No.
87, September 1, 2010
OPENINGS
what’s hot and what’s not?
XIIIIIIIIY
Leko-Gelfand: Semi- 9rsn-wqkvl-tr0
9zpl+-+p+-0
9-+p+psn-zp0
Slav theme match 9+p+-sN-+-0
9-+pzPP+pzP0
9+-sN-+-vL-0
9PzP-+LzPP+0
9tR-+QmK-+R0
By IM Merijn van Delft & IM Robert Ris xiiiiiiiiy
The Arctic Securities Chess Stars and Leko-Gefand Frequency
were two elite rapid events this week, of which the
latter turned into a Semi-Slav theme match. We also
checked out the Spanish and Serbian Leagues and the
qualifying tournament for the Russian Championship.
what’s hot?
Anand beat Hammer with a modest Italian Game and with Black he easily
won in the Catalan. Carlsen vs Hammer was a hard-fought 1-1 (English
Score
Opening twice). Anand-Carlsen was a boring perpetual in the Accelerated
Dragon and Carlsen-Anand a boring 5.¦e1 against the Berlin. The decisive
Carlsen-Anand game reminds of what Ivan Sokolov explained in Winning
Chess Middlegames: the black b- and c-pawn are weaker than a4 and d4
(see the exercise on p.4; the full game will be added next week).
Below you'll find how White beat the Petroff, while Shirov-Gashimov (0-1)
is added to the PGN file. Nepomniachtchi beat Timofeev in the Sveshnikov
with 11.c4, which is not so easy. This young man seems to be on his way
to the very top.
In our Game of the Week we summerize what happened in the Anti-
Moscow this week. In the diagram position Leko consistently defended
himself with 11...¦g8. Theoretically the man from Hungary proved his point,
but he nevertheless lost the match. On page 3 we cover Leko's attempts
with White in the Moscow. Efimenko-Sakaev (Catalan) and Bischoff-
Hebden (KID) are added as study material. Source: Megabase + TWIC, 2500+ only
For Judit Polgar the rapid event in Kristiansund was extremely tough, facing the best possible opposition and scoring only 0.5 out of 4
against Anand and Carlsen. Anand funnily copied Carlsen's openings in the encounters with Polgar. First by playing the Berlin Wall with the
black pieces and then by playing 1.e4 c5 2.¤f3 e6 3.b3 b6 4.¥d3 ¥b7 5.0-0 ¤e7 6.¦e1 ¤g6
with White. Are the World Champion and his likely future challenger still working together?
what’s Not?
1 of 4
ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not? No. 87, September 1, 2010
Winning in theory, losing in practice
That Leko eventually solved all black problems in the Anti-Moscow Gambit can be judged
from the proud king on e5 in the diagram position. That he got there with some trial and error
can be judged from the game references we have added to the analyses.
Alternatives don’t promise much more.
game of the week a) After 18.¤c7+ ¢d8 the ¤ has to retreat to
b5 again.
Gelfand, B (2739) - Leko, P (2734) Eljanov-Akopian, Elista 2008. b) 18.¤xa7?! ¦xc5 the ¤ is out of play.
Miskolc, 29.08.2010 12...¤bd7 13.¤xd7 £xd7 14.¥f3 c5!? 18.¤d6+ ¥xd6 19.cxd6 ¤c5 and since the ¢
D43, Semi-Slav, Anti-Moscow Gambit This important theoretical innovation became can perfectly blockade on d7, Black has an
the main tabiya of the match. In CVO 41 we excellent game.
1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.¤f3 ¤f6 4.¤c3 e6 5.¥g5 only mentioned 14...0–0–0 and 14...b4. c) 18.a3 ¦xg3! 19.fxg3 ¦xc5 20.¤d4 b3 with
h6 6.¥h4 XIIIIIIIIY excellent compensation.
In the same match Leko twice played 6.¥xf6 9r+-+kvlr+0 18...¤xc5
as can been seen on the next page. The text 9zpl+q+p+-0 18...¥xc5?! is strongly met by 19.¥d6!.
better suits a more adventurous player like 9-+-+psn-zp0 19.¤c7+ ¢e7 20.¥d6+ ¢f6 21.¥xc5?!
