc3 ltlxc5 The resistance could have been slightly prolonged by 23 l:!.cl f.ZJb3 24 l:tc2 ltld4 ! 25 :ee l c2+ 26 !lxc2+ ltlxc2 27 'it?xc2. • bxc3 'irb6+ 'Wb2+ ltlxd3 ..ib3+ In this hopeless position White lost on time. If 28 @el there would have 23 24 25 26 27 ltlf6 dS e6 cs ltlxd5 Theory rightly considers that the seemingly active continuation 6 e4 ltlxc3 7 bxc3 cxd4 8 cxd4 ..tb4+ does not lead to an advantage for White. In the present game for the moment both players are following a quite good example (Botvinnik-Alekhine, AVRO Tournament 1938 - Game 94). 6 . ..te7 An insignificant deviation from the afore-mentioned game, where 6 ...t.ZJc6 was played, although it used to be suggested that after 6 ... JJ..e7 White gains an advantage by 7 il.d3. ltlc6 7 il.c4 But now the position on the board is again one from my game with Alekhine. Incidentally, Black does not fear 8 i.xd5 exd5 9 dxc5 i.e6 10 ltla4, since he regains the pawn with roughly equal chances: 10 . . . ..txc5 1 1 llJxc5 'i'a5+ and 12 ...'i'xc5. The simplest. Black connects his rooks and happily exchanges his passive bishop for White's centralised knight. 22 23 ltlf'J d4 c4 ltlcJ cxd5 e3 lld3 'it?cl @dl i.xd3 followed, for example, 28 . . �ifd2+. That was the course taken by the first game in which this system was employed. The first, but by no means the last! My opponents, relying on nonnal positional concepts, considered this new system to be incorrect and 8 • 0--0 9 i.xd5 exd5 threatened. 47 cxd.4 10 dxc5 was now 9 exd4 0--0 play on the weakened dark squares in the opponent's position. In addition, he has to consider the consequences of the unpleasant advance . . . f7-f5. 14 15 16 Itel i.g5 1Fb6 llac8 Provoking an unavoidable weakening of the kingside pawns, since my opponent must avoid the exchange of the dark-square bishops. 16 11 .i.eJ White is the first to deviate from the familiar path, but it has to be admitted that 10 :el (as I played against Alekhine) was stronger. .id3 . 11 12 ..tbl a6 17 The variation 1 1 .i.xd5 exd5 12 'i'b3 .i.e6 would not have won a pawn; as after 13 'i'xb7 ttJa5 the white queen has no retreat square. ttJe4 i.d2 1!'c7 ttJcb4 b5 Now Black is threatening to play 13. . . ttJxc3 14 bxc3 tt:'id.5. This entire manoeuvre, beginning with 1 1 . . . �b4, was borrowed by Ravinsky from that game of mine with Makogonov in Sverdlovsk, in which the Baku master was playing Black. However, this plan is not without its drawbacks, since in Black's position the c5 square is weakened. 13 14 f6 17 .i.d2 was more prudent. On the whole, although, as already explained, each move of this bishop was been made with good intentions, it turns out that White has already moved it four times, and this cannot help but entail the loss of the initiative. 10 10 11 Act And now Black has the unpleasant threat of 18 . . . ttJc2, with exchanges and the seizure of the open file. White is obliged to sacrifice a pawn, for which he gains some compensation, since he retains the two bishops, whereas Black has to part with one of his. .ib7 White decides to retain his dark­ square bishop, in order to use it later for 48 18 19 20 Firmly 20 ...l£ic2. l£ic5 dxc5 l£id4 parrying 20 21 • • • .teJ .txc5 11xc5 the threat In view of the unpleasant threat of 33 ltie5, Black is forced to exchange his centralised bishop, after which the weak pawns cannot be defended. of 33 34 35 l£ic7 • • • 1i'd5 Apparently a menacing move, but, as will be seen from what follows, 2 1 .. .'i'e7 was preferable. 22 W'b2 �f6 l1d2 'i!t'xf5 My opponent was not only a brilliant master of attack, but was also distinguished by his great tenacity in defence - as will become clear from the subsequent course of the game. Of course, not 2 1 l£ixe6, since the bishop at cl is en prise. 4 · 21 Jbc6 llcxe6 f3 Already White wants to play 23 .te4, so that the queen again has to move. 22 . • • 1!t'b5 On its own the queen cannot do anything; 22 . . . 'i!fd7 was simpler. Now the initiative gradually passes to White. 23 24 25 1!t'b3 .tn Jie4 �bd5 Wh8 White, of course, does not even think about regaining the pawn (25 ltixe6 l£ixe6 26 l:txe6 nc 1 +), but continues intensifying the pressure. 26 .ixd5 27 " · 'ila3 . 28 llacl .ixd5 'iffi J:r.cd8 The impression is that, at the cost of material, Black has built up an attack: after all, the second rank is in his possession! In fact, White could have won fairly easily here by 36 Vc5, defending his bishop and attacking the rook at f8. 36 . . . tai7 would have been met by 37 :es, and 36 . . . :gs by 37 :xa6. However, it was time trouble that now had the decisive word. 29 . 1!fe3 30 b3 31 1if4 32 l£ic6 lld7 'iff6 �e8 .txc6 As a result, instead of being two pawns up White has lost his material advantage. . 25 . • f5 Now, when not only e5 has been weakened, but also other dark squares in the opponent's position, White can consider himself to be out of danger. · 36 37 38 The c-file should not have been conceded without a fight. · 49 l:[e8 llxg8+ 1'c5 . l:lg8 l£ixg8 11fxa2 39 40 41 b4 lhe2 h3 :e2 'ihe2 49 1id2 49 50 iJ..xe7 Thus White has achieved an arrangement of his pieces that will enable him to begin a pawn offensive, and Black decides that it will be better for him to meet it without the minor pieces, since the bishop is much more active than the knight. Cj'je7 The first goal has been achieved. 11fxe7 50 After missing a win in . the middle­ garne, White must now aim to convert his slight advantage in the endgame. It consists in the fact that Black's queenside pawns are blocked, and hence White is effectively a pawn up. 41 42 iJ..h4 'i!fe6 As Capablanca rightly considered, queen and knight are stronger than queen and bishop. Therefore · White prevents the activation of the enemy knight, and is ready at the first opportunity to exchange it. 42 43 44 45 .i.d8 iJ..b 4 f4 46 47 48 1ifd6 .*-d8 Wh2 51 52 53 54 �g3 We3 Wd4 54 55 56 57 �c3 \t>b2 \t>bl � 1!fe4 1fc4 11fe6+ For the moment White does not find the correct plan, and the journey of his king to the queenside cannot achieve anything positive. h6 Wd7 1!'e6 Thus White begins carrying out his plan. It is obvious that he cannot get by without advancing his kingside pawns. 1!fe4 45 9'd6+ 'i!fc6+ 'i!ff6+ \t>h8 Now it is quite evident that, with White's king on the queenside, the advance of his pawns does not achieve anything. It is good that he is able to c.fiih7 Wet+ 'iie4 50 71 repair his mistake, and also he has no reason to hurry! 58 59 60 61 62 @c2 ct>cJ <ii>d4 @eJ tlfg6+ 11'c6+ 1id6+ 11fe6+ placed here, where White has a pawn majority, and this is its only position where it can be secure. 62 1!fe4 g4 <it>g3 <it>g2 <!fl @h7 'Bbl 11'e4+ @h8 11'bl 'ii'a l 'iff6 70 W'cJ+ A committing decision, but wtless the black queen is driven from the key f6 square, neither White's king, nor his pawns, will be able to advance. • • • 72 73 74 11'e7 'iti>b5 h4 1!ff4 c.filb7 75 76 77 g5 hxg5 tlfe4 hxg5 78 f6+ White is intending to play 75 11ff7, and if 75 . . . 1!fxb4 76 f6 Wes+ 77 g5 6. Therefore Black must take control of the f7 square. 74 1!fc4 Once again White gains time for thought before taking decisive action. 66 67 @g3 68 f5 69 'ife3 70 11'e6 11fd2 .. <!fl It is clear that the king should be 63 64 65 66 @b4 Black's last reasonable chance was to take the pawn: 71...1i'xb4 72 f6 gxf6 73 11fxf6+ <ifilh7 (but not 73 . @g8 because of 74 'i'g6+, 75 'i'xh6+ and 76 'ifxa6 5) 74 'iff7+ .Jo>h8 75 <ifi>h5 tlfc5+ 76 <ifi>xh6 tlfe3+ and a draw is inevitable. After White's king has broken through to h4 and he has retained the b4 pawn, he has every chance of winning, since the pawn ending will always be lost for Black. 1!fc8 1i'f8 For the second time White misses a certain win: 78 g6+! �g8 (78...<ifi>h8 79 @g4! with the threat of 80 'Whl+) 79 'i!fe6+ c.filh8 80 f6! gxf6 8 1 ifd7 'i!fg7 51 (8 1...'ilgS 82 c.fi>h6) 82 'ild8+ 'ifg8 83 'ilxf6+ 'flg7 84 'ifd8+ 11ig8 85 'ifxg8+ 'itixgS 86 'itih6 a5 87 bxa5, and, in contrast to that which occurs in the game, the queen appears · at a8 with mate. Now the struggle is again drawn out for a long time. 78 79 . 1"e6+ 80 Wxf7+ 81 fxg7 82 g6 the 1947-1949 Soviet Yearbook. The Estonian grandmaster studied many of the positions that arose, but did not indicate a general method of play for the stronger side. 'ot>g8 1i'f7+ <llxf7 @xg7 bxa5 a6 a7 a8'9' 9a7+ 1if7+ 'oii>b6 @g7 'iti>f6 'ot>e5 1ih1+ @d4 91 92 93 1!ff6+ ct>g8 g7 �c5 cii>b5 @a4 94 � 94 ... The black king runs as far away as possible from the battle zone, in order not to hinder the queen in its defensive functions. a5 Hopeless for Black is 82...'oii>g8 83 'itih6 'oii>h8 84 g7+ 'itig8 85 cii>g6 a5 86 bxa5 with mate in three moves. Ravinsky naturally prefers to go into a queen ending. 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 b4 b3 b2 bl'li' . Keres begins his analysis from this position, and suggests that 94 1if5 ! was correct. 94 'ifd4+, centralising the queen, was undoubtedly even stronger. However, more details of this type of ending are given in the notes to my game with Minev (No.23 1). Only then, ten years later, was I able to find the general principles which should enable the stronger side to win At the · moment when this game was played, the resulting ending of queen and knight's pawn against queen had not yet been worked out .in theory; and neither side handled it in the best way. The ending was studied in detail by Keres, and his analysis was published in 52 Wh5+ 116 117 118 94 . . .'ifb7+ would have created more difficulties for White, but should not have led to a draw. 95 96 97 <fJe7 9d6 <t>f8 1!fc5+ 1!fg5+ 118 119 120 121 122 · @e8 <t>f8 '3ie7 1'f6 'it>d7 1!ff5+ 11fh5+ W'f5+ 1i'g5+ 1!fc5+ 'ifd5+ 122 123 <ba7 1!ff4+ 1!ff6! '3ib7 112 1 13 114 115 '3ic7 <ia>d7 @e7 '3ie5 <3;f5 ®g5 </;g6 1!fc8+ 1!fc3+ 11i'd3+ 1t'e3+ • • • </;h6 'ife8+ 1!fg8 Otherwise 124 'ilfg5+ and 125 gS'ilf. 1la5+ 'ifb5+ 1!fd7+ 'ifb5+ 1!fd5 A threat has been created - 109 'i'a7+ and 1 10 'i'b7+, but it is easily parried. 108 109 110 111 112 'ilfc4+ 1lc5+ Black's choice of checks has been sharply reduced. 102 ... 1!fa7+ was preferable. Now the white king heads to the queenside. Intuitively I sensed that the stronger side's king should be on the same rank or file as the opponent's (or an adjacent one), but in the given situation this does not lead to success. 103 </;c7 104 '3ib7 105 1!i'b6 106 'tic7 107 <tla7 108 <ia>b8 "1e7 <i&>e6 The king finally heads for where it should be - on the neighbouring rank to the black king. White stubbornly keeps his king close to the queening square g8, which is a fundamental mistake. 97 98 99 100 101 102 @f7 1!ig8+ 'lids <&>as 1!fc5+ 124 125 1!Fe5+ <!lg6 125 126 'iFf4+ ®a4 Threatening 126 'i'f4+ and 127 'flil. • • • 1ic8 Now the king cannot step onto the 5th rank on account of 127 'i!ff5+, nor to a3 on account of 127 'i'f8+� nor to b3 in view of 127 'ilil+ Thus the king has to retrace its steps. 1!fh5+ "ilfc5+ 1!fd5+ 1!fc5+ Black resigns. The reader can see how White was able to win th�s . ending. In the final 53 diagram his king stands on a rank that is adjacent to the rank of the enemy king. But not one of the analysts drew attention to this factor. Game 133 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 Queen's Gambit e4 d4 exd5 c4 lllc3 9 . . • a6 In the event of 9 . . . 0--0 (which was perhaps preferable), a position from my games with Alekhine (No.94) and Ravinsky (No. 1 32) would have been reached. Khavin parries the threat of 10 i..xd5 exd5 1 1 'ii'b3 i..e6 12 Wxb7, since now after 12 . . . lba5 White loses his queen. 9 . . .ltJxc3 10 bxc3 0--0 is also fairly common, but then comes 1 1 i..d 3, and sooner or later Black is forced to weaken the pawns in front of his king. M.Botvinnik-A.Khavin 1 2 3 4 5 If 9 i..xd5 exd5 10 �3 , then 1 0 . . . i..b4, but now White is threatening to win a pawn in this way. c6 d5 cxd5 lllf6 e6 10 l:tel b5 14 15 16 tt)d2 ltlb3 'i!fd2 l:la7 �c7 .:.c6 17 18 19 llle2 .!:tact 'iff4 ltlf5 Iih6 Also in Game 132, in this way Black In the notes to Game 123 it has weakened a number of squares in his already been pointed out why 5 . . . lbc6 . position, in particular c5, but on this would seem to be stronger. occasion White does not :riiiss his 6 /llfJ i..e7 lllxd5 chance. 7 cxd5 exd5 11 i.. xd5 After this move, strictly speaking, the 12 i..g5 0--0 opening is now transfonned from a Had Black played 1 2 . . .f6, he would Caro-Kann Defence to a Queen's soon have run into difficulties over the Gambit. defence of his d5 pawn. lll c 6 8 i..c4 13 i..xe7 lllxe7 9 0--0 Now the weakness of c5 becomes obvious, and it only remains for White to direct his king's knight to that square. Exploiting the absence of White's knight from the kingside, Black creates some threats on that part of the board, aided by this curious rook manoeuvre. 54 With his queen so active, White has nothing to fear on the kingside. 19 . 20 liJcS 21 11ff3 liJd6 nh4 thf5 22 neS • • • 26 1!feJ 26 27 ... ltlb3 27 28 •cl 29 lila5! 29 30 liJxc6 As a result the black rook proves to be out of play. 2 1 . . l£ie4 was perhaps slightly better, but by the threat to the d4 pawn Black wants to hamper White's initiative. . llcdl 25 . .. llxd4 was still bad because of 26 1!fe3. liJc6 Somewhere around this time the lights in the hall went out. My opponent and I were both in time trouble, and I involuntarily exploited my advantage, since I was able to analyse fairly clearly without sight of the board, whereas Khavin evidently did not do this. There­ fore by the time that the game was resumed I already had everything worked out. 'ife7 1!fd6 Incautiously played, since the opposition of rooks on the open central file proves unfavourable for Black (since one of his rooks, as soon transpires, has been diverted from the main events). 23 liJg3! 23 24 l:hel Exploiting the fact that 23 ... �d4 is bad on account of 24 'i'xd5 ! , White completely seizes the initiative. 7 • • • D.xel+ t'tle7 With the exchange of knights Black's position becomes hopeless. Black would prefer not to move his knight, of course, especially when there is no prospect of finding a secure post for it, but after 24 ...t2)xg3 25 hxg3 he cannot play 25 . . . t:lxd4 on account of 26 'it'e3. Even so, 24... g6 was preferable. 25 h3 • • • Or 30 ... .i.xc6 3 1 lbf5. 31 32 <li>f8 55 il.d7 't!ixc6 Wg5 llh6 1fe7+ Black resigns lDc6 (1 1 ... 'iic6 12 lDb5 -'.b6 13 lDe5) 12 lDxd5 'i'd6 13 axb4 .ixb4+ 14 lDxb4 'i'xb4+ 1 5 Vxb4 lDxb4 16 �d2. The point is that in such a situation Black's queenside pawns are not a strength, but a weakness. 10 0-0-0 The king itself climbs into hot water - it is hard to understand why! .lxc3 10 c4! 1 1 11hc3 12 'iie3+ The start of a faulty plan. involving an attempt to create pressure in the centre and on the kingside. But even after the better continuation 12 e4 .lg4 (12 .. dxe4 13 lLle5 and 14 ..i.xc4) 13 exd5 0-0 14 -'.xc4 �7 Black has a sound and promising position. 12 i.e6 1£ic6 13 1£ie5 Game 1 34 G.Veresov-M.Botvinnik 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 Nimzo-Indian Defence 3 d4 c4 thc3 5 6 cxd5 1£ifl 1 2 4 'Ifcl e6 .lb4 d5 exd5 For the moment White avoids 6 .lg5, as Keres played against me (Grune 1 14), aitd first defends his d4 pawn. · 6 1 .8 .tgs .txf6 c5 h6 . A sound continuation. Now White has a good game. 8 9 a3 'iixf6 .ta5 14 g4 Assuming that Black is bound to castle kingside, White casts caution to the winds in order to attack the king. But when in reply there follows queenside castling, it transpires that these manoeuvres are a waste of time. Risky (9 . . . .lxc3+ is correct). Now after both 10 dxc5 iLxc3+ 1 1 'i!fxc3 Vxc3+ 12 bxc3, and 10 b4 (which is even stronger, as my opponent pointed out immediately after the game) White gains the advantage: 10 . . . cxb4 1 1 'i'a4+ 56 2 1 . . . c2+ was threatened, and 21 bxc3 would have been met by 2 1 . . . lt'lc4 with the threats of 22 . . . 'ifb6+ and 22 . . . .til 23 ctJh4 l:txe3. For the same reason the tactical operation 14 lt'lxc4 dxc4 1 5 d5 0---04> is also wlfavourable for White. It is curious that a year later a position with roughly the same structure occurred in my game with Lilienthal (No. 149), and White committed the same positional errors as Veresov in the present game. 14 15 0-0--0 ! f4 1 5 .tg2 or 1 5 h4 and 16 .th3 suggests itself. The move played leads to a further weakening of White's position in the centre. 15 • • • lihe8 Incidentally threatening 16 . . . .txg4. 16 17 'flf3 e3 1!fe7 21 22 23 24 And this is already the decisive mistake. White misses the last chance to exchange knights, after which Black's attack would not have been so strong. In the event of 17 f5 .i.d7 White would have had to continue 18 'iixd5 lt'lxe5 1 9 dxe5 .txf5 2 0 Wxc4+ 'it?b8, which is completely bad for him. 17 • . . .tg2 �g6 �bl 21 l:tcl �c4 �d2+ �xfJ .tf7 This is the whole point: White al_so loses his e3 pawn, after which further resistance is pointless. Q:'}aS! Now 18 f5 .td7 19 'ifxd5 is ruled out by 1 9 . . . ltib3+ and 20. . . .txf5+; the white knight is now driven away from the centre, and Black's advantage increases. 18 19 20 l1xc3 �c2 .txf3 25 �h4 26 llxc7+ 27 �d2 28 ltct+ 29 1'%.cJ . :xe3 �xc7 1'%.de8 �b6 29 30 31 32 33 bxc3 Q:'}g2 �eJ h4 :xc3 g6 'it?c7 �d6 !'.%.h8 34 h5 gxh5 29 . . . g5 was threatened, and so White himself is forced to offer the exchange of rooks. f6 ifc7 c3! A paradoxical, but precisely cal­ culated move. Black opens the c-file, on which his king and queen are situated. If now White does not open the position on the kingside, Black will do this by 34 . . . h5. This natural move leads to the loss of the exc ge, blit what was there to do? hm,i 57 35 36 gxh5 c4 .i.e6 . This tactical operation accelerates White's defeat. 36 37 38 39 40 .i.xb7 .i.e4 �c3 �d2 Game 135 M.Botvinnik-S.Flohr merely 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 dxc4 l:tb8 l:tb2+ lib3+ Reti Opening 1 2 3 tLlfJ c4 e3 d5 d4 ll)c6 4 5 6 exd4 ll)xd4 tLlcJ ll)xd4 1!fxd4 c6 The strongest reply, after which Black achieves a satisfactory game. Black can also manage without this move. In a game Bagirov-Mikhalchishin (1 978) after 6. . . e5 7 d3 ll)e7! 8 'iie2 .id7 9 .i.e3 1!fd6 1 0 0-0-0 0-0-0 1 1 g3 tbf5 he did not stand any worse. es 7 d3 40 ... el 9 .i.e2 lba3 l:lxe3 For the moment White refrains from d3-d4, in order to avoid simplifying the game. Black decides to return the exchange, in order to reach an easily won ending where he is two pawns up. 41 d5 42 43 44 45 <iti>xe3 .i.xd5 �c5 .i.c2 a5 .i.f5 .i.c6 .i.c2 White resigns The simplest solution. 1!fd8 8 8 . . . 'i'd6 is of equal merit, especially after 9 d4 exd4 10 'ii'xd4 'i'xd4 1 1 .i.xd4. 9 . 'Of6 0-0 �hl .i.e7 • . At the time this move was considered essential. Meanwhile, by analogy with the Bagirov-Mikhalchishin game, 9 ... ll)e7 comes into consideration. In this game White suffered due to his faulty evaluation of the significance of a centralised knight. 10 11 In the same tournament, soon after the present game, Lisitsyn played against Mikenas 1 1 f4 exf4 1 2 l:txf4 ! (but, of course, not 12 .i.xf4 'i!fb6+). This is perhaps stronger, since now Black could have replied 1 1 ....i.fS, 58 when White's hopes of an advantage merely remain a dream. 11 . . • pawn goes to g6, the position reached is very much in Flohr's style. Black 0-0 develops his pieces quite comfortably and counterattacks against the d4 pawn. 19 20 21 22 .i.f4 .i.xg6 :hJ :reS ifdS fxg6 Since the black king's position is quite safe, another field of activity has to be found for this rook, and this is to assist in the conversion of the pawn majority in the centre. 12 22 23 24 f4 a3 l':td3 'ifd7 l:.ad8 White has had this move in mind for a long time : he needs to open the f-file and to eliminate Black's central pawn, which, in tum, will allow the white d­ pawn to advance. 12 13 14 ::xr4 d4 exf4 .i.e6 'i!fd7 For the successful defence of his king's position Black must transfer his light-square bishop to g6, and White is unable to prevent this. If not 15 .i.dJ After provoking d4-d5, Black then securely blocks the passed pawn, and, reaches the required position. 16 17 18 19 Forcing 1fd2 .i.f5 :afl :b4 the .i.b5 'ilc7 i.g6 opponent We6! 24 .i.g4 via f5, then via h5 the bishop by tying the white pieces to its defence, obtains a good game. after 25 26 the d5 cxd5 · cxd5 White makes it significantly more himself to convert his following exchange of bishops to take difficult on g6 with the f-pawn (it is dangerous to positional advantage. He should have lake with · the h-pawn, since the rook 's file is opened). However, when the for gone in for simplification, to deprive the f7 opponent 59 of counterplay: 26 ll'ixd5 tLixdS 27 l:lxdS l:txdS 28 cxd5 'Ba6 29 :el l:ld8 30 'ilt'e3 . 26 • . . 1lla6 An important subtlety. 27 d6 is not possible because of 27 . . . .i.xd6. 27 28 29 30 lldl h3 .i.xd6 lle3 .i.d6 b6 1!Fxd6 30 31 1!fxe3 32 'ii'd3 33 l:lel 34 �gl 35 1ie3 llxe3 a6 tLJb5 tLJg3+ l:.f8 35 36 37 tLJe4 \l'xe4 c.tib7 tLJxe4 38 39 !tdl 1!f'b4 the centre, Black could have achieved a draw more quickly. Now the white king comes into play. ci>g8 41 'ifi'f2 <t;n 42 'it>e3 43 llfl+! It is essential to exchange one pair of rooks, in order to reduce Black's involving piece counter-chances pressure. White will be forced to exchange knights, and this should have been done immediately, while the king was still at g8. IU5 Black could have punished White for his inaccurate play and won a pawn: 37 . . . l:.f4 38 'i'd3 Wes+ and 39 . . .l:.d4. True, a draw would have remained the most likely outcome, but now it is Black who will have to fight for the draw. 1%f6 43 44 45 White needs to exchange queens, and there is no point in delaying this. 39 40 • • • u:b4 A little trap, prepared in adjournment analysis. In the rook ending after 43 . . . �e7 44 @d4 %1b6 4S @cs l:lb5+ 46 �c4 l:lb6 47 !tf4 h5 and then 48 . .. l:.f6 Black would have gained a draw. If instead 47 l:lel+ r.fi>d7 48 lte6 l:lxe6 49 dxe6+ �xe6 50 @cs, then the pawn ending also does not give · White any winning chances, both in the event of 50 . . . 'it>d7 (Bronstein), and after 50 . . . hS, which was · pointed out by the English player Comcroft. As for the ending reached in the game, despite the repairing of the black pawns, it is a simple win for White. 111xb4 l:td6 l:lxf6+ g4! !tf6? gxf6 It only remains for White to 'beat' a path for the invasion of his king via f5, after which, amusing thought it sounds, his central d-pawn,. as an outside passed Another inaccuracy. By 40. . . 'it>g8 (4 1 d6 l:lf8, and the d6 pawn is weak), hindering the white king's passage into 60 Now it will be a race between the kings alone, but since the interval between them is greater than the norm, Black has no chance of saving the game. pawn from the kingside, will decide the outcome. 45 46 47 48 b4 @e4 b5 48 49 gxb5 @e7 @d6 b6 Now White's plan is clear. gxh5 a5 <ifi>g5 <ifi>f5 <ifi>e6 <&t>d7 <&t>c6 58 59 60 61 62 rbd5 <ifi>c6 <&t>xb6 <J.?c5 <ifi>xb4 63 64 65 66 67 68 <ifi>a5 <&t>b7 rba7 <o&?b5 <&t>c6 <&t>a6 <&t>a7 b4 <&t>b8 b5 'iti>b6 Black resigns The remaining events could have been foreseen without moving the pieces. The game is interesting mainly for its pawn ending. 50 <tJf5 It was also possible to win as follows: 50 bxa5 bxa5 51 b3 @c5 52 'it>f5 'ifi>xd5 53 'ifi>xf6 ®d4 54 ®g6 'iti>c3 55 'ifi>xh6 'ifi>xb3 56 �g6 and White, after queening, is in time to defend the a l square. 50 51 <&t>xf6 52 <&t>g6 ub4 <&t>xd5 <&t>e6 White also wins easilv the race of kings and pawns: 52 ... �c4 53 �xh6 'iti>b3 54 �g5 ®xb2 55 h6 'ifi>a2 56 h7 b3 57 h8'i!f b2 58 'i'a8+ etc. 53 54 55 56 57 <o&?xh6 b3 <J.?g5 <J.?(5 <of.?e5 <of.?f6 <J.?f7 <J.?g7 <J.?b6 <o&?xh5 Game 1 36 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1 944 French Defence 1 2. 3 4 e4 d4 l£ic3 e5 e6 d5 i.b4 c5 There is perhaps no other such complicated and sharp opening system that has occurer d so often in my games. 5 a3 6 . bxc3 .ixc3+ l£ie7 This development of events was first seen in my game with Milner-Barry from the · Hastings .· tournament of 61 1934/35 (No.64). In my games with Smyslov it occurred several times, since we held principled views on this position. Smyslov thought it was bad for Black, whereas I considered it promis­ ing enough from the point of view of counterplay. 7 a4 illbc6 s lllo 9 i.d2 Black prevents c3-c4, after which the position would have been opened and the power of the white bishops would have increased. Now White has no compensation for the weakness of his a4 pawn. 'ffa5 In a previous meeting with the same opponent (Game 1 25) I played 8 . . . i.d7. This by no means signifies that I was disillusioned with that move. Simply it is desirable, even if only in details, to vary one's decisions, in order to complicate the task of a well-prepared opponent. Of course, White should have played 9 'ifd2, since later the dark-square bishop has to be transferred to a3. True, in this case the exchange of queens was possible: 9 . . . cxd4 IO cxd4 'i!f xd2+ 1 1 i.xd2, but I assumed that my opponent would not allow such simplification. Thus in this case the 'psychological' play (8 . . . 'ffa5) justified itself. 9 • • • 10 lllg5 10 11 . illhJ This move was employed against me by Pogrebyssky, although, as it later turned out, with an incorrect idea (Game 10 1). In the commentary to that game it was pointed out that the continuation of the knight's raid via g5-h3 -f4-h5 may exert · unpleasant pressure on Black's kingside. Modern theory gives preference to I 0 g3 . . . b6 If 1 1 1Wbs the simplest is 1 1 . . . lbg6 or l l. ..g6 12 'ffb3 @f8 and then . . . @g7. 11 Preventing the knight manoeuvre. liJg6 afore-mentioned 12 1io 13 14 liJf4 1ixf4 liJxf4 15 h4 i.xa4 Intending to exchange the knight at h3 for the one at g6, which, however, is not dangerous for Black. Uhlmann considers that after 1 2 i.e2 followed by i.hS White retains the advantage. i.d7 12 c4 llJe7 The openiJ;tg..haSilot gone in White's favour: the ;loss of the a4 pawn is unavoidable. Therefore he must aim for active play on the kingside, and he embarks there on a pawn offensive. However, it is by no means easy to create any real threats. 62 16 17 'it>dl 18 il.cl 18 19 20 il.e2 'it>d2 b5 1fb5 worsen the pos1t1on. Here, however, Black's king was safe enough in the centre, whereas after castling he will have considerable problems with it, and in particular he has to play . . . f7-f6, after which the h2-b8 diagonal is opened for the white queen to invade the enemy position. This is a more advisable way of defending the c2 pawn than 17 !tel 'i'b2 18 'it>dl. l:lc8 17 This signals the start of an attack on White's king, and for some time he has to switch to defensive measures. 21 22 23 24 25 The bishop finally heads for its predestined square a3, but how much time has been wasted on this! llc6 l:ta6 f6 D.A1'6 l:lt7 @b7 With the terrible threat of g4-g5-g6+. After thinking for more than thirty minutes I came to the conclusion that I would have to play 25 . . .'i'd7 26 'i'xd7 .i.xd7 27 !txa6 bxa6 28 'it>e3 Jil.b5 with roughly equal chances, since, in the event of the white g-pawn advancing, Black's knight is ready to occupy f5. However, at the last moment I nevertheless decided to take a chance, and I chose a rather cunning variation, but one e>..1remely dangerous for Black. Otherwise it was not possible to pany the threat of 20 . . . .i.xc2+, but such a king move is a definite achievement for Black. 20 g4 eA1'6 1ic7 'ifd8+ f4! 0-0 Being a pawn up, it was time for Black to aim for simplification: 20 . . .Wb6 and 2 1 . . . .i.d7, or 20. . . 1fd7 and 2 1 . . .�bS. True, the move played contains a trap: 2 1 .i.a3 il.xc2 22 �xe7 'i'b2 ! , but traps are good only in a hopeless situation or when they do not 25 1fa5 Black offers the exchange of queens without a worsening of his pawn 63 structure, which the opponent naturally declines. .i.e8 it is doubtful whether White could have saved the game. Here I realised that Black's position was not easy, but at heart I was hoping that my opponent would not deny himself the pleasure of concluding the game with a direct attack on the king. White returns the 'compliment'. After 30 dxe5 he would have been by no means bound to lose. If the continuation had been the same as in the game, the retention of the f4 pawn would have guaranteed him good play. 26 21 '1Vb8 Ve8 28 1lg6+ 28 29 . .i.a3 lbc6 :e1 Smyslov played this without think­ ing, evidently assuming that after 28 'i'f8 'ird8 the exchange of queens was inevitable, whereas after the move in the game White would retain a strong attack. Th.is was a serious delusion, since after 28 Wf8 'ii'd8 29 'i'xd8 ibxd8 30 g5 White's offensive would have continued, and it would no longer be so easy for Black to transfer his knight to f5. In the game the white queen lures itself into a trap. . . fxe5 30 31 32 33 iLb4 11fxa6 cxd4 33 ... :b7 34 35 :xa4 @dl Wg5+ a5 36 37 38 .i.f3 .ixd5+ :n+ l:lxb4 lbxd4 Wd8 bxa6 <.fi>gS . • How is it that White does not notice that his queen does not have a single retreat square? Therefore 29 g5 was essential, after which a very sharp situation would have arisen, for example: 29 . . . 'i'c7 (29 . . .tbxd4 30 l:.xa4 'ilfxa4 3 1 cxd4 e5 32 'ii'f5) 30 gxh6 .i.xc2 3 1 'it>xc2 l:.xal 32 h7+ �h8 3 3 h6 'i'd7. 29 30 The wiruring move; because of the absence of his f4 pawn White loses, since the black queen breaks with gain of tempo into the enemy position. e5 . There were also other ways to win, for example 35 . . . c3 . A very significant omission. I saw the correct continuation 29 ... 'ii'c7, but after 30 l:lhfl I, naturally, did not like the variation 30 . . . ctJeS 3 1 fxe5 .i.e8 3 2 l%.f8+ @xIB 3 3 'i'h7. But the other knigl1t sacrifice - 30 . . lbb4 ! did not occur to . me, · although after 3 1 .i.xb4 . @18 These checks cannot continue for long. - 38 64 • • • @es 39 .i.c6+ @e7 Black is preparing, and will soon begin active play in the centre - the fight for the e5 square. White plans to oppose this with free piece develop­ ment. 1!rxg4+ 40 J:Cxb4 41 @cl White sealed this move, but he did not bother continuing the game and he resigned. This was an interesting struggle, but the errors by both sides in the concluding stage reduced somewhat the completeness of the game. Game 1 37 M.Botvinnik-LBoleslavsky 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 7 8 French Defence 1 2 3 e4 d4 lbd2 e6 d5 lbc6 Soviet masters began employing this defence in 1940, although it had also occurred earlier, for example in the game Spielmann-Nimzowitsch (Berlin 1928). The use of this variation by Boleslavsky is the best recommendation for it, but in the present game, alas, he did not manage to overcome his opening difficulties. 4 lbgfJ If 4 c3 the most energetic is 4 . . . e5 (as I played against Keres in the 22nd USSR Championship, 1955), but it is not easy for Black to gain equal chances, after, if there is nothing better, 5 exd5 1!rxd5 6 t2Jgf3 and 7 .i.c4. 4 lbf6 5 6 e5 �bJ f6 6 In the light of what has just been said, this is the thematic continuation. However, in recent times Black has tried to manage without this immediate attack on the centre. Typical in this respect is the game . Geller-Vaganian (48th USSR Championship, 1980/8 1): 6 ... a5 7 a4 .i.e7 8 h4 b6 9 .tg5 h6 IO .ixe7 tbxe7 1 1 h5 c5 12 .ii.b5 ilc7 13 0-0 .ia6 etc. .i.b5 .tf4 .te7 White has achieved his aim - his pieces are well developed. Now he can even exchange on f6, since he will retain control of the e5 square both along the e-file, and along the h2-b8 diagonal. 0-0 8 .. 9 . exf6 gxf6 Of course, after the capture on f6 by a piece White would have gained an �d7 65 excellent base at e5. But now the difficulties facing Black are no less. Even if he should succeed in playing . . . e6-e5, White will seize control of f5, while in the event of . . . f6-f5 the e5 square would be significantly weakened. 10 0-0 17 l:.e3 18 1!fe2 18 19 ..ixd6 20 llgJ llg7 l£ib6 10 . . .a6 came into consideration, while White had not yet nipped in the bud ·the possibility of the e-pawn advancing. 11 12 13 :I.el AgJ .i.dJ .i.d6 a6 l£ia4 Although this knight is on the edge of the board, it is nevertheless fulfilling two important functions here: it attacks the b2 pawn and controls the c5 square, not allowing the white knight to invade. 14 D.bl Now Black all the time has to reckon with the possible exchange sacrifice on e6. If in this case White wins another pawn apart from the one on e6, it will be clearly in his favour, since then he will also be able to occupy f5. b5 But this move, although it prevents the attack on the centre by c2-c4, has considerable defects. Black weakens the c5 square. which for the moment does not appear dangerous, since after 1 5 ..txd6 cxd6 the d6 pawn prevents the wh_ite knight from going to c5. But with the help of some tactical trickery, White forces Black to take on d6 with his queen! 15 16 cJ ttlli4 ! 'il'f8 1Wxd6 Thus White achieves the goal that was mentioned in the note to Black's 14th move. Black could not play l 9 . . . cxd6 on account of 20 llxe6 Axe6 2 1 'ii'xe6+, when one of the pawns, d5 or d6, is lost. But the battle for the c5 square still continues, since for the moment it is controlled by the knight at c4. i.d7 With the threat of 2 1 Axh7+ @xh7 22 'ifb5+ @g8 23 tt:lg6. The white knight has also ended up on the rook's file, where it too fulfils two functions. White is preparing an attack on the enemy king, and the . . . . e6e5 advance becomes altogether im­ possible, as the resulting weakening of the f5 square would be catastrophic. 16 . . . l:lti 20 21 . . • hxgJ llxg3 1!fe7 The queen has to return to the defence of the king. 22 23 66 llel 'ifc2 1!fg7 l£id8 :cS 24 ltlcl In the event of 24 . . . c5 25 b3 c4 26 bxa4 cxd3 27 ltlxd3 bxa4 28 lbc5 White gains a decisive advantage. 25 b3 26 b4 27 ltlb3 31 c4! 31 32 33 34 .i.xc4 .i.d3 it'c5 White gets rid of his weakness at c3 and securely supports his c6 pawn. ltlb6 kla8 bxc4 ltlb6 llb8 After 27 lbe2 Black would perhaps have decided on 27 . . . eS, when because of the poor position of White's knight at e2, his advantage becomes less appreciable. 34 There is practically nothing that Black can move, and · he aims for an endgame, hoping to achieve this by giving up only the h7 pawn. However, the price for the exchange of queens proves to be higher. ltlb7 27 Black wants to take control of the c5 square and simultaneously to prepare . . . a6-a5, but this chasing of two birds does not succeed. The main task would have been fulfilled by 27 . . . lba4. 28 29 lbc5 bxc5 c6 .i.xh7+ lbf5+! . </;g7 exf5 37 38 %te7+ .i.g6 </;h8 .te6 39 40 41 l:txe6 dxc5 il.xf5 Wxc5 _ lba4 After 36 . . . @f? 3 7 ii.g6+ </;g8 White can avoid the exchange of queens. ltlxc5 lba4 Otherwise 39 �e8. And now 29 . . .lbc4 should have been preferred, when the knight would be more active. 30 35 36 .i.c8 As a result of Black's error (27 . . . lbb7) his bishop has been pushed back; 30 ... i.xc6 3 1 :xe6 was altogether hopeless. Now, with White two pawns up and the time control reached, it would have been the right time to lower the curtain. 41 67 l£ic3 �b5 42 :e7 43 44 45 46 l:tc8 ild3 �d4 a4 �xc6 .i.xa6 %te6 Black resigns Of course, the c7 pawn cannot be given up. Game 1 38 M.Botvinnik-V.Makogonov 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 This position was reached in my game with Fine (AVRO Tournament 1938), who played l 1 . . .ltle8. Here Black brings · his knight into play in another, also quite reasonable way. Four Knights Gaine 1 2 3 4 e4 �f3 �CJ ilb5 e5 �c6 �f6 �d4 As: has already been mentioned, Makogonov not only resembled Rubin­ stein in style, but he also liked to employ his opening variations. 5 6 iLa4 d3 .i.c5 tLle2 tLlgJ �d7 tLlc5 d5 14 15 W'f3 .i.eJ .i.c7 d4 16 17 18 19 cxd4 iLd2 'ifh5 f4 exd4 a5 b6 f5! A committing decision! Now White gains a pawn majority on the kingside, but on the other harid Black secures the position of his knight at c5 for the time being, and, more important, restricts the possibilities of the bishop at c2. As a result White's chances of an attack are reduced. c6 d6 Without making this exchange, there is no sensi1Jle plan available to White. 9 10 11 c3 iLc2 Exploiting White's unhurried play, Makogonov is the first to make a pawn advance in the centre, thereby fore­ stalling similar action by the opponent. The other popular continuation - 6 tLlxeS 0--0 7 tal3 ilb6 8 tLlf4 d5 - is perhaps slightly more promising for White, but he prefers quieter play, in accordance with his sound toumainent position. 6 0-0 7 0-0 8 h3 9 . �xd4 11 12 13 .i.xd4 .i.b6 The correct decision! The pawn sacrifice is only a temporary one, but as 68 If 25 .tc4 then, 25 . . . .ta6. a result of it White's initiative on the kingside comes to a standstill. If 20 exfS, then 20 . . . 'i!fdS, and the pawn is immediately regained, while after 20 lbxfs g6 2 1 ti:lh6+ @g7 22 'ifgs there follows the exchange of queens (22 1!fxg5 23 fxg5) and 23 . . . .L.6, winning the d3 pawn, which is not in White's interests. b4 20 21 22 23 1!t'h6 .i.xb4 .i.xc5 in the game, exf5 .i.a6! gxf5 28 J:tfJ c4! 29 30 .i.xc4 dxc4 .i.xc4 .klff8! 31 c5 :ad8 32 33 l:tdl tlle2 25 26 . • • But not 26. . ..i.xd3 27 l:.e6 'ilg7 28 'i'xg7+ @xg7 29 lte7+. 27 ..xf6+ llxf6 . . . 20 as An important subtlety! Since 29 dxc4 is dubious for White on account of 29 . . . cS, when the black bishops are very active, he is forced to exchange bishops. But now the a-pawn becomes weak, and the black d-pawn becomes dangerous. Necessary, in order to bring the dark­ square bishop into play and with its help to eliminate the strong knight at cs. At the same time White's other bishop is also activated. g6 axb4 1!ff6 bxc5 Bad was 30 . . . llxa2 3 1 l:.e8+ @g7 32 :e7+ l:.f7 33 tllxfS+ with a decisive advantage for White. Therefore Black defends his back rank. A move typical of Makogonov. He disregards the win of a pawn (3 L.:xa2 32 l:le7 followed by :d7), and transfers his rook to a strong, centralised position Thus White is effectively a pawn up, but the doubled c-pawns cannot be securely blockaded. Particularly to blame for this is the poorly placed knight at g3. @h8 24 .i.b3+ Of course, not 24 ... .te6 in view of 25 .i.xe6+ 'i'xe6 215 ti:lx.fS or 26 exfS . 8 25 ltael . 69 :d5 lbc5 Now it is unfavourable for White to take the pawn, since if 34 �d4 there follows 34 . . . l:td8, while if 34 l:txd4 .l:tc2 " with the threat or 3 5 . . . i...b6. l:le8 l:lc2 :xa2 i... xf4 34 35 36 37 �1 l:lfd3 illxd4 illxf5 3s 39 40 41 :as l:lds c5 l:l.8d7 g3 i...e5 l:lel Draw agreed The game is quickly heading for a draw. (the preparatory exchange 7 ... cxd4 8 exd4 does not prevent this). However, Black should have made this exchange before playing . . . d7-d5: 7 . . . cxd4 8 exd4 cis, and if 9 cxd5 tl)xd5 10 i...b5+, then 1 0 . . . i...c6 (regarding the variation with b2-b3, cf. Game 78). Now he gets into difficulties. exd5 8 cxd5 If 8 ... t'bxd5, then 9 e4 is possible. 9 i...b5+ Makogonov defended subtly, in a style resembling Rubinstein's best games. Game 139 A.Kotov-M.Botvinnik 13th USSR Championship !.foscow 1944 Queen's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 /l}f3 e3 i...dJ illf6 b6 c5 The variation with the fianchetto of White's king's bishop can be found by the reader in Game 1 56. 4 5 6 c4 0-0 i...b7 e6 i...e7 d5 7 /llcJ This continuation is essential for Black: otherwise (for example, after 7 . . .0-0) White himself will play d4-d5 What should Black do now? Bad for him is 9 . . .l'Dbd7 IO dxc5 bxc5 1 1 &Des 0-0 12 l'Dxd7 ti:)xd7 1 3 l'Dxd5, or 9 . . . ..i.c6 I O 'i!ia4! , as in the game Petrosian-Keres ( 1 9th USSR Champion­ ship, 195 1). Therefore the decision that Black takes is forced. After it, at least, a complicated struggle continues. 9 @f8 10 11 12 13 14 bJ -*.e2 i...b2 l£le5 /llxc6 a6 l£lc6 l:l.c8 i... d6 14 f4 is less favourable on account of 14 . . . cxd4 ( 1 5 exd4 l£lxd4). 14 70 . • . l:lxc6 After 14 . . . ..axc6 the a6 pawn is lost. 15 ..i.fl Of course, in order to try and exploit his lead in development:, White should open up the game - l 5 d.xc5 bxc5 - and only then create unpleasant pressure on Black's pawn centre by 16 .i.f3. Thanks to this error I am able to close the position, after which the poor placing of the king at f8 and rook at h8 may not tell. 15 c4 This is the whole point! 16 g3 16 17 18 bxc4 1i'd3 Threatening the d5 pawn, which for the moment was indirectly defended: l 6 t'.l)xd5 t'.l)xd5 17 .i.xd5 .txh2+. l:tc8 l:txc4 W'c8 Black must play with extreme care. The obvious 1 8 . . .bS, for example, would have been bad in view of 1 9 a4 b4 20 t'.l)xd5. sacrifice the exchange: 1 9 . . J:txc3 (there is nothing better), but after 20 'ifxc3 'ifxc3 2 1 .i.xc3 dxe4 White nevertheless retains definite chances of converting his material advantage. After missing this opportunity, my opponent gradually ends up in a difficult position. 19 20 l:tacl .i.g2 1!fe6 h5! 21 22 23 tLle2 lLif4 1!fdl b5 'fie7 Thanks to the fact that White is essentially not undertaking any activity in the centre, Black gains the oppor­ tunity to take the initiative on the flank. It unexpectedly transpires that the rook at h8 is not so badly placed, and has a rapid. if rather unusual, way of corning into play. White's planned manoeuvre of his queen to the kingside cannot achieve anything, but meanwhile he wastes precious time and does not succeed in impeding Black's mounting activity. It was essential to play 23 h4. 23 In agreeing (by no means of my own free will) to the diagram position, I had. of course, to anticipate the conse­ quences of 1 9 .e4 ! I was intending to 71 h4 24 'lffJ Cifvg8 25 26 J:[fdl lL!d3 lL!e4 :b6! 27 28 29 11fe2 fxg3 .i.xe4 hxg3 'i'g5 24 . . . t:Lie4 was not possible on account of 25 tbg6+, but now White can no longer prevent the black knight from occupying this excellent post in the centre. All the black pieces are ideally placed . for a decisive offensive on the kingside. 35 36 37 On the one hand, White has to reckon with the possible threat of . . . tDxg3, but now the h l -a8 diagonal is decisively weakened! 29 30 . • • lL!f4 A difficult game for both sides; for Black, because he failed to cope with the subtleties of the opening, and for White, in view of the fact that he did not find the correct path in a complicated positional battle. Curiously, this was the second time in a game with me that Kotov under­ estimated Black's activity on the long light-square diagonal (cf. No. I 02). dxe4 And now Black can immediately open the long diagonal. After 30 tbe5 he had the reply 30 . . . l:.xcl 3 1 l:txcl f6, while if 30 00 .txg3 . 30 31 32 exf4 1i'g2 .i.xf4 'ffd5 It may seem that White has managed to consolidate his position a little, but this is not so, since Black has the possibility of play over the entire front. 32 33 34 lhc4 b3 35 Wh2 e3! :c2+ 1!fxd5 Cifvgl .txd5 White resigns Game 140 M.Botvinnik-V.Alatortsev lihc6 lixc4 b4 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1944 Slav Defence In addition Black also has a pawn majority on the queenside! 1 2 3 4 Allowing Black to play his · rook immediately onto the cherished second rank, but all the same he would have achieved this gradually. d4 lL!fJ c4 lhc3 d5 lLif6 c6 dxc4 Up till now we have only en­ countered 4 . . . e6 (Games 1 3 1 and 1 54). 72 5 6 a4 e3 Af5 But it would appear that this has not been played. A game Ivkov-Knezevic ( 1 966) went 1 1 'i'b3 t'.Da6 12 ..te3 ttJxc4 1 3 ..txc4 °irb6 14 a5 !, but Black's play in this game seems unconvincing. The unexpected thrust h2-h4 sets Black new problems. It seems to me that 6. lbe5 gives White better prospects. Here is what I found regarding this is one of my note­ books ( 1 96 1 ), where I recorded the results of my analytical work on opening theory. * 11 ... J.e7. Or 11 ... h6 12 the5 .i.h7 13 a5 th6d7 6 lbe5 e6 7 f3 .i.b4 s lbxc4 lbd5. No better for Black is 8... c5 9 dxc5 Wxdl+ 10 ®'xdl Axc5 11 e4 Ag6 12 lbb5 lba6 13 lbbd6+ �e7 14 thxb7. In the late 1960s and later this variation occurred in practice, but attempts to improve it for Black were not successful: 1 2. . . ®'d8 13 ttJcd6 iLxd6 14 ltJxd6 �c7 1 5 lbc4, or 1 2 . . . 'itld7 1 3 lbe5+ �d8 14 ii.f4 tiJbd7 ( 14. . . ttJa6 1 5 . lbd3 iLe7 16 .l:.c l ) 1 5 ltJd3 a6 16 ltJd6. 8 . . . 0--0 is more often played, but this quiet continuation does not require any particular analysis, since after 9 .i.g5 White has an enduring positional advantage (after 9 . . . c5 or 9. . . h6 10 i.h4 c5 the exchange of queens again occurs, but now the. white rook ends up on dl). 9 il.d2 thb6. 14 9'b3. 12 h5 .i.b4+ 13 �e2 lbxc4 14 hxg6 fxg6 15 .i.f4! Ae7. Dubious is 15 .. 0-0 16 g3 .i.g5 17 .i.h3. 16 1!f'b3 'ifb6. . 16...'ifxd4 17 lldl Wc5 18 Vxb7 is . rather bad for Black. 17 Vxc4 1!fxb2+ 18 Ad2 'ilxal 19 1Wxe6 thd7 20 l:txh7 l:txh7 21 'ifxg6+ 'itf8 22 W'xh7 thf6 23 1!fh8+ lbg8 24 ®'fl Vb2 25 .i.c4 1!fxd2+ 26 the2, and White wins. From this analysis it is evident how I used to prepare for events. Some assert that such a method was possible only in the past. In my opinion, this is incorrect. However, let us return to the game. 6 7 8 9 10 Or 9... 1fh4+ 10 g3 Wxd4 1 1 e3 and 1 2 e4 with an overwhelming advantage for White, as occurred back in the game Mikenas-Feigen (Kemeri 1 939). 10 e4 .i.g6. 10...lbxc4 11 .i.xc4 9xd4 (or 11 ...i.g6) is also insufficient on account of 12 9b3. 11 h4. Axc4 0-0 ife2 the5 e6 Ab4 thbd7 iLg6 Earlier here the quiet 10 Ad3 .i.xd3 1 1 'ifxd3 0--0 12 l:td l 'ife7 was more often employed. Euwe-Alekhine (1937) continued 13 e4 e5 14 ..ig5 h6 15 ii.xf6 'ifxf6 16 d5 �fd8 17 dxc6 bxc6 1 8 lDa2, and White's position was preferable. Later White also tried an interesting pawn sacrifice: 1 0 e4 i.xc3 1 1 bxc3 ltJxe4 12 Aa3. with a dangerous attack. . * 111ese notes are given in bold to distinguish them from the remaining comments. 73 Declining the sacrifice (10 . . 0--0 1 1 .td3) also does not solve all Black's problems. . .' · • After the strong move 18 . . . a5 White would have been unable so easily and successfully to escape from the pin, as in the game. r With the move played White tries to imitate the plan that Capablanca carried out in a similar position against Euwe (Nottingham 1 936). However, in the given position this idea proves unsuccessful. 10 11 12 13 14 15 dxe5 f4 Adl .i.b3 'ifel lhxe5 lhd7 �b6 1i°h4 iLh5 l:txel .i.xd5 .i.d2 JJ..e7 20 21 �d6 exd6 .i.xd6 21 22 23 24 25 .i.b4 Aacl a5 · Afd8 Aac8 f6 .i.e8 � There was no point in playing 25 l:tc7; after 25 . . . l:txc7 26 dxc7 Ac8 27 .i.d6 Black plays his king to d7, and the bishop has to move. 'ifxel+ lhd5 What else can White do? If 17 .td2 :.ds and his chances are worse, as is also the case after 17 ltJxd5 cxd5 (or 17 ... .i.xel). 17 18 �e4 On the board there are opposite­ colour bishops, which increases White's chances of a successful defence. It is fortunate for White that he has avoided losing material, but for the forthcoming endgame Black will have the superior pawn formation. 15 16 17 19 After the exchange 19 . . . .i.xd2 20 ltJxd2 the white knight would have taken up such an excellent position at d4, that it would not have been inferior in strength to the enemy bishop. 25 26 27 28 cxd5 0--0 74 .i.c5 Aedl g4 .i.b5 a6 � .i.a4 29 l:ld4 �b5 In the resulting multi-piece ending Black is still justified in playing for a win, since the white d6 pawn is securely blockaded, whereas Black's central pawns are able to advance. 30 31 Itel D.dl �c6 ..ta4 Instead of this move, the only aim of which was to reach the time control without changing the position, 3 1 . ..eS came into consideration (immediately or after first playing the king to d7). 32 33 34 l:.d2 �g3 e4 34 35 36 37 ..ib6 h4 g5 38 �c7 38 39 40 :n Jk5+ Without the pawn sacrifice this bishop manoeuvre would not have been possible, and now Black's pieces are cramped. �b5 �c6 White decides to sacrifice a pawn, in order to activate his pieces and support his passed d6 pawn along the file. It was possible, of course, to continue manoeuvring, but White essentially does not risk anything, and the element of surprise contained in this advance may even lead to success. dxe4 l:ld7 h5 lte8 75 �g6 � .1\d5 Here the game was adjourned., and, in the opinion of the correspondents, with an advantage to Black. I, however, thought that, despite being a pawn down, White's chances were not worse. It is clear, for example, that without . . . e6-e5 Black is not able to activate his game, but then his centralised bishop is deprived of its support. In general, the most sensible decision would have been to agree a draw. My opponent, however, held a different opinion (I could not offer a draw, being a pawn down), and so the battle continued . . . 4 1 :a. :rs 42 43 l:.cJ J:lt'2 l:lfti e5 44 fxe5+ �xe5 As has already been mentioned, Black carries out a risky operation. 45 g6! the enemy bishop does not reach the long diagonal - in that case the g6 pawn will become very dangerous. An important move, separating and still further cramping the black rooks. And for the g6 pawn, which seems to have rashly broken away from its main forces, an important role in the future has been prepared. 45 46 • • 54 55 And already Black must return the extra pawn: either 46. . 'iii>e6 47 l:lc5 .ic6 48 l:lxh5, or, as in the game, give up the c-pawn. . 46 47 48 l:txe3+ .i.b6 e3 ..ie4 .id4+ ct>f4 ..ixg7 f5 'it>e6 l:lxd6 .i.xf8 llxd2 <iii>f6 53 l:lgJ i.d5 54 .lc5 lldl 55 56 57 <it>eJ ¢>d4 58 59 60 .id6 .i.b8 llxh5 60 61 <it>eJ llfl+ ltfJ+ .i.g8 <it>e6 llbJ The time has come when the g-pawn has to be sacrificed, in order to make effective use of the other passed pawn on the h-file. The point is that White can give up his rook at d2, since the enemy rook at f8 is attacked. 51 52 • The position of the bishop at g8 cannot be called a good one, but other moves were even worse. White decides to give up defending his d6 pawn, but to win the g7 pawn, in order to create the threat of advancing his g6 pawn. 48 49 50 51 . llg5 The rook has left the g3 square, and Black no longer has the drawing chance involving . . . f5-f4. Now begins the concluding phase of the struggle to penetrate with the bishop onto the long diagonal. :f8 . :d2! . llb4+ 1lg4 For a draw it was sufficient to play 52 . . Jlg2, and Black can no longer hope for more. Black continues, without any groWids. to play for a win. He could have forced a draw by 53 . . . llf2+ 54 <t>e3 f4+ 55 'it>xf2 f.xg3+ 56 'it>xg3 i.xg6. . After the f2 square has been defended, the position of the white king is secure. Now Black must take care that Black was evidently coWiting on 62 l:.h6 'it>f6 63 h5 <it>g7 64 l:lh8 lle4+, but 76 a big and insuperable danger awaits him. 62 63 64 :h8 h5 .i.f4! l:lxg6 !lg4 64 65 ... Il.h6+ .i.ti 65 66 67 nd6+ h6 68 lld7 Further restricting the mobility of the black pieces. Before advancing the h-pawn, White activates his rook. <ifiid5 <tics 1:th4 67 . . JXxf4 68 <itixf4 �xd6 69 h7 would also have lost immediately. White does not win the f5 pawn (68 opponent's bishop. l:lb3+ <itid2 il.d5 h7 il.c6 .i.e4 lle7 .i.e5 Black resigns f6 e5 e3 i.b5+ . s · .. . · �c6 · 6 0-0 6 7 ... .i.e2 6 .i.xc6+ was possible, reaching a position similar to one of the variations of the Nimzo-Indian Defence (of course, with opposite colours). .i.d6 On the one hand, this is a natural move, since White wants to play d2-d3 and in so doing to preserve his light­ square bishop from exchange, but this Game 1 4 1 G.Lisitsyn-M.Botvinnik 13th USSR Championship Moscow 1 944 · Reti Opening �f3 b3 3 4 5 5 . . . i.d7, which the Encyclopaedia* considers equally favourable fof Black, has also been played. An instructive endgame with opposite-colour bishops. The main thing in such endings is the activity of the pieces. A side whose bishop is passive always has to overcome great difficulties. 1 2 i.b2 Also in Black's favour is 5 d4 cxd4 6 exd4 e4 7 l£ifd2 f5 8 c4 l£if6, as in the game Mazel-Sorokin (7th USSR Championship, 1 93 1). In a game Reti­ Barcza (1936) White played 5 lLlh4, but this too did not bring any advantage. l::tf6), because it is restricting the 68 69 70 71 72 3 At that time this was considered to be an opening mistake, in view · of the fact that after 3 . . . f6 Black can set up a pawn centre (4 d4 cxd4 5 l£ixd4 e5, in contrast to the analogous situation with colours reversed in the Grtinfeld Defence, is here unfavourable for White). But if after 3 . ..f6 .,White plays 4 c4, he achieves a good game, for example: 4 . . . d4 5 e3 e5 6 exd4 exd4 (or 6 ...cxd4 7 g3) 7 b4. *Here and subsequently this refers to the Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings, pu�lished in recent years in Yugoslavia. d5 c5 77 manoeuvre loses a tempo. Therefore he should have preferred 7 i.xc6+, as mentioned in the previous note. 7 8 9 d3 l£ibd2 l£ige7 i.e6 b6 !tel .A.fl c4 W'd7 0-0 14 l£ie4 d4 ..tc7 1!t'd2 • . . 15 16 l£ig3 . . • f5 16 17 18 19 20 21 tl)f1 24 !taet dxe4 hxg3 l£ih2 g4 e4 .i.xg3 fxe4 i.f5 .i.g� !:lti Black is counting on pressure on the f-file. 2 1 . . .%fad8 and then 22 . . . tt:le5, attacking the g4 pawn, was probably more effective. 22 l£ig3 llaf8 'ifc7 23 %1.fl All with the same aim of establishing the knight at e5, and then supporting it with the second knight from c6. An imprudent move, after which Black's pressure in the centre intensifies. In general, White has played the opening passively, and even after the essential preparatory exchange of pawns (14 exd4) his position would have remained difficult, mainly because his bishop at b2 is shut out of the game. 14 i.e2 Black has a wide choice of good continuations. In the event of 16 . . .f4 1 7 exf4 exf4 1 8 tLle4 l°Dg6 and 1 9. ..l£ice5 his pieces dominate the board (I obtained roughly the same structure, only as White, against Kavalek at the tournament in 1 969 in Beverwijk). After 16 ... dxe3 17 fxe3 i.xf3 (or 17 . . .f4 and 1 8 . . .l£if5) 1 8. i.xf3 e4 White's pawns are broken up, but his queen's bishop is inunediately activated. The game con­ tinuation seems the most promising, since Black obtains a passed d-pawn. Black's expectations prove correct. 12 13 15 It was already too late for 1 5 exd4 on accowit of 1 5 . . . i.xf3 , but the fourth move in the opening by this one bishop cannot protect White against the opponent's growing initiative. In the event of attempts to widennine his centre by c2-c4, Black intends to advance . . . d5-d4. But then after lLid2-e4 he will have to retreat his bishop from d6, and therefore the c5 pawn must be defended beforehand. 10 11 12 If immediately 14 . . . f5, then 15 l£ieg5 with the exchange of the bishop at e6. Now, however, after the advance . . . f6f5 Black will retain his queen's bishop. i.g4 78 d3 25 il.dl � g4 pawn, and he avoided 3 1 il.xg4, but in that case it would have been hard for Black to create any serious direct threats. Now, however, the g4 pawn will plan an important role in the development of the attack. Black wants to play 26 . . .liJ7c6, after which White will be bound hand and foot. However, Lisitsyn finds a clever way of freeing his pieces, exploiting Black's error on move 2 1 . 26 27 il.xe5! I-bbl! Wxe5 Black is unable to prevent f2-f4, giving almost equal chances. Therefore he opens up the position on the kingside in order to create some tactical complications. 27 28 29 30 f4 gxf3 f4 l-bg3 33 :h2 33 34 l-bxf5 l-bf5 llxf5 :h4 gJ il.e4! The pawn could no longer be taken: 32 i.xg4 ifg6 etc. 32 i.b7 White wants to exploit his last opportunity of attacking the g4 pawn from the flank (or, in some cases, taking it with the bishop, which will then be defended by the rook from h4). This plan is immediately disrupted. h5 exfJ hxg4 1!fd6 The g4 pawn cannot be defended: if 30 . . . 'l'e6 there can follow 3 1 e4. It is more important to impede this advance in the centre, by attacking once more the f4 pawn. 31 31 32 The whole point is that now if 35 i.xg4 there follows 3 5 . . . :g5!, and if 36 fxg5 'i'g3+ 37 :!g2 .llxg2. lif2 35 36 Up till now Lisitsyn has resourcefully conducted a difficult defence, but here his intuition and calculation let him down. He evidently assumed that it would always be possible to regain the :n In order to explo_it the opportunity that has appeared ofblocking the long diagonal by 37 iLfl, "but . : : · 79 case too there are variations in which White retains a slight, but enduring advantage. 4 5 6 e3 .i.xc4 1ib3 .i.g4 e6 6 7 ... gxf3 .i.xfJ l:la7 8 9 .itd2 ltlc3 ltlf6 ltlbd7 10 11 .te2 d5 c5 The other branch of the opening is 6 h3. 36 37 38 ltg4 .i.fJ The idea of this defence, including Black's last move, belongs to Alekhine. He played this in 1 93 9 at the Olympiad in Buenos Aires against Van Scheltinga. Subsequently it was taken up by Flohr, and often employed by Smyslov, who, however, often avoided 7 . . . l:!a7 in favour of 7 . . . b5 . g5! 'ifh6 11i'h3!! At just the right time! The white rook has lost its way in the pawn 'forest'. 39 'ifg2 'iVxg4 40 41 .itxg4 .i.xg2 �xg2 :sf6 White resigns also Taimanov considers immediate 9 . . . c5 to be possible. This was my last meeting at the board with Georgy Lisitsyn, who, although he grew up in the Leningrad chess organisation,. in contrast to his colleagues always remained a practical player, and a strong one at that. the Game 142 M.Botvinnik-S.Flohr 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Q11een 's Gambit Accepted 1 2 3 d4 c4 ltlfJ d5 dxc4 a6 If now l l . ..exd5 1 2 ltlxd5 tLixd5 1 3 'i'xd5, then Black i s not obliged to play 1 3 . tLif6, which allows White a pleasant choice between 14 ifxdS+ @xdS 1 5 Modem theory and practice give preference to 3 . . tbf6, although in this . . 80 . 19 Jl.a5+ with a marked advantage in the endgame, and 14 'i!i'e5+ Jl.e7 1 5 0-0-0 0-0 16 Jl.c3 'i'e8 1 7 l:thgl with attacking prospects. 9 1 3 . . . .i.e7 is perhaps better, although even then White's two bishops give him a definite advantage. 11 12 13 14 a4 0-0 ..tvhl 14 ... e4 15 16 Agl .i.xf3 exf3 tl'le5 .i.d3! Taking control of the central e4 square. 19 • • . Aaa8 The rook must be brought into play, and this is the only way. Thus in the present game the opening move 7 ...l:ta7 has not justified itself. 20 'ifc2 Wc7 e5 .i.d6 21 22 23 'ife7 It is easy to see that motifs from this encounter were used by me in the fourth game of my 1 954 match with Smyslov (Game 220). b3 :aft 9d1 :res llad8 Black was apparently afraid of e3-e4, after which his chances of gaining counterplay would have been problem­ atic. Now, however, the position is opened up, and White's bishops become very active and his pawn centre becomes mobile. An obvious move, but by no means the strongest. It merely assists the advance of the white pawns in the centre. One can also hardly agree with the recommendation of 16: . . hS, hoping for 1 7 l:txg7 lDg4! White would probably have replied 1 7 l:tg2 tbg4 1 8 ltJe4, continuing to build up the positional pressure. Correct was 16 ... 'i'e5! 17 :g2 g5! followed by . . . g5-g4, after which the advance f2-f4 would have been neutralised and Black would have maintained his outpost at e5. 17 18 Ae2 f4 White plans at a convenient moment to play 1!if3 followed by e3-e4-e5, achieving a dominating position. There­ fore Flohr, exploiting the conglomer­ ation of white pieces on the d-file, decides on a sacrifice, hoping to fish in 'troubled tactical waters' . 23 24 25 26 exf4 l£ixd5 .i.xf4 llixd5 :xd5 1ie2 llff3 J:led8 'i!t'd7 l:td4 lilgJ The bishop is most soundly defended from the side. 26 27 28 0-0 tl'lg6 81 Black's pressure on the d-file has come to a standstill, and White's extra piece is bound to have the decisive word. 29 i.cJ! Game 143 A. Tolush-M.Botvinnnik 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 French Defence 1 e4 2 d4 3 ltlcJ 4 e5 5 a3 6 bxc3 7 /l)fJ e6 d5 i.b4 c5 i.xc3+ Q)e7 7 \!fas Regarding 7 a4, cf. Game 1 25. 29 • . • • • • 8 i.d2 In accordance with his style of play my opponent avoids the exchange of queens and rejects 8 11'd2, which is undoubtedly stronger. Since at the present moment White is no longer threatening to play his queen's bishop to a3, Black can block the position by . . . c5-c4. The first time I employed this opening was in my game with Milner­ Barry (No.64). c4 8 .. :es Neither capture by Black on f4 was possible: 29 ...:xf4 30 i.xg6 lhf3 3 1 .i.xh7+, or 29 . . . ltlxf4 30 :xr4 :xr4 3 1 i.xh7+ r.fi>xh7 3 2 :xg7+ �h6 3 3 :h7+! 30 31 Wft i.xd4 ltlb4 cxd4 32 33 34 35 .:.n c;fa>gt lle2 :eJ 'ii'e7 1i'c5 White does not want to allow the blockading move 9 . . .'i'a4. The alter­ native was immediate piece play on the kingside with 9 .lDg5. 36 37 l:r.xe3 dxe3 1!fb3 Black resigns With obvious designs on the a4 pawn. In games that I had played earlier, the queen's knight already stood at c6. Now, however, Black attacks the a4 pawn· in the most advantageous way. Or 3 1 . ..ltlxf3 32 i.xg7 :el 33 .i.c3+. . 9 11ff8 l:tc2 When the initiative has petered out, to carry on playing a rook down is unnecessary. 9 After this game, played at the start of the tournament, my opponent fell ill and withdrew from the event. Naturally, his games were not counted, but never­ theless they were played . . . 10 a4 . . . i.e2 Q)d7 Too passive. Black wins the pawn without any interference. More 82 dangerous for him was 10 t'Dg5 h6 1 1 li:lli3 , as in Game 136, when White makes certain gains on the kingside. 10 11 0-0 Black can hope to win only after playing . . . a7-a5, but now White is finally able to play . his bishop onto the a3-f8 diagonal. However, against this Black has prepared a successful rejoinder. l£lb6 , t£ixa4 18 19 .tel .taJ a5 Ilb6! 20 21 1!fg3 .td6 'iid8 21 ... l:txd6! 22 23 exd6 h3 ..i.c6 �d7 It becomes clear that sooner or later the black queen will go to b8, to ensure the advance . . . b5-b4. Then White will be forced to play his bishop to the 'strong' post at d6. This move could also have been delayed. 12 l£lh4 12 13 l£lxg6 A positional error. Black gains the opportunity to offer the exchange of knights, after which his h-pawn moves lo g6, a white pawn offensive on the k ingside is ruled out, and it only remains for him to find a good plan for converting his material advantage on the queenside. l£lg6 1 3 t'Df3 really would have been l>cuer. 13 14 15 16 :et .tfl 'l'f3 hxg6 .td7 b5 l'lb8 Without this bishop White is deprived of any possibility of aqtive play or of preventing Black's pawn offensive. As for the pawn that appears at d6, it will be doomed, and for the reason that the enemy king remained in the centre! It seems strange that Black does not castle either on the queenside, or the k ingside. In fact he acts correctly, since in the given position the safest place for his king is in the centre! 17 :ebl ifc7 It was also possible to play 'for 83 Trying to exchange the h3 pawn for the b4 pawn (3 I.. .:xh3 32 cxb4 axb4 3 3 :b 1 ), to which Black, of course, is not agreeable. It follows that it would have been better to go in for the previous variation, which would have been reached after 3 1 cxb4 axb4 32 l:lb l . brilliancy' : 23 ... 1!fh4 24 'ife5 'iff6 25 1!fxf6 gxf6, in the hope of 26 .:!Ixa4 bxa4 27 :b8+ Wd7 28 :xh8 a3 . But how many times could White have deviated from this variation! Therefore Black consistently carries out his intended plan. 24 25 26 llel 11i'e5 1Wg3 'ifh4 1!ff6 :h4 Defending against the threat of l:lel­ e3-f3, Black begins a manoeuvre that leads to the exchange of queens. 21 neJ 28 il.e2 29 il.f3 30 ·wxh4 31 cxb4 nbt h4 l:r.h8 axb4 Ab8 l:lb7 35 'ot>h2 �xd6 There is no defence against the 'leap' of the knight to c3. :r4 11i'h4 b4 Now it is time for this pawn, which earlier covered the black king, to be eliminated. In the variation 30 cxb4 axb4 3 1 :b 1 Black plays 3 1 . . . 1Wxg3 32 fxg3 :xd4 33 %1xb4 'iii>xd6 and quickly obtains two connected passed pawns. If instead White avoids the exchange (30 'ifh2), then 30 . . . 'i'f6 3 1 cxb4 axb4 32 %:tb l 'ifxd4, and Black's advantage increases. Therefore White himself decides to exchange queens. 30 31 32 33 34 36 g4 37 38 39 40 l:r.dl h5 Wg2 ltlc3 37 J:lal In the event of 37 :b2 f6 and tl1en . . . e6-e5 Black would also have won easily. But now that White has removed the attack on the b4 pawn, Black forcibly occupies the a-file with his rook. l:r.xh4 ltlb5 l:la7 g5 l:r.a2 The c2 pawn cannot be defended. White sealed 41 il.e2, but resigned without resuming tile game. One can only be astonished: how could my opponents go in for · the system I had prepared in the French Defence, without making a serious study of this opening? In tile competition for tile best game, this encounter shared 2nd and 3rd prizes. g3 84 11 Game 144 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 tl)fJ lhc3 eJ .id3 d5 e6 tbf6 c6 tbbd7 lle7 0-0 b3 0-0 . .Ii.bl 1!fe2 ltacl e4 dxc4 13 14 bxc4 dxe5 e5 .ixe5 15 16 l'l.cdl lLlh4 We7 1!fb4 17 18 11fc2 tbc5 1!i'a5 After 14 . . . tiJxe5 1 5 tbxe5 .ixe5 16 f4 the white pawns begin advancing with gain of tempo. 8 e4 is more energetic, since in such a situation the opening of the position is in White's favour. Even so, this involves some simplification, which on this occasion I was aiming to avoid (cf. Game 24) . . 8 9 10 11 12 The analogy continues: after . . . .i.d6f4, which was a possible move for Rabinovich (there it was the 14th) I had been intending to play e4-e5, sacrificing the exchange and gaining a vecy strong attack for it. White would probably have taken the same decision here in the event of 12 . . . .tf4. Even so, Black should have opted for 1 2 . . . dxe4. Another to deviate in this way from the Meran Variation was Ilya Rabinovich in our game in 1934 (No.60). 6 . . .tb4 is more promising. 7 8 .i.d6 In the afore-mentioned game with Rabinovich, Black also committed this same loss of time instead of the natural continuation . . . c6-c5. M.Botvinnik-A.Koblenz Black's activity on the queenside soon comes to a standstill, since his queen lacks solid support. 16 . . J::tfd8 was more logical. b6 .tb7 .!:lc8 a3 Even so, Black should have aimed for the endgame: 1 8 ... 1!fb3 19 'i'xb3 tDxb3 20 ltlf5 ncd8, although here too there follows 2 1 f4, and White's advantage is undisputed. 19 ltlf5 20 [f4 21 l:txd3 22 .'�bl ltcd8 tbxd3 1!ic5+ Now or after the preparatory exchange 22 . .Jlxd3 23 'i'xd3 Black had to retreat his bishop, but then the pawns covering his king would be· immediately 85 broken up (by lDa4 and .i.xf6, if there is nothing better). Therefore he carries out a combination, which . . . proves to be incorrect. Game 145 V.Chekhover-M.Botvinnik 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Ruy Lopez 1 2 J 4 5 e4 tt)fJ .i.b5 .i.a4 'ife2 es ti)c6 a6 ti)f6 The usual castling would not have been in the style of Chekhover, who in the opening was always aiming to deviate from approved variations. 22 23 24 fxe5 exf6 1fxc4 ZlxdJ . • . 1!1'cl 7 8 . 0-0 8 9 10 a4 a5 10 11 12 .i.c4 exd5 il..e7 b5 • . d6 If 8 a4 Black would have replied 8 . . J 1b8 or 8 ... i.g4. ltd7 In order to conclude the game as quickly as possible - with a mate. 2s 26 cJ .i.bJ Retreating the bishop to c2 would have allowed Black to equalise immediately by 7 . . . dS. Here, apparently, Black saw that 24 . . . l:txc3 does not work on account of 25 tLle7+ ®h8 26 fxg7+ '3;xg7 27 .i.xc3+ f6 28 i.xf6+ (28 . . J 1xf6 29 'i'xc4). But there is also no other way of saving the game. 24 25 5 6 7 0-0 b4 In this way White deprives the knight at c6 of the convenient square as . In the event of 10 d4 bxc3 1 1 bxc3 .i.g4 Black gains equal chances. :rds l:lgl Black resigns Koblenz always used to aim for a tactical struggle, but it must be combined with positional play! :bs d5! ti)xd5 White now has two ways to win a pawn, but he is obliged to reject both. In the event of 13 il..xa6 tt)f4 14 'i'c4 i.e6 ! 1 5 'i'xc6 .i.d5 16 'i'a4 i.xf3 17 gxf3 'i'd6 18 ®hl 'i'xa6 Black's attack soon bears fruit, while after 1 3 tLlxe5 tt:lf4 1 4 86 We4 tDxe5 15 'i!fxe5 i.d6 he has a decisive lead in development. 13 d3 In the Encyclopaedia Matanovic points out that l3 d4 would have led to an unclear position. 13 14 . • . cxb4 14 15 16 ttk3 .i.e3 lbdxb4 .ii.g4 <ifo>b8 17 18 tDe4 it)c5 1!i'g6 it)c2 lbd7 .i.xd4 21 22 23 Q)xf8 fue2 i.xe2 .i.xf8 l:txb2 24 lbc3 .i.b4 available 25 26 27 it)d5 lbxc7 it)xa6 .i.c5 1lld6 i.xf2+ 28 l:txf2 'ffd4 An elementary loss of precious time. Correct was 24 . . . h5, so that later the weakness of the back rank should not be felt. the Black has given up· two pawns, one after another, in order to cany out a combination, which proves to be faulty. . Also possible, as suggested by my opponent:,. was 1 8...f5, but after 1 9 lbd7 not 19 . . . e4 20 dxe4 fxe4 21 tt)fe5, but rather 19 ...f4, offering an exchange sacrifice which, strictly speaking, cannot be accepted. 19 20 lbxd4 The rook and laright do not compen­ sate for the queen and pawn, but Black cannot afford to relax,. which is pre­ cisely what he does on the next move. ifd6 But this move certainly deserves to be criticised, since now the d4 square becomes accessible to the enemy pieces. 1 4 :el suggests itself. Black must have advance . . . f7-f5. 21 This queen sacrifice is forced, but it enables White to resist, although objectively his position is lost. It was a good thing that I noticed in time that after 28 .. Jlxf2 (in order to win after 29 �xf2 'i!fd4+) White even wins by interposing 29 :bl ! (29 ... :b2 30 l:xb2 'ifd4+ 3 1 :t2). �d4 fud4 87 29 �aft e4 If White really wanted to continue in this hopeless position, then at least he should have kept his h-pawn. i 1fxh2 37 11fa2 38 !tf5 : 39 g4 'ifaJ+ 40 'iW4 1i'd6+ 41 � White resigned, without resuming • • • the game. Game 146 P.Romanovsky-M.Botvinnik 30 dxe4 Chekhover thought that he could have gained a draw by playing 30 g3 (30 ... e3 3 1 !tf4 'iic3 32 !txf7 h5 33 lt7f5 g6 34 !tf8+ 'it>h7 35 h4). It remains unclear how he was intending to save himself after 3 5 . . . e2. Another variation given by him is also dubious: 30 ...!txf2 3 1 !txf2 exd3 32 .txd3 'ifxd3 33 tfJc7 'ii'c4 34 tlle8 1 0 and 35 tllxg7, 'after which the rook moves between f4 and h4 . But what if 33 . . . 'ii'd7 or 34 ... g6 (35 tlld6 'ii'c l +)? Thus it can be concluded that, despite his errors (on moves 24 and 28) Black has retained a winning position. !txf2 30 ' 31 32 33 llxf2 ltlb8 l:b:f7 1fxc4 1!fb5 1lfxb8 37 g3 llf4 <iflf2 � 1 2 3 4 5 6 e4 ltlfJ d4 l£ixd4 tllc3 i.g5 cs ltlc6 cxd4 ltlf6 d6 This variation, with the idea of castling queenside, was developed by the Soviet master Rauzer. I usually used to avoid it, by taking play into the Dragon Variation, which is precisely what White's last move prevents. Thus if Black wants to fianchetto his king's bishop, he must play . . . g7-g6 earlier. 6 7 • • . .tbs e6 Romanovsky avoids 7 "i'd2, and hence also queenside castling. But with kingside castling the move 6 .tg5 has no great point, and this last move also cannot bring White any advantage. Generally speaking, the development of the bishop at b5 in the given variation of Here White can no longer set up any kind of fortress. 34 35 36 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Sicilian Defence �g8 'lfbl+ 'i!fa2+ 88 the Sicilian Defence is favourable only in exceptional cases, since it leads either to simplification favourable to Black, or to the loss of a tempo, as in the present game. It should be mentioned that my opponent, while possessing a distinctive and original talent, and a deep under­ standing of chess, was never strong in opening theory; moreover, it did not interest him. Samuil Vainstein, who worked for many years as the editor of Shakhmatny Listok, used to receive numerous foreign magazines in which he would look for theoretical inno­ vations. He told me that he tried to show these innovations to Romanovsky, but the latter did not show any particular interest in them. Therefore it is probable that the move 7 i..b 5 and the subsequent kingside castling in the present game can be explained simply by a striving to avoid any theoretical preparations. 7 8 ... 0-0 i..d7 . @bl J.e7 allowed Alekhine to gain an advantage in a game with Napolitano (1942): 1 1 .txf6 gxf6 12 a4. 9 10 . . . h6 i..eJ 10 a6 But this is already a mistake, since the bishop at b5 is driven away to where in fact it should be, for developing an attack on the kingside. A normal position from the Scheveningen Varia­ tion is reached, the only difference being that Black's kingside has been weakened by the advance . . . h7-h6, and the pawn attack g2-g4-g5 may prove very dangerous. After 10 ... 0-0 it is even unfavourable for White to play 1 1 f4 on account of 1 1 . . . tLlxd4 1 2 i..xd4 .txb5 n tLlxb5 d5. Now 8 'i'd2 no longer has its usual strength, since precious time has been lost, and also at some poirit Black will gain an important tempo for the development of his attack on the queenside, by playing . . . a7-a6. 8 9 • • Now I do not understand why I did not castle immediately, although the move in the game does not spoil anything, thanks to the · fact that the enemy bishop is doing nothing at b5. White did not gain any opening advantage after 9 ltJb3 a6 IO i..e2 Wc7 1 1 'i'el 0-0 12 f4 h6 1 3 i..h4 b5 14 i.f3 llab8 1 5 .fl.di b4 16 tLle2 e5 17 f5 g5 (Gligoric-Boleslavsky, 1947), whereas · the hasty move 1 0. . .bS, leaving the d6 pawn without additional defence, 11 .i.e2 e5 This move, characteristic of the Boleslavsky Variation (Game 124), is hardly advisable in the given situation. 89 12 13 l£ib3 l£id5 0-0 l£ixd5 Strictly speaking, this is already Black's fourth inaccuracy in a row, and on this occasion it leads to a difficult position. Meanwhile, it was quite safe for him to play 1 3 . . . lDxe4 14 .ib6 'irc8 1 5 f3 lDf6 16 lDxe7+ lDxe7 17 ifxd6 'ifxc2 18 .id3 'ifc6. 14 15 exd5 l£id2! l£ia5 Even at a5 Black's knight is inactive, but now it will be pushed back to b7, where for a long time it will be out of play. 15 16 17 b4 c4 b5 ltJb7 f5 19 20 ifxeJ .ixe3 1!fg5 21 f4 exf4 22 'S'b6! • • • Only in this way can Black fight for the initiative. In the event of 20 . . . bxc4 2 1 lDxc4 .ib5 22 ltfel l:lcS 23 lbb6 l:tc7 24 .ixb5 ! axb5 25 a4 bxa4 26 l:txa4 the knight at b7 is still immobil­ ised, and the invasion of White's heavy pieces into the enemy position is unavoidable. What was Black hoping for, by offer­ ing the exchange of queens? If White had agreed to go into the endgame, the chances would have become roughly equal. To anticipate the evaluate all the consequences of 2 1 f4 was not easy, of course, but Black assumed that in the resulting complications there would be an opportunity to exploit the un­ defended knight at d2 and bishop at e2. White was no doubt relying no less on the same defect in the placing of the knight at b7 and bishop at d7. Otherwise 22 fxe5 dxe5 23 c5, and Black has no defence against the further advance of the passed pawns. Here White could have developed his initiative by 1 8 f4 .if6 1 9 l:lcl exf4 20 .ixf4 bxc4 21 lDxc4 .ib5 22 .ie3 with the threat of 23 lbb6. By choosing a less active continuation, he allows his opponent to begin a battle for the dark squares. .i g5 18 f3 19 After 1 9 .igl Black would have controlled the c l square, and the advance c4-c5 (the crux of White's plan) would have become virtually impracticable. Therefore he has to agree to the exchange of bishops. This move may not in fact be the strongest, but it deserves an exclamation mark, since the bold raid by the queen is an interesting idea. 22 • • • l:.ab8! And this unexpected saving manoeuvre is based on the unprotected ifbJ 90 state of White's minor pieces. 25 ...Wc3 did not achieve anything in view of 26 a3. 26 Wxb7 Aa7 Incidentally, Black has 'rid himself' of the main defect of his position - his wretched lrnight at b7. 23 Wxa6 Or 23 c5 dxc5 24 bxc5 'ii'e7 with a double attack - on the bishop at e2 and the pawn at c5. 23 . • . 'fie7 And it was only here, in choosing where to move his bishop - to d3 or dl - that in this fluctuating game White makes the decisive mistake, possibly because the unexpected turn of events had unsettled him. Correct was 27 .tdl l:lxb7 28 l:lxe3 fxe3 29 c5 dxc5 30 bxc5 l:lc7 3 1 c6 i.xc6 32 dxc6 l:.xc6 33 i.b3+ Wh7 34 tLld4 l:ld6 35 till:b5 Ad2, when a draw is clearly on the cards. But in the game there followed . . . In this way the black queen goes with gain of tempo to e3, from where it takes away all the white queen's retreat squares - a3, a7 and b6. And immediately there is a threat to win the queen by . . . l:.a8, 'i'xb7 .l::ta 7. How should White save his queen? One possibility was 24 l:lfel 'fie3 25 tt)fl 'iff2 26 'W'a3 (the variation 26 i.f3 l:la8 27 Wxb7 l:la7 28 l:le2 'ifd4 29 l:tdl Wxdl 30 'i'xa7 'ifxfl+ 3 1 'i!fgl Wxgl + 32 Wxgl bxc4 is most probably in favour of Black) 26 . . .l:lfe8 27 'i'f3. Here Black has a choice between a roughly equal ending after 27 . . . 'ifxf3 , and a complicated battle: 27... W°b6 28 . cxb5 l:te4 29 a3 l:.be8. The chances of the two sides are roughly the same after the decision taken by White. 24 25 l:tael thf3 27 28 i.dJ nxe3 l:Cxb7 And now not 28 . . . fxe3 29 c5 ! for which White was probably prepared, but a surprise in the form of an interposition . . . , 28 • • • bxc4! . Black agrees to forgo the win of the exchange, but on the other hand he deprives the opponent of his two connected passed pawns. 'ife3 lla8! 91 29 l:te7 Game 147 29 .txc4 fxe3 is equally hopeless, since in this case White has no compensation for the exchange. 29 JO 31 32 33 34 thet l:trl7 thxdJ l:tdl l:txdJ B.Ratner-M.Botvinnik 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 cxdJ :n <it>xti Griinfeld Defence 1 2 J 4 .tbs �xdJ l:txb4 d4 c4 thcJ cxd5 ll.\f6 g6 d5 At the present time too, this variation of the Griinfeld Defence is popular. 4 5 6 e4 bxcJ �c4 thxd5 ll.\xcJ c5 7 In those years everyone was influenced by the game Vidmar­ Alekhine (Nottingham 1 936), in which Black quickly equalised (7 .te3 .tg7 8 00 ll:ic6 9 h3 0-0 IO 'ifd2 1!fa5 !). However, now it has been shown that after 7 00 he faces difficult problems. .tg7 7 8 9 Black is not only a pawn up, but also his pieces are active, as a result of which further loss of material for White is inevitable. 35 36 Adi l:ld2 l:ta4 CiW6 37 h4 g6 38 <it>gl <it>e5 White resigns ll:ie2 0-0 0-0 ll.\d7 The main continuation is 9 . . .ll:ic6. Intending if 3 7 lle2 to reply 37 . . J 1e4! (after 38 llxe4 fxe4 39 a4 '1t>e5 40 a5 <;t>xd5 the black king is inside the square). Preventing the possible obstruction of the kingside pawns by h4-h5. 10 92 a4 It is advantageous for Black to exchange bishops, as after 18 .i.xf6 lDxf6 White's pawn centre beings to 'creak'. In the second game of our match for the World Championship ( 1 95 1), Bron­ stein employed against me Furman' s very strong move 1 0 .i.g5. It was after this that 9 . . lbd7 was deemed insufficient for equality. Now, however, Black succeeds in developing his queen at c7, thanks to which his opening difficulties are behind him. . 10 11 12 Jl.a2 Jl.e3 13 14 l:Z.el 1!t'b3 15 d5 · 18 19 Jl.b6 exf5 rlti gxf5 20 21 a5 rladl b5 22 !£ig3 22 ... Now, however, White's dark-square bishop is in danger. 11c7 b6 .i.a6 Perhaps it would have been psychologically more correct to avoid routine continuations and to try and complicate the play by 2 1 · d6. 21 lbc5 With direct or indirect threats Black puts pressure on the white pawn centre. l:Z.ad8 e5 Now White is forced to block the centre, and the mobility of his pieces is considerably restricted. Black's further program includes first the advance of his c-pawn, which helps to disrupt the coordination of the enemy forces, and then of the f-pawn, the signal for activity in the centre. i.e7! Because of the threat of 23 . 00, White does not have time to retreat his bishop from h6, and Black is able to cut it off from the main forces. . 15 16 17 1t'a3 Jl.g5 23 24 25 26 c4! f5 . .i.f6 'i!fct 1£ih5 Jl.g7 l£ixg7 f4 1'd6 lbg7 �xg7 . As a result Black was won two minor pieces for a rook, while retaining all the advantages of his position. 93 27 i.bl . 28 1fc2 ..tc8 %lh8 29 30 31 ilf6 ild7 38 Black has no reason to hurry, and it is a pity even to 'give up' his !might for a rook (28 ... tD<i3), since in so doing he also loses two pawns. 'i!fe2 'i!fh5 ..tc2 'ilg3+ rbf7 White resigns Game 148 M.Botvinnik-LBoleslavsky 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Ruy Lopez 31 I should like to say a few kind words about my opponent in this game. Isaak Efremovich Boleslavsky ( 19 19-1977) was a player who had a very significant influence on establishing the funda­ mentals of the Soviet Chess School. He created numerous opening systems, linked with subtle plans in the middlegame, which is a distinguishing feature of our chess. Boleslavsky' s greatest success was a share of first and second places in the 1950 Candidates Tournament in Budapest. Later, unfortunately, defects in his competitive character together with his none too robust health led to a rather premature loss of his exceptional chess strength. With him, more often than with other masters, I used to begin the game with 1 e4. In Sverdlovsk he tried the Sicilian Defence against me (Game 1 24), but without success; on this occasion he preferred the ' Spanish'. e5 1 e4 e4! This pawn sacrifice enables Black to activate his pieces still more. We5 32 .i.xe4 33 'i!ff3 The ending after the exchange of queens would have been hopeless for White, but also in the middlegaJ11:e he cannot resist for long. · 33 34 35 36 .i.d3 l:lxel i.fl 37 'i!f xf4 l:le8 W xel+ l:lxel+ tDe4 Together the rook and knight work wonders. 2 3 4 5 6 t:bxc3 And now White is threatened with a fork (38 . . . tl'ie2+), which he cannot parry on account of the threat of mate. 7 94 t:bfJ i.b5 Aa4 0-0 cJ d4 t:bc6 a6 Q:)f6 d6 .i.d7 g6 In this opening vanauon Black achieves a comfortable mobilisation of his forces, but for White it is easier than usual to embark upon active play. 8 Escaping from the pin, planning the manoeuvre . . . lbf6-h5-f4, and, in addition, threatening to win a pawn by 1 3 . . .ltixd4 (14 iLxd7 ttJxf3+ 15 'i'xf3 ltixd7). White should have parried this threat by 13 �hl , when it would not have been easy for Black to find a good continuation (if 1 3 . . . lbh5 - 14 lbe3 t'Af4? 1 5 lbd5). I should also mention the interesting game R.Byme-Ciocaltea ( 1974), in which there followed 13 .tb3 �h8 ! 14 lbe3 l:tc8 1 5 lbd5 lbg8 16 dxe5 dxe5 17 i.g3 f6 ! 13 .i.c2 lbh5 lbbd2 Suggested by Alekhine. Later it was shown that 8 .txc6 .i.xc6 9 dxe5 lLixe4 IO lbbd2 .te7 1 1 lLixe4 .txe4 12 exd6 'ilfxd6 13 'ilfxd6 cxd6 14 .!:.el .i.d5 1 5 ..tg5 iLe6 16 l:te3 i s stronger (Geller­ Zhukovitsky, 1969). 8 • • • 11fe7 It is useful to defend the e5 pawn in view of the threat of 9 .i.xc6. Other replies are weaker: 8 . . . 1'.g7 9 iLxc6 .txc6 10 dxe5 dxe5 1 1 lbxe5, or 8... b5 9 i.c2 i.g7 10 dxe5 dxe5 1 1 lbb3 i.e6 12 lbc5. 9 10 11 :et ltifl 15 dxe5 ltie7 0--0 A typical plan in such positions. In the first instance White must restrict the bishop at g7 and also open the d-file to counter Black's possible attack on the kingside. Another plan here is 1 5 'ilfd2 f6 16 h3 .i.e6 17 c4 l:td8 18 b4 c6 1 9 :ad l (Ribli-Kavalek, 1 973). .i.g5 i.h4 lbeJ i.g7 An unpleasant plan for Black. Subsequently White will always be able to retreat his bishop to g3, reducing to the mmnnum the opponent's possibilities on the kingside. 11 12 14 15 16 . i.g3 • . dxe5 This standard procedure is also very useful. In order to defend his e5 pawn, Black exchanges knight for bishop, but b6 'i'e8 95 then (as we have already said) the moving of the h-pawn to g3 radically dispels any hopes of activity by him on this part of the board. 16 17 18 hxg3 1Fe2 19 20 l:cadl J%d2 lt}xg3 l:cd8 lt}c8 It is doubtful whether 1 8. . . .i.b5 19 c4 or 1 8... .i.e6 19 i.b3 was any better. c6 White's initiative on the d-file begins to asswne real proportions. 20 21 . • . J%ed1 b4 .i.b3 23 24 25 26 1!fxd2 axb3 c4 27 c5! 27 28 1i'd7 �8 9'xb3 29 'it'xb7 .i.g5 l%xd2 .i.xb3 9'e6 .i.f6 Now Black is unable to occupy the d­ file with his rook: 27 ...l:cd8 28 ifxd8+ .i.xd8 29 l:txd8+ and 30 cxb6. 'if'e7 lt}b6 2 1 . . .b5 was more cautious, not allowing White to seize space on the queenside, although in this case too after 22 b4 the situation favours him (the manoeuvre ttill -e l -d3-c5). 22 23 1breatening a mass exchange on d8 and then e6, which would lead to a won position for White, as the black pawn formation would be ruined. . • . After 28. . . l:d8 White could have won in two ways: 29 'i'xe6 l:.xdl+ 30 �dl fxe6 3 1 lt}e3 , or 29 1Wxb7 29 . . . !txd l + 3 0 lllxdl llle7 3 1 llle3 'i'xb3 3 2 Wb8+ @g7 33 lllg4. .i.e6 After 22 . . . f5 23 exf5 gxf5 24 l:.xd7 I!xd7 25 lt)xf5 White energetically develops an attack. Black prepares for the exchange of light-square bishops, since at b3 the white bishop would be very active, but as a result the opponent obtains an invasion square at d7. 30 1!fxc6, attacking the bishop, was threatened. After the other defence 29 . .lt}e7 there would have followed 30 ltd6. - . 30 31 96 lt}xg5 'lfxa6 hxg5 showed that 3 9 . . .{'jjf6 would have led to a draw: 40 l:ld8 (40 !txf7+? 'iixf7 4 1 t:Dxf7 l:lal+ 4 2 @h2 {'jjg4+ 4 3 'Ot>h3 t:Dxf2+ 44 'iith2 .l:.hl mate) 40 . . . l:txd8 41 'l!fxd8 'i'bl + 42 'iith2 1!fxe4 43 1fc7 1!fd5. Apart from a positional advantage, White also has an extra pawn. 31 32 33 34 Wb7 'l!fd7 1t'd6 35 {'jjg4 36 ifxe5 {'jje7 :e8 '� 'lfxb4 39 40 41 42 {'fjf6+ 1!fxf6 Wh2 43 1!fxc6! �b7 {'fjxf6 @g8 l'!f8 The most energetic continuation. 35 :aS . • • The first inaccuracy committed by White. 36 {'jjxe5 'iixe4 37 1!ff6 1!ff5 38 tbd7+ was immediately decisive (it was this last move that I did not notice in time trouble). 36 37 • . • l'ld7 In analysis I was able to find that 43 . . . 'i'b2 (threatening a perpetual check from h8 and al) loses to 44 1fd6 'ifxf2 (44 . . . 111h8+ 45 'ifiig l Wal + 46 'ifdl ) 45 c6 �g7 46 'iixf8+ and 47 c7. 1!fb3 {'jjgS 43 44 Black defends very resourcefully. 38 38 39 • • • 1!fd4+ Wd6 �g7 Defending the first rank. 1t'd6+ 38 'ifiih2 was stronger. • • • 44 45 46 <l;g7 When you have no time, you make the first move that suggests itself, but on this occasion it was the right one. Subsequently 39 tbe5 was recom­ mended, with two threats - 40 'i'xg6+ and 40 !txf7+. However, Ravinsky 1id4+ c6 1!t'bl @b7 With the S!Pile idea after 46 . . . lth8 of sacrificing queen for rook. Black resigns. Probably the most subtle game that I played in this event. 97 to this tactical subtlety that the black bishop could immediately be brought out to its active position. Game 149 A.Lilientha1-M.Botvinnik I4th USSR Championship Moscow 1 945 9 10 11 Queen's Gambit 1 d4 2 c4 3 � d5 e6 . c6 4 5 tbf6 .i.d3 0-0-0 tbd7 1!fe7 ti'lf6 The reasons for my liking for this position are given in the notes to Game 127. tl)f3 cxd5 Lilienthal' s decision was all the more natural, for the reason that a year before this game, in the 13th USSR Champion­ ship, he had personally satisfied himself of the strength of my preparation after 5 .i.g5. On this occasion he chooses a safer continuation, in which, however, Black has no particular opening problems. 5 6 ii.g5 7 ilxf6 exd5 h6 Now Black will no longer have any difficulties. In order to · maintain a complicated game, the bishop should have been retreated to h4 or f4. 1lxf6 Ad6 ..b3 e3 12 libel 14 tt'le5 14 15 f4 ii.e6 Now it is no longer easy to carry out the standard e3-e4 advance. 13 11fc2 � Black's queenside castling prevents White from finding any active plan. In such a situation, Lasker, for example, would simplify the game, avoiding any risk. With this aim 14 Af5, for example, could have been played. Determining the position of the enemy bishop. Theory considers that 6. . . .tf5 (7 'flb3 'flb6) also leads to an equal game. 7 8 9 Black too successfully completes his development, and his pieces will be aimed at the opponent's queenside castled position. But this is a routine manoeuvre, not in accordance with the character of the position, as has already been mentioned in the notes to Game 134, where White took a similar decision. 9 e4 dxe4 10 iZ)xe4 is not dangerous for° Black in view of 10 . . 'i'e7 1 l 0-0--0 Af4+� · when White must waste time on the retreat 12 tDfd2. It was only thanks · . 98 �b8 White was unable to prevent . . . c6-c5 by 15 l£ia4 on account of the loss of a pawn: 15 . . . .i.xe5 16 dxe5 l£ig4 17 f4 l£ixh2. But the move played leads to a weakening of the important e4 square. 15 ... cs 16 'iifi>b l c4 Black intends to advance his c-pawn further. Can this be prevented? In the event of 16 dxc5 .txe5 17 fxe5 llld7 18 t'llb5 l:.c8 the opening of the c-:file is not in White's favour, while after 16 t'llb5 all the same there is the reply 16 . . . c4 ( 1 7 'ii'a4 a6 18 t'llxd6 cxd3). This plan too was employed in the afore-mentioned Game 1 34. 17 .i.f5 That which was good on the 14th move is now forced and belated. The enemy pawn is already at c4, and the e4 square has been significantly weakened. But White has little choice. If 17 .i.e2, then 17 . . . g6, and the battle for the bl­ h7 diagonal leads to unpleasant consequences: 18 g4 h5 1 9 h3 hxg4 20 hxg4 l:lh2. 17 18 • • . 1!fxf5 .l:te2 bxc3 21 22 23 'ital 'ircl l:ld6 .i.xc3 After 2 1 'ii'xc3 Black would have carried out the standard plan of a pawn offensive on the queenside. Now, however, the white c3 pawn becomes a convenient target. White intends to set up a fortress by placing his rook at c2, as otherwise after 23 . . . l:la3 the c3 pawn falls. ..i.xf5 .i.b4 23 . . . l:ld8 To conclude his attack Black needs to switch his rook from h8 to, the queenside. This requires three moves (the route via h6 after . . . h6-h5 would have taken the same nwnber). It only remains to exchange the knight at c3, and the knight at f6 will occupy e4. 19 19 20 21 11i'c2 Before it is too late, the queen must be returned to its own camp. Now Black had a forcing and fully favourable continuation: 19. . . l£ie4 20 iL:lxd5 .l:txd5 2 1 'irxe4 l:lhd8 (but not 2 1 . . .'ii°e6 22 f5) 22 l:te2 f6 23 a3 i..xa3. However, following Capablanca's advice, I avoided complications in a position where I had an obvious advantage. 24 llc2 25 i l£ig4 lldd6 It was no accident that Black avoided losing time i on . . . f7-f6. The white knight . voluntarily leaves the central square, where it looked imposing, but was out of play. However, White's natural desire to exchange it . for . the 99 active enemy realisable. 25 26 knight proves .. b3 l:lg6 h5 ttk5 ti)f3 llgb6 • 34 tLlxd4 35 l:ld2 tLle2 ltlc3 36 l:lel 37 :ct White resigned before Black's reply. un­ Black himself even drives this ill­ fated knight to its pseudo-active position. 27 28 Game 150 M.Botvinnik-LBondarevsky 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 King's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ltlg5 29 30 31 32 Vxa3 l:ldcl ti)xf7 8 After 29 t'De5 Black, of course, would have had to avoid the trap (29 . . .tZ'lxc3 30 'i!fxa3 J:lxa3 3 1 l:ldcl llbb3 32 lbd7+ c/;c7 33 tZ'lc5) and find the simple way to win: 29 . . . llb3 30 Wxa3 llaxa3. lillc3 lha3 ltlb5 32 llel f6 does not change anything. 32 33 34 lbe5 g4 l:lxe3 <l;c7 If 34 00, then 34 . . J::te4 , if there is nothing better. e5 ltlbd7 g6 .i.g7 0-0 · Now the c3 pawn is doomed. 29 ltlf6 d6 Thus, with a slight change in the move order, exactly the same position has been reached as in my game against Lilienthal (No. 1 13). 'Wa3! 28 d4 c4 ltlc3 ltlf3 g3 .i.g2 0-0 e4 c6 This is a s1Junder continuation than 8 ...:es, after which in the afore­ mentioned game there followed 9 .ie3. Earlier against Boleslavsky (Game 108) I played 9 d5, which is not bad, but even so, less effective. 9 b3 As shown by the 14th game of the Botvinnik-Smyslov world championship match (1 954), the following line is dangerous for White: 9 .te3 tZ'lg4 10 .ig5 Wb6 1 1 h3 exd4 12 lLla4 'iia6 1 3 hxg4 b5 1 4 li:Jxd4 bxa4, with complications not unfavourable for Black, but 9 h3 is perhaps preferable. 9 100 ... exd4 10 11 12 tLlxd4 .i.b2 'tlfc2 lle8 tLlfl and 17 %hd6) 16 b5 or 16 a3 with an imposing positional advantage. tLle6 15 b4 11fe7 16 tLlfJ This is why the lrnight had to go to h6, to keep open the queen's line of retreat. tLlc5 11 :re1 18 @h2 22 bxc6 f6 White was threatening 1 8 lbd5 with the tinavoidable exchange of the g7 bishop, defending the position of the black king. The move played parries this threat, but of course the placing of the pawns at c6, d6, f6 and g6 is no adornment to Black's position. If 18 lbd5 Black replies 18 . . . 'ifd8. 18 tLlf7 19 tLlb4 tLlf8 a5 20 f4 This move does nothing to strengthen Black's defences, but merely weakens them. ..i.e6 21 b5 Bronstein's idea 12. . . a5 was em­ ployed in the game Denker-Boleslavsky (Groningen 1946) in the following form: 13 ltadl 'ilb6 14 h3 (14 .i.a3 could have been tried) 14 ...a4 1 5 bxa4 11fc7 16 <it>h2 h5 with equal play. My opponent decides on something dif­ ferent, but his attempt to initiate immediate activity on the kingside proves inappropriate. tLlg4 12 1lg5 13 J:ladl 14 hJ bxc6 tLlh6 Why didn't Black retreat his lrnight to f6? He can hardly have been afraid of the variation 14 . . . tLl:f6 15 tLlf3 Wh.5 16 g4 ii.xg4 17 hxg4 lbxg4, since for the piece he gains two pawns and good attacking chances. If 15 ii.cl there would also have followed 1 5 . . . \Wh5 (but not 15 . . . 11fe5 16 ii.f4 'ife7, when 17 lbxc6 bxc6 18 .i.xd6 and 19 .i.xc5 is crushing). Therefore White would probably have begun immediate play on the queenside: 15 b4 lba6 (15. . .lbe6 16 23 tLlf'S! A standard manoeuvre, which Black · · should have anticipated, since after 101 23 . . . gxf5 24 exf5 both 24 . . . .i.xf5 25 li'xf5 'iib7 26 .i.al and 24 . . . Wc7 2 5 fxe6 l:txe6 2 6 laxe6 lDxe6 2 7 t:be4 are unfavourable for him. Therefore he has to agree to the exchange of the knight for his g7 bishop, after which his castled position becomes indefensible. 39 40 1!i'e7 il..f7 1!ff8 mate 23 24 25 ltlxg7 c5! 25 26 27 ltla4 ltlxc5 dxc5 'i!t'b4 .i.c4 28 'i!t'fl! 11ab8 It rarely happens that a game between grandmasters ends in mate. This is possible only in the most severe time trouble. 29 30 31 .i.al e5 l:txdl l:led8 l:lxdl l:tb5 LRudakovsky-M.Botvinnik 'irb7 <ot?xg7 This is also a standard procedure, breaking up Black's pawn chain. The a2 pawn is taboo: 27 ... i.xa2 28 .i.c3 'ifa3 (28 ... 'i!fxc5 29 i.xf6+) 29 l:tal etc. Now 28 . . . .i.xa2 was bad because of 29 e5. Game 1 5 1 The exchange of pawns on e5 loses immediately, as the f6 square cannot be defended against the invasion of the queen. 32 33 34 35 ltld7 exf6+ l:ld2 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1!fa4 <ot?g8 l:lbl l:lxal lDxf8 Mate is not far off after 35 . . . <L>xffl 36 1!fc5+ (which, however, is also true after the game continuation). 36 37 38 ltld7 .:.b2 'ifb4 l:lxa2 We3 Of course. White is no satisfied with the win of a piece. 38 • . • longer 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 ltlc3 'irc2 al 5 6 7 1lfxc3 ltlf3 lDf6 e6 .ib4 d5 In Games 1 14 and 134 White ex­ changed immediately on d5, which in general is harmless for his opponent. Rudakovsky chooses a continuation that leads to some difficulties for Black. ltld6 102 .i.xc3+ ltlc6 Othenvise (for example, after 7 e3) there would have followed 7 . . . e5 8 dxe5 d4, with complications not llll.favourable for Black. Now, however, a position from the Ragozin Defence is reached. tLle4 7 .. If 10 . . . 'i'xd5, then after 1 1 e3 it is not possible to play 1 1 . . . tLlb3 on account of 12 ..i.c4. Now, at first sight, everything seems to be alright with Black: his pieces are well developed, while White has wasted a considerable amount of time, but Black's opening difficulties have not yet been overcome in view of the unfor­ tunate position of his knight at a5. . ..i.f5 11 e3 12 .i.d3 A pseudo-active move. Preferable was 1 1 . ....i.d7 and then . . . b7-b6 with a satisfactory position. 