W
hen studying the excellent book Secrets of Grandmaster Play by John Nunn and Peter Griffiths, my attention was drawn to a position which occurred in the game Nunn-Van der Wiel (Wijk aan Zee 1 982).White to move
It was suggested to pupils of our school as a piece of homework (with the right to move the pieces on the board ) after studying the topic 'Opposite-colour bishops in the middle
game' .
'But where are the opposite-colour bishops here?' you may ask. This will soon become clear.
White has a clear advantage. 28 .l:!.dh 1 suggests itself, but Black has the reply 28 .. . �f6. Not finding anything convincing here, John Nunn decided not to allow the bishop to go to f6 .
2 9 e5!?
The start of a combination calculated 12 ( ! ) moves ahead .
29 . . . llxh8!
The only defence. All other attempts are easily refuted .
A) 29 . . . d5. Petya Kiryakov and Vova Baklan pointed out the amusing variation 30 Ji.g5!?
�xg5 (30 .. . .l:ta8 31 'ifxa8) 3 1 'ifc5+ 'it>b8 32 l:.xg8 (there is also 32 'i!i'xc8+) 32 . . . .l:txg8 33
"iif8+ 'ii'e8 34 'ifxe8+ l:txe8 35 l:th 1 . Not bad , but why go for a combination, when there is a simple solution : 30 l:tdh 1 with the threat of 3 1
�g8 .l:txg8 3 2 .l::th8.
B) 29 ... l':txg7 30 l2Jxe6+. (The suggestion of l lakha Kadymova is also strong: 30 exd6+!
..txd6, but then she continued 3 1 l':txc8+
'it>xc8 32 ..tf4! Ji.xf4 33 "ii'c5+, which is unconvincing: 33 .. .'�b8 34 'ii'f8+ .tea 35 'iVxg7 'ii'd7. Meanwhile, 31 lLlf5 ! ! wins immed iately. ) 30 .. . fxe6 3 1 exd6+ . (There is also another way: 31 i..b6+ �c6 32 llxc8+
.txc8 33 'it'c7+ 'itb5 34 exd6 (34 b3; 34 Ji.e3).) 31 . . . Ji.xd6 32 "ii'b6+ 'itb8 33 "i¥xd6+
.l:tc7 (33 .. . '>t>a8 34 'ii'c5! 'iii>b8 35 Ji.f4+) 34 l:txc8+ ..txc8 35 �a7+ and wins.
C ) 29 .. . dxe5 30 lLlb3 "ii'b5 3 1 Ji.b6+ 'i+'xb6 32 lid?+ 'itc6 (32 .. . 'it>xd7 33 'ii'xb6 �d5 34 1\i'a7+) 33 l2Ja5+ 'ii'xa5 34 'ii'xb7+ '>t>c5 35 .l:.xg8 l:.xg8 36 l:ic7+. Many pupils of our school found another, perhaps even more spectacular way of attacking: 30 l2Jxe6+!?
fxe6 3 1 Ji.b6+ 'itc6 32 l:id7! <;i(xd7 (32 .. .'it>b5 33 b3) 33 'it'xb7+ 'itd6 34 'iVxc8 llxc8 35 l:lxc8.
30 exd6+
31 gxhS"ii'
Ji.xd6
The obvious move, but not the only one. We will return later to this position .
31 . . . l:txh8
32 lbxe6+
33 'ifb6+
34 'iVxd6
fxe6
�c8 'ii'c6
The only defence against the numerous threats. Bad was 34 .. . .i.d5 35 .lli.f4 �b7 36 'i!Vc7+ �a8 37 .i.e3 .lli.b7 38 .l:!.d8+.
Nothing is given by 35 'it'd4 .l:!.e8 36 .tf4 (with the threat of 37 'iie5) in view of 36 .. . 'ifd5.
Therefore 35 'iixb4 suggests itself, but after 35 .. . .l:td8! 36 �xd8+ �xd8 Black successful
ly defends, for example: 37 .lli.g5+ �c7 38 'ifa5+ �b8 39 'ifd8+ .lli.c8, or 37 'iff8+ 'ife8!
