Learn Chess Tactics: Discover the Secrets of How to Win Chess Games 1901983986, 9781901983982

Citation preview

Learn Chess Tactics

John Nunn

�A�BDT

First published in the UK by Gambit Publications Ltd 2004 Copyright© John Nunn 2004 The right of John Nunn to be identified as the author of thi s work has been asserted in accor­ dance with the Copyri ght, Designs and Patents Act 1 98 8 . A l l rights reserved. This book i s sold subj ect t o the condition that it shall not, b y way o f 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 thi s condition being i mposed on the subsequent purchaser. A copy of the B ritish Library Cataloguing in Publication data is available from the British Library. ISBN 1 90 1 983 98 6 DISTRIBUTION:

Wor.ldwide (except USA ) : Central Books Ltd, 99 Wallis Rd, London E9 5LN. Tel +44 (0)20 8986 4854 Fax +44 (0)20 8 5 3 3 5 82 1 . E-mai l : [email protected] USA : B H B International , Inc . , 302 West North 2nd Street, Seneca, SC 2967 8, USA. For all other enquiries (including a ful l list of all Gambit chess titles) please contact the publishers, Gambit Publications Ltd, P.O. Box 3 2640, London W l 4 OJN. E-mai l : info@ gambitbooks.com Or visit the GAMBIT web site at http ://www.gambitbooks.com Edited by Graham B urgess Typeset by John Nunn Printed in Great B ritain by The Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, Wi lts.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I

Gambit Publications Ltd Managing Director: GM Murray Chandler Chess Director: GM John Nunn Editorial Director: FM Graham B urgess German Editor: WFM Petra Nunn

Contents

Introduction

4

Prerequisites and Symbols

6

1

Fork

10

2

Discovered Attack

25

3

Pin

34

4

Skewer

43

5

Deflection

46

6

Trapped Piece

56

7

Removing the Guard

62

8

Opening and Closing Lines

65

9

Back-Rank Mate

70

10

Pawn Promotion

75

1I

In-Between Moves

80

I2

Defensive Tactics

83

13

Combinations

89

14

Miscellaneous Exercises

99

Solutions

Ill

Index of Players

158

I ntrod uct i o n

This book aims to provide a basic course i n chess tactics. We will define a tactic to be a short­ term operation, using forcing moves, which aims for an immediate concrete gain (such as win­ ning materi al or mate). Most chess games are decided by tactics. At higher levels, long-term strategic thinking is also important, but even amongst grandmasters tactics predomi nate. Those who enj oy rapid or blitz chess will already be aware that the faster the time-limit. the more the balance shifts towards tactics . At lower levels, tactics are especially prevalent and the quickest way for most players to achieve better results i s to improve their tactical ability. Learn Chess Tactics is essentially practical in nature, with little in the way of theoretical dis­ cussion. The first five chapters deal with the most important and fundamental game-wi nning tactics: fork, discovered attack, pin, skewer and deflection . The following seven chapters cover slightly more advanced topics. Chapter 1 3 deals specifically with the way in which the basic tactical elements can be linked together to form more elaborate 'combinations' Readers should note that this is not a book about attacking play ; the basic ideas presented are those that win material, which is the key to scoring the maximum number of points . Thus you will not find standard attacking combinations (e.g., the bishop sacrifice on h7 or the dou­ ble bishop sacrifice) in thi s book. There is in any case little point in coveri ng attacking combi­ nations without a lengthy discussion of attacking play in general; you are unli kely to arrive at a position in which a double bi shop sacrifice is possible unless you have aimed for it from an earlier stage . In real life, some games are decided by a direct attack on the enemy king. but far more are won by gaining material. The structure of each chapter is the same ; there i s a discussion of the key ideas, with exam­ ples, and then there is a set of exercises for the reader to solve. Within each chapter. the exer­ c i ses are of graduated difficulty, starting with very simple examples and working on to more complex cases. The reader is strongly advi sed to start at Chapter 1 and work steadily through the book, tackling the exerc i ses at the end of each chapter before moving on to the next one . The reason for thi s is that later chapters use concepts deve loped in earl ier ones; moreover, the exercises themselves contain important ideas and are not there just for testing whether the reader has been paying attention. There is also a gradual increase in difficu lty throughout the book and in later chapters some points are presumed rather than being spell out in detai l as in the earlier chapters . The final chapter consists of a set of exercises in which no hint is given as to theme or difficulty. These present the reader with a situation simi lar to that of an over-the­ board game ; the main difference, which can hardly be avoided, is that in a game you don ' t know whether there really i s somethi ng t o b e found. The positions are all from real games and all except one are from recent ( since 1990) play. There are good reasons for thi s . Positions in books on tactics tend to be heav ily recyc led, with the result that a slightly more sophisticated reader may well find that he has seen a good pro­ portion of the positions before . I hope to have avoided this by de liberate ly steeri ng clear of well-known examples and focusing on positions which are recent enough not to have appeared frequently in print. I have also avoided esoteric examples featuring themes of li ttle practical

INTROD UCTION

5

importance; this book focuses on ideas which occur time and time again and which are bound to arise in readers' games sooner or later. Readers may be surprised by the fact that in many of the examples, one player resigns after losing a relatively modest amount of material . This is a reflection of the fact that most of the examples are taken from games by i nternational players ; at this level, losing two pawns (or the equivalent) without compensation is usually a cause for resignation. Even the loss of one pawn, if it is accompanied by a positional disadvantage, may be enough for a player to throw in the towel. Of course, at lower levels the game would normally continue after the loss of mate­ rial, but being a pawn or two up is bound to give you a head start ! This leads on to another point. It would have been easy to i nclude only tactics leading to a large gain of material, but this would create a deceptive i mpression. Many games are decided by tactics that win a mere pawn (or its equivalent) . Having secured a material advantage, the player resolutely swaps all the pieces off, promotes a pawn and finally delivers mate with the extra queen (if the opponent doesn't resign first). I have therefore included some examples in which the gain of material is quite modest. Some chess knowledge i s assumed, but I have provided a quick revision course in the fol­ lowing chapter. Readers may l ike to have a quick look at this to see if there i s any unfamiliar material before proceeding to the main part of the book. Those who have read my earlier book Learn Chess will be able to skip this preliminary chapter.

Prerequ i s ites a n d Sym bo l s

The rules of the game are assumed and will not be covered in thi s book. The other main prerequisite is a knowledge of chess nota­ tion. In this book we use algebraic notation, which is the world-wide standard for chess notation.

a

b

b

d

e

h 8 7 6 5

Notation

a

c

3 c

d

e

g

2

h

Each of the 64 squares on the chessboard is given a unique name, as shown in the above diagram . The names are based on a system of coordinates, with the left to right direction being represented by the letters 'a' to ' h ' and the bottom to top direction being represented by the numbers 'I' to ' 8 ' These names remain the same n o matter which side of the board you are looking from , so if you are White then ' a l ' w i l l be near you on the left. while if you are Black then ' a ] ' w i l l be situated on the far side of the board .

The vertical and horizontal lines of squares on the chessboard are given special names. The vertical columns of squares are called files, and the horizontal rows are called ranks. In the above diagram one rank and one file have been marked. If you compare this dia­ gram with the previous one, you will see that the squares on the marked file have names running from 'c I' to ' c 8 ' - in other words they all start with a 'c' For this reason the marked fi le is called the 'c-fi le' The same principle applies to the other seven ti les. In the same way the eight squares on the marked rank have names running from 'a4 ' to 'h4' These all end in a '4' so this is cal led the fourth rank. Players often refer to ranks from their own perspective, so for White the sec­ ond rank runs from 'a2 ' to 'h2' while for Black the second rank runs from 'a7 ' to 'h7 ' The pieces are represented in this book by figurines, as follows : King 'it> Queen "iV Rook l:i. =

=

PREREQUISITES AND S YMBOLS

Bishop = Knight = Pawn Figurines are often used in printed chess notation, as they are independent of language, but for recording games in tournaments play­ ers usually use a system of letters which var­ ies from language to language. In English, for example, the letters representing the above sequence are K, Q, R, B , N, P while in Ger­ man they are K, D, T, L, S, B . When writing a move i n chess notation, first the piece i s given and then the destina­ tion square. The exception is for pawn moves, when no piece name i s used. Thus a knight move to f3 is written ' 4Jf3 ' , while a pawn move to e4 is written simply ' e4 ' . If a move is a capture then an 'x' i s written after the piece name. Pawn captures form an excep­ tion , since in this case the original file of the pawn is written. For example, a pawn capture from e3 to d4 is written 'exd4' Finally, if a move is a check then '+' is ap­ pended to the move, while black moves in isolation are preceded by ' The following diagram shows some chess moves and how they are written. a

b

c

d

e

h 8 7 6 5

3 2

The five marked moves are written: . . . b5, �xb4, ... Wie7, ... �xd4+ and .Uc5 . You should work out which arrow corresponds to which

7

move. In general, in order to interpret a move written in chess notation, such as ' 4Je5 ' , you have to find 'e5 ' on the board, then look for a knight which can move there . If you are not familiar with chess notation this can take some getting used to, but with practice it be­ comes second nature. If two pieces of the same type can move to the same square, for example if rooks on a l and f l can both move to d 1 , then the two moves are distinguished by adding the starting file after the piece name (thus either 'l:f.ad1' or '.l:lfd I ' according to which rook moved to d 1 ). If this fails to distinguish the two ambig­ uous moves, then ranks are used instead: thus if rooks on c 1 and c7 can both move to c5, we write either ' l::!. I c5 ' or '.l:!7c5 ' as appropriate. Pawn promotions are written, for example, ' a8Wi' , meaning that White advanced a pawn to a8 and promoted it to a queen. The fol lowing table summarizes the addi­ tional symbols used in the chess notation in this book: = Check + ++ Double check = Mate # = Castles kingside 0-0 Castles queenside = 0-0-0 = Good move ? B ad move = B rilliant move !! = Serious mistake ?? Moves which are part of a game are gener­ ally written with move numbers. For exam­ ple, here is a very short game which also uses some of the symbols given above: I e4 e5 2 .ltc4 4Jc6 3 Wih5 4Jf6?? 4 Wixf7#. Note that a white move and its following black move are given the same move number. In this book, we usually join games somewhere in the middle, so the first move given may have al­ most any move number. The result of a game may be indicated as follows: 1-0 The game ends in a win for White 1/z-1/z The game ends in a draw 0-1 The game ends in a win for Black

8

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

Conventions There are a few other conventions of chess writing which are worth mentioning. The di­ agonal lines of squares on the chessboard are called simply diagonals and the two diago­ nals from al to h 8 and h l to a8 are called long diagonals. We refer to a piece on a par­ ticular square as, for example, 'the pawn on e4 ' or 'the e4-pawn' The players are called White and Black and are capitalized. Thus we have 'White 's bishop' or 'Black 's e5pawn' However, white and black (without capital s) can also be used as adj ectives, refer­ ri ng to the colours of the pieces, as in 'the white bishop ' or 'the weak black e-pawn' On the chessboard there are 321ight squares and 32 dark squares. If some captures result in the removal of equal amounts of white and black material , we speak of an exchange; the simplest case is when one white piece and one black piece of the same type are cap­ tured. Rather confusi ngly, the common ma­ teri al advantage of rook for knight or rook for bi shop is referred to as the exchange; thus we speak of 'winning the exchange' It should be clear from the context which mean­ ing of 'exchange' is intended. In this book we adopt a few additional conventions which are far from universal in chess writing. Firstly, moves given in bold are those actually played in the game. Sec­ ondly, some of the diagrams contain arrows indicating points of importance. Solid ar­ rows represent moves actually played, while dotted arrows represent potential moves or threats. A small 'W' or 'B ' by the side of the diagram indicates who is to move in the dia­ gram position . When a game is quoted, we give the names of the players and the event in which the game took place. Often in chess books you will see a variety of abbreviations used to show the type of event in which the game was played. In thi s book we will usually write

event names out in full and use only one ab­ breviation, namely 'Ch ' for 'Championship'

Material Chess games are often decided by a material advantage - whoever has the larger army is likely to win. It is easy to compare a position in which White has a knight, a bishop and a pawn and Black has a kni ght and a pawn clearly White is a bishop up. But who has a materi al advantage when White has a queen , a bishop and a pawn and Black has two rooks and two pawns? To answer such questions, chess-players have worked out a table of ma­ terial values for the various pieces: = Pawn l Knight = 3 3 Bi shop = = Rook 5 Queen = 9 This table allows one to work out who is ahead on material . In the example given above White has 9+3+1 = 13 while Black has 10+2 = 12, so White is one point (which is equivalent to one pawn) up. The king does not feature in thi s table because loss of the king ends the game, so its relative value is a meaningless concept. It must be emphasized that this table of material values is a rule of thumb rather than a strict law. A particular position may favour one type of piece over another, and in this case the val ues need to be modified. As a general principle, a material advantage of two points is sufficient to win, subject to certain provisos . First of all,

there should be no compensation for the ex tra material - if there is a mating attack, for ex­ ample, the materi al situation is irrelevant. Compensation can take many forms, some quite subtle, but compensation for materi al loss normally ari ses when the materi al is sacrificed deliberately. If it is lost acc iden­ tal ly, then compensation is much less likely to arise, although the player who is about to

PREREQUISITES AND S YMBOLS

gain material should always check to see if he is damaging his position in the process. Secondly, the side with the extra material should still have some pawns. The main win­ ning method when material ahead is to ex­ change pieces and eventually promote a pawn; if you don ' t have any pawns l eft, this isn't possible. Finally, this two-point rule as­ sumes accurate play ! Of course this raises the question as to whether a one-point advantage is enough to win. Unfortunately, it all de­ pends on the position and there is no general rule which enables one to decide.

9

We can see how important winning mate­ rial is, but gaining material is easier said than done. If you attack an enemy piece, your op­ ponent may overlook the threat, but once you get beyond the beginner level this is very un­ usual. More often he will respond to and nul­ lify your threat. How, then, can you achieve the material gain which is necessary for vic­ tory? That is the subj ect of this book. There are standard tactical devices which win mate­ rial in thousands of games every day. B eing familiar with these will win you plenty of games and save you many more.

1

Fork

In chess, making a single threat often doesn ' t have any real impact. For example, if you at­ tack a piece, then your opponent may defend it or move it out of range of the attack. Cre­ ating two threats simultaneously is a differ­ ent matter. In many cases, there will be no way to meet both threats and material loss will be inevitable. The fork is one of the sim­ plest ways to set up a double threat; the es­ sential idea is that one of your pieces moves to a position where it creates two threats si­

w

multaneously. In the most basic version, the

two threats are simply attacks against vulner­ able enemy pieces.

B

J . Polga r - Macieja Rapidplay, Budapest 2002

This position is a clear example . Black played 23 ."�a4, attacking both undefended white rooks. The diagram at the top of the next column shows the situation. There is no way for White to defend both rooks, so she resigned at once rather than play on a whole rook down. ..

Although the fork is one of the most basic tactical devices, it is also one of the most common in practice and decides countless games at all levels of play from begi nner up to (as in the above example) grandmaster. It is therefore especially important to gai n ex­ perience at spotting forks, both in order to ex­ ecute them yourself and to avoid allowing them by your opponent. Of course, grand­ masters don ' t normally al low a simple fork such as the above - this example is very much the exception - yet even this elemen­ tary case reveals an important psychological point. A fork is easier to overlook if there is something a little bit out of the ordi nary about it. It is not immediately obvious that the white rooks are vulnerable to a fork ; they are only undefended because the pawn on d5 interrupts the communication between them. Moreover, one 'prong ' of the fork points up the board and the other points down, which often makes a fork harder to see than if both prongs point forwards into the enemy posi­ tion. This chapter and the numerous exercises

11

FORK

at the end provide plenty o f chances for you to gain useful 'fork-spotting' experi ence.

w

As with many of the tactical ideas featured in this book, a fork gains in strength if a check is involved. a

b

c

d

e

g

h

B

R . Ruck - Krasen kow European Ch, Ohrid 2001

Holmsten

-

G . Mohr

European Team Ch, Leon 2001

In this position, White had j ust played his king from c I to b1; he now resigned without waiting for 33... .Jte4+, which wins White ' s queen i n return for a bishop. Forks executed by checking moves are quite common be­ cause a check is a very forcing move ; the op­ ponent has to respond to the check, which often leaves him little chance to deal with any other threats created by the checking move. It follows that a king exposed to checks i s a weakness even if the king cannot be directly attacked. The checks give rise to many possi­ ble forks, and avoiding these forks restricts the player's options. A particularly vulnerable formation is an exposed king together with one or more un­ defended pieces. In this case an enemy piece can both check the king and attack an unde­ fended piece. The queen i s especially effec­ tive at exploiting this situation and can do plenty of damage single-handed.

In this position the black king is exposed to checks along the back rank. White's queen is in a position to check on either b8 or d8, and that means that any undefended pieces which can be attacked from b8 or d8 are lia­ ble to be lost to a queen fork. Black's previ­ ous move was the unwise advance of his h-pawn from h6 to h5. This left his rook on g5 undefended and White was not slow to take advantage of thi s by 33 11Vd8+, both checking the king and attacking the loose rook. Faced with the loss of his rook, Black resigned immediately. Once again there is a psychological element to Black's blunder. He must have realized before playing ... h5 that White 's checks on b8 and d8 were not genu­ inely dangerous, and therefore thought he could use a tempo to start some kingside counterplay by pushing his h-pawn. Unfortu­ nately, it was this very move which trans­ formed 1!Vd8+ from a harmless check into a deadly game-winner. It is not enough to make sure that your opponent has no tactical threats ; you must also ensure that there are no tactical possibilities in the position after your in­ tended move. Forks do not have to involve direct attacks on undefended pieces. Another possibility is

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

12

that the fork attacks a vulnerable piece and at the same time threatens to deliver mate. Just as with a check, a threat of mate has to be dealt with at once and this gives the attacker a free tempo to wreak havoc elsewhere.

w

lzeta - Sanz Alonso Elgoibar 1 999

Here there are no undefended pieces to ex­ ploit, but nevertheless White found a lethal fork. He played 31 tLle6, threatening both 3 2 tLl x c 5 and, more seri ously, 3 2 "Wig7#. Clearly the mate threat takes priority over everything else. Black can meet it with a move such as 3 I . . .f6 or 3 I . . .tiJf6, but then White takes the rook on c5 with a decisive material advan­ tage. Note that Black cannot reply 3 l . . . fxe6, because of mate i n two by 32 ..txe6+ 'it>f8 33 'iVh8#. Black ' s only other possibility is 3 I . . Jhc l +, but after 3 2 l:txc l White wins Black ' s queen , because 3 3 .l:txc8+ and 33 "VJI/g7# are both threatened. Therefore Black resigned at once. Although the rook on c5 was protected, it was vulnerable to an attack by a knight because a rook is worth consider­ ably more than a knight. Here Black proba­ bly overlooked the deci sive knight move because the e6-square was apparently cov­ ered by the f7-pawn ; White, however, saw further and realized that the knight was invul­ nerable on e6.

Any piece is capable of delivering a fork, but the two pieces most effective at forki ng are the queen and the knight. The reason is that the queen and knight tan attack in eight directions simultaneously and therefore have better chances of catching enemy pieces in a fork than the rook and bishop, which can only attack in four directions, or the pawn, which is restricted to just two. The king, it is true, can also attack in eight ways, but it is such a short range piece that i s not very effective at forking. In addition, the king is normal ly not in the thick of the battle and therefore usually only comes within range of the enemy in the endgame, when there isn't much around to fork. Both the queen and knight can create forks which are relatively hard to spot in advance. In the queen 's case, thi s is because its long­ range action is capable of forking pieces at opposite ends of the board (as in the first ex­ ample above, J. Polgar-Macieja) so that no undefended piece is safe. In the knight 's case, its crooked mode of action makes a fork that little bit less visible.

w

Ponoma riov

-

V. M ilov

European Ch, Ohrid 200 I

Black has just played his rook from c8 to c5 . Thi s turned out to be a mistake because White replied 22 tLla4, attacking the rook and

FORK

queen simultaneously. B lack had no choice but to deal with the threat to the more valu­ able queen, leaving the knight to take the rook. Winning the exchange (rook for knight or rook for bishop) without compensation al­ most always confers a decisive advantage, but here B lack had the additional misfortune that White was able to break through quickly in the centre. The finish was 22 .. .'iVa5 23 tZ:lxc5 'ii'xc5 24 f5 ..txa2 25 f6 ..trs 26 'i¥a4+ (a further fork of king and bi shop) 26 ... b5 27 �xa2 l!Ve3+ 28 'it>bl 1 -0. It is possible

that Black thought he could counter White ' s knight fork b y 2 2 . . . 'i¥c6, attacking the white queen, only to realize too late that White wins the exchange in any case by playing 23 tZ:lxc5 , because this capture also defends the queen. It is of course pleasant when you get the chance to play a simple fork as in the ex­ amples above, but few opponents are so co­ operative. More often there is no immediate fork, but it is possible to force the opponent's pieces into position for a subsequent fork. Sometimes this preliminary action involves no more than a check to drive the enemy king onto the right square, as in the following ex­ ample.

13

In this position White had just played his knight from f3 to e5, taking a black bishop in the process. As White is now a piece up, he no doubt expected that Black would recapture the knight on e5 . However, Black saw that the opening of the queen 's line from e4-h l gave him the opportunity to set up a fork by means of a check. He played 40 'i¥hl+ and White resigned since after 4 1 'it>e2 lDc3+ his king and queen would be forked and he would face disastrous loss of material . It is a mistake to assume that just because you have made a capture, your opponent must recapture. ..•

In the following example, two preliminary checks are needed to line Black's king up for the decisive fork. a

b

c

d

e

g

h

w

Ba reev - Onishchuk

B

Rapidplay, Moscow 2002

Soppe - B raga Villa Gisell 1 998

In this position White has the material ad­ vantage of a knight for two pawns, and would probably have won in the end in any case, but he saw the chance to finish the game at a stroke. He continued 45 tiJd6+ and Black re­ signed. There are two possibilities . If B lack plays 45 . . . 'it>e5 , then 46 'Llf7+ forks the king and rook. The alternative is 45 . . . 'it>f4, but then 46 .l:!g4+ drives the king to e5 in any case, and after 46 . . . 'it>e5 47 �f7+ Black again loses his rook for nothing. It is interesting to

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

14

note that B lack ' s previous move was to advance his pawn from h5 to h4. Previously White ' s check on d6 was not a serious threat, but by pushing the pawn B lack allowed White an additional check on g4, and this proved his undoing.

a .-----,,---,---,=,....:::..,.= W

In the opening phase of the game, it isn ' t unusual for the traditional weakness o f the f7 -square (or f2-square if White is the vic­ tim) to play a part in a forking combination. a

b

c

d

e

g

h

w

S hirov - Topalov Rapidplay, Prague 2002

M i ru m i a n - Steh l i k Plzen 2000

The above position arose after the opening moves 1 e4 e5 2 tt:::lc 3 d6 3 j_c4 tt:::lf6 4 d3 tt:::lc 6 5 f4 i.g4 6 tt:::lf3 tt:::la5 7 fxe5 dxe5?

(7 . . . i.xf3 is correct) . White saw the opportu­ nity for a fork on e5 and continued 8 ..txf7+! Wxf7 (8 . . . We7 is no better as Black loses both a pawn and the right to castle) 9 tt:::lx e5+ (the fork arrives and White ends up two pawns ahead) 9 ... Wg8 1 0 tt:::lxg4 tt:::lxg4 1 1 'iWxg4 h5? (the position is lost in any case, but this fur­ ther error, losing the aS-knight to a queen fork, cuts the game short) 1 2 'iWe6+ Wh7 13 'iWf5+ g6 14 'iWxa5 1 -0.

Checking isn't the only way to set up a fu­ ture fork. Another possibility is to clear the square on which the fork will take place.

This position can be sol ved by the ' if only' method. We first have to spot that there is a potenti al knight fork of B lack 's king and bi shop on d6. Indeed, White's knight is al­ ready poised on a square from which it can jump to d6, so White would have an immedi ­ ate win, 'if only ' his pawn were not blocking the crucial square. The question then is how White can get rid of the obstructive pawn and make his wish come true. White continued 40 d7!, threatening to promote the pawn. Black has to deal with this threat. which would give White an extra queen, but then White has time to execute his knight fork . The finish was 40 ... tt:::lxd7 41 tt:::ld 6+ 'it>g6 42 tt:::lxc4 h5 (Black has only one pawn for the piece, so White is sure to win provided he takes a little care ; in particular, he must retain at least one pawn) 43 gxh5+ 'ii?xh5 44 tt:::ld 6 �g6 45 g4 tt:::lb 6 46 'iiff3 tt:::ld5 47 'ii?e4 tt:::lc 7 48 tt:::lf5 �f7 49 h4 g6 50 tt:::lh 6+ 'ii>e6 51 h 5 gxh5 52 gxh5 1 -0.

One of the most common methods of set­ ting up a fork is by means of a sacrifice. Forcing sacrifices based on checks or cap­ tures often have to be accepted, setting the stage for the follow-up which regains all the sacrificed material and more.

FORK

a w

b

d

c

e

g

" �---�V ;

%, ,!%'

//,

_

//�.---..-V

;

a

h

B.tB - B � - � -··-�- fl.t.B � - - B -· i.B %��, B � B � - � �=----! -� rt!f� - 0�� � - - - �

15

8 7

w

.i

6 5 4

__

%-uuY

3 2

�----S

de Firm ian - P. Carlsson

Almeida - Abreu

Stockholm 2002

Cuban Ch, Holguin City 2002

Black's knight on f6 is pinned by the white queen, since it cannot legally move, There­ fore one might be tempted to play 38 lt:Jd5 , which forks the black queen and the pinned knight. However, not all forks are decisive and here Black can reply 38 .. :�d6, moving one attacked piece and at the same time de­ fending the other. However, we are on the right lines with the idea of a fork on d5 , but it has to be set up the correct way. White played 38 �xf6+! and Black resigned. Black must recapture on f6 or else he will be a piece down, but after 38 . . . c,i;>xf6 39 lt:Jd5+ followed by 40 lt:Jxc7 White emerges a piece ahead in any case. As mentioned in the introduction, it is often hard to separate one tactical element from another, and all but the simplest pieces of tactics usually i nvolve more than one of the basic tactical ideas. Here White ' s queen sacrifice was a deflection, drawing the en­ emy king onto the correct square for the knight fork. We shall have more to say about deflections in Chapter 5 . I n the above case the preliminary sacrifice was a capture, so B lack had to accept or else remain material down. It is often harder to see preliminary sacrifices which do not in­ volve a capture (so-called empty-square sacrifices), but they can be j ust as effective.

A potential fork exists on f6, but first White must deflect the black king to a suitable square. The game continued 26 l:[h7+ ! and Black resigned. If Black accepts the sacrifice by 26 . . . 'itxh7 then 27 lt:Jxf6+ forks his king and queen; the upshot is that White wins a queen for a rook. However, declining the sac­ rifice is no better as the king cannot continue to guard the bishop; after 26 . . . �f8 27 lt:Jxf6 White not only wins the bishop, but also picks up further material because he is now forking Black's queen and rook. Another common preliminary idea is that of removing the guard. Once again, we shall look at this in more detail later (Chapter 7), but the principle i s that a fork would be possi­ ble, except that an enemy piece is covering the square on which the fork is to be exe­ cuted. A preliminary sacrifice may be needed to eliminate or deflect the piece that is pre­ venting the fork. In the diagram overleaf, there is a possible knight fork on f3 , but at the moment it is pre­ vented by the white pawn on g2. How can B lack remove thi s pawn so as to execute his fork? The game continued 42 ... lt:Jh3+! and White resigned. He cannot decline the sacri­ fice since 43 'it>h l allows immediate mate by

16

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

It isn ' t obvious that the decisive point of White's attack will be a queen fork from the square e2 ! White continued 20 �xg7+ ! , in it­ self a fork of B lack's kingpnd h8-rook. Black was forced to accept or lose the exchange and a pawn, but after 20 ... �xg7 came 21 tt::lf5+ forking king and queen . Here White is using the pin along the e-file to justify his play. Moving the king is no help, as White would then win queen and pawn for bishop and knight (a gain of four points), so Black played 2 1 ...exf5 22l:.xe7 tt:Jxe7 (see next diagram).