8 lib3 When I played Makogonov in the 1 1th USSR Championship ( 1 93 9) I had already prepared the variation involving 8 1i'c2 e5 9 dxe5 i..f5 10 1"b3 lDa5. My opponent, however, replied 9 e3, which led to rapid equality. Six years had passed, and I was again hoping to employ this variation in the present game, but on this occasion too White chose a different continuation. Thus I was unable to make use of my analysis in a tournament game. Laszlo Szabo proved more fortunate: independ­ ently of me he had developed the same variation, and he employed it in a game with Florian at a tournament in Budapest (1 950). tLla5 8 9 10 11fa4+ cxd5 Now Black has no difficulties, as he is able to seize control of the b3 square. Correct, as shown by Boleslavsky, was 12 i..d2 lDxd2 1 3 lDxc12. But here, instead of the continuation considered in his analysis - 1 3 . . . 0-0 14 ..te2 b5 1 5 'i!fb4 lDc4 16 b 3 a5 17 'i'c5 lDxc12 18 'ifi>xd2, which is clearly in White's favour, Black should again play 1 3 . . . ..td7 followed by . . . b7-b6, when the weakening of the c6 pawn is of no real significance. c6 exd5 12 103 • . • 9'b6! 13 9c2 After 13 b4 Gtk4 14 0--0 tbc3 15 'i'c2 .i.xd3 16 'i'xd3 tbe4 Black would have achieved domination of the light squru:es. 13 14 15 l:tbl ltlh4 • • • 0-0 exd4 d5 21 22 °ifd3 l:tfe8 Perhaps it would have been preferable to sacrifice the exchange: 2 1 .i.e3 .i.c4 22 'i'g4 i.xfl 2 3 tbfs 'i'f6 (but not 23 . . . 'ifg6 24 tbe7+) 24 l:txfl, at least retaining some initiative. lbb3 c5 ! Parrying the threat of 15 ... c4 16 .i.e2 �6. White would have lost material ·after 15 dxc5 lbbxc5 16 tbd4 .i.g6. Oniy by driving the black bishop off the b l -h7 diagonal can he organise a resistance. 15 16 20 21 .i.d7 .i.e6 16 .i.xe4 dxe4 17 1!1xe4 was extremely dangerous in view of 17 . . . 'i'a5+ 18 �e2 cxd4 19 exd4 0-0 etc. 16 :cs 17 18 19 .i.xe4 °ifd3 W'xe4 cxd4 dxe4 0-0 'i'b5 22 This move is good enough to win, but it is a typical illustration of the deficiencies of my tactical ability. There was an immediate win by 22 ...tbxcl 23 l:lbxc l l:txc l 24 l:txcl 'ifh6 (double attack) 25 'i'c4 .i.b5 ! (diversion) 26 "ifc5 b6 (a further diversion). . . • 23 'ildl 23 24 25 .i.eJ 26 f3 Or 23 'i'xb5 .i.xb5 24 l:tdl .i.e2 25 !te l .i.d3, or 23 'i'g3 W'xfl+ 24 1¥rxfl .i.b5+ 25 lt>gl 1%el mate. Black has achieved a great positional advantage.. . His pieces are very well coordinated, whereas the opponent's are disunited. · 1ic4 g3 l:le5 .i.g4 Black constantly creates threats, not wasting time on the capture of the d5 pawn. 104 .i.h3 27 28 llel f4 g5 It seems to me that Geller's manoeuvre 7 'i'a4 1Ld7 8 'i'e4 gives White an advantage, whereas the game continuation is far weaker, and in this case Rubinstein's idea proves justified. Retreating the lalight would have lost the exchange (28 . . . 1Lf5). Therefore White seeks salvation in a temporary piece sacrifice. 28 29 30 31 32 33 1i'f3 g4 1Lxd2 11fxh3 1!fxb4 7 l:txd5 gxh4 li)d2 :xd2 11fxf4 • • • e5 Although White has managed to get rid of his two bad minor pieces, his heavy pieces are passive, as a result of which Black dominates the board. 33 34 :cc2 11fg3 Wd4+ White resigns The finish could have been as follows: 35 'iti>hl 'i'd5+ 36 'iti>gl �g2+ 37 <iif.1fl 'i'b5+, and mate next move. Thus a position from the Dragon Variation of the Sicilian Defence with colours reversed has been reached, but with an extra tempo . for White. Regarding this opening, cf. also Game 48. Game 1 52 8 G.Goldberg-M.Botvinnik 1 2 3 4 5 c4 lt)cJ g3 cxd5 1'.g2 li)f6 c5 d5 li)xd5 li)c7 I frequently and successfully employed this continuation of Rubin­ stein, until I came to the conclusion that it is nevertheless.insufficient to equalise. 6 lt)f3 7 . 0-0 b3 With this continuation the pawn at d2 prevents the manoeuvre ltJf.3-d2-c4, and White is left with a passive game. After 8 d3 1Le7 9 ltld2 .i.d7 10 lDc4 f6 the chances are roughly equal. 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 English Opening li)c6 105 8 9 10 1'.b2 l:tcl 11 ihel il.e7 0-0 f6 1 1 tbe4 or 1 1 lDa4 was now threatened, with a simultaneous attack on the c5 and e5 pawns. After U ltla4 Black can play 1 1 . . . b6, since the rook at a8 is defended ( 1 2 lDxe5 lDxe.5 . .� 3 1Lxa8 l£ixa8). 11 12 13 ll'la4 ll'lc2 .i.f5 ll'la6 In the game Kirillov-Botvinnik (7th USSR Championship, 1 93 1) 1 3 .i.a3 'i'a5 14 lbc2 l:lfd8 15 ll'le3 ii.e6 was played, and Black seized the initiative. The exchange on c6 (13 i.xc6) is in general dangerous, since, if the black pieces are actively placed, the weak­ ening of White's kingside may tell. Such a doubling of the c-pawns is worthwhile for White only when Black is behind in development (Game 205). In the present game and in similar positions the only correct plan is the timely counter f2-f4, as played by White in the game Botvinnik-Fine (Notting­ ham 1 936). 13 . . • 15 d3 ll'ld4 . 16 17 1!fd2 ll'lc3 l:tad8 ll'lb4 Although in the opening Black lost time (5 . . . lllc7), the position is begin­ ning to take on the same character as in the afore-mentioned Game 48. 'ifd7 Now Black is also insured against the doubling of his pawns, and his advantage increases. t4 lL:ie3 Ae6 14 . . . i.h3 was also good. White would have been unable to avoid the exchange of bishops: after 15 i.d5+ 'ifth8 1 6 l:lel ll'lcb4 the a2 pawn is lost. Black's pieces are deployed in accordance with a well-tried strategic pattern, and his pressure on the enemy position is growing with every move. Therefore here White evidently could and should have played 18 f4. The exchanging operation 18 . . . ll'lxa2 1 9 ll'lxa2 ll'lxb3 2 0 'it'dl lllx cl 2 1 lbxc l does not present any danger for White. By choosing passive tactics, he con­ demns himself to defeat. 18 19 .tat ll'lc4 f5 19 f4 was no longer feasible, as there would have followed 1 9 . . . e4. Since then 20 dxe4 is not possible because of 20 . . . lllf.3 +, the white d3 pawn would have become weak. 106 19 20 llfdt .i.f6 20 f4 e4 2 1 dxe4 was again ruled out for White because of 2 1 . . . .txc4 22 bxc4 00+. 20 21 ... lDb2 b5 Not waxtmg for the situation to deteriorate further, but the opening of the position leads to a quick loss. White is conducting the game passively, but also in other encounters where I employed this variation, my opponents did not find an active plan. 25 26 27 28 exd4 d5 a3 cxd4 J.g5 .tf7 28 :b 1 is met by 28 . . :res, when the queen is unable to defend the knight at c3 . . Now the time has come for the long­ awaited blow in the centre. 21 22 • • e3 . After 22 dxe4 00+ 23 .txf3 'ifxd2 24 :xd2 l:txd2 it is not the loss of the exchange for a pawn that is so terrible for White, so much as the extremely bad placing of his pieces. 22 23 24 .txf3 9et 24 25 d4 28 29 30 e4 tf)fJ+ exf3 Other.wise there could have followed 24 . . . f4, 25 . . . .txb3 and 26 . . . 'i'h3 . But now White is ready to meet this with 27 'i'fl. 11'fl l:txcl l:tfe8 J.xcl lDxd5 So, not a bad 'harvest' : already the exchange and a pawn. 31 32 33 tlJxc3 lt:\d3 .txb3 .txc3 lDf4 .tc4 White resigns It is instructive to follow how the same opening ideas were carried out after a lengthy interval of time. The present gamei took place 14 years after my meeting with Kirillov. l:tc8 107 This exchange is necessary in view of the threat of 15 i.c7, but it does not bring Black any relief Game 153 M.Botvinnik-LKan 14th USSR Championship Moscow 1945 Queen's Gambit 1 d4 2 c4 3 lt'icJ 4 i.g5 5 lt'ifJ 6 e3 ll'if6 e6 . d5 il.e7 ll'ibd7 h6 7 .i.f4 8 c5 0-0 15 16 17 exf4 bxc5 0-0 18 .i.f5! bxc5 f6 e5 This move cannot be approved, since the bishop will stand no worse at f4 than at g5 (7 i.h4 has also been played), whereas the weakening of Black's king­ side may tell. Now play transposes into the game Botvinnik-Yurev, played in 1928 (No.2 1 ), the only insignificant differ­ ence being that the black pawn is at h6 rather than h7. This was able to happen,. because the tempo lost on 6 . . . h6 was saved by Black playing . . . a7-a5 in one go (in Game 2 1 , 7 . . . a6 was played). 8 9 10 11 .i.dJ b4 aJ c6 b6 18 axb4 Itxal ll'ih5 lLlxf4 . • . exd4 Otherwise 19 i.xd7, winning the e5 pawn. a5 As was mentioned in the notes to the afore-mentioned game, this entire variation for White makes sense only when his queen's rook has not left a l , so that Black is not able to take control of the a-file. 11 12 axb4 13 1!h:al 14 · Wa7 If I was able to find this good move when I was not yet 17, naturally I repeated it when I had become twice as old. In this way, by the temporary sac­ rifice of his d4 pawn,. White finds . a way of defending his c5 pawn, and thanks to this the black pieces remain tied down. 19 20 ll'ia4 .txc8 lt'ib6 Only here do the 'twins' cease to resemble each other. Against Yurev I played 20 cxb6, which was evidently simpler and more convincing. 20 . • . ll'ixc8 After 20. . . lt'ixa4 2 1 i.e6+ White would have won a piece. 21 108 'ifb7 dJ 22 23 24 1!fxc6 11fa6 11fxd3 lLla7 1!fc7 31 32 33 34 llct 1ie1 1!i'e8+ li'lxd5 l:.b5 ..i.xc5 Wh7 1i"d6 35 36 'i!f'e4+ lldl ¢1h8 Although White's extra pawn is doubled, the decisive role, .in view of the defects in the enemy king's p<)sition, will now be played by the absence of the black pieces from the main part of the battlefield. In order to seize control of the d-file for an invasion. A pawn up and with the better position, White is, of course, assured of the win. 24 25 26 1!fc2 'i!t'b3 1!fc6 tLlb5 ctih8 27 28 29 l:.bl g3 1!fb4 lla8 ltaS 'i!f'a6 36 37 • • • l:.b2 lLleJ The simplest. White covers the f2 pawn and simultaneously activates his rook. 37 • • 38 39 li'lh4! 9'e6+ 40 41 Wrs+ ctig8 li'lg6 Black resigns • 1!ff8 The king has to move, so that at least the weak d5 pawn should not be pinned. But now the consequences of the weakening of Black's kingside pawns are seen: at h7 the king may always be the target for an unpleasant check, while at h8 he has to reckon with the attacking move OO-h4, which in the end in fact decides the outcome. All Black's efforts are aimed at winning the c5 pawn, even if at the cost of the d5_ pawn. In the endgame, when pawns remain only on one wing, the extra pawn may not tell. But as yet it is still the middlegame ! tba3 30 lLlb6 ..t?g8 ctib7 Or 39 . . .'l'f7 40 l:.d8+ .tf8 4 1 l:xf8+! ¢ixf8 42 'l'd6+ (42 . . . We7 43 lLlg6+). 109 He loses at ieast a piece. . Game 1 54 A.Denker-M.Botvinnik Radio Match USSR- USA, 1945 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 s d4 c4 ttlc3 tLlfJ ..tgs d5 e6 c6 ttlf6 After my games with Zhivtsov (No. 1 3 1), Lilienthal and Mikenas (Moscow 1 944 ), the American masters already knew that I played this varia­ tion, and, 'naturally', they imagined it to be favourable to White. Nevertheless they should have warned my opponent that it was hardly worth playing this variation against Botvinnik. . 5 dxc4 This leads to complicated counter­ play. 6 7 8 9 10 e4 e5 ..i.h4 ttlxg5 .txg5 b5 b6 g5 hxg5 ttlbd7 (including one training game) that this position had occurred in my games. It is curious, however, that here Denker does not choose the strongest continuation, which was employed in the two pre­ viously published games by Lilienthal and Mikenas (1 1 g3). He places his choice, accidentally of course, on Ragozin' s line from our training game, which was not then known to anyone (cf. the final chapter). 11 12 13 exf6 ..i.e2 0-0 ..lb7 1ib6 On the first occasion when I was able to employ this variation in a tournament game (No. 1 3 1 ), my opponent castled long, but also on the queenside his king came under a strong attack. 13 14 a4 0-0-0 Only here does the play diverge from the afore-mentioned training game (this shows how useful they can be!). Ragozin played 14 h4, which allowed Black to launch an immediate attack on the kingside; Denker aims to break up the pawns covering the black king. And so, this was the fifth time 1 10 opportunity of exploiting both the weakening of the g l -a7 diagonal, and the position of the knight at g3. Interesting complications arose here in the game Flesch-Negyesy ( 1 953): 14 ...lllc5 15 dxc5 Wc7 16 g3 l:txdl 17 :rxdl . 14 • • • b4! By driving the knight away from the d5 square, Black begins an attack in the centre and seizes the initiative. If now 1 5 a5 Wc7, winning a piece·. 15 16 llle4 Vbl c5 At c2 the queen would have been less well placed. Black would even have acquired a paradoxical possibility of active play (on the file where his king is situated!): 16 'i'c2 c3 17 bxc3 (17 dxc5 lllxc5 18 lllxc5 .txc5 and 19 . . . 'i'c7) 1 7 . . . 'i'c7 18 lllg3 cxd4 19 c4 lllc5 with a won position. Also interesting is the following rapid development of events: 16 llld2 'ilc7 17 f4 cxd4 18 lllxc4 d3 ! 19 Wxd3 .tc5+ 20 <it>h l lllxf6 21 'i'b3 l:.dg8 ! and Black wins (Kovacs-Fuchs, 1 967). 16 17 ... Vlc7 ltlgJ After 17 h4 the attack, as in the game with Ragozin, would have been continued by 17 . . . .th6. White wants to avoid weakening his king's position, but he does not succeed in this. 19 In order to divert White's bishop from fl. Wc6 18 .txc4 Thus White is forced to weaken his king's position. 19 dJ! ! 20 'ircl Only the threat of 20 . . . Wcs+ and 2 1 . . . 'it'xg5 has been parried, but now the white king is driven into the comer. Attempts to parry this threat too did not work: 20 .te3 .tc5 2 1 .txc5 (2 1 'ifc l d2 22 'i'xd2 llle5) 2 1 . . . 'ifxc5+ 2 2 �hl l:txh2+, or 20 ltJe4 ilc7 2 1 g3 .txe4 22 fxe4 'i'xc4 (22 . . . Vc5+ and 23 . . . Wxg5 is also possible) 23 l:.c l Ji.cs+. cxd4 17 • • • Now the a7-gl diagonal is opened, and this is of decisive importance. f3 White securely blocks the h l-a8 diagonal, and seemingly avoids any immediate danger. But Black has an 111 20 Ji.cs+ In order to answer 2 1 .te3 with 2 1 . . .d2. 21 'it>hl 22 11ff4 'i!fd6 Threatening 22 ...ltxh2+ 23 �xh2 l:.h8+ 24 ii.h6 d2 or simply 22 ... 'ifxg3. Other continuations are no better: 22 .tf4 :xh2+ 23 �xh2 .:hs+ 24 ttJhs Itxh5+ 25 �g3 e5 (25 . . .11id4) 26 .te3 (26 ii.gs e4+ 27 <Jtg4 d2 28 Wxd2 tiJxf6+ 29 i.Xf'6 Wxd2 3 0 <itixhs· 'i'xg2) 26 ... e4+ 27 f4 (27 @f2 d2 28 Wc2 exf3) 27 ... Wxf6 28 @fl 11ixf4+. 6 22 23 24 25 llxh2+ <iitixb2 llh8+ 11ih4 %bh4+ .ixh4 'Iff4 White resigns . • • W'a5 The usual continuation is 6 ... .i.f5, Emanuel Lasker used to prefer the modest but sound reply 6 ... e6, while I several times tried 6...tt:fu5, but this move can hardly be recommended, although it turned out successfully. The point is that no one replied 7 .ie5 ! whereas after 7 .td2 (7 .tg3 lili:g3 8 hxg3 g6 9 e3 JJ.g7 - this position was reached against Citron, 1958) 7 . . . g6 8 e3 (8 e4 is more active) 8 . . . .tg7 9 .te2 0-0 10 0-0 e6 1 1 J:k l JJ.d7 1 2 lba4 b6 1 3 JJ.a6 Wes 14 lLic3 (Birbrager­ Botvinnik, 1 966), or, after 6 ... e6 7 e3 had first been played, 7 . . . lLih5 8 lJ.g5 Wb6 9 a3 h6 10 .th4 g5 1 1 JJ.g3 tnxg3 1 2 hxg3 JJ.g7 (this was played as White by Letelier in 1964, and by Petrosian in a training game - in 1952) Black is alright. With the move in the game Black tries to seize the initiative, for which there are no objective grounds. And subjective ones (Denker's painful defeat with White in the previous game) also cannot justify such a decision. lt)e4 7 e3 , Game 1 55 M.Botvinnik-A.Denker Radio Match USSR-USA, 1945 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 lt)fJ c4 cxd5 d5 tnf6 c6 In this defence the exchange variation guarantees White a slight, but undisputed superiority, since in a symmetric, semi-open position the advantage of the first move is an appreciable one. 4 5 6 tnc3 .i.f4 cxd5 tnc6 1 12 8 9 11'b3 .tdJ 10 :ci 10 . . e6 ..tb4 After the exchange on c3, recommended by Euwe, White also retains a clear position advantage, and the same can be said about 9 ...l£id6. 16 'ii'xd5, but the most unpleasant thing for him is that White is by no means obliged to agree to the routine contin­ uation 14 .txe4 ..ib7, after which he would be obliged to pany the threat of 15 . ..tl:ixd4. In one of the games from the Euwe­ Keres match (1940) after 10 .txe4 dxe4 1 1 l£id2 at the cost of the e4 pawn ( l l . . . 0-0 1 2 0-0 1 2 'i'f5 1 3 tt:Jdxe4) Black gained counterplay. The move played sets him more difficult problems. · • t£ixc3 This exchange signifies that the attack on c3 has not achieved its aim. More complicated play results from 10 . . .f6 with the possible threats of . . . e6e5 and . . . g7-g5, but in this case too White's good development ensures him the better chances. 11 bxc3 .i.a3? After l l . ...te7 White would subsequently have built up the pressure by c3-c4 or e3-e4, but then at least the bishop at a3 would not have needed to be constantly defended. 12 llbl b6 14 .i.b5! 14 15 l£id2 16 17 18 i.. xc6 tbc4 ..td6 An unexpected counter. Now, in view of the possible manoeuvre OO­ d2-c4 winning the queen, Black cannot avoid loss of material. . .td7 a6 . • Black's idea of sacrificing his queen has its clever side, but if cannot save the game. However, it is easy to see that there is nothing else available to him. It was harcJ for Black, of course, to admit his previous mistakes and to choose the only possible way to resist, by retreating both his bishop to e7, and his queen to d8. But the move played weakens his queenside, and - most important - stalemates his queen. Hopes of exchanging the light-square bishops - by . . . i.a6 are not destined to be realised. In view of the abundance of tempting continuations (for example, 18 'i'xa3 'i'xf4 1 9 l:txb6 .td5 20 l£id6+) White might even have lost his head, but the move chosen is the simplest. After 13 ... .ta6 Black would have lost a pawn: 14 .txa6 'i'xa6 1 5 exd5 exd5 18 . .. .tdS 19 .i.xa3 b5 would have lost immediately fo iO lDd.6+, whereas 13 e4 dxe4 1 13 18 . . . · .txc6 1lrf5 eJ now Black is able to delay a little his capitulation. 19 20 21 l£lxe3 1f xb1 1!f'xb6 'ilfxbl+ .ixd6 21 22 ... 'ilfbJ 'it>d7 White has not only queen against rook and bishop, but also an extra pawn. White could still have made things much more difficult for himself: 22 0--0 llhb8 23 'ifas llbS 24 'ifa4 ..txh2+ 25 'it>hl llhS 26 'i'dl %lh4. It is better, of course, without losing anything, to surrender the initiative temporarily. 22 23 24 'i'c2 0-0 b3 c4 l£lg4 .i.xe5 29 dxe5 l:txe5 30 9d2+! Now if 30 . . . 'it>e8 or 30 . . . 'it>c8 - 3 1 'i'd6, while after 30. . . 'it>e7 or 30. . .'it>c7 3 1 lldl followed by 32 11ld6+. llab8 llb5 l:h5 Black resigns. Game 1 56 E.Lundin-M.Botvinnik llb8 g6 Groningen 1946 Queen's Indian Defence Freeing the rook from the defence of the h-pawn, but weakening the dark squares, which White promptly exploits. 21 tl:le5+! The only reply that allowed the battle to be prolonged slightly was 29 ... 'it>e8. Black was expecting 30 lld l + 'it>e8, but White had prepared a more effective continuation. Such an attack cannot ease Black's lot, but he wants to defend his h7 pawn with gain of tempo, in order immed­ iately to bring his second rook into play. 25 26 28 The exchange of the dark-square bishop and the opening of the d-file bring White closer to his goal, but after 28 . . . 'it>c7 29 tZ:1·xc6 'it>xc6 30 'i'a4+ things would have been equally dismal for Black. :rs 1 2 J 4 5 6 7 d4 c4 lt)fJ g3 .i.g2 0-0 tticJ l£lf6 e6 b6 ..tb7 ..te7 0-0 d5 It may be wondered why, when I considered 7 ... tl:le4 to be stronger for Black (No. 96), in this game, and also in the one with Chekhover (No.45) and even earlier against Zamykhovsky (7th USSR Championship, 1 93 1 ), I never­ theless played 7 . . . dS ? The point was that, when meeting opponents against whom I considered myself obliged to 1 14 aim for a win with Black, I avoided the simplification to which 7 . . .tt'ie4 leads. In Game 96 it was Alekhine who had White against me, and 7 . . .tt'ie4 was the perfectly natural continuation. 8 � In the afore-mentioned game Chekhover played 8 cxd5 exd5 9 ..tf4 and did not gain any advantage. In the fight for the initiative 8 ti)e5 can be considered obligatory. Black does not object to some slight simplification, in order to free his game somewhat 10 lbxd5 11 1!fb3 exd5 10 . . . ..txd5 is bad on account of 1 1 e4 and 12 �f4, when White develops strong pressure on the c-file. White aims to provoke . . . c7-c6, as after this, immediately or later, he will be able to make the useful advance e2e4. For the same reason Black defends his d5 pawn in another way. 1!fe6 11 After 1 1 . . . l:td8, as Smyslov played in one of his games, there could have followed 12 e4, when Black's position is difficult. 12 Wc8 s I lmew that 8. . . c6 (Game 92) cannot give Black a satisfactory game on account of 9 e4, but instead of the move played, 8 . . .tt'ia6 came into consideration, as was demonstrated in Las Palmas ( 1 977) by both Karpov and Tai. Against the World Champion, Browne made the poor move 9 ii.f4, and against the Ex­ World Champion he played slightly more strongly: 9 ii.e3 c5 10 l:.c 1 ltJe4 1 1 cxd5 exd5 12 tt'ixe4 dxe4 1 3 dxc5 Axc5 14 Axc5 tt'ixc5 1 5 b4 lbe6, but did not gain any advantage. Perhaps 9 'ifa4 is a more promising reply (Kochiev-Karpov, 1 977). 9 cxd5 ti)xd5 lbdJ .:.ds Here is another example of . . . c7-c6 being played prematurely: 1 2 . . . c6 13 e4 dxe4 14 'i'xe6 fxe6 1 5 lbr4 with a significant advantage to White (Larsen­ Olafsson, 1 956). ! 13 : Ji.el 1 3 .i.f4 was more energetic, since at e3 the white bishop will be very passively placed, and in addition it 1 15 away at a time when it cannot be transferred to either c5, or e5 . prevents the advance of the e-pawn. This finally allows Black to play . . . c7c6 and to calmly complete his development. 13 14 15 l:tfdl l:lacl c6 lhd7 The . result of the opening is that White has- mobilised all his forces, but he has not prevented Black from doing the same. 15 16 • • • l:lc2 lhf6 lhe4 The manoeuvre . . . lhb8-d7-f6-e4 has enabled the g2 bishop to be shut out of the game, and it would have been extremely dangerous for my opponent to exchange it, on account of the weakening of the light squares on the kingside. 17 18 19 l:ldcl lhf4 Wa4 l:lac8 1!fd7 If 19 b3 all the threats are parried by 19 . . . f5, when the structure of the position is amazingly similar to that in Game 45. 19 • . • 22 lhh5 22 23 24 25 26 f3 .i.f2 b3 h3 26 27 g4 28 .i.g3 22 lhb3 was more circumspect, since at h5 the knight proves to be out of play. White wants to support his knight by g3-g4. a5! Roughly the same also occurred in Game 45, but the idea of creating the pawn chain a5-b6-c6-d5 with the possibility of playing the bishop to a6 was one that I noticed in Ragozin' s games. 20 21 1ib3 1fd3 f5 lhd6 l:lf8 l:lf7 b5 g5! Again a familiar positional idea from the game with Chekhover. The move is very important. Exploiting the fact that .the white queen is taking away the d3 square from its knight, Black drives it 1 16 1ie6 1tg6 The decisive mistake. White allows the opponent to advance his f-pawn with gain of tempo, after which the exchange on g6 will be impossible on account of the loss of a piece. As · a result White remains with doubled d-pawns and his knight shut out of the game. Taking account of these factors, Bronstein rightly pointed out that 28 t:bg3 would have been stronger, also forcing 28 . . . f4, but in this case after 29 'ifxg6+ hxg6 30 lill1 the pawns are not doubled and the knight is in play. However, 30 . . . b4! followed by . . . t:bb5 and . . . .tf6 would have given Black a significant advantage. 28 29 30 .tf2 exd3 35 36 hxg5 �gl hxg5 .td7 . For the moment Black has defended his c6 pawn with his bishop from a more active square than b7, and, after relieving his rook of this duty, has simultaneously cleared the way for it to break through on the a-file. 37 l:lce2 � 38 39 l:lc2 ..tfl l'!a7 39 ... a4! f4 'ifxd3 This breakthrough forces White to move all his pieces (apart from his knight, which is condemned to inactivity) to the defence of the queenside, and then they will be tied down. 30 31 32 33 l'!el l'!e5 �h2 40 41 42 b4! 1Ic7 �b5 _White prepares to exchange the h­ pawns, in order to tie Black down to the defence of the g5 pawn. 33 34 h4 i.c8 h6 bxa4 l:tb2 Ziel l:txa4 �c3 l:th7 Black has no reason to hurry. The further course of the game shows that the rook will come in useful here. 43 . l:lal � But perhaps the rook will need to .be switched via h8 to a8. 44 1 17 i.el �b5 45 .i.e2 An incorrect idea: White considers that it is advantageous for him to exchange his doubled pawn at d4 for the enemy b4 pawn, but he does not take account of the fact that then the black knight will come decisively into play. He should have returned his dark-square bishop to f2. 45 46 .i.dl ltlxd4 and to gain an overwhelming material advantage. 48 � After another move by the king (for example, to fl) Black would simply have taken the bishop on a4. · .i.xg4 48 49 .i.dl 49 50 51 52 ltle5 .i.xg4 ltlxg4+ ltxh5 'iti>gl .i.f6! ltg2 White resigns After 49 .i.c6 'iti>e6 50 .ie8 ltle5 Black wins the knight at h5 (5 1 � .i.xh5 52 l::th2 .i.g6), and with three pawns for the exchange he easily con­ cludes matters. Game 157 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov Groningen 1946 Griinfeld Defence c5! 46 After the alternative 46 . . J:ta3 47 .i.xb4 White would have activated his pieces, but Black is not obliged to retreat! It may seem that with the move in the game he sacrifices the exchange, in order to retain his b4 pawn and have both material, and particularly, positional compensation. 47 .i.xa4 ltlxfJ+! Nothing of the sort ! Black sacrifices not the exchange, but temporarily a rook. At the same time White gets rid of his passive knight at h5, which, how­ ever, is defending his king quite well. As a result, the activity of Black's pieces allows him to mount on attack 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 ltlcJ ltlfJ 1!fb3 ltlf6 g6 d5 .i.g7 dxc4 6 7 1!fxc4 e4 0-0 .i.g4 Regarding 5 ... c6, see Game 55. In the game Black concedes the centre, but not, of course, 'for free' . As it turned out, Smyslov had in mind an elegant and logically-founded system of development, which in 1946 did not yet allow Black to achieve an equal game, but a year later, after necessary im­ provements, gained every right to exist. 1 18 This is the point of Black's plan. If White avoids the exchange on f3 by playing 8 tlle 5, then 8 . . . .te6 is possible, and 9 d5 .tc8 is hardly advisable, since Black will immediately begin under­ mining the pawn centre and the undefended knight at e5 will assist this. In the event of the exchange on f3, Black will no longer have the problem of developing his queen's bishop, and as soon as the knight at b8 comes into play, all his minor pieces will be developed. As for White's pawn centre, it proves to be by no means as powerful as might appear at first sight. 8 .i.e3 Black in the centre. .i.xfJ! 9 ... During the game I was somewhat afraid of 9 . . .tlla5 10 Wa4 c6, thinking that after 1 1 e5 .txn 12 exf6 Ji.xf6 1 3 gxf3 cxd5, despite the win of a piece, it was hard to say whose position was better. After all, White's pawn chain is broken up, and Black's two extra central pawns are impregnable! Therefore I thought that Smyslov was on the wrong track, in making an exchange that was not yet forced. Later it transpired that instead of 1 1 e5 White has the energetic reply 1 1 l:td 1 ! , emphasising the unfortunate position of the knight at a5. 10 gxfl! The subtle point of Black's idea was that if 10 dxc6 he does not retreat his bishop, but replies 10 . . . b5 ! , wining the central e4 pawn and achieving a good game. However, White safely avoids this imperceptible pitfall, and retains a positional advantage. �e5 10 . • . 11 8 �c6 Alas! At that time Smyslov had not yet found the clever and strong manoeuvre 8 . . .t2Jfd7 ! , after which the entire variation rightly bears his name. In the present game Black ends up in a difficult position. • • • 9 d5 White must be careful, since the opponent has already mobilised his forces. For example, 9 h3 .txf3 10 gxf3 e5 1 1 d5 �d4 ! leads to great activity by We2 c6 Twenty years later Simagin tried to improve this variation for Black, by playing l l . ..b5 against Portisch, but after 12 l:tdl a6 13 .tg2 t2Jc4 14 f4 t2Jxe3 1 5 fxe3 l1b8 16 es t2Jd7 17 h4 White had an undisputed advantage. 12 f4 �ed7 12 ...ll:\eg4 13 es �xe3 14 exf6 lllxfl l S fxg7 Black is left a piece down. But now it appears that pawn ex­ changes in the centre are inevitable, which in view of White's retarded development will give Black fair prospects. 1 19 13 .ig2! although unfavourable for Black, is probably his only saving hope. The whole point is that if 13 ...cxd5 there follows 14 e5 ! tbe8 1 5 .ixd5, and Black's b7 pawn is hopelessly weak. Since subsequently too he has no opportunity to exchange in the centre, Black cannot hope for equal chances. Now it becomes clear that his opening plan involving 8 . . . tbc6 was incorrect, and that White will be able to complete the mobilisation of his forces. 13 14 1s l:Cdl tbb6 1ic7 :rds 16 11 :ct D.fdt 1!t'd7 Wg4 After working out the following exchanging variation, I came to the conclusion that it would lead to a won ending with an extra pawn, and without checking this continuation any further (after each of Black's replies) unpardonable carelessness! I quickly made the planned moves. - 0--0 Note that all the time . . . cxd5 was bad because of e4-e5. Now White carries out a useful regrouping of his heavy pieces, so that they operate on both the open (in the future), and the half-open files. The correct decision, . since otherwise Black will have no active possibilities and will be obliged to contemplate how White will improve his position. The move played leads to a number of exchanges and to an ending which, 18 19 20 1!t'xg4 .ixb6 dxc6 20 21 e5 l£lxg4 axb6 This could have led to White losing a considerable part of his advantage. The immediate 20 e5 was correct, and if 20 . . . c5 (20....ih6 2 1 h3), then 2 1 a4, 22 b3 and 23 �b5, when White is effectively a pawn up with the better position. • . • bxc6 Before making my 1 8th move I care­ fully analysed this situation. To me it seemed favourable to White, since the bishop at g7 is inactive, it will take two moves for Black to bring his knight at g4 into play ( . . . tbg4-h6-f5), and the c6 120 pawn cannot be defended: 2 1.. .l:tac8 22 i.h3 h5 23 f3 . But here, as I awaited my opponent's reply, I noticed to my vexation that in this latter variation Black continues 23 . . . lbe3 ! maintaining material equal­ ity, while in the event of 2 1 .. .l:.ac8 22 l:t.xd8+ l:.xd8 23 i.xc6 the pawn is won, but Black gains the d-file for counter­ play. It is probable that after 2 1. . .l:acS I would nevertheless have had to go into a slightly better ending: 22 i.h3 il..h3 h5 23 f3 lDe3 24 i.xc8 lDxdl 25 l:.xdl l:.xc8 26 l:.d7. However, I was not vexed for long. Smyslov was evidently under the impression of my rapid and confident play during all the preceding exchanges, and, without checking the variations deeply, he accepted the loss of his c6 pawn. , 21 22 23 24 i.xc6 llxdl li:ld5! li:lb6 llxdl+ , 11�8 White does everything possible to de­ fend his bishop at c6, since in so doing he keeps the black rook 'out of,p_lay. •' 24 25 llcl 26 llc4! 26 27 28 li:lxb6 l?la4 29 30 31 i.e4 � i.b7! .i.f8 li:lfS In an ending with opposite-colour bishops where both sides have pawn weaknesses, one should not strive for a big material advantage. Thus, for example, after 26 lDxb6 l:tb8 the retreat 27 lDc4 would have been impossible in view of 27 . . . li:ld4 ! with a double attack on bishop and rook (the fork at e2), while after 27 lDa4 l:.b4 the activity of the black pieces would have increased. Now, however, the b6 pawn will all the same 'not run away'; since 26 ... l:.bS 27 a4 ! is pretty hopeless for Black. e6 llb8 lid8 Even so, Smyslov finds a loophole by which to gain counterplay, which however is not too dangerous for White. lllh4 il.h6! li:lf5 Each side has his trumps. Black wants to cut off the enemy rook from the f4 pawri, in order to win it. For his 121 part. White has prepared the exchange of rooks, which will facilitate the conversion of his two connected passed pawns, but for the moment he takes measures to defend his weak pawns on the kingside. knight to d3 to defend the e5 and f2 pawns; Black would have had no defence against the advance of the a2 pawn. Now, however, slight compli­ cations arise. Alas, such inaccuracies were typical of my play; I found good ideas, but their tactical implementation was not always successful. 38 39 40 32 33 34 35 <i!iie2 <t>e3 Wf3 <i!iie4 • • • l1c8! lDe2 The absence of Black's rook - his only dangerous piece - should have quickly told. 36 37 .ilxc8 38 b4 • • • ltlhJ! ltlxf2+ -*.f4 ltld4+ ltlf5+ ltld4+ When I had a material advantage I in­ variably followed Capablanca 's advice, and did not hurry to try and convert it. First it was necessary to centralise the king. Black was forced to agree to this, since only now "is he finally able to approach the white pawns. 35 36 b5 <i!iid4 llxc8 ltlxf4 If 37 ... .i.x:f4, then 38 'it>D . 38 tllc5 was simpler, in order always to have . the possibility of playing the The game was adjourned in this position, and White had to seal his move. The straightforward advance of the b-pawn makes the win more difficult in view of 4 1 b6 tllg4 42 b7 .i.xe5+ and 43 . . . -*.xh2. However, White can disrupt the coordination of the opponent's pieces. 41 h3! f6 If 4 1 . . .lllxh3, then 42 b6, followed if necessary by 43 tllc 5, after which one of White's two passed pawns reaches the eighth rank in time. Smyslov tries to bring his king closer to the queenside, at the same time opening the diagonal for his bishop. 122 . 42 43 44 45 ..txe6+ exf6+ ttlc5 ¢id5 ¢ig7 ¢iXf6 ¢ie7 9 The centralisation of the king emphasises best of all Black's insuper­ able difficulties. 45 46 47 48 49 50 g5 ttldl a4 ttlcJ+ as ttlxb5 ¢ic6 ..tb8 <li>xb5 <li>b6 Black resigns 9 10 10 11 ifc2 1lfe8 .. l:tael • 'ifh5 In the afore-mentioned previous games White played more purposefully: .l:.ad 1. The fact that here he deviates from the standard plan indicates that he is insufficiently familiar with the ideas of this complicated variation. H.Steiner-M.Botvinnik Groningen 1946 Dutch Defence d4 c4 g3 .i.g2 ..td2 . . . Now a position from my games with Rabinovich and Yudovich (Nos. 15 and 6 1) is reached. White's last move allows him not to worry about . . . dxc4, since then he will advantageously advance e2e4 or immediately regain the pawn by ttle5 . Game 1 58 ·l 2 3 4 5 Af4 The bishop is not badly placed at f4, but later I came to the conclusion that 9 Ag5 is stronger, as Chekhover played against Ryumin back in 1 936. e6 f5 ttlf6 ..tb4+ il..e7 11 • • • ttlbd7 Black appears to have lost a tempo, but this is insignificant. The point is that now it is hard for White to carry out Geller's idea of playing his queen's knight via d2 to f3, and his king's knight via f3 and e5 to d3. He will therefore he forced to waste time on a second move of his dark-square bishop. 6 tt)f3 Possibly here the variation involving the-development of the king's knight at h3 should have been considered. 6 7 8 ttlcJ 0-0 d5 c6 0-0 Black must aim for . . . g7-g5, but without weakening his position by . . . h7-h6, _which would take away the h6 square from his rook. Therefore in the game with Yudovich I had to play 123 . . . rJiih8, . . . I4g8 and only then . . . g7-g5. Here, however, · with his next move my opponent moves his knight from f3 and allows Black to begin advancing his kingside pawns without any preparation. 12 13 lhd2 1'..c7 g5 lhe8 14 15 1'..e5 dxe5 lhxe5 position against Levenfish. It only remains to add that in that game White did not exchange on f4, but played e2e4, allowing . . . f4-f3. f4! Black does not allow White to defend his central pawn by f2 f4. If 16 e4 there would have followed 16 . . . f3 with an obvious advantage to Black. It is hard to assert that White's game is lost, but after his next incautious move, opening the g-file and further weakening the e5 pawn, Black has every chance of wiMing. It should be noted that this entire variation for Black ( . . . g7-g5, and the exchange of minor pieces on · e5 followed by . . . f5-f4) is not new. As far as I remember, in the Leningrad Master Tournament (1930) Model successfully employed it with Black . in a similar - · M gxf4 <ii>h8 18 rJiib t lhg7 19 1!fcl gxf4 A useful move. Both now and later White is unable to advance his e-pawn. For example: 1 8 e3 l:g8 19 @hl (otherwise 19 . . . 'iih3) 19 . . . l:xg2 (20 <ii>xg2 'i!fg4+). White's bishop must be exchanged as soon as possible. 15 16 17 19 e4 fxe3 was again bad for White, for example: 20 fxe3 lhr5 2 1 'i'f2 l:g8 22 tLle2 Vh6. Having no active plan, my opponent is obliged merely to observe the development of events, but just in case he attacks the f4 pawn and prepares a possible pawn advance on the queen­ side. 19 . • . .i.d7 It only remains for Black to transfer his rooks to the open file, and the game will be decided. 20 a3 White apparently has no suspicion of the dangers awaiting him. 124 20 21 22 23 b4 l:lgl lLldl l:lti l:lg8 lf)f5 prepared the decisive blow. However, it leads by force to defeat. 24 25 In the event of 23 'ifxf4 lLlg3+ White could yet have prolonged the resistance, obtaining almost sufficient material compensation for the . queen, but 23 . . . l:tg4 24 'ifd2 :fg7 would have led to roughly the same situation as in the game. 23 • . . 1!fxf4 1!rd2 .ll g4 lLlh4 Exchanging the chief defender of White's position - the knight at fl. He cannot avoid this. After 26 tLlxh4 l:txh4, mate is inevitable, and in addition his bishop is now attacked. But with 23 lLld l a defence had seemingly been prepared . . . 26 27 l:tfg7! lLle3 exf3 lLlxf3 Or 27 .txf3 'ifxh2+! 28 <li>xh2 lth4 mate. l:l.h4 27 .tg5 28 lt)fl White resigns, since when the queen . • . moves there follows 29 . . . .tf4, and there is no defence against the mate. In this game a decisive role was played by the choice of opening. I had not the slightest doubt that my opponent would be unfamiliar with the subtleties of this variation, which before Model's researches was regarded sceptically. · Since the moment when the g-file was opened only seven moves have passed, and Black has already mobilised all his forces for the attack (apart from his queen's bishop, which he can man­ age without). There · is practically nothing that White can move - even 24 Afl is not possible in view of 24 . . . "i'xf3+. 'In his sorrow' White decides to · take the f4 pawn, which is psychologically under­ standable: with luck he niay be able to repel the attack, and in addition, all the time this pawn has been cramping his game, and under its cover Black has Game 1 59 M.Botvinnik-M.Vidmar Groningen 1946 Catalan Opening 1 2 3 4 5 d4 lt)f3 c4 g3 Va4+ d5 lLlf6 e6 dxc4 1!rd7 The most common reply is 5 . . . tLlbd7. In the· analogous situation after I d4 d5 2 c4 dic4 3 lDf3 lM6 4 . "ii' . a4+ Petrosian 125 '· . ' . employed the interesting move 4 . . . tt:ic6 (Botvinnik-Petrosian,. Match 1 963), which in the given position would evidently be unfavourable. Vidmar, however, preferred playing for simplification - he was then in his 62nd year. White in reply plays 'a la Smyslov', agreeing to the exchange only on condition that he gains some positional advantage. 6 7 8 1!fxc4 �bd2 lhxc4 9 10 ..td2 �fxd2 10 11 12 e3 @e2 �c6 lhb4 14 15 16 17 18 a3 e4 lha5 @e3 lhd7 lDd5 lh5b6 .i.b5+ 0-0-0 19 20 Jlhcl b3 lhb8 ..i.d7 21 22 23 ..tfl lDxc6 a4 lhc6 ..i.xc6 ..i.e8 ..td7 ..i.c6 The correct decision. The black king is needed for the defence of the queenside pawns. ..txd2+ The diagonal for the king's bishop must be opened as soon as possible. ..i.g2 f3 Black has managed temporarily to shut the enemy bishop out of the game, but at what a price! White creates a strong pawn centre, and Black's oppor­ tunities for counterplay are reduced to the minimum. 1 4 e4 would have been wrong, if only because of 14 . . . tt:ic2. 1!fc6 1ixc4 ..tb4+ Sticking to the same drawing tactics, but this new exchange also worsens Black's position. 8. . . c5 was better, for the moment retaining the · dark-square bishop. 12 13 14 Only in this way can Black gain an opportunity to offer an exchange of knights. 20 . . . tt:ic6 was bad because of 2 1 a4 tl:ixa5 2 2 axb5, when the knight at a5 has no retreat. Now the position of the 'upstart' knight is rendered pointless. 126 White was threatening to play 24 as and 25 a6, e:i..'J>loiting the fact that the black b-pawn is tied to the defence of the bishop, which for this reason retreats. 24 a5 Cf1a8 25 26 a6 b4 b6 <lt>b8 Vidmar defends with exceptional accuracy. After 24...tbd7 25 a6 b6 26 nc3 <it1b8 27 l:r.ac l l::k 8 28 tbc4 (with the threat of 29 ltld6) 28 . . . l:tdS 29 ltla3 l:tc8 30 tbbS Black would have been unable to defend his c7 pawn. 31 32 33 It was dangerous to play 26 . . . c6 irrunediately on account of 27 ..ibS <$;;c7 28 l:t.c3 (the simplest) and 29 l:tacl. 27 l:tcJ White hurries to connect his rooks and misses an opportunity to play 27 b5 without any hindrance, consolidating his positional advantage. 27 28 ... 29 CiJ.bl c6 f6 Jlacl Black eliminates the threat of tbd2c4-e5 and for the moment avoids 28 . . .tbc7, after which there would have followed 29 b5 ltlxb5 30 ..i.xb5 cxb5 3 1 Jlc7 with the unavoidable intrusion of the rooks onto the seventh rank. The manoeuvre ltid2-bl -a3 prepares b4-b5. 29 30 • . . .i.d7 tbaJ Now the threat of b4-b5 is irr�istible, since 30 . ..b5 leads to an irreparable weakening of Black's position, while if 30 ...�c8, then 31 tbc4 and ltld6 is dangerous. 30 Cfic7 b5! .i.xb5 Jlc7 Cf1xb5 cxb5 The critical moment of the game. If 3 3 ...b4, then 34 l:.b7+ <lt>a8 35 l:t.cc7 ..ic8 3 6 l:.xa7+ <$;;b 8 37 ltib5, and there is no satisfactory defence against 38 l:tcb7+ ..ltxb7 39 l:t.xb7+ and mate next move. In the event of 33 ... <$;;a8 34 �b7 ..ltc8, both 35 l:.xc8+ l:lxc8 36 ltlxb5 and 35 l:lxg7 .i.xa6 36 l:lcc7 are good for White. But it would appear that after 3 3 ... ..icS 34 GDxb5 Jld7! (weaker is 34 ... ..ltxa6 35 tbxa7 ..ltb7 36 ltlb5) 35 llxd7 .i.xd7 36 ltlxa7 q;xa7 37 l:lc7+ <$;;xa6 38 l::.xd7 l:tc8 Black would have gained quite good practical drawing chances. 33 • • • Jlc8 This decision allows White to consolidate his advantage with an exchange sacrifice. 34 ltb7+ The black king is driven into the comer. • • • 1 27 34 . . . . <lt>a8 46 35 36 l:lxd7! · ltlxb5 Axel l:lbc8 Both black rooks must be on the c­ file, to parry the threat of 37 l::txa7+ 'i!tbS 3S l:tb7+ ®as (38 . . . <ifiics 39 tba7+ and 40 l::tb8+) 39 tllc7+. 37 46 b6 White already has two pawns for the exchange, and the remaining black pawns cannot be defended. 38 39 40 41 42 llb7+ :a7+ llb7+ g4 ®b8 ®as 'i!tbS @as E:-..-ploiting the fact that at the given moment the black rooks cannot leave the c-file, White aims to increase his advantage by h2-h4-h5. Black must drive the knight from its dominating position. 42 43 44 45 d5 lla7+ lib7+ e5 l:llc5 'i!tb8 @as • . :bs 47 48 l:txb8+ 'it>xb8 <iiib7 a7+ If 4S . . . @as, then 49 d6 lies 50 'it>d3 White has no reason to hurry. • . • • The first and last moment to exchange the rooks. The retuni· of the white rook to b7 was threatened. l:lxg7 37. 38 l:lxa7+ llxb6 'i!tb7 5 1 0.c7 'iftxa7 52 'iftc4 is im­ mediately decisive, but now after 49 d6 there follows 49 . . . l:tc8 50 �d3 l:.cl 5 1 tllc3 l:tal with a draw. However, White has another way to win. 49 50 51 ltld6+ lLle8 ltlxf6 'it>xa7 'it>b6 The passive placing of Black's pieces (with his opponent having a material advantage) makes his position hopeless. 51 52 53 54 @fl h4 ltlb5 l:lcJ+ %lc7 l:tf7 54 g5 would have been a mistake on account of 54 . . . hxg5 5 5 hxg5 l:lg7. 54 55 56 128 g5 hxg5 'it>c7 hxg5 l:lb7 57 ti)f6 l:tb2+ 6 Of course, not 57 ... l:tg7 58 tDe8+. :thl 58 'iti?g3 l::tb8 59 °iti?g2 60 g6 Black resigns (60 . . . :th6 61 g7). On that same August day, ten years before my meeting with Vidmar, my game with Capablanca at Nottingham (No.8 1 ) ended in a draw. After an analysis in which the former World Champion tried to demonstrate that he had a win, I said: 'But today you couldn't have won against me, because today is my 25th birthd3y.' And here after the adjournment session and analysis of my game with Professor Vidmar, to console him I added: 'Today is my 3 5th birthday' . And my opponent's face again cheered up. 7 8 J.eJ 0-0 9 9'd2 9 10 11 J.xg4 f3 ..tg7 ti)c6 0-0 · 9 tbb3 is somewhat more promising. The move played leads to an equal game (this was what Grigoriev played against me in the tournament of Leningrad masters, 1933). Game 160 O.Bernstein-M.Botvinnik Groningen 1946 Why drive the bishop from a position in which. strictly speaking, there is nothing for it to do? Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 e4 ti)fJ d4 ti)xd4 ti)cJ ..te2 lhg4 ..txg4 cs d6 cxd4 ti)f6 g6 11 At the time when this game was played, the Rauzer variation, involving 6 .ie3 and 7 f3, was already known, but 11 my opponent, an elderly grandmaster (he was born in 1882), who had played long ago against Chigorin, preferred a quieter continuation. • • • ..te6 Here the bishop is more actively placed than at d7, and it is unfavourable for White to exchange it; after 12 tbxe6 fxe6 Black's position in the centre is strengthened. 12 ti)xc6 Now Black's chances will be definitely better, since the b7 pawn will take up an excellent position at c6, and White will not succeed in exchanging the dark-square bishops. But both now 129 and later my simplification. 12 13 opponent ... i.d4 aims for 18 ..tf2 18 ... bxc6 13 i.h6 was not possible on account of 13 . . .txh6 14 'i'xh6 "l!fb6+ 1 5 'ifi>h l 1i'xb2. . a5! It is important to provoke a2-a4, after which it only remains to play . . . c5-c4 in order to separate White's queenside pawns. 13 ... f6! 14 15 bJ 1£ibl 1i'a5 An important move, by which Black retains the two bishops for the endgame. The experienced grandmaster realises that the opening battle has concluded not in his favour, and he aims for sal­ vation in the endgame. Here, however, he encounters considerable difficulties. 15 16 17 1£ixd2 1:1.adl 17 .;. 19 20 a4 l:tfel 20 21 22 .i.eJ bxc4 l:tfc8 20 c4 l:tcb8 followed by 2 1 . . . .i.xd2 and 22 . . Jbb3 would have led to White losing a pawn. c4! i.g7 .i.xc4 The first aim has been achieved: the white pawns at a4 and c2 have become isolated. 1ixd2 .i.b6 23 24 25 1£ib3 l:te2 l:td4 ..tf7 l:tc4 l:tc3 White, of course, will succeed in exchanging one pair of rooks, but I rarely missed an opportunity, by In anticipation of the coming skirmish on the queenside, perhaps 17 . repeating the position, to speed up the :Cd 1 and then 'ifi>fl -e2 would have been reaching of the time control. l:lc4 26 :dd2 slightly sounder. 27 c5 1 30 l:l.d4 iU � � �> i ·�; •·���L ,;•:,wa; · a • -ii� •'Wffi.{,,,,,,,�J; ,�. ,"'";�:.�if ""•·"0®• ,� . �-��.--, ,%. ••• • ..t • m = •e . %. - • "" f5 27 The bishop, which Black carefully preserved from exchange, comes into play at the decisive moment. 28 29 30 lbc4 :et .i.d2 i.xc4 fxe4 30 31 32 .. lhe7 ti)xaS exfJ fxg2 33 34 c4 i.f3 A mistake, which makes it easier for Black to win. After 30 fxe4 i.c3 3 1 .td2 i.xb3 32 .txc3 .i.xc2 he would still have had to overcome serious technical difficulties in order to convert his extra pawn. • Evidently 32 @xg2 should have been preferred, although even then after 32 . . . .td5+ and 3 3 . . . l:tc8 Black has an overwhelming position. 32 i.dS @f:z l:tf8 The quickest way to win. 34 . . Jlxa5, hoping for 35 .i.xa5 .td4+, did not work due to 35 llxg7+ @xg7 36 .i.xa5, while 34 . . . il.d4+ 35 .te3 i.xe3+ 36 nxe3 would have been prolonged the battle. 131 35 36 37 38 i.e3 lla7 @g3 l:txa5 .tcJ i.c6+ .i.xa5 :f3+ This is why Black should not have been allowed to retain his pawn at g2. 39 @xg2 :xeJ+ 40 . @gl :cJ lbc4 41 l:la7 1:1.cl+ 42 l:l.c7 llc2+ 43 @£2 White resigns This was my only meeting at the chess board with Ossip Bernstein. When I was playing him, I could not help re­ membering that, back in the year when I was born, Capablanca had played with him a brilliant game (San Sebastian 1 9 1 1), which entered the golden treasury of chess. Game 161 M.Botvinnik-M.Euwe Groningen 1946 · Qlleen's Gambit Accepted In his later years Max Euwe ( 190 1 1 98 1 ) was well known as the President of FIDE, but we became acquainted long before this. A highly ambitious and energetic player, he was a pragmatist at the chess board (and, perhaps, also in life). Euwe made a brilliant study of every­ thing that others had done in chess, but anything new that he himself introduced was of strictly practical significance. He would change the character of the battle on the chess board with exceptional mastery, always aiming to seize the initiative, thanks to which he gained significant competitive successes and for two years held the chess crown. Initially Euwe and I were rivals, but then, after he had given up playing, he offered me his hand, which was happily accepted. I invariably felt a liking for him and regarded him as my friend, although I was very worried by the fact that as FIDE President he was not always fair, and took decisions which were not in the interests of chess. Euwe's ability to change the situation on the board was a stumbling block for me. Before this game we had met five times. Twice I had lost, and three games had ended in draws. And now came our sixth encounter, at a tournament taking place soon after the death of Alekhine, when the chess world had been left without a champion. At the FIDE Congress in Winterthur (Switzerland, 1946), a final decision as to how to determine the new champion had not yet been taken. Dutch chess players, and Euwe himself, realised: if the former World Champion were to win this· game and emerge as victor of the first major tournament after the war, public opinion would approve the sug­ gestion of proclaiming Euwe World Champion without any contest. This was the situation in which we played. Some two thousand spectators, crowding into the Harmonie Hall, followed the encounter from the first to the last move. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 d4 tl)f3 c4 eJ i.xc4 0-0 a4 d5 lDf6 dxc4 e6 c5 a6 7 8 ... 1le2 lDc6 JJ..e7 This continuation, introduced by Rubinstein in his time, restricts Black's activity. Subsequently the move went out of fashion, but then experienced a revival in the Botvinnik-Petrosian match ( 1963). Black does not exchange in the centre, since after 8 .. cxd4 9 :d1 JJ..e7 1 0 exd4 White gains the opportunity of comfortably developing his queen's bishop. l 132 . 9 :dl I thought that 9 dxc5 lL'ie4 would give Black a good game. Some ten years later, however, I changed my opinion after a scrupulous analysis. Here are the variations I found: 10 :td l Wc7 1 1 lbct4 tL'ixc5 12 tL'ixc6 bxc6 (12 ... ifxc6 1 3 il.b5 axb5 ·14 axb5 l:.xal 1 5 bxc6 l:.xbl 16 b4 l:.xb4 17 .ta3) 13 b4 tL'id7 ( 1 3 . . .ltie4 14 i.b2 0-0 1 5 i.d3 lb:f6 16 lL'id2 !tb8 17 ltic4 with a positional advantage) 14 i.b2 0-0 1 5 tL'id2 i.xb4 16 'i'g4 ltie5 17 ifg3 . After this analysis I came to a different opinion: White would have the initiative! And so 17 years later I played 9 dxc5 in the 8th game of my match with Petrosian. However, Igor Botvinnik found that after 17 i.a3 Black continues 17 . . . l:tb6 ! and retains a material advantage. 9· 10 l£lc3 • • • ilc7 For 10 h3, see Game 1 16. After 10 dxc5 i.xc5 l l i£lc3 0-0 12 h3 l£le5 the chances would have been equal. 0--0 10 • 11 • . b3 White could no longer have achieved anything with 1 1 dxc5 i.xc5 12 e4 tt:lg4. 11 12 • • • Ab2 i.d7 !tac8 Euwe waits, but meanwhile after 12 . . . cxd4 1 3 exd4 tt:la5 he would have gaiged counterplay on the queenside. 1 2 . . . l:.fd8 also came into consideration. Now, however, the c-file remains closed, and White advantageously opens the centre. I alsq carried out this plan in a game from the 1 941 Match- 133 Tournament with Keres (cf. the afore­ mentioned Game 1 16), but to be fair it should be pointed out that this idea was employed much earlier by Alekhine. If 13 14 15 d5 t£lxd5 i.xd5 16 Wc4 exd5 i£lxd5 i.g4 1 5 . . . tt:lb4 White would advantageously have replied 16 i.e5. 16 h3 i.h5 17 g4 i.g6 18 h4 is more active, but at the same time more risky. 16 17 • . . i.xc6 i.h5 Although now too the pawn offensive 17 g4 .ltg6 18 h4 involves some risk, this was the only way to develop the initiative. In this important game I was aiming for a peaceful continuation, but I did not find peace and merely squandered my advantage. 17 18 ... i£le5 'ii'xc6 1!fe8 A move typical of Euwe' s resourceful style. Now against 19 g4 he had prepared 19 . . . i.f6, and if 20 l:!.d5 the simplest is 20 . . . b5. 19 · l:ld5 !td8 Black too commits an inaccuracy. The same prescription - 1 9...b5 was also applicable in this position. Where should the queen go? If to a neutral square, c2 or f4, then 20 . . . l:.d8, while the construction of a battery (20 'i'c3) is neutralised by 20 ... f6 21 CLld7 'iff7 22 e4 nf"d8. 20 25 �xfl l£id7 An anti-positional · idea. White concedes the d-file for the sake of an illusory attack, and ends up in a critical position. For many moves, with greater of lesser justification, l had been avoiding continuations involving g2-g4, but now, at any event, I should not have neglected this possibility. After 20 g4 i.g6 (20. . .bS 21 l:.xd8) 2 1 :adl l:.xdS 22 'i'xd5 'ifc8 23 ti:)d7 White has the initiative, as 23 . . . l:.d8 is bad on account of 24 i.xg7 Ji.c2 (24 . . . �xg7 25 ii'e5+) 25 .tc3 i.xdl 26 'i'e5 f6 27 We6+. 20 21 l:bd7 1Fd8 l:l.xh5 A crafty move. In view of the threatened check at d l , White does not have time to play 22 ii..xg7 @xg7 23 'i'g4+ <it>h8 24 'i'f5. 22 :n g6 23 :hJ l:.dl 25 • • • b5 The former World Champion plays with his customary energy. The b-pawn is immune, since the white queen must defend the g4 pawn. 26 27 axb5 'iff4 axb5 f6 28 29 e4 'ifdl+ Now Black does not have to fear the queen going to h6 (since he will always have . . . l:.f7), and in the meantime he wants to win the b3 pawn. �g2 Now the 'attack' on the black king comes to an end, and the rook is driven back to a position that is unfavourable from the point of view of the endgame. Black, of course, aims to take play into an ending, since on the opposite side of the board from the kings he has . an extra pawn. 24 g4 A useful, although belated thrust. 24 l:txfl+ • . 29 • 134 . • . .td6 Euwe finds a tactical possibility of talcing play into a rook ending. 30 31 32 33 Wf3 D.xf3 .i.xe5 llc3 ifxf3+ .i.e5 . , fxe5 A passive move. Significantly stronger was 33 l:td3 l:tc8 34 :d.5 c4 35 bxc4 bxc4 36 'i¥tfl � (36 ... c3 37 :dl ) 3 7 'iit>e2 'iit>e6 3 8 !ta5, when White could have hoped for a draw. The exchange of rooks has to be avoided (33 l:txf8+? 'iit>xf8 34 <it>f3 g5, and the black king marches over to the queenside). 33 34 35 36 @e3 f4 36 37 38 39 @xf4 bxc4 h4 w %Cc8 � 'iit>e6 Why in time trouble make such a committing move? 39 • . • exf4+ c4 . bxc4 h6 When, immediately after the game, Flohr advised playing 39 . . .l:k5, my opponent showed that in this case too White retains saving chances: 40 e5 'iit>d5 4 1 :e3 c3 (4 1 . ..:c6 42 h5) 42 e6 c2 43 e7 l:tc8 44 l:tel @d6 45 @g5 'iit>d7 46 l:tcl @xe7 47 'i¥i>h6. Another suggestion (39 . . . l:tc6) was later made by Levenfish. Then 40 h5 l:tc5 4 1 e5 l:c6, but here not 42 'iit>e4? g5 43 ltiid4 :cs 44 'iil>e4 l:tc7 45 'i¥i>d4 l:td7+ 46 'i¥i>e4 l:tf7 when Black wins, but 42 hxg6 hxg6 43 'iit>e4 g5 44 1:.h3 c3 45 l:h6+ 'iit>d7 46 :h7+ 'i¥i>e8 47 :hl with a draw. 40 g5 h5 In this position I sealed my move. Of course, my opponent, like myself, knew tl1at Lasker had won a similar ending against Rubinstein (St Petersburg 1914). The only difference was that there the h­ pawns were absent. But during the break for dinner I was able to establish that the presence of these pawns changes the evaluation of the position. I did not find this immediately - I was hindered by the awareness that the great Rubinstein had been unable to save the ending. I was looking desperately at the board, when into the room came the leader of our delegation, Veresov. He knew that things were bad for me, but he hopefully asked: 'Mikhail Moise­ evich, perhaps you will nevertheless find a way to save the game?' I then looked at the position without a pre­ conceived opinion, and . - oh joy! - I understood the secret of this endgame. When I arrived for the resumption of the game, Euwe sympathetically slap­ ped me on the shoulder. He was in no dout>t that, if the greai Rubinstein had been unable to save such an ending, the 135 outcome was clear. Also obviously in agreement were the spectators, who awaited with impatience .the triumph of their favourite. 41 @e3 @e5 42 llc2! Forcing the enemy pawn to advance. 42 43 @d3 the breakthrough by the black rook on the h-file, and they lead to the pawn ending being drawn. 43 44 • • l:td8+ Of course, 44 @xc3 was dangerous, as the white king would have been cut off from the kingside. c3 Here my opponent looked at me sus­ piciously. Evidently he did not like the fact that I was so calm. In the game with Rubinstein, Lasker won by the manoeuvre . . Jk7, @e3 llh7 followed by . . J �h3+ and . . J lg3. After . . . 1:lc7 his opponent could not take the c3 pawn, as after the exchange of rooks the pawn ending would have been lost (I should merely add that in the afore-mentioned game the colours were reversed). But here the transition into the pawn ending would have led to a draw: 43 . . . llc7 44 llxc3 l:txc3+ 45 @xc3 @xe4 46 'it>c4 M4 47 �d4 @g4 48 @e5 @xh4 49 @f6 @g4 50 @xg6 h4 5 1 ltif6 h3 52 g6 h2 53 g7 bl if 54 g8°i'+. The h-pawns play a dual role: they rule out • lt?eJ 44 45 46 llxc3 47 llc6 Wf3 lld4 llxe4+ l:txh4 The most accurate. After 47 ... 'ifilf5 48 l:tc5+ <iti>e6 49 llc6+ Black cannot achieve anything. 47 l:lf4+ l::te4+ 48 ct>eJ 49 � <Ms 50 '1f6+ <tixg5 51 l:txg6+ Draw, without which it would probably have been impossible to stage the 1948 Match-Tournament for the World Championship. 136 which is usually chosen in the English Opening by White. This means that Stoltz should have adopted a King's Indian set-up, namely: S t'l}f3 dS 6 d3 (but not 6 lt:Jc3 d4 7 lt:Jdl e5, Smyslov­ Larsen, 1 972/73) 6. . . g6 7 0-0 il..g7 8 liJbd2. Game 162 G.Stolt21-M.Botvinnik Groningen 1946 French Defence 1 2 e4 'Be2 e6 5 6 Avoiding the normal continuations, my opponent employs Chigorin's move, but it soon becomes clear that he is not familiar with the subtleties of this opening idea. 2 • . . 7 g3 Better here is 3 . b3 , preventing the development of the black bishop at g7, or, as recommended by the Encyclo­ paedia, 3 f4 tDc6 4 tDf3 f1Jge7 S g3 d5 with an equal game. 3 4 5 i.g2 fiJcJ g6 _ JLg7 c5 At that time theory mainly con­ sidered continuations such as 2 ... i.e7, 2 . . .tt:Jc6 and 2 . . . eS. But during the game 2 . . . cS came to mind; this suggests itself, since play transposes into a Sicilian Defence, where the move 'i!fe2 may prove inappropriate. It is possible that this idea was suggested to me by the game Alexander-Botvinnik (Nottingham 1 936), where, it is true, the white queen was not at e2, but at d2, but everything else was very similar . . . However, I cannot consider myself to be the discoverer of 2 . . . cs, since, for example, it was played (and more than once) back in 1893 by Tarrasch in his match in St Petersburg with Chigorin. 3 d3 Ae3 f1Jc6 li)ge7 The subsequently unavoidable . . . d7dS will enable Black to carry out a plan This plays into the hands of Black, who now provokes the exchange of the central e4 pawn and then establishes his queen's knight in the centre. In roughly the same way, Levenfish as Black played the opening badly in the 12th game of our match (No.87), but there at least the queen was on its initial square, whereas Stoltz's queen stands worse (at e2). 7 tDf3 or 7 tDh3 was better. 7 ... 8 exd5 Threatening . . . d5-d4. d5! ·,. 8 it.xcS could not be played on account of 8 . . . ilaS 9 ilxe7 i.xc3+. 1 37 . 8 • • • li)d4 An important intermediate move; the unfortunate position of the . queen at e2 tells. 9 1!fd2 9 10 t'Llce2 11 9cl 11 12 c3 After 9 i..xd4 cxd4 and 10 ... t'Llxd5 Black has clear and easy play. . . . exd5 h6 Black would not have achieved anything with 10 . . .t'Llxe2 1 1 t'Llxe2 i..xb2 12 l:tbl .tg7 1 3 i..xc5. 12 13 ... t'Llxe2 t'Llxe2 d4 14 15 .td2 .i.xb7 .txd3 Of course, not immediately 1 3 . . . .txd3 in view of 14 i.xc5. Counting on the 'normal' contin­ uation 15 ... l:tb8 16 .tn 0-0 17 0-0 g5 18 :tel tLlg6 19 .tg2 t'Lle5 with a possible defence. Black, however, gains a highly important tempo for his attack. 0-0! 15 It turns out that in the given situation the b7 bishop is much more important than the rook at a8. After 16 i.xa8 'i'xa8 White is obliged to play 17 l:tgl , and his king, caught in the centre, will not last long. g5! 16 .i.fJ Taking the f4 square away from the white pieces and preparing the concluding knight manoeuvre . . . lt'lg6e5-e3. In the first half of the tournament in Groningen I played very strongly, using against my opponents the method of domination, perhaps no worse than Karpov has done in more recent times. . Why is White's position difficult? After 1 1 t'Llxd4 cxd4 12 i..f4 g5 he loses a piece. If 1 1 c3 ll'lxe2 then he has to take with the queen, again occupying the ill-fated e2 square, since after 12 ttJxe2 d4 13 cxd4 cxd4 14 i.f4 g5 he is again a piece down. Therefore White frees d2 for the retreat of his bishop. i.f5 But for some reason my opponent rejects the exchange that was now possible: 12 t'Llxd4 cxd4 1 3 i..d2 l:tc8 14 'i'dl , retaining a solid position. Depriving the d3 pawn of defence proves fatal. 138 . . 17 18 19 0-0 11.el iLg2 30 31 32 33 34 35 lLJg6 lLJe5 gxf4 .i.e4 Vh3 gxf4 Wxh2+ :gt 'ifh5+ ltg2 11'h3+ ®e3 Ve6 ®e2 White resigns Game 163 S. Tartakower-M.Botvinnik Groningen 1946 French Defence This position has already occurred in the note to White's 1 5th move, only with White to play. The tempo gained by Black radically changes the evaluation. 19 20 'ildl 21 1lla4 22 f4 i.a6 lLJd3 11if6 J:lae8 23 24 25 26 27 28 i.c6 .txe8 J.c6 <it>xe2 bxc3 l£ixe1 l£if3+ l£ixd2 .txe2 dxc3 1i'xc3 29 Adl Ild8 At last! For seven moves Black's rook remained under attack, which enabled him to gain time for obtaining a decisive advantage. cbf2 It might be assumed that Stoltz was unaole to calculate precisely all the preceding exchanges, but now it was easy to take stock, and he should not have delayed his capitulation. 1 2 3 4 e4 d4 exd5 e6 d5 exd5 ll)fJ Already in the opening the original chess thinking of the talented grand­ master is seen. In order to rule out any opening surprises, in the French Defence Tartakower chooses the exchange variation. However, he does not regard it, as is usual, as the prelude to numerous exchanges and the rapid agreement of a draw, but skilfully finds ways to complicate the play! 4 5 6 i.d6 l£if6 c4 c5 This looks active, yet this pawn will be exchanged, and then the drawbacks of this advance will tell. However, one can agree with the opinion of Larsen (expressed by him in the Encyclo­ paedia) that in this variation one cannot speak of any advantage for White. For example, 6 ibc3 dxc4 7 iLxc4 0-0 8 0---0 iLg4 with an unclear position. 6 139 • • • iLe7 ' 7 14 ltlcJ I again reached the position after 15 c6 WxdJ .i.g5 Black's 6th move several years later (Kasparian-Botvinnik, 20th USSR 15 .i.f4 was more circumspect, but Black's reply was not so easy to foresee. Championship, 1 952). White chose 7 At any event, the further course of the ..tb5+ c6 8 i.d3 , and here I missed an game shows that to Tartakower it came as a surprise. opportunity to obtain a good game by 8.. . b6. 7 8 9 10 cxb6 i.dJ 0-0 b6 axb6 0-0 15 • . lbxg4 • This decision was taken after twenty minutes' thought. Black's advantage was easily determined in the event of 16 10 . . • .i.xe7 tLixe5 17 .i.xd8 tLixd3 18 .i.xb6 .i.g4 tLixb2. It was much more difficult to assess It is quite hard for Black to find the correct plan. It would seem that he the chances of the two sides after 16 should play 10 . . . c5, but then his b5 is hxg4 i.xg5. For example: 1 7 f4 .i.f6 18 weakened, and by 1 1 .i.g5 ! i.e6 1 2 ttJe5 White seizes the initiative. But after the @g2 ..txe5 1 9 l:t.hl f5, or 1 7 @g2 f6 18 move in the game, in order to carry out l:.hl ..th6 19 ltJg6 l:.f7 (but not 1 9 . . . hxg6 20 l:[xh6 ! ) 20 ttih4 ..tg5, and this plan my opponent has to go in for a White retains the initiative, which to double-edged continuation. some extent compensates for the lost 11 12 hJ g4 .i.b5 pawn. This is the continuation that he should have chosen. Incidentally, instead of this Keres recommended 12 .i.e2, which is possibly stronger, and in any case safer. 12 13 ltle5 .i.g6 .i.xdJ The decision to maintain material equality, taken by my opponent, hands Black the initiative. The weakening of White's kingside is then bound to tell, and his defence becomes difficult. 140 16 17 18 18 l£lxc6 il..xe7 hxg4 • • . l£lxc6 l£lxe7 With his nex1 move White achieves material equality, but he cannot prevent the development of the enemy attack. f5! An wipleasant blow for White. Taking the pawn is exiremely dangerous, irrespective of whether it is Black's rook or knight that appears at f5 . Defending the g4 pawn is practically impossible (if 1 9 f3, then 1 9 . . . 'ilfd6 20 �g2 tl'ig6, if there is nothing better). All that remains is to sacrifice it, in order to gain time for seizing control of the open central file. 19 20 :tael! fxg4 21 'lrb5 l£ig6! :o :eS An important move, shutting the white queen off from the defence of its king. It stands to reason that 2 1 . .. 'iid6 would have been a mistake on accoWlt or-22 :txe7, when Black has to save himself by perpetual check: 22 . . . l:g3+. But now after 22 'iixd5+ Wxd5 23 :xd5 ll'if4 and 24 . . . l:.f8, then 25 ... g3 or 25 ... ttlli3+, the ending is hopeless for White. 141 22 23 :txd5 :gS 1i'f6 Tartakower defends with amazing tenacity. If immediately 23 1:1h5, then 23 . . . l:.dS (preventing the check at d5), whereas now the g4 pawn is attacked, and White has a tempo to give a useful check with his queen. :tf8 23 11ff4 24 l£ie4 25 'Ifd5+ �h8 26 l:.h5 Not only defending against the threat of 26 ... :th3, but also creating the counter-threat of 27 tl'ig5. Therefore 26 . . . g3 27 ltJg5 gxf2+ 28 @hi is not dangerous for White. Here White was already in serious time trouble, whereas Black had some fifteen minutes left. Studying the variation 26 ... h6 (with the intention of 27 . . . g3) 27 'ife6, I did not notice the decisive 27 . . J 1e3 ! 28 'i!fxg6 l:lxe4 with the threats of 29 . . .l:te2 and 29 ...ltxd4. After spending ten precious minutes on my next move, I also ended up in time trouble, and almost threw away the win . . . 26 27 28 ltxh3 J:lh3 gxh3 This move seems safer for the king, but 32 . . . g5 was more accurate (the king would have easily avoided the checks: 33 :cs+ @g7 34 ltc7+ @f8 etc.). 33 h6 g5 34 :e3 g4 35 36 37 d5 lL!c3 :� <l;g7 :f6 38 39 40 41 llxf6+ d6 lL!d5 lL!xb6 'l;xf6 <l;e6 <l;xd6 Here too 34 ...lL!xd4 suggested itself, although after 35 :txh3 l:txe4 36 ltxh6+ @g7 3 7 ltxb6 White would have retained drawing chances. <l;f7 37 . . .ltxe6 was simpler. tl'igJ 28 tl'ig5 would have lost immediately to 28 . . . ltJe7! 29 it'e5 'i'g4+ 30 'ii'g3 1fxg3+ 3 1 fxg3 h2+. lL!h4 28 29 1fe4 lL!f3+ 11fxe4 30 @bl 31 lL!xe4 ltf4 32 Itel 32 l:tc3 But this is a more significant inaccuracy, since White's important passed pawn should have been eliminated with gain of tempo 33 . . . lL!xd4, and then the knight returned to fl. Despite the material equality, White's position is critical in view of the terrible threat of . . . h6-h5-h4 and . . . g4-g3-g2 mate. Here Black had to 142 seal his move, and he began carrying out this plan. 41 • • • h5 White does not have a great deal of choice. He can either bring the knight up to the defence at once, as in the game, or immediately create counter­ threats on the queenside by 42 a4. But in the latter case Black would have cut off the white knight from the kingside (42 . . . ttxl.2 ! - pointed out by Bronstein), and after 43 as h4 44 a6 g3 4S fxg3 hxg3 46 a7 g2+ 47 <ifi>h2 ttill + 48 @xh3 gl'i' 49 a8'if 'ifh2+ SO <Ji>g4 lbeS+ would have mated the opponent' s king. In the event of 4S a7 (instead of 4S fxg3) Black wins by 4S . . . gxf2 46 a81!f fl'if+ 47 <ifi>h2 ttill +. <it>d5 42 lbc4+ 43 lbeJ+ @e4 The white knight has been brought up to the defence, and Black cannot, of course, create a mating attack without the help of his king. 44 a4 Let us consider the other attempt at counterplay - 44 b4, hoping for 44 . . . @d3 4S bS 'it>e2 46 b6 <ifi>xf2 47 lbrS h4 48 lbxb4, when . White saves the game after both 48 . . . lbxh4 . 49 b7 g3 SO b8°if g2+ S l <ifi>h2 gl11V+ S2 <ifi>xh3, and 48 . . . g3 49 lt)xf3 'it>xf3 so b7 � S l b8'i' g2+ 52 �h2 gl'i'+ S3 'it>xh3. But it turns out that by · playing 44 . . .lbd4 ! (instead of 44 . . . <it>d3), which prevents 4S bS, Black penetrates with his King to f2 via f3 a tempo sooner. In every variation White loses: the mating threats to his king ·give the opponent the necessary tempf · 44 • • • 45 lbd5 In order to try and eliminate the mate threat by sacrificing the knight for the h3 pawn. 45 46 47 lbf4+ lbxb3+ 'ote2 <it>xf2 Or 47 lbxhS g3 48 lbxg3 <ifi>xg3 49 as h2 SO a6 tZ:lgS S l a7 lbe4 and mate next move. Black could have won by 47 . . . gxh3 48 a5 <it>g3 49 a6 GLJgS 50 a7 lbe4 S 1 a8'ii 00+ S2 <ifi>gl h2+ S3 � hl'i'+ S4 'irxhl lbxhl SS b4 tLJf2 S6 bS lbe4 S7 b6 tZ:id6 S8 <it>gl h4 S9 <it>hl h3 60 @gl h2+ 6 1 <it>hl tZ:ie4, and mate is inevitable. However, he chooses a more natural and simpler plan. <it>d3 143 47 48 49 50 51 ll'lf4 ll'lg2 a5 li)f4 � . gJ � h4 <it>fl There is no defence against . . . h4-h3. 52 53 54 lDg2 h3 lDeJ+ � lDg4+ 'itie2 White resigns This was my second and last meeting with Saviely Tartakower, who deser­ vedly enjoyed the affection of the chess world. Game 164 M.Botvinnik-C.Kottnauer Groningen 1946 Queen's Gambit 1 2 3 4 d4 ll)fJ c4 cxd5 d5 li)f6 e6 12 I was afraid of the simplification after 4 li:)c3 c5 5 cxd5 li:)xd5, whereas in the game it is not so easy for Black to avoid a complicated struggle. 4 5 • • • li)cJ i.g5 'ifc2 e3 Ji.dJ i.h4 . cxd4 13 14 exd4 li)xc6 li)c6 bxc6 15 16 i.gJ hxgJ AxgJ li)g4 17 18 Wd2 b3 ltb8 18 19 ... 'iff4 lrf6 'ifxf4 20 21 22 gxf4 llfdl n.b4 Again White has to be vigilant in view of Black's intended manoeuvre . . .'tlig5-h5. c6 0-0 n.eS h6 Ae6 Had this move not been made, White would have had no doubts about the need to castle short and to cany out tl1e standard pawn attack on the queenside. Now, however, there is an opportunity to activate his game somewhat in tl1e centre. 11 ll)es c5 The natural reaction. In the event of passive play there could have followed f2-f4. 12 0--0 . Now 15 . . . Jlxh2+ 16 'it>xh2 �g4+ 17 <iti>g3 g5 is threatened. exd5 Ji.d6 This looks unconvincing. 5 . . . c6 is better, in order to develop the bishop at f5 as soon as possible. 6 7 8 9 10 • In such situations it is advisable to play 12 . . .li:)c6 immediately. 18 �4 was evidently stronger, and if 18 . . . iigS 19 'i'xg5 hxg5 20 b3 n.b4 2 1 :fd l . · After the transition into the endgame the weakness of the c5 square and the c6 pawn will tell, of course, but avoiding the exchange of queens would have meant Black going totally onto the defensive. 144 Jlfl 'it>f8 �f6 White had everything prepared for the manoeuvre of his knight to c5. If after 23 ttJa4 there had followed 23 . . . ttJh5, then 24 g3 i.g4 25 l1d3 ! (25 :td2 l1e4) 25 . . . i.e2 (25 . . . :e4 26 f3) 26 :td2 .i.xfl 27 <iftxfl with a definite advantage. After White's slow move in the game the opponent is able to prevent the indicated knight manoeuvre. 23 l:lact 24 f3 i.d7! 24 25 26 il)e2 g4 lt)b5 26 27 il)c3 28 29 30 g5 il)a4 il)cS il)g8 �7 i.c8 31 32 33 a3 i.d3 i.xf5 l:tb8 il)f5 1bis exchange is necessary, of course, as the black knight is too active. 33 34 35 36 If 24 tiJa4 there follows 24 . . . l:le4. <iftf2 l:lht l:tcet i.xf5 h4 h3 f6 a5 In view of the threat of . . . a5-a4 White is obliged to weaken his kingside. Only by forcing the enemy knight to move can he free his own knight from the defence of the f4 pawn and block the . . . a5-a4 advance. • • • il)f6 h5! -Since the exchange on h5 is clearly not in White's favour, he is obliged to advance his g-pawn, after which Black obtams a passed pawn and also the f5 square for his minor pieces. 37 g6! White agrees to give up this pawn for the important passed h-pawn, and for 145 The king should have been kept close to the h8 square, to prevent the invasion of the white rook, but even this could not have changed the outcome. the moment he prevents the black king from moving. 37 l:l.xel 38 :.xel :cS By manoeuvring with his rook on the b-file, Black would have set White a more difficult task. . 39 . • �g3 49 50 51 'it>xb3 �g3 lle2 c;t>n 43 44 45 46 47 cii>e l cii>d 2 llel llbl Wd6 .tf5 l:le8 'it>c7 After 5 1 . . .l:te7, either 52 .l:.a8 or 52 l:txe7 <l;xe7 53 t'.Db7 would have been immediately decisive. .i.xg6? By giving up his main trump - his h3 pawn, Black finishes up in a lost ending, since now he will have no compensation for his weaknesses on the queenside. 40 41 42 43 l:thl .D.h8 52 cii>c3 ..trib6 axb4+ 53 b4 :n 54 ..trixb4 55 :as Black resigns. White is threatening .tf5+ llb8 � to win the rook by 56 a5+ or 56 .:ta6+, and if 55 ... .tg6 there follows 56 f5 .th5 57 a5+ <lic7 58 l:la7+ <libs 59 l:txf7 .txf7 60 lbe6 g5 (60... g6 61 �8) 6 1 <lic5 .tes 6 2 <lib6 .i.d7 6 3 a6 etc. White takes his king across to the queenside, where he is able to create a passed pawn. .tc8 lla8 lla7 l:te7 lla7 Game 1 65 M.Botvinnik-K.Guimard Groningen 1946 French Defence 1 2 3 4 5 e4 d4 lhd2 lhxe4 g3 e6 d5 dxe4 lhd7 5 ... thgf6 Played with the aim of avoiding theoretical variations. I wanted to see how the inexperienced Argentine master (later grandmaster) would react in an unfamiliar situation. 48 a4! Now b3-b4 is unavoidable, and White will effectively be a pawn up. 48 . <lie7 . . After 5 . . . e5 6 dxe5 lbxe5· 7 'ifxd8+ <lixd8 8 .tf4 White's position is clearly preferable. 146 6 ltlxf6+ ltlxf6 7 ... c5 from d7, after which the knight at d4 will be in danger. However, White had prepared a pretty tactical continuation, which unexpectedly changes the evaluation in his favour. Here Euwe suggested 6... Wxf6. 7 .t g2 Now Black has some difficulties over the development of his queen's bishop. After 7 ... e5, as recommended in the Encyclopaedia, possible is � l2Jf3 exd4 9 'i'xd4 .td6 10 0-0 0-0 1 1 .tf4 .txf4 12 'i'xf4 l2Jd5 1 3 'i'd2 c6 1 4 c4 with the better development for White. If instead 8 dxe5, then Euwe is of course right in thinking that after 8 . . . 'i'xdl + 9 <iit?xdl �g4 10 t'Dh3 �xe5 Black is quite alright. 8 ltle2 8 9 10 11 12 0-0 c4 ltlxd4 Naturally, White does not play 8 tt:lf3 , which would reduce the activity of his king's bishop. 1'b6 .i.d7 cxd4 l:td8 Ac5 .te3 Dubious was 12 ...'ifxb2 13 when White's initiative grows. 13 b4! 1Wxb4 14 l:tbl VcJ 15 l:txb7 0-0 Black avoided taking this pawn when it was at b2, but now he has no choice (if 1 3 . . . .txb4 there would have followed 14 llli'5 and 1 5 ltlxg7+, if there is nothing better). Guimard underestimates the danger, otherwise he would not have avoided taking the second pawn, and although after 14 ... 'ifxc4 1 5 l:tc l 1Wb4 16 :Xc5 Vxc5 1 7 ltlxe6 .txe6 1 8 .txc5 l:txd 1 19 l:txdl the black king is caught in the centre, it is not clear whether White would have been able to convert his positional advantage. Now White builds up the pressure, but with material equal. :bl , Black's position looks threatening, since he is ·intending to move his bishop l:.c8 16 1i'e2! If 16 . . . .txd4 there would have followed 1 7 l:tb3, but not 17 l:tc.l 1!fa3 1 8 l:lb3 Vc5. 147 ' · ' ' . . 17 'Llb5 'ife5 18 19 20 ..ixa7 .tc6 After 17 . . . .i.xbS 1 8 cxb5 .i.xe3 19 Wxe3 'if'xe3 20 fxe3 White has a decisive advantage in the ending, but in the game too he wins a pawn. 'Llxa7 lha7 f3 An important move. White is obliged to avoid simplification and to retain his two bishops (he needs the light-square bishop for the defence of his c4 pawn). 20 21 • • • llaJ llfd8 Preparing the exchange of one pair of rooks - the fewer of them on the board, the easier it will be for White to defend his separated pawns on the queenside. 21 • • • h5 h4 llxd8 'i!fd3 l:lf2 llb8 l:tb2 After 26 ..td4 'it'd6 White would have lost his a2 pawn, and he does not want to part with his outside passed pawn. 26 27 28 .i.xf2 .i.fl l:lxf2 Wat+ Wd6 .i.a4 30 31 a3 1fd4 ..idt ifcl 32 33 Wd8+ 'ifd3+ �h7 f5 34 35 36 .i.e3 .td4 .iLe3 1fal Wet 36 37 38 39 .td4 'ife3 The exchange of queens would have led to a hopeless ending for Black. Although all White's pawns are isolated, he now has two more of them and also a pair of bishops, the power of which is bound to increase with every exchange. 24 25 26 29 The f3 pawn is taboo: 29 . . . .txfJ 30 11fd8+ 'iii>h7 3 1 'iid3+. Black realises that he must play actively on the kingside, otherwise White will exploit his extra pawn in an endgame. 22 lldJ 23 l:lxd8+ 24 gxh4 'Llh5 28 The alternative was 28 ... 'irxa2 29 'if'd8+, and now 29 ... 'Wt>h7 30 .td3+ g6 3 1 1i'xf6 loses, while after 29 . . . lL:ie8 Black's position is very passive. Black should hardly have gone in for this weakening of his position. This repeating of the position was provoked, of course, by shortage of time. � 1li'al 1li'cl 'ifbl White defends the f3 pawn and releases himself from the opposition 148 with the enemy queen along the first rank. 39 ... i.a4 40 41 42 °@d2 We3 .i.e2 .i.c6 Wdt Wc2 42 . . . 'i'hl could have been met by 43 .i.e5. Now 43 Wxe6 tl'if4 44 ile7 Wxe2+ 45 Wxe2 t'Dxe2 46 �xe2 was not bad, but White prefers to retain the two bishops. i.e5 11fc3 ii.fl 'it>g3 Wf4 t£ig6 (jje7 (jjg6+ 51 52 53 'it>g5 h5 f4 (jjf8 .i.c6 The white king can be diverted only temporarily from its intended march to the queenside. After arranging in the best way his weak kingside pawns, White will continue his plan. Although towards the finish of the tournament I did not play so con­ vincingly, even so my good technique counted . Not all these moves in time trouble are the most accurate. Perhaps it would have been better for Black to play 39 ... 'i'a2+, and now for White to take the e6 pawn. 43 44 48 49 50 �g8 .i.e8 The pursuit of Black's queen begins: it will be hard for him to avoid the exchange. 44. 45 'it'b2 46 1!fal 47 i.xal Wbt 1ih1 'i!hal One gafus the impression that Black is hoping for 54 h4 tbh.7+ 55 �g6 .i.e8 mate. 54 55 56 57 Without the queens the ending is an elementary win. 47 • • . l£if4 .i.e2 'it>h4 �g3 'it>t'2 (jjb7+ Wf7 (jjf6 Black resigns A nervy game. After two defeats (against Kotov and Yanofsky), in every game I needed to win, in order to compete for the first prize with the tournament leader Max Euwe. 149 Game 166 S.Reshevsky-M.Botvinnik USSR v. USA Match Moscow 1 946 French Defence Samuel Reshevsky ( 19 1 1 - 1992) 12 was already g1vmg simultaneous displays at the age of six, and on one occasion one of his opponents was none other than the future World Champion and President of FIDE, professor Max Euwe. There was no doubting the great talent of the child prodigy. Reshevsky appeared in the international arena in the 1930s, he played successfully in the AVRO Tournament (1938), and subse­ quently, as one of the top players, he was invited to participate in the World Championship Match-Tournament of 1948. When the FIDE rules came into force, the many-times USA Champion and winner of numerous international tournaments several times won the right to participate in world championship events, and even at the age of 56 he for the last time became a candidate. . Reshevsky was a brilliant and dis­ tinctive chess player. He calculated variations excellently, and possessed an outstanding positional understanding, but even so he was a typical practical player, with an additional defect, con­ sisting . in an incurable time trouble disease. This last factor, unfortunately, was a hindrance to his results being even better. In October 1 983, in the Manhattan Chess Club in New York, there was a meeting of the three (our of eight) surviving participants in the AVRO Tournament: Fine, Reshevsky, and the author of these lines. Fine had given up chess long before, I had stopped com­ peting in tournaments in 1 970, but the indefatigable Sammy was continuing to play. In the second USSR-USA match the players were already sitting opposite one another. The Soviet team was placed in a difficult position, since half of the participants had arrived in Moscow after the difficult tournament in Groningen, which had just finished. As a result the atmosphere was nervy, as the present game indicates. The match ended in a victory for the USSR team, but this time a less convincing one (12Y2-7Y2). 1 2 3 4 5 d4 e4 6 1!fg4 6 7 8 9 dxc5 bxcJ 1!fxg7 lllcJ e5 a3 e6 d5 ..tb4 c5 ..ta5 I chose this continuation for the first time in my career (although it was known earlier), to safeguard myself against possible preparations by my opponent for 5 . . . hc3+, which I usually employed. After considerable thought in the opening, Reshevsky finds a good plan. The more popular move 6 b4 was recommended by Alekhine back in the 1920s. llle7 ..txcJ+ llld7 But this is a routine move. The simple 9 tbf3 would have given White a 1 50 15 good game, although the Encyclopaedia considers that after 9 . . . ttlg6 10 h4 h5 1 1 'i!i'g3 ttlxc5 the position is unclear. Now White eliminates the g7 and h7 pawns, but this takes time, and in addition the central e5 pawn disappears from the board, as a result of which the initiative passes to Black. .J\b5 In the hope of forcing Black to choose the modest move 1 5 . . . .i.e6, and subsequently of tying the black king to the defence of the f7 pawn. 15 9 10 11 . • • • 11fxh7 .i.e2 l.1.g8 ltlxe5 Exploiting the fact that the g2 pawn is immune ( 1 L .ltxg2? 12 'iib.8+ and 13 'i!i'xe5), White completes the develop­ ment of his kingside pieces. 11 12 • . • .i.d2 1fa5 1i'xc5 li:lfJ .i.xfJ 16 .i.xti+ Hardly any better was 16 11fxf7+ �d7 17 'ii'f6 ( 17 .. :a:IB was threatened) 17 ... ltxg2. . White has a nominal material advantage, but this is compensated by the fact that his doubled pawns are devalued, that Black can occupy the centre with his pawns, and, most important, that it is hard for the white king to find a secure refuge. 13 14 .i.f5! . • • Not a move that one is able to make in every game. There is no doubt that it came as a surprise to my opponent. As a result an exchange of the f7 and g2 pawns occurs, White's extra pawn will not be worth anything at all, and his king will have nowhere to go. lLlxfJ+ e5 Black is threatening by 1 5 . . . .i.f5 and 16 . . . 0-0--0 to complete his mobilisation. 151 16 17 • . • 'ilb6 �d7 During the game I did not notice that I could now have tried to win the bishop that is stuck in Black's territory: 17 . . . l:!h8 18 'i'f6 (18 'i'g5 :!h7 19 iLh5 ltg8) 1 8... 'ifc6 1 9 'ii'xe5 lth7 (the advantage is also on Black's side after 19 'tixc6+ bxc6 20 f3 lir.af8). 17 18 !lfl �xg2 with 28 . . . b5, moving the pawn off the 7th rank (or 28 .lld8 tLlc6). 28 D.xb7 This seems risky, but White has accurately calculated everything. 28 18 • • . 1!t'b6 A positional mistake. Black ex­ changes queens at the cost of a worsen­ ing of his pawn structure, and the game becomes level. At the board I did not find the continuation 18 ... 1Wc4 1 9 :bl 'iie4+ 20 'i!ie3 b6, in which Black has an undisputed advantage. 19 20 11i'xb6 axb6 � Well played. First and foremost White connects his rooks. 20 21 22 23 24 25 @b2 il.eJ .txe6+ .i.xb6 :gt .rl.xaJ .rl.a4 il.e6 @xe6 D.xh2 Black would have good wmrung chances if he were able to exchange one pair of rooks. Then his king would be safe, and his knight would acquire scope. But now White has counterplay. 25 26 27 • . • Jlg7 Jlh7 tLld6 .rl.b6 Jlg6 tLlf5 An incorrect pawn sacrifice. 27. . . l:t.c4 was better, in order to answer 28 .i.a5 29 @b3! An important gain of tempo. By advancing, the king (initially) feels more secure. 29 . . • Jla8 29 ...'Dxb7 30 @xa4 ttJd6 was also possible. 30 31 32 33 Jlc7 Jlc6 lic7+ Jlc6 ll.b8 @d7 @e6 l:lb7 34 c4 dxc4+ A reckless decision. It would have been more sensible to repeat moves and accept the draw, tacitly offered by the opponent. The d-file should on no account have been opened. By playing 34...d4 I would not have risked anything, e.g. 35 c5 @d5, or 35 l:t.hl <ifi>d7 36 :c7+ :xc7 3 7 l:th7+ @c6 38 .txc7. Now the positional advantage passes to White. 152 35 @b4 <iJe7 Already the only move. 3? ... cbd7 would have lost to 36 cbc5. But now too after 36 l:td5 Black would have found himself in a difficult position. 36 <iJa5 • • • l:l.xc4 'it>d7 .l:l.e6 One poor move, his 36th, and White would have inunediately lost after 37 .. ·since he would have had to give up his rook for the knight. Alas, I too was in severe time trouble. Jlg8, l:lb8 @es 40 l:td8 The following continuation suggests itself: 40 llhl :as+ 4 1 1J..a7 l:txa7+ 42 l:txa7 (42 @xa7 ti)b5+) 42 ...tt)cs+, where Black nevertheless should be able to draw. In the game, however, it is White who will have difficulty in drawing. The control moves had been made, and now White could have thought and found the only way of avoiding loss of material - 4 1 cba6. Reshevsky, how­ ever, had not managed to record the moves, and, afraid of losing on time, he instantly moved his rook, thereby committing the decisive mistake. I think it was after this move that Reshevsky forgot to press his clock. We were both in time trouble; what was I to do? In a tournament I would have inunediately suggested to my opponent that he correct his error, as I had done ten years earlier in a game with Bogoljubow in Nottingham. But in a team game? I had no time to consult with my captain. The match situation had become extremely tense, and I decided to do nothing. When Reshevsky noticed his mistake and pressed his clock, his flag was already raised, and he had to make his moves instantly. 36 37 38 cba6 39 :c7+ 40 'it>a7 41 42 43 43 l:lhl 'it>b7 1J..xc7 ' • • . ti)b5+ ti)xc7 lld4!! I had the 1good fortune to be able to seal this winning move, which establishes control of the 4th rank: neither of the white . pawns must be allowed onto it. No one expected this 153 revenge for his su:fferings before the time control, when the white rooks were pursuing his king. move; they only considered 43 ....l:.d2 44 f4 with a draw. Therefore the partici­ pants in the match (both the Americans, and the Soviets) had no doubts about the outcome. The fact that Black should win was known only by Ragozin and my wife. The main threat is 44... I:tb4+. 44 c3 l:lc4 45 .i.a5 <i&>d7 The white king is cut off from its pawns, and this is Black's main trump. l:lf6 46 l:th8 A cunning manoeuvre, found during night-time analysis. White's king, bishop and pawn are passive, and now his rook too will be badly placed. l1d8+ J:td2 l:la2 49 50 51 l:lb2 .i.b6 51 52 53 54 55 l:lb4 l:lb2 lta2 <i&>a6 'it?d7 :cs A tacit admission that defeat is inevitable. But how could White venture 5 1 .ib4 I:tc7+, after which mate is threatened from all sides? After the bishop has moved to a5 (the e5 pawn is not attacked), the exchange 46 I:th7+ I:te7 47 I:txe7+ </;xe7 is in favour of Black. 47 48 49 There is no great choice. After 49 .l:.e2 the noose around the white king tightens: 49 . . . !ld5 50 Ji.b4+ </;d7. l:lxcJ 'it?e6 l:ldd3 l:ld7+ l:lbJ The storm clouds are gathering over the white king. </iie7 56 57 58 59 ..i.e3 l:ld6+ 'ot>a5 l:ld8 'ot>a6 I:txe3 fxe3 White resigns A nervy match and a nervy game. But its opening and its ending are undoubtedly worth studying. Game 167 M.Botvinnik-C.Kottnauer 48 lld6 A further unpleasantness. 49 Ji.b4 cannot be played (49 . . . l:txb4+ ), and the • • Moscow 1947 Slav Defence • exchange of rooks is also ruled out. Black has an opportunity to gain 1 54 1 2 3 4 �fJ d4 c4 cxd5 d5 �f6 c6 For devotees of the Slav Defence this exchange was then considered un­ pleasant, since after 4... cxd5 5 t2Jc3 ll'lc6 6 ..i.f4 .i.f5 7 e3 e6 8 .i.b5 the symmetry is disrupted and White seemingly retains the initiative. Modem theory does not share this point of view. 4 5 6 tlX3 .llf4 cxd5 ll'lc6 e6 Lasker's favourite continuation, for which Smyslov also had a liking. J.d6 7 eJ An old and quite reasonable idea. From the viewpoint of general principles, the coming exchange of bishops is unfavourable for Black, since he exchanges his 'good' bishop and remains with his 'bad' c8 bishop. However, as regards the battle for the centre the . exchange 8 .llxd6 'ifxd6 would be playing into Black's hands, as he would gain control of the important e5 square. For this reason White himself does not make the exchange, and Black defers it until the circumstances are more favourable. The system of defence preferred by Lasker - 7 ... i..e7 also has its drawbacks, as will be described in Game 209. The manoeuvre 7 . . .lLih5, which I introduced into tournament play (training game with Petrosian in 1952, games with Citron and Letelier in the 1 958 and 1964 Olympiads) had some success, but in.these games White did not make the strongest reply 8 .i.e5 ! s Ad3 8 9 0-0 8 i..g3 also came into consideration. 0-0 9 b6! The tactical operation 9 ...ll'lxd4 10 lDxd4 e5 would have been incorrect because of 1 1 .Jlg5 exd4 12 exd4 with a significant advantage to White. Kottnauer chooses a positionally correct plan for mobilising his forces, and so in the present game I am unable to find a way to retain the initiative. 10 11 12 :ct a3 11fe2 .i.b7 llc8 .i.xf4 13 exf4 tLla5 14 llc2 tLlc4 15 16 l:tfcl tLlbl a6 After Black has satisfactorily developed his forces, this exchange is perfectly justified, since he obtains clear counterplay on the queenside. Therefore White should earlier have played i.f4g5, avoiding the exchange of bishops. The subtle point of Black's idea is that after 14 lLie5 tiJb3 ! 15 l:tcd 1 tlJ.xd4 16 i.xh7+ lDxh7 17 :Xd4 11ff6 he obtains a satisfactory position. 15 tlJe5 was again not possible on account of 15 . . . tDxb2. 155 17 . . • tlld6 Now, however, thanks to the weakness of the dark squares in the opponent's position and his control of the c-file, White gains some advantage. 18 l:lxc8 19 tlle5 19 20 ... g4 20 21 'itig2 .ixc8 Black far-sightedly vacates b7 for his knight at· d6, in the event of the white rook invading at c5 . 16 • • . b5 The temporary retreat of the white knight should perhaps have been exploited by 16 . . . 'ifd6 17 lbe5 b5. Then it would be impossible to harass the knight at c4: 18 b3 tllxa3 or 18 tlld2 tllxb2. 17 bJ White's desire to drive back the active knight is understandable, but consideration should have been given to the fact that the bishop at d3 has no retreat square. And then he would have found the move 17 'i'el , making way for the bishop (preparing b2-b3) and defending once again the rook at c 1 (which is necessary for the manoeuvre tllb 1-d2-b3-c5). The only way of revealing White' s lack of accuracy i n implementing his strategic plan was by 17 ... 'fle7 (but not l 7... 1!f'd6 in view of 18 bxc4 dxc4 1 9 1!f'e5 !). Then i n the variation 18 bxc4 dxc4 19 .ixc4 bxc4 20 :xc4 :xc4 2 1 :xc4 tlld5 Black would have gained a dangerous initiative for the pawn, but it is possible that after 18 a4 White could have initiated favourable complications. · Outwardly the most active move. And in addition, if one of the enemy knights should occupy e4, there can immediately follow f2-f3. However, in reality White wastes precious time. The modest 19 'ifc2 would have created the unpleasant threat of 20 'i'c7 and not allowed Black a respite. To be fair, it should be said that the difficult positional battle had taken both players a great deal of time, and now they were having to glance increasingly often at the clock. It is this in particular that explains the errors first by one side, and then the other. .id7 20 'illc2 no longer worked on account of 20 . . . 'ilfe7 with the counter-threat of 2 1 . . .l:tc8. Now White prevents ... tlJf5, which minimises his concerns over the d4 pawn, ties the black queen to the defence of the bishop at d7 in view of the possible advance g4-g5, and in general the position of the enemy king ceases to be so secure. • . • g6 White is thinking only of the fact that he has to make a further 20 moves. 2 1 . lDd2 tlJfe8 22 b4 tllc4 23 tllb3 l'.Dxa3 24 1 56 Ita l lLlc4 25 l:Cxa6 would have retained his advantage. 21 22 23 24 WeJ LLlt3 h3 lilfe8 f6 lllg7 \%6 A l:tc5 l:tc2 l:lxc8+ g5 lilb7 l:Cc8 .i.xc8 typical time trouble error. This in principle highly important advance would never have run away from White, and for the moment he should have occupied the open file with his queen. After the possible 28 Wei i.d7 29 g5 'i'.d6 30 gxf6 tbh5 3 1 lhe5 lLlxf6 32 tLid2 tbh5 3 3 tLlfl and 34 tLlg3 it would have been hard to question White's advantage! But with this the time trouble 'adventures' are not exhausted. 28 • .. 11i'c7! gxf6 l£ie5 Wd2 31 32 Wc2 lilh5 lllxf6 White could not tolerate for long the position of the black queen at c7 - it is too strongly placed. Therefore he goes in for the exchange of queens, intending to exploit the better placing of his bishop and the weak squares c5 and e5 in the enemy position. Inexorably approaching is the exchange of rooks on the only open file, which would seem to guarantee a draw. But White still has a faint hope of exploiting the weakness of the dark squares in the opponent' s position. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 • . . llld6 1ixc2 But why does Black agree to go into an unfavourable ending? The point is that if 32 .. .' e7 White will transfer his knight via c3 to e2, defending his only weakness - the f4 pawn, and then use the c-file for active play. ii; 33 .i.xc2 llln Instead of. this it was suggested that Black should play 3 3 . . . b4 (34 axb4 lbb5 ! ), which at first sight appears very attractive, but then 34 i.d3 ! would merely have increased the activity of the white bishop. However, Black's plan of exchanging knights at e5 cannot be approved, since White gets rid of his 157 weak f4 pawn, and the pawn at e5 will cramp the dark squares just as strongly as the knight is now doing. In the given situation the routine approach of the black king to the centre was the most sensible decision. 34 arose, and there too Black had good drawing chances, but lost . . . 40 ltlc3 The place for this knight is at c5, to where it should have been directed via d2 and (after b3-b4) then b3 . 34 35 36 37 38 . fxe5 00 'iti>e3 ltle2! 38 39 ltlf4 thd3 The ill-fated last move before the time control. By 40 h4 ! White would have increased the pressure, since after 40 . . . b4 4 1 axb4 axb4 42 h5 ! both 42 ... gxhS 43 .i.xh7 and 42 . . . gS 43 tl:ld3 tl:la6 44 h6 ! lose for Black. tha6 40 thxe5 After the voluntary retreat of the knight from f4 Black has gained a temporary respite, and he initiates counterplay on the queenside. However, White could well have ignored it by playing 4 1 h4, reverting immediately to the idea of beginning action on the kingside. Instead of this he decides to block Black's queenside by b3-b4. Such a plan looks particularly 'theoretical', since it emphasises the passive placing of the black bishop. But, on th.e other hand, White creates for himself a chronically weak b4 pawn! tDe8 ff1c7 Wf7 A good . move, which would have quickly given positive results, if White had had in reserve . . . another minute! The attack on Black's weakened kingside by lbr4 and h3-h4-h5 should have inevitably assisted the activity of the white pieces. 'iti>e7 a5 axb4 41 42 b4 axb4 · ltlb8 43 'ifi>d2 ltlc6 While White still had to spend two tempi on defending the h4 pawn with his king, Black had time to play 42 ... gS 43 'iPd2 .td7 44 'iti>c3 .i.e8, but the bishop would not be able to go to g6 on account of tl:ld3-c5. A year before this tournament I also played White against Kottnauer in Groningen. The surprising thing is that there too roughly the same structure But this is already a flaw in Black's adjournment analysis. He is intending to play his knight via d8, fl and h6 to f5, but in certain cases the exchange of the bishop for the knight at f5 may prove very useful for White. However, it is doubtful whether . . . ltlb8-d7-b6-c4 was any better, since 158 But not 50 ..i.xf5 gxf5 5 1 h6, after which there is nowhere for the white king to break through. although the knight would appear well placed at c4, it would be inactive. 