20188021 chess endgames

T T T T CHESS ZONE TTTT

1

The eternal duel between bishop and knight. It is astonishing that two such different pieces should be in general of approximately the same material strength. But, when one gets down to it, in the duel between bishop and knight, it depends to a great extent on the concrete features of the given position. In open positions, with play on both wings, then as a rule the bishop is better – as in the following rapid game: Kramnik-Khalifman, played recently in Zurich. With White to move, how could he have best demonstrated the superiority of his bishop? Kramnik,Vladimir (2759) - Khalifman,Alexander (2612) [D38] Champions Rapid Zürich (2), 23.08.2009 [Analysis by GM Müller, Karsten] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 d5 4.¤c3 ¥b4 5.¥g5 h6 6.¥xf6 £xf6 7.£b3 c5 8.cxd5 exd5 9.e3 0–0 10.dxc5 ¥xc3+ 11.£xc3 £xc3+ 12.bxc3 ¤d7 13.¦d1 ¤xc5 14.¦xd5 b6 15.¦d4 ¥e6 16.c4 ¦fc8 17.g4 ¦c7 18.g5 hxg5 19.¤xg5 ¦ac8 20.¤xe6 ¤xe6 21.¦d5 ¤c5 22.¦g1 ¤b7 23.h4 ¢f8 24.h5 ¦c5 25.¦gg5 ¤d6 26.¦xc5 ¦xc5 27.¦xc5 bxc5 28.¥d3 ¢e7 29.¢e2 ¤e8 30.¢f3 ¤f6 31.¢f4 ¤xh5+ 32.¢e5 ¤f6 33.¥f5 g6 34.¥h3 ¤e8 35.¢d5 ¤f6+ 36.¢c6 ¤e4 37.f4 ¤f2 38.¥f1 ¤d1 39.e4 ¤c3 40.¢xc5 ¤xa2 41.e5 ¤c3 42.¢d4 ¤a2 43.c5 ¤b4 44.¥b5 ¢d8 45.¢c4 a5 46.¥a4 ¤a6 47.¢d5 ¤c7+ 48.¢d6 ¤e6 49.c6 ¤c7 50.¥b3 ¤e8+ 51.¢c5 ¢e7 52.¢b6 f6 53.¥c2 fxe5 Diagram

It is astonishing that two such different pieces should be in general of approximately the same material strength. On larger boards, such as for example 10x10 squares, the bishop should as a rule be considerably superior to the knight and even on our 8x8 board general opinion gives a very slight edge to the bishop. But in the latter case, it depends to a great extent on the concrete features of the given position, which is one of the charms of the game of chess. If it is an open position, with play on both wings, then as a rule the bishop is better - as in the


2

following rapid game: 54.fxe5? This automatic recapture turns the position into a static one and Black's blockade ought to hold up against White's attempts at siege warfare because of the strongly reduced amount of material on the board. The dynamic [54.¥xg6! ¤f6 55.¢b7 ¤d5 56.¥e4+- would have allowed Kramnik to secure the promotion of his passed c-pawn directly.] 54...a4 [Surprisingly, even 54...g5!? is playable: 55.¥g6 g4 56.¥xe8 g3 57.c7 g2 58.c8£ g1£+ 59.¢a6 (59.£c5+ £xc5+ 60.¢xc5 ¢xe8=) 59...£d4= and, paradoxically, White's extra piece cannot guarantee a win, because the pawnless endgame of queen and bishop against queen is generally speaking a draw.] 55.¥xa4 [55.¥xg6 a3 56.¥xe8 a2 57.c7 a1£ 58.c8£ £b2+ (Of course, not 58...£d4+?? 59.£c5+ £xc5+ 60.¢xc5 ¢xe8 61.¢d6+-) 59.¥b5 £xe5=] 55...¢d8? This blockade can be lifted with the decisive engame weapon of zugzwang. Getting rid of the e-pawn by [55...¢e6 56.¥c2 ¢xe5 57.¥xg6 draws, e.g 57...¤d6 58.c7 ¢e6 59.¥h5 ¤c8+ 60.¢b7 ¤e7 61.¥g4+ ¢d6 as we get a well-known drawing fortress.] 56.¥c2 g5 57.¥f5 Now the bishop controls matters according to the principle of the single diagonal. It can always force Black into zugzwang by waiting moves, so the black fortress cannot hold out for long. 57...¤c7 58.¥h3 ¤a8+ 59.¢c5 ¢e7 60.¢d5 ¤c7+ 61.¢c5 ¤a8 62.¥g4 ¤c7 63.¢b6 ¢d8 64.¢b7 ¤e8 65.e6 ¤d6+ 66.¢b8 ¤b5 67.¥h3 and Khalifman admitted defeat in view of the fresh zugzwang. 1–0

Really? When the world's top players + engines analyze a tactical position, then the result must be perfect play. Really? The Dortmund game Jakovenko-Kramnik shows a different picture. Jakovenko's 19.Kh1 was reputedly prepared, Kramnik reacted promptly. But his 20…f6 is a clear mistake, as pointed out by 21-year-old Brazilian GM Alexander Fier. It appears that the players and seconds had not set up their engines properly or taken into account previous games, e.g. a correspondence game from 2002 that escaped everyone's notice. Jakovenko,Dmitrij (2760) - Kramnik,Vladimir (2759) [C42] Dortmund SuperGM Dortmund (9), 11.07.2009 [Analysis by GM Fier,Alexander] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.¤xe5 d6 4.¤f3 ¤xe4 5.d4 d5 6.¥d3 ¥d6 7.0–0 0–0 8.c4 c6 9.£c2 ¤a6 10.a3 ¥g4 11.¤e5 ¥xe5 12.dxe5 ¤ac5 13.f3 ¤xd3 14.£xd3 ¤c5 15.£d4 ¤b3 16.£xg4 ¤xa1 17.¥h6 g6 18.¤c3 £b6+ 19.¢h1 When Kramnik played this line against Bacrot some rounds earlier, I was wondering what he would do against 19.Kh1... To me, this is the critical test for Black. [19.¦f2 ¦fe8 20.£f4 £c7 21.¦e2 ¦e6 22.b4 was Bacrot - Kramnik which ended in draw.] 19...£xb2 20.£f4 f6? Diagram:


3

For some reason, this move is played more often than 20...f5, but I think that after this Black is just lost! [20...f5 is better, and after 21.¤a4 £e2 22.¦xa1 ¦fe8 23.cxd5 cxd5 24.£b4 £xe5 25.¦g1 b6 26.¥f4 £e2 27.¤b2 there are chances for both sides.] 21.¤a4? Now Black is alive again... [21.e6! A stunning move! 21...£xc3 (21...£b6 22.¥xf8 ¦xf8 23.cxd5+-) 22.£d6! (22.£c7?! looks dangerous, but only leads to draw after 22...f5 23.¥xf8 ¦xf8 24.cxd5 £c4 (24...¤b3 25.e7 ¦e8 26.£d7 ¢f7 27.£e6+ ¢g7 28.£d7 ¢f7=) 25.¦xa1 £xd5 26.£xb7 (26.¦e1 c5) 26...£xe6 27.£xa7=) 22...¤b3 (22...£xc4 23.¦xa1 £h4 (23...£d4 24.¦g1 f5 25.e7 ¦fe8 26.£e6+ ¢h8 27.£f7+-) 24.¥xf8 ¦xf8 25.£d7 £d4 26.¦g1 £e5 27.e7 ¦b8 28.f4!+-) 23.£d7 f5 24.e7 (24.¥xf8 ¦xf8 25.e7 is an option.) 24...¤c5 (24...¦fe8 25.£e6+ ¢h8 26.¥f4+-) 25.exf8£+ ¦xf8 26.£e7 £f6 27.£xc5+- was surprisingly played before in the game Nevio,J - Peunariemi,P corr 2002!] 21...£c2 22.¦xa1 [22.¥xf8 ¦xf8 23.cxd5 fxe5 24.£xe5 £xa4 25.¦xa1 cxd5 26.£xd5+ ¦f7 with a draws endgame.] 22...£xa4 23.e6 £a5 24.£d6 [24.cxd5 was interesting too, but Black holds without problems after 24...cxd5 25.¥xf8 ¦xf8 26.e7 ¦e8=] 24...¦fc8 [24...£d8 25.¥xf8 £xf8 26.e7 £f7 27.cxd5 ¦e8 28.¦e1 £xd5 29.£xf6=] 25.£e7 £c7 26.£xf6 ¦e8 27.¦e1 [27.cxd5 Again this move was possible. 27...£e7 28.£e5 ¦ad8 (28...cxd5 29.¦e1 unclear) 29.¥g5 ¦xd5 30.£xd5 cxd5 31.¥xe7 ¦xe7 32.¦e1 ¢g7 33.¦e5 ¢f6 34.¦xd5 ¢xe6 and Black has his king better placed and a queenside pawn majority that gives him good chances.] 27...£e7 28.£e5 dxc4 29.¥g5 £f8 30.¥f6 b5 31.f4 [31.¦d1 ¦e7 (31...c3 32.e7 £f7 33.£xc3 with compensation) 32.¥xe7 £xe7 33.¦d7 ¦d8! 34.£d4 ¦xd7 35.£xd7 ¢f8 36.£xc6=] 31...a5 32.f5 ¦a7 33.¦e3? Diagram:


4

[33.h3 was better... now both players need to play carefully to equalize. 33...£xa3 (33...b4 leads to an exotic endgame after 34.fxg6 hxg6 35.axb4 axb4 36.£g5 ¦g7 37.¥xg7 £xg7 38.¦d1 c3 39.¦d7 c2 40.¦xg7+ ¢xg7 41.£e5+ ¢h7 42.£c7+ ¢h6 43.£xc6 b3 and I think there is nothing better than 44.¢h2 ¦xe6 45.£xe6 c1£ 46.£xb3=) 34.fxg6 hxg6 35.£e4 £d3 36.£xc6 ¦f8 37.e7 ¦xe7 38.¥xe7 (38.¦xe7? £f1+ 39.¢h2 £xf6–+) 38...¦f1+ 39.¦xf1 (39.¢h2 ¦xe1 40.£e8+ ¢h7 41.£f7+ ¢h6 42.£f8+ ¢h7 43.£f7+=) 39...£xf1+ 40.¢h2 £f4+ 41.¢h1 £f1+=] 33...b4? [33...¦d7! A trick which is very hard to see, but winning. 34.h3 (34.exd7 ¦xe5 35.¦xe5 £xf6 36.¦e8+ ¢g7 37.h3 c3 38.d8£ £xd8 39.¦xd8 c2) 34...¦d5 35.e7 £f7 36.fxg6 hxg6 37.£b2 ¦f5 38.¥h4 (38.¦f3 ¦xf3 39.gxf3 b4 40.axb4 axb4 41.£d4 c3 42.£h4 £d5–+) 38...g5 39.¥g3 ¦xe7–+] 34.fxg6 hxg6 35.£g5 [35.¦g3 ¦g7 (35...£h6) 36.h4 c3 37.¥xg7 £xg7 38.£e4 ¢h7 39.axb4 axb4 40.h5 £f6 41.£xb4 (41.¦xg6 ¦xe6 42.£xb4 £f1+ 43.¢h2 ¦xg6 44.hxg6+ ¢xg6 45.£xc3) 41...c2 42.£d2 ¦xe6 43.hxg6+ ¢g8 44.£xc2 £h4+ 45.¦h3 £e1+ 46.¢h2 £e5+ 47.¦g3 £h8+ 48.¢g1 £a1+=] 35...¦g7 36.h3 c3 37.¥xg7 £xg7 38.£c5 [38.axb4 axb4 39.¦d3 with the same idea of 33.h3 b4... 39...c2 40.¦d7 b3 (40...¦xe6 41.¦xg7+ (41.¦d8+ ¢f7 42.¦d7+ ¢g8) 41...¢xg7 42.£d2 b3 43.¢h2=) 41.¦xg7+ ¢xg7 42.e7=] 38...£f8 [38...£f6 39.axb4 axb4 40.£xc6 ¦e7 41.£c4 and probably White can hold.] 39.e7 £f1+ 40.¢h2 £f4+ 41.¢h1 £f1+ [41...¢g7 42.axb4 c2 (42...axb4 43.¦e6) 43.¦c3 £xb4 44.¦xc2 ¦xe7 45.£xc6=] 42.¢h2 £b5 43.axb4 £xc5 [43...axb4 is very dangerous, but 44.£d4! c2 45.£d7 £b8+ 46.¦g3 ¢g7 (46...c1£?? 47.£e6+ ¢h8 48.£f6+ ¢g8 49.£xg6+ ¢h8 50.£g7#) 47.£xc6 followed by 48.Qxc2 is fine for White.] 44.bxc5 c2 45.¦c3 ¦xe7 46.¦xc2 a4 47.¢g3 ¢f7 48.¢f4 ¢f6 49.¦a2 g5+ 50.¢f3 ¦a7 51.¢e4 a3 52.¢d4 ¢f5 53.¦f2+ ¢g6 54.¦a2 ¢f5 55.¦f2+ ¢g6 56.¦a2 ¢f5 A very tense and exciting game! ½–½


5

Scoring against the Berlin Defense The Berlin Defense keeps on going and going and going. Many players avoid it, but those who accept the challenge find themselves, after only nine moves, in a position from which it is extremely difficult to win the game. Yet, GM Vugar Gashimov of Azerbaijan won the said endgame twice in the 10th Poikovsky tournament, one of the top events and here is one of the two games with his own annotations. Gashimov,Vugar (2730) - Naiditsch,Arkadij (2700) [C67] Poikovsky Karpov 10th Poikovsky (7), 10.06.2009 [Analysis by GM Gashimov,Vugar] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 The Berlin Defense, my opponent's main weapon against 1.e4 and one in which he has pretty good results. 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¤e7 10.¤e4 This move is very rarely seen, yet even so, I was employing it for the fourth time already! 10...¤g6 11.b3!? Diagram:

Already a year ago, my trainer and second, Viorel Jordacescu told me about this move, but only in round 2 of the present tournament did I get to employ this novelty against Onischuk, in a game I won. [Before this, I had played 11.¤fg5 against Alekseev and Aronian last year, both games ending in a draw.] 11...h6 [Onischuk played 11...¢e8 ] 12.¥b2 ¥f5 13.¤g3 ¥d7 14.¦ad1 c5? [Probably 14...¢c8 was stronger.] 15.e6! My opponent was playing very quickly, and I was mystified as to what he had prepared, since Black's position is already very bad. 15...fxe6 16.¦fe1 The plan with h4-h5, playing for full domination, was also interesting, but I wanted to bring the rook to e4-g4. 16...¢c8 [16...¢e8 17.¦e4 (also possible is 17.h4 ¥c6 18.¦xe6+ ¢f7 19.¦e3) ] 17.¦d2! Now White switches to another plan. 17...b5 18.¦ed1 ¥c6 19.¦d8+ ¢b7 20.¦xa8 ¢xa8 21.¤e5! [21.¦d8+ ¢b7 22.¤e5 allows 22...¥e7 23.¦xh8 ¤xh8 24.¤xc6 ¢xc6 25.¥xg7 ¤f7]


6

21...¤xe5 22.¦d8+ ¢b7 23.¥xe5 a5 Before surrendering the exchange, Black advances his pawns as far as possible. [23...¥d6 24.¦xh8 ¥xe5 25.f3!? and then Ne4.] 24.¤f1!?

[Maybe 24.¤h5 was stronger, but I did not like the position after 24...¥d6 25.¦xh8 ¥xe5 when it was very difficult to calculate everything out fully. Even so, post-game analysis showed that White is winning.] 24...h5! Black's best chance. 25.h4! Not allowing ...h4, ...Rh5. 25...¦g8 26.¥f4 Another accurate move, preventing g5, and not giving Black any counter play. 26...e5 27.¥e3 ¥e4 Black has no more waiting moves, as White is threatening 28.Bc5. 28.¥xc5 ¥xc5 29.¦xg8 ¥xc2 30.¦xg7 ¥b1 31.g4 ¥xa2 [31...hxg4 32.h5 ¥xa2 33.¤d2 ¥f8 34.¦g6 a4 35.bxa4 bxa4 36.h6 ¥xh6 37.¦xh6 a3 38.¦h5 ¥d5 39.¦xe5 a2 40.¦e1 ¢c6 41.¢f1 ¢c5 42.¢e2 ¢b4 (42...¢d4 43.¦c1 c5 44.¤f1 c4 45.¤e3 ¥e6 46.¢d2 c3+ 47.¦xc3 a1¤ 48.¦d3+ ¢e4 49.¢c3 ¢f3 50.¦d6 ¥g8 51.¦g6 ¥h7 52.¦g7 ¥e4 53.¦f7++-) 43.¢d3 c5 44.¦a1! c4+ 45.¢d4 c3 46.¢xd5 cxd2 47.¢d4 ¢b3 48.¢d3 ¢b2 49.¦xa2+ ¢xa2 50.¢xd2 ¢b2 51.¢e3 ¢c3 52.¢f4+-] 32.gxh5 ¥f8 [32...¥xb3 33.h6 ¥f8 34.¦g6 ¥xh6 35.¦xh6 a4 36.¤d2 ¥d5 37.¦h5 a3 38.¦xe5 a2 39.¦e1 b4 40.h5 b3 41.¤xb3 ¥xb3 42.h6 ¥c2 43.¦a1 ¥b1 44.¦xa2+-] 33.¦f7 [The move 33.¦g8 was more accurate.] 33...¥h6 34.¦f6 ¥c1 [34...¥xb3 35.¦xh6 a4 36.¤d2 ¥d5 37.¢h2 a3 38.¦g6 a2 39.¦g1+-; 34...¥f4 35.¦xf4! exf4 36.¤d2+-] 35.h6 ¥b1 36.¤e3 ¥xe3 [36...a4 37.bxa4 bxa4 38.¤c4 ¥d3 39.¤a5+ ¢a7 40.¤c6+ ¢b7 41.¤d8+ ¢c8 (41...¢b8 42.¦a6!+-) 42.¤e6+-] 37.fxe3 a4 38.bxa4 b4 39.¦f1! ¥d3 [Stronger would have been 39...¥e4 40.¦c1 ¢b6 41.¢f2 (41.¦c4 c5! 42.¦xe4?? b3) 41...c5 42.¢e2 ¢c6 (42...b3 43.¦c3) 43.¢d2 ¢d5 44.a5 c4 45.a6 c3+ 46.¢e2 ¢c4 (46...¢c6 47.¦a1 b3 48.a7) 47.a7 b3 48.h7 b2 49.¦e1 c2 50.h8£ b1£ 51.£c8+ ¢b3 52.£b8++-] 40.¦c1 1–0


7

Mating attack in a rook ending The fact that mating motifs can be decisive even in an ending was demonstrated by Cheparinov in his first round game in Jermuk. With a clever deployment of his passed pawn on the h-file, he forced Jakovenko's king to the edge of the board, where it was unable to escape its fate. Cheparinov,Ivan (2678) - Jakovenko,Dmitrij (2760) [C49] 5th FIDE GP Jermuk ARM (1), 09.08.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¤c3 ¤f6 4.¥b5 ¥b4 5.0–0 0–0 6.d3 d6 7.¥g5 ¥xc3 8.bxc3 £e7 9.¦e1 ¤d8 10.d4 ¤e6 11.¥d2 ¦d8 12.¥d3 ¤f8 13.¤h4 c5 14.£f3 h6 15.¤f5 ¥xf5 16.exf5 £c7 17.£g3 ¢h8 18.dxe5 dxe5 19.c4 ¦e8 20.¥c3 ¤8d7 21.¦e3 ¦e7 22.£h4 ¦ae8 23.g4 e4 24.g5 exd3 25.¦xe7 ¦xe7 26.gxf6 ¤xf6 27.¥xf6 gxf6 28.£xh6+ ¢g8 29.£xf6 £e5 30.£xe5 ¦xe5 31.cxd3 ¦e2 32.a4 ¦b2 33.¢g2 ¦b3 34.¦d1 ¦a3 35.¢f3 ¢g7 36.¢e3 ¦xa4 37.¦b1 b6 38.h4 ¢f6

A mating attack in a rook ending On account of the well-known draws tendencies of many rook endings it is frequently necessary to display great accuracy in order to transform an advantage into the full point. In the present case, Cheparinov exploits his activity well: 39.h5! following the known motto: passed pawns must move forward. Here the advance of the h-pawn serves above all to shut the black king off on the h-file. [39.¦g1? on the other hand, allows counter play by means of 39...b5] 39...¢g5 [39...¢xf5? is countered by 40.¦h1! , because the black king can no longer stop the h-pawn: 40...¢f6 41.h6 ¢g6 42.h7+-] 40.¦g1+! ¢h6 [after 40...¢xh5? the white monarch plugs the gaps in the mating net: 41.¢f4 ¢h6 42.¢e5 and Black has to surrender too many pawns to avoid being mated.] 41.f6 ¦a2? The final chance to rip apart the net was [41...¦a6 42.¦g8 b5 , however, after 43.¦h8+ ¢g5 44.f4+ ¢f5 45.¦c8 White has good winning chances.] 42.¦g7 ¢xh5 43.f4