(weaker is 37 ... �c7 38 .i.f4+).
I n a middlegame with opposite-colour bish
ops the most important thing, as we know, is the initiative. Even if there are comparatively few pieces left on the board , in the first instance you should think not about winning material, but about creating threats to the enemy king .
35 'ife5! !
Threatening 36 .lli.f4; i f 3 5 .. . .Uh5 there follows 36 .i.g5.
35 . . . .l:rd8
36 .l:rxd8+ ..t>xd8
37 .i.g5+ �d7
37 .. . �c8? 38 'it'h8+, or 37 .. . ..t>e8? 38 'ifh8+
�f7 39 'ii'h7+ �f8 40 'ii'e7+ 'itg8 41 .i.f6.
38 'ii'g7+ �d6
39 'iff8+ �d5
39 .. . �e5 40 .lli.f4+ �d5 41 'iixb4 was even worse for Black.
40 'ifxb4
Only now is this an appropriate moment to capture the b4-pawn .
This was the position for which Nunn aimed, when he made his 29th move. He sensed that, despite the material equality, things would be bad for Black. A very deep calculation and a completely correct assess
ment!
Why is White's advantage so appreciable?
The entire blame lies on the awkward position of the black king in the centre of the board , and , as usua l , the presence of opposite-colour bishops greatly strengthens the attack. Nunn's pieces are dominant on the dark squares. The enemy bishop is unable to help here in any way, and the q ueen also is hardly participating in the defence, since it is tied to its own bishop.
Thus the king remains alone against White's superior forces .
I should also mention the good position of the f3-pawn (as stipulated by the rules - on a square of the colour of the opponent's bishop) - it secures the e4-point for the queen and takes away this square from the black queen. The queenside pawns are also
You can't get by without a Combination!
l2J
1 59 ready to join the attack: b2-b3 followed byc2-c4+. White is also threatening the imme
diate 41 c4+ �d4 (4 1 . . . �e5 42 Wc3+ �d6
The concluding stage of the game convinc
ingly demonstrates how helpless Black is.
We will only examine the main variations - a detailed analysis can be found in the afore
mentioned book. defence, but even then after 44 'ii'f7 + �d6 45 c4! 'it'd? (45 .. . 'ii'c7? 46 c5+ �c6 47 'ii'e6+
'it>b5 48 c6! ) 46 'ii'f8+ �e6 47 'ii'h6+ �f7 48 'lh7+ White would have retained a powerful attack.
43 'iff7+ 'ifi>d4
44 'ii'b3! e4
The only defence against mate by the bishop from e3.
Threatening not only a terrible check at c7, but also 52 f5. If Black advances his pawn : transposing into a position with opposite
colour bishops was the only correct solution for White. However, in their analysis only two of our pupils opted for this course (and on the 35th move, alas, they only considered 35 'ii'xb4? instead of 35 'ike5 ! ! ) . All the rest tried to exploit immediately the unfortunate posi
tion of the black king and the power of the g7-pawn . To my surprise they succeeded , and, what's more, in various ways.
Let us return to the position arising after 29 e5 .U.xh8 30 exd6+ .i.xd6 . Apart from the move in the game, Nunn also examines 31 ttJxe6+ fxe6.
The variation he gives is 32 'ii'b6+ 'Ot>b8 33 'ifxd6+ 'Ot>a8, and White has no time to capture on h8, since his c2-pawn is attacked . Kiryakov and Baklan found the excellent quiet move 32 'ii'd4! 1 . If 32 .. . l::l.hd8 White wins by 33 g8'ii'! . If instead 32 • • • '0t>b8, then 33 b3! 'ii'c6 (33 . . . 1\i'ea 34 1\i'xd6+ 'Ot>a8 35 gxh81\i' 1\i'xh8 36 'ii'b6) 34 gxh8'ii' 'ii'xc2+ 35 'Ot>a1 l:.xh8 36 1\i'xhS+ i..c8 37 l;lc1 and wins.
