100% found this document useful (1 vote)
605 views194 pagesGlenn Flear - Grandmaster Chess
Glenn Flear - Grandmaster Chess
Uploaded by
Lucas AntonioCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
100% found this document useful (1 vote)
605 views194 pagesGlenn Flear - Grandmaster Chess
Glenn Flear - Grandmaster Chess
Uploaded by
Lucas AntonioCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 194
GLENN FLEAR Grandmaster
Chess
Glenn Flear CADOGAN BOOKS DISTRIBUTION
UK/EUROPE/AUSTRALASIA/ASIA/AFRICA
Distribution: Grantham Book Services Ltd, Isaac Newton Way,
Alma Park Industrial Estate, Grantham, Lincs NG31 9SD
Tel: (01476) 67421 Fax: (01476) 590223
USA/CANADA|LATIN AMERICA/JAPAN
Distribution: Paramount Distribution Center, Front and Brown
Streets, Riverside, New Jersey 08075, USA
Tel: (609) 461 6500 Fax: (609) 764 9122
First published 1995 by Cadogan Books plc, London House,
Parkgate Road, London SW11 4NQ
Copyright © 1995 Glenn Flear
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission in
writing from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British
Library.
ISBN 1 85744 100 1
Cover photographs by Mark Huba
Cover design by Brian Robins
Typesetting by B. B. Enterprises
Printed in Great Britain by BPC Wheatons Ltd, Exeter
A CADOGAN CHESS BOOK
Chief Advisor: Garry Kasparov
Editor: Andrew Kinsman
Russian Series Editor: Ken Neat
For a complete catalogue of CADOGAN CHESS books please write
to: Cadogan Books plc, London House, Parkgate Road,
London SW11 4NQ. Tel: (0171) 738 1961 Fax: (0171) 924 5491 Contents
10
Introduction
A Brief Summary of 1993
The PCA Cycle
The FIDE Cycle
Quickplay and Novelty Tournaments
Important Round Robins
Open Tournaments
Women in 1994
National Championships
Team Chess
Other Significant Events
1994 at a Glance
Index of Complete Games
21
42
53
114
133
151
154
173
190
191 Introduction
This book is a look at modern grandmaster chess, a world of exciting
and exotic places (although not always!), weird and wonderful charac-
ters, and of course some terrific games of chess. I have detailed the
main happenings of 1994 and picked out those games that shaped the
chess year, and I hope the reader finds my selection of games and
events both representative and enjoyable. However, it is merely a se-
lection of the thousands of games and hundreds of tournaments that
make up professional chess in the 1990s, and I hope that the result is
both informative and a useful source of reference.
In recent years there has a been tremendous expansion in chess lit-
erature; there are now dozens of teaching manuals and huge theoretical
tomes on every popular opening. Such books are necessary but I per-
sonally found in my youth that the most enjoyable books to read were
games collections, or those covering tournaments and matches. Nowa-
days these are somewhat out of fashion and this collection of the best
games by the best players introduces this type of book in a modem
setting.
One possible criticism of my approach is that magazines already tell
the story of the recent past. This is true, but each periodical gears its
coverage to its readership, such as over-emphasis on domestic tourna-
ments, and I am frequently dissatisfied with the quality of their anno-
tations. I have tried to be objective in annotating games and in cover-
ing controversial events, so if the reader objects to something that I
have written then I apologize in advance.
Glenn Flear
January 1995 1 ABrief Summary of 1993
A look at 1994 naturally needs a beginning and where better to start
than 1993!
The FIDE World Championship cycle is currently a three-year af-
fair, and 1993 was the year in which the Zonals and Interzonals took
place. Boris Gelfand won the Biel Interzonal outright and Paul van der
Sterren was the shock qualifier. The top ten (including Viswanathan
Anand who scraped in at the death) joined Jan Timman and Artur
Yusupov (semi-finalists from the previous cycle) in the first round of
the FIDE Candidates matches in January (see Chapter 3).
Meanwhile the previous cycle was continuing; Nigel Short edged
out Timman 712-51 and then national adulation turned to shock and
confusion as Garry Kasparov and Short broke away from FIDE to form
the Professional Chess Association (PCA). Throughout the year there
was much speculation, rumour and bad feeling but the result of it all
was the establishment of a parallel World Championship cycle.
Kasparov beat Short 12'/2-7'/ after an explosive start, followed by a
tather tame end to the match, to become the first PCA World Cham-
pion. Karpov and Timman filled the void created by FIDE’s disqualifi-
cation of the rebels and Karpov won equally convincingly by a score of
12)-8'h.
We now had two world champions; FIDE’s Karpov, for the second
time(!), as a result of the holder relinquishing the crown, and the
PCA’s Kasparov, still widely recognized as the strongest player.
There was little general support for the rebels’ action but FIDE
chose to drop them from the international rating list, a move seen by
many as petty. At first, the PCA was almost universally viewed with
suspicion but when their own ‘alternative’ cycle (see Chapter 2) got off
the ground in December most top players participated. Further, with
the announcement that a series of PCA-run quickplay events (well
sponsored by Intel) would take place in 1994 (see Chapter 4) and the
introduction of a PCA rating list, the rebels had to be taken seriously.
Kasparov had overall a good year in 1993, winning Linares (the
world’s strongest tournament) with Ist Kasparov on 10 points, 2nd= 6 Grandmaster Chess
Anand and Karpov on 8/2, but Linares 1994 (see Chapter 5) was to be
a different story.
The Women’s World Championship final was a very one-sided af-
fair; Xie Jun demolishing Nana Ioseliani 8'/-2'/2. There would cer-
tainly have been more media interest if Zsuzsa Polgar had been play-
ing, but she had squandered a seemingly invincible lead in the Candi-
dates final allowing a fortunate Nana Ioseliani to win the play-off.
Judit, her younger sister, made further progress in 1994, including the
best ever result by a woman (see Chapter 5). Developments in
women’s chess are otherwise covered in Chapter 7.
In 1993, the Junior World Champion was Mladinovic, from ‘the rest
of Yugoslavia’, and the Girls’ Champion Churtsidse of Georgia; both
came from war-weary lands. It’s hard to explain how the former Soviet
republic of only five and a half million people can produce so many of
the world’s leading female players.
Team chess (see Chapter 9) can be a lucrative source of income for
the top echelon, especially in Germany where the ‘Bundesliga’ is well
established. France has also developed team chess to the extent that
Kasparov and Karpov both participated in the league in 1993, Lyon-
Oyannax, the European Champions of 1993, were ‘French’, although
the entire team of six (Lautier, Anand, Shirov, Dorfman, Vaiser and
Sharif) could manage only one French parent between them!
The most important team event of 1993 was the World Team
Championships, held as always in Lucerne, Switzerland. The USA
surprisingly clinched first, ahead of the Ukraine with Russia only third,
but nations such as the USA and Israel have gradually been strength-
ened by the arrival of several ex-Soviet grandmasters, indeed Larry
Christiansen was the only ‘home-grown’ American.
The last major development of the year was the PCA Qualifier in
Groningen, which is the starting point of the next chapter. Throughout
the last few months of the year there was much speculation that the
event would not take place, which might have been because of genuine
teething problems or disinformation by the chess media, but when it
finally got under way it was clear that the PCA meant business.