8

and Jakovenko resigned, because the white king makes a decisive entry, e.g.: 43...a5 44.¢e4 a4 45.¢f5 ¢h6 46.¦xf7 a3 47.¦f8 ¢h7 48.¦a8+- 1–0 Breaking through in a knight ending The 5th tournament in the FIDE Grand Prix series is under way and Karsten Müller has already discovered and annotated a few interesting endings. There is, for example the knight ending Ernesto Inarkiev vs Vassily Ivanchuk from the second round. In it a spectacular breakthrough led to success – no, sorry, should have led to success... Inarkiev,Ernesto (2675) - Ivanchuk,Vassily (2703) [B33] Jermuk FIDE GP Jermuk (2), 10.08.2009 [Analysis by GM Karsten Müller] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¤c3 e6 4.d4 cxd4 5.¤xd4 ¤f6 6.¤db5 d6 7.¥f4 e5 8.¥g5 a6 9.¤a3 b5 10.¤d5 ¥e7 11.¥xf6 ¥xf6 12.c4 b4 13.¤c2 0–0 14.¥e2 a5 15.0–0 ¦b8 16.£d3 ¥g5 17.¦ad1 ¥e6 18.b3 ¢h8 19.¤de3 g6 20.¥g4 £c8 21.¥xe6 fxe6 22.£xd6 ¦d8 23.£c5 ¦xd1 24.¤xd1 £d7 25.¤b2 ¥e7 26.£e3 ¦d8 27.£b6 ¦b8 28.£e3 ¦d8 29.¤e1 £a7 30.£xa7 ¤xa7 31.¤f3 ¤c6 32.¦d1 ¦xd1+ 33.¤xd1 ¢g7 34.¤b2 h5 35.¢f1 ¢f6 36.h3 ¤b8 37.¢e2 ¤d7 38.¤a4 ¥d6 39.¢d3 ¢e7 40.g4 hxg4 41.hxg4 ¢d8 42.¤h4 g5 43.¤f3 ¥e7 44.¢e3 ¢c7 45.¤b2 ¢c6 46.¤d3 ¥f6 47.¢d2 ¢d6 48.¢c2 ¥e7 49.¢b1 ¥f6 50.¢b2 ¤b8 51.a3 ¤c6 52.axb4 axb4 53.¤fe1 ¥d8 54.¤c2 ¥a5 55.¢c1 ¢d7 56.¤c5+ ¢d6 57.¤b7+ ¢c7 58.¤c5 ¢d6 59.¤b7+ ¢c7 60.¤xa5 ¤xa5 61.¤xb4 ¤xb3+ 62.¢c2 ¤d4+ 63.¢d2 ¢b6 64.¤d3 ¤c6 65.¢c3 ¢c7 66.¤e1 ¤d4 67.¢d3 ¢b7 Diagram:

Breakthrough in a knight ending At first glance, the barricaded kingside makes any progress for White look problematic. Thus the plan 68.Ke3? Kc7 69.Nf3? leads straight to a draw. However Inarkiev finds a possibility to break through the black


9

walls: 68.f4!! [68.¢e3? ¢c7 69.¤f3? leads straight to a draw: 69...¤xf3 70.¢xf3 ¢c6 71.¢e3 ¢c5 72.¢d3 ¢b4 73.f3 ¢a5! 74.¢c3 ¢a4=] 68...gxf4 69.g5 ¤b3 Ivanchuk seeks salvation in a counter-attack. [The passive 69...¤c6 is not sufficient either because of the weakness of the black pawns: 70.¤f3 ¢c7 71.g6 ¢d6 72.¤g5 ¤e7 (72...¢d7 73.g7 ¤e7 74.c5 ¤g8 75.¢c4 ¢c6 76.¤f3+-) 73.¤f7+ ¢c5 74.¤xe5+-] 70.¢e2 ¤c5 71.¢f3 ¤b3 72.g6 ¤d2+ 73.¢g4 ¤xe4 74.¤d3 ¤f6+ 75.¢g5 ¤e8 [The more active 75...¤e4+ doesn't help either, because the white knight turns out to be very nimble: 76.¢h6 f3 77.g7 ¤f6 78.¢g6 ¤g8 79.¢f7 ¤h6+ 80.¢xe6 e4 (80...¤g8 81.¢xe5 ¢c6 82.¢e6 ¢b7 83.c5 ¢c8 84.¤f2 ¢c7 85.¤g4 ¤h6 86.¤xh6 f2 87.g8£ f1£ 88.£g3++-) 81.¤c5+ ¢c6 82.¤xe4 ¤g8 83.¤f2 ¢c5 84.¤g4 ¢xc4 85.¤e5++-] 76.¤xe5 ¢b6 77.¢xf4 ¢c5 78.¢e4 ¤g7 79.¤d3+ [79.¤f7!? was somewhat simpler: 79...¢xc4 80.¤d6+ ¢c5 81.¢e5 ¤h5 82.¤e4+ ¢c6 83.¤g3 ¤g7 84.¢f6 ¤e8+ 85.¢xe6+-] 79...¢xc4 80.¤f4 ¢c5 81.¢e5 ¢c6 82.¢f6 [82.¤xe6 also wins: 82...¤e8 83.¤d4+ ¢c7 (83...¢d7 84.¤f5+-) 84.¢e6 ¤g7+ 85.¢f6 ¤h5+ 86.¢e7+-] 82...e5 83.¢xe5 ¢d7 84.¢f6 ¤e8+ 85.¢f7 ¤d6+ 86.¢f8? Inarkiev misses the following liquidation to a draw. To improve his knight, he should have chosen [86.¢g7! which intuitively looks all wrong: 86...¤f5+ 87.¢f6 ¤d6 88.¤d5 ¤e8+ 89.¢f7 ¤d6+ 90.¢g7 ¢e6 91.¢h7 ¤f5 ( 91...¢xd5 92.g7 ¤e8 and the pawn queens with check: 93.g8£++-) 92.¤e3 ¤e7 93.g7 and according to Fine's rule of thumb, White has reached a winning position because his pawn has reached the seventh rank supported by its king, e.g. 93...¢e5 94.¤g2 ¤d5 95.¤h4 ¤f6+ 96.¢h8 ¢e6 97.¤g6 ¢f7 98.¤f4 ¤g8 99.¤g6 ¤f6 100.¤e5+ ¢e6 101.¤g4 and the knight is decisively deflected.] 86...¤f5 87.¢f7 ¤h4 88.g7 ¤f5 89.g8£ [89.g8¤ of course no longer helps. Black could simply sacrifice his knight with 89...¤h6+ 90.¤xh6=] 89...¤h6+ 90.¢g7 ¤xg8 ½–½ Attention, bishops of opposite colors! Endgames with bishops of opposite colors are very drawish? Yes. Yet, despite that you have to be very, very careful, because there are also a heap of dirty tricks. Psomiadis,Stavros (2204) - Skembris,Spyridon (2452) [B31] 37th Greek Teams Championship Kallithea Halkidiki (1.1), 03.07.2009 [Analysis by GM Karsten Müller] Endings with only bishops of opposite colors have an extremely high tendency to end as draws, because if the defender sets up a fortress based on squares of the same color as his bishop then such a fortress cannot be taken. Zugzwang can only very infrequently be used against the bishop, so generally speaking an attempt must be made to create more passed pawns. This can even involve the sacrifice of the bishop as in the following example:


10

43...¥xh3!! [43...¥e4? 44.¥c1 g4 45.hxg4 ¥xg2 46.¢xb3 ¢e6 47.¥f4 ¢d5 48.g5 is only a draw, e.g. 48...¢e4 49.¥h2 ¥h3 50.g6 ¥e6+ 51.¢b4 ¢f3 52.¢c5 ¢g2 53.¥f4 h3 54.¢c6 h2 55.¥xh2 ¢xh2 56.¢c7=] 44.gxh3 g4 45.¥c1 gxh3 46.¥f4 ¢e6 47.¢xb3 The tricky [47.¢b2!? would have led to study-like positions: 47...¢f5 48.¥h2 ¢e4 (after 48...e6? 49.¢xb3 ¢e4 50.¢c2 ¢f3 51.¢d2 ¢g2 52.¢e2 ¢xh2 53.¢f2= the black king is shut in permanently.) 49.e6 and now the only way to win is the surprising 49...¢e3!! because after (49...¢f3? 50.¥d6 ¢g2 51.¥xe7 h2 52.¥xh4 h1£ 53.e7= the black queen is dominated and cannot stop the e-pawn.) 50.¥d6 ¢f3 and White is in zugzwang, e.g. 51.¥xe7 h2 52.¥xh4 h1£ 53.e7 £g2+–+] 47...¢f5 48.¥h2 ¢e4 49.e6 ¢f3 and White resigned on account of 50.¥d6 ¢g2 51.¥xe7 h2 52.¥xh4 h1£ 53.e7 £d1+ 54.¢c4 £d7–+ 0–1

Magnificent endgame technique All players are well aware of how difficult it is in rook endings to convert winning positions to the full point. This makes all the more amazing the magnificent demonstration of good endgame technique displayed by Alexei Shirov in his first round victory in Bazna over Kamsky. But the American could have put up a more stubborn defense, if he had only activated his rook in time. Kamsky,Gata (2720) - Shirov,Alexei (2745) [A14] Kings' Tournament 3rd Bazna (1), 14.06.2009 [Analysis by GM Müller,Karsten] Rook endings are always drawn - exceptions prove the rule. Of course, this well-known aphorism is highly exaggerated, but it does contain a grain of truth, because the drawing tendency in pure rook endgames is pretty big: here Gata Kamsky is losing because of the activity of the black pieces, but he could still have put up a lengthy resistance:


11

53.¦e5+?! This does get all the pawns involved first, but in the long run it is too passive. Activating the rook by means of [53.d5 ¢d4 54.¦c8 would have put up more resistance, e.g. 54...¢xd5 55.¦g8 ¦xb5 56.¦xg5 ¢e4 57.¢f2 ¦b2+ 58.¢g1 ¦d2! (Knaak) (58...f4? would, on the other hand, be premature: 59.¦a5 ¢e3 60.¦a3+ ¢e2 61.¦a1 f3 62.¦c1 ¦d2 63.¦a1 and Black cannot win because after 63...¦d1+ 64.¦xd1 ¢xd1 65.¢f2 ¢d2 the pawn ending is only a draw after 66.h3 gxh3 67.¢xf3=) 59.¢h1 (59.¦h5 ¦d5 60.¢f2 f4 61.¦h8 ¦d2+ 62.¢e1 ¦a2–+) 59...f4 60.¦xg4 ¢e3 61.h4 f3 62.¦g7 ¦d1+ 63.¢h2 f2 64.¦e7+ ¢d2 65.¦d7+ ¢c2 66.¦c7+ ¢b3 67.¦f7 f1£ 68.¦xf1 ¦xf1 69.¢g3 ¢c4–+] 53...¢f4 54.¦d5 ¦b1+ 55.¢g2 ¦b2+ 56.¢g1 ¦d2! This use of the lethal endgame weapon, zugzwang, decides matters: 57.¦c5 [57.b6 ¦b2 58.¦d6?! ¢f3–+; 57.¢h1 g3–+] 57...¦xd4 58.b6 ¦b4 59.¦c6 g3 60.h3 [60.hxg3+ ¢xg3 61.¦c3+ ¢f4 62.¦c6 g4–+] 60...¢e4 0–1

The eternal duel between bishop and knight part II At the Grand Slam Masters in Bilbao Alexander Grischuk took second place behind Levon Aronian. Whereas he had good results with white and won two of those games, he had to submit to two defeats as black. GM Karsten Müller has annotated for Grischuk's pretty endgame success against Alexei Shirov from round two. In it, it is once again the bishop which triumphs over the knight. Grischuk,Alexander (2733) - Shirov,Alexei (2730) [D47] 2nd Grand Slam Masters Bilbao (2), 07.09.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.d4 d5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.c4 c6 4.¤c3 e6 5.e3 ¤bd7 6.¥d3 dxc4 7.¥xc4 b5 8.¥d3 ¥b7 9.e4 b4 10.¤a4 c5 11.e5 ¤d5 12.0–0 cxd4 13.¤xd4 ¥e7 14.¦e1 0–0 15.£g4 ¦e8 16.¥b5 ¢h8 17.¥d2 a6 18.¥c6 £c7 19.¦ac1 ¤xe5 20.¥xb7 ¤xg4 21.¦xc7 ¤xc7 22.¥xa8 ¦xa8 23.¤c6 ¤d5 24.¤xe7 ¤xe7 25.¥xb4 ¤d5 26.¥d2 ¦c8 27.¦c1 ¦xc1+ 28.¥xc1 ¤e5 29.¤c5 ¤b4 30.b3 ¤xa2 31.¥b2 ¤c6 32.¤xa6 ¢g8 33.¢f1 Diagram:


12

The eternal duel between bishop and knight: Part 2 Unlike in the first example Kramnik-Khalifman, here there is a second pair of knights on the board, which makes the situation harder to pin down. However, it is clear that here the side with the bishop has the advantage, because Grischuk has a passed pawn and is more active. 33...f6 [33...e5 34.¢e2 f5 is not sufficient for a draw. 35.f3 ¢f7 36.¢d3 ¢e6 37.¥a3 ¤d4 38.¤c7+ ¢d7 39.¤d5 ¢e6 40.¢c4 ¤c2 41.¥b2±] 34.¢e2 ¤ab4 35.¤xb4 ¤xb4 36.¢e3 ¢f7 [36...e5 essentially, this changes nothing. 37.¢e4 ¢f7 38.¥c3 ¤a6 39.¢d5±] 37.¢d4 ¤c2+?! Diagram:

Shirov sends the knight on a long-range mission to the kingside, a mission which takes too long to accomplish. [37...¢e8 would have allowed him to put up stiffer resistance, but in the long run White should still win. 38.¥c3 ¤d5 39.¥d2 ¢d7 40.¢c5 ¢c7 41.b4 ¤b6 42.¥f4+ e5 43.¥e3 and sooner or later the white king will


13

be able to penetrate.] 38.¢c5 ¤e1 [38...¢e7 39.¥c3 ¢d7 40.¢b6 and White has pushed forward far enough, e.g. 40...¤a3 (40...¢c8 41.b4 e5 42.b5 ¤d4 43.¥b4+-) 41.b4 ¤c4+ 42.¢a6 ¤d6 43.b5 ¢c7 (43...¢c8 44.¥b4 ¤b7 45.¢b6 g6 46.¢c6+-) 44.¥b4 ¤b7 45.¥f8 g6 46.¥e7 f5 47.f4 ¢b8 48.¢b6+-] 39.¢c6 ¤xg2 40.b4 ¤f4 41.b5 ¤d5 42.¢d6 ¢g6 Shirov seeks salvation in counterattack, but his king is too slow. [The passive defense with 42...¢e8 also fails: 43.¥d4 ¢d8 44.b6 ¢c8 45.¢xe6 ¤f4+ 46.¢f7+- and the white king will reap a rich harvest on the kingside.] 43.¥d4 ¢g5 44.b6 ¤xb6 45.¥xb6 e5 [45...¢f5 46.¢e7 e5 47.¢f7 g5 48.¥d8 e4 49.¥xf6 h5 50.¥d8 h4 51.¢g7 h3 52.¢h6 ¢g4 53.¥xg5 ¢f3 54.¥h4+-] 46.¢e6 e4 47.¢f7 f5 48.¢xg7 h5 49.¢f7 f4 50.¢e6 ¢g4 51.¢e5 ¢f3 52.h4! And Shirov resigned. But not [52.¢f5? h4 53.h3 e3 54.¢g5 exf2 55.¥xf2 ¢xf2 56.¢xf4 ¢e2! 57.¢g4 ¢e3 58.¢xh4 ¢f4=] 1–0 Nakamura,Hikaru (2710) - Van Wely,Loek (2655) [B81] 3rd NH Chess Tournament Amsterdam NED (2), 21.08.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.h3 e6 7.g4 d5 8.exd5 ¤xd5 9.¥d2 b5 10.¥g2 ¥b7 11.0–0 ¤xc3 12.¥xc3 ¥xg2 13.¢xg2 £d5+ 14.£f3 £xf3+ 15.¤xf3 ¤c6 16.¦fe1 b4 17.¥d2 ¥e7 18.¦e4 0–0 19.c3 a5 20.¦c4 bxc3 21.¥xc3 ¤b4 22.¤e5 ¤d5 23.¤c6 ¥f6 24.¥xf6 gxf6 25.a4 ¦fc8 26.¦c5 ¦a6 27.¦xd5 ¦cxc6 28.¦b5 ¦ab6 29.¢f3 ¢g7 30.¢e3 e5 31.¦a3 ¦xb5 32.axb5 ¦c4 33.¦xa5 ¦b4 34.¢d3 ¦xb2 35.¢c3 ¦xf2 36.b6 Just getting a queen is not the be all and end all... At first sight the position looks totally won for White, but the wily Dutch grandmaster Loek van Wely is not for giving up just yet: 36...¦f1 37.¦b5 [37.¢b2 also wins. However, after 37...e4 White should play 38.¦a8! Because after (38.b7? e3 39.b8£ e2 40.¦e5 e1£ 41.¦xe1 ¦xe1 it is not at all clear whether the queen can win, whereas the rook ending is an easy one to win.) 38...e3 39.¦e8 e2 40.¦xe2 ¦d1 41.b7 ¦d8 42.¢c3 ¦b8 43.¦b2+-] 37...¦c1+ Diagram:


14

38.¢b4? Nakamura cannot resist the temptation to get a queen and presumably assumes that the queen will somehow win. But that is not the case. He should continue with [38.¢d3! ¦c8 (38...¦d1+ 39.¢c4 ¦c1+ 40.¢d5 ¦d1+ 41.¢e4 ¦d4+ 42.¢e3 ¦d8 43.b7 ¦b8 44.¢e4+- is a transposition of moves.) 39.b7 ¦b8 40.¢e4 remaining in a rook ending, e.g. 40...¢g6 41.¢d5 ¢g5 (41...f5 42.gxf5+ ¢xf5 43.¢c6+- and White wins thanks to his h-pawn, which deprives Black of squares and serves as a potential reserve winner.) 42.¢c6 ¢h4 43.¦b3+- (Baburin in Chess Today 3210)] 38...e4 39.b7 e3 40.b8£ e2 Paradoxically, White (to move) cannot win here despite his extra queen. 41.¦g5+ fxg5 42.£e5+ ¢f8 43.£xe2 ¦c6 44.£e5 h6 45.¢b5 ¦e6 46.£h8+ ¢e7 The king would prefer to be on g8 or g7, but in the present case things work out ok like this. 47.¢c5 ¦a6 48.£c3 ¦e6 49.¢d5 ¢f8 50.£h8+ ¢e7 51.¢d4 ¦c6 52.¢e4 ¦a6 53.£c3 ¦e6+ 54.¢f5 ¢f8 55.£h8+ ¢e7 56.£g7 ¢e8 57.h4 gxh4 58.¢f4 ¢e7 59.¢f3 ¦g6 60.£h8 h3 61.£b8 h2 62.£b4+ ¢e8 63.¢g2 h1£+ 64.¢xh1 ¦e6 65.¢g2 ¦g6 66.¢h3 ¦e6 67.¢g3 ¦g6 68.¢h4 ¦e6 69.¢h5 ¦g6 70.£e4+ ¦e6 71.£a8+ ¢e7 72.£g8 ¦c6 73.g5 hxg5 74.£xg5+ ¢f8! Diagram:

[Of course, not 74...¦f6? 75.¢g4 ¢e6 76.£c5 ¦g6+ 77.¢f4 ¦f6+ 78.¢e4 ¦g6 79.£c7 and White wins because the king cannot get back inside its fortress.] 75.£d8+ ¢g7 76.£d4+ ¢g8 77.£g4+ ¦g6 Now van Wely has set up a typical drawing position which can be found in numerous books; so Nakamura liquidates to a draw straight away: 78.£xg6+ fxg6+ 79.¢xg6 ½–½


15

Missed tactical opportunities... ... in games on the very highest level truly are a rare occurrence. Yet sometimes... Okay, this is what happened: Cheparinov,Ivan (2687) - Gashimov,Vugar (2717) [C42] 2nd FIDE GP Sochi RUS (1), 31.07.2008 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.¤xe5 d6 4.¤f3 ¤xe4 5.d4 d5 6.¥d3 ¥e7 7.0–0 ¤d6 8.¥f4 0–0 9.¦e1 ¦e8 10.¤c3 c6 11.¤e2 ¤d7 12.¤g3 ¤f8 13.¤e5 f6 14.¤f3 ¥e6 15.c3 £d7 16.£c2 ¥f7 17.¤h4 g6 18.¥h6 ¤e6 19.¤f3 ¥f8 20.£d2 £e7 21.b3 ¥xh6 22.£xh6 £f8 23.£d2 g5 24.h4 h6 25.c4 b6 26.¦ac1 ¦ad8 27.cxd5 cxd5 28.¤h2 ¤f4 29.¤g4 £g7 30.¦xe8+ ¥xe8 31.¤f5 ¤xf5 32.¥xf5 ¥g6 33.¥xg6 £xg6 34.¦c6 ¦f8 35.g3 h5 36.¤xf6+? Diagram:

