[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Then play might [ Taking the e5-pawn is losing for Black.Aftercontinue 15.%àc2 %àe7 16.&àbd1! 23.&àxe5? 24.'àc3 &àd5 ( or 24.&àe8and, although the  wasted tempi are now 25.'àxf6 , followed by 26 d7 ) 25.'àxd5 cxd5equal (.Nf6-h5-f6 vs.Ra1-b1-d1 and Bc1-f4- 26.'àxf6 'àxf6 27.%àxd5 , I don t think Blacke3), all White s pieces are harmoniously has enough counterplay.]placed, while taking the e4-pawn is too risky: 24.f4 White now has an awesome pawn(àfxe4? 17.(àxe4 (àxe4 18.'àxe4 %àxe4 chain! In contrast, Black is unable to find19.'àd2! and Black has to give up his queen open files for his rooks and therefore can tfor insufficient material, leaving White activate his position.b6 25.'àxd5 cxd5clearly better.26.(àb3 f6 27.'àf2!? Nevertheless, theNote that the position after 16 Rbd1 might position is double-edged and it s not easy toalso arrive via 12 Qc2 a5 13 Be3 Qe7 14 find the best option from the practical point ofRad1.However, Black has other, more view.promising options by that move order.] [ Here White might try 27.(àd4 'àd7 28.(àc615.(àb3 'àxc6 29.&àxc6 fxe5 30.%àxd5+ &àf7 31.f5 17.'àxc5 dxc5 action and the text move is too passive.18.exf5 'àxf5 19.'àe4 &àe5 , Black is still [ Black should have played 27.fxe5very much in the game.] 28.'àxb6 %àxd6! 29.'àxa7 %àd7 , regaining15.(àd7 the piece, when the position is far from clear.[ Other knight moves don t alleviate the For instance, after 30.(àbc5 %àxa7pressure either: 31.%àxd5+ 'àe6 32.%àc6 'àf7 , Black s15.(àxb3 16.%àxb3 and White has a slight bishop pair shouldn t be underestimated.]but stable advantage; we can already see 28.(àxb6 'àxh3 29.g4! Perhaps Blackoverlooked this move.His bishop on h3 is now counterbalanced by Black s positionalcut off, and White also threatens Rc8, advantage on the queenside.]trapping the queen.fxe5 10.b5?! Black should have delayed this for a[ There is no time for 29.h5 , because of while and opted for a solid move;30.e6! and wins ( which is even stronger [ such as 10.&àe8 and then:than 30.&àc8 here.)] A) 11.&àe1 b5 ( or 11.exd4!? 12.(àxd430.&àc8 %àxc8 31.(àxc8 &àxc8 32.%àf3 (àc5 13.%àc2 %àe7 ; this can be comparedThis was more or less forced after 29 g4 and with the previous game ) 12.c5! exd4 ( notWhite is going to be a piece up.The rest 12.b4?! 13.(àa4 (àxe4 14.cxd6 (àxd6should be a matter of technique, though Black 15.(àxe5 (àxe5 16.dxe5 &àxe5 17.'àb6still has some counterplay with his rooks.'àf8 and White was clearly better in J.Smejkal-33.%àxh3 'àxd6 34.%àd3 a4 35.(àd2 Th.Casper, German League 1992 )[ 35.%àa6 &àd8 36.'àh4! would probably have 13.(àxd4 'àb7 14.cxd6 c5 15.(àb3 (àxe4ended things more quickly.] 16.(àxe4 ( White might try 16.'àxe4!?35.&àd8 36.fxe5 'àxe5 37.'àd4 &àe8 'àxe4 17.'àxc5 , winning a pawn at the38.'àxe5 &àxe5 39.(àf3 &àe4 40.g5 cost of the bishop pair ) 16.'àxe4 17.'àxe4[ And here 40.%àxd5! was more accurate; for &àxe4 18.(àxc5 &àxe3 19.&àxe3 (àxc5example, &àxg4+ 41.$àh2 (threatening Ne5) 20.%àd5 (àe6 was fine for Black in P.H.$àg7 42.$àh3 &àgf4 43.(àg5 and wins.] Nielsen-V.Nithander, Swedish Team40.&àg4+ Championship 2012.;[ 40.&àf5! would have been more B) 11.a4 , restraining the queensidetenacious.] advance,41.$àh2 &àf5 42.%àe3 &àe4 B1) should again be met by 11.a5![ Or 42.&àgf4 43.(àd4 &àe4 44.(àxf5!.] , as in the previous note (in fact 12.&àe143.%àc3 &àc4 44.%àa5 &àc8 45.%àa6 &àcf8 would transpose to that directly ( and46.%àe6+ $àh8 47.(àe5 d4 48.%àd6 &àf4 12.%àc2 is much the same.);49.(àg4 &à8f5 50.(àh6 B2) Instead, I don t like 11.&àb8?![ The resulting position after 50.(àh6 &àf2+ much, as.b5 looks impossible for51.$àg3 &à2f3+ 52.$àg4 &à5f4+ 53.%àxf4 Black: 12.d5! (White is going to develop&àxf4+ 54.