44 45 <ifi>cl h4 ltld8 ltlt7 hxg6 <i&>cl The exchange 5 1 i.xf5 gxf5 would 50 51 • • • again have led to a draw. 51 52 ' • • • i.e2 c;&>t7 52 �l was more accurate. 46 ltlf4! 46 47 <ifi>d2 47 48 49 i.d3 h5! • • ltld3 ltlc5 ltla6 55 56 57 .i.g4 ltlc5 58 <ifi>dl ..i.d7 <i&>e7 ..i.e8 This is merely a repetition of moves, in order to reach the next time control as soon as possible. White finally finds the correct way, which he overlooked on move 40. • 52 53 54 55 i.d7 <ifi>d8 i.d7 <i&>e7 White would not have achieved anything with 47 h5 g5 followed by . . . h7-h6. Therefore he resorts to cunning: he leaves the d4 pawn undefended, to entice Black to play his knight to f5. i.e8 ltlh6 But now this advance is advantageous to White, since after 49 . . . g5 50 lD113 i.xh5 5 1 t'Dxg5 he wins the h7 pawn, while if 49. . . gxh5 there follows 50 i.xh7, and Black cannot avoid the loss of his h5 pawn. Therefore he is forced to agree to the creation of another weak pawn - at g6. 49 50 hxg6 ltlf5 Again White has to use cunning. Since his king has blocked the fl -a6 diagonal, it appears that Black has no reason to be concerned about the defence of his b5 pawn. However, 58 i.h3 was essential, sin�e D.t the · game Black could have played · the active 159 58 . . . g5 ! , when if 59 f4 he has the reply 59 . . . �6! (only not 59 . . .gxf4 60 .txf5 exf5, which favours White). 58 59 • • • .i.bJ .tcs �es .td2 Itel 8 9 10 11 12 13 cxd5 .i.e2 0--0 l:lfdl .tel e6 b6 Perhaps it is slightly premature to decide here which rook should be placed on which file. 8 ..te2 looks more A tragic moment. Black reckons that he is not threatened by anything, and he falls into the trap . . . True, as already mentioned, 59 . . . g5 was now bad in view of 60 f4 ! , but after 59 . . . lbh4 ! and then . . . g6-g5 he could still have put up a tenacious resistance. 60 6 7 8 natural. �CJ It becomes clear that the b5 pawn is lost: after 60 . . . ..td7 61 ..tfl the black bishop cannot move (the e8 square is occupied, and the king is not defending the e6 pawn). .i.b7 exd5 c6 lbbd7 l:le8 .tf8 Black resigns. Grune 168 S.Gligoric-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1947 Griinfeld Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 tl)cJ tl)fJ eJ tl)f6 g6 d5 .i.g7 5 6 ... 1!fb3 0--0 The reader will already be familiar with 5 'i'b3 from Games 55 and 157. It will also occur in Game 177. Of the many other moves employed ih this position, Makogonov's patent 6 b4 looks energetic; I had to play against this variation in Game 202. Regarding 6 .te2, see Game 88. White has not only failed to gain any opening advantage, but also the initiative is gradually passing to Black, who controls the central squares e4 and e5. With the idea of an attack on the kingside, Black begins playing his bishop to d6, but he later has to give up this idea. An interesting plan for Black was suggested by Ragozin: 1 3 . . . ..th6, and if 14 ttJd2 tDf8 15 M lt:ie6, preventing e3-e4 and threatening to win a pawn by 16 . . . lt:ixd4 17 exd4 .l:bel + 18 �xe l i.xd2. 160 If 14 . . ..i.d6 there could have followed 1 5 .i.f3 'fie7 16 g3, when White carries out the useful advance e3e4. Therefore Black doubles heavy pieces on the e-file, with his queen behind the rook. However, the rook will be unable to remain at e6 for long, and therefore 14 ... .i.h6 should have been preferred. 15 16 17 .i.f3 ttle2 ttlf4 'ile7 .i.h6 lld6 18 ttlfl a5 19 ttlg3 Black avoids the exchange on f4, preserving his king's bishop for a subsequent complicated struggle. Ragozin was correct when he wrote that there now follow complications,. the consequences of which were difficult to calculate in time trouble. As for his recommendation of amung for simplification by 25 . . . 'ii'd5 26 .ixc5 bxc5 27 'ifxc5 'ifxc5 28 l:.xc5, Black would have retained the advantage and it would have been easier for him to find his way when short of time, but for White too things would not have become more difficult! And at that point no one could know that it was I who was destined to end up in a difficult position. · Preventing the unpleasant 19 .i.b4. After 1 9 ti:id3 ti:ie4 20 'iic2 White would have restrained the enemy forces and continued manoeuvring. Now, how­ evet, the black pawns begin advancing. 19 20 • • . dxc5 cs Otherwise after 20 . . . c4 and then . . . b6-b5-b4 White's position would become very cramped. 20 21 . . • 11fc2 it)xc5 .i.:xf4 Now this exchange is necessary, to clear the way for the d-pawn, which now becomes passed. 22 23 24 e:xf4 .i.xb7 b4 Activating the bishop. 24 25 . . • .i.xb4 d4 11t'xb7 26 27 'ile2 f5 lid7 27 28 ... 1!Ff3 l:te8 gxf5 29 it)e2 b6 Such a pawn sacrifice, weakening the enemy kingside, may prove effective, especially in time trouble. Calculations show that Black has nothing to fear. axb4 l:td5 It is hard to find fault with this move, since here the rook defends the knight at c5 and controls the f5 square. Of course, 161 The h7 square has to be vacated for the king: on the dark squares it will feel less secure. . 30 ti)f4 Jlde5 35 36 37 Indirectly preventing the attack on the d4 pawn by 3 1 Ac3 (3 1 . . . dxc3 32 llxd7 llel +). · 31 In time trouble it is always useful to open an escape square in the castled position. 31 . llc8 I do not widerstand how I betrayed my old rule - during time trouble the pieces must defend one another! Besides, 3 1 . . .llc8 had no particular point (I merely wanted to free the rook at e5 from having to defend the knight at c5). By continuing 3 1 . ..�h7, I would have been able to answer 32 ilc3 with 32 . . J:te4, threatening 33 . . . 'i'd6. 37 38 34 1!be5 Defending mate. • • • lhd4 1!fe6 !lxd4 Dangerous was 38 . . .'i'xe5+ 39 �xe5 nxd4 40 i.xd4 b5 4 1 ll.e5 when White has the better ending. Black prefers to keep the queens on and to exchange the queenside pawns, since in play on one wing the knight is not at all weaker than the bishop. • • 'i'g3+ tDh5 Jlxct+ l:tc4 In this way Wlllte restores material equality and, importantly, eliminates Black's passed pawn. h3 32 33 !lxd3 �h2 �d6 � 39 40 41 �h7 tDxh5 against the threatened 1rxa2 'ill'xd4 11fxb6 'ife6 ti)f6 11t'd4 Draw agreed Gatne 169 A.Kotov-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1947 Dutch Defence As Gligoric was hesitating slightly over his last few moves, I had already foreseen this position and had found a miraculous escape, to my great delight. 34 . tDdJ! • 1 2 3 d4 c4 e6 f5 .i.b4 4 5 ifc2 e3 ltlf6 &:J Such a combination of the Dutch Defence with the ideas of the Nimzo­ Indian Defence is not without point. It occurred both in matches at the start of the century, and also, for example, in my world chatnpionship match with Tal (1960). There my opponent chose with Black the following move order: I d4 tDf6 2 c4 e6 3 tDc3 .tb4 4 a3 i.xc3+ 5 bxc3 ltle4 6 'i'c2 (or 6 e3) 6. . .f5. • 162 At one time Rubinstein used to play the opening this way with White. After continuing .i.d3 , tLlge2, f2-f3, .i.d2 and 0--0--0, he would then open files on the kingside for an attack on· the black king. In the present game Kotov only paTuy follows this plan and, as if ignoring the move . . . f7-f5, chooses a system of development typical of one of the variations of the Nimzo-Indian Defence. 5 6 .i.dJ tLlge2 0-0 d6 c5 7 In view of White' s intention of playing 8 a3, and after 8 . . . i.xc3+ of recapturing 9 tL!xc3, in this case Black prepares to put active pressure on White's centre by 9 . . . t'lic6 (Game 1 87). 8 d5 All this confirms the correctness of Rubinstein' s strategy. 8 ... .i.xcJ+! 9 tLlxc3 exd5 10 cxd5 lDg4! 11 12 0-0 i.e2 lDa6 The subtle point of Black's active defence. If 9 Vxc3 there follows (if there is nothing better) 9 . . . e5, when the manoeuvre tlie2-f4-e6 is no longer possible. After the game continuation too the white knight is diverted from making this dangerous manoeuvre. This move is necessary, in order not to allow the exchange 10 dxe6, after which in some cases the white knight could have occupied d5. Here the knight is very actively placed, and it can be driven away only by weakening the pawns in front of the white king. Now Black has everything defended. The strength of White's two bishops is not felt, as a result of the semi-closed character of the position. Besides, one of them (the queen's) still has to be developed, while the other (the king's) will have to be used for exchanging the aggressive knight. This, of course, gives up the fight for the initiative, but it is hard to suggest anything else. But this decision cannot be approved; Kotov tries in vain to exploit the weakening of the light squares in the opponent' s position. The sacrifice can­ not be accepted: 8. . .exd5 9 cxd5 t'lixd5 10 .i.c4 .te6 1 1 1Wb3 . In the event of 8 a3 Black can also retreat his bishop, as I played against Taimanov (Moscow. 1953). 1 63 12 ' . . . i.d7 12 . . .We7 was more accurate. Now White could have improved his position somewhat by 1 3 fl tlie5 14 f4 t'lig6 ( 14 . . . t'lig4 1 5 ,.txg4 fxg4 16 e4). 13 bJ Passively played and, in addition, moving the bishop from c l to b2 weakens White's kingside. 13 14 15 ... .i.b2 l:r. ael 1!fe7 l:r.ae8 Instead of this Romanovsky recom­ mended 15 h3, after which he con­ sidered 15 . . . lbe5 16 .*.xa6 bxa6 17 f4 lbg6 18 l:r.ael, but after 15 ... lbr6 and then . . . lbe4 Black has a clear predomin­ ance in the centre and on the kingside. 15 16 • • • .i.xg4 lbc.7 White is not only tired of observing the annoying enemy knight, but he simply has no other sensible plan (after 16 h3, as pointed out, the manoeuvre . . . lbg4-f6-e4 is unpleasant). 16 17 e4 fxg4 t£ib5 19 l:r.xf3 White had been intending to reply 19 lDxb5, but he rejected this because of 19 . . . fxg2 ! ! 20 l:r.xf8+ l:txf8 21 'i'xg2 (otherwise 2 1 . . . .i.h3 ! with unavoidable mate) 2 l . ...i.xb5 . Meanwhile, although a pawn down, he would have retained more drawing chances than in the game. Now the pawns in front of his king are broken up, and the enemy knight invades at d4 with gain of tempo. l:!xf3 19 . • • 20 21 gxf3 1fg2 lDd4 ltf8 22 23 Afl 1!Fg3 1!fb4 23 24 25 26 hxg3 l:lf2 Probably stronger was 2 l.. .'i'h4 22 l:te3 (22 l:tfl .i.h3) 22 ... l:te5 (23 lDe2 t£ixe2+ 13 24 'i'xe2 l:r.g5+ and 25 ... .i.h3). Short of time, Black aims for simplifi­ cation, assuming that the ending will be an elementary win. Because of the threat of 23 ... .i.h3, White has to give up a pawn. This move was probably not anticipated by White. Since after 18 tLlxb5 .i.xb5 he loses the exchange, Black's other knight breaks through to the strategically important d4 square. 18 f4 No better for White was 18 lbbl tLld4 19 .i.xd4 cxd4 20 'ii'd3 'i!t'e5 2 1 tLld2 b5 2 2 l:tcl l:tc8 2 3 f4 'if'f6. 18 • .. gxfJ! 164 'it>bl 1ixg3+ .i.h3 tl)xf3+ lDd4 The further simplification was not essential, but it does not spoil anything. The maximwn that White can hope for is to reduce matters to an ending with opposite-colour bishops, but even this does not save him, since Black can create passed pawns on both wings. . 27 28 29 30 31 �xf'8+ @gt <it>eJ lhbl <ifi>xf'8 <ifi>e7 .i.g4 g5 tbfJ 32 33 34 lhd2 <ifi>xd2 <it>d3 tbxd2 h5 .i.h3 <ifi>f2 obtained as many as three (not just two) passed pawns, whereas White's central connected passed pawns would never have been able to move and would not have had any value. But at this critical moment Black makes an obvious error, perhaps his only one in the entire game. There is only one justification -· it was the 3 9th move! After 3 1. . .lt1e2 32 @fl White's pieces would have become active, whereas now he can cotint only on the exchange of knights. The simplest way to win was by the immediate advance of the h-pawn (34 . M 35 gxh4 gxh4 36 .i.cl h3 37 .i.f4), when Black would only have had to make the accurate move 37 . ..tf3 , advance his pawn from b7 to b4, transfer his bishop to the fl -a6 diagonal, and play . . . c5-c4. However, now too he is on the right track. .. . . 35 36 <it>eJ .i.c3 37 b4 .i.g2 b6 Again the h-pawn' s advance would have decided the game more quickly. A last and 'desperate' attempt. . . 37 h4 38 gxh4 gxh4 39 bxc5 It only remained for Black to reply 39 . . . dxc5 ! (as was later pointed out by Goldberg), and his advantage would have increased. In time he could have 165 39 40 41 .i.et .i.g3 41 42 43 44 a3 <ifi>d2 <it>c3 ii.fl .i.c4 .i.a2 .i.bt 45 46 e5 exd6+ . Aa2 <it>d7 bxc5 b3 A surprising position has been reached: Black's king is tied to the defence of the d6 pawn, and the advance of the c-pawn will merely lead to its exchange for the e-pawn. Therefore already here the draw is clear. Now the pawns · in the centre are exchanged and the black king obtains freedom of movement, but even this does not help matters. . 47 48 49 50 ll.b2 .i.g3 .i.b2 .i.g3 ll.xd5 �c6 .i.e6 Game 170 M.Botvinnik-N.Novotelnov Moscow 1947 Griinfeld Defence 1 d4 2 c4 3 thfJ 4 · g3 thf6 g6 ..tg7 5 6 7 8 d5 thxd5 c5 In the earlier games of the book this move has not occurred, but with White I was already prepared to employ this variation of the Griinfeld Defence, and in subsequent events it made frequent appearances. 0--0 4 It is curious that Black can even win the bishop (50 . . . �d5 5 1 .th.2 <Jte4 52 d7 .ixd7 53 'it>c4 'it>f3 54 <it>xc5 <Jtg2 etc.), but he does not achieve anything by this, since the white king easily reaches the a l square. 50 51 52 53 54 .ih2 �b2 .tg3 .ih2 A .well known variation. White refrains from developing his queen's knight at c3, so as not to allow the implementation of Griinfeld's idea: 8 ttlc3 cxd4 9 tbxd4 thxc3 10 bxc3 tbc6 ! (or 10 ... 1i'a5), and Black does not experience any problems in developing. Another popular continuation is 8 dxc5 tha6 9 tbg5 (also good is 9 c6, as I played against Zuidema, Amsterdam 1 966), and after 9 . tbdb4 10 tbc3 'i!fxdl 1 1 l:txdl White has the advantage. <iiibi 5 'it>a4 a5 .i.f5 c4 Black makes use of his last chance. 55 56 57 58 .i.gJ cJ+ �xc3 <ii?xa3 'it>a2 .ih2 .igJ Draw agreed ll.g2 cxd5 0--0 e4 .. 8 ... thb6 d5 .tg5 e6 8 . .tbf6 is perhaps more active, as in Alekhine-Mikenas, Kemeri 1937 (cf. also Game 1 90). . After 58 . . . a4 59 .lth2 a3 60 'it>b4 'ili>b2 there follows 6 1 .ie5+. In this game my opponent was able · to save a difficult ending with opposite­ colour bishops. However, in 1 955 I had the good fortune to gain my revenge (No.236). 9 10 A double-edged move. On the one hand, White provokes a weakening of the opponent's pawns ( . . . f7-f6), but on 166 the other hand White's queen's bishop ends up on e3, which gives Black an important . tempo for the manoeuvre . . . ctJb6-c4-d6. knight to go to d6, thus hindering the implementation of the plan mentioned above. In trying to seize the initiative, he is prepared to give up material. f6 10 11 12 ctJa6 .teJ tLlc4! tiJcJ The correct plan. Black is aiming for an ideal piece set-up: central pawn at e5 and knight at d6. Then he will prepare to attack White's centre by . . . f6-f5. Black played less well in Fairhurst­ Flohr (USSR v. Great Britain, 1947), where he hastily exchanged pawns in the centre (12 . . . exd5), which gave him a difficult game. 13 .tel After lengthy thought White came to the conclusion that after 13 lbd2 lbxe3 (but not 1 3 . . . tLlxb2 14 Wc2) 14 fxe3 exd5 15 exd5 .td7 16 a4 lbb4 17 lbc4 f5 Black has equal chances. By avoiding this natural variation, White assists his opponent's plan, and apparently ends up in a difficult position. 13 14 • • • lDb5! e5! White does not allow the black 14 15 a4 ilb6 16 17 b3 :ei tLla5 tLlb4 ... .td7 One has to give credit to Novotelnov's positional sense, in not wanting to part with his light-square bishop. Indeed, after 15 . . . .txb5 16 axb5 l1Jc7 White had only one move, but an adequate one, 17 b4 ! ! , eliminating Black's main threat of . . . 11Jxb5 and . . . lLJd4. After 17 . . . cxb4 18 'i'b3 lbd6 1 9 b6 ! axb6 20 l:txa8 11Jxa8 2 1 'i'xb4 White would have gained a clear advantage. However, if Black does not exchange the knight at b5, his own knight will be unable to reach the cherished d6 square. In the new situation the exchange 17 ... .txb5 1 8 axb5 with the win of a pawn by 18 . . . 'ifxb5 would have left the black pieces wiable to come to the aid of their king after 19 iLfl Wb6 20 h4 1 167 18 lDaJ a6 19 ..1l.e3 has in reserve the tlueat of . . . f6-f5-f4. However, even now his position is less promising, since his queenside pawns are weakened. This latter factor should have suggested to White that he play 2 1 axb5 axb5 22 'it'e2 ! (but not 22 .ifl because of 22 . . . f5), when Black ends up in a difficult position. For example: 22. . f5 23 tiJxb5 'it'b6 24 tiJaJ f4 25 tiJdc4, or 22 . . . .l:tab8 23 .l:tec 1 .l:tfc8 24 tiJc2 ! But White was feeling complacent, since Black had avoided playing . . . f6-f5, and he decided to continue 'tempting fate', but in so doing he miscalculated1 f5! 21 .ift Now the initiative passes to Black. Up to here White has played well, but now he makes a routine move which does not threaten anything, since the c5 pawn is easily defended. At e3 the bishop merely comes under attack after . ; . f6-f5-f4 ! Correct was 19 lbd2 ! flc7 20 iLfl, and now . either 20 . . . f5 21 .ib2 f4 22 l£ic2 lb.xc2 23 'i'xc2, or 20. . . .l:tab8 2 1 .ib2 b 5 2 2 axb5 axb5 2 3 lDc2 ! with an appreciable advantage to White due to the weakness of the enemy queenside. 19 . .. . 'ifd6 Black unpins the c5 pawn, which was not in fact necessary. Meanwhile, by playing 19 . . . f5 ! immediately he could have demonstrated the weakness of White's previous move . . 22 23 24 f3 hxg3 f4 fxg3 .i.h6 26 ltxeJ 1!fb6 28 lLlc2 .if2 With the extremely unpleasant threat of 25 . . . .ixd2. White has to go in for the exchange of dark-square bishops, which weakens his king's position and strengthens the opponent's queenside. .i.xe3+ 25 .ieJ 20 . The best indication of the change in the situation is the return of the queen to b6. Earlier it felt uncomfortable here, whereas now it is threatening to develop Black's initiative. lLlb7 27 � lLld2 The alternative plan, 20 tiJc2 tiJxb3 2 1 tiJxb4 tiJxal 22 tiJa2 c4 23 'it'xa I .ixa4 24 tiJc3 .id7, would have led to unclear play. 20 • . . b5 Of course, 20 ... tiJd3 would have lost to 2 1 tiJdc4. With his last move Black has established control over c4 and he The latight at b4 has to be exchanged, of course. In general White · justifiably begins aiming for simplifi­ cation, so that it will be easier to defend his king's position. In addition, it is only in the endgame that the weakness of Black's queenside pawns may tell. 1 68 28 29 30 Wxc2 'ifc3 ttlxc2 g5 This was probably also clear to Black, but he imagined that he saw a tactical 'subtlety', enabling him to gain precious time for developing his attack on the kingside. 33 ... h5 Black continues his attack, disregarding the exposing of his own king. 34 lial lie8 Probably the losing move. Black 'lures' his opponent into playing 35 l:la7. 35 :a7 White 'naively' falls into the trap. 35 Both sides are playing consistently: Black on the kingside (which is un­ pleasant for White, considering his shortage of time on the clock), while for the moment White is preventing the enemy knigitt from going to d6, from where it could easily join the attack. 30 ... axb5 %:txa8 It becomes clear that the need to watch the a-file prevents Black from creating a dangerous attack on the king. · • . 'i!fb6 W'f6 Subsequently 30 . . .%:tae8 was suggested here, so as not to tie down the queen to the defence of the e5 pawn, but after 3 1 axb5 axb5 it would have had to guard the a7 square. Besides, . for the moment Black is hoping that his attack will succeed and therefore he includes his queen in it. In reply White immediately begins active play on the queenside in order to obtain counterplay. 31 axb5 32 lba8 33 . �el! • The white rook is attacked, and a discovered check (36 . . . c4+) is also threatened. 36 :xb7 It transpires that it is not White, but Black who has fallen into a trap. This exchange sacrifice diverts the black queen from the defence of the kingside, where the white queen now begins to take charge. 169 36 37 1!i'eJ! 1fxb7 g4! At a difficult moment Novotelnov does not become flustered, and he finds the best decision. If White had won the black pawns on the g5 and h5 squares, he would have been able to create three connected passed pawns and the win would have been guaranteed. Now, however, this plan is not feasible, and the conversion of the advantage is more difficult. 38 11fg5+ � 39 40 11ff6+ 'i!fg6+ 41 42 43 11ff6+ 1Wg6+ 'ifxh5 'i&i>g8 � The adjourned position. White has good winning chances, of course: the enemy king is exposed, and all the black pieces are badly placed. 'i&i>g8 <iPf8 Here in my adjournment analysis I also examined these main variations: (a) 43 ... W"a7 (43 . . 1!fb6 44 1!i'h.8+ � 45 'ifli.7+) 44 .ixb5 ! (but not 44 Wh.8+ � 45 'itb7+ � 46 .i.xb5 c4+ 47 'i&i>e2 gxf3+ 48 'i&i>xf3 1 4 Ji.g4+!) 44...c4+ 45 'i&i>e2; (b) 43 ... c4! 44 'i!fh6+ � 45 bxc4 . 'i'a7+ 46 'i&i>g2 bxc4 47 .ixc4, and White has real winning chances. Great was my amazement when my opponent, without thinking, made a move that I had not considered. Perhaps he was counting on the effect of surprise, and, it has to be admitted, with some justification. 43 lia8 I sensed that this move was weaker • • • than the others, but for a long time I was unable to find the solution to the problem. I wanted to carry out the combination involving Ji.xb5 (which was examined after 43 ... 'if'a7), but after lengthy consideration it had to be rejected, since in the given situation it leads only to a draw. Then I began considering what was the correct continuation: 44 f4, 44 'ifxe5 or 44 fxg4, but by then I had only some 10- 1 5 minutes left - serious time trouble was imminent. Therefore I nevertheless had to return to the variation with .ixb5, since it had been worked out in every detail. But first, of course, I had to repeat moves as much as possible, in order to gain time on the clock. � 44 1lh8+ 45 Wh7+ 'it>f8 46 'i!fb8+ <llf7 � 47 11fh7+ 48 .ixb5 As will be seen from what follows (and as, strictly speaking, I was afraid), this 'brilliant' move should have led only to a draw. Meanwhile, White was not far from his goal when he was studying 48 'i!fh6+ r:i;f] 49 fxg4 ! After 49 . . . l:.a2 50 g5 ! ! Black is apparently not saved by 50 . . . :.xd2+ 5 1 'i&i>e3, since 170 after the rook moves there follows 52 g6+ �6 53 g7+ <j;f7 54 'it'h7. If instead 50 . . . 1!fa6, then 5 1 'irxa6 .fl.xa6 52 lDf3 <tre7 53 lbxe5 and the ending is quite favourable to White. 48 49 50 51 1!fh8+ 1!fxa8 1!fa5 the white queen gives a check and on the next move goes to e3 . 55 1!fh5+ Black resigns 1ixb5! <ilf7 Game 171 1!fd3 K.Plater-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1947 Sicilian Defence 1 2 51 . • • .i.b5 A mistake, which Black played instantly. He thought that his position was hopeless and that his last chance was merely to try and exploit White' s time trouble. B y continuing 5 1 . . . 'i'd4+ 52 'ifr>e2 gxf3+ 53 'ittxf3 'ffd 3+ 54 'it>f2 .i.g4! he could have gained a draw, since from g4 the bishop defends the important squares on the c8-h3 diagonal. In the game Black loses all of his pawns. 'ifi?e8 52 Vc7+ Or 52 . . . 'ifi?g8 53 'i!fc8+ �h7 54 'fff5+ etc. 53 54 1!fxe5+ Vf5+ <ot?d7 �e8 If the king moves onto a dark square, 171 e4 lbe2 c5 Plater had already employed this variation against Kottnauer earlier in the same tournament. When I was preparing for this game, I thought that, although in the afore-mentioned game the Polish master had obtained an inferior position from the opening, he was unlikely to refrain from repeating the variation, which in the end had brought him a win. Surprisingly enough, on this occasion my supposition was justified. 2 3 iDbcJ 4 5 6 exd5 lbxd5 lbcJ . • • lDf6 d5 Keres rightly pointed out that 3 . . . lbc6 4 g3 d5 ! is good for Black (5 exd5 lbd4 ! 6 .i.g2 .i.g4 7 0:-0 tLixd5). On the other hand, White could have 'changed his mind', and with 4 d4 transposed into normal variations of the Sicilian Defence. l.fild5 9xd5 Plater's 'patent' manoeuvre, which, however, cannot be recommended. Black gains at least equality, since White neglects the battle for the central squares. In this same tournament Keres 11 played correctly against Kotov - 6 d4 ! , after which Black has to overcome certain difficulties . .6 7 · • • • Jl.c4 'fld8 lLlc6 Kottnauer replied 7 . . . e6 8 d3 iJ...e7, when by White came a demonstration 9 'ifg4, which generally speaking is harmless. But my opponent had learned his lesson from the earlier game, and he now refrains from the queen sortie. 8 dJ e6 9 0-0 JJ..e7 13 14 • cii>h l 14 15 'ifxdJ 16 lLlf2 17 lldl lLla5! c4 'irxdJ cxdJ l:ld8 f4 A highly committing move. White, of course, is hoping to mount an attack on the black king, but if nothing comes of this, the advance f2-f4 will merely involve a weakening of his kingside pawns. 10 11 • cJ After 14 i.a4 cxd3 1 5 cxd3 White would have had no compensation for the weakness of his d3 pawn. Securely covering n, after which there is no future for the bishop at c4. 10 . Beginning a forcing manoeuvre, leading to a prosaic ending which is favourable to Black. 'fid4+! 12 i.bJ The point of the manoeuvre. 13 00 cannot satisfy White iD. view of 1 3 . . . ltixb3 14 axb3 i.d7, and so he is forced to allow . . . c5-c4. . . • lLle4 0-0 Following White's positional errors, he overlooks a tactical subtlety. Correct was 1 1 a3, securing the retreat of the bishop at c4. It may seem that White has successfully defended, and that he will regain his pawn and be able to develop normally. Indeed, Black does not achieve anything, for example, with 1 7 . . .e5 1 8 fxe5 ..tf5 19 Jl.e3 ! However, after forty minutes' thought I managed to find the correct way to consolidate my positional advantage. 17 .. ..i.c5! 172 . 18 l:lxd3 21 h6 A useful move. In some cases Black • The only move, since 18 �d3 l'bxb3 19 axb3 e5 is bad for White after, say, 20 lbt2 (20 fxe5 .tf5) 20... .tg4 15 2 1 l:txd8+ l:lxd8 2 2 .te3 .txe3 2 3 ltixg4 exf4. 18 19 ... .teJ 19 20 llxe3 The variation 19 lbe4 ltixb3 20 axb3 .tb5 ! cannot satisfy White. .txeJ .tbs 22 23 21 tbe4 • is threatening to play . . . f7-f5, in order to gain control of d2, and then White will not be able to reply tbg5, with a counter-threat against the e6 pawn. · As for the exchange on b3, Black is waiting for the white rook to move from a l. After the immediate 21...lLlxb3 22 axb3 the rook would be well placed on its initial square. Here I made use of a lesson given to me by Lasker in 1936 in Nottingham (Game 82). .td7 It all becomes perfectly clear. Black firmly controls the only open file, and after the inevitable exchange on b3, his bishop will be more dangerous than the white knight, especially in view of the weakness of White's kingside pawns. For Rubinstein, an incomparable master of such endings, the win would now be a matter of teclmique. Therefore Black's task was not so difficult, since he merely had to follow a (to some extent) well-beaten path. • llael axb3 lbxb3 a5 This barely noticeable move gives Black the advantage also on the queen­ side, where his two pawns counter­ balance the three enemy pawns. This will become clear when White plays c3c4, which he will soon be forced to do. Otherwise he is unable to secure the position of his rook at d2, in order to defend the second rank, and his king is unable to go to f2. Defending the d2 square against the invasion of the rook 173 · · 24 25 26 h3 @gl @b2 l:.ac8 @f8 · llc7 If White sticks to waiting tactics (he has nothing active available), then Black will gradually improve the placing of his pieces. . 27 28 29 @g3 @h2 @gt b6 l:lcd7 lldl 34 35 'if;>f2 h4 l:ld3 What else can White do, when there is simply nothing else than he can move? He moves one pawn off a light square, but he cannot advance the second one, since the :f3 square has to be defended. l:leJ h5 ltd2+ 37 38 39 J:le2 lleJ fle2 J:ld3 J:ld2+ llxe2+ 40 41 thxe2 li.)d4 <li>d6 g6 35 36 • • • Of course, it was also possible to win as follows: 36 ... .l:.xe3 37 @xe3 iLxg2 38 tLla4 <li>d6 39 tLlxb6 'it>c5 followed by . . . �cS-b4xb3xb2, but in time trouble Black continues with his plan. Now White can take on e2 with his knight, without losing his g2 pawn, but this does not change the evaluation of the position. White does not have a great choice. For example, 30 <itf2 is not possible on account of 30 . . . fS (cS and gs are now controlled by Black pawns) and 3 1 . . .l:l8d2+. Moving the king to h2 is also bad in view of 30 . . J:txel 3 1 l:xe l i.c6 followed by . . . i.xe4 and . . lld2. Therefore he. finally has to . advance his c-pawn. . 30 31 c4 lt)cJ .ic6 Axel+ Black can now go in for simplification, exchanging one pair of rooks, and after bringing his king up to the centre he can also exchange the second pair. Incidentally, in similar positions Rubinstein several times demonstrated the advantage of a bishop over a knight. 32 33 l:lxel J:le2 @e7 f6 The final subtlety. After defending the f5 square, Black then creates a passed e-pawn, after which he decides the game by taking his king to the 174 queenside. Of course, White c3Illlot exchange minor pieces, since the pawn ending is hopeless for him. 42 43 44 g3 fxe5+ c!Dc2 54 55 56 e5 fxe5 .ie4 'ili>e3 c!Df3 c!Dd2 57 58 59 60 61 .tf5 �b4 Capturing the e5 pawn could not compensate for the loss of both b­ pawns, after which the a-pawn would queen. But now the bishop actively intervenes. 48 49 � 50 'ili>e4 51 . 'ili>xe5 52 'ili>d4 a4 .i.h3 .i.g2 To advance his b-pawn Black has to play his king to c5, and for this he needs to push back the white king. Immediately forcing the knight to move, so that the black king is free to go to b4. 'ili>c5 45 · c!Del 46 47 48 c!Dd2 <itd5 'itd4 .i.c2 .i.xb3 i.xc4 .i.d3 'ili>d3 Wc3 WdJ l£lbl l£ld2 Wc5 b4+ .il.d5 .i.e6 il.f5+ For the umpteenth time in this game the black bishop moves to f5 with decisive effect. 62 �el .i.c2 White resigns The opening of the game was uninteresting, but in the middlegame a subtle battle for control of the d-file developed, and this led to an ending of textbook importance. .i.f5 Game 172 A.Sokolsky-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1 947 Sicilian Defence · 1 2 3 e4 c!Dfl iLb5+ c5 d6 This cunning check was devised roughly ten years before the present After winning a pawn, the bishop has retunied to its excellent post, from which it will assist the conversion of the pawn advantage. 53 llk4 game. Its main aim is to divert Black from his pl3Illled theoretical (or non­ theoretical ! ) path. and to take the game into unexplored territory. The simplest reply is perhaps 3 . . . .i.d7, . as was subsequently played by Najdorf. b5 175 3 4 . 0-0 .c!Dc6 a6 · he has to take the only correct decision, which is not to try and prevent the opponent from carrying out his plan. 0--0 10 Already somewhat behind in development, Black takes the liberty of losing a further tempo. This makes it difficult for him to achieve a good game, and subsequently he has to be very careful to avoid ending up in a critical position. 4 . . . t2Jf6 or 4 ... .td7 was better. 5 .ixc6+ bxc6 6 d4 7 Wxd4! 8 11fd3 • 11 • • �a3 Sokolsky decides to act in accord­ ance with Tarrasch's saying: 'The threat is stronger than its execution ' But in the given case this proves to be incorrect, since the threat can be promptly eliminated. Why then did my opponent reject the capture on f6? After 1 1 i.xf6 gxf6 12 c4 he has a significant positional advan­ tage, since the enemy bishops are inactive. Most probably my opponent was afraid that after 1 1 .txf6 .txf6 1 2 1lfxd6 'ii'b6 Black would have some initiative for the pawn. It is possible that I would have chosen this continuation, but White should not have avoided it. cxd4 e5 �f6 Black is at least two tempi behind in development and he has to reckon with the weakness of his d6 pawn. However, could he have avoided the following pin on his knight? Apparently not, since after 8 ... .Yi.e7 9 l:tdl 'ii'c7 (9 .. t2Jf6 IO .ig5) 10 .tg5 ! Boleslavsky rated White's chances very highly. .te7 9 .i.g5 . 11 • • . lla7 This move saves the pawn: after 12 .txf6 .i.xf6 1 3 'ii'xd6 :td7 White loses. Moreover, thanks to his compact pawn mass in the centre, Black even gains a slight advantage. Later it was shown that the immediate blow in the centre l l . . .d5 ! gives Black the advantage, for example 12 �xe5 lic7 ! It is amusing that the Encyclopaedia also considers 12 .ixf6 .txf6 13 exd5 e4 14 Wxe4 .ixb2 to be extremely favourable for Black, but . . . cites the present game, in which nothing of the sort occurred. · 10 1:1.dl! The most unpleasant move for Black. He has practically no defence against the exchange on f6, after which he either loses the d6 pawn ( 1 1 .txf6 .txf6 12 't!i'xd6), or else after l l . . . gxf6 he has problems with the f5 square. Therefore 12 13 �c4 �eJ l:ld7 Since the attack on the d6 pawn has been repulsed (if 13 .txf6 1Lxf6 1 4 �xd6 .ie7), White switches to a 176 systematic siege, threatening to play his knight to f5 and to advance his c-pawn. How the position has changed in just five moves! Black has the initiative. He is intending an attack on the most important white piece - the knight at f3, which . controls the d4 square. White decides against preventing 20. . . .i.g4 by 20 h3, since then the position of the black knight at f4 becomes almost invulnerable. 20 21 g3 �xg4 Ji.g4 If the knight had moved from f3, there would have followed . . . t'Af4-e6d4. 13 14 . Ji.b4 • • 21 h6! After 14 .i.xf6 .i.xf6 15 t'Af5 Black would have replied 15 . . . d5, while if 15 c4 g6. 14· . . . g6 15 16 l£Jb5 Now the activity of the knight at e3 is restricted, and Black eliminates the pin. · 17 18 19 c4 .i.xe7 W'c2 b4 l:ld2 'ifxe7 l£if4 l:ldd8 h5! 177 . • • �b3+! 2 1 . . .hxg4 was weaker in, view of 22 gxf4 gxf3 23 'i'd3 . The active knight must be retained! 22 23 @g2 �gl hxg4 �g5 24 l:ladl f5 As a result of just one exchange, the defects of White's position have be­ come more evident: weak squares at d4, f3 and h3, and the threat of . . . f7-f5. At this difficult moment Sokolsky takes the correct decision to initiate desperate counterplay. After the exchange on fS White loses quickly, since the a8-hl diagonal is soon opened. All that remains is to answer blow for blow! 25 c5! If now 25 ...dxcS, then 26 l:lxd8 l:lxd8 27 l:lxd8+ 'ifxd8 28 'i'xc5 lbxe4 29 11fxe5 and White is alright. However, Black finds the Achilles' heel in his opponent's position. 25 26 • . • cxd6 lLixe4 Wb7! Of course, not 26 ... l:lxd6 27 l:.xd6 lbxd6 28 11fxc6. But now White is lost, since he has no way of blocking the long diagonal. For example, if 27 1:td3 , in order to prepare f2-f3, there follows the natural reply 27 . . . cs ! 27 11fc4+ "'1g7 28 llc2 l:l.xd6 29 30 31 :xd6 1ic5 Wxc6 lLixd6 lLir! 1i'xb4 28 . . . cs 29 'i'd5 11fxd5 30 htxd5 cxb4 was not convincing (for example, because of 3 1 l:lc6), and Black decides to take play into a prosaic ending where he is a pawn up. Theoretically White's game is lost, but he retains practical hopes, since both players are in time trouble. 32 :c4 'i!fb5 33 34 35 a4 D.c5 l:tc4 1ia5 11t'b4 1'd2 36 37 38 :c4 l:lc2 1i'd4 1ifd8 Here already is the first time trouble error, which, however, like the subse­ quent ones, does not affect the final result. 32. . . 1!fd2 3 3 l:lc2 'ifd8 was more convincing (34 11fxa6 'i'd5+ is hopeless for White). Generally speaking, · Black does not object to this pursuit of his queen, since his chances are not impaired, and the end of his time trouble is approaching. llb4 The queen cannot leave the long diagonal. e.g. 38 'i'xa6 iidS+ 39 'it?fl 'i!fd l + 40 'iti>g2 l':1b8 with the threat of . . . :b l, immediately or after . . . 'ifd5+. 38 . . • 1!fa8 Otherwise the attack by White's heavy pieces could have become dangerous. 178 39 llb6 39 40 41 lDe2 D.xc6 A player with good endgame technique would undoubtedly have played 39 'i'xa8 l:.xa8 40 a5, after which the white rook on the sixth rank would have attacked the a6 pawn and restricted the black king. However, it should not be forgotten that the time control had not yet been reached. • • • a5! 11fxc6+ lld8 This is stronger than 41.. .l:r.b8, as on the d-file the rook prevents the possible manoeuvre ll'ie2-c3-d5-e7. 42 lDcJ What would have happened after 42 l:.c5 will be seen from what follows; two moves later this is what White played. 42 43 · l:tc7! • • . Ac5 @fa • . • lDd5 49 . lt)fJ e3 51 lDf4 White resigns. His position res­ embles 'Trishka's coat' 16 he covered the cl3 square, but this opened the e3 square. - Game 173 M.Botvinnik-V.Ragozin e4 lDgS As soon as the knight reaches g5, the game should be quickly decided. 46 lDeJ �e7! Forcing White to declare his inten­ tions, and he cannot play either 47 lDxg4 because of the prosaic 47 . . lDoo, or 47 l:tc2 in view of 47 . . . l:.xc2 48 ll'ixc2 �d6, when the black king approaches the a4 pawn Wf6 l:ta2 With the threat of 50 ... lDel + and 5 1 .. .ll'id3. 50 lDd5+ �g5 Other continuations could merely have postponed White's defeat. 44 45 Ae5+ l:tc5 l:tc4 Or 49 llxa5 tbh.3 50 tLid l :d2. l:r.d2 The strongest. As far as possible White prevents the black knight from going to g5. If 43 . . . �6 there follows 44 l:tc6+. 43 44 47 48 49 Moscow 1947 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 it)cJ e3 lDf6 e6 ..lb4 We7 Typical of Ragozin, aiming for a continuation that will be unexpected for his opponent The move is not without point in view of Black's intention of 179 It is not so easy to refute White's · plan. After 8 . . exdS 9 cxdS Black does not achieve anything: 9 . . . Wes 10 ..ic4 or 9 . . tL'le4 10 ..id2. This means that sooner or later he would have to play . . . d7-d6, although this somewhat weakens the c6 square. later opening the e-file, but since he is planning to fianchetto his queen's bishop, it would have been more logical to play 4 ...b6 immediately. 5 . . tL'lge2 Rubinstein's well known idea. White will force the exchange of the bishop at b4, without worsening his pawn fonnation on the queenside. 5 6 7 a3 tL'lxcJ 8 d5 b6 i.xc3+ i.b7 11 8 .id3 could also have been played, operation since the exchanging · 8 . . . ..ixg2 9 l:lgl .tb7 10 l:lxg7 favours White. But Black is free to reply 8 . . . d5, transposing into normal situations. Therefore White decides to advance his d-pawn, trying to cramp the oppon­ ent's pieces. This strategy involves a certain degree of risk in view of the fact that he is somewhat behind in develop­ ment. If now the game should become open, Black will be able to exploit the more active placing of his pieces and his lead in development. 8 . • • 9 .te2 tL'lbd7 9 . . . exdS 10 cxd5 fies was less advisable in view of 1 1 e4 ( 1 1 . . . tbxe4 1 2 'i!t'a4+). 10 0--0 0--0 e4 Here we can take stock: White has the two bishops and a spatial advantage, while Black's pieces are cramped and he appears to have no way of creating counterplay. Here some masters suggested 1 1 . . .tbe8, but after 12 ..ie3 ! f5 13 exf5 all that Black achieves is the opening of the e-file, with his kingside now weakened. Therefore Ragozin takes the correct decision to open the centre without losing time and without the dubious advance . . . f7-f5. d6 180 11 12 13 exd5 .tel exd5 I:lfe8 a6 It is essential to prevent the possible knight manoeuvre via b5 to d4. 14 1fc2 the5 But this effectively loses the game. Black's position is critical, and he has no time to make 'general ' moves, with­ out any specific aim. My opponent did not appreciate that his main enemy was the lrnight at c3, which cramps Black both in the centre, and on the queenside. Hence it follows that 14 ... ltie4 ! was necessary, achieving an almost equal game, since 1 5 .i.d3 tili:c3 ! 16 .txh7+ 'it>h8 17 bxc3 is not dangerous for Black in view of 17 . . . 'i'h4 18 .i.d3 lbes, if there is nothing better. He could also have considered 14 ...bS 1 5 cxb5 axb5 16 ltixb5 ( 1 6 .i.xb5 ltixd5 17 ltixd5 .txd5 18 1Wxc7 1 7 'i'e4) 16 ... ltixd5. The position of the knight at e5 merely aids the development of White's initiative. A similar mistake was also made in his time by Flohr (Grune 142). 15 :aet .i.c8 Black does not sense the impending threats. 16 17 .td4 f4 .ld7 lti g6 Of course, not 17 ...lbeg4 18 hg4 and White wins. As a result · the black pieces are completely driven away from the centre! 18 g4! ! 18 19 20 g5 11i'd2! 20 21 22 23 f5 hJ gxf6 h6 li)6e5 ltlf6 'il'xf6 24 25 26 9'f4 Wh1 .lg1 .J:Ie7 cs g6 Totally unexpected. Without wasting a single tempo, White wants to create a powerful and mobile pawn roller on the kingside (for example, after 19 g5 the knight at f6 has no retreat square). After 18 ...h6 Black would have ended up in a hopeless position: 19 .td3 1!fxel 20 l:hel %txel + 2 1 @fl %tae8 22 .txf6 gxf6 23 .txg6. The best move was 18 . . . �h8! , vacating a square for the knight's retreat, but in this case too after 1 9 'ifd2 'l'd8 20 h3 White retains an overwhelming advantage. Black fails to find this reply and falls into a trap. 1!fd8 li)g4 A quiet move, which refutes Black's plan. The weak squares on the c l -h6 diagonal (in particular e3) are securely defended, and the knight at g4 is inevitably lost. Black has managed to obtain only one pawn for the piece, which is paltry compensation. He continues to resist largely through inertia. Black achieves a further opening of the position, but at the same time the queens are exchanged. 181 27 28 fxg6 l:txf4 1!1xf4 fxg6 29 30 31 llf6 l:txd6 lle6 Afs lLixc4 If 28 . . . lLid3 White continued 29 llxf7. Now further evitable. 31 32 33 tournaments in Sernrnering-Baden ( 1 937) and Holland (1938). could exchanges have 1 2 d4 tLlf3 e6 f5 3 4 5 6 gJ .ig2 lLif6 ..i.e7 c4 d5 With the obvious avoiding a draw. are in- .l:xe6 ..i.xe6 dxe6 Jl.f3 Black resigns 0-0 intention of 0-0 I chose this variation of the Dutch A somewhat premature decision, since Black now has a second pawn for the piece. However, after 33 . . . l:tf8 34 .tb7 (this is simpler than 34 J:txe6 llxf3) 34 ... .tf? 35 lle2 a5 36 a4 his position is hopeless. Defence against Keres, because my opponent, while being a brilliant tactician, had a weaker understanding of the positional subtleties peculiar to closed positions . 7 lLicJ 7 8 .l:bl Things are more difficult for Black after 7 lLibd2. • • • c6 White prepares an attack on the queenside by b2-b4, as Reshevsky played against me in Nottingham, 1 936. 8 b3 is considered in Garne 57, and 8 Wc2 in Garnes 15 and 6 1 . I myself prefer 8 Ji.gs. Garne 174 P.Keres-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1947 Dutch Defence For about seven years Keres and I had not met at the chess board. Flohr advised me to play for a draw in this game with Black, and to try and win in the last round with White against Trifunovic, in order to secure victory in the tournament. But I took a different decision. Prior to the event in The Hague, it was very important to try and win in this game, thereby improving my chances in the forthcoming Match­ Tournarnent for the World Champion­ ship, where my main rival could only be the winner of the major international 8 9 • • • cxd5 <tih8 This seems obligatory, as after 9 b4 there could have followed 9 . . . dxc4 10 lDe5 tDd5. White expected the reply 9 . . . exd5, when he was going to begin an attack by 1 O b4. Another plan was carried out in my afore-mentioned game with Reshevsky, but there I played the weaker 8... We8 9 c5 'ilh5 10 b4. A little earlier (Moscow 1936), in a similar position Flohr played c4-c5 against Ryurnin, but without particular success. 1 82 16 17 9 . • • 1i'd3 1ie8 cxd5! This simple reply refutes White's plan. 9 l:tb 1 proves to be a loss of time, Black's queen's knight will take up a good position at c6, and his queen's bishop has chances of being more active than its opposite number at g2. positional inaccuracy. It was essential to preserve the knight from exchange, and for this l 7...h6 should have been played. The immediate 1 O t'De5, preventing 10 . . . t'Dc6, was clearly preferable. Here also it was not too late for 18 . . . h6. 10 10 11 .if4 • • • lDe5 li)c6 1 1 t'Db5 is not dangerous for Black in view of l l . . . li)h5 (12 .ic7 'i'd7). 11 12 13 . . • !:tel 1!fd3 .id7 D.c8 li)b5 It is quite good to force the bishop to retreat. 14 15 .id2 li)xc6 .id6 . An admission by White that he is no longer thinking of an advantage. 15 tbxd7_looks more logical. 15 16 �'· · · "Wf3 .ixc6 Unable to find any expedient plan, White waits. 183 A 17 • . . li)f6 · 18 a3 19 .ig5 19 ... !lc7 Played with a full understanding of the situation. Now White is threatening 20 .ixf6 followed by 2 1 f4, equalising. li)g4 Black grows nervous and makes an altogether aimless move, since the threats of 20 . . . Wh5 and 20 . . tDxh2 are easily parried. It would have been better to play the knight to h5 or e4. . 20 21 1id2 .if4 21 22 · 23 Axd6 1if4 li)f6 In this way it is even easier, than after the exchange of bishop for knight. for White to obtain an equal game. 1'd7 11rxd6 My opponent too does not act very calmly. By doubling rooks on the c-file, he would have guarded himself against any unpleasantness, whereas now Black will be better prepared for the occupation of the file. 23 24 25 gxf4 el 1i'xf4 11fc8 Another wasted tempo. It was essential to play 25 lba2, in order after 25 . . . .ib5 26 l::txc7 l::txc7 to exploit the possibility of 27 l::tc l to exchange the last pair of rooks. Now White gets into difficulties. 25 26 27 l:tfel f3 • • • 28 29 Ji.fl .ixc4 29 30 Wf2 30 31 32 We2 WdJ If 29 e4 Black would have returned his knight to f6. • . . :xc4 Again the knight could not move because of 30 . . Jk2. l£id6 bS .i.b5 Wg8 As long as the e4 square is not covered, White cannot exchange bishops (27 .ifl .ixfl 28 <it>xfl tbe4 29 lba2 l:.c2), while after 27 lba2 Black immediately breaks through to the second rank. Waiting tactics also do not help, as after suitable preparation Black will advance his queenside pawns. 27 Black is not in a hurry to improve the position of his knight, so that if 28 e4 he can reply 28 . . . lbh5. .i.c4 White has managed to bring his king to the centre, but the black pieces are now very active. Generally speaking, White was short of just one tempo. If it were him to move, 3 3 b3 followed by the retreat of his knight would save him. 32 • • • b4 Any move by White leads to defeat. After 33 axb4 l::txb4 34 l:tbl .l:kb8 3 5 Wc2 lbc4, as in the game, he loses a pawn. In the event of 33 tbe2 bxa3 34 bxa3 l:!.xc l the capture 35 l::tx cl loses a pawn immediately (35 . . . l:!.xc l 36 lbxc l lbc4), while 35 t'bxcl loses one quickly 184 42 (35 . . .l:b8, but not 35 . lbc4 36 e4). The last variation was probably the toughest defence. . . 33 34 35 36 37 · lLla2 bxa3 bxa3 ' l:a4 lLlxc8 lbc8+ ltxa3 lLlc3 @c2 37 38 39 40 41 :.bl JJ.b4 @d3 @c2 37 e4 would not have assisted the defence after 37 . . . lDd6 (38 exd5 ttlb5). ttld6 rM7 Ital :aJ llal Black repeated the position in order to be able to seal this move, without wasting effort or time; the next day there was a difficult adjournment session in prospect. If now White exchanges rooks, the knight ending should be lost. In my notes to a game with Grigoriev (Moscow 1927), I had already stated that knight endings are very similar to pawn endings, and in both cases an outside passed pawn gives good winning chances. · 42 Wd3 • .. llel!! The winning move, found in analysis, which involves a temporary pawn sacrifice. After the attack by the rook on the undefended white pawns, White could probably have saved the game, for example: 42... M 43 l:a4 ftlc8 (43 ... l:xf3 44 %:txa7+ Wf6 45 l:.a6) 44 ttlb5 l:i.xf3 45 l:.a6, or 42 . .. l:lhl 43 l:i.a4 l:xh2 44 .1:lxa7+ �6 45 .l:.a6, and the activity of his pieces compensates to some extent for his material deficit. 43 44 45 46 47 :a4 Iba7+ e4 <itc2 exf5+ 47 48 49 l:txg7 <ati>b3 49 50, 51 : 52 53 'it>a4 :n+ l:tf8 ttlb5 :b2+ :xb2 'itg6 ttld6 ttlf5 56 :r6+ <ifiih5 ttlc4 <ati>g6 l:te3+ :x0 After 47 exd5 ftle3+ 48 c;tid2 ftlxd5 49 ftlxd5 exd5 50 l:i.a6+ Wh5 5 1 l:i.a7 <ati>h6 52 l:i.d7 l:i.xf4 53 l:i.xd5 'itg5 Black will also pick up the h2 pawn. <ati>xf5 :f2+ To retreat to the back rank would be very unpleasant, but also at a4 the white king will be a long way from the action. With the knights on it is easier for Black to win. 54 i ftlc7 :e2 In this way Black obtains two connected passed pawns, whereas after 54 ...ftlxd4 55 f5+ exf5 56 ftl.xd5 the pawns would have been separated. 55 tbe8 ftlxd4 185 57 58 .llti .llxh7+ ltlf5 @g4 Now the win is, of course, a matter of technique, but my opponent, under­ standing the importance of this game, defends with great tenacity. 59 60 .lld7 lLlc.7 70 @a5 71 '.t?b5 72 c.t?a4 73 '.t?a5 lLlc4+ .llb6+ lLlb2+ li'lc4+ 74 '.t?a4 l:lb8 75 76 77 78 79 lLlb4+ lLlc6 �a3 c.t?a4 l:lb6+ @e6 lLlb2+ lLlc4+ l:lbl <it>f5 80 lLlb4 Even in this clear position it is not a bad idea to gain time for thought. As for 73 . . . li'lxd3 74 <it>xb6 e4, it too would have won, but would have demanded great accuracy. Why make things more di:fficult ! @xf4 @es If 74 ...:f6 there would have followed 75 l:lc7 ! , whereas now this is bad because of 75 . . . li'lb2+. The only problem in converting the advantage is to prevent the sacrifice of the knight for the two pawns, which, for example, was threatened now (6 1 lLlxd5+ or 6 1 li'lxe6+). With this in mind, the inunediate 60 . . . d4 was the most rational. 61 62 63 64 65 �b4 <is>bJ @b4 <ls>a5 �b6 .llc2 li'ld4+ .llc4+ tt'lf5 d4 66 67 68 li'la6 li'ld6 @dS e5 Threatening in .. some cases to play . . . li'le3 and ... .llxc7 followed by li'lds+. ... . lLlc5 lLldJ Now Black difficulties. 69 no .llh7 longer has any .llc6+ Finally we again adjourned the game, and Keres sealed his last move. In this case I had prepared 80 . . . e4 8 1 llh5+ '.t?g4 82 l:lc5 li'lb2+ 83 '.t?a3 lDd3 84 li'lxd3 exd3 85 lld5 'ittf3 . And if the move in the envelope had been 80 iDxd4+ (hoping for stalemate), the finish could have been 80 . . . exd4 8 1 1 86 played against me in the second game of our play-off match for the USSR Championship (Moscow 1 953). :r6+ (81 :h5+ �e6 82 :h6+ 'it>dS) 8 1 . . . �es 82 :rs+ (82 :e6+ 'ittd5) 82. . . 'itie6 83 l:.f6+ 'ittd5, and in each case after one more check Black would have released the stalemate · of the enemy king. However, these variations did not have to be demonstrated . . . 9 .td2 dxc4 10 11 .i.xc4 0-0 e5 0-0 12 :ae1 12 13 ... llle4! It was not essential to concede ground in the centre; 9 ... i.c7 could have been tried. White resigns. Game 175 M.Botvinnik-M.Euwe . Atfatch-Tournamentfor the World Championship, The Hague 1948 First Cycle Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 ll:if3 � e3 .td3 d5 e6 lllf6 c6 lllbd7 Thus White is agreeable to the Meran Variation (6 . . . dxc4 etc.), · but Euwe accepted this challenge only in Moscow (Game 179). 6 • • • A cunnirig move, since it is not easy for Black to find a satisfactory reply. After 12 ...exd4 1 3 exd4 White gains an important tempo by attacking the queen; if 12 . . .:e8 there follows 1 3 lllg5, while if 12 . . . e4 13 lllxe4. Therefore, in order to create the threat of . . . e5-e4, Black has to retreat his bishop. .i.b4 This move had been well known to my opponent for a long time, since he played it against Alekhine in their 1 937 World Championship Match. 7 aJ .ta5 In the afore-mentioned game Black exchanged on c3 and ended up in a difficult position. Therefore it is natural that Euwe should avoid the exchange of minor pieces. · s Wc2 1!Fe7 �s It would have been b€1tter �C> c il�,.. without losing time, as . Taimanov JJ..c7 In this way White prevents the variation 1 3 : . . e4 14 lllg5 i.xh2+ 15 �xh2 lllg4+ and 16 ... 'i!VxgS, and simul­ taneously creates the tllreat of 14 .tb4. 13 , . · · li)xe4 14 ' 1lfie4 · �• •. But thi� ;.s . a waste-,, O.f. precious time, and a weakening of 'the position. 187 Keres's recommendation of 14...�hS 15 .i.b4 c5 also seems dubious in view of 16 .i.xc5 tLixc5 17 dxc5 f5 (17... 'ifxc5 18 tLlg5) 18 'i!fd5 .l:td8 19 'ilf7. 14 . . ..td6 came into consideration. 15 16 .ta2 'if'h4 However, it was essential to play 20 . . . ii.e6, and if 2 1 .tb l , then now 2 1 . . . lLidS 22 1Vxe4 (after the exchange of queens the ending is safe for Black) 22 . . . fS and 23: . . tLixc3 . Of course, White's position would have remained more favourable, but there would still have been all to play for. lLif6 e4 21 22 17 11fxe7 fxe4 tbxe7 llJe5 A natural pawn sacrifice. If it is accepted, White will gain a strong attack on the enemy king. 17 . . • It would have been better to decline· the sacrifice and play 1 7 . . . .i.e6, in order to answer 18 .tb l with 18 . . . .td5. But in this case too, with 19 .tc3 followed by f2-f4, White would have retained the advantage. 18 19 20 dxe5 i.cJ f3 White has two active bishops, play on the d- and f-files, and finally, doubled pawns which excellently con­ trol the central squares. Axes 11fxe5 Ve7 tbd5 Euwe becomes nervous: he wants to suppress White's attack as quickly as possible, but he does not notice that the resulting ending is difficult for him. 20 . . . exf3 would also not have worked, in view of 2 1 i.b 1 h6 22 l:lxf3 tats 23 :tg3 ! 22 . . • b6 This move was rightly criticised by the commentators, but what can be suggested instead? 22 . . . .te6 loses quickly to 23 .i.xe6 fxe6 24 :xf8+ <it>xf8 25 Jlil+! <it>g8 (25 ... �e8 26 .i.xg7) 26 .l:tdl , and after the inevitable :invasion of the rook at d7 it can be considered that the game is decided. If 22 . . . .tg4 there follows 23 l:tf4 ilh5 24 g4 .tg6 25 h4 h5 26 'it>h2 'it>h7 27 l:tgl f6 (suggested by Keres), but here, if there is nothing better, possible 188 29 30 31 32 is 28 gxh5 .i.xh5 29 e5 ! with a strong attack. After 22 ... .i.g4 23 l:r.f4 �5 24 g4 .i.g6 also sufficient is 25 l:r.dl l:r.ad8 26 l:r.xd8 l:lxd8 27 .i.xa5 :dl + 28 'ifiif2 , when White is a pawn up with two strong bishops. Perhaps after 22... .i.g4 Black would have had slightly better practical chances of saving the game, but his position would have remained lost, and therefore his 20th move must be considered the decisive mistake. 23 24 2s 26 l:ldl l:r.d6 :n e5 .i.c6 .lh.b6 lDxc6 lbc6 e7+ l:r.t7 .i.d5 Black resigns Game 176 P.Keres--M.Botvinnik Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, The Hague 1948 First Cycle · R.eti Opening lDg6 .i.a6 .i.bs And so we now met in The Hague. After our game from the previous tour­ nament (Moscow 194 7) Paul, of course, could not feel relaxed; I therefore aimed for a complicated battle. 1 2 3 c4 g3 ..i.g2 e6 d5 d4 A highly risky move, against which White immediately finds a good rejoinder. The variation 3 . . . dxc4 4 'i'a4+ 'i'd7 5 't!fxc4 occurred in a later game (No.205). The most sensible for Black is nonnal development by 3 , . .lDf6, 4 .. .i.e7 and 5 . .0-0. . . Now Black loses because of the weakness of his f7. White's doubled pawns begin advancing, preparing the decisive opening of diagonals for the bishops . and continuing · to control the central squares. 26 27 • • • e4 lDe7 Maintaining control of the centre. 27 28 e6! c5 f6 4 b4 White would not have derived anything from the variation 4 e4 e5 5 d3 i.d6. 4 • • • c5 Tiris too, objectively speaking, is not the best continuation. 4...a5 was pre­ ferable. For example, a game Goldberg­ Bronstein ( 1947) continued as follows: 5 b5 es 6 d3 Ab4+ 7 tDd2 t2Jf6 s �3 lDbd7 9 0-0 0--0 10 a4 h6, and Black's position was even to be preferred. 189 5 b5 and 1 1 tLif4, while if 9 ... .tg4 10 h3 .txe2 1 1 'i!fxe2 exf4 12 e5 !) 10 f5 when he retains equal chances. But here it is difficult to explain the point . of White's move. The idea of adding to the pressure on the g2-b7 diagonal with an attack on the b-file suggests itself. After 5 bxc5 .ixc5 6 .ia3 White would have the initiative. 5 6 d3 9 10 11 0-0 f3 11 12 13 f4 f5 13 14 lLld2 lLlh6 _i.g4 Again there are grounds for a critical comment: it was essential to transfer the knight from b 1 via d2 and f3 to h2, increasing the number of defenders on the kingside, as Black often does in the King's Indian Defence, manoeuvring his queen's knight to h7. e5 ..i.d6 .te6 .ig4 In this situation it was now danger­ ous for White to open the position by 13 fxe5, and he could not continue his development with 13 00 on account of 13 . . . exf4. 7 e4 This decision is also not easy to understand. White has just closed the b­ file, and now he also blocks the important diagonal. Meanwhile, with the cunning manoeuvre (introduced, if I am not mistaken, by Capablanca) 7 lLld2, and only if 7 . . . f5 8 e4, White would have initiated play in the centre, while retaining the possibility of activating his bishop at g2 . 'Wc7 7 Hindering f2-f4. thd7 g6 - • 8 9 • • lLle2 h4 h5 Yet another positional error, after which f2-f4 will involve a weakening of the g4 square. White should have continued 9 f4 f6 (otherwise 10 fxe5 A critical moment in the game. The opening of the f-file is inevitable, and since in this case White has to reckon with the weakness of his e3 square, Black has the better prospects. 190 15 16 11 18 fxg6 tl'lfJ :n ..i.xh6 fxg6 il..e7 'ifd6 24 In an open game, when there are no fixed positional weaknesses, the dark­ square bishop may be exchanged. But in this position White has such a weakness (the e3 square), and the other side's dark-square bishop will persistently aim to reach there. 18 19 20 'ifd2 ll'lg5 21 l:tel l:txf8+ The exchange is inevitable, of course, but why help the black bishop to go to h6? ..i.xf8 24 .. • 25 a4 Here the knight should have been returned to f3, preventing ... il..h6. The loss of a pawn is now unavoidable. l:lxh6 l:lh8 ll'lf6 Finally Black too commits a positional error. It was essential to exchange a pair of rooks by 20 . . . Itf8, after which White would have been unable to create any counterplay. Now 22 lLJr4 is threatened, whereas the immediate 2 1 lDr4 would have been premature because of 2 1 . . . exf4 22 gxf4 (22 e5 'ilxe5 23 l:tel We3 ! ) 22 . . . 'i!ic7. 21 . . . Wb6 Black parries the threat of 22 ll'lf4, removing his queen from a possible attack. 22 ll'lfJ This unexpected move again allows Black to exchange a pair of rooks, and this time he exploits the opportunity. Things would have developed different­ ly if White had signalled liis intention of starting an immediate attack on the other wing - 22 a4 a5 (otherwise 23 a5 iic7 24 a6 b6 25 lDr4 exf4 26 e5) 23 bxa6 l:r.xa6 24 'ilic2, when he has the possibility of active play. 22 23 ll'lg5 ll'ld7 l:tf8 191 25 26 a5 il..h6 1'f6 ll'lb3 :rs • • . A second attack on the pinned knight, and a third will soon follow, whereas there is nothing more with which to defend it. 0-0-0 27 ll'lcl A typical idea, of which I made extensive use: Black castles only on the 27th move. Of course, this is possible in closed positions. Delayed castling allows one to gain time for manoeuvres aimed at fighting for the initiative in the post-opening stage. 28 Black has no reason to hurry, and for the moment he completes the mobil­ isation of his forces, and also takes certain prophylactic measures, iri order to be fully prepared for possible actions by the opponent on the queenside. 29 30 3t l:.at l!fct l:.a2 1i'e7 'ifilb8 l:.ti 32 33 'if'a3 hxg5 ..i.xg5 The way for the knight via f8 to e6 is open; White decides to give up a pawn inunediately. 39 40 4t ..i.b3 1i'dt b6 4t 42 Wg4 42 43 'it>xg3 c!Llb7 c!Llg5 This, the strongest move, was sealed. After analysis Black was able to play boldly, not fearing his opponent's threats on the queenside, since his ac­ tivity on the kingside is more effective. It need hardly be said how much anxiety this game caused. Everyone considered Paul and myself to be the main contenders for victory in the tour­ nament. The game was adjourned with an advantage to Black, but with possib­ ilities of counterplay for my opponent. • • • The last chance. • • • b4! hxg3+ Of course, not 43 'i'xg3 l:.h7. 33 . . • ..i.dt The simplest - Black eliminates the knight that is attacking his c5 pawn, after which his queen will be relieved from having to defend it. 34 Wet 34 35 l:.b2 ..i.xb3 ..i.dt 36 37 l!fxdt Wet Wxg5 c!Llf8 38 'ifilh2 'iff6 Of course, this change anything. • • • 'trick' does not Diverting the queen from the defence of the g5 pawn. Being a pawn up is not enough - the knight must also demonstrate its superiority over the bishop! I chewed over this position for a long time, but was unable to find any secure way to win. In the event of 43 . . . �xh3 44 'i'xh3 I first had to reject 44 . . . 'iff3+ 45 'ifilh2 'ifxh3+ 46 'ifilxh3 :n+ 47 'ifilg4 l:txd3 because of 48 l:th2 axb6 49 axb6 'it>c8 50 l:th7 l:te3 5 1 @g5. Then, instead 1 92 of the rook ending, I considered the queen ending: 44. . . 'i'f4+ 45 'it>g2 'i'fl+ (45 . . . g5 46 1i'h6) 46 'it>h2 l:tf2+ 47 l:txf2 Vxf2+ 48 'it>hl 'iii'el+ 49 'it>g2 Ve2+ 50 'it>hl 'i'h5 5 1 'it>g2, and it transpired that the pawn ending with an extra pawn cannot be won - 5 1 . . . 'i'xh3+ 52 'it>xh3 axb6 53 axb6 'it>c8 54 'it>g4 r,t>d7 55 r,t>g5 'iPc6 56 'it>xg6 <ifi>xb6 57 c;t>f5 . What could I do? I had to call on the assistance of Flohr, my other official second (my main second was, of course, Rag�zin). Within an hour my consultant returned and suggested a move, which was in fact accepted. 43 . • • After 46 l:txb7+ <lr>xa6 White loses a piece, while if 46 <lr>xh3 Black wins by 46 . . . 'iffl+ 47 cJi>h2 lth8+ 48 'it>g3 'i!fg 1+ 49 l:lg2 'i'e3+ 50 'i!Ff3 l:th3+. This means that the knight has to be taken by the queen. 'i!Fxb3 <lr>g2 'it>b2 ltxf2 Whl <itg2 <lr>gl 52 53 54 'IfxeJ 'iff4+ 'iffl+ ltf2+ 1fxf2+ 1iel+ 1!fe2+ If 52 <ii>h l there follows 52 . . . 1Wh5. IU'8 This seems very risky, but Flohr had calculated everything precisely. After 44 'i!fd7 Vf4+ 45 <iti>g2 a6 or 44 ..ig2 �e6 45 .Jlh3 �4 46 1!fd7 �2+ 47 l:txe2 'i'f3+ White stands badly. r,t>xa7 44 · bxa7+ 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 axb7 'iieJ+ dxe3 ci>xb7 a6 There was no perpetual check (45 ll.xb7+ <ifi>xb7 46 'i!fd7+ <lr>b8 47 'iib5+ <ifi>a8), but now Black transposes into a won pawn ending. 45 • • • �xh3 Here the outside guarantees a win. 55 56 57 58 <lr>g2 <t>fJ <it?xeJ Wd2 passed ci>b6 <lr>a5 'it>b4 g5 pawn It was also possible to win by 58 ...'it>b3 59 d4 <tixc4 60 dxe5 �b5 !, but the advance of the pawn simplifies everything. White n�signs. 193 From move 45 to the end of the game I played instantly. This apparently made a great impression on an American General who was present at the adjourn­ ment session. He gave me a lengthy handshake. His American accent was incomprehensible to me, but I realised that there are also chess enthusiasts in the US Anny. uncovers the bishop at g7, attacking the d4 pawn, and the other bishop can eliminate the knight at f3 which is defending the same !pawn. Grune 177 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov Afatch-Tournamentfor the World Championship, The Hague 1948 Second Cycle Griinfeld Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 lDcJ lt)f3 1!fb3 9 Fate decreed that Smyslov and I were to play more than a hundred tournament and, mainly, match games. It is natural, therefore, that many opening variations and even individual lines were repeated in our games. This applies, in particular, to Smyslov's Variation in the Griinfeld Defence, which he had already tried in our gaine in 1946 (No. 157). 0--0 6 Wxc4 i.g4 7 e4 8 i.eJ 9 10 lDfd7 This improvement (in the afore­ mentioned game the weaker 8... lllc6 was played) had already been tested quite successfully by Smyslov in several games in 1947 (in Pamu, Warsaw and Moscow). It is quite logieal, since it lDd2 For my part, for this event I had specially prepared this new move, al­ though I realised that it was insufficient for gaining an advantage (earlier 9 i.e2 was usually played, then subsequently 9 0-0-0). The point of the innovation is that White preserves his knight from exchange, after which the bishop sortie to g4 seems pointless, while the d4 pawn will be defended by the same knight from b3 . However, as will be seen, here too Black could have easily equalised. lDf6 g6 d5 i.g7 dxc4 · . • • 'ffd3 lDb6 c6 Analysing this position at home, I saw that after 10 . . . f5 1 1 f3 fxe4 ! Black obtains good prospects, e.g. 12 fxe4 lllc6 13 h3 .i.c8 14 00 e5 15 d5 llld4 16 t'llxd4 'Wh4+ 17 @dl exd4 18 ..txd4. However, I assumed that, on first encountering 9 llld2, Smyslov would not risk going in for tltis sharp variation. 194 17 18 My assumption proved to be correct, but to be fair it should be mentioned that with the continuation chosen Black also achieves a reasonable game. 11 12 13 14 f3 lldl a3 1fc2 1fxe2 0-0 l:tad8 As in the previous game (No. 176), White castles late, for reasons that are already known to the reader. '.i.e6 llla6 '9'd7 9e6 18 White has played the opening too slowly, and the queen manoeuvre dl­ b3xc4-d3 -c2 has cost him four tempi. He. therefore experiences difficulties on account of his lag in development, and he is even forced to leave his d4 pawn undefended. 19 14 • . • f/)e,7 Why did Black decline the pawn sacrifice? After 14. . . .ltxd4 I S lllb3 i.xb3 16 'ifxb3 es or IS llldbl cS 16 lllbS :res 1 7 tbxd4 cxd4 1 8 lllc3 .i.c4 19 llxd4 'i'c6 his chances are better. Only later was I able to establish that, by playing l S .ltxd4 'ifxd4 16 lllc4 'i'f6 17 llla S i.c8 1 8 i.xa6 bxa6 19 b4, White gains equality. Possibly it was this variation that Smyslov did not like. 15 16 lllb3 .i.e2 Ac4 i.xe2 lllc5 A premature sortie - the knight will soon be driven back. 19 tLJas should have been considered, and t11en, per­ haps, it would have become clear that, by declining the pawn sacrifice (14 . . . .i.xd4), Black gave White an opportunity to retain an opening advantage. 19 20 . <ifi>hl 21 I tLlbJ 22 . Wc4 't!fc8 ltld7 b6 This queen sortie is also unsuccessful, since there is nothing for it do to here, 'as White is soon forced to admit. By playing 22 :d2 followed by .l:lcl and %ldc2 White would have created real pressure on the half-open c­ file. 1!fb7 22 23 195 f4 A double-edged move. It practically forces . . . e1-e6, but it markedly weak.ens the light squares in White's own position, which Black could have promptly exploited. 23 24 . • • :ct e6 lfil6 With the aim mentioned in the previous note, Black should have played 24 . . .fS, as suggested by Keres, thus seizing control of the central square d5. :cS 25 ii.gt 26 27 llc2 'W'e2 l:l.fd8 lDb5 31 lDd2 31 32 ... lDe4 Again I have to agree with Keres, in that the preparatory 3 1 .i.f2 was stronger, not hurrying with the tempting manoeuvre of the knight to d6. I have to admit that I underestimated Black's defensive resources after the obvious exchange sacrifice. lDf5 lDxd4 The only way! After 32 . . J:txd4 33 ..i.xd4 tllxd4 34 llld6 'i'd7 3 5 'i'f2 Black would have been left without any compensation for the lost exchange. Also, the decision could not be deferred, since the quiet 32 . 'ifa6 33 l:ldl h5 34 :d3 would have allowed White an overwhelming advantage in the centre, which would have been difficult to oppose. . 33 34 35 . ..i.xd4 lDd6 exd6 l:l.xd4 :xd6 This pawn offer is correct: after 28 lDxb5 cxb5 29 :xc8 :xc8 30 e5 lDd5 3 1 Wxb5 llc2 Black gains sufficient counterplay. Therefore White declines the sacrifice, and he finds a way of intensifying his positional pressure. 28 e5 lDxcJ 28 . . .lDdS 29 tlle4 would have been unpleasant for Black, but now the transference of the white pawn from the b-file to the c-file allows it to take part in the battle for the central squares. 29 30 bxc3 c4 lDd5 lDe7 35 . . • c5! This is the point of the positional exchange sacrifice: the d6 pawn is doomed, and the black bishop will take up a dominating position at d4. 196 36 37 lld2 'lffJ ltd8 11fxf3 38 39 ltxf3 g3 ..i.d4 44 45 But here Black overestimates his chances in the endgame. He should have kept the queens on (37 ... 'ifd7), ·when in the subsequent play the balance would have been maintained. ltd2 � "'e7 The time trouble 'blemishes' continue. 39 g4 was more energetic. 39 • • • :xd6 3.9. . . h5 would have emphasised White's inaccuracy on his previous move. 40 r.t?g2 Although it involved a loss of time, 40 g4 was better. 40 . . . f5 On this move it was again not too late to play 40_. . . h5. Wf7 41 a4 42 ltb3 For the moment White does not adjourn the game, since the next few moves do not appear to be decisive, and therefore he does not take any action before the break. But this · was wrong! After 42 a5 bxa5 43 l:!.a3 l:la6 44 l:!.da2 he would have broken through on the queenside, increasing his winning chances. <itf6 42 43 lla2 Another weak move, allowing and even suggesting to Black the advance . . . a7..a.5 (at the time I thought that it would make things easier for White). Here too it was essential to play 43 as bxa5 44 l:ta3 l:tb6 45 l:tc2. 43 • . . a5 The game was adjourned in this position, and Smyslov sealed his move. For two days I worked with Ragozin, and we came to the conclusion that White can hope tQ win only if he is able to break through on the kingside (here it is, the price of his carelessness on the 42nd and 43rd moves). Then, by com­ bining threats on this wing with an attack on the b6 pawn, he can try to put Black in zugzwang. This plan would have been most difficult to carry out if Black had sealed 45.�.h5, and it was adopted as the main move in the following analysis: 46 h3 lfi?e8 47 g4 h4!! Now alas, I had to reject 48 gxf5, and not only because of 48 . . . gxf5 49 l:tg2 <M1 50 ltd3 .ie5 5 1 l:txd6 .ixd6, when Black plays his bishop to d8, and in view of the blocked nature of the position White has nowhere to break through. Even stronger for Black is 48 ...exfS ! , when he places his king at fl, and the threat to the b6 pawn is not dangerous , .in view. of the manoeuvre 1 97 . . . .l:td6-e6-e3+. This means that the pawn exchange has to be deferred. 48 .l:tdl 'ifild7 (otherwise 49 .l:tdbl ) 49 gxf5! gxf5 (now if 49 ...exf5 there follows 50 .l:te 1, and after unhurriedly doubling rooks on the e-file, White will then break through to the enemy rear) 50 :d2 'ite7 51 J:tg2 'itf7 52 l:ld3 i..e5! I considered this to be the only move, but Keres thought that 52 . . ..l:td8 was stronger. After continuing the variation - 53 llb2 .l:tb8 54 llbl 'itf6 55 l:tdb3 .l:tg8 56 l:txb6 l:tg3+ 57 <Ji>e2 l:txh3 - he wrote that 'it seems improbable that White has any real winning chances )l.ere. ' It is hard to object to this, of course, but why hurry to win the b-pawn when instead of 55 .l:tdb3 it is possible to play 55 'it>g2 and only then l:tdb3 ? Then if . . .l:tg8+ the king can retreat to b l, and the pawn is lost without any compensation. After 52 ... .ie5!, however, it is un­ favourable for White to exchange on d6, but he continues 53 l:ldd2, and Black cannot go in for the exchange, since he loses his b6 pawn or allows the rook into his rear. And in the event of 47 48 49 J:tg2 J:td3 h4 49 50 51 52 lbg4 l:lg2 J:tgd2 52 53 54 :·g2 l:lgd2 55 'it>e2 rbe7 "1f7 A mistake: this pawn should not have been placed on a square of the same colour as the enemy bishop. fxg4+ b5 l:ld8 In order for the moment not to allow the bishop to go to f6. But it imme­ diately becomes clear that this aim cannot be achieved. 53 i..d4 54 l:lgl �e5 55 l:lddl! i..d4 56 l:ld3! il.e5 57 l:lgdl! .id4 58 l:tbl wes "1f7 'it>e8 .•. the b6 pawn is after all lost. It is not clear whether this would have definitely led to a win for a White, but he would retain c:;onsiderable practical chances. As it transpired when the envelope was opened, Smyslov had sealed another, objectively weak move, and all my efforts were wasted - the play followed an unexplored path. 45 46 g4 'ifild7 h6 Preventing 55 ... i..f6, on which there would follow 56 l:td6, when Black can­ not reply 56 . . . i..e7 as the rook at d2 is now defended by the king. It is interesting that the aggressive attempt to break through with t:IJ.e king 55 <ili>e4 i..f6 56 l:td6 i..e7 57 l:txd8+ .txd8 58 'it>e5 'it>e7 ! - would have led White into an impasse: after 59 l:txd8 'ifilxd8 60 "1xe6 b5 ! he even loses. 1 98 55 56 • • @e7 • l::t dl I rejected 65 .l:.c l + because of 65 . . . c;tib3 ! (65 ... c;tid4 66 l::tec5) 66 .l:.b5+ (66 l::te3+ 'itib2) 66...<ata2, and Black defends against the mate. Tirreatening in two moves to switch both rooks to the b-file and finally win a pawn. Black creates counter-threats. :rs 56 65 66 67 68 69 • • • 57 l::tfl .i.f6 58 59 60 nbJ l::txb6 l::tb7+ iLxh4 AgJ </;Jf6 Here is the result of the mistake on move 49 - the pawn at h4 is under attack. After 60 ... @d6 61 I!dl+ c;tic6 62 l::tdb 1 things end in mate. �c5 h4 c;tid6 . @d7 J:tf5 @fJ l:lbl l::tb6+ @g4 Black seems to have set up an impregnable fortress, but in such cases the idea of zugzwang sometimes comes to the aid of the stronger side. Thus, for example, here White could have won by 70 l:la6!, when Black himself is forced to destroy his fortress (I suggested this move immediately after the game). The black rook cannot move along the f-file because of the loss of the as pawn, nor along the fifth rank in view of 71 .l:.axe6. If 70 . . . i..h2 there follows 71 .l:.exe6 l:txf4+ 72 c;tih3 !, and the king cannot move from d7 due to 71 l:axe6. In the game White's pursuit of the enemy king is insufficiently effective. <t/e7 70 l::td4+ · Here White should probably have played 6 1 � h4 62 @g4. But in the game another 'exchange of compli­ ments' occurs. 61 · l::tb5 </;Jf5 After 6 1...@g7 62 l::txc5 i..xf4 63 l::txa5 h4 the black pawn would soon have reached h2, and the win for White woµld have become highly problematic. 62 · l:txc5+ @e4 . .· . 63· . . l:te5+ · · 64 :··: l::t dl+ .65 . lle4+ ' · · �d4 @xc4 71 72 73 74 l::tb7+ ltb5 lld6+ :xa5 @f6 e5 <tlg7 The final error in this long-suffering game. 74 fxe5 was essential, still retaining some minimal wmnmg chances, although, in · the opinion of Keres, with 74 . . . :!4+ 75 'it>h3 l::txa4 76 I!d7+ c;tih6 77 e6 g5 Black secures a draw. This would seem to be correct, since 78 e7 g4+ 79 ¢>g2 l::ta2+ 80 <i>fl .l:.31+ 81 lfiie2 .l:.e t+ 82 c;tid2 'it?g6 ! leads to a draw (83 .l:.b6-¥ @f7 84 :h6 ..tf4+). 199 · · 4 5 6 el al bxc3 7 lbe2 0-0 .txc3+ Jle8 Here 6 . . . c5 or 6 ...d6 is simpler, since the advance of the e-pawn planned by Black does not bring him any particular gains. The natural continuation. In the event of 7 .i.d3 Black would have advanced his central pawn with gain of tempo . . . e6-e5-e4. Therefore White first plays his knight to g3 and then develops his bishop at e2. - 74 Jlxf4+ 75 '1filhl <i&>b6 'ifrh5 76 Jlaa6 l:lxa4· 77 Jlxg6 78 l:th6+ ci>g5 79 llhg6+ 'li>h5 Draw agreed 7 8 lbgl e5 A heavy-weight battle, . which does credit to both players. More than once, exploiting imperceptible errors by Black, I built up an advantage, and each time Smyslov demonstrated his tactical superiority. A fine feature of the game was undoubtedly . provided by the analysis of the adjourned position, even though it remained 'off-stage' . 8 Game 178 M.Botvinnik-P.Keres Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, The Hague 1948 Second Cycle Nimzo-Indian Defence · 1 . d4. 2 c4 l lbcl lbf6 e6 .i.b4 • • . d6 Instead of this Keres recommends 8 . . .d5, and Taimanov 8 . . . b6. But I think that 8 . . e4 9 Ae2 b6 10 0-0 i.b7 was better, when 1 1 f3 leads to a complicated battle with chances for both sides. . 9 .te2 Immediate operations in the centre would not have promised White any advantage: 9 f3 c5 10 e4 exd4 1 1 cxd4 cxd4 12 'ilfxd4 ltic6. 200 9 • • • lLlbd7 With the aim of putting pressure on White's pawn centre, 9 ... c5 and then 10 ...lLlc6 was more energetic. Keres thought that the immediate 9... lbc6 was also possible (10 0-0 lLla5). 10 0-0 c5 With the queen's knight at d7, this move is no longer so strong. 11 f3 Since Black's queen's knight is not attacking the d4 pawn, White has the opp0rtunity to prepare and carry out the advance of his e-pawn. 11 • • . cxd4 In such positions Keres liked to open the centre. He also carried out a similar plan in our first encounter in the AVRO Tournament ( 1 938). In the given position this decision can hardly be approved, since White gets rid of his doubled pawn and his queen's bishop becomes active. 1 1 ... tbf8 came into consideration, although even in this case White has the better chances. 12 13 cxd4 .ib2 lLib6 exd4 All three possible recaptures would have justified Black's exchange: 14 'it'xd4 tBa4, 14 exd4 d5 or 14 .txd4 .te6 1 5 l:.cl l:.c8, in each case with counterplay. But White can defer the elimination of the d4 pawn, after creating a more favourable situation for this, and Keres, apparently, did not take this into account. In · the spirit of the position was 13 . . . .te6 14 l:tc l l:.c8 15 dxe5 (15 d5 .id7) 1 5 . . .dxe5 1 6 1!fxd8 ltexd8 17 .txe5 with the better prospects for White in the endgame. 20 1 14 e4! White plans to capture on d4 with his queen, when the a l square has been vacated for the retreat of his bishop. 14 15 . :ct • . .te6 :e7 A loss of time. By 1 5 . . .l:tc8 16 'i'xd4 lba4 17 .ta l lbc5 Black could still have carried out the thematic manoeuvre of his knight to the blockading position. 1!fc7 16 1!1xd4 Black effectively provokes White into opening the position, which is favourable for the latter as his rook comes very powerfully into play. Strange though it may seem, here Black misses his last opportwrity to prolong the resistance: 16 . . . l:tc8 17 l:tfdl Vic? ( 1 8 'ifxd6 'it'xd6 19 l:lxd6 lbe8 20 l%d4 l%ec7). 17 18 c5 l%xc5 dxc5 'ilf4 ' 18 ... 'i'd8 was better, since after 19 'i'e3 �d7 or 19 Vlxd8+ 1'xd8 20 .txf6 gx:f6 2 1 lbh5 f5 ! (22 exf5 .txf5 23 l:txf5 :xe2) Black would have parried the opponent's immediate threats. In the game it all ends more quickly, since the black queen is pushed back a long way from the kingside. 19 After this second defeat in the Match-Tournament it became clear to everyone that Paul could no longer hope to win the event. Jlcl The position of the bishop at c 1 also proves useful as regards the attack on the black king. 19 . . • 'ilb8 Game 1 79 Or 19 .. J�d7 20 'ifb4 'iib8 2 1 .i.b5. If 20 l:lg5 M.Botvinnik-M.Euwe li:\bd7 Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, Moscow 1948 Third Cycle Slav Defence 20. . .lLleS there would have followed 2 1 lLlh5 f6 22 lLlxf6+, when White is a pawn up with an attack. Paul did not suspect that White could sacrifice his rook and conclude the game with a direct attack. However, this happens to players with an attacking style - they often underestimate their opponent's attacking possibilities. 21 22 l:lxg7+! �h5+ 1!1'e3 d5 li:\f6 e6 c6 5 6 el .i.d3 �bd7 dxc4 8 9 10 .i.d3 e4 e5 a6 c5 After suffering a failure in the first game of the Match-Tournament (No. 175) with 6 . . . .i.b4, the former World Champion decided to try an old and well-known continuation in the Meran Variation, which theory considered to be sufficient for equality. Regarding 6. .. .i.e7, see Game 144. b5 7 .i.xc4 'it>xg7 'it>g6 The retreats of the white pieces are amusing: first the bishop from b2 to c l , and now also the queen. .. Black resigns. d4 /i)fJ c4 �c3 Euwe employs my own weapon against me (cf. , for example, Game 154). White's attack was also irresistible after 22 . . . 'it>t8, but now things ends in mate. 23 1 2 3 4 I had made a thorough study of this continuation (see, for example, Game 10). 10 d5 was known back in the 1 920s, but at that time it did not receive a proper evaluation. Euwe knew, of course, that I did not employ it. 10 202 . • • cxd4 In the afore-mentioned Game 10, 10 . . . t'Llg4 was played. 11 lDxb5 axb5 12 exf6 1!i'b6 13 14 fxg7 0-0 .txg7 When at that time I played the Meran Variation as Black, I used to prefer Sozin' s move - 1 1... t'Llxe5. In the 19th USSR Championship (195 1 ); against me Simagin played 1 2 . . . .i.b7, which does not substantially change the evaluation of this variation. 'ii'd6 17 'ii'c2 h6 18 .td2 .i.b7 19 a3 Larsen gained a substantial advantage against Mestel, Hastings 1972/3) 16 M4 .i.dS, since White has a good choice between occupying e5 ( 17 t'Lle5 t'Llxe5 18 .ixe5 .txe5 19 llxe5, and if 1 9 . . .f5 there is the dangerous exchange sacrifice 20 llxd5 exd5 2 1 'i'b3 1Wc5 22 .ixb5 l:tfb8 23 'ii'g3+), and seizing control of the c-file ( l 7 1!i'e2 b4 18 l:iac l). 15 15 16 All this had been prepared by me before the War and tested in April 1939 in a training game (see the last section of the book). Ragozin was playing Black, and he continued 14... .ta6, since he always liked to make 'non­ theoretical' moves, but after 15 b4 he got into difficulties. Euwe sticks to the recommendation of theory. How could he have known that it were wrong? 14 . . • lDc5 .if4 White begins implementing the plan of seizing control of the centre with his pieces. The seemingly promising ex­ change of Black's knight for the bishop at d3 cannot prevent this aim. It was this that constituted the subtle point of the new system I had prepared. • • • Itel .ib7 l:td8 Here Euwe realised, of course, what the opponent's plan was, and he decided to stick to waiting tactics, but the continuation that suggested itself was 16 ... l'Llxd3 1 7 'ifxd3 .ixf3 1 8 'ii'xf3 0-0, which occurred in subsequent games. Even so, after 19 'ifg4 White has the advantage. Black could also have gone in for sharp play without castling: 16 ... .idS 17 .ieS .txe5 18 t'Llxe5 llg8 1 9 .to with advantage to White. 11 18 �ct .ie5 :d5 Thus White has achieved that for which he was aiming. In this position Black cannot castle, and this . is perhaps the most important thing. · If 18 . 0-0 there would have followed 19 · .txg7 ! �g7 20 t'Lles, with · the threat of 21 l:txc5, 22 'i!fg4+ and 23 'ifbs. If .. The following continuation is dubious for Black: 14 ...0--0 15 .!:t.el .ib7 (15 ...eS is anti-positional; after 1 6 �5 203 20 . . .tbxd3 2 1 'i'xd3 �h8 (2 1...f6 22 l:tc7+! 'i'xc7 23 'i'g3+), then 22 'iff3 f6 23 'iff4, intending 24 �6. It should be mentioned that numerous analyses of 1 9 Jlxh7+ led to an unclear game. Instead, White gains a decisive advantage by continuing his plan of occupying the centre. 22 1f'g3! There is no defence against the invasion of the white queen. 22 23 24 In accordance with his style, Black begins simplifying, hoping to take play into an ending where Black's good bishop and central pawns will give him the advantage. 18 19 . • • :xe5 Jlxe5 • • . • • tbxe5 '9xd3 24 25 26 27 28 'ifeJ bJ 29 f3 1!f'xc7 11be5 lbe5 ltlxdJ f6 When Black played 18 ... Jlxe5 he undoubtedly had this position in mind, but could he have imagined that the white knight was not bound to retreat? However, if Black had preferred 2 I . . .llg8, there would have followed 22 'ifxh7, not fearing just one check (22 . . . l:lxg2+). 204 fxe5 l:lf8 Since Black cannot play 24 ... 'ird6 on account of 25 l4xb7 d3 26 Ila? 'fid8 27 'ifxh7, he is forced to give up his queen. This way, with the rook, since it is useful to exchange Black's active rook. 19 20 21 . 1!fg7 l:lc7 1!fxc7 i.d5 d3 i.c4 llf7 White need not hurry capture of the bishop. 29 30 31 32 1i'd2 bxc4 with the 3 4 5 6 7 l:td7 e5 bxc4 � <i!tf2 Since 32 ... c3 33 it'xc3 d2 loses to 34 it'c8+ rJ;;;e7 35 'i'xd7+ and 36 <ite2, Black could have tenninated his resistance with a clear conscience. 33 rJ;;;eJ rJi;e6 34 35 36 160). Otherwise I would have had to play 2 . . . d6. llc7 1fb4 llc6 rJi;d2 a4 Black resigns Before this event I had been unable to win a single game against Euwe, whereas here I was able to achieve this twice. There is no doubt that, had I been unable to overcome this psychological barrier, I would not have succeeded overall. This was undoubtedly my best game from the Match-Tournament. Game 1 80 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik Alatch-Tournamentfor the World Championship, Moscow 1948 Third Cycle 1 e4 c5 2 /l}O /l}c6 I had . played the French Defence so often against Smyslov, that for the Match-Tournament I decided to try the Sicilian. Black also avoids the Dragon Variation, which at one time was my favourite weapon (Games 54, 75, 80 and 205 cxd4 /l}f6 d6 e6 A decision that is rather unexpected and hard to explain. White avoids Rauzer's plan (7 1fd2) in favour of something 'non-theoretical' (cf. also his 9th move). Incidentally, in Game 146 Roman­ ovsky too considered it his duty in this position to choose a little-e,.-plored path (7 J.b5). 7 8 • • • 0-0 il..e7 Here White could still have played 8 'i'd2 followed by queenside castling. 8 9 ... /l}db5 0-0 Unfortunately for Smyslov, I had analysed all this back in the 1930s, so that the surprise effect was equal to zero. This differs from the theoretical continuations, only in that White loses two tempi. 9 10 Sicilian Defence d4 /l}xd4 /l}cJ J.g5 i.e2 . • • i.xf6 a6 gxf6 I could also have replied 10. . . J.xf6 1 1 /l}xd6 'ifc7. I avoided this, rightly thinking that Smyslov was more dangerous in a simple position, and one where (after the inevitable 12 . . . J.xc3 1 3 bxc3) he would haye a weak, but nevertheless extra pawn. If 11 /l}d4 this position Is · compared with a well-known position from the Rauzer Variation, in which Black forces the exchange of the bishop at g5 by . . . h7h6, it becomes clear that White has not only lost three moves (the manoeuvre lbd4-b5-d4 and the exchange on f6 without being forced), but also the pawn has remained at h7, which is advantageous to Black. 11 12 13 14 �bl f4 ..ifJ ti)xc6 Now the b7 pawn moves to c6, which allows Black to begin immediate action in the centre. Therefore 1 5 ti)ce2 was more prudent, since the attempt to gain an advantage with 1 5 . . . tl'ia5 1 6 b3 f5 would have been refuted by 1 7 .th5 ! (but not 17 exf5 because of 17 . . . e5). ti)e2 f5 c4 'iid4 1!fxc4 gJ dxc4 c5 .i.d6 Here 2 I . . ...te5 suggested itself. . • • 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 <ifi>hS l:lg8 ..id7 It was more logical to continue the advance of the f-pawn, but in any case Black has at least an equal game. l:tc8 14 15 the activation of the black bishops. However, it is already hard to suggest a good plan for White, as a result of his insufficiently well thought-out handling of the opening. 'ifc7 17 bxc6! d5 In the given position this advance is inappropriate, since it merely leads to 21 • • • .tbs Black's plan takes shape: to exert pressure along the a6-fl diagonal and (after the pawn exchange on f5) along the e-file. However, this also opens the long diagonal for the white bishop, and the bishop at b5 can be driven away. Therefore this plan is not the strongest, and the exchange on f5 is over-hasty, although it received unanimous approval. 22 Vc2 exf5 Thus here White should have attacked the bishop - 23 a4 (23 . . . ..ic6 24 ti)c3), after which Black's extra pawn is hardly of any great significance. But the next move in the game is also 206 32 33 not bad; at any rate, it cannot be regarded as the decisive mistake. 23 24 exf5 l:tf2 l:tce8 .i.fl 1fxdl Axdl Ad8 Now Black gains a highly important tempo for his attack, and he wins by force in all variations. Only with 24 a4! i.xe2 (24 ... i.c6 25 lbc3) 25 .txe2 i.xg3 26 .tf3 ! could white have still held on. In time trouble Black chooses the safest move (winning the exchange). 34 1fc2 After 34 1fxd8+ 11fxd8 35 .txc4 Black wins immediately by 35 . . . Wd4. 34 35 36 .ig2 38 39 40 Or 25 lbc3 .tc6 26 Jil.g2 i.xg3 ! 25 26 27 28 29 lbgl 11fd2 AfJ 1We7 Jl.d3 c4 Ae8 b3 .i.c5 l:le1 bxc4 .txc4 . • . Threatening 3 1 . . . .i.xg l . material is unavoidable. 31 .i.g2 .txf3 l:td2 lba2 White resigns .txfJ lbe2 Adl After 29 l:i.xe3 11fxe3 30 11fxe3 Axe3 the ending is also hopeless for White, but even so he could have put up a more tenacious resistance. 29 30 .i.d5 .i.d4 ifd3 'ifeJ It is also useful to exchange the queens. 37 1!I'xeJ .txe3 Ae3 Here it is, the decisive tempo! 24 25 11fc3 Loss Game 181 S.Reshevsky-M.Botvinnik Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, Moscow I 948 Fourth Cycle French Defence of 1 2 207 d4 e4 e6 d5 3 4 5 liJcJ e5 aJ i.b4 c5 i.xcJ+ played 8 . . . CDe7. If then White carries out the same plan as in the present game (which is what Smyslov did), then 6 bxcJ 1!1c7 played by Tai), White has the better chances. Black's decision justifies itself, but in the event of 9 'ifxg7 ! (which was twice 5 . . . i.a5 occurred in a game between the same players a year and a half earlier (No. 166). In Games 125, 136 and 143 Black Since Reshevsky would undoubtedly have prepared for 6 . . . CDe7, I decided to set him different problems in the i.d2 i.dJ 0-0 b6 liJe2 liJr4 iLa6 Reshevsky plays the opening stage of the game very strongly. The knight at f4 such as Reshevsky to think 1!fg4 1llg3 10 11 12 13 always useful to force a 'time trouble 7 8 liJe7 Since White has two active bishops, this was the correct decision, since it is addict' cxd4 it is natural that Black should aim to exchange one of them. opening. From the practical viewpoint already in the opening. 9 Of course, not 9 . . . Wxc2 on account of 10 i.d2 and then 1 1 l:.cl . played 6 . . . CDe7. The text move is not so popular and is considered slightly less reliable, although it is hard to say why. f5 will be excellently placed. 13 14 • . . i.xa6 'i!fd7 In our 1957 match Smyslov carried out a different idea, deciding to get rid of his weak c-pawn: 14 h4 i.xd3 1 5 cxd3 . However, the further course of the game showed that Black gains reasonable counterplay: 1 5 . . . lbbc6 1 6 i.e3 l:.ac8. 14 15 • . . 'i!fdJ liJxa6 liJb8 The knight heads via c6 and a5 to c4 - Black's only active possibility. To counter this plan, White begins play on 8 . • . cxd4 the kingside. 16 17 18 A well-known variation. As it later transpired, this exchange has its drawbacks. Therefore many years later, in my games with Smyslov ( 1 4th match game, 1 957) and Tal ( 1 st match game, 1960, and 12th match game, 1 96 1 ) I h4 l:.hJ l:.gJ liJbc6 l:tac8 @b8 A useful prophylactic reply, since in the event of 18 .. JU7 19 h5 the threat of 20 h6 g6 2 1 tbh5 is rather unpleasant. 208 19 h5 20 h6 1:1.ti A committing continuation. Although Black's position will be very cramped, it will not be easy to breach. If 20 t'Llg6+ he would have replied 20 . . . 'iti>g8. 20 21 . l:tcl . . • g6 · . . • • • • <ifi>f1 <itigl Ji.gs l:tc4 tllbc6 tllgS 26 27 l:te1 cl Wti tlla5 28 tllf4 l:lc6 29 .i.f6+ It is useful to defend f6, although the bishop check on that square was not so dangerous. White's initiative has led only to a spatial advantage, and he attempts to reinforce it with c2-c4. 2 1 . . .t'Da5 would not have prevented this (22 .i.xa5 bxa5 23 c4). Therefore Black connects his rooks. 21 22 23 24 2s Now, when c2-c3 has been played, the black knight is needed at c4, but also White's knight does not have to defend his central pawn. l:lff8 � 22 c4 was not possible in view of 22 . . . dxc4 23 :xc4 (23 'iixc4 tllxd4) 23 ...tllxe5 24 dxe5 'ii'xd3 and 25 . . .:xc4. 22 tllb8 Strategically, Black's plan is under­ standable and justified: by attacking the c2 pawn, he wants to force the opponent to play c2-c3, and then his queen's knight will be free to occupy c4. However, such a 'pleasure' costs several tempi . . . 22 ... tlla5 23 .i.xa5 bxa5 would have given satisfactory play. 209 Black's 'plan' in 1he opening proved justified: Reshevsky was already in serious time trouble, and in 1his compli­ cated battle he . makes an oversight. However, to be fair, it should be mentioned that even after 29 l:lge3 (intensifying the pressure on the e6 pawn) 29 . . tt'lc4 30 l:t3e2 0.e7 3 1 llf6+ <iftg8 32 'flb l l:tfc8 33 f3 l:t8c7, although White retains the possibility of further activity (g2-g4 ! ), his pawns at c3 and a3 come under fire, and his king's rook has abandoned its active position. It can be concluded that Black's position would have been better than ten moves earlier. . 29 30 • • . exf6 After 1his, of course, White loses quickly, but also after 39 0.e5 0.xe5 40 l:txe5 he would have been unable to count on saving the game. After all, he is not only a pawn down, but also his rook at h4 is practically shut out of play. After, for example, 40 . . . l':tfS 41 'i'el l:t8f6 it is altogether not apparent what White can do. ltlx:f6 �4! Itis possible that White had reckoned only on 30 ... 'i'xf6 3 1 l:tge3, but this interposition changes the entire picture. Now the e6 pawn is secured, since control of e3 has been established, and Black will have the better position, also with a material advantage. 31 32 33 'irbl a4 li)dJ 39 40 41 11fxf6 g5 f4 :bJ J:lhl Wdt 39 li)f4 42 43 44 45 46 47 g4 llc7 Wg6 A time trouble inaccuracy. After 36 ... l:tgS Black would have retained control of h4, and the rook at h l would have been unable to become active. 37 llh4 fJ 38 g3 h'Xcf7 :xr4 l:lxf4 l:lf5! The queens must be retained, so that the threat of . . . g4-g3 should become decisive. Of course, 33 . . . 'i'xh6 was the simplest, but in time trouble it is always pleasant to create threats and force the opponent to defend. . 34 35 36 gxf4 1!fb1 'WdJ 'irfl g3 gxf2+ �xf2 l:tg5 1ih3 :g2+ <ifi>xfJ li)d2+ 'it>e3 llg3+ White resigns This game was of considerable importance in the tournament. Before it the score in my mini-match with Reshevsky was equal (1 Y2- l Y2). By winning this game against my nearest rival, I was able to consolidate my lead. 210 8 9 Game 182 M.Botvinnik-P.Keres Queen's Gambit d5 .i.f5 3 4 e6 9 10 Of course, in this way Black solves an eternal problem of the Queen's Gambit - the development of his queen's bishop, but the weakening of the b7 pawn will cause him certain problems. c4 cxd5 By choosing this simplifying contin­ uation, White guarantees himself against any surprises, but at the same time he cannot aspire to much. In the 8th game of my match with Smyslov (1 954), I found the correct plan: 4 'iib3 tLlc6 5 Ad2 ! 4 5 ... 'i!fb3 10 11 12 13 14 - .tgS .i.xe7 Ae7 tLlgxe7 J:lcl • • • 0-0 a5! Excellently played, and a positional flank blow typical of Keres. In view of the threat of . . . a5-a4-a3 White is obliged to parry it by a2-a3, after which his queenside pawns are fixed, as well as the weak squares b3 and c4. exd5 /i)c6 Should White take the b-pawn? No, since after 6 11fxb7 /i)b4 the initiative passes to Black. And the move suggested earlier, 6 .td2, is no longer so strong in view of 6 . . . :bs 7 tLlc3 .te6 ! this is the drawback to the exchange of pawns in the centre (the e6 square is freed for the bishop). However, it has to be admitted that in this game I was not aiming for a complicated battle, and this was unfavourable for my opponent, for whom, on account of his tournament position, only a win would do! 6 7 1lt'd6 The point is that after the natural 9 lbc3 there could have followed 9 . . . lbb4 10 l:tc l .i.d3. with some discomfort for White. 1 8 Therefore preference had to be given to a less active continuation. Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, Moscow 1948 Fourth Cycie 1 d4 2 /i)fJ e3 /i)bd2 · a3 .tdJ 1!t'c2 'irxd3 Afc8 a4 il.xd3 lbd8! An essential link of the same plan. Now Black would have been expected to activate . his queenside ·pawns . . . tt:le6, ...b7-b6 and . . . c7-c5. 15 0-0 16 . lk3 /i)e6 b5 A strange decision. When all was ready for tl1e attack indicated in the 211 previous note, Black weakens squares on the c-file without any justification. After 16. . .b6 White would have had to reply 17 e4, which would have main­ tained the balance, but not more. 17 is achieved by attacking the central d5 pawn. 21 22 23 23 1fc2! . • • thet · !tcb8 24 25 The other route was 'prohibited' : 1 8 lbes cs ! , and the advantage passes to Black. 