Ironically, one year later the Greek government and FIDE had
problems seeing eye-to-eye over the financing of the intended Thessa-
loniki Olympiad and the much-maligned PCA stepped-in to save the
event. So in December 1994 the Moscow Olympiad came about (thank
you Garry!) and the political playing field has again had its goal posts
realigned. But now I’m jumping ahead; for the purposes of our story
we start with the PCA Qualifier over Christmas in Groningen. 2 The PCA Cycle
‘The PCA had come into being as a result of wrangling and power-
struggling between some of the world’s top names. If as 1994 ap-
proached it could get its own cycle into motion then the lay observer
could then at least see something positive coming out of all the politics
i.c. more top-quality chess.
Most of the leading grandmasters seemed to be willing to participate
in both World Championship cycles; hysterical animosity between the
two rival camps was not shared by players more naturally concerned
by prize funds. The Intel Corporation had come up with over $200,000
for the Groningen ‘Interzonal’ plus the guarantee of megabucks for the
seven qualifiers, so it was no surprise that three-quarters of the world’s
fifty-odd 2600 players were there.
Groningen in December 1993 was to be the first tournament run by
the Professional Chess Association but it bore great similarity to
FIDE’s Biel Interzonal run a few months earlier. The main difference
is that the FIDE cycle has an additional earlier stage; the regional
Zonal tournaments which allow lesser mortals the chance to qualify.
PCA qualifier, Groningen
The qualifiers:
M.Adams 2630 ENG 7'h/11
V.Anand 2725 IND 7'h
G.Kamsky 2645 USA 7
V.Kramnik 2710 RUS 7
S.Tiviakov 2635 RUS 7
B.Gulko 2635 USA 7
O.Romanishin 2615 UKR 7
NYAWawn—
Those in the world’s top ten that didn’t make it:
8 A.Shirov 2685 LAT 62
23 E.Bareev 2660 RUS Sh 8 Grandmaster Chess
45 Kir.Georgiev 2660 BUL 4
The seven qualifiers were joined by Nigel Short for the next stage.
The Trump Tower, New York in June was the venue for the PCA
Candidates matches, quarter-finals.
PCA Candidates quarter-finals, New York (matchplay)
G.Kamsky V.Kramnik Vh-1p
V.Anand O.Romanishin 5-2
N.Short B.Gulko 4-4
Play-off (30 mins each)
N.Short sel= B.Gulko 2h-1'2
M.Adams 1100=10= _ S.Tiviakov 4-4
Play-off (30 mins each)
M.Adams =s===]1 S.Tiviakov BA-2h
(n.b. throughout the book the reporting of match results has been
presented in standard form. Thus in Kamsky-Kramnik, Kamsky won the
first two games, then there were three draws and Kamsky won the last
game, etc.)
The United States was a home draw for two players: Kamsky, who
won the first two games, both of which were rather wild encounters,
and thereby essentially finished-off Kramnik; and Gulko, who took an
early lead against Short, only to be caught and then lose in the lottery
of the play-offs.
England’s two participants showed their prowess at half-hour chess.
Many would feel that half-an-hour for all one’s moves is an inappro-
priate way to decide such important matches but it’s certainly exciting
for the public.
Anand’s one-sided match was the only predictable result. He plays
astonishingly quickly and even won one game (on time!) after using
only 24 minutes of his allotted two hours.
So no players from the former Soviet Union (Kamsky was born in
Tatarstan in Russia but defected some years ago and is now considered
American) survived to the semi-finals. This fact alone virtually guaran-
teed Western media interest and another high profile final when Kas-
parov meets the winner of the series in 1995 for the PCA title.
When the pairings were made Kramnik had been widely tipped to
beat Kamsky and along with Anand was strongly favourite to get a The PCA Cycle 9
chance at Kasparov. His demise at the hands of Kamsky became less
of a surprise with the benefit of hindsight; the American proving him-
self to be exceptionally good at matchplay and the only survivor in
both cycles as the year came to a close.
The Candidates semi-finals of September in Linares saw the follow-
ing matches
PCA Candidates semi-final, Linares (matchplay)
SA-Vh
Sh-1'h
N.Short
M.Adams
111011=
111=1==
G.Kamsky
V.Anand
English hopes of a Short-Adams final were rudely dashed as both
players were completely overwhelmed, making the latter stages of the
semi-finals almost irrelevant.
Nigel Short’s form in 1994 has been well below his best, perhaps he
needs to set new goals as financial insecurity and his career peak are
probably both behind him. He has to rediscover his enthusiasm for the
game if he is to maintain his top ten ranking.
Michael Adams also never came into his match and didn’t seem to
really have any confidence in his defence to 1 e4 (he tried four open-
ings in four games). Both he and Kramnik will go further next time
given more thorough preparation in their approach.
So will it be Kamsky or Anand? In their recent match in the FIDE
cycle (see Chapter 3) Kamsky sensationally came back from a two-
point deficit to turn the tables. Will ‘Vishy’ (Anand) be that much
tougher next time?
Game One
Michael Adams-Sergei Tiviakov
2nd match game
PCA Candidates quarter-finals, New York 1994
Michael Adams originally comes _ lished on the international scene,
from Truro in Cornwall, England.
In his early years he certainly got
to know the British Rail network,
covering the length and breadth
of the country in his hunger for
the game. Once he became estab-
a base in London, with easy ac-
cess to Heathrow Airport, became
imperative, and he now lives a
stone-throw away from his good
friend and second, Grandmaster
Julian Hodgson. This liaison has 10 Grandmaster Chess
helped both players to advance;
and the following game is an ex-
ample of their meticulous re-
search.
Having won the first game, his
first ever victory over Tiviakov,
Michael Adams must have ap-
proached this game with some
confidence.
1 @& 5
2 DPB d6
3 RbS+ Ac
I believe that 3...2d7 is a
sounder choice.
4 0-0 g4
The Russian has had some suc-
cess with this line but he must
already have suspected that his
opponent had something new
prepared.
5 h3!
Although 5 c3, after 5... Wb6, is
similar to the game, the inclusion
of first 5 h3 &h5 and only then 6
c3 tums out to be very important,
as we shall see. After 5 c3 Wb6
one of Tiviakov’s previous games
continued as follows: 6 2a4 Af6
7 d4 0-0-0 8 &xc6 Wxc6 9 d5
Wa6 10 Hel e6 11 Aad Ad7 12
£4 Be7 13 h3 VhS 14 c4 g5 15
SRh2 g4 and Black had good play;
Ulibin-Tiviakov, Oakham 1992.
Sie 2hS
5...2xf3 gives up the impor-
tant bishop cheaply, e.g. 6 Wxf3
e6 7 d3 Dge7 8 &g5 Wd7 9 c3 a6
10 a4 Ag6 114d2 b5 12 Rc2
Re7 13 Re3 0-0 14 WhS d5 15
exd5S exd5 16 d4 and White has
some advantage due to his light-
square pressure; Larsen-
Bronstein, Moscow 1962.
6 3
The alternative 6 c4!? was tried
by another of Tiviakov’s oppo-
nents, but after 6...Af6 7 g4!?
Rg6 8 eS dxeS 9 AxeS Hc8 10
Dc3 6 11 Wa4 We7 12 Bel 2d6
Black had good counterplay
against White’s loose kingside;
Oll-Tiviakov, St Petersburg 1993.
Gitte Wh6
Adams and Hodgson (his sec-
ond) had anticipated this varia-
tion in their pre-match prepara-
tion. The rest of the game should
be a good lesson for those who
always play the same way and
leave themselves open to pre-
pared improvements.
7 a6
8 Rat We7
9 44 bs
White can now retreat to b3
but, with the pin on the a4-e8 di-
agonal then broken, the pressure
would be off.
10 xb!