However, as Nunn pointed out in the 2nd edition of his book Secrets of Grandmaster Chess, Black can put up a tough defence by 32 . . . i..d5! 33 gxh8'i!V l:.xh8 34 'iig7+ 'iid7 35 'ii'xh8 i..xf3 or 34 'ili'xh8 b3.
The analysis by Kadymova was less good , unfortunately: 32 i..b6+ 'Ot>c6 33 gxh8'iV l:.xh8 34 i..d4 .Uc8 35 'ii'b6+ 'Ot>d7. She then considered 36 'iWxb7+ l:!.c7 37 'ii'e4, but this is unconvincing in view of 37 .. . b3! 38 cxb3 'ili'xb3, and Black's chances are not worse.
36 i..c5! wins. However, Black can defend more accurately: 34 .. . 'ii'b5 (instead of 34 .. . .:c8?) 3 5 i..xh8 �c5 3 6 'ii'xc5 i..xc5, and the most probable outcome is a draw. Another way of making a draw was later suggested by Nunn: 34 . . . l:tb8!? 35 1i'b6+ 'Ot>d7 36 i..c5 'ii'a2+! 37 'Ot>xa2 i..d5+ 38 lixd5 l:!.xb6.
Perhaps the most unexpected and spectacu
lar idea was found by grandmaster Sergey Dolmatov during a training game which began from the original position: 30 i..g5!?.
After checking the variations we concluded that Black is helpless, for example: 30 .. . Ir.he8 31 i..xe 7 l:lxe 7 32 exd6+ �xd6 33 tt'lb5+
'Ot>e5 (33 .. . '0t>c6 34 l:td6+ 'Ot>xb5 35 'iY'b6+) 34 'ii'd4+ 'Ot>f5 35 t2Jd6+ 'Ot>g5 36 l:tg 1 + 'it>h6 37 l:.h 1 + 'it>g5 38 'i!kh4 mate. Nunn agreed with our opinion , adding the interesting variation 30 .. . l:.hg8 31 i..xe7 dxe5 32 tbb3 (perpetual check results from 32 t2Jxe6+ fxe6 33 .id6+
'Ot>d7 34 i..c5+) 32 .. . 'ii'b5! 33 tbc5 (33 .id6+
'Ot>c6 34 'ii'e3 is unclear) 33 .. . l:.a8 34 If.d7+
'Ot>c8 35 'iVxb7+ 'ii'xb7 36 l:txb7 l:.xg7 37 .id6 and wins (the refinements in brackets are mine). However, here Black's defence can be improved: 34 . . . '0t>c6! (instead of 34 . . . Wc8?).
Going into an ending by 35 'ifxb7+ is now unpromising, which means that White is obliged to repeat moves: 35 :d6+ 'it>c7 36 l:td7 + '.t>c6 ! . So that, alas, the brilliant bishop move to g5 is not good enough to win . Let us return t o the position with which we began. Seryozha Movsesian analysed the consequences of 29 tiJb3 ! ? 'i!kb5 (29 ... 'i'c6 30 tba5 'ii'b5 3 1 l:txg8 .l:txg8 32 J:!.d4).
I ncidentally, in the game the knight had only just been at b3, and the queen at b5 - the last moves were 28 tbd4 'iWa4.
