7 Volume 2 Unlocking the mysteries of the modern chess openingsG AMBER T | www.gambitbooks.com For many chess-players, opening study is sheer hard work. It is difficult to know what is important and what is not, and when specific knowledge is vital, or when a more general understanding is sufficient. Tragically often, once the opening is over, a player won't know what plan to follow, or even understand why his pieces are on the squares on which they sit. PR See Ro Reo) Neel Met Mare Come Se UU oad of the openings. In his previous books on chess strategy, Secrets of Modern Chess BSc (eh A ORCI Mee REMC Roe CR Uae Lele Curae moder chess. Moreover, he did so in ways that have enabled these ideas to be understood by club players. Here he does likewise for the openings, explaining not only the ideas and strategies behind specific openings, but also the interconnections of chess openings taken as a whole. By presenting the common threads that underlie opening play, Watson provides a permanent basis for playing openings of any type. This second volume focuses on queen’s pawn openings, exploring such openings as the Nimzo-Indian, King’s Indian and the entire Queen's Gambit complex, and the characteristic structures to which they lead. International Master John Watson is one of the world’s most respected writers on chess. His groundbreaking four-volume work on the English firmly established his reputation in the 1980s, and he has produced a string of top-quality works since. In IS Ter ola ole eS CACORE a 0) ol ere OD bed Same eee oie Com Ue CUR We RRO ORS CCC} Federation Fred Cramer Award for Best Book. His former pupils include the 1997 World Junior Champion, Tal Shaked. Other chess titles from Gambit include:Mastering the Chess Openings Volume 2 John Watson GAMBEITFirst published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2007 Copyright © John Watson 2007 The right of John Watson to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being im- posed on the subsequent purchaser. ISBN-13: 978-1-904600-69-5 ISBN-10: 1-904600-69-7 DISTRIBUTION: ‘Worldwide (except USA): Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 SLN, England. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8533 5821. E-mail: [email protected] Gambit Publications Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 SLN, England. E-mail: info@ gambitbooks.com Website (regularly updated): www-gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham Burgess ‘Typeset by Petra Nunn Cover image by Wolff Morrow Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wilts, 10987654321 Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: Murray Chandler GM Chess Director: Dr John Nunn GM Editorial Director: Graham Burgess FM German Editor: Petra Nunn WEM Webmaster: Dr Helen Milligan WFMContents Symbols Bibliography Introduction Section 1: Closed Games 1 2 Introduction to 1 d4 and the Closed Games Queen’s Gambit Declined Declining the Gambit: Other 2nd Moves Early Commitment Classical Variations Lasker Defence Orthodox/Capablanca Defence Tartakower Variation Alatortsev Variation Exchange Variation Carlsbad Variation Modern Exchange Move-Orders in the Queen's Gambit Declined Slay and Semi-Slav Slav Main Line Dutch Variation: 6 e3 Modern Line with 6 eS Exchange Slay Semi-Slav The Meran Anti-Meran (6 We2) Section 2: Indian Systems 4 A Introduction to the Indian Defences Nimzo-Indian Defence Stimisch and Related Lines Lines with ...d6 and ...e5 Lines with ...d5 and the Botvinnik Approach Saimisch Main Line with ...c5 and ...5.a6 43 and the Hiibner Variation Early Castling 14 116 118 120 122 ae 135 1354 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS 4...c5 and the Hiibner Proper Classical Nimzo-Indian: 4 We2 Central Counter-Atack: 4...d5 Classical with 4...0-0 6 Queen’s Indian Defence Introduction to 3 Df3 Fianchetto Variation The Classical 4...2b7 Petrosian System (4 a3 7 King’s Indian Defence Four Pawns Attack Central Break 6...2a6 vs the Four Pawns Classical King’s Indian Exchange Variation Strongpoint Variation ‘The Classical Main Line with 7...Ac6 9 Del 9d? The Bayonet Variation Averbakh Variation Siimisch Variation Stimisch wi Stimisch with ... 8 Griinfeld Defence Exchange Variation 7 Be3 with 8 Wd2 7 &c4 and the Classical Exchange Modern 7 \f3 System Modern Main Line with Bb1 Russian System 9 Modern Benoni Classical Main Line Pawn-Storm Systems Mikenas Attack Taimanov Attack Fianchetto System Index of Players Index of Openings 138 143 143 154 164 164 165 166 169 173 183 188 191 201 204 205 208 216 218 231 236 238 240 241 244 248 249 249 Pak) 268 272 280 290 294 301 302 303 309 316 319Symbols ch Chet Weht check double check checkmate brilliant move good move interesting move dubious move bad move blunder championship team championship world championship world team championship European championship European team championship Candidates event interzonal zonal European Clubs Cup olympiad junior event team event the game ends in a win for White the game ends in a draw the game ends in a win for Black nth match game see next diagramBibliography Periodical Publications ChessBase Magazine (up to no. 113); ChessBase ‘New in Chess Magazine; New in Chess Informator (up to no. 96); Sahovski Informator Websites ChessPublishing; Kosten, A.; http://www.chesspublishing.com The Week in Chess (up to no. 608); Crowther, M.; http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.huml Jeremysilman.com; Silman, J.; http://www.jeremysilman.com ChessCafe.com; Russell, H.; http://www.chesscafe.com CDs and DVDs Breutigam, M.; King’s Indian with h3; ChessBase 2002 Breutigam, M.; The Chigorin Defence; ChessBase 2001 Corr Database 2006; ChessBase 2006 Dreey, A.; Meran Variation, ChessBase 2002 Henrichs, T.; Queen's Gambit Orthodox Defence ~ Exchange Variation D31/D35-D36, ChessBase 2005 Kasparov, G.; How to Play the Queen's Gambit (DVD); ChessBase 2005 Miloy, V.; Nimzo-Indian ~ 4 f3 