Gelfand. A clear inaccuracy. Better would have been
9+pzp-+-+-0
6...dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.¥g3 b5 9.¥e2 21.e5+ ¢g6 22.¦h3 when a possible line could
Being in a must-win situation, Leko opted for
9-+pzPP+-zP0 be 22...¥xf3 23.¦g3+ ¢h7 24.¦xf3 ¤d3+
9.¤e5 in the last round, though after 9...¥b7
9+-sN-+LvL-0 25.¢c2 ¦xg2 26.¦xf7+ ¢g8 27.¦f3 ¥xd6
10.h4 ¥g7 (A reasonable alternative is 10...g4 9PzP-+-zPP+0 28.exd6 ¦d8 29.¤xe6 ¦xd6 30.¦f8+ ¢h7
see CVO 41.) 11.hxg5 hxg5 12.¦xh8+ ¥xh8 9tR-+QmK-+R0 31.¦f7+ leading to a perpetual.
13.¥xc4!? (This positional piece sacrifice offers xiiiiiiiiy 21...¥xc5 22.¦d7 ¢e5!
White some attacking chances. However, up till 15.dxc5 XIIIIIIIIY
now, Black still stands the test of time.) 13... In the 5th game Gelfand deviated with 15.e5 9-+r+-+r+0
bxc4 14.¤xc4 ¢f8 15.¤d6 (Deviating from ¤d5 16.¤e4 0–0–0 17.0–0 ¦xg3! (A very typical 9zplsNR+p+-0
15.e5 which was seen in Grischuk-Gelfand, exchange sacrifice, which may be found in 9-+-+p+-zp0
Dagomys 2010 - see CVO 66). 15...£e7 16.e5 various other lines in this opening. Black's
9+-vl-mk-+-0
¤e8 17.¤ce4 ¤xd6 18.exd6 £e8 19.¥e5 minor pieces are able to exert more pressure
f6! 20.¥xf6 ¥xf6 21.¤xf6 £g6 22.£b3 ¥c8 than the White ¦s.) 18.¤xg3 ¤f4! and although
9-zpp+P+-zP0
Gelfand solved all his problems. It seems the White won the game, Black certainly had
9+-+-+L+-0
critical test of 10...¥g7 still has to be revealed! reasonable chances as well. 15.d5!? requires 9PzP-+-zPP+0
9...¥b7 10.h4 further investigation. Evaluating the present 9+-mK-+-+R0
The 3rd match game featured another topical game, we may conclude that White needs to xiiiiiiiiy
subvariation: 10.0–0 ¤bd7 11.¤e5 ¥g7 focus on either 15.e5 or 15.d5 for future games. A wonderful move. In the middle of the board the
12.¤xd7 ¤xd7 13.¥d6 a6 14.a4 b4 15.¥xb4 15...b4! ¢ proves to be untouchable.
(15.d5!? was seen in CVO 85.) 15...£b6 16.¥a3 A strong improvement, which seems to close 23.¤xe6 fxe6 24.¦xb7 ¥b6?!
£xd4 17.£c2 c5 18.¦ad1 £e5 19.¥xc4 £c7 the chapter about 15.dxc5. The first game saw Allowing simplifications. Leko could have tested
20.¤e2!? (A new idea, aiming to play b3/¥b2 a forcing sequence with 15...£xd1+ 16.¦xd1 a6 his opponent a bit more by 24...¦b8! 25.¦xb8
exchanging ¥s, after which the black squares 17.e5 ¥xf3 18.gxf3 ¤h5 19.¤e4 ¦c8 20.¥f4! an (25.¦c7 ¦gc8) 25...¦xb8 26.¥e2 (26.¦f1 b3
become vulnerable. 20.¥b5 leads nowhere important resource, as otherwise the ¥ would 27.axb3 ¦xb3 28.¥e2 ¦b4 and pawns on b2
- CVO 79.) 20...¥e5 21.¢h1 0–0 22.b3 ¦fd8 have been stuck on g3. After 20...f5 (20...¤xf4? and f2 are hard to defend similarly.) 26...¥xf2
23.¥d3 ¤f6 24.f3 ¥xh2 25.£xc5 £xc5 26.¥xc5 21.¤f6+ ¢e7 22.¦d7#) 21.¤d6+ ¥xd6 22.cxd6 27.¥xc4 ¦c8 28.b3 ¦g8! and Black regains his
¥e5= Gelfand-Leko, Miskolc 2010. ¦c5 23.¥xh6 ¦xe5+ 24.¢d2 ¢d7 25.¥g5 the pawn with some initiative.
