1 e4 cs 2 tt'Jf3 d6 3 .

tbs+ tt'Jd7 4 d4 cxd4 5

?xd4 a6 6 .ixd7+ .ixd7 7 c4!?
A somewhat unusual move, but it has
Sergey Tiviakov's stamp of approval. The
idea is simple to comprehend: we want to
play a Maroczy bind structure. The lightsquared bishop is blocked in by the c4- and
e4-pawns in the normal Maroczy bind, so it
makes sense first to exchange it.
7 0-0 l:tc8 8 c4 is looked at in the next
game.
7 .�� .ig4
Considering that the Dutch prodigy subsequently decides not to take on f3 this
move must be deemed a mistake. Otherwise:
a) 7 ... es 8 ?d3 bs is similar to the following game. Now 9 tt'Ja3 (9 tt'Jc3 also
looks
sensible here, as dS is already a big hole}
9 ... ?6 10 0-0 and then:
a1) The immediate 10 ... tt'Jf6 would be a
mistake as 11 .tgs is rather awkward to
deal with: for example, 11 ... .ie7 12 .ixf6!
(the a3-knight is a long way from ds, but d6
is still a problem) 12 ... .ixf6 (or 12 ... gxf6 13
Moscow Varia tion: 3 ... tDd7
cxbs axbs 14 tt'Jc2 and the knight has some
juicy squares in sight} 13 l:tfd1 when Black
has problems defending d6, as 13 ... .ie7?
fails to 14 tt'Jxes!.
a2) 10 ... .ie7 is Vigorito's suggestion, but
I think 11 .ig s! is still strong with the plan
of focusing on the weak d6-pawn.
a3) 10 ... h6 was seen in S.TiviakovV.Babula, Dresden 2007, when 11 tt'Jh4!?
looks interesting: for instance, 11 ... g6 (or
11 ... tiJf6 12 tt'Jfs ?c6 13 f3 g6 14 tt'Je3 which
gives White good chances for an edge) 12
.ie3 ?c6 13 tt'Jf3 (now that g6 has been
forced out of Black, the knight can retreat;
13 f4!? also looks interesting, when my
main line of analysis runs 13 ... tt'Jf6 14 fxes
dxes 15 cxbs axbs 16 tt'Jxbs tt'Jg4 17 a4 .tcs
- 17 ... tt'Jxe3 18 J:tac1 .tcs 19 b4 is good for
White - 18 .txcs ?xcs+ 19 \t>h1 .txbs 20
?xbS+ ?xbs 21 axbs l:txa1 22 J:txa1 o-o
and the endgame is a fraction better for
White but probably drawn) 13 ... tt'Jf6 14 tt'Jd2
and Black still has a few positional problems.
b) 7 ... e6 8 o-o tt'Jf6 9 tt'Jc3 .tc6 10 .tgs
transposes to variation 'c'.
c) 7 ... tt'Jf6 8 .tgs .tc6 9 tt'Jc3 e6 10 o-o
iLe7 11 J:tfe1 0-0 12l:tad1 and now:
c1) 12 ... h6!? 13 .txf6 .txf6 14 ?xd6
?xd6 (Palliser suggests 14 ... ?as with rea9
How to Beat th e Sicilian Defence
sonable play for the pawn, but I believe
White still has some chances to exploit his
extra pawn: 15 ?d2 ?c5 16 l:tc1 l:tfd8 17
?e2 and White has started to neutralize
Black's play, while here 15 ... l:tfd8?! 16 lbd5 !
is a well-known trick but one which might
still catch some players unaware) 15 l:txd6
l:tfc8 was seen in V.Bologan-L.Van Wely,
Internet (blitz) 2004, and now 16 e5 iLe7 17
l:td4 i.xf3 18 gxf3 b5 19 l:tcl! would have
left White with reasonable winning
chances.
c2) 12 ... ?a5 13 ?d2 ?6 and here the
thematic 14 lbd5 ! iLxd5 15 cxd5 (15 exd5
e5 16 lbd4! would also promise White an
edge) 15 ... e5 16 l:tc1 l:tfc8 17 iLxf6 iLxf6 18
l:tc3 h6 19 l:tecl gave White full control of
the position in P.Girinath-S.Sitanggang,
Singapore 2007.
d) 7 ... l:tc8 8 0-0 transposes to Game 2.
8 lbc3 e6
8 ... 1Lxf3 would be in keeping with
Black's previous move, but following 9 gxf3
e6 10 iLe3 White should have a small edge
thanks to his space advantage. Black will
struggle to come up with a plan and the
doubled f-pawns are actually useful for
White, as they support the centre and allow
operations down the semi-open g-file. I like
the idea of castling long for White and hid10
ing the king away on bl. It's important that
10 ... .l::tc8 11 0-0-0! ?c7 12 ?bl is playable as
12 ... ?xc4 13 ?a7! ?C7 (13 ... ?c6 14 l:tc1) 14
lbb5! is an extremely strong sacrifice.