An enterprising piece offer
which, of course, would have The PCA Cycle ll
failed without the preparatory 5
h3 &h5; pushing the bishop back
and therefore denying Black re-
course to a defence based on
w= d7,
10. axb5
11 = &xb5 0-0-0
White threatened 12 d5 so
Black is forced to castle into open
space.
12 ba!
A powerful novelty, worked
out by Julian Hodgson, which
essentially wins the game.
Less convincing is 12 Wad4
when 12...2b8 13 dxc5 &xf3 14
gxf3 dxc5 15 @f4 e5 (15... Wxf4
16 2a6+ looks immediately
drawn as Black can hardly escape
the threat of perpetual check) 16
fdi is rather unclear; Iskov-
Larsen, Copenhagen 1979.
13 gxf3
White has sacrificed a piece for
two pawns. Black’s kingside re-
mains undeveloped and White
threatens to open further lines
against Black’s king. Few players
would relish the task of defending
the black position.
aos Dos
14 Wad
After 14 bxc5 dxc5 15 Wa4 e6
White opens up the queenside for
the attack but also allows Black
to more space for his defence.
Instead, Adams is happy to allow
the centre to become blocked as
his opponent then suffers from
being severely cramped.
ove e4
15 d5!
Further restricting his oppo-
nent.
1S ww D6
16 =Re3 @ftd7
17 &c6 6
18 bs!
White is less concerned with
grabbing the c-pawn than carry-
ing out the threat of playing 19
b6.
18. exd5
19 exd5 Ab6
After 19...2e7 White wins af-
ter 20 b6! Axb6 21 Bxb6 Wxb6
22 Habl Wc7 23 Wa8 as there is
no defence to the threat of 24
Bb7 (23...2d7 is met by 24
&xd7+ &xd7 25 Hb7).
20 Wh4
White must avoid 20 Wa5? in
view of 20...Axd5! etc.
200 ww Re7
21 ad 26
22 «a5
Black is totally swamped.
220 we Axc6
23. bxc6 = DAxd5
24 WbhS de8 12 Grandmaster Chess
25 2b6 1-0
After 25...We7 26 Wa6+ (26
Wxd5 also wins) 26..b8 27
Zab! leads to mate. I suspect that
White’s new move (12 b4) al-
ready gave him a winning posi-
tion.
Game Two
Viadimir Kramnik-Gata Kamsky
2nd match game
PCA Candidates quarter-finals, New York 1994
Gata Kamsky’s father, Rustam,
was a boxer in his youth. His
rather abrasive approach towards
Gata’s opponents is more typical
of the fight game than the chess
world, but despite widespread
unpopularity Rustam has made
his son into a tough chess battler,
who is at home in many different
openings and types of positions.
In this game the world’s top
two under-20’s fight it out with
the American Gata Kamsky suc-
cessfully refuting Kramnik’s ag-
gression and taking a practically
decisive two-nil lead.
1 438 Af6
2 4
Kramnik’s move-order leads to
an English Opening, while
avoiding those variations follow-
ing 1 c4e5.
eee oes e6
3. D3 2b4
4 g3 0-0
5 Sg2 cS
6 0-0 Deb
7 da
The opening can also arise via
the Nimzo-Indian Defence, e.g. 1
d4 Df6 2 4 €6 3 Ac3 Qb4 4 g3
5 5 Df3 0-0 6 &g2 Ac6 7 0-0.
Pitted exd4!?
Kamsky introduces a double-
edged plan involving a timely
...xc3, crippling the white
queenside pawns at the risk of
problems on the dark squares. A
solid alternative is 7...d6 main-
taining the tension.
8 @xd4 We7
9 BDc2
If White doesn’t wish to allow
...&xc3 his last chance is to play
9 Dad(!?).
9
on Rxe3
10 bxc3 Had8
ll Rad d6
This particular position has The PCA Cycle 13
been seen before but is fairly un-
usual. In this variation, White has
two powerful bishops but the
doubled c-pawns give Black a
target for counterplay.
12 Ebi
A natural developing move
which had been previously sug-
gested by Tukmakov, who con-
tinues his analysis thus: 12...e5
13 De3 Re6 ‘unclear’
He also considers 12 @d4 and
after 12...De5 13 Wb3 Afd7 14
Wb4 Ac5 15 Db3 aS 16 Axa5
&d7 he again stops with the
ubiquitous unclear assessment. Is
White tangled-up (17 @xb7 Ba4)
or simply picking off pawns? The
variation is rich in possibilities
but probably White’s best try is
12 Wd2! when the continuation
12...We7 13 Bfdi d5 14 De3
dxc4 15 2d6 Wb6 16 Hab1 Wa6
17 Wb2 keeps Black rather pas-
sive, as in Ribli-Emst, Subotica
Interzonal 1987, which was
definitely better for White after
the further 17...2d5!? 18 Axd5
exd5 19 &c7 He8 20 Hxd5 &g4
21 Wxb7.
12... We7!
Getting off the a3-f8 diagonal
and preparing for play on the c-
file.
13° Add Dxd4
14 exd4!?
This pawn sacrifice is enter-
prising but risky and was no
doubt partially provoked by his
loss in the previous game and the
desire to immediately strike back.
Kramnik was probably not im-
pressed by the alternative 14
Wxd4 as 14.05 15 Wd3 Re6 16
Exb7 Wxc4 looks comfortable
for Black. There the bishops
compensate for the pawn weak-
nesses and the chances would be
more or less equal.
“4. Wxe4
15 Wd2 Wa6!
Covering the sensitive b7 and
d6 squares with gain of tempo.
16 =-Bb3 Eb8
Black is now ready for
17...S.d7 followed by 18...2.c6.
17 ea?!
This natural move is uncon-
vincing as the game continuation
suggests. Interesting is 17 g4!
intending to switch the rook on
b3 over to the kingside. After
17...2d7 (17...Axg4? fails to 18
WeS Df6 19 Hg3 winning im-
mediately) 18 g5, or 18 Zh3 first,
White has sufficient activity to
compensate his pawn deficit.
17 a7
18 Hel
White now only has vague
threats for the sacrificed pawn
but he must act quickly before the
American is fully deployed.
18 a4
19 Ef Ebc8
The intention is clear; to play
...ic2 when possible.
20 (Sf RbS
21. &h3 Wad
Again preparing the invasion
of c2.
22. «dd
Defending against the imme-
diate invasion by 22 Hc3 is pos- 14 Grandmaster Chess
sible, but this abandons hope of
mounting an attack on the king-
side, and further, 22...Xxc3 23
Wxc3 We4 24 WaS b6 25 Wxa7
Wxd4 26 We7 Ha8 leaves White
with absolutely no compensation
for his efforts.
22 ae Bc2
23 We3
23 Weg5 is clearly unsatisfac-
tory: 23...h6 24 Wh4 Be2 25
Exe2 (25 Hbl Hxe4 wins)
25...Wd1+ and Black wins.
230 we exd5
Good enough is 23...e5?! as
White’s attack would probably
fail, but 24 Bxf6 gxf6 25 Wh6
He2 26 Hcl! (rather than 26
£5? Bxel+ 27 Sg2 Rfl+ 28
&f3 Wd1+) could still cause a
few awkward moments.
24 «eS
Desperate but dangerous. Now,
after 24...dxe5 25 &e7 Black
would suffer from the opening up
of his king. However, Gata Kam-
sky was now able to coolly calcu-
late a long forced win despite the
tension of time trouble.
2a d4
25 Weg5(D)
Now comes a real blow.
2S ee Be2!
White is forced to sacrifice as
26 Hct HxeS is hopeless.
26 ~~ exf6 Bxel+
27 Qf Exfl+
28 «dg2 Melt!