B

a

lonescu - Aron ian

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

w

Bucharest 1 999

43 .. Jhfl#. However, accepting it by 43 gxh3 removes the pawn ' s guard of f3 , and after 43 . . . 4:Jxf3+ 44 �f2 tt:Jxd2 White loses not only rook for knight, but even a further piece as he cannot save both bishop and knight. As with all the tactical ideas in this book, when they occur in isolation they are not so difficult to spot, but they can be put together in combinations of almost limitless complex­ ity. We will take a look at a more complex ex­ ample to show some of the possibilities. a

b

c

d

e

g

w

h

A quick count shows that Black has a rook and two knights for a queen and a pawn, so he is actually one point ahead on material . Has all White's brilliance been in vain? No, be­ cause White now played 23 Vi'e2, forking the two enemy knights. Black is unable to save them both and so, instead of being one point up, he will be two points down, almost al­ ways a decisive disadvantage. The game con­ cluded in an easy win for White: 23 ...4:Jg6 24 11Vxc4 1;ld2 25 �b3 �d5 26 �xa6 .I;i.d8 27 �xd5 �8xd5 28 h3 tt:Je5 29 a4 f4 30 aS f3 31 'ifb7 fxg2 32 a6 1 -0. White needed consider­

Kra m n i k - Ka rpov Rapidplay, Frankfurt 1 999

able foresight to spot the final �e2 before embarking on the initial sacrifice. Such an elaborate combination, involving three forks, may not come easily at first because although the building blocks are not too difficult in

FORK

themselves, the art of assembling them into a complete combination c an only be acquired with practice.

r

3 w

Fork Exercises Solutions start on page Ill. How did White force immediate resigna­ tion?

1

4

w

B

How did White win material and the game?

Material is roughly equal. What should Black play ?

White has just taken a pawn on e5 with his knight. Was this a good idea?

How did Black win the game with a fork?

18

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

6

9 w

w

How does White win a piece with a fork?

How did White use a fork to win a piece?

Black has j ust moved his rook from a8 to a7 . Was this a good idea?

A sharp tactic netted White a piece. How?

8

11

B

B

How did Black use a fork to win the game at once?

How can Black win material with a knight fork?

FORK

19

15 B

How did White win material i n this world championship match game?

What should Black d o about his attacked queen?

16 w

How did Black finish the game at a stroke?

How can White win the black queen?

17 w

How did Black win a piece?

How did White win a piece?

20

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

18

21

B

w

How did B lack finish the game straight away?

How did White win a piece?

19

22

w

w

White is able to win a piece. How?

White is in check. What should he play ?

20

23

B

B

How can Black force a win?

How did Black win a vital pawn?

FORK

Here White played 5 �xf7+. Does this win material?

21

How does Black use the undefended rook on h2 to win material? a

25

B

b

c

d

e

28 w

5

How did Black win the exchange using a fork?

How did White set up a decisive knight fork?

26

29

w

Does White have anything better than 3 2 �xe4 followed by 33 'i¥xb5, winning a pawn?

B

How did Black use a fork to launch a mating attack?

22

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

a

30 B

8

7

33 w

b

c

d

f

e

h

g

• • • •• • • • ,.,7 , . � .. . . � '"}jf{; • ·ttJ·.t� • • • .4 • 3 • • • //� �� .... -��2 '� �.:= • � 8

//" '-/�

6

6

'iX

4 3

2

�

�

%

'

5

/

The position looks hard to win but Black made it seem easy. How?

Black threatens mate in one on g2. How should White react?

B lack's queen is attacked. What should he do?

How does White set up a decisive fork ?

32

35

w

w

How did White use a fork to win two pawns?

How did White win a piece?

23

FORK

36

39

w

w

Black has just taken a piece on b 3 . Should White recapture?

How can White win a piece with a knight fork?

37 w

A slightly unusual fork netted White a piece. How?

38 8

How did Black win material by a spectacu­ lar combination?

40 w

How did White use a knight fork to launch a deadly attack?

41 B

How did Black win a vital pawn?

24

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

42 w

How does White win using a knight fork?

45

B

How did B lack set up a decisive queen fork?

43

46

w

w

How can White win at least one pawn?

44

B

Should Black regain the sacrificed piece with ll. . .f6 or ll. . .h6?

How did White set up a knight fork with two preliminary sacrifices?

2 D iscovered Attack

Like the fork (see Chapter 1 ), the discovered attack is a way of creating two threats at the same time. Unlike the fork, the discovered at­ tack involves two attacking pieces . The fol­ lowing diagram shows the basic idea. a

B

b

c

d

e

the rear piece. In the above example the e7pawn is the firing piece and the black queen i s the rear piece . The rear piece in a discov­ ered attack is always a line-moving piece (rook, bishop or queen) but the firing piece can be anything.

h

I

8

B

7 6 5

3 2

Grubisic - Tischendorf Z. Almasi - Adams

Darmstadt 1993

European Team Ch, Pula 1997

White has an undefended knight on g5 , which is on the same diagonal as Black's queen. At the moment there is a black pawn in the way, but Black now played 16 e6. This moves the pawn out of the way, di scov­ ering an attack by the black queen on White 's knight. At the same time the pawn itself at­ tacks the white queen . Thus Black has cre­ ated two threats, one directly and one by qiscovery. White 's queen cannot move so as to defend the knight, and so White loses a piece. In the game White struggled on for a few moves before resigning. In a discovered attack , we call the piece which actually moves the firing piece and the piece which has its line of attack opened ...

Here ' s another example. Black ' s queen and bi shop are li ned up on the long diagonal , and Black would be able to take the white knight on f3 if only his own d5-knight were not in the way. Any move by thi s knight wil l threaten to win a piece by . . .'�xf3 , but White can meet thi s single threat by, for example, l:Ie3 . Therefore Black must look for a way to move the d5-knight so as to set up a second threat. The move 27 4Jf6 fits the bill admi­ rably. In addition to the threat to the f3knight, Black directly attacks White's queen. White cannot cope with both threats and must lose a piece; he therefore resigned im­ medi ately. ...

26

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

A discovered attack may not exist immedi­ ately, but can be prepared by a suitable se­ quence of forcing moves.

w

B

Rasik - l sonzo Mitropa Cup, Leipzig 2002

Portisch - Ka rpov Bie/ 1 996

In this position there is a potential discov­ ered attack along the long diagonal. White has an undefended rook on h i which would be under threat if the rook on g2 moved away. However, there is no immediate discovered attack and, moreover, Black must first deal with the attack on his queen . Karpov solved the problem by 18 J!xb5 !. This preliminary sacrifice not only eliminates the attack on the queen, but also deflects the white bishop away from e2, and so allows Black to play his rook to g4. The finish was 1 9 il..x bS .U.g4 and White resigned because he must now move his queen, whereupon he loses a whole rook on h i . Taking into account the initial sacri­ fice on b5 , the net result is that Black has won a piece.

In this position the two queens are lined up, with only a white bishop separating them. The game ended 32 il..x h7+ and Black re­ signed, since he has to deal with the check, whereupon White can safely take Black's queen.

a

b

c

d

e

g

h

w

..

A check is one of the most forcing moves, so a discovered attack which is also a check gives the defender less chance to escape from his predicament. Either of the two pieces involved in a discovered attack can deliver check. In the next position it is the firing piece which checks.

Karpov - Leko Tilburg 1996

This is a more complex example because a preliminary sacrifice is necessary to set up the discovered attack. In the diagram White is marginally ahead on material (rook for

27

DISCOVERED ATTA CK

bishop and pawn), but his h i -rook i s under attack and his g5-knight is caught in a nasty pin. White turned the tables by 28 l:txh6! �xh6 29 �e3 ; suddenly Black's bishop is under attack and he also faces the threat of 30 li:Jf7+ with a discovered attack against Black's queen. The result is that Black will end up at least a piece down, and he therefore resigned . This particular combination was hard to see because the line-up which is char­ acteristic of a discovered attack did not exist in the diagram, but had to be set up by the correct sequence of moves. If the rear piece of a discovered attack de­ livers check, then we speak of a discovered check. This type of discovered attack is par­ ticularly strong because the firing piece has virtually complete freedom to move where it wants. The rear piece delivers check, which the defender has to deal with. The firing piece then gets another move before the de­ fender gets a chance to respond. With two free moves to play with, it is not surprising that quite a lot of damage can be done.

w

king. Any move by the knight will deliver check by discovery from White ' s queen. However, White has to take into account the attack on his queen from the c4-rook. The multi-purpose discovered check 1 7 tZ:Ie4+ both blocks the fourth rank and prepares to take the bishop on d6. Black will lose his queen, for example 17 . . . Wf8 1 8 �xd8+ or 1 7 . . . �e8 1 8 tZ:Ixd6+ �f8 1 9 �xd8+, and he therefore resigned. Discovered checks are so powerful that it is often worth a considerable sacrifice to set one up. a

b

c

d

e

g

h

B

Rogulj - Atlas Zonal tournament, Dresden 1998

Zifroni - Manor Czerniak memorial, Bikurei Haitim/Tel Aviv 1 997

This is a typical example. White 's queen and knight are li ned up against the enemy

Black is well down on material (rook and pawn for knight) but White's king lacks de­ fenders. B lack managed to break through with a brilliant combination based on sacri­ ficing his queen to set up a lethal discovered check. The game continued 18 ... .l:!.g8 ! ! (at­ tacking the white queen and setting up an at­ tack against g2) 1 9 �xeS (White may as well take the queen) 1 9 ... .l:.xg2+ 20 � h 1 (now the discovered check has been set up; Black would like to mate by playing his rook along the g-file, but first he must remove the f2pawn to prevent White from blocking the long diagonal with f3 ) 20 ....l:.xf2+ (this example

1

28

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

demonstrates the key feature of the discov­ ered check with brutal clarity ; the defender has to respond to the check from the rear piece, so the firing piece can wreak havoc with i mpunity) 21 'it'g1 l::t g2+ 22 'it'h 1 (the king must return to the comer, allowing a second and final discovered check) 22 ....l:.g3+ and White resigned since it is mate in two more moves.

and then White can safely play 33 l::t x d I be­ cause the double check has blocked the d-file with gain of tempo and thus left Black's queen undefended. Nott� that 3 2 tZ:le3+ is bad, because this is merely a discovered check, and so B lack can reply 32 .. .'�xfl +, remain­ ing material up in the endgame . The game ac­ tually finished 3 1 ...lld3 32 tZ:ld6++ 'iit>e6 33

The discovered check may seem deadly enough, but it is not the ultimate chess weapon. That accolade belongs to the double check, a special type of discovered check in which the firing piece and the rear piece both check the enemy king simultaneously. The key feature of the double check is that the only legal reply is a king move. Most dou­ ble checks form part of a mating attack, but the fol lowing example shows that other moti­ vations are possible.

There is one type of discovered attack which is very easy to overlook. This involves what we call pin-breaking. The following example makes the idea clear.

.lad 1 1 -0.

w

w

Conde Rod riguez - M unoz Palmerin Vila de Padron 2000

This position arose after the moves 1 e4 eS 2 tZ:lf3 d6 3 �c4 �g4 4 tZ:lc3 cS? . Black's

Golod - Zak Israeli Team Ch 2002

Here White is a piece up, but his knight is under attack and if the knight moves then Black can promote his pawn. White played 31 tZ:lxfS ! , apparently allowing the pawn to advance. However, if B lack plays 3 1 . . .d 1 � then White replies with the double check 3 2 tZ:ld6++ . A double check forces a king move,

g4-bishop is apparently pinning the white knight on f3 . Indeed, if the knight moves then Black can take White's queen. You may recall that it is sometimes possible to win material with a forking combination based on �xf7+ (see page 1 4), but it doesn't work here since after 5 .Jtxf7+? 'iiitx f7 6 tZ:lxe5+ dxe5 7 'ii'xg4 White has lost a piece. Nevertheless, White does have a way to win material based on the weakness of f7 . This depends on the fact that a pin against any piece other than a king is not absolute ; the pi nned piece can still legally

29

DISCOVERED ATTACK

move, and if it can create a strong enough threat then the pin may tum out to be a dis­ covered attack fo r the other side. White now played 5lt'lxe5! . This threatens 6 � xf7 + 'lte7 7 4Jd5#, which is such a strong threat that the fact that White's queen can be taken is irrelevant. Black could have played on a pawn down by 5 . . . dxe5 6 'i¥xg4 tLlc6, but he decided to allow the mate: 5...�xd1 6 �xf7+

Black a pawn up with a large positional ad­ vantage because the e4-pawn is very weak; finally, 14 lLlxe4 'iVxh4 also gives B l ack an extra pawn which White cannot regain by 1 5 tLlxd6 because then his d4-knight can be cap­ tured. After 1 3 . . . tLlfxe4 ! , White did not care to play on a pawn down with a bad position, and he immediately resigned.

'lte7 7 4Jd5#.

The use of pin-breaking to convert a pin

into a discovered attack often proves totally

unexpected to the opponent, and it is surpris­ ing h ow often it occurs in practice.

Discovered Attack Exercises Solutions start on page 1 1 7.

In the following example, it was not a mate threat but a threat to the enemy queen which

allowed the pin to be broken .

1

w

8

B

7 6 5

3 2

Stone

-

How did White win using a discovered attack?

Ni jboer

Den Bosch 1 999

Here the knight on f6 appears pinned, but Black broke the pin by 13...lLlfxe4! . The pin has been converted into a discovered attack, with the knight attacking White's queen, and the black queen attacking White's h4-bishop. With so many pieces under attack, it is neces­ sary to calculate all the variations carefully, but it is not too difficult: after 1 4 �xd8 tLlxd2 White is not only a pawn down, but has four pieces under attack; 1 4 fxe4 'ii'x h4 leaves

a

b

c

d

e

g

h

2

w

A discovered attack wins quickly. How?

30

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

6

3

B

B

Black, two pawns up, decided to grab a third by 4 1 . iYxb3. Was this a good idea? ••

How did Black win with a discovered attack?

4

7

B

B

1:,1 Black's rook is under attack. Does he have to move it?

What is the simplest way for White to win?

Here Black played 14 Jhc3 15 �xc3 ctJxe4, forking queen, rook and bishop. Was this a good idea? ..

Black won with a discovered attack. How?

DISCOVERED ATTA CK

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

a

31

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

12

9

w

w

A discovered attack deci des the game. How ?

10

How did White set up a discovered attack with a preliminary sacrifice?

13

w

B

The line-up of queens on d2 and a5 suggests a discovered attack. Is there one here?

How did Black win material by a discovered attack?

14

11

B

B

How did Black finish the game at a stroke?

In this rather complex position, how can Black win material ?

32

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

15

18

B

B

How did a discovered check help Black to win?

How did Black win a pawn?

16

8

19

8 7

B

B

Black's bishop is attacked. What is his best continuation ?

How did Black set up a decisive discoverect check?

White won quickly. How?

How did White win an important pawn?

DISCOVERED AITA CK

What is the quickest win for White?

How did Black win a pawn with a discovered attack ?

22 w

How did White win a pawn?

a

How did White win materi al by arranging discovered attack?

33

25 w

How did White win material with a sur­ prisi ng discovered attack?

Black played 26 JIYxf7. Was this a good move ? .•

3 Pin

The pin is one of the most basic tactics, but it has immense practical importance. It is very easy, even for masters and grandmasters, to overlook the effect of a pin and thereby lose material . The basic idea involves three pieces, one friendly and two enemy, all lying on the same line. Here is an example. a

b

c

d

e

g

White wil l be able to play .l:lxc7, winning B lack' s queen. White exploited thi s situa­ tion by playing 23 'iYxd4 (see next diagram) , when B l ack immediately resigned.

h

w

Zonal tournament, Man ila 2001

If Black ignores the capture then he stays a knight down, but 23 . . . cxd4 24 l::!. x c7 does not help him; the queens are exchanged, but his material deficit remai ns.

In the diagram, the three relevant units are the rook on c I , the queen on c7 and the inter­ vening pawn on c5 . In a pin, a friendly line­ moving piece lies on the same line as two en­ emy pieces. Both enemy pieces are on the same side of the friendly piece. We call the nearer enemy piece (in this case the pawn) the pinned piece and the distant enemy piece (here the queen) the rear piece. If the pinned piece moves off the line of the pin, then the rear enemy piece can be captured. In thi s case, the c5-pawn is defending the d4-knight, but this protection is more apparent than real , because if Black actuall y plays . . . cxd4, then

When the rear piece is not the king, the pin may or may not result in the immediate loss of material - it all depends on the values of the pieces involved. In the above case, White lost a queen, while Black lost a queen and a knight, so the net result was that White gained a knight. However, if Black 's queen had been defended, so that he could have taken White's rook on c7 at the end, then the material bal­ ance would have shifted in Black's favour and so he would have avoided materi al loss. The more valuable the rear piece is, the more likely it is that the pin will lose material, but each case much be treated individual ly.

Handoko - Chon

PIN

If the rear piece is the king, then the situa­ tion is different because the pinned piece cannot move off the pin-line at all, and so the material values are less i mportant.

35

This position shows that it can be hard to see more complex tactics involving pins. It looks as though the d2-square is adequately defended, but Black realized that he canl in­ deed play 34 l:!.d2 ! . White resigned straight away because he loses his queen thanks to a double pin. The f3-knight is pinned by the b7-bishop, while the queen on e2 is pinned by Black's rook. How can one see such tac­ tics in advance? In most cases there are clues which alert players can spot. Here the line-up of the b7-bishop and White's king is the key feature; looking at this reveals that any move by the d5 -rook will totally paralyse White's knight, rendering it incapable of guarding any square. That leads naturally to the d2square, and the lethal second pi n. ...

B

Rublevsky - Vaga n ia n Olympiad, Elista 1 998

Here Black' s queen is pinning the white rook against the white king. The rook has no legal moves, so Black can attack it with im­ punity. After 37 .lae8 White resigned since the rook is now attacked twice, and White is unable to defend it a second time.

If you are lucky then you may be able to win material with an immediate pin, but few opponents are so helpful as to lose material in one move. In most cases the pin has to be prepared; this will usually involve forcing moves such as captures and checks.

...

a

b

c

d

e

B

h

B

Topalov - Lautier Tilburg 1 998

Dongu i nes - Ad ia nto Asian Ch, Calcutta 2001

The f2-pawn is pinned by Black 's queen, but this observation leads to no immediate win. However, by means of a prelimi nary sacrifice Black can force White's queen to

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

36

repl ace the pawn, providing a much more worthwhile target for a pin . The game con­ tinued 30 .. Jhf2 ! 3 1 �xf2 (White must ac­ cept, or he faces catastrophic material loss) 31. ....te3 (now White's queen is pinned, and Black ends up winning a queen and pawn for a rook and a bishop) 32 '.tg2 ..txf2 33 �xf2 iYe3 34 lZJxd6 (Black has a decisive material advantage in any case, but he can win the game quickly with some further tactics) 34 ... nbt ! 0- 1 . White resigned since he loses more ma­ terial ; for example, 35 ltxb 1 ..txd5+ 36 '.tg 1 �xg3+ 37 '.tfl 'iVd3+ winning the b 1 -rook, or 35 ..tf3 .l:lxd 1 36 ..txd 1 �d3 attacking pieces on d 1 and d6. Although most pins operate agai nst en­ emy pieces, it is also possible to pin a piece against a threat, such as a potential mate . a

b

c

d

e

w

Shaba lov - l stratescu Olympiad, Elista 1 998

h 8

B

A pin can tie up the opposing pieces so much that the attacker can afford to spend some time bringing further pressure to bear on the pinned piece.

7 6 5

3 2

Tivia kov - Volokiti n Esbjerg 2002

In this position the white rook is pinned, even though there is no other white piece on the pin-line. If the rook moves, then Black has instant mate by . . . �g4#, so the rook is immobi lized in much the same way as if it were pinned against the ki ng. Black played 53 .. J!f2 (53 . . . .l:!.e I is also good) and White resi gned since the second attack on his rook leaves him facing loss of material .

White has sacrificed considerable material to reach this position, and is currently the ex­ change and a pawn down. Therefore it would not do simply to take twice on d7 ; although this would regain the exchange, White would then be a pawn down in the endgame. In or­ der to end up ahead on material, White must aim to win the pinned d7-rook for nothing. Thus he must bring further pressure to bear on Black's position. Note that White 's e3bishop is itself pinned, so cannot play an ac­ tive role. This pinned bi shop also prevents White from playing 27 �c 8+ '.te7 28 �xh8, as then 2 8 . . . ..td2 would win materi al for Black. The white piece which is currently playing little part in the action is the rook on g I. White must seek to acti vate this rook, but although the pin holds Black captive for the moment, he is threatening to escape his bonds by . . . �e7 (although Black can still legal ly castle, this would drop a whole rook on d7 ) . releasing the rook for acti on. White played 27 .i.a4! (27 kla l is less effective due to 27 . . . �e7 ), threatening 28 .l:I.d I. Although this

PIN

might seem a rather slow plan, there i s noth­ ing B lack can do to avoid decisive material

loss ; for example, 27 . . .'3ite7 28 lad 1 "iYxd 1 + 29 i.xd 1 .l:.xd 1 30 "ii'h 7 +, winning the b4-

bishop. The game actually finished 27 ... f5 28 .l:!.d l and B lack resigned, because after 28 . 1Wxe4+ 29 "i¥xe4+ fxe4+ 30 Wxe4 B lack will lose a whole rook on d7, ending up a piece down. This example is typical in that the attacker is able to take his time stepping up the pressure on the pinned piece, but he has to bear in mind the possibility of the de­ fender unpinning. .

.

37

8 "i¥d2 i.. x d2+ 9 Wxd2 hS 47 l:!eS+ 'it>g4 48 l:!.gS+ 'it>h3 49 �e2 1 -0, with Black unable to avoid mate by 'iVfl #.

2

w

.•.

Currently White is a piece for a pawn down. How did he regain the piece and reach a winning position?

SKEWER

3

45

5

B

B

How can Black win material ?

4

Black played 36 ... g6 here. Was this a good move?

6

B

B

How did Black finish White off?

How did B lack force a win in this appar­ ently placid position ?

5 Defl ect i o n

In the earl ier chapters of thi s book, the tactics depended on the geometrical arrangement of the pieces on the board ; for example, pins and skewers are based on the li ning-up of the pieces involved. Not al l tactics are of this type . In thi s chapter we meet for the first time tactics which depend on the functions of the pieces invol ved rather than the geometry of the chessboard. A deflection ari ses when an enemy piece has an important duty. If it is forcibly pulled away from its current position, then it may no longer be able to fulfil its duty, and catastro­ phe ensues. a

b

c

d

e

rather than real . White played 20 �xc6+, placing Black in a dilemma. After 20 .. J:!.xc6, White can reply 2 1 .U.d8#, while the only other legal move, 20. . . Wf8, allows 2 1 'VJVxc8#. Black therefore resigned. The important duty which forms the basis for a deflection doesn ' t have to be defence agai nst a mate threat , although thi s is a com­ mon motif. In the following example it is the defence of another piece.

w

h 8

w

7 6 5

3 2

A. Horvath - Priehoda Mitropa Cup, Leipzig 2002

M a rciano - Prie French Ch, Narbonne / 997

In the diagram, Blac k ' s c8-rook has a vital responsibility - covering d8 so as to prevent White from mating by .l::!. d 8#. If it is forced to abandon this duty then the game will end at once . It follows that the rook is unable to ex­ ercise any influence along the file, and there­ fore its defence of the c6-pawn is apparent

Here Black's king has the duty of defend­ ing the rook on f8 , which is under attac k by White ' s queen . Unlike a mating threat, the duty of defending a piece can be abandoned, albeit at the cost of the piece in question . Whether the deflection is worthwhile depends on the relative value of the pieces in questi on ; if the attacker wins a more valuable piece by sacrificing a Jess valuable one, then the tactic is worthwhi le. White continued 23 jLh7+

DEFLECTION

�xh7 2 4 �xf8. By giving u p a bishop, h e de­ flected Black ' s king away from the defence of the rook and thereby won the exchange, securing a winning position . When you have won material, it is important not to relax and assume that the game will win itself. The rest of this game is a perfect example of how not to exploit a material advantage. White carelessly became embroiled in unnecessary complications, miscalculated some tactics and eventually even lost: 24 b6 25 axb6 axb6 26 �a3 lt:JbS 27 !!aS .l:txc2 28 lt:Jc5 �d8 29 �d6? (29 g3 ! would have snuffed out B lack' s counterplay and won easily) 29 .'t?Vh4 30 tt:ld3? (30 .l::r f l was stil l winning) 30 lt:Jc6 31 .laxe8 tt:lxd4 32 ktel tt:lf3+ 33 gxf3 �g5+ 34 Wfl �xh5 35 Wg2 �g6+ 36 �fl ? (36 ..th2 �xd3 37 .l::f. g l would still have drawn) 36. .'ijk'xd3+ 37 'it>g2 11Yd2 38 .l:!fl �g5+ 39 Wh2 :c4 40 'Jii/e 7 �h4#.

47

while 48 Wh2 is also mate after 48 . . . �h l # or 48 . . . � l #. This deflection is han:k!r to see than those in the examples given above be­ cause the white king ' s important duty isn ' t obvious in the diagram - . . . 'ijY h l + is hardly a move one would consider while the white king is sti l l guarding h I . Chess cannot be played successfully by rote and a certain de­ gree of imagination is necessary to spot many ideas.

•..

•.

.••

.

One type of deflection occurs time and time again in practice and regularly catches out players of all levels, up to and including grandmasters . Here is a recent example. a

b

c

d

e

h 8

B

It is quite common for deflections to play a major role in attacks on the king.

B

B u i Vinh - Frey Olympiad, Bled 2002

Topalov - Kasparov Rapidplay match (game 3 ) , Sofia 1 998

Here Black is a piece down, and in addi­ tion his d4-knight is caught in a pin. It might seem hopeless, but Black actually won with the aid of a deflection : 47 .. Jhfl+. White resigned as 48 Wxfl is met by 48 . . . 'i?Vh l #,

White ' s b l -rook has the important duty of defending the queen . If this rook could be deflected away, then White would lose his queen. 32 ... l:.c l+ does the trick. After 33 �xc l �xb4 Black has won a queen for a rook, while after 33 Wg 2 Black wins a rook with the characteristic continuation 33 . . . 'ijYxb4 34 llxb4 �xa l , exploiting a kind of pin along the first rank. White therefore resigned. The typical features of this tactic are a rook on the first rank defending a queen, and an enemy rook which can land on the first rank with check. It is amazing how often this trick

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

48

occurs in practice ; for some reason it is in­ credibly easy to overlook.

that 3 3 tt:lxd2 is met by 3 3 .. .'t1Vxg2#) . In all cases White faces catastrophic material loss.

In all the examples given so far, the de­ flecting move has been a check. Since checks are such forcing moves, it is not surprising that they occur frequently in this type of tac­ tic . However, non-checking deflections are also quite common .

As with all the tactical elements covered in this book, deflections can occur with varying degrees of complexi ty. The next example is a l ittle more involved.

a

b

c

d

e

h

w

B

Beshukov - Jenetl Krasnodar 1 999

Cifuentes - Reinderma n Dutch Ch, Rotterdam 1 999

White's fl -bishop has the ' important duty ' of preventing . . . Wiix g2#, so it is not genuinely covering the d3- square. Black exploited this by 29 .. J:Id3 ! , attacking White's queen . The queen also has a duty, that of guarding the knight on e4. A quick check shows that the queen has no move which sti l l defends the e4-knight, and so White must lose material . The game continued 30 Wlixd3 (this looks like a reasonable chance, giving up the queen for a rook and a knight, but it turns out that White faces further material loss) 30 ...tt:lxd3 31 .Jl.xd3 .l:!d8 and White resigned. If he de­ fends the bishop by 3 2 liad l , then 32 .. Jhd3 33 .l:Ixd3 .Jl.xe4 gives Black queen and bishop for two rooks, while after 3 2 .Jl.bl (32 .Jl.c2 .l:id2 is the same) 3 2 .. J::t d 2 ! White has no rea­ sonable way to defend against the mate threat on g2 (note that the e4-knight is pinned, so

Black's queen has the ' i mportant duty ' of defending the knight on d5 . At first sight the queen is not needed because the d5-knight is defended by the e6-pawn, but this pawn is pinned by the white queen. In other words, if the queen were not defending d5 then White could win a piece by playing .Jl.xd5 , meeting . . . exd5 by Wlixe7 . This leads us to the wi nning move 12 g4 ! , after which the queen cannot retain its defence of d5 . White wins a piece and the game conc luded 12 ... 'i/Vxg4 13 .Jl.xdS exd5 14 Wixe7 tt:lf6 15 l:Ig1 �f4 16 Wlid6 Wlih6 17 tt:le4 and Black resigned since White 's threats of 1 8 .Jl.xh6 and 1 8 tt:lxf6+ win further material. Sometimes a preliminary action is neces­ sary before the actual deflection takes place . A deflection is not apparent in the following diagram, but White set one up with a prelimi­ nary sacrifice : 25 .l:Ixd5! exd5 (B lack can

DEFLECTION

49

This position looks rather confusing, with both sides having advanced pawns, but White won the game with a neat combination : 29 �h8+ ! (this deflection allows White to take on f7 without the king recapturing) 29 ... Wxh8 30 gxf7 (suddenly White has two deadly threats, 3 1 .l::t. h 1 # and 3 1 fxe8�+ ; there is no defence against both) 30 .bxa2++ 31 Wxa2 1 -0. Black resigned because after 3 1 . . .l'.:lb2+ 32 Wa 1 he runs out of checks and cannot meet White 's threats. In this case the deflec­ tion was combined with pawn promotion and with the creation of mating threats .

w

..