After 14 ... axb5 (14 ... ?d7 can be met by
15 l:tcl!; 14 ... ?8 is best, although Black is
really going to struggle in the endgame
after 15 ?xb8 l:txb8 16 lbxd6+ i.xd6 17
l:txd6} 15 l:tc1 ?d7 16 l:txc8+ ?xc8 17 l:tcl
the quality of the pieces is far more important than the quantity and Black is
forced
to give up his queen to prevent mate.
9 iLe3 lbf6?!
Giri forgets the knight can run away.
9 ... 1Lxf3 had to be played at this point,
transposing back into the previous note.
10 lbd2!
Keeping the knight. Now the bishop on
g4 looks very offside. It would be far better
on d7 or even c8, as on g4 it is on completely the wrong route. Another drawback
is that g4 is wanted by the black knight.
White has a very pleasant advantage already.
10 ... .1te1 11 h3 es!?
This cedes the dS-square for the rest of
the game, but at least allows the bishop to
return to the fold. After the alternative,
ll ... .iths, the bishop is out of play for the
rest of the game. White could even try to
exploit that immediately with 12 f4!?,
threatening to trap the bishop with g2-g4
and f4-f5. After 12 ... i..g6 (12 ... h6 13 fs !
doesn't save the bishop, while 12 ... es 13
fxes dxes 14 1\Yxes gives Black insufficient
compensation for the pawn) I like the aggressive 13 g4!? (White can win material
with 13 0-0, but I wouldn't advise it: 13 ... h6
14 fS .ith7 15 fxe6 fxe6 16 es dxes 171\Yxes
11i'd6 18 11i'xd6 .i.xd6 19 .i.xh6 wins a pawn,
but Black gets good compensation following 19 ... .itcs+ 20 'it>h2 ctJg4+ 21
hxg4 .itd3 22
'it>g3 l:.xh6 23 l:.hl; here White has an extra
pawn, but the bishop-pair gives Black good
chances) 13 ... h6 14 o-o-o when White has
good chances on the kingside.
12 11i'b6
Muzychuk, playing the tournament
leader, decides to play it safe and reach a
fractionally better endgame, a strategy that
pays off perfectly.
12 'i!Vd3 was the more dynamic option:
for example, 12 ... .ite6 13 o-o o-o 14 a4 l:.c8
15 as ctJd7 16 tt:Jds and White has a pleasant advantage with possession of the
dsand b6-outposts and more space on the
queenside. Here she could have started advancing her b-pawn when Black's position
would start to creak. He doesn't have much
counterplay; .. .f7-f5 is one idea, but White
M oscow Variation: 3 ... I:�Jd7
can deal with it by simply exchanging followed by ctJd2-e4.
12 ... 1\Yxb6 13 .i.xb6 .ite6 14 ctJd5
14 ... .itxds
I think 14 ... l::tc8! was the most accurate
when Black should equalize: 15 o-o (after
15 I:�Jxf6+ .itxf6 16 b3 l:.c6 17 .ite3 bs Black
will successfully open the position for his
bishops) 1S ... I:�Jxds 16 cxds (16 exds!? is
perhaps a more aggressive try) 16 ... .i.d7 17
l:.fcl 0-0 and Black is very close to equality,
although not quite there yet.
Vigorito points out that 14 ... tt:Jxds is not
sufficient to equalize, as now White will
gain possession of the c-file: 15 cxds .itd7
16 l:.c1 l:.c8 17 l:.xc8+ .itxc8 18 'it>e2 .itd7
(18 ... .itd8 is mentioned by Vigorito when I
like 19 ctJc4!} 19 .:tel .i.d8 20 .itxd8 'it>xd8 21
'it>e3 (Vigorito) would leave Black in a very
unpleasant endgame, as d6 and b6 are big
problems in his structure. Perhaps he
should try 21 ... 'it>e7 in order to be able to
exchange the rooks, but 22 f4!? exf4+ 23
'it>xf4 l:.c8 24 l:.xc8 .itxc8 25 tt:Jc4 would continue to set problems.
15 cxds .itd8
1S ... l:.c8 16 'it>e2 o-o 17 l:.acl is also
somewhat unpleasant.
1S ... ctJd7 16 i.e3 l:.c8 is offered by Vigorito, although it doesn't save Black
from the
11
How to Beat the Sicilia n Defen ce
same unpleasant endgame after 17 ?e2
0-0 (17 .. .l:Ic2? does nothing as White can
play 18 ?d3 when the rook is trapped after
18 ... l:txb2 19 ?c3 l:tbs 20 a4) 18l:'thc1.
16 i.xd8 ?xd8 17 l:'tc1 bs
I would be very happy to see this move
as now c6 is a huge hole. Giri was obviously
scared of the knight jumping via c4 to b6,
but in my view this is a bigger weakness.