and Siimisch Variation; ChessBase 2002 Neven, K.; The Griinfeld; ChessBase 2004 Neven, K.; Classical Nimzo-Indian — 4 We2; ChessBase 2005 Opening Encyclopaedia 2005; ChessBase 2005 Ripperger, R.; How to Play the Nimzo-Indian?; ChessBase 2002 Rogozenko, D.; The Slav Defence; ChessBase 2002 Books and Articles Aagaard, J.; Queen’s Indian Defence; Everyman 2002 Bosch, J.; Secrets of Opening Surprises 1-5; New in Chess 2003-6 Bronstein, D.; Bronstein on the King's Indian; Everyman 1999 Bronznik, V.; The Chigorin Defence (English version); Kania 2005 Burgess, G.; The Slav; Gambit 2001 Collins, S.; Understanding the Chess Openings; Gambit 2005 Cox, J.; Starting Out: | d4!; Everyman 2006 Emms, J.; Starting Out: The Queen's Indian; Everyman 2004 Emms, J.; Easy Guide to the Nimzo-Indian, Gambit/Cadogan 1998 Emms, J., Ward, C. & Palliser, R.; Dangerous Weapons: The Nimzo-Indian; Gloucester 2006 Fine, R.; The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings [3rd Edition]; McKay 1989 Gallagher, J.; Starting Out: The King’s Indian; Everyman 2002 Gallagher, J.; Play the King’s Indian; Everyman 2005 Gligorié, $.; Play the Nimzo-Indian; Pergamon 1985 Golubev, M.; Understanding the King's Indian; Gambit 2006 Hansen, Ca.; The Nimzo-Indian: 4 3; Gambit 2002 Kallai, G.; More Basic Chess Openings {1 d4}; Cadogan 1997BIBLIOGRAPHY 7 (ed.); ECO D ~ 3th Edition; Sahovski Informator 1998 Kmié, Z. (ed.); ECO E ~ 3th Edition; Sahovski Informator 1998 Lalié, B.; Queen’s Gambit Declined: £95 Systems; Gambit/Everyman 2000 Nunn, J., Burgess, G.,Emms, J. & Gallagher, J.; Nunn’s Chess Openings; GambivEveryman 1999 Nunn, J.; Grandmaster Chess Move by Move; Gambit 2006 Nunn, J. & Burgess, G.; New Classical King's Indian; Batsford 1997 Nunn, J. & Burgess, G.; Main Line King's Indian; Batsford 1996 Palliser, R.; Play J d4!; Batsford 2005 Palliser, R.; The Modern Benoni Revealed, Batsford 2004 Panczyk, K. & ezuk, J.; The Cambridge Springs; Gambit 2002 Pedersen, S.; The Meran System; Gambit 2000 Rowson, J.; Understanding the Griinfeld, Gambit 1999 Sadler, M.; Queen's Gambit Declined; Everyman 2000 Shaw, J.; Starting Out: The Queen’s Gambit, Everyman 2002 Vaisser, A.; Beating the King's Indian Defence and Benoni; Batsford 1997 Ward, C.; Starting Out: The Nimzo-Indian; Everyman 2002 Ward, C.; The Controversial Sdmisch King's Indian; Batsford 2004 Watson, J.; Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy; Gambit 1998 Watson, J.; Chess Strategy in Action; Gambit 2003 Watson, J. & Schiller, E.; How to Succeed in the Queen Pawn Openings; Trafford 2005 Watson, J.; The Gambit Guide to the Modern Benoni, Gambit 2001 Watson, J.; The Unconventional King’s Indian Defense; Hypermodern 1999 Yakovich, ¥.; Play the 4 f3 Nimzo-Indian, Gambit 2004 Yermolinsky, A.; The Road to Chess Improvement; Gambit 1999 Yrj0la, J. & Tella, J.; The Queen’s Indian; Gambit 2003Introduction This second volume of Mastering the Chess Openings investigates openings in which White plays 14. As in Volume 1, which examines 1 e4, I work from the ground up, starting with the very first moves of each opening to explain its elementary properties. Someone with only a modicum of playing experience should be able to master these fundamentals and use them as a basis for under- standing the more sophisticated material that follows. For a primer on the rudimentary principles that apply to all opening play, please refer to Chapter 1 of Volume 1. The next two chapters of that volume may also be useful, since they identify the ideas and themes most often referred to in the book as a whole. My philosophy is the same in both volumes, but a few points bear repeating. These books are not, meant to cover all openings, much less all of their variations; such an undertaking would require scores of volumes. Instead, I have selected systems that I consider the most useful for the sake of explanation and instruction. In the main, these are the most ‘important’ openings, in that they have had a large following through the years and have a well-developed theoretical underpinning, Within these major openings I have picked a number of variations to study in some detail, based upon the belief that in-depth familiarity with several variations is better than superficial under- standing of all. In order to place this selection in context, I leave signposts to indicate the direction in which alternatives may lead. While some of the games and analysis are recent, many classic examples are used to illustrate general points. ‘This is not primarily a theoretical tome: some of the opinions that I venture about the value of hotly-contested individual lines will undoubtedly prove wrong or irrelevant. Instead, my goal is to provide a solid basis for the reader to play openings successfully, emphasizing positional features and techniques that extend to variations beyond those at hand, Notice that this differs from a full ex- planation of an opening using concepts specific to that opening. We shall sce that individual moves themselves express ideas, whether or not they fit into a general scheme that has previously been set forth. Accordingly, a certain level of detail is absolutely necessary to understand both the consis- tent strategies and the anomalies that can render such strategies irrelevant. On a practical level, Ihave subjected readers to recitations about the niceties of move-orders; the associated issues can be confusing but bear a direct relation to real-world results. Assessments of variations can evolve very rapidly, but how one best arrives at the desired starting points tends not to change much. In the next chapter I examine the fundamental characteristics of 1 d4 and how it differs from 1 e4. You will find further comparisons between these moves in both volumes. The study of 1 d4 by itself will suffice to improve your chess understanding by leaps and bounds, but if you truly aspire to master the game you will want to know as