P. Cra m l i ng - Barkhagen Hasselbacken 2001

insert some checks, but 25 . . . �cl + 26 'lt>f2 .U.c2+ 27 �g3 doesn' t change the situation) 26 .U.e8+ �b7 (the only square for the king ; oth­ erwise White can take the aS-rook immedi­ ately) 27 a6+ ! (here is the deflection ; B lack ' s king must abandon the important duty of de­ fending the rook) 27 �xa6 28 �xa8 (White has won a piece for a pawn; B l ack soon gave up) 28 .l:tc7 29 .te5 �d7 30 'it>f2 1-0.

W

••.

•••

In the fol lowing example, the deflection i s combined with other tactical elements.

Dreev - Svidler European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002

w

Koga n - Sama rita n i Bled 1 998

This example is even more complex . Black has a bishop and knight for a rook and a pawn, so material is roughly equal . A more important factor is the activity of several white pieces, but for the moment there is no direct way to break through. A queen check on e7 would be decisive, but Black's queen cover s this square. However, Dreev noticed that this is an important duty for the black queen, and he went on to look for a way the queen could be deflected away from this duty. The game continued with the sacrifice 26 .l:tc4 ! , trying to force the queen to quit the a3-f8 diagonal. If Black plays 26 . . . �a3 , then

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

50

27 l:ie4 wins (the e8-knight is attacked, and after 27 . . . l2:'lf6 White mates by 28 �d8+), so B lack must accept the sacrifice. The forced continuation is 26 . . .'i¥xc4 27 Wl/e7+ �g8 28 't!Yxe8+ �f8 29 l2:'le7+ �g7 30 l2:'lf5 + ! (better than 30 'ifxa8 �xe7 3 1 'Jii/x a7, which only leaves White slightly ahead on material) 30 . . . Wf6 3 1 'i¥xa8 Wxf5 3 2 'i¥xf8 and White is the exchange and a pawn up, a decisive material advantage. B lack saw all this and therefore resigned. Although this combina­ tion was quite deep, most of it was forced and the really difficult part was having the idea for the deflection in the first place. Then it was a matter of calculating whether the ma­ terial White gains by checking on e7 out­ weighs the initial rook sacri fice. We end with a form of deflection which is subtly different from the examples we have seen so far.

a bad square for the queen as this move, cut­ ting the queen ' s guard of g5, comes with gain of tempo) 1 3 �e5 �f5 he ends up a Q iece down. The distinction between this idea, which is often called a 'decoy ' , and that of deflection may at first seem obscure, as in both cases a forcing move compels an opposing piece to take an unfavourable action. The difference is that in a deflection it is the departure of the enemy piece which is unfavourable, while in a decoy it is the arrival of the enemy piece on a particularly bad square which is unfa­ vourable. The terminology for these different motifs is not wholly standard ; the words 'de­ coy ' 'diversion' and 'deflection' are used to mean different things by different writers . In this book our focus is on winning games, and not on the nuances of chess termi nology ; therefore for simplicity we will use the word 'deflection ' for all such ideas .

Deflection Exercises Solutions start on page 1 27 .

I

w

B h u iya n - Liogky Sautron 2001

White ' s queen has the i mportant task of defending the outlying knight on g 5 , but there is no way to deflect the queen away from this duty. Instead B lack wins a piece by drawing the queen onto an especially unfa­ vourable square. The game continued l l e3 and White resigned as after 1 2 Wl/xe3 f4 ( e3 is ...

White is a pawn down. What should he play ?

DEFLECTION

51

5

2

w

w

What is the si mplest win for White?

3

Black resigned after White's next move . What was it?

6

w

8

How did White win material?

How did Black force a quick mate ?

4

7

w

w

What is White 's quickest way of pushing his attack home?

How did White win a rook with a detlection ?

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

52

8

8

11 B

w

8

• [I' ;1�"' /"i . ·" •• .t� ··. ··"'""� • .1 • • �· r-• , � � �; � · Mct:JB � -�- � ;;,]] i. � r: 0, • � � B

7

"

6

/:;;;:. Y> ""� ' ' '

5

. ...

/

3 2

" �'l. " . ;

/f - - . ;

.. , ,

� ::

/,:;; '

/,

;; ;:;

6 5

4 3 2

White played 16 h3 in this game between two top grandmasters. Was this a good move?

Deflections can also occur in the endgan How did Black win here?

A deflection secured Black a decisive rnateri al advantage. How ?

How did Black use a deflection to force quick mate?

a

b

c

d

e

10

13

w

B 6 5

3 2

How does White win most easi ly?

How did Black end the game with a singlt deadly blow?

DEFLECTION

14

53

17

w

B

White has sacrificed a piece for a strong initiative. How did he press his attack home?

Black played 25 J:tc8 and the game ended in a draw. Did he have a better move? ..

How did Black force an instant win?

How did Black force material gain?

16 w

White has sacrificed a piece. How did he win with a deflection ?

19 w

White used a deflection to start a decisive attack on Black's king. How ?

54

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

20

23

B

B

A deflection forced immediate resignation. How ?

21

How did Black force a quick mate ?

24

w

B

White has sacrificed a piece. How did he force his attack home?

How did Black win using two consecuti deflections?

22

25

B

B

How did Black win with a double deflection?

How did Black win with a preliminary sxc I h2. fol­ lowed by ... h I 'it', and Black has a winning m aterial advantage.

68

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

O pening and Closing Lines

3

Exercises

B

Solutions start on page 1 35 .

How did Black force mate ?

I

4

w

B

Which deadly blow did White strike here?

2

A confusing-looking position, but B lack found a lethal move . What was it?

5

w

B

How did White press home his attack?

Here Black found a knock-out move . What was it?

OPENING AND CLOSING LINES

6

w

Both sides are attacking furiously, but how did Black strike first?

69

9 B a ck- Ra nk M ate

It quite often happens that the castled king is hemmed in by three friendly pawns on the second rank. Thi s makes it vulnerable to a mate del ivered by an enemy queen or rook arriving on the first rank. Such a mate is called a back-rank mate. Two conditions must be satisfied for such a mate to occur; first of all , the defender's resistance on the back rank must be inadequate, and secondly an enemy queen or rook must be able to pen­ etrate to the back rank. Here is a simple ex­ ample. a

b

c

d

e

9

h

w

In this example White ' s queen sacrifice se up both conditions simultaneously ; the roo! was eliminated by capture and at the samt time the b-file was opened to allow White ' : rook to deli ver the mate . B ack-rank mates are unusual in the earl) middlegame, when there are usually two de fensive rooks on the back rank. However later on the rooks may leave the back rank OJ be exchanged off, and then the danger of < back-rank mate increases . Sometimes play· ers spend a tempo playing g3 or h3 ( . . . g6 OJ . . . h6 for Black) specifically to create an es­ cape-square and reduce the danger of a back­ rank mate . However, such moves must bt carefully j udged since they can create weak­ nesses around the king ; there is no generai rule and each position must be treated indi­ vidually. The next example shows another typical back-rank idea. a

B

b

c

d

h

e

-�

8 7

Kravtsov - M a l i n i n

6

Russia Cup, Novgorod 1 99 7

Black ' s king is blocked in by the three un­ moved pawns in front of it, so there is a po­ tential back-rank mate. However. B lack sti ll has a rook coveri ng the back rank and this rook , for example, prevents mate by "JJ:Ve 8#. In order to de liver a back-rank mate the resis­ tance of this rook must be overcome ; White achieved this by 20 "JJ:Vxa 8 + ! . Black resigned. since after 2CLCLJxa8 Wh ite plays 2 1 l::i. b 8#.

5 4 3

ts � .�

�

Xie J u n - Seirawan ' Queens vs Kings · Jinan

2 002

2

71

BACK-RANK MATE

White 's king is vulnerable to a potential back-rank mate, and indeed if White's queen were not defending the d 1 -rook, then immedi­ ate mate by .. Jhd 1 # would be possible. This naturally raises the question as to whether White' s queen can be compelled to give up the duty of guarding d 1 . Earlier in the book, we covered the three main ways in which a piece can be compelled to abandon a duty : capture, direct attack and deflection. Capture is not possible here, and the direct attack by 24 . . . h5 achieves nothing after 25 WVe2. That leaves deflection and leads us to the winning move 24 .. Ji'e4! . White 's queen is attacked, so he has no time to take on d8, but 25 WVxe4 allows mate in two by 25 .. Jhd 1 +. Moreover, White 's queen has no square available which retains control of d 1 , so, faced by catastrophic material loss, White resigned.

a w

b

c

d

h

e

8 /:i ' ' %

-V Jt - � · �'� if� � �� J: - . .� � - 8 . f""� �� � f;' - � /" " " ' / ' /

moved, since the escape-square(s) can be covered by enemy pieces. Indeed, practice shows that back-rank mates of this type are frequently overlooked. The reason is likely to be psychological ; a row of unmoved pawns in front of the king sends a warning signal to watch out for possible back-rank mates, but once one of the pawns has moved, the player rel axes and it is then that mistakes occur. In the diagram position White played 3 3 �e4! and B l ack resigned. The double pin has sud­ denly been transformed into a double attac k on the enemy rooks. Neither white rook can be taken due to the back-rank mate (33 . . J:ha7 34 �xb8# and 33 .. Jhb5 34 .l:.a8+ ), so one black rook must move to defend the other, but then B l ack loses his knight. The main line is 3 3 .. .'�Jxf2+ 34 �g2 l:f.ee8 35 l:!.xb8 lhb8 36 �xf2 and White is a piece up. Back-rank mate combinations often spring up unexpectedly, as in the following exam­ ple.

7

a

:/, o / /

b

c

d

e

h

B

� />o u V

�

Topa lov - Morozevich Cannes 2002

White is a pawn up, but his bishop is dou­ bly pinned and his f2-pawn is attacked. At first sight there cannot be a bank-rank mate in this positi on, because Black's h-pawn has moved, giving the king a flight-square . How­ ever, it is i mportant to recognize that back­ rank mates can sti l l occur even when one (or more) of the pawns in front of the king has

McShane - M i rumian Lippstadt 1999

White has just pl ayed .l:Ie3-d3 . attacking Black's queen. Since the e8-rook is also un­ der threat, White probably expected to win material . However, Black replied with the shocking 22 ... J1Lc4 ! . Although three blac k

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

72

pieces are under attack, none of them can be captured: 23 lbxe8 loses a piece to 23 . . . �xd3 fol l owed by . . . .I:.xe8, while 23 .l:Ixd4 .I:.e I + 24 .I:.fl l'.:txfl # and 23 lt:Jxc4 l'.:te I # lead to back­ rank mates, the latter depending on the fact that the f2-rook is pinned. Therefore White had to play 23 .l:f.d l , moving the attacked rook and at the same time covering the threatened mate on e I . However, by 23 'ti'xd6! Black again exploited the weak back rank (see dia­ gram below). ...

becomes a mirror reflection of kingside cas­ tling and then back-rank mates become more likely .

Back- Rank Mate Exercises Solutions start on page 1 36.

w

1

w

Black has won a piece for nothing, and the finish was 24 lt:Je4 l'.:txe4 0- 1 . Here again the lack of the traditional three­ pawn li ne-up probably dulled White 's sense of danger, although the absence of both rooks from the first rank was a warning sign that he should have heeded.

Black threatens mate in one. What should White play ?

2

All the examples in this chapter feature kingside castl ing. Back-rank mates occur more often on the kingside than the queenside for two reasons. Firstly, kingside castling is in general more common than queenside cas­ tling. Secondly, queenside castl ing usually involves advancing the d-pawn and develop­ ing the queen 's bishop; then after 0-0-0 there is a natural flight-square on d2, which makes a back-rank mate less l i kely. However, if White plays 0-0-0 and then �bl (or . . 0-0-0 followed by . . . 'it>b8 for Black) the situation .

B

How did Black force immedi ate resi gna­ tion ?

BACK-RANK MATE

3

73

6

w

B

How did Black win immediately ?

White played 24 'ifa7 and the game ended in a draw. Did he have a better move? a

4

b

c

d

e

7

w

B

How did Black force a quick mate?

5

White played 43 lL:lxd6 here. Why was this a mistake?

8

w

w

How did White push home his attack?

How did White exploit the back rank?

74

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

11

9

w

w

How did White win material?

10 w

How did White force a quick win?

White decided to exchange bi shops by 30 �xfS. Was this a good idea?

12 w

Despite the simplified position White found a forced win. What was it?

1 0 Pawn Pro m ot i o n

When a pawn promotes to a queen, the pawn vanishes and a queen, worth nine points, ap­ pears on the board; thus the net gain is eight points . This is a large material gain and it is therefore worth a considerable sacrifice to achieve a pawn promotion.

are fewer pieces around to prevent them from promoting.

B

B

Smirin - Grishchuk FIDE Knockout, New Delhi 2000

E . Berg - l bragi mov Katrineholm 1 999

Thi s example is typical . Black has an ad­ vanced pawn, but at the moment it is block­ aded by the queen . Black i s willing to give up his queen for a rook (a sacrifice of four points) in order to destroy the blockade and ensure promoti on, which nets him eight points within a couple of moves - a quick and profitable return on his investment. After 40 Ji'xd3! White resigned since 4 1 'li'xd3 e2 followed by 42 . . . e 1 'li'+ leaves Black a whole rook up. ..

Pawn-promotion ideas arise frequently in the endgame, when there are more likely to be advanced pawns on the board, and there

With equal material and opposite-coloured bishops, a draw looks likely, especially as the immediate 64 . . . b2 can be met by 65 ..ig6, when both black pawns are halted. Even if Black can manage to play his king over to the b-pawn and win White 's bishop for it, White will easily be able to capture Black's last pawn with his king. Black, however, found the subtle 64 ... �f6 ! . There are three ways White 's bishop can cover b1 in two moves or fewer (jLf7-a2, jLg6 and .tg4-f5) and this sly king move covers all three. Promotion cannot be prevented and so White resigned . Note that White would have drawn had his king not been blocking the h5-d 1 diagonal . for then he could have played ..id 1 -c2. When an advanced pawn is in the vicinity of the enemy king, combinations may ari se

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

76

which use pawn promotion as p art of an attack; a new queen suddenly popping i nto exi stence will reinforce the most j aded offensive !

B

B

Heini Danielsen - Aagaard Tastrup 1 999

Nataf - Korc h noi Cannes 1 998

Here Black pushed home his attack with a simple but effective combination: 31...'i!Vg2+! and White resigned since 3 2 �xg2 h I 'iV# is mate. One queen vanished only to be imme­ diately replaced by another. The rules of chess allow a pawn to be pro­ moted to a piece other than a queen ; the other options are rook, bi shop and knight. In prac­ tice, the queen is chosen the vast maj ority of the time because this offers the greatest mate­ rial gain, but sometimes a knight is preferred, usual ly because a knight delivers check while a queen would not. Positions exist where a rook or bishop promotion is necessary to avoid stalemate, but these are so rare in prac­ tice that we can safely ignore them . In the following diagram, Black i s cur­ rently a pawn up, but his d3-pawn is pinned and apparently lost. However, Black found a neat combination involving promotion to a knight: 29 ... d2! 30 d6+ (this intermediary check doesn ' t change the situation) 30 ... �h8 (not 30 . . . d3 b4 Black had a safe extra piece. The finish was 34 c7 lt:le8+ (Black returns the piece in or­ der to simplify into an easily winning pawn ending) 39 e6 lt:lxdS 4 1 'it>xdS �g7 4 2 t>g2, then 42 .. .'�'ld2 ! 43 't�Yd8+ �g7 44 �e7+ ii.f7 also leads to a quick mate for Black. Si nce White has no way of defending hi s e 1 rook, that would appear to be the end of his resources . However, he countered Black's threats with the deflection 4 1 �d8 + ! . This forks the king and the d 1 -rook, so Black is forced to play 4 1 .. Jhd8. White replied 42 .l:!.xe2 and the tables had been turned on Black. The exchange of queens has elimi­ nated Black 's attack, and now White won easily using his advanced a-paw n : 42 ... e3 43

Moscow 2002

In this position, Black suddenly un leashed the move 23 ... t:Z'Jf4, discoveri ng an attack on the e4-bi shop and also threatening 24 . . . tZ"le2+. It would be easy for White to 'believe ' Black and play a limp move such as 24 �e3 . but i n the game White put his finger o n the fl aw in Black 's idea and played 24 �bS ! . This attacks the e8-rook and covers the fork on e2 with gain of tempo. Now Black is left with his bi shop and rook under attack, and if 24 .. J�e7 (24 . . . .U.b8 is the same), then 25 ..ixb7 l:!.xb7 26 .l:.c8+ �h7 27 �e8 forces Black to give up his queen to avoid mate . It follows that Black

84

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

cannot avoid losing material, and the game finished 24 ... .l:i!.d8 25 il.xb7 'ii'x d4 (White is simply a piece ahead) 26 .l:!fl a6 27 il.xa6 �d5 28 'ii'e 8+ �h7 29 lt:Jf3 11Vxb2 30 �xf7 :rs 31 'ii' b 7 �xa2 32 g3 lt:Jh3+ 33 '>t>g2 'i¥a3 34 �xh3 1Wxf3 35 �xf3 l:txf3 36 il.b7 1 -0. There are two specific tactical ideas which by their nature can only lead to a draw, and therefore their use is restricted to situations in which one is trying to save a bad position. Some players pay less attention to drawing inferior positions than to winning favourable ones, but this i s a mistake. The difference be­ tween a draw and a loss is half a point, just the same as the difference between a win and a draw. Very successful players tend not only to win a lot of games, but also to be remark­ ably effective at avoiding defeat. Knowledge of standard drawing ideas i s very helpful in performing Houdini-like escapes from un­ pleasant situations. The first of these ideas is perpetual check. This involves one player giving a series of checks from which there is no escape; there is no mate, but equally there is no way out and sooner or later the position is repeated, resulting in a draw.

Black i s a rook down, but White's king is exposed and this gives him hope for a draw. The game continued 3 1 . .. �g4+? 32 'it>h1 'i¥xf4 33 'it'd5 ! (now White consolidates his extra material) 33 lt:Jg4 34 Vi'd8+ 'it>h7 35 �xd3+ 'iii> h 8 36 lt:Jf3 'it>g8 37 h3 lt:Je5 38 lt:Jxe5 �xeS 39 �e3 'i!Vd5+ 40 �h2 'ifxa2 41 'ii'e 8+ 1 -0. However, i n the diagram position Black missed a chance to force a draw. He should have played 3 1 . . .lt:Jf3 + ! and now 32 �h i ?? �xh2# is mate, while after 32 �g2? �g4+ 33 '>t>h l 'i¥h3 ! 34 lt:Jxf3 �xfl + 35 lt:Jgl d2 36 �f7 1Wd3 ! (not 36 . . . d l 'i¥ 3 7 'iie 8+ ! �h7 3 8 �e4+ and White gives perpetual check) Black will promote his pawn with a decisive material advantage. This means that 32 lt:Jxf3 is forced, but after 32 . . . 'i¥g4+ 3 3 'lt>h l 'ti'xf3 + 34 'iii> g l 'ti'g4+ the position re­ peats - it is perpetual check. •..

Perpetual check can sometimes help to save positions which appear quite hopeless.

w

B

Gasiorowski - Gawronski Darm 1 994

Hoffm an n - Lobron Bundesliga 2001/2

White is a piece down for one pawn, and his threats on the kingside appear to have come to nothing. Indeed, if Black were now given a free tempo to play . . . l:rg8 then White would be facing inevitable defeat. All this means that if White is going to try something,

DEFENSIVE TA CTICS

then he must do so straight away . The game conti nued 23 "iYg7+ ! ! (an amazing idea; White gives up h i s queen i n order to set up a perpetual check) 23 .i.xg7 24 f6+ 'iii? h S (24 . . . 'it>g8 25 laxg7+ 'it>h8 26 lih7+ is an im­ mediate perpetual check) 25 .laxg7! (this is the key idea, threatening perpetual check on h7 and g7 ; 25 fxg7+? 'iii? g 8 26 gxf8'i¥+ 'iii? xf8 is wrong as White has only a rook for the queen) 25 ... e4 (surprisingly, there is little Black can do to prevent the draw) 26 .i.xe4 l:!.feS (giving the king an extra square on f8 , but White forces the draw i n any case) 27 l:rh7+ 'it>gS 28 .lag7+ 'iii? f8 29 I:lh7 (threaten­ ing mate on h8, so B l ack ' s king has to return) 29 �g8 30 .l:.g7+ 1h- lf2 . •..

•..

The second drawing tactical idea i s stale­ mate. The rules of chess state that if you have no legal moves but your king is not under at­ tack, then you are in stalemate and the game is declared drawn. S talemate only occurs in the endgame, and although it plays an impor­ tant role in the theory of certain endgames, it is easy to overlook if it arises outside one of its normal contexts. a

b

c

d

e

g

h

85

5 5 'it>d5 'it>b6 5 6 Wxc4 'lt>c6 57 b 4 Wb6 5 8 Wd5 'iii? c 7 5 9 c 4 �d7 6 0 c5 �c7 6 1 c 6 �c8 62 'it>d6 �d8 63 c7+ �c8 64 �c6 a5 65 b5 a4 66 b6 a3 67 b7#. Therefore Whhe indeed played 55 �d5. If Black mov � s his king, then White takes the c-pawn and wins, so Black replied 55 a5. However, the continuation 56 'it>d4 put B l ack in a dilemma. He only has one more pawn move, 56 . . . a4, and then 57 'it>d5 wins because now that B l ack ' s moves with his a-pawn have been exhausted, he must lose the c-pawn. Black resolved the di­ lemma with the move 56 �a4 ! . The threat is 57 . . . '1t>b3 winning the b2-pawn, so the re­ ply 57 'iii?xc4 was forced. However, Black is now in stalemate and the game is drawn . Note that Black had to play . . . a5 before play­ ing . . . 'iii? a4, because otherwise it wouldn ' t have been stalemate (the king would sti ll be able to move to a5) . ...

•.•

In the following position Black saved the game by combining stalemate with perpetual check. a

b

c

d

e

h

w

w

Sza blewski - Radjabov Tivia kov - I . Sokolov

European Under- 1 0 Ch, Rimavska Sobota 1 996

Linares 1 995

If Black loses his c-pawn for nothing, then the position is lost for him. A typical line i s

This position i s winning for White, but it requires a little care. One method is I 1 4 'iii? f6 �g1 1 1 5 "Wia7 �g2 I 1 6 "Wib8+ .l::!. g 8 1 1 7 'i¥e5

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

86

(the key idea; White 's queen and king are set up in such a way as to give discovered check) 1 1 7 . . . 'it>h7 (if the rook moves, then White picks it up with a fork: 1 1 7 . . . :g2 1 1 8 'it>f7 + '>t>h7 1 1 9 �e4+ - of course 1 1 9 1i'g7+ in this line also wins) 1 1 8 'it>f7 �g6 1 1 9 'ii'f5 and wins. However, White actually played 1 14 h7?, probably intending the line 1 1 4 . . Jlg7 1 1 5 �e8+ 'it>xh7 1 1 6 'it>f6 and White wins the rook in a few moves. However, Black spotted 1 14 ....l:.g5+ ! . If the rook i s taken then it is stalemate, so White has to move his king. However, Black j ust follows the king, moving his rook up and down the g-file, checking all the time . There is no shelter from the checks, and if the king goes to the seventh rank, then Black plays . . . �g7 , pinning and winning the white queen . The position is drawn and after the further moves 1 15 'it>e4 �g4+ 1 16 'it>d5 .l:.g5+ 1 17 We6 112- 112 White gave up his winning attempts .

2

w

White played 58 'it>fS. Why was this a mis­ take?

3 B

Defensive Tactics Exercises Solutions start on page 1 4 1 .

a

b

c

d

e

Black pl ayed a natural but bad move that allowed a draw. What was it? h

a

1

4

w

b

c

d

e

h

.1.

w

3 2

White pl ayed 66 'it>fS. How should Black repl y ?

2

Can White, who i s a piece down, trap Black's queen with 20 �d2?

DEFENSIVE TA CTICS

87

5

8

White decided t o finish the game b y 2 5 l:tld7, threatening mate on e8. Does Black

White 's rook on d 3 is pinned b y Black's bishop. What should he play ?

w

w

have anything better than resigning?

9

w

6

B

Should Black play 64 . . . £3 or 64 . J:hg2? .

White played 69 'i¥f3 and eventually lost. Did he have a better move?

7

10

White is material down and seems to be facing defeat. How did he draw ?

White is a piece up but both his bishops are attacked. What should he play ?

w

w

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

88

14

11

w

B

Which king move should Black play?

a

b

c

d

White is a piece down but 22 'fixc7 tt:lb5 favours Black. What should White play?

e

12 w

15

8

The game concluded 73 .ltxf6 �xf6 74 l:ta6+ f8 22 �h8+ r.l;e7 23 ctJg6#. There is no reasonable de­ fence to the twin threats ; e.g., 20 . . . .l:i.ff8 2 1 �xh7+ �f7 22 'i¥xg7+ �e8 23 .tg6+ and mate in two more moves. Black therefore de­ cli ned the sacrifice by 19 ... ..td6, but after 20 l:te2 .txe5 2I l;ixe5 White was a piece up and Black resigned. .

Pa ris 2002 Black won material with a very attractive combi nation based on consecutive knight forks . He played 3 1 ...'i¥f3+! (a queen sacri­ fice sets up the following knight charge) 32 �xf3 ctJxh4+ (the first knight fork) 33 �fl ctJxf3 and unfortunately for White he falls victim to a second knight fork in a row. After 34 .l:ted 1 ctJxd2+ 35 .l:txd2 .te5 36 We2 .l:.g7 White resigned rather than play on a rook down .

39) La utier - Karlsson

35)

Sch i l ler - Ya kovich

New York 1 998 The prelimi nary exchange 3 1 .txc5 (3 1 �xd3 ? is ineffective owing to 3 1 . . . .txb6)

Malmo 1 999 A preliminary check is necessary to drive Black's king into the right position for a later g6+ to set up a fork . The game fini shed 40 .l:.d8+! (40 g6? is less good because after

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

116

40 . . . lt:Je3+ ! 4 1 lt:Jxe3 fxe3 42 fxe3 �a4 43 l:th7+ 'it>g8 44 l:txh5 'it>g7 White will still have to do some work to win the ending) 40...Wh7 4 1 .l:lxd5 ! (4 1 g6+ ! 'it>xg6 42 l:hd5 �xd5 43 tiJe7+ is also effective) 1 -0. After 4 1 . . Jhd5 42 g6+ Black will sooner or l ater have to put his king on g6 or g8, allowing a fork on e7 ; for example, 42 . . . Wh8 43 g7+ 'ith7 44 g8�+ 'it>xg8 45 tlJe7+ and White will be a whole piece ahead.

40) Cifuentes - Spraggett Ampuriabrava 1 997 White is a pawn down and although he can regain it by 5 1 tlJxe6+ tlJxe6 52 �xe6, he could not hope for more than a draw after 52 .. J:td4. Instead, White found the surprising 51 �xe6! . If Black takes the queen then he ends up a piece down after 5 l . . .tiJxe6 52 tlJxe6+ followed by 5 3 lt:Jxc5 . However, de­ clining the queen is little help as all White's pieces are ready to bear down on Black's ex­ posed king; indeed there i s no defence to the immediate threats of 5 2 .l:td7+ and 52 �f7+. The game ended quickly after S l . .. l:.f4 52 .l:td7+ 'ith6 53 tiJf7+ Wg7 54 tiJeS+ �h6 55 .l:.xh7+ 1 -0 (55 . . . 'itxh7 56 �f7+ mates next move).

42) Loskutov - Chuprikov Russian Team Ch, Smolensk 2000 White scored a quick knock-out by 19 �d8+ 'it>g7 20 �xh8+! and Black resigned, because after 20 . . . �xh8 2 1 tiJxf7+ followed by tiJxd6 White is a whole rook up.

43) Stu rua - del Rio Linares open 2001 The fork doesn ' t exactly leap to the eye but White spotted it nonetheless : 22 lt:Jxe6! fxe6 (after 22 . . . �xg3 23 fxg3 11fe8 Black's losses are restricted to one pawn, but 24 lt:Jg5 'B.e7 25 e5 should be winning for White thanks to the pressure against the weak f7-pawn) 23 �xg6 hxg6 24 .ltxe6+ 'ith7 25 i.. x d7 l::!.x cl 26 lhcl :d8? (26 . . . .i.xe4 is better, but after 27 f3 .i.d5 28 Wf2 �d8 29 .l:lc7 White is a pawn up with a good position and should win) 27 l!c7 .ltxe4 28 lha7 .ltfS 29 .ixfS gxfS 30 aS ! bxaS 31 llxaS (White is two clear pawns up and won without difficulty) 3 1 ...Wg6 32 .U.a4 f4 33 'it>n WfS 34 'it>e2 .U.b8 35 lla2 We4 36 �d2 �d8 37 dS l!d6 38 lldl �fS 39 �f3 WeS 40 .U.d2 WfS 4 1 .l:!d4 1 -0 .