29° ~$h3
Of course 29 &xgl Wd1+ 30
&g2 Wl is mate.
29 we Rd7+
Being a rook up is fine but
Black must still parry the mate!
30 ghd " 6
31 Whe = d3+
32 Era) Wxf4+!
The point of Black’s play; he
gives his queen but now it is
White’s king in the mating net.
33 Wxf4
After 33 gxf4 Black wins by
33...Hg4+ 34 @h3 Bgs+ 35 bh4
Eh5+ etc.
330 Zhi
34g hé!
Gaining time to surround the
White monarch as 35 Wxh6 is
met by 35...8xh2+.
35. ¢h3 gS
36 «=Wa4 d2!
37 Wxd2 «Bgl
383 &b5
0-1
White must give his queen to
stop 39...&f1 mating. An exciting
game which virtually finished off
Kramnik’s chances of reaching
the semi-finals. Grandmaster Chess 15
Game Three
Viswanathan Anand-Michael Adams
1st match game
PCA Candidates semi-finals, Linares 1994
‘Vishy’ Anand, a Hindu and
vegetarian, is a master tactician
and the quickest thinker and
player amongst the world elite. A
popular and friendly person, he
may lack the mean streak and
killer-instinct necessary, it seems,
to become world champion.
Very often the first game of a
match between two equally-
strong opponents can set the tone
of the whole contest.
1 e& D6
A surprise, but this experiment
wasn’t repeated in later games.
2&5 Das
3. «d4 d6
4 OB dxe5
The so-called Larsen variation
is less popular than either 4...26
and 4...&g4. Black provokes the
knight forward in order to seek its
later exchange.
5 @xe5 96
5...2d7?! can be met by the
aggressive 6 xf7 &xf7 7 Wh5+
Se6 8 4.
6 g3!?
This solid move was men-
tioned by Hort in 1980 but has
been largely ignored _ since.
Anand uses the idea to channel
the game away from likely pre-
match preparation.
6 &g7
7 Sg2 0-0
8 0-0 6
9 Hel R£5
10 3 BDa7
By delaying this move until
now, Black avoids anything un-
pleasant in the opening. Anand
has cautiously avoided any out-
right attempt at refutation and
settled for a nagging edge: pres-
sure on the semi-open e-file and
better central pawn deployment.
11 }P3!
Exchanges would ease Black’s
defence.
11. He8
12 Abd2
12... D6?!
Black would like to break out
with ....e7-e5, and if he can get
away with it then it should be
played. Can 12...e5!? be play-
able? White should try 13 @c4
(dull is 13 dxe5 AxeS 14 DAxeS 16 Grandmaster Chess
Bxe5 15 Exe5 Bxe5 16 Act
&g7 with a level position)
13...2g4 (after 13..exd4 14
EBxe8+ Wxe8 15 Ad6 Web 16
&xf5 Wxf5 17 Axd4 the bishop
pair guarantees a continuing edge
for White) 14 d6?! (14 dxe5! is
best when the continuation
14...Dxe5 15 DcxeS Rxe5 16
Wb3 probably forces 16...2xf3
conceding the bishop pair)
14.,.Be6 15 Dxb7 Wh6 16 Wb3
with interesting complications
favouring Black, e.g. 16...Sxf3
17 &xf3 exd4 18 Hxe6 fxe6 19
cxd4 2xd4 20 Wxb6 axb6 21
Dd6 Sf8 and despite the bishop
pair White is tied up. So 12...e5 is
playable but White can still claim
a pull (with 14 dxe5). After the
text move White puts a stop to
Black’s natural pawn-break and
Black is always on the defensive.
13. Ac4 We7
14 DeeS Dga?!
Adams again seeks the ex-
change of the strong central
knight but overlooks White’s
next. 14...2\d7 was a better way
of seeking exchanges.
15 @hd4!
This must have been underes-
timated by Adams; White now
gains a clearly superior game.
5... Dxe5
16 @xf5 —gxf5
17. dxe5—e6
Snatching a pawn by
17...2xe5? actually loses one
after 18 &xd5 cxd5 19 Wxd5
&g7 20 Wxf5 when White has a
clear pawn more. Otherwise
17...Mad8 18 We2 e6 changes
very little; White has his bishops
and Black’s kingside is com-
promised.
18 We2 e7
Michael decides on a slightly
passive regrouping strategy rather
than risk 18...b5 which would
maintain the d5 outpost at the risk
of further weaknesses.
19 f4 DAS
This seems like a waste of
time. He should have preferred
19...Had8 20 Re3 Hd7.
20 4
With the bishop pair against
him and space becoming a prob-
lem Michael has obviously lost
the opening stage. This depress-
ing scenario may have put him
off the Alekhine (for the time
being!) despite the improvement
at move twelve.
20 De7
21 Red Had8
22 «bd
After 22 c5 then 22...Ac8
avoids an immediate invasion
and, as in the game, Black will
delay or omit ...b7-b6 which
weakens the a8-h1 diagonal.
22 os 27
23 WE2 cB
24 «ad
The general expansion of the
queen’s wing is well supported
by the bishop pair. A refinement
is the exchange of one pair of
rooks by 24 Hadi or 24 Hedl
before the general queenside ad-
vance is implemented. This pre-
empts any counterplay that The PCA Cycle 17
Black’s doubled rooks on the d-
file might generate.
24 eds
25 ad
White is finally threatening 26
$2xa7 which up to now could
carlier have been met by ...b7-b6.
25 we f6!
Striking back at the centre is
Black’s best hope. Now that he is
better organized he can afford to
weaken the e6-point to liberate
his bishop.
26 exf6 Rxf6
27 Habl 23
28 sEfl a3
29 «Bhi
Necessary in view of the threat
29...Hxe3 30 Wxe3 2d4.
30 Bxaa
Black has been able to cause
some general mischief, tempo-
rarily distracting his opponent
from active operations. Now he
must decide how to recapture.
30 3xd4?
A poor move allowing White
to cut the communication be-
tween the black rooks.
Evidently 30...28xd4 was a
better try meeting 31 We2 by
31...\Wd7 (intending 32...2xc4 or
32...Ad6 followed by a later
...@e4) although with 32 c5! and
WeS to follow White keeps the
better prospects.
31 = ‘Efe!
The immediate 31 2d5 is less
clear after 31...cxd5 32 Wxd4
dxc4 with some play for the ex-
change.
31 we Wf7
31...2xc4 permits 32 We2 Ad6
33 Wxe6+ Yg7 34 We5+ Sg6 35
Ebdi when White has a powerful
attack.
32 a5! We7
32...84xd5 33 cxd5 exdS was
objectively better but 34 He5S
Dd6 35 Hoel De4 36 Wxa7 Whs
37 &p2 is also hopeless.
33 -Ke5
33 &xe6+ was simple and
good, but the text is stronger.
33 B4xd5
34 exd5 ~—s exd5
35 gd!
Moving in for the kill. Black
loses his queen if he captures the
g-pawn.
i Del
36 0 «-Exe6—s fixgd
37 Wh4 Bd7
38 «Ebel §=f8
395 1-0
The loss of the first game was
the beginning of a one-sided
match as the Indian grandmaster
convincingly outperformed the
Englishman. 18 Grandmaster Chess
Game Four
Gata Kamsky-Nigel Short
5th match game
PCA Candidates semi-finals, Linares 1994
For family reasons Nigel Short
has recently moved from London
to Greece. Perhaps the contro-
versy associated with his in-
volvement as a founder-member
of the PCA has affected him
more than he anticipated. Several
previously close colleagues con-
demned his actions, and this may
have affected his form. Certainly
the magic of his matchplay in
1992-93 has not been so evident
in the past twelve months.