much as possible about the e-pawn openings as well. I sincerely hope that these volumes will help you in both respects.1 Introduction to 1 d4 and the Closed Games At the most basic level, 1 d4 might seem to resemble 1 e4. It brings a pawn to the fourth rank to occupy the centre and frees a bishop for action. Very much as the main ‘goal’ of 1 e4 is to enforce a successful d4, it may be said that after 1 d4 White’s goal is to achieve e4. Never- theless, even from this most primitive stand- point, we can see that 1 e4 only controls one central square (d5) and 1 d4 controls two (d4 and e5). This latter quality accounts for some immediate differences between opening with the queen’s pawn and the king’s pawn. For ex- ample, when we look at the defences to 1 e4, some of them attack e4 directly: the Alekhine Defence (1 e4 \f6) and the Scandinavian De- fence (1 e4 d5). Others allow 2 d4 and then at- tack e4 on Black’s 2nd move: the Caro-Kann Defence (1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5), the French Defence (1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5) and the Pire Defence (1 e4 d6 2 dd Qf6). But versus 1 d4, none of Black's major defences attack the d4-pawn, and none even allow 2 e4, ie, these defences all start with either 1...d5 or 1...2f6, fighting for con- trol of e4, It doesn’t take much thought to see how that difference arises: after 1 e4 White’s e-pawn is unprotected, meaning that attacking it with tempo can bring significant rewards, or at least a temporary initiative. Since White's d-pawn is already protected by his queen after 1 d4, the chances for Black to gain the initiative by tar- geting it are correspondingly low. On the other hand, when he plays 1 d4, White has done nothing to contribute towards castling kingside. In fact, he often follows up with the moves 2 c4, 3 Dc3 and in some cases moves such as 4 &f4, 4 S25 or 4 We2, none of which clear the way for kingside castling. One might argue that in such situations White's prospects of queenside casting are enhanced, since early moves by the knight, bishop, and queen clear the road for castling queenside. However, apart from a few attacking lines such as the Exchange Queen's Gambit and the ‘Samisch Variation of the King’s Indian, White seldom avails himself of the opportunity to cas- tle queenside. As is the case in most chess openings, queenside castling carries with it too many risks in terms of exposing White's king to quick attacks. Then the question becomes whether Black can gain anything from White’s delayed king- side castling. Can he put pressure on White that requires a degree of compromise in White's strategic plans? Before tuming to 1 d4 dS, let's consider the Indian Defences that begin with 1 4 6. The answer to our question changes with each opening and in each variation. In the main line of the King’s Indian Defence, for ex- ample, Black puts very little pressure on White while he’s getting castled, since his first five moves don’t threaten anything or even directly challenge the centre. For example, the main line goes 1 d4 @f6 24 g6 3 Dc3 Lg7 4.e4 d6 5 2)f3 0-0 6 Be? with 7 0-0 next. As in all major openings, Black’s counterplay is based upon a central advance, normally the move ...e5. In that case White has great strategic leeway and10 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS delayed castling hasn't proved a decisive factor in the ensuing play. Furthermore, White can achieve positions in which his moves allow rapid castling anyway; e.g., 1 d4 Af6 2.c4.g6 3 NS 27 4 g3 d6 5 Sg? and 60-0. Butif White plays more ambitiously and delays 0-0 longer, he may run into other issues — for example, af- ter 5 £4 0-0 6 Af3 c5 7 d5 e6 8 Be2 exdS 9 exd5. In that case White has exposed his e4- pawn, which can’t be supported by other pawns. Thus Black can play 9...2e8, leaving White having to respond to the threat on his e-pawn before being able to castle. White’s e-pawn is not always Black’s main target. For example, in the main line of the Ex- change Griinfeld, 1 d4 Af6 2 c4 g6 3 @c3 d5 4 cxdS Axd5 5 e4 Axc3 6 bxe3 Lg7, White needs to set up his pieces having in mind Black’s quick attack on his d4-pawn by ...c5 and ...\c6. This means that White is confined to just a few ways of rearranging his pieces in order to bring his king to safety, placing them on what he may consider non-optimal squares; for instance, 7 S.c4 c5 8 De2 Ac6 9 &e3. Or, in the process of shoring up his centre with pieces, White might allow Black to play ..cxd4 and |Wa5+ on the move before he’s managed to ar- range 0-0; for example, 7 Af3 0-0 8 Ebi c5 9 Be2 cxd4 10 exd4 Wa5+. More obvious situa- tions arise from variations in the same opening such as 1 d4 Af6 2.c4 g6 3 Ac3 d5 4 24 and 4 285, in which Black can play ...c5 and White's necessary defensive moves relate directly to his delayed kingside development and inability to castle quickly. In the Nimzo-Indian Defence, 1 d4 #6 2.c4 e6 3 Ac3 &b4, there are several situations in which Black can play ...2e4 quickly in order to disturb White’s plans on the kingside, Two ex- amples are 4 @)f3 b6 5 g5 h6 6 &h4 £6773 258 2 g3 Ded and 4 A\f3.c5 5 g3 Ded, If White plans to play &d3 and Age2, he might run into, for example, 4 €3 b6 5 £d3 &b7, when White will normally play 6 @f3, because after 6 De2 he can’t castle in time to protect his g-pawn, Of course there are just as many variations in which delaying 0-0 doesn’t affect White’s plans, but in contrast to most 1 e4 openings he has to take into account the trade-offs involved in delaying his kingside development. Openings beginning with 1 d4 d5 (D) are known as the ‘Closed Games’. We shall begin our | d4 investigations in the next two chapters by examining those openings. Black emphasizes prevention of e4, since that would ideally be White’s next move. In fact, very seldom will you see a successful e4 on one of the first six or seven moves of a Queen's Gam- bit Declined (2 4 e6) or a Slav (2 c4 c6), which are the most important Closed Games. This con- trasts with both the King’s Indian and Griinfeld Defences mentioned above. Still, the impor- tance of the move e4 motivates both sides’ play. White’s predominant response to 1...d5 is 2 04, clearly aimed at undermining dS and thus shak- ing Black’s contro! of e4. With the positional threat of 3 cxdS Wxd5 4 @c3 and 5 e4, Black usually feels compelled to prevent the key move e4 even at the cost of compromising his position Thus we see the main lines 2...e6 and 2...c6. As explained in the next chapter about the Queen’s Gambit Declined (2...