44) Koksch - C. Meissner

41) Radjabov - Adams Rapidplay game, Prague 2002 Black used the potential knight fork on f3 to win the key e4-pawn. The game continued 31. .. .ixe4! 32 �f2 (after 3 2 .ixe4 �xe4 33 l:.xe4 lt:Jf3+ 34 'it>f2 tlJxd2 White's rooks are forked and he ends up a whole rook down, so he is forced to decline the sacrifice) 32 .ic6 (the loss of the e4-pawn has wrecked White 's position, since Black can now attack along the long light diagonal) 33 h4 tiJf3+ 34 l:t.xf3 (34 Wfl e4 35 .ic2 l::!. x b2 is also hopeless for White) 34 ... .ixf3 35 hxgS fxgS 36 �e3 e4 37 .tn �e7 38 b4 �eS 39 bS �g3+ 0- l . l t is mate next move. .••

Germany (Oberliga East) 200011 Black should have played 1 1 . . . f6, and after 1 2 .ltc4 fxg5 1 3 0-0 an unclear position arises in which White has a lead in development in return for Black's two extra pawns. However, she i nstead played l l . h6? and was shocked by the reply 12 �d8+ ! Wxd8 13 lt:Jxf7+ Wc7 14 lt:JxeS leaving White a piece up for j ust one pawn. The game fini shed 14 .if5 15 .id3 e6 16 0-0-0 1 -0. •.

•••

45) Lju bojevic - Avrukh Lost Boys, Amsterdam 1 999 The fork is fairly well di sguised in thi s po­ sition, but the undefended bi shop on e7 is a

117

SOLUTIONS

clue. Play continued 26 ...c3 27 bxc3 (if White doesn ' t take this pawn, then it advances to the seventh rank ; for example, 27 'ili'd3 c2 28 .l:ia I .1i.xb2 forking the rooks) 27 ... .l:txb 1 28 �xb 1 �e4 (here ' s the fork; White must lose a piece) 29 l:tb6 W/xe7 30 l;txd6 .1i.xc3 and Black ' s material advantage of a piece for two pawns proved sufficient for a win.

46)

l:i.f8#. The game actually ended 40 ... lt:Jxc5 41 Wlixf7#.

3)

Xie J ia nj u n - La nda

Beijing 1 99 7 It certainly wasn ' t a good idea. After 41. .. 'fixb3?? 42 lt:Jf5+ exf5 43 W/xb3 Black resigned, as the discovered attack has cost him his queen .

Grishchuk - Ti mma n Wijk aan Zee 2002 White won by 26 g6+! (the first sacrifice) 26 ... .1i.xg6 (after 26 . . .�f8 27 lt:Je6+ .1i.xe6 28 J:lxe6 White wins because Black is effec­ tively playing a rook down; a typical line is 28 . c5 29 l:txa6 �e7 30 .1i.xg7 .l:tg8 3 1 .1i.c3 and White is two clear pawns up) 27 .l::t e 7+ ! (the second sacrifice sets the stage for a deadly knight fork) 27 .. .'JJ xe7 28 lt:Jxg6+ (White ends up winning a piece for a pawn) 28 ... �e6 29 4lxh8 g5 (Black makes a futile attempt to trap White ' s kni ght and when that fails he re­ signs) 30 lt:Jg6 c5 31 .1i.g7 �f5 (3 1 . . . �f7 is met by 32 lt:Je5+) 32 lt:Je7+ �e6 33 lt:Jc6 d4 34 Wd2 a4 35 c3 �d5 36 lt:Jd8 1 -0. . .

4)

L. Johan nessen - Akesson

Asker 1 997 No. Instead of moving his rook, Black played 22 d4, attacking both the queen and the bishop. White must lose a piece, so he re­ signed. .••

5)

A. Horvath - Hoang Thanh Tra ng

Budapest 2002 White won Black's queen by 26 .J1.g6+ .l:txg6 27 �xa3, whereupon Black at once re­ signed.

6) P. N i koliC - Topalov

Sol utions to Discovered Attac k Exerc ises 1)

Cicak - Pa lsson

VISA Grand Prix, Reykjavik 1 998 A fter 30 lt:Jxd6+ Black resigned, as White follows up with 3 1 l:txb7 , winning a whole rook. 2)

Morozevich - Ga llia mova

Russian Ch, St Petersburg 1 998 White unvei led a discovered attack on f7 by playing 40 .Jtxc5+. Thi s leads to a quick mate whatever Black plays; for example, 40 . �e8 41 �xf7+ �d8 42 �e7+ �c8 43 .

.

Linares 1 997 If the knight on g4 were not there, Black could play .. .'t!Vxh3#. This provides the moti­ vation for the winning move 22 ... lt:Je5, both attacking the queen and threatening mate in one. White cannot save his queen, so he re­ signed.

7)

l b ragi mov - Schekachev

Russian Ch (rapid playoff), Moscow 1 999 No, it wasn ' t a good idea. Black was so concerned with his own combination that he forgot about his opponent ' s tactical possibi li­ ties. After 14 .. Jhc3 15 �xc3 lt:Jxe4 White won Black's queen by 16 l:ic8+ .Jtxc8 1 7 'tl¥xa5 and after 17. . .lt:Jxg5 18 b 6 Black re­ signed.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

118

8) Sa kaev - Vol kov FIDE Knockout (rapid playoff), New Delhi 2000 Black won the exchange by 18 ....iJ3, at­ tacking White's queen and the g l -rook. After 19 'i¥xf3 l:!.xg1+ 20 ..tfl .l::i.d 8 21 �xd8+ �xd8 22 �a8+ �e7 Black had a decisive material advantage and went on to win.

9)

Weiss - Socko

European Ch, Ohrid 200 I As so often happens, an undefended piece provides the clue hinting that a discovered at­ tack might be possible. After 38 ..th6 ! , the queens face each other, but Black has no time to capture as White is also threatening mate by ..tg7#. Black resigned as he must lose his queen .

1 0) Landen bergue - M . Roder Berne 1 993 White played 1 1 'Lld5 ! , discovering an at­ tack on Black's queen. If he replies 1 1 . . .�xd2, then 1 2 'Llc7# is mate. In fact, Black cannot save his queen without allowing the mate on c7, so he resigned. Note that 1 1 'Llb5 is less effective, as Black can defend by 1 1 . . . �b6.

1 1) B . La lie - Kotsu r World Team Ch, Lucerne 1 997 Black set up a discovered attack by the rook sacrifice 40 .. Jhh2+. White resigned in view of the continuation 41 �xh2 ..txf4+ followed by 42 .. .'ihe2 , winning his queen . Note that the si mple 40 . . . �xf4 is ineffective, as White can reply 4 1 �xh5 .

1 2) Sa kaev - Shipov Russia Cup, St Petersburg 1 997 The line-up of the white queen and its un­ defended black counterpart on h5 suggests a

possible discovered attack. White played 28 'Llxe6, clearing his knight out of the way with gain of tempo. If Black plays 28 . . . fxe6, then he loses his queen to 29 .l:.xg7+, while if he moves the queen then White can take on d8. In either case Black faces catastrophic mate­ rial loss, so he resigned.

13) Kriventsov - G u l ko USA Ch, Seattle 2002 Play continued 34 ... .l:.xc5 ! 35 .l:.e1 (the key line is 35 �xeS 'Llc3+ winning the queen) 35 ... .l::!.x c2 36 .l:.xc2 ..txc2+ 37 �a1 'Llxf4, when Black had a decisive material advan­ tage. The game finished 38 .l:.e8+ 'lt>h7 39 �d8 'Llxh5 40 llh8+ �g6 41 �e8+ 'lt>g5 42 �e7+ �g4 43 .l:.f8 �e4 44 �d7+ �g3 45 .l:.e8 f2 0- 1 .

1 4)

Va n Wely - S hirov

Ter Ape/ 1 997 The discovered attack isn ' t especially ob­ vious in the diagram, but it only takes one move to set it up. The exchange 3 1 . ....txf3 32 ..txf3 both removes the defender of the d4rook and helps to clear the line g4-d4; now the stage is set for a discovered attack. The game continued 32 'Llh3+ 33 �g2 �xd4 34 �xh3 ..txe5 with a decisive materi al advan­ tage for Black. The finish was 35 'Llc4 ..tc7 36 'lt>g2 �d3 37 �cl h5 38 'Lle3 ..te5 39 'Llc4 �c3 40 �xc3 ..txc3 41 ctJd6 .l:.d7 42 b5 �f8 0- 1 . •••

1 5) Svensk - Svidler Gausdal 1 992 The key idea is that of pin-breaking. The f6-knight is apparently pinned, but in fact the knight can move so as to set up a compen­ sating attack on White's queen . The game continued 12 ... 'Llxe4 ! 13 'Llxe4 ( 1 3 ..txd8 'Llxd2 1 4 �xd2 .l:.xd8 also leaves Black a pawn up) 13 ... �xh4 14 c3 ( 1 4 'Llxd6 ..txb2

119

SOLUTIONS

1 5 .l:I b l Jtd4 and again B lack has a n extra pawn).

B

.1Lxd5 also costs B lack a piece ) 10 t2Jxc6+ and B lack resigned since White follows up with 1 1 t2Jxd8 and 12 laxd 1 , ending up with an extra piece . This type of tactic occurs rela­ tively often in the opening phase.

1 8) San Segu ndo - Van den Doel

Now Black won by 14 ... d5! (the clearest) 15 cxd4 dxe4 1 6 dxeS e3 ! 1 7 �c2 ( 1 7 �xe3 �b4+ wins the bishop) 17 ... exf2+ 18 'it>n Jte6 19 l:ta3 'tWf4 20 h4 .l:i.ad8 0- 1 .

1 6) B u rmakin - Kha rlov Russia Cup. Kazan 200 I Black won a pawn with the effective com­ bination 28 ... ..ll xa4 ! , based on the point 29 .l:.xa4 t2Jc5 with a discovered attack agai nst the d4-knight. White therefore decided to play 29 JtbS eS 30 �xa4 exd4 31 .l:.ee 1 , but Black is a pawn up with a good position. The conc l usion was 3 1 ...t2Jc5 32 .tc6 .l:Iac8 33 .1Ld5 lt:'ld3 34 �eb1 �cS 35 b3 hS 36 �g1 t2Jf4 37 .1Lc4 h4 38 �a2 d3 39 'it>n lt:'le2 40 J:ld2 a4 41 :xd3 .l:.xd3 42 .txd3 lt:'lf4 43 .ic4 a3 44 .l:.a1 l:tgS 45 .l:.d 1 �xg2 46 :d8+ \t>h7 47 .)ixf7 a2 0- 1 .

1 7) Ah matovic - Medvescek Sloven ian Under- 1 6 Girls Ch, Maribor 200 1 White won material with a pin-breaking motif combined with a discovered check: 9 tUxeS ! .txd 1 (9 . . . lt:'lxe5 1 0 .l:.xe5+ .1Le6 1 1

Zonal tournamen t, Mondariz. 2000 There is no discovered check visible in the diagram, but Black can set one up with a few forcing preparatory moves: 22 ... .)ih2+ (White actually resigned here) 23 'it>h l .l:txe3 (de­ flecting the f2-pawn) 24 fxe3 (or else White remains a piece down) 24 . . . lt:'lg3+ 25 'it>xh2 (the preparations are over and now the dis­ covered check comes with devastating ef­ fect) 25 . . . t2Jxfl ++ fol lowed by 26 . . . t2Jxd2 and White loses his queen for j u st one minor piece.

1 9)

Fedorov - Ad ianto

Olympiad, Istanbul 2000 Black won by 33 t2Jed2+ 34 'it>c l (34 'i.t>a2 and 34 �a l are both met by 34 . . . �a5#) 34 ... lt:'lb3+ ! and White resigned, as 35 cxb3 t2Je3+ (the discovered check), 35 Wd 1 t2Je3+ (a fork) and 35 'i.t>bl t2Jcd2+ all cost White his queen, in the last case because playing 36 '.t>a2 would again allow 36 ... �a5#. •..

20) Kengis - Hertneck Bundesliga 1 999/00 White played 1 9 lt:'lgS ! , discoveri ng an attack against the undefended bi shop on b7 and threatening mate on h7 . The continuation was 19 ... .§i.xg5 20 SLxgS �xgS 21 .)ixb7 .l::!. b 8 (Black must move the rook, or else he loses the exchange, but now the c7-pawn falls) 22 .l:!.xc7 and White could be satisfied with the outcome of his combination . He has an extra pawn, and his rook occupies an ac­ tive position on the seventh rank . The conclu­ sion was 22...lt:'ld5 23 .1Lxd5 �xdS 24 b3

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

120

axb3 25 axb3 e5 26 dxe5 l�Vxe5 27 l�Vc4 ltb6 28 ltd1 .l!tf6 29 .l:Ic8 "VI/e7 30 l�Vc7 'Jiilxc7 3 1 l:txc7 g 6 3 2 �b7 :e8 3 3 e 3 and B l ack re­ signed, since after 33 . . . lte4 34 l:.d8+ �g7 35 .l::l.d b8 he loses a second pawn, when White' s material advantage is decisive.

rank with gain of tempo) 4 l . . .�a8 (4 l . . .�b8 42 i.d6+ is one move quicker) 42 jLxe4+ 'itb8 43 .ii. d 6+ and White wins the queen, ending up with an extra piece .

21)

Linares open 2001 The undefended b2-bishop gave Black the chance to win a pawn by 13 . ..ll:lxe4! 14 jLxg7 ( 1 4 tt:Jxe4 it.xb2 also costs White a pawn) 14 ... tt:\xd2 1 5 'Jiilx d2 (if White retreats the bishop from g7, then Black can win the exchange by taking on fl ) 15 �xg7. White struggled on for a long time but could not save the game. This type of discovered attack along a long diagonal is quite common in practice.

Russian Team Ch, St Petersburg 1 999 White won quickly by 28 l:!.xb7 ! , setting up a discovered attack along the h l -a8 diago­ nal. If 28 .. .'�Wxb7, then 29 tt:\d6+ jLxd6 30 l�Vxb7 wins Black's queen, while 28 . . . �c8 fail s to 29 tt:\f6+ jLxf6 (or 29 . . . gxf6 30 l�Vxc6+ l:!.xc6 3 l l:!.b8+ .lidS 32 Ilbxd8+ We7 3 3 l:!. l d7#) 30 exf6 ! (threatening mate on e7) 30 . . . gxf6 3 l l:!.d8 + ! (a neat finish) 3 l . . .Wxd8 3 2 l�Vxf6+ We8 33 l�Ve7#. The game actually concluded 28 ...l:!.d8 29 tt:\f6+ and Black re­ signed, as White mates in two more moves.

22}

2 5)

P. Frohlich - Motylev

..•

Sal mensuu - Maki Finnish Ch, Vammala 1 999 The line-up of queen on d2 and unde­ fended queen on a5 is suggestive, and sure enough a discovered attack nets White a pawn: 15 tt:\d5 ! l�Vxd2 16 tt:Jxe7+ (this and the following are in-between moves which enable White to seize a pawn before recap­ turing the queen) 16 ... �f8 17 il.. x g7+ ( neces­ sary, as the immediate 17 lhd2 would lose a piece after 1 7 . . . .ii. x d4) 17 .. .'itxe7 ( 1 7 . . . �xg7 1 8 l:!.xd2 also leaves White a pawn up) 18 �xd2 it.xb3 19 axb3 f6 (White is a pawn up, so Black tries to trap the g7 -bishop) 20 .lth6 g5 21 h4 (this frees the bishop and gives White a winning position) 2 1 . .. l:!.g8 22 hxg5 fxg5 23 f4 1-0. Black resigned as White will inevitably win another pawn.

24) Kha l ifman - B u rmakin

Anand - Lautier

Bie/ 1 99 7 The two queens are facing each other and Black's queen is undefended, but there is no obvious discovered attack by moving the d3-bishop. However, Anand found a brilliant solution : 2 1 jLg6 ! ! .

B

23) Ma. Tseitl i n - Titz European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002 White played 40 l�Vxc4 ! and B lack re­ signed in view of 40 . . . dxc4 4 l l:!.d7+ (White sets up a discovered attack along the seventh

2 1 ... l2Je7 (Black cannot take the queen be­ cause 2 1 . . .l�Vxd l is met by 22 l:!.xe6+ tt:\e7 23

121

SOLUTIONS

.l:Iexe7+ Wf8 24 .i.xh6+ 'it>g8 25 .i.xf7#, so he has to retreat the knight, but now that the e3-rook is not under attack White can round up the g2-bishop) 22 �xd4 l:!.xd4 23 .l:ld3 (23 i.h5 and 23 .l:!.xe6 are also very strong) 23...�d8 (after 23 .. Jlxd3 24 i.xd3 , threaten­ ing both 25 Wxg2 and 25 .U.b8+, White wins material) 24 Zir.xd8+ Wxd8 25 .ltd3 1 -0. Black resigned because 25 ... .i.h3 26 Wg3 and 25 ... ..th I 26 .i.d2 followed by 27 .l:lb I win the bi shop, leaving White a piece up. Note that 2 1 .l:txf7, hoping for 2 1 . . .Wxf7 22 i.g6+, i s less effective since Black can reply 2 1 . . .l!Va I ! with an unclear position .

26) M i randa - Tivia kov New York 1 998 It was a very good move. 26 .. .'�xf7 looks like a blunder because it allows White a dis­ covered attack by 27 .i.xe5+ WaS (White ac­ tual ly resigned here) 28 �xf7 , but it is Black who strikes the final blow by 28 . . . .l:lxg2+ 29 �h I :rxf2+ (this discovered check forces mate ; 29 . . . .l:.g7+ is also deci sive) 30 �gl .l:i.g2+ 3 1 �h I I;lg7+ 32 'i:Vf3 .i.xf3+ 3 3 .laxf3 �d I + 34 l:!.fl llxfl #.

Sol utions to Pin Exercises 1)

I bra h i m - Russell

Olympiad, Bled 2002 White's d4-pawn is pinned agai nst the un­ defended queen on d3, so its defence of the c5-bi shop is an i l l usion. Black exploited this by 19 .'tfVxc5 , picking up a piece for nothi ng. White resigned in due course . •.

regain the lost piece. Note that the attempt to win B l ack ' s queen by 24 .l:lxe8+ fol l owed by 25 'i:Vxd3 fail s as the recapture 24 . . Jhe8+ i s check.

3) Kopionkin - Arkh i pov Russian Team Ch, Smolensk 2000 At the moment the d5 -knight is not seri ­ ously pinned, because the d8-rook is de­ fended and so moving the knight would cost at most the b7-pawn. However, by 29 'i:!VbS White set up a deadly horizontal pin of the knight. The knight is attacked three times but only defended twice, and Black is unable to defend it again. If Black plays 29 . . . a6, then White wins a piece in any case by 30 lhd5 . The game actually concluded 29 ... .i.c7 30 l:.xdS and Black resigned, since 30 . . . �h2+ 3 1 �fl �h i + 32 'it>e2 is the end of Black 's checks, leaving him a piece down .

4) Mateo - Gongora Santa Clara 2000 Black played 38 J:td2 and White resigned since the d-fi le pin costs White a piece. ••

5)

Czebe - Raj l ich

Budapest 2002 White's queen is pinning two black units, the rook on f7 and the pawn on c6. White pl ayed 26 .i.dS ! , exploiting both pins with one deadly blow. Black resigned rather than continue 26 . . .�c7 27 't!Vxf7+ �xf7 28 .i.xf7+ �xf7, when he is the exchange down for nothing and must l ose in the end.

6) 2)

J.C. Hernandez - M i llan U rrutia

Linares open 2000 White's e3-rook is pinned against his king and so has no influence horizontally. After 23 .'�xd3 White resi gned, si nce he cannot ..

Crouch - Eames British League (4NCL) 200 112 The b3-rook is pinned horizontally, so i s n o t really defending t h e other rook. Black re­ signed after 29 �xb8+, since 29 . . . .U.xb8 30 l:.xa3 leaves Whi te a rook up.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

122

7)

1 0) Prh� - Santo-Roman

French Ch, Narbonne 1 997 After 38 c4 Black resigned, as the d5 bishop is pinned along the d-file and so Black must lose a piece.

8) D. Atlas - B u rovic

H racek - 011 Polanica Zdroj / 996 The pin along the fourth rank proved fatal after 20 �gS+ ri;g7 21 il...e 7+.

B

Zonal tournament, Dresden 1 998 It is someti mes quite hard to see an im­ pending pin and here White 's last move (34 �a7-e3) allowed the reply 34 .'�Ve2. •.

w

Black resigned because 2 1 . . . ri;h6 22 'VJV g5# is mate, while 2 l . . .il... g 6 allows White to win Black's queen .

1 1) Nguyen Anh Du ng - M a iwald

White resigned as the e3-bi shop i s pinned and doubly attacked ; it cannot be defended and so White must lose either a piece or the exchange ( after 35 l:hd2 .l:.xd2 ) . In either case his position is hopeless.

9) Kotsur - Morad iabadi Asian Ch, Calcutta 2001 It is quite easy to make the false assump­ tion that a piece in the middle of one ' s own position must be defended . White evidently failed to notice that his rook on fl was unpro­ tected and therefore the e2-rook was pinned. Black played 30 tZ'lxc2! 31 �c l tZ'ld4 win­ ning a vital pawn, which he eventual ly con­ verted into victory. .•.

Budapest 1 999 The pin along the line c l -e3 neutralizes the rook on d2, opening up the possibility of capturing on g2. Nevertheless Black has to take care, because 36 . . . .l:.xg2+? loses to 3 7 .U.xg2 1Jfxe3 3 8 �dxg7+ f6 33 't�Vd2 We7 34 Wf3 1-0.

w

1 5) Lautier - Bologa n Enghien -les-Bains 1 999 White won by 9 '*'a4+ ..td7 (9 . b5 loses material after I 0 .txb5+ axb5 1 1 '*'xa8 ) 10 lt:Jxd7 and Black resigned as after I O . . '*'xd7 I I S£.b5 (agai n utilizing the pin along the a­ fi le) l l . . . axb5 1 2 '*'xa8+ '*'d8 1 3 '*'xb7 White wins the exchange and a paw n . . .

.

W hite can only avoid mate by giving up his queen, and the game concluded 24 '*'xf7+ ( 24 dxe4 '*'xb3 is also hopeless for White) 24 �xf7 25 dxe4 '*'xe4 26 iLa6 '*'f3 27 I:'l.fd l �xa3 28 ..td3 e4 29 ..tc4+ 'it>f6 30 .l:tal 'l:IVxb4 31 l:txd4 .l:!.c8 32 .laad l .l:txc4 33 �d6+ ...

rJJ e 7 0- 1 .

1 6) Sta ngl - Leh ner Mitropa Cup. Baden 1 999 First of all one must note the two pins al­ ready i n existence, along the l i nes c6-h I and

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

124

e8-e I . The first pin means that the d5-knight isn ' t defending the e3-bishop, which is itself limited in mobility because of the second pin. Black played 3 1 . ..th6, stepping up the pres­ sure on the pinned bishop, which is now at­ tacked three times and only defended twice. White cannot defend the e3-bishop again, so loss of material is inevitable. Following 32 'it>g1 (unpinning the d5 -knight and so provid­ ing a temporary extra defence of e3, but B lack can easily eliminate this defender) 32 ... ..ixd5 White resigned since after 33 'i\\V x d5 (33 cxd5 ..txe3+ also wins for Black) 33 . . . 'i\\Vx d5 34 cxd5 .l:.xe3 B lack wins a piece. •.

1 7} Estrada N ieto - Szeberenyi Budapest 2001 Although there are three pieces between the c 1 -rook and Black's queen, White won mate­ rial with a typical combination. 14 lZ:ld5 ! exd5 (Black has little choice; 1 4 . . . 'i\\V b 8 and 1 4 . . . 'i\\Vc 8 lose to 1 5 lZ:lxc6 bxc6 1 6 lZ:lxe7+, while 14 . . .'�d7 1 5 lZ:lb6 forks queen and rook, winning the exchange) 15 cxd5 (now the c6knight is pinned and attacked three times; Black cannot reasonably defend it, and so White wins a pawn) 15 ...lZ:ld7 16 dxc6 bxc6 17 l'hc6. White is a pawn up with a large po­ sitional advantage, and won in a few moves.

1 9}

Alonso - Gomez Baillo

A rgentine Ch, Buenos Aires 1 998 In the diagram B l ack's rook and knight are attacked, and he also faces a possible dis­ covered check if White moves his bishop. However, Black was able to resolve these dif­ ficulties and even win a piece : 33 'i\\Ve4+! (clearing the way for the c3-rook to retreat to c7) 34 'it>a1 .:.c7 (now the bishop is pinned and White must lose a piece) 35 1iVxd5+ (White grabs a second pawn for the piece, but the endgame is hopeless) 35 ... 'i\\Vx d5 36 .:.xd5 .:.xe7 37 f4 'it>c6 38 ladS 'it>c5 39 'it>b1 lZ:ld4 40 �f8 'it>d5 41 f5 �xeS 42 f6 .l:ld7 0- 1 . •..

20} Rogic - Morrison European Ch, Ohrid 2001 There is no obvious pin in the diagram, but White was able to set one up with two prelim­ inary captures: 24 lZ:lxe6 fxe6 25 .l:lxe6 ! (this forces a decisive material gain) 25 ... 1iVd7 (the key line is 25 . . . 'i\\Vx e6 26 ..ixd5 , pinning and winning Black's queen; in the game Black avoids this fate, but ends up a piece down) 26 ..ixd5 'it>h8 27 ..ixc4 'i\\Vx d1 + 28 .l:lxd 1 �xf4 29 gxf4 .l:lac8 30 .l:ld4 b5 31 �fl .l:lxc3 32 .l:lxa6 1 -0.

21}

1 8}

Morozevich - Ada m s Lutz - Ba ngiev

German Ch, Bremen 1 998 The f6-knight is already pinned against the black queen. White added a second pin by 20 ..ig4, immobilizing the other knight. Black's position depends on the knights being able to defend each other, so it is not surprising that it now collapses. The immediate threat is to take the f6-knight, which is now attacked twice and defended only once. If B lack plays 20 . . . 'it>c7, then 2 1 ..ixd7 .:.xd7 22 .:.xd7+ wins material, while 20 . . . lZ:lg8 21 'i\\Vxe7 lZ:lxe7 22 lZ:lxf7 f!.de8 23 lZ:ld6+ is also disastrous . Black therefore resigned .

Wijk a a n Zee 2001 The preliminary exchange 26 ... �xc3 27 'i\\Vx c3 drew White ' s queen onto the third rank and so pinned the g3-pawn horizontally. Then came the deadly blow 27 ... lZ:lh4! and White resigned since Black threatens mate on g 2 ; preventing it w i l l cost White his queen.

22} Anoori - Ravi Calcutta 2001 A preliminary sacrifice set White up for a decisive pin: 39 ... .l:lxd4! 40 .l:lxd4 ..ic5 41

125

SOLUTIONS

We3 b3 (Black decides to promote his b­ pawn; 4 l . . .Wxe5 winning the rook is just as good) 42 Wd3 .ll. x d4 43 �xd4 b2 44 �e4 b l�+ with an easy win. 23 )

Nolte - Yu rtaev

Asian Ch, Calcutta 2001 The game continued 25 .. Jhg3+ 26 �xg3 (or 26 hxg3 �h l #) 26 .. Jlg8 ( now that the white queen has been drawn onto the g-file, Black is able to pin it) 27 .lae8 (this sideways pin is the only way to avoid loss of the queen, but White ends up a piece down in any case) 27 .'�xg3+ 28 hxg3 �xeS 29 �f2 .ll. g4 30 �el .l:.e4 31 l!e3 �g7 0- 1 . ..

24 )

Sofronie - Ma nea

Team event, Eforie Nord 2000 The g2-bishop is pinned horizontally, and this gave Black the option to invade with his queen by 20... �h3 ! . White resigned as mate­ rial loss is inevitable. Black's principal threat is 2 l . . .�xg3 followed by . . . llh l # ; the two main defences are 2 1 .ll. x h3 llxe2, which wins a piece because both white bishops are under attack, and 2 1 .ll. f4 .l::[ h 1 + 22 .ll. x h 1 (22 Wf2 �xg2+ ! 23 �xg2 �8h2#) 22 . . . �xh l + 23 �f2 llh2+, which wins the white queen with check.

2 5) Seul - M iezis Bad Godesburg 1 996 Yes, he does. Black won by 35 �h2+ 36 'it>n llf8+ 37 .ll. f3 (or 37 �f3 llxf3+ 3 8 .i.xf3 'illf2#) 3 7.. Ji'h1#, the final mate mak­ ing use of the pin along the f-file. ..•

2 6) Strenzke - Richter Hamburg 1 999 The d4-bishop is pinned against the pos­ sibility of 'illd 8+ followed by mate, so 22 �c3 proved decisive . The bishop is now also

pinned against the queen, so Black cannot play 22 . . . �b6, and it cannot be defended. Thus the bishop is lost and Black resigned.