30 l:.xg8 .l:txg8 31 e5! d5
Black loses quickly after 31 . . . Vxe5 32 ii.b6+
'it>c8 33 ttJa5 or 31 . . . l:.xg7 32 exd6+ i..xd6 33
You can't get by without a Combination!
ttJ
1 6 1'i'd4 1Ve5 34 Wb6+. I f 3 1 . . . dxe5 Movsesian suggested 32 ..tb6+!? 'ifxb6 (32 .. .'it>c8 33 ltJa5; 32 .. . <iitc6 33 l2Ja5+ Wxa5 34 ..txa5 .i.c5 35 .l:td8 or 35 .l:.d6+) 33 l:td7+, but the situation arising after the win of the q ueen (33 . . . <iitxd7 34 'ilxb6 .i.d5, or 33 .. . <iitc6 34 ltJa5+ <iitxd7 35 'i!i'xb6 .i.d5), is unclear, in Nunn's opinion . White's attack can be strengthened by 32 .i.c5 ! , for example, 32 ... .i.xc5 33 l2Jxc5 <iitc8 34 l2Jxb7 'iVxb7 35 'i'c5+ <iitb8 (35 .. . 'i!i'c7 36 'iVf8+) 36 .Ud6, and this time the black queen is lost without any compensation .
3 2 c4!?
A spectacular breakthroug h . However, as Volodya Kramnik rightly pointed out, the simple 32 .l:th 1 is also sufficient.
32 ... bxc3
Or 32 . . . dxc4 33 ii.b6+! 'ili'xb6 (33 . . . <iitc8 34 ltJa5) 34 l:.d7+ <iitxd7 35 'ii'xb6 cxb3 36 'i'xb7+ <iite8 37 'ili'c6+ <iitd8 38 'iVa8+, and Black loses his rook.
33 .l:.c1 ii.b4
No better is 33 . . .'ifxb3 34 l:.xc3+ 'i!fxc3 35 bxc3 l:txg7 36 .i.c5! (but not 36 Wb6+? <iitc8 37 i.c5 .i.d8 with chances for both sides).
34.i.d4
34 i.c5? .i.xc5 35 .l:!.xc3 is a mistake in view of 35 . . .'ilt'd3+! .
34 .. J:txg7 (34 . . . 'ild3+ 35 �a 1 c2 36 Wb6+
'it>b8 37 1Vxb4) 35 .i.xc3 .i.xc3 36 l:bc3+
'it>d7 (36 .. . <iitd8 37 'i!fb8+) 37 l2Jc5+, and Black has no defence.
In conclusion , let us check 29 l:tdh1 (with the threat of 30 l:txg8 l1xg8 31 l::th8). In Nunn's opinion , it is insufficient because of the reply 29 . . . i.f6! .
(see diagram)
An interesting way of attacking was later suggested by Artur Yusupov: 30 e5!? .i.xe5
(30 . . . dxe5 3 1 l2Jxe6+! fxe6 32 l:txg8 .l:!xg8 33
'i'b6+ <iitb8 34 'i¥d6+ <iita8 35 .l:lh8) 31 l:t1 h4!
- position after 29 . . . .i.f6!
-- the rook wants to break through on c4 (after l2Jxe6+ or l2Jb3). But also available to White is another, perhaps more convincing way.
30 l2Jxe6+! fxe6 31 Wb6+
Nothing is promised by 31 l:txg8 .U.xg8 32 'ifb6+ <iitc8 33 'ifxd6 (without check!) 33 .. .'ifd7.
31 ... <iitb8 32 Wxd6+ <iita8
Now there is no time for the exchange on g8, since the c2-pawn is attacked .
33 'ifc5 ! !
This excellent stroke, found b y Vadim Zviag
intsev and Maxim Boguslavsky, decides the game in White's favour. If 33 .. . <iitb8 there follows 34 lbg8 1:1xg8 35 .U.h8 :Xh8 36 gxh8'if+ ii.xh8 37 'ifd6+ <iitc8 38 .i.b6 with unavoidable mate.
33 ... !1xc5 34 .Uxg8+ .i.c8 35 .i.xc5 <iitb7 36 l:.xc8 ii.xg7 37 �g8, and, as it is not hard to see, White wins.
Thus the position could have been won in various ways, and the path chosen by Nunn was by no means the shortest. But this does not imply that the win is achieved 'as you please' - success was not possible without the discovery of far from obvious combina
tive subtleties and a very accurate calcula
tion of variations.
Igor Khenki n , Vlad i m ir Kram nik