18 • • • 20 21 tl:)dJ ttlb4 tl:)cs tl:)b6 The whole point is that White does not allow the enemy knight to invade at c4. Now and on the following move this • • l:lxc6 l:lxc6 llxb6 l:ldS This obvious exchanging operation destroys Black's pawn fonnati.on. . ·. For the second time Black prepares a more active continuation ( 1 8 ...b4) but then refrains from it. Such indecision is bound to prove costly. In addition he incautiously lifts his control of c6. 1'e7 19 J:[c6 . l:ld8 Ad6 Black misses the last chance to gain counterplay by 23 . . Jlad8. Then there would have been an opportunity to separate the white rooks (24 ...ttlc4), and 24 l:lxb6 cxb6 25 l£ic6 'fic7 would have even. lost for White. Now the knight at f3 will head via e l to d3, securing White an obvious advan­ tage. It was easy to reject 17 'i'xb5, since there would have followed 17 . . . !tcb8 and 18 . . . !txb2. 17 18 Vf5 :rci 25 26 27 28 tl)c6 ttlxd8 Wc2 cxb6 1'c7 'i!rxd8 White's occupation of the only open file condemns Black to a passive, and in the given situation, hopeless defence. · Therefore Keres goes in for the ex­ change of queens; with them on the board, the play would have been more complicated. 212 28 . . • Vc7 29 'ifxc7 ltlxc7 Now it all becomes clear. First White centralises his king. 30 itlbl <otf8 31 <liif1 <lle7 32 <lle2 . 33 . �d3 'i!i>d6 �c6 Then he plays his knight to b4 and prepares for action in the centre. ltle8 34 ltlc3 f6 35 ltla2 35...fS would have hindered White's play in the centre, but Black was evidently afraid of also weakening his kingside pawns. 36 37 38 39 40 f3 itlb4+ e4 fxe4 ltlc7 <tid6 dxe4+ ltle6 ltlc7 q.,d3 itle6 �c6 ct>eJ Black can only wait. 41 42 43 ttJd5 h4! 43 44 • • • lbf4 . lbd8 <it?d6 Or 44... g6 45 lbd5 f5 46 lbf6 fxe4+ 47 �xe4 h6 48 <it?e5. 45 46 lbb5 . �e3 . ltle6 The g7 pawn is doomed. Now the game is decided, and nothing can save Black - the rest is a matter of technique. 46 47 48 Hoping 49...�es. 43 lDxf6 would have led to some complications, whereas now Black loses a pawn without any tactical chances, as his kingside is seriously· weakened. .213 .. · • • . d5 lbxg7 to regain <tle7 lbc5 <lld6 the pawn by 49 1£ie6! 49 50 51 52 53 @d4 C/Jg7 C/Jf5+ �c3 Other continuations in this opening leave Black with even fewer possib­ ilities of initiating the complicated, double-edged battle, for which Reshevsky was · obliged to aim on account of his tournament position. 5 0--0 In Game 27 it was mentioned that 5 d3 allows Black the advantageous possibility of 5 . . . t'bd4. 5 0--0 The decisive move! The pawn ending after 49 . . . <ii>e5 50 t'bxc5 bxc5 5 1 g4 h6 is hopeless for Black, since the white king goes to c3 and the exchange of the queenside pawns becomes unavoidable. The move played allows White to win a tempo, in order to gain control of e5. 1£id7 t'be5 C/Jc4 <ii>c7 @d7 • • 6 .i.xc3 bxc3 .llg5 l:lel d4 d6 11fe7 CiJdS tbe6 For the moment Black could still have safely continued the symmetrical play. And now White effectively has two extra pawns. 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 • d3 7 8 9 10 g4 g5 fxg5 C/Jf.J hxg5 C/Jxg5 <ii>b4 e5 h5 @d8 e6+ Wxb5 Black resigns After his two defeats in our games in The Hague, it was also difficult for Paul to play against me in Moscow. Game 183 M.Botvinnik-S.Reshevsky Four Knights Game All this has been known for a very long time, as has the move 10 . . . .tg4, which undoubtedly sets White more serious problems. e5 C/Jc6 C/Jf6 .i.b4 1 1 . . .c5, which has been played much more often, is considered by theory to be of equal merit. ttJf8 12 ilfl Match-Tournamentfor the World Championship, Moscow 1948 Fifth Cycle 1 2 3 4 e4 C/Jf.J C/Jc3 .i.b5 11 214 Act l:ld8 But this is the fruit of Reshevsky's imagination, whereas by analogy with other variations he should have played 12 . . . c5 or 12 ... tLld7, which is currently considered strongest. Now Black ends up in a difficult position. 13 tLlh4! tLlg4 Since the variation 13 ... tLlxe4 14 l:txe4 f5 15 ..tc4+ 'iiih i> 8 16 'ifh.5 fxe4 17 .i.g5 'i'd7 18 .ti! could not appeal to Black, he embarks on risky play, hoping somehow to 'stir up trouble' . . . 14 15 16 g3 f3 ..teJ 'tflf6 tLlb6 White is not satisfied with the exchange 16 .i.xh6, not because of 16 ... 'i'xh6 17 dxe5, but in view of 16 . . . gxh6 followed by . . . tLlg6. He should not lose the opportunity in the future of e loiting the power of the two bishops. 'iff6 ( 1 9. . . 'i'xe4 20 ..txh6 gxh6 2 1 .i.b5) 20 .i.c4 ile7 2 1 .i.xh6, and the attack develops of its own accord. 18 19 ii'd2 18 tLlg2! • • • ..te2 . 19 20 . 'itixg2 .ll.xg2 d5 21 22 23 24 exd5 cxd4 exd4 . • Reshevsky gives up a pawn, in order to complicate the play, and thereby also the task of his opponent, who was in great time trouble. His hopes are partly justified. :eS tLlg6 .i.f2 c4 24 .. . . White safely avoids a trap - 18 .i.g5? tLlxh4 ! He does not lose the f3 pawn, since if 1 8. . .'i'xfJ there follows 19 ..te2 .ll.h3 Again 1 9 .ig5 was not possible in view of 1 9 . . . 'i'xfJ, when 20 i.e2 allows mate. But now White is threat­ ening to win a pawn: 20 ..tg5 (not inunediately 20 ..txh6 gxh6 2 1 'i'xh6 i.xg2 22 <Jiixg2 tLlf4+) 20 . . 'i!fe6 2 1 dS and 22 .i.xh6. xi) 16 17 . tLlfS l:led8 h5 Slightly better was 24 . . .b5 25 l:tacl bxc4 26 i.xc4 tfile7 27 'i'a5 'i'f5 28 'i'xc7, although in this case too White would have retained a material 215 29 advantage. Now, however, with 25 .l:.ab 1 White could have completely deprived his opponent of counterplay. 25 26 h4 'ifg5 b5 In view of White's lack of time for thought, this move is advisable from the practical viewpoint. 26 27 • • • hxg5 30 'ifxg5 h4 .id3 ..i.xg3 lbxd4 ltadl With the threat of 3 1 .ixg6. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 White had only two to three minutes left on his clock, whereas Black had about twenty-five. Reshevsky neverthe­ less made his moves instantly, hoping only to exploit his opponent's time trouble. A dubious method, which was condemned in his time by Ilyin­ Genevsky in a well-known article in the magazine Shakhmatny Listok. . To be fair, it should be mentioned that even after the comparatively best continuation 27. . .bxc4 28 .ixc4 tDfe7 29 l:acl tbxd5 30 .ib3 tl.'Jge7 (30...:acS 3 1 llc6 0.ge7 32 l:a6) 3 1 l:txc7 0.xc7 3 2 l:txe7 tbd5 3 3 l:e5 tDb4 34 g6 it is hard for Black to breath. 28 29 • • . Black not only leaves his opponent with two active bishops, but also as though clears the position for him . A more tenacious resistance (but that is all !) could have been offered by 29 ...tbxg3 30 'it>xg3 bxc4 3 1 .i.xc4 'it>ffl . dxc6 .i.e4 llxd8+ .tf5 lle8+ cxb5 c5 lbxc6 llac8 tDxd8 lla8 'it>b7 hxg3 Black is stalemated, White is a pawn up, and he can win in various ways. But he still has four moves to make, and during that time his flag might fall. Therefore the game continues . . . 36 37 38 39 40 41 2 16 f6 lbe6 .tc7 llxa8 lbxc7 lbxb5 llxa7 fxg5 · lld7 a4 Black resigns For roughly five years I employed this variation with some success, until in the Alekhine Memorial Tournmnent ( 1956) in his game with me Keres chose the correct plan: 8 i.xf6 gxf6 9 0--0--0 a6 10 f4 h5 1 1 'it>bl ..id7 12 ..ie2 'iib6 13 lbb3 ! , and White's position is preferable. 8 ..ixf6 gxf6 Grune 184 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 6th game Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 e4 tbtJ d4 tbxd4 tbcJ cs tbc6 cxd4 ibf6 d6 e6 ..igS It will be remembered that in Game 146 White played 7 .i.b5 here, and in Game 180 - 7 .i.e2. On this occasion he accurately follows Rauzer. 7 7 1!fd2 • • • 9 10 11 0-0-0 f4 a6 ..id7 'it>bl This move could have peen qelayed until Black played . . . h6-h5. · 11 12 il..e2 13 14 15 'ifxd4 %thf1 :o • • • il..e7 tbxd4 Aft.er the exchange of knights, the freedom of the black queen increases. 1!fa5 h5 h6 I prepared this variation specially for the present match. Black goes in for an inferior pawn formation, but he gains a 'tooth-like' pawn formation in the centre, and also the advantage of the two bishops, the power of which may tell in some cases, particularly in the endgame. I found this plan after analysing the game Dubinin-Koblenz (1949). White prepares for queenside castling by his opponent: 1 5 ... 0-0--0 16 b4 'flc7 1 7 ibd.5 exd5 1 8 l:lc3, but disillusion­ ment aWaits him. The point is that Black has available a manoeuvre (incidentally, prepared before the match) that ensures the safety of his king. 217 15 16 17 111d2 l:e3 1!1c5 ..tc6 1!fa5 Black could not castle long, again because of 1 8 illd5, but he should have considered 17. . . h4, improving his position and awaiting activity by the opponent. I had in mind that White would either have to repeat moves ( 1 8 1!i'd4 'iic 5), or that I would advantage­ ously be able to play · 1 8 . . . 0-0-0. However, Bronstein chose another continuation. 26 1!fc4 26 27 bxc4 Only a short time ago White avoided the exchange of queens, but now, in the interests of safety, he himself forces it. After 26 ltld5 exd5 27 exd5 i.xa4 28 bxa4 l:tdc7 Black would certainly not have stood worse. 1ixc4 · 18 ..to In the game Liberzon-Botvinnik (1 967) White chose the following plan: 1 8 a3 l:td8 19 ..tc4 ..td7 20 'i'e2 l:c8 2 1 i.a2 c.tf8 22 f5. 18 0-0-0 . 19 . • 1!fd3 Renewing the threat of 20 lLid5. The immediate 19 ltld5 would not have given White anything: 19 . . . 'i'xd2 20 ltlxe7+ <itid7 21 l:txd2 </;xe7. 19 20 • • • b4 J:ld7 The blocked nature of the position prevents either side from undertaking any activity. The h5 pawn is fixed, but White does not have sufficient resources to win it. 20 21 22 a3 <ii>a2 @b8 ..td8 1fc5 23 l1e2 a5! On the queenside Black unexpectedly creates the threat of . . . b7-b5-b4, and White has no choice - he is forced to . play a3-a4, after which the position, full of weaknesses for both sides, becomes drawish. a4 b3 i.b6 l:lc8 'ot>b3 l:ld3 l:b8 l:ldd8 ..tgl 30 31 32 l:led2 ti)e2 l:dl ¢Jc7 ..tf2 i.c5 33 ltlgJ l:dg8 Black openly admits that for the moment he does not have a good plan, but even play without an aim is sufficient to maintain equality. Not 22 ... i.b6 because of 23 b4. 24 25 27 28 29 Of course, it would have been unfavourable to take the h4 pawn; the most sensible was 32. . . l:ta8, and after 33 I:tfl ..tcs the threat of . . . l:a6-b6+ forces the white knight to guard the b5 square. 218 could have played 3 8 tiJe2, in order to transfer his knight to f4, where it defends the g2 pawn against a counter exchange sacrifice on g2 and also attacks the h5 pawn. Are the complications after 34 tiJxh5 favourable for White? In the event of 34 . . . f5 35 ttJf6 fxe4 36 .be4 J.xe4 37 ttJxe4 l:lxg2 38 ttJxc5 dxc5 39 l:td7+ his advantage is obvious. However, after 34 . . . J.xe4 35 tiJxf6 J.xd3 36 l2Jxg8 i.g6 37 ll:Je7 l:lxh4 3 8 t2Jxg6 fxg6 a draw would be inevitable. Therefore White, clearly encouraged by his victory in the previous game of the match, continues playing for a win. 34 ltle2 35 f5! 35 36 tiJcJ 38 39 ltle2 39 40 41 J.xg2 ltlf4 • • • lthg7 It is obvious that, in time trouble, Black has decided to return the exchange, in order to activate his pieces. White, for his part, evidently considers this to be advantageous to him, and he does not prevent the sacrifice. Meanwhile, 39 :l.d2 was possible. l:bg2 :xg2 l:th7 The simplest was 34 . . .:as, diverting the white knight to c3. Creating the threat of 36 ltlf4, which Black is obliged to parry. ... e5 i.d4 41 • • • l:tgJ+! This provocation is inappropriate. In principle, Black does not object to a sharpening of the situation, but in the given position the exchange sacrifice is clearly advantageous to White. An essential check. The reply c2-c3 would worsen White's position, and from b2 the king will not be defending the a4 pawn. The d4 pawn will never run away from White, and in the meantime he This entire study-like way to draw was found in home ·analysis. Black 37 38 :xd4 l:txd4 exd4 219 42 43 44 . <itib2 lt)m5 ltlxf6 l:tg4 n.m4 <itib6! 51 52 53 54 55 56 gives up a second pawn. in order to activate his king. 45 .llxd6 46 e5 'it>c5 Or 46 l:td8 JJ..xa4 47 :ts llh2 48 Xtxf7 l:txc2+ 49 'it>bl l:txc4 50 l:txb7 .tc6 with a draw. 46 . • • :44 This startling move was suggested during our analysis by my second, Ragozin. In the first instance Black exchanges .. rooks, after which his centralised king becomes formidably strong. But the main subtlety of Black's entire idea is that White wins a piece, and therefore he may evaluate incorrectly the resulting drawn position. Meanwhile, Black would also not have lost after the 'simple' continuation 46 ... l:lf4 47 �d7+ .txd7 48 l:txd7 l:txf5 49 l:txb7 l:txe5 50 <it>b3 f6. 47 48 49 50 51 l:txd4 �g4 e6 f6 ¢ib3 <it>:x:d4 .i.xa4 fxe6 .i.e8 cJ+ �h6 f7 t:j)xf7 �d8 JJ..xf7 e4 e3 Only here, apparently, did Bronstein notice that after 57 lDe6+ @fl 58 tDd4+ � 59 <itta4 e2 60 �c2 el'if 6 1 �xel 'it?xe 1 62 <ittxa5 'ifiicl2 63 'it>b6 'ittxc3 a draw is inevitable, and he decided to check whether there was not another way to win. In so doing, under the psychological 'pressure' of his material advantage, White lost his sense of danger! And after the time control had already been reached, Bronstein committed a tragic oversight. 57 'itic2? 'it?gJ! White resigns It only remains to anticipate the perplexity of those readers who are familiar with B.S.Vainstein's book David Bronstein: All White's actions leave one in no doubt that he is confident of winning. e5 ¢ie4 Wf4 Chess Improviser (Pergamon. 1 983). In it is written: 'What Bronstein was hoping for :in playing his king to c2 · · rerllains · a mystery. It turns out that even after-·the 220 less precise reply 57 . 'ittf3 White still loses in a few moves: 58 � e2 59 tLld4+ 'ittf2 60 tLlxe2 @xe2, and the pawn ending is an elementary win for Black. ' In fact after 57.. � White has an easy draw: 58 tLlf7 e2 59 tbe5+ 'ittf2 60 tLld3+ 'Wt>fl 61 �b3 . Therefore it is clear what my opponent was hoping for, and where his mistake lay. .. . and 7 Ea:3 followed by 8 .i.g5 ! , as has already been mentioned in the notes to Game 174. I employed b2-b3 followed by the development of the bishop at a3 back in 1 939 in a game against Ragozin ( 1 1th USSR Championship). 7 8 .i.a3 0-0 Game 1 85 M.Botvinnik-D.Bronstein World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 7th game Dutch Defence 1 2 3 d4 c4 d5 e6 c6 lLlfJ Not being a great expert in the field of opening theory, my opponent took a ' Solomon-like' decision: to employ one of Botvirutik' s variations against Botvinnik This was a serious mistake on his part. Because of my lengthy break from tournament play, I would have felt much less happy in unfamiliar variations! In the afore-mentioned game Black himself exchanged bishops, which as­ sisted the manoeuvre tLlxa3-c2-b4(el)­ d3 . However, he played more strongly in the game Szabo-Botvinnik (Budapest 1952), namely 8 : . . tl:lbd7 (No. 1 99). Here it is! All this I had played many times: first the set-up . . . d7-d5, . . . e7-e6 and . . . c7-c6, and now . . . f7-f5 - the stonewall variation of the Dutch Defence. White cannot retain any appreciable opening advantage with, for example, 1 2 tLld3 c5, 12 f4 c5 or 12 tl:lclf3 tbxe5 1 3 �e5 �7. The same can be said about the position in the game. 4 g3 f5 5 6 .i.g2 0-0 b3 �f6 .i.e7 8 9 10 11 7 Other continuations, perhaps more deserving of consideration, are 7 �bd2 22 1 12 13 • • • .i.xe7 �e5 �d2 �xd7 e3 b6 1!fxe7 i.b7 �bd7 tl:lxd7 If the black pawn were at f7; the game would be completely equal. Here, however, despite the simplification that follows, White retains a slight positional advantage, for the reason that this pawn is at f5 - the weakness of the e5 square may tell. 13 14 15 Act 1lfd Aac8 c5 lDf6 16 cxd5 ii.xd5 his position is slightly better, and he calmly waits for Black' s patience to run out. Black has satisfactorily mobilised his forces, but White's pawn formation is still to be preferred. 22 ifd3 g6 23 24 25 11fa6 11fe2 a4 rl;g7 1id6 This creates another slight weakening - of the seventh rank. In this way Black exchanges White's bishop, which is defending his king's position, but this is achieved at the cost of . a certain weakening of his own queenside. If 17 .ixd5 exd5 18 19 20 21 lDf3 l:k2 Afcl lDe5 Ac7 Afc8 lDe4 lDf6 17 ...'DxdS there would immediately have followed 1 8 e4. For the present my opponent is happy to play passively, since in this match he usually timed any sharpening of the position to coincide with time trouble. But White too has no reason to hurry : Apparently played without any point, but in fact there is a reason for this move: if in the subsequent play Black should succeed in advancing . . . c5-c4, it will be hard for him to support this pawn with . . . b6-b5. 25 lDe8 26 27 111d2 Wc3 'ifd3 lDf6 lDe4 cxd4 28 Apparently played in expectation of 29 l:lxc7+ l:lxc7 30 l:t.xc7+ 'i'xc7 3 1 'i'xd4 'i'c3, which would have led to an equal ending. However, the position of Black's king is insecure, and he should not have opened up the position in this way. It would have been better to wait calmly, or else to choose the sharp 222 continuation suggested later by Szabo: 28 . . . c4 29 bxc4 'ii'b4, which after 30 c5 bxc5 3 1 dxc5 .l:.xc5 32 l:.xc5 l:xc5 33 .l:.bl 'i!i'xa4 34 J:tb7+ would have led to a draw. 29 30 exd4 <it>g2 a5 32 33 34 35 36 30 31 32 We2 gxf4 'i!rd7+! lLJxd7 <it>f3 lLJxb6 1i'xd7 lLJxf4+ lLJdJ Thus White has successfully got through the time scramble. li)f6 f4 The time trouble complications begin. The curious thing is that both players overlook the variation 32 ... .l:.xc2 33 l:hc2 tbh.5 ! , when Black regains his pawn with a perfectly sound position. Therefore White should first have exchanged all the rooks on c7 and only then taken the f4 pawn, reaching the same position that arises after the mutual mistakes in the game. lLJh5 llxc7 'ifxc7 li)f6 lLJh5 There is practically nothing else that Black can move, but now White forcibly transposes into a won ending. · 37 38 39 40 A rare instance of the two sides' positions being so symmetric after 30 moves. The only difference is that White's pawn is at f2, and Black's at f5. But on the one hand, this factor gives White a slight positional advantage, and on the other hand, it tempts Black into sharpening the play. l:.xc7+ l:txc7+ 1!t'g4 We6 40 41 42 43 <it>f4 lLJd7+ lt)es lLJb4 <it>f6 <l;e7 White's plan is straightforward: move his king to c3, post his knight at d3, and then begin making use of his extra pawn on the queenside. It is important, only, that in so doing he should not allow the enemy king to approach his f- and h-pawns. 223 43 44 45 rj;eJ f3 <l;e6 �5 g5 triangulation manoeuvre with his king to try and give his opponent the move. 51 52 53 • • • 'ii?e2 'ifi>d2 li)a6 'it?e6 53 �c5+ li)xc5 54 dxc5 was dangerous in view of 54 . . . 'ifi>d7 55 'it?d3 'it?c6 56 'ifi>d4 h4 ! In the game, however, Black cannot reply either 53 ... lbc7 or 53 . . . �5 on account of 54 'it?c3, when he is in zugzwang (compare this with the position before White's 5 l st move). 46 53 'ii?d2 A tactical subtlety, preventing Black from playing 46...�4, when there follows 47 �d3+ lDxd3 48 �d3 'it?xf3 49 b4 axb4 50 a5 and the a-pawn queens. 46 47 48 • • . lDd3 li)cS • • • 'ifi>e7 Other king moves would not have changed anything. 54 'ifi>cJ 'it>d6 55 b4 li)xb4 a5 'it>dJ axb4+ li)c7 li)b5+ h5 li)a6 White arranges a two-move 'respite' to gain time on the clock. 48 49 50 • . • li)d3 h3! li)b4 li)a6 .Now in the event of the exchange of the kingside pawns - 50. . . g4 5 1 hxg4+ hxg4 52 fxg4+ 'ii?xg4 53 li)e5+ �f4 54 tLic6 Black loses another pawn. 50 51 • • • 56 ti)c7 �e3 White would also have won after 5 1 'itr>c3 �a6 5 2 b4 axb4+ 5 3 lLJxb4 �4 54 li)xa6 @xf3 55 �c5 g4 56 hxg4 hxg4 (56 ... h4 57 g5) 57 �d3 g3 58 �l+ 19 <ifre2 59 lbg2, but 5 1 . . .tLie6 had to be considered as well, and the time control was approaching. Therefore White does not hurry to force events, but uses a 57 58 The a-pawn no longer needs the help of the king; it will advance without any assistance. 58 59 60 • • • <beJ a6 <be6 lDa7 li)b5 After 60. . .'it>d6 White would have broken through with 6 1 f4. 224 61 62 �c6 �b4 63 . 64 65 66 a7 llk7 ' <it>f5 Or 62. . . lDb5 63 'iti>f2 followed by <it>g3 and f3-f4. <it>f2 <it>e6 h4 gxf4 f4 � Black resigns In this game my nerves proved to be a little stronger. This was probably helped by the many hours I had spent in the fresh air by the raging Moscow River! The point was that on free days I travelled to my dacha (in Nikolina gora), and unexpectedly the ice began to drift. By chance (on account of an ice blockage) the river cleared; I was taken across on a boat, and I arrived in time for the game! 5 6 � d5 0-0 This clearly 'non-theoretical' move was made, so that already in the opening my opponent would have to take some decisions in an unfamiliar situation. It was simplest for Black to reply 6 . . . e5 with equal chances, but he immediately loses a tempo by moving the same piece twice. 6 .i.b4 e5 8 .i.d2 eJ 8 9 �ge2 d6 a6 10 1fc2 Wes 11 f3 7 White is aiming for a complicated and blocked game, in the hope of outclassing his young opponent in positional understanding. • • • Black decides to preserve his king's bishop from exchange, and he prepares a retreat for it at a7. Game l 86 M.Botvinnik-D.Bronstein World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 9th game Dutch Defence 1 2 d4 c4 e6 f5 Again; as in the previous game, Bronstein continues his faulty opening strategy of choosing my favourite variations. On this occasion this decision was just as favourable for me, since I had many times employed the Dutch Defence and had also played against it 3 4 g3 .i.g2 �f6 JJ..e7 In this way White gains control of e4 and g4, and in some cases he can play e3-e4. But more significant are the drawbacks to this advance: the 225 weakening of e3 and the reduction in the activity of his king's bishop. Even so, after weighing up the pros and cons, I played this, in order to keep Black in the dark as regards the side on which I was going to castle. 11 . 12 1fb3 . • Black overrates his position. He was obliged to play 14 . . . axb5 15 it)xc5 dxc5, when after 16 f4 ! e4 17 .tc3 c4 18 'i!fd l approximate equality is maintained. Now, however, White gains a decisive advantage. b5 The opening phase of the game is concluded, and Black begins trying to sharpen the play, in order to confuse his opponent. Avoiding for the moment the ex­ change of pawns, which would enhance the activity of the black pieces on the queenside. For example, 1 2 cxb5 axb5 1 3 'iib3 lDa6 ! with the unpleasant threat of 14 . . .t2Jc5. 12 .tc5 Although the pawn sacrifice offered is very promising, it was simpler to play 1 2 . . . il..xc3 13 t2Jxc3 bxc4 14 11ixc4 11if7, planning . . . c7-c6 to attack the enemy centre and . . . a6-a5 to develop the bishop at a6. • 13 • • cxb5 il..d7 15 15 Seemingly forcing White to take on a6, after which Black is even further ahead in development. Meanwhile, 13 . . . axb5 was possible, leading after 14 t2Jxb5 (14 'il'xb5 'i!fxb5 1 5 tbxb5 it)xd5) 14 . . . 'iff7 ! 1 5 f4 e4 16 tLled4 tLlxd5 17 .tfl c6 18 il.c4 to a game with chances for both sides. 14 14 ... ii.a7 • • • il.. xa4 But now, surprisingly enough, Black loses a rook. 16 b7!! White does not take the bishop, of course, but attacks the rook, after which both this rook is lost, and White acquires a new queen. tba4! As before, it was dangerous to play 14 bxa6 it)xa6, when Black completely seizes the initiative. For example, king­ side castling was not possible in view of 15 . . . f4. b6! This combination was clearly not anticipated by Black. All he can so is to continue the battle a pawn down in the variation 15 . . . cxb6 16 tLlxb6 .txb6 17 'it'xb6 it)xd5 18 'i!fxd6. 16 · 17 18 19 bxa81!f axb3 tLlc3 .txb3 il..b6 'i!fb5 'i!fxb3 My poor form, characteristic of the match as a whole, begins to tell in this game too. Black's only, but clearly insufficient consolation for the lost rook 226 earlier, there simply follows 25 . . . l:txa4 26 .txd5+ �. and now neither 27 .txe3 llal+, nor 27 @e2 .ixd2 28 �d2 .l;d4+ is possible. And · in the event of 25 .i.b5 Black would have continued 25 . . . .txd2+ 26 Wxd2 llJe7 followed by . . . c7-c6. White again has to waste precious time. is the poor position of the white queen. Iltls, however, could have been easily overcome: 20 0-0 f4 (or 20. . . 1!fxb2 2 1 lla2 Wb 3 2 2 llb l 'ii'c4 2 3 .tfl) 2 1 c;Phl fxe3 22 .i.cl .td4 23 lle i. Instead of this, and in addition being short of time, White decides to sacrifice the exchange, to bring his queen into play immediately. 20 21 22 lba6 1ixa6 'ifa4 lDxa6 lDxd5 Both 22 'i'e2 and 22 t'bxd5 'ifxd5 23 <it>e2 f4 24 'ifd3 would have won with­ out difficulty. Aiming for the immediate exchange of queens allows the opponent some hopes of saving the game. 22 23 24 lDxa4 24 • • • bl 'ifi>xd2 .tdJ �cl lDc3 29 30 31 32 .i.e2 lDa4 :lc4 i.xd2+ � g6 :lb8 If 29 llc6 Black would have replied 29 . . . llb7, and then all the same . . . t'bb4. 1ixa4 .ixeJ .i.fl At first sight this is an active move, but in fact it is a loss of time, since it is essential to bring the rook into play as soon as possible. This would have been achieved by 24 t'bc3 .txd2+ 25 @xd2. 25 26 27 28 29 lDb4 lla8 c6 The time trouble play of both sides is not overblessed with ingenuity: the main aim is not to · leave anything en prise, and to attack if possible. lla8 The whole problem for White is that after 25 .tc4, which he was planning 227 32 . 33 .i.dl 34 1£ib2 · 35 . :lh4 llb8 'it>e7 . d5 A useless venture, since here the rook is badly placed. Now White no longer has any winning chances. seal my move. The idea was that, tired out by the five hours of play, I would seal a poor move and also spend much time on it, so that on the resumption I would be close to time trouble. However, on this occasion Bronstein was so wrapped up in considering the position, that he noticed the arbiter only after Opocensky had invited Black to seal a move . . . In reply the challenger quickly played 41 35 36 • . h5 • g4 The dangers of 36 lbd3 were pointed out in his commentary by Romanovsky: 36 . . . lDxd3 37 'it>xd3 e4+ 38 fxe4 dxe4+ 39 �e3 'it>f6. 36 37 fxg4 38 39 40 41 g5 l:lb7+ l:lg7 l:lxg6+ • • Simpler was g4-g5. • hxg4 f4 37 ... ®f6, preventing • . • <it>e5 and demanded that White should seal a move. After some hesitation the arbiters (Opocensky and Stahlberg) took the decision that Black had made an open sealed move (as is provided for in the rules). But, alas, analysis during a sleepless night showed how dangerous the black passed pawns were, and in the final position I thought it best to offer a draw, which was accepted. llf8 cbd6 e4 Here, as was the case throughout the match, Bronstein was apparently pre­ paring to employ a standard procedure. When a game was about to be ad­ journed, he would usually wait for tl1e chief arbiter Karel Opocensky to head towards our table, in order to give the directive about sealing a move, and at this point my opponent would manage to make his move on the board. Then the arbiter, naturally, would invite me to In the event of the game being resumed, the following variation, for example, could have occurred: 42 Jl.g4 (in order to answer 42. . . l:th8 with 43 h3) 228 42 . f3 43 %U6! l:lxf6 44 gxf6 �xf6 45 .tx:f3 ex:f3 46 �e3 it)c2+ 47 'iii>x:f3 lDd4+ 48 �e3 lDxb3 49 tiJd3 c5 (or 49 . . . @e6 50 h4) 50 tDxcS ttJxc5 5 1 'ifi>d4 <Ji>e6 52 'itixc5 'itie5 53 h4 d4 54 �c4 <Ji>e4 55 h5 d3 56 h6 etc. In the afore-mentioned game White played 8 d5; I should also remind you of my recommendation: 8 .i.d2. . . 8 Game 1 87 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik Dutch Defence d4 c4 e6 f5 .tb4 5 6 e3 0-0 • • .i.xc3+ 9 10 thxc3 dxc5 10 11 12 b3 .i.b2 13 ..i.e2 lDc6 10 d5 lDe5 is no better. World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 1 0th game 1 2 3 • This is stronger than 8. . . ..i.35, which I played in my match with Taimanov (1953). It can happen that, when searching for something new, a player 'discovers' an inferior continuation. dxc5 .td7 ltJe5 tiJcJ The point of this manoeuvre and the subsequent course of the opening battle are explained in the notes to Game 169, in which the player with White was Kotov. 4 1ic2 lDf6 7 8 .tdJ lDge2 a3 d6 c5 My opponent prefers to retain his king's bishop. Meanwhile, in the event of 13 0-0-0 ! I did not see any clear plan for Black, and therefore I made my previous move only after much hesita­ tion. Indeed, the exchange 13 . . . lDxd3+ 14 l:txd3 would have allowed White the open central file, and the bishop at b2 would have exerted significant pressure along the long diagonal. After the retreat of the bishop Black will prevent his opponent from castling 229 19 queenside, and White begins to exper­ ience some difficulties, as the position of his king in the centre or on the king­ side (after castling short) is insecure. 13 14 f3 15 tDdl . • . JLc6 tDbS! Threatening an unpleasant check at h4. In the event of 15 0-0 Black would have developed pressure on the castled position: 15 . . . 'i'g5 16 Ji.cl f4. 15 16 • . . 'ii'c3 tDg6 'it' g5 While White's knight is preventing him from castling queenside, the queen can give up its observation post at d8 to the rook. 17 18 19 g3 tl)f2 l:.gl . • • ile7 As shown by Aronin, Black could apparently have won with 19...f4 ! (20 tllli3 'it'h6 2 1 gxf4 llllixf4 22 ibxf4 exf4, or 20 e4 fxg3 21 hxg3 lbxg3 22 %1 lbxe2). The cautious move in the game allows White to evacuate his king to the queenside. 20 21 22 23 :dt :d2 <li>dl <!>ct ti)f6 a6 b5 b4 24 25 26 27 'i'c2 'lfxd2 1ic2 gxf4 :xd2 l:.d8 f4 exf4 Black too does not waste time in vain: the advance of the queenside pawns is aimed not so much at an attack, as at the further 'smothering' of the opponent's pieces. e5 :ad8 Against the pawn sacrifice 27 . e4 White could have replied 28 f5 ! , with unclear consequences. Now, however, Black retains all his trumps. .. 28 29 White realises that he must also finally give up the idea of castling kingside. Had he played, for example, 19 f4 'i'h6 20 0-0, then 20 . . . nd7 ! 21 l:.adl .l:te7 would have put him in a critical position, since the a8-hl diagonal is poorly defended. 230 e4 tDd3 a5 White justifiably considered himself obliged to control the e5 square as far as possible, but now this has led to a situation which could have been resolved by tactical means: 29 . . .lllxe4 ! 30 fxe4 (30 tbxf4 l:td2) 3.0. . . .txe4 3 1 'fid2 (3 1 l:tdl f3 32 .tfl tbf4) 3 1 ...f3 32 .tfl 'i!fd6 3:3 l:tg5 h6 34 li:th5 We7, and it is doubtful if White's p<)sition can be defended. However, with his undisputed positional advantage (possibility of occupying e5 with his pieces, blocked white pawns at e4 and f3, passive bishop at e2), Black prefers to continue manoeuvring. 29 30 31 32 axb4 il.al l:ldl 33 lbe5! lbd7 axb4 lbdf8 lbe6 Black should not have been in a hurry to complete this knight man­ oeuvre, which concedes control of e5 . 32 . . . 'i!fg5 did not have this defect. This move, by which White activates his bishop at al, is tactically irre­ proachable: (33 . . . Wf6 34 l:xd8+ �d8 35 Wb2, or 33 . . Jhdl+ 34 Wxdl 'iif6 35 'iid6). 33 34 35 36 37 .li.xe5 llxd8+ ifd2 <it>xd2 lbxe5 'i!fg5 VxdS 'lfxd2+ White has significantly repaired his position. Now it only remains for him to play his bishop to h3, and he will have equalised completely. Naturally, Black makes every effort to erect a barrier at g4. 37 38 39 40 <it>d3 .Ii.fl g5 <tJti h5 .ie2 The fortieth move, the last before the time control ! At e2 there is nothing for the bishop at do, and 40 .th3 g4 could perfectly well have been ventured, for example: 41 fxg4 tbg5 42 .tfl il.xe4+ 43 <it>e2 hxg4 44 .ixf4 tbe6 45 id6 .i.c2 46 .i.g2, and the position becomes so simplified that a draw is inevitable. 40 41 42 .i.fl .i.h3 <it>e7 .i.d7 But now this move is unsuccessful, since White's only chance was to rely on the strength of his bishops. 42 43 .txd7 44 h3 45 .i.g7 46 ".te5 lbd8 cli>xd7 <it>e7 c;t>f7 The ending is lost for White, but the solution to this study is not at all easy to find. I sensed that there should be one, but for several· hours· I unsuccessfully sought the correet way to · win. As a 23 1 result, the analysis proved to be one of the worst in my career. 54 55 .if8 <i!i>d3 Draw agreed Game 188 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 12th game Dutch Defence 1 2 3 The point was that I did not even suspect that there was any possibility of exploiting zugzwang in the diagram position. This was pointed out after the game by (if I am not mistaken) Stahl­ berg: 46. . . 'it>g6 ! ! Now if 47 .i.d6 there follows 47 . . . lDe6, and the . . . g5-g4 breakthrough is decisive, while after 47 'it>e2 lDc6 White loses his b3 pawn. 46 47 ... i.g7 rbe7 lLlb7 If was not yet too late to return the king to fl. The position of the knight at b7 is truly awful, and it is not difficult for White to find a saving arrangement of his forces. 48 49 50 51 52 i.b6 ..tf8 .i.h6 i.f8 'ifl>e2 53 i.h6 �6 Wf7 °it>g6 Wf6 Black has given his opponent the move, but White also has the option of moving his king. 52 <j;f7 <,f;;ig6 232 d4 c4 e3 e6 f5 One of the oldest ways of playing against the Dutch, which does not cause Black too many opening problems. 3 4 5 . . • • lLlc3 li'lh3 lLlf6 d5 5 00 would have led to well-known variations, considered by theory to be favourable to White. Now, although the knight at h3 enables f2-f3 and e3-e4 to be played, it is itself badJy placed. 5 6 7 .id2 11fc2 c6 .id6 0-0 8 � Bronstein is aiming to complicate matters as much as possible, and there­ fore he decides to castle on the other side. A breakthrough in the centre will immediately follow, with the prospect of an attack on the king. 8 · 9 o • • • 1!re7 dxc4 Aiming for counter-measures, Black decided on this exchange, in order after 10 .ixc4 b5 1 1 .ie2 ( 1 1 .id3 lba6) to play . . . e6-e5, and if 1 1 .i.b3 to build up an attack with . . . a7-a5 . Even so, White should have gone in for one of these lines. 10 e4 Due to the threat of e4-e5, White will always have time to regain the c4 pawn. fxe4 10 . . . 1 1 �xe4 But this switching to gambit play is not at all justified. Black gains an opportunity to play for the retention of his c4 pawn, which significantly cramps White's forces, in particular the bishop at fl . The resulting play is similar to that in the so-called Botvinnik Variation of the Queen's Gambit. In addition, here Black is a pawn up. Meanwhile, 1 1 fxe4 would have renewed the threat of 1 2 e5, tl1e reply 1 1 . . . e5 would have been forced, and after 12 .i.xc4+ there would still have been all to play for. 11 b5 . 12 • • �xd6 It was hard to refrain from this exchange, especially since 1 2 lbhg5 lbbd7 13 g3 lbxe4 14 Vxe4 lbf6 cannot be good for White. 233 1!rxd6 12 13 f4 A significant positional error, after which White's game is objectively lost. The problem is that now the bishop at d2 is also restricted, and playing with two inactive bishops, as well as a pawn less, offers no chances. The . . . e6-e5 advance should have been prevented by 13 .tf4. �a6 13 The win of a second pawn 13 . . . 'i'xd4 - would after 14 .i.b4 'i'e3+ 1 5 'it>bl c5 16 :el 'ifd4 17 .i.c3 have allowed White to seize the initiative. 14 .i.e2 c5! This removes the central d4 pawn, eliminates Black's doubled pawn, and activates his bishop - what more can one want from one move? 15 16 • . . • . • ..i.f3 .i.cJ llb8 An oversight in a difficult position. It was essential to exchange first on c5. Now White has to give up a second pawn, but in a less favourable situation than that which could have occurred on the 13th move. 16 17 ... dxc5 17 18 19 20 Wbl 1!f'xc3 l:thel lbb4 Also bad, of course, is 1 7 .i.xb4 cxb4, after which the stonn clouds are gathering over the white king. lbxa2+ lbxc3+ 1!f'xc5 h6 Black prepares the exchange of bishops, since 20. . . .i.b7 could not be played immediately in view of lbh3g5xe6. It is true that now White's attack is seemingly facilitated, since the advance g2-g4-g5 gains in strength, but the white king is exposed, and Black will always have available an energetic counter. 21 22 23 lte5 g4 .i.xb7 'iic7 .i.b7 If 23 g5 there would have followed 23 . . . b4 24 'i'e3 .i.xf3 25 'ifxf3 lbd5 with the threat of 26 . . . 'iixe5, while the capture of the pawn - 23 l:txb5 - is ruled out by 23 . . . .i.xf3 24 l:txb8 .i.xdl (or 24. . . .i.e4+). 23 24 ... g5 24 25 l:ldxd5 If 27 bxc3 the most effective reply is 27 . . . 'i'c4, while after 27 Wxd5+ 'irf7 White would have to resign immediate­ ly. On all the remaining moves to the time control, he endeavours to maintain at least some tension in the position. l:txb7 lbd5 White's last hope is the time scramble. In this case, as for example in the 9th game of the match (No. 1 86), the material balance may not play a particular role. 11fd4 b3 lbn Wcl l:txg5 :e5 1i'd7 c2+ hxg5 1i'e6 1ffd6 32 33 Wxc2 �d2 :c7+ Now White is forced to eliminate the enemy pawn that is covering his king. White could not be satisfied with 24 ltxe6 lbxg4 25 ltg6 fif7 (26 ltxg4 'i'f5+). 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 exd5 c3! 234 33 . 'ifc5 The threat of mate forces White to exchange queens. 6 ...dxc4 was undoubtedly sounder, transposing into variations of the Queen's Gambit Accepted, but, I repeat, on this occasion I wanted to follow an unexplored route. Now even time trouble is no longer able to help White. 7 c5 would have been premature in view of 7 . . . tLlbd7 with the threat of 8 . . . e5. With this in mind, White defers playing c4-c5 until a time when . . . e6-e5 will not be possible. • . l::cxc5 :c6 a6 34 35 36 't!fxc5 lhdl l::cxd5 37 38 39 40 b4 l::cb6 b5 l:tbf6 b4 :rs l::c d6 l:t8f6 White resigns 7 7 bl • . • lhbd7 Perhaps it would have been better for Black to play 7 . . .bxc4 8 bxc4 dxc4 9 .i.xc4 c5, but then the strategic plans of the two sides would have been obvious. 8 0-0 .i.b7 Game 1 89 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 18th game Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 lhcJ lhO eJ dS c6 lhf6 e6 This position had already occurred in the 8th game of the match, where after 5 . . .lhbd7 6 �d3 dxc4 7 �xc4 b5 the Meran Variation was reached. Since it was to be expected that my opponent had prepared thoroughly for this, one of the concluding, decisive games, he could have found some improvement for White. Therefore I decided to be the first to deviate from the familiar path, although I have to admit that, as the present game shows, the continuation chosen by Black does not give equality. 5 6 .i.dJ a6 b5 9 c5! 9 ... At just the right time. After Black's queen's bishop has moved off the c8-h3 diagonal, . . . e6-e5 seems dubious. Here, for example, is how events could have developed in this case: 9 ... e5 10 dxe5 ltlg4 1 1 e6 fxe6 12 ltld4 ltlxc5 13 'i'xg4 tLlxd3 14 'i'xe6+ 'i'e7 15 Wf5. Ae7 The fianchetto of this bishop came into consideration. 235 10 a3 aS 12 'ifc2 g6 Preventing 1 1 e4, on which there would have followed 1 1 . . . b4. 11 ..flb2 0-0 Black prepares to play his bishop to g7 (which, as mentioned, it would have been advisable to do earlier and more quickly) and his rook to e8, maintaining the threat of . . . e6-e5. Even so, 12 ... 'ifc7 was probably better, and if 13 b4 axb4 14 axb4 l:bal 1 5 l:l-xal :as. 13 b4 axb4 Otherwise White would have had the opportunity of opening up the queenside at a more favourable moment by b4xa5 and a3-a4. 17 17 18 axb4 l:tael 11fc7 White cannot exploit the open file for the development of his initiative, and so he plays his rook to the centre in order to commence activity there. 15 16 • • • l£ie2 Afe8 16 ltle5 (if 16 . . .ltlxe5 1 7 dxe5 Wxe5 1 8 �e4) and f2-f4 looks more energetic. 16 .tf8 • • • l£ie5 Jlg7 l£if8 The exchange on e5 was, of course, unfavourable for Black: the other white knight would have occupied d4. . 14 15 h3 Now 17 �e5 can no longer be played on account of 17 . . . ltlxe5 1 8 dxe5 ltlg4, since 1 9 f4 is not possible (in this variation the movement of the knight to e2 has left the e3 pawn undefended). Therefore White takes control of g4. 19 fJ 19 20 21 f4 l£if3 White prepares e3-e4, but it does not promise him any benefits, as my opponent promptly realises. The place for this pawn is at f4, in order to prevent the freeing advance . . . e6-e5. l£16d7 f6 l:t.e7 Black too wastes time, since the . . . e6-e5 advance is an unrealisable dream. In particular, if 2 l. ..e5 there would have followed 22 fxe5 fxe5 23 e4, and the opening of the centre threatens to prove catastrophic for him. 22 �c3 236 22 . • . f5 Black correctly decides to block the centre, in order to safeguard himself here against the development of White's initiative. I expected now that Bronstein would immediately begin preparing an attack on the kingside with g2-g4. This, incidentally, would not have involved any particular risk for him. But he somewhat surprisingly again sets his sights on the queenside. . 23 24 25 26 :at ll'le5 l:txal 1i'bl l:tee8 l:ixal l:ta8 A • . • .i.xb5!! 27 28 29 fxe5 .i.cl /i)xe5 .i.h6 Before accepting the sacrifice, Black improves somewhat the placing of his pieces, but the inevitable decision can not be deferred any further. A subtle move! With the following combination in mind, White first defends his rook with his queen, in ord�r to free his bishop from this role. 26 27 positional sacrifice. The two connected passed b- and c-pawns will be stronger than the bishop. 29 30 31 32 ll'lxb5 ll'ld6 'iixal 33 'i!fc3 cxb5 ll'ld7 l:bal 'fla8 W'c8 What, it would seem, is the difference, whether the queen goes to c8 or to b8? Meanwhile, it is so great, that it could have decided the outcome of the game. The point is that from b8 the queen would have controlled important squares on the b-file. This, however, was not easy to foresee. More accurate was 3 3 'i'b2, ensuring the defence of the b-pawn after its fur­ ther advance. This should probably have led to a win for White. But even now Black's position is not easy. There is nothing he dm do, other than exchange his bishop for the strong knight at d6, giving the opponent three connected and far-advanced passed pawns. 33 34 · 35 237 b5 exd6 .i.f8 .i.xd6 1!fa4 36 'illb 2 If White· s queen had already been at b2, he would have had an extra tempo, and he could have continued 36 ..i.d2 � 37 W'b4 'ifdl + 3S <it>h2 tfil6 3 9 'ifa5 llle4 40 .iii.e l with an obvious win. Wf7 36 • 37 • advance of the h-pawn. Even a possible exchange of queens does not change the evaluation of the ending. I pointed out these variations immediately after the game. • �h2 3 7 ..i.d2 was stronger. 37 • . • h6 A move typical of time trouble, when one is afraid of messing things up. 3 7 ... t'.M6 would apparently have saved the game, since after 3 S il.d2 �es White does not achieve anything either by the exchange of queens (39 'ifb4 ifxb4 40 .i.xb4 <it>d7). or by the breakthrough of the queen into the enemy position: 39 c6 il.xc6 40 bxc6 'ifxc6 41 Wbs+ �d7 42 Wa7+ @cs 43 'ile7 lbe4 44 W'xe6+ 'ild7. 38 e4 White is aiming to complicate the play. Here too 3S il.d2 and then 'ifb4 was more accurate. 38 . • . f4 After 3S... dxe4 3 9 d5 ! or 3S ... fxe4 3 9 il.xh6 the way into the enemy rear would have been opened for the white queen. 39 40 e5 'ife2 g5 <1Jg7 In this critical position the game was adjourned, and no one, myself included, had any doubts that White would win. Analysis confirmed this, and showed that after 41 c6 .i.xc6 42 bxc6 'ifxc6 43 .i.xf4 ! gxf4 44 'l'g4+ � 45 Wxf4+ <j;g7 46 'ilfg4+ <j;f7 47 Wh4 ! (but not 47 'i'h5+ <j;g7 48 'ife8 tl:lxe5) 47... M 48 Wxh6 Black has no way of opposing the There remained only the slight hope that White had not sealed 41 c6, assuming that this possibility would always be available to him. But even in this case, for a long time I was unable to find a satisfactory continuation in my adjournment analysis. It was only an hour and a half before the resumption that the correct plan of defence was found. 41 11i'd3 lLlb8!! 42 h4 Wc4 This paradoxical move, placing the knight 'out of play', is the only one that saves Black. White can still regain his piece, but no longer the bishop, but the knight. Then opposite-colour bishops are left on the board, and Black has nothing to fear. Bronstein makes a last attempt by opening up the opposing king's position, but in so doing the white king is also deprived of protection. 238 Now Black also need not fear the exchange of queens - the knight is helping the bishop to control the c6 square. 43 i!f'h3 Wxb5! The b-pawn is more dangerous than the bishop, and therefore it must be eliminated. 43 . . . 'Wxcl would have been incorrect on account of 44 hxg5 hxg5 45 'ifxe6 'ife3 46 'i'f6+ 'it>h7 47 'i'xg5 'i'g3+ 48 Wxg3 fxg3+ 49 'it>xg3, and the white pawns are stronger than the black pieces. 44 45 hxg5 •xe6 hxg5 1i'd3! 46 47 Wf6+ 'itih7 55 56 57 47 48 49 W'f6+ .i.xf4 Wh8 'iflh7 The bishop sacrifice cannot achieve anything for White, of course, but he is assured of perpetual check, and so he is not taking any risk. 49 50 Wf7+ 51 li'e8+ 52 W'e7+ 53 'ille8+ 54 1fe7+ gxf4 Wh8 'ifi?g7 Wh8 'ifi?g7 \filh8 W'f7+ Wxb7 'ifi?b7 Wh8 Now it is Black who has perpetual check. 1Wg3+ Whl Draw agreed 57 58 Game 190 M.Botvinnik-D.Bronstein World Championship Match· Moscow 1951, 19th gafize Grtinfeld Defence Black must immediately create the counter-threat of . . . 'i!fg3+. Wf7+ Thanks to the move 45 . . . 'ifd3 ! , in the event of 47 'i'xg5 'i'g3+ 48 'i'xg3 fxg3+ 49 <t>xg3 .Jlc8 followed by . . . 'it>g6, . . . lbc6 and . . . .i.d7, Black can set up an impregnable fortress. Wf8+ 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 g3 Ag2 cxd5 tt'itJ li'if6 g6 .i.g7 d5 li'ixd5 0-0 According to theory, 6 ... c5 would have been premature. 7 0-0 8 e4 c5 8 ll'if6 8 dxc5, as I played against Zuidema (Amsterdam 1 966) would seem to be less active, but, on the other hand, the position of the pawn at e5 - and it will advance to there - is less favourable for White that at e2. . . .. 8 ...lbb6, which is perhaps less good, occurred in Game 170. li'id5 9 e5 The position is repeated, but I did not even calci.ilate how many times this was happening, since I did not intend to claim a draw - in any case it is obvious. 10 dxc5 Otherwise, as for example in the game Najdorf-Boleslavsky ( 1 948), after 10 'i'e2 Black could have advantage­ ously replied 10 . . . cxd4. 239 time for the mobilisation of his forces, but White will have the advantage of the two bishops, which does not require any particular recommendation. 14 15 16 hJ . 'i!fxf3 'ffe4 .txf3 ltldxe5 'ffdJ 17 'ilfa4 Wc4 18 19 lladl .i.d5 l:lad8 19 20 ltlxa4 'i!rxa4 e6 21 .ta2 White's centralised queen is so well placed that Black has no alternative - he has to exchange it. 10 • . . Only not 17. . . t:Dc4 on account of 1 8 :adl t:Dxb2 19 l:xd3 tLlxa4 2 0 tLlxa4. tLlb4 10 . . .tLlc6 was played against me by Ragozin, not long before the present encounter (cf. training games). The continuation chosen by my opponent cannot be recommended, since Black falls behind in development. After all, he will still have to spend time regaining his pawn. After 10 ...tLla6 it is doubtful whether White would have had any advantage. 11 12 tLlcJ a3 Only in this way can White gain control of the c4 square, so that it should not be occupied by an enemy knight. ltl8c6 It is useful to drive the enemy knight away from the c2 square, especially since White's queenside pawn majority is his main trwnp. 12 . • . tLldJ After 12 ... 'ifxdl 13 :xdl tLlc2 14 :bl .tf5 the reply 15 tLlh4 is convincing enough. After the other possible move ( 12 ... tl'ia6 13 b4 tl'ixe5 14 tl'ixe5 .txe5 1 5 .tb2) White's initiative would have quickly developed. 13 .teJ Ji.g4 The pawn is immune: 13 ... ltlxb2 14 We2 (14 . . . t:Dd3 15 .:fd l ). Black aims to exchange his bishop in order to gain Ragozin, my second, who later annotated this game, suggested that the bishop should have been returned to g2. I, however, considered it essential to retain control of the c4 square. After 21 .tg2 the following could have occurred: 240 2 1 . . . ltlc4 22 ii.cl lLld4 23 .i.xb7 lbe2+ 24 <li>g2 ltlxcl 25 :xcl lLlxb2, and White has no advantage. 21 • . • lhf3+ <li>g2 g4 23 . 24 l:ld2 fxe5 lhd5 28 29 30 31 32 hxg4 �xfl l%f2 .i.xf2 32 33 34 35 �g2 .i.c4 b4 'it>g7 36 37 38 a4 .te2 .tg3 lhe5 .td4 a5 39 40 41 42 bxa5 lhc7 a6 lhxa6 lhxc5 ltlc6 bxa6 e5 .i.xe5 This prevents the further advance of the f-pawn, which would be highly unpleasant, but White can no longer avoid exchanges. Black exploits the opportunity to occupy the central d4 square, which, however, is not so effective. 22 23 26 27 28 lhfd4 The knight must not be allowed to go to f5. h6 'it>b7 fxg4 lbfl :cs+ lbf2+ The capture 32 'it>xf2 would have brought the king closer to the centre, but did not work because of 32 . . . itJc2 (33 .tc I .td4+). a6 lhe6 .i.b2 It would have been simpler to exchange White's last pawn on the kingside by 35 . . . h5. But perhaps Black was hoping to win this ending? Black's last two moves clearly indicate his intention to play . . . f7-f5. White should have prepared for this with 25 itJc3 f5 26 f3 ! followed by :fd l , when he retains all the advantages of his position. 25 f4 25 26 lhc3 This is a useful operation for Black, but the previous recommendation (38... h5) remains valid. In view of the fact that White has two bishops, Black can feel easy only when there is play on just one wing. But now, as a result of exchanges, the position becomes simplified, and Black's chances of a successful defence are improved. f5 26 nfdl could not be played immediately on account of 26 . . . ttJc2. Just as the win for White in the adjourned position of the previous game seemed obvious, so too no one was in any doubt that the present encounter, 24 1 Both of Black's knights lack strong points and are unable to oppose the active white bishops. How, under such circwnstances, could he avoid ex­ changing his knight for the bishop at f3 ? A suicidal decision! lLlb5 47 lLlb4 which was interrupted after 40 moves, would end in a draw. Indeed, there are so few pieces and pawns on the board . . . Here, for example, Black had an elegant possibility, pointed out by Goldberg, of forcing a draw by combinative means: 42 . . .ltixa4 43 .tb5 tbc5 44 ltixc5 .ixc5 45 .ixc6 .ie3 46 @fl (or 46 .ih4 h5 47 g5 ilcl ) 46.. :.tg� 47 .tf4 .txf4 48 <it>xf4 g5+ and 49. ..h5. It is hard to explain why Bronstein did not go in for this variation: either because he overlooked it both in his adjournment analysis, and at the board, or because he asswned that 'all roads lead to Rome' . . . 48 il.d8 <it>f8 49 50 lLlc6 .te2 .tc5 Things are obviously bad if the king, to help its pieces, has to move to the centre, abandoning the kingside pawns to their fate. · Beginning the pursuit of the knights. 50 lLle3+ If 50 . ..lLlbd6, then 5 1 .te7+ and 52 • • • .txc4, while if 50 ... it)cd6 51 ..te7+ and 52 .txb5, in each case winning a piece. 51 52 53 42 43 44 45 .tc7 Ao a5 g5 lLld4+ i.xd4 lLle4 lLlc3 . lLleS h5 Black finally decides on this advance, but at a moment when it does not lead to ari exchange of pawns. The simplest way to draw was by 45 .. .ltlxf.3 46 <it>xf3 Wf6 . and only then . . . h6-h5. Then he could have calmly given up a piece for the a-pawn. 46 � lLlxd4 ..id3 lLlc4 Here the effect is seen of Black's mistake, in 'sparing' both the white g­ pawn and the light-square bishop. Now the weakness of the g6 pawn proves fatal (if the · king defends the g6 pawn, White plays 54 .tb6). 242 53 54 55 . .i.xg6 'iite4 �g4 �e5+ �c6 After 55 ... �g6 56 'iitxd4 the a-pawn ca1U1ot be stopped. 56 .tb6 . . It was not yet too late to spoil everything: 56 .i.xh5 �d8 57 �xd4 lbc6+. 56 • • .i.xb6 • Or 56 . . . i.c3 57 a6 .i.d2 58 �e7+ 59 'ifiie6 ltlc6 60 ile4. 57 58 59 · 8 9 9c2 exd5 <Ms axb6 h4 .ifs 'iite7 'iitd6 'iitf4 Black resigns White has not gained any advantage from the opening, and for the moment he does not decide on his plan - he awaits the development of events. Game 191 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 20th game Reti Opening 1 2 3 4 5 A premature exchange. Correct was 8 e3, as I played in similar positions against Petrosian (1964) and Larsen ( 1 967). c4 tLlfJ g3 .tg2 0-0 e6 tLlf6 b6 .i.b7 Jl..e7 bJ .i.b2 7 8 cxd5 e3 10 11 12 13 dJ tLlcJ �adl • . . l:Ce8 Against 10 tLlg5, with the threat of 1 1 .i.xf6, Black would also have replied 10 ... ltlbd7. In this position White had an opportunity to transpose into the Queen's Indian Defence by 6 d4, but he prefers a more complicated set-up from the Reti Opening. 6 7 9 10 0-0 Now, . however, Black is free to advance his central d-pawn. d5 A cunnin move. Black provokes d3d4, in order then to open up the game by . . . c7-c5, not , fearing the appearance of an isolated pawn in the centre. He needs to do this, in order to exchange pieces and reach the haven of a draw. After all, at that point the match score was in my favour. 14 243 g ltlbd7 .i.f8 a6 b5 a4! It is useful for White to force the further advance of the b-pawn. 14 15 16 b4 c5 tne2 lhd2 For the moment White refrains from playing d3-d4, and correctly so. Alas, a few moves later my opponent was unable to resist this temptation. 16 • . 20 • • • lhg6 It is important for Black to exchange the knight that is attacking the central d5 pawn. lDe5 . In the end White is unable to resist the temptation, but this leads merely to exchanges, and with them a draw becomes probable. Meanwhile, e3-e4 would have retained all the advantages of his position. 21 lhxg6 2 1 tiJd3 would have led to more complicated play, since for the moment Black cannot reply 2 1 . . . c4 (22 bxc4 dxc4 23 .i.xb7 llxb7 24 tbxc4). dxc5 hxg6 .i.xc5 23 24 Wal l:.cl ife7 lhg4! 25 .i.d4 21 22 • • . Now Black is alright. It is true that he has an isolated d5 pawn, but this is compensated by White's concerns over his weak c3 square. Black now invites his opponent to play d3-d4 with gain of tempo. After all, there is no doubt that one of White's central pawns is going to advance. I was in fact afraid of e3-e4, when I would have had to reply . . . d5-d4, and after h2h3 and then f2-f4 White would have had good prospects. He would have gained a good post for his knight at c4, and then all his preceding play would have been justified. However, for the moment Bronstein does not want to undertake anything. 17 18 19 20 lhf4 ifbl !tfel d4 · l:lc8 a5 llc7 It is essential to block the a7-gl dia­ gonal, since if 25 h3 there would have followed 25 . . . tiJx:f2 26 lt>xf2 .i.xe3+ 27 <t>fl .i.a6+. Also bad was 25 .i.xg7, not 244 so much on account of 25 . . li:lxf2, as in view of 25 . . . f6 26 h3 lt:le5. 40 41 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 f!ec8 lLltJ .i.h3 lLlxd4 .:.xcl 'I'xcl li)f6 i. xd4 l:lxcl .:.xct + lLle4 tDc2 1!fd4 rl;e7 In the knight ending too White cannot hope to win. 41 42 . • . lLlxd4 11fxd4 lLldl The sealed move, after which the outcome becomes clear. 43 lLlc2 43 44 45 46 lLlb2 ltldl ltld4 lLlc2 lLlb2 lLld4 Draw agreed After 43 tl'ic6+ r$;d6 44 lt:lxa5 rl;c7 White would have lost his knight. Game 192 M.Botvinnik.;..D.Bronstein Black has achieved all the aims that .he had set himself: exchanges have occurred, the d5 pawn is securely defended, and the c3 square will be occupied by his laright. 31 32 33 34 .i.c8 .i.xb7 f3 'iffl lLlcJ 11fxb7 � 1!fc8 Here and subsequently Black prevents the activation of the enemy queen. g5 35 <it>g2 36 37 . 38 g4 Wet 'ifd2 WfdJ This was the decisive game in our match. By that time Bronstein was a point ahead, and for the last time I had White. Therefore this was effectively also my last hope of drawing the match and of retaining the title of World Champion: the game had to be won. g6 1!fe8 'iff6 1 2 3 d4 c4 g3 lLlf6 g6 c6 4 5 .i.g2 cxd5 d5 Usually Bronstein used to choose more complicated lines, but on this occasion he was satisfied with a draw. 'Ife5 Strictly speaking, the ending is even favourable to Black (compare, for example, the placing of the queens), but this, of course, is not enough for a win. 39 World Championship Match Moscow 1951, 23rd game Griinfeld Defence This was of handling the opening is the most unpleasant for Black. It is hard 245 for him to gain counterplay, and the ex­ tra tempo gives White some advantage. 5 6 7 lL:ic3 lL:ih3 back, and then return to their former positions. More understandable would have been 12 . . . lDe8 and 13 ... ltld6, which would have secured Black an equal game. cxd5 iJ..g7 The usual 7 lL:if3 is stronger, of course, but White wanted to avoid the usual continuations. 13 13 14 7 • • • .i.xh3 .i.g2 e3 .1i.d2 0-0 .i.xh3 tL:ic6 e6 0-0 :cs tL:id7 • • • ii.cl \!fb6 Capablanca' s standard procedure in similar positions is well known. Back in 1 9 16, with Black in a famous game against Janowski, he ·answered 5 'iib3 with 5 . . . 'i!fb6. I was also intending to reply 14 'i'b3, but how could I decide on the exchange of queens in a game which I had to win at any price? As a result of his indecision, White loses a tempo, and Black is again alright. This seems quite sensible, since Black gains time, achieves a comfort­ able development, and exchanges pieces. But in the future, if the game should become open, the presence of the two active bishops may tell. Quiet development would have been sufficient for maintaining equality, as, for example, in the game Euwe-Bronstein (Amsterdam 1 954) : 7 . . . 0-0 8 lL:if4 e6 9 0-0 ltlc6 10 e3 i.d7 1 1 llld3 .Uc8 12 ltlc5 b6 I 3 ltlxd7 1!fxd7. 8 9 10 11 12 lDe2 White, of course, does not repeat Black's mistakes, and transfers his knight, although not immediately, to d3 . Bronstein liked such indeterminate manoeuvres, when the pieces first move 14 . 15 tL:if4 li'lf6 16 1i'b3 li'le4 17 18 1!fxb6 .Itel axb6 18 ... lDa5 • • :fd8 Black's first threat takes Therefore White . .. ii.f8-b4. urgently defend the b4 square. shape must Well played. Since in the event of 16 lDd3 lDe4 17 .Itel Black is fully prepared for . . . e6-e5, White reverts to thinking about Capablanca's procedure ... Bronstein too knows that one need not fear the doubled pawns after such an exchange of queens. Therefore Black easily maintains the balance. If White does not retain the two bishops, there will be no point in playing on. 246 reply f3-f4, after which White would have lost any hope of success. 23 19 lbd3 i.f8 Black sensibly avoids the pseudo­ active invasion with his rook ( l 9 . . .:c2), since after 20 tl:ib4 it would have had to retreat (20 . . . l:txb2 is. bad in view of 2 1 i.xe4 d.xe4 2 2 i.c3 l:te2 2 3 :rc1 and 24 <iWJ.); But he should not have dis­ regarded 1 9. ..tl:ic4, when 20 l:tdl ll or 20 ..ib4 i.f8 2 1 i.xf8 <Ji>xf8 leads to an equal game. 20 f3 Black's knight is pushed back, and this is already an indication that his previous move was not the best. 20 21 • • . .tf2 lbd6 The nervy atmosphere affects both players. White does not prevent the invasion of the rook onto the second rank, and Black does not make us of it. Meanwhile, 21 l:tf2 was quite possible, and after 2 L. . lbac4 22 l:te2 tbf5 23 i.f2 i.h6 the play would have developed roughly as in the game. . 21 22 • . • .l:tact l:tfel Ah6 lbac4 Both here, and later, by playing . . . ttxi6-f5 . Black would have forced the 23 . . • lba5 The above recommendation of 23 . . .tbf5 would not have been refuted by the combinatien 24 g4 tbfxe3 25 i.h3 with the threat of 26 b3, on account of 25 . . .tl:ixg4 26 fxg4 i.xc l 27 l:txc l ttxi2. But, as the reader already knows, my opponent liked to man­ oeuvre, awaiting a favourable moment. However, in the given case the moving to and fro of the knight pursues a definite aim. Black was apparently hoping for the exchanging variation 24 :xc8 l:txc8 25 l:tc 1 l:txc 1 + 26 t'Llxc 1, after which the knight again advances (26 . . . lbac4), and one of the white pawns is lost. 24 <!>fl i.g7 25 26 g4 b3 lbc6 White has only just sorted everything out, when one after another there follow two bad moves. Now the queenside pawns . ate weakened unnecessarily, 247 whereas he had the logical move 26 .i.h4, provoking 26 . . . f6. 26 27 �e2 28 29 30 a4 .ig3 .ifl • . . tLlb5 And now 27 a4 suggested itself, in order to prevent Black from nipping in the bud White's queenside initiative by 27 ...tLla3. However, my opponent rejects this move. Ars 27 tLlc7 tLla6 35 <i>dl 35 36 37 38 39 �xcl �c2 �c3 e4 40 41 gxf5 .i.d3 Here it was sufficient to play 35 ... 'if.?f?, when neither 36 Axa6 bxa6 37 ..ic7 Axe l 38 @xcl lDxb3+ 39 @c2 lDa5, nor 36 �c2 l£Jb4+ 37 �bl tLla6 would have given White an advantage. But, as in many other games of this match, I was now in time trouble, and here an ill-fated idea occurred to Bronstein: why not go in for the win of a pawn, in order to achieve complete success in this game, and conclude the match victoriously ahead of schedule? Alas, Black's extra pawn will have no significance, his knights lack strong points, and White only needs to open up the position for the power of his two bishops to tell in the endgame. .ixcl tLlxb3+ tLla5 � f5 This is playing into White's hands, since it leads to a weakening of the h7 pawn. 30 ... f6 32 33 lhc8 II.cl lbc8 Black had a wide choice of equalis­ ing continuations: 30 ...l£icb4, 30 ... .i.a3 and 30 ... tLias. He was probably hoping for 3 1 �d2 tLias, which would have led to him seizing the c-file (3.2 .l:tc3 .l:.xc3 33 'itrxc3 .l:.cS+ 34 @b2 tt:lb4 35 tt:lxb4 .txb4). 31 l:ledl tLla5 Simultaneously defending the c2 square and (indirectly) the b3 pawn. . 33 · 34 . /l)xcl · . • l:lxcl ..iaJ 248 gxf5 <iti>g6 And here I had to seal a move. In general, the plan is obvious. Move one bishop to d6, then the other to b 1 , exchange pawns on d5 and after .i.a2 win the central pawn. For twenty minutes I tried to weigh up which was stronger: 42 .i.d6 or 42 .i.b l . On general grounds I decided that the first of these was better. 42 .i.d6 But our night-time analysis showed that in the event of 42 ...tllc6 43 i.bl 'iti>f6 White cannot strengthen his position, e.g. 44 exd5 exd5 45 .ia2 �e6. Here I also established that after 42 .i.bl (which was not sealed) and then 42 . . . tllc6 (if 42 . . . tllc4 43 i.f4 and 44 i.a2) 43 exd5 exd5 44 h2 tt)ab4 45 i.b3 or 44 . . . &[je7 45 .i.h4 Black loses a pawn. And if 42 . . . fxe4 (instead of 42 . . . ltlc6) 43 fxe4 dxe4 44 .i.xe4+ �g7 the position is opened up and the white bishops dominate . the board. An interesting variation was pointed out by Flohr: 45 .i.xb7 tllxb7 followed by �c3 -c4-b5xa6xb6 and the creation of a passed a-pawn. But . . . it was another move that had been sealed. 42 43 .. ii.bl . ltlc6 cbt'6 The moves 42 . . . &[jc6 43 .ibl 'iti>f6 were undoubtedly decided upon in analysis and were made immediately when the game was resumed. However, Black's last decision was not the only one . . . All night I looked for a way of continuing the battle. And it was only at eight in the morning that I was fortunate enough to find a staggering idea, which was in fact carried out on the resumption. Had Bronstein suspected that an unpleasant surprise had been prepared for him. he would possibly have found 43 . . . t{ja7 (to be honest, in my analysis I underestimated the strength of . this move) 44 exd5 exd5 45 h2 b5 46 a5 b4+! 47 �d3 ltlb5 48 .i.e5 lbac7 49 �c2 <tin 50 �b3 lba6, and could then have gained a draw and, in all probability, become the seventh World Champion in history. However, after the natural move 43 . . . tllf6 my opponent encountered a surprise. 44 ..tgJ!! Now a zugzwang position is created. The point of the move is that if 44 . . . ltlab4 White has the reply 45 .i.e5+!, when the king is driven to g6 (if 45 . . . tbxe5 46 dxe5+, winning a piece), but then 46 i.d6 t{ja6 4 7 exd5 exd5 48 .ia2 (it should be mentioned that 45 .i.c7 would lead only to a draw: 45 . . . dxe4 46 fxe4 fxe4 47 .ixe4 tbd5+). We will also show that g3 is the best square for the bishop . If 44 .if4, then 249 . after 44 . . . 0e7 Black has everything defended and he is threatening to ex­ change pawns in the centre followed by . . . tLld5+. But now if 44 ... 0e7 there follows 45 ..ih4+, winning a pawn. 44 • • • fxe4 Black thought it best to exchange pawns, to free his king from having to defend the f5 pawn, but this leads to a decisive increase in the activity of the light-square bishop. 45 fxe4 b6 46 47 i.f4 exd5 h5 Saving the h-pawn. White had a good choice: 5 1 ..ixe7 <tixe7 52 ..ig6 �c6 53 ..ixh5 tLla7 54 <tib4, or 5 1 ..ih3 lbbc6 52 ..ig2 <tig7 53 Ji..xe7 lbxe7 54 <tib4 lbc6+ 55 <tib5 tLlxd4+ 56 <tixb6. h4 i.g5+ i.f5 exd5 tLlab8 . • • <M7 l'/)a7 54 55 56 il.e2 57 ..ig5 lbbc6 tLlc8 'it>g6 . . • cM6 'it>g6 l'/)6e7 Af3 Or 56 ...tLl8e7 57 Ag5 (57 ..ic7 lbf5 58 ..ixd5 lbfxd4 59 ..ixb6 is also good) 57 . ..lbf5 58 i.xd5 lbfxd4 59 ..ie4+ 'it>f7 60 ®c4. The white bishops dominate the entire board, preventing 50 ...lbd7 and simultaneously threatening to attack the b7 pawn. 50 ..if4 ..id3 i.e2 .i.dJ+ The experience of a chess practician in action. I had already seen the final zugzwang position, but first I decided to avoid time trouble by repeating the position, in order to make all the moves before the time control. Removing the possibility of 47... 0e7 followed by ... dxe4 and .. .tLld5+. 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Trying to play . . . b6-b5. 50 ... lbe7 was more cunning, but even in this case Although Black is still a pawn up, he loses because of zugzwang, the second in this one game. A possible continuation was 57 . . . tLlc6 58 ..ixd5 lbd6 59 ..if3 'it>f5 60 250 .tel (pointed out by Smyslov) 60 . . . b5 61 .txc6 bxc6 62 a5. After 40 minutes' thought Black resigned. The score in the match became equal. The last game ended in a draw, and I was able to retain the title of World Champion. 8 e4 d6 9 .ie2 tllbd7 10 0--0 c6 1 1 d5 came into consideration, as in a game Reshevsky-Bisguier ( 1 957). 8 9 • • • b5 d5 White does not achieve anything in the variation 9 cxd5 .txfl 10 'it>xfl exd5 1 1 'i!ff3 c6 12 b5 ..i.d6. Game 1 93 9 10 11 cxd5 .i.b2 12 .i.e2 12 13 14 0--0 M.Botvinnik-0.Moiseev .i.b7 exd5 c5 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951 Nimzo-Ind.ian Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 e3 5 6 7 �ge2 a3 �f4 tDc3 lht'6 e6 .i.b4 b6 4 . 0--0 is the more usual continua­ tion, for the moment not determining Black's plans. . . .i.a6 .i.�7 One of the games from my match with Bronstein (195 1) developed dif­ ferently: 7 lbg3 d5 8 cxd5 .txfl 9 l'Dxfl exd5 10 lbg3 1!i'd7 1 1 'i'f3 �c6 12 0--0 g6 13 .td2 0--0, and as White I did not manage to gain any advantage. 7 • • • 0--0 After 1 2 bxc6 l'Dxc6 Black would have obtained a good game by sub­ sequently playing his knight to c4. Now, however, the b5 pawn cramps the enemy pieces. This factor, and also the weakness of the d5 pawn, are not compensated at all by the passed c­ pawn. Preference cannot be given to 7 ...d5. It is true that against Novotelnov (No. 196) I did not achieve much, but in one of my matches with Smyslov (No.2 19) my opponent employed his continuation only once - a fact that speaks for itself. 8 b4 25 1 a4 c4 a6 White over-protects his b5 · pawn, aiming to retain his pawn outpost. Meanwhile, he would not have lost anything by parting with this pawn. After the exchange on a6 Black would have been given a new weakness - the b6 pawn. It is curious that for the next four moves White could have reverted to this plan, but instead he forced Black to play . . . a6-a5. 14 15 16 'W'c2 l:ltbl 16 17 18 .t.a3 l1xa3 Ab4 'ifd7 Since the c4 pawn is securely blockaded, in the centre and on the kingside White effectively has an extra pawn. 23 24 25 .i.f3 tLlh5 25 26 27 Axh5 .i.f3 l:lad8 tbe6 Of course, White did not want to support the d5 pawn by 25 tl'ixe6 fxe6, but now Black gains an opportunity to advance his f-pawn, blocking the position. White holds on to his b5 pawn. :eS .t.xa3 'it'd6 tbxh5 g6 f5 In this way Black establishes effective control of e4, but in some cases White will be able to open up the position with g2-g4. 28 29 30 19 g3 <tJg7 h6 @£6 l:la2 Here was the last time when 19 bxa6 ! could have been played, since 19 . . . 'ifxa3 20 axb7 l:la6 2 1 lDi'xd5 tbxd5 22 tbxd5 'i'xa4 23 'i!i'xa4 l:lxa4 24 tbxb6 is dubious for Black. 19 a5 At last the position on the queenside is stabilised. White decides to exchange queens, . in order to deprive his opponent of any active possibilities. In the ending his advantage is undisputed. • 20 21 22 23 l:la2 'st>f1 • • 1'cl '8'a3 l:lxa3 h4 . tbbd7 'tlxa3 ttlf8 Here or later Black could have ad­ vanced his rook's pawn to h5, blocking the position even more. Then, in order to break through, White . would' first have had to play f2-f3 , which all to some extent looks problematic. 252 In short, White would like to avoid such problems, and whereas he forced Black into playing . . . a6-a5, he now acts very cautiously, to avoid suggesting to his opponent the need to play . . . h6-h5. 31 32 'it>g2 :ht .l:th8 :he8 33 34 35 l:td2 lle2 .l:te7 llee8 It transpires that Black is quite satisfied with his pawn fonnation and does not intend to change it - good! c;t>n Now White is free to play his king to d2, where it will replace the knight that is blockading the c-pawn. and in some cases will prevent the black bishop from attacking the a4 pawn. 35 36 37 38 <it?el 'it>d2 lleel 38 39 lDe2 llb8 l:lbe8 l:te7 At the time of the breakthrough both rooks must be on the first rank. Now it only remains for White to establish control of f4. l:tee8 llh8 Black Jllisses the last chance to play . . . h6-h5, but how could he have guessed that White had lo:p.g been dreaming of making a breakthrough, and that he would not be stopped by the need to make his last move before the time control? 40 41 g4 llegl llbg8 fxg4 42 .i.xg4 lldf8 43 44 .i.xe6 lDf4+ 'it>xe6 'it>d6 45 llh2 This makes things somewhat easier for the opponent; it really would have been better to allow 42 gxf5 gxf5 (but not 42 . . . 'it>xf5 43 .i.g4+) 43 tLlg3. Perhaps the decisive mistake. It was essential to activate the bishop by 42 . . . .i.c8 ! , since with it at b7 the open­ ing of the position proves catastrophic for Black. After 44. . . 'it>f6 45 :h3 the bishop would have remained in its passive position. Then White would have either won the g6 pawn (45 . . . l:tf7 46 l:tfJ), or after . . . g6-g5 he would have opened the h-file and invaded the enemy position with a rook. But now too the loss of a pawn is inevitable. Defending the f2 pawn; 46 l:l.xg6+ is threatened. 45 46 Too late . . . 47 48 49 50 • • • l:l.bg2 llxg6 l:txg6 tDxg6 tDe5 .:.r6 .i.c8 l:tgxg6 :xg6 .i.f5 Jl.bl Had White not played his king to d2 in good time, Black would now have 253 2 3 4 5 played 50... .i.c2, when it is not clear how it would all have ended. 51 @cJ .i.a2 c4 li)cJ e3 a3 e6 i.b4 d5 . Jl.e7 The seemingly logical 5 t:bge2 was refuted in a game Euwe-Capablanca (193 1): 5 . . . dxc4 6 a3 i.a5 7 'i'a4+ c6 8 'ifxc4 0--0 9 t:bg3 lbbd7 10 f4 lbb6 1 1 'lid3 c5 1 2 dxc5 'i'xd3 1 3 .i.xd3 .i.xc3+ 14 bxc3 lba4. 5 52 e4! This is the simplest way to neutralise the bishop's aggressive manoeuvre. 52 . • • dxe4 Or 52 . .. i.b3 53 exd5, and it will be time to resign after both 53 . . . @xd5 54 lbd7. an!! 53 . . . i.xa4 54 t:bxc4+. But the pawn ending is also hopeless . . . 53 54 55 56 t:bxc4+ Wxc4 d5 d6 .i.xc4 h5 @e5 56 57 @xd6 @d4 Black resigns A well-known manoeuvre. Game 194 M.Botvinnik-LLipnitsky 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 d4 • • What is the point of the manoeuvre . . . ii.f8-b4-e7 ? It is that now, compared with similar positions in the Queen's Gambit, White can no longer develop his bishop actively at g5 or f4. li)f6 6 7 8 9 li)f3 b4 .1Lb2 Wc2 0-0 li)bd7 c6 The game Botvinnik-Reshevsky from the first cycle of the World Champion­ ship Match-Tournament (1948) showed that after 9 .i.d3 dxc4 10 i.xc4 i.d6 1 1 t:be2 a5 White cannot claim any opening advantage. 9 lle8 Other continuations deserve prefer­ ence: 9 ... a5 10 b5 c5, or immediately 9 ... dxc4 10 .i.xc4 and now IO . a5 1 1 b5 lbb6 12 .i.d3 cxb5 1 3 �b5 .i.d7 14 t:be5 .:t.c8 1 5 'i'e2 lba4 16 0--0 i.xb5 ! 17 i.xb5 t:bc3, with complete equality. This improvement was demonstrated by Reshevsky in his game with me from the 4th round of the USSR-USA Match (Moscow 1955). Meanwhile, even now White has no other rational continuation., apart from the development of his fl bishop, since it is hardly advantageous for him to • • • . . 254 move his rook from al ( 10 l:td l dxc4 1 1 i.xc4 b5 1 2 .i.d3 a5). 19 20 :xb2 21 1id2! 21 22 23 �a7 l:t.xb7 1!f xa7 23 ... 'i!f'a8 :fbl l!ed8 ..i.e8 This obvious move proves to be a decisive mistake - it exposes the seventh rank. Black should have left his defended bishop on it and played 20 . . . .i.f8. 10 11 i.dJ i.xc4 dxc4 a5 Generally speaking, this is a subtle idea - Black intends to gain control of the a4 square, but, as already pointed out, it should have been implemented differently. 12 13 14 15 16 b5 ..fi.dJ �xb5 �e5 1!fe2 A very important subtlety. White simultaneously attacks the a5 pawn, threatening to win it by 22. �c4, and defends the c 1 square, releasing his rook at b l from this mission. Now there is no defence against 22 lLla7. �b6 cxb5 i.d7 :cs 1 6 'ifb3 a4 17 'i'dl was also possible. In the game White concedes the a4 square, but the weakness of Black's b5 more than compensates for this. 16 17 . • . 0-0 18 . :abl This combination is only possible because the white queen is at d2; with it at e2 Black would reply 23 . . . 'i!fxb7 or 2 3 .. J:tcl+, remaining a piece up. �a4 'it'b6 Had Black's rook not been at e8 (cf. the note to his 9th move), he would now have been able to play as Reshevsky did: 1 7. . . i.xb5 1 8 i.xb5 tZlc3. �xb2 This exchange could not be deferred on account of 1 9 .i.al, after which the knight at a4 would be out of play. a4 It really would have been better to sacrifice the queen - 23 . . . 'ii'xb7 24 !txb7 i.xa3, which would have given Black at least some practiool saving chances, since he would have ebtained a passed a-pawn. 255 24 25 26 27 Axe7 :c7 ..txbl llcl 27 28 29 30 11fc2 ..ta2 h3 31 32 · 33 Wc7 Wxb8 l:tc2 llb8 :xbl+ �d5 should have brought his king to the centre. 36 37 38 39 40 41 27 l:.c5 was also good, but White, having gained a material advantage, wants in the first instance to safeguard himself. li'bS g6 �e7 1Id2 �el d5 :b2 Ab4 lld8 .tbs �c6 �e5 ..td3 The sealed move. The loss of a second pawn is unavoidable, and Black resigned without resuming. Lipnitsky, a talented master who suffered an untimely death, conducted this game rather passively, which, gen­ erally speaking, was not typical of him. c;t>f8 Now White forces the exchange of queens. No better for Black was 30 ... :cs, after which the rooks would have been exchanged. :cs llxbS Game 195 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951 Slav Defence Now Black is completely deprived of counterplay, and the win for White is merely a question of time. 33 34 35 36 �4 l:tb2 e4 �f5 :cs �e7 Strictly speaking, White should not have hurried with this move; first he This was my first USSR Cham­ pionship since 1 945. For half of the tournament I played quite well and took the lead, but then I failed to display the necessary competitive qualities. Perhaps my most interesting game was the one with my recent opponent in the World Championship match. 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 �cl �f3 ..tg5 5 6 e4 d5 c6 �f6 e6 This had already been played against me in Games 1 3 1 and 154. 256 dxc4 b5 Moscow, 1 95 1 . The Tchaikovsky Concert Botvinnik. Hall. 1 952. A simultaneous display against young pioneers. The Olympiad in Amsterdam, 1 954. The match USSR v. Argentina - the meeting between the team leaders, Botvinnik and Najdorf. Amsterdam, 1 954. From left to right: Flohr, Postnikov (leader of the Soviet delegation at the Olympiad), Botvinnik, his wife, Euwe and Keres . In the Leningrad chess club, 1 948. From left to right: G. Rabinovich, Botvinnik, Goldberg, Taimanov. At the dacha in Nikolina gora, 1 95 1 . Botvinnik and Ragozin during preparations for the world championship match. With partici pants in the USSR Championship of collective farm workers. Moscow, 1 948. Euwe and Botvinnik. Sverdlovsk, 1 943. From left to right: Makogonov, Botvinnik, Ragozi n . Moscow, 1 944. The 1 3th U S S R Championship. Botvinnik, 1 942 S i multaneous display in a m i l i tary hospital, 1 945. After a simultaneous display. Botvinnik i s second from the right i n the second row. The Botvinnik fam ily, 1 945. Berlin, 1 946. On the way to Groningen. Berl i n , 1 946. The Botvinnik fami ly. Moscow, 1 946. During discussions concerning the rules for the World Championship. The Hague, 1 948. The Ragozin and Botvinnik families. Moscow, 1 946. After the USSR - USA match. Botvirmik and Reshevsky at the airpcrt. Moscow, 1 948. The last game of the final round of the World C h ampionship Match-Tournament. Together with Alexander Rueb, the first President of FIDE. Moscow, 1 948. The first autographs of the new World Champion. Moscow, 1 948. From left to right: Botvinnik, Rueb (FIDE President), Rogard (FIDE Vice-President), Vinogradov (President of the USSR Chess Federation). Botvinnik and his wife Gayane with congratul atory telegrams. Moscow, 1 949. Botvinnik and his wife watching a game between two famous Soviet actors. Moscow, 1 948. Arriving at the Belorussian Railway Station. The USSR v. USA radio match, 1 945 . The FIDE Congress in Paris, 1 949. Botvinnik is second from the left on the front row. 194 8 1958 1 961 � - 1 9 5 7. 1 9 6 0. 19 6 3. Giving autographs to young Dutch chess fans. Caricature. Meeting with journalists, after one of the games with Denker, 1 945. Zurich, 1 956. A simultaneous display with clocks against the strongest Swiss players. Flohr and Botvi nnik with their wives. The USSR v. USA match. Bronstein goes in for this opening variation. in order to surprise his opponent with a prepared innovation. 7 8 9 e5 .i.b4 exf6 . b6 g5 A continuation which was widely employed in the immediate post-war years. In the afore-mentioned games White played 9 ltlxg5. 9 10 . • . gxb4 ltle5 Of course, there is no need for White to waste time on the capture 1 0 ltlxh4. 10 11 12 gJ However, i n the quiet of my study I was able to establish that after 14 . . . h3 15 i.e4 .i.xc6 16 dxc6 tDc5 17 lL!xb5 'i'e5 1 8 lLlc3 :xc6 19 f4 'i!fd6 the advantage is with Black, since the acceptance of the exchange sacrifice - 20 i.xc6+ 11rxc6 (2 1 0-0 1!fg2 mate) - is clearly not in White's favour. 12 ltlxe5 Here 12 . . . i.b7 has also been success­ fully :layed. 12 . . . cs too comes into consideration. • • • 13 dxe5 15 0--0--0 'ile7 The Encyclopaedia also recommends 1 3 . . . 'i!fd8, in order to answer 14 l:dl with 14 . . . 'ifb6. 14 .i.g2 .i.b7 1!fxf6 ltld7 We2 It was this move that Bronstein had prepared for the present game. Earlier 1 2 f4 had been played here. The new continuation is more dangerous for Black, since White is now ready to castle queenside. Even so, in the sharp battle that now begins Black's chances are better. During the game, while awaiting my opponent's ffi()Ve, I was afraid of 12 tDxc6 i.b7 1 3 i.g2 :cs 14 d5. Black's position seems extremely hazardous. If 1 5 . . . :ds White would not have exchanged, since in this case the black king would find a shelter on the queenside, but would have continued 16 tDe4 :d5 1 7 ltld6+ 'itid8 18 .i.xd5 with an imposing advantage. These consider­ ations force the black king to seek salvation on the other wing. Then too the position remains uneasy, but it turns 257 out that Black has good possibilities of counterplay, and together with his mat­ erial advantage this means something. 15 16 17 18 f4 :d6 l:lhd1 19 exd6 .ig7 0--0 l:lad8 l:lxd6 The only way for White to sharpen the play. After 19 l:.xd6 l:!d8 he does not achieve anything with 20 'i!fd2 l:!xd6 2 1 exd6 'i'd8 22 d7 b4, while after 20 ltJe4 Black can reply 20 ... c5 followed by 2 1 . . . .i.d5. Now, however, Black's king's bishop comes into play. 19 20 . • • iLle4 1!fd8 If 20 ltJxb5 Black could have advan­ tageously continued either 20 . . . 'iia5, or simply 20 . . . cxb5 2 1 .i.xb7 'W'b6. 20 11'a5 A cunning move. After 21 tLlc5 . . • W'xa2! 22 ltJxb7 11'al + 23 @d2 'il'a6 24 ltJc5 1!fa5+ any move by the king leads to the loss of the knight: 25 @c2 'i'b4, 25 'itie3 'i'b6. 25 @c l 'ilal+ 26 'itid2 'i'xb2+ 27 @e l 'ilb4+ or 27 'itie3 'i!fa3+. The a2 pawn has to- be defended by the king, and this gives Black new possibilities. 21 @bl 'i!fb6 This move could have allowed White to gain a draw. During play I did not notice the subtle 2 1 ...h3, which would have provoked the reply 22 .to (22 .i.xh3 c5 23 ttlxc5 .i.d5). Why White's bishop is less well placed at f3 than at g2 will be see from what follows. 22 1!fg4 In a complicated position my opponent overlooks the loss of a piece. A draw would have resulted from 22 d7 l:ld8 23 f5 c5 (23 . . .exf5 24 ttld6) 24 ttld6 .ixg2 25 fxe6 fxe6 26 1!fxe6+ @h7 27 'i'f5+ with perpetual check (as Boleslavsky showed, after 27. . .@gs 28 1!fg6 'i!fc6! White is all the same forced to give perpetual check). It is not hard to see that, with the white bishop at t1 (see the previous note) this variation would not work, since Black plays 24... .i.xD, attacking the queen. One further question may suggest itself: is it not possible for White, after 22 d7, to gain winning chances, for example by 27 :tel (instead of 27 258 'i'f5+)? Then 27 . . . l:tf8 28 l£ie8 .l:.fl 29 'i'xb6 l:lxel + 30 <ifiic2 axb6 3 1 d8W :e2+ 32 <itidl .i.f.3 , and White's extra queen does not save him. 22 23 . . • 'ilfg6 f5 c5 Now White has to give up a piece, as after 24 l£ixc5 'ii'xc5 (but not 24 ... .i.xg2 25 l£ixe6) 25 .i.xb7 Wf2 ·there is no satisfactory defence against mate. 24 g4 Bronstein nevertheless finds an opportunity for an attack, which is his natural element. 24 25 26 27 �xe4 g5! fxg5 .i.xe4+ fxe4 hxg5 Wd8 'ihe6+ 'S'g4! g6 'flxh4 d7 'ifxe4 a4 36 36 • • • b4 Black no longer had any time to think! 36... c3 was correct. :lgl 37 1!fxc4 would have caused Black the most difficulties, when there would probably have followed 37 . . . 'i'f2. <ifiih8 W'e8 .i.h6 <itig7 1fd8 .i.g5 1!fe7 <ifiia2 White would also have lost after 36 axb5 c3 37 bxc3 'i!fxc3 38 'i!fxg5 (38 d8'i' Wb3+ 39 @al Wa4+ 20 40 @bl 'i'xb5+ and 4 1 . . . l:txd8) 38 ... 'iib3+ 39 <i>cl 'i'c4+ 40 <atbl Wxb5+ 4 1 <ifiic l Wc4+ 4 2 <ifiib l l:lb8+. 37 Several successive moves by Black have been forced, but sufficient for a successful defence. 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 The moment has finally arrived when White no longer has any resources for continuing his attack, and hence Black can set about converting his material advantage. 35 'i!fg4 1'f6 37 38 39 • • • <i>a3 1i'b5 b3+ .i.e3 .i.h6 3 9...l:lh8 was not possible in view of 40 d8'i!f! l:txh5 (40 ... 1ixd8 41 'ife5+, or 40 ... :xd8 4 1 'i'h7+ @18 42 g7+) 4 1 'i'xf6+ �xf6 4 2 g7. 40 259 1fxc5 40 . • • !td8 The last time trouble move. 40 ... ..i.e3 ! would have been immediately decisive. 41 ltdl White now had time to find that after 41 'ilfxc4 it would have been much more difficult for Black to convert his extra piece. 41 • • • �xg6 4 eJ e6 il..b4 b6 5 6 tt'lge2 a3 liJf4 .i.a6 il..e7 d5 tLlcJ 7 This is perhaps more logical than immediate castling, which Black chose in Game 193. ifgl+ The c4 pawn was now immune: 42 'i'xc4 .if8+ 43 'it>xb3 l:lb8+. 42 43 �b4 44 'i&>c5 45 11fxe3 c4 It has already been mentioned that 4 . . . 0--0 is more popular. And, incident­ ally, the Encyclopaedia also considers that in the variations with 4 . . . b6 Black cannot equalise. However, in practice things often turn out differently . . . With the terrible threat of 42 . . . ..i.f8, which would also have been canied out after 42 ltd6. 42 2 .J 'i&>h7 l:lb8+ .ieJ+ 1!fb6+ The remainder was not essential. 1Wxe3 46 'i&>xc4 47 d811f !txd8 48 l:lxd8 'i!f'e6+ 49 l:td5 a5 50 h4 White resigns It can truly be said: he who sows the win reaps the whirlwind. A game typical of my play in this tournament. Interesting ideas, but inaccurately implemented. Game 196 M.Botvinnik-N.Novotelnov 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951 · Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 d4 liJf6 8 b3 8 cxd5 is stronger, but in Moscow the text of the game Shainswit-Fine (New York 1951), in which White employed the plan involving this exchange, had not yet then been received. In Game 2 1 9 I was able to strengthen and success­ fully use it. 0-0 8 • 9 • . .i.b2 c6 If 9 . . . dxc4 it is probably best to reply 10 .ixc4, since after 10 bxc4 tLlbd7 1 1 .ie2 e5 Black gains counterplay. 260 10 11 .i.dJ 0-0 .i.d6 have played 1 5 ....i.b7 with the intention of . . . c6-c5. But now if 1 1 . . .dxc4 12 bxc4 e5 there follows 1 3 ltife2 followed by tllg 3, when White has some advantage. 11 12 • • • tZlh5 ttlbd7 White decided to exchange this knight, since in some situations it could have provoked Black into making the advantageous exchange on c4 followed by . . . e6-e5. Now, however, White threatens a possible f2-f4. 12 13 1!1'xh5 1fe2 f3 ttlxh5 f5 15 . • • 1ih4 This only temporarily prevents the advance of the e-pawn. Black should 1fh3 17 l:tadl dxc4 18 19 .i.xc4 bxc4 .i.xc4 l:tce8 20 f4! If 20 e4 Black might well have replied 20 . . . e5 (2 1 dxe5 .i.c5+ and 22 ...tDxe5). Now, however, . . . e6-e5 is ruled out, whereas e3-e4 is unavoidable. l:tc8 Beginning preparations for an attack in the centre by e3-e4, which forces Black to take urgent counter-measures. gJ With the intention of being fully prepared for e3-e4, Black provokes some simplification, but in so doing he concedes ground in the centre. The kingside would have been weakened by . . . h7-h6 or . . . g7-g6. If 1 3 . . .ltif6 14 WM, and White retains the initiative. Now a kind of Dutch Defence position is reached. 14 15 16 This is the idea behind Black's manoeuvre. If 17 e4 there follows 17 . . . fxe4 18 fxe4 .i.xg3 1 9 hxg3 'i'xg3+ with perpetual check, since the bishop at d3 is not defended. However, there is nothing to prevent White from eliminating this tactical threat. 20 21 . . • e4 tZlf6 tZlg4 In the event of exchanges in the centre (2 1 . . .ltixe4 22 tDxe4 fxe4 23 'i'xe4) the weakness of the c6 and e6 pawns would have been very serious; in 261 32 addition, White would have gained the opportunity for an attack on the a l -h8 diagonal. 22 23 24 e5 J:td3 Vg2 Wh2 i.e7 llc8 Since White has an extra pawn in the centre and a sufficient endgame advan­ tage, he offers the exchange of queens. 24 • • • 1'h5 Naturally, for the moment Black avoids an unfavourable ending. 25 26 h3 it.cl ltlh6 32 l:tfd8 32 ...tbe4 is dangerous on account of 33 g4 (with the threat of 34 gxf5 exf5, after which White has an overwhelming position) 3 3 . . . l£ig5 34 tDh5 with a decisive advantage. 33 'ffh5 White persistently aims for the end­ game, and not without reason. He can no longer be denied this, as if 33 ... Wg7 there follows 34 h4 and 35 l£ixe6. g5 26 The only active possibility. • 27 28 29 • • fxg5 i.xg5 ltle2 • • • lbf4 l£ixh5 llel 35 36 37 g4 hxg4 • • . W'xh5 lbf7 3 5 ...l£ixe5 was threatened. .i.xg5 'ffxg5 The knight aims for a highly favour­ able post at f4. 29 30 33 34 35 As a result of this forced exchange, Black loses for ever the e4 strongpoint for his knight. lllf7 1i'h6 Black, in turn, wants to occupy a defended central square (e4) with his knight, with which, however, he does not succeed. 31 11e2 thg5 <ifrf8 fxg4 37 38 • • • Wg3 We7 b5 In this way Black eliminates the threat of d4-d5, but now his c6 pawn is fixed, and it will need to be defended. 39 c5 a5 262 40 41 �4 li)f6 llg8 llg7 42 llhl h6 The diverting of the black rook onto the g-file means that temporarily the d4 pawn does not need defending, and the white rooks are free to manoeuvre. 49 50 l:tf4 :ht 50 51 52 lDe4 li g6 :hg8 lDd2 lDb3 <it>g3 lth2 lt8g7 ltg8 lDb7 l:t8g7 llg8 For the moment nothing can be achieved on the f-file, and White must try improving the position of his knight; for this, just in case, he sets up a barrier on the h-file. 'iti>f3 White has securely defended his d4 and g4 pawns, leaving . his knight completely free. 52 53 54 55 56 43 a4! Black cannot agree to the opening of the position: he has one rook in play against two of the opponent's. Therefore he is forced to advance his b-pawn, but then his a5 pawn becomes hopelessly weak and the white knight becomes even more active, since it has available the b3 and c4 squares. 43 44 45 46 47 lid2 <it>e3 !tdh2 II.fl 47 48 l:lhfl b4 l:lg6 :ds :bs White first tries to exploit the f-file the only one that is open. • . • l:tb8 lDd8 49 ll:ig8+ was threatened, and if 48 ... !lg7 (48 . . %;f8 49 lDh7), then 49 lLih5 :gh7 so :f6 and 5 1 ll:if4. . 263 The last few moves before the time control could not claim to be following any plan, but now White has to decide how to proceed further. In this the main thing is to find the optimum position for his knight, since, as has already been mentioned, the rooks have only one route - the f-file. 57 58 59 60 61 62 :b4 <it>f3 lLid2 ll)c4 llh3 lDeJ! %lh8 l:th7 lDd8 lLib7 llhg7 Here is the solution, a rather para­ doxical one. It transpires that the knight is best placed not in the immediate vicinity of the a5 pawn or the d6 and f6 squares. Now it only remains for White to exchange rooks, in order to transpose into a knight ending that is won thanks to zugzw�pg.. 62 63 64 l:lh2 �e4 .l:lh7 'lld8 l:tf7 lbis position is now won by force: if 74 . . . <tig7 there would have followed 75 (£je4 lLJd.8 76 �h5 (£jb7 77 lbd6 and then 77 . . . l:tg5+ 78 �h4 'lld8 79 :f6 or 77 . . . (£jd8 78 ltieS+ <tih7 79 l:tf8. Otherwise after 65 l:th:f2 White's rook would have penetrated into the enemy rear, and 65 . . . l:lf7 would not be possible in view of 66 l:txf7+ (£jxf7 67 lbc4. 65 66 67 68 lllc4 <bxf4 �g3 ll'ld2 lhf4+ ll'lb7 � White has already planned his further actions, but it safest to carry them out after the next time control has been reached. 68 69 70 71 ll'lb3 J:tf2+ <tih4 ll'lc1 ll'ld8 ll'lb7 <tlg7 <tlh7 72 For the moment the exchange 72 l:tf7+ l1g7 73 l:txg7+ <tlxg7 would have been premature, as will be evident from what follows. 72 73 74 ll'lb3 illd2 74 75 76 77 J:tf7+ .l:lxg7+ <ifl>h5 78 tLlxb3 l:tg8 l:tg7 Cifi>xg7 bJ What can Black do? If 77 . . .lbd8, then 78 (£jb3 (£jb7 79 g5 hxg5 80 �g5, and the black king has to give way to its white opponent (which would not have happened if the rooks had been ex­ changed after the 72nd move). A classic confirmation of Ragozin's assertion that there is no great difference between pawn endings and knight endings. Often both types of ending can be won thanks to zugzwang. Beginning harvest . . . illd8 illb7 264 78 79 80 81 82 the gathering d5 e6 'it>h 7 exd5 Wg7 <ifl>xh6 <tixe7 e7 Wf7 of the 83 g5 83 84 85 86 87 ibd8 g6 lbe6 d4 ltlxa5 lbxc6+ <ii>d7 lbe5+ Black resigns which 8 li)e2 (8 d5 e4) 8 ... d6 9 e4 t'lllis 10 dS is possible, but not 10 0--0 g5, which favours Black (Bronstein­ Smyslov, 19SO). This would have been a timely moment for the game to conclude. 8 8 Game 197 ibf6 e6 i.b4 c5 ltlc6 6 7 a3 bxc3 i.xc3+ b6 • d6 9 lbe2 e5 10 0-0 ibd7 11 'ifa4 9 . ..t'Dd7 is perhaps more accurate, in order to exclude the possibility of 10 i.gS. This is what I played against Kan in 19S2 (cf. training games). 19th USSR Championship Moscow 1951 Nimzo-Indian Defence d4 c4 lLlc3 el i.d3 . • 8 ... cxd4 9 cxd4 t'Dxd4 was bad for Black in view of 10 es t'Dg8 1 1 'i'g4. Compared with the game, 8 . . . es 9 dS li)a5 is not significantly different. M.Botvinnik-P.Keres 1 2 3 4 5 e4! Occupying the centre without delay. Then it had not yet been established that S . . 0--0 is more accurate. . A not altogether successful move. In I think that this continuation is stronger than the immediate 7 . . . e5, after · the same championship Geller gained a significant advantage against Lipnitsky by playing 1 1 l'Dg3 g6 12 dxe5 dxeS 13 'i'e2 Ve7 14 l:.dl i.b7 15 tDfl 0--0--0 16 t'De3. However, in the afore­ mentioned training game I was able to show that 1 l . . .exd4 gives Black good play. Surprisingly, this continuation is not even considered by theory. 26S 11 . • . 'W'c7 Nowadays the Encydopaedia con­ siders that l l . ..il.b7 12 d5 ttJa5 13 tl'ig3 g6 followed by . . .'fle7 and queenside castling is better for Black. 12 13 d5 tt'lgJ Wdl There is nothing more for the queen to do at a4. It is curious that this game resembles my first meeting with Keres, in the AVRO Tournament. 14 . . • :eS tt'lf5 ttJe3 g3 :a2 l:lel f3 lllg6 1i'e7 .i.h3 .i.d7 For the moment White has no clear plan for strengthening his position and he sticks to waiting tactics. At the same time, Keres, as could have been ex­ pected, begins preparing a breakthrough on the queenside. This is Black's only active possibility. 20 21 22 23 23 Perhaps Black should nevertheless have decided on 14 ... g6. But 14 ... .i.a6 1 5 ttJf5 ! would have led to an advantage for White, e.g. 1 5 . . . il.xc4 16 .i.xc4 ltixc4 17 .ih6. 15 16 16 17 18 19 20 tt'la5 0-0 In the event of 13 ... g6 14 il.h6 Black would have been forced to castle queen­ side, which did not come into his plans. Keres had great experience in this type of position, and was intending to ad­ vance . . . b6-b5 . 14 When White succeeds in defending his c4 pawn, it is hard for Black to create counterplay. a4 .i.fl ttJf5 • • • a6 :eb8 'Be8 'i!ff8 Black avoids exchanging on f5, since he needs his bishop to prepare . . . b6-b5 . But, alas, he will nevertheless have to give up his bishop for the knight, and in less favourable circwnstances. ttJf8 24 25 l1b2 f4 f6 White needs to do something at last. 266 25 ... ltlb8 26 Wg4 .i.xf5 Exchanges in the centre are un­ favourable for Black: 25 ...exf4 26 gxf4 .i.x:f5 27 exf5 'De7 28 'ife2. Mate was threatened (27 %6), and 26 . . .ttif? 27 tiJh6+ and 28 'i!fxd7 was also unpleasant for Black. 21 Wxf5 '11f7 28 Wh5 l:tb7 How should this position be evaluated? White has the advantage of the two bishops, but the position is blocked, and for the moment they are unable to display their strength. 29 30 1'e2 1!i'dl 1!fe8 llab8 This so obvious move came as a complete surprise to me. By temporarily giving up a pawn, Black seizes the initiative. 34 ".i.c2 35 Aa4 1!fc8 34 .. J::txb5 was not possible because of 35 .i.a4. A further oversight. Keres correctly pointed out that 35 Jl.e3 l:txb5 36 l:ta2 was better. 35 36 37 Ae3 Aa2 ltlb3 l:.a8 Yet another mistake, as a result of which White ends up in a difficult position. Aft�r 37 Axb3 l:txb5 38 l:tb l cxb3 39 :lxb3 he would still have been a pawn up, and it would have been up to Black to demonstrate that this advantage was not enough for a win. 37 38 • • • .i.xb3 J:t.xb5 Equivalent to capitulation, since the passed b3 pawn will tie down White's forces. For the moment nothing terrible was threatened, and he could have made a waiting move (for example, 38 'it>hl). 31 .i.d3 There now begins the next stage of the game, full of mistakes by White. He should have prevented . . . b6-b5 by 3 1 J:ta2 l:ta8, and then played h2-h4, f4-f5, .le3 and g3-g4, threatening g4-g5 with a clear advantage. 31 32 axb5 33 cxb5 b5! axb5 c4 38 39 40 41 42 43 l::lxa8 c4 .i.d2 'it>hl Wf3 cxb3 'ifxa8 l:lb4 Wa7+ l:lb8 Three moves had passed since the start of the resumption, and already here Black thought for a long time. There was an elementary win by 43 . . . 'iia2 44 'ild3 b2 45 :bl .l:tb3 46 \'fc2, when the manoeuvre . . . ttif?-d8-b7-c5 is decisive. However, in his analysis of the 267 adjourned position, Black foresee this variation. did not 49 43 44 45 'lfc3 ffeJ 'W'd4 'llf2 White forces the exchange of queens, after which he. . . loses a piece. But then it turns out that he acquires some hopes of saving the game. 45 46 47 48 .i.xe3 :bl c5 'lfxe3 bl l:Cb3 The last practical chance: White gives up a piece, but obtains a protected passed pawn. After other moves the outcome would have been decided by the knight manoeuvre via dS and b7 to a5 (or c5). 