2 7)

Lagowski - Tomcza k

Polish Ch, Warsaw 2002 The winning combination is quite hard to see, because at the moment there is no trace of a possible pin . The continuation was 19 tt::lx c6! tt::lx c6 20 tt::ld 5 ! (White is attacking both b6 and c7, so if the queen moves then White regains his piece with an extra pawn) 20 ... tt::l x d5 (20 . . . �xd5 2 1 cxd5 wins a pawn in the same way) 21 cxd5 (now the pin mate­ rializes ; White has a triple attack against the pinned c6-knight) 2 1 . .. ..tf7 (the attempt to regain the lost pawn by 2 1 . . . �d7 22 dxc6 llac 8 ? fails to 23 'illa 2+) 22 dxc6 (not only has White won a pawn, but the powerful c6pawn gives him a l arge positional advantage) 22 ... llfb8 23 I!b7 .l:Ia2 (after 23 . . Jhb7 24 cxb7 'illx c2 25 bxa8'ill+ White wins a rook) 24 'ill b 1 llxb7 25 cxb7 and Black resigned, since 25 . . . 'illb 8 26 llc l followed by llc8+ is decisive.

28) Romanishin - Bel iavsky Lvov 2000 At first sight White cannot take on a6 be­ cause the pawn appears to be pinned against the undefended rook on b2. However, White played 22 bxa6! based on the counter-pin 22 . . . llxb2 23 'illa l and Black loses the rook on b2, with the net result that White has won an important pawn on a6. Black therefore preferred 22 ... lla8, trying to regain the pawn on a6. However, while Black is achieving this, White has time to gain a decisive advan­ tage in other areas . The game ended 23 'il!d3 tt::le 5 24 'illc 3 (threatening gxf4, winning the pinned knight) 24 tt::l g7 25 llfb1 llxa6 26 gxf4 tt::ld 7 (26 . . . llxf4 runs into yet another pin after 27 llb8) 27 tt::l g 5 (Black is not only a pawn down but his position is wrecked) .•.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

126

27 ... \t>g8 28 lt:le6 Wif6 29 "VIiixc7 lt:lxe6 30 dxe6 "VIiixe6 31 l:tb7 �f7 32 'MVc8+ lt:lf8 33 'MVxe6 lt:lxe6 34 �dS 1 -0.

and here White resigned without waiting for 29 . . . lt:lb3 30 'MVb2 lt:lxd4 3 1 'MVxd4 (or else White remains a piece down) 3 l . . .�c5 pin­ ning the queen.

29) Acs - Korch noi European Ch, Ohrid 2001 It certainly wasn ' t a good idea. Black in­ tended to reach a rook and pawn ending with an extra pawn, but the counter-pin 33 .l:ta8! turned the tables completely.

31)

Glek - Hernando Rod rigo

European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002 White should have played 28 .l:re5 with a roughly equal position, but instead he chose the tactical 28 lt:lxe6? fxe6 29 !!eS relying on the e-file pin to escape from the double at­ tack of Black's e6-pawn. However, Black spotted the error in White's idea and replied 29 ... 'MVxc5 ! . This move wins a rook, because 30 .l::i. x c5 can be met by 30 . . . exf5 when Black has an extra piece in the ending. The game in fact concluded 30 'iYf4 "VIiix c2 31 .l:te4 lt:ldS 0- 1 .

Sol utions to S kewer Exercises 1)

Chabanon - Relange

Black's only hope is to play 33 . . . .l:tg4+, but after 34 'MVxg4 hxg4 35 .l:!.xg8+ Wxg8 36 a4 Black is unable to stop White's a-pawn, while White's king easily copes with B lack's nearby d-pawn. Therefore Black resigned . This is a further example of a player initiating tactics but overlooking a tactical possibility for his opponent.

French Ch, Meribe/ 1 998 Black's queen and bishop are lined up ready for a skewer. After 40 .ladS Black has to move his queen, for example by 40 . . . 'MVb4, when White can win a piece by 41 'MVxd7 (4 1 .laxd7 also wins). Then Black has no time to take on c4, because his own e8-rook is at­ tacked. He therefore resigned.

30)

2)

Jonkman - Firman

Lvov 2001 There is no obvious pin in the diagram but a series of forcing moves set one up along the a7-g l diagonal : 27 ... .l::i.x cl (this preliminary exchange permits a later . . . lt:lb3) 28 Wixcl .txbS (28 . . . lt:lb3 is also effective ; it doesn ' t matter i f Black inverts thi s move and his next) 29 �xbS (29 axb5 is met the same way )

Ba reev - Fedorov

FIDE World Cup, Shenyang 2000 White continued 39 "VIii b 8+ when Black must move his king. However, this leaves his bishop undefended and after 39 ... �d7 40 WlxeS Black resigned since White is a pawn up with two connected passed pawns and in addition Black's king is hopelessly exposed.

12 7

SOLUTIONS

6)

3)

Wells - Arlandi

Va n der Weide - I . Sokolov

Zonal tournament, Escaldes 1 998 White's queen has ventured into enemy territory and now suffers thanks to a line-up with the a3-knight. After 1 8 .l:i.a8 Black wins, since 19 .i.xa8 .U.xa8 20 'iVb7 l:.xa3 wins bishop and knight for rook. B l ack would also have a large positional advantage (light­ squared control and weak white pawns) so White decided to resign immediately.

Dutch Ch, Rotterdam 1 998 Black won a rook by 58 ... .l:i.d4+ 59 c;to>rs l:.hS+ and here White resigned in anticipa­ tion of 60 �f6 (after 60 c;to>e6 '!J.d6+ White loses a rook at once) 60 . . . l:.d6+ 6 1 '!J.e6 '!J.h6+ and an unusual skewer picks up a rook.

•.•

4)

Sol utions to Deflection Exerc ises

Logi nov - Nevostruev Russian Team Ch, St Petersburg 1 999 Black won a piece by 35 l:.xe3 ! 0-1 . After 36 �xe3 .i.h6+ Black picks up the c 1 -rook with a skewer.

1) Jaci movic - Trkaljanov

•••

5)

Yermolinsky - Sei rawa n

Merrillville 1 997 No, 36 g6? wasn ' t a good move because it allowed White to win a rook by 37 l:.h8. .•.

European Ch, Ohrid 200 1 The motif i s the same a s in Bui Vinh-Frey on page 47 . Black's rook has the i mportant duty of defending the queen, and when White lobbed in 34 lae8+ Black faced loss of mate­ rial after 34 . . . '!J.xe8 35 'iYxd6 or 34 . . . c;to>g7 35 l:.xd8 . He therefore resigned. Whether one views this as a deflection or as a fork (of h8 and d8) is l argely a matter of taste.

2) Radulski - Sha nava European Ch, Batumi 2002 B lack's f8-rook has the important duty of preventing mate on f7 , but White managed to deflect it by 41 l:.g8+. Black resigned in view of the impending mate by 4 1 . . . '!J.xg8 42 ti'Jf7#.

3) Mehmeti - Weber European Team Ch, Leon 2001 White ' s queen must retain control of b l , or else Black mates there, so 38 ... ..ie5+ wins. White resi gned as it i s mate in two moves.

This threatens to promote the pawn, but if Black plays 37 . . . '!J.xa7 then the skewer 3 8 J::i h7+ decides the game; Black therefore re­ signed. Instead of 36 . . . g6?, Black should have moved his rook along the a-fi le, when he would have had chances to draw the game.

4) N isipea nu - Soln Ljubljana 2002 The f8-rook must guard f7 , or else White mates in two by 'iYxf7+ fol lowed by 'iVg7# or

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

128

Wlih7#. Thus the deflection 34 l:.cS ! forced immediate resignation.

important pawn. He went on to win the game using his material advantage.

5)

9) Mal ishauskas - Asauskas

Bykov - N i kolenko

Lithuanian Ch, Vilnius 2002 I make no apologies for including another example of a theme we have seen before, since its i mportance is such that plenty of practice is well j ustified. White played 21 l:.d8+ and Black resigned, as 2l ... .lixd8 loses to 22 'iVxc5, while 2 1 . . .l2Je8 and 2 1 . . . ..5tf8 both cost Black a rook after 22 'iVxc5 �xc5 23 1ha8 .

Russia Cup, Moscow 1 999 Black spotted that the f3-knight has the vi­ tal duty of preventing mate at h2, and contin­ ued 1 4 ... tLld2 ! .

6) Kriventsov - Sagalchik USA Ch, Seattle 2002 Black's h5-knight has two duties, defend­ ing f4 and g7. However, because White's at­ tacks on f4 and g7 employ the same piece (his queen) he has to take care to choose the right capture to exploit Black's predicament. The game continued 30 ..5txg7+ (this i s the correct capture, since if Black plays 30 ... l2Jxg7 he loses his queen) 30 ...'it>h7 (Black must de­ cline the offer, but now he loses too much materi al) 31 ..5tc2+ fS 32 'iVxf4 lLlxf4 33 �xf8 .l:!.xf8 34 lLlxdS l:.xd8 3S �xfS+ 'it>hS 36 lad4 1 -0.

British Ch, Torquay 2002 After 3S 'iVf6+! Black resigned, since after 35 . . . 'iVxf6 36 gxf6+ Black loses a rook, no matter whether he retreats his king to the first rank or plays 36 . . . 'it>xf6 .

White cannot take this knight in view of immediate mate, while if he moves the queen then Black mates in any case by 1 5 . . . l2Jxf3+ and 16 . . .'iVxh2#. It could be argued that White was lucky not to have to resign i mmediately, but after 1S .JteS lLlxf3+ 16 i.xf3 lLlxeS 17 .Jtxa8 �xc4 1 8 �fc1 1:Ixa8 it made no differ­ ence to the final result as Black had a decisive material superiority. The finish was 19 h3 dS 20 a4 'iVe7 21 'iVc3 lLld3 22 l:tcb1 'iVh4 23 'iVd2 eS 24 bS h6 2S aS l:teS 26 axb6 axb6 27 f3 e4 28 f4 'iVg3 29 l:tfl .JtxbS 30 l:tab1 .Jtc4 0- 1 .

8)

1 0)

7) Sa rava nan - D . Howel l

Va n Wely - G rishchu k

Zaja - Nova k

Wijk aan Zee 2002 16 h3? wasn ' t a good move, since White's g2-bi shop already has the duty of defending the knight on d5 . Therefore Black was able to play 16 i.xh3 with impunity, winning an

Croatian Ch, Pula 2000 Black's queen must cover f8 , or else White mates by 'iVxf8#. The simplest route to vic­ tory i s 32 .JibS ! , winning the queen, since it cannot move so as to retain its defence of f8 .

••.

129

SOLUTIONS

11)

Kacheishvi l i - Fedorowicz

New York 1 999 Black spotted that the c3-knight must de­ fend against a possible mate by . . . ii.xe4#, and after the deflection 48 tLla2 ! White was under intolerable pressure. The continuation was 49 ii.e1 (the only way to avoid losing a piece) 49 ... tLlxc3 and White resigned as 50 .ltxc3 �xe4+ followed by ... �xd5 leaves Black with two extra connected passed pawns in the ending. .•.

12) A. Naiditsch - B renke Lippstadt 1 999 This winning i dea is similar to that of Topalov-Kasparov on page 47 . The conclu­ sion was 33 .. Jhf2+! 34 c;t>xf2 �h2+ and White resigned in view of 35 c;t>f} l:tf8+ fol ­ lowed b y mate next move.

1 3) Kiselev - Gubaid u l l i n Russian Team Ch, S t Petersburg 1 999 This innocent-seeming position was de­ cided by the deflection of the e 1 -rook, which has the duty of preventing mate i n two by . . . Jl.e4+ . Black played 30 ... .l:icl ! and White resigned as he loses at least a rook.

1 4) M a rkid is - H a l kias Greek Ch, A thens 1 998 Black's rook must defend against :Sg8#, so White was able to bring his queen into the at­ tack with gain of tempo by 22 �xf5 ! . Black limped on by 22 .. .'t1Bd8 (22 .. ..l:ird8 23 �f7 mates on g7 or g8), but White's attack, rein­ forced by the arrival of the queen, proved de­ cisive : 23 �g4 i.g5 (or 23 .. ."tlle 7 24 'i�Yg8+ .i1xg8 25 .l:rxg8#) 24 �xg5 (24 i.b2 ! is even better, but of course regaining the sacrificed piece is enough to win) 24 ... �xg5 25 .l:.xg5 (Black is two pawns down, so he tries to grab one back . . . ) 25 ... tLlxb4 ( . . . but now he runs

into a forced mate) 26 i.b2 (Black can do lit­ tle about White's lethal discovered check) 26 ... tLlxd5 27 e6+ 1 -0. It is mate in three more moves; e.g., 27 . . . tLlf6 28 e7 .U.f7 29 e8�+ �f8 30 �xf8# or 27 . . . l:If6 28 l:.ag l h6 29 .l:ig8+ �h7 30 J:! l g7#.

1 5)

Koziak - La bensky

Rovno 2000 A preliminary sacrifice is necessary to set the stage for the decisive deflection. Black continued 14....ltf2+! 15 �xf2 (now the white king has the duty of defending the queen, and so the situation is ripe for a deflection) 15 .. Jbd1 + 16 'it>e2 .l::!.a 1 ( 1 6 . . . ii.c4+ ! 1 7 bxc4 lhe4+ 1 8 ii.e3 �b 1 would have been devas­ tating, but the move played proved surpri s­ ingly effective) 0-1 . A rather early resignation by White, although after 1 7 �xb6 .l:ixa2+ 1 8 We3 axb6 Black's material advantage should be enough to win in the long run.

1 6) Ardelea nu - Vajda Romanian Ch, Jasi 1 999 White can ' t win with the simple 23 hxg4 since Black would reply 23 . . . �xg3. Instead White utilized the fact that the f6-knight has to prevent both �h7+ and lhg4+ . The only real question is which of these two moves is effective. 23 .l:.xg4+? tLlxg4 24 �h7+? Wh8 is completely wrong since White's queen is under attack and so his discovered checks are ineffective. The correct sequence is 23 �h7+ tLlxh7 24 .l:.xg4+, which wins Black's queen . The game ended 24 ... �xg4 25 hxg4 .l:.e6 26 �d2 .lib8 27 g3 and Black resigned, as White's material advantage is too great.

1 7) Kozul - N isipea n u European Team Ch, Batumi 1 999 Yes. Black could have won the game by 25 . . . �xc4 26 �xc4 I!.d 1 +, with decisive ma­ terial gains.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

130

1 8) Akhmylovskaya- Dona ldson - Wang Pin USA - China Summit, Shanghai 2002 White 's f3-bishop has the task of prevent­ ing mate by . . . tt'lg4#. Black exploited thi s by 42 .. .'�xg2+! when White resigned as it is mate after 43 i.. x g2 tt'lg4#.

1 9)

La h ner - Vesely

Ostrava 2002 Black's queen is tied to the duty of pre­ venting 'i¥f6+, so White continued 27 .laxb7 ! (now the black queen cannot retain control of f6) 27 ...'t\Vxb7 28 'i¥f6+ (Black's king is driven out to its doom) 28 ... �xh5 29 �g2 1 -0. Black cannot meet the threat of 30 .l:!.h 1 + fol l owed by either 3 1 'i¥f3# or 3 1 f3#.

20) Motylev - J. Polga r

material advantage) 29 .l:i.xg7+ (now White has a forced mate) 29 ... �h8 30 �f7 and Black resigned, since mate on g8 cannot be prevented.

2 2) M . Pribyl - Konopka Prague 2000 White 's queen must defend the c2-rook, while the knight on c5 is preventing mate by . . . .l:i.d 1 + fol lowed by . . . �d3#. All this means that neither piece is effectively covering a6, a fact which Black exploited by 32 ... i.. a6+ ! . The sacrifice cannot b e declined, since 33 We i .l:i.d l # is mate, while 3 3 �gl loses to 33 . . . .l:i.d 1 + 34 �h2 �h4#. If White plays 3 3 �xa6, then 3 3 . . . .l:i.xc2 gives Black a decisive advantage since he is ahead on material and White's king remains very exposed. White chose the only remaining option, 33 tt'lxa6, but after 33 .l:i.dl+ he resigned since it is mate next move by 34 �e2 �d3#. •..

European Clubs Cup, Kallithea 2002 If White's queen were absent then Black would be able to take both bishop and rook with check, so it is worth sacrificing material to deflect the white queen . After 30 i.. f4 ! White resigned, as the queen cannot maintain its guard of d3. Note that 30 . . . i.. h4 is inferior as White can reply 3 1 �d6. •..

21) Vlad i m i rov - M u rshed Asian Ch, Calcutta 2001 Because White is already a piece down, it is no good to win Black's queen by 28 lhg7+ �xg7 29 i.. x g7 .U.c l + 30 i.. f l �xg7 . Then White's attack would have disappeared, his bishop would be awkwardly pinned and he would have no genuine defence against the deadly threat of . . . i.. c 4. White has to do more than simply win the queen on g7, and the key idea leading to success is a deflection. The game continued 28 i.. xa6 ! �xa6 (28 . . . �c7 loses to 29 il.. x g7, since 29 . . . �c l + 30 i.. f l gives White a winning attack, or 29 . . . �xg7 30 l:!.xg7+ Wxg7 3 1 i.. x c8 with a decisive

23 ) Va n Wely - Acs Hoogeveen 2002 Black continued 1 8 i.. g3 ! , threatening mate on f2 . There is no defence ; for example, 1 9 fxg3 i.. h 3#, 1 9 �e2 �xf2#, 1 9 .l:i.e2 �h 1 # or 1 9 �c2 i.. x d3+ (a deflection) 20 �xd3 �xf2#. Playing 1 9 tt'le7+ �h8 first doesn 't change the situation. .•.

24) Landa - l b ragimov Russian Ch, St Petersburg 1 998 Black won with the spectacular sacrifice of both his bishops, starting with 22 ... i.. c4! . The mai n line runs 2 3 �xc4 (23 �d 1 loses to 23 . . . tt'lxe4) 23 . . . i.. x f2+ ! 24 �xf2 (after 24 �e2 �xg3 there is no real defence to the threat of 25 . . . �f3+) 24 . . . .l:i.xd2+ 25 �e3 .l:i.xc2 and White i s not only a pawn down, but his position is completely shattered and his king hopelessly exposed. White therefore re­ signed straight away.

131

SOLUTIONS

2 5)

Zschabitz - Dwora kowska

Barlinek 2001 The game continued 25 .l:.xc2+ ! 26 'i¥xc2 (26 �xc2 allows 26 . . . 'i¥b2#) 26 ... .l:Ic8 ! (this is the deflection) 27 �d2 (other moves are even worse; e.g., 27 'i¥xc8 'i¥b2# or 27 .l:Id2 'iVa i #) 27 ....l:.xc2+ 28 Wxc2 'i¥b2+ 29 '>t>d3 'i¥d4+ (now B lack picks up the bishop with a fork, securing a decisive material advantage) 30 We2 'i¥xb4 31 �f3 'i¥c3+ 32 �e2 'i¥e3+ 0- 1 .

fxe5 'i¥xb3 46 lbf4 is even better) 45 .. Jhe3 46 .l:.xe3 .l:Ixe3 47 'i¥xg6 1 -0. B lack is too much material down.

•••

2 6) Barbea u - Cha rbonneau Montreal 2001 If Black's queen were not guarding d7, then White would have a spectacular forced mate by l lbd7+ ( 1 'i¥f6+ ! and 2 lbd7+ also works) l . . .�f7 2 'i¥f6+ ! .l:Ixf6 3 lbg5#. This suggests that a deflection might be in the air, and White continued with the modest but deadly 43 b3 ! .

2 7)

Pedzich - M u rdzia

Swidnica 1 999 White found a spectacular win by 25 .l:Ixd6! (this deflection forces Black's queen to aban­ don its defence of the f7-square) 25 ... 'i¥xd6 26 .th7+ ! (a second sacrifice, but not a de­ flection ; White j ust wants to get rid of his bishop with gain of tempo so that his queen can enter the attack) 26 ... �xh7 (26 . . . .l:.xh7 27 'i¥f7+ 'iit> h 8 2 8 'i¥e8+ mates next move) 27 'i¥g6+ �g8 28 'i¥f7+ ( making use of the pre­ liminary sacrifice on d6) 28 ...�h7 29 .l:.xh6+! (a final deflection sacrifice which draws Black's king out for the mate) and Black re­ signed since 29 . . . �xh6 30 'i¥g6# is mate.

Sol utions to Trapped Piece Exercises 1)

B

Shaked - Kaspa rov

Tilburg 1 997 B lack played 20 Jl.e5 and White resigned since his queen is trapped. .•.

2) Sem inara - Gomez B a illo

Black cannot maintain his guard on d7 for long, since 43 . . . 'i¥b5 is met by 44 c4, but once ctJd7+ becomes possible White can mate as above. Black therefore tried the desperate 43 h6, but lost after 44 'i¥xh6 ( 44 lbxg6+ also wins) 44 .l:Ixe5 (44 . . . 'i¥xb3 45 lbxg6+ '>t>f7 46 lbg5+ is devastating) 45 bxa4 ( 45 ...

••.

A rgentine Ch, Buenos A ires 1 998 No, he can ' t get away with 20 'i¥xg7 White probably calculated that after 20 . . . .l:.g8 2 1 'i¥xh6 his queen could escape, but Black played 20 ... .l:.h7 instead, trapping the queen . White therefore resigned.

3) Holmsten - M i nasian Ubeda 2000 B lack trapped White's queen by 23 ... lbd5. Although White managed to avoid actually

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

132

losing his queen, he ended up a piece down after 24 ctJxe5 .txe5 25 �c6 �xc6 26 bxc6. The finish was 26 .. Jlfc8 27 �fe1 f6 28 g3 g5 29 .l:.c4 nxc6 30 a4 !1ac8 31 .txd4 lixc4 32 dxc4 .txd4 33 cxd5 !:!.c2 0- 1 . After 34 l:.fl White is paralysed and B lack can easily start rounding up White ' s pawns.

7)

4)

8)

Pavasovic - Rogulj

Zonal tournament, Dresden 1 998 The immediate 1 7 ctJa4 is met by 1 7 . . . 'iYd4, but the preliminary 17 c5 ! proved decisive, since 1 7 . . . dxc5 1 8 ctJa4 now traps the queen. Black loses at least a piece and so resigned.

Kholmov - Shinkevich

Galego - Hauchard

Russia Cup, Perm 1 997 White could have won by 27 l:.xe5 ! �xe5 28 .tf4, trapping B lack's queen in mid-board. However, he overlooked this possibility and the game continued 27 .ta4? 'Jae7? (Black also misses the sacrifice on e5 ; had he seen it, he surely would have played 27 . . . ii.d4+ to remove his bishop from the vulnerable e5square) 28 .tc6 (once again, White could have won by 28 .l!i.xe5 , but this time it doesn ' t matter much, since Black has nothing better than moving his attacked rook) 28 ... .:.b8 29 .l::I xe5 ! (finally he sees it ! ) 1 -0.

Zonal tournament, Mondariz 2000 It was n ' t a good idea as Black trapped the rook using his king: 18 ... 'it'd7 19 l:.xc8 (White has no choice, since 1 9 l:.b6 cJ;; c 7 is even worse for him) 19 ... l:.xc8 20 a3 'it'e6 and Black was material up (rook for knight and pawn) which he eventually exploited to win the game.

5)

Kurajica - Stu rua

European Team Ch, Pula 1 997 After 41 ctJe3 Black resigned, as his rook is captured immediately on every square apart from d2, but 4 l . . . .l::I d 2 runs into the knight fork 42 ctJc4+, when the rook is lost in any case.

6) Seminara - G iaccio Argentine Ch, Buenos A ires 1 998 White's queen is not actually trapped here, but it is so short of squares that Black can se­ cure a deci sive material advantage. The game continued 13 ... g5 ! 14 WHxe4 ( 1 4 'iVg4 h5 1 5 'iYh3 g4 is even worse for White, since he loses a piece without gaining any counter­ play) 14 .txe4 15 ctJxe4 h6 and Black has won White ' s queen for a bishop and a knight. Although White has some counterplay, it is not sufficient and Black won in due course. ••.

9)

Spa ngen berg - Sem inara

A rgentine Ch, Buenos Aires 1 998 White played 22 g4, attacking the queen . It has only one safe square to flee to, but after 22 . . . 'iYe6 23 l:.b6 the queen is trapped and White wins a piece. Black resigned at once .

1 0) Sa rava nan - Thi psay Guntur 2000 Black's bishop has ventured into enemy territory and after 30 ctJg4, cutting off the es­ cape-route to h6, it was i n serious trouble. The continuation was 30 ...l:.de8 3 1 'it'f3 and Black faced unavoidable material loss. The game finished 3 1 ...ctJf7 (3 l . . . l:.g8 32 ctJxf6 l:.xg3+ 3 3 'it'xg3 ctJxf5+ 34 cJ;; g 4 ctJh6+ 3 5 'itf3 gives White the decisive material advan­ tage of rook and pawn for bishop) 32 tt:Jxe3 ctJe5+ 33 'it'f2 l:.g8 34 l:.e4 1 -0.

1 1) Pa ra monov - Ta rasov Petroff memorial, St Petersburg 2000 White played 1 2 axb5. If Black replies 1 2 . . . l:.xb5 . then White wins material with a

133

SOLUTIONS

variety of tactical motifs : 1 3 �a4 (a skewer of rook and knight) 1 3 . . . .l:Ib6 14 d5 (pin of knight against rook) and B lack loses the ex­ change. In the game Black played 12 ... axb5, but after 13 d5 his c6-knight was unexpect­ edly trapped. The continuation was 13 ... �b7 14 dxc6 .txc6 15 'iWc2, and White won with the extra piece.

21 lt:Jg4, which looks a good reply as it threat­ ens both to take on f6 and to play 'iYh6+.

1 2) V. M i kha levski - l konnikov Vlissingen 1 998 White's queen and knight are under threat, but Black's own queen is attacked. White avoided 33 .l:Ixb6? ? which loses the exchange to 33 .. JIVxc 1 +, and 33 'iWh4? 'ii' b 7 , when Black keeps his extra pawn. Instead, he con­ tinued 33 .l:Ixc8 lt:Jxa4 34 .l:Ic4 ! , trapping the knight. Black resigned at once.

13) Khurtsidze - Vokarev Moscow 2002 It doesn ' t look as if the white queen can be trapped, as it has a3 and c7 available as escape-routes. However, Black revealed the fallacy of this logic by 26 ... lt:Jc3 ! . White re­ signed, because after the attacked rook moves Black plays . . . lt:Jb5 , trapping the queen. One cannot emphasize often enough that great caution must be exercised before sending the queen off on a lone j ourney into the enemy position.

1 4)

Comas Fa brego - Morovic

Capablanca memorial, Havana 1 999 White's queen and knight have taken up attacking positions, but without enough sup­ port from his other forces. Both pieces are rather short of squares, and the possibility of . . . g5 is an ever-present danger. At the mo­ ment this can be met by 'ii' h 5, so Black played the subtle 20 ... 'iWe8! taking away the h5-square and threatening to trap White's queen by 2 1 . . .g5 . The only defence to this is

However, the second subtle retreating move 21...lt:Jg8! proved deadly as it met all White's threats and in addition renewed the threat of . . . g5 trapping the queen. There is no real an­ swer to this and, faced by the loss of at least a piece, White resigned.

1 5)

Pavasovic - Bel iavsky

Vidmar memorial, Portoroz 1 999 The rook is a liability. An active rook on the seventh rank is normally an asset, but as always one must take care with pieces that venture i nto enemy territory. Here White had not been alert to the danger, and after 3 1 . .. �e6, cutting off the rook's retreat, he could not meet the threat of 32 . . . .td6 33 .l:Ib7 .tc8 winning material. The finish was 32 .ta6 .td6 33 .l:Ib7 .tc8 34 ctJb2 .txb7 35 .txb7 .l:Ib8 0- 1 .

1 6) Ye J i a ngchuan - Bacrot Europe-Asia rapidplay match, Batumi 200 1 Black played 50 ... e6+ ! (50 . . . .l:Ixd5+? 5 1 'it>e4 costs Black material since his rook and knight are both attacked) 51 We4 ( 5 1 .l:Ixe6 loses the rook after 5 1 . . . .l:Ixd5+) 5 1 ...ctJf6+

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

134

52 'itf3 'itg7 trapping White ' s rook and win­ ning the exchange. The finish was 53 .li!xf6 �xf6 54 dxe6 'itxe6 55 4Jf2 �cl 56 tt:Je4 �a 1 57 tt:Jg5+ 'ite7 58 'it>e4 .l:.xa2 59 'itf3 .l:!.b2 0- 1 .

Sol utions to Removing the G uard Exercises 1)

5)

Lobzhan idze - M illan U rrutia

Uheda 2000 White played 25 4Jdc5, which both un­ covers an attack by White ' s queen on the f5 pawn, and at the same time drives Black's queen away from guarding it. 25 . . . ..txc5 26 tt:Jxc5 doesn ' t help Black, and when the queen moves away White will play �xf5+ followed by �xh7 , winning a piece.

6) Ram i rez Alva rez - Chau Sau M i ng

Lima - Mel lado Trivino

Olympiad, Bled 2002 White noticed that the g6-knight has the duty of preventing �f8#. He eliminated it di­ rectly by 28 .l:Ixg6 and Black resigned since he faces ruinous material loss.