Having dominated the first
three games, Kamsky’s progress
to the Candidates final had been
temporarily halted by a loss in the
fourth game. If Short was to have
a chance he could not afford to
lose another game.
1 d4 D6
2 4 e6
3 Ded
Kamsky has a very wide reper-
toire and is willing to play just
about anything. Short, on the
other hand, used to stick to only a
few variations. However, in re-
cent matches, to broaden his once
rather limited range of openings,
he has tried several defences to
the queen’s pawn. Nowadays, in
the computer-age, the top echelon
must adapt to rapid changes in
opening theory to stay ahead of
their contemporaries.
Siete &b4
The Nimzo-Indian has always
been in his repertoire despite
flirtations with the Dutch,
Queen’s Gambit Accepted and
Orthodox Queen’s Gambit.
4 3 cS
5 £d3 Ac6
6 Age2
The Hiibner variation (6 Af3
&xc3+ 7 bxc3 d6 with ...e6-e5 to
follow) has proven to be very
sound, Black gives up the bishop
but stations his central pawns on
dark squares. Indeed, the closed
centre often suits the ‘knight
pair’, so in recent years the text
move has been preferred.
6 cxd4
7 exd4 d5
8 ecxdS Axd5
9 00 Rd6
10 Ded Re7
ll a3
All this has been seen at
grandmaster level many times
before. White prepares the stan-
dard battery with his bishop on c2
and queen on d3. Black can avoid
immediate problems with ...g7-
g6, but this inevitably loosens his
control of some important dark
squares.
ites 0-0
12 &c2
Compared with many isolated The PCA Cycle 19
queen’s pawn positions the
knight on e2 is less active (than if
it were on the typical f3 square)
but White can still maintain some
early pressure by avoiding ex-
changes.
a2 atte es
Black could have tried
12...e5!? immediately _ hitting
back at the centre. Instead we
have a typical isolated queen’s
pawn (IQP) game.
13 Wd3 6
14 &he 6
15 Hadi
Black would like to steady
things down, exchange a few
pieces and exploit the long-term
weakness of the d4-isolani in the
ending. White has to use his tem-
porary activity to open up Black’s
king defences.
The alternative 15 Hac1 is less
critical as this can lead to possi-
ble rook exchanges on the c-file,
a course of action that would
generally suit the second player.
Semkov-Psakhis, Erevan 1988,
then continued 15...2b7 16 Hfdi
Hc8 17 Wg3 Do 18 Dgs Wd6
and White’s attack failed to
breakthrough the black defensive
set-up.
5... &b7
16 = Efel Ec8 (D)
17 2b3!
17 42c3 Da5 18 We3 Ac4 19
a4 2c6 20 &b3 was certainly
very complex in the game Shirov-
Psakhis, Klaipeda 1988. Black
won this encounter and Kamsky
must have prepared the text as a
x
N
>
a
“Y
WV
We
refinement. See also the game
Judit Polgar against Tiviakov
(Chapter 7) for another example
of this theme; the bishop rede-
ploys now that ...g7-g6 has been
provoked.
17. a6
After 17...0a5, 18 &a2 keeps
the black knight out of the impor-
tant c4 square. The bishop has
annoying pressure along the a2-
g8 diagonal.
18 4293
Avoiding exchanges that may
result from 18 2c3 and heading
towards the Englishman’s mon-
arch.
18 Db8?
It’s true that the knight was
rather in the way on c6 and rede-
ploying the beast to d7 improves
the scope of the queen’s rook and
bishop, but it’s all too slow. Bet-
ter is the prophylactic 18...2h4
avoiding White’s twentieth move
and even allowing further support
for his king by ...@ce7 and
DES.
19 «WE c7 20 Grandmaster Chess
Defending both b7 and
(indirectly) f7, however in view
of what now happens 19...2h4
should still have been tried.
20 @h5! = Ad7
20...gxh5? allows 21 Wg3+
winning.
21 ~=ihdé!
Intensifying the pressure. The
pawn will later go onwards to h5,
support a piece on g5 or play the
role of a decoy.
2 iw D6
21...2xh4 has been given
elsewhere as an improvement but
in fact White wins by force: 22
Dd6 He7 23 g3 Rf6 24 DAxb7
Exb7 25 &xd5 exdS 26 Axf6+!
(rather than 26 Wxd5? with only
an edge) 26...Axf6 27 Wxf6!
Exel+ 28 Hxel Wxf6 29 Hes
mate.
22 Dbxf6+ ADxf6
23—«d5!
A decisive line-opening blow.
There are now many options but
no defence:
a) 23...exd5 24 Axf6+ Rxf6
25 Wkxf6! and White mates in
three;
b) 23...Axd5 24 Bxd5 &xd5
25 Exd5 exdS (25...Wxd5 26
Df6+ etc.) 26 Df6+ Bxf6 27
Exe8+ Wxe8 28 Wxf6 Bcl+ 29
Sh2 Wh8+ 30 g3 concludes
neatly;
c) 23...e5 24 d6 &xe4 25 Hxed
&xd6 26 £5 pins and wins.
230 a Dxe4
24 = dxe6 £5
This is no defence but at least
Short makes it past move 25!
25° Hxd8 = Exd8
26 «=i 10
Enough is enough. Black only
has a rook and minor piece for
the queen and the enormous e6-
pawn. White will transfer his
queen to the al-h8 diagonal with
a quick mate. An excellent dis-
play in the handling of an IQP
position by Kamsky. 3 The FIDE Cycle
Since the Second World War, FIDE, the international chess federation,
has had total control over the World Championship. The events sur-
rounding the formation of the PCA have, for the first time, seen com-
petition in the form of an alternative cycle. The confused public has
the right to ask the question: What are the differences?
A few players for personal reasons have preferred not to participate
in one cycle or other (Salov, for instance, shunned the PCA Qualifier
because he doesn’t get on with Kasparov) but most top players see the
PCA cycle as an opportunity for extra earnings and to double their
chances! FIDE organize a first stage of world-wide Zonal tournaments
which enables a few unlikely players to qualify for the Interzonal. The
PCA do not and will eventually be accused of concerning itself only
with the top echelon unless they intend to open it up.
In years gone by there used to be two or three closed Interzonal
tournaments but in 1993 a lone Swiss system event in Biel determined
the ten places in the 1993-95 FIDE World Championship. PCA’s
Groningen Qualifier was a very similar affair, as we saw in the last
chapter.
The ten qualifiers plus Timman and Yusupov, as losing semi-
finalists in the previous Candidates, received invitations for the first
round of matches in Wijk aan Zee, January 1994. Note that Nigel Short
was not invited nor was Garry Kasparov (hell hath no fury...) as they
were deemed to have defaulted such privileges.
Karpov was to join in at the semi-final stage, a significant change, as
carlier World Champions have only ever had to play one match (the
final) to retain the title (as is still the case in the PCA event).
The PCA have announced a major coup in obtaining a sponsor for
their cycle whereas FIDE have had a piecemeal approach for each
stage with varying degrees of success.