48 • . . ltxe3 In the event of 4S... dxc5 49 .ixc5 lbdS (but not 49 . . . :c3 50 .l:.xb2 with the threat of 5 1 .l:.bS+) White would also, apparently, have lost. 49 l:lxb2 Now it only remains for Black to make an escape square for his king, and then to switch to decisive action. g6 After this poor move White finds a surprising possibility, which makes the win for Black more difficult. Had Keres guessed what difficulties he would have to endure, he, of course, would not have exposed the seventh rank, but would have played 49 . . .h5 ! with as easy win. For example: 50 c6 .l:.c3 5 1 :b7 lbh6 52 .l:.d7 lbg4 53 .l:.xd6 l:k l + 54 @g2 ltc2+ 55 <itigl lbxh2, or 50 .l:.bS+ @h7 51 .l:.f8 dxc5! (but not 5 1 ...lbh6 52 cxd6) 52 .l:.xf7 exf4 53 gxf4 l:lxe4. 50 51 c6 :b7 l:Ic3 Here the rook occupies an excellent position, as though waiting in ambush. �g7 51 Black misses the last chance of winning by 5 1 . ..@:f'S! 52 l:lbS+ (if 52 c7 @eS) 52 ... <itig7! (but not 52 ...@e7 53 .l:.b7+ @es 54 l:tbS+ lbdS 55 :cs <itie7 56 l:.c7+ @es 57 l:lcS with a draw) 53 .l:.b7, and compared with a possible position in the game Black would have gained a tempo, which would be of decisive importance: 53 . . .f5 ! 54 fxe5 dxe5 55 exf5 gxf5. 26S . • . Game 198 B.Sliwa-M.Bohinnik Budapest 1952 English Opening c5 1 2 e4 c4 2 3 4 5 6 lLlcJ dJ gJ ..i.g2 ti)c6 g6 .iLg7 d6 e6 lDge2 lLlge7 Now a Sicilian Defence is transformed into an English Opening. Thus, if in the game there had followed 52 c7 f5 53 fxe5 dxe5 54 exf5 gxf5, in the diagram White's pawn would already be at c7 and he would have had the advantageous continuation 55 d6. But with the pawn at c6 he has to play 56 l:.d7 (if 56 c7 there follows 56 . . . @£6). Earlier this position was in­ correctly judged to be drawn. However, after 56 . . 'ifilfS! (if 57 c7 'i¥te8) White's position becomes hopeless. . 52 c7! Now there is no way for Black to improve the placing of his pieces, since he has to reckon with the threat of d7-d8'iW, and the following rook manoeuvres are of course unable to change anything. ltc2 52 h5 53 'i¥tgl l:tc4 54 h4 !tc2+ 55 . Wg2 J:lc4 56 @fl lic2+ 57 'iit>g2 .l:lc4 58 � Draw agreed At that time this variation was rarely employed. A few years later it became very popular, because the correct plan for Black was found: . . . ltJf6, ... 0-0, and then ... ltJr6-e8-c7 with an equal game. In the position reached. 7 f4 and then � can be recommended for White. 7 8 .ig5 Provoking . . . h7-h6, after which Black will be tied to the defence of his rook's pawn, and kingside castling will prove impossible. However, this man­ oeuvre does not bring White any par­ ticular gains, although other plans also did not promise anything significant. 8 9 • • • .ii.el h6 Now, in view of the threat of d3-d4, Black must occupy the central square with his knight, and White gains a tempo for 10 'i!i'd2. 9 10 . . . lLld4 .iLd7 'ifd2 It would seem that Black could have played 10 . . . 0-0, but after 1 1 .ixh6 Axh6 12 'ifxh6 lEic2+ 13 c;tid2 tEixal 14 269 So, the cards are revealed: the king is heading for h7. h4 ! White will only be the exchange for a pawn down, and his attack develops of its own accord. Instead of · this Black continues his well-camollflaged strategic plan: he brings into play all his pieces, apart from his rook at h8, and his king. which for the moment remains in the centre, castles artificially only at the last moment. His opponent is somewhat disoriented by this. 11 l:tbl a5 12 13 14 15 0-0 l:tbel bl l:tbl .ic6 1!1'd'7 b6 15 16 l:tbel 17 18 t2Jf4 ttJce2 �g8 �h7 19 20 21 22 23 .ixd4 b4 b5 a4 .ILhJ cxd4 l:ta8 .ILb7 %lhe8 Now White has nothing better than to exchange the opponent's centralised knight, which, as was mentioned, should have been done earlier and more effectively. Of course, b2-b4 cannot be allowed, but now White could have achieved a good game by 12 .i.xd4 cxd4 13 t2Jb5. Bu( he avoids this exchange, not wishing to relieve the pressure on the h6 pawn. Here are the first fruits of Black's strategic plan! Still waiting to see which way the enemy king will go . . . lid8 ..WS! 270 This attempt by White to resolve his problems by piece manoeuvring is doomed to failure, and he gradually ends up in a difficult position. However, the closed nature of the' position makes it hard for Black to win. 23 24 25 tl)ct tl)b3 25 26 27 28 W'dl tl)e2 f4 tl)gS 1!fd8 all possible, given accurate defence by White. But it should be said that, had Black played 3 I . ..@xg6, there would not have been that subtle psychological analysis of the adjourned position, for which this game is noteworthy. Beginning a manoeuvre to provoke . . . e6-e5, after which the game becomes even more blocked. h5 tl)b6 e5 At last! Played, however, after much delay, and now the weakening of the e3 square, for which there is no compen­ sation, condemns White to passive defence. 28 29 . • • f5 .tc8 Forced. In the event of 29 .txc8 1!fxc8 Black would have subsequently been able to play . . . t:bg4 (the same could have happened after 29 .tg2). If instead 30 fxe5 dxe5 3 1 c5, then this is after all a pawn sacrifice (3 l . . .bxc5 32 'ii'c2 ..tf8). 29 30 31 .txg4 fxg6+ tl)g4 hxg4 fxg6 A serious error, after which it will be impossible to make a pawn break­ through, which is so necessary to activate the bishops. After 3 1 . . .@xg6 ! at the appropriate moment Black would have been able to play . . . f7-f5, which would have decided the outcome. Now, however, the win is very difficult, if at 271 32 @g2 After 32 l:f7 i..e6 the rook would have had to abandon enemy territory. 32 33 . tl)gt 34 tl)at ! Heading to the important e3 square. 34 35 36 37 · 38 tl)c2 :n 'lfe2 @bl 38 39 ... l:g2 l:a7 .th6 defence of the :h8 Wg8 l:tah7 i.. g5 Black has completed his minimum program in good time, and now he merely wants to reach the time control. .tf4 Of course, White avoids 3 9 gxf4 g3. 39 40 · :n .i.g5 " .*.e6 41 :m Analysis showed that the direct battle for control of the f-file would lead merely to the exchange of the heavy pieces. The only possibility of avoiding this consists in playing a rook to f5. Then the acceptance of the sacrifice (e4xf5) opens the a8-hl diagonal, while the exchange (the capture with the rook on f5) allows Black again to obtain an f­ pawn and to use it to break through. Since this operation has to be carried out in favourable conditions, for the time being Black endeavours to conceal his plan, in order to catch his opponent unawares. A psychological ploy, similar to that which was employed in Game · 193. <tlg7 41 42 43 44 Wet 1!fe2 l:(fl l:th5 1!fe7 46 l:tfl :m 1!1'h6 :th7 <tlg8 One rook is ready to ·go to f5, and Black's other heavy pieces also have to be concentrated on the h-file. 45 :m 1!f'g7 47 This rook must also have the possibility of switching to the f-file. Now it only remains to arrange the bishops in their places. .i.d7 48 l:tfl White is moving only one rook, apparently in order to demonstrate to the opponent the futility of his attempts to win this 'drawn' position. Black's last move was counting on this, since he needs to play his rook to f5 when the white rook is at f2. Why this is neces­ sary will be evident from what follows. .i.cS 49 .:m 50 l:tfl .i.e7 Only at the last moment does the bishop make way for the rook. 51 :m 51 l:lf5!! At just the right time! Had White's rook been at fl , he would have had a defensive resource - 52 l:lgf2. Now, however, all his replies lead to defeat. If 52 W'xg4 there follows 52 . . . l:lxf2 53 'i'xc8+ l:lf8 54 We6+ <tlh8. After 52 exf5 .i.b7 Black threatens 53 ... 'i'xh2 mate. If 52 ttlel Wh5 53 exf5 (otherwise all the same 53 . .. .ib7, then ... .i.g5, in 272 • . • some cases ... .i.e3 and . .llhf7, and as soon as exf5 is played the rook goes back to h7) 53 .. . Ab7 54 tt:lgf3 gxD 55 tt:lxf3 gxf5, and the advance of the black pawns in the centre is decisive. In the game Black wins even more simply (than after 52 tt:lel ) . This is where the effect of surprise is seen! Game 199 . 52 53 54 l:tfl. vxr1 1'el 54 55 56 57 Ae2 •d2 :g2 L.Szab6-M.Botvinnik Budapest 1952 Dutch Defence . Laszlo Szab6 (1917 -1998) was a sharp and interesting player. Three times in succession (1950, 1953 and 1 956) he appeared in Candidates Toui"narnents, and this says a great deal. The Hungarian grandmaster's rather impetuous chess character sometimes led to him taking hasty decisions, when he would throw away an advantage already gained. An example of this is provided by the present game. lixfl :n Or 54 n.f2 nxf2 55 'i!fxf2 ifcl . 1if8 l:lfl 1if3+ lidl 1 d4 2 c4 3 g3 4 .i.g2 5 lL!fJ 6 0-0 7 bJ e6 f5 ll'if6 J.e7 d5 0-0 7 8 c6 li)bd7 Reshevsky, and later Geller, intro­ duced the plan of seizing control of the central e5 square, beginning with 7 ll'ibd2. The move in the game is not particularly dangerous for Black. Now White has a choice - he can lose in the endgame after the exchange of queens, or he can try for some activity before the curtain comes down. 58 59 60 61 62 ifh6 Ad2 1t':xf8+ lbdl tDel 1!ff6 ..i.f8 'Wxf8 'il'f2 1!fb2 • • ..i.aJ This move is possible, since if 9 ll'ig5 there is the reply 9 . . . .i.xa3 10 l£ixa3 (or 10 t£ixe6 'i!fe7) 10 ... 'ife?. It is perhaps more promising than 8 . . b6 (Game 185). . 9 An amusing zugzwang position - 63 lLig2 Wc2. White resigns. • .,,cl li)e4 In order after 10 J.xe7 'i!lxe7 1 1 'i'a3 (an idea of Flohr, which he employed in our game from the 22nd USSR Cham­ pionship, 1955) to have the convenient square f6 for the queen. 273 10 lhbd2 and in some cases can play his bishop to a6 (as, for example, occurred in a game of mine with Chekhover - No.45). However, 15 ...lhxcl2 16 llxc12 f4 was better. Incautiously played. By 16 e3 White would have taken control of f4. Now, however, Black's hands are freed: . . . f5f4 is possible, and also the attack on the knight at e4 is removed. 10 . • • AxaJ In this situation the exchange suggests itself: the knight has now moved from b 1 and cannot follow the route b l -a3-c2-el -d3, as I played against Ragozin back in 193 9 in the 1 1th USSR Championship. The original move 10 . . .lbd6 is not in keeping with Black's plans, but on the other hand it is in the style of Ragozin, who always aimed for complicated play (Flohr­ Ragozin, 1 948). 11 12 13 14 15 11fxa3 l:E.acl :rd1 cxd5 lhel b6 Ab7 1!rf6 exd5 My opponent nevertheless finds a way of transposing into the afore­ mentioned plan of controlling e5 with his knights. Now, of course, the d4 pawn is immune on account of 16 lbxe4. 15 . a5 A manoeuvre that Ragozin used to employ in similar positions. Black frees his rook from the defence of his a-pawn • 16 17 18 lhd3 hxgJ 18 19 20 21 22 23 llc2 111'cl Ah3 'iitg2 Axd7 f4 fxgJ If 18 fxg3 there would have followed 18 . . . 'i'h6. Now White's occupation of e5 bf a lrnight will be not so dangerous for Black, who has both play on the kingside, and the counter . . . c6-c5. . llae8 1!rh6 'ifd6 :r6 c5 A committing decision: White exchanges a good defender of his king. 274 23 . • • 1!1'xd7 24 25 l£ife5 f4 "d6 probably have allowed Black gradually to convert his material advantage. Carried away with his idea of occupying the centre, White overlooks I he loss of the exchange. 25 26 • • • :c7 cxd4 31 l:Cxc5 'illxc5 29 30 31 t£ixc5 l:Cxd4 t£icd3 t£ic5 bxc5 'ii' xc5 Perhaps 28 . . . 'i!fa6 would have been simpler. .tas :cs • • l:Cc2 l:Cxa5 �e3 l:Cxe2+ :c2 l:Cf8 d4+ 36 37 �xd4 �e3 l:Cd8+ l:[ g2 38 39 40 g4 b4 a4 l:Cc2 .td5 .i.hl 41 l:!a7 32 33 34 35 White can no longer avoid the following forced variation, as otherwise his position will be completely unpromising. 26 27 28 • Extremely dangerous play. Black's passed pawn in the centre will not be as threatening as White's two passed pawns on the queenside. .l:l.a4 <ifin'3 A move that is typical of my play in the period 1 95 1-52: a lack of clarity and completeness. 35 . . . h5 was essential, and only then ... d5-d4+ followed by . . . l:!.g2, and if the h-pawn had become passed it could have caused White considerable trouble. After this Black ends up in a critical situation, whereas by . . . .tg2-fl xd3 he would have eliminated one of the knights - they are operating really too concertedly! For the exchange White has a pawn and a strong position. For example, the black a5 pawn is weak, and in the event of its loss White will obtain two connec­ ted passed pawns. Also, of course, the bishop at a8 is no adornment to Black's position. Even so, the prosaic 3 1. . .l:!.b6, with the idea if 32 l:!.a4 of defending the a-pawn with the rook from b5, would How many tempi has Black lost in time trouble! Even here the manoeuvre . . . .td5-g2-fl would still have saved him. Now, however, my opponent had an opportunity to seal a winning move. To win it is sufficient for White to play l:!.a7-d7. As soon as the rooks are exchanged, or if the rook moves from d8, the knight at d3 will be securely defended and he will easily advance his pawns. Therefore I made a move which for the moment prevents this plan. . 275 41 42 • . • bS lla2 Routine play. This appears to be the best arrangement for the pawns, but now the black rooks begin actively coordinating. Meanwhile the prosaic 42 a5, relieving the rook of the defence of the a-pawn, should have led to a win, e.g. 42 . . . lla3 43 l:td7 l:txd7 44 lbxd7 .i.g2 (44... Ac6 45 lb7e5 .i.b5 46 @d4 l:tb3 47 lllc4 @f8 48 @c5 etc.) 45 lll7e5 .i.fl ! 46 �d4 Wf8 47 lbc5 cl;e7 48 llle4! , and the white king heads for b6, while if 48 . . . @d8, then 49 lllg5 . Szabo tries to avoid these compli­ cated variations, but �bumps into' an unpleasant prepared variation. 42 43 • • • as l'la3 Now 43 . . . :as loses to 44 l:lxa8+ Axa8 45 lllc4, as does 43 . . . Ag2 44 b6 Afl 45 b7 Axd3 46 l:ta8 ! But in my adjournment analysis I had prepared a different continuation . . . 43 • • • more significant is the fact that the position of the laright at e5 becomes less secure. This move was only outlined during my adjournment analysis, since the main attention was devoted to variations with 42 a5 . At the board, after lengthy reflection, I nevertheless had to decide on this continuation, although the passed f-pawn seems very dangerous. 44 f5 44 fxg5 is weaker in view of the same reply. 44 45 • . • l:le7 :tdS White has to give up a pawn on the queenside, but now his passed f-pawn becomes very dangerous, aided by the 'suspect' position of the black king. 45 46 • • • f6 l:t.xb5 l:txe5+ Not only mate was threatened, but also the forced promotion of the f-pawn. rl;r7 47 l:lxe5 48 :rs After 48 l:txg5 ri;xf6 Black's task would not have been difficult: exchange the kingside pawns and give up his bishop for the a-pawn. gS ! It seems incredible that such a move can save Black. After all, White obtains yet another passed pawn. However, 276 White appears to have achieved everything that he wanted. If 5 l .....ie6, then in both variations (52 f7 We7 53 l:tg8 �.:xf7 54 l:tg7 'iti>f6 55 l:txf7+ Wxe5 56 l:.xh7 and 52 llh5 �g8 53 f7+ ..txf7 54 llg5+ i.g6 55 tl:lxg6 hxg6 56 l:txg6+) he has good winning chances in the rook ending. I reached this position in my analysis. Black has made some definite achieve­ ments. All his pieces have become active, White no long�r has connected passed pawns, and I thought that the draw was already made. But during the game my mood deteriorated. How was I to defend against the threat of 49 'if.?d2 followed by tl:le5+ ? And here Caissa (the goddess or muse of chess) smiled on me. Apparently I had gained her favour by the fact that I had not spared any effort during my adjournment analysis. At the board I was fortunate enough to find one of the most beautiful combinations in my entire career. 48 49 . . • 'if.?d2 i.b7! In the event of 49 'ifi>d4 l:ta4+ 50 'ifi>c3 J::la3+ the white king would have been forced to retreat to d2. Now Black could first have driven the king onto the back rank by 49 . . . l:ta2+, but in the end this would not have changed anything. 49 ... 50 51 tLle5+ llxg5 51 ... lha5!! 52 53 54 55 56 lLld7+ l:txa5 Cit?eJ Wf4 l:ta7 i.xd7 i.xg4 ..te<> ..ic4 h5 57 58 59 60 Cit?g5 Cit?xb4 Cit?g5 l:tc7 h4 ..ibJ ..ic4 i.a2 This unexpected exchange sacrifice settles everything. White loses the last pawn which could have become a queen. Black has no need at all of this pawn. . i.c8! The g4 pawn is the main target. 'if.?f8 A theoretically drawn position has been reached, one which had been pub­ lished in many books on the endgame. White, however, wanted .to test the conclusions of theory. 277 61 62 63 64 65 llc1 Wf5 'itie5 llc7+ llb7 .td5 ¢>£7 .i.b3 c.tif8 .i.c4 After 66 t:7 Black saves himself by 66 . . . <t/g7 ! White tries to drive the bishop off the a2-g8 diagonal, but the board is so extensive! 66 67 l:lb4 Wf5 .ta2 ..id5 68 'itig6 .tti+ 69 70 71 72 73 <li>g5 l:lb4 l:.h8+ l:lh7+ ti ..td5 .tb3 75 76 l:tg7 .tb3 'ifiixf8 f81!i'+ Wf6 <ifle8 'ifiid8 l:le7+ Draw agreed The only square for the bishop! If 67 ... <i;f? there would have followed 68 l:tb7+ and 69 'itig6. Again there is no other move! .t g7 3 4 5 e4 f3 d6 �bd7 6 7 .teJ �ge2 e5 a6 9 d5 �c3 Generally speaking, in this variation the development of Black's queen's knight at c6 leads to a more complicated game (cf., for example, No.39). Since Black has not put immediate pressure on the central d4 square with 5 ...�c6, here it was inadvisable to avoid the theoretical continuation 7 . . .exd4 8 �xd4 c6 followed by . . . d6-d5. 8 1!fd2 � It is interesting to note that this move, made in 1952, is even today recommended by theory. <tlf7 c,fjlf8 ctJe7 Again the only reply, but an adequate one. .tc4! 74 'itig6 Only not 74. . . .tc2+? 75 <t/g7 ! Now, however, White is tied up. 77 78 � 9 Attempts to complicate the play by sacrificing a pawn on the kingside (9 . . .�5 10 g4 �4 1 1 �xf4 exf4 12 .txf4 �e5 13 .te2 f5 14 .tg5 'ires 15 gxf5 gxf5) and the more so on the queenside (9 . . . b5 10 cxb5 axb5 1 1 �xb5 ii.a6 1 2 �bc3 llTh5 13 �g3) are • Game 200 C.Ko.ttnauer-M.Botvinnik Budapest 1952 King's Indian Defence 1 · · d4 2 c4 ' �f6 g6 278 . . in White's favour, as pointed out by the t':ncyclopaedia. Black aims to activate his game by advancing . . . f7-f5. 10 �g3 11 b4 11 12 13 14 :ct a3 axb4 �c5 For the moment I did not want to go in for the variation 10 ...f5 1 1 exf5 gxf5, not because of 12 .i.g5 ili6 13 h4 h6 14 .�xh6 .i.xh4, after which the play becomes sharper, but in view of 12 .i.t2, when it is hard for Black to find a sensible continuation. But the move in the game also has no clear point. . . Now, however, Black' s decision is justified: he obtains certain chances on the queenside. After 1 1 0-0-0 White's prospects would have been better. �d7 A highly significant rejoinder. The point is that after 17 .txf8 lbxf8 White faces two threats: 18 ...f4 and 1 8 . . . .i.g5, and this enables Black advantageously to regain the sacrificed exchange. 17 18 19 20 a5 axb4 f5 15 15 16 . .th6 . .tf6 White still does not see what his idea will lead to. However, Black would also have had a reasonable game after other continuations. 16 20 21 22 23 .tg5 • • . • .th4! gxf5 l:.ti �f8 The white king takes up a position that for the moment looks compara­ tively quiet, but how much safer it would have been if White had refrained from playing b2-b4. Here, compared with the lines examined in the note to Black's 10th move, he controls the open rook's file and his queen's rook is now mobilised. Even so, after 1 5 exf5 gxf5 16 .tn White would have had the better game, but I had no other active possibility. Kottnauer chooses another plan, which appears tempting, but does not take account of one highly important tactical subtlety. exf5 �dl .tdJ �c2 �al �b2 l:bal �g7 .td7 l:txal Although the open a-file is in White's possession, Black's pieces are conveniently placed. In addition, his pawns may be able to advance, which is particularly significant, since the king on the queenside is not completely safe. 23 24 • . . 1ic2 �g6 A useful move, creating an additional attack on the f5 pawn, whereas one of 279 the defenders of this pawn may be eliminated by the exchange on g7. 24 25 tt'lge2 a pawn, Black activates his pieces. 'ifc8 32 33 fxe4 tt'lxe4: 34 <ifi>c2 34 35 36 37 Jlxc4 .ixd5+ ilxd5+ fxe4 .ie5 But this indicates that White is unable to find a good plan. However, this was not easy to do - there are no vulnerable points in Black's position. 25 26 27 28 l:ta7 l:t.a3 itib3 .i.f6 1lb8 tt'le7 This loses quickly. Practical chances were offered by 34 l:l:a7, e.g. 34...bxc4+ 35 .i.xc4 cxd5 36 1:1.xd7 dxc4+ 37 <ifi>c2. However, here Black probably has more than one decisive continuation, say 37 . ..tllef5 or 37... We8. 28 ... c6 The prediction comes true: Black has gained the opportunity to begin opera­ tions directed against the enemy king. 29 30 t/)g3 t/)ge2 Only memories remain of the white king's defences. 38 39 l:tf8 • • • 'ila2 b5 e4 The consistent continuation of an attack on the enemy king. By sacrificing 1lfa5 tll4c3 1!fb7 A significant factor is the lack of strong points in the centre for White's knights. Time trouble was already having an effect. It was this factor that Black took into account when he made his next, rather risky move. Possibly he should not have opened the seventh rank for the white rook to take up an active position. 30 31 bxc4 cxd5 tllxd5 .i.e6 39 40 <itd2 41 �el White resigns. Wxg2 ilxh2 There could have followed 4 1 .. . .ic4 (if there is nothing better), with the irresistible threat of 42... iLxc3+. 280 cover the central d4 square, whereas the d5 square in the opponent's position may in some cases become vulnerable. Game 20 1 M.Botvinnik-AO'Kelly Budapest 1952 King's Indian Attack 1 2 3 4 5 6 ll'lo g3 .i.g2 0--0 d3 ll'lbd2 ll'lf6 g6 .i.g7 d5 0--0 ll'lc6 A position typical of the King's Indian Defence, but with colours reversed. Black's last move is the simplest way to gain equal chances. 7 e4 dxe4 Stronger is 7 ..es 8 c3 a5, as was played a few months later in a training game Geller-Botvinnik. . . 8 dxe4 e5 10 11 12 13 1!fc2 ii.fl b3 14 .i.c4+ 15 ..i.aJ . ll'ld7 ll'lc5 a5 f5 A significant positional error. Tiris advance is insufficiently well prepared, especially as the black rook has moved off the f-file. The normal plan for Black would be 13 ... .i.e6 followed by . . . f7-f6 and ... ..i.IB. Wh8 Black has deprived himself of the possibility of answering 14 ... ii.e6 or 14 ... tDai, which would lose the f5 pawn. It is hard for Black to get by without this move. l:e8 9 :et 9 . . .h6 and then ... .i.e6 was better. 10 cJ 15 White's position is preferable, since he can develop an initiative on the queenside with b2-b4 and securely 281 In this way Black loses a pawn, but gets rid of the opponent's active light­ square bishop. This cannot save the game, but there was no longer any satisfactory defence. After the retreat of the knight from c5 White wins the exchange (16 i.fl), while if Black · defends it · by 15 ...b6, then 16 i.d5 i.d7 17 hc5 bxc5 1 8 lllc4 gives White a significant positional advantage. Even so, Black should have chosen this continuation, as being the lesser evil. l:le7 16 .tf7 hxg6 17 i.xg6 l:lti 18 i.xc5 19 20 .lxf8 ltlc4 26 ltlxf5 gxf5 'lfxf8 lle7 27 ltd5! White decides to give up his extra pawn in order to mount an attack, exploiting the open position of the enemy king. 27 28 29 Now White could have successfully built up the pressure by 2 1 ltlh4 'i'f6 22 llle3 with the threats of 23 llld5 and 23 exf5. The game continuation is also effective enough. , 21 exf5 i.xf5 e4 22 'it'cl If 22 ... .llae8 there could have followed 23 ltlg5, intending 24 ltle4, or 23 'i'a3, threatening the e5 pawn, and also in some cases the one at a5. 23 ltlh4 Wf6 :rs 24 W'f4 24 ... lld8 would have been answered by the same move as in the game. l:teti 25 lladl 282 ltedl 1'xc3 a4 ltle7 lLle3 The f5 pawn cannot be given up: 29 ...axb3 30 lllxf5 bxa2 3 1 W'b6+ <&t>g8 32 1!fg6+ <&t>h8 (32 ....llg7 33 lhxg7 'ifxg7 34 'i!fe6+) 33 llld6 .llh7 34 0n+ .llfxf7 3 5 :ds+. JO lld7 axb3 31 32 33 :.xc7 axbJ 1!fb4 <&t>g8 l:tdd7 Black resigns White is threatening 34 'it'g5+ (34 . . . llg7 35 'i!fxg7+ <&t>xg7 36 l:txe7+ <&t>g6 37 l:tg7+ <&t>h6 38 l:th7+ <&t>g6 3 9 l:kg7+ �6 40 lhd5+), 34 :Ixe7 l:txe7 35 'lfg5+, and also the quiet move 34 Wes. Game 202 O. Troianescu-M.Botvinnik Budapest 1952 Grtinfeld Defence 1 d4 2 c4 3 lLlc3 4 el lLlf6 g6 d5 Troianescu was not strong on open­ ing theory, and so he chooses a con­ tinuation with some positional 'kick', but without heavily-analysed variations. 4 5 6 ll)fJ b4 i..g7 0-0 An idea of Makogonov: White immediately begins activity on that flank where Black usually aims for the initiative in the Griinfeld Defence. 6 'irb3 occurred in Game 168. 6 • . • c6 Black would also have successfully overcome his opening difficulties by 6 . ..b6 (followed by 7 . . . c5) or 6 . . .lLle4, but then White too does not face any complicated problems. 7 'lfb3 It would have been more sensible to make the natural move 7 i..b2, when Boleslavsky thought that after 7 . . . lbbd7 8 cxd5 tLixd5 9 tLi.xd5 cxd5 10 11ib3 White' s position is preferable. Now, however, the rook at a l is not defended, the queen has made a premature sortie, and these factors allow Black to seize the initiative at such an early stage. dxc4 7 • • • 8 ..txc4 b5 9 10 ..te2 a5 10 11 12 Vb2 1!fxb4 i..e6 a.xb4 lLla6 13 1!fb2 b4 It is important that White's bishop cannot now retreat to b3 - this is one of the drawbacks to his 7th move. 0-0 In this way White at least manages to castle. The complications resulting from 10 bxa5 'i'xa5 1 1 .td2 b4 1 2 tLldl c5 13 dxc5 lba6 would have favoured Black. 12 ... tLld5 13 tLixd5 ..txd5 would have been less e:ffective. The simplest way of developing the initiative. White has to play his knight to a4 (in order to control the c5 square), where at any moment it may come under attack. 14 15 lLla4 11fc2 15 16 'i'b3 1!Fa5 After this, which incidentally is already the fifth move by the queen out of the first 1 5, it is doubtful if White can save the game. Perhaps it would even have been better to give up a pawn: 1 5 .txa6 'i'xa4 16 i..d3 ..txa2. 283 i..f5 . . lLle4 17 i.b2 22 23 llk.7 dxc5 lL!xc5 tbxc5 i.c4 Of course, not 23 ... i.xb2 24 tbxe6 with counterplay for White. 18 i.dl Again it would probably have been better to give up a pawn: 18 tbc5 tbxc5 19 dxc5 .iLe6 20 'i'c2 .1Lxb2 2 1 'i'xb2 'i'xc5, for example 22 l:lfc l 'i'b6 23 'i'd4 :fb8 24 tbe5 i.d5, and, despite White's material deficit, his position is still viable. However, Black could perhaps have improved this variation by 20 . . .Wa4 2 1 'i'xa4 (2 1 llfcl Wxc2 22 :ctxc2 b3) 2 1 . ..llxa4 22 i.xg7 @xg7, when, in view of the weakness of the opponent's pawns at a2 and c5, he gains a material advantage while retaining a good position. · 18 19 • • • tiJb5 i.c2 tiJbd6 What can White do? 20 a3 l:lfb8 is extremely unpleasant, and in addition he has to save his rook at fl from the threat of 20 . . . i.e6 2 1 'i'd3 i.c4. 20 l:tfcl i.e6 21 'tl'dJ c5! The decisive move. This pawn cannot be allowed to advance further, but its exchange, opening up the position, also has painful consequences. Here White resigned. Troianescu evidently thought that 24 'i'd2 i.xb2 and 24 i.xg7 i.xd3 25 i.xf8 i.xc2 26 i.xe7 'irxc5 27 liJd4 (27 Axd6 'ilfxd6 28 .:ctxc2 is worse on account of 28 . . . b3) 27. . .b3 ! 28 tbxb3 'i'b6! 29 i.xd6 i.xb3 were equally bad. Indeed, after 30 i.c5 iia6 all that White can do is resign. However, subsequently it was found that after 30 axb3 llxal 3 1 llxal iixd6 32 g3 the win for Black involves great technical difficulties. Let us consider a possible contin­ uation: 32 . . . 'i'b4 3 3 l:ta4 (in the event of the b-pawn being defended, things are easier for Black) 33 . . . 'i'xb3 34 l:td4 � 35 h4 @e7 36 @g2 f5 37 <it>gl h6 3 8 'iti>g2 'iii>e6 3 9 'iiig l @e5 40 'iitg2 g5 41 hxg5 hxg5 42 ..t>gl (after 42 ..t>fl 'i'b l + 43 @e2 'ii'b5+ 44 @el 'i'a6 White must allow the enemy queen to go to fl) 42... Wc2 43 @g2 'i'c3 . 284 · Game 203 M.Botvinnik-RPilnik Budapest 1952 Queen's Gambit 1 2 3 5 d4 c4 illcJ .tg5 e3 5 6 7 8 :ct .th4 cxd5 4 44 <Jifl (we will show just once why rook cannot leave its secure post: 44 lld8 'i'c6+ 45 <Jigl ®e4 46 ®g2 f4 47 gxf4 gxf4 48 exf4 'i'g6+ 49 <Jtfl ®i3) ·14 'i'al + 45 Wg2 'i'xd4 46 exd4+ (46 n+ lt>e4 47 exd4 g4!) 46... ®xd4. This continuation, with which White refrains from developing his knight at f3, has its purpose. I he ... 0-0 h6 b6 exd5 Since in the variation 8 lbxd5 9 i.xe7 'i'xe7 10 tbxd5 exd5 1 1 'ifc2 two pairs of minor pieces disappear from the board, Black has better chances of equalising, as White retains merely a minimal advantage. However, as my opponent told me after the game, he was aiming for a win and therefore he avoided simplification. 9 .tdJ .tb7 ... 10 This position is won for Black Subsequently I composed a study on 1his theme, which demonstrate<I how to win. illf6 e6 d5 .te7 21 285 f3 The point of the system of dev­ elopment chosen by White. Now the simplifying manoeuvre ... �6-e4 is ruled out (10 ... ttJe4 1 1 il.xe7 ltlxc3 12 ..txd8 ltlxdl 1 3 �xdl :xd8 14 .l:.xc7), and the bishop at h4 can advantageously retreat to f2. Thus Black's . . . c7-c5 will be neutralised, and he will face a choice: in the event of the pawn exchange on d4 his bishop at b7 will be shut out of the game, while after . . . c5-c4 the bishop at d3 will retreat to b 1 and the central breakthrough e3-e4 will be imminent. Subsequently such a strategic plan also justified itself in the game Botvinnik­ Larsen (Noordwijk 1965). 10 11 12 13 14 ltlge2 0--0 .i.f2 llel In this way White frees the knight at g3 for action, since the bishop on d6 will no longer be able to take the h2 pawn. In this case there follows g2-g3, and Black loses a piece. 16 17 18 19 ltlg3 16 �hl ! cxd4 l:txel+ ltlf8 White begins transferring his pieces closer to the enemy king, which Black can do almost nothing to oppose. Attention can once more be drawn to the positive consequences of the advance of the pawn to f3 , where it con­ trols the important e4 and g4 squares. 19 20 21 c5 ltlbd7 l1e8 .i.d6 a6 lllf5 lLle6 ..tf8 ..teJ Preventing the knight from being driven away from f5 by . . . g7-g6; in addition White gains control of f4. One can perhaps agree with the recommendation by Filip, that it would have been preferable to play the knight immediately from d7 via :f8 to e6. 15 exd4 'i!fxel ltlce2 21 22 23 24 1!fb8 'iih4 1!fg4 lllf4 ltle8 Wd8 �h8 The first threat has appeared: 25 ltlxe6 fxe6 26 %4. The simplifying 286 24 ...�xf4 25 .i.xf4 does little to ease mack's position in view of the existence of a second threat: 26 �xh6 ! gxh6 27 'Wf4 �6 28 .i.e5. 24 1!fg5 Black would seem to have avoided I he worst - a mating attack on his king, but he has acquired such weaknesses I hat it is probably no longer possible for him to defend. 25 lbxe6 1!fxg4 • • . 26 27 28 fxg4 ibh4 ibg6 fxe6 29 30 31 32 g5 .i.xg5 hxg5 tbf6 can follow 33 . . . Ab8 34 lbf8 l!e8 (34. . .l:tc6 3 5 tbd7) 35 tbxe6 ! l:txe7 36 :ts+ �h7 37 l:txb8 or 33 ... .l:te8 34 .i.xd6 lbxd6 35 .l:c l , and things are bad for Black. 32 l:lc7 Pilnik gives up a pawn immediately, in order to activate his position at least a little. • 33 34 35 36 �g8 .i.d6 . • Axf6 l:txf6 :n g3 gxf6 licl + .l:tc7 As a last 'consolation' Black tries to retain his two bishops. �gl :n :lc8 It is obvious that the game will be decided by White's two connected passed pawns. There is no way of defending the knight at f6 (32. . . 'it>n 33 tbe5+ �e7 34 h4, and the pawn advances inexorably to h6), and there is nowhere for it to go. If 32 . . .tbe8 or 32 . . . lbe4 there follows 33 i.e7. In the first case this wins immediately, while in the second there 36 37 38 39 llel lbe5 �g2 b5 i.c8 �g7 b4 The advance of the queenside pawns does not create any threat. 287 40 41 h4 a5 g4 Black resigns Game 204 M.Botvinnik-A.Konstantinopolsky 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 Centre Counter Opening 1 e4 d5 Konstantinopolsky, guessing about my knowledge of opening theory, correctly assumed that I had not analysed this opening in the quiet of my study. 2 3 4 5 exd5 lL!cJ lL!fJ d4 Wxd5 1!1a5 lLlf6 5 . .tg4 6 hJ Now (or on the previou� move) this advance is essential, since after, for ex­ ample, 5 .te2 lLlc6 followed by . . . .tg4 Black avoids any opening difficulties. . • 8 9 10 11 12 .i.f4 l:lfel a:J e6 lLlbd7 .te7 0-0 l1fe8 13 .i.gJ 1!fb6 14 11fd3 llad8 15 b4! 15 16 17 l1ad1 0-0 Now there is no point in playing 1 3 b4 'i'd8 1 4 :ad 1 on account of 14 . . teid5. White makes a waiting move, but one that is by no means pointless. . If 13 . . .lLld5 there would have followed 14 lL!e4, avoiding simplifi­ cation, but instead of the move played it would have been more sensible for Black to continue his development by 1 3 . . . l:tad8, since if 1 4 b4 he could have calmly replied 14 . . . 1!fh5, whereas now the direct switching of the queen to the kingside is ruled out. But now if 5 . . .lL!c6 there was the unpleasant reply 6 .tb5, if 5 ... c6 - 6 .tc4, and after 5 . . . .if5 - 6 tbe5 c6 7 g4 .tg6 8 h4. Forcing the exchange of bishop for knight, since 6 . . . 1Lh5 7 g4 .tg6 8 lL!e5 c6 9 h4 is dangerous for Black. There­ fore White gains a minimal, but never­ theless enduring positional advantage. Incidentally, it is interesting to note that in the above variation the move 8 lL!e5 occurred in one of Alekhine' s games in 1924, and 9 h4 was analysed by Lasker. 6 7 8 ifxf3 .i.c4 .txf3 c6 It is curious to note that back in the year of my birth Rubinstein played 8 il.d2 and also gained an advantage. 288 Now the black queen has no move, and in view of the threat of 15 tCia4 urgent measures must be taken. lLle4 lL!f8 i.d6 lL!xe4 18 19 lbe4 9xg3 Jl.xgl Despite the exchange of almost all the minor pieces, White still retains an advantage; it is hard for Black to do anything active. In the thematic sense, a similar plan for White was carried out by Tal in the 15th game of our world championship match (1960). 19 %ld7 With the aim of gaining counterplay Black should have played 19 . . . aS, which would have led to the opening of the a­ file. • . 20 21 22 never recommended, and this rook cannot be well placed at b7. 26 1if3 27 g4 . cl 1ig5 'ifh5 'iic7 1'd8 1if6 The passive placing of the black pieces allows White to begin an offen­ sive with the pawns covering his own king. 27 28 29 30 Thus by a roundabout way the queen has nevertheless reached the kingside, but here it is unable to oppose the preparation of a pawn storm by White. 23 24 25 !lc7 a4 lidel f4 b6 lied8 !lb7 Although the position has not yet been opened, wasting time pointlessly is J:le5 1ig3 bxc5 g6 @g7 c5 bxc5 Now 3 1 g5 'ile7 3 2 d5 would have completed the attack. Either White simply picks up the e6 pawn, or he wins after 32 . . . lbd7 by 33 f5 gxf5 34 l:r.xe6, while if 32 . . . l:r.d6 - 33 f5 gxf5 34 dxe6 fxe6 35 %lxf5. The move played is significantly weaker. · 31 32 33 f5 !lxf5 1ixc7 exf5 gxf5 cxd4 It would have been better for Black to play 33 ...l:t.d7 34 'fixes fxg4 35 hxg4 'i'h4, although the variation 36 'ife5+ f6 37 'i'e4 lbg6 . 22 38 i.e6 would have given him only slim chances of saving 289 the game, despite the open position of the white king. 34 45 46 47 48 lle7! Now the outcome is decided: Black loses material. 34 lld7 �xd7 dxc3 fxg4 35 :xd7 36. 'll'xd7 37 ild3 38. 11fxg4+ � White's · next objective is to get What else could Black do? After would all quickly. through the time scramble safely. W'c8+ 1lg4+ 11b4+ </;g2 </Jg7 43 44 45 h4 W'e4 'it>g3 1lc6+ 9'f6 'it>f8 'it>g7 a6 W'fl 48 . . . @h6 49 'ilfe3 + �g7 50 'ifg5+ it c 39 40 41 42 11fb4+ .tc2 1Wc5 </;f8 ci>g8 h5 42 . . . h6 would perhaps have been more circumspect, although in principle nothing should any longer save Black. 45 'i'h7+ � 46 1!i'xh5 could have been played immediately, but, remem­ bering Capablanca 's advice, with a material advantage I was not in a hurry to force the play. 290 49 50 51 52 53 54 have ended 'lfxc3+ W'd3 1!fe4 cbf2 w <i>e2 even 'it>g8 1if6 'ilfcJ+ 'Ifd2+ 1icJ+ more In this type of position there is no hope of perpetual check; here too the k ing easily escapes from the pursuit. 54 � .t.d3 'iff4 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 as 'ilfb2+ 55 56 57 58 59 60 1i'e4 fofi>e2 .i.c2 1if6+ 1!fb2+ 61 62 .i.dt 1!ff4 <llg7 f6 64 65 66 Was+ 111d5 <llg7 irb2+ '&bl 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 11fxh5 'ifd3+ 1!fe2 'iff5+ 1!ff3 'ilfbl 'lfb2+ �g2 �bl <li>f8 1lfa8+ �g7 1!fg2+ Black resigns @f3 Game 205 M.Botvinnik-B.Goldenov Reti Opening 1!t'c3 1 2 3 c4 g3 .i.g2 e6 d5 dxc4 4 11fa4+ 1i'd7 5 6 'lfxc4 fl)aJ c5 It is perhaps better for Black to try and transpose into the Tarrasch Defence by 3 . . . tbf6, and then . . . .i.e7, . . . 0-0 and ... c7-c5. However, experience has shown that White, by refraining from d2-d4, obtains a complicated and interesting game. Regarding 3 . . . d4, see Game 176. In contrast to the Queen's Gambit Accepted, in the given situation Black's chances are worse, on account of the fact that White has not spent time on playing d2-d4 and has a wider choice of possibilities. 'i'c3 The observant reader may have noticed that over the past few moves the position has hardly changed, but during this period the next time control has been reached. After gaining an opportunity for reflection, White decides to 'concern himself' with the h5 pawn. The threat of 63 11fg5+ has forced Black to weaken the light squares on his kingside, and this immediately tells. c;fo>f8 63 'ife4 Preferable for Black was 4 .. �eid7 5 1!fxc4 fl)gf6 6 ttJf3 c5 or 6 . . . a6, as well as 4... .i.d7 5 'i'xc4 i.c6. <t>n The h5 pawn cannot be defended. A promising development of the knight, which may then move to c4, and later also to e5. In addition, White prepares a positional trap, which his opponent failed to see through. 6 ltX6 It was essential to take control of the b5 square by 6 . . . a6, simultaneously preparing . . . b7-b5. • 7 • • 1i'b5! a6 Now this is too late, and it plays into · White's hands. Only 7 ... eib4 would 29 1 have parried the trap, although after 8 Vxd7+ c;.tixd7 9 lt):f3 f6 10 d4 White has a significant lead in development. as it would have been at d4, which would not have been hard to occupy via f5. And if White had wanted to ex­ change such a strong knight, it would have improved Black's pawn structure. 14 15 lLa5 e4! i..e7 The knight can and must be driven from its central square. The wealrness of d3 resulting from this is illusory. 15 8 1Lxc6 This is the point! If 8. . . axb5 9 lLxb5, arid Black loses a pawn. Even so, that is what he should have played, since his two bishops and free piece development would have compensated to some extent for his material deficit. 8 • • • . • . lDb4 Again the natural move is incorrect. But whereas Black's omissions on moves 7 and 1 3 were positional in character, here he miscalculates in tactical complications. The only satisfactory move was 15 . . . lbc7, in the hope of nevertheless transferring his knight via e6 or b5 to d4. At b4 the knight does not have a single move, and it is doomed, or else saving it will incur irreparable losses. 16 0-0-0 bxc6 Now Black's queenside pawn for­ mation is so ruined, that his game must be considered positionally lost. 9 1ia4 llb8 10 11 12 13 lDf3 dJ lDc4 .*.d2 f6 lDe7 e5 lDd5 For the moment 9 . . .e5 was not possible because of 10 lbc4 "ikc7 1 1 ltlxe5. A natural and even obvious decision, but, as often happens in such cases, hardly the correct one. The point is that on this central square the knight is less securely and not as menacingly placed It is cl� that Black's hopes regard­ ing the weakness of the d3 pawn have proved illusory, and his knight is in a critical position. But the board is full of 292 pieces and there are still many events to come. 16 • • . 11fg4 After 16 . .. �d3+ 17 �bl ! there is no way. of defending the ill-rated knight. 17 18 �1 a3 .i.d7 'hd5 Black seems to have· saved his knight, since after 19 exd5 cxd5 both White's queen and his knight are en prise. But it transpires that from d5 too the wandering knight will never be able to move. Therefore White does not have to hurry with the capture of the knight, especially as in this case Black would obtain a strong pawn centre, and, exploiting his two active bishops, would be able to build up an attack. 19 20 21 1!fc2 fJ 'hg2 l:lb5 'il'e6 White is prepared to restrict himself to the win of a pawn (24 . . .lt)e7 25 tjjf4 1!Fg4 26 .i.c3), merely so as not to give the opponent counterplay. However, Black prefers to give up a piece in the hope of some initiative. 24 25 26 exd5 lhr4 fxe5 cxd5 'i!rh6 It would appear that White has to agree to 27 t2Jxe5, but . . . 2 7 l:lxe5 Returning the piece, but obtaining a decisive attack. 27 28 29 30 J:lh5 .i.c3 dxc4 dxc4 W'f6 11Ff7 g6 � Had Black tried to vacate a square for the retreat of his knight.(2 1.. ilf'8) there could have been an amusing finish: 22 f4 tjje7 23 f5 1i'g8 24 tjjd6 mate. . 22 23 J:lhel f4 , J:ltb8 .i.f8 J:lxd7! 11xd7 l:l5b6 �xf8 31 32 33 �xg6 34 35 l:txb7 1fg4 11'f2+ Black resigns ifuf8 Or 33 . . J:tx:ffl 34 l:lg5+. 24 fxe5 293 with Ragozin (1 940) I played 9 . . . g6, which is undoubtedly weaker. Gaine 206 A. Tolush-M.Botvinnik 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 French Defence 1 d4 2 e4 3 �d2 4 e5 e6 d5 �f6 �fd7 5 .tdJ Now the most popular continuation is 5 f4 c5 6 c3 �c6 7 �df3 . After the possible variation 7 . . . 'i'a5 8 .te3 cxd4 9 &Dxd4 &Dxd4 10 .txd4 Uhlmann judges the position to favour White. But in the event of 7 . . . c4, in order not to allow the enemy king's bishop immediately onto the b l -h7 diagonal, as played by Petrosian against Cooper ( 1964), and later also by me in a game with Ostoic (1969), White can obtain a dangerous initiative. 5 .. c5 10 �g3 11 �f3 1 0 f4, employed against me by Kan ( 1952) in my · preparations for the present championship (cf. training games), is less good, since Black can reply 10 . . . f5. He need not fear the weakening of the e5 square after 1 1 exf6 CDxf6, since White's e4 is equally weak. 10 . .te7 . • The Encyclopaedia considers 1 1 'i'g4 g6 12 thf3 to be more energetic, followed by 12 . . . h5 13 'i'f4 c4 14 CDg5 .ixg5 1 5 'i'xg5 'i'xg5 16 .i.xg5. But in the present game too things do not go badly for White. • 6 cl b6 An idea which I employed back in 1938 against Abramian. It involves a little trap, since after the natural move 7 'i'e2 there follows 7 . . . cxd4 8 cxd4 &Dc6 9 CDgf3 &Db4, exchanging the bishop at d3 (since 10 .tbl .ta6 clearly favours Black). That is in fact what happened in the afore-mentioned game. 7 �e2 8 .txa6 9 0-0 .ta6 �xa6 �c1 In order to defend the e6 pawn in advance and to have the possibility at an appropriate moment of playing . . . f7-f5. In one of the games from my match 294 11 . . . h5 A committing decision, after which Black can no longer hope to castle short. But on the other hand, now White cannot carry out the standard attack on the kingside, which usually begins with the advance of his knight to h5. 12 �el The manoeuvre tDf3-el-d3-f4-h3 lakes a great deal of time and brings li ltle benefit. The immediate 12 .i.e3 was better. 12 13 14 ll'id3 .i.e3 g6 'lfc8 c4 Black drives the knight to where it is aiming, since otherwise he cannot gain counterplay on the queenside. 15 16 ll'if4 lllb3 16 17 18 1!fd2 a3 b5 The manoeuvre is complete, and after ile3-g5 Black will be unable to avoid the exchange of bishops. ensure the advance . . . b5-b4 or the subsequent manoeuvre of the knight via e7 to f5. I carried out this same man­ oeuvre in the afore-mentioned game with Ragozin. 19 20 21 .i.g5 l:tfel lllxg5 ll'ic6 .i.xg5 llle7 22 23 1if4 lllxf5 ltlf5 gxf5 This knight has to be used for covering the n pawn. I carried out this same manoeuvre in one of the games from my match with Ragozin ( 1940). 1fd8 a5 After 18 a4 b4 19 b3 cxb3 20 l:.tbl tllb6 Black would have succeeded in occupying the important c4 square with his knight. Black has already achieved much. His passive g-pawn has moved to an active position at f5. The only defect of his position is the weakness of his h­ pawn, but on the other hand he has good prospects of a pawn offensive on the queenside. 18 • • • llib8! A manoeuvre typical of this opening variation, as a result of which one knight should remain at c7 and the other occupy c6. In the present case this will 295 24 25 ile7 :eJ ltgJ White too does not hide his intentions: he is aiming to win the h­ pawn. 25 . . • . @d7 26 27 �f3 l:l.g5 .J:lh7 'li?c6 Black has managed to defend the c4 pawn, and his lalight obtains a good post at d5. 28 29 h4 �h2 l:Cb8 The excha.1ge of queens did not satisfy Tolush, of course, since in view of the poor placing of the white pieces, the passed c-pawn would have become too dangerous. Now, however, White retains counterplay due to the open position of the black king. .. axb4 b4 axb4 Giving up the right to castle, which is something I did frequently in my games. Thus it only remains for White to transfer his knight via fl to g3, and if necessary to play 'i'D, and the h5 pawn will be doomed. The alternative 29 tDel followed by �2, directed against . . . b5b4, was too passive. 29 30 • For the moment the position of the black king at c6 is invulnerable. 31 'Ifcl l:l.hb8 Preparing to switch this rook too to the queenside. 35 1Wf3+ 35 36 ... �fl �d5 1i'c3 Continuing to aim for the endgame. 'i!fb3 37 !f dl It is dangerous to allow the enemy queen to go to a4. 38 32 b3 In view of Black's menacing activity on the queenside, White gives up putting pressure on the h5 pawn and endeavours to expose the black king. 32 33 34 bxc4 1ixc3 bxc3 dxc4 'it'b4 296 'i!fel 'i!fcJ It is too risky to play 3 8 ... c3 : there follows 3 9 tDe3 . But this means that neither side can avoid the repetition of moves. 39 40 1'dl 1ib3 'i!fel W'c3 Draw agreed training games). Subsequently, how­ ever, Spassky showed that 7. . . tiJd5 has its drawbacks in view of 8 0-0 i.d6 9 tbc3 .ie6 10 tbe4 ! For a long time this variation was considered unsatisfactory for Black, until Furman showed that instead of 7. . . tbd5 he should play 7 . . . i.d6, and if 8 'ife2+ �f8. Returning to the present game, it should be said that, since all this had been prepared by me beforehand, it was not Black, but White who had to seek the correct plan, and my opponent's very next move was not the strongest. Game 207 D.Bronstein-M.Botvinnik 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 King's Gambit 1 2 3 e4 f4 w e5 exf4 d5 4 5 6 exd5 .ib5+ dxc6 tDf6 c6 bxc6 Theory gives preference to 3 . . . g5, as they played in olden times, leading to great complications. 8 9 It seems to me that 6. . . lbxc6 is a weaker reply, if only because in an open position every tempo is precious, and in the game White has to waste time re­ treating his bishop. 7 iLc4 d4 0--0 .ld6 It is hard to White to exploit his four pawns against two enemy ones on the queenside, whereas the advance of Black's majority pawn mass on the kingside is bound to bear fruit. This was checked in the afore-mentioned training game, but in the present encounter things did not come to that. tDd5 0--0 9 10 11 t2)cJ bxc3 tDxc3 ..tg4 12 13 1id3 g3 l£ld7 Perhaps even stronger was 1 1 ... lt:Jd7 12 ..td3 c5 13 lt:Jd2 cxd4 14 cxd4 llli6 15 lt:Je4 .ig4, as Lilienthal played a year later with Black against Bronstein in the Moscow Championship. If Bronstein imagined that, by play­ ing the King's Gambit, he was taking me by surprise, then he was mistaken. I had analysed this entire variation much earlier, before the match-tournament for the world championship, and had even tested it in practice against Ragozin (cf This seems very strong, as if 13 . . . fxg3 White wins inunediately by 14 tbg5. But Black has an opportunity to simplify the position by a pawn sacrifice and dispel the opponent's hopes of an attack. Better attacking chances were offered by 1 3 .id2 and then :ae 1. 297 13 14 .i.b3 lDb6 Tirinking only of victory, White avoids · exchanges, in the process losing an important tempo. After 14 .i.x:f4 i.xf4 1 5 gxf4 ltlxc4 16 'ifxc4 'i'd5 17 'i'xd5 cxd5 1 8 lDe5 .�.f5 the chances would have been roughly equal. cs 14 . 15 • • c4 White's position would also have become difficult after 15 dxc5 i.xc5+ 16 <t>hl 'i'c8 ! 1 7 i.x:f4 'i'C6. Probably his best alternative was 15 i.xf4 i.x:f4 16 gxf4 .i.xf3 17 %1xf3 Wc7. With his bishop at b3 , which for the sake of retaining White has wasted time, now shut in, his position becomes difficult. 15 16 • . . lDe5 '9f6 16 . . . .if5 followed by . . . fxg3 was threatened. White is oounting on the advantage of the two bishops, but this is purely symbolic: for the moment the bishop at b3 is merely an observer. 16 • .. Axe5 17 18 dxe5 .ixf4 11xe5 1l'b5 19 20 21 l:tfel l:lfe8 .ie2 lDd7i Black's advantage is obvious, but he has to play carefully, since the bishop at b3 may yet come into play. a4 'i!fc3 In the event of 2 1 . . .a5 Black's queen's rook would have been tied to the defence of this pawn. Therefore he has to release the bishop at b3, but on the other hand he quickly switches his knight to the kingside where it partici­ pates in the attack. 22 23 a5 .ia4 ltlf6 l:le6 Here I was afraid of the only move which would have allowed Bronstein to continue the resistance, namely 24 'i'd2 ! White would have simultaneously parried the threats of . . .�d8, ...llle4 and ...t£ig4, and would himself have been threatening the unpleasant 25 .ic6 (which would also have followed after 24 . . . 'i'f3). In the event of 24 'i'd2 Black would probably have had to restrict 298 himself to the modest win of a pawn by 24 . . . il.xc4. It is curious that this possi­ bility of continuing the struggle also went unnoticed by the commentators. ltle4 24 �g2 25 1!t'a3 g5 White resigns. After 26 .i.c 1 (or 26 .tc7) Black has the decisive 26 . . .l:U6. ltlgl -f3 White normally used to castle on the kingside, whereas when he played ltlgl -e2 he would castle queen­ side. But in the present game a 'hybrid' variation has been employed, with the aim of making it difficult for the opponent to choose · a plan. After White' s kingside castling it is harder for Black to obtain active play, in which Keres always felt confident. Game 208 M.Botvinnik-P.Keres 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 Queen's Gambit 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 ltlcJ cxd5 ltlf6 e6 d5 This move causes Black the greatest problems, since now all that he can contemplate is a tenacious defence, whereas White has an enduring initiative. 4 5 6 7 8 .i.g5 eJ .i.dJ 1!fc2 exd5 J.e7 0--0 ltlbd7 l:te8 For the time being Black avoids playing . . . c7-c6. This does not introduce anything significantly new into this rather well-known variation of the Queen's Gambit. 9 10 ltlge2 0--0 Itab1 12 'ifi>h1 c6 .i.d6 This 'attacking' move (threatening 12 . . . .i.xh2+ 1 3 'iti>xh2 ltlg4+ and l4 . . . Vxg5) proves to be a serious mistake, since Black will be unable to release the pin on the knight at f6, other than by returning with his bishop to e7. He should have played l l . . .ltlg4. Now in the event of 12 . . . .i.xh2 White would have played 1 3 .i.xf6 'i'xf6 14 'iti>xh2. . ltlf8 But this is a continuation that was unusual for that time, although it has now become quite common. After 10 11 12 13 • . . fJ! ltlg6 White has prepared the standard attack on the queenside 1 1 .!:tab i , but now, of course, he rejects this plan in 299 - favour of an offensive in the centre. Black can no longer prevent e3 -e4, since in the given position it is hard for him to counter with . . . c6-c5. This is the consequence of the unfortunate move . l l . . . .id6. 18 13 • • • .ie7 After 13 . . .h6 White would not have continued 14 .ixh6 gxh6 1 5 .i.xg6 fxg6 16 1fxg6+ 'it>h8 17 W'xh6+ �7 with an unclear game, but simply 14 .ixf6 'i!i'xf6 15 e4 with an obvious advantage. 14 .D.bel /i)d7 Black avoids the complications which would have arisen after 14 ...h6 15 .ixh6 gxh6 16 .i.xg6 fxg6 17 'ii'xg6+ 'it>h8 ( 18 llli4 ..il.f8 19 '8f7 .i?i.fS), but perhaps he was wrong to do so. After 14 . . . c5 15 dxc5 .ixc5 16 .ixf6 gxf6 1 7 �4, however, his pawn structure would have been irreparably weakened. 15 Jl..xe7 .D.xe7 Black has finally managed to exchange the enemy bishop, but with a significant loss of time, thanks to which White has already made much progress. 16 17 /i)g3 1i'f2 /i)f6 .i.e6 /i)f5 White does not hurry to advance e3e4, remembering Tarrasch's saying that the threat is stronger than its execution. But it is not put off for long, only to a time when Black will not have any active replies. 18 • • • Jl..xf5 If 1 8 . . . l:.e8 there would have followed 19 g4, and then after the exchange on f5 White would have recaptured with the g-pawn. causing Black fresh problems. But in the game too the white bishop will be very well placed at f5, and the e-pawn can be advanced immediately. 19 20 .ixf5 e4 1'b6 dxe4 21 22 fxe4 l:.d8 By opening the position Black hopes to gain at least some counter-chances, but in the process White's activity also increases! e5 Although Black now obtains a comfortable post for his knight at d5, far more important is the fact that the white knight will penetrate to d6. 300 In order to answer 30 l:ih3 with 30 . . . f5, when after 3 1 exf6 possible is 3 1 . . . 'i'xd6. 22 23 • • . /l)e4 /l)d5 /l)f8 23 ... /l)c7 was not possible in view of 24 l'Lld6, and if 24 . . . /&8 (in order to immediately expel the white knight from d6), then 25 l'Llc8 or 25 0.xf7. 24 . • . Ae4 1fc7 lhe6 'flh4 .ixd5 l!cl 28 29 l:tc3 30 31 /l)h6+ l:fe8 White is again not content with winning the exchange: the capture of the f7 pawn wins more simply. The resistance could have been prolonged by the exchange sacrifice (25 . . . :xd6 26 exd6 'ifxd6), but, of course, not for long (if only because of 27 Axd5 cxd5 28 l:te5). Now, however, White exchanges the opponent's centralised laright and occupies the c­ file which is opened in the process. 26 27 28 /l)f5! . /l)d6 But now too White is threatening both 25 t'Llxc8, and 25 t'Llxf7 l::txf7 (25 . . . 'it>xf7 26 Jie6+) 26 Ae6. 24 25 30 This ensures the win of the exchange, since if 30 .. :ees there follows 3 1 'irf6 h5 32 l'Llh6+ Wh7 33 t'Llxf7. g6 cxd5 After 28 :e3 Black might yet have 'changed his mind' and given up the exchange. 'ird7 l:f8 301 31 32 33 'flf6 l:kfJ <t>f8 /l)g7 A picturesque position! There is the threat of 34 'ifxf7+ l:txf7 35 l:lxf7+ 'ilxf7 36 l:lxf7 mate. 33 34 35 36 37 ttlxf7 'ifg5 ttlb6 g4 l:lc8 l1.e6 ttlf5 1!fg7 Black resigns Game 209 7 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 Slav Defence 1 2 3 d4 c4 ttlc3 cxd5 8 9 10 d5 c6 ttlf6 4 As in the Queen's Gambit (see the previous game), the Exchange Variation of the Slav Defence retains an opening advantage for White, and deprives Black of counterplay. cxd5 4 5 6 ttlf3 .tf4 ttlc6 e6 e3 .te7 Regarding the variation with 7... .td6, see Game 167. As was mentioned in the notes to Game 155 (there the reckless 6 ... 'iia5 was played), this modest but sound reply was preferred by Lasker, while I several times chose 6 ... ttlh5. As for the most popular and complicated variation with 6 ... i.f5, as, incidentally, Tai ( 1 961) and Pomar ( 1966) played against me, to all appear­ ances Smyslov was insufficiently familiar with it. .td3 h3 0-0 0-0 .td7 1f'b6 Smyslov played less successfully 10 . .. a6 - against me in the 14th USSR Championship, 1 945. 11 We2 11 12 13 1:1.acl l:tfdl White can also carry out another effective plan, as in a game from the Portisch-Petrosian match (1974): 1 1 a3 tlla5 12 b4 ttlc4 13 ttle5 ! l:tac8 14 .txc4 dxc4 15 .tg5 'ifd8 16 Wf3 .ltc6 17 tbxc6 l:lxc6 18 l:lad l . llfc8 i.e8 Wd8 Thus Black has completed a subtle regrouping plan: his king's rook has been allowed across to the queenside to support active play there, his bishop has retreated to e8 to reinforce the kingside, and his queen has returned to its initial position, in order from a distance to take part in the battle, wherever it should · flare up. 302 22 23 24 25 14 15 �bl l£1e5 l£1xc6 1fel! Jbc6 Black was threatening 17 ...b4 18 lba4 l:txcl and 1 9... �xa4, winning a piece. Now the e2 square is vacated, and via it the knight heads for d3. 17 18 . . • llxc6 /i)cl l£1d3 25 llxc6 l£1d6 l£1c4 The knight' at c4 is not badly placed, but from there it is unable to perform its 'traditional '. duty of cqntrolling· the e4 square. Therefore White begins making preparations for e3-e4. . • • �xdJ At this critical moment, when 26 e4 was finally due to follow, Black takes the correct decision: he allows his opponent the advantage of the two bishops, but prevents the invasion of the knight at c5 which would be unavoidable after e3-e4. 26 27 �xdJ e4 1fc7 l£1b6 Otherwise there follows 28 exd5 exd5 29 l:.el , and White has a danger­ ous initiative. llac8 l£1e2 l£1e4 The opposing knight, in turn, heads for the c4 square. 19 20 21 f6 �g6 1!fb6 a6 b5 This move would advisable if Black were to succeed in transferring his knight from c6 to c4. But since White immediately exchanges this knight, Black does not gain any compensation for the weakness of the c5 square. 15 . . .l£1a5 and only then . . . b7-b5 was essential. 16 17 We2 �gJ f3 .i.f2 28 gJ 29 · rxe4 dxe4 e5 Black plays this in order to provoke the advance of the pawn to d5, where it will be blockaded, thereby reducing the activity of the light-square bishop. However, this plan has its drawbacks, since White is able to open the position on the queenside . and . obtain definite pressure. 303 30 31 32 33 d5 �g2 Wxdl b3 :ct l:.xdl l£ia4 l£ic5 34 35 36 37 Wc2 .te2 a4 bxa4 .id6 Black's active queen controls the left flank, and the only thing that remains for White is to prepare a pawn break­ through on the other side of the board. 43 44 45 46 After 33 ... lLic3 34 'i'c2 a5 35 .tel b4 36 .tc4 Black would not have escaped from his difficulties. @f8 .ixc5 .txa6 i.xc5 <ll;e7 Black, of course, is not agreeable to the exchange of bishops, but will aim for the disappearance of the queens. 40 41 42 Ae2 h4 Af3 @d6 Wet t!fb4 g6 h5 @e7 There is now a threat of 47 g4 (47 . . . hxg4 48 'ifxg4), which, however, Smyslov immediately parries. bxa4 Wa5 WaJ! .tf3 After 47 g4 .if2! White would have 46 47 Black's actions are restricted by the need to combat the two active white bishops and also to keep an eye on the protected passed pawn in the centre. Therefore Smyslov decides to sacrifice a pawn, after which opposite-colour bishops remain on the board, and the defensive strategy becomes more clear­ cut. 38 39 �h3 .tg2 @h2 W'dl • • • had to play 48 'i'f3, since 48... 'ifg3+ cannot be allowed, and the exchange of queens would be equivalent to agreeing a draw. 47 48 49 50 ct>g2 @h3 .A.g2 .id6 1fa2+ 1!1a3 And now there was no point in playing 50 g4 in view of 50 . . . hxg4+ 5 1 'iti>xg4 We3 . 50 f5 Smyslov could have continued adhering to waiting tactics, but his 304 61 62 decision to force events also leads to the desired goal. 51 52 'iit>b2 11'f3 f4 11'xf3 ..i.xf3 'iit>xg3 'iit>f2 Ae2 ..tb5 <ifi>g3 ..td8 <l;;e7 All White's attempts to break through with his bishop to e8 have been in vain; all that remains is to try and penetrate with the bishop along the h3c8 diagonal. .*.a5 63 i.fl A draw would have been achieved more quickly by 52 . . . 'i'xa4 53 g4 'ife8 (but not 53 ...hxg4 54 'i!fxg4 with the threats of 55 'i'e6+ and 55 . 'i'xg6) 54 gxh5 gxh5 55 'i'h3 'i'g6. Smyslov, however, went in for the exchange of queens. A characteristic decision . for him: he always subtly evaluated the endgame. In the given situation the endgame is drawn, so therefore the queens must be exchanged. 53 54 55 56 . 57 58 .i.a6 ..i.b5+ 64 65 66 c;t>f'2 ..th3 <it>g3 <ifi>d6 ..td8 <ifi>c5 It ttuns out that active defence is the most accurate! After 66 . . . �e7 67 ..te6 Black would still have had problems. �d4 67 .i.d7 68 c;t>f3 ..txh4 <ifi>c5 69 a5 ..td8 70 .i.e8 71 a6 <ifi>b6 Draw agreed fxg3+ ..tb4 @d6 ..taS ..td8 In this game Smyslov resourcefully and almost faultlessly conducted a difficult defence. Game 2 10 M.Botvinnik-LBoleslavsky 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 King's Indian Defence An ideal arrangement of the black forces: from d8 the bishop controls the a5 square and ties the white king to the defence of the h4 pawn. 58 59 60 ..tc6 ..i.b7 <l;e7 Jl.c7 <ifi>d7 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 g3 ..tg2 tbc3 ti)f3 tllf6 g6 ..tg7 0-0 d6 tbbd7 The choice of opening variation is, of course, a matter of taste, but, judging by the general tendencies, 6 . . . tbbd7 is 305 lLif8 13 i.e3 &iJf7 14 'ii'd2 lLie6 15 d5 currently less popular than 6 . . . c5, and particularly 6 . .. lLic6. 7 8 0--0 e4 lLifS. Here, according to the Encyclo­ paedia, White could have retained an advantage by 16 b4. Even so, this continuation is considered the lesser evil. e5 l:te8 8 . . . c6 is perhaps sounder, as played against me by Bondarevsky (Game 1 50). 12 13 lhxd4 b4 14 lhf5! 14 ... gxf5 15 16 17 exf5 fxe6 .i.xb7 lLie5 .i.xe6 '.t>h8! lhc5 lhe6 This position had already occurred, and after 14 'ii'xg4 lLixd4 Black obtained a satisfactory gmne. White's next move is a new one and would seem to be stronger. ·· 9 .i.eJ In 1940 I preferred 9 d5 against the same opponent (Grune 108), but then in 1941, against Lilienthal, I employed this continuation, which seems to me to be more promising (Game 1 13). There Black replied 9 ... exd4 10 lLixd4 lLie5 .1 1 b3 lLifg4, seemingly seizing the initiative, but soon his pieces were driven back. . Boleslavsky, however, chooses a different plan, refraining for the moment from the exchange of pawns in the centre. 9 10 11 .i.g5 .i.ct lLig4 f6 exd4 A similar idea was carried out in Game 150, and also subsequently against Pachinan (Oberhausen 1961). Black does not want to part with his g7 bishop (by playing, for example, 14 ...lLie5), and it is hard to reproach him for this. · Boleslavsky played less successfully against Ragozin (1944) - l l . ..c6, while in 1950 a game of his with Bronstein developed differently: 1 1. ..lLlh6 12 h3 In the event of 17 ...:b8 18 �d5 White would have had a clear advantage, whereas after Boleslavsky's 306 After 23 . . . .lhbS 24 l:.ae l .i.xe5 25 b5 'ikg7 26 ltle2 h5 27 .i.f3 Black would been in little danger. clever decision ( 17 . . . �h8 ! ) it is risky to accept the exchange sacrifice, since Black would gain active play on the weakened light squares in the enemy position. And at the same time it is no longer possible for White to exchange the bishop at e6. 18 19 .i.d5 11fa4 24 25 <ii>hl .i.xa8 .i.xe5 l:ha8 26 27 1!fg2 llldl c6 29 30 :aet .i.xfl %tg8 31 ll'ih3 By playing 25 . . . .i.xc3 26 l:acl i.d2 Black would have immediately regained the exchange, but now he is hoping for a successful attack. .i.g4 This loss of time is hard to explain there is nothing for the queen to do here, and it will immediately have to go to c2. If -� 2 7 'i'xc6, then 2 7 . . . l:g8, and Black does indeed have a dangerous attack. 'ifh6 27 .i.e2 28 00 :xfl f5! 19 Black's threat of 20 . . . 00+ is highly unpleasant; his 'King's Indian' bishop at g7 comes into play. 20 21 1ic2 .i.g5 1if6 The knight check at f3 was again threatened, and already White has to resort to 'tricks' . 21 22 23 f4 fxe5 'ifxg5 ft6 At this point White could finally have ventured accepting the exchange sacrifice: 23 .i.xa8. . 23 • • • 11fe3+ I have to agree with Levenfish, who pointed out that 3 1 lbd3 would have been stronger. The point is that Black could not have replied 3 1 .. .l:!xg3 on account of 32 tbxe5 (32 . . . l:!xg2 33 tbf7+), while if 3 1 . ...i.xg3, then 32 'i'b2+ l:!g7 33 l:!xf5 �g8 34 'i'e2, and now if 34 . . . 'i'g6 35 l:!g5!, or 34 . . .l:!e7 35 'i'g4+ :g7 36 1Wh5 1ixh5 37 l:.xh5 307 ii.e5 38 t'tlxe5 dxe5 39 l:.xe5, never­ theless with an extra pawn in the rook ending. In analysis it was not hard to find these variations, but when White had very little time for the 10 moves to the time control, he justifiably chose a quieter continuation. 31 32 33 34 b5 bxc6 :xrs A game typical of Boleslavsky's style. When defending, he always tried to set up active counterplay, thereby parrying his opponent's attacking possibilities. Game 2 1 1 J:tg4 lbc4 We3 1ic5 M.Botvinnik-Kan 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 English Opening Now White could have played for a trap: 35 c7 'flxc7? 36 'i'a8+ Wc8 37 l:.f8+. But after 35 . . . l:.c l + 36 t'tlg l 'i'xc7 37 "ifa8+ rj;g7 38 'i!ff8+ ®g6 the black king, strangely enough, is safe. 35 36 37 38 1if3 :f8+ :n+ 'ffxc6 38 39 40 41 l:lxc6 :ct+ :xa7 rtlg2 l:.c2+ � :m2 Draw agreed 11 xc6 rtlg7 rtig6 The exchange of queens predetermines, of course, a peaceful outcome. 1 2 3 4 5 6 ttlf3 c4 g3 .tg2 0--0 d3 6 7 8 9 e4 ttlcJ ttlet c5 ttlf6 b6 .tb7 g6 White avoids the continuation 6 d4 cxd4, since it is well known and in addition it leads to premature simplifi­ cation. As regards . . . d7-d5, a very common advance in the English Opening, here it is . already too late, since 6 . . . d5 7 t'tle5 followed by 'fla4(+), t'tlc3 and .i.g5 would lead to difficulties for Black. Therefore he has to allow White's next move, which gives him a spatial advantage. .tg7 0--0 ttlc6 A useful move. White makes it harder for Black to carry out a possible thrust in the centre ( . . . e7-e6 and . . . d7d5) and prepares the advance of his f­ pawn. The continuation that occurred in the game Karpov-Savon (1973), 9 :bl t'tle8 10 .te3 lbd4 1 1 lbe2 e5 12 b4 d6 308 13 bxc5 dxc5 14 ltlexd4 cxd4 15 ..td2 ltlc7 16 ltlel ltle6, in the opinion of the Encyclopaedia, does not retain an opening advantage for Wlllte. 9 ltle8 Beginning the quite logical man­ oeuvre of the knight via c7 to e6, in order to occupy the strategically impor­ tant d4 square. However, soon Black deviates from this plan. 10 ..tg5 ltlc7 11 12 ..d2 .i.h6 ltld4 e6 The exchange of the dark-square bishops could have been prevented by 10 ... h6, but Kan decided to avoid weakening the pawns in front of his king. An inconsistent move, depriving the knight at c7 of the e6 square. Black chooses an incorrect plan - all the same he will be unable to achieve the . . . d7-d5 advance. Both now and later he should have advanced his pawn to e5, since the attack with f2-f4-f5 is not so dangerous. 13 14 15 .txg7 ltlc2 1!fxc2 �xg7 lLlxc2 :.bs 16 :adl After achieving a slight (for the moment not very significant) weakening of the black king's position, White wants to open the centre with d3-d4. This should of course have been prevented by 16 . . . e5, as after 17 f4 f6 Black's position is solid enough. 16 17 18 d4 l:txd4 19 e5! 1'e7 cxd4 ..tc6 The idea of this move is sensible: to defend the d7 pawn in advance in the event of White doubling rooks on the d­ file, and to prepare . . . b6-b5, creating counterplay on the queenside. But had Black foreseen the consequences of his opponent's reply, he would probably have first played 1 8 ... e5. The weakening of the d5 square (for Black) and of d4 (for White) is roughly equivalent, and White has nd significant advantage to speak of. An interesting positional pawn sacrifice, which Black is forced to accept in view of the threat of 20 .txc6 and 2 1 ltle4. 309 Generally speaking, I never aimed to sacrifice just for the sake of it. But when this had to be done, especially a positional sacrifice, I did not avoid doing so. 19 Wc5 20 21 22 1id2 .i.xc6 l:tel 1!he5 : dxc6 1i'f5 Even this, the best reply, should not have saved Black. White, of course, analysed the most efficient continuation of the attack with 23 !U4, but in the variation 23 ... :bd8 24 lDd5 he over­ looked that 24 . . . l:lxd5 is not possible on account of 25 'ifc3+. And meanwhile, all moves by the queen would have lost quickly: (a) 23 . . . W'g5 24 :xn+; (b) 23 . . . 'i'h5 24 :th4; (c) 23 ... 1fc5 24 tDe4 'i'xc4 (24 . . .'i!i'e7 25 t'fil6 and 26 Wc3) 25 t'fil6 1!fc5 26 b4 and 27 Wc3; (d) 23 ... 1!fa5 24 b4! ! Wxb4 25 :th4 h5 26 l:txh5 gxh5 (26 . . . :h8 27 'ifd4+) 27 Wg5+ 'iPh7 28 Wxh5+ �g7 29 'irg5+ 'it>h7 30 l:te4. 23 . g4 But now the battle flares up anew. 23 • • • 11t'f3! The point of this defence is that White can drive the queen from its active position, only by blocking the c l ­ h6 diagonal. 23 ... 'ii'f6 would have lost imme­ diately to 24 l:td7 l:lbd8 (or 24. . . tDa6 25 tDe4) 25 g5. 24 l:teJ 24 25 l:td7 26 27 lled3 1lxd7 In the event of 24 :tf4 the reply 24 . . . :bd8 would have saved Black, since, with the black queen being at f3, after 25 lDd5 :txd5, in contrast to the variation given in the note below the last diagram, White has no check at c3. • • • Wf6 l:tfd8 Again the only move. The f8 square has to be vacated for the retreat of the king. After 25 . . Jlbd8 26 %:th3 ! h5 27 g5 or 26... g5 27 'irc2 White wins imme­ diately. 23 llxd7 l2)e8 27...tDa6 is worse in view of 28 lDe4 Wes 29 lDd6 l:[f8 30 f4 'irc5+ 3 1 'ifilg2. 28 tDe4 Wfl 3 10 Again Black is 'universal' move. 29 30 30 1'd4+ lllg5 • • • If 30 ...'iff6 there followed 3 1 'ifd2 ! 31 32 33 ltlxf3 b3 lllxd4 saved by 38 this ; 34 Axa7 35 llb7 . • c5! would Even here White's position is better. For example, 39 tbe5 l:txa2 40 l:txfi llle4 41 l:tf4 looks tempting. However, the last few moves were made in a time scramble. have cxd4 Iles lllf6 lllxg4 If 34 ... lld8 there could have followed After 35 l:td7 followed by l:td6 White would have continued to control the d­ file and would have forced his opponent to defend passively. 35 36 37 tbfJ �g2 lld8 ltdl+ Aal 39 40 lllg5 � 40 41 J:bb6 42 43 �e4 l:lb5 lha2 If 40 l:txfi or 40 tbxii there would have followed 40 . . . lbe4. Black is aiming for active counter­ play. After 33 . . ..l:c7 34 lld8 � 35 lbb5 hls position would have deteriorated. 35 g5 . lllf6 cbg8 33 g5 came into consideration, fixing Black's kingside pawns. 33 h3 • • • l:tb2 h6 The sealed move. After White's only reply 42 tbe4 Black had the opportunity in home analysis of evaluating the con­ sequences of transposing into the rook ending (42 . . . li:lxe4 43 �xe4 l:txf2 44 c5), and he would have convinced himself that the white pawns run more quickly. Therefore a different decision was taken. lbd7 Of course, not 43 l:tb7 because of 43 . . . lbe5+ and 44 . . . fi:lxc4. 43 • • • � Probably the decisive mistake: in his analysis Black did not take account of 311 the latent subtleties of the position. Correct was 43 .. .f5 44 tD<l6 l:tc12 !, and after 45 lllb7 or 45 lllc8 White would have had to reckon with the advance of the black pawns in the centre. If White wished to avoid sharp continuations, he could of course have forced a draw: 45 c5 lhxc5 46 tbc4 l::td5 47 tbe3 l:te5 48 lllc4. by f/;f6 the invasion of the king wins for White, since he creates mating threats, and loss of material for Black is inevitable. Black resigns; Game 2 1 2 G.Ilivitsky-M.Botvinnik 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 Catalan Opening 1 2 3 44 <i>e3! 45 llld2! f5 Too late. Now the black rook is cut off from its main forces. This is the whole point. White has succeeded in regrouping, and now his passed c4 pawn advances, and on the vacated square his knight will occupy a favourable post. 45 46 c5 r/iJe7 lllf6 1Ib7+ tLlc4 r/iJd4 'it>d8 llld5+ tLlc7 An obvious oversight, but also after 49. . . .:xf'2 50 c6 lDc7 5 1 'it>e5 ! followed d5 e6 c6 This pawn formation (c6, d5, e6) was one that I had also employed many times before. It enabled me to choose with great flexibility between various opening systems: the Meran, the Dutch, the so-called Botvillllik Variation and the classical Queen's Gambit. Ilivitsky was not noted for his deep knowledge of opening theory, and so he preferred a reply that did not commit him to anything. 4 5 11fc2 g3 lllf6 tLle4 6 7 8 .i.g2 0-0 b3 .i.d6 0-0 A dubious continuation, since Black, before mobilising his forces, engages in rather early activity in the centre. 46 . . . lDe5 was slightly better, restraining for the moment the further advance of the c-pawn. 47 48 49 d4 c4 tLlfJ This was played against me in a similar (already 'Dutch') position by Szabo (Game 1 99), and earlier by me against Ragozin (1 1th USSR Champion­ ship, 1939), where I was able to carry 3 12 out a manoeuvre, one that was subse­ quently employed by Reshevsky, of my knight from b l via a3, c2 and b4 to d3. However, with this aim it would have been more advisable in the present case to play 8 tLlbd2, and if 8 . . . f5 9 t'Del, then tDdf3 and tLld3 . 8 9 . • tt'ld7 . .i.a3 White continues carrying out his plan, but, as soon becomes clear, with an incorrect aim. 9 10 11 .i.xa3 '1e7 tt'lxaJ tt'lbl It was logical to play 1 1 'i'b2, vacating the c2 square for the knight to make the manoeuvre mentioned in the note to White's 8th move. 11 12 • • • cxd5 . Forestalling a possible attack by Black on this knight (along the c-file). 16 1!fb2 16 17 18 l:lacl tt'lc4 19 20 21 l:lc2 llfcl f3 21 22 fxe4 dxe4 f5 :acs .i.a6 :c7 The doubling of rooks will almost inevitably lead to their exchange, which will be to the advantage of Black, whose other pieces are more active. b6 the c-file cannot achieve anything for White, and Black's bishop will now be stronger than its opponent. tbc3 tt'lxe4 tt'ld2 White's plan must include under­ mining action in the centre, but for the moment 16 f3 would be premature: after 16 . . . exfl 17 exfl Black could have set up pressure on the isolated central d4 pawn. A positional mistake. The opening of 12 13 14 14 15 cxd5 .i.b7 llfc8 ltlf6 Before exchanging rooks, wants to activate his bishop. . • . White .i.b7 Now Black gains a strong point at e4 for his pieces. 22 t'De5 was better. 22 3 13 . • • ltlxe4 23 24 25 llid2 ltxc2 1Wxc2 his queen by force to f4. For example: 29 . . . h6 30 'ifxa7 e3 3 1 'lbs+ @h7 32 'Wf4. � 29 l:bc2 J:txc2 • • • 30 1!fc7+ 31 11ff4 @g6 Now White no longer has the check at b8 that saved him in the previous variation. 25 . . • Of course, not 3 1 'i'xa.7 e3 . Now Black must first ensure the safety of his king, after which he will finally be able to decide on winning material. But White still has counter­ play, as will be clear from the further course of the game. 1'b4! 31 32 h4 33 b5 34 e3 35 'fi'f7 Black firmly seizes the initiative. In the event of 26 M 1ic3 he forces the exchanges of queens, and wins a pawn. 26 llixe4 fxe4 An unexpected decision - the e4 h6 <t>b7 1i"al 11ha2 pawn will restrict the activity of the white pieces. Of course, Black would not have achieved anything with 26 . . . 'i!fel + 27 .i.fl .txe4 on account of 28 Wes+. 27 Wc4 Other moves are worse: 27 .txe4? 'i'xd4+ or 27 'i'dl 'i!fc3 . 27 28 • . • .i.fl 'Bel+ .i.d5 In contrast to the variation after the 26th move, the e6 pawn is defended, and White does not have a perpetual attack on the black king. 29 1!1c8+ By allowing the enemy king to break free, White commits the decisive mistake. After 29 1!1c7 he would have retained the possibility of transferring · White's last hopes are pinned on perpetual check, but they will soon be dashed. 3 14 35 36 37 38 .i.h3 'it>h2 .i.g2 'lfaJ 1!fcl+ 1fc2+ 1!fc6 39 40 b4 bxa5 a5 contribution to the development of the Soviet chess school. A great master of complex positions, when preparing for competitions he found deep plans in the middlegame, closely linked with the start of the game. His exceptionally dynamic play made Geller very popular. Talking about his competitive succes­ ses, it is sufficient to point to the fact that he took part five times in the Candidates events. However, although it sounds paradoxical, in quiet systems Yefim Petrovich felt less confident, as the present game demonstrates. bxa5 The concluding act of the play begins: the threat of the a-pawn's advance forces White to adopt extreme measures. 41 g4 42 g5 43 'i'g6+ 44 h6 45 <ii>h l 46 hxg7+ White resigns. His a4 hxg5 Wh8 1 d4 2 c4 3 g3 4 .tg2 5 lLlcJ 6 li)f3 7 d5 lDf6 g6 Ji..g7 0-0 d6 lDc6 A hasty move. It would have been more sensible to castle first. 7 lba5 1!fc7+ a3 Wg8 • own pawn at g7 securely protects the black king. Ilivitsky was not very strong in the accurate calculation of variations, and I was able to exploit this. Game 2 13 M.Botvinnik-Y.Geller 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 King's Indian Defence Yefim Petrovich Geller ( 1925-1 998), along with Boleslavsky, was a player who made an especially weighty 315 8 • • lLld2 c5 1ic2 a6 This move leads to more complicated play, of course, than 8 . . . c6 (9 b4 t'Lixd5), which was introduced by Spassky in 1955; this continuation enables Black to equalise easily. For this reason 7 0-0 was better, since in the event of 7 . . . a6 8 d5 t'Lia5 9 llld2 c6 Black loses by force in view of the possible variations: 10 b4 t'Lixd5 I I cxd5 .i.xc3 12 J:lb I i.xd2 1 3 .ixd2 t'Lic4 14 Ji..h6 .l:.e8 1 5 'ifd4 t'Lie5 16 f4, or 10 ...lllxc4 1 1 lbxc4 t'Lixd5 12 lbxd5 .txal 13 t'Lidb6 :bs 14 .th6 i.g7 15 Jl..xg7 @xg7 16 lhxc8 :xc8 17 e4 b5 18 lbe3 (Toprover-Zagorovsky, 1959). 9 10 0.:..0 10 . • . .tf5 In this game the plan for White with 'ii°c2, b2-b3, iib2 etc. was employed for the first time. In this way he reinforces his c4 pawn,. and the latlght at a5 is shut out of the game. The implementation of this plan provided the impetus for numerous analyses and tournament games, of which the most interesting are those where Black chose 10 . . . e5 (for example, Botvinnik-Smyslov, World Championship Match . 1957), or 10 . . JlbS, as played against me by Averbakh in a training game (in 1957 before the match) and by Donner at the tournament in Wageningen (1958). The move in the game invites White to make the not unfavourable advance of his central pawn without loss of time. 11 12 13 e4 b3 i.b2 14 15 bxc4 llabl l:lb8 llb4 a3 16 . 17 lhdl 17 18 19 tZ)eJ iLcJ 19 20 21 22 h3 i:r.xbl lbxbl . • llb8 This move surprised me. 16. . . llxc4 1 7 tl:)xc4 tl:)xc4 18 il.cl 'i'a5 would have been in Geller's style, with Black gaining some positional compensation for his material deficit. As a result the manoeuvre . . . l:tb8-b4-b8 has led to a loss of time. The latlght heads for e3 , where it will be strongly placed, and from c3 White's bishop will threaten the loright at a5. 'i!lc7 llb7 White happily goes in for the ex­ change of rooks, which deprives Black of any real possibility of counterplay. il.d7 b5 bxc4 Black fixes the position prematurely. The opening of the b-file favours White: subsequently the position of the latlght at a5 may become insecure. 16 llfb8 l:lxbl llxbl+ After 22 Wxbl the gains from the queen's position on the open file would have been illusory, whereas the damage resulting from the lifting of control of the a4 square would be real. 3 16 22 23 ... tDd2 'ifb6 tDe8 from the kingside, and the white pawns will carry out their destructive mission. 29 30 This allows White to occupy the centre of the board, and the position of the enemy king is weakened. When in the given variation Black himself offers the exchange of his king's bishop, this normally means that he has not found a good plan. Even for the knight at a5 things do not become easier, since it will be attacked by the queen instead of the bishop. For these reasons, 23 ... e5 should have been preferred. 24 25 i.xg7 <ii>h2 . 31 32 33 34 35 35 tl)f6 26 f4 28 1f'c3 i.dJ i.e2 h4 ..td3 f5 . . • . lbh5 lbg7 lbe8 lbg7 tDb3 Black's position is so hopeless, that he decided to take the chance that his opponent might not notice the win of a piece. 36 37 38 39 40 41 Throughout the game Black provokes the advance of the e-pawn, thereby drawing the enemy's fire on himself. tDe8 27 e5 - f6 It was dangerous to make use of the opportunity to play 28 . . . Jla4 in view of 29 ltlg4, when White's attack on the enemy king intensifies. But now too most of the black pieces will be cut off i.a4 tDg7 Alas, the tempting 30 ...lbb3 had to be rejected, as it would have lost a piece: 3 1 'i'b2 'fla5 32 tLlxb3 'if el (32 . 'flb6 33 i.c2) 33 'ifd2. tDxg7 tDe8 Now White is all ready for the pawn storm. e6 i.e4 'if a5 'ffb2 'ifel lbxb3 lbg2 1idl tl)cl gx:f5 i.e2 1!Fd4 'ffxd4 Black resigns This was the only game that I ever managed to win against my resourceful opponent. 317 Game 2 14 O.Moiseev-M.Botvinnik . 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1 952 Grtinfeld Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 lDcJ Jif4 el li)f6 g6 d5 JJ..g7 c6 Theory gives preference to 5 . . . c5 and especially 5 . . . 0-0. However, in the first case the position is immediately opened up, and in the second case after, for example, 6 cxdS lDxdS 7 lDxdS 'ii'xd5 8 hc7 lDa6 (8. . .ltlc6 leads to an unclear position) 9 JJ..xa6 'i'xg2 10 1i'f3 White can easily make a quick draw if he wishes (as, for example, Flohr played against me in the AVRO Tournament, 1 938). But from the tournament position I was obliged to aim for a win, and so I chose a variation in which the battle develops more slowly. · 6 ll)fJ . 7 Jid3 0--0 7 8 dxc4 lDd5 9 10 11 12 bxc3 lDxcJ c5 1i'e2 Jig4 0--0 lDc6 Only now, when White has already spent one tempo on 12 'l'e2 and will also have to play h2-h3, does this bishop move followed by the exchange on f3 look sensible. 13 14 15 h3 'ifxfl l:tacl 16 1i'e4 .i.xfl llc8 11fa5 7 'itb3 is more often played. . • . JJ..xc4 The Encyclopaedia recommends developing the bishop immediately 8 . . . JJ..g4, and after 9 h3 .txD 10 'i'xf3 10 . . . 'ifa5 1 1 0-0 lDbd7 with equal chances. 9 i.gJ White could have considered 9 i.xdS cxd5 IO 'i'b3 e6 1 1 lDb5 ( 1 1 . . .� 12 i.d6 l:.e8 13 lDc7 'i'xd6 14 lDxe8 and 15 lDxg7). Threatening to drive away the knight ( 1 7 d5) and then win the e7 pawn. 3 18 16 • . . 'ifa3 In order after 17 d5 to have the advantageous reply 17 . . . lba5. 17 Abs Af6 There is no other way of defending the e7 pawn. 18 d5 It would definitely have been better to refrain from this move: Only now does Black gain counterplay, thanks to the queenside pawn majority he has acquired and to the activation of his bishop. · 18 19 • • . 1i'c2 �a5 White does not choose the shortest route from e4 to a4. 19 20 . Va4 • . c4 The concerted advance of White's central pawns cannot be allowed. Since it is unfavourable for White to retain his pawn at d5 (it will certainly be blockaded) and he needs more scope for his bishops, he decides to capture en passant. 24 25 26 Axa4 , · 26 27 e4 Adl il.fJ h5 'i!rxa4 27 21 22 23 fxe6 l:tfe8 This seems strong and logical, since it is aimed at the further advance of the f-pawn and the opening of diagonals for both bishops. However, during the game I was afraid, and not without reason, of 26 e5 ! fixing the weakness of the e6 pawn and restricting Black's bishop. After the move in the game the advantage passes to Black. Otherwise it will be hard to rescue the bishop at b5 from its dangerous position ( . . . a7-a6). 20 21 dxe6 Ag4 f4 a6 b5 e5 • • • e5! By blocking the e4 pawn, Black aims to restrict the activity of White's king's bishop, for which he is ready to make the following pawn sacrifice. 28 29 3 19 l:tfdl fxe5 ll�d8 Ag5 30 l:lbl l:ld3 l:.xa2+, and the rest, as they say, is a matter of technique. This leads to further complications, whereas by 30 . . . .i.d2 3 1 i.e l .i.xel 32 :xe 1 :d3 Black could have increased his positional advantage without any problems. 31 32 33 :d6 e7 :xa6 Jl.e4 37 38 :xb5 llc6 e5 llxe7 c3 l:lg7 Alas, Black has to make this passive move, since after 36 . . . c2 37 .i.xg6+ rl;g7 38 .i.xc2 l:txg3 39 l:.xa5 l:txe5 40 l:tbxb5 he would be two pawns down. e6! By advancing his e-pawn, White finds a clever way of activating both his bishops. The e6 pawn is immune, since if 3 1 . . .:xe6 there is the unpleasant reply 32 e5, after which the knight at a5 is shut out of the game and .i.d5 is threatened. · 31 34 35 36 ll'ic4 Of course, not 38 l:txa3 ll:lxa3, and 39 :cs (39 . . . c2 was threatened) cannot be played on account of 39 . . . i.e3+. 38 .. i.e3+ :xc3 • l:laJ 39 'it>h2 39 ... li:ld2 40 Ad3 c2! The losing move, allowing Black a precious tempo for a knight manoeuvre. 39 'it>hl was correct, when White would have retained the better chances, e.g. 39 . . . tLid2 40 i.d5, or 39 ... tt:la5 40 l:lc8 :n 41 �h2 (4 1 . . . :n 42 :b1). The natural 3 3 e5 would no longer have saved White on account of 3 3 . . . c3 34 .i.e4 c2 35 .i.xc2 l:lxg3, but now too Black could have substantially increased his advantage. With a double threat: 40. . . liJxe4 and 40 . . .lilil+. 33 • . • 'it>h7 Time trouble has its effect. Black wastes a tempo defending a pawn, and the picture changes sharply. Correct was 33 . . . .i.e3+ 34 .i.:f2 (34 'it>h2 c3 3 5 :xg6+ 'it>h7) 34... i.xf2+ 35 'it>xf2 The need to control fl does not allow White to eliminate the dangerous c2 320 reply 46 .tc4 there follows 46 . . . lDxg3+ 47 l:xg3 .i.b6+! 48 �h2 .i.c7 49 h4 l:a3, and White comes out a rook down. pawn (4 1 .txc2 ttJfl+); 41 l:.d5 is also bad on account of 4 1 . . . l:xd3. 41 42 .ile2 e6! llxa2 The best continuation. White activ­ ates his passed pawn and his dark­ square bishop. 42 .1'.d3 was bad because of 42 . . . ttJD+ ! 42 . • . :a1 After 42... �e4 43 .i.e5 ! cl'iW 44 %1xcl .i.xc l 45 .td3 the black knight has no good move, and as a result White's chances would seem to be no worse (45 . . . tbg5 46 .i.xg7 �xg7 47 l:.b7+ �6 48 e7 and 49 .i.b5). 43 44 44 l:xc2 ci>hl • . • .i.gl+ �e4! l:tb3 h4 47 48 49 50 51 1bg3 �hl Ik5! l:d5 l:l.xd6 52 53 54 55 56 llh3 r.fi>g3 J:th2 llh3 lbxg3+ . Jld4+ .i.e5 .i.d6 Ibe6 Jlxd6 Despite the material advantage, the win is far from obvious, since the play is taking place on one wing; in addition, the black pawns are badly placed on light squares (the g6 pawn is weak). However, there is also a defect in White's position: the fact that he has a light-square bishop guarantees Black a win if the position is simplified. 52 .to . Now Black wins almost by force. It is true that 52 .i.d3 J:ta4! 53 �h3 Il:dd4! 54 .txg6+ �h6 was also had for White, but after 52 l:td3 he would still have retained hopes of saving the game, although the ending after 52 . . . Il:xd3 53 .txd3 Il:a4! 54 g3 It.a2+ 55 �h3 would be difficult for him . An important subtlety. The white bishop cannot move anywhere on the h2-b8 diagonal on account of 45 . . . lbf2 mate, while if 45 Jui4 there follows 45 . . . .i.f2+. The loss of the exchange is unavoidable. 45 46 Black cannot intensify .the pressure, since he has to reckon with the possible manoeuvre J:tf3 and then Ji.fl . J:te7 White is tied down, and Black brings his rook into play, at the same time setting a little trap: after the natural 32 1 Ild4 @g7 <!>f6 @f5 ltbl Here White sealed his next move. Despite Black being the exchange up, the realisation of his material advantage, as already mentioned, involves great technical difficulties. Even so,. iii. home analysis a way to win was. fo�c;I. . 61 62 63 64 65 57 .i.fJ llhJ il.b7 l:l:xhl il.c8 �es l:lccl :ht l:'l:xhl .*.el It should be mentioned that 57 l:lh2 would have lost quickly to 57 . . . l:tg4+! 58 .txg4+ (if 58 'ifi>f2 or 58 'it>h3, then 58 . . . 'ifi>f4) 58 ... hxg4 59 'it>f2 (or 59 h5 l:tb3+ 60 'it>h4 g5 mate) 59. . .'it>f4. But, of course, I was not counting on such an easy success, and now this combination does not give Black anything on account of 57 ... l::tg4+ 58 <it>h2. The winning plan consists in exchanging rooks on bl; in this case the white king will not reach the h-file. Then the g6 pawn is exchanged for the h4 pawn, after which the black king penetrates to g3. Curiously, my opponent judged the position after the exchange of rooks to be drawrt Therefore he happily assisted the opponent in the implementation of his plan, which accelerated White's defeat by several moves. 57 58 59 .*.o l::th2 59 60 .i.d5 l::td2 :n After 59 <Ji>h2 there would have followed 59 . . . �4, and if 60 l:.g3 l:[hI+. l::tc2 l::tcJ+ Both sides have achieved the position for which they were aiming. 65 • . . �6! Now the afore-mentioned exchange of pawns is unavoidable. White was short of just one tempo. If his bishop had been at h3, he would have con­ tinued 66 <iti?f4, and Black could have exchanged pawns only by moving his rook from hl, which would have allowed the opponent (after the pawn exchange) to play his king to h2, creating a drawing 'fortress'. 66 .i.d7 g5 67 68 hxg5+ Ac8 �xg5 h4+ It is paradoxical that, despite the limited number of pawns, Black goes in for a further simplification of the position - it is important for him to activate his king. He wants to queen his · h-pawn! 322 69 70 c;t>fJ iLd7 llct Game 2 15 A clever trap. After 70 ... llc3+ 7 1 �e4 llg3 7 2 iLh3 Black to move would be unable to strengthen his position. But if it is White to move, Black wins easily, since his king penetrates to f4. 70 71 • • • JLe6 Ac2 7 1 .llh3 l:lc3+ 72 'itie4 l:lg3 would have led to the position considered in the previous note - it is won for Black, since it is his opponent's tum to move. 71 . . • l:tc7!! A.Suetin-M.Botvinnik 20th USSR Championship Moscow 1952 Sicilian Defence This game was played in the last round. Although I was a point behind Taimanov, he had to play Geller, and, given a favourable combination of circumstances, there was a possibility of catching my rival. I very much wanted to do this, because since 1 948 my competitive results had declined somewhat I needed to show that I had not forgotten how to play chess. - 1 e4 2 ttJf3 3 d4 4 ltJxd4 5 ltJcJ 6 .llg5 7 1id2 A classic zugzwang position. The reader already knows that 72 .llh3 loses. 72 'itie4 lle7 73 'iiti>e5 l:le8, when the black king reaches the cherished f4 square, is no better. Therefore White is forced to help the opponent to create a passed pawn. 72 73 74 75 llc3+ h3+ <it?g2 ¢ih4 'it?b2 l:tc2+ g5 White resigns g4 c5 ltJc6 cxd4 ltJf6 d6 e6 b6 As already mentioned, I borrowed this opening variation from a game by Koblenz and first employed it in my match with Bronstein (Game 1 84). To be fair, it has to be said that Black does not achieve a completely satis­ factory game. However, White has to solve certain subtle problems of a positional nature, and so I thought that it made sense to employ this variation against a young and inexperienced opponent. 8 9 10 11 .i.xf6 0-0-0 f4 .i.c4 gxf6 a6 JLd7 1 1 �e2 is also possible. White's plan is to attack the e6 pawn by f4-f5 and 323 force . . . e6�e5, squares. 11 12 weakening the <ii>b l light h5 W'b6 l:thfl White apparently has no objection to a draw. However, the secret of the position is that, with the exchange of queens and a pair of knights, Black is freed from all ctifficulties: his king in the centre will be better placed than White's, he retains the two bishops, and his e6 pawn is securely defended. 13 14 15 16 1!fxd4 l:txd4 .tb3 l:td2 17 18 19 f5 l:tdf2 The fact that the Encyclopaedia evaluates this position in favour of White seems to me to be a mis­ understanding. Apart from the plan that he chooses, he has nothing else, and what it leads to will soon become evident. In the game Keres-Botvinnik (Moscow 1956) the same position was reached, expect that the white bishop had been developed at e2. My opponent played 13 ttlb3 ! , and Black did not manage to overcome his opening difficulties. 13 16 17 1!fxd4 ttlxd4 l:lc8 A plausible move, but for the defence of the kingside the bishop should have been moved there. 19 . . • h4 '3Je7 .th6! I was unable to refrain from making this tempting pawn sacrifice. The position is opened up (Black has the two bishops!), White's pawn weaknesses are emphasised, and most important - a pair of rooks is exchanged, eliminating White's activity. 20 21 22 fxe6 l:txf6 :xf8 fxe6 24 25 .tc4 �e2 .tel .igl l:lcf8 .txf8! Of course, the second rook, an active one, is retained by Black. .th6 23 :r.z 324 Black would have gained wmrung chances in view of the poor enemy pawn formation. It is pleasant to retain the two bishops, of course, but White succeeds in defending his weak pawns. 26 g3 26 27 28 bxg3 a3 36 37 38 39 40 l:tel /i)dl /i)c3 /i)bl 41 ltgl l:tg4 ..ie5 l:tf4 l:lf3 i.g3 Correctly played. After 26 h3 White would have risked losing both of his kingside pawns, whereas now he has good chances of drawing the game. hxg3 l:lxg3 i.e8 A dubious manoeuvre. It would have been better to prepare the switching of the bishop to c6 (it is not worth playing 28 . . . ..ic6 immediately because of 29 t2Jd5+), where it is both attacking (the e4 pawn) and defending (the b7 pawn). 29 30 31 @a2 Itel l:tbl .i.h5 .i.d4 l:tg5 32 33 34 35 36 @b3 i.d3 l:tb4 a4 :ht .i.e5 i.g6 ltgJ Af6 3 1 . . . .i.g6 could also have been played immediately, but Black did not want to force matters before the interval. A typical error - a hasty 41 st move, in order to force the opponent to seal a move. My opponent, like Bronstein in 1 95 1 , assumed that after five hours' play I would be unable to find the correct continuation. Meanwhile, if he had stopped to think, Suetin would certainly not have given up a pawn, but would have maintained his defensive position by 4 1 l:te2. 41 . 42 /i)d2 43 @aJ 44 /i)e4 A risky move (36 �f4 suggests itself). Now after 36. . . .i.xc3 37 bxc3 Axe4 i.d5+ l:lfl �h2 White apparently did not notice this when he made his hasty 4 l st move. 325 44 . . ..i.xe4 45 .txe4 .te5 would have led to a less clear position. Of course, not 52 . . . e5 because of 53 .i.e4. Here 45 . . l:l.f3 was perhaps simpler, retaining the two bishops and avoiding opposite-colour bishops. Now a draw seems highly probable, and although at this point Geller had already won against Taimanov, I realised it was unlikely that I would to be able to overtake my young rival. 'It was unlikely', but that didn't mean I should agree a draw. And so the game continued, although I could only hope for a miracle. 45 llg6 .txe4 .i.xe4 .i.dJ d5 . 46 47 .te5 The start of Black's misadventures. Correct, apparently, was 47 ... e5 48 l'!b6 e4 49 l'!xb7+ 'itid6 50 .itxa6 l1xc2 or 50 . . . e3 when White is in a very dangerous position. Now, however, Black's passed pawn will be stopped, and White begins preparing simplifying exchanges. 48 49 50 50 l:lg8 b4 l:lgl . • • cDbJ l:ldl 53 54 55 56 57 58 cDd7 .itf6 l:lb2 Another error! As soon as the e-pawn could have been advanced, this should have been immediately exploited: 50 ... e5 5 1 lldl 'itie6 52 c4 d4 53 cDb3 (53 .ite4 b6 with the threat of 54 ...lle2) 53 ... llf3 54 'itic2 l:te3 . 51 52 53 c4 �aJ .i.xc4 .i.bJ cDa2 J.c4 dxc4 llc2 .ib2+ ltf2 How can Black retain any hopes of winning? First of all he must preserve at least one of his queenside pawns from exchange. And since White is threat­ ening to play a4-a5 followed by b4-b5, my reply is obvious. cDd6 @e7 326 58 59 60 61 bxa5 cDb3 .ib5 a5 ..ic3+ .ixa5 b6 The first aim has been achieved: the b6 pawn can no longer be exchanged. True, for this the bishop has to be kept on the edge of the board, where it is not very actively placed. But perhaps it was this factor that caused my opponent to relax. Meanwhile, the bishop is not only defending the b6 pawn and blocking the a4 pawn, but at the necessary moment it can leap out from its ambush and take part in the battle. Also, White's bishop too is not very active - it has to defend his last pawn. 62 63 64 65 66 67 Wc4 Wd4 We3 llhl �d3 llh5+ :bs %lh5+ 70 :h3 We5 �4 In order to answer 70 . . . e5 with 71 .tc6, when Black does not have 7 1 . . .J:tg3+. 70 . • • %lg8 Played mainly in order not to allow a three-fold repetition of the position (70 ... 'itle5 71 :115+), but now the black king has to retrace its steps. 71 72 73 1!h4+ l:.th5+ :h4 'itle5 Wd6 74 We4 74 @d4 was more accurate, in order to answer 74 . . . .tc3+ with 75 �c4. The natural desire to avoid a square where the king could be checked by the bishop or pawn leads in the given case to difficulties. 74 Now threatening . . . e6-e5-e4+. :g3+ 73 �6 :if4+ We5 1le4+ l:tg4 Wd6 Black can activate his game only if he is able to advance his passed pawn to e4. There it will no longer be far to the queening square, which he controls. However, for the moment it is not apparent how this can be achieved. 68 69 73 l:1h3 was simpler, defending the third rank. White correctly judged the position to be drawn, but did not realise that his king; closer to the centre and apparently more strongly placed, would in fact be in greater danger. . . • .td2! Finally the bishop comes into play. The threat is 75 ... lle3+ 76 Wf4 (76 �d4 e5+ 77 �c4 nc3+ 78 �b4 nh3+) 76 ...�d5 !, and the e5 pawn inevitably advances. Apparently the only saving move was 75 Wd4, and if 75 . . . e5+ 76 �e4 ne3+ 77 �5 �d5 78 .tc4+, or 75 ...l:te3 76 l:th6, when Black cannot strengthen his position. 