Initiating a liquidation sequence... with a light flaw. [Okay for White was 36.¤e3 gxh4 37.¢h2 hxg3+ 38.fxg3 winning back the pawn.] 36...¦xf6 37.¦xf6 Now Black could have won by force, 37...£xf6? Returning the favour. [Winning was 37...£b1+! 38.¢h2 ¤h3!! when White has no defence against the threatened 39...Qg1+: 39.¦g6+ (39.g4 £g1+ 40.¢xh3 hxg4#) 39...¢f7! 40.f3 ¢xg6 41.¢xh3 (41.£e3 £c2+! 42.¢xh3 (42.¢h1 £c8–+) 42...g4+ 43.fxg4 hxg4+ 44.¢xg4 £f5#) 41...£h1+ 42.£h2 g4+ 43.fxg4 hxg4+] 38.gxf4 gxf4 39.£e2 £xh4 40.£e6+ ¢g7 41.£d7+ ¢g6 42.£e8+ ¢g7 43.£d7+ ¢g6 44.£e8+ ¢g7 45.£d7+ ½–½


16

Rooks need space... Hillarp Persson,Tiger (2526) - Humphrey,Jonathan (2289) [B90] Politiken Cup Helsingor (9), 26.07.2008 [Analysis Reeh,Oliver] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥e3 e5 7.¤b3 ¥e6 8.f3 ¤bd7 9.g4 ¥e7 10.h4 0–0 11.£d2 b5 12.g5 b4 13.¤d5 ¤xd5 14.exd5 ¥f5 15.¥d3 ¥xd3 16.£xd3 a5 17.¤d2 £c7 18.0–0–0 a4 19.¢b1 ¦ac8 20.¤e4 £c4 21.£xc4 ¦xc4 An interesting Sicilian endgame has arisen. Ein interessantes sizilianisches Endspiel ist entstanden. 22.b3 ¦cc8 23.¥d2 ¦b8 24.¦hg1 ¦b5 25.c4 bxc3 26.¤xc3 ¦b4 27.¤xa4 ¦xh4 28.¦c1 ¦d4 29.¦c7 ¦xd2 Really a most diligent rook! 30.¦xd7 ¦e8 31.¤c3 ¦d3 32.¤e4 ¦xd5? Diagram:

But here Black's star piece goes astray. White can now employ a winning combination. [After 32...¦xf3 chances would be about equal, e.g. 33.¤xd6 ¥xd6 34.¦xd6 e4 and in this double rook ending Black is sufficiently active.] 33.¦xe7! Liquidating a defender of the crucial square f6... [Instead, 33.¤f6+ ¥xf6 34.gxf6 g6 would yield less than nothing.] 33...¦xe7 34.¤f6+! ...to open the g-file... 34...gxf6 35.gxf6+ ¢f8 36.¦g8+! ...and finally promote the pawn. Black resigned, since after 36... Kxg8 37.fxe7 even the super rook on d5 can't prevent White from getting a new queen on e8. 1–0 Pawn endings: basic knowledge

How easy it is to unnecessarily concede half a point in the endgame can be seen from the following example from the Helmut-Kohls Tournament, to which FM Gervasio Andrés Calderón Fernández from Buenos Aires has drawn our attention. After 53. ... Kc5 54.Kf2 Kd6 the players agreed on a draw. Instead of that can you demonstrate a win for Black?


17

Litwak,Aleksej (2268) - Savchenko,Viacheslav (2429) [C42] Helmut-Kohls-IM-Turnier Dortmund (6), 09.07.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] FM Gervasio Andrés Calderón Fernández from Buenos Aires (Argentina) drew my attention to the following exciting pawn ending: the game quickly ended in a draw, because it appears that both kings will have eternally to be keeping an eye on the passed pawns. But appearances can be deceptive: 53...¢c5

[If, in a pawn ending like this one, you cannot see a way to make progress, then you should near in mind the possibility of triangulation: 53...¢c7!? 54.¢f2 ¢d7 55.¢f3 ¢d6 56.¢f2 ¢c5 Now White has to accept that the passed d-pawn is threatening to queen with check: 57.¢f3 ¢d4 58.d6 d2 59.¢e2 ¢c3 60.d7 f3+ 61.¢d1 f2 62.d8£ f1£#] 54.¢f2 ¢d6 This variation from FM Gervasio Andrés Calderón Fernández is instructive and the interim triangulation can do no harm, but here too Black can still transpose to the above variation with[54...¢b4 55.d6 d2 56.¢e2 ¢c3 and win.] ½–½

Berlin Endgames... Carlsen,M - Jakovenko,D [C67] Dortmund, 02.07.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¢e8 10.h3 h5 A lot of moves have been tried at this point. [10...a5 has been played most often, followed by; 10...¥e7 and; 10...¤e7] 11.¤e2 ¥e7 12.¥g5 ¥e6 13.¤f4 ¥d5 14.¥xe7 ¢xe7 15.¤g5 ¤d4 16.¦ad1 ¤e6 17.¤gxe6 ¥xe6 Objectively speaking, the position should be drawish, but in practical terms White definitely has the better chances on account of his slight strategic initiative. 18.h4 a5 19.a3 a4 20.¦fe1 g6 21.f3 ¦a5 22.c3 ¦b5 23.¦e2


18

¦a8 24.¦d4 ¦aa5 25.¢f2 ¦xe5 26.¦xe5 ¦xe5 27.¦xa4 ¦b5 28.b4 c5 29.¦a7 cxb4 30.cxb4 ¢d7? Diagram:

Jakovenko wastes valuable time, since his king will end up going to d6. [30...¥c4 intending 31.¢e3 ¢d6 (Lilov on chessbase.com) and then c7 is more active and draws easily, e.g.: 32.¢d4 (32.¦a8 c5 33.¦c8 b6 34.¢d2 ¢d7=) 32...¦f5 33.g3 ¥f1= because 34.¦xb7? runs up against 34...g5 35.hxg5 h4] 31.¤e2 ¦b6 32.¢e3 ¥c4 33.¤d4 ¢d6 34.¦a5 ¦a6? Without the rook Black is short of counter play. The side with the knight is always aiming for complete control so that the slower maneuvers of the knight can in fact be executed. In addition, rook endings are very drawish and now the defensive option of liquidating to a rook ending is done away with. [34...¥e6 offered better drawing chances, e.g. 35.¢f4 ¢d7 36.¦b5 (36.¢g5 ¦d6; 36.g4 hxg4 37.fxg4 ¦d6 38.¤xe6 ¢xe6) 36...¦d6 37.¤xe6 ¦xe6 38.a4 (38.¦xb7 ¦a6) 38...b6] 35.¦xa6+ bxa6 36.g4 hxg4? The passed white h-pawn which is now created will decide the day, because it can, for example, be used to bring about an advantageous exchange of all the kingside pawns. [36...¢e5 was the final chance. However, White ought now in any case have good prospects for a win.] 37.fxg4 ¢e5 [37...c5 38.bxc5+ ¢xc5 39.h5 gxh5 40.gxh5 f6 41.h6 ¥g8 42.¤e6+ ¢c4 43.¤f8 ¢b3 44.¢f4 ¢xa3 45.¤d7 ¥h7 46.¤xf6 ¥g6 47.¢g5 ¥b1 48.¤d7 a5 49.¤f8 a4 50.¤g6+-] 38.¤c6+ ¢f6 [38...¢d6 39.h5+-] 39.¢f4 ¢e6 40.h5 gxh5 41.gxh5 ¥d3?! The attempt to set up a barrier with [41...f6 put up a more stubborn resistance, but does not succeed in the long run, because, as in the game, White is able to exchange off the kingside pawns: 42.¤d8+ ¢e7 43.h6 ¥d3 (43...¢f8 44.¢f5 ¢e7 45.¢e4 ¢f8 46.¢d4+-) 44.¤b7! White has to bring the knight to the kingside without delay. (44.¢e3?! ¥f5 45.¤b7? loses control. 45...¢f7 46.¤c5 ¥c8 47.¢d4 f5! a) 47...¢g6? 48.¢d5 ¢xh6 (48...f5 49.¢c6 f4 50.¤d3 f3 51.¤e5+ ¢xh6 52.¤xf3+-) 49.¢c6 ¥h3 50.¤xa6 f5 51.b5 f4 52.¤c5 ¥f5 53.¢xc7 ¥c2 54.¤d7 ¢g5 55.¤e5 ¢f5 56.b6 ¢xe5 57.b7 f3 58.b8£+-; b) 47...c6? 48.¤e4 ¢g6 49.h7 ¢xh7 50.¤xf6+ ¢g7 51.¤e8+ ¢f8 52.¤c7 ¢e7 53.¢c5 ¢d7 54.¢b6+-; 48.¢d5 ¢g8 49.¢c6 f4 and Black's counter play should suffice for a draw.) 44...¢f7 45.¤c5 ¥f1 (45...¥c4 46.h7 ¢g7 47.¢f5+-) 46.h7 ¢g7 47.¤e6+ ¢xh7 48.¢f5+-] 42.¢e3 ¥f1 [42...¥c4 43.¢d4 ¥b3 44.¤b8+-] 43.h6 ¢f6 44.¤e5 ¥b5 45.¢d4 ¥a4 [After 45...¥e8 46.¢c5 Black is in zugzwang, because 46...¢xe5 fails to 47.h7 .] 46.h7


19

¢g7 47.¤xf7 ¢xh7 48.¤g5+ ¢g6 49.¤e6 And Jakovenko resigned because sooner or later he will lose the two pawns. 1–0 Jakovenko,Dmitrij (2737) - Alekseev,Evgeny (2715) [C67] RUS-ch Moscow (3), 05.10.2008 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¢e8 10.h3 ¥e7 11.g4 ¤h4 12.¤xh4 ¥xh4 13.¦d1 ¥e7 14.¢g2 h5 15.f3 ¥e6 16.¤e2 ¦d8 17.¦xd8+ ¥xd8 18.¤f4 hxg4 19.hxg4 ¥c8 20.¤h5 ¦h7 21.¥e3 b6 22.¦h1 ¢f8 23.¦d1 ¢e8 24.c4 c5 25.¤f4 a5 26.¤d5 ¥e6 27.¥f4 ¦h8 28.¤e3 ¦h7 29.b3 ¥c8 30.¥g3 ¦h8 31.¤d5 ¥e6 32.¤f4 ¥c8 33.¤h5 ¦h7 34.¥e1 ¥e7 35.¥c3 ¥e6 36.¢g3 ¢f8 37.¤f4 ¢e8 38.¤xe6 fxe6 39.¥d2 ¦h8 40.¥e3 ¥d8 41.¢g2 ¥e7 42.¥f4 ¦f8 43.¥c1 ¦h8 44.¥e3 ¥d8 45.¦h1 ¦xh1 46.¢xh1 g5 47.f4 gxf4 48.¥xf4 ¢f7 49.¢g2 ¥e7 50.¢h3 ¢g6 51.¥g3 ¥f8 52.¥h4 ¥g7 53.¥f6! Diagram:

Because the pawn ending is won, Jakovenko can employ this active method to replay to the attack on his e-pawn. 53...¥xf6 [53...a4 54.¥xg7 axb3 55.axb3 ¢xg7 56.¢h4 ¢h6 57.g5+ ¢g6 58.¢g4 ¢g7 59.¢h5 ¢h7 60.g6+ ¢g8 61.¢h6 c6 62.¢h5 ¢h8 63.¢h4 ¢g8 64.¢g4 ¢f8 65.¢h5 ¢g8 66.¢h6 b5 67.g7 b4 68.¢h5 ¢xg7 69.¢g5+-; Nor does remaining in a bishop ending with 53...¥h6 help matters, because the queenside pawns are fixed on black squares. 54.¥d8 a4 55.bxa4 ¥d2 56.¥xc7 ¥a5 57.¢g3 ¢f7 58.¢f4 ¢g6 59.g5 ¢h5 60.¥d8 ¥d2+ 61.¢e4 ¥a5 62.¢f3 ¢g6 63.¢g4 and Black is in zugzwang: 63...¢g7 64.¢h5 ¢h7 65.g6+ ¢g8 66.¢h6 ¥d2+ 67.¥g5 ¥c3 68.g7 ¥xe5 69.¥d8+-] 54.exf6 ¢xf6 55.a4! Precision is required. [Or else after 55.¢g3? Black can undermine White's queenside with 55...a4 : 56.bxa4 ¢g5 57.¢f3 e5 58.¢e4 ¢xg4 59.¢xe5 ¢f3 60.¢d5 ¢e3 61.¢c6 ¢d4 62.¢xc7 ¢xc4 63.¢xb6 ¢d4=] 55...¢g6 [55...¢e5 56.¢g3 ¢e4 57.¢h4 e5 58.g5 ¢f5 59.¢h5 ¢e6 60.¢h6+-; 55...c6 56.¢h4 e5 57.¢g3 b5 58.¢f3 bxa4 59.bxa4 ¢g5 60.¢e4 ¢xg4 61.¢xe5 ¢f3 62.¢d6 ¢e4 63.¢xc6 ¢d4 64.¢b5+-] 56.¢g3 ¢g5


20

57.¢f3 e5 [57...c6 58.¢e4 ¢xg4 59.¢e5 ¢f3 60.¢xe6+-] 58.¢e4 ¢xg4 [58...¢f6 59.¢d5! (The immediate 59.g5+? fails to 59...¢e6 60.g6 ¢f6 61.g7 ¢xg7 62.¢xe5 ¢f7 63.¢d5 ¢e7 64.¢c6 ¢d8 65.¢b7 ¢d7=) 59...c6+ 60.¢e4 ¢e6 61.g5 ¢d6 62.g6 ¢e6 63.g7 ¢f7 64.¢xe5 ¢xg7 65.¢d6+-] 59.¢xe5 ¢f3 60.¢d5 ¢e3 61.¢c6 ¢d2 62.¢xc7 ¢c3 63.¢xb6 ¢b4 [63...¢xb3 64.¢b5+-] 64.¢c6 ¢xb3 65.¢b5 1–0

Jakovenko,Dmitrij (2737) - Wang Yue (2736) [C67] Elista FIDE GP Elista (1), 14.12.2008 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¢e8 10.h3 ¥e7 11.g4 ¤h4 12.¤xh4 ¥xh4 13.¦d1 ¥e7 14.¢g2 h5 [14...¥e6 15.¥e3 a5 16.¤e2 h5 17.f3 a4 18.¤f4 g6 19.¦d2 ¦d8 20.¦xd8+ ¢xd8 21.¦d1+ ¢e8 22.¤xe6 fxe6 23.¦d4 b5 24.¦d3 ¦h7 25.b3 axb3 26.cxb3?! (¹26.axb3) 26...¥a3 27.¥g5 ¦d7!= Now the resulting bishop ending is a relatively easy draw because of the passed black c-pawn which will arise: 28.¦xd7 ¢xd7 29.f4 hxg4 30.hxg4 c5 31.¢f3 c4 32.bxc4 bxc4 33.¢e4 c5 34.f5 gxf5+ 35.gxf5 exf5+ 36.¢xf5 c3 37.e6+ ¢e8 38.¢e4 c2 39.¢d5 c1£ 40.¥xc1 ¥xc1 41.¢xc5 1/2–1/2 Karjakin,S (2727)-Wang Yue (2704), Sochi 2008] 15.f3 ¥e6 16.¤e2 ¦d8 17.¥e3 a6 18.¤f4 g6 19.¦xd8+ [19.b3 ¦d7 20.¤d3 ¢d8 21.¤c5 ¦xd1 22.¦xd1+ ¢c8 23.¤xe6 fxe6 24.f4 b5 25.¥f2 ¦h7 26.¦d3 hxg4 27.hxg4 ¦h8 28.¦h3 ¦xh3 29.¢xh3 ¢d7 30.c4 ¥b4 31.¢g2 ¢e8 32.¢f3 ¥d2 33.¢e4 ¥b4 34.¥h4 ¥d2 35.¥f2 ¥b4 36.¢d3 ¢d7 37.¥e3 ¥a5 38.¥d2 ¥b6 39.¥e3 ¥a5 40.a3 ¥e1 41.¥c5 ¥g3 42.¢e3 ¥h4 43.¥b4 ¢d8 44.¢f3 ¢d7 45.¢g2 ¢e8 46.¢f3 ¢d7 47.¢e4 ¥f2 48.f5 gxf5+ 49.gxf5 exf5+ 50.¢xf5 bxc4 51.bxc4 ¥d4 This ending too is very easy to draw because White cannot get at the black c-pawns: 52.¢f6 ¥b2 53.¥c5 ¥c3 54.¢f5 ¥b2 55.¢f6 ¥c3 56.¥e3 ¥b2 57.a4 ¥c3 58.¥f4 ¢e8 59.¢e6 (59.¢f5 ¢e7 60.e6 ¢d8 61.¥e5 ¥a5 62.¢f6 ¢e8=) 59...¥b4 60.¥e3 ¥a5 61.¥c5 ¥c3 62.¥e3 ¥a5 63.¥f4 1/2–1/2 Adams,M (2734)-Wang Yue (2736) , Kallithea 2008] 19...¢xd8 20.¦d1+ ¢c8 21.¤xe6 fxe6 22.f4 b5 23.b3 ¦h7 24.¥f2 hxg4 25.hxg4 ¦h8 26.¦h1 ¦xh1 27.¢xh1 ¢d7 28.¢g2 ¥b4 29.¢f3 ¢e8 30.¢e4 ¢e7 31.¥h4+ ¢e8 32.f5 gxf5+ 33.gxf5 exf5+ 34.¢xf5 ¥c3 35.¥f2 ¢e7 36.e6 ¢e8 37.¥g3 ¥a5 38.¥e5 ¥b6 39.c3 c5 40.c4 Diagram:


21

With this setup White has very good practical winning chances. 40...¥a5? After this the penetration of the queenside by the white king will bring about the win. [40...bxc4 41.bxc4 c6 was required: 42.¥d6 ¥a5 43.¥xc5 (43.e7?! ¢f7=; 43.¢f6?! ¥c3+ 44.¥e5 ¥e1 45.e7 ¥h4+=) 43...¥e1 and I haven't found a way to crack open the black fortress. 44.¢e4 ¥c3 45.¢d3 ¥e5 46.¢c2 (46.¥b4 ¥f6 47.¢c2 ¥h4 48.¢b3 a5 (48...¥g3? 49.¢a4 ¥c7 50.a3+-) 49.¥xa5 ¢e7 50.¥b6 ¢xe6 51.a4 ¢d7 52.a5 ¢c8 53.a6 ¢b8=) 46...¥f6 47.¢b3 a5! (47...¥d8? 48.¥d6 ¥a5 49.¢a4 ¥e1 50.¥b4+-) 48.¥d6 (48.¥b6 ¢e7 49.¢a4 ¥c3 50.¥xa5 ¥d4 51.¥c7 ¥c3 52.¢b3 ¥e1 53.¥b6 ¢xe6 54.a4 ¢d7 55.a5 ¢c8 56.a6 ¢b8=) 48...¥d4 49.¢a4 ¥c3 50.¥c7 ¢e7 51.¥xa5 ¥d4 52.¥c7 ¥c3 53.¢b3 ¥e1 54.a4 ¢xe6 55.a5 ¢d7 56.¥b6 ¢c8 57.a6 ¢b8=] 41.¢f6 c6 [41...bxc4 42.bxc4 ¢f8 43.¥b2! c6 (43...¥b4 44.¢e5 ¢e7 45.¥c1 a5 46.¥g5+ ¢e8 47.a4+-) 44.e7+ ¢e8 45.¥e5 ¥d2 46.¥c7 ¥e1 47.¢e6 ¥h4 48.¢d6+-] 42.e7 ¥e1 43.¢e6 ¥h4 44.¢d6 ¥xe7+ 45.¢xc6 bxc4 46.bxc4 ¢d8 47.¥d6 ¥h4 [47...¥xd6 48.¢xd6 ¢c8 49.¢xc5 ¢c7 50.a4 ¢b7 51.¢d6 ¢c8 52.¢c6+-] 48.¥xc5 ¢c8 49.¢b6 a5 50.¢xa5 ¢b7 51.¢b5 ¥g3 52.a4 ¢a8 53.¥e3 ¥d6 54.¥d2 ¢b7 [54...¢b7 55.¥b4 ¥g3 56.c5 ¥e5 57.c6+ ¢a7 (57...¢c7 58.a5 ¢c8 59.¢c4 ¥c7 60.¢d5+-) 58.¢c4 ¢b6 59.¢d5 ¥c7 60.¥c3 ¥g3 61.¥d4+ ¢a6 62.¢e6 ¥c7 63.¢d7 ¥g3 64.¥c5+-] 1–0