The first round of the FIDE Candidates took place in Wijk aan Zee
in the Netherlands in January: 22 Grandmaster Chess
FIDE Candidates first round, Wijk aan Zee (matchplay)
V.Anand A.Yusupov VPh-2h
B.Gelfand M.Adams 5-3
G.Kamsky P.van der Sterren 442-242
V.Kramnik L.Yudasin 42-242
V.Salov A.Khalifman 5-1
J.Timman J.Lautier VPh-34)2
Several players managed to qualify for both the FIDE and the PCA
Candidates matches. As an aside, I imagine that the most likely way of
re-unifying the split in the chess establishment is if someone such as
Anand or Kamsky were to battle his way through and overpower both
Kasparov and Karpov! Already various challengers have complained
about the tough task of winning four matches to become world cham-
pion, but to take both crowns the challenger will have to win seven!
There were only two matches that needed all eight games: Gelfand-
Adams and Timman-Lautier. The young Comish player was elimi-
nated when Gelfand won the eighth and final game; Adams weakening
his own queenside as he desperately sought a win with Black. Gel-
fand’s extra experience in matchplay was probably the decisive factor
in an otherwise even pairing.
Michael suffers from not really being a theoretical specialist. He
gets round this by trying to ‘pick and choose’ his openings to avoid his
opponent’s preparation. His win in round five came from the c3 Sicil-
ian (fairly unusual at 2600+ level) but his loss in round four resulted
from a Queen’s Gambit Accepted which transposed to a Petroff’s De-
fence! Unfortunately it was Michael who seemed to be the more con-
fused. Further, in round six 1 d4 d6 2 e4 f6 3 £3 d5!? was an interest-
ing idea but one with which he was unable to equalize.
Joel Lautier of France pushed Timman hard in perhaps the closest
fought of the six matches. The Queen’s Gambit Accepted featured in
three games, the first was drawn, game three was won by Lautier but
Timman won game five. Lautier adopted 1 d4 d5 2 c4 dxc4 3 e4 Ac6!?
on each occasion, a line frequently employed by his second, Matthew
Sadler. The only other decisive result was in the second game where
Timman, as Black, won a long struggle despite having had a very du-
bious position in the early middlegame. In the final game, Lautier
needing a win to tie the score, adjourned with winning chances in a
difficult ending. However, despite the extensive analytical efforts of The FIDE Cycle 23
Matthew Sadler he didn’t make the best of his chances and Timman
gratefully held the draw. The other encounters went more or less as
expected.
In the summer the FIDE cycle moved to Sanghi Nagar in India,
where the locals had high hopes of their young star, Vishy Anand.
FIDE Candidates second round, Sanghi Nagar (matchplay)
B.Gelfand 01 V.Kramnik 42-342
V.Salov -Timman 42-32
G.Kamsky ==00=11= V.Anand 4-4
Play-off
G.Kamsky 11 V.Anand 2-0
By a remarkable quirk of fate, all three second round matches all
began in favour of the eventual loser. Kramnik took an early lead in his
match against Gelfand but was pegged back to all-square in game four.
As the tension mounted after three draws he was again criticized for
the quality of his opening preparation, which cost him the eighth and
final game as a result of a schoolboy blunder. Gelfand’s nerve was
again tested in this match but he remained solid and converted the final
point to earn the right to play Karpov (who, as FIDE Champion, was
exempt until the last four). Interestingly, in November in Cap D’Agde
on the French Mediterranean, Gelfand defeated Karpov in the blitz
play-off of a mini-match. Karpov was pressing but Gelfand took his
chances to run out victor. I don’t believe that Karpov will underesti-
mate his opponent next time.
The Dutchman Timman has had a long and up and down career. By
far the veteran of the six players in Sanghi Nagar, he has over the years
produced more than his fair share of brilliant games and with his enter-
taining and provocative analyses he remains a good model player for
the young enthusiast. However, his confident approach sometimes
leads to over-optimism and he tends to be rather inconsistent, his name
frequently appearing either at the very top or the very bottom of the
tournament table. He is often drawn into playing fashionable variations
in which he introduces his own brand of novelties and exciting chess.
When on form this approach reaps dividends, but when below par...
Always self-critical, Timman would be the first to admit that his best
form has eluded him of late, and in particular in this match. In fact,
Salov’s early loss was due to the Russian overplaying his hand. After 24 Grandmaster Chess
that Salov was almost always in control.
The Spanish-based Russian Valery Salov is an out-spoken critic of
Garry Kasparov, the PCA and anyone who he judges to be in that
camp. His White openings seem benign, but he scores very well with
Black. In his youth Salov was something of a tactical theoretician, but
nowadays, although still a young man, he has moved towards a slow
manoeuvring style similar to that of the Swedish Grandmaster Ulf An-
dersson. It must be disconcerting for his opponents to see a youthful-
looking Salov steering towards unspectacular endings and then out-
playing them with the refined technique of a player many years older.
In 1994 Salov made great strides, advancing to FIDE semi-finals and
achieving an outstanding result at Tilburg. But, with his entrance into
the political arena (with open letters to the powers-that-be with sug-
gestions how to put the chess world’s problems right) will he become
distracted from his assault on the world title?
Anand seemed to be coasting to victory in his match with Kamsky,
two up with three to play. However, Kamsky again showed his great
fighting qualities to turn the Indian celebrations into mourning with an
unlikely comeback. In the play-off a demoralized Anand was a shadow
of his normal self and was dismissed easily. There is no doubt that
Kamsky will be totally focused in his forthcoming match with Salov.
A number of the players in Sanghi Nagar were dissatisfied with the
conditions arranged by the Indian authorities. With the semi-finals
scheduled to take place at the same venue, the players’ anxieties about
health, food, climate, etc., could cause some problems for FIDE. In any
case Indian support for the local hero Anand was the source of such
great interest in the second round matches: with Anand eliminated,
would there be the same enthusiasm?
Game Five
Leonid Yudasin-Vladimir Kramnik
1st match game
FIDE Candidates first round, Wijk aan Zee 1994
Both Yudasin and Kramnik were
new to the Candidates stage of
the World Championship. Kram-
nik settled first and won this,
their opening encounter. Yudasin,
now playing under the Israeli
flag, did miss a win and the
chance to equalize the match in
the third game but otherwise
Kramnik was in control. With
White Kramnik made little head-
way but as Black in complex
Sicilians (such as this one) his
talent came to the fore. The FIDE Cycle 25
1 e4 5
2 DE De6
3. «4 exd4
4 ®xd4 D6
5 Ac3 e5
Kramnik employed this varia-
tion more frequently a few years
ago when it was generally more
popular. Although called by a
variety of names modern practi-
tioners call it the Sveshnikov af-
ter the Russian grandmaster who
did so much to develop it.
6 dbs d6
7 &d5
The main line follows 7 &g5
a6 8 4a3 bS 9 AdS when Black
has active play but an inferior
pawn structure. Black’s early
..€7-e5 in the Sicilian gains time
and challenges directly for the
centre at the cost of potential
problems on d5 and d6.
Yudasin’s move saves a tempo
but more importantly establishing
a queenside majority. Black in
compensation has an extra pawn
on the other wing where his
chances of counterplay lie.
7 Dxd5
8 exdS De7
The other retreat 8..Ab8 is
generally followed by 9 c4 e7
10 &e2 a6 11 Ac3 0-0 12 0-0
when Black will seek activity by
..f7-f5 and the redeployment of
the knight to d7, where it will
have influence over the important
c5 and e5 squares. This was in
fact the course of the seventh
game of this match.
9
Another try is to bolster the
centre with 9 c4 but this weakens
White’s grip on d4 and the light-
squared bishop has less scope.
Still, 9..Dg6 10 Wat 2d7 11
Wb4 Wb8 12 2e3 is then the
critical continuation where White
has a queenside initiative.
(aes OES
Overprotecting the d-pawn and
preparing to develop the kingside.