75 . .td3 This gives Black a · tempo for the unexpected creation of a mating threat in the middle . of the board. Perhaps the 327 mistake also had a psychological context. Since Black has activated his bishop, why shouldn't White do the same? However, the a4 pawn should on no account have been left undefended. 75 • • • .i.g5 ! Driving the rook off the fourth rank and blocking the fifth. 76 time the demonstrator came over to them to report on the latest events. Finally came the news: Suetin had resigned! 'You're joking! ', the grand­ masters exclaimed in chorus. But when the demonstrator showed them the final position, silence fell. l:lb5 White still does not notice that his king is threatened. Otherwise he would have played 76 l:th8 l:lg4+ 77 'iWJ, giving up the a4 pawn, although with two extra pawns the win would become a question of time. 76 'ili>c5!! A very rare position! True, mate can be prevented - 77 l:.xg5+ or 77 @es l::txd3 78 l:lxg5 l:td5+, but this does not enable White to avoid defeat. White resigns. Meanwhile my rival Taimanov, together with his trainer Flohr, who had been expecting a draw, had been following the adjoununent session in the cafe of the Railway Workers' Central Culture Club (where the championship was held) From time to : Game 2 1 6 M. Taimanov-M.Botvinnik USSR Championship Play-OffMatch Moscow 1953, 1st game Slav Defence Mark Yevgenevich Taimanov (born in 1926) began his chess career almost like a child prodigy: the boy reacted instantly and calculated variations brilliantly. Subsequently, after also studying the methods of positional play, he achieved some major successes: he won the USSR Championship and twice participated in candidates events for the world championship. And yet the impression remains that Taimanov could have achieved more. What told were evidently the traits of his hmnan character. In searching for the truth he did not like to have doubts, which often led to hasty decisions. This has also happened with other top players, such as Bogoljubow in the past, and Larsen in present times. 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 liJcJ liJfJ liJf6 c6 d5 e6 Once again we see the triangular set­ up for Black c6, d5, e6, which was mentioned earlier (Game 212). At that 3 28 time the 5 .i.g5 dxc4 continuation had not yet been sufficiently studied, and there were no lrnown ways leading to a clear advantage for White. lLlbd7 5 e3 6 Wc2 Game 1 89 showed that 5 . . . a6 does not give Black equal chances. A comparatively unexplored contin­ uation, which is sometimes called the 'anti-Meran', since in this way White avoids the complicated Meian Variation (6 .i.d3 dxc4 7 .i.xc4 b5). 7 6 7 • • • .i.d2 ..i.d6 b3 followed by .i.e2 and kingside castling is more often played. If instead 7 e4 dxe4 8 ltlxe4 ltlxe4 9 'i'xe4, then 9 . . . e5 ! , as was successfully played once by Levenfish (10 dxe5 ltlxe5 1 1 ltlxe5 'iia5+). Taimanov chooses a different plan, which imparts theoretical interest to the game. 7 8 0--0-0 0-0 hnmediate queenside castling sets Black more difficult problems than 8 329 ..id3 dxc4 9 .i.xc4 e5, with roughly equal chances. 8 . . . cs It is correct to begin active play on the queenside, even though this involves some risk. Although Black weakens his d5 pawn, he reduces the effectiveness of the standard advance 9 e4, when there can now follow 9 . . . cxd4 10 ltlxd4 dxc4 1 1 ..ixc4 ltlb6 1 2 .i.e2 .i.d7. 9 10 cxd5 Wbl exd5 Too slow. 10 Jl.el came into con­ sideration, creating an immediate threat to the d5 pawn. In this case the game would possibly have continued 10 . . . c4 1 1 g4 ltlb6 with sharp play. 10 . • . a6 Fifteen years later in a game Kjarner­ Vaganian, Black managed without this prophylactic move, replying l 0 . . J:te8 1 1 lbb5 ..if8 12 dxc5 tbxc5 1 3 ..tb4 b6 14 ltlbd4 ..td7 1 5 .i.b5 :cs 1 6 'i'e2 lDre4 with complicated play. 11 12 13 14 .tel g4 bl ..ig2 c4 lbb6 1'!.e8 ..tb4 The battle revolves around the central e4 square, and Black carries out the same strategic idea as in my games with Veresov (No. 134) and Lilienthal (No. 149). 1i'xc3 .i xc3 it)e4 17 11fc2 it)d6! . . • 24 g5! 24 This knight invasion looks active, but it can hardly be approved: in the end it turns out to be a loss of time. Meanwhile, by playing 15 t2Jd2 in order if possible to advance e3-e4, White would have created a favourable situation in the centre. It is interesting that a similar positional mistake was made in the afore-mentioned games by both Veresov, and Lilienthal. 15 16 .tcJ tt)34 Taimanov exploits the opportunity .to create counterplay. it)e5 15 23 How much precious time has been lost! • • • .td7 If 24 . . . fxg5 there could have followed 25 t2Je5 with the threat of 26 h4, or immediately 25 h4. 25 26 27 28 gxf6 Wat Wdl bxcJ .tf5+ J.dJ it)xc3 Black offers a pawn sacrifice - 17 .i.xe4 dxe4 18 t2Jxc4, in order after 18 . . . t2Jd5 ! to bring block the play in the centre and seize the light squares. It is possible that White should have accepted the sacrifice, since his position soon becomes anxious. This retreat was apparently not anticipated by White. He is now forced to switch to passive manoeuvring. 18 . .td2 a5 .tel tt)fJ ' J:lcl f6 .td7 .ta4 Not allowing the white bishop to go to b4, and preparing an offensive on the queenside. 19 20 21 A serious omission. The obvious 2 I . . .t2Ja4 followep by . . . b7-b5 would have given good chances of a successful attack. 22 We2 .ib5 Here I had to give the position some thought. Of course, · I did not want to spoil my kingside pawns, but, on the other hand, how otherwise can the central e5 square be protected? Alas, I took the wrong decision. 28 ... gxf6 Black wants to retain control over e5, but he allows the opponent to transfer his knight to another highly favourable post - f4. Meanwhile he should have considered 28 . . \lfxf6 29 tLle5 l:txe5 30 dxe5 'i'xe5 · with sufficient compen­ sation for the sacrificed exchange. 330 . 29 30 31 32 33 �el .i.xe4 :c2 �g2 �f4 .i.e4 �xe4 ..ti>b8 ltg8 .'ilfd7 34 35 f3 Jlb2 �g5 35 36 37 38 39 :et h4 �xe6 e4 40 41 1Ibe2 't!fd2 was defensible, but that accurate play was required of him. b5 :ae8 � l:r.xe6 In the end this operation to create a protected passed pawn should have saved White, and so it merits approval. llge8 39 ... e5! 42 43 44 'ifxc3 1ib2 44 45 1!fxb4 45 46 Jlxe5 46 47 JlxeS 'ife7 Completing the creation of the passed pawn. Black still has some advantage, mainly because in the future (in the event of the exchange of queens) his king may prove more active than White's. Therefore Black should aim for a rook ending. Over the past few moves White has earned out a useful exchange and knight manoeuvre. Now he could have retained active play by 34 'i'h5 (weaker is 34 h4 f5) 34 . . . f5 35 'i'h4 ! Instead of this, he allows the opponent to exchange the dangerous knight at f4. And this move is a waste of time. 41 42 bxc3 'ilfb4 White is agreeable to the exchange, but in the process he does not want to connect the black pawns. However, that is what he should have played, obtaining after 44 'i'xb4 axb4 45 f4 the possibility of a successful defence. For example: 45 . . . f5 46 :g2 l:r.h6 47 :thl :as 48 ..ti>bl llha6 49 Jlh3 b3 50 Jlhh2. b4 fxe5 This is now forced, although it involves the loss of an important tempo. 45 .l:.xe5 would have lost to 45 . . . 'i'xel +, while if 45 dxe5 'i!fc5 ! and then . . . d5-d4. Here · the game was adjourned. . Analysis showed that White's position 331 axb4 After 46 dxe5 d4 Black's pawns quickly advance, which gives him fair hopes of winning, but the pawn ending is even worse for White, although my opponent was convinced that the connected passed e- and f-pawns would guarantee him a draw. l:r.xe5 47 dxe5 <tlg7 is also bad for White, since the black king succeeds blocking the e- and f-pawns. 47 48 Game 2 1 7 in M.Botvinnik-M.Taimanov USSR Championship Play-OffMatch Moscow 1 953, 4th game :xe5 dxe5 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 ltlf6 e6 ll.b4 ltlc6 d4 c4 lLlcJ eJ This was then Taimanov' s patented method of play in the given variation. The usual lines promise Black more: 4 . 0-0, 4 ... c5 or 4 . . . b6. .. 5 6 7 tL\ge2 a3 cxd5 d5 JJ..e7 In a game between us in 1951 ( 19th 48 USSR Championship) I played 7 ltlg3, d4! but did not achieve anything substantial The rule is that connected pawns are after 7 . . . h5 followed by . . . h5-h4. The decision taken here looks more logical, stronger than separated ones. But here the contrary is true. The black king since the white knight will be able to easily take up a more active post at f4. restrains the opponent's con­ nected pawns, whereas there is no way that White can prevent the creation of 7 • . . 8 tL\f4 exd5 and d3 . This short match of six games was a realised . what was continuation of the 20th Championship, awaiting him - just a move earlier he where in my game with Taimanov the had offered a draw . . . same opening occurred, but I played separated pawns Taimanov now 49 50 51 52 e6 f4 f5 <tlb2 at b3 g3 . After 8 . . <tlg7 <ttf6 dJ h5 11 ltla4 . 0-0 b6 12 tba.c3 .i.a6 achieved a satisfactory position. Naturally, for the match Zugzwang! After 53 <tlbl b3 54 axb3 cxb3 55 rtfcl rtfe7 one of the black 8 9 .i.g2 ltla5 1 0 0-0 c6 Black I had An interesting variation is given by Taimanov: 8 ltlg3 prepared a different line. pawns promotes to a queen. Black had h5 9 .i.d3 h4 10 ltlf5 g6 l l ltlxe7 'i!fxe7, this position in mind when he went in when he considers that with . . . £tb5 and for the exchanges of the heavy pieces. . . . �.f5 Black achieves a good garn.e. . 8 White resigns. ... 0-0 8 . . .M5 was perhaps preferable. 332 9 .te2 I rejected the immediate attack on the central pawn by 9 1ib3, since after 9 . . . !bas IO 'i'a2 Black could not only remain on the defensive (10 . . . .te6), but could also venture 10 . . . c6 1 1 b4 tl:ic4 12 .txc4 dxc4 13 Wxc4 a5, gaining the initiative for the sacrificed pawn. 13 13 14 9 .i.f5 10 g4 tl:ixe6 .i.� 11 A serious positional error. After 1 1 g5 (by analogy with Game 2 1 9) and h2h4 White would have had a clear advantage. An alternative was 1 1 e4 'i'd7 12 lllxe6 fxe6 13 e5. 11 12 0--0 fxe6 1ild7 333 • • • .td3 lDd8! The immediate 14 b4 was more logical, when, although it gives Black new opportunities for counterplay, the most dangerous one - 14 . . . c5 - is ruled out. Why didn't Taimanov exploit this factor? Apparently he thought that . . . c7-c5 would not run away, and for the moment he decided to strengthen his defences on the kingside. 14 15 A challenging move. Black provokes White into a sharp game, which is easy to understaiid, since this was already the fourth game of the match, and my opponent was a point behind. For this reason he avoided the sounder, but passive 9 . . . lDb8 (in order to play . . . c7c6), and also 9 . . . .i.e6, to which White would have replied 10 e4 'i'd7 1 1 e5 lDe8 12 .tf3, with active play. f4 White once and for all prevents the freeing advance . . . e6-e5, but now Black will be able with great effect to threaten to undermine the pawn centre by . . . c7c5. • . . b4 tl)f7 Nothing comes of the premature attack: 15 g5 tl:ie8 16 Wh5 (16 g6 hxg6 17 .txg6 tl:ih8 18 .ic2 tl:id6 and then . . . tl:if5) 16 . . . g6 17 .txg6 hxg6 18 'ifxg6+ tl:ig7. 15 16 ... b5 a5 Only in this way can White maintain the threat of switching his queen's rook via a2 to g2. 16 17 . . • 'lffJ lDd6 The alternative plan is 17 a4. White, however, prefers to continue the con­ centration of his forces on the kingside, and he simultaneously defends the e4 square against invasion by the enemy pieces. 17 18 . . . lla2 a4 c6 In anticipation of g4-g5, 18 ... g6 was more circumspect. 19 20 bxc6 l:tc2 Wxc6 'lfd7 Defending against 25 lbb6 and clearing the seventh rank for the queen. If Black should succeed in playing . . . g7-g6, his advantage on the queenside will inevitably tell. Therefore White is obliged immediately to start vigorous action against the king. 21 22 g5 .i.xh7+ �fe8 There was no longer anything else. After 22 lbxd5 (22 1lfb3 tbf5, but not 22 . . . g6 23 ltJxd5) 22 . . . exd5 23 'ii'xd5+ 'it>h8 White would not have achieved anything. Meanwhile he could not allow 22 . . . g6, curtailing his activity on the kingside. The further course of the game shows that the bishop sacrifice was correct. White obtains two pawns for the piece and retains serious threats, fully com­ pensating for the slight material deficit. 22 23 • • • 1!fh3+ <ii?xh7 <i>g8 On g6 the king would have been in even greater danger (23 ...'it>g6 24 fud5 �d8 25 ttJb4 with the threat of ltJb4-d3e5+). 24 �xd5 .i.d8 25 26 g6 �xf6+ 27 g7 �f6 gxf6 This seems very strong, but in reality it could have led to the loss of the game. The calm 27 l:tg2 would apparently have given a decisive attack, as is evident from these variations: 27 . . . l:te8 (27 . . .ttJes 28 d5) 28 g7 tN7 29 l:tf3 l:tc8 30 .i.b2 l:tc7 3 1 'i'b.4 Wes 32 .i.c3 ! ! (32 . . . l:txc3 33 'iih8 +!). 27 l:te8 This game took place in a very nervy atmosphere, and here Black took White 'at his word', that the pawn was Meanwhile, after invulnerable. 27 ... Wxg7! 28 'ffb5 l:lf7 or 28 h!g2+ 'it>f7 the king would have felt safe, and only 28 f5 ! 'it>n ! 29 e4 'it>e7 30 .id2 would have given White problematic chances of saving the game. But now White again has a decisive advantage. � 28 1lfh8+ . 29 . • 1lfh5+ <i>g8 Now, alas, the g7 pawn is indeed · immune: 29 ...Wxg7 30 :g2+ Wf8 3 1 334 'i'h8+ rj;e7 32 :tg7+ tj:jf"/ 33 l:txf7+ rj}xf7 34 'ifb7+. Also, the king could not move to e7 on account of 30 'ifh7: 30 The cunning point is that after 32 ... 'i'c6 White gives mate with 33 'l'h8+!, while after 32 . . .f5 the queen returns to h5 with the irresistible threat of 34 llh3. Black is also not saved by 32 ... 1!fc7 33 .td2 'i'c2 on account of 34 .txa5 (but not 34 .U.h3 'i'dl+ 3 5 .tel llh5). l:l g2 It was hard to decide· on this move when I had only five minutes remaining for eleven moves. However, I very much wanted to win this game, which would practically secure the title of USSR Champion. This was assisted, I would say, by the even intense atmosphere of the match, resulting from the fact that during our game from the championship itself there had been a rather unpleasant dispute. And so I avoided the repetition of moves, although the risk was great. 30 32 ... e5 33 34 35 l:.b3 1txh3 exf4 1llxb3 exf4 .tb6 36 37 c;t>n .tb2 .U.b5 Only by giving up his queen can Black save his king. If 35 ... llel+ and 36 . . Jhcl, White mates in three moves: 37 'i'h7+! etc. Now it is all clear, whereas after 37 1!fd7 l:lel+ 3 8 rj;f2 l:.xb2+ 39 �xe l llxg2 40 1!fxb7 Black would have had the defence 40 . . . l:lb2. 37 .ta5 &Df7 38 39 40 41 42 31 l:lf3! . 'ifi>f2 W'xe8+ !tb3 !tbe3 l:Cel+ .tc7 The resulting ending is easily won. Black resigned, without resuming. With this game the outcome of the match was effectively decided. The rook is mobilised for the attack with decisive effect. It is true that at first sight the position of the white king becomes very dangerous, but things are even worse for the black king. 31 .• 32 - ffh4! l:tc2 1i'd7 1Fxa4 Grune 218 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match - Moscow 1954, 1st game French Defence J:la5 It was only after finding this move that I decided to play on with 30 llg2. Altogether I played three matches for the World Championship with Smyslov, 335 in which we met 69 times. This was in Smyslov's heyday, and the series gave him an advantage in points .( 18 wins, 17 defeats and 34 draws), but I was the one who finished ahead in terms of laurel wreaths (2-1 ), since in the event of a drawn match the champion retained his title. 1 2 3 e4 d4 t/)cJ e6 d5 Smyslov nearly always employs this move. It seems to me that after 3 tDd2 it is harder for Black to gain counterplay. 3 • . . ..ib4 This sharp continuation has been popular for a good six decades. Black may end up in a difficult position, but on other hand he gains counter-chances. 4 e5 White has many promising continuations (4 e5, 4 a3, 4 ..td2, 4 lDge2), but unfortunately in one game only one of them can be employed! In the present match Smyslov chose only 4 e5 ( l st, 3rd and 9th games), and 4 a3 (7th, 19th and 2 1 st games). 4 5 • • • aJ c5 ..ta5 5 . . . ..txc3+, which previously was very popular, first lost many of its devotees after the well-known radio match game Alexander-Botviilllik ( 1 946), but then again became common. In particular, it occurred in my Games 1 25, 136, 143, 1 8 1 and 235. The bishop retreat, if I am not mi'staken, became fashionable since the time of the �eshevsky-Botvinnik game (No. 166), in which White chose 6 'i'g4, not the best continuation. · 6 b4 6 7 ... lDb5 7 8 9 f4 tt)fJ JJ..c7 lDe7 ltlbc6 10 ..idJ i.b8 This pawn sacrifice was recom­ mended by Alekhine in the book of the New York international tournament of 1 924. Soon it was tried in a similar position (with the addition of the moves 00 and . . . f7-f6) in the game Botviilllik-Ragozin (No. 14). Alekhine only considered the reply 6 . . . cxb4, after which White gains strong pressure on the black position: 7 it:Jb5 bxa3+ 8 c3 etc. I was able to test this idea too in my game with Pavlov­ Pyanov (No.20). cxd4 In the 9th game of the match Smyslov played more strongly - 7 'ifg4, and gained an advantage, which led to a win for him. 7 it:Jb5 was employed in the game Makogonov-Aramanovich ( 1 949). Since there were periods when Smyslov collaborated with Makogonov, such a similarity of 'tastes' was quite logical. It can be mentioned that 7 it:Jb5 leads to quieter play (compared with 7 'i'g4). Aramanovich played the weaker 9 . . . a6, but the simplest here is 9 . . . i.d7 10 lDb:xd4 it:Jbc6 1 1 c3 tt:Jxd4 1 2 cxd4 (as I played in the 3rd game of this match), and now I should have continued 12 . . . tt:Jc8 followed by . . . ltlb6 and in some cases . . . ltlc4. Of course, much time is lost on this manoeuvre, but the dark-square bishop is really very useful ! 336 11 12 �bxd4 .ile3 a6 .ila7 With his last move White prevented the opponent from castling (if 1 8. . 0-0 there could have followed 19 'i!fh.4 �g6 20 .txg6 fxg6 21 :n with a dangerous initiative). Now castling again proves possible, but since White is expecting it, when he intends to begin active play on the kingside, for the time being Black refrains from castling. . 19 13 0--0 White is aiming for the exchange of the dark-square bishops, while main­ taining a piece outpost at d4 and a favourable endgame. 13 c3 was more dangerous for Black, in order after the exchange on d4 to retake with the pawn. Then White would have had more possibilities for an attack on the kingside - a similar plan was carried out by Smyslov in the 3rd game of the match. Now, however, with a series of ex­ changes Black weakens the opponent's pressure and successfully completes his development. 13 14 • . • ii.xd4 a4 White is tempted by the prospect of squeezing the opponent's position on the queenside by a4-a5, but he over­ estimates his chances. I should mention that also in the event of 19 :cl a5 (followed by .. Jla8) Black would have retained counterplay: the weakening caused by b2-b4 begins to tell. 19 . . • a5 The natural reply, which White, of course, had in mind. 20 �b3 �xd4 14 liJxd4 followed by c2-c3 came into consideration. 14 15 16 �xd4 �hl iLxd4+ 'ffb6 .ild7 17 18 c3 'i'el l:tc8 h6 Of course, not 16 ... 'ffxd4 1 7 .ib5+. It was on this move that White was pinning his hopes, when he began his manoeuvre (a3-a4). After 20 ...axb4 2 1 cxb4 he vy!u hl:lve a clear advantage on . 337 the queenside. But Smyslov overlooked his opponent's shrewd reply. 20 . • . 1!rc7! The turning point of the game, as now the initiative passes to Black. Since 2 1 t'DxaS b6 22 t'Db3 'i'xc3 is by no means in White's favour, he has to play his knight to cS, where it is insecurely placed. 21 tDc5 22 Wf2 26 tDxd7 26 27 bxa5 28 a6 28 29 c4 29 30 .txc4 This too is logical. All the same the knight cannot be maintained on cS. l:txd7 l:a8 .li.c6 Black shows sensible caution. After 2 1 .. .0-0 22 tDxd7 'ifxd7 23 bxaS he would still have had to find a way to regain the pawn. For example: 23 . . . :as 24 c4 dxc4 25 .txc4 'iic7, and the chances are equal. The following line was not dangerous for Black: 22 fS lDxfS 23 .txrs exf5 24 l:txfS 0-0, and White has many weaknesses. 22 23 tDbJ 24 . 'i!fc5 But this is a routine decision. White aims to close the a-file. Meanwhile, the black pawn at b7 was a target for him to attack, whereas by moving to a6 it will restrict the activity of the white bishop by controlling the b5 square, after which the white a4 pawn may be in danger. White should have played 28 c4 immediately, or, as suggested by Averbakh, 28 .tbs l::tc7 29 l::tfc l and 30 c4 with almost equal chances. 0-0 .td7 Smyslov nearly always aimed for the exchange of queens, if this did not worsen his position. Here too he chooses this path, hoping to save the endgame. This decision would seem to be quite sound - after 24 :tfcl f6 25 'ifg3 fxeS 26 fxe5 tDrs White would have been in a difficult position on account of the weakness of his pawns. 24 . • • 1!rxc5 The exchange of queens was forced, since if 24 . . . 'i'dS there would have followed 2S 'i'e3 ! (but not -2S 'ifxaS b6 26 'i'a6 l:ta8 27 'i'b7 .tc6), and White gains an important tempo, since now his bishop is defended. 25. tDxc5 . • . bxa6 White gets rid of his weak c-pawn, but in the process files are opened for the invasion of the black rooks. Perhaps, therefore, Romanovsky's recommen­ dation of 29 :tab l should have been preferred. . l:tc7 338 dxc4 l:d4! Anticipating Black's . . . g7-g5, White tries to exchange as many pawns as possible. If 37 ..te2 there could have followed 37 . . . lbe3. 37 g5 Now it is obvious that the position of the paWll at a6 is advantageous to Black. 31 ..tel If 3 1 l:!acl there was .. the unpleasant reply 3 1 . . . �5 . 31 32 33 34 g3 ..tn • . lbd5 lbcJ :bs 38 39 . hxg5 fxg5 hxg5 Also after 39 ..te2 a5 40 ..txc4 l:lxc4 Black would have retained the advantage in the double rook ending. 39 lbxe5 l:laJ Had White allowed 34 ... l:!b3, he would have been in a difficult position, since the position of the lmight at c3 would have become invulnerable. White parries this threat in the only way. • • . 40 ..tel 41 <t>g2 l:.bl+ A second error, and, as often hap­ pens, on the last move before the time control. 40 . . .as 4 1 ..tbs l:!g4 ! would have favoured Black, but after this pointless check White gains an important tempo for the defence. The sealed move. Black's position is still significantly better on account of the weakness of the enemy pawns. 41 34 . . • lbbl Perhaps Black's first error in this game. He should have calmly taken the pawn - 34 . . .lbxa4. After 35 l:!fal he had the reply 3 5 ... l:tbb4 (36 ..tdl lbc5 37 l:tc3 l:!bc4 38 l:txc4 l:rxc4 39 i.e2 l:!e4 40 ..txa6 g5), while if 35 ..tc6, then 3 5 . . . lbc5, if there is nothing better. After 34 . . . tDxa4 White would have retained only slight chances of saving the game. 35 36 37 l:.a2 .:.n h4 lbd2 lbc4 • . . a5 The pawn must be moved away from the attack. For example, 4 1 . . .l:tb3 42 l:U4 %lxf4 43 gxf4 lbg6 44 f5 lbh4+ 45 'it>f2 lbxfS would have led to a draw due to 46 .!i.xa6. If instead 43 . . . lbd3, then White can probably save himself in the rook ending: 44 ..txd3 %lxd3 45 l:te2 l:!d4 46 f5 exf5 47 l:!e5 l:!xa4 48 l:!xf5. 42 l:.c2 One of the strongest continuations. After 42 ..th5 'it>g7 43 %tf4 l:!d5 ! 44 Ilaf2 l:!b7 followed by . . J:te7, Black, who in some cases threatens . . .lbg6, would also have retained some advan­ tage. 42 • . . llb3 A curious incident! When I began analysing the adjourned position, I 339 immediately found the best plan in the diagram position (although," perhaps, not good enough for a win): 42 ...l1xa4 43 l:lc5 l:le4 ! Now after 44 .th5 %:[.b3 45 .txf7+ &i:Jxf7 46 l:tc8+ <tlg7 47 l1c7 <il?g6 Black remains a pawn up, while if 44 l:txa5 l1b3 or 44. . .l:le3, and the g3 and g5 pawns are weak. I not only worked out these variations, but also wrote them down. But in the morning I analysed only 42 i.h5, and I returned to 42 l1c2 not long before the start of the adjournment session. In so doing . . . I forgot not only about the results of the previous evening's searchings, but even that all this had been written down - the height of absent-mindedness! - and in my haste I planned 42 . . . l:lb3 . During the resumption I had the feeling that what I was playing was not the strongest, but I was unable to force myself to deviate from the 'prepared' path. to White's 42nd move, and as a result he did not take account of Black's reply, or he underestimated its strength. He should have played 43 l:lc5, immed­ iately creating threats. Then after 43 . . . &i:Jd3 44 .ixd3 l:.dxd3 45 l:txa5 l:.xg3+ 46 <itih2 the draw would have been more or less obvious, as also would be the case after 43 ... .l:tdS 44 D.xd5 exd5 45 l:lf5 l:.e3 46 @fl d4 47 .l:tf4. 43 . l:r.d5! 45 i.b5 &i:Jg6 46 :g4 l:leJ! 47 48 i.xg6 :n <li>xg6 ll.f5 49 50 51 52 ll.xf5 llc4 J:lc7 l:la7 exf5! • . Now this manoeuvre has even greater strength than in the variation 42 i.h5 <tlg7 43 l:tf4 l:td5 (cf. the note to White's 42nd move), since White must lose time in order to place his bishop at h5, and before this play his rook to e4 (44 i.h5 is not possible immediately in view of 44 . . . D.dd3). And in the given situation, when the fifth rank is inaccessible, there are no benefits from the move 42 l1c2. <tlg7 44 .l:te4 Sooner or later White will be forced to go into a bad rook ending. Threatening 47 ... &i:JeS followed by . . .l:ldd3, as well as 47 ... .l:teeS, when the g5 pawn is lost. White cannot get by without the exchange of minor pieces. The simplest, although 48 ...l:txg5 49 Itxg5+ @xg5 50 nxn l1e4 would perhaps also have won. 43 l:lf4 The decisive mistake. Obviously in his home analysis Smyslov had not noticed the manoeuvre given in the note 340 J:te4 l:txa4 l:laJ 3 4 lLlc3 e3 .tb4 b6 5 6 7 lLlge2 .ta6 il..e7 d5 8 cxd5 A year before our match, at the Candidates Tournament in Switzerland, Smyslov also employed the Nimzo­ Indian Defence, but with 4 ... c5. For the sake of caution he refrains from this continuation, fearing possible prepar­ ations on my part, but in so doing he goes from the frying-pan into the fire. 53 �h3 Clever, but that is all! However, White also loses after 53 �h2 tla2+ or 53 'itm ! a4 54 �g2 �xg5 55 tlxf7 tlb3 ! 53 54 55 ¢>h4 tla6+ f4 fxg3 ¢1'5 The only way! After 55 . .. @g7 56 °it>h3 ! we essentially reach the ending that was already assessed as drawn in the note to Black's 4 l st move. The presence of the pawn at g3 is of no significance. 56 57 58 ¢>e4 llf6+ l:tf3 <ioib3 l:tf5 l:ta6 White resigns In 1 95 1 I played S b3 against Novotelnov (Game 196), but, after seeing the game Shainswit-Fine played the same year in New York, I preferred the method of play employed by the American master. 8 9 • • • <ioixfl il..xfl This is how the afore-mentioned game continued. After 9 dxe6 h6 10 exf7+ @xf7 1 1 'i'b3+ @es 12 lLle6 'ilfd7 13 ltlxg7+ @dS 14 ltle6+ @cs White's attack would have come to a standstill, and Black would have gradually taken over the initiative. 9 Game 2 1 9 World Championship Match Moscow 1 954, 2nd game Nimzo-Indian Defence d4 c4 lLlf4 7 . . . 0-0 is weaker (cf. Game 193). . . . exd5 The only move. 9 ...it)xd5 would have lost a pawn: 10 tDcxd5 exd5 1 1 'ilfh5 c6 12 ltle6 g6 1 3 'i'e5 f6 ( 1 3 ... .tf6 14 lDxdS+ .txe5 15 lDxf7 24) 14 ifg3 .ld6 15 ibxdS .txg3 1 6 lbxc6, and the attempt to save it by l l . ..g5 in the game Milev-Bobekov (1958) quickly ended in a crushing defeat for Black: 12 lbe6 'i'd7 1 3 lbg7+ @f8 14 'i'h.6 ifc6 1 5 ltle6+ @e8 16 ifg7. M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov 1 2 a3 tl'lf6 e6 3 41 open up the centre with gain of tempc>, since the black bishop is badly placed. 10 g4! An improvement found in the quiet of my study. For my opponent it was, of course, a surprise. After 10 'i'f3 c6 1 1 g4 0-0 Fine achieved a good position. Now, however, Black is lUlable to castle in time, since White carries out the entire plan without losing time on 'it°f3. 10 • • . 11 g5 12 h4 li)fd7 of knights - 1 1 . . .tt.)e4 would have led to Black after 13 h4 and °i'g4. 15 16 dxe4 14 ti)xe4 li)c5 15 t'Dxc5 bxc5 1 6 i.e3 White's advantage i s Wldisputed. But now he gains the opportunity to dxe4 Axf4 J.xf4 h5! if only 0-0 With the positional threat of 17 h6, after which the situation of the black king will become hopeless. For ex­ ample, 16 . . . t'Da6 17 h6 l:te8 (17. . . g6 1 8 'i'a4) 18 hxg7 :xe4 19 'Wh 5 r3;xg7 20 'i'xh7+ <iftf8 2 1 i.d6+ 'iti>e8 22 ifxe4+. Also, 16 ...ife7 is no better on account of 17 Wt3 'i!fe6 1 8 h6 g6 1 9 ti)d6. Therefore Black aims to drive away the centralised white knight immediately, so that it should not be directed at the f6 square. 16 17 J.d6 It really would have been better to castle, although after 12 . . . 0-0 13 e4 e4 li)xe4 14. . . i.e7 is also dismal, because of 1 5 h5. c6 Smyslov chooses the natural move and ends up in a difficult position. Later it was shown that boldness - 10 . . . g5 was necessary. True, all the same White would have retained some advantage: 1 1 ti)h5 ti)xh5 12 gxh5 'i!fd7 13 'iff3 c6 14 e4, or 12 . . . c6 1 3 'iif3 ti)a6 14 e4 ti)c7 15 :g1 h6 16 h4. The exchange 12 li)xe4 dxe4 difficulties for followed by ti)h5 13 14 . . • li)d6 l:ie8 l:ie6 As will be clear from what follows, it would have been simpler and better to give up the exchange immediately 17 . ttJfS. True, even then it would have been not so easy to occupy the d5 342 .. square with one of the knights, which is necessary for successful action with queen and lmight against queen and rook (with the white king insecurely placed). Incidentally, such play the ex­ change down was successfully demon­ strated in several of his games by Stahlberg. 18 d5 l:txd6 19 .ixd6 tlxg5 Smyslov's favourite transition into an endgame does not bring him any relief. 20 21 22 23 24 1Wxd5 l:tcl b4 l:tb3 1!fxd5 cxd5 lba6 b6 @b7 What else can Black do? If 18 . .. cxd5 1 9 'fixd5 lba6 White has the decisive combination 20 lbxf7 ! @xf7 2 1 g6+ hxg6 22 hxg6+ @e7 2 3 .id6+ @f6 (23 ...llxd6 24 'fin mate) 24 'i'f3+ @xg6 25 llgl + @h7 26 Wf5+. It would appear that Black has given up the exchange under more favourable circumstances, since he has already won one pawn, another is attacked, and after 20 dxc6 lbxc6 he successfully com­ pletes his development. However . . . Nominally White does not even have a material advantage, but his active pieces dominate the board. 25 26 27 28 29 30 20 l:td3 b5 .i.xc5 l:txc5 a4 l:tdc3 lbf6 lbc5 bxc5 l:tb8 l:lb7 It only remains for White to exchange rooks, and then queen his a­ or b-pawn. Since even if 30 . . . t2Je4 there follows 3 1 llc7, Black resigns. . Tiris game is a striking example of the usefulness of home preparation. 'iff3! The decisive move! Now Black's queen is restricted, and after 20 . .. cxd5 2 1 llgl 'iih.4. 22 llg4 \!fd8 23 l:.cl his position is very passive. Even 343 tLlc3 :lxc6 13 tl'ixb5 axb5 14 b4 Wb6 1 5 bxc5 l:l.xc5 16 'ifb3 followed by 17 i.a3 or 17 a4 does not secure Black full equality, which, however, can also be said about the game continuation. Game 220 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 4th game Queen's Gambit Accepted 1 2 d4 c4 d5 dxc4 3 tDf3 a6 4 e3 .i.g4 After choosing the Nimzo-Indian Defence in the 2nd game, and moreover a variation in which he was apparently hoping to set White new problems, it would seem that my opponent is again ainiing for a surprise·; for which he employs the Queen's Gambit. Tiris was occasionally played by Alekhirie. It is this free development of the queen's bishop, which is not possible in other variations of the Queen's Gambit Accepted, that constitutes Alekhine's idea. 5 6 .txc4 'i!fb3 e6 First 6 0-0 is perhaps preferable. 6 • • • .ll.xf3 6 ...b5 would have been reckless in view of 7 tLle5 (7 . . . bxc4 8 'i'a4+). 7 gxf3 b5 In a siniilar position Alekhine played 7 . . . :a7; that was also how Game 142 continued, after which the move went out of fashion. 8 .te2 lDd7 Tiris, it turns out, is what Smyslov had prepared! The usual 8 . . . c5 9 dxc5 ti:Sd7 (9 ... .txc5 10 'i'c3 i.f8 or 10 a4 b4 1 1 tLld2 tLlf6 12 'irc4 tLlbd7 B .b3 0-0 14 i.b2) 10 c6 tLlc5 1 1 'i'c2 :lc8 12 9 10 a4 lDd2 b4 During the game it seemed to me that 1 0 f4 tl'igf6 1 1 i.f3 c5 12 i.xa8 Wxa8 was more energetic, but I was unable to evaluate exactly the resulting position, and so I chose a quiet move. It can now be said that this was the correct decision, since in that same year, in a game Ilivitsky-Grechkin, in this varia­ tion Black gained compensation for the sacrificed exchange (the continuation was 1 3 :gl cxd4 14 exd4 .i.d6). 10 11 12 il'le4 lDxf6+ lDgf6 c5 Subsequently it was shown that 12 it'lxc5 lbxc5 13 dxc5 i.xc5 14 i.d2 (or perhaps even 14 f4) 1 4. . 0-0 15 0-0-0 Wb6 16 �bl is more promising here. 344 . 12 • • • ifxf6 A committing continuation: 12 ...it'lxf6 13 dxc5 .ixc5 was simpler, · although the Encyclopaedia considers White's position to be preferable (a position from the previous note is reached). 13 d5 e5 · In the event of 13 . . ...td6 14 dxe6 fxe6 1 5 'ifd3 Black would begin to have difficulties. 16 . . . c4 can be considered the initial cause of Black's defeat. Meanwhile, 16 . . .'ifh4 followed by . . . g7-g6 and . . . f7-f5 or immediately 17 . . . f5 would have led to double-edged play. 17 18 1!bc4 11i'b3 l:ifc8 1i'g6 This, it turns out, was Black's idea to prevent White from castling on either side. But was it really worth sacrificing a pawn for this? Of course not, since in any case queenside castling would have been dubious in view of the weakness of the as pawn. As for White castling on the kingside, Black all the same cannot prevent it, even if it is done artificially. The threat of 19 . . . 1Wg2 is also parried without difficulty. 14 15 a5! e4 19 20 21 ..td6 Apparently the best continuation. The point is that Black has the positional threat of . . . f7-f5, followed, depending on circumstances, by either . . . e5-e4 or . . . f5-f4 . Now, however, only the second possibility of . . . f7-f5-f4, which is less dangerous for White, remains. And for the moment White's bishop will occupy an excellent position at e3, where it defends the f2 pawn (in the event of . . . f7-f5xe4) and attacks the c5 pawn. 0-0 15 16 c4 ..teJ Smyslov clearly overestimates the possibilities for Black, who not only loses a pawn without sufficient compen­ sation, but also increases the scope of the white pieces � J:ig1 f5 1!fb5 l:ig2! Now it is clear that Black's play has come to a standstill and that the pawn sacrifice has not justified itself. It only remains for White to transfer his king to hl, in order to consolidate his position, after which the g-file will be used for an attack. 21 22 • . . 1!fd1 � 1i'h4 The immediate 22 . . . f4 was simpler, but it was not so easy to decide to block the position, abandoning the last hopes of an attack. on the queenside. 345 23 'iiiig1 White is intending to play 24 .tg5 Wh5 25 .tf6, and then 26 f4. If, for example, 23 . . . fxe4, then 24 .tg5 11i'h3 25 fxe4 with the threat of 26 i.g4 (or 24 l:tg4 and 25 fxe4). Black has only one defence. opponent is in time trouble!) - that of waiting. He could also have played 34 l:tg5, of course, but this would not have given anything concrete in view of 34 . . . g6 3 5 'ilffl 'i!ff6. 34 ... 1ih5 35 36 37 38 'ilg2 l:r.g5 'ilfl i.ct 'ifh6 g6 ..tg7 38 39 ... l:.5g4 .tf6 i..e7 40 .i.d2 lbf6 41 1!4g2 41 42 43 44 .i.xa6 i.b5 a6 Black intends answering 3 5 ..txa6 with 3 5 . . . �6, provoking favourable complications. 23 24 25 26 21 .i.d2 <!?ht .i.c4 'ilfgt In time trouble, White is perhaps correct to avoid 3 8 i.xa6 i..f6 39 l:t5g4 1la8 40 i..b5 D.xa5 4 1 ..txd7 l:lxd7 42 'i!fc4 'i!if8 43 11fc6 'ild8. Why take unnecessary risks? f4 l:r.ab8 :m l:lf6 .tm Smyslov was in severe time trouble, and this tells on his decisions. On no account should he have moved his bishop from its ideal blockading and defensive position, merely in order to return ii (IS moves later!) to its former place! 27. . .'!!fl was correct. 28 29 30 31 l:r.g4 W'g2 b3 llgt 11'h5 'ilf7 'ot?h8 1ld6 32 33 34 i.ct ..tb2 'iffl lbd7 l:r.e8 The rook is badly placed here, since it only blocks the d-pawn, but does not defend the pawns at b4 and e5. Although White has a great advantage, as yet there is no direct way to win. Therefore he chooses the most 'correct' practical approach (when the 39 ... i.dS was better, since now the loss of a second pawn is inevitable. Here the game was adjourned. The simplest. After 4 1 . ..l:tbS there follows 42 i..xa6 :as 43 i.c4 l:txa5 44 .txb4, while if 4 1...'ifh3 42 'ifdl ! l:tb8 43 'i'al ! l£id7 (43 ... 'ifh5 44 ..te2) 44 ..txf4. It is easy to see that all Black's misfortunes stem from the poor position of his rook at d6. Therefore Smyslov takes the correct decision - to immediately improve the position of this rook. 346 :d7 lla7 Ilg8 g5! succeeds in carrying out his pawn storm on the kingside, but, thank God, the white king's position proves to be invulnerable. Black's last chance is a pawn offen­ sive on the kingside. Here White has many tempting continuations. The simplest, of course, was 45 'i'al .td6 46 .txb4 ! .txb4 47 'ifxe5, when Black is in a desperate position: White now has four(!) passed pawns for a knight. 45 'i'c4 'i!fh.3 46 d6 .txd6 47 'ifc6 was tempting, when Black again stands badly. However, after calculating many complicated variations, I made an ob­ vious mistake. Apparently I was feeling greedy that evening, and I did not want to sacrifice anything. 45 1Wd3 46 47 48 49 1'1e2 'i!Fdl J.e2 ilel! 49 50 51 fxg4 J.xg4! :ag7 'ffh4 g4 The bishop will successfully stand in ambush! Of course, 49 fxg4 tt:Jxe4 50 .i.el lDg5 5 1 f3 'ilfh3 was weaker, when White has difficulties. Black can no longer strengthen his position. For example, if 49 ... 'ifh3 there would have simply followed 50 'i!Fd3 ! h5 hxg4 .i.d6 Here I had in mind 46 'i'c4 'i'h3 47 1fc6, reaching the same position as in the preceding variation, but retaining the d5 pawn. But when after my opponent's reply I checked the planned contin­ uation, I noticed to my distress that after 46 'i'c4 there follows 46 . . Jk7, and here the following line no longer helps: 47 .tc6 1Wh3 48 .i.xb4 .txb4 49 11fxb4 'itxf3 50 'i'd6 lDg4 5 1 l:.fl tt:Je3 52 \!Vxe5+ l::tcg7. Therefore White has to temporarily go onto the defensive, and Black even Nevertheless I had to sacrifice some­ thing that evening! Now White should win. Black's best reply was 5 1... tt:Jxg4 ! After the natural 52 f3 'i!fh.7! (but not 52 ... 'ifh3 53 fxg4 .tc5 54 .tf2) the direct continuation 53 .U.xg4 l:xg4 54 l::txg4 l:.xg4 55 fxg4 'ifxe4+ 56 �gl (pointed out . by Laszlo Szab6) does not achieve its aim in view of 56 . . . .ic5+ 57 347 .tf2 .txf2+: 58 �xf2 We3+ 59 �g2 'i'e4+! 60 'i':f.3 'i'c2+. The clever 53 'ilic2 (preventing . . . .tc5; if the knight moves, this leads to roughly the same position as in the game) was rejected by Szab6 on account of 53 . . J lc7 54 'ifb2 l:lcg7 (e.g. 55 l:lxg4 l:lxg4 56 fxg4 'i!fxe4+ 57 1Wg2 Wxg2+ 58 l:lxg2 :as 59 :a2 e4). In time trouble I assumed that White was bound to win by 53 a7, but Roman­ ovsky suggested for Black the very strong 53 . . . .tc5 ! 54 l:.xg4 .txgl 5 5 l:lh4 .txa7. However, there was a win, and it was indeed based on the a6-a7 advance. White should play 53 fxg4! 'i'xe4 54 .tf2 ! ! with the threats of 55 a7 and 55 l:.el 'i'g6 56 W:f.3, and after 54 ... l:lxg4 55 a7 :4g5 (55 ... l:.xg2 56 'ii'h5+, or 55 . . J�4g7 56 'i'h5+ :h7 57 'i'f5 ! !) 56 h4 :rs 57 Wb 1 ! Black has no defence. Therefore after 53 fxg4! he must play 53 ... .tc5, but in this case too 54 .tf2 ilxf2 55 .l:xf2 'i'xe4+ 56 'i':f.3 'i'x:f.3+ 57 .l:x:f.3 is possible, or even 54 'if:f.3 .txgl 55 l:xg l. Of course, I have to thank fate that all these endless variations did not have to be calculated in time trouble, during the game, since with his ne:-.1 move Black made things easier for White. 51 52 • • • f3 variation, since it would have enabled him to prolong the resistance. 53 54 55 . • • .:.xgl+ .:.xgl+ li)e8 White has three passed pawns, and if one of them will tie down Black's extra piece, the remaining two will easily accomplish their task. l[jc7 56 a7 57 58 59 60 61 � r,l;>e2 .tf2 �d3 'ifl>c4 </;;g7 </iJf7 �es <it>d7 Black resigns The threat of 62 .tc5 cannot be parried. l:lxg4 The bishop emerges from ambush with decisive effect. 52 .t:xh4 1fxgl �xgl :xg2 Black would also have lost after 52 . . . l:tg3 53 .txg3 fxg3 54 :xg3 or 52 . . . 'iih3 53 fxg4 li)xe4 54 g5, but even so he should have decided on this last 348 Game 22 1 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 5th game Slav Defence 1 2 c4 d4 c6 d5 3 4 5 �f3 �c3 .tg5 �f6 e6 Smyslov declares his readiness to allow the so-called Botvinnik Variation; he had once been successful against it in a game with Bronstein ( 1 950). Black does not decline the 'invitation'. 5 6 7 8 9 e4 e5 .th4 �xg5 9 10 Jlxg5 11 exf6 11 12 ... g3 In the afore-mentioned game with Bronstein, Smyslov played 1 1 g3 ilb7 12 .tg2, after which there followed 12 . . J:tgs. Apparently, in order to avoid this variation. White goes in for a different move order. dxc4 b5 h6 g5 .tb7 It is in this way that in recent times White has systematically gained success. The alternative 9 exf6 occurred in Game 195. hxg5 �bd7 12 . . • 11fb6 Initially this reply was discarded, for reasons that will subsequently become clear. At one time Black successfully used to play 12 . . . c5 13 d5 Wb6 14 .i.g2 0-0-0 15 0--0 b4 16 ll:la4 Wb5, until in the 48th USSR Championship (198 1), with the previously known but incor­ rectly evaluated move 17 a3 !, Kasparov gained two sensational wins. Thus today the variation is apparently suffering another crisis, but perhaps by the efforts of someone it will once again be resurrected. 13 14 The move 10 . . . .lle7, to which theory simply attached a question mark, un­ expectedly occurred in a game from the Kasparov-Smyslov Final Candidates Match (1984). The former World Cham­ pion, who on this occasion was upholding Black's position, renovated and somewhat improved the well­ known continuation 1 1 exf6 .itxf6 12 .ilxf6 'it'xf6 1 3 g3 with 1 3 . . . tba6. 349 .i.g2 0--0 0-0--0 ll:le5 Here I was ready to accept the queen sacrifice, whereas in my well-known game with Denker (No. 154) I avoided doing so, since Black already had a big advantage, and there was no reason for him to make the play double-edged. However, subsequently it was shown that after 1 5 dxe5 l:!.xd l 16 l:!.axdl White has the advantage. For example, the correspondence game Hollis­ Bawnbach (1976) continued 16 . . . i.c5 17 ttle4 i.d4 18 lbd6+ ri;c7 19 i.f4 l:!.f8 20 i.h6 l:ths 2 1 i.g7 lids 22 tLlxn i.xf2+ 23 �hl . White has no other good possibilities (apart from 1 5 dxe5). If 15 i.e3 c5 16 dxc5 i.xc5 17 i.xc5 'i'xc5 18 i.xb7+ ri;xb7 Black has sufficient counterplay, while after .the continuation in the game Black regains his pawn, and White can hope only for an equal endgame. 15 1ie2 16 i.eJ! 16 ... 17 .U.fdl 1lfxd4 The Encyclopaedia considers that 1 5 . . .lbd3 16 i.e3 c5 is stronger. Best. If Black had managed to play his knight to d3 (for example, 16 l:!.fdl ttld3 ), this move would no longer be possible - the f6 pawn would be left undefended. 1!t'd3 16 . . .'i'g4 17 f3 'ifh5 18 . h3 'i'g6 19 ttle4 would have led to an unclear position, but since I was playing Black, I did not object to a draw, for which reason I decided to exchange queens. Diverting the enemy king from the defence of the queenside. Once again I cannot help drawing the reader's attention to this decision typical of Smyslov's play: he happily goes in for the exchange of queens, since in the ending White will have a minimal advantage. However, Black was able to save this game. 17 18 19 .U.xd8+ t:hxe2 1!fxe2 @xd8 Black still has some difficulties. For example, it is dangerous to play 19 ... ttlg4 in view of 20 i.xa7 tbxf6 2 1 a4, while after 19 ... @c7 20 i.f4 i.d6 2 1 .U.dl ! .U.d8 (or 2 1 . ..tLlct3 22 i.xd6+ <ifi>xd6 23 ttlc l) 22 l:!.xd6 <t>xd6 23 ttlc3 his position is completely bad. The simplest was 19 ... @c8 (sugges­ ted by Moiseev). Then if 20 i.xa7 c5 (2 1 a4 tbD+), while after 20 l:!.dl c5 2 1 i.xb7+ @xb7 2 2 lbc3 @c6 23 lbe4 ttld3 24 b3 1'.h6 Black achieved complete equality (Kapic-Iovcic, corres­ pondence 1 971). The game continuation leads to some complications. 19 20 . bJ! • . tLldJ Since Black cannot take this pawn, White succeeds in separating and 350 doubling the enemy pawns on the queenside. He would hardly have achieved any more after 20 a4 a6, since in the game he retains the possibility of winning the a7 pawn. 20 21 22 • . . bxc4 i.xa7 '3Jc7 bxc4 It appears that at h6 too the bishop will be immediately locked in by the f4 pawn, but in fact .it will soon play an active role. · Had Black played 25 ...llh6 26 a4 l:txf6, then after 27 f3 his rook would have been out of the. game. 26 f4 The alternative was 22 .l:.bl i.b4 23 .�xa7 (23 tbr4 a5) 23 ...lla8 24 i.e3 ilxa2, when White retains some advan­ tage. But how could he avoid capturing a pawn, also obtaining, incidentally, an outside passed a-pawn, supported by · rook and bishop? Of course, White cannot allow 26 ... i.d2, as the c4 pawn would become very threatening. 23 . . .tt'ib4 24 i.xb7 <3ixb7 25 i.xc5 ! .txc5 26 a3 was bad for Black. No better was 27 <3Jf3 exf4 28 gxf4 i.fs ! or 27 fxe5 .i.d2 (28 lldl c3 29 tt'ixc3 tt'iel+), but 27 i.xe5 tt'ixe5 28 fxe5 was preferable, although 28 . . . l:teS! (but not 28 . . . ..td2 29 llb2 c3 30 l:lc2) 29 llb2 llxe5 30 llc2 · would have appar­ ently led to a drawn ending. Now, however, the black pieces will even become slightly the more active. 22 23 ... :bl 24 iLb8+! 24 25 �xg2 c5 i.xg2 The point of White's entire manoeuvre. Of course, after 24 '3Jxg2 .Mld6 Black would have been quite alright, whereas now ·the eighth rank is blocked, and the a-pawn is dangerous. 25 • • • '3Jc6 26 • • • e5! This is the basis of Black' s · man­ oeuvre. White's monolithic pawn mass on the kingside is broken up, artd the black bishop comes into play. iLh6! 351 27 a4 27 28 gxf4 exf4 c3! The concluding subtlety, which Black had to foresee on his 25th move. Otherwise his bishop at h6 would have remained out of play. Thus Black's opening trump - his c4 pawn - saves him in the endgame. 29 30 31 lLlxc3 .!lxf4 Wg3! last employed it in 1944 (Game 1 40). Earlier with Smyslov I usually contin­ ued 4 cxd5, but in this game I wanted to play something di:ff�rent. ii.xf4 lLlxf4+ �g4 Wg5 lLlxd5 h4 Wg4 a4 e3 6 7 8 ii.xc4 0-0 9 lLlh4 dxc4 Ji.rs Later I came to the conclusion that 6 lLle5 is more promising, but at that time I was influenced by Spielmann' s idea of using the king's lalight in a different way. In a difficult position Smyslov plays with great accuracy. White is aiming to advance his king and his h-pawn - his main trump. It is natural, therefore, that 3 1 @f3 would have been weaker, when the h-pawn is left undefended. 31 32 33 34 35 36 ; 4 5 6 lLlh5+ lLlxf6+ lLld5 Wxd5 f6+ e6 ii.b4 lLlbd7 In the Candidates Tournament ( 1953) Smyslov chose this variation several times. Evidently fearing some prepar­ ation, or wishing to keep this tested continuation in reserve, previously in the match my opponent had not employed this defence. Of course, the h4 pawn is more important than the one at f6. 36...c4 37 a5 c3 38 a6 l:ta8 39 <it;f5 l:ba6 40 h5 lla2 41 �xf6 Draw agreed Game 222 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 12th game Slav Defence 1 2 d4 c4 d5 c6 3 4 tLlfJ lLlc3 lLlf6 Finally in this match Smyslov resorts to one of his favourite openings. This idea is not new. I found it in the game Spielmann-Van Stenis (1 936), which went 8 0--0 (instead of 8 lLldb7) 9 tDh.4 .ig4 10 f3 fil15 1 1 g4 ll'ld5. ... I rarely play this variation; before the present game I would appear to have 352 . . . However, it had occurred earlier in the game Asztalos-Tarrasch ( 1920), which continued 9 . . . .tg6 10 �g6 (I played 1 0 f3 and 1 1 e4 against Kan see training games). Regarding 9 We2, see Game 140. 9 . . • Levenfish: 12 dxe5 ! t'tlxe5 13 .i..e2, when both after the exchange of queens, and after 1 3 . . . 'ifb6+ 14 'it>hl :ad8 15 'i'c2 White's chances are better (the bishop at g6 is out of play!). 0-0 I was genuinely surprised when my opponent made this move, almost with­ out thinking. After all, following the retreat of the enemy bishop to g6, White will always be able to exchange it, without fearing counterplay by Black on the h-file. Therefore 9 . . . .tg6 seems more cautious. At the time I thought that 9 ... .tg4 suggested itself, and if 10 f3 ttJd5 1 1 fxg4 'i'xh4 12 'ii'f3 or 1 0. . . .th5 1 1 g4 i..g6 1 2 �g6, although both cases White's position seems to be preferable. Now, however, I even find it hard make a choice between these three moves. 10 11 fJ! e4 . . • 12 lhxg6 gain the advantage of the two bishops, but White chooses an incorrect course! He should have played as suggested by 13 ... 'ife7 14 15 'i'e2 ..ixd4 exd4 ..ic5 16 17 J.xc5 'it>hl 'i'xc5+ g5 The exchange of the dark-square bishops reduces somewhat White's attacking potential. e5 Of course, it is always tempting to hxg6 Incorrect. With 1 3 ... 'ib6 ! Black would have pinned the d4 pawn and set White a difficult problem. True, after the possible 14 'it>hl :ad8 15 dxe5 'i!fxe3 16 exf6 tt'lxf6 1 7 'ifb3 the chances are roughly equal. Now Black again encounters some difficulties. Subsequently Borisenko (against Igantiev, 1 966) played 1 1 tLlxg6 hxg6 12 'ifc2 a5 (if 12 . . . e5 1 3 'ifxg6 exd4 14 exd4, or 12 ... c5 13 t'tla2) 1 3 :dl 'ib6 14 'it>hl J:ac8 15 �b l c5 16 d5 t'tle5 17 ..tfl c4, and only now 1 8 e4. 11 ... ii.el A routine move. Here too White should have played 13 dxe5 lllxe5 14 i.e2,. not allowing the pin on the a7-gl diagonal. He avoided the exchange on e5, in order not to have to move his bishop off the a2-g8 diagonal, since its retreat to b3 or a2 would allow Black to play his knight via e5 to d3. However, Black gains an opportunity to equalise ahnost completely. , .tg6 A bold move, since now the bishop at c4 appears to become very dangerous, but perhaps a necessary one. Black strikes at the poorly defended d4 pawn and gains some counterplay. 12 13 This move provoked a mixed reaction, but to me it seems quite justified. White's plan is to advance his e- and f-pawns, which with the support of his long-range bishop may become very dangerous. Now, in order to make such an advance, he will have to expose his king, which gives Black some counter-chances. 353 18 gJ 23 24 ll.ad8 18 . . . lhe5 19 i.a2 g4 20 f4 ttJf3 2 1 e5 thd5 22 thxd5 cxd5 23 h3 was not in Black's favour. 19 i.a2 It would have been premature to play 19 f4 gxf4 20 gxf4 lhb6 2 1 i.a2 .l:.d4 22 as (or 22 e5 ctJfd5 23 lhe4 'i'e7 !) 22 ... lhc4 23 e5 thd5 24 lhe4 'iib4, since it would have led to complicated, double-edged play (25 l:tgl lld8 26 'i'g4 g6 27 e6 'i'e7). 19 20 ... .l:.adl llfe8 Here too 20 f4 would have given Black counterplay after 20 . . . gxf4 2 1 gxf4 'i'h5. 20 • • • t[)f8 Finally White gains an opportunity to advance his central pawn. · . 21 . 22 : 23 l:lxd8 e5 ibxd5 l:l.xd8 ti)d5 • • • 'ilfd2 cxd5 It is very important, with gain of tempo (by attacking the g5 pawn), to make the squares b4 and d4 inaccessible to the enemy queen. The immediate 24 f4 gxf4 25 gxf4 'i'd4 26 'ii'g2 'ile4 27 'i'xe4 dxe4 leads to an ending with only a minimal advantage to White. 24 l£ie6 25 26 f4 gxf4 gxf4 'ifc6 It is possible that this move is the decisive mistake. Black underestimates the dangers of his position. It was essential to provoke the exchange of queens by 26 . . . 'i'd4 27 'i'xd4 lhxd4 28 l::d l tbe6 29 f5 ctJc5 30 .l:.d4 (or 30 i.xd5 � 3 1 a5 tba4) 30. . � 31 �g2 �e7 32 a5 g6, when he retains real chances of a draw. . 27 28 f5 'iig5 l£ic5 l:l.d7 29 30 llgl exf6 f6 28 ...f6 29 'i'g2 fxe5 would also not have saved Black after 30 b4 l£id3 3 1 f6 'ifd7 32 'ife4 ! Simultaneously blocking the d-file, which is good for White, and the a2-g8 diagonal, which is Undesirable for him. But the d5 pawn will be weak, and in the end this plays a decisive role. 354 l£ie4 Game 223 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 13th game Sicilian Defence 1 2 e4 l£ic3 2 3 4 5 g3 .tg2 d3 c5 In the Sicilian Defenee; Smyslov often chose the Closed Variation. It was on this intermediate move that Black was pinning his hopes. Now after 3 1 'ifg2 tili:f6 he would have had a winning position, since the d5 pawn is securely defended by the knight, and all the white pawns are weak. 31 f7+! A complete surprise! The pawn can be taken only by the rook, but this removes Black's control of d8, and the central d5 pawn falls. White's opening idea achieves its completion - the light­ square bishop comes into play with decisive effect. 31 32 33 1id8+ .txd5 l1xf7 c;tib7 I wanted my reply to be a surprise. Of course, my opponent was expecting 5 ... e6 followed by . . . f?Jge7, as I played back in 1936 in Nottingham against Alexander. Incidentally, it was Srnyslov who found the antidote to this line - 6 i.e3 f?Jd4 7 /i)ce2 ! , although theory considers that Black equalises by 7 . . b6 8 c3 tbxe2. However, as will be see from .what follows, 5 . . . b6 cannot be considered a good move. It was only in the 15th game of the match (No.224) that I was able to find the correct plan for Black. . 6 ; l£ige2 In the later game Smyslov-Portisch (1971) White successfully played 6 l£ih3. A different development is also recommended: 6 f4 and then �- All three of Black's pieces attacked (there's a fork for you!), and he is bound to lose material. 33 34 35 36 37 c;tig2 1fxf6 @xf2 /i)f2+ 'iff6 l1xf6 l1xf5+ l1f4 .to This move was unnecessary. 38 :g4 Black resigns l£ic6 g6 .tg7 b6 6 i . . . d6 It would Jeem illogical to play first 5 . . . b6 and then 6 . . . d6. Alas, this latter move is forCed: after 6 ... i.b7 7 .i.e3 ! (7 . . . tbd4 8 .txd4 cxd4 9 lLib5) White advantageously advances d3-d4. · · But now if 7 .i.e3 Black can reply 7 , . . f?Jd4 or 7. . . e5. 355 7 8 0--0 f4 il.b7 Hardly a good decision. 8 il.e3 was undoubtedly better, to answer 8 . . tbcl4 with 9 ..txd4 cxd4 10 tDbS es 1 1 a4. . 8 . . • f5 The most logical reply, since Black blocks the f4 pawn, which restricts the activity of its own pieces. However, now White gains an opportwlity to initiate complicated play. 9 g4 This pawn sacrifice is perhaps the best practical chance, since the play becomes very sharp. The alternative was 9 exfS gxfS 10 ..ie3 followed by d3-d4. True, in this case numerous exchanges would have occurred, but the score in the match was level, and ·Smyslov, of course, considered himself obliged to try and win with White. 9. 10 f5 • • • fxg4 9'd7 It is good to be a pawn up, but the weak dS and e6 pawns cause Black considerable trouble. · 11 tDf4 After 1 1 tDdS tl'id4 12 tDef4 gxfS 13 c3 es 14 ll'lhS 00+ l S ..ixf3 gxf3 16 'i'xf3 f4 Black stands better, although the battle would still have been quite complicated. 11 . . . gxf5 After the preparatory l l . . ...txc3 12 bxc3 and then 12 . . . gxfS there would have followed 1 3 tbhs 0-0-0 14 :xrs. But now 1 2 tbhs can be answered by 12 . . . ..td4+. 12 exf5 After this move Black finds a latent opportunity to simplify the position and to reduce matters to the prosaic exploit­ ation of his material advantage. 12 ll'lcd5 tDd4 would have transposed into the line given in the note to White's 1 1th move, and this was the lesser evil. 12 ... ..td4+ 13 �hl Axel! The only reason for this move was to make the white king go to h l - now the exchange of light-square bishops will always take place with check. An important exchange! Tiris knight could have taken up a strong position at d5, and so it has to be eliminated. Soon · further exchanges will inevitably take 3 S6 unable to do anything active, but this new simplification favours Black: he also obtains a queenside pawn.majority. place, and White will simply be a pawn down. It has to be said that his opening strategy has been rather risky. 14 15 16 17 bxc3 1ie2 ilxb7 1lrg2 17 18 'iti?xg2 18 ... 20 ild4 . ltle5 l£if6 'irxb7+ In the given instance Smyslov goes in for the exchange of queens, not only because he is relying on his good technique in simple positions. The king could not move on account of 17 . . . ltlfl+, while after 1 7 ltlg2 it would have been in a dangerous position. 1!hg2+ 20 21 22 cxd4 JZ.f2 26 l:lee2 ltlxd4 l:lc8 cxd3 It would have been better fo retain this exchange as a threat, since now White gains the second rank for manoeuvring. For the moment Black should have played 22 . . . 'iti?d7; a 1useful move in all respects. I it>f7 23 cxd3 The king would have been more safely placed at d7, and after 23 ... 'iti?d7 24 JZ.el l:k3 25 l::tfe2 l::te8 26 lLle6 tiJd5 27 f6 ttJxf6 28 llJg7 Black would have had the counter 28 . . . ltJd5!, which during the game I did not notice . . . Then White's resistance would have ' been completely broken. 24 l:lel kthdS Again 24. . . l::tc3 25 l::tfe2 :es should have been played. 25 ltle6! l:td7 c4! Preventing c3-c4, after which the bishop on b2 would have been highly unpleasant for Black. In addition, new weaknesses are now fixed in White's position - the c2 and c3 pawns. 19 i i.:e3 ltlf3 Not allowing the bishop onto the long diagonal. Nevertheless the bishop occupies the central square. It is true that White was Both here and . on the next move White does not make. . use . of all his 357 chances. &hg5+ and lbe4 would have enabled him to put up a more tenacious resistance. This is why the black king would have been better placed at d7. 26 27 <li>g3 l:[b7 l:tg8! 28 �h4 h6 . • . Preventing the variation given above. Leaving the white king only one retreat square - f4, but if it should use it, there follows 29 .. J:lg5. . 29 llg2 Since White cannot get by without .:.c2, he should play this immediately. 29 30 31 32 llc2 a4 lbc2 33 :n llbb8 ll bc� llxc2 l£id5! It is amazing how beautifully placed the knight at e6 is, and at the same time how it is �ot capable of doing anything. 34 35 36 <it>g3 @h4 d5 White's king is stalemated, moving the knight from e6 allows mate in one move, and the rook cannot leave the second rank on account of 38 . . . g3 3 9 hxg3 &he3, wheri there i s no satisfactory defence against . . . llh8 mate. But first the time control has to be reached . . . 38 39 40 @xh5 l£ie3 l£if5 Now the stalemate situation can be exploited . . . 40 41 • • • axb5 b5! axb5 Now there could have followed 42 d4 b4 43 llf2 b3 44 llb2 g3 45 hxg3 ibxg3+ 46 �h4 &hrs+ 47 'iti>h5 llh8+ 48 'iti>g4 %:.h4+ 49 'it>f3 &hxd4+, but Smyslov decided not to play on. White resigns. �6 h5 l£ie3 Game 224 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik The knight has to be protected. 36 37 llb2 l:tfl+ 11b2 World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 15th game Sicilian. Defence l£ixf5+ a6! 1 2 e4 l£ic3 c5 And so, again the Closed Variation. Smyslov had evidently come to the conclusion that the line with 5 . . . b6 was insufficient for equality (Game 223), and not without reasol).. However, disillusionment awaits him , . . 2 3 4 5 3 58 g3 i.g2 d3 l£ic6 g6 i.g7 d6 Black begins implementing a differ­ ent plan. 6 �ge2 Spassky, when he was fighting for the title of world champion, successfully played both 6 lDh3 and 6 f4 here. The latter move was also employed by Srnyslov, but it was perhaps 6 .te3 that occupied the most significant place in his repertoire. The move in the game is to some extent a retrograde step. 6 • • . loses its strength: it is no longer possible to open the d-file� White should have either exchanged on e7, or defended his knight at d5 with the one from e2, or finally, as recommended in the Encyclo­ paedia, retreated his knight to e3 . e5! Since the bishop at g2 is securely blocked in, it becomes hard to advance d3-d4, and f2-f4 can be panied by . . . f7f5 . As for the weakness of the d5 square, it is of no great significance, since White can only occupy it with his two knights, whereas for its defence Black, apart from his knights, also has his bishop. From this it can be concluded that Black has already overcome his opening difficulties. It only remains to remind the reader that a similar plan (with colours reversed) had also occurred earlier in the English Opening, and in particular it was successfully employed for White by Nimzowitsch. 7 �d5 As has already been mentioned, this can only lead to exchanges. After 7 0--0 tl:Jge7 8 f4 0--0 followed by . . . f7-f5 Black also has no difficulties. 7 ... 8 c3 �ge7! Not fearing 8 .tg5 h6 9 .tf6 0--0. The initial cause of all White's problems! Black now rids himself of the only defect of his position - the weak­ ness of the d5 square. In addition, d3-d4 8 9 10 exd5 0-0 �xdS �e7 The variation 10 d4 exd4 1 1 cxd4 cxd4 1 2 lBxd4 0--0 ! (but not 12 . . . t'Dxd5 1 3 0--0 tl:Je7 14 lBb5 d5 1 5 .tf4) is advantageous to Black - the activity of his bishop at g7 increases sharply. 10 11 • • f4 • 0--0 White should nevertheless have risked 1 1 d4. After the pseudo-active continuation in the game, he ends up in a difficult position. The f4 pawn will restrict the activity of the bishop at c I and the knight at e2. The position of the white king is weakened and may become uneasy. As for the possibility of the exchange of f- and e-pawns, for White to go in for it (f4xe5) is clearly unfavourable, whereas Black can ex­ change pawns ( . . . e5xf4) at a favourable 359 moment. As a result White's game is restricted by the fact that he must always be prepared for this exchange. 11 • . . by 17 fxe5 on account of 17 . . . ..th6 1 8 'ilfc2 lLle3 . 17 .id7 �h2 ..th6 By the threat of 12 ...Wc8 Black provokes 12 h3, which weakens still further the white king's position. 12 f.xe5 dxe5 1 3 d6 lllf5 14 ..txb7 l::tb8 is unpromising for White. 12 13 h3 .teJ ilc7 White plays his bishop to f2, where it would seem to defend his king better. But in the process the c l -h6 diagonal is weakened, and Black soon exploits this. 13 ..td2 was more circwnspect. 13 14 . . • 'ilfd2 l:lae8 The queen will be badly placed on this diagonal, so now White should have completed the planned manoeuvre of his bishop to f2. 14 15 16 ..tf2 l:lael tl)f5 h5 There is no longer time for such moves. While it was not too late, White should have increased the scope for his pieces by 16 g4 hxg4 17 hxg4 ltlh6 18 g5, although at first sight this seems dangerous. Now, however, Black closes this 'loop-hole' too, after which White will be completely deprived of any active possibilities. 16 . . • Vd8! In order after 17 g4 hxg4 18 hxg4 to reply 18 . . . tbh4, exchanging one of the white bishops, which instead of the pawns are now covering the white king. White cannot uy to relieve the situation The storm clouds are gathering over White's kingside. He again cannot play 1 8 g4 in view of 1 8 . . . hxg4 19 hxg4 ltlh4 20 g5 ltlxg2 2 1 @xg2 exf4 22 gxh6 'ii'g5+ 23 'it>h2 Wxh6+ 24 'it?gl Wg5+ 25 'it?h2 <i;g7. Meanwhile, Black intends to break up the enemy king's fortress by . . . h5h4. For example, 18 'ilfc2 exf4 19 ltlxf4 h4, or 1 8 ..tgl h4 19 g4 tl)g3 . Therefore White decides to block the black h5 pawn, hoping to defend his f4, but Black finds a combinative motif, enab­ ling him to attack successfully this important point 18 h4 'fff6! The decisive . move, although it contradicts one of the main attacking rules - don't advance the queen in front of your minor pieces. The black queen · is apparently in a dangerous position, but White cannot exploit this. White has no satisfactory defence against the threat of 19 ... exf4 20 lllxf4 · lLlxh4, and if 19 ..tgl there immediately 360 follows 19 . . . tbxh4! , so therefore he loses a pawn. 19 20 21 22 .i.e4 ll'lxf4 .i.eJ .i.xf5 exf4 ll'lxh4 lt'lf5 The 'thematic' variation, in which the main idea of Black's plan is revealed, looks like this: 22 CDxh5 gxh5 23 .!txf5 (23 .i.xh6 'i'xh6) 23 ... .i.xe3 24 �xe3 'ifg5 ! ! (weaker is 24 .. . ilxf5 25 :en l:i.e5 26 d4 cxd4 27 cxd4 l:!xd5 28 'i'f2), and White loses the exchange. 22 • • • 23 24 1!i'g2 1!t'e2 llxe2 l:lee1 h4 28 29 30 31 32 llxe5 d4 'it>xg3 'it>b2 .i.eJ l:txe5 hxg3+ l:lg5+ l:lf5 32 33 34 35 36 cxd4 'it>b7 .:.n g5 ll'le2 l1xf2+ f5 .i.xf2 White resigns cxd4 One of the decisive games of the match! W'g4 Otherwise there follows 24 . . . h4, but all the same White cannot avoid this. 24 25 26 .i.f2 Black cannot now win a piece: if 32 ... g5 there is the reply 33 l:!gl , but with his next two moves he creates this threat. 1!t'x:f5 Here the black queen can be attacked - 23 tbe6, but after 23 . . . ilxe3 ! 24 'ii'xe3 'ifxd5 White's position is hope­ less. For the moment Black still has that same minimal material advantage (one pawn), but his positional superiority has grown greatly. 27 Now Black will have two connected passed pawns. 1Wxe2+ l:te5 llfe8 Game 225 M.Botvinnik-V.SmysJov World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 16th game King's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 g3 ilg2 'll'lf6 g6 .i.g7 0-0 5 6 ll'lc3 e3 d6 Smyslov is happy to repeat the opening that brought him success in the previous even-numbered game. Avoiding 6 00 tbbd7 7 0--0 e5 8 e4 c6 9 .i.e3 tbg4 I 0 .!lg5 'ilib6 with very complicated play, not unfavourable for Black, as occurred in the 14th game. 361 The method of development chosen in the present game cannot give White an opening advantage, and the weight of the struggle is transferred to the middlegame. 6 • . • 7 l£ige2 8 9 bJ .lil.aJ l£ibd7 e5 In the 18th game of the match (No.227), without spending time on this move, Black immediately began pre­ paring active play on the queenside by 7 . . . a6 8 b3 :bs, which was immediately suppressed - 9 a4. • • • � dxe5 12 c5! a6 l£ixe5 An imperceptible inaccuracy, after which White's game is no longer worse. Correct was 1 1 ...dxe5 !, as Black played in a similar position in the 20th game, when his position was perhaps slightly preferable. l:l.e8 This manoeuvre is much stronger after a2-a4, as in the 1 8th game; in this case Black does not have· counterplay with . . . b7-b5. However, before Black has played . . . a7-a6 or . . . l:.b8, it is hard for White to decide on a2-a4. In general, it is easy to see that White, with colours reversed, is adop­ ting the same strategy that is typical for Black in the closed variation of the Sicilian Defence. Tilis, for example, is how the game Alexander-Botvinnik (Nottingham 1936) developed. 9 10 11 The following exchange seems to favour Black, since he obtains a pawn majority on the queenside. However, White's e- and f-pawns prove to be more mobile. In addition, now . . . b7-b5 will be pointless, and hence the moves . . . a7-a6 and . . . :bs turn out to be a loss of time. l:t.b8! An excellent plan! In view of the threat of . . . a7-a6 and then . . . b7-b5-b4 winning a piece, White must play cautiously. Black could not play 9 . . . e4, as after l O 'i!fc2 ile7 1 1 g4 White would advantageously give up his g-pawn for the central e4 pawn. Also good here was the preparatory 9 . . .h5 - a refinement employed by Smyslov in the 20th game of the match, and after IO h3 - 10 . . . a6. 12 13 • • . ilxc5 dxc5 b6 There was no point in Black playing 1 3 . . . tDed7 in view of 14 .i.a7! l:a8 1 5 .i.d4, after which White's pieces are more actively placed. However, strange though it may seem, it would have been more advantageous for Smyslov himself to exchange · queens, even though this appears to lose a tempo in the battle for the open file. The point is that 362 1 3 . . . 'i'xdl 14 l:laxdl b6 15 i.d4 c5 16 i.xe5 l:lxe5 17 e4 leads to a position which subsequently Black will unsuc­ cessfully try to obtain. 14 lS Wxd8 i.d4 l:l.xd8 lle8 Now it is clear why Black has lost time. Of course, the 'obvious' 16 l:lad l c5 17 .i.xe5 l:lxe5 1 8 e4 would have led to the position that Black missed on his 13th move; in this case the game would have been roughly equal. But White also has another possibility - an imme­ diate offensive in the centre. 16 e4! .i.b7 17 f4 ttleg4 18 h3! The only way! After 18 e5 c5 ! 19 exf6 cxd4 White would have been in a critical position, and no better was 18 i.xf6 .i.xf6 19 e5 .i.xg2 20 �xg2 tt'le3+. 18 • . • cs Forced. Black, of course, had been hoping for 1 8. . .lCixe4 19 hxg4? tt'lxc3 ! with an easy win, but at this moment he observed that his combination would be refuted by the prosaic exchange 19 .i.xe4! .i.xe4 20 hxg4. Now he faces a difficult defence in the endgame. 19 20 21 22 23 The balance could almost have been maintained by 16 ...tt'lc6 17 .i.xf6 (or 17 .i.e3 tt'lb4) 17 . .. i.xf6 18 %lad 1 tt'lb4. Instead, Smyslov plays for a trap, but falls into it himself, since in one of the variations he overlooks an intermediate exchange. .i.xf6 es Wxg2 l:.adl l:l.d6! ttlxf6 .i.xg2 ttld7 ttlf8 It was still possible to avoid the intended continuation: 1 7. . . tt'lc6 18 i.xf6 Slxf6 19 l:ladl , and there is little doubt about White's advantage. Even so, Black should have played this. How the position has changed in just a few moves! Black no longer has the two bishops, and his remaining one has no prospects. The d-file has been lost, and the weakness of the d6 square is especially unpleasant - for this reason the important advance . . . f7-f6 cannot be made. It is hard, if at all possible, for 363 Black to · find a good plan. As was correct pointed out by Romanovsky, if 23 ... l::te6 White can advantageously continue 24 l::tfdl f6 (24 ... l::tbe8 25 tl:la4) 25 l::txe6 tl:lxe6 26 l::td6 '3;f7 27 exf6 .i.xf6 28 l::td7+ @g8 29 tl:ld5. 23 24 .. t:Lle4! • 24 25 . llfdl 26 l:txd8 21 l:txd8 l:ted8 At'S llxd8 tl:lxd8 28 29 �g7 Now White wins a pawn by force. 29 tl:le8+ @g8 30 tl:lc7 tl:le6 (30. . . a5 3 1 a4 and 3 2 tl:ld5) 3 1 t:Lixa6 was also possible, but White thought that before winning the a6 pawn it would be more advantageous to provoke . . . b6-b5. ·The manoeuvre 'it>f3-e4 was also tempting, refraining for the moment from the win of a pawn. Reckoning that all these variations were roughly equiv­ alent, in the endgame White neverthe­ less preferred . . . a material advantage! 29 30 31 32 tl:lc7 � gxf4 bxc4 t:Lixa6 35 t:Lic7! 35 36 37 38 39 40 fxe5 <it>e4 a4 a5 a6 41 t:Llb5 bxc4 f6 lLle6 . Now the f6 square is fixed. Black's position is difficult, and he understand­ ably tries to weaken White's pressure by exchanging all the rooks. However, this makes things simpler for the stronger side, as the opponent will have no hope of counterplay. tl:lf6+ t:Lid5 33 34 b5 g5 gxf4 c4 This decision merely accelerates Black's inevitable defeat, since White immediately acquires a passed pawn on the a-file. White goes in for a variation in which he gives up his h3 pawn. Of course, he could have avoided any sacrifice by playing 35 exf6+, but then he would have been left with a pawn at f4, which is less dangerous for the · opponent than one at e5. Also, to win the h3 pawn the black king is diverted to the edge of the board, and it will be unable to take part in the main events. fxe5 'it>g6 @gs 'it>h4 tl:lc6 @xh3 The time scramble had ended, and White was able to ponder over which move to seal. Black's misfortunes are aggravated by the fact that his bishop cannot move onto the a7-g l diagonal (41....i.c5 42 'it>d5 tl:lb4+ 43 @xc5 tZ:lxa6+ 44 @d6). Now 42 tl:led4 is threatened, ensuring 364 the promotion of the a-pawn, and Black is forced to sacrifice his c-pawn in order to delay his defeat. 41 42 43 44 lbbxc3 tbd4 tbd5! World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 1 7th game King's Indian Attack c3 �g4 CDa7 1 2 3 4 5 tbtJ g3 il.g2 0-0 d3 lDf6 g6 .i.g7 0-0 White attempts to employ the King's Indian Defence with colours reversed. But the point is that Black can achieve success in this opening only when White has already played d2-d4. In the given case too, if Black acts cautiously (does not hurry with . . . d7-d5), it is hard for White to gain an advantage. h5 The white larights control the entire board. The only attempt to put up a resistance, albeit also a hopeless one, was 44 . . . ..ti>h5, since now Black loses a second pawn. Apparently my opponent reckoned that the aim of the ' adjournment session' had been achieved - White had not gained an additional free evening when he could relax and now he himself was seeking a convenient terminate to the opportunity 'struggle' . . . - 45 Game 226 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik 5 6 c5 tbc6 d5 7 In the light of the preceding note, this move should not have been made: it turns out that Black falls in with his opponent's wishes to initiate typical King's Indian play. 7 ... d6 was more cautious, and if 8 tiJbd2 e5, as in the game between the same players from the 22nd USSR Championship (1955). 8 e5 White forces the play prematurely and ends up in a difficult position. 8 l'Llbd2 was correct. tbf6+ Black resigns If 45 . . . 'it>g5, then 46 . CDh7+, or 45 ... 'it>h4 46 00+, if there is nothing else. e4 c3 8 9 .. d4 • tbeS il.g4! This simple manoeuvre completely refutes the over-hasty advance in the centre. The white d4 and e5 pawns turn out to be convenient targets for counterplay by Black. · 365 · account of 15 . . . ..txeS 16 .i.xe6+ 'it>h8 (16 . . .@g7 17 'ii'd2) 17 ltJd2 with a double-edged game. If 15 ... f:Dc7 there follows 16 f4. Therefore all that remains for Black is the forced, but not un­ favourable advance of his d-pawn. 15 16 • hJ 10 11 12 13 ..txfJ .i.eJ cxd4 This reaction is essential in view of the threat of 10 . . . Wd7. ..txf3 e6 cxd4 f6 17 18 If now White were obliged to exchange on f6, his position would become completely bad. However, he has an opportunity, by attacking the e6 pawn, of gaining an important tempo for supporting the centre by f2-f4. 14 .i.g4 fxe5 1 5 f4 cannot be allowed. The move played suggests itself, since it is unfavourable for White to take the e6 pawn -15 he6+ @hS 16 dxeS &Dc7 17 ..tg4 d4 18 .i.d2 &Dxe5, and Black has an obvious advantage. But Smyslov defends very calmly and is able, by delaying the capture on e6, to renew the threat of f2-f4. 15 dxe5! A precise move order. Now Black cannot take the central pawn with his knight 'in view of 15 . . .ltJxeS 16 .ixe6+ and 17 ilxdS, or with his bishop on . d4 Again the bishop could not hurry with the capture of the pawn: 16 .ixe6+ 'it>h8 17 ili4 ltJc7 18 ..tb3 ti)d5 ! 19 ..txd5 'i'xdS is in Black's favour. ltJxe5 16 This move cannot be delayed any further in view of the threat of 17 f4. White too cannot now keep the capture of the pawn in reserve. . 10 • .id2! . . ..txe6+ .i.f4! <it>b8 The saving move! White covers the f3 square and threatens to exchange Black's most active piece - his lmight at es . ltJc7 18 • . . 19 .i.bJ 19 ... 20 Wg4 White has achieved much, and, as is evident from the preceding comments, mainly because he avoided the premature capture of the e6 pawn. ll'lc6 Black has no choice, since he must not allow the exchange of his centralised knight. Securing the g5 square for his bishop; otherwise after 20 . . . f:Dd5 he would been virtually forced to retreat it to c l (leaving d2 for the development of his knight). How can Black exploit his temporary and not so significant lead in develop- 366 ment? In the event of 20. . . tba5 2 1 ttld.2 l°iJxb3 22 ttlxb3 he does not gain any real advantage, while after 20 ... d3 2 1 lbc3 ttld4 2 2 l:tadl or 2 2 i.c4 White is again satisfactorily placed. Nevertheless! 22 • • • lt)eJ! Even so, White finds the only way to save the game. 20 ... In principle this decision is correct, except that Black should have first played 20 ...l:tf5, when after 2 1 h4 (securing the g5 square for the bishop) 2 1 . . . ttld5 22 i.g5 he would have the reply 22 . . . i.f6, and, in contrast to the game, White would be unable to gain a tempo by 23 .ih6, while after 23 .txf6+ ttlxf6 Black has a good game. This proved to be a significant moment in the game. 21 Ags 'ifa5 From the previous note it follows that if 2 1 . . . .tf6 White would have replied 22 i.h6 and 23 ttld.2. Now, however, his development seems to be hampered, since if 22 ttla3 there is the reply 22 . . . ttlb6 (but not 22 ... ttleS 23 ttlc4) with the threat of 23 ...ttle5, while against 22 ttld2 a little combination had been prepared. . 23 24 ttld5 fxeJ %hf8+! 1ixd2 After 24 exd4 Wxb2 ! (the queens should not be exchanged earlier than necessary) the black pieces would have taken up threatening positions. 24 25 • • • k'tfl! D.xf8 All accurately calculated. Now Black can no longer avoid the exchange of rooks, after which he will be forced to give perpetual check. 25 . lbfl+ • . 26 <it>xfl · · 1!fcl+ 27 28 29 <ba. <it>g2 Wd2+ Wet+ The point is that White is threatening Wc8+ or 'iie6 followed by Wg8 mate. �g2 Naturally, the king chooses squares where, apart from the queen, nothing can attack it. 22 . lt)d2! 367 29 30 <it>f1 1fxb2+ 1'cl+ If 30 ... 'ifa3 3 1 'ii'c8+ 'ifffi+ 32 1!fxf8+ ..txf8 33 exd4 ll'ixd4 34 ..tf6+ ..tg7 35 ..txd4 and the draw is obvious. 31 In a game Petrosian-Spassky ( 1966) instead of this Black replied 9 . . .a5, but White retained the better prospects. �g2 Draw agreed 10 ..ta3 If 3 1 . . . ll'ie5 White can advantage­ ously play 32 ifxd4. Game 227 M.Botvinnik-V.Smyslov World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 18th game King's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 gJ ..tg2 ltlf6 g6 J.g7 0-0 10 ltlcJ The critical dispute continues. White lost with this opening in the 14th game, but won in the 16th. This means that now it can be expected that the first to deviate will be Smyslov. 5 6 e3 7 ltlge2 d6 ltlbd7 a6 b3 a4 l:r.b8 A good plan: now . . . b7-b5 is not possible, and Black has to seek an alternative. 9 • • • • • b6! 11 12 0-0 d5 ..tb7 12 13 14 e4 1!fc2 ltlc5 h5 15 ltael h4 Hardly advisable. Instead the follow­ ing line suggests itself: 12 dxe5 ltlxe5 (12 ... ..txg2 13 exf6 ..txfl 14 fx.g7 q;;xg7 1 5 �xfl, and White has a material advantage) 13 e4 a5, and although the black laright at c5 will also be well placed, White has more possibilities. And that is what happens: in contrast to the previous even-numbered game, Black begins play on the queenside without wasting time on . . . e7-e5. Even so, 7 ... e5 8 b3 l:te8 was preferable, and after 9 ..ta3 - 9 . . . h5, as the 20th game of the match developed. 8 9 • Correctly played! After . . . ..tb7 White will have to either exchange the light-square bishops, pennitting a weakening of his f3 square, or advance one of his central pawns, which allows the black knight a good post at c5. a5 A well-known manoeuvre. Apart from the standard plan of . . . tl'ih7 and ... f7-f5, Black can always neutralise the active advance f2-f4 by . . . h5-h4xg3. e5 368 Perhaps the correct decision, since after 15 . . . ll:lh7 16 f4 exf4 1 7 gxf4 f5 18 exf5 gxf5 1 9 ll:lb5 and lDed4 White's game is to be preferred. 16 i.cl i.c8! 17 ll:lb5 17 i.g5 'ife8 ! 18 i.xh4 was dangerous on account of 18 . . . ll:lh7 19 f4 f6, and in order to save the bishop, g3g4 would have to be played. And if 17 f4 there could have followed 17 . . . hxg3 18 hxg3 exf4 19 gxf4 ll:lg4 with the unpleasant threat of 20 . . . 'iWh4. 17 • • • i.g5! 21 22 23 il.d7 The need to act on the kingside (17 . . . lZ:lh7 and . . . f7-f5) had already become acute, but instead Black has a different · plan: although he eliminates the knight at b5, he gives up his bishop for it, which seems anti-positional ! 18 it merely strengthens the white castled position. Was this decision forced? The sacrifice of the h4 pawn - 18. . . 'i'c8 apparently did not appeal to Black. Then there could have followed 1 9 t/Ja.7, and if 1 9 . . . 'i!fb7 20 ll:lc6 .i.xc6 21 dxc6 'i'xc6 22 .txh4 lZ:lh7 23 f4 f6 24 g4 with unclear play. And in the event of 1 9... 'ii'e8 20 i.xh4 ll:lh7 2 1 g4 .ixg4 22 lLic6 lila8 23 JJ..e7 Black would have lost the exchange, but would have gained some positional compensation in the forthcoming complicated battle. From this it follows that the decision to advance the pawn to h3 was by no means forced, and, on the contrary, the pawn could have been sacrificed. .txb5 19 iJ..h l Every exchange simplifies the position, which, as already mentioned, is to White's advantage. In addition, Black is now left without his bishop which was defending the h3 pawn. 1Wd7 20 cxb5 h3 Now the entire manoeuwe . . . h7-h5h4 loses its point, since in the · given position, with White's king's bishop on the board, the pawn at h3 securely defends . . . the white king. In addition, as the game simplifies this pawn may become weak, and at h3 i.xf6! lbcl lbd3 iJ..xf6 .i.g7 23 . 24 lbxc5 25 i.f3! f5 dxc5 25 26 ifd6 The exchange of a third pair of minor pieces is also inevitable! Intending 26 'i'e2 and 27 g4. Black, apparently, did not suspect this idea, since with his next move he assists its implementation. However, all the same this positional threat (g3-g4) could not have been parried. 369 g4! 28 @bl 'it>e7 It can be said that it is only this unprovoked journey of the king, first to . e7 and then to d8, that gives White real winning chances. If Black had placed his rooks on h4 and h8, his bishop on e7 and his king on g7, White would probably have had to settle for an immediate draw. But at e7 and d8 the king is not safe, and so the battle continues. 29 30 . . . h7-h5-h4-h3 and . . . f7-f5 it was easy for even e>..."}Jerts to be deceived), now all illusions are dispelled. The threat of 27 gxf5 gxf5 28 exf5 with the occupation of the e4 square is so unpleasant, that in searching for a way to save the game, Black tries to block the position. • . • g5 f4 An essential move; if White were to allow . . . g6-g5, he would lose any possibility of breaking into the enemy position. This last move involves a pawn sacrifice (27 . . .'fle7 28 'it>hl 1!fxg5), but in this case White does not risk anything, whereas Black faces a difficult defence. It is this that explains the decision: White plays on, and Black declines the win of the pawn. 27 • . . l:tb8 In order, given the opportunity, to play d5-d6, and also to attack the h3 pawn with the rook from d3 . Whereas up till now it might have seemed that Black had quite a good game (in evaluating the pawn offensive 26 27 Agl :dt 30 31 32 Ad3 'ffe2 Ah4 1!i'd7 For the moment the 32 d6+ break­ through was not dangerous for Black in view of 32 . . . cxd6 3 3 ngdl :d8. An 32 . • • l:tbb8 omission, which goes un­ punished. Black should have restored the blockade of the d-pawn by 32 . . . 'ifd6, and to 33 .1i.g4 replied 3 3 . . . :bh8. @f7 This must be judged a good move, since it opens the way for the rooks to the h-file, but at the same time a bad one; since Black associates it with a faulty idea. 370 33 .ig4 White should have played 33 d6+ cxd6 34 .llg4 'iic7 3 5 l:t.gd l ltd8 36 :xh3 , developing a dangerous initiative (pointed out by Averbakh). 33 • • • 1lfd6 The only move, since 33 ... Vd8 34 d6+ cxd6 35 ltgdl and then 36 l:.xd6 'ifxd6 37 l:.xd6 lt>xd6 38 Wdl+ is w1favourable for Black. 34 lifl has good chances of a draw in view of the closed nature of the position. It was still wrong to take the g5 pawn. After 39 . . . l:.xg5 40 i.g4 or 3 9 ... .i.xg5 40 'i':t3 and 4 1 'i'g4 Black's position would have become difficult. It should be mentioned, however, that all these subtleties would have been superfluous, if the black king had been at g7: 40 41 White does not immediately find the most favourable arrangement of his pieces, but does not lose anything as a result. 34 35 . • • :o bxc4 1Wxa3 111a3 .i.xa3 .tf8 For the moment it was not possible to win the h3 pawn (35 J:txh3 l:txh3 36 i.xh3) on account of 36 . . . c4! 37 bxc4 'ii'a 3, when Black picks up the more important a4 pawn. Therefore White decides to place his queen on the third rank, so that the a3 square should be defended, and for this he vacates d3. 35 . • . <li>d8 35 . @n 36 .ie6+ lt>g7 perhaps have been simpler. .. 36 37 38 1!fd3 .i.e6 lbh3 .i.e7 lt8h5 lbh3! 39 .i.xhJ c4! would Black successfully avoids a cam­ ouflaged trap: after the natural reply 38 . . . :XgS there would have followed 39 i.g4 ! ! l:.gxg4 40 l:.xg4 ltxg4 4 1 lth8+ .tf8 (4 1 . . .lt>d7 42 'i'h3) 42 'i'h3 l:tg5 43 'i'h6, and White's attack becomes decisive. 25Here too this is good (cf. the note to White's 3 5th move), since in the ending, despite being two pawns down, Black After the adjournment of the game this position was of course analysed by both players. The ending would be completely drawn, were it not for the possibility of White breaking through by sacrificing his bishop (42 i.f5), or by playing his rook to h3. I came to the conclusion that this second possibility did not give any chances, for example: 42 .i.g4 l:th8 (neutralising the threat of .if5) 43 lt>g2 lt>e7 (43 ... ..te7 is weaker in view of 44 d6 cxd6 45 c5 bxc5 46 b6) 44 l:.dl l:.h4 45 1'.e2 1'.c5 46 ltd3 <i>d6 47 l:lh3 1'.xf2 48 .i.fl ltxh3 49 'it>xh3 ' and after 49 ., . . lt>e7 50 ..ie2 (50 �g4 .tgl 5 1 h4 .i.f2 52 h5 c;1a/)_ 5o. . . ..ie3 5 1 371 ..tf3 ..tf2 52 ..tg4 .i.e3 53 ..te6 f3 White has no real winning chances. Therefore I decided to give the spectators some pleasure by sacrificing my bishop. 42 43 ..if5 g6 In my analysis I had overlooked this spectacular move. It is no longer pos­ sible to advance h2-h4, and White is effectively playing a king down. Since 49 l:te4 �d7 50 :xe5 l:h4 does not promise White anything, and 49 <3;gl <Ji>d7 50 l:tg7+ �d6 51 .l:.g6+ leads only to perpetual check, I chose a different way to draw, in which at least the white king escapes from its prison. gxf5 A draw is also inevitable after 43 exf5 <3;e7 44 f3 <t;n 45 :g4 Ji..e7 46 h4 ..txg5, while 44 f6+ 'iW?! 45 g6+ �g8 46 g7 :rs 47 :g6 e4 48 l:.h6 l:tg5 49 h4 :g4 is even dangerous for White. 43 • .. ..tf8 The only move, but sufficient to save the game. 43 . . . l:th8 44 g7 l:g8 45 h4 i...e7 (or 45 . . . 'itie7 46 h5 � 47 h6) 46 h5 ..tf6 47 h6 <tfe7 48 l:g6 was hopeless for Black. 44 45 46 47 exf5 f6 g7 l:l:x:g7 ..tg7! .i.xf6 ..t:x:g7 fJ! Of course, this position too was studied by both players. I thought that Black would gain a draw by 47 . . . e4, but Smyslov found a more convincing way. He is threatening to play 48.: ..:M. 48 l:tg4 49 50 51 :gJ l:l.:x:fJ lla3 l:th4 lixc4 The a4 pawn must not be given up! 51 52 53 54 'iiftg2 'iiftg3 h3! @d7 'itid6 @xd5 Caution is still necessary. After 54 h4 White would have been in . danger of losing this pawn after the journey of the black king to h5. Now, however, the presence of the outside passed h-pawn guarantees White a draw. 54 55 56 57 58 l:th3!! w <ii?g3 w @e6 @f5 cbg5 %tf4+ 'iiftg3 Draw agreed A fighting game! Game 228 V.SmysJov-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 19th game French Defence 1 e4 e6 And so, ten games later - again the French Defence. Which variation this 372 time, following his brilliant win in the 9th game, will my opponent choose? 2 3 4 d4 ltJcJ a3 is in the endgame that he has good chances. Therefore he immediately offers the exchange of queens. d5 .ilb4 Smyslov does not repeat the sharp continuation 4 e5 c5 5 a3 .ta5 6 b4 cxd4 7 'i!fg4, which he employed in the afore-mentioned game. Evidently he had come to the conclusion· that because of the match situation he could not risk it again, and he chooses quiet develop­ ment, aiming for a slight, but solid advantage. I myself think that 4 JLd2 is more logical, since in the game the doubled, and then tripled c-pawns plus the tempo wasted by White (a2-a3) give Black good counter-chances. 4 5 6 7 s bxcJ 'ffg4 Wxg7 Wh6 .*.xcJ+ dxe4 ltJf6 llgS cs 9 l2Je2 t:Dc6 This is how events developed in a training game Ragozin-Botvinnik, played back in 1936. Then I played this same variation against Romanovsky ( 1 938), and several times against Smyslov. Another acceptable plan is 8 . . . ng6 followed by the fianchetto of the queen's bishop. The present game shows that this To be honest, I was genuinely sur­ prised when my opponent made this move. You see, the opening of the 7th game had been unfavourable for me, and it would have seemed that White should ainl to repeat the position, by playing 1 1 'ife3 . I would then have faced a different problem: I would have had to find the correct reply to 1 1 We3 1 1 . . . ii'a5 (instead of l L.ll'ig4). At the same time I had, of course, also analysed 1 1 Vd2, which for a long time had been considered the strongest. When it appeared on the board, I was staggered by the coincidence in our understanding of the. position. If 12 . . . 'i'a5 White can now advantage­ move is premature. 9. . .l:.g6 is correct, as played in the 7th and 2 1 st games. The latter of these is given below. 10 u dxc5 .l:lg6 'i' d2! Smyslov demonstrates a · highly subtle understaRding of the position: U1anks to White's two strong bishops, it 373 ously continu� 12 ll'id4 ! with the threat of 1 3 ll'ib5. immediately after the 7th game I had . been unable to find a satisfactory solution for Black, which later became obvious. 11 ; ... .ild7 Now 1 2 ll'id4 is no longer dangerous on account of 12 . . . a6 ! Here Smyslov thought for a long time, from which it can be concluded that in his analysis he had not studied this move. However, having a clear goal before him (the exchange of queens), at the board my opponent found a very strong continuation. 12 manoeuvre that he had apparently pre­ pared beforehand. 15 %1bl! ... 11id6 Very consistent. 13 14 i!lxc7+ a6 16 Af4+ 17 g3 17 18 .*.d2 @cs Of course, not 16 ... e5 17 l£lxc6. This move in turn had gone unnoticed during my analysis. Since 12 ... 'i!i'a5 13 li)f4 ! l:tg8 14 J:xb7 0--0--0 15 l:X.b5 looks very dubious for Black, he is forced to agree to the exchange of queens. 12 13 l£ld4 Naturally, the knight should not be allowed to go to b5, and with this Black's main difficulties come to an end. This is wrong, since now the initiative passes to Black. 17 i.xa6 bxa6 1 8 l:lb6 l£ld5 ! was also harmless for him. White merely had to reckon with one threat: 1 7. . . l£ld5, and to parry it with 17 i.d6. Then if l 7 ... tiJe8 there would have followed 1 8 i.g3, while if l 7 . tiJd5 1 8 @d2, in each case retaining a good game. 'i!i'c7 0-0-0 ¢1xc7 .. The first outcome is that White has achieved his aim, and, thanks to his two bishops . and extra pawn, his position is preferable. Now 15 tiJg3 suggests itself ( 1 5 . . . h5 16 h4), in order to tie down the knight at f6 to the defence of the e4 pawn. This would have been the most unpleasant for Black. Smyslov, how­ ever, does not want to abandon a l£ld5 e5 Here are the results of White's preceding errors - he unexpectedly finds himself in a difficult position In the event of 1 9 tiJxc6 i.xc6 20 .i.h3+ i.d7 the tripled pawns will not be easy to defend. The continuation in the game also has its drawbacks. 374 19 20 21 ltlb3 ..tg2 0--0 The showy 26 ltJa5 lbxg2 27 lhb7+ <it>c8 28 lteb 1 e3 was, of course, not in White's favour. ..tg4 f5 ..to But Black should not have been in a hmry to play this. Thirigs would have developed clearly in his favour after 2 1 . . .h5 22 f3 exf3 23 ..txf3 .i.xf3 24 l:txf3 f4 25 :e l h4. This line clearly shows that Black's extra pawn on the kingside is more important than White's two extra pawns on the queenside. 22 .i.h3 22 23 :rel 24 .tg2 26 27 • • • • .ixf4 exfJ And now if 27 ltJa5 there would have followed the prosaic 27 . . . t2Je2+, when Black's spatial advantage is obvious. White still has work to do, in order to restore the balance. 27 exf4 The two sides' pawns are very picturesquely arranged. But whereas White's pawns on the queenside are blocked, the black pawns at f4, f5 and h5 are participating in the attack on g3, an important defensive point. . 22 .i.xf3 exf3 23 <it>hl h5 was unpromising for White, and he tries at least somehow to complicate his opponent's task. Unexpectedly these tactics prove successful. • • J:lf8 • • <i!i>c7 Another instance where a natural move (removing the pin on the f5 pawn) proves to be a serious inaccuracy. Black underestimates (both now, and later) the manoeuvre lbb3 -a5 ! (after c3-c4), and in the end loses his advantage. He should have immediately played 23 . . . h5 ! , when White would have been in a critical position. h5 Too late! Meanwhile, with 24 . . . ..txg2 25 <it>xg2 h5 26 h4 (or 26 <it>f1 h4 27 gxh4 lbf4) 26. . . f4 27 J;[xe4 fxg3 28 fxg3 '1fg8 ! (29 ..tg5 ttJxc3) Black would have gained a clear advantage. 25 c4! ltlf4 After 25. . . lbde7 26 ltJa5 ! tt)xas 27 .�xa5+ �c8 28 ..txf3 exf3 29 ..tc3 (but not 29 l:txe5 lbc6) 29... e4 30 llbdl the play would have become double-edged. But now Black retains some pressure. 26 ..txfJ 28 ltld2 The knight is needed for the defence of the kingside. The rook ending - 28 c3 l:.d8 ! 29 t2Jd4 lbxd4 30 cxd4 llxd4 3 1 l:le7+ was clearly in Black's favour after 3 1 . . . 'ifi>c6! (32 l:tb6+ �xc5) . 28 29 . • • lDxfJ! . fxgJ The only defence: 29 fxg3 f4 3 0 <it>f2 fxg3+ 3 1 hxg3 h4 ! would have led to a win for Black. 375 29 30 . �xh2 • • gxh2+ :rg8 This knight manoeuvre enables Black to suppress the initiative that the opponent was about to obtain. 30 . . . :g4 was probably . weaker: 3 1 �h3 l:txc4 3 2 t'iJg5. 31 �h3 38 39 :g4 Black does not exploit all his 1;hances. After 3 1 . . .l::tg2 32 l:te2 l:t8g3+ 33 fxg3 l:txe2 (34 t'iJh4 t'iJe7) with the exchange of one pair of rooks White's position would have deteriorated, since his counterplay involving threats to the b7 pawn would have been reduced to the minimum. 32 lle6 32 33 ... llf6 Only in this way can White on attack on the enemy pawns. lt)cJ :ee2 The aim is achieved: the rook no longer needs to guard the seventh rank. 40 :b6 li)d5 41 !bc2 was now sealed, but a draw was agreed without the game being resumed. The finish could have been: 4 1 . . . l:txc2 42 li)e6+ �d7 ! 43 l:td6+ @e7 44 l:txd5 �xe6 45 l:td6+. arrange Game 229 :xc4 V.Smyslov-M.Botvinnik World Championship Match Moscow 1954, 21st game French Defence Winning an important tempo, in view of the threat of 34 l:tf7+. 33 34 · J:lxf5 a4 :c4 :g7 %bc2 1 2 3 4 e4 d4 lt)cJ e6 d5 .i.b4 a3 And so, Smyslov again avoids 4 e5, which was mentioned in the notes to the previous game. However, even in this comparatively simple variation with 4 a3 an opening surprise awaited him . . . It is now obvious that the game will end in a draw, and this would have been agreed more quickly after 34 ... t'iJd4. 35 36 37 li)g5 @h4 %%.f4 l:t.e7 li)d4 li)b5 4 5 6 7 8 9 bxcJ 1!fg4 'ifxg7 Wh6 li)e2 .i.xcJ+ dxe4 lDf6 l:lg8 cs l!g6 This move, chosen by me back in the 7th game, is quite logical, whereas 9 . . .t'iJc6, as played in the 1 9th game (No.228) is weaker. White . is now · forced to detennine the position of his 376 queen, after which it is easier for Black to find the correct plan. In the 7th game · Black obtained an equal position, but subsequently I forgot ( ! ) that . White's king had already moved, and that he had lost the right to castle. As a result of this I spent a lot of time on the calculation of a variation, which by the rules of the game was not possible. 10 'ifd2 This looks unnatural. White wanted to avoid the continuation from the 7th game, 10 We3 li)c6, and was aiming for a position from the 19th game, which could have been reached after 10 . . . li)c6 1 1 dxc5. However, Black had prepared a different variation. 12 hJ An unusual plan. White is intending g2-g4-g5, but his king remains in danger. Better was 12 li)f4 %lg8 13 i.b5 Wc7 14 c4 cxd4! 1 5 'ifxd4 'ifxf4 16 'ifxf6, although even in this case Black does not face any specific threats. 12 13 14 10 • . • lDbd7! 11 i.b2 b6 An incautious move. l l...llfc7 was . more accurate, defending the c6 square in the event of ...b7-b6. .li.b7 'ifc7 Before playing g2-g4, it is essential to castle, since the king's position in the centre would be even more dangerous than on the queenside. 