Grischuk,Alexander (2719) - Eljanov,Pavel (2720) [C67] Elista FIDE GP Elista (6), 20.12.2008 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] Ruslan Sherbakov examined this game extensively in Chess Today 2966 and I have made use of his comments. 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¥e7 10.¦d1+ ¢e8 11.g4!?N [11.¥g5 is the main line.] 11...¤h4 12.¤xh4 ¥xh4 13.h3 ¥e7 [13...h5!? was well worth considering, e.g. kam stark in Betracht, z.B. 14.g5 f6 (14...¥xh3? 15.¦d4+-) 15.exf6 gxf6 16.¤e4 ¢f7 (16...fxg5? 17.¥xg5 ¥xg5 18.¤xg5 ¦g8 19.¦e1+ ¢f8 20.h4± (Scherbakov)) 17.¤xf6 ¢g6 18.f4 ¥xh3„] 14.¢g2 h5 15.f3 hxg4 16.hxg4 f5 Black exchanges as many pawns as possible to reduce White's winning potential and to open the position for his bishops. Schwarz tauscht


22

so viele Bauern wie möglich, um das weiße Gewinnpotenzial zu reduzieren und um die Stellung für seine Läufer zu öffnen. 17.exf6 gxf6 18.¥f4 ¥e6 19.¥xc7 f5 20.gxf5 ¦g8+ 21.¢f2 [21.¥g3 ¥xf5 22.¤e4 ¢f7 23.¦d3 ¥h4 24.¦b3 ¥xe4 25.fxe4 ¦ad8 gives Black enough counterplay. gibt Schwarz genügend Gegenspiel.] 21...¥c5+ 22.¢e2 ¦g2+ 23.¢d3 ¥xf5+ 24.¤e4 ¢e7 25.¦d2 ¦xd2+ [25...¦ag8 26.¦h1 ¦xd2+ 27.¢xd2 ¦g2+ 28.¢c3 ¥g1 is an attempt to avoid the exchange on e4. The bishop pair gives Black excellent drawing chances. ist ein Versuch, den Abtausch auf e4 vorerst zu vermeiden. Das Läuferpaar gibt Schwarz exzellente Remischancen.] 26.¢xd2 ¥xe4 27.fxe4 ¦g8 28.¦h1 ¥d4 29.b3 ¦g2+ 30.¢d3 ¥g7 31.¥f4 b5 32.¦h5 a6 33.a4 [33.¦g5 ¦xg5 34.¥xg5+ ¢e6 (Scherbakov) is an impregnable fortress. ist eine uneinnehmbare Festung.] 33...¦g4 34.¥e3 ¦g3 35.c4 Diagram:

¢d7?! [35...bxa4 36.bxa4 ¢e6 was more active and should hold the draw more simply than the game continuation. war aktiver und sollte einfacher als die Partiefortsetzung remis halten.] 36.¢e2 [36.axb5?! axb5 37.cxb5 cxb5 38.¢e2 (38.¦xb5? ¥h6=) 38...b4 39.¥f2 ¦g6 should be defensible. sollte haltbar sein.] 36...bxa4 37.bxa4 ¥c3 38.¦h7+?! [38.¥f4!? exerts more pressure, e.g. macht mehr Druck, z.B. 38...¦g1 39.¦h6 ¦g4 40.¢e3] 38...¢e6?! [38...¦g7!? was more accurate, since the bishop ending after war genauer, weil das Läuferendspiel nach 39.¦xg7+?! ¥xg7 40.¢f3 ¢e6 is drawn. remis ist.] 39.¦c7 ¢e5 40.¦xc6?! After this the ending is clearly drawn because of Black's activity and the slight winning potential. Danach ist das Endspiel wegen der schwarzen Aktivität und des geringen Gewinnpotenzials klar remis. [40.¦e7+ offered better practical chances, e.g. bot bessere praktische Chancen, z.B. 40...¢d6 (40...¢f6 41.¦e8) 41.¦b7 ¢e5 42.¦b3] 40...¥d4!? 41.¥d2 ¦a3? Eljanov makes things unnecessarily difficult for himself. He should simply have taken the e-pawn at once: Eljanov macht es sich unnötig schwer. Er hätte einfach direkt den e-Bauern schlagen sollen: [41...¢xe4! 42.¦e6+ ¥e5 43.¥a5 ¦g2+ 44.¢d1 ¢f5 45.¦xa6 ¦a2 46.¥d2 ¢e4= (Scherbakov)] 42.¥c1! ¦a1 [42...¦xa4? runs into the mating attack: läuft in den Mattangriff 43.¢f3! ¥a1 (43...¥c3 44.¥g5 ¢d4 45.¥f6+ ¢d3 46.¦d6+ ¢c2 47.c5 a5 48.¥xc3 ¦a3 49.e5 ¦xc3+ 50.¢e4 ¦xc5 51.e6+-) 44.¥f4+ ¢d4 45.¥e3+ ¢e5 46.¥c5 ¦a2 47.¢e3 ¦c2


23

48.¥b4+-] 43.¢d2 a5! 44.¦h6 ¦b1?! Eljanov just creates problems for himself. Eljanov bringt sich nur selbst in Probleme. [Once more he should go for exchanges with the immediate Erneut sollte er direkt mit 44...¢xe4 : abwickeln: 45.¦h4+ ¢e5 46.¢d3 (46.¦xd4 ¢xd4 47.¥b2+ ¢xc4 48.¥xa1 ¢b3=) 46...¦xc1 47.¦h5+ ¢d6 48.¢xd4 ¦d1+ 49.¢c3 ¦c1+ 50.¢d3 ¦d1+ 51.¢c2 ¦a1 52.¦xa5 ¢c6=] 45.¦h4 ¥f2 46.¦g4 ¢d4 47.¢c2 ¦b7 48.e5+ ¢xe5 49.¥b2+ ¢f5 50.¦g8 ¥c5 51.¦d8?! It is not yet the turn of the rook, because it can possibly be used to cut off the king by taking the e-file. Der Turm ist noch nicht dran, weil er eventuell eine Absperrung entlang der e-Linie errichten kann. [51.¥c3!? to first tie Black down to the a-pawn was more venomous. In any case, Black can still hold his own after that too: um Schwarz zunächst an den a-Bauern zu binden, war etwas giftiger. Allerdings kann sich Schwarz auch danach behaupten: 51...¢e6 (51...¥b4? 52.¦e8 ¢f4 (52...¥xc3 53.¢xc3 ¦b4 54.c5 ¢f6 55.¢d3 ¢f7 56.¦e4+-; 52...¦c7 53.¢b3+-) 53.¦e1 ¦c7 54.¢b3 ¥xc3 (54...¦b7 55.¥xb4 ¦xb4+ 56.¢c3 ¦xa4 57.c5+-) 55.¢xc3 ¦c8 56.¢d4 ¦d8+ 57.¢c5 ¦c8+ 58.¢b5+-) 52.¦g6+ ¢d7 53.¦g7+ ¢c6 54.¦xb7 ¢xb7 55.¥xa5 and White cannot win because he has the wrong rook's pawn. und wegen des falschen Randbauerns kann Weiß nicht gewinnen.] 51...¥b4 52.¦d5+ ¢e6 53.¥c3 ¥xc3 54.¢xc3 ¦b1 55.¢d4 ¦a1 56.¦xa5 ¢d6 57.¦a6+ ¢c7 58.¢c5 ¢b7 59.¦b6+ ¢c7 60.¦b4 ¦h1 61.¢b5 ¦h5+ 62.c5 ¦h1 63.a5 ¢b7 64.a6+ ¢a7 65.¦d4 ¦b1+ 66.¢c6 ¦h1 67.¦d8 ¦h5? The rook has to remain in the south-east corner: Der Turm muss in der Südostecke bleiben: [67...¦h2 68.¢b5 ¦b2+ 69.¢c6 ¦h2 70.¢c7 ¢xa6 71.c6 ¦h7+ 72.¢d6 ¦h6+ 73.¢d7 ¦h7+ 74.¢c8 ¢b6 75.¦d6 ¦c7+=] 68.¢b5! ¦h7 69.¦d5! Now Black can no longer prevent his king being cut off on the 8th rank. Nun kann Schwarz nicht mehr verhindern, dass sein König auf der 8. Reihe abgeschnitten wird 69...¦h1 [69...¦g7 70.c6 ¦h7 71.¦d7++-] 70.¦d7+ ¢b8 71.c6 ¦b1+ 72.¢c5 ¦c1+ 73.¢b6 ¦b1+ 74.¢c5 ¦c1+ 75.¢d6 ¦d1+ 76.¢e7 ¦c1 77.¦d8+ ¢a7 78.¢d7 ¦d1+ 79.¢c8 [79.¢c8 ¦h1 80.c7 ¢xa6 81.¢b8+-] 1–0

Shirov,Alexei (2726) - Naiditsch,Arkadij (2678) [C67] Dresden ol (Men) 38th Dresden (4.2), 16.11.2008 [Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 ¤f6 4.0–0 ¤xe4 5.d4 ¤d6 6.¥xc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 ¤f5 8.£xd8+ ¢xd8 9.¤c3 ¤e7 10.h3 ¤g6 11.b3 [11.¥g5+ is more frequently played, e.g. wird häufiger gespielt, z.B. 11...¢e8 12.¦ad1 ¥d7 13.¤d4 h6 14.¥c1 ¥e7 15.f4 h5 16.¦fe1 ¤h4 17.¤e4 ¢f8 18.¤g5 ¥xg5 19.fxg5 ¤g6 20.b3 ¢e8 21.e6 ¥xe6 22.¥b2 ¦g8 23.¤f5 ¢f8 24.¥a3+ ¢e8 25.¥b2 ¢f8 26.¦d7 c5 27.¥xg7+ ¢e8 28.¦xc7 ¢d8 29.¦xc5 ¥xf5 30.¥f6+ ¢d7 31.¦xf5 ¦ae8 32.¦d1+ ¢c8 33.¦c5+ ¢b8 34.¦d7 ¦c8 35.¦xc8+ ¦xc8 36.¦xf7 ¦xc2 37.¥d4 ¦xa2 38.¦g7 ¦a6 39.¥f6 ¤h4 40.¥e5+ ¢c8 41.¦c7+ ¢d8 42.¦h7 1–0 Shirov,A (2726)-Karjakin,S (2730), Motril 2008] 11...a5 12.¥b2 ¤f4 13.¦ad1+ ¢e8 14.a4?! This allows the black bishop to develop to f5. Dies erlaubt dem schwarzen Läufer die Entwicklung nach f5. [14.¤d4 was tried out in a later round of the Olympiad: wurde in einer späteren Runde der Olympiade probiert: 14...¥b4 15.a4 (15.¤e4!?) 15...¥d7 16.¢h2 ¥xc3 17.¥xc3 c5 18.¤b5 ¥xb5 19.axb5 ¢e7 20.g3 ¤e6 21.f4 ¦hd8 22.¦xd8 ¤xd8 23.¥b2 ¤e6 24.f5 ¤d4 25.¥xd4 cxd4 26.¢g2 ¦d8 27.¢f3 d3 28.¦c1 d2 29.¦d1 g6 30.g4 gxf5 31.gxf5 f6 32.e6 ¦d5 33.¢f4 ¦d4+ 34.¢e3 ¦d5 35.¢f4 ¦d4+ 36.¢e3 ¦d5 37.¢e4 1/2–1/2 Ganguly,S (2603)-Onischuk,A (2644), Dresden 2008] 14...¥f5 15.¤d4 ¥g6 16.g3 ¤e6! ... and Black's position is sound and solid. ... und Schwarz steht fest und


24

solide. [16...¤xh3+?! 17.¢g2 ¤g5 18.f4 ¤e4 19.f5 ¤xc3 20.¥xc3 ¥h5 21.¦de1 on the other hand, gives White a dangerous initiative. gibt Weiß dagegen gefährliche Initiative.] 17.¤ce2 ¤xd4 18.¤xd4 ¥c5 19.¦d2 ¦d8 20.¦fd1 ¥b4! Provokes a weakening of White's queenside pawn structure. Provoziert eine Schwächung der weißen Damenflügelstruktur 21.c3 ¥c5 22.g4?! This is more of a help to Black to bring his leeping h8-rook into the game. After Das hilft eher Schwarz, seinen schlafenden Turm h8 ins Spiel zu bringen. Nach [22.¢g2 Black is only minimally better. steht Schwarz nur minimal besser.] 22...h5 23.f3 hxg4 24.hxg4 ¥e7 [24...f6!?] 25.¥c1 ¦d5 26.¦e1? Too passive. Zu passiv. [26.e6 was worth trying. war zu versuchen.] 26...¥g5! 27.¦de2 ¥h4! One annoying pinprick after the other. Ein lästiger Stich nach dem anderen. 28.¦h2 ¦h7! After this very strong move, it is hard for White to hang on to the e5-pawn, because 29.Ree2? loses to 29...c5!. The immediate Nach diesem sehr starken Zug kann Weiß den Bauern e5 nicht mehr gut halten, weil 29. Ree2? wegen 29...c5! verliert. Das direkte [28...¥xe1?! 29.¦xh8+ ¢e7 30.¥a3+ ¢d7 31.e6+ fxe6 32.¦g8 on the other hand, gives White more counterplay. gibt Weiß hingegen mehr Gegenspiel.] 29.¦f1 ¦xe5 30.¥f4 ¦d5 31.¥xc7 ¢d7 32.¥b6 ¥f6 33.f4 ¦xh2 34.¢xh2 c5 Diagram:

35.f5?! After the forced liquidation which follows, the resulting black passed c-pawn will be very dangerous. It was better to retreat the knight with Nach der folgenden forcierten Abwicklung wird der entstehende schwarze c-Freibauer sehr gefährlich sein. Es war besser, den Springer mit [35.¤f3 , and, for example, after zurückzuziehen, um zum Beispiel nach 35...¥xc3 36.¦c1 ¦d3 to bring about bishops of opposite colours by mit 37.¤e5+ ¥xe5 38.fxe5 ¦xb3 39.¥xc5 . ungleichfarbige Läufer herbeizuführen.] 35...cxd4 36.fxg6 dxc3 37.gxf7 ¢e7 38.¥e3 ¢f8! 39.¢g2 c2?! [39...¥e7?! is also inaccurate: ist ebenfalls ungenau: 40.¢f3 (40.¢f2? ¥c5–+) 40...¢xf7 (40...c2? 41.¦c1 ¦d3 42.¦xc2 ¥g5 43.¦e2 ¦xb3 44.¢e4 ¦xe3+ 45.¦xe3 ¥xe3 46.¢xe3 ¢xf7 47.¢d4=) 41.¢e4+ ¢e6 42.¥d4 ¥f6 43.¥xf6 gxf6 44.¦c1 ¦c5 45.¢d4 b6 46.¦c2 and it is not clear whether Black can win. und es ist nicht klar, ob Schwarz gewinnen kann.; But Aber 39...¦e5! should win, e.g. sollte gewinnen, z.B. 40.¥f4 (40.¢f3 ¢xf7–+) 40...¦e6 41.¦f3 (41.¦f2 ¦b6 42.¦f3 ¦xb3 43.g5 ¥e7 44.g6 ¦b6 45.¦xc3 ¦xg6+ 46.¢f3 ¦c6–+) 41...g5 42.¥c1 c2 43.¦f2 ¦c6 44.¦f5 b6 45.¦f2 ¥e7 46.¢f1 ¦c3 47.¦d2 ¥c5–+] 40.¥c1? [40.¦f2 ¦d3


25

41.¥c1 ¦xb3 42.¦xc2 ¢xf7 43.¥f4 offered far better drawing chances. bot weit bessere Remischancen.] 40...¥e7?! [40...¦d1! is a stronger way to tie down the white forces, e. g. bindet die weißen Kräfte stärker, z.B. 41.g5 ¥e7 42.g6 ¦d6 43.¢f3 ¦xg6 44.¢e4 ¦g3 45.¦f2 ¦c3 46.¢d4 ¥b4 47.¢d5 ¥c5 48.¦f4 b6 49.¦c4 ¦xc4 50.¢xc4 g5 51.¥xg5 ¥a3 52.¢b5 c1£ 53.¥xc1 ¥xc1 54.¢xb6 ¥d2–+] 41.¦f2 ¦c5 42.¢f3! Alexei Shirov activates his king in order to be able to get more counterplay. Alexei Shirov aktiviert seinen König, um mehr Gegenspiel bekommen zu können. [After Nach 42.¢f1? it is easier for Black to concentrate fire on the queenside pawns, e.g. kann Schwarz die Damenflügelbauern leichter unter Beschuss nehmen, z.B. 42...¦c3 43.g5 g6 44.¢e2 ¦xb3 45.¢d2 ¦b4 46.¢xc2 ¦xa4�] 42...¢xf7 [42...¦c3+? 43.¢e4 ¦xb3 44.¦xc2 ¦b4+ 45.¢f5 ¢xf7 46.¦c7 and White is very active. und Weiß ist sehr aktiv.] 43.¢e4+ ¢g6 and Shirov resigned somewhat early. Black's win is not that easy, e.g. und Shirov gab etwas früh auf. Leicht ist der schwarze Gewinn aber keinesfalls, z.B.[43...¢g6 44.¢d4! ¦c6 (After Auf 44...b6? White still has verfügt Weiß noch über 45.g5! ¥xg5 (45...¦xg5 46.¦xc2) 46.¦g2 ¢f6 47.¥xg5+ ¦xg5 48.¦xc2) 45.¦f5 ¦f6 46.¦g5+ ¢f7 47.¦f5 (47.¦xa5 ¦f1 48.¦f5+ ¥f6+ 49.¢d3 ¦xc1–+) 47...¦xf5 48.gxf5 ¢f6 49.¢e4 b6 50.¥b2+ ¢g5 51.¢d3 ¢xf5 52.¢xc2 g5–+] 0–1 Short,Nigel D (2706) - Efimenko,Zahar (2654) [B90] Match Mukachevo (5), 25.09.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.a4 ¤c6 7.¥e2 e5 8.¤xc6 bxc6 9.f4 ¥e7 10.a5 0–0 11.0–0 exf4 12.¥xf4 ¥e6 13.¢h1 £c7 14.£d2 ¦fd8 15.h3 £b7 16.£e3 d5 17.¥e5 ¤xe4 18.¤xe4 dxe4 19.£xe4 ¥d5 20.£g4 g6 21.£f4 c5 22.¥f3 f5 23.¥c3 ¥d6 24.£h4 ¥xf3 25.¦xf3 £f7 26.¦e1 ¦e8 27.¦fe3 ¦xe3 28.¦xe3 ¥f8 29.b3 ¦c8 30.£e1 c4 31.b4 f4 32.¦e6 f3 33.£e5 ¥g7 34.£xg7+ £xg7 35.¥xg7 f2 36.¦f6 ¢xg7 37.¦xf2 c3 Rook endings are extremely drawish. So, despite being a sound pawn ahead, Nigel Short still has to demonstrate great precision: 38.¦f4! Diagram:


26

An important prophylactic move which ensures that an activation of the black rook will be at a price. 38...¦d8 39.¦c4 ¦d1+ 40.¢h2 ¦b1 41.¢g3 ¦b2 42.¦xc3 ¦xb4 43.¦c6 g5 44.¢f3 ¦b5 45.¦xa6 ¦c5 46.c4!? With this move, Short arranges things so that his rook can get out of the unfavorable position in front of the a-pawn. 46...¦xc4 47.¦b6! h5 48.a6 ¦a4 [Nor does the exchange of pawns with 48...g4+!? suffice for a draw. Because of the strongly reduced winning potential, however, White has to play with great accuracy, e.g. 49.hxg4 ¦xg4 (49...hxg4+ 50.¢g3 ¦a4 51.¢h4 ¢f7 52.g3 ¢e7 53.¢g5 ¢d7 54.¢f5+-) 50.a7 ¦a4 51.¦b7+ ¢f6 52.g3 ¢e5 53.¦e7+ ¢f6 54.¦h7 ¢f5 55.¢e3 ¢g4 56.¦g7+ ¢h3 (56...¢f5 57.¢d3 ¢e5 58.¢c3 ¢d5 59.¢b3 ¦a1 60.¢b4 ¢c6 61.¦h7+-) 57.¢d3 ¢h2 58.¢c3 ¢h3 59.¢b3 ¦a1 60.¢b4 ¦a2 61.¢b5 ¦a3 (61...¦xa7 62.¦xa7 ¢xg3 63.¦g7+ ¢f3 64.¦h7 ¢g4 65.¢c4+-) 62.¢b6 ¦b3+ 63.¢c7 ¦c3+ 64.¢b8 ¦b3+ 65.¢a8 ¦b5 66.¦g8 ¢g2 67.g4 h4 68.¦b8+-] 49.¢e3 ¦a2 50.¦b7+! The advance of the a-pawn to the seventh rank which follows forces the black rook to remain on the a-file, where sooner or later it can be put under pressure by the white king. 50...¢f6 51.a7 ¢f5 [51...¢e5 essentially makes no difference, e.g. 52.¦e7+ ¢f6 53.¦h7 ¦a4 54.¢d3 g4 55.h4+-] 52.g3 ¦a4?! [After 52...¢e5!? White must first position his rook better with 53.¦e7+ ¢d5 54.¦d7+ before he can approach with the king: 54...¢e6 (54...¢e5 55.¢d3 h4 56.gxh4 gxh4 57.¢c4+-) 55.¦h7 ¦a4 56.¢d3 h4 57.g4+-] 53.¢d3 ¦a1?! Now White can win with the a-pawn. [53...¢e5 was more stubborn, but in the long run there will be a winning endgame with linked passed pawns: 54.¢c3 h4 55.g4 ¢d5 56.¢b3 ¦a1 57.¦g7 ¢e6 58.¦xg5 ¦xa7 59.¦h5+-] 54.¢d4! Good technique! Short's king will any case require three moves to get to b6 and so he exploits the possibility of getting in another body check. 54...h4 55.gxh4 gxh4 56.¢c5 ¢f4 57.¦g7 ¢f3 58.¢b6 and Efimenko resigned in view of 58...¦b1+ 59.¢c7 ¦a1 60.¢b8 ¦b1+ 61.¦b7+- 1–0 Two unprotected pieces.. Kveinys,Aloyzas (2533) - Nisipeanu,Liviu Dieter (2684) [E04] 38th Olympiad Dresden (5), 17.11.2008 [Reeh, Oliver] 1.¤f3 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.d4 dxc4 5.¥g2 a6 6.0–0 b5 7.¤e5 ¤d5 8.a4 ¥b7 9.e4 ¤f6 10.axb5 axb5 11.¦xa8 ¥xa8 12.¤c3 c6 13.d5 ¥e7 14.dxe6 fxe6 15.£e2 0–0 16.¥h3 ¢h8 17.¥xe6 £e8 18.¦d1 c5 19.¥f4 ¤c6 20.¤xb5 Initiating a complicated simplification. 20...¤xe5 21.¤c7 £g6 [A spectacular transposition could have occurred after 21...¥xe4!? 22.¥xe5 (22.¤xe8 ¤f3+ 23.¢f1 ¤xh2+ 24.¢e1 ¤f3+ with a perpetual.) 22...£g6] 22.¥f5?! White wants too much. [Correct was 22.¥xe5 , e.g. 22...¥xe4 23.¥xf6 ¥xf6 (23...¥d3 24.£e3 ¦xf6 25.¥xc4) 24.¥xc4 and now 24...¥d4 fails to (24...¥f5 is okay.) 25.¤e6! ¦xf2 (25...¥xf2+ 26.£xf2! or 25...Bf3 26.Nxf8.) 26.¦xd4! and Black's weak back rank decides.] 22...¤f3+! Luring the queen to f3 and thus the e-pawn into a pin. [22...£xf5 only leads to the already familiar draw after 23.exf5 ¤f3+ 24.¢f1 ¤xh2+ 25.¢e1 ¤f3+] 23.£xf3 £xf5! 24.¤xa8 ¤xe4 with an advantage for Black. 25.¤b6 ¤g5 26.£e3 £g4 27.¦d7 ¤h3+ 28.¢f1 ¤xf4 29.gxf4 ¥d8 30.¦f7 £d1+ 31.¢g2 £g4+ 32.¢f1 ¦g8 33.¤xc4? Diagram:


27

This loses material [Better was 33.¦b7 even though after 33...¥f6 followed by 34...Bd4 Black is on top.] 33...£d1+ 34.£e1 [34.¢g2 £d5+] 34...£d3+! A neat intermediate check to block the square e2. [After the immediate 34...£d5 White bails out with 35.¤e5] 35.£e2 £d5 with a mate threat on h1 - the rook f7 falls! 0–1 The passed pawn on the seventh rank Whenever an opposing passed pawn reaches the seventh rank, the highest level of alarm is appropriate. But if it is possible to neutralize all possible dangers, such a passed pawn can even turn out to be a decisive weakness. In the fourth round of the Pearl Spring Tournament in Nanjing precisely this subject was up for discussion in the game between Jakovenko and Carlsen. (Diagram, White to move). Thanks to some inaccuracies on the part of his opponent, Magnus Carlsen was able to gather in both the opposing passed pawn and the full point. Jakovenko,Dmitry (2742) - Carlsen,Magnus (2772) [B92] 2nd Pearl Spring Nanjing (4), 01.10.2009 [Müller,Karsten ] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥e2 e5 7.¤b3 ¥e7 8.0–0 0–0 9.¥e3 ¥e6 10.£d2 ¤bd7 11.a4 ¤b6 12.a5 ¤c4 13.¥xc4 ¥xc4 14.¦fd1 ¦c8 15.f3 ¦c6 16.¢h1 £c8 17.¦ac1 ¦d8 18.¤d5 ¥xd5 19.exd5 ¦c4 20.£d3 e4 21.fxe4 ¦xe4 22.c4 ¦e8 23.¥g1 ¥f8 24.¤d4 g6 25.¦f1 ¥h6 26.£f3 ¦f4 27.£d3 ¤g4 28.¤f3 ¦fe4 29.¦c3 ¤e3 30.¦e1 £g4 31.¦e2 £h5 32.¥xe3 ¦xe3 33.¦xe3 ¥xe3 34.£e2 £h6 35.c5 dxc5 36.d6 ¦e6 37.d7 ¥g5 38.£d1 ¥d8 39.¦xc5 £f8 40.¦d5 £b4 41.b3 ¦e3 42.¤d2 £c3 43.¤f3 £b4 44.¤d2 £f4 45.¤f3 ¦c3 46.£e2 £e3 47.£xe3 ¦xe3 Magnus the Mighty Very far advanced passed pawns can decide a game, in one way or another. In the present case everything depends whether the white d-pawn is strong or weak. Jakovenko could still have kept things level, but after his mistakes the young


28

Norwegian superstar's fantastic technique finishes things off safely: 48.¦d4? Diagram:

The rook is already in a good position. Jakovenko had to activate his king immediately, in order to be able to hold on to the draw thanks to his far advanced passed pawn: [48.¢g1! ¢f8?! (48...f6 still offers certain practical chances.) 49.¢f2 ¦xb3 50.¦e5 ¥e7 51.¦d5= 48...¢f8 49.¦b4? Another unfortunate rook move. [49.¢g1 was still preferable, although now after 49...¢e7 50.b4 f5 it now tends to look as though there are good winning chances for Black, e.g. 51.¢f2 (51.¤g5 b6) 51...¦e4 52.¦xe4+ fxe4 53.¤d4 ¢xd7 54.¢e3 ¥e7 55.b5 ¥b4 56.bxa6 bxa6 57.¤b3 ¢c6] 49...¦d3 50.¦xb7 ¦d1+ 51.¤g1 ¥xa5 52.g4 [Unfortunately for Jakovenko 52.b4 ¥d8 53.¦a7?! ¥b6 54.d8£+ ¥xd8 55.¦xa6 ¥g5! 56.¦a3 ¦e1–+ (Golubev) is not playable either.] 52...¢e7 53.¢g2 ¦xd7 54.¦xd7+ ¢xd7 In any case, in this setup with an open centre and pawns on both wings the bishop is superior to the knight, and so Carlsen was able to convert his extra pawn into a certain victory: 55.¢f3 ¢d6 56.¢e4 ¢c5 57.¢d3 ¢d5 58.¤f3 ¥d8 59.h3 h6 60.h4?! This pawn will become a target. But after [60.¤d4 too, Black will win slowly but surely by repeatedly employing that dangerous endgame weapon - the zugzwang, e.g. 60...¥b6 61.¤f3 ¥c5 62.¤e1 ¢e5 63.¤g2 ¥a7 64.¢d2 (64.b4 ¥b6 65.¤e1 ¢f4 66.¢e2 ¢g3 67.¤d3 ¢xh3 68.¢f3 ¥d8 69.¤c5 g5 70.¤xa6 f5–+) 64...¢e4 65.¢e2 ¥d4 66.¤e1 ¢f4 67.¤f3 ¥b6 68.¤d2 ¢g3 69.¤e4+ ¢xh3 70.¢f3 ¥c7 71.¤f6 (71.¤c5 a5 72.¤d7 ¢h4 73.¤f6 ¥d8 74.¤d5 h5–+) 71...¢h4 72.¤e4 (72.¤d5 ¥e5 73.¤b4 ¥d6 74.¤d5 ¢g5–+) 72...g5 73.¤f6 ¥d8 74.¤d5 h5–+] 60...h5! Carlsen puts his finger on the sore point. 61.gxh5 gxh5 62.¢e3 ¢c5 63.¢d3 [63.¢e4 ¢b4 64.¤e5 ¥xh4 65.¤xf7 ¢xb3 66.¤d6 ¥f6 67.¤b7 ¢b4–+ Because the knight will not be able to sacrifice itself for the a-pawn, if Black plays carefully.] 63...¢b4 and Jakovenko resigned, because after 64.¢c2 ¥f6 he will lose another pawn because of zugzwang. 0–1


29

The king as an attacking piece Aagaard,Jacob (2420) - Kempinski,Robert (2545) [E61] Groningen op Groningen (10), 30.12.1998 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.¤f3 0–0 5.¥f4 d6 6.h3 £e8 7.e3 ¤a6 8.¥e2 ¤h5 9.¥h2 f5 10.¦b1 f4 11.b4 c5 12.b5 ¤c7 13.0–0 b6 14.¤d5 ¤xd5 15.cxd5 fxe3 16.fxe3 ¥h6 17.£d3 ¥f5 18.e4 ¥d7 19.£b3 ¤f4 20.¥c4 £c8 21.e5 cxd4 22.e6 ¥e8 23.g3 ¤h5 24.¢h1 £c5 25.g4 ¦c8 26.¥d3 ¤f4 27.g5 ¥g7 28.¥xf4 ¦xf4 29.¤d2 ¦h4 30.¦f3 h6 31.¤e4 £c7 32.gxh6 ¦xh6 33.¦g1 £b7 34.¦fg3 ¦h5 35.¦g5 ¦xh3+ 36.¢g2 ¦e3 37.¦g3 ¦xg3+ 38.¢xg3 ¥h6 39.¦h1 ¢g7 40.¥c4 ¥e3 41.£b2 g5 42.¢g4 ¥d7 43.¤xg5 ¦xc4 44.¦h7+ ¢g6 45.¦h6+ ¢g7 46.¦h7+ ¢g6 47.¦h6+ ¢g7 48.£g2 ¥xg5 49.¢xg5 ¥e8 50.¢f5+?

Being in time-trouble, White decides to go for the perpetual. [Instead, he could have won, however, not with 50.£e4? £xd5+! 51.£xd5 ¦c5 52.£xc5 dxc5–+; this move is 50.¦h8!! , when Black is helpless - 50...¦c2 (The rook is taboo on account of 50...Kxh8 51.Kh6 and mate on g7, while alternatives are no better: 50...£xd5+ 51.£xd5 ¦c5 52.£xc5 dxc5 53.¦xe8; or 50...¥g6 51.¦g8+ ¢xg8 52.¢h6) 51.£h1! Controlling the h-file while keeping an eye on d5. 51...¥h5 (51...¦h2 52.¦xh2!) 52.¦xh5] 50...¢xh6 51.£g5+ ¢h7 52.£h4+ ¢g7 ½–½


30

Knight in the Corner Cheparinov,Ivan (2667) - Caruana,Fabiano (2662) [A29] 17th TCh-Eur Novi Sad (1), 22.10.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.c4 ¤f6 2.¤c3 e5 3.¤f3 ¤c6 4.g3 ¤d4 5.¥g2 ¤xf3+ 6.¥xf3 ¥b4 7.0–0 0–0 8.¥g2 c6 9.d3 h6 10.¥d2 ¦e8 11.¦c1 a6 12.a3 ¥f8 13.b4 d5 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.¤a4 ¥g4 16.h3 ¥h5 17.¤c5 b6 18.¤a4 ¦e6 19.¦e1 ¦c8 20.¦xc8 £xc8 21.£b3 £d7 22.¤c3 e4 23.dxe4 ¤xe4 24.¤xd5 ¤xd2 25.£d3 £b5 26.£xd2 ¦xe2 27.¦xe2 ¥xe2 28.£e3 ¥c4 29.¤xb6 ¥e6 30.¥f1 £c6 31.¥g2 £b5 32.¤a8 £c4 33.h4 g6 34.¤b6 £b5 35.£d4 a5 36.¥f1 £f5 37.¥d3 £f3 38.bxa5 £d1+ 39.¢h2 ¥f5 40.a6 £xd3 41.£xd3 ¥xd3 42.a7 ¥e4

The knight in the corner The old saying "A knight on the rim is dim" is well illustrated in the following game: 43.a4?! Cheparinov continues to play for a win, instead of going in for the draw after [43.a8£ ¥xa8 44.¤xa8 ¥xa3 , but one little detail slipped his mind.] 43...¥b4! [Presumably Cheparinov had planned 43...¥c5? 44.a8£+ ¥xa8 45.¤xa8 ¥xf2 46.a5 (Baburin)] 44.a8£+ ¥xa8 45.¤xa8 ¥a5 This imprisons the knight for a very long time. Despite that, the position should still be drawn, since in any case the black rook's pawn has to queen on a square of the wrong colour. But of course, it is very difficult to hold the ending over the board. 46.g4 ¢f8 47.¢g3 ¢e7 48.h5 gxh5 49.gxh5 ¢e6 50.¢f4 f5 51.¢e3 ¢e5 52.¢d3 ¢d5 53.¢e3 ¢e5 54.¢d3 f4 55.¢c4 f3 56.¢d3?! from a practical point of view, it was better to free the knight from its exile immediately: [56.¢b5! ¥e1 57.¤b6 ¥xf2 (57...¢f5 58.a5 ¥xf2 59.a6 ¥d4 60.a7 f2 61.a8£ f1£+ 62.¢c6=) 58.¤c4+ ¢f4 59.¤d2 ¢e3 (59...¥a7 60.¢c4=) 60.¤xf3! ¢xf3 61.¢c4= (Baburin in Chess Today 3272). Because the white king is within Rauser's drawing zone: a3-c5-d4-e5-h2. The additional white a-pawn is irrelevant for this; all it could do would be to help White.] 56...¢f4 57.¢d4 ¥e1 58.¢d3 ¥xf2 59.¤c7 ¥a7 60.¤d5+?


31

loses the h5-pawn, as does [60.¤b5? ¢g4 61.¤d6 (After 61.¤xa7 ¢g3–+ the f-pawn runs through.) 61...¥b8 62.¤e4 ¢xh5 63.¤d2 ¢g4 64.¢e4 f2 65.¢e3 ¥a7+ 66.¢e2 ¢g3 67.¢f1 h5–+; The knight had to hurry to the rescue with 60.¤e6+ After that, surprisingly, I could not find a win. 60...¢g4 61.¤g7 ¥b6 (61...¥d4 62.¤e6=) 62.¢d2 ¢h3 63.¤f5 ¥d8 64.¢e1 ¢g2 65.¤e3+ ¢g1 66.¤g4 (66.¢d1!?) 66...¥b6 67.¢d2 ¢g2 68.¢d3 ¢h3 69.a5 ¥xa5 70.¤e3 ¥b6 71.¤c2 ¥f2 72.¢e4 ¢g4 73.¤b4 ¥c5 74.¤d3= Black may be able to win the knight, but not the game, because the white king can always take refuge in Rauser's drawing zone.] 60...¢g5! 61.a5 [61.¢d2 ¢xh5 62.¢e1 ¢g4 63.¤f6+ ¢g5 64.¤e4+ ¢f4 65.¤f6 ¥d4–+] 61...¢xh5 62.a6 [62.¤e3 ¢h4 63.¢e4 f2 64.¤f1 ¢g4–+] 62...¢h4 63.¤e3 h5 0–1 Blumenschein,E - Smith,W.H Dayton, 25.02.1890 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver]

In this position White has a beautiful forced mate in five:

1.¥xg7+! ¢xg7 2.£h6+!! The point - Black's king is dragged into a discovered double-check. 2...¢xh6 [2...¢h8 3.¥g6+ ¢g8 4.£h7#] 3.¤f5+ ¢g5 4.¤e4+ ¢g4 5.¦h4# or 5.Ne3++. This brilliancy was published far more than 100 years ago - in May 1890 on page 155 of International Chess Magazine. (Source: "A Chess Omnibus", Edward Winter, Russel Enterprises, Inc., 2003) A rook ending worth its weight in gold Gashimov,Vugar - Stellwagen,Daniel [B12] 17th European Team Championship - Open Novi Sad (9), 30.10.2009 [Analysis by Müller, Karsten] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 ¥f5 4.¤f3 e6 5.¥e2 c5 6.¥e3 cxd4 7.¤xd4 ¤e7 8.¤d2 ¤bc6 9.¤2f3 ¥g4 10.0–0 a6 11.¦c1 ¥xf3 12.¤xf3 g6 13.c4 ¥g7 14.cxd5 £xd5 15.£a4 £a5 16.£b3 0–0 17.¥c5 ¦fe8 18.¥d6 ¤xe5 19.¤xe5 ¥xe5


32

20.¦c5 £d2 21.¥xe5 £xe2 22.£xb7 ¤d5 23.¥g3 ¦ad8 24.h3 ¦e7 25.£b3 ¦ed7 26.a3 h5 27.¦c2 £b5 28.£f3 ¤e7 29.¥c7 ¦c8 30.¦fc1 £d5 31.£e2 £b7 32.¥e5 ¦xc2 33.£xc2 ¦d5 34.£c3 ¢h7 35.¥h8 ¤f5 36.g4 e5 37.gxf5 ¢xh8 38.fxg6 fxg6 39.£c6 £xc6 40.¦xc6 a5 41.¦xg6 ¢h7 42.¦b6 ¢g7 43.a4 ¦d4 44.b3 ¦d3 45.¢g2 e4 46.¦b5 ¢g6 47.h4 ¢h6 48.¦e5 ¦xb3 49.¦xe4 ¦a3 50.f3 ¢g6 51.¢g3 ¢f6 52.¢f4 ¦a1 53.¦c4 ¦a3 54.¢e4 ¢e6 55.f4 ¦a1 56.¦c6+ ¢f7 57.¦c4 ¢e6 58.¦c6+ ¢f7 59.¢f5 ¦xa4 60.¦c7+ ¢f8 61.¦a7 ¦a1 62.¢g6 a4 63.f5 ¦g1+ 64.¢f6 ¢g8 65.¦xa4 ¦g4 66.¦a8+ ¢h7 67.¦a7+ ¢g8 68.¦a8+ ¢h7 69.¢f7 ¦xh4 70.f6

For practical players, the study of rook endings is one of the most important areas in endgame theory. Games are continually being decided in this phase. This was also the case in the European Team Championship in Novi Sad. Gashimov had to win in order for the Azerbaijani team to secure the gold medal: 70...¦f4? Daniel Stellwagen follows the famous rule of thumb of Dr.Tarrasch, namely that the rook should be placed behind the passed pawn. [But here it had to go to the long side in order to be able to deliver checks: 70...¦b4 71.¢f8 (After 71.¢e6 ¦b6+ 72.¢e7 ¦b7+ the king cannot find a good hiding place from the checks.; 71.¦e8 ¦b7+ 72.¦e7 ¦b8=) 71...¢g6 72.f7 ¦f4 73.¦a6+ ¢g5 74.¢g7 ¦xf7+ 75.¢xf7 h4 76.¢e6 h3 77.¢e5 h2 78.¦a8 ¢g4 79.¦h8 ¢g3 80.¢e4 ¢g2=] 71.¢e6! h4 [After 71...¦e4+ 72.¢f5 ¦e1 73.f7 ¦f1+ 74.¢e6 ¦e1+ the white king simply moves closer and closer to the rook. Dvoretsky describes this maneuver as "using the escalator". 75.¢d5 ¦d1+ 76.¢e4 ¦e1+ 77.¢d3 ¦d1+ 78.¢e2+-] 72.f7 ¢g6 [72...¢g7 73.¦g8++-] 73.f8£ ¦xf8 74.¦xf8 ¢g5 75.¢e5 and Stellwagen resigned on account of 75...¢g4 76.¢e4 ¢g3 77.¢e3 h3 78.¦g8+ ¢h2 79.¢f2 ¢h1 80.¦e8 ¢h2 81.¦e3 ¢h1 82.¦xh3# 1–0


33

The desperado rook Spoelman,W (2554) - Najer,E (2681) [B90] Bundesliga 2009–10 Wattenscheid GER (7), 16.10.2009 [Analysis by Müller,Karsten] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥e3 e5 7.¤b3 ¥e6 8.£d2 ¤bd7 9.0–0–0 b5 10.f4 ¥e7 11.f5 ¥c4 12.¢b1 0–0 13.g4 ¤xg4 14.¦g1 ¤xe3 15.£xe3 ¥xb3 16.£h6 ¥f6 17.axb3 ¢h8 18.£h5 ¥e7 19.¤d5 ¤f6 20.¤xf6 ¥xf6 21.¦d3 h6 22.¦g2 ¦a7 23.c4 £e7 24.¦d5 bxc4 25.¥xc4 a5 26.£d1 ¦c8 27.¦xd6 a4 28.¦gd2 axb3 29.£xb3 ¢h7 30.¦6d3 ¥g5 31.¦d1 £c7 32.¦c3 ¦b8 33.¥xf7 £xf7 34.£xb8 £a2+ 35.¢c2 £a4+ 36.£b3 £xe4+ 37.¦cd3 £xf5 38.¢b1 e4 39.¦d5 £e6 40.¦b5 £g6 41.¦b6 £f5 42.£c2 ¦e7 43.¦b4 g6 44.¦e1 e3 45.h4 ¥f6 46.£xf5 gxf5 47.¢c2 ¦c7+ 48.¢d3 f4 49.¦xf4 ¥xb2 50.¦ff1 ¦c3+ 51.¢e2 ¦c4 52.h5 ¦c5 53.¦h1 ¥g7 54.¢xe3 ¦a5 55.¦d1 ¦a7 56.¦d5 ¦e7+ 57.¢d3 ¦a7 58.¦b1 ¦a3+ 59.¢e4 ¦a7 60.¦db5 ¦e7+ 61.¢f3 ¦f7+ 62.¢g3 ¦c7 63.¦1b3 ¦c1 64.¦b7 ¦c5 65.¦7b5 ¦c1 66.¦3b4 ¦c3+ 67.¢h4 ¥f6+ 68.¢g4 ¥g7 69.¦b7 ¦c1 70.¢g3 ¦c3+ 71.¢h4 ¢h8 72.¦4b6 ¦c4+ 73.¢g3 ¦c1 74.¦g6

What usually happens is that extra forces help the besieging army storm fortresses. But there is also the opposite case, when the presence of extra material actually saves the defending side, as in the present situation. If he did not have his rook, Black would be totally lost in the duel between White's remaining rook and the black bishop. But White simply cannot force the exchange of rooks: 74...¦f1!? [Even 74...¦g1+ 75.¢f4 ¦xg6 76.hxg6 ¥c3! is still a draw, because the g6-pawn blocks the invasion by the white king, e.g. 77.¢f5 ¢g8 78.g7 ¢h7=] 75.¢g2 [75.¦bxg7 runs into the stalemate defense 75...¦f3+ 76.¢h2 ¦h3+ 77.¢g2 ¦g3+= (Baburin in Chess Today 3267), because the desperado rook cannot be shaken off without allowing stalemate.; A sample variation after 75.¢g4 goes: 75...¦f2 76.¦b3 ¢h7 77.¦f3 ¦g2+ 78.¢f5 ¦h2 79.¢e6 ¦xh5 80.¢f7 and then a bishop move such as 80...¥h8= (However, even here the exchange of rooks would be fatal: 80...¦g5?