10...g4 11.¤e5 11...¦g8 12.¥xg4 ending is quite annoying for Black, though he 25.¦d1 c3 26.¦d3 ¦gd8 27.¦xd8 ¦xd8
The alternative 12.¤xg4 ¤bd7 13.¤xf6+ £xf6 should have been able to hold. 28.bxc3 bxc3
is quite harmless according to theory: 14.£d2 16.£xd7+ ¤xd7 17.¤b5 ¦c8! and here the players agreed to a draw, in view
b4 15.¤a4 c5 16.¤xc5 ¤xc5 17.dxc5 ¥xc5 An important move, neutralizing White’s of 29.¢c2 ¥d4 and neither side can really make
18.0–0–0 ¥xe4 19.£d7+ ¢f8 20.£c7 ¥e7! threats. 18.0–0–0 progress, as e.g. 30.¦h7? fails to 30...¦b8. ½–½
(20...¥xf2? was seen in Sakaev-Gelfand,
Kallithea 2008 and now 21.¥d6+! ¢e8 22.¦hf1
would have been very strong for White.)
21.¥xc4 ¥d8 22.£c5+ ¥e7 23.£c7 ½–½
gelfand - Leko
2 of 4
ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not? No. 87, September 1, 2010
this week’s harvest
Petroff, ¤c3 1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤f6 3.¤xe5 d6 4.¤f3 ¤xe4 5.d4 d5 6.¥d3 ¤c6 7.¤c3
XIIIIIIIIY ¤xc3 8.bxc3 ¥g4 9.¦b1 ¦b8 10.h3 ¥h5 11.¥b5 ¥e7 12.g4 ¥g6 13.¤e5
9-tr-wqk+-tr0 Can a simple change of move order confuse your opponent enough to make him lose track right in the opening?
9zppzp-vlpzpp0 Leko managed to do so in the fourth match game, the only 1.e4 game of the match. Gelfand played his usual
9-+n+-+l+0 Petroff, and instead of the common 8.¤c3 which brought him success before (compare CVO 17 and 41), Leko
tried 7.¤c3!?. As far as we can see, after 8...¥e7 Black would return to the usual lines, but for some reason
9+L+psN-+-0
Gelfand played 8...¥g4?. Leko then quickly took the initiave with some forceful moves. In the diagram position
9-+-zP-+P+0 Black is losing a pawn and after a long massage in the endgame White won. In Predojevic-Sakaev this week
9+-zP-+-+P0 White did play 8.¤c3 and got some nice pressure after Black's first new move 17...¦fd8 (17...¥f6 had been
9P+P+-zP-+0 played before and may be better). A nice back-ranker decided the game, even though it took White long to do the
9+RvLQmK-+R0 technical job. We still believe in 8...¥f5, as was confirmed by the recent game Svidler-Ivanchuk, Astrakhan 2010.
xiiiiiiiiy
1.e4 e5 2.¤f3 ¤c6 3.¥b5 a6 4.¥a4 ¤f6 5.0–0 ¥e7 6.¦e1 b5 7.¥b3 d6 8.c3 0–0 9.h3 ¤b8 Ruy Lopez Breyer
10.d4 ¤bd7 11.¤bd2 ¥b7 12.¥c2 ¦e8 13.¤f1 ¥f8 14.¥g5 h6 15.¥h4 exd4 16.cxd4 c5 17.d5 g6 XIIIIIIIIY
18.¥g3 ¤b6 19.b3 ¥g7 20.¦c1 a5 21.¥d3 b4 22.¤3d2 a4 23.¤e3 axb3 24.axb3 ¤h5 25.¥h2 ¥b2 9r+-wqr+k+0
The Breyer Variation (9...¤b8) may ultimately replace the Chigorin Variation (9...¤a5) as the main line of the 9+l+-+p+-0
Ruy Lopez (on 2700+ level 9...¤b8 is indeed more often played), since it leads to a more harmonious position. 9-sn-zp-+pzp0
Carlsen had no problem defending his lead in the final against Anand using the Breyer. When Anand failed to
9+-zpP+-+n0
play the prophylactic 23.¦b1! preparing c4, Carlsen took over the initiative with the mirror manoeuvre 23...¦b8!