¢6), other second moves tend to give White a central majority in return for Black’s lead in development. What we'll find is that although Black can cope with or prevent 4 in the Closed Games, he doesn’t get away un- touched in doing so. In the next two chapters, we'll discuss the ways in which White can try to exploit Black’s concessions within the context of specific, selected opening variations. We shall also see how Black tries to combine pressure upon White’s centre with maximum activity for his pieces. The Closed Games with 1 dé d5 are rightly considered essential to the education of, all developing players.2 Queen’s Gambit Declined 1 d4 d52¢4(D) Wy a 4 This is the venerable Queen's Gambit, the most popular response to 1...d5 by a huge mar- gin (all the more so if you include 2 £3 fol- lowed by 3 c4), White’s immediate goal is to break down Black’s control over d5, or other- wise gain concessions from him. This chapter is primarily about 2...e6, and includes short sections on other less important ways to decline the gambit Before moving on to more sophisticated anal- ysis, I should stipulate that the Queen's Gambit is not a gambit in the sense of giving up a pawn for the sake of other compensating factors. White can recover his pawn almost immedi- ately after 2...dxe4 3 e3 or 3 Df3 or even 3 e4, To show this, let's try the simple 3 €3, intending 4 &xcd with easy development. At this point Black has a perfectly acceptable game by re- turning the pawn. He can play 3...f6 4 &xcd 6, for example. But Black doesn’t normally try to hang on to the pawn by 3...b5? because it leads to a disadvantage. White plays 4 a4! (D). Here Black needs to avoid 4...c6? 5 axb5 cxb5?? 6 Wf3, attacking the rook on a8 and winning at least a piece. But other moves return the pawn under poor circumstances; for exam- ple, 4...bxa4 5 &xc4 £b7 6 Af3 e6 7 Wxad+, or4,..2A7 5 axb5 &xb5 6 4)e3 c6 7 b3! cxb3 8 |AGY ADxbS cxbS 9 &xbS+ Dd7 10 Wxb3. In these positions White has the advantages of the cen- tral majority and pressure on Black's weakened queenside. On the other hand, Black can’t just sit around. The move 2 c4 attacks his d5-pawn, and if White were given a free move he would play 3 exdS Wxd5 4 Dc3, gaining a tempo on the queen, and play 5 e4 next. That would establish the classic ideal centre. How to respond? If Black doesn’t want to accept the gambit, he can choose to defend his pawn by 2...e6 or 2...c6. Alternatively he can decline by counterattack with, for example, 2...e5, 2....£5 or 2... Ac6. These latter moves are relatively less com. mon, and we shall look at them shortly. But first I want to make some introductory comments about Black’s main choice: 2...€6 (D) The position after 2.,.e6 introduces the clas- sical Queen’s Gambit Declined, an opening ri- valling the Ruy Lopez as the greatest in chess history. For generations this move was almost obligatory at the highest levels. The greats such as Steinitz, Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine chose in it in the vast majority of the games in which they confronted 1 d4 d5 24. The 1927 World Championship match between Alekhine and Capablanca featured no fewer than 32 out of 34 games with the Queen's Gambit Declined.574 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS Although no longer holding such an exalted status, 2...e6 has remained the most important defence to the Queen’s Gambit throughout the years and into the present. In some ways this is strange, because Black imprisons his bishop on 8 behind its own pawns. This is no trivial mat- ter, since the bishop won’t be able to participate in the struggle to control the centre nor in any active role. As usual, pieces condemned to stay- ing on the first rank cause other problems, such as interfering with the connection of the rooks. ‘The struggle to free the light-squared bishop and find a good spot for it is arguably Black's main problem in the Queen's Gambit De- clined (a.k.a, ‘QGD’). As Kasparov indicates, the theme of finding a role for this bishop per- meates the theory of the opening, and even complex ideas can often be reduced to it. The obvious question, then, is why Black would subject himself to a potentially arduous task. What happens if Black doesn't block off his bishop? ‘A superficial explanation concerns the two conventional alternatives, First, accepting the pawn by 2...dxc4 immediately cedes the centre to White, And in both Queen's Gambit Ac- cepted theory and practice, it turns out that ...e6 is usually played within a few moves, before Black’s c8-bishop is developed anyway! For example, the traditional main line of the Queen's Gambit Accepted is 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 Df3 2)f6 4.e3 €6 5 &xc4 c5, when that bishop is left sitting on its original square behind the ¢6- pawn, By contrast, the Slav Defence with 2...c6 keeps the c8-bishop open for development, but it takes away the best square for Black’s queen's knight. The move 2...c6 also foregoes ...c5, which is one of Black’s most effective ways to attack White's centre. Furthermore, Black’s two main lines in the Slav Defence are hardly per- fect solutions to the light-squared bishop prob- lem. After 2...c6 3 3, he can choose the extremely popular Semi-Slav by 3...f6 (or 3...€6) 4 Ac3 e6, in which case the bishop on c8 is still hemmed in, even more so than after 2...