34

81.¦xg5 hxg5 82.¦g3 ¥h6 83.¦g1+-) ] 75...¦f4 76.¦g3 ¦f5 77.¦g6 ¦f4 [Of course, not 77...¦xh5?? 78.¦bxg7+- because now the stalemating constellation of pieces is broken.] 78.¦b3 ¦f7 79.¦gb6 ¦f5 80.¦3b5 ¦f4 [The exchange of rooks 80...¦xb5? loses in a typical manner: 81.¦xb5 ¥f6 82.¦b7 ¢g8 83.¢f3 ¢f8 84.¢e4 ¥e7 85.¢f5 ¢f7 86.¦c7 ¢f8 87.¢g6 ¥g5 88.¦f7+ ¢e8 (After 88...¢g8?! 89.¦f2 Black is straight into a deadly zugzwang.) 89.¢g7 ¥e3 90.¦f1 ¥d2 91.¦d1 ¥g5 92.¦e1+ ¢d7 93.¢f7 ¢d6 94.¦g1 ¥f4 95.¢f6 ¢d7 96.¢f5 ¥e3 97.¦d1+ ¢c7 98.¦d3 ¥g5 99.¦g3 ¥d2 100.¦g2 ¥e3 101.¢e4 ¥c5 102.¦g6 ¥f8 103.¦f6+-] 81.¦b4 ¦f5 82.¦6b5 ¦f7 83.¦b7 ¦f6 84.¦e4 ¦f5 85.¦ee7 ¦g5+ 86.¢f3 ¦f5+ 87.¢e4 ¦g5 88.¢f4 ¦a5 89.¦a7 ¦b5 90.¦eb7 ¦c5 91.¦e7 ¦b5 92.¦a8+ ¢h7 93.¦a3 ¢h8 94.¦g3 ¦c5 95.¢e4 [After 95.¦gxg7 ¦f5+ the white king can still not find a safe hiding place from the insistent desperado rook, e.g. 96.¢e3 (96.¢g4 ¦f4+=) 96...¦f3+ 97.¢d4 ¦d3+ 98.¢c4 ¦d4+=] 95...¦b5 96.¦d7 ¦e5+ 97.¢f4 ¦c5 98.¦g1 ¦b5 99.¦d8+ ¢h7 100.¦g2 ¦b4+ 101.¢g3 ¦b3+ 102.¢f4 ¦b7 103.¢e4 ½–½ The Troitzky line [Analysis by Müller, Karsten]

An important variation in the analysis of the game Magnus Carlsen-Wang Yue ended in the following position with two knights against two pawns, which is won although two knights alone can't checkmate. Due to several requests, I would like to consider this problem once more in detail: 65.¤f4! It is of vital importance to safely block the f-pawn on the Troitzky line a4-b6-c5-d4-e4-f5-g6-h4. This always wins, however, possibly not with regard to the 50–moves rule. Taking this into account, the new line is a5, c5, d5, e5, f5, h5 , always with positions existing on the b- and g-file which can't be won within 50 moves. But those are very rare. The additional black d-pawn plays no part here since it can easily be raked in which, after blockading the f-pawn, is White's next goal now: 65...¢b4 66.¢c2 ¢c5 67.¤f7 ¢c4 68.¤e5+ ¢b5 69.¢d3 ¢c5 70.¤c4 ¢b4 71.¢xd4 Now the black king must be forced into a corner in which White can checkmate it. In this very favorable case, White principally can checkmate in all four corners since the


35

blockade knight on f4 is placed quite centrally. However, there are examples where this is different. There is one rule in particular: if the pawn has passed the Troitzky line, then there are drawing and losing zones for the defending king. The drawing zones can be safe edges or corners, but not necessarily. In the present case, of course there is no salvation. The defending king will try to finally escape in the direction of the north-eastern corner in order to survive as long as possible. Most favorable for him would be squares like g5, g4 or f3, yet in this case he can't get there if White doesn't let him. 71...¢a4 72.¤e5 ¢b5 73.¤ed3 ¢c6 [If the defender tries to escape towards the south, play might continue as follows: 73...¢a4 74.¢c4 ¢a3?! 75.¤c5 ¢b2 76.¢d3 ¢c1 77.¤a4 ¢d1 Now follows a typical technique, known as 'Henry's side check': 78.¤b2+ presenting Black the choice in which corner he wants to get checkmated: 78...¢e1 (78...¢c1 79.¢c3 ¢b1 80.¤bd3 ¢a2 81.¢b4 ¢b1 82.¢b3 ¢a1 83.¤d5 f4 84.¤c3 f3 85.¤b4 f2 86.¤c2#) 79.¢e3 ¢f1 80.¤bd3 ¢g1 81.¤e1 ¢f1 82.¤eg2 ¢g1 83.¢e2 ¢h2 84.¢f3 ¢g1 85.¤e3 ¢h2 86.¢f2 ¢h1 87.¢g3 ¢g1 88.¤e2+ ¢h1 89.¤d1 f4+ 90.¢h3 f3 91.¤f2#] 74.¢c4 ¢d6 75.¢b5 ¢e7 76.¤e5 ¢d6 77.¤f3 Since the knights are forming a barrier, now the king can advance. This knights' placement is often very effective at least against central or bishop pawns. 77...¢d7 78.¢c5 ¢c7 79.¤d4 ¢c8 80.¢c6 ¢d8 [80...¢b8?! runs into the direct 81.¤b5 ¢c8 82.¤e6 f4 83.¤d6+ ¢b8 84.¢b6 f3 85.¤c7 f2 86.¤a6+ ¢a8 87.¤b5 f1£ 88.¤bc7#] 81.¤de6+ ¢e7 82.¢c7 ¢f7 83.¢d7 Since the knights are not able to lose tempi, it is very important to choose the right squares with the king. Triangle maneuvers often play a vital part in this endgame too. 83...¢f6 84.¢d6 ¢f7 85.¤d4 ¢e8 [After 85...¢f6 86.¤f3 ¢f7 87.¢d7 ¢f6 the white king bypasses his counterpart with 88.¢e8 ¢g7 89.¢e7 ¢g8 90.¤d4 ¢g7 91.¤de6+ ¢h7 92.¢f7 ¢h6 93.¢f6 ¢h7 94.¢g5 ¢g8 95.¢g6 ¢h8 96.¤d5 f4 97.¤f6 f3 98.¤g5 f2 99.¤f7#] 86.¤c6 ¢f7 87.¢e5 ¢f8 88.¢f6 ¢e8 89.¢e6 ¢f8 90.¤e5 ¢e8 91.¤f7 ¢f8 92.¤d6 ¢g7 93.¢e7 ¢h7 94.¢f7 ¢h6 95.¢f6 ¢h7 96.¢g5 ¢g7 and now finally the moment has come where the blockade knight initiates the final attack: 97.¤e6+ ¢h7 98.¤e8 f4 99.¤f6+ ¢h8 100.¢g6 f3 101.¤g5 f2 102.¤f7# For those who want to delve even deeper into this fascinating territory, I would like to indicate some sources in the following: A. Troitzky, Collection of Chess Studies, 1937 Richard Forster, Late Knight column 24, Archive of www. chesscafe.com, April 2000, Late Knights' Tango: The Troitzky Endgame Karsten Müller, Endgame Corner column 35 and 36, Archive of www.chesscafe.com, November and December 2003, The damned pawn Balashov, Prandstetter, Basic Endgames, Prague Chess Agency 1992, S.55-65 Cheron, Text and handbook of endgames, Volume 2, 2nd edition, Verlag Das Schach Archiv 1964, p. 220–250 Speelman, Tisdall, Wade, Batsford Chess Endings, Batsford 1993, p. 112–115 1–0


36

Magnus' mighty knights. Carlsen,Magnus (2772) - Wang Yue (2736) [D17] 2nd Pearl Spring Nanjing (8), 06.10.2009 [Karsten Müller] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.¤f3 ¤f6 4.¤c3 dxc4 5.a4 ¥f5 6.¤e5 ¤bd7 7.¤xc4 £c7 8.g3 e5 9.dxe5 ¤xe5 10.¥f4 ¤fd7 11.¥g2 g5 12.¤e3 gxf4 13.¤xf5 0–0–0 14.£c2 ¤g6 15.0–0 ¢b8 16.¦fc1 a5 17.b4 axb4 18.¤b5 £e5 19.¤bd4 ¥c5 20.¤b3 h5 21.¦ab1 ¥a7 22.¥xc6 fxg3 23.hxg3 ¦c8 24.£d3 bxc6 25.£xd7 ¦c7 26.£d3 h4 27.¤bd4 hxg3 28.¦xb4+ ¢a8 29.¤xg3 ¦d8 30.e3 ¤h4 31.¢f1 £a5 32.¦cb1 ¤f3 33.¤b3 £d5 34.£xd5 cxd5 35.¦d1 ¦c2 36.¦f4 ¤e5 37.¤d4 ¦c4 38.¤de2 ¦xf4 39.¤xf4 d4 40.¤ge2 ¤c6 41.e4 ¦b8 42.¤d5 ¦b2 43.¤ef4 ¢b7 44.¤d3 ¦b3 45.¢e2 ¦a3 46.f4 ¦xa4 47.¦b1+ ¢c8 48.¦c1 ¢b7 49.e5 ¦a3 50.¦h1 ¦a5 51.¤f6 ¥b8 52.¦b1+ ¢c8 53.¦c1 ¢b7 54.¤e4 ¦a3 55.¦h1

Actually two knights alone cannot deliver mate without the presence of pawns. So in the present position, on account of the reduced material present everything actually points to a draw. At the same time, Wang Yue's combination 55...¥xe5! 56.fxe5 ¤xe5 is also objectively speaking correct. But Magnus Carlsen's knights manage to set so many traps that Black finally does stumble. It is also worth noting that the presence of black pawns can also work out to the disadvantage of Black, as events will show. 57.¤d6+ ¢a6! First of all Wang Yue steers a steady course around the reefs. 58.¤b4+!? [58.¤xe5?! ¦e3+ 59.¢d2 ¦xe5 60.¦a1+ ¦a5= and; 58.¤c5+?! ¢b6 59.¤d7+ ¢a6= finally lead nowhere.] 58...¢b6 59.¦c1 ¦e3+? This obvious looking check takes Black off course. [59...¦a5 60.¦b1 ¢c7= was required.] 60.¢d1! Now Black's forces are enmeshed in a net from which there is no escape. 60...¦b3?! [From a practical point of view 60...¢a5! 61.¤d5 ¦e1+ 62.¢xe1 ¤d3+ 63.¢d2 ¤xc1 64.¢xc1 f5 65.¤f4 really had to be preferred. However the position is lost, although White himself does not have a pawn and two knights on their own are not enough to deliver mate, because the pawn on f5 is safely blockaded behind


37

or on the so-called Troitzky Line a4-b6-c5-d4-e4-f5. This does not actually take into account the 50 move rule, but the present position can be won within the 50 moves. Nor does the d-pawn which is still there affect this evaluation, because Black may be able to cross the Troitzky Line with it, but he cannot hang on to it in the long run.] 61.¤d5+ ¢a7 62.¦a1+ ¢b8 63.¢c2 The rook does not have a square on the b-file and so the black king cannot really slip away. In fact, the fantastically well coordinated white forces make an impressive picture! 63...¦h3 64.¦b1+ ¢a7 65.¦b7+ ¢a6 66.¦b6+ ¢a5 67.¦b5+ ¢a4 [67...¢a6?! runs into the immediate 68.¤c7+ ¢a7 69.¦b7#] 68.¤b6+ ¢a3 69.¦xe5 and Wang Yue resigned, because the presence of the rooks makes the win for White much easier. 1–0 Aagaard,Jacob (2420) - Kempinski,Robert (2545) [E61] Groningen op Groningen (10), 30.12.1998 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 g6 3.¤c3 ¥g7 4.¤f3 0–0 5.¥f4 d6 6.h3 £e8 7.e3 ¤a6 8.¥e2 ¤h5 9.¥h2 f5 10.¦b1 f4 11.b4 c5 12.b5 ¤c7 13.0–0 b6 14.¤d5 ¤xd5 15.cxd5 fxe3 16.fxe3 ¥h6 17.£d3 ¥f5 18.e4 ¥d7 19.£b3 ¤f4 20.¥c4 £c8 21.e5 cxd4 22.e6 ¥e8 23.g3 ¤h5 24.¢h1 £c5 25.g4 ¦c8 26.¥d3 ¤f4 27.g5 ¥g7 28.¥xf4 ¦xf4 29.¤d2 ¦h4 30.¦f3 h6 31.¤e4 £c7 32.gxh6 ¦xh6 33.¦g1 £b7 34.¦fg3 ¦h5 35.¦g5 ¦xh3+ 36.¢g2 ¦e3 37.¦g3 ¦xg3+ 38.¢xg3 ¥h6 39.¦h1 ¢g7 40.¥c4 ¥e3 41.£b2 g5 42.¢g4 ¥d7 43.¤xg5 ¦xc4 44.¦h7+ ¢g6 45.¦h6+ ¢g7 46.¦h7+ ¢g6 47.¦h6+ ¢g7 48.£g2 ¥xg5 49.¢xg5 ¥e8 50.¢f5+?

Being in time-trouble, White decides to go for the perpetual. [Instead, he could have won, however, not with 50.£e4? £xd5+! 51.£xd5 ¦c5 52.£xc5 dxc5–+; and this move is 50.¦h8!! , when Black is helpless - 50...¦c2 (The rook is taboo on account of 50...Kxh8 51.Kh6 and mate on g7, while alternatives are no better: 50...£xd5+ 51.£xd5 ¦c5 52.£xc5 dxc5 53.¦xe8; or 50...¥g6 51.¦g8+ ¢xg8


38

52.¢h6) 51.£h1! Controlling the h-file while keeping an eye on d5. 51...¥h5 (51...¦h2 52.¦xh2!) 52.¦xh5] 50...¢xh6 51.£g5+ ¢h7 52.£h4+ ¢g7 ½–½ Brynell,Stellan (2472) - Popov,Valerij (2588) [D38] 39th Rilton Cup Stockholm (3), 29.12.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.¤f3 d5 4.¤c3 ¥b4 5.cxd5 exd5 6.¥g5 ¤bd7 7.e3 h6 8.¥h4 g5 9.¥g3 ¤e4 10.¤d2 ¤xg3 11.hxg3 ¤b6 12.¥d3 ¥e6 13.£c2 c6 14.a3 ¥d6 15.0–0–0 £f6 16.¤b3 0–0–0 17.¢b1 ¢b8 18.¢a1 h5 19.£e2 ¥g4 20.f3 ¥c8 21.£f2 ¥c7 22.¤c5 ¤d7 23.¤xd7+ ¥xd7 24.¦c1 ¦de8 25.e4 ¥b6 26.exd5 ¥xd4 27.£c2 ¥xc3 28.dxc6 ¥xb2+ 29.£xb2 £xb2+ 30.¢xb2 ¥xc6 31.¦ce1 ¦xe1 32.¦xe1 h4 33.gxh4 ¦xh4 34.¢c3 ¦h2 35.¦e2 f6 36.¥e4 ¥xe4 37.fxe4 ¢c7 38.¦f2 ¦h6 39.¢d4 ¢d6 40.a4 ¢e6 41.¦b2 ¦h7 42.a5 ¦d7+ 43.¢e3 ¢e7 44.¦b5 ¢d8 45.¢f3 ¦e7 46.¢e3 ¢c7 47.¦c5+ ¢d7 48.¢d4 ¦e6 49.¦b5 b6 50.axb6 axb6 51.¦b1 ¦d6+ 52.¢e3 ¢c6 53.¦c1+ ¢b5 54.¢f3 ¦e6 55.g4 ¢a6 56.¦a1+ ¢b7 57.¦b1 ¦e5 58.¢e3 b5 59.¢d4 ¢c6 60.¦c1+ ¢d7 61.¦b1 ¢d6 62.¦f1 ¦e6 63.¦b1 ¢c6 64.¦c1+ ¢b6 65.¦b1 ¦d6+ 66.¢e3 ¢c6 67.¦c1+ ¢d7 68.¦c5 ¦b6 69.¦f5 b4 70.¢d2 b3 71.¢c1 ¦e6 72.e5 ¦xe5 73.¦xf6 ¦e4

Cutting off the king because the activity of the king is very important in rook endings, methods to restrict it play a hugely important part in the arsenal of endgame technique. The most frequent of these consists of cutting off the king either horizontally or vertically with the rook. This proves to be of decisive importance in the following example. 74.¢b2? This move takes the king too far away from the kingside and it is cut off with decisive effect. [74.¦b6! ¦xg4 75.¦xb3 ¦d4 A barrier like this is often enough to win a game. But here White can repay his opponent in the same coin. (After 75...¢e6 76.¢d2 ¦f4 (After 76...¦e4 the barrier is broken by 77.¦e3 .) 77.¢e3 ¢f5 78.¦b1 the rook's checking distance of three squares is great enough. 78...¢g4 (78...g4?? 79.¦b5+ would even backfire.) 79.¦g1+