17 ... l:tc8 18 ?e2 ?e7 (18 ... ctJd7? 19 l:txc8+
?xc8 20 ct:Jc4 ?c7 21l:'tc1 wins material} 19
We3 4Jd7 20 CLJb3 was better, although
Black will still have to suffer.
18 ?e2 ?d7 19 l:tc6
Happily taking control of the c6-square.
19 ... l:'thc8 20 l:thc1l:txc6?!
I think Giri overlooked the strength of
White's 22nd. Instead 20 ... 4Jg8 was more
accurate, not allowing the rook to remain
on the sixth rank.
21 l:txc6 4Jg8 22 a4! ctJe7 23l:'tb6
Now it takes a long time to shift the rook
from the sixth rank where it targets two
weaknesses. I think the position is already
lost for Black.
23 ... ?c7 24 asl:'ta7 25 CLJf3!
Threatening 26 ct:Jxes, as well as starting
on the long road to the b4-square.
2S ... f6
Black's active attempt at counterplay
12
fails: 2 s . . .fs 26 ct:Jxes! fxe4 (26 ... dxes 27 d6+
?d7 28 dxe7 fxe4 29 l:'te6! would have been
hopeless) 27 ct:Jc6 ct:Jxds! (or 27 ... 4Jxc6 28
l:txc6+ ?d7 29 ?e3) 28 ct:Jxa7 ct:Jxb6 29
axb6+ ?xb6 30 4Jc8+ ?cs 31 f3 exf3+ 32
gxf3 and White's extra knight should see
her through.
26 ct:Je1ct:Jc8 27 l:tc6+ ?d7 28 4Jd3 4Je7
Black has managed to force the rook
away, but a6 is still a chronic weakness.
29 l:'tc3 fs 30 f3 f4 31 ?f2
As Black's pieces are forced to remain on
the queenside to defend his weaknesses,
Muzychuk correctly opens up the kingside.
31 ... l:ta8 32 h4 g6 33 g3! fxg3+ 34 ?xg3 gs?
Often I find when my opponent has
been under pressure all game eventually he
cracks and we see it here too. This move
smacks of desperation. Giri wanted to activate his rook, but he does not get
anywhere
near his goal.
Black should have waited with 34 ... h6,
but 35 ctJb4 puts him in zugzwang: 3S ... l:tg8
(3S ... l:'ta7 36 4Jc6! ct:Jxc6 37 l:txc6 is given by
Vigorito when White is easily winning as
Black cannot stop him breaking through on
the kingside} 36 ct:Jxa6! l:ta8 37 CLJc7 l:txas 38
4Je6 l:ta7 (38 ... l:ta2 39 l:tc7+ We8 40 l:tb7 is
lost as White threatens to win the knight
with 41 l:tb8+) 39 f4 exf4+ 40 ?xf4 b4
(40 ... l:!:b7 41 l:!:a3! would again leave Black
unable to deal with the threats: 41...b4 42
l:!:a8 tt::lc8 43 tt::lf8+ when g6 drops for starters, 41 ... l:!:b8 42 l:!:a7+ ?e8
43 es! sees White
crash through, and 41 ... tt::lc8 42 l:!:g 3 tt::le7 43
tt::lf8+ is likewise hopeless) 41 l:!:c4 l:!:b7 42 b3
and again Black is in zugzwang.
35 hxgs l:!:g8 36 ?h4 h6 37 gxh6 M:g1
So Black's rook is active, but at the cost
of two pawns, one of which is now on the
sixth rank.
38l:i:c1
Simple chess.
38 ... l:!:g6
38 ... tt::lg6+ 39 ?hS ctJf4+ picks up the exchange, but it's easy to see that the
h-pawn
is simply too strong after 40 tt::lxf4 M:xc1 41
tt::lg6 l:!:h1+ 42 tt::lh4.
39 f4
Unnecessary, but it doesn't change the
result. 39 ?hS, defending the pawn, was
much simpler.
39 ... l:!:xh6+ 40 ?g3 exf4+ 41 tt::lxf4 tt::lg6 42
tt::le6 ?e7 43 tt::ld4 ?f6 44 tt:Jfs l:!:hs 45 l:!:c8
l:i:gS+ 46 ?f3 l:!:g1 4 7 tt::lxd6 l:!:bl 48 l:!:e8
M:xb2 49 l:!:e6+ ?gs so tt::lf7+ ?hs 51 ?e3
l:!:b3+ 52 ?d4 l:!:b4+ 53 wcs MC4+ 54 ?b6 b4
55 M:xg6 1-0
A commendable positional effort by the
young Slovenian. I should point out that at
the time of writing, her opponent, Anish
Giri, is rated 2686 and thus to beat him so
comfortably speaks of excellent technique
coupled to a great opening!