Leon 1 99 7 There is a right way and a wrong way t o go about the task of removing the guard of the e6-rook. The wrong way is 20 . . . �xd4+? since after 2 1 �xd4 White threatens mate on h8, and 2l . . . �xe6 runs into 22 �g7#. The right way is 20 ... c5 ! with a genuine attack on the supporting knight; now White cannot avoid losing material.

2) 011 - Svidler European Clubs Cup, Kazan 1 997 The g2-pawn must prevent ... �xh3#, so Black eliminated it by 31..Jbg2 ! . 32 �c3+ .l:I8g7 does n ' t help White, so he resigned as the only way to avoid a quick mate is to give up al most all his pieces !

a

w

b

c

d

e

g

h 8

3) Gulko - Benja min USA Ch, Chandler 1 997 This is a simple case of removing the guard . After 26 ... .l:i.xe3 27 fxe3 4Jxd2 Black had won two pieces for a rook. The game con­ cluded 28 a4 'itd7 29 .l:i.b7 .!:.aS 30 I1b4 tt:Je4 31 .l:.d 1 'ite6 32 .l:'!.b7 .l:i.xa4 33 .l:i.xc7 tt:Jg5 0- 1 .

4) Va n Wely - J. Polga r Hoogeveen 1 997 Re mov ing the guard tactics occur quite of­ ten when attacking the ki ng. Here Black was able to force mate by removing the guard of the g3-pawn: 30 .. ..l:hf2+ and White resigned in view of 3 1 .l:Ixf2 �xg3 + 32 Wfl �xf2#.

The game continued 21 .Sxd6 cxd4 22 .ll. xd4 (White has obtained two pawns for the piece, but they do not provide enough com­ pensation in the long run ) 22... .Sad8 23 .ll. xa7 .l:i.xd6 24 �xd6 b5 25 �d5 �xd5 26 cxd5 I1a8 27 .ll. b 6 .Sxa2 28 .Sd 1 4Jf7 29 d6 lla1 30 �xa l .ll. x a1 31 d7 .ll. f6 32 Wf2 4Jd8 33 We3 �f7 34 .ll. x d8 .ll. x d8 35 �d4 We6 36

135

SOLUTIONS

�c5 h5 37 h l 'iWg l #.

34 .l:tg8+ ! and B lack resigned in view of 34 . . . .l:txg8 35 1;lxg8+ 'it>xg8 36 'iWa8+ l:!.e8 37 Wt'xe8#.

5) Sutovsky - de Ia Riva Pamplona 1 99819 A back-rank mate may appear unlikely, but the e6-pawn and h6-bishop control the squares f7 and g7 respectively, substituting for black pawns on those squares. Black re­ signed after 32 �xg8+, since mate is forced : 32 . . Jhg8 33 �xg8+ ! 'it>xg8 34 �d8#.

6) R i bshtein - Volzhin Budapest 2000 White could have won by 24 �xc4 ! (this does not lead to mate, but it is a back-rank combination all the same) 24 . . . bxc4 25 .l:.b8+ (the men blocking in the black king don ' t have t o b e pawns; here the queen and bishop prevent the king from fleeing to the second rank) 25 . . . �d8 (25 . . . �c8 26 �xc8+ costs Black all his pieces) 26 l:!.xd8+ 'itxd8 27 tLle5 , winning a piece due to the pin along the d-fi \ e.

7) A. Ma rie - Kosi ntseva European Women 's Ch, Varna 2002 White probably hoped to gain material with 43 tLlxd6? ( 43 h3 is better, with a likely draw ), since both 43 .. Jhd6 44 .l:lxc7 and 43 . . . �xb7 44 cxb7 are totally winning for White. However, Black replied 43 .. J�xc6 ! and suddenly White was helpless; for exam­ ple, 44 l!xc6 lt:Je2+ 45 'ith I �fl # or 44 .l:!bb2 tLle2+ 45 l:txe2 �c l + 46 Ite l l:!.xe l #. Faced with ending up a rook down, White decided to resign.

8) Kha rlov - H u l a k European Clubs Cup, Budapest 1 996 White broke down Black's remaining resis­ tance on the back rank with a rook sacrifice :

9)

Tsesarsky - Rotman

Petah Tiqwa 1 997 White exploited Black's weak back with 39 l:!.xe4! fxe4 40 .J1Lxe6, which wins two pieces for a rook since Black cannot reply 40 . . . .l:txe6 due to 41 l:!.c8+ mating. In the re­ sulting position B lack cannot keep his e4pawn, so White ends up with two very active bishops in return for a rook. This proved suf­ ficient for a win: 40 ... h6 41 .JiLdS .l:t.be7 42 .J1Lxe4 'it>g8 43 .JiLdS+ 'it>h7 44 .J1Le4+ 'it>g8 45 �g6 .l:;la8 46 h4 l:!.ea7 47 .J1Le4 l:!.d8 48 'it>g4 t!ad7 49 .l:t.c6 'it>f7 SO 'it>hS 'it>g8 51 .JiLfS l:te7 52 'it>g6 l:Ide8 53 l:t.d6 .l:f.b8 54 �e6+ 'it>f8 55 l:!.a6 1-0. In the final position Black must lose more material as both �xb8 and ii.d6 are threatened.

1 0) Liu Dede - lsaev Asian Ch, Calcutta 200 I Two moves were enough to destroy Black's position: 29 iVe8+ ! (the first blow ; White ' s queen cannot b e taken a s 2 9 . . . l:!.xe8 3 0 l:txe8+ ii.f8 3 1 !!xf8# is mate) 29 ii.f8 30 �f7 ! (the second blow ; 3 1 'iWg8# is threatened, and if 30 . . . ii.c5 then 3 1 Z;le8+ mates) 30 ... �e7 31 .l:!.xe7 1-0. Black faces a ruinous material loss. ••.

1 1)

Rozenta lis - Ada ms

Olympiad, Elista 1 998 With 30 ii.xf5 White was hoping to es­ cape from his difficult position by exchang­ ing bi shops and then queens. However, he was rocked back by the reply 30 ... �xel + ! . After 3 1 �xe l lt:Jxf5 32 �xe8+ !Ixe8 White's queen cannot move so as to guard the threat­ ened back-rank mate on e l . It follows that there is nothing better than 33 tLld3 , but after

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

138

33 . . . liJxg3+ 34 hxg3 .lae2 the ending is an easy win. White therefore resigned.

1 2) V. Georgiev - Laza rev Elgoibar 1 999 Congratulations if you managed to solve this rather difficult exercise ! Various tactical ideas based on Black's weak back rank play a part in the solution. The game continued 34 �d4! (this deflection allows White to trans­ fer his queen to the eighth rank with gain of tempo) 34... 'i!Va3 (the deflection is not i mme­ diately decisive as Black stil l has a square to maintain his defence of f8) 35 �dS gS (the only way to defend the attacked rook) 36 �dS+ (another tempo-gaining move, allow­ ing the queen to switch to f7) 36 ... WhS 37 �f7 ! (White again doubly attacks the poor f8-rook, and this time there is no . . . gs to defend it) 37 ...iVd6+ (there is no real de­ fence ; Black can only delay the end slightly by giving a couple of checks) 3S f4 �h6+ 39 'ii' g3 1 -0.

Sol utions to Pawn Promotion Exercises 1) de Ia Villa - l llescas Pamplona 1 999/00 Fol lowing 36 ... �h5! White resigned, be­ cause after 37 �xh5 bxc2 the black pawn promotes, while otherwise White loses his bishop.

3) Dragoon - Gorbatov Russia Cup, Moscow 1 998 White won with 49 .ii. d S ! . This bishop is i mmune from capture (49 ... ..txd5 50 e8�# or 49 . . . .laxd5 50 b8�+ followed by mate) and by pinning the f7-bishop, White threatens 50 e8�#. There is nothing Black can do apart from 49 . . . .lab2+, but after 50 'ii' g l .lab l + 5 1 'ii' f 2 .lab2+ 5 2 'it'e3 the checks come to an end and Black faces imminent defeat. He there­ fore resigned at once.

4)

Hebden - H a n ley

British Ch, Torquay 2002 When an advanced pawn is b lockaded by an enemy piece, one way of shifting the b lockade is to concentrate all one's firepower on the blockading piece. Black resigned after 39 �eS+! ..trs 40 .labS, when the multiple attack on the d8-rook leaves Black helpless ( 40 . . . .laxb8 4 1 �xb8 and the pawn will pro­ mote ) .

5)

Hector - Akesson

Nordic Ch, Reykjavik 1 997 White won a piece with a neat combina­ tion based on the promotion of his h7-pawn: 39 .lagS! .laxgS (39 ... liJxg8 loses to 40 �xh8 as the g8-knight is pinned) 40 �xe7+! (de­ flecting Black's queen away from the promo­ tion square) 40 ... 'ii' c S (40 . . . �xe7 41 hxg8� also leaves White a piece up) 41 hxgS� 1 -0.

6) M a . Tseitl i n - Psa khis

2) Bobras - Lagowski Polish Ch, Warsaw 2002 White continued 53 �aS+! and Black re­ signed since after 53 . . . 'ii' x a5 54 a7 the a­ pawn promotes, while otherwise Black loses his bishop. Here White decisively combined the ideas of pawn promotion and skewer.

Israeli Ch, Ramal Aviv!Modiin 2000 Black won by playing 26 ... exf3 ! 27 .laxc7 f2. White's pieces are unable to prevent the promotion on fl (for example, 28 �d l liJg3+ followed by . . . fl �) and so Black 's combi na­ tion nets him a whole rook. As he was a piece down to start with, Black ends up the ex­ change ahead. The finish was 2S 'ii' h 2 f1 �

139

SOLUTIONS

29 'iWh3 .l:i.f7 30 .l:rxf7 �xf7 31 �xh7+ 0,g7 32 0,b7 �f6 33 0,d6+ �e6 34 �g1 .l:rb8 35 i.e1 .l:.b1 36 �g8+ �e5 0- 1 .

7)

while after 1 8 .l:.xb 1 .i.xc6 White is the ex­ change and a pawn down. The game continu­ ation was 18 0,xe7+ �xe7 19 exd6 0,xd2 20 dxe7 l:i.fe8 21 l:i.d1 0,xc4 22 .l:.xd7 0,xb2 and B l ack won with his extra rook.

K i . Georgiev - Henrichs

Recklinghausen 1 998 Black should have played 33 . . . a6, with a likely draw. Instead he preferred 33 ... a5? , but resigned after the reply 34 axb5 ! . If 34 . . . axb4 then 35 b6 promotes the pawn, while after 34 . . . cxb5 (relatively the best) 35 .l:.xb5 Black loses his a-pawn as well , whereupon he i s the exchange down for nothi ng.

8) N ieto - B l it A rgentine Under- 1 2 Ch, Esperanza 2002 It is tempting to play 22 . . . bxa2, but after 23 0, a3 White rounds up the advanced a2pawn, leaving Black with only a modest ad­ vantage. Instead, Black found the far more effective continuation 22 ... �xa2! (trapping the rook on a ] ! ) 23 .l::l.x a2 bxa2. White cannot prevent promotion, so Black emerges a rook ahead. The finish was 24 0,a3 a1'iW 25 Ji.f6 gxf6 26 exf6 l:!.b7 27 �g5+ �h8 28 Ji.h5 0,d8 29 �h4 �c l 30 g4 0,f7 31 i.xf7 .l:.xf7 32 �h5 .l:.xf6 0- 1 .

9) M. Roder - Senoner Graz 1 997 If Black simply recaptures on c6, then White moves his rook from bl and remains a piece up. 1 7 . . . axb 1 � is equall y ineffective because after 1 8 0, xd8 Black's newly-created queen is trapped, and after 1 8 . . . �xfl + 1 9 .i.xfl .l:.fxd8 20 exd6 White has a decisive materi al advantage. The winning move i s 1 7 . . . axb1 0, ! . Here the motivation for the knight promotion is that a knight on b1 attacks White's queen, whereas a queen on bl would not. However White plays, he ends up down on material ; for example, 1 8 0, xd8 0, xd2 1 9 0, xb7 0, xf] leaves Black two exchanges up,

1 0) Rogers - Va n de Mortel Wijk aan Zee 1 995 At present material is more or less balanced (rook and pawn for bi shop and knight) but White tipped the balance deci sively in his fa­ vour with the simple but unexpected pinning move 28 �h6 ! . White threatens 29 h8�+, and 28 .. .f7 fails to 29 �e6+ �f8 30 �g8#. Black was reduced to 28 ... .i.xh6, but he re­ signed after 29 h8�+ �f7 30 �xh6 e5 31 C}jf3 since he is not only a whole exchange down, but in addition his king remains very exposed.

1 1) V. Georgiev - Pa ra mos Dom inguez Skopje 2002 In fact 42 i.g5 ? is bad, because after 42 . . . i.. f6 White's d-pawn is definitely kept under control, while he faces materi al loss along the g-fi le. In this case he could hope for a draw at most. Instead, White won by trust­ ing in the d-pawn: 42 �xg6! hxg6 43 i.g5 ! (thi s is the right way to push the pawn home ; after 43 i.. b 6? i.. f6 44 .l:.fl White threatens to win with 45 d8� or 45 .l:.xf6, but Black can defend by 44 . . . �h6 45 .l:.xf6 �g5+ with per­ petual check, since if the king moves to the f-file the rook drops with check) 43 ... �xb4 (43 . . . i.f6 44 i.xf6 �xf6 45 .l:.a8+ followed by 46 d8� also leaves White a rook up) 44 d8�+ 1 -0 .

1 2)

Short - Stefa nsson

Match (game 5), Reykjavik 2002 Even if you have a good move avai lable, it is often worth spending a little time looking for a better one. White would undoubtedly

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

140

have good winning chances after 3 8 exf8'i¥+, but his modest material advantage (rook for bi shop and pawn) might not be so easy to convert into the full point. White actually pl ayed 38 .l:.xg6+ ! and B l ack resigned in view of 3 8 . . . hxg6 (38 . . . fxg6 39 exf81li'#) 39 h7+, when White ends up a queen ahead : 39 . . . �xh7 40 exf8� or 39 . . . �g7 40 exf81li'+ �xf8 4 1 h8�+.

1 3) Terentiev - Gallagher Liechtenstein 1 990 No, it wasn't correct as White had over­ looked a pawn-promotion combination. The game (which started 1 d4 t2lf6 2 ii.g5 lt:Je4 3 i..f4 c5 4 c3 iVb6 5 iVb3 cxd4 6 iV'xb6 axb6) continued 7 ii.xb8? (7 cxd4 is better, al­ though Black sti ll has some advantage due to his better development) 7 ... dxc3 8 il.. e 5? (this is really disastrous ; 8 t2lxc3 t2lxc3 9 bxc3 l:txb8 leaves White a pawn down, but any­ thing is better than what happened now ! ) 8.. Jha2 ! .

A bril liant and unexpected blow ; after 9 .I:ixa2 c2 the pawn promotes, so White is forced to jetti son material . 9 lt:Jxc3 llxa1 + 10 lt:Jd 1 lt:Jxf2 1 1 �xf2 .l:!xd 1 (the exchange and three pawns down, White could well have re­ signed here, but he plays on to the bitter end)

12 e3 e6 13 i.e2 l:!.c1 14 h4 il.. b 4 1 5 h5 f6 16 i.. d 4 e5 17 il.. x b6 d5 1 8 g3 ii.f5 19 l:!.h4 il.. e 1 + 20 �g2 i.e4+ 2 1 iLf3 �c2+ 22 �h3 f5 0-1 .

1 4)

Frieser - U. Bohm

Germany (Oberliga) 1 993/4 It looks as though Black should resign, since giving his king some air by 24 . . . b6 fail s to 25 lt:Jd6+ �d7 26 t2lf5+ winning the queen. Amazingly, the position is winning for Black ! The game continued 24 .. .'iYc5+ ! (the only move, but a strong one) 2 5 �g2 (25 �h i loses at once to 25 .. .'i¥xc l +, while after 25 l:!.xc5 e l i¥+ 26 �g2 1li'e2+ followed by . . .'i¥xd3 there is no mate and Black wins with his extra material) 25 ... e1 lt:J+! (again forced; Black must meet the threat of 26 l:!.d8#, and 25 . . . lt:Je7 loses to 26 lt:Jd6+, as 26 . . . �d7 27 lt:Jxb7+ costs Black his queen while 26 . . . �xc7 allows White to take the queen with check) .

26 l:!.xe1 (if White moves his king, then 26 . . . lt:Jxd3 27 l:!.xc5 t2lxc5 leaves Black a rook up) 26 ... 1li'c2+ (the final point: the d3rook fal l s and Black secures a decisive mate­ rial advantage) 27 �g1 1li'xd3 28 iLf4 lt:Je7 29 lt:Jd6+ �d7 30 lt:Jf7 lt:Jg6 31 lt:Jxh8 lt:Jxh8 32 ii.e5 lt:Jf7 33 ii.xg7 lt:Jg5 34 l:!.fl 1li'e2 0- 1 . Thi s was a difficult exercise and anyone who

141

SOLUTIONS

found Black ' s first two moves can be justly proud.

Sol utions to I n - Between Moves Exerc ises 1)

Kyaw Kyaw Soe - Dang Tat Thang

Zonal tournament, Yangon 1 998 After 27 .ll. x c5 Black resigned, because 27 .. .'tlVxd l 28 .ll. x e7+ (the in-between move) 28 . . . Wxe7 29 lbxd l leaves White a piece up for nothing.

4)

Si ngh - Aarth ie

Calcutta 2002 White struck with the in-between move 3 1 'i¥xe8+! . Black resigned since White emerges a piece up after 3 l .. .'�f8 32 'tWxf8+ lhf8 3 3 bxc3 o r a queen u p after 3 l . . . .l::t x e8 3 2 l:!.xe8+ 'i¥g8 3 3 .l:lxg8+ Wxg8 34 d6+ (of course 34 bxc3 i s also good enough to win) followed by 35 dxc7 .

Sol utions to Defensive Tactics Exercises

2) Cvita n - Khuzman European Ch, Ohrid 200 I In fact 3 1 ...�xe2? was a losing mistake (Black should have continued 3 l . . .'tlVd7, al­ though White retains a considerable advan­ tage even after this). Although the lines 3 2 lbxf5 ? �xd2 and 3 2 'i¥xe2? 'i¥xf2 favour Black, the in-between move 32 .ltxg7+! de­ stroyed his hopes. After 32 . . . �xg7 3 3 lLlxf5 + o r 3 2 . . . We8/e7 3 3 'i¥xe2+ White delivers a crucial check, winning the enemy queen in both cases . Faced with heavy material loss, Black resigned.

1)

Halkias - Dambacher

Lost Boys, Amsterdam 2002 The position is winning for White, and after 66 'i¥e6+ followed by 67 �f5 , for exam­ ple, Black would lose in the long run. How­ ever, White wanted to win immediately and carelessly played 66 �f5?, threatening mate on g6 and apparently forcing Black to ex­ change queens by 66 . . . 'i¥h7+. However, Black actually continued 66 ... 'tWf7+! and after the forced 67 'i¥xf7 it was stalemate .

2) del Rio - l l lescas

3) Andonovski - BojkoviC Skopje 2002 No, Black has a much stronger move than simply recapturing on d6. The game contin­ ued 1 8 ... lbh4+ ! (a fork combined with possi­ ble deflection of the g3 -pawn) 1 9 Wh1 ( 1 9 gxh4 lbf4+ 20 '.t>h I lbxe2 wins White's queen for insufficient material) 19 ... lbxf3 (White must lose material, since both e l and d6 are under attack) 20 lbe4 lbxe1 21 .l:i.xe1 (Black has won the exchange for nothing, and White soon decided to give up) 2 1 ...lbf6! 22 f3 lbxe4 23 fxe4 .l:i.f7 24 'i¥g4 .ltxc4 25 bxc4 .l:i.af8 0- 1 .

Dos Hermanas 2002 58 'ii' f5? was a mistake because of the con­ tinuation 58 ... .l:i.xa7 ! 59 .l:lxa7 with stalemate. White could have won easily in the diagram position by 58 �d6 heading for the a-pawn and winning Black's rook within a few moves.

3) Dittma r - Schu lte Dresden 2002 Of course thi s position is totally winning for Black, but even with such an overwhelm­ ing advantage it is still possible to make a mistake. Black played 50 ... 'ii' g5?? and was

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

142

doubtless shocked by the continuation 5 1 l:rg4+! xg4 stalemate. The lesson here is that concentration is necessary right up to the moment that your opponent resigns.

White gave perpetual check by 32 .l:.xf8+ Wh7 33 .l:.xf7+ 112- 112 .

4)

Moscow 1 96 7 White saved the game b y playing for per­ petual check: 19 .lah3 ! .txe2 20 .ltxh7+ Wh8 and a draw was agreed as White can repeat moves by 2 1 .ltg6+ (or anywhere else on the same diagonal) 2 1 . . . Wg8 22 .lth7+, etc .

Prokopchuk - Smirin

Moscow 2002 Evidently White thought so, because he played 20 �d2? . However, after the reply 20... �c3 ! he had to resign, since Black keeps his extra piece (2 1 �xc3 'Llxe2+ 22 Wh 1 'Llxc3). Instead White should have played 20 �xa 1 'Llxe2+ 2 1 Wh 1 .ltxa1 22 .l:.xa 1 , when he has some drawing chances.

5)

Sagalchik - Kaufman

USA Ch, Seattle 2002 Had White been a little more patient then he would have secured the win; for example, after 25 l:rxe8+ �xe8 26 �a6, attacking the f6-pawn, White wins easily. However, the move pl ayed, 25 .l:. l d7??, was a terri ble blunder because Black replied with the de­ flection 25 �xd7. White loses a rook and so he was the one who had to resi gn . .•.

6) Jankovic - Tomicic

8)

9)

Bobotsov - Petrosian

S m i rin - Tukma kov

Solin 1 999 White 's position looks very poor, since Black's pawn i s on the verge of promotion. In the game he tried pinning the pawn by 69 �f3?, but lost after 69 �d4 70 Wa2 Wd2 71 �g2 �a7+ 72 Wb2 �d4+ 73 Wa2 �eS 74 b4 Wd3 75 �f3+ �e3 76 �d5+ �d4 77 �f3+ Wd2 78 �g2 �xb4 79 �f2 �c4+ 80 Wb2 �c3+ 0- 1 . After 8 1 Wb1 or 8 1 Wa2, Black plays 8 l . . .Wd 1 and White can no lon­ ger prevent promotion . However, in the dia­ gram position White missed an immediate draw by 69 �h 1 + ! e 1 � (69 . . . �e 1 70 �d5+ repeats) 70 �f3 + (70 �h5+ also draws) 70 ... �de2 7 1 �d5+ � 1 d2 72 �h 1 + �ee 1 73 �f3+ and Black cannot evade the checks. ..•

Croatian Under- 1 8 Team Ch, Pula 2002 In the game Black played 64 ... .laxg2?, but White drew by 65 l:tb3+ f3 (65 . . . Wf2 even loses, to 66 .l:.b2+) 66 .l:.xf3+! gxf3 (66 . . . Wxf3 is also stalemate) with stalemate. He could have won by 64 . . . f3 ! 65 gxf3 llh2+ 66 Wg1 gxf3 ; for example, 67 .lab3 .laa2 68 .rl.b 1 .lag2+ 69 Wfl .rl.h2 70 Wg 1 f2+ 7 1 Wfl .l:.h 1 + and White's rook fal ls.

Ljubljana 2002 White used the discovered-attack motif to rescue his attacked pieces: 26 .ltd6! and Black resigned because after 26 . . . .laxd6 27 .ltxf7+ Wxf7 28 .laxd6 White is the exchange and a pawn ahead with an easy win.

7)

1 1)

Lawrenz - H . Ernst

Bad Ragaz 1 994 White saved the game with the surprising 31 .l:.d8 ! . This threatens both 32 �xe7 and 32 .laxc8, so 31...�xh4 was forced, but then

1 0) Kha rlov - N isipea n u

R. M a in ka - Stefa nova

Recklinghausen 1 998 The game fini shed 40 ... We7? 41 .lab7+ (now White can del iver perpetual check) 41 ...Wf8 (4 l . . .Wd8 42 ctJf7+ fol l owed by

143

SOL UTIONS

tL:'ld6+ is also perpetual check, since 42 . . . �e8 43 tL:'ld6+ �f8?? runs into 44 �f7#) 42 �b8+ �e7 43 :!.b7+ �f8 (43 . . . �f6?? 44 ::if7#) 44 .t:f.b8+ �g7 45 .l:.b7+ �f8 46 .l:tb8+ �e7 47 .l:tb7+ �e8 48 �b8+ 112- 112 . 40 . . . �c7 ? is also wrong, as White draws by 4 1 tL:'lf3+ ! (shield­ ing the f4-bishop from the attack of Black ' s queen) 4 1 . . . e5 42 �xeS+ �d7 43 �xf5+ �e7 44 .t:f.b7+ and there is no escape from the rook checks . The winning move is 40 . . . �d6 ! , which looks least likely because i t allows White to give a double check. However, after 4 1 tL:lf3+ �d5 or 4 1 tL:lc4++ �d5 the checks soon run out, whereupon B lack wins easily with her massive material advantage.

1 2) Dorfman - Onishchuk Cap d 'Agde 2000 Yes, Black could have improved. After 73 jL_xf6 'it>xf6 74 �a6+ Wg7 75 .l:.a7+ he could have drawn by 75 . . . Wf6 ! . If White takes the rook it is stalemate, while 76 .l:.a6+ r:J;; g 7 sim­ ply repeats the position . Curiously not only Onishchuk, but also Grandmaster Ribli. an­ notating the game in ChessBase Maga::.ine, overlooked this drawing resource.

1 3) Benita h - Cvita n Mitropa Cup, Baden 1 999 Black started with 52 ... f3+ ! . If now 53 Wh3 g2 54 h8� g I �. the question is whether White has a perpetual check. The answer is no, but Black must take care not to capture the b6-pawn, si nce then White wou ld be able to force stalemate by giving up his queen. One line runs 5 5 �c8+ 'it>d6 56 �c7+ r:J;; e 6 57 �c6+ 'it>e7 58 �c7+ �f6 59 �d6+ 'it>f5 60 �d7+ 'it>g5 6 1 �d8+ �f4 62 �f6+ �e4 63 �c6+ 'ote3 64 �c3+ �f4 65 �d2+ jL_e3 66 �b4+ 'otf5 and the checks run out. There­ fore White played 53 �xf3, and the game ended 53 ... jL_d4! ( setting up the discovered attack 54 h8� e4+) 54 'it>e4 (forced to pre­ vent Black advancing the e-pawn ) 54 ... f5+ !

(removing the blockading king) 5 5 �xf5 e4 56 'it>xe4 g2 0- 1 .

1 4) Wi ntzer - Von Gleich Saint Augustin 1 990 White solved the problem by forcing a sur­ prising perpetual check : 22 ..ltxh7+ ! �xh7 23 �xg7+! Wxg7 24 .l:t.g3+ Wh8 25 .l:ih3+ 'otg8 26 l:tg3+ 1h-1h (this possibility was first poi nted out in analysis of the famous game Lj uboj evic-Andersson, Wij k aan Zee 1 976 ).

1 5)

Greta rsson - Ashley

Bermuda 1 999 After 27 ... tL:lf2?, White replied 28 �xe2 dxe2 29 .1i.. xf2, defusing Black' s attack and remaining with the material advantage of two rooks and a knight ( 1 3 points ) for a queen and a pawn ( I 0 points ) . In the game continu­ ation White was able to free his pieces and move over to the attack: 29 .. .'V&'e5 30 .l:!e1 f5 3 1 c4 �c7 32 .l::!. xe2 �xc4 33 r:J;; h 2 �xd5 34 l::I.c l f4 35 'otg1 h5 36 tL:'lf3 g4 37 �d2 �b5 38 hxg4 hxg4 39 tt:Je5 jL_f5 40 .l:f.d8+ 'it>h7 4 1 .l::!.c 7+ W h 6 4 2 .l:.h8+ 1 - 0 . However, in the di­ agram position Black could have forced a draw and it is curious that neither Ashley nor annotator Avrukh (in ChessBase Maga­ ::.ine) spotted it. The saving move for Black is 27 . . . i.. a4 ! ! .

w

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

144

White has to take care not to lose, but after the best reply 28 �xd3 (28 V:Vb 1 .i.c2 ! and 28 Wkc 1 d2 can only favour Black, while after 28 '¥Wxa4? .l:1xe 1 +! 29 :!.xe 1 'ii'f 2+ 30 'it>h2 'i¥g3+ 31 �g1 l!Vxe 1 + 3 2 �h2 �g3+ 3 3 �g 1 'i¥e3+ 34 �h2 l2Jxc3 ! Black has decisive threats) 28 . . . �xe 1 + ! 29 .l:1xe 1 'ii'f 2+ 30 �h2 'i!ff4+ the game ends in perpetual check.