¢6. The most favourable variation in this re- spect is the old main line 3...2\f6 4 @c3 dxe4 5 a4 £5. While this develops the bishop quite actively, it comes at the cost of giving White a central majority. These variations and associ- ated issues will be discussed in detail in the next chapter, Declining the Gambit: Other 2nd Moves After 1 d4 d5 2 ¢4, the argument for playing 2...€6 gains force when one investigates less- played responses to 2 ¢4 which don’t imprison Black’s bishop on 8, This book is not encyclo- paedic and I certainly won’t analyse many side-variations in detail. But in this case it’s ex- tremely valuable to examine the ideas associ- ated with those deviations from both 2...e6 and 2...€6, including their good points and the prob- Jems that accompany them. In each case, Black wants to keep the ¢8-bishop’s path open and leave the c6-square free for his knight on b8. These lines are terribly instructive and hope- fully useful, Marshall Defence 1 d4.d5 204 £6 (D) What could be simpler? Black develops a piece, defends the pawn on d5, and leaves the c8-bishop with a clear path to the outside world. It’s interesting that if you show this posi- tion to even fairly experienced players and ask how they would proceed, many will react by suggesting 3 cxd5 @\xd5 4 e4, which certainly is natural: White thereby forms the ideal centre with the gain of a tempo. Then if Black plays 4...2f6, the obvious response is 5 “c3 (5 eS 2d5 leaves Black comfortably placed on theQUEEN’S GAMBIT DECLINED 13 ideal blockading square in front of White's backward pawn). Up to this point, White has done everything logically and correctly, but Black can fight back with 5...e5! (D). This changes the central equation, as every advanced player will recognize from similar positions in several openings. Play might con- tinue, for example, 6 dxeS (6 d5 &c5 allows free and easy development for Black's pieces) 6...Wxdl+ 7 &xdl (7 Dxd1 Axed) 7...Ag4, threatening the pawns on f2 and eS with a complex fight ahead in which Black has fully- fledged play. Also, for the record, 5 243 has a couple of drawbacks, the straightforward one being 5...Ac6 with pressure on the centre. Then Black is well developed following 6 d5 De5 or 6 Af3 &g4. Also possible but less clear is the temporary pawn sacrifice 5...e5!? 6 dxe5 Ded. So is 2...2f6 the solution to the Queen’s Gambit? Alas, it turns out that there is a better move than4 e4, Simply 4 4f3! gains the advan- Lage, since it stops ...e5 and truly threatens 5 ¢4. Then the only efficient way for Black to pre- vent that move and still remain competitive in the centre is 4...25 (the dubious move 4...f5?! creates a big outpost on eS for White’s pieces, at the same time restricting the range of that 8-bishop Black was trying so hard to free). But 4...S25 can be met by 5 Wb3! and itis awkward for Black to defend b7; for example, 5...6 (5...Db6 allows 6 2c3 with e4 to come next) 6 @bd2. White has won the central battle. This time e4 cannot be stopped, as can be seen from an instructive line after 6...f6 (D): Ww 7 e4! Gxed (7...dxed 8 Axed Ded 9 DeS not only threatens checkmate, but also &b5+ and sometimes W3) 8 AeS! Dd6 (the only real move, since 8..e6 9 &b5+ is too strong) 9 &b5+ (also good is 9 Dxf7!? Dxt7 10 W3, but, that is messier) 9...c6 10 Dxcé Wd7 11 Axa7 xbS 12 AxbS and White has an extra pawn and good development. What's the lesson behind the apparently lucky forcing moves at White’s disposal (7 e4! and 8 @e5!) in this last variation? In the 1 d4 openings, a recurring theme is that an early move by Black’s bishop from c8 may be met by attacking the squares that the bishop has just abandoned, usually by the move t#b3 threaten- ing the pawn on b7, and sometimes by Wad. This occurs, for example, in many Slav and Queen’s Gambit Exchange variations (and we see it in many other openings, including some beginning with 1 e4). The situation with re- versed colours can elicit the same response; for example, when White plays 1 d4 Af 2 £25 (the Trompowsky), Black often replies ...c5 to get ..W/b6 in, The same ...c5 (or, sometimes,14 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS .c6) idea comes up in the Torre Attack (with &g5), London System (with 24), the Veresov Attack (1 d4 d5 2 2c3 Af6 3 &g5), several variations of the King’s Indian Defence, and a host of other openings. The fact that 4 @\f3 was clearly superior to 4 4 in this simple example illustrates that White needs to refrain from occupying the centre with his pawns until he is sure that those pawns can- not be attacked to good effect. For instance, Black may be able to compel White's centre pawns to advance, or get the opportunity to ex- change one or both of them. The problem is ob- vious enough, but often White's decision is not an easy one to make. This basic situation will arise throughout the openings that we are study- ing. , Baltic Defence 1d4.d52c4 &f5(D) Rather than defend dS, Black can directly develop with this bishop move, known as the Baltic Defence or sometimes the Keres De- fence. Black’s idea is simple: he would like to play the move ...e6, but wants to get his bishop out in front of his own pawns first. We have empha- sized that after 2...e6, the c8-bishop can be a ive piece. So why not develop it first, espe- ly to a nice active post? Well and fine, but White still has his idea of exd5, and if Black plays ...Wxd5, he wins a tempo against Black's queen by @\c3 (perhaps followed by e4). Alter- natively, we know already that early moves by Black's c8-bishop can sometimes be met by pas Wh3 with an attack on the b7-square. Both of these themes arise after the following two moves: a) 3 exd5 (White chooses a gentle way to proceed, immediately establishing a central ma- jority of pawns) 3....xbl (this capture is Black’s idea, so as to prevent White from achieving the powerful centre that would arise after 3...Wxd5 4 