$àxf4 is absolutely winning for a big queenside initiative) cxd5 13.cxd5White, and therefore Black resigns.] (àc5 14.(àd2 b5 (okay, he plays it1-0 anyway) 15.axb5 axb5 16.b4 (àa417.(àxa4 bxa4 18.%àxa4 'àd7 19.%àb3and White has an extra pawn, not toE69 mention his space advantage, P.Dautov,R Kalisvaart-L.Brummelaar, HaarlemSutovsky,E 1997.;Bad Homburg (Game 44) 1997 C) 11.%àc2 (a natural move; White plays[Damian Lemos] simply to complete his development) b512.dxe5 dxe5 13.&àfd1 %àe7 14.(àe1!1.d4 g6 2.(àf3 'àg7 3.c4 d6 4.g3 (àf6 (heading for d3 where it will control key5.'àg2 0-0 6.0-0 (àbd7 7.(àc3 e5 8.h3 c6 squares in the centre) &àb8 15.cxb5 axb59.e4 a6!? This is a less usual but playable 16.(àd3 (àb6 17.b3 (àfd7 18.(àe2 'àb7alternative to the more popular lines.The 19.(àc5 gave White a slight advantage inconcept is similar to the Old Indian Defence, H.Kubikova-J.Schauer, Klatovy 1997.]where Black prepares.b5 to get some 11.c5! A very strong breakthrough.White hasqueenside space.10.'àe3 I like this simple the superior development and Black s centredeveloping move.There s no need for White is collapsing.White has a plethora of otherto prevent.b5.possibilities here, though the text move looks[ Instead, after 10.a4 a5! , Black takes best.control of the c5- and b4-squares.D.[ 11.dxe5 (this seems premature) (àxe5Reizniece-Xie Jun, Elista Olympiad 1998, 12.(àxe5 dxe5 13.cxb5 axb5 14.%àc2 'àe6continued 11.&àe1 &àe8 12.'àe3 exd4 15.a3 (àd7 16.&àfd1 %àb8 17.(àa2 &àc813.(àxd4 (àc5 14.%àc2 %àc7 15.&àad1 (àfd7 18.(àb4 'àf8 19.'àf1 c5 20.(àd5 c4 21.'àg516.f4 (àa6 and White s space is &àe8 22.$àh2 h6 23.'àe3 &àc8 24.&àab1gave rise to a highly complex position in V.12.(àxe5?!Lukov-B.Dena, St Ingbert 1989.] [ Here White could have won material with[ 11.cxb5 axb5 12.b4!? (a standard idea to 12.dxe5! (àe8 ( 12.(àh5 13.g4 traps theseize space on the queenside) &àb8 13.&àc1 knight ) 13.'àxc5 , since the d7-knight is&àe8 14.%àb3 'àb7 15.dxe5 dxe5 16.&àfd1 pinned.Strangely, this continuation was%àe7 17.(àe1 (a key manoeuvre in this line  also overlooked by GM Goldin in anotherthe knight heads for the hole on c5) 'àf8 game the same year.]18.(àd3 %àe6 19.%àc2 %àc4 20.%àb1 %àe6 12.(àxe521.&àd2 &àa8 22.&àcd1 &àa3 23.(àe2 &àea8 [ Black can t complete his development with24.(àec1 &à3a4 25.(àb3 and White has a 12.'àb7 yet, as 13.(àxd7 and 14 dxc5slight advantage, although Black s position leaves White a healthy pawn up.]is pretty solid, J.Plachetka-J.Franzen, 13.dxe5 (àd7 14.f4 &àe8 15.%àd6 This active-Czechoslovakian Championship, Trinec looking move doesn t achieve much, as the1972.] pawns are easily defended, and Black can[ 11.%àc2 and now: drive the queen back whenever he likes.A) 11.bxc4?! is inferior as White is going [ White might have preferred 15.b3to take on e5 sooner or later and Black s to limit the c5-pawn s advance, and thenpawn structure (e5, c4, c6, a6) will become target it with moves like Rc1 and Ne2-c1-d3,weak: 12.&àfd1 ( the immediate 12.dxe5 when I think his advantage is obvious.](àxe5 13.(àxe5 dxe5 14.&àfd1 %àc7 15.%àb615.(àa4 'àe6 16.(àc5 %àc8 17.$àh2 [ There is no need for 15.&àe6 , which wouldwas good enough for an advantage too in be answered by 16.%àd2 and Black s rook isH.Barez Menendez-J.Vazquez, Madrid just misplaced on e6.]1995 ) 12.%àe7 13.dxe5 (àxe5 14.(àxe5 16.&àac1 h5!? 17.$àh1 a5dxe5 15.(àa4 'àe6 16.'àc5 %àc7 17.(àb6 [ Not 17.'àb7?? 18.%àxd7 &àad8&àab8 18.'àxf8 'àxf8 19.(àxc4 and White , since White can escape the trap bywas clearly better in A.Garcia-M.Sion 19.'àxc5! and wins.]Castro, Seville 1992.; 18.a4 White plays to fix the black queensideB) 11.'àb7 12.dxe5 dxe5 13 [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]