followed by c5. When Frolyanov started attacking too early on the kingside against Tomashevsky, he also slowly
9-zp-+P+-+0
but surely lost the initiative and ultimately suffered defeat in the endgame. Only Gashimov successfully battled
9+P+LsN-+P0
the Breyer this week in his game against Navara. Critical may be 16...g5 when White most likely sacrifices a 9-vl-sN-zPPvL0
piece with 17.¤xg5 hxg5 18.¥xg5 after which the position is difficult to evaluate. In the game interestingly a 9+-tRQtR-mK-0
Benoni structure appeared, of which Gashimov is of course a huge expert. In the diagram position he sacrificed xiiiiiiiiy
the exchange with 26.¥b5 ¦e7 27.¤g4 and went on to win in the attack.
Semi-Slav, Moscow 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.¤f3 ¤f6 4.¤c3 e6 5.¥g5 h6 6.¥xf6 £xf6 7.e3 ¤d7 8.¥d3 dxc4 9.¥xc4 g6 10.0–0 ¥g7 11.¦e1
XIIIIIIIIY The rapid match between Gelfand and Leko was dominated by a theoretical discussion in the Semi-Slav. In
9r+l+k+-tr0 round two a well-known ending with opposite coloured ¥s was seen. White's edge is of marginal value and
9zpp+n+pvl-0 due to the weakened kingside he is unable to pose any serious problems. In Alekseev-Maletin, with the main
9-+p+pwqpzp0 difference of Black having a weakened queenside pawn structure, the case was quite similar. The presence
of the ¤s made White's task to exert pressure on the c-pawn quite hard. Round 6 saw a more challenging
9+-+-+-+-0
approach with 11.¦e1!?. In the nineties, Croatian GM Cebalo often employed this move to continue 12.£c2.
9-+LzP-+-+0 However, Leko had a concrete new idea in mind. After 12.e4 e5 13.d5 ¤b6 14.¥b3 it becomes obvious that White
9+-sN-zPN+-0 is intending to answer 14...¥g4 with 15.¦e3! not allowing Black to weaken the pawnstructure and preparing to
9PzP-+-zPPzP0 double ¦s on the d-file. Being surprised by this new concept, Gelfand didn't find an adequate answer and finally
9tR-+QtR-mK-0 White's space advantage started to count.
xiiiiiiiiy
x
1.d4 ¤f6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.¤f3 ¥e7 5.¥g2 0–0 6.0–0 dxc4 7.£c2 a6 8.£xc4 b5 9.£c2 ¥b7 Catalan, main line
10.¥d2 ¥d6 11.¦e1 ¥e4 12.£c1 ¥b7 13.¥g5 ¤bd7 14.¤bd2 c5 15.¥xf6 gxf6 16.¤b3 c4 XIIIIIIIIY
Curiously enough, three days prior to this game I (RR) noticed in my preparations that the Catalan main line with 9r+-wq-trk+0
10...¥d6 can be reached from a different move order as well. As was mentioned in CVO 83, Russian GM Turov 9+l+n+p+p0
is an expert in the system with 4...¥b4 5.¥d2 ¥d6!?. Initially I wanted to follow the game Dominguez-Alekseev, 9p+-vlpzp-+0
but soon I realized Black could have improved play with 16...c4, making his aspirations on the queenside clear.