2c3, when e4 will follow, even after 4...We6 513) 4 Wade (4 Exbl Wxd5 attacks White's pawn on 2, so White interpolates this check) 4...c6 (4...Wd7 5 Wxd7+ Axd7 6 Bxbl leaves White with the bishop-pair and central major- ity; for example, 6...Agf6 7 &d2 Bxd5 8 e4 4)5f6 9 13) 5 Bxb) Wad 6 £3 (D). Without looking at the theory of this position in depth, we can see how powerful White's cen- tre is about to become if Black waits a move and permits White to play e4. Then White’s two bishops will rule the board. So let's briefly look over Black’s most obvious continuation: 6...e5 (note that when playing against the two bishops and with no weaknesses in the position, Black usually wants to transform the pawn-structure and create opportunities for his knights; among several other variations favouring White are 6...Dd7 7 €4 DE 8 exd5 Axad 9 dxc6 bxc6 10 2.03! and 6...Af67 e4 Axed 8 Bcd WIS 9 fxed Wxed+ 10 Ae2 Wxbi 11 Wh3! with various threats including 12 Wxb7 and 12 2.43 Wal 13 0-0; in the latter case Black's queen won't es- cape) 7 dxeS Dd7 8 £4 Ac5 (8...AxeS 9 e4) 9 ed! Wa7 10 Wes Kd8 11 Me? with an extra pawn and the bishop-pair. The basic idea here is, that unless some tactic by Black changes the overall dynamic of the game, White’s centreQUEEN’S GAMBIT DECLINED 15 and two bishops will grant him the long-term advantage, b) Even though 3 cxd5 gave White the ad- vantage, much more aggressive is 3 Wb3! (D), following the rule that when Black’s bishop moves from c8, look at attacks on the queenside In fact 3 Wb3 seems to be a virtual refutation of the Baltic (with the usual disclaimer that anything can change). Since the play that en- sues is essentially tactical (and rather chaotic), it isn’t particularly instructive to demonstrate all the details, Nevertheless, we have a situation in which capturing a pawn on b7 is followed by aggressive use of White’s queen rather than a retreat to safety. This is a theme enunciated at various points in this book. So I shall show only the theoretically most critical move 3...e5!? (Black lashes out with aggressive intent; the usual problems that crop up when his early sortie by the c8-bishop is met by Wb3; for ex- ample, 3...c6? 4 cxd5 Dxd4?? loses to 5 Wad; instead, 3...b6 4 cxd5 Af6 5 Ac3 e6 6 S25 keeps White a clear pawn ahead; and still worse is 3.,.Wc8? 4 cxdS Df6 5 £3! with et next) 4 Wxb7 Ad7 5 43! exd4 (these moves are hard to improve upon; for example, 5...dxe4 6 e4 exdd 7 Dd5 Bb8 8 Axc7+ He7 9 Web) 6 xd5 Bd6 and now 7 Df3! (D) is simpler and more effective than 7 e4!?, although in my opinion both moves ultimately lead to winning games. A critical variation goes 7.,.2c5 8 Dxe7+ Wexe7 (8...2xc7 9 Wh5+) 9 Wxa8+ Se7 10 Was &e6 11 Wxd4 Af6 12 b4! and wins, No- tice how keeping the queen in the enemy camp disturbed Black's development. I discussed this in Volume 1. Albin Counter-Gambit 14 d52c4e5!? This is another counterattacking defence that refuses to acknowledge the need to defend against cxd5, It is a more serious challenge to the Queen’s Gambit than the second moves of the preceding two variations. Black sacrifices a pawn following 3 dxe5 d4! and hopes that the cramping effect of his advanced pawn will limit White’s pieces while giving him freer de- velopment. There normally follows 4 Af3 26 (D). Unlike the 2nd-move variations seen above, White has neither an ideal centre nor tactical threats. But he does have an extra pawn and good development. White has a choice between 5 g3 and 5 Abd? (moves like 5 a3 are also played but held in lesser regard). This is not a16 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS theoretical tome, but it’s my opinion (and al- most all theoreticians and players concur) that Black will not quite achieve full compensation. ‘The reasons for this are concrete and explicable only by investigating the actual variations. But one way of thinking about itis that White, hav- ing the privilege of the first move and relatively logical places to put his pieces, is likely to achieve one advantage or another if and when Black takes time to regain his pawn, whereas White's position is sufficiently solid and free of weaknesses that he should be able to resist a brute-force attack. Nevertheless, this verdict is hardly etched in stone given the activity of Black’s pieces. There is in fact no fundamen- tal chess principle that ensures the superiority of either 2...e5 or 2...26, in spite of their oppos- ing characters. What are each side’s strategies in the Albin Counter-Gambit? In general (but not always) Black's chances lie with a direct kingside at- tack (versus 5 g3, for example, he can play Re6/t5/e4, ...Wd7, ...0-0-0, ...h3 and ...h5- h4), or with a central initiative usually associ- ated with ...0-0-0 and ...d3 or ...{6. Recently, Black's attention has turned to ....\ge7-26. For White, a variation that promises an advantage, albeit a limited one, begins with 5 bd2, when White has ideas of attacking the d4-pawn by means such as @bd2-b3 and/or b4 and &b2; this is causing Black some problems at present. White’s oldest and most popular plan is to de- velop by 5 g3 followed by 6 &g? and 7 0-0 Then, after Black commits to ...0-0-0, White can attack via b4, often playing this as a pawn sacrifice to open queenside lines. One standard attacking idea for White involves moves like b5 and Wad. The move b4 may also support the simple idea of £b2 and @b3, attacking Black's d-pawn. Versus ...S24, ...Wd7 and ...0-0-0, White will often play the move ¥b3 (without 4) to gain threats against Black’s vulnerable b7-square. All this is time-consuming, how- ever, and the simple ...2\ge7-g6 plan challenges its effectiveness. Naturally there are other strategies for both sides. In this sort of position featuring attacks and forcing moves, there is no substitute for careful study, which requires independent re- search. I won't be able to guide you through that maze, but here are a couple of excerpts, beginning with the traditional 1 d4.d5 2 4 e5 3 dxeS d4 4 D3 Ac6 5 g3: a) The old main line was 5...