10 a4 26
This costs (yet another) tempo
over the natural 10...2e7 11 2d3
0-0 but in that case the continua-
tion 12 0-0 h4 (preparing ...f7-
£5) 13 £4! may be slightly better
for White, e.g. 13...f5 14 fxe5S
dxe5 when 15 d6 disrupts the
black camp, whereas 13...a6 14
Ba3 £5 15 e4 and 13...exf4 14
&xf4 both give White some cen-
tral pressure.
11 Red
In the third game 11 2d3 2g7
12 0-0 0-0 13 Wb3 He8 14 Hel
b6 15 a5! gave Yudasin a strong
queenside initiative. If White can
obtain an advantage by force then
10...g6 may just be dubious and
Kramnik was prudent to switch to
8...Ab8 in the seventh game.
i. &g7
12 0-0 0-0
13. Wb3
Aiming to pressurize d6. If
Black reacts with 13...a6 then
after 14 a3 with 4c4 to follow
Black has a further weak point on
b6.
130 ww Bes
14 «Wha e4 26 Grandmaster Chess
White was threatening to un-
dermine the knight with 15 g4.
Black could have played 14...hS
but the text is more dynamic.
15 Sf
A move such as 15 g4 would
be viewed suspiciously by many
grandmasters as White’s kingside
is seriously compromised. The
cheeky 15...&2e5 16 gxf5 Wh4 is
refuted by 17 f4 when en passant
allows 18 Wxh4. Black could in-
stead try 15...a6 16 gxf5 axb5 17
&xb5 Wh4 with attacking chan-
ces and the threat of perpetual
check or even 15...e7.
Risky would also be 15 a5 &e5
16 g3 hS followed by 17...h4.
15 ReS
In this game Black exchanges
both pairs of bishops in order to
develop his attack. White’s de-
fensive pieces are eliminated one
by one and his king is gradually
exposed. This first exchange al-
lows the rook to take up an at-
tacking posture.
16 SxeS HxeS
17. Hadl = @h4
Intending to threaten mate with
18...Wg5. Black could have first
forced the white queen to commit
herself by 17...a5 but whether this
is desirable is a debatable point as
Black may later regret not having
the option of ...a7-a6.
18 thi Wes
19 &gl Rg4
Kramnik reduces further the
white king’s support.
20 &xg4 Wrxgd
21 ‘Edel
After 21 Wxd6 “£3! White has
problems: 22 gxf3 Wxf3+ 23 Hg2
Wxd1+ (hence the need to move
this rook) or 22 Hgfl Wf4 23 g3
Hh5! 24 h4 We4 with a quick
mate in either case. The best try
is 22 h3 but 22..2h5 23 Wg3
leaves White with insufficient
compensation for the exchange.
21 Wea
Inferior is 21.3 22 gxf3
Wxf3+ 23 Hg2 Hg5 as White can
play 24 Wxe4. Black can improve
by first displacing the white
queen and then forcing a draw:
21...a5 22 Wxd6 Af3 23 gxf3 The FIDE Cycle 27
Wxf3+ 24 Be? Hp5 25 Hel Bxg2
26 Hxg2 Wfl+ with perpetual
check. The text is an attempt to
play for more.
Who is better? White can cap-
ture on d6 but can he then still
defend his king? Is Black’s attack
worth a draw or even more?
22 Wxd6?
An error but the position was
very complicated:
a) 22 @d4 can be met by
22...8h5 23 g3 Af3 24 Axf3
Wxf3+ 25 Eg2 e3! with an equal
game; capturing on e3 is met by
...Wxd5 and 26 Wxb7 is risky as
26...He8 27 fxe3 Exe3 28 Wc8+
‘&g7 29 Bei He2 favours Black.
b) 22 *xd6 is best when the
direct attack 22..Bh5 23 Hxe4
3 fails to the clever resource
24 He8+! Hxe8 25 Wxf4. Black
does best to meet 22 Axd6 with
22...a5 when White has a difficult
decision to make:
bl) 23 Wxb7 Hf8 (after
23...2h5 White can defend with
24 Wxf7+! obtaining four pawns
for the piece after 24...Wxf7 25
@®xf7 Sxf7 26 Exe) allows
Black all the chances.
b2) After 23 Wd4 White can
survive to a nominally better
ending after 23..%h5 24 Exe4
Wxd6 (24...Wxh2+ is attractive
but unsound as 25 @xh2 Af5+ is
met by 26 Hh4 Bxh4+ 27 Wxh4
@xh4 28 Dxb7 and White wins
the ending) 25 Exh4 Exh4 26
Wxh4 Wxd5 27 b4 but after
27... Wb3! a draw is on the cards.
oe es Os!
Better than the typical draw
with 22...Df3 23 gxf3 Wxf3+ 24
Bg? Hp5, etc.
After 22...Af5 White is lost.
The best try is 23 Wb4 but after
23...Wxf2 24 Hxe4 Hae8 Black
has a winning attack, e.g. 25 Hf4
Deg3+ 26 hxg3 Wxg3 and there
are too many threats.
23 We7
Yudasin had obviously pinned
his hopes on this pin. Now
23...fae8!? is interesting but
Kramnik had prepared a spec-
tacular coup de grace.
230 e3!
24 = Exe3 — Wxe3!!
Capturing the queen allows
mate in two by 25 fxe3 Ag3+ 26
hxg3 3h5 mate! A sensational
combination, but Yudasin pre-
ferred to lose more prosaically.
25 @d6 e7
The most efficient.
26 Axf5 —gxf5
27 “Wa6
If 27 fxe3 then 27...Bxc7.
27 we Wes
28 Wh4 Hae8
29 Wha £6
300 h3 Wrxd5
0-1
Kasparov is on record as hav-
ing stated that he believes that
Kramnik will be his main chal-
lenger in the course of time. It’s
worth noting that this was his
first game as a ‘Candidate’
However, Kramnik surprisingly
failed to make much impact in
either cycle and his first game
was to be his best. 28 Grandmaster Chess
Game Six
Paul van der Sterren-Gata Kamsky
5th match game
Candidates first round, Wijk aan Zee 1994
Kamsky must have felt very for-
tunate when the pairings for the
first series of matches were made
as Paul van der Sterren was gen-
erally considered by far the
weakest qualifier. However, in
the match itself van der Sterren, a
renowned theoretician, consis-
tently obtained excellent posi-
tions only to spoil his good work
in time pressure. The final score
may have been predictable but
not the manner of it. In the fol-
lowing fighting game the Dutch-
man missed two wins.
1 d4 D6
2 4 26
3 e327
4 e d6
5 f3
The Samisch variation of the
King’s Indian.
Sites 0-0
6 Red eS
7 d5 6
8 2d3
Sharper is 8...b5!? with an un-
balanced game. In particular 9
exbS cxd5 10 exd5 Abd7 gives
Black dynamic play for the
gambit pawn.
8 exdS
9 exdS ADhS
White has a space advantage
but Black can obtain play with
the typical King’s Indian counter
»f7-£5,
10 Aged £5
11s exf5 exf5
12 0-0
The Samisch is often associ-
ated with queenside castling and
attacks on opposite wings. In the
present game van der Sterren pre-
fers a more cautious approach,
tucking his king away on hl be-
fore commencing active opera-
tions.
Ww a6
A useful move in such posi-
tions (preparing ...b7-b5 or sim-
ply stopping White using the b5
square). The main alternative
12..0d7 13 Bel Ac5 looks
slightly better for White after 14
&c4! (threatening 15 b4 and 15
Sxc5 dxc5 16 d6+); Timman-
Kasparov, Paris (25-minute
game) 1991.