1 6) H nydiuk - Tyomkin European Junior Ch, Tallinn 1 997 Clearly there is a stalemate if White can get rid of his queen, but the stalemate only exists while Black's king is blocking the g4pawn. Consequently White has to choose the correct check here, because once the oppor­ tunity has gone it won ' t tum up again. The right move is 88 �e5 + ! ! . Then 88 . . . 'it>h4 and 88 . . . �h6 allow 89 �xf6+ followed by 'i¥b2 with an easy draw, while 88 . . . 'it>xg4 89 'i¥e2+ 'i¥xe2 is stalemate. That leaves just 8 8 . . . 'lt>g6, but after 89 'i¥e8+ �h6 90 �e3+ �g7 9 1 Wi/e7+ 'it>g6 92 �e8+ Black can only repeat the position. In the game White played 88 'i!fe3+? but now Black is winning. He can evade the checks without capturing the g4pawn, and then White is lost: 88 ... �h4 ! .

w

�gl + 'it> f3 9 2 Wiifl + ( 9 2 � 1 + 'it>f4 is much the same) 92 ... 'lt>e3 93 �el+ �f4 94 �fl+ (94 �4+ is a better chance, setting the trap 94 . . . 'it>g5 ? 95 'i!fd2+ ! , but after 94 . . . �e4 ! B lack reaches a winning ending with 'i�H+m vs 'i¥) 94 ... 'it>g5 95 'ii'b 5+ 'it>h4 96 'ti'g5+ 'it>g3 97 'iVe3+ �g2 98 'i¥e1 � 1 + 99 l!Vxb1 axb1'iV+ 100 'it>xb1 �g3 1 0 1 �c2 'it>xg4 1 02 'it>d2 'it>f3 103 'it>el f5 0-1 . After 1 04 'it>fl f4 White must allow . . . 'lt>e2 or . . . \tg2, where­ upon the pawn promotes.

Sol utions to Com binations Exercises 1) Karaklajic - Zhang Zhong Beijing 1 997 The finish was 37 ... l2Jxd4+ and White re­ signed since he loses his queen.

2) Varga - Anastasian World Team Ch, Erevan 2001 White combined a fork with the deflection motif to win by 46 l2Je8+. After 46 . . . .l:rxe8 47 .l:rxd7 Black loses even more material be­ cause of the fork of c7 and f7 , so he re­ signed.

3) Joecks - Shaba lov Hamburg 1 999 Black ignored the attacked bishop and played 20... h5. Now 2 1 'iVxg5 l2Jh3+ and 2 1 'iVg3 l2Je2+ lose the queen to knight forks, so White played 21 'iff5. However, after 2l. .. g6 the queen was trapped in mid-board.

4)

89 �e l+ (89 'i!Vg5 + 'it>g3 90 'i!fe3+ 'it>g2 and Black wins) 89 'lt>h3 90 Wii h l + 'itg3 9 1 •..

G ra ba rczyk - Bobras

Polish Ch, Warsaw 2002 White played 25 l2Jd6 ! , exploiting the pin of the rook, and trapping Black' s queen .

145

SOLUTIONS

B lack resigned in view of the impending ma­ terial loss.

5)

Short - Leko

Sarajevo 1 999 White's b-pawn is pinned, and so Black was able to play 44 ... .l:!c3, trapping White 's queen.

9)

Kasparov - Adams

Sarajevo 1 999 White continued 30 .l:Ixe8+ .l:!xe8 3 1 .i:.dl and Black resigned as 3 1 . . .1!Ve2 is the only way to avoid loss of the b5 -knight, but then comes the skewer 32 !le l and Black loses material .

1 0) S h i rov - Motylev

6) Smirin - Pel letier Biel 2002 White won a piece by 28 'lWxe6, since after 28 . . Jlxe6 29 tZ::l f 7+ the deflection allows a knight fork regaining the queen.

7)

Plachetka - Berkes

FIDE Knockout (rapid playoff), Moscow 2001 White won by a combination of skewer and back-rank mate : 13 �xb2! (the similar idea 1 3 1!Va4+ tt:'ld7 1 4 ktxb2 is equally effec­ tive) 1 -0. Both 1 3 .. .'�xa6 14 ktxb8+ 'lWc8 1 5 ktxc8# and 1 3 . . . 'lWxb2 1 4 'lWc6+ �d8 1 5 tt:'lxf7# lead to mate.

Mitropa Cup, Leipzig 2002 A combination of pawn promotion and back-rank mate led to victory for Black after 29 .l::!. a l ! . 30 �xa l c 1 1IV+ 3 1 .laxc 1 .laxc l # is mate, while 30 fxe3 .l:.xc 1 + 3 1 'it>f2 k!.fl + fol­ lowed by ... c 1 'lW gives B lack an extra queen, so White resigned.

Hamburg 2001 White played 36 tt:'ldxf6+ (36 tt:'lexf6+ is equally effective) and B lack resigned since he loses his queen after 36 . . . gxf6 37 tt:'lxf6+.

8)

1 2)

..•

1 1)

Putzbach - M . Kopylov

Ki nsii: - Yi lmaz

Rublevsky - Varga

European Team Ch, Batumi 2002 White played the surprising move 35 l:if8! threatening both to take on g8 and to win the queen by 36 tZ::l g 6+. B lack faces heavy loss of material and could find nothing better than 35 ..Jhf8 36 tt:'lg6+ ci;g7 37 tt:'lxh4+ �xg3 38 hxg3, but White 's extra material proved deci­ sive : 38 ... ci;f6 39 ci;f2 �c8 40 iLd4+ ci;gS 41 �c3 ci;g4 42 tt:'lrs .u.rs 43 ci;e3 hS 44 �g7 l:!dS 45 iLf6 �d7 46 ci;f2 ci;h3 47 d4 .l::i.f 7 48 eS dxeS 49 dxeS .l:i.fS 50 ci;f3 b6 51 axb6 .l:.bS 52 e6 k!.xb6 53 tt:'lg7 aS 54 iLc3 .l:i.b7 55 tt:Jrs l::t b 6 56 e7 .l:Ie6 57 �f4 a4 58 i.. b 4 .l:.e2 59 tt:Je3 .l:Ixb2 60 i.. d 6 a3 61 eS'lW a2 62 �xhS#. Note that the immediate 35 tZ::l g 6+? is bad due to 35 .. .lhg6 36 :xg6 'lWe i + win­ ning the bishop.

World Team Ch, Erevan 2001 White won by deflection combined with line-opening: 14 i.. f4! 1!Vxf4 (Black decides to give up his queen ; 1 4 . . . e5 1 5 iLxe5 'i¥xe5 1 6 i.. g 6# and 14 . . . 'lWd7 1 5 iLxc7 Wi/xc7 1 6 iLg6# are even worse) 15 i.. g6+ Wilf7 16 i.. x f7+ Wxf7 (White is well ahead on mate­ rial and Black is still troubled by his exposed king) 17 f3 ! g3 18 1!Vd4 ci;gS 19 iYeS tt:'lba6 20 ifxg3+ i.. g7 21 tt:'lc3 e2 4Jc3+ 25 'it>e1 �d3 0- 1 .

.i.xeS 27 �bS (White's queen makes a meal of Black's queenside) 27 ... gxf5 28 �xa7+ i.. f 7 29 �xb6 .l:!.eS 30 a4 i.. d 5 31 �a7+ .i.f7 32 aS 1 -0.

1 4)

1 8) Ka riakin - Kosteniuk

S h i pov - Yu rtaev

Match (game 4 ) , Brissago 2003 At first sight White has nothing better than 34 .i.a4, but 34 laa8! is decisive. Black loses either the exchange after 34 . . . i.. x b3 35 .l:rxa6 or a piece after 34 .. Jha8 35 .i.xd5+, so she resigned.

Chigorin memorial, St Petersburg 1 997 First White pinned the d6-knight with gain of tempo by 37 �b8+ �h7 and then he forked Black's king and rook by 38 i.. f5+. The finish was 38...�xf5 39 l:Ixf5 l2Jxf5 40 �f4 g6 41 g4 CLJg7 42 d6 1 -0.

1 5)

1 9)

Jaracz - G rabarczyk

Polish Ch, Sopot 1 997 We have seen the pin plus fork combina­ tion several times already and here is another example. White won Black's queen and the game: 19 4Jb6+ 'it>c7 20 l2Ja6+ Wd6 21 4Jxb8 CL:Jxg2+ 22 �f2 1 -0.

1 6) Komarov - Razuvaev Reggio Emilia 1 996/7 White won as follows: 15 .l:rxg7+ ! Wxg7 ( 1 5 . . . �h8 1 6 .l:!.g6 ! hxg6 1 7 �h4+ also wins the black queen) 16 �g4+ (a discovered at­ tack, which also uses a pin to prevent . . . �g6) 16 ... 'it>h8 17 .i.xf6+ .l:rxf6 18 l2Jg5 (White has a decisive material advantage) 18 ... CLJd7 19 CL:Jxe6 .l:rg6 20 �d4+ CLJ7f6 2 1 4Jf4 l2Jxf4 22 �xf4 bxa3 23 �f3 i.. g4 24 �xc6 .l:rcS 25 �a4 .l::!.eS 26 1:!.xa3 i.. xe2 27 .l:!.e3 .l:!.xe3 28 fxe3 .i.xfl 29 Wxfl h6 30 �d4 1 -0.

1 7) Benja m in - Ni H ua USA - China Summit, Shanghai 2002 White won material with a skewer com­ bined with an in-between move : 24 CLJd6! �xe2 (after 24 . . . �xg3 25 l2Jxe8+ i.. x e8 26 hxg3 White wins the exchange) 25 CL:Jxe8+ �xeS (25 . . . .l:!.xe8 26 .l:!.xe2 l:he2 27 �c7+ and White picks up the bishop) 26 l:!.xeS

Flear - G . Wa l l

British Ch, Torquay 2002 A combination of skewer and deflection finished B lack off: 33 .l:!.b1 ! and B lack re­ signed, because 33 . . . �xb l 34 .l:rxg7+ leads to mate, while if the queen moves away then .l:!.b8+ is decisive. Black can try 3 3 . . . 4Jf2+, but it doesn't help after 34 �g2.

20) Epishin - Felgaer Linares open 2001 Black resigned after 25 .i.f5 ! , as 25 . . . gxf5 26 �g5+ mates, while otherwise the skewer of Black's rooks wins the exchange.

21)

Petrov - Kem pinski

European Ch, Ohrid 2001 The spectacular det1ection move 39... CL:Jc4! decided the game. The only way to prevent promotion is by 40 �xc4, but then the mate threat is relieved and Black wins by 40 . . . �b2, threatening to promote with check. White therefore resigned.

2 2) Feoktistov - R iaza ntsev Russian Ch, Elista 2001 It would be mate by . . . �e4+ if only Black could deflect White ' s bishop from d3. A

147

SOLUTIONS

preliminary l ine-opening converted Black' s wish i nto reality : 26 ... CL'lxe5 ! 27 dxeS �xbS 28 �xa7 (28 �xb5 �e4+ mates) 28 �xd3 29 1!Vxd3 �c l + (White ' s king is exposed and his pawns are falling) 30 �gl �xb2 31 'iikg3 'iWe2 32 �f2 ii.h4! 0- 1 . White loses more material since 33 �xh4 fai l s to 33 . . .''t!Vf l + 34 ii.g I Wi¥f3#. ••.

23 ) Ka rasik - V. M i khalevski Beersheba 1 998 Black combi ned a fork with a back-rank mate : 22 ... �c2 ! 23 "iWfl (White must give up a piece, since 23 1Vxc2 'iVxc2 24 l:lxc2 l!d 1 # is mate) 23 ... �xa4 24 f4 CL'ld4 25 cS �c6 26 �f2 'L'lfS 27 h3 CL'lh4 0- 1 . After 28 �xh4, Black wins by 28 .. J::t x d2 29 �xd2 Wtxg2#.

24) Hochgrafe - Pelletier Hamburg 1 998 White played 17 CL'lxdS and Black resigned. since he cannot avoid heavy materi al loss. The main point is that 17 . . . CL'lxd5 1 8 �g4 ! (but not 1 8 �xd5 ?? .lth2+ winning White ' s queen ) leads t o mate in a few moves (for ex­ ample, 1 8 . . . g6 1 9 'L'lh6#) . Relatively best is 1 7 . . . �h2+ 1 8 Wxh2 �xd5 , but after 1 9 CL'ld6 .l:tcd8 20 CL'lxb7 Black is two pawns down with a bad position .

2 5) P. H . N ielsen - Kariakin Hastings 2002/J Black resi gned after 20 �aS+, because 20 . . . Wib6 (20 . . . We8 2 1 d7+) 2 1 .l:tb l ! skewers the queen agai nst the back-rank mate on b8.

26) M a riasin - Za lkind Israeli Ch, Jerusalem 1 996 The sacri fice 31 l:!.xd6! shattered Black's defences : 31.. . .i.xd6 (3 1 . . . �xd6 32 �xc8+ �d8 3 3 'L'le6+, forking king, rook and bi shop, is decisive) 32 'L'le6+ (thanks to the pin, White

wins B lack' s queen) 32 'ite7 33 CL'lxd8 'it>xd8 34 .l:!d l �d7 35 'iVc6 i.b7 36 'iVI>6+ 'lt>e7 37 �xd6 1 -0. .•.

2 7)

Solozhenkin - Norri

Finnish Cht 1 993 White won with an unusual combinati on : 12 CL'lxdS ! ( 1 2 CL'lb5 is also good, but less strong than this move) 1 2 .. .''t!Vxd5 ( 1 2 .. .''t!V x d2 1 3 CL'lxe7#) 13 c4! (trapping Black's queen ) 13 ... CL'le4 (Black tries to escape, but to no avai l ) 1 4 fxe4 and Black resigned, since after 1 4 . . .'�xe4+ 1 5 �d3 Black loses his queen af­ ter al l .

2 8) Herrera - Abreu Capablanca memorial, Havana 1 998 White won by opening the l i ne e2-b5 with gain of tempo : 21 Itxe4! �b6 ( Black decides to surrender the piece, since 2 1 . . . fxe4 2 2 �b5+ followed b y 23 'L'lc6+ costs h i m his queen, but he gives up after a few more moves) 22 .lae3 b3 23 a3 �cS 24 .l:i.g3 I:i.b8 25 c3 1 -0.

29) G . Kuzm i n - Czebe European Ch, Oh rid 2001 Black struck with 38 ... 'L'lg6 ! and suddenly White, who had been a pawn up, was lost. The game continued 39 .U.g4 (39 .l:.h6 'L'lf4+ and 39 �xg6 .l:txe2+ 40 Wf3 .l:txa2 are also hopeless for White) 39 ... f5 ! (there is no es­ cape from the various forks and pins, so White must lose material ) 40 .l:!.xg6 lhg6 41 .i.d3 .l:.xe2+ 42 �xe2 aS and Black was the exchange up for a pawn, which is sufficient to win in the current position . Black did in­ deed secure the full point, although not in the most efficient manner possible: 43 a4 Wg7 44 �bS Wf6 45 Wf3 .l:i.g4 46 h4 l:tb4 47 �d7 .l:.d4 48 �c6 'it>eS 49 'it>e3 f4+ SO gxf4+ .l:.xf4 5 1 hS .l:.h4 52 Wd3 'Ei>f6 53 �e8 'ite7 54 �c6 'it>d8 55 Wc3 Wc7 56 �e8 Wb6 57 'it>d3 'it>c5

148

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

58 'it>c3 'itxd5 59 Wd3 'ite5 60 'ite3 .l:.f4 6 1 i.b5 'it>f5 6 2 h 6 .l:t.e4+ 6 3 'it> f3 I:f.h4 6 4 h 7 Wf6 6 5 .id3 'itg7 6 6 i.e4 l1h3+ 6 7 'ite2 l:th2+ 68 '>tel Wf6 69 .id3 'ite5 70 i.g6 Wf4 71 'itfl 'ite3 0- 1 .

�d8 34 WigS lt:Jxe7 35 Wixe7 .l::!. c 8 36 c3 i.g7 37 'iVxb7 i.e5+ 38 'it>gl .l:.b8 39 'iYe7 Sl.g3 40 'itfl l-0.

3 0)

FIDE Knockout, Groningen 1 99 7 The preliminary sacrifice 2 7 l:txd7 ! Wxd7 pinned the knight so that White could trap Black's queen by 28 .l:!.b4. 28 .. .'�f5 29 g4 is hopeless for Black, so in desperation he gave up his queen by 28 ... 'iVxb4 29 i.xb4 .l:!.hc8. White finished efficiently: 30 j_d6 I:!.c4 31 lt:Jd2 l:td4 32 c3 .l:.d3 33 c4 .l:.xd2 34 '!Wxd2 bxc4 35 Wixh6 1 -0.

N i Hua - Benjam i n

USA - China Summit, Shanghai 2002 After 42 ... l:!.b3 White resigned. Fork, pin and skewer all play a part i n the continuation 43 I:!.xc6 lt:Jb4+ 44 Wc4 l:txc3+, by which Black nets a piece.

3 1)

3 2) Anand - N i kolic

Ol ivier - Manik

Mitropa Cup, Baden 1 999 The game continued 16 lt:Jh6+ ! (getting rid of the knight with gain of tempo; 1 6 CiJe7+? i s wrong because 1 6 . . . lt:Jxe7 covers f5 ) 16 ...gxh6 ( 1 6 . . . Wh8 1 7 lt:Jf7+) 17 l:i.f5 (thanks to the pin, Black's queen is trapped) 17 .. JlYxf5 18 exf5 .

18 Wh8 (on top of the loss of materi al, Black 's pawn-structure has been badly dam­ aged so White wins easily) 19 fxe6 ..ltxe6 20 �d2 ..ixb3 21 axb3 d5 22 .l:.fl d4 23 ..ixd4 CiJxd4 24 'iYxd4 i.g7 25 l:td l h5 26 't\Vf4 lt:Jg4 27 h3 ..lte5 28 'iYd2 lt:Je3 29 l:i.el tt:Jrs 30 lt:Jd5 j_d4+ 31 Wh2 h4 32 lt:Je7 1;lxe7 33 �xe7

3 3) Kasimdzhanov - S m i ri n Olympiad, Elista 1 998 It seems i mpossible to trap the b7 -knight, because it can safely retreat to a5 . However, 20 ... lt:Jxe2+ (not 20 . . . I:!.fb8 first due to 2 1 ..ltxf4) 2 1 't\Vxe2 .l:tfb8 pinpointed the key weakness of White's position : the undefended rook on b l .

.•.

Since 22 lt:Ja5 .U.xa5 would cost White a piece for nothing, he tried 22 c5, but after 22 ... dxc5 23 bxc5 lt:Jxc5 24 lt:Jxc5 .U.xbl 25 lt:Jxd7 White resigned without waiting for the decisive 25 . . . Wixd7 .

149

SOLUTIONS

34)

3 6) l bragi mov - Yandemi rov

Borovikov - Aleksand rov

Russian Ch, Elista 1 997 White's pressure along the diagonal b2-g7 suggests some tactical i deas, and he won ma­ terial by combining a fork with a discovered attack: 34 eS! 'iYxeS 3S lZ'lfS+ ! .

Kramatorsk 2001 A long but forcing continuation led to a decisive gain of material : 30 lbf2+! 31 .laxf2 .l:t.d1 + 32 ..ltg1 l:i.gxg1 + (not 32 . . . .U.dxg l + 3 3 'it>h2, when Black h a s nothing) 3 3 'it>h2 1i!.h1 + 34 'it>g3 .l::i. d g1 + (34 . . . .l:t.d3+ is equally good) 0- 1 . After 35 .l:t.g2 .l::r x g2+ 36 'it>xg2 l:.xh4 Black has an extra rook. •.•

Sol utions to Miscellaneous Exercises 1) Vlad i m i rov - Bacrot

3S ... gxfS (35 . . .'�ii xf5 36 .l:.xd6 i s also hope­ less for Black) 36 �xeS �xd2 37 �xfS (White has won a queen for a rook and a knight; Black fights on but without any real hope of saving the game) 37 ... .l:.dS 38 �e6 .l:.d7 39 g4 .l:.f7 40 f4 lbg8 41 fS lZ'lh6 42 h3 aS 43 �eS+ 'it>f8 44 f6 .l:t.d7 4S �e6 .:.d1 + 46 'it>f2 lbg8 47 gS .U.d8 48 �xb6 .l:t.d7 49 �c5+ 1 -0.

3 5) Schekachev - Lopush noi Russia Cup, Tomsk 1 998 It hardly looks as though Black is doomed because of a weak back rank, but j ust see what happens : 20 lbxdS ! and Black resigned ! The main line runs 20 . . . exd5 2 1 ..ltxd6 .l:t.xe l 22 .l:.xe l i.xd6 23 �xd6 and after 23 . . . �xd6 24 l:.e8+ Black does indeed get mated. Of course, Black could deviate at virtually any point in this line and play on a pawn down with a bad position, but apparently he just didn ' t feel like struggling on .

Europe-Asia rapidplay, Batumi 2001 The simple move 3 1 .. . .l:t.e1 + gave Black a decisive material advantage. After 32 'it>h2 (or 3 2 Wf2 .U.xd I 3 3 �xf6 �d4+, forcing the exchange of queens with a winning endgame) 32 .U.xd 1 33 �xf6 (the mating threats on g7 and f8 would be awkward except for the fact that Black can exchange queens) 33 �d6+ 34 �xd6 .U.xd6 the ending is hopeless and White soon gave up: 3S '>t>g3 .U.e6 36 Wf2 'it>f7 37 i.d2 cS 38 ..ltc3 We7 39 ..ltd2 '>t>d6 0- 1 . .••

•..

2) Zhu Chen - Spassky Veterans - Women, Marbella 1 999 Black won with a combination of deflec­ tion and in-between move : 26 ...�g6! 0- 1 . 27 �xg6 .l:t.xd 1 + 28 'it>h2 fxg6 and 27 �e2 .U.xd I + 28 �xd I �xe4 both cost White a rook.

3)

Dautov - Khuzman

Zonal tournament, Dresden 1 998 White won with a combination based on opening the g-file: 25 �xf6! and Black re­ signed, since mate is threatened on g7, while 25 . . . gxf6 loses to 26 .U.g4+ 'it>h8 27 i.xf6#.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

1 50

4)

Emms - Sutovsky

Harplinge 1 998 After 37 .. J�e1 + White resigned as 3 8 'iit> g 2 l:.e2+ followed by .. J!xc2 wins his bishop.

5)

H. Olafsson - Redgaa rd

Munkebo 1 998 White has a forced mate in seven moves with the deflection 33 i.. h 5+ ! . After 3 3 . . . 'iit> f5 White mates by 34 �d6 ! (threatening 35 '&ff4#) 34 ... e5 35 f3 (threatening 36 g4+ 'iit> f4 37 '&fd2#) 35 . . . 'i¥d8 36 'i!Uxd8 e4 37 'i!Ud7+ We5 38 f4#, while 3 3 . . . Wg7 34 'i¥xf7+ 'iit> h 8 35 'i¥xf6+ Wg8 36 i.. f 7+ �f8 37 i.. g 6+ 'iit> g 8 38 'i¥f7+ 'it.>h8 39 "VJt/h7# only l asts one move longer. The game ended even more quickly after 33 ...Wxh5 34 'i¥xf7+ '.t.>g4 35 "VJt/g6#.

6)

I . Sokolov - Seirawa n

Dutch Team Ch playoff, Enschede 2002 A preliminary sacrifice draws the black queen into position for a deadly skewer: 38 .l:Ixd7 ! �xd7 39 .lac7 (the queen cannot move due to a possible mate on g7 ; Black must lose material) 39 .l:Iad8 40 l:.xd7 .l:Ixd7 41 .ltxf6 1-0. Black is too far behind on material .

9)

M a rciano - B rica rd

French Ch, Narbonne 1 997 Black saved the position by 25 ... .txg2 ! . If White declines the bishop by 26 .l:!.hd I, for example, then after 26 . . . .l:Ifxf2 Black would even have some advantage; 27 . . . .l:If3+ is a threat and in addition the black rooks are ide­ ally placed to gobble up White's queenside pawns. The game ended 26 'iit> xg2 1/z- 1/z since 26 .. Jlexf2+ gives perpetual check with the rooks along the f-file.

1 0)

Plaskett - Pei n

Southend 1 999 A familiar pattern emerges after a few pre­ liminary moves. White played 17 e5 ! and Black resigned in anticipation of 1 7 . . . fxe5 1 8 fxe5 .txe5 (Black must accept, or he loses his bishop) 1 9 l:!.xe5 'i!Uxe5 (everything is in place for the idea we first saw in Bui Vi nh­ Frey on page 47 ) 20 l:!.f8+ (once more this typical deflection strikes) 20 . . . l:!.xf8 2 1 "VJt/xe5 and White, with queen and knight for two rooks and a pawn, has a decisive material ad­ vantage.

••.

7)

Zelcic - Va n Wely

Olympiad, Elista 1 998 Black found a decisive combination uti liz­ ing a deflection and a fork : 32 ... ..txe4! 33 'i!Uxe4 d5 (now 34 'i!Ud3 c4 is a deadly fork, so White has to abandon the f5 -rook) 34 "VJt/f3 'i¥xf5 35 g3 'i!Uh3 36 l:Ib7 .ltg5 37 lLlc6 .ltxh4 38 lLlxd8 .l:!.xd8 0- 1 .

8) Portisch - H ickl Jakarta 1 996 After 28 .l:Ih8+, Black resigned at once since 28 . . . Wxh8 29 lLlxf7+ followed by lLlxg5 leaves White well ahead on materi al .

1 1)

Sa nto- Roma n - Spassky

French Team Ch, Paris 2002 Here the winning ideas are fork and trapped piece. Black continued 35 ... lLld5 ! and White resigned. The bi shop cannot move so as to maintain its defence of the a l -rook, while af­ ter 36 .l:Ixa2 lLlxc3 White loses a whole rook and so ends up a piece down.

1 2) Kengis - Godena European Team Ch, Leon 2001 White won a piece with the back-rank combination 37 "VJt/xc5 ! . Since 37 . . . "VJt/xc5 3 8 l:!.d8+ 'i!Uc8 39 l:!.xc8# is impossible, Black was reduced to 37 ... "VJt/b8, but after 38 .l:Ixe5 fxe5 he resigned.

151

SOLUTIONS

1 3)

McNab - Plaskett

Southend 1 999 A combination of deflection and back-rank mate ensured Black' s downfall : 42 'iYxe6+! and Black resigned, as mate is forced after 42 . . . �xe6 43 �xe6+ 'it>h8 44 l:!.xf8+ l:!.xf8 45 .l:!xf8#.

continued 8 ... �d7 9 tbxd7 'iYxd7 10 �g4 (B lack is not only a pawn down, but in addi­ tion his light squares have been irreparably weakened) 10 ...'iYc7 1 1 'iVa4+ 'it>d8 12 tLlbS 'iYb6 13 tbxd6! 1 -0. The neat finish is based on the line 1 3 . . . 'iYxd6 14 i.f4, when Black must lose his queen to avoid mate on d7 .

1 8) Anastasian - Estremera Panos

1 4) Lautner - Lendwa i Aschach 1 997 White resigned after 38 ... 'iYd 1 + ! as there is a back-rank mate next move.

1 5) Kacheishvi li - Fedorov European Team Ch, Leon 2001 Black must act quickly, since if White can exchange off the e5-bishop then the result will probably be a draw. The winning move is 52 l:!.d2+! , since after 5 3 e7 0- 1 .

34) lordachescu - M i l u Ciocaltea memorial, Bucharest 1 998 After 39 l:t.d8 Blac k resigned because he loses his queen for a rook.

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

154

3�

Sedlak - Sadvakasov

Subotica 2000 Black won material with a combination of fork and deflection: 37 ... i.d2+ (forking king and rook, so White must take the bishop even though thi s loses the exchange) 38 tt::lx d2 .l:i.xcl 39 l:ta3 I:te1 + 40 Wd3 .lte2+ 41 'lt>e3 i.d 1+ 0- 1 . 42 Wd3 ii.c2# is mate, while 42 Wf2 l!e2+ costs White more material .

3 6)

Aleksand rov - Becerra Rivero

FIDE Knockout, Las Vegas 1 999 White played 29 �xc3 and Black resigned since he is losing a piece (after 29 . . . dxc3 30 .l:!xd5 c2 White can stop the pawn with 3 1 l;Ic5 ) .

37)

Benjam i n - de Firm ian

USA Ch, Denver 1 998 At the moment one cannot see a skewer, but Black set one up with a spectacular queen sacrifice: 33 .. JWxfl+! 34 �xfl l:!.d1 + 35 �e2 .l:i.e1+.

3�

Voiska - Zawadzka

European Women 's Ch, Varna 2002 After 27 .l:i.xe8+ Black resigned, because 27 .. .'�xe8 28 'tWxf6 leaves White a clear piece up.

39) Dorosh kevich - Shishkov Chigorin memorial, St Petersburg 1 999 Black's weak back rank stands out as a weakness. White exploited this by 30 'tWb4 ! and Black resigned as the attacks on c4 and b8 will cost him a piece.