&g4 6 &g2 Wd7, as in Kozlovskaya-Mosionzhik, USSR 1971: 7 231? (7 0-0 &h3 8 Wb3 prepares the standard trick 8...0-0-07 9 e6! &xe6 10 Ae5) 7...0-0-0 8 0-0 \ge7 9 Wad &b8. This position isn’t entirely clear, but the game went well for White following 10 @bd2 Ag6 11 b4 h5 12 ¢5 &h3? (D). 13 e6! (the same tactic) 13....8.xe6 (13...Hxe6 14 Dg5) 14 b5 Dce5 15 c6 with a terrific attack. b) Practice over the last five years has been dominated by 5...Age7; for example: bl) 6 &g5 (depending upon the specifics, it can be favourable for White to exchange pieces, to reduce both Black’s attacking chances and his ability to win his pawn back) 6..Wd7!? (6...h6 7 &xe7 Gxe7 8 Sg? 0-0 9 Abd? with the idea %b3 is probably a tad better for White) 7 &xe77! (7 h4! with the idea £h3 is promis- ing; White will probably make the exchange on e7 later) 7...Axe7 8 Bg? 0-0 9 0-0 Ba8! 10 Dod2 Web 11 We2 DxeS 12 Had] c5! 13 Axes ‘Wxe5, Kunte-Sales, Kuala Lumpur 2005. Black has recovered his pawn and has the two bish- ops. Although White's pieces are well-placed he stands a little worse. 2) 6 Abd? a5!? (a late addition to Black's arsenal, appropriate in several positions) 72 g2 a4 8 Ded Dg6 9 ApS sb4+ 10 Vfl Le7 11 Axe? DgxeT 12 eS a3 13 bxa3?! (13 bal! xb4 14 Dxdd leaves White with somewhat better prospects) 13...0-0 14 Ab3 Ag6 15 Abxd4 \cxe5 with equality, Asgeirsson-Kristjansson, Reykjavik 2005.QUEEN’S GAMBIT DECLINED 17 b3) 6 &g2 Ag6 7 g5 (there have been nu- merous games with 7 0-0 AgxeS 8 DixeS Axe and Black has held his own; balanced play fol- lowed 7 Wad Sb4+ 8 Dbd2 0-0 9 0-0 a5 10 a3 eT 11 Hdl DexeS 12 DxeS DxeS 13 D3 Dxf3+ 14 Sxf3 Ll6 15 c5!? We7 16 LF4? gS 17 Sd2 c6 {17...g4!} 18 We2 a4 in Khenkin- Morozevich, Mainz (rapid) 2005) 7...Wd7 8 0-0 h6 9 24 Axf4 10 gxf4, and now the typically dynamic idea 10...g5! (D). 11 Qbd2 (a later game Mlynek-Hasan, Brno 2005 saw 11 e3 gxf4 12 exd4 Be8 13 hI Exg2!? 14 eG! fxe6 15 dexg? e5 16 Axe5 Wh3+ 17 BhI DxeS 18 dxeS £d7 19 Dc3 0-0-0 20 £3 cS; then Black has definite attacking chances but he is a pawn and exchange down) 11...gxf4 12 Ded He7 13 Wd2 Wed 14 Shi VES 15 S)xd4? Bd8 16 DxfS Bxd2 17 Dxe7 Sxe7 18 &)xd2 Wxe2 with a winning game for Black, Gelfand-Morozevich, Monte Carlo (Amber blindfold) 2004. Of course it’s entirely unclear who was better after 10...g5 or, indeed, earlier in the game. Needless to say, these examples are merely indicative of typical themes rather than best play. Chigorin Defence 1 d4 d5 2.4 26 (D) The Chigorin Defence is increasingly popu- lar and is currently considered a legitimate at- tempt to gain equality. It could even command. its own section because the positional and stra- tegic themes associated with it are so varied. Right away we can see that 2...2c6 is unique in that it both develops a piece and attacks White's d-pawn. That means that the positional threat set up by 2 ¢4, that is, 3 cxdS Wxd5 4 Dc3, doesn’t work after 2...Ac6 3 exd5 Wxd5 4 \c3? because of 4...Wxd4. Black’s 2nd move also sets up the advance 3...e5. A primary idea behind the Chigorin is rapid development: Black will rush his bishops to squares like g4 and b4, his king’s knight to £6 or 7, and he will castle rapidly, either kingside or queenside. This is of- ten necessary because White will have played cxd5 at some early point to gain a central ma- jority and, given time to breathe, will march his, centre pawns forward to drive away Black's pieces. In many lines Black needs to pin and/or capture knights on c3 and f3 in order to stop this expansion from taking place or at least delay it. For example, after 3 cxd5 Wxd5 4e3 5 5Ac3, Black has given himself the opportunity for 5....8b4 and can maintain the queen on d5. Or, after 3 @\f3 (renewing the idea of 4 cxd5 WxdS 5 @c3), Black will play 3...Sg4, and if 4 cxd5, 4..2xf3 5 gxf3 Wrd5 follows, when again 6 )c3? loses the d-pawn. Therefore White might play 6 3, threatening 7 &\c3 for real, but after 6...e5, Black is once more ready for 7 @c3 bd, Such a strategy has two main problems. It of- ten necessitates the exchange of one or both bishops for knights, thus presenting White with the bishop-pair. Moreover, as described, White will gain a central majority at some point; in combination with two bishops, mobile pawns can be devastating. For example, this pairing of two bishops and broad centre just about inv dates the Baltic Defence, as described above (of course the Baltic also has tactical problems).18 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS The difference here is a matter of specifies and timing. In the Chigorin, Black is normally able to inflict weaknesses in White's position as the play develops. If not, his lead in develop ‘ment can sometimes produce attacking chances, or force advantageous transformations of the pawn-structure. Here are some game excerpts representing a small fraction of Chigorin Defence themes. As with any aggressive system, specific study of variations is necessary if you don't want to be rudely surprised. We'll start with the classic Pillsbury-Chi- gorin, St Petersburg 1895, hardly the latest the- ory but with a few nice ideas from the man whose name the defence bears: 1 d4 d5 2 4 Deb 3 D3 Led 4 cxd5 Axf3 5 dxc6 Lxc6 6 D3 €6 7 e4 Sibd 8 £3 £5 (D). 9 €5%! (in order to protect the pawn on e4 White concedes the d5 outpost to Black; White should play the dynamic counterattack 9 &c4! with some typical play going 9...4h4+! 10 g3 Wh3 11 Wb3! &xc3+ 12 bxc3 Wg2 13 Efl fxe4 14 &xe6, when Breutigam suggests the equally dynamic 14,.)f6! 15 2£7+?! dB 16 2.959! €3! 17 &xc3 &xf3 18 2F27 BB; Black seems to be doing quite well in this variation starting with 9...1Wh4+ and 10...Wh3) 9...Ae7 10 a3 &a5 11 &c4 &d5 (Black keeps occupy- ing the light squares, a colour-complex strategy that often occurs in the Chigorin) 12 Wa4+ 6 13 £43 W6! (threatening ...2b3!) 