39

¢h4 80.¦h1+ ¢g3 81.¦g1+=) 76.¦g3 ¦d5 77.¦e3! This forces Black to raise his barrier sooner or later in order to be able to activate his own king; this means that the white king always gets free in time: 77...g4 (77...¢d6 78.¢c2 ¦e5 79.¢d2=) 78.¦g3 ¦d4 79.¦e3 ¢d6 80.¢c2 ¢d5 81.¢c3 ¦e4 82.¢d3=] 74...¢e7 75.¦g6 [75.¦f1!? was trickier, but does not save him in the long run. 75...¦f4! (The greedy 75...¦xg4? runs up against a barrier: 76.¢xb3 ¦d4 (76...¦f4 77.¦xf4 gxf4 78.¢c3=) 77.¢c3 ¦d5 78.¢c4 ¢e6 79.¦e1+ ¦e5 80.¦f1 g4 81.¢d4 and White's counter-barrier secures the draw, e.g. 81...g3 82.¦g1 ¦g5 83.¢e4=) 76.¦g1 (After 76.¦xf4 gxf4 77.¢xb3 f3 the white king cannot get into the queen square.) 76...¢e6 77.¢xb3 ¢e5 78.¦e1+ ¦e4 79.¦g1 ¢f4 80.¢c2 ¢f3 81.¢d3 ¦xg4 82.¦f1+ ¢g2 83.¦f5 ¦g3+ 84.¢e4 (84.¢e2 g4 85.¦f4 ¢h3 86.¢f2 ¦g2+ 87.¢f1 ¦a2 88.¢g1 ¦a1+–+) 84...¢h3 85.¦f8 ¦a3–+ and the barrier along the third rank decides matters.] 75...¦xg4 76.¢xb3 ¢f7 77.¦a6 ¦e4 78.¢c3 ¦e6 breaks White's barrier, after which the game is decided: 79.¦a1 [After 79.¦xe6 ¢xe6 80.¢d3 ¢f5 81.¢e3 ¢g4 82.¢f2 ¢h3–+ the king reaches a key square for his pawn.] 79...¦d6 80.¦g1 ¢f6 81.¢c4 ¢f5 82.¦f1+ ¢e4 0–1 Timofeev,Arty (2651) - Khismatullin,Denis (2643) [B52] 62nd ch-RUS Moscow (5), 24.12.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.¥b5+ ¥d7 4.¥xd7+ £xd7 5.c4 ¤c6 6.¤c3 g6 7.d4 cxd4 8.¤xd4 ¤f6 9.f3 ¥g7 10.¥e3 0–0 11.0–0 ¦ac8 12.b3 a6 13.a4 £d8 14.£d2 £a5 15.¦fd1 ¦fd8 16.¦ac1 ¤d7 17.h3 ¤xd4 18.¥xd4 ¥xd4+ 19.£xd4 £c5 20.¢f1 £xd4 21.¦xd4 ¤c5 22.¦b1 a5 23.¢e2 f6 24.¢d2 ¢f7 25.¢c2 g5 26.¤d5 h5 27.¤e3 h4 28.¦d5 ¦c6 29.¦bd1 ¦dc8 30.¦f1 ¦b6 31.¦b1 ¦bc6 32.¦d2 ¤e6 33.¢c3 ¤c5 34.¤d5 ¤e6 35.¦f1 ¦g8 36.¤e3 ¦b8 37.¤f5 ¦b6 38.¦fd1 ¦a8 39.¦d5 ¤c7

The pawn roller normally in the endgame pieces are much more valuable than pawns, unless we are talking about a very far advanced passed pawn or unless the


40

pawns form a phalanx. Material sacrifices are rare too. The following game shows examples of both these cases: 40.¦b5!! A fantastic idea! The black rook on b6 is going to be imprisoned. 40...¤xb5+ [40...¦xb5 does not solve Black's problems completely: 41.cxb5 ¤e6 42.¢b2 b6 43.¢a3 ¤c5 44.¤e3 with an initiative for White.] 41.axb5 ¢e8?! This retreat looks somewhat unnatural. [41...¦c8!? 42.¢b2 ¦c7 (42...¦c5? gives White certain winning chances: 43.¢a3 ¢e8 44.¢a4 ¢d7 45.¤d4 ¦e5 46.¤e2 f5 47.¤c3 fxe4 48.¤d5 ¦c6 49.bxc6+ bxc6 50.fxe4 cxd5 51.¦xd5 ¦xe4 52.¦xg5) …43.¢a3?! d5 44.exd5 e6 45.¤e3 ¦d6 was more accurate.; 41...¦d8?! 42.b4 ¦a8 43.¤e3 e6 44.bxa5 ¦xa5 45.¢b4 ¦a2 46.¦d3 is on the other hand dubious, on account of the rook which is still shut in.] 42.¦a1 e6 Black has to do something, or else White will sooner or later get a real advantage because of the rook which is immured on b6. 43.¤e3 d5 44.exd5 [44.¢d4!? was the alternative. 44...¦d8 (44...¦d6 45.exd5 exd5 46.¤f5) 45.exd5 exd5 46.¤xd5 ¦e6 47.¦xa5 with an initiative for White in both cases.] 44...¦d6? does free the rook, but in the final analysis it simply goes out of the frying pan into the fire. [44...¢f7 and he should still be able to defend.] 45.c5 ¦dd8 46.¢d4 ¦ac8?! 47.¦xa5 e5+?! 48.¢c4 b6 49.b4!! a really breathtaking idea! The prosaic [49.¦a6?! ¦xc5+ 50.¢b4 ¦c1 (50...¦b8? 51.¦xb6 ¦xb6 52.¢xc5+- (Baburin in Chess Today 3335)) 51.¦xb6 ¢f7 52.¦c6 ¦e1 probably also wins by is not so clear by a long chalk.] 49...bxa5 50.bxa5 White wins because the black rooks are incapable of developing any activity. And also they were never designed to hold back linked passed pawns. 50...¦a8 51.a6 e4 52.fxe4 ¢d7 53.¤f5 ¦e8 54.c6+ Like an army of ants the pawns make their way through the thickets of the black position. 54...¢d8 55.¤d6 ¦e7 56.¢c5 f5 57.exf5 ¦e2 58.¤b7+ ¢e8 59.d6 ¦xg2 60.d7+ ¢e7 61.f6+ ¢xf6 62.c7 1–0 Short,Nigel (2707) - Ni Hua (2665) [C13] Chess Classic London ENG (4), 12.12.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.¤c3 ¤f6 4.¥g5 dxe4 5.¤xe4 ¤bd7 6.¤xf6+ ¤xf6 7.c3 h6 8.¥h4 c5 9.¥xf6 gxf6 10.£f3 cxd4 11.¥b5+ ¢e7 12.¤e2 £d5 13.£xd5 exd5 14.¤xd4 f5 15.0–0–0 ¢f6 16.¤e2 ¥e6 17.¤f4 ¦d8 18.¥c4 d4 19.¥xe6 fxe6 20.¦xd4 ¥c5 21.¦xd8 ¦xd8 22.¤h3 h5 23.¦e1 e5 24.¦e2 e4 25.¢c2 h4 26.f3 ¦e8 27.fxe4 fxe4 28.b4 ¥d6 29.¦f2+ ¢e5 30.¤g1 ¦g8 31.g3 hxg3 32.hxg3 ¦xg3 33.¤e2 ¦f3 34.¦g2 ¢d5 35.¤d4 ¦h3 36.¤b5 ¥e5 37.¦d2+ ¢e6 38.¤d4+ ¥xd4 39.¦xd4 ¦h2+ 40.¢b3 ¦e2 41.a4 e3 42.¢c4 ¦a2 43.a5 e2 44.¦e4+ ¢d6 45.¢d3 b6 46.axb6 axb6 47.¦xe2


41

In pawn endings the opposition often plays an important part. But is not always enough for a win: 47...¦xe2! The best practical choice. [The rook ending after 47...¦a8?! should also be a draw, e.g. 48.¢c4 ¦c8+ 49.¢b5 ¦xc3 50.¢xb6 ¦c6+ 51.¢b7 ¦c7+=] 48.¢xe2 b5 [48...¢d5 49.¢d2 ¢c4 50.¢c2 ¢d5 51.¢b3 b5 is also playable.] 49.¢d2 White may have taken the distant opposition (there is an odd number of squares between the kings), but he cannot transform it to the close opposition, because Black has at his disposal a counter-attack. 49...¢e6! [After 49...¢d5?? White first achieves the close opposition by 50.¢d3 and then by means of 50...¢e5 (50...¢d6 51.¢d4 ¢c6 52.¢e5 ¢c7 53.¢d5 ¢b6 54.¢d6 ¢b7 55.¢c5 ¢a6 56.¢c6 ¢a7 57.¢xb5+-) 51.c4 bxc4+ 52.¢xc4 ¢d6 53.¢b5 ¢c7 54.¢a6+- he obtains a key square for his passed b-pawn.] 50.¢d1 ¢d5 51.¢c2 ¢d6 52.¢d2 ¢e6 53.¢e3 [53.¢e2 ¢d6 54.¢f3 would be the typical technique to turn the distant opposition into a close opposition. But here it fails to 54...¢d5 (After 54...¢e5?? 55.¢e3+- White would have reached his goal.; 54...¢d7= with the virtual opposition (the rectangle d3-f3-f7-d7 around the kogs has four corner squares of the same color) is, on the other hand, also playable.) 55.¢f4?? ¢c4–+ and Black would even win.] 53...¢e5 [The distant opposition 53...¢e7 also draws.] 54.¢d3 ¢d5 55.c4+ bxc4+ 56.¢c3 ¢c6 57.¢xc4 ¢b6 58.b5 ¢b7 59.¢c5 ¢c7 60.b6+ ¢b7 61.¢b5 ¢b8! 62.¢c6 ¢c8 63.b7+ ¢b8 64.¢b6 stalemate. ½–½ Hector,Jonny (2568) - Areshchenko,Alexander (2667) [B97] Bundesliga 0910 (5.3), 12.12.2009 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver] 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.¤xd4 ¤f6 5.¤c3 a6 6.¥g5 e6 7.f4 £b6 The razor-sharp poisoned pawn variation in which theory often starts only after the 20th move! 8.£d2 £xb2 9.¦b1 £a3 10.f5 ¤c6 11.fxe6 fxe6 12.¤xc6 bxc6 13.e5 dxe5 14.¥xf6 gxf6 15.¤e4 £xa2 16.¦d1 ¥e7 17.¥d3 0–0 18.0–0 f5 19.¦f3 fxe4 20.¦xf8+ ¥xf8 21.£g5+ ¢h8N


42

[A predecessor game saw 21...¥g7 22.¥xe4 ¥b7 23.£h5 h6 24.£g6 ¦f8 25.£h7+ ¢f7 26.¥g6+ ¢f6 27.¥h5 e4 28.£g6+ ¢e5 29.£xg7+ ¦f6 1–0 Klimov,S (2509)-Virovlansky,S (2437)/Moscow 2005/ EXT 2006] 22.¦f1 £a3 23.£f6+ ¢g8 24.£f7+ ¢h8 25.¥xe4 £e3+ [Apparently the correct defense was 25...¥c5+ 26.¢h1 ¦a7! , z.B. 27.£f6+ (27.£e8+ ¢g7 28.£h5 ¢g8) 27...¦g7 28.£d8+ ¦g8 29.£f6+ and the game ends, by no means not unusual in this line, in a perpetual check.; It also seemed possible to return the piece with 25...£c5+ 26.¦f2! (Instead, after 26.¢h1 Black might threaten a back rank with ...Rb8 later on, winning a tempo)) 26...£e7 27.£xf8+ £xf8 28.¦xf8+ ¢g7 29.¦d8 ¦b8 30.¥xc6 ¢f6] 26.¢h1 £h6 27.¥xh7! £g7 This is what Black had relied upon. [27...£xh7 is mate after 28.£xf8+ £g8 29.£h6+ £h7 30.¦f8#] 28.£h5 ¦a7 [28...£h6 29.¦xf8+ £xf8 30.¥f5+ ¢g7 31.£g6+ ¢h8 32.£h7#] 29.¥d3+ [Gives away victory, which could have been obtained by 29.£e8! - so the correct answer is C). The point after 29...£xh7 (29...¢xh7 30.¦xf8 and Black has no defense against the threat 31.Qh5+ Qh6 32.Rh8+ winning the black queen.) 30.¦xf8+ ¢g7 is the retreat 31.¦f3! Which leaves Black helpless against the rook shift along the 3rd rank - he either gets checkmated or has to give the queen. 31...¦b7 (31...£h6 32.£f8+ ¢h7 33.¦h3+-; 31...£xc2 32.£f8+ ¢h7 33.¦h3+ ¢g6 34.¦h6+ ¢g5 35.£f6+ ¢g4 36.¦h4#) 32.£f8+ ¢g6 33.¦g3+ ¢h5 34.£f3+ and game over.] 29...¢g8 30.£e8 e4 31.¥c4 ¦c7 32.£d8 ¦f7 33.£xc8 ¦xf1+ 34.¥xf1 £d4 35.£xe6+ ¢g7 36.£g4+ ¢h8 37.£h5+ ¢g7 38.£g4+ ¢h8 39.£h5+ ¢g7 40.£g5+ ¢h8 41.£h4+ ¢g7 42.£g3+ ¢h8 43.c3 £d1 44.£e5+ ¢g8 45.£e6+ ¢g7 46.£e5+ ¢g8 47.¢g1 £e1 48.£e6+ ¢g7 49.£g4+ ¢h8 50.£h5+ ¢g7 51.£g5+ ¢h7 52.g3 £xc3 53.£f5+ ¢g7 54.£g4+ ¢f6 55.£f4+ ¢g7 56.£xe4 £c5+ 57.¢g2 £d5 58.£xd5 cxd5 59.¥xa6 ¥b4 60.¥b7 d4 61.¥a6 ¢h6 62.¢f3 d3 63.¥xd3 ¥c5 64.¥b5 ¥b6 65.h4 ¥c7 66.g4 ¥d8 67.¢g3 ¥e7 68.g5+ ¥xg5 69.hxg5+ ¢xg5 ½–½


43

Müller,Karsten - Appel,Ralf [B03] Bundesliga Hamburg, 12.12.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 ¤f6 2.e5 ¤d5 3.d4 d6 4.c4 ¤b6 5.exd6 exd6 6.¤c3 ¥e7 7.¥d3 0–0 8.¤ge2 c6 9.0–0 d5 10.c5 ¤6d7 11.£c2 ¤f6 12.¥g5 h6 13.¥f4 ¤h5 14.¥e3 ¦e8 15.£d2 ¤d7 16.g4 ¤hf6 17.f3 ¤f8 18.¦ae1 ¤6h7 19.¤g3 ¥g5 20.¥xg5 ¤xg5 21.¦xe8 £xe8 22.h4 ¤gh7 23.¥f5 ¤e6 24.f4 b6 25.¥xh7+ ¢xh7 26.f5 ¤f8 27.cxb6 axb6 28.g5 £d8 29.¤h5 £d6 30.£f2 ¥d7 31.¦e1 ¢g8 32.¦e5 ¦e8 33.£e3 ¦xe5 34.dxe5 £b4 35.gxh6 £xh4 36.£g3 £xg3+ 37.¤xg3 gxh6 38.¢g2 h5 39.¢h3 ¤g6 40.¤a4 b5 41.¤b6 ¤xe5 42.¤xd7 ¤xd7 43.¤xh5 ¢f8 44.¢g3 ¤e5 45.b3 b4 46.¢f4 ¤d7 47.f6 ¢e8 48.¢f5 ¢d8 49.¤f4 ¢c7 50.¤h3 ¢d6 51.¤g5 ¤e5 52.¢f4 c5 53.¢f5 c4 54.bxc4 dxc4 55.¢e4

The tricky knight My position had long since reached rock bottom and I had just been hoping for some tricks. Fortunately Rainer Knaak had recently asked to take a closer look at some knight endings for CBM 131, a circumstance which I was now able to turn to my advantage: 55...b3? Ralf Appel had reckoned that it did not matter which pawn he advanced and that the move in the game "was a quicker win". But the white knight now becomes so active all over the board that at the end it can even cooperate with the f-pawn to thwart the queen. [55...c3 is, on the other hand, a clear win, e.g. 56.¢e3 ¢c5 57.¢e2 ¢b5 58.¢d1 ¢a4 59.¢c2 ¢a3 60.¢b1 b3 61.axb3 ¢xb3–+] 56.axb3 cxb3 57.¤xf7+!? from the practical point of view, this spectacular move is also probably the best one. However, [57.¢d4 b2 58.¤e4+ ¢e6 59.¤c3 (After 59.¤d2? the knight runs into a deadly knight fork: 59...¤f3+ 60.¢c3 ¤xd2–+) 59...¢xf6 60.¤b1 also leads to a drawn position according to Tablebase.] 57...¢c7 [After 57...¢e6 the game can be saved by the line shown after the game by Appel: 58.¤g5+ ¢d7 (58...¢xf6 59.¢d4 b2 60.¤e4+ ¢e6 61.¤d2 ¤f3+ 62.¢c3 ¤xd2 63.¢xb2=) 59.¢xe5 (But not 59.f7? ¢e7 60.¤e6 ¢xf7 and the white forces cannot stop the b-pawn.) 59...b2 60.¤h7!! The decisive subtlety in the move order.


44

(60.f7? ¢e7 , however, loses disastrously.) 60...b1£ 61.f7 £xh7 62.f8¤+= (62.f8£ is of course also playable.) ; 57...¤xf7 leads directly to the loss of the b-pawn: 58.¢d3 ¢c5 59.¢c3=] 58.¢xe5 b2 59.¤g5 b1£ 60.f7 and the unfortunate position of Black's king on c7 will be his undoing. 60...£b2+ 61.¢f5 £f2+ [61...¢d7 62.¤h7= (After the game, my opponent correctly pointed out that 62.f8¤+ also holds the draw. But it of course makes no sense to play that, because Black can even give up a whole queen without losing) ] 62.¢g6 [But not 62.¢e6? £f4 63.¤h7 £h6+ 64.¢e5 £g7+ 65.¢e6 £g6+ 66.¤f6 £h6 67.¢e5 £f8 68.¢e6 ¢d8 69.¤d5 £g7 70.¤f6 £h6 71.¢f5 £f8 72.¢e6 £e7+–+] 62...¢d7 63.¤h7 ¢e7 64.f8£+ £xf8 65.¤xf8 ¢xf8 ½–½ Karjakin,Sergey (2723) - Mamedyarov,Shakhriyar (2719) [C83] World Cup Khanty-Mansiysk (5.1), 03.12.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 a6 4.¥a4 ¤f6 5.0–0 ¤xe4 6.d4 b5 7.¥b3 d5 8.dxe5 ¥e6 9.¤bd2 ¤c5 10.c3 ¥e7 11.¥c2 d4 12.¤b3 d3 13.¥b1 ¤xb3 14.axb3 ¥f5 15.b4 0–0 16.¦e1 £d5 17.h3 ¦fd8 18.g4 ¥e6 19.¦e3 h5 20.£xd3 £xd3 21.¥xd3 hxg4 22.hxg4 ¥d5 23.¥c2 ¥xf3 24.¦xf3 ¤xe5 25.¦h3 g6 26.g5 ¦e8 27.¥f4 ¥f8 28.¦e3 ¥d6 29.¥b3 ¤c4 30.¥xc4 ¥xf4 31.¦f3 ¥h2+ 32.¢xh2 bxc4 33.¦f4 ¦e5 34.¦xc4 ¦xg5 35.¦a5 ¦xa5 36.bxa5 ¦a7 37.¢g3 ¢f8 38.¢f4 ¢e7 39.b4 ¢d7 40.¢e5 ¦b7 41.¦d4+ ¢c8 42.¢f6 ¦b5 43.¦f4 ¦d5 44.¢xf7 g5 45.¦f6 ¦d3 46.c4 ¦d4 47.c5 ¦xb4 48.c6 ¢d8 49.¦f5

A mate attack out of the blue. In endgames one usually doesn't count with a direct mate attack anymore, putting weight on technical matters. Yet every now and then this fires back: 49...¦b2? Runs into an astonishing counter attack. [49...g4 50.¦d5+ ¢c8 51.¦g5 ¢b8 52.¦g8+ ¢a7 53.¢e7 ¦d4 54.¦d8 ¦f4 55.¢d7 ¦xf2 56.¦g8 ¦f7+ 57.¢c8 ¦h7 58.¦xg4 ¦h8+ 59.¢xc7 ¦h7+ is drawn since the white king finds no


45

dry spot against the rain of checks.] 50.f4!! ¦f2 [After 50...gxf4 51.¦h5 the black f-pawn forms an umbrella against the check rain of Black's rook, so that the back rank mate can't be prevented anymore.] 51.¦d5+ ¢c8 52.¢e7 [52.¢e7 ¦e2+ 53.¦e5 ¦c2 54.f5 ¦xc6 55.f6+-] 1–0 Gordon,Stephen (2535) - Rogozenco,Dorian (2541) [A56] BL 0910 Hamburger SK - SG Turm Trier (3.3), 14.11.2009 [Analysis by Reeh,Oliver] 1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e5 4.¤c3 d6 5.e4 ¥e7 6.g3 0–0 7.¥g2 ¤bd7 8.¤ge2 a6 9.a4 ¤e8 10.0–0 b6 11.¥e3 g6 12.¥h6 ¤g7 13.f4 ¦a7 14.£d2 f5 15.exf5 gxf5 16.¤d1 £e8 17.¤e3 £g6 18.¥xg7 ¢xg7 19.fxe5 ¤xe5 20.¤f4 £h6 21.b4 ¥g5 Black goes for an all-out attack on the kingside and surrenders his whole queenside. [21...a5!?] 22.a5 ¤g6 23.axb6 ¦b7 24.bxc5 ¤xf4 25.gxf4 ¥xf4 26.¦xf4 £xf4 27.£c3+ ¢g8 28.cxd6 ¦g7 29.c5 £g5