40) M i les - Nataf Capablanca memorial, Havana 2001 After 19 tt::l g3 B l ack's queen is trapped ( 1 9 . . . b5 20 't\Ve4 doesn ' t help) and so he re­ signed. This was probabl y a case of inatten­ tion because, with f5 and g4 avai lable, it didn ' t appear likely that the queen would suddenl y run out of squares.

41) M . G u revich - Va n der Sterren Dutch Team Ch playoff, Enschede 2002 Black is attacking both b4 and e7, but de­ spite this White managed to win material : 40 f6 ! . Now 40 . . . tt::l xf6 costs the knight after 4 1 .l:i.d6+, while 40 . . . tt::l x b4 4 1 .l:i.d8 (not 4 1 f7 ?? because 4 l . . ..l:i.xe7+ is check) wins too much material .

42) M i khalchishin - Sch m ittdiel

After 36 Wd2 .l:i.xeS 37 Wxc2 .l:i.e2+ White resigned, since he has not only lost the ex­ change, but also stands to lose most of his kingside pawns as wel l .

Dortmund 1 999 White won with the promotion combina­ tion 46 !lf8 ! (not 46 .l:i.xh7+? 'tWxh7 47 e8'iV+ .l:i.xe8 48 'jYxe8+ 't\Vg8 with a draw) 46 ... tt::lxf8 (46 . . . 'tWxf8+ 47 exf8'iV+ tt::l x f8 48 'iVf6+, win­ ning the rook, i s hopeless for Black) 47 'iVf6+ 1 -0. It is surpri sing that Black resigned here as there is one final finesse : 47 . . . Wh7 48 exf8tt::l + ! and Black must give up his queen,

1 55

SOLUTIONS

but not 48 exf8'iV? �c4+, when B lack deliv­ ers perpetual check.

43) P. H . N ielsen - Holst A rs 1 999 White won with a combination of pin and deflection . After 40 �d7+! B lack cannot take the rook with his bishop because it is pinned. Thus he has to move his king, but af­ ter 40 . . . '.txd7 the king no longer guards the queen and White can play 4 1 �xb6. There­ fore Black resigned.

44) Koga n - Radziewicz Koszalin 1 999 White continued 24 jLxfS and Black re­ signed. His queen is attacked, so he must re­ ply 24 . . . �xf5 . but then 25 lif3 wins material since Black cannot move his queen without losing the f6-rook.

45) Akopian - Gelfa nd Groningen 1 996 The game continued 28 .l:Ixb6 �xc4 29 :ci.xb7? .l:!.d4 and ended in a draw, but in the middle of this line White missed the chance to win a piece by the in-between move 29 .l:!.xf6 ! .

46) Borge - Mortensen Danish Ch, A rhus / 999 Black ensured the promotion of his f-pawn by the ingenious move 62 ... ctJd3 ! (62 . . . We2 63 ktc I fl 'iV+ 64 .l:Ixfl 'it>xfl wins the rook, but White can capture Black ' s last pawn after 65 a6 ctJc6 66 '.tg4 d5 67 Wf4 'it>e2 68 a7 ctJxa7 69 'it>e5 ) . The knight move controls c I , so the rook can ' t get back to stop the pawn. Therefore White has nothing better than 63 l;Ixd3+ �e2 64 .l:!.xd6 (the pawn cannot be stopped), but after 64 . . . fl 'iV+ 65 �g3 'iVf3+. fol lowed by 66 ... 'iVf4+, Black wins the rook. White resi gned immedi ately.

47)

B ra u n - Rabiega

German Ch, Altenkirchen 2001 The g6-bishop has to prevent .l::f. x h5#, so the deflection 40 f5 was deadly. Black re­ signed since he must lose a piece or be mated.

48) Ovod - Shalimov Chigorin memorial, St Petersburg 2002 Black's two connected passed pawns look unstoppable, but stalemate came to White's rescue: 72 .Jl.xc3! (72 e8'iV .ll. x e8 73 jLxc3 also works; Black can refuse the bishop, but the opposite-coloured bishop ending is a sim­ ple draw) 72 ... �xc3 73 eS'iV .Jl.xe8 stalemate .

49)

Siegel - Val lejo Pons

Capablanca memorial, Havana 1 998 White is threatening mate on g7, but that didn ' t make the slightest difference after 33 ... ctJd5, both defending agai nst the mate and forki ng White ' s queen and rook. Faced with a decisive material loss, White resigned.

50) D . G u revich - I . Ivanov USA Ch, Denver 1 998 White has a potential knight fork on e4. but at the moment his bishop is obstructing thi s square. The game continued 25 .ll. x h7+! (c learing e4 with a forcing move which gives Black no time to avoid the fork ) 25 ... �xh7 26 ctJe4 'iVxdS 27 ctJxc3 and White was the exchange up without compensation, an ad­ vantage which proved sufficient to win.

51)

Rublevsky - Nguyen Anh Dung

FIDE Knockout. Moscow 200 / A deflection o f the f2-pawn sets the stage for the deci sive fork: 30 ... .l:!.xe3 31 'iVgS (3 1 fxe3 �g3 followed by 32 . . . .txe l is the main idea, but it leaves Black a piece up for noth­ ing) 3 1 .. . .l:!.e5 32 'iVxg6 ctJce4 ( w ith only one

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

1 56

pawn for the piece, White ' s position is hope­ less) 33 ll'lxe4 l;!xe4 34 'it>fl i.. b 4 35 l:!d 1 'iVI12 36 f3 ..tc5 37 We1 �g1 + 38 Wd2 �e3+ 0- 1 .

B l ack with the decisive material advantage of queen and pawn for rook and bishop.

52)

New York 2001 White won by 34 l::!x f7+, removing the guard of the key g6-square. It is mate after 34 . . .'itxf7 35 �g6# or 34 . . Jhf7 35 �g6+ followed by 36 �g8#, so Black resigned.

R. Burnett - Hoa ng Than h Trang Budapest 2000 Rather surprisingly, it is the undefended rook on bl which is the target of Black's combination. The game continued 25.. Jlxh3! (playing 25 . . . ll'lxe3+ and only then 26 . . . .l:!xh3 is also good) 26 .laxh3 l:i.xh3 27 i.. xg5 (the main line is 27 'it>xh3 �h7+ 28 'iit> g 2 ll'lxe3+ 29 'iVxe3 'iVxb l and the discovered attack along the h7-b l diagonal leaves Black a piece up) 27 ... .l:!h7 28 ll'lf6 (28 il... x e7 �xg4 is also hopeless for White) 28 ... il... xf6 29 i.. xf6 �g6 and Black is a piece up for just one pawn . White fought on but eventually had to resign.

53) Va"isser - Tkachev Cannes 2000 The g3-pawn is pinned by Black's queen so he was able to win material and the game by 39 ... �xf4+ 40 �xf4 gxf4 0- 1 .

54) Seul - M a i n ka Essen 2000 36 ... ll'ld3 forks bishop and rook, and wins a piece . White therefore resigned.

55) Alterman - Avrukh Tel Aviv 1 999 The deflection 34 ... �xf4 ! won a piece for nothing, since 35 exf4 allows mate in two by 35 . . . ..td4+ 36 l:!.e3 il... x e3#. White resigned.

56) Bastian - Lobron German Ch, A ltenkirchen 2001 After 30 .. J:txf2 White resigned, since 3 1 �xf2 ..td4 32 l::! f l j;_xf2+ 3 3 l:!.xf2 leaves

57)

58)

Sim utowe - Sarka r

Postny - Stryjecki

European Junior Ch, Patras 200 I White won with a spectacular combina­ tion based on discovered attack combined with back-rank mate : 47 l::!x c7 ! l::! d 8 (after 47 . . . 1:!xc7 48 ll'lg4 ! White attacks the queen and threatens mate by �h8+ ; then 48 . . . �f4 49 �h8+ l:!.c8 50 �xc8+ �b8 5 1 �xb8+ leaves White two pieces up) 48 l:td7 1 -0. Black is two pieces down and White wins easily with a direct attack based on b5 .

59) Sei rawan - Adams Match (game 1 ), Bermuda 1 999 After 39 ... 'iit> g7 there was no escape for White 's rook. The finish was 40 l:!.xf6 �xf6 41 h4 b5 0- 1 .

60) Stohl - N i kolaidis European Team Ch, Pula 1 997 The undefended d5-rook is a tactical weak­ ness which White exploited by 22 j;_xa7 ! . After 2 2. . .l:!.xa7 (Black cannot even escape with the loss of a pawn by 22 . . . �b7 , because 23 ..if3 pins the d5-rook and wins more ma­ terial) 23 l:!.xd5 White had won the exchange and the game concluded 23 ... e6 24 b6 (push­ ing the passed pawn is even simpler than 24 l::! d 2) 24 .. J�ba2 25 :b5 d5 26 b7 ll'ld6 27 �g3 ! e5 28 l::! b 6 l::!a 7 29 ..ia6 ll'lxb7 30 �b3 l:!.xa6 31 l:!.xa6 �c7 32 �xd5 ll'ld8 33 l::!a 8 1 -0.

157

SOLUTIONS

61)

64) H u l a k - Bologa n

I. Sokolov - Magai

European Ch, Ohrid 2001 White set up a fork on f6 with the prelim­ inary sacrifice 23 .laxh5 . After 23 ... 'Llxg5 (the alternative 23 .. Jhh5 24 'Llf6 followed by 'Llxh5 is also hopeless for Black) 24 .laxh8 .l::. x h8 25 fxg5 �xd5 26 cxd5 Black was a piece down and lost in due course.

Olympiad, Elista 1 998 This is another case of an adventurous queen being punished for a lone sortie into enemy territory. At present the queen can re­ treat to h3, but Black cut off this escape-route by 24 ... llf5 ! , when there is no real defence to the threats of 25 . . . 'Llf4 and 25 . . . 'Llg7 . The game concluded 25 'Lle4 'Llf4 26 1li'xd6 .l::. x d6 27 'Llxd6 �f8 28 l:lbd l 'ii'd 7 29 h3 'Llxh3+ 0- 1 . White resigned as after 30 gxh3 �xh3 followed by . . . �f4 Black has a decisive at­ tack.

62 )

H racek - Alterman

European Team Ch, Pula 1 997 Black won with an unusual type of back­ rank combination : 39 ... �xf4 ! .

65) Swath i - H utchinson British Ch, Torquay 2002 White won a piece by 32 .l:!xb6+! 'itxb6 33 'Llc8+ c:j;c7 34 'Llxe7. Black has no compen­ sation and gave up after 34 ... 'Llxh5 35 'Llf5 'Llf4 36 'Llxe5 'Llxg2 37 'Llxg7 'Llf4 38 'itd2 �d6 39 'Llxf7+ �e7 40 'Llxh6 'it>f6 4 1 'Lle8+ �e7 42 'Llc7 1 -0.

66) Loch - Roh rer

White resigned because 4 0 �xf4 allows Black to mate by 40 . . . .l::!. e 1 + 4 1 'iii h 2 g3+ 42 'iii h 3 llh l #.

63) Fedorowicz - S h l i perman New York 1 999 Black. who has j ust played 30 ... �e5-e4?, resigned without waiting for White to reply 3 1 W.Vxe4, exploiting the d-file pin.

Germany (Oberliga) 1 991/2 How can Black make use of his advanced a2-pawn? After 29 . . . a1 WI, White replies 30 '¥Wxb5 and Black is much worse. 29 .. .'�xb4+ is also ineffective, since after 30 Wxa2 White is a pawn up and does not face any immediate danger. The winning move is the surpri sing 29 ... alctJ+ ! . By delivering check, Black does not give White the time to take on b5 . 30 I:txa 1 is impossible as White ' s queen is left undefended, so there i s nothing better than 30 �a2 'ilVxd3 3 1 l:!.xd3 'Llc2, when Black is a piece up with an easy win in prospect. White therefore resigned.

I n dex of P l ayers

Numbers refer to pages . Bold text indicates that the player had White. Fedorov 1 1 9, 1 26,

Aagaard 76

B anas 1 5 1

Carlsson, P. 1 5

Aarthie 1 4 1

B angiev 5 6 , 1 24

Cebalo 43

Abatino 1 1 4

B arbeau 1 3 1

Chabanon 6 2 , 1 26

Abramovic 9 1 , 1 1 1

B areev 13, 126

Charbonneau 1 3 I

Abreu 1 4, 1 47

B arkhagen 49

Chau S au Ming 1 34

Feokti stov 146

Acs 1 1 5, 126, 1 30

B arsov 1 1 2

Chemiaev 1 45

Fercec 43

Adams 25 , 1 1 3, 1 1 6,

1 5 1 , 152 Fedorowicz 1 29 . 157 Felgaer 1 46

B astian 156

Chon 34

Firman 80, 1 26

1 24. 1 3 7 , 1 45 , 1 5 2,

B atsanin 43

Chuprikov 1 1 6

Flear 1 46

1 56

B auer 62

Cicak 1 1 7

Fouad 1 1 2

Adianto 3 5 , 1 1 4. 1 1 9

Becerra R ivero 1 54

C i fuentes 48, 1 16

Frey 47

Ahmatovic 1 1 9 A kesson 1 1 7 , 1 3 8

B e l i avsky 1 25 , 1 3 3

Comas Fabrego 1 33

Frieser 1 40

Belov 8 3 , 1 1 5

Conde Rodriguez 28

Frohlich, P. 120

Akhmylovskaya-

Benitah 1 43

Cramling, P. 49

Galego 132

B e nj am i n 1 34, 1 46,

Crouch 1 2 1

G a l l agher 1 3 5 , 1 40,

Donaldson 130 Akopian 1 36, 155

1 48 , 154

Cummins 1 1 2

153

A1avkin 1 1 5

Berezovsky 136

Cvitan 1 4 1 , 1 43

A leksandrov 1 49, 154

B erg, E . 75

Czebe 1 2 1 , 1 47

Gasiorowski 84

A l masi, Z. 25

Berkes 44, 1 45

Dambacher 1 4 1

Gawronski 84

A l meida 14

B erkov ich 63

Dang Tat Thang 1 4 1

Gdanski 8 3

Alonso 124

Beshukov 48, 1 1 5

Danielsen, Heini 76

Gelfand 1 5 5

Alterman 1 56, 1 5 7

B huiyan 50

Dautov 1 49

Georgiev, K i . 139

A l varez 135

B iebinger 67

de Firmian 15, 57,

Ammer 1 1 3

B igaliev 1 5 1

Anand 120, 148

Blit 1 39

de Ia Riva 58, 1 3 7

Giaccio 1 1 4, 1 3 2

Anastasian 80, 1 1 4.

Bobotsov 142

de I a Vi l l a 1 38

G lek 126

B obras 1 38, 1 44

Degraeve 136

Godena 1 5 0

Anderberg 1 5 3

Bohm, U. 1 40

del Rio 1 1 6, 1 4 1

Goldin 9 1

Andonov ski 1 4 1

Boj kovic 1 4 1

D ittmar 1 4 1

Golod 2 8 , I l l

Annageldiev 80

Bologan 1 23 , 1 36, 1 5 7

D izdar I l l

Gomez B a i l l o 1 24,

Anoori 124

Borda 3 7

Donguines 3 5

Antic 9 1

Borge 1 5 5

Dorfman 1 43

Gomez Esteban 153

Arbakov 1 1 4

Borovikov 149

Doroshkev ich 154

Gongora 1 2 1

Arde leanu 129

B raga 1 3

Dreev 49, 56

Gorbatov 1 3 8

Arkhi pov 1 2 1

Braun 155

Dragoon 138

Gormally 9 1

Arlandi 1 27

B reder 8 1

Dworakowska 1 3 I

Grabarczyk 144, 1 46

Aronian 1 6 . 1 1 5

B renke 1 29

Dydy shko 1 23

Gretarsson 57, 143

Asauskas 1 2 8

B ricard 1 5 0

Eames 1 2 1

Gri shchuk 7 5 , 1 1 7,

Ashley 1 43

B uckley, S. 1 1 1

Efimov 1 5 3

Atlas 27. 122

B u i Vi nh 47

Eichab 1 1 2

Groberman 153

Averbakh 67

B urmakin 1 1 9, 1 20

Emms 150

Grubi sic 25

Av rukh I l l . 1 1 6, 1 5 6

B urnett, R. 6 5 , 156

Epishin 146, 1 52

Azarov 8 1

B urov ic 1 2 2

Ernst, H . 1 42

B ac rot 1 3 3 . 1 49

Bykov 128

Estrada Nieto 1 24

Gulko I I 8. 134

B akhtadze 1 1 4

Cao Sang 44

Estremera Panos 1 5 1

Gun narsson 1 1 5 . 66

1 44, 1 5 1

1 1 2, 1 36, 1 54

G a l l iamova 80, 1 1 7

Georgiev, V. 138, 139, 1 53

131

1 28

Gubaidu l l i n 1 29 Gui dare l l i 1 1 5

159

INDEX OF PLA YERS

Gurev ich, D . 155

Jonkman 1 26

Gurev i c h , M. 1 1 2 ,

Kache i s h v i l i 1 29, 1 5 1

154

Kantsler 1 5 2

Landa 1 1 4, 1 1 7 , 1 30, 1 36

M i khalevski I l l , 133, 1 47

Landenbergue 1 1 8

M i les 1 54 M i l lan Urrutia 1 2 1 .

Halkias 1 1 2, 1 29, 1 4 1

Karakl aj i c 1 44

Lane I l l

Handoko 34

Karasik 1 47

Lautier 3 5 , 90, 1 1 5 ,

Hanley 1 3 8

Kari aki n 146, 1 47

Hasenbank 1 1 2

Karl sson I 1 5

Lautner 1 5 1

Milu 1 53

Hauchard 1 3 2

Karpov 1 6 , 26, 26

Lawrenz 142

M i nasian 1 3 1

1 20, 1 23

1 34 M i l ov, V. 1 2 , 90

Hebden 138

Kasi mdzhanov 1 48

Lazarev 1 3 8

M i randa 121

Hector 138

Kasparov 47 , 9 1 , 1 1 2,

Lehner 1 23

M i rumian 14, 7 1

Leko 26, 1 45 , 152

Mohr, G . I I

Henrichs 1 39

Kaufman 1 42

Lendwai 1 5 1

Moi seenko 1 36

Hernandez, J . C . 1 2 1

Kei t l i nghaus 89

Lerner 66

Moradi abadi 1 1 4, 1 22

Hernando Rodri go

Kel ly, B . 65

Levi tt 1 1 1

Morovic 1 3 3

Kempinski 83, 1 46

Lima 134

Moroz 66 Morozevich 7 1 , 1 1 7,

Hell sten 152

1 26

1 3 1 , 145

Herrera 147

Kengi s 1 1 9, 150

Liogky 50

Hertneck I 1 9

Khalifman 1 20

Liu Dede 1 37

Hick) 1 50

Kharlov 1 1 9, 1 37, 1 42

Lj ubojevic 1 1 6

M orrison 1 24

1 24, 1 3 5 , 1 5 1

Hnydiuk 1 44

Kholmov 1 32

Lobron 84, 1 5 6

Mortensen 1 5 5

Hoang Thanh Trang

Khurtsi dze 133

Lobzhanidze 1 34

Motylev 1 20, 1 30,

Khuzman 91 , 1 4 1 , 1 49

Loch 157

Kinsic 1 45

Loginov 1 27

1 1 7, 1 56 Hochgrafe 147

1 45 , 1 45 Movsesian, S . 90

Hoffmann 84

Ki selev 1 29

Lopushnoi 1 49

Munoz Palmerin 28

Hol msten 1 1 , 1 3 1

Klauser 1 3 5

Loskutov 1 1 6

M urdzia 1 3 1

Holst 1 5 5

Kobal i y a 1 1 2

Lputi an 1 1 4

M urey 1 52

Hol usova 1 1 2

Kogan 49, 155

Lutz 1 24

Murshed 1 30

Horvath, A. 46, 1 1 7

Koksch 1 1 6

Machul sky 1 23

Naiditsch, A. 129

Howel l , D . 1 2 8

Komarov 146

Maciej a 1 0

Najer 1 1 3

Hracek 1 22, 157

Konopka 1 30

M agai 1 57

Nakamura 62

H i.ibner 1 53

Kopionkin 1 2 1

M agomedov 1 3 5

Nanu 1 1 2

Hulak 1 22, 1 3 7 , 1 57

Kopy lov, M . 1 45

Mai nka 1 5 6, 142

Nataf 76, 1 54

Hutchinson 1 5 1 , 1 5 7

Korchnoi 67, 76, 1 26

Maiwald 1 22

Navara 1 23

l brag imov 7 5 , 1 1 7 ,

Korobov 1 5 2

M aki 1 20

Nevostruev 1 27

Kosi ntseva 1 3 7

M a l i n i n 70

Nguyen Anh Dung

Ibrah i m 121

Kosteniuk 1 46

M a l i shauskas 1 28

I konnikov 1 3 3

Kotsur 1 1 8 , 1 22

M anea 1 25

Ni Hua 1 46 , 148

I l lescas 1 3 8 , 1 4 1

Kovacevi c , A . 1 1 3

Manik 1 48

N i e l sen, P. H . 1 47 , 1 55

I onescu 16

Kovacev i c , B. 1 22

Manor 27

N i eto 1 39

Ionov 1 1 2

Koval i ov 1 35

Marchand 1 1 5

N ij boer 29

Iordachescu 153

Kovchan 1 36

M arciano 46, 150

Nikitin 1 1 5

I saev 1 37

Kozak 135

Mari asin 1 47

N i kolaidis 1 3 5 , 1 5 6

l sonzo 26

Koz i ak 1 29

Marie, A. 137

N i kolenko 1 2 8

l stratescu 36

Kozul 1 29

Markidis 1 29

N i kolic 1 48 , 1 1 7

I vanchuk 1 5 3

Kramnik 16, 1 1 2

Marti novic 1 1 3

N i s i peanu 1 27. 1 29,

I vanov, A . 5 7

Krasenkow I I , 90

Mastrovas i l i s I I I

Kravtsov 70

M ateo 1 2 1

Nolte 1 25 N orri 1 47

1 30, 1 49

I vanov, I. 1 5 5

1 22, 1 5 5

1 42

! zeta 1 2

Kriventsov 1 1 8, 1 28

McNab 1 5 1

l zoria 83

Kummerow 89

McS hane 7 1

Novak 1 28

Jacimovic 1 27

Kuraj ica 132

Medrano 37

Nyback 1 3 5 O l afsson, H . 150

J ankov ic 142

Kuz m i n , G. 1 47

Medvescek 1 1 9

J aracz 1 46

Kyaw Kyaw Soe 1 4 1

Mehmeti 1 27

O l i v i er 1 48

Jenet1 48

Labensky 1 29

Meissner, C. I 1 6

011 1 22 , 134, 1 5 2

Jenni 1 1 3

Lagowski 125, 1 3 8

Mel lado Trivino 1 34

Oni shchuk 1 3 , 1 43

Joecks 144

Lahner 1 30

Miezis 1 25

Ovod 155

Johannessen, L. 1 1 7

Lal i c , B . 90, 1 1 8

M i khalch i s h i n 154

Ovseev ich 1 1 5

LEARN CHESS TA CTICS

1 60

Pal sson 1 1 7

Rozentalis 137

Papaioannou 1 1 1

Rublevsky 35, 1 45 ,

Paramonov 132 Paramos Dominguez 1 39

S mirin 75, 1 42 , 142, 1 4 5 , 1 48

Vai·sser 1 36 , 156 Vaj da 1 29

S mimov 1 1 2

Vallejo Pons 1 1 1 , 1 5 5

Ruck, R . 1 1

Socko 62, 1 1 8

Van de Mortel 1 39

Ruckschloss 1 5 1

Sofronie 1 25

Van den Doe! 9 1 , 1 1 9

155

Sokolov, I . 8 5 , 1 27 ,

Van der S terren I 1 2 ,

Pardy 1 1 2

Russell 1 2 1

Pavasovic 132, 1 33

S advakasov 1 54

Pavlovic 1 1 3 , 1 23

S agalchik 1 28 , 142

Soln 1 27

Van der Weide 1 27

Pedzich 1 3 1

S akaev 1 1 8 ( 2 )

Solozhenkin 1 47

Van Wely 1 1 8, 128,

Pein 1 50

Saldano 5 6

Soppe 1 3

Pel letier 1 45 , 1 47

Sal mensuu 1 20

Sorokin 1 1 4

Varga 144, 1 45 Vau l i n 1 1 1

136, 1 50, 1 57

1 54

1 3 0 , 1 3 4 , 135, 1 50

Peng Zhaoqin 90

Salov 89

Spangenberg 132

Petrosian 1 42

S amaritani 49

S passky 1 49 , 1 50

Vesely 1 30

Petrov 146

San Segundo 1 1 9 ,

S praggett 1 1 6

Vidarsson 153

S tangl 1 23

Vladimirov 1 30, 1 49

Pi xton 1 5 3

S anduleac 1 1 2

S tefanova 1 42

Voi ska 1 54

Plachetka 1 45

S anto-Roman 1 22,

S tefansson 5 7 , 66,

Pisk 1 3 5

Pl askett 5 8 , 1 50, 1 5 1

Polgar, 1. 10, 1 30,

1 52

1 50

1 39 , 1 5 3

Vokarev 1 3 3 Volkov 1 1 8

Sanz Alonso 1 2

S teh l i k 1 4

Volokitin 36

S apunov 9 1

Stohl 156

Volzhin 1 3 7

Ponomariov 1 2

S aravanan 1 28, 1 32

Stoj anovski 1 1 4

Von Gleich 1 43

Portisch 26, 150

S arkar 1 56

Stone 29

Wal l , G. 1 46

1 34, 1 5 1

Postny 156

Schekachev 1 1 7 , 1 49

S trehlow 67

Wang Pin 1 30

Pribyl, M. 1 30

Sch i l ler 1 1 5

S trenzke 1 25

Weber 1 27

Prie 46. 1 22

Schmied 1 1 3

S tryj ecki 1 5 6

Weiss 1 1 8

Priehoda 46

Schmittdiel 1 54

Sturua 1 16, 1 3 2

Wel l s 1 27, 152

Prokopchuk 142

Schulte 1 4 1

S utovsky 1 1 1 , 1 37,

Wiertzema 153

Psakhis 1 3 8

Sedlak 154

Putzbach 145

Seirawan 70, 1 27 ,

Rabiega 1 5 5 Radjabov 8 5 , 1 1 6 Radulski 1 27

1 50, 156 Seminara 1 3 1 , 1 3 2, 1 32

1 50 S vensk 1 1 8

Wi l l i am s , S . 1 5 1 Wintzer 143

S v i dler 49, 1 1 8 , 1 34

Xie Jianjun 1 1 7

S v i ri n 43

Xie Jun 70

S wathi 157

Yagupov 1 1 3

Radziewicz 1 5 5

Senoner 1 39

S zablewski 85

Yakovich 1 1 5

Raj l ich 1 1 4, 1 2 1

Seul 1 25 , 156

S zeberenyi 1 24

Yandemirov 136, 1 49

Ramirez A l varez 1 34

Shabalov 36, 1 44

Tarasov 1 3 2

Ye J iangchuan 1 33

Rasik 26

Shaked 1 3 1

Terentiev 1 40

Yermoli nsky 1 27

Shali mov 1 5 5

Thipsay 1 3 2

Yi lmaz 1 45

Ravi 1 24

Shanava 1 27

Ti mman 1 1 3 , 1 1 7

Yurtaev 1 25 , 1 46

Razuvaev 1 46

Sharma 1 1 2

Ti schbierek I I I

Yusupov 1 5 2

Rasmussen, K. 1 3 5

Rei nderman 48

Shi nkevich 1 3 2

Ti schendorf 25

Zacharias 1 1 2

Rel ange 1 26

Shipov 1 1 4, 1 1 8 , 1 46

Titz 1 20

Zaj a 1 28

Ri azantsev 1 46

Shirov 14, 89, 1 1 8 ,

Tivi akov 36, 8 5 , 1 2 1

Zak 2 8

Ribshtein 137

145

Tkachev 152, 1 56

Zakharevich 1 5 1

Shi shkov 1 54

Tomczak 1 25

Zakharov 1 1 5

ROder, M. 1 1 8 , 139

S h l iperman 1 5 7

Tomicic 1 42

Zalkind 1 47

Rodgaard 1 50

Short 139, 1 45

Topalov 1 4, 35, 47,

Zawadzka 1 54

Richter 1 25

Rogers 1 39

Siege1 155

Rogic 1 24

S i mutowe 156

Trkalj anov 1 27

Zhang Zhong 1 44

Rogulj 27, 1 3 2

Si nger 1 3 6

Tseitlin, Ma. 1 20, 138

Zhu Chen 1 49

Rohrer 1 5 7

Singh 1 4 1

Tsesarsky 6 3 , 1 3 7

Zifroni 27

Romanishin 1 25

Skembris 1 1 4

Tukmakov 1 42

Zontakh 1 1 3

Rotman 1 3 7

S l obodian 56, 1 1 5

Tyomkin 1 44

Zschabitz 1 3 1

Rowson 1 5 2

S magin I l l

Vaganian 3 5 , 1 1 1

Zi.iger 1 1 3

71, 1 1 7

ZelCic 150