13. hi hs
In Brunner-Gallagher, Bern
1993, (a game in which White
needed to win for a GM norm)
the natural 13...2\d7 was met by
14 &xf5!? (compared to our
game White is missing Ecl and
Black @h8) when 14...8xf5 15
g4 Ef7 16 gxhS Wh4 17 Dg3
DM6 18 Dce4 Axed 19 Dxes
&h3 20 Hf2 Wxhs5 21 Axd6 Bf6
22 De4 Bg6 23 We2 Hd8 24 Hdl
@h8 gave Black good compensa- The FIDE Cycle 29
tion for the pawn.
14 Eel
15 &xf5!
Van der Sterren introduces a
‘novelty’ although the idea is
known; Timman-Thipsay, Thes-
saloniki Olympiad 1984 contin-
ued 15 Wd2 b5 16 &xf5 Bxf5 17
g4 and White had the advantage.
After the text White has a more
active position than in the Brun-
ner-Gallagher game above, es-
sentially having the extra move
Bcl.
Da7
15... Exf5
16 g4 Ef
17 gxhS = Wh4
18 Ded a6
This is more active than
18...WxhS as White can then
snatch the pawn on d6: 19 @xd6
Exf3? (19.06 is objectively
better but Black is a pawn down
for no compensation) 20 g3
Exfl+ 21 Wxfl and White wins a
piece.
19 Dxd6
The critical choice. Instead of
this White could try 19 42g3, a
solid alternative.
19 &h3
20 «gl Ead8
A complicated struggle that is
worth comparison with the Brun-
ner-Gallagher encounter above.
White’s chances are better here
because of the rook on the c-file
and indeed it seems that he has a
clear advantage. From this obser-
vation it becomes clear that
13..@h8 was inferior and the
immediate 13...2d7 should be
preferred.
GY a
= nine
iene.
s
21. Ke7
Also promising is 21 Hc4 as
both 21...e4? 22 Axe4 Bxd5? 23
@®xf6! and 21...WxhS 22 Ag3
Wg6 23 DgfS win material. In
the latter case Black can put up a
serious defence with 23...2xf5
24 Exg6 2xg6.
21 aged
After 21...Axh5 White has 22
®f7+, while the natural
21,..Axd6 is met by 22 Hgxg7
Rd7 (23..Bxd5 fails to 24
Wrxd5!) 23 h6 Bxd5 24 Wg1when
White threatens mate in two
starting with 25 Hxh7+ and fin-
ishing with 26 Wg7.
The wild 21...Ag4 (blocking
the g-file) is refuted by 22 fxg4
xg4 23 Df7+ Sg8 24 Dh6+
&xh6 25 Ac3 with a deadly pin
on the g-file (25...8f1 26 Wxfl
Sxe3 27 Wf7+ and mate next
move).
The text is a desperate attempt
to find salvation through compli-
cations.
22 Dc3 30 Grandmaster Chess
After 22 fxg4 Axg4 23 Exg4
Wxg4 24 Dt7+ Bxf7 25 Oxf7
Black has 25...We4+ winning
back the piece with a good game.
220 &xh5S
Now White meets 22...Bxd6
with 23 fxg4 maintaining a two
pawn advantage.
23. ‘SXgxg7?
Up to this point the Dutchman
had performed admirably but
now 23 Hcxg7! was required:
23...8xd6 24 &c5 e4 is then met
by the beautiful 25 &xd6! 2xf3+
26 Wxf3 exf3 27 S2xf8 h5 (27...f2
allows 28 Hg8+ Axg8 29 2g7
mate!) 28 Mg6 f2 29 &g7+ h7
30 Hh6+ dg8 31 Hh8+ &F7 32
s+ Ye7 33 Rxf6+ winning.
Very missable in time pressure!
230 we Bixd6
24 25
a FY,
Y
Ly, avy
UID),
24 we e4?
Kamsky had a fascinating pos-
sibility in this position; 24...d7!
when best play could be 25
Hcxd7 Bh6 26 Wd2 Hff6! 27 Kgs
Ehg6 28 Hd8+ g7 29 Bd7+
taking a perpetual. Of course this
line only scratches the surface of
a very sharp position but Black’s
attack has to be taken seriously
and White can’t seem to profit
from his extra material.
25 Hp3 Wa
26 «=Rxd6?
A natural move but one that
overlooks Black’s resource. By
playing 26 8xb7 first, White
comes out two pawns ahead after
26...2xf3+ 27 Exf3 exf3 28
Rxd6 Wxd6 29 Wxf3.
26 Wxd6
27. Exb7) = Wxg3!
Van der Sterren was probably
expecting 27...2xf3+ 28 Exf3
etc., when the two pawns and
significant simplification should
guarantee victory. The text must
have been a terrible blow.
28 hxg3 BR xf3+
29 Sgl = &xdl
30 @xdl = Axd5
31 = Xb!
A necessary move as 31 Bd7?
would lose to 31...e3!
31. (ww Ec8
32 De3 Axc3
33 Exc3 «=-d8
34 Ee3 Ed2
35 Exe4 = Exb2
360 -Had Eb6
37 &g2 ath
A fascinating battle. Had van
der Sterren managed to convert
this game he would have clawed
back to one down and might have
put Kamsky under real pressure.
As it was, the American teenager
managed to halve out to win the
match. The FIDE Cycle 31
Game Seven
Vishwanathan Anand-Artur Yusupov
5th match game
FIDE Candidates first round, Wijk aan Zee 1994
The Russian-born Artur Yusupov
has been one of the most consis-
tent players over the past ten
years, during which he has regu-
larly appeared in the final stages
of the world championship. A
few years ago Yusupov moved to
Germany and he even represented
his adopted country in the Mos-
cow Olympiad. In fact, the Tatar
Yusupov must have unpleasant
memories on the Russian capital
as when he lived there he was
shot and seriously wounded after
disturbing burglars one evening,
an incident which may have
prompted his move to the com-
parative safety of the West.
This game took place in the
critical stage of the match in
which Anand’s two-point lead
had just been halved. A further
defeat for Anand at this stage
would have well and truly handed
the initiative to his highly experi-
enced opponent.
1 ed e5
2 @B De6
3 &b5 a6
4 Ra4 d6
Yusupov has frequently used
the ‘Open’ variation (4...Af6 5
0-0 Dxe4) in his matches in re-
cent years and his adoption of
4...d6 during this match was quite
a surprise.
5 3 f5
This so-called ‘Siesta’ varia-
tion is named after a Budapest
sanatorium, which was in fact the
venue of a 1928 tournament,
where Capablanca used the idea.
In fact Marshall had introduced
the variation against the Cuban
19 years earlier but he already
had a certain variation of the
Spanish named after him! (see
the next game).
6 exfS Rxf5
7 0-0 2d3
8 Hel
The complications following 8
Wb3 bS 9 Wd5 Ad4! should only
be entered into after some thor-
ough homework.
i Re7
9 Bcd!
The main problem with this
tactical line for Black is that
White simply exchanges off the
bishops, avoiding complications,
and obtains the better prospects
due to Black’s weaknesses on the
light squares.
Dee Rxc2
10 Wxe2 Af6
11 d4 0-0
After 11...exd4 12 cxd4 0-0 13
4\c3 @h8 White can create some
interesting complications: 14
Dgs Dxd4 15 Wd3 h6 (15...c5 32 Grandmaster Chess
fails to 16 4d5) 16 Wxd4 hxg5
17 &xg5 Wd7 18 Ads Axd5 19
&xe7 HFS (19...Axe7 is worse
due to 20 Wh4+