[29...£h4!? would have prevented White's following move, leading to an unclear position.] 30.£e5! This powerful centralization of the queen takes the sting out of Black's kingside attack. 30...f4 31.£xg5 ¦xg5 Here White can exploit the fact that the black rook f8 is an indispensable defender of the back rank - he wins with 32.¦f1! - answer C). 32...fxe3 [32...f3 33.c6! and the capture on g2 is no threat.] 33.¦xf8+ ¢xf8 34.d7! The decisive deflection - the rook on g5 is a fine attacking piece, yet it is no help whatsoever against the passed pawns on the queenside. 34...¥xd7 35.b7+- ¥h3 36.b8£+ ¢g7 37.£c7+ ¢g6 38.£c6+ ¢f7 39.£c7+ ¢g6 40.£d6+ ¢h5 41.£g3! White has correctly calculated that the bishop ending is won. 41...¦xg3 42.hxg3 e2 [Or 42...¥g4 43.d6 ¢g5 44.¥f3! (44.c6? ¢f6=) 44...¥e6 45.c6 ¢f6 46.¥e2 ¥d5 (46...a5 47.¥b5+-) 47.c7 ¥e6 48.¥xa6 winning] 43.¥f3+! ¢g5 [43...¥g4 44.¥xg4+ ¢xg4 45.¢f2 ¢f5 46.¢xe2] 44.¥xe2 a5 45.¥b5 ¢f6 46.¢f2 ¢e5 47.d6 ¢d5 48.d7 ¥xd7 49.¥xd7 ¢xc5 50.¢f3 ¢b4 51.¢g4 a4 52.¥xa4 1–0


46

Cheparinov,Ivan (2667) - Caruana,Fabiano (2662) [A29] 17th TCh-Eur Novi Sad (1), 22.10.2009 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.c4 ¤f6 2.¤c3 e5 3.¤f3 ¤c6 4.g3 ¤d4 5.¥g2 ¤xf3+ 6.¥xf3 ¥b4 7.0–0 0–0 8.¥g2 c6 9.d3 h6 10.¥d2 ¦e8 11.¦c1 a6 12.a3 ¥f8 13.b4 d5 14.cxd5 cxd5 15.¤a4 ¥g4 16.h3 ¥h5 17.¤c5 b6 18.¤a4 ¦e6 19.¦e1 ¦c8 20.¦xc8 £xc8 21.£b3 £d7 22.¤c3 e4 23.dxe4 ¤xe4 24.¤xd5 ¤xd2 25.£d3 £b5 26.£xd2 ¦xe2 27.¦xe2 ¥xe2 28.£e3 ¥c4 29.¤xb6 ¥e6 30.¥f1 £c6 31.¥g2 £b5 32.¤a8 £c4 33.h4 g6 34.¤b6 £b5 35.£d4 a5 36.¥f1 £f5 37.¥d3 £f3 38.bxa5 £d1+ 39.¢h2 ¥f5 40.a6 £xd3 41.£xd3 ¥xd3 42.a7 ¥e4

The knight in the corner The old saying "A knight on the rim is dim" is well illustrated in the following game: 43.a4?! Cheparinov continues to play for a win, instead of going in for the draw after [43.a8£ ¥xa8 44.¤xa8 ¥xa3 , but one little detail slipped his mind.] 43...¥b4! [Presumably Cheparinov had planned 43...¥c5? 44.a8£+ ¥xa8 45.¤xa8 ¥xf2 46.a5 (Baburin)] 44.a8£+ ¥xa8 45.¤xa8 ¥a5 This imprisons the knight for a very long time. Despite that, the position should still be drawn, since in any case the black rook's pawn has to queen on a square of the wrong colour. But of course, it is very difficult to hold the ending over the board. 46.g4 ¢f8 47.¢g3 ¢e7 48.h5 gxh5 49.gxh5 ¢e6 50.¢f4 f5 51.¢e3 ¢e5 52.¢d3 ¢d5 53.¢e3 ¢e5 54.¢d3 f4 55.¢c4 f3 56.¢d3?! from a practical point of view, it was better to free the knight from its exile immediately: [56.¢b5! ¥e1 57.¤b6 ¥xf2 (57...¢f5 58.a5 ¥xf2 59.a6 ¥d4 60.a7 f2 61.a8£ f1£+ 62.¢c6=) 58.¤c4+ ¢f4 59.¤d2 ¢e3 (59...¥a7 60.¢c4=) 60.¤xf3! ¢xf3 61.¢c4= (Baburin in Chess Today 3272). Because the white king is within Rauser's drawing zone: a3-c5-d4-e5-h2. The additional white a-pawn is irrelevant for this; all it could do would be to help White.] 56...¢f4 57.¢d4 ¥e1 58.¢d3 ¥xf2 59.¤c7 ¥a7 60.¤d5+? loses the h5-pawn, as does [60.¤b5? ¢g4 61.¤d6 (After 61.¤xa7 ¢g3–+ the f-pawn runs through.) 61...¥b8 62.¤e4 ¢xh5 63.¤d2 ¢g4 64.¢e4 f2 65.¢e3 ¥a7+ 66.¢e2


47

¢g3 67.¢f1 h5–+; The knight had to hurry to the rescue with 60.¤e6+ After that, surprisingly, I could not find a win. 60...¢g4 61.¤g7 ¥b6 (61...¥d4 62.¤e6=) 62.¢d2 ¢h3 63.¤f5 ¥d8 64.¢e1 ¢g2 65.¤e3+ ¢g1 66.¤g4 (66.¢d1!?) 66...¥b6 67.¢d2 ¢g2 68.¢d3 ¢h3 69.a5 ¥xa5 70.¤e3 ¥b6 71.¤c2 ¥f2 72.¢e4 ¢g4 73.¤b4 ¥c5 74.¤d3= Black may be able to win the knight, but not the game, because the white king can always take refuge in Rauser's drawing zone.] 60...¢g5! 61.a5 [61.¢d2 ¢xh5 62.¢e1 ¢g4 63.¤f6+ ¢g5 64.¤e4+ ¢f4 65.¤f6 ¥d4–+] 61...¢xh5 62.a6 [62.¤e3 ¢h4 63.¢e4 f2 64.¤f1 ¢g4–+] 62...¢h4 63.¤e3 h5 0–1 Getz,Nicolai (2270) - O'Toole,George E (2146) [C54] 85th Masters Hastings (5), 01.01.2010 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥c4 ¥c5 4.d3 ¤f6 5.0–0 d6 6.c3 a6 7.¥b3 ¥a7 8.¤bd2 0–0 9.h3 h6 10.¦e1 ¤h5 11.¤f1 £f6 12.¥e3 ¤f4 13.¤g3 g6 14.¤h2 h5 15.£d2 ¥xe3 16.fxe3 ¤e6 17.¦f1 £h4 18.£f2 ¤g5 19.¢h1 ¥e6 20.¥c2 ¦ae8 21.d4 ¥d7 22.¦ad1 ¤h7 23.¤f3 £e7 24.a3 ¤g5 25.d5 ¤d8 26.¤xg5 £xg5 27.£f6 £xf6 28.¦xf6 ¢g7 29.¦df1 h4 30.¤e2 ¥b5 31.¦6f2 f6 32.a4 ¥xe2 33.¦xe2 ¤f7 34.a5 ¤g5 35.¢h2 ¦b8 36.¦a1 f5 37.exf5 gxf5 38.¦f1 ¤e4 39.¥xe4 fxe4 40.¦a1 b5 41.axb6 ¦xb6 42.¦a4 ¦fb8 43.¦xe4 ¦xb2 44.¦xb2 ¦xb2 45.¦xh4 ¦d2 46.¦c4 ¦xd5 47.¦xc7+ ¢f6 48.¦c6 a5 49.¢g3 ¢e6 50.¢f3 ¦d2 51.¦a6 ¦a2 52.c4 ¢e7 53.h4 a4 54.h5 ¦a1 55.¢e4 a3 56.h6 ¦h1 57.¢f5 ¦xh6 58.¦a7+ ¢e8 59.¦xa3 ¢d7 60.g4 ¦h1 61.¦a7+ ¢c6 62.g5 ¦e1 63.e4 ¦f1+ 64.¢e6 ¦g1 65.¢f6 ¦f1+ 66.¢e6 ¦g1 67.¦a6+ ¢c5 68.¦xd6 ¦xg5 69.¦d5+ ¢xc4 70.¦xe5

Horizontal barriers. This method of keeping a king at a distance from a passed pawn is frequently more effective than a vertical barrier. 70...¦g8 [After 70...¦g4 71.¢f5 ¦g8 72.¦a5 White wins in a similar fashion to the game.] 71.¦a5 ¦e8+ 72.¢f5 ¦f8+ 73.¢g5 ¦e8!? here this typical move sets another little trap. [After


48

73...¦g8+?! the white king quickly gets closer. 74.¢f6 ¦f8+ 75.¢e7+-] 74.¢f4 [The over-hasty 74.e5?? spoils everything because of 74...¢b4 75.¦d5 ¢c4=] 74...¦f8+ [After 74...¢d4 75.e5 (75.¦d5+?! ¢c4 76.¦d1?! would be bad technique. After 76...¦f8+ White has to find 77.¢e3! ¦e8 78.¦c1+ ¢b5 79.¢f4 ¦f8+ 80.¢g5 ¦e8 81.¦e1+-) 75...¦f8+ 76.¢g5 the white king is also cut off, but the threat of the advance of the e-pawn overloads the defense.] 75.¦f5 In itself the checking distance of the black rook (3 squares) is large enough. But because we are dealing with a horizontal barrier, the white rook can simply join the party. 75...¦e8 76.¦f6 White moves the barrier one rank forward. Typical technique for the present case. 76...¢d4 77.¦d6+ ¢c5 78.e5 ¦f8+ 79.¦f6 ¦d8 [79...¦xf6+ 80.exf6 ¢d6 81.¢f5 ¢d7 82.¢g6 ¢e8 83.¢g7+-] 80.¢f5 ¦d7 [80...¦h8 81.¦a6 ¦h5+ 82.¢f4 ¢d5 83.¦d6+ ¢c5 Since the pawn has crossed the centre line and since the black rook is no longer well placed to counter an attack based on a vertical barrier White can now make that change: 84.¦d8 ¢c6 85.e6 ¦h7 86.¢e5 ¢c7 87.¦d4+-] 81.¦a6 ¦f7+ 82.¢g6 ¦f1 83.e6 ¦g1+ 84.¢f7 ¦f1+ 85.¢e8 ¢b5 86.¦d6 ¢c5 87.¢d7 ¦f6 88.¦d1 ¦h6 89.e7 ¦h7 90.¢d8 1–0

Sasikiran,Krishnan (2653) - Aronian,Levon (2781) [D15] 7th World Team Championship Bursa (5), 09.01.2010 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.¤f3 ¤f6 4.¤c3 a6 5.g3 dxc4 6.a4 e6 7.¥g2 c5 8.dxc5 £xd1+ 9.¤xd1 ¥d7 10.¤e5 ¥c6 11.¤xc6 ¤xc6 12.¥d2 ¤d5 13.¦c1 ¥xc5 14.¦xc4 ¥e7 15.¤e3 0–0–0 16.0–0 ¢b8 17.¤xd5 exd5 18.¦c3 ¦he8 19.¦e3 ¥f6 20.¦xe8 ¦xe8 21.e3 d4 22.¦c1 ¥g5 23.¥xc6 bxc6 24.¦xc6 dxe3 25.¥xe3 ¥xe3 26.fxe3 ¦xe3 27.¦xa6 ¦b3 28.¦d6 ¢c7 29.¦d2 ¦b4 30.¦c2+ ¢d7 31.¦d2+ ¢c7 32.¦c2+ ¢d7 33.a5 ¦b5 34.¦d2+ ¢c7 35.¦c2+ ¢d7 36.b4 ¦xb4 37.¦a2 ¢c7 38.a6 ¢b8 39.¦f2 f6 40.¦e2 h5 41.¦e8+ ¢a7 42.¦e7+ ¢xa6 43.¦xg7 ¢b6 44.¦f7 h4 45.¦xf6+ ¢c7 46.¦f4 ¦b1+ 47.¢g2 hxg3 48.hxg3 ¢d7 49.¦e4 ¦b8 50.¦e3 ¦h8 51.¢f3 ¦f8+ 52.¢g4


49

Vertical barriers When, as is the case in the present position, the defending rook is operating from its own back rank, things first of all depend on whether the pawn has crossed the centre line or not. Because, if it has, then the checking distance is too short and the attacking side has good winning chances. Here Aronian's rook is still far enough away and so cutting off his king by two files does not help either. But Black must defend very accurately: 52...¢d6! The king must be prepared to push back the white rook if the white king pushes too far forward. 53.¢g5 ¦g8+? This automatic check spoils things because it lets the white king get too close. [It is only after 53...¢d5! 54.¢g6 that Black can give the check: (After 54.g4 ¦g8+ 55.¢f5 ¦f8+ 56.¢g6 ¦g8+= the white king cannot get any further forward.) 54...¦g8+ 55.¢f7 ¦g4 56.¢f6 ¢d4 57.¢f5 ¦g8 58.¦a3 ¦f8+ 59.¢g6 ¢e4 60.¦a4+ ¢f3 61.g4 ¦g8+ 62.¢f5 ¦f8+ 63.¢g6 (63.¢e6 ¦f4=) 63...¦g8+=] 54.¢f6 ¢d5 [54...¦f8+!? was far more resilient, as can be seen from the following sample line: 55.¢g7 ¦f5 56.¢g6 ¦f8 57.¦a3 ¦g8+ 58.¢f7 ¦g4 59.¢f6 ¦g8 60.¦d3+ ¢c5 61.¢e6 ¢c4 62.¦a3 ¢b4 63.¦f3 ¢c5 64.¢f7 ¦g4 65.¢f6 ¢d5 66.¢f5 ¦g8 67.¦d3+ ¢c4 68.¦a3 Again and again White must make use of the whole board. 68...¢b4 69.¦f3 ¦f8+ 70.¢g4 ¦g8+ 71.¢h5 ¢c5 72.g4 ¦h8+ 73.¢g6 ¦g8+ 74.¢f5 ¦f8+ 75.¢e4 ¦e8+ 76.¢f4 ¦f8+ 77.¢g3 ¦g8 78.¦f6 and White wins thanks to the horizontal barrier.] 55.¦e5+ ¢d6 56.¦e3 ¢d5 57.¦e5+ ¢d6 58.¦g5 ¦f8+ 59.¢g7 ¦f3 60.g4 ¦f4 61.¢h6 ¢e7 62.¦g7+ ¢f8 63.g5 ¦f1 [63...¦a4 64.¦b7 ¦a6+ 65.g6 does not help either, because Black is not allowed to play Kg8 and Ra8 at the same time.] 64.¦a7 ¦g1 65.¢g6 ¦g2 66.¦a8+ ¢e7 67.¦a5 ¢f8 68.¦a8+ ¢e7 69.¦g8! and Aronian resigned because Sasikiran will sooner or later achieve the Lucena position and win by building a bridge, e.g. 69...¦g1 70.¢h7 ¦h1+ 71.¢g7 ¦g1 72.g6 ¦h1 73.¦a8 ¦h2 74.¦a4 ¢e8 75.¦e4+ ¢d7 76.¢f7 ¦f2+ 77.¢g8 ¦h2 78.g7 ¦h1 79.¢f7 ¦f1+ 80.¢g6 ¦g1+ 81.¢f6 ¦f1+ 82.¢g5 ¦g1+ 83.¦g4 and the rook has completed the construction of a bridge for the king. 1–0 Shirov,Alexei (2723) - Kramnik,Vladimir (2788) [C42] Corus A Wijk aan Zee (11), 29.01.2010 [Analysis by Karsten Müller] 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.¤xe5 d6 4.¤f3 ¤xe4 5.d4 d5 6.¥d3 ¤c6 7.0–0 ¥e7 8.c4 ¤b4 9.¥e2 0–0 10.¤c3 ¥f5 11.a3 ¤xc3 12.bxc3 ¤c6 13.¦e1 ¦e8 14.cxd5 £xd5 15.¥f4 ¦ac8 16.h3 ¥e4 17.¤d2 ¥xg2 18.¥g4 ¥h1 19.f3 ¥h4 20.¦e4 f5 21.¢xh1 fxg4 22.hxg4 £f7 23.£b3 ¤e7 24.£xf7+ ¢xf7 25.c4 ¤g6 26.¥h2 ¥f6 27.¦b1 b6 28.d5 ¥e5 29.f4 ¥d6 30.a4 h6 31.¦be1 ¤f8 32.f5 ¤d7 33.¥xd6 cxd6 34.¦e6 ¤e5?


50

The board on fire In endgames with rooks and knights it often depends on who has the initiative. This is because both pieces need to be active and are not well suited to passive defense. For that reason Alexei Shirov grasped his opportunity with both hands and set the board on fire in his usual fashion. 35.c5!! This pawn sacrifice brings Kramnik to the brink of defeat, because all the white pieces up to the king are threatening to become active. However, because it will take the monarch too long to become effectively involved, Black should still be able to keep his head above water. 35...¤d3 [35...bxc5? is an admission that White's forces can deploy to best effect: 36.¤e4 ¦xe6 37.dxe6+ ¢e7 38.¦b1 ¦c7 39.¤c3+-; 35...¦xe6 is probably also playable, but after 36.dxe6+ ¢e7 37.cxd6+ ¢xd6 38.¦e4 ¦c1+?! 39.¢g2 ¦c2 40.¢g3 White is still in the driving seat, because 40...¦xd2? can be met with 41.¦xe5 ¢xe5?? 42.e7 .] 36.cxd6 [The alternative 36.¤c4!? is also extremely dangerous, but Kramnik would probably have held things together, e.g. 36...¤xe1 37.¤xd6+ ¢f8 38.¤xe8 (38.c6 ¦xe6 39.fxe6 ¦a8 40.c7 ¤d3 41.c8£+ ¦xc8 42.¤xc8 and the white king is too far away for White to be able to win.) 38...bxc5 (38...¦xe8? 39.c6+-) 39.¤xg7 (After 39.¤d6 the only move is 39...¦d8 , but it should suffice for a draw.) 39...¢xg7 (39...c4? 40.¦c6+-) 40.¦xe1 c4 41.¢g2 c3 42.d6 ¦c4 and the great drawish tendency of rook endings should save Black.] 36...¤xe1 37.d7 ¦cd8 38.dxe8£+ ¦xe8 39.¤c4 [39.¤e4!? possibly offered better practical chances, because the knight is slightly more flexible. But after 39...¦xe6 40.dxe6+ ¢f8 (avoiding a possible check from d5) 41.¤c3 a6 things should also probably end in a draw. The white king simply needs too long to be able to get involved.] 39...¦xe6 40.fxe6+ Shirov creates linked passed pawns, from which the teeth can be drawn, however, by a knight sacrifice. [A sample line after 40.dxe6+ goes: 40...¢e7 41.¤e5 ¢d6 42.¢h2 ¤c2 43.¤c4+ ¢e7 44.¢g3 ¤b4 45.¤e3 a6 46.¢f4 ¢d6 47.¤c4+ ¢c5 48.¤d2 b5 49.g5 ¤d5+ 50.¢e5 hxg5 51.¤e4+ ¢c6 52.axb5+ axb5 53.¤xg5 ¤e7=] 40...¢e7 41.¤e5 ¢d6 42.¤c4+ ¢e7 43.¤e5 ¢d6 44.¢h2 [After 44.¢g1 ¤c2 45.¤c4+ ¢e7 46.¢f2 ¤b4 47.¤e3 ¤xd5 48.¤xd5+


51

¢xe6 we have a similar ending to that in the game. The white knight cannot keep up with the struggle on both sides of the board, which makes a win impossible, e.g. 49.¤f4+ ¢f6 50.¢e3 g6 51.¢f3 h5 52.gxh5 gxh5 53.¤xh5+ ¢e5=] 44...¤c2 45.¤c4+ ¢e7 46.¢g3 ¤b4 47.¤e3 ¤xd5 48.¤xd5+ ¢xe6 49.¤c3 a6 50.¢f4 [Nor can the white knight win after 50.¤a2 e.g. 50...a5 51.¤c3 ¢d6 52.¢f4 g6 53.¤e4+ ¢c6 54.¢e5 b5 55.¢f6 bxa4 56.¢xg6 a3 57.¤c3 ¢c5 58.¢xh6 ¢c4 59.¤a2 ¢b3=] 50...b5 51.axb5 and a draw was agreed. A sample variation goes: [51.¤xb5 axb5 52.axb5 g6 is also completely level.] 51...axb5 52.¤xb5 ¢f6 53.¤d6 g5+ 54.¢e4 ¢g6 55.¤f5 h5= ½–½

20188021 chess endgames

Documents

e7 fe8

cxd5 cxd5

cxd5 c4

game of chess

bacrot kramnik

bishop controls

e5 xe5

cxd5 fxe5