9+p+-+-+-0
Hence, instead I opted for the more precise move order 7.£c2 and eventually outplayed my opponent, before
committing a serious mistake with 24.a4? (24.h4! would have yielded me a clear advantage). Zhigalko proved
9-+pzP-+-+0
that my analyses are correct and forced Caruana to give a repetition. Some days later in the Serbian league,
9+N+-+NzP-0
Volokitin introduced a risky attempt to improve play for White and had to be content when his opponent offered 9PzP-+PzPLzP0
a draw. Black's weakened kingside is sufficiently compensated for by his queenside majority, and so I believe 9tR-wQ-tR-mK-0
White has to look for other ways to deal with 10...¥d6. xiiiiiiiiy
3 of 4
ChessVibes OPENINGS what’s hot and what’s not? No. 87, September 1, 2010
it's your move
XIIIIIIIIY XIIIIIIIIY
O9r+-tr-+k+0 o9r+-tr-+k+0
9+p+q+-vlp0 9zpp+-+pvl-0
9-+psnp+p+0 9-+n+-+p+0
9zp-+p+p+-0 9wq-zpP+-sN-0
9P+PzP-+-+0 9-+-+-+l+0
9+P+-zPLzP-0 9+-zP-vL-+-0
9-vLR+-zP-zP0 9P+-wQ-zPP+0
9+-tR-wQ-mK-0 9+-tR-mKL+R0
xiiiiiiiiy xiiiiiiiiy
last week's solutions
XIIIIIIIIY
9r+-+-+rvl0 Gashimov-Bacrot, Spanish Team Championship (Sestao) 2010
9+kzp-+p+-0 Black has managed to neutralize White's kingside majority, while the pawn structure on the queenside has been
9-zp-+l+nzp0 fixed. Having an additional pawn on c7, Black can easily protect the base of the pawn chain. Bacrot proves White
9zp-zp-zP-zpN0 has more difficulties doing so. 22...b5! A thematic thrust to get to the weak pawn on b3. 23.cxb5 23.axb5 a4
24.bxa4 ¦xa4 and soon c4 and b5 will fall. 23...¥xb3 24.¦c1 24.¦a1 doesn’t really help, since after 24...¦gd8
9P+P+-+P+0
Black will seize control of the d-file. 24...¦gd8 25.¦xc5 ¥xa4 and now it has become clear the operation on the
9+P+-+N+P0 queenside has certainly favored Black. Bacrot instructively converts his advantage.
9-vL-tR-zP-mK0
9+-+R+-+-0
xiiiiiiiiy
XIIIIIIIIY
Edouard-Tkachiev, French Championship (Belfort) 2010 9r+lwqkvl-tr0
If you managed to solve the other exercise, this one may have come easier to you (or the other way around, of 9+-zpn+-+p0
course). Again a pawn move that seems impossible at first sight does the job: 12.e5! Blasting open the position.
9p+-zp-zp-+0
12...dxe5 12...fxg5 13.exd6+ ¢f7 14.dxc7 £f6 15.axb3 ¢g7 16.¤c3 and Black’s king remains in the open.
13.¤xe5! Played in grand style. 13...¤xe5 14.¦xe5+ ¥e7 15.£h5+ ¢d7 16.¥xf6 and Black is defenceless.
9+p+-+-vL-0
16...¤xa1 16...¥xf6 17.¦d5+ doesn’t help either. 17.¥xe7 £xe7 18.¦xe7+ ¢xe7 19.£c5+ ¢f7 20.£xc7+ 1–0
9-+-+P+-+0
9+n+-+N+-0
9PzPP+-zPPzP0
9tRN+QtR-mK-0
xiiiiiiiiy
www.chessvibes.com/openings
ChessVibes Openings is a weekly PDF magazine that covers the latest news on chess openings. Which openings are hot in top level chess?
Which are not? Editors IM Merijn van Delft & IM Robert Ris keep you updated once a week! Singles issues cost € 1. You can subscribe too:
€ 25 a year (that’s less than € 0.50 per issue!). More info can be found at www.chessvibes.com/openings.
© 2010 ChessVibes. Copyright exists in all original material published by ChessVibes. Any copying or distribution (reproduction, via print, electronic format, or in any form whatsoever), as
well as posting on the web, is strictly prohibited without prior written permission.
4 of 4