14 • • • 0-0-0 Carelessly played. The position is so complicated, that one hasty move can change the entire picture. The Encyclopaedia rightly gives preference to l4 . . . cxd4 1 5 cxd4 li)d5, but overrates the recommendation of 16 'it>bl %lc8 17 %tel , when there can follow 17 . . . b5 ( 18 li)g3 e3 ), and Black's chances are perhaps the more promising. 15 It becomes evident that White's main aim - the win of the c5 pawn and the exchange of queens - is unattainable. And at d2 the queen will be badly placed. l:lgl 0-0-0 1!ff4 if'c6 After lengthy consideration, Black decides. on this gambit continuation (on the next move a pawn is sacrificed). It should be mentioned that the endgame would be in White's favour, and the e4 pawn would all the same be doomed on account of the unavoidable set-up g2-g4, ttJg3 and .ig2. Therefore Black prefers to give up the central e4 pawn immediately, in or(jer to engage White in a battle now, before he has com­ pletely mobilised his fore.es. The subtle point of Black's manoeuvre is that the tempting 16 c4 (hoping for 16 . . ;cxd4 17 ttJxd4 and 16 377 lDb5) can · be met by either 16 ... a6, or 16 ... 'i'c7 17 'ii'xc7+ <l;xc7 18 c3, after which for the weakness of the e4 pawn there is some compensation in the form of the weakness of the c4 pawn. 16 g4 17 1!he4 l£id5! By establishing his IaUght on this central square and blockading the opponent's queenside, Black gains a lot for his pawn. account of 22 .i.xd5 l:txgl 23 .i.xb7+, but 20 . . . l£17f6, when 2 1 gxf5 exf5 22 lbr4 lDxf4 23 .i.xb7+ 'it>xb7 24 'il'xf4 would have led to essentially the same position as after the 32nd move, when the white g-pawn was exchanged for the black e6 pawn! It has to be admitted that Black has gained sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn. If 17 'i'xf7 there could have followed, if there is nothing better, 17 . . . lD7f6 and 1 8 . . . l:td7. 17 18 . . • .i.g2 'iia4 White is a pawn up, but he has to defend very carefully. For example, 1 8 c4 was bad because of 1 8 . . . lDb4 19 d5 exd5 20 'i'f5 l:tg5 2 1 'ii'xh7 lDIB, while 1 9 lbc3 (or the same move later) does not work in view of 19 . . . lbal+! 18 19 . . • 'ifd3 f5 White would have lost after 19 gxf5 l:txg2 20 l:txg2 ltlb4 (or 20 . . .lb5f6). Therefore he makes use of the first opportunity to move his queen off the dangerous diagonal, which gives Black an important tempo for the advance of his c-pawn. 19 . • . c4 In addition to obtaining an 'eternal' knight at d5, Black has blockaded the opponent's queenside, the position of the bishop at b2 being particularly miserable. 20 21 9'g3 Would 20 'iid2 have changed any­ thing? Black, of course, would not have replied 20. . . fxg4 2 1 hxg4 l:txg4 on • l£17f6 On the one hand, it is natural that White should aim for exchanges, to re­ duce Black's pressure. But on the other hand, when the light-square bishops and a pair of knights have disappeared, the only minor pieces remaining will be the centralised black laUght and the white bishop at b2, the 'virtues' of which have already been mentioned. · 20 • • l£if4 21 22 23 24 .i.xb7+ 'i!lxf4 1if3 l£ixf4 <l;xb7 l£id5 :f8 Black is after all a pawn down, which demands a certain caution on his part. If, for example, he had played 24 ...fxg4 378 25 hxg4, there would have been the possibility of f2-f4-f5, and the wealmess of the h7 pawn would have become more evident. Ve8 25 lldel Now, in view of the threat of 26 . . . fxg4, White is forced either to exchange his g4 pawn, or advance it. Very cautious tactics! After 30 �dl 'i'c6 3 i .i.cl �6 there would still have been a lengthy and, most probably, double-edged battle in prospect. But White prefers to exchange his g5 pawn for the e6 pawn, if only to take play into an ending. Tiris exchange has already been mentioned in the note to White's 20th move. · 26 g5 30 Tiris is the correct choice; 26 gxf5 l:txgl 27 :xgl l::txf5 28 l:lg7+ 'itra6 29 'i'e2 Wc6 30 :xh7 t:M6 3 1 l:te7 l:tx:f2! would have been to Black's advantage (32 'i'xf2 'i!rh.1+ 3 3 'itrd2 l'De4+). 26 • • • h6 h4 J:bg5! 28 29 hxg5 hxg5 It is advantageous for White to exchange the blockading rook, which is also defending the e6 pawn. llxg5 llg8 • • 1!fc6 32 33 34 llxe6 lle5 �d2 !hg5 'itrc6 a5 35 a4 llh5 The immediate 34 ...b5 was danger­ ous because of 35 a4 a6 36 l:te6+, and the c5 square should also not be weak­ ened without necessity. But Black is now ready to play 35 . . . b5, which provokes the opponent's reply. Black should not allow h3-h4-h5, since it would become hard for him to defend his e6 pawn. Now, it is true, White acquires a passed pawn, but it is not very difficult to block it. 27 28 • The c4 pawn must be defended. 31 Wxe6 \Ifxe6 Demonstrating that there is no way for White to strengthen his position. For example, 36 .i.a3 l:th3, or 36 'itre2 l:thl 37 l:txf5 l:tbl 38 i..a3 l::ta l 39 .i.f8 ttlxc3+ 40 'itrd2 ttld5 and 4 1 . . .l:txa4 with fine counterplay for Black. 36 lle6+ <j;c7 37 :e5 'ili>c6 38 l'le6+ 'itrc7 39 l:te5 'itrc6 40 Ae6+ Draw agreed Game 230 M.Botvinnik-G.Stahlberg Olympiad, Amsterdam 1954 Reti Opening 30 1 2 \!fe2 379 c4 g3 e6 d5 l i.g2 it)f6 4 5 6 it)f3 0--0 bl JJ..e7 0-0 d4 7 el it)c6! Regarding 3 . . . dxc4, cf. Game 205. An interesting attempt to occupy the centre; in this position it would not appear to have occurred previously. It has to be admitted that in this present game White did not manage . to refute this original opening set-up. Showing a subtle positional under­ standing! Black refrains from . . . c7-c5, which would be a significant loss of time, and a,ims to play . . . e6-e5. For this reason White is forced to exchange in the centre. 8 9 10 exd4 i.b2 1ixf3 it)xd4 lt)xf3+ l1b8! An idea fully in the style of Capa­ blanca. With this imperceptible move Black prepares the exchange of light­ square bishops, after which little will remain of White's opening advantage. 11 12 13 14 We2 lt)cJ l:tadl �xg2 b6 i.b7 i.xg2 c6 15 it)e4 l:tb7 Black is now contemplating activity with . . . b6-b5. Stahlberg has played the opening stage of the game excellently, but now he takes a not altogether convincing decision. 1 5 . . . it)xe4 16 "iixe4 lk8 and then ... i.f6 suggested itself, when the chances are equal. Now White carries out a curious latlght manoeuvre and sets his opponent new problems. 16 11 18 it)g5 ! tt)f3 d4 it)d7 Af6 Reti would have been happy: White makes this move only in the middle of the game and only when it is absolutely necessary. In this way he is able to avoid further siinplification and to cramp somewhat the enemy pieces. 18 . . • lies Black chose this unfortllllate position for his queen, in order to advance . . . c6c5 . But this is to the advantage of White, who obtains a pawn majority on the queenside, which with his better mobilised forces may give him an enduring initiative. I was prepared for such a situation: something similar had occurred in a training game which I played as White with Smyslov in 195 1 . 19 20 21 it)d2 it)e4 Axd4 c5 .i.xd4 21 ... cxd4 The immediate 2 1 it)d6 would not have achieved anything significant (2 1 . . . 'i!i'c6+ 22 'i!ff3 'ifxf3+ 23 'it>xf3 lbe5+ 24 <;fo1e2 l:ld7). 380 22 move the knight to the queenside and to begin an offensive there, where White has an extra pawn. llxd4 For a long time I thought that after 22 tbd6 1!i'c6+ 23 'i'f3 Black could have advantageously sacrificed the exchange - 23 . . . 'i!fxd6 24 'i'xb7 tbc5 (or 24 ... e5 25 f4 ), creating strong pressure in the centre. This opinion was based on the fact that 25 'i!fxa7 was supposedly not possible on account of 25 . . . 'ifc6+ 26 f3 lla8. But then White wins by 27 llxd4! g6 28 lld6 ! Therefore Black would have had to go into an inferior ending after 23 ... 'i'xf3+ 24 �xf3 llc7 (24...tbe5+ 25 �e4) 25 llxd4. 22 . .. tllc5 In the ending the knight at c5 will be insufficiently active, and so White hap­ pily goes in for the exchange of queens. 23 24 25 tbd6 1!i'f3 �xf3 29 30 31 32 1'c6+ 11'xf3+ lld7 llfdl �e3 l:l.d5 llxe7 32 • • • <j}f7 32 . ..tDc7 33 tbxa7 tbe8 was dubious on account of 34 .l::r.d8, but now Black has prepared this manoeuvre, although it is easily parried. 33 :c6 l:l.d7 34 35 36 l:tc8 b4! c5 lLic5 lLid3 Black's last hope is counterplay on the d-file. f6 e5 ttle6 Here I had to think for a long time. 29 tbf5 (not allowing the rook to go to e7) was very tempting, with the idea after 29 . . Jk7 30 :d6 l:te8 3 1 �d7 ! of seizing the seventh rank. But when I turned to the reply 30 ... g6! 3 1 tt'ih6+ �g7, here I was unable to find a good continuation. Therefore I decided to .:.e7 l:UJ7 The manoeuvre of the rook via d6 and c6 to c8, with the threat of lla8, would seem to be the most dangerous plan. After the game Stahlberg suggested that he would have done better to play 25 . . . lle7, since all the same Black does not manage to prevent his opponent from seizing control of the d-file. However, in this case too White would have retained the advantage. Now also White has to overcome considerable difficulties, before he is able to win. 26 27 28 ttlb5 J!d7 l:txe7 lld6! Consistently played, but, alas, it should not have proved successful. However, after 36 a3 a6 37 tbc7 ttlb2 ! Black would also have retained drawing chances. 381 36 • • • lL!xb4 finding the white queen among the pieces that had been removed from the board . . . 40 c811f+ <t/e7 41 1fc7+! This is the whole point. Since 41.. . 'it>f8 is not possible on account of 42 'i'd8+ <tJf7 43 'i'd7+ and 44 'i'xb5, Black is forced to give up his g7 and h7 pawns, and then the outcome is decided by White's passed h-pawn. 41 <"ot>e6 42 9xg7 lhd5+ If 42 . . . f:Dxa2, then 43 'i'gS+. 43 w l:ta5 44 'Wxh7 The sealed move. Perhaps it would have been rather more accurate to play 44 'it'g8+ first, but at that moment I did not suspect that Black could decline the win of the a2 pawn! • Black had to give up something. He invites his opponent to choose between being the exchange up or having queen against rook and knight. White prefers the latter, and in the end he converts his material advantage, since the black pieces proves to be badly placed. Meanwhile, Black should have sac­ rificed even more material: 36 . . .bxc5 37 bxc5 J:d5 ! 38 f:Dc7 l:.xc5 39 'it>xd3 'it>g6 ! , when the white pieces are pinned, which gives him excellent chances of gaining a draw. 37 • • c6! Now this pawn cannot be stopped without losing material. 37 38 . • • c7 l:ld5 l:i:xb5 Of course, not 38 ... llc5 39 l:l.d8. Here White rightly avoided the position where he was the exchange up (39 l:td8 lk5 40 cS'i' l:lxc8 41 l:txc8 l:Dxa2), since in the given situation it would have been very difficult, if at all possible, to convert this advantage. 39 :.f8+ 'it>xf8 Stahlberg obligingly suggested to me what I should promote my pawn to, by During my analysis I had to spend the most time on 44 . . .f5 (after 44 'i'g8+ 'it>d6 45 'lixh7 Black would not have had this possibility). Even so, a solution was found: 45 'i'g6+ iL!f6 46 h4 e4+ 47 'it>g2 'it>e7 26 48 'i'g5! �e6 49 h5! f4 50 'i'xf4 l:txh5 5 1 g4 l:tes 52 'lb.6 <tJf7 53 382 g5 liJ.e8 54 g6+ 'itrf6 55 g7+ <bi7 56 'i'f4+, and Black must resign. It all turned out much more simply after Black's reply in the game. pionship ( 1933). The Encyclopaedia mentions that the author of this move is Erik Lundin, although it only cites the game Capablanca-Lundin (1936). Since then much water had flowed under the bridge, and the entire variation had been analysed in detail. lba2 l:ld2 liJ.e7 f5 If 47 ... lld8, then 48 1!fg7 �5 44 45 46 47 h4 h5 h6 9 liJ.e4 (48 . . .:gs 49 'flxg8+!) 49 'i'g4 l:[h8 50 'iii?e4. 48 49 50 "iig7 � g2 e4+ e3 h7 Black resigns If 50 . . . e2 there follows the prosaic 5 1 'i'h6+ and · 52 'i'xd2, while after 50 . . . l:txf2+ 5 1 'iii?g l White acquires a second queen (or more precisely, the third over the course of the game). Game 231 M.Botvinnik-N.Minev Olympiad, Amsterdam 1954 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 liJ.f3 c4 d4 liJ.c3 e3 .tdJ 1Lxc4 liJ.f6 c6 d5 e6 liJ.bd7 dxc4 b5 8 .td3 b4 A transposition of moves has led to the Meran Variation, which, as the reader already knows, I had analysed in the pre-war years. This was played against me by Lisitsyn, back in the 8th USSR Cham- 9 liJ.e2 is weaker (Ragozin­ Capablanca, 1936). To me the contin­ uation in the game seemed better than 9 ltla4 (as Capablanca played . against Lundin), since White wants to exchange on f6, diverting the knight at d7 from supporting . . . c6-c5 (which, incidentally, can follow immediately after 9 t'Da4). Lisitsyn replied to 9 t'De4 with 9 . . . .te7, and after 10 lLlxf6+ ltixf6 1 1 e4 .tb7 12 i.g5 White gained some advantage. I tried to improve Black's play with 9 ... ltlxe4 (13th game of my match with Smyslov, 195 S) 10 .txe4, which hillders e3-e4, but subsequently it was shown that here too : White retains the advan­ tage (for example, 10 . . . .tb7 1 1 'l'a4 �6 12 .td2 �d6 1 3 0-0 0-0 14 a3 ! a move which, if my memory does not betray me, was suggested by Furman). It 383 the queenside, and his king finds itself in danger. is doubtful whether Minev's decision too can enable Black to avoid fully any opening difficulties. 9 ... 10 /£ixf6+ i.b7 gxf6 11 e4 i.d6 12 13 0-0 1We2 l:lg8 11fa5 Wanting to use his knight at d7 for the control of c5, Black agrees to the doubling of his pawns, hoping also to create an attack on the king along the g­ file. But things do not come to that . . . l l . . .c5 was dangerous due to 12 d5. In the event of the exchange of the light-square bishops (if Black had allowed 14 iLa6), he would have had no hopes of an attack. Black parries the threatened exchange, at the . same time aiming to switch his queen to h5. 0--0-0 14 1£id2! There was no point in provoking 1 5 g3 ( 1 4... 'iig5), since in this case the queen would soon have come under attack. But it would have been reason­ able to achieve such a weakening of the white king's position by 14 . . . 'ilc7. For example, the following curious variation could have followed: 15 g3 h5 16 'W'xh5 ..ixg3 17 fxg3 llxg3+ 18 hxg3 'i'xg3+ 19 <oti>hl , and White should win. 15 16 1£ic4 f4 'flc7 Now White has blocked the b8-h2 diagonal in a more convenient way. 16 17 . • • a3! c5 It turns out that White can ignore the threat of 1 7 . . . cxd4, which would merely lead to the opening of the c-file. How­ ever, Black is no longer able to block f5 17 Therefore Minev makes use of the only opportunity for counterplay. 18 axb4 /£if6 19 1£ia5 c4!! 20 21 1£ixb7 1£ixd6+ cxd3 Jbd6 An interesting counter, which should nevertheless have led to a rapid defeat for Black after 1 9 bxc5 (19 l:r.xa7 fxe4 20 iLc2 is insufficient on account of 20 ... cxd4, or 20 �xd6+ :xd6 2 1 ..ia6 l:lxa6 22 lha6 cxd4) 19 . . . fxe4 (or 19 . . . iLxc5 20 dxc5 l:lxd3 2 1 Wxd3 ..ixe4 22 �d6+) 20 �xd6+! (but not 20 cxd6 exd3 21 dxc7 dxe2 22 cxd81i'+ 'iti>xd8) 20 ... l:lxd6 2 1 i.b5 ! ! l:r.xd4 22 i.e3 and then c5-c6. Alas, during the game I did not see the 21st move, and so I rejected this continuation, which pro­ longed matters significantly. This move also came as a surprise to me. Since White's bishop cannot reach a6, nothing comes of his attack, and he merely retains certain advantages of his position. 3 84 2 1 .. .'ifxd6 would have only changed things slightly, and in favour of White, since on the 23rd move (see below) not only the queen retreat to e2 would be possible, but also the active 23 Wc4+. 22 11fxd3 fxe4 23 1fe2 1ib7 If 22 . . . ttJxe4 White would have been free to play 23 .i.e3, and then d4-d5 . The d4 pawn was immune (23 ...l:Xd4 24 .i.e3), and White's next attacking move was also unavoidable in the event of 23 ... ltd5. 24 f5! 24 25 1fxe4 Now the · game is opened up even more, and the position of the black king becomes extremely dangerous. • • • tl)c15 thxb4 Black decided to seek salvation in the endgame, since there was no hope that if 25 . . . exf5 26 'i'xf5+ <tibS White would fall into the trap (27 'ifxf7 .:.xg2+), which is parried by the simple 27 g3, and there are no other useful moves. 26 27 28 1fxb7+ fxe6 ltti+ Wxb7 fxe6 �c6 29 30 il.eJ ltxh7 <tid5 Also after 30 l:taxa7 White is two pawns up, guaranteeing him a win. 30 31 • • • .*.f4 tl)c6 But this was already my third over­ sight in this one game. There was an elementary win by 3 1 .l:.h5+ We4 (3 1.. .¢>c4 32 ltc5+) 32 !te l ttlxd4? 33 .i.xd4+ <tixd4 34 l:tdl+. 31 32 32 .i.c7 • • • ltdd8 Jlh8! This reply, which I had not antici­ pated, forces the exchange of one pair of rooks, after which the black king ceases to be a liability, and becomes an active fighting Wlit. 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 :g7 lth7 l:lg7 ltti .Jiafl lbti Ae5 lthg8 ltb8 J:lhg8 1tgf8 ltxti .:cs White goes in for the rook ending, although there too the activity of 385 Black's king compensates to some extent for his minimal material deficit. 39 40 41 1Lxd4 � lLlxd4 @xd4 It is hard to say whether it would have been better to seal another move 4 1 g4 or 4 1 .l:txa7 . I was tempted by the fact that in the obvious variation 4 1 .. . .l:tc2+ 42· W l:txb2 43 h4 as 44 h5 .l:tbl 4S 'iii>g4 es 46 .l:td7+ 'ifiic4 47 <Ms White wins without difficulty. 41 42 . • • g4 a5 th� previous note, 42 h4 should have been played, but in analysis 42 g4 seemed to me to be more convincing. 'ifiig3 g5 g6 l:tc2+ ltxb2 a4 If 4S .l:ta7 there could . have followed 4S . . . �e4 ! 46 g6 ®fS 47 g7 .l:tb8, and the g-pawn is lost (48 .l:tf7+ @g6 49 .l:tf8 :b3+). 46 .l:txa4+ @rs 47 :as+ es would also not have helped White. 45 Abt @h4! <.t>h5 Agl @c4! 48 49 50 51 52 53 :tf4+ :.o ltf4+ :.o :.g3 hxg3 'ot>b5 @b4 @b5 @b4 :.xg3 53 54 55 56 g7 g81!f 'it'g4+ The a-pawn unexpectedly gains in strength, whereas the attempt to retain it in a different way (47 . . ..l:tg2 48 h4 a3 49 .l:ta7 a2) would have failed due to the rapid advance of the h-pawn: SO @h6 <itic3 S I hS eS S2 @g7 e4 S3 h6 e3 S4 h7 e2 SS h8'1' e l 'if S6 'i'c8+ etc. The whole point is that with the game con­ tinuation Black does not lose a tempo defending the a-pawn with his rook. White is therefore forced to regroup. It would appear that, by analogy with 42 43 44 45 46 47 Thus, White has succeeded in trans­ fonning his h-pawn into a g-pawn, which gives him some hopes in the in­ evitable queen ending. a3 a2 a11!1 @a5 If S6 . . . 'ifiia3 White would have continued S7 1!ff3+ 'itb4 58 W'e4+ and Black, to avoid the worst, must all the same move his king orito the fifth rank. 57 1!he6 The preceding turbulent events can perhaps be regarded as the 'introductory play' to the resulting study 'queen and g-pawn against queen' . Ten years before this game I had already played such an ending against Ravinsky (Game 1 3 2). There I had not understood the specific features of the ending, and I had tried, as in a rook ending, to keep my king on 386 the eighth rank, supporting the pro­ motion of the pawn at g8, and. . . had made the win very difficult for myself. On this occasion I avoided this mistake. After 57. . . 'ihl+ 58 'it>g5 'ifcl+ 59 '>t>g6 the pennissible checks are ex­ hausted. 58 59 60 61 'it>g6 g4 g5 11ff5+ 'irc3 'iid2 11fd4 'it>a4 62 63 'it>h5 'it>g4 1i'h8+ 'ffh l 64 65 66 67 'S'f4+ 'ire5+ g6 <itig5 <it>a5 <it>a4 1idl+ 1lfd8+ Minev is happy to go to a4 with his king, since this was recommended by Keres in a well-known article, in which he analysed the ending of my game with Ravinsky. Now White first centralises his queen, and only then continues advan­ cing his pawn. . 68 69 70 71 72 73 <it>C5 <il>f4 11fe3 'ife5 <it>f5 <itig5 74 Wf6! 1!fc8+ 1!fcl+ Vc7+ 1i'cl+ 111c8+ •d8+ Although before the adjournment I did not find the correct plan, neverthe­ less I intuitively avoided moving my king to the eighth rank. I sat down to analyse for several hours, and finished only at three o'clock in the morning. My wife, of course, nagged me: 'Off you go and sleep, otherwise you won't have enough strength left for the resumption'. But I had to finish the work. We were living in an attic, the window looked out onto a garden, it was quiet, the air was fresh, and my mind worked well in searching for the truth. 11fh8+ 57 when the game is adjourned for the second time. In a 'study' this should not be included, of course. This position will be repeated six moves later, after Black seals his move The only way! After 74 'it>h6 'ifh4+ 75 'it>g7 'ifb3 White's task would have been more difficult, since with his king on the 7th or 8th rank the black queen has greater possibilities. I made this mistake in my game with Ravinsky, although Keres did not mention it. But if the white king is on the same rank as Black's, or on a neighbouring one, the enemy queen's checks may possibly be exhausted, since, by · covering his king with his queen, White himself will give check! But this was a mistake made not just by Keres and me. In general, this type of queen ending had been always analysed 387 with the pawn on the seventh rank and the king on the eighth. In this case with a pawn at f7 a winning manoeuvre had been found, but not with a pawn at g7, and the ending was considered to be drawn. Such a delusion can be ex­ plained · only by the fact that the researchers acted as though by analogy with rook endings. But in fact in queen endings every­ thing happens differently. Both the queen and the king can be kept at a distance from the g-pawn, but alongside each other, so that the queen should have positions where it is supported. But the main thing is that the king should be on the same rank or file as the opponent's, or on a neighbouring one. It was this discovery that was the main outcome of my night-time analysis. 74 . 75 'iff5 76 ®b5 'fld5+ 'ifd8+ 78 @a4 • • • end, it means that the further advance of the pawn is assured. 82 lih6 @a4 83 'ife5+ 84 g7 'ifht+ Wdt+ 85 @d4 'Bet+ 86 @cs 87 @d6 87 @d5 Wes is less good - the a2-g8 diagonal must be keep free for the white queen. 87 ... Wd2+ 88 89 90 91 @e6 fid5 @d6 @c5!! 'ila2+ 'ife2+ 'i!fh2+ Or 87 . . . 'ifh6+ 88 �d5 ! - there are no checks, and the g8 square cannot be blocked. 1!t'e8 If Black used his last check, 76 ...'ifhS+, after 77 @g4 he would end up in a difficult position, e.g. 77 . . . 'flg7 78 'i'f7 ! Ylc3 79 g7! Therefore he makes use of a pin. @a5 77 'i!ff4+ 'i!fd2+ Black makes it easier for White to move his queen to d4 with gain of tem­ po, but he is following (and wrongly) the recommendation of Keres in the afore-mentioned article - to keep the king at a4. 79 80 81 82 1'd4+ @g5 @£5! c.fi>e4 �a5 'il'e7+ •f8+ Since the checks have come to an Black resigns. This position reveals very clearly the method of play. If now one turns to Game 1 32, it is easy to observe that the concluding play in the final stage of that game suggested to me the method that was subsequently found. It remains to add that immediately after the Olympiad I published some 388 notes to my game with Minev, and ex­ plained the winning method on the pages of the magazine Shakhmaty v SSSR ( 1955, No. I). It is interesting to note that Yuri Averbakh, who in 1962 published a volume on queen endings which then ran to several editions in the USSR and abroad, does not say a word about the Botvinnik-Minev game and my notes to it, where the winning method in this complicated ending was first revealed. l£icJ 8 l£if3 1£lc6 d6 0--0 e3 A modest continuation, but it sets Black new problems. However, both after 8 d5 1£la5, and especially in the event of 8 dxc5 dxc5, White cannot count on a clear opening advantage. 9 Miguel Najdorf (19 10-1997) was one of the most popular figures in the chess world. He participated only twice in candidates events for the World Cham­ pionship, but he willingly and highly successfully appeared in many tourna­ ments. The popularity of chess in South America is undoubtedly linked to a significant degree with his activity. In his best years Najdorf was a highly distinctive chess player. He did not pay much attention to the study of the chess experience accumulated by other masters, but at the board he used to find solutions that were original and dangerous for his opponent. 1£lf6 g6 .tg7 0-0 c5 7 • • . .i.f5 The Encyclopaedia mainly considers 8. .. .tg4 as leading to an equal game. Olympiad, Amsterdam 1954 King's Indian Defence d4 c4 gJ .lg2 6 8 Game 232 M.Botvinnik-M.Najdorf 1 2 3 4 5 · more flexible than 5 . . . d6 6 00 tLlc6 (in which after 7 d5 Black plays 7 . . . lba5 followed by . . . c7-c5). In the present game White avoids d4-d5, in order to take Black away from familiar paths. 9 bl • . . 1!i'c8 A loss of time. 9 . . d5 would hardly have been any better, e.g. 10 cxdS lllxd5 l l lllxd5 'i!i'xd5 12 .ta3, but by 9 .. lbe4 10 i.b2 lbxc3 1 1 .txc3 .te4 12 :cl cxd4 13 itJxd4 .ixg2 14 'it>xg2 lllxd4 15 .txd4 .lxd4 16 'ifxd4 'i'a5 Black could have equalised. My opponent quite often employed this plan of development. It is perhaps 389 . . 10 .tb2 11 · :c1 12 .lxc3 It is easy to see that, if instead of the pointless move 9 . . . Vc8 Black's bishop had already been standing at e4, by playing 12 . . . cxd4 he would have been able to simplify. But now the exchange in the centre will improve White's ·position thanks to his pressure on the h l -a8 diagonal. It follows that the d4-cl5 advance will be hard to parry, and White's advantage is obvious. It is probable that Najdorf sensed this, since at this momen� he offered a draw. 12 .te4 13 14 d5 %txc3 15 tDd2 · .lxcl tDd8 After 14 . . . .txf3 15 1irxf3 tDe5 16 ife2 and the unavoidable f2-f4 Black would also have had a difficult game. An interesting moment. By 18 :d3 ! (in order to gain a base for his pieces at d5) followed by e3-e4 White could have consolidated his positional advantage. By missing this opportunity, he allows his opponent adequate counterplay. �xg2 .lxg2 f5 f4 e6 • • • Preventing 17 e4, when the reply 17 . . . f4 is unpleasant for White. But with his next move he renews the threat of advancing his central pawn. 17 e4 19 cxd5 19 20 21 llel l:tceJ 22 'W'fl With the aim of sharpening the play, White retains his central pawn, and thanks to this a pawn majority in the centre. After 1 9 exd5 :es 20 :el 00 2 1 lke3 l:.xe3 22 :xe3 'i'd7 23 Wel 'it>IB the position would have been siin­ plified, and Black would have gained good equalising chances. The blockading bishop has to be exchanged, of course. 15 16 exd5 18 Now a white pawn ends up on d5, which is not particularly advantageous. tDf7 l:te8 'ifd7 The exchange in the centre (2 1.. .fxe4 22 tDxe4) is not to Black's advantage, of course, but also not obligatory. Sooner or later White hiinself must open the e-file, and then after e4xf5 Black will have to recapture with his queen (after . . . g6xf5 there follows 'ifh5 and lDc4-e3, when the f5 pawn falls). And with the black queen on f5, White's plan will be to play g3 -g4-g5 and then tDe4-f6, after which the enemy knight will be greatly restricted, and the white knight extremely active. The plan is a bold one, but rather transparent, and it is surprising that my opponent was late in recognising the danger. First, of course, the f4 pawn must be defended in advance. 22 390 • • • llad8 Black plays excessively cautiously, safeguarding himself against 23 e5, after which there follows 23 . . . dxe5 24 fxe5 'i'xd5. But all the same this was not a threat on account of 23 e5 dxe5 24 fxe5 lLig5! and 25 ...'l'xd5+. However, this last move does not yet spoil anything. 23 a4 As yet the plan given ill the note to Black's 2 1 st move does not work: 23 exf5 .l:xe3 24 .l:xe3 'ifxf5 25 g4 'ifc2 26 .l:e2 'ii'xa2 27 ltie4 'ifal . White has no reason to sacrifice a pawn, and so he moves it away from a possible attack. knight to f6, although Black did not fully exploit it. 28 ltJe4 1lfdl 29 30 lill'6+ g5 '3Jg7 D.c8 The logical completion of Black's defensive manoeuvre would have been 2S ... 'ifcl . Then 29 tl:\f6+ '3;g7 30 g5 would not have worked because of 30 . . . tl:\xg5! However, by playing 29 'i'e3 ! White would have forced an end­ game that is fairly dismal for his opponent. In the game Black's position immediately becomes hopeless, since his pieces are disunited and cramped. 30 ...h6 is also bad, not because of 3 1 h4 hxg5 3 2 hxg5 J:lhS !, but 3 1 l:te7 ! 27 But now Black was obliged to pre­ vent the opponent from carrying out his plan, which could have been achieved by 23 . . . tl:\h6 ! , bringing the knight into play and intending to answer 24 exf5 with 24 . . . tl:\xf5 . The move played is probably the decisive mistake. 23 24 exf5! 25 %be3 26 g4 27 Ae2 b6 lbe3 ifxf5 ifc2 ltf8! The only possibility of not allowing the immediate manoeuvre of the white It is amusing that here both players missed the transparent trick 3 1 tl:\e8+ @gs 32 lbxd6. H<;iwever, if I had seen it, I would probably have avoided it, since after 32 . . . tl:\xd6 33 :es+ l:xe8 34 'i'xdl l:!.e4 the win would have been more difficult than in the game. The same can be said about 3 1 fte7, after which Black · would have gained counterplay involving the advance of his c'."pawn (3 1 . . . 'ifc2+ .32. <it>g3 c4). . 391 The move played does not have these drawbacks. 31 lleJ Or 3 1...'ifc2+ 32 'iff2. 32 <it>xfJ 1ixf3+ h6 After 32 . . . c4 33 bxc4 !lxc4 34 :es White wins. 33 h4 · 34 hxg5 hxg5 a6 35 36 l:te7 lla7 D.b8 b5 37 llxa6 bxa4 The variation 34 . . . 'ittfs 35 lle6 a6 36 tLle4 @g7 37 lle7 leads to almost the same situation as in the game. If 36 . . . a5 37 tLld7, winning the b6 pawn. If 37 ... c4. then 38 b4! 38 bxa4 11.cS 39 a5 <itf8 40 llc6 lla8 cannot give Black full equality. In this case the attempt by White to avoid the creation of an isolated pawn by 8 'l'xd4 proves futile (Fine-Reshevsky, 1951). Correct is 8 exd4 dxc4 9 i.xc4 tLlc6 10 i.e3 0-0 11 0-0 b6 12 'i!fd3 i.b7 13 lladl (Botvinnik-Tolush, match Moscow­ Leningrad 1 965) and here 13 . . . h6, after which White has a minimal advantage (in the event of 13 . . .tLla5 14 i.a2 W'c8 1 5 i.g5 ! i.a6 16 'iih3 .i.xfl 17 i.bl White has a dangerous attack). 8 9 cxd5 .i.b5+ exd5 Played in order that the black bishop should be at d7, where it is less well placed than at c8. 41a6 Black resigns 9 10 .i.e2 11 b4! .i.d7 .i.c6 Game 233 M.Botvinnik-V.Pirc Olympiad, Amsterdam 1954 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 d4 2 c4 3 tLlcJ 4 e3 5 · ttlge2 ttlf6 e6 i.b4 c5 d5 5 . . .cxd4 6 exd4 d5 is perhaps more accurate, leading to an equal game. 6 a3 .i.xc3+ 6 . . .ta5 cannot be recommended in view of 7 dxc5 dxc4 8 'i'xd8+ with the better chances for White. For 6 ... cxd4 7 axb4 dxc3 8 tL!xc3, see Game 247. 7 ttlxc3 b6 7 . . .cxd4 is preferable, although it . This emphasises the drawbacks to the Black's opening variation. If l l. . .c4 White plays 12 b5, depriving Black of the important c6 and c5 squares. 392 11 12 13 14 0-0 .tb2 axb4 0-0 ttlbd7 cxb4 a5 immediately, but to keep the queens on, in order to try and complicate matters. In the event of the queens being exchanged, he would also have been unable to defend simultaneously both weak pawns at b6 and d5, and the loss of even one of them would have allowed White to win without difficulty. Otherwise after b4-b5 the backward a7 pawn becomes a convenient target. 15 1!fb3 15 16 17 18 l:tfcl ii.al tiJb5 19 20 21 22 23 .i.xb5 11i'xb4 llxc8+ llcl .i.xcl White prefers not to block the position by b4-b5, sinee in an open situation it is easier to make use of the two bishops. lle8 'i!i'e7 'ife6 Axb5 Black is also forced to exchange his second bishop: · otherwise he cannot avoid the invasion of the knight at c7, or after b4xa5 - at d6. axb4 llec8 l:txc8 llxcl+ The exchange of rooks, depriving Black of possible counterplay, emphas­ ises the advantage of the two active bishops over the · knights, which in addition have no strong points. 23 24 .. 1!fc3 • h5 h4 .i.a3 ii.fl g6 'Bf5 t;)f8 Wbl+ lhe6 1!t'b4 Wdl f3 The enemy queen is Black's only active piece, and White aims to exchange it. 29 � 35 36 .i.e2 'ifb5 .i.h4 lDe6 tiJg8 37 38 . 'if'b8 39 . . 1!fe5 'iia2 <iih 7 tiJg7 1!fxb6 hxg5 .i.f8+ . After 3 3 . . .Wxf8 34 <iig7 g5 lhxg5 <iig6 'ifxf6 'i'c2+ 35 .ie2 'iig6 36 'i'd8+ �g7 3 7 'i'xd5 or 34 . . .ttJe6 35 1!i'h8+ and 36 'ilfxh5 Black would have lost another pawn. 1!fc2+ 34 il...e7 The queen too, after occupying the open file, is more capable of creating threats than its opponent. 24 25 26 21 28 30 31 32 33 37 Here there was no longer any point in exchanging queens: a material advan­ . tage has been gained, and it may prove more convenient to convert it with the queens on. For the same reason Black even prefers to give up the b6 pawn 3 93 40 41 e4 1ixe4+ dxe4 f5 42 43 1ie5 .lgl 1ib2 43 44 45 .lf4 'i!fe3 It is curious that, depending on the position, White first aims for the exchange of queens, and then avoids it. Now he intends to create direct threats against the opponent's king. · After 4 1 . . . �h8 Black would have been even more cramped. 53 54 55 56 57 In order to support the advance of the d-pawn. Now both black practically immobilised. 45 46 47 48 49 W'dl Wc4 .ldl d5 .le5 'i!fd4 <it>g2 Wc5 &£jfd6 1t'f7 <it>h7 <it>g8 Continuing the suffocation strategy. knights · 57 58 are 11fa2 W'd5 Wd7 <ii>g6 • • • .lc3 11f'e7 Now White intends to place his queen in front of the bishop, in order to create decisive threats along the long diagonal. 58 @f7 59 60 'ifd4 We5 61 f4 61 62 63 64 .le2 Wb8 'ifg8 <il>g6 Again White offers the exchange of queens. After 60 .. . Wxe5 6 1 .lxe5 he wins without difficulty, but it is also un­ favourable for Black to move his queen. rj;f7 60 • • • After this Black will no longer be able to exchange on e5, since he will be unable to stop the two connected passed pawns. The beginning of the end, but Pirc continues to resist tenaciously. 49 50 51 Wd4 @fl 1t'e7 1t'h4+ Cf:jeS 52 53 g3 We3 Threatening 65 .lxh5+. �b6 64 Even this is no defence. • After 5 1 . . .'i'hl+ 52 'i'gl 'i'h4 53 'i'b6+ <ii>h7 54 'ilc7 the game would have ended more quickly. W'f6 394 1id7 <it>g6 Cf:jg7 65 66 67 68 . . .lxh5 'ifg5+ 1!fxh5+ 1lfg6+ Cf:jxb5 <ii>h7 �g8 � 69 · .i.b4 Black resigns 7 . . .l£le7, but ended up in a difficult position: 8 bxa5 dxc3 9 'Wxg7 l:.g8 10 'ifxh7 tbd7 1 1 00 t'Llf8 12 'i!fd3 'i'xa5 13 h4 .i.d7 14 .i.g5 l:.c8 15 t'Lld4 t£if5 16 l:.b 1 . The strengthening of this variation by 10 . . . i£lbc6 1 1 00 ( 1 1 f4 'i'xa5) 1 1 . . .'ifc? 12 ilf4 .id? 13 i..d3 0--0--0 14 i.g3 tbg6 appeared much later, but, as shown by Fischer, after 12 .i.b5 i.d7 13 0--0 0--0--0 14 ilxc6 .ixc6 15 'i'xf7 White again has a significant advantage (15 . . . d4 16 'ifxe6+ .id? . 17 ikxe7 l:.xg2+ 18 'itixg2 ilh3+ 19 'itixh3 'i'xe7 20 ilg5). On this occasion I decided against sacrificing the g7 pawn, but this also left White with the initiative. In this game, with an extra pawn in the endgame, I again . made use of Capablanca's wise advice - to wait, and when the opportwrity presents itself, win a second pawn. Game 234 W. Unzicker-M.Botvinnik Olympiad, Amsterdam 1954 French Defence 1 2 3 e4 d4 i£lc3 e6 d5 ..i.b4 I used to be a devotee of Nimzowitsch's Variation in the French Defence (3 . . . .i.b4). Back in 1927 Model taught me the rudiments of how lo play this variation. By 1934 the basic ideas were already clear enough, and I gained my first success with Nimzo­ witsch' s move in a game against Milner-Barry (No.64). However, against the West German grandmaster Unzicker I seemed fated to be unlucky. In the present game I quickly ended up in a difficult position, and it was a miracle that I was able to adjourn the game in a rook ending. 4 5 6 7 e5 a3 b4 'i'g4 bxa5 i£lfJ 9 10 .i.dJ 10 ; dxc3 Typical of Unzicker's style. In his best years he played energetically, but perhaps too 'correctly'. 9 a4 or 9 h4 would have led to more lively play.. l£le7 cs il.a5 cxd4 In Game 2 18, 7 i£lb5 was played. 7 . @f8 A few moves before the Olympiad, in the 9th game of my World Champion­ ship match against Smyslov, I played . 8 9 . .. i£ld7 10 . .i£lbc6 was undoubtedly better, . depriving the enemy queen of the 395 convenient square b4. It is true that in the correspondence game Pietzsch­ Herzel (196 1) after 1 1 0-0 'ifxa5 12 :le 1 t'Llg6 1 3 h4 White had the makings of an attack, but for the moment he was two pawns down! 11 . Wb4 Wc7 12 t'Llc5 before Black brings his other rook into play. Black could not escape from the pin by 1 1 . . . 'iit?g8, as after 12 ..tg5 f6 13 exf6 gxf6 14 ..th6 t'Llg6 15 h4 his position would be full of holes. . 0-0 Clearly I could not afford to be temp­ ted by the central pawn ( 12 ... t'Llxe5 1 3 t'Llxe5 'ifxe5), as after 1 4 ..tf4 'iff6 1 5 llae l things would be approaching a rout. If Black offers to exchange queens by 12 . . . 'ifc5, White plays 13 'ii'f4, then 14 a4, and develops his bishop with gain of tempo at a3. However, with 12. . .b6 Black could perhaps have created a more complicated situation. 13 14 15 1!fxc3 a4 ..ta3 Ji.d7 llc8 l£ixd3 16 17 11hc7 cxd3 l%xc7 f6 18 llfcl Black takes the opportunity to exchange queens, before White's king's rook begins operating on the b-file. · The only move. After l 7. . . 'iifi?e8 18 ..td6 l:.c3 (18... l:.c8 1 9 l:.ful ..tc6 20 t'Lld4) 19 l:.fu l i.c8 20 a6 b6 2 1 llcl Black cannot avoid the invasion of the rook. It is true that now too things end in the same way, but the king does manage to release the rook at h8 from imprisonment. 18 19 l:txcl 20 21 llc7 ..txe7 21 22 23 llxb7 • . • l:.xcl+ 'iifi?f7 The unfortunate thing for Black is that if 19 ... ..tc6 White has the decisive 20 a6. lld8 An essential move, after which there will no longer be opposite-colour bishops on the board, and Black does not manage to play 2 1 ...l£ic6, which would have been useful for him. 'iifi?f1 'iit?xe7 llc8 After making a series of strong moves, my opponent is again unable to refrain from a 'correct' continuation. He should have prepared a second attack on the pinned bishop: 23 g4! l:.c3 24 exf6+ gxf6 25 g5 l:txd3 (25 . . .fxg5 26 t'Lle5) 26 'iit?g2 etc. Unzicker plays this part of the game very strongly. White exchanges rooks 3 96 23 24 . . • lla7 Otherwise - 24... l:.c5. 24 . . • a6 l:.c2 25 J:txa6 Now the bishop is activated, and Black gains something resembling counterplay. White should have refrained from ·pawn-grabbing' in favour of the same move 25 g4. 25 26 27 • • • lta7 �e2 lta2 Axa4 d4 Black could not allow 28 'it>e3, but the main point of the pawn advance is to activate the bishop at the first opportunity. 32 lt)cS .td5 33 a6 llal+ 35 <ii>b2 :al+ In a difficult position Black has up till now played resourcefully, but his last move deserves to be criticised. 32 . . . e5 was quite a good chance, in the hope of winning White's kingside pawns and giving up the bishop for the a-pawn. The d7 square should not have been left undefended. 33 . . . l:lxf2 34 Axh7 Axg2 35 a7 l:ta2 would now have been bad because of 36 lllxe6+. 34 <it>c2 l:taJ 35 . . . l:.c3 would have been a blunder (36 Ad7+ and 37 l:txd5). l:ta5 36 <t>bl 28 li)d2 Well played. The white knight aims Lo break into Black's position via the now weakened e4 or c4 squares. Aa2 28 • • • 29 'itdl 30 exf6 'it>d8 29 . . . l:lal+ 30 'it>c2 Aa2+ 3 1 'it>cl ktal+ was not able to achieve anything, because of 32 �b2. I A typical mistake. White helps Black to reduce the number of weak pawns on the seventh rank. 30 llle4 .ic6 3 1 lllc5 .id5 32 l:lxg7 fxe5 33 a6 would have been quickly decisive. 30 31 • • • li)e4 gxf6 .tc6 3 7 ! li)b7+! White advantageously takes play into a rook ending, where is a pawn up with a solid positional advantage, since the enemy king is cut off from its pawns. 397 37 38 . axb7 .txb7 l:tb5+ 39 40 c;t>c2 b81W+! 40 41 42 l:[xb7 c;t>c7 The king will be not only confined to the back rank, but also a long way from its own flank. :e7 c;t>xb8 lt>c8 Unzicker has a clear leaning towards play with his pieces. By playing 42 g4 followed by h2-h4, White would have accelerated the development of events. 42 :eS 43 44 45 <it>d2 :n . c;t>e2 <it>d8 :rs �es White's unfortunate manoeuvres have led to the black king reaching its goal with gain of tempi. :eS+ 46 :a7 l:.b5 47 �1 48 h4 at five o'clock in the morning. Initially I was helped by Boleslavsky, but an hour before midnight I let him go, since he had difficulty in waking up when I roused him. Then Flohr came to help me. He bore up very well : when I roused him, he woke up straight away. At two o'clock we parted, with the agreement that he would turn up at eight o'clock to check my analysis. And, when he returned, Flohr struck me a severe blow. He showed that in one variation Black could nevertheless lose. To be fair, I should mention that du­ ring the resumption I also found another way for White to win. We concluded the game in splendid isolation in the enor­ mous Apollohal. Hardly any chess reporters were there - so sure was everyone that Black's position was hopeless. Only Paul Keres turned up he carefully followed the play, and left only when the result was obvious. 48 • • . f5 The sealed move. The attempt to play actively would not have saved Black: 48 . . . l:tb l + 49 <it>e2 l:!hl (49 . . .l:!b2+ 50 lt>f3 l:td2 5 1 h5 l:!xd3+ is even worse because of 52 c;t>e2 and 53 h6) 50 g3 e5 5 1 <it>f3 f5 52 c;t>e2, and there is no defence against 53 l:!a5. 49 g3 If 49 h5 there would have followed 49 . . . l:!b l + and 50 . . . l:!hl . The extra pawn "and the passive position of the enemy king should ensure White a win. And so, an even more sleepless night than when I analysed the ending with Minev (Game 23 1): I went to bed only Wf8 l:!d7 As shown by Smyslov, White could have more quickly obtained the same position as in the game by 50 h5 <it>g8 5 1 l:te7! e5 52 h6 c;t>h8 53 lti>g2, since 50 . . Jlb l + 5 1 <it>g2 <it'g8 52 :e7 l:tel 53 398 49 50 . . • h6 e5 54 � 'ith8 55 g4 e4+ 56 @£4 e3 57 fxe3 fxg4 58 e4 g3 59 .l:lg7 is bad for Black. 50 51 52 'itg2 h5 e5 �g8 But not 52 f4 exf4 53 gxf4 .l:lb2+ 54 'itg3 .l:lbl 55 l:lxd4 .l:lgl+ with counter­ play for Black. 52 .l:la5 Black can merely await the develop­ ment of events. His defeat would have been hastened by 52 ....l:.bl 53 .l:.e7 e4 54 l:td7 l::tb4 55 dxe4 fxe4 56 g4. 53 h6 .l:lb5 . • 54 • • .l:lg7+ .l:le7 55 'it>f3 56 'it>h8 l:la5 Finally White finds the correct plan, and Black has only one chance left. · 56 57 • • • g4 :ds After 57 h7 Black would have had a more modest choice: 57 . . .:a5 58 :t7, or 57 . . . e4+ 58 dxe4 fxe4+ 59 .l:.xe4, but perhaps my opponent did not want to give up his h-pawn? 57 58 dxe4 'it>e2 e4+ fxg4+ 59 Of course, I was not really hoping for 59 'itxg4? d3 . 59 dJ+ . 60 . . • 61 62 • • • l:r.d4 l:r.e8+ • • • !te6 'ith7 .l:la4! Just now, all Black's counterplay involved his d-pawn, but now it has to be given up ! 63 64 'it>d2 After 60 'iii>d l , following my analysis, I would not have replied 60 .. J::td4 because of 6 1 'itd2, giving Black the move, but 60 . . . lla5 ! with the idea of counterplay, which subsequently I was in fact able to exploit. 60 61 6 1 e5 ! would have won, since after 61.. ..l:.f4, which is what White was afraid of, there would have followed Flohr's manoeuvre 62 .l:.g7!, and the e­ pawn cannot be stopped. And after 6 1 . . . .l:ld5, as I observed with great regret during the resumption, White wins by 62 e6 .l:ld6 63 .l:.e8+! 'iii>h7 64 e7 .l:.e6 65 'iii>xd3 l:e5 66 �d4 .l:.e6 67 'itd5 .l:.e2 68 'itd6 .l:.d2+ 69 'ite5 ! .l:.e2+ 70 M4 l:Ixf2+ 71 'iii>e3 . The move in the game prematurely releases the enemy king from imprisonment, which leads to a draw. 'it>xd3 'ite2 l:la3+ l:lfJ A curious position, in which the two extra pawns are insufficient for a win. White is unable to strengthen his position (65 .l:.a6 .l:.f4), and after thinking for 40 minutes, he decides to give up his e-pawn 399 65 66 e5 ..tel l:US French Defence against Unzicker (Euro­ pean Team Championship, Oberhausen 1 96 1 ). the goddess's patience ran out. I did not even manage to get as far as an ending . . . I lost in the middlegame. l:lf4 Game 235 V.Antoshin-M.Botvinnik 22nd USSR Championship Moscow 1955 French Defence 67 l:tf6 No better was the attempt 67 'it>fl g3 68 l:lf6 (68 f3 l:xf3+ 69 @g2 %1e3 70 'it>h3 %1a3) 68 ... l:lxf6 69 exf6 <ifiixh6 70 fxg3 'it>g6 7 1 '1tig2 'it>xf6 72 'it>h3 'it>g5 with a draw, whereas now it would be fatal to go into the pawn ending: 67 . . J:txf6 68 exf6 'it>xh6 69 'it>e2 'it>g6 70 'it>e3 <ifiixf6 7 1 <ifiif4 g3 72 fxg3 ! 67 68 69 70 �· ..tig2 �gJ l:te4+ l:be5 l:la5 l:tg5 Incidentally, Black would also draw without his g-pawn. 71 ..tib4 l:lg8 72 e4 d4 lhc3 e5 aJ e6 d5 �b4 c5 .txcJ+ 6 bxcJ 'ilfc7 7 thfJ 7 8 ... .idJ In my match with Smyslov ( 1 954) I gave preference to 5 . . . .ta5, but since I assumed that my opponent would be expecting this move, I chose the older continuation. In my first French Defence game with Smyslov (No. 1 15) I played 6 . . . the7, and then also in Games 125, 136 and 143. This leads to quieter play. 7 'i'g4 has more supporters (Game 18 1). gJ ..tib5 Draw agreed If 73 nn+ <ifiih8 74 h7, then the most elegant way to draw is 74 . . . l:tg4 !, al­ though 74 . . . :as 75 fxg3 l:ta5+ 76 'it>g4 l:!g5+ 77 'it>f4 :g4+ is also possible. Thus, on . this occasion the goddess Caissa smiled on me, and I miraculously saved this ending. But when seven years later I played this same variation of the 1 2 3 4 5 the7 8 .te2 or 8 a4 is more often played. 8 . . • thd7 A cunning idea. Without delay the knight intends to make for a4. Theory, however, considers only the more standard continuations: 8 . . .tLlbc6, 8 . . .b6 or 8. . . �d7. 400 9 0--0 15 16 exf6 ..ig4 gxf6 lDg6 17 llel l:t.de8 18 't!ff'3 18 19 20 .i.h6 lDf4 21 l:le3 It would have been more consi.stent to advance the e-pawn. Missing the last moment for . . . e6•e5 . White's plan is also logical. Here and subsequently he refrains from playing a3-a4, so as not to give Black counter­ chances involving the win of this pawn (for example, 9 a4 Wa5 10 0--0 c4 1 1 ..ie2 lDb6 and 1 2. . .lbxa4). At the same time White is ready to allow the black knight to go to a4, where it will block the queenside, but will be too far away from the main battlefield. 9 10 11 .i.e2 lbel! c4 lbb6 A highly unpleasant move for Black: the c3 pawn is now defended by the queen, and the bishop at d2 is freed for action I had a difficult choice. 1 8 ...f5 would have irreparably weakened the dark squares, and after the move played the black rooks come under attack by the enemy bishops, but the third way of defending the f6 pawn - 1 8. . . 'ffdS should perhaps have been chosen. l:lhf8 l:[f7 1fd6 20 . . .lDxf4 2 1 ..ixf4 would have lost the exchange after the unavoidable 22 ..ih5. Now White cannot play 2 1 lDxd5 in view of 2 1 . . . ..ic6. An idea which was later employed by Fischer. The knight is switched to g2. In the event of 1 1 a4 .i.d7 1 2 a5 lba4 the a­ pawn would have been doomed. 11 lba4 Now Black's queenside castled position will be safe. • l2 13 14 • • .i.d2 g3 ibg2 .i.d7 0-(µ) f6 Black has achieved a comfortable development, but he has to be careful. The continuation chosen creates a target - the e- and f-pawns. Perhaps 14 . . . l'bg6 would have been more circumspect. 40 1 21 e5 This leads to a lost position, but ap­ parently there was no longer any satisfactory defence, e.g. 2 1.. .f5 22 .ih5 l:tg8 23 l:tae l , intensifying the pressure. 22 . lt)xg6 23 dxe5 24 .tf4 hxg6 :xe5 24 25 26 27 28 l:tfe7 fxe5 c.t>c7 'ilfxd7 Winning the exchange, since after 24 ... l:txe3 25 'i'xe3 Black has to simul­ taneously parry the threats of 26 'i'e8+ and 26 'iixa7, which is impossible. .ixe5 'i'f8+ .ixd7 ltael 33 34 Forcing . . . e5-e4, when Black's pawn centre will be immobilised. 28 29 JO Wf6 Wxd6+ 30 31 f4 win, @xd6 • • • Slightly careless: Black should not have been left with a protected passed pawn. 3 1 f3 was simpler, leaving the opponent with no saving chances. 31 32 b5 . . • @g2 And this is very careless. After 32 g4 (clearing the third rank for the rook) White's position would still have been won. But now he · will have to think about how to draw! 34 35 axb5 36 g4 . .. fuel!! A sacrifice which has to be accepted, after which Black will regain the exchange. If White does not take the knight, within two moves his opponent will create two connected . and far­ advanced passed pawns. dxcJ c.t>c5 After the psychological trauma caused by the unexpected 32... tbxc3, Antoshin is unable to find the correct plan. He should first have played 36 'iti>f2, in order after 36 .. J ld7 to capture the central pawn - 37 l:lxe4, and then if 3 7 . . . l:ld2+ to return the rook to the second rank 38 :e2. Then after 3 8 . . . <t>xb5 3 9 l:txd2 cxd2 40 'ot>e2 c3 4 1 f5 gxf5 42 h4 a5 43 h5 White should not lose. - . · 32 d4 If 34 l:tdl , then 34 . . . <it>c5. e4 'Bd6 There are many ways to including by exchanging queens. l:txc3 a4 36 37 38 39 l:le2 h4 h5 'l:ld7 Wxb5 a5 It would appear that here too White is not behind in the pawn 'race', but it unexpectedly turns out that Black will promote his h-pawn, and not his a­ pawn, and then the white king will have no defence. 402 39 . . • gxh5 40 g5 king hides from the checks, whereas White's is threatened with mate both at d2, and at fl . Despite the mistakes by both sides, a game not without its instructive points. After 40 gxhS White would �ve no chance of success with his separated pawns. Game 236 A.Kotov-M.Botvinnik 22nd USSR Championship Moscow 1955 Slav Defence 40 • • • l:td2 Now this transition into a pawn ending is decisive. h4 41 � 42 43 44 g6 'it>xe2 g7 llxe2+ h3 • • • g81!r h2 h11!t' In the queen ending Black wins without difficulty. 46 . 9'd5+ 47 f5 'it>b4 Of course, there is no perpetual check: 47 'ilfd6+ 'it>a4 48 'irc6+ 'it>a3 49 'i'cS+ 'it>b2 50 'irb6+ 'it>xc2. 'i!ff3+ 47 . 9'e3+ 48 'it>el 'i'f2! 49 'it>dl White resigns. After 50 'ird6+ �a4 . d4 c4 ltlcJ ltlf.J e3 .tdJ 7 0-0 7 8 ..td2 8 ... d5 c6 ltlf6 e6 ltlbd7 ..i.b4 Regarding 6 ... dxc4, see Game 231, while 6 . . . .te7 occurred in Game 144. 7 a3 is the most energetic (Game 175). Nothing would have changed in the event of 44 'it>fl e3 4S g7 h2 46 'it>g2 e2 47 g8'i' el ii'. 44 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 • • • • 0-0 In view of White's intention to play 9 lbxd5 (9 . . . lbxd5 10 cxd5 .txd2 1 1 dxe6) it is simplest for Black to retreat his bishop to d6, achieving a more or less satisfactory game. However, 8 . . . 'i'e7 is also possible. Then if 9 lbe5 there follows 9 . . . cs with equal chances, as in the game Portisch­ Botvirutik (Olympiad, Leipzig 1960), but after 9 'Be 1 dxc4 10 .ixc4 .td6 1 1 .tb3 e5 1 2 tlJg5 ii..c7 1 3 lbce4 lbxe4 14 lbxe4 as 15 d5 White would have retained the advantage (lvkov-Kolarov, 1957). S l 'ilfc6+ �a3 52 'ird6+ 'ili>a2 the black 403 .td6 9 b3 This waiting move can hardly give White an advantage, which he could have counted on after 9 e4, e.g. 9 . . . dxc4 10 .i.xc4 e5 1 1 ..ig5 . The following move order could have come to the same thing: 6. . . .i.d6 7 0-0 0-0 8 e4 dxc4 9 ilxc4 e5 10 .i.g5. Black also achieves equality in the event of 9 h3 dxc4 10 hc4 e5 . 9 10 . • . 1'c2 1ie7 e5 The most suitable plan in such positions. Black is left with an isolated d-pawn, but in view of the poor placing of the white bishops (it is more advantageous to keep them at b2 and e2) he achieves a good game. 11 12 13 cxd5 dxe5 tt'.id4 cxd5 tt'.ixe5 White pins his hopes on his centralised knight, whereas 1 3 .ie2 would have been more circumspect. 13 14 Wxd3 tt'.ixd3 the e4 square, but the immediate 14 . . . l:td8 came into consideration. 15 16 f4 l:tacl 17 ltc2 'ife7 Both players overlook the possibility of the strong manoeuvre iLel -h4, although after 16 ii.el l:te8 Black would have gained sufficient counterplay. 16 . � . l:td8 At this point I had already seen the above manoeuvre, which in the new conditions (with the rook at d8) would have been especially unpleasant. Fortunately, Kotov did not notice it. 17 • • • ..ic5 Now Black achieves a good game (the d5 pawn is defended by the rook, and 1 8 .tel can be met by 1 8 . . . tbe4, if there is nothing better). The exchange of White's centralised lallght leads to a position with opposite-colour bishops, but the white bishop is passive. 18 19 tt'.ia4 9xd4 19 20 21 22 i.b4 ltc3 ltccl 22 23 ... ltfdl .ixd4 After I 9 exd4 White would have no compensation for the weakening of the e4 square, since the d5 pawn would cease to be a defect in Black's position. 'ffe5 i.f5 '9d7 tt'.ie4 22 t'Llc5 was simpler, since 22 . . . t'Llxc3 was not possible in view of 23 ..txc3, when, in view of the mate threat, Black loses his queen. It was hard to refrain from making a move which provokes a weakening of 404 b6 f6 The pawn moves 22 . . . b6 and 23 . . . f6 have restricted the activity of the enemy pieces. White has no other plan, other than to exchange knights in the hope of saving the game with the opposite­ colour bishops. But all ii; not so simple, since the black pieces will take up very active positions. �xc3 24 tt)cJ 25 l:txcJ .te4 Black's positional advantage is clear. His d5 pawn has ceased to be weak, his bishop is more active than his oppon­ ent's, which is irreparable when there are opposite-colour bishops, and White is forced to consider the defence of his g2 square. 26 27 28 11fd2 h3 'i!t'f2 32 33 llcct .id4 33 34 35 36 37 l:ld2 :dd1 11fe2 11ff2 l:ldc8 Black controls c2, c3 and . c4, which s�bsequently assures him of control of this open file. Now I went in for an op­ eration to save time for thought, which could have concluded unexpectedly . . . .tc2 ..te4 11i'f5 11fg6 A typical delusion. Manoeuvring first with one piece (the bishop) and then another (the queen), in time trouble Black forgets that, irrespective of this, the position is repeated. This is also missed by Kotov, who before making his last move could have claimed a draw. But the most amusing thing is that this was not noticed by any of the spectators, or the readers of bulletins, magazines and books. 'i!t'g4 'i!t'g6 h5 37 38 • • • :xc8+ a4 If 3 8 bxa4 there would have followed the unpleasail.t reply 3 8 . . . l:lc4 and then . . . litxa4. · It is curious to note that, as regards the chess material, this game very much resembles a previous encounter of mine with Kotov (No. 102). Here, however, White has better defensive possibilities. 29 �h2 a5 30 31 ..taJ ..tc5 b5 b4 Now the time has come to play actively on the queenside. 38 39 . . bxa4 40 l:cd2 41 'ilh4 Ibcs 11i'e8 11i'xa4 llc2 42 43 11Fxc2 Otherwise it is hard to exploit the weakness of the a2 pawn, although, of course, the exchange of rooks increases White's drawing chances. l:txc2 ilg3 Here I was initially intending to play 43 . . . 'if.?f7. but I noticed in time that after 44 f5 ! .ixf5 45 'iff3 a draw was 405 drawn, but let us see how events develop. inevitable. Therefore Black also has to agree to the exchange of queens. 43 44 1'..xf6 45 46 11fxg2 1'..d4 .i.xg2 �g3 h4 rJm 55 1!fxa2 1!fxg2+ As in our 193 9 game, the queen nevertheless captures the g2 pawn. This move leads to the win of a pawn. If 46 1'..e7 there would of course have followed 46 . . . b3 . 46 47 48 49 Wf2 ..te4 g6 <ifi>e6 Thus Black is a pawn up, but this advantage would appear to be insufficient for a win. 50 51 52 53 54 <ifi>e2 c;t>d2 ..tf6 ..te7 ..tf6 54 ... <ifi>f5 <it>g4 'i!i>g3 <it>h3 54 ..ixb4 'it>xh4 was bad for White: he would have to give up his bishop for the h-pawn. 28 The position 'it>g4 seems hopelessly ..te7 This is not an attack on the b4 pawn, since the bishop is obliged to defend the h4 pawn, but simply a waiting move. 55 • • • .i.f5! The black bishop is switched to e6, where at first sight it is more passively placed. But in reality, from this square it will be able to defend the b-pawn, when it steps onto the third rank, and it also covers the g8 square, on which a white pawn may possibly promote to a queen. 56 57 58 .i.f6 ..te7 'i!i>cJ � b3 ..te6 Black could have won a second pawn (58 ... @xe3 59 'iiti>xb3 @xf4), but then the drawing character of opposite-colour bishops would have been fully apparent (60 'iiti>c3 'it>e3 6 1 .i.g5+ @e4 62 @d2). Now, however, the b3 pawn is immune: 59 'it>xb3 d4+ 60 'it>c2 dxe3 61 'it>dl � 62 ..tcs ..ib3+ 63 'it>cl �. and White loses his f4 pawn, which allows Black to break through with . . . g6-g5 and to win. 406 59 i.c5 Titis move seems obvious, since White's king must stop the b-pawn, and hence the e3 pawn should be defended by the bishop. Jn fact the truth lay in the paradoxical move 59 'it>d2, with which the white kirig apparently makes a hope­ less attempt to catch two birds (defend the e-pawn and stop the b-pawn). The point is that White cannot win the b­ pawn on the third rank whereas (by analogy with the variation given in the note to Black's 58th move) on the second rank this is perfectly possible. We will repeat this continuation in its new version: 59 . . . b2 60 'it>c2 �xe3 61 'it>xb2 <ifi>xf4 62 <ifi>c3 with a draw. In the game White gives up control of the g5 square, which allows Black to create a passed h-pawn, and the defender's position becomes hopeless. , @xe3 . After the decision taken by Kotov, the ending becomes 'poetic'. 60 fxg5 61 exd4 d4+! The central pawn, boldly advancing into a three-fold attack, sacrifices itself so as to save the outside passed pawn. The capture with the king is pointless, since the b-pawn becomes a queen while after 6 1 i.xd4 <ifi>g3 62 g6 'it>xh4 63 <it>d2 the win is achieved by 63 . . . <ttth3 ! ! 64 'itie2 @g2 65 i.£'6 h4 etc. ; 61 • . . <it>gJ It was still possible to run into this drawing variation: 6 1 . . .<it>g4? 62 d5 .ixd5 63 i.f2. 62 i.aJ 62 63 64 65 <it>dJ c;foie4 With the loss of the h4 pawn, all White's saving hopes are dashed. <it>xb4 @xg5 h4 'it>f3 It is not Black's fault that his opponent avoided a more spectacular concluding move: 65 d5 i.xd5+. 65 59 • • • g5! ! A possibility which Black envisaged when he played his bishop to e6. The capture with the h-pawn loses 'prosaically' : 60 hxg5 h4 6 1 f5 (61 .id6· MS 62 g6 .ixg6 63 f5 .ixf5 64 �xb3 'it>g2) 6 1 . . .i.xfS 62 'it>xb3 h3 63 i.d6 407 i.d5+ White resigns The final position is a typical one from an ending with opposite-colour bishops, where there are two widely separated passed pawns. But how many subtleties preceded it! Game 237 M.Botvinnik-LKan 22nd USSR Championship Moscow 1955 English Opening 1 2 3 c4 till'3 l0d4 e5 e4 l0c6 Roughly the same pawn configur­ ation arises in the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez. White's plan in such situations is obvious: exchange pieces and go into an ending, where he will effectively be a pawn up. Other continuations that have occurred are 3 . . . c5 4 l0b3 (Tartakower­ Spielmann, 1 925) and 3 . . . d5 4 cxd5 11fxd5 (Berger-Gilg, 193 l ); in neither case did White gain an opening advantage. 4 5 6 l0xc6 lDc3 e3 dxc6 lDf6 The fianchetto of the king's bishop led after 6 g3 .i.c5 7 ..ig2 ..if5 8 0-0 0-0 to approximate equality in the game Reti-Torre ( 1925). 6 • • • d4 ..txd3 i.d6 exd3 Now, in any possible endgame, White's superior pawn formation will give him a theoretical advantage. 8 9 10 11 11fc2 b3 ..ib2 1!fe7 i.e6 0--0-0 ... h5 12 13 0-0-0 h3 h4 l0d7 14 15 16 ..i.f5 ..txe6 lDe2 llde8 Wxe6 l:lh5 Black should be aunmg for a complicated battle, but he fails to find any way to achieve this. It would not have been bad, for example, to make use of his doubled pawns by . . . c6-c5 and . . . c7-c6, to establish control of the central squares. 6 . . . ..i:f5 was more accurate, in order to hinder the advance of the d-pawn. 7 8 11 This move could be worthwhile only if White had castled kingside or was planning to do so. But in the given position, of course, he will castle on the queenside. It was not yet too late for 16 . . . c5, preventing the enemy knight from going to d4. · 17 408 l0d4 'tie4 · As a result, Black himself is forced to offer the exchange of queens: 17 . . .'i!i'h.6 or 17 . . .We7 is met by the unpleasant 1 8 t'Df5. 18 19 20 Wxe4 ltltJ Ahel lbe4 g6 tDc5 This is Black's idea: he is aiming for activity on the queenside, where nomin­ ally he is a pawn up. However, the pawn structure is such that it is not possible to create any threats. 21 22 @cl :d4 a5 White, for his part, continues to ex­ change material. 22 23 • • • :e2 f5 g5 1be4 ltld2 @xd2 e4 �el 28 29 JO :xe4 .i.cJ %ih6 Jlf4+ As it is, for the moment all is quiet on the queenside, so the king is transferred to that part of the battlefield where White has a pawn advantage. 30 . • • fxe4 c5 a4 In order to worsen the opponent's pawn formation and to gain active play on the queenside, Black sacrifices a pawn. While this strategic idea deserves respect, it should nevertheless be mentioned that in the given instance 30 .. :a6 would have given better chances of a successful defence. . Here one cannot help remembering Tarrasch's cautionary saying, that pawns cannot move backwards! 24 25 26 26 27 28 ltlxe4 ltlxd2 White consistently proceeds towards his goal. In the absence of the lallghts, the superiority of his pawn configur­ ation becomes appreciable. 31 32 bxa4 @e2 l:.b6 �d7 But this is inconsistent. 32 ... :bl should have been played immediately, with the threat of 33 ... l:r.cl 34 'ii?d3 %:.gl. Then the strongest reply would seem­ ingly have been 33 Ae5 . Now, however, White will immediately force the invading rook to retreat. 409 'il>dl :et �c2 :bl :b6 35 36 l:te4 37 llel 38 :e2 l:lg6 l:d6 l:[g6 33 34 35 44 · When it proved necessary to defend the b 1 square, the king returned to the queenside. 44 45 46 :e4 llel :e4 a3 • • • a5 • llf8 bxa5 . 46 47 48 b6 l:r.d6 J:g6 l:[d6 l:[g6 : gS . . • l:te4 'iL'e2 J:d8 c;fo>c6+ And once again the white king is in the place where at the given moment it is most needed, since the outcome is bound to be decided on the kingside. A useful move, since if it should be necessary to give up this pawn, this is better done at a3 than on the second rank. 42 43 . . J:e2 'il>d3 Of course, not 46 .i.xa5 because of 46 . . :as. Before the time control there is no reason to take any committing decisions. 38 39 40 41 42 a4! White gives up his material advan­ tage, in order to weaken the enemy pawns and to tie the black pieces to their defence. 48 49 50 51 l:le6+ Ae7 Jle4 51 52 53 54 l:.e6 :e7+ lle4 55 .i.el 'iL'b6 c6 Wa6 White needs to gain time on the clock before the next control. The variation 43 . . .bxa5 44 .i.xa5 l:i.a6 45 .i.d2 .i.xd2 46 <itrxd2 l:xa3 47 l:te5 would have led to a won rook ending (thanks to the timely advance a2-a3 !). 4 10 Wb6 Wb7 c;fo>a6 Wb6 75 Finally, when Black has no counter­ play, White sets about creating a_ passed pawn. 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 g3 fxg3 h4 gxh4 i.d2 'rt>f3 i.ct ·hxg3 l:tb8 gxh4 il.b2 i.d4 Game 238 Yu.Averbakh-M.Botvinnik 22nd USSR Championship Moscow 1955 French Defence 1 2 3 4 In conclusion., the white king performs its last role, this time an active one. 61 62 63 64 65 i.g5 l:tf4 l:tt'S h5 i.b2 l:tf8+ l:tg8 i.d4 h6 cl;g4 :r4 l:le4+ cl;c7 ci;d7 �e6 l:lb8 White seems to be illogically driving the black king_ to where it wants to go. But in the given instance, calculation shows that, when Black's king is on the eighth rank, due to the threat of mate his rook is unable to leave that rank, in order to become active. 69 70 71 72 73 74 l:te7+ �5 ci;g6 llb7+ l:ld7 w �g8 AflH ci;b8 �g8 . • • lDc3 i.d3 e6 d5 i.b4 4 5 6 i.xe4 ..id3 dxe4 l£if6 6 i.f3 is better, as in the Euwe­ Mar6czy match (1921/22). As regards the variation 6 i.gS c5 7 dxc5, initially Tarrasch played against Lasker (match, 1 908) 7 . . . i.xc3+ 8 bxc3 Was, and White gained a great advantage (9 ..ixf6 gxf6 10 'i'd4). Then in the same match Black played 7 . . . 'i'xd l + 8 .l:i.xdl lllbd7, and his position became the more promising. 6. 7 dxc5 8 i.d2 9 . i.b5+ c5 l£ibd7 lhxc5 l£icd7 9 . . i.d7 was simpler, of course, but Black avoids simplification and prefers to retain his light-square bishop. . 10 11 12 13 It is simplest to exchange the rooks. 74 e4 d4 This move does not set Black any difficult problems, and he easily equalises. White's patience is rewarded - his pawn majority on the kingside is successfully realised. 65 66 67 68 69 Ad8 Black resigns c;tb8 411 thfJ ..i.d3 . 0-0 l£ie4 a6 0-0 b6 iJ...e7 Again · avoiding an exchange. Now Black advantageously completes his development, and his queen's bishop will occupy the long diagonal. 14 15 16 17 We2 l:ladl .i.g5 c4 17 18 19 20 J:lfel lhxf6+ .th4 only be assumed that he was afraid of 23 ... gS 24 .i.g3 g4 25 t'Llel l:lxdl 26 .i.xd l l:ld8 with the threat of 27 ... .tb4, but this was hardly dangerous for him. 23 24 25 26 27 .i.b7 1'c7 l:lfe8 17 c3 was preferable, not weakening the central squares and tying the black pieces to the defence of the a6 pawn. Aft .i.c2 .i.xf6 .ixf6 g6 Axd8 Axdl+ l:lad8 b6· lhxf6 .i.b4 Black has no reason to fear the ex­ change on f6, since his position in the centre is strengthened, and White is tmable to exploit the weakening of the kingside. 21 22 23 b3 l:lxd8 Adi il.xdl Now Black has a clear advantage in the endgame. One observes the same motif as in the preceding game - a pawn majority on the ·kingside. It is true that here White's pawns on the queenside are not spoiled (he does not have doubled pawns), but the black pieces occupy dominating positions, and this will tie down the white pawns. 27 28 Wc6 .i.e7 It would have been more logical to exchange on f6 when the black bishop was at b4. White gives his opponent the advantage · of the two bishops, without gaining any compensation for it. It can 29 30 31 lhel lhc2 lhe3 lhd5 32 33 34 g3 h4 .i.c2 es e4 1!fd6 Wd4 .i.g5 After 3 1. . ..i.xdS 32 cxd5 Wxd5 3 3 .ic2 a draw would have been inevitable. 4 12 f5 .i.d8 rt.>f7 Here too, of course, Black is not tempted by 34 . . ..i.xd5 35 cxd5, since after 35 . . . b5 36 'ii'd l 'ifxdl+ 37 .i.xdl ¢;f7 38 a4 White succeeds in defending his d5 pawn, and the opposite-colour bishops would have played their peace­ making role. 35 'ifdl 36 37 38 .i.xdl l£if4+ � �e6 �6 g5 39 40 41 hxg5+ l£id5+ a4 hxg5 �e5 �d4 The centralised enemy queen cannot be tolerated for long, but it is for the endgame that Black is aiming. 'ffxdl+ 35 43 44 45 46 �1 �gl �g2 ..t.e8 ilf7 47 48 49 � gxf4 l£ixf4 f4! gxf4 49 50 51 52 i.dl .1g4 .ile6 52 53 54 55 t£ixe6 l£id4+ tt:)f5 .i.d7 a5! After fixing the weak pawn at b3 (and hence also the one at a4), with the following pawn sacrifice Black secures the breakthrough of his king on the queenside. The same aim could not have been ·achieved by 46 ... b5 on account of 47 axb5 axb5 48 l£ib4! �c3 49 tl'ic6 etc. Otherwise there would nothing for White to move. The main strategic idea of the game begins to be exploited. soon be �c3 @d2 @cl White pins his last hopes on the exchange of bishops. .ilxe6 J..e7 �c3 ..t.f8 The black pieces have taken up the key positions, and the knight at d5 only appears to be well placed. 42 43 i.e2 �g2 J..c8 Another plan involved playing the king across to c2, but it too had its drawbacks. 413 Again the bishop has to keep to the edge of the board, so . that the white · knight is unable to attack it, gaining a tempo. 56 57 58 59 60 61 lllgJ �e2 lllxe4 <il?d3 llld2+ c5 <il?xb3 c.li>xa4 �b3 a4 'itib2 b5! Black gains control of the c4 square, after which his a-pawn cannot be stopped. 62 63 c6· 'lle4 9 'W'c2 e6 10 11 12 13 0-0 cxd5 b3 .i.b2 exd5 l:l.e8 b5 l:l.b8 14 a3 In the last of the afore-mentioned gaines, Geller played 9 . . .a6, which is preferable; 9 . . .e5 is also better. 13 . . .b4 14 lllce4 l£ixd5 was bad for Black on account of 15 .i.xg7 <tlxg7 16 lllc 4! .id6 .i.b8 Again on the edge of the board! a3 lllcJ f4 .i.xf4 The simplest. White resigns. 64 65 Gaine 239 M.Botvinnik-G.Borisenko 22nd USSR Championship Moscow 1955 King's Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 g3 .i.g2 lllcJ 'llf6 g6 .i.g7 0-0 d6 6 tllfJ /.i)c6 7 d5 Later 14 11.fe l .i.f5 1 5 e4 .id7 16 a4 was played here (Petrosian-Gligoric, 1956), and after 16 b4 17 lllb5 White seized the initiative. Boleslavsky thought that Black's position was also worse after 16 . . .a6 17 axb5 axb5 18 ICdl and then t2Je3 . . . . Najdorf played 5 . . . c5 against me (Game 232). Regarding 6... t'.bbd7, see gaines 150 and 21 0. It has already been pointed out in the notes to Game 2 1 3 that · it is more accurate to play 7 0-0 first. 7 8 l£id2 14 15 16 l!fel lllce4 16 17 18 .i.xg7 'iib2+ .i.d7 'llb7 The same thematic sacrifice that was examined in the note to White's 13th move. llla5 c5 414 lllxd5 <tlxg7 A dubious enterprise. White misses the combinative blow 18 ll'lxd6 ll'lxd6, not noticing the winning move 19 'ifxc5! (19 . . . ll'le3 20 fxe3). 18 • . . f6 A poor reply. After 18. . . ll'lf6 it is not apparent how White can exploit the pin on the a l -h8 diagonal. 'iti>g2 would be dangerous on account of 3 1 . . . 'i'b7. If instead 3 1 l1e 1, then after the exchange of rooks there would be nothing left of White's advantage. The e6 pawn is blockaded, and it is not so much active, as requiring defence. dxc5 19 20 tDxc5 .ixd5 20 21 22 23 e4 l1ac1 11Jf3 tDd6 l1c8 11Jf7 lle6 24 25 l:tcdl Jhd5 .ixd5 11e7 26 27 28 e5 l:txd8 e6! l1ed8 l:txd8 Thus, not without some adventures White has regained the sacrificed pawn. By forcing the exchange of the opponent' s centralised bishop, Black almost completely equalises the position. After the mistakes by both sides, White has managed to retain some initiative, thanks to which he now advantageously carries a out breakthrough in the centre. · Wc3 l:le4 .:.e1 ifc2 33 Wxf5 33 34 e7 l:txf5 •d7 35 36 e8W %1xe8 'ifxe8 %1xf3 h5 l:ld5 1!fd6 In time trouble Black too makes an error, after which White could have played 3 3 'lfe2, winning the b5 pawn (thanks to the threat of 34 e7). Another oversight on account of lack of time. A passed pawn has nevertheless appeared, and it has to be blockaded, and this causes Black some discomfort. 28 29 30 30 31 32 &iJd6 tDt3 A dubious move. In time trouble White fails to find a good plan for strengthening his initiative. But gener­ ally speaking, was there one? If now Black had replied 30. . . l1dl+, then 3 1 This is the whole point. After 34 .. :xn 3 5 e811J+! or 34 . . .Vxe7 35 l1xe7+ ®f8 36 l1e3 (it was only these replies that I had time to consider) White would have won easily. . White's faulty combination has led to a prosaic ending where Black is a pawn up. 4 15 37 38 39 40 41 %le7+ b4 bxc5 l:lb7 c6 �b6 lba3 a5 b4 • White carries out a standard oper­ ation aimed at exchanging his c-pawn for the black b-pawn. Even so, dwing my analysis of the unfinished game I had many unpleasant thoughts. I once again lamented over the fact that in this, my last USSR Cham­ pionship, I was playing with a lack of conviction. But there was an endgame in prospect. . . 41 42 43 44 45 c7 l:lxb3 l:laJ Aa4 by analogies, as, for example, has already been pointed out in the notes to Game 161. 45 . �g5 The position of the black king at g5 will only assist the activation of the white pawns on the kingside. The correct plan for Black was point­ ed out by Nikolai Kopayev: 45 . . . 'it>g7 46 h4 r:;n 47 ..tfl <it>e6 48 'it>e2 'it>d6 49 @d3 f5 50 f3 �c6 5 1 g4 �b5 52 l:ld4 a4 53 �c2 a3 54 'it>bl l:la4 55 .l:.d6 hxg4 56 .l:.xg6 gxf3, and Black must win. �f5 46 fJ! AcJ b3 Axc7 %la7 47 . g4+! Now it is inevitable that either the black pawns on the kingside will be weakened, or White will create a passed pawn. Whereas in the variation from the previous note the pawn position was 'dead', here the white pawns come alive. 47 . . • hxg4 If 47 . . . �g5, then 48 gxh5 �xh5 49 h4. 48 fxg4+ @es 49 50 51 h4! h5 gxh5 'itd5 gxh5 'ii?e6 52 h6 </;f7 Or 48. . . �g5 49 'i&ig2 �h4 50 h3. This position is of theoretical inter­ est. When the game was adjourned, no one doubted that Black would win, since Alekhine had won a similar en­ ding against Capablanca in the con­ cluding, 34th game of their match for the World Championship ( 1 927). However, it is dangerous to be guided If the king had headed to the queenside, then after 5 1. . .c.ti>c5 52 h6 'it>b5 53 l:lh4 .l:.h7 54 Ah5+ c.ti>b4 55 l:lh4+ it could have hidden from the checks either on the sixth rank, when the a-pawn is not dangerous, or on the first rank, but then l:lh2-h4, and the a­ pawn is lost. The position of the white king at g l is the optimal one for pur­ suing the opponent's king. 416 3 4 tbf3 bl d5 g6 5 6 .ltb2 .ltg2 0-0 Ag7 0-0 lt)bd7 8 1!fc2 9 9 lt)cJ ... This is a sounder continuation than 4 . . . .i.f5 . 53 llg4! 53 54 55 56 ltf4 llg4 llf4 :a6 lla7 'it>g8 llxf6 Af2 Aa2 a4 Wh7 Wxh6 'it>g5 Cutting off the black king from the hpawn. 'itif8 The draw is now obvious, but Black still wants to try a pawn sacrifice. 57 58 59 60 61 @f2 lt)f8! . 'it>e3 Draw agreed Game 240 cxd5 cxd5 11 ttJb5. But now both 10 . . . d4 and 10 . . . e5 are threatened. 10 cxd5 cxd5 11 lbb5 achieves nothing, if only because of 1 1 . . . .i.d7. Therefore, although White's next move is the most natural, the initiative nevertheless passes to Black. 10 M.Botvinnik-G.Stablberg d4 .ltf5 It becomes clear that the move 8 'iiic2 Olympiad, Moscow 1956 Reti Opening c4 g3 Subsequently it transpired that this move was no better than others, but apparently White could not in fact have gained an opening advantage. 8 l:le8 9 .. e5 was premature in view of IO Although everyone predicted that White would lose, a 'miracle' occurred. 1 2 7 With the development of the bishop at g7, the fianchetto of the queen's bishop seems the most sensible, so that Black usually plays 7 . . .b6. Stahlberg, however, had devised another plan, and he delays the development of his bishop from c8. Later he tries to provoke d2d4, in order to have the possibility of attacking White's central pawn with . . . e7-e5 . was not very timely. 11 12 lt)f6 c6 The best reply to the variation chosen by White. 417 1icl .:.dl lt)e4 lt)xc3 Black incorrectly goes in for simplifi­ cation, thereby losing his advantage. 12 ... l:tc8 should have been played. 13 14 .txc3 �1 14 15 16 17 18 'it>xg2 1!fc2 .tb2 Aacl .ie4 After 14 .th3 .txf3 1 5 exf3 . e6 White's two bishops would not have given him any advantage. .ixg2 tLld7 11t'c7 l:lac8 dxc4 �xc4 tLld3 dxe5 .txe5 22 b4 b5 23 bxa5 23 24 tLlxe5 A clever reply. If 22 . . . 1!fc7, then 23 tLlxe5 ltixe5 24 'i!fc3 would have been unpleasant for Black (24 . . . f6 25 e4 followed by f2-f4). Black is still aiming for . . . e7-e5, in order to gain counterplay, and for the moment he parries the threat of 19 cxd5 . The latter, however, would have been more simply achieved by 1 8 . . . 'i'b8. 19 20 21 Stahlberg had been intending, of course, to play 2 1 . . . ltixe5 22 ltixe5 ii.xe5, until he noticed that there follows 23 Ad7 Af8 24 b4, winning a piece. But now if 22 tLlxe5 ltixe5 23 .txe5 1!fxe5 24 Ad7 there is the · saving reply 24 . . . Ae7. The simplest solution, since in the ending White's advantage will become more apparent. It will be hard for Black to defend his weak queenside pawns. 1!fa5 . • • bxc4 Also good was 24 Axc4 .txb2 25 ltixb2 Axe2 26 Axd7 Axb2 27 a4 followed by Af4. 24 25 20 • • • e5 • . • h3 tLlxe5 Such a 'fine' knight in the centre of the board is left without a single retreat square. If now 25 . . . c5, then 26 Ad5 tLlc6 27 l:.xc5 Axe2 28 .td4, and Black cannot avoid defeat. Even so this is premature. It was correct first to exchange queens 20 ... 1!fd5+ 2 1 f3 'i'xc4 22 l:txc4, and only thenplay 22 . . . e5 (but not 22 . . .lbb6 23 Ac2 lbd5 24 'it>f2 .th6 25 ii.c l, which would have been in White's favour) . After the move in the game, which involved a miscalculation, Black ends up in a difficult position. 25 26 ... 27 l:tbl ..icJ Or 26 ... f6 27 Ad6. Abs Ae7 Now White wrests control of the b­ file in order to invade the enemy position. 418 27 28 29 J:lxbl a6 11.xbl f6 c5 This too does not save Black. My friend Stahlberg usually found himself playing Black, I would gain a positional advantage, a favourable end­ ing would be reached, . and even his desperate resistance would not save him from defeat. 38 Axb6 38 39 40 41 l::tf7 l::txf6+ l::tfJ 42 e4! 3 8 l:.xh7 was probably weaker on account of 38 . . . ttld5 39 a7 c3. ®xb6 @xa6 'it>b5 l::td8 4 1 . .. l%a8 42 a3 'it.?c6 43 <ii>d2 c.ftd5 was more tenacious, but here too with 44 l::tc3 ! followed by f2-f4, g3-g4 and f4-f5 White would have created a passed pawn on the kingside. 30 31 32 l:lb8+! lks � 32 33 l:tc6+ The only plan that leads to a win. White must immediately advance his passed pawn and support it with his rook. After 42 a3 l:!d4 43 h4 h6 44 l::tc3 h5 45 f3 'it>a4 ! 46 e4 l:!d3 47 :txc4+ c.ftb5 Black can successfully defend. @f7 42 /i)d7 The e2 pawn has to be defended, and simultaneously White's king approaches the centre, and hence also the queenside. • • • ®e6 ®ds In this way Black loses his a7 pawn, but even after the repetition of the position - 33 . .. @n 34 l:lc7 @e6 - the consequences would have been the same. 34 35 36 37 l:lc7 :xa7 Jla5 ®el �d6 :!e8 ®c6 In time trouble White chooses the safest continuation. 37 l:tc7+ 'it.?d6 38 a7 c3 39 ®e l lbe5 would have led to complications. · 37 • • • /i)b6 • • • l:t.d4 Or 42 .. J:te8 43 l:le3 c3 44 c.ftdl. 43 e5 43 44 45 46 l::te3 f4 <it>e2 Of course, not 43 l:!e3 in view of 43 . . . c3, when Black exchanges one of his devalued doubled pawns for White's passed pawn. c.ftc6 <li>d7 We6 Black is in zugzwang (for example, 46 . .. h5 47 h4 ®e7 48 l:lc3 and then a2a4). If instead 46 ... g5, then 47 f5+ 'itrxf5 48 e6 l:ld8 49 i e7 l:!e8 50 a4 @f6 5 1 a5, and after the exchange on e7 the black king is not in l;ime to stop the a-pawn. In the game too matters are decided by the advance of the passed rook's pawn, after which the black rook has to aban­ don its comfortable post on the fourth rank. 419 be considered proven that 3 ... c6 is preferable. But if White plays 2 tllc 3, then this idea is not justified, as was shown by the 9th game of the Botvinnik-Tal return match (196 1). 4 5 6 7 8 cxd5 lllcJ tlltJ 0-0 aJ lllxd5 tllb6 tllc6 i.e7 8 . . . 0-0 The immediate 8 d3 is also played here. 46 47 48 49 a4 l:.aJ �dl :ds l:.b8 l:lb2+ Since White's intention of playing b2-b4 is obvious, Black should have made the prophylactic move 8 . . .a5, as Portisch played against me in a similar position in Monte Carlo ( 1968). Only not 49 'it>e3 because of 49 . . . l:l.g2 50 'it>f3 l:l.b2 with the threat of 5 1 .. Jlb3+. 49 50 51 a5 �d2 l:.b6 l:la6 g5 Black is forced to do something, although he again ends up in zugzwang. 52 53 54 55 gxf4 ¢ic3 c.fild5 gxf4 l:lal h5 h4 Black resigns 9 10 11 b4 d3 tlle4 a6 i.e6 h6 12 .ib2 f5 This is merely a loss of time and a weakening of the castled position, since the white knight is aiming not for g5, but for c5. Game 24 1 M.Botvinnik-0.Benkner O�vmpiad, Moscow 1956 English Opening 1 c4 2 g3 . 3 i.g2 e5 tllf6 d5 Thanks to the efforts of Keres, it can This looks active, but now Black's game is positionally lost, primarily 420 24 because he is no longer able to set up a reliable barrier on the al -h8 diagonal. 13 lbcs .txc5 14 bxc5 14 15 16 Act lbh4! 16 17 18 19 f4 gxf4 'ifel l:lcel Another defender of the central e5 pawn has disappeared from the board lbd7 1We7 Indirectly parrying the attack on the c5 pawn (in view of the threat of 17 lbg6), but more important - preparing f2-f4, to open the long diagonal. 'iffi exf4 Aad8 .td5 The bishop cannot move from e4, since there follows 25 l:lxe7, but it is also not possible to defend it. It is naive to imagine that White will agree to the exchange of bishops; subse­ quently the central strike e2-e4 will be made with ·gain of tempo. But for the moment this would have been prema­ ture: 20 e4 fx.e4 21 dxe4 .tc4, and the c5 pawn is in danger. 1 9 ... ttJf6 may have been better. 20 ... 11fg3 lbe7 Olympiad, Moscow 1956 • • • King's Indian Defence g6 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 g3 .tg2 lbcJ lbf6 g6 .tg7 0-0 d6 6 lbf3 c5 e4! It will be remembered that 5 ... c5 occurred in Game 232. dxe4 6 . lbbd7 was examined for the last time in Game 210, and 6 . . . lbc6 in Game 239. By sacrificing a pawn, White opens the position with decisive effect. 22 23 111xe4 l:txe4 llel 1Wxf4 lbe7 Black resigns Game 242 The f5 pawn is secure, but now there is not a single black piece or pawn remaining on the al-h8 diagonal. 22 25 26 27 M.Botvinnik-N.Padevsky Again threatening the f5 pawn, since one of its defenders - the queen - is simultaneously saving Black from mate. 21 ... .th3! The f5 pawn comes under attack. 20 21 1Wc4 24 Or 24 . . . lbxc5 25 Wc3 . fxe4 .txe4 421 .. 7 White is forced to exchange on d5: he cannot allow . . . d5-d4. d5 The alternative and more rational continuation is 7 0-0 ll'ic6 8 d5 lba5; it is clear that the black knight will be better placed at c7 than at a5. 7 8 9 0-0 ll'id2 13 14 15 fi)a6 fi)c7 • • • Wc2 ll'ifxd5 b6 But this simplification is unfounded. Now the exchange of light-square bishops also becomes inevitable. For the moment this could have been avoided by 1 5 liadl. As a result, White is deprived of any attacking possibilities. 9 a4 is recommended here, to prevent Black's counterplay on the queenside. 9 10 cxd5 .ilb2 fi)xd5 llb8 e5 15 16 17 The recommendation on the previous move by the Encyclopaedia is con­ firmed by the variation 10 ... b5 ! 1 1 cxb5 ll'ixb5 1 2 ll'ixb5 llxb5, in which Black achieves an equal position. .ixg7 lladl .i.xd5 �xg7 17 e4 would have weakened the central d4 square. 17 18 19 'it>xg2 fi)e4 .txg2 We7 An unconvincing continuation, since Black can easily defend his f6 square, and the knight at e4 is insecurely placed. However, White no longer had any promising continuations; in the given situation the pawn attack with e2-e4 and f2-f4 is too late. 19 20 11 dxe6 • • • bl .ixe6 d5 Black has nothing to fear, especially as he is slightly ahead in development. • • b4 D.fd8 . llxdl After this move certain hopes appear­ ed, and my mood improved somewhat. It became clear that my opponent had not seen one tactical subtlety. He evidently assumed that to gain a draw he only had to exchange the rooks. This would have been so, if Black had first made one more accurate move, 20 . . . f6. Without the exchange on e6 it is hard for White to activate his pieces; e2-e4 is pointless, since it will inevitably be countered by . . . f7-f5 . But now Black is able to play . . . d6-d5, after which he does not have any particular difficulties. 11 12 • 21 llxdl lld8 22 1!fb2+ f6 My suppositions are confirmed. It was not yet too late for 2 l...f6, although Black must then concede the d-file. 422 If 22 . . .�h6 there would have followed 23 tfu'6 ! with numerous threats (for example, if 23 . . . J:lxdl 24 lLig8+). After the move in the gatne Black loses two pawns. Game 243 B.Larsen-M.Botvinnik Olympiad, Moscow 1956 Sicilian Defence thf3 e4 d4 lhxd4 lllc3 c5 lhc6 cxd4 lfil6 d6 6 Ji.gs 7 '9°d2 8 .i.xf6 9 . :dl e6 h6 gxf6 1 2 3 4 5 For the moment I had no reason to avoid the Rauzer Variation, since Games 1 84 and 2 1 5 had developed favourably for Black, and my encounter with Keres at the Alekhine Memorial Tournament (1 956), which brought dis­ illusionment, was still to come. 23 lLixf6! <tlf7 24 25 26 27 l:txd8 lL!xb7 'We5 lL!gS+ 'ilt'xd8 lhe6 b5 If 23 .. Jbdl 24 lLid5+, or 23 . . .l:ld4 24 e3 ! A queen ending with two extra pawns and the opposing king insecurely placed - this is the surest way to win. 27 28 ... hxg5 lhxg5 This way, so that there is always the threat of °i!i'f6+. 28 29 30 e4 W 'i!Fa8+ Wc8 c4 Equivalent to an admission of defeat. 31 32 'i!Fxc4 bxc4 'ifd5+ Black resigns In all the afore-mentioned ,games White castled queenside. The avoidance of this in favour of kingside castling makes things easier for Black. 9 10 ii.el 11 12 0-0 'il?hl .i.d7 12 . Vb6 13 14 illb3 f4 • • • a6 h5 Preventing the white bishop from going to h5. The Encyclopaedia reckons that after 12 lL!b3 1lc7 13 'iti>hl 0---0--0 14 f4 White retains an advantage, but even so, I should add, less of an advantage than if he had castled queenside. • • The queen would have been more safely placed at c7. 423 .i.e7 h4 After the game I recommended first playing 14 ...1!t'a7. In his commentary, Larsen suggested that then after 15 a4 followed by a4-a5 White would have a good game. But in this case Black can immediately return with his queen ( 1 5 . . . 'i'b6), with comfortable play. 15 of the black king would have given my opponent good attacking chances. Larsen, however, preferred to take play into an ending in accordance with the saying: 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' . • • . ltlac5 1!ra7 And now White exploits the fact that the bishop at d7 is undefended. 16 • • . dxc5 After 16 ... ..tc8. 17 tl'ld3 Black would have been well behind in development, and so I took the difficult decision to give up the right to castle. 17 18 1!t'xd7+ e5 � A useful move. Black cannot open the f-file, and in the meantime the white bishop is activated. 18 19 ltlxc6 ltlxa7 22 g3 22 23 gxh4 lba7 f5 24 25 l::tgl+ a4 �h7 .l:ta8 .l:tbd8 l:lxd7 ltc7 ltla4! Now Black gets into difficulties. If 15 . . . 'ifc7, then 16 'ife3 and tl'lb6. 15 16 19 20 21 • • • ltla5 �g7 Larsen correctly pointed out that 22 f5 l:lxa7 23 fxe6 fxe6 24 .tc4 fxe5 25 .i.xe6 ..tf6 26 l:ld6 would have been more advantageous for White, although after 26 . . . e4 Black would retain possib­ ilities of a defence. But he could also improve on this variation by instead of 24 . . . fxe5 playing 24 ...l:!a8 25 i.xe6 l::td8 with good drawing chances. • • • A position typical of the given variation: the doubled h-pawns do not present a danger, and the f4 pawn may be a good target for the black bishop, when it is switched to h6. 1 9 exf6+ .ixf6 20 'ifd3 was more dangerous, when the exposed position 424 26 27 a5 l:l.xd8 .!:td8 .i.xd8 Game 244 M.Botvinnik-S.Gligoric With every exchange White's · theor­ etical advantage fades, . and a draw becomes imminent. Olympiad, Moscow 1956 English Opening · 28 l:tdl 29 l:td6 30 l:b6 31 .i.f3 .i.xh4 .i.e7 .i.d8 31 Ae7 • • • After 3 1 . ..l:.d7 32 l:.d6 Black would have remained a pawn down, whereas now White's temporary burst of activity leads only to exchanges. J:txb7 .i.xa5 f6 32 33 34 lbb7 ..i.xb7 c3 35 36 37 38 39 fxe5 ..tc8 fxe5 .i.c7 .i.xe5 .i.xe6 .i.xf5+ <tig7 ctJg2 ..tf4 Draw agreed Although in the end this is a pawn sacrifice, it leads to a drawn position. Svetozar Gligoric (born 1923), along with Vidmar, is Yugoslavia's most out­ standing chess player. His play is distin­ guished by a highly subtle under­ standing of position and exceptional energy. He is very close to the Soviet Chess School, in the sense that with him the opening of a game is always firmly linked with a plan in the middlegame. His cheerfulness and systematic partici­ pation in sport (even at the age of 50 he successfully played football) enabled him to retain his chess strength over a prolonged period of time. And just how strong he was is best indicated by these facts: Gligoric participated eight times in Interzonal Tournam ents and three times in Candidates events. Just as, in their time, Capablanca's successes aided the popularity of chess in Cuba, and Euwe 's did in Holland, so Gligoric has done much for Yugoslav chess to become popular on a mass scale, and for the cowitry's masters to become leading players. 1 c4 2 g3 3 .i.g2 4 i l£ic3 5 · 1£if3 g6 c5 .i.g7 1£ic6 1£ih6 The easiest way to equalise is with 5 ... e6 followed by . . . 1£ige7 and . . . d7-d5. The move in the game has the drawback of allowing White to create difficulties for Black by the unimpeded advance of his h-pawn. 425 It is curious to note that in 1927, in a team competition, Levenfish also dev­ eloped his knight at h6; this was our first meeting at the chess board. I failed to cope with the problems of the opening and lost quickly. 6 7 h4! d3 d6 llb8 8 h5 .i.d7 White was able to delay h4-h5 by one move, only because 7 . . . i.g4 would not have prevented his plan. The point is that in the event of 8 h5 gxh5 Black would have a broken position, while after 8... i.xh5 9 i.xh6 i.xh6 10 g4 he would have lost material. Black should have preferred the radical measure 8. . . f6, when the threat of . . . g6-g5 forces White to exchange pawns immediately. In this case the black king would not be threatened with mate, as occurred in the game. 9 10 11 il..xh6 hxg6 'Bel .i.xb6 hxg6 11 12 13 :ms+ 'Wb6 .tg7 .txhs .ixc3+ bxc3 e6 • @e7! • 13 ... Ju6 is no better in view of 14 ltlg5, after which the threat of 15 ltlh7 (or 15 lbge4) is highly unpleasant. 14 15 lbgS Things would have been more diffi­ cult for Black after the preparatory 1 5 @d2, which would have prevented him from occupying the h-file ( 1 5 ...@e7 16 l:.hl ) . If in this case 1 5 . . . 'i'f6 (15 ... 'i'e7 does not change anything), then 16 lbg5 (16 . . . 'ilfxf2 17 l:tfl , or 16 . . . @e7 17 l£ie4 l:th8 18 lbxf6 l:lxh6 19 0.g8+), while 1 5 ... 'i'b6 is parried by 16 :tel. 15 16 . • @d2 There is nothing else available to White: the variation 16 0.e4 'i'h8 17 °fig5+ f6 18 'i'xg6 l:lg8 is quite useless. 16 il.e8 Black misses the opportunity to force the exchange of queens - 16 ... Wh8 17 :bl 'Wxh6 18 l:lxh6. He would have had every chance of gaining a draw in the endgame (18 . . . lbd8 and then . . . b7-b5). He also did not have to fear 17 tbh7, since after 17 . . J ig8 18 l:Ih l f6 White's initiative comes to a standstill. Now, however, the queens remain on the board, and White's hands are freed for an attack on the king. • Apparently, when he played 8 ... i.d7 Black overlooked this possibility. The queen is immune due to 12 l:lxh8 mate. • • . . 17 18 1!fg7 f4 18 19 :ht ®d7 In this way the knight is supported in its favourable position (the hasty 1 8 0. xn would have lost to 18 . . . We7). 426 1ie7 l£id8 up trouble ' ? Let us see: 26 ... 'ifc7 27 'ifg8 'ifb6 28 'ife8 tbc6 29 'flxf7 'flb2+ 30 @e3 i!fxc3 3 1 tbd7 'if'd4+ 32 00 l:ld8 33 ttJf8 and it is time to resign. Generally speaking, being a pawn down, his game is lost, and Gligoric makes a desperate attempt to restore material equality, but it merely simplifies things for White. · 27 'lfg5 @xa4 20 tlJe4 20 l:th7 and then 2 1 �e4 was more energetic, when the loss of the g6 pawn is inevitable. 20 21 llh8 22 . tiJf6 rlic7 .i.c6 @b6 23 tlJxc6 . . • 28 llhl @bl 29 'i!fh4 @b2 30 g4 The threat was 29 @c2, after which there is no escape from the mate (29 ... @a5 30 tbd5 !), while if 28 . . . @a5, then immediately 29 ttld5 ! Of course, the bishop sacrifice could not be accepted: (22. . . �xg2 23 l:te8), but even with control of the e8 square (22 . . . .i.d7) Black was threatened with the loss of his queen: 23 J:lf8 and 24 tbg8. .i.xc6 After 23 . . .bxc6 White's heavy pieces would have surmounted the pawn barrier in a very curious way: 24 l:te8, 25 'iff8 and 26 lle7. 24 :h7 tiJdS The pawn can no longer be defended: 24 . . . l:tf8 25 'ifxf8. 25 1lfxg6 @ a6 Since Black soon pins his last hopes on the activity of his king, 25 ... @a5 was more logical, although equally hopeless. @a5 26 a4 Did Black have time to bring his queen out into the open, in order to 'stir The simplest, since Black imme­ diately resigned, but White could also have won 'brilliantly' : 30 l:tbl+ @xbl 3 1 'ii'h l + @b2 32 'i'c l + <it>b3 33 'i'bl+ ®a3 34 ®c2 and mate next move. In this game Gligoric did not display his best qualities, perhaps because from the very start the play took an unusual tum, and it was hard for him to find opportunities for counterplay. 427 aiming. The weakness of g4 is less significant, since a black bishop on this square can always be attacked by lbd2fl(c4)-e3. Grune 245 M.Botvinnik-V.Ciocaltea Moscow 1956 Ruy Lopez 1 2 3 4 e4 lbtJ ii.b5 �a4 5 6 7 c3 d4 lbbd2 e5 lbc6 a6 d6 In Games 130, 145 and 148, Black replied 4 . . . �6. · Ad7 {fjge7 Observing the play of the future Romanian grandmaster at the Olympiad in Moscow, I noticed that he employed the so-called Steinitz Defence Deferred with 7 . . .{fjg6. After deciding to check certain nuances of this variation, I chose the Ruy Lopez, but on the next move I was to be disillusioned . . . 7 8 . dxe5 • . 9 10 . . . g6 9 h4 This non-theoretical continuation has mainly a psychological context. Al­ though the Encyclopaedia considers that 9 . . iLg7 10 h5 {fjc8 gives Black equal chances, there are few players who are willing to allow h4-h5. Hence one can expect the reply . . . h7-h5, weakening the g5 square, for which the white bishop is . b5 f6 11 12 13 {fjc4 1!fe2 .i.d2 iLg4 1!fd7 13 ... lbc8 14 15 lbeJ lbxg4! lbb6 White does not hurry with the manoeuvre lbc2-e3xg4, aiming first to connect his rooks. dxe5 I have already mentioned several times in my notes that simplification is normally to the advantage of the defending side. From this point of view it was preferable to play 8 ...lbxe5. .i.b3 After this it can be considered that White's idea has been a success. 10 ...Ag7 l l lbg5 0-0 was better. This restricts Black's king's bishop, when it will be developed at g7. 8 . • . loss of time on a pointless manoeuvre. After 13 ... 0-0-0 14 0-0-0 'ife8 15 lbe3 �d7 16 lbd5 White has a clear spatial advantage, but this would have been a lesser evil for Black compared with the game continuation. A White sacrifices a pawn, but regains it without difficulty, whereas the absence of Black's light-square bishop will be keenly felt. 428 15 16 ... hxg4 �h2 After 16 lC!gl �as Black's position would have been satisfactory, whereas now he is forced to take the h4 pawn, in order not to lose the g4 pawn without compensation. White firmly seizes the initiative, creating one threat after another. · 16 17 0-0-0 l:lxh4 Otherwise the f6 pawn cannot be defended, since if 2 1.....te7 there would have followed 22 ..th6 'itb.8 23 ..tgs ilg7 24 lCixf6. fle7 22 ..th6 23 Ji.el �d7 24 a3 The light-square bishop has to be retained! 24 �a5 . . • 25 Aa2 Ac6 26 27 28 Abs ..td5 ..th6 'i&>b8 ltd6 It was only possible to defer the invasion of the white rook. For example, if 25 ... 'i!Fg7 there could have followed either 26 ..th6 We7 27 .i.xf8 'i'xf8 28 .l:th7, or 26 lth3, then 'ii'h l and lth7. Black is forced to concede the h-file. 17 . . . 'i'h7 is bad on account of 18 lC!xg4 with the threat of 19 teixf6+, and 17 . . . g3 18 fxg3 (but not 18 ..tg5 ltxh2 ! ) 18 ... lthS 1 9 lDg4 is no better. 9g7 17 . • . 18 19 g3 lC!xg4 h5 19 20 . AXhl ltxhl 21 1if3 l;td6 Now the enemy king hides on the queenside, whereas after 1 9 Wxg4 it would have remaiited in the centre. However, it was not easy to judge which was more favourable. • • 0-0-0 Parrying White's threat of i l lth7. White has created the threat of 29 ..txf8 t'.Dxf8 30 &Dxe5, which cannot be parried. If 28. . .lDc6 he will include the exchange on c6. The game continuation merely defers the loss of the pawn by one move. 28 29 30 429 ..ta2 ..txf8 c6 b5 tl'ixf8 31 32 /i)xe5! Axf8+ 1!f:i.e5 JJ 34 35 :n+ <ifi>bs c5 f5 <ifi>b7 But it is not even a matter of the extra pawn; the position of the black king cannot be defended. 1!feJ .i.d5 knight for the bishop at b3 . Even so, the diverting of the knight to the edge of the board causes serious doubts, and prob­ ably gives White the better prospects. 10 f4 11 1!i'f3 b6 With the last hope of 36 1!fxc5? ltlb3+, when White loses his queen. 36 :rs+ Black resigns, since the c5 pawn will be captured with check. Game 246 N.Padevsky-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1956 Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 e4 /i)f3 d4 ltlxd4 /i)cJ Ac4 c5 ltlc6 cxd4 /i)f6 d6· One of the favourite continuations of the Bulgarian master, who a few years later became a grandmaster. It first occurred in the game Sozin-Rokhlin, 6th USSR Championship, 1 929. 6 7 . . e6 9 ii.bl /i)a5 • 0-0 iLe7 Black would appear to gain the best chances of equalising after 7 . . .a6, intending . . .ltla5, . . .b7-b5 and . ..'fl.c7. 0-0 8 ii.eJ This manoeuvre allows Black to develop his bishop at b7 in the quickest way possible. In addition, at the appro­ priate moment he can exchange his White should have begun immediate action with 1 1 e5 ! , which subsequently was employed many times and gave him the better game. For example: 1 1 . . . ltles 1 2 f5 dxe5 13 fxe6 tb.xb3 14 ltlc6! After the move in the game Black successfully completes the fianchetto of his queen's bishop, and of White's opening advantage nothing remains. . 