14 &c2 Wa6 15 SdI Sc4 16 £40-0-0 17 &e3 Dds (D). The culmination of a typical Chigorin De- fence light-square strategy. After 18 Ad? Ab6 19 We2 Bxd4 20 Bcl £43 21 3 Acd, Black went on to win. Kasparov-Smyslov, Vilnius Ct (11) 1984 shows us the flip side. White's strategy is sim- ple: take over the centre and attack with the bishops! 1 d4 d5 2 23 Ac6 3 c4 Bed 4 cxd5 xE3 5 gxt3 Wrd5 6 €3 05 7 De3 bs 8 Ld? &xc3 9 bxc3 Wd6 10 Eb] b6 (D). It looks as though White’s centre can’t ad- vance but Kasparov found the idea 11 £417 ext 12 e4, establishing a powerful centre. White also has two very active bishops, but he is a pawn down. The game continued 12...Age7 13, ‘WES 0-0 14 S.xf4 Wa3?! (14...Web! is a typical attempt to grab the light squares: 15 d5 @\xd5 16 Bcd Btek, 15 Be? £5 16 eS Wxa2 17 0-0 Bad8 18 &g5 Web or 15 Axc7 Wxa2 16 Hdl Hac8 17 @g3 £5 18 @h3 Wed 19 e57! Dd5) 15 Be2 £517 160-0 fxed? 17 Wxed Wrc3 18 Be3! Wa3 (else Bbc1) 19 2d3! Wd6 (the dishop- pair are overwhelming Black's position; afterQUEEN'S GAMBIT DECLINED 19 16 20 &ic4+ followed by d5 White wins a piece) 20 Wxh7+ £7 21 BbS Axd4 22 Wes? (after some complications, 22 S.xd4 Wxd4 23 Bg5! wins) 22...Rad8! 23 Sxd4 Wxd4 (D). 24 DAS+! @xfS 25 WafS+ de8 26 Wh7+ 7 'h-'h. As shown in the notes, however, Black could probably have equalized before White achieved a winning position We get a slightly more up-to-date look in Flear-Miladinovié, Athens 1999: 1 d4 d5 2 ¢4 Deb 3 cxdS Wxd5 4 €3 e5 5 Ac3 Ab4 6 Bd? kxc3 7 Bixc3 exdd 8 De? (over the last few years, this position has occurred more than any other in the Chigorin) 8...Af6 9 Axd4 0-0 10 ps We5! (D). And this one! After scores of games no one seems to know what's happening in this fash- ionable line, although Black has his share of wins. The game went 11 @)xc7 Sg4 12 Wb3 Bad8 13 h3 2c8! 14 Whs We6 15 Axt6 ext6 16 Zcl! Wed! with great complications. An- other case of very rapid development on Black's part, in this instance in return for a pawn. Don’t forget the bishops and centre. Wells- Shannon, Hastings 1988/9 makes the point again: 1 d4 d5 2 c4 Aco 3 DF3 gd 4 cxdS x13 5 gxt3 Wrd5 6 €3 e5 7 De3 Lb4 8 Ad? Rxc3 9 bxc3 exdd 10 exdd Dge7 11 Bgl 0-07 12 f4 Bfe8 13 &g2 (D) 13..We6 14 d5! AxdS 15 &xd5 Wxd5 16 Exg7+! G18 17 &c3 with a strong attack. After all that, let’s return to the standard Queen’s Gambit Declined, which is defined by 1 d4 d5 2.4 e6. As an introduction to the main lines analysed in this chapter, we'll walk through. the first moves. 3. Ze3 (D) This is White’s most obvious and natural continuation, increasing his control over the key squares dS and e4.20 MASTERING THE CHESS OPENINGS Move-order issues permeate the Queen's Gambit Declined. As I wrote this chapter, it got more and more cluttered with move-order sub- tleties, I felt that they shouldn't interfere too greatly with the presentation of the most impor- tant material, especially keeping in mind that many readers may be unfamiliar with the open- ing, Nevertheless I have to address a limited set of options over the next few moves, especially if they involve elementary moves that you should ayoid if you want to play a particular variation that I've written about, I think that most moder- ately experienced players will appreciate hav- ing some guideposts as we move towards the actual systems that we'll be examining. For amore thorough treatment, I have placed an extra section at the end of this chapter that deals with the more complex details. It talks about what transpositions and independent paths can result from playing one order of moves or another, even if they seem to be heading for the same position, Experienced players may wish to take a look at that section if they need clarifi- cation about this or that path through the jungle. However, I want to emphasize that you can skip all of the explanations about move-orders and not worry about them until after you've read the meat of this chapter. They may not be so vital until you have played the Queen's Gambit Declined for a while as White or as Black, If it’s a question of doing so or giving up on this wonderful and instructive opening, by all means jump ahead to the section ‘Early Commitment’ below, or even ‘Classical Varia- tions’ below that. All right, let’s jump into some whys and wherefores. Many players like the Exchange Variation of the Queen’s Gambit when they're playing White; in fact, it is the most popular choice of all against the Queen’s Gambit, That variation normally begins with 3 c3 Ato 4 cxd5 exd5. Is there any reason why White wouldn't want to play the immediate 3 cxd5 exdS (D) instead? The answer is that from the resulting position White cannot force a transpo- sition into that form of Exchange Variation. This requires a fairly complicated digres- sion. To repeat, the sequence actually called the Exchange Variation begins 1 d4 d5 2 c4 &6 3 2\c3 Df6 4 cxd5 exd5 and has its own lengthy section in this chapter (in fact, the move 5 £25 is also part of what some call the traditional Ex- change Variation). But if White tries to get to that position by 3 cxd5 exd5 4 c3, Black can choose moves other than 4...f6, The most useful of these is probably 4...c6. Then of course White cannot play 5 &g5?? without losing the bishop. But the alternate bishop move 5 &f4 hasn’t much punch, because Black can oppose the bishop by 5...2d6 if he wants to. Another perfectly satisfactory move for Black after 5 Rid is 5.265. What if, after 3 cxd5 exd5 4 Dc3 c6, White rejects 5 £4 and plays the natural move 5 13? This still isn’t ideal for someone who likes the white side of the main lines of the Ex- change Variation, because after 5 2f3, Black has a good move in 5....£f5, and then if White plays 6 Wb3, Black can comfortably answer by 6...Hb6. By comparison, you might ask why 5...@5 isn’t a good move in our ‘real’ Ex- change Variation above (1 d4 d5 2 4 e6 3 Dc3 M6 4 cxd5 exd5 5 Sg5); the answer is that White can play 6 Wb3 (D):