11 .i. b7 • 12 • . g4 A highly risky move, in view of the possible activity of Black's queen's bishop on the long diagonal (and that its opponent will be exchanged for the knight at a5). However, Black also has the initiative after 12 f5 e5 13 ltlde2 ltlxb3 14 axb3 d5. 12 13 . g5 • • Ac8 White could not play 13 tD<le2 in view of 13 . . . ltlxe4 14 ltlxe4 d5 (and, 430 possibly . . . d5-d4). From this variation it is clear that the knight at a5, defending the bishop at b7, is in the given instance well placed. 13 14 . . • bxc3 llxc3! However, after 18 . . . l:txf6 19 f5 exf5 20 tbxf5 .i.f8 2 1 lZlli6+ (or 2 1 l:Cafl Ilg6 22 lZlli6+ gxh6) 2 1 . . .l:Cxh6 22 'ifxc8 Ilg6+ 23 'i¥tf1 .i.xc8 24 .l:lxa7 .ig4 25 :ITT .lih3+ 26 �el :e6 the win for Black is not in doubt. Now White loses his important cen­ tral pawn, the h l -a8 diago�l is opened, and his position becomes critical. In the eYent of 14 gxf6 lhe3 it is, of course, unfavourable for White to play 1 5 fxe7 on account of 15 . . J lxf3 16 exd8'if l:txfl+ and 17 ...llxd8, when Black is a pawn up, but the position after 15 'i'xe3 .lixf6 is also rightly judged by the Encyclopaedia to be in favour of Black, as was demonstrated in the correspon­ dence game Rubanov-Borisenko (1 960). The whole point is that the position of the white king is insecure, and the two black bishops are very dangerous. Padevsky, hoping for an attack, chooses a continuation in which White retains his g5 pawn. 14 15 . • • 1!fg4 lLlxe4 1!fc8! After 1 5 . . . g6 White could have com­ plicated the play with a rook sacrifice by 16 f5 exf5 17 l:txf5 gxf5 18 tbxf5. 16 l:tfJ But now if 16 f5 there could have followed 16 . . . e5 17 rn lbxb3 1 8 axb3 'i'xc3 19 :ael d5 followed by . . . .i.cS. 16 17 18 axb3 'iih4 lLlxb3 f5 Things are more difficult for Black after 18 gxf6. e.g. 18 ... tbxf6 19 'ii'xe6+ 'i'xe6 20 lbxe6 .i.xf3 2 1 liJxf8 <it>xf8 22 l:txa7 b5 23 ii.d4, and he faces consider­ able technical difficulties. 43 1 18 19 20 l:lh3 'ifh5 e5 h6 The last chance. White wants to play 2 1 gxh6 and then hxg7. But his king proves to be in a more dangerous position. 20 21 Itdl 1!fxc3 exd4 Now if 22 gxh6 there 22 . . . dxe3 , and g7 is defended. 22 follows .id2 22 .ixd4 'ifxc2 23 gxh6 tbf6 was equally hopeless. 22 23 • . • gxh6 Wc6 lLlg5 This is more accurate than 23 . . .tbf6, to which White could still reply 24 'i'g6. 24 25 llgJ li'hl+ lLle4+ White resigns c.t>f2 manoeuvre 14 ...ti)c7 and ... a7-a6 or . . . .id7-f5, but with doubled b-pawns and opposite-colour bishops, this advantage may not be decisive. Game 247 M.Botvinnik-M.N ajdorf Moscow 1956 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 J 4 5 d4 eJ ti)ge2 ti)f6 e6 Ab4 c5 d5 6 a3 cxd4 c4 Q)cJ 5 . . . cxd4 6 exd4 d5 leads to an equal game, but the reader already knows (Game 232) that Najdorf was not very strong in opening theory. Better is 6 ... .i.xc3+ 7 lbxc3 cxd4 8 exd4 dxc4 9 .i.xc4 CLJc6 10 .i.e3 0--0, as in the game Botvinnik-Tolush ( 1 965); now White has a solid advantage. 7 8 axb4 ti)xc3 dxc3 0-0 Should Black await another pawn exchange, or should he make it· himself? In the latter case (8 ... dxc4 9 'i'xd8+) he loses the right to castle, and his king may come under attack. 9 cxd5 ti)xd5! White would have gained greater attacking possibilities, if the pair of knights had remained on the part. 10 ti)xd5 1!1xd5 11 ' 12 13 'i'xd5 iLd2 .ic3 exd5 .if5 ti)a6 This reduction of the opponent's attacking potential is also logical, although in the ending White has an undisputed advantage. Black finds the correct method of play. It is hard for White to refuse the win of a pawn, in view of the possible 14 15 .ixa6 l1xa6 bxa6 .idJ! 17 18 cti>d2 l:tc5! a6 18 19 g4 Seizing control of the b5 square and thereby blocking the white b-pawns. 16 l:la5 .ic4 The best post for the rook, from which it attacks the d5 pawn and con­ trols c7. And if Black should wish to ex­ change it, White will repair his pawns. Afd8 Widening the front of the attack, which is aided by the fact that the black bishop is tied to the queenside. It was possible, of course, to win another pawn ( 1 9 'i&?c2 l:td7 20 e4 l:tad8 2 1 lldl .ie2 22 l:td2 .i.b5 23 exd5), but after the simple reply 23 . . . f6 it is not apparent how White can strengthen his position, since it is not possible to switch his bishop to the h2-b8 diagonal (e.g. 24 f3 <tlf7 25 l:td4 ilfl). 432 19 20 21 • • • h4 ltbl h6 ltd7 moves, and to find the correct plan at home? 21 22 23 24 25 26 bJ l:lgl i.d4 f3 b5 :xc7 l!xc7 :ds JO i.c5 :as 31 �el il.dJ 32 33 34 lid7 lixd5 l:ld3 i.c2 .i.xb3 34 35 36 l!cJ 1'.d4 37 38 39 40 41 il.cJ i.d4 i.cJ e4 28 29 Ensuring the unblocking of the c-file. lte8 .tbs �h7 :�6 :e8 f6 • . • Black needs to drive the enemy rook off the seventh rank. Najdorf unexpectedly changes his mind. 30 . . . l::td7 was logical, not fearing 3 1 Uc8+ �h7 (only not 3 1. . . <it>f7, in view of the threat of f3-f4-f5, with mate at f8) 32 f4, since even if White makes the successive moves 3 3 :!:tf8, 34 .td4, 35 f5 and 36 g5, in the hope of 36 . . . fxg5 37 f6 g6 38 l::th8+! , there follows 36 . . . hxg5 37 h6 l:td6 with a draw. Black has to stick to waiting tactics. 27 Preventing the exchange of the queenside pawns (34 l!d7? .ta4 and 35 . . . a5). l:lgcl Now the white pieces look to be very well placed, but that is all. Meanwhile, the standard plan of a pawn stonn would have created insuperable difficul­ ties for Black, due to the absence of his bishop from the decisive part of the battlefield, and also the weakness of the g7 and d5 pawns. For example, 27 f4 :f8 28 llg2 :es 29 g5. 27 28 . • • l:lc7 If 36 . . .a5 there would have followed 37 l:tc5, winning a pawn. 'itig8 Also a standard decision, but posit­ ionally incorrect. After the exchange of one pair of rooks it will hardly be possible to win. White's impatience is unjustified. Would it really have been difficult to 'mark time' for some fifteen .i.c4 .tb5 .te8 :cS Without this White convert his advantage. 41 • • . :bs l:id8 :bs lld8 is l:ld3 · unable to Najdorf was apparently afraid that, if he exchanged rooks, he would be unable to save the bishop ending. However, the following analysis shows that, although 433 dangerous, Black's position was defen­ sible: 4 1 . . .:d6 42 � :c6 43 'iti>e3 (43 f4 a5 ! ) 43 . . .l:txc5 44 bxc5 @fl 45 'ifi>d4 'ifi>e6 46 f4 .tc6 47 f5+ @fl 48 'iti>e3 .td7 49 �f4 .tc6 50 e5 .tb7. 50. . .fxe5+ 5 1 'it>xe5 .t.f3 52 <t1"4 .tc6 53 g5 hxg5+ 54 'it>xg5 .td7 loses to 55 .txg7 ! ! @xg7 56 h6+ @gs 57 @g6 .tes+ 58 @f6 .td7 59 <&t>e5 a5 60 f6 a4 6 1 �d6 a3 62 @xd7 a2 63 <i;;e7 a l 'i' 64 fl+ 'ifi>h7 65 f8'i'. 5 1 e6+ <1Te7 52 'iti>e3 .tc6 53 .td2 .tb7 54 <;f;>d4 .tf3 55 g5 hxg5 56 .txg5 .txh5 with a draw. 56 ...fxg5 is bad on account of 57 h6 gxh6 58 �e5 g4 59 f6+ <ties 60 'it>d6 g3 6 1 fl+ �f8 62 'it>d7 .tc6+ 63 �xc6 g2 64 <it>d7 g l 'i' 65 e7+ �xf7 66 e8'i'+ <it>f6 67 'i'e6+ 'l;g7 68 c6. As for the resulting rook ending where White is a pawn up, he could have won it fairly simply. 42 'ifi>e2 If 42 � there would have followed 42 . . . .la4, intending 43 ... i.dl . 42 • • • .lb5 Black could no longer 'think better of it' and play 42 ... lid6, for the following reason: 43 e5 fxe5 44 .lxe5 :c6 45 .i.c3 l:lxc5 46 bxc5 .tc6 47 � r:t;n 48 f4 .i.d7 49 'iti>g3 .tc6 50 f5, and then as indicated in the note to Black's 4lst move. 43 44 l:lxb5 l:tb8+ 49 l:lb6 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 l:lb8+ l:lb7+ 'iti>g3 b5 cii>f4 b6 l:txc3 <l;f7 But not 44 . . . �h7 45 f4 :g3 46 e5 fxe5 47 fxe5 l:txg4 48 <i;;d3 , when the e­ pawn is dangerous. � 45 Ab7+ Wf7 46 l:lb8+ <l;f8 47 l:tb7+ 48 <l;t'2 Ab3 Preventing 49... a5 . l:la3 Wf7 � a5 a4 l:lb3 Black gains drawing chances, since the queenside pawns are exchanged. In the variation 55 @!5 :xf3 + 56 @e6 @g8 I missed 57 �d5 !, after whi�h the · passed b-pawn inevitably advances. 434 55 <it>g8 An error in reply. Quite good draw:­ ing chances were offered by 55 . . . :b5, when it is hard for White to create a passed e-pawn. For example, 56 e5 a3 ! 57 ex:f6 gxf6 58 l:ta7 l:txb6 59 l:txa3 l:lb5, or 56 l:ta7 l:.xb6 57 l:txa4 .llb5. Now, however, things are easier for White. The exchange of the queenside pawns is inevitable, and when pawns remain on only one side, the kingside, a minimal advantage in a rook ending does not usually guarantee a win. But here a significant role is played by the weakness of the g6 square and the pas­ sive position of the black king, which increases White's winning chances. • the passed pawn by 60 . . . l:tb2 would have lost: 6 1 @g6 @f8 62 l:ta8+ <it>e7 63 @xg7 l:tg2 64 l:ta7+ <it>e6 65 f5+ �e5 66 l:ta5+ <it>xe4 67 @x:f6 <it>d3 68 g5 ! • • 56 <it>f5 57 <it>e6 61 62 Jba2 c:llf7 l:ta5 First White needs to transfer his rook to the central d5 post, where it will defend his king against checks, and after the advance of the e-pawn it will be threatening to invade on the seventh rank, ensuring a won pawn ending. 62 63 64 65 ltd5 e5 fxe5 ltc7 lla7 fxe5 llb5+ After 56 . . . l:txf3+ 57 <it>g6 Black loses immediately. It was even possible to be mated: 57 . <it>g6 l:tg5 . 57 58 . f4! a3 ... a2 • • • White takes control of the g5 square and simultaneously prepares the crea­ tion of a passed e-pawn. 58 After 58 . ..<it>h7 White would have exploited the diversion of the enemy king from the main part of the battle­ field by 59 <it>d7 a2 60 l:ta7 l:txb6 61 l:!xa2, when the e-pawn soon begins advancing. And if 58 ... l:ta5 he had the reply 59 l:ta7. 59 60 lta7 <it>f5 l:txb6+ l:tb7 The only possibility of activating the king somewhat. The attempt to retain The afore-mentioned threat has now arisen: 66 l:td7+! l:lxd7 67 e6+ <it>e7 68 exd7 <it>xd7 69 <it>g6 etc. 65 66 j e6 • . . <it>e7 A practical game is not a study, where there must be only one way to achieve the win. Therefore the more complicated, but also effective contin­ uation 66 ltd4, found later by Lilienthal, does not reduce the interest in that which occurred in the game. 435 66 • • • l:ta4 In reply to 66 ...l:ta6 67 l:.d7+ ®f8 White would have won by the swift approach of his king: 68 <iti>g6 ! l:.xe6+ 69 �h7, and Black loses both of his pawns. 67 l:td7+ l:tti+ • • • �· 0 :as l:tf6 Black resigns, since there is no 72 e7 73 defence against 'f1d6-d8. The endgame is of interest for its combination of tactical subtleties with techniques that are well known in the theory of rook endings. In his time Tarrasch joked that rook endings are never won. Sometimes they are! Game 248 B.Sliwa-M.Botvinnik Moscow 1956 French Defence hxg5 Wf8 Wg8 g4 70 Wg6 71 h6! The final subtlety. White does not need his h-pawn, but it is important to secure control of f6. Now mate becomes inevitable. 71 gxh6 Or 71...l:.as 72 hxg7 g3 73 e7 l:ta6+ 74 l:.f6. • � . • .:• . • · fj ·�· • • • • ... . . • • • � . . . • • • • • • • • g5 After 67 l:td7+ ®f8 the fifth rank would have remained undefended, and the advance of the g-pawn would have temporarily becoine impossible. Now let us consider first the interest­ ing defensive possibility suggested by Aronin, 67. . .'f1a7, based on the fact that the combination 68 l:ld7+ l:.xd7 69 exd7 <it>xd7 70 'it>g6 hxg5 7 1 <ifi>xg7 g4 leads only to a draw. White, however, plays 68 :es ! Now there is the threat of 69 @g6 'it>f8 70 e7+, in view of which the exchange 68 . . . hxgS 69 <ifi>xg5 is forced. White again wants to play 70 <ifi>g6. For example, after 69 . . .'f1a6 or 69... 'iii?f8 (in the latter case 70 <ifi>g6 l:.e7 7 1 h6 gxh6 72 �6 is possible), while if 69 ...l:.al , then 70 <ifi>g6 l:.fl ! 7 1 @xg7 l:lgl + 72 @h6 ! ltg2 73 l:tg5 l:tf2 74 </;g7 </;xe6 7 5 h6 l:tf7+ 76 <ifi>g8 l:ta7 77 h7. However, let us return to the game. 67 68 69 � 1 2 e4 d4 4 exd5 3 tLlcJ e6 d5 ..i.b4 This leads to the exchange variation of the French Defence (cf., for example, Game 163), in which White cannot hope for an opening advantage. This was exactly how Ilya Rabinovich played against me in the Leningrad Champion­ ship ( 1932), as did Lasker (Moscow 1936). 436 4 5 .i.dJ 6 lLJge2 7 .i.g5 exd5 lLJc6 lLJge7 pawn, defending the c4 square (as Lasker played in a similar position in the afore-mentioned game). . 7 0--0 .i.f5 8 i.xf5 iLJxf5 proved even more favourable for Black (Capablanca­ Alekhine, match, 1927). 7 f6 A rather bold move, but Black, in avoiding simplification, deviates from the usual ways of developing. . 8 9 . 11 • .i.f4 0-0 .i.f5 • • • bxcJ • • lLJa5 12 W'gJ /1'}f5 13 1!1'h3 g6 15 16 ti:ixf5 l:lfel+ '3;n The trouble is that after 12 . . . 0--0 1 3 .i.xc7 Black loses not only a pawn, but also his knight. 1 3 . . . 'ild7 14 .i.xc7 ti:ic4 15 !tfel 0--0 16 tLlg3 'i'xc7 17 ll'ixf5 was little better for Black. 'if d7 14 lLJgJ After 14 . . . tb.xg3 White had the important intermediate check 15 .l:tfel + (but not 15 'ii'xg3 in view of 15 . . . 'ii'd 7! 16 .i.xc7 lLJc4, which is to Black's ad­ vantage), when if 1 5 ...lL'ie4 there follows 16 ife6+ 'iie7 17 ifxd5, winning. Things would hardly have been any easier for Black after 14...lDg7 15 fLfe l + <llf'l 16 fLe2 h5 17 fLae 1. Here the two sides chances are equal, but Black is forced to exchange his bishop at b4 for the knight, as otherwise lLJa4-c5 is unpleasant for him. 9 10 • In preventing c3-c4, Black loses time and ends up in a dangerous position. He should have castled urgently. ifxf5 .i.xc3 After 10 lLJxc3 iDxd4 White is still faced with regaining his paWIL 10 • • • .i.xdJ A careless move, allowing White to seize the initiative. 10 ...lL'ia5 should have been played immediately. 11 'ilxdJ! I underestimated this move, since I was sure that White had to take with his 437 Black does everything possible to save the game, but he underestimated the strength of the Polish master in attack. Fortunately, in the end a sharp endgame is reached. 17 Vh6! 17 18 . 19 l:labi il.. xc7 Tying Black down with the threats of 29 'ifb7+ and 29 Vxa7+. After 28 ... 'i'el+ 29 r/i;h2 'ifxf2 White gives perpetual check. 28 Black was expecting White to go into an ending with an extra pawn: 1 7 'i'xf5 gxf5 18 il..xc7 GDc4, in which he was hoping to draw without difficulty. After subtly evaluating the position, Sliwa chooses a continuation that sets his opponent very difficult problems. For the moment the threat is 18 l:te7+ r/i;xe7 1 9 'i'g7+ 'it?e6 20 l:t.el+. lbc6 b6 White is nevertheless tempted by the win of a pawn, but this is wrong: Black gains two tempi necessary for the switching of his knight to f5, and his chances improve. Things would have been worse for him . after 19 l:te2 ! followed by l:t.be l-. 19 20 ' . .i.f4 · 21 · . D.e2 • . . . .At just the right time! 22 1!t'b3 'ifd7 lbe7 lbfS h5 Although Black is a pawn down, his position is preferable thanks to the weakness of the white c-pawns and the c4 square. · · 23 ifd3 l:lac8 24 h3 h4 l:r.he8 25 D.bel Black · cannot get by without the · · · exchange of rooks. 26 27 28 :xe8 :xe8 1!fa6 g5 :xe8 1lfxe8 A standard decision in such cases. Now White must choose where to play his bishop to, which is not so simple. He plays it to a passive position, whereas after 29 'ifb7+ 'it>g6 30 ..ltb8 'iie l+ 3 1 r/i;h2 'iixf2 32 Wxd5 �3 33 W'g8+ (but not 33 Wf3 because of 33 . . . 00+ 34 �hi Wei) the game would have con­ cluded in perpetual check. 29 ..i.d2 31 i.e3 31 ... lbd6 Securing the knight's position at c4 (this is worth more than a pawn), but a draw was still possible. 30 'Ifxa7+ 'it>g6 A draw results from 3 1 Wxb6 lbc4 32 Wa6 'i!ie2 (32 . . . lbxd2 33 'i'd3+ ttJe4 34 f3) 33 .i.e3 Vel+ 34 �h2 lbxe3 3 5 fxe3 Wg3+ 36 'it>gl 'i'xe3+. lbc4 Despite the loss of two pawns, Black's game is preferable, but that is all . . . 438 32 33 34 c.tihl 11i'b7 11i'xd5 f5 f4 White becomes nervous and decides to get rid of his passive bishop. He obtains a nominally equivalent compen­ sation in pawns, but he will have to defend with great accuracy'. Meanwhile, after 34 .ii.c l the open position of the black king would have given White excellent drawing chances. We should add that 34 .ii.xf4 gxf4 35 11i'xd5 W'n was bad for White. 34 35 .. fxe3 • ficulty. This game too is no exception. Bogdan Sliwa was a real fighter, but in accuracy of calculation he was found wanting. 39 40 41 1!fd6+ 1i'h2 c.tig6 .<it>h5 fxe3 Of course, not 35 'i'xc4 e2. 35 36 • • • �xe3 'ffd6+ <t;f7 The position of the black king in the centre gives White new chances. More accurate was 36 ... c.tih5 (which Black in fact arrives at later), and if 37 ilf6, then 37 . . . b5 38 d5 lDc4. 37 °@h6 37 38 39 1!fxb6 1i'c7+ If 37 'ifxb6 there would have followed 3 7 . . . 'ifa8 ! , defending the a6 square (weaker is 37. . . 'ife4 38 'i'a7+ @g6 39 'i'a6+! and 40 'i'e2) 38 'ilfc7+ @g6 3 9 'ifd6+ @h5, and all that remains for White is 40 'i'h2 (or 40 d5). 1!fe7 1fe4 The last chance of gaining a draw was 3 9 'ifa7+ ! �g6 40 'i'a6+ �5 41 'i'e2. The check at c7 loses, since the white queen has to take up .a passive position at h2. This was our second meeting at the chess board. In the first (1 952)' l·extor­ ted a win only with the greatest dif- Why is it hard for Black to win in this · position? White has sufficient compensation in pawns for the missing piece. In addition, Black's attacking possibilities are restricted due to the insecure position of his own king. And yet, after a highly protracted search, I managed to find the only way, and a highly subtle one, to win. In my work on this ending I was rendered invaluable · assistance by . my colleague Grisha Goldberg, who was a highly skilled analyst. The decision arrived at is yet another demonstration of the diversity of chess. It would appear that Black should be aiming to eliminate the enemy .passed pawns. But this is an exception in this case the threat of·' mate on g2 is removed; arid the white queen is freed to attack the black king,,;The way to win is '.. 439 - paradoxical - Black exchanges his last pawns, but opens up the position of the enemy king. Of course, this is possible only because the queens are retained, with one of them - Black's - being significantly stronger than the other. 41 Wc6 lbis move was sealed by me, and therefore during the resumption I had to reject the attempt to eliminate the pawns: 4 1 . . .'it'xc2 42 g4+ hxg3 (42 . . . <li>g6 43 'it'd6+) 43 Wxc2 lDxc2 44 d5 ! @h4 45 d6 @xh3 46 d7 g2+ 47 @gl lDel 48 d81!f lt):f3+ 49 @fl gl'i!f+ 50 @x:f3, and Black has only a draw. • 42 • h4 g4 46 'i'd6+ <it>hS 47 Wes+ @xh4 48 'iif6+ @h3 49 'i'h6+ @g3 50 Wd6+ @n 5 1 'iWf6+ <it>e2 52 'i'f2+ �dl 53 d5 'i'es S4 d6 g3 S5 1!r:f3+ <it>d2. However, it is time to return to the continuation in the game. • 'ifgl Now the greater part of our analytical work remained off-stage for the spectators, but the reader can make its acquaintance. The least pleasant reply for Black was 42 a4. It is desirable to eliminate immediately the outside passed pawn, since 42 ... 1!fxc3 43 a5 1!fxa5 44 g4+ hxg3 45 'ire2+ �h4 46 'i'xe3 'i'd5+ 47 @gl @xh3 48 @fl leads to a favourable ending for Black, but nevertheless a queeri ending. 29 Therefore 42 ... Wxa4 43 Wgl ! (but not 43 g4+ hxg3, which now loses: 44 'i!Ve2+ <it>h4 4S 'ilixe3 'ifxc2 46 'i'gl 'iti?xh3, or 44 'i'xg3 Wa l + 4S 'i'gl Was+ 46 @h2 'i!ff3) 43 . . . lDf5 44 Wdl+ <it>g6 and Black should win, but he has to overcome certain technical difficulties. It is not so easy to find a forced win in the event of 42 <it>gl. For example, 42... Wxc3 is bad in view of 43 'i!feS ifel+ 44 @h2 lDfl + 4S <it>gl . Black wins by 42 . . . �g6 43 g4 (or 43 a4 g4 44 hxg4 'i'f6 45 @hl lDxg4 46 Wgl 'i'f4) 43 . . .hxg3 44 Wxg3 Wxc3 4S 1ixc3 42 43 a4 g4! After 43 . . . 'i!fxd4 44 as tDxc2 4S a6 the outside passed pawn would have become an important trump in the battle for a draw. . 44 • • hxg4+ But now the further advance of the pawn (44 a5) would have proved disastrous: 44 . . . gxh3 4S gxh3 lic6+ 46 <it>h2 'ilixc2+ 47 <it>hl 'ire4+ 48 r.ti>h2 'Wf4+ 49 @hl Wf3+ 50 @h2 00+. 44 <it>g5 ! After 44. . . tbx:g4 45 'i'fl the queen breaks out of imprisonment. 45 a5 Or, which would have slightly pro­ longed the resistance, 45 Wcl @xg4 46 as Wxd4 47 a6 h3 48 gxh3+ <it>xh3. 45 . h3! A picturesque concluding position. The queen and knight perform miracles. 440 • • • . . difficult for Black to simplify the position. I should add that the soundest set-up for Black ( 1 c4 tt)f6 2 g3 c6) was employed by Stahlberg in Game 240. 3 4 5 6 .*.g2 0--0 b3 7 8 .tb2 e3 d5 .te7 0-0 b6 In ·Game 230 Stahlberg played 6. . .d4, and theory correctly recommends this. It was Capablanca who long ago pointed out the combined strength of these two pieces. Both after 46 gxh3 'i'c6+ 47 <ifi>h2 'iff3, and in the event of 46 g3 ifc6+ 47 'it>h2 1!fxc2+ 48 'it>hl tt:)xg4, mate is not far off. White resigns. At that time this was comparatively new, but subsequently it defined an opening variation which I employed several times, for example against Petrosian (USSR Team Championship, 1964) and Larsen (Palma de Mallorca, 1 967). 8 . . • 8 . . . c5 is more usual. 9 Game 249 9 Moscow 1956 1i'e2 . . . a5 Here too 9 . . . c5 was probably preferable (Botvinnik-Polugayevsky, 1 969). Reti Opening · c4 ll)f3 g3 lLlbd7 Defending the d3 square, just in case. M.Botvinnik-G.Stahlberg 1 2 3 .tb7 10 e6 lLlf6 The reader will probably already have noticed that, in my meetings with Stahlberg, for the third time in a row I choose a closed system of development, avoiding the Queen's Gambit. The point is that the Swedish grandmaster handled it very confidently, as I was able to see for myself during our g!ime in Budapest (1952). With the variation employed in the game, White retains m�re oppor­ tunities for manoeuvring, and it is more 44 1 lLlc3 10 . • • ltle4 10 . . .a4 was dangerous on account of 1 1 ltlxa4 dxc4 12 'W'xc4! Aa6 13 'W'c6 Axfl 14 � with good compensation for the sacrificed exchange. 11 12 13 14 llfd1 d4 Axc3 llact .if6 ltlxc3 'ifcs dxc4 15 16 bxc4 .i.h3 .ie4 20 21 ltle4 .tb2 22 ltlg5 22 23 24 25 ltlh3 f3 e4 25 26 27 .tat ltlt'2 ltld7 lla4 28 29 30 ltlg4 ltleJ .J:l.c2 h5 .i.g5 lbf6 .te7 ltlf6 Conceding the centre is not the best decision. At just the right time! After . . . 'i'b7 White would no longer have been able to avoid the exchange of the light­ square bishops. But now this standard idea ( 16 .ih3) is an attempt to carry out the manoeuvre ltld2 and e3-e4, retaining the king's bishop. 16 ... This begins a lengthy knight manoeuvre, the aim of which is to provoke . . . h7-h6, weakening the enemy position, and to avoid simplification, involving the exchange of knights. 'ifa6 Here the queen is not much more actively placed. 17 18 ltld2 .ig2 .ib7 18 e4, which White had in mind when he played 16 .th3, looked tempt­ ing. Then after the immediate 18 . . . cS he would not have continued 19 e5 on account of 19 . . . .te7 (20 d5 .ixd5), but 19 d5 Axc3 20 llxc3, and Black has some difficulties in view of his undefended lrnight at d7. However, 18 ...ltad8 is stronger for Black, and after 19 e5 .i.e7 the threat of . . . c7-c5 is hard to parry. Therefore White chooses a quiet continuation, guaranteeing him some positional advantage. 18 19 'it>xg2 Axg2 :fd8 h6 1i'b7+ a4 White creates a powerful pawn centre, and things become more difficult for Black. a3 In aiming to create at least some counterplay, Black puts his rook on a bad square, where it proves to be out of play. Black's simple threat of 3 1 . . . lbxe4 32 fxe4 'ifxe4+ 3 3 rJtf2 .i.xe3+ 34 'ifxe3 . 'i'xc2+ is easily parried. 442 31 d5 Opening the long diagonal for the bishop and threatening the unpleasant f3-f4. 31 32 • • • iLxf6! exd5 41 11fh8+ Black resigns After 4 1 . . . <Ji;e7 there would most probably have followed 42 'i'xh5 'ilfxc4 43 l:.d5 ! with irresistible threats. White chooses a simple path. but one leading to a clear positional advantage. 32 33 lbxd5 .i.xf6 Game 250 M.Botvinnik-L.Szab6 Moscow 1956 English Opening 1 2 3 4 5 c4 g3 .i.g2 tl'lcJ dJ g6 .i.g7 e5 tl'le7 c6 After 5 . 0-0, as Robatsch played against me at Varna Olympiad (1 962), White employed the same system of development as in the present game. .. 33 . l1e8 lbxf6+ lld5 l:txe5 gxf6 l:.e5 fxe5 . • Other continuations were little better for Black: 33 ... :d6 34 f4 ! , or 3 3 ... 'ii'c6 34 e5 l:.e8 35 'ii'e4. 34 35 36 The ell..iensive simplification (and even the undoubling of his pawns) does not make things any easier for Black. illc6 37 38 39 Wd2 1ig5+ %ld2 � :.aS 40 Wxe5 D.e8 Too late. Black could not play 40 ... 'i'xc4 on account of 4 1 'i'h.8+, but now too this move concludes the game. 443 6 e4 6 7 lbge2 d6 a6 8 a4 a5 .i.eJ 0-0 .i.e6 11fd7 If 6 00 there would :have followed 6 . . . d5 with an equal game. White, not fearing the weakening of the d4 square (which Black is practically unable to exploit), prevents . . . d7-d5. • • • Black tries to create counterplay with . . . b7-b5, but White is able to parry this. Now the advance of the rook's pawn is aimed at · securing c5 (or b4) for the queen's kIDght, but Black loses too much time. 9 10 Neglecting the development of his queen's knight, Black falls well behind in the mobilisation of his forces. l1 b3 h5 12 h4 .i.h3 13 d4 14 15 l1a2 ci>xg2 This is premature. 1 l . ...i.h3 is usually played first, to prevent White's possible reply h2-h4. White is well prepared for this break in the centre, which is the best way of countering the opponent's flank manoeuvre. 0-0 13 • • . Defending the d7 knight by 19 . . .l:ad8 or 19 ... l:tfd8 was not possible in view of 20 l:Hdl, and moving it - 19 . . .�6 was bad because of 20 l:b 1 . dxc4 .i.xe5 18 19 'i!fxd7 lld2 �xd7 .i.xc3 21 c5! After 17 . . . 'i'xdl 18 l:xdl .i.xe5 19 l:tb2 White would have won the b7 pawn. .i.b4 llfe8 21 f5 22 :fdl If 22 ...l:.a7, then 23 l:c7 and 24 • But Black opens up the position, without having sufficient resources to oppose White in the centre. This leads to insuperable difficulties. However, even after the cautious move 1 5 . . .'iic7 White would have continued 16 lld2 (16 . . . tlxl7 17 clxe5), and bis advantage is obvious. dxe5 bxc4 :xd7 By separating the black pieces on the a3-f8 diagonal, White puts his opponent in a hopeless position: the bishop at b4 is shut out of the game, and the knight at e7 needs protecting. Jlxg2 d5 16 17 20 • • l::tdd7, if there is nothing better. fxe4 23 24 l1xb7 lld6 25 26 27 lleb8 �f4 <i>eS l1bd7 �e6 Black resigns Forcing the opponent's king to step voluntarily onto the dangerous seventh rank. � 24 If 27 . . . ttJd5, then 28 .i.g5 with the threat of 29 llxd5 and 30 !te7 mate. 444 13 14 Game 25 1 M.Botvinnik-W. Uhlmann Af4 JLhJ JLb5 Moscow 1956 King's Indian Attack 1 2 e4 dJ 2 3 4 5 tLld2 ttlgf3 gJ e6 At that time Uhlmann was insufficiently experienced in this opening. d5 ttlf6 c5 Thus, White completely goes over to the King's Indian Defence with colours reversed. 5 6 7 8 .i.g2 0-0 J:t.et tLlc6 �e7 0-0 l:lb8 Apparently, in order after . . . b7-b5 to be able to answer a2-a4 with . . . a7-a6. However, it was better to play 8 . . . b5 immediately, and if 9 a4 b4. 9 e5 The preparatory 9 a4 was also possible, and only after 9 . . . a6 - 10 e5. In this case, when Black plays . . . b7-b5, a pawn exchange takes place on the queenside, and White can hope to exploit the rook's file. 9 10 11 iLlfl h4 iLld7 b5 i.a6 A loss of time. In a joint analysis after the game, Uhlmann and I established that it was correct to play l l .. .a5 and then ... it.36. Subsequent games confirmed this opinion. . 12 iLllh2 b4 445 14 . • • c4 A crucial positional mistake, after which White gains the opportwrity to support his main outpost in the centre his e5 pawn, and Black is deprived of counterplay. The a-pawn should have been advanced to a3. 15 16 17 d4 JLeJ tLlg5 17 18 19 f4 11fb6 l:t.fc8 Threatening 18 tLlxe6. tLlf8 iLld8 f5 Over-hasty. The f-file is opened, it is true, but at the same time the black pieces gain some freedom. 19 g4 was preferable. 19 20 . • . JLxf5 exf5 tLlde6 Black does not immediately arrive at the correct idea of exchanging the light­ square bishops, which he should have done now by 20 . . . i.d7. Then White's attacking chances would have been reduced. 21 1if3 A questionable decision. Of course, 29 White did not want to retreat his knight from g5, but now, after the exchange of knights, the doubled g-pawns will interfere with his attacking operations. His only chance lies in the manoeuvre lDh2-g4-f6+, but for the moment this is a long way off. 21 ... lhxg5 22 23 hxg5 lhg4 Ads thg6 2 I . . . lhxd4 was not possible due to 22 'i'f2. The g6 square would have been best kept free for the black queen. Besides, from f8 the knight was defending well the h7 pawn. Meanwhile, 23 . . . i.d7, as already mentioned, suggested itself. 24 �g2 i.d7 25 26 i.xd7 llbl l:lxd7 'ire6 27 28 J:l.h5 l:tabl l:lb6 thf8 29 30 Otherwise defended. . gxf6 • gxf6 • the .i xf6 king cannot 31 exf6 1!fe4 32 33 34 35 1'xe4 l:l g5+ l:lc5 l:tc8+ dxe4 li)g6 l:lxf6 thf8 36 l:lb4 36 37 38 39 40 l:txe4 l:lxc4 d5 llxb4 be 3 1 .. .'ifxf6 32 l:f5 (but not 32 'i!fg4+ 'it'g7) 32 . . .ile6 33 l:hh5 'i!fe4 34 'ifxe4 dxe4 35 l:c5 comes to the same thing. lf 3 5 . . . 'itrg7 36 i.116 mate. The simplest, since after 36 .ih6 l:xh6 37 %:txh6 %:txd4 Black still has some counterplay. Played with a considerable delay. If 26 ...tl)f'S, then 27 tiJf6+ would now have been decisive. lhf6+! The quickest way to win. This blunder anything. 41 446 does <liig7 l:ta6 l:tb7 llxa2 Ebb2 not i.d4+ Black resigns change Training Games M.Botvinnik-V.Ragozin Leningrad 1939 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 ttlf3 e3 ttlc3 .i.d3 d5 c6 ttlf6 e6 ttlbd7 dxc4 7 8 9 10 .txc4 .i.d3 e4 e5 b5 a6 c5 cxd4 11 ttlxb5 axb5 12 exf6 1fb6 13 14 fxg7 Jlxg7 This gives White the opportunity of preventing . . . t'lxl7-c5 ( 14 . . .lLlc5, as played by Euwe in the afore-mentioned game, is more accurate). Now it is use­ ful for White to delay by one move the implementation of his plan, consisting in seizing control of the central e5 square by .!:el and .i.f4, in order to parry . . . b5-b4. The game Larsen-Mestel ( 1972/73) went 14 ... 0--0 15 ne1 e5 16 .tf5 'ifd6 17 'i'c2 h6 1 8 .td2 .tb7 1 9 a3, also with good prospects for White. 0-0 15 b4 16 .!:.el .tb7 The bishop needs to be switched to an active position. .i.a6 The most interesting moment in the game. In the opening Black avoided the manoeuvre . . .tDd7-c5xd3, and now he Preparing for the next USSR Cham­ pionship, the 1 1th, we decided to check the Meran Variation, and one compara­ tively new continuation in it. 10 . . .ttlg4 occurred in Game 10. 1 1 ...lLlxe5 is perhaps stronger, as in Games 58 and 120. All this was judged by theory to be in favour of Black, and not only then, in 1 939, but also for the next nine years, until in the game Botvinnik-Euwe (No. 179) the plan carried out in this training game was demonstrated. 0-0 This position was well kriown at that time. 14 • • . 447 17 ll.f4 f5 l:txe6 l:txe6 22 'ifd5 l:.fe8 2 3 11fxd7 'itth8 (23 . .c;tit8 24 .i.xe6 11fxe6) 24 i.xe6 11fxe6 25 'ifxe6 l:.xe6 26 c;ftfl , and White has no more than a better ending. Now, however, despite the exchange of the light-square bishops, White's attack continues. wants to exploit the weakening of White's pawns on the queenside. Indeed, if Ragozin had been able to play . . . i.d5, Black would have had fair prospects. But it is now White's tum to move, and he immediately launches an attack on the weak e6 pawn; with this aim he needs to gain control of c4. 18 19 a4!! .i.c4 . 20 21 bxa4 21 22 23 19 . • . exd5 ::xf7 'ird3 The f5 pawn cannot be defended; if 23 . . . 1Wf6 or 23 . . . 'i!fg6 there follows 24 libs. But after its loss, White's attack develops automatically. .i.d5 If 19 . . . l:tfe8, then 20 :Xe6 l:txe6 2 1 l!Dg5 tDf8 22 'fih.5 'i!f'c6 2 3 .ixe6+ ttlxe6 24 'i'xh7+ � 25 i.d6+! (25 'ifxf5+ 'iftg8 26 'ilxe6+ 'i'xe6 27 lhxe6 i.f6 28 ttlc5 i.c6 is unclear) 25 . . .'ii'xd6 26 'ifxf5+ 'ittg8 (26. . . @e7 27 'if'f7+) 27 'i'f7+ 'itth8 28 ttlxe6 i.e5 (or 28 . . .l:tgS 29 ifb5+) 29 'i!fxb7 etc. Even so, Ragozin apparently did not suspect how dangerous his position was. Perhaps he should have decided on the variation 19 ... .i.xf3 20 'i!fxf3 (but not 20 l:lxe6 i.xd 1 2 1 l:txb6+ @h8 22 l:tb7 i.b3) 20 ... l:tae8! (20 .. JtfeS is bad on account of 2 1 l:txe6 l:txe6 22 'i'xa8+) 2 1 .i.xd5 l:te7 The strongest, and perhaps the only continuation. Black's position is not as bad as it might appear at first sight. White's queenside has practically been destroyed, and Black's central pawns, though doubled, are strong. The para­ doxical thing about White's idea is that he forces the exchange of his active rook for the passive enemy rook, in order to 'lure' the black king into the danger zone. 23 24 25 26 27 1!t'xf5 i.e5 ti)g5+ ti)f6 a3 l:.a6 'iftg8 'irc6 ltd There was no defence against the threat of 28 l:lc8+, but this 'trick' does not save Black, of course. 28 29 lixc6 llxc6 g4 Black resigns This training game enabled me nine years later to win a game against Euwe, which was undoubtedly my best 448 It is only this move that subsequently lost its topicality, but in 1945 that is what Denker played against me (Grune 1 54). Regarding 12 g3, see Game 22 1. However, it was this training game that played an important role in the development of this opening. creative achievement in the World Championship Match-Tournament. 1bis once again confirms the impor­ tance of well thought-out preparation. V.Ragozin-M.Botvinnik Pushkin, 1941 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 ihcJ ihf3 i.g5 e4 .i.b4 lhxg5 9 10 11 i.xg5 exf6 e5 b5 h6 g5 Bronstein played 9 exf6 against me (Game 195). hxg5 ihbd7 Ragozin lrnew Szabo's move 1 1 'i'f3, of course, but, rightly expecting that, since I was testing this variation, I would have something in reserve, he chose a different continuation, one which, incidentally, by present-day concepts is stronger. 11 12 lLe2 0-0 14 h4 14 ... .i.h6! 15 16 a4 hxg5 Axg5 b4 d5 e6 ihf6 c6 dxc4 How the decision was taken to develop this variation is mentioned in the notes to my game with Zhivtsov (No. 1 3 1 ), where I first employed it in a tournament (Moscow Championship, 1943/44). Here the reader can see how the fruits of my thinking about this variation were first tested by Ragozin. 6 7 8 9 1fb6 0-0-0 12 13 i.b7 In Game 1 54 only here did White play differently - 14 a4. Ragozin's attempt to support his bishop at gS merely weakens White's kingside, and allows the opponent to make effective use of the h-file for an attack. 'This manoeuvre subsequently be­ came a standard one in the given variation, after h2-h4 has been played. The opening of lines is now inevitable. This idea has also been passed from game to game. fu the present situation it is even more unpleasant for White, since he cannot reply 17 a5 on account of 1 7 . . . Wc7, winning a piece. 449 17 �e4 c5 23 24 A counter-blow, carried out in almost all the games played later with this variation. 18 19 a5 �gJ 'ifc7 White covers his king, but he immediately loses the battle in the centre. Black restores material equality and breaks through with his rooks into the opponent's rear along the h-file. 19 20 21 a6 1ic1 • • • �e5 ltc6 'S'e3 llfcl Defending against .:dh4 23 ...00+ i.xf3 l:.hl+ 25 tbxhl 'iWh2 mate. l:lh2 If instead 24 f3, which seems more logical, then 24 . . . lL!g4 25 'i'xc5 (25 fxg4 l:.xg2+ 26 � 'ifxg3 27 'i'xg3 l:r.hl mate) 25 ....l:r.hl+ 26 �l l:r.xhl + 27 �xhl 'i'h2 mate. 24 25 26 1!fxc5 26 27 28 29 1i'f8+ Wxd8+ fxe5 <iW1 l:txg2+ l:lh3 l:tgxg3 11fd8 'it>xd8 l:thl+ Beginning a forcing variation, which leads to Black winning a piece. 30 31 32 l1xd4 The d4 pawn is eliminated by the rook, not in order to defend the c4 pawn, but with the aim of switching this rook by the shortest way to the h-file. 22 23 • 26 'i'xe5 'i'xe5 27 fxe5 :gxg3 etc. is equally hopeless. Here the queen sacrifice 2 1 dxe5 was pointless, as can be seen by comparing this position with Gatne 221, where such a possibility could have been favourable for White. 21 .. f4 � 'it>e3 <ifi?d4 .Jig?+ l:th3+ If 32 @d2 the simplest way to win would have been 32 . . . c3+ or 32 .. . l:t.hh2 33 llel .i.f3, so White tries to 'recompense' himself for the loss of his bishop by the activity of his king. 32 33 34 35 24 J:l.xc4 ..t.?c5 @xc4 and Black won. llxe2 J:le4+ l:txc4+ :g3 V.Ragozin-M.Botvinnik Bolshevo 1947 King's Gambit 1 2 e4 f4 es Training games prior to the Chigorin Memorial Tournament simultaneously 450 pursued the aim of preparing for the World Championship Match-Tourna­ ment in the spring of 1948. Since among those due to play in this event were Keres and Fine, who might be expected to employ the King's Gambit, I had to decide on a method of defence in this opening. 2 3 exf4 d5 tM3 The first surprise for my trainer. Theory considers that 3 ... �6 is stronger. 4 5 6 7 7 exd5 ..i.b5+ dxc6 .tc4 the King's Gambit, and Bronstein too did not venture it in our World Cham­ pionship match ( 195 1), although pre­ viously he had been attracted by this opening. I was already thinking that the preparation time had been wasted, when suddenly in the 20th USSR Champion­ ship Bronstein nevertheless offered the King's Gambit (Game 207), and this new idea was tested in a tournament game. 8 li)f6 c6 bxc6 8 9 li)d5 The diagram position was already known. In the game Nimzowitsch­ Schweinburg (1 934) after 7 . . . .td6 8 'i'e2+ 'i'e7 9 'i'xe7+ @xe7 10 d4 .tf5 1 1 ltJe5 .txe5 12 dxe5 White gained the advantage. But I had prepared a dif­ ferent variation, which seemed more soundly based. However, in the World Champion­ ship Match-Tournament no one played 0-0 In the afore-mentioned game Bronstein played the weaker 8 d4. . .. .i.b3 .i.d6 Now Black is alright. It is important that to 9 We2+ or 9 l:.el+ he is able to reply 9 . . . ..i.e6, not fearing 10 ltJd4 if only because of 10 . . . 'ii'b6. But . . . as has already been mentioned in the notes to the game with Bronstein, subsequently Spassky found that by 9 ltJc3 .i.e6 10 ltJe4 ! White retains an opening advan­ tage, and the variation in this form disappeared from tournament play. It should nevertheless be remembered that Furman suggested a different way for Black to play, namely 7 ... .i.d6 (as in the Nimzowitsch-Schweinburg game), in order to answer 8 'ft'e2+ with 8 . . . @£8, and Black has a good game. 9 10 ... c4 0-0 This is not dangerous for Black. After he has safely castled, the centralised knight is no longer so necessary. Now his plan consists in blocking the ccnlrc, and then exploiting his pawn majority on the kingside. 451 10 ... ltJf6 11 d4 c5 12 cJ5 .i.g4 13 lLlcJ a6 Note the identical ideas carried out in this game and the one with Bronstein. Since White cannot safely support his pawn at d4, he is forced to advance it. Black freely completes the develop­ ment of his pieces, and the f4 pawn cramps White. The bishop at d6 is too valuable a piece, and it seemed to me that lLlb5 had to be prevented. This problem was solved differently, but also successfully, by Geller in a game . with Lutikov (1960). He played 1 3 ... lLlbd7, and after 14 tLlb5 .i.e5 1 5 'i'd3 - 15 . . . a6. · 14 Wet White considers himself obliged to attack the king - this was why he played the King's Gambit! In reality, it is only Black who has chances of an attack, since his pieces occupy key positions on the kingside. 14 15 16 17 .i.c2 1!fh4 .i.d2 lLlbd7 h6 flc7 l:tae8 452 For Black to mount an offensive, it only remains for him to play his bishop from g4 to g6, after which the centre will be under his control. .i.h5 18 l:tael 19 lLle4 19 20 21 22 .i.xe4 .i.c2 .i.a4 The exchange of this knight for the knight at d7 (namely d7, since the other knight appears at f6) makes it easier for Black to seize control of the centre. lLlxe4 lLlf6 .i.g6 After 22 .i.xg6 fxg6 Black could have immediately advanced his g6 pawn to the fourth rank . 22 23 • . • b3 lle4 23 l:be4 tLlxe4 was no better, and 23 .i.b3 would be completely passive. 23 24 25 Ji.cl 'tixel 25 26 Ahl .i.h7 !txel If instead 25 l:txel tLle4, and the white queen is shut out of the game. lLle4 f5 Now the advance of the g-pawn cannot be prevented. White is not even saved by the following exchange of bishops, since Black is able to defend the e5 square. ltt7 27 Wal %r.e7 28 i.e5 At just the right time. without any deviations, in the 19th game of the World Championship match with Bronstein (Game 190). Black has succeeded in carrying out his plan. Two months later this position occurred in Game 190. Naturally, during this match game I felt quite confident. The point of 10 dxc5 is that White avoids a variation which could have occurred in the game Najdorf­ Boleslavsky ( 1948), where 10 'ife2 was played, and Black could have advantageously replied 10 . . . cxd4 (Tarasov-Zak, 1 95 1 ). ifxd6 g5 29 30 .i.xd6 11fb2 31 i.c6 31 32 33 34 g4 ltlg5 ltlel f3 ltld3 b4 .D.e2 White resigns This move, and the subsequent pawn break by White on the queenside, are no longer able to save him, of course. If 35 bxc5 lbh3+ and mate next move. In this short game I was able to test a number of both opening, and middle­ game ideas. 7 8 0-0 e4 c5 ltlf6 9 10 e5 dxc5 ltld5 In the first of the afore-mentioned games Black played less actively 8 . . .ttJb6. 10 . • • ltlc6 It has already been mentioned that 10 . . . lDa6 is stronger, while Bronstein played less successfully - 1 0. . . lDb4. 11 11e2 M.Botvinnik-V.Ragozin Nikolina gora 1951 Grtinfeld Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 d4 c4 g3 i.g2 cxd5 ltlfJ ltlf6 g6 i.g7 d5 ltlxd5 0-0 This same position. with an insignificant transposition of moves, occurred in Game 170, and later, 453 On the basis of games played by Najdorf against Boleslavsky �d .Kotov, . this position was considered to favour White. In the first of these Black replied 1 1 . . .J.g4, after which there could have followed 12 l:idl , when 1 2 . . . fi)xe5 is dangerous in view of 13 h3 etc. 11 12 .. l£ibd2 • After the exchange of the h-pawns the weakness of Black's kingside will become obvious. 1ia5 12 l£ifd2 fi)db4 (but not 12 ... 11fxc5 13 fi)bJ , winning a piece) 1 3 l£ib3 11fc7 14 f4 J.e6 1 5 l£ic3 l:iad8 16 .ik.e3 fi)xa2 17 l:.xa2 .ik.xb3 1 8 l:.a3 .lle6 1 9 l£ib5 Wb8 20 l:idl would have led to unclear complications. 12 13 14 15 l£ib3 l:idl h4 1ixc5 Wb6 e6 Up to the last move this was as in the Najdorf-Kotov game, but instead of this natural continuation, creating threats against Black's kingside, Najdorf played 15 t£ibd2. Now White easily holds on to his central e5 pawn, and his initiative grows without any particular hindrance. 15 16 17 Itel J.d2 Wc7 b6 a5 %tact Wd7 . There is nowhere else for Black to display any activity, but here too it soon comes to a standstill. 18 19 19 20 21 11e4 h5 .lla6 l:tac8 . hxg6 ltfe8 hxg6 23 24 25 26 J.g5 l£ibd4 l:txcl :txc8+ t£ice7 :txcl :tc8 26 27 28 29 1'h4 t£ixc6 J.h6 29 30 31 J.xf8 l£ig5 • . Black would have difficulties after 22 . . . fxg6. had fewer White does not avoid the exchange of rooks, after which Black's hopes of any counterplay on the c-file disappear. But also the subsequent exchanges of minor pieces do not prevent the successful development of White's attack with limited forces. a3 An essential prophylactic move: White must take control of b4, so that Black is not able to exploit it to transfer his knight to the weak d3 square. 21 22 irxc8 l£ic6 1hc6 Eliminating Black's important defensive piece. 454 J.f8 �xf8 In view of the inevitable exchange of the knight at d5, the position of Black's king becomes indefensible. V.Ragozin-M.Botvinnik Nikolina gora 1951 Sicilian Defence 1 2 e4 ltlfJ c5 ltlc6 4 5 6 7 ltlxd4 ltlcJ .ig5 1'd2 ltlf6 d6 e6 h6 Whereas in pre-war tournaments I normally played 2 ... d6 and then the Dragon Variation, for events in the 1950s I had already prepared another variatio1t 3 d4 cxd4 31 32 33 34 'ltib2 .i.xd5 '8bs+ 1!fcl+ '!ties exd5 White is effectively playing with an extra piece, since in this game Black's bishop has proved to be out of play. 34 35 36 ltlxti 1!fdS+ 1!fas+ 'ltid7 1!fd1 'ltic6 'ltib5 37 If 37 . . . .ib7 the simplest is 38 'ife8+ 'ltic7 (38 . . . @c5 39 'ife7+) 39 'i'd8+ @c6 40 1!i°d6+ 'ltib5 4 1 'i'd7+ @a6 42 ltld6 ii.as 43 'i'c8+, and mate next move. 3S ltld6+ Black resigns This game displays very clearly the strategy based on domination: indeed, the white pieces dominated the board. Thus this method of play was also known early, but it was World Champion Anatoly Karpov, of course, who perfected this method. In the notes to Game 1 84 it was mentioned that the idea of this move was borrowed from a game of Koblenz. The situation is immediately clarified, and if the queens are exchanged both the advantage of the two bishops, and the compact formation of black pawns in the centre, may tell in the endgame. After the afore-mentioned game from the match with Bronstein (195 1), the system withstood further tests with greater or lesser success in games with Bondarevsky (19th USSR Champion­ ship, 195 1), Suetin (Game 2 15), and Larsen (Game 243). However, as I have mentioned, my game with Keres (Alekhine Memorial, Moscow 1956) showed that the variation had now been thoroughly studied by my opponents, and it had to be temporarily shelved. s 9 .ixf6 ltlb3 gxf6 9 0-0-0 (Game 1 84), as later Keres also played, is more dangerous for Black. 455 9 10 • • . .le2 a6 h5 White interposes 15 'ifg7. The king is well placed at f8. I subsequently carried out this idea in many tournament games. Even when White has not castled queenside, the bishop should not be allowed to go to h5. But after 9 0-0-0 a6 10 i.e2 the move . 10 . . . h5 is essential, which I overlooked in my game with Bondarevsky. 11 12 0-0 15 16 17 12 l£ixb3 1!fa5 l:ld8 18 %ld4 White begins a manoeuvre, aimed at driving back the . black queen and intensifying the pressure on the d-file. .A.d7 %ladl In Game 243 the same position arose, except that instead of ltlb3 White had played �hl . · f4 axbJ @bl 18 19 • . • b4 .A.c6 Energetic, but over-hasty; White overlooks his opponent's 20th move. He should have defended his g2 pawn with 19 il.f3. .A.e7 19 20 llfdl 1!fb6 f5! 21 22 .i.f3 WbJ h4 .A.f6 • • • Since 2 1 exf5 is bad because of 2 1 . . .%lg8, Black is able to improve the placing of his pawns and to activate his dark-square bishop - the first sign that White has not found the correct plan in this opening. After the voluntary retreat of the knight to b3, Black has no reason to hurry with the development of his queen. It is another matter when the white knight is still at d4. Then Black cannot avoid . . . 'ib6, with the hope of transposing to an endgame by ex­ changing queens on d4. 13 ...e3 l£ia5 A manoeuvre with which Black wins the c5 square for his queen (cf. also Game 1 84). 14 1!fg3 � Of course, not 14 . . .l£ixb3 when In view of the threat to the e4 pawn, the rook has no time to retreat; 23 %lxd6 456 :xd6 24 l:lxd6 1fxb4 is also Wlfavour­ able for White. Therefore Ragozin prov­ okes exchanges, hoping to exploit the rather insecure position of the black king. 23 24 25 26 e5 !lxd8+ .txc6 fxe5 26 27 1fd3 27 28 . 1£la4 .i.xe5 Wc7 29 30 1£lc5 1Cixa6 'ilg7 White cannot avoid the transition into an endgame, and with the loss of a pawn. 33 34 35 36 dxe5 .i.xd8 b:x;c6 . hxg2+ 'ii'xg2+ l::xh2+ llhJ+ <ifi1f3 Only to gain time on the clock. 37 <t>f2 :b2+ 38 <ifi1f3 For the moment the black pieces are not altogether well placed, but the weakness of the white · e5 pawn is a more important factor. • • 1!t'xg2+ <l;;xg2 .tc7 It is not possible to defend simultaneously the e5 and b4 pawns; therefore White decides to give up his central pawn, but fight for the initiative. • . 28 . . .1Wxb4 was bad on account of 29 1!t'd8+ <i;;g7 30 Wg5+. White decides to regain the pawn, but his knight proves to be out of play, and the initiative passes to his opponent. Perhaps at the given moment he should have sought salvation in the endgame (30 'i'd7). 30 31 32 cJ lDc5 1!i'b6 1!i'f2 hJ 38 . . • :xb2! An elegant, and at the same time the most rational way to win. Black obtains three pawns for the exchange, and things reduce to a matter of technique. 39 Itgl + 'it>b6 40 41 42 ICidJ 1£lxb2 cofteJ .txcJ il.xb2 43 1:%.b 1 'it>g5 Of course. not 39 . . . 'it>fS 40 llld7+. Overlooking the obvious reply. But, for example, 32 1Wd2 would already have lost to 32 . . . 1fxd2 3 3 I:txd2 lla8, which means that White cannot avoid loss of material. Ji · 33 1!ff3 The b2 pawn would appear·:.to . be indirectly defended, since its capture allows a fork. However . . . .i.cJ A highly important opportunity to divert the rook to the defence of its last pawn. Now the black king comes into play. . 457 44 @d3 ..te5 45 46 47 l::t gt+ �c4 l::t g8 M6 f4 47 48 49 ..ti>d3 :cs 49 50 l:txc6+ 50 51 J:k4 add that at that time it development of events after 5 interested me, in connection game Botvinnik-Petrov from USSR Championship (1940). In order to answer 45 l:tcl with 45 . . . ..td6. 5 6 7 8 9 The white king cannot move away from the centre, since the black pawns will easily deal with the lone rook. Or 49 'iif.?e4 f2. . . • f3 ll.f4 • • e5 ..ti>g5 5 1 . . . e4+ was threatened. 51 52 53 with the the 12th c5 b6 ..ta6 llll:a6 lDc7 Petrov played 9 . . . ..te7 followed by . . . f7-f5, and after exf6 he was obliged to take on f6 with his bishop (so as not to lose a piece after 'ifa4+). The idea of 9 . . . 0.c7 is to have the possibility of taking on f6 with the knight, and developing the bishop at d6. However, . . . f7-f5 is possible only if White plays f2-f4; then not only is Black's e5 square weakened, but also White's e4. And in addition, the f4 square becomes inaccessible to the white pieces. White has at last managed to win the c6 pawn, but it is too late! • c3 lDe2 ..txa6 0-0 was the ..i.d.3 that f5 l:.xf4 ..t?xf4 b5 e4+ White resigns I was also successful with passed pawns against a piece in a training game with Ilya Rabinovich (cf. Volume 1). LKan-M.Botvinnik Nikolina gora 1952 French Defence 1 2 3 4 5 e4 d4 lDd2 e5 ..td3 e6 d5 lDf6 lDfd7 10 The reader can find comments about this opening in Gaine 206, played soon after the present training game. I should f4 It is not hard to guess how disappointed I was when Tolush subtly appreciated the positional drawbacks to f2-f4 and refrained from this move. 458 However, in a slightly different situation (after 9 ... g6) Ragozin had already played 10 00 in the 6th game of our match ( 1940). 10 • • • ·rs . 10 . . . g6 is worse, e.g. 1 1 00 h5 12 g3, and White can prepare a pawn offensive on the kingside (h2-h3 and g3g4). 11 exf6 If White does not take en passant, this leads to a closed position where Black's chances of a successful pawn attack on the queenside ( . . . c5-c4, . . . b6b5, . . . a7-a5 etc.) are very good (Game 206). 11 12 . Q)tJ • . lbxf6 li.d6 Black has been able to carry out his opening plan, and White must take measures to defend his e4. 13 14 15 ttlg3 ttle5 cxd4 0-0 cxd4 'eternal' d5 square for his knight, insur­ ing him against any surprises. This is why he first had to exchange on d4. 16 lbg4 16 17 18 19 ttlf2 1!fb3 lhfxe4 Even the withdrawal of the knight from e5 cannot prevent Black's plan, since the exchange on e4 is un­ avoidable. Because of the wealmess of his f4 pawn, White is forced to exchange knights, but in a worse situation than a few moves ago. 19 20 • . . il..eJ • • • dxe4 l:taf8 20 . . .l?id5 would have been premature on account of 2 1 f5. 21 f5 21 ... In this way White wrests control of the central d5 square, but all the black pieces are now actively placed, and there are significant weaknesses in White's position. Or 2 L.exf5 22 l?ixf5. 15 1!fe8 'ilg6 J:lti ttle4! This is the main subtlety of Black's entire opening set-up. In the event of 16 t:bxe4 dxe4 17 'iie2 .i.xe5 he obtains the 459 1!fg4 22 23 fxe6 tt)f5 ti)xe6 Overlooking the opponent's reply. 23 • • . .tf4! A tactical blow which refutes White's idea. 24 ti)g3 24 'i'xe6 was not possible on account of 24 . . . .txe3+ 25 'iti>hl 'it>h8. 30 24 25 26 27 hxg3 1fxe6 'iti>h2 .i.xg3 1!fxg3 1fxe3+ 'ilfh6+ Transposing into a favourable rook ending. 27 ... 'i'xd4 28 lladl 'i'c5 29 l:ld7 would have led to unclear compli­ cations. 31 28 29 30 Wxh6 :xn �g3 gxh6 .:.xn sacrifice, since the doubled h-pawns are no adornment to Black's position. But in rook endings (as, however, also in other endings) a positional advantage has important significance. :tel 'it>xb4 llxe4 34 g3 h4+ l:tf2 <it>f7 At the given moment White is even a pawn up, but his pawns on the second rank are under attack. 34 d5 llxb2 35 l:.a4 a5 36 g4 was somewhat better. 34 35 • • . �g5 l:lxb2 Material losses for White are also inevitable after 3 5 a4 lla2 36 d5 .l:'Ld2. llxa2 35 36 37 38 39 40 After 30 l:tel l:tf2 3 1 l:txe4 l:txb2 (or 3 1 .. .@f?) it is doubtful whether White would be able to save the game. But now too Black penetrates with his rook onto the second rank. 30 31 32 33 h5 d5 lle5 lld2 a5 a4 �4 b5 lle4 a3 �e5 White resigns LKan-M.Botvinnik Nikolina gora 1952 Nimzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 This pawn will have to be sacrificed. It was not so difficult to decide on this d4 c4 ti)c3 a3 bxc3 e3 .i.d3 itlf6 e6 .tb4 Jl.xc3+ c5 ltlc6 With an insignificant transposition of moves we have reached the same position as in an earlier game from the 460 19th USSR Championship, Botvinnik­ Keres (No. 197). The next few moves were also played in a different order, but by the diagram position the identical · nature of the games had been restored. 7 8 �2 9 e4 10 . 0--0 b6 d6 ltld7 e5 · after 13 . . . .i..b7 14 f4 (µ)--0 I5 g5 W'g6 16 cxd4 cxd4 17 e5 32 dxe5 I 8 lbe7+ ll:!ixe7 I 9 .i..xg6 ltlxg6 20 fxe5 ll:!idxe5 21 c5 ! Black has insufficient compen­ sation for the sacrificed queen. Then, however, I found the defence 13 ... l:tg8, which transposes into the present game. 13 14 • . • g4 ..fl.b7 llg8 The only move. 1 5 g5 Wg6 16 ltlxd4 cxd4 17 f5 was threatened. 15 llal 16 cxd4 16 17 18 llafl .fl.bl Conducting the attack in such a slow way, it is hard to count on success. 15 g5 was more energetic. 0--0-0 15 . . • This move assists the activation of the black laright at d7, since the c5 square is freed for it. But White had to reckon with the possibility of . . . dxc3 . 11 ltlg3 Against Keres I played the weaker I I 1!t'a4, while the text move was first employed in the same Championship by Geller against Lipnitsky. In reply to l l ...g6 White gained an advantage by I2 dxe5. Analysing this position, I came to the conclusion that Black should have won the d4 pawn, since he can parry the attack involving lbg3 -f5. The play, however, is very complicated, and this idea needed to be tested in a training game. 11 12 ltlf5 13 _f4 cxd4 ltlc5 't!fe6 exd4 Wf6 Initially in my analysis this move seemed weaker than 13 g4, since then 461 White has not exploited the danger­ ous position of the enemy queen, whereas g2-g4 has hopelessly weakened his kingside. As a result, Black is a pawn up with the better game. After 19 lbxd4 lbxd4 20 'i'xd4 he would have had a pleasant choice between 20 . . . 1!fxg4+ and 20 ... .txe4 2 1 f5 Wes (20 . . .tt1xe4 2 1 Zlel tt1xf2 22 l:.xe6 tDh3+ 23 'iStfl fxe6 is less clear). 19 20 Ilel g5 The tempting 30 .. 'ifdS would have lost to 3 1 tDc6+, but Black soon exploits this possibility. 33 31 1!fg3 • a6 . 32 h3 . �a8 ..tiib8 This move is immediately exploited by Black to open the kingside. 20 21 22 • • • llg2 fxg5 f6 fxg5 If 22 l:xg5 there could have followed 22 . . . 1!fxc4. White would like to secure the f4 square for his queen's bishop, but this does not bring any real gains, since the black knight goes to e5. · 22 23 ... li)xd4 li)e5 1!fxc4 24 25 .l:tg3 i.b2 .l:tgf8 g6 26 W'd2 With the 24 . . . 'i'xd4+. obvious threat White has removed one of the defences from fl , which leads to the loss of his central pawn. i.xe4 l:tc3 . 33 34 35 36 of It is useful to deprive the white knight of the f5 square. Black's pieces control the entire board. 26 27 28 Now the threat of 33 ...1!fd5 cannot be parried, since moving the knight from d4 allows 33 . . 00+. A game in the style of Ragozin, although one can also notice a tendency towards domination. I was very proud of my subtle analysis of this variation, but I was not in fact able to employ it in a tournament game a pity! tt)xe4 .txe4 1!ff7 Again the rook at e l cannot leave the first rank on account of mate at fl . 29 30 9'e3 l:ldl l:tccl ifd5 �h2 Q)fJ+ :e2+ li)xfJ Ilx:fJ 'i!?gl White resigns i.b7 llde8 462 - T.Petrosian--M.Botvinnik Voronovo 1952 Slav Defence 1 2 d4 c4 li)f6 e6 /.l)f3 /.l)cJ cxd5 3 4 5 d5 c6 Even in a training game the young Petrosian displays his customary caution, avoiding the complications that arise after 5 .tg5 or 5 e3. He offers his opponent exchange a choice variations between of the the Queen's Gambit (5: .. exd5) and the Slav Defence (5 . . . cxd5). Black prefers the latter. 5 6 7 .tf4 e3 cxd5 /.Dc6 /.l)b5 White's position is difficult. He can­ The idea of this move occurred to me not play at the board, and it is very dubious if e3-e4 on account of the weakening of his d4 pawn, and kingside White replies 8 .te5 ! Swprisingly, both castling looks dangerous. Therefore he in this game, and in others with Citron ( 1 964) and Letelier ( 1 964), my oppon­ waits. 17 /.l)fl g4 Blocking White's pawns. and cramp­ ents played .i.g5 (driving the queen to a better position), or .tg3. regarding this, ing his pieces. Incidentally, this idea see also Game 1 55. was 8 9 10 11 12 13 .i.g5 a3 .i.h4 .i.g3 hxg3 .i.d3 'ifb6 also employed in the afore­ mentioned game with Letelier. h6 g5 /.l)xg3 .tg7 Theoretically speaking, White can establish a knight at f4, but in practice he is not able to achieve this. An 18 /.l)d2 e5 essential move, increasing the activity of both black bishops; Letelier played 1 3 l:!.cl , which is less natural. Now Black retreats his queen, this in order to deny White the possibility of would be especially noticeable in the variation 1 9 dxe5 .txe5 followed by playing his knight to c5 with gain of ... a7-a6 and . . . d5-d4. 19 1!f'b3 20 lDxd4 21 'exd4 22 'itidl tempo, and also to prepare the advance of his h-pawn. 13 14 15 16 Twelve /.l)b2 :ct lDb5 years 'ifd8 h5 .i.d7 After 22 Wfl the white rook at hl c;tn'sr later this exd4 /.l)xd4 We7+ would have remained out of play, but after the elimination of the d4 pawn (as same manoeuvre was also employed in my occurred in the game) the white king in game with Letelier. the centre is insecurely placed. 463 22 23 l:lc7 23 24 25 :let l:lxb7 • . • .i.xd4 Of course, not 23 1!fxb7 in view of 23 . . . i.a4+; but now if 23 ... J\a4 there follows 24 9xa4 'ifxc7 25 Wxd4 or 24 l:xe7 .i.xb3+ 25 t'bxb3 @xe7 26 1£ixd4. .i.b6 1i'd6 lth6! If 34 ..te2 (34 l:te2 l:cl+) there follows 34 ... W'd4, and there is no defence against the checkmate at g 1. It stands to reason that subsequently I did not risk employing this opening idea (7 . . . thbs) against strong opponents. M.Botvinnik-S.Flohr With the king at f8, this manoeuvre is typical. 26... ..txf2 27 l:tfl :t"6 is threatened. The immediate 25 ... ..txf2 was dangerous in view of 26 l:fl ..tb6 27 l£ie4!, but 25 ... ..tc6 26 l£ie4 'ii'd8 was also possible (27 'l'c3 l:h6). ..tb5 ..te6 27 f4 28 thxf3 29 . the5 gxf3 26 Zvenigorod 1952 English Opening The f7 pawn is defended, whereas the f2 pawn is under attack. l:tc8 1lfc5 1 2 3 4 5 c4 thc3 thf3 d4 thxd4 lhf6 c5 lhc6 cxd4 d5 6 7 8 cxd5 thxc6 ..td2! lhxd5 bxc6 8 9 ... e4 e6 lhb6 Now 5 ... e6 is preferred, but at that time it had a poor reputation. Flohr was not aiming for a win, and reckoned that 5 . . . d5 was good enough for a draw. However, the present game shows that White can gain an advantage, if he does not avoid simplification. Now Black has no compensation for his separated queenside pawns. The Encyclopaedia recommends 9 .lhb4, which seems dubious, if only .. With. the unequivocal threat of 30 ... 'ilfcl+. 30 llxf7+ @g8 31 32 33 ltf3 @e2 11fcl+ l:lc2+ 11d2 @ft White resigns because of 10 'ira4, e.g. 10 . . . ..td7 (10 ...Wb6 1 1 .te3) 1 1 a3 c5 12 ..tbs lhd3+ 13 @e2 lhxb2 14 ..txd7+ 'ifxd7 15 'ifxd7+ cJi>xd7 16 l:hbl l£ic4 17 l:b7+ with an obvious advantage. 34 10 ..teJ It is in the endgame that White's advantage will be especially perceptible. 464 In passing he prevents the development of the black bishop at c5. 10 11 'iit>xdl Black could not tolerate this un­ pleasant bishop any longer, but the exchange of bishops also comes into White's plans, since after this the d7 square is weakened and the activity of the white king increased. <.t?c2 i.e2 e5 i.e7 0-0 A typical mistake: Black should not (in view of the coming endgame) have taken his taken so far away from the centre. 1 3 ...f6 followed by . . . 'iit>f7 was better. 14 llhdl .i.e6 l:tfd8 i.xd8 After 17 ... l:txd8 18 i.b7 the weaken­ bl llxdS+ ing . . . c6-c5 would have been practically forced. 18 19 i.c5 lldl 21 b4! l:bc8 The further advance of this ·pawn will enable White to seize control of the central d5 square; at the same time his king is activated. The bishop has to be brought into play, but now the white bishop at c6 will cramp Black's game. · 15 i.a6 llab8 16 17 .i.xc8 11t'xdl+ In the coming endgame the main events will develop on the queenside. Naturally, the white king will be best placed at c2. 11 12 13 20 i.c7 i.c8 465 f6 21 22 23 <ot?b3 b5 23 ... .i.d8 24 25 26 bxc6 l:txd8 :bs �xc6 :xc5 <itlg6 27 l!b7 t£ic8 'iit>f7 White would not have achieved anything with 23 .ixb6 .ixb6 24 l::td7+ <ot?g6. A clever defence. 23 . . . cxb5 24 tl:ixb5 was bad for Black. Since 26 .. J:k7 27 tl:ibS tlld7 28 l::ta8 l:tb7 29 'iit>b4 is unsatisfactory for Black, he is forced to concede the seventh rank. 28 a4 28 29 30 f3 lld7 'it?b7 36 �xa5 37 ltlfS Black resigns. He loses his knight The decisive role is prepared for the a-pawn. h5 :c6 after 37 . . . ltxg2 38 lk7. One of those training games that enabled me to regain my form before the USSR Championship. M.Botvinnik-LKan Nikolina gora 1953 Sicilian Defence 1 2 3 4 5 6 The position is such that White need not hurry. Before the time · control it is always useful to make use of this. 30 31 . . ti'ldS • • • . h4 a6 a5 A positional idea, which was also employed, incidentally, by Alekhine in a game with me (No.94). Preparing for the invasion of the black rook on the second rank, White moves one of his pawns off this rank. 32 33 34 35 <ili>c4 <it>bS ltle3 %1a6 :c6+ llc2 • .. !tb2+ 6 7 8 9 d4 ltlxd4 ltlc3 Ae2 c5 ltlc6 cxd4 li'lf6 d6 ltlb3 0-0 .i.fJ es .i.e7 0-0 White has more often chosen other continuations - 9 .i.e3 or 9 'ifi>hl, but even then he has not normally gained anything significant from the opening. 9 Transferring the knight to f5 is the quickest way to win. 35 00 Many experts recognise Rauzer's dis­ covery (6 Ag5) as being the strongest even today. I chose the modest 6 .i.e2, in order to test, before my match with Taimanov (for the title of USSR Champion), the Boleslavsky Variation, which my future opponent frequently employed. Threatening 32 li'lb4 (32 . . .%1b6 33 a5). 31 32 e4 • .. ltla5 A perfectly possible reply. With the inclusion of the moves 9 . . . a6 10 a4 this same manoeuvre occurred in the game Smyslov-Kholmov (1949) and enabled Black to equalise. 466 10 11 tbxa5 .i.g5 1!fxa5 In the afore-mentioned game White developed his queen's bishop at e3. That was also how the Pilnik-Taimanov game (1952) proceeded. The idea of 1 1 .i.g5 will subsequently become clear. .i.e6 11 Wes 12 a3 White was already threatening to play 13 .i.xf6 .i.x:f6 14 1!fxd6 l:.fd8 15 Wb4. This threat could also have been parried by 12 ...:fd8. • • • 13 14 h3 11fd2 :fd8 And even so this vanation 1s 10 White' s favour after 16 tbxd5 tbxd5 17 .i.xd5 il.xg5 (17 . . . l:.xd5 1 8 Axe7) 18 iLxf7+ Wxf7 19 'i'xg5. 14 15 • • • .i.xf6 h6 This is the idea of 1 1 .i.g5. White takes the knight on f6 only when Black loses a tempo on . . . h7-h6, and thereby weakens his light squares. 15 16 • • . llfdl Axf6 With a clever trap, which is now difficult to parry. 16 • . • :ac8 Black would have not achieved anything with 16 . . . .i.g5 17 'ife2 (or 17 'i'e l) 17 ... Ac4 18 'i'el . The . . . d6-d5 advance is ruled out, and this is highly important. This move may cause some doubts. It would appear that Black would have gained an equal game by 14 ... d5. Then there could have followed 15 .i.x:f6 dxe4 16 tDxe4 Itxd2 (but not 16... 'ifc7 because of 17 1!fg5) 17 tDxc5 gxf6, which would not have given White any advantage. If instead 15 exd5, then 15 . . .ltJxd5 is not possible in view of 16 l£ixd5 .i.xg5 17 'i'xg5 ..ixd5 18 Wxe5, and Black must play 15 ... �xd5, hoping for 16 .i.xf6 .itxf3 . 11 Ag4! An essential part of White's plan. He is aiming either to force Black to exchange bishops, or at the appropriate moment to establish his knight on d5 (without the exchange of bishops). White himself, of course, will not exchange on e6. 467 Now it is clear why l:lidl was played: it was essential to prevent . . . d6-d5. 17 @£8 18 19 20 1'e2 1!ff3 h4 a6 l1c6 @e7 21 g3 b5 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ltacl l:td3 b3 lDdS+ lbd5 axb4 'ife2 1!fc4 b4 1ic5 .txd5 °ifb6 11fxb4 also after 32 . . . axb3 3 3 cxb3 White has a passed pawn and an obvious positional advantage. The position is a closed one, and this allows Black to bring his king nearer to the centre without particular risk. For the moment t'Lld5+ is not possible, since the c2 pawn is attacked. But after this pawn has been defended, the knight will go to d5. Otherwise Black cannot do anything active. 1id1 .tel .tc4 l:tal a5 a4 llb4 1lfb2 11bxc4 35 36 37 38 bxc4 llbl :b4 c5 a3 11fa2 l1a6 38 39 dxc5 l:td7+ Black resigns The attack on the king decides the game immediately. As soon as the bishop is transferred to c4, Black's counterplay on the c-file will be eliminated and White will be free to attack the a-pawn. Therefore Black hastens to advance it. 30 31 32 nd3 c3 Preferring to retain the a-pawn, at the cost of losing the exchange. With the obvious threat of 29 l:lal, which Black does everything possible to prevent. 28 29 30 33 34 Up till now Black has defended resourcefully, but here he begins to complicate matters wmecessarily, and overlooks the loss of a pawn. However, M.Botvinnik-LKan Nikolina gora 1954 Nirnzo-Indian Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 Q)cJ Q)fl into Transposing Variation. 468 lDf6 e6 .i.b4 d5 the Ragozin 5 6 cxd5 i.g5 exd5 h6 11 Act 12 h4! i.a5 In one of our training games Ragozin 1 1 . . .i.xd4 is not possible in view of 12 'ifa4+ lbc6 1 3 l::t xc6. played 6 . . . 'ilfd6, which turned out to be bad. The text move is stronger, but even This is the whole point. Black is in this case White has the possibility of seizing the initiative with a pawn forced to advance . . . g5-g4, after which his kingside pawn chain is devalued. sacrifice. 6 . . . 'i'd6 subsequently and 6 . . . h6 were in many employed tournament games, without any i.h4 ... e3 g4 li:'lc6 14 15 i.b5 0--0 .td7 li:'le7 1 3 . . . c6 was preferable. particular achievements for Black. 7 12 13 g5 At that time this variation was little­ This leads to some simplification of studied. Now theory recommends 7 ... c5, the position, but even so Black's extra e.g. 8 e3 lbc6 9 i.b5 (or 9 dxc5 g5 10 pawn i.g3 lbe4) 9 ... 'ilfa5 l O i.xc6+ bxc6 1 1 dangerous position of his king. i.xf6 i.xc3+ 1 2 bxc3 'i'xc3+ 13 lbd2 gxf6 1 4 l::tc l 'ifd3 with unclear complications (Portisch-Fischer, 196 1 ). 8 9 i.g3 li:'ld2 li:'le4 does not compensate 16 17 18 i.xd7+ �b3 a4 'if xd7 i.b6 a5 19 20 21 22 1£lc5 llxc5 i.e5 1fb3 i.xc5 c6 Ag8 for the 1 8 . . . 'iixa4 1 9 ii..xc7 was no better. First White provokes a weakening of his opponent's queenside, and then he switches his queen to the kingside. 22 23 24 25 II.bl 'ifd3 l:k2 lla6 b6 'Ifa7 Ag6 Black does not prevent the invasion of the queen at h7. Perhaps he should have decided on 25 . . . f5 . 26 . h5 27 'ilfh7 In 1 954 this continuation was still a secret. Apparently, Black should accept the pawn sacrifice. In . the l:le6 <ifi>d7 Sacrificing a pawn, Black tries to game Borisenko-Averbakh ( 1957) he declined remove his king from the danger zone, it, and was left with an inferior game. but now comes · a breakthrough in the 9 10 • • • bxc3 li:'lxc3 i.xc3 centre. 469 28 'ii'xf7 1!fa8 29 The set-up with the black pawn triangle c6, d5, e6 has already been discussed in the notes to Games 2 12 and 2 16. Although I repeatedly employed it I considered it useful again and again to test it during my preparations for an important event. e4 5 e3 /l)bd7 6 7 8 'i!fc2 .i.d2 0-0-0 .i.d6 9 dxc5 5 ...a6, which occurred in Game 189, does not allow Black to gain satisfactory play. 29 • .. 1i'e8 0-0 c5 Black would also have lost after 29 ... dxe4 30 d5 .:.xe5 3 1 dxc6+ @c7 (3 1...�dS 32 l:t.dl +) 32 'iif4 'ifb8 33 l:t.b5. 30 Wg7 dxe4 3 1 d5 32 Ac7+ 33 Abet 34 .i.f6 35 .i.xe7+ 36 llxe7 37 'it>xf2 38 9g8+ Black resigns in cxd5 @d8 Aas g3 lbe7 gxf2+ 11fxe7 view of the inevitable 38 . . . WeS 39 Wxd5+ @e7 40 l:t.c7+. LKan-M.Botvinnik Nikolina gora 1954 Slav Defence 1 2 3 4 d4 c4 �f3· �c3 d5 c6 �6 e6 In the first game of our match (1953) Mark Taimanov played 9 cxd5, which was criticised by the commentators. Analysts suggested that by 9 dxc5 tLlxc5 10 .i.el White could have created unpleasant pressure on Black's centre. And so it was decided to test this recommendation in the present training game. It is curious that this advice was apparently never used by anyone, and the Encyclopaedia does not even mention it. 9 470 • • • /l)xc5 10 11 .iet 'ifi>bl Ad7 White cannot be criticised for declining the pawn sacrifice. 1 1 cxd5 exd5 1 2 ttlxd5 looks dan erous for him. Kan decided against risking this varia­ tion, and perhaps not without reason. Now, however, having gained a respite, Black avoids any difficulties and achieves an easy game. g 11 12 . • • ttld2 'ife7 . This time it would have been clearly unwise to win material: 1 2 cxd5 exd5 1 3 ll'ixd5 ll'ixd5 14 l:txd5 .ic6, and after the rook moves - 1 5 ... .i.e4. However, White's plan of bringing out his dark­ square bishop to h4 is slow, although equality on the board is maintained. Perhaps the exchange of pawns in the centre should have been preferred. 12 13 f3 llac8 .i.b8 14 15 .ih4 .ixc4 dxc4 15 16 ... e4 l:.fd8 b5! 17 18 19 tDxb5 iLxb5 'ifxe4 .i.xb5 lhcxe4 1 5 tDxc4 was now pointless in view of 1 5 . . . b5 . Black is the first to launch an attack, although deep calculation showed that with accurate defence White could have maintained the balance. After a series of obligatory moves, Black has two possibilities, which he had to study before playing 1 6 . . . b5. If 19 . . .ll'ixe4 20 .ixe7 ll'ixd2+ 2 1 'ifi>al , then if anything White has the advan­ tage. Therefore preference was given to the second variation. 19 20 . • • l:t.xd2 kt.xd2 20 .ixf6 :.xdl + 2 1 :xdl 'i!fxf6 22 g3 would have been simpler. 20 21 22 JJ..xe7 <it?al 23 .l:tdl lhxe4 lhxd2+ .ie5 Creating a threat (23 . . . :c2) which is not very dangerous, since the c2 square can be covered (23 i.d3 ), and as a last resort even after the invasion of the rook there is the defence ..te7-a3 . The continuation in the game is therefore not bad. g5 A useful move; Black eliminates the Black is intending to play . . . dxc4, and it is essential that after the reply ll'ixc4 his bishop at d6 should not be attacked. Therefore the seemingly pas­ sive 1 3 . . . .ib8 in fact assists his attack. 471 threat of a mate on the back rank. Here too 24 J.d3 was a sufficient defence, e.g. 24 . . . ttlc4 25 .ixc4 l:txc4 26 �b 1, and an approximately equal ending is reached. But how could White reject the win of a pawn, with an additional attack on the knight? 24 Axg5 'unearthed' a little-known continuation of Spielmann. 1:tc2 6 Thus White has fallen into a trap. Now he cannot defend the b2 pawn by .ta3, and 25 Jlxd2 l:txb2 leads to a curious position, in which he loses, despite being a piece up. e3 .i.xc4 0-0 il)h4 e6 .i.b4 0-0 9 10 ... f3 .t g6 10 11 e4 7 8 9 This move, made in a 1936 game Spielmann-Van Stenis (and even earlier, in 1920, by Asztalos against Tarrasch), was employed by me in the 12th game of our match (No.222). Van Stenis replied 9... .tg4, as did Kan in another training game, played a few days earlier. In the present game Kan preferred to retreat his bishop to g6. This is Spielmann's idea. 1ic7 After 26 ilf4 l:ld2+ 27 .txe5 :xd 1 + 28 �b2, which may have come into my opponent's plans, there follows 28 . . J:td5, and Black will be the ex­ change up. Therefore . . . White resigns. M.Botvinnik-LKan Niko/ina gora 1954 Slav Defence · 1 2 3 4 5 d4 c4 lt)cJ lt)f3 a4 d5 c6 il)f6 dxc4 .i.f5 11 In my preparations for the World Championship match with Smyslov I had to take account of his liking for this variation of the Slav Defence. And I . . • l:ld8 Smyslov chose a different plan: he left his king's rook at f8 and immed­ iately attacked the central pawn with 1 1 . . . e5 (instead of . . . Wc7 he had earlier played . . . t2Jbd7). The method employed by Kan - piece pressure on the d4 pawn· - is also not bad. 472 12 ll 1'bl ..leJ ..ta5 .i.b6 An Threatening . . . e6-e5, and so White defended an equal number of times! 23 24 must defend not only his d4 pawn, but also his bishop at e3. Here 14 15 I lhe2 lhxg6 lbbd7 I bishop to a safe position. should not have hurried with this exchange. 15 16 17 l:tfdl Wal hxg6 lbf8 a5 Preventing a4-a5. Now White makes 18 b4 19 b5 ..lxd4 1!fc7 29 gl l:ld6 obliges White to force the exchange of llad8 rooks. mounting pressure on White's d4 pawn. bxc6 e5 1!fa7 il.xd4 lhxd4 The unpleasant threat of 30 ... 1!fd7 c6 pawn, which is compensated by the bxc6 lldl lladl 1fc3 27 28 sufficient counterplay. White Black is agreeable to having a weak 20 21 22 2l lhd6 lhxc4 exd4 Black is left with his weak c6 pawn, would have gained dangerous pressure on the b-file. ii.gt 1!hc4 but the activity of his queen gives him l:ld7 After the exchange on b4 24 25 26 White was threatening to take on e5. use of the opportunity to get rid of his backward b2 pawn. tne8 . • • c;W1 Removing the king from the critical diagonal and preparing to retreat the made the same mistake as in my game with Smyslov; amazing concentration of power. The d4 pawn is attacked five times, and lO ll l2 ll liJb5 l:lxdl l:lxd8 lhd4 l:lxd3 'ii'b8 1!fxd8 If 33 'i'xc6, then 33 . . . 1!fdl+ 34 � 'it'xa4. White has no possibility of strength­ ening his position, and therefore a draw is inevitable. l3 l4 35 lhxc6 <ifi>f2 Or 35 <iitg2 °Wd2+ 36 l5 36 After 37 11'd6 'i'dl+ <iith3 1fh6+. 11fd2+ 1!re2 1!fcl Draw agreed lhe7+ 'ith8 38 'itg2 ifb4 the balance would have been restored. 473 Tournament and Match Cross-Tables ( 1 942- 1 956) 1943 Master Tournament, Sverdlovsk 1* *1 ** 0* 0* 00 *0 ** *1 00 *0 00 00 1* ** 1* 1* *O 1* 11 1* 11 11 11 ** *0 1944 1 3n1 USSR Championship, Moscow 0 o. 0 * 0 0 * 0 1 0 0 * 0 * 0 * * * 0 1 0 0 * * 0 * 0 0 0 * 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 * 1 * * * * 1 1 1 * 1 1 * 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 * 0 * * 0 * 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 * 0 0 * * 1 0 474 --.l Vl .J::.. 'Y:l�i�JJS::i:l:J'::@:mI �iw.:�=�e���fa;ft�=�=�=�=�=�=�=�:��=== u n * 0 0 0 0 * * * * 0 0 * * * - 0 0 * 0 0 1 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 1 1 o · 1 0 1 1 - 0 0 1 0 * 0 * 0 0 0 * 1 * * 0 * * * * * * * - 0 0 * * 0 0 0 1 * 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 - 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 * 1 1 - 0 1 1 0 0 1 * * 1 l 1 * 1 * 0 1 * 1 1 0 * 1 23rd Moscow Championship 1943/1945 0 1 * 1 * 1 1 1 * * * 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 1 0 1 * * 0 1 * 1 1 * * 1 1 1 * 1 1 * 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 * 1 1 1 * 0 * 1 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 + 1 + + + 1 + * 1 * * 1 * * * 0 0 * 1 * 0 1 0 0 * 0 0 0 1 * 1 1 0 0 0 0 * 0 1 * 1 1 * 0 1 1 * 0 1 * * * * 1 * 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 * 0 1 0 0 1 1 * 0 1 1 * * 1 1 0 * * 1945 14th USSR Championship, Moscow * 0 * * 0 0 1 11 * * 0 0 * * 0 - 0 0 * 1 * 0 * * 1 0 1 0 0 * � 0 1 * 1 * * * 1 0 0 * * 0 1 1 1 1 1 * 1 * 1 * * 1 * 1 * 1 1 * 0 1 1 * 1 1 1 0 * 1 * lo I 1 I* Io 0 * 1 1 * 1 1 * 1 * 1 0 * * 1 * 1 1 * * 0 0 0 1 * 1 0 * * 1 0 * 1 * 0 t:K!:1itr1 ::i:1m:m11: : :sr: �:1;:m:: !:11m::11:::: :lUWjjfgj: ::1:1t:;![$ji, jjjjij :::1:1; ::is:: rr.1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 * * * * 1 1 0 * 0 1 1 0 0 * 1 1 0 * * 0 0 0 * * * * * 0 0 * 0 0 I li�nQ!iJi:i 11$��:: 1: ; IIB.i�t!I (jJl��j'.ij[, lillli@ K'1 i)(:: 1J :::i?.:: ��::::::;::: l:\2�$@J f2�1II:1 t'=��:tr tl�Q@iI i:il!Q�Vf ; i 'm!J:!�Btt: lii.]��U fl��II 1 I 1 11 1 11 I1 1 1 I1 I * I* I1 11 * , 1 1o I * I1 I 1 I1 I 1 I1 I 1 I1 I 0 I* I* I O 1 1 I- · 1� 1: \D r-­ -.:t" 1945 Match USSR v. USA (by radio) USSR USA 1946 Match USSR v. Great Britain (by radio) 2nd USSR GREAT BRITAIN 'J!llJ,lt!t tiiU.inllii@mm:m:::::m: nrn:{{! 1 : 0 !Hiiffdtitt'.!ViiI!II!IIIIII!! 1 :0 Total JJ�$.!@Jltf Uf.�$.]{!f}% 477 · · ····· · · 1 946 International Tournament, Groningen, * 1 o 1 * * o * o o * * * * * * o * 1 * * * IO 0 0 * Io * IO I * o o o o o o o 0 o o * 1 * * o * 1 o 1 * * o o o * * * * * o * 1 o * * o 1 o * * * * o 1 1 1 * o o * 1 * o I * IO * * o 1 o o 1 * * * * 1 * 1 * * * o * * 0 10 11 * 10 10 1 * o 1 o 1 1 1 * o 1 1 1 * * * 1 o 1 1 * o * * 1 1 * * * * * o 1 1 I0 * I I 1 IO * 0 * * 0 * 1 I* I1 10 10 10 10 10 * 1 * o I * 11 0 * 10 * * * JO I* * * o o o o * 1 10 I* * o o * 0 10 1 * * * * 0 * 0 * 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 * * * 0 * I* * o * 10 1 1 * * 1 * 1 * 1 * 1 1 * * * 1 1 1 * * * * * o * I * 11 * 1 I 0 11 * 1_.i[il.l-i,i·il 10 I * 1::gJ1@::i 1 1 1:}141,!II �•�1rm o ttttu:rni 1 ;f.iltf}i 0 \6-�$.{@i :iim:::::t: 1 1 1 :14.is:: : 1 1 1 :oc41.:::: 1 1 1 :u.1t 1 * 1 :111�:: : 1 1 1 :a.111::=: 1 1 1 :11:�9: : * 1 1 ==1:1:�1u 1 1 1 :Iut�sf:, * 1 1 :tm�t.r 1 1 * \!��$.JW 0 11 * I* * I0 1 * * * o * :::trnt ::11111u: 11::r: rtt:t =:imm =:=1r;m :*::rn:: i�Pt:::iuJ : 1:1:: :::11:: m�=: =:=14:: .=:is.:: Ui§I : :121 : J=ru ::rm::. ::it:i �-�-��o 1 1 * 1 1 :mMB.Mli.i.ik.Ittlt@ * 1 1 * * * lm�=::1111.trnm:rnimmmm * * * 1 * * * \illWSm¥$.l«�Ettit:tm 0 1 1 * o * 1:•r:1•1a1�t.r1 rmmrn1m 1 1 * o 1 HlJ.il1�1mtnnmwrnu o * 1 1 ::mMiifilrlY:&t& n:rn:m o * * : n1t:rt;&ifrn:mr:rnm1n11r * * :mitea1m1i1:1mtt:m: o = = =�1i:tmrnttt:11:rn: o ·············-----··· 1:;:;:;:.liil.l\;_\f:!ll., ! !i.J.;l:afiii imf:]\I)\IJli\I O [1:11:.1.11.•1ilil\l,\l!\·l\!l:·\;ll ! :11.�::E1ir�UI@Im:ti1 0 rn1m11.am.twtm:::trnmrn o .::1w1 1w: s.�mI1mm o :rur.:::ntma.w: :1:rn1i1:1 o ::�gtlfia�m.w.11:Irnt: :: o 00 !'­ '<:!" 1946 Match USSR v. USA, Moscow USSR 1s t 2nd 479 USA c · ", -- -· - - · :y.�:������•:::::::���:::;:;:;:;::::��:::::::: - -· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·-·· ·-· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· ··· · · · ··· · · · · · == = = · · · · ··· · ···· . .••"'iqiMJ MlNmm •w.•mm1::1mm1:: :11�am1nm;;mmm :::�1D111a m:rnmm :11m11Gt11 11::1m1mmm:m tillSB.fll::::: =::::::mmmmm ::ur�n•qvrnmr::rnm: : J: * * * * * 1 * * 0 * * * * 0 * 0 * 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 * 0 0 0 * * 0 0 0 0 * * * * * 0 0 0 * 0 1 * 0 1 947 * * * * * * * * * * 1 * 1 * * 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 * * * * 1 1 * * * * * * * 0 * 0 0 0 1 0 1 * * 1 0 * 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 * 0 0 * 1 1 1 * * 1 1 .L * * * * * 1 1 1 0 1 * .L International Chigorin Memorial Tournament, Moscow ..L * * o 0 0 0 0 .L .L .L * 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 * 1 * 1 1 0 * 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 * * 1 1 ::���:::::=:::::=:=::: :Jfitlil lliUtt:t Jturrtr !i�'-lt:II 00 'tj" 0 +:-00 ...... · · · · · ············· · · ·· ·· · ·· · :=�;:: :m111:a:1111::::=: �===� 1 1 1 1 o 1 * o 1 1 1 * 1 * * : :11�1:=.: O O * l * * * l * * l l O l l :j:Jil'�gi[:1 1 0 * 1 * 1 1 1 : :1�1 1 :1 : 1 :i11�1:: : * 10 i * l*ll =il\41 : : =: ,:� 0 1* 1*101011 10 10101* : 1ifiWiiiitI::1:m:ns.:=:=:=:==:== :1.m.i@:: :m:1: Jnm.a:J: :m:tJt::r:n1a11v,r:::==:I:I IIdiB;:::mtit:mtrntm Match-Tournament for the World Championship, The Hague/Moscow, 1948 * 1 0 0 1 0 * 0 0 0 0 0 0 * * * 0 1 * 1 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 * 0 * 1 1 1 1 I* 0 1 * * 0 0 * * 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 * 1 1 0 * 0 0 1 * * 0 * 0 * * 0 * 1 * * * * 1 * * 0 * * 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 * 1 1 1 * 0 1 0 0 1 0 * * * 1 * * 1 * 1 0 * 1 * * 1 0 0 0 * 1 * 0 1 0 1 1 * * * 0 * * 1 0 * 1951 19th USSR Championship, Moscow 1 I* I* 1 I* * 0 1 * 0 * 1 * * * 0 0 * * 0 * 0 * 1 * * "' 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 * * 0 * * 1 * 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 * 0 0 * * 0 0 * 1 0 1 1 1 1 * * * * * * 1 * * * 1 1 1 1 1 0 * 1 1 1 0 0 * 0 o I* o IO 1 1 * * 1 * * 1 * 1 0 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 11 1 1 1 1 lo 1 -·-·· Uf.�lfJ] N 00 """ .i::. 00 w * 1 o : ii/-ii.H!i!!: ::1s�::mw.a: : : : r: : : 0 :JJ!{:1t�i��1:i 0 ii\tf!StWtQg itIII:I: 0 Jtl:ittwUWIJIJt:trn 0 . . :�t=�=]� : �m.J :......::::::t: =Di:nv�t::rn:mm:r:::: 0 0 0 0 * * * 0 * * 0 * * 1 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 1 0 0 0 0 * 1 0 0 0 0 0 * * * * * * * 0 * * 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 * 1 * * * * 1 1 0 * 0 0 0 0 1 * * * 0 1 * 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * * * * 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 * * * * 0 * * * * 1 1 * 1 * * 1 0 * * 1 1 1 0 * * 0 * 1 0 * * * 0 0 * 0 0 1 * 1 1 0 * 1 * 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 * 1 * 1 1 * 0 * 1 . 0 0 0 0 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 * * 0 1 1 1 * * * 1 0 1 0 * * 1 1 * * * * * * 1 1 1 International Maroczy Memorial Tournament, Budapest 1952 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 * 1 ...... . .. . . ::t.lbftil Jtil.$.ff :��S.ttf :��5.trnrn :1Jtlilt :B.J5!1tl il*lftl: :�IIIIl !�0.fII !1.�itII w.mrnmr !$.1$1II 5.�IFtI :10:: 1m . * 0 0 * * * 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 * * 1 1 0 * * 0 0 0 * * 0 * * 1 * 1 1 * * 0 0 0 * * * 0 0 * * * * * 1 * * * 1 * 0 * 0 0 0 * 0 * 1 * 0 * 1 * 1 0 * * * * 0 0 * 1 0 0 * * 0 1 1 1 * * * 1 * * 0 1 0 * 0 0 l 1 * 1 * * 0 * * 1 0 * 1 * 0 * 0 1 1 * 0 * * 1 1 0 0 * 1 * * 1 1 * 1 1 1 * * 1 * * 1 * * 0 1 * 1 1 1 0 0 * * 0 * * * * * 1 1 * * * 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 1 * 0 1 1 1 1 0 * 1 * 0 * * * * 0 1 1 * * * * 0 1952 20th USSR Championship, Moscow * 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 1 1 0 0 * 0 0 0 * * 1 0 * 1 0 * * I* I* * I1 * 1 * * * 0 * 0 1 1 * 0 * 0 0 0 0 1 1 * * 1 0 * 1 * 1 1 0 0 1 1 * 1 * 1 1 1 * 1 * 0 0 * 1 * * 1 * * I* * I1 1 * 1 1 * 1 * * * 1 1 * 1 * * * * 1 * * 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 * * 1 * 1 1 * 1 I1 1 * 1 1 * 11::��i;:�::::11 [Hts] '<t" 00 '<t" 1951 Match fo r the World Championship with D . Bronstein, Moscow : tf'''. ·:::,>:<:;: <«•'i'?t r1rE1a1r:1 * * * * * * * * 0 : 11n1num:: 1Drmta�Dt' * * * * * * * o * 1 1 1 o o 1 * * * * * * * 1 o * o o * 1 1 * 1 o 1 i:(i�l.Jt: :rn: : $.�l.tt:r: 1 * * : 11�tH:::w : :Ji��tu:rn: 0 o 1953 Match for Title of USSR Champion with M. Taimanov, Moscow !liflt!t fiiiDiri ''. 1 ltiimliiittJr@:: o 112 1 o 112 112 112 o : a�s.tt:Ft? : 1111rnmmt 112 112 1 1954 Match for the World Championship with V. Smyslov, Moscow ::�w•urJ:: 1 ::s.mv.a;r; :::mr:: 0 �!l..ilifai: 1 !SffiJimiii !'!Wi o 1 * * 0 1 o 0 1 1 * 0 0 * * * 1 * * o * * 485 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 : :�III : 6.) 1:;: * * * * 0 * : :11 1 i'itli:Ii 0 1 * * * 0 * 1 1 * 1954 1 1th Chess Olympiad, Amsterdam ::f11:t:Mm:ttm:::: :::rn1: :{:I:: : J:m: rn:n:m:: ::m: : :1fl1u1tbthf.1Iloo n@:m::;mmrt1t mmmr rn:: : ::t:::: r:r11i:::::: l"t Round 1 :0 0-1 2°d Round 3rd Round Botvinnik - Salo Tapio Finland Parliaros - Botvinnik Greece Botvinnik bye Austria 4rd Round 5th Round Botvinnik - Euwe Netherlands Botvinnik bye Iceland 1st Round 2°0 Round 3rd Round Botvinnik - Stahlber2 Sweden Alexander - Botvinnik Great Brifain Botvinnik - Porath Israel Szabo - Botvinnik Hun2ary Botvinnik - Minev Bul2ary Botvinnik bye Iceland 1/2 1m1::rn111t:mr1r1:: 1mnmmmmmmrrm:: :tiJ.1.n:�mmmw11m1r:rnmmnrnr: : :r:r:n:;r1rmrn1rn:rn11rnr 4rd Round 5th Round 6th Round 7th Round gth Round 9th Round 10th Round 1 1 Round m Botvinnik - Na_idorf Ar2entina Botvinnik - Pirc Yu2oslavia Unzicker - Botvinnik Germany Botvinnik bye Czechoslovakia Botvinnik bve Netherlands 1-0 1/2 112 1/2 1-0 1-0 1-0 1/2 1 955 Match USSR v. USA, Moscow USSR i#J.1.!-�ltrn::]Jift\i:II::i 0 : 1 ==:::::-1v.;: w: 1Ern::rn:rn1rn:rn1: 112 Total : 112 1 :o 112 112 7. 0 25 .0 486 USA .j::>. 00 -..J I * ttil:f!.].�l:l�&m :m:1:1:1: : : 1 o 1 1 IItt: : : ::t:t:t: 1 o 1 o ::1:14m.J::rn: : tJJl.fs.l'.'' ' '.'''?''t'.\iIIlJIII o * :i§�:: l(ijl$ifiliil1ttt 0 - - * : 1Qt:sihi.tii.iki.\tmttrn o o ::1:1i:l.if.Di#.U.]: :::=It=J 1 \:fi!lltilit.tiiili1 :IIII1 * i ®M$.i�MillItII @::t1 1 t¢tiitm::: rnmna * :V:f.t:t.:rni ilifl1lili*lm¥:tfiII:J 1 :m�::11i11i�:11 111t:1 o 1 1.;::1ijri$Glii ::1Eimima 0 :J:itllitmiif:ftfl!ID l)J)jtJf.ijbi\(%}\'\ )\j\j\ }()fj\n 0 1:11r:s.11rirn:::::1 1:nm@m1 o 1 * I 1o I * 1o ,* I * I * * , I0 * * 0 0 0 * * 0 * 0 * 0 0 1 * * * * 0 * * * * * * * * 0 0 * 0 � * '0 * 0 1 1 0 I* 1 * '1 * 0 * 1* * 1 I* 0 '* * 0 1 IO * I* 1 * '0 * 0 0 11 1 * I* * I1 * 0 10 * I* * * I* * I1 0 * '1 * I0 * * I* * I* 0 0 10 * I* 0 1 Io 0 0 10 0 * * I* 0 0 * I0 11 I* 11 I* I1 IO I0 * * I* 0 '* * I* 1 I* 0 11 0 10 * I* 0 10 0 * 1 * * 1 * 0 1 0 0 * 0 * 1 * * 1 * * 1 0 * * 0 1 1 0 * * 1 1 * * * * * * * * 0 * 0 * * 1 1 * * 1 * 0 * 1 * 1955 22nd USSR Championship, Moscow 1111q,::�1rt.1rn11m11:: -:'ft:;:;:;:::: * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1:: 11�1} * o 1 1 I * I * I 1 1::tltn::� 1 * I 1 I * 1 1 I 1 111:1:$:1:;� * * 1 1 1 1 I * 1 1 il:l:t:�::l * * ' * 1 1 I * 1 1 i\\111'$.J 1 * , * , 1 1 1 1 1 �:oc:ns) * 1 1 1 1 1 I * 1 1 lj:jjj:�IJ * 1 1 0 1 1 I * I * i:If!Ui/ * 1 1 1 1 1 I * 1 1 Uiti.!i::: * o 1 1 I 1 I * I 1 l:filt�l\\ i * * 1 0 l l I * 1 1 J::}Jt�if 1 1 1 I * 1 1 I * i\\j�'$fG1 * I 0 I * 1 * :;:-:4··-:-:-·- -:-:-:-:-:-: ·:·.·:*Y.:::: : : * I o * 1 ::1ilf :I * * * il.$.:ft 1 ]J.�S.II * t'l�!III * * 1 1 1 o ::1.�s.rnm * 0 0 * 0 * 1956 12th Chess Olympiad, Moscow : :]r:: 1: trrn:: : : :r: :mt:JI::11::tI:=:-m=mm::mt11mii mi. 1ifalmi.HJ r:: 1: : ::imm:mrn:: : m:{:J1::t::tr:: :1Jtl: : 1st Round 2nd Round 3rd Round 4rd Round 5th Round 6tn Round 7th Round 1•t Round rd Round 3rd Round 4rd Round 5th Round 6'h Round 7th Round 8th Round 9th Round 10th Round 1 1 th Round Botvinnik - Stahlber2 Sweden Botvinnik bye Porto Rico Botvinnik - Benkner The Saar Botvinnik bye Poland Vestol - Botvinnik Norway Botvinnik - Padevsky Bul2aria Botvinnik bye Switzerland Botvinnik - Golombek Great Britain Botvinnik bye Israel Unzicker - Botvinnik West Germany Botvinnik - Szabo Na i dorf - Botvinnik Hun2arv Ar2entina Botvinnik - Padevsky Bulearia Filip - Botvinnik Czechoslovakia Botvinnik - Blau Switzerland Larsen - Botvinnik Denmark Botvinnik - Gli2oric Yugoslavia Botvinnik bye Roumania 488 1-0 1-0 0-1 1/2 1-0 1/2 1/2 1/2 1-0 1/2 1/2 1/2 1-0 1 956 International Alekhine Memorial Tournament, Moscow 489 Tournament and Match Results ( 1 943-1 956) Year 1943 1943/44 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 195 1 1 952 1953 1954 1955 1956 Event = Master Tournament, Svedlovsk 23rd Moscow Championship 13th USSR Championship, Moscow 14th USSR Championship, Moscow Match USSR v. USA (by radio) Match USSR v. Great Britain (by radio) International Tournament, Groningen Match USSR v. USA, Moscow International Chigorin Memorial Tournament, Moscow Match-Tournament for the World Championship, The Hague/Moscow Match for the World Championship with D.Bronstein, Moscow 19th USSR Championship, Moscow International Maroczy Memorial Tournament, Budapest 20th USSR Championship, Moscow Match for title of USSR Champion with M.Taimanov, Moscow Match for the World Championship with V.Smyslov, Moscow 1 1th Olympiad, Amsterdam 22nd USSR Championship, Moscow Match USSR v. USA, Moscow 12th Olympiad, Moscow International Alekhine Memorial Tournament, Moscow 490 7 11 11 14 2 1 13 1 - 1 2 - 1 3 - 7 3 3 4 I Place I I I I - 3 1 I 8 1 6 I 10 2 8 I 5 6 5 3 14 8 v 7 9 2 1 8 III-IV 9 I-11 2 1 3 7 6 7 7 - 10 5 9 - 3 l III-V 3 6 - 7 8 l 6 1-11 Translator' s notes* 1 (p.7) An industrial city in the Ural Mountains, some 700 miles east of Moscow. (p. 9) This may be a misunderstanding. Paul Robeson certainly was not one of the stars of Casablanca. 3 (p. 1 5) The actual quotation used by the author as the heading for this chapter was 'Ah, heavy art thou, crown of Monomakh! ' - from Alexander Pushkin's Boris Godunov. I have taken the liberty of substituting Shakespeare's line from Henry JV. Part 2, which expresses the same idea and may be more familiar to English-speaking readers. 2 4 (p.49) 2 1 tDxe6 tbxe6 22 :xe6 is probably bad (22 . . . :fd8), but not because the bishop at cl is en prise (22 ... 'i'xcl 23 .i.xh7+). 5 (p. 5 1 ) This also looks good enough for a draw: 7 4 'i'g6+ 'it>f8 7 5 'i'xh6+ � 76 "ii'xa6, and now 76 . . . 'i'el+ 77 �h5 'i'e5+ 78 g5 '1'118+ 79 �g4 'i'd4+ with perpetual check. 6 (p. 5 1 ) After, say, 74 . . . 'i'd4 7 5 °ilf7 'i'xb4 76 f6, instead of 76 . . . 'ii'c5+ 77 g5 which leads to mate, Black has the defence 76 ... 'i'IB ! (77 'i'xf8? g6 mate), which appears to hold the position. 7 (p.55) Black has a curious tactical resource which appears to lead to complete equality: 23 . . .: xd4 24 tbxf5 .i.xf5 25 'i'xf5 'ii'e7 ! , e.g. 26 h3 l:txdl 27 :xdl 1!f'xc5 28 'ifxd5. 8 (p.69) In fact 26 ttlxf5 can be met by 26 . . . 'i'f6, winning material (27 ll:ig3 or 27 tbh4 - 27 . . . .i.xf4), while 26 exf5 appears to leave White with only a slight advantage after, say, 26 ... 'i'f6 27 fxg6 1Wxg6 28 'i'xg6+ hxg6. 9 (p.81) White's attack looks to be completely winning. He is threatening 18 l:.xg7+, and after l 7 ... g6 (what else?) l 8 l1d6 Black has no defence. 10 (p.88) The immediate 34 ... 'iic I+ is possible, winning the knight. * A computer was used to help in checking the analysis. 491 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 (p. 129) Bernstein was awarded the FIDE grandmaster title in 1950. (p. 1 50) Here and subsequently, where an opponent has died since Botvinnik:'s comments were written, the date of death has been included. (p. 164) 23 . . . 'ife l + wins instantly. (p. 1 70) White does not have to lose in one move; 48 tl'ixf3 is clearly stronger. (p. 173) 20 ... .i.e6 wins a piece. (p. 179) From one of lvan Krylov's fables. (p. 1 8 1 ) 18 l:.fdl seems much better, winning a pawn in safety (e.g. 18 . . . .i.b7 1 9 'ifxc7 'i'e4 20 Afl). (p.2 1 1 ) After 10 ... ii.d3 it would appear that White can win a pawn by 1 1 tl'ixd5. (p.224) 58 ll'ie l + �e2 59 ll'ig2 only leads to a queen ending with an extra pawn: 59 . . 'itm 60 a5 �xg2 61 a6 � 62 a7 g2 63 a8'fi g l'i' 64 'i'xd5. The immediate 58 a5 is much stronger, as after 58 ... @e3 (58. . g2 59 tl'ie l+) 59 tl'ie 1 @e2 60 tl'ig2 White is a tempo ahead of the previous variation. · . . 20 21 (p. 259) There is clearly a misunderstanding here, as White can play 40 'i'xa4. But presumably Black wins by 39 ... :xd8 40 :d7+ .:xd7 41 'ilxd7+ �xg6. (p.285) The solution was first published in Shakhmaty v SSSR (1 952, 7, 199). 492 The pawn ending is easily won after 47 'itth 3 'ifte4 48 'ittg2 'iftd3 49 'ittfl. 'iftd2 50 'ittg2 @el 5 1 'iftg l 'ifte2 52 'iftg2 f4 53 g4 �el. White is also not saved by 49' 'itth l 'ifi>d2 50 'iti>h2 because of 50 . . . 'ifi>d l ! Now he loses after 5 1 �g2 'ifte l , or 5 1 'ittgl 'ifte2, or 5 1 'it>h l f4, or, finally, 5 1 'iti>h3 'ifte2. But how is Black to win after 47 'ittfl ! ! 'iftd3 48 'ifte l f4 49 g4 (since 49 ...D 50 'iftdl 'ifte4 5 1 'iftd2 'iftf4 52 �d3 �xg4 53 r.Pe3 leads only to a draw)? Even so, there is a win: 49 . . . <it>c2 50 <it>e2 'iftc l ! 5 1 <it>d3 (5 1 @e l f3) 5 1.. . 'iftd l 52 <it>e4 'ifte2 53 f3 �f2 54 �5 @xf3 55 <it>xg5 <it>g3 . 2 2 23 (p.289) Why not 37 ... Wg3+ followed by 38 . . . 'ifxc3 ? (p.3 10) After 26 ... g5 27 'tlfc2 White does not win immediately: 27 ... h6, and 28 l:.xc7 can be answered by 28 . . . 'i'f4, threatening both 29. . . 'i'xc7 and 29 ... :td2. 24 (p.341) Several games, beginning with Timrnan-Hiibner (Montreal 1979) have suggested that the ending after 1 5 ... �xf7 16 dxe5 lf'id7 is quite playable for Black. 25 (p.371) After 43 'i'h6 Black has a surprising defence: 43 . . J 1f5 ! 44 exf5 'ifxd5+ with perpetual check. 43 'i'h4 is stronger: 43 . . . 'i'f6 44 l:Xxf8+ 'i'xf8 45 Wxg5+. But in any case 42 . . . 'iff6 looks a better defence (than 42 . . . !tg5): 43 f3 l:!g5 44 Wh6 cJiie7 45 :xIB 'i'xf'8 46 1!fxg5+ 'i'f6. 26 (p.382) It is not clear why only 47 . . . 'ifte7 is considered (after 48 'iWg5 ! 'ifte6 etc. Black has simply wasted a precious tempo) . Why not the obvious 47 ... !txa2, when Black not only creates the counter-threat of . . . e4-e3, but also has the defensive manoeuvre . . . . . .ltc2-c7, hailing the h-pawn? 27 (p.391) 3 1 gxh6+ wins immediately. 28 (p.406) After 55 'ifte2 'iftg4 (or 55 ... 'iftg3 56 .te l + '1t>g4 57 'ittf2) 56 'itf2 it isn't clear that White has to give up his bishop for the h-pawn, and the position after 56 ...d4 57 exd4 'iti>xf4 would appear to be a theoretical draw. 29 (p.440) The 'favourable' queen ending after 48 Ml would appear to be easily won for Black after 48 . . . Vf5+ 49 �gl (if 49 <it>e l or 49 'ifte2, then 49 . . . 'itth2) 49... 'i!ff4 (50 'i'e6+ g4). 493 30 (p.460) In fact after 25 ...<t>hS 26 h3 White appears to win material (26 . . . 'i'e2 27 · l:tfel). 31 (p.460) I don't think that there any 'unclear complications' . Black seems obliged to force a draw by 29 . . . 'i'h5+ 30 <t>gl 1!i'c5+. 32 (p.46 1) 17 tLie7+ tLixe7 18 f5 is perhaps more convincing 33 (p.462) After 3 1 . . . �xc6 32 l:txd5 �xd5 I don't think that Black is losing - he has more than sufficient compensation for the queen! 34 (p.464) After 17 ... <t>c6 is White's advantage really so obvious? - 18 l:ixf7 (or 18 l:labl tLixa3 19 l:U b3 tLlc2 and it is doubtful whether White's positional compensation is worth two pawns) 1 8. . . tLle5 19 l:U4 ile7, with the threats of . . . �g5 and ... g7-g5. 494 Index of Openings Open Games Four Knights. Game. C48 - 138; C49 183. King's Gambit. C36 - 207. Ruy Lopez. C75 - 245; C77 - 1 30; C79 - 148; C86 - 145. Three Knights Gaine. C46 - 129. Semi-Open Games Caro-Kann Defence. B14 - 123. Centre Cowiter Opening. BOl - 204. French Defence. COO - 162; COl 163, 248; C04 - 1 37; C05 - 206; ClO - 165; Cl5 - 228, 229, 238; Cl7 - 166, 2 18, 234; C l 8 - 181; Cl9 - 125, 136, 143 , 235. Sicilian Defence. B20 - 171; B24 223; B25 - 224; B5 l - 1 72; B59 124; B62 - 146, 180; B63 - 184, 2 1 5, 243 ; B73 - 160; B84 - 128; B88 - 246. Closed Games Catalan Opening. EOO - 159. Dutch Defence. A84 - 169, 187, 188; A9 1 - 186; A94 - 185, 1 99; A95 1 58, 1 74. English Opening. A20 - 237; A21 - C48 etc. are Encyclopaedia 250; A29 - 24 1; A30 - 2 1 1 ; A34 1 52; A37 - 244; B20 - 1 98. Griinfeld Defence. D70 - 1 92; D74 170, 190; D87 - 147; D93 - 2 14; D94 - 202; D95 - 168; D98 - 1 57, 1 77. King's Indian Attack. A04 - 226; A07 - 20 1 ; AOS - 251. King's Indian Defence. E6 1 - 225, 227; E64 - 242: E65 - 232; E66 - 2 13, 239; E68 - 1 50, 210; E85 - 200. Nimzo-Indian Defence. E26 - 197; E28 - 178; E35 - 134; E36 - 1 5 1 ; E40 - 173, 2 1 7: E42 - 233, 247; E44 - 1 22; E45 - 193, 196, 2 19; E5 1 - 1 94. Queen's Gambit. D06 - 182; D35 149, 164; 036 - 208; D4 1 - 132, 133; D53 - 1 53 ; 054 - 203. Queen's Gambit Accepted. D22 - 142, 220; D27 - 1 6 1 . Queen's Indian Defence. E l4 - 139; E I S - 156. Reti Opening. A06 - 1 4 1 ; A09 - 135; A l l - 240; A 13 - 126, 176, 205; A l4 - 1 9 1 , 230, 249. Slav Defence. D l 3 - 1 55, 167, 209; D I S - 140, 222; 030 - 2 1 2; D44 1 3 1 , 154, 195, 221 ; D45 - 127, 189, 2 16; 046 - 144, 175, 236; D 47 23 1 ; 049 - 179. of Chess Openings codes Numbers refer to games 495 Already published: Mikhail Botvinnik: Botvinnik' s Best Games Volume 1 1925- 194 1 In preparation: Mikhail Botvinnik: Botvinnik' s Best Games Volume 3 1957- 1970 496 \ E: 29 · 99 r)